Talk:Sauron

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle-earth, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to J. R. R. Tolkien and his legendarium. Please visit the project page for suggestions and ideas on how you can improve this and other articles.
Assessment B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Article upgrading needed: You can help.

WP:IA

Stub to Start-Class Upgrading Instructions To contribute in upgrading this stub article to start class, the following requirements must be met: Significant intro (list the title, alternate titles, year released, director, actors starring in the film, summary of headings, etc.) Film infobox ({{infobox film}}) Picture: Consult WikiProject Free Images for freely released images from a film shoot, opening, or other relevant free image; non-free and unlicensed images are to be avoided if at all possible Plot summary Cast section At least two other developed sections of information (production, reception (including box office figures), awards and honors, references in popular culture, differences from novel or TV show, soundtrack, sequels, DVD release, etc.) Categories (by year, country, language, and genre(s))  Helpful links: WP:BETTER, WP:LEAD, WP:REF Once this article has fulfilled these requirements, the film can be reassessed to start class and this template will be removed automatically.

	This article is part of WikiProject Films, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to films and film characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. Unknown This article has not been rated on the importance assessment scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.

Did anyone see the Family Guy episode where Stewie says something like "I'm in more trouble than when Sauron lost his contact lense.." and then it cuts to the eye looking around frantically going "Can anyone see it?! I think it might have gotten stuck on some rocks or a tree or something...god I am soo grounded..." That was so funny.

In "Before and during the First Age, Sauron was in origination an "angelic" spirit called a Maia in Tolkien's invented mythology" is the first part really needed? His origin didn't change after the First Age.

Also, do people think it makes sense to call the Silmarils "holy"? I realise that they hold the Light of the Trees, and burnt Morgoth when he touched them, but "holy" doesn't sound quite right to me.

Molinari

The lust and greed they inspired in all who coveted them was anything but holy. OTOH, they were the supreme artifacts of elvish power, of which the Rings of Power were mere pallid imitations. ...?...Lee M 02:17, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC)

The problem lies in the fact that we really don't have a word other than 'holy' to apply. The Silmarils radiated the light of the Two Trees, the light itself may have been holy or sactified, but the Silmarils themselves surely were not. Additionally, they inspired lust in the viewer, a trait one doesn't normally apply to a holy object. Perhaps 'holy' should be changed to 'powerful,' or 'overwhelming.' 206.156.242.36 20:46, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Actually, the Silmarils were hallowed by Varda after Fëanor had created them, so that no mortal flesh, nor hands unclean, nor anything evil could touch them. "Hallowed" here has the same meaning as "holy". That said, holy ought to be replaced with hallowed wherever possible, as holy can also mean divine, whereas hallowed need not carry that meaning. [[User:Anárion|Image:Anarion.png]] 22:14, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Removed "Sauron, in a way, was wiser than Morgoth - he had never fallen as low as his master did." from first paragraph of First Age section. This is because I'm not sure wanting to dominate people rather than lands actually consists of not falling as low. (From one way of looking at the matter, it's worse.) If this is something Tolkien actually said, I'll be glad to stand corrected (although a citation would be appreciated).

Morgoth's Ring, "Myths transformed", Text VII: Notes on motives in the Silmarillion. The essay literally states "In this way Sauron was also wiser than Melkor-Morgoth". The essat discusses the difference between the mad lust for annihalation that powers Melkor-Morgoth, and contrasts this with the relentless desire for order present in Sauron.

Oh, and I removed "holy" so it just says "the Silmarils". I figure they are of such value that they speak for themselves. Actually, I just didn't know what word would be better, but I thought maybe just removing the adjective would suffice. --Aranel 00:13, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hallowed? [[User:Anárion|Image:Anarion.png]] 06:27, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Contents 1 The first paragraph has too many links 2 The Eye of Sauron 3 Pippin and the Palantir 4 Succeeded by himself? 5 Metaphysics? 6 Second Age- odd phrasing 7 Return of the King My ass 8 Annatar Sauron 9 The Name "Gorthaur" in the Movies 10 My Family Guy Reference 11 Doesn't Sauron's body die before Isildur cuts off his Ring in the book? 12 More expansion 13 The Jackson eye is a bit wrong (other than physical form). 14 my family guy reference answer 15 comparison with the evil queen disney 16 Categories 17 Gil-galad, the High King in Lindon? 18 Pronunciation of the name 19 Physical Form 20 Sauron, the Ring and Númenor 21 Return? 22 Shock wave?

[edit] The first paragraph has too many links

The first paragraph is close to unreadble due to the two parentical phrases and the many links. I made a possible change, but I'm not sure it's better. Any help would be appreciated. JesseW 08:37, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] The Eye of Sauron

Sauron was unable to assume shape AFTER Isildur cut the ring from his finger, I thought? This paragraph seems incorrect then (after all, if he was unable to assume a fair shape, how could they cut the One Ring from his finger?): From this point on he was unable to assume a fair shape, and ruled now through terror and force. A few faithful Númenóreans were saved from the flood, and they founded Gondor and Arnor in Middle-earth. These faithful Men, led by Elendil and his sons, allied with the Elven-king, Gil-galad, and together fought Sauron and, after long war, defeated him, although both Elendil and Gil-galad were slain. Isildur, son of Elendil, cut the One Ring from Sauron's finger and claimed it. But later the Ring betrayed him, so that Isildur was slain by Orcs, and the Ring was lost for centuries. MDesigner 10:54, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

Nooo… only Peter Jackson thinks Sauron was shapeless, or just an eye. It is quite clear Sauron had taken shape by the time of Gollum's capture (after The Hobbit but before LotR: Gollum talked about Sauron's four-fingered hand. If Sauron had no shape, what hand would that be?

Sauron initially was able to assume any shape, and in the First Age had at least the following: -normal (human-like but terrible), -werewolf, -vampire bat. Sauron survived the First Age intact. In the Second Age he took a beautiful and fair human-like shape (as Annatar), and kept this shape at least until the War of the Elves and Sauron. Afterwards he appeared to have taken a terrible shape, although that is not entirely clear. In any case he was still able to change it at will before forging the One Ring, and it is not stated that in forging the One Ring he lost this power.

After the Downfall Sauron lost the ability to change his shape, and when he returned to physical form (after Gandalf ousted him from Dol Guldur, but before the events of the LotR) he only had his terrible shape. In any case it is 100% certain Sauron had a physical form again by the time Frodo destroyed the Ring, and therewith Sauron's power. Afterwards so little of Sauron was left he never was able to take form again. Jordi·✆ 11:28, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Wow, they certainly changed a lot for the movie. So you mean the whole flaming eye on the tower of Barad-Dur was a creation of the screenwriters? Or the Eye of Sauron existed in the books too, but it was simply a way for him to see what's going on, while his physical form (as a body) was able to roam around? MDesigner 21:02, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

Mostly, yes. The Eye of Sauron is in the books more or less equivalent with Sauron's attention: when the Eye is focused on someone, it means that Sauron and/or his forces are paying close attention there. On the other hand, the Eye is also seen by Frodo at Amon Hen, so it was a way Sauron presented his will. Jackson erred, in presenting the Eye as the form of Sauron, rather than just a (or the) representation of his will. When Pippin gazes in the palantìr, he sees Sauron's actual form: "Then he came" — and follows a description of evil mocking of Pipping by Sauron, and not by an Eye. Jordi·✆ 21:35, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Don't you think that we should make it more clear that Sauron was not a floating eyeball? It's a common myth nowadays, with Peter Jackson's supporting the Sauron-disembodied-floating-eye... I know it doesn't say that "Sauron is now an Eyeball" in the article, but it also doesn't say "Sauron is not an eyeball". Maeglin_Lómion

So perhaps the "simplest explanation" is that when Sauron is seen directly (including using the Palantir) his "humanoid" form is evident: his presence is sensed from a distance as an eye. It is also easier to direct the Nazgul and others to a given place by "showing" them where to go.

Jackiespeel 17:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The Return of the King movie also made it clear that the Eye was not Sauron himself; particularly in the scene (in the extended version) where Aragorn looks into the Eye in the crystal ball and Sauron himself appears (within the pupil) telling him "Behold! Your precious Arwen" or something of the like. You can't quite make out what he's saying. At first it sounds like a Latin incantation, then it goes deep and plays out like a secret deep-voiced message from 1960's pop album run backwards. Saruman also implied Sauron's ability to take physical form by his comment "he cannot *yet* take physical form" (meaning: that he *will* eventually take physical form!) The word "yet" makes all the difference in meaning! The movie trilogy is filled with all sorts of subtle 1-word or 0-word cues (body gestures, looks, eye movements, etc.) like this, which serve as an equivalent substitute for what could take an entire passage in book form.

[edit] Pippin and the Palantir

"Peregrin Took...looked into one of the Palantiri, enabling (Sauron) to discover Frodo's location."

I find this statement rather odd - perhaps I've missed something rather important but surely Pippin doesn't actually _know_ Frodo's location at that point? Frodo escapes from the slopes of Amon Hen in secret, unknown to any of the rest of the company bar Sam (contrary to Peter Jackson's version, which alters events rather pointlessly IMO). IIRC the only hint as to his location that the rest of the company receives is from Gandalf, when Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli meet him in Fangorn, and Gandalf doesn't really tell them much there (memory might fail me at this point... I don't have the book to hand ATM.)

Further, Sauron is so excited at a Hobbit's use of the Palantir that he doesn't even divine what little Pippin does know of the company's plans - otherwise he surely would have followed the course Gandalf outlines to the three hunters in Fangorn (sealing Mordor up tight), so what basis is there for suggesting that Sauron learns Frodo's location, which it is difficult to imagine that Pippin knows anyway?

MockAE

You're right. The whole point is that Sauron doesn't figure out about Frodo. He already knows that there's a hobbit who has the Ring. What does end up getting revealed (intentionally!) - and what is much more important - is that Isildur's heir is on the move. I removed the questonable part. -Aranel ("Sarah") 19:33, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Succeeded by himself?

Preceded by none	Dark Lord of Mordor circa 1600 SA— 3441 SA	Succeeded by himself
Preceded by Himself	Dark Lord of Mordor circa 2951 TA— 3119 TA	Succeeded by None

?Savidan 00:25, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

• Well, no one else claimed the title in the 2,500 years between the Seige of Barad-dur and his return to Mordor. -- SFH 05:53, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I removed the box. Its just silly. As a general rule of thumb, if there is only one member of a line of sucession, a succession box adds nothing. Pure succession box-cruft. No one really defended the idea of their being a box, although I agree that there was no one who came in between him and himself. We can note this info in a non-boxy way in the article. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 08:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

• I just felt it made better since to put one on him being the Dark Lord of Mordor than one on him being the bearer of the One Ring, but it's not something I'm willing to fight over. -- SFH 23:18, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

The argument could certainly be made (as I have tried to do) that Herumor of "The New Shadow" DID succeed Sauron as the chief evil-doer/dark lord of Middle-Earth, but apparently there are others who don't share that view and don't want it stated, even with a disclaimer.

Actually, no, that argument couldn't be seriously made. All we know about Herumor, even if we accept TNS as canonical, is that he was a cult leader of some kind. He may have called himself "Dark Lord", which is more or less what "Herumor" means in Sindarin, but that doesn't make him one. Since the story about him was never written, the extent of his actual authority or influence is unknown. He may even have turned out to be peripheral, a figurehead for the real cult leader.

That's even if using a succession box for an "office" that had, at most, three occupants made any sense in the first place. I don't think it does. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

My biggest issue was that there simply isn't any evidence to suggest that Herumor occupied anything like the role held by Sauron or Morgoth. It's the whispered name of a bad guy from a fragment of an abandoned story. Tolkien's description of the intended plot of that story makes him at most the leader of a minor group of malcontents... inevitable rot setting in and needing to be rooted out. It'd be like saying 'The Great Goblin' was the 'Dark Lord of Arda' prior to Sauron's re-appearance. Except there'd actually be more evidence for that because the Great Goblin appeared in published stories and actually controlled some territory. --CBDunkerson 11:57, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Metaphysics?

Shouldn't "metaphysical," repeatedly used to reference the Eye, be "metaphorical?" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.77.124.62 (talk • contribs).

Actually, I think 'metaphysical' is the better term in this case. The 'eye' was not just a 'metaphor' for Sauron... it was an actual manifestation of his will which could be 'felt' and even seen in some cases. --CBDunkerson 21:15, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Second Age- odd phrasing

In the section on the Second Age, near the end there's discussion of the Rings of Power and this oddly written sentence:

"But the Three Rings, which the Elven smith Celebrimbor had forged himself without Sauron's help, were saved from remained in the hands of the Elves." (Emphasis mine)

Does anyone know what the author was trying to say here? I'm not really that familiar with the LOTR pre-history so I can't correct it, but this really should probably be re-written for grammar and construction. --40 Watt 17:59, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I changed it to; "However, the Three Rings, which the Elven smith Celebrimbor had forged himself without Sauron's help, were saved and remained in the hands of the Elves." --CBDunkerson 19:29, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

excellent... thanks!--40 Watt 21:01, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Return of the King My ass

One thing bothers me, Sauron replaced himself with one of his lackeys. and everyone is panicing like Sauron is already there. What gives. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Super Ranger (talk • contribs).

What do you mean? I don't understand the question. Ted87 17:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean the Mouth of Sauron or something?

[edit] Annatar Sauron

What did they have it for the movie? Jamhaw 15:13, 26 May 2006 (UTC)jamhaw

A scene was planned for ROTK in which Sauron comes out of the Balck Gate and fights Aragorn. He first appears as Annatar, but then changes to the evil shape which you also see in the prologue of FOTR. Galadh 16:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Name "Gorthaur" in the Movies

Though not mentioned in the main article, the name "Gorthaur" is used in the Return of the King. That was the chant yelled out when the Minas Tirith was stormed through the broken gate by the horde.

[edit] My Family Guy Reference

I tried to reference Family Guy, from the episode mentioned above, in the article but someone removed it. Some people are not fun, I guess.

try and make a section like "Sauron in pop culture" and add it there. If the hardcore Tolkien fans think its not suitable for the page, too bad. This is an encyclopedia, not a character guide.

That's correct. This is an encyclopedia, not a collection of idiotic trivia. TCC (talk) (contribs) 03:31, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

good point, i stand down

Why the article on Palpatine is little more than a collection of idiotic trivia nowadays. I actually think we should have a section on "Sauron in popular culture" as he has made something of an impact on popular culture, being as he is, Middle-Earth's ultimate antagonist.

[edit] Doesn't Sauron's body die before Isildur cuts off his Ring in the book?

If I'm not mistaken, Elendil and Gil-galad killed him and were killed themselves. Then Isildur cuts off the Ring. Either way, his spirit flees. Uthanc 03:28, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

• But I seem to recall Isildur citing the fact that he killed Sauron as reason for him to keep the One Ring. Although admittedly that could have been the Ring itself talking at the time. Is it possible that Elendil and Gil-Galad mortally wounded Sauron, and that Isildur's cutting off the source of Sauron's power being to much for him to heal? -- SFH 04:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

  Right, it is stated somewhat differently in various passages. In some Elendil and Gil-galad are said to have killed Sauron. In another Isildur claims to have dealt the death blow. Assuming both are 'correct' and following the most detailed accounts it might be reasoned that Elendil and Gil-galad killed Sauron's body, but his spirit did not flee until Isildur cut the Ring from his hand. --CBD 23:46, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

  That would make sense given that Sauron passed much of himself into the Ring: even with his body dead he lived as long as the Ring was in his possession. As formidable an opponent as he was during the War of the Ring, without the One Ring in possession he was but a shadow of himself. -- Jordi·✆ 07:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't remember any reference to a "death" even for an immortal Maiar. The term used is actually that he "fled" so it suggests that if not exactly voluntarily his retreat was calculated. I can only speculate on what his reasoning was behind it, certainly without the Ring Sauron was vastly diminished and could not have stood against the Last Aliance. It may be that Sauron reluctantly surrendered the Ring and fled reasoning that if they couldn't destroy it, he could regroup and press the attack later. Though Elrond and Cirdan did in fact know that throwing it into Orodruin would destroy it, they had refused Sauron's instruction in magic and it is nowhere explained HOW they could have known that. Sauron might very reasonable have assumed that either they would not destroy the ring (as was true) or that they would not figure out how (which was not true). --24.60.168.187 18:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More expansion

See Talk:One Ring. TCC (talk) (contribs) 03:19, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Jackson eye is a bit wrong (other than physical form).

In the book, it's only rimmed with fire, and it's yellow with a black iris, just like a normal cat's eye. The film has flame everywhere. We need an illustration. Uthanc 13:52, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] my family guy reference answer

whoever said that sauron is middle-earth's ultimate antagonist, HE'S NOT!. morgoth is.

Morgoth's spelt with a capital M. Duh! Anyway, Sauron and Morgoth share the role of ultimate antagonist. Besides, that's a matter of opinion. The fact is that Sauron is the most iconic Middle-Earth villain so my point is that we should have a section of Sauron in popular culture. Oh and by the way, Sauron IS in my opinion Middle-Earth's ultimate antagonist because he was around causing trouble at the same time as Morgoth and stayed around, causing mayhem long after Morgoth was captured by the Valar, and when he created the One Ring he became as strong as Morgoth as the article says [or at least used to say] with the power of the Ring, combined with the powers Morgoth had shared with him and his own already awesome power.

Sauron became as powerful as Morgoth was in his localized personality after he had dispersed most of his substance into Arda and his various "creations", but was never more powerful than Morgoth's total being. With that taken into account, Morgoth was even more powerful than Manwë. (There's no indication at all that Morgoth ever "shared" power with Sauron or any of the other Maiar in his service.) Most of what Sauron was capable of, particularly with the Rings, was only possible because of this prior corruption of Arda's material substance. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

True. But what about that other stuff like him being around at the same time as Morgoth and afterwards? And do you think we should have a section on Sauron in popular culture as well? If you do that would be something we could agree on.

What about it? The article talks about that. And I despise "popular culture" sections. They almost never add anything of interest. TCC (talk) (contribs) 18:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I was just saying how the fact that Sauron was around longer than Morgoth and therefore caused more damage than him could class him as Middle-Earth's ultimate antagonist. And a popular culture section could be useful.

Actually, Morgoth and Sauron are the both the original Dark Lords; they have existed equally as long, and created the powers that their allies and sucessors use, and the existence of hatred and evil. therefore, they both share the title of ultimate antagonist.

[edit] comparison with the evil queen disney

i see comparisions of him with the Evil Queen of Disney. here are some similarities: both are the second evil, both lost the ability to have a fair and pleasing form after an accident, they have a lot of servants. put more similarities here please.

The Evil Queen does not lose the ability to take a fair and pleasing form. She just has the ability to take an unpleasant one. Good points though. no, i mean by putting they lost the ability to take a fair and pleasing form is because, if you look in the article, there's something about in the italian comics that a writer wrote something that said she survived her fall, and as a result, she can't change back into her fair form.

[edit] Categories

I was wondering if we should install Big S into the categories of Fictional narcissists, Fictional megalomaniacs and Fictional dictators. Hello, anybody still there.

No, we shouldn't. He wasn't a narcissist, which means vain self-absorption. We don't know enough about his motivation to call him a narcissist, since we're privy to his thoughts on only one occasion. He wasn't a megalomaniac, since he acknowledged a superior and was in fact the prime conscious spirit of evil in Middle-earth at the time of LotR. Nor was he a dictator; this term in the sense of an absolute ruler is an anachronism. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

He was vain and self-absorbed as he fell from grace because of pride (and Morgoth) and just because he aknowledged a superior doesn't mean he wasn't power-mad which is basically what a megalomaniac is. After all he only served Morgoth because he had a position of power under him. He could be classed as a dictator as he was the absolute ruler of Mordor and aspired to be the dictator of the world.

Anon.

I find the first definition of "megalomaniac" here [1]: "A psychopathological condition characterized by delusional fantasies of wealth, power, or omnipotence." Sauron's sense of power was not delusional.

"Dictator" in the sense you want to use it is a modern realpolitik term, and should not be applied to historical or pseudo-historical persons. In the Roman Republic it had a specific legal meaning. In a world where monarchy is the general rule it draws a distinction between degrees of authority in the monarch that is merely relative. And again, we aren't sufficiently privy to his thoughts to be able to clearly classify him as narcissistic. TCC (talk) (contribs) 18:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

You're right about the narcissism and the dictator-thing but megalomania isn't always a delusional condition. The category for Fictional megalomaniacs is for people who want to rule the country, planet or universe as well as controlling everyone and everything around them. I'd say that was Sauron.

[edit] Gil-galad, the High King in Lindon?

Shouldn't Gil-galad be called the High King of the Noldor or the High King of the Noldor of Middle-earth, not the High King of Lindon? Aule the Smith 02:26 UTC, December 3 2006 (UTC)

I am going to change this, if anyone disagrees, you can chang it back, although I think High King of the Noldor is more correct. Aule the Smith 22:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually both are correct. It didn't say "of Lindon", it said "in Lindon", which is true. The most informative way to put it would be "High King of the Noldor, who ruled from Lindon." (The distance between Lindon and Eregion is a salient point, I think.) TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation of the name

Sauron is a Quenya name, and it should be pronounced as such, not as in English. I had changed the given pronunciation to the correct one, but the change has apparently been reverted. The correct pronunciation is described precisely enough in the Appendix E of The Lord of the Rings: u and o should always have quality as in brute and for, respectively, and r is always thrilled. So, could someone change /'sɑʊɻɒn/ to /'sɑu.rɔn/? (and ensure that it be not reverted again ;)) 83.131.224.11 17:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Saw-ron would be the closest pronunciation --24.60.168.187 18:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Physical Form

The line that Sauron could not take physical form never appears in the book (althought Sauruman says so in the movie). The book actually says exactly the opposite on numerous occasions. That Sauron does have a physical body and can move from place to place.

Aragorn not only seems to believe that Sauron has a physical form but that it would be possible to do damage to tha form (as his ancestor indeed did) "Let the Lord of the Black Land come forth! Let justice be done upon him!........Th Lords of Gondor demand that he atone for his evils and depart then forever."

Denethor who has wrestled with Sauron mentally says that Sauron "will not come save to triumph over me when all else is conquered." So Denethor believes that he can move himself from place to place, as do his soliders of Gondor.

Tolkien (in the form of narrator) referrs to how Sauron would have needed to come to Lothlorien in what might be considered the epilogue "The power of that land was too great for any to overcome unless Sauron should come there himself."

Most clearly is that Gollum has actually seen the Dark Lord with his own eyes and confesses this much to Frodo. He referrs to him as having "Only 4 fingers on the black hand." He may be speaking poetically but that seems a little beyond Gollum.

Long story short the idea seems to be Sauron does not have a physical form (or any real power for that matter) once the ring is destroyed. But various statements in the Tale of Year refer to Sauron taking shape again. This could hardly take him 1500+ years (the time which was between his taking shape and the war of the rings) since his body was destroyed in the Fall of Numemenor but we know explicitly it has been repaired by the Last Alliance a few short decades later.

Also it is quite possible Sauron did not have the ring with him at Numenor yet we know he has a physical body there. We aren't explicitly told this one way or the other but he only arouse after the fall as a "Spirit" so its unclear if he could have rescued the ring from the ruins of Numenor. --24.60.168.187 18:52, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sauron, the Ring and Númenor

About Sauron and the Ring in Númenor :

Sauron was first defeated by a 'miracle': a direct action of God the Creator, changing the fashion of the world, when appealed to by Manwë: see III p. 317. Though reduced to 'a spirit of hatred borne on a dark wind', I do not think one need boggle at this spirit carrying off the One Ring, upon which his power of dominating minds now largely depended. Letter 211

aravanessë —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.84.142.16 (talk) 21:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Return?

I don't remember in the Silmarillion it claiming that Sauron would or could ever return. I recall Morgoth will certainly return but can anyone actually say canonically Sauron will? Even Gandalf said his fall was so low "none here can forseen his rising ever again." --Darkling235 01:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shock wave?

The article says: "Separation from the Ring destroys Sauron's body, which explodes and causes a shockwave, knocking everyone on the battlefield over." To me it looked like the orcs's bodies disapeared and their armor fell to the ground. There was a blast of wind but not that strong. It just ruffled one of the elves' hair. If there was a literal shockwave Isildur, who was at ground-zero, would have certainly been killed. Steve Dufour 13:04, 25 March 2007 (UTC)