An Enemy Spy Reads The Wheel of Time IV: The Spy Reborn

[Psyren]

*snip*

Some of that is definitely spoilers.

[Tvtyrant]

Yup, sorry. Fixed.

[Sapphire Guard]

Perrin and Rand carry an axe and a sword because both are the only fighting weapon they have. Actual soldiers prefer lances and pikes. People who do other things than full time soldiering don't want to have to carry a spear with them everywhere. Rand can wear a sword on his hip and not raise too many eyebrows, it's trickier to carry around long spear, and he would have no ability to use it anyway.

Nobody wants to get into a fight with a Trolloc or Fade at all. If you must, ideally it's with a bow, or a lance (and a bigger group of friends or allies). Getting into a swordfight with these things is something you only do if you have no other choice, because it's only survivable if you're Lan.

Warders wear swords because they can carry them with them everywhere, so if they need to defend their Aes Sedai they can. Adventuring parties have much the same logic, because you can still carry your sword to do other things than combat.

[Rodin]

Warders wear swords because they can carry them with them everywhere, so if they need to defend their Aes Sedai they can. Adventuring parties have much the same logic, because you can still carry your sword to do other things than combat.

Not that this stops most D&D parties from wandering into a tavern in full plate mail and propping their ancestral greataxe of demonslaying up with the town drunk.

Of course, wandering into a tavern with an Aes Sedai, a Warder, and a guy with wolf eyes isn't exactly inconspicuous either.

[Mechalich]

Being honest, WoT does not have a particularly good grasp of Early Modern Period (the art style and many of the garment choices strong indicate that the setting is intended to be Early Modern, not Medieval) weapons, armor, or tactics - even in the human v human conflicts (trollocs and other shadowspawn introduce weird variables), and the series takes a bunch of very disappointing shortcuts with regard to applying a bizarre parity to the weapons, armor, and tactics of highly varied cultures that should not, in any way, possess that sort of developmental equality. It's particularly obvious with the Seanchan, who have all kinds of bizarre fantasy weirdness, but somehow despite a completely different weapon and armor style fight the Randland populace as if they were just any other country when it comes to conventional weapons.

There's some measure of justification in how all the civilizations are in fact operating as technological cargo cults and everyone is trying to rediscover the knowledge of the age of legends rather than develop their own, but it's still fairly week.

[Psyren]

Perrin and Rand carry an axe and a sword because both are the only fighting weapon they have. Actual soldiers prefer lances and pikes. People who do other things than full time soldiering don't want to have to carry a spear with them everywhere. Rand can wear a sword on his hip and not raise too many eyebrows, it's trickier to carry around long spear, and he would have no ability to use it anyway.

Nobody wants to get into a fight with a Trolloc or Fade at all. If you must, ideally it's with a bow, or a lance (and a bigger group of friends or allies). Getting into a swordfight with these things is something you only do if you have no other choice, because it's only survivable if you're Lan.

Uh, the Borderlands say hi to all of these points

[Sapphire Guard]

They'd agree, when they go to Tarwin's gap, they fight with lances from horseback.

[Psyren]

They'd agree, when they go to Tarwin's gap, they fight with lances from horseback.

Yeah on horseback. On foot they use swords, e.g. when Shienar is attacked, or even Ingtar's group in Falme (him, Uno, Masema, Hurin etc.) I think the sidearm analogy is apt.

[Wookieetank]

I think the sidearm analogy is apt.

This reminds me of the joke that no, bastard swords do not make the clack clack of a shotgun being primed when you draw the bastard sword from it's sheathe.

[Iruka]

This reminds me of the joke that no, bastard swords do not make the clack clack of a shotgun being primed when you draw the bastard sword from it's sheathe.

Ah, but it does inevitably make that 'shiing' sound when drawing it. Or point it at an opponent.

[Wookieetank]

Ah, but it does inevitably make that 'shiing' sound when drawing it. Or point it at an opponent.

Guess it also has the obligatory lense flare as well

[snowblizz]

Of course, wandering into a tavern with an Aes Sedai, a Warder, and a guy with wolf eyes isn't exactly inconspicuous either.

Oh come on, give us the punch line.

[quinron]

Is Tolkien big on swords particularly? The Fellowship has a bowman, an axeman, and two swordmen, the hobbits carry daggers as swords are too big for them.

Gil Galad's favoured weapon is a spear. Anduril/Narsil is a sword, but it's more effective because of magic, not because it's inherently a better weapon.

Not a big Tolkien expert or even fan, but just off the top of my head from the main trilogy and The Hobbit, we've got Glamdring, Orcrist, and Narsil/Anduril, as you mentioned. Casual wiki-crawling makes it look to me like plenty of important figures wield different weapons, but it's overwhelmingly the swords that get names and thereby become important artifacts.

[Gnoman]

Herugrim is the sword of the King of Rohan, Narsil/Anduril is the weapon of the King of Gondor, Glamdring was forged for the King of Gondolin, Orcrist's wielder isn't named but context suggests it belonged to the Gondolin royalty as well. The swords get names because they're the weapons of kings, not because swords are particularly special. The primary weapons of just about everybody are some form of spear. - it is even noted that Boromir and Aragorn carried no weapon save swords because the Fellowship was expected to avoid combat.

[Rodin]

Herugrim is the sword of the King of Rohan, Narsil/Anduril is the weapon of the King of Gondor, Glamdring was forged for the King of Gondolin, Orcrist's wielder isn't named but context suggests it belonged to the Gondolin royalty as well. The swords get names because they're the weapons of kings, not because swords are particularly special. The primary weapons of just about everybody are some form of spear. - it is even noted that Boromir and Aragorn carried no weapon save swords because the Fellowship was expected to avoid combat.

Spoiler: General WoT stuff

Show

Of couse, not many of our heroes use particularly special swords either.

Rand's sword is a well-made but otherwise standard sword that's only remarkable because it has a heron on the hilt. The heron is only remarkable because it was the insignia of a swordmaster. The man makes the weapon special, not the other way around.

After he melts that one, he creates his own from the One Power for a bit before getting a power wrought blade - specifically, the king of Cairhien's.

Mat doesn't get a sword, he gets a dagger - and a cursed one at that. He later upgrades to a spear/pike/naginata/glaive-guisarme-glaive-glaive.

Perrin gets an axe, and sticks with this starter weapon for pretty much the entire story. His backup is a perfectly ordinary blacksmith hammer. I don't think he ever uses a magical weapon outside of the world of dreams (where he is the magical weapon).

Lan has a special sword, but that's by dint of being King of Malkier. Regular Warders make do with regular swords.

The rest of the cast either use normal weaponry or no weapons at all - the One Power is a better option.

That pretty much follows the same rules as LOTR. A few major characters have kingly weapons and that's it. There isn't a +5 sword of demonslaying under every rock.

[Psyren]

Spoiler: Perrin

Show

Perrin gets an axe, and sticks with this starter weapon for pretty much the entire story. His backup is a perfectly ordinary blacksmith hammer. I don't think he ever uses a magical weapon outside of the world of dreams (where he is the magical weapon).

As a matter of fact yes:

Spoiler

Show

He becomes the first person since the Trolloc Wars to forge a new Power-Wrought weapon - a hammer that he names Mah'alleinir (obvious callback to Mjolnir.)

In addition to being indestructible as all the PW weapons are, it is particularly harmful to shadowspawn and can even permanently one-shot Darkhounds.

[Lord Torath]

How tall are ogier? I initially got the idea that they were roughly 12 feet tall, and trollocks were around 7-8 feet. The cover art seemed to consistently give them different heights, and I seem to recall the text itself mixing it up on occasion.

[Psyren]

Loial is close to 10ft tall. Erith is described as "short for an Ogier" at around 8ft ("head and shoulders taller than Rand."). Not sure if that helps.

[Trafalgar]

Herugrim is the sword of the King of Rohan, Narsil/Anduril is the weapon of the King of Gondor, Glamdring was forged for the King of Gondolin, Orcrist's wielder isn't named but context suggests it belonged to the Gondolin royalty as well. The swords get names because they're the weapons of kings, not because swords are particularly special. The primary weapons of just about everybody are some form of spear. - it is even noted that Boromir and Aragorn carried no weapon save swords because the Fellowship was expected to avoid combat.

I am not sure that spears are the primary weapons in the Hobbit Lord of the Rings.

In the Hobbit, Bilbo finds the ring useful in avoiding Goblin Swordsmen. In the Two Towers, the Uruk Hai under Ugluk wield broad bladed swords. The other orcs from the misty mountains and those under Grishnakh wield crooked swords and knives. In Return of the King, Chapter I, in the reinforcements for Minas Tirith, Tolkien mentions bowmen and men armed with battle axes but no companies of spearmen. In Chapter VI, Tolkien writes that "the drawing of the scimitars of the Southron's was like a glitter of stars".

Tolkien is very ambiguous in describing the arms of soldiers but you often see swords, axes, mattocks, etc in the hands of common soldiers.

[Thomas Cardew]

I am not sure that spears are the primary weapons in the Hobbit Lord of the Rings.

In the Hobbit, Bilbo finds the ring useful in avoiding Goblin Swordsmen. In the Two Towers, the Uruk Hai under Ugluk wield broad bladed swords. The other orcs from the misty mountains and those under Grishnakh wield crooked swords and knives. In Return of the King, Chapter I, in the reinforcements for Minas Tirith, Tolkien mentions bowmen and men armed with battle axes but no companies of spearmen. In Chapter VI, Tolkien writes that "the drawing of the scimitars of the Southron's was like a glitter of stars".

Tolkien is very ambiguous in describing the arms of soldiers but you often see swords, axes, mattocks, etc in the hands of common soldiers.

In the Hobbit, the elven host is explicitly described as "many spearmen and bowmen". When the Battle of 5 Armies starts: "Behind the arrows a thousand of their spearmen leapt down and charged." Also worth noting that Tolkien's characters use shields. To the extent we see over military descriptions, it is things like the elven hosts in a pretty traditional combined arms force or the Númenóreans at the Gladden Fields forming wedge and shield wall formations

Regardless, I think the big difference is tonal. In WoT and similar derivative works the emphasis is placed on (1) how awesome the sword is (2) on the special quality of being a 'blademaster', swordmaster, etc. Tolkien's characters are not explicitly great 'swordmasters'; they're great warriors, the weapon is irrelevant . We see Hurin use a sword, shield, and 2H axe while Tuor uses both an axe and sword/shield, etc

[quinron]

Herugrim is the sword of the King of Rohan, Narsil/Anduril is the weapon of the King of Gondor, Glamdring was forged for the King of Gondolin, Orcrist's wielder isn't named but context suggests it belonged to the Gondolin royalty as well. The swords get names because they're the weapons of kings, not because swords are particularly special. The primary weapons of just about everybody are some form of spear. - it is even noted that Boromir and Aragorn carried no weapon save swords because the Fellowship was expected to avoid combat.

As I said - not an expert or even a fan. But if anything, this just shifts my opinion a little further downfield - Tolkien, historian that he was, probably knew that swords were a more aristocratic weapon in the real world, which is why all the kings have swords. But the people who came after him and based their works on his either didn't know this, or only learned it after they'd had "swords are superior" cemented into their heads in their younger years.

[Psyren]

As I previously mentioned though - even if we conclude that swords are more common than they probably should be for a normal quasi-medieval military force, Randland's nations AREN'T a normal quasi-medieval military force. Especially the ones whose military we get the closest viewpoint on, i.e. the Borderlanders, for whom constantly fighting a variety of monsters is the norm. As undesirable as it might be to face Trollocs and Myrddraal with swords, facing them with daggers is far worse, so swords being the sidearm of choice makes sense.

[snowblizz]

As I said - not an expert or even a fan. But if anything, this just shifts my opinion a little further downfield - Tolkien, historian that he was, probably knew that swords were a more aristocratic weapon in the real world, which is why all the kings have swords. But the people who came after him and based their works on his either didn't know this, or only learned it after they'd had "swords are superior" cemented into their heads in their younger years.

Tolkien was a linguist, not historian. It's an important difference. He was familiar with history, but from literary perspective. So he knew his Norse sagas, Kalevala and Beowulf and so on. He knew how they conveyed ideas. But he wouldn't have known a sword from an axe in sense of actual historical use of weapons. As said, Beowulf and such stories talks about swords as mystical, and they were rare and precious at the time they were told. That is consequently the way Tolkien treats them as well.

What I find hilarious is that the LotR movies make Rohirrim Anglo-Saxons, effectively, yet Tolkien specifically says he is not implying that's how they look and feel. Just the way he chose to translate their language.

[Sapphire Guard]

It's pretty common for Tolkien to be blamed for things that aren't actually in his work.

There's no super special magical sword in the works of Tolkien. Plenty of other weapons have names, from Grond to Aeglos to Bard's black arrow. Bilbo names his sword Sting because it kills a spider, it was some random Gondolin elf's dagger before that, it just carries the enchantments that all Gondolin weapons have.

The hobbits use random daggers looted from the barrow wights which for them function as swords because they can't use human scaled weaponry, the daggers were never anything special to their makers, (they do carry enchantments, but that's by default, because they were grave offerings to someone important.

Narsil is special because it's the sword that cut the ring, it didn't cut the ring because it was special.

The orc that stabs Frodo in Moria uses a spear, then tries to pull his sword when his spear is broken. So for that orc the sword was a backup. Orcs most frequently use bows. Boromir breaks his sword on a trolls leg

Other weapons get names because of specific special things they do, Helm Hammerhand, Thorin Oakenshield.

Anduril only does one magical thing that I recall, splitting that orc's helmet that stabbed Frodo.

[Corvus]

Spoiler: General WoT stuff

Show

Of couse, not many of our heroes use particularly special swords either.

Rand's sword is a well-made but otherwise standard sword that's only remarkable because it has a heron on the hilt. The heron is only remarkable because it was the insignia of a swordmaster. The man makes the weapon special, not the other way around.

After he melts that one, he creates his own from the One Power for a bit before getting a power wrought blade - specifically, the king of Cairhien's.

Spoiler

Show

Erm, I'm fairly sure that Rand's starting sword wasn't just a standard sword but was a powerwrougth sword. Lan talks about it. He says that his sword had been a mere common soldier's sword back in the Age of Legends, but Rand's, with its Heron Marked blade, had been a general's sword during the AoL.

[Mechalich]

As I previously mentioned though - even if we conclude that swords are more common than they probably should be for a normal quasi-medieval military force, Randland's nations AREN'T a normal quasi-medieval military force. Especially the ones whose military we get the closest viewpoint on, i.e. the Borderlanders, for whom constantly fighting a variety of monsters is the norm. As undesirable as it might be to face Trollocs and Myrddraal with swords, facing them with daggers is far worse, so swords being the sidearm of choice makes sense.

Randland, it's important to recognize, isn't really quasi-medieval at all, it's quasi Early Modern. At least, it is by the later books, in part due to a revolution in government policies that unfolds in the background of the books.

Spoiler

Show

This is most obvious is the army numbers. Characters regularly remark in-universe that the size of field armies has increased by a full order of magnitude, from 10,000 to 100,000.

This is somewhat strange, since Randland lacks the characteristic technology that marked the shift to the early modern period, firearms, and actually considers longbows to be a notably advanced weapon even though the longbow had been almost completely abandoned as a battlefield weapon by the onset of the Early Modern period. Likewise we see Early Modern pike formations, but in the absence of guns there's no real pike and shot.

Spoiler: exception

Show

Though the Band of the Red Hand does appear to use something like pike and shot infantry tactics once they acquire their super-crank crossbows late in the books

Soldiers in Wheel of Time artworks are regularly pictured in Early Modern kit - the original cover of The Path of Daggers being perhaps the most obvious case - and the descriptions imply that few soldiers, if any, are wearing the full plate that dominated the Late Middle Ages even though in the absence of firearms it is somewhat unclear why such armor would be abandoned.

The significant swords in WoT are usually portrayed as single-edged blades and at least slightly curved, which makes them more like cavalry sabers. And, we also know that the warrior aristocracy of Randland drastically favors cavalry over infantry. A sword as a weapon of an Early Modern Cavalryman makes a great deal of sense, even though they would probably have also carried a spear or a pistol historically.

So there's certainly an in-universe explanation for why swords are lauded as supreme weapons due to being favored by the mounted aristocratic military elite, even if the actual verisimilitude of WoT battlefield equipment is rather low.

[Psyren]

Eh, I don't trust the "artwork", especially the cover art further than I can throw it; the official art also frequently ignores the text when it comes to various characters' canonical skin tones, height etc, so expecting them to whiff basic stuff like that but get all the swords right doesn't quite mesh for me.

But in any case, my point stands, nothing about the world has to be perfectly or even mostly in line with how our own developed.

As far as the army sizes, that's not all that surprising either - we went from an Age of relative "peace" (with the greatest threats being civil wars and squabbling lords) to

Spoiler

Show

armed conflict with an entire other continent, plus all the crap pouring from not-Mordor in the span of a few books,

so I'd say the armies getting fielded growing in size over time makes sense.

[Tvtyrant]

Eh, I don't trust the "artwork", especially the cover art further than I can throw it; the official art also frequently ignores the text when it comes to various characters' canonical skin tones, height etc, so expecting them to whiff basic stuff like that but get all the swords right doesn't quite mesh for me.

But in any case, my point stands, nothing about the world has to be perfectly or even mostly in line with how our own developed.

As far as the army sizes, that's not all that surprising either - we went from an Age of relative "peace" (with the greatest threats being civil wars and squabbling lords) to

Spoiler

Show

armed conflict with an entire other continent, plus all the crap pouring from not-Mordor in the span of a few books,

so I'd say the armies getting fielded growing in size over time makes sense.

Spoiler

Show

They also use portals for supply, and by the end are expecting mass famine as everyone abandons farming to fight. It is all or nothing effort.

[snowblizz]

This is somewhat strange, since Randland lacks the characteristic technology that marked the shift to the early modern period, firearms, and actually considers longbows to be a notably advanced weapon even though the longbow had been almost completely abandoned as a battlefield weapon by the onset of the Early Modern period. Likewise we see Early Modern pike formations, but in the absence of guns there's no real pike and shot.

Pike formations vastly outdate the invention of gunpowder. And medieval pike formations were in use long before firearms became a reliable mass weapon.

As Psyren says the setting differs from our own world. We notice they tend to rediscover stuff. That's because they do not have to invent everything from scratch. Many things are known (sometimes to only a few) or exist in written form to rediscover.

If nothing else in the fact that most of these military innovations are not new or unknown.

Spoiler

Show

I forget exactly where but experienced soldiers know the value of infantry, I remember the phrase "I've seen well led pikes will hold" or along those lines. A v

Randland is not early modern or medieval. It's a post-apocalyptic devolution world which retains certain characteristics. It hasn't gone through the history we have to get to our early modern point, so their's would look different. That's actually very consistent, history isn't a set progression. Especially not one always labouring under the yoke of "magic exists".

[Misery Esquire]

Soldiers in Wheel of Time artworks are regularly pictured in Early Modern kit - the original cover of The Path of Daggers being perhaps the most obvious case - and the descriptions imply that few soldiers, if any, are wearing the full plate that dominated the Late Middle Ages even though in the absence of firearms it is somewhat unclear why such armor would be abandoned.

Since heavy full plate was developed in the first place as a response to early firearms, the lack of it isn't too surprising. Though with crossbows seemingly having punchthrough on everything armour may be lagging behind - though there's two points to consider there;

A.) Most of the scenes mostly note being shot in the legs and arms, not through the chest and,
B.) Armour isn't relevant to wizards, though noone has fought them for 3000 years, which is how we end up with blocks of troops.

Also, the Three Oaths must have made Artur Hawkwing's Siege of Tar Valon pretty funny on that second point.

Warders can kill people very well, but they're not going to take a shot at a couple thousand, and the Aes Sedai can only fire when they feel threatened, which the testing does its best to force out of the women. And, as they like to point out from time to time, a crossbow you don't see, you can't/won't stop.

So, to siege them, you just have to be willing to be very rude but non-threatening. A hundred (or a thousand, to prevent Air shenanigans) people standing in your way isn't a threat to your life but if they don't move you can't go through. And if you slowly push your way through, you can't know when someone behind you pulls a knife.

The occasional sister would make it through, wrapped in Air or scaring troops out of the way, but sieging is only in terms of deterring most movement anyway.