Can Elves kill Ringwraiths?

[Angmar_the_Horrible]

@Burrahobbit:

Sorry, but I just can't take your posts for
serious anymore. I think you see this
discussion as a joke and you are far from
making qualified statements...

"How many Nazgul were there? How many Nazgul
attacked Minas Tirith?"

What nonsense are those questions! There are
eight, of course, and the Witch-King! If one
of them was killed earlier, Tolkien would
have said in the book.

And what is the crap about extra- Nazgul??
Nonsense!

[*Varda*]

Think of the one that Legolas shot down! If that creature was in any way alive, it certainly was not going to live through a fall from the sky. How did it come back to assail the fields of Pelinnor? It had to float back to Mordor, and there take another body and another creature to ride.

Legolas never shot a Nazgul. I'm pretty sure it was only the creature he rode. Anyway, Eowyn killed the WitchKing when the One Ring was still around.

Angmar_The_Horrible - Don't start criticising other people. At least make an intelligent point with it.

[Tirned Tinnu]

Yes, it is true that Eowyn destroyed the Witch-King, and Legolas only shot down the creature that one of the Nazgul rode. If you read my post, you would see that I was talking more about their need to return to Mordor to be rehorsed, not that they were killed outright. As it is said in the books, you cannot kill something that is not alive and not dead. I pose the question to you again, how do you think they returned to Mordor? Why did it take them time to reinvest themselves in new steeds?
You will also rememeber that it took each Nazgul quite a long time to get back to their former jobs.

It was because they were so close to the destruction of the One Ring that the others did not return again. I believe that even the Witch-King might have returned if the Ring had not been destroyed so soon after his "death".

My argument is on the futility of "killing" something that will just come right back at you. would you waste precious time zapping the undead, instead of retreating from them?
Or convincing them into not coming back, if you could? This is my statement: The Elves were wise to hold back. In doing so they saved lives that would have been spent in futility.

[ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: Tirned Tinnu ]

[burrahobbit]

My argument is on the futility of "killing" something that will just come right back at you. would you waste precious time zapping the undead, instead of retreating from them?
Or convincing them into not coming back, if you could? This is my statement: The Elves were wise to hold back. In doing so they saved lives that would have been spent in futility.

Firstly I'd like te repeat my earlier question, where did Tolkien say that?

Secondly I'd like to remind you of Sauron. Huan fought Sauron and he died. Numenor fought Sauron and he eventually died. The last alliance fought Sauron and he died. Judging from that it looks like all of the wise people ever in the whole world would waste their time in the futility of killing something that would just come back.

[*Varda*]

Elves could kill ringwraiths. The prophecy said that man would not kill the Witch-King, not could not. In any case, the Witch-King does not count for all nine ringwraiths.

As for how the Wraiths got back to Mordor, they probably DID walk. Think logically. How else would they? They were only unhorsed, they were still embodied, so their spirit would not just FLOAT back to Mordor.

Not that that point bears ANY relation to the actual question.

[Ransom]

Few short questions:

1) On a similar tangent, how can you kill something that's already dead?

2) How do you define death in the case of a Nazgul?

3) Did Gandalf and Elrond 'kill' the Nazguls at Rivendell?

[burrahobbit]

1: They weren't dead for most of the story.

2: Death is when a fea leaves a hroa. Nazgul still have hroar, even if they are "thin and stretched."

3: No.

[Angmar_the_Horrible]

Elves CANNOT kill Ringwraiths, it is said
nowhere in Tolkiens work. Or, if it is, show
me a passage where it is CLEARLY said, not
just passages where you can work out EVERY-
THING.

And for me, the words "will not be killed by
a man" also included male elves, even male
dwarves. I don't think it is limited to the
race of men.

And I still think that the elves are overrated.

[*Varda*]

This thread is absolutely pointless.

The prophecy saying no man would kill the Witch-King only applies to the Witch-King. Not the other 8 Ringwraiths. And the prophecy said would not, not could not.

And I don't know where all this crap about elven blades is coming from.

Also, Angmar_The_Horrible, you said no elves could kill the Witch-King. So you get no female elves then?

[burrahobbit]

Elves CANNOT kill Ringwraiths, it is said nowhere in Tolkiens work.

So you are admitting that you have no support for your argument? I think i can live with that.

[Angmar_the_Horrible]

@*Varda*:

I totally agree with you. This discussion
IS pointless and will never come to any
solution.
As for the female elves: I was speaking of
the elves in general. And I do think, that a
female elve in place of Eowyn would have been
able do kill the Witch-King.

@burrahobbit: Neither do you. *yawn*

[*Varda*]

@Angmar_The_Horrible

At least burrahobbit didn't contradict himself. You don't have a leg to stand on in this argument, there's not a single shred of evidence to back up your assumption.

Burrahobbit and I win on logic alone.

Oh, and it would be nice if people would actually READ the posts, instead of repeating the same mindless drivel about elven blades and women.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

People, please keep this discussion on the subject matter, not on personal ones, or it will be a prime candidate for closure!

[Angmar_the_Horrible]

@*Varda*:

I think I know at least as much about
Tolkiens work as you do and do have a leg
in this discussion.
But anyway, I return to the discussions on
my favourite forum - which just offered me
moderator-status.

[burrahobbit]

"And here in Rivendell there live still some of his chief foes: the Elven-wise, lords of the Eldar from beyond the furthest seas. They do not
fear the Ringwraiths, for those who have dwelt in the Blessed Realm live at once in both worlds, and against both the Seen and the Unseen they have great
power.'" -- Book II, chapter 1

Oh no, Angmar_the_Horrible, I've got no support at all! You're so right, how do I even manage to get up in the morning!

[burrahobbit]

@Angmar:

Yay.

[Tirned Tinnu]

Hmm, Burrahobbit! You bring up an interesting question.
Yes, what about Luthien? What about the battles against Sauron and his fell spirits? After so many legendary battles in the name of the Sils could the Elves see themselves past it?
Could it be that the Elves we get to know in the LOTR are not as driven as they? I think this is a good thread, that has worth. I see it as a way to get to know LOTRs Elves that much better!

[ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: Tirned Tinnu ]

[Thenamir]

First of all, let me clarify what this post is. I had a long discussion of this thread with burrahobbit on the chat this afternoon. I really had not much interest in the question, but the debate was intriguing, and so I voiced an opinion, and burra and I spent a spirited hour discussing, and this post is the distillation of what I think based on that discussion.

The question, "Can an elf kill a Nazgul" is deceiving, becuase Nazgul exist, as burra has said, in two "planes" of existence.

I think it is possible for an elf, or anyone else with sufficient strength, skill and bravery could "disembody" a Nazgul -- render the physical form so badly damaged that the wraith could no longer function in it. That is one kind of "death", and I say that this kind of death is the kind that *anyone* could deal out. In this sense, I agree with burra. This is the kind of thing that happened at the Fords:

"the waves took the form of great white horses with shining white riders; and there were many rolling and grinding boulders"

This killed the horses outright, and rendered the Nazgul body-less, but not unable to re-body and return. That would seem to indicate that you cannot destroy a Ringwraith until and unless you sever the connection between it and its master. Their bodies could no longer sustain their spirits, being held and enslaved by Sauron by his power.

"'Eight out of the Nine are accounted for at least,' said Gandalf. 'It is rash to be too sure, yet I think that we may hope now that the Ringwraiths were scattered, and have been obliged to return as best they could to their Master in Mordor, empty and shapeless."

On the other hand, when *I* think of "killing" a Nazgul, I have in mind a more permanent arrangement, like what happened to the Witch-King after Merry and Eowyn came after him:

"a cry went up into the shuddering air, and faded to a shrill wailing, passing with the wind, a voice bodiless and thin that died, and was swallowed up, and was never heard again in that age of this world."

To accomplish this, you apparantly need special weaponry:

"So passed the sword of the Barrow-downs, work of Westernesse. But glad would he have been to know its fate who wrought it slowly long ago in the North-kingdom when the Dúnedain were young, and chief among their foes was the dread realm of Angmar and its sorcerer king. No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will."

The key words here being "no other blade", that is one specially made and imbued with the particular power for this one purpose. You can grind the body of a Wraith to powder, but as long as the power of Sauron and the Ring endured, the spirits of the kings of men could always be called back to Mordor, and be given new bodies.

"`I thought they were all destroyed in the flood,' said Merry.
'You cannot destroy Ringwraiths like that,' said Gandalf. `The power of their master is in them, and they stand or fall by him."

I'd like to think that is a pretty strong case. Could Glorfindel have disembodied a Nazgul? I think the answer to that is "certainly" -- if that was on pay-per-view, I'd be on the phone to Tom "Bookmaker" Bombadil with 50 gold coins on Glorfindel. But power was not in Glorfindel to defeat Sauron himself, or to destroy the ring outright, therefore he could not sever the connection between the wraiths and their master.

I'd also like to think that if the elves could take out the Nazgul anytime they wanted, as Burrahobbit asserts, they would have done so. Since these are fictitious characters anyway, to get all hot and bothered about what might or might not be possible in a world that existed truly only in the imagination of one man smacks of *someone* needing a life. But if you insist on trying to argue the point, at least do it from the texts he's written, and let's get on to more important questions -- like who would win the ultimate grudge match: Arwen versus Eowyn, mud-wrestling for the hand of Aragorn!

[burrahobbit]

An Elf that had been to Valinor, such as Glorfindel, exists on two planes just as the Nazgul. I think that he would hurt the nazgul on both planes if he hurt it at all. A regular elf like Legolas or any man would just be on one plane, and so would need a special weapon to to lasting damage. Merry stabbed the Witch-king with his barrow blade, which functioned as a sort of anti-morgul blade to bring WK out of the world of the unseen (as opposed to the morgul blade bringing you into the world of the unseen), which allowed Eowyn to kill him fully. Glorfindel wouldnt need WK to be pulled anywhere, they both exist in the same places already.

[Orome]

Its the whole thing where Frodo sees the Nazgul differently with the ring on. in the second plane, where they are tall and powerful kings of old, their "true selves" they can be destroyed i believe, like burra said.

and if Angmar comes back i hope he is a bit less heavy handed

[Dior]

Hey, Burrahobbit. Where in Tolkien's works does it state that an elf who has been Mandos'ed lives in two planes? I'm not contradicting you, just wondering.

[burrahobbit]

"And here in Rivendell there live still some of his chief foes: the Elven-wise, lords of the Eldar from beyond the furthest seas. They do not
fear the Ringwraiths, for those who have dwelt in the Blessed Realm live at once in both worlds, and against both the Seen and the Unseen they have great
power.'" -- Book II, chapter 1

[Thenamir]

Repeating the same quote over and over does not bolster your case, Burra.

As I said, could Glorfindel drive off a Nazgul? Yes. Could he "hurt" one? Certainly. Could he do what Merry and Eowyn did with their respective weapons? There is no evidence to support that.

The fact that he has "great power" over both the seen and the unseen does not mean "absolute power", and does not negate Gandalf's statement that the ringwraiths stand or fall with their master. The knives of Westernesse are probably the only exception mentioned in all JRRT's works. If I picked a fistfight with Burra, his youth and strength would be pitted against my "perceived" age and skill. Each would have "great power" over the other in some ways, and yet the outcome still be in doubt. The ringwraith obviously has great power in "both planes" as well -- it is not a foregone conclusion that an elf will always defeat a nazgul one-on-one.

Another point. Burra makes great hay of both the elves and the Nazgul existing on "two planes" at once. But if elves go to Mandos' halls at death, and what happens to men after death is unspoken in JRRT's magnum opus, then how can one have any certainty that the "unseen plane" of the elves is the same as the "unseen plane" of men? Tolkien never said what happened to men in the afterlife, at least not in the major books (I will admit to a vast yawning ignorance of the HoME tomes...) .

It matters little to me one way or another. *My* real point in wasting all this bandwidth is to demonstrate (1) that no one except the man himself knows the score on this one, and (2) that where the text is ambiguous, or at least open to multiple interpretations, we should be charitable to those who hold differing opinions.

Way too much effort is being expended on this question, which is, as I noted with different verbiage in my last post, a futile exercise, a moot point, a non-issue, not worth getting worked up about.

Geez.

[ October 01, 2002: Message edited by: Thenamir ]

[burrahobbit]

I know, Thenamir, I was replying to Dior.

[Dior]

Thanks Burrahobbit.

I hadn't noticed that, though I do hold the view that it would be impossible for someone such as Glorfindel to truly kill a Ringwraith just because of the good, two-planed aura his spirit gave off, since there would be no other way without a sword of significant anti-wraithing power in his control, as has been proved previously.

[Dior]

This topic does bring up the question though, that if elves were able to kill Balrogs, than what is it that would prevent them from killing Wraiths, other than the power of the ring, which didn't prevent Merry/Eowyn from killing one. Seeing as the Balrogs were maiar, and couldn't be killed without their opposition dying, does bring the differences in perspective though. Eh, well I guess you can scrap this post than, unless someone else has something profound to say of this.

[Nar]

It's an interesting point, Dior.

if elves were able to kill Balrogs, than what is it that would prevent them from killing Wraiths

It seems to me that if the RIGHT elf (not just any elf-- a Glorfindel-Echthelion kind of elf) could kill a Balrog even at the cost of his own life, then the right elf could kill a Nazgul. One difference would be how much fading had gone on with the elf in question. Glorfindel would be a good candidate, as he has an excellent resume and obvious courage, had been spiffed up and possibly recharged in Valinor (re: fading) and is blessed with one of the author's favorite names. There's difference in degree of power (Nazgul vs. Balrog, etc.), then there's differences in the nature of the enemy, which have been ably explained on this thread already (presence on the other side and so forth).

Seeing as the Balrogs were maiar, and couldn't be killed without their opposition dying,

I'm not sure if you meant that as a sort of rule or not-- I don't think that's a rule (perhaps you don't either). If we were talking about a RPG or a computer game, the author can be supposed to be working from nice clean rules we're expected to figure out: then, the fact that no character kills a Balrog without losing his own life WOULD suggest a rule about Balrogs vs. other. Since we're talking about a story, 'real world, fictional time' (not an exact quote, but it's more or less from JRRT), 3 cases, or even 30, don't suggest a rule but a likelihood. If I only know of three cases where the giant rhinobeast of Bohemia was killed, and all three hunters (or killers, depending on your perspective) died themselves, I would not conclude that it wasn't possible to kill one and survive. On the other hand, if I went out hunting them, I would definitely want Glorfindel along.

[ October 04, 2002: Message edited by: Nar ]

[Dior]

Yes, my point was not that everyone who could fight and kill a Balrog would they themselves die, I was just showing that there must've been some large catastrophic happening every time a Balrog was killed, and how that differed from the event in which the Witch King was killed.