Discussion: Question about Nazgûl

Envoyé par Cutholen

Personally, I think sugestions that Aragorn [b]drove of[/] the Nazgul are incorrect. In the book (unlike in the movie), he was present when they first began their assault in Weathertop. He was present when they entered the Dell, present when Frodo revealed himself as the Ring bearer by putting on the Ring, and present when the Witch King stabbed Frodo with the morgul blade; yet it was only after that they he was able to "drive them of". That suggests to me a strategic withdrawal rather than being driven of.

Having accomplished what they reasonably believed was all that was necessary to achieve their mission, it was not worth the risk of further confrontation with Aragorn. It is not that they feared he would defeat them, but perhaps only that they feared he might injure or defeat one of the lesser of their number even though they would have defeated him. Bear in mind, the Witch King was amongst their number, who faced Gandalf the White with confidence. He would hardly have been afraid to face Aragorn.

Glorfindel, perhaps, was a different matter. He had killed a Balrog by himself in the First Age, though like Gandalf did in the third age, he died in the attempt. Any of the lesser Nazgul, though perhaps not the Witch King, would have feared to face him alone. Yet still I believe that a group of Nazgul would have avoided conflict with him not because they feared they would not kill him, but because they feared that one or more of their number might die in the attempt; and that at that time it was not worth that risk either to kill him or to stay on the bridge.

Interesting take.

However it leaves me wondering if the WK had the Ring right there in front of him, why didn't he take it? I can't remember at the moment (and don't have the book handy) why else he would have left Weathertop without the Ring. Wasn't it rather that Aragorn actually drove him off? Otherwise it doesn't make any sense that, when he has the Ring literally within reach, and his target (Frodo) already wounded, that he should willingly walk away.

What you must remember is that by all reasonable calculations, the Witch King had secured the Ring when he stabbed Frodo. The morgul blade was going to work on him, making him a lesser wraith subject to the Witch King's command, and do so within a very short period.

Frodo did not become a wraith because of the unusual resistance of Hobbits to such effects, because Aragorn knew about the use of Athelas is such circumstances, and finally, because he was carried at speed to the house of Elrond on an elven stead.

All of these are were unpredictable to the Witch King. Once he stabbed Frodo, he could expect that within a week, Frodo would have brought the One Ring to him at his command; or perhaps that the heir of Elendil would have forcibly taken the Ring from another to prevent that outcome. Given the effects of forcible aquisition of the Ring, that outcome may well have been more desirable than the immediate acquisition of the Ring. You can imagine how delighted Sauron would have been to have the heir of Elendil as a wraith subject to his command.

The Witch King also did not know (at the time of the attack) that the other contingent of Nazgul had been driven from the "Last Bridge" by Glorfindel. In other words he had reason to believe that he had closer to a month than a fortnight to secure the Ring.

So, IMO, the calculation made by the Witch King was, either:

Press the attack, secure the Ring immediately, but possibly loose one or two nazgul; or

Withdraw, secure the ring within a week or two, and possibly gain the heir of Elendil as a lesser wraith to command or torment; or at worst,

Press the attack in a weeks time (near the Last Bridge), when he had all nine Nazgul, so that Aragorn's defeat would be swift, and without risk, and still gain the Ring.

Envoyé par Cutholen

What you must remember is that by all reasonable calculations, the Witch King had secured the Ring when he stabbed Frodo. The morgul blade was going to work on him, making him a lesser wraith subject to the Witch King's command, and do so within a very short period.

Frodo did not become a wraith because of the unusual resistance of Hobbits to such effects, because Aragorn knew about the use of Athelas is such circumstances, and finally, because he was carried at speed to the house of Elrond on an elven stead.

All of these are were unpredictable to the Witch King. Once he stabbed Frodo, he could expect that within a week, Frodo would have brought the One Ring to him at his command; or perhaps that the heir of Elendil would have forcibly taken the Ring from another to prevent that outcome. Given the effects of forcible aquisition of the Ring, that outcome may well have been more desirable than the immediate acquisition of the Ring. You can imagine how delighted Sauron would have been to have the heir of Elendil as a wraith subject to his command.

The Witch King also did not know (at the time of the attack) that the other contingent of Nazgul had been driven from the "Last Bridge" by Glorfindel. In other words he had reason to believe that he had closer to a month than a fortnight to secure the Ring.

So, IMO, the calculation made by the Witch King was, either:

Press the attack, secure the Ring immediately, but possibly loose one or two nazgul; or

Withdraw, secure the ring within a week or two, and possibly gain the heir of Elendil as a lesser wraith to command or torment; or at worst,

Press the attack in a weeks time (near the Last Bridge), when he had all nine Nazgul, so that Aragorn's defeat would be swift, and without risk, and still gain the Ring.

But the WK had the Ring right there, within his grasp. All he had to do was close his hand around it and leave. There would be no reason at all for him to wait for Frodo to become a wraith and then command him to bring the Ring to him. Also, the Nazgul at that point were sent to retrieve the Ring, not to fight a war, so any attempts to try to snare Aragorn would not make any sense. That's also assuming the WK knew who Aragorn was at that moment. It's possible he may not even have known that an heir of Elendil still existed, since it seems Aragorn's true identity was not known to Sauron until he revealed it to him later through the Palantir of Orthanc. (it's also possible that the WK thought that Elendil's line was wiped out when he defeated the northern kingdoms centuries before.)

In short, if your mission from your cruel master is to get his Ring, and you have it right there at hand, you take it and go back to your master. Nothing else makes sense.

What I come back to is two things - the extent by which Aragorn was out numbered; and the known strength of the Witch King.

We know that the Witch King confidently challenged Gandalf the White at Minas Tirith, and we can be sure he know who he was challenging. At the time of the challenge, he probably knew about events in Moria, for orcs of Mordor had met with Orcs of Moria chasing after the fellowship to exact revenge for the death of their lord. He probably also had a fair idea about events at Isengard, for Aragorn had already challenged Sauron with the Palantir, revealing that Isengard had fallen. By his own estimate then, the Witch King was about as dangerous a foe as the Balrog of Moria, possibly more dangerous.

We also know from the conversation between Eowyn and the Witch King that he knew of the prophecy of Glorfindel, and believed it - believed that he could not be bested by any mortal man.

The Witch King's estimate of his strength and his belief in the prophecy are not likely to have changed between Amon Sul and Minas Tirith. Therefore, when he faced Aragorn on Weathertop, the Witch King believed he was about as strong as a Balrog, and that he could not be defeated by mortal man. Why then would he retreat? Certainly not for fear for his own safety.

Second, we know that on Weathertop, the Nazgul outnumbered Aragorn five to one. If five are challenged by one, then those in front simply retreat a small way, while those to the side envelope the one. Then at a signal, they all press their attack at the same time and the one must fall. A man with two torches in his hand simply cannot defend himself against five swordsman who have him surrounded, what ever delusions movie directors like to encourage.

So even if the Witch King had not been on Amon Sul, five Nazgul could have pressed their attack against Aragorn with every confidence of success. With the Witch King there, that confidence becomes certainty. The only thing that cannot be guarantteed is that all five Nazgul would have survived the attack. Assuming the Nazgul, five kings over a thousand years old, experienced with wars against Arthedain and Gondor did not panic (a very safe assumption), there calculation in retreating can only have been a calculation of relative risk of them all surviving had they pressed their attack, and relative certainty of gaining the Ring in any event.

If you were in the Witch Kings shoes, how many Nazgul would you expend to get the Ring just one week earlier?

Don't forget in the book just as the Witch King springs towards Frodo, Frodo cries "O Elbereth ! Gilthoniel !" These are powerful words in Tolkien's world. Frodo later cries another Elvish phrase in Shelob's Lair for strength, and Sam speaks words of Elbereth just before he fights off Shelob. These words wouldn't be enough to defeat a Nazgul but they do seem to summon great reserves of inner strength to the person who utters them, or perhaps the mention of the Valar and the Undying Realm unnerves the servants of Evil. I certainly doubt the Nazgul expected a Hobbit to utter that type of phrase.

Also - in the very next chapter Aragorn says words to the effect of he doesn't know why they retreated but he suspects they feel the Ring cannot fly much further at this point.

Cutholen, I agree with everything you just said. And as usual, you stated it very well.

But it still doesn't address the question of why the WK didn't just take the Ring when he had it right there in front of him. Tuor's very good point below, however, does address it, and he brings up something I'd forgotten:

Envoyé par tuor66

Don't forget in the book just as the Witch King springs towards Frodo, Frodo cries "O Elbereth ! Gilthoniel !" These are powerful words in Tolkien's world. Frodo later cries another Elvish phrase in Shelob's Lair for strength, and Sam speaks words of Elbereth just before he fights off Shelob. These words wouldn't be enough to defeat a Nazgul but they do seem to summon great reserves of inner strength to the person who utters them, or perhaps the mention of the Valar and the Undying Realm unnerves the servants of Evil. I certainly doubt the Nazgul expected a Hobbit to utter that type of phrase.

Also - in the very next chapter Aragorn says words to the effect of he doesn't know why they retreated but he suspects they feel the Ring cannot fly much further at this point.

It was a mystery to Aragorn too, their retreat. Yet still, he's just one man. A strong man, sure, and not one to ever let fear or foe stop him from doing what must be done, but not someone you'd expect to be able to withstand face-to-face combat against the WK, let alone the WK and several of his Nazgul. Even with Frodo saying what he said, it shouldn't do much to defeat the WK; maybe stop him momentarily, but nothing more, especially since those words were spoken by a mere hobbit, and a hobbit wearing the corrupt Ring, which I would think would tend to counter-act any such speech.

I'll have to get out my book and re-read that part, cause at this point it just makes no sense to me. I'll have to get back to you all on this after checking it out...

Personally, I think the fundamental problem is that Tolkien does not adequately convince the attentive reader that it's plausible the Nazgul would choose not to press their advantage on Weathertop. (Or alternately, I suppose, that Aragorn and Frodo could have ran them all off.) Their departure suited Tolkien's narrative purposes, but it's one place he didn't properly cover his authorial tracks.

I believe the explaination best supported by the text is that they made, to use Cutholen's phrase, a strategic withdrawal. But that doesn't make it a - satisfying - explanation.

We know that the Witch King confidently challenged Gandalf the White at Minas Tirith ...

Small quibble. At that point, his "hour" as he calls it, the Witch-king seems to have grown a great deal in stature. Presumably this was because much of the full attention and power of Sauron, relatively close at hand, was upon him. I'm guessing you're well-aware of it already, but that Sauron did channel in this way can be seen in several places. For example, the sentence earlier in the chapter, "The Nazgul came again, and as their Dark Lord now grew and put forth his strength, so their voices, which uttered only his will and his malice, were filled with evil and horror." (Incidentally this was one phrase which got me thinking on whether there might be no soul / fea left to the wraiths.)

First, I'd like to applaud your enthusiasm in this body of work, and second, the way you are politely debating it. But I would like to suggest a different take on what we consider fact and what we know or don't.

Envoyé par Cutholen

As to your particular theory, it is made clear at the Council of Elrond that Tom also would fall to Sauron's power in the end, should Sauron regain the Ring. This would not be possible if Tom's power were incapable of interacting with Sauron's power.

Is this clear, is it fact? I don't believe so. I think this is what Elrond believes, and Gandalf, did not dispute, either through wisdom or knowing it was not worth disputing. Tolkien did not say this as narrative, and it might be worth considering that Elrond, despite his obvious wisdom, is still fallible. He has seen this quest fail before and clearly dreads this cycle continuing.

I think that the author presents this, excellently, as a case of not leaving things up to fickle chance, which I believe Tom Bombadil represents.

When a character in a story says something, it is from that characters point of view, and inherently, not definitely fact, but a character's opinion.

EDIT: Just wanted to add, that while I wrote this a Luminous Fire-fly has caused me to succumb to my wounds.

I certainly do not mean to focus on one poster, but this other line stood out to me.

Envoyé par Cutholen

We also know from the conversation between Eowyn and the Witch King that he knew of the prophecy of Glorfindel, and believed it - believed that he could not be bested by any mortal man.

Do we really know that he knew? He was at one point just a man, and perhaps some part still was. He may have had no knowledge of the prophetic words spoken by Glorfindel. I don't believe there is any evidence to say he was aware of it. It could be simply the boasting of an arrogant tormented soul, that felt a mortal man (who he thought he was facing) was incapable of defeating him.

Just some thoughts.

Envoyé par thesilverfox

Is this clear, is it fact? I don't believe so. I think this is what Elrond believes, and Gandalf, did not dispute, either through wisdom or knowing it was not worth disputing. Tolkien did not say this as narrative, and it might be worth considering that Elrond, despite his obvious wisdom, is still fallible. He has seen this quest fail before and clearly dreads this cycle continuing.

I think that the author presents this, excellently, as a case of not leaving things up to fickle chance, which I believe Tom Bombadil represents.

When a character in a story says something, it is from that characters point of view, and inherently, not definitely fact, but a character's opinion.

In the first instance, your point is exactly correct. Almost everything we know about Middle Earth we know from something that has been said by a character, and characters can be mistaken (or lie). What is more, accepting Tolkien's literary convention, even the words of the "omniscient narator" and the contents of the appendix's are just the records made by various hobbits (and a Gondoran scribe), who might also be mistaken.

In fact, except for a few comments in letters, almost no part of the Tolkien corpus can escape this objection.

And that is the problem with the objection. If we use it as the basis of scepticism, then logically we find our selves in the position of knowing nothing about Middle Earth.

To avoid this pyrrhic scepticism about Middle Earth, we are forced to take the inhabitants of Middle Earth's understanding on face value. If a source that is accepted as reliable by other inhabitants of Middle Earth claims something about which they could reasonably have knowledge, then in the absence of clear reasons to the contrary we ought to accept that claim as true.

In this particular case, a claim made by Glorfindel (one of the best qualified inhabitants of Middle Earth to make the claim) is backed by Galdor (well qualified, but no exceptionally so) and is not disputed by either Elrond or Gandalf (who it would be hard to find better qualified on the subject). If we cannot take that claim at face value, then we are completely at sea in trying to make sense of Tolkien's world.

EDIT: Just wanted to add, that while I wrote this a Luminous Fire-fly has caused me to succumb to my wounds.

Is this an example of the pen being mightier than the sword

I certainly do not mean to focus on one poster, but this other line stood out to me.



Do we really know that he knew? He was at one point just a man, and perhaps some part still was. He may have had no knowledge of the prophetic words spoken by Glorfindel. I don't believe there is any evidence to say he was aware of it. It could be simply the boasting of an arrogant tormented soul, that felt a mortal man (who he thought he was facing) was incapable of defeating him.

Just some thoughts.

I would not say that we have no evidence. Eowyn answer's the Witch King's claim that, "No living man may hinder me!" by revealing that she was a woman. Had the Witch King's claim been boasting, arrogance, the fact that she was a woman rather than a man would have been irrelevant. It certainly would not have caused the Witch King to be "... silent, as if in sudden doubt." If no living man can hinder him because of his overwhelming strength without reference to the prophecy, then surely no living woman could either.

Never-the-less, it is not stated what the Witch King believed, so it could have been an arrogant boast rather than a citation of the prophecy. You are correct about that.

This is an example of a general problem in epistemology. It is a fact that for any finite series of observations, there are an infinite number of theories that can explain those observations. Of course, given that that a novel is of finite length, this means that there are an infinite number of relatively coherent ways of interpreting it. This is true in science as well. Necessarilly, the sum of all observations made by humans over any finite number of generations constitutes a finite series of observations. Therefore, there are an infinite number of potential theories which all equally explain those observations. None-the-less, scientists get on quite well because only a very small number of those theories manage to satisfy Ockham's Razor. Only a very few of the theories are trully simple.

In interpreting novels, I apply Ockham's Razor to my interpretations as well. In this case, Glorfindel's prophecy had been known for a thousand years, so it is likely the Witch King knew it. It then provides a satisfactory explanation of his words on Pelennor field, so there is no need to seek further explanation on the grounds of simplicity.

Of course, you don't need to apply that metric. No interpretation is trully "right" or "wrong" in this sort of case. It is after all a fictional world. However, part of Tolkiens' genius was that he did not just write rivetting stories, but that he developed a coherent world in which to set them. For this reason, I consider it a mark of respect to the Professor that I interpret his world to be as coherent as I can. And hence, I must inevitably apply the simplicity metric in interpretation.

Envoyé par BIGeyedBUG

Personally, I think the fundamental problem is that Tolkien does not adequately convince the attentive reader that it's plausible the Nazgul would choose not to press their advantage on Weathertop. (Or alternately, I suppose, that Aragorn and Frodo could have ran them all off.) Their departure suited Tolkien's narrative purposes, but it's one place he didn't properly cover his authorial tracks.

Whether you find it satisfying is of course up to you. For the record, however, I have always found it satisfying. I find Tolkien's Nazgul to be convincing creatures of menace and power; unlike those of Peter Jackson who give every appearance of being incompetent, weak, blunderers. More keystone cops than mighty and ancient kings, steeped with evil power.

Small quibble. At that point, his "hour" as he calls it, the Witch-king seems to have grown a great deal in stature. Presumably this was because much of the full attention and power of Sauron, relatively close at hand, was upon him. I'm guessing you're well-aware of it already, but that Sauron did channel in this way can be seen in several places. For example, the sentence earlier in the chapter, "The Nazgul came again, and as their Dark Lord now grew and put forth his strength, so their voices, which uttered only his will and his malice, were filled with evil and horror." (Incidentally this was one phrase which got me thinking on whether there might be no soul / fea left to the wraiths.)

You are absolutely correct on this point. However, I still believe the incident at the gates of Minas Tirith shows the Witch King to have been a very powerfull being, if perhaps not as powerfull as a Balrog when it was not his hour.

Envoyé par Cutholen

In fact, except for a few comments in letters, almost no part of the Tolkien corpus can escape this objection.

And that is the problem with the objection. If we use it as the basis of scepticism, then logically we find our selves in the position of knowing nothing about Middle Earth.

To avoid this pyrrhic scepticism about Middle Earth, we are forced to take the inhabitants of Middle Earth's understanding on face value. If a source that is accepted as reliable by other inhabitants of Middle Earth claims something about which they could reasonably have knowledge, then in the absence of clear reasons to the contrary we ought to accept that claim as true.

In this particular case, a claim made by Glorfindel (one of the best qualified inhabitants of Middle Earth to make the claim) is backed by Galdor (well qualified, but no exceptionally so) and is not disputed by either Elrond or Gandalf (who it would be hard to find better qualified on the subject). If we cannot take that claim at face value, then we are completely at sea in trying to make sense of Tolkien's world.

In interpreting novels, I apply Ockham's Razor to my interpretations as well. In this case, Glorfindel's prophecy had been known for a thousand years, so it is likely the Witch King knew it. It then provides a satisfactory explanation of his words on Pelennor field, so there is no need to seek further explanation on the grounds of simplicity.

Of course, you don't need to apply that metric. No interpretation is trully "right" or "wrong" in this sort of case. It is after all a fictional world. However, part of Tolkiens' genius was that he did not just write rivetting stories, but that he developed a coherent world in which to set them. For this reason, I consider it a mark of respect to the Professor that I interpret his world to be as coherent as I can. And hence, I must inevitably apply the simplicity metric in interpretation.

Another very good post, Cutholen. Very well said.

That's what a lot (but not all) of these discussions have to come down to: the fact that many of the events and facts of Tolkien's world have to be taken with a grain of salt, and that many of them are truly open to interpretation.

Another thing I'd add to what you were saying, or actually more like expanding upon what you said, is that, in a way similar to biblical study, we have to let the work define itself. The bible will interpret itself if things are kept within the context of the whole, and in that way we can usually come to a reasonable understanding of various difficult matters. The same thing pretty much happens in Tolkien's world, where one thing or another in the whole context will help clarify something else within the world.

BIGeyedBUG makes a good point about the power of the nazgul, and the witch king specifically being dependent on certain factors. When he faces Gandalf at the gate of minas tirith, the witch king says 'this is my hour'. does that mean that it was not the witch king's 'hour' atop weathertop? the nazgul seem to be strengthened by two things: being gathered together, and having the will of sauron behind them. perhaps their willingness to engage in battle is dependent on these two things.

furthermore, there are countless examples in tolkien of evil creatures being driven off by the mere presence of a person or a weapon. not only is aragorn the heir of elendil, he also has with him the shards of narsil.

Envoyé par Cutholen

Whether you find it satisfying is of course up to you. For the record, however, I have always found it satisfying. I find Tolkien's Nazgul to be convincing creatures of menace and power ...

That's interesting, especially in light of your opinion on the movie versions, which I share. Originally I thought the Ringwraiths were among the most menacing creations in literature, myself. But as I reread LotR over and over, as well as background materials like "The Hunt for the Ring", I found that opinion not replaced, but mixed with another: they sure seem to do a bit of hapless bumbling. YMMV, obviously.

Another view:

Why did Sauron 'fear' Aragorn acquiring the ring of power? Aragorn was assumed to be very 'powerful of will' and would have contested Sauron's influence for a very long time (or so we might believe from the 'fear' explanation). In the meantime, Aragorn could amass armies to go against Sauron, and the longer the ring was kept away from its true master, the greater the chance it could become 'lost' again.

The explanation about the events at weathertop don't completely satisfy me either, but I can't come up with a better explanation that would tie-in perfectly with the following events of LoTR than the one Tolkien invented.

I also tend to think that Bombadil would never have been influenced by the ring, and the misgivings of Elrond were actually based on his belief that Bombadil might absent-mindedly 'lose' the ring at some point. It's better PR, however, to say that the ring would be the downfall, not Tom's lack of interest.

I also tend to think, the combination of Frodo's "words of power" and Aragorn's wrath with fire as a weapon served to unnerve the WK for a brief time. Perhaps the WK regretted his retreat almost immediately, but couldn't find a 'good' chance at ambushing the fellowship again until the fords.

Envoyé par BIGeyedBUG

That's interesting, especially in light of your opinion on the movie versions, which I share. Originally I thought the Ringwraiths were among the most menacing creations in literature, myself. But as I reread LotR over and over, as well as background materials like "The Hunt for the Ring", I found that opinion not replaced, but mixed with another: they sure seem to do a bit of hapless bumbling. YMMV, obviously.

A funny way to put it, "hapless bumbling". Ha, that's hilarious!

I think this haplessness is due to their living in a different dimension than the rest of the normal world. That would make it difficult to function well if they are required to interact with normal people and do normal things like finding small objects. Not that they're bumbling (though that's funny to imagine), but that they can't operate very well that way. Be kinda like me if I took off my glasses, and wrapped a my fat head in a fairly thick gauze, then went around trying to do normal things like drive around or sort my mail.

On the other hand, if they're allowed to function as they normally would, and attack and do whatever they normally would do, then they're not at all bumbling or hapless, but they become in fact the most deadly servants of the Enemy, as we're told they are.

Envoyé par aleczander

I also tend to think that Bombadil would never have been influenced by the ring, and the misgivings of Elrond were actually based on his belief that Bombadil might absent-mindedly 'lose' the ring at some point. It's better PR, however, to say that the ring would be the downfall, not Tom's lack of interest.

I agree. Bombadil was not capable of being influenced by the Ring. He and it were just too alien from each other. Not only that, but I'm inclined to think that if Bombadil chose, he could have become more powerful than Sauron with his Ring, and therefore would have had no use for such a device. Yet that greater power would not have been used in any sort of conventional military manner, meaning that Sauron would have been able to overwhelm his land with orcs, trolls, and nazgul (and himself with his Ring, of course), and so eventually one or more zerg-rushes would have made it through. I do imagine he could have done things like Elrond and Gandalf did with the Bruinen river if they tried to cross it. And he possibly could have called upon Ents, or the trees and maybe even the land, to attack or defend (more likely to defend, as any sort of offense seems foreign to his mind). And so being purely offensive, he would eventually be overwhelmed, and if not killed, then forced out, and he'd forever be a harried opponent. And thus, he'd not be a good guardian of such a device as the Ring. If nothing else, Sauron would not have much to fear from Bombadil, as he'd only have to contain him, or just leave him be, and he'd be no real threat.

Envoyé par aleczander

I also tend to think, the combination of Frodo's "words of power" and Aragorn's wrath with fire as a weapon served to unnerve the WK for a brief time. Perhaps the WK regretted his retreat almost immediately, but couldn't find a 'good' chance at ambushing the fellowship again until the fords.

I finally went back and re-read that part, and I think you're right. It appears to have been the combination of Frodo's words and Aragorn's attack that more than anything distracted the WK. He then stepped back, so to speak, and immediately lost that opportunity to grab the Ring. So he wasn't scared off or forced off, but momentarily thrown off balance, if you will.

Envoyé par jimmyboy131

I finally went back and re-read that part, and I think you're right. It appears to have been the combination of Frodo's words and Aragorn's attack that more than anything distracted the WK. He then stepped back, so to speak, and immediately lost that opportunity to grab the Ring. So he wasn't scared off or forced off, but momentarily thrown off balance, if you will.

I think that is a very good way of putting it, that he was "momentarily thrown of balance".

I do not think there is any doubt that had Aragorn not been there, or not resisted, that he would have seized the ring at that time. Nor do I think it is plausible that he believed that he could not overcome the resistance if he had tried. So I think he made a decision to withdraw as a tactical ploy in the face of unexpected resistance. Thinking that he had done enough to secure the ring in any event, he felt no need to test just how strong the unexpected resistance might be.

One thing that strikes me in reading the various encounters with Nazgul is just how close Frodo was to disaster. He was a few yards away from meeting a Nazgul in Hobbiton before he set out, and had he set out a day later, of the Gaffer been better informed, he and the Ring would have been taken to Mordor. Twice in the Shire, he was moments away from discovery, leaving the road just in time to avoid disaster. He missed a Nazgul on Farmer Maggot's lane by less than an hour ("not long a while back"), and at the ferry by ony a few minutes.

In Bree, had Aragorn not heard their conversation on the road outside, he would not have followed them to the Inn, and they would have been lost. Likewise had they not trusted him.

At Weathertop, had four of the Nazgul not been chasing after Gandalf, all would have been lost. Had Glorfindel not chased them of, the Nazgul would have held the last bridge, and again he would have been captured. Had the Nazgul preceded Glorfindel as he doubled back, they would have found the Hobbits tracks first, and found the Ring.

Even at the last, Frodo was mesmerised by the Witch King, and would have been lost had he not been on an Elvish horse that obeyed its Elvish master rather than its rider. He passed across the face of the nearest Nazgul pursuer, so had his horse been a yard slower, or the Nazgul's a yard faster (or those Nazgul arrived a minute earlier) he would have been captured. And had he not been resistant enough to the morgul would, so that he only lost consiousness after crossing the Bruinen, again he would have been captured.

And, of course, had the Witch King pressed his attack on Weathertop, the Ring would have returned to Mordor.

So baldly presented, it strains credulity that Frodo was not captured. But as Tolkien writes it, it does not. As Tolkien writes it, I think you can see (or at least, he intended us to see) the workings of fate. The working of fate is constantly present in Frodo's journey, whether in the appearance of Gollum as a guide, or in the end as an adversary, the passage of Mordor, or in the choices of Master Samwise.

"It is no laughing matter," said Gandalf. "Not for you. It was the strangest event in the whole history of the Ring so far: Bilbo's arrival just at that time, and putting his hand on it, blindly, in the dark."
...
"Behind that there is something else at work, beyond any design of the Ring-maker. I can put it no plainer than by saying that Bilbo was meant to find the Ring, and not by its maker. In which case you were also meant to have it. And that may be an encouraging thought."

(LotR pp 54-55)

It was no doubt a mistake, from the Witch King's perspective, not to press his attack on Weathertop. In the end, it cost his master everything when the Ring was destroyed. But just as Frodo's narrow escapes in the Shire may be attributed to fate, perhaps the Witch Kings mistake was a fatefull mistake, in every sense of the word.

Envoyé par Cutholen

One thing that strikes me in reading the various encounters with Nazgul is just how close Frodo was to disaster.

I think all the exceptional-ness (?) of all the events is what makes it a tale worth remembering and telling. Hence, that's why we have it.

Envoyé par Cutholen

It was no doubt a mistake, from the Witch King's perspective, not to press his attack on Weathertop. In the end, it cost his master everything when the Ring was destroyed. But just as Frodo's narrow escapes in the Shire may be attributed to fate, perhaps the Witch Kings mistake was a fatefull mistake, in every sense of the word.

He made at least two fatal mistakes: one, what you just pointed out. Two, he was arrogant during his fight against Merry and Eowyn. Had he not been so flippant (for lack of a better word) he would have killed Eowyn, and then Merry, and Merry's Westernesse-damage blade would never have touched him. (I wonder what its speed and DPS stats are...?) It then makes for some mind-boggling to imagine what would happen after that. Would Aragorn and Eomer and Gandalf and Company have been able to withstand him? It's quite probable Gandalf the White could have withstood him, even destroyed him (old seer's ramblings aside). But how? What would his blade do? What about Gandalf's "magic"? The WK was a flippin' bad-to-the-bone sorcerer, probably on par with Gandalf. What about Anduril? Aragorn said that every blade that pierces the WK is destroyed, but if Anduril stabs him, would it also kill him? And what then would happen to either Aragorn or Gandalf? Probably Gandalf would be relatively unharmed, but Aragorn was not a resurrected wizard. Would that blow also kill or seriously wound him? Eowyn and Merry (and Faramir, who got hit by a morgul dart) would have died if not for Aragorn. Hmm...who knows...

We had a discussion on this very point a few months back in this forum. I had expressed the same incredulity that JimmyBoy has that the WK could have failed to simply seize Frodo on the spot. I recognize that the WK believed Frodo would succumb to the Morgul wound in short order. I understand that Aragorn was there wielding flame. I understand that Frodo called upon Elbereth. He also brandished a "Westernesse-make" blade, which caused the nazgul some hesitation (and Tolkien emphasizes this point in one of his letters).

Nevertheless, all the WK had to do was reach out his hand and take the Ring and the entire war would be won in that instant. I do like the idea that the WK may have been concerned that one of the lesser nazgul might have been destroyed if they stand and fight - but frankly why does the WK care if he can have the Ring in his hand and be on his way back to his master? It really makes no sense to me without more.

By withdrawing, the WK risks unforseen events intervening. For example, why isn't the WK concerned that this unknown warrior (Strider) will take the Ring from a weakening Frodo and claim it for his own? Wouldn't that have put the WK on a much worse footing than at any point in the pursuit of Frodo from the Shire? What if Elrond sends out a company of elves from Rivendell to try and meet Frodo on the road? So much can go wrong if the WK withdraws - as so happened in fact.

By contrast, all the WK has to do is grab Frodo and run. Even better, just chop Frodo's hand off and take the Ring. Game over.

However, I do have a working theory that satisfies my own dismay on this point. I believe that the WK was unable to act directly against a Ring-bearer that retained his will and actively opposed him (as Frodo did by calling on Elbereth and brandishing a sword). I believe that it was probably very difficult for the WK even to stab Frodo as he did. Had Frodo's courage broken on Weathertop, then perhaps the WK could have simply taken him then and there. But Frodo opposed him, so the WK was forced to an alternative of waiting for the Morgul wound to break Frodo's will. Thus, by the time they reached the Ford of Bruinen, Frodo was too weak to oppose the WK. He tries to muster the same conviction, but he is too far gone and the words are ineffective. He raises his sword, but the WK breaks it with a gesture (I think that bit happens - for some reason I can't recall for certain). Thus, in my view, the WK had no choice but to play the waiting game because he was unable to act directly against a Ring-bearer with the strength of will to oppose him. Even though Frodo was not the master of the Ring, the WK was nevertheless its slave. I think that the WK was no doubt surprised at the resistance from the halfling in the face of the WK's terror. But I don't think that simply being thrown off balance properly explains his failure to seize the Ring. It is my belief that it must have been exceedingly difficult for any of the nazgul to take direct physical action against a defiant bearer of the Ring.

That's a very elegant theory, Vilnas, and the only pleasing one I can ever recall seeing.

Envoyé par BIGeyedBUG

That's a very elegant theory, Vilnas, and the only pleasing one I can ever recall seeing.

Why thank you.

Envoyé par Vilnas

Why thank you.

You're welcome. And the more I think about it, the more I like it. Not least because it also adds dimension to later events, like the relative retirement of the Ringwraiths from the hunt for the ring after the Fellowship left Lorien.

Vilnas jogged my memory, and I looked up the following in the Reader's Companion, citing Tolkien in "Marquette MSS 4/2/36 (The Hunt for the Ring)":

...there were probably several reasons, the least to be expected being the most important, namely that [the Witch-king] was actually dismayed. He had been shaken by the fire of Gandalf, and began to perceive that the mission on which Sauron had sent him was one of great peril to himself both by the way, and on his return to his Master (if unsuccessful); and he had been doing ill, so far achieving nothing save rousing the power of the Wise and directing them to the Ring. But above all the timid and terrified Bearer had resisted him, had dared to strike at him with an enchanted sword made by his own enemies long ago for his destruction. Narrowly it had missed him. How he had come by it--save in the Barrows of Cardolan. Then he was in some way mightier than the B[arrow]-wight; and he called on Elbereth, a name of terror to the Nazgul. He was then in League with the High Elves of the Havens.

Escaping a wound that would have been as deadly to him as the Mordor-knife to Frodo (as was proved at the end), he withdrew and hid for a while, out of doubt and fear both of Aragorn and especially of Frodo.

[Italics are Tolkien's, brackets above are those of the Companion's authors.]

There's much of interest here. I'll note that this doesn't support Vilnas' theory exactlly, though it certainly doesn't contradict it either. If Tolkien had really emphasized the difficulty of the Witch-king acting "directly against a Ring-bearer that retained his will" and courage, I'd be pleased as punch. The idea is still something that can be read into it, at least.

Thank you for digging that up. I think it does not support my theory particularly (which is premised on the relationship of the nazgul to the One Ring), but rather the notion that the WK was acting out of doubt and hesitation. For my part, I just could never get my mind around the concept that a "power" of the WK's stature would have faltered from mere doubt when the Ring was literally within his grasp. Consider that the WK stabbed Frodo AFTER Frodo called upon Elbereth and brandished his enchanted blade. If the WK was prepared to close with Frodo at that point (despite his sudden doubt), I struggle to see how he could then fail to conclude the matter once and for all given that he actually had Frodo under his knife and the Ring there for the taking. For me, there has to be an additional factor at play, which I have described above. I realize that my explanation is most likely not Tolkien's own (or else I think he would have given it in the letters that he wrote on the subject), but it is an answer that satisfies me. In my view, in some cases there is simply insufficient data in the texts to resolve a question definitively, and in those instances we are left with a certain amount of conjecture. We strive to ground that conjecture in the lore that is available to us and to avoid mere "invention" to the greatest extent possible. Hopefully my theory is sufficiently within the lore, even if it is not the explanation that Professor Tolkien had articulated for himself (assuming that he had even entertained and definitively resolved the question in his own mind).

ofcourse, why did the WK then draw back and stab at Frodo with a morgul-blade? To weaken his will.
Talking about Tom Bombadil pushed me away from this idea, but remembering that the WK was a servant of the ring (although indirectly) it brought the point back to me.. so to speak

I love this forum!

And thankyou Vilnas for a very elegant theory, and BigEyedBug for a brilliant quote.

However, from my perspective, Vilnas' theory is overstated. It cannot have been impossible for the Nazgul to act against the Ring Bearer's opposition. If it were, then Sauron would not have sent the Nazgul to collect it, for he surely would have known of this weakness.

On the other hand, it is made clear in Unfinished Tales that if one of the powerfull of Middle Earth, in this case Saruman, took possession of the One Ring and contested the will of Sauron, then he could have commanded the Nazgul and they would have obeyed. It follows that in the hands of the powerfull (Saruman or Gandalf, or possibly Aragorn), Vilnas' theory would be correct. But in the hands of an ordinary mortal, the Ring was likely to dominate their will, and hence make it impossible to oppose the Witch King. Thus while the Ring was in such hands, it was safe for Sauron to send the Nazgul as his agents to collect it.

From this perspective, that Frodo resisted him would have confounded the Witch King; not because it prevented him from acting against Frodo, but because it would have made it more difficult, and because where he expected no powerfull opposition, he found two sources of it. So Vilnas would be partly correct, and Tolkien's comments exactly correct.

However, I would still maintain that none of these would have been sufficient to force the Witch Kings withdrawal had he not still had a reasonable expectation of securing the Ring in the end. He did not withdraw until after he has stabbed the Ring Bearer, that is, until after he had ensured the Ring bearer would become a slave to his will in fairly short order. But there he was confounded by Hobbits unusual resistance to such things.

This theory, by the way, explains why he did not resume the assault later that night, or in the next few days. He was waiting for the Morgul wound to prevent Frodo resisting him before attempting to get the Ring again.

Kudos again to Vilnas for a great theory, and to BigEyedBug for a fantastic quote.

Thank you for your kind words. I think we are saying essentially the same thing. I do not believe it would have been completely impossible for WK to act against the Ring bearer in any way, but rather (given the relationship of the nazgul to the Ring) that it would have been extremely difficult for him to seize the Ring from him (or seize his person) for so long as the bearer claimed the Ring and actively opposed the nazgul by exercise of will. I believe that Sauron (and the nazgul) assumed that the terror of the Nine would overwhelm the ring-Bearer (particularly the Baggins that was described to him by Gollum) and that it would be a fairly simple task (once the Baggins was located) to collect the Ring and bear the halfling back to Mordor shrieking all the way. However, I also believe that the nazgul were given tools by their master to deal with the possibility that terror alone would be insufficient to accomplish their ends (and not just in connection with this mission). After all, the functioning of the Morgul-blade on Frodo was not an accident - it was by the design of its maker/wielder. Nor was Aragorn baffled by the significance of the chipped Morgul blade. Rather, he understood practically in an instant what was happening. Thus, it must have been that although the nazgul expected to rely on their terror to overwhelm the Ring-bearer, they were also equipped with backup tools to break the Ring-bearer's will in case he was able to summon the courage to oppose them.

Envoyé par Cutholen

However, from my perspective, Vilnas' theory is overstated. It cannot have been impossible for the Nazgul to act against the Ring Bearer's opposition.

Not "impossible", just difficult, particularly in the face of other factors. And you're right, the theory doesn't work if it's just any "opposition"--it has to be courageous and defiant opposition.

If it were, then Sauron would not have sent the Nazgul to collect it, for he surely would have known of this weakness.

A couple of things. First, arrogance. It seems plausible that Sauron would not have suspected such a weakness could come into play against anything less than one of the Wise, as anyone else in his view--particularly a humble Hobbit--should be overwhelmed by the terror of the Nine, or dominated by the Ring in their presence, or both. Second, what better options did Sauron have? Not only were the Nazgul his most powerful servants, they were the only ones who could be absolutely trusted to bring the prize back if they laid hands on it.

From this perspective, that Frodo resisted him would have confounded the Witch King; not because it prevented him from acting against Frodo, but because it would have made it more difficult, and because where he expected no powerfull opposition, he found two sources of it. So Vilnas would be partly correct, and Tolkien's comments exactly correct.

However, I would still maintain that none of these would have been sufficient to force the Witch Kings withdrawal had he not still had a reasonable expectation of securing the Ring in the end. He did not withdraw until after he has stabbed the Ring Bearer, that is, until after he had ensured the Ring bearer would become a slave to his will in fairly short order. But there he was confounded by Hobbits unusual resistance to such things.

I want to be clear that this all sounds very reasonable. It just doesn't quite work - for me - without the Ring-bearer's defiance being the predominant factor.

I think Vilnas is not far off the mark...the unknown is how much 'servility' you could expect on Weathertop vs. Mount Doom.

Letter 246 ..... discussing the situation after Frodo claimed the Ring instead of throwing it into the fire.

"Sauron sent at once the Ringwraiths. They were naturally fully instructed, and in no way deceived as to the real lordship of the Ring......But the situation was now different to that under Weathertop, where Frodo acted merely in fear and wished only to use (in vain) the Ring's subsidiary power of conferring invisibility. He had grown since then. Would they have been immune from its power if he claimed it as an instrument of command and domination ?

Not wholly. I do not think they could have attacked him with violence, nor laid hold upon him or taken him captive; they would have obeyed or feigned to obey any minor commands of his that did not interfere with their errand - laid upon them by Sauron, who still through their nine rings (which he held) had primary control of their wills. That errand was to remove Frodo from the Crack. Once he lost the power or opportunity to destroy the Ring, the end could not be in doubt..."

Continuing on the subject of the Nazgul's likely actions...

"I think they would have shown 'servility'. They would have greeted Frodo as 'Lord'. With fair speeches they would have induced him to leave the Sammath Naur - for instance 'to look upon his new kingdom, and behold afar with his new sight the abode of power that he must now claim and turn to his own purposes'. Once outside the chamber while he was gazing some of them would have destroyed the entrance."

If Frodo refused to go to Barad-dur......

"they would have simply have waited. Until Sauron himself came. In any case a confrontation of Frodo and Sauron would soon have taken place, if the Ring was still intact. Its result was inevitable."

Then it goes on to talk about how no mortal, not even Aragorn, could win a similar contest and that Gandalf would be the only one who might be expected to master him. Very interesting read

Thanks for digging that one up Tuor!

Fascinating thread. I think that Vilnas and Cutholen have some fine points and I do not wish to disagree. The power of the bearer over the Nazgul is an important factor as well as the surprise when the plan did not go as intended. The ring likely could not fly much farther so to speak and the likelihood of success was high, so high that the workings of fate seem to have been the only reason that it did not.

Not yet mentioned is the fact that there had been a battle shortly before at Weathertop with Gandalf the Grey (as opposed to the White that the WK seems pleased to challenge) where he drove them off. That the ring bearer was not with him may have been the deciding factor for their retreat but you get the impression that direct confrontation was not their strong suit. It was not their master's either. When confronted with the might of Numenor he surrendered and preferred to work their corruption from within for example. He also did little during the breaking of Angband, so much so that he survived where just about all the other of servants of Melkor did not. The two times he fought openly he was baddly marred, onced against the Hound of the Noldor in the form of a Wolf and the second time at the battle that ended the second age. So if the Ringwraiths rely on poison and are gutless in the face of the unbowed and righteous it is only a reflection of their master. Let us not forget that they were marred by a lack of will and avarice in the first place and thusly seduced in the first place.

Another concept I would like to discuss is the waxing and waining of Sauron's power. If they are so tied to him then their might must be a function of his in some way. By stating that it is his hour on the fields before Minas Tirith the WK may have been saying that the Eye had reached its zenith (pre-capture of the ring) and with it his might as well. At the time of the incident at Weathertop his power was still growing and while much stronger than it had been was perhaps not enough. After all, the Nazgul had not been seen since the fall of Agmar. All the time that he had played the part of the Necromancer they did not sally forth and did not even when the Council drove him from DG (as far as I know). They certainly seem to grow in stature as the war progresses, taking fell beasts for mounts and such. So perhaps at the time of Weathertop they lacked power and confidence in the face of unexpected events.

As readers we view the Nazgul through the lens of those that know the end of the story and at the end they are very powerful indeed but to imply that they were static in that sense may be inappropriate. While they had grown powerful near the consummation of Sauron's plan, at the beginning, like our heroes, they were somewhat less so.

P.S. I remember hearing that Sauron had sent the riders and started the war sooner than he had hoped, that he had a desire to further establish himself before starting, but that events forced his hand. I can't remember where this information would have come from, however. It is stated in the Silmarilion that Melkor started his breakout from Angband too soon, resulting in the Elves being able to hold him off after terrible losses and ultimately buying time for Earandil's parley with the Valar. Perhaps this speaks of a lack of patience being a fault of evil. Regardless, if he had been able to wait perhaps his riders would have been stronger. Then again maybe there is a distinction between his waxing power being not some ontological growth but rather simply the numbers of Orcs available. Then again, it is said that after the drowning of Numenor and the loss of his body it took long for him to regain his strength, which I take to mean his personal strength, as seems to be the case for the loss of the ring, which held so much of himself. So I tend to think that the end of the third age was the time of the end of his convalescence. How a Mair goes about convalescing is beyond me. Perhaps it was three thousand years of chicken shadow soup.

Envoyé par bonas1999

Not yet mentioned is the fact that there had been a battle shortly before at Weathertop with Gandalf the Grey (as opposed to the White that the WK seems pleased to challenge) where he drove them off. That the ring bearer was not with him may have been the deciding factor for their retreat but you get the impression that direct confrontation was not their strong suit. It was not their master's either.

Good point - although he was still only Gandalf the Grey, he was no slouch in facing the servants of the Enemy, as the Balrog fight shows. After a hard fight with Gandalf they may not have been quite ready for another showdown so soon, but with the Ring so close, they had to act immediately.

Fascinating thread indeed.

bonas, your PS got me looking: I remembered your thoughts about maybe "starting before he was ready" also.

Envoyé par bonas1999

P.S. I remember hearing that Sauron had sent the riders and started the war sooner than he had hoped, that he had a desire to further establish himself before starting, but that events forced his hand. I can't remember where this information would have come from, however. It is stated in the Silmarilion that Melkor started his breakout from Angband too soon, resulting in the Elves being able to hold him off after terrible losses and ultimately buying time for Earandil's parley with the Valar. Perhaps this speaks of a lack of patience being a fault of evil. Regardless, if he had been able to wait perhaps his riders would have been stronger.

From The Return Of The King:

'You forget to whom you speak,' said Aragorn sternly, and his eyes glinted. 'Did I not openly proclaim my title before the doors of Edoras? What do you fear that I should say to him? Nay, Gimli,' he said in a softer voice, and the grimness left his face, and he looked like one who has laboured in sleepless pain for many nights. 'Nay, my friends, I and the lawful master of the Stone, and I had both the right and the strength to use it, or so I judged. The right cannot be doubted. The strength was enough – barely.'
He drew a deep breath. 'It was a bitter struggle, and the weariness is slow to pass. I spoke no word to him, and in the end I wrenched the Stone to my own will. That alone he will find hard to endure. And he beheld me. Yes, Master Gimli, he saw me, but in other guise than you see me here. If that will aid him, then I have done ill. But I do not think so. To know that I lived and walked the earth was a blow to his heart, I deem; for he knew it not till now. The eyes in Orthanc did not see through the armour of Théoden; but Sauron has not forgotten Isildur and the sword of Elendil. Now in the very hour of his great designs the heir of Isildur and the Sword are revealed; for I showed the blade re-forged to him. He is not so mighty yet that he is above fear; nay, doubt ever gnaws him.'
'But he wields great dominion, nonetheless,' said Gimli; 'and now he will strike more swiftly.'
'The hasty stroke goes oft astray,' said Aragorn. 'We must press our Enemy, and no longer wait upon him for the move. See my friends, when I had mastered the Stone, I learned many things. A grave peril I saw coming unlooked-for upon Gondor from the South that will draw off great strength from the defence of Minas Tirith. If it is not countered swiftly, I deem that the City will be lost ere ten days be gone.'

Another thought I wanted to pipe up with: Could it be that the wraiths waned in power as they moved away from Sauron? Is their power directly related to their proximity to him?

We have a lot of mechanics in LOTRO that tie in to proximity - some necessary for battle, and some tied in to Turbine's interpretation of the lore.

Proximity may indeed be a factor, just like 'time' is, but I don't own the Letters and my other books are locked up.

I love this thread too!

I think Frodo was in a catch 22 situation if he had chosen to become the master of the ring then he could have compelled the nazgul to do almost anything, not neccessarily because they were beholden to it, he threatened to use the power of the ring to compell Golum to jump into the fires of Mount Doom and if Galadriel had taken up the ring she would have compelled all people to love her, however using the ring in this way condems them to all sorts of problems I need not go into.

It does raise the question of what Saurons hold over the Nazgul is if he doesnt personally hold onto his ring, as I see it they are compelled to serve the wearer of the one ring not necessarilly the maker of the ring. Its my impression that once wraiths they surrended their rings to Sauron and he keeps them in a box under his pillow thus if their bodies are destroyed their rings are not all in the sand at the bottom of the Bruinen or does this infer that the body of the ancient king along with his ring is interred in a secret place similar to a Lich and his canopic jar and the nazgul is a spirit and not an animated corpse (if so why cant they walk through walls?). If the ringwraiths surrendered their rings to Sauron why were they not lost in the destruction of Barad Dur at the end of the second age or sent to the bottom of the sea along with Numenor when Saurons body perished there.

If there is no body and it is enough for a nazguls ring to retain the memorey of its former wearer what would happen if Sauron handed these rings out to new servents, surely over 5000 years better candidates would have come along who could have been tricked into taking a ring. The One ring in theorey would have produced multiple wraiths, Golum, Bilbo, Frodo and Sam, giving the ring to a new person did not cancel the previous wearers probability of becomming a wraith, therefore it seems odd the the Nazguls rings were only worn by one person when it would seem that Sauron could have had multiple wraiths from each ring.

Someone who claims the Ring might have ability to compel the Nazgul to do his bidding for a time but the Ring is compelled to return to it's true master. Eventually the Ring wielder would be betrayed. As for the wraiths, they interacted with our physical world so they must have had some physical form, it would have existed in both realms however, the real and the wraith world and apparently was more potent in it's own element. I think of it as a transformation into a new form that we cannot perceive but, none the less, it is there.

Making an army of Nazgul - interesting idea unless each ring could only affect one being at a time (except for the Ruling Ring). Pass the Ring on and, like Bilbo, time and normal mortal destiny eventually take over.

Bonas, I have to disagree with your analysis.

Sauron regained a bodily form, and began to grow in power from about 1100 of the Third Age. However, by 2063 he was still sufficiently weak that Gandalf by himself could drive him from Dol Guldur. This was something of a strategic withdrawal, he did not want his identity discovered, so he may have been stronger than Gandalf at that point. But he was not sufficiently stronger that he could be confident of capturing or slaying Gandalf. If he had been, that would have been the easier way to protect his identity. Bear in mind that by fleeing, Sauron gave up for four hundred years (till 2460) his search for the Ring at Gladden fields, the reason for his occupying a fortress in Southern Mirkwood (as it was later called). (As it happened, the Ring was found by Deagol just 3 years after Sauron's return, so had it not been for his retreat, Sauron my well have found the ring first.) Even in 2850, Gandalf was able to enter Dol Guldur and leave without being captured, suggesting Sauron was still much weaker than he would be towards the end of the Third age.

Yet despite the relative weakness of Sauron, durring this period the Witch King was able to defeat the three kingdoms of divided Arnor. Even at the end, when Earnur brought from Gondor an army so large that room could not be found for its ships in the Elvish harbours, and when they had won the day against Angmar's forces, the Witch King alone was unopposable by any of Gondor's forces, with only Earnur having the courage to stand against him, though his horse didn't:

But it is said that when all was lost sudenly the Witch-king himself appeared, black-robed and black-masked upon a black horse. Fear fell upon all who beheld him; but he singled out the captain of Gondor for the fullness of his hatred, and with a terrible cry he rode straight upon him. Earnur would have withstood him; but his horse could not endure that onset, and it swerved and bore him far away before he could master it.

The the Witch-king laughed, and none that heard it ever forgot the horror of that cry. But Glorfindel rode up then on his white horse, and in the midst of his laughter the Witch-king turned to flight and passed into the shadows.

(LotR Appendix A p 1026)

I will make these points:

a) Though fear was his primary weapon (Monty Python flashback), the Witch-king was undoubtedly very strong at this point of time (TA 1975);

b) But at that same time, Sauron was relatively weak;

c) And as Sauron was at Dol Guldur and the battle took place between Fornost and Evendim, he was also distant; and finally,

d) He was obviously not afraid of a direct confrontation with Earnur, heir to the throne of Gondor, even though Earnur was in the midst of his victoriuos army, and the Witch-king was alone.

These points conjointly refute your claims. At the very least, they demonstrate that any effect you are pointing is weak.

I think a far more relevant factor in the Witch-king's power are Pellenor fields was the smoke from Orodruin. We know that the Nazgul's strength varied depending on how light or dark it was. In the day, nine Nazgul fled before Gandalf's wrath near Amon Sul, but at night, in a strong defensive position, he barely held them of till dawn. In the dark under the smoke of Orodruin, in which was forged the One Ring; I suspect the Witch-king would have been particularly powerfull.

As to your post script, you raise an interesting point. However, Morgoth is said to have begun the Dagor Bragollach early out of over confidence in that he underestimated the strength of the Elves and their allies. As Boraxe indicates, Sauron struck early out of fear.

Sauron knew that Aragorn had been in the same company as the ring bearer. He knew that Aragorn, now revealed as Elendil's heir, carrying Elendil's blade reforged had some how been connected with the complete crushing of Saruman - a victory so complete that he had wrested from Saruman the Palantir (he would not have known Wormtongues part in that). He knew that Aragorn was sufficiently powerful to rest from him control of the Palantir, hence more powerfull than Denethor (and possibly Saruman).

In fear then, he tried to crush the forces of Gondor before Aragorn, weilding the One Ring, could command them.

Envoyé par bonas1999

Not yet mentioned is the fact that there had been a battle shortly before at Weathertop with Gandalf the Grey...

See the Tolkien quote in post 62.

Let us not forget that they were marred by a lack of will and avarice in the first place and thusly seduced in the first place.

I think this is an unsafe assumption to make. Remember that such strong and generous persons as Gandalf, Galadriel, and Aragorn all feared the seduction of the Ring.

By stating that it is his hour on the fields before Minas Tirith the WK may have been saying that the Eye had reached its zenith (pre-capture of the ring) and with it his might as well. At the time of the incident at Weathertop his power was still growing and while much stronger than it had been was perhaps not enough. After all, the Nazgul had not been seen since the fall of Agmar. All the time that he had played the part of the Necromancer they did not sally forth and did not even when the Council drove him from DG (as far as I know). They certainly seem to grow in stature as the war progresses

I get that feeling too.

P.S. I remember hearing that Sauron had sent the riders and started the war sooner than he had hoped, that he had a desire to further establish himself before starting, but that events forced his hand.

I'm not 100% sure what you mean, but as far as starting the war goes, see Cutholen's post. But if you're also referring to the much earlier mission of the Nazgul to find the Ring, the only thing I can think of that fits is Sauron's discovery that Gollum had been captured and taken to Thranduil's realm. (See "The Hunt for the Ring" in UT.) It does seem to me that he had little choice at that point. I might actually characterize that problem as too much patience rather than too little though.

Thank you for your replies. My first line of reasoning pre-drafting, was one about proximity, but then the strength of Agmar seemed to dispel that notion. Now, as for what Cutholen points out the Witch King and Sauron did seem to lie at the opposite end of the spectrum with thier roles reversed, so in large part I gladly concede the point, yet it does raise the issue as to if their respective might was reversed and Sauron lacked the ring, why did the bond persist; a matter upon which I don't think I can venture an opinion. But I likely overstate it. I am just trying to fill up the corners as a Hobbit might say, or rather subject an unnecessary theory, given the depth of the conversation, to scrutiny and see what errors may be found and if we covered it all :-)

I full heartedly believe what is said about their respective powers in dark and in light, I might add. I am not sure if I can fully agree that the Witch King at Pellenor fields was emboldened by the shadow of ash from mount doom exclusively (which I don't think you are trying to say), but I am sure it did not hurt. I am not sure if his individual assault on the King of Gondor was not more out of rage than of true might and I am not sure that his bravado with Gandalf at Pellenor Fields was more than just having lots of friends to back him up but for these things at this point I fear have to diverge, or at least am tempted to, into personal preference rather than literary critique or research.

Lastly, as we have discussed the respective might of Gandalf vis-a-vis the Witch King and touched upon a comparison to Sauron himself, I thought I might lend a seed for a future thread on the ontology of Miar, and their respective powers. I have often wondered, if Olorin and Sauron were of the same category or class, why could Gandalf not personally deal with him, or at least the five Istari together do so right at the start. I am sure there are distinctions within the class and perhaps the Valar allowed the Istari to go back with the caveat of having a restrictor plate built in and I know that there is a lot of text and timeline suggesting the impossibility of such an event (it would after all reduce the publishing costs considerably at the expense of sales). I know it is not much different than a five year old's "who would win" type question. Still, Gandalf can barely fight off the ring wraiths in, what, October but a short time later he is an even match for just one, even after he has been set back new and improved. The wraiths power can wax and wain, just as their master's, and while that may occur independently of each other, they sill seem to me weaker at Weathertop.
I apologize for this rambling discorse, I'll try to get organized in the morning :-)

Being quite happy to diverge into preference rather than literary critique ,I will follow up on these points.

First, it is quite clear that the Nazgul were enslaved to their rings, which where in turn enslaved to the one ring. As lord of that Ring, I beleive that would give Sauron the power to command the Nazgul while no-one else controlled the one ring. Should somebody else take control of the ring, and wrest it to his use; then they would have controlled the Nazgul. Of course, the one Ring was powerfull in itself, so only the very powerfull could have seized full control of it (ie, Saruman, Gandalf, Galadriel, and posibly Elrond or Cirdan; but not Aragorn). Tolkien says as much in the letter quoted above.

I would suggest, and this is entirely conjectural, that Sauron allowed the Nazgul to wear their rings while he possessed the One Ring; for his control was complete, and in wearing the rings, the Nazgul would have become even more dominated by them if possible. After he returned as the Necromancer, however, he retained their rings to assure his control of them. Based on the letter quoted above, this would have ensured him overriding control over the Nazgul should the One Ring be claimed and weilded by any but the very mightiest.

As to the attack on the heir to the throne of Gondor, I don't think it was just rage. Had he in fact slain Earnur, then then king of Gondor would have been without an heir, and their would have been no clear claimant to the throne. In a similar circumstance in the past, Gondor descended into ruinous civil war (the Kinstrife) which resulted in one province being permanently lost, and later coming over to Sauron's side as the Corsair's of Umbar. So there was purpose to the attack, worth the risk until Glorfindel arrived on the scene.

In fact, the attack did pay of; for just 25 years later, the Nazgul launched their attack on Minas Ithil, capturing it in TA 2002. In TA 2043, when Earnur became King, the Witch-king, now rulling in Minas Morgul, challenged him to a duel, citing his "cowardice" near Fornost. Earnur listened to advisors, and refused. But when the Witch-king renewed the challenge seven years later, Earnur proved himself a fool and accepted. He road with a small party to the gates of Minas Morgul, never to be seen again. He had no heir, and the reign of the Stewards commenced. Bravado, or fury, or calculated attack, the Witch-king's onslaught near Fornost led almost directly to the ending of the line of kings.

As regards a direct challenge by the Istari against Sauron, it is made clear that they were explicitly prohibited from doing so by the Valar before being sent on their mission.

Emissaries they were from the Lords of the West, the Valar, who still took counsel for the governance of Middle-earth, and when the shadow of Sauron began first to stir again took this means of resisting him. For with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but clad in bodies as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the fears and pains and weariness of earth, able to hunger and thirst and be slain; though because of their noble spirits they did not die, and aged only by the cares and labours of many long years. And this the Valar did, desiring to amend the errors of old, [b]especially that that they had attempted to guard and seclude the Eldar by their own might and glory fully revealed[b], whereas now their emissaries were forbiden to reveal themselves in forms of majesty, or to seek to rule the wills of Men or Elves by open display of power, but coming in shapes weak and humble were bidden to advise and persuade Men and Elves to good, and to seek to unite in love and understanding all those whom Sauron, should he come again, would endeavour to dominate and corrupt.

(Unfinished Tales p 503, my emphasis)

Envoyé par Cutholen

I would suggest, and this is entirely conjectural, that Sauron allowed the Nazgul to wear their rings while he possessed the One Ring; for his control was complete, and in wearing the rings, the Nazgul would have become even more dominated by them if possible. After he returned as the Necromancer, however, he retained their rings to assure his control of them. Based on the letter quoted above, this would have ensured him overriding control over the Nazgul should the One Ring be claimed and weilded by any but the very mightiest.

On your theorey, if Sauron alowed them to wear there rings while he held the one ring then they would be possibly be wearing them when Isuldur cut off his finger, perhaps they then hid for 1000 or so years waiting for their master to stir again and then handed their rings back to him, however if they physically wore the rings they would loose them later at Bruinen when they lost their other equipment, (I presume the Nazgul at the fall of Barad Dur would have done similar things to when the ring was finally destroyed and disintergated thus dropping any rings they physically wore). If Sauron retained their rings then presumably they would have been on his "corpse" with the great ring.
Barad Dur collapsed save its foundations at this time so they were unlikely to have been secreted in that structure (same with any Dwarven rings he had recovered by this stage) which leaves the possibilities of a secret cache somewhere in Middle Earth (Mordor?) or a servant who was trusted to look after these relics for 1000 years.