The Family of Gil-Galad

[MithLuin]

In other words, there is a difference between 'it just never happened' and there being rules saying 'it's strictly forbidden.' We're trying to figure out how to tell our story, how to show character motivations.

We know why the Numenoreans adopted the rule about Ruling Queens; we don't know if the Noldor would ever have done so. There really aren't going to be many stories where it is relevant - I'm thinking most of the story of Maeglin, who more-or-less sees himself as Turgon's heir (or would be, if Idril married him). The real place it matters, though, is in Galadriel's story. Galadriel winds up distancing herself from the Noldor. She moves to Doriath, becomes a pupil of Melian, and marries Celeborn. We know that one of her ambitions in leaving Valinor was to have a realm of her own (which happened in Lothlorien). Was her ambition frowned upon by the Noldor - so that her brother could found Nargothrond, but if she tried to do so, it wouldn't have worked? Is it possible that under no circumstances would the Noldor have accepted the concept of a Ruling Queen? Sure. It's one possible interpretation of the text that such an idea was foreign or unthinkable to them. It's just that it's not the only possible reading, so we were exploring alternatives that maintain what we do know about Noldoran High Kings without relying on that as a codified rule.

Keep in mind that 'oldest of the descendants of Finwë' is going to be Maedhros after Fingolfin's death. Getting Maedhros to agree that Fingon should be High King isn't too difficult. But we do have to be cautious with how we codify that rule. If Fingolfin is the oldest of the descendants of Finwë, and then Fingon is the oldest of the descendants of Fingolfin, that neatly cuts out the Fëanorean branch. But...then why Turgon? Why go back to 'oldest of the descendants of Fingolfin' when you're looking for Fingon's heir? And if you do exhaust the supply of descendants of Fingolfin, and go back to 'descendants of Finwë' when looking for Turgon's heir...that would make the Fëanorean branch of the family eligible again. Maedhros ceded to Fingolfin's claim, and we know that neither he nor any other Fëanorean ever became High King of the Noldor. But that doesn't mean that we can ignore them in the succession - we can't be sure that Maedhros would have ceded to Gil-galad's claim, for instance.

Unless, of course, Gil-galad becomes High King after the War of Wrath, in which case Maedhros is dead and Maglor is gone, leaving only Celebrimbor, whom we *know* acknowledged his High Kingship. As long as that makes sense in our story, we're alright.




Whether or not the Noldor had laws of succession is an open question. If they were a medieval human society, we would not only assume that they do, but have certain assumptions about what those rules would have to be. Preference for male, preference for the younger generation (rather than a brother or uncle), preference for older sons. But with elves, some of those assumptions don't seem to have a basis in the story. We are worldbuilding, here, so need to create rules that make sense for the situation the elves are in. Without a concept of 'old age', would they land on the same inheritance rules the kings of France did? For a culture embroiled in war, the 'but elves are immortal!' rule falls away - any High King could be killed in battle. So, having a plan for an heir can happen, and a preference for male heirs might make sense in that context. What is much iffier is the whole 'firstborn son' concept. Why? Why would they do that? Fëanor had a feud with his younger half-brothers, but the basis of that feud doesn't repeat in later families.

Certainly, the way the texts are written, the narrator assumes the concept of inheritance is understood. It seems natural that a king would have heirs, and it's not all that surprising that Fëanor named his eldest son 'Third Finwë' just to spitefully point out that Fingolfin isn't part of the line of succession, not being a 'true' son of Finwë. That was in Valinor, where no one ever had any reason to think that Finwë would someday die and need an heir. So, did they just come up with some rules of what would happen if Finwë were ever to step down or retire? Was that a thing kings could do? Was there some sort of ceremonial significance to being a king's heir that would not require the death of said king to be meaningful? Tolkien was certainly familiar with succession conflicts in European history and wrote some into his own stories (specifically with stories of Men: when an estranged king and queen of Numenor had only one daughter, Ar-Pharazon unlawfully seizing the throne after his marriage to Míriel, Arvedui's unsuccessful bid to claim the throne of Gondor, the Kinstrife, and even Eomer's inheritance from Thingol his uncle after the king's son Theodred died in battle, etc). But...does any of this make sense for immortal elves who can be slain? Assuring an heir you can pass everything on to is key to any mortal institution or endeavor, because none of us live very long. If you don't make some provision to pass the torch, your accomplishments end and die with you. But why would elves need that concept of 'heir'? I think that's a question our story should answer, even if the texts do not directly address that.

But with elves...why should they immediately go to male primogeniture? It took a lot of specific cases for humans to hammer out inheritance laws, and other than the distinction between children and adults, elves probably don't care overly much about age. There was no harm in having a king's brother inherit, as he would be just as likely to live as long as his son. Whereas when Fidel Castro named his brother as his heir, the world looked at him funny. Likewise with there being no problem with your great-grand-nephew being your heir. The general reasoning for not selecting a female as king is that you want your king to be able to lead the military, to be in the field during a battle. And certainly that is a concern for the Noldor during the First Age. Laws and Customs of the Eldar suggest that young unmarried women can be warriors, but that it would be unusual for a married woman with kids to participate in a battle.


Basically, I'm interested in thinking through the cultural logic of adopting Salic succession laws before assuming that the Noldor have done so. And I want to think about how whatever choices we make play out in our story, how we will present that to the audience.

 

[Faelivrin]

I have no idea what "Salic" even means.

But that doesn't mean that we can ignore them in the succession - we can't be sure that Maedhros would have ceded to Gil-galad's claim, for instance.

He didn't. One of the texts says he declared himself King of the Noldor after Turgon died. But none of the non-Feanorians wanted him as King of All Noldor, so in practice he wasn't.

Certainly, the way the texts are written, the narrator assumes the concept of inheritance is understood. It seems natural that a king would have heirs, and it's not all that surprising that Fëanor named his eldest son 'Third Finwë' just to spitefully point out that Fingolfin isn't part of the line of succession, not being a 'true' son of Finwë. That was in Valinor, where no one ever had any reason to think that Finwë would someday die and need an heir. So, did they just come up with some rules of what would happen if Finwë were ever to step down or retire? Was that a thing kings could do? Was there some sort of ceremonial significance to being a king's heir that would not require the death of said king to be meaningful?

I really think this was nothing more than Feanor being... peculiar. I imagine Nerdanel and her parents discretely rolling their eyes and even Finwe looking at Feanor kind of funny when he announced his son was going to be named Finwe the Third.

 

[MithLuin]

Salic Law, which included the idea that women could not inherit royal land under the Frankish king Clovis, was later used to stipulate that women could not inherit the throne of France. Also, their children could not inherit, either, so no distaff lines. This only applied to the throne, and not other aspects of inheritance. There are (of course) exceptions and variations in history.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salic_law


As for Fëanor - yeah, it was pure spite, or saying that was the rule he wanted it to be, not an actual rule among the Noldor. But perhaps they *did* have inheritance laws of some sort before Finwë's death - if so, we'd have to think of...why.

 

[Ange1e4e5]

Salic Law, which included the idea that women could not inherit royal land under the Frankish king Clovis, was later used to stipulate that women could not inherit the throne of France. Also, their children could not inherit, either, so no distaff lines. This only applied to the throne, and not other aspects of inheritance. There are (of course) exceptions and variations in history.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salic_law


As for Fëanor - yeah, it was pure spite, or saying that was the rule he wanted it to be, not an actual rule among the Noldor. But perhaps they *did* have inheritance laws of some sort before Finwë's death - if so, we'd have to think of...why.

Maybe have the eldest child regardless of gender?

 

[MithLuin]

Eldest child (male or female) = primogeniture

There are other laws where brothers split the inheritance, but obviously it's difficult to apply that to the kingship .

But for elves, the entire idea of 'inheritance' passing from parents to children has to be more or less invented from scratch.

The issue with straight primogeniture (oldest male or female child) is that Idril would clearly be Turgon's heir under that system.

 

[Ange1e4e5]

The issue with straight primogeniture (oldest male or female child) is that Idril would clearly be Turgon's heir under that system.

True.

 

[Faelivrin]

As for Fëanor - yeah, it was pure spite, or saying that was the rule he wanted it to be, not an actual rule among the Noldor. But perhaps they *did* have inheritance laws of some sort before Finwë's death - if so, we'd have to think of...why.

It's sort of implied that he might have had special rights or privileges as the King's firstborn. Maybe some ceremonial role. But I seriously doubt anybody but Feanor and perhaps Maedhros cared about degrees of descent from the King and giving extra privilegs to Maedhros. I can't imagine that actual death and succession crossed the mind of anybody, even Feanor.

Nah, this was just Curufinwe Feanaro telling the whole world that "Nolofinwe" and "Arafinwe" were illegitimate, ill-gotten bastards who didn't deserve the name Finwe, and didn't count as real Finwes. And he named his other six sons Finwe too. But maybe Nerdanel's good sense prevailed a little -- the rest of them got normal, non-political, non-spiteful prefixes.

And they all preferred their mother-names, except Curufin.

 

[cellardur]

In other words, there is a difference between 'it just never happened' and there being rules saying 'it's strictly forbidden.' We're trying to figure out how to tell our story, how to show character motivations.

We can speculate about why these things happen, but I think first we need to decide if this is the direction we want to go or if we want to change things. I can provide MY own personal theory of they the Noldor culture developed the way it did.

We know why the Numenoreans adopted the rule about Ruling Queens; we don't know if the Noldor would ever have done so. There really aren't going to be many stories where it is relevant - I'm thinking most of the story of Maeglin, who more-or-less sees himself as Turgon's heir (or would be, if Idril married him). The real place it matters, though, is in Galadriel's story. Galadriel winds up distancing herself from the Noldor. She moves to Doriath, becomes a pupil of Melian, and marries Celeborn. We know that one of her ambitions in leaving Valinor was to have a realm of her own (which happened in Lothlorien). Was her ambition frowned upon by the Noldor - so that her brother could found Nargothrond, but if she tried to do so, it wouldn't have worked? Is it possible that under no circumstances would the Noldor have accepted the concept of a Ruling Queen? Sure. It's one possible interpretation of the text that such an idea was foreign or unthinkable to them. It's just that it's not the only possible reading, so we were exploring alternatives that maintain what we do know about Noldoran High Kings without relying on that as a codified rule.

It's equally relevant in Idril's, Earendil's and Elrond's story. Not to mention Maedhros. As for Galadriel's first realm could possibly ben Eregion.

The boldest line is what I have an issue with. I understand Nicholas Palazzo's position. He thinks a modern audience would view the Noldor's rejection of a High-Queen as sexist and therefore we should look for more alternatives. It leaves no doubt of the intention of the group. Your statement of 'it not being the only possible reading' indicates we need to exam the text further and discuss which readings are the most probable, but that is not what the majority seem to have decided. There are many possible readings and the reading of the Noldor, rejecting a High-Queen is not one the majority want to use. So let's move on to what we want to put in the Silmfilm.

Keep in mind that 'oldest of the descendants of Finwë' is going to be Maedhros after Fingolfin's death. Getting Maedhros to agree that Fingon should be High King isn't too difficult. But we do have to be cautious with how we codify that rule. If Fingolfin is the oldest of the descendants of Finwë, and then Fingon is the oldest of the descendants of Fingolfin, that neatly cuts out the Fëanorean branch. But...then why Turgon? Why go back to 'oldest of the descendants of Fingolfin' when you're looking for Fingon's heir? And if you do exhaust the supply of descendants of Fingolfin, and go back to 'descendants of Finwë' when looking for Turgon's heir...that would make the Fëanorean branch of the family eligible again. Maedhros ceded to Fingolfin's claim, and we know that neither he nor any other Fëanorean ever became High King of the Noldor. But that doesn't mean that we can ignore them in the succession - we can't be sure that Maedhros would have ceded to Gil-galad's claim, for instance.

Unless, of course, Gil-galad becomes High King after the War of Wrath, in which case Maedhros is dead and Maglor is gone, leaving only Celebrimbor, whom we *know* acknowledged his High Kingship. As long as that makes sense in our story, we're alright.

The Maedhros claim should be a matter of contention. The majority of the Noldor just crossed over with Fingolfin. Whether Maedhros meant to give up the Feanorian claim or not, that's what it is taken as.

For Maedhros begged forgiveness for the desertion in Araman; and he waived his claim to kingship over all the Noldor, saying to Fingolfin: 'If there lay no grievance between us, lord, still the kingship would rightly come to you, the eldest here of the house of Finwë, and not the least wise.' But to this his brothers did not all in their hearts agree.
Therefore even as Mandos foretold the House of Fëanor were called the Dispossessed, because the over-lordship passed from it, the elder, to the house of Fingolfin, both in Elendë and in Beleriand, and because also of the loss of the Silmarils. But the Noldor being again united set a watch upon the borders of Dor Daedeloth, and Angband was beleaguered from west, and south, and east; and they sent forth messengers far and wide to explore the countries of Beleriand, and to treat with the people that dwelt there.

The problem the Feanorians have, is that none of the other brothers can make a claim, whilst Maedhros the oldest son and their leader does not. The implication in Maedhros response seems to be the 'Eldest of the House of Finwe' gets the kingship. Consequently after the death of Fingon, it would make sense that kingship passes to the next oldest rather than Gil-galad, but all this is solved if we just make Gil-galad Orodreth's son. I don't think some Feanorians ever stop arguing they should be the High Kings.

Whether or not the Noldor had laws of succession is an open question. If they were a medieval human society, we would not only assume that they do, but have certain assumptions about what those rules would have to be. Preference for male, preference for the younger generation (rather than a brother or uncle), preference for older sons. But with elves, some of those assumptions don't seem to have a basis in the story. We are worldbuilding, here, so need to create rules that make sense for the situation the elves are in. Without a concept of 'old age', would they land on the same inheritance rules the kings of France did? For a culture embroiled in war, the 'but elves are immortal!' rule falls away - any High King could be killed in battle. So, having a plan for an heir can happen, and a preference for male heirs might make sense in that context. What is much iffier is the whole 'firstborn son' concept. Why? Why would they do that? Fëanor had a feud with his younger half-brothers, but the basis of that feud doesn't repeat in later families.

Just the mere possibility of younger sons fighting over the throne is reason enough to invent some laws of inheritance. The Noldor as a whole don't really have a problem rejecting leaders, but part of the problems arise is because Finwe couldn't (be expected to) and didn't leave a clear heir. After the mess that happens with Feanor and Fingolfin fighting over the kingship, it's enough for the Noldor to decide they need a clear code, to stop this possible infighting occurring again. The argument could easily be made that the Noldor would have been more united if they had a clear successor.

I also don't think there has to be preference for the 'Younger Generation.' The reason the 'younger generation inherit is twofold.
1. This is unpopular, but we have seen that Elvish children often inherit qualities of their parents. So a son/daughter is more likely to have the same leadership qualities as the parent.
2. The child is educated by the parent and grows up in the household. The primary source of knowledge will be ones parents. An elf raised by a king is going to grow up knowing what it means to be king. From a pragmatic point, they will have an invaluable experience.

The preference for an older son/child is a pragmatic and logical decision, which goes back to the issue of conflict. Brothers will fight over the kingship often in real time and it is much worse when there is no clear succession. If the next heir was merely chosen by the king then it could lead to siblings fighting to be the favourite and heir. Fingolfin ad Feanor were bad enough, without knowing they were competing to be the next king. Having the eldest son be the heir, reduces the risk of future conflict. If Feanor had his way, he may have chosen Curufin as his heir (though possibly not, because it would weaken his own claim), but this could lead to infighting.

Those are some practical reasons an Elvish society would codify the succession and non more so than the Noldor, who unlike most Elvish groups, have actually seen the conflict a lack of an heir can bring. If any Elvish group were to have a clear succession plan and hammer out the details it would be the Noldor. They would not want the repeat of Fingolfin/Feanor.

Certainly, the way the texts are written, the narrator assumes the concept of inheritance is understood. It seems natural that a king would have heirs, and it's not all that surprising that Fëanor named his eldest son 'Third Finwë' just to spitefully point out that Fingolfin isn't part of the line of succession, not being a 'true' son of Finwë. That was in Valinor, where no one ever had any reason to think that Finwë would someday die and need an heir. So, did they just come up with some rules of what would happen if Finwë were ever to step down or retire? Was that a thing kings could do? Was there some sort of ceremonial significance to being a king's heir that would not require the death of said king to be meaningful? Tolkien was certainly familiar with succession conflicts in European history and wrote some into his own stories (specifically with stories of Men: when an estranged king and queen of Numenor had only one daughter, Ar-Pharazon unlawfully seizing the throne after his marriage to Míriel, Arvedui's unsuccessful bid to claim the throne of Gondor, the Kinstrife, and even Eomer's inheritance from Thingol his uncle after the king's son Theodred died in battle, etc). But...does any of this make sense for immortal elves who can be slain? Assuring an heir you can pass everything on to is key to any mortal institution or endeavor, because none of us live very long. If you don't make some provision to pass the torch, your accomplishments end and die with you. But why would elves need that concept of 'heir'? I think that's a question our story should answer, even if the texts do not directly address that.

There doesn't seem to be any concept of an heir in a meaningful sense before war and death. As said above, it's Finwe's death and the confusion over the succession that would drive the Noldor to come together and decide on how to proceed.

But with elves...why should they immediately go to male primogeniture? It took a lot of specific cases for humans to hammer out inheritance laws, and other than the distinction between children and adults, elves probably don't care overly much about age. There was no harm in having a king's brother inherit, as he would be just as likely to live as long as his son. Whereas when Fidel Castro named his brother as his heir, the world looked at him funny. Likewise with there being no problem with your great-grand-nephew being your heir. The general reasoning for not selecting a female as king is that you want your king to be able to lead the military, to be in the field during a battle. And certainly that is a concern for the Noldor during the First Age. Laws and Customs of the Eldar suggest that young unmarried women can be warriors, but that it would be unusual for a married woman with kids to participate in a battle.

I have addressed possible reasons why primogeniture is preferable.

One possible reason Salic Law would be applicable in ONLY times of war is as follows.

A leader of his people should be the first to sacrifice for his people. This is the Christian theology, which Tolkien tries hard to make his world consistent with. I know they have different views on a number of things, but this C.S.Lewis quote from the Narnia Chronicles always struck me what a king should be.

"For this is what it means to be a king: to be first in every desperate attack and last in every desperate retreat, and when there's hunger in the land (and must be now and then in bad years) to wear finer clothes and laugh louder over a scantier meal than any man in your land."

In the LOTR we see Aragorn and Faramir show this attitude. This is contrasted with Denethor and Sauron's attitude.

'He will not come save only to triumph over me when all is won. He uses others as his weapons. So do all great lords, if they are wise, Master Halfling. Or why should I sit here in my tower and think, and watch, and wait, spending even my sons? For I can still wield a brand.'

In times of war and times of war ONLY, the Noldor could want their leader to be on the battlefield not only to inspire and lead, but to follow the example of previous kings. Ingwe, Finwe and Elwe became kings, because they had the courage to make the sacrifice for their people. They took the risk first and led. The Noldor could quite easily feel that a leader should be doing the same. So any leader in this time of war would have to be on the battle front.

I didn't read Laws and Customs as saying unmarried elves can be warriors. I thought the text suggested ALL elvish women could be warriors. Just that in the case of elvish woman that HAD NOT borne children, the difference in strength between the genders was much smaller than humans. Tolkien stresses that both Elvish genders are physically capable of doing any occupation, but they have tendencies to choose specific roles. So elvish woman even elvish women that had never had children, did not become warriors, but were capable of fighting fiercely when needed.

There are, however, no matters which among the Eldar only a ner can think or do, or others with which only a nis is concerned. There are indeed some differences between the natural inclinations of neri and nissi, and other differences that have been established by custom (varying in place and in time, and in the several races of the Eldar). For instance, the arts of healing, and all that touches on the care of the body, are among all the Eldar most practised by the nissi; whereas it was the elven-men who bore arms at need. And the Eldar deemed that the dealing of death, even when lawful or under necessity, diminished the power of healing, and that the virtue of the nissi in this matter was due rather to their abstaining from hunting or war than to any special power that went with their womanhood. Indeed in dire straits or desperate defence, the nissi fought valiantly, and there was less difference in strength and speed between elven-men and elven-women that had not borne child than is seen among mortals. On the other hand many elven-men were great healers and skilled in the lore of living bodies, though such men abstained from hunting, and went not to war until the last need.

Since it was 'the elven-men who bore arms at need,' it makes sense for the Noldor to want their kings to be like Finwe and making a sacrifice for the people. When the debates about the succession are going on, they could quite easily conclude that in this war time, the High King should be a warrior, which was the main priority at the moment. When Morgoth had been defeated and peace established they could return to Absolute Primogeniture.

Basically, I'm interested in thinking through the cultural logic of adopting Salic succession laws before assuming that the Noldor have done so. And I want to think about how whatever choices we make play out in our story, how we will present that to the audience.

From what I am seeing the decision of the majority is to find another solution.

EDIT

This would also be a Noldor only issue. The Sindar have a different history and seem to have very, very different ideas on succession and the role of the king. The High King of the Noldor says something and he is ignored. When Elwe made statements the Sindar obeyed.

 

[amysrevenge]

Sons fighting over the Noldor kingship: never happened.

Feanor was spoiling for a fight but never got one (Fingolfin preemptively conceded before the fight could even start).

Maedhros similarly concedes before it becomes a fight.

Nobody else ever fought over it later on. As far as we know, every single succession from Finwe to Gil-Galad was accepted peacefully (maybe grudgingly in some cases, at worst) by all.

ETA: I suppose, had he lived a bit longer, Maeglin might have done some fighting. But he didn't.

 

[cellardur]

Sons fighting over the Noldor kingship: never happened.

Feanor was spoiling for a fight but never got one (Fingolfin preemptively conceded before the fight could even start).

Maedhros similarly concedes before it becomes a fight.

Nobody else ever fought over it later on. As far as we know, every single succession from Finwe to Gil-Galad was accepted peacefully (maybe grudgingly in some cases, at worst) by all.

ETA: I suppose, had he lived a bit longer, Maeglin might have done some fighting. But he didn't.

I don't mean a physical fight, but there seems to be a lot of conflict. It may be heresy here, but Fingolfin doesn't appear to be humbly accepting Feanor as King.

And indeed when Fëanor began the marshalling of the Noldor for their setting-out, then at once dissension arose. For though he had brought the assembly in a mind to depart, by no means all were of a mind to take Fëanor as King. Greater love was given to Fingolfin and his sons, and his household and the most part of the dwellers in Tirion refused to renounce him, if he would go with them; and thus at the last as two divided hosts the Noldor set forth upon their bitter road.

The Noldor for the most part don't accept Feanor as their king and want Fingolfin instead, which is one of the reasons I keep saying the Noldor are a really headstrong bunch.

Tolkien would later add in the Shibboleth, that Fingolfin never gave up his claim to be the king of the Noldor. However as Christopher would point out Fingolfin also says 'Thou shalt lead and I shall follow.'

It's hard to interpret the text, but the questions have to be asked why didn't Fingolfin tell his followers to accept Feanor as king?

 

[Ange1e4e5]

I don't mean a physical fight, but there seems to be a lot of conflict. It may be heresy here, but Fingolfin doesn't appear to be humbly accepting Feanor as King.

And indeed when Fëanor began the marshalling of the Noldor for their setting-out, then at once dissension arose. For though he had brought the assembly in a mind to depart, by no means all were of a mind to take Fëanor as King. Greater love was given to Fingolfin and his sons, and his household and the most part of the dwellers in Tirion refused to renounce him, if he would go with them; and thus at the last as two divided hosts the Noldor set forth upon their bitter road.

The Noldor for the most part don't accept Feanor as their king and want Fingolfin instead, which is one of the reasons I keep saying the Noldor are a really headstrong bunch.

Tolkien would later add in the Shibboleth, that Fingolfin never gave up his claim to be the king of the Noldor. However as Christopher would point out Fingolfin also says 'Thou shalt lead and I shall follow.'

It's hard to interpret the text, but the questions have to be asked why didn't Fingolfin tell his followers to accept Feanor as king?

A vision from Mandos saying that he’ll have to take the mantle soon?...

 

[Faelivrin]

Tolkien would later add in the Shibboleth, that Fingolfin never gave up his claim to be the king of the Noldor. However as Christopher would point out Fingolfin also says 'Thou shalt lead and I shall follow.'

I like the Shibboleth version too, but it got outvoted in favor of “Thou shalt lead and I shall follow.” So in the episode outlines, Fingolfin submits to Feanor’s leadership (albeit with some grumbling) and doesn’t claim the Kingship until he learns that Feanor burned the ships. His followers prefer him to declare himself earlier, but they can’t make him. (I think we depicted Turgon urging him to contest Feanor earlier?)

The problem the Feanorians have, is that none of the other brothers can make a claim, whilst Maedhros the oldest son and their leader does not. The implication in Maedhros response seems to be the 'Eldest of the House of Finwe' gets the kingship. Consequently after the death of Fingon, it would make sense that kingship passes to the next oldest rather than Gil-galad, but all this is solved if we just make Gil-galad Orodreth's son. I don't think some Feanorians ever stop arguing they should be the High Kings.

I agree that some of Maedhros' brothers never stop wanting their House to lead/rule, and that they can’t do anything about it as long as Maedhros is in charge of them.

Maedhros’ declaration that Fingolfin would be King anyway, because he’s eldest, could be interpreted as a law — either one he establishes, or one that was in place already. But, I don’t think that’s the case. I think he was just making up an excuse that sounded good, to do something he was planning to do anyway. Fingolfin’s followers were planning to reject Maedhros’ claim anyway, regardless of what he said. It looks to me like the Noldor (nobility) all just wanted to pick whichever person they considered best qualified — the way Tolkien writes about it has consistently indicated to me that there was no prior law in place. In the Grey Annals it’s described more like an election.

If Maedhros were establishing a law (and the other Noldor accepted it) then according to how he worded it, he would be King after Fingolfin instead of Fingon. But, that didn’t happen.

Just the mere possibility of younger sons fighting over the throne is reason enough to invent some laws of inheritance.

I don’t think that's necessarily the case. Feanor and Fingolfin were a bad deal, and Fingolfin and Maedhros could have been just as bad. But Fingon and Turgon weren’t inclined to argue or fight each other over this. The Noldor could reasonably expect Maedhros not to argue with Fingon over it, either. And during the Siege, I think that most of the Noldor didn’t expect to be defeated or to lose Fingolfin.

If Maedhros hadn’t abdicated and Fingolfin had been chosen only after a bitter feud, then I think many Noldor would have wanted to codify a fixed law ... and maybe they’d be unable to agree on one.

Turgon before Gil-galad is simpler if Gil-galad is Orodreth’s son (and I’d prefer that), but he was probably too young anyway during the Nirnaeth Arnoediad. Especially if he’s Orodreth’s son — I think the Narn has a bit that implies he can’t be older than Finduilas.

If you prefer, we could maybe show a scene where Maedhros privately assures Fingolfin that he won’t contest a claim from Fingolfin’s House. He contests Gil-galad later, because he’s Orodreth’s son.

One possible reason Salic Law would be applicable in ONLY times of war is as follows.

In warfare, yes, the Noldor are going to prefer a High King or Queen who can and will lead in battle, and do it well. That usually means men and not women, but just as there are some men who don’t fight until the last resort, I imagine that there are probably some women who do fight in war. Women not fighting is a generality, but so is women not hunting, and we know Aredhel was an exception to that. I can’t recall any Elven law against women going to battle, whereas I think in some medieval European countries a woman who was caught on the battlefield was in trouble. So I don’t think they would have a codified law forbidding rule by women either. Rather, they’d have a marked preference for warriors, which in practice would almost always mean a male ruler.

This likely makes Idril less of a candidate, or is a reason for her to decline, since she’s apparently not a warrior. It might make Celebrimbor less of a candidate, though we don’t know much about him.

But I don’t think it would rule out Galadriel. She didn’t partake in the warfare against Morgoth (or, not much), but I don’t think that was from a lack of drive or talent, or even inclination. She preferred to live in Doriath instead of the north where the main front was, and (possibly due to tutelage from Melian) realized that active warfare against Morgoth was mostly futile. But I expect that she was a more active participant than Elrond in the fighting during the Last Alliance, and I think she also fought in the earlier war(s) against Sauron. Tolkien considered her enough inclined to fight that he said in a few different texts (starting with the Shibboleth) that she fought against the Feanorians at Alqualonde. We didn’t use that (I would have preferred it) but it is a valid indication of her character as somebody inclined to fight in battle, when she thinks it’s not futile.

 

[amysrevenge]

Someone else already said it somewhere, but the main primary #1 succession plan seems to be "if we don't talk about it out loud, hopefully the current King will live forever".

 

[MithLuin]

In this project, we have shown several women entering into battle at the Kinslaying.

Earwen, daughter of Olwë and wife of Finarfin, fights on the side of the Teleri, commanding their archers.
Irimë, Fingolfin's sister, is by his side and fights with him, until she is shot down and killed.
Galadriel is present with the host of Fingolfin, and did not stay behind with Finarfin's host. She does not fight, but she is armed and there. She devotes her efforts to finding/saving her mother Earwen from the fighting.

So, from the point of view of the Silm Film, Noldorin women can and do fight in battles. Keep in mind that warfare (as a concept) is very new to the elves. They've never had one before!

 

[cellardur]

Someone else already said it somewhere, but the main primary #1 succession plan seems to be "if we don't talk about it out loud, hopefully the current King will live forever".

This is an idea I really am not in favour of. It makes the Noldor look like bumbling fools with their heads in the clouds. Finwe was killed, Feanor was killed and then Fingolfin was killed. The Noldor High-King seems to often be right in the vanguard. Morgoth has set a huge bounty on the head of the High-King and they are constantly at war. It's almost something from the historical comedy TV show Blackadder.

In this project, we have shown several women entering into battle at the Kinslaying.

Earwen, daughter of Olwë and wife of Finarfin, fights on the side of the Teleri, commanding their archers.
Irimë, Fingolfin's sister, is by his side and fights with him, until she is shot down and killed.
Galadriel is present with the host of Fingolfin, and did not stay behind with Finarfin's host. She does not fight, but she is armed and there. She devotes her efforts to finding/saving her mother Earwen from the fighting.

So, from the point of view of the Silm Film, Noldorin women can and do fight in battles. Keep in mind that warfare (as a concept) is very new to the elves. They've never had one before!

Well I guess this is a case of one change causing an avalanche. We are now going to have Noldor women in all the battles and either explain reasons why Idril, Finduilas and Galadriel (in the future doesn't fight) or give some believable reason for why the Noldor women suddenly stopped going to wars. This will have implications regarding Arwen too. It's going to look strange for her not to ride with the Grey Company, when most her family have fought previous

I like the Shibboleth version too, but it got outvoted in favor of “Thou shalt lead and I shall follow.” So in the episode outlines, Fingolfin submits to Feanor’s leadership (albeit with some grumbling) and doesn’t claim the Kingship until he learns that Feanor burned the ships. His followers prefer him to declare himself earlier, but they can’t make him. (I think we depicted Turgon urging him to contest Feanor earlier?)

I agree that some of Maedhros' brothers never stop wanting their House to lead/rule, and that they can’t do anything about it as long as Maedhros is in charge of them.

Well it has been decided.

Maedhros’ declaration that Fingolfin would be King anyway, because he’s eldest, could be interpreted as a law — either one he establishes, or one that was in place already. But, I don’t think that’s the case. I think he was just making up an excuse that sounded good, to do something he was planning to do anyway. Fingolfin’s followers were planning to reject Maedhros’ claim anyway, regardless of what he said. It looks to me like the Noldor (nobility) all just wanted to pick whichever person they considered best qualified — the way Tolkien writes about it has consistently indicated to me that there was no prior law in place. In the Grey Annals it’s described more like an election.

If Maedhros were establishing a law (and the other Noldor accepted it) then according to how he worded it, he would be King after Fingolfin instead of Fingon. But, that didn’t happen.

I don’t think that's necessarily the case. Feanor and Fingolfin were a bad deal, and Fingolfin and Maedhros could have been just as bad. But Fingon and Turgon weren’t inclined to argue or fight each other over this. The Noldor could reasonably expect Maedhros not to argue with Fingon over it, either. And during the Siege, I think that most of the Noldor didn’t expect to be defeated or to lose Fingolfin.

If Maedhros hadn’t abdicated and Fingolfin had been chosen only after a bitter feud, then I think many Noldor would have wanted to codify a fixed law ... and maybe they’d be unable to agree on one.

Turgon before Gil-galad is simpler if Gil-galad is Orodreth’s son (and I’d prefer that), but he was probably too young anyway during the Nirnaeth Arnoediad. Especially if he’s Orodreth’s son — I think the Narn has a bit that implies he can’t be older than Finduilas.

If you prefer, we could maybe show a scene where Maedhros privately assures Fingolfin that he won’t contest a claim from Fingolfin’s House. He contests Gil-galad later, because he’s Orodreth’s son.

It could be done, but again it brings us to needed to decide on Gil-galad's parentage.

In warfare, yes, the Noldor are going to prefer a High King or Queen who can and will lead in battle, and do it well. That usually means men and not women, but just as there are some men who don’t fight until the last resort, I imagine that there are probably some women who do fight in war. Women not fighting is a generality, but so is women not hunting, and we know Aredhel was an exception to that. I can’t recall any Elven law against women going to battle, whereas I think in some medieval European countries a woman who was caught on the battlefield was in trouble. So I don’t think they would have a codified law forbidding rule by women either. Rather, they’d have a marked preference for warriors, which in practice would almost always mean a male ruler.

This likely makes Idril less of a candidate, or is a reason for her to decline, since she’s apparently not a warrior. It might make Celebrimbor less of a candidate, though we don’t know much about him.

But I don’t think it would rule out Galadriel. She didn’t partake in the warfare against Morgoth (or, not much), but I don’t think that was from a lack of drive or talent, or even inclination. She preferred to live in Doriath instead of the north where the main front was, and (possibly due to tutelage from Melian) realized that active warfare against Morgoth was mostly futile. But I expect that she was a more active participant than Elrond in the fighting during the Last Alliance, and I think she also fought in the earlier war(s) against Sauron. Tolkien considered her enough inclined to fight that he said in a few different texts (starting with the Shibboleth) that she fought against the Feanorians at Alqualonde. We didn’t use that (I would have preferred it) but it is a valid indication of her character as somebody inclined to fight in battle, when she thinks it’s not futile.

We have discussed this before, but the text implies the complete opposite. Elrond was the general in charge of fighting Sauron for most of the Second Age and the general left in the east to be the first to fight Sauron. Elrond also fought with Gil-galad right up to his end and death. Only Isildur and Cirdan were there. Either way that is topic.

The battle at Alqualonde is the only time we hear of Galadriel fighting in the books and that was a desperate situation.

As things stand it makes more sense for Idril and Galadriel to both be warriors.

I changed my mind about Gil-galad being Orodreth's son. It makes more sense for Turgon to never be an official High-King, but a caretaker to the throne. Gil-galad can be Fingon's son. Turgon is just ACTING High-King, but never officially claims the the title, he is looking after the throne for Fingon's heir Gil-galad. In that way Idril, Galadriel and Earendil are never ever in the succession.

However, without the conflict between brothers, why do the Noldor decide it's best to make the eldest child inherit?

 

[Faelivrin]

As far as I know, we have not decided that all or most women fight. It has been decided that some women fight. As far as I know, they're the minority, just as male healers are the minority among men. I don't think it's likely that Idril or Aredhel were ever warriors. Luthien, Finduilas, and Arwen clearly are not. In this project Irime fights, but dies at Alqualonde and is never a candidate for the crown. But we don't show Aredhel fighting at Alqualonde or even being present with those who do fight (unlike Galadriel).

 

[cellardur]

In this project, we have shown several women entering into battle at the Kinslaying.

Earwen, daughter of Olwë and wife of Finarfin, fights on the side of the Teleri, commanding their archers.
Irimë, Fingolfin's sister, is by his side and fights with him, until she is shot down and killed.
Galadriel is present with the host of Fingolfin, and did not stay behind with Finarfin's host. She does not fight, but she is armed and there. She devotes her efforts to finding/saving her mother Earwen from the fighting.

So, from the point of view of the Silm Film, Noldorin women can and do fight in battles. Keep in mind that warfare (as a concept) is very new to the elves. They've never had one before!

From MithLuin's statement it seems it might be an overstatement to say most, but a good percentage of Noldor women do fight.

As far as I know, we have not decided that all or most women fight. It has been decided that some women fight. As far as I know, they're the minority, just as male healers are the minority among men. I don't think it's likely that Idril or Aredhel were ever warriors. Luthien, Finduilas, and Arwen clearly are not. In this project Irime fights, but dies at Alqualonde and is never a candidate for the crown. But we don't show Aredhel fighting at Alqualonde or even being present with those who do fight (unlike Galadriel).

Ironically it seems Aredhel is the most likely out of all the Noldor princesses to ride to battle. She is fearless,but then so are all the royal family, she is headstrong, reckless, from the warrior House of Fingolfin, seeking adventure and a friend of Celegorm. My interpretation is that she is already used to killing and hunting with Celegorm.

In the Silmfilm Idril will be just a child at this point so can't fight, though she will fight Maeglin to defend Earendil later on.

Every notable Noldor princess (whether by marriage or nor) at Alqualonde, except Aredhel will be fighting.

To keep the story consistent either we need to continue to have Noldor royalty fight or come up with an explanation why they suddenly stop.

 

[Faelivrin]

Actually of the 13 princesses associated with Tirion and Formenos the script outlines only show 3 choosing to get involved in Alqualonde. Aredhel, Nerdanel, Anaire, Eldalote, Maglor’s wife, Caranthir’s wife, Curufin’s wife, Elenwe, Indis, and Findis do not go there. Only Irime, Earwen, and Galadriel get involved in the fight. 3 out of 13. Of those 3, only Galadriel makes it to Middle-earth. Galadriel is not the majority of the princesses or of the women. She is one person. And we have not decided whether she stops fighting in Middle-earth.

In the last podcast, the Hosts laughed at the idea of Luthien with a sword.

There is a big middle ground between “all princesses are always warriors” and “women never are warriors.”


To return to the topic, without a law banning woman warriors, it would not make sense to outlaw woman rulers.

The Noldor do not need to have succession laws at all. The canonical Noldorin succession is too inconsistent to be law-based, which is why we can’t agree what law could describe it. That is: neither primogeniture nor "the Eldest here of the House of Finwe" could justify Fingolfin's claim while Feanor lives, and neither law can explain the entire sequence Finwe > Feanor > Fingolfin > Fingon.

 

[cellardur]

Aredhel, Nerdanel, Anaire, Eldalote, Maglor’s wife, Caranthir’s wife, Curufin’s wife, Elenwe, Indis, and Findis do not fight. Only Irime, Earwen, and Galadriel fight. 3 out of 13. Only Galadriel makes it to Middle-earth. Galadriel is not the majority of the princesses or of the women. She is one person. And we have not decided that she stops fighting in Middle-earth.

There is a very vast middle ground between “all princesses are always warriors” and “there is a law banning women from battle.”

Nerdanel was not there, Edalote was not there, Anaire was not there, Indis was not there, Findis was not there and Curufin's wife was not there. You can't use examples of princesses that decided to stay in Valinor and in most cases were aghast with the decision to leave. I repeat what I wrote before:

Every notable Noldor princess (whether by marriage or nor) at Alqualonde, except Aredhel will be fighting.

We know nothing about Maglor and Caranthir's wives. Has a decision even been made about them? Are they part of the script?

As for Galadriel, I never said we've decided anything about her. According to my knowledge, I don't think there is any reference to Galadriel ever fighting in a battle except against Feanor. She is mentioned as organising defences and planning for the war to come with Sauron, but in the many versions of her story, never again does she fight.

 

[MithLuin]

Okay, so...Anaire is in that episode. She likely goes with Fingolfin as far as Alqualondë to see him off.

So, IN OUR ADAPTATION, Earwen, Anarie, Irime, Galadriel, Aredhel, and Elenwë all have opportunity to be involved in the fighting at Alqualondë. Aredhel, Anairë, and Elenwë all stay back in the camp (as does Finarfin and all of his sons). Aredhel's reason for sitting out the fight was most likely because she got lost somewhere on the way from Tirion to Alqualondë. Half of the noble women of the Noldor taking part in very much unplanned fighting does not mean that they would become warriors in an officially organized army later.

Galadriel is most certainly involved in taking down Dol Guldor. I would not say that never again does she fight. But for what it's worth, she doesn't fight at Alqualondë, either. She's there, and she's armed, but she dives into the water to rescue her mother rather than take part in any fighting. Later in life, her magical powers would be more formidable than her skill as a warrior, I would think. She's Melian's pupil. Here, she is young. She's allowed to develop as a character.

I said that we have depicted women fighting. I did not say that all women fight, nor did I claim that we would be establishing a culture of warrior princesses. Nor will we be depicting women who don't fight as weak or cowardly.

This is an idea I really am not in favour of. It makes the Noldor look like bumbling fools with their heads in the clouds. Finwe was killed, Feanor was killed and then Fingolfin was killed. The Noldor High-King seems to often be right in the vanguard. Morgoth has set a huge bounty on the head of the High-King and they are constantly at war. It's almost something from the historical comedy TV show Blackadder.

I understand your distaste. Rules of succession are such a big deal to any monarchy, it would seem almost absurd not to have them. But...

While it is true that Finwë was killed and then Fëanor was killed ... it was 455 years later when Fingolfin died. That's longer than almost any human dynasty I can think of (the earliest Chinese dynasties come to mind). It might seem just as absurd to the Noldor to plan for an eventuality that may not come to pass for centuries, as anticipating the situation on the ground at that time would be quite difficult. Wouldn't a system of convening a council at the time it was needed be deemed more prudent when there can be such a long gap between kings?

Also...it's not the worst system ever. The College of Cardinals convenes at the death of a pope to select a new one from amongst their own ranks. That system seems to be working fairly well. Conclave is not the worst way to choose a successor. There can be strict rules about who is eligible to participate in the conclave, or who is able to call a conclave, or the manner in which elections are carried out...

...all without there being any strict rules in place for the role heredity plays in the selection of the next leader.

Also...why is the crown desirable? Typically, it's worth it to be king because of the consolidated power and the ability to collect wealth from the entire country. The title of High King among the Noldor in Beleriand doesn't seem to have worked in quite that way. You can be lord of your own land without ever being High King, and still exercise nearly absolute authority. So....perhaps the Noldor do not anticipate bloody kinstrife fighting for the crown. It might not seem that impressive a prize. Useful for planning a united offensive against Morgoth, but other than that...


We will have plenty of opportunities to emphasize a hereditary kingship among Mortals. I'm fine with doing something a little different (though not too radical) amongst the Noldor.