Why did the Rohirrim go to Isengard?

[Artanis]

Why did king Theoden and his men follow Gandalf to Isengard? What was Gandalf's purpose with bringing them there? Wouldn't it be more sensible for the war against Sauron to let the Rohirrim return to Edoras as soon as possible, and then proceed quickly to Minas Tirith?

[Valandil]

Gandalf himself had several reasons to go, I think: To put Saruman in his place - and give him a chance to repent, To check on the status and instruct Treebeard and To reunite elements of the fellowship.

I believe he brought King Theoden because Saruman had wronged him and his kingdom, and Theoden therefore needed to be a part of - or at least witness to - the confrontation. It also served as a demonstration to Theoden that Saruman's power was indeed broken and he was no longer a threat to Rohan... that they COULD turn their focus eastward.

Sensible??

[Valandil]

PS - also, I don't know if they expected Minas Tirith to fall so quickly under attack when they set off for Isengard. It was two things involving the palantir of Orthanc that triggered Sauron's attack: Pippin looking into it - and Aragorn subsequently revealing himself to Sauron through it. Those happened after they reached Isengard. Even the first made Gandalf hot-foot it to MT.

[Artanis]

Originally posted by Valandil
PS - also, I don't know if they expected Minas Tirith to fall so quickly under attack when they set off for Isengard. It was two things involving the palantir of Orthanc that triggered Sauron's attack: Pippin looking into it - and Aragorn subsequently revealing himself to Sauron through it. Those happened after they reached Isengard. Even the first made Gandalf hot-foot it to MT. I'm not sure that these two events actually triggered the attack on Minas Tirith, I think it would have come that soon anyway. Aragorn's strife with Sauron through the palantir made Sauron send more of his forces to Minas Tirith perhaps, to meet the challenge of the heir of Isildur. And wouldn't Pippin's little encounter with the palantir rather make Sauron relax, because now he thought the Ring was in Isengard with Saruman, his ally?
Gandalf himself had several reasons to go, I think: To put Saruman in his place - and give him a chance to repent, To check on the status and instruct Treebeard and To reunite elements of the fellowship.This I agree with. Gandalf's reasons to go to Isengard are very understandable.I believe he brought King Theoden because Saruman had wronged him and his kingdom, and Theoden therefore needed to be a part of - or at least witness to - the confrontation. That is the reason Gandalf gave in the book, yes. But Theoden gives the impression of being willing to follow Gandalf before that. I think from Theoden's point of view this is - what shall I say - neglecting some of his duties towards Gondor?
It also served as a demonstration to Theoden that Saruman's power was indeed broken and he was no longer a threat to Rohan... that they COULD turn their focus eastward.That's a good point. But I think Theoden on his return to Edoras would have gotten reports from his marshal Elfhelm and other people that the war was indeed won in Rohan.

[IronParrot]

I'm not sure that these two events actually triggered the attack on Minas Tirith, I think it would have come that soon anyway. Aragorn's strife with Sauron through the palantir made Sauron send more of his forces to Minas Tirith perhaps, to meet the challenge of the heir of Isildur. And wouldn't Pippin's little encounter with the palantir rather make Sauron relax, because now he thought the Ring was in Isengard with Saruman, his ally?
The short answer: no.

Saruman was in many ways a liability to Mordor. No self-respecting Dark Lord would trust the Wizard of Many Colours as far as he could throw him. Saruman was very clearly trying to profiteer off the security of an alliance with Mordor while searching for the Ring himself; that's why Sauron was particularly watchful of his activities. As soon as they lost direct contact over the palantir, Sauron would have known something was wrong. Just look at the conflicting orders of the Orcs of Isengard and Mordor in Book III: Sauron was very wary of Saruman's unholy allegiance to him.

Aragorn challenging Sauron in the palantir was clearly a provocation for him to charge into Gondor prematurely. Remember that the fundamental flaw in Sauron's line of thinking is that he couldn't possibly envision that anyone would want to back-door into Mordor and destroy the Ring. Therefore, any and all such provocations by a potential King of Gondor that could beat Sauron on the power-scale was seen as the greatest and most direct threat to the Dark Lord's place on top of the proverbial hill.

The defeat of Saruman, by itself, could also be seen by Mordor as a red flag.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by Valandil
It also served as a demonstration to Theoden that Saruman's power was indeed broken and he was no longer a threat to Rohan... that they COULD turn their focus eastward.
That's the ticket.

[Artanis]

Iron Parrot, your arguments are convincing. But I don't think Theoden reasoned like that when he followed Gandalf. I still don't quite see why he should take his forces to Isengard instead of turning them towards Gondor. There was already a war going on there, for Osgiliath, and everyone knew that the battle would soon enough come to Minas Tirith itself.

[IronParrot]

Yes, but until the Muster of Rohan, I think the issue of whether or not Rohan would come to Gondor's aid at all was still very much up in the air.

One thing was clear, though: Théoden had a score to settle with his neighbour in Isengard. And it is ultimately Théoden who symbolizes Saruman's fall when he shows on the steps of Isengard that he is impervious to the wizard's voice.

[The Gaffer]

Also, they only sent a small group to Isengard. The Muster of Rohan wouldn't have happened any faster if they hadn't gone to Isengard.

And we'd never have had the Flotsam and Jetsam chapter.

[Artanis]

Originally posted by IronParrot
One thing was clear, though: Théoden had a score to settle with his neighbour in Isengard. And it is ultimately Théoden who symbolizes Saruman's fall when he shows on the steps of Isengard that he is impervious to the wizard's voice. That's a good point, and probably why Gandalf wanted Theoden to come.
Originally posted by The Gaffer
And we'd never have had the Flotsam and Jetsam chapter.That would be a pity of course. :)

[old scholar]

I think on eof the reasons that Gandalf convinced the Riders of Rohan to go to Isengard was that he knew that Merry or Pippin had some more part to play.:confused:

[Black Breathalizer]

Originally posted by Artanis
Why did king Theoden and his men follow Gandalf to Isengard? The answer to this one always seemed obvious to me. Saruman attacked Rohan. Theoden and Company are able to hold off the Uruks at Helm's Deep. When the reminants of Saruman's army retreat and run into the Heurons, it became clear that Saruman was suddenly vulnerable.

It is human nature to want to strike back against your foe once you've gained the upper hand. If Theoden waited, for all he knew, he'd be allowing Saruman to rebuild his army for yet another attack on his kingdom. Theoden understood that this was the time to take the fight to Isengard with the hope of ending the threat of Saruman once and for all.

[Artanis]

From TTT, The road to Isengard:'And what may be the answer to your riddle?' said Théoden.
'If you would learn that, you should come with me to Isengard ' answered Gandalf.
'To Isengard?' they cried.
'Yes,' said Gandalf. 'I shall return to Isengard, and those who will may come with me. There we may see strange things.'
'But there are not men enough in the Mark, not if they were all gathered together and healed of wounds and weariness, to assault the stronghold of Saruman,' said Théoden.
'Nevertheless to Isengard I go,' said Gandalf. 'I shall not stay there long. My way lies now eastward. Look for me in Edoras, ere the waning of the moon!'
'Nay!' said Théoden. 'In the dark hour before dawn I doubted, but we will not part now. I will come with you, if that is your counsel.'
It seems to me that Theoden went to Isengard because Gandalf asked him to. He didn't think Saruman to be vulnerable, he still thought of Isengard as a stronghold, he didn't know about the Ents and their desicion to go to war.

He really shows a great confidence in Gandalf.

[Attalus]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
The answer to this one always seemed obvious to me. Saruman attacked Rohan. Theoden and Company are able to hold off the Uruks at Helm's Deep. When the reminants of Saruman's army retreat and run into the Heurons, it became clear that Saruman was suddenly vulnerable.

It is human nature to want to strike back against your foe once you've gained the upper hand. If Theoden waited, for all he knew, he'd be allowing Saruman to rebuild his army for yet another attack on his kingdom. Theoden understood that this was the time to take the fight to Isengard with the hope of ending the threat of Saruman once and for all. I agree. And, don't forget, Theoden had not yet received the Red Arrow, so he was not immediately called to Minas Tirith.

[crickhollow]

Originally posted by IronParrot
One thing was clear, though: Théoden had a score to settle with his neighbour in Isengard. And it is ultimately Théoden who symbolizes Saruman's fall when he shows on the steps of Isengard that he is impervious to the wizard's voice. Do you think that it was also important for the men of Rohan to witness Theoden's rejection of Saruman? This would confirm in their minds that Theoden and not Gandalf is calling the shots where the kingdom of Rohan is concerned.

[Bombadillo]

You all provide good arguments, but I have a completely different theory.

As Artanis pointed out, Theoden didn't seem to have a reason to go with Gandalf.* In fact, it seemed that Rohan could be better off if he went straight back to Rohan (of Gondor).

But I think Gandalf's reasoning was a bit in the past, not the future. The Steward Beren had given Saruman the Key of Orthanc many years ago, probably as a result of his powerfully persuasive vioce. Gandalf was now on his way to cast him out of the tower once and for all. Surely, Gondor, or at least a strong Gondorian ally, should be there to witness such a triumph. Gandalf was of course very wise and understood at once that Aragorn couldn't make it, but he had Theoden and much of Rohan's army right with him. He's a good guy, so he invited them along, proabably forseeing their relative uselesness upon their immediate appearance on Pelenor Feilds.

In short, I think it was more ceremonial that strategic.

*As for Theoden's reasoning: He obviously knew Gandalf was a smart guy. I'd go with him too. But more than that, I think it was sort of a "I got your back against that bastard, Mithrandir. I'm right behind you." Just to be there, not fully aware of what would even happen.

[Attalus]

Originally posted by Bombadillo
. Beren had given Saruman the Key of Orthanc many years ago, probably as a result of his powerfully persuasive vioce. . He did? I thought Beren died in the First Age, and Orthanc was built in the Second.:confused:

[Earniel]

I think he means the steward Beren. When reading the list of the stewards of Gondor, I noticed they sometimes recycled names from earlier aera's.

[Bombadillo]

Woops. I'll edit that in.

[Snowdog]

Beren and Turin were popular names to name kids I suppose.

[Olmer]

Bombadillo
...I think it was more ceremonial that strategic.
Gandalf wanted to set a score with Saruman, for he had wronged him before. Now it comes the shining hour of Gandalf the White. Being quite ambitious he wanted to have a witneses of his success, this why Theoden and Co. was invited along . Other than to witness his triumph over his former supervisor, they were quite useless at the given place.
Artanis
It seems to me that Theoden went to Isengard because Gandalf asked him to. He didn't think Saruman to be vulnerable, he still thought of Isengard as a stronghold...
Judging by quote from TTT, I think that, after the wizard's great assistance, Theoden, as man of high honor, felt obliged to follow Gandalf, just to back him up if unexpected would happened.


IronParrot
Aragorn challenging Sauron in the palantir was clearly a provocation for him to charge into Gondor prematurely
Right on the target. Aragorn was provoking the war, because only the war could give him a chance to claim the throne of Gondor. He needed the war and he was trying to make it happen in spite of whatever Gandalf's plans had been.
But his first successful attempt happened much earlier.
Up to that time Sauron was busy remodeling and redecorating his Barad - Dur and making inquiries about the Ring.
The **** hit the fan (pardon my French) after poor little maniac "ventured himself into Mordor" to be tortured and thus to let Sauron know that the Ring is not working for him, but just safely tugged in the little hobbit's hole .
Gandalf, without having the second thought about real intentions of his "friend"(Aragorn) who said to him that ..." something draw him away" .. , was puzzling at what kind of obstacle made Gollum to turn in opposite of his intended direction .
I think, this "something" was that same" friend", who, using his experience as ranger, he made it in such subtle way that neither Gandalf nor Gollum himself ever suspected of the intended plan.

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Olmer
Right on the target. Aragorn was provoking the war, because only the war could give him a chance to claim the throne of Gondor. He needed the war and he was trying to make it happen in spite of whatever Gandalf's plans had been.
But his first successful attempt happened much earlier.
Up to that time Sauron was busy remodeling and redecorating his Barad - Dur and making inquiries about the Ring.
The **** hit the fan (pardon my French) after poor little maniac "ventured himself into Mordor" to be tortured and thus to let Sauron know that the Ring is not working for him, but just safely tugged in the little hobbit's hole .
Gandalf, without having the second thought about real intentions of his "friend"(Aragorn) who said to him that ..." something draw him away" .. , was puzzling at what kind of obstacle made Gollum to turn in opposite of his intended direction .
I think, this "something" was that same" friend", who, using his experience as ranger, he made it in such subtle way that neither Gandalf nor Gollum himself ever suspected of the intended plan.

That's quite an accusation Olmer (especially the part I underlined)... and against MY HERO!!! :eek:

I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask you to step outside... and take off your glasses, if you wear them! ;) :p

[Olmer]

Originally posted by Valandil
That's quite an accusation Olmer (especially the part I underlined)... and against MY HERO!!! :eek:


Hey! He is MY HERO too! Look in my profile.:p
I think the ability to make independent from Elves or wizards influence decision and to proceed with his plan in spite of whatever coming on him, just adds to his titanic and tragic character, makes him unordinary and very strong (mentally) person.
I'm not blaming him. I'm admiring him.:)

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Olmer
Hey! He is MY HERO too! Look in my profile.:p
I think the ability to make independent from Elves or wizards influence decision and to proceed with his plan in spite of whatever coming on him, just adds to his titanic and tragic character, makes him unordinary and very strong (mentally) person.
I'm not blaming him. I'm admiring him.:)

But you make him sound so... sneaky! :p

[Forkbeard]

Originally posted by Valandil
But you make him sound so... sneaky! :p

Not just sneaky....Sauronish.....in Olmer's take, there are no good guys; there are those who want power and will wield malaciously and those who want power and will wield it somewhat less malaciously. I guess I'm just not that jaded.

Forkbeard

[Olmer]

Originally posted by Forkbeard
Not just sneaky....Sauronish....

...in Olmer's take, there are no good guys;

there are those who want power and will wield malaciously and those who want power and will wield it somewhat less malaciously. I guess I'm just not that jaded.

Forkbeard
Who said that the Ranger had to be a wall-flower?
Don't be so naive: to deal with danger one everyday basis you had to be ruthless and creative, and goodiness is not an option for survival. If you don't believe, ask Vietnam veterans.

There is no totally good guys or totally bad guys, as there is no pure Evil or pure Goodiness, everything is relative.

You are just too modest...:) EVERYBODY at some or another period of time WANTS to have a power over others to make things work for you in the desirable way. The difference is that for some of them it's just stays as a wishfull thinking,

[Forkbeard]

Originally posted by Olmer
Who said that the Ranger had to be a wall-flower?
Don't be so naive: to deal with danger one everyday basis you had to be ruthless and creative, and goodiness is not an option for survival. If you don't believe, ask Vietnam veterans.

There is no totally good guys or totally bad guys, as there is no pure Evil or pure Goodiness, everything is relative.

You are just too modest...:) EVERYBODY at some or another period of time WANTS to have a power over others to make things work for you in the desirable way. The difference is that for some of them it's just stays as a wishfull thinking,

Who said the Ranger was a wall-flower?
What makes you think I'm naive? Having frequently been in danger of various kinds, I believe you can smart, alive, and have ruth and goodness. Again, I'm not that jaded, though I've seen the most degraded forms humanity can take.

But that is all beside the point, what matters is not your view or my view of reality and notions of "goodness" vs. "badness" but to attempt to discern Tolkien's and the views he presents in the novel. It is naive to assume that one's own view of the world is the author's view as well. Tolkien rejected relativism, not necessarily in favor of absolutes, but one can choose other points on the spectrum besides the extremes.

As for there are no "truly" good guys, we'd agree on the statement but not on the meaning. That is, "good" in Tolkien is flawed and makes mistakes. Evil is also not absolute and makes mistakes. But in the end the purposes of the good are not the same kind as the purposes of evil: Aragirn and Sauron are not seperated merely by degrees of self interest and desire to weild power, a power that for Tolkien corrupts. They are seperated by kind.....their approaches to power, to self will, to others are very, very different. As for the desire for power....sure, isn't that the nature of sin in Tolkien's view? But the desire for power is not the same as having nefarious purposes.

Forkbeard