DF World: Do non-humans have their own countries?

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Single species nations seem unrealistic to me unless they live in places impossible for others to survive.
Though if one species is just super suited to a region or ill-suited to others so they defend their niche with ferocity such that it's overwhelmingly them there, I could see it making sense.

Eh, Fantasy species are more like human races, and there have been plenty of nations throughout history that have been essentially made of a single race. This hasn't required them to be particularly well-adapted to their environment (at least not in a genetic sense) - rather, it's more just that most people don't want to move somewhere that everyone looks, speaks, and acts differently than what they're used to, and that the natives are not-uncommonly xenophobic. Large nations are rarely monoracial, of course, but even then other races tended to make up a rather tiny fraction of the population. Once global trade becomes significant, however, things tend to become a good deal more cosmopolitan.

[sir_pudding]

Enclaves need to have large enough populations to reproduce. There aren't going to be any high elves if they are 1:1,000,000 and evenly geographically distributed or whatever.

Also it makes sense that dwarves and coleopterans live underground and humans usually don't, or that sea-elves and merfolk don't live in the desert.

[Flyndaran]

Living fully underground sans modern tech requires very alien biology, especially if they aren't dependent on top world agriculture.
And that would follow my suggestion of living in environments hostile to other species.

[sir_pudding]

Yes, because there is a high degree of verisimilitude in the agrarian models in dungeon delving sword and sorcery.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Eh, Fantasy species are more like human races, and there have been plenty of nations throughout history that have been essentially made of a single race. This hasn't required them to be particularly well-adapted to their environment (at least not in a genetic sense) - rather, it's more just that most people don't want to move somewhere that everyone looks, speaks, and acts differently than what they're used to, and that the natives are not-uncommonly xenophobic. Large nations are rarely monoracial, of course, but even then other races tended to make up a rather tiny fraction of the population. Once global trade becomes significant, however, things tend to become a good deal more cosmopolitan.

Less true than previously thought.

Early medieval English monks had sufficient knowledge of Africans that they were doodling caricatures of African men in the margins of their books - dressed like the English men they were also doodling, and doing the same things as the English peasants. They've found North African skeletons in English graveyards from around the Crusades era, and not in port cities on waste ground where e.g. a foreign sailor might be buried. Instead they're found in inland Christian graveyards, and with isotopic evidence strongly implying long-term residence in England.

By the time of Queen Elisabeth there were enough people with dark skin (assumed to be African, as they're described as "black-black") in England that the court was issuing letters complaining about how they already had too many people "of our own Nation" in England as it was without the addition of these other people.

There's also a lot of genetic evidence on the Y chromosone in England that contact with e.g. North Africa significantly predates the mercantilism of the Elizabethan era.

This may all be a remnant of the Roman occupation, but it's also a case example of how ethnic diversity actually happens before periods of mass migration - national borders move around, the people living under them do not. Someone conquers the nations around them, their empire splinters two generations later, but the borders end up somewhere else - and in the two generations of unification the citizens moved around internally so you can't draw tidy borders any more anyways.

There's a long-standing Swedish-speaking population along the eastern border of Finland due to this sort of thing - this isn't a language clime like along the France-Spain border, Finish is completely unrelated to the other Scandinavian languages (IIRC its closest modern relative is Turkish).

[Anders]

Originally Posted by Bruno

There's a long-standing Swedish-speaking population along the eastern border of Finland due to this sort of thing - this isn't a language clime like along the France-Spain border, Finish is completely unrelated to the other Scandinavian languages (IIRC its closest modern relative is Turkish).

The Turkish connection is no longer thought to be tenable, but Finnish has plenty of living relatives: Estonian and Hungarian are probably the most familiar to Westerners. There's also lots of related language in Russia, on both sides of the Urals.

[khorboth]

Ok, I try not to go too deep into my Tolkien fandom here, but every now and then it comes out. *cracks knuckles*

Hobbits are, indeed, a branch of Men, though not strictly Human. The earliest (chronological) mention of them is with Smeagol and Deagol in the Anduin valley where they found the One Ring. This is not far from Minas Tirith, though the exact location is vague. Their exact origin is somewhat obscure.

I don't remember where it was detailed (Perhaps Christopher Tolkien's histories based on his father's notes?) but, Hobbit history for quite some time was a series of being moved on by humans. Being good farmers, they would set up farms, produce well, and then humans would kick them out. As the human population swelled through the third age, farmland continued to be at a premium. Hobbits moved to the frontier, set up new farms. Humans came along and took the farms. Rinse, repeat. This lasted until the fall of Angmar stopped the cycle and for a long time, there was not much pressure on the farmland around where the Hobbits had settled. Civilization receded instead of proceeding, leaving behind The Shire as a kind of high water mark (for the age).

The Shrie's main defense is it's inconspicuousness. Buried in the interminable prologue (possibly of The Hobbit) is a passage about how Big Folk can walk through The Shire without even noticing that they are even in a civilized place. That keeps Humans from bothering them. Animals are kept at bay mostly by throwing rocks at them. Hobbits are mentioned a few times as having excellent throwing aim.

When looking at the Hobbit racial traits, it's important to remember that most of the examples in the book are sedentary civilized examples. There are a number of less reputable, less settled hobbits that live near The Shire. They are less stout (though still look fat to humans), hardier, and complain less.

There were a couple of comments in the thread about the Rangers spending lots of effort keeping The Shire safe. The Rangers were actually trying to contain monsters and evil forces in general and combating the westward flow of evil. They were protecting the entire region which included The Shire. Heated statements were made about sacrifices to protect it by Gondorians as well. It was a more general protection, but the specific effect was brought up to prove a point in an argument.

-------

To bring this all back to relevance to the actual topic....

This is the kind of thought I go through when determining weather my races have their own countries. Would they move to the outskirts or would they live as an underclass with better security? Would those that moved to the outskirts have found a way to survive? What would that have looked like, and how would it have affected their current society? If the originating society suffered a total collapse, what would be left behind? Would any outsiders be welcome in that society? Would they be comfortable there? All this influences the interconnected world-building that ultimately answers the question.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by khorboth

Ok, I try not to go too deep into my Tolkien fandom here, but every now and then it comes out. *cracks knuckles*

Hobbits are, indeed, a branch of Men, though not strictly Human. The earliest (chronological) mention of them is with Smeagol and Deagol in the Anduin valley where they found the One Ring. This is not far from Minas Tirith, though the exact location is vague. Their exact origin is somewhat obscure.

I don't remember where it was detailed (Perhaps Christopher Tolkien's histories based on his father's notes?) but, Hobbit history for quite some time was a series of being moved on by humans. Being good farmers, they would set up farms, produce well, and then humans would kick them out. As the human population swelled through the third age, farmland continued to be at a premium. Hobbits moved to the frontier, set up new farms. Humans came along and took the farms. Rinse, repeat. This lasted until the fall of Angmar stopped the cycle and for a long time, there was not much pressure on the farmland around where the Hobbits had settled. Civilization receded instead of proceeding, leaving behind The Shire as a kind of high water mark (for the age).

The Shrie's main defense is it's inconspicuousness. Buried in the interminable prologue (possibly of The Hobbit) is a passage about how Big Folk can walk through The Shire without even noticing that they are even in a civilized place. That keeps Humans from bothering them. Animals are kept at bay mostly by throwing rocks at them. Hobbits are mentioned a few times as having excellent throwing aim.

When looking at the Hobbit racial traits, it's important to remember that most of the examples in the book are sedentary civilized examples. There are a number of less reputable, less settled hobbits that live near The Shire. They are less stout (though still look fat to humans), hardier, and complain less.

There were a couple of comments in the thread about the Rangers spending lots of effort keeping The Shire safe. The Rangers were actually trying to contain monsters and evil forces in general and combating the westward flow of evil. They were protecting the entire region which included The Shire. Heated statements were made about sacrifices to protect it by Gondorians as well. It was a more general protection, but the specific effect was brought up to prove a point in an argument.

-------

To bring this all back to relevance to the actual topic....

This is the kind of thought I go through when determining weather my races have their own countries. Would they move to the outskirts or would they live as an underclass with better security? Would those that moved to the outskirts have found a way to survive? What would that have looked like, and how would it have affected their current society? If the originating society suffered a total collapse, what would be left behind? Would any outsiders be welcome in that society? Would they be comfortable there? All this influences the interconnected world-building that ultimately answers the question.

Close. The Anduinian Hobbits had a friendly relation with the embryo Rohirrim. At least Christopher specifies that it was the incursion of Easterlings not simply the fact that there were Big Folk. Certainly the Lotr Rohirrim have folktales of Hobbits and they are mostly affectionate.

Their relations with Big Folk historically were not as hostile as all that. They were mostly isolated at Lotr time but in Bree they lived together.

I doubt it is possible to walk through the Shire and not know it is civilized. It is pretty intensely cultivated. But apparently the trade routes have pettered out. Both Elves and Dwarves occasionally go through and they cause no trouble because they stick to the road. Presumably Hobbit innkeepers servicing the road are familiar with Dwarves though Elves may camp alone. Men seem to be rare inside the Shire.

[khorboth]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

Close. The Anduinian Hobbits had a friendly relation with the embryo Rohirrim. At least Christopher specifies that it was the incursion of Easterlings not simply the fact that there were Big Folk. Certainly the Lotr Rohirrim have folktales of Hobbits and they are mostly affectionate.

Their relations with Big Folk historically were not as hostile as all that. They were mostly isolated at Lotr time but in Bree they lived together.

I doubt it is possible to walk through the Shire and not know it is civilized. It is pretty intensely cultivated. But apparently the trade routes have pettered out. Both Elves and Dwarves occasionally go through and they cause no trouble because they stick to the road. Presumably Hobbit innkeepers servicing the road are familiar with Dwarves though Elves may camp alone. Men seem to be rare inside the Shire.

This is why I don't like delving into the fandom. It inevitably devolves into thread-derailing minutia. I hate putting incorrect information out there, but I also hate derailing a thread. Those forces war within me, and it's really hard for me not to take over a thread, pull out my books, and correct any misconceptions I may still harbor. Also, my wife really hates when I spend hours tracking down the minutia. I freely concede that I may have gotten many details wrong.

I didn't mean to imply open hostility between Humans and Hobbits, more of a constant pressure due to land value and population expansion.

The fact of Big Folk being able to walk through The Shire without noticing is explicitly stated. It's then followed by descriptions of bridges, inns where Big Folk are served, one brick building, fenced gardens, and manicured lawns. I have never been able to fully reconcile the two. My only explanations are that Tolkien changed his mind between The Hobbit and LOTR or that later descriptions are Hobbit perspective only.

Regardless, I think it's a good example of world-building resulting in a non-human country. Let's high-five on Tolkien fandom, and if we want to dissect it further (I don't really), I think we have to move to another thread.

[KarlKost]

Originally Posted by khorboth

Hobbits are, indeed, a branch of Men, though not strictly Human. The earliest (chronological) mention of them is with Smeagol and Deagol in the Anduin valley where they found the One Ring. This is not far from Minas Tirith, though the exact location is vague. Their exact origin is somewhat obscure.

The Anduin is huge, like the Amazon River or the Nile. It crosses the entire continent of the western lands of Middle Earth. The river folk hobbits like Sméagol and Deagol were probably close to the borders of the kingdom of Rohan (or of the lands that would eventually become Rohan). But that would still be some hundreds of miles away from Minas Tirith.

Originally Posted by khorboth

To bring this all back to relevance to the actual topic....

This is the kind of thought I go through when determining weather my races have their own countries. Would they move to the outskirts or would they live as an underclass with better security? Would those that moved to the outskirts have found a way to survive? What would that have looked like, and how would it have affected their current society? If the originating society suffered a total collapse, what would be left behind? Would any outsiders be welcome in that society? Would they be comfortable there? All this influences the interconnected world-building that ultimately answers the question.

It is important to note that the Hobbits on LotR do NOT constitute a fully independent and autonomous race. The Shire is not an independent "country" by it's own, but rather a vassal to the kingdom of Arnor; when civilization in the North collapses, it remains as an autonomous comunity, but it lack the power to constitute a "nation", and the Shire remains an integral part of the difuse lands of the North; those lands are composed of several communities like the Shire, perhaps only smaller, but they are all of humans, only the Shire is an exception, being fully hobbit. Over time, the Shire had became more and more isolated from the outside world, as the human's settlements around it would not flourish (it seems that the human populations in the North were slowly declining ever since the fall of Arnor). The trade routes that crossed the Shire were abandoned, leaving them even more distant from the outside. And over a long time, the hobbits in there were allowed to increase in numbers, organize and create a kind of culture of them on, starting the process of finally divorcing their identities from the local culture of Arnor and having their own traits (instead of being just some weird kind of small humans).

In Arnor itself, yes, it is true, they were never seen as "aliens" living in the kingdom. They were just a minority group of subjects that lived mostly in an isolated area. Hobbits are usually very friendly, so they always lived in the North without too much trouble.