Debate Tournament - Round 2: Tolkienology vs. Periaur [Archive]

Mrs. Maggott

06-04-2003, 01:16 AM

Fellow Guild and Forum members, the question that has been posed to us in this debate is as follows:

Was Eowyn right in joining the ride of the Rohirrim, and disobeying King Theoden’s order to stay in Rohan?

I should like to say at the outset that in fact, Eowyn did the right thing. Indeed, not only was it the right thing, but it was an act that certainly saved the day, the battle, the City and the War itself.

But let us look at the last part of the question first: that the Lady “disobeyed” King Theoden’s “order to stay in Rohan”.

It is true that Eowyn was given the responsibility of guiding the people of Edoras to their stronghold at Dunharrow when Theoden set out to war against Saruman:

‘”Behold! I go forth, and it seems like to be my last riding,’ said Theoden. ‘I have no child. Theodred my son is slain. I name Eomer my sister-son to be my heir. If neither of us return, then choose a new lord as you will. But to some one I must now entrust my people that I leave behind, to rule them in my place. Which of you will stay?’

No man spoke.

‘Is there none whom you would name? In whom do my people trust?’

‘In the House of Eorl,’ answered Hama.

‘But Eomer I cannot spare, nor would he stay,’ said the king; ‘and he is the last of that House.’

‘I said not Eomer,’ answered Hama. ‘And he is not the last. There is Eowyn, daughter or Eomund, his sister. She is fearless and high hearted. All love her. Let her be as lord to the Eorlingas, while we are gone.’

‘It shall be so,’ said Theoden. ‘Let the heralds announce to the folk that the Lady Eowyn will lead them!’

Then the king sat upon a seat before his doors, and Eowyn knelt before him and received from his a sword and a fair corselet. ‘Farewell sister-daughter!’ he said. ‘Dar is the hour, yet maybe we shall return to the Golden Hall. But in Dunharrow the people may long defend themselves, and if the battle go ill, thither will come all who escape.’

‘Speak not so!’ she answered. ‘A year shall I endure for every day that passes until your return.’ But as she spoke her eyes went to Aragorn who stood nearby.

‘The king shall come again,’ he said. ‘Fear not! Not West but East does our doom await us.’” {The King of the Golden Hall, TTT, LOTR}

However, after the victory at Helm’s Deep, as Aragorn promised, the King in fact does come to Dunharrow at which time, he confronts his surrogate, Eowyn:

“As they drew near Merry saw that the Rider was a woman with long braided hair gleaming in the twilight, yet she wore a helm and was clad to the waist like a warrior and girded with a sword.

‘Hail, Lord of the Mark!’ she cried. ‘My heart is glad at your returning.’

‘And you, Eowyn,’ said Theoden, ‘is all well with you?’

‘All is well,’ she answered...’it was a weary road for the people to take, torn suddenly from their homes. There were hard words, for it is long since war has driven us from the green fields; but there have been no evils deeds. All is now ordered, as you see.’” {The Muster of Rohan, ROTK, LOTR}

So, in fact, Eowyn has completed her task – that of bringing the people to the safety of the stronghold. She has not disobeyed nor has she failed in her duty. However, before the king returns, Aragorn with his small escort reaches Dunharrow on their way to the Paths of the Dead, the road which it is prophesied he shall take at this crucial point in the War. Eowyn greets him gladly, having become infatuated with a man who represents to her an escape from an unbearable situation. When she learns of his mission she attempts to dissuade him but when she cannot, she asks to be allowed to join him:

“’You are a stern lord and resolute,’ she said’ ‘and thus do men win renown.’ She paused. ‘Lord,’ she said, ‘if you must go, then let me ride in your following. For I am weary of skulking in the hills, and wish to face peril and battle.’

‘Your duty is with your people,’ he answered.

‘Too often have I heard of duty,’ she cried. ‘But am I not of the House of Eorl, a shieldmaiden and not a dry-nurse? I have waited on faltering feet long enough. Since they falter no longer, it seems, may I not now spend my life as I will?’

‘Few may do that with honour,’ he answered. ‘But as for you, lady: did you not accept the charge to govern the people until their lord’s return? If you had not been chosen, then some marshal or captain would have been set in the same place, and he could not ride away from his charge, were he weary of it or no.’ {The Passing of the Grey Company, ROTK, LOTR}

At his leave-taking, she asks once more for permission to join him and he refuses. But is his refusal based only upon the duty laid upon the Lady by Theoden?

‘Then wilt thou not let me ride with this company, as I have asked?’

‘I will not, lady,’ he said. ’For that I could not grant without leave of the king and of your brother; and they will not return until tomorrow. But I count now every hour, indeed every minute. Farewell!’ {The Passing of the Grey Company, ROTK, LOTR}

In truth, Aragorn could not permit Eowyn to ride with him even had she simply been one of those living in the stronghold without any other responsibility. Why? Because she was a woman and therefore he would have had to ask the permission of her father or her brother or her husband – or even of her son were she to have one and he had been of age! Women were under the protection – and the authority – of their male relatives. Aragorn could not have taken Eowyn with him without first seeking the permission of those in whose care she was placed by familial bonds, as he himself notes.

And furthermore, not only could he not spare the time to await those whose permission he would have to ask but he knew it would not be granted – after all, even Eowyn considered that he was going to his death on the Paths of the Dead.

Aragorn then assures Eowyn that she had “no errand to the South” and attempts to dissuade her as passionately as she him. She argues that her lot is useless:

‘Shall I always be chosen?’ she said bitterly. ‘Shall I always be left behind when the Riders depart, to mind the house while they win renown, and find food and beds when they return?’ {The Passing of the Grey Company, ROTK, LOTR}

He counters by trying to assure her that her efforts are not any less brave than those of the Riders for whose lot she yearns:

‘A time may come soon,’ said he, ‘when none will return. Then there will be need of valour without renown, for none shall remember the deeds that are done in the last defense of your homes. Yet the deeds will not be less valiant because they are unpraised.’ {The Passing of the Grey Company, ROTK, LOTR}

However, the Lady is not to be denied and delivers one of the best “put-downs” in the whole book:

‘And she answered: ‘All your words are but to say: you are a woman, and your part is in the house. But when the men have died in battle and honour, you have leave to be burned in the house, for the men will need it no more.’” {The Passing of the Grey Company, ROTK, LOTR}

Still, Aragorn – who has a certain degree of prescience – may believe that arguments and duties notwithstanding, the Lady is going to adventure in the South. This may be deduced by Eowyn’s conversation with Merry after Theoden and the Riders return to Dunharrow to the muster of Rohan. It is here that Theoden once again appoints Eowyn as his surrogate while he is off to war in Gondor while at the same time, ordering Merry to remain behind:

“The king turned to Merry. ‘I am going to war, Master Meriadoc,’ he said. ‘In a little while I shall take the road. I release you from my service, but not from my friendship. You shall abide here, and if you will, you shall serve the Lady Eowyn, who will govern the folk in my stead.’” {The Muster of Rohan, ROTK, LOTR}

Go to second post:

Mrs. Maggott

06-04-2003, 01:17 AM

But Theoden’s plans are under attack almost as he makes them and we see that Aragorn has not been idle in his short stay at Dunharrow before setting out on the Paths of the Dead:

“Then Eowyn rose up. ‘Come now, Meriadoc!’ she said. ‘I will show you the gear that I have prepared for you.’ They went out together. ‘This request only did Aragorn make to me,’ said Eowyn, as the passed among the tents, ‘that you should be armed for battle. I have granted it, as I could. For my heart tells me that you will need such gear ere the end.’” {The Muster of Rohan, ROTK, LOTR}

It is true that one might understand that Aragorn “knew” that Merry would end up before the gates of Minas Tirith, but the question then becomes, how is Eowyn implicated in Aragorn’s “vision” as well? When Merry asks Theoden to accompany him to Minas Tirith, the King responds:

‘I received you for your safe-keeping,’ answered Theoden; ‘and also to do as I might bid. None of my Riders can bear you as a burden...’ {The Muster of Rohan, ROTK, LOTR}

The simple fact is that Merry is not large enough to ride a horse, but at the same time he is not so small that he would be an insignificant burden for any Rider and his mount over a long journey followed by a battle. Furthermore, he is even larger than he was when he departed upon the Quest owing to the hospitality of Treebeard:

“’It does not seem to have done you any harm,’ said Aragorn. ‘Indeed you look in the bloom of heath.’

‘Aye, you do indeed,’ said Gimli, looking them up and down over the top of his cup. ‘Why, your hair is twice as thick and curly as when we parted; and I would swear that you have both grown somewhat, if that is possible for hobbits of your age. {Flotsam and Jetsam, TTT, LOTR}

So the fact is, that an ordinary Rider could not have carried the hobbit to war without putting both himself and Merry in the gravest danger. Yet Aragorn has the hobbit outfitted for war. What other reason could there be, but that the Rider who would carry him thither was not an “ordinary” Rider but one whose size would enable the two to ride as one without wearing out their mount or otherwise endangering their companions or themselves:

'Unnoticed a Rider came up and spoke softly in the hobbit’s ear.

‘Where will wants not, a way opens, so we say,’ he whispered; ‘and so I have found myself.’ Merry looked up and saw that it was the young Rider whom he had noticed in the morning. ‘You wish to go whither the Lord of the Mark goes: I see it in your face.’

‘I do,’ said Merry.

‘Then you shall go with me,’ said the Rider.” {The Muster of Rohan, ROTK, LOTR}

Of course, the question might be asked: what proof do we have of Aragorn’s “prescience” in the first place? Well, of course, the mere fact that he requested that Merry be garbed for battle (as best as possible) given the fact that Theoden would not have taken him to Minas Tirith does suggest some foreknowledge. But more and better proof exists that the heir of Elendil has some small gift of precognition in the argument that takes place when the Fellowship attempts to cross the Misty Mountains:

“I too once passed the Dimrill Gate,’ said Aragorn quietly; ‘but though I also came out again, the memory is very evil. I do not wish to enter Moria a second time.’

‘And I don’t wish to enter it even once,’ said Pippin.

‘Nor me,’ muttered Sam.

‘Of course not!’ said Gandalf. ‘Who would? But the question is: who will follow me, if I lead you there?’

‘I will,’ said Gimli eagerly.

‘I will,’ said Aragorn heavily. ‘You followed my lead almost to disaster in the snow, and have said no word of blame. I will follow your lead now – [I] if this last warning does not move you. It is not of the Ring, nor or us others that I am think now, but of you. Gandalf. And I say to you: if you pass the doors of Moria, beware!’” {A Journey in the Dark, FOTR, LOTR}

Aragorn foresaw Gandalf’s fall in Moria – and was correct. Therefore, it is quite possible that he also foresaw both Merry and “Dernhelm” on the Pelannor.

Go to third post:

Mrs. Maggott

06-04-2003, 01:19 AM

In sum: I think it is evident that Eowyn fulfilled her duty to her people for which she had been chosen by Theoden when he set out against Saruman. Furthermore, we have seen that the King upon his return to Dunharrow had no complaints about her performance of that duty. We have also seen that Theoden reiterated his announcement that Eowyn was to rule in his stead while he went to war. But did he actually “order” her to remain in Rohan? It is very unlikely that he gave her a direct order although doubtless he understood that she would remain there in the capacity which he had named. Certainly, he never prevailed upon her to take an oath that she would remain. For had he done so, she could not have disobeyed. Oath-breaking was perhaps the worst crime that anyone could commit in the type of societies written of in LOTR and Rohan not the least:

“’Now is the hour come, Riders of the Mark, sons of Eorl!...Oaths ye have taken: now fulfil them all, to lord and land and league of friendship!’” {The Ride of the Rohirrim, ROTK, LOTR}

So although nowhere is it stated that Theoden did not swear Eowyn to an oath to remain behind, it is simply impossible to suppose that he did – or she would have fulfilled that oath for she could not do otherwise and remain true to herself. And yet, although no oath was demanded or given, it is certain that the Lady did disobey the King’s command. However, this was not the first of Theoden’s commands that had been disobeyed:

“’Come now!’ said Eomer. ‘The Heir of Elendil would be a strength indeed to the Sons of Eorl in this evil tide. There is battle even now upon the Westemnet, and I fear that it may go ill for us.

Indeed, in this riding north I went without the king’s leave, for in my absence his house is left with little guard. {The Riders of Rohan, TTT, LOTR}

So it appears that in the face of danger and in need, Eomer is willing to risk the king’s wrath and disobey. And his actions are not without consequence:

“’Much,’ said Gandalf. ‘But first send for Eomer. Do I not guess rightly that you hold him prisoner, by the counsel of Grima, of him that all save you name the Wormtongue?’

‘It is true,’ said Theoden. ‘He had rebelled against my commands and threatened death to Grima in my hall.’

‘A man may love you and yet not love Wormtongue or his counsels,’ said Gandalf.

‘That may be. I will do as you ask. Call Hama to me. Since he proved untrusty as a doorward, let him become an errand-runner. The guilty shall bring the guilty to judgment,’ said Theoden, and his voice was grim, yet he looked at Gandalf and smiled....” {The King of the Golden Hall, TTT, LOTR}

So, Eomer is in fact punished upon his return, but it appears as if he has been imprisoned not by Theoden’s will, but that of Saruman’s agent, Grima. Once Saruman’s hold over Theoden is broken, Eomer is restored and his disobedience forgotten.

But Eowyn/Dernhelm and Merry are not the only ones who are aware of the thwarting of Theoden’s orders concerning Merry at least, and given the circumstances, probably Eowyn as well:

“Tired as he was, Merry could not sleep. He had ridden now for four days on end, and the ever-deepening gloom had slowly weighted down his heart. He began to wonder why he had been so eager to come when he had been given every excuse, even his lord’s command, to stay behind. He wondered, too, if the old King knew that he had been disobeyed and was angry. Perhaps not. There seemed to be some understanding between Dernhelm and Elfhelm, the Marshal who commanded the eored in which they were riding. He and all his men ignored Merry and pretended not to hear him if he spoke. He might have been just another bag that Dernhelm was carrying.” {The Ride of the Rohirrim, ROTK, LOTR}

Elfhelm, commander of the eored in which Merry and the disguised Eowyn travel is not unaware of at least the hobbit’s presence. Given that Theoden had distinctly ordered the hobbit to remain behind, it would appear that Elfhelm is not overly exercised by this flouting of the Royal Will. Furthermore, it is quite possible – indeed probable – that he is more than aware of the identity of his young underling for who else could have persuaded him to take such a dismissive view of the King’s command?

Go to fourth post:

Mrs. Maggott

06-04-2003, 01:20 AM

And as one last consideration regarding Eowyn’s abandonment of her duties as a “dry nurse” to the Rohirrim at Dunharrow. Obviously, they would triumph and be safe or they would be defeated and destroyed even in the stronghold. Yet, as well as leaving Eowyn, Theoden took care of his folk:

“’Hail, Lord of the Rohirrim, friend of Gondor!’ he said. ‘Hirgon I am, errand rider of Denethor, who bring you this token of war. Gondor is in great need. Often the Rohirrim have aided us, but now the Lord Denethor asks for all your strength and all your speed, lest Gondor fall at last.’

‘We will come... When all is ordered we will set out. Ten thousand spears I might have sent riding over the plain to the dismay of your foes. It will be less now, I fear; for I will not leave my strongholds all unguarded. Yet six thousands at the least shall ride behind me.’ {The Muster of Rohan, ROTK, LOTR}

So it would seem that as well as his lovely niece, Theoden was leaving almost four thousand armed men behind at Dunharrow. Doubtless such men had their own leaders and there is nothing to suggest that Eowyn would attempt to assume military leadership in the event of an attack. Her duty was to succor her people and with her presence give them hope and courage. She did that. Once they had reached the (relative) safety of the stronghold, any further defense would have been in the hands of the Riders that had been left behind for that purpose. Ergo, she could, with a good conscience, don her disguise and follow the King to Minas Tirith without in any way soiling her honor.

Very well. We have seen by the aforesaid that Eowyn, sister-daughter of Theoden King had been placed as a surrogate leader while the King went to war first with Saruman and then with Sauron. We have also seen that, having fulfilled her responsibility to bring her people to Dunharrow, she then wished to go to war herself because she was in deep despair and longed for some sort of honorable release from her pain:

“’My friend,’ said Gandalf, ‘you had horses, and deeds of arms, and the free fields; but she, born in the body of a maid, had a spirit and courage at least the match of yours. Yet she was doomed to wait upon an old man...and watch him falling into a mean dishonored dotage...My lord, if your sister’s love for you, and her will still bent to her duty, had not restrained her...’”{The Houses of Healing, ROTK, LOTR}

Therefore, even in her disobedience, Eowyn was not being proud or vainglorious or foolhardy but, in fact, was seeking release from her long pain and so nothing ignoble or base can be said of her act.

And finally, let us go back to the first part of the question:

Was Eowyn right in joining the ride of the Rohirrim - ?

I do not believe it is necessary to recount what happened on the Pelannor Field nor what part Eowyn played in the great victory that was gained there, a victory which so discommoded the Dark Lord that his entire attention was drawn away from his own land and therefore was the Ring-bearer able to destroy the Ring. Had Sauron’s great Captain survived, there can be no doubt that the victory would have been Sauron’s. But Eowyn was on the battle field that day, and thus was fulfilled the following prophecy:

“But the Host of the West came down on him out of the Hills of Evendim, and there was a great battle on the plain between Nenuial and the North Downs. The forces of Angmar were already giving way and retreating towards Fornost when the main body of the horsemen that had passed round the hills came down from the north and scattered them in a great rout. Then the Witch-king, with all that he could gather from the wreck, fled northwards, seeking his own land of Angmar. Before he could gain the shelter of Carn Dum the cavalry of Gondor overtook him with Earnur riding at their head. At the same time a force under Glorfindel the Elf-lord came up out of Rivendell,. Then so utterly was Angmar defeated that not a man nor an orc of that realm remained west of the Mountains.

But it is said that when all was lost suddenly the Witch-king himself appeared, black-robed and black-masked upon a black horse. Fear fell upon all who beheld him; but he singled out the Captain of Gondor for the fullness of his hatred, and with a terrible cry he rode straight upon him. Earnur would have withstood him; but his horse could not endure that onset, and it swerved and bore him far away before he could master it.

Then the Witch-king laughed, and none that heard it ever forgot the horror of that cry. But Glorfindel rode up then upon his white horse, and in the midst of his laughter the Witch-king turned to flight and passed into the shadows. For night came down on the battlefield, and he was lost, and none saw whether he went.

Earnur now rode back, but Glorfindel, looking into the gathering dark, said: ‘Do not pursue him! He will not return to this land. Far off yet is his doom, and not by the hand of man will he fall.’” {Appendix A, LOTR}

Was Eowyn right? Not only was she correct in her actions, the simple fact is that had she not followed her heart and rather had allowed her spirit to be cowed by custom, the outcome of the War of the Ring would have been a total victory for Sauron and an eternal darkness in Middle-earth. Against this, it would seem a mere king’s “order” pales into insignificance.

Niniel

06-04-2003, 10:13 AM

Ai! It seems we are up to some very strong competition. However there are some arguments that would point in the other direction, namely that Éowyn was wrong after all when she decided to go to war.
First, even though 4000 riders were left behind in Rohan, it is not said that all these were in Dunharrow. The defence of Rohan was very weak, because 4000 men were not enough by far to defend the whole country. Even though the main treat was from Sauron's forces, it was possible that Saruman would try a last trick on Rohan and attack them from the West, while their main force was gone.
Furthermore, I don't think Éowyn's task in Rohan was purely to 'succor her people and with her presence give them hope and courage', as Mrs. Maggott said. After all, Éowyn was trained as a warrior: 'I am from the House of Eorl and not a serving-woman. I can ride and wield blade, and I do not fear either pain or death.' I think it likely that in the case of an attack of Rohan, Éowyn herself would lead the defence. After all, most of the top leaders of the army were gone -Éomer, Elfhelm and Grimbold-, and those that may have been left (it is not said who lead them after the departure of Théoden and the army leaders) may not have been in Dunharrow with Éowyn.
Besides, even in times of war, the leader of a country does not have only military jobs to do; things like food and water supply, providing medical care (if there was anything like that), maintaining order among the people etcetera, needed to be done and there needed to be someone to take care of those things. It is a pity the governmental structure of Rohan is not explained in full, but it seems as if there was no leader at all left in Rohan when Éowyn departed. She seems not to have made any provisions for the quite necessary tasks that had to be done.
Éowyn's task was thus more than just giving moral support to her people; she had important things to do. The people of Rohan may have been very noble, but I don't think they would last long without any form of leadership.
And then there is the problem that Éowyn's presence in the battle of the Pelennor Fields turned out to be of the utmost importance, because she killed the Witch-King and thus gave Sauron an extremely hard blow. This is of course true, and from hindsight it could be said that it was fortunate that she disobeyed Théoden's wish (if it can't be called an order) and went to war after all. But nobody -except maybe Aragorn- could have known this before it happened, and so it is not valid as an argument to determine whether Éowyn was right to leave Rohan. Even if Aragorn knew that Éowyn had to play such an important role to play, he did not encourage her to go to war, indeed he strongly advised against it. It might be said that he knew that by trying to hold her down, she would the try the harder to go after all, and thus she would play her part without getting Aragorn into trouble, but this seems too far-fetched; I think Aragorn meant what he said and nothing else when he told her she had to stay behind.
Therefore I think that, when she decided to go to war, Éowyn did something that was wrong, especially because she left her people ungoverned. The results of her going may have been good, but this was not at all sure when she set out.

Lhunithiliel

06-04-2003, 11:49 AM

After the wonderful post by my Team-mate, Mrs.Maggott, it’s my turn to present my opinions as well.

Was Eowyn right in joining the ride of the Rohirrim, and disobeying King Theoden’s order to stay in Rohan?

I see the question as 2 in 1:
1/ Was Eowyn right to join her countrymen in their ride to war in help and defense of Gondor?
2/ Did she in fact disobey King Theoden’s orders to stay in Rohan?

Therefore I find I only the very right thing to present arguments to BOTH these sub-parts.

First of all, I however should state what side I have chosen …
But…should I, really? Why not first present my arguments and then you, who will later read, discuss, oppose, judge etc., will certainly get my point of view!

So, let me start with sub-question #1 :

1/ Was Eowyn right to join her countrymen in their ride to war in help and defense of Gondor?

To start with, I’d prefer to go back in the history of the formation of the nation of the Rohirrims and the kingdom of Rohan.

From the Unfinished Tales, “Cirion and Eorl and the friendship of Gondor and Rohan”:

These Northmen were descendants of the same race of Men as those who in the First Age passed into the West of Middle-earth and became the allies of the Eldar in their wars with Morgoth. They were therefore from afar off kinsmen of the Dúnedain or Númenóreans, and there was great friendship between them and the people of Gondor.
The Oath of Eorl: “Hear now all peoples who bow not to the Shadow in the East, by the gift of the Lord of the Mundburg we will come to dwell in the land that he names Calenardhon, and therefore I vow in my own name and on behalf of the Éothéod of the North that between us and the Great People of the West there shall be friendship for ever: their enemies shall be our enemies, their need shall be our need, and whatsoever evil, or threat, or assault may come upon them we will aid them to the utmost end of our strength. . This vow shall descend to my heirs, all such as may come after me in our new land, and let them keep it in faith unbroken, lest the Shadow fall upon them and they become accursed.”
So, who is Eowyn in the light of her historical background?
Eowyn - a descendent of a people closely related to the Gondorians,
Eowyn – heir of the line of Eorl, bound forever as any and each Rohirrim, and especially those of the Kings’ house, by an utmost solemn oath for fighting the enemies of Gondor in times of need.

So, was Eowyn right to join the ride of the Rohirrim then? Why ask at all?! It was much more than just taking some sort of decision! It WAS a duty to fulfill! A life-duty coming out of and through the ages; a duty, based on an inherited pride and dignity and the sense of being faithful to those sacred oaths.
And this is precisely how she felt it and this is precisely what her proud family lineage needed her to do. And this is precisely what she did.

Was she wrong? How could she be?!? Is it wrong to fulfill an oath?
For an oath she did fulfill. And it was the very right thing to do! The right thing for a true heir of Eorl!

The second thing I’d like to state in this relation, concerns a sub-sub-question to this sub-question #1 :
Was Eowyn fit and capable of going to war?

I myself would not comment on this… Why?!? I need only to present the comment of J.R.R.Tolkien himself !!!

From: Letter # 244 (from a draft to a reader of The Lord of the Rings):
……she was not herself ambitious in the true political sense. Though not a 'dry nurse' in temper, she was also not really a soldier or 'amazon', but like many brave women was capable of great military gallantry at a crisis.
And all Eowyn did in the fierce battle on the Pellenor Fields proved this.
******

tbc :)

Lhunithiliel

06-04-2003, 11:50 AM

Now, let me proceed with my arguments concerning sub-question #2 : Did she in fact disobey King Theoden’s orders to stay in Rohan?

My Team-fellow Mrs.Maggott has commented on this question on a large scale and therefore I would not repeat those arguments again, as they were skillfully laid and presented.

I’d however wish to draw your attention to some more facts – facts that prove that Eowyn did NOT disobey King Theoden’s orders to stay in Rohan.

First of all, let us just for a moment remember what was that order :
'Behold! I go forth, and it seems like to be my last riding,' said Théoden. 'I have no child. Théodred my son is slain. I name Éomer my sister-son to be my heir. If neither of us return, then choose a new lord as you will. But to some one I must now entrust my people that I leave behind, to rule them in my place. Which of you will stay?'

No man spoke.
'Is there none whom you would name? In whom do my people trust?'
'In the House of Eorl,' answered Háma.
'But Éomer I cannot spare, nor would he stay,' said the king; 'and he is the last of that House.'
'I said not Éomer,' answered Háma. 'And he is not the last. There is Éowyn, daughter of Éomund, his sister. She is fearless and high-hearted. All love her. Let her be as lord to the Eorlingas, while we are gone.'
'It shall be so,' said Théoden. 'Let the heralds announce to the folk that the Lady Éowyn will lead them!'
Was it an order indeed? Why can’t I feel it like such?
To me it was NOT a direct order but rather a decision taken unwillingly and as a result of a state of impasse. The King had no intention to point Eowyn as the new Lord of the Mark and the decision he made was only because there was no better choice at the moment.
In some sense, it was NOT his decision either! It was Hama’s suggestion and Theoden was pressed enough by the circumstances as to reject it firmly and look for another solution.
So what order was that? None, IMO. It was rather a request in time of great need, a request the King addressed to one of his closest and most trustful people – Eowyn.
As to whether she fulfilled this request – Mrs.Magott gave strong arguments on this point and I just agree with her.
For Eowyn did all that was expected from her – to secure enough the people of Rohan in the safest possible place.

Therefore I do NOT see Eowyn’s actions as violating some firmly stated order by her King.
****
There are some more and very important arguments “pro” Eowyn’s actions.
But all in its time! All in its time!

As for answering and countering the arguments of our opponents....there is still time! ;) :)

Lhunithiliel

06-04-2003, 05:05 PM

I congratulate Niniel for her post. :)
Yet, please alow me to comment (understand - counter ;) :) ) some of your arguments, fair Lady:

Niniel: First, even though 4000 riders were left behind in Rohan, it is not said that all these were in Dunharrow. The defence of Rohan was very weak, because 4000 men were not enough by far to defend the whole country.
Re: From UT, The Ride of Eorl:
Eorl at once summoned his council of Elders, and began to prepare for the great riding. But this took many days, for the lost had to be gathered and mustered, and thought taken for the ordering of the people and the defence of the land…… At last the whole host was assembled; and only a few hundreds were left behind to support the men unfitted for such desperate venture by youth or age
And he won a victorious battle!
It is not so uncommon for a people as the Rohirrims were to react in situations of war as hastily as possible! They had had an uneasy history of settlement in the lands of Middle-earth and had learnt to evaluate their forces for both – the battlefield and for the defense of the rest of the population. So, leaving 4000 men-warriors back was quite enough, IMHO.
****
Niniel:It is a pity the governmental structure of Rohan is not explained in full, but it seems as if there was no leader at all left in Rohan when Éowyn departed. She seems not to have made any provisions for the quite necessary tasks that had to be done.
Not convincing! Noooot convincing! The ”as if”-s or the ”seems”-s can hardly be taken as arguments and evidences.

********
Niniel:…from hindsight it could be said that it was fortunate that she disobeyed Théoden's wish (if it can't be called an order)……
Exactly my point! ;) :p No direct orders were given to Eowyn! Therefore - NO order had been disobeyed!!!
She had a much more high-purpose and important oath to fulfill after she had taken enough care for the people in Dunharrow.
****
These were just a few points that drew my attention as not well thought of and in a debate, isn't it like in a war...;)

Niniel

06-04-2003, 07:15 PM

Ah, in that case I will try to counter your arguments :)
Although 4000 men might be enough to defend the whole country of Rohan (which I doubt) it would need a very coordinated strategy to make the defence work. Éowyn was the only person left of high rank and with enough authority to unite the whole country. If there was to be any leader of Rohan, it would have been her, and she had enough military training to coordinate the defence. When she went to the war no one was left that could organise Rohan's defence and provide any sort of government that was very much needed.
According to Mrs. Maggott, Éowyn's job was to succour her people and with her presence give them hope and courage; but I can imagine that her sudden disappearance would have caused exactly the opposite effect: the people of Rohan would certainly have been distraught when they found that the whole royal family and anyone with any authority had left them, no matter how important the cause was. Tolkien makes it seem as if the people were wise enough to govern themselves if their was nobody to govern them, but that cannot have been the case.
I agree with Lhun that Théoden had not given Éowyn an order; but he had expressed his wish and Éowyn knew that his wish was logical, because someone needed to take care if Rohan while he was left. She knew that Théoden would not be pleased if she disobeyed him; he had not thought of the obligation that she had to the oath of Eorl (I doubt if she considered this herself) and he doubtless thought that his wishes were as orders to Éowyn. Éomer was very upset when he found out she had been in the battle, and if Théoden had seen her wounded he would have been very grieved. She knew that she would run the risk of getting hurt and thereby causing pain to her loved ones.
In the end her going to the war turned out to be a good choice, but at the moment that she made this choice, she must have known that what she did was wrong, because it would be dangerous to her country, and because it might grieve her family if she got wounded or died- which, as a matter of fact, would leave Rohan completely leaderless, since she was the last of the House of Eorl.

Anamatar IV

06-04-2003, 09:02 PM

Although 4000 men might be enough to defend the whole country of Rohan (which I doubt) it would need a very coordinated strategy to make the defense work.

Why do you doubt it? Rohan was mostly open fields and pastures. There were few cities. On top of that, all the population had been moved to Dunharrow. So in truth, it is 4000 soldiers defending the whole population of Rohan in one city, a city made to withstand siege, a city made for defense.

According to Mrs. Maggott, Éowyn's job was to succour her people and with her presence give them hope and courage; but I can imagine that her sudden disappearance would have caused exactly the opposite effect: the people of Rohan would certainly have been distraught when they found that the whole royal family and anyone with any authority had left them, no matter how important the cause was. Tolkien makes it seem as if the people were wise enough to govern themselves if there was nobody to govern them, but that cannot have been the case.

What I find interesting about this is that it neglects what Tolkien wrote. Throughout Tolkien kings and princes go to war. Rohan is not an exception. Not only was there the ride of Eorl and the coming to Gondor’s aid, but Eomer left Rohan to full out war in the Fourth Age, helping Aragorn (another example of a king riding to war) in the south.

I agree with Lhun that Théoden had not given Éowyn an order; but he had expressed his wish and Éowyn knew that his wish was logical, because someone needed to take care if Rohan while he was left.

Again, it was not the all of Rohan that needed to be taken care of.
***************

Do not only think only about the good of Rohan or the good of the world but also think of the good of Eowyn here. As literature, specifically Greek mythology shows us, foreboding and anxiousness are the end of mankind. The last ill that Pandora clutched and locked shut was foreboding, knowing what would happen everyday of your life and not being able to do anything about it. Also, Aegus leapt from the high precipice of Athens in anxiousness for his son to return from the battle with the Minotaur. Both of these ills show with Eowyn:

A year shall I endure for every day that passes until your return.

She, like Aegus, would have eventually lost control with the anxiousness. Everyone she had ever loved was away in war. She would have withered to a starved corpse watching the eastern horizon waiting for those horsemen to return and Aragorn, her desire, was seemingly without a hope.

But aside from this, she was bored. She was not destined to live as a house-maid. She wanted to live.

I am weary of skulking in the hills, and wish to face peril and battle.

’What do you fear, lady?’ he asked.
‘A cage,’ she said. ‘To stay behind bars until use and old age accept them, and all chance of doing great deeds is gone beyond recall or desire
(emphasis added)

If Eowyn had stayed behind in Dunharrow, “skulking in the hills” and taking care of “faltering feet” she surely would have lost control of herself and her actions through anxiousness and boredom.

Lhunithiliel

06-05-2003, 12:37 PM

A lot has been said about Eowyn leaving her people undefended
But let’s see if this is so.

From ROTK, The Muster of Rohan:
Ten thousand spears I might have sent riding over the plain to the dismay of your foes. It will be less now, I fear; for I will not leave my strongholds all unguarded. Yet six thousands at the least shall ride behind me…
So, Theoden assessed his strength wisely. And if 6000 warrior go to a most fierce war, then 4000 would be quite enough as to guard Rohan.
But most of the people of Rohan were gathered in Dunharrow. And it was there where Eowyn should have accommodated them and taken care.
But let’see if her presence was so desperate till the end, which might have impeded her from going to Pelennor Fields.
Let’s first trace the meaning of the name of the refuge place for the Rohirrims:
Dunharrow: comes from Old English, Dun-harug, meaning 'hill-sanctuary'.
And was it really?:
From The Muster of Rohan:
"...While he was peering from side to side the king's party came up under the looming cliff on the eastern side of the valley; and there suddenly the path began to climb, and Merry looked up in amazement. He was on a road the like of which he had never seen before, a great work of men's hands in years beyond the reach of song. Upwards it wound, coiling like a snake, boring its way across the sheer slope of rock. Steep as a stair, it looped backwards and forwards as it climbed. Up it horses could walk, and wains could be slowly hauled; but no enemy could come that way, except out of the air, if it was defended from above.
"At last the king's company came to a sharp brink, and the climbing road passed into a cutting between walls of rock, and so went up a short slope and out on to a wide upland. The Firienfield men called it, a green mountain-field of grass and heath, high above the deep-delved courses of the Snowbourn, laid upon the lap of the great mountains behind: the Starkhorn southwards, and northwards the saw-toothed mass of Irensaga, between when there faced the riders, the grim black wall of the Dwimorberg, the Haunted Mountain rising out of steep slopes of sombre pines. Dividing the upland into two there marched a double line of unshaped standing stones that dwindled into the dusk and vanished in the trees. Those who dared to follow that road came soon to the black Dimholt under Dwimorberg, and the menace of the pillar of stone, and the yawning shadow of the forbidden door.
"Such was the dark Dunharrow, the work of long-forgotten men.
To me, and I think to anybody it is obvious that Tolkien described a stronghold that was meant to protect and stand against bitter attacks, which was not precisely the case with Rohan at that time.
Therefore, I don’t see Eowyn’s presence so crucially important once she had led the people there and secured their safety. And therefore, I cannot agree that she did anything so much wrong by leaving that guarded stronghold and going to the real battlefields where her heart and pride called her.

Eöl

06-08-2003, 01:31 AM

Sure, you can tire yourselves out by complaining about the topic, but that won't help one bit. Maedhros and I agree: It stays!

This is the official ruling by Arvedui and Maedhros, as far as I and the GoT know. If anyone can prove otherwise, I will delete my post.

When deciding whether or not Eowyn was right in riding to Minas Tirith, you must look at the fact of predetermined fate, and things like the “luck of the Valar” referred to numerous times in the HoME. Gandalf states in UT that In that far distant time I said to a small frightened Hobbit: Bilbo was meant to find the Ring, and not by its maker, and you therefore were meant to bear it. And I might have added: and I was meant to guide you to both those points. Does this mean that Eowyn was meant to go to Minas Tirith and help determine the fate of Middle Earth? Imagine what is she hadn’t gone to the battle, what if she had remained behind as Theoden wished? Would Middle Earth as the free peoples knew it have ended that day? Let’s take a look at what would have happened if she had not gone: Without anyone or anything to stop him, the Witchking would have caused the armies of Minas Tirith to flee in terror before him. Minas Tirith would have more than likely fallen that day. With that city secure, Sauron would have continued to pillage and burn Gondor, while simultaneously directing his next attack to Arnor. Being occupied by little more than the remnants of the Dunedain, the country would fall to Sauron with only a fraction of his army to occupy it. Rohan would be besieged in a sea of enemies, with only the 4,000 soldiers left behind to guard it occupying Dunharrow. The flying Nazgul would swoop down upon the hill, and most likely take the fortress in less than 2 or 3 days. Up it horses could walk, and wains could be slowly hauled; but no enemy could come that way, except out of the air, if it was defended from above. Eowyn would go out to challenge the Witchking, most likely in single combat, and fall victim to a trap set by the other Ringwraiths. With nobody left to rally the troops, the Nazgul would overrun the fortress, and they would be followed by an invasion of Orcs. Rohan would now be wiped out, and Sauron would have nothing left to conquer, other than the Iron Hills, Lorien and Mirkwood. With nothing left for the Dark Lord to defend, they would each fall eventually. Sauron’s dominion would be complete. There you have it, the most likely scenario for the end of the War of the Ring. One last quick point that I feel cannot be stressed enough: Eowyn was not ordered to stay at Dunharrow. Her task was to bring the people of Rohan there and see that a defense was organized. As Mrs. Maggott has pointed out in a quote There were hard words, for it is long since war has driven us from the green fields; but there have been no evil deeds. All is now ordered, as you see. Eowyn had completed the given task, naught remained for her to do but settle any small disputes that arose among the people of Rohan. Thus she was entirely correct in going to war.

Snaga

06-10-2003, 12:50 PM

I must apologise to my team-mates, opposition and judges for my lack of posts in this debate. Too busy with exams to do it justice but I’d like at least to contribute.

As I understand it the Tolkienologist position is that
(1) Rohan was fine without Eowyn because it was well-defended,
(2) Eowyn was obliged to be in Gondor because of the Oath of Eorl
(3) Eowyn had a psychological need to be at the battle
(4) She bagged a bad guy, so it all turned out ok.

The trouble with this is that when you examine each of these they all fall apart.

Firstly 4,000 might be adequate, barely, but they really aren’t half as effective without their leader. Eowyn was the appointed leader, and although the eored’s left behind would have their own leaders, who would take overall charge? It would be undecided, and therefore there would be misunderstanding, chaos and mistakes. Rohan was invaded from the Wold while Theoden went to Gondor. For the defenders to be in a state of confusion is, let us say, highly undesirable.

So we better be looking for a damn good reason for this act. Something that overrules the commonsense that leaders do not abandon their people in secret.

Lets dispense with the nonsensities. The Oath of Eorl falls on the heir of Eorl. That was Theoden, not Eowyn. The whole point about being an heir is that there is only one! So Theoden has to decide how to discharge the Oath. He did that… by bring 6,000 of his best warriors. It really doesn’t matter if you think he should, under the wording of the Oath, brought more. Its certainly not for Eowyn to overrule him. If you disagree, its not about individuals that were left behind, its about thousands of men. Eowyn’s disobedience is not in fulfilment of the Oath.

Besides, lets consider her motivation. As well we should since its her decision that is in question.

But in passing I believe Mrs Maggott thought this was some strange act of foresight on behalf of Elessar. That he knew to arm Merry and leave him with Eowyn… that he was engineering the downfall of the Witch king and the fulfilment of the words of Glorfindel. A strange argument. Surely he was arming Merry because he thought no land was safe, and that wherever Merry was he might have to fight? All his words to Eowyn were that she might well see battle in Dunharrow just as easily as anywhere else. That applies to the young holbytla too.

Eowyn’s conversations with Aragorn and later Faramir reveal all you need to know about her motivation. She wants to see battle, she wants to fight and be heroic. But fundamentally she is seeking death. She has spent long hours having her mind poisoned by Wormtongue, and through him by Saruman. She says to Faramir:’I wish to ride to war like my brother Eomer, or better like Thoden the king, for he died and has both honour and peace.’That says it all… she is not content with events at Pelennor: she still wishes to die.

Therefore, we can see that under the affliction of the words of Wormtongue, she abandons the task appointed to her by her king, to seek her own death. Whether you consider Theoden’s will to be a direct order or not, is really immaterial. Certainly to abandon your people in dark times, against the wishes of your King, because you want to die is not a decision I can call ‘right’ however sympathetic you might feel to her.

The final point of the Tolkienologists si that all works out for the best. She and Merry kill the Nazgul, the enemy is routed at the gates of Minas Tirith, and so its all worth it. While this is great after-the-fact reasoning, it doesn’t bear at all on Eowyn’s decision. She didn’t rebel in order to kill others, but to die herself. A fate she did not achieve: and but for her injuries, she would have repeated the act. Fundamentally, if this is the argument it really says that it is ok to do wrong, if good comes out of it. But unless the good that comes out of it is calculated and intended, then it can hardly make the decision right. In fact, Eowyn’s motivations and intentions were worse than the decision itself.

Of course if you say 'this was what the Valar intended', then was it a decision at all? Guessing what else might have happened, had Eowyn not been at Minas Tirith is vain. It took a sword of Arnor to break the spell that made the Witch King invincible. Pippin had one too. There were other women in Minas Tirith, though not many. Any could have grasped a sword and struck a blow. Who knows what other instruments of fate Iluvatar could have chosen? We can all invent what-if scenarios to suit ourselves, but its futile. If someone decides to murder a small child is it right? No? Does it become right, if that child is actually Adolf Hitler and you saved millions of lives? I don't think you can make those sorts of arguments. She didnt know what the Valar intended, or think about it in terms of the greater good at all. She merely did what she wanted for herself.

Therefore while we would wish to excuse Eowyn her defiance of Theoden’s will, it still remains a decision that was wrong.

Eöl

06-10-2003, 03:05 PM

’I wish to ride to war like my brother Eomer, or better like Thoden the king, for he died and has both honour and peace.’

This quote does not necessarily only apply to death in battle, notice how she states in the beginning that she 'wishes to ride to war like my brother Eomer.' Eomer does not die in the battle, this is how you can see that she only wishes for honor in battle, and if death brings that honor, then death in battle.

The final point of the Tolkienologists is that all works out for the best. She and Merry kill the Nazgul, the enemy is routed at the gates of Minas Tirith, and so its all worth it. While this is great after-the-fact reasoning, it doesn’t bear at all on Eowyn’s decision. She didn’t rebel in order to kill others, but to die herself. A fate she did not achieve: and but for her injuries, she would have repeated the act. Fundamentally, if this is the argument it really says that it is ok to do wrong, if good comes out of it. But unless the good that comes out of it is calculated and intended, then it can hardly make the decision right. In fact, Eowyn’s motivations and intentions were worse than the decision itself.

This point is no longer valid, because she did not rebel to die, only to seek glory in battle. That the Nazgul were there may have been fate, pr preordained.

Snaga

06-10-2003, 06:27 PM

Come now Eol, we all know that's not right.

Merry first sees Dernhelm: A young man, Merry thought as he returned the glance, less in height and girth than most. He caught the glint of clear grey eyes and then he shivered, for it came suddenly to him that it was the face of one without hope goes in search of death in battle.
Eowyn to the healer: 'And it is not always good to be healed in body. Nor is it always evil to die in battle, even in bitter pain. Were I permitted, in this dark hour, I would chose the later.'
Eowyn to Faramir:'I looked for death in battle. But I have not died and the battle goes on.I think that adequately proves the point. Her motivation is little better than Denethors!

As for this fate/ pre-ordination point of yours I will leave it to your own team to dispute that one. Because if it was all pre-ordained, then there was no free-will involved. The question is "Was Eowyn right in joining the ride of the Rohirrim, and disobeying King Theoden’s order to stay in Rohan?" If its pre-ordained, the answer is no. She was neither right nor wrong, as she made no decision at all!

I'll let you guys argue your way back out of that little philosophical condundrum. Meanwhile I'll have to insist that its not right to defy the wish of your King in order to seek your own death.

[editted to sort out vb codes]

Lhunithiliel

06-10-2003, 07:14 PM

To Snaga with love ;)

My dear opponent, my most feared rival,
you have convinced me once again that “fear has big eyes” (a saying that we have here ) :p
For I expected form you a cannon fire!! And what did I get? Several random gunshots! ;)
But I guess this must be because of the exams!

Never mind!
I’ll help you see the “right from wrong”…although I am sure you , just as we all, see it was ALL right with Eowyn’s decision, for NO order had been disobeyed and NO treason to her people did she commit by going to war!

First, let’s make one thing clear: After all, do YOU consider Eowyn important or not a very important person in the King’s house?
For you seem to be unable to make up your mind!
First you say:
Eowyn was the appointed leader, and although the eored’s left behind would have their own leaders, who would take overall charge? It would be undecided, and therefore there would be misunderstanding, chaos and mistakes.
Oh! What VIP you have pictured her!
But then you say:
The Oath of Eorl falls on the heir of Eorl. That was Theoden, not Eowyn. The whole point about being an heir is that there is only one!…
Its certainly not for Eowyn to overrule him.
Now…. Who’s that insignificant girl that you put over there “by the stove”? Just a young woman from the people of the Rohirrims? Some plain girl with no king’s blood and lineage in her veins?
WRONG!
She WAS a heir of Eorl, for the same blood as Theoden’s ran in her and the same lineage and background she had and the same pride and dignity of a true heir of Eorl she had…. What’s here to not accept as the truth?! She was Theoden’s sister’s daughter!!!
And in the words of Aragorn himself (“The Houses of Healing”, ROTK):
For she is a fair maiden, fairest lady of a house of queens.
and
For her deeds have set her among the queens of great renown
And if you deny her royalty, then you should deny the same rights to her brother Eomer as well!

But would you, a child of Sauron, ;) dare oppose the Great King of Rohan’s decision:
'Behold! I go forth, and it seems like to be my last riding,' said Théoden. 'I have no child. Théodred my son is slain. I name Éomer my sister-son to be my heir.
Don’t play the “macho”-song for the heritage being passed only through men for it is not right in the case of Eowyn!
Therefore the oath binds Eowyn with the same strength as her uncle and as her brother!

That cleared, let me proceed with the subject about the security of the people of Rohan.
A lot of facts have been provided by our side to confirm that the Rohirrims had been well and thoughtfully and carefully accommodated and protected and defended at Dunharrow.
And not one firm and solid evidence you have given to us to prove the contrary!
What power do your speculations and free-flowing “what if”-type arguments have against our strong arguments?
You say the Rohirrims were badly defended. Prove it!
To speak about this issue in the Second and even Third Conditional sentences is and cannot be a too convincing argument!!! :p :D

Now comes the best part!!!
Eowyn’s “true” motivation.

And our opponent says – “death” was what she wanted.
. But fundamentally she is seeking death.
The even MORE amazing thing all of a sudden appears to be that she, Eowyn, was…..…how was that exactly as put by Snaga:
She has spent long hours having her mind poisoned by Wormtongue, and through him by Saruman.
Oh, really?!?!???
Then you must have not paid any attention to Eomer’s explanations:
Care and dread she had, and shared with me, in the days of Wormtongue and the king’s bewitchment; and she tended the king in growing fear. But that did not bring her to this pass!’
Or, how about Gandalf’s words!?!:
……but she, born in the body of a maid, had a spirit and courage at least the match of yours. Yet she was doomed to wait upon an old man, whom she loved as a father, and watch him falling into a mean dishonoured dotage; and her part seemed to her more ignoble than that of the staff he leaned on.
….and so on…
Three of the greatest heroes and warriors of their times appraised her courage to withstand PRECISELY the poison of Wormtongue’s deeds and words…and all of a sudden, you, my “Great Orc” ;) blame her of the contrary!
Whom to believe – you or them?!
I’d rather accept their opinion, you know! ;)
Because it comes from Tolkien himself!
Therefore, your suggestions….or rather – quite vague and uncertain speculation about Eowyn wanting death because her mind was “poisoned” by the words of Wormtongue, all fall shattered into pieces.
For no one can counter the author’s words! Right?

I would say no more ... for the moment ;)
But you, see, my friend, the truth about Eowyn is not “somewhere out there”!
The truth is in the facts and in the words of Tolkien!

Niniel

06-10-2003, 07:19 PM

So far some of the arguments have been based on the result of Éowyn's actions; namely that she killed the Witch-king and thereby achieved a great deed that proved instrumental to the victory in battle. Unless we accept that her being there was pre-ordained, in which case there wouldn't by a right and wrong, but she had no other choice than to be there, we should not focus on the results of her actions, but on the reasons for her choice. Snaga has already done that; I agree with his argument that Éowyn's choice was based only on self-centered reasons. She wanted a glorious death, because she thought she could not get what she needed to make her happy: the love of a great man (Aragorn) and a life that would make her feel useful. Thus she disobeyed Théoden's wish and, without taking the interests of Rohan into consideration, went to war.
Even though Rohan (or Dunharrow, wich was the most important stronghold) was well defended, the country needed a leader, both for military reasons as to secure the well-being of the people; food, water, the prevention of looting etcetera. We are not told whether Éowyn made sure Rohan would be governed while she was gone, but even if she had, it would be a great disappointment for the people if it turned out she was gone. Her abandoning her people might cause despair and chaos, and so have terrible consequences for her country. So the Tolkienologist's argument (by Snaga numbered no. 1), that Rohan was fine without her, is not proved.
The same goes for argument no. 2; as Snaga said, Éowyn had no obligation to the Oath of Eorl; it was Théoden's responsibility to help Gondor, since he was the heir of Eorl.
Argument no. 4 does not count, since as I explained above, one cannot judge Éowyn's actions by their results, but needs to consider the reasons for her choice.
That leaves argument no. 3: Éowyn had to follow her heart and go to battle, since she would be unhappy if she stayed behind. This is true; and it turned out that going to battle made her happy in the end (she met Faramir and married him, and was satisfied with her new life). Yet again we are judging her actions by their results; and more importantly it was selfish of her to follow her heart's desire. In a war there are always people who are suffering and are unhappy, and who don't get the chance to change their lives. Éowyn could have helped the suffering people of Rohan, by staying with them and helping them; instead she decided to improve her own life, thus only making their suffering worse. Even though maybe she would have been unhappy herself (which is not certain; she might have found a meaningful life without having gone to battle- she might even have met Faramir, since he was an important leader of her neighbouring country); she would have had to choose for the well-being of her people, since it was her duty as the only remaining member of Théoden's family. In this case her duty should have prevailed over her own wish.
So in all, I see no arguments that are in favour of Éowyns' going to war, and thus must conclude that it was wrong.

Mrs. Maggott

06-10-2003, 08:59 PM

I had not wished to post again on this debate after my first rather lengthy post in recognition of that old Italian proverb which says that both fish and guests begin to stink after the third day, or, in this case, debaters begin to stink after the third page of their first post! However, given that my name has been used in vain here and there, I would like to posit the following thoughts:

I was not arguing predestination (since I don't believe in it). What I did argue was that the prophecy was there (and I quoted it), that Aragorn had shown at least one case of prescience with Gandalf in Moria (and I quoted it), that he had tried to dissuade Eowyn from going south (and I quoted it) and finally, she had made known to Merry that Aragorn had taken the time (under rather amazingly stressed circumstances) to prepare him for a battle which under ordinary circumstances, Aragorn would have known the hobbit would never see (and I quoted it).

Given the foregoing, it would seem that the stage was set for Eowyn and Merry to be the fulfillment of the prophecy that had been made so many years before and somehow - whether through the use of the palantir or through his own natural prescience - Aragorn was aware of that fact. Remember, he does not ask Eomer as they meet upon the field, "Hey, where's the Witch-king, Eomer, buddy?" Something it would seem a natural question for him to ask under the circumstances. Might that be because that he was already aware that the old boy was no longer about? Mmmmm, could be!

Now let's look at the Denethor-Eowyn connection, or rather, the lack thereof. Poor Denethor is driven finally to despair and suicide by the might of the will of Sauron working through the palantir of the White Tower. Denethor wishes to perish before he suffers the humiliation of defeat and he wishes to take his dying son with him. By this time, Denethor is obviously no longer playing with a "full deck" and really cannot be held accountable for his actions although, of course, they do mirror his less than amiable personality.

On the other hand, Eowyn is certainly desparate, but not necessarily just to die. Her statement that she wants to die in battle was in recognition that most of those who went to war with Theoden believed that would be their fate especially when they looked upon the besieged city. Remember, Merry wonders if Theoden will simply "slink off" into the hills! Eowyn is looking for something worth dying for rather than simply looking for death. Upon her awakening after striking down the Captain of the Ringwraiths - and still despairing even after such obviously glory - it may then be said that she resigns herself to seeking the opportunity to die, with or without glory, but still serving her people in battle. But until that time, her true hope is to simply end her life in a manner that she considers fitting for a shieldmaiden of the House of Eorl. If she just wanted to die, there were plenty of high places in Dunharrow she could have jumped off, but she didn't do that. However, had she been a female version of Denethor, at the King's departure - or at the news of his death/defeat or even victory, she would have taken the steps necessary to simply end her life as did Denethor.

As for the "oath" I brought up: cmon fellas! It has nothing to do with Eorl and everything to do with the fact that oaths were an important part of the social culture in Tolkien's world. Hence, I pointed out that had Theoden required an oath from Eowyn that she would stay behind, she would have stayed behind, but because she felt no dishonor in simply "disobeying" the king, we can rest assured that she did not take an oath and then break it.

Eowyn disobeyed Theoden. End of story. The question is not did she do so, but was she correct in doing so. Again, considering what would have happened had she not, I think the answer is obvious. After all, I ask everyone to consider a confrontation on the battlefield between Aragorn and the Captain of the Ringwraiths, the creature who was not going to die at the hands of man. Gondor had already lost one king to that evil being. Perhaps he would just have struck down Aragorn with the Black Breath, grabbed up the last heir of Elendil and flown off with him to Minas Morgul or even Barad Dur for the entertainment of Sauron over a hundred years or so. With Aragorn dead or taken, what hope would there have been even with Gandalf?

Aulë

06-10-2003, 09:27 PM

The first thing I want to show you is this little quote:
LotR: RotK - The Battle of Pelennor Fields
Then the prince went from his horse, and knelt by the bier in honour of the king and his great onset; and he wept. And rising he looked then on Éowyn and was amazed. 'Surely, here is a woman?' he said. 'Have even the women of the Rohirrim come to war in our need?'
'Nay! One only,' they answered. 'The Lady Éowyn is she, sister of Éomer; and we knew naught of her riding until this hour, and greatly we rue it.'

Now, before I continue with the importance of that little quote, I believe that it is time to set the record straight.
We can't have Tolkienologist's running amuck, telling untruths.

Now, where to begin, where to begin...

Firstly,
Mrs. Maggott
I should like to say at the outset that in fact, Eowyn did the right thing. Indeed, not only was it the right thing, but it was an act that certainly saved the day, the battle, the City and the War itself.
No. That is actually very wrong. (I'll go into that in a bit)

Anyway, in Mrs. Maggott's first post, she basically says that Aragorn could not have excused Eowyn from her duties in Dunharrow, and only a male in her family has that power.
Now that's all very good, except it has NOTHING to do with the topic.
She also quite kindly pointed out that Eowyn did not fulfil the wishes of Theoden (A very wise King who knew what was best for his people).

Continuing on to her second post:
Mrs. Maggott
It is true that one might understand that Aragorn “knew” that Merry would end up before the gates of Minas Tirith
No, no, no, no, NO!
Aragorn never knew that Theoden wasn't going to allow Merry to travel to Gondor. He was just making sure that when he thought Merry was going to head into Gondor (with Theoden's leave) that it would be nice to have some Hobbit-sized armor to protect Merry from those nasty Orc-arrows.

Mrs. Maggott
Aragorn foresaw Gandalf’s fall in Moria – and was correct. Therefore, it is quite possible that he also foresaw both Merry and “Dernhelm” on the Pelannor.
He didn't 'forsee' Gandalf's fall in Moria.
As a traveller, he would have heard of the rumours of Durin's Bane dwelling in Moria from the Elves in Lórien and other folk. Or of something which had kept the Dwarves out of Dwarrowdelf for all those years.
The absense of a Christmas card from Balin may have also given Aragorn the thought that not everything had gone acording to plan in the reclaimation bid.

Now that completely destroys Mrs. Maggott's 'vision' theory.

Now, her thord post:
Mrs. Maggott
So it appears that in the face of danger and in need, Eomer is willing to risk the king’s wrath and disobey. And his actions are not without consequence:
But the King that Eomer disobeyed was not the King that Eowyn disobeyed.
Eomer disobeyed a King who was being poisoned by the lies of Wormtongue. Grima was feeding Theoden lies, and was causing him to make unjust decisions. Eomer knew this, and that is why he rebelled.
Eowyn, on the other hand, disobeyed a completely sane (and wise) King. The 'wise' Theoden had his people's intrests at heart, and Eowyn completely disobeyed his orders, jeopardising the lives and wellbeing of the women, children and eldar of Rohan.

Mrs. Maggott
Elfhelm, commander of the eored in which Merry and the disguised Eowyn travel is not unaware of at least the hobbit’s presence. Given that Theoden had distinctly ordered the hobbit to remain behind, it would appear that Elfhelm is not overly exercised by this flouting of the Royal Will. Furthermore, it is quite possible – indeed probable – that he is more than aware of the identity of his young underling for who else could have persuaded him to take such a dismissive view of the King’s command?

Or perhaps he knew that the Rohirrm would need every warrior available, and that to have Merry sent back to Dunharrow, it would further reduce their already low numbers?

OK, now that we have cleaned up Mrs. Maggott's first few posts, lets go back to that first quote of hers:
Mrs. Maggott
I should like to say at the outset that in fact, Eowyn did the right thing. Indeed, not only was it the right thing, but it was an act that certainly saved the day, the battle, the City and the War itself.
And at the end:
Mrs. Maggott
I do not believe it is necessary to recount what happened on the Pelannor Field nor what part Eowyn played in the great victory that was gained there, a victory which so discommoded the Dark Lord that his entire attention was drawn away from his own land and therefore was the Ring-bearer able to destroy the Ring. Had Sauron’s great Captain survived, there can be no doubt that the victory would have been Sauron’s. But Eowyn was on the battle field that day, and thus was fulfilled the following prophecy:

This is completely wrong, as it was Merry who slew the Witch King: not Eowyn.
The prophecy says that no Man could kill the Witch-King. But it is referring to the race of 'Men', not the gender. The race of Hobbits was ever destined to kill the Witch-King.
Any single person could have distracted the Witch King long enough to allow Merry to inflict his spell-breaking wound.
Eowyn just dealt the 'final-blow', which any Gondorian or Rohirrm could have done (Such as the Rohirrm who would have been in 'Elfhelm's' place, had Eowyn obeyed her King). And I presume that the Witch-King would have dies even if Eowyn had not inflicted the final blow. Once the spell was broken, the equivalent to what happened to Bilbo when he gave up his Ring would have occured: age would have caught up with him (rather quickly too, considering how old he was).
And I suppose you will say that Merry would not have even been at Pelannor Fields if Eowyn had not taken him? Well, I think that even if Eowyn had not brought Merry to Pelennor, he would have found someone else to take him (he was rather determined), making that argument irrelevant.
Therefore Eowyn was NOT the reason for the Witch-King being killed. If she had stayed behind, and protected her people (As ordered by her King) nothing less would have eventuated in Gondor.

Now: onto Lhun's posts...
Lhunithiliel
So, was Eowyn right to join the ride of the Rohirrim then? Why ask at all?! It was much more than just taking some sort of decision! It WAS a duty to fulfill! A life-duty coming out of and through the ages; a duty, based on an inherited pride and dignity and the sense of being faithful to those sacred oaths.
And this is precisely how she felt it and this is precisely what her proud family lineage needed her to do. And this is precisely what she did.

Was she wrong? How could she be?!? Is it wrong to fulfill an oath?
For an oath she did fulfill. And it was the very right thing to do! The right thing for a true heir of Eorl!

Now, here's a nice spot for my first quote to go.
LotR: RotK - The Battle of Pelennor Fields
Then the prince went from his horse, and knelt by the bier in honour of the king and his great onset; and he wept. And rising he looked then on Éowyn and was amazed. 'Surely, here is a woman?' he said. 'Have even the women of the Rohirrim come to war in our need?'
'Nay! One only,' they answered. 'The Lady Éowyn is she, sister of Éomer; and we knew naught of her riding until this hour, and greatly we rue it.'
Eowyn was WOMAN, and was therefore not expected (or wanted) to be on the battlefield, by either the people of Gondor OR of Rohan.
The Prince of Imrahil seemed quite shocked and disturbed to think that a woman should be on the battleground. The Rohirrm rued her coming, as they should have. King Theoden was quite right in not allowing her to come into battle.
Lord Denethor, who was also a wise leader, sent virtually all of his women out of Minas Tirith to save them from harm.
This proved to be a smart move, because what happens to Eowyn when she goes into battle?
Lhunithiliel
#1 :
Was Eowyn fit and capable of going to war?

And all Eowyn did in the fierce battle on the Pellenor Fields proved this.
Yes! Did you notice what happens when Eowyn went into a 'fierce' battle? She gets her arm broken, and is almost killed- that's what.
No wonder women are kept off the battle field. They just don't have the strength of men, and should be kept safe AS FAR AWAY from war as possible, with the protection of many Men, and a LEADER: something that Eowyn took away from the women of Rohan when she foolishly rode into battle.

Aulë

06-10-2003, 09:29 PM

In Lhun's second post, she decides that she want's to contradict Mrs. Maggott a bit, and says that Eowyn was 'not' ordered to stay in Dunharrow, even after Mrs. Maggott had said otherwise, proving quotes to back herself up.

The Passing Of The Grey Company
“’You are a stern lord and resolute,’ she said’ ‘and thus do men win renown.’ She paused. ‘Lord,’ she said, ‘if you must go, then let me ride in your following. For I am weary of skulking in the hills, and wish to face peril and battle.’

‘Your duty is with your people,’ he answered.

‘Too often have I heard of duty,’ she cried. ‘But am I not of the House of Eorl, a shieldmaiden and not a dry-nurse? I have waited on faltering feet long enough. Since they falter no longer, it seems, may I not now spend my life as I will?’

‘Few may do that with honour,’ he answered. ‘But as for you, lady: did you not accept the charge to govern the people until their lord’s return? If you had not been chosen, then some marshal or captain would have been set in the same place, and he could not ride away from his charge, were he weary of it or no.’

Eowyn accepted to look after the people of Rohan until her Lord returned. Now, Theoden did make a re-appearance for a short while, but no-where is it specified that Eowyn was relieved of her duties. When Theoden rode to Gondor, Eowyn was still under the order to look after the people in Dunharrow.
In fact, Theoden says this to Merry:
[quote]The Muster of Rohan
The king turned to Merry. 'I am going to war, Master Meriadoc,' he said. 'In a little while I shall take the road. I release you from my service, but not from my friendship. You shall abide here, and if you will, you shall serve the Lady Éowyn, who will govern the folk in my stead.'
Theoden certainly thought that Eowyn was to remain there.
Tsk, tsk- I'd expect better from you, Lhun. Make sure to read LotR before posting again.

Now, for my dear friend, Anamatar....
Anamatar
Do not only think only about the good of Rohan or the good of the world but also think of the good of Eowyn here. As literature, specifically Greek mythology shows us, foreboding and anxiousness are the end of mankind. The last ill that Pandora clutched and locked shut was foreboding, knowing what would happen everyday of your life and not being able to do anything about it. Also, Aegus leapt from the high precipice of Athens in anxiousness for his son to return from the battle with the Minotaur. Both of these ills show with Eowyn:

She, like Aegus, would have eventually lost control with the anxiousness. Everyone she had ever loved was away in war. She would have withered to a starved corpse watching the eastern horizon waiting for those horsemen to return and Aragorn, her desire, was seemingly without a hope.

But aside from this, she was bored. She was not destined to live as a house-maid. She wanted to live.

If Eowyn had stayed behind in Dunharrow, “skulking in the hills” and taking care of “faltering feet” she surely would have lost control of herself and her actions through anxiousness and boredom.

That's all very nice, but she was ordered to stay in Dunharrow. A loyal servant of Rohan would surely follow the wishes of his or her wise King?
To be sworn under the leadership of Rohan, a person should do anything to fulfil the King's wishes, even if that were to sit anxiously in Dunharrow.

Now, as my fellow Periaur have dealt with the other matters, we come to Mrs Maggott's next post:
After consulting my dictionary a few times, I almost understood what Mrs. Maggott was talking about.
I sure hope the judges have a larger vocabulary than me....

She is still going on about how Aragorn can prophecise...
Mrs. Maggott
Remember, he does not ask Eomer as they meet upon the field, "Hey, where's the Witch-king, Eomer, buddy?" Something it would seem a natural question for him to ask under the circumstances. Might that be because that he was already aware that the old boy was no longer about? Mmmmm, could be!

Notice how he doesn't ask of the other Nazgul either?
That's because he thinks they are off flying elsewhere. He didn't even know that the Witch-King was at the Pelennor Fields earlier.

Mrs. Maggott
As for the "oath" I brought up: cmon fellas! It has nothing to do with Eorl and everything to do with the fact that oaths were an important part of the social culture in Tolkien's world.
Yep....Good communication between the Tolkienologists there:rolleyes: .
Mrs Maggott: check one of Lhun's earlier posts....(which has been proved wrong anyway)

Mrs Maggott
The question is not did she do so, but was she correct in doing so. Again, considering what would have happened had she not, I think the answer is obvious.
Yep, it is quite obvious. I'm glad you picked up on that.
By Eowyn leaving her people in Dunharrow, she left them leaderless, and weakened (As said by my comrades).
By running off to Gondor, Eowyn accomplished nothing of significance to the destruction of the One Ring, which could have happened otherwise.

Snaga

06-10-2003, 09:37 PM

Lhun, thank you for your empty mockery. Let me puncture your flaccid 'arguments'.

Actually they are more like wriggles... you are wriggling to try and escape from actually dealing with the what I actually said.

Wriggle #1: The will of the King is unimportant

You think the King's wish can just be randomly ignored? Really? You think he needs to specifically order something, to make it binding? People in charge often make their wishes known without specifically demanding or ordering it. Having to make something a direct order is usually a sign of a lack of personal authority, so the person has to pull rank. Perhaps you believe Theoden lacked personal authority? They expect their wishes to be carried out. They certainly don't expect you to do the exact opposite in secret! At the very least, he deserves to be told she isnt doing what he expects. His wish would have been a command to her, not something to be ignored because he didnt say 'Please'! Unless you think she should undermine the personal authority of the King?

Wriggle #2: The Importance of Being Eowyn

You demand to know how important Eowyn is. Important: she has the task of leadership which you believe can be cast aside. Not more important than the King: she can't arbitarily ignore his wishes. Get it? Probably not... you should answer your own question. How important is she? You think she is so important she can overrule the king! Wow!! Gosh Lhunny... you really have her on a pedestal.

Wriggle #3: Heir of Confusion

You really don't understand what an heir is? How sad. A big barrier to you making progress in this debate. The heir can be only one person, when it comes to the Kingship. Theoden is the heir of Eorl... Gosh even your own quote proves it: his heir is Eomer. Get that: not Eomer and Eowyn! Just Eomer. Or perhaps they all get crowned??

Wriggle #4: 'You read the book, you sexist pig!'

To note that Eowyn is not the heir of Eorl or even Theoden is not to adopt some sexist stereotype, its just being familiar with the facts as presented by the author. Come on Lhun... read the book. Hell, Mrs Maggost posted most of it!

Wriggle #5: 'Do I really have to read ALL the book?'

Thanks for your selection of quotes. Lets look at the order in which their statements come... Aragorn first says Her malady begins far back before this day, does it not, Eomer? To which Eomer replies Care and dread she had, and shared with me, in the days of Wormtongue and the king’s bewitchment; and she tended the king in growing fear. But that did not bring her to this pass! To which Gandalf replies ……but she, born in the body of a maid, had a spirit and courage at least the match of yours. Yet she was doomed to wait upon an old man, whom she loved as a father, and watch him falling into a mean dishonoured dotage; and her part seemed to her more ignoble than that of the staff he leaned on. Hmm could there be more.
Originally posted by Lhunithiliel
….and so on…Perhaps there is... lets read on a little more. I like this book. No need to cut corners is there? 'Think you that Wormtongue had poison only for Theoden's ears? Dotard! What is the house of Eorl but a thatched barn where brigands drink in the reek, and their brats roll on the floor among their dogs? Have you not heard those words before? Saruman spoke them, the teacher of Wormtongue. Though I do not doubt that Wormtongue at home wrapped their meaning in terms more cunning. My lord, if your sister's love for you, and her will still bent to her duty, had not restrained her lips, you might have heard even such things as these escape them. But who knows what she spoke to the darkness, alone, in the bitter watches of the night, when all her life seemed shrinking, and the walls of her bower closing in around her, a hutch to trammel some wild thing in?' Gosh Lhunny, if you'd just kept reading!:rolleyes: I know you were desperately hoping I wouldnt have time to respond. Too bad you've been caught trying to deceive the judges with selective quoting...

Wriggle #6: 'Death... damn I forgot to address that one...'

Yeah Lhunny: you didnt actually even disturb my central point, which is that Eowyn is seeking death, and this is no basis for ignoring the will of her King. I have quote after quote that proves my point. Originally posted by Lhunithiliel
For no one can counter the author’s words!Are you forgetful? Incapable? You need some exams to focus your mind!;)

Mrs. Maggott

06-10-2003, 09:49 PM

Not going to take up a lot of time. Just a few notes about "inaccuracies":

Firstly, Merry didn't kill the Witch-king unless he kept his persona in his knee. The hobbit's stroke simply caused the Nazgul to "miss" his stroke against Eowyn and brought him low enough for her to run her sword through what would have been his head. It would seem to me that the second blow was distinctly more fatal than the first.

Secondly, the business about not by "man's" hand would he fall sounds at the time as if it refers to the race, but in fact like so many prophecies, it means just what it says: man as opposed to a combination of woman and hobbit. Since he falls by the hand of that combination, that's what it means and it makes little sense trying to change it. Remember Shakespeare (although Tolkien wasn't fond of him): Macbeth did not have to fear "any man born of woman" - and in the end doesn't he find out that MacDuff was delivered via a cesarian section and not "born" in the literal sense of the word. Ya gotta watch prophesies, they can getcha in the end!

Thirdly, Aragorn speaks specifically to Gandalf's danger in Moria and none other. Look at the quote. Unless one believes that the Balrog had no business with anyone but Gandalf or to suggest that Aragorn had heard about the Balrog as a "traveler" is a bit desperate, don't you think? Why not just say to Gandalf when the argument began, "Hey, we don't want to go through Moria because I've heard that there's a Balrog loose in there!" Before Gandalf would place the Fellowship in such danger, he would have tried the Redhorn Gate again or gone through the Gap of Rohan and hoped for the best. Since he continued to plump for Moria and in the end Aragorn gave in, I cannot imagine that the man ever knew about the Balrog.

Fourthly, as for not asking after the rest of the Nazgul, why should he? They were not leading Sauron's army against Minas Tirith! Only their Captain was and I'm sure that Aragorn had learned that little fact when he gazed into the palantir. If he hadn't taken the opportunity to learn who was leading Sauron's forces in the battle, then he was dimmer than Jackson's Treebeard!

I'm afraid that excellent though the attempts are to disprove our position, they require far too many liberties with the facts to be believed!

Aulë

06-10-2003, 10:17 PM

Mrs. Maggott
Firstly, Merry didn't kill the Witch-king unless he kept his persona in his knee. The hobbit's stroke simply caused the Nazgul to "miss" his stroke against Eowyn and brought him low enough for her to run her sword through what would have been his head. It would seem to me that the second blow was distinctly more fatal than the first.
Hahahahahahhahahahahahahahahaha...hahaha....
Dear Mrs. Maggott: All my respect for you as a Tolkien scholar just flew out the window with that quote...
I'm sorry, but that was laughable.

The Battle Of the Pelennor Fields
So passed the sword of the Barrow-downs, work of Westernesse. But glad would he have been to know its fate who wrought it slowly long ago in the North-kingdom when the Dúnedain were young, and chief among their foes was the dread realm of Angmar and its sorcerer king. No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will.
Seems like it did a tad more than "knock the big ol' Witch King off his balance", eh? :)

The Battle Of the Pelennor Fields
But suddenly he too stumbled forward with a cry of bitter pain, and his stroke went wide, driving into the ground. Merry's sword had stabbed him from behind, shearing through the black mantle, and passing up beneath the hauberk had pierced the sinew behind his mighty knee.
'Éowyn! Éowyn!' cried Merry. Then tottering, struggling up, with her last strength she drove her sword between crown and mantle, as the great shoulders bowed before her. The sword broke sparkling into many shards. The crown rolled away with a clan
You may even notice that it was Merry who roused Eowyn to finished off the job. The poor woman didn't even have the strength to jab her sword in the direction of the virtually dead Nazgul under her own will.

Mrs. Maggott
Secondly, the business about not by "man's" hand would he fall sounds at the time as if it refers to the race, but in fact like so many prophecies, it means just what it says: man as opposed to a combination of woman and hobbit. Since he falls by the hand of that combination, that's what it means and it makes little sense trying to change it. Remember Shakespeare (although Tolkien wasn't fond of him): Macbeth did not have to fear "any man born of woman" - and in the end doesn't he find out that MacDuff was delivered via a cesarian section and not "born" in the literal sense of the word. Ya gotta watch prophesies, they can getcha in the end!
This is Tolkien, not Shakespear.
I hope you're reading the right book, MM...I'm beginning to get the feeling that you lost your copy of LotR a few decades ago.

"Shakespeare (although Tolkien wasn't fond of him)"
Why in earth would he copy him then???
*shakes head*

Mrs Maggott
Thirdly, Aragorn speaks specifically to Gandalf's danger in Moria and none other. Look at the quote. Unless one believes that the Balrog had no business with anyone but Gandalf or to suggest that Aragorn had heard about the Balrog as a "traveler" is a bit desperate, don't you think? Why not just say to Gandalf when the argument began, "Hey, we don't want to go through Moria because I've heard that there's a Balrog loose in there!" Before Gandalf would place the Fellowship in such danger, he would have tried the Redhorn Gate again or gone through the Gap of Rohan and hoped for the best. Since he continued to plump for Moria and in the end Aragorn gave in, I cannot imagine that the man ever knew about the Balrog.
Gandalf knew that something was in there. That's why he didn't go in there until it was the last resort.
He tried to cross the Pass of Caradhas!! A virtually impossible feat in itself, before trying Moria.
There was NO OTHER WAY.
The two alternatives of your would have been suicide for the entire fellowship.
Thousands of orcs were patrolling both of those.
At least with Moria, Gandalf thought they stood a chance of sneaking through unhindered.

Mrs. Maggott
Fourthly, as for not asking after the rest of the Nazgul, why should he? They were not leading Sauron's army against Minas Tirith! Only their Captain was and I'm sure that Aragorn had learned that little fact when he gazed into the palantir. If he hadn't taken the opportunity to learn who was leading Sauron's forces in the battle, then he was dimmer than Jackson's Treebeard!
Whilst using the palantir, Aragorn was wrestling with the mind of Sauron, and I'm sure that a trifle of information such as who was leading the opposing army was not something that Aragorn was seeking.
The palantor doesn't reveal all in a few glimpses...
(I actually thought that Jackson's Treebeard was quite wise, something that will be proven in the EE...)

Aulë

06-10-2003, 10:59 PM

[Posting as Tournament Coordinator, not debater]

Following a query from a participant:
This debate shall close in 2 hours, 13 minutes.
(7 days after Mrs. Maggott's opening post)

Eöl

06-11-2003, 12:47 AM

Closing Post for the Guild of Tolkienology:

Our team believes that Eowyn was correct in disobeying the Witch-king because:

1. Eowyn fulfilled her original given task - That of bringing the people to Dunharrow and making sure they were settled in.

2. Theoden did not order Eowyn to stay behind, he simply gave her a request to do so. Periaur may argue all they want about Eowyn's disobedience of the king's wishes, but the fact remains that Eowyn was an adult, capable of making decisions as she wished.

3. The role of gender in the prophecy is somewhat relevant, but the fact remains that it could be taken two ways, as in "a male will not destroy the Witch-king" or "the race of Men will not destroy the Witch-king." If the prophecy meant "the race of Men will not destroy the Witch-king" then Glorfindel would have pursued him. Thus it must mean "a male will not destroy the Witch-king", so without Eowyn the day would have been lost. The argument that other women could have taken her place is not valid, because Gondor did not train their women to fight at all.

4. Eowyn dealt the killing blow. Merry aided her, but he would have perished if he had been alone. Of course, without Eowyn's ride he would not be at the battle at all.

5. With or without Eowyn at Dunharrow, the people would have perished had she not destroyed the Witch-king. 4,000 soldiers would not be enough to hold off the full assault of Sauron whether Eowyn was there or not.

6. Even if the soldiers of Rohan did not have an overall leader, they still would certainly band together. When Theoden was ill, did the army fall apart because they did not have a leader? No. This would be true here as well.

One last thing, snaga, your tone was not appreciated. These debates are supposed to be fun, and I didn't enjoy watching my teammate being ridiculed.

Snaga

06-11-2003, 01:01 AM

(Eol – I was being ridiculed myself. I didn’t exactly enjoy it, but if people are willing to use such tactics themselves, they should expect to get it back in equal measure. I'm sorry if I overstepped the mark.:) )

The debate draws to a close it is worth a quick post to summarise what has been said.

At the outset Mrs Maggott says: I should like to say at the outset that in fact, Eowyn did the right thing. Indeed, not only was it the right thing, but it was an act that certainly saved the day, the battle, the City and the War itself. Here we have two things being drawn together as: the decision of Eowyn, and the effect it is believed to have had. I say believed, because these effects have been greatly contested.

It is worth dealing with this argument first, since it has been used frequently as the ‘ace in the hole’ of the Tolkienologists. Surely Eowyn saved the day at the Battle of Pelennor, by killing the Witch-King, and doesn’t everything pale into insignificant thing which justifies all else?

But Aule has undermined this position completely, by pointing out that in fact it is not Eowyn who is decisive but Merry whose blade dealt a blow so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his undead sinews to his will. Let’s not decry Eowyn’s act in delivering the coup de grace, but Merry did the damage, making his death possible. So it is not a man who does the deed: it is a hobbit. Eowyn’s act, whilst brave, is not decisive: her presence is not decisive.

This leaves in a mess most of the arguments about predestination which Eol believes in, while Mrs Maggott does not. Predestination becomes a bit beside the point, if Eowyn wasn’t decisive in the Witch-King’s death.

But predestination is a dangerous argument to take. Eol’s position is that Eowyn was right because this was how it was meant to be. But then, that’s hardly Eowyn’s choice at all. It doesn’t prove Eowyn right, because she had no choice in the matter. If this is the case then was Saruman ‘right’ to send the Uruk-Hai to kidnap Merry and Pippin, and try to bring them to Isengard? Because that ending up with the hobbits rousing the Ents, and various other matters that led from it. Perhaps including Merry being in Rohan at all, and therefore being able to ride with Eowyn. No… what Saruman did was wrong, because his intentions were bad. So Eowyn’s actions must be based on her intentions too.

Mrs Maggot has some position which appears to be that Aragorn had some foresight that Eowyn and Merry would team up, and that he therefore got Eowyn to get him armour for that purpose… its all a bit obscure to me. If he wanted to get them to Gondor because he foresaw their role, I think he would have mentioned his vision to someone and helped it along a bit more. Get Merry protection in dangerous times really doesn’t prove he knew he would end up in battle, let alone that Eowyn would be there. The point about Eomer and Aragorn not talking about the Black Captain is even more tenuous. They had plenty of foes on the battlefield to concern themselves with, without needing to chat about the fate of one more. Frankly whatever credence you give this, its just totally irrelevant. None of this bears on the question of Eowyn’s decision. Because her decision isn’t based on foresight and prophecy: its based on her desires against the wishes of her king.

Lhun, Eol and Anamatar have done their best to undermine the importance of the will of Theoden. Firstly there is the question of when is an order not an order. This is a bit of an irrelevance because there is no doubt about Theoden’s will in the matter, and there is no doubt about his expectation. No one can seriously argue that there is no problem with not doing what your king wishes. Theoden doesn’t state it as a direct order, precisely because he expects his wishes will be carried out, without the need to issue a direct instruction. He doesn’t expect disobedience. Its certainly not because he doesn’t care! Mrs Maggot at least concedes this point.

Anamatar is slightly more concerned to show that there was no major threat to Rohan, and that the people would do splendidly without the appointed leader. It is said that Dunharrow is unassailable from the ground, if any defend it. Eol doesn’t help this line, by pointing out that the Nazgul could have could attack from the air, in his eagerness to demonstrate that Eowyn should actually be elsewhere. So Dunharrow was not at all impenetrable, but yes, a strong fortress. But it needed defending, and therefore leadership. One cannot help but wonder the effect of that leader, the representative of the House of Eorl that they had specifically asked to lead them, Eowyn, disappearing mysteriously. If anything was calculated to have men leaving their posts, this would it. Its not possible to prove that it WOULD have been fatal, but you can hardly argue it didn’t matter whether she was there or not. The people wanted leadership, she was asked by her King to provide it, and she decided not to.

So we come at last to motive. Why did Eowyn choose to ignore the will of Theoden? As Aule showed, it wasn’t the same as Eomer’s defiance, where really he was defying Wormtongue. No, this was wise and kindly Theoden doing what he could to fulfil the Oath of Eorl whilst still looking after his people as best he could. We would hope to find a good reason.

But instead, we have Eowyn’s desire for death, amply attested to. Mrs Maggott draws a distinction between Denethor, who wishes for death before the humiliation of defeat, whilst Eowyn wants death and glory. They are different, but only slightly. Denethor is full of pride in Gondor, and wishes not to see this brought low. Eowyn, under the influence of Wormtongue, believes the House of Eorl is already dishonoured and thinks a heroic death will redeem it. But she survives our act of heroism, but is still not content. She still wishes her death: the desire for death is dominant. Besides, the dishonour of the House of Eorl is not real, it is the lies of Wormtongue, and Eomer and Theoden themselves bring honour aplenty to the people of Rohan. Her act is thoroughly wrong-headed.

She disobeys her King to seek her own death. She abandons her duty, for reasons that are not rational, and that are inspired by the lies of Wormtongue. There is no way in which this can said to be right.

Ithrynluin

06-11-2003, 01:54 AM

I'm not too happy with the tone of some of the posts.

Nice to see that the Periaur got round to finding interesting arguments. ;)

Thread closed.

EDIT: Apparently the debate is not over yet. Check out this post made by Arvedui: http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=322341#post322341

I can see strife arising from this...*sigh* :(

Aulë

06-11-2003, 06:13 AM

Actually, Ivan, the debate IS over.
The Periaur were not informed of any extention, and I believe that Arvedui just made a miscalculation in what time it closes.

Lhunithiliel

06-11-2003, 06:19 AM

Originally posted by Aulë
Actually, Ivan, the debate IS over.
The Periaur were not informed of any extention, and I believe that Arvedui just made a miscalculation in what time it closes.
Actually Aule, there is NO any extension or any other violation of the NORMAL procedures!
I also think it is extremely arrogant of you to complain about "breaking the rules" concerning this debate, after you have done a complete mess out of it and I am very much disappointed!

Whatever it is - a game, a way to prove knowledge or whatever, after all we should preserve a good tone and friendly relations and be HONEST !

So, the debate is NOT over!

Aulë

06-11-2003, 06:27 AM

O stop being a sore loser Lhun.
The debate IS over.

I know you're going to continue complaining, so please take it to the Tournament discussion thread.

I expected better from the GoT....:rolleyes:

Ithrynluin

06-11-2003, 06:34 AM

Originally posted by Aulë
Actually, Ivan, the debate IS over.
The Periaur were not informed of any extention, and I believe that Arvedui just made a miscalculation in what time it closes.

Well, Matthew, I only closed the debate for symbolical reasons. Whether it is closed or not, both teams must follow the rules that the debate host has set for them. If Arvedui miscalculated or not is another matter... and it is between the two teams and Arvedui.

Lhunithiliel

06-11-2003, 06:41 AM

Originally posted by Aulë
O stop being a sore loser Lhun.
The debate IS over.

I know you're going to continue complaining, so please take it to the Tournament discussion thread.

I expected better from the GoT....:rolleyes:
A sore loser, Aule?:eek:
Kind and a perfect gentlemen as ever, I see!
Look who's hurrying for the debate to be closed!
What?!
Are you afraid that some of us might decide to post an answer to your ...hmm... "arguments"...?!?

I kindly ask Ithrinluin to clear up the debate thread from this newly arisen discussion and move it to the respective thread.

Aulë

06-11-2003, 06:54 AM

I am not 'hurrying' for the debate to be closed.
I am just making sure that the rules are followed.

Now, no more posts in this thread. Take ALL discussion of this matter to the proper thread.

Lhunithiliel

06-11-2003, 09:39 AM

AN INTRODUCTORY NOTE
to my closing post in this debate:

1/ I can’t understand the “tactics” the Periaur have applied in this debate!
Moves of the Periaur :

First - rushing us to open the debate asap
Second – silence!
Third – starting some secret negotiations to change the topic of the debate as they did not like it!
Fourth – silence!
Fifth – a discussion arises and they DEFEND !!!!! their “rights”! What rights, excuse me, when you had violated quite a few rules basing your acts upon a statement: “I have invented this tournament, I will decide what is to be done” (though not an exact quote, but still truly close to one of Aule’s posts)
Sixth – silence! on the debate-thread but still leading an active discussion about the topic in all other respective threads!
Seventh – silence!!!
Eighth – all of a sudden in the last hours of the debate they start posting in a hurry and watching impatiently the clock!

The last actions – being “spiced” by numerous and various not “gentlemen-like” statements, too!

And all for what?!

To attract the judges’ attention as in “See? We too can participate in a debate!”

Or was it to DIStract the judges’ attention from the posts, that clearly stated your TRUE opinion on the subject right from the beginning:
Aule; 06-05-2003 10:27 PM;posted at the thread for discussing debate matters at the GoP: I know that you guys have been having fun stating the obvious, but we basically have NOTHING to say in response.
later:
In the 40 hours between the Tolkinologist's opening post and our appeal, we have been browsing through HoME, LotR, UT and Letters; searching for something that put Eowyn's decision in a reasonable amount of doubt.
We thought that there would surely be something out there that could support our stance.
To read through all the relevant material is not a 2 hour job, let alone a day's job. We therefore couldn't make an appeal unti lwe at least knew for sure that there was nothing out there.
There you had stated it all clearly!
You yourself had admitted that it is obvious that there is NOTHING to prove that Eowyn did anything wrong!
So, why is now all this shouting out loud and being really sarcastic?

Which leads me to

2/ To Snaga1 in particular
Snaga, if you have understood my humour as “mockery” at you, then I feel morally obliged to ask you to excuse me! I did NOT mock you! I was NOT offensive , NOT rude, NOT sarcastic… I just entered a bit of humour!
Why you had decided the contrary I do not know, but as it seems to be the case, again, I ask for your apologies!

Lhunithiliel

06-11-2003, 09:41 AM

Now, having cleared this, I can proceed to the actual subject of the debate.

Again I’ll remind it:
Was Eowyn right in joining the ride of the Rohirrim, and disobeying King Theoden’s order to stay in Rohan?

I must have done the judges a great favour in gathering and summarizing your scattered ideas and opinions (for I can hardly call them “arguments”!)!
But I had to do this, because otherwise I would not have able to respond to them.

Here is what I could make out of it:

1/ You find a discrepancy between Mrs.Maggott’s and mine positions about Eowyn’s actions, concerning the “order” of Theoden. And you have spent a lot of space on the board to comment on it.
In vain!

Posted by Mrs.Maggott on her very first post:
So, in fact, Eowyn has completed her task – that of bringing the people to the safety of the stronghold. She has not disobeyed nor has she failed in her duty.
and later:
In sum: I think it is evident that Eowyn fulfilled her duty to her people for which she had been chosen by Theoden when he set out against Saruman. Furthermore, we have seen that the King upon his return to Dunharrow had no complaints about her performance of that duty. We have also seen that Theoden reiterated his announcement that Eowyn was to rule in his stead while he went to war. But did he actually “order” her to remain in Rohan? It is very unlikely that he gave her a direct order although doubtless he understood that she would remain there in the capacity which he had named. Certainly, he never prevailed upon her to take an oath that she would remain.
Clear stuff!

Now – to my own post concerning this matter. Let’s look for the discrepancy that you so much wish to be found! Does it really exist?
Lhunithiliel’s very first post: Was it an order indeed? Why can’t I feel it like such?
To me it was NOT a direct order but rather a decision taken unwillingly and as a result of a state of impasse. The King had no intention to point Eowyn as the new Lord of the Mark and the decision he made was only because there was no better choice at the moment.
In some sense, it was NOT his decision either! It was Hama’s suggestion and Theoden was pressed enough by the circumstances as to reject it firmly and look for another solution.
So what order was that? None, IMO. It was rather a request in time of great need, a request the King addressed to one of his closest and most trustful people – Eowyn.
As to whether she fulfilled this request – Mrs.Magott gave strong arguments on this point and I just agree with her.
For Eowyn did all that was expected from her – to secure enough the people of Rohan in the safest possible place.

Therefore I do NOT see Eowyn’s actions as violating some firmly stated order by her King.
Now, how come I can’t see ANY difference or discrepancy in our opinions? Can anyone?!?

Meanwhile even your team-mate Niniel agreed on the same issue:
Niniel: This is of course true, and from hindsight it could be said that it was fortunate that she disobeyed Théoden's wish (if it can't be called an order) and went to war after all.

So, NO discrepancy!
The truth stays – and it is: Eowyn did not disobey a direct order of the king and moreover she completely fulfilled her task and her duties to her people before going to war! It was not some thoughtless impulsively taken decision out of some selfish caprice. Eowyn – a renown Queen among Queens, had done her best as to secure her people before, following the call of the oath that mattered to the royalties, as well as to the people of Rohan – the oath to be there to defend the friendship with Gondor.

2/ The other important argument of yours is that the presence of Eowyn on the Pelennor fields and her slaying of the Witch King was in fact of no importance and that it was Mary who fulfilled the prophecy that the Captain of the Nazgul was to be slain by no living man.
Aule: The prophecy says that no Man could kill the Witch-King. But it is referring to the race of 'Men', not the gender. The race of Hobbits was ever destined to kill the Witch-King.
Let me remind you of sth.Tolkien wrote himself:
From the LOTR, Prologue.
It is plain indeed that in spite of later estrangement Hobbits are relatives of ours: far nearer to us than Elves, or even than Dwarves. Of old they spoke the languages of Men, after their own fashion, and liked and disliked much the same things as Men did. But what exactly our relationship is can no longer be discovered. The beginning of Hobbits lies far back in the Elder Days that are now lost and forgotten...
So, it is clear that the fate of the Witch King was - to be slain by the race of Men! But not by a living man! So although a “word-play”, it is obvious that it is all about gender! For Eowyn and Merry were of the same race.
Besides, let’s remember the reaction of the Witch King himself:
‘Hinder me? Thou fool. No living man may hinder me!’
Then Merry heard of all sounds in that hour the strangest. It seemed that Dernhelm laughed, and the clear voice was like the ring of steel. ‘But no living man am I! You look upon a woman. Éowyn I am, Éomund’s daughter. You stand between me and my lord and kin. Begone, if you be not deathless! For living or dark undead, I will smite you, if you touch him.’

The winged creature screamed at her, but the Ringwraith made no answer, and was silent, as if in sudden doubt.
And, I’d also quote the very scene of killing the Lord of the Nazgul:
Still she did not blench: maiden of the Rohirrim, child of kings, slender but as a steel-blade, fair but terrible. A swift stroke she dealt, skilled and deadly. The outstretched neck she clove asunder, and the hewn head fell like a stone. Backward she sprang as the huge shape crashed to ruin, vast wings outspread, crumpled on the earth; and with its fall the shadow passed away. A light fell about her, and her hair shone in the sunrise.

Then tottering, struggling up, with her last strength she drove her sword between crown and mantle, as the great shoulders bowed before her. The sword broke sparkling into many shards. The crown rolled away with a clang. Éowyn fell forward upon her fallen foe. But lo! the mantle and hauberk were empty. Shapeless they lay now on the ground, torn and tumbled; and a cry went up into the shuddering air, and faded to a shrill wailing, passing with the wind, a voice bodiless and thin that died, and was swallowed up, and was never heard again in that age of this world.
So, was it Mery, who killed the Nazgul? No! It was Eowyn and this is how a prophecy had been fulfilled.
Speaking about prophecies, it also caught my attention that you oppose the opinions on the prophecy concerning Eowyn being the one destined to kill the Witch King. You stated several times that it is nonsense and a fact that is not true. That prophecies and the pre-ordained scenario of the fate of the Lord of the Nazgul was not an argument to be taken seriously into consideration. Not about Eowyn!!!
Yet you do accept the same prophecy and the same pre-ordained scenario related to Mary!
I don’t think so! And what I have just stated above proves that you are “shooting in the dark” just as to escape from the obvious truth.

The role of Eowyn in the utmost vital and important events in the War of the Ring is undisputable!

3/ …Mmmmm… where to find it…? Simply doesn’t exist!
(Ooops! Lhun is being sarcastic again! Sorry! It’s just my evil “wraith” nature”)

Well, in fact there were some more “arguments” provided by our opponents, but they were all most sensibly and solidly countered by us in the course of the debate, and I do not wish to go back and repeat them all over again – things like “Eowyn wishing her death because her mind was poisoned by Wormtongue, or that the poor Rohirrims [I]would have perished without Eowyn…
Not to speak of the obviously “favourite” one – about the wonder of Prince Imrahil at seeing Eowyn at the battlefirld!
This one, just like the one concerning the “debate-in-debate”-topic what a direct order is and is not, are so poor and irrelevant that I have decided to fully disregard them for them being of NO importance whatsoever.

Well, I think I have covered it all.

In conclusion and in addition to the wonderful closing post by my Team-mate Eol:

[i]1/ Was Eowyn right to go to war?

Yes! She was a true heir of the royal house of the Rohirrims and her place was where the ancient oath for friendship with Gondor summoned the leaders of Rohan.

2/ Did she disobey an order given by King Theoden?

No! There was no a direct order for her to stay back! She was demanded to secure the people and this is what she did and ONLY AFTER this she took her further decisions and actions.

So, Eowyn did what was right and it turned out the very right decision in the overall events at one of the most crucial stages of the War of the Ring.

Aulë

06-11-2003, 11:49 AM

Ah OK.
As the Tolkienologists' have been able to have an extra closing post, it only seems fair that the Periaur can too.

Firstly, Lhunithiliel has proven that she was in agreeance with Mrs. Maggott. Good- Now I can say that you are both wrong.

Lhunithiliel
The truth stays – and it is: Eowyn did not disobey a direct order of the king and moreover she completely fulfilled her task and her duties to her people before going to war! It was not some thoughtless impulsively taken decision out of some selfish caprice. Eowyn – a renown Queen among Queens, had done her best as to secure her people before, following the call of the oath that mattered to the royalties, as well as to the people of Rohan – the oath to be there to defend the friendship with Gondor.
As I showed before, Eowyn was still under the order to stay with the people when Theoden left for Gondor.

The Muster Of Rohan
The king turned to Merry. 'I am going to war, Master Meriadoc,' he said. 'In a little while I shall take the road. I release you from my service, but not from my friendship. You shall abide here, and if you will, you shall serve the Lady Éowyn, who will govern the folk in my stead.'
You say that Eowyn should fulfil the Oath of Eorl to go to the aid of Gondor?
Well she is breaking another oath in disobeying the King's orders, as she is sworn to the allegiance of Rohan, and has to do anything that the King wishes, even if that be sitting idle in Dunharrow. Merry and Pippin swore allegiance to Rohan and Gondor, and would have to leave their homeplace in the Shire if their King wished for it.
And Gondor obviously did not expect women to come to there aid because of the Oath of Eorl, considering their reaction when they discovered Eowyn at the Pelannor Fields.

Secondly, Lhun goes on to say that Hobbits are virtually Men, so therefore they couldn't kill the Witch King.
Phhht!
Hobbit's probably evolved from Men many thousands of years beforehand. They are no longer Men- they are Hobbits.
Minas Tirith
'I will vouch for him before the seat of De