Contact between The Chieftains and The Stewards

[Beran]

Boromir backs Aragorn
The Charge Nurse of the Houses of healing (what's her name...Rachet?) backs Aragorn
Casper and his traitorous bunch "backs" Aragorn
Faramir backs Aragorn
Elrond backs Aragorn
Arwen backs Aragorn
Gandalf backs Aragorn
Santa backs Aragorn (Oh, wait he was in Narnia not ME)
The Easter Bunny supports Aragorn

So what?

ME is based on Medieval Europe...what is right? Might is right, Denethor (if he had survived) is in charge of Gondor. He is the law. All the cards would have been in his hand. If he didn't back down it would have taken some drastic and distasteful action on the part of Aragorn and his supporters to claim the crown.

[Southron]

Here is a response from Michael Martinez from the Entmoot Forums. He mentions the part about Tolkien originally having Denethor live but doesn't state where the info is from. However, it is IMO an excellent read on this topic:



"We just went through this in the news groups a week or two ago. I had to concede that Aragorn had inherited the RIGHT to rule both Arnor and Gondor. However, I don't think Aragorn could have asserted the right merely by showing up and announcing he was there to restore the House of Elendil to Gondor.

Aragorn's rights as the Heir of Elendil and the Heir of Isildur were not exactly identical. Isildur was the only king to rule both Arnor and Gondor directly (although there is some evidence that Elendil may have been involved in Gondor -- such as his conferring the title of "prince" upon Imrahil's ancestors). When Isildur died his lordship over the Dunedain of the North and of the South did not exactly die with him, but it sort of passed into a state of limbo. There were High Kings after Isildur but these kings appear to have little if any actual authority over Gondor, and when the sons of Earendur divided Arnor between them, the High Kingship was effectively ended forever (Aragorn did not become High King, but simply King of the Reunited Realm).

When Arvedui claimed the throne of Gondor he presented his claim as the Heir of Isildur first. The Council of Gondor (led then by the Steward Pelendur) rejected his claim, and that rejection effectively LEGALLY barred Isildur's line from reasserting their royalty in Gondor. But Arvedui responded by asserting his right as the Heir of Elendil, and this time the Council of Gondor made no response, effectively leaving open the issue of whether a northern Heir of Elendil could claim the throne.

The crown was then given to Earnil, the victorious captain who had led Gondor's armies in war and saved the kingdom. He was a male line descendant of Anarion but there is some question of whether he was the most senior male line descendant in his time. Tolkien seems to imply there were other members of the House of Anarion who were not as pure of blood as Earnil and his son Earnur.

It has been argued (though not convincingly in my opinion) that the royalty of Gondor persisted with the House of Anarion until that House was no more. By the time of the War of the Ring, it seems clear that there were no more descendants of Anarion (of the male line, at least) in Gondor. Hence, the argument goes, the royalty of Gondor reverted to the House of Isildur. But the Isildurians had been rejected by the Council of Gondor, so by Gondorian law they could not be kings. And yet the kingship belonged rightfully only to the House of Elendil. This is why the Stewards never took the kingship upon themselves. Tolkien says that some people still remembered the northern line and hoped that a king would come from it some day, so the Stewards could not have been anything more than usurpers if they had tried to take the throne for themselves.

Now, my feeling on the issue is that no matter what Aragorn's rights were, Gondor would not have accepted someone who hadn't led her armies in war. Earnil II had established that precedent. i.e., the status of being a victorious captain was sufficient to elevate his claim above all others.

Aragorn's appearance was foretold, by Malbeth at least. The ancient Seer had foreseen that an Heir of Isildur would return to command the Oathbreakers who had been cursed by Isildur. And the portents Fat Middle listed are legitimate. A definite sign of the return of Gondor's royalty was in the air, so to speak. But the choice to accept the king was still Gondor's.

When Aragorn's identity was made known to Boromir in Rivendell, Aragorn asked him if Gondor wished for the House of Elendil to return. Aragorn was later on careful to present himself as Elendil's Heir to the Rohirrim, and though he had to march through Gondor as the Heir of Isildur (to command the Dead), he displayed the "tokens of Elendil's house" (according to Eomer) in the Battle of the Pelennor Fields.

It has been pointed out that both Faramir and Imrahil acknowledged Aragorn as their rightful king after the battle. Of course, Imrahil knew by this time that Denethor was dead and that Aragorn had led a Gondorian army in battle. Aragorn would have satisfied all the previous criteria for claimants to the throne, except coming from the House of Anarion (Aragorn's descent from Firiel, daughter of King Ondoher, didn't qualify him for the kingship). Faramir awoke from a nightmarish coma or sleep induced by the Black Breath and immediately hailed Aragorn as king, though he knew nothing of how the battle had gone or his father's death.

In response to the point about Faramir, I note that the narrative says "a light of knowledge and love was kindled in his eyes". Faramir had already heard of Aragorn from Frodo, and he had had plenty of time to ponder all the signs. Sauron's war was going to be the final assault against Gondor -- who could understand this better than Faramir, who had been monitoring the passage of Gondor's enemies through Ithilien? If the House of Elendil was going to make a return, now was the time. And he seems to have been given a gift of knowledge and understanding (by Iluvatar or the Valar, it doesn't really matter).

I think Faramir's declaration was intuitive, and if he had made it while his father was alive it would have placed him squarely in defiance of his father.

The political situation in Gondor would have become tense, and Aragorn acknowledged this before he entered Minas Tirith. That was why he had his banner furled and he declared himself to be simply a captain of the Rangers of the North. Later, when Imrahil learned that Faramir was become Steward (from Gandalf, in front of the Houses of Healing), he asked who should rule the City, and if they shouldn't send for Aragorn. Once again Aragorn declined to assert his right, and he suggested that Imrahil should rule the City. Aragorn's stated purpose was to avoid strife among Sauron's enemies.

By the time the Army of the West had set out and was marching through Ithilien Imrahil had heard Faramir's declaration and the situation in Minas Tirith was more secure and orderly. So he had the heralds proclaim the coming of the King Elessar, effectively ending all doubt about Aragorn's status. But by then many of Gondor's people had already "thrown in" with Aragorn by marching under his standard. He had arrived in Gondor as the unacknowledged king de jure (by right) and was now the de facto king, but he didn't yet rule Gondor (Faramir was still the Ruling Steward). Aragorn was proclaimed King of Gondor (given the throne) after the final battle with Sauron.

Had Denethor lived I think he would have been expected by many to step down. But there is the question of whether the Army of the West would or should have marched at all if Denethor had lived. Tolkien originally did not have Denethor kill himself during the battle, and the confrontation between the Ruling Steward and Aragorn after the Battle of the Pelennor Fields strikes me as being very unlike the way Tolkien finally chose to portray Aragorn. In "The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen" Elrond told Aragorn he would have to earn the Sceptre of Annuminas. I think by extension he had to earn the Crown of Gondor. Both were his by right, but they were being held in trust for an Heir of Elendil who would prove himself worthy.


So, that more-or-less summarizes what came out of the news group discussion. My own position on the matter was changed by that discussion, and this is how I see things now."

[Rocmistro]

"Had Denethor lived he would have been expected by many to step down."

To me that's one of the most important points. Aragorn's "evidence" (including his behavior) along with Denethor's madness would have resulted in a non-bloody power change that left Denethor sulking but irrelevant. What our discussion has educated me on was the need for Aragorn to both save Gondor's bacon, along with all the other trappings of his Kingship, in order to have successfully become King without a civil war ensuing.

[Stormcrow]

ME is based on Medieval Europe...

NO! Nononononono! It isn't. No!

Much detail is drawn from the LITERATURE of Dark Ages Northern Europe, but you can't say Middle-earth equals Europe and apply any old correspondence you like.

[Glorelendil]

NO! Nononononono! It isn't. No!

Much detail is drawn from the LITERATURE of Dark Ages Northern Europe, but you can't say Middle-earth equals Europe and apply any old correspondence you like.

Thank you.

Anyway...

...I haven't chimed in on this thread because I thought it un-wise to get in between dueling Silmariliteralists. But Rocmistro touched on an important point: if we're going to ask what if Denethor hadn't killed himself and what if he hadn't lost his marbles (two contingent "what if's" in one work of fiction....whew!) eventually we have to factor in that his isn't the only opinion that matters. Lots of people would be swayed by the ring and the sword and the healing, and even autocrats can't totally ignore public opinion.

[Beran]

ME is based on Medieval Europe...

NO! Nononononono! It isn't. No!

Much detail is drawn from the LITERATURE of Dark Ages Northern Europe, but you can't say Middle-earth equals Europe and apply any old correspondence you like.

Read the comment. I said "based on...". Not exactly like. Like Jackson's movies were "BASED" on Tolkien's works, not taken directly from it.

[Glorelendil]

Read the comment. I said "based on...". Not exactly like. Like Jackson's movies were "BASED" on Tolkien's works, not taken directly from it.

So in other words: similar sounding names, but otherwise not even remotely similar?

[Stormcrow]

X is based on Y; therefore we can approximate X(1) by using Y(1).

That's what you did, and that's what I object to. Middle-earth is NOT, NOT, NOT "based on" medieval Europe. You can't look at the politics of medieval Europe and apply them to the politics of Middle-earth. One of the few direct "based on" things we get from Tolkien is the Rohirric culture being based on Anglo-Saxon culture (which he lamely denied). Other than that, there's no direct mapping between a Middle-earth culture and a real-world culture.

What Tolkien did was to write stories inspired by the LITERATURE—not history—of ancient and medieval Northern Europe. His major themes and language come largely from this. And even then, his works were not "based on" this literature. The Hobbit is not "based on" Beowulf, but many of its elements and themes are inspired by it. You can't look at the politics in Beowulf and use them to figure out the politics in The Hobbit.

Likewise, the technology of Middle-earth is not "based on" medieval Europe. The technology suits whatever literary inspiration requires of it. Having swords and shields and mail is not strictly from medieval Europe—many cultures, older than that, had them. People get tripped up by the apparently high-technology Shire, but what we've really got is simply the use of technology that depicts the Shire as similar to a quiet English countryside.

Here's an amusing tidbit. On another forum one of the early players of D&D once corrected someone who insisted that D&D was "based on" medieval Europe. He said it was no such thing—it was its own thing based on literary sources. Now here's the fun bit: D&D, as we know, grew out of Chainmail, which was a wargame with a fantasy supplement in the back designed to let players fight famous fantasy battles—specifically the Battle of Five Armies. So even one of the creators of D&D, which was "based on" Chainmail, whose fantasy supplement was inspired heavily by Middle-earth, says that, even through all those degrees of separation, it's all STILL not "based on" medieval Europe.

[DavetheLost]

I think there was a steady decline in contact between and even knowledge about the Chieftains and the Stewards. Iirc it is even implied that some Hobbits still thought there was a King somewhere far off.

The Rangers of the North were certainly that a Steward sat the throne in Gondor, and likely aware that their Chieftain had a claim to be heir to the throne. The Stewards likely knew that the Rangers were descended from the Lords of Arnor.

Denethor most probably would have opposed Aragorn's claim to the throne of Gondor, while at the same time supporting a claim to the throne of Arnor. Aragorn as King in Arnor puts him safely out of the way and lets Denethor carry on business as usual in Gondor.

Sadly for us Tolkien did explicitly map all of this out for us. This makes life difficult for the game designers, but is quite freeing for individual Lore Masters. We can do what we like for our own campaigns without worrying about contradicting Tolkien.

[aramis]

X is based on Y; therefore we can approximate X(1) by using Y(1).

That's what you did, and that's what I object to. Middle-earth is NOT, NOT, NOT "based on" medieval Europe. You can't look at the politics of medieval Europe and apply them to the politics of Middle-earth. One of the few direct "based on" things we get from Tolkien is the Rohirric culture being based on Anglo-Saxon culture (which he lamely denied). Other than that, there's no direct mapping between a Middle-earth culture and a real-world culture.

You're ignoring that Hobbits are explicitly based upon rural England. It's the only direct allegory/derivation the professor ever admitted. The Rohirrim are very clearly Anglo-Saxons, and certain other cultures are very closely based upon certain other European cultures.

Even if one, in a fit of grandiose sophistry, removes it to "based upon their literature" instead of "based upon them", one still is basing upon the culture.

The technological base is clearly (outside the Shire) based upon medieval Europe. The languages are derived from European linguistic patterns. The Human, Hobbit, and Dwarf names are directly taken from European languages.