The state of Imladris during the War of the Ring

I've heard it many times refered to, and the passage is said to be somewhere in Return of the King, but for the life of my I can not find it - evidence that there was a siege of Rivendell, and that was the apparent reason why Elrond could spare not but his sons, and the Grey Company. I know Rhovanion was beseiged, and Legolas refers to this in "The Passing of the Grey Company", as vague as elves do.

Do any of you know of this said attack upon Rivendell. I'm quite vexed by it.

This may be faulty memory, but I recall reading about this in the appendices, though I can't say where specifically. It's always an adventure to roam around the appendices from time to time.

Happy haunting! um, hunting!

Bah! The one place I've not yet looked, which should have been the very first. Thanks for the tip. I'll go browse it now.

Any more wisdom from others?

I doubt if anyone could lay siege to Rivendell during the War of the Ring.

First of all, who could have done it? Sauron was too busy trying to decimate Minas Tirith, the Elven enclaves in Mirkwood, and Erebor. Saruman was already overthrown.

Secondly, how? Sauron cannot send a large army to Rivendell: Gondor blocks the south passage, while Erebor and Dale blocks the northern one. Sure, he could send forces over the middle portion of the Anduin, but I'm sure the residents of Rivendell could handle them.

Saruman, like I said, is overthrown. His army is destroyed. Sure, he has a bunch of ruffians operating there, but sending them against Rivendell is like "a child threatening a mail-clad knight with a bow of string and green willow."

[Eothain Elfwine]

It does say in Appendix B, toward the end of the Third Age timeline, that Lorien and Mirkwood were both assaulted, so it is possible that Imladris also was. Elrond was no greater or more powerful than Galadriel and Celeborn (who, although he is mentioned but rarely was a very great Elf and was accounted the wisest of the Elves), and both had rings of power, and it was said of Lorien

Three times Lorien had been assailed from Dol Guldur, but besides the valour of the elven people of that land, the power that dwelt there was too great for any to overcome, unless Sauron had come there himself. Though grievous harm was done to the fair woods on the borders, the assaults were driven back

I don't know whether Imladris was assaulted or not, but it would make sense.

[Falagar]

Since no attack on Imladris is mentioned anywhere (and the attacks on Lórien, Dale and Erebor are) I don't believe there was any. Sauron probably thought he had everything under control, the attack on Lórien was (if my memory serves me right) only to prevent Galadriel and Celeborn from sending Gondor help, and when he had beaten Minas Tirith/Gondor conquring the rest was a small problem (in his eyes).

Secondly, how? Sauron cannot send a large army to Rivendell: Gondor blocks the south passage, while Erebor and Dale blocks the northern one. Sure, he could send forces over the middle portion of the Anduin, but I'm sure the residents of Rivendell could handle them.

The same way as Lórien: from Dol Guldur. Or perhaps from Moria or Gundabad (both which Sauron probably had at least some control over).

[Firefoot]

I am quite sure that Rivendell was never under siege during the War of the Ring. If Lothlorien had fallen, then Rivendell probably would have been next, and if Saruman had won at Helm's Deep he might have gone after Rivendell, but Rivendell wasn't under siege. The Tale of the Years in the appendices is pretty complete and there is nothing about a siege in Rivendell. I'm having a bad time finding quotes right now or else I might post some. There is another quote I am thinking of that says if Sauron had gotten the Ring back then Rivendell would have for a while been under siege but after a short time it would fall.

Well, I guess I was Rivendelling when I should have been Lothloriening. I hope this comes up as a trivia question worth a bunch of money--I would for sure win it next time!

Thanks for your posts, guys. Turns out a few of the people who first gave me this idea couldn't find that quote either. Someone should send up a fund for all the precious lines of LOTR text that mysteriously disappear. :P

[Tuor Turambar,Cursed by the Valar]

IT is possible that there were enemies from Moria or somewhere else near Rivendell, so Elrond felt that if he sent to many people away, they would attack and he would not be able to defend. A siege is different from an all out attack. I can't find a quote, so i'm just guessing until i find one.

[The Saucepan Man]

I do not believe that Rivendell was under attack during the War of the Ring. Certainly there is, as far as I am aware, no reference to it being so in any of Tolkien's works.

Red Feather's post makes a lot of sense to me. There was no way that Sauron could have got forces to Rivendell in any meaningful numbers. I am sure that the Orcs in Moria, while a threat to the Fellowship, would not have presented any danger to a stronghold which held out for a good while when Sauron's forces had overrun most of Eregion in the Second Age.

Unfinished Tales tells us that Gandalf's main reason for encouraging Thorin into the Quest of Erebor was to vanquish Smaug and see Dale and Erebor fortified so that Sauron could not use the northern passes to attack Rivendell. This seems to suggest that, while Men and Dwarves barred the northern passes and Lothlorien and Rohan held the other routes to Eregion (as they all did during the War of the Ring), Rivendell would be safe. Indeed, in relating the background to the Quest of Erebor to Frodo, Gimli et al, Gandalf paints an attack on Rivendell as the nightmare scenario, suggesting that it was something that never happened.

[Lost One]

The idea that Dale and Erebor in any substantial way protected Rivendell always seemed odd to me. If you look at the map, it makes no sense at all: an attacking army from practically any direction wouldn't need to go anywhere near the Lonely Mountain to get to Rivendell. The Beornings would be much better placed for that protective role And the idea that an ancient settlement of powerful Noldor needed a bunch of men and/or dwarves for protection also feels odd. Granted, it would have been a huge blow for the side of good if Elrond had gone down, but the same could be said for any of the major communities of elves, men and dwarves. Obviously Tolkien was trying to shoehorn Bilbo's story into the broader history of the Third Age, and also give Gandalf's role a compelling strategic motivation to match his enhanced stature, but I don't think that this particular detail worked. The broader idea of removing Smaug as a potential weapon of Sauron and thus threat to Rivendell was more successful as a concept.

[The Saucepan Man]

Well it works well in LotR Risk!

Seriously, my thoughts were much the same as yours when I first read that passage in UT, Lost One. But, when I considered it further, I concluded that (assuming that Erebor and Dale presented no obstacle), it would make sense for Sauron to launch an attack on Imladris via the northern passes. It is largely "friendly" territory. All of the other routes, although shorter in terms of distance, would provide major opposition for much of the way, whereas Sauron's forces would be unopposed all the way through the northern passes, into Eregion and on to Rivendell.

And I do think that the capture of Rivendell would represent a major feather in Sauron's cap. I see it as the seat of the White Council and the main base for anti-Sauron operations. So, symbolically, it would represent a major coup for him. Only Lothlorien and the Grey Havens were equivalent in importance, and (courtesy of Galadriel's protection) Lothlorien could not be vanquished without Sauron attending to it personally (something that he would no doubt be loathe to do), while Mithlond was even further away from Sauron's power base than Imladris. The capture of Rivendell would no doubt provide a base for operations against the Grey Havens.

So, on reflection, I tend to go with Gandalf on this one.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

I think the importance of Rivendell to Sauron was not really strategic but tactical. By the time he could have gotten enough orcs there to destroy it, he would have had to either conquer Gondor and Rohan, or Gondor, Rohan AND Lothlorien (if he attacked from over the Misty Mountains and not through the Gap of Rohan) -- by which point a single haven of Elves on his flank would have done little to stop the conquest of Eregion.

So it's not the location of Rivendell that makes it important, but the people there -- Lothlorien had Galadriel with Nenya and Celeborn, but after that there really aren't any Elves of much heritage (isn't Galadriel the only Noldor in the Golden Woods?). But at Rivendell there was Elrond and Glorfindel at the very least. And let's not forget Arwen. Even if Sauron did not know of her betrothal to Aragorn and what that would represent to him (the reuniting of all the houses of Elves!) he would have known that she represents the 'return' of Luthien -- and that would only spell trouble for him!

Given the people in Rivendell, I think Gandalf's purpose in destorying Smaug makes perfect sense. A dragon can't capture a fortress and subdue a whole country -- that needs an army -- but it can sure wipe out a bunch of people you hate and fear pretty quickly.

A related thought -- it's lucky, in an odd way, that Gandalf met the Balrog in Moria. If he had not destroyed the demon, would it not have come out of Moria and joined the armies of orcs attacking Lorien? Or even, to keep within this thread, mightn't it have gone north and filled in for Smaug at Rivendell?