3 Concerning Naugrim, Ents and Eagles

[ArcusCalion]

DE-EX-07, 07.1: For the first one, I think simply removing the second part of the sentence is the safest bet, like Fin suggests. As for the issue with the Dwarves propagating, by the old relation of YT to YS, there is a period of around 700 years from the awakening of the Elves to the time when the Vanyar and Noldor first entered Beleriand. I know we are not necessarily abiding by this timeline due to the uncertainty of the relations, but this is the timeframe imagined (any revisions only make this time period longer, so this is the shortest time frame possible.) I would say that 700 years is plenty of time for the Firebeards and Broadbeams to have exiled the smaller and more deformed of their race (i.e. the Petty Dwarves) and for them to have grown enough. Obviously having an entire race formed from a single pair of people presents a bunch of genetic issues, but as this is a fantasy world that may be overlooked. I would say 700 years is enough time for the pairs story to make sense.

[Findegil]

700 years is for Dwarves not so much. Let assume the Fathers started at once to beget children, since each generation takes 100 sun years get children of their own, generation no 8 would be just born when the Elves entered Beleriand. If we calculate that 3 generations are alive at the same time and each generation would 1.5 times greater as the one before (which is a very high rate considering what we are told about the dwarves):
Generation 6 (the grandparants): 4 x 1.5 x 1.5 x 1.5 x 1.5 x 1.5 = 30.375
Generation 7 (the parants): 4 x 1.5 x 1.5 x 1.5 x 1.5 x 1.5 x 1.5 = 45.5625
Generation 8 (the children): 4 x 1.5 x 1.5 x 1.5 x 1.5 x 1.5 x1.5 = 68.34375
And this is calculated for both Nogrod and Belegost together. How could they already push out a portion of this? And how could these develop to a smaller varity?

If at all this would function with the 144 S.Y = 1 V.Y. calculation, where generation 106 is just born when the Elves enter Beleriand.

Respectfully
Findegil

[ArcusCalion]

As for the smaller variety, random mutations occur in any generation, especially since the Dwarves are a very small gene pool. That there would be a portion of them born even in the third or fourth generation with mutations is not unreasonable, and that they would be ostracized is canon.

[Findegil]

Okay, let’s have a bit more of these calculations:
Form AAm we learn that, the earliest time for the awakening of the father of the Dwarves is Valian Year 1050 (that is when the elves awoke). The Eldar enter Beleriand in Valian Year 1125. So the maximum time we have is 75 Valian Years (VY).

In LotR, Appendix A we are told that the Dwarves get their first children about the 100th year of the Sun (SY) of their life. That would mean that the average time between one generation and the next is a bit longer, but for the easier calculation let us stick with 100 SY.
In addition we learn: ‘The number of dwarf-men that marry is actually less than one-third.’ In the ‘Line of the Dwarves of Erebor’ the greatest number of sons recorded for one Dwarf is 3. If that would be a general fact the race would not grow but dwindle. So we have to assume that earlier the Dwarves that married got more children, let us assume 4 sons of which 1.3 in average would marry and beget children on their part. (This is already a stretch, since it would mean 5.3 children in average for each couple including the daughters.)

For easy reference I will now call the 7 Fathers generation 0 (G0), their sons and daughters G1 and so on.

Now we are told that Durin had no wife and that his people were gathered from other houses. That means that Durin did take part in the propagation of his race only starting from generation 1 (G1) and that we have to split the total number of Dwarves starting from generation 1 by 7 to get the number of Dwarves in each House.

The split between the Petty-Dwarves and the Dwarves of the Ered Luin will not be taken into account by the calculation. It must have occurred early in the time period described above, but probably later then generation 2 and the gathering Durin’s people.

The mathematic:
A) The Second Generation:
We do not want the total number of Dwarves in that generation, we are only interested in the couples for producing the further generations: The prolific of spring of the 6 fathers plus Durin and his wife: 6 x 1.3 + 1 = 8.8
We will round that to 9 and start from that number after a time of 100 SY.

B) Assuming 1 VY = 9.582 SY:
75 VY x 9.582 SY/VY = 718.65 SY.
That means we have G7 as children, G6 as parents and G5 as grandparents. To calculate the total number of Dwarves in G5 we need the number of prolific couples in G4:
9 x 1.3 x 1.3 x 1.3 = 9 x 1.3**3 = 19.773
Total number of Dwarves in G5 is: 19.773 x 5.3 = 105
Number of prolific couple in G5: 9 x 1.3**4 = 25.7049
Total number of Dwarves in G6 is: 25.7049 x 5.3 = 136
Number of prolific couple in G6: 9 x 1.3**5 = 33.41637
Total number of Dwarves in G7: 33.41637 x 5.3 = 177
Total number of Dwarves alive: 105 +136 + 177 = 405
Total number of Dwarves in Beleriand and Ered Lindon: 405 x 2 / 7 = 116
I don’t think that is enough.

C) Assuming 1 VY = 144 SY:
75 VY x 144 SY/VY = 10800 SY.
That means we have G108 as children, G107 as parents and G106 as grandparents. Doing the same mathematic as above would yield 38.5 x 10^12 Dwarves in Beleriand and Ered Lindon, which is far too much. That means in this case we could go with fare more realistic procreation rates and would none the less come to realistic numbers of Dwarves.

Conclusion:
If we assume 1 VY = 9.582 SY we need the additional Dwarves laid to sleep near the fathers. If we assume 1VY = 144 SY we do not need them.

Respectfully
Findegil

[ArcusCalion]

Fin that was amazing kudos!!!

It appears that the issue of the Years of the Trees to Years of the Sun ratio is far more important than we thought. Hopefully it only becomes material in this instance, but perhaps we really do need to tackle the issue after all and come to a definitive answer on which is correct?

As for me, with the LotR appendix and the "Aman" essay, along with Tolkien's notes that the time before the Sun needed to be expanded, I think we have clear indications that the YT -> YS was 144 rather than ~10. The lengthening of time was proposed by him to give adequate time for the expansion of Men, but as we have decided to reject the Sun from the beginning or the Men awakening before the Sun versions of the story, this cannot apply. The Awakening of the Elves and their march would suddenly become much much longer than they were before, but only if we used the dates from AAm, which were based off of an older system, which certainly would no longer apply under the new conception. Thus, to me, it seems the biggest obstacles to the 1YT = 144YS is the time of the Sindar in Beleriand. If they existed (and the Noldor in Valinor) for hundreds upon hundreds of years, their society as the Noldor found it would appear to be far too scanty and unestablished for the time period allotted. On the other hand, we are told that Elves have few children, and do not necessarily marry young, so they increase their numbers very very slowly, which might account for it. Along with that, the Second and Third Ages make very little sense from a population distribution point of view, and they are indisputable canon, so there are clearly population-based flaws inherent in the Tolkien mythos. Should we simply agree that 1YT = 144YS without ever explicitly saying so? This would allow us to leave out the (risky) other Dwarves near the Fathers, as well as justifying a longer period before the stars (as was Tolkien's wish). Thoughts?

[Aiwendil]

I've been a bit under the weather for the past few days, and thus moving more slowly with this. But I may as well post what I have at the moment. A few more thoughts should follow soon.

DE-EX-01: You both make good points, and I agree the story of the dwarf-women was not rejected. The part that chiefly concerned me was that the possible re-interpretation of 'Durin slept alone' in 'Dwarves and Men' might mean that the detail of six dwarf-women, and Durin without a mate, might have been rejected. However, that detail was well-established, and I think much less ambiguous evidence would be needed to conclude that it was rejected. So I agree to use this passage.

DE-EX-07:

Originally Posted by Findegil

I found a contradiction that we must adress: In Quendi and Eldar, dated 1959-60, it is said that, the Dwarves 'claimed to have known Beleriand before even the Eldar first came there'. This is contradict, in a way, by the Passage (e) from Concerning the Dwraves, dated 1969-70, that we toke up into our text: "But it is not known when Durin or his brethren first awoke, though some think that it was at the time of the departure of the Eldar over sea." Even so we could argue that 'some think' as a qualifier is enough to make the contradiction bearable, but I would here rather use principle 2b and skip the second half of the sentence.

'Concerning the Dwarves' is from c. 1958, though isn't it (The same time as LQ)?

In any case, I think that there is sufficient doubt expressed in both passages that they needn’t be considered to contradict each other. The Dwarves claim to have been in Beleriand before the Elves; others say that the Dwarves did not awaken until the Eldar departed over the sea.

DE-EX-07.1:

Beside that I will again break a lance for DE-EX-07.1. How do we think that with the 6 couples and one additional male and the reported unprolific behaevier of the Dwarves with in such a short time as given between the awakening of the Elves and the Eldar reaching Beleriand such a variation like the Petty-Dwarves would be reached?.

In my opinion, it's still the case that the additional dwarves are an unworkable projection. The making of additional dwarves would undoubtedly have entailed significant changes to the legend as told in 'Concerning the Dwarves' and Letter 212. Which means that in my opinion, if the statement about the Petty-dwarves in 'Quendi and Eldar' is deemed to conflict with the story of the origin of the Dwarves, then it too must be rejected. However, I would still point out that it is (as far as I can see) only stated that the Dwarves claimed to have been in Beleriand before the Elves. This ties in nicely with the fact that - as we are about to say - this is the Elvish myth about the Dwarves’ origin. Perhaps in the Dwarvish myth there are additional Dwarves beyond the 7+6.

I can’t quibble with the calculations Findegil has provided, though I would question whether it is necessarily a valid assumption that the information about Dwarvish marriage and reproduction found in Appendix A applies equally well to the first Dwarves as it does to the Dwarves of the late Third Age. I could easily imagine that early in their history, Dwarves were more likely to marry, married at a younger age, and had more children.

As for 9.582 vs. 144 - as I explained in the other thread, I am now convinced that the 144 figure for the Elvish yén and the 9.582 figure for the Valian Year coexisted simultaneously, and that the idea of a 144 year Valian Year entered later and was part and parcel of the proposed revised chronology, with Men awakening much earlier. But I think it would be best if we can retain ambiguity on this.

All in all, then, I think that we cannot add these additional Dwarves, but must either:

a) reject the statement that Dwarves were in Beleriand before the Elves
b) accept the statement about the Dwarvish claim but deem in non-contradictory (either because it is only a claim or because we can imagine the early dwarves being more prolific than their descendants) or
c) somehow leave the text ambiguous so that even though additional Dwarves are not explicitly mentioned, nothing contradicts the possibility that either Aule or Eru added additional Dwarves

DE-EX-07.2: Yes, as I look more carefully at other possible placements for this material, I think I agree that this is the best place for it. I still find it a little awkward that it jumps forward to talk about the awakening of the fathers and the dispositions of the Dwarvish clans, but that is not a problem per se.

DE-EX-08:

If we would discard this passage because Tolkien did not take it up into his final version, we would need to form some text from LotR, Appendix to contain the information about the female dwarves. In other cases like that we prefered to restore the rejected passages, and I think that is here the better way as well.

I’m not sure that follows - we needn’t say anything about Dwarvish women here at all. However, I am not much against including this passage; its content, at any rate, seems to be on very firm ground.

DE-EX-09:

I don't see that this is redundant with what follows. What I includes from that Letter is: 1. That what was told so far is the Elvish version of the story. 2. That Elves and Men know nothing of the fate of the fëa of the Dwarves after death. Only the second could be said to be redundant to the false belief that Dwarves return to earth and stone. But is that a statment about the dwarvish fëa at all?

That’s a good point. However, the fact that this Elvish belief (that they return to earth and stone) is contrasted with the Dwarvish belief that they are gathered to Mandos suggests that the Elvish belief does somehow pertain to the fëa. So I think I’d prefer to remove the statement about Elves and Men knowing nothing of the fate of Dwarvish fëar after death (though retaining the statement that this is an Elvish myth).

[Findegil]

DE-EX-07: For the sake of safety I am still inclined to skip the speculation about the Dwarves awakening at the time when the Eldar left Middle-earth.

DE-EX-07.1: Since we did not specify in our text what ratio we assume between VY and SY, we could simple leave the issue with the Dwarvish procreation necessary for the story of the Petty-Dwarves unaddressed.
a) Does sound simple, but would mean some changes in the farther chapters where the story of the Petty-Dwarves is retold. Even in the Narn and RoD so it is not made explicit the story is in the background. Therefore this option does not work for me.
b) This option would work for me as descript above, so I would, as said in DE-EX-07, at least skip the impossible speculation of the late awakening.
c) I can see a way to be ambiguous about who made these additional Dwarves, but how we could edit a text that implicitly suggest the additional Dwarves without mentioning them within our rules, is beyond me imagination in the moment.

DE-EX-08: Good, we will keep the passage.

DE-EX-09: I agree that the circumstances of the statement suggest that it applies to the dwarvish fëa. But what fate would that be? Imprisoned in the stone/tomb forever? Annihilation of the fëa? Good that we do not have to solve that riddle! I agree to your suggestion to remove the statement about Elves and Men knowing nothing of the fate of Dwarvish fear after death and to keep that about this being an Elvish myth.

Respectfully
Findegil