# Was the Council of Gondor right in rejecting Arvedui's claim?



## Inderjit S (Sep 14, 2004)

Was the Council of Gondor right in rejecting Arvedui's claim for kingship-was Earnil, in the end, the right choice, despite Malbeth's prophecy? Post your thoughts here. I will post mine later on in the thread.


----------



## Confusticated (Sep 14, 2004)

I would tend to say they were wrong. I think they were just trying to find excuses to refuse him. 

That the people of Gondor prefered to have Earnil should count for something, and if the law truly were unclear or not agreed upon then this alone could justify their choice I think. But on the other hand this could have been a bad tradition, that in the absense of an heir any man from the royal house could be chosen. Unless the overwhelming majority were in favour of one person this could just cause more civil war. It sort of becomes free for all. Even more than this, a united kingdom could have been stronger.

But then they shouldn't have been forced to reunite the realms, so they had every right to deny Arvedui I think. Of course then they could have denied Aragorn too if they had wanted, but that they were willing to accept an heir of Isildur at the time of the _War of the Ring_ doesn't mean that looking back Arvedui should have been accepted. Ultimately I think it was up to Gondor, so bad choice or not, the choice should have been theirs.


----------



## Valandil (Sep 14, 2004)

_*Hee-hee! Is this all from that 'shaking' I gave you about Meneldil's House??? * _  

I'm a big fan of the northern Dunedain myself, so it would be all too easy to say, 'Yes - it was wrong and they should have taken Arvedui as their King!'

However... I'm not so sure it was even possible for them to do so in 1944-45 of the Third Age that Tolkien presents us with.

When Isildur left Osgiliath in Year 2 of the Third Age, he was High King of both kingdoms and was entrusting the southern portion to Meneldil's care. However, as the years went by, the kingdoms grew apart. Some even make a good case that as Gondor grew stronger, its rulers saw less and less need to continue to acknowledge the overlordship of Isildur's line in the North. Certainly by the time following King Earendur's death in 861 - their acknowledgement of this came to a complete end, for the title 'High King' was relinquished in the North at the same time as the Kingdom of Arnor was divided. So... the seeds for the Council of Gondor's decision in 1945 were really sown in the first few hundred years of the Third Age (EDIT: I think we even see it hinted at in the description of Meneldil at Isildur's farewell and charge to him).

I'm doubtful that Malbeth's prophecy about Arvedui was even known in Gondor. Even if it was, they would feel little compulsion to heed it, and even Malbeth admitted that it was the choice which seemed less hopeful.

Things were quite different in 3019 when an ancestor of Arvedui was given the crown. By this time, Gondor itself was in decline, and they knew it. They were starved for a renewal... and Aragorn had saved the land by his leadership in battle. In 1945, it was really only the logical thing to do to give the throne to the man who had saved them at that time - Earnil. He was only second cousin-once removed to their last King, but that was a much closer relation, male side considered, than Arvedui was to them - for his distant ancestor Isildur had been a brother to Ondoher's distant ancestor Anarion.

One could wonder if... had Angmar NOT destroyed Arthedain, and yet if Earnur had been lost similarly to how he was lost, if Aranarth, son of Arvedui would have been appealing to Gondor - rather than leaving the throne vacant. Aranarth, after all, was a grandson of Ondoher, not merely a son-in-law. But... *sigh* - in 2050, Aranarth was leader of a wandering people and no king at all, certainly of no appeal to Gondor at that time - if they could have even found a forwarding address for him - or if they even suspected he might still be alive.

_PS - if you're interested in some fanfic on this... see my 'Letters of Firiel' in the 'Letters of Middle Earth' thread of Prancing Pony forum. Firiel, of course, is the daughter of Ondoher who marries Arvedui - and Arvedui subsequently tries to use that marriage as leverage to press his claim. Anyway - I've gotten a few positive comments on them, but you probably have to have an interest in the period... and lots of patience. _


----------



## Valandil (Sep 15, 2004)

Further thoughts: The story of course, would have been fundamentally different. If the Ring still made it to the Shire some 1000 years after Arvedui took the throne of Gondor, some provision would need to be made for watching over certain halflings on their travels.

Now naturally, we tend to think of things this way - in a historical sense, but in the reality of the situation, from the author's perspective - Aragorn gave rise to Gondor. As he spun his story, the need for a seasoned guide was first filled by the hobbit, Trotter - later transformed into the Ranger-man, Strider / Aragorn. This allowed JRRT to tie-in his 'Atlantis' legend, and to make the character best suited for the story, it worked well for him to be a king with no kingdom, working to secure for himself the rulership of a kingdom with no king. So the linkages of the two historical kingdoms were provided, along with some rationale(s) for him to feel it was a legitimate claim.


----------



## Valandil (Sep 20, 2004)

*what - no one else wants to talk about this??*   

In regards to what I wrote above, *ON THE OTHER HAND:*

I wonder if the possibility of making Arvedui their King held some appeal to at least a vocal minority on the Council of Gondor. After all, he did give some nice rationale in his statements... and he WAS the direct descendant of Elendil and Isildur, and since he was married to Firiel, his son would be a grandson of their previous King, Ondoher.

It seems like some of them COULD have favored him, by the simple fact that they waited a full year before making Earnil their king.

Another way to look at this is to assess WHY the CoG waited a year. There are a number of possible reasons that come to mind: (1) Uncertainty about the possibility of making Earnil their king. (2) Thorough search made for all who could trace their descent back to any of the last several kings of Gondor. (3) Careful consideration of Arvedui's claim. (4) Or - did Pelendur himself have any hopes of becoming what his grandson Mardil actually became... a Ruling Steward of Gondor??

Pelendur himself, we are told, was in opposition to Arvedui's claim. Other council members may have been sympathetic. I wonder who they might have been. We know a few names of those who may have been on this council... perhaps Earnil himself - but also Prince Adrahil, whose son Imrazor was to become the father of Galador, first Prince of Dol Amroth. Adrahil was descended from a kinsman of Elendil, and Elendil had conferred the title of 'Prince' upon this ancestor of his. I wonder if he would be just the member of a Council of Gondor to honor the claim of Elendil's heir. I also wonder if he would fall out of favor once things played out the way that they did.


----------



## Inderjit S (Sep 22, 2004)

Sorry about the delayed reply----I have been busy. Well, my reply is basically made up of my other posts on the topic. Feel free to debate on this Valandil-it is a topic we disagree on.

The decision to appoint Eärnil II was a logical political one. Why? Well, even though Isildur held himself to be High-King of Arnor and Gondor we don't know if his descendants continued this. Certainly after Earendur and the ensuing feudal war within 'Arnor', the issue of High-Kingship in terms of Gondor would have been pretty much forgotten. No Arnorian King is said to claim the throne a Gondor when any of the King's didn't have a child. (Tarannon Falastur, Narmacil or when Telemnar I and his children perished in the Great Plague. Or even in the Kin-strife, though at this time the Dunedain of Gondor were divided with the supporters of Eldacar and the confederation of various descendants of Anarion, who removed to Umbar. Castamir was the chief of these and the one who took the Kingship from Eldacar.

It seems that Ondoher was attempting to secure better relations between Arnor and Gondor, hence his marrying of his daughter, Firiel to Arvedui, the King of Arthedain. But Ondoher and his sons were slain in the Battle with the Wainraiders. Eärnil in effect saved Gondor after first defeating the Southern Force and then routing the Northern one when they were feasting. He was a hero.

We then get two people claiming the kingship. Eärnil, the captain of Gondor, has just saved Gondor, descended from Meneldil, who Isildur relinquished the realm to (though he still claimed over-lordship over the realm), known and loved by the Dunedain of Gondor, and descended from the male line, from Arciryas, brother of Narmacil II. Descendance from the male line is important in Gondor. In Numenor, Tar-Aldarion changed the laws of succession to get back at his wife, so Ancalime could become Queen. Of course unlike any male heirs to the throne, the female ones could refuse the sceptre, as did the sisters of Tar-Anarion. But in M-E, where war was ravaged, this law seems to have been rejected and passed over. Women weren't good war time rulers. So descendent from the female line seems to have been rejected, thus one of Arvedui's claims, that he is married to the last child of Ondoher cannot be seen as being a legitimate claim. Tarannon Falastur was succeeded by his nephew of his brother, Narmacil I by his younger brother and Telemnar by the son of his brother.

The people of Gondor at that time thought little of Arthedain too. Plus the claim of Earnil was universally accepted and supported. Plus the fact that Pelendur, Earnil's steward, was a great supporter of the claim of Earnil shows there may have been some selfish elements to the rejection of the claim of Arvedui, maybe he would have less power/influnece under Arvedui or maybe it was because he was close friends with Earnil. This was a few hundred years before the death of Ondoher. (Of course the house of Stewards had begun with Hurin, steward of Minardil, who was slain by the Corsairs and it was in his sons time, King Telemnar that the Great Plague came and Tarondor removed to Minas Anor (Tirith).)

The choice to appoint Earnil was the more sensible one. There was no 'spritual' reason behind it, it was simple politics.

Taken from The Gondorian Council Worthy? 

The question of the Salic law in Middle-Earth is an ambiguous one. Númenórean laws state that somebody can come to king/queenship through the female line, after the whole Aldarion incident. But the law went through a great deal of change of the years. Elendil and co. were conservatives-and descendants of the female line from Elros. So it would be kind of ironic if they said "no descendants from the female line" straight away. It would have been silly. The whole Salic law thingy, which was brought to the fore after the death of Ondoher and his sons, and Arvedui, pressed his claim, as the descendant of Isildur, the "high king" of Arnor and Gondor, and eldest son of Elendil, the first king, as well as being the husband of Ondoher's only child, Fíriel. The Gondorian council rejected his claim, in the favour of the war captain Eärnil-a member of the royal family, and the saviour of Gondor. They claimed that in a time of war, salic law should be allowed, and that it was allowed in Númenór because Númenór was in a state of perpetual peace. Any continuation of the salic law would take place when a state of peace existed. Plus Isildur's claim of high-kingship could not be re-claimed so many years after his death, and it made more sense for the popular Eärnil to be king-they wanted to avoid any dissonances and a possible civil war. Any civil war would have left Gondor very weak. So a descendant of Meneldil was needed, and Eärnil fitted the bill. Sorry for digressing.

Taken from Hobbit population and the age of men 

You say you are interested in Arnor-perhaps you will be interested in the following;

The Civil Wars of the Dunedain 

Differences Between Arnor and Gondor 

The Enigmatic House of Hurin


----------



## Valandil (Sep 22, 2004)

Inderjit S said:


> Sorry about the delayed reply----I have been busy. Well, my reply is basically made up of my other posts on the topic. Feel free to debate on this Valandil-*it is a topic we disagree on*.



How so? Or were you too busy to read my post?  I essentially agreed with most of what you were saying in my first post... post #3 of this thread. At least I thought I did!   Just tossed out a couple other thoughts in post #'s 4 & 5. See where I say:



Valandil said:


> However... I'm not so sure it was even possible for them to do so in 1944-45 of the Third Age that Tolkien presents us with.



Then read on from there.



Inderjit S said:


> ...This was a few hundred years before the death of Ondoher....



I wasn't sure what you were saying here - perhaps it was incomplete... Arvedui's claim came immediately after Ondoher's death, of course.   



Inderjit S said:


> The choice to appoint Earnil was the more sensible one. There was no 'spritual' reason behind it, it was simple politics.



As I said, I agree. If the Council had made Arvedui their king, the people of Gondor would've said: _"Arve-*Who*? Why *HIM*??? Are they *NUTS*? So some guy up there says it'll be best for us all if we make him our King... RIIII-iiight! And my Aunt Bettiwen says it's best for Gondor if you make *ME* King!"_   



Inderjit S said:


> You say you are interested in Arnor-perhaps you will be interested in the following;
> 
> The Civil Wars of the Dunedain
> 
> ...



Please re-check the paths, Indy... the first one took me nowhere, the second ('Differences Between Arnor and Gondor") actually took me to where the first was supposed to go - 'The Civil Wars of the Dunedain'. The third was fine. I was familiar with much of the information in 'The Civil Wars of the Dunedain'

Thanks.


----------



## Valandil (Sep 22, 2004)

BTW - more on the House of Dol Amroth:

It seems logical that the Council of Gondor was not in universal agreement that Earnil should be given the throne - because it took them a full year to do so.

I've just been reminded that in _*'The Heirs of Elendil'*_ we find that at the point where the Ruling Stewards took power (2050 TA), Dol Amroth ceased to be part of Gondor... but was still a loyal allied province.


> ... After the ending of the kings they became virtually independent princes, ruling over Belfalas, but they were at all times loyal to the Steward as representing the ancient crown.


 I saw it noted elsewhere (another MB - in discussion on Imrahil) that of the forces that rallied to Gondor, only Dol Amroth's marched under their own banner (aside from the Rohirrim - who were obviously also a separate kingdom - but a loyal ally).

Could it be that Prince Adrahil of Belfalas DID support Arvedui quite vocally in the Council's debates? And that all those years later (105 - but that's not long in ME time!  ), his son Imrazor saw where the opposite choice had led them, and made a pointed statement about it by withdrawing himself from Gondor's direct influence?? Just a thought...


----------



## Inderjit S (Sep 23, 2004)

Sorry about the links-and the 'topic we disagree on'-, maybe I should have said, 'disagree on some things'-I was a little ambiguous, but you seem to be pretty pro-Arnor a.l.a your second post, I understand you are just exploring possibilities but your pro-Arnor bias has clouded your judgement  . I understand and agree with a lot of your points in your first post. But I think it was impossible to make Arvedui king of Gondor, despite Malbeth's prophecy. 

And on the 'few hundred years' thing-I have no idea.



> I've just been reminded that in 'The Heirs of Elendil' we find that at the point where the Ruling Stewards took power (2050 TA), Dol Amroth ceased to be part of Gondor... but was still a loyal allied province.



I think 'ceased to be part of Gondor' is an exaggeration-they became 'virtually' independent princes i.e. they were in sense princes, but not in name, so they did not secede, but gained a sense of quasi-autonomy. I think that they were independent in everything but name-though as you say, they still pledged allegiance. I think that any such change would have taken place over time and not straight away. i.e. it became normal to see Dol Amroth as semi or fully autonomous. 



> Could it be that Prince Adrahil of Belfalas DID support Arvedui quite vocally in the Council's debates? And that all those years later (105 - but that's not long in ME time! ), his son Imrazor saw where the opposite choice had led them, and made a pointed statement about it by withdrawing himself from Gondor's direct influence?? Just a thought...



I don't think so-I think their loyalties would have lay with Gondor and the war captain Earnil, who would have been much revered.

And on Pelendur wishing to make his son ruling steward-I highly doubt it! The Gondorians sure valued their royal family.

Again, sorry about the 'we disagree' comment. I'm an idiot.


----------



## Valandil (Sep 23, 2004)

Inderjit S said:


> Again, sorry about the 'we disagree' comment. I'm an idiot.



Not hardly!  

But... HEY! What did you mean by 'clouded my judgement'?!?!?!


----------



## Inderjit S (Sep 23, 2004)

Excessive bias can lead to clouded judgement.  Though we are all of us biased, to an extent.


----------



## Valandil (Sep 23, 2004)

As an interesting side-note, I just stumbled upon something by a better-known prophet:



> "After some years, they will become allies. The daughter of the King of the South will go to the King of the North to make an alliance, but she will not retain her power, and he and his power will not last."
> 
> Daniel 11:6 (a) NIV



Comments in my Study Bible indicate that this passage refers to those who would rule the remnants of Alexander's conquests... but I thought it was funny. The rest of the context doesn't really fit with Arnor and Gondor, of course.


----------



## Inderjit S (Sep 25, 2004)

Tolkien would, of course, castigate you for your distasteful allegorical references.


----------



## Valandil (Sep 25, 2004)

Inderjit S said:


> Tolkien would, of course, castigate you for your distasteful allegorical references.



How thoughtful of you to do so in his prolonged absence!


----------



## Richard (Oct 19, 2004)

IT would seem it was the right decision. I wondered why Sauron could not find the heir of Isildur. Having going back to the north why did the witch king not find him?


----------



## Valandil (Dec 13, 2004)

*bump*

Just for comparison with the similar new thread...



*Edit:*

For another slant on all this, see Letter #'s 8 & 9 (both on page 2) in the thread with the link in my sig. That'll show you what Firiel thought of the whole thing!


----------

