Battles of the late Third Age

[The Saucepan Man]

Quick question. Wasn't it the forces bound for Helm's Deep that Merry and Pippin observed? I thought that the Battles of the Fords of Isen had taken place some time before.

[Kuruharan]

The first one had, the second one hadn't.

I find the most curious comment in the account regards the band of Uruk-hai that chased Theodred's riders to the south after the onslaught. The Uruks vanished in the middle of the night and Tolkien made the comment that "It was not until later that they discovered whither the Uruks had gone."

I may be overlooking something very obvious (which is probably most likely) but I can't quite figure out what he means by this. I do have a pet theory though.

A look at the timeline shows that it is possible that this was none other than Mauhur's "lads" who then marched north to meet up with Ugluk. Although how Ugluk knew they were there is a matter for some speculation. It was probably in the plans, but that seems like an overly complex plan relying heavily on happenstance. Of course, then we get to the puzzle of trying to figure out Ugluk's movements, which is a pretty futile exercise. But, then again, it is just a pet theory.

Anyway, a few other general observations.

I find it very curious that Theodred's scouts knew of the Isengarder troop concentrations but failed to discover the prepared positions. That points to some sloppy reconnaissance.

I am still puzzled as to why the eastern garrison broke so easily. The garrison that Theodred had left behind had not moved and should have been in a position to receive an attack.

Also, those riders of Theodred who were driven to the south that I mentioned above had some rudiments of hardiness because not only did they return to the fords after being driven off, they returned expecting to find the enemy in position and they intended to fight!

[Rumil]

Hi again,

lots of interesting points here, I agree with Kuruharan that Saruman could have equipped the Dunlendings with armour. I've always seen the Dunlendings as similar to the 'Barbarians' who fought the Early Imperial Romans, ie Britons, Gauls, Germans and Dacians. Mostly these warriors were unarmoured, though their cheifs and cavalry certainly wore armour and they had the technology to make decent chain mail, probably its a question of economics as chainmail is time consuming and expensive to make. Maybe there's a cultural aspect too. Strangely the wearing of hats amongst the Dacians was a mark of nobility, perhaps armour was only reserved for the Dunlending nobles and not allowed to the 'commoners'? Another thing is that the armour point is based on one of Christopher Tolkien's 'Author's notes', not sure how canonical this makes them, maybe one of the 'canonicity-heads' could comment? Nice point too on the mysterious fate of the missing batallion of Uruk-Hai, Mauhur's lads sound like good candidates. will have to read up before we move onto Eomer's battle.


Ah, Saucepan Man, you're quite right, I wasn't making myself completely clear, in the second post I was considering the total size of all Saruman's forces, as the hobbits saw them leaving Isengard on the way to the Second Battle of the Isen and Helm's Deep. Tuor, I also found that Gandalf had asked Treebeard for help with 10,000 or so orcs, meaning the forces at Helm's Deep. You can usually trust Gandalf for this sort of thing, but maybe he wasn't counting the men and wolves here? Anyway I guess this will be expanded upon over the next two subjects.

I'd agree that the scouting abilities of Rohirrim appear really poor in this battle, no doubt the mist contributed, was this maybe a 'device' instigated by Saruman?

On the eastern force, I can only speculate that the 3 eoreds and the levies were stationed south-east of the ford and were carried away by the rout of Theodred's cavalry returning over the ford, who were surprsed and caught in the flank. As you say, after the pursuing Isengarders drew off, these forces showed their courage by their willingness to return to the fight. I guess the cavalry mostly survived the fighting, but the levy foot might well have been sadly massacred.

As to what the Rohirrim could have done, I guess the first thing is to 'get there fastest with the mostest', they had a powerful army and if it had all ben mobilised and perhaps caught Saruman's forces on the plains of Rohan, I doubt that Saruman could have won, even if he did have significantly more than 10,000 troops. Shows you how important Wormtongue was!

[Snowdog]

Originally Posted by Rumil

... I'd agree that the scouting abilities of Rohirrim appear really poor in this battle, no doubt the mist contributed, was this maybe a 'device' instigated by Saruman?

On the eastern force, I can only speculate that the 3 eoreds and the levies were stationed south-east of the ford and were carried away by the rout of Theodred's cavalry returning over the ford, who were surprsed and caught in the flank. As you say, after the pursuing Isengarders drew off, these forces showed their courage by their willingness to return to the fight. I guess the cavalry mostly survived the fighting, but the levy foot might well have been sadly massacred.

As to what the Rohirrim could have done, I guess the first thing is to 'get there fastest with the mostest', they had a powerful army and if it had all ben mobilised and perhaps caught Saruman's forces on the plains of Rohan, I doubt that Saruman could have won, even if he did have significantly more than 10,000 troops. Shows you how important Wormtongue was!

I think the Rohirrim's overall tactic was flawed from the beginning. Did they not realize Sarumann could send forces down the east side of the river from Isengard? This in itself makes the Fords somewhat indefensable. Of course this was never a problem in history, with Sarumann at one time friendly, and before that, Isengard was a fortress of Gondor.

On the second Battle of the Fords, I think a solid command structure was missing, due in part to Theoden's state of mind, and the death of Theodred in the first battle. Both Battle of the Isen were solid victories for Sarumann.

[Aiwendil]

Regarding the Dunlendings:

. . . many of the forest-dwellers of the shorelands south of the Ered Luin, especially in Minhiriath, were as later historians recognized the kin of the Folk of Haleth; but they became bitter enemies of the Numenoreans, because of their ruthless treatment and their devastation of the forests, and this hatred remained unappeased in their descendants, causing them to join with the enemies of Numenor. In the Third Age their survivors were the people known in Rohan as the Dunlendings ("Of Dwarves and Men", HoMe XII).

So they are neither barbarians nor Numenoreans, but descendants of those of the second house of the Edain who did not go to Numenor.

[Kuruharan]

neither barbarians...but descendants of those of the second house of the Edain

These two are not mutually exclusive.

[Saurreg]

Good points people! Excellent discussion going on here. Since I'm quite a novice in military affairs, I'll stay in the wings and continue reading as these fine posts come pouring in.

My compliments to Rumil for resurrecting this great thread!

[Saurreg]

Here's a little thought I have. I do hope Kuruharan and other knowlegeable military enthusiaists can expound or maybe even expostulate on it.

Strategic Comment

Cavalry of Rohan

It is in my view that despite being big men on big horses (that itself is subjective), the Rohirrim soldiers were light cavalry men on the lines of Khazar, Sarmatian and Scynthian light horsemen as well as the Sicilian cavalry during the Hellenistic era. The ways in which they were deployed as well as the weapons they used closely resembled the recorded doctrine of the three people as well as other riders from central asia and the Iranian plateau.

Heavy cavalry on the other hand had been used exclusively as a shock weapon on the battlefields to drive fear into the enemy through sheer momentum and size and hopefully generate a rout. Thessalian and later Macedonian heavy cavalry were antiquity's prime examples of lance mounted men trained to charge and overwhelm the enemy in a critical moment. The extreme example of the heavy cavalry would be the eastern cataphracts and their heavily armored successors. In any case heavy cavalry was the least flexible and most difficult branch of the mounted arm to command due to their impetuosity and low stamina.

Mongolian heavy cavalry was an exception but I do not think Tolkien based the Rohirrim on them. The battle of the Fords of Isen and the Rohirrim journey to Gondor were carried out at great speeds and the riders were battle-ready when they arrived at the battlefield - another characteristic trademark of the light horse men.

Force structure of Rohan and Its Inherent Deficiencies

If we are in agree that the generally the force structure of Rohan was based on the light cavalry with perhaps some exceptions such generals' bodyguard's etc, than the army of rohan would greatly resemble that of the Sarmatians and Scynthians.

The difference is that the two historical people were generally semi-nomadic. They lived within fixed regions but aside from burial mounts, they had no permanent settlements, as such their armies were centered on versatility and mobility as according to their lifestyle. Rohan on the other had permanent settlements that required defending (Settlement of westfold, Meduseld and Helmsdeep etc). Generally when there are fixed objectives to defend, an immoblie force is needed. Not immobile as in totally stationary but rather, a force centered on the ability to withstand impact without shifting rather than high mobility. Infantry is the most versatile branch of the armed forces and itself can be divided into heavy and light types.

Heavy infantry are classified as infantry that is able to withstand shock and deliver some shock of its own. Greek hoplites and roman legionnaires are good examples of heavy infantry as well as Swiss pikemen from medieval ages. In Tolkien's world the heavy infantry non-par excellence was the Gondorian infantry. Light infantry on the other hand were skirmishers, missile troops and lighter armored foot soldiers whose main feature is versatility and flexibility.

Of the two types, heavy infantry offers higher survivability on the open battlefield (the presence of other arms such as artillery and cavalry provide of course) whereas light infantry should not be deployed without other branches of the army out in the open but are more economical in fortifying settlement defences.

This brings us back to Rohan. Despite its achievements with the light cavalry arm, it is essential an unstable force devoid of an effective infantry. There were infantry militias of course, but they lack the staying power of well-trained heavy infantry and would be at best second rate light infantry. History has shown such outfits as totally ineffective on the battlefield and the weaklink of the army against a capable foe.

The most effective armies of antiquity from Philip's Macedonian war machine to Surenas' Parthian war host operated on the principles of combined arms. It was the job of the heavy infantry to hold while the cavalry pushed. The artillery had the vital task of effecting the above maneuvers with their awesome (hopefully) firepower. None of the three could perform well without the other. Without infantry, the enemy would flow with the push. Without cavalry, the enemy would simply pull and without effective artillery, hold and push may not occur.

The fact that the Rohirrim was lacking both infantry and artillery and possessed only light cavalry goes to show how deficient the army was. It was their fortune that Tolkien decided not pit them against an army with an Alexander or his immediate successors in his fable.

Campaign Comment

First battle of The Fords of Isen

(I shall be using Rumil's Excellent post and information for a stage by stage commentary. He has done such a fine job.)

We know Theodred mustered the troops of his own household and went forth to Isengard while Elfhelm remained for the continuing muster other available troops. This would leave Theodred with over 1400 light horsemen and over 800 militia light infantry of dubious quality for his "invasion force".

What was his primarily objective? Was it to destroy the army of isengard itself during its lax pax state of readiness? Or to lay siege and capture Isengard?"

We do not know except to speculate the the first objective was most probable and that it was Theodred's intention to preemptively assault Saruman and deal him a crippling blow. That it self is impossible since we know the great strength of the latter's army and the fact that the Rohirrim were lacking in infantry and artillery (the hold and push effect comes into play here). Even if possessing supreme skill and courage, the little force would simply dash itself to pieces in the initial charge.

Throughout the entire cause of the battle, the Rohirrim have displayed an incredible ineptitude in reconnaissance and information gathering. This was unlikely in light cavalry since scouting was one of their chief missions. It was either the Rohirrim cavalry like Gallic cavalry were of low quality and at best mediocre or to give Tolkien's prized horsemen a benefit of a doubt, Theodred knew his force was too small and hence arrayed his riders in close ranks, placing a higher premium on force security and battle-readiness over intelligence. If that was the case why did he still commence his mission? Either way, he had committed the ultimate fatal error of going into battle blind.

After scattering the mounted force of his enemy (most probably a scouting force), Theodred rode on in pursuit until he encountered enemy pikemen and ground fortifications in a narrow defile. The battlefield was then clearly an infantryman's battle. If the Rohirrim had a band of tough light infantry like Macedonian Hypasists on call, they could have been sent to clear the trenches and make way for heavy infantry. However Theodred had none of those. What he had was an outfit on unsuitable terrain against unsuitable defences and enemies. A defeat is expected.

When Theodred drew his forces back and decided to make a stand at the fords, he made the ultimate tactical blunder - committing unsuitable forces to unsuitable terrain fighting in an unsuitable manner. The Fords of Isen on either bank and on the island offered little protection for his light infantry militia of dubious quality. As commented before, I believe that only heavy infantry could hold open ground on their own indefinitely. Erkenbrand's militia were not heavy infantry and for them to hold a static line and recieve shock is tantamount to suicide. Theodred must have also ordered some cavaliers to dismount and fight as infantry. Ditto. As for the rest of the riders, they were positioned near to the static line at the east bank to act as missile troops most likely. This is a tactical error - the worth in cavalry is fundamentally maneuver and mobility. By placing them in such close vicinity as the static line, the riders have had their attributes greatly reduced.

It is in my opinion that Theodred should have traded space for time and mobility for shock. His main advantage over his enemy was mobility and he should have made full use of it. A withdrawal eastwards followed by a razed down policy could keep his enemy in check. Also when the time came the Rohirrim could adopt Sun Tzu's dictum of pinning down the enemy front with an ordinary force while outflanking with an extraordinary force. In that maneuver the center of gravity and objective of the maneuver would be the enemy's point of weakness, the one would would cause the total psychological collapse of the enemy - easily the Isen fords again.