# Bombadil and Sauron face to face!!



## meneldor (Mar 23, 2004)

I have often wondered the result of these to meeting. While the discussion of Bombadil has heated up again I ask this question. Would Sauron have any power of our favorite enigma or would Tom just laugh at him, give him some flowers and a have a nice day bumper sticker? Tom held the ring in his hand and played with as it was a toy, would it be the same if they had met?


----------



## Melian_the_Maya (Mar 23, 2004)

My guess is that Tom Bombadil would not have been strong enough to withstand the might of Sauron and the Ring put together as is hinted the council of Elrond. There it is said that only few parts of the world would originally remain uncorrupted, but they too would be ensnared. Maybe Tom would just continue to exist, but his realm would be corrupted and therefore his use in the parts, the very purpose of his existence, would disappear.


----------



## Gothmog (Mar 23, 2004)

From "The Council of Elrond


> `But in any case,' said Glorfindel, `to send the Ring to him would only postpone the day of evil. He is far away. We could not now take it back to him, unguessed, unmarked by any spy. And even if we could, soon or late the Lord of the Rings would learn of its hiding place and would bend all his power towards it. *Could that power be defied by Bombadil alone? I think not. I think that in the end, if all else is conquered, Bombadil will fall, Last as he was First; and then Night will come*.'


 It would seem that Glorfindel at least did not think that Bombadil was a match for Sauron and the council did not disagree with him on this. so I would say that although the ring had no hold on Tom, his strength was not such as could battle with Sauron face to face.


----------



## HLGStrider (Mar 23, 2004)

I doubt Sauron would have taken Bombadil too seriously. Bombadil's powers are so different from Sauron's. Also, Bombadil wouldn't take Sauron seriously. If you're suggesting a fight, Bombadil would probably tra la la la la away laughing. . .not exactly an effective method to destroy an enemy. . .annoy, yes, destroy no.


----------



## grendel (Mar 24, 2004)

Well, I don't know... Sauron was a Maiar, and I think the consensus is that Bombadil probably was also... so their powers should have been of the same magnitude. Bombadil probably never really put his to full use... but if he did, why couldn't he take on Sauron? Especially a Ring-less Sauron? And if not defeat him, at least earn a draw?


----------



## Melian_the_Maya (Mar 24, 2004)

A Maia is not necessarily equal to all other Maiar, since they were not mass produced...  Just the same way as Melkor was the mightiest of the Ainur, so could Sauron be mightier than Bombadil, no problem. Their powers were very different as was stated before, but their purposes were different. It is my opinion that if Bombadil had the River Daughter (and mind, that would not be granted under a second darkness... just the same way as Sauron could master the three Rings, he could also affect the River Daughter, because she too was a part of what had been controlled by the Three) he and Sauron would have coexisted, with Bombadil on a small oasis inside the darkness. But afterwards the darkness would have crept inside his realm too and he would be destroyed from within. There would be no battle, because Tom would not try to battle Sauron himself for the land. He would probably try another Girdle of Melian strategy, which in my view would not have worked.


----------



## Aglarband (Mar 30, 2004)

Bombadil would so win, unless Sauron cheated, and we all know the bad guy ALWAYS cheats.  

For real though, Tom would win because his love for Goldberry and his land would make him want to live. I think Glorfindel was saying that Bombadil could not take Sauron and his army. No doubt Sauron would even risk fighting Tom 1 vs. 1, and if they did, Tom would win because he is Tom.


----------



## Telëlambe (Jun 16, 2005)

I agree with the whole girdle of Melian theory. If all the men and elves perished and darkness spread over the world, tom would carry on heedless, and have little to do with the outside world. All of Saurons servants would not be able to penatrate Tom's land (even if he wished to try, which i think he would not) as tom in his own small land has an imessurable hidden power, and he doesnt seem to know fear, whereas the baddies alwase know fear.


----------



## Greenwood (Jun 16, 2005)

In the Council of Elrond, Elrond says that the power to resist Sauron is not in Bombadil. He says that if Sauron wins and conquers Middle Earth, than Bombadil would be last as he was first. Elrond says this when it is suggested that the Ring be sent to Bombadil for safekeeping. So he is sayng Bombadil does not have the power to resist Sauron, even if Sauron has not yet regained the Ring, if he has already conquered all of Middle Earth.


----------



## Telëlambe (Jun 16, 2005)

in the form he is in perhaps, but if he is a miar, and not restricted to any for such as the istari, he could perhaps do what he wanted as being of equal spirit to sauron.


----------



## Alatar (Jun 16, 2005)

Well i think that sauron is the stronger maia there, maybe the strongest everas he was chosen by melko and it is said that morgoth toaught him things.


----------



## Greenwood (Jun 16, 2005)

Telëlambe said:


> in the form he is in perhaps, but if he is a miar, and not restricted to any for such as the istari, he could perhaps do what he wanted as being of equal spirit to sauron.


That is a mighty big "but" in there considering there is not one bit of Tolkien's writings, that I am aware of, that states Bombadil is a Maia. Even if there was, there is still Elrond's comment. Of course, if you wish to completely disregard what Tolkien has written in the form of Elrond's comments, that is up to you.  Personally, I prefer to accept Tolkien's own views on the matter when they have been clearly stated.


----------



## Telëlambe (Jun 17, 2005)

lol, alright alright, you win.


----------



## Ingwë (Jun 17, 2005)

Of course Sayron will win. We don't know whether Tom Bombadil is a Maia or he isn't. Sauron was servant of Morgoth, he forged the One Ring, he was many other powers. Tom has no chance


----------



## Alatar (Jun 17, 2005)

Well if you think what was said about Lorin, it could not be invade as of the power in that land unless sauron came.
So if Bombadil has more power than Galadriel, then Sauron would have to come and fight him 1 one 1.


----------



## ingolmo (Jun 18, 2005)

I'm not really sure. Bombadil was able to withstand the power of the Ring, so why not Sauron. But as Elgee pointed out, I doubt Tom would want to fight Sauron. 'Tom Bombadil's got to get going, Cause Goldberry is waiting...Tra la la la la.' I doubt Tom would even take anything seriously even if he were standing alone in front of the Black Gate, with thousands of hosts of orcs facing him.
And how about making this a poll, Elgee?


----------



## HLGStrider (Jun 19, 2005)

Here is my theory: Sauron wouldn't need to defeat Bombadil in the end Elrond refers to. When all else has fallen, when all good in Middle Earth has passed, something in Bombadil (who it has been suggested is in fact the spirit of the English/Middle Earth country side) would cease to exist, and Bombadil would perish by default. By conquering Middle Earth, Sauron is conquering Bombadil.

This is what I take Elrond to mean by "when all else is gone, Bombadil will fall." 

When the hillsides themselves have been stripped of their beauty and tortured beyond recognition, when there ceases to be trees, when there ceases to be beauty, Bombadil ceases to exist.



Oh, as for a poll, I'd have a hard time picking out enough coherent options other than 'Bombadil would beat Sauron" "Sauron would beat Bombadil" and "Bombadil would go off tra la laing."


----------



## Thorondor_ (Jun 19, 2005)

According to letter 153, Bombadil is "a particular embodying of pure (real) natural science: the spirit that desires knowledge of other things, their history and nature, _because they are 'other'_ and wholly independent of the enquiring mind".

I think that the correct interpretation to the fact that :"*if all else is conquered, Bombadil will fall, Last as he was First" *is that if there isn't anything else to be known, the spirit of science cannot exist anymore as such, thus Bombadil's identity will be lost. I don't think Tom will fall because of the corruption around him, no matter how deep that is, he will "fall" (loose what identifyes him/gives him reason to live) only when science doesn't have any object.


----------



## Wraithguard (Jun 21, 2005)

Thorondor_ is correct on manny occasions there. But the question here is not how he will fall but whether or not he would stand against Gorthaur. Being that Bombadil is the embodyment of pure natural science, Gorthaur would have at least some major difficulties with him. Of course then again think of what Gorthaur did with Ereinion and Elendil at Barad-dûr in the Last Alliance.


----------



## theostyn (Sep 21, 2011)

lol Tom is the master he has been around alot longer then sauron (even before the elves came and he is the only one of his kind) why do u think his wife calls him THE master. Tom is the most powerful force knowen to middle earth do you remember from the book ware frodo gets taken by the wights tom just dances and kills ever thing... Tom loves the forest and thats the only thing he cares about so if sauron won and he conquered ever thing to the old forest thare wold be a 1v1 be cause he would be the only thing from world domination (so tom would clap his hands three times sing a song and blow all of mordor and sauron off the face off middle earth) !!! p.s Tolkien's first work was poems about Tom bombadil and his wife goldberry so the author would make tom win no matter the odds P.s.s adding a army will not even the odds vs tom


----------



## EldradMustLive (Oct 14, 2017)

I know Tolkien said he didn't like allegory. Still though, that being said, there's no doubt in my mind that he intended Bombadil to be Iluvatar, also called Eru. The clues are right there and Goldberry's comment gave it away immediately when the hobbits asked her who he was. She said "He is." That is unmistakable in Christian theology and Tolkien was a Christian. Remember Moses' burning bush and the voice said "I am that I am." And Jesus repeatedly said "I am" as in "I am the bread of life", "I am the door", "I am the good shepherd", "I am the resurrection and the life." That's why the jews wanted to stone him. They understood the reference. Also, Tom later said that he was the first, i.e. the eldest. Another dead giveaway. He was there even before the Dark Lord came into the world. So he IS Iluvatar.

Someone once asked me if I thought God was supposed to be shacking up with a beautiful woman. Well, that's the biblical picture. Israel is continually referred to as the bride of Jehovah and the Church is referred to as the bride of Christ. Sex itself is meant as a picture of the relationship of God to man.

I suppose that Bombadil was Tolkien's view of God. I.e. that he maintains a disinterest in the affairs of the world. I think a lot of people feel that way. Bette Midler sang a song "From a Distance" where she sings "*God* is watching us from a distance." In other words he stays separate and almost disinterested. It's not at all true of course but that's what some people think.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Oct 14, 2017)

EldradMustLive said:


> I know Tolkien said he didn't like allegory. Still though, that being said, there's no doubt in my mind that he intended Bombadil to be Iluvatar, also called Eru. The clues are right there and Goldberry's comment gave it away immediately when the hobbits asked her who he was. She said "He is." That is unmistakable in Christian theology and Tolkien was a Christian. Remember Moses' burning bush and the voice said "I am that I am." And Jesus repeatedly said "I am" as in "I am the bread of life", "I am the door", "I am the good shepherd", "I am the resurrection and the life." That's why the jews wanted to stone him. They understood the reference. Also, Tom later said that he was the first, i.e. the eldest. Another dead giveaway. He was there even before the Dark Lord came into the world. So he IS Iluvatar.
> 
> Someone once asked me if I thought God was supposed to be shacking up with a beautiful woman. Well, that's the biblical picture. Israel is continually referred to as the bride of Jehovah and the Church is referred to as the bride of Christ. Sex itself is meant as a picture of the relationship of God to man.
> I suppose that Bombadil was Tolkien's view of God. I.e. that he maintains a disinterest in the affairs of the world. I think a lot of people feel that way. Bette Midler sang a song "From a Distance" where she sings "*God* is watching us from a distance." In other words he stays separate and almost disinterested. It's not at all true of course but that's what some people think.



When Frodo asks Goldberry just who Tom Bombadil is, she responds simply by saying


> "He is",


which some have taken as a reference to God's statement


> "I Am that I Am"


in the Book of Exodus. But Tolkien rejected this notion, saying that in Middle Earth


> "there is no embodiment of the One, of God, who indeed remains remote, outside the World.
> 
> Carpenter, Humphrey, ed. (1981). _The Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien_. Houghton Mifflin. 181. ISBN 0-395-31555-7.





and he carefully differentiated Goldberry's response from the Biblical



> "I Am that I Am".[3]




I'm sorry to say, but Tolkien rejected this view.

Hope this helps.

CL


----------



## EldradMustLive (Oct 14, 2017)

Perhaps you're right that Tolkien disavowed the idea but the references you cited don't say that at all. And I have to say that my observations stand despite any nay saying. If Tolkien received criticism and THEN responded with "I really do think you are being too serious, besides missing the point" then I actually take it as a tacit admission that Bombadil WAS intended to be Iluvatar. Tolkien in that quote (which is what you cited) didn't deny it at all. He just sounded like he was blustering his way out of the situation. Again, Bombadil says he was the first. The first what? If it's just "the first", period, then Bombadil is Iluvatar.

Hope the helps even more.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Oct 14, 2017)

EldradMustLive said:


> Perhaps you're right that Tolkien disavowed the idea but the references you cited don't say that at all. And I have to say that my observations stand despite any nay saying. If Tolkien received criticism and THEN responded with "I really do think you are being too serious, besides missing the point" then I actually take it as a tacit admission that Bombadil WAS intended to be Iluvatar. Tolkien in that quote (which is what you cited) didn't deny it at all. He just sounded like he was blustering his way out of the situation. Again, Bombadil says he was the first. The first what? If it's just "the first", period, then Bombadil is Iluvatar.
> 
> Hope the helps even more.



"I have to say that my observations stand despite any nay saying."  A bit arrogant, don't you think?

I don't see how you can declare this as fact...especially when none of us are Tolkien himself. Tolkien created Bombadil, not us.

This is actually a well-known _theory_.

Please, this is to help you, don't declare your opinions as fact, especially online. It makes you look prideful. Plus, it is a bit arrogant to characterize Tolkien that way when we don't even know him personally! I just gave his own words on the matter, not my own opinion. 

If Bombadil _is _Illuvatar, Tolkien would've said so. It'd be a pretty major plot point, don't you think? He didn't though. He wrote the book the way he wanted.

CL


----------



## EldradMustLive (Oct 14, 2017)

Good heavens CL, I'm not being a bit arrogant. Look, when something is as obvious as the nose on one's face it's not being arrogant to state it. Am I arrogant if I state that the sky is blue? No. It is blue! At least on a clear day it is. And I'm sorry but it's obvious who Bombadil was supposed to be. Bombadil even said he was there before the Dark Lord came into the world and he wouldn't have been talking about Sauron. This was Melkor. So he preceded the Ainur Melkor in the world. That can only be Iluvatar.

And no, Tolkien wouldn't have said that he had intended Bombadil to represent God himself. I'm afraid you're being hoist by your own petard here. You're claiming to know what an author would choose to reveal! You're doing what you accuse me of. And you're basing it on ... what? Authors don't always give explanations of what they intended by what they wrote. As far as I know, they usually don't. They usually seem to think that it's better not to. 

I will point this out though that in his letter to Milton Waldman in the Silmarillion preface he says that he had the sense of recording what was already there, somewhere, not inventing something. So he tried to express true things. What came out was a veiled personification of God in the person of Bombadil.

I don't doubt that this is a well known opinion. It's so obvious that I'd be surprised if nobody else had seen it. Apparently I've come late to that party!


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Oct 15, 2017)

EldradMustLive said:


> Good heavens CL, I'm not being a bit arrogant. Look, when something is as obvious as the nose on one's face it's not being arrogant to state it. Am I arrogant if I state that the sky is blue? No. It is blue! At least on a clear day it is. And I'm sorry but it's obvious who Bombadil was supposed to be. Bombadil even said he was there before the Dark Lord came into the world and he wouldn't have been talking about Sauron. This was Melkor. So he preceded the Ainur Melkor in the world. That can only be Iluvatar.
> 
> And no, Tolkien wouldn't have said that he had intended Bombadil to represent God himself. I'm afraid you're being hoist by your own petard here. You're claiming to know what an author would choose to reveal! You're doing what you accuse me of. And you're basing it on ... what? Authors don't always give explanations of what they intended by what they wrote. As far as I know, they usually don't. They usually seem to think that it's better not to.
> 
> ...



Fine. Suit Yourself. I'm Catholic and I don't believe Bombadil is God. If anything, he's a Green Man, a nature figure. 

But if this floats your boat, go ahead.

CL


----------



## Elthir (Oct 15, 2017)

The great Glorfindel says: "... soon or late the Lord of the Rings would learn of its hiding place and would bend all his power toward it. Could that power be defied by Bombadil alone? I think not. I think that in the end, if all else is conquered, Bombadil will fall, Last as he was First; and then Night will come."


I note also Letter 144, where Tolkien says that "Ultimately only the victory of the West will allow Bombadil to continue, or even to survive. Nothing would be left for him in the world of Sauron."

And letter 181: "There is no 'embodiment' of the Creator anywhere in this story or mythology" seems to agree with "The One does not physically inhabit any part of Ea." (letter 211)

In any case...

... _Glorfindel Laurefindele_ is never wrong


----------

