Unfinished Tales...

Well dude, guessing from a statement about Eldarion being full-ripe for kingship combined with the exiled Numenorean tradition of this age translating to 21 years of age and basing it with Elessar's death gives an idea of the approximate time of his birth as S.R. 1520 or somewhere rounds a bouts.

Uh, oh!

But you need to help me out on this Numenorean tradtion. In my limited reading, I've never accounted it. And 21 sounds a little young to be "full-ripe for kingship!" I was worried that for a Numenorean, 58 would be too young!

It sounded too young to me, too, on first glance but consider that Aldarion from "Aldarion and Erendis" was said to be in his "full age" at 25. Did that make him full ripe for kingship at that same age? I don't think so. He wasn't proclaimed King's Heir for another 75 years, which put him at 100. I think that may be more in line with what the Numenoreans considered fully mature. This was when their life-span was longer (Aldarion lived to be 39 , so it might be reasonable to assume that the age of full maturity might occur younger later on. Aragorn was 88 when he became king. It it noted in Appendix A that Aragorn came early to manhood at age 20. He was seemingly old enough to take on Narsil at that point, but not the Sceptre of Annuminas, which he had to earn (and that was only after the War of the Ring).

Whoah there! I said EXILED Numenorean. With reduced lifespan. I based the figure upon when Valandil was accorded old enough to rule Arnor, and when Elrond deemed Aragorn old enough to know his true lineage. Those were positions of demonstration and age absolutes that seemed to register a man's acknolwledged maturity.

I think that Valandil was forced into it at an exceptionally early age! You must recall that Elendil and Isildur had died early and Arnor was waiting for a king, hardly the case with Eldarion.

I can't definitively say that Eldarion was NOT 21 or so, but it seems that 90 years or so is a long time to wait around before starting a family! And he had sisters. I presume Eldarion is first-born. Did Aragorn wait for old age to start his family, only to die leaving Arwen to pine to death, a boy in his tweens on the throne, with bereaved teenaged, or younger sisters as well as a kingdom on his hands? I can't get my arms around that.

90 years to start a family? Don't know about THAT! Hmm what could have Elessar been doing? I would say he was unifying the realm of Gondor with the aid of his bud Eomer and rebuilding Arnor as a good occupier for a bunch 'a time there. Why your presumption that he was first-born? Older sisters are most likely, and from the sounds of the text there were a few, especially if he was an only son and late coming; he needed a male heir. Sounds to me like the dude was tired. He's like; 'Ok, the kingdom's in order, you're of age now, you've got almost no enemies, I've trained you for most of your life, this is as good as I can give ya. Now get a job!' Can you explain why he would suddenly lay down his life trying to keep the Numenorean tradition of handing the sceptre over before dotage; as was the hallmark of the later reigns of the Numenorean kings, without continuing on as advisor and living with his hard-won queen without sufficient excuse? I may be wrong in the age, but it's based upon precedent and history of rulership rather than whimsy or desire. At most I would place him at the age of 50, but even that's a stretch for rationale. Eldarion wasn't a longer living dude. The gift of longer life wasn't returned. At the time of Aragorn II, the average lifespan of his line was about 150 years. He seems to have been an exception, clinging to life a little maybe? If so, one must ask why.

Actually, by your reckoning, a 21 year old Eldarion would mean Aragorn and Arwen waited 101 years (less 9 months!) before conceiving Eldarion...





...that's a long time by even Elvish standards.


I think that Eldarion was first because primogeniture seemed to be the rule among Numenoreans. Gondor may have departed from it, but I think Elessar would have restored the highest ways. I read a debate on this somewhere. Why should not the First Born be a Ruling Queen? Hence, his sisters were younger (and this dodges the issue!).

Of course, that's just a conjecture on my part.

BTW This ought to show you folks on the WOMEN thread where my heart really is on this sort of thing!

Yeah, and Elrond and Celebrian waited 130+ years, and Elwe and Melian waited anywhere from 500 to something like 7,000 years (all dependin on what conversion ya use) for the birth of Luthien. Wanna talk about elven standards some more? Try to remember this is Gondor, who have had male rulers as far back as they could remember. They even rejected the claims of Arvedui and Firiel on these grounds. Here's another interestin bit to mull over: why was Aragorn's death extended for 20 years? This number 20-or 21 dependin on circumstance-keeps poppin up. Strange huh? I ain't sayin I'm right, but I do seem to have some credibility for the idea and not wishful thinking. You believe him born whenever ya like, it ain't carved in stone. But circumstantial evidence is mountin.

>>It it noted in Appendix A that Aragorn came early to manhood at age 20. He was seemingly old enough to take on Narsil at that point, but not the Sceptre of Annuminas, which he had to earn (and that was only after the War of the Ring).<<

Look out dude, I was kinda like way bored today.

Eruve; I was using 'canon' evidence. 20-21 seems to be an age that is recognized. The thing he had to earn was the legitimate and recognized rule of the kingdoms. I think Elrond witheld it cause there wasn't any North Kingdom to rule. (Not countin the analogy to Elwe on the impossible task to win the fair maiden).

I flung out 50 too. This also was done for reason. Using non-canon material (namely the LOST ROAD Numenorean chapters) 50 is an age that is implied by Elendil for full manhood. Aldarion and Erendis recognizes 25 as you say. Correcto dude! Which do ya use? LOST ROAD is an old piece, done before LOTR. 's why I went with the 21 instead of 50 there dude, but didn't totally exclude it yaknow? Could one say ripe for kingship is 20-25 and full ripe is 50? Maybe. Is he older than 50? I like highly doubt that. Like I said earlier, 50 is a stretch, but one supported by at least SOME evidence. Some more supportin of the 50 mark is the lifespan of the line of Isildur at the time of 150 years or so, and the statement from Tolkien that Eldarion had AT LEAST a 100 year reign. All this still don't answer why Elessar didn't hang around like all the kings did before for the average 5-15 years as advisor unless SOMETHING fishy was goin on in the backplot since he was tryin to restore the old glory and grace to the kingship. Now what this does to the mixing up later of Aragorn's death and the fudging concerning 120, 110, 100, and 105 year differences if the matter wasn't of some importance is kinda interestin dontcha think? Let's see--only cause I was bored.

(note concerning placing NEW SHADOW around 220 years after fall will be addressed at the end)

Aragorn dies around 100 years after fall of Mordor. (accordin to first edition of LOTR and NEW SHADOW)
What this means:

The NEW SHADOW is strangely edited to state around 105 years had passed since Barad-dur went boom. To make Eldarion at least 20 at the time of Elessars' death he would have to be born around F.A. 80. (This coincidentally makes him 25 at the time the story takes place), but then Aragorn's death is moved 20 years later. What happens to Eldarion? Does his birth change as well? Or is it altered so that Eldarion can have the significance of the 100 year mark as a birthday point or does it remain the same? If not; then ol Eldy is around 45 and would look forward to a 100 year or so reign while being full-ripe for kingship as this would have been recognized when he was 20-21 (again we come back to the not commitin rule to Eldy earlier thing and passin on in true High Numunorean style, but that's questionable I suppose). If ya wanna keep the 45 or 50 year benchmark with the death of Elessar in 100 then Eldy would have had to have been born no earlier than F.A. 50 (now amended with Elessar's death to F.A. 70 unless ya want Eldy to be 170 or so when he croaks which isn't in keepin with the reduction of lifespan that is explicitly stated), but that don't explain the alteration to the years at all considerin it was originally written to begin 120 years after the fall. If it IS moved to the 100 year mark, then we have Eldy about 20-21 at the time of His dad's death. Ok, but then Tolkien writes it takes place around 220 years after the fall, bypassin the entire problem. Or does it? Borlas is the younger son of Beregrond. Could Borlas be alive at this time 220 years after the fall? The Steward Hador is stated to be the last man of HIGH Numenorean blood in Gondor to reach 150 years of age (the average at the time of LOTR was 120 years and another recurring number). This means that Borlas could NOT be born earlier than F.A. 70 and was most likely born around F.A. 100. Could Beregrond (assumin he was at least 20 and of HIGH Numenorean blood and already had a kid Bergil) have another kid when he was at minimum 90 years of age (and most likely 110 years at minimum)? Don't know. Does this year 220 hold up as a good date for the beginning of NEW SHADOW? Nope. Could the year 220 Have more importance as the END of the story? Most likely. Which of the above concerning Eldy's birth is correct? Your choice, it ain't carved in stone.

As you say, it ain't carved in stone.

Aragorn was already in his 80s at the time of the War. He knew that when children born then grew old, he too would grow old. I think that waiting an additional 101 years is a long time. And we are NOT talking about Elves who have ages to work with (I know, I mentioned that). There is also, I think, the pressures of succession that every kingdom knows. It doesn't seem prudent to wait until you are an elderly king to start a family. And we still have the matter of Eldarion's sisters. Would an elder sister necessarily sit by and let a 21 year old little brother take the throne just because he was a boy? Look at all the intrigues that surrounded the children of Henry VIII.

It just doesn't make any sense to delay that long and then leave a young grief stricken king to raise his teen and child sisters as well as manage a kingdom. There is no artistic or chronological need for this.

What I was really looking for was a definitive word, but I'm satisfied that there isn't one.

There seems to be a range of possible years here for Eldarion's birth. I see no reason to be bound by speculations that there was some hard fast rule about when to confer a kingship. I do not see that this speculation is supported and the reasons against a 21 year old High King are legion. In the natural course of things, this is an exception.

Aldarion's father handed over the crown earlier than he might have and this too was an exception. Aragorn may not have wished to linger around, if Eldarion was full ripe for kingship (and only a tweenager would think 20-25 is "ripe" much less "full ripe!"), and prefered to let him be clearly seen as King, not needing Daddy's hand behind the throne.

However, I cannot absolutely rule out this scenario. The office of Steward had been retained. But given Gondor's history of prefering a ruling Steward to a rightful king, would Aragorn have created a doubtful succession?

Aragorn left because he was old, and he deemed the time right. A long lived people would not think much of a 21 year old king, unless circumstances forced it. I think that Arwen and Aragorn were quite well in control of the matter and weren't caught by surprise, uh oh time to die, glad Eldarion is 21, he's full ripe for kingship! Hope he can hold it all together and marry his little sisters off!
Again, I think that the arguments against a 20 year old King are strong. The arguments against a 58 year old king are weak.


But it ain't carved in stone. I'm just looking for something that is not strongly or reasonably contradicted by the canon.

>>I'm just looking for something that is not strongly or reasonably contradicted by the canon.<<

Then you're fine. The original response was attempting to use canon. It only diverged to the possible age of around 50 when other sources were applied.

There is no absolute date here, only what can be inferred from historical precedent.

Waiting to start a family is positive, only the amount of time is speculation, as is the idea that the daughters of Elessar and Arwen were younger than Eldy. Again, not carved in stone. Has the line of Elros alwas had sons first? Nope. There were several daughters born first on many occasions. But if it works for your fan-fiction to have them born after, then go with it. Arguments against a 58 your old king? Dude, I was just showin logic and math on how this works. 50, 58, 45, 40, 20 it really doesn't matter that much. Is Eldy in his 80's or older? I hope I accomplished presenting facts that show he wasn't even near it. Some people believe Eldy was born immediately after the wedding. I've found that people believe whatever they wish to believe.

Speakin of belief; I think you inferred I was a 'tweenager'. Incorrect; but thanks for playin tho. Here's yer door prize:

Ancalime was proclaimed King's Heir (a recognition of maturity and adulthood and thus should anything happen to the king, be crowned) at the age of 19, and she was A HIGH Numenorean with one heck o' a lot more lifespan than poor Eldy or even Elessar who was 80ish cause that's when circumstances allowed him to fulfill Elrond's requirement, although I'm sure if he could have done so earlier, he would have.

Have fun with the fan-fiction dude.

Understood, but I point out again that Ancalime was NOT 19 when she took the throne (if I remember aright) and this was another exceptional situation. You've certainly proven that the throne could be held by a youngster! Though these young Heirs were not actually given the Throne, the succession being made clear at an early age indicates a regard for the competence of the individual Heir. (If not some dire situation where this is thrust upon them...)

Does this mean you are past your own tweens?
(Hope you didn't take offense!)

I lived through my own Tweens, but I'm still not sure I've recovered!

When I was 20, I knew everything.

When I was 22, I knew everything worth knowing.

When I was 24, there wasn't much worth knowing that I didn't know.

When I was 26, I saw that there were a few things I needed to learn.

When I was 28, I realized there was a lot I didn't know.

When I was 30, I knew that I knew virtually nothing.

And that's why they used to say "Don't trust anyone over 30!"

(Of course, all the folk who said that are now in their 50's.)


For what it's worth, I appreciate your advice and I'm pretty sure that 58 is right about in the middle range of possibility, and perhaps even on the upper end! I was thinking that 58 was young.

Saulotus, Eruve is already helping, but if you would like, take a look at the message board I've set up dealing with the story. There is an outline and a couple of chapters. I am mainly concerned that I'm not crossing any firmly established lines. If you're interested (and this goes for the rest of you) check it out.

Any one who doesn't want the story spoiled, and would rather wait, please do not follow this link.

THE HOBBITS
pub22.ezboard.com/fgreatadventuresfrm6

I am attempting a fusion of styles, between TH and LotR.

I looked. Pretty good fan-fiction so far. I have one small note for clarity tho; not sure if ya want it here or on your own board. What is the year exactly for the tri-centennial in the story? It appears to be placed in S.R. 1476. However calculations give S.R. 1479 aka F.A. 58 as the correct date. I can like see now why a younger Eldy would destroy the story (sort of. I still think the sisters were older, but n/m).

The only lines I can see that might be like 'blurred' are canon notes concerning the Shire-folk not celebrating Sept. 22. I don't really see too much of a problem with Samwise PERSONALLY throwing the celebration as seems to be the case, so that line seems to be ok (I think).

Oh and I think there's a whoops on Sam's age too. IIRC you have him aged 109 there somewhere. This is like 7 years after he sailed away dude.

And with that; I'll stop there.

Good luck dude. Oh; and don't trust me then.

That makes two of us he shouldn't trust. Another if you include Gil. himself, LOL.

War is too important to leave to generals.

Education is too important to leave to teachers.

Stories are too important to leave to writers.


Thanks for the help!

(And having said this, the important little hobbit proudly beamed.)