Talk:Nazgûl

There are some dates in this document that seem to be the result of vandalism. Have a look under the Third Age heading for dates like 1975 and 2000 that are wildly incorrect. I tried to find the original dates, but gave up.

Belay my comment about dates. I looked up the Witch-King and the dates are accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.247.4.180 (talk) 19:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

---

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.182.46.84 (talk) 05:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

How about some mention of the epic orkish black metal band of the same name who are way better than Lord of the Rings, as well as probably being very influenced by them considering their name and that they sing about elves and stuff in Latin.

---

In regards to the modern slang claim, I have my doubts about the accuracy of that. Since Nazgul has a negative connotation and the majority of Slashdot users are supporters of IBM in the IBM vs. SCO case, I doubt that's where the usage originated from. Perhaps they were trying to be facetious but I would imagine the origin of the slang as applied to IBM going back to their dates when they were less popular with the community and when they were using their lawyers to threaten other smaller companies. I would imagine it going back to the days when terms like "You can't go wrong with IBM" was common, when IBM used unfair tactics to choke on innovations and start-ups. As of now, however, the perception has changed. In the SCO case, IBM is the hero, not the villain of the community. Comatose51 03:25, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

---

"At Bree in the Prancing Pony inn the Riders attacked the hobbit's rooms, but the Ranger Aragorn tricked the Riders."

Wouldn't it be more correct to say Strider here? Instead of Aragorn?

---

Why do you use  —  instead of normal dashes and spaces? I see these spaces as squares instead of spaces... Ausir 18:11, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Ugh... horrible browser. See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Dashes on why I use the em dash to represent an em dash rather than the ugly ASCII dash. But I'll leave out the hair spaces. Question though, what browser are you using? Jor 18:23, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

IE 5.0 Ausir 18:48, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

That explains it then… thx. Jor 19:01, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Why is this listed under Ringwraith instead of Nazgûl? They are indeed called Ringwraiths often in LotR, Nazgûl is more often used by folks who know what they really are, and by Tolkien in his other writings. --Aranel 20:22, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Primarily because you need to be an admin to delete pages, and in order to move this page to its proper place the redirect must be deleted first. [[User:Anárion|File:Anarion.png]] 21:00, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

So can we ask an Admin to delete the redirect (i.e. to accomplish the move for us), or would it be necessary to go through rfd? --Aranel 20:56, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The plural form of Nazgûl

I just removed the following insertion:

In Elvish (of which Black Speech derives), the plural form of the word would be Nazgûli (singular Nazgûl), but the unadorned plural Nazgûl is the most common usage in english.

Aside from not specifying which Elvish is meant (I assume Quenya, since Sindarin has a much more complex method for forming plurals), there is no reason to think that Black Speech would form plurals like Elvish. The major language sites do not mention this. (See for instance Ardalambion, "It is remarkable that the word Nazgûl is used both in a singular and a plural sense. Perhaps a simple noun is neither singular nor plural, but has a very general or generic sense".) Also, Tolkien generally used his own plurals in his writings (Dúnedain), yet he always used nazgûl as both singular or plural.

For the films, they used nazg as both singular and plural. [1] -Aranel ("Sarah") 22:10, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Nazgûl is not "Elvish", Quenya or Sindarin. Nor does the Black Speech derive from it: the Black Speech was Sauron's invention, possibly modelled on Morgoth's own language. As Sauron was a Maia, he would have spoken Valarin, which heavily influenced Quenya, and through Exilic Quenya also the form of Sindarin that was spoken from the end of the First Age onwards.

The Elvish (Quenya) name for the Ringwraiths was Úlairi. Its form in Sindarin would most likely be *Ulaer (from CE *úlgajré), but this is non-attested.

-- Jordi·✆ 22:27, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The Black Speech was actually derived from the Valarin language, as both languages share some cognates, including the BS nazg and V naškad. Ausir 00:07, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Númenórean Nazgûl

I have removed the rather puzzling claim Angmar was specifically listed as NOT Númenórean in the books: if such a reference exists, I cannot recall or find it now. I think it was rather likely Angmar was a Númenórean actually, and in any case we only know Kamûl was NOT of Westernessean race, not which Nazgûl WERE. -- Jordi·✆ 17:22, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

In "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age" it seems to be strongly implied that the Witch-King ruled Angmar before his transformation in a Nazgul. This would, if true, strongly suggest that Angmar is his native land, and would pretty much rule out a Numenorean origin for him. --User:210.55.39.225

That is not how I read the text, and it doesn't fit the timeline. Angmar was founded only around T.A. 1300, the Ringwraiths appeared around S.A. 2251 (2500 years earlier). No mention of individual Ringwraiths is made until the Witch-king is identified as ruler of Angmar. -- Jordi·✆ 11:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't have the article but i read over it online earlier and it said in one of tolkien's letters that he said The Witch King of Angmar was probably of Numenorean descent. Hopefully someone could help me reference it. But only Tolkien knows the truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.245.32.11 (talk) 18:22, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Merrys dagger weakened him?

if i remember correctly from the book (wich i have read) Merrys stab did not "unimmunize" him. somewhere in the book says that "no MAN could kill him",but Eowyn is a woman,this is also said in the movie and books,i think that merrys stab was powerful,yes,but only to bring him to his knees,so she could stab him in the face. Lord revan 17:57, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

"No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit hs unseen sinews to his will." -L.O.R. 826

I think it is pretty clear that Merry's dagger is what killed the Witch King.

It doesn't seem logical to me that Merry deals the fatal blow. Merry strikes first, his blade "...pierced the sinew behind his [Nazgul's] mighty knee". Then Eowyn "...drove her sword between crown and mantle, as the great shoulders bowed before her. The sword broke sparkling into many shards. The crown rolled away with a clang." If the Nazgul is already dead, there is no reason for Eowyn's sword to shatter, and the crown rolling away emphasizes that this is the moment that the Lord of the Nazgul dies. I read the "...unseen sinews" that Merry's blade slices as literally the sinews of his leg behind his knee, as explicitly described, and not a metaphor for the Nazgul's entire body. Moreover it is called a "bitter" wound, not a "fatal" wound. "...no living man may hinder me" suggests Eowyn as well, although Merry being a hobbit isn't strictly a man either. --Bealevideo 05:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Merry's dagger was made by the Dunedain, for combat against the dark creatures of Sauron. The was I see it, Merry's attack weakened the Witch King, allowing Eowyns stroke to destroy him. Therefore, the Witch King was not killed by a man, but by a woman and a Hobbit. Both blades dissolved, if I remember correctly, therefore they both played a part in the Witch King's demise.Aragorn245 (talk) 18:35, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The book seems to attribute the demise of the Witch-king (or rather the disembodying) to Éowyn with the help of Merry. This is (characteristically) hidden away in a footnote in an appendix (A II 'The House of Eorl' -- footnote regarding Éowyn to the tabular entry on Éomer Éadig), where it is said that 'thus the words of Glorfindel long before to King Eärnur were fulfilled, that the Witch-king would not fall by the hand of man. For it is said in the songs of the Mark that in this deed Éowyn had the aid of Théoden's esquire, and that he also was not a Man but a Halfling.' Together with the quotations from 'The Hunt of the Ring' published in The Lord of the Rings: A Reader's Companion by Hammond & Scull, this certainly implies that Éowyn could not have 'killed' the Witch-king alone (but neither could Merry). Troelsfo (talk) 16:54, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Faramir and the Black Breath

Vouching for the statement that Faramir indeed was a victim of the Black Breath, to settle dispute of whether Faramir was or was not a victim:

(Imrahil) ' "It was, as I remember, just such a dart as the Southrons use. Yet I believe that it came from the shadows above, for else his fever and sickness were not to be understood; since the wound was neither deep or vital. How then do you read the matter?"

' "Weariness, grief for his father's mood, a wound, and over all the Black Breath," said Aragorn. "He is a man of staunch will, for already he had come close under the shadow before ever he rode to battle on the out-walls. Slowly the dark must have crept on him, even as he fought and strove to hold his outpost. Would that I could have been here sooner!" ' (The Return of the King, "The Houses of Healing")

It clearly states in the book that Faramir indeed was one of the victims of the Black Breath. There also many other Lord of the Rings informative/fansites that can also vouch for this. I can give the list, if more evidence is needed. —Mirlen 15:59, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Rings of Power

Did the rings disappear when they transformed into Nazgul, or do they still have them? If so, can they use them anyhow? --Mr. Orange 62.168.125.219 11:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Sauron took them from them, and controlled them with it, at least until he had the One Ring back. I don't recall a reference of them being returned. They certainly didn't need them any longer, being wraiths. -- Jordi·✆ 12:35, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Are the Nazgûl really "undead"?

Wikipedia defines "undead" as "the collective name for all types of supernatural entities that are deceased yet behave as if alive." (italics mine.) The Ringwraiths were neither alive nor dead as wraiths, but they didn't die when they became wraiths. I'm removing the category Category:Fictional undead. Uthanc 11:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid your changes have been made a bit too hastily. Tolkien himself considered the Ringwraiths to be undead (at least within the context of The Lord of the Rings).

For example, in confronting the Witch-king, Éowyn warns: "Begone, if you be not deathless! For living or dark undead, I will smite you, if you touch him." (emphasis mine)

More importantly, however, is the 3rd person narrator statement: "No other blade, though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will." (emphasis mine)

Perhaps Tolkien's definition of undead does not match Wikipedia's, to which I would suggest altering Wikipedia's definition. Another famous example of undead is from D&D -- the Lich, a high-level magic-user who did not "die" prior to becoming a Lich, but used his own magic to animate his flesh well beyond his mortal lifetime. LotR 18:07, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

- Eating my words - I forgot that line... Uthanc 01:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, glad to hear you agree. So will you go back and revert the changes or should I do that? (Probably would be easier for you since you know better which changes you made.) LotR 18:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Just put Category: Fictional undead back, though I think we need to clarify that they aren't re-animated. How about defining the state of being undead as "having the outward appearance of life, but shouldn't be alive?" Tricky... Uthanc 00:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I think this may be the sticking point here, namely that I would consider an undead to be animated, but not necessarily re-animated. That's the reason I brought up the example of the Lich -- when you get down to it, a Lich is somewhat similar to a Ringwraith -- though they never formally expired (as in they were buried), it can be argued that they are "dead" in a sense. It seems that they are animated by their own souls (as opposed to another individual), but their souls are unnaturally bound to their bodies through the power of the Rings ("the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will"). I would suggest altering your definition to something along the lines of "...should be dead but are magically animated to behave as if alive." LotR 21:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree that they are not really undead. No one considers Gollum to be undead, and they are essentially the same. The quote referenced only mentions undead "flesh." Obviously their flesh has withered away, but undead means something that was once dead and is now no longer dead, i.e., reanimated. The Nazgul have continuously diminished in appearance since obtaining their rings, so there never was a revival or reanimation. I believe further research and discussion is needed.

Citation needed

I am wondering where the statement that three of the Nazgul were 'great lords of Numenor' comes from. Is that from someplace in 'History of Middle-earth' or perhaps 'Letters'? --Sephiroth9611 22:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it's in The Two Towers, according to Faramir. Uthanc 04:20, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

From the Akallabêth, "Yet Sauron was ever guileful, and it is said that among those whom he ensared with the Nine Rings three were great lords of Númenórean race." (p.267 The Silmarillion, Second Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company) – Pedantic79 ^(talk) 19:51, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Riding on the back of a Nazgul

Shouldn't we mention, that Peter Jackson and a number of the other staff members misunderstood the term and believed (at least until the recording of the ROTK-Special Extended Edition DVD commentary) that the word Nazgul referred to the Fell Beasts. There is a relevant reference in that article. Iago4096 13:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

"They are the Nazgul ..." - Aragorn to the hobbits in the FOTR film, when asked what the creatures in black are. Dhimwit 20:02, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Well? What do you ,mean? Iago4096 14:43, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

athelas?

There is a discrepancy here. If my memory serves me, in the Fellowship of the Ring novel Strider makes it known (to the elf princes who arrive to spirit away Frodo I believe) that athelas does nothing at all but he wanted to give the hobbits something to occupy them. In the movie the opposite is true. VanTucky 01:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

That can't be right. I'm pretty sure that he says something like that the athelas slowed the poisoning but that it would eventually be overcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.46.228 (talk) 08:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I believe that in the book that athelas are used to cure those affected by the Black Breath. Therefore they must have some power over the Nazgul's magic. That was before Aragorn was king though. Maybe that has something to do with it...Aragorn245 (talk) 18:38, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Athelas was indeed a wonderously powerful cure, but it could do little to slow the effects of the wound. Whereas it was commonly used to counter the effects of the Black Breath, Frodo was wounded by a Morgul-blade, which is a far deadlier weapon, having more profound and immediate effects. (The Black Breath merely kills, whereas the stab would have enslaved Frodo had it struck his heart.) Also, a portion of the blade remained in the wound, and even the greatest of cures could not heal the wound whilst the fragment endured. LordShonus (talk) 08:46, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

"Nazgûl" or similar-sounding names as real names in the real world: relevant?

I believe we don't have any evidence that Tolkien ever studied Turkic (not Turkish) or Persian. For what it's worth, al-ghūl means "the ghoul" in Arabic (hence Batman's "Ra's al Ghul", also see Algol). But Tolkien didn't ever study Arabic either, didn't he? Northern and northwestern European languages were his field of interest... Uthanc 06:48, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

dwimmerlaik

Please explain the word "dwimmerlaik" used by Éowyn in her guise as Dernhelm to insult the Lord of the Nazgûl: ("Begone, foul dwimmerlaik [...]!" she shouts to him in the chapter "The Battle of the Pelennor Fields".) Since "dwimmerlaik" is written with a lower-case "d" I thought it to be a (rare) word of the English language. Which apparently it isn't really, as Tolkien seems to have made it up. Puzzling to a non-native speaker. (fm4a@yahoo.com) --213.39.147.239 12:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

See Talk:Fell_beast#Dwimmerlaik 222.127.122.27 16:56, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Black horses

The article says the horses were specially bred and trained in Mordor but I am sure that the book refers to horses being stolen from Rohan, but only ever black ones, for the service of the dark lord. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.186.33 (talk) 03:07, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I though those horses were given to Mordor by Rohan as a gift. Wasn't that when Theoden was being controlled by Wormtongue? Aragorn245 (talk) 18:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

sauron gave rings to elves

The article says Sauron gave rings to the elves.

Technically, I didn't think Sauron gave rings to the elves, though he participated in the Elven procurement of ring-lore. This is why the elven rings could still be used for good, as long as the One Ring remained out of Sauron's hands. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.199.3 (talk) 01:15, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Nazgul theme song

Okay its not a theme song its an orchestral score; I thought that the nazgul score in the LOTR movies was a little bit stubborn and overused. I hate it when music becomes stubborn; when a theme is repeated way too much, or when a singer repeats the lyrics over and over for like 2 minutes straight at the end of the song god damn is that ever annoying!

206.63.78.62 (talk) 09:42, 11 September 2008 (UTC)stardingo747