|
Post by kymahalei on Jul 8, 2010 13:28:26 GMT -6
With regard to boats, an image of something like a keelboat springs to mind. That looks like a vessel that would appeal to the Númenórean exiles, and it can travel both upstream and downstream. Erm, *scratching head* Do they make boats that can only travel upstream? (sorry!) I do like your choice of boats. The wide and shallow Yangon River in Burma has many boats of this size for fishing. They use outboard motors rather than sails to go upstream.
|
|
|
Post by pandemonium on Jul 8, 2010 13:37:18 GMT -6
Is that the Upper or Upper Dells? One thing that impressed me is how they have insisted that no buildings can be seen from those stretches of river -- even though there are definitely houses and hotels back there in those trees. As for the rest of it -- it's like Las Vegas or Gatlinburg. You wanna buy a genuine rubber tomahawk made in Taiwan? You've come to the right place! LOL Lower Dells. Yes, I should qualify that the Dells are best experienced while on the river! Ride the Ducks. Actually, a lot of folks I knew while I lived in Madison canoed on the river.
|
|
|
Post by pandemonium on Jul 8, 2010 13:39:22 GMT -6
Erm, *scratching head* Do they make boats that can only travel upstream? (sorry!) Heh. One way upstream boats, yep! The qualification is there because 19th century flatboats were "one way." They would travel downriver only and then would be disassembled to recycle their lumber.
|
|
|
Post by Gandalfs apprentice on Jul 8, 2010 15:18:00 GMT -6
A thought to add to your cogitations: maybe the geography of Sarn Ford altered over the years. Tolkien presents his world with a lot of geological inertia (along with social, political and economic inertia), but I don't see why we have to keep to it.
There's even a canon precedent, turned on its head: the approach to Moria is flooded when the Fellowship gets there, when it hadn't been before. Well, perhaps the river at Sarn Ford was deeper once. Maybe it changed course, like the Mississippi.
|
|
|
Post by elfscribe on Jul 8, 2010 16:24:05 GMT -6
You know I never know what I'm going to find when I tromp over here. Now everyone is playing with river boats. Better get out my barge mule.
|
|
|
Post by randy on Jul 8, 2010 17:18:18 GMT -6
I think I need to edit my post. I plead the heat. I've been on the Ducks, both upper and lower Dells. And at the time I thought I would dearly love to come back and canoe the upper Dells.
The Watcher had dammed it, I thought. For the Baranduin, maybe beavers? ;D
|
|
|
Post by erulisse on Jul 8, 2010 19:05:41 GMT -6
I love the Dells, I drive through there 2-4 times a year, but never have the time to stop and play with the water. It is a beautiful area, though.
Rivers carry many things, including sediment. If there is a higher point in the river bed, it is possible that over many years sediment may be deposited alongside of that point filling in the river and making a shallower area in the water - a ford if there are also stones or if there is a firm foundation under the sediment. Having forded many rivers in my youth, and having gotten the occasional vehicle badly stuck in areas just off the ford area with mud up to the axles, I highly recommend knowing the dimensions of the ford before walking/riding/boating across it. A channel could be cut for river traffic, or a portage could be made. I think that a portage would be more likely unless the boat was similar to a keel boat with a very shallow draft.
If there was a portage around the ford, taxes could be collected from the portage area where goods would be unloaded onto a ferry which would take the goods to the other side of the portage, or the goods would be manually transported by "hired" hands, and all would reconnect on the other side of the portage and meet the ship at that point for reloading and continuation down the river. It's a good source of revenue for the "kingdom" or "ruler" or whatever/whoever.
Of course, some fords would be temporarily impassable if there had been a heavy rain upstream or seasonally during the rainy season. This type of situation was a real problem with the canostoga wagons travelling west during the western expansion of the US, especially in the early spring with the winter melt swelling the rivers and flooding the floodplains.
You've got me wishing I was an author, I do so love playing in the water. I have a creek on my property - I think I'll forgo watching Le Tour for a little while and go out with a glass of wine to enjoy my local "river".
- Erulisse (one L)
|
|
|
Post by pandemonium on Jul 9, 2010 5:54:01 GMT -6
A thought to add to your cogitations: maybe the geography of Sarn Ford altered over the years. Tolkien presents his world with a lot of geological inertia (along with social, political and economic inertia), but I don't see why we have to keep to it. There's even a canon precedent, turned on its head: the approach to Moria is flooded when the Fellowship gets there, when it hadn't been before. Well, perhaps the river at Sarn Ford was deeper once. Maybe it changed course, like the Mississippi. I agree with Randy that the damming of the Sirannon is an apple to Sarn Ford's orange. Or wait! Maybe they are both apples! I'd say the precedent is the Watcher intervening to create a new body of water. Ergo, precedent for Númenórean engineers to dredge and such! Yes, I did consider that and could certainly discard the entire idea that Sarn Ford existed in ca. 1700 of the Second Age vs. 3018 of the Third Age. It's not like I haven't looked at canon many times, wrinkled my nose, and said "Fergeddaboudit!" or have at least used it in less than conventional ways. You're right: that's a long enough time span for significant changes, and *points to my original post* one of those "sketchy" areas in JRRT's world that he had not fully thought out and would (if he could) admit as much. Not unlike an eight foot tall Elendil. This is an indulgent exercise with the premise that Sarn Ford is a relatively stable feature. I agree that it stretches belief, but then so do humans who live for thousands of years and jewelry that confers invisibility.
|
|
|
Post by pandemonium on Jul 9, 2010 5:54:55 GMT -6
You know I never know what I'm going to find when I tromp over here. Now everyone is playing with river boats. Better get out my barge mule. And a banjo!
|
|
|
Post by pandemonium on Jul 9, 2010 6:08:44 GMT -6
Rivers carry many things, including sediment. If there is a higher point in the river bed, it is possible that over many years sediment may be deposited alongside of that point filling in the river and making a shallower area in the water Heh. Yes, they carry many things. The Charles had all sorts of interesting and icky detritus in it after a big rain. Oh, the things that got stuck on my oar or smeared on my thighs! I not only rowed, but was also a coxswain so I was very familiar with the shallows resulting from sediment deposits and had to avoid them. Once, when the Harvard men's crew was barreling down the other side of the river, and I had my crew skootch the boat over to give them a wide berth, I got too close to the notorious sandbank (which had extended further into the channel that summer) and broke the rudder of our shell. Our coach was Not Happy. . Yep, both are options and have plenty of real-world precedent. Flat-bottomed boats with low displacement have an ancient history...as do canals. That's a neat idea. Even if there was a canal or dredged channel early in the T.A., by the middle part, when Eriador is becoming more and more depopulated and the Northern Kingdom has split up (plus more and more knowledge is lost), any canal (I do like this idea) would be defunct with little impetus or resources to reconstruct it, so one of the rulers of decaying Cardolan might make use of taxed portage. Hey, you can and should be an author! Why ever not? I'm envious of your creek. We had a creek that flowed through our farmland when I was a kid, and that was a favorite place for me to play (catch crawdads and get leeches on my bare legs). Thanks muchly for the thoughts!
|
|
|
Post by erulisse on Jul 10, 2010 4:24:25 GMT -6
Hey, you can and should be an author! Why ever not? I'm envious of your creek. We had a creek that flowed through our farmland when I was a kid, and that was a favorite place for me to play (catch crawdads and get leeches on my bare legs). Thanks muchly for the thoughts! You're very kind, Pande. I have stories that perch in my head - several of which I have even done the basic research for. But I am primarily an artist - I create my stories in visual form instead of in words, or I am inspired by words to create art. I contribute to this wonderful community by beta services and as a complete fan, and I help out when I can, such as helping out with water traffic. If I could write a story that I actually would read, maybe then I would put fingers to keys :-) - Erulisse (one L)
|
|
|
Post by crowdaughter on Jul 10, 2010 14:49:39 GMT -6
But I am primarily an artist - I create my stories in visual form instead of in words, or I am inspired by words to create art. Then maybe do them as comics? I LOVE Comics! I would dearly love to see a Tolkien story done as a decent Comic, any time! ;D (And no, I did not really found the visualization of the Hobbit as a comic that had been released some years ago very satisfying in that regard).
|
|