Inspired by the recent orcs thread, it's made me think about all the different sorts of orcs that have appeared in various games.

In this thread, rather than trying to front-load with many different orcs in the original post, I thought I'd just put the origin of orcs first, and post more about other orcs in later posts. Tolkien is the popularizer of orcs, but he was inspired by the mention of "orcneas" in Beowulf.



In the Francis B. Gummere translation, the passage goes:

QuoteGrendel this monster grim was called,
march-riever mighty, in moorland living,
in fen and fastness; fief of the giants
the hapless wight a while had kept
since the Creator his exile doomed.
On kin of Cain was the killing avenged
by sovran God for slaughtered Abel.
Ill fared his feud, and far was he driven,
for the slaughter's sake, from sight of men.
Of Cain awoke all that woful breed,
Ettins and elves and evil-spirits,
as well as the giants that warred with God
weary while: but their wage was paid them!

He translates "orcneas" as "evil-spirits". But they're in the same category of monster as giants ("eotenas" similar to "jotun") and elves ("ylfe") - as well as Grendel and his mother.

The Fantasy Bestiary suggests two possible etymologies. One is "demon-corpse" that implies an undead creature like a ghoul or zombie. This may relate to the god of the underworld "Orcus" in Etruscan and Roman mythology. The other implies a sea-monster -- from "orcen" related to the modern-day "orca", also known as killer whale.

https://fantasy-bestiary.fandom.com/wiki/Orcneas

It is interesting that Beowulf puts elves and orcs as the same category of monster, but Tolkien makes them into polar opposites, even if orcs originated as a corruption of elves. More on Tolkien in a later post.

Getting the Noble Savage Greenskin out the way, while D&D had Orcs as player characters. I think it was Earthdawn that really dove into making Orcs a people. There were reasons why Orcs seemed hot headed and bad tempered. "Gahad"

QuoteThe ork's reputation for violence grows from his passionate nature. You may say that your heart is full of love, or full of spite. When you say this, you are speaking poetry. When an ork says it, he means it. If you arouse an ork to desire or fury, they feel it in their heart as intensely as other races would feel a fever in their head or poison in their gut. Orks call this sensation gahad. If an ork's gahad is awakened, expect them to act on their emotions. They can try to resist the gahad, but resisting sets their brain to boil and curdles their stomach. This is not a simple metaphor — it hurts when an ork resists his gahad. Orks believe that such resistance shortens life — an able-bodied ork who suddenly drops dead at forty is said to have swallowed his gahad one time too many.

Orcs in Earthdawn were viewed by the other races as violent savages, and most Orcs resent their treament, contributing to the hostilites between the race and others.

I like them as pig faced cannibals hell bent on destruction. 

At this point, implementing whatever version of orcs pisses off the most half-shaved-head blue-haired "people" (communists aren't people) possible is the goal.

Regarding Tolkien's orcs --

I don't think I need a general introduction, but I think the interesting point about Tolkien is that his orcs are savage but not technologically primitive. They are the military-industrial complex. He expresses it most clearly in The Hobbit:

QuoteThey make no beautiful things, but they make many clever ones. They can tunnel and mine as well as any but the most skilled dwarves, when they take the trouble, though they are usually untidy and dirty. Hammers, axes, swords, daggers, pickaxes, tongs, and also instruments of torture, they make very well, or get other people to make to their design, prisoners and slaves that have to work till they die for want of air and light. It is not unlikely that they invented some of the machines that have since troubled the world, especially the ingenious devices for killing large numbers of people at once, for wheels and engines and explosions always delighted them, and also not working with their own hands more than they could help; but in those days and those wild parts they had not advanced (as it is called) so far.

In the Lord of the Rings we see them use machines like their great siege engines or the mechanics of the Black Gate. They use some sort of bomb to blow up defenses at Helm's Deep. (The movies have a scene to show this as something from Saruman that the orcs knew nothing of, but that was invented for the movies - and the quote above makes clear that Tolkien saw them as inventors.)

Often forgotten is how they have a draught that dulls pain and a salve that effectively seals wounds, though it leaves a nasty permanent scar (used on Merry).

In later Tolkien-based fantasy, orcs and goblins are considered two different species, and goblins are sometimes shown as crazed inventors. However, Tolkien used orc and goblin as alternate names for the same creature.

I was working on a book about various orc metaphors for The Arcane Confabulation but given the climate a few years back I decided to put it on the back burner.  Orcs as the other, orcs as us, orcs as oppressed minorities, orcs as oppressors, orcs as children of darkness, orcs as rabble, orcs as the evils of war, orcs as constructs, orcs as a force of nature, nature, orcs as the world's antibodies, and so on and so on.

Y'know. I think I jumped the gun trying to "participate" there. I'm gonna sit back and let jhkim go through the orc races in rpgs without interjecting.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 19, 2025, 09:11:55 PMY'know. I think I jumped the gun trying to "participate" there. I'm gonna sit back and let jhkim go through the orc races in rpgs without interjecting.

Did he already make a thread about telling us how orcs really aren't the bad guys?

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 19, 2025, 09:11:55 PMY'know. I think I jumped the gun trying to "participate" there. I'm gonna sit back and let jhkim go through the orc races in rpgs without interjecting.

Thanks for the Earthdawn entry, Ratman_tf. I only know of Earthdawn by reputation, and don't have a copy. I do know Shadowrun, which Earthdawn was sort of the prequel to. I hadn't thought about including Shadowrun, but now I think it was significant.

I'm thinking of maybe a timeline of ones I know:

1937: The Hobbit first published
1954: Lord of the Rings first published
1974: OD&D first orc entry
1977: Monster Manual describes orc and half-orc
1978: Player's Handbook makes half-orc a PC race
1982: Dragon #62 - creates orcish myth of seeking revenge for oppression
1985: Unearthed Arcana makes drow a PC race - notable as the first pure-blooded evil race for players
1987: Warhammer 40K - space orks as violent horde, comically likened to soccer hooligans
1988: The Orcs of Thar - orcs as a PC race for Basic D&D
1989: Shadowrun - orcs as lower-class tough guy PCs in magical cyberpunk
1993: Earthdawn 1st edition - orcs as savage, passionate PC race
1994: Warcraft
2001: World of Warcraft

I think these are some of the more influential examples. There are also a bunch of less mainstream re-interpretations of orcs, like Harnic orcs and Sovereign Stone along with Dungeons & Delvers.

this is doubly interesting because they also use giant as a descriptor for Grendel, he's also described as being a direct descendant of Cain as well. (of the old testament) if we are talking about giants as a word used in the bible it also has two possible etymologies in the hebrew old testament, Rephaim and Nephilim, Goliath and his ilk are described as Rephaim, and Rephaim as a more direct translation to english would be "Dead Ones" or "spirits who dwell in shoel" which really adds a whole chthonic bent to this and lines up with the etymologies pertaining to Orcs.



I'm starting to think the ancient Hebrews and Anglo Saxtons were describing something very similar and the connection the Anglos made to Cain and Biblical giants was also very intentional.

Quote from: jhkim on February 19, 2025, 06:37:32 PMHe translates "orcneas" as "evil-spirits". But they're in the same category of monster as giants ("eotenas" similar to "jotun") and elves ("ylfe") - as well as Grendel and his mother.

The Fantasy Bestiary suggests two possible etymologies. One is "demon-corpse" that implies an undead creature like a ghoul or zombie. This may relate to the god of the underworld "Orcus" in Etruscan and Roman mythology. The other implies a sea-monster -- from "orcen" related to the modern-day "orca", also known as killer whale.

https://fantasy-bestiary.fandom.com/wiki/Orcneas

It is interesting that Beowulf puts elves and orcs as the same category of monster, but Tolkien makes them into polar opposites, even if orcs originated as a corruption of elves. More on Tolkien in a later post.

First, the fantasy bestiary is wrong.  There is no question as to which of the two etymologies for the word Tolkien favored.  He tells us himself (in the "Notes on Nomenclature" he prepared for the Danish and Swedish translations of the Lord of the Rings).

QuoteOrc. This is supposed to be the Common Speech name of these creatures at that time; it should therefore according to the system be translated into English, or the language of translation. It was translated 'goblin' in The Hobbit, except in one place; but this word, and other words of similar sense in other European languages (as far as I know), are not really suitable. The orc in The Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion, though of course partly made out of traditional features, is not really comparable in supposed origin, functions, and relation to the Elves. In any case orc seemed to me, and seems, in sound a good name for these creatures. It should be retained. It should be spelt ork (so the Dutch translation) in a Germanic language, but I had used the spelling orc in so many places that I have hesitated to change it in the English text, though the adjective is necessarily spelt orkish. The Grey-elven form is orch, plural yrch. I originally took the word from Old English orc [Beowulf 112 orc-neass and the gloss orc = pyrs ('ogre'), heldeofol ('hell-devil')]. This is supposed not to be connected with modern English orc, ork, a name applied to various sea-beasts of the dolphin order.

Second, the grouping in Beowulf is not a puzzle at all. These monsters are the descendants of Cain (and "cousins" of Grendel), and have been transformed by the Christian chronicler who preserved the tale.  We have no way of knowing whether the Anglo-Saxon sources considered them to be equivalent or related, but we can tell that the Christian source saw all of these creatures as stained by the curse of Cain (a common explanation of monstrosities for the Dark Ages).  As such, they are presented as spiritual/supernatural entities, elves by that time being more what we would call "fey" creatures than the more tangible elves of Norse mythology.  Giants were mostly mythological/historical beings as well, as Christian doctrine asserted at the time.  So, to the Christian monk rewriting/transcribing the tale, these would all be creatures of legend as told by his forebearers (not present creatures in the world).  It is doubtful that any such association was present in the original Anglo-Saxon story, and we have no way of knowing if they were even mentioned.  Tolkien knew all of this, and therefore had no reason to assume any relationship, thought he does preserve a little connection by originally conceiving of orcs as warped elves.  But this is all artistic license.  Tolkien was a master at taking words of uncertain meaning in Anglo-Saxon and using them for his own purposes (see "wuduwasa" and Woodwoses in RotK).  No conclusions about the nature of Tolkien's orcs can be inferred from Beowulf.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on February 19, 2025, 11:09:53 PM

Quote from: jhkim on February 19, 2025, 06:37:32 PMHe translates "orcneas" as "evil-spirits". But they're in the same category of monster as giants ("eotenas" similar to "jotun") and elves ("ylfe") - as well as Grendel and his mother.

The Fantasy Bestiary suggests two possible etymologies. One is "demon-corpse" that implies an undead creature like a ghoul or zombie. This may relate to the god of the underworld "Orcus" in Etruscan and Roman mythology. The other implies a sea-monster -- from "orcen" related to the modern-day "orca", also known as killer whale.

https://fantasy-bestiary.fandom.com/wiki/Orcneas

It is interesting that Beowulf puts elves and orcs as the same category of monster, but Tolkien makes them into polar opposites, even if orcs originated as a corruption of elves. More on Tolkien in a later post.

First, the fantasy bestiary is wrong.  There is no question as to which of the two etymologies for the word Tolkien favored.  He tells us himself (in the "Notes on Nomenclature" he prepared for the Danish and Swedish translations of the Lord of the Rings).

Thanks, Eirikrautha. In my OP, I was trying to separate out what "orcneas" meant prior to Tolkien creating his distinctive vision of the orcs of Middle Earth.

In other words, what's a reasonable translation of "orcneas" in the context of Beowulf? Put another way - if a native Old English speaker listened to Beowulf in the 9th or 10th century, what would he understand "orcneas" to mean? Do you think the translation of "evil spirit" is reasonable?

I agree there's an interesting issue of the distinction of the Christian monk transcribing the tale and the original meaning of the story, since the setting is pagan 6th century Scandinavia but the earliest manuscript we have is circa 1000CE.  I realize all this is just a shot in the dark, but I think it's still interesting - as Tolkien evidently did.

Also, do you understand this part of what Tolkien says?

QuoteI originally took the word from Old English orc [Beowulf 112 orc-neass and the gloss orc = pyrs ('ogre'), heldeofol ('hell-devil')].

What does "the gloss orc = pyrs" mean, and how does "heldeofol" relate to that?

Quote from: jhkim on February 20, 2025, 01:10:32 AM

QuoteI originally took the word from Old English orc [Beowulf 112 orc-neass and the gloss orc = pyrs ('ogre'), heldeofol ('hell-devil')].

What does "the gloss orc = pyrs" mean, and how does "heldeofol" relate to that?

The copy/paste somehow substituted "p" for the Anglo-Saxon "þ" (thorn).  The term should be "þyrs", which is an Anglo-Saxon word usually associated with trolls or ogres (large humanoid monsters, like giants).  Much of our knowledge of the Anglo-Saxon language comes from Latin manuscripts which had "glosses", or translations of the Latin words into the vernacular in the margins, so that partially literate Latin readers (which may have described the vast majority of the trained monks in the Dark and Early Middle Ages) would understand the meaning of rare or unusual Latin words.  Several 9th century manuscripts contain the term "orc" as a gloss for the Latin word roughly meaning "ogre" or "monster" (the Germanic ogre had the connotation of a creature that fed on people), and the same Latin word was also glossed with "þyrs" elsewhere.  The same occurred with heldeofel.  This suggests that orc, ogre, and hell-devil are all terms with a similar meaning.  So the term "orc" predates Beowulf (at least the written form, though probably not the story itself), and was combined in the poem with "-neas" possibly meaning "body" or "corpse" (so it could meaning "monstrous creatures" or "monstrous corpses/undead", depending on how you interpret it). 

Also note, this is the Christian chronicler's (actually two different scribes) attribution (and the first scribe appeared to have modified the source material more than the scribe of the second half), so we don't know if that term would have been one used by the original pagan author(s) to describe Grendel or associated monsters.

So, I believe Tolkien here was justifying his reading of "orcneas" as "monstrous spawn of hell/underworld", based on the usage of the term in Beowulf and the Latin glosses.

Quote from: jhkim on February 20, 2025, 01:10:32 AMThanks, Eirikrautha. In my OP, I was trying to separate out what "orcneas" meant prior to Tolkien creating his distinctive vision of the orcs of Middle Earth.

In other words, what's a reasonable translation of "orcneas" in the context of Beowulf? Put another way - if a native Old English speaker listened to Beowulf in the 9th or 10th century, what would he understand "orcneas" to mean? Do you think the translation of "evil spirit" is reasonable?

Let us assume that it is either correct or close enough to correct; does this really then serve as any manner of predecessor to Tolkien's orc?  He tells us where he got the name, certainly, but that doesn't mean he was trying to implement that specific monster (he didn't even use the name directly, after all).  In other words, assuming you're correct, isn't an "orcneas" a different imaginary creature entirely then an "orc"?

Thanks again, Eirikrautha! I believe you, but do you have a source other than Tolkien's letters that I can reference for that if I'm writing this up?

Quote from: Venka on February 20, 2025, 01:55:38 PM

Quote from: jhkim on February 20, 2025, 01:10:32 AMThanks, Eirikrautha. In my OP, I was trying to separate out what "orcneas" meant prior to Tolkien creating his distinctive vision of the orcs of Middle Earth.

In other words, what's a reasonable translation of "orcneas" in the context of Beowulf? Put another way - if a native Old English speaker listened to Beowulf in the 9th or 10th century, what would he understand "orcneas" to mean? Do you think the translation of "evil spirit" is reasonable?

Let us assume that it is either correct or close enough to correct; does this really then serve as any manner of predecessor to Tolkien's orc?  He tells us where he got the name, certainly, but that doesn't mean he was trying to implement that specific monster (he didn't even use the name directly, after all).  In other words, assuming you're correct, isn't an "orcneas" a different imaginary creature entirely then an "orc"?

That's kind of the point of the topic. I agree an "orcneas" is a different creature than a Middle Earth "orc" -- but then, I also think that a Warhammer 40K "ork" and a World of Warcraft "orc" are also different creatures.

All of these are called something like "orc", but they are shifting versions. The most popular media of the time define what people think of "orcs" as.

Tolkien defines his orcs as being unruly drivers and pawns of the military-industrial complex, with their fiendish machines and scarring medicine. The popular understanding has steadily drifted away from that, though, so that now people think more of hulking green-skinned brutes - possibly even Noble Savage as Ratman_tf mentioned.