2nd in command to sauron

[Eurytus]

I am afraid that in addition to all the other things you are wrong about you are also wrong in this;

No, this wasn't his "surface" reason or anything.

It was his surface reason which was why as he progressed towards the Black Gate he had his heralds proclaim that the King had come to reclaim his kingdom and Sauron's forces should leave. That is delivering a message.

Liked the way you ignored my Rudolf Hess example though....

When did Khamul stop ruling Dol Guldur? It's totally not irrelevant. If Sauron trusted the Mouth as he trusted Khamul or the Witch-King and made him second in command, would he not have him further away ruling a fortress he wasn't physically present at? It is also relevant because Khamul is called "Sauron's lt." even though it is clear that the Witch-King outranks him - this is a clear indication that the title of "lieutenant" does not mean that he (or anyone referred to as such) is second in command, nor is there only one lieutenant.

How wrong is the above? Answer, very wrong.
You like to keep harping on about Khamul being the lieutenant of Dol Guldur despite the fact that this situation was before the events in LOTR occurred and it is not possible to command a fortress when you are not even there.

As much as you play the semantics card neither you or Gwahir have dealt with the following points;

1. It is stated in the text that the Mouth is to be Sauron's lieutenant in Isengard and nowhere refuted.

2. None of the Nazgul other than the Witchking command armies and Tolkien expressly stated in one of his letters on the subject that the Nazgul are unable to function without Sauron's will and have no initiative. Not ideal commanders then.

3. A creature which inspires absolute terror in mortal men, which causes them to flee, is not going to be the best candidate to control tribute kingdoms. The tribute kingdoms would presumably pay taxes etc to Sauron and to control this you need to be able to meet with their representatives. Something that the Nazgul would be unable to do.

My first two points are those stated by Tolkien himself and the latter is sheer common sense.
What Khamul did before LOTR is of no account.
Whether the Witchking ranked higher than Khamul is of no account. He's dead.

But good luck in trying to argue against Tolkien's own writing guys.

[Maéglin]

Personally I think Sauron had no second in command just like Morgoth did not (Morgoth had Gothmog, Sauron, Glaurung as commanders/lieutenants) who was a TYRANT, but rather his own most trusted servants. And since Maia (or in the case of Morgoth Vala) tended to be immortal and very powerful, they probably did not perceive the thought of their own downfall, thus ruling out the need of a second in command.

What is the point of a second in command in Mordor (by that I mean where his power runs) if the ruler dies whose power is what keeps the entire realm sustained. You must understand that under Sauron's dominion the Mouth must also have been under his will, doing whatever he bids. So the Mouth really has no greater authority than the rest of Sauron's following. For example, the Mouth could not have commanded the Nazgul because they followed the will of Sauron alone. Nor could the Nazgul or even the Witck king command the Mouth because he was too, under the direct control of Sauron.

Its not as if the Mouth would have got first dibs on commanding the Ringwraiths if Sauron took a holiday or something because it was just not possible. Sauron could have had the Lord of Morgul, Lord of Isengard, Lord of wherever the hell he wants, but ultimately they were all his servants.

[Eurytus]

I don't think Sauron would need 2nds in command or people to step in for him and command his military forces. Nor would he need someone to 'bounce ideas off' so to speak.

However he would be in control of a massive kingdom. Since there is no evidence that Orcs are much cop as farmers it would make sense for Sauron's realm to have to import much of its food. It certainly did in the case of Mordor (from the East) and it is likely that much of the role given to the tribute realms beyond the Anduin would be to supply the troops and workers of Sauron's realm with food and materials.

Sauron is not going to want to be bothered with this type of micromanagement and it is here that I believe the power heirachy comes in useful. Quite simply Sauron's realm would be too big for him to worry about the 'small details' like the sourcing of food and supplies. That would be his lieutenant's job. Given Isengard's location, commanding the gap between Sauron's realm and the tribute realms it would be in prime position to control the flow of products, supplies and materials from the west to the lands controlled by Sauron.

That is the situation where I think the Mouth of Sauron would have come in.

[Maéglin]

So The Mouth is not a second in command... merely the tax/parole officer so to speak. Second in Command means that he (or she) has all the powers of the First and he is ONLY under the direct command of the Ruler as is clearly not the case with the Nazgul.

If Sauron has to place his will behind them for them to be effective battle commanders then he might as well command the forces himself. A commander who cannot function without the guidance of his superior is worthless in warfare.

One of the Nazgul was in charge of the tower at Cirith Ungol. And Sauron's will penetrated through all his servants so that they fled (like orcs and the such) when they realised he had been vanquished. Yet Orcs do have their own 'will,' obviously (Clear example is Battle of the Five Armies). They fled because of fear of the Host of the West.

[Legolas]

In interest of time, I'll stick to my main concern: you have not yet shown me where Tolkien says the Mouth of Sauron will be the ruler of Isengard. Still waiting on that.

"Liked the way you ignored" the following indisputable points:

Khamul is called "Sauron's lt." even though it is clear that the Witch-King outranks him - this is a clear indication that the title of "lieutenant" does not mean that he (or anyone referred to as such) is second in command, nor is there only one lieutenant.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it shows that the Mouth thinks being a spokesman for a godlike entity is of greater worth than being king of a kingdom that he believes is about to be destroyed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While Gandalf is sent from the King of Arda, far closer to God than Sauron?

With Manwe's 'messenger' being on the same level as Sauron, even, and said to be the only one in Middle-earth who could defeat him...

And most of all

quote:
---------------------------------------------
Looking in the Messenger's eyes they read his thought. He was to be that lieutenant, and gather all that remained of the West under his sway; he would be their tyrant and they his slaves.
---------------------------------------------

This is the only hint I see, but it is not a statement by the Mouth; it is merely a mention of the twinkle in his eye, thinking himself to be that one to dwell in Isengard. Would he definitely be that one? We don't know. Would that person definitely be second in commmand? We're not positive.

I find this a very out-of-place point:

3. A creature which inspires absolute terror in mortal men, which causes them to flee, is not going to be the best candidate to control tribute kingdoms. The tribute kingdoms would presumably pay taxes etc to Sauron and to control this you need to be able to meet with their representatives. Something that the Nazgul would be unable to do.

Sauron himself fits that very description.

[ October 17, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

[Eurytus]

In interest of time, I'll stick to my main concern: you have not yet shown me where Tolkien says the Mouth of Sauron will be the ruler of Isengard. Still waiting on that.
"Liked the way you ignored" the following indisputable points:

I 'ignored' them because they were, in my view, obviously wrong and I wanted to address those points that seemed to me to be better placed for discussion but since you insist.....

Khamul is called "Sauron's lt." even though it is clear that the Witch-King outranks him - this is a clear indication that the title of "lieutenant" does not mean that he (or anyone referred to as such) is second in command, nor is there only one lieutenant.

I actually did not ignore this point, I addressed it several times but for whatever reason you seem to take no notice of this. It would be more accurate were you to say Khamul WAS Sauron's lieutenant. At the time of LOTR there is no indication that he remained so. Remember he dwelt at Dol Guldur as Sauron's lieutenant. When he left Dol Guldur there is no indication that he kept the lieutenant role, and no reason to do so.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it shows that the Mouth thinks being a spokesman for a godlike entity is of greater worth than being king of a kingdom that he believes is about to be destroyed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While Gandalf is sent from the King of Arda, far closer to God than Sauron?

With Manwe's 'messenger' being on the same level as Sauron, even, and said to be the only one in Middle-earth who could defeat him...

Out of interest where does it say that Gandalf can defeat Sauron or is even on the same level?
As to the rest of the point, in no way does your response invalidate my point. There is no inidication that Sauron knew exactly what Gandalf was. He knew of him but may well not have known his true nature. After all this was a reason behind the Istari cloaking their true power.
There is even less likelihood that the Mouth knew who Gandalf was.

Of course even if he did he would still consider his master as more powerful than any of the other Maiar.

And most of all
quote:

quote:
---------------------------------------------
Looking in the Messenger's eyes they read his thought. He was to be that lieutenant, and gather all that remained of the West under his sway; he would be their tyrant and they his slaves.
---------------------------------------------
This is the only hint I see, but it is not a statement by the Mouth; it is merely a mention of the twinkle in his eye, thinking himself to be that one to dwell in Isengard. Would he definitely be that one? We don't know. Would that person definitely be second in commmand? We're not positive.

I find this a very out-of-place point:

You find this a very out of place point? It was your point. That's your post. And the one its answering was not mine. I can't see how it's relevant.

Sauron himself fits that very description.

If he did then it further strengthens the case for the Mouth's role at Isengard. However I do not recall any indication that Sauron's nature was the same as the Nazgul.
Either way it does not erode my position.

[Legolas]

You find this a very out of place point? It was your point. That's your post. And the one its answering was not mine. I can't see how it's relevant.

What? When you see a colon, it means that whatever follows is what the sentence is referring to. THe point about the Nazgul bringing fear to mortal men - Sauron did this also. He was very large and terrible.

About Khmaul:

I'm not saying he was lt. at the time of the Morannon. Whether he was or not, there WAS a time that he ws called lt even though the Witch-King clearly outranks him.

This has nothing to do with them outranking the Mouth. It just shows that the term "lt." does not refer to a person that is second in command - so the Mouth being called lt. does not make him second in command.

This point is not out of place, but rather the most direct point here:

quote:
---------------------------------------------
Looking in the Messenger's eyes they read his thought. He was to be that lieutenant, and gather all that remained of the West under his sway; he would be their tyrant and they his slaves.
---------------------------------------------
This is the only hint I see, but it is not a statement by the Mouth; it is merely a mention of the twinkle in his eye, thinking himself to be that one to dwell in Isengard. Would he definitely be that one? We don't know. Would that person definitely be second in commmand? We're not positive.

Tolkien is not explicitly stating that the Mouth would be that lt. at Isengard, nor would being the lt. in Isengard make him second in command. THe Mouth was clearly just thinking of it.

[Eurytus]

Your point regarding Sauron being big and scary does not indicate that he inspires the same fear as the Nazgul do.

Tolkien is not explicitly stating that the Mouth would be that lt. at Isengard, nor would being the lt. in Isengard make him second in command. THe Mouth was clearly just thinking of it.

The fact remains that this occurs in LOTR and none of your alternative suggestions as to who would be Sauron's 2nd have any textual back up at all!

[Legolas]

Why does the fear have to be the "same" fear? Fear owuld be present, and Sauron would undoubtedly be more terrifying than the Nazgul.

The fact remains that this occurs in LOTR and none of your alternative suggestions as to who would be Sauron's 2nd have any textual back up at all!

Nor is there any textual back up that the Mouth would be second in command, or that there is, in fact, anyone designated as second in command.

What "occurs" in Lord of the Rings? The passage I'm guessing that you're referecing (since I've requested it multiple times with no response) does not state that he is second in command, or that he is the only lt., or that he is even going to be that lt. at Isengard.

You only claim the Mouth to be the only candidate for second in command based on your opinions of what common sense dictates Sauron should do. If we base everything not stated on "common sense" (especially because thoughts on what this is would differ from person to person), then we are taking away Sauron's character and placing ourselves in his position.

Because you think it would be in Sauron's best interest to place the Mouth at Isengard and proclaim him second in command does not mean it is what he would've done.

I think it was stupid to have such incompetent orcs running Cirith Ungol; I think a better plan to retrieve the Ring would not have included sending the Nazgul out to spread havoc in trying to attain the Ring by force. Did Sauron agree? No. Did he succeed in these tasks? No. Does that change the fact that they occurred the way they did? No.

[ October 17, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

[Eurytus]

OK, this is going to be my last post on the subject as we are not going anywhere. It states in the book that the captains of the West could see that the Mouth thought that he would be the lieutenant of Isengard and would be the tyrant over the tribute realms west of the Anduin. The Mouth hints to as much.
This post would quite obviously be the second most prominent after Sauron in Sauron's new world order. The tribute realms would after all provide much of the products for Sauron's realm and the man commanding their distribution would be powerful indeed.

Nowhere in the books is any indication at all given that the Nazgul would obtain any position of command in Sauron's new world order. None. That just leaves Gothmog about whom we know little.

The only logical explanation is that the Mouth is the most likely candidate. I would suggest that it is not I that is letting my intepretations govern my opinion. Mine is based on Tolkien's only writings covering the issue.

Yours seems more based on a perception of the talents of the Nazgul and is not backed up at all by the text.
I have little doubt that you will keep this opinion but to my mind it is based more on the perceived combat effectiveness and 'power' of the Nazgul than an accurate intepretation of the text.

The fact remains that, given what little we have in writing, we have to expect that the Mouth would have the position of most influence and power after Sauron in his re-ordered realm.

[Maéglin]

You say that nowhere in the book does a Nazgul get a position in command... a Nazgul was in charge of Cirith Ungol. This was stated by an orc in ROTK Book VI when Frodo and Sam are overhearing a typical orc argument.

[Eurytus]

I believe a Nazgul had been sent to Cirith Ungol to take the matter in hand, or so they had heard. In any case there are two points to be made. It could not have been there for long since it was soon required at the Black Gate and investigating a disturbance at Cirith Ungol would not come close to commanding Isengard.

[Maéglin]

No.. your belief is wrong. The exact quote is

One of them's in charge at the Tower now.

It does not even hint at any disturbance that you are assuming. This particular Nazgul must have been present at the Black gate but so what? He was still in charge. The Witch king was in charge of Minas Morgul and he went off to war to the Pelennor field did he not?

[Eurytus]

If you want to equate taking charge of Cirith Ungol, a comparatively small guard-tower that has had all it's Orcs killed, and moreover taking it over for the period of about 3 days or so with running Isengard and acting as conduit for the tribute realms then there is really no discussing it with you is there?

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Careful, please - since there is no definite book answer to this question, I ask you to be respectful of the opinions of others, even when they differ from yours. Keep the discussion centered on the issues instead of criticizing the persons - thanks!

[Eurytus]

Assuming that the last post referred to my previous post I would like to state that I was not trying to be insulting to Maeglin. I was merely expressing the fact that it is extremely unlikely that either of us are going to see even a fraction of the other's viewpoint and hence further discussion was futile.

Can see how it came out looking like a dig though.

[Telchar]

I do not want to take part in this discussion as I have no real interest in the answer - why dont I have interest? Simply because Tolkien never gave a direct answer to it.

I do however wonder at the fact that none of you have grasped at this quote from the last pages of The Black Gate Opens where Merry thinks to himself:

‘If only I could smite that foul Messenger with it, then almost I should draw level with old Merry. Well, I’ll smite some of this beastly brood before the end. I wish I could see cool sunlight and green grass again!’

The word almost being my point...

Cheers T

[Eurytus]

The word almost being my point...

Well of course if you went back and actually read the thread you would see that nowhere at all do I dispute that the Witchking WAS 2nd in command to Sauron. The discussion had progressed to what happened after the Witchking's demise so the 'almost' post is irrelevant to that discussion.

[the phantom]

‘If only I could smite that foul Messenger with it, then almost I should draw level with old Merry. Well, I’ll smite some of this beastly brood before the end. I wish I could see cool sunlight and green grass again!’

Actually, that quote may not mean anything to the 2nd in command debate.

To demonstrate my point, take the Balrog. If Pippin were to "smite" the Balrog, he would not only "draw level with old Merry", but he would surpass old Merry.

But this certainly doesn't mean that the Balrog was second in command. Though it is sometimes true, the most powerful is not always the highest ranking. It takes a certain combination of skills and attributes to make a good leader/ruler, and these skills and attributes are not necessarily the same exact ones that make a good General.

(I don't have an opinion on who the 2nd in command was, just trying to add to the discussion)

[The Saucepan Man]

The word almost being my point...

I think that Telchar's quote actually helps your argument more than it harms it, Eurytus. The point being that the Mouth is described as being almost on a par with the Witch-King and therefore possibly second only to him in the heirarchy (prior to the Witch-King's demise).

But, then again, these are Pippin's musings and I hardly think that Sauron's command structure was his specialist subject. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

I can't think of a single precedent either in history or in Tolkien's mythology for a herald inheriting his master's entire dominion. That's all the Mouth of Sauron appears to be, given the context of his appearance.

All this talk of a second-in-command for an immortal entity seems rather moot to me. We must ask ourselves what the point is in having a second-in-command. Surely it is to ensure that the leader's intentions cannot be thwarted by his own absence, sickness or death, and so that he can share the burden of command. Sauron is immortal, owns at least one Palantír and quite probably needs neither rest nor sleep. Also, if one's aim is personal world domination, as it was with Sauron, then that aim cannot be achieved if one has been succeeded in power. Therefore it's quite plausible that Sauron didn't care what happened after he was gone: what use is an army of conquest to a dead conqueror? If we add to that the fact that Sauron can never completely die, that he is superior to all of his minions in both power and wisdom, and that he does not share his authority, it becomes increasingly likely that he had a cadre of lieutenants who were considered equal in the hierarchy.

This arrangement would be to Sauron's advantage in that it would ensure that he had some followers who could be trusted to take charge of important functions that he would otherwise have to perform himself, whilst ensuring that none of them had enough authority ever to challenge him (doomed though such a rebellion would be it could still be damaging if it came at the wrong moment). By giving all of his immediate inferiors exactly the same rank and status, Sauron would have engineered a situation in which each of them would watch the others' power and loyalty jealously, saving the Dark Lord the trouble of doing so himself.

Sauron's ambitions are based solely on himself. He is god, king, high priest, general and cause embodied. Without him the entire arch of the Mordorian system collapses, which would leave little for a second-in-command to do. Given the situation after the fall of the Dark Tower, I'm not sure that any of his surviving lieutenants would have much fancied taking over Sauron's role, but I'm pretty sure that anyone who did would be chosen by the classic technique of uncontrolled competitive examination from among the more powerful of the old Dark Lord's commanders. In the end, though, it's not so much a matter of entitlement to the leadership, more one of who could possibly want it.

[ October 22, 2003: Message edited by: The Squatter of Amon Rûdh ]

[Rumil]

Evening all,

Squatter, I think I agree with most of your conclusions, but on heralds, Eonwe and Elrond come to mind as fairly high up the command chain [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

I think the problems we have are that first, there's hardly any info on Sauron's senior 'officers', we only have the Nine, the Mouth, possibly Gothmog II and King of the Haradrim. Surely there would have been more? Secondly there's the 'imprecision' of military rank in LoTR, where captain appears to simply mean 'leader' and lieutenant 'subordinate leader', rather than the hierarchy of generals, colonels, majors, captains and lieutenants (etc) that JRRT was certainly familiar with. I guess this stems back to the Middle Ages and before, where troops weren't formally organised into regiments and such ranks weren't closely defined (in contrast to social ranks ie Duke, Count, Baron etc).

The lieutenants mentioned seem to be linked to specific fortresses, Khamul at Dol Guldur, Gothmog at Minas Morgul, The Mouth at Barad-Dur. Before the War of the Ring the Witchking had independent commands, first in Angmar, then at Minas Morgul (therefore presumably he was 'captain' of Minas Morgul?). I think even Sauron needed a high ranking 'officer' on the spot to make everyday decisions and react to local events. There was certainly not instantaneous communication between Dol Guldur and Barad Dur, as one of the Nazgul was used as a messenger, however there may have been between Minas Morgul and Barad Dur (the lightning discharge???).

On the relationship between Mouth and WK, remember that the Witchking had been 'killed' by the time of Mouth's conversation, where it's implied that he believed that he would become master of Isengard. I think a Nazgul could have done that job (as Khamul at DG), perhaps Sauron was toying with the Mouth, intending to snatch away the offer at the last minute (and presumably cackle maniacally)!

As Squatter says, maybe there was no designated second in command. Who ranks higher, the great general or the chamberlain of the palace? However, I don't reckon even the Mouth would relish standing up to the Witchking!

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

Eonwe and Elrond come to mind as fairly high up the command chain

I've edited the sentence that seems to have caused this confusion. What I meant to say was that I've never heard of a herald inheriting the dominions of his master, even taking on the role of a second-in-command. Certainly Eonwë makes an effective general, but he is by no means the heir to his overall commander's position. In any case I think it unhelpful to look to the Valar for examples, since they clearly have a distinct and possibly unique social structure.

As for Elrond, he was not a herald but Gil-Galad's standard bearer; a greater honour by far since it called for great courage and fighting ability. Aside from anything else, a king's herald is a non-combatant, which is why the Mouth of Sauron is inviolate on the field. This considered, I don't think that he would have wanted to challenge the Witch-King in person either. His boasts to Aragorn and his generals seem to me just that. Whether based on misinformation or personal vanity I sincerely doubt that a mere spokesman would be allowed a command as detached as Isengard.

On a more general note: as Rumil points out we cannot think in terms of a modern military structure when dealing with The Lord of the Rings. The concepts of lieutenant and captain have absolutely nothing to do with the present-day military ranks: a captain is any leader of a large body of men, and a lieutenant is a steward or second-in-command. In a society like those of Middle-earth, military and social rank are indeed closely related, position within the chain of command being based on one's social status. There is nothing nebulous about the system: the king is the commander-in-chief (as is still the case in Britain); his senior generals are the highest-ranking noblemen. The captains or regimental commanders are also aristocrats, who lead troops raised on their estates; the size of the forces under their command being determined by their wealth and prestige. We can see this structure at work as the forces gather at Minas Tirith, each commander entering the city at the head of the men that he has raised. Those commanders form the general staff under the overall leadership of the Steward and later the King. Each man also has personal command over any forces raised on his lands, so it should come as no surprise that aristocratic titles have military connotations, no matter from which language they have been taken.

Although Mordor's armies seem more modern than this in the brief glimpses that we are afforded of them, the principle is still much the same. Sauron is at the top, his word law. Below him are an uncertain number of senior commanders, probably hand-picked for loyalty and ability and beyond that we just don't know, although we do know that the Orcs were also stratified into ranks. Again, since this is a militant society, military rank and social position are virtually interchangeable.

[Rumil]

Ooops, indeed, quite right Squatter! Isn't it a shame we don't get to see many of Sauron's main henchmen. Orc legions are mentioned in LoTR, but whether they had any similarity in numbers or organisation to the Roman legion is unknown, I'd guess probably not. (After all even the Late Roman legion was radically different in size from the Early Imperial legion.)

Ho Hum!

[Telchar]

Squatter, just to be a real pain in the .... BUT:

As for Elrond, he was not a herald but Gil-Galad's standard bearer

Elrond himself claims:

I was the herald of Gil-galad and marched with his host. I was at the Battle of Dagorlad before the Black Gate of Mordor, where we had the mastery: for the Spear of Gil-galad and the Sword of Elendil, Aiglos and Narsil, none could withstand.

Both Eonwe and Elrond are described in the texts as being both herald and banner-bearer.

[ October 22, 2003: Message edited by: Telchar ]