How many in Battle of 5 Armies?

[Gwathagor]

All things being equal, if the battle consisted only of hand-to-hand combat between the elves and the dwarves, the dwarves would undoubtedly win. However, I think the key advantage of crack-shot archers would give the elves the upper hand because of the long, open distance the dwarves would have to cover before reaching the elven army. The casualties inflicted by the elven archers upon the slow dwarves would only exaggerate the already existing differences in numbers between the two armies. In the ensuing hand-to-hand combat, I'm sure the dwarves would inflict very heavy casualties, but at that point the elves would be able to overwhelm the dwarves simply by virtue of having, by that point, more than twice as many soldiers as the dwarves. The dwarves would be surrounded and then overrun.

I emphasize again that the elves would doubtless incur very heavy casualties during the close combat phase.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

We are turning more to a tactical talk instead of the actuall topic: How many where in the battle

Before I return to this I would like to say a few thing about the tactics. . . Agincourt is not the best of examples, as the major problem for the French was the tactics or rather the fact that the heavily amoured nobility did not want to fight pessants armed with bows. (not much glory or gain in that)

Anyways even though dwarves are tougher in close combat than elves, pikes still make an excelent defence weapon and good for keeping foes at bay. . .together with a bunch of archers I think they would have the upper hand against the dwarves.

I think they where confident they would win, the question would have been how many casualties they where ready to accept.

Also I belive that the elves would have been armoured. . .as you said they normally fought from the safty of the trees, in the woods mobility and camuflage was key. If they knew they where going to the open, where there are plenty of unknown factors. . .surely they would wear armour.

Anyways back to the topic:

I always pictured the elves numbers being somewhere between 1000-2000, the men of laketown only a few hundreds. I cannot remember what the book said about the amount of orcs and wargs, but I always imagined them as being of same amount or maybe a bit larger.

But this is based on nothing, only loose memories, it has been years since I read the Hobbit.

[Gwathagor]

Agincourt has its limitations as an example, but it demonstrates well the potential of archers and pikes against heavy armor, even when vastly out-numbered. Which was the point I was making.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Gwathagor

Agincourt has its limitations as an example, but it demonstrates well the potential of archers and pikes against heavy armor, even when vastly out-numbered. Which was the point I was making.

I got that and I do not dispute that pikes and archers can be a good combo against heavily armoured troops, but I thought it important to point out that it several important factors that decided the outcome of Agincourt. . . .

One could say that I was trying to present a more diverse picture of the events. . .that sounded fancy enough for my liking.

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by Gwathagor

I emphasize again that the elves would doubtless incur very heavy casualties during the close combat phase.

Hmm... well I don’t see how they could. The spear is not a weapon that is made for the close combat phase, seeing how you need some space to stab or to swing with it. Besides I doubt that this phase would occur since Dain’s main objective is to make it into the mountain. If the elves were so mighty shots why didn’t they storm Esgaroth while there were only the thirteen dwarves in there? Says quite a bit about the elves don’t it?

Soldiers are most effective when they have a cause to believe and fight for. What where the elves fight for? They were fighting for their king and his greed and want of jewels, not much of a cause. However, the dwarves were fighting to reclaim their long lost home; they were fighting for what was theirs. They had a cause to fight for, this would make them unconquerable in battle.

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

Hmm... well I don’t see how they could. The spear is not a weapon that is made for the close combat phase, seeing how you need some space to stab or to swing with it. Besides I doubt that this phase would occur since Dain’s main objective is to make it into the mountain. If the elves were so mighty shots why didn’t they storm Esgaroth while there were only the thirteen dwarves in there? Says quite a bit about the elves don’t it?

Soldiers are most effective when they have a cause to believe and fight for. What where the elves fight for? They were fighting for their king and his greed and want of jewels, not much of a cause. However, the dwarves were fighting to reclaim their long lost home; they were fighting for what was theirs. They had a cause to fight for, this would make them unconquerable in battle.

There seems to be a rash of people misunderstanding my posts.

sigh

I think, Groin, that the word "incur" may have thrown you off. To incur means to take, to acquire, to bring upon oneself, to receive...something like that.

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

Also I belive that the elves would have been armoured. . .as you said they normally fought from the safty of the trees, in the woods mobility and camuflage was key. If they knew they where going to the open, where there are plenty of unknown factors. . .surely they would wear armour.

But the question is: do they have the armor. You can't just make it appear out of thin air, and I don't think that the Mirkwood elves ever fought out of their woods, since they had enough problems with Dol Goldur. Even if they did have armor I would imagine it would be light, made out of leather or something. That is hardly sufficient to stop a Dwarf's axe from killing you.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

Hmm... well I don’t see how they could. The spear is not a weapon that is made for the close combat phase, seeing how you need some space to stab or to swing with it. Besides I doubt that this phase would occur since Dain’s main objective is to make it into the mountain. If the elves were so mighty shots why didn’t they storm Esgaroth while there were only the thirteen dwarves in there? Says quite a bit about the elves don’t it?

Soldiers are most effective when they have a cause to believe and fight for. What where the elves fight for? They were fighting for their king and his greed and want of jewels, not much of a cause. However, the dwarves were fighting to reclaim their long lost home; they were fighting for what was theirs. They had a cause to fight for, this would make them unconquerable in battle.

I don't know why on earth the elves would want to storm Esgaroth, that would make no sence at all. . . it makes more sence to talk about why they did not storm Erebor

I am quite sure that they did not want any casualties if it could be avoided, so why storm a fortified position? They could just starve them! I am also quite sure that the elves recognised Thorin's claim and so had wish to kill him or any of the dwarves, but wanted an agreement with them.

About spears: remember that the dwarves was the attackers and spears are excelent as a defence weapon.

and you simply cannot just create a rule about when soldiers are most effective. . .soldiers can also get carried away and do foolish things because they belive in the cause.

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

But the question is: do they have the armor. You can't just make it appear out of thin air, and I don't think that the Mirkwood elves ever fought out of their woods, since they had enough problems with Dol Goldur. Even if they did have armor I would imagine it would be light, made out of leather or something. That is hardly sufficient to stop a Dwarf's axe from killing you.

Elves live for a long time. . .there was a time before Dol Guldur, where the enemy was elsewhere. To think that you would never engage in combat outside your own little green patch would be foolish and just plain weird. As far as I remember the elves of Doriath had armour and they seldome ventured out in the open. . .
Anyways the fact is that we are never told about elves who never used armour, it is the standard that elves have armour of some sort and therefor it would be an obvious thing to mention if they did not have any armour.

I would also like to add that quite heavy armour is seldom going to keep you alive after a direct blow, it is more likely to save you from minor injuries and so keep you in the fight longer.

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

I would also like to add that quite heavy armour is seldom going to keep you alive after a direct blow, it is more likely to save you from minor injuries and so keep you in the fight longer.

By minor injuries do you mean like, oh say, an arrow? Either way the elves are screwed, nothing can withstand a heavy battle axe!

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

Hmm... well I don’t see how they could. The spear is not a weapon that is made for the close combat phase, seeing how you need some space to stab or to swing with it.

The use of spear and pike, particularly when an army has the advantage of higher ground (as was the case of the Elves), is lethal in an en masse charge (as at the battle of Sempach, or with the Flemish bourgeois against French chivalry during the 14th century). It is noted by Tolkien that the Elves charged the Orcs twice with spear, to great effect. This, in tandem with hails of arrows, is a proven medieval strategy (far more effective than countless cavalry charges or with unmounted, heavily armored knights -- as was the French downfall at Crecy, Poitier and Agincourt during the 100 Year's War).

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

Besides I doubt that this phase would occur since Dain’s main objective is to make it into the mountain. If the elves were so mighty shots why didn’t they storm Esgaroth while there were only the thirteen dwarves in there?

It was not the intent of the Elves and Men to slaughter the thirteen in Erebor, the text is quite clear in that regard.

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

ays quite a bit about the elves don’t it?

Elvish restraint saved the situation from getting far uglier sooner (which would have led to chaos and an Orkish victory). The text supports that the Elves and Men had a decisive advantage against the Dwarves both numerically and from strategic positioning:

"Fools!" laughed Bard, "to come thus beneath the mountain's arm! They do not understand war above ground, whatever they may know of battle in the mines. There are many archers and spearmen now hidden in the rocks upon their right flank. Dwarf-mail may be good, but they will soon be hard put to it, Let us set on them now from both sides, before they are fully rested!"

But the ElvenKing said: "Long will I tarry, ere I begin this war for gold. The dwarves cannot pass us, unless we will, or do anything that we cannot mark. Let us hope still for something that will bring reconciliation. Our advantage in numbers will be enough, if in the end it must come to unhappy blows."

The text shows the Dwarvish strength at 500, whereas Tolkien speaks of 1000 Elvish spearmen in the initial charge against the Orcs (and reserves for a second charge, plus countless Elvish archers, and an unquantified host of Men under Bard). In addition, the Elves and Men held the high ground and were assembled in the plain below (the classic pincer movement).

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

But the question is: do they have the armor. You can't just make it appear out of thin air, and I don't think that the Mirkwood elves ever fought out of their woods, since they had enough problems with Dol Goldur. Even if they did have armor I would imagine it would be light, made out of leather or something. That is hardly sufficient to stop a Dwarf's axe from killing you.

The Elves of Mirkwood fought under Oropher and Thranduil in the War of the Last Alliance (in Mordor), so yes, they do have experience fighting outside the forest (Elves being immortal and all). Plus they have a distinct height and reach advantage over the dwarves, particularly with spears. Add to this their renowned archery ability and the dwarves would be cut to little, hairy ribbons.

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by Rune

and you simply cannot just create a rule about when soldiers are most effective . . . soldiers can also get carried away and do foolish things because they believe in the cause.

Who’s making up a rule? I was stating that a soldier actually fighting for something will have a better chance of winning the battle. That is mainly why the dwarves fought to such great affect in the War between Dwarves and Orcs.
If that’s not clear to you then let me ask you this: who here amongst ya’ll would like to mess with an angry dwarf?


You bring up some interesting points, Morthoron ; I now believe that the alliance of men and elves would outmatch the dwarf force.

The dwarf force must be much smaller than the alliance's, and Bard and Thranduil had the chance to seek out the best ground before the dwarves arrived. I'm not sure that the archers would do much harm, but reading back up on my history I see that the spears would be a much greater threat.

However, I'm not sure that you all fully comprehend the capabilities of a dwarf. From what I gather, you see the battle as: shoot dwarves and stab them if they get too close. A mere mindless rabble of tiny men, I think not!

I would also like to bring up the subject of pole arms such as the halberd. Now mostly dwarves consider any other weapon besides a sword, mace, or axe as sissy and cowardly weapons (especially range weapons), but I think that we can make an exception with the halberd. Therefore I think that both sides would have weapons to keep the enemy at bay, and making it a contest of range weapons.

Therefore I do think that the elves and men would win, but not big enough to call it a victory. Much like the battle of Azanulbizar.

[Rumil]

Hi all,

intersting thread! Here's an earlier one with some details and speculation on the Battle of Five Armies-

http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthr...t=battles+late

Scroll down a bit for the Five Armies section.

To summarise, the dwarves had 500 heavily armed soldiers with a few archers. The elves had 1000 spearmen at least, and I believe that their archers would have outnumbered the spearmen, so I guessed at a total elven force of 2500. The men of Laketown (and presumably the surrounding area) are not numbered, but were assigned the dwarves to bolster their flank of the battle, if you guess at an even split of forces that makes up-to 2000 Lakemen, though I admit this is a complete guess.

On Dain's potential 'blue-on-blue' it seems clear that the Elven-Laketown alliance had concealed the majority of their forces, confusing the dwarves who were not experienced in above-ground battles. If this calamity had happened then the dwarves would surely have lost, though must have inflicted heavy losses on the allies.

[Formendacil]

It's quite clear that the Elves and Men outnumbered the Dwarves, no question there. I also think most are willing to concede that individually, the Dwarves would have been more formidable than any/all of their adversaries, though they seem to have been outnumbered to an extent that they would probably have lost a battle, though decimating the enemy forces.

What is not being asked is whether or not a pitched battle was the Dwarven intention.

We know from the book that the Dwarves were seeking to get to the Lonely Mountain, and the Elven/Mannish intention was the prevent the same, and the battle that might have occurred would have been fought over this question. Now, it seems to be a good bet that Dáin's men would have lost--but I question whether or not this would have been a concern for them in the long run.

How many men would it take to hold the Lonely Mountain? Thorin's company of thirteen were able to man it well enough, once they walled in the main gate, that the Elves and Men weren't quite ready to throw themselves against it without talk, and it sounds as if Dáin's army was enough to make it impregnable. How much of Dáin's army was necessary to accomplish this feat? Considering also that a large reason the Iron Hills contingent was wanted was for provisions, it does not seem that a particularly large portion of the army would have needed to have made it to the gate.

What then, if the Dwarven battle plan was simply to win at all costs through the enemy lines and reinforce their kin in the mountain? I think we can already agree this would have been devastating to the Dwarves, and nearly suicidal, but let us say that a mere fifty Dwarves made it. Personally, given that thirteen was enough to give the Elven-Mannish alliance pause, I think this would have been enough to hold the mountain indefinitely. Fifty is a pretty paltry remnant of an army of five hundred, but given that they'd have to smash their way through the enemy lines and flee to the mountain, it doesn't seem too amiss.

Now, for any conventional army, such tactics might seem like wasteful suicide, unacceptable losses, but I think we need to recall that Dwarves don't seem to exactly have that mindset. Azanalbizar has been mentioned a couple times on this thread as a comparable battle, and one should look at the the Dwarves involved there. They would do anything to avenge a grudge; imagine how they would fight to regain the treasure and fortress of their people? 90% losses, I think, would be fully acceptable losses, and with the Mountain reinforced and reprovisioned, and with winter about to set in, Thorin would have been in place to entrench himself in for months, until spring, when it would be entirely possible for a much larger force to amass from the Iron Hills and the Dwarf houses in the east (the few Dwarves in the Blue Mountains would not have been able to come, given the problems with Mirkwood and the Misty Mountains). Would the Elves and Men have had such reinforcements? Maybe a few from the Men to the south, kinsmen of the Lakemen, but not many I would think, and certainly no one from Rivendell or Lothlórien.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

However, I'm not sure that you all fully comprehend the capabilities of a dwarf. From what I gather, you see the battle as: shoot dwarves and stab them if they get too close. A mere mindless rabble of tiny men, I think not!

Wearing mail, no matter how well it is made, does not confer invincibility (and these Dwarves weren't all decked out in mithril). In fact, mail was eventually abandoned in favor of plate during the Middle-ages because it did not protect adequately enough.

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

I would also like to bring up the subject of pole arms such as the halberd. Now mostly dwarves consider any other weapon besides a sword, mace, or axe as sissy and cowardly weapons (especially range weapons), but I think that we can make an exception with the halberd. Therefore I think that both sides would have weapons to keep the enemy at bay, and making it a contest of range weapons.

Hmmm...interesting Dwarvish theory equating ranged weapons with sissification. I would think that the Dwarves eschewed archery simply because they lived primarily underground where ranged weapons would prove useless (the whole business of shooting around corners and such). Besides, Dain's Dwarves carried mattocks for the most part, which would be only effective for a Dwarf at very close range; thus, keeping them a goodly length away eliminates their vaunted battle prowess. One can't hit what one can't reach.

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Wearing mail, no matter how well it is made, does not confer invincibility (and these Dwarves weren't all decked out in mithril). In fact, mail was eventually abandoned in favor of plate during the Middle-ages because it did not protect adequately enough.

We're not talking about the Middle Ages, we are talking about dwarves: the best smiths the world has ever known. Who knows some of them might have plate armor.

Formendacil, you make some excellent points! These dwarves that are fighting are also experienced battle hardened warriors from the War of Dwarves and Orcs; the men of Laketown, I imagine would be pretty green, and the elves might have some who survived from the Last Alliance. Everyone seemes to be under the assumption that the battle would commence as soon as the dwarves arrived, but what if they waited until dark. The dwarves can see very well in the dark and this might aid them in their attack, and they might also produce some mischief with their many skills with fire.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Wearing mail, no matter how well it is made, does not confer invincibility (and these Dwarves weren't all decked out in mithril). In fact, mail was eventually abandoned in favor of plate during the Middle-ages because it did not protect adequately enough.

Anyway, chain mail allows more speed and flexibility. I know it has been proved that plate armour is not immanoeuvrable, but still, it is not allow as much agile movement. But for some reason dwarves have always seemed to me
to wear plate armour (they can easily carry it because of their immense strength and hardiness).

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

I never agreed to anything. That is a figment of your imagination.

I said: almost all of us! You keep telling me to read the book, how about you reading my post [correctly]!

Originally Posted by Gwathagor

All things being equal, if the battle consisted only of hand-to-hand combat between the elves and the dwarves, the dwarves would undoubtedly win.

This is what I was talking about, Morthoron! It's post 19.

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Conjecture on your part. They were fully armed with spear, sword and bows. What makes you think the Dwarves spent much time supplying themselves?

I didn't say that the dwarves had more time and the elves didn't! I don't think either side had much time to gather supplies, only what they might need for an immediate battle. If if consisted of a siege the elves, and perhaps dwarves, would not be capable of lasting long.




I'm done with this discussion for a while so here is my analysis:

The dwarves attack the elves and hand to hand melee ensues shortly with the dwarves losing around a fifth of their overall strength to the elven arrows. The elves and men hold their own for awhile, but soon the dwarves push them back. Around 150-300 dwarves make it into the mountain and a long futile siege begins.

Have fun with it!

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

I said: almost all of us! You keep telling me to read the book, how about you reading my post [correctly]!

Groin, I am asking you to read the book because everything you have presented in this thread (save your one post regarding corslets) is based on your conjecture (with a highly anti-elf bias I might add). For me personally, it seems like you haven't read the passages regarding the battle for a while, and are content with relying on stereotypical characterizations from fantasy roleplaying. If I am wrong I apologize in advance.

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

The dwarves attack the elves and hand to hand melee ensues shortly with the dwarves losing around a fifth of their overall strength to the elven arrows. The elves and men hold their own for awhile, but soon the dwarves push them back. Around 150-300 dwarves make it into the mountain and a long futile siege begins.

Have fun with it!

Fascinating...sort of a fantasy within a fantasy.