Patriotism and the Lord of the Rings

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

To me, since it seems that patriotism is most commonly defined as love of or devotion to country, the kind of patriotism one sees in LotR would depend on how the inhabitants view the land in which they live. Gondor and Rohan appear to have a very clear view of their lands as sovereign nations, and one does see overt love of country shown among their peoples (Boromir, Faramir, and Theoden come most strongly to my mind). The Hobbits seem to have a looser sense of the Shire as a nation, but their love of their land does become evident when their backs are pushed to the wall by the ruffians (a splendid example, I think, of Gandalf's assertion that Hobbits are "brave in a pinch," a situation they try very hard to avoid). The marchwardens of Lothlorien appear quite dedicated to the defense of their land, but I sometimes wonder if they are more devoted to Celeborn and Galadriel than to any sense of "country." Then again, is "country" an actual place, or a sense of community not dependent on a physical location? I think that for the mortals, a sense of physical place is important, as the land is passed down from generation to generation, but among the Elves, it might be less so, since in a long, immortal lifetime, one might get bored with staying in one place (as some of the Noldor did in Valinor), but could carry a devotion to a specific group of people from place to place.

Something to think about....

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel

The marchwardens of Lothlorien appear quite dedicated to the defense of their land, but I sometimes wonder if they are more devoted to Celeborn and Galadriel than to any sense of "country." Then again, is "country" an actual place, or a sense of community not dependent on a physical location? I think that for the mortals, a sense of physical place is important, as the land is passed down from generation to generation, but among the Elves, it might be less so, since in a long, immortal lifetime, one might get bored with staying in one place (as some of the Noldor did in Valinor), but could carry a devotion to a specific group of people from place to place.

Very perceptive, Ibrin.

If you look at history, particularly in the manner a philologist like Tolkien would, then the migration of clans, including their societal norms, customs and language, would take precedence over nationalism, which is a relatively new process in time. Patriotism, then, should be viewed as an Anglo-Saxon, Celt, Goth or a Norman would see it; that is, identifying with kin or clan over the physical boundaries of a given realm. In France, for instance, it wasn't until the 15th century that there was a consolidation of power by the monarchy sufficient enough to weld disparate Burgundians, Armagnacs, Guiennese, etc., into a unified country. In the Dark Ages, the later Merovingian kings ruled only the Ile de Paris, and had varying influence outside that limited scope.

Tolkien tracks migrations of clans throughout Middle-earth's history: The Eldar from Cuivienen to Aman, the Noldor back to Arda, 1st Age Men from the East, Numenoreons to Gondor and Harad, the Eotheod from Rhovanion to Rohan, the Wainriders and Balchoth from Rhun or Hildor, Hobbits from the Vale of Anduin to the Angle, to the Shire, etc. In nearly every case, the customs and the very nature of the migratory clans were preserved in the lands they conquered or settled, and the patriotism is far less national and more allied to the clan. Gondorions still relive their illustrious Numenorean past, The Rohirrim have progressed very little from their Northmen antecedents, and the Hobbits are clannish in the extreme.

[Lalwendë]

Some great food for thought here!

Originally Posted by Ibrin

Then again, is "country" an actual place, or a sense of community not dependent on a physical location? I think that for the mortals, a sense of physical place is important, as the land is passed down from generation to generation,

This makes great sense - if you have endless life then there is less 'need' for other kinds of immortality, yet mortals can only achieve anything like immortality by living on in the memory of their descendants. Thus things like passing on their property and land become important (as does having 'sons and heirs', thinking of Henry VIII, or maybe living on through doing great and memorable deeds....or in the modern age, just having a nice body and Max Clifford as your PR guru ). That could be one root of patriotism in Middle-earth and in the real world. I'd never thought of that.

Then you should take into account how settled a people are in their land and as Morthoron says, migrants might feel less connected to their land. The Rohirrim definitely give the impression of being a relatively 'new' and developing culture in Rohan (their wealth is portable, their literature still oral and not in libraries) - so their loyalties are to their people and less so to their land. Maybe this is why they do not challenge Theoden in his madness?

Another thought springs to mind about Hobbits. Their sense of loyalty is much quieter and yet they can be stirred into making a big show of their feelings. Very like the British who believe it or not generally do not like a lot of flag waving and find it ostentatious and mutter about 'jingoism' and the like - sometimes this is put down to the appropriation of the national flag and other symbols by the far right (Billy Bragg wrote about this idea) but it's also down to feeling simply embarrassed However, if the occasion warrants it, the flags and the pitchforks are brought out with gusto!

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Then you should take into account how settled a people are in their land and as Morthoron says, migrants might feel less connected to their land. The Rohirrim definitely give the impression of being a relatively 'new' and developing culture in Rohan (their wealth is portable, their literature still oral and not in libraries) - so their loyalties are to their people and less so to their land. Maybe this is why they do not challenge Theoden in his madness?

I suspect that fear (stirred up by Saruman and his allies) gave the common residents of Rohan more immediate concerns than the mental and physical condition of their king (beyond, I imagine, grumbling over why the king was doing nothing to defend them). I do agree with both you and Morthoron; there is a definite sense that even the more developed "nations" of Middle-earth are fairly "primitive," when compared to more developed nations we know today (or even several hundred years ago). But there are definite signs that both Gondor and Rohan have laid claim to their lands and are determined to hold and protect them (Rohan to a lesser degree, being the newer of the two countries). They are cultivating and making use of the resources of their lands in ways that indicate a desire to remain there permanently, not merely as long as the resources hold out. Both have built strongholds, developed forms of military forces, and have plans to deal with the protection and evacuation of their citizens in time of war. No doubt there are other things I'm forgetting. It's too bad that we don't see more of the attitudes of the common folk of these lands, since one can argue that what appears to be "patriotism" in the ruling class may be more of a desire to hold land for reasons of power. Although I think that in Faramir's case, there is a distinct love of his country involved, a desire to protect his people not for glory or duty or even the approval of his father, but because he loves his land, both in its history and in what future it may yet have.

One does wonder about the Dwarves, though...

[Guinevere]

Originally posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel
The marchwardens of Lothlorien appear quite dedicated to the defense of their land, but I sometimes wonder if they are more devoted to Celeborn and Galadriel than to any sense of "country."

I think the Lothlorien Elves really love their country as well!

Haldir tells the fellowship that they "live now upon an island amid many perils" and that he fears that if "the Shadow will draw back"

for the Elves it will prove at best a truce, in which they may pass to the Sea unhindered and leave the Middle-earth forever. Alas for Lothlorien that I love! it would be a poor life in a land where no mallorn grew.

and Galadriel tells Frodo:

The love of the Elves for their land and their works is deeper than the deeps of the Sea, and their regret is undying and cannot ever be wholly assuaged. Yet they will cast all away rather than submit to Sauron.

As for the Dwarves, their patriotism seems more allied to the clans. Nevertheless, they have a love for their ancient homes, like the Lonely Mountain, and Khazad-dûm, and try to win them back again even after a long time. The Blue Mountains where they earn their living in the meantime aren't really consideredy their country.

[Groin Redbeard]

You touched on something in your first post, AOR, which I think deserves more attention than it is getting: one's ancestors. Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, and even Humans put great stock on their ancestors. For example, when people meet, their house, or a great ancestor comes into play. Take, for example, the simple meeting between Frodo and Gildor. Frodo was a simple Hobbit and would not have known any of the great figures of Elven history, as Gildor probably knew, yet Gildor introduced himself as being a par of the house of Finrod.

[QUOTE=Three is Company]'I am Gildor,' Answered their leader, the Elf who had first hailed him. 'Gildor Inglorion of the house of Finrod.'] Similar happenings like this are common in the books. Tolkien seems to put great emphasis on the heritage of ancestors and ten to one, I think, that people take greater pride in the family than in country. Love of country is much stronger with Men than any other race.

The Dwarves, as well as the Elves divided themselves by their houses: the Broadbeams of Belegost, the Firebeards of Nogrod, the Longbeards of Khazad-dum, ext. Yet family just doesn't seem to cut it for the Dwarves. Born at the Lonely Mountain at the height of its glory, Thorin was just 24 years old when his people were driven into exile by the dragon Smaug. He fled with his father Thráin II and his grandfather King Thrór, but his grandfather was devastated by the loss and left his people, wandering south with a single companion, Nár. Thráin meanwhile led the exiles to Dunland, where they eeked out a meager living. The colony moving to Dunland, instead of moving in with their relatives in the Iron Hills or the Blue Hills, shows that rugged individualism that many people find appealing for the Dwarves. A will to make it on their own, or not make it at all and (just like Hobbits) are able to come to one another's aid in a crisis [such as the War Between Orcs and Dwarves].

Without their home in the Lonely Mountains, however, those Dwarves seem to dwindle until Thorin reclaims it for them once again. The Dwarves are loathed to depart with anything that is there's, so yes land (or more precisely: their realms) would be a major contribution to their patriotism. We see this with Balin's premature attempt to retake Khazad-dum.

Originally Posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel

Gondor and Rohan appear to have a very clear view of their lands as sovereign nations, and one does see overt love of country shown among their peoples (Boromir, Faramir, and Theoden come most strongly to my mind). The Hobbits seem to have a looser sense of the Shire as a nation, but their love of their land does become evident when their backs are pushed to the wall by the ruffians (a splendid example, I think, of Gandalf's assertion that Hobbits are "brave in a pinch," a situation they try very hard to avoid).)

Hobbits may be "brave in a pinch" but they are rarely in a pinch. Except for a few highlights in their history, Hobbits are a peaceful people protected by greater kingdoms, or the descendants of that kingdom: Dunedein. Gondor, and Rohan to a lesser extent, went to war far more, protecting their sovereignty from invading Haradrim, Easterlings, Orcs, and Corsairs. Therefore, I think we can forgive individuals like Boromir for his actions, his was an act of desperation and despair not patriotism. I am confused, however, why you included Faramir in your examples of overt patriotism.

Theoden issue is easily solved as to why the people did not rise up in revolt. Monarchy was the only system of government known to the people and to suggest anything else would be just crazy talk. The king was appointed according to his family tree in the royal class, of course you are going to get a few bad heirs who are rotten kings, but for the majority that was tolerated so long as the majority of heirs were dutiful to the position of king (by the way it is interesting to note that almost all the kings in Tolkien's books show more patriotism than the ordinary individual).

Love what you are saying Ibri. Nice job.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

(by the way it is interesting to note that almost all the kings in Tolkien's books show more patriotism than the ordinary individual)

I would add a caveat to that statement, Groin, because we know relatively little about what ordinary individuals felt about their countries. This is because, save for the Hobbits, we know virtually nothing about 'commoners', as Tolkien does not touch on their lives at all. But if one extrapolates Tolkien's view of the world into real-world history, we find much the same absence of how common folks felt at any given time. The great unwashed masses have, until only very recently, been avoided like the plague by historians (who were usually under the patronage of a noble in any case).

Most commoners lived short, squalid lives, were dragged off to war by press gangs, and were slaughtered brutally on the battlefield without any comprehension about what they were actually fighting for. Whether they cared about which tyrant they fought for mattered little anyway. Those legless, armless or blinded individuals who escaped death were trundled off back home, given a tin cup and spent their remaining wretched lives begging for alms in front of their local cathedral. Was Gondor or Rohan any different? Perhaps. With Tolkien's rather Platonic view of enlightened kings (as opposed to the callousness and savagery of the actual monarchy), we would hope the commoners' lot was better. It is, after all, a fantasy.

[Nogrod]

Basically posting just to say that I totally agree with Mort'h last post...

In history patriotism seems to be an ideology for those who can afford it - or those who have been lured into it not realising their efforts (death and suffering) only help those who gain from the conflicts sacrificing nothing themselves.

Okay. I admit being a bit too pessimistic on it up there. There sure are conflicts where people have actually fought literally for their friends and houses and their neighbours & their houses, and that is both brave and great. Although it's not automatically patriotic. But still many have fought for some higher glory be it nation, state or religion or some more vagueish thing like a concept ("freedom", "equality").

The question then becomes what is important enough fighting for and to whom? Or do peple actually fight for the reasons they believe they're fighting for? Like did the death of a Mid-Western 18-year old in Iraq help the cause of freedom? Did the death of an 18-year old Dunleding help the cause of their freedom from Rohan?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by AbercrombieOfRohan

What about the Rohirrim (or Rohanites as Lush would say…)? How come they didn’t overthrow Theoden, even though he was poisoned by Saruman?

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Then you should take into account how settled a people are in their land and as Morthoron says, migrants might feel less connected to their land. The Rohirrim definitely give the impression of being a relatively 'new' and developing culture in Rohan (their wealth is portable, their literature still oral and not in libraries) - so their loyalties are to their people and less so to their land. Maybe this is why they do not challenge Theoden in his madness?

I don't think their "nomadishness" actually plays any considerable factor here. I think all nations in Middle-Earth would act like that, nomadic or not nomadic. I would say Groin was right here - like many others, he simply was not a good king, but he was a king nevertheless (like Fengel just shortly before him, too - he had really a bad reputation). The same as Denethor was a Steward. King is a king - any insurrections are usually wrongful in Middle-Earth, the order is indeed monarchy, as Tolkien himself liked it to be, for that matter.

Originally Posted by Morthoron

If you look at history, particularly in the manner a philologist like Tolkien would, then the migration of clans, including their societal norms, customs and language, would take precedence over nationalism, which is a relatively new process in time. Patriotism, then, should be viewed as an Anglo-Saxon, Celt, Goth or a Norman would see it; that is, identifying with kin or clan over the physical boundaries of a given realm. In France, for instance, it wasn't until the 15th century that there was a consolidation of power by the monarchy sufficient enough to weld disparate Burgundians, Armagnacs, Guiennese, etc., into a unified country. In the Dark Ages, the later Merovingian kings ruled only the Ile de Paris, and had varying influence outside that limited scope.

Well, certainly. One has to bear in mind the fact that the idea of a "national state", or, the idea of a nation bound to some space - a country - is, in fact, generally a very modern thing only a few centuries old. And in Middle-Earth, indeed, it is usually not very important for anybody to defend the land itself - if somebody is defending a piece of land, it is usually because there is some city, some tower, some fortress etc. There is a very slight difference between this modern idea of a "national state" and, let's say, the Gondorians trying to win over Umbar. It has nothing to do with the fact that "this is Gondor", but simply with that that there is a monument of their ancient king and victory over Sauron.

And yadayada… what do you guys think about other cultures? What about the Elves (Rivendell, Lothlorien, Noldor even?)

Originally Posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel

The marchwardens of Lothlorien appear quite dedicated to the defense of their land, but I sometimes wonder if they are more devoted to Celeborn and Galadriel than to any sense of "country." Then again, is "country" an actual place, or a sense of community not dependent on a physical location? I think that for the mortals, a sense of physical place is important, as the land is passed down from generation to generation, but among the Elves, it might be less so, since in a long, immortal lifetime, one might get bored with staying in one place (as some of the Noldor did in Valinor), but could carry a devotion to a specific group of people from place to place.

Originally Posted by Guinevere

I think the Lothlorien Elves really love their country as well!

I believe with Elves, indeed, as it has been said, it usually really is not about the land itself (I recall some Elves leaving their homes in Southern Mirkwood just because it was getting too shadowy ), although not completely. Certainly the immortality means outliving any realms, and any changes, including those of the land - and ultimately, the Elves would all leave Middle-Earth for good, whatever realms they had there. Nevertheless, even they are quite "patriotic" about Lórien, or Gondolin and other places, for that matter. The answer is, in my opinion, not in the piece of land itself, but in what the land represents. Gondolin or Nargothrond are places of beauty, the pride of Elvendom. And Haldir's love for Lórien is of similar kind, I am sure: he does not love the piece of ground, but he loves the land blessed by the power of the Lady. Haldir's love for his land is actually of the most "basic" sort: he loves "leaf and branch, water and stone" - I don't know how about you, but I have some places near my home which I like to visit. For Haldir (and other Elves, I think most of them, very likely), this just goes deeper. And think about Treebeard. Now that is the same, and going even further! In fact, if we are to speak of any patriotism, then the Ents are certainly something! And, all right, a patriotism bordering with xenophobia belongs to the Old Forest (although there were other factors as well, and it was mainly the despocy of Old Man Willow and not as much a thing of the trees themselves).

What about Tom Bombadil?

[Thinlómien]

I'm glad I decided to read this thread after all, because it has made me think about stuff.

Unlike it has been argued, we actually get one common soldier's view of things: Beregond's. I think we would be right to call him a patriot, although his deepest loyalties lay with a single captain, Faramir. But is there in his admiration something of sharing Faramir's love of the country and the city? I think it seems so. So patriotism was not just for the nobility, but some commoners found it inspiring as well. (As a side issue, what would you guys say about Bergil? Is it simple boyishness sense of adventure that makes him stay in the city or is there actually patriotism involved?) At least patriotism is strongly involved in the scene where the different captains from other parts of Gondor come to Minas Tirith.

Which leads me to think... did the Gondorians cherish the ethnic differences in their country - like in this scene, all the different "peoples" are presented and it shown in positive light that they have different armies with their sopecial abilities coming to the city and the people cheer at them all? But still, those who are the stars of the show are the sons of the old Dúnedain lordfs - the knights of Dol Amroth. More or less all the big Gondorian heroes are of Númenórean descent.

Patriotism, it has a lot to do with nationalism and now I'm led to wonder if there were separatist movements inside Gondor. In our world, nationalism is a new-ish concept, but what about M-E? Did the "aborigines" of Gondor ever feel oppressed by the Dúnedain kings and folk? Did they desire to have a country of their own to rule as they will (for that sure is an ancient desire)? I think they generally accpeted the Dúnedain because they were treated well and a lot of good was done to them, and in the course of time the two peoples mingled so that most of Gondorians were of mixed blood. But the idea of a separatist "aborigine" clan somewhere in the mountains of western Gondor just sounds rather intriguing...

Ok, now I got carried away. Back to the topic.

Originally Posted by Ibrin

The marchwardens of Lothlorien appear quite dedicated to the defense of their land, but I sometimes wonder if they are more devoted to Celeborn and Galadriel than to any sense of "country."

A lot of good points have been made about the Lórien Elves, and I will not repeat them, but I still have something to add. You have to consider how long Galadriel and Celeborn had been there. The kingdom as it was would not have existed without them, they were to rule it for ever, for they were immortal - they were the kingdom. So in the case of these Elves, it is difficult if not impossible to separate loyalty to the leaders from loyalty to the country.

This, I think, applies to Elves in many other cases as well. So many kingdoms fell when their leaders fell. In Elvish systems, the leaders were the heart of the country even more permanently than in the monarchies of our worlds, where the leader changes from time to time simply because of the fact that people die.

An interesting case to consider in this light is Nargothrond and its leader changes. I wonder if they affected the patriotism of the citizens a lot... should recall more of it. But Nargothrond thrived in felagund's time, before the arrival of Celegorm and Curufin, that's for sure.

Originally Posted by Groin

Theoden issue is easily solved as to why the people did not rise up in revolt. Monarchy was the only system of government known to the people and to suggest anything else would be just crazy talk. The king was appointed according to his family tree in the royal class, of course you are going to get a few bad heirs who are rotten kings, but for the majority that was tolerated so long as the majority of heirs were dutiful to the position of king (by the way it is interesting to note that almost all the kings in Tolkien's books show more patriotism than the ordinary individual).

Also, I think that we should look a bit less narrow-mindedly at the case of Théoden. Was he such a bad king, in fact? Did the general majority of the commoners think his avoidance of the war was bad? We have Gamling clearly expressing his approval of the new policy, but what about the peasants of Wold or Eastfold, or the people of Edoras and its surroundings? The war was not at their doorstep in the same manner as at the Westfolders'. And if you forget about the war, do we have any reason to expect that Rohan was badly or unjustly governed under Gríma&Théoden? And as one last point, people had been generally content with their kings in Rohan, so there was no general disappointment with the ruling family, and besides, we haven't been told anything about Théoden's early years as a king. Maybe he was a loved and a good king then? Maybe he used to be popular among the people? Well-established popularity fades slowly, I think it quite likely that Rohirrim were slow to "turn against" Théoden because they still remembered him as a good king.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Unlike it has been argued, we actually get one common soldier's view of things: Beregond's. I think we would be right to call him a patriot, although his deepest loyalties lay with a single captain, Faramir. But is there in his admiration something of sharing Faramir's love of the country and the city? I think it seems so. So patriotism was not just for the nobility, but some commoners found it inspiring as well. (As a side issue, what would you guys say about Bergil? Is it simple boyishness sense of adventure that makes him stay in the city or is there actually patriotism involved?) At least patriotism is strongly involved in the scene where the different captains from other parts of Gondor come to Minas Tirith.

Indeed. Gondorians, from my point of view, are obvious patriots, even the common people. Even Faramir and his Rangers, as far as I can remember, at least I got this impression. Although, of course, they are soldiers, so one can hardly expect any complaints from them. But even in general, I am imagining the common Gondorians a bit of the sort of the cheered-up people: "Every sheep from my herd gives wool, from which my wife can make blankets which could be sent to our brave soldiers who are staying all winter in Osgiliath, protecting our homes!"

Which leads me to think... did the Gondorians cherish the ethnic differences in their country - like in this scene, all the different "peoples" are presented and it shown in positive light that they have different armies with their sopecial abilities coming to the city and the people cheer at them all?

Well, aside from the "purest" Dúnedain, as you mentioned, I doubt the differencies otherwise play much of a role. It is no different, in my opinion, from let's say the Shire, where you have the Tooks and Brandybucks and Bagginses and whoever else. And mainly, I think it has little to do with the cheering - people were simply cheering because they saw more of these "brave soldiers who are going to protect our homes" - cf. above (and the coolest were those of Dol Amroth). It possibly was only that old Beregond Sr., sitting in a pub with his friends, went on saying "Ah yes, I have been to Lamedon, it's a queer folk out there, you know, all day spending with the sheep... and they couldn't even speak properly, if you ever heard how funnily they pronounce 'Denethor'..." But that would be about it. So, I don't think the Gondorians (and now one would be also to ask what do you mean by "Gondorians" - the common people, or the nobles?) actually cared in any way about what ethnic groups is their nation composed of. They simply were all Gondorians (and for quite a long time), only old Beregond Sr. could complain over the Lamedonians having funny accent, that's about it.

But in general, it seemed that the various parts of Gondor were quite a lot in contact with each other - for example, Ioreth had relatives in Imloth Melui, I have no idea where it was, but I gather that it was not quite next door. (Although, maybe all Ioreth's family was living in Imloth Melui, and only the young perspective girl just went for studies to Minas Tirith and started a big career...)

Patriotism, it has a lot to do with nationalism and now I'm led to wonder if there were separatist movements inside Gondor. In our world, nationalism is a new-ish concept, but what about M-E? Did the "aborigines" of Gondor ever feel oppressed by the Dúnedain kings and folk? Did they desire to have a country of their own to rule as they will (for that sure is an ancient desire)? I think they generally accpeted the Dúnedain because they were treated well and a lot of good was done to them, and in the course of time the two peoples mingled so that most of Gondorians were of mixed blood.

I am very certain that there were such groups. For example, the Dead Men of Dunharrow (before they became Dead) were a kind of extreme example of something, which in my opinion existed among the, as you say, "aborigines" of Gondor. And remember the still existing division between the "lesser men" and those of Dúnadan descent: I am pretty certain that all the time, there existed some groups of people (on both sides) who were displeased with one or the other. But as we see from the history, it never turned into any large-scale idea of rebellion.

But the idea of a separatist "aborigine" clan somewhere in the mountains of western Gondor just sounds rather intriguing...

Yes, and they could form also a weird secret cult in the White Mountains, could they

Also, I think that we should look a bit less narrow-mindedly at the case of Théoden. Was he such a bad king, in fact? Did the general majority of the commoners think his avoidance of the war was bad? We have Gamling clearly expressing his approval of the new policy, but what about the peasants of Wold or Eastfold, or the people of Edoras and its surroundings? The war was not at their doorstep in the same manner as at the Westfolders'. And if you forget about the war, do we have any reason to expect that Rohan was badly or unjustly governed under Gríma&Théoden? And as one last point, people had been generally content with their kings in Rohan, so there was no general disappointment with the ruling family, and besides, we haven't been told anything about Théoden's early years as a king. Maybe he was a loved and a good king then? Maybe he used to be popular among the people? Well-established popularity fades slowly, I think it quite likely that Rohirrim were slow to "turn against" Théoden because they still remembered him as a good king.

Indeed, actually, I see no reason why Théoden should be regarded as bad king except for the very last few years? We hear nothing particularly wrong about him. And even then, indeed, as you say, who knows if some common people did not actually approve even latter Gríma's policies... yesss! It was all just these "grumblers" like Éomer, this young snake, whispering bad things about the King, troubling the minds of his poor people.

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

To veer back to the original topic for a moment... Finally got my computer and my book in the same place at the same time.

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

I am confused, however, why you included Faramir in your examples of overt patriotism.

Largely because of one statement:

"For myself," said Faramir, "I would see the White Tree in flower again in the courts of the kings, and the Silver Crown return, and Minas Tirith in peace: Minas Anor again as of old, full of light, high and fair, beautiful as a queen among other queens: not a mistress of many slaves, nay, not even a kind mistress of willing slaves. War must be, while we defend our lives against a destroyer who would devour all; but I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend: the city of the Men of Numenor, and I would have her loved for her memory, her ancientry, her beauty, and her present wisdom. Not feared, save as men may fear the dignity of a man, old and wise."

This is in distinct contrast to what he says earlier about his brother Boromir, that he was "proud and fearless, often rash, ever anxious for the victory of Minas Tirith (and his own glory therein)." Faramir does not speak of his own glory, but of his love of what he is defending, its present as well as its past -- and possibly he does not speak of its future because that is so plainly hanging in the balance in what appears to be a hopeless situation. But to me, these are some of the most patriotic words spoken in LotR, about the soldier's love for the land which he is fighting to save.