Consolidation of Aragorn's Rule and Reconstruction

Now, the whole uncharted territory problem I mentioned expresses itself in another way too. Essentially, there is no way that the War of the Ring would lead straight to a new golden age for Gondor. One does not simply take a society transitioning away from feudalism then introduce a devastating mass mobilization war into the mix and expect everything to be okay. Especially if one replaces the leadership at the same time.
Essentially, Gondor would need to rebuild its society while dealing with the rapidly occurring changes the war would unleash. Meanwhile, Aragorn would be trying to consolidate his rule. But I have really no exact blueprint to work with here in order to figure out exactly how this would work. This is not military tactics to work with, where there is "clearly" an ideal option. Nor is geopolitics, where one can eliminate some possibilities by stating those enemies are too far away. So to start, I am going to detour a bit into more story writing methods to get some ideas.
First is the issue of ultimately Aragorn has to die. He is human after all and his mortality is a key element of his romantic subplot. The question is how you get this death to happen in a way that is compelling and highlights the themes of the narrative. This is where I think the French and Russian revolution models could come in very useful. Aragorn can be struggling mightily to hold Gondor together, expand the realm, defeat its enemies all while battling the side effects of his slide to evil. Despite the difficulties, he keeps things together in this version of the story.
But, when and how he dies will become a form of inciting incident itself, just as how the fall and eventual executions of the monarchs of France and Russia set up the coming drama of the Napoleonic wars and the rise of the Soviet Union. For our case, Gondor’s internal transformation from feudal monarchy to industrial democracy will take many different turns based on how this fall and death of Aragorn takes place.
The fall and death need to happen in such a way that it feels like the story has been building up to this point. It also needs to be a big moment that serves as a turning point – effectively breaking the status quo. Thus the story needs to both facilitate it and be thrown out of alignment due to it. Often, good dramatic hero deaths – especially in the ancient Greek tradition – come from a character flaw that causes the conditions of the character’s death the result of their own unforced errors.
Exploring how this happens and the consequences of it both preserves the realism and can form an extremely interesting narrative. This allows the hero to have a presence in the story even after their death by making large sections of the story about filling the hole they leave behind. In monarchies and in some fiction, there is a particular person who takes over for the dead person and attempts to fill their role in the story. There is in some historical cases (see any succession struggle) and stories like Game of Thrones, there is a vacuum where the narrative is forced to follow many people due to the fact that no one person is left powerful or interesting enough to become the focus of events. This can then produce hosts of conflicts and potential story lines. In order to pull this off, one needs to have the other characters not have their arcs purely bound up with the continual reign of Aragorn. Once they have some of their own agency, they can act on their own and drive the story.
This means that even as the story has been focused on Aragorn and his role has been central to the story and the cause of his own death, the power has drifted away from him to the point the narrative is no longer driven by him. Instead, characters that continue after begin to appear as if their actions are independent of Aragorn’s. Thus, while Aragorn’s death may be the culminating point of the story thus far, the narrative power should have shifted to the point Aragorn’s fate no longer controls all. By doing so, you get a very fitting foil to the theme of the siren song of power with its corruption. This is its instability. Aragorn becomes so attached to his own power that the actions he takes to preserve it undermine not just him but the entire system he built. Just how the creation of the One Ring greatly expanded Sauron's power and proved to be his undoing.
Lets get to some more technical story telling elements here. A primary conflict is the internal conflict of the hero that reflects the theme or intended character arc. The secondary conflict is the outward battle that hinges on the tactical abilities of the hero. This is meant to be a symbiotic, outward manifestation of the more internal primary conflict. Often, some change in the hero critical to them winning the primary conflict and overcoming their weaknesses is important to the victory in the secondary battle. Thus, victory in the primary battle is required for victory in the secondary battle. This makes the battles integral to the story overall as it increases the stakes as the many story lines come to culmination at the same pivotal moment. Basically this means that character arc should mirror to some degree the narrative overall. So, the secondary/external conflict clarifies, provides context to and symbolism for the more internal primary conflict.
To set up this good conflict combo, the character arc for the hero should rest on their weakness, a moral need and a psychological need. The weakness is basic human flaws. A psychological need is one that only affects the hero and must be fixed through internal struggle if the hero wants a better life. The moral need is what the hero needs to overcome through internal struggle so that their action no longer harm those around them. These weaknesses and needs are overcome and met in the moment of self revelation. The hero demonstrates that they have met the conditions they need to when they commit to a new course of action that their weakness prevented them from before.
Remember how climactic battles have two intertwined conflicts? There is no need to have them both won. It is entirely possible to have the hero win the secondary battle but not the primary one. This can be an effective set up for a turn towards evil. Especially when winning the secondary battle requires a loss in the primary battle or even embracing the very weakness that victory in the primary battle requires the hero to overcome. This is rare, but has a precedent in Lord of The Rings with Isildur. He defeated Sauron in battle – a secondary battle. But he fell to the corruption of the One Ring – thus losing the primary battle. Such conditions are the set up for the fallen hero story, one that I feel the post War of the Rings Middle Earth is perfect for.
The heroic fall story is one well covered in Ancient Greek literary tradition, fallowing a story essentially describing what would have otherwise be called the villain defeating themselves and the central figure in their own story, rather than the victim and antagonist in some other character’s story. This makes them tools for moral instruction. Part of this is the need to show the consequences of failure to live up to moral standards, using the suffering the hero brings on themselves to demonstrate the essential part morality plays in happiness. At the same time, the hero, as a representation of the society and the individual reader, the change in values a reversal of fortune can cause introspection in the reader, preventing the fall of the real life individual. As a result, a reversal of fortune must be the beginning of the story arch for the hero – with one journey being started by a tragic call to adventure.
Due to the fact that the problems seen in the villain are simply projections of internal issues and not external to the hero, the refusal to address their own problems means that the hero will fail to solve the core problems they face. In fact, the projection and the single minded, hate fueled quest to defeat the villain will result in the hero undergoing a process of reversal into the opposite – becoming the very evil they wished to defeat. This projection serves as the fatal flaw that leads to the fall and total reversal of fortune that was in no way inevitable based on the initial misfortune. A defining feature of this arch is that the sufferer must be the agent of their own suffering by no conscious moral failing on his part in order to create a tragic irony. Thus, while moral flaws are present and contribute to the eventual outcome, it must be understandable to the audience and not out of some intentional evil – at least at first.
Ultimately, the villain must be defeated, so that the journey to the dark side can be completed by the hero taking over for the villain literally as well as symbolically. At this point, the reversal has become complete in terms of character, but not in terms of circumstances – that comes later.
The victory over the villain takes a psychological toll on the hero in two important ways. First of which, the hero's emotional needs required the struggle and persistent push towards victory to distract from the reality of the hero's personal problems. Thus, the hero both needs a villain to struggle against to provide something resembling emotional stability, but it cannot hold back in the struggle either, as the villain as scapegoat needs to be defeated to purge the negative elements from the hero's life. Due to the fact that the underlying causes of the hero's inner turmoil do not disappear due to the loss of the villain, new villains will be manufactured to struggle against next.
This leads to alienation of friends and allies, who might feel that the original villain was a worthy target, but each new enemy becomes more tenuous and less justifiable. At the same time, the hero still has yet to face a critical juncture that forces introspection, things that go wrong still appear to be the result of external and hostile forces. Beyond the fact that each new enemy becomes harder to paint as an enemy worth attacking, each new struggle makes the former allies feel that they could be next. From there, allies and friends start to become enemies, justifying the seeming paranoia of the hero, sensing enemies everywhere.
Victories up to this point feed the ego of the hero, who continues to push forward despite all warnings, sense of proportion and meaningfulness in the struggles. This produces insolence, contempt for an ever growing list of those deemed inferior and excessive violence towards an ever growing list of perceived enemies. Victory disease comes at the end of the fall and is the final reversal that completes the arc. Due to complacency and/or arrogance brought on by a victory or series of victories, an engagement ends disastrously for the hero. The hero may disdain the enemy, and believe in their own invincibility, leading allies to disaster.
The whole falling action plot section has plenty of room to fit this in if embraced. Remember that in the books, Saruman takes over the Shire. This requires the hobbits to organize their own rebellion to take back the very land they joined the Fellowship to protect. Basically – use the lingering effects and fallout of the climax to let the impacts of the character arcs become clear. But this requires a more personal approach. Clearly, the final battle at the climax must eliminate the potential for the antagonist to win strategic victory. But, striking the hero in such a way that it wounds them personally can be powerful revenge. This can make the hero’s victory pyrric in nature and make them or their allies wonder if it was worth the costs. This personal element that demonstrates what the stakes truly are to the main characters can be a solid bit of narrative in the “falling action” area. This is especially true where they win the final battle but ultimately fail to protect what they were fighting for.
Now, the main story is of the hobbits. Aragorn’s is honestly the secondary conflict in the broader story. After all, it was Bilbo who found the Ring, Frodo who got it to Mount Doom and Gollum who destroyed it. The rest of the Fellowship was the secondary struggle that showed the stakes, provides the context in terms of the wider world and provides external drama to mirror the struggles of Frodo. This allows Frodo to be the main hero with the big heroic arc that "wins" both struggles. Should Aragorn take the fallen hero arc I describe, this would provide a solid contrast to the successes of Frodo and highlight the main themes of the series.
For Aragorn, the primary battle is to overcome the weakness he feels he inherited from Isildur. This weakness is (wait for it) the temptation of power that leads to evil. There is a psychological need to prove himself better than Isildur by rejecting the corruption. Then, the moral need is to prevent the absolute tyranny from enslaving his people (which of course can only happen if he overcomes his weakness as well). The secondary struggle is against Sauron who represents the evil Aragorn could become.
What major themes are these? First is the inherent corruptible nature of man and the powerful corrupting nature of power. Aragorn would fall when placed on the throne while the hobbits would not. The sort of citizen soldier archetype of the hero going off and doing their duty but wanting nothing more than return home and ultimately does so would be a good model here. Then, there is the whole theme of how evil never truly goes away. It may lose power, face set backs, and change forms, but will always be there. Sauron being the minion of Morgoth, returning twice and the conquest of the Shire by Sauruman all show how this is a thing in Middle Earth. But it also seems to get weaker over time. After all, Sauron had no armies of dragons and balrogs.
One last major trope to discuss as this one directly also models the turn that I see Aragorn taking in ways that affect the projected plot. This one is from Star Wars – called the Four Stages of the Dark Side. Apparently it is so common in the Legends continuity that characters in universe have even written books on it. The first stage is temptation – once one gains power one can use it to whatever ends one desires. Situations would arise that tempt people toward selfish applications. Rushing to help friends, facing obvious perils, and ending disputes quickly were all acts that can push a person to act first and contemplate later. Imperilment comes next. A person becomes blinded by the idea of doing what they perceive to be right, by any means necessary. Think of taking an ends justifies any means philosophy. If one accepts the darkness by which they are surrounded as a means to power, then the next stage has no bearing on their concerns.
Basically the character feels they can do more good through the power of the dark side, while remaining uncorrupted by it. But because they accept the dark side as the power necessary to bring about good, they completely give in to it. At this point, they reach the third stage – submission. They accept the dark path, the justifications become irrelevant. Power and domination are their own justifications in their own right. The last stage is redemption. This is pretty self evident. The character has a moment of self realization and recognizes their poor decisions. They then take steps to solve the problems they caused with selfless acts of heroism that do not call on the dark side.

The Conflict

Prelude

How bad of a situation are we talking here? Well – lets start with Aragorn’s position personally. There are three conditions in which leaders are most vulnerable to being overthrown. The first is right at the start of their rule, like Aragorn is at the end of Return of the King. The second is when the ruler is so old people expect them to die soon and start taking precautions to secure themselves in what they see is the imminent transfer of power. Aragorn is 87 I think in The Two Towers. The last one is a financial crisis, where key backers of the ruler come to think that the ruler is no longer able to pay them enough to justify their continued loyalty. With two of Gondor’s main cities – including the capital – and hundreds of thousands of refugees in a nation whose entire yearly economic output is only $1,995,427,000 at best, Gondor is on the verge of bankruptcy.
To be fair, Aragorn apparently reigns for 120 years in the books, so he is not in any danger of sudden death absent a knife to the heart. But this was out of line for more humans in Middle Earth and suspecting health problems is sufficient to cause a crisis. However, the financial issues are present and Aragorn’s reign did just begin. So even if the people did not fear Aragorn’s coming end, that is still 2 out of three.
So, lets do some numbers here. Gondor’s pre war population I estimate at 1,351,000, Minas Tirith was around 67,550 and Osgiliath 13,510. Pelargir was 21,616. For the sake of the calculations, I'm going to say Cair Andros had 2,500 civilians in it. This would mean 105,176 urban residents in the path of Mordor and its allies. If we assume the same numbers as before (1.2 acres to feed one person, the average family plot is 15 acres with 7.5 people per family) we get 63,106 people in the surrounding areas that feed these cities. That comes out to 168,282‬ people either killed or displaced in a nation of 1,351,000. By my calculations, that is around 12.5% of the population screwed by the attacks. This is ignoring the raids the Corsairs and other small scale attacks that likely killed even more in the rest of Gondor.
For the sake of comparison, the US lost around 850,000 people, with 620,000 of those soldiers in the Civil War. This is out of a pre war population of 31,429,891. That comes out to be about 2.7%. That was a brutal war. The War of the Ring would see Gondor lose over four times that many people proportionally.
So, how much would reconstruction cost? The best estimate I could find is the Marshal Plan. I used this because it was seen as the most successful and incorporated aid for resettlement and large scale urban rebuilding after total war. But this was aid sent by a huge industrialized economy to help rebuild other industrial societies after a total modern war. So this is not exactly a perfect fit. But such aid was not typically provided in the middle ages, there is no direct comparison that would fit better. Or at least there were no cases I am familiar with.
Germany was the most destroyed in World War 2, meaning the reconstruction of Germany would most likely match the needs of Gondor the most directly. Germany got $1,448,000,000 from the Plan, which had 12,000,000 refugees to help. That is $120.67 per person in reconstruction aid – assuming direct transfers to refugees and only refugees. But the nature of these things tends to be more public good investments rather than direct transfers. Essentially the money is given to governments to rebuild their societies as they see fit.
Still, if we use this figure, we get a need for $20,306,588.94. That would take 1% of the entire prewar economy and 6% of prewar government revenues to pull off. At a time when two major cities, their agricultural base and major trade and manufacturing capacity was destroyed. Just for comparison imagine the US paying between $195,194,000,000 and $218,580,000,000 after losing 40,809,252 people and the economic power of New York and Washington DC. That would be rather difficult. And keep in mind that even the devastating losses to Mordor – the war is still on even after Minas Tirith. This is on top of the normal operating expenses of the government, a continuing external war and accumulated debts that radically expand in times of war.
This means that Gondor is dealing with its reconstruction of large sections of its territory, resettling large numbers of its people, fighting the last battles of a war against a still strong alliance and financing its daily operations at the same time. Also remember that government spending is limited by the size of the economy and the subsistence level of the population. The tax burden cannot be so high as to reduce the population to starvation. Subsistence is considered between $300 and $500 per year in income per person depending on who you ask. I estimate that the highest per capita GDP of Gondor is $1,304 to $1,477.
That means that between 20% and 38% of the economy’s production must stay in the hands of the private economy to prevent mass starvation. The government is already extracting between $235.02 and $252.63 per person. this means that the economy could theoretically only spare between $551.37 and 941.98 per person. Or between 744,900,870 and 1,272,614,980 total value left in the economy before famine sets in. So - we have a best case situation where the government is able to extract $1,613,916,783.70 to cover $683,094,430.09. Which means there technically is 930,822,353.61 available.
But this is assuming that the entirety of this surplus value could be extracted from the economy and no losses occurred. Good luck with that. Basically this is an impossibly optimistic scenario, given the amount of cropland and farmers lost. Then there is the fact that more farmers would be drafted into the army or fled from their fields than were lost. The same destruction and loss of population would see the loss of existing wealth and productive potential in cities - where most of this surplus value would be located. Then, the final push for defeating the forces of evil would probably require the mobilization of all available troops. That means an additional 25,200 men being called up for service. The constant call ups would take their toll on the economy as well, disrupting food production. These men would also have to be paid.
We need to factor in that the economy is likely to likely to have shrunk a good bit in the attacks. Lets assume $2,147 for the income of the average urban worker and $1,304 for the rural residents. I chose the $1,304 figure to account for the fact that $1,477 is the upper bound of the per person GDP for the Byzantines. Because urban workers tend to earn more per average, the rural population must earn less. But this $1,304 to $1,477 range is for the entire population - mostly farmers. So the numbers are going to be at the lower end, but not much lower.
I calculated 105,176 urban residents and 63,106 rural people. This comes out to be $308,103,096 in lost economic output at a minimum. I say minimum because this is just wages – it does not capture taxation and profits, as both of those are subsets of the value produced in the economy that are not built into wages. This also does not factor in the much more difficult to calculate damage done by the raids in the Southern Fiefs. So again an optimistic assessment. Which then leaves us with 622,714,257.61 total value. This means that the economy also shrunk by 15.4%. Which is then going to feed back into reduction in the base level government revenues.
An eagle eyed reader will notice something I forgot about myself in my first analysis. The Thematic lands. Lets assume that the 1,000 additional troops Denethor added to the army have not had time to get their banda communities set up. That means that the Royal Lands would be based around the original core of 4,000. If these soldiers had families with the average 6 people, that is 24,000 people displaced. Given the maximum number of people who could have been employed on these grants, we have possibly 75,742 living on Thematic lands. Depending on exact breakdowns, the economic value of Thematic lands measured in the wages needed to work the land is between 194,135,984 to 485,443,444.
Remember, these lands would be lands for active duty soldiers. Which means placed for defense. So we can assume that they would be in the path of Mordor's armies. So these families would see huge losses too. We can expect to see another 9.7% and 27.6% drop in economic output. Holy Etruscan Snoods Batman! It is far more likely to be the smaller number though. Many of the jobs provided by Thematic lands would be for the rank and file plots, which only need roughly two people to work. The family of the soldier would most likely fill these roles.
This is compounded by the issues of how currency enters the economy. When the military payroll, lands and equipment purchases are disrupted, so too is the mechanism by which the government introduces money into society. The same currency that is then used to pay taxes. So even if the lower 9.7% figure is closer to reality, there are still huge issues involved. So this is the set up for a nice period of financial difficulty for a government already struggling with funds. On the plus side though, the tribute demanded by other states would be eliminated.

Deployment

Gondor has no money and a serious lack of troops. Aragorn has a horribly understaffed professional army. Even before the war, 5,000 men would be hard pressed to handle a coordinated revolt from the entirety of the Southern Fiefs. The Tower Guard, Rangers, and Urban Cohorts would provide some aid. But all of these forces took losses in the fighting and would be needed to deal with the remnants of Mordor's Coalition. Which basically means they would be dispersed everywhere. And just as important is the generations of loyalty to the ruling Stewards. The same people who would screen for loyalty to themselves and who would enact policies to ensure their loyalty.
The Rangers would pose unique challenges. Their leader would be seen as the legitimate ruler after the fall of Denethor if the Steward line continued. So they might become a center point of resistance. In terms of manpower issues, the Urban Cohorts would be needed to deal with the internal disorder likely to be rampant. After all, the huge amount of destruction and displacement would produce discontent. Until the reconstruction efforts start to bear fruit, the Urban Cohorts would be needed to keep the Royal Lands under control. The Tower Guards specifically would need to be more concentrated than ever to protect Aragorn and his officials from assassination.
The Army of the Dead was also hyper focused on Mordor. It was extremely useful in defeating that particular threat. But it was only for that threat. The phrasing of the Oath as I understand it does not allow for use against Mordor's allies. Unless as a consequence of them being engaged in the same battle as Mordor's army. Gondor's other enemies are certainly not part of this. Nor are the King's internal enemies. So we cannot expect much help from them.
Against this is a combined army of 25,200 for the nobles. Granted, that number is going to be split between several different locations and some will be loyal or take a “wait and see” approach. Then there is the whole issue of the Southrons. Some of the Southern Lords would naturally grant Aragorn control over their troops to deal with that threat. While this means that Aragorn would not have to face all the nobles at once and would have some support. Lets also remember that passivity in a crisis aids the ruler. Yet, Aragorn’s forces are still facing a much larger enemy than even the nobles combined, which would likely embolden them.

The Engagement

So, how is Aragorn going to get the money needed? The obvious first choice would be Rohan. But here is the thing. Rohan has little people or economic output. Pastoral societies tend to have much lower GDPs even compared to the inefficient feudal agricultural systems of places like Gondor. Assume the $300 yearly income for farmers, $2,147 for the urban residents (a very high assumption for this society). This gives us $7,352,200.59 in income for the first 19,348 people, but maximum extraction of this group would only net $1,547,786.
This means that the remaining 11,502 people would have to produce in excess of what Rohan’s army and government need for daily operating, war and its own reconstruction . While I have no idea what the actual incomes of this group is, I seriously doubt it is anywhere near that high even before tax. Even if we assume the largest population estimate for Rohan (49,360) and the high estimate of Gondor's per capita GDP ($1,477), we still only get $72,904,720. That is not a lot.
Who is left? Well, both Rivendell and Moria. Rivendell is the obvious choice due to the splendor it shows off in the quality of its war material and construction. But most important is the fact that Aragorn married Elrond’s daughter. I have trouble believing that Elrond would not provide significant aid to the nation most directly responsible for defending against the forces of Mordor whose leadership he is related to by marriage. More useful would be the medical aid that could be given. Elrond’s ring of power is assumed to provide greater healing power to its wearer and the elves are rather good at that to begin with. So I suspect that Aragorn would call on Elrond to provide medical assistance. Given that it is a full city, I would not be surprised if another group of elves as large as 500 could be sent for military assistance. That would be important later.
Next and just as important is Moria. While I have little to no information that can give me exact numbers, I can assert with relative certainty that Moria would have the economic power to provide what Gondor needs by several orders of magnitude. The amount Gondor would need in aid is 20,306,588.94, which at current price levels is 13,686.64 ounces of gold or 1,167,039.97 ounces of silver. I found that the density of gold is 10.172 Troy oz. per cubic inch and silver is 6.06 ounce per cubic inch. This means the volume of the needed gold would be 37.38 cubic yards and the silver would be 5,349.47 cubic yards. The Lonely Mountain appeared to have enough in its vaults to supply that entire amount. Moria is described as the richest of the Dwarf kingdoms – meaning that it would have more at its disposal than the Lonely Mountain.
But there is no marriage alliance to exploit to get the needed goodies – so the needed aid would be harder to secure. Aragorn does have Gimli though. He was the first cousin once removed of Balin. If we assume that Balin takes over the Battle of Azanûlbizar like how he tried to do in the official story, then there is a familial connection. And due to the fall out between Gondor and the Lonely Mountain, an opportunity has arisen. One of the ways this is likely to express itself is the Glittering Caves.
So, how would Aragorn get the loyalty of the nobles? Traditionally in history, there have been three main ways rules have kept control of their essential backers in a crisis. The first was bribes – whether it is pay, contracts, policy concessions or so forth. The second is purging. Not all have to be killed – arresting and exiling them work as well. The last is to make the starting group irrelevant for the ruler’s power. This usually means empowering other groups to form a counterweight to the power of those the leader feels are too powerful or disloyal.
So, how do rulers typically resolve a financial crisis? The first is again to purge their backers and replace them with those who could be secured for cheaper. The second is tapping natural resources – the dwarves have most of that unfortunately for Gondor. But this will prove useful elsewhere. I'll get to that when I deal with the Glittering Caves.
Next is foreign aid and loans. The last is a variation of the make them irrelevant tactic from above. Here, a ruler takes what money they have left and invests in public goods in the hopes this makes the economy productive enough to supply the needed revenue. This works by rewarding or buying the loyalty of lower ranking members of society, providing the counter-weight to elites. But, this has the downside of taking a long time to get going effectively.
I would take a form of “all the above” strategy here. We discussed the aid and credit options above. Now, we have to get the message that the aid is coming to the nobles. To do this I would send a force of Guards and Rangers. Lets assume we have 1,000 regular troops, 50 Rangers and 200 Guards that are available and loyal enough for this mission. As there are 8 southern fiefs, this would mean 125 professional soldiers, 6 rangers and 25 guards. I would send one of these groups to each of the nobles in charge of these fiefs with the message that aid from the dwarves has been secured.
It honestly matters little at this point if that aid has actually been secured or not – as long as the nobles think it has. If their loyalty is not secured in the short term, it matters little what the long term situation is. I would offer compensation for rebuilding costs, lost revenue and the value of their serfs lost in conscription. In return, the lord is expected to publicly declare loyalty in front of their subjects, immediately mobilize their troops and begin conscription of their serfs. Then, I would have them or their heir apparent come with their army when it deploys to Minas Tirith. This grants Aragorn an unofficial hostage as insurance.
It is important to make sure the nobles understand that a pledge of loyalty ensures their safety. This means that the overall structure of the society will not be challenged. Their wealth and status should not be challenged. So as long as they remain loyal they will continue on. It matters not if Aragorn intends to make this official policy. All that matters is the nobles are convinced. Part of this is creating the impression that Aragorn’s position is stronger than it is. This is why Aragorn needs to pretend the deal with Gimli is a done deal regardless of whether it is or not. Aragorn benefits by being the only one who understands just how weak he really is.
Those that accept this offer are to be given palaces in the rebuilt Minas Tirith and land in conquered territories. Those that refuse I would authorize the commanding officer to capture and publicly execute them. Ideally, at least one political enemy could be found among the lower, non essential elite ranks to execute prior to the meetings with the first lord to show that these threats are not to be taken lightly. The commander can also be authorized to take hostages from the family of the lord if they feel extra insurance is needed.
I would also provide a budget to pay off guards in palaces/gatehouses and/or household staff. This should be in the range of about 6 months to a year’s worth of wages for the people to be bribed. The idea would be to allow the troops to gain access to fortifications should the lords bar them from entry. The household staff bribes are meant to gain spies to report on who is wavering or who gives treasonous advice. These advisers are to also be publicly executed.
But, as this group marches into an area but before the meeting with the lord, I would have the commanding officer go to the central town square of villages and towns in the area to deliver public addresses. The core message would be Aragorn is now king and he won glorious victories in the fight against the enemy at both Helm’s Deep and Minas Tirith. But the war is not yet over and the people's participation is needed to win the war against enemies that both want to and still can utterly destroy Gondor. The message must discourage resistance by highlighting the strength of the regime and calming the fears that would motivate revolt.
The people are to be called on to do their duty to the king and their country by reporting to Minas Tirith for essentially basic training. Those who agree to fight will be given 40 acres and a mule (to borrow from the US civil war for a second) after 3 years of service. Those who still pledge loyalty to the stewards are to be considered enemies of the state – but this would be made clear through the executions of top officials. The soldiers can also be authorized to burn villages that are universally hostile to them to take supplies needed for their trip. Individuals that resist can be put in stocks or similar punishments. It would be a bad idea to take too harsh of actions at this stage with the size of the forces I am sending. Basically, these forces would need to be harsh enough to demonstrate strength and scare potential rebels into obedience. But they shouldn't go so far as to produce the hatreds that motivate that resistance in the first place.
On the flip side, the budget each of these groups is to have would include enough to provide some charity for those hurt in the struggle, to buy supplies above market value from the local population and help get reconstruction started independent of the lord. Ideally, the combination of charity and direct appeals would get some of the local serfs to leave regardless of the interests of the lord (making them irrelevant and thus in less of a position to resist) or to incite potentials for mob violence against officials that don’t publicly declare loyalty to Aragorn. Gaining public support reduces the need for troops to coerce obedience and is insurance against elite betrayal.
Now, this is where Aragorn's symbolic actions come into play. The emancipation of slaves from Harad and Nurn would already have begun cultivating a power base independent of the nobles. Then, there is the conquests that show Aragorn as capable. The glory from battle wouldn't hurt either. Granted, the Army of the Dead does not have utility in violent suppression of dissent. But it does solidify Aragorn's claim to the throne. The fact that he then used it to defeat the biggest threat to the Southern Fiefs would go a long way to showing that Aragorn's concern for the region is not just words. Which would be a nice contrast to the last steward, which failed to adequately deal with this problem. Lastly the money these troops bring with them would be limited. But it would not need to be much either. The fact that any comes at this point would convince some that more is coming. That would be enough to buy loyalty long enough for a real solution to be found.
Basically, I suspect that there would be some issues along the way. There might be some defections of troops. A few lower nobles might be problematic. Dealing with them might result in a bit of unjustifiable use of force. But given the wider context and actions of the companies, I suspect that there would be not much resistance. Aragorn I suspect would then leave the men sent to each fief there to make sure there are no defections and help administer the calling up/training of troops.
Policies back near Minas Tirith would have an impact as well. The promotion of Faramir would show that Aragorn is not out to kill all those connected to the old regime. However, some would die. But, I would suspect that the first two days after the battle would involve a purge of the high level officials with a mix of execution, demotions, exile (either outright banishment or being given positions in remote areas) or imprisonment. Then, I would promote from the ranks of the militia those who acted exceptionally heroically into the vacated posts or from the gentry. Now, this would not see total turnover at the top. I would guess that maybe 1/3 of the top posts get replaced.
Then the resettlement would begin at this point. I would invite the refugees back to Osgiliath but not Minas Tirith. First, this would be easier to accomplish just from a logistics perspective. Then, there are the security concerns with having too many civilians right up at the base of political and military power. Then, Osgiliath is also much better situated for trade, so having more people there would reduce the transportation costs of exporting manufactured goods. I would therefore limit Minas Tirith to the Royal Family, their servants and household staff, court personnel and police, military, civilian administration, top level officials and nobles (plus their servants). I would also probably have some key military production facilities there as well. I would grant the nobles control over the immediate countryside for food production, with as much of the food needed for siege stores and regular military supplies coming from these noble lands near the capital. This not only simplifies logistics at a time where transportation is not easy and bandits are more of a problem, but it also buys the loyalty of the nobles.
The plains around Minas Tirith would also host the troops coming in from the Southern Fiefs. So, this would mean that the refugees would be relatively safe here. This would also provide the first opportunity to reward loyalists in the way I talked about to counter the influence of potentially disloyal nobles. The militia is not so much meant to provide protection but to form the core of the new administration of the area – police, military commanders, mayors, government functionaries and political appointments. I would also give the government contracts for the making of war materials, shipping the goods to Moria to these people. Not to mention the normal guild style monopolies given over specific industries common in the medieval period. This same structure is what motivated similar numbers for the occupation of Minas Morgul.
Once control is established, it needs to be decided who gets the land grants. Obviously loyal nobles are a good place to start. After all, all loyalists need rewards proportional to their power and elites have the most power. The basic law of diminishing returns states that when you already have a lot, you need more to get the same utility out of it. So, what your normal serf soldier conscript would consider more that sufficient of a reward, the elites would not even notice.
The second sons of nobles who joined the call would be a better place though. Typically in an established feudal system noble estates are inherited by the oldest son and everyone else got nothing. This means that the younger sons were pretty much screwed. They have no independent power or economic base but still have elite level education and contacts. This means they can be effectively controlled with less expense.
So, how is Gondor to get the men needed to fight against a potential large collection of internal and external foes? Well, there are three main issues. The first is a large number potential recruits. These would be the destitute refugees displaced by Mordor's invasions. Or they would be the people left unemployed by the loss of economic activity that inevitably comes from destruction of productive assets. The former slaves from Nurn and Harad would also be prime targets for recruitment.
Serfs from the southern fiefs seeking to get out of serfdom would also likely join too. But the Southern Fiefs did not experience as much devastation and the area would provide a stable if poor standard of living. Then, the losses from the fighting would actually see the increase in bargaining power for them. Wages would be expected to climb, duties to lords go down and land per serf would on average go up. So I expect that some would join, but not as many as the other demographics mentioned. Probably the serfs joining would be primarily the landless peasants that relied on village wage labor.
Low revenue relative to need is the next major issue facing troop recruitment. The above mentioned demographics would need training and equipment. After all, these people I predict would join now would not be the sort of people with extensive combat experience like the traditional knights or mercenaries Gondor would have relied on before. Nor would they have their own equipment on hand. So these new soldiers would require more upfront costs relative to others on top of continual upkeep costs associated with food. Nor could these costs be expected to be picked up by the nobles, like the Compagnie d'ordonnance was.
Large amounts of land with little to no government presence was the last major one. Places like Arnor, Mordor and the new territories in Rhun all would require more people to run than Gondor's administration would have the manpower to manage. Arnor would be particularly bad as there are so few native residents to recruit from. Harad and Mordor certainly don't have any skilled people.
Fortunately, the solutions are not new ideas. I'll be drawing from the US Civil War and Revolutionary War here as the sides involved all struggled with manpower, money and supply shortages that made their lives difficult. These wars also existed in the period when primitive firearms were the standard and horses were the main form of transportation. Like Gondor, the transition to what we would call modern professional armies were beginning in these conflicts. Basically, I think the trends that Gondor appears to already be experiencing would be reinforced and accelerated by the War of the Ring and Aragorn's struggles for power. Which then means these conflicts would be even more instructive.
Conscription is a fast way to get men in uniform. The Compagnie d'ordonnance would be a good place to start. They already are mobilized, trained and equipped. Perhaps not to the standards of a professional army, but better than the nearest alternative. In the US Civil War, both sides instituted conscription with buy out provisions. Conscription for the Union applied to men between 20 to 45 and the CSA conscripted men between 18 and 35.
American militias in the Revolutionary War could call on men between 16-65 while the British versions could call on 16-60. As militias were part time, not professionals, they would be much cheaper. So a higher percentage of the available manpower could be trained and equipped. And a militia system is an improvement over the Compagnie d'ordonnance from a central government perspective even if the quality of the men and equipment is roughly the same. Primarily, it is loyal to and reports to the central governments instead of the local lords. Which disempowers them while transferring power to the King. It is also standardized due to it being organized by a single authority. So when the militia is called up, the government knows exactly what to expect.
Such a militia/conscript system would probably not result in the highest quality of men health wise. But it didn't for the Union either. Many Union soldiers were kicked out because it wasn't until after time on campaign that the Army figured out the men in question were not fit for service. But it did get enough men. The combination of sheer numbers and trial by fire experience ended up producing an army able to win.
For Revolutionary War era American militias, the experience issue was dealt with by making their officers veterans whose terms of service were up. Simple drills were preferred as a result of the lack of experienced men in the new American units. This system would go a long way to exploiting Gondor's advantages. It would have a decent amount of professional soldiers with combat experience. An American company in the Revolutionary War had 14 officers and 76 privates. Regiments had 8 companies and 10 regimental officers. Which means that a single 200 man banda before the war could produce a full regiment of militia - which was 733 privates.
Then there is the salaries, sign on bonuses and land grants. The British paid between £1.1 and £3 ($168.86 and $460.53 today) in sign on bonuses during the American Revolution. The Americans offered between $10 and $20 ($283.00 and $567.00 today). The Americans also had more land to offer than money. So they granted 100 acres as part of their sigh up. They too used drafts. The American term for conscripts was one year compared to 3 for the British in the conflict. Peacetime British volunteers were for life, which I take to mean 20 years. American revolutionary soldiers were paid $62 ($1,760.00 today). Meanwhile, the CSA paid its men $25 ($516.00 today) every 6 months to cover their expenses.
So, if we take this ad hoc mix of sources together, we could expect 100 acre land grants and roughly $168.86 be given to volunteers who sign up for 20 years. But most would be the one year conscripts. Militias would be organized as veterans retire from active duty. The supplements for supply purchases would be continued from the CSA. The 40 acre allotment would probably be granted to conscripts who make it the full 1 year. Officers, Tower Guards and Rangers would probably get closer to the higher end of the sign up bonuses after they take up their posts.
I suspect that the full age range of 18-45 would be borrowed. Which means a decent chunk of the Compagnie d'ordonnance would probably be retained. But not all. This is where the governmental poverty starts to make itself felt. The Union is the American Civil War allowed people to pay $300 (6,190.00 today) for substitutes to take their place in the draft. Which means that only the poor actually got drafted. If this then was borrowed by Gondor, it would mean that the poor, unemployed, vagrant and destitute would join out of desperation or being forced into the army. Meanwhile, the supply supplements could be covered by the richer peasants and middle class urban residents paying to get out of fighting.
Due to the land grants given to those who join, the areas that need people would be settled by the people trained to defend it. Who also have the equipment to do so. Their pay and land came from Gondor, creating a class of landowners dependent on Gondor for their survival in the newly colonized areas. And Gondor would have a network of
This is where the poverty of Gondor shows itself again. The British soldiers during the Revolutionary War had to pay out of pocket for their supplies and uniform. Which would often be how the sign on bonuses were spent. Deductions were also taken from salaries to cover the food, musket repairs, new shoes and so forth. Essentially, soldiers did not actually make all that much at the end of the month.
Gondor, with its Byzantine influences, would have its own workshops producing armor and arms. So a lot of these deductions would send soldier pay right back into the government treasury. Which would then pay for the wages of the craftsmen in question. The supplies needed for this equipment would increase jobs in mining and transportation of the raw materials. But this would generally reduce expenses for the government and create jobs - in a way that buys loyalty from those affected.
Lastly, the settlement of new areas would see their economic output jump. The influx of new settlers would see more demand in the areas and more agricultural produce. The soldiers would also under the system proposed would see troops compensated for buying supplies from the private sector - like their uniforms and food. Which means that the one main expense Gondor would incur under this system would stimulate private sector job growth. Thus helping rebuild through defense spending.
Just as important though is the money supply problem we mentioned. Once this system gets going, the Gondor's main means to introduce currency into circulation gets kick started again. Which then allows for the average citizen to trade more effectively. This further improves the economic situation. More important is that when people have money, the government can then take it as taxes. Which makes funding the government that much easier. The twin impacts of there being more economic activity to tax and money to pay those taxes with means that Gondor should become less dependent over time on outside loans. Say like from Moria or the Loenly Mountain.
Once this gets going enough, it would be hard to attract volunteers to the army through such poor wages. So some increases in pay would occur over time. But as Gondor becomes more secure, the demands for troops would go down. Which means the conscript system could slowly become a mere formality - like the draft in the US today. Economic growth would then fuel higher tax revenues and probably accompany technological advancement. Which would likely mean the replacement for conscription would be an increased reliance on volunteers. These would be long term professionals - better trained, paid and outfitted. With a real professional staff backing them up and officer training programs.
Samuel H. Williamson, "Seven Ways to Compute the Relative Value of a U.S. Dollar Amount, 1790 to present," MeasuringWorth, 2019. URL: www.measuringworth.com/uscompare/
"Five Ways to Compute the Relative Value of a UK Pound Amount, 1270 to Present," MeasuringWorth, 2019 . URL: www.measuringworth.com/ukcompare/

Outcome

Now, here is where the fun comes in. The consequences of the actions I suggest. Leaders tend to invest in public goods in two different contexts. The first is for revenue generation. This is done again under two different conditions. The first is when there is a financial crisis like the one Gondor will be faced with again once aid money runs out. Essentially Aragorn must invest this money in such a way he can afford to keep his backers loyal after the help ends – which means rebuilding a domestic revenue base.
The second condition is also relevant to our discussion here – labor productivity as the main source of government revenues. Take any nation reliant on natural resources and taxes are low or not present at all. England does not have natural resources enough to finance a government. Therefore, it needs workers to produce more. This then means enough healthcare so that workers don’t die, enough education they know what they are doing and enough roads that the goods can be shipped from where the producers are to where the buyers are.
The next reason for investing in public goods is when the coalition the ruler relies on to stay in power grows too large for private goods (pensions, wages, government contracts, concessions and so forth) to be affordable. As government revenues are limited by the size of the economy, no payments can expand forever. When 2 people make up the winning coalition, the ruler can just shower them directly with goodies worth $1,000,000 each and they stay loyal. However, should the coalition expand to say 500, that $1,000,000 each becomes a bit harder to afford. But, $2,000,000 – the price of the original coalition – can buy a good school, which then keeps the 500 people happy. Remember that in a financial crisis rulers try and expand their coalitions so they are reliant on a cheaper set of essential backers? This is why.
Another important impact of expanding coalitions is a decline in revenues. Mainly, one does not retain power long by taxing those you need support from. So the highest taxes proportional to income/wealth will be on those not allied with the rulers. Which means when the governing coalition expands, the tax base effectively shrinks. This also has a problem in the amount of tax one can get. As the higher one's economic position, the more valuable one becomes as part of a governing coalition. So rulers, seeking to minimize the size of this coalition, would appeal to the higher classes first. Which means the lower classes are what are left. They by definition have less wealth and this wealth is scattered among more people. So getting that money is harder.
There are three places a government can invest existing revenue to maximize future revenue but all suffer from the law of diminishing returns. The first is tax collection, so that more of the official rate is actually collected. By having more people collect and a greater infrastructure to monitor and enforce the tax code, more people will pay. The second is repression, essentially using fear to allow the state to collect more before resistance becomes an issue. Police actions allow for the regime to get around that natural dislike people have of giving up their money to the government. People will not pay if they feel they can conceal their noncompliance, the full extent of their taxable assets or if the costs imposed on them for noncompliance are less than compliance. So these two tactics are natural complements to each other.
The third is propaganda – which convinces people to voluntarily give up their surpluses to the state. This hits a wider segment of the population than is feasible with high tax collection and repression. However, it is going to get less return on investment per person than the others. This means that it is the only real way to get the ruling coalition to pay more taxes, but it will not get as much out of them as police actions and higher official tax rates.
There is one tactic that – given these factors – allows for pretty great balancing here. That is schools. If you control the subject matter and the teacher training, as does the US, then it becomes easy to use that power to turn schools into propaganda centers. You get the power of propaganda while the public gets the value of education. Add in that the jobs in and construction of these schools allow them to be tools to provide private goods to your supporters as well. Then, the middle classes tend to get the better paid jobs in these schools. Cronyism has many outlets. One policy can serve as rewards for many different constituencies and serve them in many different ways. All of these continue the trend of Gondor moving towards a modern state based on legal domination of modern law and bureaucracy.
This means that Aragorn will be investing the large amounts of aid from Moria into reconstruction and a military build up. Then exports of manufactured goods, food and possibly slaves will be provided to Moria. The nobles will decline in numbers and wealth while the middle class expands in both. Working class people from Gondor will see wages rise as urban manufacturing jobs expand and farm and mining jobs will decline due to the use of encomiendas. Aragorn will intentionally use these to counter the power of the nobles and generate revenues.
Osgiliath probably would become the main trade and manufacturing center of Gondor. Also, it would serve as the front lines against another attack on Minas Tirith. Therefore, it would need a bit more protection. So more troops and investment into city walls would occur. But not as much as one would think. Minas Morgul would protect against orcs coming from the most direct path from Mordor. Pelargir would provide some cover from the south. The north would be protected by the buffer zone set up in Rhun.
The main reason Osgiliath would become the main trade hub is geography. Most trade up from the Southern Fiefs would got through the Anduin. Mainly due to the costs of transport over land and the location of the White Mountains and the fact there a few markets west of them. Then all the exports from Harad would come through Osgiliath up from Umbar and Pelargir. Mordor's exports would flow out through Minas Morgul. So some similar expansion to what I predict for Umbar and Pelargir would occur there too. But the main road out of Minas Morgul would head strait to Osgiliath. Which then allows for goods to be loaded onto the river networks. Cair Andros would be at the heart of northern trade networks that go in and out of Gondor. So trade based expansion there too. But if one heads south from there, again the same main option shows up.
So many areas would see expansions in trade related economic growth. Which would lead to more production across all affected geographic regions. Some regions would benefit from proximity to single trade routes and profit handsomely due to that. But Osgiliath is at the heart of all the Gondor based trade links.

Aftermath

From there I suspect the course of Gondor to follow a rather mundane path. Growing industrialization will lead to agricultural mechanization, fueling further urbanization and industrialization. Democratic rights will expand as working people conduct militant union actions even if these rights do not arise from the above revolution. Mordor will likely be the first sacrifice zone due to its already poor environment and resources available. Yet it is too isolated – trade and communications will be too hard. This will likely lead to it declaring independence again.
Meanwhile, the centralization of Gondor’s state will continue. The rise of a more professional army, police and education will lead to greater power and responsibilities for the state. Gunpowder will be a game changer. In the medieval period nobles had great power due to their castles. Yet cannons made these obsolete. Not just that, but they could only be afforded by a central administration – most first order civil divisions could not buy and maintain them. Thus, the kings gained a weapon that only they could use and could counter the greatest advantage of the nobles.
Gunpowder also led to muskets being the main weaponry for infantry. The combination of guns, a background of conscription and a newly professional army around the same time would see a quicker than normal switch to fully Napoleonic tactics. The irony for my writings here is not missed. Such shifts would see the adoption of fortifications more in the WW1 style trench or Fort McAllister style earthworks. So, the changes I propose to the fortifications in Lord of the Rings would lead to a shift away from the same style of forts I have been looking at.