How could the Nazgul take Minas Morgul?

[CaptainofDespair]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

I’ve also had another thought. Earlier CaptainofDespair mentioned that the Witch-king would be in the mood for a violent and quick victory. His later behavior at Minas Tirith gives some indication of what he liked to do in war. Yet this is exactly the sort of thing that did not happen. It was a loooong drawn out process.

But we must remember, at Minas Tirith the Wiki had essentially all of Sauron's power at his finger-tips. Since Sauron is still rebuilding out of Dol-Guldur (if my memory is correct), it makes sense that the Lord of the Nine would not have such powerful resources at his command. While he would love to just break the gate and kill everything inside as he had done at Fornost, he did not have the siege machinery capable of crushing such fortifications quickly, hence the siege.

I would also like to bring up a semi-new point against the idea of a haunting/guerilla campaign: that guerilla warfare does not win wars, or even sieges, by itself. We see this throughout history, from Napoleon in Iberia to Vietnam. Guerilla forces are guerillas because they do not have resources or manpower to deal with a larger threat. While they may control the countryside (as with Vietnam) through terror, it cannot be used to take cities (there are exceptions I suppose, but even then the besiegers are aided by more conventional means).

With Vietnam, Saigon did not fall until the US left, which allowed the conventional North Vietnamese army to march in unopposed. With Napoleon, his forces held numerous cities, while the Spanish and British pestered the French in the countryside, moving from hot spot to hot spot. Eventually, more conventional British and Spanish troops were deployed to reconquer Iberia. While the guerillas played a major role, they cannot lay siege without conventional assistance.

If the Nazgul and a small force were using guerilla warfare, at some point a larger conventional army would have to be used to actually take Minas Ithil.

And while I do not outright dismiss the potential for guerilla tactics to be used in some way in conjunction with conventional means, I do not think using it as the reasoning for Tolkien's use of 'siege' is correct.

When do we actually see the forces of the Enemy using such tactics in instances of warfare that are more than just skirmishing? And what types usually do this? The Haradrim would seem to be most in-line with this tactic, while Easterlings and Orcs seem to be more of the backbone infantry types of a traditional army. I cannot see the Nazgul being able to deploy these troops, especially in a desolate land such as Mordor, in such a fashion. It seems to go against the very way the Enemy fights in every other major confrontation.

[Kuruharan]

While the Nazghul might be invisible, their swords are very much real.

Hmmm…for some reason I seem to have some vague recollection of some reference that Nazgul had to have a visible form to affect the visible world i.e. they had to have a visible form to hold a sword. I might be mistaken in this recollection.

In the Two Towers, doesn't Faramir mention something about treachery having been Gondor's greatest foe in the long wars with the Enemy?

Hmmm…there definitely might be something to this, although we still have the two year siege to ponder.

Since Sauron is still rebuilding out of Dol-Guldur (if my memory is correct), it makes sense that the Lord of the Nine would not have such powerful resources at his command.

Which is exactly the reason why he couldn’t conduct a two-year long formal siege in the conventional sense.

I would also like to bring up a semi-new point against the idea of a haunting/guerilla campaign: that guerilla warfare does not win wars, or even sieges, by itself.

A good point. However, my theory always encapsulated a final attack by Mordorian forces that were significant enough to quickly overrun the weak garrison already crippled by two years of Nazgul inspired malaise and hit-and-run attacks by small forces. I find Břicho’s suggestion of treachery to be particularly appealing as a potential end game here.

When do we actually see the forces of the Enemy using such tactics in instances of warfare that are more than just skirmishing? And what types usually do this? The Haradrim would seem to be most in-line with this tactic, while Easterlings and Orcs seem to be more of the backbone infantry types of a traditional army. I cannot see the Nazgul being able to deploy these troops, especially in a desolate land such as Mordor, in such a fashion. It seems to go against the very way the Enemy fights in every other major confrontation.

I’m afraid I disagree with you on this, particularly on the use of orcs. They are in many places portrayed as raiders and I believe that this was the area of warfare in which orcs excelled. They are not such great stand-and-fight soldiers, by and large.

[CaptainofDespair]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

I’m afraid I disagree with you on this, particularly on the use of orcs. They are in many places portrayed as raiders and I believe that this was the area of warfare in which orcs excelled. They are not such great stand-and-fight soldiers, by and large.

I'm not quite saying they couldn't raid, and nor am I really saying that standard infantry types don't engage in raiding. However, orcs do not seem to be very good at guerilla warfare. Guerilla warfare and raiding, while not mutually exclusive, are different in certain respects.

Raiding is very much a piece of guerilla warfare, but it is not the entire puzzle. This sort of activity can be engaged in by traditional armies, and actually is quite often. It serves as a method of procurring provisions and loot when both are low in supply. I agree orcs could excel at this particular piece of the puzzle. And while they are able to terrorize, they are not so good at carrying at the other aspects of a guerilla war.

Guerilla fighters are not entirely self-sufficient. They often resort to using a sympathetic populace to feed them when they are on the move. Orcs, in contrast to this, are brutal, and in-fight amongst each other even when united by a power like Sauron. This greatly reduces their effectiveness in garnering supplies from a partly willing populace. And with Mordor mostly desolate, I see it being very difficult for them to win over Easterlings or Haradrim. That sort of thing is left to the Nazgul.

The Nazgul, too, I do not see being very good at guerilla warfare. It is rather difficult for them, it would seem, to engage in it effectively with their...unique...physical properties. And this manner of warfare goes against the very tactics we see the Witch-King using time and again.

Based on the types of forces he might have at his disposal, and the way the Witch-King himself is portrayed, I find the proposition of a "Haunting" to be highly improbable. Maybe the action was part of a lesser form of intimidation, but his tactical mind does not seem to be set for a guerilla-type war. The most probable explanation of Tolkien's writings, to me, then seems to be what he wrote, that it was certainly a siege in the traditional use of the word.

[Farael]

I honestly do not see where you find that the Nazghul would not have been inclined towards using subtler tactics. I think that the Witch King was a very competent military leader and thus he would have used the best tactic according to the situation. If he did not have enough forces and supplies for a conventional siege, I'm sure he would have opted for something else.

If you are thinking about either the fall of Arnor or the Siege of Minas Tirith later on (which I'm sure we all agree WAS a conventional siege, until broken) in both cases the WK had superiority in numbers and he was fighting a disheartened, weakened foe. While the garrison in Minas Ithil was certainly weak and disheartened, Minas Tirith and Osgilliath were close enough that he knew he would have had to deal with them. Therefore, it's completely plausible that he chose an alternative method.

Furthermore, with regards to your comments on supplies for guerrilla warfare, they did not need to win the love of the Haradim or other evil men as long as they could scare them into doing what they wanted. And I'm sure both orc and Nazghul can be rather scary.

[CaptainofDespair]

Originally Posted by Farael

Furthermore, with regards to your comments on supplies for guerrilla warfare, they did not need to win the love of the Haradim or other evil men as long as they could scare them into doing what they wanted. And I'm sure both orc and Nazghul can be rather scary.

Unless I am mistaken, I thought there was an entry in regards to the orcs and Easterlings, and their hatred of one another.

As another thought on orcs, are they ever really effective when they don't have great numbers over their foes? In most cases, no. They are mainly a mass attack group, whether in raiding or standard combat. Their effectiveness in combat seems to be diminished when in smaller numbers.

And about Wiki's 'plausible' alternative: Cite sources of where the Witch-King, as a military commander, chooses subtler methods over his favored option of traditional combat. In most, if not all, of the Witch-King's mentioned confrontations that are military in manner, he favors overt over subtle action.

[Farael]

Originally Posted by CaptainofDespair

And about Wiki's 'plausible' alternative: Cite sources of where the Witch-King, as a military commander, chooses subtler methods over his favored option of traditional combat. In most, if not all, of the Witch-King's mentioned confrontations that are military in manner, he favors overt over subtle action.

As well, in all situations but this one, as far as I know, he has superiority in numbers, has he not? Cite sources of where the WK, as a military commander, chooses overt action over subtler methods when he does not have superiority in numbers (and when he is choosing the way of engagement... when Angmar is destroyed he was overpowered but he was put in a defensive position, reacting to the forces of Gondor and not choosing how and when to attack).

Also, Břicho is dead on with his mentioning of treachery... I'd say that that is a clear indication that at least at some point in time, subtler tactics were used.

[CaptainofDespair]

Originally Posted by Farael

As well, in all situations but this one, as far as I know, he has superiority in numbers, has he not? Cite sources of where the WK, as a military commander, chooses overt action over subtler methods when he does not have superiority in numbers (and when he is choosing the way of engagement... when Angmar is destroyed he was overpowered but he was put in a defensive position, reacting to the forces of Gondor and not choosing how and when to attack).

Also, Břicho is dead on with his mentioning of treachery... I'd say that that is a clear indication that at least at some point in time, subtler tactics were used.

Treachery does not have to come in accord with the Enemy's plans. Such things can happen rather randomly, as an act of good fortune for the besiegers...by, in WW terms, a Cobbler type person. Thus, is not a clear indication of any subtle tactics being exercised.

As for your rebuttal for sources: We do not know how many troops the Witch-King had under his command. It is only assumption one way or the other. Thus, he could very well have had an advantage in numbers. The beset could have just made things difficult. These were different Men than what he would face at Minas Tirith.

[Wayland]

Originally Posted by FeRaL sHaDoW

I think i have read somewhere that the Nazgul have some power to influence or take control of people. Couldent they just turn the city people agaisnt them selves. Then in the end wouldent the nazguls just have to walk in.

Good point. Whatever mechanics were employed outside, an equally important process of demoralisation, corruption and treachery was doubtlessly occurring within. We need only to look at Sauruman, Denethor and Theoden to see how good men, in Tolkein’s world, are almost imperceptibly brought down.
No doubt the end was ushered in by some small gate opened by the hands of a traitor in the dead of night, some poor orders from the captains and downright self-serving foolery or cowardice by others.
Would it not be in character to speculate that the place was as much ‘lost’ by those entrusted with its defence as it was ‘taken’ by those who wanted it?

[Kuruharan]

Guerilla fighters are not entirely self-sufficient. They often resort to using a sympathetic populace to feed them when they are on the move.

You are not taking the circumstances of the situation into account.

There was no "sympathetic" population for the orcs to impress and gain supplies from. There were targets to be scared and killed. Orcs were good at scaring and killing.

Raiding is very much a piece of guerilla warfare, but it is not the entire puzzle. This sort of activity can be engaged in by traditional armies, and actually is quite often.

Which is what I was talking about. Besides, are not orcs frequently spoken of ambushing people?

The Nazgul, too, I do not see being very good at guerilla warfare. It is rather difficult for them, it would seem, to engage in it effectively with their...unique...physical properties.

Would you care to explain why?

I think they would be uniquely suited to it because creating terror was what they did best.

Unless I am mistaken, I thought there was an entry in regards to the orcs and Easterlings, and their hatred of one another.

I can't remember reading anything like that. While I doubt that the orcs and Easterlings liked each other very much, they would definitely been on the same side.

Cite sources of where the Witch-King, as a military commander, chooses subtler methods over his favored option of traditional combat.

He tricked Earnur.

Treachery does not have to come in accord with the Enemy's plans. Such things can happen rather randomly, as an act of good fortune for the besiegers...by, in WW terms, a Cobbler type person. Thus, is not a clear indication of any subtle tactics being exercised.

True, but the other side of that coin is at least as likely. I don't think there is any fodder for either side to gain from this issue.

Thus, he could very well have had an advantage in numbers.

And where did these troops come from and how were they supported? Up to this point you've failed to give an adequate explanation for this.

[CaptainofDespair]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

He tricked Earnur.

I would consider that more like taunting him into performing a foolish action. He never truly tricked him. Earnur was stupid enough to think he might actually get a fair fight.

And where did these troops come from and how were they supported? Up to this point you've failed to give an adequate explanation for this.

And I disagree with you there. I think I have given adequate explanation, and that you are just requiring an immense degree of evidence for support. And I do not see you requiring the same of your own side of the argument.

In any case...Parts of Mordor, Rhun, and Harad could provide both troops and supplies. Anywhere that Sauron might have held some sway. They can be supported entirely by traditional means via supply lines reaching into Rhun and Harad, and maybe Nurn. And if Mordor is so "desolate", there are not many bandits to worry about in that last leg of the journey. The only part that must be secured is the Rhun area, and by simply sending shipments with reinforcement contingents or using outposts as waypoints they could easily transport the needed supplies to the Ithil besiegers.

There was no "sympathetic" population for the orcs to impress and gain supplies from. There were targets to be scared and killed. Orcs were good at scaring and killing.

Exactly my point. Which is why I think guerilla warfare is not a viable option. That type of warfare has many different factors that extend beyond simply 'scaring' and 'killing'. Orcs are best suited for the traditional army type, which more than allows for the raiding that they would enjoy.

I can't remember reading anything like that. While I doubt that the orcs and Easterlings liked each other very much, they would definitely been on the same side.

We have seen that orcs go after one another when from different 'tribes', and even amongst singular tribes they in-fight. And that comes during times of war, as well. Thus it is entirely plausible that they would attack Easterlings, and vice versa, if tempers boil over. And they certainly would in such a situation of duress.

[Tuor in Gondolin]

Originally Posted by FeRaL sHaDoW
I think i have read somewhere that the Nazgul have some power to influence or take control of people. Couldent they just turn the city people agaisnt them selves. Then in the end wouldent the nazguls just have to walk in.

Good point. Whatever mechanics were employed outside, an equally important process of demoralisation, corruption and treachery was doubtlessly occurring within. We need only to look at Sauruman, Denethor and Theoden to see how good men, in Tolkein’s world, are almost imperceptibly brought down.
No doubt the end was ushered in by some small gate opened by the hands of a traitor in the dead of night, some poor orders from the captains and downright self-serving foolery or cowardice by others.
Would it not be in character to speculate that the place was as much ‘lost’ by those entrusted with its defence as it was ‘taken’ by those who wanted it?

What I like about this suggestion is that it gives a
reasonable explanation of how the palantir was captured. If
the fortress was captured by stealth then the palantir would have been
valuable as a communication device with Minas Tirith for the
Gondorians who, presumably, did not think that their fortress
was in iminent danger of being lost.

[Kuruharan]

I would consider that more like taunting him into performing a foolish action. He never truly tricked him. Earnur was stupid enough to think he might actually get a fair fight.

The principle I was articulating is the same.

“Insult the enemy with subtlety where and when you can insult him; degrade him where you can degrade. Offer fool’s bait and entice him to display his stupidity.”
The Art of War, Chapter I

And I do not see you requiring the same of your own side of the argument.

Specify on what is unclear and I will expound at length, believe me.

And if Mordor is so "desolate", there are not many bandits to worry about in that last leg of the journey.

I agree with you there. I don’t think bandits would have been a big problem in Mordor.

The only part that must be secured is the Rhun area, and by simply sending shipments with reinforcement contingents or using outposts as waypoints they could easily transport the needed supplies to the Ithil besiegers.

Again, this is a loooong supply line compared to the one the Gondorians had to use.

Exactly my point. Which is why I think guerilla warfare is not a viable option. That type of warfare has many different factors that extend beyond simply 'scaring' and 'killing'. Orcs are best suited for the traditional army type, which more than allows for the raiding that they would enjoy.

I believe you are attempting to create a straw man here.

We have seen that orcs go after one another when from different 'tribes', and even amongst singular tribes they in-fight. And that comes during times of war, as well. Thus it is entirely plausible that they would attack Easterlings, and vice versa, if tempers boil over. And they certainly would in such a situation of duress.

You do realize that by saying this you are making an even stronger case for the side of the argument that says that the Gondorians could have overrun the pass in a straight military encounter (particularly that bit about “under duress.”)

[CaptainofDespair]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Again, this is a loooong supply line compared to the one the Gondorians had to use.

But if the supply line goes unhindered for the most part, it is no problem to constantly ship things along it. Napoleon mananged to have couriers, at various points, reporting daily from France when he was moving into and through Russia. Although his situation deteriorated rapidly as it progressed, the Nazgul would not be faced with the Russians...or their winter. And their distance to send supplies along is not so great as that.

Thus, if the supplies are readily available and in fairly constant transport for the most part, the distance, so long as it goes unimpeded, is not much of a problem. I would think the Gondorians might have more difficulties having to haul things over the Anduin, while worrying about potential raids on the shipments from orcs and other baddies.

You do realize that by saying this you are making an even stronger case for the side of the argument that says that the Gondorians could have overrun the pass in a straight military encounter (particularly that bit about “under duress.”)

History is full of interesting moments like that, where the one side does not act (or in some cases does act) at a time when they could easily achieve victory. This, it seems, often leads to defeat for those who do not act (Archduke Karl waiting against an isolated Napoleon outside Vienna, allowing reinforcements to arrive).

Dissension would not be tolerated by the Nazgul, who would put things into line. But since the Nazgul must worry of their personal safety they would not go off on guerilla affairs for fear of being surrounded and outnumbered. Yet, at the same time, keeping the troops in line requires their presence. The only way to keep the various groups in line is to force them to by being constantly around, and that requires mass supervision.

While they could have the orcs and Easterlings act only amongst their own, they must also worry of another factor. Guerilla attacks on cities/outposts/forts require timed assaults by various units working in consort. Distraction and division are some of the best tactics for these fighters. But if the groups involved truly do not like each other, and would rather see the other dead, they may very well not attack at the designated point. The Nazgul would need to prevent this, but there are only nine of them, and thus they cannot be everywhere. Factor in that the Witch-King seemingly doesn't go into the field himself until he feels he has mostly won the day, and you have eight available for baby-sitting duty.

Thus, based on the potential fractured relations of the groups involved, it would be easiest, methinks, to keep them together in large contingents that are more easily managed by the few Nazgul.

I feel as if I am becoming incoherent...possibly from ranting. I shall end this post here before something goes amiss in my brain.

[Kuruharan]

But if the supply line goes unhindered for the most part, it is no problem to constantly ship things along it.

Unhindered by sentient beings does not mean totally unhindered. Broken transports, weather delays, the necessity of feeding the ones doing the transporting, rock slides, mud volcanoes...these problems become more inevitable and substantial with every mile you have to cross.

Let's take the time to look carefully at the map.

In an act of generosity on my part, we'll say that there are sufficient settlements just to the east of the Sea of Rhun, that is a distance of at least 600 miles.

The distance from Minas Tirith to Minas Ithil is about 45 miles.

Are you starting to see where we are coming from here?

I would think the Gondorians might have more difficulties having to haul things over the Anduin, while worrying about potential raids on the shipments from orcs and other baddies.

Nonsense. It was their river and they were a river people.

As for orcs and other baddies, there were no orcs or other baddies in that particular area at the time. That is part of why we are finding it so hard to accept that the Witch-king just created an army out of nothing and then laid siege for two years unopposed.

[CaptainofDespair]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Are you starting to see where we are coming from here?

No. You offered very little support for your own argument. I do not think that you can support the idea of a 'Haunting' without going into the unreasonable.

Nonsense. It was their river and they were a river people.

As for orcs and other baddies, there were no orcs or other baddies in that particular area at the time. That is part of why we are finding it so hard to accept that the Witch-king just created an army out of nothing and then laid siege for two years unopposed.

Just because they are a river people does not mean there are inherent difficulties in hauling supplies over water. The relatively dry lands of Rhun are more easily crossed in general.

I will not say that weather and terrain problems cannot cause problems, but I find it highly unlikely that they could not be fixed. And especially by a people like the Easterlings, who would most likely be able to cope with such set-backs. Rhun is vast, as is Mordor. It would not be hard to..."go around"...the obstacles.

As for there being no orcs or other baddies:

I'm not saying they were naturally there. Once the siege starts, the Witch-King could easily dispatch units to the periphery of his theater of war to way-lay the Gondorians who would be attempting to reach Ithil. And if the Haradrim are part of this, all the easier to acquire good troops for this sort of action, as well as any supplies they bring to the table.

And really, if you think that I'm saying that the Wiki created an army out of nothing and laid siege unopposed, you have not been reading what I'm posting. If that is the case, then it may be useless to debate this further.

I have never said that the Wiki created an army out of nothing, nor that he went unopposed. Easterlings, Haradrim, orcs...they do have other homes than just Mordor. It's not hard to see the Witch-King or Khamul conscripting these groups into combat. What I find hard to believe is that anyone would think that the Witch-King went into this without planning this out ahead of time.

The Witch-King certainly would not have gone unopposed at Ithil. The Gondorians would send troops. But, without any proper intelligence coming out of the city, it would be very difficult to gauge the strength of the enemy force. Thus, at least for the first few months, the Gondorians may not have had the intelligence they needed to field a force capable of defeating the Witch-King. Another factor is that the King and his commanders may have felt Ithil might not be the full attack. Being the defender, they could not afford to make a mistake that could not only lose Ithil, but other important fortresses. While such a situation may not have happened, they would have to plan for it. Thus, they could not send the fullness of their might against the Wiki. Just one of many potential factors that may have hindered Gondor's response to the Ithil situation.

Now, if you continue to misinterpret my posts, then you may consider yourself alone in continuing this discussion.

[Kuruharan]

No. You offered very little support for your own argument.

I'm terribly sorry, but I don't understand what else there is to say in support of the argument about the supply lines. I find that, according to your theory, the Witch-king's were impossibly long. Compared to this the Gondorian were very short. These considerations weigh heavily against the idea that this encounter was a conventional siege.

Just because they are a river people does not mean there are inherent difficulties in hauling supplies over water.

One other point you might want to consider is that the river was still bridged at this point.

The relatively dry lands of Rhun are more easily crossed in general.

For every mile an army’s supplies must cross the “teeth to tail” ratio becomes ever more heavily weighted to tail. I think that even the process of moving the supplies across to Minas Ithil from Rhun would have been prohibitive in terms of manpower, especially if you are envisioning the supplies arriving on a frequent basis.

I will not say that weather and terrain problems cannot cause problems, but I find it highly unlikely that they could not be fixed. And especially by a people like the Easterlings, who would most likely be able to cope with such set-backs.

Yes, the Easterlings being the great pioneers in weather-control and terraforming technologies.

Rhun is vast, as is Mordor. It would not be hard to..."go around"...the obstacles.

Adding to the amount of time it would take the supplies to get where they are going.

I'm not saying they were naturally there. Once the siege starts, the Witch-King could easily dispatch units to the periphery of his theater of war to way-lay the Gondorians who would be attempting to reach Ithil. And if the Haradrim are part of this, all the easier to acquire good troops for this sort of action, as well as any supplies they bring to the table.

And for them to be able to do that against a major relief force (which I think it highly likely the Gondorians would have dispatched had they understood the situation as conforming to conventional norms) there would have to have been a major battle that we know nothing about.

I have never said that the Wiki created an army out of nothing, nor that he went unopposed. Easterlings, Haradrim, orcs...they do have other homes than just Mordor. It's not hard to see the Witch-King or Khamul conscripting these groups into combat. What I find hard to believe is that anyone would think that the Witch-King went into this without planning this out ahead of time.

I’m not saying that he could not have done this. I am saying that it does not fit the situation.

But, without any proper intelligence coming out of the city, it would be very difficult to gauge the strength of the enemy force.

Just as an aside, and this is not particularly directed at you, but isn’t it amazing how a palantir can at one moment be the most useful thing in the world and in the next moment serve no useful function whatsoever. Odd that…

Anyway…

Being the defender, they could not afford to make a mistake that could not only lose Ithil, but other important fortresses. While such a situation may not have happened, they would have to plan for it. Thus, they could not send the fullness of their might against the Wiki. Just one of many potential factors that may have hindered Gondor's response to the Ithil situation.

They could have thought this in the early months at most. Remember this siege lasted two years.

[CaptainofDespair]

I do not refer to supply lines, but of your general argument in support of a 'Haunting'.

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

One other point you might want to consider is that the river was still bridged at this point.

Even bridges become difficult to cross if a large number of men, war horses, supply train horses and wagons, and any siege materials they might try to take along are being sent across. Backups are a definite problem.

For every mile an army’s supplies must cross the “teeth to tail” ratio becomes ever more heavily weighted to tail. I think that even the process of moving the supplies across to Minas Ithil from Rhun would have been prohibitive in terms of manpower, especially if you are envisioning the supplies arriving on a frequent basis.

And since when does Rhun not have the manpower? Numerous military commanders throughout history have been able to march their troops to war, and maintain immense supply lines. It is not as impossible as you seem intent on making it.

Yes, the Easterlings being the great pioneers in weather-control and terraforming technologies.

It's not exactly very difficult to create patch-work fixes for a supply line. And it's not very hard to go around other obstacles.

Adding to the amount of time it would take the supplies to get where they are going.

Time is something the Wiki had, and the Gondorians did not.

And for them to be able to do that against a major relief force (which I think it highly likely the Gondorians would have dispatched had they understood the situation as conforming to conventional norms) there would have to have been a major battle that we know nothing about.

And the Gondorians just cannot be lacking in knowledge of the situation? They were not exactly expecting something out of the desolation. You seem to expect a lot of things out of Gondor. They cannot have an off moment? Perhaps you think too highly of their abilities...

I’m not saying that he could not have done this. I am saying that it does not fit the situation.

A rather weak rebuttal. Why don't you try expanding your argument? How does it not fit the situation? The Wiki was defeated in Angmar years before his return to Mordor. He could very easily spend that time in the East, in communication with the other Nazgul and the Easterlings/Haradrim/Orcs, planning an assault.

Just as an aside, and this is not particularly directed at you, but isn’t it amazing how a palantir can at one moment be the most useful thing in the world and in the next moment serve no useful function whatsoever. Odd that…

Perhaps the tower's commander was not authorized to use the palantir? Such an awesome tool could not be left idly in the hands of a lesser...

They could have thought this in the early months at most. Remember this siege lasted two years.

And this threat could not linger at all times? It would seem that if Gondor got bogged down at Ithil, it would become even more likely that the Wiki might to go around Ithil and attack Osgiliath, if only to draw off the Gondorians at Ithil.

And a side thought to this: Maybe the siege did not go unbroken, but was rather an off and on again affair based on the ability of the Witch-King to maintain enough supplies, and to prevent a large relief force from attacking.

[Kuruharan]

Numerous military commanders throughout history have been able to march their troops to war, and maintain immense supply lines.

A supply line of 600 miles through desolate landscape to an equally desolate battlefield…hmmm…can’t think of any example like that off the top of my head during a comparable period of our history.

Time is something the Wiki had, and the Gondorians did not.

They had two years. That is enough time to do plenty of things.

And the Gondorians just cannot be lacking in knowledge of the situation? They were not exactly expecting something out of the desolation. You seem to expect a lot of things out of Gondor. They cannot have an off moment?

They can have an off moment. Two years is a bit too much to swallow. King Earnil was no idiot.

Perhaps you think too highly of their abilities...

Perhaps you think too little of them…

Why don't you try expanding your argument?

Fair enough. I’ll give you a step-by-step account of what I think is a reasonable chronology of how things went down.

I think that when the Nazgûl launched their assault against Minas Morgul they did so by moving into the area unclad for the express purpose of causing terror and driving people away.

Note what Tolkien said…

[T]heir chief weapon was terror. This was actually greater when they were unclad and invisible; and it was also greater when they were gathered together.
-The Hunt for the Ring text B

-and-

They passed slowly and in stealth, through Anórien, and over the Entwade, and so into the Wold, and rumor of darkness and a dread of men knew not what went before them.
-The Hunt for the Ring text A

-and-

They rode through Rohan in haste, and the terror of their passing was so great that many folk fled from the land, and went wildly away north and west
-The Hunt for the Ring text A

Is it really so very hard to believe that the prolonged presence of the Nazgûl could cause the inhabitants of Minas Ithil to start going out of their minds and fleeing in droves? The king wouldn’t know what to do because the city was not under attack, its people were just collectively going insane. After a fairly short time of this exposure, I think the more faint-hearted residents would start heading west. Given more time and the stout-hearted would start to have the urge as well. Eventually, I think that the only people in Minas Morgul would be the garrison soldiers. They too would have experienced their share of desertions, but we’ll give them some credit for bravery or a devotion to duty that was greater than their fear. The king still wouldn’t understand what was happening because nothing intelligible was happening. Undoubtedly he would send reinforcements, but they would suffer just like the rest of the troops. After two years of this process, I imagine that the garrison would be in utter shambles and reduced in strength. The Nazgûl would then summon up a strike force sufficient to storm the (probably ill-manned) walls one night, or they would induce some terror-stricken individual to open the gates for them…and PRESTO!! City fallen.

I also think that this manner of conquest could go a long way toward explaining the unique properties of Minas Morgul. The rest of Mordor was not like that (although we admittedly don’t know what Barad-dûr was like, but Shagrat and Gorbag talk about serving in the city as if it is a unique experience). I think this haunting manner of conquest could explain a lot about why the city turned out the way it did.

Perhaps the tower's commander was not authorized to use the palantir? Such an awesome tool could not be left idly in the hands of a lesser

Even if the city were under heavy siege and in danger of falling? I doubt that.

It would seem that if Gondor got bogged down at Ithil, it would become even more likely that the Wiki might to go around Ithil and attack Osgiliath, if only to draw off the Gondorians at Ithil.

How? His passage was blocked.

[CaptainofDespair]

A supply line of 600 miles through desolate landscape to an equally desolate battlefield…hmmm…can’t think of any example like that off the top of my head during a comparable period of our history.

I can think of several examples of long supply lines being maintained. The degree of success may vary in the individual cases, though. Napoleon maintained long supply lines (though at the very end of what was a several thousand mile long line) in both Egypt and in Russia. While he ended up losing both, that was more to his own faults and declining mindset than to the fault of his supply line. He could have realistically held both, but he made poor choices that ended up cutting them up. The Crusaders, a comparable period of time, managed to do much with a combination of stretched supply lines and 'living off the land' tactics.

While Mordor and Gondor were certainly no Levant, Ithilien could have been foraged in for some supplies, especially early in the campaign.And while Rhun and Mordor were desolate, Napoleon had managed to ship supplies (but his mistakes ruined any good that could have happened with the logistics) in both the cases of Egypt and Russia. The Witch-King had a smaller line of supply, then, and could thus do it as well (and I doubt he was as foolish as Napoleon in the case of logistics).

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Perhaps you think too little of them…

No, I give them credit where credit is due. But there are several decades between Angmar and Ithil, and I do not think they were quite the same force. I also think that you might be placing on them an aura of greatness that they in truth may not have had.

Is it really so very hard to believe that the prolonged presence of the Nazgûl could cause the inhabitants of Minas Ithil to start going out of their minds and fleeing in droves? The king wouldn’t know what to do because the city was not under attack, its people were just collectively going insane. After a fairly short time of this exposure, I think the more faint-hearted residents would start heading west. Given more time and the stout-hearted would start to have the urge as well. Eventually, I think that the only people in Minas Morgul would be the garrison soldiers. They too would have experienced their share of desertions, but we’ll give them some credit for bravery or a devotion to duty that was greater than their fear. The king still wouldn’t understand what was happening because nothing intelligible was happening. Undoubtedly he would send reinforcements, but they would suffer just like the rest of the troops. After two years of this process, I imagine that the garrison would be in utter shambles and reduced in strength. The Nazgûl would then summon up a strike force sufficient to storm the (probably ill-manned) walls one night, or they would induce some terror-stricken individual to open the gates for them…and PRESTO!! City fallen.

How imaginative. But where is that stout heartedness you earlier attributed to the Gondorians, and not just their soldiers? Hadn't they only decades before faced the Witch-King, who not only caused fear himself but infested the Barrows of Cardolan with evil spirits from Carn-Dum? Should not Gondor have had some sense of what was happening, then?

Now, how is two years good enough for the Gondorians to get over the shock of a "siege" and the possibility of attack from elsewhere, and yet not enough for them to come to grips with something they had recently just seen in the Wights, which was a comparable situation? And add to that they know about the Nazgul, or at least the Witch-King, and the properties he brings to the table.

I also think that this manner of conquest could go a long way toward explaining the unique properties of Minas Morgul. The rest of Mordor was not like that (although we admittedly don’t know what Barad-dûr was like, but Shagrat and Gorbag talk about serving in the city as if it is a unique experience). I think this haunting manner of conquest could explain a lot about why the city turned out the way it did.

I think the properties of Morgul are not so much changed by the manner of conquest, but by the inhabiting that followed. The Nazgul, I agree, can haunt places. But I do not think their effect is enough to drive the 'stout' defenders of Gondor, especially at this time, into abandoning the city of Ithil. Abandonment, I think, does not fit with the use of "Siege", as well.

How? His passage was blocked.

There are other ways into Gondor besides the Morgul pass, ya know.

[Kuruharan]

Napoleon maintained long supply lines (though at the very end of what was a several thousand mile long line) in both Egypt and in Russia. While he ended up losing both, that was more to his own faults and declining mindset than to the fault of his supply line.

Collapsing supply lines had a lot to do with why Napoleon retreated. But…Age of gunpowder. Incomparable periods of history. Irrelevant.

The Crusaders, a comparable period of time, managed to do much with a combination of stretched supply lines and 'living off the land' tactics.

Except for that irritating fact that the sea was right there and the Crusaders were supplied by sea (and wouldn’t have taken Jerusalem in the first place without it.

The Witch-king had no such option.

Try again.

Ithilien could have been foraged in for some supplies, especially early in the campaign.

Supposing the Witch-king even had access to it. Yet again your theory rests on the utter and complete inertia of Gondor, something I find difficult to believe in.

and I do not think they were quite the same force.

Even if they were not, they must have still had sufficient force to make a powerful effort at rousting the besieging forces.

Hadn't they only decades before faced the Witch-King, who not only caused fear himself but infested the Barrows of Cardolan with evil spirits from Carn-Dum? Should not Gondor have had some sense of what was happening, then?

Not necessarily. And I doubt that the Gondorians had much to do with or heard much about the Barrow-downs. They had other things on their minds when they were there.

and yet not enough for them to come to grips with something they had recently just seen in the Wights

As I said, I doubt they had any contact with them.

And add to that they know about the Nazgul, or at least the Witch-King, and the properties he brings to the table.

I’m not sure how much the Gondorians of that day and age would have known about them. Only the Wise seemed to be deeply versed in the lore and much of the past was forgotten in Gondor as the ages wore on. True, they had just defeated the Witch-king, but I’m not sure that experience would give them a realistic assessment of Nazgûl capabilities. Remember by the time we see the Gondorians talking about the Nazgûl they have had centuries of experience with them.

I certainly think that they would not have been clearly versed in what the Nazgul were capable of doing if they were unclad (which is what my theory rests upon). At some point the Gondorians may have had some inkling about the Nazgul, but what are you supposed to do against an enemy that you can’t see?

[CaptainofDespair]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Collapsing supply lines had a lot to do with why Napoleon retreated. But…Age of gunpowder. Incomparable periods of history. Irrelevant.

Quite foolish of you. Whether it is the Age of Gunpowder or not makes no difference. They still relied on horses to pull everything from cannon to supply wagons.

Except for that irritating fact that the sea was right there and the Crusaders were supplied by sea (and wouldn’t have taken Jerusalem in the first place without it.

The Witch-king had no such option.

You are not listening, again. I never said he'd use the sea. I was focused mainly on the ability to forage. Also, the Crusaders received very little in the way of supplies, especially in the First Crusade. I don't suppose you got the message that they were starving when they were sieging Antioch, as well as other fortifications. Had the Muslim armies managed to actually join together and isolate the Crusaders, what little aid the Byzantines provided wouldn't have helped either.

Try again.

Perhaps you should "try again".

Supposing the Witch-king even had access to it. Yet again your theory rests on the utter and complete inertia of Gondor, something I find difficult to believe in.

No, it does not rely on the complete inertia of Gondor. You only think that.

Even if they were not, they must have still had sufficient force to make a powerful effort at rousting the besieging forces.

Perhaps, but that does not mean they, the Gondorians, could not be beaten. They are not invulnerable. You seem to be attempting to give them an aura akin to that.

Not necessarily. And I doubt that the Gondorians had much to do with or heard much about the Barrow-downs. They had other things on their minds when they were there.

Why? Because Tolkien doesn't mention it? People did not stop traveling in this time period. Word would get around, and I imagine it would not take too long.

Remember by the time we see the Gondorians talking about the Nazgûl they have had centuries of experience with them.

And yet no mention of a 'Haunting' of Ithil. How odd...

[Kuruharan]

Whether it is the Age of Gunpowder or not makes no difference. They still relied on horses to pull everything from cannon to supply wagons.

A valid point. And the fact that since Napoleon's campaign also failed has nothing to do with me conceding this point.

You are not listening, again. I never said he'd use the sea. I was focused mainly on the ability to forage. Also, the Crusaders received very little in the way of supplies, especially in the First Crusade. I don't suppose you got the message that they were starving when they were sieging Antioch, as well as other fortifications. Had the Muslim armies managed to actually join together and isolate the Crusaders, what little aid the Byzantines provided wouldn't have helped either.

I’m afraid I have to strongly object to this. You are the one who is not listening and failing to comprehend the situations.

Of course, you didn’t say the Witch-king would use the sea. He had no access to the sea, it would be irrelevant to the campaign. My point was that he couldn’t where as the crusaders had access to the sea and the First Crusade would probably have failed without it (see the arrival of the Genoese and English ships on 17 June 1099). The mere presence of the sea utterly changes the strategic situation and makes the siege of Minas Ithil and the siege of Jerusalem utterly different in nature (Now there’s a statement I never thought I would have to utter).

No, it does not rely on the complete inertia of Gondor. You only think that.

As far as I can tell, you don’t think Gondor did anything except hunker down for fear that the assault on Minas Ithil was some sort of bizarre two-year diversion. Perhaps you have some different definition of the words “utter inertia” in mind.

They are not invulnerable.

No, but I think the strategic situation heavily favored them in a conventional military campaign at that time.

People did not stop traveling in this time period. Word would get around, and I imagine it would not take too long.

The Gondorians that were there were not there to sightsee. They were soldiers on campaign. And why would anybody mention the Barrow-downs. Who would have been interested in it at the time?

And yet no mention of a 'Haunting' of Ithil. How odd

By that time they understood what had happened.

[CaptainofDespair]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

A valid point. And the fact that since Napoleon's campaign also failed has nothing to do with me conceding this point.

That he ultimately failed in the campaign in Russia (or Egypt) is irrelevant, I think. For thousands of miles, either by land or sea, the French had managed to keep the supply lines fairly open. It was only after Napoleon made the mistake of marching towards Moscow, rather than St. Petersburg (which could ended the war if it fell, as the Czar was there), that he stretched his lines too far. Regardless of his own failure with the situation, Napoleon had managed to keep supplies coming in until his fateful choice of attack. With Egypt, he failed to take in even more logistical problems (such as checking for bread ovens) before arriving. Why, despite being across a sea which the British controlled, the French managed to get some supplies past.

If Napoleon could do that, over a much greater distance for a much larger army, it is then feasible that the Witch-King could have done so with a smaller distance, and then properly maintained it, as he had no worries of the Gondorians encircling him effectively, as the Russians had done to Napoleon after he fled Moscow on the Death March.

Of course, you didn’t say the Witch-king would use the sea. He had no access to the sea, it would be irrelevant to the campaign. My point was that he couldn’t where as the crusaders had access to the sea and the First Crusade would probably have failed without it (see the arrival of the Genoese and English ships on 17 June 1099). The mere presence of the sea utterly changes the strategic situation and makes the siege of Minas Ithil and the siege of Jerusalem utterly different in nature (Now there’s a statement I never thought I would have to utter).

I still think you are ignoring what I am looking at (which actually may not have been entirely clear, for which I apologize). I am certainly not looking at the entire Crusade period, only a select few moments, which is all I need. The arrival of the Genoese/English ships does not concern my argument, because they were not present at Antioch (which is my main example for this). When the Crusaders arrived and laid siege to city, they were already low on food. Over the course of the siege, they ran out of food, and were forced to forage what they could in the countryside or were forced to eat dogs/horses/other pack animals. Also, the situation at Antioch (location, ect) is similar enough to Ithil to provide a decent comparison.

I do not see the orcs having much of a problem with this (and it might be preferred over their usual food). I also do not see them having a problem with eating the bodies of the dead if need be. And there would be plenty, either of their own side or of the Gondorians. Of course, Ithilien would provide a small amount of forage material in the early weeks and months of the campaign.

As far as I can tell, you don’t think Gondor did anything except hunker down for fear that the assault on Minas Ithil was some sort of bizarre two-year diversion. Perhaps you have some different definition of the words “utter inertia” in mind.

Hunkering down requires something more than being inert. But that is not the point. I'm not saying the entire siege was a diversion, but with the thought in their minds, they still had to plan for it early. As the siege wears on, and it becomes clear it is not a diversion, the planning then must shift to defending the relief forces that are trying to dislodge Mordor's forces. A small force coming out of the Morannon or elsewhere might very well be able to do that under certain circumstances, or if not, at least inflict enough confusion and casualties that the Gondorians need to withdraw some troops to cover their flanks and rear. Gondor does not have the potential numbers for conscription that Mordor and Rhun do.

No, but I think the strategic situation heavily favored them in a conventional military campaign at that time.

Perhaps, perhaps not. I do not think so highly as you do of the Gondorian "advantages". Most of their victories seem to be very lucky. With the later siege of Osgiliath, it is Boromir that maintains the defense. In his absence, the city fell much more easily than it might have. At Minas Tirith, it was the arrival of Theoden and the Rohirrim. Had they not come, or had arrived but an hour later, the Witch-King certainly could have taken the city.

It seems that without a superior warrior, such as Boromir, in their midst, Gondorian soldiers of the later Third Age don't seem to fair so well. While the same certainly goes for the Mordor armies, they did have the Wiki and the other Nazgul at Ithil.

The Gondorians that were there were not there to sightsee. They were soldiers on campaign. And why would anybody mention the Barrow-downs. Who would have been interested in it at the time?

Not necessarily the Gondorian soldiers. Several decades passed between Angmar and Ithil. I think that is quite the reasonable amount of time for word to spread around.

By that time they understood what had happened.

Yet, no mention of some unconventional method of taking the city.

[Farael]

Originally Posted by CaptainofDespair

Gondor does not have the potential numbers for conscription that Mordor and Rhun do.

There, that's the whole issue. At least with me, I can't speak for Kuruharan. As far as I know (which admittedly is not everything) there was no possible conscription from Mordor. I believe I have read that Mordor was desolate until the coming of Sauron and desolate means very few, if any, inhabitants. The WK cannot conscript orcs from Mordor quite simply because there are none.

And following up on that "desolate" idea... while you chose to use Napoleon and the Crusades as an example, let me use a more modern one. World War 2, Hitler's attack on the USSR. They too had an extremely long supply line, and that was their downfall. When winter came around, it acted pretty much as a "scorched earth" policy. The Russians retreated and left behind no resources for the Nazi armies, who had to ship everything from Germany. In the end, this turned out to be impossible, even though they had trucks and trains and airplanes.

What does this have to do with all of this?

Oh, very simple... Mordor was constantly desolate, it wasn't just one season in the year, it was a barren wasteland all year round.

Not to mention that the same thing happened to Napoleon, winter came around and all of a sudden his (already stretched thin) supply line just couldn't cut it.

So you chose to look at the "possitive side" but you are ignoring the fact that these armies fell... within a year!! How could the WK hold such long supply lines to support his siege for twice as long?

And also...

Yet, no mention of some unconventional method of taking the city.

There is almost no explanation for whatever happens. We just get one brief line of text and a lot of guesswork. Yet what is a "conventional" method? In Middle Earth we have seen situations such as the "gods" coming down from "heavens" (ok, Valar coming from Valinor) to smack the hell out of Morgoth in his fortress... we have seen dragons and balrogs, we have seen little rings that keep whole realms safe and sound... We have seen weird tree-creatures tossing boulders as if they were pebbles... so howcome all of a sudden "conventional" can only be an army camped out outside a fortress' doors?

And in the light of those "unconventional" situations, what is so rare about a haunting that demoralises the troops and leads a few scared souls to open the doors to an enemy that, otherwise, would not have been enough to besiege the city without being driven off by near-by Minas Tirith/Osgiliath forces?

[CaptainofDespair]

Originally Posted by Farael

Oh, very simple... Mordor was constantly desolate, it wasn't just one season in the year, it was a barren wasteland all year round.

When we come to the War of the Ring, there are thousands and thousands of troops there. All of that is despite the desolation. And the mountains surrounding Mordor could very well harbor the orcs in their many caves. I doubt the Ephel Duath or the Ash (?) Mountains are places the Gondorians want to check.

Not to mention that the same thing happened to Napoleon, winter came around and all of a sudden his (already stretched thin) supply line just couldn't cut it.

Napoleon's supply lines were only broken after being stretched to Moscow. Had the French not gone towards Moscow, and had rather gone towards St. Petersburg, that breakage may very well not have occurred. The line to the Russian capital, while still thousands of mile long, could have held. Going to Moscow, however, leads one deep across long stetches of nothingness. Both Napoleon and Hitler made that mistake. That is an error the Witch-King would not have to contend with.

So you chose to look at the "possitive side" but you are ignoring the fact that these armies fell... within a year!! How could the WK hold such long supply lines to support his siege for twice as long?

The Wiki's supply line was nowhere near as long, and nor did he have to contend with armies nipping at his lines, as those only ran through Sauron-dominated regions. It's not hard to maintain a longer supply line if you only go through friendly territory. Combined that with the larger potential manpower over Gondor, and it becomes much, much more feasible for the Nazgul to lay siege for a longer time, and resist the relief efforts.

There is almost no explanation for whatever happens. We just get one brief line of text and a lot of guesswork.

I think Tolkien's mentioning of the fall of Ithil is quite enough explanation. The word "Siege" says it all. There is no guesswork in that, to me.

And in the light of those "unconventional" situations, what is so rare about a haunting that demoralises the troops and leads a few scared souls to open the doors to an enemy that, otherwise, would not have been enough to besiege the city without being driven off by near-by Minas Tirith/Osgiliath forces?

What is rare about it? That is the point. It is rare, to the point of being unheard of. And I do not recall a haunting being another meaning for the word 'siege'.

The simplest explanation is usually the correct one. While there are some pitfalls in explaining the fullness of either argument, the idea of a traditional "siege" fits more easily with what Tolkien wrote, and is thus the simplest explanation (in going with exactly what Tolkien wrote). A Haunting requires so much more flushing out and it does not really fit with the definition of the word that Tolkien chose. I doubt Tolkien would have come up with an entirely new meaning for "siege" without explaining it. And Tolkien obviously did not write anything to the effect of the situation of a Haunting occurring. Thus, it is far more likely that the simplest idea, that of the traditionally defined siege, is the most correct and feasible one.

[FeRaL sHaDoW]

Nazgul: (knocks on the door)

gatekeeper: who is it??

Nazgul: um courier...

gatekeeper: (opens gates)

Nazgul: (quickly jump in and storm the place)

[The 1,000 Reader]

Originally Posted by FeRaL sHaDoW

Nazgul: (knocks on the door)

gatekeeper: who is it??

Nazgul: um courier...

gatekeeper: (opens gates)

Nazgul: (quickly jump in and storm the place)

Isn't it obvious that the Nazgul just sat outside the gate while the Witch-King used the tech tree he made in his Angmar Campaign to constantly bombard Minas Ithil with Avalanches, swarm with Summoned Orcs and Wights, and sick the Ice Wolf on the city? The reason it took two years was because there was a lot to conquer and the spells needed to recharge!

[Kuruharan]

All of that is despite the desolation.

Sauron had his tribute system up and running by then.

Combined that with the larger potential manpower over Gondor, and it becomes much, much more feasible for the Nazgul to lay siege for a longer time, and resist the relief efforts.

We still seem to not be communicating on this.

the idea of a traditional "siege" fits more easily with what Tolkien wrote

Not really, as we have been explaining for quite some time now.

[Rhod the Red]

There's no mention of a battle to take Minas Ithil, so I imagine the Nazgul used their power of fear (magnified by their combined number) to drive out the guards/population.

[tom the eldest]

Finally!i've searching for this thread even before i join the forum!

Now,maybe at the time minas ithil is besieged,gondor's atention was diverted to somewher else.could the corsair maybe distracting gondor while the nazgul attack?with the plalantir,ithil could communicate with the king,but if they do not know what attacking them,the king's answer maybe 'hold on,we are curretnly busy.we will send troops as fast as we can'.but then,the king and the steward forgot it,and then its too late.

Ah,im so happy now that i found this thread.


PS: old thread get really long,much longer than the new one,isnt it?