The Wise in Middle Earth

It is said, according to lore in Minas Tirith, that Elrond was the wisest of Loremasters. Surely this title is better given to Gandalf, a messenger of Eru & great among the wise?

An example of Elrond's folly would have been to send an elf lord, such as Glorfindel, as part of the Nine Walkers, instead of Pippin. Wouldn't the hosts of Mordor be able to detect the power of an elf lord if he dared to enter?

Saruman is already accounted for as a fool for falling foul of the lure of the Ring. Sauron is very wise in most aspects of lore, but only from the point of view of mastering Middle Earth, which ultimately cost him his chance of ruling it.

Sam's suggestion of Frodo being the wisest is riddled with folly, made all the more clear as he is the most foolish of the 4 hobbits that went with the Company.

As for Galadriel, she relies greatly on forsight to makes decisions, which is a sign of weakness.

Tom Bombadil is a mystery among the Wise, since he makes no contribution to the causes in Middle Earth & cares of little beyond is own lands. All the more reason to accuse him of being foolish, a play thing which Tolkein threw into the novel for his own amusement only. He is a creature which makes no sense & serves no purpose in the novel.

[Quempel]

So are you asking who is the wisest of Middle Earth? What would constitute wise in Middle Earth?

I would have to say I agree with what you have said about Elrond. Of course the Elves of Middle Earth make me angry at times.

I am assuming we are not counting the Valar in this.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Just to be clear, you probably mean "wise" and not "The Wise", as they are often referred to, meaning mostly the members of the White Council (Frodo, Tom Bombadil and Sauron have never been in the Council ).

But it is different what you now imagine under the word "wise". From what you wrote, I understand you mean something like "who was the best in wisdom and making good decisions". In this, Gandalf could be mentioned as being very successful, however, I think that's not as true as it seems. Gandalf, as it is shown many times in the books, had the tendency to fail - for example, had Saruman been in his place, he would probably not have overlooked the Ring for 50 years as Gandalf did (the fact that the result was probably ultimately better than if he learned it too early is another thing). Gandalf is also often, and maybe too often, led by "pure luck" (as he himself says). Many times, it is not his own wisdom that accomplishes the goal - it is "chance, as we say in Middle-Earth" - so, the success is not of his doing, but mainly by the power that leads him.
If we speak just of the word "wise", Gandalf himself calls Saruman as being wiser than him, having more knowledge etc. I am sure Saruman was (after all, where would the name "Saruman the Wise" come from) more learned than Gandalf, which of course is the typical "difference between knowledge and wisdom" But I think at this point, and especially among the Wise (with capital W), the word "wise" means just this: learned. This speaks in favor of Elrond, who has been in Middle-Earth for quite some time and, though for example Galadriel was there longer than him (and she was also at Valinor), Elrond probably is more of the type of "sage", who knew a lot and studied the history, while Galadriel was more into the practical things (like creating Golden Woods, divining from mirrors and learning Khudzul).

Speaking of Tom Bombadil, he was never meant to be wise - Saruman would probably have the same words for him as he had for Radagast (very similar to what you said about him). Tom is not the one who would care of "big things", as is Treebeard, who, for example, also has knowledge he collected through the years.

So, in conclusion, if Elrond is called the wisest, I won't object. And if you insist that there is also the criterion of "using one's wisdom in choices that ultimately lead to success", then I say Galadriel. She has foreseen things, but (as with the Hebrew prophets, for example), her actions do not rely on merely divining the future, but also - and often more - in correct analysis of the present, and acting on it. Galadriel's results rely on her own wisdom, so all her successes are indeed hers (or at least from the look of it, we don't know to what scale there is "something else at work") - at least in comparison to Gandalf, who is led by "chance" far, far more than her. Now it's not to say, of course, if being led just by one's wisdom is the better way (and as we can see, Gandalf's results were very good), but as an answer to this question, this is it.

I would not call Galadriel the wisest judging from her performance in the Loth Lorien Cahpter of the LOTR. She contributes no useful advice to the Company at all beyond the obvious, & is more or less just another Bombadil.

As far as the Wise are concerned, I would only include loremasters in this, although others such as Aragorn could also be accounted for as being wise.

[Lalwendë]

It interests me that as a Professor at probably the world's greatest University, Tolkien made some very interesting points about knowledge and learning - the most prominent one being that knowledge is not the ultimate 'good'. You can see this in so many characters as has already been pointed out.

Saruman for one is extremely clever and possibly second only to Sauron in Ring Lore, but this same knowledge is also his downfall, as he cannot see that this very knowledge is also a temptation to try Ring making for himself, and to try mastering the One.

Gandalf is outwitted by Saruman, and though he gives sage advice to many, he often gets through by the skin of his teeth. Galadriel's wisdom is tempered by a flaw in that she wishes/d to be powerful. Treebeard is slow in making decisions. Tom isolates himself.

Those who do eventually show real wisdom are those who admit their failings and flaws, showing that Tolkien was possibly making a point that nobody should ever be too proud of their knowledge or intelligence as it's simply not possible for one person to know everything.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Those who do eventually show real wisdom are those who admit their failings and flaws, showing that Tolkien was possibly making a point that nobody should ever be too proud of their knowledge or intelligence as it's simply not possible for one person to know everything.

It is the subtle application of knowledge which demonstrates wisdom, not knowledge by itself. Gandalf & Sauron were the masters of this, especially the former.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Mansun

It is the subtle application of knowledge which demonstrates wisdom, not knowledge by itself. Gandalf & Sauron were the masters of this, especially the former.

I'd agree that Sauron is a candidate for possessing the most powerful mind. Although Sauron, in his pride, fails to realise both the possibility that someone may wish to destroy the One Ring and that it may be a humble Hobbit who would undertake to do this, sneaking into Mordor by a back door. Those who work out this failing in Sauron's perception (or planning!) prove themselves to be more wise ultimately.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

I'd agree that Sauron is a candidate for possessing the most powerful mind. Although Sauron, in his pride, fails to realise both the possibility that someone may wish to destroy the One Ring and that it may be a humble Hobbit who would undertake to do this, sneaking into Mordor by a back door. Those who work out this failing in Sauron's perception (or planning!) prove themselves to be more wise ultimately.

It is made clear by Gandalf in the Council of Elrond that Sauron is a very wise & powerful adversary, perhaps too wise for his own good. This then provides the Ring bearer a great hope, by using the arts of folly to deceive him. Even still, Sauron & Gandalf are the real masters of Middle Earth.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Mansun

It is made clear by Gandalf in the Council of Elrond that Sauron is a very wise & powerful adversary, perhaps too wise for his own good. This then provides the Ring bearer a great hope, by using the arts of folly to deceive him. Even still, Sauron & Gandalf are the real masters of Middle Earth.

Which goes to show that Tolkien was telling us that 'wisdom aint all that' so to speak - that even the cleverest can still be outwitted.

How far would you say Gandalf gets by on luck though? For example, he goes to Isengard because he is tricked by Saruman and manages to get himself out of this sticky situation. Do situations like that show he was not quite so clever or do they show his superior wisdom in being able to work out how to get himself out of a tight spot? Another situation might be when he was trying to get into Moria - why could he not work out the 'password'? Was that genuine? I often suspect not. But was this a misguided delaying tactic as he did not want to go in there?

And just another question that occurs - what about the way Tolkien calls his least lettered main character, one Mr Gamgee, Samwise? This Hobbit is to my mind not so dumb as he makes out.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Ah, but A-S Saemwis translates 'semi-wise, half-wise'........

After all, it's Sam's *lack* of wisdom which thwarts Gollum's near-repentance. Nor does he initially trust Strider or Faramir, whilst Frodo perceives their natures. What Sam has is good plain Hobbit-sense, as well as dogged loyalty; but that's not the whole of wisdom.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

How far would you say Gandalf gets by on luck though? For example, he goes to Isengard because he is tricked by Saruman and manages to get himself out of this sticky situation. Do situations like that show he was not quite so clever or do they show his superior wisdom in being able to work out how to get himself out of a tight spot? Another situation might be when he was trying to get into Moria - why could he not work out the 'password'? Was that genuine? I often suspect not. But was this a misguided delaying tactic as he did not want to go in there?

Do you wish Gandalf to always be right? The LOTR would be over within 100 pages if that were the case. The wisest need not be always right (& cannot be anyway) - what counts is the means, designs, intelligence, application & knowledge of the Loremaster.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hickli

Ah, but A-S Saemwis translates 'semi-wise, half-wise'........

After all, it's Sam's *lack* of wisdom which thwarts Gollum's near-repentance. Nor does he initially trust Strider or Faramir, whilst Frodo perceives their natures. What Sam has is good plain Hobbit-sense, as well as dogged loyalty; but that's not the whole of wisdom.

I think his reactions to bearing the Ring are very telling. He seems to know that what he experiences is not 'right' - of course this could be due to him wearing the Ring for the first time, but he has a particularly powerful reaction to it and responds with strength and wisdom. Maybe he has a lot more Hobbit-sense than Frodo...

Originally Posted by Mansun

Do you wish Gandalf to always be right? The LOTR would be over within 100 pages if that were the case. The wisest need not be always right (& cannot be anyway) - what counts is the means, designs, intelligence, application & knowledge of the Loremaster.

Well exactly. If Tolkien threw us an all-powerful Wizard out there then it would soon become a boring story, rather like when you are watching a predictable action film and you stop feeling any suspense because it dawns on you that this guy is just not going to fail to save the girl/world/universe In Tolkien's work though, we don't get that as even Gandalf can act the buffoon - and there is the masterstroke of having him 'die' in Moria - when I read that for the first time I was convinced he was a goner.

The best and most satisfying heroes, whether intellectual heroes or action ones and Tolkien gives us some great examples, have failings and flaws. Of course, nobody likes a smart arris, so there's another reason Tolkien may have given Gandalf a bumbling side

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Tolkien (of course) was very careful in the words he used. "Loremasters" itself is a translation of ngolmor, derived from the same root as Noldor, denoting "intellect, knowledge, factual and technical expertise."* The greatest of all Loremasters was Feanor- who most certainly wasn't wise in the sense of "prudent, perceptive, possessed of sound judgment;" nor in general were the Noldor (think Exile and Rings of Power). Elrond's mastery is shown in lore- he is Middle-earth's greatest historian, and possibly its foremost doctor. If he's also possessed of sound judgment, that's really a separate thing.

The Wise of the Third Age (the Istari and chief Eldar) again are so denoted in the first sense (the original meaning of wise, from OE witan "to know," from which we also get wit and wizard): but they aren't all "wise" in the second sense. Radagast is something of a clever fool, Saruman we know about, Celeborn doesn't come off as especially 'wise' whatever his wife may say about him, and Galadriel herself took some seven thousand years to achieve 'wisdom', even though "she was a match for the loremasters of the Noldor" already in her youth.



*For many years Tolkien used "Gnomes" as an alternate name for the Noldor, because it evoked Greek gnomos with similar meaning.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hickli

Celeborn doesn't come off as especially 'wise' whatever his wife may say about him, and Galadriel herself took some seven thousand years to achieve 'wisdom', even though "she was a match for the loremasters of the Noldor" already in her youth.
.

Maybe it was on this score that Galadriel showed her greatest wisdom?

[Knight of Gondor]

Should we not distinguish between practical wisdom (IE, possessing the mental faculties to evaluate all given factors and future possibilities, decide on the choices, select the optimal choice, and be able to take action on said choice) of the wise, and being a lore master?

Elrond may not have as much foresight as Gandalf (Gandalf's foresight suggested Pippin should journey with the Nine, and victory would have been diminished or nonexistent if Elrond's will was heeded) or Galadriel, but due to being so stationary (in Rivendell) and as the master of such a refuge, could gather much information from travelers and other great warriors. (We know he did - he also possessed the tokens of Elendil such as Narsil, and the scepter of Annuminas.)

In this sense, I propose that when Elrond is said to be the greatest lore master, it means he is master more of knowledge than of wisdom.

He also possessed the power of healing (not only power of spirit, but evidently practical medical skills) which is not exhibited either by Galadriel nor Gandalf (excepting Theoden's healing, which I deem more spiritual than physical).

As for Galadriel, she relies greatly on forsight to makes decisions, which is a sign of weakness.

I do not understand with this reasoning, and I do not agree that relying on foresight is a sign of weakness. But for the foresight of Gandalf (which seemed to many "folly"), the War of the Ring would have been lost.

Question: If Elrond and Galadriel were present at Sauron's downfall, why does the movie narration say "much that was once known is lost for none now live who remember."

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by Knight of Gondor

Question: If Elrond and Galadriel were present at Sauron's downfall, why does the movie narration say "much that was once known is lost for none now live who remember."

Of these two, only Elrond was present at Sauron's downfall. The movie quote probably refers to Men.

[Farael]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Those who do eventually show real wisdom are those who admit their failings and flaws, showing that Tolkien was possibly making a point that nobody should ever be too proud of their knowledge or intelligence as it's simply not possible for one person to know everything.

I would say that this statement probably defines "wisdom" the best, as opposed to "knowledge". Wisdom, to me, is an inherent property of the self while knowledge is a learned attribute. This means that, iif a "wise man" was bornn complete isolation from civilization, he will still be wise. However, his wisdom will be expressed in ways that are not the ones associated with wisdom in civilization, as he would not have the opportunity to acquire the knowledge that has been learned since the beginning of written history. His wisdom will probably be reflected in more practical ways as they involve with his own survival (after all, humans are social animals and a human isolated from civilization will be very hard pressed to survive)

Conversely, a "dumb" man (for absense of a better word) will still be dumb, even if he learns all there is to know about "lore". It is not WHAT he knows, but rather HOW he uses this knowledge. For example, Saruman was very knowledgeable, but he did not see that his path would ultimately lead to his own demise. Not only would trying to compete with Sauron for the Ring lead to a very angry and vengeful Sauron... but even if Saruman had succeeded, he would have ultimately succumbed to the Ring itself, which would have caused his undoing. He might have survived, but he would have become an unwitting slave to Sauron's will.

Therefore, according to my perspective, I would say that Elrond was wise indeed as not only he had knowledge, but he acted upon it in a sensible manner. Not only he made good choices, but he also listened to other people's suggestions (even if at first he did not want to do it, he DID send Pippin with the rest of the company. Not to mention that he meant to send Pippin back to warn The Shire about the impending evil... and it would've been a reasonable course of action, as we learn much later from The Scouring of The Shire)

Gandalf was also wise, he was very aware of his own strenghts and weaknesses and was able to "see the big picture" and understand the complexities of everything that was happening in Middle Earth. He is, in my opinion, Elrond's equal, as he seeks Elrond's advice and gives advice to him.

Finally, I would say that Frodo was also wise after a fashion. Certainly he was not knowledgeable, but he managed to achieve something that very few (if anyone else) would have. He did this through his realization of his own shortcomings, which lead him to lean on those who were willing to help him. Should he had been "wise" (note: sarcasm) as Saruman, he might have been to proud to accept help from Faramir, Sam or even Gollum (he might have had an ulterior motive, but without Gollum the Ring would have never been destroyed, and I don't mean the finger biting alone).

[LadyBrooke]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Those who do eventually show real wisdom are those who admit their failings and flaws, showing that Tolkien was possibly making a point that nobody should ever be too proud of their knowledge or intelligence as it's simply not possible for one person to know everything.

Just have to comment on this, in light of the fact that everybody seems to doubt Celeborn’s wisdom. (Yes, I am a Celeborn fangirl.)

If we believe this then Celeborn is indeed wise for being able to admit his mistakes. Unlike nearly every other elf in the books, who take ages to admit their mistakes, the second Galadriel points out his to him he admits it and apologizes. Certainly this is better than the ring-bearers who couldn’t destroy their rings even though Tolkien seems to believe they should have. It seems to me that to many fans, only the Noldor are considered as possible wise elves, even though they’re the ones that make 75% of the mistakes - Silmarils, kinslayings, rings. Galadriel is clearly not that wise to me - she thinks that she could have taken the one ring and used it. Besides Elwe and his descendants, do we see any really stupid actions by the Sindar on par with the Noldor’s mistakes?

[Andsigil]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Cirdan- a character about whom I wish Tolkien had written an entire book of stories.

I keep up the hope that he did, and that Christopher Tolkien has only to stumble across some musty steamer trunk buried in the attic...

[LadyBrooke]

I wish he had written more about Cirdan too. So we could know how old he is and such. I bet that's one elf who's lived an exciting life.

But I bet the same thing applies to him that seems to apply to all the elves: If you havn't made a major mistake (kinslaying, rings, ect.) or are related to somebody who has, we don't see much of you (at least in LotR and Sil, in TH we did see Thranduil).

Since the wise are less likely to make mistakes (by my definition of wise, which excludes Elrond and Galadriel - genusies, yes; wise, no) we learn less about them.

[narfforc]

Originally Posted by Andsigil

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Cirdan- a character about whom I wish Tolkien had written an entire book of stories.

I keep up the hope that he did, and that Christopher Tolkien has only to stumble across some musty steamer trunk buried in the attic...

There is more about Cirdan in The Unfinished Tales and The Peoples Of Middle-Earth, his relationship to Elwe and the search for him. There is more, I won't spoil it, enjoy

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by narfforc

There is more about Cirdan in The Unfinished Tales and The Peoples Of Middle-Earth, his relationship to Elwe and the search for him. There is more, I won't spoil it, enjoy

Really? I'm definately going to have to get that (Peoples of Middle Earth) now. He's always been one of my favourite elves, and I don't think he's given as much credit as he should be.

[JeffF.]

I just wanted to respond to the original post. Elrond never said he would choose Glorfindel over Pippin. Gandalf used Glorfindel as an example of a potential alternate to Pippin. Elrond's objection to Pippin was his age (by his own admition in RotK Pippin was not yet at the hobbit age of adulthood) and wished to send him with warning to the Shire to prepare as best they could.

Glorfindel would not have been all that bad a choice. An elflord with his power "revealed in his wrath" would have been an excellent way of fixing Sauron's attention and distracting him from the real ringbearer, but in all likelihood it would probably have been Glorfindel who would fall fighting the Balrog in Moria rather than Gandalf (since he'd killed one before at the Fall of Gondolin at the cost of his own life), but then Gandalf would not have been reincarnated as Gandalf the White.

[narfforc]

Glorfindel was supposed to have been sent 'back' to renforce Gil-galad and Elrond early in The Second Age. Imladris was the last bastion of strength for the Noldorin Elves, I don't think Elrond would have let Glorfindel go anyway. If Lorien or The Woodland Realm in the North fell, then Imladris would have been the last refuge for their remnants on the way to the Grey Havens.

[JeffF.]

But what would Elrond have been saving Glorfindel for? By his own admission at his council Elrond had no host of elves. The High elves were leaving and it is doubtful Imladris could have held out much despite the power of Elrond's Ring (some force of arms was still needed, even by Galadriel). The mission of the Fellowship was an all-or-nothing, do-or-die plan. At least the High Elves could have done SOMETHING or at least been represented by him (as the four hobbits did for their people).

[narfforc]

I think that if everything had gone wrong, the retreat to Mithlond and it's rearguard defence was important. This would have required some measure of strength, until as many elves as possible could be saved. You would not normally send your best general of on a quest, one based mostly on hope, which on the face of it had little chance of succeeding, and you would want your best soldiers with you if it did fail.

[Vultur]

Galadriel wasn't necessarily 'unwise' to think she could take the One Ring - she recognizes that she would become evil in the process. (She probably could, in a simple question of ability: she is arguably the most powerful being, after Sauron, in Middle-Earth at this point. Tolkien wrote that Feanor and Galadriel were "the greatest of all the Eldar"; and the greatest Eldar seem to be on equal level with Balrogs etc.)

One thing I've always wondered: would the Elves' retreat to the West, if Sauron had been victorious, prove to be a false hope in the end? Sauron, being a Maia rather than a mortal, might have been able to find the Straight Road - wearing the Ring, could even Valinor resist him forever? Tolkien said, at least in late writings (published in Morgoth's Ring), that the Valar too 'faded' in a sense; and that 'Sauron at the end of the Second Age was 'greater', comparatively, than Morgoth at the end of the First'. Repossessed of his Ring, would he not return to his full might which he possessed at the end of the Second Age?

It seems to me that the West must ultimately not have been a safe refuge: else the Ring could simply be taken West and kept in, say, Ulmo's safekeeping.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Vultur

One thing I've always wondered: would the Elves' retreat to the West, if Sauron had been victorious, prove to be a false hope in the end? Sauron, being a Maia rather than a mortal, might have been able to find the Straight Road - wearing the Ring, could even Valinor resist him forever?.
Tolkien said, at least in late writings (published in Morgoth's Ring), that the Valar too 'faded' in a sense; and that 'Sauron at the end of the Second Age was 'greater', comparatively, than Morgoth at the end of the First'. Repossessed of his Ring, would he not return to his full might which he possessed at the end of the Second Age?

Despite the fears of Frodo that 'over the Sea' would not be 'wide enough to keep the Shadow out', I don't think the Valar had anything to fear from Sauron.
I don't have Morgoth's Ring, but it seems illogical that Sauron the Maia, even with his Ring, could be said to be more powerful than Morgoth, even after the latter's millenia of expending his innate power and will in the domination of others.
Throughout the First Age, the major defeats of Morgoth, by which I mean the overthrowing of his military might and forcible removal from his stronghold, were accomplished only by direct intervention of the Valar.
Compare that to Sauron, whose armies were destroyed and he himself personally vanquished (if only temporarily) by the Last Alliance of Elves and Men, who had no 'divine' assistance in their fight. And Sauron suffered that humiliation while in possession of the Ring.
As to the Valar 'fading', again, I haven't seen the reference you speak of, but I would like to know the reason they would 'fade'. Even if they were doing so, Sauron would seem to be much weaker himself by the time of the War of The Ring than at the end of the Second Age; he had been forced to re-body again, which was a drain on his power, and, as Morgoth, had wasted his power in the domination of his servants.

Originally Posted by Vultur

It seems to me that the West must ultimately not have been a safe refuge: else the Ring could simply be taken West and kept in, say, Ulmo's safekeeping.

It wasn't that it would not have been a safe place to guard the Ring, but, as Gandalf told the Council of Elrond, the Ring was Middle-earth's problem, and those in the West would not have allowed it to be brought there.

[The Mouth of Sauron]

Originally Posted by JeffF.

I just wanted to respond to the original post. Elrond never said he would choose Glorfindel over Pippin. Gandalf used Glorfindel as an example of a potential alternate to Pippin. Elrond's objection to Pippin was his age (by his own admition in RotK Pippin was not yet at the hobbit age of adulthood) and wished to send him with warning to the Shire to prepare as best they could.

Glorfindel would not have been all that bad a choice. An elflord with his power "revealed in his wrath" would have been an excellent way of fixing Sauron's attention and distracting him from the real ringbearer, but in all likelihood it would probably have been Glorfindel who would fall fighting the Balrog in Moria rather than Gandalf (since he'd killed one before at the Fall of Gondolin at the cost of his own life), but then Gandalf would not have been reincarnated as Gandalf the White.

Let's be honest - it was insanity sending 4 hobbits off to Mordor in the first place. And incredible that Elrond, Gandalf and Aragorn would countenance such a move.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by The Mouth of Sauron

Let's be honest - it was insanity sending 4 hobbits off to Mordor in the first place. And incredible that Elrond, Gandalf and Aragorn would countenance such a move.

Not to nitpick (Heaven forbid! ), but really only one Hobbit was 'sent' to Mordor: Frodo. The rest, with the remainder of the Fellowship, were merely companions to aid him along the way, for as far as they would, or could continue.
The choice of who was to go was, I think, primarily Elrond's, though he gave in to Gandalf's wish to allow Merry and Pippin. Aragorn seems to have played no part in the selection, beyond volunteering himself. Gandalf obviously had, though maybe not conciously, a foresight that Merry and Pippin would play a crucial role, and Elrond was wise enough to trust him.