The creature Gothmog at the Siege of Minas Tirith

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by obloquy

The Witch-King was never called Morgul.

Well, yes and no...

As a matter of fact it is the name "Witch-King" which is rarely used in LOTR: only once in the text itself (and it refers to the Angmar period) and several times in the Appendices, most of the cases also refer to the Angmar period.

In other cases in LOTR he is called "The Morgul-lord" (Many meetings), "the Morgul-king" (the Stairs of Cirith Ungol) "Lord of Morgul"(App. A), and only once "King of Minas Morgul" (App. A.).

The sentence about Gothmog II looks like one of the occasions where the WK seems to be called simply "Morgul". (I believe that all the mentions of "legions of Morgul" in LOTR mean the "Witch-King's legions", not "the host of Minas Morgul", because the host of the Minas Morgul fortress constituted only about a third of the army assembled at the Pelennor).
There is another sentence in the "Hunt for the Ring" published in Reader's Companion, where the WK is called simply "Angmar".

As to the the WK' names I have my own little theory:

In Sindarin "King (Lord) of Morgul" would most likely sound as "Aran Morgul". It sounds like a name given by enemies, yet flattering, one that he would accept and use. "Lord of Black Magic!" A title more befitting Sauron himself, I would say. Not bad for he who had been a mere Man once...

And if we go a tad further and consider how "Aran Morgul" would translate into Westron by a person from the "good side" - what do we get?
The Witch-King! King of bad, Dark Sorcery = witchcraft.
Translate both parts of the name and you get the Witch-King, translate only the title and you get Lord/King of Morgul.

I believe the Nazgul Lord never changed his name: Aran Morgul he had been in Angmar, Aran Morgul he remained in Minas Morgul, the city named after him. Likely the Minas Morgul fortress, the former Minas Ithil, took its new name from its new ruler, not the other way round: it may simply mean "Morgul's Tower."

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by Gordis

Well, yes and no...

No and no. The Witch-King was never called Morgul or Angmar, regardless of your theories or what the notorious Tolkien Companion says.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by obloquy

No and no. The Witch-King was never called Morgul or Angmar, regardless of your theories or what the notorious Tolkien Companion says.

Here is the case when he is called Angmar:

It was no doubt at the end of 1418 that Sauron (S. likely aided by Angmar) bethought him of the winged mounts; and yet withheld them, until things became almost desperate and he was forced to launch his war in haste.-RC p.263

So, why not Morgul?

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Gordis

Here is the case when he is called Angmar:

So, why not Morgul?

It appears to me 'Angmar' simply refers to the region.

For at that time the realm of Angmar arose in the North beyond the Ettenmoors. ........ [The lord of that land was known as the Witch-king, but it was not known until later that he was indeed the chief of the Ring-wraiths, who came north with the purpose of destroying the Dúnedain in Arnor, seeing hope in their disunion, while Gondor was strong].

Appendix A ROTK

If he was 'the lord of that land', and himself called Angmar, why was he known as 'the Witch-king?

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

It appears to me 'Angmar' simply refers to the region.

Not in this quote, speaking of events of TA 3018 following the disaster at the ford of Bruinen. Here is the fuller quote:

Only the bodies of 8 horses were discovered; but also the raiment of the Captain. It is probable that the Captain took the one horse that remained (he may have had strength to withdraw it from the flood) and unclad, naked, invisible, rode as swift as he could back to Mordor. At swiftest he could not accomplish that (for his horse at least would need some food and rest, though he needed none) ere November had passed. The wrath and fear of Sauron then may be guessed; yet if there was any in the world in whom he trusted it was the Lord of Angmar; and if his wrath were lessened by perceiving that his great servant had defeated by ill chance (and the craft of the Wise) rather than by faults of his own, his fear would be the more – seeing what power was yet in his Enemies, and how sharply fortune favoured them at each turn when all seemed lost. Help no doubt was sent out to the other Ringwraiths as they made their way back, and they were bidden to remain secret again. It was no doubt at the end of 1418 that Sauron (S. likely aided by Angmar) bethought him of the winged mounts; and yet withheld them, until things became almost desperate and he was forced to launch his war in haste. RC p.262-3

[Inziladun]

I don't have the Reader's Companion, nor have I read it. Is it considered 'canon'?
And why' The Lord of Angmar, and not the Lord Angmar?

[Gordis]

The Hunt for the Ring in UT and RC is as uncanonic or canonic as all the unpublished Tolkien writings...

But the RC quote is indeed the single case in all the Legendarium where Tolkien calls the WK simply "Angmar", likely for shortness sake.


As for Morgul, I believe in many cases "Morgul" might mean the "Lord of Morgul", not "Minas Morgul":

By our valour the wild folk of the East are still restrained, and the terror of Morgul kept at bay...

the Rammas is breached far and wide, soon the host of Morgul will enter in at many points

The lines of fire became flowing torrents, file upon file of Orcs bearing flames, and wild Southron men with red banners, shouting with harsh tongues, surging up, overtaking the retreat. […]The hosts of Morgul intent on their prey, taken at unawares in wild career, broke, scattering like sparks in a gale.

New forces of the enemy were hastening up the road from the River; and from under the walls came the legions of Morgul

Under the south walls of the City the footmen of Gondor now drove against the legions of Morgul that were still gathered there in strength.

but Gothmog the lieutenant of Morgul had flung them into the fray;

After all, can you find a single quote where "Minas Tirith" is called simply "Tirith"? There is not a single case. Why would Minas Morgul be different? Why would it be called simply "Morgul" so many times?

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

I don't have the Reader's Companion, nor have I read it. Is it considered 'canon'?

Tsk tsk! Opening that can(on) of worms?

No one I know what call it such, as it's merely someone else's (Robert Foster's, if memory serves) index and brief explanation of people and places in the LotR--not bad, given when it was published (pre-Silm, or at least pre-Unfinished Tales), but not fully accurate, as it gets speculative in places and is directly contradicted by later, more authoritative (dare I say "canonical"? ) sources.

Originally Posted by Inziladun

And why' The Lord of Angmar, and not the Lord Angmar?

The same reason the King of England can be called England, or the King of France called France. Of course, barring the obvious problem that France no longer has a monarch, we obviously don't use this type of language much anymore, mostly because we no longer have a view of the monarch wherein he is both the private person (himself) and the public person (the state = England/France/Angmar).

I don't want to say for certain, because my memory can't site any cases, but I think this type of usage is used in Shakespeare, possibly for monarchs, possibly (in the History places) for the Dukes (not saying these are Shakespearian examples, but they would be ducal examples: York, Lancaster, Norfolk). When you are referring to a monarch/lord as the body public, it is eminently properly to say "England," "Norfolk," or "Angmar." The "of" comes in when you use, additionally, his title, but the title is implied in the use of the place, since "Angmar" means, really, "the person who, by right of his office, is the body public of Angmar."

Gordis is not arguing at all, as I understand it, that the Witch-king's personal name was Angmar, but merely demonstrating that this type of usage is made use of by Tolkien in reference to the Witch-king: that is, he is referred to by the land he is identified with as lord. In the case of the Kingdom of Angmar, this is incontrovertible. Personally, I find Gordis's reasoning for a like reference where "Morgûl" is made use of in the text to be convincing.