Login | Register
 
Message Board | Latest Posts | Your Recent Posts | Rules

Thread: Power of the Rings of Power

Is this discussion interesting? Share it on Twitter!

Bottom of Page    Message Board > The Lord of the Rings > Power of the Rings of Power   << [1] [2]
Sauron recovered 3 of the Dwarven Rings whilst the rest were consumed in Dragon Fire.
Quote:
A small correction Mellon - only three of the Nazgul were Kings, not all nine.

Where did you come upon this information, if I may ask?

They were all great Kings of Men, or Sauron wouldn't have bestowed the Nine to them.
Quote:
They were all great Kings of Men

I thought so too ...at least that is what I 've read in the books .Maybe LoA has another book/copy ?
I know the quote you two are getting confused with. Its here:

"Those who used the Nine Rings became mighty in their day, kings, sorcerers, and warriors of old."

They became mighty in their day - thats not to say all were Kings. Indeed 6 were Warriors and sorcerers.
Forgive me but I cannot locate at the moment the quote where it says only 3 were Kings. It is just one of those 'known things'. I will try to get it for you however.
It is stated in the Akallabêth
Quote:
'...among those whom he ensnared with the Nine Rings three were great lords of Númenórean race'
Indeed three of these names are Númenórean in form: Murazor, Akhorahil and Adunaphel.

so believe when Tolkien mentions somewhere in LOTR that the Nazguls were 'Kings' of men he is merely stating they were very powerful among men, and doesn't necessarily mean they were all Kings.

However I'm probably wrong and All 9 of them were Kings but only 3 of them are worthy of Tolkien giving them a name, as was the case, and the other 6 may have still been lords/kinds of men just not as majestic as the 3 greater Nazguls.
Yes indeed I have pondered that myself. I could never think of Which Kings they were. In the time the Nazgul came to be Numenor was at large and we know that none of the Numenorean Kings became wraiths. I assumed that it had to be some King of the Easterlings or Haradrim but that did not seem to fit.

Your quote has addressed the matter with keeness Turin.

By king in this instance Tolkien simply meant 'Great Lord'. As we know Numenor had many Great Lords opperating at the same time as the King. It appears this is what Tolkien meant by 3 Kings.

So I suppose that the 3 'king' Nazgul were really Lords of Numenor who became 'Black Numenoreans' when sailing over to Middle-earth, thus they were ensnared.

I think we can now eliminate that they were 'all kings'. It appears that none of them were - only 3 'Great lords of Numenorean race'.
Thank you all for responding Smile Smilie No matter the debate /discussion ,I think you all answered my first question
Quote:
Lord of All
Your quote has addressed the matter with keeness Turin.

Thank you. Smile Smilie

it really is a touchy subject, like most discussions and debates Tolkien's work, because often Tolkien's work conflicts within itself or else he never got around to finishing a specific 'chapter'.
Quote:
They became mighty in their day - thats not to say all were Kings. Indeed 6 were Warriors and sorcerers.

They became warriors, kings and sorcerors, like the quote says. Ever heard of the Witch-King of Angmar? First they were warriors/Kings and the power of their Rings made them sorcerors. Duh.

Quote:
Indeed three of these names are Númenórean in form: Murazor, Akhorahil and Adunaphel.

Those names do not originate from JRRT. The only name coming from JRRT was Khamûl.

Those names you've provided come from a LOTR RPG... I think you should've read the rest of the article on the Encyclopedia of Arda where you've copied it from.

I'll post part of this article in here myself :
Quote:
"One of them, the second in rank after the Lord of the Nazgûl himself, was named Khamûl, and also known as the Black Easterling. This is the only one of the nine Nazgûl explicitly named by Tolkien.

This may come as a surprise if you've come across one of the many sources that list a set of names of the other eight: Murazor (the Witch-king himself), Dwar, Ji Indur, Akhorahil, Hoarmurath, Adunaphel, Ren and Uvatha. These names are common across the Web, and often have detailed biographies to go with them. They're also consistent with what Tolkien had to say about the origins of the Nazgûl: in the Akallabêth it is stated '...among those whom he ensnared with the Nine Rings three were great lords of Númenórean race', and indeed three of these names are Númenórean in form: Murazor, Akhorahil and Adunaphel.

None of these eight names, though, have their origins in Tolkien's own work. Instead, they come from a series of role-playing and trading card games produced by Iron Crown Enterprises. The names of Murazor, Dwar and the rest emerged from the unavoidable need for these games to develop and expand Tolkien's universe to meet the needs of the gaming fraternity. The games' popularity accounts for the regular appearance of the names, to the extent that they're now frequently presented as the 'true' names of the remaining eight Nazgûl.

Some readers have even suggested that these names are so widely accepted that they should be considered the de facto names for the eight otherwise unnamed Ringwraiths. On a personal level, or in the context of the games that spawned the names, this isn't an unreasonable approach: if Tolkien never told us the name of, say, the Witch-king, there seems little obvious harm in imagining that his name was originally Murazor (or anything else, for that matter). Things become a little more problematic where the names are published without explanation: we receive plenty of e-mail from puzzled readers trying to work out which of Tolkien's books the names come from (hence this entry in the FAQ). "


Hence I am sorry to say that the argument about 3 Kings is incorrect. Somebody may be confusing this with a certain movie starring George Clooney et al. I take it they were all Kings, but the other 6 were Kings of the Easterlings or Haradrim.

Moderator Smilie Next time, please try to not rip quotes out of context just to be proven right but try to give the entire quote. And please, do post where the quote comes from. Thank you. Moderator Smilie
My first quote clearly say They were 'Kings, warriors, and sorcerers of old'. - Thus your theory about them all being Kings is utterly flawed.
I am not sure where you are coming from mentioning the 'Witchking'. What insight does this bring?
*yawns*

How hard can it be to read a post?

Witch-King = sorceror + king... they were all that at the same time. They started as mighty Kings, which is why Sauron gave them the Nine, which granted them powers and made them sorcerors...

Don't you understand English, or is looking for arguments simply one of your other unsavoury hobbies? Or is it both?
Virumor - my post was perfectly civil. Why do you always have to be blunt all the time?

Can you provide any quotes stating that they were all Kings?
Oh dear Lord (the Lord, NOT you, God forbid), I give up...
Ahh your last posts provides a clue.

Is all this anger towards myself merely becuase of my Username? Do you find a name such as 'Lord of All', infuriating? Being so anti-evil are you very religous or something?

You seem to have built up excess anger and express it by accusing me of false wrongs and giving me false attributes.
Perhaps I am imagining it but whenever I do a good post with quotes I soon have Virumor down my neck trying to rebut everything I say and never providing any proofs to support your claims, whether its in 'Concept of Eru's creations', or 'Power of the Rings of Power' or 'Mans mortality' or whatever.

I have tried being civil Vir but this also seems to have little effect. Why not say what you think and get it all out in one post? I promise I shan't be offended (I am impossible to offend I assure you). Or if the content is unsuitable for the family friendliness of this site I recommend PMing me.
Perhaps then we can call a truths.
Quote:
It is stated in the Akallabêth
Quote:
'...among those whom he ensnared with the Nine Rings three were great lords of Númenórean race'


The important part of the quote i did mention was from Akallabeth, sorry that i didn't mention where I found the other 3 names, mainly because it wasn't as important to the topic and like you mentioned i don't know how reliable those names are. You are also correct, i should have read the whole article before i posted that little tid-bit.

One thing I did not appreciate though was being accused of ripping quotes just to prove myself right, I merely post them so I can show people why I may believe the way i do about a subject, and if you read a posts I made earlier I even stated and I quote,from the post I made Tuesday 19th December 2006 (10:26pm)
Quote:
However I'm probably wrong and All 9 of them were Kings but only 3 of them are worthy of Tolkien giving them a name, as was the case, and the other 6 may have still been lords/kinds of men just not as majestic as the 3 greater Nazguls.

I do, however, believe you both can lighten up on each other. Virumor can't you at least pretend to be nice sometimes and just correct us politely?
Lord of All there is a good chance Virumor is correct on the subject and it's safe to say that; out of all the users on this forum he is probably the most knowledgeable on Tolkien's work.

Bottom line... can't we all just get along?
Indeed if you believe he is the most knowledgeable user here Turin then that is fine by me. Smile Smilie

Myself I have been as polite as is possible with words, even to Viromor but it has not been reciprocated.

Persoanlly I would say Viromor has a good knowledge on most aspects on Tolkien's world, but his main fault is rarely providing quotes and being so anti-evil (and of course being arragant).

Turin - I have yet to see any quote anywhere from anyone that states all of the nine Nazgul were kings. As such I do not believe Virumor is correct on this one.
My my what a commotion has created itself here..
Everyone just take it easy, and check what your quoting.
As for my opinion.. I think i understand what Virumor is saying. They were all "Kings", not maybe litteraly, but they were some kind of leaders-warriors..and with the power of the Nine Rings, they also became these dark sorcerors and later the shades-Nazgul's..
Hmm I do not dispute they were Great warriors. Glad to here someone speaking the truth. Virumor is stating that all 9 were officially Kings however.
Dear all,

I shall provide a quote from Tolkien’s Letters about the Nazgûl/Ringwraiths :

Quote:
Footnote to letter #156 (to Robert Murray)

So while God (Eru) was a datum of good* Númenórean philosophy, and a prime fact in their conception of history. He had at the time of the War of the Ring no worship and no hallowed place. And that kind of negative truth was characteristic of the West, and all the area under Numenorean influence: the refusal to worship any 'creature', and above all no 'dark lord' or satanic demon, Sauron, or any other, was almost as far as they got. They had (I imagine) no petitionary prayers to God ;

(* There were evil Númenóreans: Sauronians, but they do not come into this story, except remotely; as the wicked Kings who had become Nazgûl or Ringwraiths.)
On reading that final quote, I'm convinced, in a letter from the hand of Tolkien himself....... They were all obviously warriors and Kings of Men, then with the Rings given to them, they became sorcerors.....
I tend to agree: Why waste Rings of Power on butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers. Would be best to give them to the top dogs in various regions, especially if you want to corrupt them and their followers. Sauron would want to get the most bang for his buck.
Okay so what your saying Vir is the Nazgul were Numenorean kings? How can this be however when every one of the 20 odd Kings of Numenor are acocunted for?

I believe you are taking the term 'King' as litterally a 'King of a realm', rather than a meaning for a very great lord or Warrior of sorts.
On the southern coast of Middle-earth (farther south than Gondor) there were Numenorian outposts that when Numenor sank, lost contact with their homeland and the leaders of these outposts became kings of their little regions. These fell prey to the machinations of Sauron and became the Black Numenorians. There were also pockets of Men in the East that would have had kings for their leaders.

I'm not sure of the actual timelines here and don't think it worth the effort to look up references. I'm just saying that the leaders of isolated pockets of Men can call themselves kings if they are strong enough to keep their crowns.
Exactly, Grondy.

Whilst tis written in the Akallabeth that 3 of the Nazgûl were Númenoran 'Lords', this doesn't automatically mean that the other 6 were not Númenoran - it might mean that although 3 belonged to Númenoran noble Houses, the other 6 were initially Númenoran commoners (maybe servants of the main 3), who sought their fortune in Númenoran outposts/colonies in Middle-earth and worked their way up to finally become Kings in Middle-earth, perhaps of their own founded Kingdoms (Khand, for instance).

Or maybe they came to Middle-earth with the 3 Lords and were sent as Emissaries by the 3 to found other Kingdoms.

The second in the rank of the Nazgûl, Khamûl, may have been called 'Easterling' by the Free Peoples of Middle-earth, but this might simply be because although his origins lay in Númenor, the Kingdom he founded was in the East. Furthermore, he mainly hailed from Dol Guldur.

Tolkien delibaretely chose to not reveal everything, which is why sometimes we must use our imaginations.

Quote:
I tend to agree: Why waste Rings of Power on butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers. Would be best to give them to the top dogs in various regions, especially if you want to corrupt them and their followers. Sauron would want to get the most bang for his buck.

Well, another option would be bestowing them to housewives. Those can indeed be really nasty..
I see where you two are coming from now.
It was just a dispute over what we were each calling 'Kings'. I was associating King with King of Numenor, King of Harad, King of Khand etc not King of Umbar for instance. Though they were actually Lords of the lessar fortresses and realms I suppose it is not incorrect for them to be called Kings I suppose, even though they don't fit exactly into the description.
  << [1] [2]