Witch King of Angmar

[David Bent]

I've always been curious on this point. If the Witch King of Angmar was the
captain of the Ringwraiths, and fought against the North Kingdom, eventually
bringing it to an end, how did he not know about hobbits?
Supposedly the hobbits sent archers to the last battle, and it is hard to
believe that he would have overlooked them. He could have conquered them and
used them for slaves to grow food for his armies.

Any ideas?

Thanks!

D. Marrold Bent

[Christopher Henrich]

Post by David Bent
I've always been curious on this point. If the Witch King of Angmar was the
captain of the Ringwraiths, and fought against the North Kingdom, eventually
bringing it to an end, how did he not know about hobbits?
Supposedly the hobbits sent archers to the last battle, and it is hard to
believe that he would have overlooked them. He could have conquered them and
used them for slaves to grow food for his armies.

My guess is he just didn't bother to notice them. Not very smart, you
say... but even the most villainous of us sometimes are not very smart.

I have no recollection of how big the Hobbit contingent was in that
battle.

[Michael Ikeda]

Post by Christopher Henrich

Post by David Bent
I've always been curious on this point. If the Witch King of
Angmar was the captain of the Ringwraiths, and fought against
the North Kingdom, eventually bringing it to an end, how did he
not know about hobbits? Supposedly the hobbits sent archers to
the last battle, and it is hard to believe that he would have
overlooked them. He could have conquered them and used them for
slaves to grow food for his armies.

My guess is he just didn't bother to notice them. Not very
smart, you say... but even the most villainous of us sometimes
are not very smart.
I have no recollection of how big the Hobbit contingent was in
that battle.

I don't think LoTR actually says. The Prologue just says "some
bowmen" without specifying a number.

[Dworkin]

Post by David Bent
I've always been curious on this point. If the Witch King of Angmar was the
captain of the Ringwraiths, and fought against the North Kingdom, eventually
bringing it to an end, how did he not know about hobbits?
Supposedly the hobbits sent archers to the last battle, and it is hard to
believe that he would have overlooked them. He could have conquered them and
used them for slaves to grow food for his armies.
Any ideas?
Thanks!
D. Marrold Bent

Concerning Hobbits tells us that hobbits could be very stealth, and
were likely to be overlooked, especially if they were on campaign.
LotR gives us many examples where hobbits are overlooked, even in
Mordor, mainly because the other creatures know not exactly what to
look for.

What are hobbits? Tolkien tells us explicitly that they are a race of
Men. But it becomes more and more assumable that this is not the whole
story.
Men are NOT to set foot on Valinor. Period. Nevertheless, Bilbo and
Frodo go. Tolkien wrote a workaround, calling Valinor a Purgatory.
But there's more. Smaug. Smelling Bilbo, he should have smelled Man.
But he smelled hobbit, and did not know what to make of it.
And the Nazgul in the woods... If he could feel the Ring, he would
have gone straight for it. But obviously the smell distracted him.
Did he smell Man? Or did he smell Elf? He felt there were many more
Elves nearby.. Nazgul could deal with Men piecemeal. But Elves?
Too bad JRRT lived much too early.. Would we not have enjoyed to see
him answer on internet?

[Öjevind Lång]

"Dworkin" <***@pl.hanze.nl> skrev i meddelandet news:92e2c4c5-2ff3-46dd-aa72-***@13g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

[snip]

Post by Dworkin
Concerning Hobbits tells us that hobbits could be very stealth, and
were likely to be overlooked, especially if they were on campaign.
LotR gives us many examples where hobbits are overlooked, even in
Mordor, mainly because the other creatures know not exactly what to
look for.
What are hobbits? Tolkien tells us explicitly that they are a race of
Men. But it becomes more and more assumable that this is not the whole
story.
Men are NOT to set foot on Valinor. Period. Nevertheless, Bilbo and
Frodo go. Tolkien wrote a workaround, calling Valinor a Purgatory.
But there's more. Smaug. Smelling Bilbo, he should have smelled Man.
But he smelled hobbit, and did not know what to make of it.
And the Nazgul in the woods... If he could feel the Ring, he would
have gone straight for it. But obviously the smell distracted him.
Did he smell Man? Or did he smell Elf? He felt there were many more
Elves nearby.. Nazgul could deal with Men piecemeal. But Elves?
Too bad JRRT lived much too early.. Would we not have enjoyed to see
him answer on internet?

We are told none of the hobbit archers came back, which indicates they were
all killed in the battle. If the Witch-king noticed them at all, he probably
thought they were young boys. One thing we know about the evil side in
Middle-earth is that they were completely uninterested in anything that
wasn't of immediate use, or an obvious threat. Such a lack of interest often
entails lack of observation too.

Öjevind

[Morgoth's Curse]

On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 12:20:37 +0200, Öjevind Lång

Post by Öjevind Lång
[snip]

Post by Dworkin
Concerning Hobbits tells us that hobbits could be very stealth, and
were likely to be overlooked, especially if they were on campaign.
LotR gives us many examples where hobbits are overlooked, even in
Mordor, mainly because the other creatures know not exactly what to
look for.
What are hobbits? Tolkien tells us explicitly that they are a race of
Men. But it becomes more and more assumable that this is not the whole
story.
Men are NOT to set foot on Valinor. Period. Nevertheless, Bilbo and
Frodo go. Tolkien wrote a workaround, calling Valinor a Purgatory.
But there's more. Smaug. Smelling Bilbo, he should have smelled Man.
But he smelled hobbit, and did not know what to make of it.
And the Nazgul in the woods... If he could feel the Ring, he would
have gone straight for it. But obviously the smell distracted him.
Did he smell Man? Or did he smell Elf? He felt there were many more
Elves nearby.. Nazgul could deal with Men piecemeal. But Elves?
Too bad JRRT lived much too early.. Would we not have enjoyed to see
him answer on internet?

We are told none of the hobbit archers came back, which indicates they were
all killed in the battle. If the Witch-king noticed them at all, he probably
thought they were young boys. One thing we know about the evil side in
Middle-earth is that they were completely uninterested in anything that
wasn't of immediate use, or an obvious threat. Such a lack of interest often
entails lack of observation too.
Öjevind

Moreover, what evidence is there that the Witch-king actually
remembered it even if he did notice the existence of hobbits? He had
fled from Eriador after the destruction of Angmar more than a thousand
years earlier. Is there any evidence that total recall was one of the
powers of the Nazgul? I suspect the that reverse was true: Their
memories became ever more vague as their existence continued. I would
wager that by the time of the War of the Ring began, the Witch-king
probably couldn't remember such basic details as when and where he had
been born or the names of his childhood friends.

I think that Frodo's words in Mordor apply to the Nazgul as well:
"No taste of food, no feel of water, no sound of wind, no memory of
tree or grass or flower, no image of moon or star are left to me. I am
naked in the dark, Sam, and there is no veil between me and the wheel
of fire. I begin to see it even with my waking eyes, and all else
fades."

Morgoth's Curse

[Troels Forchhammer]

In message <news:***@4ax.com>
Morgoth's Curse <***@nospam.yahoo.com> spoke these
staves:
<snip>

Post by Morgoth's Curse
Moreover, what evidence is there that the Witch-king actually
remembered it even if he did notice the existence of hobbits?

There is ample evidence in 'The Hunt for the Ring' in UT that he did
_not_ know about the Shire -- he spent months searching for it around
the Gladden, which should be clear enough evidence that he had no
clue ;)

This, of course, doesn't tell us whether he had known it previously
or not -- as you point out he might have completely forgotten rather
than having never known. At most we can surmise that _if_ he learned
that there were halflings living in the western part of Eriador when
he invaded those parts, _then_ this information had not made much
impression -- certainly not enough that he could recall it a
millennium later.

Post by Morgoth's Curse
Is there any evidence that total recall was one of the powers of
the Nazgul? I suspect the that reverse was true: Their memories
became ever more vague as their existence continued.

That's an interesting idea. The only text that I can recall that
gives some hint at the mental capabilities of the Witch-king is the
passage from 'The Hunt for the Ring' that is published in Hammond &
Scull's _Reader's Companion_, which, in my opinion, suggests fairly
ordinary mental powers, though of course it doesn't tell us much
about his recollection (in the UT passages we learn by implication
that he still remembered sending the Barrow-wights, but that would
have been a far more momentous event than being told about some oddly
small inhabitants somewhere towards Lindon.

Post by Morgoth's Curse
I would wager that by the time of the War of the Ring began, the
Witch-king probably couldn't remember such basic details as when
and where he had been born or the names of his childhood friends.

I quite agree, but he did, for instance, remember the sorcery that he
had learned, and I would also expect there to be a difference between
before and after his becoming a slave of his Ring, and also a
difference between sensory memories and 'intellectual' memories.
<snip quotation>

I think you're right, but I would also point out that Frodo could
still remember knowing _about_ all these things, and I am sure he
would be able to explain what a tree is, what grass is or the Moon or
the Sun: what appears to be lacking are the sensory impressions: the
sound, the smell, the feel, the sight, the taste etc. Gollum
appeared to still be able to remember quite a lot of details about
the day he got the Ring (even if he tried to deny his own memories),
and so we probably can't draw any very firm conclusions.
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.

If no thought
your mind does visit,
make your speech
not too explicit.
- Piet Hein, /The Case for Obscurity/

[Raven]

Post by David Bent
I've always been curious on this point. If the Witch King of Angmar was
the captain of the Ringwraiths, and fought against the North Kingdom,
eventually bringing it to an end, how did he not know about hobbits?
Supposedly the hobbits sent archers to the last battle, and it is hard to
believe that he would have overlooked them. He could have conquered them
and used them for slaves to grow food for his armies.

Presumably he did not have time to discover and conquer them, until he
himself was utterly defeated. For one thing he could not have his attention
everywhere. He was master of a large army, and would have delegated power
over its subdivisions to his officers, while he focussed on the big picture,
and also on certain choice details - such as pursuing Arvedui who had fled
north, and putting evil wights into the Barrows. He himself came as far as
Fornost, which lies between Angmar and the Shire. The Shire-folk went into
hiding, and if their fields and ordered lands were noticed by enemy soldiers
and officers, it does not follow that these realized that Hobbits rather
than Men dwelt in the land. Nor would he necessarily have noticed them in
the two battles that they supposedly fought in. If he saw or received
reports of some curious runts amont the enemy slain after the first battle,
where Arvedui was defeated, he might have thought it of no importance. In
the second battle against him that they took part in he was in a far worse
shape to gather information on the battle-field ---
Had he been given more time to consolidate his rule over the vanquished
Arthedain then the Shire-folk might have escaped, perhaps into the Elvish
lands east of Ered Luin or perhaps south, or perhaps scattered. Perhaps he
would have discovered them and prevented their escape. Then they would
indeed have become slaves. But even if he did know of them he would not
have considered them particularly important. He had all the surviving but
defeated Dúnedain to deal with, and he hated them far worse than some race
of mud-grubbers who had been taken under their protection. He lived, after
all, in a world with many races of speaking-peoples, not just Men.
Of course the Witch-king's failure to enslave, chase away or destroy the
Shire-folk and the Bree-folk tell us something of events in Arthedain
between 1974 where Arvedui was defeated and the Battle of Fornost in 1975.
His victory in 1974 cannot have ensured his immediate and total dominance in
the land. He must have kept large parts of his army searching for the King
in the north, manning the borders against the attack from Lindon that
eventually came, and/or concentrated at Fornost to secure his prize. Also
the harsh winter would have impeded the movements of his own army. The
occupation of Arthedain took place during a time when the Shire-folk would
have found it easy to hide in their tunnels and snow-covered houses, living
on food stored since harvest like any other year. It would only have become
difficult for them when winter broke, and they would need to be active
above-ground at a season where enemy occupation forces would find travel
easy. But before that happened, the vast Gondorian army solved all their
problems.

Korb.

[Stan Brown]

[quoted text muted]
eventually bringing it to an end, how did he not know about hobbits?
Supposedly the hobbits sent archers to the last battle,

"or so they maintained, though no tales of Men record it."

The quote is from "Prologue: Concerning Hobbits" in LotR.

[Troels Forchhammer]

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Raven

Post by David Bent
I've always been curious on this point. If the Witch King of
Angmar was the captain of the Ringwraiths, and fought against
the >>> North Kingdom, eventually bringing it to an end, how did
he not >>> know about hobbits? Supposedly the hobbits sent
archers to the last battle,

"or so they maintained, though no tales of Men record it."
The quote is from "Prologue: Concerning Hobbits" in LotR.

But in Appendix A (I (iii) 'Eriador, Arnor, and the Heirs of
Isildur') it is stated more explicitly:
The Shire-folk survived, though war swept over them and
most of them fled into hiding. To the help of the king they
sent some archers who never returned; and others went also
to the battle in which Angmar was overthrown

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Raven
Presumably he did not have time to discover and conquer them,
until he himself was utterly defeated.

He took Fornost in T.A. 1974 and Eärnur came with the armies of
Gondor in 1975. But the quotation from the appendix (which you also
refer to) says that 'war swept over' the Shire. As I read this, the
implication is at least that the front oved across the Shire (we know
that the Dúnedain of Arthedain withdrew behind the Lune), but that
the Hobbits 'fled into hiding' at the time (also across the Lune?).

The Witch-king himself would have stayed in Fornost until the arrival
of the new forces the next year (when he rode out with his armies to
meet his enemy in the open), and I doubt that anyone would have found
it of sufficient interest that there were some odd burrows in the
area between the Baranduin and the Emyn Beraid.

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Raven
The Shire-folk went into hiding, and if their fields and ordered
lands were noticed by enemy soldiers and officers, it does not
follow that these realized that Hobbits rather than Men dwelt in
the land.

Precisely. Until the fall of Arthedain, the Hobbits were subjects of
the King in Fornost. This means that there was no separate country of
Hobbits as we're used to at the end of the Third Age, but rather
there was a very fertile area that had always been the seat of
agriculture, and which was, at that time, farmed by rather smallish
peasants :-)

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Raven
Nor would he necessarily have noticed them in the two battles that
they supposedly fought in.

They might have been taken for small dwarves or children of Men --
the Witch-king would have thought nothing of putting ten-years-olds
in the front-line, and so would probably not think twice about the
Dúnedain appearing to do the same.

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Raven
Had he been given more time to consolidate his rule over the
vanquished Arthedain then

This reminds me . . . somewhere on some Tolkien-related forum I saw
someone posting whose sig-line contained the statement that "there is
no 'what-ifs'" -- presumably to point out the opinion that in a sub-
created history any kind of contrafactual discussion is meaningless.
I'm not sure I agree entirely -- in this case, for instance, the
'what-if' is a tool in our attempt to better understand the
political, sociological etc. situation in the north-west of Eriador
in T.A. 1974-5 (in particular why the Witch-king didn't discover the
Hobbits in the Shire), but on the other hand I can also see why the
person (I wish I could remember where I saw it) would reject
contrafactual discussions on the basis that this is sub-created
history which is not determined by chaotic repercussions of small
events, but by the mind of the author.

That, however, is tangential to this discussion. I agree with your
'perhaps'es.

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Raven
Of course the Witch-king's failure to enslave, chase away or
destroy the Shire-folk and the Bree-folk tell us something of
events in Arthedain between 1974 where Arvedui was defeated and
the Battle of Fornost in 1975.

Exactly.

<snipping more agreement>
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.

Ash nazg durbatuluk,
ash nazg gimbatul,
ash nazg thrakatuluk
agh burzum ishi krimpatul.
- /The Fellowship of the Ring/ (J.R.R. Tolkien)

[JJ]

Post by Troels Forchhammer

  Of course the Witch-king's failure to enslave, chase away or
destroy the Shire-folk and the Bree-folk tell us something of
events in  Arthedain between 1974 where Arvedui was defeated and
the Battle of Fornost in 1975.

Exactly.

Except why should the W-K destroy the hobbits? You don't destroy
peasants - you need them to provide food for you (or in the case of
the W-K, your underlings, I suppose).

[Troels Forchhammer]

In message

Post by JJ

Post by Troels Forchhammer

  Of course the Witch-king's failure to enslave, chase away or
destroy the Shire-folk and the Bree-folk tell us something of
events in  Arthedain between 1974 where Arvedui was defeated and
the Battle of Fornost in 1975.

Exactly.

Except why should the W-K destroy the hobbits? You don't destroy
peasants - you need them to provide food for you (or in the case of
the W-K, your underlings, I suppose).

The full version is 'enslave, chase away or destroy', which should
cover the options for the Witch-king fairly well. I think that the
his priorities would be
1: Enslave
2: Destroy
3: Chase away

After all, the ultimate goal of Sauron (and the Witch-king, as one of
the Nazgûl, had no will save Sauron's) was to dominate /all/ of
Middle-earth, and if he couldn't enslave a people, he would prefer to
see them destroyed. In the case of the Hobbits I think he'd prefer to
enslave them, but, failing that, I don't think he'd consider it a
significant loss to simply eradicate them: peasants, after all, are
fairly easy to replace, and there would be a need for considerably
less food in Eriador after the victory of Angmar . . . ;-)

[Stan Brown]

Post by Troels Forchhammer
After all, the ultimate goal of Sauron (and the Witch-king, as one of
the Nazgûl, had no will save Sauron's) was to dominate /all/ of
Middle-earth, and if he couldn't enslave a people, he would prefer to
see them destroyed. In the case of the Hobbits I think he'd prefer to
enslave them

I agree.

"Hobbits as miserable slaves would please him more than hobbits happy
and free", I believe Gandalf says in Book I Chapter 2.

[Kristian Damm Jensen]

Post by Troels Forchhammer

Post by Stan Brown

Post by David Bent
I've always been curious on this point. If the Witch King of
Angmar was the captain of the Ringwraiths, and fought against
the >>> North Kingdom, eventually bringing it to an end, how did
he not >>> know about hobbits? Supposedly the hobbits sent
archers to the last battle,

"or so they maintained, though no tales of Men record it."
The quote is from "Prologue: Concerning Hobbits" in LotR.

But in Appendix A (I (iii) 'Eriador, Arnor, and the Heirs of
The Shire-folk survived, though war swept over them and
most of them fled into hiding. To the help of the king they
sent some archers who never returned; and others went also
to the battle in which Angmar was overthrown

Ah, but that was written by Bilbo, Frodo or Sam, whereas the Foreword was
written by Tolkien.

[Stan Brown]

Post by Troels Forchhammer

[quoted text muted]
"or so they maintained, though no tales of Men record it."
The quote is from "Prologue: Concerning Hobbits" in LotR.

But in Appendix A (I (iii) 'Eriador, Arnor, and the Heirs of
The Shire-folk survived, though war swept over them and
most of them fled into hiding. To the help of the king they
sent some archers who never returned; and others went also
to the battle in which Angmar was overthrown

I *hate* it when Tolkien contradicts himself. :-)

"Go not to the author for lore, for he will say both yea and any."

[Troels Forchhammer]

<snip>

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Troels Forchhammer
But in Appendix A (I (iii) 'Eriador, Arnor, and the Heirs of

I *hate* it when Tolkien contradicts himself. :-)
"Go not to the author for lore, for he will say both yea and any."

<really "laughing out loud">

In this case I'll admit that I've always took the qualifications in the
prologue to be of the same order as all the "it is said", "among them
the tradition is handed down", and, even better, "in Elvish tradition
it was said" ;-)

All these are part of the important meta-fiction layer in Tolkien's
work, but I think it is a big mistake to take them as justification for
doubting information that is qualified in this way. The qualification
is there only as a part of the narrative conceit of the statement, the
meta-fictional layer, not, I strongly believe, as a qualification of
the veracity.

[NY Teacher]

Post by David Bent
I've always been curious on this point. If the Witch King of Angmar was
the captain of the Ringwraiths, and fought against the North Kingdom,
eventually bringing it to an end, how did he not know about hobbits?
Supposedly the hobbits sent archers to the last battle, and it is hard to
believe that he would have overlooked them. He could have conquered them
and used them for slaves to grow food for his armies.
Any ideas?
Thanks!
D. Marrold Bent

My guess would be that at the time of the last battle, the Hobbits did not
call themselves "Hobbits," but more likely something like "Stoors," and were
probably referred to as Halflings .

So when it became known among the villainy that "a Hobbit" had the ring,
there was no prior knowledge of that word or any reason to connect it to
"Stoors" or "halflings."

Good thing Gollum didn't yell out "halfling" under torture...

Just my theory...

NYT

[Troels Forchhammer]

In message <news:ixwpo.13$***@newsfe17.iad> "NY Teacher"
<***@upstate.ny> spoke these staves:
Well met -- good to hear from you again :-)

<snip>

Post by NY Teacher
My guess would be that at the time of the last battle, the Hobbits
did not call themselves "Hobbits," but more likely something like
"Stoors,"

Or possibly something like 'holbyts' or some other intermediate form
('hobbytla'?)

Post by NY Teacher
and were probably referred to as Halflings .

That appears to have been their 'standard' name in both the Eldarin
languages and in Westron throughout the Third Age (I wouldn't be
surprised if, after their rise to prominence at the end of the Third
Age, the name 'Hobbit' was adopted in Westron).

Post by NY Teacher
So when it became known among the villainy that "a Hobbit" had the
ring, there was no prior knowledge of that word or any reason to
connect it to "Stoors" or "halflings."
Good thing Gollum didn't yell out "halfling" under torture...

He did, in a way -- he _was_ a halfling himself and Sauron did (at
least according to one version of 'The Hunt for the Ring' in UT) get
the connction:
Now Sauron had never paid heed to the "Halflings," even if
he had heard of them, and he did not yet know where their
land lay. From Gollum, even under pain, he could not get
any clear account, both because Gollum indeed had no
certain knowledge himself, and because what be knew he
falsified. Ultimately indomitable he was, except by death,
as Sauron did not fully comprehend, being himself consumed
by lust for the ring. he became filled with a hatred of
Sauron even greater than his terror, seeing in him truly
his greatest enemy and rival. Thus it was that he dared to
pretend that he believed that the land the Halflings was
near to the places where he had once dwelt beside the banks
of the Gladden.
- UT part 3 ch. IV 'The Hunt for the Ring' (i)

According to this version of the story, when Sauron learned that
Gollum had been captured he sent out the Witch-king to search for the
Shire, land of the Halflings, but only when he spoke with Khamul (who
came from Dol Guldur and met the others in the Field of Celbrant) did
he learn that 'no dwelling of Halflings could be discovered in the
Vales of Anduin'. If we follow this version, then, Sauron certainly
knew that Baggins was a Halfling and that the Shire was the 'land of
the Halflings'. In another version of the story, however, Tolkien
says (Christopher's comments extra indented)
Gollum would not know the term "Hobbit," which was local
and not a universal Westron word. He would probably not
use "Halfling" since he was one himself, and Hobbits
disliked the name. That is why the Black Riders seem to
have had two main pieces of information only to go on:
Shire and Baggins.
From all the accounts it is clear that Gollum did
at least know in which direction the Shire lay; but
though no doubt more could have been wrung from him
by torture, Sauron plainly had no inkling that
Baggins came from a region far removed from the
Misty Mountains or that Gollum knew where it was,
and assumed that he would be found in the Vales of
Anduin, in the same region as Gollum himself had
once lived.
This was a very small and natural error - but possibly the
most important mistake that Sauron made in the whole
affair. But for it, the Black Riders would have reached the
Shire weeks sooner.
- ibid, (iii)

Christopher Tolkien does seem to emphasize the first version seeing
it as 'being the most finished as a narrative', but Christopher
Tolkien notes that 'these manuscripts are confusing and their
relations obscure,' which makes it difficult to say more with any
degree of certainty. Actually I think that this, the manuscripts for
'The Hunt for the Ring', is one area that would benefit from more
attention so that we could have all the manuscripts transcribed (as
far as this is possible) and published along with some comments on
their relations. Unfortunately this doesn't appear to be high on the
priority list of most Tolkien scholars -- possibly because it would
be mainly interesting to the story-internal perspective rather than
the critical perspectives applied by most Tolkien scholars.

[Stan Brown]

Post by Troels Forchhammer
He did, in a way -- he _was_ a halfling himself and Sauron did (at
least according to one version of 'The Hunt for the Ring' in UT) get
Now Sauron had never paid heed to the "Halflings," even if
he had heard of them, and he did not yet know where their
land lay. From Gollum, even under pain, he could not get
any clear account, both because Gollum indeed had no
certain knowledge himself, and because what be knew he
falsified. Ultimately indomitable he was, except by death,
as Sauron did not fully comprehend, being himself consumed
by lust for the ring. he became filled with a hatred of
Sauron even greater than his terror, seeing in him truly
his greatest enemy and rival. Thus it was that he dared to
pretend that he believed that the land the Halflings was
near to the places where he had once dwelt beside the banks
of the Gladden.

I think Tolkien was right to reject that version. It is much more in
keeping with the terrible power of the Ring and of Sauron as its Lord
that no one of mortal stature can withhold it or knowledge of it from
him. Sauron could reduce Pippin (temporarily) to a gibbering idiot
in a few seconds; imagine what he would do with Gollum over weeks or
months.

[Troels Forchhammer]

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Troels Forchhammer
He did, in a way -- he _was_ a halfling himself and Sauron did
(at least according to one version of 'The Hunt for the Ring' in

<quotation from the ‘A’ version of ‘the Hunt for the Ring’ (Hunt)>

Post by Stan Brown
I think Tolkien was right to reject that version.

I am not convinced that we can conclude that he did -- at least not
the details I quoted. CJRT mentions four ‘versions’, ‘A’ through ‘D’,
of which ‘A’ is the ‘most finished as a narrative’, but he believes
that ‘C’ is the latest (even without evidence I'd trust his instinct
on that), but apart from that he makes no guesses about their
relation. As far as I can see, however, we don't know what the ‘C’
version has to say about this. We get some information -- the other
quotation I provided -- from the ‘D’ version (which appears to be an
umbrella name for all the lose notes, questions etc. rather than an
actual ‘version’) that does in part contradict the particulars of the
‘A’ version, but these may be early notes, a later false start just
as easily as a rejection of the ‘A’ version. With respect to the ‘C’
version, we only get some differences that belong to a later section
of the story (when the Nazgûl start searching westward and come by
Gríma and Isengard). Since CJRT chose the ‘A’ version as the main
narrative, I'd say that I could build a solid argument claiming that
significant differences to that version would be noted (as they are
indeed for the unconnected notes of the ‘D’ version and the later
parts of the ‘C’ version).

Post by Stan Brown
It is much more in keeping with the terrible power of the Ring
and of Sauron as its Lord that no one of mortal stature can
withhold it or knowledge of it from him. Sauron could reduce
Pippin (temporarily) to a gibbering idiot in a few seconds;
imagine what he would do with Gollum over weeks or months.

I don't disagree, but we _are_ told that in all versions of the Hunt,
Gollum does hold something back. All versions agree that he did know
that the Shire was in the west (west of the Misty Mountains) and he
did manage to withhold that from Sauron. This much is also implied in
LotR as published -- Gandalf tells how Gollum learned that the Shire
was in the West, but though the Nazgûl cross the river on June 20 it
was three months later, on September 18, that they crossed the Isen:
these three months represent the time they spent searching for the
Shire in Wilderland and are otherwise inexplicable.

Whether Gollum was able to also withhold from Sauron that Bilbo was
of the same kind as Gollum himself is, I think, more uncertain:
Gollum may not have used the word ‘halfling’ (or ‘hobbit)’, but just
as Gandalf could guess from Bilbo's tale that Gollum was a Hobbit, so
Sauron might, from Gollum's tale, guess that Bilbo, too, was a
halfling.