[Galadriel55]

I am not as learned in various lores as the other people who posted on this thread, but I want to give my two cents. While it's hard for me to differentiate between a "Germanic" and a "Norse" wizard, I can see the difference between that and a "Celtic" one. It's not so much about the correct terminology as being able to convey the right image.

Thinking of wizards' appearances I remembered one bit of Norse mythology that describes Odin - while he is a warrior, he would sometimes take the shape of an old man with a long beard leaning on a staff, wearing a big hat and a cloak. Sounds familiar? And though one of his aspects is concerned with magic (my memory is a bit hazy here) I don't recall him doing that magic through the influence of nature (ie the elements) - but again, I can't be sure about that last point.

There are two ways to do magic/miracles/whatever you want to call it. You could do it with the nature, or against the nature. An example of "with" would be Sam asking for light and water in Mordor and - surprise - they found water and it becomes light. It's as if someone actually influences the nature. An example of "against" would be Gandalf setting the place on fire to scare off wargs and werewolves near Moria. It's less of an act through the means of nature and more of an act independent of nature.

Sometimes it's hard to draw a clear line between the two, but at any rate Gandalf, when doing "magic", tends to go against nature. I would say that this is more Nordic than Celtic.

Then, there is an interesting aspect I noticed regarding the Russian translation of LOTR. There are words in Russian with a similar etymology as the word wizard - they also stem from the words wisdom, knowledge. But the translators did not use any of these words; they chose the non-Slavic term mag (which stems from the same roots as magic). Now to put in a word for the Slavic "wizards" - they tend to do magic with nature (so are closer in this sense to Celtic wizards than to Norse ones). On the other hand, mag is associated more with magic against nature. I know that the translators are not Tolkien, but in my opinion this shows very much what sort of wizard they believed Gandalf to be.


However, the division of Norse/Germanic/Celtic is not really the point. The question is about how and why Gandalf changes.

As for his changes in TH, I agree with what Legate has said - ie that how you act depends on where and when. But also I think that the mood of the entire book becomes more grave at that point. Well, the change begins a bit earlier, but the point is that overall the Mountain chapters are much graver than An Unexpected Party. Bilbo gains some wisdom and maturity, the Dwarves get an aspect of seriousness and a passionate longing for their home in addition to their earlier depiction, the "adventure" becomes much more dangerous and complex than a hobbit-and-dwarf walking party... So just as everything changes, so does Gandalf's personality.

But I think it is not until LOTR that his real wisdom and power shine through. In TH, even at the end, he is still more of a comical-wizard, "conjuring cheap tricks". In LOTR, while he still does some of that "magic", his greater power is not is his little tricks. They seem petty compared to the power of his will and thought. But he is just that - will and wisdom clothed in a body. When he becomes Gandalf the White, it is as if he is given special permission to act, in addition to what he had as Gandalf the Grey. Not that he did not act before, but those were more passive actions, in a sense.

So Gandalf just gains and gains as he goes along, and we gain information about him as we go along (in book terms). Doesn't really lose anything, but some aspects are merely overshadowed.