Gondor and Arnor a handfull

[Gwaihir the Windlord]

Arnor and Gondor were kingdoms very large, and quite far away from each other. One would have thought a seperate king in each realm, the system that operated until King Elessar, would be a lot more practical than one king ruling both kingdoms, spending less time in each.

Thoughts?

[Saurreg]

I think that's because with the destruction of Mordorian forces and those of Isengard, Arnor no longer faced a great deal of threats. Further more with the expanding of the land of the hobbits and autonomy, there was much Elesser needed to do to rule Arnor.

[Galorme]

Elessar was not a normal king. He has kingly powers you cannot even begin to envisage. Plus he had a very nice wife, who could fix things and held a lot of sway in the now almost gone elven community.

[Kuruharan]

I'm inclined to agree. The whole system seems a bit far-flung and impractical. However, Arnor was virtually depopulated, and even with the migration of people that undoubtedly took place it probably still remained a fairly empty country. This lack of population would simplify government problems in the area.

But, the system still seems unstable. It would be interesting to see how this system reacted under stress.

However, just try telling any king that his empire is too big! [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[Galorme]

However, just try telling any king that his empire is too big!

You hit the nail on the head there. "Me Elessar, me great king, me have big sword, me do anything!". He probably just got lucky, or the system only held together because everyone loved him so much.

well the shire had its own mayor and thain so they could take care of them selves. most other places Elessar probably sent goveners, stewards, or diplomats. Same basic principle Alexander thge great used. The shire, and bree folk could take care of themselves after the scoring of the shire. Bree had some big lok living there so they could defend themselves from orcs and such. there were also rangers around Arnor so they were pretty well taken care of.

[Manwe Sulimo]

A handful? Hardly.

Gondor was easy, it already had it's "governors" in place. Faramir, Imrahil, and Angbor were already well-established by the time Elessar first went back North, to Arnor.

Arnor, on the other hand, was almost non-existent. Other than the Shire and Bree, there were no settlements left. Elessar rebuilt Annúminas, so that made one major city, one major town, a few homesteads, and a self-sufficient and largely autonomous region. Not much in the way of people to govern....

All in all, it's probably the equivalent of governing medieval Spain. After the Moors were driven out, it was (relatively) easy.

[Kuruharan]

All in all, it's probably the equivalent of governing medieval Spain. After the Moors were driven out, it was (relatively) easy.

Historical Note: This statement is wrong in most every respect.

The Moors were not finally driven out until 1492, which is technically after the end of the Middle Ages. Governing "Spain" (a mere geographic expression, the nation did not technically exist as such until after the death of Ferdinand and Isabella) was in no way easy; what with all the brigands rampaging about the countryside (up until Ferdinand eventually extirpated them), dealing with all the irritating feudal nobility that did not want to cooperate, and the usual run of governmental difficulties (riots, the difficulty of dealing with the Church, etc.) Then there was the little matter of having Spain broken into rival independent countries throughout the Middle Ages which caused all sorts of fun.

In short governing in the Middle Ages, in Spain or anywhere else, was no game.

Speaking of powerful feudal nobility, that is exactly what Faramir, Imrahil, and company were. They were not truly a source of stability. They were a source of potential trouble, and always would remain so.

While certainly governing Arnor would not be too big of a problem (at least for a generation or so), Gondor had the potential to be just tons of fun.

It just showed what a wonderful guy he was that nobody (that we know of) launched a major revolt against Elessar. (Remember it was his friends that were writing the history. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img])

I wonder what kind of experiences his son had during his tenure.

[Manwe Sulimo]

But considering the time frame and level of technology, it was almost the same. I never said that governing Spain had been easy, just a lot easier once the Moors (or forces of Mordor and Isengard) were driven out or destroyed. In case my point wasn't clear enough, governing Arnor and Gondor together wasn't hard enough that one set of monarchs couldn't handle it (e.g. Elessar and Arwen), which was the main point of this thread--"was it too much for Elessar?"

[ December 20, 2002: Message edited by: Manwe Sulimo ]

[Galorme]

The thing is no-one argued that aragorn had the right to lead. He had masterminded the defeat of Sauron, united many enemies and healed many wounds. Was it a handful for Aragorn? No, because there was no compition. Even Mordor was with him, since it was now ruled by slaves he had released. Do you think he ever used the palanters to comunicate with different regions?

[Manwe Sulimo]

Of course Aragorn had the right to lead. He was the heir of the king of a monarchy. He only had two palantíri, so he couldn't really communicate too much....and one of them was essentially worthless to all but him.

After freeing all those lands, don't you think he deserved it?

[Pookabunny]

Aragorn is certainly worthy of the throne of Gondor - both by birthright and by earning it. He's is learned in the ways of Middle Earth, he's well traveled, he's a warrior, a noble man, an honorable man and husband to an ELF! That's TOO COOL.

However, I'd have to disagree with the following:

He had masterminded the defeat of Sauron

Sauron was defeated when the ring was destroyed, and even that event was due to luck, defiance and fate. If anything, Galdalf can be somewhat credited with that since he had an incling that Gollum still had a role to play in the fate of the ring.

[doug*platypus]

I think that from the history of the two kingdoms it would be appropriate to have one ruler overall. This ruler would be High King of Gondor and Arnor, effectively High King of all the Numenorean realms in exile, just as Fingolfin and those who followed him were previously High Kings of all the Noldorin realms in exile.

From what I understand noone was left who could claim direct descent from Anarion in a line of rulership. Faramir had to fill that place as Steward. Even when Isildur and Anárion were still alive, Elendil was considered High King of Gondor and Arnor.

[Dimaldaeon]

May i ask why there were two seperate kingdoms in the first place. Apart from the land between the Greyflood and the Isen all the land was under the control of the Numenorean exiles. Why didn't it exist as one empire divided into two regions instead of two countries ruled by the same royal family? Couldn't Elendil have been hgh king with Isildur as steward of Arnor and Anarion as steward of Gondor. I suppose this had something to do with Isildurs untimely death, alas in the same way as Brian Boru.

[Kuruharan]

That is a very good question. And there are actually a few reasons, however it was originally intended to be one big happy empire. Elendil was originally king of the whole shebang. Same with Isildur.
However, the reason why there were two sub-kingdoms in the original set up is because after the downfall of Numenor Elendil and his sons made landfall in different places. They basically just established themselves where they landed.

Stopping and thinking about matters, it probably would have made more sense for them to gather in one place and have greater concentration of power in one geographic location rather than being spread out. But they did not do that for whatever reason.
That was one of the reasons for the eventual split. Anarion and Isildur were the co-kings of Gondor, under their father, because their father could not rule Gondor in far away Arnor.

After the Last Alliance Elendil and Anarion were both dead. Isildur was High King of the Dunadain. He stayed in Gondor for two years teaching his nephew Meneldil the art of ruling. Since Arnor was the senior part of the empire, Isildur decided to rule that directly and leave Meneldil as King of Gondor. Meneldil was a rather ambitious fellow and he was not sorry to see Isildur take himself off to the North, and I doubt if he was particularly broken up when Isildur was killed. That was when he struck out on his own and made Gondor an independent kingdom on its own rather than a junior partner in an empire. Meneldil was able to do this because the new King of Arnor was Isildur's only surviving son, Valandil, was a child and apparently a rather weak individual. Meneldil became a true king, the kings of Gondor were descended from Anarion and the kings of Arnor were descended from Isildur, so after that point it was not really looked upon as being the same family. A view that the Gondorians took when they were having something of a succession crisis after the death of King Ondoher and his heirs. They rejected the claim of King Arvedui of Arnor and picked one of their generals who was of royal blood.

So originally it was an empire, but a rather unstable one. Arnor was too far away for the High King to control the King of Gondor if the King of Gondor became independent minded. The whole structure was rickety and prone to collapse. The separation was inevitable. And as a matter of fact probably re-played itself at some point in the Fourth Age.

[ January 04, 2003: Message edited by: Kuruharan ]

[Mandos]

If I may add my two cents, if you look at it this way, everything in the kingdoms was divided between them. By this I mean that Arnor was Elendil's kingdom with its capital at Annuminas. Anarion's kingdom was Gondor with its capital of Osgilliath. And Isildur's kingdom was Ithilien with its capital of Minas Ithil.So in actuality, there were THREE kingdoms. One for the father, one for each son. Elendil was high king and his sons were two lesser kings under him. Through the Palantiri, they could communicate with each other to effectively rule the continent.A very good system.

[Kuruharan]

A very good system.

Do you mean that the system of communication using the palantiri was a good system. If that is the case I agree.

Or, do you mean that the system worked well as long as Elendil, Isildur, and Anarion were alive. I could go with that. However, they being mortal was something of a flaw.

Or, do you mean that generally it was a good system. As is probably obvious from all of my other posts, I disagree. Looking at the evidence I don't see how it could be said that it was a good system. It collapsed a few decades after its creation. Being able to communicate through the palantiri did not equal control over the under-kings. Gondor was too far away to control properly. It would be exceedingly difficult to launch punitive military expeditions to keep Gondor in line, to say nothing of costly, it was so far away and well blessed with resources and population.

Essentially the King of Gondor was in a position to declare independence whenever he felt like it. Not a good system for keeping the empire together.

[Mandos]

By my quote, i mean that the system of using the seeing stones of Feanor was ingenious. If there arose a need to get in contact with the High King one could "call" him up just like a a phone call. This was very helpful. While perhaps at times chaotic, I personally think this empire was run quite well. It worked apparently for several hundred years and the only reason it did not continue to work is the fact that wars ( fights with Agmar) and in-family conflicts destroyed Arnor, a missing heir hurt Gondor, and the sack of Minas Ithil by the Nazgul turing it into Minas Morgul ( Tower of Sorcery ) , caused Ithilien to be deserted; caused the cripling and decay of the empire.

[Mandos]

also, why would Gondor wish to declare independence? The kingdoms worked quite well together and the palantir did indeed let the high king have constant communication to the other kingdoms. the palantiri were located at minas arnor, minas ithil ( this is where it was captured by the nazgul in the sack of minas ithil) orthanc, amon sul (weathertop- this stone was destroyed), the towers of emyn beraid, and the ruling stone was placed in osgiliath ( where it was captured and taken to sauron).

[doug*platypus]

Arnor was Elendil's kingdom with its capital at Annuminas. Anarion's kingdom was Gondor with its capital of Osgilliath. And Isildur's kingdom was Ithilien with its capital of Minas Ithil. So in actuality, there were THREE kingdoms. One for the father, one for each son. Elendil was high king and his sons were two lesser kings under him.

I don't believe that Ithilien was ever a Kingdom - it was a Princedom (did Tolkien invent this word, or what?). The South Kingdom was Gondor, capital Osgiliath as you say, and Minas Ithil was a fortress of Gondor, Ithilien a kind of province, like what was later known as Dol Amroth. I think Kuruharan's view of Isildur and Anárion as "co-kings" is the most accurate.

I'm not sure if I would use the word "Empire" for the realms of Gondor and Arnor, but whatever it was it was not very strong. Mostly due to assaults in earnest on both of them by Sauron. Arvedui and the Kingdom of Arnor perished largely because Gondor looked to its own survival first. Gondor certainly seems to have been the more ambitious of the two. Perhaps Gondor and Arnor were united under a High King for fear that if separated they would fight with each other? It seems to me that the two Kingdoms were not sufficiently linked together, and that an arrangement such as that between Rohan and Gondor may have suited them both better. I think Arvedui was dreaming when he thought he could rule both Kingdoms.

Were there actually any High Kings between Isildur and Aragorn?

[Mandos]

alas, i disagree with some of these things, Arnor perished because of its own inner turmoils and the multiple assaults upon it by the realm of agmar.however, as you say isildur and anarion were co-kings, their thrones were set side by side in the city of osgiliath. Isildur's was the tower of the rising moon, and Anarion's was the tower of
the Setting Sun.To that effent Ithilien couldnt be called a princedom since it wasnt ruled by a prince, but a co'king. so for loss of a better word, i called it a kingdom.

[Mandos]

Also, the two kingdoms were very much in touch with each other. The had all seven seeing stones! Gondor had to look after its own survival since it was bordered with Mordor. Just as Arnor had to look after it's own survival even though it was fighting amongst itself while being attacked by the witch king. If there had been a strong high king at the time, both kingdoms would have been made stronger and warded off the decay that wreaked havoc in the time of the Fellowship.And, if it wasnt an empire , what was it? They controlled or had discovered their known world.

[Kuruharan]

Were there actually any High Kings between Isildur and Aragorn?

I think that the answer to this pretty much sums up everything that could be said about this. The answer is a simple no.

"So passed the first victim of the malice of the masterless Ring: Isildur, second King of all the Dunedain, lord of Arnor and Gondor, and in that age of the World the last.

That from the Unfinished Tales: Disaster of the Gladden Fields.

It worked apparently for several hundred years

It worked from SA 3320 to TA 2. As stated by Tolkien himself, the system fell apart on the death of Isildur. That is a total of 123 years, the remaining lifetimes of the founders of the Realms in Exile. The system did not survive their passing. After the death of Isildur, Arnor and Gondor only had a rather nebulous alliance. At least until Arnor fell apart and then things became more nebulous still. However, the Gondorians probably paid little attention to doings up North by that point.

also, why would Gondor wish to declare independence?

Ask King Meneldil. However, I suspect that he, like most people, disliked having anyone in charge of him. Such things are still harder to bear if you are the ruler of a powerful land.

[doug*platypus]

It seems to me that the two Kingdoms were not sufficiently linked together

Also, the two kingdoms were very much in touch with each other.

Subtle difference in wording, but a difference nonetheless. Much the same as the difference between Kingdom and quite clearly not a Kingdom, but a Co-Kingdom (no matter how the word sounds, that's what Ithilien was if you don't like Princedom). In the end the Palantíri, wondrous as they were, weren't much help in the survival of Arnor.

I can't see what advantage there would be to having a High King, and I don't know why the two realms were not separate. I think Aragorn should have been relieved that Denethor and Boromir were not around to dispute his claim. He wasn't descended from Anárion after all, and the High Kingship seems more like a device for the Kings of one Kingdom to claim rulership over the other. Or could only Arnor claim the High Kingship, as descendants of the elder son of Elendil?

[Mandos]

A very good question, however, i suppose that it would only be descendants of the elder son who could claim the high kingship, and therefore i suppose that they would have to come from Arnor.

[doug*platypus]

Then perhaps the whole High Kingship thing was just a dirty Arnor ploy to maintain influence over Gondor, which was quite clearly a separate Kingdom. Perhaps then Aragorn is a pretender to the throne, and cannot really claim the Kingship of Gondor? Of course, he does make a pretty fantastic King, and they really did need one right about then.

I'm glad to have read this discussion, though, and I now understand the position of Denethor, and the Pride of Gondor better. From a certain point of view, Aragorn is King of another Kingdom, seeking to wrest the rulership of Gondor from the Stewards by invoking a claim to High Kingship, so ancient it has been heard of only once (Arvedui) since Elendil. Noone had more to gain from the death of Denethor. How fortunate! Any conspiracy theorists out there want to guess what else Aragorn used the Palantír for??

[Inderjit Sanghera]

I know I'm re-iterating some opinions that have been put forward, but Arnor didn't really have much to rule. Also wasn't Aragron the only full blooded heir of Isildur and Anarion (through Arvediu's wife) and who else would rule Arnor/Gondor without a Steward type rule being in place?

[doug*platypus]

Arnor didn't really have much to rule

Good gracious me! Admittedly, by the time of the War of the Ring, Arnor wasn't really up to scratch, but don't forget that when it fragmented it made up three whole kingdoms (Arthedain, Cardolan, Rhudaur)!

who else would rule Arnor/Gondor without a Steward type rule being in place?

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at, Inderjit, but I don't think the kingdoms really needed combined rule under one person. Although I'm sure in the great days of the Reign of Elessar, with evil greatly diminished, it would have been well within his power to control two kingdoms.