[Marileangorifurnimaluim]

Dead on with the Macbeth reference.
So much of ME has a whiff of familiarity because he drew on our half-forgotten mythology, which surfaces in everything from Shakespeare to the brothers Grimm. (he also drew on the roots of our own languange - ever notice you can almost understand elvish?) The theme of the prophecy understood too late goes back to Oedipus, but it's likely older still.

Regarding Mithadan's interesting and unpredictable point - that Merry and not Eowyn slew the Witch King.. why do you think that?

I wondered recently why swinging an ordinary steel blade in the empty space between head and crown would do anything besides make a nice Swishing sound (except that it brings to mind early Medieval superstitions that held iron was poison to - well, dangerous elves in that context, but any uncanny spirits of the night - yet I don't think that superstition applies here).

In my first reading I picked up that it referred to both his death at the hands of Merry, a hobbit and Eowyn, a woman - the prophecy had a double edge so to speak. [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img] I thought that was very clever of Tolkien. Later I doubted my interpretation since no one agreed!

The prophecy mentions only to the circumstances "not by the hand of man", and not the means.

The means, an ordinary sword through thin air doesn't make sense to me. Even if it did shatter in a billion pieces. Yet it's hard to imagine stabbing anything in the calf could do much harm.

So do you think it was Merry because of how Tolkien made much of the fact he wielded a blade of Westernesse, "bound about by spells for the ruin of Mordor"?

Or do you feel Merry's bespelled blade rendered the leader of the Nazgul vulnerable at that moment, and she just happened to strike precisely then, thus fulfilling the prophecy?

Sorry my thoughts are disorganized, a little tired tonight.

-Maril

Very interesting, all.

[ November 28, 2001: Message edited by: Marileangorifurnimaluim ]