Skip to main content

tolkiens legendarium - Is the Eye of Sauron an artifact: similar to the Ring or to a Palantir?


In the trilogy, The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien describes Sauron's fortress of Barad-dûr as having a high tower, within which there exists the Eye of Sauron.



In the black abyss there appeared a single Eye that slowly grew, until it filled nearly all the Mirror. So terrible was it that Frodo stood rooted, unable to cry out or to withdraw his gaze. The Eye was rimmed with fire, but was itself glazed, yellow as a cat's, watchful and intent, and the black slit of its pupil opened on a pit, a window into nothing.
[The Fellowship of the Ring, Book II, Chapter 8]



And throughout the story, there are scattered references to the lidless eye in connection with Sauron. The Lord of the Nazgul, for instance, warns Dernhelm -




'Come not between the Nazgûl and his prey! Or he will not slay thee in thy turn. He will bear thee away to the houses of lamentation, beyond all darkness, where thy flesh shall be devoured, and thy shriveled mind be left naked to the Lidless Eye.'



Frodo physically possesses an Elven artifact, the Ring, which confers upon its bearer a power to see things from far away, as he experiences upon Amon Hen at the conclusion of Book II. In The Two Towers Sauron, Saruman and Denethor all possess Elven artifacts, the surviving palantíri, which confer upon their keeper a power to see far away. Gandalf refers to other Elven artifacts of power, the Silmarils stolen by Morgoth in the First Age; and he turns out to possess, himself, one of the Three Rings of the Elven Kings. And Galadriel has yet another Elven artifact with the power to see far away: namely, the Mirror of Galadriel.


Is the Eye of Sauron an Elven artifact, obtained or stolen by Sauron in the Elder Days? Like the Ring, it evidently confers a power to see far away (for Sauron uses it thus, at a time when he no longer possesses the Ring). But I am not as familiar with The Silmarillion, or Unfinished Tales, or The History of Middle Earth, or The Letters of JRR Tolkien as I am with the trilogy.


I am not asking whether the Eye is a real object rather than a metaphor. For myself, I am satisfied that it is not a metaphor, for Frodo sees it as an actual object, in the Mirror of Galadriel: in the passage I have quoted above, both the Mirror and the Eye appear to be real objects having a physical existence.


Is there evidence, anywhere in the writings of Professor Tolkien, which casts light on the nature, or origin, of the lidless eye? Is it in fact an artifact? If so, is it Elvish in origin (like the Silmarils, the palantíri, the Mirror of Galadriel, and the Elven Rings)?


Is there any suggestion that Sauron's power to see far away derives simply from his possession of the Ithil Stone (rather than being an innate power of the Eye of Sauron)?



Answer



No, there is no evidence for this


You're just going to have to trust me on that; the nature of the Eye of Sauron is never really discussed in any kind of satisfying detail. Whatever physical component may exist is likely related to one or more concepts:




  • Sauron's enhanced powers as a Maia

  • The palantír of Minas Ithil, in Sauron's possession


If the palantír is a component of the Eye1 (which seems likely, though, again, there's no direct evidence for this), then it's (at least partially) an artifact in that sense. However, there is no reason to suspect that the Eye is a separate item from the Elder days.




1 See Shamshiel's answer for more on this


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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...

languages - Do we ever see written English in the Star Wars films?

In Empire Strikes Back , we see a transcription of what R2's beeps and bloops mean, but it's not English (sorry for the low quality, it's from the 2004 DVDs): I'd assume it's what Basic looks like when written, but is there some point in the the Star Wars films we see written English instead? (This sort of spun off from a discussion in How do people understand astromech droids? .) Answer At one point there was English but it has been phased out in subsequent versions of the films. Chris Gould at DVD Active did a comparison of all versions of each of the Star Wars films, and in his comparison of Episode 4 , there are a couple of screenshots showing how the power gauge for the Death Star tractor beam was changed. I imagine there are probably more to be found in his other comparisons but I haven't got around to reading those yet.

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...

star trek - Warning regarding forward saucer section in Nemesis?

In Star Trek: Nemesis , just before the Enterprise rams into the Scimitar, Picard sends a text message from his captain's chair arm pad to Troi — who is manning the helm in lieu of the crewman who was just blown out through what was once the view screen — indicating that she should put full impulse on standby. (Literally, if you watch the scene closely, Troi's console prefaces the order with "TXT MSG" !) My question is: Did Picard also somehow warn crew members in the forward saucer section about what was about to happen? The ramming of the Scimitar was a heat of the moment decision. Considering that he also resorted to calling the auto-destruct sequence shortly after (which ended up being offline), he probably was of the mindset that any losses would be acceptable in order to hault Shinzon's march to Earth. Still, I'm curious. Answer The original script indicates that he called for the crew to " brace for impact ". Whether that call (or the comma...