Control over The One Ring

[Iarhen]

I have consistently read on this forum that no one could ever use the One Ring without having their wills bent towards the will of Sauron and, eventually, Sauron would recover the ring, no matter who was the new bearer.

Of course, Im excluding Gandalf, Saruman, Radagast and the 2 blue wizards here, since all maiar I assume they could control the Ring to their wills, and they would ultimately destroy Sauron and take over his place. I know they would become terrible Dark Lords in their own terms.

But my main concern is about the other Powers on Middle Earth that could ensnare the One Ring. Case by case:

1. Tom Bombadil. Since we dont know his nature, we do know taht the Ring had no effect over him. I.e., he had control over the Ring's effects over him. But if he wanted to use it for his purposes, would he be able to? I think it would depend on what his nature is... a maiar?

2. Fangorn. Could and Ent use the Ring? Since it was a mighty living being, with power and ages of wisdom and self control, could he use the Ring? Or would he be twisted to a bad plant????

3. Galadriel. My main concern over my Tolkien-reading life. Being the most powerful elf on M.E., and already a ring bearer, could she take it? I assume her power would grow big enough to challenge Sauron and eventually defeat him. And I am sure that she would turn evil in time... But some disagree and think that Sauron would eventually recover his Ring from her finger and make her pay for it...

4. Elrond and Cirdan. Powerful elves, too. A ring bearer and one who used to have Narya. Could they posses the Ring and resist Sauron?

5. Aragorn. Since of numenorean blood and high lineage, could he take the Ring and use it wisely enough to drive his forces and overcome Sauron?

6. The Lord of the Nazgul. Could he? A powerful wizard, even though dominated by Sauron's will, he had domination over the other Nazgul. So, with the aid of the One Ring, could he challenge Sauron's will?

7. The Balrog. A maiar, so I pressume he could effectively take the One Ring and overthrow Mordor and its Lord.

[Afrodal Fenyar]

Sauron was the master of the Ring. There were many that could have competed Sauron with the Ring, like Galadriel, Gandalf, Aragorn, and many others. And should they have won using the Ring, they would've been corrupted eventually. And a new Dark Lord/Lady would have arisen. After several millenias, Sauron would have stepped into the room and taken the Ring. Nobody could ensnare the ring, save maybe some Ainu much greater than Sauron. Anybody else would become ensnared him/herself.

[Meoshi]

The Balrog would probably be able to control it- after all, how much more corrupted could he become?

[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

Iarhen, good questions. First, you said

without having their wills bent towards the will of Sauron

I don't think that's necessarily true. They would turn evil in some way, but their will would not be bent towards Sauron. It could remain very different and they could always oppose Sauron, but Sauron still would overthrow them and defeat them, with the help of the ring itself. And that's excluding those you mentioned of course. And then you said

since all maiar I assume they could control the Ring to their wills, and they would ultimately destroy Sauron and take over his place.

I think you had it right when you said 'could' for the first part, but you forgot about the second part. You can't say they would, because we don't know that. I think that Gandalf would be the most likely to succeed in this, but what about the others. Just because they are maiar doesn't mean that they will. I think it's safe to leave the two blue wizards out of this since we know reletively little about them. Saruman would be next after Gandalf, but he obviously is overconfident and that could lead to his downfall. And are you talking about him being able to do this at his prime? If so, I still think he's very vulnerable since he's so cocky. And there are other factors too, but the bottom line is I think that he would not overthrow Sauron. Radagast, I don't know. I would not think so since he is ignorant to certain agendas and since he has isolated himself. I'd say no for him also.

And back to that same thing, they can't control the ring. only Sauron can, and that's why he is the Lord of the rings. The ring has it's own will binded with Saurons and the ring does not let other's control it. It will trick its bearer and manipulate it for its own device and benefit. So, the ring actually controls the user. Just because the bearer might be more powerful with the ring than Sauron is, doesn't mean they won't eventually fall. They can and probably will, but besides that, if the ring is never destroyed, that means that Sauron will live on. And I think if you give him enough time, he will eventually regain the ring.

Now, to the other stuff.
Tom Bombadil:

he had control over the Ring's effects over him.

I don't think it's safe to say that about Tom. Just because there is no effect doesn't mean that he has control over the ring. He might, it's a possibility, but the ring might not effect him only in his given realm, meaning the area he lives in and rules, with certain borders. What happens if he steps outside of his realm? Maybe the ring could effect him out there. But we don't know for sure. And maybe the ring did have some effect over him but we just were not aware. Kind of far-fetched but it's another possibility. The ring sort of has a mind of its own, so maybe it was using trickery to make Tom think that there was no effect on him but the ring might have actually been holding back to decieve him, maybe.

But if he wanted to use it for his purposes, would he be able to? I think it would depend on what his nature is... a maiar?

If the ring had absolutely no effect on him, then no, he could not use it. If he had control of th ering, then yes, I think he could control the ring. And then it all depends on whether he's inside his realm or not, and whether the ring is playing tricks or not. No one knows what he is. You call it nature, and I'm not sure what his nature is. He's an enigma.

Fangorn:

Could and Ent use the Ring?

Yes, I think so. It would look wierd but I think that it is possible.

Since it was a mighty living being, with power and ages of wisdom and self control, could he use the Ring?

Yes he could use the ring, I think, but he would be easily corrupted I think. Just because they are mighty, doesn't mean they would have any more of a chance if they weren't mighty. Physical attributes do not make a difference when dealing with the ring. The ring operates through the mind therefore you have a mental battle. And it would definately not be good to have a big ego or an overconfidence to you since the ring could easily play off that. Remember, Boromir? He was mighty, yet he was easily deceived by the ring, and he didn't even touch the ring. And the ents are not that wise either. They might be among themselves in their own region, but they are isolated and very ignorant to the politics of the world they live in. Tolkien even says that Treebeard, the most wise of them all, is not considered among the wise since there is much he does not know. Yes, they do seem to have a great sense of self-control. But if Merry and Pippin can rouse them up that easily (or maybe it was Saruman that did it) what makes you think the ring can't. I'm sure the ring can easily take adavantage of their, well...anti-hasty way of life, which includes their thinking probably. And if they do lose self-control, they seem to be, well, out of control. The ring can definately take advantage of that too. I don't think that the ents would stand much of a chance.

Galadriel:

Being the most powerful elf on M.E., and already a ring bearer, could she take it?

Yes she could take it but she wouldn't do much good with it. I think that Sauron would definately defeat her and the ring would decieve her. Frodo offers her the ring and without even touching it she already has a little power trip, just by imagining. I think that the ring was tempting her there, and that it would overcome her will, eventually. And she is a really powerful elf, but that doesn't make a difference. She still is not as strong as Sauron. And you know what they say, the bigger they are, the harder they fall. And even though she is already a ringbearer, that also doesn't help her. Her ring is not at all like her ring, it is very different. If she did take the one ring and thought she would stand a good chance because she's already a ringbearer, then the ring would definately win. Why? Well because the ring is different and she would definately not be used to it, and secondly, overconfidence.

I assume her power would grow big enough to challenge Sauron and eventually defeat him.

I don't think so. I stated why just above that quote. Even if she somehow does defeat him, he will still come back since the ring is not destroyed, and then there's still the issue of the ring. That would corrupt her while she's busy dealing with Sauron. Sauron would keep coming back and eventually see his chance and take it. Sauron and the ring would have time on there sides.

Elrond and Cirdan:

Powerful elves, too. A ring bearer and one who used to have Narya. Could they posses the Ring and resist Sauron?

No. It's just the same as Galadriel.

Aragorn:

Since of numenorean blood and high lineage, could he take the Ring and use it wisely enough to drive his forces and overcome Sauron?

Also no. And for the same reasons stated above. And besides, we see that he goes against Sauron when looking in the palantir. Although he wins, he is very exhausted. If he had the ring, he would have to fight a battle with the ring, fight Sauron, and besides that, there's the issue of time, which is on the side of the ring and Sauron.

The Lord of the Nazgul:

Could he? A powerful wizard, even though dominated by Sauron's will, he had domination over the other Nazgul. So, with the aid of the One Ring, could he challenge Sauron's will?

Once again, no. He was Sauron's servant. Sauron already had decieved him and corrupted him through the nine rings. And Sauron has complete authority over all nazgul. The other nazgul would obey Sauron's orders, not the Witch King's (assuming the witch king goes against Sauron). And is it even possible for the nazgul to posses the one ring. I guess they could hold it, but I don't think they could use it since they are wraiths. And besides, even if they could, the thought to overthrow Sauron and take the one ring would never enter their mind at all.

The Balrog:

A maiar, so I pressume he could effectively take the One Ring and overthrow Mordor and its Lord.

Hmmmm....This is mind-boggler, if that's even a word. I do not know. It's a possibility, but eventually Sauron would regain the ring if it was not destroyed.

[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

Meoshi:

The Balrog would probably be able to control it- after all, how much more corrupted could he become?

No, no one but Sauron could control the ring. And even if teh Balrog is corrupted, that doesn't mean the ring can't trick him and manipulate him.

Sorry for double-posting but Meoshi posted while I was still typing.

[Carlas]

If Gandalf or any others would have taken the ring, they would have still been bent towards the will of Sauron. The only way to destroy Sauron was to destroy the ring, but they would have used the ring and become corrupted, and not have destroyed it. This is what Sauron wanted. There were none that could use the ring(I think) without becoming corrupted, Frodo nearly made it, but in the end could not help it. I think it might actually be harder, if you have great powers like Gandalf. It would be so tempting to have more, this is probably why Gandalf didn't take it in the first place.

[Legolas]

I assume they could control the Ring to their wills,

No one could bend the Ring away from evil.

In response to the main question:

Only Gandalf would be able to accomplish such a feat. Tolkien says so. Any other beings that had ideas about being able to control the One Ring were deceived. Part of its power was deceiving others into thinking that they could use it.

Gandalf is the only person who could (be expected to) defeat Sauron, but even after Sauron's body's destruction, the Ring would still corrupt Gandalf. Though he would do good, his 'good' would eventually be bad.

Letter No. 246:

Of the others only Gandalf might be expected to master him – being an emissary of the Powers and a creature of the same order, an immortal spirit taking a visible physical form. In the 'Mirror of Galadriel', 1381, it appears that Galadriel conceived of herself as capable of wielding the Ring and supplanting the Dark Lord. If so, so also were the other guardians of the Three, especially Elrond. But this is another matter. It was part of the essential deceit of the Ring to fill minds with imaginations of supreme power. But this the Great had well considered and had rejected, as is seen in Elrond's words at the Council. Galadriel's rejection of the temptation was founded upon previous thought and resolve. In any case Elrond or Galadriel would have proceeded in the policy now adopted by Sauron: they would have built up an empire with great and absolutely subservient generals and armies and engines of war, until they could challenge Sauron and destroy him by force. Confrontation of Sauron alone, unaided, self to self was not contemplated. One can imagine the scene in which Gandalf, say, was placed in such a position. It would be a delicate balance. On one side the true allegiance of the Ring to Sauron; on the other superior strength because Sauron was not actually in possession, and perhaps also because he was weakened by long corruption and expenditure of will in dominating inferiors. If Gandalf proved the victor, the result would have been for Sauron the same as the destruction of the Ring; for him it would have been destroyed, taken from him for ever. But the Ring and all its works would have endured. It would have been the master in the end.
Gandalf as Ring-Lord would have been far worse than Sauron. He would have remained 'righteous', but self-righteous. He would have continued to rule and order things for 'good', and the benefit of his subjects according to his wisdom (which was and would have remained great).

[The draft ends here. In the margin Tolkien wrote: 'Thus while Sauron multiplied [illegible word] evil, he left "good" clearly distinguishable from it. Gandalf would have made good detestable and seem evil.']

(The "Of the others" at the beginning means other than Frodo and Aragorn. The previous paragraph explains how Frodo would've lost quickly and the reasons why Aragorn was able to defeat Sauron in the palantir incident.)

It is also important to note that this line is explaining a hypothetical situation that may not even have been possible. The 'in any case' is like saying 'in the unlikely (or impossible) event that Elrond or Galadriel did obtain the Ring and keep it from Sauron':

In any case Elrond or Galadriel would have proceeded in the policy now adopted by Sauron: they would have built up an empire with great and absolutely subservient generals and armies and engines of war, until they could challenge Sauron and destroy him by force.

One shouldn't speculate without first considering what the author said about it. You must lay aside your own presumptions when they are in conflict with the creator's.

[ March 26, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

[The Saucepan Man]

Wow, great post, Legolas. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] And thanks for providing that extract for the Letters. I have always felt that, of those in ME at the end of the Third Age, only Gandalf would have had any chance of successfully using the Ring against Sauron. It is a point that has been touched upon on a number of threads recently, and I have found it difficult to pull together my thoughts and establish a line of reasoning to back up my "gut instinct". But that Letter sets it all out so clearly and concisely. I really must get hold of the Letters.

One thing, though. The extract from the Letter does not mention Saruman. As one of the Istari, he was "a creature of the same order" as Sauron, just as Gandalf was. Doesn't the same reasoning that posits a possible Gandalf victory over Sauron equally apply to Saruman (and the other Istari, too, for that matter)? Or did his descent into malice and treachery somehow diminish his powers, just as Radagast's disinterest in the task at hand might have diminished his?

[Legolas]

Thanks!

All the signs we're given point to Gandalf as the greatest of the Istari without competition. From Letter No 156:

Gandalf alone fully passes the tests, on a moral plane anyway (he makes mistakes of judgement). For in his condition it was for him a sacrifice to perish on the Bridge in defence of his companions, less perhaps than for a mortal Man or Hobbit, since he had a far greater inner power than they; but also more, since it was a humbling and abnegation of himself in conformity to 'the Rules': for all he could know at that moment he was the only person who could direct the resistance to Sauron successfully, and all his mission was vain. He was handing over to the Authority that ordained the Rules, and giving up personal hope of success.

That quote points out that Gandalf was greater than Saruman, but observed him as leader of the Istari because the Valar designed it that way. He acknowledged their wisdom, and in that, obeyed them. Gandalf had faith in the restrictions placed upon him. The point is that the mission would've failed had Gandalf not followed these restrictions, and he knew that. The Valar were wise enough to place such a mission and conditions upon him to know that if he stuck to them, he would succeed. I believe Gandalf knew this, though he feared otherwise because of his humility.

The following are from Unfinished Tales.

And Curunír 'Lân, Saruman the White, fell from his high errand, and becoming proud and impatient and enamoured of power sought to have his own will by force, and to oust Sauron; but he was ensnared by that dark spirit, mightier than he.

This says Sauron was greater than Saruman. If Sauron is greater than Saruman and Gandalf is (at the least) equal to Sauron, he too is greater than Saruman.

Gandalf is equal to Sauron at the least, since they were equal in their beginnings and Sauron had presumably weakened as he spread out his power in his various evil projects:

To the overthrow of Morgoth he [Manwë] sent his herald Eönwë. To the defeat of Sauron would he not then send some lesser (but mighty) spirit of the angelic people, one coëval and equal, doubtless, with Sauron in their beginnings, but not more? Olórin was his name. But of Olórin we shall never know more than he revealed in Gandalf.

There are more explicit quotes that acknowledge that Gandalf was greater than Saruman.

But Círdan from their first meeting at the Grey Havens divined in him the greatest spirit and the wisest; and he welcomed him with reverence, and he gave to his keeping the Third Ring, Narya the Red.
In his heart Saruman recognized the great power and the strange "good fortune" that went with Gandalf.

Saruman soon became jealous of Gandalf, and this rivalry turned at last to a hatred, the deeper for being concealed, and the more bitter in that Saruman knew in his heart that the Grey Wanderer had the greater strength, and the greater influence upon the dwellers in Middle-earth, even though he hid his power and desired neither fear nor reverence.

At the council of the Valar when they picked the Istari, Manwë asks where Olórin (Gandalf) is. After the matter is settled, Varda hints at Gandalf's greatness.

Then Manwë asked, where was Olórin ? And Olórin, who was clad in grey, and having just entered from a journey had seated himself at the edge of the council, asked what Manwë would have of him. Manwë replied that he wished Olórin to go as the third messenger to Middle-earth (and it is remarked in parentheses that "Olórin was a lover of the Eldar that remained," apparently to explain Manwë's choice). But Olórin declared that he was too weak for such a task, and that he feared Sauron. Then Manwë said that that was all the more reason why he should go, and that he commanded Olórin (illegible words follow that seems to contain word "third"). But at that Varda looked up and said: "Not as the third;" and Curumo remembered it.

Even without these quotes, we can see that Gandalf is greater. Gandalf knew trying to get hold of the Ring and using it was a terrible plan whereas Saruman is deceived in thinking that he could use it and defeat Sauron.

This has been discussed a few times, including these two threads:
http://forum.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin...c&f=1&t=001982
http://forum.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin...c&f=1&t=000780

[ March 26, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

[akhtene]

Thanks for the Letters, Legolas. Very enlightening.

It was part of the essential deceit of the Ring to fill minds with imaginations of supreme power.

I see the problem not as who could overpower Sauron and gain full control of the Ring, but who would resist a temptation to use the Ring at all. No one could ever use the One Ring without having their wills bent towards the will of Sauron. Perhaps... But much more likely that the will of any new ring-user (not just bearer) will take the same course as that of Sauron - DOMINATION. It's the Ring of Power. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. All power in one hand (ON one hand) deprives others of freedom, and that I think is evil. Galadriel is not afraid of doing evil things - she fears doing too much. A spoilt person would do what he/she wants. A 'good guy' would do what he/she believes right. But no choice for others. "All shall love me and despair"- says Galadriel. So destroying the Ring was actually removing the ultimate temptation of ultimate power from M-E. And Gandalf and Galadriel actually overpowered Sauron by beating that main temptation.

[Afrodal Fenyar]

Well, couldn't a Vala use the Ring without being corrupted? After all, the Valar are much greater than Sauron.

And good points, akhtenen. They did overpower Sauron.

[Legolas]

You don't "overpower" a wild animal to get it in a cage. You outsmart it. The peoples of Middle-earth did not overpower Sauron; they outsmarted him, and, in an event of 'chance,' destroyed him.

[ March 27, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

[akhtene]

couldn't a Vala use the Ring without being corrupted?

What for? The Valar by themselves are Powers.

The peoples of Middle-earth did not overpower Sauron; they outsmarted him,

Well, speaking of the way the Ring was taken to Orodruin and disposed of, you're right, Sauron was really outsmarted.

But first, resisting the temptation which the Ring offered, they beat the evel will of Sauron with the power of wisdom, hope and humility.
Btw, the one who really hoped to outsmart the Dark Lord was Boromir. Where did it get him? [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img]

[Legolas]

Boromir was trying to outsmart Sauron at his own game. A very silly idea. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[Dondagnirion]

I think that you are all missing the basic point here. Wether or not Sauron is the master of the ring does not matter. There are those that can, possesing the ring, turn it to their will and destroy Sauron. This would then mean that they are the master of the one ring (wether or not it would decrease in power or continue to have any power at all has never been stated by tolkien or chris tolkien and therefore cannot be determined). In either case the destruction of Sauron without the destruction of the ring is definetly possible although the destroyer would him/herself be corrupted in the process. This is explicitly stated at the Council of Elrond in FOTR. If you did not realize this I reccomend a little re-reading.

Dondagnirion

[Legolas]

Wether or not Sauron is the master of the ring does not matter.

Yes, I'm sorry. It matters a great deal. It's part of him.

There are those that can, possesing the ring, turn it to their will and destroy Sauron.

No. Absolutely not. They don't/can't bend the Ring to their will etnirely - else it would not corrupt them like we know it eventually would. Gandalf could destroy Sauron, but he could not control the Ring. If he could have, he would've obviously taken it straight to Mount Doom. Read on.

(wether or not it would decrease in power or continue to have any power at all has never been stated by tolkien or chris tolkien and therefore cannot be determined).

No. Absolutely not. Did you not read my post? Tolkien said that even with the death of Sauron, the Ring and all of its works would endure. It would continue to have power - as much power as ever. He said that even with Gandalf as Ring-lord the Ring would still control him, forcing him to make good seem detestable as evil. In any case with a bearer and the Ring, the Ring would be the master (with the sole exception of Sauron bearing the Ring himself, as it is an extension of his spirit).

the destruction of Sauron without the destruction of the ring is definetly possible although the destroyer would him/herself be corrupted in the process.

The ring-bearer would be corrupted, but not necessarily the person who killed Sauron. The Last Alliance made this point, though: Sauron's body could be killed. However, without the destruction of the Ring, he would be able to build up enough strength to return. Had Gandalf killed him but not used/destroyed the Ring (or if the Ring went unused), it is not totally certain that Sauron would not come back again and again.

'Council of Elrond':

'Alas, no,' said Elrond. 'We cannot use the Ruling Ring. That we now know too well. It belongs to Sauron and was made by him alone, and is altogether evil. Its strength, Boromir, is too great for anyone to wield at will, save only those who have already a great power of their own. But for them it holds an even deadlier peril. The very desire of it corrupts the heart. Consider Saruman. If any of the Wise should with this Ring overthrow the Lord of Mordor, using his own arts, he would then set himself on Sauron's throne, and yet another Dark Lord would appear. And that is another reason why the Ring should be destroyed: as long as it is in the world it will be a danger even to the Wise.

Thus if one was able to defy the Ring's will, they would not be corrupted by it, as that was part of its will.

I recommend you read up a little, chief.

[ March 28, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

[Iarhen]

However, I DO think that Gandalf, Elrond and Galadriel overopowered Sauron when they rejected the One Ring.

The objective of Sauron, and the will which towards he bent all his power, was to dominate others. The creation of the One Ring was with the sole purpose of controlling elves, men and dwarves.

When Galadriel, Gandalf and Elrond rejected the ring, they overpowered it because they could not be mastered by the power of the Ring. They were their own masters, and their will was able to resist Sauron's will, and they defeated him when they rejected the ring because the Ring did not have power over them.

Not only did they outsmart him, they overpowered him.

[Legolas]

No, they didn't outpower him by rejecting the Ring. They out-willed him, you could say, but not outpowered him.

Resistance is not overpowering.

Overpower - To overcome or vanquish by superior force; subdue. To affect so strongly as to make helpless or ineffective; overwhelm.

By simply resisting the Ring, they avoided one of Sauron's traps, but Sauron could defeated them still by pure military force.

Resisting the Ring was more of a good thing for Sauron. By resisting it, it was definite that Sauron would never have to match himself up against Galadriel, Elrond, or Gandalf. Whether he would've defeated them or not, it would have been very tiring for him to face such an adversary. Taking the Ring from a hobbit would've been so much easier.

They overpowered the Ring's power to tempt them to use it, but that is all. That is not overpowering Sauron.

[ March 29, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

[Iarhen]

Youre right, they overpowered the Ring, not Sauron himself.

BTW, I have another question. Since Sauron was only manifested in spirit when the War of the Ring was held, how would he be able to take the Ring if he had no hand? ... This sounds so stupid, but this has been troubling me for the past few days...

Immediately after Sauron recovered the Ring, would he gain physical form again? Or just his spirit would gain all its former power and subdue all other powers on M.E.?

[Legolas]

He did have physical form, actually. That of a man, except moderately larger. The movie made Sauron out to be a huge eye or something.

I wrote an article about this here:
http://www.barrowdowns.com/faq_sauronform.asp

[ March 29, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

[Dondagnirion]

'Council of Elrond':


quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Alas, no,' said Elrond. 'We cannot use the Ruling Ring. That we now know too well. It belongs to Sauron and was made by him alone, and is altogether evil. Its strength, Boromir, is too great for anyone to wield at will, save only those who have already a great power of their own. But for them it holds an even deadlier peril. The very desire of it corrupts the heart. Consider Saruman. If any of the Wise should with this Ring overthrow the Lord of Mordor, using his own arts, he would then set himself on Sauron's throne, and yet another Dark Lord would appear. And that is another reason why the Ring should be destroyed: as long as it is in the world it will be a danger even to the Wise.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thus if one was able to defy the Ring's will, they would not be corrupted by it, as that was part of its will.

I recommend you read up a little, chief.

That was said by Legolas.

Two things here. Yes, it is true I said the new darklord / onering master would be corrupted and I WAS wrong about that, I admit it. But my basic point in my post which, granted, was not all that well articulated, was that even if Sauron was the rings only master and that he was part of the ring did not matter because Gandalf could still use the ring and overthrow Sauron in the process, as well as specific others. I was not saying either way that any one specific thing would happen after someone capable of doing this did it, but that there were a few possibilities. I am sorry for being unclear in my last post about what I was saying. I hope this clarifies my sleep-post and shows that I do not have to do much re-reading, cheif.

Dondagnirion

[Phrim]

Given that, according to Tolkien, only Gandalf could have successfully wielded the Ring to cast down Sauron, I have some comments about what Sauron actually feared from the fellowship. Gandalf himself mentions the following:

He supposes that we were all going to Minas Tirith; for that is what he would himself have done in our place. And according to his wisdom it would have been a heavy stroke against his power. Indeed he is in great fear, not knowing what mighty one may suddenly appear, wielding the Ring, and assailing him with war, seeking to cast him down and take his place. That we should wish to cast him down and have no one in his place is not a thought that occurs to his mind.

If only Gandalf himself can wield the Ring in this way, why is it implied that one of many Ring-bearers may emerge to challenge Sauron? If Gandalf was truly the only person he need fear, why was he at all concerned with anyone else?

Also, Aragorn says the following after looking into the Palantir:

It was a bitter struggle, and the weariness is slow to pass. I spoke no word to him, and in the end I wrenched the Stone to my own will. That alone he will find hard to endure. And he beheld me. Yes, Master Gimli, he saw me, but in other guise than you see me here. If that will aid him, then I have done ill. But I do not think so. To know that I lived and walked the earth was a blow to his heart, I deem; for he knew it not till now. The eyes in Orthanc did not see through the armour of Théoden; but Sauron has not forgotten Isildur and the sword of Elendil. Now in the very hour of his great designs the heir of Isildur and the Sword are revealed; for l showed the blade re-forged to him. He is not so mighty yet that he is above fear; nay, doubt ever gnaws him.

Again, why is Sauron concerned with the Heir of Elendil, if a mortal man such as he cannot possibly wield the Ring against him? Sauron had no reason to fear being bested by strength of arms alone, for his armies dwarfed the forces of Gondor and its allies. It seems that the Ring was his only weakness--and why in that case be concerned with what Aragorn does?

[burrahobbit]

The point isn't that nobody could wield the Ring, Gollum and Bilbo and Frodo and Sam all wielded it to a degree, the point is that they can not use it without eventually turning evil. Turning evil is not something that a person can be allowed to do, so the free peoples can't wield the Ring.

[Legolas]

Thus if one was able to defy the Ring's will, they would not be corrupted by it, as that was part of its will.

You're not considering context. He meant 'defy the Ring's will (long enough to cast down Sauron).' Tolkien himself said specifically that only Gandalf might be expected to defeat him, and even with him, the Ring would eventually corrupt his deeds.

It seems that the Ring was his only weakness--and why in that case be concerned with what Aragorn does?

Aragorn would have taken the throne of Gondor and thus command over Gondor. Sauron had been working on Denethor and almost had him completely. Also, it was Elendil (with Gil-galad) that killed him previously. Elendil's heir would be a reminder of Sauron's previous fall at the end of the Second Age.

[ March 31, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

[Noxomanus]

All of this makes me wonder though: What effect would the Ring have had on Dragons,Eagles or even normal animals,should they have it put on their fingers/claws(hooves/fins?)I really wonder.

[Aiwendil]

Legolas wrote:

That quote points out that Gandalf was greater than Saruman, but observed him as leader of the Istari because the Valar designed it that way.

I'm not sure it's quite that clear-cut. The letter you quoted says that Gandalf was, in the event, the only one of the Istari that was fundamentally succesful in his mission. And it says that, at the time when he fought the Balrog, he was the only one who could lead the resistance against Sauron (which of course Saruman could not now do, simply because he had been corrupted).

This (and the whole plot of the book) suggest that Gandalf was morally stronger than Saruman, but give no clear indication that he was stronger than him in terms of power, knowledge, or anything else. I would say that in some ways Gandalf was superior but in others Saruman was.

This says Sauron was greater than Saruman. If Sauron is greater than Saruman and Gandalf is (at the least) equal to Sauron, he too is greater than Saruman.

Who says that Gandalf is greater than Sauron? The opposite seems to me to be far more likely. If we consider Gandalf and Sauron as individuals, then we must acknowledge that Gandalf was at this point incarnate and thus far less powerful than he was originally. Sauron was also incarnate at this point, but he had not willingly given up much of his power in the way that Gandalf had. He was still a Maia; Gandalf was a Maia in the form of a human. Sauron did not disseminate his power as Melkor did; rather he concentrated it in the Ring. But as long as the Ring existed, it seems that he retained most of the power he had put into it.

You do make a good point with the quote about Cirdan. I would say that Gandalf was wiser than Saruman and had greater strength of will and a greater ability to shape the counsels of Men and Elves. But I think that Saruman had greater skill and knowledge and possibly greater personal power. In the end, Gandalf's greater wisdom and willpower serve him better than Saruman's skill.

Iarhen wrote:

1. Tom Bombadil. Since we dont know his nature, we do know taht the Ring had no effect over him. I.e., he had control over the Ring's effects over him. But if he wanted to use it for his purposes, would he be able to? I think it would depend on what his nature is... a maiar?

I don't think he had 'control' over the Ring's effects over him. Rather the Ring had no control over him, in part (or in whole?) because he did not desire control over it. The question about what would happen if he tried to use the Ring for his purposes is, I think, moot; he simply would not do that. If he did, I expect that his attempt to control or use the Ring would allow him to be controlled by it, just like everyone else. The very reason that the Ring doesn't affect him is that he doesn't try to use it.

[Legolas]

Who says that Gandalf is greater than Sauron?

I didn't. The quote I provided (and the statement I made after it, which you quoted) did not say Gandalf was greater than Sauron. It said Gandalf was equal to Sauron in their beginnings:

To the overthrow of Morgoth he [Manwë] sent his herald Eönwë. To the defeat of Sauron would he not then send some lesser (but mighty) spirit of the angelic people, one coëval and equal, doubtless, with Sauron in their beginnings, but not more? Olórin was his name. But of Olórin we shall never know more than he revealed in Gandalf.

I did not break it down into specific areas. I assert that Gandalf as a whole was greater than Saruman. Willpower, wisdom, skill...everything figures into an overall person. One person may better another in certain areas, but the other may be greater overall still. I did not mean to imply that Gandalf was stronger than Saruman in very possible attribute.

[Aiwendil]

That Gandalf was equal to Sauron in their beginning does not tell us all that much about their status at the end of the third age. Most importantly, Gandalf was at that point incarnate and was thus clearly of lesser personal power than he was in the beginning. Also, I'm not sure that "coeval and equal" necessarily means precisely equal in overall strength/power. It could be more loosely interpreted as meaning that they belonged to the same order of beings and that they were comparable in strength.

I did not break it down into specific areas. I assert that Gandalf as a whole was greater than Saruman.

Okay. But what I was pointing out was that your quotes about Gandalf's greater wisdom and greater moral fortitude do not prove that he was greater than Saruman overall - merely that he was greater in those ways. But if we are talking about one's ability to control the Ring (as opposed to one's ability to resist the Ring), then I don't think that moral fortitude would come into it at all, though wisdom certainly would. My main point was that we have no proof that Gandalf was greater than Saruman (or vice versa) overall. What we have is evidence that each was greater than the other in certain areas.

[Legolas]

Of the others only Gandalf might be expected to master him – being an emissary of the Powers and a creature of the same order, an immortal spirit taking a visible physical form.

Since Saruman is not included in that sentence, isn't it logical that he would be lesser than Gandalf, who could be expected to master Sauron?

But if we are talking about one's ability to control the Ring (as opposed to one's ability to resist the Ring), then I don't think that moral fortitude would come into it at all, though wisdom certainly would.

I think you missed my initial response to this: no one would be able to control the Ring. Gandalf was the only person who would be successful in defeating Sauron while keeping the Ring from him, but he could not master the Ring.

[ April 01, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

[Aiwendil]

Since Saruman is not included in that sentence, isn't it logical that he would be lesser than Gandalf, who could be expected to master Sauron?

This does seem to be the strongest point of evidence in favor of Gandalf being, in some general kind of way, superior to Saruman. But it's curious that in that sentence Gandalf's potential ability to defeat Sauron is explained by the fact that he is "emissary of the Powers and a creature of the same order, an immortal spirit taking a visible physical form". Certainly this description applies just as well to Saruman (or to Radagast, Alatar, or Pallando for that matter). So I would still maintain that it is possible that the 'others' in the sentence refers to those who were actively involved in the defence against Sauron.

Unfortunately I don't have my copy of Letters with me at the moment - but what is the context of this statement? What precedes it? To whom does 'others' refer (i.e. who has already been addressed and is being distinguished from the 'others'?)

Also bear in mind that the discussion in that letter is concerned solely with the case where Gandalf, or Galadriel, or whoever else actually has the Ring and uses it. There's a big difference between saying that Gandalf with the Ring could defeat Sauron and saying that Gandalf is more powerful than Sauron.

I think you missed my initial response to this: no one would be able to control the Ring. Gandalf was the only person who would be successful in defeating Sauron while keeping the Ring from him, but he could not master the Ring.

Okay, sorry. But my point stands, I think, if we substitute 'use the Ring' for 'control the Ring'. Whether one can physically defeat Sauron or not has nothing to do with moral fortitude.

[Legolas]

The 'others' in reference to people other than Aragorn and Frodo, particularly the Wise.

I do (and did) realize that Tolkien explanation there seemed lacking, but he must've been keeping it relatively short for the letter's sake. The fact that he did say 'only' still indicates to me that Gandalf was the only period. That he is referring to the Wise in the passage would to me exclude Saruman as a possible victor over Sauron because he was considered such (whether he was or not) in being the leader of the White Council. If he is referring only to the Wise and others involved in the War of the Ring, I do suppose that would leave it open to the other Istari, though CT and Saruman observe Radagast as a being of lesser stature. (No offense, Aiwendil [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] )

Edit: misread one of your questions.

[ April 03, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

[Aiwendil]

I do (and did) realize that Tolkien explanation there seemed lacking, but he must've been keeping it relatively short for the letter's sake. The fact that he did say 'only' still indicates to me that Gandalf was the only period.

True. One further argument I could make would be that perhaps the possibility of one using the Ring to defeat Sauron would depend not only on one's overall power, but more particularly on one's foresight, wisdom, strength of will, etc. - qualities in which Gandalf surpassed Saruman. So I still think that the statement can't be used to prove that Gandalf is, overall, superior to Saruman. But I acknowledge that it makes a good argument.

If he is referring only to the Wise, I do suppose that would leave it open to the other Istari, though CT and Saruman observe Radagast as a being of lesser stature.

Yes. I am (as you guessed) a great fan of Radagast (and the Ithryn Luin to a lesser degree) but certainly Saruman and Gandalf were above the others.

[Legolas]

Yes, it's by no means an absolute measure. I am too, actually. Tried registering 'Radagast' previously.

[ April 03, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]