Who Killed the Witch King: The Final Answer
Robert Shirley
I'm going to risk opening another round of discussions
concerning the eternal question as to who _actually_
"killed" the Nazgul: Eowyn or Merry.
Well, I was thumbing through LETTERS and came across a
most remarkable passage. It had to do with Tolkien's
criticism of someone's feeble attempt at an animated
screen play for LotR.
He is commenting on the fight on the top of Weathertop:
"Aragorn did not `sing the song of Gil-galad'.
Naturally: it was quite inappropriate, since it told of
the _defeat_ of the Elven-king by the Enemy. The Black
Riders do not scream, but keep a more terrifying silence.
Aragorn does not blanch. The riders draw slowly in on
foot in darkneww, 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. (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)."
LETTER #210
Seems like this is conclusive evidence that Merry did NOT
"kill" the Witch-king, but merely wounded it - which
allowed for Eowyn to officially "off the bugger".
Sam's blade is like Merry's blade - coming from the
Barrowdowns and having been made by the Men of
Westernesse with spells of ruin for the Witch-king,
HOWEVER - Tolkien states that if Sam had stabbed the
Nazgul he would have "fallen down" - this is a far cry
from killing, vanquishing, mortally wounding, or whatever
term you want to use.
So, Merry gets the assist and Eowyn the point.
Guillermo Alvarez
I think that the very LotR makes this point clear. It says something
to the effect that Merry wounded the Nazgul's knee from behind (by
slipping the Dunedain sword through a slit of the armor) when the
Nazgul was about to kill Eowyn. The nasty fell, and Eowyn thrusted
her sword with all her might at the "empty" space between the crown and
the robed shoulders, killing the sucker.
Guillermo
@#$%!?!
: slipping the Dunedain sword through a slit of the armor) when the
Technically, under the haubrek. JRRT didn't put his characters in
plate armor, but rather chain mail shirts. A haubrek hung down to
the knees, like a short dress, and boots protected the lower leg.
--
The Queen who loves, the Queen of life, | smr...@netcom.com PO Box 1563
the Queen who straits, the Queen of strife;| Cupertino, California
with gasp of death or gift of breath | (xxx)xxx-xxxx 95015
she brings the choice of birth or knife. | I don't use no smileys
ajan...@uwyo.edu
In article <4m5rbp$3...@news2.cts.com>, Robert Shirley <shi...@cts.com> writes:
>I'm going to risk opening another round of discussions
>concerning the eternal question as to who _actually_
>"killed" the Nazgul: Eowyn or Merry.
>
OH, my GOD! Not again!
BThompson
Robert Shirley <shi...@cts.com>, a man of letters, wrote:
>I'm going to risk opening another round of discussions
>concerning the eternal question as to who _actually_
>"killed" the Nazgul: Eowyn or Merry.
>
<interesting quote snipped>
>
>So, Merry gets the assist and Eowyn the point.
>
Nah...it was Colonel Mustard with a candlestick in the library.
Regards,
Bill
O. Sharp
BThompson (will...@lamar.colostate.edu) suggests an alternate answer:
: Robert Shirley <shi...@cts.com>, a man of letters, wrote:
<very good quote, which I wish I'd noticed first, snipped>
: >So, Merry gets the assist and Eowyn the point.
: Nah...it was Colonel Mustard with a candlestick in the library.
Well! That takes care of _my_ pet theory that it was really a suicide. :)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
o...@netcom.com "Oh, but surely he simply shot himself and then
hid the gun."
-Michael Palin
Yale University Public Cluster User
Robert Shirley wrote:
> So, Merry gets the assist and Eowyn the point.
No, the Witch-King got the point ;)
Peter Maksym
BThompson
o...@netcom.com (O. Sharp) came in with guns a-blazin':
Then again, maybe it was Bombadil in drag with a banana twinkie...
Regards,
Bill
P.S. Is everybody recording this for future discussions? :^)
Bruce Hietbrink
Just a conceptual question--is it possible to have a thread
with the subject "The Final Answer"? It seems that with the
first followup the title is negated.
Bruce Hietbrink
Bruce Alderman
BThompson <will...@lamar.colostate.edu> wrote:
> Then again, maybe it was Bombadil in drag with a banana twinkie...
> P.S. Is everybody recording this for future discussions? :^)
It ought to at least go into the FAQ.
--
O. Sharp
BThompson (will...@lamar.colostate.edu) reveals the final clue:
: o...@netcom.com (O. Sharp) came in with guns a-blazin':
: >BThompson (will...@lamar.colostate.edu) suggests an alternate answer:
: >: Robert Shirley <shi...@cts.com>, a man of letters, wrote:
: >: >So, Merry gets the assist and Eowyn the point.
: >: Nah...it was Colonel Mustard with a candlestick in the library.
: >Well! That takes care of _my_ pet theory that it was really a suicide. :)
: Then again, maybe it was Bombadil in drag with a banana twinkie...
Hmmmmm.... <light bulb goes off above head, standard 40-watt A-fixture>
That's it! That's _it_, man! You've finally given me the clue we really
needed to solve the mystery of Tom Bombadil at last!
Ready?
_Tom Bombadil and the Witch-king of Angmar are the same person._
1) We never hear of Tom at all during the whole of the First Age. The
Nine Rings aren't forged until the Second Age. QED.
2) You never see the two of them together.
3) In the first part of _Fellowship_, the Nazgul are sent to the Shire to
look for the wandering Baggins. Interestingly, Tom says to Frodo at the
dinner-table: "...I was waiting for you. We heard news of you, and
learned that you were wandering... But Tom had an errand there, _that he
dared not hinder_" (_Fellowship_ p.137 hardback, emphasis mine: note the
fear Tom has of his master, Sauron!).
4) In Tom's questioning of the Hobbits, JRRT notes that "there was a glint
in his eyes when he heard of the Riders." (_Fellowship_ p. 144) I think
he was concerned that his double-life might have been noticed.
Interestingly, Tom _immediately_ changes the subject of conversation!
Furthermore, the One Ring had _no effect_ on Tom - which seems
consistent with JRRT's observations about how the Nazgul would have
handled the same priceless object (_Letters_ #246): "They were... in no
way deceived as to the real lordship of the Ring."
5) It's also interesting to note that Tom could see Frodo clearly while
Frodo was wearing the Ring (_Fellowship_ p. 144 hardback) - _just as the
Witch-king could see Frodo clearly while he was wearing the Ring at
Weathertop!_ (_Fellowship_ p. 208 hardback)
6) Perhaps most damning, however, is the incident with the Barrow-wights
(_Fellowship_ pp. 151-155), where Tom - with nothing more than a few
simple words (p. 154) - commands the Barrow-wight to leave. _And it does,
without argument._ Why would the Wight be so completely under Tom's
control? _Because in his alternate guise as the Witch-king of Angmar, Tom
ordered the Wight to inhabit the barrow in the first place!_ Turning to
_RotK_, Appendix A, p. 321, "evil spirits out of Angmar... entered into the
deserted mounds and dwelt there." Obviously the Witch-king was reponsible
for sending the wights there; just as obviously, the Witch-king
(disguised as Tom) would be capable of ordering them to leave!
...Yep: I think we have an airtight case here. :)
...It's worth noting that, after the Witch-king was dead, Gandalf said he
was "going to have a long talk with Bombadil" (_RotK_, p. 275).
Curiously, he never tells anyone about it later... and he's right there at
the Grey Havens at the end of the book: undelayed, it seems, by long
conversation. I think we can therefore theorize that Gandalf made it to
the Old Forest, but that Tom (once the so-called "Witch-king" had died)
was nowhere to be found!
...Of course, all this brings up the curiosity of motive. What would make
the Witch-King of Angmar sport such a double identity? I suppose that the
Witch-king, once of proud Numenorean ancestry, felt trapped by the guise
of evil which Sauron had tricked him into, and in the fullness of time
forged this alternate identity for himself so that he could occasionally
feel happy, helpful, noble, and more at one with himself and his lineage.
The situation is perhaps analagous to a crossdresser who, feeling trapped
in a man's body, would occasionally assume the identity of a woman. It
therefore makes sense that the Witch-king's other identity would be so
peculiarly enigmatic, and perhaps sheds light on JRRT's observation in
_Letters_ #144: "And even in a mythical Age there must be some enigmas,
as there always are. Tom Bombadil is one (intentionally)."
...Who else would be aware of Tom's double-life, I wonder? Since Tom
repeatedly claims to have been around "before the river and the trees",
and indeed even claims to be older than the Ents (_Fellowship_ p. 142),
surely the eldest of the Elves would know he was lying. Elrond plays
along with Tom in public, being kind enough not to reveal his secret, but
also seems to know that Tom and the Witch-king are one and the same; hence
his refusal to give the Ring to Tom for safekeeping (_Fellowship_ p. 278-9):
"Power to defy the Enemy is not in him."
...Yes, I think we've solved the mystery of Tom Bombadil's identity once and
for all. :)
: P.S. Is everybody recording this for future discussions? :^)
<grin> We can only hope. :) :) :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
o...@netcom.com Sing along with me, everybody:
"The ol' Witch-king is a merry fellow,
Dark black his cowl is, and his crown is yellow..."
Raistlin Wakefield
BThompson <will...@lamar.colostate.edu> wrote:
>Robert Shirley <shi...@cts.com>, a man of letters, wrote:
>>I'm going to risk opening another round of discussions
>>concerning the eternal question as to who _actually_
>>"killed" the Nazgul: Eowyn or Merry.
>>
><interesting quote snipped>
>>
>>So, Merry gets the assist and Eowyn the point.
>>
>Nah...it was Colonel Mustard with a candlestick in the library.
Is that a suggestion or an accusation?
Raist
BThompson
rai...@gate.net (Raistlin Wakefield) cross-examined:
>BThompson <will...@lamar.colostate.edu> revealed:
>
>>Robert Shirley <shi...@cts.com>, a man of letters, wrote:
>
>>>I'm going to risk opening another round of discussions
>>>concerning the eternal question as to who _actually_
>>>"killed" the Nazgul: Eowyn or Merry.
>>>
>><interesting quote snipped>
>>>
>>>So, Merry gets the assist and Eowyn the point.
>>>
>
>>Nah...it was Colonel Mustard with a candlestick in the library.
>
>
>Is that a suggestion or an accusation?
>
Actually, it's an exposition. :^)
Regards,
Bill
@#$%!?!
: Actually, it's an exposition. :^)
: Regards,
: Bill
Hey, look everybody. Bill exposed himself on the Internet.
anti-blair
"Giving this thread all the respect
it deserves."
Eric Adam Smith
O. Sharp (o...@netcom.com) wrote:
: 3) In the first part of _Fellowship_, the Nazgul are sent to the Shire to
: look for the wandering Baggins. Interestingly, Tom says to Frodo at the
: dinner-table: "...I was waiting for you. We heard news of you, and
: learned that you were wandering... But Tom had an errand there, _that he
: dared not hinder_" (_Fellowship_ p.137 hardback, emphasis mine: note the
: fear Tom has of his master, Sauron!).
More like fear of what Goldberry would do if he didn't get those
water-lilies back in time. :-)
--
Eric Adam Smith
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt6699b
Internet: gt6...@prism.gatech.edu
ajan...@uwyo.edu
In article <IboixQcr...@southwind.net>, b...@southwind.net (Bruce Alderman) writes:
>BThompson <will...@lamar.colostate.edu> wrote:
>
>> Then again, maybe it was Bombadil in drag with a banana twinkie...
>
>
>--
>
Well now we are getting some intelligent conversation on this issue. My money
says that it was really a tag team match that Goldberry and Rumplestiltsken
won!
Paterson, Adrian Mark
>Hmmmmm.... <light bulb goes off above head, standard 40-watt A-fixture>
>That's it! That's _it_, man! You've finally given me the clue we really
>needed to solve the mystery of Tom Bombadil at last!
>Ready?
>_Tom Bombadil and the Witch-king of Angmar are the same person._
This REALLY made me laugh. Still it does raise the issue of who Goldberry
was. She is just as much of a mystery. Maybe she is Galadriel.
1) You never see the two of them together.
2) She can walk through the rain without getting wet, she's the river's
daughter or something. This obviously ties in with Galadriel's ring (isn't it
water related).
3) She hates Sauron (who orders her partner out and about for many months at a
time, time he could spend at home).
4) I'm sure that it says that she was a bit frosty to Eowyn and Merry for
killing Tom/Witch King.
5) Explains why Lothlorien did nothing about the Balrog up the road or much
during the war.
6) well the list goes on. But it all fits.
That Tolkien, what a guy. He could outplot the best.
Adrian
Bruce Alderman
On Tue 7 May 1996, pate...@lincoln.ac.nz (Paterson, Adrian Mark) wrote:
> Still it does raise the issue of who Goldberry was. She is just as
> much of a mystery. Maybe she is Galadriel.
Wait... I've got it! Goldberry is Eowyn!!! Consider...
1) [The cliche] You never see the two of them together.
2) When Theoden and company arrive at Dunharrow, Theoden asks Eowyn if
all is well: "`All is well,' she answered; yet it seemed to Merry that
her voice belied her, and he would have thought that she had been
weeping, if that could be believed of one of so stern a face." Already
she knew that it was her fate to kill the Witch-king Bombadil. Though
she tried to keep a stern face, she could not help weeping at the loss
which she was fated to suffer.
3) Eowyn took the name Dernhelm ('Dern', IIRC, means 'secret') because
she was keeping secret the fact that she is actually Goldberry.
4) When Eowyn/Goldberry revealed herself to the Witch-king/Bombadil, he
was suddenly taken aback and filled with doubt... he never imagined that
his lover would try to kill him.
5) Later, in the Houses of Healing, Gandalf says to Eowyn, "Great
gladness it is to see you wake again to health and to hope, so valiant a
lady!" And Eowyn replies, "To health? It may be so. ... But to hope? I
do not know." She could no longer hope after her beloved Bombadil had
died... by her own hand, no less.
The great tragic heroes of the Silmarillion pale beside the story of
Goldberry and Tom Bombadil, now fully revealed for the first time.
--
Yale University Public Cluster User
Paterson, Adrian Mark wrote:
> >_Tom Bombadil and the Witch-king of Angmar are the same person._
>
> was. She is just as much of a mystery. Maybe she is Galadriel.
> Adrian
No, no, no. Goldberry was really Queen Beruthiel :)
1. She's every bit as enigmatic as Goldberry, and we certainly never see
THEM together.
2. If Goldberry exhibited a sort of Jeckyl/Hyde complex, it would lend
support to the notion that her husband spent evenings and weekends as an
alter-ego, the scourge of the Dunedain.
3. And who else but someone with a cat fetish could take in a bunch of
scraggly looking hobbits who had just been tramping through the Old Forest?
4. Furthermore, a close look at the name, "Beruthiel", reveals it to be
a shortening of "Berethiriel" (Sindarin?) which comes from "bereth", an
element in "Elbereth" that signifies loftiness or sublimity, "thir" which is
related to "sir", a word for river, and "iel" which means daughter.
Conclusion? Queen Beruthiel is really the joyful river-daughter!
Pete Maksym