Saruman for or against Sauron?

[Mansun]

The Two Towers deals with the link between Isengard and Mordor in the battle against ME. However, one thing that I have had trouble deciding was, did Saruman JOIN with Sauron (as with the film), or was there just a casual link between the two (i.e passing of information) from which the treacherous Sauron benefited totally through commanding the will of others from the seeing stones?

I had the idea that Sauron was just using Saruman as a puppet to turn against ME, hence increase his own chances of defeating ME, while never having any plans of formally joining with Saruman. There is no clear evidence that Saruman built his army to directly aid Mordor as far as I have known.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

They were against each other insofar as they both wanted the Ring of Power and both wanted to defeat the other, but they were cooperative because they both felt the threat of the 'good guys', particularly Gondor. They didn't like each other but they hated Gondor more.

I think it's sad how the film shows Saruman as being, like you say, a puppet and little more.

[Kath]

I think it's sad how the film shows Saruman as being, like you say, a puppet and little more.

I agree. He was actually very cunning and powerful in his own right. He used Wormtongue to infiltrate Rohan and was doing a fine job of corrupting them until Gandalf showed up. And the power of his voice is never really shown in the film either which is shame as I always thought this a very interesting power in the books.

Saruman wasn't really working for Sauron though I don't think. I would say that they were working in tandem toward a common goal. Both wanted the Ring and power over ME and had Saruman got the Ring he would have had a fair shot at this as the Ring would have magnified his powers.

[Elladan and Elrohir]

Saruman betrayed the Council to enter the service of Mordor; he then betrayed Mordor to work to get the Ring for himself. Sauron was aware of this from a very early time, I think. However, Saruman was for the present in his service, at least in public, and so he used Saruman as much as he could. Ultimately Saruman would never have been any match for Sauron, unless he got hold of the Ring, as Gandalf makes clear in Book Three.

[The Only Real Estel]

I think that Saruman did 'join' with Sauron, but had his own plans all along. Like Mansun said, I don't think there is any evidence at all that Saruman bred his army solely to help Sauron, he was breeding them in his own little attmept to copy Sauron's army. If he could get Sauron to fall for his lip-service pitch he could still destroy Rohan (which would help him quite a bit) and hopefully recover the Ring before Sauron did, with a decent sized army to protect him. That said I doubt Sauron fell for it for long.

I think it's sad how the film shows Saruman as being, like you say, a puppet and little more.

I'll third that. Saruman had his own powers and plans and was a good deal more than a stupid finger puppet, being bent to his new master's will.

[davem]

I think there's also Saruman's envy of Sauron to take into account. Its clear that Saruman saw Sauron as some kind of 'ideal' role-model:

A strong place and wonderful was Isengard, and long it had been beautiful; and there great lords had dwelt, the wardens of Gondor upon the West, and wise men that watched the stars. But Saruman had slowly shaped it to his shifting purposes, and made it better, as he thought, being deceived--for all those arts and subtle devices, for which he forsook his former wisdom, and which fondly he imagined were his own, came but from Mordor; so that what he made was naught, only a little copy, a child's model or a slave's flattery, of that vast fortress, armoury, prison, furnace of great power, Barad-dur, the Dark Tower, which suffered no rival, and laughed at flattery, biding its time, secure in its pride and its immeasurable strength.(The Road to Isengard)

It seems that he wasn't so much competing with Sauron as wanting to become him. Whether Sauron was responsible for putting this desire into his mind, or whether it merely reflected some deep-rooted desire in his own psyche, I don't think we'll ever know for certain.

[Mansun]

I think Sauron gave away the idea that he did have a decent understanding (so he thought!) with Saruman. If you remember, Pippin had an encounter with Sauron through the seeing stone, in which Sauron thought he was for a moment communicating with Saruman, asking " Why have you neglected to report for so long?". This implies that Saruman actually betrayed Sauron, but it is highly likely that should Sauron retain the Ring he would brush aside even a loyal Saruman to some low key mischief job, assuming that the Mouth of Sauron was to become the lieutenant of Isengard.

The fact that the Mouth of Sauron also made out that the Darklord no longer trusted Saruman to be worthy of that role when all was to be won at the black gate suggests that he did most likely work well with Saruman initially, but then was betrayed by him. Sauron must have thought Saruman was incapable of getting the Ring in the first place, and even if he got it, Sauron would know exactly where it was, and would bend his power towards Isengard like a storm (or quicker).

[mormegil]

They both agreed that they were working together and Saruman would assume to be the vassel of Sauron if the ring were recovered and M-E conquered. This was the plan on paper. In reality they were each using each other and each thought they had the upper-hand. However Sauron had the mastery. In other words they proclaimed their alligence to on another, or at least Sauron accepted Saruman's aid and offered rewards in return, but as most evil villains will do they would betray each other in the end. So I would argue that Saruman did have some powers yes but they were insignificant next to Mordor and was in fact a puppet to Sauron.

[Boromir88]

I've often compared the Saruman-Sauron relationship like the Hitler-Stalin relationship.

Hitler and Stalin necessarily didn't like eachother (they both had contrasting views) but they agreed to put their differences aside and not attack eachother. For a long time they would help eachother out, but both had plans of undermining eachother once the allies were gone. Hitler knew the two-front war was one reason for Germany's defeat in WW1 so he signs this pact with Russia trying to prevent that again. In secret he just wants to deal with the West first and then turn on Stalin. It was when Hitler believed that the West had been dealt with (one fault) when he turned on Stalin and started invading Russia (another fault).

I think the Sauron and Saruman relationship can be similar to this. They both are after the same thing (The Ring) and they enter into this agreeance of "Look we both hate these people let's get rid of them," but they were secretly planning to betray eachother if and when they finished with Gondor and Rohan.

[Ar-Pharazon]

I don't think Sauron and Saruman were truly allies and more competitors using the metaphor as a chess match, where they would make moves to counter the other.

When Sauron arises in Mirkwood, Saruman goes along with the plan of the council to march on Dol Guldur and force him out. His reasoning was that it would move Sauron farther from Anduin so he couldnt freely search for the ring.

In the UT - Sauron dispatches the Ringwraiths in search of the Ring, but all they know is there is a creature named Baggins and he is in a land called the Shire. The wraiths come upon Isengard. Here the story gets muddled about what exactly happens. But the gist is that Saruman lies to the Ringwraiths about where the Ring is, he either sends them to Rohan and on the way they run into Grima who, out of fear, tells them where the shire is. The other is Saruman sends them on a scenic route north and on the way they run into one of the Ruffians whose working on the shire and he has all sorts of maps on them. Either way the wraiths discover Saruman's treachery and later Sauron learns of it.

When Pippen touches the Palantir, Sauron assumes that because a hobbit touched the stone it is the one that has the Ring and therefore Saruman has the ring. Sauron immediately dispatches a Nazgul on a fell beast who flies over the company after they leave Isengarde.

In my opinion the book's represent Saruman and Sauron as a dueller of wits. For at first Saruman hated Sauron, but after studying him he came to envy his power and respect him as a rival.

~ArP

[Lalwendë]

When Sauron arises in Mirkwood, Saruman goes along with the plan of the council to march on Dol Guldur and force him out. His reasoning was that it would move Sauron farther from Anduin so he couldnt freely search for the ring.

This brings to mind something I've been pondering. When Saruman went along with the White Council to work to eject Sauron from Dol Guldur, was he, at that time, using the Palantir? These events took place not long before the beginning of the War of the Ring, and so we must presume that he was using it, that he may have been using it for quite a long while (he might have sought to occupy Isengard as he knew the Palantir was there). So he must have been able to cloak his thoughts and actions from Sauron at that time which begs the question why did he supposedly fall under the influence of Sauron so quickly?

From this line of thought, it is likely that he was not totally in thrall to Sauron. Saruman seemed to seek a 'third way' in Middle earth. This may have begun with him choosing to deal with the problem of the Ring and Sauron in a different way. If we think about the range of suggestions for dealing with the Ring displayed by the great and the good at the Council of Elrond, then it is obvious that the way supported by Gandalf and Elrond is not the only opinion that was held in Middle earth.

What makes Sauron different is that he thought he had the superior knowledge to deal with the Ring in another way. He seeks to discover the nature of Eru and divinity in Arda by breaking the Light, and wishes to use the knowlegde he has gained by taking over from Sauron. Compare this with Galadriel, who is also a power-seeker; when she is offered the Ring she knows that she too could take over and provide a third way, but she instead rejects this power. So I think that this is the key similarity between Saruman and Sauron - they are different characters seeking different ends, but both have such a desire for the Ring that they are prepared to do just about anything to get it.

They are both villains in the grand scheme of Middle earth, and though on the surface they have made an alliance, it is purely a surface alliance in my opinion. Their desire has got the better of them and there is simply no possibility that one can possess the Ring while the other does not have it.

I'd love to think what might have happened between the two of them had Saruman got his hands on the Ring. :eek:

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

A Third Way? Oo er! If only Tony Blair had long white hair. :D

Morm, I see what you're saying: that Saruman was effectively a puppet to Sauron and this I can accept. But what he did not do was set out with the intention of joining with Sauron, and this is what the film suggests. Saruman was more of a rebellious adolescent than a naughty child, if you'll follow me.

[Kuruharan]

I'd love to think what might have happened between the two of them had Saruman got his hands on the Ring.

After that particular war would have been over there would not have been enough left over of Saruman to spread on a meager slice of bread and call it Aruman Butter. :eek:

[Holbytlass]

Saruman stepped onto Middle-Earth on the side of good, head of the white council, follower of Eru's plan. Somewhere along the way, he wanted to be mightiest, strongest, most powerful being, which doesn't always equate to evil. I don't even see Saruman in the beginning wanting to be evil just most important. Unfortunately, at the time, the thing that could make this happen for him is the One Ring, which is evil.
In Saruman's wish for the ring, he unwisely uses the palantir to see what Sauron is up to, but that entraps himself to Sauron. And in this entrapment, both have some means to their own ends. Saruman might not like being under Sauron's thumb but at least he can use this position to his own advantage by gaining information from Sauron. And Saruman is biding his time until he can recover the ring for himself. Likewise, Sauron thinks he has an 'insider' to the white council and to his enemies.
Saruman got in over his head, and we know what happened to him because things didn't go according to his plan.

Is Saruman for or against Sauron? Saruman is for himself, but his choices cause him to be with Sauron and then under Sauron. Sauron is just as good a 'sweet talker' as Saruman, probably better, which puts enough thoughts into Saruman's head that if he joins Sauron, he could be in a better position to become mightiest, after his betrayal.

[Elladan and Elrohir]

This brings to mind something I've been pondering. When Saruman went along with the White Council to work to eject Sauron from Dol Guldur, was he, at that time, using the Palantir? These events took place not long before the beginning of the War of the Ring, and so we must presume that he was using it, that he may have been using it for quite a long while (he might have sought to occupy Isengard as he knew the Palantir was there). So he must have been able to cloak his thoughts and actions from Sauron at that time which begs the question why did he supposedly fall under the influence of Sauron so quickly?

Actually, according to Gandalf, Saruman probably used the palantir for some time before he finally dared to gaze upon Barad-dur, and thus make contact with the Ithil-stone. "Then he was caught!" So he probably hadn't made contact with Sauron at the time the White Council "forced" the Necromancer out of Dol Guldur.

[Lalwendë]

Actually, according to Gandalf, Saruman probably used the palantir for some time before he finally dared to gaze upon Barad-dur, and thus make contact with the Ithil-stone. "Then he was caught!" So he probably hadn't made contact with Sauron at the time the White Council "forced" the Necromancer out of Dol Guldur.

Do you think that Sauron may have been aware that he (or someone, as he may not have been able to identify exacty who) was using the Palantir though? This would mean that Saruman was caught quickly as soon as he tried to communicate with Sauron. And there is another question - would Saruman know who held that Palantir?

I do wonder just whether possession of the Ring would in any way be a 'match' for Mordor's armies? If Saruman had got hold of it, then Sauron's minions would have swept from Mordor, laying waste to Gondor and Rohan on their way. Possibly Gandalf might have had to get involved, attempting to take it from Saruman before the horde descended... I'm not that bothered by a lot of 'what if' speculation but this is a truly frightening prospect, and it does throw Saruman's wrongdoing into sharp relief! :eek:

A Third Way? Oo er! If only Tony Blair had long white hair.

Something is clearly being withheld from us... :eek: ;)

[Kuruharan]

I do wonder just whether possession of the Ring would in any way be a 'match' for Mordor's armies?

Only possession and mastery. I don't recall seeing anywhere an implication that Saruman could have mastered the Ring. I only remember Gandalf as being possibly able to do it.

However, as soon as Saruman tried to master the Ring the armies of Mordor would certainly have made a beeline for Isengard...

[Kath]

Only possession and mastery. I don't recall seeing anywhere an implication that Saruman could have mastered the Ring. I only remember Gandalf as being possibly able to do it.
But if Saruman was originally higher in the Order than Gandalf then surely he should have had an equal if not higher chance of being able to master the Ring?

[Lalwendë]

Yes, the important point is whether Saruman (or anyone for that matter) could master the Ring. Saruman did possess a lot of Ring-lore, but whether it was deep or comprehensive enough to truly master the Ring is something we could only guess at - and I have to say that I think it would not have been; one of Saruman's failings is that he puts too much store in his own learning. But, it is possible that even with a little knowledge Saruman could do something. What would be most likely would be for him to cause chaos, but ultimately he would not have the mastery of the Ring.

I'm not sure whether status would have had that much to do with mastering the Ring, I get the impression that it took understanding of the Ring to master it; couldn't anyone could have the potential to understand it? And as I say above, it might not be possible for anyone apart from Sauron to truly master it (leaving Tom Bombadil aside ;) ). This is why it has to be destroyed. It only has one owner, and that owner means to use it for evil ends. No-one else can really master it, and its true master must not be allowed to master it.

[Kuruharan]

But if Saruman was originally higher in the Order than Gandalf then surely he should have had an equal if not higher chance of being able to master the Ring?

Prestige does not necessarily reflect potency.

From the ever useful Letter #246...

Of 'mortals' no one, not even Aragorn...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.

We have to assume that Saruman fell into the category of "Of the others" even though he too was an emissary of the Powers.

[Elladan and Elrohir]

Gandalf would seem to imply otherwise in Book Three: "But Isengard cannot fight Mordor, unless Saruman first obtains the Ring."

Obviously, it's a matter of opinion as to how far that statement can be taken. It may merely mean that Saruman would never feel secure enough to challenge Sauron's might unless he first had the Ring.

EDIT: That "only Gandalf might be expected to master him" quote has been used a lot on the Downs to "prove" that only Gandalf could have mastered the Ring and thus Sauron. I will not do full battle with that argument, but will merely point out that Tolkien uses the curious phrase "might be expected," which implies that this is not a for-sure thing. I will also add that Saruman also fulfills the qualities of Gandalf that are mentioned in this passage: an emissary of the Powers, of the same kind as Sauron; and, as has already been mentioned in this thread, he was before Gandalf's fall and resurrection more powerful (or at least perceived to be more powerful) than the Grey Wizard.

[Kuruharan]

That "only Gandalf might be expected to master him" quote has been used a lot on the Downs to "prove" that only Gandalf could have mastered the Ring and thus Sauron. I will not do full battle with that argument, but will merely point out that Tolkien uses the curious phrase "might be expected," which implies that this is not a for-sure thing. I will also add that Saruman also fulfills the qualities of Gandalf that are mentioned in this passage: an emissary of the Powers, of the same kind as Sauron; and, as has already been mentioned in this thread, he was before Gandalf's fall and resurrection more powerful (or at least perceived to be more powerful) than the Grey Wizard.

So which is it? You are arguing both points.

The "might be expected" part implies that it was not a sure thing that even Gandalf would be able to defeat Sauron even if he mastered the Ring.

Let me do some added emphasis...

only Gandalf might be expected to master him.

This is a statement of the unique stature of Gandalf. I don't see how it could be taken any other way.

Please, feel free to explain why Saruman could have mastered the Ring and proved a match for Sauron. However, bear in mind that you have already mentioned part of the answer to this riddle...

(or at least perceived to be more powerful)

...and that Tolkien said elsewhere...

[Saruman], having lost any devotion to other persons or causes was open to the domination of a superior will, to its threats, and to its display of power. - The Palantiri footnote 14

For a variety of reasons, Saruman was not on Sauron's level and could not be expected to successfully contend with him.

Oh, by the way, there is also another thing relevant to this topic in this little piece...

Saruman fell under the domination of Sauron and desired his victory, or no longer opposed it.
-The Palantiri

I think this sheds some light on the original question.

[Mansun]

It might be that all things that become under Sauron's command eventually become under his control through his power, as with the fate of the Nazgul and the Mouth of Sauron, for instance. They are very much Sauron's puppets, doing exactly as he bids, and Saruman may have sensed that this was to be his doom unless he strove for the power of the Ring itself, his ''way-out" from Sauron's clutches.

[Mansun]

So which is it? You are arguing both points.

The "might be expected" part implies that it was not a sure thing that even Gandalf would be able to defeat Sauron even if he mastered the Ring.

Let me do some added emphasis...



This is a statement of the unique stature of Gandalf. I don't see how it could be taken any other way.

Please, feel free to explain why Saruman could have mastered the Ring and proved a match for Sauron. However, bear in mind that you have already mentioned part of the answer to this riddle...



...and that Tolkien said elsewhere...



For a variety of reasons, Saruman was not on Sauron's level and could not be expected to successfully contend with him.

Oh, by the way, there is also another thing relevant to this topic in this little piece...



I think this sheds some light on the original question.



Would Saruman then, after finding out that if he could not master the Ring, hand it back to Sauron if he ever got hold of it? Or if he could master the ring, & I believe that he did have the strength of power & will to do it, would he have enough time to counter Mordor's wave of attacks with just 10,000 uruk-hai?

[Kuruharan]

Would Saruman then, after finding out that if he could not master the Ring, hand it back to Sauron

He might have tried, but he would have been turned into Aruman Butter immediately afterwards for his presumption.

Or if he could master the ring...would he have enough time to counter Mordor's wave of attacks with just 10,000 uruk-hai?

Depends...

[Mansun]

He might have tried, but he would have been turned into Aruman Butter immediately afterwards for his presumption.



Depends...


I think Saruman deserves a lot of credit for amassing 10,000 formiddable warriors which, man-to-man not even Mordor could match. Perhaps he could have held out against Mordor long enough to wield the ring.

[Kuruharan]

I think Saruman deserves a lot of credit for amassing 10,000 formiddable warriors which, man-to-man not even Mordor could match.

What's your basis for saying that?

The Rohirrim chopped them up pretty good, and they were outnumbered.

Perhaps he could have held out against Mordor long enough to wield the ring.

One has to ask oneself what exactly would happen if this impossible event did take place. It might not have done Saruman any good.

[Mansun]

What's your basis for saying that?

The Rohirrim chopped them up pretty good, and they were outnumbered.



One has to ask oneself what exactly would happen if this impossible event did take place. It might not have done Saruman any good.


The basis is do you think Sauron's orcs were anything like as strong as the Uruk-hai? The only way Sauron could have been victorious would be through sheer strength in numbers through weak puny orcs. Man-to-man the 10,000 Uruk-hai would probably obliviate even 30,000 Mordor orcs. The real difference would be made by Mordor trolls & the Nazgul. But, as Saurman's plans would then have been to shield an attack as oppose to attacking an enemy, there may have been a chance to build even more soldiers whilst the siege on Isengard was taking place.

Orcs do not ride horses like the Rohirrim - a big advantage for the Rohirrim. Take out the horses & then what result would you have forcasted?

[Boromir88]

Sauron actually had more men available to him than Orcs. A lot of Sauron's force was comprised of Men, not 'puny orcs.' Also, Saruman wasn't the one who originally came up with this 'cross-breed' of Orc-Men. it's only something he 'rediscovered' and found out:

"Finally, there is a cogent point, though horrible to relate. It became clear in time that undoubted Men could under the domination of Morgoth or his agents in a few generations be reduced almost to the Orc-level of mind and habits; and then they would or could be made to mate with Orcs, producing new breeds, often larger and more cunning. There is no doubt that long afterwards, in the Third Age, Saruman rediscovered this, or learned of it in lore, and in his lust for mastery committed this, his wickedest deed: the interbreeding of Orcs and Men, producing both Men-orcs large and cunning, and Orc-men treacherous and vile."~Morgoth's Ring

[Formendacil]

He might have tried, but he would have been turned into Aruman Butter immediately afterwards for his presumption.

That's a bold statement to make, Master Dwarf!

Short of Sauron himself, who would force Saruman to hand over the Ring? It looks pretty clear in the Lord of the Rings and Unfinished Tales that though Saruman was in Sauron's cahoots, if the Ring had slipped into his fingers he would have been "Saruman for Saruman". And, quite frankly, within the safety of Orthanc, we know (from UT) that he needn't fear from Sauron.

The question is how long it would have taken Saruman to master the Ring. Did he have the military resources to hold off Mordor (and possibly the remnants of Rohan and Gondor)? We are told that his efforts in Orthanc were paltry imitations compared to Sauron's war machine. We must, however, acknowledge that he had an army comparable to that of the "good" nations- which fended off Sauron for quite a few years. Furthermore, if Sauron had to fight his way past Gondor and Rohan- that would have bought Saruman more time.

And, of all the people in Middle-Earth, Saruman would probably have made the quickest study in mastering the Ring. Ringlore was, after all, his specialty. His downfall, too, but that's another matter. I personally don't think it would have been long (in a count of years) before he would have been strong enough to crush Sauron with the Ring. The question is whether he would have had that time.

[Boromir88]

That's a bold statement to make, Master Dwarf!
Not really, considering the quote provided from Letter 246 where 'only' Gandalf would be expected to master the Ring. And also Sauron knew very well what Saruman was up to, but Sauron being able to use him only as a pawn in his desire to dominate:

'Saruman is a fool, and a dirty treacherous fool. But the Great Eye is on him.'~The Uruk-hai

The big difference between 'good' and 'evil' is the evils inability to 'bond.' 'Good' can ally themselves and come together for a common goal, a common purpose, and a common enemy. Where 'evil' is just all in it for themselves. They may join together, because it would make their goals a lot easier, but behind all the 'buddy-buddy' they are just planning the other's downfall. Because after all there can't be two dark-lords ruling can there be?

I'll take when Sauron joins with Morgoth. A lot of people think that Morgoth sort of sullied or persuaded Sauron to join him. But, actually I think Sauron, much like Saruman was to him, was drawn to Morgoth and really was forming his own plans of ruling. And Sauron being smart knew that the best course for HIMSELF to rule would be to side with Morgoth for the time being...just as Saruman does with Sauron.

'It was the apparent will and power of Melkor to effect his designs quickly and masterfully that had first attracted Sauron to him.'~Morgoth's Ring, Myths Transformed
'Sauron had been attached to the greatest, Melkor, who ultimately became the inevitable Rebel and self-worshipper of mythologies that begin with a transcendent unique Creator.~'Letter 200
I think both of these show that Morgoth did not sort of sully Sauron to his side, but Sauron was attracted to Morgoth's power and will, and he soon attached himself to Morgoth.

Now why would Sauron do this? Well, because I feel like Sauron had his own aspirations of ruling, just as Saruman did. And Sauron knew that Morgoth was a much more inherently powerful being than he was, so in order to achieve his own goal of ruling, he'd join up with Morgoth, and eventually break away, and this is exactly whate he does:

Sauron was not a ’sincere’ atheist, but he preached atheism, because it weakened resistance to himself (and he had ceased to fear God’s action in Arda)..... To wean one of the God-fearing from their allegiance it is best to propound another unseen object of allegiance and another hope of benefits; propound to him a Lord who will sanction what he desires and not forbid it. Sauron, apparently a defeated rival for world-power, now a mere hostage, can hardly propound himself; but as the former servant and disciple of Melkor, the worship of Melkor will raise him from hostage to high priest.~Morgoth’s Ring, Myths Transformed
Sauron did not 'sincerely' believe what Morgoth did or taught. But he knew if he used Morgoth's names and ideas that would make his goal of ruling a lot easier, as people would be drawn to him more. And this is exactly what happens:
'When he found how greatly his knowledge was admired by all other rational creatures and how easy it was to influence them, his pride became boundless. By the end of the Second Age he assumed the position of Morgoth's representative. By the end of the Third Age he claimed to be Morgoth returned.'~Letter 183
As people start listening to him, and resistance was weakening, he was no longer Morgoth's 'servant,' his pride grew and eventually he conceived himself as being Morgoth himself.

Anway, where I'm going with all this is showing the inability for evil guys to bond together. They're in it for themselves. Sauron was drawn in by Morgoth's power, but Sauron himself had his own plans and goals, and he took the best route in joining Morgoth's side, eventhough he necessarily did not agree with his ideas. And this is exactly what Saruman does with Sauron:
A new Power is rising. Against it the old allies and policies will not avail us at all. There is no hope left in Elves or dying Numenor. This then is one choice before you, before us. We may join with that Power. It would be wise, Gandalf. There is hope that way. Its victory is at hand; and there will be rich reward for those that aided it. As the Power grows, its proved friends will also grow, and the Wise, such as you and I, may with patience come at last to direct its courses, to control it. We can bide our time, we can keep our thoughts in are hearts, deploring whatever evils done by the way, but approving the high and ultimate purpse: Knowledge, Rule, Order;....~The Council of Elrond
To make my long story short (sometimes I can go off a bit, let's see if I can tie this up). 'Evil' is all in it for themselves, Saruman planned on backstabbing Sauron, and Sauron knew very well what Saruman wanted to do. Seeing all this, I agree with Kuru in that Sauron had Saruman beaten in every aspect, in power, strength of numbers, and knowing what Saruman was up to, and playing Saruman to suit his own advantages. Going back to what Grishnakh said, Saruman was being fooled.

[Kuruharan]

The basis is do you think Sauron's orcs were anything like as strong as the Uruk-hai? The only way Sauron could have been victorious would be through sheer strength in numbers through weak puny orcs. Man-to-man the 10,000 Uruk-hai would probably obliviate even 30,000 Mordor orcs.

Unlikely. The physical differences between them were not that great. Historically speaking, the only way that armies are able to overcome disparities of this nature was by great technical (not physical) superiority or brilliant leadership. Isengard possessed neither of those. An army outnumbered three to one, all other things being relatively equal, would get swamped.

Take out the horses & then what result would you have forcasted?

*cough* I thought it painfully apparent that the example I was citing was the Battle of the Hornburg, where the Rohirrim chopped up the Isengarders largely without their horses.

That's a bold statement to make, Master Dwarf!

Not really. We're operating off of an impossible premise here.

Short of Sauron himself, who would force Saruman to hand over the Ring?

I think you just answered your own question.

And, quite frankly, within the safety of Orthanc, we know (from UT) that he needn't fear from Sauron.

I'm rather under the impression that if Isengard was placed under siege it would ultimately fall. Fortresses under siege do not hold out by themselves. There has to be outside help. Where was this outside help to come from in Saruman's case? If nothing else Saruman's physical body could have been starved to death. However, I suspect that long before that conclusion would have been reached, Sauron would have undermined Orthanc and caused it to collapse.

Did he have the military resources to hold off Mordor (and possibly the remnants of Rohan and Gondor)?

No.

We must, however, acknowledge that he had an army comparable to that of the "good" nations- which fended off Sauron for quite a few years.

Hmmm...comparable to Rohan, maybe. Gondor's actual military strength was greater than we saw at Minas Tirith because the southern fiefs were not exactly totally forthcoming with their men. I believe that Tolkien said that many of them only sent a tithe of their strength.

One also gets the impression that up until that point (at least in recent years) Sauron had not been trying that hard but was instead gathering everything together and conserving it for the final blow.

Furthermore, if Sauron had to fight his way past Gondor and Rohan- that would have bought Saruman more time.

Not necessarily. Isengard is actually rather exposed to attack from Mordor. The river could be crossed, and then it is just a march across the Wold, cross another little river, tramp, tramp, tramp, and there you are. Gondor would probably be out of this equation. The Rohirrim might be able to delay Sauron, but I doubt they could stop him.

I personally don't think it would have been long (in a count of years) before he would have been strong enough to crush Sauron with the Ring. The question is whether he would have had that time.

Is there something about Letter #246 that I've been missing all these years?

Let me try this yet again...

Of 'mortals' no one, not even Aragorn...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.
Letter #246

No amount of study would have helped Saruman gain the strength to master the Ring. He was a lesser being than Sauron. He did not have the power within him to be able to do it.

I fail to see how the phrase "only Gandalf" could possibly be up for any other interpretation than in the sense that "only Gandalf" would have been capable of mastering the Ring and challenging Sauron with any hope of emerging victorious.

EDIT: Cross-posted with Boromir88

[Formendacil]

Not really, considering the quote provided from Letter 246 where 'only' Gandalf would be expected to master the Ring. And also Sauron knew very well what Saruman was up to, but Sauron being able to use him only as a pawn in his desire to dominate.

I'll take your point about Sauron being very much in the know about everything Saruman was up to... but I would quibble over giving too much weight to the quote about "only Gandalf". Coming, as it does, from a letter, it is naturally of somewhat weakened weight if it contradicts the Legendarium directly, which it might be said to do.

Because, I must confess, I see no reason why Gandalf should have been able to use the Ring, and not Saruman. They were both Istari, both Maiar in human form. Both fairly close in power. (Indeed, Saruman the White seems to have been more powerful than Gandalf the Grey. Intimations are made that Gandalf, though not head of the order or council, was the greater of the two, but I would call these tenuous and certainly a strong case can be made to the contrary. In any event, they were very close.) Prior to Gandalf's death, rebirth, and reappointment into what were Saruman's shoes, it seems to me that if Gandalf could have wielded the Ring, then Saruman could have.

What's more, and maybe it's just my idiosyncratic view of Middle-Earth at work here, but my reading of the books always left me with the idea that Gandalf, Elrond, or Galadriel had pretty much equal chances of becoming successful Dark Lords (or Lady) had they succumbed to the Ring's evil. Consequently, I have no difficulties seeing Saruman as being able, had he acquired the Ring.

I do agree though, that Sauron was playing him for a fool: hook, line, and sinker.

[Boromir88]

Intimations are made that Gandalf, though not head of the order or council, was the greater of the two, but I would call these tenuous and certainly a strong case can be made to the contrary.
I don't know about that. Saruman the White was certainly more powerful than Gandalf the Grey (but was Curumo more powerful than Olorin?), because Saruman was placed as the head of the Istari. And as the head, he was granted more power, or the ability to use more of his power.

In dire needs Gandalf would reveal his true power (for example his fight with Durin's Bane), but he still remained in conformity to the Rules that were placed upon him, where Saruman didn't. Saruman the White was more powerful than Gandalf the Grey, but this was only because of the restrictions placed upon him, and his over-whelmingly good nature of following these restrictions:

This is sort of a nifty what if scenario that Tolkien gives us. Where Gandalf could give Sauron a run for his money.
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.~Letter 246

And Saruman was a great studier of Ring-lore, but I think we can question exactly how much he knew...considering the Ring he attempted to make seems to have been a failure and he hadn't worked out all the kinks yet. And finally, it takes more than knowledge to master the Ring:
If that would happen, the new posessor could (if sufficiently strong and heroic enough by nature) challenge Sauron, become master of all that he had learned or done since the making of the One Ring, and so overthrow him and usurp his place.~Letter to Milton Waldman
Which brings up the questions
1. Did Saruman have the necessary strength? This I admit can be debated. Because I do now see a bit of ambiguity with Letter 246. 'only Gandalf might be expected...' So even though if Gandalf is the only one 'expected' to challenge Sauron one-on-one, it doesn't necessarily mean he was the only one capable of doing so.

It's like if I said, I only expect Italy to beat USA. It doesn't mean that Italy would beat them, or is the only one capable, but it's the only team I 'expect' to do so.

2. Did he have the knowledge that it took? Saruman went into studying Ring-lore, but was this the right place he needed to actually master the Ring? As this quote suggests you need to look more at Sauron and what he was doing after making the Ring, than the Ring itself. And this is something we know that Gandalf did do (and the reason the Istari were sent to Middle-earth), as we find out he alone goes through Dol Guldur and to find out about the 'Necromancer.'

[SarumanCymraeg]

Because, I must confess, I see no reason why Gandalf should have been able to use the Ring, and not Saruman.

I would agree with this, although it is a delicate balance. Saruman the White, I should think, would be able to because Saruman the White is on par with Gandalf the White. However, by 'The Voice of Saruman' chapter, before that even, Saruman has long forsaken the 'White' of his name, and that is how Gandalf is able to break his staff.

Gandalf himself says that he IS Saruman when he re-appears. That would also suggest, I believe, that if Gandalf could master the Ring, so could Saruman.

In addition, Saruman's ring-lore must be considered, and I would imagine that he knew more than Gandalf or any other of the Wise (save possibly Galadriel?). At the beginning of his research, Saruman would have looked into the matter with good faith, and not with the intention of having the Ring for himself. He is very learned in ring-lore, and I would imagine that this knowledge would help him master the Ring for himself, and even though he was, in effect, a puppet of Sauron (though a particularly independent-minded and treacherous one), as soon as the opportunity came for him to challenge his 'master', then he would.

The Ring would be the only way for him to challenge Sauron, and if it came to him I really should think that Saruman, wise as he is, would make sure that he did not waste that opportunity.

So I think Saruman could have mastered the Ring, and done so well. I also think Gandalf and Galadriel could have, but that's another threadsworth of debate :p

[Kuruharan]

I would quibble over giving too much weight to the quote about "only Gandalf".

I don't see how it would be possible to do so.

I see no reason why Gandalf should have been able to use the Ring, and not Saruman.

-and-

my reading of the books always left me with the idea that Gandalf, Elrond, or Galadriel had pretty much equal chances of becoming successful Dark Lords (or Lady) had they succumbed to the Ring's evil. Consequently, I have no difficulties seeing Saruman as being able, had he acquired the Ring.


These are all merely your opinions, which are in stark and direct contradiction to the expressed opinion of the author of the works. You can certainly argue with him about anything you like, but once you start disagreeing with things he says would have happened in the story you are no longer talking about his works, you are talking about yours.

Because I do now see a bit of ambiguity with Letter 246. 'only Gandalf might be expected...' So even though if Gandalf is the only one 'expected' to challenge Sauron one-on-one, it doesn't necessarily mean he was the only one capable of doing so.

Again, I'm just completely failing to see how that statement admits of any other possible interpretation than only Gandalf could master the One Ring. The "might be expected" clause only reinforces the idea that even in that case it is not a sure thing that Gandalf could win, but Gandalf is the only one who had even a chance of winning.

[Mansun]

I don't see how it would be possible to do so.



These are all merely your opinions, which are in stark and direct contradiction to the expressed opinion of the author of the works. You can certainly argue with him about anything you like, but once you start disagreeing with things he says would have happened in the story you are no longer talking about his works, you are talking about yours.



Again, I'm just completely failing to see how that statement admits of any other possible interpretation than only Gandalf could master the One Ring. The "might be expected" clause only reinforces the idea that even in that case it is not a sure thing that Gandalf could win, but Gandalf is the only one who had even a chance of winning.


If Gandalf might be the only one expected to master the Ring, WHY? What is the real reason? Why then did Tolkien write about Saruman coming in for the Ring, if he had no chance of wielding its powers? The whole point of Saruman turning to evil would almost seem pointless, unless he was truly in allegiance with Sauron & hoped to secure the Ring for him. I think if asked, Tolkein would admit that Elrond, Galadriel & perhaps Saruman WERE capable of wielding the ring, with time.

If Sauron knew that only Gandalf could challenge him with the Ring, would it have not been wise to deal with him before turning to the siege of Gondor?

[davem]

These are all merely your opinions, which are in stark and direct contradiction to the expressed opinion of the author of the works. You can certainly argue with him about anything you like, but once you start disagreeing with things he says would have happened in the story you are no longer talking about his works, you are talking about yours.

Opinions expressed in the Letters cannot be taken as canonical. We don't have any context for such statements, as we don't have the letters Tolkien was responding to. Also, its easy to make statements in letters because they don't have to be made to fit the story. Tolkien was free to say anything in his letters without having to worry whether his statements would cause a problem. The letters were not written for publication - I think he would have been a lot more careful in what he said if they had been.

In short, statements in the letters were made off the cuff, & I'm sure Tolkien never expected them to be challenged. They also reflect his later thoughts & his personal opinions on the story as well as his interpretations of events. If a statement of Tolkien's in a letter to F. Bloggs in 1962 challenges or contradicts an explicit statement in LotR as published then whatever is stated in the book takes precedence.

The Letters are interesting & often helpful, but clearly the statement that only Gandalf could master the Ring is false because it contradicts what is both stated & implied in LotR.

Of course, the Legendarium changed over the years, characters altered, things were added, but new thoughts would often lead to dead ends. I give no more weight to much that is in the Letters than I do to what is contained in the whole 'Myths Transformed' farrago.

If we take Tolkien's statement re Gandalf & the Ring as fact then much of the dramatic tension in LotR is dissipated & we would read it thinking, 'Well, that's just them being silly!'. It is essential in reading LotR that we know that not just Gandalf but Aragorn, Elrond, Galadriel as well as Saruman could take, master & wield the Ring.

[Boromir88]

Again, I'm just completely failing to see how that statement admits of any other possible interpretation than only Gandalf could master the One Ring.~Kuru
Sorry, if it feels like we're gaining up on you, but besides what davem said, 'expectations' are not always certainty. And that's exactly what the Letter 246 quote says...'might be expected.' Again, even if Gandalf was the only one expected to be able to master the ring:

1) Doesn't mean that he could do so.
2) Doesn't mean anyone else wouldn't be able to do so.

Like the Italy-USA example given. You're focusing on the world 'only' where the words of 'might' and 'expect' add ambiguity to the quote. 'Might' is a term of uncertainty, it 'may happen' or it 'may not happen.' And expect is another term of ambiguity. Like, I expect USA to win the Olympics, it's something I definitely think is going to happen, 'I'm expecting it,' but that doesn't mean USA is going to win the olympics. Same case in this quote, you're putting emphasis on the 'only' where might and expect is what adds ambiguity and uncertainty. Tolkien being the linguist, and on the back cover of Letters of JRR Tolkien him saying the importance he put on every single word (which he guessed was over 600,000). So, I don't think 'might' and 'expect' two words of uncertainty should simply be ignored. :D

I said I agreed with you (and I still do), in that Saruman did not possess the capability, nor perhaps the knowledge it took to master the Ring, I'm just pointing out the ambiguity that Formendacil and others have noticed with Letter 246. The quote is not so rock-solid and sure as you have made it out to be. :D

Why then did Tolkien write about Saruman coming in for the Ring, if he had no chance of wielding its powers?~Mansun
It's called pride, Saruman was prideful and confident in his abilities to fool Sauron so he could profit. Just because Saruman believed he was pulling one over Sauron, and had thought he was capable of mastering the Ring, doesn't mean he actually was. And as Grishnakh says, it was Saruman who was the one being fooled. I'll give a perfect example, Denethor and the palantir. Denethor believed he had the strength and will power necessary to challenge and beat Sauron in the palantir, but this didn't happen:
Thus pride increased in Denethor, together with despair, until he saw in all the deeds of that time only a single combat between the Lord of the White Tower, and the Lord of Barad-dur...~Appendix A: The Stewards
Denethor believed (key word being pride) he had the will it took to view the palantir and one-on-one challenge Sauron, but he was beaten and his mind was eventually overthrown.

Gandalf himself says that he IS Saruman when he re-appears. That would also suggest, I believe, that if Gandalf could master the Ring, so could Saruman.~Saruman
But he actually says that he was 'Saruman as he should have been.' So, he actually wasn't really Saruman, but he was as Saruman should have been as the head of the Order.

In addition, Saruman's ring-lore must be considered, and I would imagine that he knew more than Gandalf or any other of the Wise.
I don't think it took knowledge about the rings (and I actually think we are told Saruman's main interest were the three elven rings, but don't hold me to that :D ). As the quote to Milton Waldman suggests...

become master of all that he had learned or done since the making of the One Ring and so overthrow him and usurp his place.

This seems to stress the importance of actually knowing what Sauron was doing since making his Ring, more than the fact of knowing about the Rings of power.

[Kuruharan]

Greetings davem.

I thought I would drag you out of the woodwork.

I'm afraid I have to admit that I don't find much relevance in your post. The expressed opinions by the author regarding the events and circumstances of his or her own stories are what carry weight when compared to the speculations of readers, no matter where or in what form the expressed opinions of the author happen to appear. I'm not refering to themes or interpretations of the stories here, I'm refering to events. Obviously, themes and interpretations are freely speculated upon by anybody and everybody. However, if you are attempting to postulate alternative scenarios to what would have happened in the story, I think that if the author makes any comments in the area under consideration we have to defer to their judgment if we wish to continue to discuss the works of the author in question. If we the readers want to continue our little line of thought, we need to do it with the understanding that we have departed the discussion of the work of the author and are instead pursuing our own. This is the main point I've been trying to get across.

There is one thing I wish to discuss though...

It is essential in reading LotR that we know that not just Gandalf but Aragorn, Elrond, Galadriel as well as Saruman could take, master & wield the Ring.

I don't think it is possible for me to disagree more strongly with this statement. It is not essential that Gandalf, Aragorn, Elrond, Galadriel, and Saruman possess the potential to supplant Sauron. I think the reverse is true. I think the fact that they are being lied to by the Ring and their own desires when they have no hope of actually achieving their fevered imaginings heightens the tension. If they try to take the Ring, they will fall to Sauron (only Gandalf potentially excepted) and the plot of The Lord of the Rings is about avoiding this fate.

Why then did Tolkien write about Saruman coming in for the Ring, if he had no chance of wielding its powers?

Perhaps he wrote it as a lesson in self-delusion. As Boromir88 said, Saruman’s desires were lying to him. His ego would never allow him to admit to himself (or probably even entertain the thought in any way) that he was utterly incapable of mastering the Ring and nothing he could do would change that. However, I think probably Tolkien’s primary motivation for writing the story that way was because it made for a great yarn.

'expectations' are not always certainty. And that's exactly what the Letter 246 quote says...'might be expected.' Again, even if Gandalf was the only one expected to be able to master the ring:

Have you stopped to ask yourself the question of who is doing the expecting?

Doesn't mean anyone else wouldn't be able to do so.

And here we are back with the same old “only Gandalf” business again.

So, I don't think 'might' and 'expect' two words of uncertainty should simply be ignored.

Again, ask yourself who is doing the expecting.

[davem]

The expressed opinions by the author regarding the events and circumstances of his or her own stories are what carry weight when compared to the speculations of readers, no matter where or in what form the expressed opinions of the author happen to appear. I'm not refering to themes or interpretations of the stories here, I'm refering to events

The most important thing is the internal logic of the secondary world. Galadriel, Saruman, Gandalf & Elrond had the capacity to wield the Ring - at the right time in the right circumstances. If they had not why would Sauron, who knew the nature of the Ring better than any, expend so much effort in trying to retrieve it?

Gandalf is clear

Other evils there are that may come; for Sauron is himself but a servant or emissary. Yet it is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till. What weather they shall have is not ours to rule. 'Now Sauron knows all this, and he knows that this precious thing which he lost has been found again; but he does not yet know where it is, or so we hope. And therefore he is now in great doubt. For if we have found this thing, there are some among us with strength enough to wield it. That too he knows. For do I not guess rightly, Aragorn, that you have shown yourself to him in the Stone of Orthanc?'

So, is Gandalf lying here? Gandalf states that Sauron 'knows there are some among us with strength enough to wield it', & he is clearly including Aragorn in that 'some'. Do we believe Tolkien or Gandalf?

[Formendacil]

As odd as it may be for me to weigh in on the same side of a canonicity debate as Davem... that's what I appear to be doing.

But to give the Letter fuller weight than I am inclined to do, I have to ask, when Gandalf is said to be the only one who might be fully expected to master the Ring in Sauron's despite, of what group is Tolkien selecting here? After all, I'm fairly sure that just about any Valar could pick up the Ring, use it with no adverse effects, and quash Sauron into the ground.

No, Tolkien is clearly saying of a certain group, only Gandalf could be expected to use the Ring successfully. Well, what is this "certain group". My own reading of it is that this group doesn't included Saruman at all, that when Tolkien was saying this, he had in mind the bigwigs of the West, the group highlighted in Davem's quotes of the previous post: Elrond, Galadriel, Aragorn, possibly Denethor- and Gandalf. Of the "ringleaders" of the West, looking at this list, it makes perfect sense to say that Gandalf was the only one that could be expected to best Sauron. He was the only one who was Sauron's peer WITHOUT the Ring.

And, looked at in this light, this doesn't so much weaken the Saruman claim, as make it stronger, since Saruman was also Sauron's native peer.

[Kuruharan]

If they had not why would Sauron, who knew the nature of the Ring better than any, expend so much effort in trying to retrieve it?

Why does anybody do anything that would make things easier for them or get them more information? My guess would be is that Sauron was not sure what would happen if somebody else attempted to claim the Ring.

This is not at all surprising considering that Sauron himself did not seem to be aware of all the aspects and potentialities of the Ring (see his belief that it had been destroyed...)

Do we believe Tolkien or Gandalf?

Perhaps The Man himself can answer for us in a passage that could illuminate this discussion where he says regarding Treebeard's knowledge of the creation of orcs...

Treebeard is a character in my story not me
-Letter 153

There is clear differentiation here between what Tolkien knows and what his characters know. You say that Gandalf implied that Aragorn was capable of wielding the Ring. Tolkien explicitly denied that Aragorn would have been able to do so successfully and so defeat Sauron. Aragorn, for all his high heritage and nobility of character was not on Sauron's level.

I don't think there is any doubt about which opinion we need to follow in this case.

[davem]

No, Tolkien is clearly saying of a certain group, only Gandalf could be expected to use the Ring successfully. Well, what is this "certain group". My own reading of it is that this group doesn't included Saruman at all, that when Tolkien was saying this, he had in mind the bigwigs of the West, the group highlighted in Davem's quotes of the previous post: Elrond, Galadriel, Aragorn, possibly Denethor- and Gandalf. Of the "ringleaders" of the West, looking at this list, it makes perfect sense to say that Gandalf was the only one that could be expected to best Sauron. He was the only one who was Sauron's peer WITHOUT the Ring.

I wouldn't set even this limit. In the quote from The Last Debate I gave earlier Gandalf clearly states that Aragorn could have mastered & used the Ring. Galadriel's words are even clearer:

'I would ask one thing before we go,' said Frodo, 'a thing which I often meant to ask Gandalf in Rivendell. I am permitted to wear the One Ring: why cannot I see all the others and know the thoughts of those that wear them?' 'You have not tried,' she said. 'Only thrice have you set the Ring upon your finger since you knew what you possessed. Do not try! It would destroy you. Did not Gandalf tell you that the rings give power according to the measure of each possessor? Before you could use that power you would need to become far stronger, and to train your will to the domination of others. Yet even so, as Ring-bearer and as one that has borne it on finger and seen that which is hidden, your sight is grown keener. You have perceived my thought more clearly than many that are accounted wise.

The Rings give some degree of 'power' to any possessor - according to their 'measure'. The statement in the letter is simply incorrect, as it contradicts statements made by characters in the story itself.

Now, it may well be that Tolkien changed his conception of the nature of the Ring in the post-LotR period, but for his statement in the letter to be acceptable he would have had to re-write a good part of the story, change motivations & behaviour. If we are to take Tolkien's statement in the letter as fact we have to say that major characters from Gandalf, Aragorn, Galadriel, Elrond & even Sauron himself are either completely mistaken about the nature of the Ring, are lying, or are simply making stuff up. because they make what are apparently very clear statements about the nature & power of the Ring. It even smacks of some kind of conspiracy as all those characters, both good & bad, are telling the same lie (including, let me add, the narrator of the story!).

Sorry, but the easiest way out of this 'dilemma' is to dismiss Tolkien's statement & let the story stand.

[Kuruharan]

And, looked at in this light, this doesn't so much weaken the Saruman claim, as make it stronger, since Saruman was also Sauron's native peer.

But Saruman was ultimately weaker in his soul than Gandalf from beginning to end.

I'm afraid there is no traction for this idea from this angle either.

And besides, Denethor was evidently had more strength of spirit than Saruman as he did not turn traitor. This does not speak well of Saruman's strength of will and strength of will would be a critical ingredient (probably the critical ingredient in mastering the Ring).

[davem]

There is clear differentiation here between what Tolkien knows and what his characters know. You say that Gandalf implied that Aragorn was capable of wielding the Ring. Tolkien explicitly denied that Aragorn would have been able to do so successfully and so defeat Sauron. Aragorn, for all his high heritage and nobility of character was not on Sauron's level..

Sorry, but I think you're 'doing a Gimli' there:

'Did you say aught to--him? Even Gandalf feared that encounter.' 'You forget to whom you speak,' said Aragorn sternly, and his eyes glinted. 'What did you fear that I should say to him? Did I not openly proclaim my title before the doors of Edoras? Nay, Gimli,' he said in a softer voice, and the grimness left his face, and he looked like one who has laboured in sleepless pain for many nights. 'Nay, my friends, I am the lawful master of the Stone, and I had both the right and the strength to use it, or so I judged. The right cannot be doubted. The strength was enough--barely.' He drew a deep breath. '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 Theoden; 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 I showed the blade re-forged to him. He is not so mighty yet that he is above fear; nay, doubt ever gnaws him.'


Aragorn has the strength of Will to claim & use the Ring - & Sauron knows that - which is why he fears Aragorn - unless, of course, Aragorn is lying to his friends.

[Kuruharan]

The Rings give some degree of 'power' to any possessor - according to their 'measure'. The statement in the letter is simply incorrect, as it contradicts statements made by characters in the story itself.

Not really.

Did not Gandalf tell you that the rings give power according to the measure of each possessor?

Do you honestly think the Ring, which is fundamentally a part of Sauron, is going to aid and abet another's quest to master it?

I find that unlikely in the extreme. The Ring would probably deceive that individual into thinking it was mastered and then betray said person to Sauron at the first available opportunity. The individual in question would quite likely be so power mad by that point that they wouldn't know if the Ring were truly mastered.

It is probably the seeds of self-doubt that reside in Gandalf (among other things) that make him uniquely capable of mastering the Ring. He would probably be less susceptible to its lies. Saruman does not impress on this score, and quite frankly, neither does Galadriel. Elrond might be a slightly different matter.

Sorry, but the easiest way out of this 'dilemma' is to dismiss Tolkien's statement & let the story stand.

There is no dilemma here. There are only some rather ill-founded opinions that some seem unwilling to let go of, to the point that if they can’t twist Tolkien’s words to suit them they will then just dismiss him out of hand if it is convenient.

Aragorn has the strength of Will to claim & use the Ring

Uhh…no. That passage doesn’t prove this at all. That passage proved that Aragorn had the strength and will to use the palantir (which was rightfully his anyway). The Ring and the palantir were two very different things.

Aragorn is lying to his friends

You are putting words in Aragorn’s mouth. He wasn’t claiming he could master the Ring.

[davem]

It is a question of 'will'. Aragorn's will was stronger than Saruman's - who let it be remembered fell to Sauron via the Palantir. Aragorn not only did not fall to him he actually proved that his will was stronger than Sauron's. Will is the essential element in controlling the Ring. Wresting control of the Palantir (or anything else) from Sauron was something no-one else in Middle-earth could have done.

Aragorn may not have claimed he could master the Ring, but Gandalf, in the Last Debate, clearly states that he could.

This argument centres around one comment in one letter, which was never meant for publication & probably reflects Tolkien's speculations at that time. There is no reason to suppose that he continued to hold that view. And if he did it would have caused as many inconsistencies as his later development of Galadriel & 'Dome of Varda', etc, did.

I think that if another commentator had made that statement about only Gandalf being able to master the Ring you would have laughed them out of court, using the same arguments & quotes that the rest of us have been using, because it doesn't fit the facts.

[Lalwendë]

To me the word 'master' is at the centre of this. I do not think anyone apart from Sauron could have 'mastered' the Ring in the fullest sense of the word. Only Sauron could use the Ring truly wilfully. Others may have been able to make at least intelligent use of the Ring - intelligent as being opposed to merely using it to 'hide'. That's something that I'm sure none of us could argue against - that's part of why the Ring is so dangerous and seductive. It makes people think they could truly 'master' it, when in reality they would never be acting with their own will.

I do think that if say Gandalf had used the Ring then Sauron could have been, if not totally destroyed, then at least fatally harmed (in as far as Maiar can be 'fatally harmed' ;)). I also think that Saruman could have had as much a chance, such as there was, with the Ring as any of his contemporaries.

[Mansun]

To me the word 'master' is at the centre of this. I do not think anyone apart from Sauron could have 'mastered' the Ring in the fullest sense of the word. Only Sauron could use the Ring truly wilfully. Others may have been able to make at least intelligent use of the Ring - intelligent as being opposed to merely using it to 'hide'. That's something that I'm sure none of us could argue against - that's part of why the Ring is so dangerous and seductive. It makes people think they could truly 'master' it, when in reality they would never be acting with their own will.

I do think that if say Gandalf had used the Ring then Sauron could have been, if not totally destroyed, then at least fatally harmed (in as far as Maiar can be 'fatally harmed' ;)). I also think that Saruman could have had as much a chance, such as there was, with the Ring as any of his contemporaries.


The LOTR does appear to give a lot of indirect pointers to the fact that a character with a great power of their own COULD wield the Ring & challenge Sauron, & even be capable of casting him from his throne, whilst the challenger would become the new dark lord.

Examples are The Council of Elrond where Elrond speaks of his fear of wielding the Ring, when Gandalf refuses to claim the ring from Frodo whilst still in the Shire, & of course when Frodo offers the Ring to Galadriel. All of these 3 characters show enormous signs of distress when the thought of the Ring being offered to them is mentioned. They all mentioned that should they wield the Ring, they themselves would then become like the Dark Lord Sauron. An interesting point is made by Elrond, wisest of loremasters, when he considers Saruman as an example, stating that by using the arts of the enemy COULD lead to the overthrowing of Sauron.

It is comments like these which paint a picture inside some readers that a character with a great power of their own, & a strong will, could wield the Ring with time & use the Ring to challenge Sauron - that was Sauron's greatest fear, according to Gandalf when he reappears in the White Rider chapter.

So after giving all these hints, all of a sudden we must accept that nobody but perhaps Gandalf may be expected to wield the Ring? It seems unlikely, but then again these comments may be taken to imply that Gandalf was the favourite of all the Wise to be able to wield the Ring (i.e. the one with the best chance of overthrowing Sauron by using the Ring), but that it was still possible for others to do it. That is as near as the truth as far as I am concerned.

[Kuruharan]

It is a question of 'will'. Aragorn's will was stronger than Saruman's

This makes my case stronger.

Aragorn not only did not fall to him he actually proved that his will was stronger than Sauron's. Will is the essential element in controlling the Ring. Wresting control of the Palantir (or anything else) from Sauron was something no-one else in Middle-earth could have done.

Far be it from me to quote letter 246 again, but…

In the contest with the Palantir Aragorn was the rightful owner. Also the contest took place at a distance, and in a tale which allows the incarnation of great spirits in a physical and destructible form their power must be far greater when actually physically present.
-Letter 246 emphasis mine

Aragorn was able to use the Stone because it belonged to him and answered more readily to his claims of possession. A fact that seems to have somehow escaped most of you is that the Ring belonged to Sauron and wanted to return to him. As we saw throughout the story, it was willing to try anything on anybody to get back to its Master. It wanted other people to think they could master it because it would get back to Sauron all the quicker. In any contest of strength over the Ring between Aragorn and Sauron, the deck would have been impossibly stacked in Sauron’s favor.

Aragorn may not have claimed he could master the Ring, but Gandalf, in the Last Debate, clearly states that he could.

After reading Lalwendë’s post, I think I understand part of the problem here…

To me the word 'master' is at the centre of this. I do not think anyone apart from Sauron could have 'mastered' the Ring in the fullest sense of the word. Only Sauron could use the Ring truly wilfully. Others may have been able to make at least intelligent use of the Ring - intelligent as being opposed to merely using it to 'hide'.

Anybody could attempt to use the Ring. Aragorn could certainly try. Tolkien didn’t say that one couldn’t use the Ring, the question is could they do so without ensuring Sauron’s ultimate triumph. Going back to the passage in question…

For if we have found this thing, there are some among us with strength enough to wield it
-The Last Debate

Gandalf did not say they could master the Ring. Wielding and mastering are not the same thing. If you wield the Ring without mastering it you will lose. Aragorn could wield it, but he could not truly master it and if he tried he was destined to fail.

And I can hear you even now typing away something to the effect of, “Well, why was Sauron so afraid?”

He had lost the War of the Last Alliance even with the Ring. His assault on Gondor had failed. There was cause for concern. As we saw with his earlier belief that the Ring had been destroyed, he doesn’t seem to know all the things that might happen in different circumstances with the Ring. He probably couldn’t be sure what would happen if somebody made a serious attempt to claim the Ring. We can’t say what the exact effect of this would have been.

Tolkien’s letter was written from the perspective of authorial omniscience. Simply put, Tolkien had knowledge his characters did not.

I think that if another commentator had made that statement about only Gandalf being able to master the Ring you would have laughed them out of court, using the same arguments & quotes that the rest of us have been using, because it doesn't fit the facts.

But this is not another commentator, this is the author of the works themselves. I am not going to assume that I know or understand his works better than he did.

They all mentioned that should they wield the Ring, they themselves would then become like the Dark Lord Sauron.

This is only what the characters themselves thought. Boromir and Sam also thought the exact same thing at one point or another, yet I don’t hear anybody clamoring for their induction into the Hall of Potential Successful Challengers to Sauron. If the Ring was capable of deluding Boromir and Sam, why can’t it be capable of similarly deluding Elrond, Gandalf, and Galadriel? I think the temptation for them would be even more extreme (hence their distress).

[davem]

Ok, I accept that if you are prepared to completely alter the characters' motivations, attitudes, intelligence level & general honesty, ignore clear & implied authorial statements within the text itself, are willing to invent new motivations for characters which are the opposite of the motives which they are clearly stated in the book to have, make characters renowned for their wisdom into idiots who don't know their Ainur from their Eldar, & are happy to accept Gandalf as a moral coward who would send Frodo & Sam to their deaths (by lying to them & telling them he himself could not master the Ring & would wnd up enslaved to it), in order to destroy something that he himself could have 'mastered', then certainly you can make one line in one private letter (which as far as we know he was never challenged on) 'fit' with the story.

[Kuruharan]

None of that is the least bit necessary to reconcile the letter to the story. Let’s take a look at each of the characters one at a time.

Elrond

He says…

“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. For nothing is evil in the beginning. Even Sauron was not so. I fear to take the Ring to hide it. I will not take the Ring to wield it.”
-The Council of Elrond

First, he does not say it would be a certainty that one of the Wise could overthrow Sauron in this manner. In fact, this passage does not really suggest that it is possible. Elrond is speaking speculatively here. He is explaining to Boromir why it is not even worthwhile to consider this as a viable alternative. Elrond wanted to utterly defeat this evil so it could never come back again or pervert anything else. Whether or not Elrond could have mastered the Ring doesn’t seem to have much to do with the underlying motivation of the character nor is Elrond lying. Whether or not he could have mastered the Ring, Elrond realized that the outcome wouldn’t be good for anybody. I see no problem reconciling letter 246 with the story here.

Galadriel

She says…

Galadriel laughed with a sudden clear laugh. “Wise the Lady Galadriel may be,” she said, “yet here she has met her match in courtesy. Gently are you revenged for my testing of your heart at our first meeting. You begin to see with a keen eye. I do not deny that my heart has greatly desired to ask what you offer. Of many long years I had pondered what I might do, should the Great Ring come into my hands, and behold! it was brought within my grasp. The evil that was devised long ago works in many ways, whether Sauron himself stands or falls. Would not that have been a noble deed to set to the credit of his Ring, if I had taken it by force or fear from my guest?
“And now at last it comes. You will give me the Ring freely! In place of the Dark Lord you will set up a Queen. And I shall not be dark, but beautiful and terrible as the Morning and the Night! Fair as the Sea and the Sun and the Snow upon the Mountain! Dreadful as the Storm and the Lightning! Stronger than the foundations of the earth. All shall love me and despair!”
She lifted up her hand and from the ring that she wore there issued a great light that illuminated her alone and left all else dark. She stood before Frodo seeming now tall beyond measurement, and beautiful beyond enduring, terrible and worshipful. Then she let her hand fall, and the light faded, and suddenly she laughed again, and lo! she was shrunken: a slender elf-woman, clad in simple white, whose gentle voice was soft and sad.
“I pass the test,” she said. “I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.”
-Mirror of Galadriel

This is a character speaking. She is not omniscient. While there can be no doubt that she is honestly expressing her desires and what she thinks might happen, these are just her desires. Anybody can desire all sorts of things that won’t happen no matter how hard they try. Just because Galadriel says these things does not mean that she is speaking with Tolkien’s voice and that they would come about. There are also some other possibilities here.

Speaking directly about Galadriel, Tolkien said (in his own voice)…

In the “Mirror of Galadriel”, I 381, 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.
-Letter 246

This is quite complimentary. Tolkien implies that Galadriel knows that she is being lied to. She could be relating the visions the Ring was planting in her brain. She could even have been engaging in some mockery of both Sauron and the Ring in this passage. However, I think she may have struggled a little more with this decision than, for example, Elrond and Gandalf.

In other respects she is very similar to Elrond in her desire to see this evil destroyed forever. Just because it would have been impossible for her to successfully challenge Sauron by using the Ring doesn’t diminish the fact that she refused temptation. I see no difficulties reconciling the character of Galadriel between the letter and the books.

Aragorn

I have to admit that I don’t see that there is a whole lot more to say about him in this context. He didn’t lay any claim to the Ring at all and when Frodo attempted to give it to him at the Council of Elrond he specifically denied it. He won a contest of wills against Sauron over his own property, but Aragorn’s claim of ownership gave him an advantage. Sauron’s fears of Aragorn likely stem from the fact that Aragorn’s ancestors defeated him even when he had the Ring. I think it unsurprising that this alone would cause Sauron concern.

Saruman

Admittedly, this horse has been pretty well beaten to death already, so just a few high points…

Saruman’s will was ultimately proven to have been weaker than Gandalf’s, Aragorn’s, and Denethor’s. Denethor is particularly telling as nobody that I’ve ever seen has put him in the Hall of Potential Successful Challengers to Sauron.

Sauron was able to play Saruman like a well-tuned zither. There is no particular reason to believe that Saruman could have been able to enslave/compel/fool the Ring (which was part of Sauron) into serving him and not betray him to Sauron at the first convenient opportunity.

The fact that Saruman was deluded by his greed into falling and chasing after something that would never be in his power to have only makes the character more tragic and the story more interesting, in my opinion.

The primary issue here appears to be that people just don’t want to give up some of their ideas about him.

Gandalf

are happy to accept Gandalf as a moral coward who would send Frodo & Sam to their deaths (by lying to them & telling them he himself could not master the Ring & would wnd up enslaved to it), in order to destroy something that he himself could have 'mastered'

What exactly is it you are advocating here? You seem to be arguing that, in order to save Frodo a lot of trouble, he should have just mastered the Ring and been done with it. I’m not sure this would have been a happy outcome for anybody. The very fact that he, who everyone agrees could have taken the Ring and successfully challenged Sauron, did not claim the Ring only shows his virtue in its most positive light. He wanted to overthrow tyranny, all tyranny, including the potential for his own. Why he should be accused of moral cowardice on these grounds is beyond me.

All the characters in the story were trying to trying to preserve their freedom and overthrow a terrible tyranny. Whether they did or did not believe that they themselves could have mastered the Ring and set themselves up in Sauron’s place doesn’t, in my view, reflect one way or the other upon their underlying motivations. What they did try was to use Sauron’s fears about somebody else using the Ring against him. (It is interesting to note that in several cases the mere thought of the Ring just being in the possession of another was enough to drive individuals into varying states of frenzy. There is every reason to think that Sauron himself would be consumed with a terrible Ring-lust just for its own sake. It was literally a part of him gone missing). In Gandalf’s case, his fears were completely justified. It may also be true that he feared Gandalf far more than Aragorn. That may even be likely. It would certainly be in keeping with Gandalf’s personality if at the Last Debate he was simply displaying modesty in downplaying the fears he awoke in Sauron and making Aragorn look greater. Gandalf was also thinking about the future of Gondor, which Aragorn embodied. Have to impress the future underlings and all that.

[Mansun]

This is only what the characters themselves thought. Boromir and Sam also thought the exact same thing at one point or another, yet I don’t hear anybody clamoring for their induction into the Hall of Potential Successful Challengers to Sauron. If the Ring was capable of deluding Boromir and Sam, why can’t it be capable of similarly deluding Elrond, Gandalf, and Galadriel? I think the temptation for them would be even more extreme (hence their distress).


Boromir & Sam cannot be likened to the loremasters in this manner, as they do not have a great power of their own, & are not strong willed enough. And I believe that what Elrond said, that by using the arts of the enemy one of great power could ''overthrow'' (& not just challenge) Sauron & take his seat on his throne to become yet another Dark Lord is not just a mere thought or prediction, it is the truth. Elrond afterall is greatest of all the loremasters, & is telling it as it really is - the Ring is a threat to the Wise as they may seek to use the Ring to overthrow Sauron & become new darklords themselves, which is Sauron's worst fear (hence the power of Mordor falling on Minas Tirith like a storm for this very reason, as told by Gandalf in the White Rider).

Sauron knows (& he should do - he is the lord of the Ring afterall!), therefore, that he CAN be overthrown by a power such as Gandalf if the Ring is used against him, or otherwise Tolkein is not making much sense in his works & is contradicting himself to an extent - maybe a case of Tolkien juggling with his own ideas but not being explicit enough about them perhaps (hence this debate!). I believe the former to be the case, however, although I would not put Aragorn in the category - why could he be able to wield the Ring if Isildur could not? He has no great power of his own or the knowhow to be able to unlock the power of the Ring as far as I am concerned (& I bet someone will try & qoute this & comment on it with something like ''you are just stating your thoughts'' - the answer to that is, well so are you because you are only stating YOUR interpretations of the book & the Letters!!!).

This thread was about whether Saruman was for or against Sauron. It seems that in the end there was no friendship between them, only a link to see what each other was up to, & how one could get information out of each other to achieve the same goal. I am a little suprised that Sauron even bothered with Saruman, as I would have thought he would have been too proud & ignorant, having great power & resources of destruction at his disposal. It just shows that Sauron was a legend in playing mind games to control the will of others.

[Kuruharan]

And I believe that what Elrond said, that by using the arts of the enemy one of great power could ''overthrow'' (& not just challenge) Sauron & take his seat on his throne to become yet another Dark Lord is not just a mere thought or prediction, it is the truth. Elrond afterall is greatest of all the loremasters, & is telling it as it really is

We may just have to disagree on that, as that is an interpretation of the text. I believe my interpretation is more in line with what Tolkien wrote elsewhere and Tolkien’s writings are the standard I go by.

Sauron knows (& he should do - he is the lord of the Ring afterall!),

Ahhh, yes…let’s talk about what Sauron “knows” about the Ring…

And this is the dreadful chance, Frodo. He believed that the One had perished; that the Elves had destroyed it, as should have been done.
-The Shadow of the Past

…evidently not much. If he didn’t know that he would have been utterly destroyed by the destruction of the Ring, I don’t think we can place ultimate reliance upon his supposed knowledge of who could or could not use the Ring to challenge him.

[Mansun]

We may just have to disagree on that, as that is an interpretation of the text. I believe my interpretation is more in line with what Tolkien wrote elsewhere and Tolkien’s writings are the standard I go by.



Ahhh, yes…let’s talk about what Sauron “knows” about the Ring…



…evidently not much. If he didn’t know that he would have been utterly destroyed by the destruction of the Ring, I don’t think we can place ultimate reliance upon his supposed knowledge of who could or could not use the Ring to challenge him.


One thing Sauron probably did know - the Ring could be used to overthrow & replace him as Darklord of Mordor by another mighty power. Otherwise what was the point in going after Gondor in such a hurried fashion if the Ring could not be used against him? He bent is power towards Gondor for great fear that the Ring would be sent there to be wielded as a weapon against him.

If Sauron did know that the Ring could not be used against him, surely he would have bent all his guile to the hunting of the Ring, even after the initial attempt by the Nine Black Riders had failed? He would have already known that Mordor forces were far too strong for Gondor & Rohan, & could afford to use his armies to lure the Ring to him again, surely his uttermost desire above all others. The only other way that things could be explained is if Sauron didn't know whether his Ring could be used against him, but judging by his choices & actions it seems as though he thought it likely that he could be defeated if it were used against him.

Infact, Saruman, Gandalf, Galadriel, Elrond & even Sauron generally believed the Ring could be used to overthrow the Dark Lord. Although we cannot be absolutely certain of this, one would have to agree that it would be likely that Sauron could be overthrown by another power with the Ring. Aside from this being Sauron's great fear, none of the above characters speak of there being a chance that by wielding the Ring they would likely as not be fooled by the lure of the Ring's power to such an extent that they would just end up succumbing to Sauron in one way or other. The fear amongst these characters was that ''another Sauron'' would form, rather than the Ring wielder entering the service of the Darklord after being corrupted by the Ring.

[Boromir88]

…evidently not much. If he didn’t know that he would have been utterly destroyed by the destruction of the Ring, I don’t think we can place ultimate reliance upon his supposed knowledge of who could or could not use the Ring to challenge him.
I think Mansun brings up some good points...

In Tolkien's letter to Milton Waldman, he makes clear that the Ring could be used against Sauron:
While he wore it, his power on earth was actually enhanced. But even if he did not wear it, that power existed and was in 'rapport' with himself: he was not 'diminished.' Unless some other seized it and became possessed of it. If that happened, the new possessor could (if sufficiently strong and heroic by nature) challenge Sauron, become master of all that he had learned or done since the making of the One Ring, and so overthrow him and usurp his place.
And it's obvious he feared this, instead of somebody being sent to Mordor to destroy the Ring:
This was the essential weakness he had introduced into his situation in his effor (largely unsuccessful) to enslave the Elves, and in his desire to establish a control over the minds and wills of his servants.
I do agree that there is a difference between 'mastering' the ring' and 'wielding' it. To master the Ring, would be to break the allegiance and tie between Sauron and the Ring. It would break the 'rapport' and Sauron would most of his power and be diminished to a spirit incapable of reforming again. Then Lalwende brings up a good point also, can one truly master the Ring? Because even if you get rid of Sauron for good, Sauron's work will continue, as the person who mastered the Ring will in time become another Dark Lord. So, the Ring can be mastered in the sense that Sauron is no longer the ring's 'Master' but the Ring has a new 'master' a new person (say Gandalf for instance) will be the new 'Lord of the Rings.' But it can't be mastered in the sense that nothing good can come from it. The Ring will be the 'master' in the end.

To wield the Ring, would be to just carry it and use it against Sauron. I think wielding goes more along the lines of using the Ring and gathering a large army to go and overthrow Sauron. This is what it appears Sauron feared the most, especially with Aragorn being Isildur's heir. He feared that Aragorn had the Ring and was coming with an army to overthrow him. This is also what Boromir and Sam had envisioned, 'armies would flock to their banner's' and especially Boromir it would give him the power to 'Command.' Sauron was defeated when he had the Ring, so I don't see why he couldn't be defeated without it, in the hands of someone else. But, to 'wield' the Ring wouldn't be the same as 'mastering' the Ring. I don't think 'wielding' the Ring would be breaking that bond between the Ring and Sauron. You are just using it as a weapon against him, not in fact mastering it's powers. So, to use the Ring against Sauron in this manner, Sauron would be able to return, as the Ring's powers would still exist and be tied to Sauron.

[Kuruharan]

Infact, Saruman, Gandalf, Galadriel, Elrond & even Sauron generally believed the Ring could be used to overthrow the Dark Lord. Although we cannot be absolutely certain of this, one would have to agree that it would be likely that Sauron could be overthrown by another power with the Ring. Aside from this being Sauron's great fear, none of the above characters speak of there being a chance that by wielding the Ring they would likely as not be fooled by the lure of the Ring's power to such an extent that they would just end up succumbing to Sauron in one way or other. The fear amongst these characters was that ''another Sauron'' would form, rather than the Ring wielder entering the service of the Darklord after being corrupted by the Ring.

All of this is still just talking about what characters "knew."
And the Ring was certainly eager to betray everybody else, why couldn't it betray one of them?

If Sauron did know that the Ring could not be used against him, surely he would have bent all his guile to the hunting of the Ring, even after the initial attempt by the Nine Black Riders had failed? He would have already known that Mordor forces were far too strong for Gondor & Rohan, & could afford to use his armies to lure the Ring to him again, surely his uttermost desire above all others.

Isn't that what he did, in a way?

The only other way that things could be explained is if Sauron didn't know whether his Ring could be used against him, but judging by his choices & actions it seems as though he thought it likely that he could be defeated if it were used against him.

I'm afraid you're not making a whole lot of sense here. At first you say that if Sauron thought the Ring was no threat to him then he would have spent more time hunting it but then you say he would have tried to use his armies to get the Ring back. Considering that he thought Gandalf or Aragorn had the Ring (which is a bizarre thing for him to think because if he thought they were going to try and master it, you'd think he'd believe he'd have sensed their efforts to do so) didn't he sort of use his armies to try and get the Ring back? Which is it you are arguing for?

It would break the 'rapport' and Sauron would most of his power and be diminished to a spirit incapable of reforming again. Then Lalwende brings up a good point also, can one truly master the Ring? Because even if you get rid of Sauron for good, Sauron's work will continue, as the person who mastered the Ring will in time become another Dark Lord.

A) It seems to me that you would have to master the Ring in order to defeat Sauron by this method. If you don’t the Ring will betray you to Sauron because the Ring would not have forgotten who it really belonged to.

Also…

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.

It seems that mastering the Ring is part and parcel of utterly breaking Sauron.

B) This is another reason why the Wise didn’t consider trying this to be a viable alternative.

I think wielding goes more along the lines of using the Ring and gathering a large army to go and overthrow Sauron.

I have to admit that I’ve never particularly understood how the Ring was especially helpful in this regard. It can’t create soldiers out of thin air and how does it entice people to follow someone else to their death they know little about and have no history of loyalty toward.

I don't see why he couldn't be defeated without it, in the hands of someone else.

-and-

Sauron would be able to return, as the Ring's powers would still exist and be tied to Sauron.


Theoretically (ignoring the military incapacity of the West for this line of thought, even though I think this is a big part of the reason why the Ring had to be mastered in order for Sauon to be defeated in this way) it might be possible to militarily defeat Sauron. However, I agree that Sauron would not be broken and that he would come back. And I’m not sure the Ring would be exactly helpful in this enterprise. I think it would be apt for betrayal.

[Boromir88]

I have to admit that I’ve never particularly understood how the Ring was especially helpful in this regard. It can’t create soldiers out of thin air and how does it entice people to follow someone else to their death they know little about and have no history of loyalty toward.
It could very well just be the deceit of the Ring. Some had accepted the Ring's deceit (Galadriel and Sam) and rejected the desires of 'glory' and 'army flocking,' where others (Boromir) fell to it.

Going back to the famous Letter 246:
In the “Mirror of Galadriel”, I 381, 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.~Letter 246
The 'Great' knew what the Ring was about, and knew their thoughts of overthrowing Sauron militarily wasn't the right strategy. So, they rejected this plan, and Galadriel passes her 'test.' Same goes for Sam:
In that hour of trial it was the love of his master that helped most to hold him firm; but also deep down in him lived still unconquered his plain hobbit-sense: he knew in the core of his heart that he was not large enough to bear such a burden, even if such visions were not a mere cheat to betray him.~Tower of Cirith Ungol
The Ring filled Sam with thoughts of being 'Samwise the Brave' leading armies to overthrow Sauron, and after he could make the Gorgoroth into some grand and beautiful garden. But, Sam knew very well that the Ring was out to betray him, and even if it wasn't, he didn't want what the Ring had to offer him anyway...what he had was good enough:
The one small garden of a free gardener was all his need and due, not a garden swollen to a realm; his own hands to use, not the hands of others to command.~ibid

Boromir, it's just a little different:
'What could not a warrior do in this hour, a great leader? What could not Aragorn do? Or if he refuses, why not Boromir? The Ring would give me power of Command. How I would drive the hosts of Mordor, and all men would flock to my banner.~The Breaking of the Fellowship
Eventhough if he knows what was said at the Council of Elrond, that doesn't mean he accepts what was said:
'Were you not at the Council?' answered Frodo. 'Because we cannot use it, and what is done with it turns to evil.'
Boromir got up and walked about impatiently. 'So you go one,' he cried. 'Gandalf, Elrond - all these folk have taught you to say so. For themselves they may be right. These elves and half-elves and wizards, they would come to grief perhaps. Yet often I doubt if they are wise and not merely timid.'~ibid
I think at least during this age where the numbers of the West were greatly diminished compared to prior ages, then a military overthrow of Sauron was impossible, even with the Ring. And this was something that was debated thoroughly throught the Last Debate, and prior. They had not had the military might to challenge Sauron, the Ring had to be destroyed. Or Sauron had to be killed, as he came out in the Last Alliance, and openly challenges Elendil and Gil-galad. But, I doubt Sauron's going to be leaving Barad-dur anytime soon:
Denethor laughed bitterly. 'Nay, not yet, Master Peregrin! He will not come save only to triumph over me when all is won.'~The Siege of Gondor

I do find it interesting though that Tolkien explores another way of Sauron's ultimate defeat:
'But that of course did not destroy the spirit, nor dismiss it from the world to which it was bound until the end. After the battle with Gilgalad and Elendil, Sauron took a long while to re-build, longer than he had done after the Downfall of Numenor (I suppose because each building-up used up some of the inherent energy of the spirit, which might be called the 'will' or the effective link between the indestructible mind and being and the realization of its imagination).'~Letter 200
So, just kill Sauron enough times, and he would not have the 'will' that it took to reform again...as each rebuilding takes up part of the 'will.' But, again, the only victory at this time during the War of the Ring would come if the Ring was destroyed.

So, long story short, I'm agreeing that the West had lacked the military prowess to overthrow Sauron (even if Aragorn had the ring). So, any sort of vision of rallying these grand armies was just the deceit of the Ring. And Sauron wasn't going to come out of Barad-dur anytime soon, so I doubt he was going to be slain as he was in the Last Alliance.

[Mansun]

All of this is still just talking about what characters "knew."
And the Ring was certainly eager to betray everybody else, why couldn't it betray one of them?



Isn't that what he did, in a way?



I'm afraid you're not making a whole lot of sense here. At first you say that if Sauron thought the Ring was no threat to him then he would have spent more time hunting it but then you say he would have tried to use his armies to get the Ring back. Considering that he thought Gandalf or Aragorn had the Ring (which is a bizarre thing for him to think because if he thought they were going to try and master it, you'd think he'd believe he'd have sensed their efforts to do so) didn't he sort of use his armies to try and get the Ring back? Which is it you are arguing for?



A) It seems to me that you would have to master the Ring in order to defeat Sauron by this method. If you don’t the Ring will betray you to Sauron because the Ring would not have forgotten who it really belonged to.

Also…



It seems that mastering the Ring is part and parcel of utterly breaking Sauron.

B) This is another reason why the Wise didn’t consider trying this to be a viable alternative.



I have to admit that I’ve never particularly understood how the Ring was especially helpful in this regard. It can’t create soldiers out of thin air and how does it entice people to follow someone else to their death they know little about and have no history of loyalty toward.



Theoretically (ignoring the military incapacity of the West for this line of thought, even though I think this is a big part of the reason why the Ring had to be mastered in order for Sauon to be defeated in this way) it might be possible to militarily defeat Sauron. However, I agree that Sauron would not be broken and that he would come back. And I’m not sure the Ring would be exactly helpful in this enterprise. I think it would be apt for betrayal.

Gandalf, as the White Rider said that Sauron should have used all his guile to the hunting of the Ring instead of throwing his power at Gondor. So, clearly there is a better strategy to hunt for the Ring than just sending plundering orcs to Gondor. Sauron could have sent some of his best men to scout & spy out the lands, whilst the Nazgul could ride openly again to scour the lands. In this situation, it would have been very difficult to get the Ring to, say Gondor, in time. Sauron could, & perhaps should have used his armies in a smarter way.

[Kuruharan]

Gandalf, as the White Rider said that Sauron should have used all his guile to the hunting of the Ring instead of throwing his power at Gondor.

Okay, gotcha.

I wonder if Gandalf was using what he (that is Gandalf) knew about what was happening. He knew that they were sending the Ring to destruction. However, Sauron didn’t know this and really didn’t know what they were doing. So certainly it would have been better for Sauron to spend all his time searching for the Ring because that was where the threat was coming from, but Sauron didn’t know that (which was a good thing).

[Gil-Galad]

"The Enemy of my Enemy is my friend till my Enemy is no more, then my friend is my Enemy."

it was simply like that, if Gondor fell, then it will be between Saruman and Sauron.

[Smaug]

I have a very much associated question.

Do you guys think that Saruman would have sought to integrate with Sauron and thus gain power under the rank-and-file system? Saruman seems to have pursued the ring vehemently in order to be all powerful and to dictate matters entirely throughout Middle Earth.

Would Saruman with his own armies from his base in Isenguard have battled Sauron for power in ME? Is this to suggest that Saruman like Sauron could forge his own dark armies that would remain loyal to him, and fight the forces of Mordor? Thus pitting orc against orc.

[Raynor]

I've often compared the Saruman-Sauron relationship like the Hitler-Stalin relationship.I believe that it was more of a superior-subordonate relationship; or at least both feigned it was - because soon Saruman would begin to deceive Sauron's agents, but Sauron didn't have yet the strength to avenge that.
Saruman stepped onto Middle-Earth on the side of good, head of the white council, follower of Eru's plan. Somewhere along the way, he wanted to be mightiest, strongest, most powerful being, which doesn't always equate to evil.I agree; in fact, that is true for both Sauron and Saruman:
[The istari] were also, for the same reason, thus involved in the peril of the incarnate: the possibility of 'fall', of sin, if you will. The chief form this would take with them would be impatience, leading to the desire to force others to their own good ends, and so inevitably at last to mere desire to make their own wills effective by any means. To this evil Saruman succumbed. Gandalf did not. [Sauron] had gone the way of all tyrants: beginning well, at least on the level that while desiring to order all things according to his own wisdom he still at first considered the (economic) well-being of other inhabitants of the Earth. [Sauron] still had the relics of positive purposes, that descended from the good of the nature in which he began: it had been his virtue (and therefore also the cause of his fall, and of his relapse) that he loved order and co-ordination, and disliked all confusion and wasteful friction.(It was the apparent will and power of Melkor to effect his designs quickly and masterfully that had first attracted Sauron to him.) Sauron had, in fact, been very like Saruman, and so still understood him quickly and could guess what he would be likely to think and do, even without the aid of palantiri or of spies; whereas Gandalf eluded and puzzled him. Would Saruman then, after finding out that if he could not master the Ring, hand it back to Sauron if he ever got hold of it? I doubt that:
Why not? The Ruling Ring? If we could command that, then the Power would pass to us. That is in truth why I brought you here. Of 'mortals' no one, not even Aragorn...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.
We have to assume that Saruman fell into the category of "Of the others" even though he too was an emissary of the Powers.I think a great deal of debate has gone over a false dilemma. The initial quote looks like this:
In his actual presence none but very few of equal stature could have hoped to withhold it from him. Of 'mortals' no one, not even Aragorn. The passage in question doesn't concern who would master the ring _in general_, but who could master the ring in Sauron's presence. Maybe only Gandalf can master the ring in such a situation, but that doesn't exclude the fact that others can master the ring properly, should Sauron not be in the vicinity.
Would Saruman with his own armies from his base in Isenguard have battled Sauron for power in ME? At the council of Elrond, as Boromir88 I believe quoted, Saruman is stated to have pursued a veiled policy of overcoming Sauron:
We may join with that Power. It would be wise, Gandalf. There is hope that way. Its victory is at hand; and there will be rich reward for those that aided it. As the Power grows, its proved friends will also grow; and the Wise, such as you and I, may with patience come at last to direct its courses, to control it. We can bide our time, we can keep our thoughts in our heartsIn the introduction to LotR, Tolkien gives an alternate view on how Saruman would challenge the leadership over M-E, should Sauron be enslaved:
The real war does not resemble the legendary war in its process or its conclusion. If it had inspired or directed the development of the legend, then certainly the Ring would have been seized and used against Sauron; he would not have been annihilated but enslaved, and Barad-dur would not have been destroyed but occupied. Saruman, failing to get possession of the Ring, would in the confusion and treacheries of the time have found in Mordor the missing links in his own researches into Ring-lore, and before long he would have made a Great Ring of his own with which to challenge the self-styled Ruler of Middle-earth.

[Kuruharan]

Now that the other Saruman thread has died down a bit...

The passage in question doesn't concern who would master the ring _in general_, but who could master the ring in Sauron's presence. Maybe only Gandalf can master the ring in such a situation, but that doesn't exclude the fact that others can master the ring properly, should Sauron not be in the vicinity.

Please explain how a physical confrontation with Sauron could possibly be avoided by this putative ringlord. How could said ringlord be sure they had mastered the Ring when they fought Sauron? I picture the Ring having a thought process similar to this...

Ring: Hmmm...another dullard who thinks they can master me. What to do? I know! I'll pretend like they've mastered me and get their ego all blown out of proportion. My new "master" will fall all over itself (har, har "it"self, clever reference to part of the discussion in other thread :rolleyes: ;) ) to take me back to my Master.

*time passes, battle is waged, Sauron makes beeline for new "ringlord"*

Ring: DADDY!!!!!!!

*BAM* new ringlord is jello

Ring and Sauron: Boo-YAA!!!

[Raynor]

Please explain how a physical confrontation with Sauron could possibly be avoided by this putative ringlord. I believe that this could be achieved by the way Elrond/Galadriel would have tried: large armies with absolutely subservient generals. I don't think that killing Sauron by 'mere' warriors is out of the question, seeing that it had already happened once at the end of the second age, in direct combat.
How could said ringlord be sure they had mastered the Ring when they fought Sauron? I believe that said ringlord would have avoided direct confrontation; as it has been quoted already in the thread, and argued by you, such a direct encounter would greatly favor Sauron.

[Kuruharan]

I believe that this could be achieved by the way Elrond/Galadriel would have tried: large armies with absolutely subservient generals.

Nope. The West was militarily incapable. Try to fight Sauron this way and you are still playing to his strength. They couldn't have won like this, they would have had no time.

I don't think that killing Sauron by 'mere' warriors is out of the question, seeing that it had already happened once at the end of the second age, in direct combat.

Sauron was not killed by "mere" warriors. He was...well, actually something surprisingly ambiguous happened considering the magnitude of the event, by two of the greater beings that had ever walked on Middle-earth and they died in the process. This actually only reinforces my point that these armies aren't going to be able to keep Sauron from making a beeline for the Ring.

I believe that said ringlord would have avoided direct confrontation

And as I said, I don't think they could avoid it as long as they stayed in Middle-earth.

[Raynor]

I don't think that sheer might is what ultimately defines Tolkien's world, quite the contrary case can be made:
The chief of the stories of the Silmarillion, and the one most fully treated is the Story of Beren and Luthien the Elfmaiden. Here we meet, among other things, the first example of the motive (to become dominant in Hobbits) that the great policies of world history, 'the wheels of the world', are often turned not by the Lords and Governors, even gods, but by the seemingly unknown and weak – owing to the secret life in creation, and the pan unknowable to all wisdom but One, that resides in the intrusions of the Children of God into the Drama. It is Beren the outlawed monal who succeeds (with the help of Luthien, a mere maiden even if an elf of royalty) where all the armies and warriors have failed: he penetrates the stronghold of the Enemy and wrests one of the Silmarilli from the Iron Crown. In what sense can the statement "the west was military incapable" be true? Certainly not in the absolute one. We can speculate that for a good while of the third age, Sauron's enemies (without the one ring) were a match to him. Up to when? Perhaps the earliest is 2060, when the Wise suspect that his power increases in Dol-Gudur; or 2460, when the watchful peace ends; or 2885, when the haradrim attack Gondor at the bidding of Sauron, or even 2951, when at last Sauron declares himself.

I think that we can only declare the west as military incapable against Sauron, when we find that the following are not synchronized in their favor:

- the period it requires them to build an empire, with the help of the One Ring, necessary to contend Sauron

- when they actually get the One Ring

- when is Sauron powerful enough to attack them first

It can even be argued that the gathering of strength can be hastened by claiming soldiers who obey Sauron's power; Tolkien noted that the nazgul wouldn't be wholly invulnerable to the power of an enemy ringlord, even in the case of Frodo; I would guess that the hosts of Mordor would too be vulnerable to its influence, seeing that they already are driven forth by Sauron's power. The conclusion I would draw is that not all the elements are known, so our estimates are rather inexact; in most, if not all, cases, some timelines favor the the victory of the west, some the victory of Sauron, but the very story of LotR shows us that no outcome is set in stone.

How powerful is Sauron in direct confrontation? Very powerful, most likely, but he is not the same Sauron of the second age. He had expended energy in making himself a new body and in "long corruption and expenditure of will in dominating inferiors" - this being also the factors of the diminishing of Melkor's power, who, even he, at the end of the first age, feared of being hurt. I believe that at the end of the third age, Sauron can be defeated in a direct battle.

[Boromir88]

I don't think that killing Sauron by 'mere' warriors is out of the question, seeing that it had already happened once at the end of the second age, in direct combat.~Raynor
I agree that Sauron could be killed in combat, as this clearly happened when he even had possession of the One Ring. However, I believe Sauron learned his lesson and coming out to fight wasn't something he was going to do this time around:
Denethor laughed bitterly. 'Nay, not yet, Master Peregrin! He will not come save only to triumph over me when all is one. He uses others as his weapons. So do all great lords, if they are wise, Master Halfling. Or why should I sit here in my tower and think, and watch, and wait, spending even my sons? For I can still wield a brand.'~Siege of Gondor

[Kuruharan]

In what sense can the statement "the west was military incapable" be true?

In the obvious one. They could not defeat Sauron by force of arms.

We can speculate that for a good while of the third age, Sauron's enemies (without the one ring) were a match to him.

No, we can’t speculate that because for much of the Third Age they were not contesting him, they just sat back for the most part.

the period it requires them to build an empire, with the help of the One Ring, necessary to contend Sauron

Exactly, they didn’t have that.

It can even be argued that the gathering of strength can be hastened by claiming soldiers who obey Sauron's power

This has always been a bit of an unclear issue. The Men that followed Sauron (and there were probably plenty enough of these to do the job) were probably not in thrall to the power of the Ring to any large extent. I think they could be counted on to follow Sauron regardless, if for no other reason than the new ringlord, whoever it would be, would be representing something they had hated and fought against for generations.

The orcs, I have to admit, I’m not sure about. On the whole I’m inclined to think they would also continue to follow Sauron for similar reasons to the Men. Whether they could actually attempt to actively harm the new ringlord I think is largely irrelevant. All the orcs would be there for is to help kill the enemy soldiers. Sauron would deal with the new ringlord.

Tolkien noted that the nazgul wouldn't be wholly invulnerable to the power of an enemy ringlord, even in the case of Frodo; I would guess that the hosts of Mordor would too be vulnerable to its influence

But Sauron would remain their master. That is not called into question in the case of the Nazgul, they remain Sauron’s slaves. They would not be needed to deal with the new ringlord. They would be much more effective doing nasty things to the new ringlord’s army.

But regardless of this, this little debate is a waste of time. It was relentlessly stated in the books over and over from the time of the Council of Elrond that the West could not hope to defeat Sauron militarily. The West also utterly lacked the capacity to launch effective offensive actions against Sauron, that in itself is very telling. I find that your argument has no foundation.

I believe that at the end of the third age, Sauron can be defeated in a direct battle.

By Gandalf, nobody else. Saruman couldn’t master the Ring to face Sauron (as the rotting horse corpse lying over there that I’ve had to beat mercilessly for the past few months attests to). Galadriel and Elrond were not of the same order of creation as Sauron and for a number of other reasons just don’t stack up. Aragorn is explicitly denied the ability to best Sauron in such a situation.

I don't know what else there is to say about this.

[Raynor]

They could not defeat Sauron by force of arms.You are ignoring my line of reasoning in that paragraph; I was referring to the moment in time Sauron became mightier in arm forces. There was a buildup in his forces, he didn’t enjoy his military superiority for the better part of the third age.

No, we can’t speculate that because for much of the Third Age they were not contesting him, they just sat back for the most part.I was discussing “for how long were they capable” not “what they actually did”. Although what you stated is correct, it doesn’t address my statement.

Exactly, they didn’t have that.In order to conclude that, we would need to know, as I stated previously:
- when would Sauron be fully prepared to attack them
- what period of time they needed to build their armies with the help of the one ring, in order to defeat Sauron
- what is the time they got the ring

As far as I know, at least the second factor is down to speculation, but I would welcome your suggestions for these. We know that Sauron wasn’t ready to fully attack the ringlord-less west at the time of the Pellenor Fields, in 15th of march, 3019. When would he be fully prepared to attack a ringlord? I don’t know. As to the third factor, that is simply down to an agreement; the sooner they got it, the quicker they would proceed to building forces, with more motivation, and, possibly, with more efficiency. Also, the sooner they would build their forces, the weaker Sauron would be. As I said, some timelines (placing the appearance the ringlord sooner in the third age) would favor the west, some would favor Sauron (placing said event later) in the third age); if the ringlord would appear only around the time of the council of Elrond or the likes, in 3018, he/she would have a serious handicap.

By Gandalf, nobody else.But Sauron facing opponents individually is not what I had in mind. You are conveniently taking into consideration only a one-on-one battle. While this seems to be defining some Hollywood style combats, I have a hard time imagining a scene in which several tens/hundreds/thousands of warriors would line up to fight Sauron individually. Even in that case, sheer number of individual fights, or just accidents, would allow us to consider that Sauron can be defeated. As far as I know, no embodied person in Middle-Earth enjoys invulnerability.

But regardless of this, this little debate is a waste of time.Err, why do you post then?

[Kuruharan]

You are ignoring my line of reasoning in that paragraph

Mainly because I didn’t see your point or how it related to what we were talking about (still don’t really).

And exactly how militarily incapable do you think Sauron was during the Third Age? He successfully (and repeatedly) instigated mass invasions against his enemies from Angmar, in 1851 with the Wainriders, and in 2000 the Nazgul seized Minas Ithil. This all happened before the Ring was fished out of the bottom of the river and before he established himself in Mordor. Arnor was gone and Gondor was already weakening. The West’s military incapacity was something of long standing.

15th of march, 3019

I’ll go with this. From this date, the West couldn’t win militarily at this point because they did not have the resources to defeat Sauron in the showdown that would quickly follow. He had all the manpower and material superiority that he needed. Once he knew who the new ringlord was he would pounce. What could be simpler? The West did not have years for a new ringlord to build up. Weeks, or at most months, would be what they would be looking at and that would not do them any good because time was more a friend of Sauron than of them.

You are conveniently taking into consideration only a one-on-one battle.

And you are conveniently forgetting that Sauron’s armies would have been larger and there for the express purposes of dealing with the new ringlord’s army. Sauron would have done everything he could to force such a man-to-man confrontation because the odds would have been impossibly stacked in his favor.

why do you post then?

For the purpose of publicly disagreeing with ideas I think are ill-founded.

[Raynor]

He successfully (and repeatedly) instigated mass invasions against his enemies from AngmarMaybe; but Angmar fell nonetheless.
in 1851 with the WainridersDefeated eventually
and in 2000 the Nazgul seized Minas IthilIn 2002 actually.
Sauron would have done everything he could to force such a man-to-man confrontation because the odds would have been impossibly stacked in his favor.I am not sure what you have in mind; if you are reffering to a man-to-man confrontation with the ringlord, I think we both ruled that out from discussion; if you are referring to confronting individual soldiers, I don't think he would actually avoid, not force such combats - perhaps you could explain.
Mainly because I didn’t see your point or how it related to what we were talking about My point is that a ringlord's chances to defeat Sauron would increase the sooner he got the ring and started building his empire; there is either a barrier of communication, or we are starting to argue in circles. I am fairly convinced that there was a time during the third age when Sauron could have been defeated even by a non-ringlord; a ringlord would have achieved that victory even quicker. On the other extreme, there is the year 3018, when Sauron is almost ready to strike successfuly the ringlord-less west. Perhaps you are right that the west had at best months to prepare against Sauron; or perhaps a ringlord could extend that period sufficiently enough; we don't know that. Galadriel seems to credit Frodo with the ability to wield the one ring in order to submit other wills, perhaps a more powerful wielder could do that on a far larger scale. Seeing that whoever wields the one ring knows all the thoughts of those who possess the other rings, perhaps even the nazgul are vulnerable to, at least, information leaking. Given time, even Frodo apparently could have mastered the nazgul:he "needed time, much time, before he could control the Ring or (which in such a case is the same) before it could control him; before his will and arrogance could grow to a stature in which he could dominate other major hostile wills [of the nazgul]". My ideas are not ill-founded, as Tolkien too considered that, if an elven ringlord would/could emerge, he/she would build armies, etc:
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.***Concerning the mastery of the ring, Elrond stated: "Its strength, Boromir, is too great for anyone to wield at will, save only those who have already a great power of their own."

Between the coming of Sauron to Dol Gudur in 1100 and some years before Pelennor Fields there is just speculation, and perhaps it is just better to agree to disagree since we all put our arguments forth and I kinda dislike the tone of the discussion.

[Kuruharan]

A personal confrontation between Sauron and the new ringlord is what I have been talking about the whole time. In the battle between Sauron and the ringlord the armies would engage and play tremendous havoc with each other. In the confusion, Sauron would storm up to the pretender and personally settle matters with them.

I am fairly convinced that there was a time during the third age when Sauron could have been defeated even by a non-ringlord

I suppose it depends on what you mean by defeated. He was driven from Dol Guldur twice, although he retreated willingly both times. If you mean obliterated, that wasn’t possible without either the destruction or mastery of the Ring, which wasn’t in any way possible until ca. 2463. However, for practical purposes it wasn’t possible until 2941, the year Sauron left Dol Guldur permanently. He returned to Mordor the next year. Ignoring all the problems of getting the Ring to one of the other “potential” candidates for Ring-mastery (as I have no problem with the picture of Gandalf being able to overthrow and replace Sauron) lets just say for the sake of argument that this other contender gets the Ring in 2942, the same year Sauron returned in secret to Mordor (obviously Aragorn is out of this particular picture). At that moment Sauron has not begun rebuilding Barad-dur and Dol Guldur lies empty. Militarily speaking the new Ringlord could command the forces of Gondor, Rohan, Lorien, the Woodland Realm, Dale, Laketown, whatever Woodmen happened to be sitting around with nothing else to do, and the Longbeards (Isengard and Dunland if Saruman is the new Ringlord, although Saruman had not at this point, it would seem, taken an army into his service yet). Assuming the new Ringlord knew where to find Sauron (which is conceivable) the Ringlord would probably have wanted to head to Mordor to put down the ultimate threat once and for all. It would probably have taken a few years to pull all of this together, with probably at least a year to put the army together. During this time Sauron would undoubtedly know what had happened. He too would spend the time assembling his forces and probably quickly establish himself in Mordor. At this point he would still undoubtedly have a large army of orcs to call upon as well as the military forces of multiple eastern and southern peoples. We still ultimately end up with a battle and a situation from which I don’t think anybody but Gandalf could have emerged victorious.

As an aside, one begins to wonder where Sauron kept his orcs during his period of exile. He apparently had some sort of dwelling in eastern Middle-earth, which is probably a likely candidate. Truly, eastern Middle-earth must have had some interesting tales to tell about itself.

[Farael]

Now, I would not want to ruin this spectacular debate with a bit of speculation (and no irony there, you guys are interesting to read) but are we forgetting one little detail?

Kuruharan you state that Sauron's armies would defeat the Ringlord's but... when Samwise a hobbit, and not the greatest one at that, was clutching the ring, Snaga (I believe it was him the orc who was running down the stairs) saw him as a huge, threatening figure. How would the other minions of Sauron see a more powerful ringlord actively using the ring?

I don't know about being able to gather enough troops for this difference to be meaningful, but if the ringlord had enough time to build up a strong enough army, and possibly choose the terrain where the fight would take place (after all, waiting only benefits the new ringlord, thus odds are Sauron would not wait for too long before launching his attack) it is possible that his army would have defeated Sauron's.

Now, in this scenario there is the issue of what would happen if Sauron himself decided to show up for the party. That'd be an interesting scenario, as I'm sure Sauron's minions fear him twice as much as they'd fear the ringlord... what would happen then?

I do not know, but the way I interpret Tolkien's comment is that, in a one-on-one battle, Sauron would win against all save perhaps Gandalf. At the same time, the characters in the book are talking about another scenario, what would happen if a strong-enough ringlord decided to battle his armies against Sauron's?

And keep in mind that none of the characters talk about certainty... so perhaps it is possible for them to defeat Sauron's armies, and effectively usurp Sauron's place (although sooner or later Sauron would arise again since the ring was still both existant and "unmastered")* but only Gandalf could defeat Sauron himself.

*Taking into account the previous comment that mastering the ring would be to break the link between it and Sauron, something only Gandalf could have done. This is unlike wielding, which would be using it without achieving mastery.
Just my cent and a half (short of two cents)

[Kuruharan]

when Samwise a hobbit, and not the greatest one at that, was clutching the ring, Snaga (I believe it was him the orc who was running down the stairs) saw him as a huge, threatening figure. How would the other minions of Sauron see a more powerful ringlord actively using the ring?

A very good point, and it also had its effect on Shagrat who was probably about as strong-willed as an orc could be, although Shagrat still held onto his purpose in that encounter. I think the effect on orcs (and indeed on lots of people) would have been even more intense for somebody who was actively trying to claim and use the Ring. I think that is part of the reason why Sauron would try to force a personal encounter quickly. However, I think Sauron would probably have a similar effect on those in his presence and in any case the new Ringlord could only be in once place at a time and I think the overpowering dread the Ring would inspire would be a...well, for lack of a better way of phrasing it a limited area-of-effect spell. It could dominate its immediate vicinity but this particular effect would not dominate the field.

As far as what would happen on the field, questions about terrain etc. are unanswerable unless one wanted to construct scenarios that would obviously be non-canonical in the extreme (even though it would probably be interesting). However, it must be remembered that Sauron was far from strategically incompetent, as his performance showed. He was defeated at the Pelennor Fields because the enemy achieved a tactical and strategic masterstroke in simultaneously robbing him of his reinforcements and getting in the rear of his army. This would cause the defeat of almost any army.

In the battle with the new Ringlord I think that Sauron and the new Ringlord would have been using their respective armies for two different purposes. The new Ringlord would have used his/her army to try and defeat Sauron. Sauron would have used his army to try and pin down the enemy so he could go take back what was his. Two different purposes, but put both of them together and it favors Sauron getting what he wanted.

[Raynor]

A personal confrontation between Sauron and the new ringlord is what I have been talking about the whole time. In the battle between Sauron and the ringlord the armies would engage and play tremendous havoc with each other. In the confusion, Sauron would storm up to the pretender and personally settle matters with them.I have never challenged the idea that Sauron would win in a direct single battle against anyone but Gandalf, although you keep returning to this; the meaning of my argument was that the ringlord would avoid, as I quoted from the letters, contemplating such a direct fight. I guess we will also have to agree to disagree that Sauron would be involved in a direct battle, out of several reasons: it seems to be the way things are in Arda that the greatest of leaders are not involved in direct battle (as Tolkien says in Myths Transformed: "the Government is always in Whitehall"); Melkor feared for his body, I think we can safely assume Sauron did too; IIRC, there was a single time when Sauron is mentioned to have engaged in direct combat, and he lost - I believe he learned the lesson; at the last battle, in front of the gates of Mordor, it is implied in LotR that Sauron believed the ringlord was present, but he did not come himself to fight.

There is another element that might be interesting to this discussion:
Unless some other seized it and became possessed of it. If that happened, the new possessor could (if sufficiently strong and heroic by nature) challenge Sauron, become master of all that he had learned or done since the making of the One Ring, and so overthrow him and usurp his place. I think it all comes down to the interpretation of what "challenge" mean. If it means direct confrontation, then it is probably down only to Gandalf; however, I think that challenge can be taken in a more general meaning; if that is the case, it appears that simple possession of the ring can provide, in itself, that which is required to overthrow Sauron.

[Mansun]

Was Saruman aware that the fellowship may consider detroying the Ring, given that Gandalf had refused him the chance of using it? If Gandalf would not wield it, then what may Saruman expect them to do with the Ring? Just take it somewhere for safe keeping? He may have thought the same as Sauron, that the Ring Bearer was on his wasy to Minas Tirith. But who then had the strength & power to wield it there? Denethor?

[Raynor]

He may have thought the same as Sauron, that the Ring Bearer was on his wasy to Minas Tirith. But who then had the strength & power to wield it there? Denethor?
As Gandalf said:
For if we have found this thing, there are some among us with strength enough to wield it. That too he knows. For do I not guess rightly, Aragorn, that you have shown yourself to him in the Stone of Orthanc?
Therefore, Aragorn would be at least one additional choice. The others are a matter of speculation.

[Mansun]

As Gandalf said:

Therefore, Aragorn would be at least one additional choice. The others are a matter of speculation.

Debatable still. Aragorn does not have the great power of Gandalf, even if he has a strong will. Denethor would have been a more realistic thought in the mind of the enemy, given that he was the Lord of Minas Tirith at the time of the war.

The point I was making was the fact that Saruman may have thought the Fellowship were upto something else, since they had refused to wield the Ring in the past. Saruman new the minds of the Wise better than many, unlike Sauron.

[Raynor]

Aragorn does not have the great power of Gandalf, even if he has a strong will.
True, but that didn't seem to matter much to Gandalf in the quote above.
Denethor would have been a more realistic thought in the mind of the enemy, given that he was the Lord of Minas Tirith at the time of the war.
However, he was much weakened and affected by his contest with Sauron. I expect that Saruman would find out about that one way or the other - spies, rumors, Sauron himself, the palantir.

[Mansun]

True, but that didn't seem to matter much to Gandalf in the quote above.

However, he was much weakened and affected by his contest with Sauron. I expect that Saruman would find out about that one way or the other - spies, rumors, Sauron himself, the palantir.


As for your first point, it did matter to Lady Galadriel. Secondly, the LOTR clearly states that Denethor was most displeased with the Ring going to Mordor. He wanted it in Minas Tirith, to be used only at the uttermost end of need. So there is not a case to say he was too weak or had no desire to wield the Ring. The only question in his mind was, who should wield it?

[Raynor]

As for your first point, it did matter to Lady Galadriel.
What do you mean?
Secondly, the LOTR clearly states that Denethor was most displeased with the Ring going to Mordor. He wanted it in Minas Tirith, to be used only at the uttermost end of need. So there is not a case to say he was too weak or had no desire to wield the Ring.
If we are speculating what Saruman thought about the likely wielder of the ring, then I believe that, in his eyes, the fact that Denethor wanted it could not overcome the negative effects of his contest with Sauron. However, I also believe we are taking really long shots here.

[Mansun]

What do you mean?


Recall the words of Galadriel to Frodo on the wielding of the Ring. One who desires to wield it will only succeed by having a great power of their own, & more besides.

The Ring was Denethor's last hope of success against Sauron. To think he had already been defeated before even learning of the fate of the Ring Bearer going to Mordor is quite astonishing to claim. He sent Boromir to Rivendell in the hope he may gain support from the Wise to use the Ring in Minas Tirith, did he not?

[Raynor]

One who desires to wield it will only succeed by having a great power of their own, & more besides.
Her exact words are:
Did not Gandalf tell you that the rings give power according to the measure of each possessor?
Why do you think this would exclude Aragorn?
To think he had already been defeated before even learning of the fate of the going to Mordor is quite astonishing to claim.
Can you rephrase that?

[Mansun]

Raynor, you have been a nuisance in other threads, & you are edging ever closer to that status here too. You know full well that Galadriel told Frodo that one who wishes to wield the Ring must have a great power of their own first. I will not quote the exact words, as you should know exactly what I am talking about.

[Raynor]

Galadriel told Frodo that one who wishes to wield the Ring must have a great power of their own first. I will not quote the exact words, as you should know exactly what I am talking about.
Where exactly is it said that Aragorn does not have the required power? And it would be nice of you if you stop making personal comments.

[Mansun]

Where exactly is it said that Aragorn does not have the required power? And it would be nice of you if you stop making personal comments.

Where exactly does it say Prince Imrahil does not have the power to wield the Ring? These sorts of questions are annoying aren't they?

Think of the personal comment as a Gandalf vs Pippin scenario :D.

[Gil-Galad]

this argument amuses Gil-Galad. continue.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

[Denethor] sent Boromir to Rivendell in the hope he may gain support from the Wise to use the Ring in Minas Tirith, did he not?

I believe you've been led astray by the movies. Denethor knew nothing of the Ring, nor did Boromir or Faramir, when the elder son departed. He was merely enquiring as to the meaning of his strange dream (wherein 'Isildur's Bane' is not clarified, and indeed Boromir thought it might be an Orc-arrow)

[Mansun]

I believe you've been led astray by the movies. Denethor knew nothing of the Ring, nor did Boromir or Faramir, when the elder son departed. He was merely enquiring as to the meaning of his strange dream (wherein 'Isildur's Bane' is not clarified, and indeed Boromir thought it might be an Orc-arrow)

I believe you have made a mistake here - recall the words of Boromir when the Ring was presented to the Council. He desired to use it for the war against Mordor. Also, recall the words of Denethor on his son's role :"He would have brought me a mighty gift".

[William Cloud Hicklin]

I believe you have made a mistake here - recall the words of Boromir when the Ring was presented to the Council. He desired to use it for the war against Mordor. Also, recall the words of Denethor on his son's role :"He would have brought me a mighty gift".

Boromir's speech at the Council occurs only after he has been told the Ring's history and Frodo displays "Isildur's Bane;" and even then Boromir is at first dubious.

As for Denethor, his tongue-lashing of Faramir occurs after Gandalf has let him in on the secret; and the context of course is What if Boromir had been in Ithilien? Nothing to do with the Fellowship. No-one in Gondor knew about the Ring until Gandalf's arrival in March. Remember, at the Council when Elrond relates that Isildur took the Ring, Boromir is shocked, and says expressly that this 'little' fact was completely unknown in the South. Only in Arnor and Rivendell was the truth known.

The whole notion that Denethor knew about the Ring and about the Council*, and despatched Boromir expressly to grab it for him, is an invention of Peter Jackson and his co-conspirators.


*to which no invitations were sent! Boromir in fact left Minas Tirith several weeks before Frodo ever departed Bag-end.

[Mansun]

Boromir's speech at the Council occurs only after he has been told the Ring's history and Frodo displays "Isildur's Bane;" and even then Boromir is at first dubious.

As for Denethor, his tongue-lashing of Faramir occurs after Gandalf has let him in on the secret; and the context of course is What if Boromir had been in Ithilien? Nothing to do with the Fellowship. No-one in Gondor knew about the Ring until Gandalf's arrival in March. Remember, at the Council when Elrond relates that Isildur took the Ring, Boromir is shocked, and says expressly that this 'little' fact was completely unknown in the South. Only in Arnor and Rivendell was the truth known.

The whole notion that Denethor knew about the Ring and about the Council*, and despatched Boromir expressly to grab it for him, is an invention of Peter Jackson and his co-conspirators.


*to which no invitations were sent! Boromir in fact left Minas Tirith several weeks before Frodo ever departed Bag-end.

Do you believe that Denethor had no knowledge of a Hobbit possessing the Ring before sending Boromir to Rivendell? At the very least he would have known the Ring had been found. He also had the Palantir to help him see things others knew nothing of.

[Boromir88]

Do you believe that Denethor had no knowledge of a Hobbit possessing the Ring before sending Boromir to Rivendell?~Mansun
I do.

For the simple fact that even if Denethor knew Frodo possessed the Ring (which I don't think there's anything to suggest that he did know), Boromir sets out for Rivendell on July 4th 3018, Frodo doesn't leave Bag End until September 23rd and has no idea he's going to Rivendell until he runs into Aragorn at Bree on the 29th.

And as WCH mentions, most in Gondor seemed to think Isildur's Bane referred to the orc arrow that slew him. Faramir thought so until he deducted that Isildur's Bane couldn't have been an orc arrow:
'...Nor when the riddling words of our dream were debated among us, did I think of Isildur's Bane as being this same thing. For Isildur was ambushed and slain by orc-arrows, according to the only legend that we knew, and Mithrandir had never told me more.'~The Window on the West
Both Boromir and Faramir had a riddle in their dreams regarding Isildur's Bane...and as both would say they had no clue it was a Ring. Apparently neither did Denethor:
'Of these words we could understand little, and we spoke to our father, Denethor, Lord of Minas Tirith, wise in the lore of Gondor. This only would he say, that Imladris was of old the name among the Elves of a far northern dale, where Elrond the Halfelven dwelt, greatest of Lore-masters....'~The Council of Elrond
Even if Denethor knew Isildur's Bane meant Sauron's Ring, before Boromir left for Rivendell (which there is nothing suggesting that he did), he didn't let Boromir or Faramir know this bit of info. As both Boromir and Faramir's story say the same thing when they went to their father to interpret the Riddle...they both (at that time) thought Isildur's Bane were the orc-arrows that slew him.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

I would add Boromir's statement at the council:

[Elrond:]'...and Isildur cut the Ring from his hand with the hilt-shard of his father's sword, and took it for his own.'

At this the stranger, Boromir, broke in. 'So that is what became of the Ring!' he cried. 'If ever such a tale was told in the South, it has long been forgotten. I have heard of the Great Ring of him that we do not name; but we believed that it perished from the world in the ruin of his first realm. Isildur took it! That is tidings indeed!'.......

[Elrond:]'Only to the North did these tidings come, and only to a few. Small wonder is it that you have not heard them, Boromir. From the ruin of the Gladden Fields, where Isildur perished, three men only came ever back....'

And after the Halfling, the Sword, and the Bane have been revealed, he says:

'I was not sent to beg any boon, but to seek only the meaning of a riddle,' answered Boromir proudly. 'Yet we are hard pressed, and the Sword of Elendil would be a help beyond our hope'

And Gandalf:

'And Boromir, there lies in Minas Tirith still, unread, I guess, by any save Saruman and myself since the kings failed, a scroll that Isildur made himself.

Certainly no news could possibly have reached Denethor about the Ring having been found or being in the possession of a Hobbit: indeed it was a secret known only to Gandalf, Frodo, Elrond and Aragorn in full prior to the Council. Bilbo and his Dwarven friends knew he had *a* Ring, which was not the same as *the* Ring; Sauron himself only got wind of it by torturing Gollum, of whom of course Denethor knew nothing; and Saruman was just beginning to guess at the time Boromir departed. In short, Denethor was as ignorant as Boromir of the Ring's existence, until Gandalf told him personally on the eve of the Siege.

[Mansun]

this argument amuses Gil-Galad. continue.

Do you want a taste of Gandalf's staff too?:D

[Nazgûl-king]

My first comment here:D!

I think that Saurman thought he could become Sauron, if he could get the Ring, and that perhaps he joined with Sauron in the hopes that he might get information that would be of use to him. I think Saruman intended to use his allegiance with Sauron as a cover for his true intensions of trying to get the Ring. I also think that in the films they should have shown Saurman as more of his own force rather then just a poppet of Sauron.