The Balrog vs The Witch King

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by obloquy

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.

Find it yourself.

Originally Posted by Of the enemies, Valaquenta, Silmarillion

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.

Originally Posted by obloquy

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]

Originally Posted by Raynor

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

Which is patently untrue.

Originally Posted by Raynor

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.

Originally Posted by Raynor

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?

Originally Posted by Raynor

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.

Originally Posted by Raynor

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]

Originally Posted by obloquy

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.

Originally Posted by alatar

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]

Originally Posted by Raynor

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]

Originally Posted by alatar

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 .

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by Raynor

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.

Originally Posted by Raynor

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.

Originally Posted by Raynor

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]

Originally Posted by obloquy

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.