7 ms·
It is difficult to explain Gondor's population collapse. Sure there have been plagues and wars but there is no shortage of unused land to farm, no reason why th
by Gupie 6y ago
It is difficult to explain Gondor's population collapse. Sure there have been plagues and wars but there is no shortage of unused land to farm, no reason why the population could not recover quickly. It is as if Gondor has a dark side, perhaps successively less superhuman Numenorians ensuring racial purity at the expense of all else?
- ed_balls 6y agoAnother possibilities: Cultural - having a single child to join estates Biological - Longevity comes at a price.
- Gupie 6y agoPossibly, but to fair I don't think there is a reason. The shire is similarly inexplicitly underpopulated when hobbits have been peacefully having large families there for 1400 years!
- TeMPOraL 6y agoPerhaps all that magic is reducing fertility rates? After all, magic requires power, sometimes quite large amounts, and no power source is to be seen. This means it's either beamed, or otherwise dispersed through the environment. This could have negative implications for health and fertility.
- scatters 6y agoOr a more sinister reason: canonically, magic is powered by sacrifice - and most powerfully, human sacrifice. Sure, Tolkien skips over the child-snatchers, the sacrificial altars, the charnel-pits behind the Valar-temples, but we well know the true cost of the Numenorean theocracy.
- Gupie 6y agoThis wouldn't explain the low population of the shire. (Unless there is a "The Time Machine" type scenario. :( )
- zdkl 6y agoWell maybe after the more fanatical followers couldn't follow through on the demanded blood/power/life offerings the powers that be continued to levy their sacrifices in an indirect way, that manifests itself as low birth rates or particularily high infant mortality?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- gostsamo 6y agoThe books talk about unusually low birth-raid. There is the racism though, about the nomenor blood being diluted with that of the common humans.
- suifbwish 6y agoIs it really racism to prefer to prevent the fading and eventual disappearance of ones own unique tribal bloodline through new gene inflow? There’s no ethical reason people should not prefer being around genetic lines most similar to their own and only breeding with individuals who share that line. To force others to do that is wrong but a group that collectively wants to genetically isolate for whatever reason is hardly unethical .
- gostsamo 6y agoI don't say that it is unethical, I say that it is racist. Like, being based on race. If you dig deeper, you will find that the racism of our world was excused with "God blessed our people" while LOTR made it true. So, if there is something unethical, then it must be Tolkien who made people not exactly equal. However, I'm not inclined to judge someone's fantasies until they stay there. In regard to genetic exceptionalism, it is practiced as a policy or unconsciously by many communities around the world. Whether it is bad could be decided when checking the consequences. They are rather obvious in small communities where inbreeding leads to all kinds of genetic diseases and "preserve your genetic line" turns rather ironic. In bigger communities the effects are a bit more subtle because the lack of diversity is not so pronounced. Issues begin when you consider your own as human+, because it is not so far off to consider everyone else as human- which provokes things like lack of cooperation, general hostility, and the occasional genocide. Of course, the topic is much larger. I haven't talked about diversity of communities and cultures, what makes humans a species, and so on, but I spread myself well enough, I think.