[Child of the 7th Age]

Ealasaide -

I have read this thread with interest, both your initial questions and the diverse responses these have elicited. Since I spend most of my time in RPGs, I too have given thought to the problems you have outlined. The fact that I am a historian has also influenced the way I view this chronological variation. My initial reaction is this: on one level, the problem is even more complicated than you have described.

Differences in 'technology' (or at least what must be called technology since we have no other label to afix to it) certainly existed in Middle-earth from one people to another. To name just a few technologies, there are numerous anachronistic references relating to Hobbits and the Shire; Gandalf's mastery of fireworks; Elvish "art" which encompasses such wonders as the Seeing Stones, Galadriel's mirror, and the actual Rings; Dwarvish weapons and mining and utilization of mithril, the latter of which seems far superior to any metal I am aware of today; and the charming toys of Dale. That's quite a range of items! At the same time, you also have people such as the Woses and the Icemen who seem to prefer what could be termed a "non-technological" approach to things, choosing to live in harmony with the earth by utilizing purely natural resources and tools.

My first impulse is to throw up my hands in despair with such a hopeless hodgepodge, but I think we can look at this another way. Is this variegated mixture all that different from the diversity of our world today? I can point to societies that are heavily dependent on modern technology, where scientists do research on problems of space travel, cold fusion energy, and genetics, but I can also point to other societies that are more traditional, some out of economic necessity and still others where people have intentionally modelled their lives in a different way. In other words, we live in a world where some people travel in jet planes while others walk, use a bicycle, or carry their belongings on the back of a llama. Yet when we try to characterize the modern world, we invariably fall back on terms and images like "jet plane". But is that accurate? The bicycle, lama, and pedestrian are just as much part of our human experience in the twenty-first century as the rocket ship or airplane. Moreover, we can look at a single society and find examples of people employing a wide variety of methods of transportation: everything from hand crafted boats to ocean liners.

I guess the point I am trying to make is this: the first step in writing about Middle-earth is to realize that there will be as much variation in that world as in the "real" world we inhabit. Different ways of doing things will be apparent, and some technologies will look strange when placed next to others, yet they are all equally valid reflections of a particular world. There is probably no one right Corsair ship just as there is no one right American or British ship today.

Secondly, are we really in all that different a position when we look back on Middle-earth than when we consider our own historical record? Tolkien has told us many things about the society, but he has admittedly left large holes. Yet the same is true of the historical record. My job as a historian is to try and fill in some of these "holes". But quite often, I am simply unable to do so. I don't have enough evidence to understand fully what is going on. And the further back in history that I push, the more difficult my problem becomes. My problem as a writer of Middle-earth RPGs is not all that different in this regard.

My gut feeling is this. Unlike Imladris, my personal preference is to "fill in the holes" to the best of my ability when I write a story. But I do not believe there is only one way these holes can get filled in (or even that they must be filled in). There are certain things I will not do because they seem blatantly wrong, e.g, spaceships and such. I do this out of respect to the author. Yet, even here, there is vast leeway. What about the mechanical monstors that figure so prominently in the early writings? What about Tolkien's story fragments on dream/time travel? If someone used these devices in a story, I would cheerfully accept them (indeed I have used time travel myself), as long as that person carefully laid a ground work to make that particular development believable.

My preference is to accord freedom to the writer and not lay down rigid guidelines as to what a Corsair ship should or should not be. If I see it one way and you see it another, so be it....we have only limited information from the author himself.

I am not Tolkien. As such, my RPGs and stories are not "canon". Even Mithadan and similar writers can only guess at what the author might have said in many cases. Interestingly, I think there are other problems far greater than technology when it comes to filling in the gaps of Middle-earth. I would love, for example, to know what a wedding looks like in the Shire or Gondor. Were they anything like the Elvish unions Tolkien described.?...probably not. So I blithely fill in the hole to the best of my ability, hoping that my words echo truthfully. If someone reads the story and responds to that echo and believes that it feels right, I will have accomplished my goal.

As an historian in real life, I see no way that Middle-earth could or should be made to conform completely to certain chronological conventions. It is helpful, for example, to consider the Shire in terms of Edwardian farming practices, or to see the Anglo-Saxon influence that underlay some of what we see in Rohan. But I honestly don't think the author himself was trying to present a completely consistent image. For every historical example you could cite, I could do research and cite examples to the contrary.

Bethberry is on the right track -- get the basic "feeling" right and don't sweat the details. And Davem is also correct in saying there is an element of "faerie" in Middle-earth that can never be understood in strictly historical terms.

Do what seems right, enjoy your writing, and don't worry too much about the rest!

*******************************

Having said all that, I will confess there is something else that still bothers me when writing for RPGS. I have no problem with ships or weddings. The problem occurs when I deal with individual characters. We have spoken at length on other threads how the most important thing for Tolkien was the telling of the story. Unlike the modern novel that focuses heavily on internal character development, Tolkien (with few exceptions) let us see his characters mainly from the outside. For the life of me, I find that very hard to do. My instinctive reaction is to delve into the character's persona in a way that is heavily influenced by the modern literature that I have read. And in most of the RPGs I've participated in, whether in the Shire, Rohan or Gondor, other posters have done the same.

Just once, I would like to do an RPG that attempted to write about Middle-earth in the way that Tolkien did: by showing things from outside in, instead of inside out. But that would be extremely difficult to achieve, and I'm not sure I could do it. Just to take the example of Frodo, one would have to expose the character very slowly and tentatively, with tiny hints here and there, instead of the long internal dialogues that I and many others are prone to use. That might not even be feasible in the context of a short RPG. Would it be desirable or preferable to try such a thing? I really can't answer that, but it would be interesting to try.