Sauron vs. Your Mama - A Discussion of Power in Middle-earth

[obloquy]

We might also extend this to the Nazgul. Tolkien said that their power was primarily in the fear that they projected, so if a character such as Eowyn has in her spirit the power to resist that fear, she may be able to overcome the power of the Nazgul and thus penetrate that barrier created by it.

Maybe. On the other hand, the Dagger of Westernesse may have done the whole job, overcoming completely the protective power of the Witch-King's ring. This idea that a power can be "broken" permanently though the body is not yet slain fits with Saruman's death. It explains why he would ultimately die to a weak creature like Grima, using no supernatural weapon. He maintained the power of his voice, that power that was peculiarly his, but he was otherwise nothing more than his physical presence.

[The 1,000 Reader]

Originally Posted by obloquy

Maybe. On the other hand, the Dagger of Westernesse may have done the whole job, overcoming completely the protective power of the Witch-King's ring. This idea that a power can be "broken" permanently though the body is not yet slain fits with Saruman's death. It explains why he would ultimately die to a weak creature like Grima, using no supernatural weapon. He maintained the power of his voice, that power that was peculiarly his, but he was otherwise nothing more than his physical presence.

This makes sense. It even carries over to Sauron's possible deaths with the one ring. Either somebody could force his will out of it (master it) or they could simply destroy it, killing him regardless.

As for power in Middle-Earth, this is not like Dragonball Z where the highest power automatically wins. Tulkas whooped Melkor good, Sauron never beat anyone, Thingol got owned by dwarves, Sam beat Shelob, upgraded Gandalf was grim/serious about a confrontation with the Witch-King, Bard killed Smaug, etc. We honestly have no idea who could win.

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by The 1,000 Reader

"And forth went Morgoth, and he was halted by the elves. Then went Sauron, who was stopped by a dog and then aged men. Finally, there came the Witch-King, who destroyed Arnor, but nobody seems to remember that."

-A History of Villains

Is that actually a published book? Whoever wrote it obviously has no clue what he's talking about.

Morgoth was originally more powerful than all the other Valar combined. He was later diminished and defeated, as all enemies eventually were in Middle-earth, but that does not mean he was not the greatest being Middle-earth had ever seen. Huan was a very powerful creature, possibly Maiarin, with destiny on his side. Gil-galad, Elendil, and Isildur and their armies are not "aged men." Sauron had some bad luck with his opponents, but he was unequivocally the most powerful of Melkor's servants. The Witch-King, on the other hand, was nothing before being enslaved by Sauron, and even then he fled twice from Glorfindel. He didn't even make Gandalf flinch in their encounter, and a little Rohan woman told him to kiss off. He was then obliterated by an ancient dagger held by a Hobbit.

While I'm at it, I may as well address some of your post. First, there's no reason to believe dragons had any real spiritual power. Glaurung might be an exception, but he also might have just benefited from Morgoth exerting influence at the time of his havoc-wreaking. Second, Tulkas captured Morgoth after he had been significantly weakened. More than creating an exception to my explanation above, this gives us a better concept of Tulkas' true strength. Third, Shelob is just a distant relative to Ungoliante, not Ungoliante herself. The latter was incredibly powerful, the former was a big fat spider. Not only that, but Sting was a pretty excellent little blade, imbued with an ancient power.

And finally for good measure, I'll reiterate that Gandalf never broke a sweat in front of the Witch-King, and nobody's ever been able to produce any piece of text or any compelling argument to indicate otherwise, whereas everything Tolkien ever wrote about Gandalf supports that he was far superior to the Nerd-King.

[The 1,000 Reader]

Originally Posted by obloquy

Morgoth was originally more powerful than all the other Valar combined. He was later diminished and defeated, as all enemies eventually were in Middle-earth, but that does not mean he was not the greatest being Middle-earth had ever seen.

But he was still defeated, which was my point about stated "power levels" not telling us who'll win.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Huan was a very powerful creature, possibly Maiarin, with destiny on his side.

Dude, in the end Huan was a dog, and Sauron lost the fight and the island by his own stupidity. I'm mocking Sauron in my sig, and I feel secure in saying that many fans agree that Sauron could have handled the whole thing much better. Just because the mightest wolf will kill him doesn't mean that he's invincible until that wolf shows up.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Gil-galad, Elendil, and Isildur and their armies are not "aged men."

If I recall, Elendil was old even for a Numenorean. Also, I believe it was mentioned somewhere that Gil-Galad paled in comparison to the High-elf kings of the First Age. Also, my sig is a joke. Don't take it seriously.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Sauron had some bad luck with his opponents, but he was unequivocally the most powerful of Melkor's servants.

It becomes hard to believe that, or to fear the strength of Morgoth's servants, if the most powerful servant failed miserably time and time again. Honestly, would you think a boxer who lost far more often than he won was one of the best?

Originally Posted by obloquy

The Witch-King, on the other hand, was nothing before being enslaved by Sauron

However, he did take out Arnor and at the very least led his forces. In LOTR, he's the closest we come to an active enemy from Mordor. Sauron's just sitting in his tower the whole time.

Originally Posted by obloquy

and even then he fled twice from Glorfindel.

The first time, the realm of Angmar was doomed and there was nothing left to save, and he also was likely going to be assaulted by the remaining forces of Gondor's army, which would be annoying to deal with while fighting Glorfindel. Also, the second time he was pursuing the Ring, and a fight with Glorfindel could have allowed Frodo to escape to Rivendell.

Originally Posted by obloquy

He didn't even make Gandalf flinch in their encounter,

He didn't flinch either.

Originally Posted by obloquy

and a little Rohan woman told him to kiss off.

He told that to Gandalf also. Feanor made a vow against Eru, yet we all know that Eru is far mighter than any other character.

Originally Posted by obloquy

He was then obliterated by an ancient dagger held by a Hobbit.

Hobbits are very stealthy creatures, the blade was packing extremely powerful magic made specifically to kill the Witch-King, and Eyown would have died if it weren't for that. Also, in the books, there was no one-liner before stabbing: Eyown made haste in her move, so we don't know if he still could have done something, or if he was paralyzed like in the movie.

Originally Posted by obloquy

While I'm at it, I may as well address some of your post. First, there's no reason to believe dragons had any real spiritual power. Glaurung might be an exception, but he also might have just benefited from Morgoth exerting influence at the time of his havoc-wreaking.

I'm not talking about spiritual power. It's a stinkin' dragon. Those things are giant, powerful, breathe potent blasts of fire and some can even fly. They don't need spiritual power to be tough. Turin could have all the spirit he wanted, but if Glarung bit his head off he'd be dead.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Second, Tulkas captured Morgoth after he had been significantly weakened.

In the majority of discussions on the subject (even here) I've seen, the majority of the poster replies always state that Morgoth's Ring happened after that, and since the details didn't go any deeper, I was confused about that. At least that's cleared up. I do think that Morgoth's former place of mightest is deserved if that happened after Morgoth's Ring, yet after he made his ring his rank is lost.

Originally Posted by obloquy

More than creating an exception to my explanation above, this gives us a better concept of Tulkas' true strength.

Well, not really. He managed to take out an exhausted Morgoth, so we don't know if that was with every ounce of his strength and skill.

Originally Posted by obloquy

Third, Shelob is just a distant relative to Ungoliante, not Ungoliante herself. The latter was incredibly powerful, the former was a big fat spider. Not only that, but Sting was a pretty excellent little blade, imbued with an ancient power.

I know that, but the fact still stands that a tired and starving hobbit from the Shire took on such a large and powerful beast in combat and won. If "initial stats" were to decide the fight, then Sam would likely have lost.

Originally Posted by obloquy

And finally for good measure, I'll reiterate that Gandalf never broke a sweat in front of the Witch-King,

The Witch-King didn't break a sweat either, in case you forgot.

Originally Posted by obloquy

and nobody's ever been able to produce any piece of text or any compelling argument to indicate otherwise, whereas everything Tolkien ever wrote about Gandalf supports that he was far superior to the Nerd-King.

That's a load of bull. Essex alone has produced enough texts to show that Gandalf wouldn't have won with ease, and your opinion is drastically effecting what you see as a "compelling arguement." I still remember you manipulating a quote from the books in an attempt to mislead me a year ago, so forgive me if your credibility is not so good in my view.

As a last comment, once again, that's low as heck as to insult my signature and call me stupid for it.

[Boromir88]

I disagree with this hole notion of Sauron being 'stupid.' Sauron never was a general, a leader, or a fighter, but in no ways does that make him stupid. Sauron was a brilliant tactician, deceiver, manipulator, and powerful enemy.

Have you forgotten that with words alone Sauron sent Numenor spiralling into chaos and destruction?

Have you forgotten that the Ring's will (which was Sauron's) was so powerful that no one had the strength to destroy it:

At the last moment the pressure of the Ring would reach its maximum - impossible, I should have said, for any one to resist...~Letter 246

The Ring was ultimately destroyed because of Eru's intervention. The Ring's power was so strong no one had the strength of will to destroy it.

Have you forgotten Sauron's brilliant strategy when it came to the War of the ring? His strongest enemy was Gondor, so it was Gondor who he would focus most of his strength on. What does Sauron do, fill Denethor's mind with dread and despair sending Gondor's ruler to madness. To prevent other 'outside help' coming to Gondor's aid and prevent the 'great alliance' that was gathered against him at the end of the Second Age; he had effectively tied up all of Gondor's possible allies.

Rohan was Gondor's strongest ally, he corrupts Saruman and gets Saruman to keep Rohan busy. Saruman (with Grima's help) corrupts Theoden, sends Rohan to it's near destruction...It's not Sauron's fault Saruman couldn't get the job done and do what he was supposed to.

From Dol Guldur Sauron attacks Mirkwood, keeping them occupied.

He sends an Easterling force to Dale and Erebor to keep the Dwarves and men there occupied.

Orcs from Moria assault Lorien to keep them occupied.

Sauron's strategy was a brilliant one. He isolated his strongest enemy (Gondor) from outside help and kept Gondor's allies from uniting together into a strong alliance. The only wrinkle in the plan was Saruman was unable to deal with Rohan...which isn't Sauron's fault.

So, as obloquy correctly observes, it's not Sauron was stupid, he was unlucky. Sauron never was a fighter, he never was a general, that we know...that does not mean he was stupid. Looking from a military perspective what he did during the War of the Ring was a brilliant strategy.

You have to recognize the extraordinary circumstances that took place to cause Sauron's defeat. The Ring's destruction didn't happen because Sauron was a fool, no it happened because of intervention by Eru. As constantly made clear there was no hope of a military overthrow of Sauron...so Sauron could of spent as many troops as he needed to. Yet he still devised a tactical plan that isolated his strongest enemy and prevented the Free Peoples from making this 'grand alliance.'

I would also have to say Sauron was a very powerful individual considering this:

Three times Lorien had been assailed from Dol Guldur, but besides the valour of the elven people of that land, the power that dwelt there was too great for any to overcome, unless Sauron had come there himself.~Appendix B: Tale of Years, The Great Years.

Sauron obviously was powerful enough to overthrow the power that dwelt in Lorien. Which is no small feat considering Galadriel was the most powerful of the Noldor (save for Feanor).

[The 1,000 Reader]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I disagree with this hole notion of Sauron being 'stupid.' Sauron never was a general, a leader, or a fighter, but in no ways does that make him stupid. Sauron was a brilliant tactician, deceiver, manipulator, and powerful enemy.

However, there is the major topic of the fight with Huan, and often times he played right into the hands of others. While he did have some smarts, he also failed to use them in critical moments, which makes him a rather odd character.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Have you forgotten that with words alone Sauron sent Numenor spiralling into chaos and destruction?

I am aware, but Numenor appeared on a bad track without Sauron's help. In my opinion, he just sped up the process, putting himself in the way of danger and giving the elves and the survivors the right to place the blame on him, making himself a major target. If he sat idly by (say, didn't arrogantly proclaim himself king of the world) when Numenor fell, the survivors and the elves would be more depressed and broken in will.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Have you forgotten that the Ring's will (which was Sauron's) was so powerful that no one had the strength to destroy it:

I am aware of that also, but I don't see a will as his brain as well. It just seemed to be his desires.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

The Ring was ultimately destroyed because of Eru's intervention. The Ring's power was so strong no one had the strength of will to destroy it.

I know, but having power is not a sign of intelligence. He did have power, yes, but he made some awful blunders.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Have you forgotten Sauron's brilliant strategy when it came to the War of the ring? His strongest enemy was Gondor, so it was Gondor who he would focus most of his strength on.

I know of that, but he did not use enough strength. The Morgul host (even though Pippin did stir problems) was sent early, and Mordor certainly had enough power to crush Gondor whenever, yet he never lent it to the Witch-King or sent it out.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

What does Sauron do, fill Denethor's mind with dread and despair sending Gondor's ruler to madness.

I do admit, that was a good maneuver. However, that still doesn't cover up his poor choices.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

To prevent other 'outside help' coming to Gondor's aid and prevent the 'great alliance' that was gathered against him at the end of the Second Age; he had effectively tied up all of Gondor's possible allies.

True, but time itself was tying them up also. The elves were much weaker of will and wanted to be by themselves or to travel to the West. They were not as critical as they were in past times. As easily seen in LOTR, the time of men had come, and the elves were shadows of the world.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Rohan was Gondor's strongest ally, he corrupts Saruman and gets Saruman to keep Rohan busy. Saruman (with Grima's help) corrupts Theoden, sends Rohan to it's near destruction...It's not Sauron's fault Saruman couldn't get the job done and do what he was supposed to.

That is true, but Saruman did not have much time or freedom to prepare. The hosts of Dol Guldur could have been used to help instead of being thrown against the isolated Lothlorien.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

From Dol Guldur Sauron attacks Mirkwood, keeping them occupied.

Yes, but the elves were quite isolated and rather weak-willed in that time, and the hosts of Dul Guldur would have been better-used to assault the elves only if they took action to help man. Keeping the elves busy was not as important as it might have been in the First or Second Age.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

He sends an Easterling force to Dale and Erebor to keep the Dwarves and men there occupied.

I honestly don't recall that, but that does seem smart, seeing as how Erebor might be one of the few dwarven kingdoms not content to flee beneath their mountains, and Dale seems like it would quickly help Gondor.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Orcs from Moria assault Lorien to keep them occupied.

Well, like I said earlier, Lorien wasn't very interested in the world, so it wouldn't have taken that much attention to trouble them. The hosts that attacked Lorien may have been better off assisting the hosts that tried to do Saruman's work.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Sauron's strategy was a brilliant one. He isolated his strongest enemy (Gondor) from outside help and kept Gondor's allies from uniting together into a strong alliance. The only wrinkle in the plan was Saruman was unable to deal with Rohan...which isn't Sauron's fault.

Actually, more forces from Moria could have helped Saruman, and seeing as how it is implied that the Corsair forces could have won at the Pelenor, Rohan didn't turn out to be as mighty as it might have been.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

So, as obloquy correctly observes, it's not Sauron was stupid, he was unlucky. Sauron never was a fighter, he never was a general, that we know...that does not mean he was stupid.

I know that too. However, Sauron's brain failed him at the most critical of times over and over again, which seriously damages his image of being a wise and mighty foe.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Looking from a military perspective what he did during the War of the Ring was a brilliant strategy.

Not that brilliant, but some brain-power was used.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

You have to recognize the extraordinary circumstances that took place to cause Sauron's defeat The Ring's destruction didn't happen because Sauron was a fool, no it happened because of intervention by Eru. As constantly made clear there was no hope of a military overthrow of Sauron...so Sauron could of spent as many troops as he needed to. Yet he still devised a tactical plan that isolated his strongest enemy and prevented the Free Peoples from making this 'grand alliance.'

I know all of that. I am simply pointing out key flaws in his actions, and the key flaw in his plans was a sudden disinterest in locating the Ring once his wars began, as well as his severe arrogance as to the possibility of the Ring being destroyed. After Eru himself sank Numenor and split the world in two you'd think that at the very least he would have had some concern of divine intervention, even if it was a psychopath falling over. He also was dreadfully afraid of someone using the Ring against him, which is very confusing considering that his will would prevail over the weilder and they wouldn't be able to use its full force. Is it possible that he forgot its potency, could the Ring have been more easily mastered than one thought, or was this a plothole?

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Sauron obviously was powerful enough to overthrow the power that dwelt in Lorien. Which is no small feat considering Galadriel was the most powerful of the Noldor (save for Feanor).

I know that he was powerful, but his lack of brain-power was his major fault. While he could have caused Lothlorien to fall, he might have made a serious error or fail to use his power effectively, thereby causing him to fall instead.

Just because it could have happened, doesn't mean it would have happened.

[The Sixth Wizard]

Going back a bit to the original topic, what about Feanor? I doubt anyone in Middle Earth had a stronger will than he, but he was destroyed in the height of his glory by mere Balrogs .
As we hear, the will was not overthrown, but he was killed by phisycal means, namely a whip from another Balrog. If we go by the hypothesis that if you are strong in will you are inpregnable to physical hurt, how is this possible?

[Boromir88]

Very fascinating stuff obloquy. You talk about the barrow-blade and as Aragorn says with other 'blades' that strike the Witch-King:

A foot above the lower hem there was a slash. 'This was the stroke of Frodo's sword,' he said. 'The only hurt that it did to his enemy, I fear; for it is unharmed, but all blades perish that pierce that dreadful King. More deadly to him was the name of Elbereth.'~Flight to the Ford

Aragorn makes the point that shouting 'Elbereth' was more deadly to the Witch-King. Also:

Escaping a wound that would have been as deadly to him as the Mordor -knife to Frodo (as was proved at the end), he withdrew and hid for a while, out of doubt and fear both of Aragorn and especially of Frodo. But fear of Sauron , and the forces of Sauron's will was the stronger....
But above all the timid and terrified Bearer had resisted him, had dared to strike at him with an enchanted swords made by his own enemies long ago for his destruction. Narrowly it had missed him. How he had come by it - save in the barrows of Cardolan. Then he was in some way mightier than the barrow wight; and he called on Elbereth, a name of terror to the nazgul. He was then in league with the High Elves of the Havens.~The Readers Companion; The Marquette Letter

As Raynor discussed in past threads that the Witch-King judged Frodo to be a powerful foe. Frodo's spiritual power I don't think was near the Witch-King's but Frodo did have

The Barrow-blade
Calling on Elbereth (a name that one could say has spiritual power):

Out of the deeps of Ea she came to the aid of Manwe; for Melkor she knew from before the making of the Music and rejected him, and he hated her, and feared her more than all others whom Eru made...
Elbereth they name her, and they call upon her name out of the shadows of Middle-earth, and uplift it in song at the rising of the stars.~The Silmarillion: Valaquenta

So Frodo did possess dangerous and spiritually powerful weapons that caused the Witch-King to flee...and eventually the Barrow-blade overthrew the Witch-King's power.

We might also extend this to the Nazgul. Tolkien said that their power was primarily in the fear that they projected, so if a character such as Eowyn has in her spirit the power to resist that fear, she may be able to overcome the power of the Nazgul and thus penetrate that barrier created by it.~obloquy

Another interesting point; as when Frodo struck back at the Witch-King, part of the startlement was that Frodo actually summoned the courage to strike him; as the Marquette Letter points out 'the Bearer had resisted him; had dared to strike at him.' It defintely was a shock to the Witch-King that the power of his fear was overcome by Frodo. And I think we can say the same for Eowyn...as the Witch-King is described threateningly:

Out of the wreck rose the Black Rider, tall and threatening, towering above her...

But she's able to overcome this and drive her sword between 'crown and mantle.'

[CSteefel]

Originally Posted by The 1,000 Reader

As for power in Middle-Earth, this is not like Dragonball Z where the highest power automatically wins. Tulkas whooped Melkor good, Sauron never beat anyone, Thingol got owned by dwarves, Sam beat Shelob, upgraded Gandalf was grim/serious about a confrontation with the Witch-King, Bard killed Smaug, etc. We honestly have no idea who could win.

Pretty nice summary

[obloquy]

That's a load of bull. Essex alone has produced enough texts to show that Gandalf wouldn't have won with ease, and your opinion is drastically effecting what you see as a "compelling arguement." I still remember you manipulating a quote from the books in an attempt to mislead me a year ago, so forgive me if your credibility is not so good in my view.

Essex has provided exactly zero arguments for anything. His entire existence seems to be dedicated to declaring as annoyingly as possible that the weak can overcome the mighty, and yet his most cogent argument to that effect to date is some soccer game that happened decades ago. And please be more specific about this text I supposedly manipulated to deceive you.

As fine and comprehensive as Boromir's post is, Sauron doesn't need his help. Sauron was Morgoth's greatest servant, period. The Witch-King derived any power he ever had from Sauron: the servant is not greater than the master. Any criticism of Sauron's vicious record is ignorant Witch-King fanboy fantasy.

Anyway, I'm tired of repeating myself about things that any old chump can figure out with a little research in Tolkien's published writings. If you're only in this thread to fight with me about who is awesomer, please respond to my post in the movies forum.

[davem]

Unless I'm misunderstanding the original post, there seems to be an assumption that the physical forms of Gandalf & the Balrog (or The Witch King for that matter) are of the same nature. I don't think this can simply be assumed - Gandalf has a physical body not unlike that of the Children - it ages for one thing. The 'physicality' of the Balrog is of a different order - 'shadow & flame'. Obviously the Balrog has some degree of physicality - it can hold things, fall down chasms etc, but it doesn't seem to be an 'Incarnate' in the same sense as a Human or Elf. The Witch King is physically invisible (in the natural world at least) so his hroa is also fundamentally different to that of other incarnates.

Oh, & Shelob isn't a 'big fat spider' she is 'an evil thing in spider form' - which probably supports your argument in a way....

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by davem

Gandalf has a physical body not unlike that of the Children - it ages for one thing.

I agree (empahsis added):

Originally Posted by The Istari, Unfinished Tales

For with the consent of Eru they sent members of their own high order, but clad in bodies of as of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the fears and pains and weariness of earth, able to hunger and thirst and be slain; though because of their noble spirits they did not die, and aged only by the cares and labours of many long years.

Originally Posted by davem

Obviously the Balrog has some degree of physicality - it can hold things, fall down chasms etc, but it doesn't seem to be an 'Incarnate' in the same sense as a Human or Elf.

Ditto

Originally Posted by The White Rider, TTT

Thither I came at last, to the uttermost foundations of stone. He was with me still. His fire was quenched, but now he was a thing of slime, stronger than a strangling snake.

[Thenamir]

Allow me to digress away from pure Tolkiana for a moment to make a point that will hopefully steer (or drag) this thread back on-topic.

Many years ago in my ill-spent youth, I was acquainted with several friends who were avid Dungeons & Dragons players, though I myself never found the time to become proficient at it. One friend in particular had over time built up a mighty warrior character – strong, skilled, equipped with high-powered weaponry and armor, an extremely able fighter who was darn near invincible. The player was naturally proud and somewhat cocky about his avatar. Which goaded his fellow-players into trying to figure out a way of bringing his character down.

For one game a fellow-player generated a pair of very small characters, probably hobbits or something like, endowing almost their entire allotment of skill-points into speed and dexterity – minimal strength, minimal intelligence, and all of 1 hit-point – meaning a single touch from an opponent would kill them. At the appropriate moment, the fellow-player loosed these nearly-disposable characters upon Mr. High-and-mighty. To all appearances the fight looked to be over before it had begun.

What happened next nearly brings tears of laughter to my eyes even now. The little annoyance characters positioned themselves on opposite sides of the warrior. Their speed and dexterity was such that they made every evasion dice-roll whenever the warrior tried to slice one of them, but their positions made it impossible for him to try to attack them both at once. One would dodge, the other would attack. While the warrior was facing one of the hobbits, the other would use his speed and agility to come in and strike the warrior from behind. They only inflicted a tiny bit of damage with each hit, but they hit nearly every time they tried. The cocky player went from amused, to concerned, to frustrated, to livid as the throwaway hobbits slowly, gradually weakened and ultimately felled the mighty warrior in clean battle. And absolutely priceless was the look on his face as he stormed away from the table muttering “I can’t believe it! I just can’t believe it!”

I guess what I’m trying to point out here is that there is much more to sizing up a battle than the obvious accoutrements of size, strength and “spiritual power”. There are intangibles that are not always obvious to an outside observer. As has been said, it ain’t the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog. I think the Wise at the Council of Elrond realized that it was outwardly folly to send a pint-sized pastoral peasant into the enemy’s home court with a veritable homing-beacon hung around his neck, but we all know who won in the end. They realized that there were factors working on their side that didn't even enter into the mind of their enemy, and worked those factors to their advantage.

As far as Gandalf-vs-Witch-King is concerned, I think even Gandalf was unsure.

Originally Posted by FotR, Many Meetings

'There are many powers in the world, for good or for evil. Some are greater than I am. Against some I have not yet been measured. But my time is coming. The Morgul-lord and his Black Riders have come forth. War is preparing!'

It seems to me here that Gandalf is specifically saying that he knows the Morgul Lord is powerful, but does not yet know how he will measure up in a direct confrontation.

To say that Gandalf does not flinch when the confrontation finally occurs says more to me about Gandalf's resolve, not so much his confidence in victory. Gandalf knows he is where he needs to be, doing what he is required to do, and is calm in that knowledge, whatever the outcome. Personally, I would have loved to see a bit of a scrap between them before the horns of Rohan call him away, but alas, such was not to be. As Treebeard said to Gandalf at the end,

Originally Posted by Treebeard

‘Well, come now!’ he said. ‘You have proved mightiest, and all your labours have gone well.'

But he could not say this until Gandalf had been tried and found victorious.

Just my two cents worth.

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by davem

Unless I'm misunderstanding the original post, there seems to be an assumption that the physical forms of Gandalf & the Balrog (or The Witch King for that matter) are of the same nature. I don't think this can simply be assumed - Gandalf has a physical body not unlike that of the Children - it ages for one thing. The 'physicality' of the Balrog is of a different order - 'shadow & flame'. Obviously the Balrog has some degree of physicality - it can hold things, fall down chasms etc, but it doesn't seem to be an 'Incarnate' in the same sense as a Human or Elf. The Witch King is physically invisible (in the natural world at least) so his hroa is also fundamentally different to that of other incarnates.

Oh, & Shelob isn't a 'big fat spider' she is 'an evil thing in spider form' - which probably supports your argument in a way....

I don't think the Balrog's hroa is different than Gandalf's. We don't have any text saying that Balrogs were incarnate, but there are good arguments for the case. The most compelling is the fact that those Balrogs who were slain in the First Age (Gothmog and Glorfindel's Bane, at the very least) never resurface to cause more trouble, and Gandalf's slaying of Durin's Bane appears to be quite final. Had these Maiar been merely clothed--embodied but less than incarnate--they would have been capable of taking a new shape when they were "slain." The Balrog's "shadow and flame" does not indicate that he is more ephemeral in hroa than Gandalf, only that he exerts his power in a visible display. It's something Gandalf would be capable of doing if he chose to disobey the guidelines for his mission. For example, that lightning and ice on the peak was surely Gandalf's doing and not the Balrog's, both being antithetical to the Balrog's spiritual nature.

You're right to draw distinctions between simply "clothed" spirits and incarnate ones, and the topic of the Balrogs is open to debate. After all, if they were less than incarnate then there's no need to wonder if they had wings: they could have had them when they chose to. It just seems more likely that Balrogs, like their master and Sauron, had become permanently incarnated. Aiwendil also recently reminded me that the incarnation of the Balrogs is not a fact made explicit by Tolkien, and he's right, but here's part of my response to him:

Additionally we recognize the affinity Tolkien's mythos have with biblical stories of the corruption of angels to the service of the devil. In those stories the angels were corrupted not just by affiliating themselves with Satan, but by indulging in activities that were reserved for true incarnates, particularly sex relations. While this is not evidence in itself, Tolkien makes the specific point that an eala could become bound to its hroa by habitual indulgence in such activities (he specifies eating and begetting offspring), and it seems unreasonable to presume that these corrupted Maiar (who were said to be corrupted by dark gifts, if I remember correctly) would have abstained more assiduously than their masters.

---

Invisibility also does not indicate a fundamentally different hroa. Bilbo and Frodo both became invisible for a time and were yet never changed from their incarnate nature. The invisibility of the Ringwraiths may be different than that conferred by The One Ring, but still the Ringwraiths are not disembodied fear. They are Men by nature, so the destruction of the hroa results in death. Sauron obviously did something really twisted with them, but there's no indication that they ever died (and thus are not necromantic); they appear simply to have faded into their LotR state, meaning that they are still merely Men.

[obloquy]

Great post, Thenamir. I'm really glad to see you paying attention to The Books again.