Didn't Sam remark on some of teh men accompanying the oiliphaunts as looking like they we. More than half-troll? Black skins and red tongues? Although they could have been among another of Sauron's armies.

I have always taken the passage to indicate the Westerners' unfamiliarity with black skinned peoples, rather than actual trollish blood.

Bill Ferny's friend in Bree was described as looking half-goblin in a similar way.

"You've et a village and a half between you since we came down from the mountains" is most assuredly trollish for "You've eaten a large number of people" not an actual count.

I think it's entirely possible to mix dark age and classical tropes together to come up with ME analogies. In fact, I think that it's folly to try to completely base ME cultures on a single real world historical culture or period.

As for Easterlings and a possible Rus analogy. Funny you should mention that Elessar. I always have viewed Dorwinion as a potential candidate for that. I even used the term Druzhina as a counterpart to the Rohirric Eoreds.

The notion sprang from two questions.

1) during the second Wainrider invasion, they were accompanied by an unexpectedly large force of cavalry. Who were these riders?

2) what happened to Dorwinion during the War of the Ring?

So, I put two and two together and came up with

Dorwinion survived because the people there are not of the Free Folk. They are Easterlings but are pragmatic and trade with all their neighbours. They were originally a sedentary people dwelling on the western shores of the sea of Rhun.
They are ruled by a Warrior Aristocracy that is descended from those Northmen who betrayed their alliances with Gondor and instigated the war that led to the rise of Vidugava and the Kingdom of Rhovanion.
Over the centuries they have become indistinguishable from their subjects(save for an occasional throwback to fair hair and blue eyes). They are responsible for the introduction of mounted warfare to the Easterling arsenal.
The Druzhina of my Dorwinion will saddle up for the Dark Lords army and will march on Dale during the War of the Ring.

Agreed.

I just tend to think in terms of the classical world, or, as I said, even more the Near East. Probably has to do with minoring in Near Eastern Studies, back in the day.

I can't remember which letter it is, but Tolkien wrote that he associated Gondor (stone-land) with the Egyptians. Definitely NOT the generic medieval Western Europeans of Jackson! Then again, it is difficult to reconcile an Egyptian motif with Tolkien's descriptions of the knights of Dol Amroth. In reality, I think, as has already been stated, that it is well-nigh impossible to neatly categorize the cultures of Middle Earth along historical lines. What works, works, and what doesn't, doesn't. Hardly eloquent, perhaps, but it does give us a great deal of latitude in our imaginations!

Really interesting thoughts on Dorwinion.

I've long thought of Dorwinion and Harondor in similar terms: they are the borderlands between the Free Peoples on the one hand, and the Easterlings and the Haradrim on the other. I've sort of thought of them as "contact zones": the place where the lines between West and East, North and South, become blurred. Are the Dorwinions Easterlings who look to the West, or Men of the West who look to the East? Depends on one's perspective, I suspect.

What about this? Along the River Harnen, both in Harondor and northern-most Harad, is a culture not unlike Upper Egypt or ancient Nubia. Let's call them the River People. It's a patchwork of small kingdoms which work both the river as well as the fertile lands produced by its annual flooding. Not talking Pharaonic Egypt, but more "salt of the earth" sort of peoples. These people don't really identify as either part of Gondor or part of Harad, and just sort of get stuck in the middle as the north and south battle it out.

Go further south, and you get the Desert People, whose life-ways are a composite of Arabic and African pastoralist groups. There are also some Desert Kingdoms, which start as trading centers similar to Timbuktu. Go even further south, you hit the jungle-lands of Mûmak-Kings.

So, it's the Desert Kingdoms and the Mûmak-Kings who serve Sauron and worship Melkor. They probably fight as much among each other as against Gondor and the West, but when the War of the Ring comes, they answer Sauron's call. For their part, the River People and the Desert People tend to worship Eru. They don't so much oppose the Desert Kingdoms or the Mûmak-Kings, as they want to be left in peace. They might, though, end up serving as a sort of "Fifth Column" in Southron lands.

Just some stuff off the top of my head, though. The idea of the South as basically African really appeals to me, though, as well as the idea that, whilst the dominant kingdoms might follow Sauron, not every people in the South has succumbed to the Shadow.

I just looked this up quickly on Google. Don't have the Letters on hand, as I loaned my copy to my nephew, but apparently in letter 211, he compares the crown of Gondor to that of the ancient Egyptian pharaohs. I think this might be a great example of how Tolkien borrowed prolifically from various aspects of real-world history and culture, such that we can't compare one culture in our world directly to any of those in ME.

Brooke,

My thoughts are that I tend to see things more in an early feudal light.
The Rohirrim are King Alfred the Great's Anglo Saxon Fyrd(except that instead of being Proto Hobilars, they actually fight from horseback).
The Kingdom of Dale is the Danelaw(North of England). Even the name suggests Yorkshire and the Long Lake just screams Windermere at me.
This IMO may explain why there seem to be Northman names for persons but English names for the places (Dale, Laketown, Long Lake).
Dunland, I see as the Welsh March or possibly the Scottish Borders of the same period with the Isen representing the rivers Tweed or the Wye. Helms Deep and the Hornburg might make a suitable analogy or Offa's Dyke? Celts? Yes, but at a stage long after the woad paint and head hunting.

The valleys of the Running and Redwater are home to the dispossessed of the old Kingdom of Dale and, along with Dorwinion, I see them as forming both pro western and pro eastern versions of the Rus. While hoping to use generic Slavic names and terminology for Dorwinion, I see the warrior aristocracy as resembling Sassanid cataphracts rather that Russian Kniaz.

Gondor as Byzantium and Minas Tirith as Constantinople. The western empire is gone and the east is crumbling in the face of the Osmanli. Haradrim as Seljuks? Hmmm...

Back to thinking about chariots.....

Letter 211, does in fact see Tolkien comparing the crown of Gondor to the Egytian pharaonic crown of the united North-South Kingdoms. But, I think it would be wrong to say he drew on Egyptian culture. We have to remember Tokien was an Oxford don who had read immensely. As he was "discovering" Middle-earth and composing his Legendarium he was drawing on the vast array of symbols and images left to him by that expansive reading. In a sense, we might say he was pulling from his subconscious those images and symbols that most worked with his world-and-life-view. When pressed to explain why something was the way it was, such as Letter 211, Tolkien starts "rummaging" through that incredible imagination of his for corollaries. Imagine him saying to himself after reading Ms. Beare's letter, "Now where did that inspiration come from?" After muttering to himself, looking out his office window to a neglected garden (actually a window in his converted motor-carriage house that he used for his office) he arrives at the conclusion through a brief deductive process: "Oh, the Gondorian crown is much like the Egyptian crown. And, that makes sense for the socio-political dynamics of Gondor mirror the dynamics of Egypt especially in its cultural monuments. There you have it!" Or, some such conversation.

As a side note, George Sayer often said Tolkien muttered to himself in working through the conundrums created by his Legendarium, especially when walking with the Lewis brothers. So, it is easy to imagine himself muttering around his office wondering where some inspiration or another came from!

The interesting thing about all of this is that Tolkien did exactly what we are doing: Now where did that come from and what would have inspired it? The philology of Middle-earth was constructed as were most things connected with language, and none more so then proper names and lineages. But, when it came to the story and those elements of setting in the story, they were discovered and later reflection could only answer what they may have been inspired by or modeled on during the (sub)creative process.

That leaves an amazing amount of room for us to probe and wander through our own psyches and divine those images and symbols that most fit our conception of Middle-earth. If not in content, at least in the process we would be staying true to Tolkien!

Regards,
E

Halbarad,

I have no problem with seeing things in an early feudal light, and it's probably the case that Tolkien saw things that way as well. It's just not the way I think. Frankly, I'm far more familiar with the ancient Near East and Classical world, so that's where my brain goes for imagery. I think that's the beauty of Middle-earth: you, and Tolkien, can think early feudal, I can think Classics and Near East, and it's all good.

And I don't think Tolkien would object to my thinking along these lines, as I think he was much more interested in spinning a good yarn and engaging people's imagination. If my imagination was engaged, I think he'd be quite happy.

Eluadin,

That makes a lot of sense to me. One of the strengths of Middle-earth is precisely that Tolkien didn't start by saying "And now let's make up something that looks like culture X in our world." It gives the world it's own flavour.

Myself, when I look for analogies, what I'm really doing is saying, "Okay, Tolkien described X. I have a mental image of X in my head. What does that image remind me of?"

I agree completely Brooke and please don't think, even for a moment, that I am attempting to invalidate your thoughts.

Oh, no, definitely did not think that. Rather, the opposite: very much enjoying other people's takes on the Easterlings and Southrons. It always amazes me how we can all be reading the same books, and come up with such different ideas of how it all looks. One of the things I don't like about the movies, which for the most part I do enjoy, is that they tend to make people's vision of Middle-earth look more alike than might otherwise be the case.

My former neighbor will always be Gandalf to me. Strong though Ian was in that role.

I love seeing different people's interpretations of Middle Earth. I wish the Tolkien estate were more lenient in that regard.

I have for some time wanted to see, or even write, a novel or short story told from the perspective of an average soldier in Sauron's army. Perhaps an Easterling or Haradrim foot soldier, a conscript who was "just following orders." It would be expanding upon the "Was he really evil?" passage in Two Towers, really. But the difficulties of dealing with the Tolkien estate make that basically impossible.

Hi Halbarad,

IMO we have to be careful and more diofferentiated when talking about "Easterlings". Those of the Second and Third Age are very likely to have been quite different people of diverse ethnic origin and outlook. I do feel that the SA Easterlings (or mannish cultures of the Age generally) might be better inspired by early mannish empires like Bronze Age early Assur, Hammurabic Babylon, the Hittites, Akkad, Urartu etc.

Since the origin of the non-Númenórean Nazgûl is so vague, there can be no definite answer here. Even though I am at variance with many of MERP's ideas here, I agree with the basic premise, that these should originate from all over the continent, often thousands of kilometers away from Eldarin or Númenórean influence or even hearsay. In this respect, my personal preference for Khamûl is to have him as an ancient king/magician/warrior from an empire far to the East in the mid-Second Age. His people have long since vanished (absorbed and merged with other mannish cultures) as has his former realm, though there may (and will be) successor realms.

Some of the Third Age-Easterlings might be inspired by Achaemenid Persians, though even here we have to be aware that this spans again 3,000 years and cultures and empires can and will change over its course.

Kingdoms designed for a TOR-era campaign might have existed only for a couple of centuries then (perhaps 200 to 500 years) and might have been non-existent before. Ethnically, things change as well (though not as fast), and the great ethnic turnovers in TA-Rhovanion are a guarantee for a great mix and frequent changes as well.

We have to remember that the setting of TOR, where Sauron is strong and again the active *ruling* power behind every move against the West is a specific phenomenon of the late Third Age. In the first 1,000 years of the Age, men were totally on their own and for another milennium Sauron was relatively weak (plus the Watchful Peace). It is only after the Watchful Peace that he is not only a grey eminence behind many moves against the Elves and Númenóreans, but an active ruler and more or less open schemer as "The Necromancer" rather than acting exclusively through intermediaries like the Witch-king in former Angmar while keeping a low profile himself.

Cheers
Tolwen

There is the open question as to whether all the Men who came under the banner of Sauron were truly evil. Some may well have been duped or served under duress.

I will not try to make this case for the Orcs and Trolls. Those were deliberately bred and twisted as mockery of Elves and Ents. Thus being *evil* is part of their nature.

The Nine were given to mortal men "proud and strong" who were ensnared by them, this in the time when Sauron wore a fair form. It seems possible that in some parts of the East and South this fair form might be what is remembered. Traditions of alliegence to Sauron or the Nazgu might persist long after direct influence had passed. It would be a simple matter for Sauron to cash in traditional loyalties and oaths, similar to those between Rohan and Gondor.

Hi Horsa,

Absolutely! And add to this the option of cooperating for their own benefit without being really "evil" in the sauronic sense. A mercenary or opportunistic option, but viable.

Of course. And even if one could debate the deep philosophical implications whether they are originally evil or just irredeemably under a greater power is irrelevant for our purposes. In Middle-earth they are "evil" in the close sense indeed.

IMHO the fair form of Sauron would be the stuff of extremely ancient and heavily distorted legends - probably of a people long gone by the late Third Age, but remembered by their successors. It is at least 4,500 years after Sauron gave these rings away, and that is a lot for Man - especially if you factor in the breaks in history and Sauron's total disappearance for a millennium. This is an eternity for normal men and their history.

Compare this to the Sumerian language and religion which long survived Sumer as a political entity. And the latter influenced the beliefs of their successors and neighbours as well.

Cheers
Tolwen

Since I was the one who suggested the Persian analogy, please allow me to clarify. The point was precisely to say that just as the Persian Empire consisted of a huge diversity of peoples, so too were the Easterlings.

The point of bringing Khamûl into the discussion was to suggest that he was given "dominion" by Sauron over the East, such that he continued over the centuries to support a nobility that maintained his Sauronic or "Khamûlite" Empire. His continued support of this nobility is a major part of how the Easterlings, or a certain portion of the Easterlings, remained loyal to Sauron.

Do I think any of this is what Tolkien intended? No. Do I enjoy thinking about it, and coming up with my own ideas about the tapestry that is Middle-earth? Yep.

Good point. Which period do you aim at here? For example, post-26th century Third Age?

And roughly which region would you "give" to him? "The East" is a very vague term that might need some more differentiation in its application here. Compare KWF's atlas (and 1st vs. 2nd ed.) or the articles in Other Minds, Issue 1 & 2 for an interpretation of the whole continent.

Cheers
Tolwen

Just looked at the map from Other Minds #1.

Let us imagine that c. SA 2000, or just after, there was a vibrant city-state culture around the lakes and rivers in the middle of what we might dub "Asia," on the analogy with our world. (I take this to be around the beginning of the third millennium of the Second Age, as the Nazgûl first appear around 2250).

Let us imagine that Khamûl was a king in one of those city-states, a combination a of Middle-earthian Gilgamesh on the one hand, who became greatly afraid of death, and Hammurabi on the other, who managed to unite several of the other city-states under his rule.

Let us imagine that Sauron played upon those fears, as well as that lust for power which Tolkien held to be endemic to Men, promising him both eternal life and eternal reign over that city-state culture, and beyond, if Khamûl but agreed to be his servant.

Let us imagine that Khamûl did agree.

Let us imagine that Khamûl then spends the balance of the Second Age carving out his empire in the East.

Thus far, stuff that I made up, hence why I say "Let us imagine."

Now, the Nazgûl disappeared from the West from the defeat of Sauron through to c. TA 1300. What were they doing?

Let us imagine that for his part, Khamûl was working to maintain his empire in the East. He was doing this to help prepare for Sauron's return.

Around 1300, the Witch-king once again begins to attack in the East, becoming a menace to the Free Peoples. For whatever reason, Khamûl is not ready to begin similar activities until about the 19th century. It's at that point that he begins to send various Wainrider tribes to attack the West, probably with promises of power and wealth.

That is, I suggest that just as the Witch-king of Angmar worked through a kingdom, namely Angmar, so too did Khamûl work through what I call his "Khamûlite Empire."

Now, of course, most of this is speculation. I'm okay with that. Middle-earth is a large painting, unfinished, upon all who are so inclined can fill in the details. And that is it's glory.

Okay, pursuant to the above discussion, I've been tossing around the idea of drafting an "Easterlings Sourcebook," for a campaign idea I might try to run after our current one runs its course. The idea would be to explore Tolkien's late idea that the Blue Wizards didn't fail in the East, but actually helped out immensely in Sauron's second defeat. With Pallando as their patron, the players would be part of those pivotal, unspecified, events in the East.

Even if this campaign never got off the ground, I enjoy drafting such things. It's a hobby, really.

So, thinking about playable cultures, here are some ideas:
--Khamûlites: i.e. Khamûl's people, i.e. the descendants of the city-state culture from which Khamûl originated, and whose nobility and royalty he has continued to patronize over the centuries, and whose heartland is to the east of Khand. I imagine them as sort of darkened counterparts to Gondor or Dale;
--the Wainriders, whom I imagine to be much like gypsies, (or Roma, as is the preferred term), turning turn to war only when necessary, or when induced by Khamûl, and who dwell largely between the heartland of Khamûl's empire and the Sea of Rhûn;
--the Fighting Dervishes, which I imagine as Eru worshipers descended from groups of independent hunter-fishers subdued by Khamûl in his rise to power, and who developed their unique fighting (or, as they would put it, dance) style in order to resist his growing power. Basically, peasants who turned traditional dancing into a martial art;
--Dwarves of the Eastern Mountains, which is inspired by the fact that four out of the fathers of the Dwarves awoke in that range. The real point here is to have more player options than just different cultures of Men.

These are just initial thoughts, of course, and it would be awhile before I got around to really fleshing them out, especially game stats, but I am curious about what people think.

Brooke, I would love to see further development of these ideas.

Thanks for the words of encouragement

Hi Brooke,
you raise a number of good points here

The OM1 maps are already good, but contained some problems that were fixed in #2 (Mapping Arda Reloaded). I would recommend using these versions exclusively.

These are great ideas about the origin. What I'd prefer is a variety among the origins of the Nazgûl in general. MERP developed them in a way that they were not all originally power-hungry, greedy or unscrupulous individuals who could be lured by promises of power and eternal life.
Differentiating on Tolkien's passage in the Sil77 and LotR, some were undoubtly of this sort, but a couple (e.g. two or three) might have been good at heart, e.g. trying to make the world a better place by promoting justice, rule of law, peace and prosperity etc. Their desire to fulfill these dreams (Man's lifespan is limited...) was their undoing and they fell to this fair-seeming figure (or an intermediary - according to the situation) who said that he had the solution for their problems. And then the ring he accepted slowly perverted his lofty ideals of justice and peace bit by bit...

IMO one of the most central aspects of Sauron's successful distribution of the Nine Rings is his ability to tailor his offers and promises exactly to what his intended victim desired the most. And for a few this might very well have been the idea of bettering the world. That Sauron's promises are dangerous they did not know.
I find it an entertaining thought of exploring Sauron's strategy in these regions. The Númenóreans and Eldar were absent and unknown here, and he did not have an already damaged reputation. Thus he could act on "clean" ground, utilizing his skills of guile and deception to the fullest. These were unleashed on Men who were not aware of his danger and in the same way neither prepared for it nor able to resist due to their lesser power and unawareness. A sad tale indeed, where the Dark Lord could till his fields unmolested by the West on victims unable to resist him or see through his lies. Great tragedy indeed.

I am inclined to put Khamûl in this group - a tragic character who was himself tricked by Sauron without any original thoughts of personal gain or aggrandizement. That would give the story of the Nazgûl much more depth. MERP tried it, but their Nazgûl biograpghies had several major flaws. The basic idea of diverse origins and motivations is IMHO very good though.

That's a good question. Drawing from the evidence we have, it seems that the Nazgûl's activities ansd power were closely linked to Sauron: When he was in power and active, so were the Nazgûl (under his orders without doubt), but when he was weak and inactive (or even away) their activity ceased as well. Compare the total inactivity of the Ringwraiths in Minas Morgul during the Watchful Peace. They *might* be active in the East in this period, but I prefer to see them as extensions of Sauron's power (which they are). Along this line, during Sauron's banishment from SA 3441 to approximately TA 1000, they would hide in the East, staying hidden and inactive until their master's return. Their dependence on the Dark Lord has weaknesses and not only strengths. I imagine their hideouts as small versions of Mirkwood around Dol Guldur (but not necessarily always within forests), where they haunt and taint the area while they nurture their weakness, collecting strength for their return.

In a word: I see them inactive in this period as well.

I greatly enjoy such thoughts about developments and greatly appreciate your imagination and creativity. Great ideas!

Cheers
Tolwen

Thanks, Tolwen

And thanks for letting me know about those articles from Other Minds. They have provided definite grist for my imaginative mill.

Obviously, things are still inchoate in my mind. I could easily be persuaded to think in terms of First and Second Khamûlite Empires: one during the Second Age, which collapsed with Sauron's first defeat, and another built up in Khamûl's former strongholds, much as Sauron eventually returned to power in his former haunts.

The most important things for me are: 1) that what I come up with fits the history as laid down by Tolkien; 2) that I maintain the realism that we see in Tolkien (i.e., yes, it's a fantasy realm, but it feels like something that could exist); and, 3) that it allows for good RP experiences.

I was also thinking that I might introduce an otherwise unknown group of elves who remained in the East. Cuivenen was located somewhere near Lake Helcar, so I think I can make sense of some elves being there. That, again, will allow a diversity which more closely mirrors that of the West.

The idea of a Nazgul as a once good king fallen in the shadows is fascinating to me.
And most of the Nazgul are completely unknown. Canvas waiting for the painter.

So I'm thinking to a Barding with the Birthright virtue, searching a symbol of hope in the growing darkness. Some heirloom of a legendary ancestor, the ancient king who swore to come back from the grave to lead his people in the direst moment. But when he reach the burial ground, he found it empty, never used.
A great king of a bygone era, the ancestor is one of the Nine. And finally he's fulfilling his vow, coming back to lead his people.

Oh well. My players know I'm a bastard

That's a brilliant idea, actually. I like it.

Some initial thoughts towards my fledgling idea for an unofficial Easterling Sourcebook, here considering a culture which I call the Khamûlites. Much of what is said is pure speculation, but no less so than MERP's treatment of the Easterlings, of course.

KHAMÛLITES
During the Second Age, Khamûl, a king in the fertile lake-lands of Rhûn, carved out a small empire through the economic and military domination of city-states neighbouring his own. Although beloved by his people for securing their borders, as Khamûl grew on in years he foresaw a succession crisis. Lacking a clear heir, he feared for the future of his people. Sauron, every watchful for an opportunity to enrich his own power, came to Khamûl with a ring of power, which he promised would render the king immortal. Desiring the best for his people, Khamûl took the ring, and soon found himself increasingly under Sauron’s will.
Now apparently immortal, Khamûl was able to take a long view of politics in the East. He spent the remaining centuries of the Second Age expanding his sphere of influence within Rhûn, thus establishing the First Khamûlite Empire. He divided his empire into a number of provinces, and rewarded hereditary rule of each to Men who had voluntarily submitted to his rule. These local rulers governed the provinces and the Empire whilst Khamûl was running Sauron’s errands. Thus, whilst Khamûl was in principle the emperor, in practice the provincial nobility had significant autonomy within their own realms.
When Sauron was defeated at the end of the Second Age, the First Khamûlite Empire collapsed. Along with his fellow Nazgûl, Khamûl re-grouped as they prepared for Sauron’s return. As Sauron grew in power, however, Khamûl turned his attention back to the East. He re-established his rule within the various provinces, the rulers of which had not forgotten that long ago their ancestors had been greatly enriched by serving Khamûl and his master. With the desiccation that has occurred in the East over the course of the millennia, the core of Khamûl’s empire is now a series of autonomous riverine city-states, each of which has official provincial status. To the west of that core are the lands of the Wainriders, some of which openly support Khamûl and live in more sedentary conditions as provincial rulers, some which actively resist his hegemony, and most of which just do what they must to survive within lands formally ruled by a Nazgûl of Mordor. To the east of the core are the lands occupied chiefly by the Dervishes, a motley population of semi-nomadic sheepherders descended from hunter-fishers who were forced to abandon that life-way as the eastern lakes died up. They are almost universally worshippers of Eru, and thus have been stubbornly resistance to Khamûlite rule.
Central to Khamûlite rule is the academy system, established by Khamûl during the time of his First Empire. At age seven, every son and daughter of the nobility was sent to one of the many academies throughout the provinces. There they were put through years of rigourous physical and ideological conditioning. The fatality rate was high. Many of the young nobles never emerged from the training schools. All those who did, however, even the women, were ready to serve as officers in the Khamûlite military or as the administrators of the provincial and imperial bureaucracies. This system was one of the few institutions which remained strong throughout the long interregnum between the First and Second Empires, and its ideological conditioning was instrumental in Khamûl’s second rise to hegemony in the East.
Although living under Sauronic rule, with a Nazgûl for a titular emperor, the Khamûlites are not without light. There are many who refuse to bow down in the temples of Melkor, and instead are devoted to the service of Eru. In addition to the free Wainriders residing in the western half of the empire, most notable is the Order of Roméstámo. Founded by the Wizard Pallando himself in the empire’s riverine core, it is a secret order which opposes and seeks to undermine Khamûl, his clients, and his patron.

Standard of Living: Prosperous
Cultural Blessing: Rigourous Conditioning (game effects TBD)
Specialties: Boating, Fishing, Old-Lore, Smith-craft, Swimming, Trading
Backgrounds: Officer of the Empire, Peasant, Provincial Administrator, three more
Cultural Virtues: Roméstámo (effects TBD); four more
Cultural Rewards: Great Bow of the East (effects TBD; open to cooler name, too); Khamûlite Long Pike (as Barding's "Swordmaster" Virtue, but with a Great Spear); one more

You develop some interesting ideas, though I'd like to note that this might lead into a "trap" similar to one encountered in many MERP sourcebooks, and which IMHO is problematic. This is the danger of devising always unnaturally long-lived realms and cultures for "unknown" people/cultures. The motivations are manifold - mostly for practical reasons IMO. But nonetheless, it is IMHO detrimental to the final product.

I may be especially sensitive to this, being very familiar with the MERP sourcebooks and their weaknesses

Please have a look at Issue 12 of Other Minds. The essay The Phenomenon of "Eternal Realms" in Middle-earth RPG settings describes quite good the potential issues associated with such developments.

Cheers
Tolwen

Fair points.

That's why I came up with the idea of two empires, actually separated by millennia, but with an institutional/educational context which can account for how the traditions about and ideologies of the first empire came down to the time of the second.

Or, more precisely, Khamûl ensured that the academies stayed in place over the centuries, so as to facilitate his planned return to power.

In other words, Khamûl was playing the long game.

All I'm concerned about, really, is creating a satisfying RP experience for myself and my group. So, I have no real commitment to the idea of a first and second empire. If Khamûl only established his hegemony a century ago, it wouldn't bother me.

Plus, I can definitely see the advantage of thinking of Khamûlite rule as more recent, as it makes the sense that it is something to be resisted more compelling.

I like the idea, though, that Khamûl has long been Sauron's chief agent in the East. Perhaps the way to have the best of both worlds is to say that he's only recently established what I'm calling his Second Empire.

The last is the point I'd leave out. The defeat of Sauron and the hiding of the Nazgûl was a major break since none of the former "big masters" was available anymore.

I'd prefer the following outline:
In the 1,000 years in-between, all institutions of the former empire collapsed after 200 or 300 years at the latest. Its people changed when other realms rose and conquered them. The remains of the former academies etc. become legend and myth, their ruins forgotten by but a few secretive cultists (and even these really don't understand what they're meddling with). When the Nazgûl (including Khamûl) become active again, they again have to begin on square one, their former kingdoms and empires crumbled to dust and the culture/people they once knew (and belonged to) vanished or mixed with others.

The era of existence for a supposed 2nd empire depends to a great degree on its supposed extent. Here maps like in OM2 come in handy to outline the territory of rule (plus client-kingdoms and areas of influence). It's quite complex if you also take into account that probably all (or at least a great part of) the Nazgûl are abroad from the mid-Third Age onward, trying to re-establish Sauron's grip on the South and East. Here they are contested by the Blue wizards and - temporary - Saruman.
They probably had divided spheres of responsibility and influence so that their activities did not overlap and hinder each other. So you'd also need the rough "territories" assigned to each Nazgûl. And these spheres might change over time, as Sauron might need all or some of them elsewhere.

I'd say that it was not until about the 28th century or so that Sauron again began to command a far-flung but still ill-coordinated empire. And it was not before the early 30th century that this was coordinated enough to allow him to begin (slowly at first) a concerted buildup of forces and logistics for his long-planned final campaign against the West.

For gaming purposes it might be best to devise a late-TA empire ruled by kings/dynasties of Khamûl's choice in the area likely to be part of a campaign (e.g. eastern or southeastern Rhovanion), and leave the rest like histories of the above mentioned sort ambiguous. This leaves room for more detailed developments while not burdening the LM with too much "historical" details where a lot of points need to borne in mind.

Cheers
Tolwen

Tolwen,

A lot of what you say makes a great deal of sense. I'm a social historian by profession, so the temptation is always to go overboard with social and historical detail.

There is a great article about concerning the original purpose of this thread in the latest issue of Other Minds. It is approximately 60 pages of information concerning the population of Eriador.

A hearty thanks to Tolwen!


HN

Hi Brooke,

Oh, how do I know that! Limiting oneself to manageable tasks is half the battle won
I certainly don't want to prevent anyone from developing original realms and cultures. My only goal is to point out potential problems and solutions. For MERP, a lot has been made in developing eastern and southern cultures (some better, some less so). This continued (and continues) with fan-made efforts in the "MERP universe". Of course one can look at these for inspiration and learning of strengths and weaknesses.

If your goal lies in world-building, I'm all the more happy since this is one of my preferences as well (as you can see in numerous OH and OM contributions by me). But even if you "only" want something for immediate use in a game and without need for detailed histories and backgrounds, that's equally appreciated! And perhaps you might think of submitting it - or something else - for publication in OM!

It is planned to have a piece for Rhovanian demography in OM14, similar to the one on Eriador in #13. This will include Easterling realms as well, but probably touches them only briefly.

@hoplitenomad:
At your service. *bows*

Cheers
Tolwen

My primary interest is having something playable, but, yes, I am definitely interested in world-building as well.

I have generally avoided MERP over the years, because I really never liked the system. I never liked I.C.E.'s approach to RPGs in general. Still, it's not a bad idea to check it out. I do have a small collection of MERP books that I found cheap about ten years ago at a used bookstore. Maybe it's time to dig them out of the attic.

Thanks, Hoplitenomad!

If you need some advice of what might be good for what purpose (and what not), just ask, and I'm sure I can help you out
As a rule of thumb, the later ones of the 2nd ed. were better than the 1st ed. ones, but the exception proves the rule

Unfortunately the region which is most important for TOR was only peripherally touched by well-made modules. Check out this thread for some information on MERP's coverage of the region (unless of course you are aware of it already).

Cheers
Tolwen

Thanks, Tolwen!

BTW: I find it strange that MERP devoted so little coverage to the region in which The Hobbit was set, given that it was The Hobbit which started "Tolkien-mania" in the first place.

I also never realized that they set the game c. TA 1640. That's kinda odd, really, when the 30th and 31st century TA is the time most familiar to most players.

Their approach was a different one than made by the LotR RPG and TOR. They wanted to use the world as described as a broad canvas (from a greater distance so to say) to introduce additional original material. IMHO, in a way they used Middle-earth as a backdrop which many people are acquainted with, but avoided too great connection to the book plots to retain - supposedly - more freedom of creativity (see below). Creativity is IMO not really hindered by being more close to the Hobbit or LotR, but is only more complex and time-consuming due to the greater effort to keep in line with all of the text. That's worth the effort IMO though - and you can still go far beyond that (like in the MERP approach).

That is - IMHO - again a result of the wish to have the familiar world as background, but no direct plot and character restrictions by interaction with the well-described persons and places and thus more more freedom in making own modules and adventures.
But in the same instant they were inconsequential, since especially the maps supposed a partly late Third Age setting (e.g. displaying places not existent or with other names as in TA 1640) in the supposedly clear TA 1640 default setting.

The first modules up to 1987 had no default temporal focus, and thus you find a temporal variety in these earlier ones, it is only after this that 1640 becomes standard. And one of the later major books (The Kin-strife) has a wholly different setting. This latter is one of my preferred times as well

The mid-Third Age setting also offers some advantages: You have Sauron and the Ringwraiths active again, relatively weak, but nonetheless present and available as grey eminences behind the enemies'a ctions (or even appearing themselves). The northern realm still exists, but is in perpetual conflict with Angmar (a great plot-generating motive). Gondor stands in the afterglow of power (of course the Plague left its marks) and though there are no Rohirrim, you have their ancestors with similar traits on the plains of Rhovanion. And Moria is still dwarvish as well.

I'd say that all this is present in the early 1400s as well, plus the advantage to experience the fall of Cardolan and the civil war in Gondor. Thus for the mid-Third Age I personally prefer the 1400 to 1440 era. For the later times, beside the TOR timeframe I find the 2740s and 50s especially exciting, especially in Eriador as laid out in the population article in OM13.

Or in other words, I'd say the MERP approach to gaming in Middle-earth was primarily inspired by the Appendices of the LotR with their broad socio-historical coverage rather than the plot of the book itself or of The Hobbit. They regularly also overstepped their license by openly using (and citing) UT or the Sil77, but in those times, this had no consdequences - probably due to the low amount of money and attention involved in all of this.

Cheers
Tolwen