Posted: July 15, 1998 at 07:16:20: by TreeBeard
I don't remember Elrond saying he would fall before the might of Sauron. Fall before the might of what Sauron represented maybe, including allies(The Nine etc..). If I am wrong here my apologies but it is possible that Elrond may have meant(and this is how it sounded to me)that it would take the combined might of Sauron and any other allies/powers at his disposal and that Sauron would need to crush all others first and then bring to bear everything he has on Bombadil.
I don't believe Bombadil to be Mai, Vala or any of the other powers. I believe him to be unique and outside of the general laws of Middle Earth. He was the first before all others.
Inconceivable though this may be do you think it possible he may have been a diety of some kind, a son of god type character, not allowed to influence things directly, only offer guidance when sought. He was also refered to as Father by some characters. Hope this dosen't freak you out to much. Something else to think on. Sauron created the ring and passed a lot of his vast power into it, yet it had no power over Bombadil.
TreeBeard.........
: I disagree, otherwise, why would Elrond make the statement that if the Ring were not destroyed, Bombadil too would fall before the might of Sauron (albeit "Last as he was First")?
: This would imply (to me anyway) that Sauron (as the most powerful of all the Mair) was more powerful. The Istari could have been either more or less powerful in thier original forms, but being "incarnated" were probably weaker. It seems to be a recurring theme that turning to evil reduces ones power (a la Morgoth), so the Balrog may have been less powerful as well.
: I guess this would all depend on who or what Bombadil actually was. If a Mai, he would be weaker than Sauron, if a Vala, stronger, if a manifestation of the earth or nature, it is very debatable.
|
