Skip to main content

tolkiens legendarium - How much of Gandalf's power is tied to his staff?


Before Gandalf freed Théoden from Saruman/Gríma's hold, he refused to give away his staff.



Háma: I cannot allow you before Théoden King so armed, Gandalf Greyhame... by order of Gríma Wormtongue.
[Gandalf nods, and they hand over their weapons]
Háma: Your staff.
Gandalf: Oh... you would not part an old man from his walking stick?



After that, while he was breaking theirs hold on him, Gríma shouted to the guards




His staff! I told you to take the wizard's staff!



But what if he was denied the use of his staff? How much of his power is tied to his staff? Is he harmless/defenseless without his staff? If his staff is taken by an other magically capable being, how much of Gandalf's power would it have?



Answer



I couldn't find anything directly related to this in canon, but circumstancially, the staff seems to be needed to help express the magic of the Istari, but is not required/critical to it.


In this way, it seems somewhat akin to wands in Harry Potter - a good wizard can do magic without a wand but the wand helps focus the magic.


On the side of the staff helping magical usage:





  • Gandalf uses his staff to break the bridge on which the Balrog is advancing




  • Gandalf's staff is used to send a signal to the Giant Eagle to help escape from Orthanc.




  • Gandalf the White breaks Saruman's staff after asking to surrender it.


    This is a really weak and inconclusive data point, since it may have had more of a symbolic/moral meaning than practical.





On the side of the staff not being critical:




  • As per FotR, Gandalf was allowed by Saruman to keep his staff when captured (see the quote below pertaining to Frodo's seeing Gandalf's escape in a dream). If the staff was so critical to his ability to do magic, surely Saruman would have taken it from Gandalf!



    In the dead night, Frodo lay in a dream without light. ... The figure [Gandalf] lifted his arms and a light flashed from the staff that he wielded. A mighty eagle swept down and bore him away...





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

harry potter - Do the Kwikspell courses work?

In Harry Potter we are introduced to Kwikspell course in The Chamber of Secrets (and never hear about it again). We see Filch taking courses, presumably by mail. The descriptions of Kwikspell make me think it is for people who are weak in magic (kind of like how Neville was supposed to be when he was younger), but had magic in them nonetheless. However, Ron's comments later in the chapter make it sound like it is mainly for Squibs to learn magic. However, it is strongly implied through out all the books that Squibs are essentially Muggles, and will never be able to do magic. How then is a Kwikspell course supposed to work? Do we have any information to know if it works at all? Is it a scam? An answer from any level of canon is welcome. Answer Kwikspell courses are (probably) useful to some wizards, but not to squibs. The Kwikspell course literature comes with two testimonials. Madam Z. Nettles of Topsham writes: ‘I had no memory for incantations and my potions were a family joke...

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.

star wars - What "exactly" happens when someone turns to the Dark Side?

When I saw the original Star Wars saga as a kid, the concept of the Dark Side imprinted in me was quite simple. You did a bad thing, so you're a bad person so you go to the Dark Side and keep doing bad things. Now, obviously this doesn't hold true in reality. In my mind it is perfectly reasonable for Luke to kill the Emperor and Vader and then just flee the Death Star and rejoin the Alliance. After all they are at war, those are enemy officers that have captured him and are taunting him by threatening with death of all loved ones and the whole operation was intended to kill the Emperor anyway. The same would hold true for Anakin. He could have killed Mace Windu to save the Chancellor and Padme but that doesn't mean he's going to then go mad and kill all Jedis including children. It doesn't add up from a merely psychological point of view. He had a set of objectives and that made him want to keep the Chancellor alive (quite valid by the way, Mace Windu is quite clums...

Was the "pure soul" of Harry's what had really hurt Voldemort?

In the Order of the Phoenix, Voldemort possesses Harry, and it hurts. Greatly. I think that Dumbledore explained that it was because Voldemort's rotten soul was incapable of assimilating Harry's pure soul, that Voldemort didn't understand the love and friendship etc that Harry has in his heart. But, I think it was a lie. Remember that in Deathly Hallows, while looking for information regarding Horcruxes, it is discovered that it is in fact possible to merge a soul fragment back, but that the process was extremely painful. Now then, if Voldemort tried to possess Harry, and Harry had a fragment of Voldemort's soul, I think that it could have been the true cause of Voldemort's pain: the fact of having his soul so close of another fragment. I think that Dumbledore knew that fact, but had to lie to Harry because it was inappropriate to let him know that he had one of Voldemort's soul fragments at the moment. Is that right? Or was it truly the pure soul of Harry's...