The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post - Galadriel VS The witch- king

davem · 07-01-2006, 11:03 AM

While both Gandalf & Angmar have a physical form, Angmar's seems not to be of the same nature. Of course, he has 'sinews' that Merry's blade can sever, but he is physically invisible. If only Merry's Barrow Blade can cut the spell that held his sinews together, then it seems that what holds Angmar's body together is a magical force. Therefore, the battle between Gandalf & Angmar would come down to whether Gandalf could perform the 'spell' or speak the 'Word of Power' that would undo Angmar's magically held together physical form. From what we are told Gandalf could not do that (only the Barrow Blade could).

Therefore the question becomes 'What was the nature of Gandalf's physical form? There is no reason to believe that Gandalf's body is impervious to harm. Certainly he tells the Three Hunters: ' Indeed my friends, none of you has any weapon that could hurt me.' But its entirely possible that we should read that as him specifically referring to the weapons of Aragorn, Gimli & Legolas ( 'none of you has any weapon that could hurt me). For him to be so specific implies (possibly) that there are weapons that could harm him, but those three don't happen to be in posession of them.

Now, if it is possible for a blade such as that possessed by Merry to be the only type that could harm Angmar, it is also surely possible that Angmar possessed a blade of a type that could harm Gandalf's body. Sauron was aware that Gandalf was his chief enemy (or one of them) hence it is likely that if a particular type of weapon could destroy him Sauron would arm his Leiutenant with such a weapon. What we do know is that Gandalf is afraid of Angmar, whereas Angmar not only has no fear of Gandalf, he actually states 'Die now and curse in vain!" And with that he lifted high his sword and flames ran down the blade.' So, Angmar raises what is clearly a magical weapon (it bursts into flame) & clearly tells Gandalf that he is about to die.

Interestingly, he doesn't use this weapon again in the battle - he chooses his mace, a purely physical weapon. It seems that the Blade has a specific purpose, namely to kill Gandalf. Gandalf doesn't have a weapon that could dispatch Angmar. Hence, it is not a question of the inherent power of the two individuals concerned, but rather that Gandalf can be killed by Angmar but Angmar cannot be killed by Gandalf.

Unless Obloquy knows better, of course....

07-01-2006, 11:03 AM	#21
davem Illustrious Ulair Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties Posts: 4,240	While both Gandalf & Angmar have a physical form, Angmar's seems not to be of the same nature. Of course, he has 'sinews' that Merry's blade can sever, but he is physically invisible. If only Merry's Barrow Blade can cut the spell that held his sinews together, then it seems that what holds Angmar's body together is a magical force. Therefore, the battle between Gandalf & Angmar would come down to whether Gandalf could perform the 'spell' or speak the 'Word of Power' that would undo Angmar's magically held together physical form. From what we are told Gandalf could not do that (only the Barrow Blade could). Therefore the question becomes 'What was the nature of Gandalf's physical form? There is no reason to believe that Gandalf's body is impervious to harm. Certainly he tells the Three Hunters: ' Indeed my friends, none of you has any weapon that could hurt me.' But its entirely possible that we should read that as him specifically referring to the weapons of Aragorn, Gimli & Legolas ( 'none of you has any weapon that could hurt me). For him to be so specific implies (possibly) that there are weapons that could harm him, but those three don't happen to be in posession of them. Now, if it is possible for a blade such as that possessed by Merry to be the only type that could harm Angmar, it is also surely possible that Angmar possessed a blade of a type that could harm Gandalf's body. Sauron was aware that Gandalf was his chief enemy (or one of them) hence it is likely that if a particular type of weapon could destroy him Sauron would arm his Leiutenant with such a weapon. What we do know is that Gandalf is afraid of Angmar, whereas Angmar not only has no fear of Gandalf, he actually states 'Die now and curse in vain!" And with that he lifted high his sword and flames ran down the blade.' So, Angmar raises what is clearly a magical weapon (it bursts into flame) & clearly tells Gandalf that he is about to die. Interestingly, he doesn't use this weapon again in the battle - he chooses his mace, a purely physical weapon. It seems that the Blade has a specific purpose, namely to kill Gandalf. Gandalf doesn't have a weapon that could dispatch Angmar. Hence, it is not a question of the inherent power of the two individuals concerned, but rather that Gandalf can be killed by Angmar but Angmar cannot be killed by Gandalf. Unless Obloquy knows better, of course....