LOTR: Return of the King.

[Legion]

Rugor i doubt that with one hand she could apply enough force to severe its hamstrings while moving in the opposite direction of the Olifants. Her knowing to attack the hamstrings seems to me nothing more than speculation.

 

[Rugor]

I doubt that she could have physically done it myself. However for someone who grew up in that culture to know not know the effects of hamstringing is ludicrous. The thing that separates her from her compatriots is not that she knew to attack the hamstrings, but that she didn't know not to attack the hamstrings on an Olifant.

 

[Legion]

Suggesting she cut its hamstrings with a glancing blow with one arm while riding a horse is ludicrous

I belief this is what i said i felt to be ludicrous.

 

[Rugor]

Legion said:

Her knowing to attack the hamstrings seems to me nothing more than speculation.

That was what I was responding to. I think its completely reasonable for her to make the attempt, because given her upbringing she would know all about hamstringing. Of course I may be affected by my knowledge of the books.

 

[Randell]

Legion said:

Her knowing to attack the hamstrings seems to me nothing more than speculation.

That was what I was responding to. I think its completely reasonable for her to make the attempt, because given her upbringing she would know all about hamstringing. Of course I may be affected by my knowledge of the books.

Honestly what are you lot arguing about? Some of the reasoning displayed here is close to being pathetic straw clutching.

i. In killing the Witch-King she was fulfilling the prophecy that no man would/could kill the Witch-King. She clearly delivered the killing blow to the head, though almost died because of it (which I guess will be in the extended DVD along with more stuff from the Houses of Healing as you only see her and Faramir together at the end in the film, with no hint of prior romance). Merry distracted the Witch-King from killing her with his stab to the knee (hardly a killing blow there and then). I thought the film delivered that scene almost perfectly from the book. No man killed the Witch-King, but a Woman and a Hobbit did.

ii. As was said before she was a shield-maiden - trained to fight, which is one reason she objected so much to being left behind. Anybody arguing any differnt hasn't read/doesn't understand that part of the story.

iii. Of course she knew about ham-strings - she's an accomplished rider etc. She would be totally au fait with animal weaknesses etc.

iv. Of course her hamstringing the Mumakil (not Oliphant btw) was unrealistic, as was Legolas taking one out single handed. It was artistic licence for the film. I agree as I watched those scenes I went 'hmm'. But they were meant to be crowd-pleasers.

 

[pax]

Your saying mumakills arent the same as oliphants? They look same to me...

 

[Rugor]

Olifant(sp) is the Westron or "common speech" name for the animal; Mumak, plural Mumakil, is the name used by the Haradrim who speak a form of the Black Speech.

 

[Randell]

It was pure luck that she defeated him. Merry stabbed him in the back, and she finished him off. She was obviously on the losing end until Merry did his thing.

absolutely, but that's how prophecy's go eh?

 

[Randell]

Olifant(sp) is the Westron or "common speech" name for the animal; Mumak, plural Mumakil, is the name used by the Haradrim who speak a form of the Black Speech.

well I always thought that Mumakil were bigger, but I guess you're right.

 

[Althornin]

It was pure luck that she defeated him. Merry stabbed him in the back, and she finished him off. She was obviously on the losing end until Merry did his thing.

absolutely, but that's how prophecy's go eh?

she didnt kill the witch king at all (in the book)

 

[Randell]

It was pure luck that she defeated him. Merry stabbed him in the back, and she finished him off. She was obviously on the losing end until Merry did his thing.

absolutely, but that's how prophecy's go eh?

she didnt kill the witch king at all (in the book)

yes she did, well they both did. Merry's stab with a Numenorean/Westernesse sword distracted him and undid the spell which bound him and Eowyn delivered the killing blow.

 

[Althornin]

yes she did, well they both did. Merry's stab with a Numenorean/Westernesse sword distracted him and undid the spell which bound him and Eowyn delivered the killing blow.

no, she didnt.
Damn, you people talk about this stuff, then i post definitive fact, and you ignore it. If you want to discuss this, please reference the text....
I guess i'll repeat myself:

"Out of the wreck rose a Black Rider, tall and threatening, towering above her. With a cry of hatred that stung the very ears like venom he let fall his mace. Her shield was shivered in many pieces, and her arm was broken; she stumbled to her knees. He bent over her like a cloud, and his eyes glittered; he raised his mace to kill.

But suddenly he too stumbled foward with a cry of bitter pain, and his stroke went wide, driving into the ground. Merry's sword had stabbed him from behind, shearing through the black mantle, and passing up beneath the hauberk had pierced the sinew behind the mighty knee.
Eowyn! Eowyn! cried Merry. Then tottering, struggling up, with her last strength she drove her sword between crown and mantle, as great shoulders bowed before her. The sword broke sparkling into many shards. The crown rolled away with a clang. Eowyn fell forward upon her fallen foe. But lo! the mantle and hauberk were empty. Shapeless they lay now on the ground, torn and tumbled; and a cry went up into shuddering air, and faded to a shrill wailing, passing with the wind, a voice bodiless and thin that died, and was swallowed up, and was never heard again in that age of this world."

So passed the sword of the Barrow-downs, work of the Westernesse. But glad would he have been to know its fate who wrought it slowly long ago in the North-kingdom when the Dunedain were young, and chief among their foes was the dread realm of Angmar and its sorcerer king. 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 his unseen sinews to his will.

i'd say the last line unequivocably says that Merry killed it - "No other blade would have ... [broken] the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will."

 

[Randell]

And I say that is a mistaken interpretation. Tolkien clearly intended it to be taken as the work of both of them, with Eowyn credited with the killing blow;

From RoTK - Appendix A.

'for her shield-arm was broken by the mace of the witch-king:but he was brought to nothing, and thus the words of Glorfindel long before to King Earnur 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 Eowyn had the aid of Theodens esquire, and that he also was not a Man but a Halfling out of a far country, though Eomer gave him honour in the Mark and the name of Holdwine.'

From the Unfinished Tales Index

Eowyn - Sister of Eomer, wife of Faramir; Slayer of the Lord of the Nazgul in the Battle of Pelennor Fields.

 

[jvd]

well anyway with estimates it should have hit 223 million as of the end of tonight. That is domestic. Not a bad take.

 

[Althornin]

And I say that is a mistaken interpretation. Tolkien clearly intended it to be taken as the work of both of them, with Eowyn credited with the killing blow;

From RoTK - Appendix A.

'for her shield-arm was broken by the mace of the witch-king:but he was brought to nothing, and thus the words of Glorfindel long before to King Earnur 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 Eowyn had the aid of Theodens esquire, and that he also was not a Man but a Halfling out of a far country, though Eomer gave him honour in the Mark and the name of Holdwine.'

From the Unfinished Tales Index

Eowyn - Sister of Eomer, wife of Faramir; Slayer of the Lord of the Nazgul in the Battle of Pelennor Fields.

Unfinished Tales is not true source, and as for the appendix entry, it does not match with what is actually said in the book. If you had bothered to read my original post, i agreed there is some wrangling over this and both sides can be argued, but if you choose to make statments, you need to back them up, which you have now done.
So, henceforth - we disagree, and that is acceptable by me.

 

[Randell]

Unfinished Tales is not true source,

but accepted as canon by Tolkien 'scholars' as edited by Christopher Tolkien.

So, henceforth - we disagree, and that is acceptable by me.

agreed

 

[cthellis42]

Offhand, I think it's rather odd to take a hard-line, personal interpretation of overly artistic, narrative comments one specific way, when Tolkien himself makes his mind perfectly clear on it elsewhere. <shrugs>

 

[John Reynolds]

Offhand, I think it's rather odd to take a hard-line, personal interpretation of overly artistic, narrative comments one specific way, when Tolkien himself makes his mind perfectly clear on it elsewhere. <shrugs>

I was just thinking the same thing. The author clearly states his case and yet since it doesn't jive with someone's personal interpretation let's just throw it out as not being "true source". sheesh

 

[jvd]

Offhand, I think it's rather odd to take a hard-line, personal interpretation of overly artistic, narrative comments one specific way, when Tolkien himself makes his mind perfectly clear on it elsewhere. <shrugs>

I was just thinking the same thing. The author clearly states his case and yet since it doesn't jive with someone's personal interpretation let's just throw it out as not being "true source". sheesh

In my tolkien class sophmore year of college our prof didn't like unfinished tales. he said it was tainted by the son.

 

[Randell]

In my tolkien class sophmore year of college our prof didn't like unfinished tales. he said it was tainted by the son.

in this case though the appendices, in Tolkiens own 'untainted hand', are are perfectly clear though.