Relative Powers

[Thalion]

A number of notes:

1) In noting that all other species differentiate between a leader and all others generally, I think ENTS should be broken into ENTS and Treebeard, Treebeard's placing directly above all other Ents...small but somewhat (in)consequential

2) Why does Balin deserve placing above Thorin, whom for awhile he was subserviant to?

3) Tom Bombadil and Goldberry are very far apart on the list...again, what is the rationale? I think since they are both enigmas of Tolkien's work, they should be placed relatively close together...

4) Regarding the Ring and future placement of the Silmarils...I think one shouldn't place these on the list at all...the list looks to be one of living characters, the Ring may be considered the "essense" of Sauron, but thats still NOT Sauron...just as the Silmarils are the "embodiment" of the two trees, but they are not the two trees...if you include the two trees of valinor on this list, then yes, you should include the silmarils, and then by conjecture, you could include the Ring...but since I don't think there is any intention of including the two trees of Valinor (I personlly see this as silly), I think by the same logic you shouldn't include either of the other two...specifically, the Ring reflects the power that wields it (albiet with an evil/Sauron twist)...it isn't an entity unto itself...

5) Beren is listed lower than Aragorn? Aragorn may be the savior of Gondor, but Beren cut a Silmaril from Morgoth's crown...additionally, he was able to pass through the Girdle of Melian...he prowess seems a little low on the list

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Thalion

Can someone explain how the Blue Istari are placed above Radagast?

Good point. And welcome to the Downs.

Originally Posted by Thalion

I think ENTS should be broken into ENTS and Treebeard.

Done.

Originally Posted by Thalion

Why does Balin deserve placing above Thorin, whom for awhile he was subserviant to?

Though subservient to Thorin, my reading of TH and LotR show Balin as more noble of character.

Originally Posted by Thalion

Tom Bombadil and Goldberry are very far apart on the list...again, what is the rationale?

Tom is lord of his realm whereas Goldberry is a river-daughter and rises to become Tom's spouse; beautiful and pucent in her own realm, yes, but that realm is small (her home and its surroundings).

Originally Posted by Thalion

Regarding the Ring and future placement of the Silmarils...I think one shouldn't place these on the list at all.

I'm persuaded, and have changed my "guiding principle" accordingly.

Originally Posted by Thalion

Beren is listed lower than Aragorn?

No longer. Thanks for your excellent points, Thalion.

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

why is Beren lower Aragorn?

noted.

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

why is Arwen so high?

By deduction from heredity. But I'll grant that she doesn't exhibit this; although Tolkien says that she is the image of Luthien. What does that count for?

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

we ought also to distinguish the primordial Melkor from the pseudo-historical Morgoth

Done.

Shelob is raised as recent arguments reflect.

I'm debating with myself whether there's really a difference between Olórin and Gandalf the White. I'm not sure there is.

Updated List

[Mister Underhill]

Originally Posted by lmp

...Bilbo still would be superior to one spider, perhaps in combat, but most certainly in culture and moral superiority. (#67)

Though subservient to Thorin, my reading of TH and LotR show Balin as more noble of character.(#106)

Nobility of character, cultural superiority, and general moral fiber are difficult metrics. If you factor these in, aren't you obliged to bump the likes of Morgoth, Fëanor, Sauron, and Saruman (for starters) down the list a ways for their social and moral defects? Furthermore, I can't see what Trolls are doing so far up the list considering they have even less culture than orcs, apparently; all they have going for them is size, strength, and an amusing accent.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

Nobility of character, cultural superiority, and general moral fiber are difficult metrics. If you factor these in, aren't you obliged to bump the likes of Morgoth, Fëanor, Sauron, and Saruman (for starters) down the list a ways for their social and moral defects? Furthermore, I can't see what Trolls are doing so far up the list considering they have even less culture than orcs, apparently; all they have going for them is size, strength, and an amusing accent.

I suppose we could quantify everything, but that might just take the fun out of it for a lot of us. Not to mention the mystery.

"Intelligence consists of (1) speech (2) tool usage (3) et cetera...."

(1) speech: +0 for no speech; +1 for 1 to 1000 word vocab; +2 for 1000 to 10,000 word vocab, et cetera.
(2) tool usage: +0 for none; +1 for 1 tool; +2 for two tools, etc.
(3) ad nauseum.....

blah.

Originally Posted by obloquy

You're unaware of the difference between a Maia in its natural incorporeal form and one that has been fully incarnated in the form of an old man?

No. I am not unaware of this. It was my understanding that the Maiar who entered Arda clothed themselves in corporeal forms of one kind or another. Do you mean to tell me that Maiar in Valinor live there incorporeally?

[obloquy]

No. I am not unaware of this. It was my understanding that the Maiar who entered Arda clothed themselves in corporeal forms of one kind or another. Do you mean to tell me that Maiar in Valinor live there incorporeally?

Yes. At least, they can, and it is written that Olorin in particular often did. Clothing oneself in material raiment is very (in fact, crucially) different than incarnation. The Istari were incarnate, meaning they could be slain as any Man or Elf, and could not simply shed their bodies if they tired of them.

[Formendacil]

Obloquy is correct that the Istari were a special form of Maiar Incarnate. Although all Ainur who descended into Arda had the power to take forms, which most did, it was natural for the Valar and Maiar to not be bound to a certain form. Indeed, the permanence of the forms of Morgoth, the Balrogs, and Sauron after the Fall of Númenor, appears to be tied directly to the fact that they are evil.

However, when the Valar sent the Istari to Middle-Earth, the Istari did not just take a form LIKE the Children of Eru, as they were accustomed to doing. Instead, they took a form that was the SAME as that of the Children of Eru. In so doing, they became, in a pure physical sense, old men. The only extraordinary thing about them was their incredible longevity. Apart from this, such special traits as they had, such as wisdom or a certain magical talent, while not exactly common, were still found in the Children of Eru- particularly those of Elven race.

The power of the Istari is a veiled power- it is not the raw might of the Maiar. This was a part of the intention of the Valar, for they had learned well the great lesson of the Second Age: Men do not like to be forced to do things. Instead of being sent to Middle-Earth to lead the fight against Sauron, they were sent to HELP the fight against Sauron.

For this reason, although Gandalf and Saruman may well, singly or together, have been able to take Sauron on in a battle as Maiar, once in Middle-Earth they were forced to work in more circuitous ways. Not all power was gone from them, to be sure, but they were rather tightly constricted in what they were able to do.

That said, this entire plan of the Valar failed. Saruman turned to evil, the Blue Wizards vanished, Radagast was distracted, and Gandalf died.

At this point Eru stepped in, and decided to make use of Gandalf. He restored him to full life, granted him authority previously given to Saruman, and returned him to Middle-Earth. It also seems apparent that he removed some of the restrictions that had formerly bound the Istari.

As Gandalf tells Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli in Fangorn, none of their weapons could harm him. Although this statement can be interpreted a number of ways, it seems clear that Gandalf was no longer a mere old man in terms of his physical presence. It seems clear that he had to keep himself, as before, rather in the background, aiding the fight rather than leading it, but it is also clear that many of the actions he undertakes as Gandalf the White he COULD not have undertaken as Gandalf the Grey. More importantly, neither could Saruman.

This is important, because it demonstrates the changed parameters within Gandalf could move. Even as Gandalf the White, he was inherently, in his native Maia strength, probably no greater than Saruman- who had been appointed the White for good reason. However, he clearly seems to be able to operate under much less constraint than even Saruman had done under the original orders of the Istari.

So, the question is, and I leave it to the debating teams to get the mental juices started, whether or not Gandalf the White returned to Middle-Earth able to use ANY and ALL of his native Maiarin powers, and chose not to (for whatever reasons), or whether he returned to Middle-Earth with authority to act more broadly than before, but still not in the freedom he would have enjoyed in Valinor.

If the former is the case, then Gandalf the White and Olórin are one and the same in terms of power. If the latter, then Gandalf the White is a step above Gandalf the Grey and Saruman, but a step below Olórin.

[narfforc]

I agree with everything Formendacil says, and he ties up much of the Gandalf/Maiar problem quite nicely. On the question of The Return of Gandalf, I believe Tolkien says, he returned with enhanced sanctity. Was this because the Valar had seen the fall of Saruman into evil, and Radagast become distracted, that they wished Gandalf to have more ability to combat these weakness's, in this case does sanctity mean free from sin?. Doesn't Tolkien say of The Istari: clad in the bodies of Men, real and not feigned, but subject to the fears and pains and weariness of earth, maybe Gandalf the White returned with less of these problems to worry him, giving him more purity to his inherent power.

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

I'm debating with myself whether there's really a difference between Olórin and Gandalf the White. I'm not sure there is.

You're unaware of the difference between a Maia in its natural incorporeal form and one that has been fully incarnated in the form of an old man?

Here's how I would design the list:

RED: [gods - Valar] *Melkor; *Manwe

RED-ORANGE: [unknown] Ungoliante? Tom Bombadil?

ORANGE: [angels - Maiar] *Eonwe; Arien; *Sauron; *Olorin; Melian; Curumo; Gothmog; Huan

ORANGE: [demigods - Eldar] *Luthien; *Galadriel; *Feanor; Glorfindel; Ecthelion; Galdor?

ORANGE: [creatures - Dragons and Others] *Ancalagon; Glaurung; Carcharoth; Smaug; Draugluin

YELLOW: [heroes - Eldar, Atani, Dwarves] *Hurin; Turin; Tuor; Beren; Thrain; Aragorn

GREEN: [the children - Elves, Men/Hobbits, Dwarves] Celeborn; Boromir; Legolas

BLUE: [lesser humanoids - Orcs]

BABY BLUE: [beasts]

Colors indicate possible overlaps between categories. For example, Ungoliante might be considered more powerful than some Valar. Another example is Ancalagon and Glaurung being on par with the Maiar, perhaps. Rankings in each bracket are more or less approximate, except where marked by an asterisk, which indicates that the individual is fairly certainly in the correct position (usually the top positions of the tier). Obviously my list isn't as extensive as yours, but I don't necessarily think it should be. Some things go without saying, and many individuals are impossible to gauge.