
Felagund
Rohan

Jan 28, 10:11pm
Views: 320
|
I don't reckon I'd appreciated the nuance in that passage before, regarding what these Men "became", as opposed to what they may have been originally - many thanks for pointing it out! I had a look at the pre-Silmarillion version of it (as published The Return of the Shadow) and did some cross-referencing with some of Tolkien's letters and, naturally, contradictions abound. The original version reverses the order, so to speak, so that it's the "kings, warriors and wizards" [not sorcerers, first time round] who 'become' the Ringwraiths. And then we get this from Letter 156 (November 1954):
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 the subject of Khamûl, I've always assumed too that he was an Easterling king, back in the day. But I can't find a reference of that nature in the usual 'go-to' source, 'The Hunt for the Ring' / Unfinished Tales. 'Shadow of the East' and 'the Black Easterling', yes, but not a king, at least prior to his descent into darkness, now that I question my own assumption! Even with all of these various inconsistencies, I agree with you that these humans had to be worth the effort, for Sauron to justify dealing out such a very limited and precious resource as a Ring of Power. So, as well as the three Númenórean "great lords", you'd reckon some of the other six could have been kings, lords or accomplished warriors of some description, prior to their recruitment by the Lord of the Rings.
Welcome to the Mordorfone network, where we put the 'hai' back into Uruk
|