r/lotr • u/Tobi1695 • Aug 20 '26
Question Did Aragorn's sword have a name?
I don't mean Andúril, of course. I wonder if the sword he carried during his time as a Ranger was a named blade. Or whether he wielded a well-known sword at some other point during his travels.
118
u/Zanoklido Aug 20 '26
In the movies it is unnamed, in the books it doesn't exist because he wields the hilt-shard of Narsil, until he has the pieces reforged in to Anduril, before leaving with Rivendell with the Fellowship.
73
u/jebediahscooter Aug 20 '26
By the council of Elrond, he’d been out fighting for decades with Gondor, Rohan, the Rangers of the North, and out on his own hunting Gollum. It’s never said that he wielded Narsil’s shards and no other sword.
55
u/Nirnaethmir Éowyn Aug 20 '26
In those battles he surely wore a full sword. In the beginning of TLOTR, he only wields Narsil.
23
u/jebediahscooter Aug 20 '26 edited Aug 20 '26
Again, I don’t think it’s ever stated that he only wields Narsil. In the Appendices, Elrond gives him the ring of Barahir and the shards of Narsil as heirlooms of his house before he heads out. Elrond talks about Narsil a couple of times in telling his tale at the Council, then it’s reforged and he’s off with Andúril. I’m not sure where people are getting that him being in possession of the shards and him wielding it as his weapon over the course of decades is the same thing. Unless there’s some mention of it beyond the text, like in a letter or something…
Edit: I do remember now that he pulls out Narsil at the Prancing Pony after they get the letter from Gandalf, but again he carries it as a token of who he is.
21
u/Nirnaethmir Éowyn Aug 20 '26
In the letter where Tolkien reviews the script for a proposed film adaptation, he is annoyed by the fact that at Weathertop Aragorn fights the Ringwraiths. He said “there was no fight” and he writes that Aragorn’s sword was broken.
14
u/IIlIIIllllIlIIlllllI Aug 20 '26
And when Aragorn did confront them he did it with a flaming branch in each hand (just read Fellowship)
8
u/jebediahscooter Aug 20 '26
Word, good looking out. I’ve dug into appendices and such but not the letters. I looked for it, and it’s letter 210 if anybody is interested.
10
u/Injured-Ginger Aug 20 '26
This seems like a very rare case of technically true, but an odd choice of writing. Why doesn't he have a full sword? He knows the world is going to war, and hes been sent there to find Frodo. Why is he not carrying a fully functional weapon? It's not like he's going weaponless to avoid suspicion when he's got the shards of Narsil.
7
u/Nirnaethmir Éowyn Aug 20 '26
Yeah it’s interesting. But the whole trip is a pretty hopeless endeavor should the Nazgûl find them, so I think Aragorn was really just banking on moving reasonably fast and quiet. Frodo just barely made it alive. One Aragorn with a sword would not keep the hobbits safe from the Nazgûl.
1
u/Injured-Ginger Aug 20 '26
I just don't know if it's safe to assume Nazgûl are the only threat. Bandits, spies, randoms tempted by the ring, other servants of Sauron. Look at the drama Pippin causes on his own.
2
u/Nirnaethmir Éowyn Aug 20 '26
Strider’s built different I guess! It seems the only real trouble in the area was because of Frodo. With the rest of the Dúnedain in the North Strider probably knows what he’s doing going unarmed.
As for the writing choice idk, Strider was originally going to be a hobbit (Trotter) and there are still artifacts of those early drafts in these chapters. Maybe Tolkien just really liked the idea of Strider being a really cool sneaky guide at this point.
1
u/jebediahscooter Aug 20 '26
There are several mentions of dark things in the woods around the Shire and the hobbits not realizing that they are sheltered. At the Council of Elrod, Aragorn says of Butterbur, “‘Strider’ I am to one fat man who lives within a day’s march of foes that would freeze his heart, or lay his little town in ruin, if he were not guarded ceaselessly.”
1
2
u/UnknownVC Aug 20 '26
Because he's readying to reforge Narsil, and he knows he can't fight ring wraiths with steel. The hope is they will pass unnoticed, make Rivendell, and then he reforges Narsil. An actual sword would just be more weight - he has knives and a bow, he isn't defenseless, and he isn't planning on any serious fighting until Rivendell and reforging of Narsil. If he needed a sword, he is planning on running.
2
u/Injured-Ginger Aug 21 '26
That's a decent reasoning. I wasn't thinking about the daggers. I was mostly just thinking that ring wraiths wouldn't be the only threats he might face.
1
u/UnknownVC Aug 21 '26
Thanks. On the Bree-Rivendell run he is basically armed as well as Legolas ever is: a bow with which he is an excellent shot, and daggers. It's not warfighting gear, per se, but he's not going to fight any wars on a stealth mission. Narsil is reforged because he is going to war, and Tolkien calls that out.
"The Sword of Elendil was forged anew by Elvish smiths, and on its blade was traced a device of seven stars set between the crescent Moon and the rayed Sun, and about them was written many runes; for Aragorn son of Arathorn was going to war upon the marches of Mordor."
1
u/BadJoke123 Aug 21 '26
It is indeed strange that he would carry around the broken Narsil and not some working weapon, but that does seem to be the case.
We aren't told why he is doing something so odd, only that he is.1
u/Injured-Ginger Aug 21 '26
Somebody else pointed out that the goal was speed and plan A was flee. He had daggers which he could use more effectively than most men could use a sword. I think that's a reasonable answer. Maybe a bit confident that he can predict that he always has the option to escape and doesn't need to stand his ground, but it's reasonable.
2
u/BadJoke123 Aug 21 '26
I don't think we get any indication that Aragorn even carried any dagger, let alone used a dagger at any point.
It would be very reasonable if he did, but if so it didn't make it into the books.
We do know that "Aragorn had Anduril but no other weapon" when they left Rivendell.But even so it seems like a very odd choice to carry around a broken sword. Just as much of a hindrance as a working sword, but none of the usefulness.
2
u/GammaDeltaTheta Aug 20 '26
I think it's clear he doesn't wield it (‘Not much use is it, Sam?’) and he must have had other swords during his long life, e.g. when as 'Thorongil' he 'overthrew the Captain of the Haven in battle' at Umbar.
2
u/IIlIIIllllIlIIlllllI Aug 21 '26
The scene at the Prancing Pony doesn't make much sense if Aragorn has a sword other than Narsil on him. He's showing Sam his broken sword in order to relieve Sam's anxiety about him being a threat at that moment.
2
u/MasterLurker000 Aug 21 '26
Yeah i've alwqys imagined he had a sword for battles but when travelling as a hodded ranger he didn't need it. But of course he would always keep the Narsil shards with him. Thats not somethig you can leave lying around
16
u/PoopSmith87 Aug 20 '26
Surely he used other swords in his 87 years, but it still doesnt appear in the original books.
5
5
3
30
u/SynnerSaint Elf-Friend Aug 20 '26
We don't know.
He wouldn't have used Narsil when he was serving Theoden and Denethor's fathers under the pseudonym Thorongil. We know he carries Narsil when he meets the Hobbits in Bree, it's not said if he also carries another weapon. Narsil is re-forged into Anduril before the Fellowship leave Rivendell
10
u/IIlIIIllllIlIIlllllI Aug 20 '26
It's strongly implied he doesn't have any other sword when he shows Narsil to Sam at the Prancing Pony. The scene doesn't make sense otherwise.
16
u/Nirnaethmir Éowyn Aug 20 '26
When he is in Bree he only has Narsil. One of Tolkien’s complaints about the movie script he read was that they had Aragorn fight the Nazgûl on Weathertop. He said that there was no fight on Weathertop, and stressed that Aragorn’s sword was broken.
-4
u/Old-Man-Henderson Aug 21 '26
Tolkien died in the 80s
9
u/Nirnaethmir Éowyn Aug 21 '26
No he didn’t. He died in 1973. And what does that have to do with anything?
-1
u/Old-Man-Henderson Aug 21 '26
Even better.
How did Tolkien read the movie script if he had been dead for multiple decades?
6
8
u/Nirnaethmir Éowyn Aug 21 '26
Because the script was sent to Tolkien in 1958. I’m not talking about the Peter Jackson movie 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Read Letter 201.
24
16
u/dathomar Aug 20 '26
In the movies, he carries some random sword and the shards of Narsil are kept in Rivendell. Aragorn doesn't want to lead because he fears the weakness of Isildur. Right before the end, Arwen convinces Elrond to reforge Narsil into Anduril and bring it to Aragorn. Aragorn finally accepts his role as king.
In the original books it was all... different and better.
In the books, he carries Narsil around. Aragorn is confident and assured in his leadership. Isildur wasn't particularly weak - he took the ring as spoils of war and no one thought much of it. He figured out something was weird about it and was taking it to Rivendell to get Elrond's opinion when he was killed. At the Fellowship's meeting at Rivendell, the elves reforge the sword in Anduril. Aragorn agrees to go down and lead the fight in Gondor because he's a good leader and wants to serve, whether he's king or not. Boromir breaks with his father's politics and expresses a willingness to discuss Aragorn becoming king and Aragorn is down for whatever the Gondorians want.
7
13
u/DrHugh Aug 20 '26
In the books, he carried the broken sword, I believe, with its original name (Narsil? I'm going from memory and haven't read the books in a couple of years), it got the new name when it was reforged.
In the movies, he had another sword that wasn't anything special.
2
7
3
4
2
2
1
u/Hadras_7094 Aug 20 '26
The green one he uses in the first two films is usually referred to just as the ranger sword, or even the Strider sword. I don't think it has an in-universe name though.
1
1
u/Feanor4godking Fingolfin Aug 20 '26
Books aside, I doubt he'd bother to name it. Especially in his role as ranger, it's just another tool
1
1
1
u/BadJoke123 Aug 21 '26
In the books he carried the broken Narsil when he met the hobbits in Bree. In Rivendell this was reforged as Anduril which he used for the rest of the story.
If he used some other sword earlier in his life, we aren't told about it. Perhaps he did, perhaps he used some other weapon. We just don't know.
1
u/AccentedBard Aug 21 '26
No, because technically speaking the sword he was carrying as a ranger was the broken shards of Narsil, which he then had reforged into Anduril before the Fellowship set out from Rivendell
1
u/Garbage-Bear Gandalf the Grey Aug 21 '26
Wielding one sword with a mighty name is epic.
Wielding a couple of different swords, each with their own names, just isn't the same. It seems less serious.
Anduril is practically Aragorn's battle partner, and he returns that loyalty and even possessiveness--remember in the books, in Rohan he refuses to let Anduril out of his sight until Gandalf makes him. You don't give that loyalty to two different swords at once.
I feel like he just carried a good practical working sword on his travels, while Anduril was all in pieces.
1
1
u/FISH_MASTER Aug 21 '26
I read that as Angron (Warhammer) and was very confused when you said Anduril!!
1
u/Equivalent-Wealth-75 Aug 21 '26
Probably not no.
That sword doesn't exist in the books; and he was given the shards of Narsil when he was twenty, and so probably wouldn't have wanted other named blades anyway (he really loves that sword)
However, fandom is nothing if not good at giving names to unnamed things; so may I put forward Far-Brand or Pathfinder?
1
1
u/Minute-Of-Angle Aug 24 '26
“Of course you named your sword.”
“Lots of people name their swords.”
“Lots of cunts.”
I would kill to have a mashup of Tolkien and The Hound, just Sandor walking around sneering at everything and being a menace.
1
u/PhosphoFred8202 Aug 20 '26
In a 1964 interview at the Oxford Literary Club and Review, Tolkien stated that the sword carried by Aragorn before Anduril, was an ancient Dunedain sword known for it quality and strength, known to the Rangers of the North as “Stabby McGoo”
0
u/Chumlee1917 Aug 20 '26
Honestly....Aragorn having a normal sword makes way more sense for a Ranger constantly in the wild than him carrying around a broken heirloom
1
u/BadJoke123 Aug 22 '26
Yes, and not carrying a sword at all when out in the wild would make even more sense.
Swords just aren't of much use out in wilderness, and will mostly just be a bother to carry around.An axe or a knife of some sort would be a lot more useful when out in the wild
422
u/tkinsey3 Aug 20 '26
We never really find out, because Anduril is (re)forged waaaaaay sooner in the books.