Elves and Ringwraiths - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Ivriniel · 03-01-2014, 11:36 PM

Quote:

On the possible other hand I have posted before that Tolkien as Subcreator 'should' be, and was, greatly concerned with consistency, and that the purposed inconsistencies should be like pepper in the soup -- some measure will actually help make the Subcreated World more believable, but too much will, or at least might, serve to help 'ruin' the taste.

Materials imputing inferential significance to Tolkien's intentions are steeped in the tradition of analysis that compares and contrasts the various excerpts in a deeply inconsistent set of materials that evidenced, not just one evolutionary trajectory, but various evolutionary trajectories. Moreover, the vast masses of materials sometimes do, and sometimes do not restore an original idea. How long did Aragorn live? Twice or thrice the lifespan of men--he actually says 'twice' somewhere in one of his letters! But decided upon 190 years in the Appendices.

Methodologies for interpretation vary. My preferred mode--only because of personal preference and certainly not because it's the most efficient (whatever that means) way of approaching the Tolienien cosmology, is to explore what is revealed, in narrative text, between characters.

LotR, as we know, post dates the mythological foundation (not publication) of the Silmarilien. He wrote (no scrawled) many of his ideas down, on paper, well ahead of the eventual first publication of the Hobbit.

Consistency, was also sometimes deliberately avoided. His positioning of the anomalous responses of Bombadil to the Ring and Bombadil's obscure misalignment of existential themes surrounding Tom, was done on purpose. I read in that in Letters (and for the life of me I can't find it right now).

So, with all that in mind, and, methodological analyses aside, and how to adapt ideas about Tolkien's intention aside--what do we know about the topic at hand from in-text citations in the published story narratives?

Ivriniel · 03-01-2014, 11:42 PM

Elves and Ringwraiths.

In terms of the existential transformation that Men succumbed to after bearing a Ring of Power--a key feature, unclearly noted in the narrative--whether or not Sauronic influence extended the power of Men, or whether some other fundament was being implied about the relative potency of Elves and Men.....

Not quite as easy as it seems on the surface. Tuor versus Legolas? Hurin versus Feanor? Gil Galad versus Boromir? The juxtapositions imply instance variance.

We don't know much about the head ringwraith. Probably Numenorean. The Witchking. We actually know a little more about Khamil, the second most powerful Ringwraith......

Ivriniel · 03-02-2014, 12:44 AM

Khamul -- now he is very interesting for a number of particular reasons. I will provide textual analysis at the end of the post.

Khamul was the only Ringwraith Tolkien spoke about. Khamul was known as The Black Easterling and Shadow of the East--before he became a Ringwraith. He is implicated in the alliance between the land of Rhun and Mordor. He was second in power, but one of the six Ringwraiths not of Numenorean descent. Interesting, that, isn't it. He was the Ringwraith who pursued the Hobbits to the Buckleberry Ferry. He spoke to Maggot asking about "Baggins", was present killing Gondor-ian soldiers on the Pelenor and present at the Battle of Moranon.

Analysis

1. non-numenoreans can achieve a greatness that rivals them. Implying.
2. A capacity for potency in Men of normal lifespan, not of the Elder Days, not exposed to the Noldorin influence in Beleriand--not connected, in any way, to the Light of Aman. With intrinsically evil/dark personality attributes.
3. Why did Tolkien *only* speak about this particular Ringwraith. Interesting isn't it. This is one of those times that we need to make inferences by, not only presence (the one he spoke about), but what that means by way of inferences by absence (why did he choose to note Easterling Ringwraiths, but not the Numenorean ones?)

This is particularly noteworthy because of the prominence of the Witchking in the mythology, don't you think. How is it that the Witchking--responsible for the destruction of Arnor, the inadvertent loss of Arnor-ean artefacts (Palantiri in the Ice Bay of Forochel, when Arvedui was lost), and who also slew Earnil, last King of Gondor. Who sacked Minas Ithil. Who occupied Dol Guldur after Sauron reoccupied Mordor.

We don't know who the *bleep* The Witchking was, but we do the Easterling of Rhun.

The Easterling's potency is materials *deeply* discordant with the mythology as it much more typically caste ideas about the 'lesser' and 'fading' races. *And* the particular Easterling noted for his history.

I, truly, do not know what this means about what the capacities for power and potency are in the Mortal Races.

On an interesting addendum, the Pukel Men, had a particular resilience to Evil (this cuts the opposite way to Khamul) and who also had particular magical powers of their own. This legacy of magic is well noted in supplementary materials Christopher Tolkien wrote (I can quote citations if people seek those. But I read a story about a stone that a Pukel men charged with magic that protected, I think it was a Numenorean home, from an Orc assault).

William Cloud Hicklin · 03-02-2014, 12:29 PM

was present killing Gondor-ian soldiers on the Pele[n]nor

Really?

Ivriniel · 03-02-2014, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

was present killing Gondor-ian soldiers on the Pele[n]nor

Really?

Hi there WCH,

Materials can only be as reliable as the citations drawn from. You can never be really sure. See here

William Cloud Hicklin · 03-02-2014, 09:51 PM

The Ringwraiths certainly played a decisive role in the assault on Gondor as Weapons of Mass Terror- but did they actually kill anyone, save those who eventually died of despair? I don't think so.

Ivriniel · 03-02-2014, 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

The Ringwraiths certainly played a decisive role in the assault on Gondor as Weapons of Mass Terror- but did they actually kill anyone, save those who eventually died of despair? I don't think so.

I diden write the citation. Did they 'directly' slay? We knew they wielded actual weapons. The mace of the Witchking struck Eowyn, and all that. The morgal blade and Frodo at Amon Sul (that must have been a favourite ole haunt of the Witchking - pardon pun

). Though, as you say, you tend to see them screachin' like troubled children and making creepy sounds more than anything else.

On the point of the 'how' a Ringwraith gets such powers, I have been pondering, much about what kinds of 'energies' or processes are at work. Ea and all of that - perhaps some inverse variant of it? Perhaps, there's this 'sink hole' or dimension where Ea flows back [into] and perhaps Sauron runs the flow in reverse?

What is 'unlight' (Ungoliante's shadow web) and 'unlife' anyway, and Tolkien's particular use of antonyms for expressing something very specific....

03-02-2014, 12:44 AM	#3
Ivriniel Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 430	Khamul -- now he is very interesting for a number of particular reasons. I will provide textual analysis at the end of the post. Khamul was the only Ringwraith Tolkien spoke about. Khamul was known as The Black Easterling and Shadow of the East--before he became a Ringwraith. He is implicated in the alliance between the land of Rhun and Mordor. He was second in power, but one of the six Ringwraiths not of Numenorean descent. Interesting, that, isn't it. He was the Ringwraith who pursued the Hobbits to the Buckleberry Ferry. He spoke to Maggot asking about "Baggins", was present killing Gondor-ian soldiers on the Pelenor and present at the Battle of Moranon. Analysis 1. non-numenoreans can achieve a greatness that rivals them. Implying. 2. A capacity for potency in Men of normal lifespan, not of the Elder Days, not exposed to the Noldorin influence in Beleriand--not connected, in any way, to the Light of Aman. With intrinsically evil/dark personality attributes. 3. Why did Tolkien only speak about this particular Ringwraith. Interesting isn't it. This is one of those times that we need to make inferences by, not only presence (the one he spoke about), but what that means by way of inferences by absence (why did he choose to note Easterling Ringwraiths, but not the Numenorean ones?) This is particularly noteworthy because of the prominence of the Witchking in the mythology, don't you think. How is it that the Witchking--responsible for the destruction of Arnor, the inadvertent loss of Arnor-ean artefacts (Palantiri in the Ice Bay of Forochel, when Arvedui was lost), and who also slew Earnil, last King of Gondor. Who sacked Minas Ithil. Who occupied Dol Guldur after Sauron reoccupied Mordor. We don't know who the bleep The Witchking was, but we do the Easterling of Rhun. The Easterling's potency is materials deeply discordant with the mythology as it much more typically caste ideas about the 'lesser' and 'fading' races. And the particular Easterling noted for his history. I, truly, do not know what this means about what the capacities for power and potency are in the Mortal Races. On an interesting addendum, the Pukel Men, had a particular resilience to Evil (this cuts the opposite way to Khamul) and who also had particular magical powers of their own. This legacy of magic is well noted in supplementary materials Christopher Tolkien wrote (I can quote citations if people seek those. But I read a story about a stone that a Pukel men charged with magic that protected, I think it was a Numenorean home, from an Orc assault). Last edited by Ivriniel; 03-02-2014 at 12:58 AM.

03-02-2014, 12:29 PM	#4
William Cloud Hicklin Loremaster of Annúminas Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 2,330	was present killing Gondor-ian soldiers on the Pele[n]nor Really? __________________ The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it.

03-02-2014, 09:51 PM	#6
William Cloud Hicklin Loremaster of Annúminas Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 2,330	The Ringwraiths certainly played a decisive role in the assault on Gondor as Weapons of Mass Terror- but did they actually kill anyone, save those who eventually died of despair? I don't think so. __________________ The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it.

03-01-2014, 11:42 PM	#2
Ivriniel Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 430	Elves and Ringwraiths. In terms of the existential transformation that Men succumbed to after bearing a Ring of Power--a key feature, unclearly noted in the narrative--whether or not Sauronic influence extended the power of Men, or whether some other fundament was being implied about the relative potency of Elves and Men..... Not quite as easy as it seems on the surface. Tuor versus Legolas? Hurin versus Feanor? Gil Galad versus Boromir? The juxtapositions imply instance variance. We don't know much about the head ringwraith. Probably Numenorean. The Witchking. We actually know a little more about Khamil, the second most powerful Ringwraith......