the true identity of the Witch King?
david60610
original identity of the Witch King was?
Of the major characters in the LOTR, the Witch King seems to be
the least developed in terms of his background. I got thinking
about his role after seeing ROTK the movie. I was struck by
Gandalf's comment--"Sauron will not take the bait"--in reference
to the possible final assault on the Black Gate. I was curious
as to why Sauron DID take the bait--after all, up to this point
Sauron has been taking the lead on all military action. Why
did Sauron change tactics, when there was no obvious reason to
do so?
I was left with the thought that there is a strange symbiosis
between Sauron and the Witch King. The Witch King depends on
Sauron's ring and his own related ring for any power he has. Yet
Sauron also depends on the Witch King to be his main military
strategist--with the Witch King gone, Sauron is deprived of his
primary military leader from the past many centuries/millenia,
and the remaining 8 Nazgul are not up to the task and start
making stupid blunders.
I have seen some strange theories proposed on the internet--that
Sauron and the Witch King were once lovers in mortal life, or
that Tom Bombadil is actually the Witch King. While these
theories seem outlandish (although you can see where the Bombadil
one got started given that Tom is the other important character
with a mysterious past, and both Tom and the Witch King have
spent a lot of time in N. Middle Earth), I am wondering what
the true explanation is. From the movie, I got the very real
sense that Sauron is very seriously weakened by the Witch King's
death--more so than the main characters expect--and that the
relationship between Sauron and the Witch King is a complex one.
I'm wondering if the Witch King's origins can help explain what,
to me, is a significant mystery.
Aris Katsaris
"david60610" <david...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5a2db3e.04032...@posting.google.com...
>
> I was struck by
> Gandalf's comment--"Sauron will not take the bait"--in reference
> to the possible final assault on the Black Gate. I was curious
> as to why Sauron DID take the bait--after all, up to this point
> Sauron has been taking the lead on all military action. Why
> did Sauron change tactics, when there was no obvious reason to
> do so?
Crushing your enemies and seizing back your ring isn't an
obvious reason?
> I have seen some strange theories proposed on the internet--that
> Sauron and the Witch King were once lovers in mortal life,
What mortal life? Sauron never had a mortal life.
> or
> that Tom Bombadil is actually the Witch King. While these
> theories seem outlandish
The Tom-Bombadil-as-Witch-King theory is a joke and a parody,
not "outlandish".
> I am wondering what the true explanation is.
It being the perfect opportunity to seize the Ring back from
Aragorn? That's the motivation mentioned in the book IIRC.
Aris Katsaris
Bill O'Meally
> I was left with the thought that there is a strange symbiosis
> between Sauron and the Witch King. The Witch King depends on
> Sauron's ring and his own related ring for any power he has. Yet
> Sauron also depends on the Witch King to be his main military
> strategist--with the Witch King gone, Sauron is deprived of his
> primary military leader from the past many centuries/millenia,
> and the remaining 8 Nazgul are not up to the task and start
> making stupid blunders.
The WK was not Sauron's strategist, but was the leader of the Morgul
army, and of the combined assault on Minas Tirith. Sauron was his own
strategist.
>
> I have seen some strange theories proposed on the internet--that
> Sauron and the Witch King were once lovers in mortal life, or
> that Tom Bombadil is actually the Witch King.
The Ring had no power over Tom, and clearly had power over the WK,
thereby blowing that theory.
From the movie, I got the very real
> sense that Sauron is very seriously weakened by the Witch King's
> death--more so than the main characters expect--and that the
> relationship between Sauron and the Witch King is a complex one.
I haven't seen the movie, but the relationship is quite simple: the WK,
as well as all the Nazgul, are completely subservient to Sauron, who is
their master. Sauron was weakened in the sense that he lost his chief
captain, and that was a blow to his confidence perhaps, but he wasn't
weakened in his powers. And he still had more than enough force to crush
the Captains of the West at the Black Gate had not other circumstances
intervened.
--
Bill
"Wise fool"
Gandalf, THE TWO TOWERS
-- The Wise will remove 'se' to reply; the Foolish will not--
Belba Grubb from Stock
wrote:
>I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts as to what the real,
>original identity of the Witch King was?
"Nine [Rings] he gave to Mortal Men, proud and great, and so ensnared
them," Gandalf says in "The Shadow of the Past." In the Tale of Years
it's said that the Nazgul first appeared around 2251 S.A., when
rebellion and division had begun in Numenor. In the Akallabeth in
"The Silmarillion" it is said that among the Nazgul three were "great
lords of Numenorean race." I think in some of the other works that
CJRT has published, there is more discussion of the Nazgul, and they
are even named, although I haven't read this yet. I would guess that
the Witch-King was originally the greatest of those three great
Numenorean lords. He and/or the others might even have been good at
one time, and noble, too.
> From the movie, I got the very real
>sense that Sauron is very seriously weakened by the Witch King's
>death--more so than the main characters expect--and that the
>relationship between Sauron and the Witch King is a complex one.
>I'm wondering if the Witch King's origins can help explain what,
>to me, is a significant mystery.
Well, I think that's also in the book, but that it has to do less with
a relationship between Sauron and the Witch-King (which is of the
usual Master-Slave variety) and more with the Witch-King's fall
bringing hope to Sauron's enemies and despair and division to his
minions. Gorbag and Shagrat refer to it, and so the tracker and the
big orc seen by Frodo and Sam in Mordor.
Sauron's "rep," if you will, takes a big hit when his "main ghoul" is
done in.
Barb
Martin Francis
> original identity of the Witch King was?
The issue is covered in the FAQ of The Encyclopaedia of Arda
(http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm). He doesn't have a name beyond
one given to him by the authors of an RPG card game.
--
Here lies the late Martin Francis
He couldn't tell you the technical merits of Leitz and Zeiss
But he did take some photographs once.
david60610
> david60610 wrote:
>
> > I was left with the thought that there is a strange symbiosis
> > between Sauron and the Witch King. The Witch King depends on
> > Sauron's ring and his own related ring for any power he has. Yet
> > Sauron also depends on the Witch King to be his main military
> > strategist--with the Witch King gone, Sauron is deprived of his
> > primary military leader from the past many centuries/millenia,
> > and the remaining 8 Nazgul are not up to the task and start
> > making stupid blunders.
>
> The WK was not Sauron's strategist, but was the leader of the Morgul
> army, and of the combined assault on Minas Tirith. Sauron was his own
> strategist.
This is true--yet I get the sense that if a Gondor historian, and
possibly even a Shire historian--were writing the tale of the War of the
Ring sometime mid-Fourth Age, the story would focus primarily on the
defeat of the Witch King's forces and the Witch King himself at
Pellonor Fields. Sauron's role and the role of the Ring would be only
a footnote. The Witch King killed the last King of Gondor, was a major
thorn in the side of the Dunedain in the North, and was finally defeated
near Minas Tirith. This defeat would be the primary topic of any
Gondor history. The final assault at the Black Gate and the destruction
of the Ring would be only a footnote.
We know that there is much more to the story, because we are told the
story from the eyes of Frodo--but Frodo leaves ME and isn't around
to tell his account of the story.
Sauron strikes me as being a bit like the dark side's counterpart to
Denethor--a guy who hides in his castle too much and leaves others to
do his fighting for him. The movie seems to suggest that the Witch
King is the dark side's counterpart to Gandalf.
david60610
> On 21 Mar 2004 13:02:42 -0800, david...@hotmail.com (david60610)
> wrote:
>
> >I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts as to what the real,
> >original identity of the Witch King was?
>
> "Nine [Rings] he gave to Mortal Men, proud and great, and so ensnared
> them," Gandalf says in "The Shadow of the Past." In the Tale of Years
> it's said that the Nazgul first appeared around 2251 S.A., when
> rebellion and division had begun in Numenor. In the Akallabeth in
> "The Silmarillion" it is said that among the Nazgul three were "great
> lords of Numenorean race." I think in some of the other works that
> CJRT has published, there is more discussion of the Nazgul, and they
> are even named, although I haven't read this yet. I would guess that
> the Witch-King was originally the greatest of those three great
> Numenorean lords. He and/or the others might even have been good at
> one time, and noble, too.
I guess my main thought was whether the Witch King might, in mortal
life, have been Ar-Pharazon, the last King of Numenor. This would
appear, superficially, to be ruled out because the Nazgul first
appeared over 1000 years before the reign of Ar-Pharazon. Yet we
are not told whether all nine Nazgul appeared at that time, and we
also know that the Three and the Seven have changed hands in the
past--so why not the Nine? Especially if the Nine were physically
not held by the Nazgul but by Sauron, it would seem that Sauron
would be able to 'reassign' the powers of any of the Nine if he
was done with an old slave and wanted to create a new underling.
To me it would explain a lot, because the relationship between
Sauron and Ar-Pharazon had the same complex element that I see
existing between Sauron and the Witch King. Sauron was originally
Ar-Pharazon's captive, yet Sauron seduced him--but to me such
an alliance has the potential for instability.
Stan Brown
rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>I have seen some strange theories proposed on the internet--that
>Sauron and the Witch King were once lovers in mortal life, or
>that Tom Bombadil is actually the Witch King. While these
>theories seem outlandish (although you can see where the Bombadil
>one got started given that Tom is the other important character
>with a mysterious past, and both Tom and the Witch King have
>spent a lot of time in N. Middle Earth),
And WE NEVER SEE THEM TOGETHER. :-)
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site)
Tolkien letters FAQ:
http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/lettersfaq.html
FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/faqget.htm
Stan Brown
>sense that Sauron is very seriously weakened by the Witch King's
>death--more so than the main characters expect--and that the
>relationship between Sauron and the Witch King is a complex one.
I wouldn't put too much stock in that.
In reality the relationship was very simple: the Witch-King was
Sauron's slave -- one of the greatest, but still a slave. Think of a
general under Hitler, and then subtract some initiative.
Sauron lost one of his best generals was the WK was put out of
action, but Sauron's military force was so great that he losing a
Nazgūl still left Sauron's chances of losing at 0%. (Read "The Last
Debate" chapter for Gandalf's summing up -- Gondor spent most of its
strength beating off an assault from a _minor_ army of Sauron's.)
Stan Brown
>Denethor--a guy who hides in his castle too much and leaves others to
>do his fighting for him.
Actually, Denethor was becoming the "good" side's counterpart to
Sauron. Alone of the captains of the West he was treating Sauron
mostly as a political foe. I know Tolkien said LotR was not an
allegory, but if Sauron had offered a decent-sounding treaty, the
Lord of Munich Tirith might well have taken it.
> The movie seems to suggest that the Witch
>King is the dark side's counterpart to Gandalf.
Again, I think it's a mistake to rely much on the movie. Or rather,
you can discuss motivations of movie characters and motivations of
book characters, but don't expect one to throw much light on the
other. The most obvious example is Faramir, but to a lesser extent
the same is true of the other characters too.
Chris Kern
posted the following:
>I guess my main thought was whether the Witch King might, in mortal
>life, have been Ar-Pharazon, the last King of Numenor.
Impossible for two reasons:
1. The Ringwraiths arose before Ar-Pharazons rule. According to the
Tale of Years, the Ringwraiths "first appear" in 2251. Ar-Pharazon
was born in 3118 (according to the "Line of Elros" in UT).
2. In multiple places Ar-Pharazon is said to have perished. Line of
Elros says he "died in the Downfall in the year 3319". In the
"Akallabeth" it says that he was buried by rocks.
-Chris
Stan Brown
>life, have been Ar-Pharazon, the last King of Numenor. This would
>appear, superficially, to be ruled out because the Nazgul first
>appeared over 1000 years before the reign of Ar-Pharazon.
And it would also be ruled out, NOT superficially, because Ar-
Pharazôn and his armies lie buried under mountains in Valinor.
Bill O'Meally
> "david60610" <david...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>> Sauron strikes me as being a bit like the dark side's counterpart to
>> Denethor--a guy who hides in his castle too much and leaves others to
>> do his fighting for him.
>
> Actually, Denethor was becoming the "good" side's counterpart to
> Sauron. Alone of the captains of the West he was treating Sauron
> mostly as a political foe. I know Tolkien said LotR was not an
> allegory, but if Sauron had offered a decent-sounding treaty, the
> Lord of Munich Tirith might well have taken it.
/Munich/ Tirith? :-) Was that a typo Stan, or are you stressing your
allegory point? If so, wouldn't "Munich" (or better, "Berlin") be more
applicable to Barad Dur?
AC
> Belba Grubb from Stock <ba...@dbtech.net> wrote in message news:<m06s50d7e9kc8c6s3...@4ax.com>...
>> On 21 Mar 2004 13:02:42 -0800, david...@hotmail.com (david60610)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts as to what the real,
>> >original identity of the Witch King was?
>>
>> "Nine [Rings] he gave to Mortal Men, proud and great, and so ensnared
>> them," Gandalf says in "The Shadow of the Past." In the Tale of Years
>> it's said that the Nazgul first appeared around 2251 S.A., when
>> rebellion and division had begun in Numenor. In the Akallabeth in
>> "The Silmarillion" it is said that among the Nazgul three were "great
>> lords of Numenorean race." I think in some of the other works that
>> CJRT has published, there is more discussion of the Nazgul, and they
>> are even named, although I haven't read this yet. I would guess that
>> the Witch-King was originally the greatest of those three great
>> Numenorean lords. He and/or the others might even have been good at
>> one time, and noble, too.
>
> I guess my main thought was whether the Witch King might, in mortal life,
> have been Ar-Pharazon, the last King of Numenor. This would appear,
> superficially, to be ruled out because the Nazgul first appeared over 1000
> years before the reign of Ar-Pharazon. Yet we are not told whether all
> nine Nazgul appeared at that time, and we also know that the Three and the
> Seven have changed hands in the past--so why not the Nine?
We can make anything up for what's not written. Doesn't help terribly much
though.
> Especially if
> the Nine were physically not held by the Nazgul but by Sauron, it would
> seem that Sauron would be able to 'reassign' the powers of any of the Nine
> if he was done with an old slave and wanted to create a new underling.
That would be impossible. Ar-pharazon lead the Numenorean fleet against
Aman and did not return. I don't have the Appendices in front of me, but I
do recall that that is mentioned. So whatever other problems might be, it
is ludicrous to think that Ar-pharazon was the Witchking.
>
> To me it would explain a lot, because the relationship between
> Sauron and Ar-Pharazon had the same complex element that I see
> existing between Sauron and the Witch King. Sauron was originally
> Ar-Pharazon's captive, yet Sauron seduced him--but to me such
> an alliance has the potential for instability.
Whether it makes sense to you or not, it is silly. Ar-pharazon may not be
dead (the rather odd fate of the Numenoreans who attempted to invade
Valinor).
--
Aaron Clausen
mightym...@hotmail.com
Jamie Armstrong
> Stan Brown wrote:
>
>>"david60610" <david...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>>rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>>
>>>Sauron strikes me as being a bit like the dark side's counterpart to
>>>Denethor--a guy who hides in his castle too much and leaves others to
>>>do his fighting for him.
>>
>>Actually, Denethor was becoming the "good" side's counterpart to
>>Sauron. Alone of the captains of the West he was treating Sauron
>>mostly as a political foe. I know Tolkien said LotR was not an
>>allegory, but if Sauron had offered a decent-sounding treaty, the
>>Lord of Munich Tirith might well have taken it.
>
> /Munich/ Tirith? :-) Was that a typo Stan, or are you stressing your
> allegory point? If so, wouldn't "Munich" (or better, "Berlin") be more
> applicable to Barad Dur?
>
Chamberlain in 1938 which sacrificed Czechoslovakia in the hopes of
achieveing "peace in our time". The meeting was held at Munich. In a
Middle-earth context the meeting would be more likely to be at Minas
Tirith (or probably even Osgiliath). Unless you think Denethor would
have been stupid enough to go to Barad-dur to sign the proposed treaty... :)
Jamie
--
"The more I see of the world, the more am I dissatisfied with it; and
every day confirms my belief of the inconsistency of all human
characters, and of the little dependence that can be placed on the
appearance of either merit or sense."
Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice
Bill O'Meally
> Not in this context: Stan is alluding to the meeting between Hitler
> and Chamberlain in 1938 which sacrificed Czechoslovakia in the hopes
> of achieveing "peace in our time". The meeting was held at Munich. In
> a Middle-earth context the meeting would be more likely to be at Minas
> Tirith (or probably even Osgiliath). Unless you think Denethor would
> have been stupid enough to go to Barad-dur to sign the proposed
> treaty... :)
Ah. Thanks.
Berislav Lopac
> "david60610" <david...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:f5a2db3e.04032...@posting.google.com...
>> I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts as to what the real,
>> original identity of the Witch King was?
>
> The issue is covered in the FAQ of The Encyclopaedia of Arda
> (http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm). He doesn't have a name
> beyond one given to him by the authors of an RPG card game.
A small clarification: a RPG (roleplaying game) is something completely
different than a card game. The names of the eight unnamed Nazgul were
invented for the Middle-earth roleplaying game (aka MERP) some time in the
1980's, and have since become adopted by many as "semi-official" (I fell
into the trap myself).
Personally, I think that their names don't really matter, and they would
over time be given many different names by many people, as was the case with
Gandalf.
Berislav
Stan Brown
>Stan Brown wrote:
>> "david60610" <david...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>>> Sauron strikes me as being a bit like the dark side's counterpart to
>>> Denethor--a guy who hides in his castle too much and leaves others to
>>> do his fighting for him.
>>
>> allegory, but if Sauron had offered a decent-sounding treaty, the
>> Lord of Munich Tirith might well have taken it.
>
>/Munich/ Tirith? :-) Was that a typo Stan, or are you stressing your
>allegory point? If so, wouldn't "Munich" (or better, "Berlin") be more
>applicable to Barad Dur?
I was stressing it, but obviously not very effectively. :-)
I meant that Denethor might well have gone for appeasement like
Chamberlain. Suppose the war had gone on longer, with continued
minor skirmishes in which a few dozen men were lost every couple of
weeks. After that war of attrition, if Sauron had offered to keep
east of the River, Denethor might well have agreed to a treaty. He
would then have been like Chamberlain at Munich, letting his wish
for peace and to avoid bloodshed overcome his common sense.
I said "Munich Tirith" because, after all, where else but Minas
Tirith could such a treaty have been signed? Denethor would not have
gone to Barad-dūr or Minas Morgul. I guess they could have signed at
Osgiliath, but that was a ruin with no secretarial facilities. :-)
The problem in the 1930s was that everybody in power outside Germany
thought Hitler was just another politician, that he would stop when
Germany was secure. They didn't realize that his goal was not the
security of Germany but world domination, and that keeping his word
was not a consideration. In the same way, to the extent that
Denethor began thinking of Sauron as a political foe, he began to
underestimate him.
In the real world, that process didn't go very far. But if Aragorn
had not shown up, I think things would have drifted along with no
real battles and only occasional raids. After years of that, and
worn out from using the Palantir and seeing only bad news, maybe
Denethor would have persuaded himself that a deal with Sauron was
the best thing for his people.
ste...@nomail.com
: In the real world, that process didn't go very far. But if Aragorn
: real battles and only occasional raids. After years of that, and
: worn out from using the Palantir and seeing only bad news, maybe
: Denethor would have persuaded himself that a deal with Sauron was
: the best thing for his people.
: --
: Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
I do not think Aragorn's appearance made that much of a difference.
Sauron attacked Minas Tirith sooner than originally planned,
but it was part of the plan. He was amassing great armies
in Mordor. Why bring all those troops all the way to Mordor
if he was not planning on using them soon? Aragorn himself
thought Minas Tirith would fall within ten days, and that
was based on Sauron's actions before Sauron knew of Aragorn.
Stephen
Jim Deutch
>On 21 Mar 2004 20:52:30 -0800,
>david60610 <david...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I guess my main thought was whether the Witch King might, in mortal life,
>> have been Ar-Pharazon, the last King of Numenor. This would appear,
>> superficially, to be ruled out because the Nazgul first appeared over 1000
>> years before the reign of Ar-Pharazon. Yet we are not told whether all
>> nine Nazgul appeared at that time, and we also know that the Three and the
>> Seven have changed hands in the past--so why not the Nine?
>> Especially if
>> the Nine were physically not held by the Nazgul but by Sauron, it would
>> seem that Sauron would be able to 'reassign' the powers of any of the Nine
>> if he was done with an old slave and wanted to create a new underling.
>
>That would be impossible. Ar-pharazon lead the Numenorean fleet against
>Aman and did not return. I don't have the Appendices in front of me, but I
>do recall that that is mentioned. So whatever other problems might be, it
>is ludicrous to think that Ar-pharazon was the Witchking.
My initial reaction was the same. But I've been thinking about it
some more. Sauron survived the downfall of Numenor because as a Maia
he could rebuild his body after it was destroyed. This is an ability
that, we infer, is also attained by Men once they've been
"wraithified" by one of the great rings (the WK was "reduced to
impotence" by his fall on the Pellenor Fields, not killed). So
perhaps the WK actually went through it more than once...
There are certainly some problems with this idea. We never hear of
Sauron giving any rings out during his time in Numenor. Nor of
Ar-Pharazon fading into a wraith. But some curious and perhaps
suggestive things remain as well.
How did Sauron manage to send the fleet to conquor Valinor and yet
remain behind himself? Did he use the Wormtongue Gambit ("I'll take
care of _everything_. You just concentrate on Invasion until you get
back.")? I suppose he'd so bamboozled the King by then that it's at
least possible. But wouldn't that bamboozlement be more explainable
if it took place through the action of a ring? Such a ring might have
been just what was needed to convince A-P that he was truly powerful
enough to prevail over the angels and become one himself.
Unsupported though it is, I kinda like the idea.
Jim Deutch (Jimbo the Cat)
--
Likes and dislikes are among my favorites.
Steuard Jensen
<f5a2db3e.04032...@posting.google.com>:
> I guess my main thought was whether the Witch King might, in mortal
> life, have been Ar-Pharazon, the last King of Numenor.
Doesn't the Akalabeth make it explicit that one of Ar-Pharazon's prime
motives for invading Valinor was a growing fear of his own mortality
as he aged? He wouldn't have had that problem if he were wearing a
Great Ring.
I'd think that any number of hints of his pre-wraith status would have
made it into the stories somewhere if this were true. Comments that
he was "well-preserved", for example, or that he seemed to have an
unusual ability to dominate other wills (assuming the Nine could help
with that) or an unusual knowledge of what went on when he wasn't
there (secretly gained while invisibile). As far as I recall, there's
no hint of any of that.
On another note, how exactly would Ar-Pharazon have gotten back to
Middle-earth from Valinor if this were true? His entire fleet was
sucked into the chasm that swallowed Numenor, so there certainly
wouldn't be a boat for him. And even if we were to assert that he
could float unbodied above the water or swim the whole way or walk
unbreathing on the ocean floor (none of which strike me as likely),
how could he find the Straight Path to take him back? (Yes, it
_could_ be easy to find from that end, but the evidence almost
suggests the opposite: only one return from Valinor was recorded in
the Third Age... and the Istari were certainly a special case!)
> This would appear, superficially, to be ruled out because the Nazgul
> first appeared over 1000 years before the reign of Ar-Pharazon. Yet
> we are not told whether all nine Nazgul appeared at that time...
This seems like decent circumstantial evidence for the "not
Ar-Pharazon" view, I agree. :)
> ...and we also know that the Three and the Seven have changed hands
> in the past--so why not the Nine?
The Seven changed hands when their owners died, it seems (there's no
sign that the Dwarves' lives were extended by the Rings, as far as I
recall). And after their initial distribution, the Three changed
hands only upon Gil-galad's death and in Cirdan's gift to
Gandalf... and Cirdan wasn't dooming himself to immediate death by
giving up his Ring as a Nazgul probably would! :)
> Especially if the Nine were physically not held by the Nazgul but by
> Sauron, it would seem that Sauron would be able to 'reassign' the
> powers of any of the Nine if he was done with an old slave and
> wanted to create a new underling.
I don't recall the detailed evidence, but I suspect that the Nine were
held by the Nazgul until after Sauron reformed in the Third Age.
Before that, Sauron could control the Nazgul and their Rings directly
with the One. (Now, Sauron could certainly take one of the Nine from
its wearer by force and give it to someone else, who could then
presumably wrest control away from the original bearer. But I'm not
clear on why Sauron would want to make such an exchange.)
> To me it would explain a lot, because the relationship between
> Sauron and Ar-Pharazon had the same complex element that I see
> existing between Sauron and the Witch King. Sauron was originally
> Ar-Pharazon's captive, yet Sauron seduced him--but to me such an
> alliance has the potential for instability.
How exactly is that related to the relationship between Sauron and the
Witch King? For that matter, what do we know at all about the
relationship between Sauron and the Witch King? (Apart from the bit
about all the Nazgul doing only Sauron's will, that is.)
Steuard Jensen
Troels Forchhammer
Steuard Jensen <sbje...@midway.uchicago.edu> enriched us with:
> Middle-earth from Valinor if this were true?
> how could he find the Straight Path to take him back? (Yes, it
> _could_ be easy to find from that end, but the evidence almost
> suggests the opposite: only one return from Valinor was recorded in
> the Third Age... and the Istari were certainly a special case!)
IDHTBIFOM, but IIRC there is something in the Glorfindel essay in PoMe
describing how Glorfindel /must/ have returned to Middle-earth before
the Akallabêth because it would have been impossible after.
Googling ...
Ah, yes - from:
<http://google.vg/groups?selm=gg0Mb.6270$g4.1...@news2.nokia.com>
" When did Glorfindel return to Middle-earth? This must
probably have occurred /before/ the end of the Second Age, and
the 'Change of the World' and the Drowning of Númenor, after
which no living embodied creature, 'humane' or of lesser
kinds, could return from the Blessed Realm which had been
'removed from the Circles of the World'. ..."
Well, it at least rules out completely the return of a "living embodied
creature" after the Akallabêth.
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail address is t.forch(a)mail.dk
Gravity is a habit that is hard to shake off.
- (Terry Pratchett, Small Gods)
Jussi Jaatinen
david60610 wrote:
> I guess my main thought was whether the Witch King might, in mortal
> life, have been Ar-Pharazon, the last King of Numenor. This would
> appear, superficially, to be ruled out because the Nazgul first
> appeared over 1000 years before the reign of Ar-Pharazon.
As others have pointed out, it doesn't appear to be the case that
Ar-Pharazon and the WK are the same person. However, if they _were_ the
same person it might have been a good idea from Tolkien as IMO it would
add a nice touch to the Nazgul.
-JJ
AC
Then that rather creates a difficulty for the Istari. Did they take on
their physical forms only when they had left the straight road?
--
Aaron Clausen
mightym...@hotmail.com
AC
Jim Deutch <10313...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>
> How did Sauron manage to send the fleet to conquor Valinor and yet
> remain behind himself? Did he use the Wormtongue Gambit ("I'll take
> care of _everything_. You just concentrate on Invasion until you get
> back.")? I suppose he'd so bamboozled the King by then that it's at
> least possible. But wouldn't that bamboozlement be more explainable
> if it took place through the action of a ring? Such a ring might have
> been just what was needed to convince A-P that he was truly powerful
> enough to prevail over the angels and become one himself.
I think there are two main elements as to how Ar-pharazon was duped into
invading Aman. First of all, Ar-pharazon, like many of the Numenoreans
after the shadow fell on Numenor, feared death. Ar-pharazon was getting
old, and thus the lies of Sauron about the Valar withholding immortality
from Men sounded very sweet indeed. Secondly (and this is a contentious
issue) I firmly believe that Sauron had the Ruling Ring. Tolkien says as
much in Letters, stating that Sauron by then relied upon the Ruling Ring to
dominate lesser wills. It seems that Sauron used that power slowly and
subtly, until Ar-pharazon's obsession with death and wresting eternal life
from the Valar became overwhelming.
So we have an old man afraid of death and a supernatural being wielding an
item capable of dominating wills.
Beyond that, of course, the Ulari had already arisen in Middle Earth.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightym...@hotmail.com
Troels Forchhammer
AC <mightym...@hotmail.com> enriched us with:
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 08:09:26 GMT,
> Troels Forchhammer <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote:
>>
<snip>
[Quotation from PoMe XIII, Glorfindel]
>> Well, it at least rules out completely the return of a "living
>> embodied creature" after the Akallabêth.
>
> Then that rather creates a difficulty for the Istari. Did they
> take on their physical forms only when they had left the straight
> road?
I have no idea, though possibly the continuation of the paragraph
contains a clue:
"... This was according to a general ordinance proceeding
from Eru Himself; and though, until the end of the Third
Age, when Eru decreed that the Dominion of Men must begin,
Manwë could be supposed to have received the permission of
Eru to make an exception in his case, and to have devised
some means for the transportation of Glorfindel to Middle-
earth, this is improbable and would make Glorfindel of
greater power and importance than seems fitting."
This implies that Manwë did have the power to send "a living embodied
creature" to Middle-earth even after the Akallabêth, but also, IMO,
that this would be impossible for others.
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid mail is <t.forch(a)mail.dk>
The trouble with being a god is that you've got no one to pray to.
Jim Deutch
>I think there are two main elements as to how Ar-pharazon was duped into
>invading Aman. First of all, Ar-pharazon, like many of the Numenoreans
>after the shadow fell on Numenor, feared death. Ar-pharazon was getting
>old, and thus the lies of Sauron about the Valar withholding immortality
>from Men sounded very sweet indeed.
And as Steuard points out, he wouldn't have that problem if he was in
possession of one of the Nine. Oh, well.
Jim Deutch
--
I feel sorry for the other rover team exploring Gusev Crater on the
opposite side of Mars... The Spirit is willing, but, to quote Charlie
Brown, "I got a rock". That's all they've found at Gusev Crater --a
bunch of boring basalt. -- Frank Reed
Stan Brown
rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>There are certainly some problems with this idea.
Like the fact that "the Nazgūl" were already active, and that the
Tale of Years (Appendix B) explicitly calls them "slaves of the
Nine Rings". :-)
> We never hear of
>Sauron giving any rings out during his time in Numenor. Nor of
>Ar-Pharazon fading into a wraith.
One of his motives for invading Valinor was his own feeling of
advancing age and the imminence of death. If he had a Ring, he would
not have felt those.
I know it's natural to cling to a clever theory after thinking it
up, but I really think all the evidence is against you here.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
Stan Brown
>remain behind himself? Did he use the Wormtongue Gambit
Maybe -- but he was after all the high priest of the Morgoth cult,
so it would be natural for him to stay behind to keep the sacrifices
going.
Stan Brown
rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>Quoth david...@hotmail.com (david60610) in article
><f5a2db3e.04032...@posting.google.com>:
>> I guess my main thought was whether the Witch King might, in mortal
>> life, have been Ar-Pharazon, the last King of Numenor.
>
>Doesn't the Akalabeth make it explicit that one of Ar-Pharazon's prime
>motives for invading Valinor was a growing fear of his own mortality
>as he aged? He wouldn't have had that problem if he were wearing a
>Great Ring.
You're right on both counts: "But the years passed, and the King
felt the shadow of death approach, as his days lengthened; and he
was filled with fear and wrath. ... And Sauron spoke to the King,
...'The Valar have possessed themselves of the land where there is
no death; ...'"
But it's also in LotR Appendix A:
"And Sauron lied to the King, declaring that everlasting life would
be his who possessed the Undying Lands, and that the Ban was imposed
only to prevent the Kings of Men from surpassing the Valar. 'But
great Kings take what is their right,' be said.
"At length Ar-Pharazôn listened to this counsel, for he felt the
waning of his days and was besotted by the fear of Death."
>Quoth david...@hotmail.com (david60610) in article
><f5a2db3e.04032...@posting.google.com>:
>> This would appear, superficially, to be ruled out because the Nazgul
>> first appeared over 1000 years before the reign of Ar-Pharazon. Yet
>> we are not told whether all nine Nazgul appeared at that time...
>
>This seems like decent circumstantial evidence for the "not
>Ar-Pharazon" view, I agree. :)
But in the Tale of Years the words "slaves of the Nine Rings" appear
where the advent of the Nazgûl is mentioned at SA 2251 -- a thousand
years before Ar-Pharazôn.
Joe
"Speaking Clock" <ext2350(cut-this-out-)@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c3mglo$29vcok$1...@ID-93488.news.uni-berlin.de...
> david60610 wrote:
>
> > Of the major characters in the LOTR, the Witch King seems to be
> > the least developed in terms of his background. I got thinking
> > about his role after seeing ROTK the movie. I was struck by
> > Gandalf's comment--"Sauron will not take the bait"--in reference
> > to the possible final assault on the Black Gate. I was curious
> > as to why Sauron DID take the bait--after all, up to this point
> > Sauron has been taking the lead on all military action. Why
> > did Sauron change tactics, when there was no obvious reason to
> > do so?
>
> This was one of the departures from the book that bothered me. In the
> chapter "The Last Debate" - which happens to be a favourite of mine - it
> is Gandalf who suggests the final assault on the Black Gate, Imrahil who
> laughs at the idea, and Gandalf who points out that Sauron will " ...
> try to trap the fly and take the sting" (which also answers David's
> question). In the film, the credit for the idea is given to Aragorn and
> Gandalf is shown as fearful and doubtful. I can see they did it because
> this was a point where Aragorn had to be kingly, but .... bah.
> --
> Speaking Clock
>
> "Inevitably the myths woven by us, though they contain error, will also
> reflect a splintered fragment of the true light."
>
Bah, yes bah!
Jim Deutch
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>I know it's natural to cling to a clever theory after thinking it
>up, but I really think all the evidence is against you here.
'twasn't mine: the OP originated this theory (though not in the OP).
Jim Deutch (Jimbo the Cat)
--
I am one with the universe - on a scale from one to ten.
becte
> I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts as to what the real,
> original identity of the Witch King was?
>
Two theories I find very interesting are
1. Isilmo, father of Tar-Minastir. Do a Google-Search for Isilmo
in alt.fan.tolkien.
2. Tar-Elmar, from the story with the same name in HoME 12, see
http://www.geocities.com/ar_nimruzir/