In Letter 144, dating to November 10 1955, J.R.R. Tolkien wrote: "I do not think that anything is referred to in The L. of the R. which does not actually exist in legends written before it was begun, or at least belonging to an earlier period -- except only the 'cats of Queen Beruthiel'...."

Although I think he had only the primary narrative in mind, Appendix A and Appendix B introduced a great number of names and ideas which did not pre-exist The Lord of the Rings.The lengthy histories of the Dunadan kingdoms Arnor and Gondor evoked dozens of new stories which sprang into microcosmic life, most failing to took root and flourish in later writings. One of the more puzzling events Tolkien devised for those histories was the division of the Kingdom of Arnor into three smaller realms: Arthedain, Rhudaur, and Cardolan.

The separation and subsequent events were indeed mentioned in the primary text (especially in the Bombadil material) as well as in subsequent writings (such as "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age"). But the cause of the division, as well as the names of Amlaith of Fornost's brothers, have yet to be published. It may be that Tolkien never visited this part of the history again, and it is destined to remain no more than a footnote in the chronicles of the Heirs of Elendil.

A few years ago I speculated that Amlaith might be derived from two Sindarin roots, am- (up,upwards) and lek- (release, loose or lossen). Well, I have good reason not to call myself a linguist. It may be more likely that Amlaith is derived from am + laita (praise, as in "A laita te! Laita te!", when the soldiers of Gondor praise Frodo and Samwise). Would this name's pronunciation be am + LA + eeth or is ai a dipthong rendering the pronunciation as AM + lye(th)? Amlaith may therefore mean something like "high praise" or "highly praised". Poetically, it could be translated as "worthy one" or "rightful one".

Amlaith's name may not reveal much about his character or his history, but the names of Arnor's kings sometimes have historical significance. After Malvegil, all the kings took names with the prefix Ar- to assert their claim over all of Arnor. Arvedui was named the "Last King (of Arthedain/Arnor)". Aranarth's name meant "king of the realm" - a name perhaps bestowed upon him by his father in anticipation of better days.

Knowing so little about Amlaith' name requires us to look elsewhere for clues to the cause of Arnor's division. We know that he quarreled with his brothers, but why did their generation seek a division of the realm? What could have inspired such ambition in two royal princes? One possibility is that lands became available for exploitation by the Line of Isildur. That is, it could be that just as the Line of Isildur would eventually be extinguished in both Rhudaur and Cardolan, perhaps other princely lines perished before Third Age 861, the year in which Earendur Amlaith's father died.

We know from Appendix A to The Lord of the Rings that Cardolan's last prince died in 1409, more than 50 years after the Line of Isildur came to an end in that kingdom. Since he was not of the Line of Isildur, where did he get his title from? One possibility is that he was descended from a daughter of the Line of Isildur, perhaps the daughter of Amlaith's brother. Another possibility is that some great warrior of Cardolan rose to prominence and was rewarded with a noble title by a king.

There is a precedent for a princely family outside of Elendil's House: The Princes of Belfalas and Dol Amroth (whom many people suppose are the same line). According to Unfinished Tales and The Peoples of Middle-earth, Galador -- son of Imrazor the Numenorean and the Silvan Elf Mithrellas -- was the first lord of Dol Amroth. But was Imrazor already a prince? In "Cirion and Eorl" (published in Unfinished Tales) we are told that a lord of Dol Amroth bore the title of prince, which Elendil had bestowed upon his family. Christopher Tolkien questions the origin of this tradition, and asks if it does not conflict with the tale of Imrazor?

It could well be that JRRT meant to fill in some gaps and establish a clear connection between Imrahil's title of "prince" and Elendil's House. The Stewards of Gondor are said, in "The Heirs of Elendil" (published in The Peoples of Middle-earth) to be "of royal origin". It's unlikely they could claim colateral descent from Elros with the Line of Elendil. Rather, I think they had to be descended from a daughter of one of the Kings of Gondor descended from Anarion. But the Lords of Dol Amroth are said to be related to Elendil, which is in part why he bestowed the title of prince upon their family.

When Gandalf and Pippin are riding from Rohan to Gondor, Gandalf recites an ancient rhyme of lore: "Tall ships and tall kings three times three, what brought they from the foundered land over the flowing sea? Seven stars and seven stones and one white tree."

We know that the stones are the Palantiri, the Stones of Seeing, which the kings distributed throughout their realms and used to maintain communication. The white tree was the sapling of Nimloth saved by Isildur, and planted by him in Gondor. The stars have long puzzled people, although the index tells us that Elendil and his captains had seven stars (between them). The seven stars "originally represented the single stars on the banners of each of the seven ships (of 9) that bore a palantir".

The seven stars were incorporated into the royal emblem of Gondor, which placed a winged crown above the stars and the white tree. This emblem may have come directly from Isildur when he conferred rule of Gondor upon his nephew Meneldil. It does not reflect the authority of the two kings, Isildur and his brother Anarion, but rather the authority of Elendil himself. The white tree, of course, honors Isildur. The banner thus proclaims the authority of the House of Elendil as delivered by the Line of Isildur, the High King. By the end of the Third Age, only the Guards of the Citadel wore this emblem on their livery. They served the House of Elendil.

The royal standard implies a special form of conservatism in Gondor, a blend of moral conservatism and political conservatism. That conservatism sustained Gondor throughout its trials, except in one instance: the Kin-strife. The Kin-Strife marks a point of division between moral conservatives (the followers of the Kings) and political conservatives (the adherents of the Numenorean status quo). Moral conservatism ultimately won out, but the balance was not fully restored until the Stewards took office.

Under the kings who succeeded Eldacar, whenever suspicion fell upon their relatives, such potential rivals would either take wives of non-Numenorean blood or they fled to Umbar and became enemies of the crown. Gondor's kings thus bled their realm dry of royal blood. They introduced a faux political conservatism which destroyed them. The Stewards established a new political conservatism which maintained the realm in political stasis until a rigtful king could again be found, and in so doing also established a rule of moral conservatism.

The clash between moral conservatism and political conservatism is more clearly underscored in the Second Age conflict between the Faithful Numenoreans and the Kings Men. The Faithful Numenoreans stood for moral conservatism. They remained faithful to Iluvatar and his representatives, the Valar. The Kings Men stood for political conservatism. They placed their national interest (in acquiring immortality) above their moral interest (being righteous in the eyes of God). The Faithful became the loyal opposition until the Kings Men began driving them out of Numenor.

In this Second Age context, political conservatism takes on the role of liberalism in Middle-earth. That is, moral conservatism stood for the status quo, whereas political conservatism sought to establish a new status quo which favored the liberal (challenging) point of view. However, in the Third Age Kin-strife, the roles were reversed. The moral conservatives (the Gondorian kings) actually presented the liberal point of view: they wanted to introduce non-Numenorean blood to the Royal House, thus challenging the status quo.

In effect, the Gondorian kings disrupted more than just bloodlines. They threw the exchanges of rights and obligations that undoubtedly accompanied marriages between Gondor's various families into complete disarray. The introduction of Northmen into Gondor's society ensured that Gondor's Old Nobility now had to share wealth, esteem, and political influence with new, shorter-lived families. Political conservatism would thus become firmly entrenched along family lines. Those families that welcomed the newcomers and intermingled with them would have been more supportive of the Kings.

The Stewards ultimately underwent a similar division in conservative positions. So long as their moral conservatism and political conservatism worked for the general good of Gondor and the Free Peoples, the Stewards of Gondor were righteous and just. There was no need for a King to return to Gondor from the shadows of the north. But when Denethor II unjustly sought to maintain the political status quo, he forfeited his moral right to be Gondor's ruler. Faramir, and probably Boromir before he died, recognized the moral obligation that Gondor owed to Elendil's House. They could never take the kingship away from Elendil's Heirs. Thus, their political conservatism had to recognize Aragorn's right to claim the throne.

Gondor was neither morally nor legally obligated to bestow the throne upon Aragorn simply because he was Isildur's Heir. Gondor's Council had concluded that the Line of Isildur had no right to Gondor's kingship because Isildur had conferred that right to the Line of Anarion. IT was incumbent upon Aragorn to present his claim as Elendil's Heir -- a claim which had not been addressed when Arvedui pressed it a thousand years before. Gnodor had elected to ignore Arvedui perhaps on the basis of having already rejected him rather than on the basis of rejecting Elendil's House. Hence, the Line of Isildur was barred from taking Gondor's throne in its name, but the House of Elendil could still claim the kingship.

But only if Gondor's moral conservatism and political conservatism both allowed such a claim to be reasonably made. That is, the claim had to be both morally correct and politically acceptable. To be morally correct, clear proofs of the claimant's lineage would be required. Elrond's word might have been good enough, but I think what clenched the moral deal for Aragorn was the fact that he and he alone brought Anduril (formerly Elendil's sword Narsil) to Gondor.

Politically, an Heir of Elendil would only be acceptable if it were clear no other claimants to the throne would come forth. Appendix A says there were no clear claimants upon the disappearance of Earnur in 2050. But there were still, apparently, descendants of Anarion left alive in both Gondor and Umbar. Umbar would eventually be destroyed again, but when it was rebuilt it no longer served as a home for descendants of Anarion. And Gondor's noble families eventually became so far removed from the Line of Anarion that they wielded less royal privilege than the Line of the Stewards (who were entitled to none themselves).

Denethor II's refusal to cede rule of Gondor to Aragorn was politically conservative but it defied moral conservatism. It was an unjust usurpation of Aragorn's right to rule Gondor. Denethor had no right or reason to challenge Aragorn's moral and political claims to Gondor's throne. Aragorn rightly sensed (from having known Denethor years before, perhaps) that Gondor would be divided if he directly claimed the throne from Denethor. Denethor's death thus prevented the division of forces by allowing Faramir to step into his father's place and restore the balance between moral and political conservatism.

The conflicts and Numenor and Gondor may therefore shed light on the type of conflict Tolkien might have envisioned, had he turned his thought to the causes of the division of Arnor. There would most likely have been a division of political forces into Conservative (loyal to Amlaith) and Liberal (loyal to his brothers) factions. The Liberals would have challenged Amlaith's authority, but they would have needed a basis for doing so.

I think a vaccuum might have been created if two princely families died out during Earendur's time. Although JRRT does not say what became of the six captains who served with Elendil, it seems reasonable to guess they became princes in Arnor and Gondor. Gondor originally started out with five regions: Anorien (ruled by Anarion), Ithilien (ruled by Isildur), Calenardhon, Belfalas (ruled by the ancestors of Imrazor the Numenorean), and Lebennin. Calenardhon eventually was divided between two minor noble families, the hereditary chieftains of Aglarond and Angrenost, whose families and peoples were eventually consolidated into one community at Angrenost before being replaced by the Dunlendings.

I think it unlikely Tolkien would have envisioned a proud Numenorean family -- perhaps related to Elendil -- descending into oblivion without a struggle. Perhaps there was never a Prince of Calenardhon or a Prince of Lebennin, but both regions would have been suitable for princely lords. Cirion's bestowal of Calenardhon upon Eorl and his people only implies that by 2510 there was no such princely house. It does not follow such a family never existed.

"Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age" tells us that Elendil's people settled throughout Eriador: at Annuminas, along the Baranduin, in Minhiriath, northern Cardolan, in the Weather Hills and at Fornost, and in Rhudaur. Elendil landed in the north with three ships. Four of the seven stars thus arrived in the north, whereas only three of them arrived in the south. Elendil's three captains could thus have established princely families which survived long into the Third Age (or two of them could have died out in the war with Mordor).

But though the idea that two princely houses might have failed quickly is reasonable, there is no literary justification for such a supposition. That is, JRRT left no holes in the texts that such a hypothesis would explain. On the other hand, if during Earendur's reign two families perished, or the second family perished, Amlaith's brothers could have seen opportunity to enhance their persnoal fortunes. What if they both married daughters of the last lords of those houses?

Imagine Amlaith preparing to assume the High Kingship and his brothers approach him, demanding that he bestow upon them hereditary princeships with all the lands and rights of their wives' fathers. While Amlaitht might be accused of harboring his own personal ambitions for such available resources, it could be that he might have questioned the moral and legal arguments of his brothers. What if other claimants to such titles lived, such as cousins descended from the male lines of both families.

The assertion of princely rights through marriage, while questionable, might be sufficient to establish a precedent for Arvedui's subsequent claim to Gondor's throne. The Council of Gondor, in replying to Arvedui's first petition, reportedly said: "The crown and royalty of Gondor belongs solely to the heirs of Meneldil, son of Anarion, to whom Isildur relinquished this realm. In Gondor this heritage is reckoned through the sons only; and we have not heard that the law is otherwise in Arnor."

Against my supposition we can place the second part of Arvedui's second petition, in which he wrote: "Moreover, in Numenor of old the sceptre descended to the eldest child of the king, whether man or woman. It is true that the law has not been observed in the lands of exile every troubled by war; but such was the law of our people, to which we now refer, seeing that the sons of Ondoher died childless."

Tolkien refers to the power of ancient law in Letter 244, a draft composed around 1963: "A Numenorean King was <i>monarch</i>, with the power of unquestioned decision in debate: but he governed the realm with the frame of ancient law, of which he was administrator (and interpreter) but not the maker...."

Amlaith thus could have been presented with a dilemma: if his brothers both wished to usurp the rights and privileges of non-royal families, were they invoking ancient law for unjust reasons? Did Numenorean law allow princely titles to pass through daughters? If not, one clever solution would be to rally the followers of the daughters and proclaim new kingships which coincided with the boundaries of the ancient princely lands. Of course, one must ask why the third princely house might have sided with the newly crowned King of Cardolan. Why not remain loyal to Amlaith?

Even rampant speculation cannot answer the question as Tolkien might have. But whatever the cause of strife between the sons of Earendur, it seems almost certain that their differences reflected a clash between moral conservatism and political conservatism -- political conservatism that sought to retain a status quo perhaps threatened by Amlaith's move from Annuminas to Fornost Erain. Amlaith's decision to move could have triggered an immense debate over the moral cost of abandoning Elendil's city. Elendil himself was not buried there, but where were the High Kings since Valandil entombed?

As Annuminas was abandoned in 861, so was Osgiliath in 1636 when the Great Plague swept through Gondor. Both cities succumbed to declines in population and the rulers of Arnor and Gondor sought to place themselves in more populous cities. But Tarondor assumed the throne of Gondor after a period of upheaval, whereas Amlaith assumed his throne at the onset of a period of upheaval. Amlaith's decision to move the seat of power east to Fornost could have been either a cause of dissension or made in response to the conflict with his brothers.

If Amlaith's name means "high praise" or "highly praised", does it refer to him or does it refer to a singular act he performed? It need be nothing more than a name, but I think that the his decision to take a name in Sindarin rather than Quenya signifies a loss of status and prestige. Suppose that, instead of going to war with his broters (as most people suppose), Amlaith deferred the inevitable by compromising in both principle and Numenorean law?

Suppose that, instead of recognizing his brothers' pretensions to princely lordships he suggested a division of Arnor into 3 equal kingships. To this Gondor might object on the grounds that the two new realms should not inherit any privileges of succession to the High Kingship. It would be unthinkable that a High King might come from a family younger than Anarion's. If Amlaith's Line should fail, should a King of Cardolan or a King of Rhudaur be recognized as the High King? What if his brothers argued for exactly that right, too?

Tolkien only tells us that the High Kings of Arnor ended with Earendur. He does not explain why the High Kingship had to end, but it seems inappropriate for Arthedain to be elevated above unified Gondor in status. Gondor may have had no voice in the debate, but Gondorian troops were stationed at Tharbad. It's not like Gondor's power was far removed from Arnor's border.

Therefore, if we suppose that Amlaith proposed and ceded his brother's kingships, then he would have had two justifications for doing so: first, to prevent his brothers from altering the ancient body of Numenorean law through usurping lands not rightfully theirs. If they married the daughters of now-extinct princely houses, the daughters should have inherited their fathers' titles in their own names under Numenorean law. Secondly, Amlaith could have been acting to prevent civil war. While the texts make it clear that there were eventually wars between Arthedain, Rhudaur, and Cardolan, Tolkien doesn't say specifically that Amlaith fought with his brothers.

Amlaith may not have foresworn the High Kingship. Rather, by not claiming it for himself, he may only have placed it in abeyance, a legal limbo that would have preserved the heritage intact from the questionable claim of a divided Line of Isildur. This may explain why Malvegil's son Argeleb I felt justified in claiming royal authority over Rhudaur and Cardolan. But Rhudaur resisted Argeleb's claim. And what did Gondor make of it? Romendcail II (Minalcar) was by this time governing Gondor. He was far more powerful than Afgeleb. Why should Romendacil have agreed to restore superior prestige to the Line of Isildur?

These choices nonetheless could have established several precedents which impacted later decisions by Gondor and Arnor: Arvedui's attempt to claim the throne as Firiel's husband (rather than assist her in pressing her own claim, which would have been more consistent with ancient Numenorean practice); Gondor's reluctance to accept the return of the Line of Isildur to the south; and the eventual reunification of the two realms of Arnor and Gondor through the Line of Isildur.

Amlaith was clearly morally conservative, but through circumstances we do not know the details of he either supported or at least tolerated a politcal conservatism which clashed with his moral conservatism. That is, he was acting to preserve a status quo (peace, recognition from Gondor, and the continuity of the Line of Isildur) through a liberal action: the division of Arnor into three realms. Amlaith may have earned high praise indeed for preventing the complete self-destruction of Arnor.

Michael Martinez is the author of Visualizing Middle-earth (ISBN 0-7388-3408-4), Parma Endorion: Essays on Middle-earth, 3rd Edition, and Understanding Middle-earth (ISBN 1-58776-145-9).