Mouth of Sauron? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Kyranger · 11-25-2010, 06:46 PM

Alright I am doing this by memory, so tell me if I get something wrong. Aragorn said at Parth Galen that Sauron did not use his right name or allowed it to be spoken, so why did the Mouth of Sauron introduce himself with that name? And also I think that he even referred to his master as Sauron the Great, or something like that anyway. So what do you guys think? Was it just a slip up or what?

Ibrîniðilpathânezel · 11-25-2010, 07:05 PM

Sauron — which means "the abhorred" — isn't his "right name." From various indications in the HoME books, it was originally Mairon or Aulendil. Just as Morgoth was not Melkor's original name, but one applied to him by his enemies, Sauron doubtless didn't consider himself abhorrent, and though he might not have clung to a name like Aulendil — "friend of Aulë" — he might still think of himself as Mairon, which I believe is derived from the "beautiful" meaning of "Maia."

Puddleglum · 11-25-2010, 07:14 PM

Maybe, but the reference to Aragorn is in the context where Gimli has just said "S is for Sauron", to which Aragorn replies "Sauron does not permit his name to be spoken." It is clear from the context that it is the name "Sauron" specifically that Sauron does not permit to be spelled or spoken. Which still leaves the question wide open.

I'd guess it was an oversight on Tolkien's part (one of few) - unless we hypothesize that the Mouth was so high in Sauron's favor that he was allowed to use the name. In that case we could say that Aragorn's information was not 100% correct (perhaps he had only before encountered servants of Sauron that were not permitted to speak/write the name).

Legate of Amon Lanc · 11-25-2010, 07:27 PM

There has been a long-ish thread about this some time ago. I believe it was even possibly started by me

Oh yes, and it was - here it is: http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=13616

Inziladun · 11-25-2010, 07:36 PM

My position is that Sauron did not allow his servants to use any personal name for him under normal circumstances, probably due to a desire to be as impersonal to his minions as possible, befitting the "king and god" status he wanted to have with them.
When dealing with his enemies, however, the use of a name was required. The Mouth wasn't the first one to do it apparently, either.

Quote:

'Then about a year ago a messenger came to Dáin, but not from Moria--from Mordor: a horseman in the night, who called Dáin to his gate. The Lord Sauron the Great, so he said, wished for our friendship.'

That was Glóin speaking to the Council of Elrond.

So, when Sauron dealt with those he didn't command, he had to use a name, and I think 'the abhorred' was probably not something he particularly hated; on the contrary, he would likely have been proud of it.

Nerwen · 11-26-2010, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Puddleglum

I'd guess it was an oversight on Tolkien's part (one of few) - unless we hypothesize that the Mouth was so high in Sauron's favor that he was allowed to use the name. In that case we could say that Aragorn's information was not 100% correct (perhaps he had only before encountered servants of Sauron that were not permitted to speak/write the name).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inziladun

My position is that Sauron did not allow his servants to use any personal name for him under normal circumstances, probably due to a desire to be as impersonal to his minions as possible, befitting the "king and god" status he wanted to have with them. When dealing with his enemies, however, the use of a name was required.

Also, there's the matter of context: the three were hurriedly trying to work out the allegiance of the Orcs bearing the "S" insignia. Aragorn (and the author) might have thought it irrelevant to mention any such exceptions to the rule at that point.

Whatever the details of Mordorian etiquette, I don't think this concept (that Sauron's servants avoid using his actual name) is just a "freak", brought up in that one chapter and then forgotten. The various Mordor Orcs we meet do go out of their way not to say it, instead substituting "The Great Eye", "Him" etc. (Gollum, who also talks like this, can be presumed to have picked up the habit in Mordor.) It's true that the good characters aren't too keen on using Sauron's name either– there's obviously some kind of "speak of the devil" notion in play in Middle-earth– but they're not nearly so consistent about it.

Galin · 11-27-2010, 01:43 PM

Yes I agree with Inziladun and Nerwen.

In my opinion Aragorn need not mean 'not in any circumstance whatsoever'; he was speaking generally and in reaction to tokens on orc-gear, and is correct enough without adding something like 'but there may be some instances in which Sauron might allow...'

I think this is just realistic conversation given the situation.

Morthoron · 11-27-2010, 06:49 PM

Well, the Mouth of Sauron couldn't bloody well have a conversation like...

MoS: I am the Mouth of...ahem.

Gandalf: Beg pardon? The Mouth? The Mouth of whom?

MoS: You know.

Aragorn: Ummm...I am afraid we don't.

MoS: Oh come on! Him -- you know -- HIM!

Gandalf: You are not being very clear.

MoS: You know, the Big Guy.

Aragorn: Is he referring to a Troll?

Gimli: Could be. Troll's need someone to speak for them.

Legolas: Aye, they are very inarticulate.

MoS: No, no, no! I am the Mouth of Sssssss...of Sssss...oh damn!

Gandalf: Sssss?

Pippin: Sam!

Gimli: No! What would a Hobbit need with another mouth? They have one too many already!

Gandalf: This is getting us nowhere. What we need is someone who can speak for Sauron.

Pippin: Why, can't he speak for himself?

MoS: Sighs...

Khazad-dûm · 12-10-2010, 02:47 PM

Perhaps at the time when Aragorn said 'Neither does he use his right name, nor permit it to be spelt or spoken...' at the time Sauron was still building his power and armies trying to be as secret as possible. Then by the time they speak with the Mouth of Sauron (third book) its already obvious that it's him so why pretend it's not.

Here's something out of the Encyclopedia of Arda that I base my statement on.

"One possible reason for Aragorn's error is that his information is out of date. For most of the Third Age, Sauron had been building his strength, in secret, at Dol Guldur. Given his need to remain hidden, it's natural that he would ban his servants from using his real name. Any detailed information that Aragorn had about him and his ways would date back to Gandalf's spying expeditions in this period."

11-25-2010, 06:46 PM	#1
Kyranger Wight Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 168	Mouth of Sauron? Alright I am doing this by memory, so tell me if I get something wrong. Aragorn said at Parth Galen that Sauron did not use his right name or allowed it to be spoken, so why did the Mouth of Sauron introduce himself with that name? And also I think that he even referred to his master as Sauron the Great, or something like that anyway. So what do you guys think? Was it just a slip up or what?

11-25-2010, 07:05 PM	#2
Ibrîniðilpathânezel Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Back on the Helcaraxe Posts: 743	Sauron — which means "the abhorred" — isn't his "right name." From various indications in the HoME books, it was originally Mairon or Aulendil. Just as Morgoth was not Melkor's original name, but one applied to him by his enemies, Sauron doubtless didn't consider himself abhorrent, and though he might not have clung to a name like Aulendil — "friend of Aulë" — he might still think of himself as Mairon, which I believe is derived from the "beautiful" meaning of "Maia." __________________ Call me Ibrin (or Ibri) :) Originality is the one thing that unoriginal minds cannot feel the use of. — John Stewart Mill

11-25-2010, 07:27 PM	#4
Legate of Amon Lanc A Voice That Gainsayeth Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: In that far land beyond the Sea Posts: 7,606	There has been a long-ish thread about this some time ago. I believe it was even possibly started by me Oh yes, and it was - here it is: http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=13616 __________________ "Should the story say 'he ate bread,' the dramatic producer can only show 'a piece of bread' according to his taste or fancy, but the hearer of the story will think of bread in general and picture it in some form of his own." -On Fairy-Stories

11-27-2010, 01:43 PM	#7
Galin Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 1,031	Yes I agree with Inziladun and Nerwen. In my opinion Aragorn need not mean 'not in any circumstance whatsoever'; he was speaking generally and in reaction to tokens on orc-gear, and is correct enough without adding something like 'but there may be some instances in which Sauron might allow...' I think this is just realistic conversation given the situation. Last edited by Galin; 12-01-2010 at 08:09 AM.

11-27-2010, 06:49 PM	#8
Morthoron Curmudgeonly Wordwraith Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Ensconced in curmudgeonly pursuits Posts: 2,528	Well, the Mouth of Sauron couldn't bloody well have a conversation like... MoS: I am the Mouth of...ahem. Gandalf: Beg pardon? The Mouth? The Mouth of whom? MoS: You know. Aragorn: Ummm...I am afraid we don't. MoS: Oh come on! Him -- you know -- HIM! Gandalf: You are not being very clear. MoS: You know, the Big Guy. Aragorn: Is he referring to a Troll? Gimli: Could be. Troll's need someone to speak for them. Legolas: Aye, they are very inarticulate. MoS: No, no, no! I am the Mouth of Sssssss...of Sssss...oh damn! Gandalf: Sssss? Pippin: Sam! Gimli: No! What would a Hobbit need with another mouth? They have one too many already! Gandalf: This is getting us nowhere. What we need is someone who can speak for Sauron. Pippin: Why, can't he speak for himself? MoS: Sighs... __________________ And your little sister's immaculate virginity wings away on the bony shoulders of a young horse named George who stole surreptitiously into her geography revision.

11-25-2010, 07:14 PM	#3
Puddleglum Wight Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 145	Maybe, but the reference to Aragorn is in the context where Gimli has just said "S is for Sauron", to which Aragorn replies "Sauron does not permit his name to be spoken." It is clear from the context that it is the name "Sauron" specifically that Sauron does not permit to be spelled or spoken. Which still leaves the question wide open. I'd guess it was an oversight on Tolkien's part (one of few) - unless we hypothesize that the Mouth was so high in Sauron's favor that he was allowed to use the name. In that case we could say that Aragorn's information was not 100% correct (perhaps he had only before encountered servants of Sauron that were not permitted to speak/write the name).

12-10-2010, 02:47 PM	#9
Khazad-dûm Pile O'Bones Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Posts: 12	Lmao ^ Perhaps at the time when Aragorn said 'Neither does he use his right name, nor permit it to be spelt or spoken...' at the time Sauron was still building his power and armies trying to be as secret as possible. Then by the time they speak with the Mouth of Sauron (third book) its already obvious that it's him so why pretend it's not. Here's something out of the Encyclopedia of Arda that I base my statement on. "One possible reason for Aragorn's error is that his information is out of date. For most of the Third Age, Sauron had been building his strength, in secret, at Dol Guldur. Given his need to remain hidden, it's natural that he would ban his servants from using his real name. Any detailed information that Aragorn had about him and his ways would date back to Gandalf's spying expeditions in this period."