Book-faithful Uruk-hai and half-orc miniatures?

[Captain Blood]

A very interesting and persuasive analysis Hobgoblin.
Long ago I dredged through the same material and set of mentions myself, and more or less ended up with the conclusion that Tolkien uses the terms 'orc', 'uruk', 'uruk-hai' and (to a lesser extent) 'goblin' pretty interchangeably.
Whilst he clearly implies that some orcs are larger and more manlike than others, the differing terms he uses to describe orcs may be fairly indiscriminate, and don't necessarily correlate directly to different sub-species or races.

But, to be fair, it's a long time since I've re-read the books 

Interesting thread though.

[Vermis]

I think RPGs, war-games and general fandom have tended to introduce sharper distinctions between different types of orcs than Tolkien himself indicates. One thing that's worth noting is that the Uruk-hai are orcs. They're also goblins. Gamers tend to distinguish between "orcs" and "Uruks", but Tolkien tends to describe the Uruks of Mordor and Isengard simply as "orcs" (or "goblins").

I hear that! I'm still bemused when I see people moan that something's a wyvern rather than a dragon, or vice versa, based on limb count. Glaurung must mess with their heads.

Couldn't agree more with your whole post. (Although... do orcs have beards? ) In addition, 'uruk-hai' is simply 'orc-folk' or 'orc-people' in Tolkien's black speech. I think the confusion comes from the fact that in the books, the term is first seen(?) in relation to Saruman's bigger, sun-resistant, humanlike orcs. Along with 'olog-hai' (troll-folk) popping up alongside descriptions of the newer, nastier, sun-resistant trolls. But then the Drúedain are called 'oghor-hai' by orcs, and they're hardly bigger, sun-resistant woodwoses bred by the bad guys!

[Hobgoblin]

Long ago I dredged through the same material and set of mentions myself, and more or less ended up with the conclusion that Tolkien uses the terms 'orc', 'uruk', 'uruk-hai' and (to a lesser extent) 'goblin' pretty interchangeably.
Whilst he clearly implies that some orcs are larger and more manlike than others, the differing terms he uses to describe orcs may be fairly indiscriminate, and don't necessarily correlate directly to different sub-species or races.

Yes, I think that's right. One of the interesting things about all this is how people read the book in a milieu full of Tolkien-influenced pop culture. Take this passage (from "The Uruk-hai"):

"In the twilight he saw a large black orc, probably Ugluk, standing facing Grishnakh, a short crook-legged creature, very broad and with long arms that hung almost to the ground. Round them were many smaller goblins. Pippin supposed that these were the ones from the North. They had drawn their knives and swords, but hesitated to attack Ugluk."

Someone who comes to this from a milieu of Warhammer, World of Warcraft and D&D will read this casually and think, "Ah yes, goblins are smaller than orcs - so of course the goblins here are smaller than the orcs." But someone reading closely in 1954 would have noted that Ugluk's Isengarders have already been described as "goblin-soldiers" - and would note that Grishnakh is later described as both an "orc" and a "goblin", while it's presumably Ugluk's "great goblin-head" that ends up on the stake (which we saw in the previous chapter). So the comparison is in fact between smaller goblins and bigger goblins.

As you and Vermis say, the terms various terms are pretty much interchangeable, with the caveat that "the word uruk of the Black Speech ... 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'.

That quote, from the Appendices of LotR, again backs up the notion of "large" and "small" orcs rather than the "small, medium and large" notion that has come in from gaming (from MERP, for example). It also indicates that Uruk-hai and uruks are interchangeable; Christopher Tolkien says that the latter is an "anglicisation" of the former.

[Hobgoblin]

I hear that! I'm still bemused when I see people moan that something's a wyvern rather than a dragon, or vice versa, based on limb count. Glaurung must mess with their heads.

Couldn't agree more with your whole post. (Although... do orcs have beards? ) In addition, 'uruk-hai' is simply 'orc-folk' or 'orc-people' in Tolkien's black speech. I think the confusion comes from the fact that in the books, the term is first seen(?) in relation to Saruman's bigger, sun-resistant, humanlike orcs. Along with 'olog-hai' (troll-folk) popping up alongside descriptions of the newer, nastier, sun-resistant trolls. But then the Drúedain are called 'oghor-hai' by orcs, and they're hardly bigger, sun-resistant woodwoses bred by the bad guys!

I think that's right. I suspect the "humanlike" bit has been overplayed slightly by gamers, though; when Aragorn and co. find the dead Isengarders, it's their equipment, not their size or shape, that seems to be the surprise - and of course they've already seen at least one bigger uruk in Moria. It's notable that the Uruk-hai are always "Orcs", whereas the half-orcs/Orc-men are always "Men".

On orcish beards: we can perhaps rule out long beards like those of the Dwarves because the orcs in The Hobbit make fun of the Dwarves for their beards - but then the Elves also mock Dwarvish beards, and we know that at least some of Tolkien's Elves had beards.

Also, orcs were certainly hairy: one of those carrying the Hobbits across Rohan has "a filthy jowl and hairy ear", and Grishnkah has "long hairy arms". It would be a little odd if that hirsuitism didn't extend to their faces!

One more point: Tolkien said that his goblins owed a debt to George MacDonald:

"They are not based on direct experience of mine; but owe, I suppose, a good deal to the goblin tradition ... especially as it appears in George MacDonald, except for the soft feet which I never believed in."

George MacDonald's The Princess and the Goblin was published with illustrations that showed the goblins (aka gnomes and kobolds) with beards throughout.

[Vermis]

As you and Vermis say, the terms various terms are pretty much interchangeable, with the caveat that "the word uruk of the Black Speech ... 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'.

Mea culpa! I recognise the quote, but it's been a while since I read it.

I think that's right. I suspect the "humanlike" bit has been overplayed slightly by gamers, though;

And, might I add, New Line Cinema. I get that the bigger movie orcs had more humanlike proportions so the job could be done more easily by human actors with a few facial prosthetics, but I'm still taken aback by how huge they made Lurtz.

[Hobgoblin]

Mea culpa! I recognise the quote, but it's been a while since I read it.

And, might I add, New Line Cinema. I get that the bigger movie orcs had more humanlike proportions so the job could be done more easily by human actors with a few facial prosthetics, but I'm still taken aback by how huge they made Lurtz.

Yes indeed! They kind of mixed up the Uruk-hai with the half-orcs.

I think one older influence, too, is David Day's A Tolkien Bestiary, published in 1979. It had splendid illustrations, but the text was full of stuff that Day had obviously just dreamt up. For example, he says that the Uruk-hai were as tall as men - but the actual text of LotR makes it quite clear that this isn't the case at all. He also describes orcs as having black skin "like charred wood", which is again entirely his own invention; in the book, one orc is described simply as "black-skinned", implying that his Uruk companion and others aren't.

I think Day might also be responsible for cementing the idea that orcs are "twisted" elves. Now, Tolkien suggested that it what was eventually published as The Silmarillion, but it certainly wasn't his final word on the subject. There's no suggestion in LotR that Orcs are made from Elves, rather than "in mockery" of Elves. Tolkien at various times thought that they might be anthropomorphised beasts, animated stone, made from humans or even robots of a sort.

[Captain Blood]

Once again, I agree with all of the above - hurrah: consensus! (At least for now )

I have to say, I did like 'Lurtz' despite his mighty size.
Whilst I think the Jackson / Weta team massively overdid the orcs in terms of the baroque nature of much of their arms and equipment, I infinitely preferred the 'Kiwis in rubber outfits' approach of the original Newline LOTR trilogy, to the ludicrously cartoony CGI of Azog and his sidekick in the Hobbit movies...

[Cubs]

Tolkien, in a letter, says that the orcs were "squat, broad, flat-nosed, sallow-skinned, with wide mouths and slant eyes; in fact degraded and repulsive versions of the (to Europeans) least lovely Mongol-types". That may not read particularly well to contemporary sensibilities; I think, though, he clearly had the Huns (ancient foes of the Goths, to whom the Rohirrim have many resemblances) and the Mongols in mind. Both were described by Western contemporaries in fairly monstrous terms.

Asiatic people (and especially Mongols) seem to have come in for special treatment in 1930's pulp as well. It seems to have been the fad of the age to define people by race and bloodline, and for some reason Asian people were the villains of the day.

[Steve F]

I'd always assumed that the Orcs were the English working class.  Despite his exotic name, Tolkien was English, and, as a rule of thumb, for the English class trumps race (or gender, or sexuality, or anything else).  Conscription in the Great War had led to widespread concerns about the short stature and general malnutrition-fuelled ill-health of the urban proletariat.  Saruman brought Birmingham to Middle Earth and the Uruks were steelworkers: short, twisted, alien and threatening to a tweedy Oxford don, and sometimes blackskinned not through melanin but through soot and oil.

Or so it seemed to me.

[area23]

In fact, the earlier descriptions of Huns were much like Tolkiens orcs, almost identical.

There's also the fashion of 'degenerate men' of the time. Lovecraft's ghouls and 'half caste' cultists, Howard's monstrous picts, but also morlocks, Opar's cavemen in Tarzan etc.

[Hobgoblin]

Here's Ammianus Marcellinus' famous description of the Huns (I suppose you could make a case for beardless Orcs on this basis, but I think it's the other stuff that's more pertinent):

1 However, the seed and origin of all the ruin and various disasters that the wrath of Mars aroused, putting in turmoil all places with unwonted fires, we have found to be this. The people of the Huns, but little known from ancient records, dwelling beyond the Maeotic Sea near the ice-bound ocean, exceed every degree of savagery.

2 Since there the cheeks of the children are deeply furrowed with the steel from their very birth, in order that the growth of hair, when it appears at the proper time, may be checked by the wrinkled scars, they grow old without beards and without any beauty, like eunuchs. They all have compact, strong limbs and thick necks, and are so monstrously ugly and misshapen, that one might take them for two-legged beasts or for the stumps, rough-hewn into images, that are used in putting sides to bridges.

3 But although they have the form of men, however ugly, they are so hardy in their mode of life that they have no need of fire nor of savory food, but eat the roots of wild plants and the half-raw flesh of any kind of animal whatever, which they put between their thighs and the backs of their horses, and thus warm it a little.

4 They are never protected by any buildings, but they avoid these like tombs, which are set apart from everyday use. For not even a hut thatched with reed can be found among them. But roaming at large amid the mountains and woods, they learn from the cradle to endure cold, hunger, and thirst. When away from their homes they never enter a house unless compelled by extreme necessity; for they think they are not safe when staying under a roof.

5 They dress in linen cloth or in the skins of field-mice sewn together, and they wear the same clothing indoors and out. But when they have once put their necks into a faded tunic, it is not taken off or changed until by long wear and tear it has been reduced to rags and fallen from them bit by bit.

6 They cover their heads with round caps and protect their hairy legs with goatskins; their shoes are formed upon no lasts, and so prevent their walking with free step. For this reason they are not at all adapted to battles on foot, but they are almost glued to their horses, which are hardy, it is true, but ugly, and sometimes they sit on them woman-fashion and thus perform their ordinary tasks. From their horses by night or day every one of that nation buys and sells, eats and drinks, and bowed over the narrow neck of the animal relaxes into a sleep so deep as to be accompanied by many dreams.

7 And when deliberation is called for about weighty matters, they all consult as a common body in that fashion. They are subject to no royal restraint, but they are content with the disorderly government of their important men, and led by them they force their way through every obstacle.

8 They also sometimes fight when provoked, and then they enter the battle drawn up in wedge-shaped masses, while their medley of voices makes a savage noise. And as they are lightly equipped for swift motion, and unexpected in action, they purposely divide suddenly into scattered bands and attack, rushing about in disorder here and there, dealing terrific slaughter; and because of their extraordinary rapidity of movement they are never seen to attack a rampart or pillage an enemy's camp.

9 And on this account you would not hesitate to call them the most terrible of all warriors, because they fight from a distance with missiles having sharp bone, instead of their usual points, joined to the shafts with wonderful skill; then they gallop over the intervening spaces and fight hand to hand with swords, regardless of their own lives; and while the enemy are guarding against wounds from the sabre-thrusts, they throw strips of cloth plaited into nooses over their opponents and so entangle them that they fetter their limbs and take from them the power of riding or walking.

10 No one in their country ever plows a field or touches a plow-handle. They are all without fixed abode, without hearth, or law, or settled mode of life, and keep roaming from place to place, like fugitives, accompanied by the wagons in which they live; in wagons their wives weave for them their hideous garments, in wagons they cohabit with their husbands, bear children, and rear them to the age of puberty. None of their offspring, when asked, can tell you where he comes from, since he was conceived in one place, born far from there, and brought up still farther away.

11 In truces they are faithless and unreliable, strongly inclined to sway to the motion of every breeze of new hope that presents itself, and sacrificing every feeling to the mad impulse of the moment. Like unreasoning beasts, they are utterly ignorant of the difference between right and wrong; they are deceitful and ambiguous in speech, never bound by any reverence for religion or for superstition. They burn with an infinite thirst for gold, and they are so fickle and prone to anger, that they often quarrel with their allies without provocation, more than once on the same day, and make friends with them again without a mediator.

12 This race of untamed men, without encumbrances, aflame with an inhuman desire for plundering others' property, made their violent way amid the rapine and slaughter of the neighbouring peoples as far as the Halani, once known as the Massagetae.

[Captain Blood]

Fascinating theory Steve

Tolkien was definitely a man of his age and class... An era when eugenics was a perfectly respectable study and proposition amongst the well educated. So the grimy, swarming urban proletariat and the grimy, swarming slant-eyed Eastern hordes were probably equally threatening to a man of his time and background. They may well have been conflated into one kind of generic bogeyman archetype: the industrialised central Asian from the Black Country - maybe with a bit of Bolshevik thrown in

It's certainly pretty clear that Hobbits are Tolkien's idealised bucolic English country folk. Thomas Hardy's Wessex folk taken to an extreme.

Presumably, the world of men (Rangers, Gondor, Rohan) are more representative of the English upper-middle and professional classes. The type of resourceful, mainly decent, indomitable and stalwart chaps who still ran quite an Empire in the 1930s.

I wonder what that makes the elves?

[Vermis]

I'm reminded of this quote.

There's no doubt Tolkien was influenced by childhood stays in industrial Birmingham and rural Sarehole (IIRC the name Samwise Gamgee was adapted from a RL occupant of the latter) but I think it's a little unfair to assume it's all about school-tie old boys vs. uppity oiks and johnny foreigners. The whole thing of (his interpretation of ) Middle-Earth began as a mythology for England and a setting for his invented languages, following his professional and personal interest in old languages, legends and sagas, was more about elves than anything else, and that bucolic hobbits only started accidentally intruding on in the early '30's.

I could bang on with a load of quotes pilfered from Letters, but I'll just add...

Presumably, the world of men (Rangers, Gondor, Rohan) are more representative of the English upper-middle and professional classes. The type of resourceful, mainly decent, indomitable and stalwart chaps who still ran quite an Empire in the 1930s.

"...as I know nothing about British or American imperialism in the Far East that does not fill me with regret and disgust, I am afraid I am not even supported by a glimmer of patriotism in this remaining War."

Letter to Christopher Tolkien, May 1945. Not to make out that he was surrounded by a golden halo at all times, but I feel there are a lot of assumptions about Tolkien as a stereotypical colonial-era toff, clinging to the status quo, when his own writings and correspondence contain evidence that mitigates those, if not outright refute them. (Not singling CB or Steve out! I'm sure we all know there's an internetful of Tolkien criticisms out there.)

[Hobgoblin]

I'm reminded of this quote.

There's no doubt Tolkien was influenced by childhood stays in industrial Birmingham and rural Sarehole (IIRC the name Samwise Gamgee was adapted from a RL occupant of the latter) but I think it's a little unfair to assume it's all about school-tie old boys vs. uppity oiks and johnny foreigners. The whole thing of (his interpretation of ) Middle-Earth began as a mythology for England and a setting for his invented languages, following his professional and personal interest in old languages, legends and sagas, was more about elves than anything else, and that bucolic hobbits only started accidentally intruding on in the early '30's.

I could bang on with a load of quotes pilfered from Letters, but I'll just add...

Letter to Christopher Tolkien, May 1945. Not to make out that he was surrounded by a golden halo at all times, but I feel there are a lot of assumptions about Tolkien as a stereotypical colonial-era toff, clinging to the status quo, when his own writings and correspondence contain evidence that mitigates those, if not outright refute them. (Not singling CB or Steve out! I'm sure we all know there's an internetful of Tolkien criticisms out there.)

I agree with all of that.

I'm pretty sure that Tolkien indicates somewhere that the portrayal of Orcs was influenced by memories of bullying NCOs/junior officers during the Great War. That's always rung true to me; after all, Ugluk et al are fairly well spoken (and demonstrate certain military virtues, despite being monstrous in other ways).

The quote about "Mongol-types" I gave above is actually fairly nuanced (and certainly so by the standards of the time).

[area23]

But after a short space of time, as Orosius relates, the race of the Huns, fiercer than ferocity itself, flamed forth against the Goths. We learn from old traditions that their origin was as follows: Filimer, king of the Goths, son of Gadaric the Great, who was the fifth in succession to hold the rule of the Getae after their departure from the island of Scandza,--and who, as we have said, entered the land of Scythia with his tribe,--found among his people certain witches, whom he called in his native tongue Haliurunnae. Suspecting these women, he expelled them from the midst of his race and compelled them to wander in solitary exile afar from his army. There the unclean spirits, who beheld them as they wandered through the wilderness, bestowed their embraces upon them and begat this savage race, which dwelt at first in the swamps,--a stunted, foul and puny tribe, scarcely human, and having no language save one which bore but slight resemblance to human speech. Such was the descent of the Huns who came to the country of the Goths.

I've got this quote as Jordanes but it very like Ammianus Marcellinus quoted above:

"They made their foes flee in horror because their swarthy aspect was fearful, and they had, if I may call it so, a sort of shapeless lump, not a head, with pin-holes rather than eyes. Their hardihood is evident in their wild appearance, and they are beings who are cruel to their children on the very day they are born. For they cut the cheeks of the males with a sword, so that before they receive the nourishment of milk they must learn to endure wounds. Hence they grow old beardless and their young men are without comeliness, because a face furrowed by the sword spoils by its scars the natural beauty of a beard. They are short in stature, quick in bodily movement, alert horsemen, broad shouldered, ready in the use of bow and arrow, and have firm-set necks which are ever erect in pride. Though they live in the form of men, they have the cruelty of wild beasts."