Gandalf, Moria, and Arrest

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Moonraker

Gandalf was pushing the patience of Aragorn and Bormomir to the limits in suggesting that Moria was the route they should take. Gandalf even wanted to take this route from the off.

But the reluctance of Aragorn and Boromir was in neither case a reflection of a lack of confidence in Gandalf. Boromir simply knew Moria as a name of ill repute, and preferred a route that was more known to him and would get him to Gondor faster.

Aragorn's fear was for Gandalf, not the Quest in general.

'I will follow your lead now--if this last warning does not move you. It is not of the Ring, nor of us others that I am thinking now, but of you, Gandalf. And I say to you: if you pass the doors of Moria, beware!'

FOTR A Journey In the Dark

There was no thought that Moria would put the Ring in any particular danger, no more than it was already. So Gandalf had done absolutely nothing that would warrant "arrest", or even choosing a new leader.

[Moonraker]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

But the reluctance of Aragorn and Boromir was in neither case a reflection of a lack of confidence in Gandalf. Boromir simply knew Moria as a name of ill repute, and preferred a route that was more known to him and would get him to Gondor faster.

Aragorn's fear was for Gandalf, not the Quest in general.

FOTR A Journey In the Dark

There was no thought that Moria would put the Ring in any particular danger, no more than it was already. So Gandalf had done absolutely nothing that would warrant "arrest", or even choosing a new leader.

I think Tolkein made an error here. He is implying that Aragorn can forsee Gandalf's doom by entering Moria, when in reality it is more likely that any of the Company were in greater peril, not having any supernatural powers themselves. If Aragorn knew Gandalf was a Maiar, why would he forecast his doom?

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Moonraker

I think Tolkein made an error here.

Now your questioning the omniscience of the author regarding his plot and his intentions?

[Moonraker]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Now your questioning the omniscience of the author regarding his plot and his intentions?

Tolkien was the first to admit his work had faults in it.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Moonraker

Mouthmoron, Tolkein was the first to admit his work had faults in it.

I question the sincerity of your posts here. By the way, his name is spelled Tolkien,
T-o-l-k-i-e-n. You've made that error a few times. But that is not surprising.

P.S. The namecalling is rather sophomoric, but apt for the type of poster you are.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Moonraker

I think Tolkein made an error here. He is implying that Aragorn can forsee Gandalf's doom by entering Moria, when in reality it is more likely that any of the Company were in greater peril, not having any supernatural powers themselves. If Aragorn knew Gandalf was a Maiar, why would he forecast his doom?

If you're going to say Tolkien was wrong, and use that to bolster your point, there's no need in discussing this further.

[Moonraker]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

If you're going to say Tolkien was wrong, and use that to bolster your point, there's no need in discussing this further.

Only an opinion. But if he was right in allowing Aragorn the ability to express such accurate foresight, I would want to know how it was possible. He only spoke for the ill fortune of Gandalf, and no other member of the Company.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Moonraker

Only an opinion.

One without foundation, particularly since Tolkien did not subsequently edit or offer another later version of the sequence. Since there is no alternate storyline, the idea that Tolkien was wrong in what he wrote is inane; in any case, the author is never wrong, even if he changes his mind. The story is his to alter.

Originally Posted by Moonraker

But if he was right in allowing Aragorn the ability to express such accurate foresight, I would want to know how it was possible.

Foresight, providence and prescience are hallmarks of the books. The foretelling of dooms runs from the early 1st Age through the end of the 3rd Age, from the Dooms of Mandos all the way to Saruman's curse of Frodo. I suggest you read further.

[Moonraker]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

One without foundation, particularly since Tolkien did not subsequently edit or offer another later version of the sequence. Since there is no alternate storyline, the idea that Tolkien was wrong in what he wrote is inane; in any case, the author is never wrong, even if he changes his mind. The story is his to alter.



Foresight, providence and prescience are hallmarks of the books. The foretelling of dooms runs from the early 1st Age through the end of the 3rd Age, from the Dooms of Mandos all the way to Saruman's curse of Frodo. I suggest you read further.

The question remains unanswered. How did Aragorn foretell the imminent doom of a powerful Maiar, one that even the Nine Nazgul could not get past? He had been to Moria before, but did he have any news of an ancient terror dwelling there? This goes way past the level of accuracy of Glorfindel's prediction on the fate of the Witch-king, which took a very long time to fulfil.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Moonraker

The question remains unanswered. How did Aragorn foretell the imminent doom of a powerful Maiar? He had been to Moria before, but did he have any news of an ancient terror dwelling there?

Perhaps there is a perception problem here. I offered you the correct answer in my last reply, which you then quoted. Here, let me re-post it so that you may read it again. Several times if you'd like:

Foresight, providence and prescience are hallmarks of the books. The foretelling of dooms runs from the early 1st Age through the end of the 3rd Age, from the Dooms of Mandos all the way to Saruman's curse of Frodo. I suggest you read further.

[Belegorn]

Originally Posted by Moonraker

How did Aragorn foretell the imminent doom of a powerful Maiar, one that even the Nine Nazgul could not get past?

Did he do so, forecast Gandalf's "imminent doom"?

[Corsair_Caruso]

Other people have addressed the issue of Aragorn's ability to make an arrest, but I'd also like to throw in my two-cents. Before he was crowned as King of Gondor and Arnor, he had zero authority except over those who swore allegiance to him. He was the Chieftain of the Dunedain, and as such, the Dunedain of the North owed him allegiance, but he claimed to ability to command or exercise authority beyond those people, not even the lands which his ancestors ruled, but merely those who counted themselves as his subjects. He did not exercise lordship over the Shire, over the the human settlements in the former territories of Arnor, but merely over the Dunedain who gave themselves over to his command.

Had he attempted to exercise authority over any land before being recognized by the existing government (say in Gondor before he was crowned), he would have been ignored. Aragorn even traveled to Gondor under an alias during the rule of the Steward Ecthelion II, but exercised no authority as King of Gondor; he merely served the steward as an advisor and commander in Gondor's armies.

Aragorn is not the only rightful king who refused to exercise his authority when he had no de facto rule over his territory. Thorin II did not reign as king until he had reclaimed Erebor. He, like the Chieftains of the Dunedain, exercised authority over subjects, but not the title and rights of a king over his kingdom. During the War of the Ring, Aragorn even wanted to avoid entering Minas Tirith until he had been crowned!

So, exercising any kind of authority as an officer/leader of Gondor is right out. Whether or not he had a right to isn't really the question, it's a question of would he have done so. The answer is no: Aragorn would exercise no authority derived from his status as king of Gondor until he had been crowned.

Next, his status as a member of the Fellowship. It has been brought up before that he might have challenged Gandalf's leadership if it appeared that Gandalf was leading the company to ruin. Arrest might be interpreted as simply devesting him of leadership authority and taking on the role himself. This is possible, but exceedingly unlikely. It would, first, require the support of either the rest of the Fellowship, or the Ringbearer, as even Gandalf deferred to Frodo's decisions. As has been brought up before, Gandalf was known (to Aragorn) to be a true and faithful servant of the Valar. His wisdom, while not entirely beyond question, was not to be taken lightly. Aragorn understood that Gandalf had the experience to properly evaluate the risks of traveling through Moria, despite their lack of knowledge of what was occupying the place. Gandalf's fall demonstrates that he was not infallible, but all other roads had been reasonably disqualified, and Boromir's evident desire to get the Ring to Gondor was troubling to all those who recognized it.

Gimli's desire to enter Moria wasn't exactly bias, in my opinion, but a combination of information and ignorance. Though the dwarves had not heard from the colony in Moria for some time, they had traveled to Rivendell (in large part) to seek Elrond's advice on investigating. They had no evidence that the colony had been destroyed; they just had no word whatsoever. Hardly confidence inspiring, but also not a reason to believe that it had been completely destroyed. Gimli obviously believed that some kind of friendly party likely occupied the place, or that whatever hostile force had occupied it before had been sufficiently subdued that it would present less of a threat than paths that were known to be watched by active enemies.

And, despite all that, Gandalf still thought it was a bad idea. He just saw no better option. He and Aragorn, in fact, agreed on that. They resolved that without a safer option, they would take the path of least resistance that wasn't confirmed to be under the watchful eye of a known enemy, but one that might be occupied by an unknown enemy that could reasonably have been recently defeated, in part if not in whole.

[Moonraker]

Originally Posted by Corsair_Caruso

Arrest might be interpreted as simply devesting him of leadership authority and taking on the role himself.

Indeed, arrest does not necessarily mean sending Gandalf to jail. Aragorn taking over the leadership is a form of arrest, if done in such a manner as to dethrone Gandalf as the outright leader and authority of the Company and the quest.

[Corsair_Caruso]

Originally Posted by Moonraker

Indeed, arrest does not necessarily mean sending Gandalf to jail. Aragorn taking over the leadership is a form of arrest, if done in such a manner as to dethrone Gandalf as the outright leader and authority of the Company and the quest.

That's fine; the points I made following that statement remain valid. I don't believe Aragorn would have acted in such a manner. I mean, it's obvious that he didn't within the bounds of the story, but Gandalf would have had to have been purposefully acting against the purposes of the Fellowship for Aragorn to have acted in such a manner. Aragorn didn't even attempt to remove Boromir from the Fellowship, and I'm sure he recognized that Boromir was falling prey to the Ring's corruption. He would not have acted against Gandalf unless Gandalf took purposeful, deliberate action against the interests of the Ring's destruction, in my opinion.

[Belegorn]

Originally Posted by Moonraker

Aragorn taking over the leadership is a form of arrest, if done in such a manner as to dethrone Gandalf as the outright leader and authority of the Company and the quest.

Aragorn was already leading the Company.

Originally Posted by FotR; A Journey in the Dark

You followed my lead almost to disaster in the snow, and have said no word of blame.

Also Aragorn said he would follow Gandalf .

Originally Posted by FotR; A Journey in the Dark

"But the question is: who will follow me, if I lead you there?"

"I will," said Gimli eagerly.

"I will," said Aragorn heavily.