Why was Thorin childless?

[Valandil]

C'mon... why? I mean, I know what Tolkien writes about dwarves and their females and marital matters and so forth - but for goodness sake, he's the heir in Durin's line! Wouldn't some nice bearded dwarf lady love to become the mother of the NEXT heir? Or was it that he was a 'king without a kingdom'? (equivalent to the Texas 'big hat - no cattle'?)

In PoME, it points out that dwarves in that royal line typically had their first child at age 101 or 102 - and that if there's a slightly greater number (like 110) the first child was a daughter - born when the father was 101 or 102 - and the son was born a little later.

Also makes me wonder about this: Thorin was already 195 (right?) when he led the troupe off to Erebor. Dwarves just lived to about 240 or 250. So what was the guy thinking? Who did he intend to leave the place to if he managed to get it back from the dragon? Fili or Kili? Or would Dain have had a better claim anyway, being descended strictly from males in the line - if that was important to dwarves (though Fili and Kili were more closely related to the more recent kings / heirs)?

Or - maybe the fact that he WAS childless (for whatever reason) made Thorin more inclined to go ahead and gamble his life on this wild quest, while his strength still lasted.

But I wonder why: Did he not find a dwarf lady where there was mutual interest? Did he marry but not have children (or they died?)? Did something else happen? Why does he appear to have not married and started having children around the age of 100 or so???

[Count Comfect]

Had a crush on Dis? Seriously, maybe his depression about his father just wandering off had something to do with it.

[brownjenkins]

he was probably just too obsessed with reclaiming erebor... and fili and kili would seem to be legitimate heirs, for the lonely mountain at least

[Lizra]

Too many weird minerals rendered him steril?

[Finrod Felagund]

Probably the same reason as Earnur (lask king of the old line of Gondor), and Boromir; he simply didn't care for women but only for arms etc..

[BeardofPants]

Yeah, I can see that: married to the cause. Guess Tolkien wouldn't exactly write in 'bastard' children either, though.

[Valandil]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
Yeah, I can see that: married to the cause. Guess Tolkien wouldn't exactly write in 'bastard' children either, though.

Um... the family tree doesn't actually show a father for Fili and Kili though...

[Anglorfin]

I always assumed it was just because Thorin had other business to attend to. To me it seemed that Dwarves were very obsessive, especially concerning riches/kingdoms. I am sure Tolkien even stated this as a reason that not many Dwarves married. And it's easy to see why Thorin might be obsessive.

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Anglorfin
I always assumed it was just because Thorin had other business to attend to. To me it seemed that Dwarves were very obsessive, especially concerning riches/kingdoms. I am sure Tolkien even stated this as a reason that not many Dwarves married. And it's easy to see why Thorin might be obsessive.

Yes, but even though some dwarves didn't marry - Thorin wasn't just any dwarf. He was the heir in Durin's line - and that hadn't been interrupted (as far as we know) by non-marriage. It's always important for the ruler to produce an heir... so it's more curious that he didn't than for any old dwarf.

[Forkbeard]

Originally posted by Valandil
Yes, but even though some dwarves didn't marry - Thorin wasn't just any dwarf. He was the heir in Durin's line - and that hadn't been interrupted (as far as we know) by non-marriage. It's always important for the ruler to produce an heir... so it's more curious that he didn't than for any old dwarf.

But unlike his forbears, he wasn't an heir to anything (unless he recovered the kingdom, which he eventually did with some help). Nor was he a ruler; an important dwarf certainly, but he was no more a ruler when we first meet him than Bilbo was. Undoubtedly had he survived, he would have married and produced offspring.

Forkbeard

[Anglorfin]

Originally posted by Forkbeard
But unlike his forbears, he wasn't an heir to anything (unless he recovered the kingdom, which he eventually did with some help). Nor was he a ruler; an important dwarf certainly, but he was no more a ruler when we first meet him than Bilbo was. Undoubtedly had he survived, he would have married and produced offspring.

Forkbeard

My thoughts exactly. Once he found something to rule again he would look for a mate. Also, look at the environment he would have had to raise his son in. I am guessing that it would not have been too favorable. He wouldn't be privaleged to learn many of the Dwarven metal crafts or even possibly Dwarven history if he was not given a secure home. OF course there would be quite a bit of folklore but still nothing to teach him about becoming a ruler, like first-hand stuff anyway such as watching his daddy.

[Tessar]

Because he didn't take his Dwarven Viagra?

Ooooh sorry. As SOON as I saw the title of the post, that thought popped into my head!

Seems Lizra and I think alike!

But really, I'd guess that either his family was killed when the Dragon invaded, or that he simply loved treasure and war more than women.

[Valandil]

Tessar - doubtful Thorin had a family when Smaug attacked, since he was in his mid-20's... as I said above, the dwarves in his line consistently had their first child at 101 or 102 years of age.

Which also makes it curious to me, Anglorfin and Forkbeard, that Thorin would wait. If he married and started a family after reclaiming Erebor, he would be almost 100 years behind the typical situation for those dwarven kings. He would die of old age while his heir was still quite young by dwarven standards. While if he HAD made an heir earlier, and if his quest should fail, at least that heir could have a chance to reclaim the kingdom later.

It's just curious to me that he didn't act similarly to how the northern Dunedain did. After Arthedain was no more, they continued the royal family line, even if diminished in authority and power. Of course, it could well be expected that dwarves would not think like men. Perhaps to them (or to Thorin anyway) reclaiming what had once been theirs was more important than (maybe even a pre-requisite to) continuing the royal line. Although if that's the case, he wasn't exactly in a hurry about it.

In some ways... that's how Aragorn proceded. If he had failed, his line would have apparently ended with him (unless there was a near enough cousin to have a legitimate claim).

[Forkbeard]

Originally posted by Valandil
Tessar - doubtful Thorin had a family when Smaug attacked, since he was in his mid-20's... as I said above, the dwarves in his line consistently had their first child at 101 or 102 years of age.

Which also makes it curious to me, Anglorfin and Forkbeard, that Thorin would wait. If he married and started a family after reclaiming Erebor, he would be almost 100 years behind the typical situation for those dwarven kings. He would die of old age while his heir was still quite young by dwarven standards. While if he HAD made an heir earlier, and if his quest should fail, at least that heir could have a chance to reclaim the kingdom later.

It's just curious to me that he didn't act similarly to how the northern Dunedain did. After Arthedain was no more, they continued the royal family line, even if diminished in authority and power. Of course, it could well be expected that dwarves would not think like men. Perhaps to them (or to Thorin anyway) reclaiming what had once been theirs was more important than (maybe even a pre-requisite to) continuing the royal line. Although if that's the case, he wasn't exactly in a hurry about it.

In some ways... that's how Aragorn proceded. If he had failed, his line would have apparently ended with him (unless there was a near enough cousin to have a legitimate claim).

Valandil,

Good to see you! So to speak. I would say though as you've already indicated that Smaug rather threw a wrench into "normal" family practices, just as War of the Ring rather threw a wench into Aragorn's family line. ANd Thorin did have heirs....Fili and Kili, sister-sons and a close cousin, Dain. So the need to continue the family line wasn't a paramount one.

Forkbeard

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Forkbeard
Valandil,

Good to see you! So to speak...

Forkbeard

Thank you! And likewise. I've been around. I hadn't posted in this thread for awhile, but I've checked in regularly to read the posts made by others.

[Count Comfect]

A thought just occured. Perhaps Thorin had similar thoughts about Fili and Kili as Theoden did about Eomer and Eowyn... and didn't feel a need to have a child (although Theoden did). He also seems to have fit the Boromir style mould (as someone mentioned) of one who just loved other things.

[Beruthiel's cat]

Originally posted by Valandil

In PoME, it points out that dwarves in that royal line typically had their first child at age 101 or 102 - and that if there's a slightly greater number (like 110) the first child was a daughter - born when the father was 101 or 102 - and the son was born a little later....


But I wonder why: Did he not find a dwarf lady where there was mutual interest? Did he marry but not have children (or they died?)? Did something else happen? Why does he appear to have not married and started having children around the age of 100 or so???

I'm trying to understand something here (that I am confused should come as no surprise to anyone...).

When you say that dwarves typically had their first child at 101 or 102 and if they waited longer, the first child was more likely to be a daughter? Or were first children in dwarf families usually (or always) daughters? If so, it could explain why there were fewer female dwarves. If the first child was female and subsequent children were male and dwarf families on average contained three or more children, this would explain the 3:1 ratio of males to females.

Or am I completely confused by what you're saying and just bithering on??

Clarify this for me, please.

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Beruthiel's cat
I'm trying to understand something here (that I am confused should come as no surprise to anyone...).

When you say that dwarves typically had their first child at 101 or 102 and if they waited longer, the first child was more likely to be a daughter? Or were first children in dwarf families usually (or always) daughters? If so, it could explain why there were fewer female dwarves. If the first child was female and subsequent children were male and dwarf families on average contained three or more children, this would explain the 3:1 ratio of males to females.

Or am I completely confused by what you're saying and just bithering on??

Clarify this for me, please.

Ah-HAH! I see that I was indeed quite successful at totally confusing you!

I read in 'Peoples of Middle Earth' that the dwarves (maybe it was only referring to this line of kings of Durin's house - see dates in Appendix A of LOTR) had their first child at age 101 or 102. This was USUALLY a son, since they had more sons than daughters. The book goes on to say that in the cases (maybe there's only one?) where we see 110 years between the birth of father and son - that the first child (born when father was 101 or 102) was a daughter and that a LATER child was the son who eventually became the next heir / king.

Does that explain it better or did I confuse you more? In either case, they had the first child at the same age. If it happened to be a daughter, a son would follow along a few years later.

[Beruthiel's cat]

No, that's much better, thanks. I understand it now. Must have been the way you worded it before.

(I think I need a cup of coffee...)

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Beruthiel's cat
(I think I need a cup of coffee...)

Couldja make me one too?

Better yet - meet you at the Teacup Cafe! Let's see what they've got brewing.