Boromir Stark
Rivendell
Feb 1 2013, 11:58am
Views: 2560
|
Question regarding Dwarves being considered "of age".
|
|
|
I have been wondering recently about the age at which Dwarves are considered mature and "battle-ready". At the time of LotR, Gimli is, I believe, around 125 years old. This means that at the time of The Hobbit, he would have been about 65. Now, some have suggested that the reason's for Gimli's non-participation in the Quest for Erebor was that he was not yet mature and at the age at which a Dwarf is considered battle-ready (what this age is supposed to be I have no idea, but I would harbour a guess at 70ish, since that is what age Fili and Kili are, roughly.) Consider this though - about 150 years prior to the Quest for Erebor, a young Dain Ironfoot not only took part in the Battle of Azanulbizar, he single-handedly defeated and slew the Orcs leader, Azog. This was considered a great achievment not because he slew Azog, but because he was so incredibly young when he done it. At the time of this event, Dain was only 32 years old, which in Dwarf years is considered very young and several decades shy of what is believed to be battle-readiness. So, what's the deal? Gimli is apprarently too young to take part in the Quest for Erebor, yet Dain Ironfoot fights in an arguably more danagerous scenario in the Battle of Azanulbizar at half the age? I've saw some people say that the reason for Gimli not accompanying his father on the Quest was because their had to be an heir left behind to carry on the line should Gloin perish. And at first I thought "ok, that seems logical." Only, it doesn't. By that logic Dain should have stayed at home while Nain fought against the orcs Anyone got any thoughts on this? It's not particularly important in the grand scheme of things, but it has been on my mind for some time.
|