Theories on the Identity of the Witch-King

[Willow Oran]

But the first time Tolkien has invented the Witch King's character, he described him as "a renegade wizard from Numenor".That was before Tolkien developed the concept of Wizards being all maiar.

This theory may still have some validity though; Tolkien does talk about the two blue wizards who:

- Come to Middle Earth in the Middle of the Second Age, c. 1600, and,
- Go east and disappear.

Given that, the 'renegade wizard' could still be in the running, though the 'from numenor' bit would take some creative speculation.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Willow Oran

This theory may still have some validity though; Tolkien does talk about the two blue wizards who:

- Come to Middle Earth in the Middle of the Second Age, c. 1600, and,
- Go east and disappear.

Given that, the 'renegade wizard' could still be in the running, though the 'from numenor' bit would take some creative speculation.

How could a Maia fade? This theory was only applicable when all the wizards were mortal Men.

[Valandil]

Originally Posted by Willow Oran

This theory may still have some validity though; Tolkien does talk about the two blue wizards who:

- Come to Middle Earth in the Middle of the Second Age, c. 1600, and,
- Go east and disappear.

Given that, the 'renegade wizard' could still be in the running, though the 'from numenor' bit would take some creative speculation.

What two blue wizards come to ME in the middle of the second age?

The only 'blue wizards' I ever heard of were the two who came with the other Istari around 1000 in the Third Age. The Nazgul had already been around for most of an Age by then. Over 2000 years anyway.

[Olmer]

Originally Posted by Gordis

How could Tolkien miss this "mistake" (as Christopher calls it) in the Second Edition while he already had the "Line of Elros" written?

It's quite obvious. Is not it?
The fact that in both official sources ("Annals" and “The Line of Elros”) were specified various dates of death I consider as an obvious indicator that the “digging” in all this mistery should be launched exactly from this point .
Here is a part of the table, made by me, with dates of birth, life and reign of the kings of Numenor.
In black - the dates which were taken from «The Line of Elros» and «The Chronology of the Westlands”(Appendices B).
In blue - my calculations .
In red - an inconsistent or suspicious dates.


According to one of my friends, the picture gives an impression of being swept with a machine gun and the blast went basically over the two particular kings.
Why this two, when other parts of the chronologies have been left as is, untouched?
As I already have mentioned, Tolkien was working on the chronology of Numenorean’s kings for a quite long time, but instead of smoothing out all roughnesses in the dates of events , he has began to do the deliberate corrections, by a definition of his son, the "mistakes".
Why Tolkien has embarked on the corrections of the dates of these two kings?
I think, that Tolkien has been planning in the indirect way to point out on the real person of the one, who later became the King-Nazgul, but by whatever reasons he has decided to leave only hints, offering to the reader to come to the necessary conclusion by himself .

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Valandil

What two blue wizards come to ME in the middle of the second age?

The only 'blue wizards' I ever heard of were the two who came with the other Istari around 1000 in the Third Age. The Nazgul had already been around for most of an Age by then. Over 2000 years anyway.

It is in HOME 12, Last Writings: "The five wisards"

The 'other two' came much earlier, at the same time probably as Glorfindel, when matters became very dangerous in the Second Age. Glorfindel was sent to aid Elrond and was (though not yet said) pre-eminent in the war in Eriador. But the other two Istari were sent for a different purpose. Morinehtar and Romestamo. Darkness-slayer and East-helper..

[Willow Oran]

How could a Maia fade? This theory was only applicable when all the wizards were mortal Men.

I very much agree that it makes more sense for all the nazgul to be corrupted mortals. But just to play devil's advocate for a bit: A Maia might fade if said Maia was first trapped in a physical form and then overpowered by another Ainu.

Didn't it say somewhere that the forms taken by the Istari were rather more solid than normally used by the Maiar? If that was the case then one of them might react by fading as a mortal would when corrupted by a ring.

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Olmer

I think, that Tolkien has been planning in the indirect way to point out on the real person of the one, who later became the King-Nazgul, but by whatever reasons he has decided to leave only hints, offering to the reader to come to the necessary conclusion by himself .

But that's not his usual style, is it? Tolkien wasn't secretive, he wrote everything in detail, even writing whole essays about small linguistic matters. If he was working out who to make the Witch-King's first incarnation, you can bet there should be writing about it where he debated which one to pick, or at least a scribbled note 'make this one witch-king instead' by a name. That seems to be more his manner instead of leaving obscure hints.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by WO

A Maia might fade if said Maia was first trapped in a physical form and then overpowered by another Ainu. Didn't it say somewhere that the forms taken by the Istari were rather more solid than normally used by the Maiar? If that was the case then one of them might react by fading as a mortal would when corrupted by a ring.

The Istari were fully incarnate, yes, but were not clad in genuine mortal bodies, only something similar. They did not age as fast as men did, they didn’t die of old age. Being Maiar, they naturally had access to the Spirit world. Sauron wore his Ring and didn’t fade, did he? Why would one of the Blue wizards? - And where then is another one?

But seriously, it just doesn’t fit because of the time of composition of different elements of this theory. In 1940-ies Tolkien had wizards as Wise Men of Numenor, with the WK as a renegade wizard (Wizard-King). In early 50-ies Wizards became Maiar, sent to ME in TA 1000, while the WK remained a Man from SA Numenor*. In late 60-ies or early 70-ies Tolkien played with the idea of sending two of the Maiar earlier, telling BTW what has happened to them. That is all.

*Note this quote from Nomenclature written for the Second Edition of LOTR, but never inserted: Reader’s Companion p.20.

The name and origin of the Witch-king is not recorded, but he was probably (like the Lieutenant of Barad-dur) of Numenorean descent.

Originally Posted by Eärniel

But that's not his usual style, is it? Tolkien wasn't secretive, he wrote everything in detail, even writing whole essays about small linguistic matters. If he was working out who to make the Witch-King's first incarnation, you can bet there should be writing about it where he debated which one to pick, or at least a scribbled note 'make this one witch-king instead' by a name. That seems to be more his manner instead of leaving obscure hints.

Yes, but there is always a possibility to find an extra set of notes...
BTW what do you mean by "the Witch-King's first incarnation???"

I don't think he planned for his readers to solve the riddle themselves - not his way, here I agree with Earniel. But he must have had some vague idea about a king-nazgul, that he might develop later, if he felt so inclined, without having to alter the published Tale of Years.
Tolkien had to decide whether to leave himself an opening or no, when he was sending the Second Edition to print. He respected his own published works - as if they were unalterable historical documents. Publishing something as straightforward as the Line of Elros left no room for further stories. Note, that he never inserted all the dates he had already written in the Line of Elros (UT) and in the drafts of the Appendices (HOME 12) into the published Tale of Years. He wanted it incomplete and somewhat contradictory,as a real historical source was likely to be.

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Gordis

BTW what do you mean by "the Witch-King's first incarnation???"

Perhaps 'first identity' is a better description.

[Alcuin]

Originally Posted by Olmer

It's quite obvious. Is not it?
The fact that in both official sources ("Annals" and “The Line of Elros”) were specified various dates of death I consider as an obvious indicator that the “digging” in all this mistery should be launched exactly from this point .
Here is a part of the table, made by me, with dates of birth, life and reign of the kings of Numenor.
In black - the dates which were taken from «The Line of Elros» and «The Chronology of the Westlands”(Appendices B).
In blue - my calculations .
In red - an inconsistent or suspicious dates.

Here’s a reasonably full discussion of when each of the kings Númenor, Gondor, and Arnor was born, when he took the throne, when and if he retired, when he died, with references and discussions of discrepancies. Buried in the footnotes is a similar discussion for the Ruling Stewards of Gondor and the Lords of Dol Amroth.

The dates of the births, ascensions to the throne, and deaths are pretty reasonable, I think. (Take a look at the graphs: it appears to me as if Tolkien charted or sketched them out for himself.) There is no evidence, in my opinion, of any assassinations of kings, royal princes, or undead kings. Anducal, husband of Tar-Vanimeldë, usurped throne from their son Tar-Alcarin for 20 years, but that took place 1000 years after the birth of Tar-Atanamir. (There is some weak evidence that Ar-Pharazôn eliminated Elendil’s uncle, Elentir; but I believe that Elentir appears in only two of three tellings of the tale, and even that is at the end of the history of Númenor, not midway through, as we are discussing here.)

Remember that the Númenóreans embalmed their dead, much as did the real-world Egyptians. The embalmers and courtiers and extended family would all have noticed any problems in this process, reported them, and midway through the history of Númenor, long before most of the population had fallen away from “true faith” in Eru and his design for Men, fought against either a usurper or an undead ruler.

The simpler argument is that the Witch-king was not a king of Númenor, but a close relative who had immediate and, for quite some time, unhindered access to the royal family.