THIS exists in M-E?

[The Saucepan Man]

If one were to seek to explain the train references in a manner consistent with the 'Translator's Conceit', then one might speculate that this was a phrase inserted by the 'translator' of the Red Book of Westmarch in place of a phrase which would have no meaning to his audience, or alternatively that it was an example of 'translator's' licence.

I am not sure that this fully explains all the anachronistic references, however, particularly those included in The Hobbit and the early chapters of LotR set in The Shire. The Shire is portrayed in a manner redolent of English Edwardian society and is in many ways at odds with the medieval feel of the remainder of Middle-earth (or at least the Mannish domains). Hence, we have mantle clocks, umbrellas, pocket handkerchiefs, waistcoats and even footballs (the latter three, I suppose, not being entirely out of place in a medieval setting), and probably others that I have overlooked. It might also (and indeed has been) argued that tobacco, potatos and coffee are also misplaced in a Western Middle-earth supposedly modelled on Western Europe (although this could be explained in a number of ways). There is a thread around here devoted to anachronisms, and another devoted to coffee and other New World imports - I will see if I can root them out.

If, on the other hand, there were actually express trains existing within Third Age Middle-earth, I would look either to the Dwarves or the Dark Lord (perhaps developed from the flying mechanical war-engines that Morgoth empoyed in the assault on Gondolin).

[The Saucepan Man]

Hmm, it seems that the anachronism thread that I had in mind no longer exists. But here are some others that I found which discuss this issue:

Hobbiton Anachronisms, or, Were the Hobbits ahead of their Time?

Modern World references in Middle-Earth

And here's the ever delightful ...

Coffee!

[Estelyn Telcontar]

I must concede that the orcs/goblins are a possibility. Here's a passage from The Hobbit that applies to their mechanical skills:

They can tunnel and mine as well as any but the most skilled dwarves, when they take the trouble...
It is not unlikely that they invented some of the machines that have since troubled the world, especially the ingenious devices for killing large numbers of people at once, for wheels and engines and explosions always delighted them...

(Over Hill and Under Hill)

[Boromir88]

Isn't it interesting that we have more difficulty accepting an express train in the context of Middle-earth than talking dragons?!~Esty

Maybe because readers expect to encounter talking dragons, giant spiders, and the 'ancient' unknown creatures in a fantasy story. But not express trains in a world that has yet to develop full plate armor, or firearms, or motor vehicles . But as has been shown there are anachronisms throughout Tolkien's story.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

One thing just for start to prevent some confusion, which, it seems, has risen among some people here. I thought it is not necessary to point it out, but maybe for preventing further confussion it's better. Of course I am aware of the fact Tolkien was the one who inserted the image of the express train there, but as Esty said, he presented LotR as a translation from the original. And this whole thread is, of course, built on this premise. He indeed used the word, with whatever intention, but it surely affects the world of Middle-Earth. Or said another way, you might say this topic assumes that LotR is indeed supposed to be a verified translation of the Red Book of Westmarch, written by honorable Mr.Baggins & co., and thus, if the image of a train is indeed there, it fits with Middle-Earth.

Originally Posted by SpM

If one were to seek to explain the train references in a manner consistent with the 'Translator's Conceit', then one might speculate that this was a phrase inserted by the 'translator' of the Red Book of Westmarch in place of a phrase which would have no meaning to his audience, or alternatively that it was an example of 'translator's' licence.

Good point. It also came to my mind originally, however in that case we would necessarily come up to a question what expression then was supposed to be used in the original. Because this would imply that Tolkien used the expression in exchange for some other expression which was not understandable at all for modern reader - and this, given the way we are presented even things totally alien to us, seems rather strange. On other places in LotR, even things totally alien to us are described just as they are, so why change it here? Or in other words, as Esty said very nicely: Isn't it interesting that we have more difficulty accepting an express train in the context of Middle-earth than talking dragons?!

Anyway, back on the railway, so to say. If we agree with the railway really existing somewhere in Middle-Earth, it really looks like either the Dwarves could have been behind it, or there is, indeed, the idea of it being a "machine of the Enemy". The latter might also explain the problem of the train being such a significant image in the hobbits' mind, and it will probably really mean that the train had became a bogeyman (quite rightfully, in this case) for the hobbits.

Originally Posted by Esty

I must concede that the orcs/goblins are a possibility.

Indeed! However, I doubt it would have been just orcs, because unless an old railway lead in Redhorn Gate when the hobbits passed through it from the Anduin Vales (or unless Golfimbul arrived with a train to face Bullroarer ), I can't imagine where would the hobbits come in contact with it (or with a rumor of it). If the train had indeed been a work of the Enemy, then I suggest looking for its roots in Morgoth's devices (I think not Sauron's, because we have no word of it being used in Mordor, and I believe that if Sauron could, he would surely use such a valuable device). After all, the image of a train could fit quite nicely with the environment of the pits of Angband. Maybe the knowledge of the making of this menace passed away in coming ages.

When we look at it, it is quite logical. Most of the real "inventions" were made by (or with the help of) more powerful beings (Maiar, ev. in this case it could be even Vala). As Boro said here:

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Besides the appearance of gunpowder (in Gandalf's fireworks and Saruman's 'bombs') advancement in technology (in Middle-earth) is virtually stagnant.

It is quite interesting, however, that we haven't got a note about train among Saruman's devices. If anyone, I would expect Saruman to make such a thing. I even pondered the thought about the train being introduced to the Hobbits during his rulership of the Shire, but later rejected that idea, because from what davem quoted, already Bilbo knew about the train. It is possible, however, that Saruman had some train in his possession, but a) kept it hidden underground or more likely b) could've had plans for it, but didn't use it because he didn't have use for it yet. One could imagine, then, that if Saruman e.g. conquered Rohan, he would have built a nice long railway through the Horse-land to Edoras. (One can almost imagine an "alternate history" where a few years after the conquest of Rohan by Saruman the Rohirrim rebel bands will attack the trains a la Wild West, maybe even equipped by real pistols stolen from Saruman's supplies. )

[davem]

Ok. One thing that got me thinking is in the first draft of TH, where there is a clear reference to 'policemen on bicycles'. Now, this was removed, while the reference to an 'engine' was not. Why? Surely a reference to a policeman on a bicycle is less anachronistic than a reference to a railway engine.

However.....in the upcoming second volume of The History of the Hobbit we will finally get to read Tolkien's attempted re-write of TH in the style of LotR - will the 'engine' reference be left in?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by davem

Ok. One thing that got me thinking is in the first draft of TH, where there is a clear reference to 'policemen on bicycles'. Now, this was removed, while the reference to an 'engine' was not. Why? Surely a reference to a policeman on a bicycle is less anachronistic than a reference to a railway engine.

However.....in the upcoming second volume of The History of the Hobbit we will finally get to read Tolkien's attempted re-write of TH in the style of LotR - will the 'engine' reference be left in?

Only time will tell. However... what you mentioned about the reference is quite important for the "real train" image, since it supports what has been said here earlier. Mystery, mystery...
Also, I would like to point out once more, the original quote about express train does not come from the Hobbit, but from LotR itself - which I find quite important, on that matter.

Oh, and one side note. I hope no one is offended by me bringing this idea up, considering me a heretic spoiling the nice fantasy nature of ME with express trains or something like that. Though the idea itself might seem somewhat strange in ME, personally I find trains quite romantic (unless they are dirty and full of people and sprayed allover with graffiti) and prefer traveling with them above other means of transport in general - and probably also partially because of the fact that you can look at the scenery of the land you are moving through. And for me, having a sightseeing tour through ME on a train would surely be lovely experience, not at all ruining the Prof's world. (though still walking and "testing it on my own feet" will be even better)

[davem]

Of course, 'express train' need not imply a machine like a steam engine. In fact even an 'engine' need not necessarily refer to a mechanical device

train (n.)
c.1330, "a drawing out, delay," later "trailing part of a skirt" (c.1440), also "retinue, procession" (c.1440), from O.Fr. train (fem. traine), from trainer "to pull, draw," from V.L. *traginare, extended from *tragere "to pull," back formation from tractus, pp. of L. trahere "to pull, draw" (see tract (1)). Train of thought first attested 1651. The railroad sense is recorded from 1824, from notion of a "train" of carriages. British train-spotting "hobby of observing trains and recording locomotive numbers" is recorded from 1958.

engine
c.1300, from O.Fr. engin "skill, cleverness," also "war machine," from L. ingenium "inborn qualities, talent," from in- "in" + gen-, root of gignere "to beget, produce." At first meaning a trick or device, or any machine (especially military); sense of one that converts energy to mechanical power is 18c., especially of steam engines. Engineer "locomotive driver" is first attested 1839, Amer.Eng.

So a 'train' could be pulled by animals - a 'wagon train' for example, & an 'engine' is simply a 'clever device'.

In other words, one could, in fact, have both 'trains' & 'engines' in M-e without them needing to be even steam powered.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Linguistic possibilities, davem, true - but how would those usages of the words account for the "express"?!