The Witch King's death
 

When Eowyn stabbed the witch king in his head, did that obliterate him completely? Was it no longer possible for the witch king to regenerate his body like Sauron could when his body was destroyed? I believe that this is the case, but I do not understand why a sword blow should sever the witch king's connection with his ring and being drowned couldn't do the job. Also my second question is assuming the witch king was not actually holding his ring, could Sauron give the witch king's ring to another man, and ensnare him also?

[ January 07, 2002: Message edited by: Thingol ]

The key here is the blow that Merry delivers. His sword, made long ago by the Dunedain, broke the spell that protected him, and allowed Eowyn's blow to finish him off (at least, to finish him effectively, he cannot be killed in the normal sense)

I've always assumed that the rings could only work for one person at a time. Anyway, if Sauron could give the rings to as many mortals as he wanted there would be an army of Nazgul riding about Middle Earth not just nine.

only Nine were made for Mortal Men doomed to die

When I read the first post a thought crossed my mind. Why was the witch-king protected from living men, or wathever it was, and not just immortal?

It's a prophecy, see? He isn't technically invulnerable to living men. A prophecy is a prediction of the future.

i know this, but the nazgul wherent wearing the rings! sauron kept them, right? (or am i totaly wrong...?) why couldnt ha have ensnared more men? or had the powers of the rings somehow been transmitted to the nazguls?

But then, if he could make the one ring, which is of course much more powerful than the nine, why could he not make more like the nine? He has Orodruin, the hottest fire in ME and the knowledge, and I'm sure he could find somebody to take the rings.

Sauron did infuse the One Ring with a part of his own spirit - or used a portion of his power in its creation - so that it would have been very draining for him to create even more.

As for the rings of the Nazgûl, I tihnk that whether Sauron kept them, or the Nazgûl were wearing them, they would still only work for one person at a time, like the One. Even though former ringbearers were drawn to it, they couldn't control it. Sauron had some influence over it even when somebody else had it because the One Ring was a part of Sauron.

So its Merry's barrow weight sword that breaks the spell and allows Eowyn to finish him off?

If Merry's sword broke the spells that held the Witch-king's sinews together, does that mean that the enslavement of the Nazgûl was not accomplished only by the wearing of their Rings? Did Sauron, a great necromancer, also have to use more magic (other than the power of the One) to create his fell servants?

Maybe, by Sauron wearing the rings of the Nazgul, they were kept partially in the real world instead of becoming a wrath altogether.

Just a seperate thought. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

Gandalf said the following about the Nazgul: "The power of their master is within them, and they will stand or fall with him." (from memory, not 100% accurate)
This leads me to believe that the Nazgul could only be killed by destroying their rings. This is also supported by the fact that the Nazgul were crushed in the flood at the Fords of Bruinen, but still they got back to Mordor and from there to battle again.

No "spell of protection" on the Witch-King is ever mentioned anywhere, but some consider it a good theory for Witch-King's apparent invulnerability.
But actually, Witch-King wasn't invulnerable in any way. As was said earlier in this thread, the prophecy "no Man shall kill him" was nothing more but a prophecy. A prediction of the future, not a spell (why would Glorfindel cast an invulnerability-spell on the Witch-King anyway?).

And the prophecy speaks of a Man . Hobbits are not men (and perhaps not even Eowyn, being a woman?), so that may have been the trigger, if the prophecy was indeed true.

Glorfindel only made a prophecy he didn't cast any spell. I don't think the prophecy meant the race of Man, but the gender. The fact that she killed him with Merry's help proves that man in the prophecy was gender related not race related.

[ January 11, 2002: Message edited by: Elrian ]

the witch king couldn't be killed by "physical means" but im pretty sure that he could have been killed by a wizard, or some being with magical attributes. the elves made the sword that merry used to injure him. the elves have some magical aspects about them, resulting in the fact that Merry had no magic, just a hand that could stab him. which would also lead me to believe that maybe the prophesy meant that he couldn't be killed by anything that was weilded by a mortal. the sword wasn't made by a mortal person, but the holder was, this might have been why Merry was heart.

The sword Merry used came out of Numenor (Westernesse)and was made by Men.

The blade that Merry used was most likely made especially for slaying threats from Angmar, the Witch-king's former realm.
But who is HE? That's my question. If 'he' is the Witch-king, then all that means is "his invisible (unseen) tendons were severed, and he could no longer walk (bend them to his will). But if 'he' is Sauron, the situation instantly becomes even more complex. Perhaps, if 'he' is Sauron, Merry's sword severed Sauron's connection with the Witch-king: a connection that could have conceivably provided the Witch-king's 'invulnerability', which gave Éowyn the opportunity to slay him, because it DOES mention flesh in the quote.
The prophecy? I think it could go both ways. Éowyn, while being of the race of Men, was not a man, per se. Merry, being a hobbit, was also, techinacally, not a man.

Merry had a sword of Westernesse and it was wound with spells. Their is much debate over Merry or Eowyn killed the Witch King. One probably shouldnt boggle over this because there are no clear answers. Though in my opinion, I believe the spells of Merry's sword allowed Eowyn to strike a fatal blow(though the sword shattered into different pieces). They both killed the witch-king,though Eowyn struck the "final blow." Also remember the quote from glorfindel. "Not by the hand of Man shall he fall." I believe it is speaking of race (hobbits arent men). Some people believe it means gender, but i think it would say "not by the hand of men" or "a man."
Thanks.

Mae govannan Tar-Elendil. Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo. (A star shines on the hour of our meeting.)

Welcome to the Downs. Hope you have fun and post often.

Concerning the death of the Witch-King and Glorfindel's prophecy, I have this to say. Could it be consider that it was not because Merry was a hobbit nor because Eowyn was a woman, for she was of the race of Men, but that what the Witch-King said was true.

He stated Eowyn went to that battle looking for death. She was a walking dead man, or should I say woman. Merry was despairing of life also, for his Captian, King Theoden, had been slain in the battle.

Each Nazgul held his/her respective ring which caused them in turn to be enslaved to the one-ring and its' maker - or wearer if their will was strong enough to wrest them away from Sauron. Simple as that I reckon. I agree with the Merry's sword undoing the spell and Eowyne's sword doing the killing theory - they made a good team!

The prohpecy refers to man the gender. That is why the Witch King is all cocky untill Eowyn reveals herself to be a woman. This makes him pause, as he knows that the prophecy does not apply here. I doubt that Merry's sword did anything other than hurt the witch-kings knee, and thus distracting him so Eowyn could finish him off. If Merry's blow had killed him, then Eowyn would not have experienced any ill affects from stabbing him (the black breath I think it is called). Chances are, her sword would be as good as his, as she comes from a royal house, and Gondor probably would have given Rohan some heirlooms such as old swords.

Since you guys are talking about the race instead of the gender, consider this: why was the witch king so confident going against Gandalf? Gandalf is not of the race of men. Gandalf seems to imply that if the prophecy is true (a key condition since the prophecy was made by someone weaker than gandalf... glorfindel) that gandalf can't kill him. Therefore, I would assume that it did not imply the race of men, but the gender. Also, I think the prophecy did not mean that a male could not kill him... just that by luck or fate it would not work out that way.