The Balrog vs The Witch King

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by CSteefel

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.

Originally Posted by davem

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.'

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by Boro

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.

Originally Posted by obloquy

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?

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.

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hickli

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.

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by Boro

If the Witch-King's mission was to kill Frodo to get the Ring

I 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.

Originally Posted by obloquy

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.

Originally Posted by davem

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]

Originally Posted by Raynor

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.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Raynor

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.