The Way We War

[Elmo]

Doesn't Bard mention something about Dwarves not being suited for battle out of their caves? Maybe that was just taunting but it was certainly what the dwarves were to! So I don't think have beaten the Elves and Men so easily as you say Sixth Wizard. but I'd imagine an axe on a dwarf would be a lethal weapon swinging upwards. They're just the right height to attack umm more delicate areas of the body.

[Kuruharan]

13 dwarves alone cut through to Bolg's bodyguard after all... Haha

What?

Roman warfare was designed for Men and would not suit Dwarves.

Roman tactics were designed in large measure to allow smaller physically weaker chaps form up behind nice large shields that are easy to hide behind and let the often larger enemy waste his time and energy whacking away at the shield and then suddenly punching out with shield and sword to knock over an enemy and to stab with the sword to deliver a disabling wound. Note that it was not necessary to kill the opponent, only disable them because writhing critically wounded people make a very effective barrier given enough additions to the pile.

The stabbing part is key because it is a lot easier to kill or seriously wound with a stab than it is with a slash and stabs expose much less of the body.

This style of warfare answers to the requirements and needs of the dwarves rather well in a number of respects. First of all there is the size issue. Secondly there is…

The dwarves have a small and slowly growing population.

…which this particular style works rather well for in minimizing casualties, especially in light of the fact that the dwarves would almost always be rather outnumbered.

stabbing (dwarves have not got long enough reach)

Hence the punching out with the shield to knock the foe off balance.

Also swords are all metal, while an axe is half wood. An axe saves precious dwarven metals.

I rather imagine wood was a scarcer material for them than metal.

Doesn't Bard mention something about Dwarves not being suited for battle out of their caves?

Not sure Bard had a whole lot of practical experience with them.

I'd imagine an axe on a dwarf would be a lethal weapon swinging upwards.

That wouldn’t be a very handy way to swing.

[The Sixth Wizard]

The thirteen Dwarves who cut through to Bolg's guard were the Thorin's company.

Thorin and his companions then charged out to join the battle, covered from head to toe in the finest armour and weapons contained in the treasure hoard of Erebor. Thorin advanced through the Goblins' ranks all the way up to the gigantic Goblins that formed the bodyguard of Bolg, who he could not get past. He was outflanked and surrounded, and was forced to form his troops into a great circle.

Taken from Wikipedia, as I don't have the book on hand. But I suppose it is accurate.

[Kuruharan]

Taken from Wikipedia, as I don't have the book on hand. But I suppose it is accurate.

Not a statement to fill one with confidence.

Down heedless of all order (aside...hmmm, ponder the implications of that for a moment those who think the dwarves favored a berzerker style of combat) rushed all the dwarves of Dain to his help. Down too came many of the Lake-men, for Bard could not restrain them; and out upon the other side came many of the spearmen of the elves.

-The Clouds Burst

Thorin and Company didn't cut their way through to Bolg's bodyguard all by themselves.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

As to bows:

I'm not sure how any Dwarven bow would be a "long" bow However, I can see the possibility that Dwarves could still be very effective archers, assuming that they accepted the years of training and practice required.

With a simple or "self" bow, both its power and its draw-weight are direct functions of its length. The classic English longbow, which was fitted to the archer by matching the length of his outstretched arms, managed (probably as a result of trial and error) to come up with the most efficient possible configuration for a simple bow, one where at full draw the bowstring makes essentially a right angle. This maximises the power available for a given draw-weight, which in English examples was as heavy as a trained man could manage.

It's certainly possible to get equal power from a shorter bow using composite construction- but the tradeoff is that, since the bow is shorter and therefore provides less leverage at the tips, the draw weight for a given power is considerably heavier; or, looking at it from a different point of view, since a short composite bow on the Asian pattern can still have a draw no heavier than a man can handle its effective power is less. In other words, a shorter bow is simply less efficient, no matter how clever its construction.

Having said all that, though, these are Dwarves- which means they might well be able to handle a draw far heavier than the 180-200 lb-f a strong man can master, and thus potentially equal a longbow's power in a dwarf-sized weapon.


Still, it seems to me that the Dwarven love of devices would have attracted them rather to the crossbow- which also doesn't require the training and practice (archery ranges underground????). Moreover, one would expect Dwarves to be able to handle hook-and-stirrup cocking of much heavier crossbows than human examples, and thus avoid the rate-of-fire penalty of the various crank systems.

[davem]

Crossbows were very much second-best against the Longbow in terms of range & speed of shooting (hence the use of pavises by crossbowmen - & their vulnerability without them (as with the Genoese at Crecy)). No medieval army would employ crossbowmen if they had trained Longbowmen. Of course, the English dominance in the medieval period depended on the use of the longbow in conjunction with men at arms on foot (again, Crecy dealt the death-blow to the mounted cavalry charge

The battle of Crećy where a 16-year-old Edward the Black Prince would earn his spurs, was no chivalric battlefield. By 1346 the English had lost interest in chivalry as a military occupation. The English were massively out numbered, and the French had assumed that the knights on both sides would battle it out on horseback, and that the smaller English force would be overwhelmed, ransomed and go home ruined. But the English were playing by a new rulebook, when they arrived at the battlefield most of the knights dismounted ready to fight on foot. They were relying on the support of their non-noble longbow men. The English Longbow was not a noble weapon, and not wielded by rich young nobles, in the right hands it was to prove to be a weapon of mass destruction; The French and their allies charged with full pageantry in the first five minutes the English loosed more than 3,000 arrows, the flower of French and Genoese chivalry was cut down by archers on sixpence a day. The French Knights mercilessly rode down the survivors of their own ineffective crossbowmen soon after their Genoese allies had succumbed to the English arrow storm. Here the notion of chivalry can be seen as a means by which to avenge so-called cowardice, even though the French Knights were doomed to suffer a similar fate, annihilated by the English cloth-yard arrow. They lost 5,000 men the English a few hundred.
http://www.authorsden.com/categories...id=17&id=18826

So, the Dwarves' choice of Longbow or Crossbow probably depended on what weaponry their enemies chose).

As to the 'shieldwall' theory - probable in some cases, but its essentially a defensive tactic. You certainly can't charge in a shieldwall formation. Again, it depends entirely on the tactics of your opponents. Certainly by the time of the English Civil Wars it had been found that shieldless pikemen were more effective than any kind of shieldwall. Shields disappeared from the battlefield when armour became effective enough to require two handed weapons like poleaxes/glaives to inflict injuries. If Orcish (or Elvish come to that) armour was strong enough to ward off a blow from a one-handed sword or axe then heavier, two-handed weapons would have been called for, & you can't then use a shield (unless, as pointed out earlier, you sling it across your back -

The dwarves are exceedingly strong for their height, but most of these were
strong even for dwarves. In battle they wielded heavy two-handed mattocks; but each of them had also a short broad sword at his side and a round shield slung at his back. Their beards were forked and plaited and thrust into their belts. (The Clouds Burst)

Seems that Tolkien envisioned both tactics - two-handed mattock for 'offence' & shield/short-sword for 'defence'.

[Rumil]

Hi all,

Crossbows are hypothetical in Middle Earth but I agree Dwarves (or possibly bad-guys) seem likeliest candidates if anyone used them.

They do have some advantages over longbows. The key point was that crossbows could be effective when used by poorly-trained troops but longbows needed archers with practically lifelong experience to be most effective (see Elves ). The crossbow can be more powerful, but is slower to load, however it can be kept 'cocked' for a while. This could be very useful in sieges or perhaps underground fighting when waiting for an appearing target. The relatively flat trajectory of the crossbow bolt means it can be easily fired indoors, and if necessary through small holes etc.

Saying that, the Iron Hills Dwarves included some bow-armed troops.

As Elmo commented, Bard disparaged the Dwarves' military abilities above-ground but I think he's referring to their tactics, being unaware that the Allies had concealed the bulk of their forces in ambush.