The drowning of Numenor

[CrazySquirrel]

Split of from the Why have Merry and Pippin in the Fellowship?-thread. This thread is to discuss the drowning of Numenor and its aspects.

Originally Posted by Landroval

Hrm, I wonder what brought that idea to you - the valar clearly recognize the children of Eru as being the culmination of Creation.

Eru was not that nice to his children. Don't forget what he did with Numenor - the whole island with all its population, not just the fleet!

Originally Posted by Landroval

For one, it was him who propose the would be suicide attack on Mordor, in which he would be a chief bait.

And with him was the new-found King of Gondor and about 6-7 thousand mortal soldiers. Gandalf included all of them in this "bait". And they were mortal, expendable guys, not like our undestructible Maia. If "killed", he would have returned to Valinor, perhaps to be reincarnated again....

[Landroval]

Don't forget what he did with Numenor - the whole island with all its population, not just the fleet!

A land where humans sacrificed, tortured humans in the temple of Melkor, where they slayed each other with swords in madness and cursed themselves in agony; they hunted the Men of Middle-Earth and enslaved them. They didn't repent even when the lightning strikes of the eagles hit them, nor when the earthquake was given a final warning. More or less, they were beyond redemption, and their acts too cruel. Given the strength of the future kingdom of Gondor, it is likely that should Numenor have survive, it would have continued to oppress Middle Earth in the same hellish manner.

And with him was the new-found King of Gondor and about 6-7 thousand mortal soldiers.

There would have been "no new age" should this diversion never occured - the hobbits couldnt have reached Mount Doom, and even if they werent caught, the armies of Sauron would have soon overwhelmed all Middle Earth.

[CrazySquirrel]

Originally Posted by Landroval

A land where humans sacrificed, tortured humans in the temple of Melkor, where they slayed each other with swords in madness and cursed themselves in agony; they hunted the Men of Middle-Earth and enslaved them. They didn't repent even when the lightning strikes of the eagles hit them, nor when the earthquake was given a final warning. More or less, they were beyond redemption, and their acts too cruel. Given the strength of the future kingdom of Gondor, it is likely that should Numenor have survive, it would have continued to oppress Middle Earth in the same hellish manner..

Yes they did all this but following whose advice? A certain Zigur-Sauron, one of the Ainu, most persuasive creature, especially with his Ruling Ring.
Eru has drowned not only those who committed crimes, but also innocent children, and fair maidens, and old people, and all the books and objects of art etc... Yes, he destroyed Sauron, that's what he wanted when toppling the island. It was simply hunting a fly with a hammer!

Originally Posted by Landroval

There would have been "no new age" should this diversion never occured - the hobbits couldnt have reached Mount Doom, and even if they werent caught, the armies of Sauron would have soon overwhelmed all Middle Earth.

I never said the diversion was a bad idea.Yes, it was necessary. But Gandalf in this was much less self-sacrificing than sacrificing the nameless soldiers that marched with him. And many of them died at the Morannon.


Now back to the topic of the thread. Why Merry and Pippin?

I agree with Olmer. Clearly the extra hobbits were needed to carry the Ring, if the Ringbearer was killed. And it is not so much Gandalf's and Elrond's decision in Rivendell that matters, it is the original company that set off from the Shire.

Gandalf APPOINTED Sam to go with Frodo (as a "punishment" for eavesdropping). And Sam invited Merry and Pippin (also very probably following Old Gandy's advice). Sam admits to Frodo at Crickhollow:

‘Yes, sir!’ said Sam. ‘Begging your pardon, sir! But I meant no wrong to you, Mr. Frodo, nor to Mr. Gandalf for that matter. He has some sense, mind you; and when you said go alone, he said no! take someone as you can trust.’

So he wanted SEVERAL hobbits to come from the Shire to Rivendell with the Ring. They were poor protection against nazgul - had Gandalf known about nazgul looking for Frodo, he would have sent at least several Rangers with them, or would have come himself. No, he wanted them as spare ringbearers for later, when the road becomes dangerous. And where can one find a hobbit in Rivendell?

[Landroval]

A certain Zigur-Sauron, one of the Ainu, most persuasive creature, especially with his Ruling Ring.

He didnt have his ring in Numenor, or at least he didnt use it; in Silmarillion, in The downfall of Numenor, it is stated that after the drowning, "he took up again his great Ring in Barad-dur". Moreover, even before his coming, the numenoreans were walking towards their world domination. One could say that his coming to Numenor only hastened things, for good and for bad.

Concerning all the inhabitants of the sunken island, you have yet to address the fact that they would have returned to their policy of enslavement after the attack on Valinor, given the environment in which they grew; furthermore, they were subject to punishment by crossing the ban of the valar, a ban directly derrived from Eru's will that the destiny of his children regarding their life length shouldnt be change.

Yes, he destroyed Sauron, that's what he wanted when toppling the island. It was simply hunting a fly with a hammer!

Is there anything to back that idea?

And they were mortal, expendable guys, not like our undestructible Maia.

Indestructible? In what sense?

But Gandalf in this was much less self-sacrificing than sacrificing the nameless soldiers that marched with him.

How was his sacrifice any less?

Gandalf APPOINTED Sam to go with Frodo (as a "punishment" for eavesdropping). And Sam invited Merry and Pippin (also very probably following Old Gandy's advice). Sam admits to Frodo at Crickhollow:

He appointed him to go only to Rivendell. Later on, the hobbits are addmitted in the fellowship against _"great wisdom"_, as Gandalf tells Elrond.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Landroval

He didnt have his ring in Numenor, or at least he didnt use it; in Silmarillion, in The downfall of Numenor, it is stated that after the drowning, "he took up again his great Ring in Barad-dur". Moreover, even before his coming, the numenoreans were walking towards their world domination. One could say that his coming to Numenor only hastened things, for good and for bad.

I believe Sauron had his ring with him in Numenor . Please, have a look at this excellent FAQ threadFAQ of the Rings
Here is the part about Numenor

Where was the One Ring while Sauron was in Númenor?
On his finger.

"He naturally had the One Ring, and so very soon dominated the minds and wills of most of the Númenóreans." [L #211 (279)]

Tolkien's very clear statement agrees with the logic of Sauron's character. Sauron had two choices: take the ring with him to Númenor, or leave it in Middle-earth. But nowhere there would be safe, from his point of view: while he spent decades in Númenor, anyone might have found the Ring and claimed it. Sauron would never risk that.

Some people are misled by Tolkien's statement that Sauron "took up again" the Ring after making himself a new body [Silm: Rings (292)]. All that means is that he first completed the new body, then turned again to his plans for world domination.

See also:

"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" back to Middle-earth after the drowning of Númenor." [L #211 (280)]

[Landroval]

I believe Sauron had his ring with him in Numenor . Please, have a look at this excellent FAQ threadFAQ of the Rings
Here is the part about Numenor

Well, I guess that settles the ring issue . An excellent FAQ indeed.

[CrazySquirrel]

Originally Posted by Landroval

Concerning all the inhabitants of the sunken island, you have yet to address the fact that they would have returned to their policy of enslavement after the attack on Valinor, given the environment in which they grew; furthermore, they were subject to punishment by crossing the ban of the valar, a ban directly derrived from Eru's will that the destiny of his children regarding their life length shouldnt be change.

My point was that Ar-Pharazon and his fleet broke the ban of the Valar and yes, THEY deserved punishment. So why not just sink the fleet? Don't tell me Ulmo couldn't do that!

The innocent civilians in Numenor broke no ban, but they died a horrible death nonetheless. Eru decided they were expendable.

I doubt, that after the destruction of the fleet, the remaining women and children would have been much of a threat to the Middle Earth. And don't forget that Elendil, Isildur and Anarion also grew in THAT environment, so why spare them?

Originally Posted by Landroval

Is there anything to back that idea?.

Eru's desire to punish Sauron is the only REASONABLE explanation for his horrible cruelty. Otherwise, it is even worse, IMHO, just the God's tantrum.

Originally Posted by Landroval

Indestructible? In what sense??

You kill him and after a month he is there again, better than before. If killed again, Olorin the Maia will be walking all young and carefree in the fair Valinor. That is why I think his sacrifice was less than any mortal's.

Originally Posted by Landroval

He appointed him to go only to Rivendell. Later on, the hobbits are addmitted in the fellowship against _"great wisdom"_, as Gandalf tells Elrond.

That was a statement made for the hobbit ears. He couldn't really tell them why they were needed, could he?

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by CrazySquirrel

My point was that Ar-Pharazon and his fleet broke the ban of the Valar and yes, THEY deserved punishment. So why not just sink the fleet? Don't tell me Ulmo couldn't do that!

The innocent civilians in Numenor broke no ban, but they died a horrible death nonetheless. Eru decided they were expendable.

a) Were there innocent civilians in Numenor? The Akallabeth indicates that all but the faithful took part in Sauron's religion and grumbled against the ban, that makes them guilty. The faithful were with Elendil. b) compare to the flood story in the Bible, Tolkien even says in one of the letters that Elendil is a "Noah figure."

I doubt, that after the destruction of the fleet, the remaining women and children would have been much of a threat to the Middle Earth. And don't forget that Elendil, Isildur and Anarion also grew in THAT environment, so why spare them?

Read the Akallabeth

Eru's desire to punish Sauron is the only REASONABLE explanation for his horrible cruelty. Otherwise, it is even worse, IMHO, just the God's tantrum.

According to Tolkien in the letters, it is meant to be humanity's "second fall" or at least akin to it. There is no indication that it was done specifically to "get Sauron" or that Sauron's presence on Numenor had anything to do with the act.

You kill him and after a month he is there again, better than before. If killed again, Olorin the Maia will be walking all young and carefree in the fair Valinor. That is why I think his sacrifice was less than any mortal's.

True, I'd agree with this, if you can measure self-sacrifice, then a human,hobbit, or elf's self-sacrifice is more "dire" in that sense than a Maia. But can we truly measure self-sacrifice?

That was a statement made for the hobbit ears. He couldn't really tell them why they were needed, could he?

Well, unless you're of the Olmer school and it appears you are, he did tell them why they were needed.

[Landroval]

There is little to add to Forkbeard's excellent post; as far as Gandalf's reincarnation possiblity is concerned (which is a far cry from indestructibility and we have no idea whether it is a repeatable event either), Tolkien, in his letter #153, doesn't exclude the possibility of reincarnation for Men too.