Uruks vs. Uruk-hai

[aragil]

Yes it is good enough for you, making it your opinion on the matter. I've pointed out before that in 1944, when that letter was written, all of the Mordor Orcs later referred to as "Uruks" were then called "Veritable Orcs", "True Orcs", etc, while the Isengard Orcs were called Uruk-hai (and Aragorn was called Trotter). It is possible that JRRT changed his mind between 1944 and publishing. I don't mind you having a different opinion on the matter, it makes for interesting discussion. But if you would kindly recognize that other opinions exist it would also make for polite discussion.

 

[Tar-Elenion]

Aragil said:
"T-E, would it at least be possible to convince you to say "I believe that Uruks and Uruk-hai are the same thing"...".

I said that JRRT used the terms interchangeably in Letter 78, thus they are the same thing.

Now you are writing about Mordor and Isengard Orcs, which was not referred to in your request. Perhaps you should be more clear in your statement and instead of complaining about my noting that words 'Uruks' and 'Uruk-hai' are the same thing, you should have complained about my statement that Sauron has Uruk-hai as well.
As the _author_ uses the terms interchangeably in Letter 78 (1944) and used the anglicization 'Uruks' for Saruman's Uruk-hai in 'Fords of Isen' (ca.1970?), then the terms are interchangeable. That is how the _author_ used them.

If you wish to argue with my assertion about Sauron having Uruk-hai then clearly state it (and of course as I've pointed out we do have Mordor Orcs referred to as 'Uruk-hai').

 

[jallan]

If you read Book 3 of The Lord of the Rings, you probably get the strong impressiion that Uruk-hai means Saruman's new breed of sun-resistant Orcs and means only those.

If you read some of the other material, notably the mention of rebel Uruk-hai by the solider Orc in Mordor in the chapter "The Land of Shadow", you will have doubts.

This most important references, because it is within The Lord of the Rings iself, is a speech in which the soldier Orca explains to the tracker Orc Orc why they have been called out. The other references in his speech all refer to the previously described disturbances around and within the Tower of Cirith Ungol. The slaughtering of most of its garrison would certainly be explain why Orcs have been summoned on duty to search for intruders and for the rebels.

So the reference to rebel "Uruk-hai" almost certainly refers to the "filthy rebel Gorbag", as Shagrat has previously said, and to his followers.

Tar-Elenion's reasoning here and elsewhere is quite right.

Why then does Uruk-hai seem to have a different meaning in the Rohirrim chapters?

One possibility is that Tolkien changed his mind during composition of the book, and did not properly modify some earlier references.

Another possibility, I believe the correct one, is that Uruk in Tolkien's mind while writing The Lord of the Rings, always meant large solider Orc, referring to a particular race or caste or class or Orc.

There were presumably Uruks, that is Uruk-hai, all about Middle-earth.

Saruman's Uruk class was different, a kind of Uruk bred especially to withstand sunlight.

But they still naturally call themselves Uruks, Uruk-hai, or fighting Uruk-hai, in contrast to other sorts of Orcs.

Saruman's Uruk-hai boast that they are the warriors of Saruman's Orc community, not like his other Orc servants, not like those smaller maggot folk from Moria. They are Uruk-hai, better than other kinds of Orcs, fiercer and better than Men.

They boast that they are the Uruk-hai, who can withstand sunlight, unlike Saruman's other Orcs or Misty Mountain Orcs.

They aren't at all thinking about other Uruks, other Uruk-hai, in Mordor or elsewhere, who cannot deal with sunlight as well.

Why should they think about these in the circumstances?

 

[aragil]

I was in fact arguing that Uruks and Uruk-hai mean the same thing. It does appear that Tolkien used the terms interchangeably in 1944, but there is the distinct possibility that he changed his mind by the time of publishing- hence my bringing up the fact that in 1944 Tolkien called large soldier Orcs of Mordor "veritable Orcs", but at the time of publishing he called them "Uruks".
We don't know for certain what Tolkien did in Fords of Isen, or if he was planning on changing the entries before he passed on. We don't even know if he had unintionally contradicted his earlier work. This is precisely why Greenwood did not like the use of a Secondary source in this matter.
You know my stance on Mordor Uruk-hai. The same statement that has Uruk-hai in Mordor has a Dwarf-man and an Elf-lord also running around. I do not call into question whether the reference is to Gorbag's lot. I just question whether it accurately refers to them as Uruk-hai. I can respect that you have a different opinion on the matter, but it would be nice to see you acknowledge that it is an issue.

 

[aragil]

Originally posted by jallan
They aren't at all thinking about other Uruks, other Uruk-hai, in Mordor or elsewhere, who cannot deal with sunlight as well.

Why should they think about these in the circumstances?

Well, I see that you are now involved in the earlier matters of the thread, rather than the strictly linguistic questions. My answer to your question is that some of Ugluk's bragging about being "Uruk-hai" comes when he is addressing Grishnakh, who is almost certainly a Uruk. Given Grishnakh's general disdain for Saruman and his filthy White Badges, it is inconceivable to me that Grishnakh wouldn't respond with something along the lines of "You're not the only Uruk-hai".

Your theory that Tolkien changed his mind and then didn't properly edit has some merit.
However, in regards to your theory of Uruk always being in Tolkien's mind, I can provide you quotes that show that "Uruk" was not applied in any form to a Mordor Orc until 1948, and then, except for the dubious "Rebel Uruk-hai" statemtent, all references to Mordor soldiers were as "Uruks". Uruk-hai was first applied to Saruman's Orcs in 1942, and, excepting a cryptic appendix entry and the references in UT (which I look at with some skepticism), the Isengarders were always referred to as "Uruk-hai" and never Uruks.

I know there are some linguistic objections- "Uruks" is certainly an anglicized plural of "Uruk". The singular of "Uruk-hai" is certainly "Uruk". However, I think that there is evidence that "-hai" is something other than just a simple plural marker, and, in any case, every other language in Middle-earth has other ways of making a plural than adding a collective marker. My own opinion is that Tolkien originally had "Uruk-hai" for Saruman, and long-afterwards decided to rename his Mordor orcs "Uruks". I think he intended them to be separate breeds (Saruman's Uruk-hai are certainly different then Shagrat, Grishnakh, or Ugluk), but tried to 'get away with one' with using such similar names. I'm trying to excuse the professor from this by coming up with a translation for '-hai' which will suitably differentiate the Isengarders from the Mordor lot, and using '-hai'='men' seems to be a logical choice. I'll freely admit that stretching 'hai' to be the plural term from 'ku'=man is stretching it, but I don't feel to bad about this as I think Tolkien has already fudged.

 

[Tar-Elenion]

Originally posted by aragil
I was in fact arguing that Uruks and Uruk-hai mean the same thing. It does appear that Tolkien used the terms interchangeably in 1944, but there is the distinct possibility that he changed his mind by the time of publishing- hence my bringing up the fact that in 1944 Tolkien called large soldier Orcs of Mordor "veritable Orcs", but at the time of publishing he called them "Uruks".

It is more likely that he did not change his mind.

We don't know for certain what Tolkien did in Fords of Isen, or if he was planning on changing the entries before he passed on. We don't even know if he had unintionally contradicted his earlier work. This is precisely why Greenwood did not like the use of a Secondary source in this matter.

Secondary sources like those that have "veritable Orcs"? Of course Greenwood did not like the use of the Appendices either.

What we do know is that 'Fords of Isen' is in agreement with "his earlier work", which also refers to Saruman's Orcs as 'uruks'.

You know my stance on Mordor Uruk-hai. The same statement that has Uruk-hai in Mordor has a Dwarf-man and an Elf-lord also running around. I do not call into question whether the reference is to Gorbag's lot. I just question whether it accurately refers to them as Uruk-hai. I can respect that you have a different opinion on the matter, but it would be nice to see you acknowledge that it is an issue.

A "sort of small dwarf-man", not a "Dwarf-man", which is an apt description of Hobbit (Frodo). And we know that Sam was seen as an Elf. As the reference was to Mordorian Orcs at Cirith Ungol, then they are the ones being called "rebel Uruk-hai". There was evidence that the 'Elf' and 'dwarf-man' were there (or believed to be). There is evidence that Mordorian Orcs were there, and these are being referred to as Uruk-hai. There is no evidence that Isengarders were there or believed to be there. Until there is some evidence presented it is simply a guess with nothing to back it up.

 

[aragil]

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
It is more likely that he did not change his mind.

Unfortunately, in this issue we don't have a better gauge of likelihood than our own opinions. What I do know is that in 1942 Tolkien was calling Mordor soldiers "Orcs", Isengard Soldiers "Uruk-hai". In 1944 he wrote a letter equating Uruk-hai and Uruks. In 1947 he was still calling Mordor soldiers "Orcs". Only in 1948 did he start calling Mordor Orcs "Uruks". I'd say he definitely changed his mind on what to call Mordor Orcs, the remaining question is whether he still thought "Uruks" and "Uruk-hai" were the same thing.

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
Secondary sources like those that have "veritable Orcs"? Of course Greenwood did not like the use of the Appendices either.

What we do know is that 'Fords of Isen' is in agreement with "his earlier work", which also refers to Saruman's Orcs as 'uruks'.

We don't know if Saruman's Uruks (from the appendices in LotR) are intended to be offshoots of his human/orc breeding program. In my opinion TA 3005 is too early for that- I know you have a different opinion.
UT is a bit of a different beast than HoME, I'm afraid. HoME is presenting us with earlier writings that we know are different from the published works- in many cases we can see how they evolve into the published works. For his part, CT made no effort to change anything in HoME. However, he acknowledges that he changed certain names in UT. We know from his letters that JRRT often used initials when writing, rather than writing out full names. We also know, from PoME, that within a year or two of writing Battle at the Fords of Isen JRRT was writing things that contradicted his published work. His mind was slipping, a fact that he lamented to CT in private. The fact is, that any or all of these ingredients could combine to make what we see in UT questionable. I'm not completely disregarding the book- I love it. However, I am saying that a possible unintended mixing of Uruk-hai and Uruks could have occurred which resulted in the wrong term being used in UT. I don't see how the same could be said of "veritable Orcs" in HoME.

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
A "sort of small dwarf-man", not a "Dwarf-man", which is an apt description of Hobbit (Frodo). And we know that Sam was seen as an Elf. As the reference was to Mordorian Orcs at Cirith Ungol, then they are the ones being called "rebel Uruk-hai". There was evidence that the 'Elf' and 'dwarf-man' were there (or believed to be). There is evidence that Mordorian Orcs were there, and these are being referred to as Uruk-hai. There is no evidence that Isengarders were there or believed to be there. Until there is some evidence presented it is simply a guess with nothing to back it up.

The other problem here is that no other Mordor unit is ever referred to as being composed of "Uruk-hai". You choose to wait until there is evidence to back up Isengarders at Cirith Ungol. I choose to wait until there is other evidence of Mordor Uruk-hai. We could be waiting a while.

 

[Tar-Elenion]

Originally posted by aragil
We don't know if Saruman's Uruks (from the appendices in LotR) are intended to be offshoots of his human/orc breeding program. In my opinion TA 3005 is too early for that- I know you have a different opinion.

Again, the terms were used interchangeably. You admit that.
There is no inconsistancy.

UT is a bit of a different beast than HoME, I'm afraid. HoME is presenting us with earlier writings that we know are different from the published works- in many cases we can see how they evolve into the published works. For his part, CT made no effort to change anything in HoME. However, he acknowledges that he changed certain names in UT.

He admits to those changes. What did he admit to changing in 'Fords of Isen'?

We know from his letters that JRRT often used initials when writing, rather than writing out full names. We also know, from PoME, that within a year or two of writing Battle at the Fords of Isen JRRT was writing things that contradicted his published work. His mind was slipping, a fact that he lamented to CT in private. The fact is, that any or all of these ingredients could combine to make what we see in UT questionable.

There is no inconsistancy. JRRT uses the terms interchangeably. Saying the JRRT's 'mind was slipping' some years after he wrote this is simply an attempt to make an inconsistancy where there is none.

I'm not completely disregarding the book- I love it. However, I am saying that a possible unintended mixing of Uruk-hai and Uruks could have occurred which resulted in the wrong term being used in UT. I don't see how the same could be said of "veritable Orcs" in HoME.

Yes lets just pick and choose the "secondary sources" to be used. 'Veritable Orcs' was not used, it was discarded. 'Uruks' and 'Uruk-hai' were both used, not discarded.

As CT wrote of 'Battles of the Fords of Isen':
"This, together with the account of the military organisation of the Rohirrim and the history of Isengard given in an Appendix to the text, belongs with other late pieces of severe historical analysis; it presented relatively little difficulty of a textual kind, and is only unfinished in the most obvious sense."

Uruks and Uruk-hai were used interchangeable for the same sorts of beings, 'great soldier-orcs from Mordor and Isengard'.
There is no logical reason to attempt to create an inconsistancy where there is none. He uses the terms interchangeably in Letters, LotR, and 'Fords of Isen' that is over a period of some 25 years.

The other problem here is that no other Mordor unit is ever referred to as being composed of "Uruk-hai". You choose to wait until there is evidence to back up Isengarders at Cirith Ungol. I choose to wait until there is other evidence of Mordor Uruk-hai. We could be waiting a while.

Again, "rebel Uruk-hai" is refering to Mordorian Orcs, which you "do not call into question". App. F says the Uruk-hai call lesser Orcs "snaga". This is done by both Mordorean and Isengarders. 2 pieces of evidence against _no_ evidence whatsoever that Isengarders were involved (or even believed to be) in the Cirith Ungol affair. None.

 

[aragil]

I'm getting a little side-tracked here from my question about Uruk-hai evolving from Uruk and Khai, but what the heck. 580 posts deserves a synopsis.

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
Again, the terms were used interchangeably. You admit that.
There is no inconsistancy.

I have never said that the terms were used interchangeably in the narrative, which is what this whole thread is about. The reference in the appendix is "great Uruks from the Misty Mountains in the service of Saruman". In my opinion this could be Mordor Orcs that Saruman has enlisted while creating his own orc/man hybrids. In which case the terms are no longer used interchangeably.

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
He admits to those changes. What did he admit to changing in 'Fords of Isen'?

CT admits to changing names where retention of the Manuscript form would lead to undue confusion. Did he do so in 'Fords of Isen'? Who the hell knows! He didn't give a list of which names he changed, he merely mentioned that he did so. This opens up the possibility that he changed some abbreviation to 'Uruks', possibly incorrectly. It does seem odd to me that Uruk-hai makes an appearance in the index, while never appearing in the narrative.

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
There is no inconsistancy. JRRT uses the terms interchangeably. Saying the JRRT's 'mind was slipping' some years after he wrote this is simply an attempt to make an inconsistancy where there is none.

Saying that is simply a fact. It causes confusion in some of his other unpublished work. It might be causing confusion here.

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
Yes lets just pick and choose the "secondary sources" to be used. 'Veritable Orcs' was not used, it was discarded. 'Uruks' and 'Uruk-hai' were both used, not discarded.

Veritable Orcs was not discarded, it was changed to 'Uruks'. Determining occurences such at this is exactly the use of these 'secondary sources'.
In any case, I'm not picking and choosing my secondary sources. I love UT, but the fact is that in some cases it conflicts with the published writing. A matter of minutes ago you told me that Celeborn could not be Olwe's grandson because then he and Galadriel would be too closely related for the customs of the Eldar. Yet if we read UT, one of the stories we get is that Celeborn is Olwe's grandson. In this case you acknowledge that UT has certain inherent problems. I'm sure it doesn't diminish your enjoyment of UT, and the possible mistaking of Uruks for Uruk-hai does not diminish mine.

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
As CT wrote of 'Battles of the Fords of Isen':
"This, together with the account of the military organisation of the Rohirrim and the history of Isengard given in an Appendix to the text, belongs with other late pieces of severe historical analysis; it presented relatively little difficulty of a textual kind, and is only unfinished in the most obvious sense."

It is obviously unfinished. It trails off in mid-sentence. We don't even know if JRRT ever looked over the thing again for gross errors. CT would not recognize any discrepancy between Uruks and Uruk-hai, assuming there is one. He already equates the term in his head due to the Letter of 1944, I'm sure. However, as I've mentioned several times, Uruks was not used in the text when CT received this letter, and when it was finally used 4 years later it was applied to a type of Orc that had been quite distinct from Saruman's Uruk-hai.

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
Uruks and Uruk-hai were used interchangeable for the same sorts of beings, 'great soldier-orcs from Mordor and Isengard'.
There is no logical reason to attempt to create an inconsistancy where there is none. He uses the terms interchangeably in Letters, LotR, and 'Fords of Isen' that is over a period of some 25 years.

He used the terms interchangeably in Letters, but he was not then referring to Mordor Orcs. I don't think it was used interchangeably in LotR. I've addressed UT several times, but it is worth noting again that the term "Uruk-hai" isn't used at all in UT.

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
Again, "rebel Uruk-hai" is refering to Mordorian Orcs, which you "do not call into question". App. F says the Uruk-hai call lesser Orcs "snaga". This is done by both Mordorean and Isengarders. 2 pieces of evidence against _no_ evidence whatsoever that Isengarders were involved (or even believed to be) in the Cirith Ungol affair. None.

The context of the quote is that the "higher ups" are in error. And indeed they are- there are no small dwarf-men or great elves running around Mordor. I don't think there are any rebel Uruk-hai running around Mordor either. You're reading of this passage depends on the passage being an accurate account. My reading relies on the fact that it is not accurate.
Again, my thesis is that "rebel Uruk-hai" erroneously refers to Mordor Orcs, in exactly the same way that "great Elf" and "a small dwarf-man" erroneously refers to Frodo and Sam.
Appendix F says that lesser breeds of Orc are called Snaga. It also notes that the Uruk-hai were especially fond of calling lesser breeds Snaga, but were apparently not the only ones to do so. According to Appendix F Shagrat could have called someone Snaga without being one of the Uruk-hai.

The beat goes on ....

 

[jallan]

Aragil posted:

My answer to your question is that some of Ugluk's bragging about being "Uruk-hai" comes when he is addressing Grishnakh, who is almost certainly a Uruk.

Check the text:

In the twilight he saw a large black Orc, probably Uglúk, standing facing Grishnákh, a short crook-legged creature, very broad and with long arms that hung almost to the ground.

This short crook-legged creature may be a different kind of Uruk, or possibly a different kind of Orc, more intelligent than the brute Uruks, the kind of Orc that Sauron could more greatly trust to handle his interests intelligently. Perhaps Grishnákh and his kind are half-Uruks bred with another type of Orc. Who knows?

That he is an Uruk is an unsupported hypothesis.

But if you wish him to be an Uruk, then note that when addressing Grishnákh, Uglúk says:

But in the meantime the Uruk-hai of Isengard can do the dirty work, as usual.

Uruk-hai is otherwise used only eight times in the main text of LR. Twice it is used by Uglúk when speaking of his own folk to the northern Orcs who are not Uruks, three times when jeering at Aragorn before the Hornburg, once in a back-reference to Pippin's captivity, and once in the reference of the Mordor soldier Orc to rebel Uruk-hai.

In all cases there is no necessity to suppose any meaning but the general "soldier-orc" meaning of Uruks.

It does seem odd to me that Uruk-hai makes an appearance in the index, while never appearing in the narrative.

Easily explained by Christopher Tolkien in the Introduction to UT under the section about The Istari:

In the event there was no index to The Lord of the Rings until the second edition of 1966, but my father's original rough draft has been preserved. From it I derived the plan of my inex to The Silmarillion, with translation of names and brief explanatory statements, and also, both there and in the index to this book, some of the translations and the wordings of some of the 'defintitions'.

The mention of the form Uruk-hai makes full sense in an entry for J.R.R. Tolkien's draft for an index to The Lord of the Rings. Compare:

Pelennor (Fields) 'Fenced Land', the 'townlands' of Minas Tirith, guarded by the wall of Rammas Echor, on which was frought the greatest battle of the War of the Ring.

The name Rammas Echor does not appear in Unfinished Tales elsewhere.

CT admits to changing names where retention of the Manuscript form would lead to undue confusion. Did he do so in 'Fords of Isen'? Who the hell knows!

How would Uruk-hai in the UT text at any point cause any confusion that a change to Uruks would alleviate?

Again, my thesis is that "rebel Uruk-hai" erroneously refers to Mordor Orcs, in exactly the same way that "great Elf" and "a small dwarf-man" erroneously refers to Frodo and Sam.

Very weak.

We know why the Orcs think there may be a "great Elf" about, for we saw through Sam's eyes and ears when and why that deduction was made.

Shagrat would have brought this information to the authorities.

"A small dwarf-man" is a reasonable description of a hobbit to beings who know about Dwarves and have probably never heard of hobbits or halflings.

Shagrat would have brought that information also

Shagrat would also have brought proper information about who was responsible for the rebellion.

There was no reason for anyone to have been confused on the point of who was responsible for the rebellion.

Aragil, your arguments are all what is usually called "special pleading".

You speculate that Christopher Tolkien included incorrect information when you don't like the information he provides, that Christopher Tolkien changed the text at the particular points that you would rather read differently, that J.R.R. Tolkien carelessly didn't write down what he really meant or should have meant when it isn't in accord with your theories, that the Mordor soldier Orc wasn't using the proper word.

All of this is possible, but certainly none of it more convincing than the position that most of this information is correct in the texts and that Uruks is Uruk-hai rendered more idiomatically in English.

Your Uruk + hai hypothesis, as I've already indicated, I also find possible, but no more.

It also possible that Sharkû is to be broken down as sha 'man' + rkû 'old', and that the plural of *sha is shai, and that -hai in Uruk-hai and other words is a weakening of that form.

There is no evidence for or against that possible hypothesis either.

Similarly, there is no suport for the idea that in Black Speech elements of compounds could change position.

A groundless hypothesis is useful for searching to see if evidence can be found to provide grounds for it.

It is not useful for anything else.

 

[Tar-Elenion]

Originally posted by aragil
I have never said that the terms were used interchangeably in the narrative, which is what this whole thread is about. The reference in the appendix is "great Uruks from the Misty Mountains in the service of Saruman". In my opinion this could be Mordor Orcs that Saruman has enlisted while creating his own orc/man hybrids. In which case the terms are no longer used interchangeably.

JRRT used the terms interchangeably. You are simply picking and choosing in order to create the illusion of an 'inconsistancy' where there is none.

CT admits to changing names where retention of the Manuscript form would lead to undue confusion. Did he do so in 'Fords of Isen'? Who the hell knows! He didn't give a list of which names he changed, he merely mentioned that he did so.

CT wrote this:
"...except in minor details such as shifts in nomenclature (where retention of the manuscript form would lead to disproportionate confusion or disproportionate space in elucidation) I have made no alterations for the sake of consistency with published works, but rather drawn attention throughout to conflicts and variations...". Obviously he, at least, felt there was no inconsistancy in 'Fords of Isen'.
And he does note things that he 'changed'.

This opens up the possibility that he changed some abbreviation to 'Uruks', possibly incorrectly.

Try dealing in probabilities.
You are simply attempting to create an inconsistancy where none exists to hold onto a pet theory that you have no evidence to back up.

It does seem odd to me that Uruk-hai makes an appearance in the index, while never appearing in the narrative.

Probably because the index was created from JRRT's original draft of an index for LotR.

Saying that is simply a fact. It causes confusion in some of his other unpublished work. It might be causing confusion here.

The 'mind slipping' was some years after 'Fords' was written. Look at the other pieces written at the same time as 'Fords'.
The only confusion is that which you are attempting to make by trying to create an inconsistancy where there is none.
Uruks=Uruk-hai is consistant in Letters, in LotR and in 'Fords of Isen'.

Veritable Orcs was not discarded, it was changed to 'Uruks'. Determining occurences such at this is exactly the use of these 'secondary sources'.

'Veritable Orcs' was discarded/abandoned as a term, it was not later used. Arwen was originally named _Finduilas_. This name for her was discarded and Arwen was used.

In any case, I'm not picking and choosing my secondary sources. I love UT, but the fact is that in some cases it conflicts with the published writing.

You are over generalizing. We are not discussing UT (which contains various 'unrelated' (FLBW) tales), we are discussing 'Fords of Isen' (one specific tale contained in UT). It is not inconsistant with LotR (nor with Letters).

A matter of minutes ago you told me that Celeborn could not be Olwe's grandson because then he and Galadriel would be too closely related for the customs of the Eldar. Yet if we read UT, one of the stories we get is that Celeborn is Olwe's grandson.

Correct. This is based on _evidence_. JRRT said Celeborn was Elmo's grandson. JRRT said Celeborn was Olwe's grandson. JRRT said that the Eldar do not wed with first cousins. I can produce passages stating each of these things. That is evidence.

In this case you acknowledge that UT has certain inherent problems.

No, I did not. I 'acknowledge' that there are problems with various versions of Celeborn's (and Galadriel's) history which create conflicts with the canonical texts as well as explicit concepts in the Legendarium. It has nothing to do with UT.

I'm sure it doesn't diminish your enjoyment of UT, and the possible mistaking of Uruks for Uruk-hai does not diminish mine.

The usage is consistant throughout. You are reduced to making assumptions because you have no evidence.

It is obviously unfinished. It trails off in mid-sentence. We don't even know if JRRT ever looked over the thing again for gross errors. CT would not recognize any discrepancy between Uruks and Uruk-hai, assuming there is one. He already equates the term in his head due to the Letter of 1944, I'm sure. However, as I've mentioned several times, Uruks was not used in the text when CT received this letter, and when it was finally used 4 years later it was applied to a type of Orc that had been quite distinct from Saruman's Uruk-hai.

Unfinished in only the most obvious sence. There are no 'gross errors'. You are making assumptions about CT based on no evidence. There is no inconsistancy in the usage of Uruks=Uruk-hai.

He used the terms interchangeably in Letters, but he was not then referring to Mordor Orcs. I don't think it was used interchangeably in LotR.

Based on the evidence your thoughts are wrong. You need to produce evidence to back up your thoughts not supposition and possibilty.

I've addressed UT several times, but it is worth noting again that the term "Uruk-hai" isn't used at all in UT.

It is not an entry in the Index either. It is a 'definition' of an entry.

The context of the quote is that the "higher ups" are in error. And indeed they are- there are no small dwarf-men or great elves running around Mordor. I don't think there are any rebel Uruk-hai running around Mordor either. You're reading of this passage depends on the passage being an accurate account. My reading relies on the fact that it is not accurate. Again, my thesis is that "rebel Uruk-hai" erroneously refers to Mordor Orcs, in exactly the same way that "great Elf" and "a small dwarf-man" erroneously refers to Frodo and Sam.

It is accurate based on the information given in the text. Hobbits _are_ a 'sort of small dwarf-man'. We know why Sam was thought to be an Elf. There were 'rebel Uruk-hai'. None of these were Isengarders. Again you have no evidence to back up your assumptions.

Appendix F says that lesser breeds of Orc are called Snaga. It also notes that the Uruk-hai were especially fond of calling lesser breeds Snaga, but were apparently not the only ones to do so. According to Appendix F Shagrat could have called someone Snaga without being one of the Uruk-hai.

This is again an attemt to create an inconsistancy where there is none. The facts are that great soldier-orcs from Isengard and Mordor both use the word 'snaga' to refer to a lesser breed, and are both referred to as Uruk-hai.

The possibilty on top of possibilty is just building a house of cards.
Try facts and evidence.

 

[Tar-Elenion]

This is something Steuard Jensen wrote in the rec.arts.books.tolkien newsgroup a little while back, on the use of 'snaga' in App. F etc. responding to Michael Martinez:

I'm not so sure of that. First of all, the word "Uruks" wasn't
previously used in the passage you quoted: only the singular "Uruk" was. The only plural of "Uruk" used in the entry on "Orcs and the Black Speech" in Appendix F is "Uruk-hai". Second, I believe that it is perfectly natural English usage for "especially by the Uruk-hai" to mean a subset of all Orcs rather than a subset of all Uruks (in fact, this strikes me as the more natural reading, unless "lesser kinds" also refers to Uruks rather than to Orcs in general).

Here is the link for fuller context:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&th=298b3c93e2b1a1c8&rnum=1

I would recommend reading the thread in "Sort by date" (button in upper right hand corner).

 

[aragil]

Grishnakh as a Uruk is not completely unsupported: First we have Pippin's view of Grishnakh:

In the twilight he saw a large black Orc, probably Uglúk, standing facing Grishnákh, a short crook-legged creature, very broad and with long arms that hung almost to the ground.

Next is a description of his companions:

From that direction there now came hoarse cries, and there was Grishnákh again, and at his back a couple of score of others like him: long-armed crook-legged Orcs.

Then we have Sam's view of Shagrat:

Behind him came Shagrat, a large orc with long arms that, as he ran crouching, reached to the ground.

Shagrat is almost definitely an Uruk, as given by the implicit conversation between him and Gorbag:

And we've got to look out. Always the poor Uruks to put slips right, and small thanks.

On top of this, we have the two earlier description of the 'Black Orcs of Mordor' from the Chamber of Marzubal, from HoME VI and HoME VII, respectively:

Gandalf says there are goblins - of very evil kind, larger than usual, real orcs.
...
'There are goblins: very many of them,' he said. 'Evil they look and large: black Orcs.

These coincide nicely with the ~contemporary passage that Tolkien added to the Hobbit, in an effort to make it more closely relate to The Lord of the Rings:

"A bit low for goblins, at least for the big ones," thought Bilbo, not knowing that even the big ones, the ocs of the mountains, go along at a great speed stooping low with their hands almost on the ground.

To me this is pretty good evidence that Grishnakh, with his long arms hanging almost to the ground is a Uruk. He doesn't even seem to be a particularly strange Uruk- all of the other descriptions of large Soldier Orcs of Mordor match the description of Grishnakh's long arms. Note: I don't think Grishnakh is particularly short for an Orc, he is just short in comparison to Ugluk. The Moria runts surrounding the two are described by: "Round them were many smaller goblins."

First off, I agree that Uruk-hai of Isengard may be used to differentiate Ugluk and co. from Grishnakh. However, earlier Ugluk had addressed Grishnakh with:

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, and we shall lead you back by the way we choose.

Here no qualifier is used (unless you consider 'fighting' somehow capable of distinguishing Isengard soldier-orcs from those of Mordor). However, it does seem that "the fighting Uruk-hai" are equated with the servants of Saruman. Again, why doesn't Grishnakh object to this characterization? Gorbag has pride in being a Uruk. Given what we know from Appendix F wouldn't Grishnakh resent being referred to as a common snaga?
Before I leave the uses of Uruk-hai, it's worth highlighting the one which most makes me think that there is meant to be a distinction between Uruk-hai and Uruks:

'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. We come to kill, by sun or moon. What of the dawn?'

Fighting without regards to the dawn is not a property of Mordor Orcs, Uruks or otherwise. Here Uruk-hai is used without qualifiers, it simply states that the Uruk-hai do not distinguish between night and day. Uruks of Mordor do.

Re. CT's use of his father's original index. Tar-Elenion has brought this up before. My response is that there is no index I have ever seen to LotR which equates Uruks and Uruk-hai, or that even cross-references Uruks and Uruk-hai. Why would Tolkien have dropped such a useful definition in the published index? If the rough draft stated that the two terms were equivalent, then why don't any of the subsequent indices cross-reference the two terms? However, this matter might actually be settled, as apparently the original index will be made public. Please read this.

A minor clarification: I was not trying to imply that Uruk-hai in UT was changed to Uruks. I was suggesting that it was possible that Tolkien used some sort of abbreviated form, which CT decided to elucidate to avoid confusion. However, IMO it is possible that CT could make a mistake under such a circumstance.

Originally posted by jallan
There was no reason for anyone to have been confused on the point of who was responsible for the rebellion.

If Shagrat had actually reported there would be no confusion. However, the whole context of the Tracker-Soldier debate is that there is confusion. "They've lost their heads". If Shagrat had actually reported, I don't see where there would be any confusion- Shagrat knew that Gorbag's lot had been taken care of. There would have been no need to mention rebel Uruk-hai, just the great Elf and dwarf-man (if Shagrat couldn't do any better after actually seeing both Frodo and Sam). I don't think that Shagrat had reported yet when Frodo and Sam overheard the Tracker/Soldier- he did not arrive to Barad-dur until that day (from Appendix B).

The extent of my "special pleading" is only in questioning how much faith we should put in UT. Tar-Elenion completely refuted an argument of mine in another thread based simply on the fact that UT was inconsistent with the published works. Given that there is an apparent distinction between Uruks and Uruk-hai in Lord of the Rings, there is a possibility that UT is inconsistent with the published works. I have never said it is definitely so, but instead recognized it only as a possibility. However, if it is consistent with the published works then I am at a loss as to why the Uruk-hai of Isengard seem to claim that all Uruk-hai are resistant to the sun, or why JRRT would title his chapter dealing with Isengarders as "The Uruk-hai", or why Gorbag would use the term Uruks instead of Uruk-hai to describe Orcs of Mordor.
In the case of the published works I have never questioned whether Tolkien wrote what he meant- of course he did, he had 5 years between the time he finished writing and the time it was published. 5 years would take care of a lot of inconsistencies. However, we have no evidence that the UT passage received any editing- it was never even finished!!

 

[Tar-Elenion]

Originally posted by aragil
Re. CT's use of his father's original index. Tar-Elenion has brought this up before. My response is that there is no index I have ever seen to LotR which equates Uruks and Uruk-hai, or that even cross-references Uruks and Uruk-hai. Why would Tolkien have dropped such a useful definition in the published index? If the rough draft stated that the two terms were equivalent, then why don't any of the subsequent indices cross-reference the two terms? However, this matter might actually be settled, as apparently the original index will be made public.

As Mr. Hammond notes: "But it [the published form] was never as full an index as Tolkien would have liked."
The cost for a much fuller index would likely have been to great.

A minor clarification: I was not trying to imply that Uruk-hai in UT was changed to Uruks. I was suggesting that it was possible that Tolkien used some sort of abbreviated form, which CT decided to elucidate to avoid confusion. However, IMO it is possible that CT could make a mistake under such a circumstance.

A house of cards.
Anything is possible. Try what is _probable_. It is most likely that JRRT used the full word he intended, and CT published it correctly. With minimal if any editing.

If Shagrat had actually reported there would be no confusion. However, the whole context of the Tracker-Soldier debate is that there is confusion. "They've lost their heads". If Shagrat had actually reported, I don't see where there would be any confusion- Shagrat knew that Gorbag's lot had been taken care of. There would have been no need to mention rebel Uruk-hai, just the great Elf and dwarf-man (if Shagrat couldn't do any better after actually seeing both Frodo and Sam). I don't think that Shagrat had reported yet when Frodo and Sam overheard the Tracker/Soldier- he did not arrive to Barad-dur until that day (from Appendix B).

The only way the Higher Ups would know about the 'dwarf-man' and the 'Elf' would be through a 'report' from Shagrat (or a Cirith Ungol survivor). They would know about the 'rebellion' from what the Nazgul and those troops who came there saw, all the dead Orcs from Minas Morgul and Cirith Ungol. From LotR we do not know that none of Gorbag's boys got out. We only know that none of Shagat's did. There is no evidence that any Isengarders were in Mordor or believed to be in Mordor.

Given that there is an apparent distinction between Uruks and Uruk-hai in Lord of the Rings, there is a possibility that UT is inconsistent with the published works. I have never said it is definitely so, but instead recognized it only as a possibility.

Considering App F and 'rebel Uruk-hai' there is no "apparent distinction".

However, if it is consistent with the published works then I am at a loss as to why the Uruk-hai of Isengard seem to claim that all Uruk-hai are resistant to the sun, or why JRRT would title his chapter dealing with Isengarders as "The Uruk-hai", or why Gorbag would use the term Uruks instead of Uruk-hai to describe Orcs of Mordor.

Do they claim that all Uruk-hai are resistant to the Sun? Besides the Mordorean Uruk-hai dont seem to have much problem with the sun either.
Why is the chapter title a problem?
Gorbag does not use the term 'Uruks', that is what Sam 'hears' as a translation effect from the Ring.

 

[aragil]

Facts and Evidence

Thank you, Tar-Elenion, for that wonderfully complementary reply- it was a pleasure to read. I'd like to take this opportunity to say that I've always thought the same of your efforts in this matter.

Here are the facts as I see them:

1940- JRRT introduces us to the large Orcs in Moria. He differentiates them from the lesser breeds by calling them "Black Orcs", while the smaller breeds are "Goblins".

1941- JRRT introduces us to the Orcs of Saruman. He immediately differentiates them from all other Orcs, by mentioning that they are larger than normal Orcs and use human-ish equipment.

1942- JRRT first uses the term Uruk-hai. He does this in reference to Ugluk's troops, who are again mentioned as being man-like. Instead of saying 'We are servants of Saruman the wise, the White Hand', Ugluk says 'We are the servants of the old Uthwit and the White Hand'. This indicates that 'We are the fighting Uruk-hai! We slew the great warrior' was probably extant at this time, which is said to be written with more facility than any chapter up to that point.

1942- JRRT again uses the term Uruk-hai, now in the battle for Helm's Deep, specifically Aragorn's parley.

1944- JRRT uses the terms Uruks and Uruk-hai in letters to CT. Up until this point Uruks has never been used in the narrative, and Uruk-hai is only used to refer to Isengard Orcs.

1947- JRRT sends in revisions to the Hobbit which later appear in the published work. Here he contrasts 'real Orcs' with 'goblins' in almost the exact same sense that he later contrasts 'Uruks' with 'orcs'. Of course, he is still not referring to anything as Uruks in the narrative proper.

1948- JRRT first uses the term Uruks. CT notes that the term 'Uruk-hai' had appeared long before. It had always been used to refer to Isengard Orcs.

1948- JRRT finally finishes writing LotR, begins serious revisions.

1948-1953- JRRT revises earlier passages that refer to Orcs so that they now refer to 'Uruks'. This is in all cases Mordor Orcs. Uruk-hai only pops up one more time- 'rebel Uruk-hai', which could either apply to Mordor Orcs or to imaginary Isengarders.

 

[aragil]

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
Do they claim that all Uruk-hai are resistant to the Sun? Besides the Mordorean Uruk-hai dont seem to have much problem with the sun either.

. 'We are the Uruk-hai: we do not stop the fight for night or day, for fair weather or for storm.' This seems to be inclusive of all Uruk-hai. They don't say 'we are those subset of Uruk-hai who do not stop the fight ...'
I've posted before where JRRT links poor Mordor-orc performance with the sun. You chose to ignore it. I posted where Treebeard wonders if Saruman's Orcs can withstand sunlight because they've been crossed with men. You discredited Treebeard's statement. I posted where Gamling says that it is Saruman's half-orcs and orc-men that care not for the light of day. You said that this did not refer to the Uruk-hai. Should I repost this quotes?

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
Why is the chapter title a problem?

It's only a problem if you assume that Mordor also has Uruk-hai. THE Uruk-hai is in reference to Ugluk's band, which is distinguished several times from any other Orcs that have appeared up to this point, or that will appear again.

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
Gorbag does not use the term 'Uruks', that is what Sam 'hears' as a translation effect from the Ring.

Ah yes, the assumption-free argument. I simply don't buy this. The internal conceipt of the story is that Frodo wrote it in the Red book, not that some magical scribe was writing down what was heard by each character inn the moment it was heard. At the time when Frodo wrote the book, he had full knowledge of the terms 'Uruk-hai' and 'Uruks'. If he had equated the two, then he would have been free to use 'Uruk-hai' here, since it is spoken in exactly the same sense as earlier when he had Ugluk say 'Uruk-hai'. Frodo didn't, and I'm not going to argue with him.

 

[Tar-Elenion]

Re: Facts and Evidence

Originally posted by aragil
Thank you, Tar-Elenion, for that wonderfully complementary reply- it was a pleasure to read. I'd like to take this opportunity to say that I've always thought the same of your efforts in this matter.

You are welcome, I think.

Here are the facts as I see them:
<snip>

The facts from LotR as published (The Canon):
There are Isengarders referred to as Uruk-hai.
There are Mordor Orcs referred to as Uruk-hai.
There are are two great soldier orcs (one from Isengard, one from Mordor) who use the word 'snaga' to refer to a lesser breed. Snaga is used especially by the Uruk-hai. The index to LotR refers to those and says to see App F for explanation.
'Uruks' and 'Uruk' is used to refer to great soldier-orcs in the service of both Isengard and Mordor.
Other facts:
'Letters' uses the terms interchangeably.
'Fords of Isen' refers to the Isengarders as Uruks.
The UT index offers a 'definition' for 'Uruks' which equates it with 'Uruk-hai'.

Fact: No inconsistancy.

Fact: There is _no_ evidence that any Isengarders were in or believed to be in Mordor. If there were evidence some one should have presented it by now.

 

[jallan]

As I indicated, we don't know exactly what Grishnákh or his followers are.

Tolkien doesn't say.

I don't think we would expect all Orcs must be either Uruks or snagas.

It is stressed Grishnákh is short. Shagrat is seen as large Orc. Possibly these are relative terms. Grishnákh is short relative to Saruman's even larger Uruk-hai. Shagrat is simply a normal large Orc compared to the smaller types who are closer to Hobbit size. Girshnákh and Gorbag might be about the same size.

Or Gishnákh might indeed be short, not a Uruk, or not a pure Uruk.

As often with Tolkien, the closer you look the more you see that you cannot find absolute evidence.

But calling Grishnákh short rather than shorter suggests to me he was short, was not an Uruk.

Aragil posted

:CT's use of his father's original index. Tar-Elenion has brought this up before. My response is that there is no index I have ever seen to LotR which equates Uruks and Uruk-hai, or that even cross-references Uruks and Uruk-hai. Why would Tolkien have dropped such a useful definition in the published index?

As Christopher Tolkien notes the original indiex was not complete. Also, it contained some very large entries, notably the entire article on the Istari.

The Nancy Smith index included in the second edition to The Lord of the Rings was an independent work, not done by Tolkien, though he later corrected it and added some annotations to it. Christopher Tolkien describes the original draft index as one on which he based in style, and also in content for some entries, the index in the The Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales. In both these indexes every entry is annoted, sometimes substantially.

Accordingly we would not expect to find the Uruk-hai information or most information from the Tolkien's original draft index in the Nancy Smith index, even if Tolkien was able to locate it at the time and use it. The Nancy Smith index remains mostly an unannotated index.

As to Unfinished Tales, this is far from being all of a piece, it has late items, early items, drafts, and finished work. One should consider each part separately.

For "The Battles of the Fords of Isen" Christopher Tolkien only remarks that

... it presented relatively little difficulty of a textual kind, and is only unfinished in the most obvious sense. This is then not a hasty and hard-to-read pencil draft which Christopher Tolkien has had to painfully decipher, guess at words, and fix up grammatically.

In the HoME series Christopher Tolkien appears to print abbreviations and odd spellings as he finds them in the texts, for such sometimes apear. It seems his father generally used few abbreviations, except in some very rough drafts.

A study of this point might be helpful. Can you find any cases of abbreviations of a kind that might be misleading in finished texts.

The Uruk-hai of Isengard claim they are resistant to the sun. They do not necessarily make this claim for all Orcs.

This is indeed the point which most makes readers suspect that the term Uruk-hai refers only to Saruman's newly bred Uruks.

What they say is:

'We are the Uruk-hai: we do not stop the fight for night or day, for fair weather or for storm. We come to kill, by sun or moon. What of the dawn?

They claim they are Uruks, for the third time, and then they boast about their prowess.

The reader, including myself originally, perceives a connection between the fact that these are Uruk-hai and that they will fight by day, a characteristic of Saruman's new breed. Therefore Uruk-hai must mean, it seems, mean that new breed.

Or it may mean, we are Uruks, professional soldiers, we don't stop for anything. Mordor-Uruks might make the same boast, though less able to fulfill it on a bright day, when the sun made their heads wobbly.

Note that almost all examples of the use of Uruk-hai in the book are in words spoken by Orcs. In the full text the only exception is the chapter heading and a back-reference to Pippin's captivity by the "Uruk-hai".

It is a term found mainly in Orc-speech.

I would take it that the title of the chapter comes about because it tells of Merry and Pippin's captivity by the Uruks who contiually call themselves Uruk-hai, a term which, to my ears, flows better than "The Uruks".

If Shagrat had actually reported, I don't see where there would be any confusion- Shagrat knew that Gorbag's lot had been taken care of.

Snaga tells Gorbag:

Gorbag’s swine got to the gate first, and none of ours got out. Lagduf and Muzgash ran through, but they were shot. I saw it from a window, I tell you. And they were the last.

All Shagrat's folk have been skilled, save for himself and Snaga. Seemingly not all of Gorbag's, since they shot Lagduf and Muzgash. So where are they? They ran off, I would suppose, wanting to get as far as they could before word of the incident got to the authorities. Snaga's fear of going out to bring word to the authorities is, I think, mainly fear that Gorbag's Orcs are out there somewhere still.

As to the confusion, of course there is confusion. An entire garrison has been wiped out, there may be one or more Elf warriors about, there are rebel-Orcs about, and who knows what kind of orders came back once Lugburz heard about the Dwarf-men, meaning Frodo and Sam, especially when it was found that Frodo was no longer there.

Pure SNAFU.

Actually, considering what we know and what Shagrat would have said, the instructions given the soldier Orc are reasonable enough.

But the tracker gleefully speculates that they've all lost their heads and some will be in big trouble.

Tar-Elenion posted:

Besides the Mordorean Uruk-hai dont seem to have much problem with the sun either.

I suspect they do, but that there aren't many bright, sunny days in Mordor. At this time Sauron's darkness has spread well ouside of Mordor. It is probably always rather dark and gloomy within Mordor, at least north-western Mordor, under a veil of volcanic cloud.

The Sea of Núrnen region was probably more pleasant in human terms and less pleasant for Orcs.

 

[Tar-Elenion]

Originally posted by aragil
'We are the Uruk-hai: we do not stop the fight for night or day, for fair weather or for storm.' This seems to be inclusive of all Uruk-hai. They don't say 'we are those subset of Uruk-hai who do not stop the fight ...'
I've posted before where JRRT links poor Mordor-orc performance with the sun. You chose to ignore it.

No, I posted _quotes_ suggesting something else.

I posted where Treebeard wonders if Saruman's Orcs can withstand sunlight because they've been crossed with men. You discredited Treebeard's statement.

I posted what JRRT had to say about some of Treebeard's suppositions.

I posted where Gamling says that it is Saruman's half-orcs and orc-men that care not for the light of day. You said that this did not refer to the Uruk-hai. Should I repost this quotes?

And I posted where the half-orcs and orc-men are distinguished from the Uruk-hai.

[Originally posted by Tar-Elenion:
Why is the chapter title a problem?]

It's only a problem if you assume that Mordor also has Uruk-hai. THE Uruk-hai is in reference to Ugluk's band, which is distinguished several times from any other Orcs that have appeared up to this point, or that will appear again.

'The Uruk-hai' is in reference to Ugluk's band. However Ugluk's boys were not THE only Uruk-hai.
The Palantir refers to the Palantir of Isengard. It was not the only Palantir.
That Mordor has Uruk-hai is not an assumption. It is a fact. Until you can present some evidence that Isengarders were involved in or believed to be involved in the events at Cirith Ungol it will remain a fact.

[Originally posted by Tar-Elenion:
Gorbag does not use the term 'Uruks', that is what Sam 'hears' as a translation effect from the Ring.]

Ah yes, the assumption-free argument. I simply don't buy this. The internal conceipt of the story is that Frodo wrote it in the Red book, not that some magical scribe was writing down what was heard by each character inn the moment it was heard. At the time when Frodo wrote the book, he had full knowledge of the terms 'Uruk-hai' and 'Uruks'. If he had equated the two, then he would have been free to use 'Uruk-hai' here, since it is spoken in exactly the same sense as earlier when he had Ugluk say 'Uruk-hai'. Frodo didn't, and I'm not going to argue with him. [/B]

And I am not going to argue with: "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." Uruks is not a BS word. Uruks is an anglicization.

 

[jallan]

As I indicated, we don't know exactly what Grishnákh or his followers are.

Tolkien doesn't say.

I don't think we would expect all Orcs must be either Uruks or snagas.

It is stressed Grishnákh is short. Shagrat is seen as large Orc. Possibly these are relative terms. Grishnákh is short relative to Saruman's even larger Uruk-hai. Shagrat is simply a normal large Orc compared to the smaller types who are closer to Hobbit size. Girshnákh and Gorbag might be about the same size.

Or Gishnákh might indeed be short, not a Uruk, or not a pure Uruk.

As often with Tolkien, the closer you look the more you see that you cannot find absolute evidence.

But calling Grishnákh short rather than shorter suggests to me he was short, was not an Uruk.

Aragil posted

:CT's use of his father's original index. Tar-Elenion has brought this up before. My response is that there is no index I have ever seen to LotR which equates Uruks and Uruk-hai, or that even cross-references Uruks and Uruk-hai. Why would Tolkien have dropped such a useful definition in the published index?

As Christopher Tolkien notes the original indiex was not complete. Also, it contained some very large entries, notably the entire article on the Istari.

The Nancy Smith index included in the second edition to The Lord of the Rings was an independent work, not done by Tolkien, though he later corrected it and added some annotations to it. Christopher Tolkien describes the original draft index as one on which he based in style, and also in content for some entries, the index in the The Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales. In both these indexes every entry is annoted, sometimes substantially.

Accordingly we would not expect to find the Uruk-hai information or most information from the Tolkien's original draft index in the Nancy Smith index, even if Tolkien was able to locate it at the time and use it. The Nancy Smith index remains mostly an unannotated index.

As to Unfinished Tales, this is far from being all of a piece, it has late items, early items, drafts, and finished work. One should consider each part separately.

For "The Battles of the Fords of Isen" Christopher Tolkien only remarks that

... it presented relatively little difficulty of a textual kind, and is only unfinished in the most obvious sense. This is then not a hasty and hard-to-read pencil draft which Christopher Tolkien has had to painfully decipher, guess at words, and fix up grammatically.

In the HoME series Christopher Tolkien appears to print abbreviations and odd spellings as he finds them in the texts, for such sometimes apear. It seems his father generally used few abbreviations, except in some very rough drafts.

A study of this point might be helpful. Can you find any cases of abbreviations of a kind that might be misleading in finished texts.

The Uruk-hai of Isengard claim they are resistant to the sun. They do not necessarily make this claim for all Orcs.

This is indeed the point which most makes readers suspect that the term Uruk-hai refers only to Saruman's newly bred Uruks.

What they say is:

'We are the Uruk-hai: we do not stop the fight for night or day, for fair weather or for storm. We come to kill, by sun or moon. What of the dawn?

They claim they are Uruks, for the third time, and then they boast about their prowess.

The reader, including myself originally, perceives a connection between the fact that these are Uruk-hai and that they will fight by day, a characteristic of Saruman's new breed. Therefore Uruk-hai must mean, it seems, mean that new breed.

Or it may mean, we are Uruks, professional soldiers, we don't stop for anything. Mordor-Uruks might make the same boast, though less able to fulfill it on a bright day, when the sun made their heads wobbly.

Note that almost all examples of the use of Uruk-hai in the book are in words spoken by Orcs. In the full text the only exception is the chapter heading and a back-reference to Pippin's captivity by the "Uruk-hai".

It is a term found mainly in Orc-speech.

I would take it that the title of the chapter comes about because it tells of Merry and Pippin's captivity by the Uruks who contiually call themselves Uruk-hai, a term which, to my ears, flows better than "The Uruks".

If Shagrat had actually reported, I don't see where there would be any confusion- Shagrat knew that Gorbag's lot had been taken care of.

Snaga tells Gorbag:

Gorbag’s swine got to the gate first, and none of ours got out. Lagduf and Muzgash ran through, but they were shot. I saw it from a window, I tell you. And they were the last.

All Shagrat's folk have been skilled, save for himself and Snaga. Seemingly not all of Gorbag's, since they shot Lagduf and Muzgash. So where are they? They ran off, I would suppose, wanting to get as far as they could before word of the incident got to the authorities. Snaga's fear of going out to bring word to the authorities is, I think, mainly fear that Gorbag's Orcs are out there somewhere still.

As to the confusion, of course there is confusion. An entire garrison has been wiped out, there may be one or more Elf warriors about, there are rebel-Orcs about, and who knows what kind of orders came back once Lugburz heard about the Dwarf-men, meaning Frodo and Sam, especially when it was found that Frodo was no longer there.

Pure SNAFU.

Actually, considering what we know and what Shagrat would have said, the instructions given the soldier Orc are reasonable enough.

But the tracker gleefully speculates that they've all lost their heads and some will be in big trouble.

Tar-Elenion posted:

Besides the Mordorean Uruk-hai dont seem to have much problem with the sun either.

I suspect they do, but that there aren't many bright, sunny days in Mordor. At this time Sauron's darkness has spread well ouside of Mordor. It is probably always rather dark and gloomy within Mordor, at least north-western Mordor, under a veil of volcanic cloud.

The Sea of Núrnen region was probably more pleasant in human terms and less pleasant for Orcs.

From a later post by Aragil:

The internal conceipt of the story is that Frodo wrote it in the Red book, not that some magical scribe was writing down what was heard by each character inn the moment it was heard. At the time when Frodo wrote the book, he had full knowledge of the terms 'Uruk-hai' and 'Uruks'. If he had equated the two, then he would have been free to use 'Uruk-hai' here, since it is spoken in exactly the same sense as earlier when he had Ugluk say 'Uruk-hai'. Frodo didn't, and I'm not going to argue with him.

Uruks is the form of the word mentioned in the fight in Moria. The s plural gives indication that it represents some Common Speech word. Sam hears what they say, and either pre-translated into Common Speech, or he is, through the Ring, translating it himself. Whatever form Gorbag here used for the plural of Uruk we would expect to be rendered to Sam's understanding as the normal Common Speech form of the plural of Uruk, which would then be represented in the published text as English Uruks.

Sam may quite well have never previously heard the term Uruk-hai, if that is the term Gorbag is using. If he had heard it, it would probably be as a foreign term. Accordingly he would not hear this in his translation.

In the other case the soldier Orc and the tracker Orc are speaking to each other in Comon Speech. Presumably Frodo put down what they said, though possibly part cleaned up, and that is what we have in English. This would include the Orc expression Uruk-hai, if that was what was spoken.

Frodo would naturally have know both Uruks and Uruk-hai, the latter from this conversation and from Merry and Pippin's account which he included in his book.

Of course, this is really bogus.

Tolkien actually composed it all down in English from the beginning. But there is really no problem in his using Uruks in one passage and Uruk-hai in another if they mean the same thing.

There is a possiblity certainly, Aragil, that Tolkien at certain times might have thought Uruk-hai meant something different from Uruks.

Tolkien was always refining his languages and changing them and enjoyed subtle distinctions.

But evidence to support it is so weak, that I don't believe you can reasonably go any further than to point it out as a possibility.