Tolkien Gateway


The name is always spelt "Hillmen" in the text of LoTR, the form "Hill-men" with hyphen appears only once in Appendix A. --Tik 06:36, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, could you please rephrase that?--Tengwar 14:17, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Good catch, Tik. It should then be moved to the approriate name, IMHO.--Morgan 18:57, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Agreed. Gaetano 16:07, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
I'll do it. --Tik 18:43, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
I approve that Tik moved the Contents of the Hill-men article to Hillmen. I searched for Hill-men with a hyphen in an e-book of the 50th anniversary edition by HarperCollins and found no match at all. I found five matches for hillmen and one match for Hillmen (the one about Rhudaur in Appendix (I) (III) The North-kingdom and the Dúnedain entry for king Argeleb). --Akhorahil 16:33, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

[edit] Origins

We actually have no information whatsoever on the origins of the Hillmen as a seperate race. The speculation about "pre-numenorean" origins should be deleted unless there is evidence. In fact, even the parts in the POME which states evil Men, subjects of Angmar, who built dark castles and worked with sorcery cannot be equated to the Hillmen either unless sources indicate their equivalence.--Tengwar 23:42, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

I have not checked the sources yet. In general, in my opinion speculations can be informative if they are disclosed as speculations (e.g. "possibly", "probably", "likely", "it is possible that", "maybe", etc.) and if it is disclosed based on which statements and sources the speculations are made. Often there is little information on a subject, so that one can only speculate. However there are many speculations about elements from Middle-Earth on the internet which are presented as if they were facts and it is informative to disclose them as speculations here or to explain why they are unlikely. --Akhorahil 09:20, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
I tried to improve the section. The speculation that the HM are related to the other Men of Eriador is quite straightforward so I just mentioned the context without speculating too much. edit: But I agree that they shouldn't be equated with the Men of Angmar. I think it was Lalaith who confused them? Sage 15:28, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
I am in favour of saying that it is possible that the Hillmen of Rhudaur like the Dunlendings, the Men of Bree and the Dead Men of Dunharrow were descended from the peoples that had dwelt in the vales of the White Mountains in ages past, because it is said that some of those peoples had passed from there to the southern dales of the Misty Mountains into the empty lands as far North as the Barrow-downs and because Rhudaur is approximately as far north as the Barrow-downs and is to the north of Dunland next to the Misty Mountains and providing Appendix F Of Men as a reference. Another reason for this speculation is that they are not included in the list of Edain whose languages were related to Adûnaic. Furthermore in Appendix A (I) (iii) The North-kingdom and the Dúnedain in the entry for king Argeleb it says that there were few Dúnedain in Rhudaur and that power had been seized by an evil lord of the Hillmen there. Furthermore Tolkien uses the term "hillmen" of Dunland in the chapter Helm's Deep and "hillmen" from Lamedon in the chapter Minas Tirith and Lamedon is in the vales of the White Mountains not too far from Erech. Neither Hill-men, nor hillmen or any of its variants are used in The Peoples of Middle-earth. The passage that in Rhudaur evil folk that are workers of sorcery and subjects of Angmar slay the remnants of the Dúnedain and build dark forts in the "hills" is in The Peoples of Middle-Earth VII The Heirs of Elendil manuscript C The Northern Line of Arnor: The Isildurioni 18. Argeleb. The use of forts in the "hills" in this draft version of Appendix A (i.e. this manuscript C) makes it possible that these men are the "hillmen" in Appendix A in the entry for king Argeleb. I dislike the publications of Andreas Möhn (= Lalaith = Codex Regius). He often phrases speculations like facts and his references are extremely imprecise abbrevivations, which stand either for a whole book and at best a chapter in a book without any page numbers or references which Edition he is talking about. In addition he now tries to sell books as Codex Regius, which seem to contain articles that can be read for free in the internet archive for his website. In Terms of undisclosed speculations it is sometimes comparable to David Day's publications. Another guy who tries to make money with publications about Middle-earth. --Akhorahil 16:12, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
I like most of these ideas. I think including this information is valuable but commenting on the speculative origins of these peoples, regarding their relations to the out-of-place Rhudaur, should be explicitly mentioned as speculative. Also, it should be noted in the article about the hyphenated form and the unhyphenated forms and which designations are used for which people. However, the stuff about the sorcery, building dark castles, and whatnot cannot be equated to the Hillmen (though imo it seems highly likely that these were the same people although Tolkien never explicitly stated so) but it should once again be stated as a high possibility. Otherwise, I think this info is great.--Tengwar 00:27, 2 March 2021 (UTC)