*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?
Thread: Power of the Rings of Power
Planet Tolkien is archived and no longer updated, but the forums remain browseable. We have established a Telegram group for old and new visitors to stay connected and discuss all things Tolkien.<< [1] [2]
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?
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.
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 Akallab’th
Quote:
'...among those whom he ensnared with the Nine Rings three were great lords of N’men’rean race'
It is stated in the Akallab’th
Quote:
'...among those whom he ensnared with the Nine Rings three were great lords of N’men’rean 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.
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. 
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.
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..
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 Nazg’l/Ringwraiths :
I shall provide a quote from Tolkien’s Letters about the Nazg’l/Ringwraiths :
Quote:
Footnote to letter #156 (to Robert Murray)
So while God (Eru) was a datum of good* N’men’rean 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 N’men’reans: Sauronians, but they do not come into this story, except remotely; as the wicked Kings who had become Nazg’l or Ringwraiths.)
Footnote to letter #156 (to Robert Murray)
So while God (Eru) was a datum of good* N’men’rean 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 N’men’reans: Sauronians, but they do not come into this story, except remotely; as the wicked Kings who had become Nazg’l 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.
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.
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 Nazg’l were N’menoran 'Lords', this doesn't automatically mean that the other 6 were not N’menoran - it might mean that although 3 belonged to N’menoran noble Houses, the other 6 were initially N’menoran commoners (maybe servants of the main 3), who sought their fortune in N’menoran 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 Nazg’l, Kham’l, may have been called 'Easterling' by the Free Peoples of Middle-earth, but this might simply be because although his origins lay in N’menor, 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.
Well, another option would be bestowing them to housewives. Those can indeed be really nasty..
Whilst tis written in the Akallabeth that 3 of the Nazg’l were N’menoran 'Lords', this doesn't automatically mean that the other 6 were not N’menoran - it might mean that although 3 belonged to N’menoran noble Houses, the other 6 were initially N’menoran commoners (maybe servants of the main 3), who sought their fortune in N’menoran 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 Nazg’l, Kham’l, may have been called 'Easterling' by the Free Peoples of Middle-earth, but this might simply be because although his origins lay in N’menor, 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.
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.
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.
