Dwarves of Sauron
 

In The Silmarillion in the chapterOf the Rings of Power and the 3rd age it says,"Of the Dwarves few fought on either side; but the kindred of Durin of Moria fought against Sauron".
How did Sauron get Dwarves under his control if he could not ensnare them with the power of the One Ring?

I would guess (and I have no text to back it up) that they could be expolited by jewels and the like. Remember that not all dwarves were good, Mim the petty dwarf wasn't a really nice midget was he?

I would have to agree with Mattius. In my opinion, dwarves only need three basic things to be happy: rocks, mithrill or jewels, and good food. I'm sure Sauron could have eisily provided all of these things

Another thing that interests me about that is that the Silm says that 'all races, even the beasts and birds, were divided that day'. Would that include Morgoth's evil races? Could there have been Orcs and Trolls who rebelled against Sauron? What about Dragons?

There are more than two sides, you see. You can fight against the Elves without fighting alongside Sauron, and against Sauron without fighting alongside Elves. Also, fighting alongside somebody doesn't mean that you like them, like when the US, UK, etc. fought alongside the USSR, and then turned around and had a Cold War against them.

Exactly, remember the two orc leaders who capture the poisned Frodo, they don't like Sauron and want to get away from him.

There were four kindreds of Dwarves somewhere to the East of the Iron Hills. I expect that Sauron may have recruited some of them. However, they did send reinforcements to Durin's kindred during the war of the Dwarves and orcs. Maybe Sauron also had some support from renegade Dwarves of the Ered Luin as resentment against the elves may have lingered from the Nauglamir issue.

Okay, maybe I'm being obtuse, but when I read this I don't think it suggests there were dwarves fighting for Sauron, just that there were few involved in the wars at all.

It doesn't say, "few fought on each side".

H.C.

My feeling is that dwarves are very easyly swayed to the will of others I agree with Scott that as long as the dwarves receive they are happy. it is indeed possible that dwarves fought alongside Sauron

Dwarves are most certainly NOT easily swayed to the will of others--stubborn individuality is one of their main traits. I think what the quote meant was exactly what it said--not many fought on either side, though the folk of Durin's line were an exception and fought with the good guys. Sauron could never enslave the Dwarves, even with his rings, but perhaps a few could have been bribed or otherwise convinced to fight for him--though they wouldn't have thought they were doing it for him. Like Saruman playing off the Dunlendings hatred of Rohan, Sauron could have played on some ancient grudge or greed on the part of a few dwarves somewhere. But very few indeed. Most would be wary of any "gifts" Sauron were trying to give--they aren't stupid, you know. And there isn't much indication that they care for good food any more than anybody else. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

That's true, Dwarves probably did not spend much time on thier food. If they did they might have had more places for growing foods (If they even ate plants). They most likely could be bribed with mithril and other earthly material, maybe thier own mountain kingdom.

didnt you here what dain said?
dwarves cannot be corrupted. we are stubborn. and we would not fight for some evil geezer.
out of interest, dain, are you dain ironfoot ot king dain the 1st?

This is what SILM has to say about who fought where....

Plus:

--->HoME 12 Of Men and Dwarves

Plus Androg's statement to Mim in U.T:

So we can see that Dwarves were able to commit evil deeds ,though they couldn't be turned into wraiths, like men. In the BoLT conceptions, the Dwarves were a evil race.

Some of you are talking about how dwarves can't be swayed. Well, I go against that. If you get a dwarf that is easily bribed, you got 'em on your side. Especially if you get a dwarf drunk.

~Burzdol~

In book of Lost Tales 1 (HoME Vol. 1) it says Fankil is a servant of Morgoth who escaped the sack of Utumno. He was one of the first servants of Morgoth to try and corrupt mortal men. Dwarves fought allied to the dark lord at this time so they could have fought with Sauron.

burrahobbit, it depends on what you mean by 'alongside'. It certainly seems to me as if there were two sides, Sauron's and Sauron's enemies. Even if a couple of Dwarves barely even knew who Sauron was, yet still went along to the battle to kill some Elves, I would say that they were doing Sauron's bidding whether they knew it or not, and therefore, by killing his enemies, were fighting alongside Sauron.

Maybe there is a difference between being on someone's side, and fighting alongside someone. (Doing my best not to disagree with Treebeard here!)

Of course, maybe there were Dwarves who went about killing Orcs and Elves, in which case they would be on no-one's side but there own.

Most Dwarves were never on any side. They cared about their own kind and expanding their wealth. Often they did not care how they acquired this gold, as long as they got what they wanted. Take, for instance, the necklace wrought with a simaril inside it. Thingol thought the necklace was beautiful, and said he was the owner of the silmaril and therefore the necklace. But the dwarves said they had made the piece, and so they killed Thingol and stole the necklace.

Which only shows that material wealth can bring a dwarf to do almost anything.

It may be that too much is made of the Nauglamir incident, at least in its implications about dwarfish nature. At this point the dwarves and Thingol were both caught up in the fate of the Noldor and the Silmarils, and succumbed to their baser instincts. And only one of the two dwarf cities (Nogrod or Belegost - I forget which)participated in the attack on Doriath: the other refused to participate.

Dwarves, like anyone (except perhaps elves) can be manipulated. Look at when the dwarves massacared the elves of Doriaith to regain the necklace of the dwarves.

Elves, as well, can be corrupted by the lust of wealth, haven't you ever heard of the Kinslaying in which Feanor and his followers murdered the solosimpi/teleri to get to ME in order to get the silmarils back? Lust and greed are the main downfalls of every race (that I can think of) in ME. Not to mention that Melkor bred such mistrust in the Noldor that they would not even trust the Valar and disobeyed them in their insatiable greed.

What I always wondered about the Dwarves that fell under the shadow of Morgoth and Sauron is what was Aule doing at the time? I mean he created the dwarves, he loves them probably more than any of the Valar or even Eru, and yet he doesnt do anything? He doesnt appear to the dwarves and tell them to go build a hidden city? He doesnt say to rebel against Sauron? The Valar have an excuse for not helping ME, but I think Aule really has a duty here...

-willkill

Yes, but he couldn't get directly involved a lot. Even Ulmo didn't get directly involved, he just directed Tuor to go to Gondolin. Tuor could have refused. Of course, refusing the Lord of the Waters ain't a smart thing to do, but still, that possibility existed. Aulë couldn't get directly involved, and tell the Dwarves to rebel against Sauron, because they would listen to him, and that would constitute direct interference, which by that time, the Valar could not do. They had already relinquished their active roles in Middle-earth and their jobs as Guardians.

Finwe is right. Aule may have created the Dwarves, but it was Eru who gave them life, just as it was Eru who gave Men life. So, Aule could no more tell the Dwarves what to do than he (or any of the Valar) could tell Men what to do.

In the immortal words of C.S. Lewis, "the Dwarves are for the Dwarves!"

Didn't some dwarves fight on the side of evil people?

In the Hobbit it says:

Yes, but a few misguided people will always fight on the side of evil because either they don't like the good guys, they have this notion that they can take over the world (*coughcoughSarumancoughcough*), or they're just plain stupid. They aren't technically a representative of the race as a whole.

aman to that. The dwarfs are literally a race apart. THey dont care about the affairs of anyone. They were made in secret and live that way also. The only allience they have s up in esgaroth

That's not entirely true. While the Dwarves did tend to keep to themselves, there was actually a long history of Dwarven dealings with other races. In the past they had other long-standing alliances with Men. The essay "Of Men and Dwarves" deals with this type of thing.

I agree (especially with Tolkien's quotes!) that it is likely that Dwarves were found in the armies of the Dark Lords at one time or another. Remember that Thorin and Co. were among the very nicest of all dwarf-kind, and they could be downright nasty at times.

As a Maia of Aulë, Sauron would have had the ability to talk to the Dwarves on their own level, and persuade them where he could not daunt them. Perhaps a nice new spanner or something of that ilk. By the way, what's the status on the Dwarf-wraith debate? Did Sauron manage to ensnare any Dwarves with Rings of Power? Or were they too stubborn to be dominated? I really should look up some old threads...

As it says in the Appendices of Return of the King, the Dwarves were too strong of will and stubborn to become bent to Sauron's will and become wraiths. They were like Hobbits in the sense that they were much too ingrained in their way of life, their hierarchy, and social system to really want to change it. That was why they couldn't be corrupted. Also, they were a very hardy race. The Rings only worked on weak-minded people, as do all temptations. If a Ring of Power was presented to a strong-willed person, the Ring wouldn't affect that person as it was supposed to, and at most, would increase their natural desires (i.e. love of gold and treasure in the case of Dwarves, and the desire to turn Mordor into a fertile garden in the case of Samwise Gamgee).

All in all, those hardy little blokes were simple too stubborn for the Rings to work (which we are very grateful for). [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

no. it says in the Appendix A in RotK just my input

my bad. I just pretty much said what Finwe said. Anyways now he has the text to back it up.

my bad,

<font size=1 color=339966>[ 8:50 PM December 08, 2003: Message edited by: Tar-Alcarin ]

But if that's the case, wouldn't Gimli (or any Dwarf of Durin's line for that matter) have made the best choice as Ringbearer?

Interesting point, Saucy!

Easy answer: not nearly sneaky enough. Being invisible is not all that handy if you happen to clunk and rattle around. And chances are he would have terminated Gollum long before finding out about the Pass of Cirith Ungol.

very interesting saucy, except for one thing, it had to be frodo. The elves wouldve objected to gimili destroying the ring. Rememember that they dont trust the Dwarfs and the Dwarfs elves. And nobody trusts men. So for that reason, it wouldve been frodo or another hobbit.

So take off his armour. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

Very likely. But, although Gandalf felt that Gollum would play some part in the Quest, no one could have foreseen exactly what part he would come to play.

But if the wise (ie Elrond, Gandalf and Galadriel) had determined that Gimli as Ringbearer was the best course of action, I am sure that the other Elves could have been persuaded. After all, who (but the wise) would have thought that Frodo would be the most suitable person to do it at the outset?

While the Seven Rings of Power clearly did not have the same effect on the Dwarves as the Nine did on the Kings of Men who became the Ringwraiths, I am sure that the One Ring would have affected Gimli (or any other Dwarf) in some adverse way, had he borne it.

(Good to see you back again, by the way, Mr Platypus. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] )

<font size=1 color=339966>[ 9:51 PM December 08, 2003: Message edited by: The Saucepan Man ]

Imagining Gimli as Gollum is a rather scary thought, so I sincerely hope that this discussion doesn't go in that direction.


By the way, Tar-Alcarin, where did you get the idea that I am male? [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img] [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

I'm stumped on that one Finwe. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

And regarding the Professor's quote, it seems quite vague. The Ring wouldn't affect the Dwarves 'life' in the way that it wouldn't affect them 'physically' (take the simple meaning of the word 'physically' here) However, the Ring did affect the Dwarves wills and desires, and this can be acounted among their lives surely?

As has been discussed on other threads (and this discussion has come round quite a long way!) Gimli would probably have given in to the temptation of the Ring more quickly than Frodo did.

I agree with you here, Eomer, and with your explanation of the quote. A Dwarf might not turn into a Ring-wraith-dwarf-thing, but he would, I am sure, be affected mentally by the corrupting influence of the Ring.

Perhaps the One Ring would have affected Gimli in the way that the Rings of Power affected the other Dwarves. It would have greatly increased his inherent desire for treasure, jewels, gold, etc. instead of power, like Sauron.

I just realized something. Do we actually know what visions the Ring put into Frodo's mind? All we know is that he eventually claims the Ring for himself, but he would have been shown visions of himself with some increased power by the Ring, and Tolkien never chooses, to my knowledge, to divulge the nature of those visions to the readers.