Sauron vs. Your Mama - A Discussion of Power in Middle-earth

[obloquy]

I'm reproducing this post from the Witch-King vs. Gandalf discussion in the Movies forum so that it can get some attention from serious Tolkien nerds.

Tolkien's definitions of power are complex, and reducing the question to who would win in one-on-one duels is misleading. One of the things that complicates things is that duels do happen, so we know that questions of "power" are not purely metaphysical, but even so the victory is generally determined on a metaphysical level, i.e. the more powerful "spirit" ought to be victorious.

I'll explain:

The example of Gandalf and the Balrog is a good one, since we don't generally consider Gandalf to be a mighty warrior in the same way that, say, Hurin was. He bested the Balrog, but doing so killed him. The spiritual stature of an eala (obviously some are greater than others, based presumably on the discarnate standard of pure will) can be manifested in physical effects, which we would probably call "magic" or "spells." The spirit within cannot be destroyed, but a fully incarnate spirit (such as Gandalf was, and such as we must also assume the Balrog was) is effectively "killed" when the body to which they are bound is slain. Gandalf's description of the struggle is very primal: clutching, strangling, hewing; also it is elemental: lightning, fire, ice. Gandalf knew that none could see the battle, so perhaps he was allowed here to unleash his latent potential. In any case, the duel is very much a metaphysical one in that each embodied eala inflicted his spiritual power on the other's physical body. Gandalf exerts his spiritual power in a physical way when he tries to bind the door in Moria; the Balrog uses a powerful counter-spell. Similarly, lightning, ice, fire, and pure physical strength--lifting, pushing, crushing power--are manifestations of spiritual prowess. This last must be the most basic translation of metaphysical power, in fact, since it is essentially an imposition of one's "will".

The idea of an incarnated eala being impervious to weapons fits with this explanation. A blade or arrow, in itself, has no will, so a creature with the power to exert its spiritual will in spontaneous physical manifestation ought to have no problem turning that blade or arrow. However, if the will (spiritual power) of the wielder of that blade is stronger than his enemy's, it will pierce despite the resistance. This overcoming power might also not be that of the wielder, but of the weapon itself, which may have been imbued with some amount of power by its maker: Merry, of smaller "spiritual stature" than the Witch-King, was able to pierce him with the Barrow Blade. The Witch-King's power comes from his ring, which presumably draws its power from The One Ring, and thus from Sauron. However, if the Barrow Blade overcame the Witch-King's spell of protection, we can deduce that the Witch-King must not have been protected by the full power of The One or of Sauron, but by some designated fraction of it. W-K may also have had some measure of his own spiritual power, supposedly being Numenorean in origin, but it seems unlikely since the Nazgul seem to have no will (which I equate to spiritual power) of their own, obeying Sauron's instead.

In addition to claiming invulnerability to his friends' weapons, Gandalf says this of the Ringwraith whose mount Legolas shot: "[it was a terror] that you cannot slay with arrows. You only slew his steed." -TTT, The White Rider. So the power of a Ringwraith drawn from its ring trumps ordinary weapons wielded by individuals with less spiritual potency than that Ringwraith's allotment. Additionally, I think that it is safe to speculate that a powerful being like Gandalf need not wield a powerfully enchanted weapon to harm a less-powerful being: his own power would be enough to overcome his foe.

Ealar also seem to have a peculiar "character" to their power. By that I mean that Balrogs were spirits of flame ("flame" must be a translation to physical terms of some spiritual aspect), Sauron was a student of craftsmanship (also a translation to physical terms) which enhanced his ability to deceive, and Gandalf was one who revealed dreams and spoke to hearts, motivating them. Obviously all manner of spiritual power can be translated to physical might, otherwise a spirit of fire would surely have crushed a spirit of flowers and bunnies; but this peculiar character does play a part in the more subtle manifestations of power. Saruman's voice must be an example of this, as well as Gandalf's ability to muster resistance to Sauron. Gandalf's spiritual character was probably also represented in his restraint. We know that he was required to carry out his mission in a discreet manner, but so were the other Istari, and Gandalf was the only one of them who succeeded. Saruman is the most important counterpoint to Gandalf since Saruman's failure indicated a repudiation of the Istarin rule of restraint: he openly flaunted his power and used it to dominate others and even build his own army in emulation of Sauron. It must be, therefore, part of Gandalf's spiritual makeup for him to conceal his true power at all but those most crucial moments when the strength of his friends was or would be overcome.

We might also extend this to the Nazgul. Tolkien said that their power was primarily in the fear that they projected, so if a character such as Eowyn has in her spirit the power to resist that fear, she may be able to overcome the power of the Nazgul and thus penetrate that barrier created by it.

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by obloquy

Gandalf knew that none could see the battle, so perhaps he was allowed here to unleash his latent potential.

Interestingly enough, he has no problem indicating the amount of power involved in this fight - nor even concerning the fight as Weathertop with the nazgul.

Originally Posted by The White Rider, TTT

Those that looked up from afar thought that the mountain was crowned with storm. Thunder they heard, and lightning, they said, smote upon Celebdil, and leaped back broken into tongues of fire. Is not that enough? A great smoke rose about us, vapour and steam. Ice fell like rain.

Originally Posted by The council of Elrond, FotR

But they closed round at night, and I was besieged on the hill-top, in the old ring of Amon Sul. I was hard put to it indeed: such light and flame cannot have been seen on Weathertop since the war-beacons of old.

Originally Posted by obloquy

So the power of a Ringwraith drawn from its ring trumps ordinary weapons wielded by individuals with less spiritual potency than that Ringwraith's allotment.

My own impression of the passage is that if even Frodo had an armour that protected him against a "spear-thrust that would have skewered a wild boar", then the Witch-king should have a similar, if not better, armour. However, I do note that previously Gandalf stated that
"- You cannot destroy Ringwraiths [by flood]. The power of their master is in them, and they stand or fall by him. "

Originally Posted by obloquy

the more powerful "spirit" ought to be victorious

I think that a counter-example would be the duel of Fingolfin and Melkor; Fingolfin was able to repeatedly wound his opponent, and I doubt we can compare their powers on any level. Also, Thorondor did some pretty good action there too, wounding Melkor without losing a feather.

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by Raynor

I think that a counter-example would be the duel of Fingolfin and Melkor; Fingolfin was able to repeatedly wound his opponent, and I doubt we can compare their powers on any level. Also, Thorondor did some pretty good action there too, wounding Melkor without losing a feather.

And yet Fingolfin could not have slain Melkor. His power was enough to wound Melkor--in other words, to overcome Melkor's power minorly and briefly, but not ultimately. Gandalf wounded the Balrog many times without fully overpowering him, and Gandalf was no doubt wounded himself in the battle. Had Fingolfin been in Legolas' place when the three met up with Gandalf the White, I'm sure Gandalf's comment about who might hurt him would have been different.

A good point, nonetheless.

[obloquy]

We might also extend this to the Nazgul. Tolkien said that their power was primarily in the fear that they projected, so if a character such as Eowyn has in her spirit the power to resist that fear, she may be able to overcome the power of the Nazgul and thus penetrate that barrier created by it.

Maybe. On the other hand, the Dagger of Westernesse may have done the whole job, overcoming completely the protective power of the Witch-King's ring. This idea that a power can be "broken" permanently though the body is not yet slain fits with Saruman's death. It explains why he would ultimately die to a weak creature like Grima, using no supernatural weapon. He maintained the power of his voice, that power that was peculiarly his, but he was otherwise nothing more than his physical presence.

[The 1,000 Reader]

Originally Posted by obloquy

Maybe. On the other hand, the Dagger of Westernesse may have done the whole job, overcoming completely the protective power of the Witch-King's ring. This idea that a power can be "broken" permanently though the body is not yet slain fits with Saruman's death. It explains why he would ultimately die to a weak creature like Grima, using no supernatural weapon. He maintained the power of his voice, that power that was peculiarly his, but he was otherwise nothing more than his physical presence.

This makes sense. It even carries over to Sauron's possible deaths with the one ring. Either somebody could force his will out of it (master it) or they could simply destroy it, killing him regardless.

As for power in Middle-Earth, this is not like Dragonball Z where the highest power automatically wins. Tulkas whooped Melkor good, Sauron never beat anyone, Thingol got owned by dwarves, Sam beat Shelob, upgraded Gandalf was grim/serious about a confrontation with the Witch-King, Bard killed Smaug, etc. We honestly have no idea who could win.

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by The 1,000 Reader

"And forth went Morgoth, and he was halted by the elves. Then went Sauron, who was stopped by a dog and then aged men. Finally, there came the Witch-King, who destroyed Arnor, but nobody seems to remember that."

-A History of Villains

Is that actually a published book? Whoever wrote it obviously has no clue what he's talking about.

Morgoth was originally more powerful than all the other Valar combined. He was later diminished and defeated, as all enemies eventually were in Middle-earth, but that does not mean he was not the greatest being Middle-earth had ever seen. Huan was a very powerful creature, possibly Maiarin, with destiny on his side. Gil-galad, Elendil, and Isildur and their armies are not "aged men." Sauron had some bad luck with his opponents, but he was unequivocally the most powerful of Melkor's servants. The Witch-King, on the other hand, was nothing before being enslaved by Sauron, and even then he fled twice from Glorfindel. He didn't even make Gandalf flinch in their encounter, and a little Rohan woman told him to kiss off. He was then obliterated by an ancient dagger held by a Hobbit.

While I'm at it, I may as well address some of your post. First, there's no reason to believe dragons had any real spiritual power. Glaurung might be an exception, but he also might have just benefited from Morgoth exerting influence at the time of his havoc-wreaking. Second, Tulkas captured Morgoth after he had been significantly weakened. More than creating an exception to my explanation above, this gives us a better concept of Tulkas' true strength. Third, Shelob is just a distant relative to Ungoliante, not Ungoliante herself. The latter was incredibly powerful, the former was a big fat spider. Not only that, but Sting was a pretty excellent little blade, imbued with an ancient power.

And finally for good measure, I'll reiterate that Gandalf never broke a sweat in front of the Witch-King, and nobody's ever been able to produce any piece of text or any compelling argument to indicate otherwise, whereas everything Tolkien ever wrote about Gandalf supports that he was far superior to the Nerd-King.

[The 1,000 Reader]

Originally Posted by obloquy

Morgoth was originally more powerful than all the other Valar combined. He was later diminished and defeated, as all enemies eventually were in Middle-earth, but that does not mean he was not the greatest being Middle-earth had ever seen.

But he was still defeated, which was my point about stated "power levels" not telling us who'll win.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Huan was a very powerful creature, possibly Maiarin, with destiny on his side.

Dude, in the end Huan was a dog, and Sauron lost the fight and the island by his own stupidity. I'm mocking Sauron in my sig, and I feel secure in saying that many fans agree that Sauron could have handled the whole thing much better. Just because the mightest wolf will kill him doesn't mean that he's invincible until that wolf shows up.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Gil-galad, Elendil, and Isildur and their armies are not "aged men."

If I recall, Elendil was old even for a Numenorean. Also, I believe it was mentioned somewhere that Gil-Galad paled in comparison to the High-elf kings of the First Age. Also, my sig is a joke. Don't take it seriously.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Sauron had some bad luck with his opponents, but he was unequivocally the most powerful of Melkor's servants.

It becomes hard to believe that, or to fear the strength of Morgoth's servants, if the most powerful servant failed miserably time and time again. Honestly, would you think a boxer who lost far more often than he won was one of the best?

Originally Posted by obloquy

The Witch-King, on the other hand, was nothing before being enslaved by Sauron

However, he did take out Arnor and at the very least led his forces. In LOTR, he's the closest we come to an active enemy from Mordor. Sauron's just sitting in his tower the whole time.

Originally Posted by obloquy

and even then he fled twice from Glorfindel.

The first time, the realm of Angmar was doomed and there was nothing left to save, and he also was likely going to be assaulted by the remaining forces of Gondor's army, which would be annoying to deal with while fighting Glorfindel. Also, the second time he was pursuing the Ring, and a fight with Glorfindel could have allowed Frodo to escape to Rivendell.

Originally Posted by obloquy

He didn't even make Gandalf flinch in their encounter,

He didn't flinch either.

Originally Posted by obloquy

and a little Rohan woman told him to kiss off.

He told that to Gandalf also. Feanor made a vow against Eru, yet we all know that Eru is far mighter than any other character.

Originally Posted by obloquy

He was then obliterated by an ancient dagger held by a Hobbit.

Hobbits are very stealthy creatures, the blade was packing extremely powerful magic made specifically to kill the Witch-King, and Eyown would have died if it weren't for that. Also, in the books, there was no one-liner before stabbing: Eyown made haste in her move, so we don't know if he still could have done something, or if he was paralyzed like in the movie.

Originally Posted by obloquy

While I'm at it, I may as well address some of your post. First, there's no reason to believe dragons had any real spiritual power. Glaurung might be an exception, but he also might have just benefited from Morgoth exerting influence at the time of his havoc-wreaking.

I'm not talking about spiritual power. It's a stinkin' dragon. Those things are giant, powerful, breathe potent blasts of fire and some can even fly. They don't need spiritual power to be tough. Turin could have all the spirit he wanted, but if Glarung bit his head off he'd be dead.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Second, Tulkas captured Morgoth after he had been significantly weakened.

In the majority of discussions on the subject (even here) I've seen, the majority of the poster replies always state that Morgoth's Ring happened after that, and since the details didn't go any deeper, I was confused about that. At least that's cleared up. I do think that Morgoth's former place of mightest is deserved if that happened after Morgoth's Ring, yet after he made his ring his rank is lost.

Originally Posted by obloquy

More than creating an exception to my explanation above, this gives us a better concept of Tulkas' true strength.

Well, not really. He managed to take out an exhausted Morgoth, so we don't know if that was with every ounce of his strength and skill.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Third, Shelob is just a distant relative to Ungoliante, not Ungoliante herself. The latter was incredibly powerful, the former was a big fat spider. Not only that, but Sting was a pretty excellent little blade, imbued with an ancient power.

I know that, but the fact still stands that a tired and starving hobbit from the Shire took on such a large and powerful beast in combat and won. If "initial stats" were to decide the fight, then Sam would likely have lost.

Originally Posted by obloquy

And finally for good measure, I'll reiterate that Gandalf never broke a sweat in front of the Witch-King,

The Witch-King didn't break a sweat either, in case you forgot.

Originally Posted by obloquy

and nobody's ever been able to produce any piece of text or any compelling argument to indicate otherwise, whereas everything Tolkien ever wrote about Gandalf supports that he was far superior to the Nerd-King.

That's a load of bull. Essex alone has produced enough texts to show that Gandalf wouldn't have won with ease, and your opinion is drastically effecting what you see as a "compelling arguement." I still remember you manipulating a quote from the books in an attempt to mislead me a year ago, so forgive me if your credibility is not so good in my view.

As a last comment, once again, that's low as heck as to insult my signature and call me stupid for it.

[Boromir88]

I disagree with this hole notion of Sauron being 'stupid.' Sauron never was a general, a leader, or a fighter, but in no ways does that make him stupid. Sauron was a brilliant tactician, deceiver, manipulator, and powerful enemy.

Have you forgotten that with words alone Sauron sent Numenor spiralling into chaos and destruction?

Have you forgotten that the Ring's will (which was Sauron's) was so powerful that no one had the strength to destroy it:

At the last moment the pressure of the Ring would reach its maximum - impossible, I should have said, for any one to resist...~Letter 246

The Ring was ultimately destroyed because of Eru's intervention. The Ring's power was so strong no one had the strength of will to destroy it.

Have you forgotten Sauron's brilliant strategy when it came to the War of the ring? His strongest enemy was Gondor, so it was Gondor who he would focus most of his strength on. What does Sauron do, fill Denethor's mind with dread and despair sending Gondor's ruler to madness. To prevent other 'outside help' coming to Gondor's aid and prevent the 'great alliance' that was gathered against him at the end of the Second Age; he had effectively tied up all of Gondor's possible allies.

Rohan was Gondor's strongest ally, he corrupts Saruman and gets Saruman to keep Rohan busy. Saruman (with Grima's help) corrupts Theoden, sends Rohan to it's near destruction...It's not Sauron's fault Saruman couldn't get the job done and do what he was supposed to.

From Dol Guldur Sauron attacks Mirkwood, keeping them occupied.

He sends an Easterling force to Dale and Erebor to keep the Dwarves and men there occupied.

Orcs from Moria assault Lorien to keep them occupied.

Sauron's strategy was a brilliant one. He isolated his strongest enemy (Gondor) from outside help and kept Gondor's allies from uniting together into a strong alliance. The only wrinkle in the plan was Saruman was unable to deal with Rohan...which isn't Sauron's fault.

So, as obloquy correctly observes, it's not Sauron was stupid, he was unlucky. Sauron never was a fighter, he never was a general, that we know...that does not mean he was stupid. Looking from a military perspective what he did during the War of the Ring was a brilliant strategy.

You have to recognize the extraordinary circumstances that took place to cause Sauron's defeat. The Ring's destruction didn't happen because Sauron was a fool, no it happened because of intervention by Eru. As constantly made clear there was no hope of a military overthrow of Sauron...so Sauron could of spent as many troops as he needed to. Yet he still devised a tactical plan that isolated his strongest enemy and prevented the Free Peoples from making this 'grand alliance.'

I would also have to say Sauron was a very powerful individual considering this:

Three times Lorien had been assailed from Dol Guldur, but besides the valour of the elven people of that land, the power that dwelt there was too great for any to overcome, unless Sauron had come there himself.~Appendix B: Tale of Years, The Great Years.

Sauron obviously was powerful enough to overthrow the power that dwelt in Lorien. Which is no small feat considering Galadriel was the most powerful of the Noldor (save for Feanor).

[Boromir88]

Very fascinating stuff obloquy. You talk about the barrow-blade and as Aragorn says with other 'blades' that strike the Witch-King:

A foot above the lower hem there was a slash. 'This was the stroke of Frodo's sword,' he said. 'The only hurt that it did to his enemy, I fear; for it is unharmed, but all blades perish that pierce that dreadful King. More deadly to him was the name of Elbereth.'~Flight to the Ford

Aragorn makes the point that shouting 'Elbereth' was more deadly to the Witch-King. Also:

Escaping a wound that would have been as deadly to him as the Mordor -knife to Frodo (as was proved at the end), he withdrew and hid for a while, out of doubt and fear both of Aragorn and especially of Frodo. But fear of Sauron , and the forces of Sauron's will was the stronger....
But above all the timid and terrified Bearer had resisted him, had dared to strike at him with an enchanted swords made by his own enemies long ago for his destruction. Narrowly it had missed him. How he had come by it - save in the barrows of Cardolan. Then he was in some way mightier than the barrow wight; and he called on Elbereth, a name of terror to the nazgul. He was then in league with the High Elves of the Havens.~The Readers Companion; The Marquette Letter

As Raynor discussed in past threads that the Witch-King judged Frodo to be a powerful foe. Frodo's spiritual power I don't think was near the Witch-King's but Frodo did have

The Barrow-blade
Calling on Elbereth (a name that one could say has spiritual power):

Out of the deeps of Ea she came to the aid of Manwe; for Melkor she knew from before the making of the Music and rejected him, and he hated her, and feared her more than all others whom Eru made...
Elbereth they name her, and they call upon her name out of the shadows of Middle-earth, and uplift it in song at the rising of the stars.~The Silmarillion: Valaquenta

So Frodo did possess dangerous and spiritually powerful weapons that caused the Witch-King to flee...and eventually the Barrow-blade overthrew the Witch-King's power.

We might also extend this to the Nazgul. Tolkien said that their power was primarily in the fear that they projected, so if a character such as Eowyn has in her spirit the power to resist that fear, she may be able to overcome the power of the Nazgul and thus penetrate that barrier created by it.~obloquy

Another interesting point; as when Frodo struck back at the Witch-King, part of the startlement was that Frodo actually summoned the courage to strike him; as the Marquette Letter points out 'the Bearer had resisted him; had dared to strike at him.' It defintely was a shock to the Witch-King that the power of his fear was overcome by Frodo. And I think we can say the same for Eowyn...as the Witch-King is described threateningly:

Out of the wreck rose the Black Rider, tall and threatening, towering above her...

But she's able to overcome this and drive her sword between 'crown and mantle.'

[CSteefel]

Originally Posted by The 1,000 Reader

As for power in Middle-Earth, this is not like Dragonball Z where the highest power automatically wins. Tulkas whooped Melkor good, Sauron never beat anyone, Thingol got owned by dwarves, Sam beat Shelob, upgraded Gandalf was grim/serious about a confrontation with the Witch-King, Bard killed Smaug, etc. We honestly have no idea who could win.

Pretty nice summary

[obloquy]

That's a load of bull. Essex alone has produced enough texts to show that Gandalf wouldn't have won with ease, and your opinion is drastically effecting what you see as a "compelling arguement." I still remember you manipulating a quote from the books in an attempt to mislead me a year ago, so forgive me if your credibility is not so good in my view.

Essex has provided exactly zero arguments for anything. His entire existence seems to be dedicated to declaring as annoyingly as possible that the weak can overcome the mighty, and yet his most cogent argument to that effect to date is some soccer game that happened decades ago. And please be more specific about this text I supposedly manipulated to deceive you.

As fine and comprehensive as Boromir's post is, Sauron doesn't need his help. Sauron was Morgoth's greatest servant, period. The Witch-King derived any power he ever had from Sauron: the servant is not greater than the master. Any criticism of Sauron's vicious record is ignorant Witch-King fanboy fantasy.

Anyway, I'm tired of repeating myself about things that any old chump can figure out with a little research in Tolkien's published writings. If you're only in this thread to fight with me about who is awesomer, please respond to my post in the movies forum.

[davem]

Unless I'm misunderstanding the original post, there seems to be an assumption that the physical forms of Gandalf & the Balrog (or The Witch King for that matter) are of the same nature. I don't think this can simply be assumed - Gandalf has a physical body not unlike that of the Children - it ages for one thing. The 'physicality' of the Balrog is of a different order - 'shadow & flame'. Obviously the Balrog has some degree of physicality - it can hold things, fall down chasms etc, but it doesn't seem to be an 'Incarnate' in the same sense as a Human or Elf. The Witch King is physically invisible (in the natural world at least) so his hroa is also fundamentally different to that of other incarnates.

Oh, & Shelob isn't a 'big fat spider' she is 'an evil thing in spider form' - which probably supports your argument in a way....

Sauron vs. Your Mama??? The thread title is a poor one.