# Greatest contribution, Arnor or Gondor?



## Arvedui (Oct 14, 2003)

_From The Lord of the Rings: The Council of Elrond_


> 'But my home, such as I have, is in the North. For here the heirs of Valandil have ever dwelt in long line unbroken from father unto son for many generations. Our days have darkened, and we have dwindled; but ever the Sword has passed to a new keeper. And this I will say to you, Boromir, ere I end. Lonely men are we, Rangers of the wild, hunters--but hunters ever of the servants of the Enemy; for they are found in many places, not in Mordor only."


*Which contributions to the defeat of Sauron in the TA is greater? Those of the Arnor and it's descendants or those of Gondor's?* 
Another topic from the Debate-Tournament.


----------



## Flammifer (Oct 14, 2003)

Hmm....I seem to be answering all these....they're good topics!

Well, I think it was Arnor. Gondor's watch on Morgul and Mordor slipped because of their idleness (is that a word?). 

Arnor was a place in which the line of Isildur managed to stay alive. This was essential to the defeat of Sauron. It was very much influenced by Elrond in Rivendell. I think that the line of Isildur _needed_ to be in the North near Rivendell. I doubt it would have survived otherwise.

Also, the Rangers contributed greatly to the measure of freedom that the North enjoyed between the Last Alliance and the Fall of Sauron. I remember Aragorn saying something in the CoE like:

"Little freedom would the North have known without us [the Dunedain]"

So, they made a great contribution.

Gondor, of course, did make a great contribution, but like I said, they let Morgul and Mordor get taken away from their control.

But Gondor did by its vigilance (though waning) manage to hold back Mordor for a while. Truth be told very little could have done this forever, in fact, nothing could, so I guess they did a great job there. But as Galdor or Erestor says:

"But your vigilance can no longer hold back the Nine" (or something like that)

So, overall, I'd say Arnor.


----------



## Elanor2 (Oct 14, 2003)

It is a good subject indeed!

Let's see. Gondor was founded as a kind of fontier kingdom whose purpose, I guess, was to survey Mordor in the South West. In a sense, they failed because despite of their vigilance Sauron and his troops managed to move around. However, this faillure was a partial one: They managed to survive and maintain a great part of their strength and made wise alliances, with the Rohirrim for example.

Arnor was supposed to be the main Numenorean kingdom, but their faillure was more profound. They wasted themselves with civil wars and they lost almost all their power while Gondor endured. Their main contribution was to keep Isildur's line intact and, in a sense, that was not because of their wisdom or power, but thanks to Rivendel and also because it is likely that greater powers were involved (after all, ME needed Aragorn).

So, in practical terms, Gondor contributed more since their armies and alliances saved the day, while Arnor gave only one single figure: Aragorn. And it is possible that Aragorn was not even their 'product', but the product of a higher necessity. 

So I would vote for Gondor.


----------



## Aulë (Oct 14, 2003)

Aragorn wasn't the only 'product' of Arnor.
Don't forget the other Rangers and those rascally Hobbits (I'm fairly sure that quite a few of those Halflings did a very rather important deeds  )


----------



## Gil-Galad (Oct 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Aulë _
> *Aragorn wasn't the only 'product' of Arnor.
> Don't forget the other Rangers and those rascally Hobbits (I'm fairly sure that quite a few of those Halflings did a very rather important deeds  ) *


But all they survived because Gondor was there, protecting the lands of Arnor.Throught the years Gondor was the only obstruction Sauron,the only Kingdom which could opposse in a way to Sauron's forces.The Hobbits and all inhabitants of Arnor paid with Gondorian blood for their saftey.
If it hadn't been Gondor,Arnor would have been qonquered by Sauron very easily,because of the long civil war and the reducing population of Dunedain.


----------



## Aulë (Oct 14, 2003)

But we can always blame Gondor for Arvedui not being made King. If it weren't for that, the Kingdoms would have been joined again, and it would have been more likely that both Kingdoms would have bloomed, and Sauron would have been less of a threat in the Third Age.
So that's a minor negative point for Gondor.


Anyway, I'm guessing that the thing to ponder in this topic is to determine who did the greater deeds in the Third Age vs Sauron.

Hobbits + Line of Isildur + Men of Arnor in battles with the Witch King vs. Line of Anárion + Men of Gondor in battles with Mordor.

We're talking about the Third Age, so we ignore the battles leading up to and including the Final Alliance. And we could probable ignore the battles against the Wainriders, since they had nothing much to do with Sauron. The Men of Arnor lost their battle with the WC (but were saved by Gondor), but the Men of Gondor would have lost their battle with Mordor, had it not been for the Hobbits of the Shire and Aragorn.

But you are right about Gondor protecting Arnor, GG. But they would have failed at that bar for the help of the Men of Rohan/Rhovanion.


----------



## Gil-Galad (Oct 14, 2003)

As I know the Men of Rohan/Rhovanion were not aprt of the Northern Kingdom.Rohan was established thanks to Gondor.
I mean they helped Gondor survive and that is why they received the lands they inhabit during III age.
I think that we can claim the battle to be won thanks to the Rohirrim,but this was a result of long-time relationships.Relationships which saved Gondor.Relationships -result of the clever policy of Gondor towards the Rohirrims.So in conclusion I would say that the Rohirrims' help was a result of the CLEVER actions of Gondor during III age.


----------



## Celebthôl (Oct 14, 2003)

Id say it was about equal, as the Heir came form the north and raised the men of Rohan and Gondors moral massively, he also saved the Pellenor fields. But Gondor was a tireless bulwark against the tide of Sauron, they never stopped guarding against him and they were excedingly brave and courageous (sp).


----------



## Beleg (Oct 21, 2003)

by far Gondor.


----------



## Aulë (Oct 22, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Beleg _
> *by far Gondor. *


Care to elaborate?


----------



## Beleg (Oct 23, 2003)

> *Originally posted by Aule*
> Care to Elaborate



no. Eleanor2 did a fine job.


----------



## Inderjit S (Oct 23, 2003)

I guess such a supposition is a matter of _opinion_ rather then _fact_ each played it's own part in the battle against Sauron but it is a matter of _opinion_ as to whether or not one played the "greater" part than the other, if indeed one side did play a greater part then the other.

Since this is a discussion of the Third Age, I will deal with things that took place within the Third Age.

The _Disaster of the Gladden Fields_ was the starting point of the histories. With the disaster of the Gladden Fields, came the loss of the Ring and the death of Isildur.

The loss of the Ring is a important factor in the history of the T.A. Isildur was willing to hand the ring over to Elrond and Galadriel claiming his "pride had fallen". Would he really have given it up? Gandalf is speculative, he claims it may have been better for Isildur to die rather then for him to live long enough for the Ring to take control of him. And even if he had given Elrond and Galadriel the Ring, what would they have done? Destroyed it? If so then they may have left Middle-Earth due to the consequences of destroying the one ring, and the resulting impotence of the Elven Rings, which they hadn't used yet. (At least not till the fall of Sauron at the end of the S.A.)

Or would they have become corrupted by the Ring? Would one of them take Sauron's stead as the new dark lord/Queen/nymphomaniac? 

If Isildur didn't march to Arnor (He took this land as his own now, in place of his father Elendil Voronda. Meneldil, his nephew was the King of Gondor) then mayhap the fate of Middle-Earth would have changed for the worst. Already you can see that the existence of Arnor was important.

The Witch-King also went to Arnor because it was the "weaker" realm at that time. Well, if Arnor didn't exist then he would have no choice but to attack Gondor. Gondor was eventually worn away by internal and external disputes whose to say the Witch-King couldn't wear away Gondor after a period of time? 

Gondor of course acted as a buffer against the forces of the East and South, but it sure wasn't a "stalwart soldier" in keeping out the Easterlings and Haradrim. The Northmen were as important as Gondor in keeping away the threat from the East. Gondor of course didn't realise the importance of the Northmen buffer until it was too late, when they started to die out due to the great plague, in which nearly half of their population died. They also bore the full brunt of the assaults from the East, and after their defeat in the Brown Lands (Together with the army of Gondor) they were scattered some joining their kinsmen if the North (Dale) and some retreating West to remain in the Vale of Anduin. A lot of them were reduced to servitude as the Waindriders took over and occupied their lands. Thus Gondor now had no bulwark to the N-E. but a enemy. King Caliemhtar, who had previously engaged in war to the south, which had been going on for some time, since the capture of Umbar by hid grandfather Telumehatar Umbardacil. He then looked to the threat from the N-E. The Battle upon Dagorlad was even, until Marhwini came to the aid of Gondor and the host of the Wainriders was scattered and they were utterly defeated, but some of the fled to the North. Now, Marhwini had earlier stirred up a rebellion and when he came back he found that although the Wainriders had retreated, most of the rebels were killed and he retreated back to the Vales of Anduin. The Northmen moved North after the destruction of Angmar and the Fall of Arnor. They then saved Gondor with the ride of Eorl. They were then given the Northern part of Gondor, 'Calenardhon' (named by them 'The Mark') and they acted as protection for Gondor for a length of time, until again saving them in the Pellenor fields. 

Of course the protection of Gondor may have encouraged the Hobbits to move Westwards to the Vale of Anduin. The Hobbits moved up North though, when they were disturbed by the presence of evil Men (The Wainriders) and the shadow in the forest. It seems by Haldir's words that the Silvan elves knew something of Hobbits, or at least had encountered them, but oddly Treebeard has never heard of Hobbits and was mystified by their appearance, though he does note that their voices reminded him of something, so Treebeard may have missed the mass immigration of Hobbits, though it may not have gone unnoticed by the Northmen and the Elves of Lorien. Yet, the Hobbits played one of the most important parts, if not 
*the* most important part in the war against Sauron, the finding, re-finding and destruction of the Ring-achieved by Hobbits, though of course there were other factors. But how did the history of the Hobbits work out? It is certain that Arnor played the more explicit part in the history and movements of the Hobbits.

They provided as safe-haven for the Hobbits in the early settlement in Eriador and later gave them the 'Shire'-a important factor in the war against Sauron. More on that later.

The war in Arnor, though troubled some of the Hobbits. The Stoors moved south, to Dunland, but excavated back North and eventually crossed the Misty Mountains and resided close to the Gladden Fields. This is a important part in the development of the affairs in the T.A. The removal of the Stoors back over the Misty Mountains lead to the finding of the ring by Deagol and then Smeagol's taking of the ring. Assuming they had not found it it may have eventually been found by Sauron.

Arnor's importance is tied up with Hobbits and thus the ring, for all their victories in wars, Gondor's efforts were in the end futile but for the destruction of the ring, in which Arnor played a important part.

Arnor also kept close ties with the Elves. Gondor lost most of it's ties with the Elves, but Arnor still communicated and allied itself with Rivendell and Mithlond. Arahael and his heirs were all fostered in Rivendell by Elrond and this the final strain of descendants of Elendil were also fostered by one of the wisest of all the Elves in Middle-Earth and had a teaching and upbringing and nobility that far surpassed any Gondorians. In. In Arnor the line of Kings endured, culminating in the saving of Gondor on the Pellenor fields and the re-uniting of the line of the Half-Elven. If it wasn't for Aragorn then Sauron would have got the ring.


----------



## Inderjit S (Oct 23, 2003)

> Let's see. Gondor was founded as a kind of fontier kingdom whose purpose, I guess, was to survey Mordor in the South West



Gondor was founded by Isildur and Anarion because their ships landed in the South and they sailed up the Anduin. They though Sauron had perished in the downfall therefore they could not act as a frontier to a non existent threat.



> Arnor was supposed to be the main Numenorean kingdom, but their faillure was more profound. They wasted themselves with civil wars



When criticizing Arnor's civil war (Stirred up by the Witch-King) you cannot ignore the civil war within Gondor-stirred up by themselves. When Eldacar married Vidumavi it caused distress in the kingdom that the Kings heir married someone of alien blood. This dissension was bound to arise amongst the Númenóreans. A group of confederates from the south, headed by descendants of Meneldil, attacked him at Osgilaith. Eventually he was driven out, and Castamir, strongest of all the rebels usurped the throne and slew his son Ornendil whilst Eldacar fled to the North. Eldacar brought a great host of Northmen and Númenóreans to Gondor to contest the power of Castamir and he defeated him at the Crossings of Erui. But in that battle a lot of the greatest men of Gondor were slain, and it's decline began. 



> And it is possible that Aragorn was not even their 'product', but the product of a higher necessity



Doesn't this involvement of 'higher powers' imply the greater importance of Arnor in comparison to Gondor in the general scheme of things?



> But we can always blame Gondor for Arvedui not being made King. If it weren't for that, the Kingdoms would have been joined again, and it would have been more likely that both Kingdoms would have bloomed, and Sauron would have been less of a threat in the Third Age.



But that would increase the possibility of Sauron *gaining the ring*. No matter how strong Gondor and Arnor were, as long as the Ring existed they could never get rid of Sauron. The Easterlings still would have attacked, the Corsairs still would have ravaged-they may have prospered for a time-but would they have survived?



> And we could probable ignore the battles against the Wainriders, since they had nothing much to do with



They had everything to do with Sauron. 



> What is here said was deduced from events long afterwards by historians, to whom it was also clear that the hatred of Gondor and the alliance of it's enemies in concerted action was due to the machinations of Sauron


 _Cirion and Eorl; U.T_ 



> As I know the Men of Rohan/Rhovanion were not part of the Northern Kingdom. Rohan was established thanks to Gondor.



Rhovanion consisted of a collection of realms, most of which aided Gondor in wars. Some were evil though. The Eothed and thus Rohirrim are descended from the Northmen. For more. info on their history read the 'Appendix' and 'Cirion and Eorl'.


----------



## Beleg (Oct 24, 2003)

I am still not convinced that Arnor played a more important role then Gondor in the war against Sauron during the third age.


----------



## Snaga (Oct 25, 2003)

Obviously the question is somewhat artificial, because it all depends on what you include in the equation.

If you say that the hobbits served Arnor, and therefore all the actions of Bilbo and Frodo count for Arnor, that really trumps everything else. 

If you exclude that you have to say that Arnor succumbed first, so Gondor looks a better bet. Arnor was always weaker than Gondor: less populous, less well fortified. That meant that they were specifically targetted by Sauron: the realm of Angmar was set up with the aim being the destruction of Arnor. In a sense, Sauron did just enough to keep Gondor from assisting (until the damage was done), while Angmar destroyed Arnor.

Gondor endured for longer, but ultimately would have fallen too. Sauron had mustered enough to knock down Gondor at the end of the Third Age. It took longer because Gondor was stronger to begin with, so it endured for longer but ultimately it would have fallen too. If it wasn't for the pesky little hobbits....


----------



## BlackCaptain (Oct 25, 2003)

I'm gona say Arnor. Simply because this War was won by heart, not military power. If it was than Mordor would've taken over Middle Earth without question. And the majority of the inspiration and hope came from:
a)Gandalf
b)Aragorn's coming with the Dunedains


----------



## Gil-Galad (Oct 25, 2003)

And all Dunedain and hobbits and etc. fought with their hearts?!!
But what about Gondorians?Didn't they sacrifice everything,didn't they fought with the enemy all these years and in the last battles?Didn't they fought with their hearts?
Just remember Boromir's words,about the price which is paid for the protection of Arnor-Gondorian blood.


----------



## BlackCaptain (Oct 25, 2003)

Well of course they did, but I'm just saying that Aragorn broght tons of Hope and inpiration to a disparing people.


----------



## Inderjit S (Oct 26, 2003)

If you were Gandalf then *Arnor* would certainly be more "important" to you then Gondor. Remember Gandalf was a emissary of the Valar, the wisest Maia and a Maia of Manwë, Varda and Irmo. His actions would be a reflection of the general 'plan' set forth by the Valar for Middle-Earth.



> But his main province was "The North", and within it above all the North-west, Lindon, Eriador, and the Vales of Anduin. His alliance was primarily with Elrond and the northern Dúnedain (Rangers). Peculiar to him was his love and knowledge of the "Halflings," because his wisdom had presage of their ultimate importance, and at the same time he perceived their inherent worth. Gondor attracted his attention less, for the same reason that made it more interesting to Saruman: it was a centre of knowledge and power. Its rulers by ancestry and all their traditions were irrevocably opposed to Sauron, certainly politically: their realm arose as a threat to him, and continued to exist only in so far and so long as his threat to them could be resisted by armed force. Gandalf could do little to guide their proud rulers or to instruct them, and it was only in the decay of their power, when they were ennobled by courage and steadfastness in what seemed a losing cause, that he began to be deeply concerned with them


 _The Istari; U.T_ 

I'm not disputing that Gondor had a bigger military role in the battle against Sauron, but not all battles are won via war. (a paradox, I know, but bear with me) because in the end what was Sauron defeated by? Armies? No. War played a part in his downfall, but the only way they could get rid of him forever was by destroying the Ring and that could never be achieved by battles. Sauron’s armies had been defeated time and time again, but he still came back-why? Because of the Ring, get rid of the Ring and Sauron's armies aren't a threat. Who played a greater part in the history of the Ring? Arnor.


----------

