Aragorn's assertiveness

[Boromir88]

Just some quick points not directly tied to Aragorn's assertiveness...

That was a complex situation. I don't know if Tolkien himself had developed all the ultimate complexities at the time of writing. Rohan existed because of the gift of the Steward who ruled until the King returned. Theoretically, that gift could be revoked by the returned King. Aragorn was put in an awkward situation because he was asked (unknowingly on the part of the askers, it is true) to diminish his status and acknowledge the supremacy of the King of Rohan within the bounds of Rohan. Those bounds, however, could still be considered provisional as they had not been confirmed by the King. Acknowledging the claim of the King of Rohan could diminish the legal standing of the King of Gondor should he decide to revoke the gift of Calenardhon.~Kuru

I disagree that Aragorn could have undone the Oath of Cirion and Eorl. Now when Cirion first cedes Calenhardon to Eorl and his people, granting them sovereignty and freedom from Gondor's laws and customs (but bound in an eternal friendship and alliance), he says it shall be so "until the Great King returns." It may sound like Aragorn returning as the "Great King" would be able to override a previous Steward's decision, but it's not quite that simple. As you say it's a complex situation.

Because Eorl and Cirion go to Elendil's tomb and bind it with an oath, that the UT says:

Such an oath had not been heard in Middle-earth since Elendil himself had sworn alliance with Gil-galad King of the Eldar~Cirion and Eorl

Aragorn breaking that oath, would have some terrible consequences. And don't forget, at this time as Hama rightfully points out Aragorn does not sit yet on the throne of Gondor, and even if he did Rohan's sovereignty is sworn by more than just "legally" (a Steward exercising a decision in place until the "Great King" returns) but bound by the oaths of Cirion and Eorl, at a "holy site" in the "keeping of the Valar."

Similarly, as Aragorn, being Isildur's heir is the judge over the King of the Mountain fulfilling his peoples' oath to Isildur. Aragorn as the "Great King" would have the oath of Cirion and Eorl pass on to him. And I don't think it's a matter of just overriding a Steward's ruling. Rohan's sovereignty and freedom from Gondor is sealed by a sworn word, as long as Eorl and his heirs keep their oath that they are allies eternally, "Gondor's enemies are Rohan's enemies" then Aragorn would be expected to keep Cirion's oath.

Which is why you have Gandalf there to mediate, and tell Aragorn as silly as Théoden's demand is, he will have his own way, in his own hall and land.

[Kuruharan]

Apparently, I must spread some reputation around before giving it to Boromir88 again.

Practically, of course, it would have been ridiculous for Aragorn to try to undo Rohan's sovereignty.

However, I still hold my original opinion that Aragorn, as legal matter, could have revoked the Oath because of the clause of the Great King returning.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Similarly, as Aragorn, being Isildur's heir is the judge over the King of the Mountain fulfilling his peoples' oath to Isildur.

I don't see this as being the best parallel because Isildur was sovereign himself (or was he? When exactly was the curse cast?) Cirion was only a servant, exercising power explicitly because of the absence of his master.

Which is why you have Gandalf there to mediate, and tell Aragorn as silly as Théoden's demand is, he will have his own way, in his own hall and land.

As being, literally, a representative of the Valar, perhaps it could be interpreted as Gandalf giving their opinion on the matter.

[Faramir Jones]

You made some interesting remarks here, Kuruharan:

Practically, of course, it would have been ridiculous for Aragorn to try to undo Rohan's sovereignty.

However, I still hold my original opinion that Aragorn, as legal matter, could have revoked the Oath because of the clause of the Great King returning.

Cirion was only a servant, exercising power explicitly because of the absence of his master.

Tolkien was quite explicit that the Ruling Stewards, from Mardil the Faithful to Faramir, were as regents able to exercise all royal powers. Cirion's grant of Calenhardon to Eorl and his people was a lawful use of these powers, even if it was an extraordinary one. Certainly, it appears that no one said, then and later, that he was acting outside his powers.

I'm presuming that Aragorn II, after his crowning as King Elessar, made his first legal act as king a retrospective confirmation of everything done by the previous Ruling Stewards.

If he had done this, the public renewal of the of Oath of Eorl wouldn't have been strictly necessary; but I'm presuming that it was done because of the great symbolic significance of the grant of Calenhardon, the most significant and sweeping act of the Ruling Stewards, and a ceremonial confirmation of the 'old alliance' between Rohan and Gondor, which had just saved the latter.

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by Faramir Jones

I'm presuming that Aragorn II, after his crowning as King Elessar, made his first legal act as king a retrospective confirmation of everything done by the previous Ruling Stewards.

Quite possibly.

If he had done this, the public renewal of the of Oath of Eorl wouldn't have been strictly necessary; but I'm presuming that it was done because of the great symbolic significance of the grant of Calenhardon, the most significant and sweeping act of the Ruling Stewards, and a ceremonial confirmation of the 'old alliance' between Rohan and Gondor, which had just saved the latter.

I believe the fact that there was a public renewal of the Oath strengthens my case that it could (technically) have been revoked.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Faramir Jones

You started a nice thread here, Leaf!

The problem with the portrayal of Aragorn in those films is partly because he is a difficult character for even avid fans who have read LotR thoroughly to get to grips with.

This is a man who is already 88 years old by the time the War of the Ring ends, he becomes King of Gondor and marries Arwen. He then reigns for 122 years, dying at the age of 210. He is 20 when he first meets Arwen, 2690 years his senior, and falls in love with her; but it is when he is 49, after many adventures and experiences, including serving in Rohan and Gondor, that he meets Arwen again, she returns his love, and they become engaged, an engagement that lasts for 39 years.

The reason behind this is that he is the heir of Elendil the Tall, of the line of Elros, of mixed human, elvish, and divine (through Melian the Maia) ancestry, being very long lived. Also, he has been fostered by an Elf, Elrond, as Túrin was by Thingol. The love between him and Arwen can certainly be justified by the love song title 'No Ordinary Love'; because she, as an Elf, would (and does) in order to be his wife need to become mortal, a sacrifice that can be barely imagined.

What I'm saying here is that it is difficult even for fans like ourselves to get to grips with who Aragorn is, who Arwen is, and the nature of their love. Aragorn, while he does express doubt about his ability as leader in the book, has already had many years to deal with a lot of earlier self-doubt.

Even while I accept that because who Aragorn and Arwen are, and their love for each other, is a difficult concept even for avid fans to grasp, and was too much for those involved in the films, it still doesn't explain the nonsense of two scenes. The first is in The Two Towers film, when this happens:

I have always found their relationship to be bit of an odd one, and I think even more so after reading your post. Not that it brought new information forth, but sometimes you simply need to see something written in order to appreciate its absurdity/complexity. I also often wondered how Elrond felt about seeing his brother's descendants fair so poorly, and weather it was weird when in the end one of them married his own daughter. Sure they are extremely/unfathomably far removed, but it still seems a bit messed up.

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

People in general don't spend enough time reflecting on the fact that all forms of government are founded upon the threat of physical force against recalcitrant members.

Apparently I too, need to spread some rep around.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Just some quick points not directly tied to Aragorn's assertiveness...



I disagree that Aragorn could have undone the Oath of Cirion and Eorl. Now when Cirion first cedes Calenhardon to Eorl and his people, granting them sovereignty and freedom from Gondor's laws and customs (but bound in an eternal friendship and alliance), he says it shall be so "until the Great King returns." It may sound like Aragorn returning as the "Great King" would be able to override a previous Steward's decision, but it's not quite that simple. As you say it's a complex situation.

Because Eorl and Cirion go to Elendil's tomb and bind it with an oath, that the UT says:



Aragorn breaking that oath, would have some terrible consequences. And don't forget, at this time as Hama rightfully points out Aragorn does not sit yet on the throne of Gondor, and even if he did Rohan's sovereignty is sworn by more than just "legally" (a Steward exercising a decision in place until the "Great King" returns) but bound by the oaths of Cirion and Eorl, at a "holy site" in the "keeping of the Valar."

Similarly, as Aragorn, being Isildur's heir is the judge over the King of the Mountain fulfilling his peoples' oath to Isildur. Aragorn as the "Great King" would have the oath of Cirion and Eorl pass on to him. And I don't think it's a matter of just overriding a Steward's ruling. Rohan's sovereignty and freedom from Gondor is sealed by a sworn word, as long as Eorl and his heirs keep their oath that they are allies eternally, "Gondor's enemies are Rohan's enemies" then Aragorn would be expected to keep Cirion's oath.

Which is why you have Gandalf there to mediate, and tell Aragorn as silly as Théoden's demand is, he will have his own way, in his own hall and land.

I really like this discussion, though it would help if we had some knowledge of legal proceedings in Gondor and its law-codes. At the very least it would be nice to know what kind of power non-royal Dúnedain (and non stewards) held within the realm of Gondor. Also what kind of sovereignty does a place like Lossarnach have? Are the people there first and foremost Gondorian?

These are questions that needs answering in order to properly discuss the political options of Aragon.

However I get the impression that he could undo the alliance if he so chose, and that without another power vetoing him. Rohan might not accept restriction of their sovereignty though... Would Aragon have support amongst his vassals, for a conflict with a trusted (and somewhat powerful) allied?