Melkor aka Morgoth and Sauron

[Revan]

Who's the most evil? whom did you hate more. Me, I loath Morgoth. I just wanted to do something really very bad and wrong, like poke him in the eyes or something.

[I'm Murrin]

Well, since Morgoth is intended to represent the very essence of evil, I don't think there's any other option...

[Revan]

Sauron and Melkor are two great enemies of Middle-Earth; each in his own way. Both have caused untold suffering and damage to its inhabitants, and although for a long time Sauron was Melkor's servant (and by that, "less evil", as Tolkien tells us in Morgoth's Ring), when he gained "independence" from his master he proved to be at least Melkor's equal in cruelty and malevolence. The difference between the nature of their evil is interesting: while Melkor seeks only to unmake Arda, sinking into what seems to be insanity further as he strives toward that goal, Sauron is not concerned with his master's quarrel with Eru; he merely seeks lordship and dominion over Middle-Earth, to eradicate all that would oppose him (especially Elves, whom he feared and hated because he could not subdue them).

Sauron also had a big advantage Melkor did not have. He had it in the beginning(as can be seen from his corruption of Men in Atrabeth Finrod ah Andreth, and by his actions in Valinor when the Valar released him), but later on, when he needed it more, he lost it. Whether because he thought he did not need it or because he could not control himself thus anymore, we do not know. That advantage is cunning, lies and deceit. Sauron mastered these skills well while under Melkor, when he wore the form of an evil sorcerer, and later on those skills literally saved his existence and proved to be the end of existence for others.

Now the scope of Melkor's "influence" is very large indeed: He brought discord into the Song, thus ensuring that Eru's original plans for Arda can never be fulfilled ere the End; he fought the Valar in the Beginning for lordship and damaged much of the young world, further marring it; he caused untold suffering to the Elves, first by deceit and lies he spread in Valinor, fueling Curufinwe's desire to leave, then by stealing the Silmarils and fighting with them for their posession.

However, Sauron's own record is pretty impressive also: He caused much harm while in Melkor's service, and then when he remained behind in Middle Earth he quickly moved to establish a reign of terror of his own; cunning and seduction served him well in the creation of the Rings and the One Ring, which tipped the scales in his favor greatly. Ordinary wars and cruel persecutions of both Men and Elves in ME are typical for his personality profile, so I needn't mention them specifically. However, there is one thing which Sauron did, and which Melkor wanted to do, but never managed to do it; to utterly destroy a race or people.

The Numenoreans had as much in common with ordinary Men on the earth as the Elves did (except for the inevitable fact they were both mortal), so I believe it is fitting to separate them from the other Men as a race of their own. Their glory was somewhat shadowed before Sauron's arrival, true, but noone with a sane mind can claim that the events would happen like they did if Sauron's influence was not at work in Westernesse. An entire group of people, a glorious, powerful race was destroyed exclusively due to his machinations and influence.

But, I have dragged on for too long. Essentially, I would like to hear your opinions on this; Who was "more evil"? Can such a comparison be made in the first place? Is Melkor's power more important when determining the magnitude of their evil than Sauron's cold, hard logic and scheming? After all, Sauron did with falsehoold and deceptions in Numenor what no multitude of Melkor's Orcs and Dragons could. I await your contribution.

[Ermingard]

Jeez Darth that was the longest post by you I've ever seen! and interesting too...

[Revan]

Heh thanks! It took ages to write... and I'm annoyed that barely no-one is responding to it.

[I'm Murrin]

That's 'cause your post closed the discussion, Tuvor. No further comment is needed on the subject - you answered the question too well.

[Revan]

Thanks... but it is supposed to be a debate... it would be good if some of you to respond and debate after writing such a long post.

[Worm of Despite]

I'd have to say Morgoth was the greatest evil. He did what he did out of spite and jealousy, whereas Sauron seemed bent on less personal matter and more on conquest. I believe that fact makes Morgoth the more malevolent one--or evil, have you.

[Ylva Kresh]

Perhaps the question comes down to the definition of "evil". Is the one that is "born and raised" "good" and then turns evil more evil than the one educated in evil by a master? The first one (Morgoth) at least has a choice, and he decides to turn upon his creator. The second one (Sauron) "only" follow in the footsteps of his master.

If seen from a completely other perspective; of course "evil" cannot regard itself as evil. Surely also this side must think itself just? Perhaps the creation of Middle Earth and its inhabitants was considered wrong from Morgoths point of view? Perhaps he felt it became meaningless if there was no evolution or strife among the beings created there and therefore was an abhorance that must be stopped or at least changed?

Most people hate changes... what if Morgoth liked the void or whatever existed before the singing and was frightened of a phase of transition?

No, I have no answers...

[Worm of Despite]

I believe in the Silmarillion it states how Morgoth was jealous of the work of the other Valar and especially jealous of his "brother" Manwe, who he thought should have been second-in-command, instead of the King of Arda--of the world. I also think he destroyed the works of the Valar out of spite born from the said jealousy. I'm not sure what Morgoth felt about the things he did. I don't think he was very introspective at all like that. It seems, being the mightiest of all the Valar, he spent all his thousands of years of existence riding on the waves of his vitriol of emotion and simply reacting to it. He never stopped and thought, "whoa, what am I doing?"

I need to read it again, but I'm quite sure Tolkien put in all the reasons for Melkor's fall into Morgoth. They were all there. And, knowing Tolkien, he left nothing out--except who Tom Bombadil was and whether balrogs had wings.

Anyway, though I may not know about Morgoth's feelings on his own actions, I'm sure Sauron, on the other hand, felt justified. Leastwise, he had little speeches his "emissaries" from Mordor would give. As a reference: Gandalf, I believe, told Saruman at an early point in Lord of the Rings that he sounded like one them.

[Revan]

YAY! Some replies... I like to go against what most people say... therefore I vote Sauron

[Guest]

Perhaps the question comes down to the definition of "evil". Is the one that is "born and raised" "good" and then turns evil more evil than the one educated in evil by a master? The first one (Morgoth) at least has a choice, and he decides to turn upon his creator. The second one (Sauron) "only" follow in the footsteps of his master.

Good point. I tend to agree with this argument. Although Sauron, despite his evil upbringing, could conceivably choose to turn his back on his dark ways at any time, was pretty much doomed from the beginning. He was practically nursed on evil nectar and fed evil manna by Melkor. He was taught to hate, kill, destroy, deceive and take power from others by any means possible. This is what made up Sauron.

Melkor was born good, was raised amongst good folk, yet he decided to devote his life to evil. He knew what it was like to be good, yet he chose another path. He gave up a life of beauty for one of powermongering and pain. If his own life of destruction doesn't make him more evil than Sauron, than the simple fact that he intetionally "created" Sauron--considered by most Middle Earth residents to be the most heinous creature in existence--ensures his ranking as the worst of the two.

[Tulizar]

Mmm...that last one was me!

[Worm of Despite]

YAY! Some replies... I like to go against what most people say... therefore I vote Sauron

Um, heh, perhaps a good reason for your vote?

[Revan]

You'll find that in the long post above

[Gart]

I have to give the "evilest" prize to Morgoth, on points. It was his rebellion and pride in it that lead many other Ainur astray, Sauron included. He had the opportunity to repent after his chaining and imprisonment and instead used it to forment trouble and ultimately slay the Two Trees, steal the Silamrils and precipitate the rebellion of the Noldor.
Sauron on the other hand was lead astray by a stronger and allegedly wiser member of his own race, and after that fall had diminshed volition.
He almost shook it off at one point, but ultimately could not:

Ffor the bonds that Morgoth had laid upon him were very strong.

[burgs]

I'm new to this part of the forum, and while I immensely respect Darth's post (that's the best post I've seen from you - never mind its length!), there's no doubt in my mind that the greater evil was Morgoth. All that became evil descended from him. If not for his fall from grace, none of the Maiar (Sauron, eventually Saruman, what became Balrogs) would have "switched".

On a different topic, he is unquestionably the more powerful of the two.

[Grimm]

there's no doubt in my mind that the greater evil was Morgoth. All that became evil descended from him. If not for his fall from grace, none of the Maiar (Sauron, eventually Saruman, what became Balrogs) would have "switched".

This doesn't necessarily mean Morgoth was the greater evil. He just got the ball rolling in the wrong direction. Others followed him. Most fell with him, but Sauron built upon what he had learned in the service of Morgoth.

I believe Sauron is the greater evil; Melkor (Morgoth) was a supreme- being and had his powers for good or evil from the start; Sauron aspired to be evil and willingly followed in the footsteps of Morgoth, growing in power and influence.

Grimm.

[burgs]

I don't quite understand that.

Morgoth/Melkor certainly didn't "just" rebel. He stole the Silmarils and caused an earth breaking battle. He cretaed Orcs in an attempt to create Elves, warped Balrogs from Maia, had "evil" dragons and spiders fighting by his side...this guy was by no means simply a supreme being who got off on the wrong foot. He desired power from the beginning, was covetous, and wrecked the world because of it.

Sauron was certainly no saint, but remember that the Dagor Dagorlath is the return of Morgoth, and therefore the return of Manwe, and the end of the universe/world as we know it. That's on a level Sauron simply can't touch. His desires were never that great. He didn't have designs on Middle Earth and Valinor, he simply wanted Middle Earth. He knew Valinor was beyond his reach.

[Grimm]

I don't quite understand that.

Morgoth/Melkor certainly didn't "just" rebel. He stole the Silmarils and caused an earth breaking battle. He cretaed Orcs in an attempt to create Elves, warped Balrogs from Maia, had "evil" dragons and spiders fighting by his side...this guy was by no means simply a supreme being who got off on the wrong foot. He desired power from the beginning, was covetous, and wrecked the world because of it.

Melkor did all kinds of nasty stuff, but that didn't make him evil, nor should Sauron be considered less evil just because he lacked the power to match Melkor's deeds. Melkor was evil from the beginning, and then he rebelled, stole the Silmarils, etc. All things Sauron would have done if he could have. Sauron chose the path he took, while Melkor was bad from the start. This is the reason I believe Sauron to be the more evil.

The more I think on it, I don't even think there are degrees of evil-ness. One is either evil, or not. After that, it's just a contest to see who can do the nastiest things.

Grimm