Uruks vs. Uruk-hai

Re: Sorry couldn't resist

Originally posted by JeffF.
from previous post.
Why? because Tolkien means for the terms to be interchangeable!

Click to expand...

All right, this sort of statement bothers me. Do we really think that Tolkien uses these two terms interchangeably? Well, we can test the usage according to statistics (any statisticians please help me along here- I'm definitely not a statistics expert).

I count the following usages of the Orcs referring to themselves as either Uruks or Uruk-hai:
Isengarders calling themselves Uruk-hai: 6 (TT p. 61, p. 67, p. 68, p. 184, p. 184, p. 184)
Isengarders calling themselves Uruks: 0
Mordor Orcs calling themselves Uruk-hai: 0
Mordor Orcs calling themselves Uruks: 1 (TT p. 441)

Well, there's not that many intstances here, but let's see what we find. I'm going to assume that Uruks and Uruk-hai are interchangeable for the sake of this exercise. Since they are interchangeable, they will have an equal opportunity of being used: 1/2. Each reference to the 'great soldier Orcs' is going to be considered as a separate trial, with equal probability that the term 'Uruk' or 'Uruk-hai' is used. As far as I can tell, this follows a Bernoulli distribution, with p=0.5, and q=0.5. For the Isengard Orcs, the probability turns out to be 1/64- six 'trials', all of which use the term 'Uruk-hai'. For the Mordor Orcs the probability turns out to be 1/2- one 'trial', which used the term 'Uruk'. The total probability that Tolkien would use the terms as he has in these seven instances, if Uruk and Uruk-hai were truly interchangeable, is 1/128. If Tolkien were to write these chapters 128 times, only once would we expect him to come up with Isengarders always calling themselves 'Uruk-hai', Mordor Orcs calling themselves 'Uruks'. This is not 100% proof of how Tolkien intended to use the terms, especially not by the high standards we've come to expect on this thread. So let's broaden the experiment out again- after all, there are other characters in the books, and there's the narrator.

Additional uses:
Narrator or other character calling Isengarders Uruk-hai: 1 (RotK, reference to Pippin in their clutches)
Narrator or other character calling Isengarders Uruks: 0
Narrator or other character calling Mordor Orcs Uruk-hai: 0
Narrator or other character calling Mordor Orcs Uruks: 6 (FotR p. 421, RotK p. 255, RotK p. 255, Rotk p.256, RotK p.414, RotK p.461)

(Please note I don't have my books here for page numbers- the narrator refers to Pippin in the clutches of the Uruk-hai is from chapter 6 of RotK, 'The Siege of Gondor') The probabilities for this usage of Uruk-hai is then 1/2, and probability for this usage of Uruks is then 1/64. These are still not all that convincing, so let's look at the total probabilities for these 14 usages- 7 times referring to Isengarders as Uruk-hai, 7 times referring to Mordor Orcs as Uruks, no other usages of either terms (that I'm aware of): The chances for these usages is 1/16384. Poor Professor Tolkien would have to write the books 16383 more times before we'd expect to see another such instance of these terms, assuming they're equally likely, i.e. interchangeable. The astute reader will note that one usage of Uruk-hai has been left out- the infamous 'rebel Uruk-hai' passage of RotK p.147, the apple of Tar-Elenion's eye. Being the fearless user of statistics that I am, I will now assume (for the purposes of this calculation only) that 'rebel Uruk-hai' refers to troops of Mordor. The chances of this outcome (assuming the two terms to be interchangeable) is now 15/32768, or 0.046%. If Tolkien were to write the books ten-thousand times, we'd expect 4.6 of those writings to have the same usage as what he actually wrote. If he were 'only' to write the books 100 times, we would not expect to see this usage. In case anybody is interested if 'rebel Uruk-hai' is a mistake by the Higher Ups (as I believe it is), then the probability becomes 1/32768. Again I have to ask: Does anybody here really believe that Tolkien was using these two terms interchangeably? If there is another reason besides the possibility that 'Uruk' and 'Uruk-hai' were different names referring to different breeds of soldier Orc, I'd be interested to hear it.

Originally posted by Grond
Aragil, from the descriptions in the text, I have always imagined Frodo as being extremely fair. He is closer to Elvish, I think than all the other Hobbits. Sam, on the other hand, has always been described as short and squat and more, well..... dwarvish. That is why I always thought that the small dwarf-man referred to him.....even before our debate here started. But that is just my internal visualization of him.

Click to expand...

Well, reverse the descriptions above and my point still holds. I also remember that Sam is described wearing a shapeless felt bag as a hat, making him look like a beardless dwarf as he left Rivendell. He's also stubborn like a Dwarf. And agreed, Faramir says there's something Elvish about Frodo, and he's certainly described as an Elf-friend (and fairer of face than most by Gandalf to Barliman). Then again, it is Sam who flatters himself as he's attacking Cirith Ungol by saying that he's the great Elf warrior, and the Orcs seem to attribute Sam's attack on Shelob as the deed of a great Elf.
Anyway, my point is that both dwarf-man and great Elf can be applied to either of the hobbits, but these are colorful descriptions, and are not 100% correct according to the racial descriptions that Tolkien gives us for Hobbits. Why can't 'rebel Uruk-hai' be a likewise colorful description of Gorbag's troops, without constraining it to be 100% racially correct (mistaking one breed of great Soldier Orcs for another)?

Re: Re: Sorry couldn't resist

Originally posted by aragil
I count the following usages of the Orcs referring to themselves as either Uruks or Uruk-hai:
Isengarders calling themselves Uruk-hai: 6 (TT p. 61, p. 67, p. 68, p. 184, p. 184, p. 184)
Isengarders calling themselves Uruks: 0
Mordor Orcs calling themselves Uruk-hai: 0
Mordor Orcs calling themselves Uruks: 1 (TT p. 441)

Interestingly enough we do not know exactly what Gorbag called them, we only know what Sam heard. It is quite unlikely that he _actually_ said 'Uruks'.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Re: Re: Re: Sorry couldn't resist

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
Interestingly enough we do not know exactly what Gorbag called them, we only know what Sam heard. It is quite unlikely that he _actually_ said 'Uruks'.

Click to expand...

This holds equally true for the 6 instances in which the Isengarders claim to be 'Uruk-hai', and just emphasizes my point. It is completely improbable that Tolkien as narrator would use the term in the fourteen ways that he did if he intended them to be interchangeable. He meant to call the soldier Orcs of Mordor Uruks, and he meant to call the Orcs of Isengard Uruk-hai, unless you believe that Tolkien 'accidently' produced the usage which was published, a 1/16384 chance.

Quoted by Tar-Elenion
Interestingly enough we do not know exactly what Gorbag called them, we only know what Sam heard. It is quite unlikely that he _actually_ said 'Uruks'.

Click to expand...

"Gorbag" didn't say anything. "Sam" didn't hear anything. Neither of these two characters ever existed. Tolkien invented and wrote it all. Tolkien chose to have his Isengarders always call themselves Uruk-hai. Tolkien chose to call his Isengarders Uruk-hai. Tolkien chose to use his invented word Uruks when referring to his Mordor orcs. Tar-Elenion seems to have lost touch with reality.

The four of us, Greenwood, Grond, Tar-Elenion and Aragil need to get together with a medium and have a seance. We will summon the spirit of JRRT and get his answer on this once and for all.

The ad hominem attacks are unnecessary, but if it makes you feel better keep on going.

Actually we do know what was actually said by the Isengarders, and by the soldier and tracker orcs in Mordor. They were speaking, for the most part, (debased) Westron, the Hobbits could understand them.

However Shagrat and Gorbag were, it seems, speaking Black Speech, and Sam did not know that tongue. The Ring seems to have 'translated' for him.

In LotR 'Choices' it is written: "He heard them both clearly, and he understood what they said. Perhaps the ring gave understanding of tongues, or simply understanding, especially of the servants of Sauron its maker, so that if he gave heed, he understood and translated the thought to himself."

First off, an apology- I posted my 'probability' bit without my books. There seems to be only one reference to the slave-drivers of RotK p. 255 as Uruks, not two as I had imagined. With this in mind, the chances of usage become thus:
Chances that Tolkien randomly came by his usages (w/o considering 'rebel Uruk-hai'): 1/8192
Chances that Tolkien randomly came by his usages (assuming 'rebel Uruk-hai' refers to Mordor Uruk-hai): 14/16384
Chances that Tolkien randomly came by his usages (assuming 'rebel Uruk-hai' refers to Isengarders): 1/16384
Probability Tolkien would have used the usages he did if Uruk was the name for Mordor soldiers while Uruk-hai was the name for Isengarders: 100%
(The Pippin in the clutches of the Uruk-hai came from RotK p. 118)

Tar-Elenion, I guess I am completely confused by your above 2 posts. You have always said that 'Uruk-hai' would be the Black speech way to say 'Uruks' (or more properly Uruk-folk), and that Uruks was the anglicized version. The one time an Orc might be speaking black speech and we listen in, Tolkien decides to translate it 'Uruks'. When Orcs are speaking debased Westron (Ugluk, Helm's Deep, Soldier saying 'rebel U-h'), Tolkien always chooses to translate it 'Uruk-hai'. Is this what you were trying to point out? I thought Tolkien always translated Westron so that it was anglicized. Shouldn't he then have had the Orcs speaking Westron say 'Uruks' (the anglicized version of Uruk-hai), while having Gorbag speaking Morbeth translated as 'Uruk-hai' in Sam's mind? Was Tolkien mistaken in his role as translator? Now I'm really confused by your argument!
If you are trying to attack the probabilities, then even without Gorbag's usage (or 'rebel U-h') the chances of our text coming from random choices of Uruk/Uruk-hai is 1/4096. Still not exactly betting odds, and you seem to be doing harm to your argument by suggesting that Gorbag's usage would be different based on the language he's speaking.

Grond- If I could only seance with JT (as I call him) I would in a heart-beat.

First off, an apology- I posted my 'probability' bit without my books. There seems to be only one reference to the slave-drivers of RotK p. 255 as Uruks, not two as I had imagined.

Click to expand...

Aragil

You were right the first time. There are two. First to the slave-driver uruksand then about two pages later when the orcs Sam and Frodo are traveling with, a company of heavily armed uruks runs into their column and in the confusion Sam and Frodo make their escape.

Tar-Elenion

You keep switching back and forth between calling Tolkien a writer and a translator. It seemed fair to make tongue-in-cheek note of it.

I thought that there were 3 mentions of Uruks in pages 255-256: two of the slave drivers being uruks, one of the uruk column from barad-dur. Turns out slave-drivers are only referred to once. Oh well, I was pretty close.

Appendix F ROTK

"...orch. Related, not 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, especialy by the Uruk-hai, snaga 'slave"

p. 511 of the 1977 Ballantine paperback edition.

In the very first post of this long discussion. excerpts of this quote are used as one of 12 quotes concluded to be ambigious.

This quote is not ambigous. In it JRRT clearly states that Uruks are from BOTH Mordor and Isengard. The Uruk-hai are clearly stated to refer to lesser orcs as 'snaga' (slave) and the only example of this in LOTR is in Return of the King when the tracker and Uruk are puseuing Frodo and Sam. It is clear that JRRT uses the terms interchangeably.

quote from Greenwood's post (just before my previous response)

If the "rebel Uruk-hai" are any of Gorbag's boys why doesn't Tolkien have the tracker call them "rebel Uruks"? Tolkien has already had Gorbag call himself and his boys Uruks. Why should Tolkien change the designation to Uruk-hai if he meant us to think that it referred to Gorbag's boys?

If JRRT called them called the only "rebel uruks" then it would just further the anbigouity of the statement regarding /Uruks/uruk-hai. The fact that he does call them rebel Uruk-hai supports the contention that the terms are interchangeable (i.e. he calls the rebel uruk-hai because it means the same thing as Uruks).

Jeff F- I realize that this thread is overly-long, so I'm not too angry that you missed the following post:
http://thetolkien.forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=46418#post46418
At the very bottom of the post I address the entry from appendix F:

What appendix F says (bolds are mine):
'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, especialy by the Uruk-hai, snaga 'slave''

What appendix F does not say:
'Uruk was the name of the soldier Orcs of Mordor and Isengard'.

I've never argued against the word 'uruk' being applied to Isengard Orcs. Uruk can very easily be proved to apply to Isengard Orcs, as in 'Uruk'-hai, meaning (I hope) Orc-men. But the passage does not say that Uruk was the name of the soldier-Orcs of Isengard. It says the word uruk was applied to them. A whole thread full of differences in that little nuance. If you still think Tolkien used the two words interchangeably, please see:
http://thetolkien.forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=48014#post48014
I think that you'll find you are either mistaken or a thrill-seeking gambler.

I'm surprised at you Aragil attacking a clearly subjective argument from a statistical viewpoint. It is an untenable stance. If JRRT was using the term interchangeably as is argued, he could use Uruks exclusively throughout the book and only use Uruk-hai on the last page. Your statistics would be as absolutely meaningless in that case as it is in this one. We are arguing the intent of the writer, and statistical analysis has no relevance.

Grond- the argument I was attacking was that the words 'Uruk' and 'Uruk-hai' are interchangeable. In a thread where nobody seems to want to agree with anybody (except for Greenwood and I with eachother), it is nice to be able to show anything, so please forgive me for resorting to statistics. What statistics can show is that Tolkien elected to not use Uruk and Uruk-hai interchangeably. Maybe they were interchangeable, but if so Tolkien chose to use them differently. Tar-Elenion and Jeff F are sort of glazing by the usage, implying that it's not that significant. They are free to do so, I just want to make sure everybody here knows the probability that Tolkien's differentiation of Isengarders as 'Uruk-hai' and Mordor Orcs as 'Uruk' arose from chance. I think that the statistics have shown this to be very unlikely, regardless of whether 'rebel Uruk-hai' refers to Mordor Orcs or those of Isengard. This is useful, and exceedingly germaine to this thread. Tar-Elenion has agreed that maybe the Isengarders were a slightly different breed of soldier-Orc, possibly having human blood. All other arguments are now pointless. The only thing in contention is whether or not 'Uruks' and 'Uruk-hai' can be equally applied to soldier Orcs of Mordor as well as Isengard. The statistical analysis was done so that everybody here is aware of what we are arguing, so I am not sorry I used it. There will still be discussion about whether or not the words were interchangeable, and (for instance) perhaps the Isengarders preferred to use the formal phrase 'Uruk-hai' while the Mordor Orcs resorted to the anlicized 'Uruks'. As I pointed out to Tar-Elenion, that would be interesting because the Isengarders generally speak Westron (the 'anglicized' language of Middle-earth), while Grishnakh and Shagrat were presumably speaking Morbeth, which would have been more appropriately rendered as 'Uruk-hai', rather than resorting to the 'anglicized' version- Uruks.

"this (Uruks) was applied as a rule only to the great soldier-orcs that at this time issued from Mordor and Isengard."


The enclosure (Uruks) being mine. This statment clearly states exactly what you said Appendix F faile to mention that is that Uruks is the name for both the great soldier orcs that issued from Mordor and Isengard. Plus the fact that App. F states that the term 'snaga'
was used by the Uruk-hai as a derogatory term for the lsesser ocs and the only time this happens is when a Mordor Uruk uses it.

It seems to me that it would not matter if you did find a direct quote by JRRT "Oh by the way Uruks and Uruk-hai are interchageable" because the thin logic used to decry the previous eviddence would be applied to a clear cut statment ast that. "Oh but he didn't say the Uruks of Mordor are the same as the Uruk-hai of Isengard, not that statment didn't say that at all. It was completely different."

A

Originally posted by aragil
As I pointed out to Tar-Elenion, that would be interesting because the Isengarders generally speak Westron (the 'anglicized' language of Middle-earth), while Grishnakh and Shagrat were presumably speaking Morbeth, which would have been more appropriately rendered as 'Uruk-hai', rather than resorting to the 'anglicized' version- Uruks.

Click to expand...

For clarity, English is not Westron. Off topically where does the term Morbeth come from? I don't remember it.

Cian- I was hoping you could come up with a reputable origin for it. I heard (saw) Pontifex using it, and remembered the term from my 'Middle-Earth Role Playing' Days. It was supposed to be the name for Black Speech, but I couldn't remember if it came from Iron Crown Enterprises or from Tolkien. If you've never heard of it, then I'd have to lean towards the former.
As for Westron- I thought that Tolkien's notes on translation said that he translated Westron to English. To me this indicates that 'Uruks' would be more likely to be used (i.e. transcribed by Tolkien) by a Westron speaker than a Black Speech (Morbeth) speaker. Conversely, Uruk-hai would be more likely to come from a Black speech user than from a Westron user. Interestingly, it is the exact reverse usage that we see in the books. Welcome back to the thread, although I must say that it hasn't become any friendlier than when you were last here. Witness, as I turn my wrath towards...

Jeff F- please read your appendix F again. Here it is:

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, especialy by the Uruk-hai, snaga 'slave'

Click to expand...

What preceeds 'this' in the above passage is 'the word uruk', not 'the name uruk'. You are inserting your own view into this reading. The word uruk is applied to the Isengarders throughout the text in the phrase 'Uruk-hai'. It is never applied to the Isengarders by itself, and the above passage does not say that it was.

Aragil, you are correct on Tolkien rendering Westron into English almost everywhere. My "clarity" was for "anyone" who might be confuzzled really (apologies. I should've added that parenthetically and been clearer myself ) ... my response only stems from a recent post (on another MB) about "Dwarrowdelf" as relating to the Westron word, so I'm just in a mode here I guess.

Anyway, yeah I don't remember Morbeth in Tolkien's corpus. Sindarin peth means "word" I note (lenited beth) Hmmm.

I'm still readin' in here anyway.

I dont think Gorbag 'said' 'Uruks'. 'Uruks' (an anglicization) is what was used to translate what Sam actually heard him say through the Ring (taking into account the internal history presented (see App. F and Prolouge)).

He heard them both clearly, and he understood what they said. Perhaps the Ring gave understanding of tongues, or simply understanding, especially of the servants of Sauron its maker, so that if he gave heed, he understood and translated the thought to himself.

Click to expand...

What Sam may have heard through the Ring was *URUKIN, This is may be the same word that Gandalf used in Moria. The tracker and soldier Orc are speaking Westron (being of different breeds they used that tongue, App. F) but both know the word 'Uruk-hai' so there is no need for that to be rendered into Westron.

(Asterisk '*' edited in, 02/08/02)

Tar-Elenion- As far as I know nothing was translated into Westron. In fact, everything was written in English (originally). In places the Good Professor decided to use words from his invented languages. Gorbag and Shagrat were speaking the Black Speech if you like. Tolkien was not constrained to translate 'what Sam heard'. He was free to translate exactly what he invisioned it was that the Orcs spoke. If he had wanted Gorbag to say 'Uruk-hai', then he would have Gorbag say 'Uruk-hai'. What he wanted Sam to hear has nothing to do with what he wrote on paper. This bears directly on your (and other notable scholars') theory that Uruk is an anglicized version of Uruk-hai. The language of Middle-Earth which Tolkien has decided to 'translate' as English is Westron. According to the 'anglicization theory', the best translation would have had Westron speakers using the 'anglicized' form, i.e. Uruk. Similarly, users of the Black Speech would have used the term from that language- 'Uruk-hai'. I find it instructive that we find the exact opposite usage in the books. I am incredibly confused by your argument for Gorbag using the term 'Uruk'. The passage you quote does not say that the ring 'tranlated their language to Westron'. It says that he understood what they were saying. In the passage from The Two Towers, Tolkien does not characterize the narrative as being what 'Sam heard'. He characterizes it as being what Gorbag and Shagrat were actually saying. I think that you are trying too hard here to explain why Gorbag calls himself and Shagrat 'Uruks'. I think the simplest explanation here is the most likely- Gorbag called himself a Uruk because he is a Uruk. Tolkien used the term 'Uruk' because that is how he envisions Gorbag. He used the term Uruk-hai when Ugluk was speaking because it was a different name, and it applied to Ugluk and his cronies from Isengard. The contention that Gorbag's words were understood by Sam, and should then be more accurately translated into the 'anglicized' version has not improved your argument in my opinion. It has made me aware of the fact that all Westron-speaking Orcs in the books say 'Uruk-hai', all Black Speech speaking (Black Speeching?) Orcs in the books say 'Uruk'. This is just further textual evidence that Tolkien uses the terms differently, probably to refer to different breeds of Soldier-Orcs.