Uruks vs. Uruk-hai

Well, Olog-hai has always been my hardest sell for 'hai' being 'men' (again not Chinese 'men'). Nobody ever argues with Oghor-hai; and Uruk-hai of course is the discussion of this thread. I guess this proves that your argument is never stronger than its weakest point.
It's also hard for me to argue against the Hill Trolls of the Morannon, as I had always thought of them as the Olog-hai too, until I started debating possible meaning for the word 'hai'. In fact to really back me up here, I remember wondering if the Hill Trolls might be the same as the half-trolls of Far Harad back in my younger days, before I forgot that the 'half-troll' passage existed.
Anyway, to prevent rehashing some previous material, here are the links to my older assertions regarding the Olog-hai:
http://thetolkien.forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=44573#post44573
http://thetolkien.forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=42725#post42725 (with passage from Appendix F)
http://thetolkien.forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=44517#post44517

Now, to actually respond to Shagrat-
The Hill-trolls might be operating in the sun, which is why I always try to say that the troll-men are the only trollish creatures ever 'unambiguously' described operating in the sun. Sauron's Orcs don't like the sun, yet they were present at the Morannon, which has always made me think that there were 'storm of Mordor clouds' present. These clouds were good enough for the Mountain Trolls weilding Grond back at the Pelannor, maybe they're good enough for Hill Trolls too.

I have to assume that the troll-men are also bearing weapons, even if they are not described as doing so. Otherwise their presence in battle stems only from their Troll-ish nature, which might help my argument as well. Remember, it is only an inference (a good one) that links Olog-hai to the trolls abroad both 'cunning and armed with dreadful weapons.' Weapons are not described in the Olog-hai passage, so I won't require my Troll-men to be described with such either.

Of course, while your reading of the passage excludes genetics, my reading necessitates it. Again if Sauron's will was all that was necessary, why couldn't Sauron also concentrate on his other trolls? Something must be different about the Olog-hai themselves. If magic was all that was necessary, why was Saruman messing around with Men and Orcs? Why not just use Orcs and magic?
I am confused by your mention of Stone Trolls from Stone. I thought that Tolkien refused to give the powers of creation (i.e. gift of life and independent thought) to Morgoth, Sauron, or Aule. Weren't the Trolls some sort of perversion of the Ents (made in mockery of them as the Orcs were a mockery of Elves)? Anyway, your description of 'non-Trollish' Trolls sounds at least as radical as my theory of mannish-Trolls.

Well enough bashing of the Hill Trolls. Like I said, I used to favor them as Olog-hai, particularly because I could never determine whether the battle of the Morannon occured under a full spread of Mordor Clouds or not. Also, I always thought about how Tolkien describes his troops becoming witless as he only concentrates on the Nazgul catching Frodo. I wondered if that was some indication that the 'will of their master' had left the Hill Trolls, and they suddenly became vulnerable to the sun. Anyway, on to the defense of my beloved Troll-men:

Could the Troll-men pass for Giant Orcs? I'm not going to require them to look too Orcish, as the Olog-hai are 'in fashion of body and mind quite unlike even the largest of Orc-kind.' But let's see if the Far Haradrim were Orcish enough to at least fool people into speculating them to be Giant Orcs. Well, first they're described as men with black skin, red tongues (are there other kinds?) and white eyes. I always took the white eyes to be white pupils, giving the half-trolls a sort of demon appearance. The Orc Chieftain of Moria was a largish (not giant) Orc, being almost man height, with black skin and eyes like coals. If the coals were white-hot, he might have looked something like the troll-men. If a larg-ish Orc is almost man-height, how much taller does a Giant Orc have to be? The Numenoreans were 'just' Men, and they were 7' tall. Harad of these very boards claims to be 7' something. Perhaps the Far Haradrim were very tall, tall enough to be considered Giant Orcs. Where's my proof? Well, what else could 'like half-trolls' be implying, if not great size and strength? If the Far Haradrim are large and strong enough to be described as 'like half trolls', then I submit that they also surpass the largest of Orc-kind 'in size and power.'

The Geographical objection is a good one. As I stated in one of my earlier, posts, all I can say is that the Olog-hai 'appear' in the Mountains of Mordor and Southern Mirkwood. The troll-men originate in Far Harad. My somewhat convoluted explanation is that the man stock comes from Far Harad, but the Troll-men are actually bred in the pits of Barad-dur and Dol-Guldur, from whence they are then deployed. This would be my explanation for why the Far Haradrim do not accompany the rest of the Southrons in the battle at Pelannor.

Well the final objection, regarding Elrond's and Gandalf's knowledge of the Black Speech, is a slippery business. We certainly know that they could read the inscription of the ring, but that should be common knowledge to members of the White Council. Gandalf also knows 'gash' to be fire, but then again, fire is his business. I will, however, agree that these lore-masters probably had a working knowledge of Black Speech. However, would they know that the Olog-hai were called such? The Hill Trolls don't proudly boast to be 'Olog-hai' like Ugluk and co. do, and the Troll-Men are never acknowldged as speaking either. Which brings me to a good point: Does anybody know that BS Olog is equivalent to Sindarin Torog=troll? I've been operating under that assumption, and it seems sort of obvious, but is anybody certain?

Anyway, if the Hill Trolls were the Olog-hai, shouldn't 'hai' mean 'hill'? How does that fit in with Oghor-hai and Uruk-hai? If 'hai' doesn't mean 'hill', then why are the Hill Trolls called Hill Trolls, instead of by the English equivalent of whatever 'Olog-hai' means in the Black speech? I've argued that this is the case for the Uruk-hai (also called men-Orcs) and Oghor-hai (also called Pukel-men, or Dru-men, or Wild Men).

Ah, nothing like the back and forth of a good debate! Anyway, Shagrat, I've noticed a lot of strange characters in your posts, like i+/-, and i-(degree o). I'm thinking that you might be trying to italicize in the same manner that you do on another board. If so, here are the tips I gave Tar-Elenion for these boards:

ps. Tar-Elenion- if you'd like to further differentiate quotes from other text, simply surround it with the {QUOTE} and {/QUOTE} tags- but using square brackets rather than the curlies. You can further distinguish it with {B} and {/B} (bold type), or {I} and {/I} (italic type) tags (again use square brackets).

Click to expand...

Originally posted by aragil

In the published version, the 'Words of the Easterlings and Dunlendings' is at the end of the 'Languages of Men Section', before the ~1 page note on Hobbits. Following this is a section on Ents, and then we get the Orcs and Trolls (Black Speech) section...

Click to expand...

Do we have different versions? My versions all have Dunlendings and Wild Men (the Druedain) and the words resembling Easterling are Eorlings (Rohirrim) and Eilenach (a mountain) but no Easterlings.

Oh and about Shagrat's strange characters, this sometimes happens when he posts on other boards. I think it may have something to do with him posting from China. I think he is studying in Beijing currently. But he can correct this if I am wrong.

I was conjecturing where the note on Variags, Khand, and mumak might have gone. I did not have my books with me (still don't), but I remember the last bit from the section on men being a mention of Dunnish Forgoil. This was in a discussion of non-Westron languages, so I assumed that this is where Variag, etc, would have been placed on the carbon of F4. The only passages between 'non-Westron' and 'Black Speech' are a note on Hobbits and Entish. I don't know if these two notes were in F4 (if it was the draft submitted to H-M then they probably were there), so it's possible that Variag was closely followed by the entry for Olog-hai. Anyway, physical closeness is not the point of my argument. The main thing for me is how long was it after the typing of F4 that Tolkien added the notes on Variag and Khand. If these were added relatively soon afterwards, then it could (pure unabashed speculation here) have been a result of him reading over the Olog-hai entry (which might be intended to augment the ambiguous entry of 'troll-men' at Pelannor), and also realizing that he left his Variags pretty well unexplained also.

My own thought on where 'mumak, Variag and Khand' might have gone had they been included stems from the note that the 'mumak sentence' was added following the 'There [at Pelargir] Adunaic was spoken...' which is quite similar to the last sentence in the fourth paragraph of App. F(I), 'Of Men'. 'Variag and Khand' were added to the 'mumak sentence' on the carbon.

My own take (supposition) on the F4 typescript is that it was in essentially the same form and structure as the published App. F. CT notes of the 4 following typescripts that they were not all complete. I would presume that when JRRT sent his final typescript to the publisher it was based off of the F4 with emendation from the 'incomplete' typescripts (which could well be just rephrasings of what is found in F4 add editing for the constraints of space, some manner of this can be seen by comparing the 'There [at Pelargir] Adunaic was spoken...' sentence published in PoME with the 'final' version published as the last sentence in the fourth paragraph of App. F(I), 'Of Men').

Originally posted by aragil
Well, Olog-hai has always been my hardest sell for 'hai' being 'men' (again not Chinese 'men'). Nobody ever argues with Oghor-hai; and Uruk-hai of course is the discussion of this thread.

Click to expand...

I would argue with the "-hai" in Oghor-hai being "men", I'm afraid.

The most obvious point is that we know that "Uruk" can describe a member of the Uruk-hai. Therefore, "Oghor" would appear to describe a member of the "Oghor-hai". This suggests that the "-hai" has something to do with a group, either as a plural suffix or as a suffix indicating a group noun.

Moreover, a plausible definition of "Oghor" is needed to show what sort of "-men" the Druedain might be expected to be. "Ogre", which you suggested, sounds very unlikely, as the ogres mentioned in "The Hobbit" and BoLT are giant creatures, which the Druedain certainly are not. If "Oghor" is simply an Orcish word for the stumpy woses, then no such difficulty arises.

But more than anything else, your argument that "-hai" means "men" doesn't fit with either what we know of the Black Speech or the descriptions of the Olog-hai and Uruk-hai themselves.

You are suggesting that "Uruk-hai" means "Orc-men". Of course, the Uruk-hai are frequently described as Orcs, and never as Men. Therefore, you have suggested that "Uruk-hai" means "Men-Orcs". This requires "-hai" to be adjectival. But the fragments of Black Speech that we have don't work like that. Instead, adjectival elements go at the front, as in English. Thus the ringwraiths, "ring-" being adjectival, are "nazgul", from "nazg", ring, and "gul", wraith. So if we accepted your usage, we would expect "hai-uruk" and "hai-olog." Of course, if "-hai" means "folk", "race" or "people", the word order fits perfectly.

Originally posted by aragil
It's also hard for me to argue against the Hill Trolls of the Morannon, as I had always thought of them as the Olog-hai too, until I started debating possible meaning for the word 'hai'.

Click to expand...

So you're looking for textual support to fit your argument, rather than drawing your argument from the text, right?

Originally posted by aragil
The Hill-trolls might be operating in the sun, which is why I always try to say that the troll-men are the only trollish creatures ever 'unambiguously' described operating in the sun.

Click to expand...

The hill-trolls are operating during the day, and the sun is present - it is described as "gleaming" twice during the battle. We know that Stone Trolls turn to stone as soon as "the sun comes over the hill", so it's a fair inference that the slightest hint of daylight would spell their ruin.

Originally posted by aragil
Sauron's Orcs don't like the sun, yet they were present at the Morannon, which has always made me think that there were 'storm of Mordor clouds' present.

Click to expand...

But Sauron's Orcs can fight and generally operate in the sun. It makes them physically uncomfortable, and they hate it, but they have no problem in fighting in it. Cloud cover would ease the discomfort on the Orcs, but I doubt it would be enough to protect the old sort of troll, particularly with the sun gleaming through.

Originally posted by aragil
These clouds were good enough for the Mountain Trolls weilding Grond back at the Pelannor, maybe they're good enough for Hill Trolls too.

Click to expand...

I would assume that the Mountain Trolls are also Olog-hai. How else could they have got to the Pelennor in the first place?

Originally posted by aragil
I have to assume that the troll-men are also bearing weapons, even if they are not described as doing so.

Click to expand...

Yes, but they are never described as "trolls". The hill-trolls are, and seem unique among trolls in that they fight with weapons and shields.

Originally posted by aragil
Remember, it is only an inference (a good one) that links Olog-hai to the trolls abroad both 'cunning and armed with dreadful weapons.'

Click to expand...

As an inference, it's pretty much a direct match! A cunning sort of troll appears late in the Third Age - and cunning trolls bred by Sauron and called Olog-hai appear late in the Third Age.

Originally posted by aragil
Of course, while your reading of the passage excludes genetics, my reading necessitates it. Again if Sauron's will was all that was necessary, why couldn't Sauron also concentrate on his other trolls? Something must be different about the Olog-hai themselves.

Click to expand...

Yes, I wasn't very clear there. Let me attempt to clarify. Tolkien says that the Stone Trolls are just "counterfeits" rather than "rational incarnates", as the Orcs are. (He says this in the letter where he points out that Treebeard was wrong about the Orcs being mere counterparts). But he says that there are other types of troll, "for which other origins are suggested."

So as the Stone Trolls aren't really alive but are made of "animated" stone, it is highly unlikely that they can breed with anything. Moreover, Tolkien says that the other kind(s) of troll have different origins. If the Olog-hai were bred from Stone Trolls and Men, they would have common origin with the Stone Trolls. But they don't.

So what I meant was that the Olog-hai are clearly not crossbred Stone Trolls, but trolls made in an entirely different sort of way. I think Tolkien even suggests that they might have been made from some "primitive" human stock (neanderthals?), but they clearly aren't made from the Stone Trolls.

But whatever the Olog-hai were made from, they are unambiguously trolls. They're not "like half-trolls" or "troll-men", but "trolls". In his letters, when he discusses different sorts of troll, Tolkien never uses "half-trolls" or "troll-men"; the new sort of troll may have been bred from some sort of Men, but they are definitely full trolls, and always described as such.

Originally posted by aragil
I am confused by your mention of Stone Trolls from Stone. I thought that Tolkien refused to give the powers of creation (i.e. gift of life and independent thought) to Morgoth, Sauron, or Aule. Weren't the Trolls some sort of perversion of the Ents (made in mockery of them as the Orcs were a mockery of Elves)?

Click to expand...

Tolkien essentially says that the Stone Trolls aren't really alive, and don't have independent thought. But the Trolls are definitely not a "perversion of the Ents". Being made "in mockery" of something is very different from being made from that thing. Trolls "mock" Ents because they are big strong giants, not because they were bred from Ents. Tolkien is quite clear that they were made from stone, not Ents.

Originally posted by aragil
Well enough bashing of the Hill Trolls. Like I said, I used to favor them as Olog-hai, particularly because I could never determine whether the battle of the Morannon occured under a full spread of Mordor Clouds or not.

Click to expand...

It doesn't, because the sun's gleam is mentioned twice.

Originally posted by aragil
Also, I always thought about how Tolkien describes his troops becoming witless as he only concentrates on the Nazgul catching Frodo. I wondered if that was some indication that the 'will of their master' had left the Hill Trolls, and they suddenly became vulnerable to the sun.

Click to expand...

I think so too. But they don't turn to stone, but instead run around like Orcs. That's surely proof that they are "rational incarnates" like the Orcs, rather than stone "puppets" like the old sort of troll. Thus they are the Olog-hai. If they weren't, they couldn't have been fighting in the daytime, and would certainly have turned into stone when Sauron was overthrown.

Originally posted by aragil
Could the Troll-men pass for Giant Orcs? I'm not going to require them to look too Orcish, as the Olog-hai are 'in fashion of body and mind quite unlike even the largest of Orc-kind.'

Click to expand...

But that objection in context is one of size; we can infer that both trolls and orcs shared a monstrous experience; Tolkien says somewhere that some Elves had one name for both creatures.

Originally posted by aragil
If the Far Haradrim are large and strong enough to be described as 'like half trolls', then I submit that they also surpass the largest of Orc-kind 'in size and power.'

Click to expand...

Surpass, but "far surpass"? Remember that Orcs are clearly immensely strong; think of the Moria chieftain throwing Boromir to the ground, or of Grishnakh running with a Hobbit under each arm. Uruks, I would argue, appear to be stronger than Men in general, so I doubt that these Men of Far Harad would far surpass Uruks in power.

Originally posted by aragil
The Geographical objection is a good one. As I stated in one of my earlier, posts, all I can say is that the Olog-hai 'appear' in the Mountains of Mordor and Southern Mirkwood. The troll-men originate in Far Harad. My somewhat convoluted explanation is that the man stock comes from Far Harad, but the Troll-men are actually bred in the pits of Barad-dur and Dol-Guldur, from whence they are then deployed. This would be my explanation for why the Far Haradrim do not accompany the rest of the Southrons in the battle at Pelannor.

Click to expand...

But these Men are explicitly described as being "out of Far Harad". If they had been bred in the pits of Barad-dur and Dol Guldor, they would never have been to Far Harad in their lives! I think the geographical objection is insurmountable.

Originally posted by aragil
Well the final objection, regarding Elrond's and Gandalf's knowledge of the Black Speech, is a slippery business. [snip] However, would they know that the Olog-hai were called such?

Click to expand...

If the Olog-hai were indeed the Men of Far Harad, how could there be any doubt as to what they were bred from? They appear as "men" and "troll-men". If indeed they are not just large, strong men of unusual aspect (to the men of Gondor), how could anyone doubt that they are not at least part man, given their appearance?

Originally posted by aragil
Does anybody know that BS Olog is equivalent to Sindarin Torog=troll? I've been operating under that assumption, and it seems sort of obvious, but is anybody certain?

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone knows for sure. However, "r" and "l" are interchangeable sounds in several languages, and initial consonants often disappear from words, so "Torog" and "Olog" sound like they might be etymologically connected.

Originally posted by aragil
Anyway, if the Hill Trolls were the Olog-hai, shouldn't 'hai' mean 'hill'? How does that fit in with Oghor-hai and Uruk-hai?

Click to expand...

No. "Olog-hai" are trolls. Whether the narrator calls them Hill Trolls or Mountain Trolls doesn't affect what they are called in the Black Speech. If "Uruk-hai"'s Anglicization is a good example, then "Olog-hai" would just be one word in English, not two.

Originally posted by aragil
If 'hai' doesn't mean 'hill', then why are the Hill Trolls called Hill Trolls, instead of by the English equivalent of whatever 'Olog-hai' means in the Black speech?

Click to expand...

Because "Hill Trolls" isn't a translation of "Olog-hai", but just a description of these creatures in Westron.

Originally posted by aragil
Ah, nothing like the back and forth of a good debate!

Click to expand...

Indeed!

Originally posted by aragil
Anyway, Shagrat, I've noticed a lot of strange characters in your posts, like i+/-, and i-(degree o). I'm thinking that you might be trying to italicize in the same manner that you do on another board. If so, here are the tips I gave Tar-Elenion for these boards:

Click to expand...

I think Tar-Elenion's explanation is right. I'm in Beijing (not studying though, alas!), and am following the correct italicization procedure, which appears to work fine via a Chinese browser. My posts (and yours) look fine from here, although some characters right at the top of the board screen appear as random hanzi to me, as do accented characters which I have seen Cian use on occasion.

Originally posted by aragil
We have Tolkien calling the Isengarders Orcs, uruks, and Uruk-hai. I claim that the last two are different, and are applied to the Isengarders in different senses.

Click to expand...

That of course puts you at variance with Christopher Tolkien, who states that "Uruks" is an Anglicization of "Uruk-hai." Now, Christopher Tolkien may not be an absolute authority, but he has had access to everything, and may (as Tar-Elenion has suggested) be drawing on an actual statement of his father's.

Originally posted by aragil
What little mannish blood Ugluk has is almost certainly not of Rohirric origin, it's probably Dunlendish.

Click to expand...

Right. But while I agree that Ugluk has a little man-blood, is he even aware of it? I don't imagine that either Ugluk pere or mere was particularly mannish in appearance, if he ever knew them!

Originally posted by aragil
How do the Uruk-hai feel about the Dunlendings? Well, they're able to march in the Dundlendings general vicinity without attacking them- that's pretty tolerant by Orc standards.

Click to expand...

It's worth noting, however, that the Uruk-hai march out of Isengard first, with the Dunlendings and Orc-men following in different columns.

Originally posted by aragil
Yet Grishnakh says nothing here. Doesn't it seem that Ugluk is boasting about how he is a Uruk-hai and his audience is not? Wouldn't that be an odd usage if Grishnakh was equally a Uruk-hai, and standing right in front of him?

Click to expand...

Nobody is "a Uruk-hai" because "Uruk-hai" is clearly plural (or a group noun); every usage of it in the book is plural. The singular appears to be "uruk", following Appendix F.

Note also that every boast of Ugluk's has "Uruk-hai" qualified by something; "we are the fighting Uruk-hai"; "the Uruk-hai of Isengard".

The only time that the Isengarders don't qualify "Uruk-hai" with another phrase is at Helm's Deep (although they do qualify it the first couple of times), when they are speaking to non-Orcs.

Originally posted by aragil
My reading of this is that the Uruk-hai are unaffected by the sun. This is a mannish quality, not posessed by the Uruks of Mordor. They are bragging about being 'part mannish', and equating it to being Uruk-hai. I don't call this definitive proof, but I do call it compelling evidence.

Click to expand...

If they were bragging about being part-mannish to Men, they would surely use language that Men can understand. If they said, for example, "We are the Men-Orcs of Saruman", the defenders would get the point. But they don't. It seems much more likely that the Uruks are just using the Black Speech term for their race, not trying to eliptically convey their origins to the Rohirrim and Aragorn.

Originally posted by aragil
What being a hybrid Orc of Isengard means is that the Orc is larger than a normal Uruk (we agree here, though you seem to be reluctant to give Isengarders much of an advantage), more cunning than a normal Uruk, and capable of tolerating sun to a greater extent than a normal Uruk.

Click to expand...

I don't give the Isengarders much of a size advantage over other Uruks, because Tolkien doesn't appear to. The Isengarders are no doubt a tough bunch, but Ugluk doesn't appear to be as imposing as the Moria chieftain, and the Isengarders are certainly small enough to be convenient opponents for Gimli.

Originally posted by aragil
I do not think it at all unlikely that the Isengarders are in a sense saying 'look at the effects man-blood has had on us, we are the fighting Uruk-hai!' In fact this seems to me to be exactly what they are bragging about.

Click to expand...

If that's what they're saying, they are doing it in a very roundabout way, especially as Ugluk appears to ascribe their superiority to training; he disparages the "maggots" for being "only half-trained."

And then you have the "Orcish solidarity" that both Ugluk and Grishnakh express.

Originally posted by aragil
As for other Orcs treating them as 'Orcs', well, Grishnakh calls them the 'muck-rakers of a dirty little wizard.' I'm sure that if the Uruk-hai were not completely dominant in combat, then the other Orcs would have treated them as 'human-filth', and bad-mouthed their breeding, etc.

Click to expand...

Grishnakh suggests that the Isengarders are cannibals; another Mordor-Orc calls Ugluk "dungfilth" (in his own language). Grishnakh also calls Ugluk an "ape". It's doesn't seem at all likely that they would miss such an obvious insult given how rude they already are.

Originally posted by aragil
Perhaps this is the sort of reason we don't see more racial slurs coming out of the mouths of the Moria Orcs.

Click to expand...

Unlikely, given that Grishnakh is undeterred from making other insults. It seems incomprehensible that Grishnakh would not use such a source of ammunition to sway the Northerners (who are on the point of attacking Ugluk at one stage).

Originally posted by ShagratU
But more than anything else, your argument that "-hai" means "men" doesn't fit with either what we know of the Black Speech or the descriptions of the Olog-hai and Uruk-hai themselves.
You are suggesting that "Uruk-hai" means "Orc-men". Of course, the Uruk-hai are frequently described as Orcs, and never as Men. Therefore, you have suggested that "Uruk-hai" means "Men-Orcs". This requires "-hai" to be adjectival. But the fragments of Black Speech that we have don't work like that. Instead, adjectival elements go at the front, as in English. Thus the ringwraiths, "ring-" being adjectival, are "nazgul", from "nazg", ring, and "gul", wraith. So if we accepted your usage, we would expect "hai-uruk" and "hai-olog." Of course, if "-hai" means "folk", "race" or "people", the word order fits perfectly.

Click to expand...

I don't know about adjectival. I always think of it as being similar to a specific epithet. It's applied to the end of a genus name- in the case of 'hai' any of the 'genera' of Uruk, Olog, or the mysterious Oghor. In this case the word order also fits perfectly. I'm not suggesting that Tolkien was using Taxonomics as the basis for Black Speech; he was a philologist, not a biologist after all. I continually point out that 'people' in our world applies only to humans, as there are no Orcs, etc. that need to be distinguished from. I am not a linguist, so it is difficult for me to say what exactly I think 'hai' means beyond a specific epithet which also bears a similarity to terms like 'people'. I agree that a member of the Uruk-hai can be referred to as a Uruk, just as a wolf or domestic dog could be referred to as a canid. However, to me the 'hai' in Uruk-hai seems to refine 'Uruk' beyond just saying Uruk-people. Uruk-hai are Uruks which are larger, more cunning, and can tolerate the sun better, as shown in:
The Two Towers, p 184 "What of the dawn?" they jeered. "We are the Uruk-hai: we do not stop the fight for night or day, for fair weather or for storm. .... "
That the Orcs referred to in the chapter The Uruk-hai were Orcs with mannish blood we both seem to agree on. That they were at least a little larger, more cunning, and could tolerate sunlight better we also seem to agree on. Where we seem to disagree is whether Tolkien bothered to give a different name to these uber-Orcs. I find it hard to believe that he wouldn't, as Saruman's Orcs had qualities so distinct from the other Orcs in Tolkien's universe. In a similar manner, we both agree that the Olog-hai have qualities beyond those of the old guard, the 'Ologs' (anglicized), if you will. Olog-hai are Ologs which are more agile, more cunning, and can tolerate the sun better, as shown in the passage from Appendix F. Perhaps I have done myself a dis-service by insisting that the Olog-hai are the 'troll-men' of Pelannor. 10 pages of posts ago, when I first found the passage, I was beset with the argument that Trolls had nothing to do with humans, and therefore there was no possibility that the traits of greater agility, cunning, and sun tolerance came from human genes.

Originally posted by ShagratU
But whatever the Olog-hai were made from, they are unambiguously trolls. They're not "like half-trolls" or "troll-men", but "trolls". In his letters, when he discusses different sorts of troll, Tolkien never uses "half-trolls" or "troll-men"; the new sort of troll may have been bred from some sort of Men, but they are definitely full trolls, and always described as such.

Click to expand...

A statement like this completely changes what I'm arguing against. That the Olog-hai could have acquired their special traits from 'humans' has always been my argument, and this theory of mine was opposed on these boards with some vehemence. However, it seems that you agree with me that the Olog-hai might have obtained some human DNA, and perhaps you even have some statements by the author to back this up. If that is the case, then I suggest that we put 'troll-men' behind us. Luckily for me I mentioned that I liked the Hill Trolls as Olog-hai before you showed up, so stepping around this issue (hopefully) does not look as bad for me as it otherwise might.
As for other matters:
Oghor as Ogre- The other names for the Druedain include Wose and Pukel(-men). Ogre, Wose and Pukel share a common germanic origin of which I am sure that Tolkien was aware. I had forgotten the mentions of Ogre in Lost Tales and The Hobbit. However, the Ogres of Lost Tales seem to be abandoned in the later writing of the Silmarillion. It seems that many of the mythical creatures of the Hobbit were also changed as Tolkien's concept for his world changed. The Hobbit was a children's fairy story, after all. As well as Ogres, The Hobbit had the Storm Giants playing some sort of Rugby, which is what drove the Dwarves into the Goblin lair of the Misty Mountains. Germaine to this thread, The Hobbit also had Stone Trolls (which we agree upon as the most primitive variety) using language at least as intelligently as the Orcs of LotR, having sleeves to wipe their mouths on, pants with pockets to hold their talking wallets, stony boots to leave paths in the wilderness, beer kegs, skewers and knives, sacks with cords, caves with proper doors and keyholes, and any number of qualities that don't fit in with the later mythology. In particular, I doubt that Tolkien would have kept the concept of turning into stone upon the glimpse of sunlight for the trolls, but this is pure speculation on my part. The point being that Tolkien's concept for creatures in his mythos changed between the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings. Some creatures that remained were changed- goblins became Orcs, and 'the orcs of the north' (which had arms reaching almost to the ground as they ran) became Uruks; trolls became less intelligent- even the Oghor-hai do not display such refined taste as beer out of barrels and using utensils to eat with. It appears to me that the Ogres and Storm Giants were abandoned as inhabitants of Middle-Earth, so Tolkien was free to bring in the Druedain as 'ogre-men' so many years later.

Oops, my better half is 'encouraging' me to go now. Will have to leave further discussion for later.

Originally posted by aragil
Oops, my better half is 'encouraging' me to go now. Will have to leave further discussion for later.

Click to expand...

Strangely enough, I am experiencing the same situation here.

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
I have remembered. We actually have a Black Speech word for 'man'. 'sharku' - 'old man'. *shar,'*old'; *ku , '*man'. Cian please give further insight as necessary.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't call it further insight from me, but Craig Daniel certainly agrees with you Tar-E. From his analysis of the BS ("A second Opinion On the Black Speech" ... now available at local Ardalambion outlets ), Craig concludes a breakdown of either Shar-kû or Shark-kû, in any event Kû meaning "man".

Craig offers his comments on 'debasement' in his work. Helge's wordlist includes parenthetical (DBS?) DBS for "Debased Black Speech".

Originally posted by aragil
Does anybody know that BS Olog is equivalent to Sindarin Torog=troll? I've been operating under that assumption, and it seems sort of obvious, but is anybody certain?

Click to expand...

I dunno myself. ShagratU has commented already to this. My only bleak addition might be that a Sindarin word *olog is possible, itself worked up by David Salo from a _theoried_ stem note ('theoried' as far as I know, but I haven't looked everywhere! and as far as he knew when he wrote it anyway) stem *ULUK ... Eldarin *uluko, *uluka yielding S. *ulug, *olog. The general meaning here might be "evil" (Sindarin Torog itself theoried from *turuka).

That's pure speculation about more speculation. I will say, for the amount of actual corpus we have of the Black Speech to date, we see '-hai' relatively frequently.

Somewhere in this thread you mentioned the uruk borrowing (into BS): that's probably borrowed from the Elvish tongues of earlier times, according to the Prof.

ShagratU, if it helps any I'll try and post (in this thread) any long vowels (acute accented) as double from now on, so as not to confuse what you see (if I remember, and if I post again that is ) I dunno if this for Ku^ helps any, regarding the circumflex.

Originally posted by Cian
I wouldn't call it further insight from me, but Craig Daniel certainly agrees with you Tar-E. From his analysis of the BS ("A second Opinion On the Black Speech" ... now available at local Ardalambion outlets ), Craig concludes a breakdown of either Shar-kû or Shark-kû, in any event Kû meaning "man".

Craig offers his comments on 'debasement' in his work. Helge's wordlist includes parenthetical (DBS?) DBS for "Debased Black Speech".

Click to expand...

However, this use of man seems to be in the sense of 'old male' rather than 'old human'. I've been arguing that Men-Orcs are orcs (etc) with human qualities, not male Orcs. This is why I say it gets confusing with Uruk-hai being Orc-people. In our world saying Orc-people is equivalent to saying Orc-humans, but that is clearly not the case in Middle-Earth. I guess I still can't state exactly what I think 'hai' is, beyond the fact that it modifies Uruk to say that Uruk-hai have (hu)manish qualities, and is used in the sense of a specific epithet. Black speech being such a wonderfully subtle and elegant language, perhaps it has it's own grammatical structure which improves upon all other languages Tolkien invented. After all, that Sauron fellow was pretty clever as a linguist....

Ash kû durbatulûk, Ash hai gimbatul ...

Trolls and Men

Originally posted by aragil

A statement like this completely changes what I'm arguing against. That the Olog-hai could have acquired their special traits from 'humans' has always been my argument, and this theory of mine was opposed on these boards with some vehemence. However, it seems that you agree with me that the Olog-hai might have obtained some human DNA, and perhaps you even have some statements by the author to back this up.

Click to expand...

The key point here is that Tolkien doesn't say or imply that trolls were crossed with Men to make the sun-resistant sort, but that the sun-resistant type(s) were created in a completely different way. That is, the newer type of troll ¨C the Olog-hai ¨C was not a hybridized version of the earlier sort, but a completely different kind of creature.

It's very clear that the Stone-trolls were just stone that was somehow animated. Tolkien's views on how the trolls were animated appear to have changed over time. At one point he notes that trolls were stone forms inhabited by "goblin-spirits". At other times, he seems to imply (if I remember correctly) that Morgoth animated them by infusing them with some of his will. Whatever the source of their animation, Tolkien seems clear that these trolls are not "rational incarnates", but "counterfeits", something like robots or the golem of Jewish folklore.

The new kind of troll, however, seems to have been something more like an Orc, in that these trolls were real living beings. They may not have been ¡°rational incarnates¡±, but were perhaps more like animals taught to speak (which was one of Tolkien¡¯s orc theories). On the other hand, they may have indeed been made from some sort of ¡°rational incarnate¡±, such as Men. But the essential point is that they were not hybrids, not part-troll and something else. ¡°Trolls they were¡±, though apparently without biological connection to the (rather un-biological) Stone-trolls.

Originally posted by aragil
If that is the case, then I suggest that we put 'troll-men' behind us.

Click to expand...

I think we should.

I think there are many objections to your ¡°-hai¡± = ¡°men¡± theory. These include the linguistic (the way that epithets appear to work in Black Speech, the existence of another word for Men ¨C and another Orcish word for one sort of Men that doesn¡¯t include ¡°-hai¡±, tarks ¨C and the precedent of ¨Crim, -lai etc.), the situational (other Orcs treat the Isengarders as Orcs and don¡¯t comment on them being anything else), and the fact that getting the Olog-hai and Oghor-hai to fit the pattern is rather difficult.

However, the most compelling objection to your argument is surely that Tolkien hadn¡¯t made up his mind on what the Uruk-hai and Olog-hai were when he published LotR (and the Black Speech ¡±-hai¡±). Given that Tolkien generally proceeded from the language first (this is well documented), it seems incredibly unlikely that he gave these creatures a name that defined what they were ¡°made¡± from when he hadn¡¯t decided. As Tar-Elenion has pointed out, Tolkien was still talking about Saruman¡¯s ¡°possible special breeding of Orcs¡± long after the publication of LotR. With the Olog-hai, Tolkien tells us that no-one knows what they were made of in LotR ¨C despite the name ¨C and in his letters, he only speculates as to what the new sort of troll might have been made from. If he had already labelled the Uruk-hai and the Olog-hai ¡°Men-Orcs¡± and ¡°Men-trolls¡±, he would have no need to speculate!

Therefore I believe your ¡°men¡± stance is untenable! 

Originally posted by aragil
Oghor as Ogre- The other names for the Druedain include Wose and Pukel(-men). Ogre, Wose and Pukel share a common germanic origin of which I am sure that Tolkien was aware.

Click to expand...

No!

Tolkien would have been very aware that "ogre" does not have Germanic origins. The word comes into English via French (the main reason Tolkien abandoned it, I suspect). There is dispute over its etymology. The three main schools of thought are: that the term was invented by Charles Perrault, the 17th century French fairy-tale writer; that it comes from "hongre" (Hungarian), or less probably, from "Oguz", the name of a Dark Age Turkic people; that it comes from Italian "orco", "ogre", which comes in turn from Latin "Orcus" (Hades).

Tolkien didn't like Romance language words, or at least didn't consider them appropriate for his "mythology". I think that one reason that he used "goblin" less in LotR was because of its Romance origins - he states this somewhere if I am not much mistaken. I may be misremembering, but I think he also expressed dislike for Perrault, and he certainly was not a fan of French language and culture. Therefore, "Oghor" is extremely unlikely to mean "ogre".

As Tar-Elenion has observed, "Oghor" was originally "Hor", which indicates that it was not even inspired by the sound of "ogre".

Originally posted by aragil
Germaine to this thread, The Hobbit also had Stone Trolls (which we agree upon as the most primitive variety) using language at least as intelligently as the Orcs of LotR, having sleeves to wipe their mouths on, pants with pockets to hold their talking wallets, stony boots to leave paths in the wilderness, beer kegs, skewers and knives, sacks with cords, caves with proper doors and keyholes, and any number of qualities that don't fit in with the later mythology. In particular, I doubt that Tolkien would have kept the concept of turning into stone upon the glimpse of sunlight for the trolls, but this is pure speculation on my part.

Click to expand...

But he does appear to have kept it - he goes to some length in his letters to explain what Stone-trolls are and why they turn to stone again in the daytime. Remember also that while the conversations of the Trolls, and some of their domestic details, can be dismissed as Bilbo's embellishments, the story of them being turned to stone certainly fits in with LotR - it is part of LotR, if you are not "forgetting your family history."

Originally posted by aragil
The point being that Tolkien's concept for creatures in his mythos changed between the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings. Some creatures that remained were changed- goblins became Orcs, and 'the orcs of the north' (which had arms reaching almost to the ground as they ran) became Uruks;

Click to expand...

I don't see this change; Ugluk, Grishnakh, the dead Isengarders and other Orcs are all referred to as "goblins" in LotR. They don't "become" Orcs; they already were in "The Hobbit", where Tolkien says that "goblin" is a translation of "orc". Tolkien seems to have come to dislike "goblin" because of its Romance connotations, but he was stuck with it, and acknowledged this in the text of LotR.

Originally posted by aragil
It appears to me that the Ogres and Storm Giants were abandoned as inhabitants of Middle-Earth, so Tolkien was free to bring in the Druedain as 'ogre-men' so many years later.

Click to expand...

Firstly, as above, Tolkien disliked Romance-language terms, and seems to be shying away from them in LotR. He cuts down on "goblin"; it would seem unlikely that he would introduce the French-derived "ogre."

Secondly, the two chief characteristics of "ogres" are that they eat people, and that they are of giant stature. Neither of these attributes fit the Druedain, even from an Orc's perspective.

Thirdly, "ogre" is a close equivalent to "troll". As Tolkien would have known, the English translators of the Eddas and the Icelandic sagas often use "ogre" to translate "troll" and various other Norse words for giant, monstrous beings. It therefore seems doubly unlikely that he would reintroduce the term into his "mythology" having excised it earlier.

I have been out of town for the last week and I see another use of the word uruks has turned up. I am reproducing below the list from my post that started this thread. In the case of example 12 I have included more of the sentences that precede the use of the words uruk and Uruk-hai. I have also added examples 13 and 14 which have turned up during the course of this thread.

1) In the chapter The Uruk-hai in The Two Towers, Ugluk says: "We are the fighting Uruk-hai! We slew the great warrior. We took the prisoners. We are the servants of Saruman the Wise, the White Hand: the Hand that gives us man's-flesh to eat. We came out of Isengard, and led you here ..... "

2) Later in the same chapter, Ugluk again speaking: "Leave them to me then! No killing, as I've told you before; but if you want to throw away what we've come all the way to get, throw it away! I'll look after it. Letting the fighting Uruk-hai do the work, as usual. ..... "

3) On the next page, Ugluk again: "You seem to know a lot. ... More than is good for you I guess. Perhaps those in Lugburz might wonder how, and why. But in the meantime the Uruk-hai of Isengard can do the dirty work, as usual. ...."

4) This is not exactly a quote, but in The Two Towers, Tolkien titles his chapter "The Uruk-hai", he does not call it "The Uruks".

5) In The Two Towers in the chapter Helm's Deep, as Aragorn looks out for the dawn there is the following passage:

"The Orcs yelled and jeered. 'Come down! Come down!' they cried. 'If you wish to speak to us, come down! Bring out your king! We are the fighting Uruk-hai. We will fetch him from his hole, if he does not come down. Bring out your skulking king!'

" 'The king stays or comes at his own will,' said Aragorn.

" 'Then what are you doing here?' they answered. 'Why do you look out? Do you wish to see the greatness of our army? We are the fighting Uruk-hai.'

" 'I looked out to see the dawn,' said Aragorn.

" 'What of the dawn?' they jeered. 'We are the Uruk-hai: we do not stop the fight for night or day, for fair weather or for storm. .... "

6) In The Return of the King, in the chapter The Seige of Gondor there is the following sentence: "No hours so dark had Pippin known, not even in the clutches of the Uruk-hai."

7) In The Return of the King, in the chapter The Land of Shadow, Sam and Frodo overhear two orcs talking and one says: ".... First they say it's a great Elf in bright armour, then it's a sort of small dwarf-man, then it must be a pack of rebel Uruk-hai; or maybe it's all the lot together."

8) In The Fellowship of the Ring, in the chapter The Bridge of Khazad-dum, Gandalf says: "There are Orcs, very many of them .... And some are large and evil: black Uruks of Mordor. ...."

9) In The Two Towers, in the chapter The Choices of Master Samwise, Gorbag says: " .... I say something has slipped. And we've got to look out. Always the poor Uruks to put slips right, and small thanks. ....."

10) In The Return of the King, in the chapter The Land of the Shadow, Sam and Frodo are overtaken on the road by troops of orcs and there is the following description of the troops: "Beside them, running up and down the line, went two of the large fierce uruks, cracking lashes and shouting." (Italics in original.)

11) In The Return of the King, in Appendix A it says: "In the last years of Denethor I the race of uruks, black orcs of great strength, first appeared out of Mordor, and in 2475 they swept across Ithilien and took Osgiliath."

12) In The Return of the King, in Appendix F it says: "Orc is the form of the name that other races had for this foul people as it was in the language of Rohan. In Sindarin it was orch. Related. no doubt, was the word uruk of the Black Speech, though this was applied as a rule only to the great soldier-orcs that at this time issued from Mordor and Isengard. The lesser kinds were called, especially by the Uruk-hai, snaga 'slave'." (Italics in the original.)

13) In The Return of the King, at the end of the chapter The Land of the Shadow, while Sam and Frodo are masqerading as orcs: "A troop of heavy-armed uruks from Barad-dur charged into the Durthang line and threw them into confusion." (Italics in the original.)

14) In The Return of the King, in Appendix A it says: "In 2989 Theodwyn married Eomund of Eastfold, the chief Marshal of the Mark. Her son Eomer was borm in 2991, and her daughter Eowyn in 2995. At that time Sauron had arisen again, and the shadow of Mordor reached out to Rohan. Orcs began to raid in the eastern regions and slay or steal horses. Others also came down from the Misty Mountains, many being great uruks in the service of Saruman, though it was long before that was suspected."


I have listed all the usages again because there has been a great tendency among the people arguing that Uruk-hai and Uruks are interchangeable to pick and choose individual cases and ignore the total usage in LOTR. Now lets look at the words and how they are used. The word "Uruk-hai" is used ten times (examples 1 - 7 and 12; note: the word is used 3 times in example 5) and it is always capitalized as if it is a proper name. In eight of the instances (examples 1 - 6), it is clearly used to refer to Saurman's elite orc troops. In two instances (examples 4 and 6), Tolkien as the narrator of the story is unambiguously choosing to refer to Saruman's elite orc troops as "Uruk-hai". Example 7 has been the subject of much debate here, so it is at best ambiguous, but Aragil and I argue that in the light of the eight earlier instances the weight of evidence is on example 7 also referring to Saruman's troops. The final example (12) has also been the subject of considerable debate here. I have expanded the quotation given to show the full context of the usage. It seems clear to me that "uruk" is being referred back to orch in discussing the derivation of the word. The subject of the last sentence is the word snaga, not "Uruk-hai" and in no way does it imply that "Uruk-hai" and "uruk" are equivalent as some have argued. If that were the case than it would mean that "Uruk-hai" was a singular noun, which it clearly is not in all the uses in LOTR. As for the argument that "Uruk-hai" is always a plural noun so we can therefore assume uruk is it singular form, there is nothing to support this. Tolkien never tells us how to refer to one individual member of the "Uruk-hai", so we don't know what the singular form would be. The singular form might be "Uruk-hai", just as the singular form of Nazgul is Nazgul. (I will return to example 12 below.)

The use of the word "uruks" is more complex. The word "uruk" (no 's') is only used once (example 12) where it is lowercase and italicized. It is clear that Tolkien in this example is giving the etymology of the base word (uruk). There are two instances (examples 8 and 9) of the word "Uruks" (capitalized and with an 's') and in both cases it is clearly referring to large Mordor orcs and the capitalization makes the usage appear to be a proper name for a group. We are left with four instances (examples 10, 11, 13 and 14) of the use of the word "uruks" (lower case). In examples 10 and 13 the word is also italicized. I do not think it is an accident that Tolkien uses the lowercase in these instances. In these cases Tolkien is using the word "uruks" as a general (generic) term for all large soldier orcs (this also explains example 12). These large soldier orcs are in the service of both Sauron (the "Uruks" proper) and Saruman (a new breed, the "Uruk-hai"). Both Tar-Elenion and ShagratU seem to have conceded that Saruman has a new breed of orc in his employ. What is so odd about their having their own designation? I could further argue that the uruks in Saruman's service in example 14 are indeed true Uruks and that they date from a time before Saruman developed his Uruk-hai. The passage refers to them as coming from the Misty Mountains and clearly places them at a time 25 - 30 years before LOTR. Saruman had to have some base stock to develop his Uruk-hai from. It seems to me that the above explanations of these words simply and clearly explain all their usages in LOTR without resorting to elaborate arguments about when characters are hearing translations and when they are not and various other convoluted explanations. To sum up orc is the broadest general category (all Uruks and Uruk-hai are orcs); uruks (lowercase) is a more restricted category and refers to large soldier orcs (all Uruks and Uruk-hai are uruks); but Uruks and Uruk-hai (uppercase) are each sub-categories of uruks belonging to Sauron and Saruman, respectively.

As to the related, but seperate, discussion of the meaning of the suffix "-hai", I still suggest that it is in some way related to a tolerance of sunlight in creatures that might normally be expected to dislike the sun. Saruman's Uruk-hai boast of their disdain for the sun when most orcs do not like the sun. The Olog-hai are a form of trolls that tolerate the sun when normal trolls cannot tolerate the sun. We are left with the Oghor-hai from Unfinished Tales. We are told in UT that Oghor-hai is the orc's name for the Druedain. We are also told that another name for the Druedain is Pukel which means goblin (=orc), so we have the Druedain being considered somewhat goblin-like (orc-like) in appearance, but they can tolerate the sun because they are not true goblins, but are indeed men. Thus we can make a sun connection for all three uses of the suffix "-hai".

Agreement with Greenwood

I'm sure it is no surprise that I agree with Greenwood here (for the most part). What can I add to the above post? Not that much, really. I re-iterate that I see 'hai' being applied in the sense of a specific epithet. The general grouping is 'uruks', and Saruman's Orcs are differentiated by adding 'hai'. Doubtless Greenwood and I see this in part due to our common background in Biology. If we were to extend this in the full sense of taxonomics, then Sauron's great soldier Orcs would be uruk Uruks, while those of Saruman could be either uruk Uruk-hai or uruk Hai. Of course, these are reversing the normal capitalizations, where the genus is capitalized and the specific epithet is left uncapitalized. But, as I've said before, Tolkien was not a Taxonomist in the strict sense, he was a Philologist. A third possibility would be to follow the naming of Gorillas. This is no doubt inspired on my part by the fact that Grishnakh calls Ugluk an ape, and Ugluk refers to the 'apes of Lugburz'. Anyway, gorillas have the same name for both genus and species, Gorilla gorilla. This reminds me of the apes of Lugburz, who (following Tolkien's capitalization procedures) seem to be uruk Uruk. However, the Mountain Gorillas are a slightly different breed, and their naming reflects that they are only found in a secluded region. They are named Gorilla gorilla beringei. Although in the same species as the more common lowland gorilla, the mountain gorilla has had beringei added to the name to indicate that it is a slightly different breed with different characteristics. In my mind, the 'hai' of Uruk-hai is analogous to the beringei in the above example. Hai modifies Uruk to inform us that the Uruk-hai are larger, more cunning, and more sun-tolerant than the Uruks of Mordor. Ugluk and comrades say as much:

"We are the fighting Uruk-hai! We slew the great warrior. We took the prisoners. We are the servants of Saruman the Wise, the White Hand: the Hand that gives us man's-flesh to eat. We came out of Isengard, and led you here ....."

Who are the 'we' in the above sentence? 'We' refers to the Uruk-hai. What are the qualities of the Uruk-hai? They are 'fighting', they slew Boromir, they took the prisoners, they serve Saruman the Wise, they eat man's-flesh, and they come out of Isengard. The Uruks of Mordor are certainly 'fighting', but they did not slay Boromir, they did not take the Hobbits as prisoners, they probably eat man's flesh when they can, but they most emphatically do not serve Saruman or come from Isengard. I would say that this is pretty good textual evidence that the name Uruk-hai refers to something other than the Uruks of Mordor. Ugluk and company do not say that they are some of the Uruk-hai, or that they are they 'that branch of the Uruk-hai which comes from Isengard'. They use the term Uruk-hai to be all-inclusive. 'We are the Uruk-hai', the Uruk-hai 'come from Isengard'. If there were other varieties of Uruk-hai, then Grishnakh would be one of them. Yet he does not object to Ugluk using 'Uruk-hai' in the all-inclusive sense, nor does he mind that Ugluk says that 'the Uruk-hai' 'come from Isengard'.
Further examples confirm that 'Uruk-hai' refers to something distinct from the Uruks of Mordor:

'"What of the dawn?" they jeered. "We are the Uruk-hai: we do not stop the fight for night or day, for fair weather or for storm."'

The Uruk-hai are not bothered by the light of day. We have no direct statement about the Uruks of Mordor, but I have posted evidence that the Orcs of Mordor are adversely affected by the sun. Grishnakh's Uruks fall behind the Uruk-hai and have their heads down until the sun goes down, when they begin to put on speed. The moment the clouds are blown away and the Rohirrim attack at the Pelannor the Orcs and Men of Mordor begin to route. While the Men regain their composure and later put up a fight, the Orcs are only further described as being routed into the river in the midst of hating the sun. Finally, there is the quote of Treebeard- stating that all Orcs other than Saruman's dislike the sun and speculating that the Isengarders' acquisition of sun tolerance might be due to crossing with humans. In Morgoth's ring we learn that Saruman did indeed cross Men with Orcs, and that by so doing the offspring acquired the traits of being larger and more cunning than the 'pure' orcs which they were descended from. Sauron could have done the same thing with his Uruks and so made them sun-tolerant, but then the following problems arise:
1) Treebeard's statement becomes one made out of ignorance. He does not know about other sun-tolerant orcs, so his statement that Saruman's Orcs alone could withstand the sunlight becomes misleading, especially since his speculation that Saruman was crossing Orcs with Men turns out to be true.
2) The statement of Tolkien's that crossing Orcs with Men was Saruman's 'wickedest deed' becomes confusing. If Sauron was already doing the same thing, then Saruman's breeding of Orcs with Men wouldn't be any more wicked than employing the crossbreeds of Sauron.
3) All of the mentions of sunlight during the final march across Rohan and the battle of the Pelannor become superfluous. Tolkien certainly had a 'descriptive' manner of writing, but the way in which sunlight is mentioned in these passages makes me think that it was affecting Sauron's Orcs.
If we all agree that Saruman's Orcs were more sun-tolerant than Sauron's, then it behooves us to look again at the above passages: 'We are the fighting Uruk-hai' by Ugluk and 'We are the Uruk-hai' by the Orcs at Helm's Deep. Neither of these passages make me think that the Isengarders are a select group of Uruk-hai, with characteristics different from other groups of Uruk-hai. Both of these passages seem to be defining Uruk-hai, in the one case as the Orcs of Saruman, and in the other as sun-tolerant Orcs. Unless there are Uruk-hai that don't fight, then both of these passages are devoid of what has been termed 'qualifiers'. Looking at the other passages, it appears to me that rather than qualifiers we are seeing synonymous adjectives. 'Of Isengard', and 'rebel' appear to fall into this category. The only way that these become qualifiers is if you first assume that the Uruks of Mordor are also Uruk-hai, without any proof of this. Particularly important to this is example 9 from Greenwood's post. Gorbag is speaking in a similar sense to Ugluk and co. He is intending to be inclusive about a breed of Orcs- who puts slips right? The Uruks. What he does not say is The Uruk-hai. The only way to make these two statements equivalent is to argue that the ring was translating into Westron for Sam's benefit, and Tolkien was translating from Westron into English for our benefit. Yet we know the English 'translation' for Uruks- it's 'Orcs', or as it's more properly applied, 'large Soldier Orcs'. The word 'Uruk' is not a Westron word, so it is unlikely that the ring would 'prefer' this as a 'translated' word, especially as Sam has only heard it once before, and that in the heat of battle when he could easily have missed it or later forgotten it. What the 'ring as translator' theory neglects is that Tolkien would have been a poor story-teller by employing such a trick. If he wants us to think of the Soldier-Orcs of Mordor and of Isengard as both having the name 'Uruk-hai', then this would be the place to do it, regardless of how fluent Sam is in Black Speech. In the chapter The Uruk-hai Tolkien clearly describes Grishnakh's Uruks as different from Ugluk's Uruk-hai. Ugluk and co. consistently refer to themselves as the Uruk-hai. If Tolkien wants us to think of Uruks and Uruk-hai as referring to the same creatures, then as a story-teller he should show us that Mordor Uruks are also Uruk-hai, and Gorbag's quote is the ideal time to do this, rather than making us worry about which Black Speech term Sam did or did not know. I don't think that Tolkien is a bad story-teller. I think there is a reason that he describes Ugluk's troops differently from Grishnakh's. I think there is a reason that he only uses Uruk-hai to refer to Isengard Orcs. I think the reason is that the Orcs of Isengard are a different (possibly derivative) breed than the Uruks of Mordor, and that this different breed has a different name: Uruk-hai.

Just to expand on my earlier post, my view that uruks (lowercase) is used by Tolkien as a broader group name, while Uruks (uppercase) refers to a specific group is based on both the standard usage in my own field of study (ornithology) and standard usage in English. Taking English first: if I write "the Nile River and the Amazon River are among the longest in the world", than the word "River" is capitalized because it is part of a proper name. If I rewrite the above phrase as "the Nile and Amazon rivers are among the longest in the world", than the word "rivers" is in lowercase because it refers to a category and is no longer treated as a proper name. Moving to my own field (and in fact basing the example in Britain, Tolkien's home) we have a number of individual species of birds: Gannet, Cormorant, Shag, Bittern, Spoonbill, Oystercatcher, Cuckoo, Jay, Wren, etc. (I could add more). All of these names when capitalized refer to a particular species of bird. (You would of course refer to multiple individuals of each species by making a plural in the normal way by adding an "s".) Each of these species of birds are however members of families of birds that include other species. When referring to these groups, the above names would not be captilalized. Thus if I wrote: "I study the breeding biology of Shags.", it means I am studying a particular species (scientific name Phalacrocorax aristotelis). But I wrote: "I study the breeding biology of shags.", it means I am studying the breeding biology of a number of the smaller species of the family Phalacrocoracidae. It appears to me that Tolkien is using Uruk-hai vs. Uruks vs. uruks in a like manner in LOTR. Uruk-hai and Uruks each refer to a specific type of orc (in this case I would argue that from a scientific standpoint they are subspecies rather than full species, and yes distinctive subspecies are at times given their own names), while uruks is a group name for all large soldier orcs.


Grond

A quick comment on Aragil's use of statistics in this discussion. There is nothing wrong with the use of statistics in literary research. To give just one example, literary scholars have used the statistics of word usage when trying to decide if a text purportedly written by Shakespeare fit the word usage commonly found in undisputed Shakespeare texts.

Uruks

For me it is clear that the remark made by the hunting orc shile pursuing Frodo and Sam was clearly tlaking about Mordor Uruk-hai. The arguments against that seem to be emotional. The main claim is that the reports from Cirith Ungol are unreliable citing the report of an 'elf-warrior' when the readers know there is not one. By a thin line of logic they conclude that Uruk-hai from Isengard is no greater an aberration. The problem is the report of the elf-warrior IS credible from a military intelligence sense. After a career studying enemy spot reports and tactical intelligence my view is the enemy would view them as very accurate. That is not to say it is true, the readers know it is not, but from the Dark Lord's view. There was an elf-blade captured and from the Enemy's view the most likely source of this weapon is logically an elf. More it is of the rare sort of sword used by the Noldor (the kind that light upo when evil is near) making it likely that this possible elf warrior is a High Elf and not Sindar or Silvan. The Enemy would learn from the Nazgul that took over Cirith Ungol that there was a rebellion of Uruk-hai attempting to steal the items captured from Frodo.

On immunity to sunlight. Another fact would be the appearance of Uruks in the time of Denenthor. Why would such an event be noteworthy unless these Uruks could tolerate the sun. They would simply be large orcs.

On the comment "Uruk-hai of Isengard." if all Uruk-hai were from Isengard why say "of Isengard?' There has been many comments saying that these must be the 'man orcs' referred to in the descriptions of Isengard forces yet we could easily hold another discussion debating that. There are no statements in LOTR saying Uruk-hai are man-orcs or half-orcs. In my view the distinguishing feature of Isengard Urus was their equipment. They apparently did not use the 'bent swords' and scimitars of the other orcs. They also used Yew bows. This equipment alone does not mean they are of mannish origin. Their near man height alone could be responsible for their iuse of mannish equipment.