Talk:Men in Middle-earth/Archive 1

Untitled
When the Men of Middle-earth die, they leave the Arda. Where do they go then?


 * They first pass to the Halls of Mandos, albeit other halls than those of the Elves. Within the Middle-earth mythology it is nowhere explained where Men ultimately go: that's the reason why they're called the guests by Elves, who are doomed to stay in Arda until the End. Jordi·✆ 17:19, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

They may end up in the Timeless Halls of Eru, although they may leave Eä altogether and go to a parallel universe where they'll live in a heavenly existence until the second Music of the Ainur. It's more likely that they'll end up in the Timeless Halls, however. Scorpionman 9:53, 1 April 2005 (UTC)

Can anyone tell me what the life span of Men is?

about 100 years

Long Life of the Numenor
Surprisingly, There is little or no information on WHY ARgorn or other Dunedain have such long lifes.


 * They are Numenoreans, who were blessed with long life by the Valar after the overthrow of Morgoth. By the way, it's "lives" not "lifes". 66.248.102.141 00:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

move. — Nightst  a   llion  (?) 09:56, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Proposed move
Please see centralized discussion at Talk: Elves (Middle-earth). savidan(talk) (e@) 10:00, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Legolas or other elf as a "man"
"Legolas, for example, may be correctly called a man but not a Man." I question this, as AFAIK Tolkien always uses the term "elf" in such cases and never "man". Got a cite? -- 201.37.229.117 (talk) 18:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree, and I think no one will find a cite for it. Male Elves are neither "men" nor "Men." Additionally, I think it is Peregrin Took who corrects some soldiers of Gondor, denying that he is a man and telling them that he is a hobbit. 72.182.33.219 (talk) 21:09, 13 January 2015 (UTC) Eric

Would it be helpful to say, conversely, that Eowyn is a "Man" but not a "man"? From this article, it appears that would be true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.170.180.58 (talk) 03:29, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Man (Middle-earth). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070222092137/http://lalaith.vpsurf.de/Tolkien/Fr_Ind.html to http://lalaith.vpsurf.de/Tolkien/Fr_Ind.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070222092042/http://lalaith.vpsurf.de/Tolkien/Fr_Men.html to http://lalaith.vpsurf.de/Tolkien/Fr_Men.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:25, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Meaning of "men"
is us. https://www.jrrvf.com/hisweloke/sindar/online/sindar/dict-sd-en.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by הראש (talk • contribs) 13:08, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

"Afterborn" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Afterborn. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hog Farm (talk) 03:28, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

pigment

 * David Ibata, writing in The Chicago Tribune, notes that these all have fair skin, and they are mainly blond-haired and blue-eyed as well.

That describes the Eotheod (and likely other Men of Rhovanion), but iirc the canonical Dúnedain mostly have brown hair and grey eyes. —Tamfang (talk) 02:04, 6 February 2020 (UTC)


 * You're right. Ibata was widely read and he had his opinion. Perhaps we should say "asserted" given that it's not 100% accurate. To be fair to the guy, he did say "mainly". Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:09, 6 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Honestly, all of the inserts about David Ibata's opinion on whether or not Lord of the Rings "feels" racist don't "feel" like they should be included in an encyclopedic article. If the article was "Racist Overtones in Tolkien," that would be one thing. 69.136.134.206 (talk) 08:46, 16 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your opinion, but I suspect you have the matter exactly the wrong way around.


 * We have here a seriously under-cited article coming rather close to being an uncited list of uncertain purpose (fancruft?). The scholarly and critical comments are its only claim to notability. You may well be right that the comments could be grouped into a single discussion rather than having the same names popping up in the "list"; but that raises the question of what the list-like structure of the article is for in the first place. If Man-in-Middle-earth is a notable topic at all, then it must be that it is of interest to scholars and critics, and the encyclopedic coverage must focus on the published differences of opinion.


 * You may well be right, therefore, that the scholarly comments do not sit well in the "list": so much the worse for the list for not approaching the topic in an encyclopedic manner - basically, like so much else of the Middle-earth coverage until very recently, it's inside out. By that I mean, it's seen from the perspective of the fan, the Middle-earth devotee, and it sees Tolkien's created structures (races, places, civilisations, swords, rings, characters) as primary. But they're not: they're the plot elements, and the encyclopedic coverage of anything "plot" should be a short summary, followed at once by a detailed analysis of how and why and when and who and what and which – of all the factors that caused and contributed; of the published opinions of scholars and critics, in short. So, I'm sorry that Ibata appears to intrude; but that is a reason for rewriting the article, not for removing the few parts of it that, in fact, are encyclopedic. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:30, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

"Hildor" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Hildor. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:48, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

"Fuinur" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Fuinur. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hog Farm (talk) 19:15, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

"Eboennin" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Eboennin. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hog Farm (talk) 22:19, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

"Herumor" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Herumor. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hog Farm (talk) 15:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Justification for page?
"Man" in Middle-earth is pretty much the same as human beings, even in their geographical distribution. This article spends a lot of time talking about dwarves, elves, and hobbits. (Yes, hobbits might be a branch of "Man", but they have their own article.) It also spends a lot of time discussing Tolkien's racism and related issues. Then there is something about linguistics. If this article actually focussed on its topic, there would be very little to say. There are hardly any references. There is much made of minor issues like "Faramir's taxonomy". What really is the justification for this page? Why does it need to exist?--Jack Upland (talk) 10:18, 27 August 2020 (UTC)


 * You said "new" in your edit comment, but page was created in 2005. There are already 12 secondary RS and I'm adding more. Man is a major "race" in Middle-earth and the subject of a detailed scholarly article in the J. R. R. Tolkien Encyclopedia. Far from spending "a lot of time" on dwarves, elves, and hobbits, they are scarcely mentioned except to say those are the contrasting races: the article is well-focused on its topic, and there is plenty to say. On the equation with "human beings", there is of course some truth, as Tolkien equates Middle-earth with our Earth, as you well know; where that is false is that the central group of Men, the Númenóreans including Aragorn, have Elvish blood, something not often seen today. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:23, 27 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I didn't say the page was new at all.--Jack Upland (talk) 00:43, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I have to say, in its current form the article does a really good job of incorporating popular and scholarly commentary. As noted, that commentary is in fact the justification for the article i.e. the subject is noteworthy precisely because it's discussed in a serious manner by literary critics and others. Well done. CAVincent (talk) 06:48, 21 October 2020 (UTC)