Sauron should have won!

[Gurthang]

Have you ever stopped to wonder why Sauron was defeated when he lost his precious ring. All his current military power(and his own physical power) were compounded during the absence of the ring. We know what would have happened if he gained it, but if it was destroyed, than he should have remained at the strength that he was. He had used his own will that was not bound to the ring, so his power would stand no matter what became of the One.

He would still have an army to subdue the world. Which leaves us with Aragorn and the other members of the Fellowship to drown in a raging sea of orcs.

My theory makes logical sense, but doesn't make a good ending...

<font size=1 color=339966>[ 5:37 PM December 11, 2003: Message edited by: Gurthang ]

[Finwe]

When he made the Ring, Sauron poured a lot of himself into the Ring, which is what gave it its "malice" and "cruelty." He was only defeated when the Ring was taken from him, effectively separating "parts" of himself. When the Ring was destroyed, Sauron lost a great deal of "himself," which had been put into the One Ring. He couldn't survive in any form or manner with such a big "chunk" of himself missing like that.


To put it in human terms, we wouldn't be able to live without arms and legs, right? Sauron couldn't either.

[Kuruharan]

Finwe has already given you part of the answer.

The second half is that all Sauron's power in the War of the Ring was still based on the power of the Ring. As long as the Ring was in existence Sauron could indirectly draw on it's power, since it was a part of him. So, if it is destroyed he does not remain at the same level of strength.

The crumbling of his armies with the destruction of the Ring was keyed to his crippling as a being. His masses of minions required his evil hand in their hearts to provide them with a will. This is another place where the Ring aided his strength. However, when the Ring was destroyed and Sauron crippled, then his will was removed from his minions and they were bereft of purpose and became nothing more than beasts.

However, his armies are largely irrelevant. Once his power was broken, there was nothing more that he could do with them anyway.

[Maédhros]

Kuru has already explain to you the answer, but you might want to see JRRT own words regarding the destruction of the Ring and what would happen to Sauron afterwards.
From the Letters of JRRT 131

But to achieve this he had been obliged to let a great part of his own inherent power (a frequent and very significant motive in myth and fairy-story) pass into the One Ring. While he wore it, his power on earth was actually enhanced. But even if he did not wear it, that power existed and was in 'rapport' with himself: he was not 'diminished'. Unless some other seized it and became possessed of it. If that happened, the new possessor could (if sufficiently strong and heroic by nature) challenge Sauron, become master of all that he had learned or done since the making of the One Ring, and so overthrow him and usurp his place. This was the essential weakness he had introduced into his situation in his effort (largely unsuccessful) to enslave the Elves, and in his desire to establish a control over the minds and wills of his servants. There was another weakness: if the One Ring was actually unmade, annihilated, then its power would be dissolved, Sauron's own being would be diminished to vanishing point, and he would be reduced to a shadow, a mere memory of malicious will. But that he never contemplated nor feared. The Ring was unbreakable by any smithcraft less than his own. It was indissoluble in any fire, save the undying subterranean fire where it was made – and that was unapproachable, in Mordor. Also so great was the Ring's power of lust, that anyone who used it became mastered by it; it was beyond the strength of any will (even his own) to injure it, cast it away, or neglect it. So he thought. It was in any case on his finger.

[The Saucepan Man]

If that happened, the new possessor could (if sufficiently strong and heroic by nature) challenge Sauron, become master of all that he had learned or done since the making of the One Ring, and so overthrow him and usurp his place.

Even then, Sauron would have won, for the new bearer would have become corrupted by the Ring which was itself a part of Sauron. And, while that new bearer might be able to master the Ring sufficiently at first to usurp Sauron, he or she would surely eventually become subservient to its will. And then, assuming that it remained intact, Sauron would be able to return and reclaim it. The Ring, no doubt, would be only to glad to help him do so, and so the new bearer would not be able to rely on its power.

[Eol Telemnar]

I say He should not have won.

[Finwe]

But what if someone of the calibre of Aragorn usurped the Ring? If Aragorn had taken the Ring, and become corrupted by it, he would have given Sauron some very serious competition. Perhaps someone with his strength would have been able to use the Ring to his own advantage.

[Alatariel]

If Aragorn had taken the Ring, and become corrupted by it, he would have given Sauron some very serious competition. Perhaps someone with his strength would have been able to use the Ring to his own advantage.

I don't think so. No one but Sauron could wield the Ring. Even if Aragorn had - through the Ring - become a great dark lord, he would still be under the influence of Sauron, since his life-force is the source of the Ring's power.

[Legolas]

He was only defeated when the Ring was taken from him

This is not the case. It's a movie-misconception. Sauron was defeated as Gil-galad and Elendil were slain. Isildur cut the Ring from a limp body:

But at the last the siege was so strait that Sauron himself came forth; and he wrestled with Gil-galad and Elendil, and they both were slain, and the sword of Elendil broke under him as he fell. But Sauron also was thrown down, and with the hilt-shard of Narsil Isildur cut the Ruling Ring from the hand of Sauron and took it for his own.

[Maédhros]

Originally posted by The Saucepan Man
Even then, Sauron would have won, for the new bearer would have become corrupted by the Ring which was itself a part of Sauron. And, while that new bearer might be able to master the Ring sufficiently at first to usurp Sauron, he or she would surely eventually become subservient to its will. And then, assuming that it remained intact, Sauron would be able to return and reclaim it. The Ring, no doubt, would be only to glad to help him do so, and so the new bearer would not be able to rely on its power.

This is not entirely true.
From the Letters of JRRT: 246

Of the others only Gandalf might be expected to master him – being an emissary of the Powers and a creature of the same order, an immortal spirit taking a visible physical form. In the 'Mirror of Galadriel', 1381, it appears that Galadriel conceived of herself as capable of wielding the Ring and supplanting the Dark Lord. If so, so also were the other guardians of the Three, especially Elrond. But this is another matter. It was part of the essential deceit of the Ring to fill minds with imaginations of supreme power. But this the Great had well considered and had rejected, as is seen in Elrond's words at the Council. Galadriel's rejection of the temptation was founded upon previous thought and resolve. In any case Elrond or Galadriel would have proceeded in the policy now adopted by Sauron: they would have built up an empire with great and absolutely subservient generals and armies and engines of war, until they could challenge Sauron and destroy him by force. Confrontation of Sauron alone, unaided, self to self was not contemplated. One can imagine the scene in which Gandalf, say, was placed in such a position. It would be a delicate balance. On one side the true allegiance of the Ring to Sauron; on the other superior strength because Sauron was not actually in possession, and perhaps also because he was weakened by long corruption and expenditure of will in dominating inferiors. If Gandalf proved the victor, the result would have been for Sauron the same as the destruction of the Ring; for him it would have been destroyed, taken from him for ever. But the Ring and all its works would have endured. It would have been the master in the end.
Gandalf as Ring-Lord would have been far worse than Sauron. He would have remained 'righteous', but self-righteous. He would have continued to rule and order things for 'good', and the benefit of his subjects according to his wisdom (which was and would have remained great). 'Thus while Sauron multiplied [illegible word] evil, he left "good" clearly distinguishable from it. Gandalf would have made good detestable and seem evil.'

If Gandalf had been the victor of such a battle, Sauron would have been uterly lost.

Originally posted by Finwe
But what if someone of the calibre of Aragorn usurped the Ring? If Aragorn had taken the Ring, and become corrupted by it, he would have given Sauron some very serious competition. Perhaps someone with his strength would have been able to use the Ring to his own advantage.

ibid.
Until Sauron himself came. In any case a confrontation of Frodo and Sauron would soon have taken place, if the Ring was intact. Its result was inevitable. Frodo would have been utterly overthrown: crushed to dust, or preserved in torment as a gibbering slave. Sauron would not have feared the Ring! It was his own and under his will. Even from afar he had an effect upon it, to make it work for its return to himself. In his actual presence none but very few of equal stature could have hoped to withhold it from him. Of 'mortals' no one, not even Aragorn.

Not Aragorn. He would be no match.

[Mungo of Bracegirdle]

I think we all can agree to an answer to the first question posted; but, I find the second question much more interesting. Once the Ring was destroyed, so was Sauron. We can agree on this. Sauron's armies on the other hand were not. The catch here is that Sauron's will and malice was bent over them. This meant as soon as he disappeared, so did his armies driving force. This is why, once Gollum falls into the Cracks of Doom; Sauron's forces are pretty much reduced to nothing but sitting ducks. One of my favorite passages in the books is:

From all his policies and webs of fear and treachery, from all his stratagems and wars his mind shook free; and throughout his realm a tremor ran, his slaves quailed, and his armies halted, and his captains suddenly steerless, bereft of will, wavered and despaired. For they were forgotten.

This is right after Frodo puts on the Ring. If the simple fact that when Sauron turned his mind, malice, will towards capturing Frodo made the entire of his empire halt, then imagine what would happen if his will were removed completely. This is why I think JRRT is a master word smith. Look at this passage; only two sentences. One full of detail. The second only a few short words yet full of power. This is why we love his literature.

Cheers,
Mungo

[Morgoth the Great]

Aragorn could barely look at Sauron in the palantir, let alone use his ring to take over middle earth and usurp Sauron. He was simply not strong enough in his mind to do so.

[The Saucepan Man]

If Gandalf proved the victor, the result would have been for Sauron the same as the destruction of the Ring; for him it would have been destroyed, taken from him for ever. But the Ring and all its works would have endured. It would have been the master in the end.

Precisely. Sauron's will, as embodied in the Ring, would have been master in the end. [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img] [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[Legolas]

If this thread is going to go in a Sauron vs. _____ in one-on-one direction, please search for other threads - there are plenty of others where the matter has been debated extensively.

This thread is really about the military confrontations.

[Pyroclastic]

Here's an odd thought:
So, all of Sauron's evil was invested in The Ring. When The Ring was destroyed, did that leave Sauron as entirely good? Is it possible that Sauron still exists, as a good guy? With The Ring, and therefore all of his evil destroyed, Sauron walks Middle Earth, as one of those dreadfully perfect people, The horror of it is un-fathomable.

[Legolas]

"All" of Sauron's evil wasn't in the Ring...he still had plenty himself, obviously. It's not as if he has evil in a jar and poured it all out into the Ring.

[Earendilyon]

Legolas, the whole passage from the Silm reads thus:

and [Sauron] wrestled with Gil-galad and Elendil, and they both were slain, and the sword of Elendil broke under him as he fell. But Sauron also was thrown down, and with the hilt-shard of Narsil Isildur cut the Ruling Ring from the hand of Sauron and took it for his own. Then Sauron was for that time vanquished, and he forsook his body, and his spirit fled far away and hid in waste places; and he took no visible shape again for many long years. [emphasis mine]

I always read this as: Sauron was thrown down (the text does not say 'killed' or 'overcome' or 'slain') in the battle with Gil-galad, Elendil and Isildur (though the last one probably did not fight Sauron till G-g. and E. were killed), as often happens in hand-to-hand battle, and then Isildur cut off his Ring. The text says at that point: "THEN Sauron was for that time vanquished, and he forsook his body". So, Sauron was only vanquished at the moment his Ring was cut off, not before.

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

This is a somewhat imprecise description, but there are other sources than the Silmarillion that describe the same event in slightly different words. Elrond's account from The Council of Elrond runs thus:

I beheld the last combat on the slopes of Orodruin, where Gil-galad died and Elendil fell, and Narsil broke beneath him; but Sauron himself was overthrown, and Isildur cut the Ring from his hand with the hilt-shard of his father's sword, and took it for his own.

Additionally, Appendix A to The Lord of the Rings tells us:

...and in the Last Alliance that was made against him Sauron was overthrown and the One Ring was taken from him.

Now, we could go into the semantics of placing the overthrow before the taking of the Ring, but Earendilyon has the right of it: Sauron was defeated by Elendil and Isildur, and thrown down; but his power did not depart until the Ring was taken from him. In letter #131, Tolkien says: "Isildur, Elendil's son, cuts the ring from Sauron's hand and his power departs, and his spirit flees into the shadows". This is much less ambiguous than the line from the Silmarillion. Tolkien clearly associates the departure of Sauron's power with Isildur's taking of the Ring, although Sauron had already been thrown down beforehand. I can't imagine Isildur being able to cut off Sauron's finger if the Dark Lord was still able to wield a weapon.

<font size=1 color=339966>[ 11:53 AM December 13, 2003: Message edited by: The Squatter of Amon Rûdh ]

[Finwe]

Unless, of course, Squatter, PJ was right, and Sauron started moving like a child's toy running out of batteries, and Isildur was flailing about with the hilt-shard of Narsil like a rabid squirrel. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]