How to take a Ring from an unwilling Ring-wielder? - crazy ideas

[Gordis]

How to take a Ring from an unwilling Ring-wielder?

This question, put by Landroval, is so interesting that it deserves a special thread, IMO. Also I have some crazy ideas on the matter that I would like to share.

Council of Elrond: Balin will find no ring in Moria, said Gandalf. Thror gave it to Thrain his son, but not Thrain to Thorin. It was taken with torment from Thrain in the dungeons of Dol Guldur. I came too late.

You know, I wonder, why was it necessary to take the ring with torment? Wouldn't sheer force suffice? Perhaps a common feature of the power rings was to be hidden to everyone and hold on to its master. Gandalf maintained his ring, even though he was imprisoned by Saruman and even when reimbodied; Sauron too kept the ring to himself all the time, with the destruction of Numenor and whatnot; we could speculate about how Galadriel and Elrond kept their rings secret too...

You know, it is so very true, Landroval.

Perhaps some torment was what every prisoner received in Sauron's dungeon's just as a part of the service - like towels in a hotel?? :eek: But there may be MUCH more to it...

Have you noticed, that no one apparently had his ring DRAGGED from his finger by force?
I mean, Sauron had his finger cut first, Frodo as well, in Isildur's and Gollum's cases, the Ring slipped from the finger all by itself; in Deagol's case, he was most probably killed when NOT wearing the Ring; in cases of the ring transfers from one person to another their owners didn't actually WEAR the rings, as in Frodo-Sam's case (near Shelob's lair), or took off the rings willingly.

Probably, it is just IMPOSSIBLE to drag a ring of Power off someone's finger without either cutting off the finger or killing the ring-wielder - in a special way (see below)?

The other option is to torture the wielder, so he gives you his ring himself?

I guess, in the case of Thrain, the last method was used, as the dwarf became mentally and physically damaged. It wouldn't have happened if only his finger was cut away.

I don't think a Ring could be hidden from either Sauron, or Saruman: "invisible" in Tolkien's world means "existing in the World of Shadows", but both Maiar had access to it. And Saruman knew about Gandalf's ring (UT). Probably he just didn't want to cut his colleague's finger off, or torment him really hard - he may still have hoped that Gandalf would co-operate? And killing the maia Gandalf would make him take the Ring with him - as Sauron did when "killed" in Numenor.

And if we go a little further (maybe further than it is reasonable :p ), could it be that ANY wielder, if killed with a Ring ON, takes the Ring with him, when he becomes a mere spirit?

So, if orcs killed Gollum while he was WEARING the Ring, there would be no material "Precious" on the finger of his dead body, instead, his spirit would take the Ring with him to Mandos and beyond? (sounds crazy?)

The same way with Isildur: if the Orcs had shot Isildur while he was invisible, the Ring would have gone out of the Circles of the World with his soul forever? Maybe the Ring felt this danger, that's why it slipped from Isildur's finger?

And Frodo at Weathertop: note that the Nazgul approached the hobbits with NORMAL swords. They could have chopped Frodo to pieces quite easily, attacking all at once. BUT, it was only the Witch-King (who had a Morgul Blade) who attacked him, and he wounded Frodo with this weapon ONLY, not the long sword he had in his other hand.
Why not chop the hobbit's head off, take the body, Ring and all, and carry away?
- Perhaps because in this way, there would be NO ring on his dead body, and try to get it back from the Halls of Mandos!

The Morgul Blade was the ONLY suitable weapon - it bounded the soul to the Middle Earth, making it unable to leave.
Perhaps, this was also the reason why Sauron sent the Nazgul for the Ring, not some mortals. The ringbearer HAD to be killed with a MORGUL Blade, that was crucial.

Thoughts?

[ecthelion]

IMO, you can rest your case. It's quite a complete argument.
Only one small question - why should sauron torment Thrain instead of just cutting all of his fingers?

[CAB]

That is a very interesting idea ...ummm...Gordroval.

Probably, it is just IMPOSSIBLE to drag a ring of Power off someone's finger without either cutting off the finger or killing the ring-wielder
I would guess that this part is quite likely true. Maybe the Elves originally built the rings this way just to keep from losing them and Sauron followed suit in making the One.

And if we go a little further (maybe further than it is reasonable :p ), could it be that ANY wielder, if killed with a Ring ON, takes the Ring with him, when he becomes a mere spirit?
I think in the letter that tells how Sauron brought the Ring back to Middle Earth from the ruins of Numenor, it is said that it is Sauron’s nature that allows him to carry the Ring, not any kind of connection between ring and holder.

And Frodo at Weathertop: note that the Nazgul approached the hobbits with NORMAL swords. They could have chopped Frodo to pieces quite easily, attacking all at once. BUT, it was only the Witch-King (who had a Morgul Blade) who attacked him, and he wounded Frodo with this weapon ONLY, not the long sword he had in his other hand.
Why not chop the hobbit's head off, take the body, Ring and all, and carry away?
To me, there isn’t really a good explanation for the Nazguls’ actions on Weathertop. I personally believe that the situation is best (but still not sufficiently) explained by malice causing poor decision making (Frodo’s friends get to watch as he turns into a wraith). Even if the Nazgul couldn’t kill Frodo (for whatever reason), they could have killed everyone else and captured him. It’s not like he could put the Ring on and disappear from the Nazguls’ view. One of Tolkien’s letters says that the Nazgul were frightened that they met any resistance, but this doesn’t explain why the Witch King obviously intended to use the morgul blade. Even if Frodo had only held off “wraithdom� as long as the Nazgul expected, this would still be a few days. Why the wasted time and added risk? What would keep one of Frodo’s companions from taking the Ring (he wasn’t always wearing it) from him? People are supposed to be tempted to take the Ring, aren’t they? It doesn’t add up.

The Morgul Blade was the ONLY suitable weapon - it bounded the soul to the Middle Earth, making it unable to leave.
Perhaps, this was also the reason why Sauron sent the Nazgul for the Ring, not some mortals. The ringbearer HAD to be killed with a MORGUL Blade, that was crucial.
That is an interesting idea, but, like I said, I don’t think sufficiently explains their actions. They could have tied Frodo up and then stabbed him with the blade.

If removal of a great ring could be accomplished by taking off a finger (obviously, it could), I don’t see why these other techniques would be needed.

[Gordis]

Only one small question - why should sauron torment Thrain instead of just cutting all of his fingers? Hmm, perhaps he loved tormenting those impertinent Dwarves who wasted one of his Rings, had it for an Age and a half, but didn't serve him? He was Sauron, after all...By the way, perhaps he did cut Thrain's finger as well.

I think in the letter that tells how Sauron brought the Ring back to Middle Earth from the ruins of Numenor, it is said that it is Sauron’s nature that allows him to carry the Ring, not any kind of connection between ring and holder.
It is true, of course. That is why I called my idea "crazy". But it does explain some things, does it not?
To me, there isn’t really a good explanation for the Nazguls’ actions on Weathertop. I personally believe that the situation is best (but still not sufficiently) explained by malice causing poor decision making (Frodo’s friends get to watch as he turns into a wraith).
I think, if malice were involved, it was not the desire to hurt his friends' feelings. Most likely it was Sauron's ORDER to the Nazgul to bring back not only the Ring, but also "Baggins", ALIVE or as a wraith.

Note that at the Ford, the Nazgul called to him: "Come back! To Mordor we will take you" and only when he refused, they settled for having only the Ring "The Ring! Give us the Ring".

I think, when the nazgul surrounded Frodo at Weathertop, they intended to capture him ALIVE. Because, really, no nazgul tried to kill him with a sword. If Frodo had no blade, he would have been carried away, kicking and screaming, all right. :D

The Witch-King attacked Frodo with the Morgul Blade, ONLY when he saw Frodo's flaming sword from Barrow-Downs :eek: and recognized its danger.

That was a big surprise for the WK, for he hasn't seen such swords for 1500 years, since TA 1409. All such swords either perished, or were kept safely in the Barrows guarded by the Wights. I think, guarding the blades was the primary task the WK assigned to them, when sending the Wights from Angmar to inhabit the Barrows, back in TA 1640 or something...

A midget Frodo was, of course, half the WK's size, but his little pin of a sword was the worse threat imaginable: "No other sword..."
And note that Frodo was decidedly "no Man" :p , which couldn't have escaped the WK's notice.
The little snake was obviously deadly.

There, I believe, the WK has made a big mistake: he should have paused to break the dangerous sword at a distance, with a spell, as he did later at the Ford. Instead, he bravely attacked immediately, wielding his Morgul blade, having settled for bringing Frodo back, not alive, but as a wraith.

But Frodo stroke first, and stroke unexpectedly low, throwing himself on the ground and aiming for the nazgul's legs (and calling out to a certain Valie ;) in the process). The WK almost got killed himself! :eek: So, the WK's blade, aimed at the hobbit's heart, only met his arm.

Then Aragorn came with his flaming branches, and the two parties separated, all the participants considerably shaken. :D

Note that at the Ford, when coming over to get Frodo, the WK didn't repeat the same mistake: he broke Frodo's sword first, and made him mute, preventing him to call to Elbereth, before he approached him.

Even if Frodo had only held off “wraithdom� as long as the Nazgul expected, this would still be a few days. Why the wasted time and added risk? What would keep one of Frodo’s companions from taking the Ring (he wasn’t always wearing it) from him? People are supposed to be tempted to take the Ring, aren’t they? It doesn’t add up.
I believe, the nazgul never intended to strike Frodo in the shoulder and wait for him to fade. IMO, if the Morgul Blade touched the heart, or passed anywhere near it, Frodo would have become wraith immediately, or in a matter of minutes, and just followed the WK like a dog, away from his friends.

Perhaps, given the erratic fight, the WK was not really sure what part of Frodo had been wounded.

But the rest doesn't add up, really. It is very strange, that the nazgul permitted the hobbits and Aragorn to get lost in the wilderness again, but not followed them from Weathertop.

Of course, Frodo's companions should have taken the Ring from him, when he came too close to becoming a wraith. I always wondered why they let Frodo keep the Ring, while he was hovering on the border of wraithdom. He could have suddenly disappeared, becoming a wraith, and carried the Ring to the nazgul.

[Jon S.]

Excellent analysis, Gordis.

I know this is not the response you want to hear but the actual explanation may be story-external (Tolkien wanted the Fellowship to have an early, abortive, non-decisive encounter with the Nazgul).

[Butterbeer]

you know i never thought about that ... Saruman must see Narya ...and yet he does not lust nor desire one of the mighty three ...especially Narya?? ...

imagine ...

Narya combined with his power of voice???

wow!

with his own ring and will of adamant?



Personally - I don't doubt for a second he'd have even hesitated to have chopped Gandalf's finger off if he wanted to!

so... what then exactly did he hope to achieve by keeping him up there?

[Landroval]

so... what then exactly did he hope to achieve by keeping him up there?
According to the Council of Elrond:
Until you reveal to me where the One may be found. I may find means to persuade you. Or until it is found in your despite, and the Ruler has time to turn to lighter matters: to devise, say, a fitting reward for the hindrance and insolence of Gandalf the Grey
Plus, he figured that Gandalf couldn't escape from that height - ignoring the good faith of Radagast.

[Butterbeer]

ok ...

let me rephrase that then ...

what then exactly did he hope to achieve by keeping him up there?


and i'd like your own thoughts rather than mere research! :p ;) :)

(best BB)

[CAB]

I think, if malice were involved, it was not the desire to hurt his friends' feelings. Most likely it was Sauron's ORDER to the Nazgul to bring back not only the Ring, but also "Baggins", ALIVE or as a wraith.
Well, I agree with that. But that isn’t necessarily a bad decision. The bad decision happens when they allow Frodo to stay with the others (presumably due to malice, to allow them to watch him change into a wraith, at least according to this idea). Like I said, I don’t think this is a particularly good explanation either.

The Witch-King attacked Frodo with the Morgul Blade, ONLY when he saw Frodo's flaming sword from Barrow-Downs :eek: and recognized its danger.
I think the problem with this is that it would have been much safer for the Witch King to use his regular sword against Frodo. Of course, if your idea about the rings staying with killed holders is true, then that wasn’t an option.

I think, guarding the blades was the primary task the WK assigned to them, when sending the Wights from Angmar to inhabit the Barrows, back in TA 1640 or something...
That’s a very interesting thought, Gordis.

Of course, Frodo's companions should have taken the Ring from him, when he came too close to becoming a wraith. I always wondered why they let Frodo keep the Ring, while he was hovering on the border of wraithdom. He could have suddenly disappeared, becoming a wraith, and carried the Ring to the nazgul.
I agree. Considering the importance of the situation, Glorfindel, after he met the others, probably should have taken the Ring straight to Rivendell himself, and let Aragorn look after the Hobbits.

I know this is not the response you want to hear but the actual explanation may be story-external (Tolkien wanted the Fellowship to have an early, abortive, non-decisive encounter with the Nazgul).
Yeah, that’s the right answer, I think. But, like you say, story-external.

[CAB]

so... what then exactly did he hope to achieve by keeping him up there?
Maybe he was just waiting to see how things would play out. He knew (thought he knew) that he could take the ring from Gandalf whenever he wanted. Perhaps that wasn’t a line he wanted to cross until he knew it was the right thing to do.

[Butterbeer]

maybe...

obviously with the nine reported abroard and riding hell for leather in a supersonic strawberry strewn blur towards 'shire' and the one clearly vulnerable and unguarded .. i shouldn't doubt for a momment that Saruman thought he had all the time in the world... :rolleyes: ;)

clearly he has his concerns at this point...


at this point you really have to wonder, morally, if saurman of many colours and of the orc armies and the breeding of the Uruk-hai, and open lust for the ONE and the total domination of Middle earth can still really worry about 'the right thing to do' ...

best, BB

[CAB]

He had put himself into a hell of a spot (double-traitor). He absolutely had to worry about the right thing to do. I’m not suggesting that he thought he could hold off on a decision for years, but he held off long enough for Gandalf to escape. Oops.

[Butterbeer]

Not at this point - as Gandalf argues earlier - he still has choices - he is not yet between the rock and hard place with sauron till later ...

oops indeed :D

(little did saruman realise the effect he would have on subsequent Bond films and evil characters ...not to mention Dr Evil! ;) )

[CAB]

Come on Butterbeer. That is exactly what I am saying. He has choices and is trying to make the best one.

[The Telcontarion]

Gordis

Your argument is without flaw, and will get no argument from me. Very insightful!!!

[Butterbeer]

Come on Butterbeer. That is exactly what I am saying. He has choices and is trying to make the best one.

you mean, he, too, was waiting for the laser-mounted sea bass... i mean sharks??? :p

El-tel , you gotta be joking right? The Professor is like MORIARTI ... she always leaves a chink in her armour .... this case though is more like a drafty Emmental cheese ...

[CAB]

at this point you really have to wonder, morally, if saurman of many colours and of the orc armies and the breeding of the Uruk-hai, and open lust for the ONE and the total domination of Middle earth can still really worry about 'the right thing to do' ...

I should have read this more carefully. I didn't mean the right thing to do in a moral sense, but in a right thing to do for Saurman personally sense.

you mean, he, too, was waiting for the laser-mounted sea bass... i mean sharks??? :p
Did Gandalf have bad teeth and serious mojo?

[Butterbeer]

:D

yeah baby!

so- Gor- does not dragging a ring from a finger like a street thief rather lack finesse?

I really fail to see any point here- either it is taken off or it is forcibly chopped off - who the flip tries to "pull it off" like an eager child????

Emmental i say! ;)

(wotcha Gor! :D :p :) )

[Gordis]

you know i never thought about that ... Saruman must see Narya ...and yet he does not lust nor desire one of the mighty three ...especially Narya?? ...
I would call it a plothole. The idea that Gandalf had Narya came very late: almost then all the story had been written. That is a story-external reason, of course.
Not at this point - as Gandalf argues earlier - he still has choices - he is not yet between the rock and hard place with sauron till later ... He still hoped to get the Ring himself. In UT it is said that Saruman didn't tell Sauron about the location of the Shire. So he hoped to go get the Ring, while the nazgul are having the recreation trip up and down Anduin. In UT it is said, that he revealed the location of the Shire to the nazgul, once Gandalf was gone. (and in another version it is told that he didn't tell anything to the nazgul even then, but sent them to hunt for Gandalf around Edoras.
The question is why hasn't he hurried to the Shire himself - too lazy? Sure he sent the squint-eyed Southerner, perhaps some other spies, but was it enough?

I think the problem with this is that it would have been much safer for the Witch King to use his regular sword against Frodo. Of course, if your idea about the rings staying with killed holders is true, then that wasn’t an option.
It wasn't an option as well, IF Sauron ordered to bring "Baggins" back, alive or as a wraith. Even Sauron couldn't torture a dead hobbit and he couldn't return his soul once it had departed.

Emmental i say!
Neither of you have thought about the best counter-argument for my "carrying the Ring to Mandos" theory:

Bill Ferny: "'Morning, Longshanks! Off early? Found some friends at last?'
Strider: "Come here, buddy, I have a shiny present for you"
Strider hands Ferny the Ring.
Bill: 'Oh lovely...My Precious...'
Ferny puts the Ring on and disappears. Strider draws what remains of Narsil and hacks the empty space in front of him into pieces..
Strider: 'Now the Ring has left Middle Earth. The Quest is over.'
The End. :p

[Alcuin]

How many people lost or gave up Rings of Power in Tolkien’s tales? The MÃ*rdain of Ost-in-Edhil, particularly Celebrimbor; Thráin son of Thrór; Bilbo and Sam; Gollum; Déagol; Isildur; and of course, Sauron.

Gil-galad received two of the Three Rings from Celebrimbor, which he subsequently surrendered to others; the third was given to Galadriel (I think I remember) by Celebrimbor. Since Gil-galad died before the One Ring was taken from Sauron, we can probably assume that he did not presume to wear it; otherwise, Sauron would have been aware of his thoughts, plans, and of course, the military preparations and plans of the Last Alliance. Gil-galad gave one ring to Elrond, and the other to CÃ*rdan; CÃ*rdan in his turn gave the ring in his keeping to Gandalf, so perhaps he did not use it, either. However, it would seem that Elrond, Galadriel, and Gandalf all used their rings to one degree or another; but they never gave them up, and passed into the West with them.

So Gandalf’s statement that no one but Bilbo had ever given up a Ring of Power was likely correct in the sense that no one who had ever worn one ever willingly gave it up except Bilbo. A question remains about Frodo’s offer to Galadriel: it seems to have been genuine. In any case, even Frodo’s will collapsed in the Sammath Naur, and this is a good place to start.

Gollum found Frodo in the Sammath Naur despite his invisibility (was Gollum so far into the wraith world himself that he could see Frodo even with the Ring?), and was able to take the Ring from him by biting off his finger. Gollum lost the Ring, as we all know, by falling into a volcanic fissure.

Sam briefly bore the Ring and wore it; he gave it back to Frodo, however reluctantly, based largely upon his loyalty to Frodo and his “plain hobbit sense.�

The MÃ*rdain of Ost-in-Edhil were defeated by Sauron’s armies. Sauron apparently physically seized some Rings from them, how many we do not know. Celebrimbor was tortured to make him reveal the whereabouts of the Seven and the Nine, though he was able to resist telling Sauron where the Three were hidden. Sauron mounted his body on a pole and used it as a banner.

Likewise, Thráin son of Thrór was captured by Sauron and tortured to reveal his ring. (Why this was necessary is not explained: surely the last of the Seven was obvious to Sauron: was it not on his finger? And where on his person would Thráin hide it?) Of course, this brings up the fact that Thrór willingly gave his ring to Thráin before Thrór took Nár on his ill-fated journey to Moria; but the text says that Dwarves were resistant to many of the powers of the Rings, which only inflamed their greed; that leaves open the possibility that Dwarves had been passing along Rings of Power from one to another. Tolkien also says that some were consumed by dragons (and presumably destroyed that way), and Sauron obtained the rest, possibly much as he obtained Thráin’s ring.

Déagol was murdered by Sméagol, who took the Ring. Gollum subsequently lost the Ring when it slipped from his finger in the orc-tunnels under the Misty Mountains, where Bilbo found it.

Isildur was shot by an arrow. Whether he died from the shot or from drowning is probably not significant.

Sauron lost the Ring when Isildur cut it from his broken body. An interesting question might be: if Isildur had left the Ring on Sauron and his body was not destroyed, would he have revived?

Finally, the Ringwraiths gave up their rings to Sauron (whether he returned them later or not is probably not significant here) because Sauron demanded them, and they were unable to resist.

To summarize: Rings of Power were willingly passed from user to user only in the case of Dwarves and hobbits. We do not know if this was true of all Dwarves, but Thrór did willingly pass his Ring of Power to Thráin. Thráin was unwilling to give it to Sauron, but Sauron was able to take it using force, and perhaps torture was necessary, too; or maybe it just gave Sauron pleasure to torture one of Durin’s heirs.

Hobbits, but not all hobbits, sometimes willingly gave them up. (Gandalf suspected that hobbits would prove resistant to the effects of the Rings of Power; why, however, we are not told, as far as I know.) Specifically, Déagol, Sméagol, and eventually Frodo (he was strong and well-meaning to begin with, but neither strength nor good purpose lasted – at the last the dark power began to devour him) were unwilling to give up the One Ring. Bilbo and Sam were able to divest themselves of the Ring. Sauron tortured Gollum, who apparently saw him during the ordeal, and was able to obtain a great deal of information from him this way, but was unable to induce him to reveal all that he knew about the location of “Shire.�

Gil-galad and CÃ*rdan passed along a Ring of Power; but it is reasonably certain that Gil-galad never used one, and entirely possible that CÃ*rdan never used his, either. I argue that never using a Ring of Power probably means that it is easier for the guardian to give it up.

The Eldar of Eregion were willing to remove their Rings of Power and forego using them once they recognized Sauron’s trap, but they did not willingly surrender them – at least, not to Sauron. Celebrimbor was willing to transfer possession of the Three to others of the Eldar whom he respected. The Elves of Eregion were killed and/or tortured by Sauron to get the Rings they possessed.

Isildur lost the One Ring when he died. The same is essentially true for Sauron, although he was “merely� “disembodied,� as he had been when Númenor was destroyed.

None of the Nine Ringwraiths willingly surrendered a Ring of Power to anyone other than Sauron, whose demand they could not refuse.

Bottom Line: Killing and torture is an extremely effective method for obtaining a Ring of Power: specifically Sauron, Isildur, Déagol, Celebrimbor, the other MÃ*rdain, Thráin, Sméagol-Gollum, and basically Frodo, too – the One Ring was taken from him by violence.

Willingly divesting a Ring of Power was done by Dwarves, Hobbits, and Eldar.

The Ringwraiths gave their Rings to Sauron at some point, and may have received them back or not; but in either case, they had no will in the matter of giving their Rings to Sauron, and it basically made no difference to them.

(Sorry for the very long, wandering post.)

[Valandil]

:
:
:
Sauron lost the Ring when Isildur cut it from his broken body. An interesting question might be: if Isildur had left the Ring on Sauron and his body was not destroyed, would he have revived?
:
:
:

I DEFINITELY think so.

[Jon S.]

(Sorry for the very long, wandering post.)

Not all who wander are lost - thanks for taking the time to post that. :)

[Gordis]

Thanks for your excellent post, Alcuin. :)

It so happened that I posted my analysis of the Weathertop episode on another forum as well, and got another interesting reply from Alcuin, pointing out the importance of destruction of the Barrow-Wight. I think I shall post my reply here as well, to share it with the Mooters.

The only point that might remain concerns Bombadil and the destruction of the barrow-wight. If the Ringwraiths knew about the end of the barrow-wight but not about Bombadil, then it seems to me that the last pieces are in place.

Tolkien drew up “notes recounting in detail the movements of the Black Riders in the Shire�, and that “the Black Captain established a camp at Andrath, where the Greenway passed in a narrow defile between the Barrow-downs and the South Downs,� from which “he … visited the Barrow-downs… and the Barrow-wights were roused…� Was he aware of the destruction of the wight and its barrow? If he were, think about who could have done this! Even Elrond’s councilors forgot about Bombadil: did the Witch-king remember Bombadil? If he did not, this would be a matter of tremendous concern – an outright disaster – because from his standpoint, the halflings somehow destroyed the Barrow-wight and seized the enchanted Dúnedain blades in the tomb. How could they do that without using the Ring? It would also imply that the halflings recognized the blades for the immensely powerful weapons they were. From this perspective, the Nazgûl had a lot to fear!

You are dead right. I have not thought about the impact of the Wight's destruction on the nazgul.

Indeed, the nazgul likely learned about the demise of the Wight even before they saw the blade. According to the notes on the movements of the Black riders in HOME VII "The Treason of Isengard", the Riders, who attacked Crickhollow while hobbits were at Bree (the night after the destruction of the wight), returned to the Witch-King at Andrath to report, thus likely passing right through the fields of barrows. It is strange if they hadn't heard the recent news from the Wight's bereaved colleagues :p .

So likely, at Andrath, the Witch-King learned from his underlings not only about their failure at Crickhollow and at Bree, but also that a Wight was destroyed and some perilous blades had gone missing. That could explain the Witch-Kings great wrath upon hearing the reports even better.

Whom could the nazgul suspect? Tom (if they ever heard of him), Gandalf (I don't think they could have been quite sure of the wizard's whereabouts), some Elves (but the appearance of, especially, Calaquendi Elves, at the Barrows at the crucial moment would have been too great a coincidence) or the hobbit with the Ring.

Did the Witch-King know (about) Tom? There was heavy fighting around Tyrn Gorthad and the old Forest back in TA 1409.
App. A: A great host came out of Angmar in 1409, and crossing the river entered Cardolan and surrounded Weathertop. The Dúnedain were defeated and Arveleg was slain. ... Cardolan was ravaged. Araphor son of Arveleg was not yet full-grown, but he was valiant, and with aid from CÃ*rdan he repelled the enemy from Fornost and the North Downs. A remnant of the faithful among the Dúnedain of Cardolan also held out in Tyrn Gorthad (the Barrowdowns), or took refuge in the Forest behind.
But it doesn't seem that Tom took any active part in it. He is not mentioned in any chronicle. It seems he remained an aggrieved spectator, watching men killing men on his lands. On the other hand, we have no data, that the Witch-King personally commanded the assault on Tyrn Gorthad. More likely, he was intent on Amon-Sul and then on Fornost (I personally think he mostly wanted to get the palantiri :) ).

Now, in September 3018, the Witch-King himself visited Tom's lands and not only had "a cup of tea :p " with the Wights, but also weaved some spells to arouse all evil things in the Old Forest (like Old Man Willow). It doesn't seem that the WK was hampered by Tom in any way, while trespassing.

So, I believe, the WK didn't know about Tom.

I don't think the nazgul suspected the hobbits of killing the Wight before they saw the blade in Frodo's hand. Most likely they suspected Gandalf. They could have become quite sure when they saw the wizard at Weathertop.

Otherwise, the WK would have been vary of the hobbits from the start - he would not have left 2 of the 5 nazgul standing idle at the lip of the dell... But once the nazgul saw the blade, the realization that it was the Ringbearer who destroyed the Wight and plundered the Barrow hit them.

They must have realized that, wielding the Ring, even a hobbit could possibly order a wight to depart. But that meant that the hobbit had much more willpower that the nazgul had previously thought. If the hobbit successfully wielded the Ring against the Wight, then the hobbit COULD try to use the Ring against the nazgul themselves ( like the situation described in the letter 246 ;) ) - a very difficult and unpleasant situation for the nazgul.
The situation as between Frodo with the Ring and the Eight might be compared to that of a small brave man armed with a devastating weapon, faced by eight savage warriors of great strength and agility armed with poisoned blades. The man's weakness was that he did not know how to use his weapon yet; and he was by temperament and training averse to violence. Their weakness that the man's weapon was a thing that filled them with fear as an object of terror in their religious cult, by which they had been conditioned to treat one who wielded it with servility. I think they would have shown 'servility'. They would have greeted Frodo as 'Lord'. ... they would simply have waited. Until Sauron himself came. But, at Weathertop, could they have waited till Sauron himself came? Of course not. So they had to act - and act swiftly.

Perhaps that was part of the reason why the Witch-King attacked immediately - nor to leave Frodo time to claim the Ring for his own and to start issuing orders to the Ringwraiths?

[CAB]

I have to admit, after you consider the Nazguls’ possible suspicions concerning the blades and the wight, the pieces start to fall into place. I guess there is a good answer to this question after all. Very well done Gordis and Alcuin. :)

[jammi567]

wow *left speechless with mouth hanging open*.

[Butterbeer]

... ENTER ... the Dentist ...

[Landroval]

If the Ringwraiths knew ... not about Bombadil
I find that really hard to believe
But I had forgotten Bombadil, if indeed this is still the same that walked the woods and hills long ago, and even then was older than the old. That was not then his name. Iarwain Ben-adar we called him, oldest and fatherless. But many another name he has since been given by other folk: Forn by the Dwarves, Orald by Northern Men, and other names beside.
Though, as the saying goes, I like the way you think :D

[jammi567]

I agree because if someone is immortal, they have many names throughout the age, and you live near the m for hundreds of years, how can you not know them?

[Gordis]

I find that really hard to believe

Though, as the saying goes, I like the way you think :D
Thanks.

We can't be sure about that of course.

Still let us consider the possibility that the Witch-King HAD heard of some strange being living in the Old Forest.

He had his own agents nearby - the Wights - so they might have reported his existence.

But Tom has never molested a wight before, it seems - he let them live on his lands and harass the trespassers (remember terrible stories about the Wights that were told even in the Shire?). So, most probably, the WK assumed that Orald (or Forn or Tom or what-is-his-name-again?) had no power over the Wights.

So, when a wight was suddenly destroyed, the WK suspected not Tom, their neutral neighbour, but someone else - Gandalf the Maia or Baggins the Ringbearer.

[Landroval]

He had his own agents nearby - the Wights - so they might have reported his existence.
All races are aware of him, _northmen_ included. He wasn't that far from the events involving the witch-king and the northern kingdoms - the chief nazgul most likely knew of him before there were any barrow wights.
So, when a wight was suddenly destroyed, the WK suspected not Tom, their neutral neighbour, but someone else - Gandalf the Maia or Baggins the Ringbearer.
There is no sign about the hobbit ringbearer having any particular power; the w-k most likely met Gollum in person and saw that a hobbit having the ring for 4 centuries is no biggie.

The fact that no evil can cross Tom's house must have been known for a long time - along with his power over the wood (I doubt Goldberrry calls him Master for nothing). He is probably the oldest being, and that most likely imply in itself a good deal of magic power. On the other hand, hobbits, like all Men, lack any magical powers:
Anyway, a difference in the use of 'magic' in this story is that it is not to be come by by 'lore' or spells; but is in an inherent power not possessed or attainable by Men as such. Aragorn's 'healing' might be regarded as 'magical', or at least a blend of magic with pharmacy and 'hypnotic' processes. But it is (in theory) reported by hobbits who have very little notions of philosophy and science; while A. is not a pure 'Man', but at long remove one of the 'children of Luthien'.
[Also, it is to be noted that there must have been other wights around, who could have told the witch-king about what happened; after all, Tom's enchantings are sure to be felt around. [Even the departed wight could have informed the w-k].]

[CAB]

But Tom has never molested a wight before, it seems - he let them live on his lands and harass the trespassers (remember terrible stories about the Wights that were told even in the Shire?). So, most probably, the WK assumed that Orald (or Forn or Tom or what-is-his-name-again?) had no power over the Wights.
I think it is a bit of an undue assumption to say that Tom never defeated a wight before. Maybe, maybe not. Also, like Landroval said, just the location of Bombadil’s house may have suggested to the Nazgul that Tom had the power to deal with wights and other evil powers.

So, when a wight was suddenly destroyed, the WK suspected not Tom, their neutral neighbour, but someone else - Gandalf the Maia or Baggins the Ringbearer.
I think you are right. Tom doesn’t seem to generally take a very active role. I don’t think the Witch King would very quickly suspect Tom’s involvement. Of course, there is the possibility, as Landroval suggested, that if the Nazgul heard about the wight’s defeat, that they got the whole story, and knew of Bombadil’s involvement. Considering that it fits better with this theory, I prefer the idea that they either heard only rumors (so to speak) or nothing concerning the end of the wight.


There is no sign about the hobbit ringbearer having any particular power; the w-k most likely met Gollum in person and saw that a hobbit having the ring for 4 centuries is no biggie.

On the other hand, hobbits, like all Men, lack any magical powers:
If anything, this is more reason for the Nazgul to be startled on Weathertop. Frodo should be helpless, but there he is, having seemingly used the Ring to defeat a wight and arm himself with an “anti-Nazgul� blade. It seems that this was enough to make them want to regroup, even while knowing that Gandalf was in the area.

Kind of, sort of related question: Apparently the art of making “anti-Nazgul� blades was lost or abandoned. Could this be due to the (possibly) well known prophesy about the Witch King’s defeat? If a Man couldn’t kill him, and the swords are made for Men, why continue to make the swords?

[Landroval]

Of course, there is the possibility, as Landroval suggested, that if the Nazgul heard about the wight’s defeat, that they got the whole story, and knew of Bombadil’s involvement.
Most likely so; the analysis that Gordis and Alcuin did failed to mention one thing:
the Barrow-wights were roused, and all things of evil spirit, hostile to Elves and Men, were on the watch with malice in the Old Forest and on the Barrow-downs.
with all those spies around, the nazgul ought to have been informed on what happened.
Frodo should be helpless, but there he is, having seemingly used the Ring to defeat a wight and arm himself with an “anti-Nazgul� blade.
Sure, he did cry out the name of Elbereth (and that hurt the nazgul more than the blade, as Aragorn states), but he has put a pretty pathetic show when he meets the nazgul, quaking as with bitter cold, being as terrified as the other hobbits who threw themselves flat on the ground; Frodo also obeyed the temptation to put on the ring - most likely under the command of the nazguls. _None_ of these are signs of a person who masters the ring to whatever relevant degree - quite the contrary I would say.
Kind of, sort of related question: Apparently the art of making “anti-Nazgul� blades was lost or abandoned. Could this be due to the (possibly) well known prophesy about the Witch King’s defeat? If a Man couldn’t kill him, and the swords are made for Men, why continue to make the swords?
Those weapons were not specifically anti-nazgul, but "wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor", as we learn from the Departure of Boromir. Their craft probably dissappeared with the demise of Numenor, them being work of Westernesse.

[Gordis]

All races are aware of him, _northmen_ included. He wasn't that far from the events involving the witch-king and the northern kingdoms - the chief nazgul most likely knew of him before there were any barrow wights.
"Northmen" in Elrond's quote are most likely Men who lived nearby, the Cardolani Men, that is, not the Angmarians. Note that Tom is not known even in Bree (it is clear from the drafts in HOME VII: "Is he known to Butterbur? - No."). Even if the WK passed through Bree several times back in 1300-1975, that wouldn't have enlightened him. And don't forget he was not supposed to know even about the land of the Shire (existing since 1600) and numerous hobbits in Northern Eriador.
He might have known of Tom, but he might not as well.

There is no sign about the hobbit ringbearer having any particular power; the w-k most likely met Gollum in person and saw that a hobbit having the ring for 4 centuries is no biggie.
CAB had addressed this well. Gollum was no biggie, but a hobbit wielding a Barrow Blade, and calling upon Elbereth (which only High Elves did - remember the quote: "They are High Elves, they sing of Elbereth") - that was a big surprise.

The fact that no evil can cross Tom's house must have been known for a long time - along with his power over the wood (I doubt Goldberrry calls him Master for nothing). He is probably the oldest being, and that most likely imply in itself a good deal of magic power.
Well, no one ever wanted his house... As for his LAND, it is another matter entirely. The facts contradict his supreme control over the territory.
We know for certain that
1. Tom didn't prevent the destruction of Cardolani warriors and people of Tyrn Gorthad by Angmarians back in 1409.
2. He let the Barrow Wights live on his territory and molest the passers-by for 1500 years. If they are not "Evil" then I don't know who is.
3. He let the Witch King visit the Barrow downs and arouse all the Wights AND all the Evil beings in the Old Forest.
So, where is this famous control? I don't say he had no magic power but he hardly used it, it seems. Too busy singing and dancing.

On the other hand, hobbits, like all Men, lack any magical powers
You missed my point. I was speaking of the Power of the One Ring, wielded by the Hobbit. Don't you think, if Frodo DID try, he might have commanded a Wight to depart? Considering the blessed #246, he MIGHT have.

Also, it is to be noted that there must have been other wights around, who could have told the witch-king about what happened; after all, Tom's enchantings are sure to be felt around. [Even the departed wight could have informed the w-k] I agree. It might have. But we don't know if it did or not. It didn't seem able to stop at Andrath to report At these words there was a cry and part of the inner end of the chamber fell in with a crash. Then there was a long trailing shriek, fading away into an unguessable distance; and after that silence..
I don't think the other Wights travelled around much - one had to go to the Barrows to talk to them. They were inhabiting decaying corpses, after all - what if one looses a head or an arm while walking around? :eek: :D
Much easier to suppose that a Wight have stopped a Nazgul travelling to Andrath via the Barrow Downs and sent word to the WK with him. And also: did the other Wights know who sent away their colleague?

with all those spies around, the nazgul ought to have been informed on what happened.
"Ought", yes, but, "were" they? :p The Wight OUGHT to call the Witch-King once it had got the Ringbearer. He was not far, really. But the night ended, the day came and still nothing. Frodo had awoken and Bombadil came first. That is really a very BAD performance.

I think it is a bit of an undue assumption to say that Tom never defeated a wight before. Maybe, maybe not. Also, like Landroval said, just the location of Bombadil’s house may have suggested to the Nazgul that Tom had the power to deal with wights and other evil powers.
I think he never prevented a wight from catching and burying some unwary traveler. Otherwise, from where did all the horrible tales come? There was perfect neutrality: the Wights let Tom be, and he let them be.
IF he wanted to rid the Barrows of the Wights, he could have done it many times over, couldn't he? He had 1500 years for the job, and certainly enough power.

Sure, he did cry out the name of Elbereth (and that hurt the nazgul more than the blade, as Aragorn states), but he has put a pretty pathetic show when he meets the nazgul, quaking as with bitter cold, being as terrified as the other hobbits who threw themselves flat on the ground; Frodo also obeyed the temptation to put on the ring - most likely under the command of the nazguls. _None_ of these are signs of a person who masters the ring to whatever relevant degree - quite the contrary I would say.
Aragorn most likely didn't know the importance of the blades. It is not even said that he even looked at them before Weathertop. I would say, he was mistaken.

As for "pathetic show" I strongly disagree. The pathetic show was in the movie. Compare the two scenes, and you will see that Frodo was far from pathetic in the book. He was the only one of the hobbits to offer resistance. He put on the Ring (an "object of terror" for all the nazgul), he cried to Elbereth and he attacked first and almost killed the Witch-King. If he had touched his leg, and not only his cloak, the WK would have been dead. "Pathetic", indeed :( .

Those weapons were not specifically anti-nazgul, but "wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor", as we learn from the Departure of Boromir. Their craft probably dissappeared with the demise of Numenor, them being work of Westernesse.
Nay, it is wrong. The blades were made n Arnor by "Men of Westernesse" = the Dunedain. It is only a translation of the Sindarin term. See this quote:
So passed the sword of the Barrow-downs, work of Westernesse. But glad would he have been to know its fate who wrought it slowly long ago in the North-kingdom when the Dúnedain were young, and chief among their foes was the dread realm of Angmar and its sorcerer king. No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will.
We can tell that the blades were made between TA 1300 (the foundation of Angmar) and 1409 (when the Last Prince of Cardolan perished and was entombed in the Barrow). Most likely they date from 1356-1409, as it was only in 1356 that Angmar became aggressive.
But the know-how came from Numenor, here you are right. The Mouth of Sauron (or his Master) recognised the sword design and called it "the blade of the Downfallen West". Perhaps such swords were used against the nazgul back in the Second Age, and during the battles of the Last Alliance.
Kind of, sort of related question: Apparently the art of making “anti-Nazgul� blades was lost or abandoned. Could this be due to the (possibly) well known prophesy about the Witch King’s defeat? If a Man couldn’t kill him, and the swords are made for Men, why continue to make the swords?
I don't think so, because the prophesy was made in 1975, when the WK was defeated and left the North. They Northern Dunedain didn't need the swords after that anyway.

BUT, I think the know-how of the sword making was lost much earlier, with the end of Cardolan. Perhaps there was a unique "school" of craftsmen in Tyrn Gorthad, and all of them were killed in the 1409 war, or , more likely, they died during the Plague of 1636. " It was at this time that an end came of the Dúnedain of Cardolan, and evil spirits out of Angmar and Rhudaur entered into the deserted mounds and dwelt there."
I believe, the Witch-King sent the Wights to guard the ONLY remaining blades. What was the point, if such blades were being constantly produced in Arthedain? No, likely the secret was lost.

There is no mention of such blades being used in the last Angmar War of 1974-75. And HAD there been such blades at the battle of Fornost, where Gondoreans fought alongside Arnoreans, don't you think that Earnur would have imported the blades and the secret of their making into Gondor? They have been attacked by the Witch-King only 27 years after the battle of Fornost and had him and the other nazgul as their close neighbors, right across the river :eek: , ever since. IF Earnur knew of the blades, the plant for their mass-production would have been installed in Minas-Tirith! :D

[Landroval]

"Northmen" in Elrond's quote are most likely Men who lived nearby, the Cardolani Men, that is, not the Angmarians.
I see no reason to restrict its meaning; but you are entitled to your opinion, of course.
Note that Tom is not known even in Bree (it is clear from the drafts in HOME VII: "Is he known to Butterbur? - No.")
Note that Gandalf himself comments on the short memory of this, otherwise, good intended bar keeper. I find it hard to believe he is representative of the knowledge of the northern men.
He might have known of Tom, but he might not as well.
Gandalf states that Tom will be the last to perrish, should Sauron win. If Sauron's second in command don't know about who Tom is, that makes them pretty dumb, esspecially since all races know of him.
Moreover, considering your previous statement:
Now, in September 3018, the Witch-King himself visited Tom's lands and not only had "a cup of tea " with the Wights, but also weaved some spells to arouse all evil things in the Old Forest (like Old Man Willow). It doesn't seem that the WK was hampered by Tom in any way, while trespassing.
and the fact that Tom's house is rather close to the barrows, this pictures the witch-king in such an ignorant position that it is not acceptable.
a hobbit wielding a Barrow Blade, and calling upon Elbereth (which only High Elves did - remember the quote: "They are High Elves, they sing of Elbereth")
If a hobbit can wield a ring to defeat a barrow-wight, I doubt he would resort crying in despair when facing a nazgul. You contradict yourself.
did the other Wights know who sent away their colleague?
They most likely picked up Tom's powerful incantations
Much easier to suppose that a Wight have stopped a Nazgul travelling to Andrath via the Barrow Downs and sent word to the WK with him
We also have all the other evil beings keeping an eye on the downs and the old forest.
As for "pathetic show" I strongly disagree.
Terror overcame Pippin and Merry, and they threw themselves flat on the ground. Sam shrank to Frodo's side. Frodo was hardly less terrified than his companions; he was quaking as if he was bitter cold, but his terror was swallowed up in a sudden temptation to put on the Ring.
He was the only one of the hobbits to offer resistance. He put on the Ring
Putting the ring on is _not_ a sign of resistance, it was done at the nazgul's bidding, as seen in other ocasions.
The desire to do this laid hold of him, and he could think of nothing else. He did not forget the Barrow, nor the message of Gandalf; but something seemed to be compelling him to disregard all warnings, and he longed to yield. Not with the hope of escape, or of doing anything, either good or bad: he simply felt that he must take the Ring and put it on his finger. He could not speak. He felt Sam looking at him, as if he knew that his master was in some great trouble, but he could not turn towards him. He shut his eyes and struggled for a while; but resistance became unbearable, and at last he slowly drew out the chain, and slipped the Ring on the forefinger of his left hand.
he cried to Elbereth
Pathetic :p
almost killed the Witch-King.
Say what?
This was the stroke of Frodo's sword, he said. The only hurt that it did to his enemy, I fear; for it is unharmed, but all blades perish that pierce that dreadful King. More deadly to him was the name of Elbereth
Though the name of Elbereth may seed terror in the nazgul, no other harm was done, besides ripping a cloack. You are probably reffering to your own quote:
No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will.
This states clearly that this sword is _unique_; moreover, it only cleaved sinews, it didn't, in itself, kill the witch-king.
Aragorn most likely didn't know the importance of the blades.
I disagree:
- See! cried Aragorn. Here we find tokens! He picked out from the pile of grim weapons two knives, leaf-bladed, damasked in gold and red; and searching further he found also the sheaths, black, set with small red gems. No orc-tools these! he said. They were borne by the hobbits. Doubtless the Orcs despoiled them, but feared to keep the knives, knowing them for what they are: work of Westernesse, wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor.

[CAB]

I think he never prevented a wight from catching and burying some unwary traveler. Otherwise, from where did all the horrible tales come? There was perfect neutrality: the Wights let Tom be, and he let them be.
IF he wanted to rid the Barrows of the Wights, he could have done it many times over, couldn't he? He had 1500 years for the job, and certainly enough power.
I am not suggesting that Tom was concerned to remove all the wights. He helped Frodo and Co., why couldn’t he have done this before? Tom doesn’t seem terribly concerned about the quest of the Ring, so why would his treatment of Frodo be so unique? I don’t see why Tom couldn’t have helped a few people out before without trying to remove all the wights or help every person who comes into contact with them. He said he first meeting with Frodo was “chance�. Chance simply wasn’t so kind to all those who traveled near the barrows.

I don't think so, because the prophesy was made in 1975, when the WK was defeated and left the North. They Northern Dunedain didn't need the swords after that anyway.

BUT, I think the know-how of the sword making was lost much earlier, with the end of Cardolan. Perhaps there was a unique "school" of craftsmen in Tyrn Gorthad, and all of them were killed in the 1409 war, or , more likely, they died during the Plague of 1636. " It was at this time that an end came of the Dúnedain of Cardolan, and evil spirits out of Angmar and Rhudaur entered into the deserted mounds and dwelt there."
I believe, the Witch-King sent the Wights to guard the ONLY remaining blades. What was the point, if such blades were being constantly produced in Arthedain? No, likely the secret was lost.

There is no mention of such blades being used in the last Angmar War of 1974-75. And HAD there been such blades at the battle of Fornost, where Gondoreans fought alongside Arnoreans, don't you think that Earnur would have imported the blades and the secret of their making into Gondor? They have been attacked by the Witch-King only 27 years after the battle of Fornost and had him and the other nazgul as their close neighbors, right across the river :eek: , ever since. IF Earnur knew of the blades, the plant for their mass-production would have been installed in Minas-Tirith! :D
That makes sense. I like the idea of the wights being sent to guard the swords. To me, it seems that the fact that a Hobbit, rather than a Man, was holding the blade on Weathertop may have been another reason for the Nazgul to be frightened.

this pictures the witch-king in such an ignorant position that it is not acceptable.
Personally, I would guess that the Witch King had some knowledge of Tom. But, that in itself is not particularly important regarding the situation on Weathertop. The question is: Would the possibility of Tom’s involvement occur to the Nazgul in the heat of the moment when they confront Frodo and Co.? I don’t think so, myself. The biggest thing in their minds (by far) probably was the Ring. Then we have the barrow-blade/wight and also Gandalf’s clear involvement. Bombadil, who seems to have always kept a relatively low profile, was probably the last thing on their minds at that moment.

Regarding the question of communications between the Witch King and the evil forces in the area:

the Barrow-wights were roused, and all things of evil spirit, hostile to Elves and Men, were on the watch with malice in the Old Forest and on the Barrow-downs.
This quote suggests that the wights and other evil beings were “awakened� but not necessarily that they were reporting to the Nazgul. I don’t think they were. If they had been, considering how completely the evil beings covered the area, the Hobbits couldn’t possibly have remained hidden from the Nazgul. Of course, they had Tom’s protection for a while, but the Nazgul should have been able to take Frodo before he ever got to Bree.

[Landroval]

That makes sense. I like the idea of the wights being sent to guard the swords.
If there was anything critical about the swords for the life of the nazguls, I doubt they would have been left out for grabs; after all, a bunch of wights is not the ultimate defence in the history of Ea. Aragorn would most likely have requested to wield one of these blades, but he didn't and I doubt he didn't observe them on the hobbits. As it stands, these didn't happen.
This quote suggests that the wights and other evil beings were “awakened� but not necessarily that they were reporting to the Nazgul.
I doubt they were put to take notes and report to Sauron after the whole thing ended. As Gordis pointed out previously, "according to the notes on the movements of the Black riders in HOME VII "The Treason of Isengard", the Riders, who attacked Crickhollow while hobbits were at Bree (the night after the destruction of the wight), returned to the Witch-King at Andrath to report, thus likely passing right through the fields of barrows." If they did, they sure must have noticed all the treasures from the tomb lying in the open and would have been informed at that moment, the latest.

[Gordis]

Hmm, Landroval, this time I disagree with most of what you say.

If a hobbit can wield a ring to defeat a barrow-wight, I doubt he would resort crying in despair when facing a nazgul. You contradict yourself.
He was not only crying in despair. He also took out his blade and struck. Whether he was crying or not is immaterial. Eowyn also was crying. Nazgul aura of despair is not for nothing.

Putting the ring on is _not_ a sign of resistance, it was done at the nazgul's bidding, as seen in other ocasions.IMO not at the nazgul's bidding, but at the Ring's bidding. The Ring made him put it on. Sometimes it slipped on his finger all by itself (in the Pony, where no nazgul were sitting around drinking beer), sometimes it urged him to put it on, even when no nazgul were around At first Frodo felt as if he had indeed been turned into stone by the incantation. Then a wild thought of escape came to him. He wondered if he put on the Ring, whether the Barrow-wight would miss him, and he might find some way out. He thought of himself running free over the grass, grieving for Merry, and Sam, and Pippin, but free and alive himself. Gandalf would admit that there had been nothing else he could do.Even Bilbo felt the urge to put on the Ring Sometimes I have felt it was like an eye looking at me. And I am always wanting to put it on and disappear

For the nazgul, Frodo's putting the Ring on might signify that he wanted to claim it and wield it. As I said earlier, it would have been quite a difficult situation.

If there was anything critical about the swords for the life of the nazguls, I doubt they would have been left out for grabs; after all, a bunch of wights is not the ultimate defence in the history of Ea. Aragorn would most likely have requested to wield one of these blades, but he didn't and I doubt he didn't observe them on the hobbits. As it stands, these didn't happen.
They were not out for grabs, they were guarded quite well. Just think of the REAL history of grave-robbers: most graves with fabulous treasures were robbed shortly after the burial. As far as I know most of the pyramids in Egypt were eventually robbed despite numerous traps and well-hidden entrances, so that the pharaohs later were buried in unmarked graves. And the treasures of the Barrows (gold, jewels, etc) were not despoiled for 1500 years.

I would say, the Wights were pretty efficient. Sure there were some Maiar and High Elves (and Tom) who COULD rob the graves, but were they likely to? And, anyway, the Witch-King had no power to guard anything from a Maia or someone like Glorfindel. As protection against humans, the Wights were perfect. I think that was one of the reasons why Tom left the Wights be. He hardly wanted the burials of the Edain despoiled. If he had sent the Wights away, he would have had to guard the Barrows himself - and he had other things to do, like singing and talking and collecting lilies for Goldberry, a busy man that he was. :D

1500 years is a pretty LONG time for men, long even for the immortals. Do we know much about year 506 AD? I am almost sure that Aragorn and the Rangers didn't know about the existence of such swords in the Barrows. Perhaps they heard legends about some fabulous swords of old, but most likely not. They were descendants of the Arthedain line, not of that of Cardolan. Did Gandalf know about the swords lying in the Barrows? Probably not.

Even Bombadil probably has discovered the swords ONLY at the moment he took them out of the Barrow.

Think about it: he knew the hobbits were hunted by Nazgul, he knew they carried the Ring. But he made no move to go fetch the swords for them in the Barrows. If they were NOT entrapped by the Wights, they would have never got the Barrow-Blades.
Gondor was fighting against Minas Morgul for centuries. IF Bombadil told Gandalf that some very handy swords were kept in the Barrows, Gadalf would have contrived to fetch some for Gondoreans, I think.

The swords are yet another thing, like the Ring, like the Palantiri, almost forgotten by everybody or believed to be a vague legend. Note in the LOTR the Wise are not all-knowing, they forget things, or they don't think of their importance in time (the Ring and the Palantiri).

Now, could EVERYONE see the BD swords for what they were immediately? I think NOT. They fell under the category of the "blades of Westernesse" (see ref. from Path Galen and reference by the Mouth of Sauron) and for those who knew more of the lore (Denethor), there were some indications that they were "Made in Arnor". There were some runes on them, that indicated that they were wrought with spells. There was also a general "bad feeling" the blades produced in all evil beings (like orcs, who dropped them at Part Galen).
But could Aragorn or Denethor see that it was a specific anti-nazgul weapon? I think NOT. Tom could, but he was an exception. And the quote about Aragorn: See! cried Aragorn. Here we find tokens! He picked out from the pile of grim weapons two knives, leaf-bladed, damasked in gold and red; and searching further he found also the sheaths, black, set with small red gems. No orc-tools these! he said. They were borne by the hobbits. Doubtless the Orcs despoiled them, but feared to keep the knives, knowing them for what they are: work of Westernesse, wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor. shows that he DOESN't understand the purpose of the swords. They were wrought with runes for the bane of ANGMAR and its KING, not "MORDOR"! :p At the time when they were made, Mordor was desolate and closely guarded by Gondor.
The only one who knew all about the blades, it seems, was the Witch-King himself. He must have seen such blades before and had hardly forgotten them. He didn't need to examine the blade: for him who lived in the Spirit-World, the blade burned red like a beacon, the same way as the Morgul knife glowed with a pale light:
... and slipped the Ring on the forefinger of his left hand.
Immediately, though everything else remained as before, dim and dark, the shapes became terribly clear. ... Desperate, he drew his own sword, and it seemed to him that it flickered red, as if it was a firebrand. Two of the figures halted. The third was taller than the others: his hair was long and gleaming and on his helm was a crown. In one hand he held a long sword, and in the other a knife; both the knife and the hand that held it glowed with a pale light.
Aragorn, as you know, wore Narsil with him, even broken. I guess, this blade could also qualify as the "bane of Mordor" , but the quote about Barrow-Down swords : No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will. is unambiguous: it is the Narrator's words, not words of one of the characters of the story. Aragorn might have been mistaken, but the Narrator not. So for fighting the WK, it was better than Sting, Narsil, Glamdring etc.
I think, the advantage of the spell on the Barrow-Downs sword was its specificity. Note the case of the Shelob's nets: the BD sword failed to cut it, while Sting did. The BD swords were not particularly good against anything but nazgul. Likely, the spell was directed against only one person : the Witch-King of Angmar, not some "general" spell against evil things. It is even debatable, if it was as efficient against the other nazgul, I think yes, but we can't be sure. It seems it also was very unpleasant for the orcs, etc.., but its MAIN target was undoubtedly the Witch-King. And exactly SUCH a blade in the hand of a "no-Man" later proved his undoing.

moreover, it only cleaved sinews, it didn't, in itself, kill the witch-king.
An ordinary sword, if stuck behind a knee of an ordinary man, would ONLY cleave sinews. Here it is clearly written: that it BROKE THE SPELL that knit his sinews (his material body) to his will. The WK became PARALYZED and an easy pray for Eowyn.
Note that Gandalf said (to Legolas) that the nazgul could not be killed with arrows. Why? Because they could be affected ONLY by the blades, that COULD reach them in the World of Shadows where they lived. BD swords were such, likely Glamdring and Narsil were such also, but the BD sword, being MORE specific, was the best.
Yes I repeat, Frodo ALMOST killed the Witch-King, or, at least, almost wounded him critically. Proof? Here: L # 210 [Tolkien's comments on the film 'treatment' of The Lord of the Rings.] The riders draw slowly in on foot in darkness, and do not 'spur'. There is no fight. Sam does not 'sink his blade into the Ringwraith's thigh', nor does his thrust save Frodo's life. ([B]If he had, the result would have been much the same as in III 117-20: the Wraith would have fallen down and the sword would have been destroyed.[B])
Why would the WK "fall down" from a wound in his thigh? (even if "fall down" is meant literally, not like in "downfall") . Clearly Tolkien again refers to the breaking of the spell.
This was the stroke of Frodo's sword, he said. The only hurt that it did to his enemy, I fear; for it is unharmed, but all blades perish that pierce that dreadful King. More deadly to him was the name of Elbereth Though the name of Elbereth may seed terror in the nazgul, no other harm was done, besides ripping a cloack. Of course, because Frodo MISSED the leg, and ONLY damaged the cloak. Aragorn knew that he missed the WK, because otherwise the sword would be destroyed. Any sword (including the BD ) were destroyed after hitting a nazgul.
This quote is another indication that Aragorn didn't know of the BD blade properties. If he did, he would have commented in a different way ("The only hurt that it did to his enemy, I fear; for the Witch-King didn't fall down"). It could have been cheering to the hobbits to know they had got swords really dangerous for the nazgul. But Aragorn said nothing - he didn't know it.

[Landroval]

Eowyn also was crying
You are misleading; Eowyn's tears were due to her pain, not to fear.
Putting the ring on is _not_ a sign of resistance, it was done at the nazgul's bidding, as seen in other ocasions.

IMO not at the nazgul's bidding, but at the Ring's bidding.
Hope never dies, right??
He bitterly regretted his foolishness, and reproached himself for weakness of will; for he now perceived that in putting on the Ring he obeyed not his own desire but the commanding wish of his enemies
shows that he DOESN't understand the purpose of the swords. They were wrought with runes for the bane of ANGMAR and its KING, not "MORDOR"! At the time when they were made, Mordor was desolate and closely guarded by Gondor.
Yeah right; Osgiliath is burned over in 1437, by who?? In 1974, the w-k overruns Arnor and 6 years later returns to Mordor. Even disconsidering that, the center of evil in Arda is still Mordor, whose foundations were still in place.
Aragorn might have been mistaken, but the Narrator not
The narrators of the story are hobbits; they wrote the Red Book, on which LotR is based.
Note that Gandalf said (to Legolas) that the nazgul could not be killed with arrows.
Then again, even Frodo has a mail shirt that saved him from a spear that could have skewered a wild boar; the nazguls being Sauron's top servants, were sure to have the best armor possible, defending them at least from arrows.
The WK became PARALYZED and an easy pray for Eowyn
...
Because they could be affected ONLY by the blades, that COULD reach them in the World of Shadows where they lived.
You contradict yourself; Eowyn's sword was an ordinary blade, but she killed the witch-king; as the King of the Marks appendix states, Merry only "aided".
This quote is another indication that Aragorn didn't know of the BD blade properties
What special propery is that? Why wouldn't Aragorn know it - as a Ranger of the north, heir of Arnor and Gondor, raised at the court of Middle-Earth's lore-master? Why don't Elrond and Gandalf make any mention about it, knowing that the hobbits are setting for Mordor, with the nazguls on hot pursuit? Or even Galadriel for that matter. It dealt a bitter wound and it made the w-k crie in bitter pain; so what? No amount of magic can make the body invulnerable, as even Melkor feared damage to his body, and even he was executed. Why did the nazgul walk right into Frodo, seeing that wielded the most dangerous (according to you) weapon against him? If one goes by your analysis, all wise ones are turning much dumber than they appear in the books.

[Gordis]

You are misleading; Eowyn's tears were due to her pain, not to fear.
And much difference does it make why did she cry? As for Frodo, to be precise, he was not crying at all. Please go and check.

Hope never dies, right??
Hope for what? Persuade you? :) Well, I am not sure that hope never dies... :p


Originally Posted by Flight to the Ford, FotR:
He bitterly regretted his foolishness, and reproached himself for weakness of will; for he now perceived that in putting on the Ring he obeyed not his own desire but the commanding wish of his enemies
He may be mistaken, right? "NOT his own desire" is correct, "the commanding wish" is correct also, but are you sure that it was the will of the nazgul, not the Ring? And how would Frodo know which one? How do you explain the cases when he/Bilbo/Sam was compelled to put on the Ring when no nazgul were nearby? When the Ring slipped on his finger all by itself?

Yeah right; Osgiliath is burned over in 1437, by who??
Surely, Landroval, you SHOULD know this. :confused: Osgiliath was burned in the Civil war: Eldacar vs Castamir the Usurper.

In 1974, the w-k overruns Arnor and 6 years later returns to Mordor. Even disconsidering that, the center of evil in Arda is still Mordor, whose foundations were still in place.
As I have proved in my previous posts, the Barrow Downs blades were most likely made between 1300 and 1409, the LATEST possible date is 1636. So the fact that the WK returned to Mordor in 1980 is absolutely irrelevant here.
And with the Necromancer in Mirkwood and the Witch-King in Carn-Dum the center of evil was HARDLY in Mordor, foundations or not. The Cardolani guys who made the blade certainly believed it was in Carn-Dum.

The narrators of the story are hobbits; they wrote the Red Book, on which LotR is based. In general it is right, but there were parts from other sources (chronicles etc.). Hardly the passage "So passed the sword of the Barrow-Downs..." belongs to a hobbit.. Tolkien often made his characters make wrong or incomplete statements, but it hardly applies to this quote.

Then again, even Frodo has a mail shirt that saved him from a spear that could have skewered a wild boar; the nazguls being Sauron's top servants, were sure to have the best armor possible, defending them at least from arrows. You are the first person I know who thinks that Gandalf when saying that the nazgul could not be killed with arrows, simply referred to their mail shirts...

Because they could be affected ONLY by the blades, that COULD reach them in the World of Shadows where they lived.
You contradict yourself; Eowyn's sword was an ordinary blade, but she killed the witch-king; as the King of the Marks appendix states, Merry only "aided".
Eowyn's sword was ordinary, but she struck AFTER the spell was broken. I have seen people argue that the Barrow-blades were in some way opposite to Morgul blades - one transferred the body to the World of Shadows, the other brought the bodies back into the World of light, making them vulnerable to all the ordinary weapons. It is conjecture, of course, but I like it.
Aided? Without Merry AND his sword, Eowyn would have been beaten into pulp on the spot. :p But the songs of the Mark of course put her forward...

What special propery is that? Why wouldn't Aragorn know it - as a Ranger of the north, heir of Arnor and Gondor, raised at the court of Middle-Earth's lore-master? Why don't Elrond and Gandalf make any mention about it, knowing that the hobbits are setting for Mordor, with the nazguls on hot pursuit? Or even Galadriel for that matter. Aragorn and Co wouldn't know it if the secret was long lost and forgotten. Aragorn was of the line of Arthedain. Arthedain and Cardolan were most often bitter enemies. BD sword is a rare example of HUMAN magic, unknown to Elrond and Galadriel.
It dealt a bitter wound and it made the w-k crie in bitter pain; so what? No amount of magic can make the body invulnerable, as even Melkor feared damage to his body, and even he was executed. [/quoteIt also made the WK bend his shoulders, probably standing on all fours, and wait paralyzed while Merry called to Eowyn , while Eowyn struggled up and prepared to strike.
As for Morgoth, sorry, but he was executed by the Valar.
[quote=Landroval] Why did the nazgul walk right into Frodo, seeing that wielded the most dangerous (according to you) weapon against him? If one goes by your analysis, all wise ones are turning much dumber than they appear in the books. Two of the three didn't - they halted. The Witch-King was not dumb, he was valiant. :p There is such thing as courage, you know. And there is fear of Sauron. The Red Eye of the Big Brother was watching... :eek:

[Landroval]

And much difference does it make why did she cry?
Her cry was not an effect of w-k's influence on her; she didn't fear him.
as for Frodo, to be precise, he was not crying at all
??
You probably misunderstood me; I was reffering to his cry of Elbereth.
He may be mistaken, right? "NOT his own desire" is correct, "the commanding wish" is correct also, but are you sure that it was the will of the nazgul, not the Ring?
If, despite the textual evidence, your persist in your personal interpretation, fine by me.
Osgiliath was burned in the Civil war: Eldacar vs Castamir the Usurper.
I conceed I went a bit overboard; the main point remains - the fall of Osgiliath refutes your point that Mordor was closely guarded.
And with the Necromancer in Mirkwood and the Witch-King in Carn-Dum the center of evil was HARDLY in Mordor, foundations or not
Aragorn, speaking after the fact, was surely aware that the target of any spell against the enemy must eventually be Mordor. The witch-king did not derrive any kind of magic from Angmar.
Eowyn's sword was ordinary, but she struck AFTER the spell was broken
What's your point? It doesn't say Merry's blow somehow left all the body of the w-k without his presumed invulnerability to normal weapons. If anything, he still have magic running through him, seeing that Eowyn's sword is destroyed.
Aragorn and Co wouldn't know it if the secret was long lost and forgotten. Aragorn was of the line of Arthedain. Arthedain and Cardolan were most often bitter enemies.
You are contradicting yourself
"But the know-how came from Numenor, here you are right. The Mouth of Sauron (or his Master) recognised the sword design and called it "the blade of the Downfallen West"."
Two of the three didn't - they halted. The Witch-King was not dumb, he was valiant. There is such thing as courage, you know. And there is fear of Sauron. The Red Eye of the Big Brother was watching...
If there was any real deadly threat about that sword, the chief nazgul would _not_ have confronted it alone, with the others standing back. He would have most likely paralysed Frodo, as he did at the Ford.
It also made the WK bend his shoulders, probably standing on all fours, and wait paralyzed while Merry called to Eowyn , while Eowyn struggled up and prepared to strike
He wasn't waiting, nor was he paralysed, he stumbled and bowed at the time when he was hit. That is what usually happens when a knee sinew is cut.

[CAB]

I guess I missed something somewhere, but why did whether or not Aragorn had complete knowledge of the barrow blade become such an issue? We don’t know that he looked at it prior to Weathertop, do we? He probably wouldn’t recognize it immediately after the Nazguls’ attack either. It was dark, the blade hadn’t actually hit the Witch King, and he had other things to do and think about.

I personally think Aragorn had to have some knowledge of the blades. Later, when he had time to look at them, he probably recognized them. If Denethor knew that they came from the North, then Aragorn probably did too. When he spoke of ‘bane of Mordor’ later, he may have just been trying to save time by not giving a long explanation. Again, he had other things to think about and do. Mordor was the center of evil during the Lord of the Rings, the Nazguls’ master lived there, so what he said was close enough to the whole truth, considering the situation.

As far as the barrow blades being the only thing that can destroy the Nazgul, I don’t buy it. If this was true, the Nazgul would be all but unbeatable late in the Third Age. Gandalf also said that neither Aragorn, Gimli, or Legolas had a weapon that could hurt him. Wasn’t Aragorn carrying a blade that was almost certainly very similar to the one that “killed� Sauron? Maybe when he said this and that the Nazgul couldn’t be killed by arrows, Gandalf was referring to their abilities to be rebodied. I would guess that any being with a physical body could have that body harmed by normal physical means (stronger beings would be less affected than weaker ones, of course), mystical weapons just did it better. I agree with Gordis that the barrow blades were most likely made specifically to deal with the Witch King (but would probably affect the other Nazgul the same way).


If, despite the textual evidence, your persist in your personal interpretation, fine by me.
I don’t understand what you are saying here Landroval. It is clear that the Ring often forces (or tries to) its bearer to put it on. This sometimes happens when no Nazgul are present, as Gordis pointed out. Also, if the Nazgul had the power to command Frodo, why have him just put on the Ring? Sure, that made it easier for them to see him, but why stop there? Why not command him to drop his sword, leave the fire (which they feared) and his friends?

[Gordis]

You probably misunderstood me; I was reffering to his cry of Elbereth.
Ahh... Then how is that the sign of weakness?

I conceed I went a bit overboard; the main point remains - the fall of Osgiliath refutes your point that Mordor was closely guarded.
How??? What has the burning of Osgiliath in the Civil war of Eldacar and Castamir to do with Mordor? :confused:

You are contradicting yourself
"But the know-how came from Numenor, here you are right. The Mouth of Sauron (or his Master) recognised the sword design and called it "the blade of the Downfallen West".
Why do you think that I am contradicting myself?

If there was any real deadly threat about that sword, the chief nazgul would _not_ have confronted it alone, with the others standing back. He would have most likely paralysed Frodo, as he did at the Ford.
You are contradicting the textual evidence "No other sword..."

He wasn't waiting, nor was he paralysed, he stumbled and bowed at the time when he was hit. That is what usually happens when a knee sinew is cut.

Then WHY did Tolkien write about a spell being broken? You dismiss it entirely.

[Alcuin]

He may be mistaken, right? "NOT his own desire" is correct, "the commanding wish" is correct also, but are you sure that it was the will of the nazgul, not the Ring?

If, despite the textual evidence, your persist in your personal interpretation, fine by me.

From “The Flight to the Ford�:

[Frodo] bitterly regretted his foolishness, and reproached himself for weakness of will; for he now perceived that in putting on the Ring he obeyed not his own desire but the commanding wish of his enemies.


I don’t understand what you are saying here Landroval. It is clear that the Ring often forces (or tries to) its bearer to put it on. This sometimes happens when no Nazgul are present

I feel like Glorfindel telling Frodo to get on the horse in regards to the will of the Ring and “the commanding wish� Frodo’s enemies: were it not for the Ring, it is likely his enemies’ “commanding wish� would have had little or no effect upon him. On Weathertop, you may well argue that the Nazgûl desired that he should place the Ring on his finger, and yes, I agree that might have increased the power of the Ring’s urging Frodo to obey. But why was Frodo tempted to put on the Ring when he saw Khamûl questioning the Gaffer? or in the Woody End, when Khamûl was sniffing him out? Or how did the Ring end up on his finger in the Prancing Pony, when he fell off the table? and how did it come to fall off Gollum’s finger in the tunnels of the orcs?

I agree with you, Landroval, that the influence of the Nazgûl on Frodo was powerful on Weathertop, and their machinations may have overcome his resistance to putting on the Ring; but I also agree with Gordis: the Ring has influence over those who bear it.

‘A Ring of Power looks after itself, Frodo. It may slip off treacherously, but its keeper never abandons it… It was not Gollum, Frodo, but the Ring itself that decided things. The Ring left him.’


Not to mention the torment that the Ring gave Frodo as he approached, entered, and traveled through Mordor. That was not the malice of someone focusing attention on him: if anything, Sauron suspected that Aragorn and Gandalf had it. The Ring was malicious and evil in its own right; and while it may have had no more “intelligence� than a computer program, it was constantly bothering Frodo and relentless in attempting to influence his thought and actions. The Ring worked on its own to master Frodo and cause him to use it at inappropriate times (inappropriate for Frodo, that is, not the Ring). In Letter 246:

Frodo was given ‘grace’ … in his resistance to the temptation of the Ring (at times when to claim and so reveal it would have been fatal)...


What's your point? It doesn't say Merry's blow somehow left all the body of the w-k without his presumed invulnerability to normal weapons. If anything, he still have magic running through him, seeing that Eowyn's sword is destroyed.Surely this belongs in some other thread. The old debate about whether Merry could have killed the Witch-king with his one blow, or whether Eowyn with hers, or whether it required them both and specifically in the order in which they attacked, is an old discussion. Surely there is a thread around here that we can resurrect to have this debate. The general consensus is that it took them both; if you want to debate this, let’s do it away from this discussion. (If I misunderstood you, Landroval, I withdraw this paragraph. I just don’t want to get dragged into that particular discussion... It is too complicated, and needs it own space.)

“Work of Westernesse� and “blade of the Downfallen West" both refer to the weapons of the Dúnedain, and the Dúnedain are what remain of the Númenóreans, but in permanent exile. I had never considered that the Númenóreans in their hey-day in Númenor had concocted such a weapon; but the text seems to indicate that it was devised in Arthedain or Cardolan for the wars against Angmar. (And Landroval, if you are suggesting they were developed in Cardolan, I tend to agree with you, even though I have no evidence for it other than that the blades were found in the tomb of the last prince of Cardolan, and the secret for making them seems to have died out with Cardolan.)


Gandalf also said that neither Aragorn, Gimli, or Legolas had a weapon that could hurt him. Wasn’t Aragorn carrying a blade that was almost certainly very similar to the one that “killed� Sauron?

It was the same sword:

…before all went Aragorn with the Flame of the West, Andúril like a new fire kindled, Narsil re-forged as deadly as of old…

The differences were that (1) Gil-galad was with Elendil; Aragorn was by himself. (We can assume that Elendil would have been proud of Aragorn: Elrond said that of all his forefathers, Aragorn was most like Elendur, Isildur’s eldest son, who in turn was most like Elendil himself. As Aragorn’s foster-father, Elrond was proud of him.) No slight to Legolas or Gimli, but neither of them – nor both of them together – were likely to be the equal of Gil-galad in fighting prowess. (2) Do you suppose that Narsil, and in its later incarnation, Andúril, might have been forged by Telchar (and especially reforged by the last of the Noldorin smiths in Rivendell) for fighting Morgoth’s creatures, and thus particularly effective against Sauron? Nah, couldn’t be – no weapon is ever forged to fight “good� or “evil�: just consider those Barrow-blades … or Morgul-knives.


If there was any real deadly threat about that sword, the chief nazgul would _not_ have confronted it alone, with the others standing back. He would have most likely paralysed Frodo, as he did at the Ford.

Assuming that the Black Captain did recognize the weapon and the risk it posed to him, he did exactly the right thing, particularly if he had any notion that Frodo might pose a deadly threat to him: attack immediately, while your opponent is off-balance. But to do that in the face of mortal danger takes a lot of courage – possibly something left over from the Nazgûl’s life as a Númenórean, something that echoed his past before his fall. (Aragorn does the very same thing to the Nazgûl: he attacks them while they are slightly off-balance, having stopped for whatever reason to look at Frodo, and while the Witch-king's attention was elsewhere. “Hey! Where’d that fire come from?!�)


He wasn't waiting, nor was he paralysed, he stumbled and bowed at the time when he was hit. That is what usually happens when a knee sinew is cut.
That’s right. It’s also why the blow of his mace went wide of Éowyn’s skull: once his knee no longer worked, he was literally off balance – and in real physical pain, something he might not have experienced since he became a wraith. And he’d land on all fours: knee, knee – OW! – palm, palm. “Shock� is the medical term for that feeling, although Tolkien uses an older word, “swoon.� (Not in regards to the Witch-king.) If he tried to get up, his knee would give out again as soon as he tried to use his leg, putting him on all fours again.

I think the point of the “no other sword� text is that there was “no other sword� that was capable of dealing such a blow to the Nazgûl that it broke “the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will.� Aragorn knew that “all blades perish� that hit a Nazgûl, and neither Merry’s nor Éowyn’s was an exception.


I personally think Aragorn had to have some knowledge of the blades.

Perhaps he had heard of them before; but whether he had or not, he probably got a crash-course on them from his foster-father, Elrond.


As far as the barrow blades being the only thing that can destroy the Nazgul, I don’t buy it. If this was true, the Nazgul would be all but unbeatable late in the Third Age.

They were. From “The Hunt for the Ring� in Unfinished Tales,

Now few could understand even one of these fell creatures [the Nazgûl], and (as Sauron deemed) none could withstand them when gathered together under their terrible captain, the Lord of Morgul.
…
[The Nazgûl] found [Sarn Ford and the southernmost borders of the Shire] guarded, for the Rangers barred their way. But this was a task beyond the power of the Dúnedain; and maybe it would still have proved so even if their captain, Aragorn, had been with them.


It was not the individual Barrow-blade that Merry wielded against the Witch-king that was unique, but the construction of those Dúnedain knives we call Barrow-blades that was unique. The reason Tom chose them was because he understood what the knives were (for to the Dúnedain, they were knives, but long enough as short swords to the hobbits) and the identity and nature of Frodo’s pursuers. Criticizing a movie treatment in Letter 210 (O! what we have said about PJ?!?) point 11, regarding the encounter on Weathertop:

Sam does not ‘sink his blade into the Ringwraith’s thigh’... (If he had, the result would have been much the same as in [“The Battle of the Pelennor Fields�]: the Wraith would have fallen down and the sword would have been destroyed.)

For Frodo, Sam, Merry and Pippin each, Tom “chose a dagger, long, leaf-shaped, and keen, of marvelous workmanship, damasked ... in red and gold. They ... seemed untouched by time, unrusted, sharp, ...�


the analysis that Gordis and Alcuin did failed to mention one thing:

...the Barrow-wights were roused, and all things of evil spirit, hostile to Elves and Men, were on the watch with malice in the Old Forest and on the Barrow-downs.


Gordis and I are actually arguing this simultaneously in two venues at the moment. I don’t know why: it just worked out that way. This quote did come up in one of my posts elsewhere in the ether. Indeed, the Witch-king intended to be well-informed: that’s why he established camp at Andrath, a central location accessible to the Shire, the East Road, Bree, and the Greenway. (It must have been an important place at one time.)


By the way, weren’t we discussing how to get a Ring of Power from a bearer who declined to part with it gracefully? The tie-in is Frodo’s declining the Witch-king’s polite invitation to Mordor to discuss legal possession of his, whatchamacallit, dingus, right?

[CAB]

It was the same sword:
I could be wrong, but I thought that (unlike in the movie) Isildur defeated Sauron with his own sword and, only after, used Narsil/Anduril to cut the Ring from Sauron’s hand.

The differences were that (1) Gil-galad was with Elendil; Aragorn was by himself. (We can assume that Elendil would have been proud of Aragorn: Elrond said that of all his forefathers, Aragorn was most like Elendur, Isildur’s eldest son, who in turn was most like Elendil himself. As Aragorn’s foster-father, Elrond was proud of him.) No slight to Legolas or Gimli, but neither of them – nor both of them together – were likely to be the equal of Gil-galad in fighting prowess. (2) Do you suppose that Narsil, and in its later incarnation, Andúril, might have been forged by Telchar (and especially reforged by the last of the Noldorin smiths in Rivendell) for fighting Morgoth’s creatures, and thus particularly effective against Sauron? Nah, couldn’t be – no weapon is ever forged to fight “good� or “evil�: just consider those Barrow-blades … or Morgul-knives.
Your right. I used a poor example. Anduril might be especially strong only against evil beings.

The problem is that I can only recall two instances (perhaps there are others?) of someone implying that a particular physical body couldn’t be destroyed by normal means: Gandalf speaking about himself and Gandalf speaking about the Nazgul. With Gandalf himself, I have to assume he was referring to himself only after his “upgrade�, since his actions (and especially his injury in The Hobbit) indicate that this couldn’t be true prior to this. I think anytime that Gandalf seemed to avoid opponents armed with only normal weapons after his upgrade can be explained other ways, so I’ll leave that question alone (though my personal opinion remains that he was at least somewhat vulnerable to them). I will also not press the fact that Saruman ran from the Ents, who seemed to be using only brute force. It would make sense that Saruman’s body was pretty much the same as Gandalf’s, pre-upgrade.

But what about the Nazgul? Just to be clear Alcuin, I don’t doubt that the barrow blades were particularly effective against them (so I am not arguing against Gordis’s theory of what happened on Weathertop, a theory I like very much), I just don’t think they were the only things that could hurt them. They don’t act like beings who can only be killed by weapons that are accounted for and under guard. Why this quote?
‘And in any case that is not their way. In dark and loneliness they are strongest; they will not openly attack a house where there are lights and many people - not until they are desperate, not while all the long leagues of Eriador still lie before us.’
Sure, it wasn’t their way to openly attack Bree and they were stronger in the wilderness, but if they were invulnerable why would the added strength be needed? Why would they be concerned about ‘many people’ if these people were incapable of harming them?

Why did the Nazgul flee from the Elves in the Shire? They may have possessed (or have been assumed by the Nazgul to possess) some mystical weapons, but hardly barrow blades. Same thing with Glorfindel. Didn’t Gandalf seem to injure a Nazgul outside Minas Tirith without a barrow blade?

No other blade, not that mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter...
Note that this doesn’t imply that no other blade could have wounded the Witch King at all (actually, it does just the opposite), only that the barrow blade wounded him worse than any other blade would.


So, I again agree that the barrow blades were particularly effective against the Nazgul, but not that they were the only things capable of harming them.

[Olmer]

I agree with you, Landroval, that the influence of the Nazgûl on Frodo was powerful on Weathertop, and their machinations may have overcome his resistance to putting on the Ring; but I also agree with Gordis: the Ring has influence over those who bear it....
No, it is wrong understanding.
Nazgul can't influence Frodo. It is the Ring was affecting those, who came in connection with it. The Nazgul got enslaved by the Ring long ago and with no turnabout, while Frodo was still fighting against its influence.
We do not know till what degree the Ring of Power was regarded by Nazgul as a weapon and treat, but they avoided to come close to it, trying to be cautious in treating Frodo. Because, as you just said if "were it not for the Ring, it is likely his enemies’ “commanding wish� would have had little or no effect upon him". More than that, if Frodo would comprehensibly use the power of the Ring and order to Nazgul, they wouldn't be able to harm Frodo or to take the ring by force.
The incident on the Weathertop explained by Tolkien as a moment of Frodo's weakness. He just got scared and wanted to hide, to run away. If he would be more brave, he would turn Nazgul into his loyal followers. Of course, using the Ring for putting somebody (even Gollum) under your control would have irreversible effect on the wielder, binding him with the Ring even closer, but the fact is that Nazgul did not know at what extend Frodo has mastered the Ring and were aware that they won't be able to resist the orders of the Ringbearer.
"The situation as between Frodo with the Ring and the Eight might be compared to that of a small brave man armed with a devastating weapon, faced by eight savage warriors of great strength and agility armed with poisoned blades. The man's weakness was that he did not know how to use his weapon yet; and he was by temperament and training averse to violence. Their weakness that the man's weapon was a thing that filled them with fear as an object of terror in their religious cult, by which they had been conditioned to treat one who wielded it with servility. I think they would have shown 'servility'. They would have greeted Frodo as 'Lord'." Letter 246

[Landroval]

We don’t know that he looked at it prior to Weathertop, do we?
In 6 days with four hobbits, each carrying a barrow blade, Aragorn had plenty of time, IMO.
Then how is that the sign of weakness?
It shows that he wasn't in control of the ring, otherwise he wouldn't appeal to the exact opposite of the ring's power.
What has the burning of Osgiliath in the Civil war of Eldacar and Castamir to do with Mordor?
I fail to see how the southern kingdom, with its main city in ruin for several centuries, could maintain the "close guard" on Mordor to which you reffered previously.
Why do you think that I am contradicting myself?
Once you argue that the blades are somehow specific to Cardolan and therefore unknown to the other kingdoms, but then you quote the mouth of sauron, recognizing the blades as being of Numenor.
You are contradicting the textual evidence "No other sword..."
Before I answer, is your position that only Merry's barrow blade could hurt the nazguls?
Then WHY did Tolkien write about a spell being broken? You dismiss it entirely.
The one thing we know was severed from the w-k's will was the sinew, I never negated that. I dislike repeating myself, but the w-k maintained his magic, as seen from Eowyn's blade still dissapearing after Merry's strike.
If I misunderstood you, Landroval, I withdraw this paragraph. I just don’t want to get dragged into that particular discussion... It is too complicated, and needs it own space.
Well, fine by me if anyone wants to resurrect such a thread. As it stands, the barrow blade issue (its origin, lore and effects) is central to this thread, so I think it belongs here too.
And Landroval, if you are suggesting they were developed in Cardolan, I tend to agree with you, even though I have no evidence for it other than that the blades were found in the tomb of the last prince of Cardolan, and the secret for making them seems to have died out with Cardolan.
I am not arguing such a thing; the evidence you reffer to is circumstancial, and nothing excludes that other kingdoms had them too. Also, Arveleg, who was slain at Weathertop, was of Arthedain and not of Cardolan, if it him which you reffer to.
Assuming that the Black Captain did recognize the weapon and the risk it posed to him, he did exactly the right thing, particularly if he had any notion that Frodo might pose a deadly threat to him: attack immediately, while your opponent is off-balance.
The right thing?? Why would the chief nazgul risk his life, alone and not unaided? Is it possible that he didn't have any means of ranged attack? And if he did, why didn't he use them? My answer is that he saw nothing deadly about the sword, and that is why he went in alone.
They were [unbeatable]
I strongly disagree; the first quote doesn't rule out that they would be beaten if alone or separated from their captain - moreover, this is just the conception of Sauron and no one else's. As far as the second quote goes, it doesn't rule out that with Aragorn's help, they couldn't have defeated the nazgul - nor do I think that at that moment, those dunedain were the mightiest warriors of _all_ middle earth (seeing that at least Gandalf was able to kick them around). Let us also consider letter #210:
Leaving the inn at night and running off into the dark is an impossible solution of the difficulties of presentation here (which I can see). It is the last thing that Aragorn would have done. It is based on a misconception of the Black Riders throughout, which I beg Z to reconsider. Their peril is almost entirely due to the unreasoning fear which they inspire (like ghosts). They have no great physical power against the fearless; but what they have, and the fear that they inspire, is enormously increased in darkness.
and to reffer to your own text from UT:
Yet this weakness they had for Sauron's present purpose: so great was the terror that went with them (even invisible and unclad) that their coming forth might soon be perceived and their mission be guessed by the Wise.
...
Therefore when Osgiliath was taken and the bridge broken Sauron stayed the assault, and the Nazgul were ordered to begin the search for the Ring. But Sauron did not underesteem the powers and vigilance of the Wise, and the Nazgul were commanded to act as secretly as they could.

Their main perk is fear, not some invulnerability/invincibility, otherwise Sauron would probably not give a fig about the power of the wise.
Indeed, the Witch-king intended to be well-informed
Ever since 3017, Sauron was terrified by the fact that Gollum was captured by Aragorn, and from that time on, all his inteligence forces were working overtime. I doubt that the w-k ever neglected the gathering of info, esspecially in this critical mission.
weren’t we discussing how to get a Ring of Power from a bearer who declined to part with it gracefully?
True enough, but Gordis' premises about the reasons of the nazgul on wheathertop were too juicy (and questionable) to be left ignored.
I could be wrong, but I thought that (unlike in the movie) Isildur defeated Sauron with his own sword and, only after, used Narsil/Anduril to cut the Ring from Sauron’s hand.
Hm, in the Council of Elrond, it is stated that Narsil was the Sword of Elendil - it was probably used to both "overthrow" Sauron and cut the ring.

[Landroval]

Sorry for double posting
Nazgul can't influence Frodo.
Even if we disconsider Frodo's acknowledgement of the commanding wish of his enemies, there still were his reactions to the main weapon of the nazgul - fear.
More than that, if Frodo would comprehensibly use the power of the Ring and order to Nazgul, they wouldn't be able to harm Frodo or to take the ring by force.
I certainly agree - if they had any reason to fear his control, they would attack him from afar.
If he would be more brave, he would turn Nazgul into his loyal followers
I disagree; the letter you turn to for evidence regards a much further moment in time - Frodo in Mordor - , when he was far greater. And even then, it states that he needed "time, much time" before he could control the nazguls.

[CAB]

In 6 days with four hobbits, each carrying a barrow blade, Aragorn had plenty of time, IMO.
Sure, he had the time, but did he have the inclination? It makes sense that he would, but we don’t really know. I don’t see how Aragorn’s knowledge in itself applies to Gordis’s theory anyway. It is what the Nazgul thought/knew that is important.

Assuming that the Black Captain did recognize the weapon and the risk it posed to him, he did exactly the right thing, particularly if he had any notion that Frodo might pose a deadly threat to him: attack immediately, while your opponent is off-balance.
The right thing?? Why would the chief nazgul risk his life, alone and not unaided? Is it possible that he didn't have any means of ranged attack? And if he did, why didn't he use them? My answer is that he saw nothing deadly about the sword, and that is why he went in alone.
I agree with Alcuin here, but (I believe) for a more specific reason. If the Nazgul thought that Frodo had some control of the Ring (which seems to me to be the most important part of Gordis’s theory) then perhaps the Witch King wanted to “disable� Frodo before he could exert any control over the Nazgul. To the Nazgul, Frodo also seemed to have knowledge of how best to defeat them (Frodo having apparently made a special trip to the barrows, to obtain a blade which was made specifically to destroy the Witch King), but I think this is less likely to draw an immediate attack than fear of control via the Ring. As for ranged weapons, maybe they had some with them, maybe they didn’t. If they were commanded to bring Frodo to Sauron either alive or as a wraith, then they probably couldn’t consider using any that they might have had.
I certainly agree - if they had any reason to fear his control, they would attack him from afar.
Why? So far as I can tell, distance is no factor regarding control via the rings, but it is definitely a factor when using swords, arrows, etc. Greater distance would be their enemy in this case.

Their main perk is fear, not some invulnerability/invincibility
Agreed. We often see the Nazgul use fear, but pretty much never see them use some sort of invulnerability in any way we might expect it to be used. One case that might be noted is the Witch King ignoring the dangers before the walls of Minas Tirith. But I think this instance isn’t really a strong argument for Nazgul invulnerability due to the fact that the Witch King was on a horse there and we can safely assume that the horse could be killed. I think his actions in this case can be explained by trust in his aura of fear.

Hm, in the Council of Elrond, it is stated that Narsil was the Sword of Elendil - it was probably used to both "overthrow" Sauron and cut the ring.
Yeah, maybe I put that the wrong way. I wasn’t trying to debate what actually “killed� Sauron; the damage he must have received before the Ring was taken, or the taking of the Ring itself. My point was that Isildur almost certainly damaged Sauron with his own sword before using Narsil. It doesn’t really matter though, as I accept Alcuin’s point that the blades (both Isildur’s and Elendil’s) may have been especially strong only against evil beings, and so, might not be expected to be of much use against Gandalf.

[Landroval]

Sure, he had the time, but did he have the inclination?
For someone renowned for keeness of the eyes (and a survivor in wild lands), these kind of things couldn't escape the notice.
I don’t see how Aragorn’s knowledge in itself applies to Gordis’s theory anyway. It is what the Nazgul thought/knew that is important.
The way I see it, neither Aragorn's nor nazgul's behavior show much importance given to the blade.
As for ranged weapons, maybe they had some with them, maybe they didn’t.
They have at least magic, seeing how Frodo was "stricken dumb" at the Ford - and that sure was a ranged atack ;), which wouldn't have killed Frodo.
One case that might be noted is the Witch King ignoring the dangers before the walls of Minas Tirith. But I think this instance isn’t really a strong argument for Nazgul invulnerability due to the fact that the Witch King was on a horse there and we can safely assume that the horse could be killed. I think his actions in this case can be explained by trust in his aura of fear.
Indeed; moreover, he was enhanced in power at that time:
The Witch-king, their leader, is more powerful in all ways than the others; but he must not yet be raised to the stature of Vol. III. There, put in command by Sauron, he is given an added demonic force. But even in the Battle of the Pelennor, the darkness had only just broken.

[CAB]

For someone renowned for keeness of the eyes (and a survivor in wild lands), these kind of things couldn't escape the notice.
Weren’t the swords sheathed? I don’t doubt that Aragorn noticed the sheaths, but he couldn’t know exactly what was in those sheaths without looking more closely. Since these blades were so rare at that time, he probably couldn’t tell what they were until looking at a whole blade. Remember that the Hobbits didn’t completely trust him at this time, so Aragorn may have been hesitant to ask to look at one of their swords.

They have at least magic, seeing how Frodo was "stricken dumb" at the Ford - and that sure was a ranged atack ;), which wouldn't have killed Frodo.
This has already been answered, Landroval. Part of the theory (at least as I understand it) is that after the Nazgul withdrew from Weathertop, the Witch King had to prepare this spell to which you refer. According to this idea it wasn’t something he could do on a whim. This could be right or wrong, but since it is part of a theory that so nicely explains the happenings on Weathertop and doesn’t contradict anything we know, I will accept it.

[Butterbeer]

... They would have greeted Frodo as 'Lord'." [/B] Letter 246

Heh up!!, it's letter 246 again!!

Come on in letter 246 your times is up!

so- what did he write in letter 247? ... just some doodles and maybe a recipie for marrow soup???

[Gordis]

Well, this tread has become so multi-themed that it is difficult to follow who believes what. Also I have difficulty to keep up with you, guys at the rate the new posts appear. So, I decided to address matters one by one stating only my opinion. Sorry if I repeat myself.

1. Was it the Ring who made Frodo desire to put it on, or the Nazgul?

The various examples of Frodo, Gollum, Bilbo etc. being compelled to put the Ring on, when no nazgul were around, points that it was the Ring. The only textual evidence against it (the quote about 'commanding wish of his enemies") may be due to
a. Frodo's misunderstanding of the situation (as I have argued earlier) or
b. That in this particular case it were indeed the nazgul who sent their additional command to put on the Ring to him. Why? Because Frodo was halfway in the Wraith-World already, due to the Morgul wound. I strongly believe, that had he put the Ring on at the Ford, he would have become a wraith immediately. Wearing of the Ring ultimately leads to wraithing. Morgul wound leads to the same. Accumulated effect of the two would likely turn him into a wraith on the spot.

Also, note that the "commanding wish" to STOP was pretty efficient. It was Asfaloth, urged by Glorfindel, who bore Frodo away. Otherwise he wouldn't have moved. That was because he was half-way into a wraith under their command. Without the Morgul wound, ( not without the Ring - here I disagree with Alcuin) I doubt the nazgul would be able to send him any commands. They couldn't command him before and they couldn't later. So the Ford case was exceptional.

But IF at Weathertop the nazgul DIDN't command him to put on the Ring, they MIGHT have assumed that he put it on in order to USE IT AGAINST THEM (here I refer to the famous L # 246).

2. Nazgul invulnerability.

I agree that this question is very ambiguous. It depends very much on our understanding of the nature of the nazgul bodies. And we don't have it. Tolkien was never clear on the point himself, and he changed his conception right in the middle of writing LOTR, failing to correct the few remaining vestiges of the previous ideas. I have discussed it at length in another thread, but I can't even remember which one now.
ALSO, an unknown value in the equation are their Nazgul Rings. It looks like they wore them all through the Second Age and most of the Third. Sauron took them from the nazgul before the time of the LOTR. It makes sense that WITH the rings they were more invulnerable than without, does it not?

So, here I admit that everything I say is pure conjecture.

I believe that the nazgul COULD be wounded by ANY weapon.Here I agree with CAB. That's why Aragorn knows "that all blades perish that pierce this dreadful King." The question is HOW BADLY wounded? Piercing a heart that doesn't pump blood (and we don't know even if it does or not) is no big deal. It may be painful, but it will heal eventually. That is one possible explanation (the nazgul bodies being so inhuman functionally that piercing them is no big deal).

At Minas Tirith the Witch-King came forward, wearing no protection on his head or face, save the crown. Why was he "heeding no dart?" Thee were archers aplenty on the walls. The same at Fornost. He came forward all alone, when all his army was dead or scattered. This time, he wore a black mask, though, probably it was a metal mask, like in the helm of Turin.

Note that to our knowledge the Witch-King was the FIRST nazgul ever killed (over 4500 years or something). And they must have been in tight places and bloody combats. Last Alliance, Fornost, siege of Minas Ithil - there must have been a lot more. If they had ordinary physical (though invisible) bodies, and no magic protection at all, someone somewhere would be killed over so long a period, IMHO.

Now let us discuss this MAGIC protection, the mention of the spell being broken by Merry's sword. No, I didn't say that by the breaking of the spell the WK lost his magic. I only think that the breaking of the spell made him more vulnerable to ordinary weapons, like Eowyn's. Someone argued, that the Barrow-blade brought him into the physical plane again. May be, may be not. There could be a wealth of conflicting theories here. I will tell you mine:

I think that had Eowyn sliced at the Witch-king's neck BEFORE Marry hit him, the Witch-King wouldn't be killed. He would have felt pain in his neck, but that is all. Because Eowyn's sword would have shattered before actually beheading him, perhaps just drawing some blood and then falling into useless fragments.

After all, what is the point of shattering the blade AFTER they are used on the Nazgul? I think the idea was to make them shatter at the first contact with the nazgul blood (or whatever they had inside), making the blades useless BEFORE any actual damage could be done. Same with arrows.
Merry's sword broke the spell, and Eowyn's sword did shatter, but it shattered AFTER it did the damage.

3. Now what about Anduril/Narsil, Glamdring ....as well as Gandalf and Glorfindel ?

At Weathertop, Gandalf was fighting nazgul with fire, not with his sword (as far as we know). There is no mention that Gandalf drew Glamdring at the Gate of Minas Tirith, though the WK had his sword in his hand. (And note Gandalf wielded Glamdring against the Barlog) Aragorn didn't draw what remained of the Narsil at Weathertop - he used firebrands instead. To me, it looks like Gandalf and Aragorn knew that their weapons COULDN'T do any serious damage to the nazgul.

Gandalf likely was thinking of fighting the WK with fire bolts and lightnings again, and Aragorn used fire. By the way, note that at Weathertop Aragorn told the hobbits to prepare the sticks to light when the nazgul approached. He didn't tell them to use their swords. (That is a very good argument proving that Aragorn DIDN't know about the BD blades properties).

So, I believe, NO other sword but that of the Barrow Downs could KILL (not simply wound) a nazgul, making him a mere houseless spirit bound to ME as long as the Nine rings held power.

Now whom did nazgul really fear? Gandalf, who used not blades, but magic fire, and even more so Glorfindel, a Calaquendi Elf, a resurrected elf, almost a Maia. Isn't it reasonable to suppose, that the nazgul feared them when they were not using blades, but magic? Glorfindel may have been a great fighter, but Earnur was the best blade in Gondor, still at Fornost the Witch-King believed he could take him on single-handedly with no danger to himself. And that was before the prophesy "no living man". But when he saw Glorfindel, he decided to flee.


Now my replies to Landroval:

Then how is that the sign of weakness?
It shows that he wasn't in control of the ring, otherwise he wouldn't appeal to the exact opposite of the ring's power.
Well, if Gandalf wielded the Ring he wouldn't be appealing to Morgoth, at least initially, would he? I should say that Frodo being able to call on Elbereth while wearing the Ring with part of Sauron's will in it, shows his independence of its evil influence, proves that he has a strong will of his own.

I once had a wild theory that it was Gandalf who felt (via Narya) that Frodo has put on the Ring, and somehow suggested these words to him, the same way as he suggested to take off the Ring when Frodo was almost caught by Sauron at Amon Hen. Sort of Ring-Ring communication.


Gordis:" What has the burning of Osgiliath in the Civil war of Eldacar and Castamir to do with Mordor?"
I fail to see how the southern kingdom, with its main city in ruin for several centuries, could maintain the "close guard" on Mordor to which you reffered previously.

Let us get this straight. I was speaking of the period when the blades were forged, between 1300 and 1409. At this time all was well in Gondor and Mordor was desolate and closely guarded. The only problem for the Northern kingdom was Angmar. Osgiliath was burned in 1437. Civil war in Gondor lasted ten years - till 1447. After that everything was well till the Great Plague and that was in 1636, 200 years later. At this time, indeed Mordor was practically abandoned by Gondor, but it was not untill 1980 that Mordor had really become an evil place. But all this is immaterial, if we speak of the period of 1300-1409.

Once you argue that the blades are somehow specific to Cardolan and therefore unknown to the other kingdoms, but then you quote the mouth of sauron, recognizing the blades as being of Numenor.
There is such thing as general design, craftsmanship etc. The BD blades certainly looked Numenorean, and for those who were more competent (Denethor) they looked Arnorean.
Another matter is the spell on the blades, their magic. I believe that the art of enspelling blades came from Numenor, but was all but lost in the Downfall. There is hardly a single major invention that the Numenoreans made in exile. Their knowledge only dwindled, not increased. That last remnant of old lore may have been preserved in Cardolan, but lost in Arthedain and Rhudaur. Or it was re-discovered in Cardolan alone..
Now the High Numenoreans may have produced blades wrought with spells against orcs, against Sauron, even, maybe, against Nazgul. But these particular blades made in Cardolan between 1300 and 1409 were wrought with spells against the King of Carn Dum - a very specific spell. And it took a person really knowledeable in magic to know what exactly this spell was. It was not evident either to Aragorn or Denethor. Maybe not even to Gandalf.

By the way, it was really fortunate for the Mouth of Sauron that Mordor ended so soon after he foolishly allowed Gandalf to take Frodo's blade from him. I believe, the 8 remaining nazgul would have torn him to pieces had they heard of it. They only never got a chance...

Before I answer, is your position that only Merry's barrow blade could hurt the nazguls?
"Hurt" - no, any blade could do it. "Kill"- yes, only the BD blade were able to. That is my opinion.

And Landroval, don't you think that these two quotes are CONFLICTING?
Their peril is almost entirely due to the unreasoning fear which they inspire (like ghosts). They have no great physical power against the fearless
faced by eight savage warriors of great strength and agility armed with poisoned blades.

[Butterbeer]

Conflicting??


only if you wholly fail to see that it is clearly a metaphorical example.
:p :p :p

[CAB]

I agree with most of what you said Gordis, but I am only going to post where I differ with you. It is no fun to just say ‘I agree’ over and over. :)

So, I believe, NO other sword but that of the Barrow Downs could KILL (not simply wound) a nazgul
It seems to me that if a normal weapon can damage a Nazgul, then it must be able to kill it also. Enough slight hurts would eventually add up to the destruction of the body. This may seem like quibbling over the details, but I think it is important because it explains why the Nazgul couldn’t simply walk into Minas Tirith (for instance) and start killing everyone in sight.
At Weathertop, Gandalf was fighting nazgul with fire, not with his sword
I think it is entirely possible that Gandalf’s fire was a more effective weapon against the Nazgul than his sword. However, I believe the main reason he used it on Weathertop was because he was facing superior numbers and wished to keep his enemies at a distance. Much safer than fighting hand to hand vs. nine opponents.
Aragorn didn't draw what remained of the Narsil at Weathertop - he used firebrands instead.
He drew out his sword, and they saw that the blade was indeed broken a foot below the hilt. ‘Not much use is it, Sam?’ said Strider. ‘But the time is near when it shall be forged anew.’

By the way, note that at Weathertop Aragorn told the hobbits to prepare the sticks to light when the nazgul approached. He didn't tell them to use their swords. (That is a very good argument proving that Aragorn DIDN't know about the BD blades properties).
Yes, it is. But why didn’t he know? I maintain that he hadn’t seen the blades themselves (only their sheaths and hilts) and that this was why he didn’t know their true nature. Even if he wasn’t familiar with these kinds of swords, he probably could have deduced their purpose.

Later, when he found Merry and Pippin’s blades discarded by the Orcs, he stated that the blades were mystical and made by the Dunedain. I think we can assume that he recognized (as Denethor did) that they came from the North. Also he would have noticed that the blades were short and probably bronze, not the kind of swords that would be a Numenorean soldier’s primary weapon. If they weren’t primary weapons (and being bronze, probably weren’t very good back-up weapons either) but were still mystical, then they were probably meant for an important specific purpose. So, we have blades that come from Arnor, aren’t very useful in a regular battle against regular opponents, yet are mystical, and probably have an important, specific purpose. What else are they likely to be made for other than killing the Witch King?

[me9996]

Of coarce there is the classic 'kill him and take the ring' stratigy or the old 'chop of the finger' trick.

Or you could try hypnotisim, or maybe a game of riddles :evil: ...

I hope I understand the topic :o

[Landroval]

Weren’t the swords sheathed? I don’t doubt that Aragorn noticed the sheaths, but he couldn’t know exactly what was in those sheaths without looking more closely...
I disagree; he was able to match swords and sheats very easily in TTT:
He picked out from the pile of grim weapons two knives, leaf-bladed, damasked in gold and red; and searching further he found also the sheaths, black, set with small red gems.
They gleamed as he drew them from their black sheaths, wrought of some strange metal, light and strong, and set with many fiery stones.
Part of the theory (at least as I understand it) is that after the Nazgul withdrew from Weathertop, the Witch King had to prepare this spell to which you refer. According to this idea it wasn’t something he could do on a whim.
I don't remember anything about preparing spells in advance, anywhere in Tolkien's work. If anything, words of command are spoken ad hoc - the same with w-k's attack.
This could be right or wrong, but since it is part of a theory that so nicely explains the happenings on Weathertop and doesn’t contradict anything we know, I will accept
Yet it is a theory that presumes wild courage on behalf of creatures known for their cowardice, ignorance on behalf of the most learned people of Middle-Earth, wild presumptions about hobbit mastering the ring, despite counter-evidence, ignorance on behalf of the nazgul about Tom, despite long neighboring life and despite heightened intelligence gathering.. let me catch my breath :p
That in this particular case it were indeed the nazgul who sent their additional command to put on the Ring to him. Why? Because Frodo was halfway in the Wraith-World already, due to the Morgul wound.
You've got the events all mixed up; the morgul wound occured after the ring was put.
He would have felt pain in his neck, but that is all
You previously argued that pain is not something that the wraiths felt...
After all, what is the point of shattering the blade AFTER they are used on the Nazgul? I think the idea was to make them shatter at the first contact with the nazgul blood (or whatever they had inside), making the blades useless BEFORE any actual damage could be done. Same with arrows.
Merry's sword broke the spell, and Eowyn's sword did shatter, but it shattered AFTER it did the damage.
I disagree; Aragorn states that "but all blades perish that pierce that dreadful King." - pierce then perish.
By the way, note that at Weathertop Aragorn told the hobbits to prepare the sticks to light when the nazgul approached. He didn't tell them to use their swords. (That is a very good argument proving that Aragorn DIDN't know about the BD blades properties).
He told them to use fire because in darkness the power of the wraiths is increased manifold.
Well, if Gandalf wielded the Ring he wouldn't be appealing to Morgoth, at least initially, would he? I should say that Frodo being able to call on Elbereth while wearing the Ring with part of Sauron's will in it, shows his independence of its evil influence, proves that he has a strong will of his own.
Since even Gandalf would succumb to the ring, I don't see how Frodo could maintain his independence.
By the way, it was really fortunate for the Mouth of Sauron that Mordor ended so soon after he foolishly allowed Gandalf to take Frodo's blade from him. I believe, the 8 remaining nazgul would have torn him to pieces had they heard of it. They only never got a chance...
Who would expose the only deadly weapons against themselves to their enemies?? Esspecially considering that during the parley the mouth of sauron was exposed. Presenting them alone was taunting their enemies to take them – as it actually happened. Some rags and elvish rubbish are of no importance - but not the deadliest weapons... right?
Conflicting??
only if you wholly fail to see that it is clearly a metaphorical example.
Very well put, BB.
I maintain that he hadn’t seen the blades themselves (only their sheaths and hilts
As quoted above, the sheats and hilts contain the most of the identifying elements of the blades.

[CAB]

I disagree; he was able to match swords and sheats very easily in TTT:


He picked out from the pile of grim weapons two knives, leaf-bladed, damasked in gold and red; and searching further he found also the sheaths, black, set with small red gems.
Maybe we are talking about two different things here Landroval. In this case, I am speaking of Aragorn’s knowledge on Weathertop, months before the time of this quote. That he could recognize the knives and sheaths among the Orc gear is meaningless anyway. I could probably do that myself. Don’t you think they would stand out a bit?



They gleamed as he drew them from their black sheaths, wrought of some strange metal, light and strong, and set with many fiery stones.
Aragorn wasn’t present when this happened. If you are equating Aragorn’s knowledge with Tom’s, then I must disagree. Tom lived near and probably often met men who carried these blades, and so, could be expected to recognize them by their sheaths alone. Aragorn lacked this experience.

As quoted above, the sheats and hilts contain the most of the identifying elements of the blades.
Sure, to someone who is very familiar with them (like Tom) or among a bunch of Orc weapons (Aragorn, later)


I think that your idea that Aragorn knew what kind of blades the Hobbits were carrying is flawed in another way. You have argued that the blades were “anti-evil� or “anti-Sauron and servants� rather than “anti-Nazgul�. You have also argued (and here I agree with you) that the Nazgul could be harmed by weapons other than those which are meant solely for them. So, if Aragorn knew that the Hobbits had magical, anti-Mordor swords, why didn’t he tell them to use them on Weathertop or at the ford? If the fire was so important (and I don’t doubt that part), why not a flaming branch in one hand and a mystical anti-evil sword in the other? Or, if he assumed that they couldn’t handle that, how about two Hobbits with flaming branches and two with the blades?

I don't remember anything about preparing spells in advance, anywhere in Tolkien's work. If anything, words of command are spoken ad hoc - the same with w-k's attack.

He (Gandalf) followed after the drivers and prisoners right to the edge of the great hall, and there he sat down and worked up the best magic he could in the shadows.
‘A very ticklish business, it was,’ he said. ‘Touch and go!’ -The Hobbit
So, not only did Gandalf sit down and work something up, but since it was the “best magic he could� we can assume that he could do better under different circumstances (almost certainly meaning: more time to prepare).

‘I could think of nothing to do but to try and put a shutting-spell on the door. I know many; but to do things of that kind rightly requires time... -Gandalf in The Fellowship of the Ring


Yet it is a theory that presumes wild courage on behalf of creatures known for their cowardice
Can’t say that I see that. Two of the Nazgul showed the typical cowardice and , as I see it, the Witch King faced the barrow-blade (which really isn’t any different than the rest of us facing any blade, which would hardly be uncommon) in order to avoid control by Frodo via the Ring.

ignorance on behalf of the most learned people of Middle-Earth
Don’t see that either. I suppose you must be referring to Aragorn’s knowledge of the blades, regarding which I (and Gordis too) have pointed out that Aragorn probably hadn’t actually seen the blades themselves at that point. Gordis seems to think that Aragorn wouldn’t recognize the blades even if he did see them and, while I disagree with her there, I don’t think this idea is too much of a stretch.

wild presumptions about hobbit mastering the ring, despite counter-evidence
That counter-evidence is one individual. Not a very strong survey, if you ask me. The presumption would follow from pretty strong evidence (considered in the moment): The Hobbit carrying the Ring (the Ring being an object of enormous power and fear to them, a feeling we probably can’t imagine) defeated a barrow-wight. I don’t think it matters too much if they had heard of the wight’s defeat before (as long as they didn’t hear about Tom’s involvement) or guessed it from Frodo’s possession of the blade. How else would they expect him (in that moment) to have defeated a wight other than by using the Ring? The theory also doesn’t necessarily require that Frodo has mastered the Ring (in the Nazgul’s eyes), only that he has gained some control of it.

ignorance on behalf of the nazgul about Tom, despite long neighboring life and despite heightened intelligence gathering
The theory does not require ignorance of Tom, only ignorance of his having been the one to defeat the wight.

If the Nazgul’s intelligence gathering had been as complete as you suggest, then the Hobbits should have never made it to Bree.

Aragorn states that "but all blades perish that pierce that dreadful King.
This is something I meant to bring up before. Isn’t the ability to destroy blades implied to belong to the Witch King alone? It seems to be said regarding only him and not as being one of the Nazgul.

[Landroval]

Aragorn wasn’t present when this happened. If you are equating Aragorn’s knowledge with Tom’s, then I must disagree. Tom lived near and probably often met men who carried these blades, and so, could be expected to recognize them by their sheaths alone. Aragorn lacked this experience.
Well, if Aragorn didn't know about the marks of such a blade at wheatertop, how did he know about them later? I don't know about any crash-course on the blades he had with Tom afterwards ;).
So, if Aragorn knew that the Hobbits had magical, anti-Mordor swords, why didn’t he tell them to use them on Weathertop or at the ford? If the fire was so important (and I don’t doubt that part), why not a flaming branch in one hand and a mystical anti-evil sword in the other? Or, if he assumed that they couldn’t handle that, how about two Hobbits with flaming branches and two with the blades?
It only makes sense that if the blades are in whatever degree dangerous to the nazgul, they are at least as dangerous to the orcs, who don't have the power of Sauron in them as much as the wraiths do. That is why the orcs were more afraid of the blades than the nazguls were. I hope I am making sense, if not, I will try to rephrase.
he sat down and worked up the best magic he could in the shadows.
He sat down and worked up the best magic; I don't see any sign of preparation here. The best magic could simply reffer to Gandalf's condition; the results of his magic are definitely defined by his state of energy/health/etc - after he destroyed the chamber of Mazarbul, he was so tired he couldn't even light the staff for the others.
Don’t see that either. I suppose you must be referring to Aragorn’s knowledge of the blades, regarding which I (and Gordis too) have pointed out that Aragorn probably hadn’t actually seen the blades themselves at that point.
I am reffering to the fact that no one - Gandalf, Elrond, Galadriel (even Denethor may be relevant here) made any remarks about the particular power of the blades against the nazgul.
Two of the Nazgul showed the typical cowardice and , as I see it, the Witch King faced the barrow-blade (which really isn’t any different than the rest of us facing any blade, which would hardly be uncommon) in order to avoid control by Frodo via the Ring.
I was mainly reffering to the chief nazgul - walking in alone on Frodo.
That counter-evidence is one individual. Not a very strong survey, if you ask me
The ring (and the rings) give power according to the stature of the wielder - why wouldn't the nazguls know that, if Gandalf and Galadriel know? They know if from themselves and they saw what kind of creature a hobbit is and they inferred what kind of power a hobbit would derrive from the ring in time, if ever. Their conclusion? Let's analyse the scene: they come for Frodo and his ring, and he attacks them - did they actually expect him to attack? No, they didn't, Aragorn says so himself. They actually expected Frodo to be more submissive - i.e. less in control of the ring than he actually was ;) ;). As Aragorn states, they didn't expect resistance!
The theory does not require ignorance of Tom, only ignorance of his having been the one to defeat the wight.
Well, if they didn't expect resistance from Frodo, then Tom was the natural explanation.
If the Nazgul’s intelligence gathering had been as complete as you suggest, then the Hobbits should have never made it to Bree.
IMO, this may simply be a matter of distance between them and the hobbits.
Isn’t the ability to destroy blades implied to belong to the Witch King alone? It seems to be said regarding only him and not as being one of the Nazgul.
Hm, I don't see Aragorn's words in a restrictive way; he may simply have mentioned just the w-k seeing that Frodo only stabbed at him.

[Gordis]

Conflicting??

only if you wholly fail to see that it is clearly a metaphorical example.

Yes I wholly fail to see that. Where is the metaphor?

Well, if they didn't expect resistance from Frodo, then Tom was the natural explanation.
Nay, Gandalf was the natural explanation. He WAS around. He had the Power. He knew about Frodo and the Ring. Tom was maintaining perfect neutrality with the wights for 1500 years. Why would he go amok now?

It seems to me that if a normal weapon can damage a Nazgul, then it must be able to kill it also. Enough slight hurts would eventually add up to the destruction of the body. This may seem like quibbling over the details, but I think it is important because it explains why the Nazgul couldn’t simply walk into Minas Tirith (for instance) and start killing everyone in sight.
In principle you are right. If a nazgul it attacked by a whole croud with ordinary blades, he may eventually be killed. But for that they have their aura of fear.
Then again not only blades are dangerous. Someone might use a burning torch. Another may pout boiling oil etc, etc.

It is clear to me he didn't deduce their purpose. Not before Weathertop or the Ford, that is.

But could he deduce the purpose of the blades even if he got a good look at therm? I doubt it. Denethor, an expert in the old lore, said only that the blades came from Arnor of old. There were runes on the blade, but no one read them to us aloud. Did these runes tell clearly "this is the bane of the Witch-King of Angmar?" I doubt it. Probably, even if the runes could have been read or deciphered, they contained less clear message. After all Aragorn DID see the runes clearly at Amon Hen, but he mistakenly told that the blades were "for the bane of Mordor".

So, we have blades that come from Arnor, aren’t very useful in a regular battle against regular opponents, yet are mystical, and probably have an important, specific purpose. What else are they likely to be made for other than killing the Witch King?
That is so. But neither Aragorn, nor the Wise were omnipotent or all-knowledgeable. Take the Ring. It really needed to put 2 and 2 together to understand WHICH ring Bilbo had. But Gandalf didn't until it was almost too late (at least if we believe his own story)
Take the Palantir of Orthank. Gandalf and Aragorn knew all the data. They knew that Orthank was never plundered or secked. They knew thast of old there used to be a Stone there. They knew the Ithil stone was captured. But still it took Gandalf and Aragorn to see the shiny ball flung at them from the Tower to understand the nature of the link between Barad Dur and Orthank. And so on and so on. Perhaps, if Aragorn had more time to scratch his head over the blades he could have come to your conclusion. But he had other things on his mind than to think about some old blades.
And then, there were plenty of orcs in Angmar. There were some swords (Orcrist, sting, Glamdring, particularly "effecient" against orcs. Why couldn't old Arnorian blades be of the same kind?

You previously argued that pain is not something that the wraiths felt...
I told there might be several theories about what sort of bodies the nazgul had - really living (physiologically), or not. Tell me, if you keep a nazgul without food or water for a year, does he die or not? Does his heart beat or not? What colour is his blood? You don't know. Right. Neither do I.

I disagree; Aragorn states that "but all blades perish that pierce that dreadful King." - pierce then perish.
I never argued that any blade perished at the mere sight of a nazgul. There sure had to be a direct hit - not only clothes, but body. And Aragorn said "pierce" not "wound". I see no contradiction to my idea. And you still didn't answer what was the POINT of damaging a weapon AFTER it was used to wound or kill?

Since even Gandalf would succumb to the ring, I don't see how Frodo could maintain his independence. Eventually succomb. It was discussed in LoTR and in the Letters. Initially Gandalf would use the Ring to do good.

Who would expose the only deadly weapons against themselves to their enemies??
The foolish Mouth and his Master were no nazgul. I doubt anyone asked the opinion of the remaining Eight.

Esspecially considering that during the parley the mouth of sauron was exposed. Presenting them alone was taunting their enemies to take them – as it actually happened. Some rags and elvish rubbish are of no importance - but not the deadliest weapons... right?

You are still arguing that the Barrow-Blades were NOT deadly to the nazgul??? And how about "no other blade..."???

As quoted above, the sheats and hilts contain the most of the identifying elements of the blades.
All the elements needed to recognize them as Numenorean in Exile / Arnorian.
But only the runes on the blade gave away the nature of the spell laid on them.

So, if Aragorn knew that the Hobbits had magical, anti-Mordor swords, why didn’t he tell them to use them on Weathertop or at the ford? If the fire was so important (and I don’t doubt that part), why not a flaming branch in one hand and a mystical anti-evil sword in the other? Or, if he assumed that they couldn’t handle that, how about two Hobbits with flaming branches and two with the blades?
Indeed. No other argument is really needed.

That counter-evidence is one individual. Not a very strong survey, if you ask me. The presumption would follow from pretty strong evidence (considered in the moment): The Hobbit carrying the Ring (the Ring being an object of enormous power and fear to them, a feeling we probably can’t imagine) defeated a barrow-wight. I don’t think it matters too much if they had heard of the wight’s defeat before (as long as they didn’t hear about Tom’s involvement) or guessed it from Frodo’s possession of the blade. How else would they expect him (in that moment) to have defeated a wight other than by using the Ring? The theory also doesn’t necessarily require that Frodo has mastered the Ring (in the Nazgul’s eyes), only that he has gained some control of it.
Very well said, CAB.

This is something I meant to bring up before. Isn’t the ability to destroy blades implied to belong to the Witch King alone? It seems to be said regarding only him and not as being one of the Nazgul.
there is this quote when Gandalf tells Legolas that a nazgul couldn't be killed with arrows. So perhaps the ability to destroy blades belongs to all the nazgul. But the Witch King is so much stronger, in all ways and smarter than the others so it was him that mattered the most. Also if I am right, and blades were destroyed before making much damage, that assuring in part the nazgul "invulnerability", then the others should have such a protection as well - no one of them was ever killed, to our knowledge.

Well, if Aragorn didn't know about the marks of such a blade at wheatertop, how did he know about them later? Can you prove that he know about them later?

That is why the orcs were more afraid of the blades than the nazguls were. A nazgul wouldn't have left such a blade lying on the ground unguarded. The orcs did. They blasdes were not particularly dangerous to THEM, just unpleasant. And orcs couldn't know these were specific anti-nazgul weapons.

I am reffering to the fact that no one - Gandalf, Elrond, Galadriel (even Denethor may be relevant here) made any remarks about the particular power of the blades against the nazgul. Here I agree with you.
To me it means that NO ONE, save the nazgul themselves and Tom, still remembered these particular blades with this particular spell. They took them for usual Numenorean/Arnorean "anti-evil" or "anti-orc" variety. Note that the Mouth of Sauron and probably Sauron himself were equally mistaken, it seems.

The nazgul recognized the blades because in their presence the blades burned red in the Spirit World. Sting burned blue ONLY when orcs were around. Gandalf, Galadriel etc. had access to the Spirit World, but the blades didn't glow without a nazgul nearby. Likely no nazgul was at hand when Sauron examined Sam's blade (if he did, of course). And the Mouth was no wiser than Denethor.

Yet it is a theory that presumes wild courage on behalf of creatures known for their cowardice
And that is a PERSONAL INSULT! :( and absolutely out of the blue. Read everything that is said about the nazgul. Sure they had their specific phobias, but then again, when necessary, they faced daylight, water, fire and magic blades. And made the Gondorean army and a whole guard of rangers run screaming away.

I was mainly reffering to the chief nazgul - walking in alone on Frodo.

Again, I repeat the Witch-King was NO coward. After Fornost, he came all alone to face all the allied army of Arnor and Gondor after his own soldiers were killed to the last man and the last orc. He was going to fight with Earnur - the best sword of Gondor. Perhaps he did fight with him man to man later, in Morgul, whatever the Gondoreans may have believed.

If the Witch-King disappeared when he saw Glorfindel, that was because he was brave, but NOT SUICIDAL. Read what Myths Transformed tell about the Resurrected Elves and you will see WHY. Even "their position in space was at will", the super-powerful magical dudes...)

The Witch-King attacked Eowyn even AFTER he understood how dangerous this no-man was. Had he been a coward, he could have turned away and left - she would have hardly ran after him.

He entered the waters of Bruinen, even though he most likely knew that Elrond could command the water to rise. After all, wasn't Rivendell besieged by Angmar for quite some time, between 1356 and 1409?? How did the Elves defend their VALLEY (not a FORTRESS)? Surely by strengthening the perimeter defenses - the flooding river and other traps around.

And sure he was the only one who attacked Frodo, though he saw clearly what kind of a blade he had and though the hobbit wore the Ruling ring, "the object of terror" for the nazgul.

And you call the Witch-King a coward, Landroval?

[Landroval]

Yes I wholly fail to see that. Where is the metaphor?
Tolkien used the word "compared to"; plus the nazgul aren't savage people, at least not in the direct sense of the word. Moreover, the fictitious event you are reffering to is much further in time, when Frodo is far greater - as I pointed to Olmer previously.
Nay, Gandalf was the natural explanation.
And, even if true, this is relevant to your theory - how? Not to mention that Goldberry was expecting the hobbits and received news about them ;).
And Aragorn said "pierce" not "wound". I see no contradiction to my idea.
I see; so if one gets stabbed, that doesn't qualify as a wound?
And you still didn't answer what was the POINT of damaging a weapon AFTER it was used to wound or kill?
I am afraid that since no one seems to complain about it, you raised a false dillema. Not to mention that it would still come handy if your enemy's sword perishes - after all, not all first wounds are lethal.
Initially Gandalf would use the Ring to do good.
Not for long, if you ask me; and Frodo's independence would last even less, seeing that we are comparing a maia with a secondborn; but I will conceed we are merely speculating.
The foolish Mouth and his Master were no nazgul.
I see; so neither the mouth knew about how just deadly that sword is, plus he is foolish, even though his name/action/ranks qualify him as their highest 'diplomat' around, so to speak . So much ignorance on all sides...
You are still arguing that the Barrow-Blades were NOT deadly to the nazgul?
It depends on where the wound occured, strenght, shock, etc..
But only the runes on the blade gave away the nature of the spell laid on them.
Hm, can you quote a text concerning the runes on the blades?
Can you prove that he know about them later?
You're joking, right?
And orcs couldn't know these were specific anti-nazgul weapons.
You've missed my point; I am not arguing these were anti-nazgul, only that the orcs feared them - apparently, more than the nazguls do.
Note that the Mouth of Sauron and probably Sauron himself were equally mistaken, it seems.
Yea, can you believe it??
I find that hypothesis to be absurd.
Even "their position in space was at will", the super-powerful magical dudes
Would you be so kind as to provide that quote?
And you call the Witch-King a coward, Landroval?
Oh, your sweetheart? :D (Gosh, I remember how good it was teasing girls.)
Gordis, though I left your other (good) points, unaddressed, they are irrelevant as long as the main issue I raised previously is left standing: the nazguls underestimated Frodo at Wheathertop, not the other way around.

[Gordis]

Tolkien used the word "compared to"; plus the nazgul aren't savage people, at least not in the direct sense of the word. Moreover, the fictitious event you are reffering to is much further in time, when Frodo is far greater - as I pointed to Olmer previously.
One can be a cultured man but a savage warrior. I don't think anyone would think "savage" here was meant literally. The Quotes ARE conflicting all the same.
As for "further in time, it is so, but the nazgul saw this particular hobbit for the first time in their lives. They couldn't know how strong he could prove to be. They didn't expect resistance at all, when they advanced, then the hobbit puts on the Ring - still an object of terror to the Nazgul, now or several months further (what is the difference?) , draws the anti-nazgul blade the likes of which has not been seen for 1500 years and that the Barrow-wights guarded. Sure the nazgul were dismayed swiftly coming from under-estimation of Frodo to over-estimation of him.

And, even if true, this is relevant to your theory - how? Not to mention that Goldberry was expecting the hobbits and received news about them . Very relevant. IF the nazgul knew a Barrow was plundered and the Wight sent away, they didn't think of the weak hobbits and peaceful Bombadil, but of the meddling Maia Gandalf who they knew was around looking for the hobbits. They thought it was Gandalf who had the blades, and they scared Gandalf away before he met the hobbits. Then when they saw the BD blade in Frodo's hand, they understood it was not Gandalf, but the hobbits with the Ring.
And how on earth is Goldberry relevant here?

Gordis: And Aragorn said "pierce" not "wound". I see no contradiction to my idea.
Landroval: I see; so if one gets stabbed, that doesn't qualify as a wound?
I cut my hand with a six inch-long kitchen knife. Pierced the skin, drew some blood. Had I got all the length of it in my body, I would have been dead. But it only pierced the skin, then stopped. - Could it be called a "wound"? I think, yes. - Is it as bad a wound that can be inflicted by the same knife if it went all the way in? Not really.

The shattering of the blades at the first "piercing" of the skin, assures a certain immunity, does it not? The nazgul get a superficial wound, then the blade perishes.

I am afraid that since no one seems to complain about it, you raised a false dillema. Not to mention that it would still come handy if your enemy's sword perishes - after all, not all first wounds are lethal.
Then you suppose that the spell assuring certain immunity to the nazgul (they can't be killed by arrows, said Gandalf) is a different spell from the one that shatters the blades used on them? I say, that was the SAME spell You stipulate the presence of two spells instead of one.. Don't forget Occam's razor, Landroval.


Gordis: Initially Gandalf would use the Ring to do good.
Landroval: Not for long, if you ask me; and Frodo's independence would last even less, seeing that we are comparing a maia with a secondborn; but I will conceed we are merely speculating.
It is irrelevant for how long here. To the nazgul's knowledge, even if Frodo DID use the Ring against the Wight, he didn't use it too many times to be unable to pronounce the name of Elbereth.

I see; so neither the mouth knew about how just deadly that sword is, plus he is foolish, even though his name/action/ranks qualify him as their highest 'diplomat' around, so to speak . So much ignorance on all sides...
I explained the reason for their ignorance in my previous post and explain it again below. If you want to argue, please, refer to the reasons I gave, not sneer at the conclusion.
As for the Mouth being "foolish", it was not a smart thing to allow Gandalf to take the sword from him unhindered. The only explanation for this utter foolishness was that he didn't know what an unique thing it was.

It depends on where the wound occured, strenght, shock, etc..
Not an answer . It could be said of any blade.

Gordis: But only the runes on the blade gave away the nature of the spell laid on them
Landroval: Hm, can you quote a text concerning the runes on the blades?

No, I can't. And that is great you noticed it, Landroval! There were NO RUNES visible on the Barrow blades:

For each of the hobbits he chose a dagger, long, leaf-shaped, and keen, of marvellous workmanship, damasked with serpent-forms in red and gold. They gleamed as he drew them from their black sheaths, wrought of some strange metal, light and strong, and set with many fiery stones. Whether by some virtue in these sheaths or because of the spell that lay on the mound, the blades seemed untouched by time, unrusted, sharp, glittering in the sun.
Now, for enspelling things, runes of Power were normally used:

Eärendil was a mariner...
.
In panoply of ancient kings,
in chainéd rings he armoured him;
his shining shield was scored with runes
to ward all wounds and harm from him
Here you see that RUNES were used for a spell to ward all wounds and harm.

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.
Here we again see runes used in the same way, either for the bane of Mordor, or just for protection, or for both.

The Dwarves also used runes of Power With golden roof and silver floor,
And runes of power upon the door.

The Rohirrim also used spell-runes:
Then Éowyn gave to Merry an ancient horn, small but cunningly wrought all of fair silver with a baldric of green; and wrights had engraven upon it swift horsemen riding in a line that wound about it from the tip to the mouth; and there were set runes of great virtue.

Even think of the Ring. Only those who could READ the RUNES on it knew what exactly was the Rings magic. Gandalf couldn't tell WHICH ring it was BEFORE he read the spell - inscription on it "One Ring to rule them all and in the Darkness bind them."

So before one deciphers the runes and understands the nature of the spell, there is no way one could know WHAT spell it was. It could have been anything... But when there were NO RUNES to read on the Barrow-blades, or maybe only invisible runes, that one can see only in the Spirit World, how could the spell be understood? Workmanship was Arnorian, that was ALL that an EXPERT such as Aragorn or Denethor or the Mouth could see!

Can you prove that Aragorn know about them later?
You're joking, right?
Not at all. Can you prove that Aragorn knew WHAT spell was on the blades before the Witch-King was stabbed?
I can prove that he mistakenly thought it to be a general "anti-Mordor" spell.

I am not arguing these were anti-nazgul, only that the orcs feared them - apparently, more than the nazguls do. Wrong. The Witch-King wouldn't have left such swords lying around unguarded for all to find. Orcs did. Who feared the blades more?

Gordis: Note that the Mouth of Sauron and probably Sauron himself were equally mistaken, it seems.
Landroval: Yea, can you believe it??
I find that hypothesis to be absurd.
Thank-you -very-much. So kind of you.

I say I am sure that Mouth was unable to recognize the blades unless Sauron or a nazgul told him.
As for Sauron, I said "probably". He had too much on his mind to peer at all the blades captured by his orcs.


Gordis: Even (the ressurected Elves's) position in space was at will", the super-powerful magical dudes
Landroval: Would you be so kind as to provide that quote?
Notes following the Appendix to Athrabeth Finrod Ah Andreth: The resurrection of the body (at least as far as Elves were concerned) was in a sense incorporeal. But while it could pass physical barriers at will, it could at will oppose a barrier to matter. If you touched a resurrected body you felt it. Or if it willed it could simply elude you - disappear. Its position in space was at will.
Compare it with the LORT quote:
Those who have dwelt in the Blessed Realm live at once in both worlds, and against both the Seen and the Unseen they have great power
Oh, your sweetheart? (Gosh, I remember how good it was teasing girls.)
So you have NO arguments.
Gordis, though I left your other (good) points, unaddressed, they are irrelevant as long as the main issue I raised previously is left standing: the nazguls underestimated Frodo at Wheathertop, not the other way around.


Well, I happily announce that now I have found proof for my hypothesis.

I was looking for proof since I posted my theory and I found it finally in a book that I don't have and that I didn't ever read: "Hammond and Scull, LOTR Readers Companion"

About a month ago, in another thread Roccondil, one of the best Tolkien scholars I know, has pointed to me the existence of this rather recently published book containing TOLKIEN'S OWN, previously unpublished NOTES. I have tracked Roccondil on other forums and I have found the proof for my (and Alcuin's - because Alcuin was the first to consider the Wight's problem) theory in this thread on theonering.net:

http://forums.theonering.com/viewtopic.php?t=89165&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Tolkien has considered the Weathertop situation and made such comments:

Tolkien wrote:

… the Witch-King, the great captain, was actually dismayed. He had been shaken by the fire of Gandalf, and began to perceive that the mission on which Sauron had sent him was one of great peril to himself both by the way and on his return to his Master (if unsuccessful); and he had been doing ill, so far achieving nothing save rousing the power of the Wise and directing them to the Ring. But above all the timid and terrified Bearer had resisted him, had dared to strike at him with an enchanted sword made by his own enemies long ago for his destruction. Narrowly it had missed him. How he had come by it – save in the Barrows of Cardolan. Then he was in some way mightier than the Barrow-wight; and he called on Elbereth, a name of terror to the Nazgûl. He was then in league with the High Elves of the Havens.

Escaping from a wound that would have been as deadly to him as the Mordor-knife to Frodo (as was proved in the end), he withdrew and hid for a while, out of doubt and fear both of Aragorn and especially of Frodo. But fear of Sauron…. was the stronger.

Oct 7. He arose and cried out to his companions, and drew the other four back to him. He then patrols the road to the Bridge of Mitheithel, knowing that it was practically impossible to cross the Greyflood between Tharbad and the Bridge. The Nazgûl search in vain for the Bearer while Aragorn leads Frodo in the pathless lands south of the Road.

Hammond and Scull, Readers Companion notes to p. 208

The nazgul DID recognize the blades, DID associate them with the destruction of the Wight and WERE afraid of Frodo. Now it is irrefutable.

On the Minas Tirith forum my "opponent" has deleted the whole thread once he saw this post. All my posts and Alcuin's are now gone. Some cowards just hate to be proven wrong. Here I hope it will only provide us with more things to discuss. :)

[CAB]

I don’t think that there is really anything left to discuss. That quote is almost completely true to your theory, point by point. The only thing I see lacking is the Witch King’s assumption that Frodo got his (apparent) strength from the Ring, but even that could be (probably, should be) implied. Congratulations Gordis. :)

[jammi567]

Hellow all. comparitivly late to join in the discussion, but have been keeping up with it. anyways, i wish to present you with a quote that no-one seems to have noticed. frodo has been captured by the wights, and is about to defeat it.
With what strength he had he [Frodo] hewed at the crawling arm near the wrist, and the hand broke off; but at the same moment, the sword splintered up to the hilt. There was a shriek and the light vanished. In the dark there was a snarling noise.
In my personal opinion, i believe that Frodo picked up a sword that was the same type that Tom later gave (i.e. anti-evil blades). Merry's sword, when he stabs the Witch king, does excactly the same thing. Therefore, in my mind at least, this proves that both the wights and the nazgul are able to have physical bodies held together by magic, but when the blade pierced them, the magic of the blades distroyed the magic holding the bodies together. This is why i think the nazgul were cautious of Frodo on Weathertop.

[Butterbeer]

Yes I wholly fail to see that. Where is the metaphor?

you are joking right????

best BB :)

[Landroval]

I don't think anyone would think "savage" here was meant literally.
We have such different undestanding of what a metaphor is, that I will stop here.
then the hobbit puts on the Ring
Under their command
what is the difference?
Frodo is far greater
And how on earth is Goldberry relevant here?
Well, I would have speculated that her keeping in touch with the good guys wouldnt go unnoticed. But that is not relevant anymore.
Pierced the skin, drew some blood.
I won 't nickpick on what a wound is either.
You stipulate the presence of two spells instead of one
Resistance due to armor was my point, not due to magic.
But when there were NO RUNES to read on the Barrow-blades, or maybe only invisible runes, that one can see only in the Spirit World, how could the spell be understood?
Runes are not prerequisite to endowing objects with magic, if that is what you imply. As far as I know, there were no runes on the silmarils, palantirs or elven rings
Can you prove that Aragorn knew WHAT spell was on the blades before the Witch-King was stabbed?
No, I can't. But your theory implies that sometime in the future he got to know, which I find unlikely.
He had too much on his mind to peer at all the blades captured by his orcs.
Only that on this case, he requested immediate and exclusive information on such events.
Notes following the Appendix to Athrabeth Finrod Ah Andreth:
Grrr, where are my books.. good quote anyway.
But above all the timid and terrified Bearer had resisted him, had dared to strike at him
The nazguls underestimated him before his attack, that was my point. It is also evident that they didn't know about the blade than after the wheatertop, (the opposite was part of your supposition, IIRC). Congrats on your quote anyway, it spoiled my day :D
Escaping from a wound that would have been as deadly to him as the Mordor-knife to Frodo (as was proved in the end),
I will note that this doesnt exclude that other weapons can't harm the nazgul, seeing that both Fingolfin and Thorondor harmed Melkor, (and the same can be said of Sauron the necromancer being overthrown by Elendil and Gil-Galad) - the nazgul being vastly inferior to both these masters of them.
The only thing I see lacking is the Witch King’s assumption that Frodo got his (apparent) strength from the Ring, but even that could be (probably, should be) implied.
Seeing that they are capable of commanding him both here and at the Ford, and not the other way around, I will argue the contrary is true.

[jammi567]

er, hello, anyone going to look at my post.

[Gordis]

I don’t think that there is really anything left to discuss. That quote is almost completely true to your theory, point by point. The only thing I see lacking is the Witch King’s assumption that Frodo got his (apparent) strength from the Ring, but even that could be (probably, should be) implied. Congratulations Gordis.
Thanks, CAB.
No there is still a lot to discuss, I think. We don't have the answer whether the nazgul knew about Tom. We don't know whether they knew about the Wight destruction before Weathertop - though it seems not, after all. The quote doesn't say whether Aragorn, Gandalf etc. recognized the swords. And there is an additional element, not really discussed before: the nazgul believed that Frodo was somehow associated with High Elves.

And another matter: the nazgul here seem so very HUMAN in mind, not some zombie-like creatures implied by UT quotes "had no will of their own", "utterly subservient" etc. They had their own good and bad moments, their own fears and doubts, different from Sauron's. Also, the quote says that the only thing that made the Witch-King act was his fear of Sauron. NOT the desire to get the Ring for his master. Whatever the UT may say, they were motivated in exactly the same way as all the servants of Mordor.

Also, we learned the reason why the nazgul didn't attack again - not that they were busy preparing spells to shatter the sword, but they were simply too dismayed. The WK went away from the others (isn't it very human not to wish your underlings to see your bad moments?), while the others were more bothered with what happened with their Captain, that with the hobbits. That is how the company of the ringbearer slipped away on the early morning of 7.

Also, from the quote in Reader's Companion, it seems very probable that the spells on the sword were NOT against all the nazgul, but against the WK alone. Have you also got this impression?

Then the hobbit puts on the Ring. - Under their command

Seeing that they are capable of commanding him both here and at the Ford, and not the other way around,

We have addressed this before. Now, would the nazgul be so afraid of Frodo, if he had just obeyed THEIR COMMAND to put on the Ring? Why couldn't they command him to drop his blade and follow them nicely to discuss some legal issues of the Ring's rightful ownership?
To me the new quote is another proof that they DIDN't and COULDN'T command him before he got stabbed by the Morgul blade..

Frodo is far greater (at Orodruin).
You miss my point entirely. How could the nazgul at Weathertop know how great Frodo was at that moment? They saw the guy for the first time! I am not saying that he COULD at this point command the nazgul, as he would be able later, but that the nazgul THOUGHT that he could.

Runes are not prerequisite to endowing objects with magic, if that is what you imply. No, it is not at all what I imply. I say that the runes are something cultured people can read. If the BD blades had an inscription in plain Tengwar/ Kertar "Die, the accursed Witch-King!", than Aragorn and Denethor and the Mouth could read it. If there were no runes, then it took someone far more competent in sorcery to learn what the spell was. It can't be told at the first glance even by them. Or it took a nazgul, who didn't need to read anything, but just saw how the blades burned red in their presence.

Gordis: Can you prove that Aragorn knew WHAT spell was on the blades before the Witch-King was stabbed?
Landroval: No, I can't. But your theory implies that sometime in the future he got to know, which I find unlikely.
I believe the nature of Tom's swords became known to the Wise, and therefore Aragorn, only AFTER the WK was killed.
For instance, Gandalf visiting Tom after the War could have asked him "By the way, old chap, what were these handy little swords you gave to the hobbits? One proved really useful!"
And Tom told him the story about "him who made the sword long ago when Dunedain were young.. and "no other sword..." thing and so the story got into the chronicles, and from there into the Red Book.

Think on it. No character in ALL the story has told the hobbits: "keep your blades at hand, these are the only things really handy against a nazgul!" Why?
No one told it to Sam, for instance - he left his sword at the "dead" Frodo's side for the orcs to take and took Sting instead, because he believed Sting was a better sword!
Imagine that the confrontation with the nazgul at Sammath Naur, so many times sketched by Tolkien, DID indeed happen. Dearly would he have paid for that choice!
To me it is PROOF that NO ONE in the Fellowship knew the truth about the swords before Path Galen, and therefore practically surely before the Pelennor.

Gordis: Sauron had too much on his mind to peer at all the blades captured by his orcs.
Landroval: Only that on this case, he requested immediate and exclusive information on such events.
CAB has all but proved that the order to send all the items found on the captured prisoners to Barad Dur was a STANDING order at Cirith Ungol. Note also that the blade was delivered to Barad Dur on the very day of the Pelennor battle. Sauron could have relied on the Mouth to examine the sword and the mail shirt. He WAS busy, you know.

The nazguls underestimated him before his attack, that was my point. And my also. As I have pointed out in my first (?) post on the matter, 2 nazgul of the 5 were left standing idle on the lip of the dell - they had nothing to do, the hobbits and the man being already outnumbered.
We differed later, you said they underestimated him during the attack, I said that the sight of Frodo's sword and his puttimng on the Ring made them pause and come from under-estimation to overestimation.

It is also evident that they didn't know about the blade than after the wheatertop, (the opposite was part of your supposition, IIRC).
Not necessarily. They didn't know that the HOBBIT had the blade, but my hypothesis that they thought that it was Gandalf who plundered the Barrow is not disproved. Neither is it confirmed.

I will note that this doesnt exclude that other weapons can't harm the nazgul, seeing that both Fingolfin and Thorondor harmed Melkor, (and the same can be said of Sauron the necromancer being overthrown by Elendil and Gil-Galad) - the nazgul being vastly inferior to both these masters of them. I always agreed that other weapons were able to HARM nazgul. The question was how badly? "Wound, not kill" that is what I said about the ordinary blades. Note that Narsil was hardly an ordinary blade, it could have been enspelled against Sauron, but still it didn't kill Sauron. Narsil and Aiglos "brought Sauron down". . His spirit left his body when the Ring was cut from his finger. If not for it, he would have recovered, IMHO.

Fog on the barrow-downs: With what strength he had he [Frodo] hewed at the crawling arm near the wrist, and the hand broke off; but at the same moment, the sword splintered up to the hilt. There was a shriek and the light vanished. In the dark there was a snarling noise

In my personal opinion, i believe that Frodo picked up a sword that was the same type that Tom later gave (i.e. anti-evil blades). Merry's sword, when he stabs the Witch king, does excactly the same thing. Therefore, in my mind at least, this proves that both the wights and the nazgul are able to have physical bodies held together by magic, but when the blade pierced them, the magic of the blades distroyed the magic holding the bodies together. This is why i think the nazgul were cautious of Frodo on Weathertop.
It is a gem of a quote, Jammi!

I think it is more than likely that Frodo picked one of the Barrow-Downs TM swords, enspelled against the WK and used it on a Wight.

Tolkien in his earlier drafts in HOME VI believed that Wights were akin to the nazgul, but later dropped the idea. As it stands now (as far as I remember from numerous threads on the matter) the Wights are thought to be Housless Spirits inhabiting dead bodies in the Barrow. But it seems the Wights had similar to the nazgul's protection spell on them, that made the sword shatter.
Anyway, it is canon, that it was the WK who sent them to Tyrn Gorthad. So being his creatures, they may have been vulnerable to the blades enspelled against him. But may be not so vulnerable as the Witch-King himself (if the spell was indeed very specific)? The wight lost its arm, but still snarled and may have recovered, had not Bombadil intervened.

So, Jammi, it is a very good observation. The more the wights were similar to the nazgul, the more the news of the Wight's destruction should have been ominous to them.

[jammi567]

Thanks Gordis. i'm surprised that no-one picked this quote up earlier.

[Butterbeer]

chickening out of the question huh Gor?? :eek: :D :p

..............

seriously though, i wish you guys would write slightly less sometimes :rolleyes: .. it is frankly impossible for me, with what time i have, to actually follow it, and it seems like a good one this...

can someone give me a concise summary of where we are at ?

[jammi567]

very good point butterbeer. :)

[Rían]

Perhaps some torment was what every prisoner received in Sauron's dungeon's just as a part of the service - like towels in a hotel?? :eek: ROTFL!!

That is so funny I can't even read the rest of the thread now! :D

[Landroval]

The quote doesn't say whether Aragorn, Gandalf etc. recognized the swords.
In one of the drafts, "At Rivendell", The Return of the Shadow, Gandalf states that "Not to mention courage - and also swords and a strange and ancient name. Later on I must be told about that curious sword of yours, and how you knew the name of Elbereth". Then again, in no version do I know of any special recomendation to the hobbits regarding the swords.. richly bizzare
And there is an additional element, not really discussed before: the nazgul believed that Frodo was somehow associated with High Elves.
Well, it seems that the w-k is looking for explanations and reasons, but the "R" word just doesn't want to come to his mind; high-elves, the wise... but not the "R" word ;).
And another matter: the nazgul here seem so very HUMAN in mind, not some zombie-like creatures implied by UT quotes "had no will of their own", "utterly subservient" etc.
Good observation - this goes against both UT and the letters; it almost calls into question just how "canonical" that quote is - seeing that it was written before the end of Lotr.
Why couldn't they command him to drop his blade and follow them nicely
They most probably intended that, before some weird thoughts about forgotten valar started messing with his mind :D
They saw the guy for the first time!
Yeah, and came with preconceptions due to underestimation, as I believe you agree.
I am not saying that he COULD at this point command the nazgul, as he would be able later
When later, Gordis? I don't have the letters, but I remember that not even at Mount Doom is he able to command their wishes - correct me if I'm wrong. We are talking about a very hypothetical future.
If there were no runes, then it took someone far more competent in sorcery to learn what the spell was. It can't be told at the first glance even by them
Aragorn recognized the general effect against the "Mordor" - there is also a nice quote about Ugluk throwing the swords away as if they burned him ;). Now, with no runes but only graphical elements but still correctly identified - it is most likely that (at least) the swords of that design carry those anti-Mordor spells.
Note also that the blade was delivered to Barad Dur on the very day of the Pelennor battle. Sauron could have relied on the Mouth to examine the sword and the mail shirt. He WAS busy, you know.
There was plenty of time between the two battles - not to mention that the incident at the tower requested an even more special attention.
They didn't know that the HOBBIT had the blade, but my hypothesis that they thought that it was Gandalf who plundered the Barrow is not disproved.
If that is true, I would like to reffer to a previous point: if these swords are the only one deadly to them, why would they leave them around, with guys like Glorfy and Gandie walking around? Tom also mentions, IIRC, that unless one is fearless, one should be aware of the wights. Seeing how precarious the defence of the blades is against such odds, if they are exclusively deadly, why leave them around?

[Alcuin]

In one of the drafts, … Gandalf states that "… I must be told about that curious sword of yours, and how you knew the name of Elbereth".

Taking intent from the drafts, and in particular extra or background information, such as plot devices, is probably a better use of them than relying upon them for the final plotlines: those are in the published novel. Characters and events emerged and submerged in the drafts, some of which were jiggered for years before they settled into final form. Some of the flaws in the finished product reflect discarded plotlines, such as when Harry the Gatekeeper slips out of the Prancing Pony after Frodo’s accident with the Ring: Harry had never entered the inn in the final telling; but he still departed. The incident can be explained away, but it is still a small error.


And there is an additional element, not really discussed before: the nazgul believed that Frodo was somehow associated with High Elves.

Well, it seems that the w-k is looking for explanations and reasons, but the "R" word just doesn't want to come to his mind; high-elves, the wise... but not the "R" word

I am afraid the ‘“R� word’ reference is lost to me; what is it? (He asks rudely.) Frodo’s association with the Noldor would already be known to the Witch-king: Gildor and his friends surprised Khamûl in the Woody End and prevented his finding Frodo and his companions.

-|-



And another matter: the nazgul here seem so very HUMAN in mind, not some zombie-like creatures implied by UT quotes "had no will of their own", "utterly subservient" etc.

Good observation - this goes against both UT and the letters; it almost calls into question just how "canonical" that quote is - seeing that it was written before the end of Lotr.

The whole notion that the Nazgûl were “zombies� or automatons is probably misplaced. They were individuals, with the gifts and deficiencies they had in normal life, but with altered perceptions, and of course, their bodies had faded into the wraith (or “shadow� or spirit) world.

The Nazgûl had no “will� of their own in matters concerning their instructions from Sauron. To the best of their abilities, they would carry out not only the letter of his instructions, but the malign spirit of them, too. That they could still make mistakes in these matters is demonstrated by the incident in “The Hunt for the Ring� in which the Nine wander about the Vales of Anduin, hunting fruitlessly for “Shire�, when it was on the other side of the Misty Mountains.

As an aside here, I believe that Christopher Tolkien has wondered in print why the Witch-king would have been unfamiliar with “Shire� and its locale. I think the answer is fairly straightforward. “Shire� was in fact the old royal demesne of the Kings of Arnor, given over to the halflings after it had become depopulated of Dúnedain with stipulations the hobbits continued to follow for 1400 years, 1000 of which were without a sitting king in Fornost. Had the Nazgûl left with instructions to find the old royal demesne, they would have headed straight for it: the Witch-king knew where that was. But “Shire� was a new one: he simply did not recognize the name, nor did he understand the association between the two. Such transpositions and changes in the names of regions are common over history: how old were you when you learned that Portugal is part of the ancient Kingdom of the Visigoths? (Maybe just now…?) If you were a Roman transported into the 21st century, and someone said, “Oh, we’re going to Colchester, you know where that is!� even when you arrived, would you recognize it as the old provincial capital city, Camulodenum?


I am not saying that he COULD at this point command the nazgul, as he would be able later

When later, Gordis? I don't have the letters, but I remember that not even at Mount Doom is he able to command their wishes - correct me if I'm wrong. We are talking about a very hypothetical future.

I believe that in Letter 246, written in 1963, Tolkien says that not even Aragorn could wrest the Ruling Ring from Sauron. The Nazgûl were under no illusions as to who their real master was. Even of the Wise, only Gandalf might have been able to wrench it away from Sauron: Galadriel or Elrond would have kept his distance and attempted to conquer Sauron from afar had either wielded the One Ring.

-|-

Recognition that the barrow-blades were the “work of Westernesse, wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor,� as Aragorn put it, does not seem to have been secret. Aragorn knew it, the orcs of Isengard knew it, the Nazgûl certainly knew it, and the Mouth of Sauron knew it. What none of them other than the Nazgûl and Bombadil seem to have recognized was that they were designed to do grievous harm to the Ringwraiths. Had Sauron closely inspected Sam’s barrow-blade himself, he might have realized this; but the way events fell out, the implication is that he did not: in his impatience, he seems to have focused entirely upon the assault on the Morannon by Aragorn, taking the bait that Aragorn and Gandalf dangled before him: the façade that they had the Ruling Ring and were challenging Sauron for supremacy, just as Ar-Pharazôn had at the end of the Second Age. Sauron seems to have grasped Mark Twain’s observation that, “History never repeats itself, but it rhymes.� Fortunately for the Good Guys, he was humming the wrong tune. (And yes, that is a reference to the Ainulindalë.) It was a masterful deception, and Sauron was taken in completely, as Gandalf hoped he would be.

[jammi567]

This has been discussed on another thread about wether the nazgul had any free will of their own here (http://entmoot.tolkientrail.com/showthread.php?t=12074). in my personal opinion, i believe Sauron had to be focusing on them to be able to control them. so when they were serching for the Ring aroung Anduin, he was throrughly serching there because that's where he know it last was. once he realized it wasn't there, and gollum said 'shire' and 'baggins', he let the nazgul have their free will back because a) he had other things to focus on, and b) they're his most loyal servents, and so should be able to find it quickly and efficiantly. of course, once they got their will back, they also recovered their former fears etc. i think this is the best senario with the evidence we've got, both from UT and letters, as well as lotr itself. what do you guys think.

[Alcuin]

…if these swords are the only one deadly to them, why would [the Nazgûl] leave them around, with guys like Glorfy and Gandie walking around? Tom also mentions, IIRC, that unless one is fearless, one should be aware of the wights.

They did not “leave them around.� They were in a barrow haunted by a barrow-wight, a necromantic creature sent there by the Witch-king after the Great Plague in III 1636, over 200 years after the collapse of Cardolan in III 1409. Gandalf told Frodo when he awoke in Rivendell that his capture in the Barrow was “perhaps the most dangerous moment of all.� Coming from Gandalf, and bearing in mind the terrible hazards Frodo faced on Weathertop and at the Ford of Bruinen, this is a very strong statement. The barrow-wight was an extremely dangerous guardian infesting the tomb.

Since Aragorn, Gandalf, and even Elrond failed to recognize completely the significance of the blades, I think we can speculate that they were manufactured only in Cardolan. Had they been devised by the smiths of Arthedain, or had they been used in both daughter kingdoms of Arnor, then Elrond would likely have known all about them; but the wars with Angmar under the Witch-king’s leadership broke out in the 14th century of the Third Age (that would be during the 1300s, not the 1400s), and Cardolan fell early in the 15th century.

Frodo and his companions were trapped by a barrow in the tomb of the last Prince of Cardolan, who died in III 1409. Tom knew him as well as his family, it would seem, and it seems he was aware of the knives’ powers and purposes. There do seem to have been quite a few of them in the tomb: each of the hobbits received one from Tom that he selected, and it may be that the blade that splintered when Frodo struck the barrow-wight was a fifth blade of that kind. The Dúnedain seem to have buried their dead kings much as the Egyptians had (and also the heathen Anglo-Saxon and Norse, as well as many other peoples throughout history), with rich treasures. That the survivors of devastated Cardolan would bury the last royal heir of their little kingdom with the best treasures they could afford would not be surprising: after he died, they all again became subjects of the king at Fornost, and Cardolan ceased to exist as a separate kingdom.

We should consider two points. First, why would these blades appear in Cardolan and not in Arthedain, the senior and greater kingdom? Second, how would Bombadil know the purpose and powers of the blades when even Elrond seems to have been unaware of them?

Again, we are speculating, but an answer the first question might be this. Cardolan was likely by far more heavily traveled by visitors than Arthedain, whose capital at Fornost was well north of the main trade routes. Cardolan sat astride the Greenway and along the Great East Road (a very ancient route: it was probably the same as the old Dwarf Road whose western end led past Nogrod in the Blue Mountains to Doriath). Tharbad, at one time both a great inland port and the site of the bridge across the Greyflood maintained jointly by both Arnor and Gondor, was on Cardolan’s border and thus its concern as long as Cardolan was independent. Bree was part of Cardolan, too: it was one of the primary junctions of the northern trading system. This might mean that the Dúnedain of Cardolan were able to obtain knowledge from Arthedain, which was once again an ally after the wars with Angmar began; from Rivendell and Lindon; and from the other great Dúnedain kingdom, Gondor. We might suppose that scholars would have traveled south from time to time to study the ancient documents stored in Osgiliath, Minas Tirith, and Minas Ithil, all of which still stood. What was lost in the ruin of Osgiliath and the capture of Minas Ithil can only be imagined, but it must have been similar to the information lost when Fornost fell. The Dúnedain of the late Third Age were a mere shadow of themselves at the end of the first millennium. The Elves and Dúnedain probably realized fairly quickly what the Witch-king of Angmar was: a Nazgûl. It is no great stretch to imagine that some genius of Cardolan, which was likely a wealthy and prosperous kingdom due to its location, started hunting about for a means of fighting this scourge, particularly if the Witch-king was already using Morgul-knives: after all, if the process of turning someone into a wraith using an enchanted blade worked, why could not the process be reversed, and a wraith be made vulnerable to the weapons of the physical world? It is also possible that these blades were copies of weapons made in the Second Age, when the Nazgûl were first encountered by the Númenóreans, or based in part upon knowledge still intact from those days. Cardolan was most centrally located for such an effort, and if the junior kingdom was under greater threat and stress than anyplace else in Eriador (Rhudaur had already fallen to Angmar’s control), the learnéd Dúnedain of Cardolan had by far the greatest motivation to discover some means of combating their undead foe.

If you can swallow all this speculation, the second question becomes much easier. I have suggested that the folk of Cardolan went all over the West to find a solution to the problem of making the Nazgûl vulnerable to their weapons. This might have been the life-long pursuit of several learnéd men, and possibly with royal support. Bombadil was their neighbor, and they actually claimed to rule the territory that he also claimed: the Old Forest and the Barrow-downs. As long as they adopted a live-and-let-live attitude to Tom Bombadil, and they were not evil, as seems likely, they would have had some interaction with him: after all, Bombadil maintained contacts in the Shire: with Farmer Maggot for instance; and Aragorn knew him, too, indicating that he had had some conversations with Bombadil in his lifetime. It might even be that Bombadil had been consulted in the matter of overcoming the necromantic defenses of the Nazgûl: if he had, that would explain his extraordinary interest in the Black Riders when Frodo was telling about his adventures on the way to meeting Tom at Old Man Willow. And if Old Man Willow was one of the “things of evil spirit, hostile to Elves and Men, … on the watch in the Old Forest� stirred up by the Witch-king during the hunt for the Ring (Unfinished Tales, “The Hunt for the Ring�), then that would be an added impetus for Bombadil to think about how Frodo might best deal with the Nazgûl, whom he was likely to encounter again. Had someone consulted with him 700 years earlier, he would be unlikely to forget; but even if had never been consulted, were the barrow-blades of Cardolan’s exclusive manufacture, and the folk of Cardolan in contact with Tom the way Farmer Maggot was in Frodo’s day, he might be the only living creature other than the Nazgûl themselves who remembered it.

Now, as a parting thought, consider this: whether any of this speculation about where the barrow-blades was constructed is correct or not, it is quite possible that the Witch-king was unaware of the disposition of the knives custom-designed to destroy him and his eight necromantic fellows despite the fact that the wight had them in the tomb. The wight might or might not have been aware of it; and even if he were, there is no way to know that the Witch-king made the rounds to check on his undead minions once he had sent them to haunt the barrows.

This has been discussed on another thread about wether the nazgul had any free will of their own here (http://entmoot.tolkientrail.com/showthread.php?t=12074). ... i think this is the best senario with the evidence we've got, both from UT and letters, as well as lotr itself. what do you guys think.I am afraid I do not agree, but perhaps it would be best to discuss that in the other thread you reference?

[jammi567]

Now, as a parting thought, consider this: whether any of this speculation about where the barrow-blades was constructed is correct or not, it is quite possible that the Witch-king was unaware of the disposition of the knives custom-designed to destroy him and his eight necromantic fellows despite the fact that the wight had them in the tomb. The wight might or might not have been aware of it; and even if he were, there is no way to know that the Witch-king made the rounds to check on his undead minions once he had sent them to haunt the barrows.
i agree with you here, because who the hell would want to go there after hearing that the dead guard the places that that they're barried in, and that they kill anyone who enters.

[CAB]

We don't have the answer whether the nazgul knew about Tom. We don't know whether they knew about the Wight destruction before Weathertop - though it seems not, after all.
Well, we can still discuss these questions, but they no longer have any importance concerning the happenings on Weathertop.

The quote doesn't say whether Aragorn, Gandalf etc. recognized the swords.
I still think that, if they weren’t familiar with these swords (which seems pretty reasonable, after all the swords had never been used successfully before), they could have deduced their most likely purpose. Maybe, like you suggested before Gordis, they just never took the time to think about it.
Think on it. No character in ALL the story has told the hobbits: "keep your blades at hand, these are the only things really handy against a nazgul!" Why?
My first impression after reading this was that maybe no one thought that the Hobbits were capable of attacking a Nazgul, but this probably wasn’t true for Gandalf at least. I now think you are right. They probably didn’t know what the swords were meant for.
Also, from the quote in Reader's Companion, it seems very probable that the spells on the sword were NOT against all the nazgul, but against the WK alone. Have you also got this impression?
I think the swords were almost certainly made exclusively for the Witch King (since there were no other Nazgul in Angmar) but would be just as effective against the other Nazgul. The impression that I get from the quote is that the Witch King was really only concerned for himself (which in the context of that quote could make it sound like the swords would only work on him alone).

Not necessarily. They didn't know that the HOBBIT had the blade, but my hypothesis that they thought that it was Gandalf who plundered the Barrow is not disproved. Neither is it confirmed.
When we talk about a barrow being plundered in this way, we are making a lot of assumptions, even leaving alone the question of whether or not they heard about the wight before Weathertop. Did every barrow (or at least every barrow with a wight) have the anti-Nazgul blades in them? How many were in each barrow? Certainly the Nazgul didn’t have an inventory of what was in each barrow, so they couldn’t know what was removed from the one that the Hobbits were trapped in. Now, it is possible that they assumed (before Weathertop) that the wight was destroyed only to obtain a barrow-blade. But this would be a big assumption (again, pre-Weathertop) and would lessen the shock that Frodo gave them (which is an important part of the explanation of events on Weathertop).

But it seems the Wights had similar to the nazgul's protection spell on them, that made the sword shatter.
That was my feeling at first, but I don’t think so now. We seem to have forgotten (and this applies to the Nazgul “semi-invincibility� also) about the “shock� that one gets when stabbing a Nazgul (or, at least the Witch King, and probably the others). Frodo doesn’t experience this, so the spell wasn’t the same (though, I suppose it could be merely similar, as you mentioned). I think that probably Frodo didn’t pick up a mystical sword, but rather a normal one. Being very old and non-mystical, the sword probably broke due to brittleness.

I say I am sure that Mouth was unable to recognize the blades unless Sauron or a nazgul told him.

What none of them other than the Nazgûl and Bombadil seem to have recognized was that they were designed to do grievous harm to the Ringwraiths. Had Sauron closely inspected Sam’s barrow-blade himself, he might have realized this; but the way events fell out, the implication is that he did not
I agree that the Mouth would almost certainly not recognize the sword, but I think that the question of whether or not Sauron saw it and Frodo’s things is an open one. One way or the other, I doubt that Sauron would have acted differently at that point. In his mind, what was the danger of the sword? He had “forces ten times and more than ten times their match� on the scene. He had to think that all the enemy forces before his gates would be dead or prisoners by the end of the day. More importantly, the Ring (in his mind) was right in front of him, so why would he care about one measly sword that wasn’t even meant for him personally, but rather for one (or nine) of his servants?

Alcuin, I like your theory concerning the origins of the barrow-blades. Seems very reasonable. But I have to question this part:

Now, as a parting thought, consider this: whether any of this speculation about where the barrow-blades was constructed is correct or not, it is quite possible that the Witch-king was unaware of the disposition of the knives custom-designed to destroy him and his eight necromantic fellows despite the fact that the wight had them in the tomb.
Doesn’t it seem that the quote from the LOTR Readers Companion disproves this idea? Also, Gordis has theorized that the Witch King sent the wights to the barrows specifically to guard the swords. Isn’t that the best explanation for their presence there?


Well, it seems that the w-k is looking for explanations and reasons, but the "R" word just doesn't want to come to his mind; high-elves, the wise... but not the "R" word ;).
I’m not sure what you are referring to either, Landroval. Let me throw out a guess. Could the “R� word be “Religion�? We are talking about Frodo calling to Elbereth, after all.

[Alcuin]

...it is quite possible that the Witch-king was unaware of the disposition of the knives ... despite the fact that the wight had them in the tomb.

Doesn’t it seem that the quote from the LOTR Readers Companion disproves this idea? Also, Gordis has theorized that the Witch King sent the wights to the barrows specifically to guard the swords. Isn’t that the best explanation for their presence there?

CAB, I am afraid I have not read Hammond and Scully’s work, but only citations from it; though I plan to rectify my short-coming in the next several days. Until I have, I would rather not address how the Reader’s Companion might provide a response to your question. If you will be patient with me, however, I shall try to answer you when I have finished with that text.

As for the Witch-king’s sending the wights to the barrows specifically to guard the swords, I do not think that was his primary purpose, although perhaps it was a consideration.

The Kingdom of Cardolan ceased to be an independent, junior monarchy in III 1409. Its last prince died in the war that year, and Amon Sûl was also destroyed in that war, and its palantir removed to Fornost. During the war, Appendix A of Return of the King tells us,

A remnant of the faithful among the Dúnedain of Cardolan also held out in Tyrn Gorthad (the Barrowdowns), or took refuge in the Forest behind.

This passage tells us several things. First of all, there were “faithful among the Dúnedain of Cardolan�. This kind of phrasing “faithful among…� is also used concerning the Númenóreans at the end of their island kingdom, and if we combine this with Faramir’s almost off-hand remark to Frodo that “‘It is not said that evil arts were ever practiced in Gondor, or that the Nameless One was ever named in honor there…’� we might easily draw the conclusion that part of the dissension among the Dúnedain of Arnor might have come from some of the Dúnedain worshipping the Dark, as had the Black Númenóreans of old. That isn’t a certainty, of course, but in addition to the fact that of the three daughter kingdoms of Arnor, it was least well-populated by Dúnedain, it could in part explain why Rhudaur was overrun by allies of the Witch-king; it would explain why Arnor was more susceptible to being overrun and destroyed by the forces of Morgul than Gondor, where such practices were never tolerated; and it might explain some of the dissension within Arnor before its division.

But the clear text says that they “held out in Tyrn Gorthad (the Barrowdowns)â€� during the war of 1409: they were hiding out in and amongst the tombs themselves. Fornost had been overrun by the forces of Angmar, and Araphor, who became king of Arthedain when his father Arveleg was killed fighting at Weathertop, was able to defeat Angmar only with help from CÃ*rdan in Lindon. The implication is that the enemy was not cleared from Cardolan until after Fornost had been secured: in other words, the Dúnedain engaged in the kind of guerilla warfare against Angmar that their distant Edain ancestors had waged against the forces of Angband toward the end of the First Age. Bombadil was in the Forest and among the barrows, as well; but whether he made himself known is not clear.

Put yourself for a moment in the Witch-king’s position at the conclusion of the war of 1409. Amon Sûl, which posed a serious impediment to the domination of eastern Eriador, is destroyed. You can’t use it, but neither can your enemies. The palantir has eluded you, but you get another shot at it later, as well as at the palantir of Annúminas: both are now in Fornost. You have entered your enemy’s capital, killed or enslaved the inhabitants who did not escape, looted the city of whatever treasures and information (another kind of treasure) left behind, and possibly burned it as well when you were forced to leave. But you were unable to secure the southern border of Cardolan and complete an envelopment of the Dúnedain because you were unable to clear them from the barrows and the Forest. The Forest, for some reason, you cannot overrun; but the barrows, which are stone (or wood) tombs dug into the earth, represent a large number of localized fortifications that your opponents have used to deny you control of the Barrowdowns. The use of these barrows must be denied to them if you are to conquer Arthedain; otherwise, the Dúnedain will be able to bring up reinforcements from Lindon through Cardolan, or perhaps by landing them at Tharbad or marching overland from Gondor or Lórien or maybe even from Khazad-dûm.

How do you stop the Dúnedain from using the barrows as cover and make-shift fortifications? Why, you infest them with wights, of course! And after Cardolan’s population was nearly annihilated through the ravages of the Great Plague in III 1636, and they are unable to resist or repel the invasion of the tombs by the wights, you seize complete control of the formerly productive and defensible Barrowdowns, which now become your defensible positions and all but unassailable unless the Dúnedain really expend a lot of resources to dislodge and destroy the wights.

By now, fellow ’Mooters, you’ve either decided I’ve wasted a lot of your time and posting-space, or you understand where I’m headed with this: the wights are not in place to prevent the Dúnedain from retrieving the enchanted knives they have constructed to fight the Nazgûl, although that might have been a consideration, assuming that the Morgul-lord knew where these weapons were disposed. The barrows were infested with wights in order to prevent the Dúnedain from using them to fortify and secure what had once been central Arnor. In fact, what had been a series of Dúnedain strongholds now becomes a series of Morgul strongholds.

Moreover, the barrows were exceedingly ancient. The Edain had buried their lords in the oldest of the barrows in the First Age before ever they crossed the Ered Luin into Beleriand and met the Eldar. The Barrowdowns were a place of not only immense antiquity, they were revered as the place in which their forefathers lay before they became “the Edainâ€�. The Dúnedain buried their own lords and noblemen in barrows on the downs. They were outstanding scholars, and they still had the resources of the Eldar to help them remember their history; it is likely that, during the Second Age, and certainly during the Third Age, they were able to identify the tombs of some of the ancestors of Bëor the Old, lord of the First House; Marach, lord of the Third House; and possibly even some of the Haladin, the folk of the Second House. This was an important place to the Dúnedain of Arnor. Remember how hard their southern cousins must have worked to build and maintain Rath DÃ*nen and its Houses of the Dead in Minas Tirith; and in Númenor, the Kings and Queens were buried in the Noirinan, the Valley of the Tombs between the southeastern and southwestern spurs of Meneltarma. This is an echo in literature of ancient Egypt’s Valley of the Kings, and like the ancient Egyptians of the real world, like the ancient builders of New Grange in Ireland, and the barrows in sight of Stonehenge in Wiltshire, England, they remained places of special reverence: the place of the ancestors. (Stonehenge itself is not a tomb but a stone circle within a complex of stone row approaches and menhir, or standing stones, outside the circle.) Besides Stonehenge and the barrows of Wiltshire, there are barrows all over the island, especially in Hampshire, Dorset, Somerset, Shropshire, Cornwall, Norfolk, Somerset – you get the picture. There are other stone circles, portal tombs, dolmens (burial chambers), cairns (piles of stone above a tomb) – the remains of a veritable stone-age civilization. Tolkien was aware of them: so were the Dark Age writers that he studied, both in Britain and across Western Europe. These are the archetype of the barrows of the Barrowdowns. The people who lived in the places – whether in Egypt or the long-lost kingdom of Mercia (Tolkien considered himself a descendant of the Mercians: see Letter 55 and especially Letter 95) – value these ancient tombs as the resting places of their forefathers.

How the Dúnedain of Arnor must have valued their ancient tombs! It was the one thing that they possessed that preceded even their experience with the Eldar. To lose possession of these tombs, to be denied access to them as a places of refuge, and to find them desecrated by evil wights, must have been very demoralizing to the Dúnedain, especially to the few survivors in Cardolan of the Great Plague.

I have rattled on far too long. (Cheers from the sidelines as Alcuin finally stops!) But the infestation of the barrows – and their importance to the Dúnedain as tombs, as refuges, perhaps even for storage of foodstuffs and reserves and weapons for war, and certainly as places of reverence, should not be underestimated. Control of the Barrowdowns was crucial to control of central Arnor, and loss of control of the Barrowdowns has to be one of the contributing factors that led to the ultimate destruction of the state of Arnor.

‘You do not know your danger, Théoden,’ interrupted Gandalf. ‘These hobbits will sit on the edge of ruin and discuss the pleasures of the table, or the small doings of their fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers, and remoter cousins to the ninth degree, if you encourage them with undue patience…’

[jammi567]

bloody hell, you're excelent! why didn't you join earlier! :). i just have one question. how could the barrow blades that the hobbits have just be specific to the witch-king, and not to any of the other nazgul?

[CAB]

Excellent post Alcuin. :)
You do not know your danger, Théoden,’ interrupted Gandalf. ‘These hobbits will sit on the edge of ruin and discuss the pleasures of the table, or the small doings of their fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers, and remoter cousins to the ninth degree, if you encourage them with undue patience…’
What a terribly misplaced quote!:) At the bottom of one of Alcuin’s (far too rare, if you ask me) posts. Doesn’t apply at all.


I must admit that I never gave too much thought to the Witch King’s reasons for sending the wights to the barrows. It seemed to require more “strength� than the he should have had (but obviously, that isn’t true), so I looked at it from a story external point of view: Tolkien wanted Frodo to encounter a wight on the way to Rivendell and he needed a reason for the wight to be there.



I hate to go back to this now, but...
I am afraid I have not read Hammond and Scully’s work, but only citations from it; though I plan to rectify my short-coming in the next several days.
I haven’t read this book either. I was referring to the quote from it that Gordis used (in post #61 of this thread) to essentially prove her (and your) theory concerning the events on Weathertop. The quote that apparently got the thread on the other forum erased by a sore loser. In this quote we are seeing things from the Witch King’s view and the danger the sword presented is clearly a major concern for him, so it seems very unlikely that he didn’t know what it was made for.

how could the barrow blades that the hobbits have just be specific to the witch-king, and not to any of the other nazgul?
The Witch King and other Nazgul are each individuals, just like you, me, and everyone else. If I had the knowledge, I could make an “anti-jammi567" blade (of course I wouldn’t do that :) ) which would be extra effective when used against you but not against me, even though you and I are in the same category (normal human beings).

Since there were no other Nazgul in Angmar, the barrow blades were probably meant for the Witch King alone. Having said that, I would guess that the blades would have been equally effective against the other Nazgul since it is probably easier to make a weapon which is strong against a category of beings rather than against an individual. However, there are other ways to look at the issue, and I couldn’t really get into it without going on and on (and I’m not Alcuin, so it wouldn’t be as informative or interesting).

[jammi567]

so if you were going to make an "anti-jammi567" blade, how would that specifically work? would you use runes and spells, or would it be some other way?

[Gordis]

so if you were going to make an "anti-jammi567" blade, how would that specifically work? would you use runes and spells, or would it be some other way?

Hmm, where is my spell book? :D

Actually, it is a good question. Let us discuss this example, and if we agree on it, the way further will be easier.

So, Jammi, first and foremost, I will have to know your NAME. I could use your penname Jammi567, but I don't think it will work as well as your real one (and your IP number :p ).

In what I have read on magic, the connection of a person with his name (or an object with its name) is believed to be pretty strong. Many people, afraid of evil spells, kept their real names forever secret, using pseudonyms. (I may be wrong, but something of this belief may influence the custom for monks to take another name, different from their old one). - well don't kill me if I am wrong here.

Also, as there are such things as spells against broad categories of beings (Orcs, for instance, like the spell on Sting), the nature of the person to be hexed is important. So, Jammi, I would have to know whether you are an elf, maia, human, orc, nazgul, hobbit or troll. :D

Also for a spell, it wouldn't hurt to have a thing belonging to you or your pcture - that is another motive in magic fics and real-life magic practices, but I don't think I saw it in Tolkien.

Pretty difficult to hex you, Jammi, with what little I know and have. :(

Now let us take the Witch-King of Angmar and the Cardolani craftsman working on the Barrow-Downs TM blade.

What was the WK's real name? no one knew. Did they know he was a nazgul? Hardly.
App. A. ‘It was in the beginning of the reign of Malvegil of Arthedain that evil came to Arnor. For at that time the realm of Angmar arose in the North beyond the Ettenmoors. Its lands lay on both sides of the Mountains, and there were gathered many evil men, and Orcs, and other fell creatures. [The lord of that land was known as the Witch-king, but it was not known until later that he was indeed the chief of the Ringwraiths, who came north with the purpose of destroying the Dúnedain in Arnor, seeing hope in their disunion, while Gondor was strong.]’
Note these square brackets. it means the insertion comes from another source - a note on the margins of the copy of the Red Book, or a quote from a later date.
The BD blades were likely forged between 1356 and 1409. Angmar Kingdom existed since 1300. So, by 1409, the Wich-Kings reign didn't yet seem extremely long - there could be a mortal King who ruled for 100 years, if he was of Numenorean blood. Neither was he reported to be seen by his enemies in person. So, more than likely they didn't know he was a nazgul... So, no name, no knowledge of his nature, no picture, no lost kerchief... how one makes a spell?

...UNLESS someone told them - and that should be someone from Rivendell.

Note that the Cardolani guys and the Imladris Elves were allies against Angmar in the wars of 1356-1409, so some contact with Elrond was more than likely. But in this case, Elrond may have revealed not only the WK's NATURE (a nazgul), but also his REAL NAME. I argued in another thread, that whoever the Witch-King may have been in the Second Age, Elrond and Glorfindel likely knew his identity, but kept it secret - very bad PR for the Line of Elros to have the Chief nazgul among them.
Perhaps for once, seeing Cardolan in peril, Elrond revealed the necessary info - and that info, when used in the spell, made the blades REALLY deadly. That may explain, why they didn't affect the other nazgul to just the same extent - their names remained unknown and were not used.

Counter-argument would be that Elrond apparently didn't know about the blades. Perhaps the Cardolani didn't have time to show him the blades themselves, before they were all destroyed?

Or, perhaps they came by the info about the WK's identity from another source? Or they made a wild guess (much as we are guessing now), and just happened to be right?

What do you think?

(the rest later...)

[jammi567]

Hmm, where is my spell book? :D

Actually, it is a good question. Let us discuss this example, and if we agree on it, the way further will be easier.

So, Jammi, first and foremost, I will have to know your NAME. I could use your penname Jammi567, but I don't think it will work as well as your real one (and your IP number :p ).

In what I have read on magic, the connection of a person with his name (or an object with its name) is believed to be pretty strong. Many people, afraid of evil spells, kept their real names forever secret, using pseudonyms. (I may be wrong, but something of this belief may influence the custom for monks to take another name, different from their old one). - well don't kill me if I am wrong here.

Also, as there are such things as spells against broad categories of beings (Orcs, for instance, like the spell on Sting), the nature of the person to be hexed is important. So, Jammi, I would have to know whether you are an elf, maia, human, orc, nazgul, hobbit or troll. :D

Also for a spell, it wouldn't hurt to have a thing belonging to you or your pcture - that is another motive in magic fics and real-life magic practices, but I don't think I saw it in Tolkien.

Pretty difficult to hex you, Jammi, with what little I know and have. :(
i never knew that if you know someones real name that they could have power over you.

Now let us take the Witch-King of Angmar and the Cardolani craftsman working on the Barrow-Downs TM blade.

What was the WK's real name? no one knew. Did they know he was a nazgul? Hardly.

Note these square brackets. it means the insertion comes from another source - a note on the margins of the copy of the Red Book, or a quote from a later date.
The BD blades were likely forged between 1356 and 1409. Angmar Kingdom existed since 1300. So, by 1409, the Wich-Kings reign didn't yet seem extremely long - there could be a mortal King who ruled for 100 years, if he was of Numenorean blood. Neither was he reported to be seen by his enemies in person. So, more than likely they didn't know he was a nazgul... So, no name, no knowledge of his nature, no picture, no lost kerchief... how one makes a spell?

...UNLESS someone told them - and that should be someone from Rivendell.

Note that the Cardolani guys and the Imladris Elves were allies against Angmar in the wars of 1356-1409, so some contact with Elrond was more than likely. But in this case, Elrond may have revealed not only the WK's NATURE (a nazgul), but also his REAL NAME. I argued in another thread, that whoever the Witch-King may have been in the Second Age, Elrond and Glorfindel likely knew his identity, but kept it secret - very bad PR for the Line of Elros to have the Chief nazgul among them.
Perhaps for once, seeing Cardolan in peril, Elrond revealed the necessary info - and that info, when used in the spell, made the blades REALLY deadly. That may explain, why they didn't affect the other nazgul to just the same extent - their names remained unknown and were not used.

Counter-argument would be that Elrond apparently didn't know about the blades. Perhaps the Cardolani didn't have time to show him the blades themselves, before they were all destroyed?

Or, perhaps they came by the info about the WK's identity from another source? Or they made a wild guess (much as we are guessing now), and just happened to be right?

What do you think?

(the rest later...)
i like your theory and i agree about how that could work. but one question. if they blades were for just the witch king, where would Elrond get the name from? we have no indication of the human kings being famous in life, and by the time they were famous (as nazgul) i have the feeling that the name would've been lost, as people feared to use it or write it down anywhere. so by the time they started to make the blades, it would've been forgotten. therefore, this is why i believe that they were made for all the nazgul, and not just the witch-king. this is why two of the nazgul halted their advance upon frodo. they knew that the blade he carried could affect them, not just their leader (the witch-king). what do you think.

[tolkienfan]

Well, when Treebeard first meets Merry and Pippin he talks about being careful not to tell just anyone your real name. IIRC

[Butterbeer]

only because ... many mortals... died of old age in the attempt IIRC..

[jammi567]

:confused: :confused:

[Butterbeer]

boy you make me laugh! (in a good way :) ) jammi!... :)

...er... long winded entish speak ... entish names being a story of days, weeks, months, years, centuries, ages of the world an' all !

best, BB

[jammi567]

oh, i see.

[Butterbeer]

;)

it's like drinking whisky ....



... an aquired taste ;)


Best BB

[Gordis]

Good observation - this goes against both UT and the letters; it almost calls into question just how "canonical" that quote is - seeing that it was written before the end of Lotr.
Uhm, I may be mistaken, I have to buy and read the book first, but I have got an impression that the notes were written on the margins of the published copy of the LOTR. We shall know soon for certain.

The Nazgûl had no “will� of their own in matters concerning their instructions from Sauron. To the best of their abilities, they would carry out not only the letter of his instructions, but the malign spirit of them, too. That they could still make mistakes in these matters is demonstrated by the incident in “The Hunt for the Ring� in which the Nine wander about the Vales of Anduin, hunting fruitlessly for “Shire�, when it was on the other side of the Misty Mountains.

I think the best proof of their free will is the fact that Sauron threatened them after their unsuccessful trip up and down Anduin.
If they were zombies, then threatening them was like threatening to send your car to a junk-yard.(Olmer's words). But really, I think Sauron grew so angry this time, not only because of mistakes (after all they searched where he told them to search), but for lagging, wasting precious time, showing little initiative, being little enthusiastic, in general. And that shows they had more free will that one may suppose.

believe Sauron had to be focusing on them to be able to control them. so when they were serching for the Ring aroung Anduin, he was throrughly serching there because that's where he know it last was. once he realized it wasn't there, and gollum said 'shire' and 'baggins', he let the nazgul have their free will back because a) he had other things to focus on, and b) they're his most loyal servents, and so should be able to find it quickly and efficiantly. of course, once they got their will back, they also recovered their former fears etc. i think this is the best senario with the evidence we've got, both from UT and letters, as well as lotr itself. I think it is wrong. Had they NO free will when they were searching in the Vales, WHY was Sauron angry at them later??? We know, there was no direct contact between Sauron and his nazgul: to send them directives, he had to use messengers (UT). So, they had their free will all right all the time.

I would not advise to rely to much on "no will of their own etc... " It was ONLY about the ownership of the One Ring. No nazgul was able to claim it, and had they found it, they would have brought it to Sauron. But does it mean they were enthusiastic and eager being sent like a small commando force into the wilderness, being obliged to travel for months, take care of their horses themselves, cross rivers, face dangers, walked undressed for 17 days, etc. etc. and all this hardship to find the ring for the Fool-Who-Has-Lost-It?? And the result would have led even to their worse enslavement?
The new quote shows that they were NOT enthusiastic and eager - they only feared Sauron.

As an aside here, I believe that Christopher Tolkien has wondered in print why the Witch-king would have been unfamiliar with “Shire� and its locale. I think the answer is fairly straightforward. “Shire� was in fact the old royal demesne of the Kings of Arnor, given over to the halflings after it had become depopulated of Dúnedain with stipulations the hobbits continued to follow for 1400 years, 1000 of which were without a sitting king in Fornost. Had the Nazgûl left with instructions to find the old royal demesne, they would have headed straight for it: the Witch-king knew where that was. But “Shire� was a new one: he simply did not recognize the name, nor did he understand the association between the two.
I always wondered about the same thing.
I still think it s a gaping plothole in the UT. The WK may have not known the name "Shire", as it was local, but still "the land of the Halflings" should have rang a bell in his memory. Halflings are something of a curiosity. He had to know where lots of Halflings lived - his own troops have overrun the land in 1974, and he WAS King at Fornost, however briefly, so he had to think about supplies, taxes, etc.

Aragorn recognized the general effect against the "Mordor" - there is also a nice quote about Ugluk throwing the swords away as if they burned him . Now, with no runes but only graphical elements but still correctly identified - it is most likely that (at least) the swords of that design carry those anti-Mordor spells.
Anti-orcs effect was a side-effect or an extra spell laid on the blades. As I said many times, Aragorn failed to see the MAIN one - anti-Witch-King.

In one of the drafts, … Gandalf states that "… I must be told about that curious sword of yours, and how you knew the name of Elbereth".
I think this "curious" word, and the desire to ask the hobbit about the blades shows that Gandalf DID examine the blades and had NO IDEA what spell was on them. Come on, Gandalf (the wielder of Narya) had been peering at the Ruling Ring and didn't recognize EVEN that one!

There was plenty of time between the two battles - not to mention that the incident at the tower requested an even more special attention.
There are several possible scenarios leading to different conclusions here.

1. Suppose Sauron had no time to look at the blade attentively, if at all, and relied on the Mouth's report. The Mouth, examining the blade, was no wiser than Aragorn or Denethor, so he had no idea what he was letting his enemies take.
2. Suppose Sauron looked AND RECOGNIZED the spell on the blade. Then, the fact that he didn't destroy it, but gave it to the Mouth to show to Gandalf and Co., shows that he wasn't too concerned about the blade's safety. And for me, that means only one thing: the blade was deadly ONLY for the WITCH-KING (who was already killed), not for the other 8 nazgul - the same impression that I got from the new Tolkien quote I posted. And [CAB]was of the same opinion:

I think the swords were almost certainly made exclusively for the Witch King (since there were no other Nazgul in Angmar) but would be just as effective against the other Nazgul. The impression that I get from the quote is that the Witch King was really only concerned for himself (which in the context of that quote could make it sound like the swords would only work on him alone).


] If that is true, I would like to reffer to a previous point: if these swords are the only one deadly to them, why would they leave them around, with guys like Glorfy and Gandie walking around?
The Wights repelled human grave robbers. G&G were not much interested in plundering the revered graves of the ancestors of the Edain, were they? G&G probably had no idea that there were potent swords in the Barrows.
Look, Glorfindel was MUCH concerned about Earnur's wish to go fight the WK. But he didn't tell him that he had to obtain a special sword to have any hope to win.
Neither did he go to the Barrow to fetch some swords for his allies before Fornost battle. And he had plenty of time to do it - about 350 years. NO, he didn't know. Neither did Erlond. I am sure of it.

Why didn't the nazgul destroy the blades? We know the WK broke one - by magic. But if there were dozens? Hundreds?
Did every barrow (or at least every barrow with a wight) have the anti-Nazgul blades in them? How many were in each barrow?
Not every barrow had the blades, as there were quite ancient ones as well, but some recent ones might have held lots of blades.

If you can swallow all this speculation, the second question becomes much easier. I have suggested that the folk of Cardolan went all over the West to find a solution to the problem of making the Nazgûl vulnerable to their weapons. This might have been the life-long pursuit of several learnéd men, and possibly with royal support.
Excellent speculation, Alcuin, I agree that central location of Cardolan must have meant a lot. ALSO they had Tharbad - one of the oldest Numenorean cities in ME, predating the Downfall, and even older Lond Daer Ened - Vinyalonde. There should have been libraries with ME chronicles of the Second Age still intact. A scholar from Cardolan might have dig out the know-how of making enchanted anti-nazgul swords as well as the IDENTITY of the Lord of the Nazgul. I believe they had his real name and used it in the spell.
.
(Tom) might be the only living creature other than the Nazgûl themselves who remembered (the Barrow-Downs blades)
Exactly.

We seem to have forgotten (and this applies to the Nazgul “semi-invincibility� also) about the “shock� that one gets when stabbing a Nazgul (or, at least the Witch King, and probably the others). Frodo doesn’t experience this, so the spell wasn’t the same (though, I suppose it could be merely similar, as you mentioned). I think that probably Frodo didn’t pick up a mystical sword, but rather a normal one. Being very old and non-mystical, the sword probably broke due to brittleness.
ALL swords shatter that pierce a nazgul. The fact that the sword shattered on a wight doesn't tell us anything about the blade- only about a similar spell. As for the Black Shadow - it was specific for nazgul and doesn't even necessitate a direct contact with them - Faramir got it without hitting any.

This passage tells us several things. First of all, there were “faithful among the Dúnedain of Cardolan�. This kind of phrasing “faithful among…� is also used concerning the Númenóreans at the end of their island kingdom, and if we combine this with Faramir’s almost off-hand remark to Frodo that “‘It is not said that evil arts were ever practiced in Gondor, or that the Nameless One was ever named in honor there…’� we might easily draw the conclusion that part of the dissension among the Dúnedain of Arnor might have come from some of the Dúnedain worshipping the Dark, as had the Black Númenóreans of old.
My, Alcuin, I think nobody EVER has commented about "faithful" in this quote. I think you are dead right here.

As well as you are right about 2 reasons for sending the Wights to Tyrn Gorthad (to secure the Barrows against the remaining Dunedain and to deal a blow to their pride. But the third reason must have been the blades kept there: the Witch-King knew it - see Roccondil's quote
Readers Companion: . But above all the timid and terrified Bearer had resisted him, had dared to strike at him with an enchanted sword made by his own enemies long ago for his destruction. Narrowly it had missed him. How he had come by it – save in the Barrows of Cardolan. Then he was in some way mightier than the Barrow-wight; and he called on Elbereth, a name of terror to the Nazgûl. He was then in league with the High Elves of the Havens.

[Butterbeer]

c'mon Alcuin post something!! ;)

[Alcuin]

Elrond may have revealed not only the WK's NATURE (a nazgul), but also his REAL NAME. I argued in another thread, that whoever the Witch-King may have been in the Second Age, Elrond and Glorfindel likely knew his identity, but kept it secret - very bad PR for the Line of Elros to have the Chief nazgul among them.

Hm. I had never thought about that, Gordis. To determine who this was, the Wise would have had to consider who had lived “beyond his years,� as it were: perhaps an uncle to Tar-Atanamir, who first refused to lay down his life.

Imagine this: “I’m, tellin’ you, Atanamir, if you fight it – fight death, and you do it with everything you’ve got, You’ll win out! Look at me – I’m you father’s brother, and I should be dead, but I’m not. And do you know why? Because I refused to die…� and Tar-Atanamir believed him, and rebelled. The embassy from Valinor urging the Númenóreans not to try to live forever, and to respect the Ban of the Valar, was sent during Tar-Atanamir’s reign. If there were a well-known, long-lived but “un-aged� Númenórean nobleman (or two… or three…) in Tar-Atanamir’s court, hm? do you suppose those might have been the three Númenórean of the Nine? And how exactly would anyone know that three of the Nine were Númenóreans anyhow? “...it is said that among those whom [Sauron] ensnared with the Nine Rings three were great lords of Númenórean race� – Silmarillion, “Akallabêth�

There is no textual evidence for the Wise knowing the identity of the three Númenórean Úlairi except for the fact that they knew they were Númenórean – and by the fact that they knew the name of Khamûl, who was an Easterling. If they knew Khamûl’s name, is it such a stretch that they would know the names of some of the others?

But there is yet another possibility that you have not considered. We have still not discussed Tom Bombadil, who seemed awfully interested in the Black Riders when Frodo and his companions recounted to him their adventure to that point, and who himself selected the long, leaf-shaped knives – and nothing else (except the brooch for Goldberry) – for the hobbits from the wraith’s usurped hoard. Unfortunately, falling back on the argument that, “Bombadil knew, and he told the Dúnedain smiths,� is not a good argument: we know very little about Bombadil and what he knew.

I suppose the best bet is to assume that during the Second Age, the Númenóreans were able to determine that three of their own had been ensnared by Sauron to become Nazgûl. It is entirely possible that they did not know how this was accomplished: there is no evidence that Ar-Pharazôn, for instance, knew about the Ruling Ring (or he would have coveted it). (There is good reasoning the Númenóreans were unaware of the existence of the Rings of Power during the Second Age: see Michael Martinez’ essay, “Shhh! It's a Secret Ring! (http://www.merp.com/essays/MichaelMartinez/michaelmartinezsuite101essay71)�) The Nazgûl first appeared around II 2251, during the reign of Tar-Ancalimon, son of Tar-Atanamir. (Appendix B, “The Tale of Years�, says that Tar-Atanamir “takes the scepter� that year; more reliable are probably the dates in “The Line of Elros� in Unfinished Tales.) They would have had the best opportunity to identify the three Dúnedain who fell to Sauron’s schemes. If they were counselors of the king, and they realized that one of the Nazgûl was of royal blood and close to the king’s forefathers, they had every good reason to hide the fact.

What was the WK's real name? no one knew. Did they know he was a nazgul? Hardly.App. A. ‘It was in the beginning of the reign of Malvegil of Arthedain that evil came to Arnor. For at that time the realm of Angmar arose in the North beyond the Ettenmoors. Its lands lay on both sides of the Mountains, and there were gathered many evil men, and Orcs, and other fell creatures. [The lord of that land was known as the Witch-king, but it was not known until later that he was indeed the chief of the Ringwraiths, who came north with the purpose of destroying the Dúnedain in Arnor, seeing hope in their disunion, while Gondor was strong.]’ I think I’d like to argue here that Elrond, CÃ*rdan, and Glorfindel, who had all participated in the War of the Last Alliance (assuming Glorfindel arrive in the Second Age) and were “in the know,â€� as well as the rulers and sages of Arnor and Gondor, had a reasonably good chance of knowing who the three Númenórean Nazgûl were. Again, they knew Khamûl’s name, which doesn’t prove anything, but it might be easier to get the name of a Dúnadan than of an Easterling in these circumstances. And what did the Nazgûl call one another? (“Hey, Number Four! Have you seen Number Six?â€� “Yeah, he had to do a number two.â€� “Ooh, that’s disgusting!â€� And the smell…)

But your quote, Gordis, indicates that at least at first, they did not even realize this was a Nazgûl. Did they find a lock of his hair, cut off, perhaps, in battle? Suppose it took 50, 60 years to determine that the Witch-king was a Nazgûl. Would that be long enough to satisfy the statement that, “it was not known until later that he was indeed the chief of the Ringwraiths,� with the proviso that they only knew he was in fact a Ringwraith without knowing which one? And no matter how they learned the name – from Elrond, old records of their own, or Rumpelstiltskin – they then knew who and what he was.

-|-

Added in an edit:

A scholar from Cardolan might have dig out the know-how of making enchanted anti-nazgul swords as well as the IDENTITY of the Lord of the Nazgul. I believe they had his real name and used it in the spell.

I had never thought of that.

[Butterbeer]

so much for the concise summary heh guys?

so .... i gotta go read all this heh to join in on the best gig at the moot in many many months?

ok ... :rolleyes: :)


Good debate btw, BB ...been a while since we had a good one!

best, BB

[Gordis]

if they blades were for just the witch king, where would Elrond get the name from? we have no indication of the human kings being famous in life, and by the time they were famous (as nazgul) i have the feeling that the name would've been lost...
Oh no, Jammi, they were quite famous in their life time.

Silm:Men proved easier to ensnare. Those who used the Nine Rings became mighty in their day, kings, sorcerers, and warriors of old. They obtained glory and great wealth, yet it turned to their undoing. They had, as it seemed, unending life, yet life became unendurable to them. They could walk, if they would, unseen by all eyes in this world beneath the sun, and they could see things in worlds invisible to mortal men; but too often they beheld only the phantoms and delusions of Sauron. And one by one, sooner or later, according to their native strength and to the good or evil of their wills in the beginning, they fell under the thraldom of the ring that they bore and under the domination of the One, which was Sauron's. And they became for ever invisible save to him that wore the Ruling Ring, and they entered into the realm of shadows. The Nazgûl were they, the Ringwraiths, the Enemy's most terrible servants; darkness went with them, and they cried with the voices of death.
So
1 They became mighty (those who were not already mighty, and it is reasonable to believe that Sauron tended to give his Rings to mighty ones - kings and princes- not stable boys).
2.they got "enending life"
3 They got the ability to enter the Spirit world and do magic
4 And only then, " one by one, sooner or later" they became wraiths.

Now, Alcuin can tell the story better, but there are ALL reasons to believe that the Witch-King was one of the Royal family of Numenor (a Prince, according to Alcuin, or even a King, according to Olmer).

ANYWAY the Witch King most likely was Elrond's relative, descendant of his brother Elros, King of Numenor, and a MUCH closer relative than Aragorn and even Elendil.

[jammi567]

yes, but where and/or where would they have had chance to learn their real names. if you look at post 83 (mine), i give my reasons why it's much more likely, in fact certain, that the blades were anti-nazgul, not just anti-witchking.

[Butterbeer]

Gor:but there are ALL reasons to believe that the Witch-King was one of the Royal family of Numenor (a Prince, according to Alcuin, or even a King, according to Olmer).

is he thus potentially a rightful heir?


..what if he got control of a Palantir, such as the one in Isengard? would he be able to claim the right to it over sauron? (forgetting all the rings / Sauron stuff as an aside for a moment? )

heh?

[Alcuin]

Alcuin can tell the story better, but there are ALL reasons to believe that the Witch-King was one of the Royal family of Numenor (a Prince, according to Alcuin, or even a King, according to Olmer). I wrote an essay on this, “Origins of the Nazgûl and the Downfall of Númenor (http://www.zarkanya.net/Tolkien/origins_of_Nazgul.htm)�.

[Alcuin]

Gor:

is he thus potentially a rightful heir?


..what if he got control of a Palantir, such as the one in Isengard? would he be able to claim the right to it over sauron? ...No, those were a gift to Elendil, who was the heir of the Lords of Andúnië. The Witch-king was from the House of Elros.

But I suspect he saw himself as a “rightful heir,� and that he probably believed he was better suited to be the ruler of the exiled Númenóreans than the House of Elendil. His status as a potential king whose elder brother became king instead might have been one of the ingredients in his downfall.

[Butterbeer]

Alcuin:

There is no textual evidence for the Wise knowing the identity of the three Númenórean Úlairi except for the fact that they knew they were Númenórean



Then just what prey Alcuin are we here for if not to discuss this?

Even historians have to have ideas and make shapes out of ideas, events and such known knowledge as is available ...


... how are we different?

best, BB :)

[jammi567]

very good point butterbeer, and in fact, that's what we've been mainly doing throught the majority of this thread. :)

[Butterbeer]

No, those were a gift to Elendil, who was the heir of the Lords of Andúnië. The Witch-king was from the House of Elros.


evidence for this? (just curious how you are SO sure...)

best, BB ;) :)

[Alcuin]

Our prey, Butterbeer…? Well, we are on a hunt, aren’t we? “The Hunt for the Nazgûl Who Hunted the Ring�?

An historian, however, must back up his speculation with logic, reason, and evidence. Unless we can find more material from Tolkien – and one of Gordis’ triumphs is the quote found Hammond by Scully – we are still speculating.
-|-
Edit - posts are coming so fast, it’s hard to keep up...
evidence for this? (just curious how you are SO sure...)

best, BB ;) :)
Now, now. You are forgetting your basic LoTR. Two Towers, “The Palantir�:

Aragorn [said,] ‘There is one who may claim it by right. For this assuredly is the palantir of Orthanc from the treasury of Elendil, set here by the Kings of Gondor. Now my hour draws near. I will take it.’
Gandalf looked at Aragorn, and then, to the surprise of the others, he lifted the covered Stone, and bowed as he presented it.
‘Receive it, lord!’ he said: ‘in earnest of other things that shall be given back. …

Unfinished Tales, “The PalantÃ*riâ€�:

These Stones were an inalienable gift to Elendil and his heirs, to whom alone they belonged by right

(So who gave Elrond permission to take the stone from the Tower Hills back into the West? Aragorn?)

[Gordis]

Alcuin, I haven't thought about Tom spilling the secret of the WK identity out to Men of Cardolan...

Possible, but would he know or even be interested in the Mannish sorcery such as enspelled blade-making


I think I’d like to argue here that Elrond, CÃ*rdan, and Glorfindel, who had all participated in the War of the Last Alliance (assuming Glorfindel arrive in the Second Age) and were “in the know,â€� as well as the rulers and sages of Arnor and Gondor, had a reasonably good chance of knowing who the three Númenórean Nazgûl were.
I am SURE all the Wise DID know the identity of the three Numenoreans. Elrond probably never let the secret out, not even to the rulers of Arnor.

But what about Glorfindel?
By the way, I even argued at length that Glorfy must have been PERSONALLY acquainted with the Witch-King back in the Second Age, when they fought side by side in the War of 1697-1700 against Sauron. We have no data, but the timeline fits nicely.

One reading the LOTR and Appendices gets a feeling that the WK and Glorfy are connected somehow.

Why would Glorfindel have a prophetic vision about the fate of a complete stranger?
Why did the WK run away when seing Glorfy?
More importantly why hadn't Glorfindel attempted to follow the Witch King after the battle of Fornost to get rid of him himself? He was no Man ...

[Butterbeer]

with respect Alcuin, .. and may i say i am prepared to provisionallly give it here gladly ;) ...

you either miss the nuances of my point or try to fob me off on a funny side-track ... :)

my point is there is a FINITE wealth of evidential Tolkien ...after all he was mortal and died ...

but his work lives on to some small degree here with us ... if we say that there can be no debate about his living works without solid historical fact ... then why debate?

The point, to me, here, is that it is open for interpretation ... simply because Tolkien himself was continually revising and trying to fathom and create a fuller, more detailed more coherrent and visceral world for us all.

what do we do here?

if not continue that tradition and respect his life's work with thought and questions and theories ... in a way he would be immortally proud of?

[Butterbeer]

Our prey, Butterbeer…? Well, we are on a hunt, aren’t we? “The Hunt for the Nazgûl Who Hunted the Ring�?

An historian, however, must back up his speculation with logic, reason, and evidence. Unless we can find more material from Tolkien – and one of Gordis’ triumphs is the quote found Hammond by Scully – we are still speculating.
-|-
Edit - posts are coming so fast, it’s hard to keep up...

Now, now. You are forgetting your basic LoTR. Two Towers, “The Palantir�:

Unfinished Tales, “The PalantÃ*riâ€�:

(So who gave Elrond permission to take the stone from the Tower Hills back into the West? Aragorn?)

I forget nothing. But what means this?

You claim now that Aragorn knew beyond the wise the identity of the Witch King?

Else, it is clearly meaningless.

best, BB

[Alcuin]

But what about Glorfindel?
By the way, I even argued at length that Glorfy must have been PERSONALLY acquainted with the Witch-King back in the Second Age, when they fought side by side in the War of 1697-1700 against Sauron. We have no data, but the timeline fits nicely.

One reading the LOTR and Appendices gets a feeling that the WK and Glorfy are connected somehow.

Why would Glorfindel have a prophetic vision about the fate of a complete stranger?
Why did the WK run away when seing Glorfy?
More importantly why hadn't Glorfindel attempted to follow the Witch King after the battle of Fornost to get rid of him himself? He was no Man ...
Yes, that makes sense. They could have been friends and comrades at one point. It would explain why the Witch-king fled from Glorfindel, it would explain why Glorfindel would not follow him, and it would explain why he had so much insight into his ultimate demise: Glorfindel saw ahead for him in the same way that Aragorn saw ahead for Elrond (“ ‘…Lo! Master Elrond, the years of your abiding run short at last…’�) and for Gandalf at the entrance to Moria…

[Alcuin]

You claim now that Aragorn knew beyond the wise the identity of the Witch King?

Else, it is clearly meaningless.

best, BB
I have made no such claim. If by error I have made this claim, I hastily withdraw it! Elrond and the Wise, perhaps, knew his identity; and maybe the Men of the West at the end of the Second Age; but I have made no such claim for Aragorn. I am prepared to accept the notion of Gordis that Glorfindel knew him: that makes sense to me, even without further proof, because in my opinion, it deepens and enriches the tale. But I do not believe I have made any claim that Aragorn knew the identity of the Witch-king.

[Gordis]

Yes, that makes sense. They could have been friends and comrades at one point. It would explain why the Witch-king fled from Glorfindel, it would explain why Glorfindel would not follow him, and it would explain why he had so much insight into his ultimate demise: Glorfindel saw ahead for him in the same way that Aragorn saw ahead for Elrond (“ ‘…Lo! Master Elrond, the years of your abiding run short at last…’�) and for Gandalf at the entrance to Moria…
Exactly, people tend to make prophesies about kin, or friends, or beloved, but not about complete strangers.

Now, perhaps, to protect himself against magic, the WK himself tried to keep his real name secret. Seing Glorfindel, he may have been dismayed ALSO because Glorfindel was able to recognise him and tell his name to others.

I think, the Dunedain and the Wise first learned he was A nazgul, but didn't know which one... Then the complete certainty came at Fornost.

[Butterbeer]

post #102 ref: the heir of the palantir question and your 'evidence' that the WK was not / could not be .... this 'theory' subsequently supported by on a quote from Aragorn in the Two towers ... which, since you now withdraw it as useless evidence is clearly not a valid point.

best, BB

[jammi567]

correct me if i'm wrong on this, but i don't think an elf re-incarnative, having lived in valinor for however long, would willingly want to join a mortal army, even if their king did practice sorcery. i mean, in tolkiens world, i believe that that would make him look pathetic, especially in the eyes of gil-galad.

[Gordis]

The quote Alcuin posted proves that Palantiri belonged to the Line of Elendil.
Now the Witch kimg was not a descendant of Elendil (for obvious reasons).
Therefore he had no right to the Palantiri and no rightful claim to Arnor& Gondor founded by Elendil anf his heirs.

But of course, being of the main line of Elros, he considered himself heir to the Kings of Numenor and claimed the kingship of all the Numenoreans in exile, Dunedain included.

As I said, regarding the kingship, it is an impossible question from the Real Life POV : suppose Charlemagne's wraith came to claim the throne of France from Louis XiV? Who has more right???

[Alcuin]

Exactly, people tend to make prophesies about kin, or friends, or beloved, but not about complete strangers.

Now, perhaps, to protect himself against magic, the WK himself tried to keep his real name secret. Seing Glorfindel, he may have been dismayed ALSO because Glorfindel was able to recognise him and tell his name to others.

I think, the Dunedain and the Wise first learned he was A nazgul, but didn't know which one... Then the complete certainty came at Fornost.
The Wise must have realized soon after Dol Guldur arose about III 1000 that the Nazgûl were active again. Although “Appendix A� would imply that the Dúnedain did not know about the Nazgûl until after the Great Plague in 1636, I think that is only in regard to the Dúnedain of Gondor, for it then says, “in the days of Eärnil they made their first stroke,� and took Minas Ithil: the Wise and the Dúnedain of Arnor must already have been aware of the Witch-king’s nature; and surely Galadriel was not deceived about the presence of Nazgûl in Dol Guldur; but perhaps I am wrong, and all these things did not come to light until after the fall of Minas Ithil. That would be the strictest interpretation; but I don’t think I am in agreement with the strictest interpretation here.

[Butterbeer]

well, jammi on the logic you put forth, consider that a 'correct me' ! ;)

best BB :)

[Butterbeer]

The quote Alcuin posted proves that Palantiri belonged to the Line of Elendil.
Now the Witch kimg was not a descendant of Elendil (for obvious reasons).
Therefore he had no right to the Palantiri and no rightful claim to Arnor& Gondor founded by Elendil anf his heirs.

But of course, being of the main line of Elros, he considered himself heir to the Kings of Numenor and claimed the kingship of all the Numenoreans in exile, Dunedain included.

As I said, regarding the kingship, it is an impossible question from the Real Life POV : suppose Charlemagne's wraith came to claim the throne of France from Louis XiV? Who has more right???

But Gor does then not the line of whom we think the WK is, not go beyond in lineage in terms of rights to the Kingship beyond any claim of Elendil prior to the massacre of Numenor innocent and guilty alike?

(correct me if i am wrong but have you not yourself not argued this very thing elsewhere?)

best, BB

[Gordis]

correct me if i'm wrong on this, but i don't think an elf re-incarnative, having lived in valinor for however long, would willingly want to join a mortal army, even if their king did practice sorcery. i mean, in tolkiens world, i believe that that would make him look pathetic, especially in the eyes of gil-galad.
Jammi, you really have to read the Unfinished Tales.

in SA 1695 Sauron attacked Celebrimbor, sacked Hollin, took the Rings and overrun Eriador, beseiging Elrond in Imladris and Gil-Galad in Lindon.
Glorfindel was said to come to ME from Valinor via Numenor, on a Numenorean ship. A great fleet was sent from Numenor to aid Gil-Galad in 1697 SA. Most likely, Glorfindel came then, to aid Elves in ME attacked by Sauron. As for the Witch-King, it is very likely he was in this fleet, maybe even was the head of the Numenorean army. It was certainly BEFORE he got the Ring.

[Alcuin]

post #102 ref: the heir of the palantir question and your 'evidence' that the WK was not / could not be .... this 'theory' subsequently supported by on a quote from Aragorn in the Two towers ... which, since you now withdraw it as useless evidence is clearly not a valid point.

best, BB
WHOA! Post #102 regards the ownership of the palantÃ*ri. The Witch-king was no descendant of Elendil, that is clear: and “the stones were an inalienable gift to Elendil and his heirs.â€� That is why Aragorn was able to wrest control of the Orthanc-stone from Sauron: he was the rightful Heir of Elendil, and so rightfully High-King of the Númenóreans and king of both Arnor and Gondor. I stand by that post.

That says nothing about whether the Witch-king was really “Elvis son of Tar-Minastir, Prince of Armenelos� and Aragorn did or did not know it. You seem to think I had made that claim, and I have not, and I do not now.

I don’t understand what you are saying, Butterbeer. I can’t see the connection between being the rightful Heir of Elendil, thereby having claim to an “inalienable gift� made to your forefather, and knowing the identity of the Witch-king. Is this a misunderstanding, or can you fill in the missing pieces?

[jammi567]

Jammi, you really have to read the Unfinished Tales.
Ah, Gordis, i have read it three times, but i've had so much on my mind lately (GCSE's for the past two years), that it practically drove everything to do with tolkein out of my head, so i may be hazy or forgettable of most things. :)

[Butterbeer]

just to clarify .... does it not go with everything Tolkien everwrote in terms of Kingship and rights and lineage and royalty as an englishman that were the WK the true heir prior to Elendil post the massacre of the west on Numenor, that in the spirit and law of both the world created by JRR and his thoughts, that IF the WK is potentially the true King, then he would be able to master BY RIGHT the palantir???

[Butterbeer]

WHOA! Post #102 regards the ownership of the palantÃ*ri. The Witch-king was no descendant of Elendil, that is clear: and “the stones were an inalienable gift to Elendil and his heirs.â€� That is why Aragorn was able to wrest control of the Orthanc-stone from Sauron: he was the rightful Heir of Elendil, and so rightfully High-King of the Númenóreans and king of both Arnor and Gondor. I stand by that post.

That says nothing about whether the Witch-king was really “Elvis son of Tar-Minastir, Prince of Armenelos� and Aragorn did or did not know it. You seem to think I had made that claim, and I have not, and I do not now.

I don’t understand what you are saying, Butterbeer. I can’t see the connection between being the rightful Heir of Elendil, thereby having claim to an “inalienable gift� made to your forefather, and knowing the identity of the Witch-king. Is this a misunderstanding, or can you fill in the missing pieces?


you seem fixxated on Elendil .. is not the point that he had no true right to the throne? The question is DID as GOR thinks the WK have that right?

best BB :)

[Gordis]

But Gor does then not the line of whom we think the WK is, not go beyond in lineage in terms of rights to the Kingship beyond any claim of Elendil prior to the massacre of Numenor innocent and guilty alike?

(correct me if i am wrong but have you not yourself not argued this very thing elsewhere?)

best, BB
Aragorn he was the rightful Heir of Elendil, and so rightfully High-King of the Númenóreans and king of both Arnor and Gondor. I stand by that post.

It is like a question, which was first: a hen or an egg...

I think the WK had good reasons to consider himself the Rightful King of Numenoreans. I believe, the Black Numenoreans, if they knew who the WK was, certainly accepted his claim.
But Gondor and Arnor were founded later, by Elendil, and therefore belonged to his sons and their sons.

So... well I don't know. Difficult legal issue.

[Alcuin]

But Gor does then not the line of whom we think the WK is, not go beyond in lineage in terms of rights to the Kingship beyond any claim of Elendil prior to the massacre of Numenor innocent and guilty alike?

(correct me if i am wrong but have you not yourself not argued this very thing elsewhere?)

best, BB
The Lords of Andúnië were the descendents of Silmariën, the eldest child of Tar-Elendil, the fourth king of Númenor; and had the law of first-born regardless of sex that Tar-Aldarion put in place so that his daughter might become the first Ruling Queen been in effect, the House of Valandil, first Lord of Andúnië, would have been the ruling house. In fact, there is some textual evidence that, at least at one point, Tolkien made Elendil’s elder brother the betrothed of MÃ*riel, daughter of Tar-Palantir; in this telling, the brother dies without explanation and Pharazôn married MÃ*riel, his first cousin, and made himself king.

All I am suggesting is that the Witch-king saw himself as a king. Had he been an ambitious prince whose brother became king (as I believe he was), that might have made him more susceptible to becoming ensnared by a Ring of Power. It would explain his hatred for the House of Elendil, in particular.

[jammi567]

wow, new entmoot record of 48 posts in one day, probally only beaten by the teacup cafe. :)

[Butterbeer]

Ah, Gordis, i have read it three times, but i've had so much on my mind lately (GCSE's for the past two years), that it practically drove everything to do with tolkein out of my head, so i may be hazy or forgettable of most things. :)


don't be brow-beaten Jammi!

it's good to have you here!

[jammi567]

i know, just stating for future reference, in case i get something like this wrong again.

[Gordis]

All I am suggesting is that the Witch-king saw himself as a king. Had he been an ambitious prince whose brother became king (as I believe he was), that might have made him more susceptible to becoming ensnared by a Ring of Power. It would explain his hatred for the House of Elendil, in particular.
Well, no need to explain hatred for Amandil and his heirs. He had betrayed the King - anyone from the main line would have seen it this way.

As for the WK identity, you choose Minastir's son, Alcuin but I always had another idea.

There was this change of the Law - the one made by Tar Aldarion. Instead of Ancalime, another one - the male heir- should have been King (and it is told who exactly in the UT). So, at any given time in Numenor's history, there was always a person who had the right to be King, if the law had not been changed. There you have a whole line of frustrated people - father to son. And rightfully frustrated.
I think we have to look there.

[Alcuin]

Guys, there is no legal issue here about who is the King of the Númenóreans in Middle-earth according to the old laws of succession.

The Witch-king, even were his father King of Númenor, never had any claim to any throne unless his father created him an underking, and there is no evidence for that. By the old laws that govern European succession, he would have been a royal duke (or an earl, under the Anglo-Saxon rules). He was not and could not become king unless every other prior claimant between him and the throne died. (Edit - Like Richard III.)

Elendil had every right to be High-King of the Númenóreans! His house, Andúnië, was the senior house of Númenor, and it was effectively the senior royal dukedom. His ancestor Elatan of Andúnië, who married Silmariën, was probably the leader of the First House of the Edain in Númenor: in effect, Elatan was already the king of the First House, so that marriage re-united the First and Third Houses.

The House of Elros was wiped out in the Akallabêth, and the remaining Númenóreans could chose whomever they liked as king. Elendil had not only the greatest claim, he was unopposed among the Faithful for this role and already recognized as their leader. The Faithful were right to reject any claim by the Witch-king, assuming he dared to make any – which would require that he publicly reveal who he was and make some explanation about how he managed to live about 1500 years. And if the Council of the faithful Númenóreans could show that he was a Ringwraith, that would disqualify him from becoming King: he was tainted and under the shadow and control of Sauron, who brought about the destruction of the Númenor in the first place.

You can’t argue that Elendil was “not the rightful king.� I’m not trying to pick a fight or anything, but that’s just specious. (Edit – well, I guess you can if you want to, but it’s really kind of a waste of time, and you have to completely ignore the rules of succession. Tolkien knew them very well, better, that I do, and he made certain that Elendil had a rock-solid claim.)

If you want to argue that the Witch-king wanted to be king, and might have set himself up in that role if he had not been killed on Pelennor and Sauron had won the war, then I agree. But he had no rightful claim to the throne of the Faithful Númenóreans.

[Alcuin]

There was this change of the Law - the one made by Tar Aldarion. Instead of Ancalime, another one - the male heir- should have been King (and it is told who exactly in the UT). So, at any given time in Numenor's history, there was always a person who had the right to be King, if the law had not been changed. There you have a whole line of frustrated people - father to son. And rightfully frustrated.
I think we have to look there.Thank you. I have a particular interest in this subject. I will pursue that line.

[jammi567]

maybe by making a new thread (although this one has about four or five divulgant topics that should've really been made into new threads, but never mind now). sighs.

[Butterbeer]

You can’t argue that Elendil was “not the rightful king.� I’m not trying to pick a fight or anything, but that’s just specious.

that sounds spurious indeed! :p

[Butterbeer]

Guys...

and Gals if you please Alcuin! |or are you denouncing the historically stated Numenorean laws?

best BB :) :) ;)

[Alcuin]

that sounds spurious indeed! :p
I did add an edit that that post:

well, I guess you can if you want to, but it’s really kind of a waste of time, and you have to completely ignore the rules of succession. Tolkien knew them very well, better, that I do, and he made certain that Elendil had a rock-solid claim.)

You can pick your fight with Tolkien, but it doesn’t look like a promising one to me. *Sigh* Do as you will... but I’d rather spend our time more constructively.

[Butterbeer]

maybe by making a new thread (although this one has about four or five divulgant topics that should've really been made into new threads, but never mind now). sighs.


heh. :) seriously - NO!! ..it gets too fragmented and you can never debate anything that way. That ways leads to to the death of entmoot and debate IMO.

[Alcuin]

and Gals if you please Alcuin! |or are you denouncing the historically stated Numenorean laws?

best BB :) :) ;)Butterbeer, you’re not trying to steer this argument toward politics, are you? Please don’t do that. It is unworthy of you… I hope.

[Butterbeer]

I did add an edit that that post:

You can pick your fight with Tolkien, but it doesn’t look like a promising one to me. *Sigh* Do as you will... but I’d rather spend our time more constructively.

heh :)

cross post then i guess?? what are the chances of that tonight huh? :p

But bear this in mind it is CANON that the perecieved rights of Arargorn are as seen from the red book of Westmarch ... and no revision can alter that fact - thus we have a dilemma - and my poijt ios JRRT is dead but he lives on in our debate.

Thus, how can it be pointless?

Else, why debate at all on anything??

:)

[jammi567]

heh. :) seriously - NO!! ..it gets too fragmented and you can never debate anything that way. That ways leads to to the death of entmoot and debate IMO.
i guess so...i guess.

[CAB]

Where did all these posts come from?!
Well this may be old news now but...
ALL swords shatter that pierce a nazgul. The fact that the sword shattered on a wight doesn't tell us anything about the blade- only about a similar spell. As for the Black Shadow - it was specific for nazgul and doesn't even necessitate a direct contact with them - Faramir got it without hitting any.
I can’t agree with what you are saying here, Gordis. First, we don’t know that Merry’s sword shattered. He himself said that it burned away.

Second, it isn’t clear to me that the Black Shadow and the shock associated with striking the Witch King is the same thing.

Third, since Frodo didn’t have this shock when he struck the wight + the fact that there is very little to indicate that the wights had protective “spells� or “powers� similar to the Witch King + that it seems that the wights attacked their victims psychologically rather than physically, so they had little need for such protection = blades probably weren’t destroyed after hitting wights as they were after hitting the Witch King.

So, blades hitting a wight probably weren’t automatically destroyed + the sword Frodo used was unquestionably very old + there is no indication that Frodo used a mystical sword = the sword probably broke because it was old and brittle. Anyway, that’s how I see it.


And for me, that means only one thing: the blade was deadly ONLY for the WITCH-KING (who was already killed), not for the other 8 nazgul - the same impression that I got from the new Tolkien quote I posted. And [CAB]was of the same opinion
I think you misunderstood me Gordis. I guess my posts aren’t as clear as they could be (the first part of this post probably being a good example).

To me, it is most likely that the blade would have effected all the Nazgul pretty much the same way. I think the best evidence for this is the two Nazgul on Weathertop stopping after Frodo drew the sword, as jammi pointed out. This isn’t absolute proof though, since it might have been the implications of Frodo’s possession of the sword that scared them rather than the sword itself. Also, as I said before, I doubt that Sauron would be concerned about his enemies obtaining a sword that wasn’t particularly dangerous to him, especially when these enemies were moments from certain annihilation (in his mind).

[Gordis]

Elendil had every right to be High-King of the Númenóreans! His house, Andúnië, was the senior house of Númenor, and it was effectively the senior royal dukedom. His ancestor Elatan of Andúnië, who married Silmariën, was probably the leader of the First House of the Edain in Númenor: in effect, Elatan was already the king of the First House, so that marriage re-united the First and Third Houses.
Well, here I disagree.
The WK may be disqualified by being a wraith, or falling under the shadow,OK there, but by BLOOD alone, he is closer to the throne than Elendil.

NOT the house of Andúnië was the senior house of Númenor, but the house of Elros - the main line.

Had Ar-Pharazon's brother survived the Downfall, by blood, he would be the rightful King, not Elendil- because he was closer to the main line.

Ar-Pharazon's hypothethic surviving brother has more right than Ar-Gimilzor's brother, the latter has more right than Tar- Atanamir's brother, and this one has more right than Tar-Ciryatan's brother.
So,
Tar - Ciryatan's brother (the WK-according to your theory) is closer to the main line, and has more right to the scepter than a descendant of Silmarien.

That is how it works in royal lines.

[Butterbeer]

Butterbeer, you’re not trying to steer this argument toward politics, are you? Please don’t do that. It is unworthy of you… I hope.

;)

nah not at all ... but you know our beloved Gor is a girl, nay a Lady yes? :D

(just mentioning Alcuin ;) )

;)

best, BB :D

[Alcuin]

heh :)

cross post then i guess?? what are the chances of that tonight huh? :p

But bear this in mind it is CANON that the perecieved rights of Arargorn are as seen from the red book of Westmarch ... and no revision can alter that fact - thus we have a dilemma - and my poijt ios JRRT is dead but he lives on in our debate.

Thus, how can it be pointless?

Else, why debate at all on anything??

:)*Exasperated* I don’t know. How many angels can dance of the head of a pin?

My apologies, ’Mooters, but this thread seems to have veered from the sublime to the silly.
-|-
Edit - posts are still coming so fast I can't keep up.

nah not at all ... but you know our beloved Gor is a girl, nay a Lady yes?

(just mentioning Alcuin )

Yes, I am quite aware of that, and a great lady, I might add. And a friend, I hope.

[Alcuin]

Well, here I disagree.
The WK may be disqualified by being a wraith, or falling under the shadow,OK there, but by BLOOD alone, he is closer to the throne than Elendil.

NOT the house of Andúnië was the senior house of Númenor, but the house of Elros - the main line.

Had Ar-Pharazon's brother survived the Downfall, by blood, he would be the rightful King, not Elendil- because he was closer to the main line.

Ar-Pharazon's hypothethic surviving brother has more right than Ar-Gimilzor's brother, the latter has more right than Tar- Atanamir's brother, and this one has more right than Tar-Ciryatan's brother.
So,
Tar - Ciryatan's brother (the WK-according to your theory) is closer to the main line, and has more right to the scepter than a descendant of Silmarien.

That is how it works in royal lines.Yes, but…

You can disqualify yourself from kingship (or being queen, Butterbeer… *sigh*).

After the Akallabêth, the whole House of Elros is gone with the exception of the Lord of the Úlairi. He is, in effect, the leader of the Black Númenóreans. The House of Elros has fallen, it has utterly and miserably failed in its sacred duty to lead and protect the people of Númenor, it has violated the laws of the Valar <add edit>, engaged in the worship of Morgoth and human sacrifice, made war upon the Valar themselves, <end edit> and brought down the wrath of Eru upon the whole of the Númenórean race.

The House of Elros has lost all claim to the High-Kingship. Then it falls to the House of Valandil and the Lords of Andúnië to take up that High-Kingship and lead the Númenóreans.

If nothing else, Elendil can claim with all legality that Eru Himself removed the crown from the House of Elros and its heirs.

[Butterbeer]

*Exasperated* I don’t know. How many angels can dance of the head of a pin?

My apologies, ’Mooters, but this thread seems to have veered from the sublime to the silly.

???

anyway, i must away to bed, so have fun! and its been an interesting debate,

goodnight all!

best, BB

[jammi567]

that's what i mentioned ages ago (posts wise at least!) :)

[Alcuin]

But bear this in mind it is CANON that the perecieved rights of Arargorn are as seen from the red book of Westmarch ... and no revision can alter that fact - thus we have a dilemma - and my poijt ios JRRT is dead but he lives on in our debate.

Thus, how can it be pointless?

Else, why debate at all on anything??Well, here I disagree.
The WK may be disqualified by being a wraith, or falling under the shadow,OK there, but by BLOOD alone, he is closer to the throne than Elendil.

NOT the house of Andúnië was the senior house of Númenor, but the house of Elros - the main line.

Had Ar-Pharazon's brother survived the Downfall, by blood, he would be the rightful King, not Elendil- because he was closer to the main line.

Ar-Pharazon's hypothethic surviving brother has more right than Ar-Gimilzor's brother, the latter has more right than Tar- Atanamir's brother, and this one has more right than Tar-Ciryatan's brother.
So,
Tar - Ciryatan's brother (the WK-according to your theory) is closer to the main line, and has more right to the scepter than a descendant of Silmarien.

That is how it works in royal lines.
Gordis, I am giving you the epissi “She who whacks sense into Alcuin’s head.� You are right. Butterbeer’s suggestion is not specious. And Butterbeer, I apologize. (But I won’t be politically correct.)

All the same, I think my answer in Post 140 (http://www.entmoot.com/showpost.php?p=554626&postcount=140) is correct: the House of Elros has been destroyed by Eru Himself, and the last remaining member of that house, the Lord of the Nazgûl, is disinherited from any claim by Eru Himself: the House of Elros failed in its duties, in its oaths to the Valar: Elros must have been given some charge by the Valar, who made him King of Númenor, and that charge had to include such things as protecting the people of Númenor, defending it from evil, and following the rules that the Valar and Eru laid down. His descendants violated these strictures so definitively and so egregiously that they cannot be deemed to be acting within the terms of their sovereignty in any way, manner, or form.

As a member of the House of Elros and one of the first of that house to rebel, the Witch-king would likewise lose all claim to be High-King. In addition, there is the fact that he is a committed servant of Sauron, who more than anyone else in all Arda helped bring about the Downfall of Númenor. The Witch-king absolutely cannot and must not be recognized as High-King: he is not independent, but a puppet of another, and he is committed to the cause that led to the destruction of Númenor and all its inhabitants. His master Sauron is the chief servant of Morgoth, the Enemy, and the Witch-king in turn is the chief servant of Sauron. Just as Morgoth was unfit to be ruler of Arda, regardless of whatever gifts he might have possessed in his beginnings; just as Fëanor and his descendants lost all claim to the High-Kingship of the Noldor by the murderous and wicked deeds; the Witch-king is unfit to be High-King of the Númenóreans and has lost all claim to that position.

But that doesn’t mean he wouldn’t claim it all the same, and in his own mind believe that he should be king.

By the way, the greatest of the Valar was unfit to rule because of his wickedness. The greatest of the Noldor was unfit to rule because of his wickedness. And if the Witch-king might be supposed to be the greatest of the Númenóreans at the end of the Third Age (a controversial notion: I think Gandalf and Elrond and all the West would object), he, too, was unfit to rule because of his wickedness.

[Landroval]

Taking intent from the drafts, and in particular extra or background information, such as plot devices, is probably a better use of them than relying upon them for the final plotlines: those are in the published novel. Characters and events emerged and submerged in the drafts, some of which were jiggered for years before they settled into final form. Some of the flaws in the finished product reflect discarded plotlines, such as when Harry the Gatekeeper slips out of the Prancing Pony after Frodo’s accident with the Ring: Harry had never entered the inn in the final telling; but he still departed. The incident can be explained away, but it is still a small error.
It seems to me verry odd that the refferences to the might of the blades are left out - by Tolkien in LotR and by Chris in the UT. Also in At Rivendell, Gandalf states that "Things work out oddly. But for that 'short cut' you would not have met old Bombadil, nor had the one kind of sword the Riders fear." It seems to me that the particular importance of the blades against the nazgul diminished; they remain nevertheless weapons against evil creatures, with tangible effects on the orcs of Mordor and Isengard.
I am afraid the ‘“R� word’ reference is lost to me
Sorry for the word-play; I was reffering to the fact that no refference to the mastery of the ring by Frodo is made.
I am not saying that he COULD at this point command the nazgul, as he would be able later
When later, Gordis? I don't have the letters, but I remember that not even at Mount Doom is he able to command their wishes - correct me if I'm wrong. We are talking about a very hypothetical future.
I believe that in Letter 246, written in 1963, Tolkien says that not even Aragorn could wrest the Ruling Ring from Sauron. The Nazgûl were under no illusions as to who their real master was. Even of the Wise, only Gandalf might have been able to wrench it away from Sauron: Galadriel or Elrond would have kept his distance and attempted to conquer Sauron from afar had either wielded the One Ring.
I was reffering to this bit:
Frodo had become a considerable person, but of a special kind: in spiritual enlargement rather than in increase of physical or mental power; his will was much stronger than it had been, but so far it had been exercised in resisting not using the Ring and with the object of destroying it. He needed time, much time, before he could control the Ring or (which in such a case is the same) before it could control him; before his will and arrogance could grow to a stature in which he could dominate other major hostile wills.
What none of them other than the Nazgûl and Bombadil seem to have recognized was that they were designed to do grievous harm to the Ringwraiths
The way Tom describes the weapons is more akin to Aragorn's than to Reader's Companion:
Old knives are long enough as swords for hobbit-people, he said. Sharp blades are good to have, if Shire-folk go walking, east, south, or far away into dark and danger. Then he told them that these blades were forged many long years ago by Men of Westernesse: they were foes of the Dark Lord, but they were overcome by the evil king of Carn Dûm in the Land of Angmar.
Tom too knew of the mission of the hobbits; why wouldn't he tell them about the particular power?
Recognition that the barrow-blades were the “work of Westernesse, wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor,� as Aragorn put it, does not seem to have been secret. Aragorn knew it, the orcs of Isengard knew it, the Nazgûl certainly knew it, and the Mouth of Sauron knew it.
If the nazgul knew about the particular power of the barrow blades, why wouldn't he inform the upper management (of which the mouth of sauron was surely a member) about this? If the nazguls are the most faithful and powerful servants, it makes sense that they would feed (at least) Sauron with all relevant information - the existing barrow blades being a critical weakness, located far away. And if Sauron knew about their location, why would he leave things like that, seeing that he was preparing for a war in which the nazgul would take an active part?
Gandalf told Frodo when he awoke in Rivendell that his capture in the Barrow was “perhaps the most dangerous moment of all.�
I may be wrong, but the way I read it, that quote from Many Meetings rather reffers to wheathertop; there was far less danger in being captured by a wight than turning into one and losing the ring. The chance of retrieving Frodo from the downs is still significantly higher, considering the keeping in touch between Goldberry and the 'good guys' - than of saving Frodo from a morgul wound or taking back the ring from the riders.
Had they been devised by the smiths of Arthedain, or had they been used in both daughter kingdoms of Arnor, then Elrond would likely have known all about them; but the wars with Angmar under the Witch-king’s leadership broke out in the 14th century of the Third Age (that would be during the 1300s, not the 1400s), and Cardolan fell early in the 15th century.
As I said previously, that prince could be Arveleg, who is of the line of the Arthedain. Even if not, those from Arthedain and Cardolan and the elves fought together at that time against Angmar. Those dire times are really not a time to keep such knowledge from your closest allies.
it is quite possible that the Witch-king was unaware of the disposition of the knives custom-designed to destroy him and his eight necromantic fellows despite the fact that the wight had them in the tomb
The reader's companion states otherwise: he knew both about their power and exclusive location. But as I said previously, I challenge the canonicity of that quote ;).
That was my feeling at first, but I don’t think so now. We seem to have forgotten (and this applies to the Nazgul “semi-invincibility� also) about the “shock� that one gets when stabbing a Nazgul (or, at least the Witch King, and probably the others). Frodo doesn’t experience this, so the spell wasn’t the same (though, I suppose it could be merely similar, as you mentioned). I think that probably Frodo didn’t pick up a mystical sword, but rather a normal one. Being very old and non-mystical, the sword probably broke due to brittleness.
It is also to be noted that Tom still had to do incantations against the wight for it to depart, even after Frodo attacked it.

I would also like to stress what I said previously: the way Tom warns the hobbits about the wights - don't go near the east side unless you are "strong folk with hearts that never falter", doesn't exclude the fact that even hobbits could defeat them, or that others could - at least elves.
I think the best proof of their free will is the fact that Sauron threatened them after their unsuccessful trip up and down Anduin.
Seeing the malice of Sauron, I don't think he would have problems with threatening servants more than was required. He was, perhaps, just as faithful to Melkor as them to him, but he still feared his wrath.
And for me, that means only one thing: the blade was deadly ONLY for the WITCH-KING (who was already killed), not for the other 8 nazgul - the same impression that I got from the new Tolkien quote I posted. And [CAB]was of the same opinion:
If that was so, it would be really stupid to have the two other nazguls, impervious to the sword, stop, while the chief one, vulnerable, attack Frodo. Don't you think?
G&G were not much interested in plundering the revered graves of the ancestors of the Edain, were they?
That is not something you leave to chance. Even if they didn't know, they may find out.
I wrote an essay on this, “Origins of the Nazgûl and the Downfall of Númenor�.
A good one; though I disagree that Sauron spoke the bit about the nine men. As far as I know, he spoke only two of the 8 lines of that elvish rhyme; neither did he suspect he will give the rings to men, seeing that he didn't count on the elves finding him out.
Why would Glorfindel have a prophetic vision about the fate of a complete stranger?
I know of no limitations of prophecies in that regard.

[CAB]

If that was so, it would be really stupid to have the two other nazguls, impervious to the sword, stop, while the chief one, vulnerable, attack Frodo. Don't you think?
Dang. You beat me to it Landroval. That is pretty strong evidence that the blades would have effected all the Nazgul the same way. Or, more accurately, that the Nazgul assumed that the blades would effect them all the same way.

[Gordis]

Dang. You beat me to it Landroval. That is pretty strong evidence that the blades would have effected all the Nazgul the same way. Or, more accurately, that the Nazgul assumed that the blades would effect them all the same way.
The blade burned red in the presence of the WK. Would it have burned red in the presence of another nazgul? We don't know.
But at Weathertop all of the nazgul saw the burning blade and thought, correctly or incorrectly, thast they all were in danger.

[Gordis]

Gordis, I am giving you the epissi “She who whacks sense into Alcuin’s head.� You are right.
*Bows*
By the way, the greatest of the Valar was unfit to rule because of his wickedness. The greatest of the Noldor was unfit to rule because of his wickedness. And if the Witch-king might be supposed to be the greatest of the Númenóreans at the end of the Third Age (a controversial notion: I think Gandalf and Elrond and all the West would object), he, too, was unfit to rule because of his wickedness.
Here I can agree, from the POV of the Faithful, it is certainly so. the WK is disqualified not by his blood (his bloodline is higher then Elendil's) but by religious considerations, in Tolkien's own POV certainly. I like the parallels with Morgoth and Feanor & sons.

I can think of another parallel: Castamir & Sons. It is quite likely, that by the end of the III age, there were some descendants of Castamir left in Umbar. They were the last descendants of Anarion by an unbroken patrilineal descent, so by blood they had precedence over Aragorn for the crown of Gondor. But no one even considered them, I doubt not, because of the reasons you gave for Morgoth, Feanor and the WK.

When Earnur disappeared, the Stewards didn't go fetch the new King from Umbar. By the way, their existance may have been one of their reasons not to elect the new King at all: as there would be Castamir's descendants's claim, Arvedui's son's claim, and claims from several houses in Gondor itself, whose bloodlines were not so pure, but who have been the descendants of Anarion all the same. There could only be a civil war again, had the Stewards not invented the ingenious formula: we rule "until the King returns"

Just a funny thought:
Likely, Castamir's descendants led this fleet coming to Minas Tirith from Umbar, that Aragorn hijacked. I am almost sure that in return for Umbar's alliance, Sauron promised the descendants of Castamir the crown of Gondor. But, it seems, he promised the same thing to the Witch-King. There was a bad surprise in store for Castamir's sons, but they were bound to learn of Sauron's treachery only too late...

If the nazgul knew about the particular power of the barrow blades, why wouldn't he inform the upper management (of which the mouth of sauron was surely a member) about this? If the nazguls are the most faithful and powerful servants, it makes sense that they would feed (at least) Sauron with all relevant information - the existing barrow blades being a critical weakness, located far away. And if Sauron knew about their location, why would he leave things like that, seeing that he was preparing for a war in which the nazgul would take an active part?
I am not sure of what time period you speak, Landroval. In TA 1636, the Witch King took care of the blades himself - not a single one appeared above the ground till TA 3019, so they were guarded pretty well, and were not giving him nightmares anymore.

- Did the WK tell Sauron about the dangerous blade in hobbit's hands after he returned to Mordor sometime in the autumn of 3018, after the disaster at the Ford?

- I can bet he DID: he had to use ALL the excuses he could think of to explain his failure. He must have presented all this as a vast conspiracy, uniting Dunedain Rangers, High Elves, three Istari (didn't Saruman lie to them about the Shire? Didn't Rhadagast warn Gandalf of the nazgul appearance)), Tom Bombadil, Glorfindel, special breed of super-resistant halflings, undoubtedly bred for the purpose over the years (much like Sauron bred uruks), Wielders of Elven Rings and perhaps Valar/Eru themselves.
I am sure the Witch-King's tale was really impressive and gave Sauron nightmares afterwards. It doesn't even seem he has punished his nazgul - at least it was not something prolonged or elaborate or irreversible. Moreover, Sauron needed them very much in the coming war. He gave them winged steeds and sent out again.

So Sauron did know that a dangerous blade was loose in his enemies hands. But what could Sauron do about the Barrows at this point? Nothing. Neither did he care that much for his servants safety as he did for his own - for the Ring. Here I agree with CAB:
Also, as I said before, I doubt that Sauron would be concerned about his enemies obtaining a sword that wasn’t particularly dangerous to him, especially when these enemies were moments from certain annihilation (in his mind).

Did Sauron tell the Mouth about the Barrow-blades? I don't think so: it is clearly said that he kept all mortals out of the matters connected with the Ring - not to let them covet it overmuch. Mouth probably never knew on what mission and where the nazgul had been. And he was surely NOT their superior, for the nazgul to report to him.


"Originally Posted by Gordis: And for me, that means only one thing: the blade was deadly ONLY for the WITCH-KING (who was already killed), not for the other 8 nazgul - the same impression that I got from the new Tolkien quote I posted."
If that was so, it would be really stupid to have the two other nazguls, impervious to the sword, stop, while the chief one, vulnerable, attack Frodo. Don't you think?
Note that this scene took a matter of seconds. The other nazgul saw that the blade burned red - so they stopped in doubt. The WK didn't pause, because he was brave, he was the leader and hated to show weakness in front of his underlings, as the new quote from the Readers Companion clearly shows.

Moreover, the impression I got from the Readers Companion quote that the swords were only harmful to the WK may be wrong. I have to read all this book to be sure, not peek at a single quote. As I said, the Cardolani most likely knew he was a nazgul, and even found his real name. So likely it was anti-all nazgul as well. That confirms my idea that the Mouth had no idea what sword was he letting his enemies take.

Seeing the malice of Sauron, I don't think he would have problems with threatening servants more than was required. He was, perhaps, just as faithful to Melkor as them to him, but he still feared his wrath.
Servants, yes, but I thought that you argued that the nazgul were zombie-like automates? If so, threatening them was a stupid thing. And how can an automate be dismayed? If he is, it is no automate.

[CAB]

Servants, yes, but I thought that you argued that the nazgul were zombie-like automates? If so, threatening them was a stupid thing. And how can an automate be dismayed? If he is, it is no automate.
With the new quote from the Reader’s Companion, the argument that the Nazgul were “robots� is essentially disproved. (I can’t remember whether Landroval was arguing for that or not. From his last post, it appears not.) There is another quote that applies here also.
… the Witch-King, the great captain, was actually dismayed. He had been shaken by the fire of Gandalf, and began to perceive that the mission on which Sauron had sent him was one of great peril to himself both by the way and on his return to his Master (if unsuccessful); and he had been doing ill, so far achieving nothing save rousing the power of the Wise and directing them to the Ring. But above all the timid and terrified Bearer had resisted him, had dared to strike at him with an enchanted sword made by his own enemies long ago for his destruction. Narrowly it had missed him. How he had come by it – save in the Barrows of Cardolan. Then he was in some way mightier than the Barrow-wight; and he called on Elbereth, a name of terror to the Nazgûl. He was then in league with the High Elves of the Havens.

Escaping from a wound that would have been as deadly to him as the Mordor-knife to Frodo (as was proved in the end), he withdrew and hid for a while, out of doubt and fear both of Aragorn and especially of Frodo. But fear of Sauron…. was the stronger.

Oct 7. He arose and cried out to his companions, and drew the other four back to him. He then patrols the road to the Bridge of Mitheithel, knowing that it was practically impossible to cross the Greyflood between Tharbad and the Bridge. The Nazgûl search in vain for the Bearer while Aragorn leads Frodo in the pathless lands south of the Road. -Hammond and Scull, Readers Companion notes to p. 208
Then Aule took up a great hammer to smite the Dwarves; and he wept. But Iluvatar had compassion upon Aule and his desire, because of his humility; and the Dwarves shrank from the hammer and were afraid, and they bowed down their heads and begged for mercy. And the voice of Iluvatar said to Aule: ‘Thy offer I accepted even as it was made. Dost thou not see that these things have now a life of their own, and speak with their own voices? Else they would not have flinched from thy blow, nor from any command of thy will.’ -The Silmarillion
In the quote from the Silmarillion, fear is a strong indicator of a “life of their own.�



The first quote also applies to the question of the Nazguls' free will (which I believe is not entirely the same as the “robot� question). The quote doesn’t answer the question, but I think it gives us some clues. Notice that the prime motivator for the Witch King here is not “Sauron’s will� but fear. He seems to be more concerned with his own well being than retrieving Sauron’s Ring. This seems to indicate some free will (unless Sauron was more concerned about the Witch King’s health than obtaining the Ring; highly doubtful).

Also, consider that fear was probably the prime motivator for all of Sauron’s servants. So, seeing that the Witch King acts out of fear of Sauron, (and therefore, probably the other Nazgul did as well), he probably usually* served Sauron faithfully for the same reason his other servants did; because he was afraid of him. I don’t doubt that Sauron was capable of exerting a more full control of the Nazgul (I would guess; not all of them at once) when needed, but he clearly wasn’t doing it on Weathertop.


*So I am not misunderstood; I don’t mean here that the Witch King was ever disloyal to Sauron (though that can be argued). What I mean is that some of the time, Sauron could have used the rings to obtain complete control of (and therefore, complete loyalty from) the Witch King. (And, yes I do feel a bit silly using the asterisk mark.)

[jammi567]

on the topic of free will, i've posted something on this thread here (http://entmoot.tolkientrail.com/showthread.php?p=554759#post554759).

[Gordis]

I agree with you, CAB, and it was an excellent quote about Aule and the Dwarves.


I can’t remember whether Landroval was arguing for that or not. From his last post, it appears not.)
I thought so, sorry if I misunderstood you, Landroval.

He (the Witch-King) seems to be more concerned with his own well being than retrieving Sauron’s Ring. ... he probably usually* served Sauron faithfully for the same reason his other servants did; because he was afraid of him.
Undoubtedly so.
And note, that unlike other Sauron's slaves, the nazgul were controlled via the 9 rings Sauron held. He had their lives in his hands - they couldn't run away, or repent as other slaves possibly could.

What I mean is that some of the time, Sauron could have used the rings to obtain complete control of (and therefore, complete loyalty from) the Witch King. For this I believe Sauron had to put the corresponding nazgul ring on his finger and concentrate. Also, I doubt it could be done at a great distance, like between Barad-Dur and old Arnor.

Sauron couldn't control the nazgul all the time, as he couldn't use the Palantir all the time, or control his orcs all the time, or watch Denethor or Saruman 24x7. Poor Sau had too much on his hands.

The fact that the nazgul suddenly sprang to action on that night at Weathertop, shows, I think, that Sauron was watching them at this moment and they were feeling the Eye.

[jammi567]

The fact that the nazgul suddenly sprang to action on that night at Weathertop, shows, I think, that Sauron was watching them at this moment and they were feeling the Eye.
Is this why the nazgul went to rivendale, despite the fact that there were many powerful enimies of both the witch-king and sauron eg. glorfindel, elrond etc. because the witch-king was being controled by sauron, via his ring, and so the other nazgul followed him, possibly out of fear of sauron, but much more likely out of the loyalty to the witch-king. i mean, they probally thought it was dangerous behavour (natually) but thought nothing of it, because, as i put in a post on the thread i linked to above, they probally forgotten what it was liked to be prossed, because the last time that happened was near the end of the second age. what do you guys think.

[Gordis]

Is this why the nazgul went to rivendale, despite the fact that there were many powerful enimies of both the witch-king and sauron eg. glorfindel, elrond etc. because the witch-king was being controled by sauron, via his ring, and so the other nazgul followed him, possibly out of fear of sauron, but much more likely out of the loyalty to the witch-king. i mean, they probally thought it was dangerous behavour (natually) but thought nothing of it, because, as i put in a post on the thread i linked to above, they probally forgotten what it was liked to be prossed, because the last time that happened was near the end of the second age. what do you guys think.

Ahem... What is "prossed" Jammi? :confused:

[jammi567]

Ahem... What is "prossed" Jammi? :confused:
being in saurons total control.

[Alcuin]

Is this why the nazgul went to rivendale, despite the fact that there were many powerful enimies of both the witch-king and sauron eg. glorfindel, elrond etc. because the witch-king was being controled by sauron, via his ring, and so the other nazgul followed him, possibly out of fear of sauron, but much more likely out of the loyalty to the witch-king. i mean, they probally thought it was dangerous behavour (natually) but thought nothing of it, because, as i put in a post on the thread i linked to above, they probally forgotten what it was liked to be prossed, because the last time that happened was near the end of the second age. what do you guys think.Wait, I’m confused. When did the Nazgûl go to Rivendell? Were they on tourist visas or student visas, or did they just pop in unannounced?

Are you talking about their pursuing the Ring-bearer to the crossing at the Bruinen? That might just be part of the assignment: Get the Ring-bearer and bring him to me. The Nazgûl would be cowardly not to try to accomplish this, even had they any say in whether they were willing or no, but I don’t believe they were cowardly. They found the situation increasingly dangerous, absolutely, and they were clearly less than pleased about that realization; but I don’t think they were cowards.

[jammi567]

The Nazgûl would be cowardly not to try to accomplish this, even had they any say in whether they were willing or no, but I don’t believe they were cowardly. They found the situation increasingly dangerous, absolutely, and they were clearly less than pleased about that realization; but I don’t think they were cowards.
i didn't mention anything in that piece about them being cowardly. i said that they were following the witch-king out of loyalty, and following him into the face of direct danger (glorfindel etc) is a very brave thing to do.

[Landroval]

But what could Sauron do about the Barrows at this point?
I am speaking about the period between ~1409 and the time of the quest - during which time the forces of evil were in a far inferior position to afford such recklessnes.
In TA 1636, the Witch King took care of the blades himself - not a single one appeared above the ground till TA 3019, so they were guarded pretty well, and were not giving him nightmares anymore.
Himself? I don't remember him patroling the downs. If even one hobbit, after being ensnared by the wight can still hurt it, this doesn't qualify as a pretty good guard. A strong heart seems enough of a good defense against the wight, according to Tom; I am sure that a couple of good warriors can take care of the mound - be they Men, dunedain or elves. Seeing that the downs are closer to Rivendell and Lothlorien than to Mordor, it's more than unsafe to leave the most dagnerous kind of weapons to the mercy of chance - or of your enemies. As far as LotR goes, we have only two hints about a particular power of the blades against the nazgul: two nazguls stop when seeing them and the narrator states that Merry's blade caused the most bitter wound. All the rest of the characters treat the blades as good weapons against 'Mordor' and just that.
Did Sauron tell the Mouth about the Barrow-blades? I don't think so: it is clearly said that he kept all mortals out of the matters connected with the Ring - not to let them covet it overmuch.
Yes, you are right, the Sources of the legend of Isildur's death, UT, states only Sauron and the nazguls knew of the one ring and it is likely that Sauron perpetuated this policy - but the matter of the downs blades predates Sauron' hunt for the ring. The blades present no temptation on behalf of the holder to turn against Sauron, in quest of supremacy, so there would be no danger in getting underlings to take care of them.
Servants, yes, but I thought that you argued that the nazgul were zombie-like automates?
Sauron's will is mentioned as the one driving the orcs forward, but I doubt he concerned himself with what individual orcs were doing. The way I interpret Sauron's (passive) dominion over the nazgul is complete conditioning (brainwashing or hypnosis if you like). Under these circumstances, the nazguls' actions would fall completely under their 'programming', maintaining whatever other vestiges of their personality they once had, as long as it doesn't contradict their software.
What I mean is that some of the time, Sauron could have used the rings to obtain complete control of (and therefore, complete loyalty from) the Witch King.
That Sauron had complete loyalty from the nazguls is beyond doubt, seeing how they would present him with the ring, no matter what. Control (or direct control) is a different matter.

[CAB]

That Sauron had complete loyalty from the nazguls is beyond doubt, seeing how they would present him with the ring, no matter what. Control (or direct control) is a different matter.
I agree that direct control and complete loyalty are two different things. However, I think it is unlikely that Sauron ever had complete loyalty from the Nazgul when he wasn’t exerting direct control.

Maybe I am mistaken, but it seems to me that when we speak of complete loyalty, we are getting into the area of absolutes. Now, I wouldn’t go so far as to say that the Witch King was truly disloyal on Weathertop, but I do think he acted less than completely loyal. Since we are dealing in absolutes, just this one case of less than complete loyalty proves that the Witch King wasn’t completely loyal.

Also, that the Nazgul would surrender the Ring to Sauron doesn’t indicate any kind of loyalty to me. It indicates a lack of stupidity. I would think that loyalty (especially “complete�) is better proven by smaller things (since they were incapable of overthrowing him), the kind of things that Sauron would never notice . On the other hand, failure by one of the Nazgul to yield the Ring could hardly go unnoticed, and would surely draw the worst possible punishment that Sauron could deliver.

[jammi567]

bumping up. :)

[Gordis]

I agree that direct control and complete loyalty are two different things. However, I think it is unlikely that Sauron ever had complete loyalty from the Nazgul when he wasn’t exerting direct control.

Maybe I am mistaken, but it seems to me that when we speak of complete loyalty, we are getting into the area of absolutes. Now, I wouldn’t go so far as to say that the Witch King was truly disloyal on Weathertop, but I do think he acted less than completely loyal. Since we are dealing in absolutes, just this one case of less than complete loyalty proves that the Witch King wasn’t completely loyal.

Also, that the Nazgul would surrender the Ring to Sauron doesn’t indicate any kind of loyalty to me. It indicates a lack of stupidity. I would think that loyalty (especially “complete�) is better proven by smaller things (since they were incapable of overthrowing him), the kind of things that Sauron would never notice . On the other hand, failure by one of the Nazgul to yield the Ring could hardly go unnoticed, and would surely draw the worst possible punishment that Sauron could deliver.
*tumbs up*

Exactly, CAB! :)

True loyalty is a thing of heart, it can't be obtained by fear. When somebody is loyal, just because he has no choice in the matter :evil: , it is poor loyalty.

The Nazgul are loyal at the end of the Third Age, because Sauron has their Nine Rings. They were loyal in the Second Age because Sauron had the One and they wore the 9.

But when Sauron had no hook for them, do you think they were loyal still? And why would they be? Out of love? :D

[jammi567]

that's what i've said in my posts 151 and 155.

[jammi567]

The Nazgul are loyal at the end of the Third Age, because Sauron has their Nine Rings. They were loyal in the Second Age because Sauron had the One and they wore the 9.

But when Sauron had no hook for them, do you think they were loyal still? And why would they be? Out of love? :D
there is an couple of interesting questions from the link above:

E14. How could Sauron trust the Nazgûl not to claim the Ring?

They were utterly enslaved to Sauron and had no will of their own. The clearest statement to this effect that I know of is in “The Hunt for the Ring�: they were “his mightiest servants, the Ring-wraiths, who had no will but his own, being each utterly subservient to the ring that had enslaved him, which Sauron held.� [UT: HR (338)]

In other words, they were immune to the lure of the One Ring because they were so completely dominated by their own Rings, and they were dominated by Sauron because he held those Rings. These same factors also meant they could not be ordered to work against Sauron.

C7. Were the Nazgûl wearing their Rings at the time of The Lord of the Rings?

Evidence that Sauron had them
Most importantly, Tolkien says so in a lot of places:

“... Sauron, who still through their nine rings (which he held) had primary control. ...� [L #246 (331), also on the Web]

Gandalf tells Frodo, “the Nine [Sauron] has gathered to himself; the Seven also, or else they are destroyed.� [LotR I 2 (65)]

Galadriel tells Frodo that, looking in her mirror, “You saw the Eye of him that holds the Seven and the Nine.� [LotR II 7 (386)]

In “The Hunt for the Ring�, we read of Sauron’s “mightiest servants, the Ring-wraiths, who had no will but his own, being each utterly subservient to the ring that had enslaved him, which Sauron held.� [UT: HR (338)]

In another version of “The Hunt for the Ring�, again we read that the Ringwraiths “were entirely enslaved to their Nine Rings, which [Sauron] now himself held�. [UT: HR (343)]

From these quotes it seems fairly clear that Tolkien conceived that Sauron had direct physical possession of the Nine Rings, not indirect possession through having the Nine on the fingers of his slaves. I really don’t see any other way to read the quotes from Letters and the two versions of “The Hunt for the Ring�. Furthermore, the two quotes from The Lord of the Rings link the Seven and Nine as “held� in the same way, and we know for certain that Sauron had physical possession of those of the Seven that were still in existence.

Beyond quotes, some physical circumstances suggest that the Nazgûl did not wear their rings. These are merely suggestive, not conclusive in themselves:

The Nazgûl’s black robes were visible. If they were wearing Great Rings, we would have expected their clothes to be invisible too.

On Weathertop, after he put on the One Ring, Frodo could see the Nazgûl’s mantles, robes, hair color, helms, “haggard hands�, and swords, as well as the Witch-king’s crown and knife. [LotR I 11 (212)] There is no mention of his seeing their Rings. Yet we know that while merely carrying the Ring in Lórien Frodo could see Galadriel’s Ring: “it cannot be hidden from the Ring-bearer, and one who has seen the Eye,� she tells him [LotR II 7 (384)]. (Those who don’t accept this line of reasoning can point out that the attack at Weathertop occurred before Frodo had seen the Eye.)

When the Witch-king was destroyed on the Pelennor Fields, no Ring was found. Since the Nine Rings had gems, it would have sparkled in the sun; though of course it could have been missed in long grass.

Evidence that the Nazgûl still wore the Nine Rings
Only one citation goes that way, as far as I know, namely Gandalf’s remark at the Council of Elrond: “The Nine the Nazgûl keep.� [LotR II 2 (267)] In a previous edition of this FAQ I tried to explain the quote away as inverted word order for “The Nine keep the Nazgûl [in Sauron’s thralldom].� But I believe a simpler and better explanation is external: Tolkien intended at one time that the Nazgûl should still be wearing their Rings, but he later changed his mind and simply missed revising that sentence.

Conrad Dunkerson supports this view with textual evidence from The History of Middle-earth: “Tolkien wrote the ‘Nine the Nazgûl keep’ line during one of the drafts of the Council of Elrond. Then much later he wrote that the Nazgûl were increased in power before the Battle of the Pelennor Fields because Sauron had returned their Rings to them. If Sauron was only returning the Rings at that point then Tolkien could not have intended that they were wearing them at the time of the Council.�

Apart from texts, some have argued that the Nazgûl must have been wearing their Rings, or else they would have aged as Bilbo did. But the cases are not parallel: Bilbo had not become a wraith, and we have no reason to think that a wraith would age or change in any way, being no longer in the physical world. Also, Gollum was centuries older than Bilbo, but he showed no signs at all of aging in the seven decades after he lost his Ring. (For that matter, Bilbo didn’t age very much after giving up the One Ring, until after it was destroyed.)

Conclusion
While not quite one-sided, the textual evidence favors very strongly indeed the conclusion that, at the end of the Third Age, Sauron had physical possession of the Nine Rings. Physical circumstances also suggest this, though other explanations are possible. But the physical evidence is well reinforced by direct textual evidence, against a single quote that says the opposite. You decide!

(What is not known is just when Sauron took the Nine Rings back from the Nazgûl, assuming that he did. We know it was some time before the Nazgûl began hunting for the One Ring, but whether it was immediately before or much earlier we cannot tell. That Sauron, even without the One, could get the Nazgûl to give up the Nine Rings, there is little doubt, since no mortal could have withheld even the One from him.)


:) :)

[jammi567]

bumping. :) :)

[Landroval]

So, no one to argue my other points? Come on guys ;).
Since we are dealing in absolutes, just this one case of less than complete loyalty proves that the Witch King wasn’t completely loyal.
I don't see why fear (if that is what you have in mind) precludes loyalty; LotR doesn't hint at them being disloyal, the letters and UT state quite the contrary; that there are other, more obscure, texts, which made it to a new book, that hint otherwise, is no surprise, seeing how often Tolkien changed his mind before building his main ideas. Then again, I might have used the 'loyalty' thingy too lightly, as the texts reffer to subserviency.
When somebody is loyal, just because he has no choice in the matter , it is poor loyalty.
I don't remember Sauron having any problem with the nazguls, as long as they are the most subservient.
But when Sauron had no hook for them, do you think they were loyal still?
That is a moot point; Sauron with no 'hook' means no One Ring, in which case the nazguls are dead also.
bumping up.
You do realise this is an active thread, right?

[jammi567]

So, no one to argue my other points? Come on guys ;).

You do realise this is an active thread, right?
First part = you dod look at my post, didn't you?

Second part = i dod realize that, i just wanted other members to take notice of it.

[Gordis]

(What is not known is just when Sauron took the Nine Rings back from the Nazgûl, assuming that he did. We know it was some time before the Nazgûl began hunting for the One Ring, but whether it was immediately before or much earlier we cannot tell.

Well he did take the Rings, no doubt of it.

When? In the Third Age. Not too early, as he really took shape etc in Mirkwood around 1000 or even later.

The nazgul, as we know from one quoite in UT, fled East after the Fall of Sauron, and presumably remained there.

That Sauron, even without the One, could get the Nazgûl to give up the Nine Rings, there is little doubt, since no mortal could have withheld even the One from him.)

As I said many times, no mortal could have withheld the Ring from Sauron IN A DIRECT CONFRONTATION, man to man. It is clear from the much quoted letter #246 so very dear to us all.

Now, Sauron, fully embodied or not, sits in Mirkwood. The Witch-King with his Ring sits in Carn Dum, surrounded by an army of orcs and men. How would Sauron arrange this direct confrontation?

Come to Carn-Dum? Even with his ring he couldn't have withstood a whole army (as we saw in the Last Alliance).

Invite the WK to Dol-Guldur, to share a keg of ale and discuss old times? :D The nazgul is no fool (and don't make me quote LoTR here - you can find the quotes easily enough).

So the only time he could have taken the Witch-King's ring was between 1975 and 1980, when the WK travelled defeated to Mordor - (that is CAB's timing), or a thousand years later, in 2942-2951, when Sauron collected all the Rings he could, has grown in Power and returned to Mordor (my timing).

And don't tell me the nazgul surrendered their Rings willingly. :( Even Bilbo didn't, not really. And for the nazgul, as they were already wraiths, giving their Rings to Sauron meant much more than for the living - it was their second enslavement.

[Gordis]

So, no one to argue my other points? Come on guys ;).
You mean whether the knives were safe in the Barrow or not?
I din't know about the others, but I am tired of discussing this point over and over. :( The FACT that no blade appeared out of the Barrows for 1500 years is proof enough for me. If you prefer Tom's chatter to the facts, fine with me.

I don't see why fear (if that is what you have in mind) precludes loyalty; LotR doesn't hint at them being disloyal, the letters and UT state quite the contrary; that there are other, more obscure, texts, which made it to a new book, that hint otherwise, is no surprise, seeing how often Tolkien changed his mind before building his main ideas. Then again, I might have used the 'loyalty' thingy too lightly, as the texts reffer to subserviency.
I am not sure what texts made it to the new book. I doubt they are obscure, simply they were found in another place, not where Cris found his staff.

Subserviency yes, the nazgul did show that. And the REASON for all this "loyalty" and subserviency is explained unambiguously in UT: Sauron had their Rings.
It is a big mistake to extrapolate this loyalty/subserviency to the period when Sauron did NOT have their rings - i.g. to the Angmar Kingdom period.

I don't remember Sauron having any problem with the nazguls, as long as they are the most subservient.

No? And wasting two months in the summer of 3018 looking for the Ring in the Vales? Had they come to the Shire a month eralier, how do you think Mr Baggins from the Bag End would have defended his ringy?

How long does it normally take for mounted men to travel from Calenardon to Gundabad and back again? TWO :eek: months?
Sure, Sauron was angry, anyone would have been.

And being unable to catch 4 hobbits who carried the Ring that was like a radar to them?
And so on... And that are only FACTS from the LOTR and UT.

What about the period we know so little about? From TA 1 to TA 2951?
I suppose the poor Sau was sitting all alone and abandoned in Mirkwood while his wraiths were busy building their own kingdoms. The WK practically took Sauron's place of the Dark Lord. Was Sau happy?


That is a moot point; Sauron with no 'hook' means no One Ring, in which case the nazguls are dead also.

Nay, Sauiron with NO HOOK means Sauron having neither the One, nor the Nine. He was in this sorry "hookless' :p state for most of the Third Age.

The One Ring when it is NOT WIELDED is no hook for anybody - neither for the nazgul, nor for the Elves with the Three. Its existance only assures that the other Rings still have power and that Sauron lives.

But its existence didn't preclude the Elves from WIELDING the Three, neither did it hamper the Nazgul with the Nine.

[Butterbeer]

So, no one to argue my other points? Come on guys . ;)

*steps forard nobly*

whatcha want a arguing Sir?

I am at your disposal Noble Landroval.

Your choice, sir...but by prefernce i avoid the pistol and the rapier ... barrow blades are hard to come by, and to my mind largely forgotten in the nether deserted lands since the kings went away ....so i suggest that which is mightier than the very swords of legend .... the pen!


yet, sir...even now is the pen but a distant fable that fades from memory .... thus sir i suggest we reconvene under agesis (sp?) of the killer stroke of the fabled fingertips....

what say you?

name your subject sir!


written by my second,

yours ever truly,

number 2.

(ever does he piss in the middle earth wind ...)

[Landroval]

The FACT that no blade appeared out of the Barrows for 1500 years is proof enough for me. If you prefer Tom's chatter to the facts, fine with me.
Gordis, let me draw you a picture:
- IIRC, the swords were found in the tomb of Arveleg of the Arthedain
- at that time, the elves, Arthedain and Cardolan were fighting together against Angmar
These two facts make the idea of swords made only in Cardolan and unknown to the others too doubtful
- there was just one wight guarding the tomb in which the nazguls knew there were the dreadful swords; we know that the elves don't fear the nazguls, so one wight is of no use against them;
The forces of evil (or at least their leadership) knew of all these. That they took this risk of leaving them with such a low defence, which proved to be inefective, means that they didn't actually care about it
- in the final version of LotR, there is absolutely no one stating any connection of the swords to whatever power against the nazgul, not even when the w-k is killed.
It is a big mistake to extrapolate this loyalty/subserviency to the period when Sauron did NOT have their rings - i.g. to the Angmar Kingdom period.
A big mistake? Did you read above that Tolkien considered Sauron giving the rings back to the nazgul, so as to increase their power? You do know that the nazgul appeared in Angmar 200 years _after_ Sauron appeared in Dol Guldur? Is there any refference to disloyalty, other than whatever inferences we can make on our own?
No? And wasting two months in the summer of 3018 looking for the Ring in the Vales?
You are missing my point - I was reffering to Sauron not caring about the quality of their loyalty towards him, as weighed against their subserviency; that the nazguls made mistakes is not similar to disobedience.

[Butterbeer]

One Wight?

How do you know?

Perhaps at the time of the Fellowship, but do we know beyond all doubt that there were no other wights or other security in days gone by?

For myself i will argue with anyone who would lay any OTHER claim that it would have gone ultimately ill for even plucky frodo against the Wight were it not for Tom Bombadill, heh bombadillo :D

and he is not an average nor determinable character by any stretch .... he sticks to his own small boundaries and world and cares little for the events outside it ..that we know and is clear -

but Tom, the oldest of the old is not to be underestimated in the slightest - he to whom the ring is meaningless and has no power over him -

be it not for him (jolly Tom) though - are you really sure the Hobbits would ever have left the barrow?

Nay!

For chance if you will, and i for myself, will not,

happened as it seems to take them Via the willow and hence to old Tom Bombadil and his lady...



best, BB :D

[Alcuin]

-IIRC, the swords were found in the tomb of Arveleg of the Arthedain

From Return of the King, “Appendix A�:

Some say the mound in which the Ring-bearer was imprisoned had been the grave of the last prince of Cardolan, who fell in the war of 1409.

This passage is presented in square brackets, meant to indicate that it was a marginal note added to the Thain’s book by a scribe in Gondor. That would indicate that, early in the Fourth Age, the Dúnedain ascertained in which barrow Frodo and his companions were trapped, and from that they could determine whose it was. The general consensus, I believe, is that this was not the tomb of Arveleg, who was king in Fornost and probably buried in Arthedain (why would the kings of Arthedain be buried in Cardolan?), but it is as the scribe indicated: the tomb of the last prince of Cardolan.


- at that time, the elves, Arthedain and Cardolan were fighting together against Angmar
These two facts make the idea of swords made only in Cardolan and unknown to the others too doubtful

You have now but one fact. The first was an assertion, and it is unlikely to be correct. (It is certainly far from consensus.) You are assuming that Cardolan shared with Arthedain a manufacturing process that would have been, in effect, a high-classified military secret, in our modern-day terms. Even if that were the case, you have also the problem that all the smiths who knew this secret could easily have been killed: it seems that not only was the last prince of Cardolan killed, but his entire family with him: they are all, apparently, buried in the tomb. Cardolan was overrun in this war. That, coupled with the notion that the entire royal family was buried in the tomb, might indicate that the capital (Andrath, perhaps?) had been taken and its inhabitants slaughtered: Fornost, the capital of Arthedain, was taken in this was. (As was Amon Sûl, where Arveleg died. Amon Sûl was destroyed, if you recall.) Bombadil seemed to indicate that the woman whose brooch he took for Goldberry met an untimely and violent end. [Edit: my apologies for poor first pass on posting this paragraph.]



-there was just one wight guarding the tomb in which the nazguls knew there were the dreadful swords; we know that the elves don't fear the nazguls, so one wight is of no use against them;

Are you now arguing that the Elves knew about swords that you are also arguing they knew nothing about?


- in the final version of LotR, there is absolutely no one stating any connection of the swords to whatever power against the nazgul, not even when the w-k is killed.

No one except the narrator. From Return of the King, “The Battle of Pelennor Field�, a well-known passage:

… glad would he have been to know its fate who wrought it slowly long ago in the North-kingdom when the Dúnedain were young, and chief among their foes was the dread realm of Angmar and its sorcerer king. No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will.

[Butterbeer]

… glad would he have been to know its fate who wrought it slowly long ago in the North-kingdom when the Dúnedain were young, and chief among their foes was the dread realm of Angmar and its sorcerer king. No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will.

Though of course, it should be considered as much poetic license as fact- this is classic Tolkien, i doubt not his main intention here is the story and the drama and this passage was not meant in any other way at the time it was written or in it's intention.

Would anyone care, then, to argue that Anduril would not have had this effect and power, chief among swords of the Dunedain, wrought in the mists of time and re-forged with many runes etc etc?

Of course this is all conjecture, but i would personally be loath to read too much into that passage in any serious way that on the sole basis of that dramatic paragraph went the next step to excluding blades such as Anduril etc.

....

Glad to see you, Alcuin and myself among (hopefully!) others are obliging good ol Landroval in his desire for an argument ! :D

Bring it on!!!


Best all, BB

[Landroval]

This passage is presented in square brackets, meant to indicate that it was a marginal note added to the Thain’s book by a scribe in Gondor. That would indicate that, early in the Fourth Age, the Dúnedain ascertained in which barrow Frodo and his companions were trapped, and from that they could determine whose it was. The general consensus, I believe, is that this was not the tomb of Arveleg, who was king in Fornost and probably buried in Arthedain (why would the kings of Arthedain be buried in Cardolan?), but it is as the scribe indicated: the tomb of the last prince of Cardolan.
This would imply that Cardolan had a prince of its own - but that seems highly unlikely, seeing that it was only Rhudaur who resisted Arthedain's claim to lordship. Tolkien made a big case of Arveleg dying in 1409, all over the prologue of HoME XII - I doubt all this is a coincidence. Moreover, Arveleg was in effect ruler of Cardolan too, and its last ruler too, seeing how it is destroyed by the w-k's attack. Burrying Arveleg in Fornost seems highly unlikely also, seeing that this city was under siege - getting him there after the repell of w-k's attack means unearthing and burying him a second time - highly unlikely again. It is more likely that he was burried in one of the most sacred places of Cardolan, Arnor and Middle-Earth.
You are assuming that Cardolan shared with Arthedain a manufacturing process that would have Even if that were the case, you have also the problem that all the smiths who knew this secret could easily have been killed
I didn't claim the sharing of technology - just the informing of its existence. There really was no competition among the allies in this concern.
high-classified military secret, in our modern-day terms.
A military ruled by Arthedain, not Cardolan.
Are you now arguing that the Elves knew about swords that you are also arguing they knew nothing about?
Alcuin, I doubt you misunderstood me. I am arguing that the nazguls took an irrational risk; they can't count on their strong enemies (too strong for one wight) not knowing about these swords.
No one except the narrator.
I am aware of that quote; that quote doesn't state anything magically anti-nazgul about the blade, nor is it made by someone knowledgeable (Gandalf, Elrond, Galadriel, Aragorn, or even Denethor) at a time when this would have been helpful in any way.

[Alcuin]

This would imply that Cardolan had a prince of its own - but that seems highly unlikely, seeing that it was only Rhudaur who resisted Arthedain's claim to lordship. Tolkien made a big case of Arveleg dying in 1409, all over the prologue of HoME XII - I doubt all this is a coincidence. Moreover, Arveleg was in effect ruler of Cardolan too, and its last ruler too, seeing how it is destroyed by the w-k's attack. Burrying Arveleg in Fornost seems highly unlikely also, seeing that this city was under siege - getting him there after the repell of w-k's attack means unearthing and burying him a second time - highly unlikely again. It is more likely that he was burried in one of the most sacred places of Cardolan, Arnor and Middle-Earth.
I didn't claim the sharing of technology - just the informing of its existence. There really was no competition among the allies in this concern.
...
A military ruled by Arthedain, not Cardolan.
Cardolan was an independent daughter-state of Arnor until III 1409. Upon the demise of that last member of its royal house, the kingdom (or princedom) reverted to the rule of the king of Arthedain. And even were Cardolan willing to share such a secret, they’d have to find the knowledgeable persons and bring that knowledge to the appropriate people in Arthedain. If the Cardolan smiths were killed when the kingdom was overrun or during any other part of what was clearly a most disastrous war for the junior kingdom, no such opportunity might have presented itself.

I think it best to assume that permanent burials of ritual and state would not be made until after the fighting had subsided, since neither kingdom (Arthedain or Cardolan) likely had the convenience of relative peace in which to do the honors due a ruler.
Alcuin, I doubt you misunderstood me. I am arguing that the nazguls took an irrational risk; they can't count on their strong enemies (too strong for one wight) not knowing about these swords.

I agree. But neither could they abandon the pursuit. Gordis and I are arguing that the Witch-king and 4 others pursued the Ring-bearer to Weathertop, where they all held back except the Witch-king when the barrow-blade was unsheathed.

I am aware of that quote; that quote doesn't state anything magically anti-nazgul about the blade, nor is it made by someone knowledgeable (Gandalf, Elrond, Galadriel, Aragorn, or even Denethor) at a time when this would have been helpful in any way.Even better then: may we presume that the Narrator is both well-informed and even-handed, and that if he says “no other blade� could “break the spell�, then it is in fact the only blade - or perhaps more precisely, the only kind of blade - that could “break the spell�, even if it is a non-magical blade?

Although, it would be rather unusual in literature for a “non-magical blade� to break a spell... Of course, Aragorn made some comment about the knives being “wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor.� But perhaps he was merely speaking metaphorically?

[Gordis]

Gordis, let me draw you a picture:
- IIRC, the swords were found in the tomb of Arveleg of the Arthedain
- at that time, the elves, Arthedain and Cardolan were fighting together against Angmar
These two facts make the idea of swords made only in Cardolan and unknown to the others too doubtful

As Alcuin correctly pointed out, the tomb with the swords belonged to the last Prince of Cardolan.

We know that the Barrow-Downs were the burial place of the Edain since the First Age. Valandil here thinks that the first Kings of Arnor (Valandil son of Isildur etc.) were also buried there. May be. But I am pretty sure that once Arnor became divided, no Kings of Arthedain or Rhudaur were buried there anymore. The three Kingdoms were almost perpetually at war. Would you bury your King far away in the enemy territory? No, I guess there were Royal tombs in Fornost, much like Rath Dinen in Minas Tirith.

Now let us take the case of Arveleg. He was slain at Amon Sul, which was overrun by Angmar. They hardly managed to save the Palantir. Most likely, they also took with them the body of their King, if they DID manage to retrieve it at all. Now the Arthedain troops were driven to Fornost, while Cardolani guys were besieged at Tyrn Gorthad. The allied Arthedain-Cardolan army was cut in two and driven into different directions. How could the body of Arveleg be buried at Tyrn Gorthad? No way.


- there was just one wight guarding the tomb in which the nazguls knew there were the dreadful swords; we know that the elves don't fear the nazguls, so one wight is of no use against them;
Do you know many Elven grave robbers? If they DIDN't know about the swords then WHY would they desecrate the tombs? To get some gold and jewels?

Secondly, there is no reference that the elves (NOT "High", or Calaquendi Elves) didn't fear the nazgul. There is evidence for the opposite: Glorfindel says: "There are few even in Rivendell that can ride openly against the Nine; but such as there were, Elrond sent out north, west, and south.
Now in the Last Homely house FULL of Elves, there are only FEW who were not afraid of the nazgul.

Thirdly, yes, there was likely approximately one wight per barrow. The Witch-King supposedly never visited Barrow-Downs himself, before 3018, so how could he know in which tombs there were the BD TM swords and in which there weren't? There was likely a tomb of this last prince of Cardolan's father and granddad, uncles and nephews, every one of these latest tombs might be filled with the swords. And consider, as Alcuin pointed out, that the Wights had to occupy all the barrows to prevent the Cardolani hiding there or fortifying the other tombs.

The forces of evil (or at least their leadership) knew of all these. That they took this risk of leaving them with such a low defence, which proved to be inefective, means that they didn't actually care about it
I don't think Sauron cared that much about his nazgul's well-being to intervene directly. And the Wights were the best guardians that the nazgul themselves could find: they couldn't send Barlogs guard the Barrows, could they?

- in the final version of LotR, there is absolutely no one stating any connection of the swords to whatever power against the nazgul, not even when the w-k is killed.
I wonder, Landroval, were you really unaware of the quote Alcuin has just posted?

A big mistake? Did you read above that Tolkien considered Sauron giving the rings back to the nazgul, so as to increase their power?
I read it not "above", in the FAQ thread out of context, but I read it in HOME "War of the Ring", in the drafts for the Siege of Minas Tirith.. The sentence was stricken out immediately by the author. Why was such a "good" idea immediately abandoned? I am sure it was because Tolkien realized, that Sauron could not give back the Nine Rings BEFORE he obtained the One. Sauron would have LOST his PRIMARY CONTROL over the nazgul and made them vulnerable to the wannabe Ringlord, who had the One (here I again refer to #246.) You remember Sauron believed at the time, that the "Forces of Goodness And Light" were preparing to wield the One Ring against him.

You do know that the nazgul appeared in Angmar 200 years _after_ Sauron appeared in Dol Guldur?
So what? What does it prove?
I can tell for instance, that the nazgul appeared in Angmar 300 years after Gondor conquered Harad. Is there a connection between these two facts? May be yes, may be not.

Is there any refference to disloyalty, other than whatever inferences we can make on our own? And is there any reference to LOYALTY of the King of Carn-Dum to Sauron?

You are missing my point - I was reffering to Sauron not caring about the quality of their loyalty towards him, as weighed against their subserviency; that the nazguls made mistakes is not similar to disobedience. Then he was a fool if he didn't care, that has proved his undoing.

Open disobedience was not something the nazgul were allowed to show. Little enthusiasm, yes: lagging behind, making mistakes, straying in daylight, not showing any initiative, looking for the Shire in the Vales, when the WK probably knew all along where it was, missing the ringbearer in Hobbiton, passing the ringbearer on the road, waiting till the Buckleberry ferry was afloat before appearing on the shore - that is another matter.

They could not rebel :the Master had their Rings and their very existence in his hands. But the only thing they cared about were their own interests, not Sauron's.

[Butterbeer]

They could not rebel :the Master had their Rings and their very existence in his hands. But the only thing they cared about were their own interests, not Sauron's.

that old chesnut huh?

But is this not potentially somewhat disingenuous from you here Gor??

[jammi567]

my god, this topic (how the barrow down swords affected the nazgul, and whether they were afrid of them) is just getting boring now. can't we talk about something else?

[Butterbeer]

...er...we usually do most of the time! :p

wotcha Jammi!

so ..what other gigs are in town at the momment then?

[jammi567]

wotcha Jammi!

so ..what other gigs are in town at the momment then?
oh, nothing much happening in southampton or portsmouth at the minute.

[Gordis]

my god, this topic (how the barrow down swords affected the nazgul, and whether they were afrid of them) is just getting boring now. can't we talk about something else?
If you wish to talk about something else, why not make a new thread about something else?


This would imply that Cardolan had a prince of its own - but that seems highly unlikely, seeing that it was only Rhudaur who resisted Arthedain's claim to lordship....

Moreover, Arveleg was in effect ruler of Cardolan too, and its last ruler too, seeing how it is destroyed by the w-k's attack.

Exactly, only Rhudaur resisted Athedain's claim to lordship. So, Cardolan accepted Arthedain's over-Lordship sometime after 1349, when Argeleb became King.
In Cardolan there were NO direct descendants of Isildur left, but there surely were indirect (not father-to son) ones. One of them was most likely invested with ruling Cardolan, under Arveleg's over-Lordship, but the new Ruler was called "King" no more, only "Prince". (There is somewhere an excellent thread where Valandil proposed this theory). The last prince was killed in 1409. Had the chronicle spoken of Arveleg, he would have been called "King of Arnor", for that was his title.


Tolkien made a big case of Arveleg dying in 1409, all over the prologue of HoME XII - I doubt all this is a coincidence.
I have just re-read the prologue of Home XII and found no big case made of this fact.
Here s the entry for Arveleg:
18. Arveleg I. born 1309 lived 100 years + slain 1409
The Witch-king of Angmar taking advantage of war among [the
Numenoreans or Dunedain >] the Dunedain comes down out
of the North. He overruns Cardolan and Rhudaur. [Cardolan
is ravaged and destroyed and becomes desolate. The Tower of
Amon Sul is razed and the palantir is broken. Evil spirits come
and take up their abode in the mounds of the hills of Cardolan.
In Rhudaur an evil folk, workers of sorcery, subjects of Angmar,
slay the remnants of the Dunedain and build dark forts in the
hills. But the Dunedain of Fornost, in spite of the death of their
king, hold out, and repel the forces of Angmar with the help of
Cirdan of Lindon. >] Cardolan is ravaged; the Tower of Amon
Sul is razed and the palantir is removed to Fornost. In Rhudaur
an evil folk ... [as above] build dark forts in the hills, while the
remaining Dunedain of Cardolan hold out in the Barrow Downs
and the Forest; the Dunedain of Arthedain repel the forces of
Angmar from Fornost with the help of Cirdan of Lindon.

Burrying Arveleg in Fornost seems highly unlikely also, seeing that this city was under siege - getting him there after the repell of w-k's attack means unearthing and burying him a second time - highly unlikely again. It is more likely that he was burried in one of the most sacred places of Cardolan, Arnor and Middle-Earth.

Was Fornost taken in 1409? I don't think so. See the quote below.
As for the Barrows, it was not a safe place to bury anyone.
App A.: A great host came out of Angmar in 1409, and crossing the river entered Cardolan and surrounded Weathertop. The Dúnedain were defeated and Arveleg was slain. The Tower of Amon Sûl was burned and razed; but the palantÃ*r was saved and carried back in retreat to Fornost, Rhudaur was occupied by evil Men subject to Angmar, and the Dúnedain that remained there were slain or fled west. Cardolan was ravaged. Araphor son of Arveleg was not yet full-grown, but he was valiant, and with aid from CÃ*rdan he repelled the enemy from Fornost and the North Downs. A remnant of the faithful among the Dúnedain of Cardolan also held out in Tyrn Gorthad (the Barrowdowns), or took refuge in the Forest behind.

[CAB]

I am arguing that the nazguls took an irrational risk; they can't count on their strong enemies (too strong for one wight) not knowing about these swords.
We really don’t know how strong the wights were. Yes, Bombadil could defeat them, but this was within his own bounds, where he seems to have been extremely strong. Remember that all of Frodo’s companions were “asleep� and completely helpless while in the barrow. They were only able to be saved by Tom because Frodo was able to gain consciousness. I wonder why that was. Did he receive aid (from the Ring, or from someone else), was he just lucky, or had the wight maybe taken too many prisoners at one time?

Anyway, what about those who probably could defeat wights? Well, it seems that people like Gandalf and Glorfindel didn’t need barrow blades to face the Nazgul. There is plenty of evidence for that. So, most likely, those who were able to face the wights wouldn’t have been interested in retrieving the blades, and those who did need the blades (being the Nazguls’ weaker enemies) were unable to face the wights. This helps explain why the swords had remained hidden for so long.

[Butterbeer]

hokay ...

(actually i meant on the moot here Jammi... :D )

.................................................. .........

so is there then a consensus that the swords were nothing especially special? Merely that happy would they who wrought them have been to know their fate - to pin one into a leg and cause the WK to stumble?

or are there still those who think these are somehow cryptonite super swords that are effectively portable fires of veritable doom for the nazgul :eek: :eek: ??

(or is that actually just too preposterous to even entertain seriously? )

best, BB

bearing in mind Eowyn's sword wot did the deed was nothing special at all ... though she was a sexy blonde and that makes her a femme fatal to the WK ... should they have done a Herod think you? ... and tried to kill all blonde girls at birth?, or send wights, balrogs et al to "defend" ALL these also???

you'd almost think there was only one knife (long enough for swords for hobbit folk walking abroad south and east) (let alone sword) from the peroid knocking about now wouldn't you?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Landroval]

Cardolan was an independent daughter-state of Arnor until III 1409.
I disagree:
In the days of Argeleb son of Malvegil, since no descendants of Isildur remained in the other kingdoms, the kings of Arthedain again claimed the lordship of all Arnor. The claim was resisted by Rhudaur.
That happened before 1356, the year of Argeleb's death. If there is any quote about its independence after Argeleb, I am not aware of it
And even were Cardolan willing to share such a secret, they’d have to find the knowledgeable persons and bring that knowledge to the appropriate people in Arthedain
Again, I did not argue for sharing of technology, only of the existence of it.
the Witch-king and 4 others pursued the Ring-bearer to Weathertop, where they all held back except the Witch-king when the barrow-blade was unsheathed.
The other two nazguls stopped when they saw that Frodo was resisting them even when he is in 'wraithdom' - they probably started assuming other surprises, and sort of covered w-k's back, just as the other two nazgul were covering the higher ground; basic tactics, if you ask me. If there was fear about that dreadful sword, they had all the means to destroy it by distance and then approach Frodo - Frodo's sword is easily destroyed at the Ford, apparently just for the heck of it.Even better then: may we presume that the Narrator is both well-informed and even-handed, and that if he says “no other blade� could “break the spell�, then it is in fact the only blade - or perhaps more precisely, the only kind of blade - that could “break the spell�, even if it is a non-magical blade?
The only blade to deal such a bitter wound - nothing states an invulnerability to other blades - their main presented strong point is fear, as we argued previously.
Although, it would be rather unusual in literature for a “non-magical blade� to break a spell... Of course, Aragorn made some comment about the knives being “wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor.� But perhaps he was merely speaking metaphorically?
I already agreed from the start these weapons are wound about with spells for the bane of evil, which is apparent in the behaviour of the orcs towards them.
Do you know many Elven grave robbers?
...
Secondly, there is no reference that the elves (NOT "High", or Calaquendi Elves) didn't fear the nazgul. There is evidence for the opposite:
These assumptions would be made too lightly about the strength and motivations of the w-k's enemies.
I don't think Sauron cared that much about his nazgul's well-being to intervene directly.
Yeah, the most powerful of his servants..
I wonder, Landroval, were you really unaware of the quote Alcuin has just posted?
I wonder, did you already forgot we debated that very quote here?
the sentence was stricken out immediately by the author
No, it wasn't stricken out immediately; here is the context, I am sure you will like it:
This survived into the first typescript, where it was afterwards replaced by the words in RK: The Nazgul came again, and as their Dark Lord now grew and put forth his strength, so their voices, which uttered only his will and his malice, were filled with evil and horror
You do like the words "only his will", as they do appear in RotK, right?
I can tell for instance, that the nazgul appeared in Angmar 300 years after Gondor conquered Harad.
You do realise this is a false comparisons, do you? There is no connection between Gondor and the nazguls. My refference shows that the nazgul appear/dissappear with Sauron, not independently of him.
And is there any reference to LOYALTY of the King of Carn-Dum to Sauron?
Fine, call it subserviency of the nazgul to Sauron.
Little enthusiasm, yes: lagging behind, making mistakes, straying in daylight, not showing any initiative, looking for the Shire in the Vales, when the WK probably knew all along where it was, missing the ringbearer in Hobbiton, passing the ringbearer on the road, waiting till the Buckleberry ferry was afloat before appearing on the shore - that is another matter.
Seeing that they are the most suited for this mission, any shortcomings they have are not intentional.

[Gordis]

They were only able to be saved by Tom because Frodo was able to gain consciousness. I wonder why that was. Did he receive aid (from the Ring, or from someone else), was he just lucky, or had the wight maybe taken too many prisoners at one time?
I believe it was the Ring again. It wanted to be put on... :D

Anyway, what about those who probably could defeat wights? Well, it seems that people like Gandalf and Glorfindel didn’t need barrow blades to face the Nazgul. There is plenty of evidence for that. So, most likely, those who were able to face the wights wouldn’t have been interested in retrieving the blades, and those who did need the blades (being the Nazguls’ weaker enemies) were unable to face the wights. This helps explain why the swords had remained hidden for so long.
I think, Glorfy and Gandy didn't know about the blades. If they did, why not give some at least to those who fought at Fornost?
Why not give one to Earnur whoi was so keen on fighting the WK?

so is there then a consensus that the swords were nothing especially special? Merely that happy would they who wrought them have been to know their fate - to pin one into a leg and cause the WK to stumble?
No consensus is possible here. :evil:

[Alcuin]

so is there then a consensus that the swords were nothing especially special? Merely that happy would they who wrought them have been to know their fate - to pin one into a leg and cause the WK to stumble?Urg! I think the consensus is quite the opposite: they were something special.

But then, as my old physics teacher used to say (usually when the football team or the band was being summoned from studying the laws of motion of the theory of optics in his physics class to some practice for extracurricular activity), All of you are special, but some of you are special-special.Ed:Be certain that I am applying this bit of scientific observation to the blades alone. I know from my old physics teacher that I am special-special, and I am sure that everyone else on Entmoot is, too.

[jammi567]

I think, Glorfy and Gandy didn't know about the blades. If they did, why not give some at least to those who fought at Fornost?
Why not give one to Earnur whoi was so keen on fighting the WK?
but what we do know of the nazgul is that they create great fear into their surroundings, and that even in rivendale, there are few who are willing to face them. therefore, what's the use of giving them these extra special blades, when all that's going to happen is that a) they cower from fright, b) they run from fright or possibly c) die from fright. :)

[Butterbeer]

they were something special.

so...you think these knives are effectively Nazgul WMDs then??? :rolleyes: :eek:

why????


(other than a quote that is clearly written for dramatic effect and for the story at that momment)

[Alcuin]

so...you think these knives are effectively Nazgul WMDs then???No, there were WIDs - Weapons of Individual Destruction.

[Butterbeer]

Touche' :D

[jammi567]

No, there were WIDs - Weapons of Individual Destruction.
you mean like they worked just against the nazgul?

[Alcuin]

you mean like they worked just against the nazgul?No, they worked one at a time.

[Butterbeer]

so... they would not work, say, against a troll or an orc?

Is this not ,then, problematical?

;)

best, BB

*edit** ... cross post ...don't all swords work one at a time? Is that not a superfluous defence? :D

[jammi567]

No, they worked one at a time.
even more confused now. :confused: :confused:

[CAB]

I think, Glorfy and Gandy didn't know about the blades. If they did, why not give some at least to those who fought at Fornost?
Why not give one to Earnur whoi was so keen on fighting the WK?
I agree that they seem to be unfamiliar with the swords. However, even if they did know of them, are you sure they would have raided the barrows to retrieve them for their less powerful allies? I don’t think so, personally.

First off, in Tolkien’s world, the most powerful opponents seem to very often meet face to face. Remember that both Gandalf and Glorfindel come very close to fighting hand to hand with the Witch King.

Second, the barrow blades weren’t exactly the key to defeating Angmar or Mordor. Useful tools, yes, but not of too much importance compared with other things. Sure, Angmar probably would have immediately fallen if the Witch King had been destroyed, but getting a good “shot at him� must have been very difficult. I would guess that this is much of the reason why knowledge of the swords seemed to have been lost to all but the Nazgul themselves and Bombadil. The only times that we know of when they had an impact was when they appeared unexpectedly (for the Witch King).

Third, it would just seem kind of weird to have someone extremely powerful digging into a tomb and facing the undead to arm much weaker people to face an opponent that this powerful person could face himself without such a weapon.

Also, as jammi pointed out, someone who needs the blade to fight a Nazgul, may be too afraid to use it.

[Alcuin]

even more confused now. :confused: :confused:One Nazgûl at a time.

[jammi567]

ohh, right.

[Alcuin]

so... they would not work, say, against a troll or an orc?Pippin called his sword "Troll's Bane" in "The Scouring of the Shire", remember? (There is a 'Mooter with that monicker.)

don't all swords work one at a time?Exactly

[jammi567]

Pippin called his sword "Troll Bane" in "The Scouring of the Shire", remember?
only because he just happened to stab one in the battle outside the black gates. he didn't kill it or anything, just gave it a comparativly small wound.

[Alcuin]

only because he just happened to stab one in the battle outside the black gates. he didn't kill it or anything, just gave it a comparativly small wound.The troll wasn't a Ringwraith, was it? If the short sword in the barrow that Frodo picked up and used to hew the hand of the wraith was a fifth blade of the same sort, it didn't kill that wraith, either.

And come to think of it, the Witch-king wasn't killed by the barrow-blade: it apparently made him vulnerable to Eowyn's blade.

So maybe it just made the troll vulnerable to something else. :p

Wouldn't this part of the discussion be done greater justice in a thread for the purpose of discussing the barrow-blades? There must be an old one lying about here someplace...

[CAB]

so... they would not work, say, against a troll or an orc?

Is this not ,then, problematical?
I don’t think it is problematic when you consider that these probably weren’t anyone’s primary sword (other than the Hobbits). They were little more than knives for the men of Arnor. The barrow blades weren’t meant to be used against Trolls or Orcs in battle, the soldiers probably had regular long swords for that. Most likely, the barrow blades were meant entirely for the Witch King.

Of course, Pippin’s blade did prove useful against a Troll and the Hobbits did manage to get a few Orcs with them also.

[jammi567]

And come to think of it, the Witch-king wasn't killed by the barrow-blade: it apparently made him vulnerable to Eowyn's blade.

So maybe it just made the troll vulnerable to something else.
Maybe that was the special power of the swords then. to simply make them vulnable to ordanary wepons, not to outright kill a nazgul.

[Butterbeer]

course' a liddle bitsy bit of water down Bruinen way was enough to knacker up their bodies ... personally i think any sword could destroy their "physical" bodies ... why then did the WK "die" though ..or is he just effectivly out of action for the duration of the rest of the time period between Pelenor and mount doom?

[jammi567]

course' a liddle bitsy bit of water down Bruinen way was enough to knacker up their bodies ... personally i think any sword could destroy their "physical" bodies ... why then did the WK "die" though ..or is he just effectivly out of action for the duration of the rest of the time period between Pelenor and mount doom?
what i mean is distroying the magic that held it to both the spiritual world and the physical world, and just brought the witch-king (or any nazgul) into the physical world, so that normal wepons could hurt, and possibly kill, him/them.

No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would've delt a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will.

[Landroval]

We really don’t know how strong the wights were.
The way Tom reffers to them doesn't imply that a terrible force is necessary to withstand them:
Keep to the green grass. Don't you go a-meddling with old stone or cold Wights or prying in their houses, unless you be strong folk with hearts that never falter!
Moreover, if they have some significant power, why aren't they mentioned in any battle. If they are such successful warriors, why don't they appear anywhere alse than the barrows?
In Cardolan there were NO direct descendants of Isildur left, but there surely were indirect (not father-to son) ones.
Even if the last prince of Cardolan and the ruler of Arthedain are not the same, though they did die in the same year and the former is not named _anywhere_ in the chronicles, which makes his separate identification quite questionable, it cannot be argued that the wraiths can count on lack of information between the dunedain of cardolan and arthedain, not when they were all fighting the same war.
I would guess that this is much of the reason why knowledge of the swords seemed to have been lost to all but the Nazgul themselves and Bombadil.
Tom didnt even state the blades were magical

[jammi567]

Tom didnt even state the blades were magical
what makes you so sure that Tom didn't know that the blades were magical or not. just because a character (in any book you read) doesn't state that they know something or not, doesn't mean that they don't have that knowledge. afterall, Tom has been around probally since the universe began, so it's unlikely that he didn't have knowledge of the power that the blades have.

[Farimir Captain of Gondor]

Is there a 'How to kill a Nazgul' thread somewhere?

I'll just ask here for now since we're talking about the barrow blades killing the WK. The prophecy says no living man could kill him right? So why wouldn't Legolas' arrows hurt him? I remember someone saying something about that. Also, if the WK had killed Eowyn wouldn't the onslaught of the Dead Army be able to kill him too? I mean, they aren't living men?

[Landroval]

So why wouldn't Legolas' arrows hurt him?
Frodo has an armor that resisted a spear that could have skewered a boar; the w-k, as the most important servant of Sauron, ought to be fitted with the best armor possible, so stoping an arrow wouldn't be such a surprise.
Moreover, we see that Tolkien switched between man and Man as he saw fit ;) - though Legolas can be said to be a 'man', by gender, he is not a 'Man', by race:
In that day Eowyn also won renown, for she fought in that battle, riding in disguise; and was known after in the Mark as the Lady of the Shield-arm. [For her shield-arm was broken by the mace of the Witch-king; but he was brought to nothing, and thus the words of Glorfindel long before to King Earnur were fulfilled, that the Witch-king would not fall by the hand of man. For it is said in the songs of the Mark that in this deed Eowyn had the aid of Theoden's esquire, and that he also was not a Man but a Halfling out of a far country, though Eomer gave him honour in the Mark and the name of Holdwine.
But that contradicts other refferences in the letters, where hobbits are said to be Men too.

[Butterbeer]

can we really call elves men in the sense you mean when they apparently don't like to have sex much? ;)

yes you'd assume Sauron might still have some stock of mithril lying about ...but maybe not ...

in the words of the stones i guess he could always paint it black :p

Best BB


* interesting piece jammi - mainly for the questions it riases (oops wrong thread on that one!)

[jammi567]

Frodo has an armor that resisted a spear that could have skewered a boar; the w-k, as the most important servant of Sauron, ought to be fitted with the best armor possible, so stoping an arrow wouldn't be such a surprise.
I would think so. after all, he's your most powerful servent you have, so he should have the best armour-even if no-one's going to be able to get close enough to strike.

[Landroval]

I found another interesting quote in the Reader's companion; it sort of refutes the idea of the blades being known only to the dunedain of Cardolan, but it also gives the blades a good deal of importance:
On 18 April and 6 May 1963, Tolkien wrote to Anneke C. Kloos-Adriaansen and P. Kloos that the incidents of the witch-king [damned be his name ] in Book I, Chapter 12, and of Merry's sword in the present chapter:
were intended to be integrated with the entire mytho-historical background, events in an agelong war. Frodo received his wound from the witch-king under Wheatertop, the bulwark of the ancient fortified line made by the Numenoreans against his kingdom; Meriadoc's dagger was taken from the gravemounds of the same people. It was made by smiths who knew all about Sauron and his servants, and made in prophetic vision or hope of ending just as it did. [spelling sic, courtesy of Christopher Tolkien]

[jammi567]

nice. so when the people made those swards, they bloody well knew what they were doing.

[Alcuin]

Landroval, I don't want to nit-pick, but I don't follow how that does or does not demonstrate that only Cardolan smiths knew the secret of making these blades.

I am uncomfortable with the idea myself; but context drives me to accept it. Consider that: Aragorn doesn't recognize the blades; Glorfindel doesn't recognize the blades; Elrond doesn't recognize the blades; Gandalf doesn't recognize the blades; None of Elrond's counselors recognizes the blades; Only Bombadil seems to recognize the blades & know what they are - other than the Nazgûl, of course.Maybe you're right, & the secret has only been forgotten; or maybe Elrond, his sons & counselors, & Gandalf are all suffering some Elvish version of senile dementia, & with age, they are forgetting: "slowly to forget, & be forgotten," perhaps?

I think the only conclusion is that they never knew or understood the significance of the blades: the knowledge had been lost to the Dúnedain, & the Eldar either never knew or, as with the Second Age Númenóreans regarding the Rings of Power, never knew enough.

I'm not saying you're wrong, only that I can't derive your claim from your post. I'm not saying I'm right, only that I feel compelled to my position because nothing else fits. To paraphrase Sir A Conan Doyle's words in the mouth of Sherlock Holmes: When all other possibilities have been eliminated, what is left, however unlikely, must be the truth.

-|-

It's a wonderful quote, though! I had specifically looked for gems from that vein, but I missed that one.

[Landroval]

* Aragorn doesn't recognize the blades;
* Glorfindel doesn't recognize the blades;
* Elrond doesn't recognize the blades;
* Gandalf doesn't recognize the blades;
* None of Elrond's counselors recognizes the blades;
* Only Bombadil seems to recognize the blades & know what they are - other than the Nazgûl, of course.
This and the fact that the blades were wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor - even though Mordor was desolate at that time, shows, to me, that Tolkien's (later?) intent wasn't very much in tune with his final work, or that he moved back and forth between his ideas, seeing that in Sauron Defeated there are some quotes in which Gandalf gives more weight to the blades than on the final text. Concerning the Cardolan exclusive trademark on them, Tolkien reffers to the M-E Numenoreans as a whole, and he wants to integrate the blades in the entire mytho-historical background. It seems to me that the emphasis is on the numenorean as a "race" , than on a particular faction.

[jammi567]

well, what do you expect from a man who was constantly going between different ideas throught the 14 years of writing the story.

[Alcuin]

This and the fact that the blades were wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor - even though Mordor was desolate at that time, shows, to me, that Tolkien's (later?) intent wasn't very much in tune with his final work, or that he moved back and forth between his ideas, seeing that in Sauron Defeated there are some quotes in which Gandalf gives more weight to the blades than on the final text. Concerning the Cardolan exclusive trademark on them, Tolkien reffers to the M-E Numenoreans as a whole, and he wants to integrate the blades in the entire mytho-historical background. It seems to me that the emphasis is on the numenorean as a "race" , than on a particular faction.Oh, ok. It could have been a Second Age discovery, and so whomever made the blades in Arnor (or its daughter kingdoms: if the blades were made during the wars with Angmar, they had to be made after III 1356, when the first war began, and before III 1636, when the barrow-wights infested the downs and the Dúnedain lost access to the tombs: at the beginning of the period, there were three kingdoms, and by the end of it, only Arthedain remained) was using information derived during the Second Age.

By implication, Landroval, you are still suggesting that the information was lost during the wars. The reasons are that the blades are still unrecognized by the Wise, who should have known what they were and told the hobbits the importance of the weapons, and Gondor should also have made such blades if the knowledge belonged to the Dúnedain as a whole, unless of course the information was remembered or reassembled only in the North (say, because Elrond or some other Elf or sage recalled some key point forgotten in the South).The advantage of this hypothesis is that it gives the Númenórean armies of the Second Age devastating weapons against the Nazgûl. However, for that to be, the Noldorin Exile survivors of Ost-in-Edhil, whom we know escaped Rivendell with Elrond during the ruinous war Sauron waged against the Elves for possession of the Rings of Power that ended Eregion, and I don’t think that assumption can be supported: the evidence is that the Second Age Númenóreans were kept uninformed about the Rings of Power. (Mike Martinez did this work; I believe I can find the reference if you need it.)

If you move the development and manufacture of these barrow-blades into the Third Age, then you have Noldorin smiths from Ost-in-Edhil living in Rivendell watching their friends and allies get their heads handed to them (literally) in a war against Angmar reminiscent in some ways of the destruction of Eregion; moreover, Elrond had blood ties to the Dúnedain, and he acknowledged that. Finally, all Dúnedain in the North knew about Isildur and the One Ring, because until the fall of Fornost in III 1974, that was the penultimate disaster in the history of Arnor. So a Dúnadan asking about the Nazgûl and their nature in the Third Age, especially during or just after a real crisis threatening the survival of the Dúnedain and maybe even the continued existence of Rivendell (the last refuge in Middle-earth of the Noldor: CÃ*rdan ruled what should have been a mostly Sindar population derived from the survivors of Beleriand, while Lothlórien and Thranduil’s kingdoms were Silvan Elves), is a whole lot more likely to get a straight answer from the few remaining Noldor who knew something about the nature and manufacture of the Rings of Power than a Second Age Númenórean who might abuse the information. (Given the track record of Númenor toward its end, I think they would have abused that knowledge.) Elrond was going have to sign off on revealing those kinds of secrets.

Now, Elrond or even Gil-galad might have given his blessing on passing along this information during the War of the Last Alliance, when the Nazgûl must also have been a scourge; but then, as before, Elrond and Wise should have recognized the daggers, and given their potency, they would be remiss not to tell the hobbits what they were. They should have attempted to recover what were left of them since Bombadil left the whole trove exposed. Again, lack of recognition is not a sure-fire indication that the Eldar knew nothing about the nature of these particular blades, but it’s highly suggestive that they did not invent them, and that they did not know what they were, even if they knew that such blades had existed in the past.

The way out of that is to argue that Denethor did recognize Pippin’s blade: and of course, we know that he did. We don’t know whether he recognized the artwork and style, making that a cultural recognition (“Oh! that looks an 11th-century Anglo-Saxon brooch.� “Yes, it is. It came a nineteenth-century dig.�) or a functional recognition in the sense that Denethor knew what it did but did not say so. I have no answer to this part of the problem, it’s just an observation.

Finally, let’s consider the nature of the weapons themselves. The barrow-blades are the “good� counterparts of the “evil� Morgul-blade the Witch-king used against Frodo on Weathertop. Aragorn and Glorfindel did recognize that weapon, both from its actions and from its appearance. That means that the Morgul-knives were used many times against Men in the Third Age. We know that Boromir Ruling Steward of Gondor received such a wound in III 2475 in the war against Minas Morgul waged in Ithilien. He did not turn into a wraith and continued to live for many years, indicating that the splinter that broke off was successfully removed, but his life was considerably shortened nevertheless. It makes sense that the Morgul-knives preceded the barrow-blades. Turning a living Man into a wraith by means of leaving a poisoned or enchanted fragment inside the victim is necessarily an act of necromancy. Sauron is The Necromancer, and his chief servant the Witch-king is also a necromancer. That they would make a weapon for this purpose is just par for the course.

If these weapons first appeared in the wars with Angmar in the fourteenth century of the Third Age, then the Dúnedain, who were still fairly numerous in Arnor (or of course, its daughter kingdoms; though the Dúnedain in Rhudaur, where they were fewest, might have been wiped out right away in the first war) and still had a civilization all their own, should have started looking for a solution to this problem immediately. Instead of finding a cure, I think what makes sense is that the Dúnedain learned how the process worked – which by necessity had to include consultation with the Noldor of Rivendell, although the Noldor would not necessarily know the outcome of the efforts of the Dúnedain sages and smiths – and they were able to manufacture a weapon that acted on the wraiths in the same fashion as the Morgul-knives did on people. I think that fits with what you’ve quoted from Reader’s Companion.

You bring up one interesting point I had not considered before, and I don’t recall its being mentioned earlier in the threads here or in the other forum that we discussed this. Aragorn said that orcs recognized the barrow-blades of which they despoiled Merry and Pippin were “bound about with the bane of Mordor.� I don’t how far to take that: I don’t know whether it means that Aragorn did positively know and understand what the barrow-blades were, or that he merely read the runes and ciphers on the blades. (If you recall, Glorfindel told Aragorn there were “evil things� written on the hilt of the Morgul-knife.) You could push really hard on this and say that the orcs knew for what the knives of Merry and Pippin were intended; I don’t think it works, but I think you could try it.

I don’t believe taking the position that the blades were “bound about with spells for the bane of Mordor� means that they had to be made only during those times in which Mordor itself was openly occupied by Sauron or his minions. First of all, we are specifically told that these knives were made by the Dúnedain of Arnor (both by Denethor and by Tolkien as narrator) for the wars against Angmar and the Witch-king (by Tolkien as narrator). You’ve already pointed out that Mordor was presumably empty then. I wouldn’t go as far as to call Aragorn’s words “poetic license,� but I think that “the bane of Mordor� is indistinguishable from the “the bane of Morgul� or “the bane of Angmar� or “the bane of Dol Guldur.� They are all fruit of the same vile tree. Angmar is no more, but a weapon intended for the Witch-king in Angmar seems to me just as potent as the same weapon used against the Witch-king in Mordor – or on the Pelennor Field. The geographic location of the intended target of a hand-held, close-combat weapon is unlikely to be of any import.

in Sauron Defeated there are some quotes in which Gandalf gives more weight to the blades than on the final text.I confess I have missed this entirely. I looked up all the Nazgûl, Ringwraith, and Wizard King (Witch-king) references in the index in Sauron Defeated for the Lord of the Rings material, and I can’t find any reference to the barrow-blades that way. Could you be a little more specific? I can’t find the reference, and I don’t remember it. You might explore trying to use that citation along with Aragorn’s words about “the bane of Mordor,� combined maybe with Denethor’s recognition of the knife as work of the Northern Dúnedain, to wedge open the idea that there is more knowledge about their history than I have ascribed to them.

[jammi567]

more knowledge! :eek:

[Valtir]

Dropping a large object would work -- crush the Ring Bearer, with the Ring unharmed amid the muck.

[jammi567]

i like your sense of humour. :)

[The One Ring, The Precous]

L.O.L. means Laugh Out Loud.