: : Many an otherwise interesting Tolkien discussion has been derailed by this kind of thinking. It is reasonable to infer that the Rangers knew how to use their bows in some fashion. Tolkien would not have had them carry weapons they couldn't use.

: : It is, however, unreasonable to start assuming, "Well, he doesn't say they DON'T have extra padding in their boots, therefore it's okay to suggest they did have it".

: : The texts support many reasonable inferences. As Martin pointed out, it is reasonable to infer that there were hidden strongholds somewhere in Eriador, even if these were not necessarily the primary abodes of the Dunedain of the North. It is not reasonable, however, to guess that there was some huge hidden city of the Dunedain simply because Tolkien didn't say it wasn't there.

: : If the only support for an idea is the absence of denial, then there is absolutely no support for the idea. Tolkien's world has limits, and I think those limits should be sought, not circumvented.

: Though logical extrapolation is a valid exercise. Encyclopaedic as Tolkien's written sources on the details of his created world are, he cannot be expected to have covered every aspect which might be of interest to his readers. Therefore "filling in the blanks" is of some use, so long as a logical route can be traced back to the written sources. Plus, as I have often said, as Tolkien claimed his world to have been our own in a legendary far past, then drawing parellels between his world and the real world also has some validity.

: It is certain that extrapolations from the texts must be hedged with words such as: probable , possible and likely.

: I think another Dunedain posting is not far off ;)

We do, however, have a source for Dúnedain warfare. In UT there is a description of the Dúnedain basic tactic in "The Disaster at Gladden Fields". There they are not described as being archers. Neither are most of those marching to the Pellanaor. But, some are, these, the troops under Hirluin(?) from Pinnath Gelin(? Greenhills), are evidently (to me) inspired by the English longbowmen whose legend is so ingrained in any Brit (or French). The French still hate the Brits for Agincourt and Crécy and the Brits still use the two fingers employed to draw a bow to make the "come and get it" sign that they used versus the French (who would cut of those two fingers when capturing an archer). I have always interpreted the Rangers to be a bunch of "Robin Hood" type special forces who carries a longbow, a broadsword and whatever other weapons they want- and, if the need arises, a shield. They would fight as infantry or skirmishers, but could function on horseback as well, be it as cavalry/knights or mounted infantry.
There is no support for this, but it is the way I see it (but I roleplay;-)). the usual Dúnedain infantry is, in my interpretation, the same sort of troop type as the roman legionaire and backed by archers and some cavalry (again like the legions' auxilia), the archers being Longbowmen of English type rather than crossbowmen.
NT