Branch thread: Tolkien's military technology

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Tolkien, interestingly, postulated a world in which weaponry remained essentially stagnent for thousands of years, or even declined. The impression one gets, from the Nirnaeth right through to the Morannon, is that miltech was fixed at about the level of our 12th century or so.

Now, why would this be? Obviously, he wanted to keep gunpowder and firearms out of his world, and that would be conceivably an argument against plate armor (although it's accepted today that 15th-century 'white harness' was actually less cumbersome than mail, in T's day the old notion of helpless ironclad tortoises that needed hoisting into the saddle was still the accepted view). Nonetherless, he could easily have atributed supertech to Dwarves or Noldor, even if just for the First Age- so why not? After all, if his viewpoint is the earlier Middle Ages and its looking back at the Ancients, we know that Roman legionaries (at least for a while) wore the banded lorica segmentata.

Also the missing crossbows- although I suppose they could exist without mention. But I would think the x-bow would be a perfect Orcish weapon. (Not so the Elves, who presumably have ample time for the training required to make a good bowman, or the Rohirrim, since a x-bow ain't a cavalry weapon). But for Orcs- a cheaply made piece of low-tech which requires little trainng, just a degree of brute strength. The AK-47 of the ancient world. And again, why not the Dwarves, esp. since one would assume a Dwarf could stirrup-cock a much heavier xbow than a Man?

[Vaine]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

Tolkien, interestingly, postulated a world in which weaponry remained essentially stagnent for thousands of years, or even declined. The impression one gets, from the Nirnaeth right through to the Morannon, is that miltech was fixed at about the level of our 12th century or so.

Now, why would this be? Obviously, he wanted to keep gunpowder and firearms out of his world, and that would be conceivably an argument against plate armor (although it's accepted today that 15th-century 'white harness' was actually less cumbersome than mail, in T's day the old notion of helpless ironclad tortoises that needed hoisting into the saddle was still the accepted view). Nonetherless, he could easily have atributed supertech to Dwarves or Noldor, even if just for the First Age- so why not? After all, if his viewpoint is the earlier Middle Ages and its looking back at the Ancients, we know that Roman legionaries (at least for a while) wore the banded lorica segmentata.

Also the missing crossbows- although I suppose they could exist without mention. But I would think the x-bow would be a perfect Orcish weapon. (Not so the Elves, who presumably have ample time for the training required to make a good bowman, or the Rohirrim, since a x-bow ain't a cavalry weapon). But for Orcs- a cheaply made piece of low-tech which requires little trainng, just a degree of brute strength. The AK-47 of the ancient world. And again, why not the Dwarves, esp. since one would assume a Dwarf could stirrup-cock a much heavier xbow than a Man?

It would have made a boring story.

[Gwathagor]

How would it have been a boring story?

[Vaine]

Originally Posted by Gwathagor

How would it have been a boring story?

Well to me it's just a personal preference, crossbows just arent as... heroic as bows.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Vaine

Well to me it's just a personal preference, crossbows just arent as... heroic as bows.

Yes, well it certainly would have been a less heroic story. All the weapons used in LOTR require skill and practice (and determination). In Tolkien's world, you need to have these to be a good warrior.
I think that using old-style weapons makes the heroes into warriors rather than soldiers.

Also, remember, Tolkien liked the Anglo-Saxon times, and they didn't have that sort of technology (at least in Europe) then.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

Also the missing crossbows- although I suppose they could exist without mention. But I would think the x-bow would be a perfect Orcish weapon.

I think (though I don't happen to have LOTR on me), that Faramir was shot with a bolt. I think Imrahil says he removed it and if so it certainly implies a crossbow to have loosed it .

Apart from the fact that the longbow is embedded in the English psyche in the way that crossbows aren't (technically all Englishmen are obliged by an obselete but not repealed law to carry out two hours of longbow practice daily!!!), there is a elegant simplicity about it - elves I am sure would be slowed down by the crossbow's action since a experienced English longbowman would be expected to loose up to 20 aimed arrows a minute, an elf with hands that move quicker than sight could surely do better.

[Rumil]

It does seem that the military technology of Midddle Earth actually declined somewhat.

Elrond refers to a 'host of elves in armour of old' or somesuch, implying that the Third Age armour was inferior to what was used in the First Age perhaps? Certainly the Gate-Guards of Gondolin had some visually impressive stuff but the exact type of armour is not described in detail.

I wonder if the 1st Age Elves had discovered face-hardening, a metallurgical technique that makes armour practically arrow-proof? Or could be that they had plenty of Mithril!

Also the steel bows of the 2nd Age Numenoreans are mentioned, but no hint of them in the Third Age.

At least we can be sure that the stirrup was used by cavalry, as Eowyn mentions the stirrup-cup.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Certainly the Gate-Guards of Gondolin had some visually impressive stuff but the exact type of armour is not described in detail.

However there's a snippet in The Children of Hurin, where it was said that "the sword and harness of the least of the warriors of Turgon was worth more than the ransom of any king among Men." Which implies either mithril, or serious high-end smith-craft.

But how did they get mithril? (And, yes, I know they built a whole gate out of the stuff).

And supposedly even the Noldor never made mail as good as the best Dwarven stuff.

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

I think (though I don't happen to have LOTR on me), that Faramir was shot with a bolt. I think Imrahil says he removed it and if so it certainly implies a crossbow to have loosed it .

The word used is "dart," rather than "bolt." I have the impression that a dart could mean either an arrow or a small javelin of some sort.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Gwathagor

The word used is "dart," rather than "bolt." I have the impression that a dart could mean either an arrow or a small javelin of some sort.

There are two other instances I could find regarding 'darts' and 'bolts':

'Then the engines and the catapults of the king poured darts and boulders and molten metals on those ruthless beasts ...' - The Fall of Gondolin, The Book of Lost Tales II, The History of Middle-earth Volume II

'Then Gil-galad and Elendil passed into Mordor and encompassed the stronghold of Sauron; and they laid siege to it for seven years, and suffered grievous loss by fire and by the darts and bolts of the Enemy, and Sauron sent many sorties against them.' - Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age, The Silmarillion

Tolkien has used the term 'darts' as synonymous with arrows in a few passages; however, I will have to reconsider a blanket statement when considering "bolts". It most likely could be that bolts were shot from an arbalist, rather than crossbows, as both quotes concern sieges or siege weaponry. In fact, the sentence 'Then the engines and the catapults of the king poured darts and boulders...' indicates he was referring directly to siege weaponry.

There is no indication that Tolkien ever mentioned hand-held crossbows, even by Orcs, but since Tolkien mentioned in The Hobbit that Orcs are keen on inventing weapons of mass destruction, it is highly likely they would have used siege weapons like the arbalist.

As far as the term 'armour', that could indicate any type of protective accoutrements, not necessarily plate. And armorial technology was certainly on the wane, even among dwarves. I recall Thorin admitting that much of their craft in smithying was gone, save for the manufacture of iron rings (or something to that effect). Long gone are the days of Telchar of Nogrod, or Eol, artificer of Galvorn.

[Mithalwen]

Yes I checked it when I got home. And the use of dart, shaft and arrow for the same item by Imrahil (who would presumably not use the terms inaccurately) makes a crossbow less likely than even dart alone - maybe it is the pub game that makes me think of a smaller thing than a longbow arrow! Anyway I got it wrong ... sorry.

[Hookbill the Goomba]

I don't think there's one reason for it. Although, I agree that Tolkien's love of Anglo-Saxon times and ancient heroics probably contributed to his choice. But more than that, it may be that he did not see such technological advances as the automatic weapon and so on as 'progress'.

Combat is so much more different with guns than with swords. The latter is much closer and confrontational. Indeed, I have noticed that there are several occasions where people (Turin springs to mind) are described as being so strange that they would be impossible to kill "unless by an evil arrow". Even here we find this slight dislike for ranged warfare. Indeed, Turin's main complaint with the people of Brethil is that they prefer the secret arrow to face-to-face battle.

As horrible as battle always is, it strikes me that Tolkien almost promoted a sort of line of thinking that if you are going to kill them, don't do it from afar. Perhaps he thought of the sword and shield as being preferable to the gun and bullet. Even Beleg Strong Bow gave up his bow in favour of the sword.

The Dwarves have an interesting slant on this. They use metals such a Mithril (when they can get it) to make chain-mail that is strong enough to stop a spear thrust. Could it be that they saw this as progress enough? For warfare, anyway. I suspect their main developments came in the finding and mining of ores.
I know mithril was not so readily available; but there is the hint throughout the books that Dwarvish armour is somehow superior to the stuff men made. Even more so when it comes to the elves.

Perhaps it is a case of almost 'enchantment' over advancement?

[Alfirin]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

Yes I checked it when I got home. And the use of dart, shaft and arrow for the same item by Imrahil (who would presumably not use the terms inaccurately) makes a crossbow less likely than even dart alone - maybe it is the pub game that makes me think of a smaller thing than a longbow arrow! Anyway I got it wrong ... sorry.

The "dart" thing brings up an interesting point. it seems to me a little odd that, in a world where spears and javelins are so important, nobody seems to use the atlatl (a kind of spear throwing sling). Unlike a lot of of the tech mentioned, atlatls are really, really ancient (they've existed since the stone age) very low tech and very very powerful (they are considered the secret that allowed early humans to be able to kill mammoths with just basic spears. While it is true that it's use had largely died out in Europe by Tolkien's time (one of the reasons why it is known by a Nahuatl (Aztec) name, it was in use in South America a LOT longer). But it seems a bit odd tha no-one seems to have kept it, inclulding very Neolithic tech groups like the Drunedain. In a world where the spear is still cutting edge, a tool that lets you throw them hard enough to take down an oliphaunt would seem to be something you would want to keep in your repetoire.

[aussie]

I think his archaism of military is a natural offshot from his love of history. Human society exploded in every possible way in the centuries following the Industrial Revolution, and it quite literally lost its balance and sense of proportion. Although its rather a naieve point to make, pre 1800, human society was much more sustainable simply because there were much fewer people on the planet. I'm sure if Tolkien was alive today he'd be even more horrified



_______________
boys military schools

[Mnemosyne]

Originally Posted by aussie

human society was much more sustainable simply because there were much fewer people on the planet.

Ever heard of Malthus?

(Oh, and welcome to the 'Downs!)

[Galadriel55]

Welcome, aussie!

My point is very short: the weapons didn't change very much, but their quality did (both ways).