Bombadil's choice of weapons: A coincidence?

From The Lord of the Rings, The Fellowship of the Ring, Fog on the Barrow-Downs:

Quote:

---

For each of the hobbits he [Tom Bombadil] choose a dagger, long, leaf-shaped, and keen, of marvellous workmanship, damasked with serpent-forms in red and gold. They gleamed as he drew them from their black sheats, wrought of some strange metal, light and strong, and set with many fiery stones. Whether by some virtue in these sheats or because of the spell that lay on the mound, the blades seemed untouched by time, unrusted, sharp, glittering in the sun.
'Old knives are long enough as swords for hobbit-people,' he said. 'Sharp blades are good to have, if Shire-folk go walking, east, south, or far away into dark and danger.' Then he told them that these blades were forged many long years ago by Men of Westernesse: they were foes of the Dark Lord, but they were overcome by the evil king of Carn Dûm in the land of Angmar.

---

Concidering what befell later, was Bombadil's choice of weapons for the hobbits a pure coincidence?
Did he have such foresight that he 'knew' that one of those knives would come to good use?

Either his own foresight... or Eru's hand at work.

Interesting too that it was Merry who spoke when awakened, a couple pages before, recalling from his dream, perhaps ancient memories of those overcome by the men of Carn Dum. The king who sat at Carn Dum, of course, was the Witch-King... and before long, he, Merry and one of those daggers would all come around together again.

One of those daggers even had an earlier 'near-miss' on the Witch-King - when Frodo cut the hem of his black cloak at Weathertop (another outpost destroyed by his forces - over 1600 years before). And with the heir of those over-thrown right back there on the spot too! :)

Tangential... but I suppose many other wonderful things were left in that pile, for 'all kindly creatures' to claim, besides the brooch and four daggers, of which we know. I expect there could be many good stories to come from there... :) ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valandil

One of those daggers even had an earlier 'near-miss' on the Witch-King - when Frodo cut the hem of his black cloak at Weathertop (another outpost destroyed by his forces - over 1600 years before). And with the heir of those over-thrown right back there on the spot too! :)

---

I think that I sense another "what if...?" coming up.
If Frodo's knife had been but a little longer, then the Witch-king would have been vulnerable to destruction much sooner. But would any of the others have sensed the opportunity.

(And now I am getting well away from the topic...)

My take is that since Bombadil uttered the following line:

Quote:

---

Sharp blades are good to have, if Shire-folk go walking, east, south, or far away into dark and danger.

---

He might have known/seen more than he let on at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arvedui

From The Lord of the Rings, The Fellowship of the Ring, Fog on the Barrow-Downs:

Concidering what befell later, was Bombadil's choice of weapons for the hobbits a pure coincidence?
Did he have such foresight that he 'knew' that one of those knives would come to good use?

---

I'm not sure of what was in Bombadil's mind, but I'm sure it was in Tolkien's mind — at some point or other — to make sure these weapons were absolutely crucial: the ones used in future to defeat enemies against whom no other weapons would work. Otherwise, the whole Bombadil episode becomes nothing more than an agreeable aside.

Barley

I've wondered what if Frodo had the knife that was given to Merry, the knife he used against the witch king later in the story. Frodo's blade was destroied when it entered the witch king, but Merry's blade survived later slayed the witch king. Also, since all the blades looked the same, why did one harm the leader of the Nazgûl while the other was destoried by him?

Frodo's swipe was a near miss- he only got the Witch King's cloak, not the actual Witch King. Apparently the four daggers were identical, so we can presume that if Frodo had stabbed WK in the same manner that Merry later did, then it would have had the same effect. Conversely, if WK had been able to put his full attention on Merry during the later confrontation, he could have destroyed that blade as well.

Regarding Tolkien and the writing, I'm relatively sure TB's words were ammended after the Pelannor scenario was written. When Fog on the Barrow Downs was originally written, Tolkien had no clear concept of who the Black Riders were, nor did the Northern Kingdom of the Dunedain 'exist' as such.

Slight historical note on the Barrow-Downs: they were never technically 'destroyed' by the forces of the Witch King. In the War of TA 1409 (the one in which the Tower of Amon Sul was lost) the last prince of Cardolan fell, but the Dunedain of Cardolan persisted. This is mentioned in the Appendix B entry for TA 1409, where the Barrow Downs are referred to as 'Tyrn Gorthad'. Interestingly, it was probably the tomb of this last prince of Cardolan in which the four Hobbits were later captured. However, the Barrow Downs did not become 'evil' until after the great plague of TA 1636, which finally wiped out the Dunedain of Cardolan.
As a side note, I always appreciated the movie sequence where the four Hobbit swords were found at Weathertop. I had hoped that this would be a nod to the books due to the commonality of Amon Sul and Tyrn Gorthad in the struggle of the Dunedain against the Witch King, although it looks like that was probably unintentional on the part of the film-makers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phantom

I've wondered what if Frodo had the knife that was given to Merry, the knife he used against the witch king later in the story. Frodo's blade was destroied when it entered the witch king, but Merry's blade survived later slayed the witch king. Also, since all the blades looked the same, why did one harm the leader of the Nazgûl while the other was destoried by him?

---

But Merry's blade was destroyed when it later created the end of the Witch King:

Quote:

---

Then he (Merry) looked for his sword that he had let fall; for even as he struck his blow his arm was numbed, and now he could only use his left hand. And behold! there lay his weapon, but the blade was smoking like a dry branch that has been thrust in a fire; and as he watched it, it writhed and withered and was consumed.

---

But of course Merry's sword had a physical effect on the Witch King and was destroyed during that physical contact. Frodo's sword had no effect on the WK, and was destroyed simply by the WK raising his arm and voicing an apparent spell.
I think that was Phantom's question, and it is resolved by the facts that Frodo didn't physically touch the WK, and the WK was not concentrating on Merry's sword.

The key bit comes later, Akallabeth, after Eomer discovers Eowyn and Merry is left standing, dazed on the battlefield:

Quote:

---

Then he looked for the sword that he had let fall; for even as he struck his blow his arm was numbed and now he could only use his left hand. and behold! there lay his weapon, but the blade was smoking like a dry branch that has been thrust in a fire; and as he watched it, it writhed and withered and was consumed.
So passed the sword of the Barrow-downs, work of Westernesse. But glad would he have been to know its fate who wrought it slowly long ago in teh 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 thoug 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.

---

There are a number of reasons to believe that the knives were specially chosen:

• Tom did not invite them to choose their own weapons, but searched the mound himself for suitable weapons.
• Tom knew the history of the blades he chose.
• Tom almost certainly knew the magical qualities of the blades, as did Aragorn in THE DEPARTURE OF BOROMIR when he found the blades and said '... Doubtless the Orcs despoiled them, but feared to keep the knives, knowing them for what they are: work of Westernesse, wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor.'

Maybe Merry's dream prompted Tom; but his foreknowledge of the weapons and, maybe also, some understanding of the nature of the power that kept the undead Ringwraiths alive from his handling of the Ring.

Tom also seemed to know that leaving the treasure for other passers-by (ie: dispersing it) was the way to break the magic of the barrow. I am now wondering if this was what should have been done with dragon hoardes that had such devastating effects on those Middle-earth dwellers who tried to keep an unfair amount of the treasure for themselves. Was Tolkien saying that if the likes of Thingol and Thorin had been fair with their treasure, it would not have damaged their characters so?

Thanks, Arvedui for a great thread!

I haven't read ROTK for a while (I'm re-reading the trillogy, but I'm only around the end of FOTR). I'm in 9th grade, and some parts of the book are still a little confusing, so I guess I didn't catch that the Witch King wasn't expecting Merry's attack, and therefore wasn't concentrating on it, but expected Frodo's attack. Too bad one of the other Hobbits didn't stab the Witch King in the back while he was going after Frodo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aragil

As a side note, I always appreciated the movie sequence where the four Hobbit swords were found at Weathertop. I had hoped that this would be a nod to the books due to the commonality of Amon Sul and Tyrn Gorthad in the struggle of the Dunedain against the Witch King, although it looks like that was probably unintentional on the part of the film-makers.

---

You make a good point, but the way the movie handled it raises another, let's say, more pressing issue. Has Aragorn been carrying around four blades besides his own in the wilderness? How did he get them? What was he doing carrying FOUR blades (as far as I know he had no knowledge he was expecting four hobbits). Where did he keep them up until the point where they reached Amon Sul? It makes it all a bit hard to believe if you have an eye for these sort of things.

As for the topic at hand, I am quite sure that the blades were not chosen each for a specific hobbit:

Quote:

---

While they were eating Tom went up to the mound, and looked through the treasures. Most of these he made into a pile that glistened and sparkled on the grass. He bade them lie there 'free to all finders, birds, beasts. Elves or Men, and all kindly creatures'; for so the spell of the mound should be broken and scattered and no Wight ever come back to it. He chose for himself from the pile a brooch set with blue stones, many-shaded like flax-flowers or the wings of blue butterflies.

---

The Fellowship of the Ring, Book I, Chapter 8, Fog on the Barrow-Downs

I think that Tom just thought of looking around the things that were in the hobbits' prison and the things he thought were useful, he put aside, such as the brooch for Goldberry and the blades for the hobbits. In the following paragraphs there is no mention of the swords being different between themselves so I think we can assume they were as identical as hand-made swords can be.

And I'm also quite convinced that the Witch King could have withstood the blow a lot better had he been focused on it, and that also he could have dismissed the blade by some spell (again).

He was however literally backstabbed... I don't think that Frodo's blow to the aware With King would have been enough to kill him (hobbits are considered men I believe, by the saying that "no man can kill" the Nine so I guess the hobbit couldn't have killed regardless of what weapon he was wielding).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thráin II

You make a good point, but the way the movie handled it raises another, let's say, more pressing issue. Has Aragorn been carrying around four blades besides his own in the wilderness? How did he get them? What was he doing carrying FOUR blades (as far as I know he had no knowledge he was expecting four hobbits). Where did he keep them up until the point where they reached Amon Sul? It makes it all a bit hard to believe if you have an eye for these sort of things.

---

Actually, that was my point- he probably wasn't toting them around, but rather found them stashed at Amon Sul. Since Amon Sul was a Dunedain stronghold engaged in the struggle against the Witch King, it becomes the likeliest candidate to find such works of Westernesse, after the Barrow Downs are omitted from the film.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thráin II

He was however literally backstabbed... I don't think that Frodo's blow to the aware With King would have been enough to kill him (hobbits are considered men I believe, by the saying that "no man can kill" the Nine so I guess the hobbit couldn't have killed regardless of what weapon he was wielding).

---

Hobbits are considered a race seperate from men (i.e. the atani or edain), and so Merry (or Frodo) could have as well been the agent of the Witch King's demise. The whole point of the 'prophecy' is that Glorfindel somehow understands that the Witch King will be killed by a woman and a Hobbit, but that the Witch King takes this the wrong way- that he is invulnerable since he can't be killed by 'man'.
Incidentally, here are a few snippets relating to the linguistics of the prophecy:
http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showt...2005#post42005

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aragil

Actually, that was my point- he probably wasn't toting them around, but rather found them stashed at Amon Sul. Since Amon Sul was a Dunedain stronghold engaged in the struggle against the Witch King, it becomes the likeliest candidate to find such works of Westernesse, after the Barrow Downs are omitted from the film.

---

I don't think such nice weapons would have lasted very long in that place now deserted and not very far from the main road. But if they had been there, and had the film-makers included a small explination (yet larger than the one-line reference we see in the film) as to the nature of the place, it would all have worked out for the best.

Quote:

---

Hobbits are considered a race seperate from men (i.e. the atani or edain), and so Merry (or Frodo) could have as well been the agent of the Witch King's demise. The whole point of the 'prophecy' is that Glorfindel somehow understands that the Witch King will be killed by a woman and a Hobbit, but that the Witch King takes this the wrong way- that he is invulnerable since he can't be killed by 'man'.

---

That also makes my point, since there was no woman (Eowyn?) with Frodo on Amon Sul so he couldn't, according to the prophecy, have killed the With King there - which means that in a way or another he would have survived.

5 Ringwraiths versus 1 Ranger and 4 terrified Hobbits?

There was only one person able to fight. Frodo lashed out in terror, but as Aragorn pointed out, it was the name of Elbereth that did the most hurt, not Frodo's knife. The wraiths only retreated because now the knife point was embedded in Frodo, they only had to wait for him to fall under its spell and return to them. It was the indomitable hobbit spirit in Frodo that got him safely to Rivendell, along with the timely intervention of Glorfindel.

As per my quote earlier, in the film it would have been good if Aragorn had said that the blades were of Westernesse, and wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor, as it was this that made the Witch King vulnerable to Eowyn's blade. Tom Bombadil was magical, and stronger than most other beings in Middle-earth, as he could handle the Ring without effect, maybe even read its secrets, and so know what blades the hobbits would need if they were to encounter the Ringwraiths again - which seemed very likely.