The Limitations of the Istari

[Nikkolas]

So if Saruman had faced the Balrog of Moria he wouldn't have been able to defeat it like Gandalf did? Seems kinda odd since I always thought he was the strongest of the istari.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Nikkolas

So if Saruman had faced the Balrog of Moria he wouldn't have been able to defeat it like Gandalf did? Seems kinda odd since I always thought he was the strongest of the istari.

Saruman was said to be the "eldest", and the "head of the Order", but it is said in UT that Círdan surrendered Narya to Gandalf because he

....divined in him the greatest spirit and the wisest...

Saruman, as the head, had the most authority, derived from the Valar, and thus had power over the others, as long as he remained the White.

As for Saruman versus the Balrog, I can't say who the victor would have been for certain, but Saruman's line of attack would almost surely have been different than Gandalf's in that situation.

[radagastly]

Originally posted by Nikkolas:

So if Saruman had faced the Balrog of Moria he wouldn't have been able to defeat it like Gandalf did? Seems kinda odd since I always thought he was the strongest of the istari.

I suspect that if Saruman looked the Balrog in the face at the Bridge of Khazad-dum and said, with his voice, "You cannot pass!," the Balrog would have believed him and listened. He probably would have lost a hand-to-hand fight though.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

It's entirely possible, indeed likely in the context of admittedly post-LR writings like Melkor/Morgoth, that as Saruman moved down the path of 'evil' (that is, selfish coercion), he expended his native power, so that as with Morgoth and Sauron much of his power had passed out of him into the apparatus of machines and Orcs that formed, in aggregate, his "power."

It might be argued that, as a corollary to the inability of Evil to create or make that which is new, it's also not possible for evil to augment its own power; all it can do is transmute it. So as Melkor of the beginning = Morgoth + the Melkor-element in all of Arda + his slaves and soldiers and creatures, and Sauron of the beginning = (later) Sauron + the Ring + his slaves, so Curunir who got off the boat = Saruman, in his own person, + his orcs and half-orcs and devices. The "Power of Saruman" is no greater than it ever was, and the inherent power in his humanoid frame is accordingly become far less, as the greater part of his aggregate power is now external to him.

Gandalf, by contrast, has never expended any of his native power to control or rule anybody; it could be said that his power actually "grew" in that he was able to persuade the Free Peoples to join their power to him, without spending himself in coercing them or asserting 'lordship.'

[radagastly]

Originally posted by William Cloud Hicklin:

Gandalf, by contrast, has never expended any of his native power to control or rule anybody; it could be said that his power actually "grew" in that he was able to persuade the Free Peoples to join their power to him, without spending himself in coercing them or asserting 'lordship.'

This implies an interesting contrast between Gandalf and Saruman. Saruman's power (in part, of course) lay in the power of his voice to persuade others to his will. So persuading people depleted Saruman, but the same act enhanced Gandalf. I'm wondering, what are the implications of this difference?

What we see of Saruman's power at work seems to indicate that his powers of persuasion genuinely affect the hearts and minds of those under it's spell. It does not simply bend their actions to his will regardless of their own will or desire. It makes people want to believe him. That does not seem fundamentally different than Gandalf's ability to "spin" circumstances to persuade people. So what is the difference between the two? Motive? The plans of Eru?

Just some thoughts to ponder . . .

[William Cloud Hicklin]

I wouldn't put it that way. Saruman's Voice seems, after all, to be the one aspect of his abilities he retained, even after his capacity to do "wizardry" was taken from him. Arguably it was already all he had left by the time Gandalf, Theoden & Co confronted him, as Merry observed. I don't think that persuasion, even skillful persuasion, constitutes an exercise of "power" in the same sense, or expended or diminished his power.

But mastery of Orcs requires more than mere persuasion.....

[Nikkolas]

Maybe the answer lay more in the last part of the quote Inziladun posted:
"but anyway I think [Saruman] has not got much grit, not much plain courage alone in a tight place without a lot of slaves and machines and things, if you know what I mean. Very different from old Gandalf."

Saruman might have powers similar to Gandalf but he doesn't have the nerve for it. When faced with the Ents or even the hypothetical Balrog, he'd much rather hide up safe somewhere and deploy his weapons and minions instead.

I mean, look at Morgoth. Diminished as he was, his fight with Fingolfin shows he still possessed amazing power by the reckoning of lesser beings. He could have easily faced down and defeated almost any opponent. However he preferred to stay deep in Angband where no foe could get to him.

Tolkien seem to like to portray the "Power Hungry" villains as ultimately being cowards. Actually, not sure if Sauron was one.