Questions for the Lore Masters.

halfwise wrote:Just because Dale is known for toys doesn't mean that's the only thing it's known for.  

{{ In terms of written evidence what Tolkien says about what Dale and Erebor produced, toys seems no1. He doesnt say Dale is famous for anything else, but its toy market is a 'wonder of the north' so must have been famous. And like I mentioned Thorin only mentions traditional wealth of gold and jewels as an afterthought to workshops and halls, as if finding the gold and jewels was purely coincidental and not the purpose of the place,it wasnt primarily a mine or for mining. And we have little supporting evidence to say what it was Erebor did produce, far as I can tell the only mentions of that is always to toy production. And it must be fairly large scale and organised if you can order  enough for a huge party of hundreds of folk a year in advance, and have it delivered hundred sof miles away om time. Its like a Dwarvish Amazon. Only efficient.


Figg- I suspect it to be a joke too, just odd he left it in later revisions.}}

Come now. Erebor was full of jewels and armor and weapons. The dwarves were craftsman. It wouldn't get press for that because that's just what dwarves do. I'm not discounting the toy market: America's famous for rock'n'roll, but there's more economic activity tied up in things like corn. It's just not notable enough for mention.

Toy making would make it seem like very attractive place for children, it is something they relate to rather than something 'boring' like trading in pork bellies. The Hobbit was made for kids from that era, toy making would have been a big deal.

halfwise wrote:Come now.  Erebor was full of jewels and armor and weapons.

{{ Actually Im not sure there is much mention of armour or weapons. There is a passage which implies they started out making stuff like that but only out of necessity, once comfortable and the gold and stuff discovered they changed to making toys it seems-

"Altogether those were good days for us, and the poorest of us had money to spend and to lend, and leisure to make beautiful things just for the fun of it, not to speak of the most marvellous and magical toys, the like of which is not to be found in the world today."

So it seems they started out making traditional dwarvish stuff, armour, weapons until they all got rich then they gave that up in favour of making fun things and toys. Also I wonder if given Tolkien association between dwarves and jews that the money lending bit is a reference in that direction?


Figg I agree them being toymakers has more childish appeal than they make weapons or something. But it does carry into Lord of the Rings with the toys at the party from Dale and Erebor, so it seems to me they were indeed primarily toy makers.}}

I'm with Halfwise on this one. In my imagination the deeper halls and greater workshops of Erebor were used for crafting various stuff, some of which pre-date Dale.
__________
Appendix A

"To the Great Hall of Thrain, Thror brought back the Arkenstone, and he and his folk prospered and became rich, and they had the friendship of all Men that dwelt near. For they made not only things of wonder and beauty but weapons and armour of great worth; and there was great traffic of ore between them and their kin from the Iron Hills"
__________

And while that might be considered compressed, I would guess if toy-making were primary . . .

And in 1960, when Tolkien returned to Thror returning, the Dwarves . . .

" . . . mined and they tunnelled, and they made deeper halls and greater workshops; and they found a wealth of gold and many gems. They grew rich and famous, and Thror became King under the Mountain, and was treated with great reverence by the Men who lived further south, and were spreading up the Running River. In those days they built the merry town of Dale in the valley overshadowed by the Mountain. Their lords used to send for our smiths, and reward even the least skilful most richly. Fathers would beg us to take their sons as apprentices, and paid us handsomely. It was always for food and wine that we asked, so that we had no need to grow it or get it for ourselves. The land was fat and fruitful then. Those were good years for us, and the least of us had gold to spend and to lend, and leisure to make beautiful things for our delight. The young Dwarves made marvelous and cunning toys, the like of which are not to be found in the world today. So the halls of Thror were filled with armour and harps and drinking-horns and cups and things carven and hammered and inlaid, and with jewels like stars; and the toy-market of Dale was one of the wonders of the North."

JRRT, the 1960 Hobbit

Interestingly, Tolkien adds that the "young" Dwarves made marvelous and cunning toys.

{{ Ah yes but the armour and mining and finding jewels and taking apprentices all comes earlier, once they are all rich they can pay for food and stuff, its then they had the 'leisure to make beautiful things for our delight.' And it was only then Dale seems to have become known for its toy market, a wonder of the North no less.

Interesting not just the 'young' change but the differences in wording with the 4th edition version-

1960-
and leisure to make beautiful things for our delight. The young Dwarves made marvelous and cunning toys, the like of which are not to be found in the world today. So the halls of Thror were filled with armour and harps and drinking-horns and cups and things carven and hammered and inlaid, and with jewels like stars; and the toy-market of Dale was one of the wonders of the North."

4th ed 1981
and leisure to make beautiful things just for the fun of it, not to speak of the most marvellous and magical toys, the like of which is not to be found in the world now-adays. So my grandfather's halls became full of armour and jewels and carvings and cups, and the toy market of Dale was the wonder of the North.

The 4th version I think emphasis the toy and fun bit more whilst cutting some of the description of the wealth stuff that went along with the armour bit, which has the effect of making the Dale toy-market more significant in the wording.
You can read the final line chronologically I think as meaning they made loads of armour and stuff first, and mined and got jewels and gold at same time- which they traded for food as they didn't grow anything themselves or raise cattle- then they got so rich and didnt need to do all that for money any more they could just buy what they needed, and so everyone started doing stuff they liked; carvings and art and cups it seems, and so many toys that were sold through Dale it become famous for it.
Personally I think that Thorin's company mainly all grew up among a lot of toy makers, makes sense to a degree of why they thought setting off to sneak into a dragons lair carrying the equipment of a small orchestra with them was a good idea. You wouldnt expect a bunch of toymakers to plan well for a mission. Or why they took Bilbo at all, probably saw a potential marketing opportunity for cute halfing dolls.

}}

For now I'll agree to disagree on the relative importance of the toy-making.

Anyway, the third edition Hobbit is the last Tolkien-revised version, revised in reaction to Ace Books, for copyright concerns. And the 1960 Hobbit [where young Dwarves make the toys] was Tolkien's aborted attempt to rewrite The Hobbit in detail, so that it fit better with The Lord of the Rings.

And later when JRRT took up the third edition, according to both Humphrey Carpenter and John Rateliff (The History of The Hobbit), it appears that Tolkien couldn't locate his 1960 revisions (which only went so deep into the story anyway). In other words, he doesn't appear to have them handy for the third edition, and Rateliff even goes so far as to say that Tolkien seems to have added "a part" of one of his 1960 Hobbit revisions -- resulting in a change that made one matter arguably more confusing, not clearer!

In any case, if anyone wants to argue a given point based on the third edition Hobbit alone, I have no problem with that of course. It's canon! But for myself, generally speaking, I wouldn't characterize the third edition as a revision of the 1960 Hobbit. For example.

In the 1960 Hobbit Tolkien puts dried blood on the swords to explain why Gandalf can't read the runes [whether anyone likes this idea or not, my point here is to illustrate Tolkien trying to explain something to make his "Gandalfs" appear more consistent] . . .  and in The Hobbit, 3rd edition, no blood of course. . .

. . . but as I say, to my mind this is not Tolkien rejecting the blood idea, but rather not having his revisions handy. Same with Gandalf's eyebrows -- I'd say Tolkien wanted to erase the idea that they stuck out farther than the brim of the wizard's hat; but not only did Tolkien not have his 1960 revisions to remind him of this for the third edition, he had apparently forgotten that this detail had been echoed in The Lord of the Rings, and not revised there, for the second edition in the 1960s!

I realize some of this looks like Tolkien being sloppy, but there it is. In my head Tolkien gave the toy-making to the young Dwarves, and slipped up as far as making it canon.

And so yes, not canon  

But still noteworthy I think, with respect to what Tolkien was thinking when he sat down and planned to do a "fuller" revision of The Hobbit.

I think you are right Petty, once the survival aspects had been dealt with, peoples turn their minds to art, like the cave paintings. Once they had all been fed and the kids were asleep safe in their warm caves in the long dark nights of Winter, their imaginations blossomed.

Elthir wrote:
I realize some of this looks like Tolkien being sloppy, but there it is. In my head Tolkien gave the toy-making to the young Dwarves, and slipped up as far as making it canon.[/i]

{{ Alternatively when he gave up the attempt to make TH more in tone with LotR's and went back to letting it stand as a childrens book, with therefore the original childrens book tone, he went back to agreeing with his younger self- that the dwarves being toy makers, and the mountain where they made magical toys, and Dale a place with a famous toy-market, suited that tone better and his original reasoning for having it there still worked for children.
And as an added bonus he could leave the toy references in FoTR as they stood without needing to revise that, as its clearly based on the TH saying that they made toys. }}

Pettytyrant101 wrote: Alternatively when he gave up the attempt to make TH more in tone with LotR's and went back to letting it stand as a childrens book, with therefore the original childrens book tone, he went back to agreeing with his younger self- that the dwarves being toy makers, and the mountain where they made magical toys, and Dale a place with a famous toy-market, suited that tone better and his original reasoning for having it there still worked for children.

Yet none of that would necessarily mean that the Dwarves of Erebor, when given the chance to make whatever they wanted, primarily became toy makers. They could still make swords, armour, harps, drinking-horns "and cups and things carven and hammered and inlaid, and craft jewels like stars", and as great Smitherers, teach Men some measure of their art . . .  and make not just functional armour and weapons, but beautiful and "wonderous" versions, and whatever we can think of . . .

. . .  including shining horseshoes for great grey horses.

And as an added bonus he could leave the toy references in FoTR as they stood without needing to revise that, as its clearly based on the TH saying that they made toys.

Of course. And the summary I quoted from Appendix A doesn't even include toy making specifically, but we know the Dwarves also made toys that were so wonderful they became famous . . .

. . . and in my opinion, adding that it was the "young" Dwarves who made the toys would not have upset the tone of The Hobbit, and I think it would have been a nice detail in keeping with both The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings.

{{ They could still make 'swords, armour, harps, drinking-horns "and cups and things carven and hammered and inlaid, and craft jewels like stars" yes, but Dale isnt famous as the market for 'swords, armour, harps, drinking-horns, cups and things carven and hammered and inlaid, and craft jewels like stars' its famous as a toy market.
This to me still says that whatever else they have may have made for pleasure, the finest swords, axes, and armour, it wasnt what they were chiefly exporting, toys were the main business. Which makes sense as you can only sell dwarf stuff to other dwarves, and the ones left at this point are all established somewhere with their own means of production, so small (no pun intended) market for that sort of stuff, and nowhere else do we see any evidence that dwarf made armour or weaponry is being sold elsewhere or to anyone else after Erebor was reestablished. We do see the resumption of toy production however, and even that toys can be exported as far as the Shire.
And in the past toys we are told are sold in numbers through Dale, enough for it to be best known as a toy market, not a wepons or armour, or fancy cups market even, a toy market.
So I say the evidence is still pointing at toys being the main money maker of Erebor. Regardless of whatever else they may have made, its toys that were their big seller.

I can imagine them having intricate beautiful board games too, like the Royal Game of Ur, the oldest known board game to exist-



Also plays into the dwarves being analogous to a degree to Jews, given the Bible says, as Tolkien would be aware, that Abraham brought God out from the city of Ur. And such games and even the making of toys have been associated with jewish culture in the past. }}

The main exports of Switzerland are....

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

I need say no more. Argument won.

{{ Who are they selling them too? Theres no evidence between them getting the Mountain back and Bilbo's party that they've been making money through weapons and arms sales- theres no hint Gondor was putting in big orders, or Rohan, or the elves, even other dwarves dont seem to have been demanding it. But we do have evidence of toys being made and sold. }}

{{ As a further thought when Frodo gets to Rivendell and speaks with Gloin, the dwarf tells him of whats been going on at the Mountain since they took it back-

"In metal-work we cannot rival our fathers, many of whose secrets are lost. We make good armour and keen swords, but we cannot again make mail or blade to match those that were made before the dragon came. Only in mining and building have we surpassed the old days. You should see the waterways of Dale, Frodo, and the fountains, and the pools! You should see the paved roads of many colours! And the halls and cavernous streets under the earth with arches carved like trees; and the terraces and towers upon the Mountain's sides! Then you would see that we have not been idle."

This sounds to me to fit what I proposed earlier- they made their money originally between mining and finding gold and jewels and making exceptionally good weapons and armours, but once they had become all very rich and had far more leisure time they turned to other things, among them making cups, carvings and art works, and toys, as well as becoming money lenders to some degree. But the point being their culture had shifted, they were doing other things now as a preference to armours or weapons. They would have more than enough for themselves stored and they had no need to make money from it any more. Its a dying industry. This resulted in Dale becoming known, and presumably wealthy, for its toy market instead, which presumably took a human generation or so to happen. But it also meant a drop off in the traditional smithing stuff of armour and weapons during that time too, and with a slow loss of techniques and practises.
Then Smaug came and they went into exile.
Fast forward to Thorins day and the retaking of the mountain and its been so many generations now since they actually were makers of swords and armour that all the old secrets are now completely lost, never passed down as the demand for them, and for making them had fallen away in favour of making beautiful or fun things before the dragon even came.
And whislt they still make some swords and armour, its not of that quality any more, and its clear from the enthusasim with which Gloin speaks of it, that whilst they still smith and mine, its the architectural work, the beauty and art of their constructions, and again making fun and beautiful things like toys as we know they still are from A Long Expected Party, which still has the most appeal for these dwarves.
Note also that Gimli, a dwarf raised in that culture upon seeing the caves behind Helms Deep is not wanting to mine them for wealth, in fact he admonishes the idea, instead he would want to carefully open them up, bringing light to them and work with the natural caverns and shapes to best expose and preserve their magesty and beauty. This is the mind-set of the Lonely Mountain. The dwarves there are not weapon and armour smiths, or primarily miners even, not any more, havent been since before the dragon came, they are makers of beautiful works of art and objects to delight, whether thats in their architecture, the objects they make, their carvings, or the waterways and paved roads of many colours, or their famous magical toys, whose secrets of making notably seem not to have been so completely lost, perhaps because many of them were preserved in exile as toy making was flourishing when the dragon struck, but smithing secrets were already being lost (and smiths would likely be deeper in the mountain when Smaug struck and less likely to escape).  }}

Where in the popular accounts do you find that Switzerland's main export is machinery?

Tolkien's writings are a popular account, not economic studies. The dwarves would have been producing better weapons and armor in the past, but who's competing with them now? I have a hard time seeing the elves as having a mercantile spirit. Second class dwarf weapons are still dwarf make, and better than you'll get elsewhere for money on the barrel, even if you don't brag about it.

You'll still get a good meal at a one star Michelin restaurant, the fact that it used to be 3 stars doesn't reduce the current quality, you just don't talk about it as much.

Dwarves make the bulk of their income from mining, jewel and metal work. That their toy market is currently top notch doesn't mean that's all they are doing.

If you don't buy this, ask the Swiss.

"In metal-work we cannot rival our fathers, many of whose secrets are lost. We make good armour and keen swords, but we cannot again make mail or blade to match those that were made before the dragon came. Only in mining and building have we surpassed the old days. You should see the waterways of Dale, Frodo, and the fountains, and the pools! You should see the paved roads of many colours! And the halls and cavernous streets under the earth with arches carved like trees; and the terraces and towers upon the Mountain's sides! Then you would see that we have not been idle."

No toys? But we know the young Dwarves also made toys


And as far as what we hear about in the legendarium, we could make a fairly notable list of what Tolkien doesn't say, especially in detail, about manufacturing and trade between cultures.

halfwise wrote:The main exports of Switzerland are....  did you first think cheese, chocolate, watches?  I need say no more. Argument won.

I thought of a wrist-watched Roger Federer eating chocolate on a mountain.

I've a question.

In Unfinished Tales, note 20, The History of Galadriel and Celeborn, Christopher Tolkien wrote:

"Before the revised edition of The Lord of the Rings was published in 1966 my father changed Finrod to Finarfin, while his son Felagund, previously called Inglor Felagund, became Finrod Felagund. Two passages in the Appendices B and F were accordingly emended for the revised edition -- It is noteworthy that Orodreth . . ."

I took "emended for the revised edition" to mean the revised edition of the first sentence. And . . .

"The names Fingolfin and Finarfin are thus spelt in B, but in A Fingolphin and Finarphin (see. p. 265 note 10). In the Second Edition of The Lord of the Rings (1966) Finarphin was spelled thus, later changed on my suggestion to Finarfin (Appendix F, Of the Elves)."

Christopher Tolkien, commentary, The Later Quenta Silmarillion (II), Of The Silmarils and the Unrest of the Noldor

And so I thought that Finrod had been altered by Tolkien for the second edition, although to Finarphin. And then I noticed that Hammond and Scull wrote in their Reader's Guide to The Lord of the Rings . . .

As first published, "Finarfin" read "Finrod". In the Allen & Unwin three-volume paperback edition (1974) "Finrod" was changed to "Finarphir" (first and second printing), then to "Finarphin" (third printing, 1975), and finally "Finarfin" (fourth printing, 1976), as Christopher Tolkien determined the name to be used in The Silmarillion (1977)."

So my question is . . . 1974?

You're expecting to get an answer out of us? No, no...that's what we have you here for. Maybe Eldy will pop up and say something incisive. Worked in a bookstore, that one.

I don't have my copies with me, but I am 99% sure the Ballantine mass market paperback edition--which has not had the text changed since 1966--has "Finarfin" rather than "Finrod" or any variant spellings. As described by Douglas A. Anderson's "Note on the Text" (included in most editions of LOTR published in 1987 or later), the Ballantine editions once represented an "errant branch" of LOTR's textual history, as they included a number of changes and additions to the Appendices by Tolkien that didn't make it into initial hardcover versions of the second edition. These changes were eventually incorporated into the mainline editions--but not until 1987, so it can't account for Hammond & Scull's comment. I suppose it's possible that Finrod's name was independently changed by Tolkien in 1966 and by Christopher in 1974, but that's pure speculation.

ETA: Another (wholly speculative) possibility is that Ballantine switched to "Finarfin" on their own initiative after the publication of The Silmarillion. Anderson states that the Ballantine text is unchanged, but the "Note on the Text" primarily follows the history of the more authoritative Allen & Unwin (later HarperCollins) and Houghton Mifflin hardcover editions. A minor change in spelling done between impressions of the same edition--by a publisher that, AFAIK, has not been involved in consultations on textual integrity since the 1960s--wouldn't necessarily bear mentioning anyway.

Thanks Eldy.

This began with a recent chat between Bill Hicklin and me, and after I disagreed with JRRT for making this alteration (to already published text), he responded with:

"Except he didn't. My Second Edition has "Finrod," bold as brass. The correction to "Finarfin" was posthumous, in 1976 (originally only the UK edition; the change wasn't made to the H-M until the Anderson revision in 1987,* and in the Ballantine never).

And after I posted the same quotes as above, he responded: "H&S know their bibliographical stuff, and I'm inclined to take their word for it barring very strong evidence contra. My guess is that not all the revisions Tolkien "prepared for" the 1966 edition actually made it into print, at least at that time."

"And although CT is a praiseworthy scholar and editor, his memory is not always perfect; he could very well have forgotten or been unaware that while "Finarphir" may have been the reading of his copy of the 2nd ed., earlier printings still read "Finrod." I can testify that the H-M 14th printing (ca 1976), which as I said above used the 1966 plates unchanged, reads "Finrod."



I have two Ballantine editions from the 70s that have Finrod [a third set is missing RK, and only Fellowship dates to the 1960s]. Anyway, today I checked the more general picture from H&S from their Reader's Companion (Drat. I don't own J.R.R. Tolkien, A Descriptive Bibliography by Anderson and Hammond):

"From July to September 1965 Tolkien sent material for a revised Lord of the Rings to Houghton Mifflin Company; this was incorporated in an authorized paperback edition by Ballantine Books of New York and first published in October 1965. These revisions were then made to the George Allen & Unwin second edition of 1966, which in turn was the basis for the Houghton Mifflin of 1967 ( . . . ) Further emendations were made to later Ballantine printings, and notably to the second printing of the Allen & Unwin second edition in 1967 -- Tolkien had continued to work on the text beyond his deadline for changes in 1965. In the process, however, errors and omissions were variously made, and the texts of these different editions diverged."

And the description goes on to describe later editions. But in this section, we seem to have revisions in BB, and then further emendations for "later" BB printings -- given the context here -- later in Tolkien's lifetime? Or not necessarily?

Or have I hit my head too hard after falling from a grey horse?

Hmm. My Ballantine copies were an early 2000s movie tie-in edition, but they're not accessible to me right now. I'm curious now if my guess about Ballantine only changing the spelling after the 1977 Silmarillion made "Finarfin" standard in readers' minds holds water, but it's surprisingly difficult to check. None of the friends I've asked so far own the Ballantine edition, and my county library system doesn't stock mass market paperbacks of LOTR. The library system for the county I used to live in does, but even though I still have an account with them, I lost my card ages ago. And they're currently only offering curbside pickup, so I can't get a replacement card, which would require entering a building. I'll keep digging, though.

{{{Of course, it's also possible I've misremembered, that Ballantine does in fact still use "Finrod", and this whole search will be for nothing. }}}

A friend of mine from the LOTR Plaza (and its associated Discord server) has a copy of the Ballantine/Del Rey ROTK from a post-1994 printing and was able to confirm that they did, in fact, eventually switch from "Finrod" to "Finarfin".

Thanks again Eldy. I asked (elsewhere) about some BB 1960s printings, and go this response:

I have a much-dog-eared Ballantine paperback edition printed in the 1960s, but I can't tell what edition it is. In Appendix F, in the section titled "On Translation," I found a sentence that says: "They [the Quendi] were tall, fair of skin and grey-eyed, though their locks were dark, save in the golden House of Finrod..."

So, given the above quotes from CJRT, I'd gotten it into my head the the change appeared in print in Tolkien's lifetime, despite that I had editions that read otherwise, and I certainly had no edition with Finarphin anyway . . .

. . . that said, H&S seem to say that this change was posthumously published!

No?

By the way Eldy, do you have the link to the Fanatics Forum? Still not sure if I'll post there, but I lost all my favorites and my e-mail address has changed -- lost all my old e-mails in the process too.

I have a 1965 Ballantine edition.  Galadriel is of the house of Finarphir, and sister of Finrod. Under Translation the golden house of Finrod is mentioned.