Galadriel VS The witch- king

[The 1,000 Reader]

Originally Posted by obloquy

If cars were your enemy and you knew that they 1) could and 2) would smash you at their first opportunity you would be foolish not to fear them. Your example is not analogous at all.

A nazgul could and would kill you at their first opportunity as well. You don't have to be greatly afraid of cars to be killed by one. A car lover (no fear at all) could get run over. The nazgul did not rely on fear alone.

Originally Posted by obloquy

When Gandalf spoke of Glorfindel not fearing the Nine, he wasn't talking about the fear that they project as a offensive tool. He was referring to how Glorfindel "rode openly against them", and how they fled from him in his wrath. The Eldar did not fear the Nazgul because the Nazgul had no power over them; and, evidently, the roles of Scary and Scaredy-cat were reversed when an Elf-lord got involved. As I said above, Not fearing an enemy who has the power to kill you is foolish: the Eldar were not foolish.

Please provide the said quote of them fleeing from his wrath. The only time I recall Glorfindel meeting all nine Nazgul was when they were chasing Frodo and were "power-limited" (so to speak) at the time. Also, the nazgul could still kill the Eldar. Glorfindel was not foolish, yet with any situation that could be fatal he was wary. Glorfindel was powerful, but I believe he'd be quite hindered if a sword was stuck in his stomach.

Originally Posted by obloquy

What Eowyn did not fear was death. She did not confront the Witch-King because she fearlessly felt she could defeat him; she merely stood her ground and defended her king in the face of certain death. Since she was only human, I promise you she felt that fear that came with the Nazgul. But she stood up to it.

Eowyn did not fear death, however the book shows no specific detail of a fear of the Witch-King. To defy him as she did and even threaten him if he harmed Theoden shows a very, very remote fear at best, one which would not grant "great power." Eowyn, in her bravery, still had her shield shattered and her arm broken in one blow.

Originally Posted by obloquy

All of the qualifications you people require really get tiresome. Tolkien frequently spoke of the "greatest" of this or that group without restricting his definition to one or two "skills" ("bow-hunting skills, 'numchuck' skills, computer hacking skills..."). Tolkien doesn't say that when he referred to Galadriel as one of the greatest two Noldor it was because of her wisdom. That is an assumption that you made, likely because of some prejudice towards women. Somehow I doubt that you put some silly qualifications on Feanor's greatness (which is parallel to Galadriel's); surely he was not only wise but also mighty in battle.

I have no prejudice towards women, and do not accuse me of having one. The great actions of Galadriel were those of governing and wisdom. While she may have been in the ranks of the athletes of Valinor, the elves of Middle-Earth diminished over time, so it is likely Galadriel wasn't as high as she used to be by the Third Age. Also, seeing as how Middle-Earth had part of the sexist roles of old England, Galadriel likely wasn't encouraged by those around her to be an expert at combat and to roam the land and climb mountains and whatnot. That could add to physical diminishing as well.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Really? Can I see some textual support for that? Because it would sure be ironic if the mightiest being in Middle-earth was scared of going toe-to-toe with the laughably overconfident Witch-King. What I see in the book is a daddy telling a neighborhood bully to get lost--and he obeys.

Originally Posted by J.R.R. Tolkien

"Then, Mithrandir, you had a foe to match you," said Denethor. "For myself, I have long known who is the chief captain of the hosts of the Dark Tower. Is this all that you have returned to say? Or can it be that you have withdrawn because you are overmatched?" Pippin trembled, fearing that Gandalf would be stung to sudden wrath, but his fear was needless. "It might be so," Gandalf answered softly.

Gandalf's attitude against having to go up against the Witch-King was not one of "Don't worry, it's fine." His attitude was more along the lines of "I don't know if he's better than me or not, but I'm the only one who stands a chance." Gandalf stood up against the Witch-King at the gate because he was brave and he was the only person in the whole city who stood any chance of beating the Morgul Lord. The Witch-King showed no fear of Gandalf, and Gandalf seemed to not have any exploitable fear of the Witch-King. In all regards, the book portrayed them as equals, one good and one evil, at that moment. The reason the Witch-King left was not that he was afraid of Gandalf, he left because Rohan arrived and he had an army to save. Gandalf wanted to chase after the Witch-King because he thought he was the only one who stood a chance at beating the Witch-King. He wasn't certain, but he had to try regardless. (Gandalf's statement of returning to "guard the hurt men that can yet be healed" was in regards to Denethor asking if Gandalf only returned to bring bad news.

Originally Posted by obloquy

WROOOONNNGGGGGGGGG again. Produce a quote that says that Sauron was the greatest of the Maiar (yeah, that's Maiar).

The quote is everywhere and I'm surprised that you haven't heard of it. From the smallest sites to the Encyclopedia of Arda, it's quoted that Sauron is the greatest everywhere. If I wasn't about to go out to dinner, I would provide the quote myself. Also, don't rag on me for saying Maia instead of Maiar. Maia is a well-accepted abbreviation for Maiar, and if I'm not mistaken the word Maia was in the writings of Tolkien himself.

Originally Posted by obloquy

At which point in Morgoth's existence it is no longer a surprising feat.

All the more proof showing that Morgoth's rank did not grant him a large advantage. In a fight, ranks can quickly become no more than fancy names.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by The 1,000 Reader

Also, don't rag on me for saying Maia instead of Maiar. Maia is a well-accepted abbreviation for Maiar, and if I'm not mistaken the word Maia was in the writings of Tolkien himself.

Obloquy isn't quibbling about the word Maia itself- he's quibbling about your usage of it.

Maiar is the plural.

Maia is the singular.

In the form you used it, it should have been the plural: Maiar.

'tis foolishly pedantic, I agree, to the point of rudeness, but technically correct.

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by The 1,000 Reader

A nazgul could and would kill you at their first opportunity as well. You don't have to be greatly afraid of cars to be killed by one. A car lover (no fear at all) could get run over.

I understand your analogy, but it's not apt. You're saying that someone can get killed by something they do not fear. That is true. The reason people do not fear cars, however, is because a car is not your enemy and would not kill you of its own volition. (A more appropriate parallel to a car is a sword: it does not inspire fear of itself, but when wielded as a weapon by an enemy, it can effect that enemy's harmful will.) The Nazgul would take every available opportunity to kill Eldar if they had the power to do so; therefore, if the Nazgul had any power over the Eldar, the Eldar would be foolish not to fear them.

The nazgul did not rely on fear alone.

Once again, we're not talking about that supernatural fear that the Nazgul used to wither weak-spirited enemies. We're talking about any rational fear at all that might come from confronting a more powerful enemy than oneself. Glorfindel is not counted among the greatest of the Eldar, yet he slew a Balrog himself and openly confronted all Nine Ulairi. Not only that, but many years earlier, this same Glorfindel had been the one to put the Witch-King to flight after his kingdom had been utterly destroyed.

I'm not claiming that the Eldar were invincible. My claim is that in any confrontation involving Eldar and Nazgul, without the additional factor of overwhelming armies, the Eldar would not be threatened. In fact, the Nazgul would not be likely to stick around.

Please provide the said quote of them fleeing from his wrath. The only time I recall Glorfindel meeting all nine Nazgul was when they were chasing Frodo and were "power-limited" (so to speak) at the time.

Power limited? How so? It's true that the Nazgul were focused on Frodo and their mission, and you're right that they do have killing power, and Glorfindel was not invincible. Gandalf tells us that even Glorfindel and Aragorn, on foot could not withstand all nine Nazgul. Then he says:

Caught between fire and water, and seeing an Elf-lord revealed in his wrath, they were dismayed, and their horses were stricken with madness.

Also:

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.

and

Appendix A: (after the Witch-King's army had been defeated and the Witch-King had rode against Earnur, whose horse fled from him in fear, which cracked up the W-K) 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.

Apart from all of this, we know that the Eldar are inherently greater beings than even the Numenoreans. The Nazgul are merely Men.

Glorfindel was not foolish, yet with any situation that could be fatal he was wary.

I'll grant that; it furthers my point: Glorfindel was not wary when confronting the Witch-King in the account from Appendix A, so we can assume he had nothing to fear.

Glorfindel was powerful, but I believe he'd be quite hindered if a sword was stuck in his stomach.

Sure, if he started a fight that way. The whole point is that the Nazgul could not get the sword there in the first place. The Balrog wasn't able to, and we know for certain that they're mightier than any Nazgul.

Eowyn did not fear death, however the book shows no specific detail of a fear of the Witch-King. To defy him as she did and even threaten him if he harmed Theoden shows a very, very remote fear at best, one which would not grant "great power." Eowyn, in her bravery, still had her shield shattered and her arm broken in one blow.

The fear the Nazgul projected was supernatural, and Eowyn was not immune to it.

I have no prejudice towards women, and do not accuse me of having one. The great actions of Galadriel were those of governing and wisdom.

You're expressing your prejudice right there. As I pointed out before, Galadriel's greatness was never qualified the way you have qualified it. She was greatest of the Noldor, and among the three greatest of the Eldar. There's no reason, apart from some preconceived notion of her position or abilities, to assume that she was not a mighty warrior in the manner of all other "great" Noldor.

The rest of your comments, particularly about gender roles in England, are bogus and not even worth responding to.

Gandalf's attitude against having to go up against the Witch-King was not one of "Don't worry, it's fine."

He was confident enough to be dishing out orders. The Witch-King obeyed.

His attitude was more along the lines of "I don't know if he's better than me or not, but I'm the only one who stands a chance."

I'll be looking forward to your textual support for this.

The Witch-King showed no fear of Gandalf, and Gandalf seemed to not have any exploitable fear of the Witch-King.

Except that when Gandalf told him to bug off, he bugged off.

In all regards, the book portrayed them as equals, one good and one evil, at that moment.

No it didn't.

The reason the Witch-King left was not that he was afraid of Gandalf, he left because Rohan arrived and he had an army to save.

Gandalf was the backbone of the Alliance. If he had fallen, it would have been a crippling blow. If the Witch-King had any chance of defeating Gandalf on the spot, he would have taken it. Gandalf slew the Balrog while observing limitations on his power. The Balrog was immensely more powerful than the Witch-King. Gandalf came back from that battle enhanced. Do you follow? Here's another line of reasoning: Sauron and Gandalf were approximately equal (look elsewhere on the forum for my discussion of this topic), Sauron was far superior to his Lieutenant, therefore Gandalf was obviously mightier than the Witch-King.

The quote is everywhere and I'm surprised that you haven't heard of it. From the smallest sites to the Encyclopedia of Arda, it's quoted that Sauron is the greatest everywhere.

Show me.

If I wasn't about to go out to dinner, I would provide the quote myself.

Haha! Nice.

Also, don't rag on me for saying Maia instead of Maiar. Maia is a well-accepted abbreviation for Maiar, and if I'm not mistaken the word Maia was in the writings of Tolkien himself.

Once again, Nice. Abbreviation? Like "cat" is an abbreviation of "cats."

[Boromir88]

The quote is everywhere and I'm surprised that you haven't heard of it. From the smallest sites to the Encyclopedia of Arda, it's quoted that Sauron is the greatest everywhere.

Actually I can provide quotes to show that Sauron was not the mightiest of the Maiar:

Chief among the Maiar of Valinor whose names are remembered in the histories of the Elder Days are Ilmare, the handmaid of Varda, and Eonwe, the banner-bearer and herald of Manwe, whose might in arms is surpassed by none in Arda. But of all the Maiar Osse and Uinen are the best known to the Children of Iluvatar~Valaquenta: Of the Maiar

Osse and Melian could also be powerful candidates:

Melkor hated the Sea, for he could not subdue it. It is said that in the making of Arda he endeavoured to draw Osse to his allegiance promising to him all the realm and power of Ulmo, if he would serve him.~ibid

Melkor was unable to control the sea, so he tries to sway Osse to his side to wreak havoc.

All that is ever said is that "Sauron was the greatest of Melkor's servants" (Valaquenta and The Index). Where we are told that Eonwe was one of the greatest among the Maiar (The Index), so Eonwe certainly seems more powerful than Sauron. Osse and Melian there's nothing so straight forward and clear. Melian was used as a shield against Morgoth, which makes me think she was one of the mightiest. And Morgoth, in order to control the sea tries to persuade Osse to join him.

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Actually I can provide quotes to show that Sauron was not the mightiest of the Maiar:


Osse and Melian could also be powerful candidates:

Melkor was unable to control the sea, so he tries to sway Osse to his side to wreak havoc.

All that is ever said is that "Sauron was the greatest of Melkor's servants" (Valaquenta and The Index). Where we are told that Eonwe was one of the greatest among the Maiar (The Index), so Eonwe certainly seems more powerful than Sauron. Osse and Melian there's nothing so straight forward and clear. Melian was used as a shield against Morgoth, which makes me think she was one of the mightiest. And Morgoth, in order to control the sea tries to persuade Osse to join him.

Good points, Boromir88. Also, Arien openly defied Melkor in his primeval state and was probably one of the more powerful Maiarin spirits.

were getting a little bit off subject here!!

[The 1,000 Reader]

Originally Posted by obloquy

I understand your analogy, but it's not apt. You're saying that someone can get killed by something they do not fear. That is true. The reason people do not fear cars, however, is because a car is not your enemy and would not kill you of its own volition. (A more appropriate parallel to a car is a sword: it does not inspire fear of itself, but when wielded as a weapon by an enemy, it can effect that enemy's harmful will.) The Nazgul would take every available opportunity to kill Eldar if they had the power to do so; therefore, if the Nazgul had any power over the Eldar, the Eldar would be foolish not to fear them.

One does not need to be the master to be the victor. The Eldar could still die from a foe who had no apparent advantage. Just look at how the Balrog killed Glorfindel.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Glorfindel is not counted among the greatest of the Eldar, yet he slew a Balrog himself and openly confronted all Nine Ulairi. Not only that, but many years earlier, this same Glorfindel had been the one to put the Witch-King to flight after his kingdom had been utterly destroyed.

When Glorfindel met the Witch-King, Glorfindel had returned from the grave, and had apparently gained some extra power to boot. Besides, killing the king would be much harder if the Witch-King had to fight Glorfindel as well, and if he fought them both it could delay his escape, thus hindering any regroup at Minas Morgul. The Witch-King also wasn't as strong as he was at the Siege of Minas Tirith.

Originally Posted by obloquy

I'm not claiming that the Eldar were invincible. My claim is that in any confrontation involving Eldar and Nazgul, without the additional factor of overwhelming armies, the Eldar would not be threatened. In fact, the Nazgul would not be likely to stick around.

In the Glorfindel/Witch-King case, the overwhelming armies were on Glorfindel's side. An approaching army, a king of men, and additional troops shows that the Witch-King was outnumbered, not bested by Glorfindel.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Power limited? How so? It's true that the Nazgul were focused on Frodo and their mission, and you're right that they do have killing power, and Glorfindel was not invincible. Gandalf tells us that even Glorfindel and Aragorn, on foot could not withstand all nine Nazgul.

Seeing as how Gandalf the grey could hold off the nine till escape presented itself, and then later doubted he could defeat the sole Witch-King as Gandalf the White shows that the nazgul had gained more power since they last met.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Apart from all of this, we know that the Eldar are inherently greater beings than even the Numenoreans. The Nazgul are merely Men.

Men who had gained a great deal of power from a dark lord.

Originally Posted by obloquy

I'll grant that; it furthers my point: Glorfindel was not wary when confronting the Witch-King in the account from Appendix A, so we can assume he had nothing to fear.

He wasn't wary? Keeping your guard up, focusing on the enemy, etc. are signs of waryness in battle. The traditional stuff in every battle. If he wasn't wary, he'd not be using his head.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Sure, if he started a fight that way. The whole point is that the Nazgul could not get the sword there in the first place. The Balrog wasn't able to, and we know for certain that they're mightier than any Nazgul.

What I meant was if he was stabbed in the stomach, he wouldn't just keep on trucking perfectly fine. I was saying that the Eldar are not invincible.

Originally Posted by obloquy

The fear the Nazgul projected was supernatural, and Eowyn was not immune to it.

If the fear was supernatural, and Eowyn was certainly not weak-willed at the moment, then that would mean that the supernatural fear was not fear, but a spell. Since a spell is magic and not fear, and the nazgul were said to gain power from fear, then the fear was not a spell, and the Witch-King did not use a spell.

Originally Posted by obloquy

You're expressing your prejudice right there. As I pointed out before, Galadriel's greatness was never qualified the way you have qualified it. She was greatest of the Noldor, and among the three greatest of the Eldar. There's no reason, apart from some preconceived notion of her position or abilities, to assume that she was not a mighty warrior in the manner of all other "great" Noldor.

I am not being prejudiced, I am simply stating that the majority of things Galadriel did were as a leader and governor, like Denethor. It was said she was in great shape in her Valinor days, but the majority of her great acts were done through leadership and wisdom. She proved herself more as an effective leader. It's right there in the books. I'm stating the facts, not insulting a gender.

Originally Posted by obloquy

The rest of your comments, particularly about gender roles in England, are bogus and not even worth responding to.

Do you see any women in the armies of Gondor, Rohan, etc.? With the exception of Eowyn, all of the women in Tolkien's works were either royalty kept away from the front lines or healers. It's right there in the books.

Originally Posted by obloquy

He was confident enough to be dishing out orders. The Witch-King obeyed.

The Witch-King did not obey. He set his sword alight and was about to combat Gandalf when Rohan arrived.

Originally Posted by obloquy

I'll be looking forward to your textual support for this.

You did notice the paragraph straight from the book where Gandalf, when asked if the Witch-King could match/defeat him, answered "It might be so," grimly and softly, right?

Originally Posted by obloquy

Except that when Gandalf told him to bug off, he bugged off.

No, when Gandalf told him to bug off, he laughed and was about to fight Gandalf when Rohan arrived.

Originally Posted by obloquy

No it didn't.

Yes it did. The grim "It might be so," line from Gandalf, the Witch-King showing no fear of Gandalf, and a battle seconds from the first blows with no clear idea of who would win. Once again, Gandalf wasn't out there because he knew he would win, Gandalf was out there because he was the best bet, and even though Gandalf could lose, it was Gondor's best shot.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Gandalf was the backbone of the Alliance. If he had fallen, it would have been a crippling blow. If the Witch-King had any chance of defeating Gandalf on the spot, he would have taken it. Gandalf slew the Balrog while observing limitations on his power. The Balrog was immensely more powerful than the Witch-King. Gandalf came back from that battle enhanced. Do you follow? Here's another line of reasoning: Sauron and Gandalf were approximately equal (look elsewhere on the forum for my discussion of this topic), Sauron was far superior to his Lieutenant, therefore Gandalf was obviously mightier than the Witch-King.

Do you really think a battle of equals would be over in one second? If the Witch-King could have beaten Gandalf on the spot and vice-versa, they would have both attacked each other as soon as they could. Gandalf slew the Balrog, yes, but when "super-charged" as Gandalf the White, he had doubts about defeating the Witch-King. Also, it was mentioned in a letter (I believe it was a letter) that Gandalf had to "break the rules" on his power to combat the Balrog. Now, say if the Witch-King won the battle of equals at the gate, in the time passed his army would be lacking in large number and missing morale. By quickly moving to eliminate Rohan's leader, lowering enemy morale and raising the morale of his troops, he would be able to combat Gandalf later with Minas Tirith falling in the meanwhile, and there would be less enemy soldiers to deal with. Finally, Gandalf was not equal to Sauron. Before Gandalf went on the mission, he was afraid of Sauron's cunning and might. If he was flat-out afraid, then it's rather obvious that Gandalf feared Sauron because Sauron out-classed him. Also, if Sauron had gotten his ring back, and stopped being a crippled shadow, Gandalf would likely not defeat him in combat. The best bet Gandalf had of defeating Sauron was combating him with the ring in Gandalf's possession. Gandalf was powerful, yes, but he was not equal in might to Sauron, and he did not have an obvious might over the Witch-King.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Show me.

Originally Posted by Encyclopedia of Arda

Sauron was one of the mightiest (perhaps the mightiest) of the Maiar.

Originally Posted by Raynor

(Paraphrased) All of the sent Maiar were peers to Sauron.

If the Valar were sending the five best-suited maia, and one of them (Gandalf) could kill a Balrog, yet all five feared the crippled Sauron, then Sauron was packing a good deal of power.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Haha! Nice.

FYI, I was out at dinner, China Star to be exact.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Once again, Nice. Abbreviation? Like "cat" is an abbreviation of "cats."

In a world of a fictional elvish language, spirits we don't know much about, and half of the online Tolkien community using both forms interchangably for all references to the servants of the Valar, such a wording should not be worthy of disdain.

Now, to let this thread rest and prevent a flame war, do not attempt to reply to this. In the end, the victor of a battle between Galadriel and the Witch-King falls down to a war of opinions.

[Boromir88]

Men who had gained a great deal of power from a dark lord.~Reader

This is what is said about the Nazgul after receiving the Rings:

Men proved easier to ensnare. Those who used the Nine Rings became mighty in their day, kings, sorcerers, and warriors of old. They obtained glory and great wealth, yet it turned to their undoing~Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age

But, the point obloquy is making, doesn't matter if they became "mightier," they were still Men, just 'greater' men. They still did not hold a lot of power over the fearless, and as has been shown Gandalf and the Eldar had sent them away several times, becuase they did not fear them.

You did notice the paragraph straight from the book where Gandalf, when asked if the Witch-King could match/defeat him, answered "It might be so," grimly and softly, right?

I'm assuming you are referring to this:

' Then, Mithrandir, you had a foe to match you,' said Denethor. 'For myself, I have long known who is the chief captain of the hosts of the Dark Tower. Is this all that you have returned to say? Or can it be that you have withdrawn because you are overmatched?'
Pippin trembled, fearing that Gandalf would be stung to sudden wrath but his fear was needless. "It might be so," Gandalf answered softly. "But our trial of strength is not yet come. And if words spoken of old be true not by the hand of a man shall he fall, and hidden from the Wise is the doom that awaits him. However that may be, the Captain of Despair does not press forward, yet. He rules rather according to the wisdom that you have just spoken, from the rear, driving his slaves in madness no before.
'Nay, I came rather to guard the hurt men that can yet be healed; for the Rammas is breached far and wide, and soon the host of Morgul will enter in at many points. And I came chiefly to say this. Soon there will be battle on the fields. A sortie must be made ready. Let it be of mounted men. In them lies our brief hope, for in one thing only is the enemy still poorly provided: he has few horsemen.~Minas Tirith

I explained this in my first post. We see Denethor's contempt for Gandalf..."Oh did you meet your match then?" I left out the middle paragraph because I felt like it held no importance.
1) 'grim' is not in there
2) softly counteracts what Pippin expected. Tolkien made every word count in his story and it's important to look at everything surrounding to get full meaning. The 'softly' is not Gandalf being 'grim' admitting he may be over-matched. It counteracts what Pippin had expected. Pippin expected Gandalf to blow up and get offended at Denethor's jab, but Gandalf keeps his cool and 'answers softly.'

He dismisses Denethor's statement, "you might be right, for the Wise don't know his end." But, notice the next paragraph Gandalf just flat out tells him no. "Nay," answering Denethor's question meaning..."No I have not met my match," he came back to look after the 'hurt men' and to tell Denethor to be prepared.

The Witch-King did not obey. He set his sword alight and was about to combat Gandalf when Rohan arrived.

The Witch-King left did he not? Therefor he did obey. Gandalf tells WK to go away. WK tries to play his fear card, laughing at him and doing some fancy tricks...but:

Gandalf did not move...~The Siege of Gondor

Gandalf did not falter, did not show any nerves, and the Witch-King goes away. IF the Witch-King felt like he could have defeated Gandalf he would have done so. As obloquy says Gandalf is the backbone of the alliance, 'he took command of Gondor's defenses,' as Denethor was just sitting back whining. If the WK thought he could be Gandalf, he would have done so. He tried to play his fear cards, it didn't work, and he left to Rohan's arrival.

Rohan's timely arrival may have been what fulfilled the prophecy. Note, first a prophecy does not have to come true, but Rohan's arrival makes the prophecy come true. Because had the WK gone toe-to-toe with Gandalf, the prophecy would not have been fulfilled, I'm sure about that.

If the fear was supernatural, and Eowyn was certainly not weak-willed at the moment, then that would mean that the supernatural fear was not fear, but a spell. Since a spell is magic and not fear, and the nazgul were said to gain power from fear, then the fear was not a spell, and the Witch-King did not use a spell.

This I'm just flat out confused...Eowyn did not fear death, but she certainly did fear the Witch-King, and would have been annhilated by him had Merry not stepped in:

Eowyn it was, and Dernhelm also. For into Merry's mind flashed the memory of the face that he saw at the riding from Dunharrow: the face of one that goes seeking death, having no hope...~Pelennor Fields

It's interesting, because we have Eowyn here, but Merry also sees a bit of Dernhelm's personality and is reminded of the 'face' when riding out to Gondor. Eowyn is not fearing death, but that doesn't mean she isn't fearing the Witch-King:

Out of the wreeck rose the Black Rider, tall and threatening, towering above her. With a cry of hatred that stung the very ears like venom he let fall his mace...~ibid

You should check out this post, where I talk about Tolkien's use of Boromir's height installing fear in Frodo. Same occurance is happening here, Tolkien is using the height of the Witch-King, over Eowyn 'tall and threatening' to install fear.

Sauron was one of the mightiest (perhaps the mightiest) of the Maiar.~Encyclopedia of Arda

While the EOA is one of the better sites, it still has it's flaws as it takes in what fans write and forms it's own the same. It remains that I have quotes from Tolkien's actual works to show that Sauron was called "greatest of Morgoth's servants." But, is never called "greatest of the Maiar." I think obloquy and I have shown at least 4 Maiar who were greater...Eonwe for sure, the other 3 mentioned it's not as definitive, but can be inferred, by their deeds.

[davem]

While both Gandalf & Angmar have a physical form, Angmar's seems not to be of the same nature. Of course, he has 'sinews' that Merry's blade can sever, but he is physically invisible. If only Merry's Barrow Blade can cut the spell that held his sinews together, then it seems that what holds Angmar's body together is a magical force. Therefore, the battle between Gandalf & Angmar would come down to whether Gandalf could perform the 'spell' or speak the 'Word of Power' that would undo Angmar's magically held together physical form. From what we are told Gandalf could not do that (only the Barrow Blade could).

Therefore the question becomes 'What was the nature of Gandalf's physical form? There is no reason to believe that Gandalf's body is impervious to harm. Certainly he tells the Three Hunters: ' Indeed my friends, none of you has any weapon that could hurt me.' But its entirely possible that we should read that as him specifically referring to the weapons of Aragorn, Gimli & Legolas ( 'none of you has any weapon that could hurt me). For him to be so specific implies (possibly) that there are weapons that could harm him, but those three don't happen to be in posession of them.

Now, if it is possible for a blade such as that possessed by Merry to be the only type that could harm Angmar, it is also surely possible that Angmar possessed a blade of a type that could harm Gandalf's body. Sauron was aware that Gandalf was his chief enemy (or one of them) hence it is likely that if a particular type of weapon could destroy him Sauron would arm his Leiutenant with such a weapon. What we do know is that Gandalf is afraid of Angmar, whereas Angmar not only has no fear of Gandalf, he actually states 'Die now and curse in vain!" And with that he lifted high his sword and flames ran down the blade.' So, Angmar raises what is clearly a magical weapon (it bursts into flame) & clearly tells Gandalf that he is about to die.

Interestingly, he doesn't use this weapon again in the battle - he chooses his mace, a purely physical weapon. It seems that the Blade has a specific purpose, namely to kill Gandalf. Gandalf doesn't have a weapon that could dispatch Angmar. Hence, it is not a question of the inherent power of the two individuals concerned, but rather that Gandalf can be killed by Angmar but Angmar cannot be killed by Gandalf.

Unless Obloquy knows better, of course....

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by davem

Unless Obloquy knows better, of course....

I know that "Angmar" is not the Witch-King's name.

[davem]

Originally Posted by obloquy

I know that "Angmar" is not the Witch-King's name.

What is his name then? I think you'll find that my use of 'Angmar' is perfectly correct in proper inglish as she is spoke.

This day is called the feast of Crispian:
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian:'
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.
And say 'These wounds I had on Crispin's day.'
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember with advantages
What feats he did that day: then shall our names.
Familiar in his mouth as household words
Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester,
Be in their flowing cups freshly remember'd.

I note you concede my main point though, for which I am happy.

[obloquy]

Good post, Boromir.

Originally Posted by The 1,000 Reader

Now, to let this thread rest and prevent a flame war, do not attempt to reply to this. In the end, the victor of a battle between Galadriel and the Witch-King falls down to a war of opinions.

Don't attempt to respond? I guess that's one way to try to win a dispute. In any case, below are the only portions of your post I care to respond to; the rest is wholly and unequivocally incorrect, and obvious enough to anyone who reads it.

You said:

The Witch-King also wasn't as strong as he was at the Siege of Minas Tirith.

Based on what text, exactly?

and:

if Sauron had gotten his ring back, and stopped being a crippled shadow,

Sauron was a 'crippled shadow'? You sure he wasn't a HUGE DISEMBODIED EYEBALL HOVERING AROUND WITH FLAMES ALL AROUND HIM? As for Gandalf vs. Sauron, I once again recommend that you look elsewhere on the forum for my arguments on the topic.