For a final informative view for Khamul

If he is not an Easterling, what kind of man was he before the Ring? Black Numenorean gone east? Exile? King?


You can tell I don't know much beyond the books.


CL

CirdanLinweilin said:

If he is not an Easterling, what kind of man was he before the Ring? Black Numenorean gone east? Exile? King?


You can tell I don't know much beyond the books.


CL

Click to expand...

There are no Tolkien articles or writes about "Black Numenorean" or "Exile" for Khamul, as you mentioned. Some friends in the forum (not @Elthir ) try to get somewhere with empty speculations, but I don't understand. Even though the "Black Easterling" epithet has been rejected, the "Shadow of the East" epithet is not already opposed to the rejected version's epithet. The "Shadow of the East" epithet shows us that (he was an Easterling); even if no note of "Black Easterling" epithet was found by Christopher Tolkien, even if it was rejected.

norrinradd said:

Yes, we are the same here.

Click to expand...

Okay. So we appear to agree with respect to the one point of your last summation that I disagreed with.

Some forum members posted and said speculation that Khamul could be directed East by Sauron and he was not actually an Easterling. This speculation that does not rely on data from any Tolkien source is a betrayal of the Tolkien universe.

Click to expand...

As long as an idea is posted as speculation not founded on any text by JRRT, I don't see it as a betrayal of Tolkien's universe. I do this from time to time, especially when trying to explain arguable inconsistencies within Tolkien-published history. And I don't think anyone in these Khamulian threads was trying to trick you, or anyone else, into thinking the notion of Sauron sending a Rider East (who thus became known as the Shadow of the East), was based on existing text.

And especially when Tolkien himself publishes something, in my opinion we stand on good ground for our interpretations. For example (The Return of the King, Appendix A): " . . . but her mother was Melian of the people of the Valar." . . . thus we know that Melian the Vala must be the mother of Luthien!

Elthir said:

I don't think anyone in these Khamulian threads was trying to trick you, or anyone else, into thinking the notion of Sauron sending a Rider East (who thus became known as the Shadow of the East), was based on existing text.

Click to expand...

Some of them conveyed this to me via PM.

norrinradd said:

Some of them conveyed this to me via PM.

Click to expand...

What text was cited in these PMs, if I may ask?

Elthir said:

What text was cited in these PMs, if I may ask?

Click to expand...

He or she said:
" "Men proved easier to ensnare [compared to the Dwarves, who were all but unaffected by their Seven Great Rings]. Those who used the Nine Rings becamemighty in their day, kings, sorcerers and warriors of old. They obtained glory and great wealth, yet it turned to their undoing."
So they need not have started out that way, as kings, sorcerers and warriors, but with the help of the Nine Rings became so.
It is hypothetically conceivable from this that Khamul was not in origin an Easterling, but was sent east by Sauron to be his, Sauron's, lieutenant there - the east having been from the First Age seen (from a western standpoint) as being much under the sways of the Dark Lords, whether Morgoth of Sauron. For the far more "Dark-Lord-friendly" east one could have sufficed for his purposes. But centuries or even millennia later, those in the west might not have known anything about this Nazgûl except his involvement with the east, and might have therefore have assumed him to be an Easterling, while he might actually have been a non-Easterling to whom Sauron had delegated control (subservient to himself) of that region.“

In many places that Tolkiengetaway website and interpreting the sources of JRTT, it is said that Khamul was an Easterling by according to the SE epithet (Although BE epithet was included in the note of the rejected version, since BE epithet did not contradict with SE epithet; BE helps us interpret SE, even though Khamul was not nicknamed like BE). So many people did not comment like someone in this forum because they never saw this speculation from JRRT's sources.

Elthir said:

I would disagree that anyone can know this for sure in an internal sense (within the story).

Click to expand...

Christopher Tolkien stated only the following regarding the rejected version:
"... it may be noted that in a rejected version of the present passage there was only one Nazgûl in Dol Guldur (not named as Khamûl, but referred to as 'the Second Chief (the Black Easterling)'). "
Why did Christopher Tolkien raise a note that JRRT had rejected and its readers did not want to read it? Why did Christopher say "it may be noted" for the rejected version of the present passage? Christopher Tolkien obviously cared about something quoted here, which he also stated in "Hunt for the Ring", and added some information to the Index chapter. Christopher Tolkien explicitly stated that Khamul had two epithets, as I showed below. Considering a literary text; much can be written in the entire rejected version. Christopher Tolkien added only 1 sentence from the rejected version of JRRT's notes, which he thought would be useful for the reader, to the "Hunt for the Ring" chapter.

Also; if there were different and contradictory notes on the same topic left by JRRT, Christopher Tolkien has also stated these contradictions and added comments to eliminate the contradictions in UT, we know. The contradicting situation between the rejected version and the present version was related to the numbers of Nazguls in Dol Guldur, I think. Since the epithet SE and BE did not conflict, the following quote was included in the index chapter which was containing information;
“Khamûl: Second to the Chief, dwelt in Dol Guldur after its reoccupation in the Third Age. Called the Shadow of the East, the Black Easterling.” – Unfinished Tales, ‘Index (Christopher Tolkien stated that this chapter was not just a classic index for determining page numbers, but an informative and descriptive index).

norrinradd said:

He or she said:
" "Men proved easier to ensnare [compared to the Dwarves, who were all but unaffected by their Seven Great Rings]. Those who used the Nine Rings became mighty in their day, kings, sorcerers and warriors of old. They obtained glory and great wealth, yet it turned to their undoing."
So they need not have started out that way, as kings, sorcerers and warriors, but with the help of the Nine Rings became so.
It is hypothetically conceivable from this that Khamul was not in origin an Easterling, but was sent east by Sauron to be his, Sauron's, lieutenant there - the east having been from the First Age seen (from a western standpoint) as being much under the sways of the Dark Lords, whether Morgoth of Sauron. For the far more "Dark-Lord-friendly" east one could have sufficed for his purposes. But centuries or even millennia later, those in the west might not have known anything about this Nazgûl except his involvement with the east, and might have therefore have assumed him to be an Easterling, while he might actually have been a non-Easterling to whom Sauron had delegated control (subservient to himself) of that region.“

Click to expand...

When we think within the framework of the Tolkien Universe, giving a "Black Easterling" epithet to a character in the burned, ripped or rejected note; and then giving the "Shadow of the East" epithet to the same character, that is very compatible with the BE epithet, in the revised version will never show us that Khamul is not an Easterling. There was no Tolkien's work that made this friend's (transmitted to me via PM) hypothesis meaningful or stuffed.

What I'm trying to say is this: It is possible that Khamul's BE epithet was also rejected with the entire rejected version. While determining whether Khamul was an Easterling or one of the eastern people; the epithet BE (even BE was rejected or even if another epithet was used instead of BE) can help us at least because it did not contradict the SE epithet. Based on simple general referance terms: Men of the East”: Eastern Peoples and “Men of the West”: Western Peoples and also, “Shadow of the East”: Eastern Khamul (We reach this result more easily because BE is compatible with SE and completes SE). How do you (not @Elthir ) claim the opposite of what I want to tell?

Can j ask you norrinradd why you're so interested in Khamul that you opened three separate threads on the subject? There's nothing wrong with that and I'm not trying to call you out or be disrespectful. I'm just genuinely curious why this subject of all things is the one you seem to be obsessed with?

🥏

Erestor Arcamen said:

Can j ask you norrinradd why you're so interested in Khamul that you opened three separate threads on the subject? There's nothing wrong with that and I'm not trying to call you out or be disrespectful. I'm just genuinely curious why this subject of all things is the one you seem to be obsessed with?

🥏

Click to expand...

I reopened it because the subject was scattered in each. You could also see, before you asked.

"These Black Riders: I am not sure, but I think, I fear they come from ----"

"They come from Mordor," said Strider in a low voice. [ . . . Frodo asks Butterbur if he's still willing to help] "I am," said Mr. Butterbur. "More than ever. Though I don't know what the likes of me can do against, against ---" he faltered.

"Against the Shadow in the East," said Strider quietly.

JRRT, Strider, The Fellowship of khamul . . . I mean the Ring.

Nametag not included.

One of my collection from Weta Workshop (artists of film):

Grand! This is the only website in existence that has gone deep into the science of Khamology!


😒

Elthir said:

Do I, as the creator of Robin, intend for anyone to even read the first draft?

Click to expand...

Yes you do not intend for anyone to even read the rejected firs draft. Since JRRT changed this nickname and didn't want to present it to the reader, why did CRT share it (rejected passage) with us?

According to Introduction of UT, Christopher Tolkien said that: “... On the other hand, the nature and scope of his invention seems to me to place even his abandoned stories in a peculiar position.” He pointed out the importance of getting information from each story (abandoned or present).

Maybe you had better guess not too much about the folders for JRRT's works, otherwise his precious son may change the lore more to prevent making the lore fewer surprising if you hit his original plan in advance. XD

norrinradd said:

He pointed out the importance of getting information from each story (abandoned or present).

Click to expand...

More Khamul! And yes, I invite anyone to read Christopher Tolkien's full reasoning for publishing Unfinished Tales.

Also, it's due to CJRT's diligence in Unfinished Tales -- with respect to dating or chronology -- that I know there's a "rejected" passage here.

And that's important

Elthir said:

, I invite anyone to read Christopher Tolkien's full reasoning for publishing Unfinished Tales

Click to expand...

Do you speak of the Introduction, Elthir, or of another source?

Oh, sorry S-eS.

Yes, I meant the "full" intro to UT -- the full part with respect to his reasons anyway 🐾