The Balrog vs The Witch King

[Mansun]

These two villains are the main threats to the free & living world after Sauron, although they do not join forces. If the Witch King therefore dared to enter the realm of Moria to gain control of the riches that lay there at Sauron's bidding, & then the Balrog appeared with a sudden burst of flame, who would triumph? Or, rather, would the Witch King acknowledge the Balrog to be superior & neal to this ancient creature?

Note that the Witch King would not at this stage be in his enhanced form, if following with the logic of the book.

[Morwen]

If it's a contest, I would put my money on the Balrog ...being a fallen maia and all...

I can't see the Witch King, pawn of Sauron that he is, acknowledging the Balrog's supremacy though

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Morwen is correct; the WK had basically just Sauron's will and there's no way he'd "convert" (the same as he didn't convert to Saruman - the only possibility would be, if the Balrog possessed the One Ring - or at least we are hinted that in "the Hunt for the Ring", where Saruman says something in that sense to WK - of course, if it's not a hyperbole). But otherwise, I think their battle could - in the best case - appear similar to the battle of Gandalf with the Balrog. I'm not sure how much the "shadow world stuff" will work and how much the Balrog would be able to harm WK, though it's true he's in fact a Maia - but the battle will most likely be a battle of power and sorcery, and if it took place on the Bridge, I'm somehow inclined to think it will end the same as the famous Gandalf vs. Balrog battle.

I am convinced that there was a similar topic already here at the Downs about half a year ago, but I can't seem to be able to find it.

[obloquy]

WK wouldn't even consider a hostile confrontation with Durin's Bane. He's arrogant, but not stupid. If WK appears to be aggressive towards Gandalf, it's most likely because he has no clue who Gandalf really is. The Witch-King was a Man. He was a formidable foe against other Men because of Sauron's backing, but he was on an entirely different (and lower) tier than the embodied Maiar (and even the Eldar). Durin's Bane would have feared him even less than Glorfindel did, who, you'll recall, sent him flying more than once.

By the way, can we please stop taking for granted that Sauron actually transfused some of his Awesome Juice into the Witch-King? It's not a fact, and I feel that the argument for it is pretty tenuous.

[Mansun]

By the way, can we please stop taking for granted that Sauron actually transfused some of his Awesome Juice into the Witch-King? It's not a fact, and I feel that the argument for it is pretty tenuous.

The Balrog was slain long before the Witch King received an added demonic force from Sauron. Therefore, in this thread at least, one cannot logically contend the enhanced Witch King with the Balrog. Not that it would make too much difference in this contest, in my opinion. Imagine a great servant of Morgoth being slain by a servant of Sauron?

[obloquy]

Are you mocking me? You quote the portion of my post in which I request that we stick to the facts regarding the Witch-King's "enhancement" (that, as far as we know for certain, it was literary rather than literal) and respond by, once again, referring to the event as if it were indisputable.

Besides, you're the one who asked what would happen if they fought.

[Boromir88]

WK wouldn't even consider a hostile confrontation with Durin's Bane. He's arrogant, but not stupid.~obloquy
Good point. The Witch-King tends to know when he's over matched, and when he is over matched he has a tendency to run away.

[Mansun]

Besides, you're the one who asked what would happen if they fought.

The contest between these fell creatures is as much of wills than of might. My feeling is they would not fight each other physically, as I believe the battle here is a psychological one. It is also perfectly plausible that they could have met in Moria, in which case the Witch King would not be able to flee. For all we knew, the Witch King & his followers could have been hiding in the shadows of Moria until the Company arrived.

[Morwen]

The contest between these fell creatures is as much of wills than of might. My feeling is they would not fight each other physically, as I believe the battle here is a psychological one. It is also perfectly plausible that they could have met in Moria, in which case the Witch King would not be able to flee. For all we knew, the Witch King & his followers could have been hiding in the shadows of Moria until the Company arrived.

Whether the contest is a physical one or a battle of wills or both, the point is that the Balrog, in origin one of the Ainur like Sauron himself, is in a class above the Witch King. The contest is therefore not one between equals and the question to my mind isn't whether the Balrog can defeat the Witch King, but how long would he take to do so.

[Mansun]

Whether the contest is a physical one or a battle of wills or both, the point is that the Balrog, in origin one of the Ainur like Sauron himself, is in a class above the Witch King. The contest is therefore not one between equals and the question to my mind isn't whether the Balrog can defeat the Witch King, but how long would he take to do so.

I think the Witch King, being overmatched in latent power, may well have been forced to neal to the Balrog in recognition of his status. The psychological pressure on him to do so would have been enormous. Though this is only one theory, as the Ring totally subdues the Witch King to only recognise Sauron as his master, so a hostile encounter cannot be ruled out.

[obloquy]

If you're talking about the type of spiritual battle I outline here (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=13758), then I suppose I understand what you're talking about. But the concept barely applies to any battle involving the Witch-King since he has so little power on the spiritual plane. If the battle was one of wills (spiritual power), as you say, it would unquestionably be no contest at all. Which is why I am sure the Witch-King would have avoided such a confrontation, just as he avoided Glorfindel.

That said, I don't see why the Balrog would be hostile towards the Witch-King, since he would most likely recognize who he represents.

[Morwen]

That said, I don't see why the Balrog would be hostile towards the Witch-King, since he would most likely recognize who he represents.

I don't know. The Balrog's agenda, as far as we know from LotR, involves keeping Moria dwarf free and ridding it of random walking parties. Like Sauron, he is a former servant of Morgoth but I don't know that this would necessarily make him automatically sympathetic to Sauron or tolerant of the Witch King if he found him wandering through Moria.

[obloquy]

He may not have reason to be sympathetic, but that alone does not provide a reason for him to be hostile.

[Mansun]

He may not have reason to be sympathetic, but that alone does not provide a reason for him to be hostile.

So, in effect you are saying the two could have coexisted. The Witch King & the Mouth of Sauron, for example, managed to do it. The difference here though is that both were in the service of Sauron, & their rank was clear. The Balrog had been at rest in Moria for a number of years without any call from Sauron, so how may one decide whether he still had allegiance to him?

[obloquy]

I have no idea what you're talking about. They could have coexisted indefinitely just as they coexisted up to the Third Age. Are you imagining the Witch-King packing up his stuff in Morgul and moving into an empty room in Moria? In that case, they both could definitely be expected to get on each others' nerves. Durin's Bane had probably grown accustomed to leaving his underwear laying around and the toilet seat up. The latter of which would truly have ruffled feathers, since, as we all know, the Witch-King sits down to pee.

[Mansun]

I have no idea what you're talking about. They could have coexisted indefinitely just as they coexisted up to the Third Age. Are you imagining the Witch-King packing up his stuff in Morgul and moving into an empty room in Moria? In that case, they both could definitely be expected to get on each others' nerves. Durin's Bane had probably grown accustomed to leaving his underwear laying around and the toilet seat up. The latter of which would truly have ruffled feathers, since, as we all know, the Witch-King sits down to pee.

I have probably started more intellectual threads than any other poster at the Barrowdowns, & never before has anyone lowered themselves to this standard of posting. Mods, please get this post from obloguy removed asap.

[Gwathagor]

What's all this about the Witch King getting upgraded? I'm not familiar with this theory.

[Boromir88]

Let's not start making boastful claims where we have not done our research yet. Let's not get our feathers ruffled up over such a topic as the Balrog vs. The Witch-King. (Maybe if it was over Balrog wing's that would be a little more understandable :p).

This is a 'what if scenario,' and also a 'someone-or-another vs different someone-or-another'. Which this means no offense, but threads such as this are not ones that too many people are going to take intellectually.

To pose a what if, since this is a 'what if'...well what if the Balrog leaves his dirty underwear lying all over the place? :D How is the Wiki going to feel about that? There's nothing to get flustered about.

I think the question you've posed is pretty clear and has already been answered. But if it hasn't...Durin's Bane proved to be even a mental strain upon Gandalf. Durin's Bane wasn't just physically strong, but he wore Gandalf out even before their big confrontation at the bridge. So, hands down, whether it's a bout, or some sort of psychological sparring, Durin's Bane would win. The Witch-King's primary weapon is fear (that is a 'psychological weapon'). Why would Durin's Bane have a need to fear the Witch-King? He didn't fear Gandalf? He didn't fear the dwarven kings he slew? If Durin's Bane didn't fear the Wiki, the Wiki was pretty much useless (just as he proved to be useless to the likes of Glorfindel and Gandalf...etc because they did not fear him).

[ninja91]

I dont care which side of the Gandalf v. the Witch King debate you are on. The Balrog would indeed be the more powerful over the Witch King. Remember, even Gandalf fled before the Balrog. And if they were not standing on that dinky bridge called Khazad-Dum, the Balrog would have easily defeated Gandalf the Grey.

[obloquy]

I dont care which side of the Gandalf v. the Witch King debate you are on. The Balrog would indeed be the more powerful over the Witch King. Remember, even Gandalf fled before the Balrog. And if they were not standing on that dinky bridge called Khazad-Dum, the Balrog would have easily defeated Gandalf the Grey.

I disagree. You say he fled, but what he did was see the Fellowship safely to the exit, and then turn to confront the Balrog. When Gandalf describes his duel after their long fall, the Balrog actually ends up fleeing from him, and, needless to say, is eventually defeated despite Gandalf's claim of weariness before the battle.

It's possible that Gandalf believed fighting the Balrog with the Fellowship present would be exactly the kind of powerful display prohibited by the rules of the Istari. Surely they would have found a new reverence for him, and reverence was antithetical to the Istari's intended function.

What's all this about the Witch King getting upgraded? I'm not familiar with this theory.

9. 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. The Witch-King, their leader, is more powerful in all ways than the others [though note that he is nevertheless not excluded from the above explication that the Nazgul rely on fear rather than any true power. -obloquy]; 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. See III 114.

This is taken by some to mean that Sauron pumped his own power into the Witch-King for Vol. III (did Sauron know there would only be three volumes?). It is not conclusive, however, and I believe it is clear that Tolkien is referring to narrative choices. First, the letter is in response to an adaptation of the book, and, strangely, this is the only mention of this enhancement anywhere in Tolkien's work. "Added demonic force" is not Tolkien vocabulary, and would only be used in this type of letter--that is, one that discusses narrative choices as opposed to Middle-earth history. Second, he doesn't say "There, given added demonic force by Sauron, he is put in command." This would have conveyed a very specific point, but it's not how Tolkien chose to word it. Instead, the Witch-King is put in command by Sauron, and as a result of that he is given an "added demonic force." It's a felt effect of that new station, not a literal transfusion of power.

Anyway, there's more of that argument over at Gandalf vs. the Witch-King (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showpost.php?p=512344).

[Boromir88]

I never interpretted the quote as obloquy has. I always took it at face value that 'added demonic force' mean the Witch-King received a little bit of a power boost. But, now that obloquy has explained it, he's absolutely right the wording is talking about the Witch-King's rise in stature (you could say importance) from The Fellowship of the Ring to The Return of the King.

The quote comes from Letter 210 where Tolkien responds (rather harshly) to Zimmerman's movie script of his books. In this particular instance Tolkien is referring to the scene on Weathertop where Zimmerman created a 'fight' between the Nazgul and Aragorn. Which Tolkien objected to, he said there was no fight on Weathertop and there should not be a fight on Weathertop.

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.
This is talking about the Witch-King's rise in 'status' (stature - a degree of development/achievement; an achieved level; status).

At Weathertop the Witch-King (being the 'leader of the Nazgul') is in all ways more powerful then them, but he is not at the level of status that he was placed at in Volume III. There, not only is the Witch-King the Lord of the Nazgul, but Sauron places him in command of his entire army. There is a rise in status the Witch-King takes from FOTR to ROTK...it is because of that his importance, his status, is increased. This quote where it supposedly says the Witch-King receives a power boost, is not referring to any 'boost' at all, but saying that the Witch-King's importance, his status, has increased from FOTR to ROTK.

[Raynor]

At Weathertop the Witch-King (being the 'leader of the Nazgul') is in all ways more powerful then them, but he is not at the level of status that he was placed at in Volume III. There, not only is the Witch-King the Lord of the Nazgul, but Sauron places him in command of his entire army. There is a rise in status the Witch-King takes from FOTR to ROTK...it is because of that his importance, his status, is increased. This quote where it supposedly says the Witch-King receives a power boost, is not referring to any 'boost' at all, but saying that the Witch-King's importance, his status, has increased from FOTR to ROTK.
I don't think that the Nazgul were increased in hierarchical status. They were already his mightiest and most trusted servants and their overall abilities put them above all of Sauron's other servants. While Sauron is gone, they are the chief enemies and it is also they who prepare the return of their master. All in all, with what we know, I would say it is safe to presume that, at least at the time of LotR, they were second to Sauron only.

[obloquy]

It's not that some other captain would have outranked the WK before RotK, it's that the WK's job in LotR, up until RotK, was to stalk the Ringbearer with the other Nazgul. In RotK, he's put in command of an army, which raises his status as the reader (or viewer) perceives it, and this was the whole point of Tolkien's letter. It has nothing to do with a promotion of rank, nor an increase of power. He was always Sauron's prime lieutenant, but on the Pelennor his job is no longer to hunt the Ring, it's to command an army in open war.

[Raynor]

I believe there is "reasonable doubt" about this interpretation. The nazgul are already described to the reader in superlatives, be they regarding power or hierarchy. The witch-king is described in the prologue as a powerful and successful leader of armies, Bombadil refers to that too and Gandalf says that Sauron governed Mordor through the nazgul. Moreover, the very wording of "added demonic power" in the context of simply reader perception concerning his role seems somewhat ... uncalled for. Imposing, majestic, frightening or other adjectives might justify this interpretation, but demonic not, imo.

[Mansun]

There is only one demonic force in Middle Earth, & that is the Balrog of Morgoth. He has no rank Sauron could give him which he could deem as worthy - he answers only to his master (the Lord of the Balrogs), & more importantly his great master, Morgoth.

[obloquy]

The witch-king is described in the prologue as a powerful and successful leader of armies, Bombadil refers to that too and Gandalf says that Sauron governed Mordor through the nazgul.

Again, it has nothing to do with actual status and everything to do with perceived status. Yes, the Witch-King had commanded armies (and even held a kingdom) before. In LotR, there is a very obvious transformation taking place from his more or less anonymity among the Nine early on, to his unveiled military leadership on the Pelennor. This transformation does not require any literal power-ups; it's perfectly congruent without them. In fact, your own point that the Witch-King was an accomplished military general before his role in LotR argues against the necessity of a literal enhancement.

the very wording of "added demonic power" in the context of simply reader perception concerning his role seems somewhat ... uncalled for. Imposing, majestic, frightening or other adjectives might justify this interpretation, but demonic not, imo.

Are you saying that because he used the word "demonic," he must be referencing Sauron's nature as a "demon," and therefore the "demonic force" was bestowed by Sauron? I think the word is perfectly applicable without such a connection.

[obloquy]

There is only one demonic force in Middle Earth, & that is the Balrog of Morgoth. He has no rank Sauron could give him which he could deem as worthy - he answers only to his master (the Lord of the Balrogs), & more importantly his great master, Morgoth.

Sauron is as much a "demon" as the Balrog is.

Besides, "demonic force" is not here intended as a person, but as a something which the Witch-King acquires more of. The question is whether that something is really something or just a something.

[Gwathagor]

I take Tolkien's statement that the Witch King received added demonic force to mean an increased demonic force. In other words, the power that was added to was the power which the Witch King made the most frequent and effective use of; that is, the fear and terror that he inspired. That is his primary function, even as the leader of Sauron's armies.

No WAY is the Witch King's scaring-power going to work on a balrog which derived his power directly from Morgoth, the OG himself.

[obloquy]

Why would Tolkien provide this information here, in a borderline hostile letter about Zimmerman's adaptation of his story (with explicit focus on narrative choices--specifically how his differ from Zimmerman's), and not, say, in the appendix to the LotR? In a court of law I would probably be forced to admit "reasonable doubt," but this reading seems incredibly improbable to me.

[Raynor]

Again, it has nothing to do with actual status and everything to do with perceived status.
I don't see why this would be an issue of actual vs. perceived. The references I mentioned to the witch-king as leader of armies are in the book, for the first time reader to see from the prologue on and are reinforced by the two oldest beings, Gandalf and Bombadil. These are not extraneous informations. If Tolkien reinforced his status time and again, I don't see why he would expect the reader to perceive the WK as not a leader of armies. And to further underscore this interpretation, we see an amazing display of magical power on behalf of the WK at the Pelennor Fields. This level of power is never before witnessed by the reader, regarding the WK, or rather no other character at all.
Then the Black Captain rose in his stirrups and cried aloud in a dreadful voice, speaking in some forgotten tongue words of power and terror to rend both heart and stone.

Thrice he cried. Thrice the great ram boomed. And suddenly upon the last stroke the Gate of Gondor broke. As if stricken by some blasting spell it burst asunder: there was a flash of searing lightning, and the doors tumbled in riven fragments to the ground.
To conclude, while the status of the WK as leader of armies is reinforced time and again before this battle in the books, his show of magic force here is definitely outstanding. To me, the interpretation of added demonic force is obvious.

[Mansun]

Here is an interesting scenario. What if the Balrog did kill the Witch King in Moria? What response would Sauron have to the fall of his great Captain? A showdown between the Balrog & Sauron himself would probably be one of the greatest & most tightly fought encounters ever seen in Middle Earth. The Balrog has no master, & is not specifically in league with Sauron, or why else would it not formally join Sauron in Mordor?

Alternatively Sauron could send a host of Trolls, probably upto a hundred to Moria, to deal with the Balrog. . .

[obloquy]

That sounds like a good topic for another one of your intellectual threads!

[Mansun]

That sounds like a good topic for another one of your intellectual threads!

Never underestimate the imagination of a human being! I take after Sam Gamgee (& Tolkein) . . . You should try playing Battle For Middle Earth on the PC.

[CSteefel]

To conclude, while the status of the WK as leader of armies is reinforced time and again before this battle in the books, his show of magic force here is definitely outstanding. To me, the interpretation of added demonic force is obvious.

Thrice he cried. Thrice the great ram boomed. And suddenly upon the last stroke the Gate of Gondor broke. As if stricken by some blasting spell it burst asunder: there was a flash of searing lightning, and the doors tumbled in riven fragments to the ground.

I would agree that this is good evidence of the Witch King's added demonic power. As several people have pointed out above or in other contexts, the Witch King (like the other Nazgul) know when to withdraw when they are overmatched. They held back from Gandalf on Weathertop during the daylight, but then closed on him (all nine) after dark, although Gandalf was able to hold them off. Even Aragorn drove them off.

But by the time the Witch King arrives at the Pelennor Field, he is able to break the Gates of the City and to face Gandalf, unless one interprets his departure to check on the horns of the Rohirrim as actually flight from Gandalf, although this does not seem likely given his challenge to Gandalf

'Old fool!, he said. "old fool! This is my hour. Do you not know Deathe when you see it? Die now and curse in vain!'
Clearly, the Witch King is feeling as if he can stand up to Gandalf, although it is not clear that understands completely that Gandalf's own power has been substantially enhanced.

Otherwise, the Witch King's breaking of the Gates of the City might be seen as similar to Gandalf's sundering of the Bridge at Khazad-dûm with his staff. This in fact succeeded in sending the Balrog into the depths (even if it did not kill him), and only by a combination of skill with his whip (and perhaps a bit of luck) was he able to take Gandalf with him.

So I'd say the Witch King, at least with his added power, would be quite a match for the Balrog, if it came to that...
'

[obloquy]

Nope.

[Raynor]

I don't think that these arguments:
Clearly, the Witch King is feeling as if he can stand up to Gandalf, although it is not clear that understands completely that Gandalf's own power has been substantially enhanced.

Otherwise, the Witch King's breaking of the Gates of the City might be seen as similar to Gandalf's sundering of the Bridge at Khazad-dûm with his staff. This in fact succeeded in sending the Balrog into the depths (even if it did not kill him), and only by a combination of skill with his whip (and perhaps a bit of luck) was he able to take Gandalf with him.
would justify this conclusion:
So I'd say the Witch King, at least with his added power, would be quite a match for the Balrog, if it came to that.The breaking of the bridge was a rather unique event that helped in the end the defeat of the balrog, with little if any chance of its necessity or conditions appearing again. While confidence is definitely an important factor in a battle, it would not suffice in overcoming a balrog, so the WK's belief he can win over Gandalf does not say much about how he would do against the balrog. In some sort of a Condorcet's paradox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_paradox), we may even find that Gandalf can defeat the balrog, WK can defeat Gandalf (presumably) and the balrog can defeat the WK. Although I think that the WK would generally lose against the balrog, I guess in the end we are talking probabilities of defeat/winning, so we can imagine that if they fought for a large enough number of times in rather similar conditions, at least in one battle the WK would win by chance.

[CSteefel]

Well, take the breaking of the Gates of the City on its own value then, it is an impressive display of force, and as I believe you said, indicates clearly the augmentation of the WK's power.

Otherwise, I agree it is difficult to say how this would play out against a Balrog, since there is ample evidence that the WK was overmatched at various other times, although he seems to have recognized it when this was the case and he withdrew. So it is quite possible he would do the same when faced with a Balrog.

The other possibility that I would not completely discount is that the WK on the Pelennor Fields is not completely aware of the power of some of the players on the field at that time. Gandalf is the obvious one--how would he have known that Gandalf had been sent back, although perhaps others will dispute whether his power is really augmented. In the end, of course, the WK is defeated by Merry and Eowyn, certainly something he did not count on.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Yawn. Done to death.



Now, Arwen vs. Eowyn! In the mud-pit! Clothes-ripping allowed! Now, that I'd pay money to see :p

[Boromir88]

Why does the breaking of the Gate prove an increase in the Witch-King's power? The Witch-King was already a sorcerer:

Those who used the nine rings became might in their day, kings, sorcerers, and warriors of old.~The Silmarillion; Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age

Also:
King of Angmar long ago Sorcerer, Ringwraith, Lord of the Nazgul, a spear of terror in the hand of Sauron, shadow of despair.~(Gandalf to Pippin) The Siege of Gondor

You don't think all those pretty lights on Amon Sul was all Gandalf now do you? The Witch-King (and most likely the other Ring-wraiths) became 'kings, sorcerers, and warriors of old' because of the use of their nine rings. Just because the Witch-King lights his sword and breaks down the gate doesn't mean he has had an increase in power as he already was a sorcerer with some neat tricks.

[Raynor]

Why does the breaking of the Gate prove an increase in the Witch-King's power?
We were debating the meaning of "added demonic force". Neither we, the more knowledgeable fans, nor the first time reader, have witnessed the WK display such force, although he had ample reasons. In this specific context of debate, the alternative interpretation is rather unlikely, for reasons given in this thread.

[davem]

Well, perhaps the Witch King could have defeated the Balrog - if he'd used a bloody great battering ram wielded by mountain trolls to stun him first.....

[Raynor]

Well, perhaps the Witch King could have defeated the Balrog - if he'd used a bloody great battering ram wielded by mountain trolls to stun him first.....
Provided he stood still ... I heard that trolls wielding a hundred-feet long ram are somewhat slow and clumsy.

[davem]

Provided he stood still ... I heard that trolls wielding a hundred-feet long ram are somewhat slow and clumsy.

That's what they want you to think........

[Mansun]

Clearly, the Witch King is feeling as if he can stand up to Gandalf, although it is not clear that understands completely that Gandalf's own power has been substantially enhanced.
'


Perhaps the Witch King was ordered by Sauron to tackle the threat of Gandalf once & for all. Either way, since Gandalf & the Balrog are both Maia then you would think Sauron would be a more realistic threat. The Witch King is indeed powerful, & his increased power ensures a battle with a Balrog would be no walkover, yet the outcome must ultimately be a victory for the Balrog.

Unfortunately, Tolkein's attempt to saviour the character & integrity of the Witch King in volume III does not bear enough fruit. The Witch King needs to have something about him which the Balrog does not, & it seems only Sauron could fit this role.

[obloquy]

Now, Arwen vs. Eowyn! In the mud-pit! Clothes-ripping allowed! Now, that I'd pay money to see :p

Hey, now. Don't go spoiling this intellectual discussion with tacky lowbrow comments. Let's stick to arguing about the outcome of an imaginary duel between demons and magicians.

Well, take the breaking of the Gates of the City on its own value then, it is an impressive display of force, and as I believe you said, indicates clearly the augmentation of the WK's power.

Neither we, the more knowledgeable fans, nor the first time reader, have witnessed the WK display such force, although he had ample reasons.

No, the Witch-King always had more power than the first two books suggest, but his mission was to hunt in secrecy. That's the whole point. That's why Tolkien says "he must not yet be raised to the stature of III". He is admonishing Zimmerman not to reveal the Witch-King's power this way, because it ruins the effect of his presence on the Pelennor, which is intended to provide him with added demonic force since the reader has not yet seen the Witch-King in this way. He is discussing a narrative design, not the history of LotR.

In this specific context of debate, the alternative interpretation is rather unlikely, for reasons given in this thread.

No, there are no reasons given in this thread that render the alternative interpretation "unlikely." What is unlikely is that Tolkien told this guy who he didn't like some valuable, secret, unprecedented information about Sauron juicing up the Witch-King instead of writing it in one of his canonical texts or in response to a reader who actually cared.

how would he have known that Gandalf had been sent back

Or that Gandalf was peers with the Witch-King's master Sauron to begin with, yeah?

The Witch King is indeed powerful, & his increased power ensures a battle with a Balrog would be no walkover,

What increased power?

[Raynor]

No, the Witch-King always had more power than the first two books suggest
As Tolkien states in that paragraph, the WK's peril is "almost entirely due to the unreasoning fear" he inspires. What other power do you have in mind, before the Pelennor Fields, when his spells crush the gate? Moreover, your own argument about the first two books not depicting WK's power gives more weight to the idea that the issue at the Siege of Gondor is not about showing WK's place in hierarchy, but showing his (inner) power.
but his mission was to hunt in secrecyThen again, we know from the Hunt for the ring, UT, that Sauron conveyed to the WK that secrecy must be abandoned - that is, before Frodo set out on his quest.
He is admonishing Zimmerman not to reveal the Witch-King's power this wayTolkien admonishes Zimmerman not for revealing WK's power, but for underestimating it at night.
No, there are no reasons given in this thread that render the alternative interpretation "unlikely."Well, if you choose to ignore the prologue, Gandalf's and Bombadil's words depicting the WK to the reader as a leader of armies .... fine.

[CSteefel]

Well, perhaps the Witch King could have defeated the Balrog - if he'd used a bloody great battering ram wielded by mountain trolls to stun him first.....
I think the Appendix B in Return of the King makes clear that it is really the Witch King who does this (not the battering ram):

March 15: In the early hours the Witch-king breaks the Gates of the City.

Up until this point, we mainly see the Witch King (along with the other Nazgul) using fear as their principal weapons, as is stated in the Unfinished Tales

Moreover, their chief weapon was terror.

or commanding armies, as the Witch King did in the attacks on Eriador from Angmar.

Plus, Tolkien makes specific mention of the augmentation of the Witch King's power, I just cannot find the quote at the moment.

Now whether this all translates to the ability to defeat a Balrog, I don't know. The Witch King only does pretty much what Sauron tells him to, so it would have to be a face off in which the power of Sauron comes up against the Balrog...

[obloquy]

Plus, Tolkien makes specific mention of the augmentation of the Witch King's power, I just cannot find the quote at the moment.

No he doesn't.

What other power do you have in mind, before the Pelennor Fields, when his spells crush the gate?

The same kind of generic "power" Tolkien always refers to. The chief weapon of the Nazgul is fear, but the Witch-King is "more powerful in all ways" than the others. Do you suppose he caused all the commotion he did solely because others feared him? It's no coincidence that he is the only one of the Nine who waged open war with the Free Peoples. We don't have any explicit examples of the Witch-King breaking a gate (ooooh! Powerful!) during that time period, but that doesn't mean he only received the power to do so in vol. III. It also doesn't mean that Sauron can beef up his servants at will. If he can, we must also assume that Gandalf can, since they are identical in nature (incarnate Maiar), and it surely would have been in the interest of the mission for Frodo to have gotten some "added angelic force."

From Unfinished Tales: In the event Gollum escaped. But the passage of the bridge was effected. The forces there used were probably much less than men in Gondor thought. In the panic of the first assault, when the Witch-king was allowed to reveal himself briefly in his full terror, the Nazgûl crossed the bridge at night and dispersed northwards.

If the Witch-King here is allowed to reveal himself briefly, it is logical to assume that at all other times he is required to conceal himself. Not so, however, on the Pelennor. The command position given to him provides him with an added force that the reader had not yet witnessed.

Besides, even if Sauron could make the Witch-King more powerful (capable of breaking gates! :eek:) he could not raise him to his own level which is, more or less, the level both Gandalf and the Balrog are on.

Additionally, the Witch-King is delusional. He imagines that "no man may hinder" him, perhaps because of Glorfindel's prophecy--perhaps not. He also probably doesn't know what Gandalf is. His encounter with Gandalf was accidental (he did not know that Gandalf would be blocking his way when he came through the gate), and it reveals nothing about the Witch-King's strength. It does show us Gandalf standing in defiance of an army, knowing exactly who is at its head, however. Yet somehow, the Witch-King's smack-talk (after which he flees) provides all the proof you people need that he was up to taking on a being like Gandalf.

Finally, the letter simply does not say that Sauron gave the Witch-King "added demonic force." What it does say is that Sauron gave the Witch-King command of his army, from which he receives "an added demonic force." This interpretation of the letter is based on what Tolkien might have meant by that and not what is actually written.

[CSteefel]

Additionally, the Witch-King is delusional. He imagines that "no man may hinder" him, perhaps because of Glorfindel's prophecy--perhaps not. He also probably doesn't know what Gandalf is. His encounter with Gandalf was accidental (he did not know that Gandalf would be blocking his way when he came through the gate), and it reveals nothing about the Witch-King's strength. It does show us Gandalf standing in defiance of an army, knowing exactly who is at its head, however. Yet somehow, the Witch-King's smack-talk (after which he flees) provides all the proof you people need that he was up to taking on a being like Gandalf.

I agree with the first statement. I believe he is delusional, and in fact this leads to his downfall, although it is not clear that he knew of Glorfindel's prophecy (how would he?)

He is familiar with Gandalf--he just faced him on Weathertop, where presumably the fireworks were chiefly from Gandalf...

[obloquy]

I agree with the first statement. I believe he is delusional, and in fact this leads to his downfall, although it is not clear that he knew of Glorfindel's prophecy (how would he?)

He is familiar with Gandalf--he just faced him on Weathertop, where presumably the fireworks were chiefly from Gandalf...

He faced him, but Gandalf always restrained himself. The encounter on Weathertop did not reveal Gandalf's nature or true power by a long shot.

[Boromir88]

Sauron could 'pour' his power into things, he did so with the One Ring. However, Sauron was not like Morgoth who just 'squandered' his power into everything, to control/corrupt everything, and in doing so weakening himself. Sauron took his far lesser power than Morgoth had and put it into a Ring; actually causing himself to be 'enhanced'. So, as obloquy said before, Sauron just giving out power gains to people doesn't really follow the way Sauron did things.

Let's put this Letter 210 into a little context. It was written to Forest J. Ackerman, and is Tolkien's commentary on film treatment of his books (specifically towards Morton Zimmerman). To say that Tolkien didn't like Zimmerman is rather understating things. Tolkien completely rips into Zimmerman's script, and despised it so badly that he refused to comment on his script from ROTK saying:
Part III .... is totally unacceptable to me, as a whole and in detail. If it is meant as notes only for a section of something like the pictorial length of I and II, then in the filling out it must be brought into relation with the book, and its gross alterations of that corrected. If it is meant to represent only a kind of short finale, then all I can say is: The Lord of the Rings cannot be garbled like that.
And as said, Tolkien 'not liking' Zimmerman is an understatement:
"I should say Zimmerman...is quite incapable of excerpting or adapting the 'spoken words' of the book. He is hasty, insensitive, and impertinent."
This was Tolkien's comments after receiving the screenplay from Zimmerman and a few months later he would write to Ackerman Letter 210.

So, what is the point? As obloquy has argued this supposed power boost only appears in one place, and in a letter that Tolkien seemed to be very nit picky, even to the point of a rant in his strong 'disapproval' of Zimmerman's script. There is already one part in that letter where Tolkien contradicts something that he wrote in LOTR:
20. The Balrog never speaks or makes any vocal sound at all. Above all he does not laugh or sneer. .... Z may think that he knows more about Balrogs than I do, but he cannot expect me to agree with him.
With a terrible cry the Balrog fell forward...~The Bridge of Khazad-dum
What Tolkien consciously wrote in his letters, after writing LOTR, is interesting insight but has to be used a little cautiously. Especially if it's a Letter to someone he probably didn't like (as Ackerman got the project of trying to make LOTR into a movie going) and ranting about someone's screenplay he definitely didn't have any respect for.

Let's also look at other parts of the Letter:
9. 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.
Than the quote continues with what's being debated...the whole 'added demonic force.' #9 is completely about the primary weapon of the Nazgul...their fear. There is no mentioning about the Witch-King's 'combat prowess,' or abilities as a sorcerer, it's Tolkien commenting that Aragorn would never have left Bree at night, because at night the Nazgul's 'fear' is greatly increased.

(Why can we use the whole part about the Nazgul's 'fear' in this Letter, while questioning the 'accuracy' of other parts of the Letter? Because, Tolkien commenting on their primary weapon - fear - does not contradict anything that he wrote in his story. We can see the Nazgul rely on fear and have a great advantage to those who 'fear' them, but to those who do not fear them, the Nazgul don't seem to be much of a threat).

Then again, we know from the Hunt for the ring, UT, that Sauron conveyed to the WK that secrecy must be abandoned - that is, before Frodo set out on his quest.~Raynor
Yet, he is still not in the role that he was at in Pelennor Fields. Sauron was hoping to keep the purpose of the Ringwraiths on the 'DL':
Thus Sauron tested the strength and preparedness of Denethor, and found them more than he had hoped. But that troubled him little, since he had used little force in the assault, and his chief purpose was that the coming forth of the Nazgul should appear only as part of his policy of war against Gondor.~Unfinished Tales; Hunt for the Ring
Because he wanted secrecy at this time...
The Lord of Morgul therefor led his companions over Anduin, unclad and unmounted, and invisible to eyes...~ibid
However, as you mention, Sauron eventually comes to want speed more than secrecy:
For Sauron had now learned of the words of prophecy heard in Gondor, and the forth going of Boromir, of Saruman's deeds, and the capture of Gandalf. From these things he concluded indeed that neither Saruman nor any of the Wise had possession yet of the Ring, but that Saruman at least knew where it might be hidden. Speed alone would now serve, and secrecy must be abandoned.~ibid

This however doesn't mean the Witch-King was willing and able to reveal his full power...this just means forget sneaking around secretly, Sauron wanted to find out where the Ring was and get it as soon as possible. As Radagast tells Gandalf about the Nine being around:
"I have an urgent errand," he said. "My news is evil." Then he looked about him, as if the hedges might have ears. "Nazgul," he whispereed. "The Nine are abroad again. They have crossed the River secretly and are moving westward. They have taken the guise of riders in black."~The Council of Elrond
Which is where the Witch-King (and his cronies :p) start running all over the place to find the Ring (to Saruman in Orthanc, to Grima in Rohan, to Sarn Ford, and eventually to The Shire). In the meantime of doing this the Witch-King wasn't like how Mr. Jackson portrayed that went rushing through slicing off everyone's head...nor was he commanding an army. He was looking for information, hence why he paid a visit to Saruman and Grima...and if people stood in his way that he had the capability of defeating (as the Dunedain had attempted) well then comes the head slicing.

This is what I meant by my comment about his 'rise in status.' Not that the Witch-King grew in Sauron's heirarchy (he was already at the top), but that his role is different. At the start, him and his merry gang, are searching for the Ring where he doesn't need to use (nor show his full power), but at Pelennor he is in the position where he has to show his full power.

Why would the Witch-King conceal his full power and not go around displaying his 'grandeur?' Why does Gandalf conceal his full power when he's with his friends? In Gandalf's case, he is restricted from revealing his full power to Men and Elves. With the Witch-King he is looking for information about the Ring, he doesn't want to go around shattering house doors, or slicing off the heads of possible informants:
In that hour the Wormtongue came near to death by terror; but being inured to treachery he would have told all that he knew under less thread.~Hunt for the Ring
At Pelennor Fields, the situation has changed, he no longer is out trying to gather information about the Ring, his job is to burn Minas Tirith to the ground for his Master. So he is in a position where he has to use his full ability. Grond wasn't breaking down the gate (it had been pounding for quite a while) so the Witch-King comes by to assist Grond in breaking down the gate. Once the gate is broken everyone flees before him, except for one - Gandalf - The Witch-King may not have known Gandalf's full abilities, but this isn't the first time they've met...Gandalf proved to be difficult against the Nine before, but also the very fact that he stands alone, ready to fight while everyone else fled must be a pretty big tip off to Gandalf's power. So, the Witch-King tries to play his biggest card...fear, he laughs, mocks, lights up his sword...but after all that 'Gandalf stood unmoving' and the Witch-King leaves.

Well, if you choose to ignore the prologue, Gandalf's and Bombadil's words depicting the WK to the reader as a leader of armies .... fine.~Raynor
Those are small glimpses, little snippets, of the Witch-King's command role. He is not in that position for a majority of the story, but he was in the glimpses we get of the past:
"For even the Wise might fear to withstand the Nine, when they are gathered together under their fell chieftain. A great king and sorcerer he was of old, and now he wields a deadly fear."~The Council of Elrond

Letter 210 is the only place where if the Witch-King received a 'power uppage' than that's where it is. So, Tolkien contradicted himself, as it wasn't Sauron's nature to start boosting up the power of his servants and spreading it everywhere. Also, taking into account who the letter was written to and the context; you may argue just how accurate is this?

Or, it's as obloquy has argued...the role of the Witch-King is entirely different in the first two books than it was in the third. In the first two books the Witch-King is concealing his power because he is out looking for information, and there rarely was a need, or a purpose, to start breaking down gates and displaying his full abilities. When there was a need (for example the Nazgul crossing over the Anduin, or defeating the Rangers at Sarn Ford) than he could briefly reveal himself. However, these instances still don't require the Witch-King unleashing his full force, just enough so he could get the job done (as his task was still to look for the Ring). Where Pelennor Fields is entirely different, and we see the Witch-King (in the context of the Lord of the Rings) in a role we haven't had before. In the command of Sauron's second largest army, who's goal is to destroy Minas Tirith. Opposing him are some pesky Gondorians, but also Gandalf who has given him problems before and is the only one who stands in his way at the Gate (a gate that was dang hard to break down :p). A situation which calls for the Witch-King to unleash his full bag of tricks and abilities as a sorcerer. Before Pelennor Fields, we get little comments of the Witch-King's ability as a 'great sorcerer' and his role as a leader, but now the reader actually can 'see' his power; and not just from several vague comments made by Tolkien's characters.

[Raynor]

If he can, we must also assume that Gandalf can, since they are identical in nature (incarnate Maiar), and it surely would have been in the interest of the mission for Frodo to have gotten some "added angelic force."
Then again, we don't know how lawful such a transfer of power would be, especially in the context of the istari mission, nor is the relation between the nazgul & Sauron comparable to that between Gandalf and Frodo. Plus, Sauron learned a lot of sorcery from Morgoth, while the subject apparently presented little interest to Olorin.
If the Witch-King here is allowed to reveal himself briefly, it is logical to assume that at all other times he is required to conceal himself.
Then again, this happened in June, before secrecy was no longer required.
Finally, the letter simply does not say that Sauron gave the Witch-King "added demonic force." What it does say is that Sauron gave the Witch-King command of his army, from which he receives "an added demonic force."
You are twisting the phrase:
There, put in command by Sauron, he is given an added demonic force.
Nowhere does it say that from the command of his army he receives an added demonic force. You are adding your own words.
As Radagast tells Gandalf about the Nine being around:
That also happened before September, although your ordering of events might lead one to think otherwise.
However, these instances still don't require the Witch-King unleashing his full force, just enough so he could get the job done (as his task was still to look for the Ring).
I disagree. Getting the ring was far more important than anything else for Sauron, and the WK was dismayed at the threats he received from his master, together with the order to abandon secrecy.
Those are small glimpses, little snippets, of the Witch-King's command role.
Well, these "snippets" come from some of the most authoritative sources, including the author. In fact, he comes off more as a leader of armies in those "snippets" than here, where he is a singular figure, wielding his sword in flames. These are the image and actions of WK as a demonic power, never before seen by the reader at such a level.

[davem]

I think the Appendix B in Return of the King makes clear that it is really the Witch King who does this (not the battering ram):


No - its shorthand: the WK is in charge of Sauron's armies, hence he 'breaks the gate'.

The drums rolled louder. Fires leaped up. Great engines crawled across the field; and in the midst was a huge ram, great as a forest-tree a hundred feet in length, swinging on mighty chains. Long had it been forging in the dark smithies of Mordor, and its hideous head, founded of black steel, was shaped in the likeness of a ravening wolf; on it spells of ruin lay. Grond they named it, in memory of the Hammer of the Underworld of old. Great beasts drew it, orcs surrounded it, and behind walked mountain-trolls to wield it.
[QUOTE]
Then the Black Captain rose in his stirrups and cried aloud in a dreadful voice, speaking in some forgotten tongue words of power and terror to rend both heart and stone. Thrice he cried. Thrice the great ram boomed. And suddenly upon the last stroke the Gate of Gondor broke. As if stricken by some blasting spell it burst asunder: there was a flash of searing lightning, and the doors tumbled in riven fragments to the ground.

The point I was making in my flip comment was that if the WK had the power to break the gates then why use Grond - why indeed spend so long forging it? Grond was designed for a single purpose - to batter down the gates of Minas Tirith. If the only example that's being offered for the WK being given 'extra' power is the breaking of the gate then its not a good one. The WK may utter words in an unknown tongue but he does it in conjunction with the use of a devastating (physical) weapon against a physical object. Of course, the implication is that he used spells to weaken the stone & metal of the gate & gateposts - & there's the 'lightning' too - but this is clearly not sufficient to break the gates without a battering ram.

If the WK had the power to break the gates unaided then he would have done. He couldn't. Hence he had to use a battering ram. Of course, its his ram, so he broke the gates. To argue that because App B states he 'broke the gates' Grond played no part is like arguing that saying the WK 'stabbed Frodo on Weathertop' implies that the Morgul Blade was irrelevant. The WK broke the Gates with Grond & he stabbed Frodo with the Morgul Blade. He couldn't have performed either act without the object.

[Raynor]

If the WK had the power to break the gates unaided then he would have done. He couldn't. Hence he had to use a battering ram.
I don't see why breaking the gates with the ram implies that the WK couldn't do it by himself. He may very well be capable, but it may weaken him too much to be worth it, in such circumstances. What Tolkien said about the use of magic vs. use of slave and technology I believe applies here as well:
But the magia may not be easy to come by, and at any rate if you have command of abundant slave-labour or machinery (often only the same thing concealed), it may be as quick or quick enough to push mountains over, wreck forests, or build pyramids by such means.
Even if using the ram would be more costly in troops casualties, it would not be something that would concern the WK, if it can better further his plans.

[davem]

I don't see why breaking the gates with the ram implies that the WK couldn't do it by himself. He may very well be capable, but it may weaken him too much to be worth it, in such circumstances.

Maybe he could - & maybe he could have turned Frodo into a Wraith without the use of a Morgul Blade, & maybe you're correct that Rams & Blades are 'labour-saving devices', but all this is speculation. The fact is that the WK used Grond & spells to break the gates, & we don't know whether he could have broken them on his own. In itself the breaking of the Gates proves nothing about whether the WK had 'extra demonic force' - all it proves is that he's able, with a combination of spells & a battering ram, to do a bit of breaking & entering.

[Raynor]

In itself the breaking of the Gates proves nothing about whether the WK had 'extra demonic force'
True, not itself. But taking into consideration that the reader doesn't see the WK display such power, although he had far more reasons to do so previously, I believe the question of added force is a pertinent one. Capturing Gondor with a huge army presents a less pressing reason to use full power than capturing the one ring, especially if under dismaying threats and no restriction of secrecy.

[davem]

True, not itself. But taking into consideration that the reader doesn't see the WK display such power, although he had far more reasons to do so previously, I believe the question of added force is a pertinent one. Capturing Gondor with a huge army presents a less pressing reason to use full power than capturing the one ring, especially if under dismaying threats and no restriction of secrecy.

The 'gates' issue, to me, comes down to the simple question of whether Grond could have taken down the gates eventually, & I see no reason to believe it would not. The WK's contribution, as I read it, is to speed up the inevitable & add a bit of 'spectacle' (bit like Gandalf's addition of 'white horses' to the Bruinen flood). You'd have to be able to argue that the gates were so strong that Grond could never have brought them down on its own, & that the WK's own innate power could not achieve that even with the use of Grond before you could offer the destruction of the gates up as evidence of 'enhanced demonic force' in the sense of a power up from Sauron.

[Raynor]

The 'gates' issue, to me, comes down to the simple question of whether Grond could have taken down the gates eventually, & I see no reason to believe it would not. The WK's contribution, as I read it, is to speed up the inevitable & add a bit of 'spectacle'
I agree. By and large, I was trying to make the same point, that there was no extremely pressing need for the WK to use such magic power - unlike when trying to capture the ring, when that particular need was evidently present, but he didn't use such power. When comparing these two situations, the direct meaning of "added force" is the relevant one.

[davem]

I agree. By and large, I was trying to make the same point, that there was no extremely pressing need for the WK to use such magic power - unlike when trying to capture the ring, when that particular need was evidently present, but he didn't use such power. When comparing these two situations, the direct meaning of "added force" is the relevant one.

I don't see that the two situations are comparable - one is trying to get hold of the Ring from an individual bearer in the wilderness, the other is trying to get into a city by breaking its gate. His power & the question of whether or not it is enhanced at one point by Sauron doesn't seem to come into it. Frodo was never separated from the WK by city walls. If he had been behind such walls on Amon Hen, & if the WK had had a battering ram at his disposal, along with a massive army, I'm sure he would have taken the same approach to getting at him.

The question, to my mind, is if the WK had been in the same position (with armies & weapons) at the beginning of the hunt for the Ring as he was at the end would he have behaved differently - was he more powerful at the Siege than at Weathertop, or was he just restricted by the means he had at hand? I'd favour the latter.

[Raynor]

I don't see that the two situations are comparable - one is trying to get hold of the Ring from an individual bearer in the wilderness, the other is trying to get into a city by breaking its gate.
What I believe the issue to be is that in both occasions - attacking the city and attempting to retrieve the ring from Frodo in various occasions - the WK did use magic, but at definitely different levels, levels which are at odds with what we know of his motivations. Even if we presume that in both occasions the WK used the most of his power (although we agree that the Siege of Gondor was a far lesser reason to do so, than retrieving the ring), there is an obvious difference.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

We perhaps should be very careful of interpreting the Nazgul as warriors- a mistake Peter Jackson made from the start, fitting them out with armor and happily lopping off hobbit-heads- culminating in the absurd swordfight on Weathertop (directly contrary to Tolkien's criticisms of the Z script).

Leaving out the W-K, who appears certainly to outclass the rest, the 8 Associate Nazgul are never once depicted as wielding physical weapons (Frodo's vision at the Ford, of course, is of the Riders as they are on the "other side.")* They operate by fear, or by breaking morale. (As an old grognard, or player of board war-games, I would have killed for some unit which automatically exacted a -5 morale penalty on all enemy units!!) Yet this itself is a weapon with physical consequences, as we learn that a good dose of Black Breath can indeed prove fatal- indeed, Grima "came near to death by terror." In The Hunt for the Ring, the BR "drove off" the Rangers at Sarn Ford (after dark fell). We do learn that some of these were indeed "slain:" but was this by physical weaponry, or Black Breath?


*It's a very common misconception, not restricted to PJ, that the Nazgul raided the Prancing Pony. They didn't. Read closely and you'll see that it was Bill Ferney and the Southerner, perhaps with Harry Goatleaf, acting on the BR's instructions).

[Boromir88]

What I believe the issue to be is that in both occasions - attacking the city and attempting to retrieve the ring from Frodo in various occasions - the WK did use magic, but at definitely different levels, levels which are at odds with what we know of his motivations.~Raynor
No, just that the situations were different. Getting the Ring was the most important goal, but let's not forget at Pelennor Fields, by this time Aragorn had revealed himself to Sauron, causing Sauron to believe that Isildur's heir would use the Ring against him. This causes the hasty attack on Gondor, so the Siege of Minas Tirith is arguably just as important of a motive for the Witch-King as was trying to get the Ring.

As davem cogently explained the situations are quite different. On one side the Witch-King is trying to hunt down a hobbit that carries a Ring, but he is also looking for information. He doesn't want to frighten informants to death (or go busting down gates) and he isn't this agent of death as WCH explains. So, he has to conceal his power as he had done when he found Grima.

When he faces Gandalf on Amon Sul, than we see some sparks flying around. I fail to see why we would assume the pretty lights were all Gandalf's...as the Witch-King was referred to as a 'great sorcerer' several times.

At Pelennor, the situation calls for him to display his full power (as what we could say happened when he first faced Gandalf on Weathertop). As he is not looking for information, or for a hobbit that carries a Ring, he's trying to:

1. Destroy Minas Tirith
2. Faces a much stronger opponent in Gandalf

Also, I don't think obloquy is twisting around anything, there is a difference between....

'There, put in command by Sauron, he is given an added demonic force.'

and

'There, put in command by Sauron, he is given added demonic force.'

The first one says the Witch-King, because of his command given by Sauron has an added demonic force (I take 'demonic force' to mean that he's scarier...as the entire part is about the fear the Witch-King inspires).

The second one says that because the Witch-King, because he was put in command by Sauron, he is given added power (that power being 'demonic force.')

Or let me try to put it this way...what is scarier? A dark figure, creepy looking Wraith who comes up and asks for directions or the same said wraith who is commanding an army of 45,000+ and is out to kill you?

I don't see how breaking down the gate and his tricks is a force that the Witch-King was incapable of displaying before Pelennor Fields. Because of the several instances where he is referred to as a 'great sorcerer,' also in his bout with Gandalf on Weathertop. The reason the Witch-King doesn't display this 'gate busting' power before is because there is no need for it, there is no reason to do so. He is trying to gather information on the Ring and ultimately end up bringing it back to Sauron, very different from trying to obliterate a city and beat an opponent far greater than him.

[CSteefel]

If the WK had the power to break the gates unaided then he would have done. He couldn't. Hence he had to use a battering ram. Of course, its his ram, so he broke the gates. To argue that because App B states he 'broke the gates' Grond played no part is like arguing that saying the WK 'stabbed Frodo on Weathertop' implies that the Morgul Blade was irrelevant. The WK broke the Gates with Grond & he stabbed Frodo with the Morgul Blade. He couldn't have performed either act without the object.
I didn't say the battering ram played no part. I simply said the Witch King was primarily responsible, although this is open to other interpretations like yours above.

However, note also that the Witch King's spell is more than just striking fear, or cheerleading, since it is said that

...speaking in some forgotten tongue words of power and terror to rend both heart and stone.

with the emphasis on "stone" added by myself. Given this extra information about the power here, I would say that your interpretation of the quote from Appendix B, while a viable one, is just one of those possible.

[davem]

I didn't say the battering ram played no part. I simply said the Witch King was primarily responsible,

And I say the battering ram was more than sufficient to do it - given a bit more time. And this is the point - this is speculation. It can't be used to support a claim that the WK was 'extra powerful' at that point - the only conclusion that can be drawn from the breaking of the gates is that under the right circumstances they could be broken.

[CSteefel]

When he faces Gandalf on Amon Sul, than we see some sparks flying around. I fail to see why we would assume the pretty lights were all Gandalf's...as the Witch-King was referred to as a 'great sorcerer' several times.
Possibly, although this is pretty much Gandalf's signature, as we see in the fight with the wolves after retreating from Caradhras.


'There, put in command by Sauron, he is given added demonic force.'

The first one says the Witch-King, because of his command given by Sauron has an added demonic force (I take 'demonic force' to mean that he's scarier...as the entire part is about the fear the Witch-King inspires).

The second one says that because the Witch-King, because he was put in command by Sauron, he is given added power (that power being 'demonic force.')

Or let me try to put it this way...what is scarier? A dark figure, creepy looking Wraith who comes up and asks for directions or the same said wraith who is commanding an army of 45,000+ and is out to kill you?


Well, I don't buy this. If it was simply a matter of commanding an army, I believe that Tolkien would have used different phrasing. In fact, he says

But it was no orc-chieftain or brigand that led the assault upon Gondor...He was still in command, wielding great powers. King, Ringwraith, Lord of the Nazgul, he had many weapons.
This says to me that he is commander of the army (no trivial thing, to be sure), but also in command of other powers beyond these.

[CSteefel]

And I say the battering ram was more than sufficient to do it - given a bit more time. And this is the point - this is speculation. It can't be used to support a claim that the WK was 'extra powerful' at that point - the only conclusion that can be drawn from the breaking of the gates is that under the right circumstances they could be broken.
I agree that by itself, this is speculative. This is meaningful in conjunction with Tolkien's statement that the WK has added demonic power. This statement is also open for various possible interpretations.

However I don't see any evidence that
the only conclusion that can be drawn from the breaking of the gates is that under the right circumstances they could be broken.
How do you prove that this is the only conclusion?

[davem]

I agree that by itself, this is speculative. This is meaningful in conjunction with Tolkien's statement that the WK has added demonic power. This statement is also open for various possible interpretations.

How do you prove that this is the only conclusion?

'cos breaking some big gates is not actually a big deal in itself. The fact is that the WK used a battering ram & some spells to break the gates. The breaking of the gates is just a bad example if you're offering 'evidence' that the WK is more powerful at the Pelennor Fields than he was earlier. The gates are not magical as far as I know & don't need magic to bring them down - only force. What other evidence is there that the WK was more powerful during the battle - he seems the same person to me - given that the Barrow blade, 'wound about with spells' that was designed to bring him down still worked.

[CSteefel]

'cos breaking some big gates is not actually a big deal in itself. The fact is that the WK used a battering ram & some spells to break the gates. The breaking of the gates is just a bad example if you're offering 'evidence' that the WK is more powerful at the Pelennor Fields than he was earlier. The gates are not magical as far as I know & don't need magic to bring them down - only force. What other evidence is there that the WK was more powerful during the battle - he seems the same person to me - given that the Barrow blade, 'wound about with spells' that was designed to bring him down still worked.
I would say it is largely because of the various evidence that the Nazgul DID NOT have added physical strength prior to this scene that the breaking of the Gates (at least partly carried out with the use of a spell) seems noteworthy to me. Otherwise, the original quote from Tolkien's Letters is:
(
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. 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.

with the emphasis here on the statement that "they have no great physical power against the fearless". This statement is made in conjunction with the Witch Kings powers in Book I and if there were no real enhancement to the WK's power, then it would seem to contradict the fact that we see the WK help to break the Gates of the City. Now you can argue that this is just Grond, but the quote above, in which it is explicitly stated that

...forgotten tongue words of power and terror to rend both heart and stone.

seems to argue directly against this notion that it is only Grond.

[Boromir88]

I would say it is largely because of the various evidence that the Nazgul DID NOT have added physical strength prior to this scene that the breaking of the Gates (at least partly carried out with the use of a spell) seems noteworthy to me.~CSteefel
Prior to Pelennor Fields there was rarely a purpose for displaying such force by the Witch-King.

In the first two books the Witch-King is not out trying to destroy the Shire, or even kill anyone. So, why would he need such a power as breaking down gates and lighting up his sword? He had to conceal his power because he was looking for information, as busting through The Shire's hedge and literally scaring people to death (as what almost happened to Grima) would have been counter productive to his task.

This doesn't mean before Pelennor he was incapable of such a force, just that such a force was not needed because of his task of hunting down the Ring. And in his way stands 4 hobbits with a ranger, who's courage he greatly underestimated:
Escaping a wound that would have been as deadly to him as the Mordor -knife to Frodo (as was proved at the end), he withdrew and hid for a while, out of doubt and fear both of Aragorn and especially of Frodo...
But above all the timid and terrified Beared had resisted him, had dared to strike at him with an enchanted swords 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 nazgul. He was then in league with the High Elves of the Havens.~The Marquette Letter (Found in Hammond and Scull's Reader's Companion)
Why don't we see some sparks with the Witch-King in his meeting with Frodo at Weathertop? Probably because he doesn't have a powerful Maiar lighting up the sky that is opposing him. He's got some hobbits (Merry and Pippin who had fallen down in fear and Sam who had shrunk and whined beside Frodo, Frodo himself who was terrified, and Aragorn who was at this time MIA). The Witch-King just didn't think that Frodo would overcome his fear and strike at him with an enchanted blade that was as crippling to him as the morgul blade was to Frodo...so the Witch-King, as I would have done had someone tried to strike me with a blade that would completely cripple me, high-tailed it out of there.

Now how is the Pelennor Witch-King different (as far as in terms of 'power') different from that of the Witch-King earlier? There isn't a difference...several times he was referred to as a 'sorcerer' before we see him at Pelennor:
"For even the Wise might fear to withstand the Nine, when they are gathered together under their fell chieftain. A great king and sorcerer he was of old, and now he wields a deadly fear."~The Council of Elrond
Those who used the nine rings became might in their day, kings, sorcerers, and warriors of old.~The Silmarillion; Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age
King of Angmar long ago Sorcerer, Ringwraith, Lord of the Nazgul, a spear of terror in the hand of Sauron, shadow of despair.~(Gandalf to Pippin) The Siege of Gondor
So, clearly the Witch-King must have done some sort of 'gate-busting' sorcery before Pelennor Fields, or he would not have been known to people as being a sorcerer.

We see his display of power in his attack against Gandalf on Weathertop. The Wraiths wait for night where their power would be greater, both Aragorn (when he arrives at Weathertop) and Gandalf say this was no walk in the park:
"But they closed round at night, and I was besieged on the hill-top, in the old ring of Amon Sul. I was hard put to it indeed: such a light and flame cannot have been seen on Weathertop since the war-beacons of old."
"At sunrise I escaped and fled towards the north. I could not hope to do more..."~The Council of Elrond
It is Gandalf who has to high-tail it out of there this time, he is the one that has to hold them off and he gets away. If someone has a gun are you going to go charging them with a knife? If Gandalf is lighting up the sky, the Witch-King (and the other ringwraiths) were 'sorcerers' because of the possession of their rings, and Gandalf even has to flee, put it all together.

Where does the Witch-King have 'great physical power' at Pelennor Fields? He still has the boldest of Gondor running in terror. In fact only the Knights of Dol Amroth and Gandalf were said to have withstood the Nazgul. When the Witch-King barges through the gate it is only Gandalf that blocks his way. And the Witch-King, seeing Gandalf was standing in his way completely unafraid, leaves that situation to go tend to another.

[Raynor]

So, he has to conceal his power as he had done when he found Grima.
His power at that time, as it has been noted several times in this thread, last time by CSteefel, is mainly fear. That power, as The hunt for the ring, UT, informs us, cannot be in fact concealed, being the major drawback of using the nazgul. What still remains unaddressed is that the WK use of magic during the times he encountered Frodo is far inferior to the Pelennor Fields. It is these times that I have called into question, not when WK met informants or Gandalf. This is when he was closest to his ultimate goal in the mission, but failed to impress by magic, although it would have helped him a lot. The fact of the matter remains that, instead of confronting his enemies - as his power you attribute him at that time warranted -, he rather bids his time, waits for the morgul blade to take effect, flees from Aragorn and all that.
'There, put in command by Sauron, he is given an added demonic force.'

and

'There, put in command by Sauron, he is given added demonic force.'

The first one says the Witch-King, because of his command given by Sauron has an added demonic force (I take 'demonic force' to mean that he's scarier...as the entire part is about the fear the Witch-King inspires).

The second one says that because the Witch-King, because he was put in command by Sauron, he is given added power (that power being 'demonic force.')Then again, the main differences between these phrasings is not the presence or absence of "an" [I fail to see why each phrasing would exclusively warrant just that one interpretation you gave them] but the meaning of "demonic", which makes this exercise rather useless.
So, clearly the Witch-King must have done some sort of 'gate-busting' sorcery before Pelennor Fields, or he would not have been known to people as being a sorcerer.Gandalf indulged in far less impressive shows of power and yet he was still known as a wizard.
And the Witch-King, seeing Gandalf was standing in his way completely unafraid, leaves that situation to go tend to another.It's not because he sees him unafraid that he leaves.

[Mansun]

This thread was meant to be about the Balrog vs the Witch King. It seems to have drifted into a Gandalf the White vs the enhanced Witch King scenario. This is ok, as long as posters can relate their thoughts back to the Balrog.

[davem]

Gandalf indulged in far less impressive shows of power and yet he was still known as a wizard.

Yes - & that's the point. Gandalf didn't go around busting bridges & killing Balrogs, but he could still do it when it was necessary. Just because he hadn't whacked a Balrog up to that point doesn't prove he was suddenly gifted with extra power in Moria in order to do so. In the same way, just because the WK hadn't knocked over a big gate before doesn't prove he wasn't capable of doing it without a power up.

My problem with this argument is that its only a gate & doesn't need much effort to knock over if you've got a massive battering ram to hand. What other evidence is there for enhanced power? One could argue that if he had the power to smash a gate he should have avoided getting into hand to hand combat with that blonde bird & just zapped her. He tends to enjoy the experience of terrorising his victims & is very much a hands on kind of guy.

[CSteefel]

This thread was meant to be about the Balrog vs the Witch King. It seems to have drifted into a Gandalf the White vs the enhanced Witch King scenario. This is ok, as long as posters can relate their thoughts back to the Balrog.
It really is now centered on the Witch King and whether or not his power was enhanced. And then, what his power really was. Gandalf is incidental, and only used to bolster the arguments pro and con, in the posts above.

As for the the WK versus the Balrog, I guess I am inclined to agree the Balrog would come out on top. The only possible caveat here is that the Witch King's power comes from Sauron, so we could not rule out completely an augmentation of the WK's power (something I believe that happened in the Pelennor Fields) to face a foe like the Balrog. But this is taking the speculation even farther... My point, however, is that the WK is not an independent power like the Balrog, but derives his power in large part from Sauron himself. This also implies that predicting his power from one case to the next might be difficult...

[Raynor]

It really is now centered on the Witch King and whether or not his power was enhanced.
I agree; the issue of the WK's power was a thorny one and it got this whole branch started.
Gandalf didn't go around busting bridges & killing Balrogs, but he could still do it when it was necessary.
That necessity was more than present previously and unlike Gandalf he had no restrictions. As I mentioned:
What still remains unaddressed is that the WK use of magic during the times he encountered Frodo is far inferior to the Pelennor Fields. It is these times that I have called into question, not when WK met informants or Gandalf. This is when he was closest to his ultimate goal in the mission, but failed to impress by magic, although it would have helped him a lot. The fact of the matter remains that, instead of confronting his enemies - as his power you attribute him at that time warranted -, he rather bids his time, waits for the morgul blade to take effect, flees from Aragorn and all that.

[Boromir88]

It is these times that I have called into question, not when WK met informants or Gandalf.~Raynor
But what this does show is that prior to the battle of Pelennor Fields the Witch-King was capable of using magic...so busting down a gate and lighting up a sword doesn't mean he suddenly had a boost of power. Why doesn't he use any of his sorcery when he encounters Frodo on Weathertop? I don't know, but he did us it when he encountered Gandalf on Weathertop. Or could it be that his task was different?

As I've said the Witch-King is hunting for the Ring, he's not out trying to kill anyone...not even the Ringbearer:
'They tried to pierce your heart with a Morgul-knife which remains in the wound. If they had succeeded, you would have become like they are, only weaker and under his command. You would have become a wraith under the dominion of the Dark Lord; and he would have tormented you for trying to keep his Ring; if any greater torment were possible than being robbed of it and seeing it on his hand.'~Many Meetings
Sending a jolt of fire from his eyes to fry Frodo wouldn't have been torment enough for Frodo. Sauron wanted this Ringbearer to suffer not have a quick and easy death.
That necessity was more than present previously and unlike Gandalf he had no restrictions.
But the quote above certainly makes it seem like Sauron limitted what the Witch-King was able to do. He wasn't trying to burn down the Shire or kill anyone who opposed him (he wasn't even supposed to kill the Ringbearer). He was to find out the location of the Ring and not only get the Ring, but also the Ringbearer, so the said Ringbearer could suffer.

At Pelennor Fields his is not limitted anymore. His objective isn't to bring people to Sauron to suffer...his objective is to completely trash Minas Tirith and kill all those who oppose him.
Gandalf indulged in far less impressive shows of power and yet he was still known as a wizard.
Aye, but Tolkien also refers to the Nazgul as sorcerers...and it is also the 'great wizard' Gandalf who calls the Witch-King a 'great sorcerer.'

[obloquy]

The phrase's meaning does not hinge upon the "an," though the "an" is there only because Tolkien meant the phrase in a certain way. The sentence structure provides a very clear picture of what Tolkien meant, but I won't try to explain it in detail. However, note that he is talking about the Witch-King receiving the "force" and the command from two separate givers, as indicated by his need to specify that the Witch-King received the command from Sauron specifically. Before and after that interjection, Sauron is not the one effecting changes in the Witch-King's stature, it is the storyteller doing so. The storyteller gives the Witch-King an added demonic force in Vol III by having him receive command of an army from Sauron. That's what the sentence says. I am not twisting the phrase's meaning, I am gleaning its meaning from its structure.

His power at that time, as it has been noted several times in this thread, last time by CSteefel, is mainly fear. That power, as The hunt for the ring, UT, informs us, cannot be in fact concealed, being the major drawback of using the nazgul.

Tolkien does not actually say this. He says this of the Nazgul, but the Witch-King is "more powerful in all ways" than the others. You're right that the fear can't be concealed: so in the example of the Witch-King revealing himself that I provided below, what would you say he was previously concealing? Remember that this happened before Vol III and the Witch-King's alleged augmentation.

What still remains unaddressed is that the WK use of magic during the times he encountered Frodo is far inferior to the Pelennor Fields. It is these times that I have called into question, not when WK met informants or Gandalf. This is when he was closest to his ultimate goal in the mission, but failed to impress by magic, although it would have helped him a lot.

What magic might have helped him? A lightning sword? Then the leader, who was now half across the Ford, stood up menacing in his stirrups, and raised up his hand. Frodo was stricken dumb. He felt his tongue cleave to his mouth, and his heart labouring. His sword broke and fell out of his shaking hand.

That's every bit as impressive as breaking a gate, right?

My problem with this argument is that its only a gate & doesn't need much effort to knock over if you've got a massive battering ram to hand.

I think Raynor must assume that the breaking of the gate is representative of other particular powers the Witch-King would have been stupid not to use in prior encounters. Like a magical lasso or something, I guess. davem is correct, though, and his posts have been good. As have Boromir88's: the Witch-King accomplished all manner of death and destruction (which no other Nazgul did) prior to his presence in LotR, and Tolkien's reference to an increase of stature in Vol III is relative only to the Witch-King's stature in Vol I and Vol II, not his pre-LotR stature.

[CSteefel]

The storyteller gives the Witch-King an added demonic force in Vol III by having him receive command of an army from Sauron. That's what the sentence says. I am not twisting the phrase's meaning, I am gleaning its meaning from its structure.

Hmmm, why is giving somebody command of an army a "demonic force". If Tolkien had meant that, why not just say "Sauron gave the Witch King command of his armies". The adjective "demonic" doesn't make much sense when applied to an army of non-magical beings (Southrons, orcs and the like)...

[Raynor]

At Pelennor Fields his is not limitted anymore.
I know of no limitation of the mission of the WK. He was supposed to get the ring, that was his job. Irregardless of Gandalf's musings, the attack of the nazgul with the morgul blade had more to do with Frodo striking at him and crying the name of Varda than with a supposed addendum to his mission.
Aye, but Tolkien also refers to the Nazgul as sorcerers...and it is also the 'great wizard' Gandalf who calls the Witch-King a 'great sorcerer.'I believe I have conveyed my point; I know of no minimum requirement of magic display in order to qualify as a sorcerer. Thus, implying that the WK must have displayed such powers before because he was called a sorcerer is uncalled for.
However, note that he is talking about the Witch-King receiving the "force" and the command from two separate givers, as indicated by his need to specify that the Witch-King received the command from Sauron specifically.
I believe that's a false dichotomy. I see no reason why the phrase can't mean he received the force from Sauron too. While I agree that the phrase can be viewed from your point also, it is definitely not the only one, especially considering the larger context.
That's every bit as impressive as breaking a gate, right?Nope; not even a fraction of its efficacy and power. It is one of the occasions I repeatedly referred to when the WK uses his power at far lesser levels than the situation requires and his supposed power permits. Also, the timing of it, the fact that the WK bids his time for 14 days and uses it in his 25th hour, when Frodo is already on enemy land, beyond the waters he rightly fears, shows that this is more for show and spite than for practical uses.
the Witch-King accomplished all manner of death and destruction (which no other Nazgul did)What different manners of death and destruction do you have in mind? And how do you know the other nazgul didn't do them?

[Mansun]

So what if the Witch King broke a gate? Gandalf broke the Balrog's sword into a million pieces. No doubt this sword was blessed with many special spells too.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

This thread was meant to be about the Balrog vs the Witch King. It seems to have drifted into a Gandalf the White vs the enhanced Witch King scenario. This is ok, as long as posters can relate their thoughts back to the Balrog.

That depends *entirely* on whether the Witch-king is confronting a winged or a wingless Balrog.;)

[Mansun]

That depends *entirely* on whether the Witch-king is confronting a winged or a wingless Balrog.;)

It also depends on whether the Witch King would fear the fire of the Balrog. It certainly grew afraid when Aragorn branded fire.

[Boromir88]

the attack of the nazgul with the morgul blade had more to do with Frodo striking at him and crying the name of Varda than with a supposed addendum to his mission.~Raynor
No, The Witch-King was already bearing down on him with the morgul blade, before Frodo made an attempt to strike:
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. He sprang forward and bore down on Frodo.
At that moment Frodo threw himself forward on the ground, and he heard himself crying aloud: Oh Elbereth! Gilthoniel! At the same time he struck at the feet of his enemy. A shrill cry rang out in the night; and he felt a pain like a dart of poisoned ice pierce his left shoulder.~A Knife in the Dark
Gandalf's 'musings' about Sauron wanting Frodo for torment are actually correct. If the Witch-King's mission was to kill Frodo to get the Ring, why not use the sword he was wielding to just do the job? Instead he uses the Morgul knife and goes after Frodo (before Frodo makes his attempted 'strike')...Therefor were not Gandalf's words actually correct? That Sauron wanted the Ringbearer to be brought back to suffer and not be killed. I would call that a restriction placed on the Witch-King, similar to the restrictions placed upon Gandalf.

Thus, implying that the WK must have displayed such powers before because he was called a sorcerer is uncalled for.
Yet, as obloquy and I have both shown the Witch-King using magic long before Pelennor Fields. In his attack against Gandalf on Weathertop and the part that obloquy quotes. So, to say that assisting Grond in breaking down a gate shows the Witch-King has an added 'demonic force' is what I think is uncalled for. ;)

[obloquy]

Hmmm, why is giving somebody command of an army a "demonic force". If Tolkien had meant that, why not just say "Sauron gave the Witch King command of his armies". The adjective "demonic" doesn't make much sense when applied to an army of non-magical beings (Southrons, orcs and the like)...

It's not applied to the army, it's applied to the Witch-King's presence, which is more open and prominent. The expression does not have to mean actual demon powers; in fact, I doubt Tolkien would ever have used the phrase to mean that. It conveys a sense of the Witch-King's presence on the battle field, which was at this time especially demonical.

Nope; not even a fraction of its efficacy and power. It is one of the occasions I repeatedly referred to when the WK uses his power at far lesser levels than the situation requires and his supposed power permits. Also, the timing of it, the fact that the WK bids his time for 14 days and uses it in his 25th hour, when Frodo is already on enemy land, beyond the waters he rightly fears, shows that this is more for show and spite than for practical uses.

So you're saying that the Witch-King's enhancement was the new ability to use his sorcery for practical purposes rather than merely show? Because striking a person dumb and shattering his sword is every bit as demonstrative of magical powers as assisting in breaking a gate.

I believe that's a false dichotomy. I see no reason why the phrase can't mean he received the force from Sauron too. While I agree that the phrase can be viewed from your point also, it is definitely not the only one, especially considering the larger context.

"The larger context" is narrative decisions, which you have, up until now, felt it prudent to completely ignore. The larger context is not how the War of the Ring played out, and what kinds of measures Sauron went to; all of that is covered in Tolkien's "historical" texts, where he makes no mention of Sauron literally enhancing the Witch-King's abilities. My analysis of the sentence structure is correct, and the interjection (regarding Sauron) is presented as a reason for the stated effect.

What different manners of death and destruction do you have in mind? And how do you know the other nazgul didn't do them?

Whatever means the Witch-King employed in his open war against Men and Elves prior to the LotR is what I had in mind. Tolkien isn't specific about them. Do you think it was solely this power of fear that made him capable of these conquests as king of his own realm? None of the other Nazgul have this kind of history, and it's because the Witch-King is "more powerful in all ways" than the others by nature, not because of this putative late-game enhancement.

[davem]

I believe I have conveyed my point; I know of no minimum requirement of magic display in order to qualify as a sorcerer. Thus, implying that the WK must have displayed such powers before because he was called a sorcerer is uncalled for.

Well, he didn't get his rep as a sorcerer because of his skill in pulling rabbits out of his hat. Unless 'sorcerer' means someone who can do card tricks or escape from a straightjacket we must assume it stands for something significant, & as I stated breaking a gate with the aid of a battering ram is not actually all that significant. Sorry, but if breaking the gate in that way was only possible after being given 'added demonic force' then the WK must have been little better than a conjuror without it.

[Raynor]

If the Witch-King's mission was to kill Frodo to get the RingI didn't say his mission was to kill Frodo to get the Ring - but to get the ring, obviously through any means necessary. And the actual phrasing is not he bore down on him with the morgul blade but he bore down on him. He was obviously not going to come empty handed and Frodo was rather likely to use the ring, thus the WK appearing armed as such would be more frightening and thus there is an additional reason to be so. WK's job was to get the ring, and if that required killing its bearer or turning him into a wraith, all the better. As far as I know, nowhere does Tolkien state that bringing him to Sauron was a priority, neither in UT nor in the letters, where he discusses Sauron's motivations. In fact, what we know of his motivations is that he desperately wanted the ring as soon as possible, before his enemies could get to it. All this delay of 14 days between stabbing Frodo and Frodo crossing the river show that the WK preferred to bid his time instead of ceaselessly attacking this small group, as his supposed great power at the time permitted.
So you're saying that the Witch-King's enhancement was the new ability to use his sorcery for practical purposes rather than merely show? Because striking a person dumb and shattering his sword is every bit as demonstrative of magical powers as assisting in breaking a gate
What I said above: having such power previously would have allowed the WK to pursue his mission more aggressively. He didn't.
My analysis of the sentence structure is correct, and the interjection (regarding Sauron) is presented as a reason for the stated effect.I see nothing that proves exclusively your point of view. Narrative choices in the passage and letter relates in fact to in-story elements, something which I definitely not avoided.
Whatever means the Witch-King employed in his open war against Men and Elves prior to the LotR is what I had in mind. Tolkien isn't specific about them.I see. So it's basically speculation. I have no problem with that, but you should not have presented your opinion as a fact.
breaking a gate with the aid of a battering ram is not actually all that significant
He didn't break the door of a hobbit shack. The context in which this occurs makes this one the (if not the) most powerful displays of magic power in the book.

[davem]

He didn't break the door of a hobbit shack. The context in which this occurs makes this one the (if not the) most powerful displays of magic power in the book.

Oh its spectacular, & its symbolic, but is it actually all that big a deal in terms of power needed? When we're talking about magic it becomes more complex - it may take no more magic to shatter a city gate than to break a sword. And I keep coming back to the battering ram - could he have shattered the gate without Grond? One can't dismiss the Ram because of the time taken in its forging & the effort expended in dragging it all the way from Mordor. Why bother if the WK can just shatter the gate unaided? And even if he could we have no evidence that he couldn't do something like that without 'added demonic force'. All we know is that he's never shown doing something exactly like that before - but we're never shown Gandalf doing anything like killing a Balrog before, & we don't look for 'added spiritual power' to explain that. And let's not forget that Frodo's sword was a Barrow Blade - a 'magical' object bound about with spells - while the gate was just a gate. It may well have take more power to break the sword than the gate.

What else did he do in the battle to display this extra power? Nothing that I can see.

[Mansun]

As mentioned earlier, the fact that Gandalf the Grey was able to break the flaming sword of the Balrog was very significant in terms of power, particularly as the sword was blessed with spell fire & other demonic spells. If a weaker Gandalf was able to destroy the Balrog like this, then a contest between it & the enhanced Witch King may not be as one-sided as some may think. Nevertheless, in order I would put Gandalf the White first, the Balrog second, the enhanced Witch King third, since the Balrog did succeed in ending Gandalf's life.

Breaking a gate, however great, is not as great a demonstration of power as breaking the magical weapon of a Maia. The character of the Balrog & its awesome presence is also probably the greatest achievement in the LOTR - no other chapter comes anywhere near it for suspense & horror than when the Balrog appears - it is a hellish creature which only existed in nightmares of even great folk like Gimli, Legolas & Aragorn.

Was the Balrog coming in for the Ring, & if so what may it have done with it?

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Guys, we have to get our terms straight, because we're sctually discussing no fewer than twenty different confrontations:

1. Gandalf the Grey vs. pre-Pelennor Witch-king
2. Gandalf the White vs. pre-Pelennor Witch-king
3. Gandalf the Grey vs. Pelennor Witch-king
4. Gandalf the White vs. Pelennor Witch-king
5. Gandalf the Grey vs. winged European Balrog
6. Gandalf the White vs. winged European Balrog
7. Gandalf the Grey vs. wingless European Balrog
8. Gandalf the White vs. wingless European Balrog
9. Gandalf the Grey vs. winged African Balrog
10. Gandalf the White vs. winged African Balrog
11. Gandalf the Grey vs. wingless African Balrog
12. Gandalf the White vs. wingless African Balrog
13. pre-Pelennor Witch-king vs. winged European Balrog
14. Pelennor Witch-king vs. winged European Balrog
15. pre-Pelennor Witch-king vs. wingless European Balrog
16. Pelennor Witch-king vs. wingless European Balrog
17. pre-Pelennor Witch-king vs. winged African Balrog
18. Pelennor Witch-king vs. winged African Balrog
19. pre-Pelennor Witch-king vs. wingless African Balrog
20. Pelennor Witch-king vs. wingless African Balrog


And that's without even getting into how much the coconut weighs!

[Mansun]

Guys, we have to get our terms straight, because we're sctually discussing no fewer than twenty different confrontations:

1. Gandalf the Grey vs. pre-Pelennor Witch-king
2. Gandalf the White vs. pre-Pelennor Witch-king
3. Gandalf the Grey vs. Pelennor Witch-king
4. Gandalf the White vs. Pelennor Witch-king
5. Gandalf the Grey vs. winged European Balrog
6. Gandalf the White vs. winged European Balrog
7. Gandalf the Grey vs. wingless European Balrog
8. Gandalf the White vs. wingless European Balrog
9. Gandalf the Grey vs. winged African Balrog
10. Gandalf the White vs. winged African Balrog
11. Gandalf the Grey vs. wingless African Balrog
12. Gandalf the White vs. wingless African Balrog
13. pre-Pelennor Witch-king vs. winged European Balrog
14. Pelennor Witch-king vs. winged European Balrog
15. pre-Pelennor Witch-king vs. wingless European Balrog
16. Pelennor Witch-king vs. wingless European Balrog
17. pre-Pelennor Witch-king vs. winged African Balrog
18. Pelennor Witch-king vs. winged African Balrog
19. pre-Pelennor Witch-king vs. wingless African Balrog
20. Pelennor Witch-king vs. wingless African Balrog


And that's without even getting into how much the coconut weighs!

To think some idiots actually spend lots of time typing this crap & expecting everyone to give them a pat on the back for well done . . . get a life, & an education.

[Raynor]

When we're talking about magic it becomes more complex - it may take no more magic to shatter a city gate than to break a sword.
I really doubt it takes a hundred-feet long ram the level of Grond to shatter a blade.
Why bother if the WK can just shatter the gate unaided?
I already expounded my arguments on that, with quotes from Tolkien about tyrants' disregard for human costs, the rather scarcity of magic and that using this power may not be worth it for the WK in such conditions.
we're never shown Gandalf doing anything like killing a Balrog before, & we don't look for 'added spiritual power' to explain that
I don't think the situation is comparable. We don't have a previous situation in which Gandalf had reasons to use his full power. Moreover, all over the LotR is the implication that all the good characters are aided in their quest, even in the most dire situations, against unimaginable odds. [And I also add that even the appendices mention that the istari were forbidden to "match Sauron's power with power, or to seek to dominate Elves or Men by force and fear", thus a second-time reader knows he can expect more from Gandalf the Grey than he shows. But I needn't go that far.]
It may well have take more power to break the sword than the gate.
I am not aware that such a blade is in any way more resistant that a normal blade.
What else did he do in the battle to display this extra power?
A sword in flames is rather impressive, but only because you asked :cool:. Never before seen, if I remember correctly.
Was the Balrog coming in for the Ring
That may be so, I have a foggy memory of something similar stated by Tolkien. The ring definitely influences evil creatures (such as the orcs that attacked Isildur - or even the watcher in the water who went straight for Frodo).As mentioned earlier, the fact that Gandalf the Grey was able to break the flaming sword of the Balrog was very significant in terms of power, particularly as the sword was blessed with spell fire & other demonic spells.
I am not aware that the balrog's sword had those; it was pretty much a contest between blades, sort of speaking. I don't see any reason why Gandalf put forth magic in that particular episode.

[obloquy]

Your arguments are foolish and desperate, Raynor, and I am done dignifying them with detailed responses.

[Raynor]

Your arguments are foolish and desperate, Raynor, and I am done dignifying them with detailed responses.
Thanks for your kind words.

[Mansun]

I am not aware that the balrog's sword had those; it was pretty much a contest between blades, sort of speaking. I don't see any reason why Gandalf put forth magic in that particular episode.

The sword the Balrog used was flamed by his own power - a power fueled by spells & sorcery like which Gandalf had not experienced before in his wildest dreams, not even when faced by the Nine Nazgul. Do not try & pretend that a flaming sword is not one with flame due to some supernatural power.



But just look at what Wikipedia has to say of Balrogs:-

A Balrog is a demon from J. R. R. Tolkien's Arda legendarium. A Balrog (Sindarin for "Demon of Might"; the Quenya form is Valarauko) is a tall, menacing being in the shape of a man, having control of both fire and shadow. One was noted to wield both a flaming sword and fiery whip of many thongs.

The Balrog induces great terror in friends and foes alike and can shroud itself in darkness and shadow. It can only be defeated by some person or thing of equal power, and amongst its own evil allies is rivalled only in its capacity for ferocity and destruction by the dragons, but the Balrogs are more powerful than dragons.[1]

According to The Silmarillion the Balrogs were originally Maiar, of the same order as Sauron, Saruman and Gandalf.

Can the enhanced Witch King match such a foe? It appears not, since he would need to be at least in equal power to Sauron, Saruman, Gandalf & the Balrog of Morgoth to be so. This ends the debate once & for all - Gandalf, Balrogs, Saurman, Sauron are all essentially closely matched, that we know. The Witch King, however powerful a sorcerer, cannot fall into this supernatural category & must therefore be deemed a weaker opponent. The Witch King cannot kill a Maiar without being of equal power at least.

[Raynor]

The sword the Balrog used was flamed by his own power - a power fueled by spells & sorcery like whcih Gandalf had not experienced before in his wildest dreams, not even when faced by the Nine Nazgul. Do not try & pretend that a flaming sword is not one with flame due to some supernatural power.
Again, there is no clue regarding just how much, if at all, the balrog's blade was enhanced.

[Mansun]

Again, there is no clue regarding just how much, if at all, the balrog's blade was enhanced.

Enhanced enough to be able to have a good chance of taking care of Gandalf. Or why bother provoking him when he can quite easily go back to sleep unharmed?

[Raynor]

Enhanced enough to be able to have a good chance of taking care of Gandalf.
We have no evidence that the balrog relied on the blade to take care of Gandalf.
Or why bother provoking him when he can quite easily go back to sleep unharmed?The ring for example, as you mentioned. Also, the fellowship would have been quite happy to just get away safely, regardless how many times they were provoked. They have little if any incentive in starting a fight.

[Mansun]

We have no evidence that the balrog relied on the blade to take care of Gandalf.
The ring for example, as you mentioned. Also, the fellowship would have been quite happy to just get away safely, regardless how many times they were provoked. They have little if any incentive in starting a fight.

The Balrog must show his power though some means, & it seems his chief weapon was his blade. A flaming sword, in biblical terms, symbolises supernatural power. Look it up on wikipedia.

Also, we have no evidence that the Balrog was after the Ring. He could have just been angry at being awaken, plus he would have been aware (eventually) that Gandalf also was a Maiar & therefore one of the few foes who could potentially defeat him.

Whatever opinion one has, the Balrog can be seen as a truly great opponent with all the hallmarks of a demonic god-like creature of ancient legend which even heroes of modern times dare not name. The Balrog effectively made the LOTR what it is today.

[Raynor]

it seems his chief weapon was his blade
Their chief weapon is fear.
A flaming sword, in biblical terms, symbolises supernatural power.
Though it may symbolise that, I don't see why it is the case here. Why do you keep insisting on this, if you have no evidence?
Look it up on wikipedia.
We are not discussing the bible and its symbols or wikipedia.
Also, we have no evidence that the Balrog was after the Ring. He could have just been angry at being awaken, plus he would have been aware (eventually) that Gandalf also was a Maiar & therefore one of the few foes who could potentially defeat him.
Indeed, we have no evidence at all of whatsoever, regarding the blade or his motivations. Therefore, no valid argument can be made.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

To think some idiots actually spend lots of time typing this crap & expecting everyone to give them a pat on the back for well done . . . get a life, & an education.

You mean beyond the three advanced degrees I already possess?

Pull out the cork, sonny. This thread has degenerated into RPG silliness and deserved a good lampooning, Mr. Most-intellectual-threads.:o

[Hammerhand]

Look it up on wikipedia.
Not the most reliable site on which to base your argument :)

Can the enhanced Witch King match such a foe? It appears not, since he would need to be at least in equal power to Sauron, Saruman, Gandalf & the Balrog of Morgoth to be so. This ends the debate once & for all - Gandalf, Balrogs, Saurman, Sauron are all essentially closely matched, that we know. The Witch King, however powerful a sorcerer, cannot fall into this supernatural category & must therefore be deemed a weaker opponent. The Witch King cannot kill a Maiar without being of equal power at least.

This brings us back to the old predicament of Glorfindel and the Balrog, of Ecthelion and Gothmog and of Fingolfin and Melkor.

Was Ecthelion on par with Gothmog, the servant of Morgoth and son of Morgoth? No, he was just a powerful Elf with particularly good fighting capabilities - doubtless he had this "power" but i would argue against it being equal to the Maija's.

Tolkien has surprised us enough with apparently "weaker" foes rising to the challenge so to speak. So to say that the Witch King is inadequate because he must be 'atleast in equal power' and he 'must therefore be deemed a weaker opponant', is in my view a little narrow minded (not personally i'm sure). Glorfindel, Ecthelion and Fingolfin each used a form of weapon to inflict damage on their foe. To say that the Balrogs were not as before, not of Maija or whatever is diverted by Fingolfins battle with Melkor, where he succeeds in frightening him and issuing him with a nice scar.

The Witch King, whom i am sure would fail to a Balrog (personally) cannot be counted out. We do not know how it would have gone, we can only bear educated guesses. After analyzing Tolkiens history of upsets it would be folly to just disregard someone because of their status in the world.

[Hammerhand]

You mean beyond the three advanced degrees I already possess?

Pull out the cork, sonny. This thread has degenerated into RPG silliness and deserved a good lampooning, Mr. Most-intellectual-threads.:o

That sir was a fantastic comeback!

Nonetheless, lets keep it civil chaps, let us not forget it is a work of fiction we debate here, not the economical state of Great Britain.

[obloquy]

Sauron could 'pour' his power into things, he did so with the One Ring. However, Sauron was not like Morgoth who just 'squandered' his power into everything, to control/corrupt everything, and in doing so weakening himself.

Sorry to respond so late to this, Boromir. I disagree. I think that Sauron's ability to craft something that is infused with a large portion of his power might not demonstrate that he has the ability to dole out his power in portions to whomever he pleases. Remember that The One Ring's capacity as a reservoir for Sauron's power came at a price: if the Ring was destroyed, Sauron was also ruined. This suggests a much tighter--and indeed a reliant--relationship between Sauron and his Ring than he would have allowed between himself and a more or less expendable servant, unless that servant was invincible to the same degree that the Ring was. Also, Sauron created The One Ring at a time when he was still evidently discarnate, which makes the situation wholly different. A more plausible scenario, I believe, would be an allocation of more ring-power (was this an active well which Sauron could draw upon, reallocate, and augment?) to the Witch-King's ring, provided Sauron was willing to let the Witch-King wear it.

(You are correct about Sauron being more conservative than Morgoth, who squandered his power. If Sauron was capable of doing this and it involves the same "process" as the Ring's infusion, we must assume that when the Witch-King was slain, Sauron himself was damaged to a certain degree. There's nothing that I am aware of that precludes this possibility, but it is certainly an example of that Morgothian power squandering. Morgoth is the only one I am aware of who is said to put his own power into another being.)

Was Ecthelion on par with Gothmog, the servant of Morgoth and son of Morgoth? No.

He may have been, yes. He was not the same type of being, but the gap in potency between the lesser Maiar (the Balrogs are described as such) and the greater Eldar was very narrow--the tiers may even overlap.

Tolkien has surprised us enough with apparently "weaker" foes rising to the challenge so to speak. So to say that the Witch King is inadequate because he must be 'atleast in equal power' and he 'must therefore be deemed a weaker opponant', is in my view a little narrow minded (not personally i'm sure).

I see this claim a lot, but I'm unaware of the references. Maybe you could share which scenarios you're talking about.

[CSteefel]

Can the enhanced Witch King match such a foe? It appears not, since he would need to be at least in equal power to Sauron, Saruman, Gandalf & the Balrog of Morgoth to be so. This ends the debate once & for all - Gandalf, Balrogs, Saurman, Sauron are all essentially closely matched, that we know. The Witch King, however powerful a sorcerer, cannot fall into this supernatural category & must therefore be deemed a weaker opponent. The Witch King cannot kill a Maiar without being of equal power at least.
Within your rigid hierarchy, how then do you explain both Glorfindel and Ecthelion killing a Balrog? Certain even a high Elf is considered below a Maia.

And does this mean that Radagast could defeat the Witch King? After all, he is a Maia.

In any case, the Witch King does not follow strictly the Middle Earth hierarchy (even if it were true, which it evidently is not), since he holds one of the Nine Rings and thus gets some of his power directly from Sauron. So one cannot simply describe his power as that of a man, or even as a sorcerer of old...

[obloquy]

Within your rigid hierarchy, how then do you explain both Glorfindel and Ecthelion killing a Balrog? Certain even a high Elf is considered below a Maia.

And does this mean that Radagast could defeat the Witch King? After all, he is a Maia.

In any case, the Witch King does not follow strictly the Middle Earth hierarchy (even if it were true, which it evidently is not), since he holds one of the Nine Rings and thus gets some of his power directly from Sauron. So one cannot simply describe his power as that of a man, or even as a sorcerer of old...

The hierarchy is pretty rigid, and generally holds, but as I said above, the more powerful Eldar may overlap with the lesser Maiar. Glorfindel in particular, though not the greatest of the Eldar, is said to be on par with the Maiar. Certainly this holds true also for Cirdan, Luthien, Galadriel, Ecthelion, Gil-galad, Elrond, Feanor, Fingolfin, Thingol, and others.

The greatest of the Atani perhaps overlap the least of the Eldar similarly, but the Witch-King is not one of the greatest of the Atani. He does not actually hold a ring of power, Sauron keeps them. He may have been a powerful Man before his corruption, and was perhaps more powerful afterward, but we know that he still fears Glorfindel, Aragorn, and even Boromir I (see appendix).

[CSteefel]

The hierarchy is pretty rigid, and generally holds, but as I said above, the more powerful Eldar may overlap with the lesser Maiar. Glorfindel in particular, though not the greatest of the Eldar, is said to be on par with the Maiar. Certainly this holds true also for Cirdan, Luthien, Galadriel, Ecthelion, Gil-galad, Elrond, Feanor, Fingolfin, Thingol, and others.

The greatest of the Atani perhaps overlap the least of the Eldar similarly, but the Witch-King is not one of the greatest of the Atani. He does not actually hold a ring of power, Sauron keeps them. He may have been a powerful Man before his corruption, and was perhaps more powerful afterward, but we know that he still fears Glorfindel, Aragorn, and even Boromir I (see appendix).
Well, at least this is a more reasonable set of statements. I was reacting to the blanket statements of Mansun above.

I believe both Raynor and I have now said that the Balrog would probably triumph in a match up with the Witch King.

So the issue is mainly whether the power of the Witch King was augmented, or in fact, what the nature of that power is. I personally believe that this power is fluid and perhaps hard to define (harder than, say, the power of the Balrog) because so much of the power emanates from Sauron. This explains in part to me the very different behavior of the Nazgul (and Witch King) when faced with various foes.

[obloquy]

Well, since there's no evidence to support that Sauron chose the Witch-King for special gifts, such as a prime ring (or even that there was a prime ring), it stands to reason that the power received from the nine rings is primarily that irrational fear that all the Ulairi share. It also stands to reason that those things the Witch-King excels the others in ("more powerful in all ways") are things he brought to the table himself. He was a sorcerer and, evidently, a warlord before his corruption. It is therefore not necessary to assume that he received any abilities as a sorcerer--aside from further training, perhaps--from Sauron or from his ring since he is already identified as a practicer of those arts.

[CSteefel]

Well, since there's no evidence to support that Sauron chose the Witch-King for special gifts, such as a prime ring (or even that there was a prime ring), it stands to reason that the power received from the nine rings is primarily that irrational fear that all the Ulairi share. It also stands to reason that those things the Witch-King excels the others in ("more powerful in all ways") are things he brought to the table himself. He was a sorcerer and, evidently, a warlord before his corruption. It is therefore not necessary to assume that he received any abilities as a sorcerer--aside from further training, perhaps--from Sauron or from his ring since he is already identified as a practicer of those arts.
Well, you lost me there. I can see that the Witch King is clearly building on whatever he was previously--presumably the Rings themselves do not convey the extra power that the Witch King has versus the other Nazgul. But it seems quite a stretch to then conclude that he gained little further from his connection with Sauron. Where is your evidence that this is the case? I myself do not find it logical at all...

[obloquy]

Why didn't the other Nazgul receive it as well? All the Nazgul received this weapon of supernatural fear, so if the Witch-King acquired his other powers from Sauron, why didn't the others? It makes more sense, lacking any textual indication that Sauron singled out the Witch-King for an extra helping of bad, that the ways in which the Witch-King is superior to the other eight are his own personal skillset, and that the ways in which he is like the other eight (wraith, "weaponized" fear, aversion to water) are what was received from Sauron and the nine rings.

[Mansun]

You mean beyond the three advanced degrees I already possess?

Pull out the cork, sonny. This thread has degenerated into RPG silliness and deserved a good lampooning, Mr. Most-intellectual-threads.:o

What counts is how you apply the education, not to mention where the degrees actually came from & what grades you acheived :p.

[Raynor]

This suggests a much tighter--and indeed reliant--relationship between Sauron and his Ring than he would have allowed between himself and a more or less expendable servant, unless that servant was invincible to the same degree that the Ring was.
We have reasons to believe they are, to a good degree:
- You cannot destroy Ringwraiths like that, said Gandalf. The power of their master is in them, and they stand or fall by him.
Also, Sauron created The One Ring at a time when he was still evidently discarnate, which makes the situation wholly different.Sauron discarnate in 1600 S.A.? Why?
A more plausible scenario, I believe, would be an allocation of more ring-power (was this an active well which Sauron could draw upon, reallocate, and augment?) to the Witch-King's ring, provided Sauron was willing to let the Witch-King wear it.An interesting thought. Then again, Gandalf mentions that Sauron keeps the nine rings, so this wouldn't be a problem (as you mentioned in a later post, I noticed).
the lesser Maiar (the Balrogs are described as such)Where are they described as such?
Glorfindel in particular, though not the greatest of the Eldar, is said to be on par with the Maiar.True, but his case is highly particular, since he is a reincarnated elf who was allowed to return to M.E.
Certainly this holds true also for Cirdan, Luthien, Galadriel, Ecthelion, Gil-galad, Elrond, Feanor, Fingolfin, Thingol, and others.Why?
it stands to reason that the power received from the nine rings is primarily that irrational fear that all the Ulairi shareHm, I hold my doubts towards this idea. The nine rigns were forged by the elves. Other than subservience to Sauron, I know of no other trait that would allow the ring to infuse the bearer with such power. Therefore, this power must come from Sauron also.
Why didn't the other Nazgul receive it as well? All the Nazgul received this weapon of supernatural fear, so if the Witch-King acquired his other powers from Sauron, why didn't the others? It makes more sense, lacking any textual indication that Sauron singled out the Witch-King for an extra helping of bad, that the ways in which the Witch-King is superior to the other eight are his own personal skillset, and that the ways in which he is like the other eight (wraith, "weaponized" fear, aversion to water) are what was received from Sauron and the nine rings.This isn't the only explanation possible. I believe that the need to have a hierarchy would require simple leadership skills on his behalf. Further from that, Sauron can give him whatever he thought was necessary for his role.

[Mansun]

Their chief weapon is fear.

Though it may symbolise that, I don't see why it is the case here. Why do you keep insisting on this, if you have no evidence?

We are not discussing the bible and its symbols or wikipedia.

Indeed, we have no evidence at all of whatsoever, regarding the blade or his motivations. Therefore, no valid argument can be made.


Raynor, you insist to disagree with everything unless it is laid it writing by Tolkein plain & clear. If he were to do that, the LOTR would be the most boring book of all time. The link between biblical history & the LOTR is clearly made by Tolkein in many of his writings. Wikipedia has also been regarded by many as being more accurate than any encyclopedia.

I would suggest you try to look at some literacy anaylsis books to see how symbolic objects are meant to be interpreted in literature.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

The link between biblical history & the LOTR is clearly made by Tolkein in many of his writings.

Such as.....?

The Witch-king's motivations are pretty explicitly laid out in the complex of papers associated with The Hunt for the Ring.

[Mansun]

Such as.....?

The Witch-king's motivations are pretty explicitly laid out in the complex of papers associated with The Hunt for the Ring.

I suggest you look to another thread I started sometime ago in the Books forum called The Lord of the Bible?. This thread has many excellent examples.

[Mansun]

If the Witch King was already enhanced, & Sauron did reclaim the Ring, would this make the Witch King more mightier than Gandalf the White & the Balrog? A major problem lies when we look back at the Witch King in the second age when he was at his most powerful level (as was Sauron) with the Ruling Ring in his Master's hand. Even in this form he failed to make any serious impact, e.g. in the Last Alliance battle.

It is plausible to say then that this added demonic force nonsense was a mistake by Tolkein, as it implies to the reader that the Witch King has had a bit of a continuous fluctuation in his power, depending on whether Sauron had the Ring, & indeed without the Ring. Just when exactly do you think he peaked in his power? It would surely have been when Sauron had the Ring?

Gandalf the White vs The Witch King (with Ring)

Gandalf the White vs The Witch King (without Ring)

Gandalf the White vs The Witch King (enhanced)

Who will answer this problem? It appears Tolkein had made a mistake here. The Witch King can only be in his greatest form when Sauron himself is at his greatest. Yet, in the volume III Sauron is at his weakest form, yet he can enhance the Witch King close to Gandalf the White's power?? This cannot be. Also, when the Witch King is killed, it would also imply that Sauron has just squandered the added demonic force he gave away lightly, to the point he may have less power himself as a result. Perhaps in this state even Gandalf the White could defeat him?

[Raynor]

A major problem lies when we look back at the Witch King in the second age when he was at his most powerful level
From what point of view was he at the most powerful level and according to whom?

[CSteefel]

Raynor, you insist to disagree with everything unless it is laid it writing by Tolkein plain & clear. If he were to do that, the LOTR would be the most boring book of all time. The link between biblical history & the LOTR is clearly made by Tolkein in many of his writings. Wikipedia has also been regarded by many as being more accurate than any encyclopedia.

I would suggest you try to look at some literacy anaylsis books to see how symbolic objects are meant to be interpreted in literature.
Interesting that you criticize Raynor for not adhering to Tolkien (let's forget about the fact that you discount his inferences, while promoting your own with little to support them other than speculation), with the following statements just below

It is plausible to say then that this added demonic force nonsense was a mistake by Tolkein, as it implies to the reader that the Witch King has had a bit of a continuous fluctuation in his power, depending on whether Sauron had the Ring, & indeed without the Ring.

where you seem to discount what Tolkien actually said quite clearly in his letters.

[CSteefel]

A major problem lies when we look back at the Witch King in the second age when he was at his most powerful level (as was Sauron) with the Ruling Ring in his Master's hand. Even in this form he failed to make any serious impact, e.g. in the Last Alliance battle.

This would presumably be true if there was a one to one relationship between the present power of Sauron and the Witch King. But it would seem that the power of the WK, beyond what he developed earlier as a mortal man, depends greatly on how much is given to him by Sauron. In the Second Age, Sauron himself appeared to take on Elendil and Gilgalad, so apparently the WK was not his only proxy able to go into battle. In contrast, I would say the WK was at his greatest power in the 3rd age, where he served as King of Angmar, destroying the North Kingdom altogether, and then later as commander of the armies attacking Minas Tirith. Of course, we should not discount completely his defeat of Earnur in the 3rd Age.

I would say that if Sauron did recover the One Ring, then he might have increased the power of the Witch King commensurately, but whether he would have felt the need to do so is another question. My reading of the WK's role in the 2nd Age is that Sauron did not feel the need to do so then...

[Mansun]

Be serious - Sauron controls & commands the power of the Nazgul, so if he is at his weakest, the the Nazgul will be also. The Witch King would only be in his greatest form if his Master had the Ring, as Gandalf hinted in the House of Elrond.

[Raynor]

if he is at his weakest, the the Nazgul will be also
Why? Where does Tolkien make such a correlation?

[Mansun]

Why? Where does Tolkien make such a correlation?

The WHOLE story is the correlation. Put simply, if the baddie gets the Ring, Middle Earth falls.

[CSteefel]

Be serious - Sauron controls & commands the power of the Nazgul, so if he is at his weakest, the the Nazgul will be also. The Witch King would only be in his greatest form if his Master had the Ring, as Gandalf hinted in the House of Elrond.
Yes, but to repeat yet again, there is not necessarily a one to one correlation in the power conveyed to the Witch King or any of the Nazgul by Sauron. If this WAS the case, then why don't we hear more of the Witch King and the Nazgul back in the 2nd Age? Why wasn't the Witch King back then defeating the Numenoreans??

[Hammerhand]

He may have been, yes. He was not the same type of being, but the gap in potency between the lesser Maiar (the Balrogs are described as such) and the greater Eldar was very narrow--the tiers may even overlap.



I see this claim a lot, but I'm unaware of the references. Maybe you could share which scenarios you're talking about.

The point i was making is similar to yours obloquy. Just because the character is of different status or what have you, doesn't make that character confined to achieve only what is deemed possible from an outward perspective. Ecthelion was not as powerful as Gothmog, i see no indication to support the possibility that he was - being that Gothmog was a particularly powerful and potent force within Melkor's ranks, and his alledged son for that matter. Ecthelion was a lord of Gondolin and of the Noldor, not royalty or of the elite echelon, yet he was revered.

We know the lesser Maija and the High Elves have a power not totally unlike the other, we have seen evidence that High Elves can endure physical conflict with the Maija - and it was physical conflict. The emphasis of 'power' in various writings of the encounters between Elf and Maija or Valar is minimal, it takes rather a more hardy standpoint on the physical prowess of those concerned.

A common example of the "seemingly" weaker foe is Glorfindel. You may argue that his status as one of the Elite Eldar gives reason enough for him to triumph over a balrog, a demigod. Who can say they saw it coming that Glorfindel on the impression they had already gained of him would win? I know i thought he was a terrific character, but defeating a Balrog in a 1 Vs1, i may have doubted.

[Mansun]

Yes, but to repeat yet again, there is not necessarily a one to one correlation in the power conveyed to the Witch King or any of the Nazgul by Sauron. If this WAS the case, then why don't we hear more of the Witch King and the Nazgul back in the 2nd Age? Why wasn't the Witch King back then defeating the Numenoreans??

The Second Age saw the fall of Sauron, in what appeared a mightier resistence against him. Plus, do not discount the enchanted blades which were made for the wars in those days to fend off the Nazgul. If anything, Sauron should have given the Witch King a power-up in this age.

[obloquy]

We have reasons to believe they are, to a good degree:

The Nazgul stand or fall with Sauron, naturally. But Sauron does not stand or fall with them, so this relationship is not equivalent to Sauron's relationship with the Ring. Come on, you shouldn't have needed me to explain that to you.

Sauron discarnate in 1600 S.A.? Why?

He was still capable of modifying his appearance until the drowning of Numenor.

Where are they described as such?

Find it yourself.

True, but his case is highly particular, since he is a reincarnated elf who was allowed to return to M.E.

And yet he was still not called one of the greatest Eldar. Are you suggesting that after his reincarnation and return he had surpassed all others? (That's a rhetorical question.)

Why?

Because they're all greater than Glorfindel.

Why am I answering these questions? Crack a book.

[Raynor]

The Nazgul stand or fall with Sauron, naturally. But Sauron does not stand or fall with them, so this relationship is not equivalent to Sauron's relationship with the Ring. Come on, you shouldn't have needed me to explain that to you.
Your initial argument was:
This suggests a much tighter--and indeed reliant--relationship between Sauron and his Ring than he would have allowed between himself and a more or less expendable servant, unless that servant was invincible to the same degree that the Ring was.If the WK would fall only if Sauron would, it pretty much means that the WK would fall only if the Ring is destroyed (other alternatives of destroying Sauron are not explored much in the book). Therefore, as long as the Ring endures, so does the WK.
He was still capable of modifying his appearance until the drowning of Numenor.Being capable of modifying appearance is completely different from being discarnate at the time of making the ring.
Where are they described as such?
Find it yourself. For of the Maiar many were drawn to his splendour in the days of his greatness, and remained in that allegiance down into his darkness; and others he corrupted afterwards to his service with lies and treacherous gifts. Dreadful among these spirits were the Valaraukar, the scourges of fire that in Middle-earth were called the Balrogs, demons of terror.
Nothing about the maiar that came into Melkor's service mentions them being any lower than the rest. Balrogs are not mentioned as lesser spirit, quite the contrary can be surmised from their mentioning in this passage. All throughout the work, the balrogs are given prime status among his servants, which justifies at least their equal status with any other fallen maia.
And yet he was still not called one of the greatest Eldar. Are you suggesting that after his reincarnation and return he had surpassed all others?Greatest of the Eldar is a rather unqualified, general label - as you yourself have mentioned.
Tolkien uses the same unqualified "greatest" to describe Galadriel as he does to describe Sauron (greatest of Melkor's servants).
Nowhere is it equated with status close or equal to that of lesser maiar.

[obloquy]

Therefore, as long as the Ring endures, so does the WK.

Which is patently untrue.

Being capable of modifying appearance is completely different from being discarnate at the time of making the ring.

No it isn't. Once incarnate, ealar can no longer change their shape at will. Prior to incarnation, they can take on any physical "raiment" they wish.

Nothing about the maiar that came into Melkor's service mentions them being any lower than the rest. Balrogs are not mentioned as lesser spirit, quite the contrary can be surmised from their mentioning in this passage. All throughout the work, the balrogs are given prime status among his servants, which justifies at least their equal status with any other fallen maia.

I guess you didn't find it then, did you?

Greatest of the Eldar is a rather unqualified, general label - as you yourself have mentioned.

Yeah, it refers to general power level, which is exactly what I have referenced. Glorfindel is not the most powerful elf.

Nowhere is it equated with status close or equal to that of lesser maiar.

No, but I never said Galadriel was described this way. However, Glorfindel was, and Galadriel is greater than Glorfindel. Figure it out.

Seriously, think before you post. Are you just trying to distract me while someone steals my belongings? Or what?

[alatar]

My two cents: Before pitting these 'creatures' against each other in a fight, one might want to look at the creatures involved. To me, the Balrog may lose the fight due to its unwillingness to engage in battle. Morgoth's Balrogs are like bodyguards, gate wardens and subcaptains of war. When did any of them set up shop on its own? Even the Roggie in Moria just sits around reading '101 Ways of Cooking Dwarves' until Gandalf shows up. Attack Lothlorien? Naa. Attack during the Battle of Azanulbizar? Naa, just keep them pesky Dwarves from coming in the door.

Without Morgoth's and/or Sauron's prompting, the Balrog would be sitting in the corner after the bell rang.

The Witch-King is another matter, having an extended resume of accomplishments pre and post wraithdom.

[Raynor]

Which is patently untrue.
Some sort of evidence would definitely help the validity of this opinion.
Once incarnate, ealar can no longer change their shape at will. Prior to incarnation, they can take on any physical "raiment" they wish.So that prior physical raiment is equivalent to being discarnate? It's a stretch that I have problems agreeing with.
Yeah, it refers to general power level, which is exactly what I have referenced.Nice. First it is unqualified (with which I agree), now, it equals general power level. Well.... maybe. Greatest of the eldar remains an unqualified label and using it one way or the other, just because it suits in one particular debate, is an argument "from ignorance", a fallacy. We don't know what exactly Tolkien meant by it, so we can't use it as we see fit.
To me, the Balrog may lose the fight due to its unwillingness to engage in battle.
Hm... though the balrog may not seek to start a battle if it implies leaving his "safe zone", I doubt he would be unwilling to continue one, or start one on his own turf.

[alatar]

Some sort of evidence would definitely help the validity of this opinion.
Am I misreading the point? The Witch-King was vanquished yet Frodo still held the Ring.

Hm... though the balrog may not seek to start a battle if it implies leaving his "safe zone", I doubt he would be unwilling to continue one, or start one on his own turf.
So you agree that you really gots to wind the Roggies up to get them to fight.

[Raynor]

Am I misreading the point? The Witch-King was vanquished yet Frodo still held the Ring.
If Gandalf's words are true, then his state was likely temporary and the WK would have been redressed eventually.
So you agree that you really gots to wind the Roggies up to get them to fight.Hm, if you mean provoking him, I guess it is one way. If all this would go down in Moria, I don't see any problem. If he was challenged to come outside, he may have some issues :D.

[obloquy]

So that prior physical raiment is equivalent to being discarnate? It's a stretch that I have problems agreeing with.

It's not a stretch at all. Ealar who are capable of changing shape are obviously not bound to one physical shape, and are therefore still fundamentally discarnate. They could drop the shape altogether and function just fine as spirits, as they were originally created. Perhaps there are degrees of incarnation, where shapechanging is still possible but not total reversion to incorporeal existence, but this is speculation. In Sauron's case, he can still change his appearance until his "death" in Numenor, after which he is bound to one specific shape. This is incarnation.

Nice. First it is unqualified (with which I agree), now, it equals general power level. Well.... maybe. Greatest of the eldar remains an unqualified label and using it one way or the other, just because it suits in one particular debate, is an argument "from ignorance", a fallacy. We don't know what exactly Tolkien meant by it, so we can't use it as we see fit.

Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about. I am using the expression exactly as I have always used it, and exactly as I understand it to be used by Tolkien. You're the one who called it "general" in your previous post. Are you saying it does not refer to power level? Because the term definitely does sometimes, and if it remains unqualified, we have to assume Tolkien means the same thing when using it in reference to Galadriel as he meant when he used it to describe Sauron's status among Morgoth's servants. In both cases it is unqualified, so in both cases its meaning must be considered all-inclusive.

If Gandalf's words are true, then his state was likely temporary and the WK would have been redressed eventually.

It's debatable. The point, however, is that Sauron is unaffected by the Witch-King's death (though perhaps he felt it), and therefore the relationship between the two is obviously not the same as Sauron's connection to his Ring.

[Raynor]

Ealar who are capable of changing shape are obviously not bound to one physical shape, and are therefore still fundamentally discarnate.
That may be so. In my opinion, we cannot equate the potential to return to a purely spirit state with the state itself. Various abilities of the ealar, such as transmission of thought, are affected when assuming shapes.
In both cases it is unqualified, so in both cases its meaning must be considered all-inclusive. I am not completely sure what you mean by all-inclusive. Anyway, the problem with "greatest" is that it may include factors which do not relate to power and which might compensate for any difference between one of the greatest's power and Glorfindel's. Also, Glorfindel not being mentioned among the greatest may simply be due to the fact that he may have returned too late to Middle Earth (1200 SA, 1600 SA - or in the TA), to be included there, even though he may have qualified from a power point of view.
The point, however, is that Sauron is unaffected by the Witch-King's death (though perhaps he felt it), and therefore the relationship between the two is obviously not the same as Sauron's connection to his Ring.I believe that the WK's "resilience" is a sufficient motivation for Sauron to invest in him, in the light of your initial argument. Also, the effect on Sauron may have occurred during the transfer of power (which I believe would be somewhat irreversible, unlike with the ring), which would explain why the WK's fall left Sauron unaffected at that time.

[Mansun]

I have no idea what you're talking about. They could have coexisted indefinitely just as they coexisted up to the Third Age. Are you imagining the Witch-King packing up his stuff in Morgul and moving into an empty room in Moria? In that case, they both could definitely be expected to get on each others' nerves. Durin's Bane had probably grown accustomed to leaving his underwear laying around and the toilet seat up. The latter of which would truly have ruffled feathers, since, as we all know, the Witch-King sits down to pee.


I cannot believe the mods did not delete this post. I think it is time to unleash a taste of Gandalf's staff on some naughty Hobbits out there!:eek::rolleyes:

[Hammerhand]

I cannot believe the mods did not delete this post. I think it is time to unleash a taste of Gandalf's staff on some naughty Hobbits out there!:eek::rolleyes:

it made me 'lol' to be honest sir. Theres nothing wrong with a bit of humor! :D

[Morthoron]

And where the plague in the LOTR is this subject discussed?

In the same spot where a balrog once fought the Witchking: adjacent to the communal outhouse by the cottage in Crickhallow (hence its geographical significance in The Lord of the Rings).

P.S. Look, Mansun, I don't know why you are so up-in-arms regarding this. It's not like the original premise of the thread was anything more than fanciful conjecture. It is rather like any such Morgoth vs Sauron vs Smaug vs WitchKing post. Given the fact that Tolkien infers that the greatest foes of the Free Peoples (and that would be Morgoth, Sauron, Smaug, et al) were most likely to work in tandem against the West and not against each other, the discussions along this line are merely idle banter. The only record of such in-fighting occurs amongst the degenerate orcs, who had no real conception of their leaders' grand schemes, or perhaps the renegade Saruman, who, coveting the Ring, rebelled against his original allies and betrayed Sauron as well.

[Legolas]

Morthoron, thanks for steering us back towards the topic of this thread.

Please continue discussion of 'The Balrog vs The Witch King' here. :smokin:

[Mansun]

Morthoron, thanks for steering us back towards the topic of this thread.

Please continue discussion of 'The Balrog vs The Witch King' here. :smokin:

Legolas, please stop doing deals with Morthoron with regards to favouritism. Mods are not so mighty yet that they are above legislation and the rights of posters.

[Morthoron]

Legolas, please stop doing deals with Morthoron with regards to favouritism. Mods are not so mighty yet that they are above legislation and the rights of posters.

Paranoid much? This isn't the first time you've complained about some conspiracy against you (as if you rated to have a conspiracy centered around you). But here's a thing I've learned from Eco's Foucault's Pendulum: If I tell you in earnest there's no conspiracy, you'll believe even more strongly that there is some great, dark plot to rend the very fabric of your being. That is manner in which the human mind tries to make sense out of its own deficiencies.

So, rather than waste my time trying to convince you, I shall only say I have never spoken to Legolas, sent him/her pm's, nor was I even aware that there was indeed a mod named Legolas. In addition, I shall no longer reply to your posts, as better discussions can be had elsewhere with less...drama.

[The Barrow-Wight]

You two need to stop talking to one another and get back to discussing the topic.

[bilbo_baggins]

... not so mighty yet that they are above legislation and the rights of posters.

Do we posters have rights? Is there legislation? Wow, I always thought that the Downs were plutocratic, being run by mods and people-in-control...

Does this mean we can elect a parliament of peers to run the site? Ooh! Ooh! We could vote on things!...

(the above post was entirely sarcastic, although the author believes the idea has a miniscule amount of merit)

[Ecthel]

http://server3.uploadit.org/files/smjordan-final.JPG (http://www.uploadit.org)

[Eönwë]

Good point. The Witch-King tends to know when he's over matched, and when he is over matched he has a tendency to run away.

Err... Gandalf? But then again, no-one except Cirdan knew exactly what he was.

By the way, can we please stop taking for granted that Sauron actually transfused some of his Awesome Juice into the Witch-King? It's not a fact, and I feel that the argument for it is pretty tenuous.

Yes, without Sauron he's just a mortal, however powerful and sorcerous (is that a word?). I think he still has the Gift of Men, however long it takes to reach him. A Maia is a Maia and cannot be truly killed- ever. Even an elf can't, so what makes anyone think a mere man, however powerful, could match a Maia.

[alatar]

http://server3.uploadit.org/files/smjordan-final.JPG (http://www.uploadit.org)

Ecthel, Welcome to the Downs! That image takes a bit to download; maybe you can give us some information regarding the same to mull over while we wait.

[Gordis]

Echtel, welcome!

What a great picture - awesome!!!
Is it your own drawing? If so, congratulations, you are a fine artist!

[Eönwë]

Yes, welcome to the Downs Ecthel.

And that is a picture to be proud of.

[wispeight]

Err... Gandalf? But then again, no-one except Cirdan knew exactly what he was.



Yes, without Sauron he's just a mortal, however powerful and sorcerous (is that a word?). I think he still has the Gift of Men, however long it takes to reach him. A Maia is a Maia and cannot be truly killed- ever. Even an elf can't, so what makes anyone think a mere man, however powerful, could match a Maia.

~~~~~~~~
I'd say sorcerous is a word. What is 'Gift of Men'? In RTK Gandalf says, and I'm paraphrasing, "They called me the great pilgrim, I've lived three hundred lives of men and find now that I have no time."

I've barely read anything on this site in relation to its mass of information. This post is my ignoring the shallow end of the pool. What is the general consensus of the interpretation of the above quote, or any-one individual who might want to chime in with their two cents? I'm only curious about the deep end. Going back to the shallows now. Gaia mi madre, Poseidon mi padre, who 'm I? Just a riddle for fun.

[obloquy]

~~~~~~~~
I'd say sorcerous is a word. What is 'Gift of Men'? In RTK Gandalf says, and I'm paraphrasing, "They called me the great pilgrim, I've lived three hundred lives of men and find now that I have no time."

I've barely read anything on this site in relation to its mass of information. This post is my ignoring the shallow end of the pool. What is the general consensus of the interpretation of the above quote, or any-one individual who might want to chime in with their two cents? I'm only curious about the deep end. Going back to the shallows now. Gaia mi madre, Poseidon mi padre, who 'm I? Just a riddle for fun.

I don't think there's anything mysterious about what Gandalf says, really. In other words, He's always had plenty of time and suddenly he's in a dire rush to prevent catastrophe.

[Nerwen]

What is 'Gift of Men'?

Death!:eek:


In RTK Gandalf says, and I'm paraphrasing, "They called me the great pilgrim, I've lived three hundred lives of men and find now that I have no time."

The quote is from the film The Two Towers:

The Grey Pilgrim... that's what they used to call me. Three hundred lives of men I've walked this earth and now I have no time.

I'm not sure what you're asking, though.


Gaia mi madre, Poseidon mi padre, who 'm I?

Hi, Antaeus.

[Anárion Cúthalion]

I don't know. The Balrog's agenda, as far as we know from LotR, involves keeping Moria dwarf free and ridding it of random walking parties. Like Sauron, he is a former servant of Morgoth but I don't know that this would necessarily make him automatically sympathetic to Sauron or tolerant of the Witch King if he found him wandering through Moria.

If memory serves, Sauron was basically Morgoth's number two man (or rather, Maia). If that is true, that would mean the Balrog would be Sauron's servent.

[Gordis]

As far as I remember, it was not Sauron, but Gothmog the Balrog who was head of Morgoth's army. So who of the two was Morgoth's second remains a question.

Also we don't know if Sauron had been friends with Gothmog and other balrogs back in the First Age. They might have been bitter rivals.

I am not sure that Sauron himself would fare well if pitted one to one against a Balrog, even the Moria one, much less Gothmog. In the Third Age Sauron was fully incarnated, even self-reincarnated (twice) and that weakens a Maia. The Balrog was likely still a shape-shifter. Sauron might have won, but it would cost him dear.

Eönwë: Err... Gandalf? But then again, no-one except Cirdan knew exactly what he was.
The Witch-King likely knew exactly what Gandalf was. He had a long experience of observing the Maia Sauron at close quarters.;) Here is also this quote from "The Hunt for the Ring": Oct. 3: Gandalf reaches Weathertop but does not overtake the Witch-king and other four Riders; for they become aware of his approach as he overtakes them on Shadowfax, and withdraw into hiding beside the road. They close in behind. The Witch-king is both pleased and puzzled. For a while he had been in great fear, thinking that by some means Gandalf had got possession of the Ring and was now the Bearer; but as Gandalf passes he is aware that Gandalf has not got the Ring. What is he pursuing? He himself must be after the escaping Bearer; and it must therefore somehow have gone on far ahead. But Gandalf is a great power and enemy. He must be dealt with, and yet that needs great force. - RC p.167

Eönwë:Yes, without Sauron he's just a mortal, however powerful and sorcerous (is that a word?). I think he still has the Gift of Men, however long it takes to reach him. A Maia is a Maia and cannot be truly killed- ever. Even an elf can't, so what makes anyone think a mere man, however powerful, could match a Maia.
The Witch-King had no idea that the One Ring was about to be unmade. While the Ring existed and the Nine Rings had power, the Gift of Men was not available to the Nazgul. If killed, they would likely become powerless spirits without a hroa, roaming Middle-Earth but unable to interact with the World of Light in any way - and that until the Rings existed. Basically it would be the same fate as for the Balrog or another wayward Maia when it is killed - eternal misery.
Nothing to look forward to, thus the Witch-King must have been much more reluctant to die than any mortal Man. He never fought against a stronger opponent when he could help it.

As for mortal Men, they were not as weak as some tend to think. Three Men killed a dragon (Turin, Fram and Bard), yet we know of no elf who had achieved the same. Beren fought Celegorm and Curufin and was in Angband, there were Turin, Tuor Elendil... but you know the story.

The Witch-King still had the same body he was born with. Albeit invisible, he had the high stature and strong muscles of a High Numenorean lord - and those were quite similar to Elves:
The Númenóreans, Kings among Men ... grew wise and glorious, and in all things more like to the Firstborn than any other of the kindreds of Men; and they were tall, taller than the tallest of the sons of Middle-earth; and the light of their eyes was like the bright stars.-Akallabeth
On the plus side he had his sorcery, lots of experience, sharp senses and extra-endurence of a wraith. On the minus side he had his fear of fire (important against a Balrog) and his fear of death.
I would say he had some chances against the Balrog - at least to make it even.;)

[Nerwen]

Um... Gordis... what's a Barlog?

[Gordis]

Well, sorry, I often tend to type rl instead of lr . Another typical mistake of mine is "Erlond":D - I really don't know why I do this, but I do, if I don't pay enough attention. I will go and correct the post above - it looks funny indeed.

[wispeight]

Death!:eek:




The quote is from the film The Two Towers:



I'm not sure what you're asking, though.




Hi, Antaeus.

~~~~~

I wish I had read the books. I watch the movies everytime they come on. I always read for escape and that ended long ago. I find it a shame that I can't sit down with a book anymore. Now its just study all the time. Even when I purchase books, I go online to read them. I'm a bit rediculous that way. I think I read on this forum that Gandalf is a maia, so my question is now not relavent. I like effortless grace, thanks for the reply.

[Caladarasiel]

If the Witch King had to fight a Balrog I would think that the Balrog would win. I don't believe the WK would ever consider doing such a foolish thing but if he had to the Balrog would have a better chance of winning. No man can kill the WK but that leaves a lot of things that can. I always wondered why elves hadn't killed the WK....because they don't belong to the race of men....or if it was refering to a man same thing...

[Gordis]

I always wondered why elves hadn't killed the WK....
Because they didn't have enough guts for it?;)

[obloquy]

Because they didn't have enough guts for it?;)

No, because the Witch-King ran and hid.

[CSteefel]

No, because the Witch-King ran and hid.
That's right, he saw Glorfindel coming and he blew town...

Also, in my opinion some have misread the encounter between the Witch King and Gandalf in the books (Peter Jackson for sure)--I think the WK decided to postpone the matchup. Hearing the horns of Rohan is not much of a reason to leave...

[Gordis]

No, because the Witch-King ran and hid.

Yes, that is the reason why Glorfindel didn't kill him, obloquy. But you know quite well that Glorfindel was no average Elf. Actually, the reincarnated Elf was quite unique - closer to Maiar in strength.

In Rivendell there were but few who could openly ride against the nazgul - most likely only three (see Glorfindel's words explaining his presence on the Great Road to Aragorn).

The rest of the Elves were hardly more capable than a Man to withstand a nazgul.
At least none had tried:
[The other three Black Riders] are left to guard the eastern borders, to watch the Greenway, and guard against Elves or Dúnedain coming from eastwards.- "Hunt for the Ring" RC p.145
[The Witch-King] himself, [with two other Riders] redoubles his vigilance on the east-borders along the Greenway... his counsels disturbed by threat of attack. Some of the Dúnedain have met Elvish messengers, and [he] is uneasily aware that many enemies are watching him and though none has yet come with power to challenge him.- RC P. 164


Also, in my opinion some have misread the encounter between the Witch King and Gandalf in the books (Peter Jackson for sure)--I think the WK decided to postpone the matchup. Hearing the horns of Rohan is not much of a reason to leave...
Indeed, but it is still a reason, an excuse.
The WK always hated to put his life in danger - and not because of cowardice, as I have tried to explain in my previous post:
Gordis: The Witch-King had no idea that the One Ring was about to be unmade. While the Ring existed and the Nine Rings had power, the Gift of Men was not available to the Nazgul. If killed, they would likely become powerless spirits without a hroa, roaming Middle-Earth but unable to interact with the World of Light in any way - and that until the Rings existed. Basically it would be eternal misery. Nothing to look forward to, thus the Witch-King must have been much more reluctant to die than any mortal Man.

Had he been on his own, he would never have dared to oppose the reincarnated White Wizard, a powerful Maia, in one-to-one duel. But he was not on his own at the Gates of Minas Tirith - there is no doubt that Sauron was watching him like a hawk. He must have known he was overmatched, but he needed an excuse to leave - and Rohan had provided it. He feared death, but he feared Sauron's wrath more.

[obloquy]

Yes, that is the reason why Glorfindel didn't kill him, obloquy. But you know quite well that Glorfindel was no average Elf. Actually, the reincarnated Elf was quite unique - closer to Maiar in strength.

His reincarnation was relatively unique, but his power was not. Note that he is still never spoken of as one of the greatest of the Eldar. Gandalf was not overly impressed when he explained that Frodo had seen "an Elf lord revealed in his wrath." In any case, the distinction you've drawn between Glorfindel and "the Elves" is a false one: if Glorfindel had slain the Witch-King it would not be unacceptable to say "the Elves killed the Witch-King," so in this case it is also rightly said that the Witch-King fled from the Elves. He did flee specifically from Glorfindel, but Glorfindel was not the most powerful of the Eldar remaining.

[Groin Redbeard]

That's right, he saw Glorfindel coming and he blew town...
The Witch King's entire army was destroyed, I don't think that gives him much reason to stay.

[CSteefel]

The Witch King's entire army was destroyed, I don't think that gives him much reason to stay.
That is true, but it did not stop him from charging Earnur
...he singled out the Captain of Gonodor for the fullness of his hatred, and with a terrible cry he rode straight upon him...But Glorfindel rode up then on his white horse, and in the midst of his laughter the Witch-King turned to flight and passed into the shadows.

[Gordis]

His reincarnation was relatively unique, but his power was not. Note that he is still never spoken of as one of the greatest of the Eldar. Gandalf was not overly impressed when he explained that Frodo had seen "an Elf lord revealed in his wrath." In any case, the distinction you've drawn between Glorfindel and "the Elves" is a false one: if Glorfindel had slain the Witch-King it would not be unacceptable to say "the Elves killed the Witch-King," so in this case it is also rightly said that the Witch-King fled from the Elves. He did flee specifically from Glorfindel, but Glorfindel was not the most powerful of the Eldar remaining.
I have to disagree with you - I think he was the most powerful of the Eldar remaining in ME. Actually, Gandalf says: And here in Rivendell there live still some of [Sauron's] chief foes: the Elven-wise, lords of the Eldar from beyond the furthest seas. They do not fear the Ringwraiths, for 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.'
'I thought that I saw a white figure that shone and did not grow dim like the others. Was that Glorfindel then?'
'Yes, you saw him for a moment as he is upon the other side: one of the mighty of the Firstborn. -LOTR ,"Many meetings"
I think it is enough to single Glorfindel out among the Elves - as a Calaquende of great power. But Gandalf was still tight-lipped: he didn't explain that G had been reincarnated, neither did he explain his own Maia status.

Here is what is said about the reincarnated Elves in "Of rebirth and other dooms of those who go to Mandos:, The Later Quenta Silmarillion, Morgoth's Ring:
The Eldar say that more than one re-birth is seldom recorded. But the reasons for this they do not fully know. Maybe, it is so ordered by the will of Eru; while the Re-born they say are stronger, having greater mastery of their bodies and being more patient of griefs
Also look at the notes following the Appendix to "Athrabeth Finrod Ah Andreth" concerning reincarnated Elves: 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.
Well, it sounds like super-powers to me...

Edit : found another quote in Home 12: "Last Writings"- "Glorfindel"
For long years he remained in Valinor, in reunion with the Eldar who had not rebelled, and in the companionship of the Maiar. To these he had now become almost an equal, for though he was an incarnate (to whom a bodily form not made or chosen by himself was necessary) his spiritual power had been greatly enhanced by his self-sacrifice..
An Elf who had once known Middle-earth and had fought in the long wars against Melkor would be an eminently suitable companion for Gandalf. We could then reasonably suppose that Glorfindel (possibly as one of a small party,(1) more probably as a sole companion) landed with Gandalf - Olorin about Third Age 1000. This supposition would indeed explain the air of special power and sanctity that surrounds Glorfindel - note how the Witch-king flies from him, although all others (such as King Earnur) however brave could not induce their horses to face him

And don't you get an impression (from reading only LOTR) that the WK feared Glorfindel more than he did Gandalf? The nazgul did attack the Grey Maia on Weathertop, the WK was preparing (albeit reluctantly) to fight him at the Gates, but the nazgul never challenged Glorfindel, even when he barred the road to them, hindering their mission.

[obloquy]

I have to disagree with you - I think he was the most powerful of the Eldar remaining.

Actually Gandalf says:

"Lords of the Eldar"..."great power"..."one of the mighty of the Firstborn."

I recognize that he was one of the most powerful Elves in Middle-earth ("one of" perhaps quite a large pool of Elves), but I dispute particularly that he had climbed to the tier of Galadriel, who is explicitly stated to be one of the three greatest Eldar (multiple sources) and "the last remaining of the Great of the High Elves" (Letters); or that of Elrond, descendant of the greatest Elda Luthien and of Melian. Further, Tolkien says that if Galadriel's presumption that she could supplant Sauron as the master of the Ring is accurate, then so also could Gandalf and especially Elrond. Elrond and Glorfindel are just two "lords of the Eldar" of the "some" that Gandalf mentions in your quote.

Cirdan, too, was likely more powerful than Glorfindel, despite never having been to Aman: he was guardian of one of the Three, so we must assume he was capable of guarding it from Sauron and his servants. He was present at Sauron's defeat in the Second Age, at Gil-galad's side. He was also perhaps the oldest and wisest of the Elves remaining in Middle-earth, and both age and wisdom seem to play a role in spiritual power. Additionally, if some part of Glorfindel's enhancement owed to his "return to innocence" (mentioned below), Cirdan's status as a genuine Firstborn must be considered. Finally, it was said at the Council of Elrond that "what power still remains lies [...] in Imladris, or with Cirdan at the Havens, or in Lorien." This suggests that Cirdan presided over other powerful individuals as well, and it can reasonably be supposed that this is also true of Galadriel.

Here is what is said about the reincarnated Elves in "Of rebirth and other dooms of those who go to Mandos:, The Later Quenta Silmarillion, Morgoth's Ring:

You misread. "More than one rebirth" refers to one Elf being reborn more than once. Tolkien clarifies in his writings on Glorfindel that reincarnation was fairly common practice for Elves, since separation of fea from hroa was so unnatural to them. It was "the duty of the Valar" to restore slain Elves to incarnate life.

However, Glorfindel remains unique for a couple of reasons. First, he is the only reincarnated character, i.e. we do not become familiar with any other reincarnated Elves--though presumably many other Elves who were characters were also reincarnated but thought it a good opportunity to go into retirement. Second, before he was slain he had been banned from returning to Valinor. The ban was lifted for him specifically because his death purged him of the guilt for which the ban was imposed (should be enough, right?), and also because of the sacrificial and crucial nature of his death.

Also look at the notes following the Appendix to [I]"Athrabeth Finrod Ah Andreth" concerning reincarnated Elves:
Well, it sounds like super-powers to me...


And yet it was not Glorfindel's reincarnation that Gandalf said gave him 'great power against the seen and unseen.' It was simply by virtue of his having dwelt in the Blessed Realm. Gandalf also clearly does not consider Glorfindel unique when explaining this to Frodo: "in Rivendell live some of his chief foes [...] lords of the Eldar"; "they do not fear the Ringwraiths."

And don't you get an impression (from reading only LOTR) that the WK feared Glorfindel more than he did Gandalf? The nazgul did attack the Grey Maia on Weathertop, the WK was preparing (albeit reluctantly) to fight him at the Gates, but the nazgul never challenged Glorfindel, even when he barred the road to them, hindering their mission.

You might be right about who the Witch-King feared more, but there's no reason to suppose WK ever perceived Gandalf's true power or nature. The Witch-King's perception has no bearing on the truth, which is that Gandalf was the single most powerful being in Middle-earth during the Third Age.

Edit : found another quote in Home 12: "Last Writings"- "Glorfindel"

I'm glad you added this because it reminded me of a point I forgot to include in this post. Two paragraphs after the text you quote, Tolkien explains that for Manwe to have devised a special means of transporting Glorfindel from Aman to Middle-earth (necessary because of the removal of Aman from "the Circles of the World"), and to have sought exception to Iluvatar's ordinance that no one was to return from Aman, was "improbable and would make Glorfindel of greater power and importance than seems fitting." Tellingly, exactly such an exception was made in order to send Gandalf to aid Middle-earth in the Third Age.

[Gordis]

obloquy - I will not argue with you about the relative powers of Galadriel/Elrond/Cirdan vs. Glofindel, or especially about their greatness. It is all very delicate. I agree the first three were greater than Glorfindel, maybe also wiser. I only wished to point out that Glorfindel was both a Calaquende (not the most powerful of them, no) and a reincarnated being - unique in ME, as far as we know. I guess that would double his powers at least in the World of Shadow, his power against the Nazgul specifically.

For instance, Cirdan may be more powerful than Glorfindel and would best him in a fight (if such a silly thing were even possible) but not being a Calaquende, Cirdan would likely be at a disadvantage when dealing with the nazgul, while Glorfindel would have double advantages. That is what I was trying to say.

And yet it was not Glorfindel's reincarnation that Gandalf said gave him 'great power against the seen and unseen.' It was simply by virtue of his having dwelt in the Blessed Realm. Gandalf also clearly does not consider Glorfindel unique when explaining this to Frodo: "in Rivendell live some of his chief foes [...] lords of the Eldar"; "they do not fear the Ringwraiths."
Right - in LOTR it is clear that any Calaquende is a threat to the nazgul. Yet, in later writings Tolkien has thought of additional reasons that would make Glorfindel so unique vs. the nazgul.

You might be right about who the Witch-King feared more, but there's no reason to suppose WK ever perceived Gandalf's true power or nature. The Witch-King's perception has no bearing on the truth, which is that Gandalf was the single most powerful being in Middle-earth during the Third Age.
I guess Gandalf the Grey himself would have said that Saruman was more powerful and Gandalf the White did say that Sauron "was mightier still".

As to the Witch-King, Gandalf said: "...my heart sank. For even the Wise might fear to withstand the Nine, when they are gathered together under their fell chieftain. A great king and sorcerer he was of old, and now he wields a deadly fear. "- LOTR
The Witch-King himself had a good idea of Gandalf's powers: [The Witch-king] is both pleased and puzzled. For a while he had been in great fear, thinking that by some means Gandalf had got possession of the Ring and was now the Bearer; but as Gandalf passes he is aware that Gandalf has not got the Ring. What is he pursuing? He himself must be after the escaping Bearer; and it must therefore somehow have gone on far ahead. But Gandalf is a great power and enemy. He must be dealt with, and yet that needs great force. - Hunt for the Ring RC p.167

[CSteefel]

"Lords of the Eldar"..."great power"..."one of the mighty of the Firstborn."

I recognize that he was one of the most powerful Elves in Middle-earth ("one of" perhaps quite a large pool of Elves), but I dispute particularly that he had climbed to the tier of Galadriel, who is explicitly stated to be one of the three greatest Eldar (multiple sources) and "the last remaining of the Great of the High Elves" (Letters); or that of Elrond, descendant of the greatest Elda Luthien and of Melian. Further, Tolkien says that if Galadriel's presumption that she could supplant Sauron as the master of the Ring is accurate, then so also could Gandalf and especially Elrond. Elrond and Glorfindel are just two "lords of the Eldar" of the "some" that Gandalf mentions in your quote.
.
But Tolkien says in "The Istari" in the Unfinished Tales that
...Galadriel, the greatest of the Eldar surviving in Middle Earth, was potent mainly in wisdom and goodness, as a director or counsellor in the struggle, unconquerable in resistance (especially in mind and spirit) but incapable of punitive action.
You might be right about who the Witch-King feared more, but there's no reason to suppose WK ever perceived Gandalf's true power or nature. The Witch-King's perception has no bearing on the truth, which is that Gandalf was the single most powerful being in Middle-earth during the Third Age.
This could be correct, since mostly Gandalf kept his power veiled. Saruman does not seem to have realized that his powers had been augmented until his own staff is broken. However, Gandalf does seem to show some of his "hidden power" when he drives off the Nazgul in order to save Faramir. Somehow the Nazgul got the message there, which is also why I suspect that the WK decided to delay a confrontation at the gates...

[CSteefel]

obloquy -

As to the Witch-King, Gandalf said: "...my heart sank. For even the Wise might fear to withstand the Nine, when they are gathered together under their fell chieftain. A great king and sorcerer he was of old, and now he wields a deadly fear. "- LOTR
:
The quote would suggest to me that Gandalf is worried about the effect of the WK gathered together with the other of the Nine on the mortals out there, and thus their impact on the battle. I doubt that Gandalf personally was afraid, since like Glorfindel (as cited in The Fellowship of the Ring), the power of the dead has little effect on those who walk in both worlds (the living and the dead). Gandalf explicitly says this as a response to Frodo's comment about how Glorfindel was able to drive the Nazgul into the river at Rivendell...

[Boromir88]

Gordis, but that doesn't necessarily mean The Witch-King knew Gandalf's nature, and knew his full power. Because even though if Gandalf is sent back with enhanced powers, he still keeps them veiled. ;)

[Gordis]

CSteefel, the quote above was taken from the Council of Elrond - Gandalf's tale about his feelings after he met Radagast in summer 3018. At this point there was no battle to worry about - yet. The two wizards (Gandalf and Radagast) were on their own, and Gandalf decided to go seek Saruman's counsel - how to "drive back" the Nine.

"Even if you set out from this spot, you will hardly reach [Saruman] before the Nine discover the land that they seek. I myself shall turn back at once." And with that [Radagast] mounted [...] and rode off as if the Nine were after him.

Now consider this: there are 2 Maiar. They have to oppose the Nine coming in their direction. But they don't even try to do this by force, two against the Nine. Radagast is plainly terrified of the Nazgul. Being a Maia is not such a great advantage in itself, it seems...;)

[Gordis]

Gordis, but that doesn't necessarily mean The Witch-King knew Gandalf's nature, and knew his full power. Because even though if Gandalf is sent back with enhanced powers, he still keeps them veiled. ;)
I didn't try to imply that the WK was aware of Gandalf's death, resurrection and his "upgrade" to White Wizard. But the quote from RC says that the WK, already while hunting the Ring near Weathertop, did know that G. the Grey was a great power. Most likely they had occasions to meet before (in Angmar?)
And what being could make a nazgul pause? Calaquendi and Maiar - or something like Tom B. (Also pretty girls, in the Witch-King's case ;) ). I think the nazgul were very good at recognizing incarnate Maiar - hadn't they watched Sauron for an Age?

[obloquy]

I only wished to point out that Glorfindel was both a Calaquende (not the most powerful of them, no) and a reincarnated being - unique in ME, as far as we know.

Well, you did say I have to disagree with you - I think [Glorfindel] was the most powerful of the Eldar remaining in ME.

I guess that would double his powers at least in the World of Shadow, his power against the Nazgul specifically.

Double? Care to share the formula you used to calculate that? I disagree with the interpretation of the "world of shadow" as a literal realm where a person might be amplified or diminished independent of his "world of direct sunlight" counterpart. It is rather a modified perception of the ordinary, unified world, in which it is possible to see the spiritual power that is ordinarily veiled by corporeal forms. When Frodo puts on the Ring, he does not transport to this other world since he still occupies physical space in the ordinary world despite his invisibility there. (The state that The Ring confers is evidently different than the state of the Nazgul since Ringbearers are made invisible clothing and all, but the Nazgul can put something on to become visible. Still, the Nazgul must also occupy physical space rather than being true disembodied spirits since they are capable of wearing clothing and carrying weapons.) What changes, then, is Frodo's perception of the world, and in some cases what he sees may even be figurative, as in his vision of the searching Eye.

For instance, Cirdan may be more powerful than Glorfindel and would best him in a fight (if such a silly thing were even possible) but not being a Calaquende, Cirdan would likely be at a disadvantage when dealing with the nazgul, while Glorfindel would have double advantages. That is what I was trying to say.

Then why isn't Glorfindel guardian of Narya? Who is Sauron likely to send to retrieve it, if he were to discover its location? Nazgul, right?

Right - in LOTR it is clear that any Calaquende is a threat to the nazgul. Yet, in later writings Tolkien has thought of additional reasons that would make Glorfindel so unique vs. the nazgul.

Again, Gandalf does not seem to consider Glorfindel unique, but just "one of" the Elf lords present in Rivendell.

I guess Gandalf the Grey himself would have said that Saruman was more powerful and Gandalf the White did say that Sauron "was mightier still".

First, Gandalf was known for his humility and it is the reason he succeeded where others failed, particularly Saruman who mistakenly considered himself the most powerful of his order and a peer of Sauron. I have written much about this in other threads. Second, Gandalf does not say that Sauron "is mightier still." This quote is constantly misinterpreted. Gandalf says that "Black is mightier still." There's no reason to believe that Sauron sometimes goes by the name Black. Black refers to The Bad Guys who, at the time that this was said, clearly still had the upper hand. It has absolutely nothing to do with Gandalf's perception of his own power.

But Tolkien says in "The Istari" in the Unfinished Tales that
...Galadriel, the greatest of the Eldar surviving in Middle Earth, was potent mainly in wisdom and goodness, as a director or counsellor in the struggle, unconquerable in resistance (especially in mind and spirit) but incapable of punitive action.

Nice research. The context of this excerpt is important, however. Here Tolkien refers to her role in the overthrow of Sauron in the Third Age, which is somewhat different than what she might be capable of in direct confrontation with the Nazgul. With this in mind, it is telling that Tolkien calls her unequivocally "unconquerable."

Edit: In my post above I referenced Glorfindel's "return to innocence" but did not elaborate because I intended to do so later in the post, but then I forgot. I think most parties involved in this discussion are probably familiar with what I was referring to, but here it is anyway (from HoMe 12 - Last Writings):We can thus understand why he seems so powerful a figure and almost "angelic". For he had returned to the primitive innocence of the First-born... It goes on to include his long association with Maiar and faithful Eldar in Aman as additional reason for his enhancement.

[Gordis]

Well, you did say I have to disagree with you - I think [Glorfindel] was the most powerful of the Eldar remaining in ME.
What I disagree with is your statement:
His reincarnation was relatively unique, but his power was not. Note that he is still never spoken of as one of the greatest of the Eldar.
I believe his power was outstanding - at least in the Third Age ME. In the First Age there had been many Elves greater than him - that's why he is not counted among the greatest of the Eldar overall. But in the Third Age he was quite a figure.
I hate to discuss relative powers of good guys, but it stands to reason that there are many kinds of power - spiritual and physical, power in domination and power in resistance and preservation, power in what men call sorcery etc. In military prowess Glorfindel was, perhaps, unmatched: wasn't he the head of the Elven forces of Lorien and Rivendell in the last Angmar War? - and not Elrond, or Amroth, or Galadriel.

I disagree with the interpretation of the "world of shadow" as a literal realm where a person might be amplified or diminished independent of his "world of direct sunlight" counterpart. It is rather a modified perception of the ordinary, unified world, in which it is possible to see the spiritual power that is ordinarily veiled by corporeal forms. That has always been my interpretation of the Shadow World as well. But even so, Calaquendi are said to have great powers both in Seen and the Unseen - which the other lack.
And the quotes about reincarnated Elves lead to believe that they have increased power in the Unseen - "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.

Then why isn't Glorfindel guardian of Narya? Who is Sauron likely to send to retrieve it, if he were to discover its location? Nazgul, right?
In the Third Age The Three rings weren't guarded, they were wielded by those who needed them most - not by those who could guard them better.

Again, Gandalf does not seem to consider Glorfindel unique, but just "one of" the Elf lords present in Rivendell.Sure, how could Tolkien in his text written in 1930-ies and published in 50-ies use the ideas from his late writings? But while writing about Glorfindel later (text in HOME 12) he did take into account LOTR. Also, as I said, Gandalf was not supposed to reveal everything to the hobbit in mid-quest.

Gandalf was known for his humility and it is the reason he succeeded where others failed, particularly Saruman who mistakenly considered himself the most powerful of his order and a peer of Sauron.
Humility is a good thing, and a part of "general strength" but it is different from raw power. Had Gandalf been mightier than Sauron, he wouldn't fear to confront him over the Palantir. Had Gandalf been mightier than Saruman, he wouldn't be trapped in Orthanc. If Gandalf were able to fight the Nine single-handedly (or with Radagast) he wouldn't have gone to Saruman, leaving Frodo on his own with only Rangers guarding the borders.

Actually, I treasure the image of the old weary wizard in grey, not the mightiest of his kind, sometimes afraid, often mistaken, but stalwart in his mission nonetheless. He is much more likeable (and believable) than a super-hero, mightier than Sauron would ever be.

Then again... what was the original question?:eek:

[Mansun]

Nevermind the Balrog vs the Witch King. What of the Balrog versus Sauron? The victor of this duel would surely overcome the Witch King. Both were servants of Morgoth, neither were directly in league with one another, however, and they certainly were not allies in The Third Age.

According to Legolas, Sauron would be the favourite:-

It was a Balrog of Morgoth. Of all elf-banes the most deadly, save the One who sits in the Dark Tower.

But how could Legolas know this? Who has ever trialled their strength at both the Balrog and Sauron?

[obloquy]

Nevermind the Balrog vs the Witch King. What of the Balrog versus Sauron? The victor of this duel would surely overcome the Witch King. Both were servants of Morgoth, neither were directly in league with one another, however, and they certainly were not allies in The Third Age.

According to Legolas, Sauron would be the favourite:-



But how could Legolas know this? Who has ever trialled their strength at both the Balrog and Sauron?

It doesn't matter how Legolas knew: Tolkien told us unequivocally that Sauron was greater than the balrogs.

[Morthoron]

It doesn't matter how Legolas knew: Tolkien told us unequivocally that Sauron was greater than the balrogs.

The only questions that have to be asked in this discussion are, which character actually took up the aegis of Morgoth after his fall? Which character had the power to restore evil in Middle-earth and maintain a semblance of rule while Morgoth was exiled (more than once, mind you)?

Hint: it wasn't a Balrog. They hid. They showed neither the propensity for leadership, nor even an inkling of will to turn defeat into the possibility of victory. They had no personal power to draw all the evil elements of Middle-earth into a vast and insidious web that ensnared all of the East and most of the West.

It is obvious that Sauron alone among the followers of Morgoth had the will and the power to become Dark Lord in his master's stead. It was Sauron that rebuilt Angband into a more terrible bastion than Utumno ever was. It was Sauron who haunted the steps of the West for two Ages, was the primary cause of the destruction of Numenor, decimated the realm of Arnor, nearly crushed Gondor, and it was against the domination of Sauron that the Valar sent the Istari to Arda.

If Gandalf could defeat a Balrog, what could be said of Sauron, who was Gandalf's primary foe, and the only reason the Istari were in Middle-earth in the first place? If one really considers the story itself in its entirety, then the answer and the question itself is superfluous.

[Mansun]

If one really considers the story itself in its entirety, then the answer and the question itself is superfluous.

I am proud of the majority of the forward thinking and creativity that this thread has encouraged.


It doesn't matter how Legolas knew: Tolkien told us unequivocally that Sauron was greater than the balrogs.

A Balrog versus Sauron would still be a tightly fought contest, and the comparably sourced dark power they would have used may have largely cancelled each other out. Was Sauron mightier than a Balrog without his Ring?

[Morthoron]

A Balrog versus Sauron would still be a tightly fought contest, and the comparably sourced dark power they would have used may have largely cancelled each other out.

You have no proof. It is merely conjecture without textual basis.

Was Sauron mightier than a Balrog without his Ring?

Doesn't matter. There was no dissent among the dark forces when Sauron temporarily assumed power in the 1st Age, nor in the 2nd or 3rd Ages when he was de facto Dark Lord. There was no no one who vied against Sauron for Morogoth's throne. All Morgoth's old minions fell naturally under Sauron's rule when Morgoth was banished for good.

One would think that evil, avaricious and power-hungry immortals would at least make an attempt to grab the throne (evil, after all, does not make fraternal and benevolent bonds between greedy and sadistic forces); this would be particularly true if the Balrogs felt they had a chance to defeat Sauron. Not surprisingly, they remained hidden and forgotten until Dwarves made the mistake of awakening one. Even then, the Balrog never left the confines of Moria to contest Sauron. Why do you think that is? The Balrog certainly had no fear of mortal Men, and he made quick work of the Dwarves. He could have left anytime he wished.

But the hierarchy of evil remained intact. It is rather like Sauron dutifully waiting for Morgoth while he was imprisoned. Per Tolkien, Sauron was just as evil as Morgoth by degree, save that he didn't hold dominion; however, Sauron, even if he wished to usurp Morgoth's throne (as evilly inclined folk are prone to do), he did not dare to do so. This wasn't merely servants blindly following centuries-old protocol like the Stewards in Gondor, it was naked power and aggression. Either you had it, or you didn't, or you waited.

I am proud of the majority of the forward thinking and creativity that this thread has encouraged.

Why thank you, I am quite touched by your magnanimity. It is quite amazing what resourceful folk can do with a subject such as this. It is a credit to all the posters here.

[Gordis]

It is quite amazing what resourceful folk can do with a subject such as this. It is a credit to all the posters here.
Indeed. ;) The thread has even inspired some great artwork in #141.:)

[Morthoron]

Indeed. ;) The thread has even inspired some great artwork in #141.:)

Yes, that is great, isn't it? I can hardly wait to see the illustrations for the Arwen vs. Eowyn jello wrestling thread. No what I mean? Nudge, nudge -- wink, wink -- say no more, say no more!

Ummm...sorry, had a Monty moment there.

[Mansun]

Why thank you, I am quite touched by your magnanimity. It is quite amazing what resourceful folk can do with a subject such as this. It is a credit to all the posters here.

I am proud of the contributions of the majority of posters in this thread. Kind words should not be checked with cold counsel. It is clearly obvious that knobody can be certain of victory in any contest in Middle Earth.

[Morthoron]

It is clearly obvious that knobody can be certain of victory in any contest in Middle Earth.

Yes, that is true perhaps, as luck and fate have a place in Middle-earth. But we are speaking with specificity regarding two Maiar who never battled each other before, nor is there any textual basis to indicate that they ever would.

Again, Morgoth's throne was there for the taking on a number of occasions. Why did Sauron assume leadership without a fight? It's not like Tolkien never wrote about kinstrife and civil war before (like among the Elves, the Numenoreans, the Arnorions or Gondorions). Why didn't a Balrog attempt to forcibly evict him? I am sure there was no allegiance between the two based on devotion or love (I can't see a Balrog being all warm and sentimental), so if a Balrog was as powerful as Sauron, why then was there no confrontation?

[Mansun]

. . . so if a Balrog was as powerful as Sauron, why then was there no confrontation?

Because Sauron dared not try to evict the Balrog from his realm, no more than he did not with Shelob. The lesson of caution is well learned. The Balrog itself was not created with a view to dominate the world as a leader, but as a servant subdued to the will of Morgoth alone. I would compare this to the Witch King, soley commanded by the will of Sauron. Also, how many top draw powerful baddies could Tolkein accommodate in the LOTR as main characters? Certainly not both the Witch King and the Balrog, in addition to Sauron?

[Morthoron]

Because Sauron dared not try to evict the Balrog from his realm, no more than he did not with Shelob.

Please present textual evidence to indicate Sauron wanted to evict either the Balrog or Shelob, or that he was afraid of them for that matter; otherwise, your argument is baseless. In fact, in the Two Towers I recall that Sauron was certainly aware of Shelob, but left her alone as she was useful in guarding the pass at Cirith Ungol. He even sent her unwanted prisoners from time to time. That doesn't sound like an adversarial relationship to me.

The Balrog itself was not created with a view to dominate the world as a leader, but as a servant subdued to the will of Morgoth alone. I would compare this to the Witch King, soley commanded by the will of Sauron.

The Balrogs were not 'created' to be subservient as you mistakenly imply. They were Maiar just like Sauron, Gandalf and Saruman. One Balrog, Gothmog, led Morgoth's armies, so they had leadership capability.

[Eönwë]

They were Maiar just like Sauron, Gandalf and Saruman. One Balrog, Gothmog, led Morgoth's armies, so they had leadership capability.
Gothmog is a different story. If we had a Gothmog vs. Sauron, I might be tempted to go for Gothmog as the winner.

[tom the eldest]

I found this old thread by coincidence,and i really interested in this type of thread.


The witch-king vs the balrog?witch-king get stomp.a maiar is far above a wraith,even the most powerful one.even if he use fellbeast,he still couldnt hurt the balrog.

[Wousides]

balrog is no man. he could easily kill the witch king. but still the witch king says cool think like"send forth all legions" and "I will break him". but no witch king of angmar doesnt stand 30 seconds against the mighty balrog... who is ttly awesome!

[Smaug's voice]

The witch-king, though one of the best villains, is still only a mortal.
the Balrog was a beast from FA, one of the first evils.
wiki has no chance.

[Belegorn]

The Balrog could probably fart on the Witch King and remove him from existence.

[cellurdur]

The Balrog could probably fart on the Witch King and remove him from existence.

That's obviously not the case. The Witch King especially at the Battle of the Pelennor Fields was greatly empowered by Sauron personally. I would still favour the Balrog, but Gandalf the White considered him a tough opponent so it would by no means be a walk over.

[Moonraker]

I found this old thread by coincidence,and i really interested in this type of thread.


The witch-king vs the balrog?witch-king get stomp.a maiar is far above a wraith,even the most powerful one.even if he use fellbeast,he still couldnt hurt the balrog.


The Balrog is more or less the equal of Gandalf the Grey, both being of the Maia order. All 9 Nazgul could not defeat Gandalf the Grey, so logically speaking the Balrog must be more powerful than all 9 Nazgul, and therefore more too than the Witch King. An enhanced (this demonic force does not imply Maiar-like power) Witch King cannot be more powerful than a weaker one plus 8 Nazgul at his side. So on all accounts, the Balrog is more powerful, and would defeat the Witch King in combat through formidable hellish spells that nearly destroyed Gandalf the Grey in Moria.

[Tuor in Gondolin]

I believe there were just (5?) nazgul at Weathertop, and Gandalf did
have to eventually retreat. Therefore it seems problematic whether
one balrog could prevail against all 9 nazgul gathered together.

[Moonraker]

I believe there were just (5?) nazgul at Weathertop, and Gandalf did
have to eventually retreat. Therefore it seems problematic whether
one balrog could prevail against all 9 nazgul gathered together.

Did Gandalf not face all 9, and then draw 4 of them away, so that Aragorn only faced 5 of them?

[Legolas]

Seems worth noting that Gandalf and Aragorn were not fighting the wraiths in a toe-to-toe Mortal Kombat battle, but a struggle to safety with the hobbits and the Ring at stake. You would fight differently alone than if you were trying to escape with a child.

[Moonraker]

Seems worth noting that Gandalf and Aragorn were not fighting the wraiths in a toe-to-toe Mortal Kombat battle, but a struggle to safety with the hobbits and the Ring at stake. You would fight differently alone than if you were trying to escape with a child.

Also worth noting the Nine did not push Gandalf over the edge to force him to reveal his true Maiar powers. I can only assume they didn't pose a big enough danger in killing Gandalf, even if he said he was hard put to at Weathertop. Didn't come across as tormented and aggravated at the Council of Elrond than when he told of his dealings with the Balrog when asked by Gimili in the White Rider guise. It seemed more like he thought the Nine were tough, but manageable, but that the Balrog was formidable and a match for him. A shaken Gandalf the White in anguish and emotional pain when telling his tale is one big indication of the might of a Balrog.