I seem to recall there being an earlier thread which tried to do the same thing. Couldn't find it though.
I am with
Mister U and
Child on this issue. It is impossible to come up with a neat and logical heirarchy of power when we are dealing with such a range of characters with varying types of power in a world such as Middle-earth.
Elempi, you say that you are looking at all aspects of power within each individual and each group. But different types of power will prove the most decisive in different situations. It was said that there was power, of a kind, within the Shire. Hobbits excel, more than most other characters, at hiding themselves away when they do not wish to be seen and in feats of great endurance. It was these abilities that enabled Frodo and Sam to destroy the Ring and save Middle-earth. So they were very powerful in that situation, moreso than Sauron since they defeated him, yet they would not fare well in a one-on-one with him. Saruman had great powers of persuasion and could corrupt nations and control vast armies, yet he was felled by the lowly Wormtongue. The power of Men was in their ability to resist the inevitability of the Music of the Ainur and embrace change, making them more powerful in may ways than Elves, yet Elves were, in general terms, their superiors in physical prowess and spiritual fortitude. The Witch King, particularly at the Siege of Minas Tirith, was one of the most powerful beings of his Age in many ways, and yet he had a fatal weakness which was exploited (unwittingly) to great effect by a mere Hobbit and a shieldmaiden. Turin was a powerful warrior and yet, in consequence of Morgoth's curse, everything that he tried to achieve turned to ruin. His powers were restricted by his circumstances.
And I just don't think that you can measure these varying types and degrees of power against each other in order to give each character a "power" rating. Whether they are more powerful, in absoute terms, than another character depends upon the circumstances of any given situation.
And then there is the problem of the nature of the information that we have to work from. You place the Dragons above Sauron. Sauron was, however, a Maia, whereas we have no conclusive indication as to the nature of Dragons. They may have been Maiar spirits trapped within the bodies of great beasts, but they may also have been great beasts raised to a higher level. Either way, it is impossible to say whether they are of a higher order than a "senior" Maia like Sauron. Instinctively, I would say not. Balrogs are another example. Depending upon the source, they were either incredibly powerful Maiar, limited in number, or they were lesser Maiar, great in number and little more powerful than the greatest Orc captains. You place them below the Witch-King. On one analysis, I would agree with you. On another, I would not.
Similarly, the relative power of a being depends upon the point in time that we are considering and the circumstances then prevailing. As others have pointed out, the powers of both Morgoth and Sauron waned over time. Saruman and Gandalf (and indeed all of the Istari) were greater Maiar and so incredibly powerful in their "natural" state. And yet, as the Istari, their powers were limited and they could be vulnerable to the lowliest of blows, as Saruman's death shows.
But, ultimately, I think that
Child has it right, when she says:
Quote:
|
... the whole idea of making such a list runs counter to the message and spirit of Tolkien.
|
It is in the nature of Middle-earth that an individual's natural power is of less importance than the circumtances in which that character finds himself and, more significantly, his ability and strength of will to achieve his aims. In that regard, Frodo was infinately more powerful than, say, Boromir. And Turin, too. One of Tolkien's central themes, and one which runs through his writings, most particularly
The Hobbit and
LotR, is the ennoblement of the humble or, in other words, the fortitude of the least powerful to overcome the vast "powers" arrayed against them, and to prevail.