The Way We War

[Kuruharan]

I was playing The Fourth Age the other day when something hit me.

I think Tolkien got the dwarven way of war all wrong.

I think in a way he stumbled on this little bit of an issue himself in the battle of the Hornburg when he has Gimli say…

“but I looked on the hillmen and they seemed overlarge for me”

The axe is not exactly a handy weapon for fighting people taller than you are as you expose yourself even more when you make your stroke.

I think a better way would have been if the dwarves fought more along the lines of the Roman legionaries whose fighting style was made to order (literally) for short people fighting taller ones.

There is some evidence of dwarven equipment of this type…speaking of the dwarves of the Iron Hills

“but each of them had a short broad sword at his side and a round shield slung at his back”

Now I’m not suggesting that there is really anything in that to support my idea. I’m presenting this as an idea that I had rather than something that is in any way supported by Tolkien.

[BGreg]

That is a very interesting topic. How did the dwarves fight? We know nothing other then they were good in fighting below ground. What about the battles above ground? The Battle of Azanulbizar was very costly for the dwarves, because the orcs held the high ground and the greater numbers. However, the dwarves fought bravely despite all odds and eventually won the battle. In the Battle of Five Armies 500 Dain's dwarves charged on a combined host of elves and men, who again had the high ground. If it weren't for the goblins' attack, there would be another massacre.

Apparently the dwarves here didn't care much for the odds or enemy's superiority in numbers (or even in size for that matter). I always imagined the dwarves fighting the enemy with no more than sheer bravery, endurance and physical strength. So in my opinion it would be no problem for a band of dwarves to beat a band of hillmen or whomever. Maybe Gimli didn't attack them just because there were no more dwarves around. And if there were, I'm sure they would have beaten the Dunlendings. I thought of dwarves as very strong, possibly as strong as the hillmen, and that they do not retreat. Ever. Quite the contrast of Romans, who were physically weaker then the barbarians. And they retreated when outnumbered.

[Morthoron]

In regards to Dain's folk...

In battle they wielded heavy two-handed mattocks; but each of them had also a short broad sword at his side and a roundshield at his back.

Tolkien never claimed all dwarves used axes, or even used them generally in battle, that is an accretion piled on Tolkien lore from elsewhere (like dwarves speaking in a Scot's accent, laddie). Mattocks are a miner's tool, and would be readily available to any dwarf (axes not being of much use in the type of subterranean manses dwarves engineered). Also, there is a tradition of dwarvish sword-making that goes back to Telchar of Nogrod.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by BGreg

Apparently the dwarves here didn't care much for the odds or enemy's superiority in numbers (or even in size for that matter). I always imagined the dwarves fighting the enemy with no more than sheer bravery, endurance and physical strength. So in my opinion it would be no problem for a band of dwarves to beat a band of hillmen or whomever. Maybe Gimli didn't attack them just because there were no more dwarves around. And if there were, I'm sure they would have beaten the Dunlendings. I thought of dwarves as very strong, possibly as strong as the hillmen, and that they do not retreat. Ever. Quite the contrast of Romans, who were physically weaker then the barbarians. And they retreated when outnumbered.

I agree. I think the Dwarves usually won because of their ferocity and toughness (and let's not forget about their good armor - and also the quality of their weapons, which was superior to the simple things made by Men, or even Orcs). Gimli very likely didn't have that much experience with fighting Men - tall Men - even before, he said something of similar sort to Éomer (that he would chop his head off, if only it was a bit lower - it was a sort of saying, but still probably reflected what he thought. Of course, not to mention that against a mounted opponent, it would have to be something completely different).

As for when he didn't attack the Dunlanders, another thing was probably simply that he did not want to interfere when tall men were fighting tall men - he was not coordinated with Éomer and Aragorn, he could be useful, but he could also make a mess. Had he been with a group of Dwarves, they would all use similar tactics in battle and it would have been very different.

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Tolkien never claimed all dwarves used axes, or even used them generally in battle, that is an accretion piled on Tolkien lore from elsewhere (like dwarves speaking in a Scot's accent, laddie). Mattocks are a miner's tool, and would be readily available to any dwarf (axes not being of much use in the type of subterranean manses dwarves engineered). Also, there is a tradition of dwarvish sword-making that goes back to Telchar of Nogrod.

Exactly. I believe this is never emphasised strongly enough. Gimli had an axe, and there was also some Durin's Axe etc., but that by no means suggests that Dwarves were using axes overall. We don't know any legends about Durin, but perhaps he just stumbled upon an axe somewhere in his youth and became skilled with this weapon, and using an axe was sort of specialisation thing for the Dwarves, a symbol of honor, something pointing towards their ancestor (and perhaps this concerned only the tribe of Durin?). Maybe it was a kind of special fighter thing, really, just like, I can't recall any good example from the Middle Ages now, but for example among the ancient Israeli warriors there has been a caste of special fighters trained to fight left-handedly, or such, you have all sorts of special groups of warriors trained to fight with some unusual weapon or in some unusual style throughout the cultures and times, so perhaps the Dwarven axemen were something of that sort, too? And Gimli (and Dáin, for example - battle of Azanulbizar) were of that sort too. Certainly they were both quite young, but skilful with that, so perhaps indeed they were trained since their youth?

Certainly the Dwarves used axes above ground, though: around their settlements and cities, they used them to get wood (as Aulë says). Treebeard and people from other cultures seemed to have some experience with Dwarves using axes, so it must not have been that unusual: however, I would like to propose here that it supports my theory about the axes being an item used by a special caste of warriors by that it became something specific for the Dwarves, and thus well known. Meaning: in a battle where you saw some Dwarves, let's say 90% of them would have had some other weapons, but then there would be this special group of axemen (or perhaps individuals), but they would be so skilled in their use of the axes, that in some way it will make the impression (I have no idea how they could use the axes to really be so much feared - I am no weapon specialist, somebody else tell us what could that be, if it could) and people will forever remember "yea, Dwarves, these are those with the axes". The same way as people in the Middle Ages remembered the longbowmen or such, even though of course the whole army was not composed of longbowmen.

Another possibility is that Dwarves using axes (i.e. normal woodcutters) in Beleriand were at some times attacked, and they just had to learn to use axes for their defense. And since they were probably the few Dwarves that other races have ever seen (others were hidden underground all the time), they simply learned to associate Dwarves with axes (since mostly every Dwarf they have seen had an axe).

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

One thing I have been wondering about, ever since the Dwarf vs. Balrog thread: Is there any evidence that the Dwarves used distance weapons of any kind? Bows, javelins, catapult, trebuchet, slingshot, whatever? If not, that might have some bearing on the way they fight, I should think. Just wondering....

[Kuruharan]

Tolkien never claimed all dwarves used axes, or even used them generally in battle, that is an accretion piled on Tolkien lore from elsewhere (like dwarves speaking in a Scot's accent, laddie).

I'm not sure I agree with that. I think we do have evidence that Tolkien thought of the axe as being the primary dwarven weapon.

Gimli used an axe (obviously). Thorin used an axe at the Battle of Five Armies and Azanulbizar. When speaking of Thorin's condition in exile Tolkien used the phrase "the axes of his people were few." The dwarves whalloped Glaurung with "their great axes."

I can't recall any good example from the Middle Ages now, but for example among the ancient Israeli warriors there has been a caste of special fighters trained to fight left-handedly, or such, you have all sorts of special groups of warriors trained to fight with some unusual weapon or in some unusual style throughout the cultures and times, so perhaps the Dwarven axemen were something of that sort, too?

It is an interesting theory. I'm not sure its one I can agree with, but it is interesting.

Is there any evidence that the Dwarves used distance weapons of any kind? Bows, javelins, catapult, trebuchet, slingshot, whatever?

Thorin used a bow that just happeend to be lying around (implying that the dwarves kept stockpiles of them to use) to shoot at the messenger. The dwarves did use (without much success) the bows Beorn gave them...which I think has largely led to the stereotype that dwarves can't use bows effectively.

Slings would be an interesting weapon for dwarves to use if they were incapable of using a bow effectively, but I don't think there is a single example in Tolkien of a sling being used.

[Kuruharan]

It would only emphasise that Thorin was not doing very well, he "did not reach the status of nobility" in the exile

An interesting interpretation.

"...the battle cry which (Gimli) uttered in the siege of the Hornburg. That at least was not secret, and had been heard on many a field since the world was young. Baruk Khazad! Khazad aimenu! 'Axes of the Dwarves! The Dwarves are upon you!'" - LotR Appendix F

I'd forgotten that one.

The problem with swords is that the Dwarves are too short to use anything longer than a foot or two, which would allow their enemies to get too close.

That's where the Roman fighting method comes into play. Hunkering down behind a big shield and quickly punching out with a short sword (stabbing not slicing).

I would think a devastating dwarf weapon,
especially for use against cavalry would be
something akin to the Swiss halberd.
Obviously shortened for Middle-earth dwarf use.

Also a valid idea.

Ha, yes, that actually sounds good. Indeed, it would have been shortened a lot, though.

Maybe, although dwarven strength might allow them to manage weapons that might at first glance look like they were too long.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

That's where the Roman fighting method comes into play. Hunkering down behind a big shield and quickly punching out with a short sword (stabbing not slicing).

To my mind that's too 'organised' & regimented an approach for Dwarves - unless in extremis. I have always seen the Dwarves as more 'Berserker' in their approach to battle - charging at their enemies & screaming their famous battle-cry. Shields would be worn protectively across the back in battle, leaving both arms free to swing an axe/shoot a bow. Of course, if they had developed plate armour sufficiently there would be no need for shields at all.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Ditto. An axe requires a fair bit of room, especially since (if Gimli is representative) they favored a horizontal swing.

[Tuor in Gondolin]

By Davem: To my mind that's too 'organised' & regimented an approach for Dwarves - unless in extremis. I have always seen the Dwarves as more 'Berserker' in their approach to battle - charging at their enemies & screaming their famous battle-cry.

A classic example (in tactics and in short-term
positive results) being Thorin's charge at the
Battle of Five Armies.

Of course, if they had developed plate armour sufficiently there would be no need for shields at all.

But another argument against dwarf open field
warfare could be their use of chain mail.
Even as good as mithrail mail was, it wouldn't help
with a key problem with chain mail, internal
injuries inflicted by either projectile weapons or heavy
swords.
Btw, meaning Frodo in Moria was either very lucky or hobbits
were really tough.

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by davem

To my mind that's too 'organised' & regimented an approach for Dwarves - unless in extremis. I have always seen the Dwarves as more 'Berserker' in their approach to battle - charging at their enemies & screaming their famous battle-cry. Shields would be worn protectively across the back in battle, leaving both arms free to swing an axe/shoot a bow. Of course, if they had developed plate armour sufficiently there would be no need for shields at all.

That is a valid interpretation. However, mine is rather different as I do think the dwarves were more regimented and organized than the berzerker model, even given their descriptions in Tolkien as being axe-wielding.

However, when it comes down to interpretations like this on rather sparse evidence one is as good as another.

But another argument against dwarf open field
warfare could be their use of chain mail.
Even as good as mithrail mail was, it wouldn't help
with a key problem with chain mail, internal
injuries inflicted by either projectilee weapons or heavy
swords.

The problems of chain mail are true, but I don't recall any place where anything more advanced is described anywhere in Tolkien. It would have been a problem everyone was dealing with.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Thorin used a bow that just happeend to be lying around (implying that the dwarves kept stockpiles of them to use) to shoot at the messenger. The dwarves did use (without much success) the bows Beorn gave them...which I think has largely led to the stereotype that dwarves can't use bows effectively.

Slings would be an interesting weapon for dwarves to use if they were incapable of using a bow effectively, but I don't think there is a single example in Tolkien of a sling being used.

Thorin seized a bow of horn and shot an arrow at the speaker. It smote into his shield and stuck there quivering.

A pretty good shot, indicative of a dwarf who had used a bow previously.

As far as slings, I thought I remembered Hobbits using slings, but apparently they only were deadly accurate at throwing things (in a cursory glance over the books, I couldn't find anything else of value sling-wise).

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

And in either case, we have the evidence of the Battle of the Five Armies, like Morth pointed out - I believe the equipment of a regular soldier - i.e. not the elite, but also not the random "armed civilians" - could have been like the one described there.

Well, 500 dwarves of the Iron Mountains under Dain used mattocks and sword, so it is evident that the use of axes was not universal in battle among dwarves. Perhaps it was a familial thing, with the Iron Hill folk preferring mattocks over the Erebor folks use of axes (and as Gimli's father was Gloin of Erebor, he would follow his direct kin's example).

[Kuruharan]

Perhaps it was a familial thing, with the Iron Hill folk preferring mattocks over the Erebor folks use of axes

I wonder if there was an interesting story behind that.

[Nerwen]

See, the trouble with this thread is that within a few replies it turns into the favourite nerd pastime of "Let's Play Medieval Warfare Experts By Linking To Wikipedia A Lot". Hence, I suppose, the otherwise inexplicable 3,000 or so posts about the use of the longbow in the Hundred Years' War. I mean, what does that have to do with anything?

But getting back to the original question:

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

I was playing The Fourth Age the other day when something hit me.

I think Tolkien got the dwarven way of war all wrong.

I think in a way he stumbled on this little bit of an issue himself in the battle of the Hornburg when he has Gimli say…

“but I looked on the hillmen and they seemed overlarge for me”

The axe is not exactly a handy weapon for fighting people taller than you are as you expose yourself even more when you make your stroke.

I think a better way would have been if the dwarves fought more along the lines of the Roman legionaries whose fighting style was made to order (literally) for short people fighting taller ones.

There is some evidence of dwarven equipment of this type…speaking of the dwarves of the Iron Hills

“but each of them had a short broad sword at his side and a round shield slung at his back”

Now I’m not suggesting that there is really anything in that to support my idea. I’m presenting this as an idea that I had rather than something that is in any way supported by Tolkien.

Regarding the bolded passage- are Dwarves typically in the position of fighting people significantly taller than themselves? I mean, yes, they can be, but don't Gimli's words suggest he's not accustomed to fighting Men? And indeed most of the references are to Dwarves fighting Orcs, who themselves tend to be on the short side- c.f. the "huge orc-chieftain, almost man-high" in "The Bridge of Khazad-dum".

[Nerwen]

Also, why are "tightly disciplined Roman legionary" and "blood-crazed, rampaging berserker" being presented as the only two possible Dwarven fighting styles?

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Also, why are "tightly disciplined Roman legionary" and "blood-crazed, rampaging berserker" being presented as the only two possible Dwarven fighting styles?

Ummm....because Dwarf ninjas would look kinda funny doing back-flips with Katanas.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Also, why are "tightly disciplined Roman legionary" and "blood-crazed, rampaging berserker" being presented as the only two possible Dwarven fighting styles?

Dunno. Since Tolkien was happy to let the Dwarves use Norse names, I have no problem envisioning them fighting in the Viking fashion, which made use of both the shieldwall and berserker rage. And lots of axes.

(NB: although two-handers or "Dane axes" became the principal weapon of Saxon huscarles and the Varangian Guard towards the end of the Viking era, most Viking fighting axes were one-handers of about 14-18", ideal for using from behind a shield. Gimli keeps his tucked into his belt, which means a one-hander rather than the absurd Frazetta fantasy that movie-Gimli carried.)

[Kuruharan]

Another YouTuber has posted a video on this issue.

Apparently dwarves are popular right now.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Another YouTuber has posted a video on this issue.

Apparently dwarves are popular right now.

Aw, how nice for you, Kuru.

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Regarding the bolded passage- are Dwarves typically in the position of fighting people significantly taller than themselves? I mean, yes, they can be, but don't Gimli's words suggest he's not accustomed to fighting Men? And indeed most of the references are to Dwarves fighting Orcs, who themselves tend to be on the short side- c.f. the "huge orc-chieftain, almost man-high" in "The Bridge of Khazad-dum".

I'm fairly sure I recall Orcs being described as roughly the same size as Dwarves, if not smaller, especially Orcs from the Misty Mountains. Also, there's a reference in HoME about it not being uncommon for Dwarves to war with Dwarves of other houses.

So, I think yes, Gimli's remark about the overlarge hillmen is his acknowledgement that Dwarves usually don't war against a significantly taller enemy.

And this battle at the Hornburg is something the movies muddle up. Saruman's attacking force wasn't 10,000 entirely his superior breed of Uruk-hai. It was a mix of Saruman's Uruk-hai, Dunlanders, and your standard/smaller Orcs.

[Zigûr]

I've always had the impression that Orcs varied quite significantly in size, but that in general terms they were shorter than Men. Otherwise the height of Saruman's Uruk-hai would not have been noteworthy. To the same degree, Frodo and Sam were apparently able to convincingly disguise themselves as Orcs in Mordor, which suggests that Orcs could also be rather small. Even the larger soldier-Orcs of Mordor, Sauron's Uruks (which seem to have been different to Saruman's), appear to have been short and broad with long arms, as Grishnákh is described as being.

On the matter of axes, it might be worth noting that Dwarves and the Men of Lossarnach were not the only ones to use them. In the First Age the Elves of Doriath are described as having stores of axes alongside spears and swords, albeit after they met and began working alongside the Dwarves. Beleg brought "great strength of the Sindar armed with axes into Brethil" to the aid of the Haladin.

However, the Noldor smithed axes as weapons in Valinor before they ever met the Dwarves.

Incidentally, it might be possible that the Dwarves would deploy weapons like spears if they encountered Men or taller opponents, and favoured axes in their more common battles, which seem to have been against foes of more manageable size: Orcs and each other.

Nonetheless, I tend to think that the representation of Dwarves as using axes is more a literary device intended to make them seem exotic than a matter of realistic tactics. That is not to say that Professor Tolkien was uninterested in that kind of realism, as I believe he was, but in this case I feel like the concept is perhaps more poetic than necessarily realistic.

Personally I tend to find the idea of the Dwarves of Middle-earth fighting with swords and spears and mattocks alongside the axes more and more appealing as the years go by because knock-offs of Middle-earth have turned the association of Dwarves with axes in Professor Tolkien's work into a tiresome, obsessive cliché. As for Dwarves being depicted fighting with war hammers of all things...