# The Stewards of Gondor



## Ancalagon (May 30, 2002)

Having ruled Gondor for thousands of years, did the ruling Steward have the right to reject Aragorns claim to the throne?

If Faramir referred to Boromir as a 'Prince of Gondor' and Denethor as 'Lord of Gondor', surely the assumption that the ruling stewards were now truly the rightful lords could easily have meant they could seek to continue their rule, even after the knowledge that Aragorn, now revealed, was in direct ascendency to the throne.

Why did the ruling Stewards not then pass a law stating that they did not recognise the line of Isildur and claim the Kingship themselves?

Discuss.


----------



## chrysophalax (May 31, 2002)

It seems that the Stewards were suffering from an enormous case of "Out of sight, out of mind." Who can blame them really? It had been so many lives of Men since there had been a true King that this assumption on their part seems a pretty good one, although it speaks for the over-all character the Stewards that they DIDN'T just say "This is ridiculous!" and assume the kingship themselves.


----------



## Thorin (May 31, 2002)

I think the stewards got quite complacent in their views that there would never be another King of Gondor....It had been so long. The letter of the law was there and accepted, but they thought it would never have to be taken seriously.....

Law and tradition had to be respected when Aragorn came back....In their complacency, the law hadn't been done away with by the Stewards, so it had to be followed....If they had, by their own power, abolished the claim to the throne from a seemingly non-existent heir of Isildur, they might have had a case against Aragorn coming into the scene....


----------



## Gothmog (May 31, 2002)

> 'And this I remember of Boromir as a boy, when we together learned the tale of our sires and the history of our city, that always it displeased him that his father was not king. "How many hundreds of years needs it to make a steward a king, if the king returns not? " he asked. "Few years, maybe, in other places of less royalty," my father answered. "In Gondor ten thousand years would not suffice." Alas! poor Boromir. Does that not tell you something of him? '


 from The Two Towers: The Window on the West.
This shows the view of Denethor and his son Faramir, that Gondor is a place of such "royalty" there was no way that they could concieve of the Stewards being made kings. It was only Boromir who thought in this way.

It is my view that the Stewards were so bound in the tradition and history of Gondor that they could not and would not even consider any change that would go against that tradition. So it was impossible for them to pass any laws to block the claim of the 'Heir of Isildur'.

All that they could do was the look at the claim and advise as to the rightness or otherwise of the claim and whether or not the people should accept it. An earlier claim was in fact rejected, and it seems that if this prior claim had been persued then Aragorn II would not have been the 'Chieftain of the Dunedain of the North' but King of Gondor and Arnor anyway.


----------



## Greenwood (May 31, 2002)

I second Gothmog's comments. The King of Arnor had laid claim to the Kingship of Gondor centuries past and that claim had been rejected by the Stewards and the people of Gondor. There was no reason for the Stewards to think that anyone would ever appear to lay claim to the Kingship once the North Kingdom had disappeared. The only reason Aragorn's claim was recognized was because he appeared as a saviour in the nick of time at the Battle of Pelennor Fields and had the backing of the elves, Rohan, Gandalf, etc., but most importantly Faramir. If Denethor had lived he would never have relinguished the rule of Gondor to Aragorn. The circumstances leading to Aragorn's claim being universally accepted could not have been foreseen by the Stewards, thus they had no reason to claim disturb the status quo by claiming the title of King when they already had all the powers anyway.


----------



## Chymaera (Jun 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Gothmog _
> * An earlier claim was in fact rejected, and it seems that if this prior claim had been persued then Aragorn II would not have been the 'Chieftain of the Dunedain of the North' but King of Gondor and Arnor anyway. *





> _The Return of the King, Appendix A(iv) Gondor and the heirs of Anarion_*
> Malbeth the Seer said "Arvedui you shall call him, for he will be the last in Arthedain. Though a choice will come to the Dunedain, and if they take the one that seems less hopeful, then your son will change his name and become king of a great realm. If not then much sorrow and many lives of men shall pass, until the Dunedain arise and are united again."*


When Ondoher, King of Gondor, was slain along with his son. Arvedui, King of Arthedain and heir of Isildur, and married to Ondoher's daughter, Firiel made a claim on the throne of Gondor. He was rejected.
Earnil the victorious captain, and member of the royal house, was granted the Kingship.

So Malbeth predicted that the Dunedain would choose, and they did. Malbeth's prediction also is a harbinger of a future king uniting the Dunedain.[AragornII]


----------



## LadyDernhelm (Apr 19, 2004)

My question:

Would they have been able to declare themselves the new ruling line? Gondor was an old, old place. We don't know a lot about the people of Gondor, but perhaps they were a tradition-bound folk. Would they have protested if the Steward had defied the line of Isildur?

And also: would anyone from outside Gondor have protested? Wizards? Rohirrim, their allies? Anyone?

Just wondering.

~LadyDernhelm


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (Apr 19, 2004)

What was it that Denethor said about ten thousand years not being a sufficient length of time for a Steward to be made a King? Did he mean--ten thousand years after the disappearance of Earnur, or did the Steward himself have to live ten thousand years?

Part of the problem is that the fiefs of Gondor appear (at the time of the War of the Ring) to have had some degree of autonomy--particularly (I would guess) the coastal regions and Pelargir. This does not mean that the folk of these provinces would have been any less loyal to the Steward in Minas Tirith. But they would have been much more loyal to, and much more unified under (the Kin-strife notwithstanding), a King they perceived as legitimate (i.e. of the bloodline of Elendil). For example, could anyone but Aragorn have led forces of Gondor, at the time of its greatest peril, to meet that peril face-to-face at the Morannon?

Had someone of Denethor's mien seized the throne, not only might it have led to strife at home, it might have strained relations with the Rohirrim--who I imagine would have counted it as dishonourable. And it would probably have led to further estrangement between Men and Elves, since the Council certainly wouldn't have recognised Denethor's kingship, even if it was unwilling or unable to do anything about it.

The Ring certainly would not have been brought within a hundred miles of Minas Tirith, if illegitimate Kings ruled there.


----------



## Halasían (May 20, 2004)

*Stewards of Gondor and the Rightful King.*

One must consider that the line was nurtured in Rivendell from the time of Aranath, eldest son of Arvedui, so there would have been documented record of the integrety of the line I would think. And I doubt Gondor wished to entertain anothe rkin-strife, of which the last vestige of the former kin-strife finally ended at thw end of the War of the Ring.a


----------



## Húrin Thalion (Jun 3, 2004)

Another thoguht: After the war of the Ring and the victory of Gondor, Aragorn was ridng high on his wave of popularity, especially since he had arrived when all thought that the last hour of Gondor had arrived, saved the day, and all this with Elendil's banner. This made him vastly popular with the people, who seem to have been thrown into a royalist fever. The question is, would they have accepted his claim, if the war had been won without him? Denethor was no man of the people, but certainly, Boromir, or Faramir, could compete with him in the hearts of the people, espsecially if they came home victorious from the war. Now, Faramir was a humble man and accepted the claim, bent to the will of the people, he had no choice but to do so. But would Boromir have done so?


----------



## Snaga (Jun 3, 2004)

LadyDernhelm said:


> My question:
> 
> Would they have been able to declare themselves the new ruling line? Gondor was an old, old place. We don't know a lot about the people of Gondor, but perhaps they were a tradition-bound folk. Would they have protested if the Steward had defied the line of Isildur?
> 
> ...


I don't see this as a likely occurence. The previous claim was rejected because there was someone (Earnil) with a competing claim from the House of Anorien, who was able to argue precedence. There was no king in Gondor in the time of the Stewards because there was no claim from EITHER house. The stewards authority rested entirely on that fact. To claim the kingship themselves over the heir of Elendil would have undermined their own legitimacy.


----------



## Valandil (Jun 9, 2004)

Chymaera said:


> When Ondoher, King of Gondor, was slain along with his son. Arvedui, King of Arthedain and heir of Isildur, and married to Ondoher's daughter, Firiel made a claim on the throne of Gondor. He was rejected.
> Earnil the victorious captain, and member of the royal house, was granted the Kingship.
> 
> So Malbeth predicted that the Dunedain would choose, and they did. Malbeth's prediction also is a harbinger of a future king uniting the Dunedain.[AragornII]



Slight correction (to get technical): Araphant, father of Arvedui, was still living and still King of Arthedain when Ondoher and his sons fell in battle in 1944. Araphant reigned until 1964 - and Arvedui after him until Fornost was sacked by the Witch King's army of Angmar in 1974. Arvedui, as Prince of Arthedain, claimed the crown of Gondor on the basis of his marriage to Firiel, d. of Ondoher (as you say) - the happy couple had married in 1940 and by 1944 likely already had their son, Aranarth... who, if Arvedui's claim to Gondor had been accepted, would have been his successor there - and a descendant of Ondoher of the line of Anarion, as well as the line of Isildur.

Instead, the victorious general Earnil was given the crown of Gondor. When his son Earnur (I'm not getting those names backwards, am I?) went AWOL in 2050, responding to a challenge of the Witch-King, and leaving no heir, the Stewards were the only ones in place to take power. Aranarth was still Chieftain of the Dunedain of the North (the only title he ever held, I imagine) - but Gondor may not have even known about him - or been in contact any longer with the heirs of Arvedui. Since they had rejected Arvedui's claim, when he stood to also gain the throne of Arthedain - it would not seem reasonable to go searching the northlands for his son - to just hand him the rule of Gondor.

Thus, the stage was set for Aragorn - who gained the crown both by his lineage, AND by his acts on the field. This time around, HE was the victorious general. In essence, he had as good a claim as Earnil (field victory) and Arvedui (lineage) combined. Also - with Denethor gone, Faramir was a 'friendly' Steward who admired Aragorn and would not have stood in his way to the throne.


----------

