The reason Sauron wanted to conquer Middle Earth... my theory...

[alatar]

Interesting thread. Why would Sauron want to conquer all of Middle Earth - would this end his game? Did he need to conquer all?

I think that Sauron, first of all, had the need to conquer all. He must have squirmed under Morgoth's "rule," though I think that he was given pretty much free reign and maybe in time would have contested even Morgoth for the rule of all. In the mean time, Sauron may have just been going along with Morgoth's game as it fit his own ends. It's been said about him that he was only 'second' only because Morgoth was first.

So Sauron may have felt the need to conquer all - to put down any chance of any possible source of resistance. But then what would this mean he would have to prepare for the coming invasion. If Sauron would have put down all - which would have kept him entertained for some time - he also would have had all of the newly enslaved building what might be called "Fortress Middle Earth." Even if the Valar would have left Middle Earth to its own problems, Sauron still would have feared an invasion.

After the breaking of Angband, would Sauron even believe that he could withstand an attack? Would he then temper his destruction and mayhem, think that if he only enslaved and not completely destroyed, that the Valar would just ignore him?

What would he do if he had reclaimed the One?

[Tietäjä]

Well, if Sauron had conquered all of Middle-Earth then what would have kept Valar from destroying him? There was nothing to lose.

[Lindale]

The Valar feared to interfere with ME matters (what, were they too holy for that?! kidding!!) because they feared that they would make things worse in the long (or rather, the middle) run -- the last time they interfered, Beleriand was ruined, sunk into the ocean. If Sauron had the mastery of all ME and the Valar decided to move against him, what, ME underwater? (Jolly Ulmo would have a wider realm now!)

You'll see that there are two types of evil archetypes: the just-evil, evil is his nature. Corruption, all that stuff. Now the author who resorts to this has seriously run out of imagination.

The second, is the fallen-angel type. Lucifer, Morgoth, Voldemort, Sargeras (from the Warcraft thing), you name it. They were once the mightiest, the greatest of the great, but because they have , shall we say, beautiful minds, somehow it crept to them to rebel.

Sauron.... hmmm hmmm hmmm. Remember the end of the Sil? The paragraph saying that Here ends the SIlmarillion.... there was something said that the seeds that Morgoth planted will continue to blossom and bear fruit even if he's long imprisoned. I think Sauron is one (and maybe the greatest) manifestation of that. And then comes the myth archetype: the fallen angel who rebelled is imprisoned by the good, but after a long long time he breaks free, to continue the destruction of the world, and then the One (the God, the Nous, whatever) allows it so that he can rebuild the whole world (like a New Jerusalem in the Christian traditions).

Sauron is part of it, Sauron is one of the "planted seeds" of Morgoth. Now if ever he did conquer ME and Morgoth is set loose, I don't think he will bow down to his fallen master. But then again, that's my speculation.

[Eönwë]

Well, I think that if Sauron had conquered ME then it would have caused the Dagor Dagorath, so Arda would end.

[Lindale]

Originally Posted by Eönwë

Well, I think that if Sauron had conquered ME then it would have caused the Dagor Dagorath, so Arda would end.

...then the Dominion of Men would not have come to pass...

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by alatar

Interesting thread. Why would Sauron want to conquer all of Middle Earth - would this end his game? Did he need to conquer all?

I think that Sauron, first of all, had the need to conquer all. He must have squirmed under Morgoth's "rule," though I think that he was given pretty much free reign and maybe in time would have contested even Morgoth for the rule of all. In the mean time, Sauron may have just been going along with Morgoth's game as it fit his own ends. It's been said about him that he was only 'second' only because Morgoth was first.

I don't think that he would have contested Morgoth's rule, although I do not want to eliminate the thought completely.


I just think that you can have an extreme lust for domination and power and still be second in command without rebelling.

Like:
Stalin under Lenin
Himler under Hitler
and
Cheney under Bush

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

I don't think that he would have contested Morgoth's rule, although I do not want to eliminate the thought completely.

I just think that you can have an extreme lust for domination and power and still be second in command without rebelling.

Rune, I agree that it is not likely Sauron would have contested Morgoth's renewed rule. After all, Sauron built Angband in anticipation of Morgoth's return in the 1st Age (and of course there's the apocryphal information regarding Morgoth's release from bondage at the end of the world).

It is, however, intriguing to think of Sauron and Morgoth squaring off, isn't it? Morgoth most likely would still command the remaining Balrogs and dragons, while Sauron (with the aid of the Rings) would probably hold his armies of corrupted men in sway. What the question would be is which way the Orcs might go (and argument could be made for either Sauron or Morgoth).

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

Like:
Stalin under Lenin
Himler under Hitler
and
Cheney under Bush

Hmmm...let me see, you list 2 sets of evil geniuses, then a pair of bumbling, obfuscating wannabes. I don't get the comparison.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

What the question would be is which way the Orcs might go (and argument could be made for either Sauron or Morgoth).

Probably Morgoth. He made them after all. Sauron is just "borrowing" them, or "keeping them safe". They're not actually his to command, if Morgoth was the other option.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Rune, I agree that it is not likely Sauron would have contested Morgoth's renewed rule. After all, Sauron built Angband in anticipation of Morgoth's return in the 1st Age (and of course there's the apocryphal information regarding Morgoth's release from bondage at the end of the world).

It is, however, intriguing to think of Sauron and Morgoth squaring off, isn't it? Morgoth most likely would still command the remaining Balrogs and dragons, while Sauron (with the aid of the Rings) would probably hold his armies of corrupted men in sway. What the question would be is which way the Orcs might go (and argument could be made for either Sauron or Morgoth).

Yes it is interesting. . .it would be interesting to see how loyalties would be devided, I mean if Sauron could betray Morgoth then the Balrogs might be split between the two and the orcs what about them?

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Hmmm...let me see, you list 2 sets of evil geniuses, then a pair of bumbling, obfuscating wannabes. I don't get the comparison.

I think it was a case of me being tired because I got home late after a night out and decided that it would be funny to throw in a pair that would devide people, then I just picked the most obviouse pair (to me).