Gandalf Vs. The Witch King

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by Essex

And I'm happy with you ASSUMING that as you say - as long as you're not just categorically TELLING me, as others have, that Gandalf would have won against the WK with 100% certainty. I am using 'Canon' to explain my point - i.e. what Tolkien himself wrote about the Istari. Your point above, (and my views on whether the WK could have defeated Gandalf as well) are conjecture - what COULD have happened. I just can't agree with posters who say with the utmost certainty what WOULD have happened if they did actually fight.

As to your second question, I can turn it around to show the two biggest 'victories' of weaker goodies vs baddies in the books. A 'weak' hobbit helps defeat the Witch King himself (how ironic is that statement in this thread), and two 'weak' hobbits defeat Sauron.

Gandalf would have slaughtered the Witch-King, no question.

I disagree with your examples, by the way. I don't see any of this underdog theme in Tolkien at all. I have no idea how Mansun can claim Tolkien is "obsessed" with the idea.

Originally Posted by obloquy

I disagree with your examples, by the way. I don't see any of this underdog theme in Tolkien at all. I have no idea how Mansun can claim Tolkien is "obsessed" with the idea.

The main theme of the LOTR is based on how a group of Hobbits step up & do great deeds against the odds to help defeat Sauron. Some other examples would be :-

Witch King vs Merry & Eowyn

The defeat of Morgoth

Pippin slays a troll

The attack at Weathertop - the Hobbits & Aragorn vs 5 Nazgul

Rocky Balboa vs Ivan Drago (the ultimate David vs Goliath!)


There are no examples in the history of Middle Earth where the mightier goodie has been defeated by a weaker baddie though. Which makes the case for a Gandalf victory virtually certain.

[Groin Redbeard]

In the book the Witch King fled before Gandalf could do battle with him, and Pippen came to get Gandalf to save Faramir. In the end I think Gandalf would arise as the victor.

Someone earlier referenced the how Tolkien earlier handled lines of power
with respect to beings. This also applies to places, objects, artifacts and it's own internal mythology.

Melkor --> Sauron (Maiar)-->
3 Rings for elven kings under the sky
7 for dwarf lords in their halls of stone
9 for mortal men doomed to die

While a lot of power was placed in those rings , none are enough to take on Gandalf.

Gandalf is a Maiar (see Sauron if we are tracking lines of power)

Sauron has more power than Gandalf only due to a more straight line to his master Melkor.

The Witchking is really a mere pawn
It would take all 9 nazgul to fight Gandalf The White (or Grey) and they would lose.

The whole scene was bad. That Staff is not getting shattered any day soon
and only by Sauron himself.

Several related weaker good guys beating stronger bad guys. With respect to the Hobbits,
their skills are underestimated and each time they are carrying artifacts that aid them in defeating the "stronger" bad guy.

Example...Shelob...Sting and the Phial of Galadriel

[Eönwë]

By the way this is the opinion I gave in the other thread.

Originally Posted by Eönwë

The Witch-king could never even get near beating Gandalf. Olorin (Gandalf) was a Maiar and the witch-king was a human (though I do think he was a "black numenorean" so he might have had some Maiar blood in him after all, but Gandalf is fully Maiar). A human, however powerful, could never kill, or even win a fight against a Maiar. And Olorin was chosen to help the peoples of middle earth, in the same that Eonwe was (not being as strong as the target but still being comparatively strong to them). Gandalf killed a Balrog, a Maiar, a being of divine descent, to get beaten by a man? The Balrog, by the way, was not even a servant of Sauron, but of Morgoth, not much weaker than Sauron, in fact. Gandalf was sent by Manwe, and even though he refused at first, Gandalf went for a reason (varda makes a sneaky comment that hints that he is stronger than Saruman (curumo in Valinor). Gandalf is an immortal, and could not properly be killed anyway. Also, the witch-king has neither the authority nor the power to break Gandalf's staff as he did during the movie.

PS. Morgoth is the lord of all the evil, the old master of Sauron
PPS. This time (with Gandalf) the target is Sauron (the target was Morgoth with Eonwe).
PPPS. Eonwe is actually Eönwë, Olorin is actually Olórin, Numenorean is actually Númenórean and Manwe is actually Manwë, if you want all the accents correctly placed

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Ken_wilsonii

Several related weaker good guys beating stronger bad guys. With respect to the Hobbits,
their skills are underestimated and each time they are carrying artifacts that aid them in defeating the "stronger" bad guy.

Example...Shelob...Sting and the Phial of Galadriel

Yes but that was sam and he is special (look at this)Also, he is actually a good fighter (or at least among hoobbits)< which they don't fully appreciate in the movies. I think Sam is underdone in the movies.

Hmmm... maybe I'll start a thread

you see, my friend and i were arguing about who would win in a battle: the WK or Gandalf. and i looked it up and found this thread and decided to join this forum, and i'm an avid lotr reader and of course i absolutely loved the movies.

but that scene really made no sense to me, knowing that gandalf was a mair and got his power from the valor itself. i mean come on he came back from the dead like jesus after kicking some *** and came back and kicked some more.

and the witch king got his power from a already very weak sauron, so gandalf obviously wins.

i dont know how anyone could put up a decent argument on the WK's side.