Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mordor was starting an industrial revolution which couldn't have been older than 60 years. Nothing explains the lack of development the previous few millemnia.
> Nothing explains the lack of development the previous few millemnia. What explains the lack of development in ancient Sumer or ancient Rome? Wait a hot minute, because we have no idea and could have no idea if there was a small industrial revolution 10K years before ancient Sumer was a suburb. There would be no way to know if something like actual stainless steel was forged 60K years ago and the technology was lost…
Why hasn't Middle Earth had an Industrial Revolution?
151–160 of 428 posts
Re: Why hasn't Middle Earth had an Industrial Revolution?
#152My immediate thought is that the technium of Middle Earth did not develop like ours due to rhe ubiquity of magic. Indeed, it is in these books that the last lights of magic are fading, and the world is being given over to other powers. Imagine if there were like an additional physics sitting on top of ours, and its use was isolated to a few hereditary practitioners, and let us see if the mundanes can scraps together…
That strikes me as reasonable. With magic, they didn't need to invent things. They didn't need engineering. There's also the hint, at least from the movies, that Sauron and Sarumon could produce an unlimited supply slave labor.
"True magic" seems to stem from intimate knowledge of the more arcane and foundational aspects of Arda. The Ainur wield it instinctively, and only the most ancient Elves seem to be able to learn it. But also they struggle to use it on scale, which was one of the reasons the Rings of Power were forged. In the Third Age, advanced magic seems to only be used via the Rings of Power, and dissipates for good after the destruction of the One Ring.
Re: Why hasn't Middle Earth had an Industrial Revolution?
#153Something not mentioned in the article: Middle Earth is depopulated. Without large market, it does not make sense to produce at scale, nor you will have the capital to do it. The main characters travel hundreds of kilometers down the biggest river around and they don't encounter other vessels or a populated settlement until they reach Minas Tirith. And I'm not even mentioning the missing cities and villages in the in…
“Only one war 60 years ago” underestimates the impact that goblins/orcs have. It’s not wars alone that cause depopulation, it’s the constant raids. The orcs have secure holds in the Misty Mountains that allow them to raid all surrounding areas at will. This keeps these areas thinly populated. The exceptions are places like Lake Town, which are highly defensible. It’s not really possible to attack the orcs in their mo…
Re: Why hasn't Middle Earth had an Industrial Revolution?
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mordor was starting an industrial revolution which couldn't have been older than 60 years. Nothing explains the lack of development the previous few millemnia.
> Nothing explains the lack of development the previous few millemnia. But it also took many, many thousands of years for us to get to the industrial revolution. And we did not have magic, we did not outsource stuff to elves and dwarves, we did not have wars with orcs and dragons and other monsters and no extremely powerful transcedental/imortal beings actively involved/shaping the development of history. And we only…
Re: Why hasn't Middle Earth had an Industrial Revolution?
#155Something not mentioned in the article: Middle Earth is depopulated. Without large market, it does not make sense to produce at scale, nor you will have the capital to do it. The main characters travel hundreds of kilometers down the biggest river around and they don't encounter other vessels or a populated settlement until they reach Minas Tirith. And I'm not even mentioning the missing cities and villages in the in…
> while the east participated in only one war 60 years ago that was done in a few weeks time. Note that when the fellowship passes through Lorien and Gondor, the ring war is already in full force, the fellowship just doesn't notice a lot of it. By the time they travel the Anduin, the river is considered a front line: Everything east of the river is already occupied by Sauron, while the areas directly west of it had b…
Re: Why hasn't Middle Earth had an Industrial Revolution?
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
So why are there no pump guns? Indeed, considering Tolkien's otherwise fully-defined universe (and the industrialisation in Mordor indicating that it can be done), it's a fun question, and they rather use the question as as springboard into quite a ranging discussion of the factors behind real Industrial Revolution rather than a comic-book-guy-style tear-down of LoTR specifically.
Because during the time of the musket there were no pump guns neither. EDIT: It took quite some time between the early days of the industrial revolution and the first semi-automatic guns. Ignoring LOTR for a minute, if in story taking place in the 17th century the question of "why didn't X use a colt .45" is easily answered, because it wasn't invented yet.
Probably the most honest reason to not have guns in Middle-Earth is that only stupid orcs, not the elves and dwarves who could easily develop them as school projects, would be interested in such tasteless weapons.
Re: Why hasn't Middle Earth had an Industrial Revolution?
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Only one war 60 years ago” underestimates the impact that goblins/orcs have. It’s not wars alone that cause depopulation, it’s the constant raids. The orcs have secure holds in the Misty Mountains that allow them to raid all surrounding areas at will. This keeps these areas thinly populated. The exceptions are places like Lake Town, which are highly defensible. It’s not really possible to attack the orcs in their mo…
But there were not many orcs and goblins for a long time in many areas, as we learned from the books. They only came back and multiplied with the slow return-growth of Sauron. I would be more interested in the period of when Moria was thriving - when they wrote the password for the back door right above it. Meaning, those must have been one of the most peaceful periods in the wider regions history. How dense was the…
Sauron had already returned c1000 TA to Dol Guldur. We're specifically told that evil things, such as Orcs, begin multiplying in number by c1300 TA, which triggers the migration of the Hobbits to the Shire (already we have an example of why there's less people than we expect.) In c1400 the Nazgul begin their long destruction of the disunited (perennially entangled in civil war) kingdoms of Arnor. In c1500, Gondor is embroiled in devastating wars with Harad. In the 1600s a Great Plague depopulates the North and West: "many parts of Eriador become desolate"; not long before, Gondor has had a horrible civil war. During the plague, even the Shire suffers "great loss." In the 1800s Gondor is again involved in a costly war, this time against the Wainriders, and loses its eastern territories. In 1981 TA Moria falls. In the 2400s Gondor is again under a major attack by (though they do not know it) Sauron, and Sauron is able to use the Orcs in the Misty Mountains to effectively cut off Eriador from the rest of the continent. in the 2500s, the Gondorians are bailed out of a major disaster by the appearance of the Rohirrim, but shortly after, the dragons appear and decimate the dwarves. In the 2700s, after centuries of Orc attacks in the region, the Hobbits themselves defeat a band of Orcs; shortly after, Dale and the Iron Mountain fall to Smaug, Rhoah is nearly destroyed, and Gondor is attacked by fleets of Corsairs. In addition, there is a devastating winter that causes "great suffering and loss of life"; in the same century, Smaug annihilates Erebor and Dale, and there's a major, costly war between the dwarves and the Orcs.
In the following centuries, there are continual major Orc attacks. In 2900 Men finally abandon Ithilien. In 2911 there is another devastating winter, and the year after, great floods that result in the desertion of Tharbad and Minhiriath.
The Hobbit begins in 2941. Orcs have been in force for 1600 years.
Re: Why hasn't Middle Earth had an Industrial Revolution?
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Only one war 60 years ago” underestimates the impact that goblins/orcs have. It’s not wars alone that cause depopulation, it’s the constant raids. The orcs have secure holds in the Misty Mountains that allow them to raid all surrounding areas at will. This keeps these areas thinly populated. The exceptions are places like Lake Town, which are highly defensible. It’s not really possible to attack the orcs in their mo…
The shire hasn't seen any raids for generations and the only thing that protects them are a few hundred irregulars under the command of Aragorn. Another example for unexplainably depopulated region is the area between the shire and the sea. Far from the mountains, those lands are not known to have large settlements.
The Great Plague some time before and the Long Winter are explicitly said to have depopulated Eriador and left it "desolate." The Rangers were also not infallible. Obviously they did nothing to stop the Nazgul or large numbers of Saruman's agents in the time of the Lord of the Rings, nor did they stop the Orc-band that invaded the Shire a hundred years before the story.
Re: Why hasn't Middle Earth had an Industrial Revolution?
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
>however, Tolkien does not provide a good reason for the other human nations, the orcs or even the hobbits. Hm.. Orcs are easy to explain. I doubt Sauron or Saruman care at all about their lives. As the animated adaption put it: "When there's a whip there's a way". add in constant external warfare (and possible internal warfare too) and you end up with a low population. Hobbits are implied to have a very different pa…
I don't think the Shire had enough hobbiton population for an industrial revolution. Estimates I have seen are below 200 000, maybe much fewer. Britain had about 10 million in the 18th century.
Re: Why hasn't Middle Earth had an Industrial Revolution?
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
As is common, fantasy stories depict individual heroes overthrowing bureaucracies. (Harry Potter is an obvious exception where it's the other way around.)
> (Harry Potter is an obvious exception where it's the other way around.) It is? Harry spent a lot of time contending with bureaucracy, whether in the form of overbearing schoolteachers or a corrupt Ministry of Magic. One of the series’ major villains, Dolores Umbridge, is sort of a personification of bureaucracy.
If anything, framing it as "the bureaucracy overthrowing the hero" (or the hero making peace with the system, for a less dramatic interpretation) is only wrong because this implies the hero was ever at odds with the system to begin with. The system is never questioned (except by Hermione, who is portrayed as annoying an naive when she does it), only individual bad actors are identified defeated.
The ending of Harry Potter does not have wizards living openly alongside muggles, house elves liberated, mutual respect and trust between wizards and goblins, or the abolition of the Ministry. Instead it shows the next generation of students getting to experience the same exciting start in their train ride to Hogwarts with the implication that this time, things will be different because the evil people are REALLY gone this time.