Discussing: When Myth clashes with RealWorld: Eowyn - Prince Faramir (son of King Ondoher): mythical heros or duty shirkers ?
When Myth clashes with RealWorld: Eowyn - Prince Faramir (son of King Ondoher): mythical heros or duty shirkers ?
elanor of aquitania
Message: 40571
22 Apr 05 7:17 PM
Original Post
General Audience
Read-Only
Message: 40571
22 Apr 05 7:17 PM
Original Post
General Audience
Read-Only
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Best wishes
Elanor
##################################################
perhaps in his fifties or even sixties at the time of the War of the Ring
Hi Marta,
'fifties' 'at the time of the War' for me somehow feels not right. He is not as serene as I would expect of an older man. He shows such an adoring and enthusiastic behaviour (all concerning Faramir) and a very open behaviour towards Pippin like a young man. I feel him to be no more than in thirties with Bergil an early child. That shows how much our minds differ when our brains react so differently to cannon words
. Therefore I thought your story played long after the War.
Childless lords sat in aged halls musing on heraldry; in secret chambers withered men compounded strong elixirs, or in high cold towers asked questions of the stars.
I took these words of Faramir (Lord of the Rings, The Two Towers, The Window to the West) to refer to fairly useless "l'art pour l'art" occupations. I have not connected them to fates foretold but to old men seeking eternal life. The paragraph starts with "Death was ever present" and ends with "And the last king of the line of Anarion had no heir."
I'd be willing to accept the idea that, in special cases, where a parent did have a strong prophetic sense regarding a child's name, a "special" name would be chosen by the parents, not the wise men, i.e., astrologers. But this would be a special case. We do know, for example, that Arvedui's name was chosen because of the prophecy of Malbeth the Seer:
I do not think that all Gondorian or even all Dunedain families have strong prophetical abilities, but I think all parents have hopes and wishes for their children. And in Tolkien's world I think those wishes would stear the naming of the child. Tanaqui's examples I cited only to show the tip of the iceberg when providing Finduilas with such visionary abilities. That Malbeth the seer is cited to have given the name of Arvedui is for me a _very_ exceptional occurance so that it merited a rather long entry in the Book of Kings. I never connected this to a normal procedure done for all children. In myth it are the special children for which a seer will have a vision of their fate.
So I gain quite the opposite impression from this Malbeth-reference. "Special" names are given by special persons. Ordinary names are given by the parents according to their hopes and wishes.
(the prince who ran away to battle endangering the Gondorian royal blood line).
Out of curiosity, is this canon?
Hmm, I think it is cannon (as Barbara wrote). though I found no reference to selfwilled behaviour of the first Faramir in HOME or Appendix A. It is described in UT "Cirion and Eorl":
This had always been the custom of Gondor, that the King, if he willed, should command his army in a major battle, provided that an heir with undisputed claim to the throne was left behind. ... he had two sons, both of age to bear arms: Artamir the elder, and Faramir some three years younger.
and later
But Faramir did not do so; he went to the war in disguise, and was slain.
I do not know when "Cirion and Eorl" was written but I always connected these two names and their fates (naturally only after I had read UT). The foreshadowing of selfwilled behaviour in Faramir, Denethor's son, is most probably fannon though. But maybe Tolkien wrote prince Faramir with thoughts of steward Faramir in mind.
I am no great student of classical astrology, but I think that if two people are born under the same stars they are supposed to have similar characters and fates. And the quickest way to identify two such people would be to give them the same names!
Hmm, but what if the fate was bad ? Only good examples would be used I think. And then it is again all reduced to hopes and wishes. It is the human brain which sees order and fate in celestial constellations. And moreover, there are many more babies than known positive models with known birth constellation ;-). Especially female babies would experience such a lack of models.
And why should Dunedain humans have the same fate as Elves even if born under the same constellation. Mumble, mumble ... You might have a point with Finduilas as to the fact that bad fate would not hinder the chosing of the name. Finduilas, daughter of Orodreth, certainly had a bad fate. On the other hand maybe the Dol Amroth parents simply fancied the name itself, or that it was a name of a famous Noldorin princess, or there might have been other human Finduilases in the long row of years, a fact that would concur with both our impressions ;-).
OK, I think we simply see Tolkien's world quite differently. For me the Dunedain are an enlightened people slowly slipping into superstitious medieval culture. You somehow see them already as a superstitious people. So let's agree to disagree ;-)
Edit:
[As Scott Atran says in "In Gods we trust, The evolutionary landscape of Religion" It is this cognitive architecture that makes it natural to render a supernatural interpretation of events under conditions of uncertainty. And the fate of a newborn child is certainly a uncertainty which would rise the need for supernatural interpretation: either by the interpretations of stellar constellations as you invoke or by wishes, dreams, and visions, as I ascribe to the Gondorians.]
Best wishes Elanor
####################################################
Fascinating discussion.
Hi Liz,
I enthusiastically agree: for me it is a very fascinating discussion as Faramir is my Tolkien role model and I see myself more in the place of the adoring Beregond.
OK, "selfwilled" is my own invention I suppose.
Looks into dictionary: http://www.answers.com/topic/self-willed&method=8
No, it is as I wanted to say it: "eigensinnig" in German.
Faramir's decisions depend on noone else than himself. If he makes a decision he sticks to it. His father's wishes are counted far behind.
That I wanted to express. For me that is the quality which makes a leader of men. Consider all facts, hear all persons concerned and then decide what you deem right (and stick to it). Maybe that is what you mean by 'strong willed'.
OK, I do not think that Prince Faramir sought glory, he went in disguise to battle. He made a decision as Eowyn, I think, to fight for his people. But as he was the heir (as was Eowyn) his duty to his people was to stay home. As we all admire Eowyn, I think I myself admire Prince Faramir though he did not meet with success but with death. For me it was a very tragical fate, but a fate not of vainglory but of a self-willed decision carried through to the end. He never revealed his ancestry. Only when the leader of the Eotheod searched his body he found tokens that showed him to be the Prince. No, if you make Prince Faramir "glory-seeking" then I have to protest vehemently.
And how we perceive Beregond depends much on our own nature and cultural background. I am a restrained person with a middle European calvinistic background. So for me Tolkien's Beregond is a very enthusiastic loving young personality:
'Faramir ! The Lord Faramir ! It is his call ! ... Help ! Help ! Will no one go out to him ? Faramir !'
With that Beregond sprang away and ran off into the gloom. (LoTR)
The last sentence reminds me of a young animal ;-)
Though a Brazilian might find Beregond's behaviour even serene, I do not know.
Liz wrote:
In Gondor (even more so than in Arnor, I think) there are many of the population, perhaps the majority, who are not Dunedain/Numenorean by descent. This is particularly true for the "common people" as opposed to the lords. In other words, much of the population consists of "Middle Men" rather than "High Men". (There are quite a number of quotes supporting this in the Origins section of my WIP Gondorians bio.)
I can easily see that the "common people" would be more mediaeval and superstitious than their Dunedain lords, just as most people in Europe were still mediaeval and superstitious even after the Enlightenment.
I thought that I would have to embellish my thoughts ;-)
OK, I think even the "common people" of Gondor are much more enlightened than peasants of the french country side around 1850.
Why ? Because of Elves and Maiar. The Maiar KNOW Eru, they know that superstition is superstition. They live with the Elves and the Men of Arda. The Maia Melian lived for many hundreds of years with Elves. And the Istari wander around in Arda. These Maiar are not saints that see God only in visions, they have experienced God. As for me the unfathomable God defines rationality superstition cannot grow between persons who are educated by Maiar. The Religion of Gondor and Arnor is much more enlightened than the religion of the french country side around 1850. These are my arguments why I see no astrologers as name givers. One cannot detect fate in stellar constellations IMO. God shows not the fate of beings through stellar constellations. Would a deer and a Man born at the same time have the same fate ? Or would God create this special fate (that the astrologer infers from the constellations) only for the Mannish baby but not for the deer baby ? Have living beings born at the same place and in the same minute the same fate ? E.g. a cat and a baby, or even identical human twins cut out of the mother's womb ? I cannot believe this.
It is the human brain that seeks order anywhere and uses any offered possibility to make sense out of uncertainty and chaotical informations. Stellar constellations and dreams provide such a possibility to divine a fate which instills order and sense into the uncertain future. I for my part can ere believe to experience God in dreams than I can believe that fate is defined by stellar constellations, but that's only me, others experience God maybe in stellar constellations. I am a physicist, I experience God in the universe but not in the two-dimensional projection of the stars in the intergalactic space around us.
Best wishes Elanor
- may the discussion go on
(and please forgive if I sometimes use not the correct words)
####################################################
Hi Liz,
you are right "eigensinnig" has the connotation of headstrong in German also. But I wanted to use the connotation "independent", the rather direct translation "eigen" - self plus "sinnig" - "thinking".
But I do agree that he is a strong and independent person capable of acting on his own initiative: fine qualities for a leader indeed.
So I mean it in the sense of "independent", that is independently thinking. For me Faramir is a person who is a well balanced harmonious person who rests in himself (direct translation).
But I think you're characterising Faramir very much in the way Tolkien characterises his father: "a masterful lord, holding the rule of all things in his own hand. He said little. He listened to counsel, and then followed his own mind."
And yes, I see Faramir's personality to resemble his father's VERY much. The main difference for me is: Faramir takes pity on the lesser beings while his father scorns them.
He (Faramir) read the hearts of men as shrewdly as his father, but what he read moved him sooner to pity than to scorn. (LoTR, App. A , The Stewards)
Now to Prince Faramir. You are right, we do not know much of him. And what we know is filtered by our minds and then fitted into our value systems. Maybe I interprete his deeds with steward Faramir in the back of my mind which induces me to see more tragical myth than a failed adventure seeker.
Looking again into UT.
OK, in my mind, when the wain raiders and their allies (attacking from north and south) concentrate in the east (and who later overwhelm Ondoher from the side when he is re-forming his lines to counter their onslaught), Prince Faramir realizes the danger of the looming invasion for Gondor. Shirking his duty to wait for the end in Minas Tirith and having not enough confidence in the abilities of Earnil he joins the Eotheod in disguise. I agree, not in such depressed despair as Eowyn, but IMO with a more male background of proving himself a worthy warrior in times of need. He is a young male not a female spurned by her love interest.
When I read those passages, I personally see a spoilt youth who is angry at being left at home. And, to me, it's not a sign of modesty but subterfuge that he's "in disguise" until he's killed: he'd be sent straight back home if anyone found out he was there.
Up to here I see no difference to Eowyn's tale.
Perhaps he's not "glory seeking" but I can't see his choice as the rational decision of a man on honour and sense.
Hmm, mythical heros are not men of sense, often not even of honour. IMO he tries to be a hero in the sense of the mythical hero, the lone warrior proving his battle skills.
To me, the tragedy of the end of the line of Kings in Gondor is precisely that too many of themlacked the necessary qualities to be good rulers.
Hmm, maybe, maybe not. History is not always kind to leaders. History is written by the survivors. And the survival depends often less on the leader's qualities than it depends on chance occurences. Would the Rohirrim have come two days earlier, the Pelennor would not have been overrun, Faramir might not have been injured by an arrow, Denethor might not have commited suicide and Aragorn might have not become king, at least not uncontested. I think, history meets out good and bad chances evenly. IMO the rulers of Arnor are not a iota better than the rulers of Gondor, ere worse, quibbling and fighting as they were between themselves. And these are the forebears of our future Elessar. No, aside of the mythical need for a king out of a male-male blood line I see no better quality in Aragorn than in Denethor which would gain him the right to be king. But as this is myth, Aragorn has the one necessary quality: the unbroken line of male to male succession. (And if you want my honest opinion: I feel Denethor to be the better ruler, better educated for the government, with deeper roots in Gondorian society and economy and with quite a good understanding for the Ranger duties ;-). Gondor will have to subsidize Arnor's development with tremendous efforts. So for me Gondor will be the more important part of the double kingdom for a long time. And contrary to the long history of a unified upper and lower Egypt, I believe Arnor and Gondor will separate again early after Aragorn's death. In my mind it is the Stewards who will rule Gondor with the Kings as heads of state loved by the people because of their mythical qualities blood-line, healing powers, and Elven relationship.)
And I really see no great difference between Eowyn (who had the luck to slay the the Witch King) and Prince Faramir (who simply died) with respect to fulfilling their duty. If Eowyn had been slayn you would judge her much harsher. History is kinder to the heroical survivors then to the undistinguished killed.
Best wishes from Elanor
who enjoys this discussion tremendously
and who realizes belatedly that we have lost Beregond in between
Edit:
but I still feel they would not be as "enlightened" as the noblest families of Dunedain descent. They would personally have had little contact with Elves or Maiar. Look at how distrustful Eomer is of Galadriel and elves in general - and he has a Dunedain grandmother and is a nephew of a King. I think the common people of Gondor may be at a similar level of "superstition" to Eomer.
I fully agree to that. Nevertheless, religion is defined by the religious thinkers and those educated to perform the rites. As in Numenor it was the king who performed the rites at Meneltarma, I expect that the Ruling Stewards also were the leaders of religious rites as before and after them the Kings (here I am reminded of the Pharaohs, kings of ancient Egypt, who were spiritual leaders, defining which God was currently the one most worthy of adoration, extreme example for this feature is Ikhnaton).
Tolkien, UT, A Description of the Island of Númenor
Near to the centre of the Mittalmar stood the tall mountain called Meneltarma, Pillar of the Heavens, sacred to the worship of Eru Iluvatar . … Thrice only in each year the King spoke, offering prayer for the coming year at the Erukeyerme in the first days of spring, praise of Eru Iluvatar at the Erulaitale in midsummer, and thanksgiving to him at the Eruhantale at the end of autumn. At these times the King ascended the mountain on foot followed by a great concourse of the people, clad in white and garlanded, but silent.
With that in mind, I agree, surely superstition abounds in the less educated, but I cannot see that this encompasses consultations with astrologers about the fate of newborns. The catholic church condemned astrology: However, in the 16th and 17th cent., Christian theologists waged war against astrology. In 1585 astrology was officially condemned in a bull of Pope Sixtus V, and in 1631, Pope Urban VIII reinforced this with another bull. (http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?s=astrology&gwp=8 ).
Somehow I do not see Tolkien to allow divination and astrology even for the simple folk ;-).
So I see superstition practiced more in prayers to the Valar, or in folk practices as giving offerings to the Valar in hope to change fate or to receive help, or in such folk practices as "knocking on wood" to invite luck.
#####################################################
Maybe the idea is similar to an AU in spirit. I think of it more like the stories in Dwim's piece "To Unwrite Them", where the idea isn't to contradict Tolkien but to go against the way we normally characterize someone or something and see where that leads us.
Hi Marta,
yes, I certainly agree with you here. I, as a purist, see it as AU in spirit and would label it so. I also labeled Ang's "Hands of the King" in my recommendation as AU because I cannot see Dunedain having bastards (I even cannot visualize them being married more than once). So Ecthelion's numerous "out of wedlock" offspring in Ang's "Hands of the King" makes the story AU in spirit for me ;-).
I decided for once to step outside of what I and I think most people think about the meaning of names, develop a different scheme, and follow that scheme through to see where it lead. If people are able to suspend their disbelief long enough to enjoy the story, I think the story's a reasonable success.
I think, there are certainly not so many purists out there in fandom who might feel as bothered as much as I feel ;-)
If I feel bothered then I start to mull over what bothers me and that somewhat disturbs my enjoyment of the story. [I had once a lengthy discussion with Altariel about the reasons why Faramir's nervous breakdown in "A Game of Chess" bothered me so much. I learned quite many things in this discussion, about me, my perception of Faramir and his relationship with Denethor, and about the perceptions of others.]
Many heartfelt thanks for this story which engendered so many thoughts about Gondorian culture
Elanor
################################################
Hi Liz,
so let's debate Prince Faramir (and Eowyn) further ;-)
I don't particularly find Eowyn's actions in riding with the Rohirrim to be admirable.
In HOME it is stated that Tolkien wanted a rider of Theoden's household to try to save him, if I remember rightly. And this one became Eowyn (early on described as Amazon, HOME7 p.437) when Tolkien found that Aragorn was too grim for Eowyn (HOME7 p.448 ):
Probably Eowyn should die to avenge or save Theoden.
Thus, only when Faramir came walking into the scenery Eowyn gained a right to live again as Faramir's bride (my interpretation).
I see Tolkien using the scenes with Faramir to bring Eowyn back into a better balance between duty and personal inclination. (And I think the reverse is true: Tolkien uses Eowyn to remind Faramir that he has personal needs he should not sacrifice as completely to duty as he has been doing so far.)
I agree to both.
BUT, and this is a real large BUT, this is myth: Tolkien thought it more important that Eowyn should act as a warrior bound to her head of kin than that she should act as a medieval lady guarding the family realm. And coming from myth, I completely agree with this view. The rationality in the duty-debate somehow not really grapples with Tolkien's intentions IMO.
I think the key words are the ones you have used: shirking his duty. Is that an admirable quality? Seeing a greater duty to a higher authority or principle, which is what I believe Steward Faramir does when he doesn't bring the Ring to Denethor, seems to me to be acceptable. Shirking ones duty when there is no greater duty does not seem acceptable to me.
I in principle agree to that. BUT, for me it is the higher duty to try one's outmost to save the country than to sit at home and safeguard the royal bloodline. In both cases I am fairly sure there were enough experienced warriors at home to defend the populace left behind.
So what is the higher duty for the heir ? Sit at home waiting to become King (Prince Faramir) or waiting to become the heiress of the land to be married to the future king (Eowyn) ? Or better ride out using the trained warrior skills in trying to save the land ? For me it is the second duty. I come from the mythical side not from the rational side. In myth the hero sets out on a quest, he does not wait at home to gain a kingdom.
Some of these arguments I tried to voice in a discussion with MadGamgee about Problem of Eowyn, The: A Look at Ethics and Values in Middle-earth
citation from first post:
In conclusion, for me Eowyn chooses to ride as Dernhelm shirking her duty as an obedient proxy out of Theoden's kin because she decides to shield Rohan and her king herself and because she decides to seek either unexpected victory or honourable death on the battle-field together with her kin and king after having lost all hope for the future and especially for a honourable future as a great man's wife.
...
citation from last post:
In conclusion, I think 'shield-maiden' is a self-definition of Eowyn, who sets shielding her kin in glorious battle before shielding the people secured in Dunharrow by a host of experienced warriors waiting for the battle decision. She wants to be part of the decisive battle and she really seeks death in battle in contrast to Theoden and Eomer as she sees no other future for herself than in case of defeat to be butchered by Sauron's hordes or in case of victory to be married off to a Rohirrim noble.
OK, for me Prince Faramir and Eowyn act in similar ways. Eowyn and Prince Faramir go the way of the mythical hero, but Eowyn succeeds and Prince Faramir fails. Maybe Eowyn only succeeds because Steward Faramir has to find an appropriate wife as matrimony and offspring is Tolkien's scheme to reward his heros unmarred by the Ring.
but I have a hard time believing he could rationally consider Earnil to be incompetent.
Prince Faramir has not to consider Earnil as incompetent, IMO he only has to lose hope that the armies will be able to defend Gondor. Then he is justified IMO to go to war. Maybe he is even trying additionally to safeguard the royal line by joining the Eotheod and not the Gondorian Armies ? This fact of joining the Eotheod opens many ways for speculation ;-). AND, knowing Tolkien's hard work in chosing the right names for his protagonists, I simply look on Prince Faramir with my most open mind and my kindest eyes as for me Steward Faramir is my most admired Tolkien personality.
And in this I agree fully with you, my highest esteem has Faramir who shirks no duty whatsoever. Though, on the other hand, come to think of it, he has not to choose between being warrior and a 'sit at home heir'. [In my fic I give him such a choice as his father wants him to become a Minas Tirith soldier and self-willed Faramir gets the disapproving Denethor's consent to become a Ranger ;-) ]. Maybe if Denethor had not used his sons as weapons but had safeguarded them at home Faramir II had run away the same as Prince Faramir
. Ducks and covers
. I know many fanfic authors see Faramir as a being brutalized by his father but I see him as a personality who has more pity for than fear of his father. And he wants to defend the Gondorian culture. How should he do that in this society of continuous war than in becoming an accomplished warrior himself. I cannot see him sitting at home with scrolls even if his father had commanded this. It is not that he seeks the glory of a warrior, he uses his abilities simply to defend Gondor with all his might IMO.
Whereas I think I read somewhere recently that prophetic visions in Tolkien were a form of interaction and guidance by the Powers, which I can see being similar to what I know of the concept of saintly visions in the Catholic church.
Yes, dreams and visions I also can see as 'a form of interaction and guidance by' God.
Thank you for this interesting discussion
Elanor
##################################################
Hi Liz,
do not misunderstand me. I valour psychodramatic fics very much, I like them very often. And I like an elaborated cultural background.
but I don't think either of us is going convince the other one to become comfortable with the other's interpretation, although we can recognise the other one as being a valid one.
I do not know if I can become comfortable with a spoilt vainglory-seeking Prince Faramir. For any interpretation, being a purist through and through, I ask me always first: does this interpretation work within LoTR as it was written by Tolkien. And if it chafes it reduces my enjoyment because I constantly wonder how Tolkien would have written this.
BUT, I think you can write without many problems such a brat Prince Faramir convincingly even to me ;-). Maybe I would label it AU in spirit. Despite of labeling it AU in spirit I like Ang's story 'Hands of the King' very much, nevertheless.
my mind immediately leapt away to wondering if you would think it "heroic" for Faramir to abandon those scrolls (and the duty laid on him by Denethor) if those scrolls related to the supply lines and logistics for the Gondorian army. It's pretty hard in practical terms for warriors to do the heroic stuff without someone ensuring they have food, shelter and warmth - and the way my brain works, I simply can't ignore those needs.
You see, though I come from the mythical side, it is not taciturn Aragorn, THE mythical saviour-king, who is my hero. No it is eloquent, sophisticated Faramir. The one character which speaks the most sentences in the whole book, more than all the other characters together I sometimes suspect. And in a fantasy story Faramir would sit behind the scrolls and steer the armies from the background as any realistic leader knowing that his mind's work is more important than the small part in the grand scheme he could play as a captain.
Yet, to answer your question if [I] would think it "heroic" for Faramir to abandon those scrolls (and the duty laid on him by Denethor) if those scrolls related to the supply lines and logistics for the Gondorian army: yes, I would think it heroic to abandon the scrolls about military supply lines. In a myth there are no supply lines, there is often not even a military command structure. An heroic warrior band is a band of individualists like the Sarmatian knights portrayed in the movie "King Arthur", which I very much enjoyed as a mythical tale. IMO Clive Owen's Arthur represents much more the mythical saviour-king than Viggo Mortensen's doubting Ranger. If I think of LoTR Aragorn then I see Clive Owen's Arthur not Viggo's Aragorn. Especially, if I try to visualize a raven haired Dunedain. Mythical fights are between the main leaders, realistical leaders stay on the hill and lead through the command structure, surrounded by their elite troups. Only when the troups are in imminent danger to be routed a realistical leader would fight with his men at the front to bolster their courage. Because realistical troups nearly always are routed if the leader falls. So, while a realistical leader has to have a strategical mind, a mythical leader has to have very good battle skills. Ergo: Faramir being a protagonist in a myth has to leave the scrolls and go to hone his battle skills.
Gondorian king Ondoher, on the other hand, is protagonist of a more historical narrative. He stays on the hill surrounded by his men, as is Theodred when he falls. You see: the realistical leaders fall despite behaving realistically. Only the mythical heros with supreme battle skills survive ;-). So Faramir save yourself, go and leave the scrolls, hone your battle skills !
As this is LoTR, the myth for England that Tolkien wanted to write, I think Faramir really has to comply to mythical surroundings somehow. So LoTR Faramir must be a warrior captain even if he would prefer to read and write. Rationality is not the right background for a myth. So for me Faramir is a role model because he does his duty as a mythical hero in a myth, and that is being a leader of warriors, though he would very much prefer to sit in the library. And in a myth young Faramir would set himself the goal to become an accomplished warrior, because hero myths are about lone warriors proving their battle skills outside of society. Only saviour-king heros come back from the wilderness into the towns, into society. Normal mythical heros stay in the wilderness, their wifes being often no more than quest prizes and bearer of offspring. So Steward Faramir is partly also a saviour-king type, but lacking the mythical blood-line he stays Steward and becomes not King.
And LoTR works for me because it is a myth, not because it is a fantasy novel with developed characters. Nevertheless I can enjoy fantasy LoTR fanfiction. I enjoy it as fantasy, but not as LoTR gap fillers.
As to the 'Eowyn' - 'Prince Faramir' - 'shirked duty' debate:
I wonder why nobody ever wondered about Aragorn sauntering around in Arda endangering this precious mythical male-male blood line. No, it is accepted all around in the fanfiction community that there is no heir around sitting fast at home while Aragorn takes on tasks any able Ranger could have fulfilled (Halbarad comes to my mind; maybe Halbarad is additionally this heir, but unconvincingly he falls on the Pelennor, and that he can boast a male-male blood line back to the kings of Arnor I do not remember to have ever read). Again, any able Ranger could have tracked Gollum, lead the Hobbits to Rivendell and beyond. Why do you all accept Aragorns dangerous lone wanderings, while Eowyn has to sit dutifully at home and show the stiff upper lip to the not-fighting populace ? I think this is due to the fact that you accept Aragorn as a mythical hero but not Eowyn. Do you really think a realistic throne heir wanders around lonely in the wilderness like Sigurd dragon slayer ? He would have least some companions as the mythical Beowulf or a friend as mythical CuChulain. Yet, I never read that anybody wondered about Aragorn's lonely wanderings. And in this context, what about the Captain of the White Tower who seeks Imladris unaccompanied ? No real leader of men would make a journey like this. It is again the mythical quest of the warrior alone in the wilderness. And don't you wonder that this last heir of Isildur battles on the Pelennor and at the Black Gate? No, I think not, because of all the trappings of the mythical hero: named sword, named horse, and unsurpassable battle skills.
So, why have Eowyn and Prince Faramir have to behave realistically but not Aragorn or Boromir ?
Despite these questions I eagerly await your realistical Prince Faramir story
Elanor
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir (son of King Ondoher): mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir (son of King Ondoher): mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
I think we also have to make allowances in 'battle leaders' for what was expected in different historical periods. An Alexander was expected to be in the thick of the fighting. A Richard the Lionheart would be expected to be an able fighter, but could also just stand back sometimes and strategize the battles (although what he considered sound strategy and what modern military men think his military goals should have been are very different items).
Ok, let me explain. I base my view of realistic ancient warfare on Roman Republic and Early Empire warfare. This is rationalistic warfare.
Earlier warfare is the base of mythic hero epics. The lonesome mythic hero (see Iliad and greek myth) is the rallying description of a model warrior those ancient warriors were supposed to emulate. Moreover, I do not believe that Alexander wandered around alone in the wilderness like Aragorn or Sigurd dragon slayer. Surely Alexander in the heat of the battle was still surrounded by his elite troups. There is a description of the Egyptian king Ramses II before Kadesh left by all his troops who calls to Amun and then vanquishes his enemies in a holy battle fury. I think this is a mythical description of the real battle situation. One might also say it is religious propaganda. But I know not of a similar description for Alexander. I suppose already for Alexander strategy was of more importance than unsurpassable personal fighting abilities. (Ramses defeated his enemies not by fighting skills but with the help of his God.) The King (be it Ramses or Alexander) surely served as a rallying point. And Alexander is shown in a mosaic in direct confrontation with the Persian enemy king. But again, I suppose here also the archetypical man-to-man hero fight has guided the artist in the description of the confrontation Alexander - Darius.
But Tolkien's heros as the mythical epic heros survive due to their supreme fighting skills:
Aragorn and Eomer and Imrahil ... These three were unscathed, for such was their fortune and skill and might of their arms, and few indeed had dared to abide them or look on their faces in the hour of their wrath. (LoTR, RoTK, The battle of the Pelennor Fields)
Was Alexander a less effective military leader because he followed the 'mythical' pattern rather than a 'strategic' one?
NO, assuredly not.
I was discussing Liz' vision of an 'strategic' leader Faramir sitting behind scrolls in the surroundings of LoTR. I tried to say that with LoTR being essentially a myth the heros also have to have mythic qualities, you might say they have to have ancient warfare qualities, I say they have to have a mythic hero's personal battle skills .
Best wishes
Elanor
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Sober again: IMO Dunedain love and marry once in their life. So the Northern Dunedain surely were not overly surprised that it took Arathorn so long to find his one love. There is simply no point to urge a Dunedain to marry, IMO he could not without love. And to find the love of one's life can be very difficult. But to the rest of your description I completely agree
How would baby Aragorn be hidden? Fairly easily, at least more easily in Imladris than anywhere else on M-e. Imladris is fairly isolated, far from strife. Orcs don't enter, or even, as far as I know, spy on it from the outskirts...And it's a fairly big place, with space for a child to wander around unseen by Enemy eyes.
Yes, I must say that this feature (though it is a mythic feature) seemed well explained to me by Tolkien. I agree to your take of the situation. Perhaps Gwynnyd will explain further, why she feels the situation unbelievable
What I wonder is how Aragorn remained hidden from Enemy eyes and spies once he journeyed out into the world, or at least managed to constantly elude capture/killing.
Yes, this is what I and Gwynnyd also wonder about. This is pure myth.
Let me cite an excerpt of the mythical hero life's pattern according to Raglan as far as it applies to Aragorn:
(1) his mother is a royal virgin = from the royal line
(2) his father is a king = from a line of kings
(3) often a near relative of his mother = not extremely near, I agree
(4) the circumstances of his conception are unusual = father marries a very young relative
(6) at birth an attempt is made to kill him = infered from the fact that Sauron searches the Heirs of Isildur as an intended attempt
(7) but he is spirited away = hidden in Rivendell as Estel
(8 ) reared by foster-parents = raised by Elrond
(9) we are told nothing of his childhood
(10) on reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future kingdom
(11) after a victory over king/dragon/giant/wild beast = Sauron
(12) he marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor
(13) becomes king
(14) for a time reigns uneventfully = not much is said about Aragorn's reign
(15) prescribes laws = I assume so
(Raglan, The Hero, A Study in Tradition, Myth and Drama)
That Aragorn manages to accord to 14 out of 22 possible mythic hero life patterns is more than Sigurd dragon slayer manages. Sigurd scores only 11 points. So in the theory of a mythical hero's life patterns Aragorn scores rather high.
Therefore, I accept Aragorn as a mythical saviour king. Therefore, I accept his lonely wanderings.
BUT, and this is a very large but, I do not understand why, if LoTR is such a mythical epic, fanfiction authors do not accept Eowyn as a mythical being also. Why is her honourable defence of her uncle as a 'shield maiden' (even if only she herself uses this definition in conversations with the two men she ponders to share her life with) seen as a desertion like she had been a real medieval lady entrusted to guard the family holdings ? Why has she to be excused by suicidal despair ?
And coming back to Prince Faramir, why has he to be a realistic deserter ? Why can he not be also a mythic hero setting out alone on a quest very much like King Earnur, who tried to vanquish the Witch King (Lord of Minas Morgul) with a small escort of Knights ?
Best wishes
Elanor
Yeah to this stimulating discussion
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
But I will add "= infered from the fact that Sauron searches the Heirs of Isildur as an intended attempt"
Thank you for this question
Elanor
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
No real argument against this, as I think the presumption can be made that Sauron would have his minions on the look out to locate and kill the Heir of Isildur on general principles, but Aragorn being taken to Rivendell is *not* unique:
After Arvedui the North-kingdom ended, for the Dunedain were now few and all the peoples of Eriador diminished. Yet the line of the kings was continued by the Cheiftans of the Dunedain, of whom Aranarth son of Arvedui was the first. Arahael his son was fostered at Rivedell, and so were all the sons of the cheiftans after him; and there also were kept the heirlooms of their house: the ring of Barahir, the shards of Narsil, the star of Elendil, and the sceptre of Annuminas.
(LoTR, App. A, (iii) Eriador, Arnor, and the Heirs of Isildur) emphasis added
So, the Heir of Isildur was traditionally protected in Rivendell, though it appears, from the Tale of Aragron and Arwen, that he might not have been taken there at birth.
Toodles - Ang
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Best wishes Elanor
who has to retreat to bed now before her children awake
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
- Barbara
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Thank you for your very interesting remarks
Elanor
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
I don't have a theory to account for it yet) why the Angle was the primary area that is supposedly settled in Ring War times when the royal line was preserved in Arthedain which was much farther west. The Angle is on the far eastern edge sort of between Cardolan and Rhudaur. I know it's closer to Rivendell, but still, why move from the more secure west to the unsettled east?
But somehow I cannot see a mythic hero willingly relinquishing his heriditary leadership to protect his people, this is modern thinking IMO. The society was built as a pyramid with the heriditary leader at the tip, who took it for granted that his people is there to protect him and vice versa. Which king went into hiding to protect his people ?
It probably is modern, rather than a strictly mythic interpretation. I never claimed to be writing to strictly mythic paradigms (although I'm not above exploiting them if they can be reconciled with a more historical interpretation). Hmm, maybe we need a challenge to come up with explanations for Aragorn's odd behavior in being alone in the wild, not just in his hereditary domain, but also in Rohan, Gondor, and 'places where the stars are strange' and why his own people did or did not accept this. I think that Tolkien portrays Aragorn's behavior as honorable and right within the mythos he was creating. I can reconcile it using a historical rather than a mythical interpretation. How do you reconcile it? Or do you say, "No, Aragorn was just a rat bastard who shirked his responsibilities even though he had the 'right' bloodlines." That does not seem to me to be in the same spirit as JRRT thought of Aragorn.
Thus, when his chieftainship is secured he leaves to gain more knowledge about the regions he hopes to claim when a possibility arrises. And IMO he didn't went to Gondor to claim the crown but to reconoiter the possibilities, to look if Gondor still wanted a king of Isildur's line, as well as providing himself with an education in open military warfare (opposed to the guerilla warfare of the Rangers) .
I could more easily accept this line of reasoning if he was gone for a year or two but I can't see him doing al lhe was said to do in Rohan and Gondor in that shhort a time? He went on many journeys with Gandalf but more and more often went alone as theyears wore on. And he 'went alone far into the East and deep into the South. ' According to your mythic ideals he should have brought along a troop of companions. But he obviously didn't.
And I agree that he went for the experience, and not to claim the crown.
Therefore I do not think, that Saurons minions had much contact to the secret and wandering Dunedain, a secret society melting into the wilderness:
I'm not sure that is possible in a world where Strider can say, "Not all the birds are to be trusted, and there are other spies more evil than they are.' ( FotR - chapter 11. "A Knife in the Dark") It's hard to hide or 'melt away' from birds.
Gwynnyd
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
. I am not convinced that this is how a mythic woman would feel. Myth is for education of the audience, would you expect any myth to be told like this, a noble woman relinquishing her honour and her son's birthright ? No, IMO noble women die defending her honour otherwise their male relations would not feel safe with respect to the bloodlines.
Now back to your post:
Herding and hunting-gathering are extremely labor intensive lifestyles. If most of the male population is syphoned off to do Ranger/warrior duties, I have a hard time figuring out how they survived at all.
I fully agree to your observations. But the eastern rider warriors (Skythes, Sarmatians, Mongols) syphoned their male populations off to war and still remained a vigorous people. Women are able herders, hunter-gatherers, even warriors (see Sauro-Sarmatian warrior women).
don't see why they have to be limited to living in the Angle when they have all of the boundaries of the old Kingdom of Arnor to hide in.
I agree to that. It is probably due to some remarks of Tolkien who settled them in the Angle. And I envision it to be easier for a small people to guard one region than to guard many fastnesses sprinkled in the woods of a large realm.
I think that Tolkien portrays Aragorn's behavior as honorable and right within the mythos he was creating. I can reconcile it using a historical rather than a mythical interpretation. How do you reconcile it? Or do you say, "No, Aragorn was just a rat bastard who shirked his responsibilities even though he had the 'right' bloodlines." That does not seem to me to be in the same spirit as JRRT thought of Aragorn.
I fully agee to that. Aragorn is THE mythical hero, the saviour-king. For sure he is honourable ! And I do not see him shirking his duties, I thought I stated this in an earlier post.
For me these wanderings alone in the wilderness is a topos of the myth of the epic hero (Sigurd dragon slayer as well as Oedipus come to my mind) as it is described expansively in Dean A. Miller's 'The mythic hero'. I accept it as myth not as reality. It makes Aragorn a mythic being and adds to his aura of the lone warrior with unsurpassable fighting skills.
It's hard to hide or 'melt away' from birds.
Yes, it is hard, but it can be done if you know for what to look as the fellowship managed it to do when hiding before Saruman's birds, if I remember rightly.
Whow, what a great discussion!
Thank you very much indeed
Elanor
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
We are probably boring the people who read the forums welcome page to tears as they have to scroll down through our very long posts. But, yes, I'm having great fun with this, too.
Carlenna, the nursery maid,
to me feels like a larger social difference than I would ascribe to a nomadic people of more even status.
Hmm, interesting. The Númenorian descended 'lords' are certainly a much smaller part of the population than the total amount of people living there. You don't see any social differences between the 'class' layers? Or do you see strictly 'noble Numenorian bloodline" groups living together with no interaction with the men who never went to Númenor? Even so, I don't see Núnemorians as being class neutral. They clearly had a layered and differentiated class structure with king, noble households, and masses of others they ruled. We know there was intermarriage or *all* the Dúnedain would have 'pure' bloodlines, and we know that's not the case, or there wouldn't be such a fuss about Aragorn's.
The biggest problems we have in coming to some kind of consensus between us on how they lived, is that I don't see the Dúnedain as 'pastoral nomads' and I don't see them as strictly mythic. A 'fortified manor house' with one wooden tower a few storeys high and a stockade wall around it enclosing a courtyard and gardens (I keep wanting to describe them as 'fortalices' to distinguish them from castles or bigger strongholds, but Liz won't let me. She says no one will know what I mean without a dictionary.) does not seem to me to be outside the realm of possibility. It apparently does to you, so I think we will just have to disagree on some points. I don't think it will ruin our enjoyment of each other's stories.
The most telling point against the Dúnedain living as 'pastoral nomads' is that, if that was the case, they would have to bring their herds and women and children along with them. I can't reconcile this with the descriptions of 'hidden fastnesses' or with the men travelling alone to protect the other people living in the north. Tolkien does create a group of 'fighting pastoral nomads', but they are the Wainriders who come from the east and nearly overrun Gondor.
Another problem is that, to the people living during the time, no matter how small, depressing and/or dirty we would find it, to them it is 'normal' and when I'm writing about it I try to look at it like they would, not as how I would see it. I think that, as in real medieval times, the most precious thing a leader could command is 'privacy'. To give the Chieftain's wife a separate room was to show luxury in her own terms. I didn't think I made it look like an18th century salon. I certainly do not envision it that way. (one storey open hall with a tower about 25 feet square, storage on ground floor, access to main hall probably with 'offices' on first storey, chief's quarters on second storey unevenly divided into several small-ish spaces, probably a guard post on the roof, and the guards have to tramp through the 'reception' space to get up and down.)
One of the problems of the limited 3rd POV, I guess. I can't step outside the viewpoint character and give an objective description of what things look like. It's probably my failing as writer, but I didn't see a need to describe it in any more detail. It's also hard for me to see a balance between what was true for medieval/dark age times and what the Dúnedain might remember and have from a more advanced Númenorean/elven tradition. I agonized over the windows (glass?, no glass? Bag End and Tom Bombadill's house both have glazed windows, does the Prancing Pony? Oh, no, it doesn't say! but would...?) and the mirror and the possibility of having some kind of running/heated water in Gilraen's dressing area for far too long. I think I left some things ambiguous because I couldn't decide and some things I wanted for storyline purposes.
I don't think people can behave only as mythic characters while they are living their lives. It's the people who come after them who turn then into myths.
Gwynnyd
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
.
But I agree somewhat on you take on 'privacy'. Yet, I do not know how much this is due to my modern western upbringing and how much this is really an human need. I perceive humans to be horde animals who would normally prefer to stay and to sleep together. Might 'privacy' be a status symbol as 'privacy' eats up resources ? As humans are cultural animals the need for 'privacy' might be simply a need culturally added on. This is a question to the anthropologist
. Nevertheless, Tolkien surely saw 'privacy' as a luxury to be coveted.
Yet, the term 'reception room' in my mind instantly invokes a 18th or 19th century room. I cannot delete my 'Jane Austen' allusions here
I don't think people can behave only as mythic characters while they are living their lives. It's the people who come after them who turn then into myths.
I completely agree to that. But IMO honour is not a mythic characteristic. Women and girls are killed even in our days in our neighborhoods because their male kin perceived a slight to the family honour. Therefore, knowing that honour was an important value in older times also in western societies I cannot see Gilraen relinquishing her honour in the manner you described. But there are many people for whom your description works quite right
.
Let us simply accept that all minds work differently, depending on their learning history, depending on their favourite pastimes, depending on the connections in their brains. Every brain forges its own reality
.
Best wishes Elanor
and many thanks for this engrossing discussion
Re: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers
.
IMO, you have to look for Dark Ages or late Roman Empire to get the right style. This is my very personal opinion, but based on my readings of Tolkien's letters (see my essay Time-line of Gondor and Rohan with respect to European history). As the Northern Dunedain are not settled farmers IMO, but guardians of Arnor, Rangers, where would they find the resources to build such elaborate houses ? I personally see simpler hall houses. But I see nothing that really contradicts such timber framed two storeyed hall houses.
Many thanks for these interesting remarks
Elanor
When Myth clashes with RealWorld (was: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers)
Re: When Myth clashes with RealWorld (was: Eowyn - Prince Faramir: mythical heros or duty shirkers)
And where do they get the malt to make their beer? There must be lot of small farms and the odd village in places that are officially 'empty' all through Eriador.
The rather small fortress with demesne farms that I have Gilraen living in in Not Without Hope is the chief's residence and main administrative center and supply depot for the northern Dúnedain Rangers. It's the biggest, best guarded, and probably most secret of the few permanent 'hidden fastnesses' that I think the northern Dúnedain must have. and it's still, in objective terms, not very big.
Gwynnyd
Re: When Myth clashes with RealWorld: hidden wandering Dunedain
OK, normal Ork raids should be taken care of by patrolling rangers at the outer rim, the no-mans land surounding the Dunedain heart land.
IF an uninvited visitor (Men, Dwarves, Elves, Orks), who should not know where and how the Dunedain live, comes along (I cannot see how friendly and obstinate visitors (maybe traders) can be dealt with by the Rangers, you will show me certainly
) comes into the heart land, then I envision the Dunedain to leave the village for a short time ('melting into the woods') leaving the uninvited visitors to consult with shadows.
Only if a larger problem arises (maybe once in hundred years ? maybe larger Ork intrusions that cannot be handled by the Rangers ?) then the village will be de-constructed and the soil abandoned in my vision. This would be a planned strategical retreat, not a hasty tactical flight.
Why don't the orcs follow the trail? It's hard to sneak away while carrying tree sized beams. And who teaches the herds to walk stealthily through the forest?
A strategical retreat means a retreat covered by Rangers. The Orks do not follow because of the Rangers. The herds roam as ever.
Part of your theory seems to be that they could trade surplus food and crafts for things they could not manufacture themselves, but your scanario also seems to involve them abandoning food and goods and spending inordinate amounts of time clearing fields
Yes, they trade surplus. And they are not 'itinerant farmers' in our sense of the word (because of meagre soil) but they wander because of their wish for stealth .
I do not think they abandon food and goods. If they abandon tactically a village they have to leave a good part of goods like any farmer in ancient war (you need even think back only to the thirty years' war in Germany 1618-1648 ).
If they abandon strategically a village, they take with them what they need IMO.
I also think you have failed to take into account the one thing that seems to distinguish the "Númenorean" from the other men of Middle Earth: their fascination with monumental architecture that they no doubt learned from the Noldor. The absolute first thing that any of them did was to build a city. I can't believe that, even in the degenerate days at the end of the Third Age, the Dúnedain Chiefs wouldn't want somewhere permanent to live. It would be a symbol that I don't think they could abandon entirely.
No, I did not forget their 'fascination with monumental architecture'. But for me this is not possible anymore for a wandering people in shadow. IMO they would try to build monumental wood architecture.
Gondor is the 'Stone-land' sc. 'Stone (-using people's) land' (Letter 324), Arnor is the 'royal land' (Letter 347) as Tolkien distinguished the realms in his letters. Moreover, in Letter 244 Tolkien calls Gondor 'the one surviving Numenorean state' (emphasis by me).
In Letter 131 Tolkien writes:
But in the north Arnor dwindles, is broken into petty princedoms, and finally vanishes. The remnant of the Numenoreans becomes a hidden wandering Folk, and though their true line of Kings of Isildur's heirs never fails this is known only in the House of Elrond.
Taking these clues together, I see no monumental architecture anymore in Arnor, not even a state. I see a tribal organisation with a chieftain who strives to hold the remnants of bygone glory together. And the most distinctive feature for me is: the Dunedain are a 'hidden' as well as ' wandering Folk'.
I can't believe that, even in the degenerate days at the end of the Third Age, the Dúnedain Chiefs wouldn't want somewhere permanent to live.
It all depends on what you mean by 'permanent to live'. Is a stockaded village in use for a hundred years not 'permanent' enough? Even if it where only for a dozen years, IMO that would be a more permanent life than the medieval dukes had who rotated their living quarters from one holding to the next. And I expect a Dunedain chieftain would be more a wanderer than anybody else. I see no CENTRAL hidden fastness. IMO the chieftain would take his administration with him around in the Angle as he takes care of his people and of emergencies. And also ancient Generals (which is the other RealWorld position I would the Dunedain chieftain primarly compare to) had a very unsteady life IMO.
OK, I understand your 'hidden fastnesses', but somehow I cannot reconcile them with Tolkien's words about a 'wandering people'
When the kingdom ended the Dunedain passed into the shadows and became a secret and wandering people. and their deeds and labours were seldom sung or recorded. (LotR, App.A, The North kingdom and the Dunedain)
IMO a 'hidden fastness' has by no means to be a 'permanent' fastness.
PoME, HoME12 p.263 - " In the latter days of the last age [> Ere the Elder Days were ended],(1) before the War of the Ring, there was a man named Dirhael [> Dirhoel], and his wife was Evorwen [> Ivorwen] daughter of Gilbarad, and they dwelt in a hidden fastness in the wilds of Eriador; for they were of the ancient people of the Dunedain, that of old were kings of men, but were now fallen on darkened days."
A 'hidden fastness' could as well be a stockaded village founded a dozen years ago
Many thanks for giving me always new thoughts to mull over
Elanor
Re: When Myth clashes with RealWorld: hidden wandering Dunedain
Re: When Myth clashes with RealWorld: hidden wandering Dunedain
.
my vote is for the Dunedain being nomadic, and not ever staying in one place for more than a season or two, and not building anything that was permanent.
Yes, this is what I thought when I read these words in LoTR. But after reading Gwynnyd's story I began to think about the economical and cultural background of these mythical wanderers ('hidden wandering people' - here myth again clashes with Real World).
The only hidden people I know of are hunter-gatherers in the Amazonian jungle or head-hunters in New-Guinea. These are in our view very primitive societies in very secluded regions of the world. I cannot see the Dunedain to live such primitive lifes.
As soon as this hidden people makes contact with the outer world through trading and Ranger duties they are not hidden anymore IMO. So how did this people hide, what did they live of ? If one thinks about the facts of life that the Dunedain have to comply with then it seems not probable anymore that they were simple nomads. To feed the families the herds have to be huge, such herds cannot be hidden IMO.
IMO the Dunedain had to hide the families actively. And providing a good screen they could also have maintained subsistence farming. IMO it easier to hide small farms in a large wood than to hide wandering herds which normally roam the steppes.
But to hide completely the Dunedain had had to hide any evidence of their actual existence. That they could have contrieved by posing as normal farming folk (which is not really a possibility IMO as Numenoreans have a distinctive facial appearance and body height) or they must have deflected any discovery of their Dunedain families, be they settled in wood cottages or stockade surrounded villages or be they nomads. IMO it is easier to hide wood farming folk than to hide nomads that have to follow their herds. Uninvited visitors must be intercepted in the wood by Rangers and deflected from the family habitats.
And thinking on the distinctive appearance of the Numenoreans it is nearly not believable that the normal populace did not connect the Rangers to the Dunedain. So the Dunedain were not really a hidden people. To make the words 'hidden wandering people' working either these words belong only to the wandering Rangers who are not really hidden or they have to describe the families, the generative part of the people where the offspring is raised. IMO it is this feature that was hidden: the fact that there was a people from which the Rangers stemmed. So one could reconcile 'hidden wandering people' perhaps even with the vision of wandering Rangers and hidden families, who might even be permanently settled in the Angle (which is Gwynnyd's view I assume). I prefer the vision that even the families had to wander around from time to time to avoid discovery.
Best wishes Elanor