How could the Nazgul take Minas Morgul? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Rune Son of Bjarne · 12-18-2006, 07:49 PM

I am like the rest quite pussled by this question.

Gondor was strong so how could the Nazgul take it at all and why was it not re-conqured again?

Of course the Nazgul could have taken the city using the element of suprise or something cunning like The Spanish Incuisition and Boromir. But Tolkien tells us that there was a 2 year siege. . .now this implies that the Nazgul most have had a major military force as it takes a bit more than 9 wights and 1 spider to succsesfully lay a siege. Where did they get this force? It does not seems like there was many orcs in Mordor. . .I kind of figured it was men from Harad they used, but somehow I think Tolkien would have told us that.

How on eart could Gondor allow a 2 year seige on one of their major cities where one of the seeing stones were placed? No other war could have been more imperative!? and 2 years should be long enough to gather an army to defeat the Nazgul. Unless the Nazgul was to powerfull for any army when together, but then why did they not take all of Gondor?

Could it be that this is actually a part of the storry Tolkien did not think through?
I am led to belive that he just wrote down some nice story with out thinking down in detail that would fit with the overall picture. I know this is very unlike Tolkien, but I can think of no other possibility. It just doesn't add up.

Sorry for using so much space on saying nothing. . .

Legate of Amon Lanc · 12-19-2006, 04:06 AM

No problem, I think you just summarized it for all of us. I fear this thread might stay unsolved (please, add this question to the list, right below that Balrog and Wings thing). I have only one more thing to add. Why on Earth can't we write a letter to Professor?!?!?!!!

Sir Kohran · 12-29-2006, 03:14 PM

I guess this is one of Tolkien's rare plot holes. I think what he does wrong here is that he intends for the story of the city's fall to be vague and unexplained, by not telling us what happened and so allowing us to come up with our own theories, but then he goes and uses very specific terms like 'siege' and 'two years' that leave us caught somewhere in the middle, unable to make up our own version or find a canon explanation.

I think it's actually fairly easy to explain the 'siege' term - the eastern lands of Middle Earth and the great wastes that lay beyond it were full of monsters and evil people that could be probably be swayed by the combined power of the Nazgul, and used as a makeshift army that allowed for a proper attack. I could see that happening.

What really confuses me is how the city itself fell. Perhaps if the attack had been sudden and the city seized before anyone had a chance to react, then it would be plausible, but the fact that it took two years seems very odd. Why didn't Gondor send reinforcements? Two years is more than enough time to gather a sizeable force to relieve the defenders. We could assume that the army that took Minas Ithil was too strong to be defeated by any Gondorian army, but then you end up wondering why such a mighty army didn't just take over all of Gondor, if it couldn't be defeated by the Gondorians' combined forces.

The idea that the Gondorians didn't see the city as all that important sounds very strange. One of the greatest cities of the south, and an important tactical base, being attacked by all the nine Nazgul? That would surely be a cause for serious concern.

Also, why did it take that long to subdue the city at all? In a battle, every single second counts for something important, so what could have taken two years to occur? And how did the defenders stay alive for so long? What was their food supply?

I suppose this is just one of those things that we'll never know...

Farael · 12-29-2006, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir Kohran

Also, why did it take that long to subdue the city at all? In a battle, every single second counts for something important, so what could have taken two years to occur? And how did the defenders stay alive for so long? What was their food supply?

I think that the answer actually lies in your question. What could have taken two years to occur? and on the other hand, two years is far too long for a siege, food supplies may last for a few months, but I wouldn't think much more than that.

So here is my theory:

The nine Nazghul, along with a few other creatures of evil persuasion, started haunting the areas around Minas Ithil. Now, since there is not an army camped outside, all the might of Gondor might not do much of a difference. Furthermore, if Gondor did not have the resources to spare to launch a "turn every stone, search every cave" kind of attack to find them, it's likely that they would have sat there and hoped for the best, doing small skirmishes if they happened to find a specific hot spot. But this kind of warfare probably had negative effects on the population of Minas Ithil, psychological warfare if you need to give it a name. Eventually the population would flee, until the city would be weakened and no longer a "strong point" for Gondor. Once that happens, it is possible that the Nazghul, leading a smaller army recruited during those two years, would have been able to take the city.

That explains the two-year long "siege" and also how the Nine (with some help, but not necessarily a huge army) were able to take Minas Ithil.

Legate of Amon Lanc · 12-30-2006, 05:28 AM

This is what I had in mind and so far it seems the best alternative, if no one comes up with anything better. It was not possible to bring an army of Easterlings through Ithilien since it remained settled for a long time after this, and also "they came out of Mordor through the pass of Cirith Ungol", and I doubt an army larger than Shagrat's squad could pass through Cirith Ungol. So I agree with Farael's explanation of the term "siege", and I also cannot help but remember the movie "Aliens" in connection with this - you know, a colony full of people, but when a recon team comes to find out why there has been no contact, they see only empty corridors...

Amras Oronar · 01-02-2007, 05:43 AM

Well for a siege af course you do need a big army, certainly considering it must have beaten all reiforcements that Gondor send to defend Minas Ithil, which af course if it was a massive siege would have happened. Now after being beaten a few deccenia ago, the Witch King could not have gotten a army big enough to lay a siege upon Minas Ithil, it was simply immpossible.

But af course it isn't immpossible that they have taken Minas Ithil, as explained in other posts they could have well taken Minas Ithil by haunting or something simulair.

Now that leaves us with 2 options, or Tolkien misused the term 'Siege' or this is one of his very few mistakes/ subject he hadn't thought through.

CaptainofDespair · 01-02-2007, 09:44 AM

Hmm...an interesting subject.

I think the discussion so far has neglected (unless I've missed it, which is quite possible) the effect of location. Minas Ithil is basically in Mordor, and the pass that it guards is rather narrow, giving those who sieze it a distinct advantage. Taking this into consideration, I think the term siege fits in quite well. The Nazgul, and whatever army they may have assembled over the course of time, could easily hold such a pass from any returning force of Gondor's while they are sieging it.

A secondary idea to this is that the siege was not on-going in the sense of a constant pounding. With Mordor being 'desolate', I think that the siege could very well be off and on as the Nazgul and their army can manage it. Even if Gondor's army is in short supply of available troops, any force of them is enough to at least deal with orcs. So while Gondor may send small replenishing units of soldiers to garrison in Ithil, the length of the siege, and a potential off and on again nature would in time subdue it.

Yet another side to the location idea is that Ithil is not in Gondor proper. Historically, occupying armies have a very hard time holding a place their people may not care for, considering when it is outside of the homeland. What is there for Ithil to offer, besides as a bastion of defense? And with Sauron himself gone for so long (or at least not on Gondor's doorstep), there may not be enough concern to warrant funneling soldiers to Minas Ithil.

On the question raised by food supply: Barad-dur held out in a siege for seven years, if I recall correctly. Orcs need food too. So then, if a seven year siege can be enacted and maintained, and the defenders can resist it well enough, why not a two year siege at Minas Ithil? It would certainly have fewer mouths to feed.

Anyway, I'm probably ranting and may have gotten off-topic. So I shall retire.

12-19-2006, 04:06 AM	#2
Legate of Amon Lanc A Voice That Gainsayeth Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: In that far land beyond the Sea Posts: 7,431	No problem, I think you just summarized it for all of us. I fear this thread might stay unsolved (please, add this question to the list, right below that Balrog and Wings thing). I have only one more thing to add. Why on Earth can't we write a letter to Professor?!?!?!!! __________________ "Should the story say 'he ate bread,' the dramatic producer can only show 'a piece of bread' according to his taste or fancy, but the hearer of the story will think of bread in general and picture it in some form of his own." -On Fairy-Stories

12-29-2006, 03:14 PM	#3
Sir Kohran Wight Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: England, UK Posts: 178	I guess this is one of Tolkien's rare plot holes. I think what he does wrong here is that he intends for the story of the city's fall to be vague and unexplained, by not telling us what happened and so allowing us to come up with our own theories, but then he goes and uses very specific terms like 'siege' and 'two years' that leave us caught somewhere in the middle, unable to make up our own version or find a canon explanation. I think it's actually fairly easy to explain the 'siege' term - the eastern lands of Middle Earth and the great wastes that lay beyond it were full of monsters and evil people that could be probably be swayed by the combined power of the Nazgul, and used as a makeshift army that allowed for a proper attack. I could see that happening. What really confuses me is how the city itself fell. Perhaps if the attack had been sudden and the city seized before anyone had a chance to react, then it would be plausible, but the fact that it took two years seems very odd. Why didn't Gondor send reinforcements? Two years is more than enough time to gather a sizeable force to relieve the defenders. We could assume that the army that took Minas Ithil was too strong to be defeated by any Gondorian army, but then you end up wondering why such a mighty army didn't just take over all of Gondor, if it couldn't be defeated by the Gondorians' combined forces. The idea that the Gondorians didn't see the city as all that important sounds very strange. One of the greatest cities of the south, and an important tactical base, being attacked by all the nine Nazgul? That would surely be a cause for serious concern. Also, why did it take that long to subdue the city at all? In a battle, every single second counts for something important, so what could have taken two years to occur? And how did the defenders stay alive for so long? What was their food supply? I suppose this is just one of those things that we'll never know... __________________ 'Dangerous!' cried Gandalf. 'And so am I, very dangerous: more dangerous than anything you will ever meet, unless you are brought alive before the seat of the Dark Lord.'

12-30-2006, 05:28 AM	#5
Legate of Amon Lanc A Voice That Gainsayeth Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: In that far land beyond the Sea Posts: 7,431	I think Farael got it. This is what I had in mind and so far it seems the best alternative, if no one comes up with anything better. It was not possible to bring an army of Easterlings through Ithilien since it remained settled for a long time after this, and also "they came out of Mordor through the pass of Cirith Ungol", and I doubt an army larger than Shagrat's squad could pass through Cirith Ungol. So I agree with Farael's explanation of the term "siege", and I also cannot help but remember the movie "Aliens" in connection with this - you know, a colony full of people, but when a recon team comes to find out why there has been no contact, they see only empty corridors... __________________ "Should the story say 'he ate bread,' the dramatic producer can only show 'a piece of bread' according to his taste or fancy, but the hearer of the story will think of bread in general and picture it in some form of his own." -On Fairy-Stories

01-02-2007, 05:43 AM	#6
Amras Oronar Registered User Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Zoetermeer Posts: 29	Well for a siege af course you do need a big army, certainly considering it must have beaten all reiforcements that Gondor send to defend Minas Ithil, which af course if it was a massive siege would have happened. Now after being beaten a few deccenia ago, the Witch King could not have gotten a army big enough to lay a siege upon Minas Ithil, it was simply immpossible. But af course it isn't immpossible that they have taken Minas Ithil, as explained in other posts they could have well taken Minas Ithil by haunting or something simulair. Now that leaves us with 2 options, or Tolkien misused the term 'Siege' or this is one of his very few mistakes/ subject he hadn't thought through.

01-02-2007, 09:44 AM	#7
CaptainofDespair Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 413	Hmm...an interesting subject. I think the discussion so far has neglected (unless I've missed it, which is quite possible) the effect of location. Minas Ithil is basically in Mordor, and the pass that it guards is rather narrow, giving those who sieze it a distinct advantage. Taking this into consideration, I think the term siege fits in quite well. The Nazgul, and whatever army they may have assembled over the course of time, could easily hold such a pass from any returning force of Gondor's while they are sieging it. A secondary idea to this is that the siege was not on-going in the sense of a constant pounding. With Mordor being 'desolate', I think that the siege could very well be off and on as the Nazgul and their army can manage it. Even if Gondor's army is in short supply of available troops, any force of them is enough to at least deal with orcs. So while Gondor may send small replenishing units of soldiers to garrison in Ithil, the length of the siege, and a potential off and on again nature would in time subdue it. Yet another side to the location idea is that Ithil is not in Gondor proper. Historically, occupying armies have a very hard time holding a place their people may not care for, considering when it is outside of the homeland. What is there for Ithil to offer, besides as a bastion of defense? And with Sauron himself gone for so long (or at least not on Gondor's doorstep), there may not be enough concern to warrant funneling soldiers to Minas Ithil. On the question raised by food supply: Barad-dur held out in a siege for seven years, if I recall correctly. Orcs need food too. So then, if a seven year siege can be enacted and maintained, and the defenders can resist it well enough, why not a two year siege at Minas Ithil? It would certainly have fewer mouths to feed. Anyway, I'm probably ranting and may have gotten off-topic. So I shall retire.