The creature Gothmog at the Siege of Minas Tirith

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by narfforc

Readers suggestions that the later Gothmog was a Nazgul or a Black Numenorean are no more than speculation; in the absence of further detail by Tolkien.
It is not clear if lieutenant here means the second-in-command of Minas Morgul or, more likely, second-in-command to the Witch-king, who is sometimes called the Morgul-lord. (Hammond/Scull)

Why is the latter more likely? The Witch-King was never called Morgul. It seems more likely to me that lieutenant of Morgul should be taken to mean lieutenant of Morgul. Actually, why does it matter which is intended? Both would almost certainly be positions reserved for Nazgul.

The assumption that the second-in-command on the Pelennor was a Nazgul is a fairly reasonable one.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by obloquy

The assumption that the second-in-command on the Pelennor was a Nazgul is a fairly reasonable one.

I'd agree.

Otherwise the lieutenant of Morgul had to be something like a really special creature and sure Tolkien would have described that kind of an "one more interesting weirdo" more closely - whether it be a very accomplished troll, a great werewolf, a Balrog (like the name suggests) or something else. The fact that he is just named as the second in command would suggest there is nothing unusual in it ie. it would be another Nazgûl just second in command?

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

The fact that he is just named as the second in command would suggest there is nothing unusual in it ie. it would be another Nazgûl just second in command?

I agree.

Moreover, let us look at the history of the sentence about Gothmog:

In an immediately rejected version of the passage in which the new hosts streaming out of Osgiliath are described, it was said of the Black Captain: 'He was gone, and the Nazgul in fear had fled to Mordor bearing ill tidings'; but this was lost in the rewriting of the passage where appears Gothmog lieutenant of Morgul - HOME 8

If Gothmog were meant to be a nazgul, then the rejection of the sentence about all the remaining Nazgul fleeing seems explained: one (Gothmog) remained on the field and took command. Also as Tolkien put Gothmog in while editing out the sentence about the nazgul, it explains why he failed to mention that Gothmog was one of them: at the moment it seemed quite obvious to Tolkien.

[narfforc]

Originally Posted by obloquy

Why is the latter more likely? The Witch-King was never called Morgul. It seems more likely to me that lieutenant of Morgul should be taken to mean lieutenant of Morgul. Actually, why does it matter which is intended? Both would almost certainly be positions reserved for Nazgul.

The assumption that the second-in-command on the Pelennor was a Nazgul is a fairly reasonable one.

Yes I agree and I was merely quoting from A Readers Companion. However my own view is very similar. All the Nazgul were Kings of Men and probably at sometime in their life had military training of a degree far beyond the normal generals found within an army. There is the misconception that the Nazgul were just mindless automatons, without any memory of their previous lives. There is also The Will of Sauron to consider, once The Witch-king was nullified on the battlefield, the next best point of control over the Army would naturally be another Nazgul, due to their stronger link with him. Seniority on the battlefield was something that Lieutenant Tolkien would have understood, once The Commanding Officer is killed, The Senior Major takes over. I think that Tolkien calls Gothmog 'Lieutenant of Morgul', because he sees him as The Morgul-lords second-in-command.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by obloquy

The Witch-King was never called Morgul.

Well, yes and no...

As a matter of fact it is the name "Witch-King" which is rarely used in LOTR: only once in the text itself (and it refers to the Angmar period) and several times in the Appendices, most of the cases also refer to the Angmar period.

In other cases in LOTR he is called "The Morgul-lord" (Many meetings), "the Morgul-king" (the Stairs of Cirith Ungol) "Lord of Morgul"(App. A), and only once "King of Minas Morgul" (App. A.).

The sentence about Gothmog II looks like one of the occasions where the WK seems to be called simply "Morgul". (I believe that all the mentions of "legions of Morgul" in LOTR mean the "Witch-King's legions", not "the host of Minas Morgul", because the host of the Minas Morgul fortress constituted only about a third of the army assembled at the Pelennor).
There is another sentence in the "Hunt for the Ring" published in Reader's Companion, where the WK is called simply "Angmar".

As to the the WK' names I have my own little theory:

In Sindarin "King (Lord) of Morgul" would most likely sound as "Aran Morgul". It sounds like a name given by enemies, yet flattering, one that he would accept and use. "Lord of Black Magic!" A title more befitting Sauron himself, I would say. Not bad for he who had been a mere Man once...

And if we go a tad further and consider how "Aran Morgul" would translate into Westron by a person from the "good side" - what do we get?
The Witch-King! King of bad, Dark Sorcery = witchcraft.
Translate both parts of the name and you get the Witch-King, translate only the title and you get Lord/King of Morgul.

I believe the Nazgul Lord never changed his name: Aran Morgul he had been in Angmar, Aran Morgul he remained in Minas Morgul, the city named after him. Likely the Minas Morgul fortress, the former Minas Ithil, took its new name from its new ruler, not the other way round: it may simply mean "Morgul's Tower."

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by Gordis

Well, yes and no...

No and no. The Witch-King was never called Morgul or Angmar, regardless of your theories or what the notorious Tolkien Companion says.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by obloquy

No and no. The Witch-King was never called Morgul or Angmar, regardless of your theories or what the notorious Tolkien Companion says.

Here is the case when he is called Angmar:

It was no doubt at the end of 1418 that Sauron (S. likely aided by Angmar) bethought him of the winged mounts; and yet withheld them, until things became almost desperate and he was forced to launch his war in haste.-RC p.263

So, why not Morgul?

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Gordis

Here is the case when he is called Angmar:

So, why not Morgul?

It appears to me 'Angmar' simply refers to the region.

For at that time the realm of Angmar arose in the North beyond the Ettenmoors. ........ [The lord of that land was known as the Witch-king, but it was not known until later that he was indeed the chief of the Ring-wraiths, who came north with the purpose of destroying the Dúnedain in Arnor, seeing hope in their disunion, while Gondor was strong].

Appendix A ROTK

If he was 'the lord of that land', and himself called Angmar, why was he known as 'the Witch-king?

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

It appears to me 'Angmar' simply refers to the region.

Not in this quote, speaking of events of TA 3018 following the disaster at the ford of Bruinen. Here is the fuller quote:

Only the bodies of 8 horses were discovered; but also the raiment of the Captain. It is probable that the Captain took the one horse that remained (he may have had strength to withdraw it from the flood) and unclad, naked, invisible, rode as swift as he could back to Mordor. At swiftest he could not accomplish that (for his horse at least would need some food and rest, though he needed none) ere November had passed. The wrath and fear of Sauron then may be guessed; yet if there was any in the world in whom he trusted it was the Lord of Angmar; and if his wrath were lessened by perceiving that his great servant had defeated by ill chance (and the craft of the Wise) rather than by faults of his own, his fear would be the more – seeing what power was yet in his Enemies, and how sharply fortune favoured them at each turn when all seemed lost. Help no doubt was sent out to the other Ringwraiths as they made their way back, and they were bidden to remain secret again. It was no doubt at the end of 1418 that Sauron (S. likely aided by Angmar) bethought him of the winged mounts; and yet withheld them, until things became almost desperate and he was forced to launch his war in haste. RC p.262-3

[Inziladun]

I don't have the Reader's Companion, nor have I read it. Is it considered 'canon'?
And why' The Lord of Angmar, and not the Lord Angmar?