The Rohirrim, why horses?

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by Rumil

The Uffington White Horse doesn't belong to the English, it's Celtic or more likely pre-Celtic, estimated as going back to 1000BC.

You're right, of course, but don't tell G.K. Chesterton! In other words, archeological knowledge is one thing, folk tradition another, and I think I can see our Prof paying hommage to the latter whether or not he was aware of the former. To quote from the site I linked to in my earlier post:

Traditionally the horse is attributed to a number of famous figures, one of these is King Alfred, who is said to have had it constructed to commemorate his victory over the Danes in 871. The horse is also said to been cut by Hengist, the leader of the Anglo Saxon horde in the 5th century AD.

[Erchamion]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

You're right, of course, but don't tell G.K. Chesterton!

Chesterton knew it was pre-Anglo-Saxon. In the Ballad of the White Horse, when he plays the harp among the Danes, Alfred says:

"All things achieved and chosen pass,
As the White Horse fades in the grass,
No work of Christian men.

“Ere the sad gods that made your gods
Saw their sad sunrise pass,
The White Horse of the White Horse Vale,
That you have left to darken and fail,
Was cut out of the grass."

So yeah, he knew it was really really old.

Your point about tradition vs. history is right, of course. But I just read The Ballad of the White Horse so I had to comment.

[Pitchwife]

I stand corrected, Erchamion (and welcome to the Downs!). Yes, he knew, but he still paid hommage to the tradition that links the Horse with Alfred's victory - probably agreeing with the point shadowfax made above, that symbols belong to those who care for them, whatever their origin.

[Bêthberry]

Tom Shippey's Road to Middle-earth does indeed posit an explanation for the presence of horses in The Mark.

Shippey argues that Tolkien is 'calquing' (a word from Tolkien's professional study of philology).

Originally Posted by Shippey

A part of the answer is that the Rohirrim are not to be equated with the Anglo-Saxons of history, but with those of poetry, or legend.

At some length Shippey discusses the similarities between "The King of the Golden Hall" and the Old English poem Beowulf, to say nothing of the similarities between Aragon's song and the Old English poem The Wanderer.

Originally Posted by Shippey

However, Tolkien was trying to go beyond translation to 'reconstruction.' And this is what explains the horses. The feeling of Anglo-Saxon poetry for these was markedly different from that of Anglo-Saxon history. Thus the retainers of Beowulf joyfully race their mearas back from the monsters' lake as they singe their praise songs. . . . Maybe the infantry-fixation of historical periods was the result of living on an island. Maybe the Anglo-Saxons before they migrated to England were different. What would have happened had they turned East, not West, to the German plains and the steppes beyond?

It's a fascinating argument in part because it employs the same technique that Tolkien employed to develop his languages.

[Erchamion]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

(and welcome to the Downs!).

Thanks!

Yes, he knew, but he still paid hommage to the tradition that links the Horse with Alfred's victory - probably agreeing with the point shadowfax made above, that symbols belong to those who care for them, whatever their origin.

Very much so.

(It's interesting how Chesterton manages to 'have it both ways'. Certainly it gets used as a symbol of Alfred's victory - "the White Horse stamps in the White Horse Vale" and all that - but the poem also makes a point of it being pre-Christian; Alfred uses that as part of his condemnation of the Danes:

"The White Horse of the White Horse Vale,
That you have left to darken and fail,
Was cut out of the grass.

Therefore your end is on you,
Is on you and your kings,
Not for a fire in Ely fen,
Not that your gods are nine or ten,
But because it is only Christian men
Guard even heathen things." )

[Lastande Took]

I considered the horses of Rohan to be part of the "freedom-loving self-sufficent mighty warrior" kind of thing. Also horses, once part of a culture, do not leave easily. Horses represent speed, independence, and, to an extent, military superiority. A soldier on horseback has a huge advantage over a soldier fighting on foot.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Lastande Took

A soldier on horseback has a huge advantage over a soldier fighting on foot.

Amusingly, that was not always the case in Middle-earth (and certainly not the case for the flower of French chivalry at Crecy and Poitiers). For instance, the Numenorean infantry was the most formidable force of the 2nd Age. Sauron's legions folded up their tents and headed for the mountains at the very sight of them.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

For instance, the Numenorean infantry was the most formidable force of the 2nd Age. Sauron's legions folded up their tents and headed for the mountains at the very sight of them.

Indeed. The Númenóreans (who effectively saved Eriador twice in the Second Age, when Sauron was too much for the mighty Eldar) weren't much into cavalry.

But [the Númenóreans] did not use [horses] in war....they were of great stature and strength, and their fully-equipped soldiers were accustomed to bear heavy heavy armour and weapons.

UT Disaster of the Gladden Fields (footnote 7)

[Lastande Took]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Amusingly, that was not always the case in Middle-earth (and certainly not the case for the flower of French chivalry at Crecy and Poitiers). For instance, the Numenorean infantry was the most formidable force of the 2nd Age. Sauron's legions folded up their tents and headed for the mountains at the very sight of them.

I didn't know about the Numenorean infantry. They sound pretty cool.

The "flower of French chivalry" lost most of the advantages of horseback combat when they decided to use Clydesdale-sized warhorses and loaded themselves and their mounts with a couple hundred pounds of armor. In doing so, they became more like the equivalent of modern-day tanks. The Rohirrim, on smaller, lighter horses, were more like helicopters - able to dart in, take advantage of their elevated (compared to infantry) position, and get back out quickly if needed. In addition, the horse itself could be used as a weapon, knocking enemies out of the way with 1,000 pounds of momentum. Not as much as a European knight's 1,800 pound armored beast, but still effective.