2nd in command to sauron [Archive] - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Eurytus

10-12-2003, 02:41 AM

The Nazgul would be in line before some man-turned-sorceror. The WItch-King was in charge of Minas Morgul; Khamul was in charge of Dol Guldur. The Mouth of Sauron was simply Sauron's Lt. at Barad-dur, and I can't see him leaving and being given his own fortress to reign over the much more active and powerful Nazgul. It doesn't make sense.

I disagree. Khamul resided in Dol Guldur yes, but he did not lead it's armies or do anything of a commanding nature.
Tolkien states that, of the Nazgul, only the Witchking had the ability to function using his own iniative without the will of Sauron behind him. Something that would be critical for any commander.
This is proven by the fact that when the Witchking died the command of the army of the Pelenor fields passed to Gothmog. Whom we know little about but since Tolkien only states 2 Nazgul names (the Witchking and Khamul) it is reasonable to assume he is something else.
Once that battle was over, at the parley it is stated that the Mouth of Sauron is now Sauron's lieutenant. I see no reason to doubt that. The remaining Nazgul do not have enough initiative to be able to command themselves.

Gwaihir the Windlord

10-12-2003, 02:57 AM

Witch King, I believe he was the chief of the Nazgul but i guess in Mordor's chain of command he was 3IC.
I do not think that the chain of command was quite as rigidly hierarchical as this. The Witch-King would certainly not take orders from the Mouth of Sauron; he answered to the Dark Lord himself.

As the name implies, the Mouth of Sauron was Sauron's spokesman. The Witch-King was both the commander of armies, and of the 'elite special forces' group that was the Nazgul. These positions are not interchangable. The Mouth was to be Sauron's 'spokesman' -- that is to say, his ambassador or representative -- in the lands that he was about to conquer.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to correct you, Eurytus:
Now at that time the Chieftan of the Ringwraiths dwelt in Minas Morgul with six companions, while the second to the Chief, Khamul the Shadow of the East, abode in Dol Guldor as Sauron's lieutenant, with one other as his messenger.

tom bombariffic

10-12-2003, 03:56 AM

I looked up "Gothmog" in the little index thing in my silm., and this is what came up:

Lord of Balrogs, high-captain of Angband, slayer of Feanor, Fingon and Ecthelion. (the same name was borne in the third age by the Lieutenant of Minas Morgul)

Wonder if that helps?

Legolas

10-12-2003, 07:20 AM

I disagree. Khamul resided in Dol Guldur yes, but he did not lead it's armies or do anything of a commanding nature. [...]
Once that battle was over, at the parley it is stated that the Mouth of Sauron is now Sauron's lieutenant. I see no reason to doubt that. The remaining Nazgul do not have enough initiative to be able to command themselves.

The Mouth of Sauron was the Lt. of Barad-dur whether the Witch-King was live or not because the Witch-King did not reside at Barad-dur. Khamul *was* the highest power at Dol Guldur - see Gwaihir's quote above.

Iarhen

10-12-2003, 07:44 AM

So, if Khamul was presnt at Dol Guldur, I presume that Sauron was mostly worried, after Gondor, of Thranduil's kingdom and of Lothlorien. Or what?

Eurytus

10-12-2003, 07:45 AM

The Mouth of Sauron was the Lt. of Barad-dur whether the Witch-King was live or not because the Witch-King did not reside at Barad-dur. Khamul *was* the highest power at Dol Guldur - see Gwaihir's quote above.

I was not discussing whether the Mouth was the lieutenant of Barad Dur, that much is obvious. I was discussing whether he was now the lieutenant of the whole of Sauron's forces which his statement suggests he is.

As to Khamul. He was the highest power at Dol Guldur when there were no military activities going on. None of the Nazgul save the Witchking were trusted with commanding armies.
Therefore we have this plus the statement of the Mouth himself to suggest that Sauron would have made the Mouth his 2nd in command.
Any of the Nazgul would have been wholely unsuited to the role in any case as the job of Sauron's lieutenant would have been to control and treat with the client kingdoms beyond the Anduin. Given the terror that went before them a Nazgul would have been unsuitable.

Finwe

10-12-2003, 08:29 AM

Khamul's job was probably just to "hold" Dol Guldur against any attacks by the White Council, and keep sending Orcs for reinforcements, raids, etc. I don't think Sauron was planning anything major in that sector of the playing field. His mind was entirely concentrated on Gondor, for that was where the first stroke would fall. Later, he thought that Gondor had the One Ring, so he doubled his assault there, ignoring, for the most part, the other parts of Eriador.

Except, of course, the Assault on the Lonely Mountain. I've always wondered whether the Orcs from that assault came from Dol Guldur or from Barad-dur. They would have needed a leader and some form of organization, so perhaps Sauron sent another "minor lieutenant" there, maybe even that messenger that he had already sent to Dain.

Lost One

10-12-2003, 10:12 AM

Forces from Dol Guldur also attacked Lorien three times during the War of the Ring, so someone with military authority and initiative was in charge there. Basically, we don't know enough about the hierarchy of Mordor, and there isn't enough infomation given by Tolkien to be too specific about this, or know exactly how Khamul, the Mouth, Gothmog and any others ranked, especially in the immediate aftermath of the Witch-king's unforeseen destruction.

Wraith

10-12-2003, 12:23 PM

Yes, the so called Mouth of Sauron was PROBABLY 2nd in command, but I do think that the Witch King was his most powerful servant, well I'm definitely sure...

Eldar14

10-12-2003, 01:51 PM

Um, why are we assuming that Sauron had a second in command over all of his forces. He wouldn't really need one. He could directly communicate with his Lt. for each of the various strongholds and armies he commanded without a need for an intermediary. Also, he is a very power hungry, jealous, and paranoid individual; do you think he would really allow another to have power so closely equal to his own.

And, if he really did have a second in command, it wouldn't necessarily be who is the most powerful physically or mystically, or even who leads the armies. Rarely would someone so high in the commanding hierarchy be put at such a risk as battle.

lindil

10-12-2003, 02:40 PM

The Lost ONe comes closest on this point methinks.

Forces from Dol Guldur also attacked Lorien three times during the War of the Ring, so someone with military authority and initiative was in charge there. Basically, we don't know enough about the hierarchy of Mordor, and there isn't enough infomation given by Tolkien to be too specific about this, or know exactly how Khamul, the Mouth, Gothmog and any others ranked, especially in the immediate aftermath of the Witch-king's unforeseen destruction.

Saruman had he stayed 'true' to his betrayel of the West, would have been the 2nd most powerful individual owing allegiance to Sauron.

In terms of 'power' the nazgul where all far above the Mouth I would guess, but that does not mean [as the 'will factor' has shown] that they were necessarily 2-10 in the heirarchy.

Sauron seemed to keep his capts/ltnts out and about plotting the destruction or troubles of the dunedain and the Elves, and doubtless recruiting East and South.

Also as Gandalf says to the Mouth at the parley, 'Sauron is the base master of treachery'; so how can we even know if he was telling the truth to the Mouth, and not just manipulating him ?

So, as with many things in the Legendarium, we are a few facts short of a conclusion...

[ October 12, 2003: Message edited by: lindil ]

Legolas

10-12-2003, 03:15 PM

I was not discussing whether the Mouth was the lieutenant of Barad Dur, that much is obvious. I was discussing whether he was now the lieutenant of the whole of Sauron's forces which his statement suggests he is.
As to Khamul. He was the highest power at Dol Guldur when there were no military activities going on. None of the Nazgul save the Witchking were trusted with commanding armies.
Therefore we have this plus the statement of the Mouth himself to suggest that Sauron would have made the Mouth his 2nd in command.

Khamul was trusted as leader of Dol Guldur whether he commanded Sauron's army or not. He was in charge there.
You missed the point - if the Mouth of Sauron was higher in rank than these two Nazgul, he would've been in charge of Dol Guldur or Minas Morgul instead.

I was discussing whether he was now the lieutenant of the whole of Sauron's forces which his statement suggests he is.

The Mouth had an obviously exaggerated opinion of himself.

without the will of Sauron behind him.

This would be an important part of the quote - it doesn't mean that the other Nazgul had no power to command the armies at all...Sauron would put his will behind them in a later attack following the Witch-King's fall.

This is proven by the fact that when the Witchking died the command of the army of the Pelenor fields passed to Gothmog. Whom we know little about but since Tolkien only states 2 Nazgul names (the Witchking and Khamul) it is reasonable to assume he is something else.

I don't think he was a Nazgul either - in any case, Gothmog was stationed at Minas Morgul specifically and would've stayed there and been in command when the Nazgul were out as they were during various points in the novel. There had to be someone else behind running things, and since he was there all of the time and the regular commander was out of action when Gothmog is mentioned, it is reasonable to deduce that he would've been able to motivate or command the troops, at least to some extent, that were so familiar with him. The troops were more frightened of the Nazgul than anything - this does not keep Sauron from putting them in positions of the highest leadership.

Also, nowhere does it state the Mouth of Sauron had the initiative to command the armies.

[ October 12, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

Olorin_TLA

10-12-2003, 05:36 PM

Just because The Mouth didn't rule Dol Gulder or Morgul doesn't mean he wouldn't get Isnegard - after all, it is a brand new post! Nobody had it before, there's space for him AND the Nazgul at DG and Minas Morgul to rule!

Commading armies is a job any idiot can be given in the real world...being Leiutenant of Barad-dur would indicate that he's not an idiot, and that he could command. Hell, all it takes at minimum is the ability to shout orders audibly.

Finwe

10-12-2003, 08:36 PM

There is also the possibility that Gothmog was not part of the set hierarchy. It could have been coincidence that the command passed to him. After the Witch-King (the Commander)'s death, the command would fall to the next highest-ranking commander/general, not necessarily the set second-in-command. Gothmog could have been a lieutenant of Minas Morgul, who happened to be with the army that day, and to whom the leadership fell. It all depends on how you read the phrase "the Lieutenant of Minas Morgul." Just because the word "the" is used doesn't necessarily mean that Gothmog was the only lieutenant of Minas Morgul, there could have been others, just not present at that sector.

Legolas

10-12-2003, 08:47 PM

Commading armies is a job any idiot can be given in the real world...being Leiutenant of Barad-dur would indicate that he's not an idiot, and that he could command. Hell, all it takes at minimum is the ability to shout orders audibly.

It's an indication that he's not an idiot, but it's no indication that he could lead an army. If he could, if probably would've been on the war front sooner than that final battle. Armies and such were obviously not his strength.

Also, with that thinking, any of the Nazgul could've done it which Eurytus denies.

Just because The Mouth didn't rule Dol Gulder or Morgul doesn't mean he wouldn't get Isnegard - after all, it is a brand new post! Nobody had it before, there's space for him AND the Nazgul at DG and Minas Morgul to rule!

Given that the Nazgul were used a lot during the War of the Ring and the Mouth was used only at Morannon and seemingly stayed at Barad-dur, it seems more likely that a Nazgul would be given reign over Isengard too, spreading their reach. The Witch-King seems most likely as Sauron would want his most trusted or powerful servant ruling in this, his most eastern tower.

Gwaihir the Windlord

10-13-2003, 01:56 AM

Eurytus, honestly. Why?

Eurytus

10-13-2003, 05:08 AM

You missed the point - if the Mouth of Sauron was higher in rank than these two Nazgul, he would've been in charge of Dol Guldur or Minas Morgul instead.

I never disputed that the Witchking was ranked higher. The Lieutenant quote comes from after the Witchking's demise.
There is no indication whatsoever in the books that Dol Guldur would be a more senior post than Barad Dur.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was discussing whether he was now the lieutenant of the whole of Sauron's forces which his statement suggests he is.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Mouth had an obviously exaggerated opinion of himself.

Since he states the fact that he is to be Sauron's lieutenant to be a fact and there is NOTHING in the text to dispute this, your statement above is unfactual and therefore not really applicable.

Sauron would put his will behind them in a later attack following the Witch-King's fall.

When did this occur? The Nazgul did not command the battle of the pelenor fields after the Witchking died and it is extremely unlikely that they were commanding the battle in front of the black gate from the air. This would hardly be efficient. So which battle did they command?

Eurytus

10-13-2003, 05:10 AM

Eurytus, honestly. Why?

Gwahir, your question might need rather more detail for me to answer it....

The_Hand

10-13-2003, 09:50 AM

I really like this topic... so many diffirent views! As for me:
I think Mouth is 2nd in command. WK would be third. Because the WK was sent to lead the armies at Pelennor fields not The Mouth. He didn't go into battle (risking his life) before the army came to the black gates. And he says so in Rotk.

Plus we Bodyparts of Sauron take orders from Mouth or Sauron himself... not WK smilies/biggrin.gif

Gwaihir the Windlord

10-14-2003, 01:55 AM

Apologies Eurytus, I was referring to this.
As to Khamul. He was the highest power at Dol Guldur when there were no military activities going on.
This line of argument seems quite unneccessary.

[ October 14, 2003: Message edited by: Gwaihir the Windlord ]

Eurytus

10-14-2003, 02:52 AM

Apologies Eurytus, I was referring to this.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As to Khamul. He was the highest power at Dol Guldur when there were no military activities going on.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This line of argument seems quite unneccessary.

The reason I stated that was that I said that the Nazgul (Witchking apart) did not have any iniative of their own and referenced the fact that Sauron did not use them to lead his armies.
someone replied that Khamul commanded Dol Guldur, hence my response that this was only during the lead up to the war, not during.

Hope that clarifies it for you.

Maéglin

10-14-2003, 02:54 AM

Sorry to break up the argument but who was Khamul? i don't ever remembering reading about him in LOTR or the Silmarillion?

Eurytus

10-14-2003, 04:03 AM

Khamul, the Easterling, was the only Nazgul Tolkien referenced by name. This was in the Book of Unfinished Tales if I recall.

Legolas

10-14-2003, 07:57 PM

When did this occur? The Nazgul did not command the battle of the pelenor fields after the Witchking died and it is extremely unlikely that they were commanding the battle in front of the black gate from the air. This would hardly be efficient. So which battle did they command?

When would it not occur? With the Witch-King gone and Sauron being undoubtedly familiar with the capabilities of the Nazgul, if necessary, he would place his will behind them.

This would hardly be efficient.

Um...what? Whether you think it to be efficient or not, the Witch-King was doing it.

I never disputed that the Witchking was ranked higher. The Lieutenant quote comes from after the Witchking's demise.
There is no indication whatsoever in the books that Dol Guldur would be a more senior post than Barad Dur.

You did miss the point again - if the Mouth of Sauron was second in command, I assert that he would've been given his own post already (like Dol Guldur or Minas Morgul) as opposed to being the Lt. of Barad-dur where Sauron was...Barad-dur was under Sauron's direct supervision (as in his physical presence was there).

Since he states the fact that he is to be Sauron's lieutenant to be a fact and there is NOTHING in the text to dispute this, your statement above is unfactual and therefore not really applicable.

Treebeard states the fact that he is oldest. There's nothing there to prove him wrong; same with Tom. It's not until Tolkien writes a letter back to a reader that we find that Treebeard is not as wise as he thinks - Tolkien never wrote a letter about the Mouth because no one questioned him about said character. However, Tolkien makes an important note in that letter - Treebeard as well as any other character in the story (though least of all Gandalf) is just that - a character - and not Tolkien himself, the author. It also does not mean we can't observe his character and make such judgements on our own. I don't deny that the Mouth was the Lt. of Barad-dur (since that is, in fact, stated by the author), but:

I was discussing whether he was now the lieutenant of the whole of Sauron's forces which his statement suggests he is.

I still don't see where it is suggested that he is the Lt. over ALL of Sauron's forces, and...

Since he states the fact that he is to be Sauron's lieutenant to be a fact and there is NOTHING in the text to dispute this,

...simply being Sauron's "lieutenant" does not mean he is second in command.

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

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

Then the Messenger of Mordor laughed no more.

Surely no messenger would be second in command.

while the second to the Chief, Khamûl the Shadow of the East, abode in Dol Guldur as Sauron's lieutenant, with one other as his messenger.

If simply being stated to be "Sauron's lieutenant" makes the Mouth of Sauron second in command, so too is Khamul - this can't be right, for Khamul is "second to the Chief," "the Second Chief" for there is one who outranks him.

‘Is there anyone in this rout with authority to treat with me?’ he asked. ‘Or indeed with wit to understand me? Not thou at least!’ he mocked, turning to Aragorn with scorn. ‘It needs more to make a king than a piece of elvish glass, or a rabble such as this. Why, any brigand of the hills can show as good a following!’

your statement above is unfactual

Does this not show the Mouth's big head? It clearly does.

The reason I stated that was that I said that the Nazgul (Witchking apart) did not have any iniative of their own and referenced the fact that Sauron did not use them to lead his armies. someone replied that Khamul commanded Dol Guldur, hence my response that this was only during the lead up to the war, not during.

Sauron can place his will behind them...instruct them to do something. That quote does not mean that the Nazgul have no battle commanding authority at all. Additionally, nowhere is it stated that the Mouth of Sauron could, nor does he even participate in battles that we know of.

[ October 14, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

Garen LiLorian

10-15-2003, 12:08 AM

This seems like a strange discussion to me. If the question is who would take over the forces of Mordor if Sauron should fall, I'd say Saruman. I'll justify that in a minute.

However, if the question is who did Sauron designate his second-in-command, I think the question has no answer. Sauron is a heavenly entity, unlike everyone under his command. He didn't allow his servants free will to carry out their own initiative, they did exactly what they were told at all times. Sauron was in command, and all others are tools that he used. There was no "executive officer." The closest there is to a chain of command is in the military, where Gothmog took control when the witch king died. But certainly the witch king couldn't have existed without the will of Sauron to back him, (if the works of the Elven rings, which weren't bound to the One, faded when it was destroyed, certainly the power of the Nine were broken as well) and the Mouth was a messenger, not a power. It's right there in his title.

I personally think that, had Sauron won, the Mouth would not have been given Isengard, because when all's said and done, he's got wraiths who are entirely subservient to his will to carry out his whims. No need to rely on a mere human.

However, if, hypothetically, Sauron simply vanished (and his forces didn't scatter when his will broke) I think Saruman would have taken control of the forces of Mordor minus the Ringwraiths, who simply cannot exist without Sauron. That's kind of what Saruman is going for all along. He wants the Ring, of course, but he wants it so that he can take the power of Mordor and enforce his "new world order" on the West. If you're looking to fill a power vaccuum, Saruman's your man.

Gwaihir the Windlord

10-15-2003, 02:07 AM

Well done, Legolas. smilies/smile.gif I think that about wraps it up.

Garen LiLorian, Saruman was definitely not Sauron's 2IC. Whether or not he would have tried to usurp Sauron's position had he fallen is another matter; I don't think he'd have been able to.

Eurytus.
The reason I stated that was that I said that the Nazgul (Witchking apart) did not have any iniative of their own and referenced the fact that Sauron did not use them to lead his armies.
someone replied that Khamul commanded Dol Guldur, hence my response that this was only during the lead up to the war, not during.
No clarification is needed, I understand what you mean. I merely state that there is no point trying to continue the theory that the Nazgul had no initiative (wherever you've managed to pull this misconception from), after it has already been pointed out that they had. I'm sorry, but rrying to save it in the fashion that you attempted above is, frankly, quite pathetic.
Anyway, I think I'll leave it at that; Legolas has covered it all now, so there isn't really any point in my continuing smilies/smile.gif.

Eurytus

10-15-2003, 02:13 AM

Legolas lets see if we can make any sense of circular reasoning such as this;

quote:

When did this occur? The Nazgul did not command the battle of the pelenor fields after the Witchking died and it is extremely unlikely that they were commanding the battle in front of the black gate from the air. This would hardly be efficient. So which battle did they command?

----------------------------------------------------
When would it not occur? With the Witch-King gone and Sauron being undoubtedly familiar with the capabilities of the Nazgul, if necessary, he would place his will behind them.

and

Additionally, nowhere is it stated that the Mouth of Sauron could, nor does he even participate in battles that we know of.

So according to you, the fact that the Nazgul are NOT shown to command any armies does not mean that they would not in the future. And yet, the Mouth of Sauron not participating in any battles during the story rules him out???

You do not need to command armies to be a second in command. And you cannot use what the Nazgul might have done in support of you argument.

Um...what? Whether you think it to be efficient or not, the Witch-King was doing it.

The Witchking was not commanding the battle of the Pelenor fields from the winged beast. He took to the air to deal with Theoden.
You tried to communciate commands from 300 feet up? They didn't have walkie talkies you know.

You did miss the point again - if the Mouth of Sauron was second in command, I assert that he would've been given his own post already (like Dol Guldur or Minas Morgul) as opposed to being the Lt. of Barad-dur where Sauron was...Barad-dur was under Sauron's direct supervision (as in his physical presence was there).

No YOU missed the point. Let me break it down for you. I have stated that at the time the parley at the gate occurred, the Mouth was 2nd in command. Who commanded Dol Guldur or Minas Morgul before this point is totally irrelevant.

Treebeard as well as any other character in the story (though least of all Gandalf) is just that - a character - and not Tolkien himself, the author.

Your whole argument about whether the Mouth's comments were based on his own viewpoint of what was to happen is because you have already decided that he is not to be 2nd in command. Bottom line is that there is reference in the text that he was to be 2nd in command and there is no contradiction in Tolkien's writings to state otherwise.
Your counterpoint is therefore only based on your own opinions.

Surely no messenger would be second in command.

Ever heard of Rudolf Hess, 2nd in command to Hitler, flew to Scotland as a messenger?

Come to think of it what was Aragorn doing at the gate. On the surface he was there to relay a message to Sauron was he not? And he's 1st in command...

If simply being stated to be "Sauron's lieutenant" makes the Mouth of Sauron second in command, so too is Khamul - this can't be right, for Khamul is "second to the Chief," "the Second Chief" for there is one who outranks him.

Not true since nowhere does it state that Khamul is still a lieutenant at this time. He was lieutenant in Dol Guldur prior to the events in LOTR taking place. This is irrelevant as to what would have happened after.

Does this not show the Mouth's big head? It clearly does.

No, it shows that the Mouth thinks being a spokesman for a godlike entity is of greater worth than being king of a kingdom that he believes is about to be destroyed.
From his viewpoint its hard to argue with him.
Even were he bigheaded it does not change the fact that Tolkien WROTE that he was to be Sauron's lieutenant in Isengard and NEVER contradicted that.

Sauron can place his will behind them...instruct them to do something. That quote does not mean that the Nazgul have no battle commanding authority at all.

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

In summary the text states that the Mouth is to be Sauron's lieutenant and hold sway over the tribute realms and nowhere does Tolkien counter this.

Your comments about the nature of the Nazgul and whether the Mouth was a braggart are solely based on your opinion and therefore cannot contradict something that Tolkien wrote in LOTR.

Legolas

10-15-2003, 07:12 AM

I'll go past some of your other arguments to say simply say this, the main point:

Even were he bigheaded it does not change the fact that Tolkien WROTE that he was to be Sauron's lieutenant in Isengard and NEVER contradicted that.

Your comments about the nature of the Nazgul and whether the Mouth was a braggart are solely based on your opinion and therefore cannot contradict something that Tolkien wrote in LOTR.

Tolkien [/b]does not say this[/b], nor would Khamul suddenly stop being Sauron's lt., nor would being simply his lt. make anyone second in command,

Come to think of it what was Aragorn doing at the gate. On the surface he was there to relay a message to Sauron was he not? And he's 1st in command...

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

No YOU missed the point. Let me break it down for you. I have stated that at the time the parley at the gate occurred, the Mouth was 2nd in command. Who commanded Dol Guldur or Minas Morgul before this point is totally irrelevant.

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

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

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

[ October 15, 2003: Message edited by: Legolas ]

Gwaihir the Windlord

10-16-2003, 03:24 AM

Actually, I think I'll do the same. May I first state that I am entirely in agreeance with Legolas here.

Your comments about the nature of the Nazgul and whether the Mouth was a braggart are solely based on your opinion and therefore cannot contradict something that Tolkien wrote in LOTR.
No, it shows that the Mouth thinks being a spokesman for a godlike entity is of greater worth than being king of a kingdom that he believes is about to be destroyed.
That stood out to me rather painfully, I'm afraid. Tolkien actually 'wrote in LOTR' this:
'They would be his servants, and he their tyrant...'
Whether or not this would be the case, the Mouth thought it would be.

Eurytus

10-16-2003, 04:01 AM

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

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

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

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

When did Khamul stop ruling Dol Guldur? It's totally not irrelevant. If Sauron trusted the Mouth as he trusted Khamul or the Witch-King and made him second in command, would he not have him further away ruling a fortress he wasn't physically present at? It is also relevant because Khamul is called "Sauron's lt." even though it is clear that the Witch-King outranks him - this is a clear indication that the title of "lieutenant" does not mean that he (or anyone referred to as such) is second in command, nor is there only one lieutenant.
How wrong is the above? Answer, very wrong.
You like to keep harping on about Khamul being the lieutenant of Dol Guldur despite the fact that this situation was before the events in LOTR occurred and it is not possible to command a fortress when you are not even there.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Maéglin

10-16-2003, 05:09 AM

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

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

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

Eurytus

10-16-2003, 06:48 AM

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

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

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

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

Maéglin

10-16-2003, 07:40 PM

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

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

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

Legolas

10-16-2003, 10:06 PM

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

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

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

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

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

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

And most of all

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

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

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

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

Sauron himself fits that very description.

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

Eurytus

10-17-2003, 01:04 AM

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

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

Khamul is called "Sauron's lt." even though it is clear that the Witch-King outranks him - this is a clear indication that the title of "lieutenant" does not mean that he (or anyone referred to as such) is second in command, nor is there only one lieutenant.
I actually did not ignore this point, I addressed it several times but for whatever reason you seem to take no notice of this. It would be more accurate were you to say Khamul WAS Sauron's lieutenant. At the time of LOTR there is no indication that he remained so. Remember he dwelt at Dol Guldur as Sauron's lieutenant. When he left Dol Guldur there is no indication that he kept the lieutenant role, and no reason to do so.

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

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

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

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

And most of all
quote:

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

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

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

Sauron himself fits that very description.

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

Legolas

10-17-2003, 06:43 AM

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

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

About Khmaul:

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

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

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

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

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

Eurytus

10-17-2003, 07:00 AM

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

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

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

Legolas

10-17-2003, 10:53 AM

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Eurytus

10-20-2003, 01:05 AM

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

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

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

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

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

Maéglin

10-20-2003, 02:16 AM

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

Eurytus

10-20-2003, 03:27 AM

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

Maéglin

10-20-2003, 03:54 AM

No.. your belief is wrong. The exact quote is
One of them's in charge at the Tower now. It does not even hint at any disturbance that you are assuming. This particular Nazgul must have been present at the Black gate but so what? He was still in charge. The Witch king was in charge of Minas Morgul and he went off to war to the Pelennor field did he not?

Eurytus

10-20-2003, 04:45 AM

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

Estelyn Telcontar

10-20-2003, 09:58 AM

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

Eurytus

10-21-2003, 02:11 AM

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

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

Telchar

10-21-2003, 06:39 AM

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

I do however wonder at the fact that none of you have grasped at this quote from the last pages of The Black Gate Opens where Merry thinks to himself:
‘If only I could smite that foul Messenger with it, then almost I should draw level with old Merry. Well, I’ll smite some of this beastly brood before the end. I wish I could see cool sunlight and green grass again!’

The word almost being my point...

Cheers T

Eurytus

10-21-2003, 07:17 AM

The word almost being my point...

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

the phantom

10-21-2003, 08:54 AM

‘If only I could smite that foul Messenger with it, then almost I should draw level with old Merry. Well, I’ll smite some of this beastly brood before the end. I wish I could see cool sunlight and green grass again!’
Actually, that quote may not mean anything to the 2nd in command debate.

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

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

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

The Saucepan Man

10-21-2003, 10:38 AM

The word almost being my point...

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

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

The Squatter of Amon Rûdh

10-21-2003, 11:02 AM

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

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

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

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

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

Rumil

10-21-2003, 04:59 PM

Evening all,

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

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

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

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

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

The Squatter of Amon Rûdh

10-22-2003, 10:22 AM

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

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

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

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

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