Talk:List of Middle-earth weapons and armour

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Middle-earth Wikiproject This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle-earth, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to J. R. R. Tolkien, his legendarium, and related topics. Please visit the project talk page for suggestions and ideas on how you can improve this and other articles.
Note: Though it states in the Guide to writing better articles that generally fictional articles should be written in present tense, all Tolkien legendarium-related articles that cover in-universe material must be written in past tense. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earth/Standards for more information about this and other article standards.
Assessment
A
This article has been rated as A-Class on the quality scale.
Mid
This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
Archive

Archives

Archive 1
('c & p' archive)
Archive 2
('move' archive)
Deleted film stuff
(For reference)

Contents

[edit] Final tidy up after the move

Copied out of /Archive 2:

  • (DONE) Restart discussion on the talk page.
  • (DONE) Re-do the missing edits.

Can the three missing edits be added back soon, before anyone else starts editing. Thanks. Carcharoth 20:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I did my update, and I think the other two are done as well. --Alataristarion 06:58, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted movie stuff

For reference: Talk:List of Middle-earth weapons/Deleted film stuff Uthanc 02:04, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Improving List Quality

It would be nice to leave this list at at least "A" quality now that standardization/citation have taken place. I'm currently working on finding citations for the "General Weapons" section, which are of course needed. What else would need to be done? --Alataristarion 22:15, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Another thought. Where you reference translations to 'Lost Road', do you mean The Etymologies section of that work? If so, the footnotes should make that clearer. Carcharoth 08:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
The 'grond' = 'club' association is clear from Etymologies, but 'bel-thron-ding' would probably mean something like 'strong-rigid-bowstring'. On 'Herugrim', I'd generally translate the 'grim' element as... 'grim', the meaning really hasn't changed. For the speculative items would it make sense to clarify which elements are known vs guessed? For instance, in Ringil the 'ring' element in the name is clearly stated to mean 'cold' in both Etymologies and Silm... the '-il' part is then generally translated as 'glint' or 'star'. For Anguirel the 'ang = iron' portion is attested in Silm, 'el = star' is probably a safe guess, but the 'uir' element appears only as a root meaning 'eternity', the 'burning' meaning is a speculative form. Finally, Dagmor doesn't have even a partial attested translation, but 'mor = darkness' is a common form... 'dag = slayer' is a reasonable but unattested extrapolation. --CBD 02:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
When supplying translations for this list, I sought to only use meanings that were attested somewhere so as to avoid Original Research. I also didn't want to get into too much detail on the etymology of names since, although I'm super interested in it and some other people obviously are, it seems a bit too close to fancruft for me. If other people disagree though, I'd definitely be ok with it... --Alataristarion 03:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
What would you think of using {{ME-lang}} to define the word elements? As in, {{subst:ME-lang|lang=s|ring|cold|il|glint/star?}} = (S. 'ring'=cold, 'il'=glint/star?). Then the whole word could be given a reference link where attested or separate links could be given for each element ('ring=cold' to Silm and 'il=glint' to the website you cited or Etymologies). Also, on the two Rohan weapons it might make sense to list 'Rohirric' as the language... while obviously Tolkien portrayed that language with Old English in the books he did make minor variations to the forms. For instance, in true Old English 'grim' would usually be spelled 'grimm'. On the issue of 'fancruft'... I think it makes sense to cite the meanings of the names and if we do then specificity allows us to be clear about which elements were stated by Tolkien and which were interpreted (and by whom). --CBD 12:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Header text query

At the risk of rubbishing someone else's work, what is the point of the discourse in the header talking about how the weapons can be classified? Just jump right in! I will remove the text "Weapons of Middle-Earth...Hadhafang are excluded." from the text and place it below in case it needs to be reused.

Weapons of Middle-earth may be classified in a variety of ways:

  • By time of construction
  • By time of recorded use:

In Tolkien's writings, named weapons were constructed and recorded to be used at vastly different points throughout the History of Arda. For example, the sword Anglachel was forged and used during the First Age, during which it was reforged and finally broken. However, some weapons were constructed and were recorded to be used in different Ages. For example, the short sword Sting was forged in the First Age but was only recorded to be used in the Third.

  • By race of creator:

In Tolkien's writings, various weapons were constructed by Elves, Men, Dwarves or Orcs.

  • By genericity:

Weapons were used by nearly all of the races in the legendarium. However, certain weapons have specific names and, often, an important lineage. Weapons may be organized according to their status in this regard, separating generic weapon types from specific, named weapons.

Weapons are listed below according to genericity. Non-canonical items such as the sword Hadhafang are excluded.

Hope I didn't step on too many toes here! Editus Reloaded 15:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] original research from Hadhafang

....The similarity to the German word "Gassenhauer" (i.e. "gap-cleaver", a two-handed sword or zweihänder to cleave gaps into the enemy throng) is striking and one may thus assume that Tolkien intended this term to denote a class of two-handed Elven swords, rather than a specific sword that never made it into his legendarium (which seems to be the basis for using the word for the non-canonical sword of Arwen in the Peter Jackson movie trilogy). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.6.184.245 (talk) 05:47, 9 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Inconsistency

Just a small issue: the description of Grond mentions nine wounds, but the Morgoth article describes it differently. I'm not sure how to solve this issue, as I don't have the sources at hand... Can somebody else solve this? I already put a comment there, without response. Hopefully this it is not too much spamming... :)

Dirk Stegemann 23:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi - from the book I count seven wound, plus one to the foot = 8, plus one from the eagle. I think that is the answer.87.102.81.184 19:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spoilers

It would be nice to include a notice at the topic that this article contains major spoilers, especially for people that haven't read The Children of Hurin. A friend of mine stumbled onto the page and had a major plot point spoiled for him. --JBladen 16:54, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Angrist

Firstly the page refs don't seem to match between editions - oh dear.

Secondly the article says " It was so sharp and powerful that it could not be carried in a sheath" yet all I can find is in the original "the blade hung sheathless by his side"

Isn't that going one step too far in interpretation, or not?

Also the 'blade broke/snapped and a shard struck morgoth' (from the silmarillion - approx) - whereas the article says the 'tip of the knife broke'

Does anyone agree that this part is not sufficiently accurate at present?87.102.81.184 19:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I've made an edit to that part - but as I'm new to this I'd appreciate it if it was a worthwhile thing to do, or did it seem pedantic?87.102.81.184 19:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] edits to list

I made some minor edits to the list, removing some specualtion, and repeated or irrelevant info. Some minor text changes. See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Middle-earth_weapons&diff=155711901&oldid=15569045987.102.20.77 21:45, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Also requested citations for a few things (that may possibly be not true)

Also removed this "The name contains the elements nar "fire" and thil "white light", referring to the Sun and Moon." which is speculation (?) wrong (?) since the sun is 'anar' etc moon is 'isil' (similar but not same)87.102.20.77 21:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

This is helpful stuff. I had a look at the stuff you removed. In my opinion you went a little bit too far, as some of the stuff could have been rewritten, rather than removed, but that can be sorted out later. Would you consider registering an account, as that would make things easier for future discussions? It also makes it easier to review your own contributions and keep track of things on a watchlist. A lot of stuff does need citing, though the main problem is how to handle page numbers. I think we should go for a system of using a combination of book name, chapter name, and page numbers. Carcharoth 22:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm mostly concerned with the slight over interpretation of some of the text - I notice that in many articles 'mormegil' has become a "black, magical, sword with a will of it's own" - it is black, and does speak once, but the rest is interpretation and best left for forums etc if these pages are to be encylopaedic.
As for the page numbers it would be good if the {{ME-ref}} template could be changed to take chapters - I've absolutely no idea how to do this. (I made extra suggestions about sub-books etc on the main talk page but that would be icing on the cake and maybe unneccessary.)87.102.5.137 09:52, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Caudimordax

The above may or may not be suitable for inclusion here - I'll leave it up to someone else to decide. Personally I would.87.102.5.137 12:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that. I merged it to Farmer Giles of Ham. Not sure what to do with Chrysophylax Dives. I think I'll merge that as well, for now. Carcharoth 16:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] last section "weapons"

added quite a few requests for references - got fed up and left most in commented form - so you need to be editing to see them.

Also changed the section to include 'etymology' not sure if that was right..87.102.114.215 (talk) 00:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] External refs

Both references are to Joe Piela's essay, on two different commercial sites. Both feel like spam. The essay itself doesn't really provide very authoritative information, and the images go well beyond the evidence of the text. Is there any reason to keep these?  Elphion (talk) 15:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC)