# The Lord of the Nazgul vs Gandalf the White



## Úlairi

I am curious as to some of the opinions as to whether or not the Lord of the Nazgul could beat Gandalf the White. In 'The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers: Chapter Five: "The White Rider"' it says:



> "And this I also say: you are our captain and our banner. The Dark Lord has Nine. But we have one, *mightier than they*: the White Rider."



Here Aragorn says that Gandalf is stronger than all the Nine together. However, Denethor says in 'The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King: Chapter Four: "The Siege of Gondor"':



> "'Yet know under the Lord of Barad-dur the most fell of all his captains is already master of your outer walls,' said Gandalf. 'King of Angmar long ago, Sorcerer, Ringwraith, Lord of the Nazgul, a spear of terror in the hand of Sauron, shadow of despair.'
> 'Then Mithrandir, *you had a foe to match you*,' said Denethor. 'For myself, I have long known the who is the chief captain of the hosts of the Dark Tower. Is that all you have returned to say? Or can it be that you have withdrawn *because you were overmatched*?'"



It then continues a little later on the same page:



> "'*It might be so*,' Gandalf answered softly.



Even Gandalf the White is unsure of if he could beat the Morgul-lord. So, what do you people think?


----------



## Rangerdave

As far as Denethor would know, the Nazgul Lord would be more than a match for what he thought Gandalf was capable of handling. First of all, Denethor has no idea what Gandalf truly is. Certainly he recognizes a Wizard of Power, but not the source or depth of said power. 

Also, Denethor had up until then only had dealings with Gandalf the Grey, the power of the White remained unknown to him. 

Lastly, Denethor and reality had seemed to have a parting of the ways. so is opinion fact based or another lie of Mordor? 

I would be interested to see what someone who knew the full truth. ie Cirdan or Galadriel would have thought the odds were in this contest. 

Cool question none-the-less. 

RD 

ps did you get my e-mail? 
rd


----------



## Beleg Strongbow

The valar forbided the Istari to use their power to "dominate others" and whilst being clothed they lost their power, right? Well i think as powerful as he could be with this power he would demolish the Morgul lord and the rest of the nazgul. Without it im not to sure. He was always wisest of the maia, Olorin.


(from the silmarillion "Valaquenta".)


> "Wisest of the maia was Olorin (gandalf). He too dwelt in Lorien, but his ways often took him to the house of Neinna and from her he learnt patience and pity".






It shows here how wise he was and i beleive he was wiser then one of suaron's servants. Even being his second in command.Olorin was still wiser then sauron, he counts as a maia. His power was very strong too. Even as Gandalf the grey he managed to kill another maia a balrog and i think, the balrog to be more stronger then the nazgul lord. He came back even stronger as Gandalf the white and being even stronger i beleive he was more powerful. As Aragorn said and Ulairi quoted he was extremely powerful and this guy had met both partys in full flight, i'd think he'd know. As for his reply to Denethor i always thought he was just trying to downplay it and not show off as one might call it. I think he didn't want to show Denethor any of those arrogant feelings. I think Gandalf while being strongfer might have found it a little hard to kill the nazgul. It was said that not a man would kill the nazgul, it ended being a hobbit. I bet that guy had taken some bigger and harder hits then that in his life. The flood at Imladris for one. I think Gandalf would have one in all catergories. He was very strong and in the end i think he could beat the dark lords second.


----------



## Niniel

I think that Gandalf the White was a lot more powerful than the Nazgul Lord. I agree with RD that Denethor didn't know Gandalf the White and didn't want to admit that Gandalf was mightier than himself. If even Éowyn and Merry could defeat the Nazgul Lord, Gandalf the White must have been able do to it.


----------



## Anamatar IV

im sure gandalf could beat the morgul lord. He stood against a Balrog one on one right? He is a member of the secret fire and holds the flame of Anor. I really dont know what that means bu t, whatever


----------



## Lord Melkor

Gandalf was most likely stronger than Lord Of Nazgul but I don`t think he would defeat all Ringwraiths at once.


----------



## Greenwood

Denethor had been sparring with Gandalf since Gandalf's arrival in Minas Tirith. I think this is just another example of Denethor trying to needle Gandalf. Gandalf's response is just his way f quietly saying "I am not rising to the bait."


----------



## pohuist

I would agree with all said above. One other point: I belive Gandalf said at some point (I think to Gimli when they met in Fangorn forest, although, I am not sure), something to the effect that he could be the scariest and the mightiest in ME unless the Dark Lord himself is come. That, of course, meeans that he is able to beat the Lord of Nazgul or even the 9 of them together. After all, Gandalf is a Maia, while an elf (Glorfindel) was able to drive 5 of them off the bridge. Their main weapon is fear of which Gandalf had none.


----------



## Anamatar IV

if gandalf is the wisest of maia then why was saruman the head of the council? Could saruman take on the nazgul lord?


----------



## DGoeij

I've read in the Unfinished Tales that when the Valar wished to aid the people in ME, they decided to send Maiar and that Curunir (Saruman) was very eager to go. Olorin (Gandalf) had to be pushed to go and he came last. 
Therefor I guess Gandalf also didn't really want the job as head of the council and I can imagine Saruman being very eager. And before the first body of Gandalf was destroyed during his fighting with the Balrog, I believe Saruman's was more mighty.


----------



## pohuist

> _Originally posted by amerxtremist _
> *if gandalf is the wisest of maia then why was saruman the head of the council? Could saruman take on the nazgul lord? *



Saruman used to be the mightiest b/f Gandalf became White. Interesting question about Saruman vs. Nazgul Lord. When the 9 rode to Orthanc with questions of whereabouts of the Ring (UT, Hunt for the Ring), Tolkien said that Saruman was capable of withstanding their attack while in Orthanc. That seems to imply that without Orthanc defences he could not. Still leaves open the question of his strength compared to the Lord of Nasgul alone. I would be still inclined to think that any Maia is more powerful


----------



## Rangerdave

Wisdom and Might are seldom the same thing. Also Cirdan and Galadriel would have prefered Gandalf to head the council. My personal opinion is that Gandalf refused because it would take up to much of his thought.

And in response to the matter of the Nazgul Lord not being able to be "killed by any man". Well, Wizards are not really men now are they.

Just my thoughts
RD


----------



## Beleg Strongbow

And in response to the matter of the Nazgul Lord not being able to be "killed by any man". Well, Wizards are not really men now are they.

Just my thoughts
RD [/B][/QUOTE]




Yes they are not, but if you were Gandalf how would you kill them? I beleive that saruman would have not been able to beat the nazgul. Remember Gandalf said "Saruman might hold out while he satys in his tower". (on the nazgul) or something along those lines.


----------



## Úlairi

All very good arguments guys, but none of them are really convincing, which is what I am looking for. The reason I posted this thread is on this very basic point. Here from UT I wilkl explain what I mean:



> "For with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order. but clad in bodies as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the *fears* and pains and weariness of the earth, able to hunger and thirst *and be slain*."
> _Unfinished Tales Page 503_



So Gandalf could be slain, we all know that, as the Balrog killed Gandalf. All the Lord of the Nazgul would have to do is decapitiate Gandalf or stab him and Gandalf would perish. Someone made the false statement that Gandalf felt no fear, where it clearly states up there that he could. It says in 'The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King: Chapter Four: "The Siege of Gondor"':



> "But it is the Black Captain that defeats us. *Few will stand and abide even the rumour that he is coming.* His won folk quail at him, *and they would slay themselves at his bidding.*"



As you can see, the Lord of the Nazgul is so terrible, if he told a man to kill himself he would. Not so with Gandalf I agree, and I know that Gandalf stands up to him, yet they are never fight. What I am saying is that Gandalf may lose to the Witch-King both because of his terror and the fact that he *could* kill Gandalf.


----------



## Rangerdave

I think that Gandalf could possibly dispatch the Witch King, but only at the cost of himself. Not just his body as in the battle with the Balrog, but the complete demise of his complete being.

I realize that a Maiar this would be difficult, but just because there is no evidence of an uncorrupted Maiar being destroyed, but it maitain that it is conceivable.

Or maybe not
RD


----------



## Úlairi

You see RD, that's exactly what I believe. If anyone is interested in a theory I have on the identity of the Witch-King PM me or check out 'The identity of the the Lord of the Nazgul' thread. As for Gandalf defeating the Lord of the Nazgul, I am still unsure in light of the evidence that I have given.


----------



## Lord Melkor

A bit off topic, but Ulairi, I remember you were writing LOTR continuation, have you abandomed this project?


----------



## SpencerC18

Honestly I think Gandalf would win, because although the witch-king is extremely powerful, his origins are human, but now a wraith. At most I think he is merely a very powerul sorcerer, Gandalf could take him.


----------



## Lantarion

I agree: all of the Nazgûl were once normal Men, but the corrosive power of their Rings broke them down into (more powerful) wraiths. Whereas Olórin was a 'pure' Maia (plural MAIAR!!), and his powers could not be matched by any Man, even if that Man had been given special magical powers. I agree w/ Spencer that thw Witch-King was just a powerful sorcerer: a Man with magical powers. But Gandalf was a Maia _and_ a 'sorcerer' (ie. wizard, magician), and although he had a mortal form and could die physically, his spirit could not be quenched by any power in M-E except perhaps Sauron, being a Maia of higher 'rank'.


----------



## Úlairi

> _Originally posted by Pontifex_
> *I agree: all of the Nazgûl were once normal Men, but the corrosive power of their Rings broke them down into (more powerful) wraiths.*



I agree.



> "But the Great Rings, they are perilous."



Gandalf says here that one of the Great Rings would be perilous even for himself let alone a mortal. The Nine were believed to be men, however, IMO, I believe these Rings gave them extraordinary power. So, therefore IMO the Lord of the Nazgul may have been a match for Gandalf the White.



> _Originally posted by Pontifex_
> *Whereas Olórin was a 'pure' Maia (plural MAIAR!!), and his powers could not be matched by any Man, even if that Man had been given special magical powers.*



I disagree Pontifex. You cannot 'presume' what the powers of the Nine Rings held. Perhaps it made the Lord of the Nazgul as powerful as Gandalf, that we will never know.



> _Originally posted by Pontifex_
> *I agree w/ Spencer that thw Witch-King was just a powerful sorcerer: a Man with magical powers.*



Again I disagree, there is no proof to actually say _who_ the Witch-King actually was. For all we know, he could have been one of the _Ithryn Luin_.



> _Originally posted by Pontifex_
> *But Gandalf was a Maia and a 'sorcerer' (ie. wizard, magician), and although he had a mortal form and could die physically, his spirit could not be quenched by any power in M-E except perhaps Sauron, being a Maia of higher 'rank'.*



Yes, Gandalf was a Maia and a sorcerer, I agree. Gandalf could die physically which is what the thread is about Pontifex. I am not interested in Gandalf's spirit, but just how his body would stand against the Lord of the Nazgul. As far as I'm concerned, this argument is far from over.


----------



## Úlairi

> _Originally posted by Lord Melkor _
> *A bit off topic, but Ulairi, I remember you were writing LOTR continuation, have you abandomed this project? *



Yes, I am still writing it. I though that you may have lost interest in it, so I stopped posting it to you. However, I haven't touched it in a while.


----------



## Tar-Palantir

There's scant evidence about the Lord of the Nazgul's fighting prowess, by which I mean his actual ability with a sword (or a mace). The only person I can think of he actually fought was Frodo and that wasn't much of one. It's stated several times that he rules mainly through fear. IMO, his fight with Gandalf would have had to involve sorcery - a battle of spells, if you will.

Oh - one other thing, Ulairi: How could Gandalf the White be decapitated or stabbed to death? He himself tells Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli something to the effect that no weapon could now hurt him (sorry I had to paraphrase here - I don't have the text in front of me and will gladly accept a correction if I mis-remembered the quote).


----------



## Ged

On a practical point, how many of the Nazgul were there when Gandalf was assailed on Wethertop in FoTR? My memory tells me that all nine were there, and Gandalf says (paraphrasing) "I was hard pushed to it. Such fire and lightning must never have been seen there in many a long year".

So, the nine together could not defeat Gandalf the Grey.

My feeling about the confrontation between Gandalf and The Lord of the Nazgul at the gates of Minas Tirith is that Gandalf KNEW that he would not be the one to kill the LoTN. He KNEW this in the same way that his wisdom told him that a hobbit should carry the ring. He didn't attack the LoTN because that would have been folly in the thousands of attackers swarming behind. No, he was watching and waiting only.


----------



## Úlairi

> _Originally posted by Tar-Palantir _
> *There's scant evidence about the Lord of the Nazgul's fighting prowess, by which I mean his actual ability with a sword (or a mace). The only person I can think of he actually fought was Frodo and that wasn't much of one. It's stated several times that he rules mainly through fear. IMO, his fight with Gandalf would have had to involve sorcery - a battle of spells, if you will.*



Yes, I agree that there is not much evidence on the topic.



> [/I]Originally posted by Tar-Palantir[/I]
> *It's stated several times that he rules mainly through fear. IMO, his fight with Gandalf would have had to involve sorcery - a battle of spells, if you will.*



Yes, I also agree. It does state this many a time. It would definitely be a battle of sorcery. 



> _Originally posted by Tar-Palantir_
> *Oh - one other thing, Ulairi: How could Gandalf the White be decapitated or stabbed to death? He himself tells Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli something to the effect that no weapon could now hurt him (sorry I had to paraphrase here - I don't have the text in front of me and will gladly accept a correction if I mis-remembered the quote).*





> _Unfinished Tales Page 503_
> "For with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but clad in bodies as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the fears and pains and weariness of the earth, able to hunger and thirst *and be slain*."



Tolkien clearly states here that the Istari could be slain. Gandalf the White states that he was 'Saruman as he should have been'. Saruman was once like this and he too could be slain. So obviously these terms are contradictory. I am unsure which to believe, but IMO I will stick to the fact that Gandalf the White *could* be slain.


----------



## Merlin

The witch-king seems to be the most confident (IMO) when he rides to the door of Gondor and meets Gandalf who comes to stop him. I just got a feeling that Gandalf was more "nervous" than the witch-king at that moment. And thats one of my favorite parts in the book 

Having said that I don't think Gandalf would have been able to kill the witch-king by himself and without being able to use his true powers.

The fact that he got killed by Merry and Eowyn doesnt change my stance -it was pure luck, nothing more.


----------



## Úlairi

> _Originally posted by Ged _
> *On a practical point, how many of the Nazgul were there when Gandalf was assailed on Wethertop in FoTR? My memory tells me that all nine were there, and Gandalf says (paraphrasing) "I was hard pushed to it. Such fire and lightning must never have been seen there in many a long year".
> 
> So, the nine together could not defeat Gandalf the Grey.
> 
> My feeling about the confrontation between Gandalf and The Lord of the Nazgul at the gates of Minas Tirith is that Gandalf KNEW that he would not be the one to kill the LoTN. He KNEW this in the same way that his wisdom told him that a hobbit should carry the ring. He didn't attack the LoTN because that would have been folly in the thousands of attackers swarming behind. No, he was watching and waiting only. *



Here is the quote:



> "I galloped to Weathertop like a gale, and I reached it before sundown on my second day from Bree - and they were there before me. They drew away from me, for they felt the coming of my anger and they dared not face it while the Sun was in the sky. But they closed round at night, and I was besieged on the hill-top, in the old ring of Amon Sul. *I was hard put to it indeed: such light and flame cannot have been seen on Weathertop since the war-beacons of old.*"



There is no number mentioned, so I guess that we can presume that all Nine were there. Gandalf *held them off, he did not defeat them*. So, Gandalf the Grey could hold *all* of the Nazgul off, but he never slayed them. So, I guess we will never know the outcome nor dare to presume the outcome between Gandalf the White and the Lord of the Nazgul.



> _Originally posted by Ged_
> *My feeling about the confrontation between Gandalf and The Lord of the Nazgul at the gates of Minas Tirith is that Gandalf KNEW that he would not be the one to kill the LoTN. He KNEW this in the same way that his wisdom told him that a hobbit should carry the ring. He didn't attack the LoTN because that would have been folly in the thousands of attackers swarming behind. No, he was watching and waiting only.*



Ged, I agree. However, in this thread we are being *theoretical* and *hypothetical*, so, what you have stated is irrelevant to the thread. No offence.


----------



## Beleg Strongbow

Are u sure all nine were there? I think Gandalf says later that not all 9 were there and that some stayed a little while off. I think Glorfindel would have been able to beat them. He wasn't scared and he could ride openly against them. He was a powerful eldar, but i still think Gandalf was stronger and definitley wiser. Gandalf could hold them off and not be killed so he just had to find a way of killing the nazgul.


----------



## Úlairi

> _Originally posted by Beleg Strongbow_
> *Are u sure all nine were there? I think Gandalf says later that not all 9 were there and that some stayed a little while off.*



I too also believed this, but I cannot find anywhere Gandalf actually gave the number.



> _Originally posted by Beleg Strongbow_
> *Glorfindel would have been able to beat them. He wasn't scared and he could ride openly against them. He was a powerful eldar, but i still think Gandalf was stronger and definitley wiser.*



You'll start up an entirely different topic here Beleg if you are not careful. So lets not bring Glorfindel into the equation, however, it would make a great debate. Yes Gandalf was stronger and wiser than Glorfindel, as he was a Maia and Glorfindel was a powerful elf.



> _Originally posted by Beleg Strongbow_
> *Gandalf could hold them off and not be killed so he just had to find a way of killing the nazgul.*



Yes, perhaps. But maybe Gandalf could not devise the Nazgul's demise.


----------



## Beleg Strongbow

Yes, perhaps. But maybe Gandalf could not devise the Nazgul's demise. [/B][/QUOTE]


Yes mayb. I don't know if Gandalf actually said that. But i think it says somewhere when they explained the whereabouts of all the riders that some satyed at the ford, thats why gandalf had to go through the entenmoors. Sorry i can't check it, i'm away fromm all my lotr books at the moment.


----------



## Úlairi

What book is it in Beleg? I'll look it up. Is it UT?


----------



## Beleg Strongbow

Thats it. I can't remember. I've had like a blimen brain freeze. I can't remember this 1 thang it is anoying me bad.


----------



## Úlairi

Darn, can anyone tell us anything?


----------



## Beleg Strongbow

Yes does anyone else think they know where they might be?


----------



## Úlairi

Anyone?


----------



## Beleg Strongbow

It might take a while to look up, so don't be too hasty.


----------



## Úlairi

Nearly 1000 Beleg?


----------



## Beleg Strongbow

Yes im there now. U will be there 2, soon as well.


----------



## Úlairi

Yes, but not today sadly.


----------



## Ged

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ulairi said:

_Originally posted by Ged 
My feeling about the confrontation between Gandalf and The Lord of the Nazgul at the gates of Minas Tirith is that Gandalf KNEW that he would not be the one to kill the LoTN. He KNEW this in the same way that his wisdom told him that a hobbit should carry the ring. He didn't attack the LoTN because that would have been folly in the thousands of attackers swarming behind. No, he was watching and waiting only.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ged, I agree. However, in this thread we are being theoretical and hypothetical, so, what you have stated is irrelevant to the thread. No offence._
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Ulairi, not exactly sure what you mean by "theoretical and hypothetical". I am simply trying to explain why Gandalf didn't attack the Lord of the Nazgul at Minas Tirith, because the fact that he didn't do so has been used previously as an argument in favour of him being weaker than LoTN.

It is not clear to me why this is "irrelevant", but no offense taken.


----------



## Ged

Beleg Strongbow,
Re the number of Nazgul at Weathertop, there is a reference later from Gandalf to I think "only 5 being there", but doesn't this refer to the number of Nazgul attacking Frodo et al at Weathertop? The reason given for there only being 5 was because Gandalf had ridden away taking some of the 9 with him.


----------



## Greenwood

Ulairi

You are at it again! You posted the following earlier, quoting Gandalf's description of his encounter with the Nazgul at Weathertop:



> "I galloped to Weathertop like a gale, and I reached it before sundown on my second day from Bree - and they were there before me. They drew away from me, for they felt the coming of my anger and they dared not face it while the Sun was in the sky. But they closed round at night, and I was besieged on the hill-top, in the old ring of Amon Sul. I was hard put to it indeed: such light and flame cannot have been seen on Weathertop since the war-beacons of old."



You said that you could find no place where it mentions how many Nazgul were at Weathertop. However, the quote you give above is not complete. In the book Gandalf continues speaking saying the following:



> At sunrise I escaped and fled towards the north. I could not hope to do more. It was impossible to find you, Frodo, in the wilderness, and it would have been folly to try *with all the Nine at my heels.* So I had to trust to Aragorn. But I hoped to draw some of them off, and yet reach Rivendell ahead of you and send out help. Four Riders did indeed follow me, but they turned back after a while and made for the Ford, it seems. That helped a little, for there were only five, not nine, when your camp was attacked.



Normally, I would give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you merely missed the reference to all nine Nazgul in the paragraph following the one you typed, but twice before I have caught you misrepresenting passages from Tolkien for the sole purpose of stirring up debate. I find it hard to believe this one is an accident. This is particularly true since the fact that all nine Nazgul did not dare face an angry Gandalf the Grey in daytime and that he could hold them all at bay at night makes a rather strong case that Gandalf the White, far stronger than Gandalf the Grey, would easily be able to take on the Lord of the Nazgul.

Can't you find anything of interest to discuss without distorting Tolkien just to stir up debates? Three strikes and you are out as far as I am concerned.


----------



## Ged

Bravo Greenwood, I agree with you.


----------



## Viceras Daydark

Woke up, bout to go back to bed, but I will share my quick thoughts.

You have:

Lord of the Nazgul
-Not in possession of a Ring of Power
-Of Man

vs.

Gandalf the White
-In Possession of a Ring of Power
-Of Maiar

The odds lean against Gandalf I would say. Let us not forget that after the hobbits and Strider left Bree, a lightning storm was seen. This storm was Gandalf fending off the Ring Wraiths. He came out on top against them (I forget if all of them were there or if only 4 or 5) then, I'd be quite confident to assume he would do more than beat the Lord of the Nazgul. Gandalf's nature was that of Guidance though. He could have done much, yet he merely guided the mortals, allowing them to do it for themselves. That was his nature. Let us not forget of his parting before the return to the Shire.

-Viceras Daydark


----------



## Úlairi

_Originally posted by Ged_

Ulairi said:



> _Originally posted by Ged_
> *My feeling about the confrontation between Gandalf and The Lord of the Nazgul at the gates of Minas Tirith is that Gandalf KNEW that he would not be the one to kill the LoTN. He KNEW this in the same way that his wisdom told him that a hobbit should carry the ring. He didn't attack the LoTN because that would have been folly in the thousands of attackers swarming behind. No, he was watching and waiting only.*





> _Originally posted by Ulairi_
> *Ged, I agree. However, in this thread we are being theoretical and hypothetical, so, what you have stated is irrelevant to the thread. No offence.*
> 
> 
> 
> Ulairi, not exactly sure what you mean by "theoretical and hypothetical". I am simply trying to explain why Gandalf didn't attack the Lord of the Nazgul at Minas Tirith, because the fact that he didn't do so has been used previously as an argument in favour of him being weaker than LoTN.
> 
> It is not clear to me why this is "irrelevant", but no offense taken.
> 
> _All of the above was posted by Ged_
> 
> Ged, I am sorry. I got you confused with someone else. I was going on two threads at the same time and I got a little mixed up but I stuck to the topic somehow. Weird. What I meant to say to you is that I disagree as Gandalf was a Maia, and not a man. The prophecy of the Witch-King was the he would be killed by no *man*, but Gandalf was one of the Maiar, so perhaps he could have killed him and he would still be fulfilling the prophecy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by Greenwood_
> 
> *Ulairi
> 
> You are at it again! You posted the following earlier, quoting Gandalf's description of his encounter with the Nazgul at Weathertop:
> 
> You said that you could find no place where it mentions how many Nazgul were at Weathertop. However, the quote you give above is not complete. In the book Gandalf continues speaking saying the following:
> 
> Normally, I would give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you merely missed the reference to all nine Nazgul in the paragraph following the one you typed, but twice before I have caught you misrepresenting passages from Tolkien for the sole purpose of stirring up debate. I find it hard to believe this one is an accident. This is particularly true since the fact that all nine Nazgul did not dare face an angry Gandalf the Grey in daytime and that he could hold them all at bay at night makes a rather strong case that Gandalf the White, far stronger than Gandalf the Grey, would easily be able to take on the Lord of the Nazgul.
> 
> Can't you find anything of interest to discuss without distorting Tolkien just to stir up debates? Three strikes and you are out as far as I am concerned.*
> 
> 
> 
> Greenwood, if you can believe this but this time it was an honest mistake. I did not read on as I usually do. I do not stir up debate all the time, only when I am bored and trust me, that doesn't happen often in my case.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by Greenwood_
> *Can't you find anything of interest to discuss without distorting Tolkien just to stir up debates?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are many things I do and they are mostly associated with Tolkien. I either argue on the forum or I read Tolkien. So, don't criticize people when you have no proof to back up your criticizm in the near future Greenwood.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Dhôn-Buri-Dhôn

Ulairi,



> So, don't criticize people when you have no proof to back up your criticizm in the near future Greenwood.



Have you ever heard the story of the boy who cried wolf?

On two previous occasions you have admitted posting in a deliberately misleading manner for the purpose of stirring up debate. Given that context, Greenwood's comment is entirely justified.

Your admitted falsifications are going to cast a shadow on every post you make here from now on. I think you'd better get used to the idea that your past actions are going to have consequences. If you want to get your credibility back, you're going to have to work at it, and snapping at Greenwood isn't going to help the healing process any.


----------



## Úlairi

> _Originally posted by Dhôn-Buri-Dhôn _
> *Ulairi,
> 
> 
> 
> Have you ever heard the story of the boy who cried wolf?
> 
> On two previous occasions you have admitted posting in a deliberately misleading manner for the purpose of stirring up debate. Given that context, Greenwood's comment is entirely justified.
> 
> Your admitted falsifications are going to cast a shadow on every post you make here from now on. I think you'd better get used to the idea that your past actions are going to have consequences. If you want to get your credibility back, you're going to have to work at it, and snapping at Greenwood isn't going to help the healing process any. *



Point well taken Dhon-buri-Dhon, my apologies Greenwood. Btw, good example, I have not heard of that story in a while.


----------



## Gimli

Damn all you who say "might" or "could" God dang it he could beet all the ringwraiths with 2 hands behind his back and his legs choped off

From your loving friend Gimli


----------



## Úlairi

Where's the proof Gimli?


----------



## Gimli

There is no need for proof but if you want it then ill give it to you.
Someone before did say that if merry and that shield maiden could been the witch king then so can gandalf and also gandalf said that the hobbits are only allowed to see a fration of his power and by reading the hobbit and the lod of the rings a fraction of his power is pretty dang strong. Plus Gandalf is to wizardish to be killed by a puny Witch King.

You loving friend ZGimli


----------



## Úlairi

I believe that I am wasting my time with you Gimli.


----------



## Gimli

You would most likely be right in that assumpuan (pardon the spelling)

You loving friend Gimli


----------



## Úlairi

I'm glad you digested that well, Gimli. Not very man people can.


----------



## Elu Thingol

> Posted by Ulairi
> quote:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Originally posted by Tar-Palantir
> Oh - one other thing, Ulairi: How could Gandalf the White be decapitated or stabbed to death? He himself tells Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli something to the effect that no weapon could now hurt him (sorry I had to paraphrase here - I don't have the text in front of me and will gladly accept a correction if I mis-remembered the quote).
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> quote:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Unfinished Tales Page 503
> "For with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but clad in bodies as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the fears and pains and weariness of the earth, able to hunger and thirst and be slain."
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Tolkien clearly states here that the Istari could be slain. Gandalf the White states that he was 'Saruman as he should have been'. Saruman was once like this and he too could be slain. So obviously these terms are contradictory. I am unsure which to believe, but IMO I will stick to the fact that Gandalf the White could be slain.



Ulairi you say that the Istari can be slain and I agree with you. However, I don't believe Gandalf could be killed by regular weapons. "Indeed my friends, none of you has any weapon that could hurt me." (Gandalf Book II pg. 125). So we see that he can not be hurt by an axe, bow and arrow, or a sword. It is safe to say now he can only be killed by a magical weapon or some sort of sorcery.

In your quote from unfinished tales it says the Istari were clad in bodies as of men or similar to men but these bodies are probably stronger than men and are similar in that of looks and most weaknesses. And about your Saruman reference I believe Gandalf is only saying that he has taken Saruman's place the quote says nothing of Gandalf's present power. Indeed we can infer that Gandalf is now much more powerful than Saruman when he easily breaks his staff at Orthanc.


----------



## Úlairi

> _Originally posted by Mithrandir2003_
> *However, I don't believe Gandalf could be killed by regular weapons. "Indeed my friends, none of you has any weapon that could hurt me." (Gandalf Book II pg. 125). So we see that he can not be hurt by an axe, bow and arrow, or a sword. It is safe to say now he can only be killed by a magical weapon or some sort of sorcery.*



Here is a quote from LoTR that supports my opinion(s):



> "I fear, Sam, that they believe your master has a deadly wound that will *subdue him to their will*. We shall see!"
> _The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring: Chapter XII: Flight to the Ford Pages 213-214_



I will quote Aragorn as best I can from the movie:



> "This is a Morgul-blade."
> _Aragorn, 'The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring', directed by Peter Jackson_



The weapons that the Nazgul had were definitely not ordinary. We cannot say what effect they would have on Gandalf the White.



> _Originally posted by Mithrandir2003_
> *And about your Saruman reference I believe Gandalf is only saying that he has taken Saruman's place the quote says nothing of Gandalf's present power. Indeed we can infer that Gandalf is now much more powerful than Saruman when he easily breaks his staff at Orthanc.*



Interpret it however you wish Mithrandir2003.


----------



## Elu Thingol

I'm simply saying that Gandalf can't be equal to Saruman in abilities and in power as you suggest or it would of been a much better fight. Admit it Gandalf and Saruman aren't equals. Gandalf is just saying he is the Saruman that should've been not Saruman.


----------



## Úlairi

As I have said, you may interpret the text which ever way you deem. You can take it out of context and defragment it like I do, I don't care Mithrandir2003.


----------



## Elu Thingol

whatever


----------



## Úlairi

*****Ulairi, you have been warned many times before, and given your last. Now, action must be taken. I will inform all the other moderators*

--<B>--


----------

