The Witch-King's Death
Matt Sherwood
for several weeks. The who-killed-the-Nazgul-King-Merry-or-Eowyn thread has
been kind of interesting. Last night, while I was reading through LoTR
looking for references to Tom Bombadil, I came across something I hadn't
noticed before. After rescuing the hobbits from the barrow-wight,
*Bombadil* picked out the Numenorean swords for them; the same sword that
was most useful against Angmar. Coincidence or chance? Any thoughts on the
matter?
Matt
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
[] [] s111...@cedarville.edu []
[] "God is dead." [] []
[] - Nietzsche [] Matthew A. Sherwood []
[] [] []
[] "Nietzsche is dead." [] All opinions expressed []
[] - GOD [] above are mine - []
[] [] get your own! []
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
Christian Almgren
>I've never posted in this group before, but I've been reading the postings
>for several weeks. The who-killed-the-Nazgul-King-Merry-or-Eowyn thread has
>been kind of interesting. Last night, while I was reading through LoTR
>looking for references to Tom Bombadil, I came across something I hadn't
>noticed before. After rescuing the hobbits from the barrow-wight,
>*Bombadil* picked out the Numenorean swords for them; the same sword that
>was most useful against Angmar. Coincidence or chance? Any thoughts on the
>matter?
It was good swords, no question about that. But was there any better sword
around? No I don't think so. If Tom wanted to give them good swords (that
wasn't to large) he would have given them the best he could find, and so
he did.
That Merry later used it aganist the witch-king, is something I don't think
that ha could have foreseen (the question is if he really cared about that).
--
-Christian Almgren Internet: d93...@nada.kth.se
Who am I? Why am I here? Forget the questions! Someone gimme another beer!
"Meatloaf"
Liam T. Yore
(Matt Sherwood) wrote:
> I've never posted in this group before, but I've been reading the postings
> for several weeks. The who-killed-the-Nazgul-King-Merry-or-Eowyn thread has
> been kind of interesting. Last night, while I was reading through LoTR
> looking for references to Tom Bombadil, I came across something I hadn't
> noticed before. After rescuing the hobbits from the barrow-wight,
> *Bombadil* picked out the Numenorean swords for them; the same sword that
> was most useful against Angmar. Coincidence or chance? Any thoughts on the
> matter?
I think Fredegar Bolger *really* killed the Witch-King. You see, if he
hadn't decided that he would stay home in the Shire and cover their
departures, then Merry would have had to, and then the Witch-King would
have Killed Eowyn and the battle of the Pellenor would have been lost, and
Sauron would reign triumphant.
Or actually, now that I think of it, it was Thorin Oakenshield who REALLY
killed the witch-king, since he met Gandalf on the road one day and asked
for his help in killing Smaug, and therefore set in motion the finding of
the One Ring, without which the Nine Walkers would never have set out, so
Merry could NOT have killed the Witch-King.
So it all comes dowm to a chance meeting, as they say in Middle Earth...
Sir Liam the getting sick of this thread (though please insert tongue in
cheek)
**************************************************************************
Liam T. Yore * "Fury spat out of his eyes when he told
Northwestern University * of things he hated; great glows of joy
Medical School * replaced this when he suddenly got happy;
lty...@merle.acns.nwu.edu * every muscle twitched to live and go."
* -- Jack Kerouac
**************************************************************************
Raymond Macon
: I think this response is a bit unfair. Matt (the original poster) did
: not try to say Bombadil killed the Witch-King. Perhaps some of the
: follow-ups lead that way. OK, you say it is tongue-in-cheek, but I
: still didn't like it. It IS a good question, and I think Matt
: deserved more than this cheap joke for an answer.
: Of the responses I have read (so far) only one really addressed the
: question raised - TB chose the (much discussed) sword for Merry. Was
: this a coincidence? Since, to my knowledge, there are no textual
: sources from which this question can be answered, we may never know.
: One poster suggested TB probably didn't care. I don't buy this. Yes,
: we know the dealings of the rest of Middle-Earth were - in general -
: not of his concern. If this can be extended completely, why did he
: rescue the hobbits at all? Indeed, why not leave Old Man Willow with
: his well-earned lunch?
: I don't really know where I am headed with this. My opinion is that TB
: could well have foreseen Merry's need for the appropriate sword, and
: provided him with it.
: ---
Dave raises an interesting point. What exactly did old Tom Bombadil know?
I've been rereading the parts of LOTR dealing with him, and an interesting
portrait emerges. Tom gives the hobbits a vision of the Dunedain
chieftains ending at last with Aragorn. Aragorn himself has met the
master, referring to him as old Bombadil when he meets Frodo at Bree.
Still, it is interesting that Bombadil both knew of the Dunedain of the
North as well as the ultimate destiny of Aragorn.
It may well be that he also knew that the foretold end of the Witch-king
was indeed at hand. It may not have been accidental at all that he gave
swords of Westernesse to the four hobbits. Indeed, outside the barrow
mound, he gives them a brief history of the North Kingdom of Arnor. True,
he does state that he is "not the master of Riders from the Black Land far
beyond his country." Nevertheless, he may have decided to take a hand in
the fulfilling of ancient prophecy in this case.
I agree with Dave that this is an open question. I just wanted to
contribute my thoughts on it.
--Raymond
--
Raymond Macon | "Laurelindorenan lindelorendor
(303) 938+9731 FAX: (303) 442+1808 | malinornelion ornemalin"
mac...@csn.org | --Treebeard in Tauremornalome
Liam T. Yore
> I think this response is a bit unfair. Matt (the original poster) did
> not try to say Bombadil killed the Witch-King. Perhaps some of the
> follow-ups lead that way. OK, you say it is tongue-in-cheek, but I
> still didn't like it. It IS a good question, and I think Matt
> deserved more than this cheap joke for an answer.
>
> Of the responses I have read (so far) only one really addressed the
> question raised - TB chose the (much discussed) sword for Merry. Was
> this a coincidence? Since, to my knowledge, there are no textual
> sources from which this question can be answered, we may never know.
> One poster suggested TB probably didn't care. I don't buy this. Yes,
> we know the dealings of the rest of Middle-Earth were - in general -
> not of his concern. If this can be extended completely, why did he
> rescue the hobbits at all? Indeed, why not leave Old Man Willow with
> his well-earned lunch?
>
> I don't really know where I am headed with this. My opinion is that TB
> could well have foreseen Merry's need for the appropriate sword, and
> provided him with it.
You are right on both counts: I did not take the question seriously, and it
is a valid possibility that Tom might have had some foresight in this
matter.
For the first: *sigh* I _know_ that Matt was not implying that Tom
Bombadil killed the Witch-king, but it didn't seem like too much of a
stretch to read that into it and make light of a (recently) hacked-to-death
subject. I wasn't trying to offend or insult, just amuse.
For the second: I think we have to reluctantly admit here that we don't
have enough info to come to any conclusion. Not enough is known about the
nature of Tom Bombadil (at least not by me) to intelligently speculate
about a causal connection between the sword chosen & the witch-king's fall,
though it is an interesting idea.
It is and will remain an open question.
Liam
Dave Wyble
>Matt Sherwood wrote:
>
>> I've never posted in this group before, but I've been reading the postings
>> for several weeks. The who-killed-the-Nazgul-King-Merry-or-Eowyn thread has
>> been kind of interesting. Last night, while I was reading through LoTR
>> looking for references to Tom Bombadil, I came across something I hadn't
>> noticed before. After rescuing the hobbits from the barrow-wight,
>> *Bombadil* picked out the Numenorean swords for them; the same sword that
>> was most useful against Angmar. Coincidence or chance? Any thoughts on the
>> matter?
>
>I think Fredegar Bolger *really* killed the Witch-King.
>
>
>Sir Liam the getting sick of this thread (though please insert tongue in
>cheek)
I think this response is a bit unfair. Matt (the original poster) did
not try to say Bombadil killed the Witch-King. Perhaps some of the
follow-ups lead that way. OK, you say it is tongue-in-cheek, but I
still didn't like it. It IS a good question, and I think Matt
deserved more than this cheap joke for an answer.
Of the responses I have read (so far) only one really addressed the
question raised - TB chose the (much discussed) sword for Merry. Was
this a coincidence? Since, to my knowledge, there are no textual
sources from which this question can be answered, we may never know.
One poster suggested TB probably didn't care. I don't buy this. Yes,
we know the dealings of the rest of Middle-Earth were - in general -
not of his concern. If this can be extended completely, why did he
rescue the hobbits at all? Indeed, why not leave Old Man Willow with
his well-earned lunch?
I don't really know where I am headed with this. My opinion is that TB
could well have foreseen Merry's need for the appropriate sword, and
provided him with it.
---
Dave Wyble | Choose 2:
Xerox Corp | - make lots of money
drw.w...@xerox.com | - enjoy the work
wy...@wc.eso.mc.xerox.com | - operate within the law
| (Brian Anderson cast...@media.mit.ed)
David Faulkner
>I think this response is a bit unfair. Matt (the original poster) did
>not try to say Bombadil killed the Witch-King. Perhaps some of the
>follow-ups lead that way. OK, you say it is tongue-in-cheek, but I
>still didn't like it. It IS a good question, and I think Matt
>deserved more than this cheap joke for an answer.
>
>Of the responses I have read (so far) only one really addressed the
>question raised - TB chose the (much discussed) sword for Merry. Was
>this a coincidence? Since, to my knowledge, there are no textual
>sources from which this question can be answered, we may never know.
>One poster suggested TB probably didn't care. I don't buy this. Yes,
>we know the dealings of the rest of Middle-Earth were - in general -
>not of his concern. If this can be extended completely, why did he
>rescue the hobbits at all? Indeed, why not leave Old Man Willow with
>his well-earned lunch?
As you say, the dealings of Middle Earth are indeed beyond his concern.
I think therefore he would not have foreseen Merry's confrontation with
the Witch King. It was of no relevance to Tom in his little land.
This has nothing to do with him rescuing the hobbits. The events
involving the hobbits and Old Man Willow took place in the Old Forest,
Tom's domain, and so of course he was interested and involved in these
events.
>
>I don't really know where I am headed with this. My opinion is that TB
>could well have foreseen Merry's need for the appropriate sword, and
>provided him with it.
I doubt it. Tom knew the hobbits were going on a dangerous journey into
Wilderland (which is a very dangerous place), and would have need of
some weapons. This would be obvious to anyone advising the hobbits on
their journey, now that they were to be going without Gandalf and
without guidance. And with a variety of weapons to choose from, Tom
would naturally choose the best available.
This does not translate into "Tom foresaw Merry killing the Witch King
and choose a special sword to do it with."
Just my opinions,
-dif-
--
Dave Faulkner, Research Engineer (d...@bhprtc.scpd.oz.au)
BHP Coated Products Division, Research and Technology Centre
Port Kembla, New South Wales, Australia.