Could a Nazgul kill Gandalf?

Cafe Society
21

OK, I’ve had a chance to review my notes and other related materials. And they reminded me that the Nazgul’s power was primarily in the spiritual world, not the physical world. Physically they weren’t all that intimidating; they couldn’t see well, didn’t hear so good, didn’t like to cross water, and were somewhat dependent on their companion animals (horse, fell beast, etc) to navigate, at least in daylight. They inspired terror and couldn’t be slain by any ordinary weapons, but were hard-pressed to interact with the physical world in the first place. Which is why the goal of the Nazgul on Weathertop was to stick Frodo with the Morgul blade, driving him into the spirit world, where they could dominate him.

Given that description, it would seem to be a wonder that the Witch-king of Angmar was such a threat to the Numenoreans, eventually causing the downfall of Arvedui, last king of Arnor. And also responsible for the end of the line of Anarion too. But it seems WK did this thru his spiritual powers rather than the physical; dominating and directing his underlings and terrifying his foes, a la his master Sauron.

And as for how the WK got so powerful by the time the Battle of Pellenor Fields rolled around; well keep in mind that on a physical plane he still wasn’t that overwhelming physically. He was trying to kill Eowyn with a mace, after all, not crushing her physical existence with a flick of his fingers. Powerful yes, but not overwhelming. And his physical power was perhaps enhanced by being the focus of Sauron’s eye, being given more strength via his master. His best feature in battle was that no man could kill him.

As for the battle with Gandalf, their battle would have been much more on the spiritual plane, had it taken place. And while Gandalf was a maiar who had defeated two other maia already, they had all been limited in some fashion; Gandalf and Saruman by the constraints of their physical bodies and the limits imposed on them by the powers when they became istari. The Balrog had been diminished over ages by spending his power in terror and hate, a la his master, Melkor.

So in the spiritual battle, you’d get a somewhat constrained maia vs. a corrupt mortal spirit supported by a stronger maia drawing on the residual power of a downcast Vala. Anything could have happened! (But I still would not have bet against Gandalf. I bet he would have overcome the WK, but would not have been able to destroy him. And I gravely doubt Gandalf would have been physically destroyed by the WK.)

22

Hated that scene! I’m glad it was cut from the theatrical release.

23

I got the distinct impression it was there simply because the staff exploding was a cool effect.

24

Not that I completely trust my memory, but I seem to remember Gandalf lamenting on the loses caused by him not being on the field of battle to face the Witch King. Gandalf was unable to pursue the WK due to saving Faramir from Denethor. Still, the implication to me is that Gandalf felt he could have done something.

I also agree that the staff breaking scene was terrible.

25

IIRC, we are told that the blade Merry uses to stab the WK was made eons ago for that very purpose.

26

It wasn’t made for the purpose. However, the blades Merry and Pippin carried were made and wielded by the ancient enemies of the WK. They picked them up in the barrow downs from the grave of a mighty man who had been slain by the WKs forces. So the blade had a special “emnity” for the WK, much like elven rope burning Gollum because it was imbued with goodness which pained Gollums evil nature. That was one of my favorite things in LOTR. The fact that a chance encounter in the begining of the story provides the means for poetic justice at the climax. Tolkiens take on magic was very much in the “sympathetic” vein. Things made by good folk are naturally hostile to evil folks and their creations, and vice versa.

27

I like your interpretation. I’ve often held the death of the Witch-King as my favorite scene in all of Tolkein’s works, and I’m one of those that feels that Eowyn could not have killed him if Merry had not struck first. But it always sort of mystified me: Why would the men of Arnor carry short swords specifically enchanted to kill the enemy’s leader, when the odds were against any particular warrior having the chance to stab that particular foe? From what little I know of the war against Angmar, the Witch-King apparently never himself appeared on the battlefields.

Your interpretation explains it well. I’ve attached the important paragraph from “The Return of the King,” for reference. It comes, of course, after Merry watched his sword smolder and dissipate as smoke.

By the way, I think Peter Jackson missed some of the drama of the scene by not letting Eowyn use the dialogue Tolkien had written for her. It would also have been cooler if they’d shown Eowyn’s sword shattering in the blow and Merry’s sword burning itself up.

In re: the OP: I also think that the Nazgul should not have had the power to shatter Gandalf’s staff. I suppose knocking him off his horse was OK, but I’d think that he’d have to defeat Gandalf in some significant way before he could have done that to the staff. And that wouldn’t have been easy for the Witch-King, if it was even possible for him. The staff-breaking seemed effortless in that scene, which was totally wrong.

28

I hope Gaudere doesn’t know Elvish… But isn’t “maia” the singular, and “maiar” the plural?

And while it certainly wouldn’t be easy, Gandalf the White vs. the Witch-King would be no contest. I don’t think Big G would have actually destroyed the Nazgul (that pesky prophecy, and all… I think Gandalf counts as a “man”), but he certainly could have routed him. Which would probably then have meant that the Witch-King wouldn’t have been bodily on the field to be slain by Eowyn and Merry, so perhaps it’s just as well.

The power of the Nazgul, meanwhile, was most definitely on a spiritual plane. Even in that great battle, he doesn’t do much in the way of killing, himself. Mostly, he’s just panicing the Gondorians by his mere presence, making it that much easier for the fleshy servants of Sauron to kill them. Compare the role of the Armies of the Dead under Aragorn: They were so imposing that they were able to win their battle without landing one single blow.

And add me to the list for not liking the staff shattering. Gandalf shattering Saruman’s staff was not a matter of power. It was a matter of authority. Gandalf is the new head of the Order, and therefore has the authority to eject Saruman and make him turn in his membership card. Similarly, we see Aragorn using the Palantir to challenge Sauron, where Gandlaf dares not: Gandalf easily has far more power than does Aragorn, but Aragorn has the right to use the Stone.

29

Yup. My bad. Despite my pretensions, I’m not fluent in Quenya, and I’m completely hopeless in Sindar! I can curse pretty well in english, though.

30

Maybe I shouldn’t resuscitate this thread, but - any thoughts from LOTR expert dopers on why Saruman/Sharkey could be killed so easily by Grima, but we are not sure that Gandalf could be overcome by the Witch-King? Of course, the Nazgul are a lot more mysterious than Wormtongue was (& I think the concept of their overpowering foes by fright and the Black Breath was near impossible to show in a film). But obviously, a Maia (Saruman) could, indeed, be killd.

31

Well, all the Istari were somewhat truncated Maiar in mortal bodies, who had significant restrictions on their powers as a result. Including the ability to have the body die. Gandalf got “embiggened” after his body was slain fighting the Balrog. Meanwhile, Saruman got “disenfranchised” when he was cast out of the order. When his body was slain, his Maia spirit was still present, but appeared to have been rejected by the powers in the West.

Bottom line, I don’t think any Maiar could be killed, even the Balrogs whose bodies got slain. They were most likely severely weakened, and ‘unhoused’, not unlike Sauron when he lost the ring.

32

Fun fact: Return of the King (actually, the animated movie) was my first introduction to that sort of irony or whatever the term is. At the age of, oh, say, six.

33

There is clearly a theme running through all Tolkien’s stories that evil leads to diminishing spiritual potency, apparently in proportion to increase in external power and dominance. Morgoth wastes himself in his efforts to enslave all of Beleriand (and Middle Earth, eventually, I’m sure), to the point of being a blackened troglodyte, easily subdued by the armies of Eonwë in the War of Wrath, once his own minions were defeated; Sauron becomes progressively more horrific to behold, and individually weaker, as he pours his energies into commanding armies and forging the One Ring. Sauruman, even before his ouster, is largely a technologist, building war machines and “genetically engineering” a breed of enhanced orcs; meanwhile only his voice holds much peril by the time of the defeat of Isengard.

Gandalf appears to progress in rather the opposite direction, in commensurately with his own lack of personal ambition, and his willing self-sacrifice for the good of the Children of Eru over his own.

It’s interesting to speculate what role creatures like the Nazgûl might play in a World dominated by Sauron. If he had won the War of the Ring, what would his stature be? And that of his servants? Tolkien states rather clearly that Sauron has different ambitions than Morgoth once on his own: Where Morgoth sought only to enslave and destroy in an enraged quest for an ultimately nihilistic existence, Sauron was much more pragmatic, and wished more to rule the world than rend it asunder. With no opposition, as a God of Earth populated by willing or cowed suplicants, would his power be ultimately extinguised, or allowed to increase to its native potency, once his battles with powerful adversaries had ceased?

34

While I agree that the increase in power of the Nazgul is problematic, isn’t there something about their power diminishing as they go further from Sauron/Mordor?

On a slightly different matter, if the Nazgul King is such a powerful sorceror, why is Grond necessary to smash the gates of Minas Tirith? Couldn’t he do it with a spell?

I think the breaking of Gandalf’s staff was the worst mistake of the three films.

35

Perhaps why it was not included in the theatrical release.

36

A glance at RoTK reveals that “spells of ruin” were laid on Grond, presumably by Wiki or his Master. So, arguably, the gates were destroyed partially by magic.

37

Well, that’s about the only exercise of “magic” we ever see from Saruman. The Wizard Wrestling Federation scene doesn’t appear in the book. So we really don’t have a continuum for Saruman that follows this thesis.

At least, not until Gandalf summons him back to the balcony and casts him out of the order. Afterwards, of course, his “spiritual potency” is greatly diminished, but so are his aims and personal power. He’s been reduced to some grubby little revenge in the Shire.

38

Only if he isn’t prepared.

Hey, somebody had to say it!