Rings of Power talk!

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by jallanite

I think it best that I put you on my ignore list...

Good idea. I was going to suggest the same.

[Radtech51]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Such topics naturally lend themselves to speculation, so I wanted to throw this out there.
Could the "invisibility" of the Three be connected with the nature of their possessors as Elves, and in Ganadalf's case, as a "divine" creature?

Gandalf explained to Frodo that Glorfindel, having dwelt in the Blessed Realm, existed simultaneously in the "real" world and that of hidden things which the Ringwraiths inhabited. Therefore he was visible to those in either world. The One (and the Nine, and the Seven) put its wearer in the wraith-world. Maybe the Three, not designed to confer invisibility, but still connected to the One, simply displayed an opposite effect when worn by Galadriel and Gandalf. I know this would not apply to Elrond, since he had never set foot in Aman, but we do not know his policy of guarding Vilya. Did he wear it all the time? Keep it in his pocket? Who can say?

It also makes me think of the One vanishing when handled by Bombadil. Was that a momentary glimpse of a similar occurrence?

Interesting idea but how does this fit into the end of the Lord of the Rings story when Frodo could plainly see now all three rings of power? I got the impression that Frodo could see them because they were void of power?

[Radtech51]

Originally Posted by jallanite

It is also just as “likely″ that the Elven Rings were rendered invisible by magic outside of their own power.

This is one of the many points unexplained in The Lord of the Rings. Were the dwarf rings also invisible to those looking at their wearers? Unknown.

In the Milton Waldman letter Tolkien states:

And finally, they [the 16 Rings of Power created by the Elven-smiths of Erebor with Sauron’s help] had other powers, more directly derived from Sauron (‘the Necromancer’: so he is called as he casts a fleeting shadow shadow and presage on the pages of The Hobbit): such as rendering invisible the material body, and making things of the invisible world visible.

But of the three rings created by the Elves without Sauron’s aid, Tolkien writes: “… they did not confer invisibility″. How this fits with these three Rings being worn by the wearers invisibly is not said.

Perhaps this is another case where material written by Tolkien but not published within The Lord of the Rings should be disregarded. Or perhaps not.

-----------

-----------

But Tolkien also has Gandalf say in the chapter “The Shadow of the Past”:

A Ring of Power looks after itself, Frodo. It may slip off treacherously, but its keeper never abandons it. At most he plays with the idea of handling it on to someone else’s care—and that only in an early stage, when it first begins to grip. But as far as I know Bilbo alone in history has ever gone beyond playing, and really gone and done it.

But Cirdan, the keeper of one of the Rings of Power, had also handed on his Ring of Power, to Gandalf himself. The best one can do to avoid seeing here a tremendous hole in The Lord of the Rings is to claim that Gandalf was uncharacteristically speaking loosely here and not thinking of the Elven-rings or perhaps even deliberately lying.

------

------

If Sauron happened to be wearing a visible Ring, or even more than one visible ring, there is no particular reason by Ar-Pharazôn would have considered anything untoward about that. But yes, Sauron might indeed have been wearing the Ring invisibly, but also might not have. The theory you present is quite reasonable, but only as one possible fan fiction that would serve.

------

You bring up an excellent point, If the rings of power could be commanded to only only be seen by the wielder or other wielders of rings of power then Ar-Pharazon would not have been able to see Sauron's ring.

------

[Radtech51]

Originally Posted by jallanite

Saruman may still have had hope that Gandalf would see reason and join with him. In the chapter “The Council of Elrond″, Elrond said:

But they [the three Elvish Rings] were not made as weapons of war or conquest: that is not their power. Those who made them did not desire strength or domination or hoarded wealth, but understanding, making, and healing, to preserve all things unstained.

So I see no problem in reconciling Saruman letting Gandalf keep Narya, for the time, with his knowledge that Gandalf possessed it. I see an equally great problem with Saruman not putting Gandalf to death immediately once Saruman had got hold of Gandalf. What was Saruman preserving Gandalf for? Did Saruman perhaps prevision that if Gandalf died, Manwë would send him back? Was Saruman genuine in his hope that Gandalf would ṗerhaps eventually reveal all that he knew of the Ring to Saruman? If as, then better do no more than imprison Gandalf without worrying about Narya.

I tend to agree with you on this idea, if Saruman did manage to get the ring from Gandolf I am not convinced he could put it too much use if any for war. If might have added him in finding his missing pieces of the puzzle and thereby allowing him create his own master ring.

PS: As for Saruman not killing Gandolf when he had the chance, that may have been his biggest mistake or downfall. I have now doubt Saruman upon reflection wished he had done so.

[Radtech51]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

P.S. Sauron certainly did have the One Ring in Numenor. In Letter #211 Tolkien states, “He naturally had the One Ring, and so very soon dominated the minds and wills of most of the Númenóreans.” And in Letter #131 Tolkien reiterates that Sauron (now in spirit form) wisked the Ring away from the ruin of Numenor: "I do not think one need boggle at this spirit carrying off the One Ring [from Numenor], upon which his power of dominating minds now largely depended."

Very interesting, I had thought that only Sauron's physical form was damaged? I did not know that Sauron was in spirit form when he left the ruin in Numenor. If he was able to pick up his master ring in spirit form why did he not do this again when he lost the ring for the 2nd time?

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Radtech51

Interesting idea but how does this fit into the end of the Lord of the Rings story when Frodo could plainly see now all three rings of power? I got the impression that Frodo could see them because they were void of power?

In Lórien Galadriel pretty clearly intimates that Frodo is mainly able to see Nenya because he was a Ring-bearer. Also, he had been wounded by the Witch-king's knife, which had basically put Frodo on the border of the real and the shadow worlds. Is it notable there that none of the other hobbits mention the Three?

Originally Posted by Radtech51

Very interesting, I had thought that only Sauron's physical form was damaged? I did not know that Sauron was in spirit form when he left the ruin in Numenor. If he was able to pick up his master ring in spirit form why did he not do this again when he lost the ring for the 2nd time?

The circumstances were different.
At the destruction of Númenor, Sauron's body was indeed destroyed, and his spirit went back over Sea to Middle-earth. The spirit itself was undamaged. There is no knowing how quickly he was then able to reincarnate, but I suspect it was rather rapid.

At the end of the Second Age, when the One was cut from Sauron's finger, his "inner" self was injured by the loss of the Ring; it was taken from him physically, and that greatly weakened him, so that he it was all he could do to escape and seek a place where he could recuperate, gradually building up enough will and power to re-embody.

[Radtech51]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

In Lórien Galadriel pretty clearly intimates that Frodo is mainly able to see Nenya because he was a Ring-bearer. Also, he had been wounded by the Witch-king's knife, which had basically put Frodo on the border of the real and the shadow worlds. Is it notable there that none of the other hobbits mention the Three?

------
Reply: You make an excellent point, but however if the three rings were void of power at this time wouldn't anyone be able to see them?
------

The circumstances were different.
At the destruction of Númenor, Sauron's body was indeed destroyed, and his spirit went back over Sea to Middle-earth. The spirit itself was undamaged. There is no knowing how quickly he was then able to reincarnate, but I suspect it was rather rapid.

At the end of the Second Age, when the One was cut from Sauron's finger, his "inner" self was injured by the loss of the Ring; it was taken from him physically, and that greatly weakened him, so that he it was all he could do to escape and seek a place where he could recuperate, gradually building up enough will and power to re-embody.

That makes sense, thanks for your insight on this my friend.

[blantyr]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

In Lórien Galadriel pretty clearly intimates that Frodo is mainly able to see Nenya because he was a Ring-bearer. Also, he had been wounded by the Witch-king's knife, which had basically put Frodo on the border of the real and the shadow worlds. Is it notable there that none of the other hobbits mention the Three?

Frodo was a ring-bearer and also one who had seen the Eye. Galadriel mentioned seeing the Eye, which might be important. Also, Galadriel had just used Nenya to create the illusion of a mighty queen. It was only after that minor bit of theatrical magic that Frodo spotted her ring.

Galadriel asked Sam whether he had seen her ring, and he responded no, he had seen a star shining through her finger. She also mentioned that Elrond had not been permitted to speak of it, meaning, I think, speak of the three rings. This seems to me like an unnecessary leak to Frodo and Sam of where another of the Three was.

At the time, the third ring was in Moria. Galadriel might have been the only one who fully realized what that meant. Thus, she sent the eagle to look for Gandalf.

I also note that when one makes a magic item in Tolkien's world, one is putting a bit of one's own strength into the item. If wizard staves have significant power, Galadriel's making a new staff for Gandalf might have been more of a big deal than many realize.

[Puddleglum]

Originally Posted by Radtech51

but however if the three rings were void of power at this time wouldn't anyone be able to see them?

But the rings weren't devoid of power at that time (when the Fellowship was in Lorien).

They lost their power only when the ONE was unmade. We're not told whether everyone could see the rings after that (except, perhaps, the reference to Gandalf wearing the third ring when he is met at Mithlond to take ship West at the end - tho it is not said explictly that all could "see" it, only that he had it), but that could simply be because the chroniclers saw no need to comment on three characters wearing rings.

The Rings were generally not talked about (especially among men who mostly wouldn't even know about them). In fact, to most people a ring on Elrond's or Galadriel's finger (even if they COULD see it) would be nothing special, either to notice or comment on: just a ring, a piece of jewelry, much like what many other Lords and princes may have worn as a matter of course. The kind of thing one can see but not "see" (unless you are an "observer" - like Sherlock Holmes or Hercule Poirot or Ellery Queen or Adrian Monk ).

[Radtech51]

Originally Posted by Puddleglum

But the rings weren't devoid of power at that time (when the Fellowship was in Lorien).

They lost their power only when the ONE was unmade. We're not told whether everyone could see the rings after that (except, perhaps, the reference to Gandalf wearing the third ring when he is met at Mithlond to take ship West at the end - tho it is not said explictly that all could "see" it, only that he had it), but that could simply be because the chroniclers saw no need to comment on three characters wearing rings.

The Rings were generally not talked about (especially among men who mostly wouldn't even know about them). In fact, to most people a ring on Elrond's or Galadriel's finger (even if they COULD see it) would be nothing special, either to notice or comment on: just a ring, a piece of jewelry, much like what many other Lords and princes may have worn as a matter of course. The kind of thing one can see but not "see" (unless you are an "observer" - like Sherlock Holmes or Hercule Poirot or Ellery Queen or Adrian Monk ).

Thanks for the information but I was referring to the end of the book when Frodo could see all three rings. I'll assume everyone could have seen them because they were all void of power at that time? Unless the three kept some small amount of power since Sauron never had anything to do with them?

[Puddleglum]

Originally Posted by Radtech51

Thanks for the information but I was referring to the end of the book when Frodo could see all three rings. I'll assume everyone could have seen them because they were all void of power at that time? Unless the three kept some small amount of power since Sauron never had anything to do with them?

Ah, right. I see now. So many intertwined treads of thought in this topic I got confused. Sorry about that.

To address your thoughts about the Rings at Mithlond...

I'm only speculating here, but I wonder how much of the hiding of the rings is an innate, automatic function of the rings themselves (ie, go on finger = go invisible) and how much is an Art of the wearers (Elves & Maia) used to aid in keeping the secret.

We already know (from "many Partings" in RoTK) that Elves and Maia can communicate without talking, by their thoughts flashing back and forth between them (similar to what we might call telepathy) so it seems feasible that they might have an art or way for diverting peoples "NOTICE" from things like their ring.

For example, in Lorien when Frodo saw the Ring and Galadriel asks Sam "Did you see my ring?", Sam's response isn't a confused "WHAT ring? You don't have a ring. I can see your hand and there isn't any ring on it." Rather it was a simple "no, I didn't" - suggesting that, perhaps, once Galadirel mentioned it he "could" see it (at least physically see it, he still may not have comprehended what it really was).

Which raises at least a <possibility> that, at the end, in Mithlond, the Rings could be seen - less because of their being shorn of power, than because there was no longer any reason for their wearers to try and KEEP them hidden from the notice or awareness of other beings.

And, even so, to some (like Merry & Pippen) the presence of a Ring on an Elven Lord's (or Gandalf's) fnger would be no big deal - whether it were (or had been) a ring of power or not. "Nobles wear rings, big deal" could have been as far as the thought would go. Especially since the **BIG** deal at that time was that Frodo was going away - for good.
Frodo, being a ringbearer, was more likely to be sensitive to the presence of such little things as "rings". Much like a person who was once traumatized by a man with a mole on his left cheek, might thereafter be far more like than other people to notice men who happen to have moles on their left cheek.

Again, this is just a speculation. It "seems" reasonable and feasible to me, and it "might" be close to the truth - but then again it might not be.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Radtech51

You make an excellent point, but however if the three rings were void of power at this time wouldn't anyone be able to see them?

An argument against that is the fact that in all the time the bearers of the Three were with the hobbits in Minas Tirith after Sauron's fall, and on the road back to the North, there is no mention of anyone seeing the Rings, but again, Frodo.

....the grey-cloaked people of Lórien rode towards the mountains; and those who were going to Rivendell sat on the hill and watched, until there came out of the gathering mist a flash; and then they saw no more. Frodo knew that Galadriel had held aloft her ring in token of farewell.

LOTR Many Partings

If the Three were visible at that time due to the loss of the One, surely it wouldn't have been only Frodo to recognize the source of the "flash" from Galadriel.

The idea that the Three were not constantly worn by the bearers, either before or after Sauron's fall, would to me explain much.

x/d with Puddleglum

[Puddleglum]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

An argument against that is the fact that in all the time the bearers of the Three were with the hobbits in Minas Tirith after Sauron's fall, and on the road back to the North, there is no mention of anyone seeing the Rings, but again, Frodo.
If the Three were visible at that time due to the loss of the One, surely it wouldn't have been only Frodo to recognize the source of the "flash" from Galadriel.

Possibly. But then, too, weren't the only times when her ring was *ever* mentioned after the Fall when the narrative (or her actions) specifically brought it up: when she holds it up in farewell (partings) and when all three rings pass away to the West (Havens)? Only two times (did I miss any?). I'm not sure I'd put too much meaning on the fact that in the two cases (a small sample-size), only Frodo (the primary source of record for those events - where he was eyewitness) is explicitly highlighted as seeing.

Especially since he doesn't (in these reports) say no one else DID see or understand - only stays silent on the point. And, we can be fairly certain that Gandalf & Elrond (who were present in each case) "could" see Galadriel's ring (being ring wearers themselves) - AND understand that the flash was her holding up the ring. Yet, that is also not mentioned in the record.

Frodo, as the author of this part of the record, and an eye-witness to the events in it, could well have felt no particular need to give a complete list of who else could and could not see the ring, or understand the flash. His mind was on other things.


BTW (and my apologies for not knowing this) but - what does "x/d" signify. I know lol, rotfl, gtr, imo, and so on - but (sadly) not x/d ???

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Puddleglum

Possibly. But then, too, weren't the only times when her ring was *ever* mentioned after the Fall when the narrative (or her actions) specifically brought it up: when she holds it up in farewell (partings) and when all three rings pass away to the West (Havens)? I'm not sure I'd put too much meaning on the lack of reference to it.

I know there's nothing definite. It just strikes me that only Frodo is ever mentioned as seeing the Three.

Originally Posted by Puddleglum

BTW (and my apologies for not knowing this) but - what does "x/d" signify. I know lol, rotfl, gtr, imo, and so on mean - but (sadly) not x/d ???

It just indicates a cross-post with someone else.

[Radtech51]

....the grey-cloaked people of Lórien rode towards the mountains; and those who were going to Rivendell sat on the hill and watched, until there came out of the gathering mist a flash; and then they saw no more. Frodo knew that Galadriel had held aloft her ring in token of farewell.

I had always thought that the three rings of power were slowly loosing their power over time once the one ring was destroyed but not all at once. I had thought that Galadriel's final display of power from her ring of power to Frodo was a parting reminder to him about their talk and about the rings of power coming to and end.

[jallanite]

Originally Posted by Radtech51

I had always thought that the three rings of power were slowly loosing their power over time once the one ring was destroyed but not all at once. I had thought that Galadriel's final display of power from her ring of power to Frodo was a parting reminder to him about their talk and about the rings of power coming to and end.

This is one of the many puzzlements in The Lord of the Rings. At that time Frodo is unaware that Elrond and Gandalf were bearers of two of the three Elven-rings and presumably only knows that Galadriel is a ring-bearer, yet the text says:

But at length all was said, and they parted again for a while, until it was time for the Three Rings to pass away.

Of course since Frodo later knows to set out with Sam to meet with Galadriel and Elrond on September 21st of the year 1421 Shire Reckoning, he presumably has received messages from the Elves about their planned return over the Seas and learned that Bilbo is to go with them, and he himself may go with them if he wishes, and that to Sam also permission is given to at last depart. It may well be that among these communications Frodo had been informed that Elrond and Gandalf were bearers of two of the Elven-rings but that he had not explicitly said so in his writing. It is only explicitly said so in the last pages of The Lord of the Rings which must be derived from Sam’s writing.

Then of course Tolkien is to be imagined as himself retelling the story in the third person, at which point the phase “until it was time for the Three rings to pass away” may be understood to have entered the tale.

When and at what point the three Elven-rings lost all their power is not told. Indeed, they may still have some power in them again when last seen. The story does not tell, just as it does not tell whether they may not have become completely powerless immediately upon the destruction of the One Ring.

[Puddleglum]

Originally Posted by jallanite

At that time Frodo is unaware that Elrond and Gandalf were bearers of two of the three Elven-rings

Well, we don't actually even "know" that. The record that became LOTR was, ostensibly, written by the Hobbits (primarily Frodo) and it doesn't explicitly "mention" the location of the other two rings before this, but the record wasn't essentially ABOUT the location of the three rings and there would have been no driving reason for Frodo to report it even if he had known (as interesting as it may have been to *US* to read it ).

So, maybe he did know, maybe he didn't.

My personal belief is that he "did" know. But that's only because he had become professionally aware of Rings (as a ring-bearer and having seen one of the rings earlier) and so would be more likely than most people (like Merry or Pippin) to "connect the dots" and conclude that "that Blue stoned ring on Elrond's hand may well be one of the Three", etc.

[blantyr]

Originally Posted by Puddleglum

My personal belief is that he "did" know. But that's only because he had become professionally aware of Rings (as a ring-bearer and having seen one of the rings earlier) and so would be more likely than most people (like Merry or Pippin) to "connect the dots" and conclude that "that Blue stoned ring on Elrond's hand may well be one of the Three", etc.

You know, with 20 20 hindsight, who else could have had the three rings?

[jallanite]

The quotation Puddleglum correctly attributes to me applies to the period when Puddleglum’s explanation was unlikely to have happened, just before the final separation of Galadriel and Celeborn and their followers from Frodo and his party when from what we are told none of the three bearers of Elvish rings then bore them openly, though Galadriel produced a glow from her ring from a distance.

Originally Posted by Puddleglum

My personal belief is that he "did" know. But that's only because he had become professionally aware of Rings (as a ring-bearer and having seen one of the rings earlier) and so would be more likely than most people (like Merry or Pippin) to "connect the dots" and conclude that "that Blue stoned ring on Elrond's hand may well be one of the Three", etc.

Frodo is shown at the end of the Lord of the Rings to have learned much information whose source is not given: the exact date that Elrond, Galadriel, Gandalf and Bilbo will be passing through the Shire, and that Frodo may join them in their journey to the west if he wishes, and that the same opportunity will eventually be given to Sam.

I see no sign that Frodo knows at the point where Galadriel departs that Elrond and Gandalf also bore rings. Possibly he is merely being discrete in not including what was then a secret in the Red Book. Possibly Frodo later learned it from whatever sources informed him of the exact time when Bilbo, Galadriel, and Elrond would be passing through the Shire on their way to the west, and that he might go with them if he wished, and that to Sam also the same choice would be given eventually. Possibly Frodo learned of the disposition of the Three Elven-rings from Elrond or Galadriel or Bilbo on his journey west.

Originally Posted by blantyr

You know, with 20 20 hindsight, who else could have had the three rings?

With 20 20 hindsight, of course the right answer would emerge. But the story as told allows the possibility that Cirdan, Glorfindel, or Celeborn might have been bearers of Elven-rings. Or possibly some other elves of whom we have not been told. Note that we are only told the last of the Elven-rings bore a red stone and was a ring of fire at the same time that we are told that Gandalf had born it.

[Radtech51]

Originally Posted by jallanite

The quotation Puddleglum correctly attributes to me applies to the period when Puddleglum’s explanation was unlikely to have happened, just before the final separation of Galadriel and Celeborn and their followers from Frodo and his party when from what we are told none of the three bearers of Elvish rings then bore them openly, though Galadriel produced a glow from her ring from a distance.



Frodo is shown at the end of the Lord of the Rings to have learned much information whose source is not given: the exact date that Elrond, Galadriel, Gandalf and Bilbo will be passing through the Shire, and that Frodo may join them in their journey to the west if he wishes, and that the same opportunity will eventually be given to Sam.

I see no sign that Frodo knows at the point where Galadriel departs that Elrond and Gandalf also bore rings. Possibly he is merely being discrete in not including what was then a secret in the Red Book. Possibly Frodo later learned it from whatever sources informed him of the exact time when Bilbo, Galadriel, and Elrond would be passing through the Shire on their way to the west, and that he might go with them if he wished, and that to Sam also the same choice would be given eventually. Possibly Frodo learned of the disposition of the Three Elven-rings from Elrond or Galadriel or Bilbo on his journey west.



With 20 20 hindsight, of course the right answer would emerge. But the story as told allows the possibility that Cirdan, Glorfindel, or Celeborn might have been bearers of Elven-rings. Or possibly some other elves of whom we have not been told. Note that we are only told the last of the Elven-rings bore a red stone and was a ring of fire at the same time that we are told that Gandalf had born it.

I thought of another way one could interpret this ending. It could be that the three rings of power were no longer needed to be hidden or kept as a secret especially now that they're about to be taken away forever from middle earth? Perhaps they all wielded them openly now in the end to symbolize the point of no more fear or secrets concerning the rings of power and that this time the war of the rings has come to an end?

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Radtech51

I had always thought that the three rings of power were slowly loosing their power over time once the one ring was destroyed but not all at once. I had thought that Galadriel's final display of power from her ring of power to Frodo was a parting reminder to him about their talk and about the rings of power coming to and end.

To me, it makes more sense that the Three immediately became powerless upon the loss of the One.
They were "tied" to it after all; there was no delineation made between the influence of the One upon the Three, and that it exerted upon the wearers of the Nine and the Seven. With the One, Sauron could know and govern the thoughts of all of them.
When the One was destroyed, immediate effects were observed. Sauron's spirit was irreparably maimed, Barad-dûr, made with the One, collapsed, and the Nazgûl fell from the sky in ruin. Since those events were not gradual, why would the Three's fading be any different?

[Puddleglum]

Originally Posted by jallanite

The quotation Puddleglum correctly attributes to me applies to the period when Puddleglum’s explanation was unlikely to have happened, just before the final separation of Galadriel and Celeborn and their followers from Frodo and his party when from what we are told none of the three bearers of Elvish rings then bore them openly, though Galadriel produced a glow from her ring from a distance.

But the text DOESN'T tell us that at that time.

Except for the statement of Galadriel's farewell flash, the text at this time doesn't tell us ANYTHING about whether the rings were worn on hands, were visible or invisible, were locked in luggage or attached to chains of flashing, multi-colored lights (ok, I'm being silly with that last option). Since the text doesn't tell us, we don't know - we can only speculate.

We know that prior to the destruction of the One they were not worn openly - but as Galadriel wore hers in Lorien without Sam realizing she even HAD a ring this "not worn openly" doesn't necessarily mean "not worn".

But we don't explicitly know whether, AFTER destruction of the One, they continued to "not wear openly", or whether it was now a moot point and they "could" wear them openly.

Either are fair speculations. My only objection was what appeared to be an absolute statement that Frodo "WAS unaware" about Elrond & Galadriel.

He "might" have been unaware, or he "might" have known by then. After all, he spent a lot of time with Gandalf in Minas Tirith from mid-April to MidSummer (Unfinished Tales tells us they shared a house), and he reasonably could also have spent time with Elrond as well.

My "explaination" (or reason for why I thought what I did) was based upon

• Frodo's long, intimate connection with Rings of Power - which predated the flash from Galadriel's ring at the parting.
• Frodo's having spent time with Gandalf in Minas Tirith (and having at least the opportunity to spend time with Elrond there as well) - which also predates the parting flash from Galadriel.

So, while my speculation may be either right or wrong, I do think it is predicated upon conditions as they were at the time referenced (the parting near Moria).

[Radtech51]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

To me, it makes more sense that the Three immediately became powerless upon the loss of the One.
They were "tied" to it after all; there was no delineation made between the influence of the One upon the Three, and that it exerted upon the wearers of the Nine and the Seven. With the One, Sauron could know and govern the thoughts of all of them.
When the One was destroyed, immediate effects were observed. Sauron's spirit was irreparably maimed, Barad-dûr, made with the One, collapsed, and the Nazgûl fell from the sky in ruin. Since those events were not gradual, why would the Three's fading be any different?

You might be right about the Three immediately becoming powerless after the one ring was destroyed, however if they were then how did Galadriel create that last parting flash of light from her ring in display to Frodo? It's true she was a powerful sorceress of sorts so I suppose creating a flash of light would not prove to difficult for her, but still it makes you wonder.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Radtech51

You might be right about the Three immediately becoming powerless after the one ring was destroyed, however if they were then how did Galadriel create that last parting flash of light from her ring in display to Frodo? It's true she was a powerful sorceress of sorts so I suppose creating a flash of light would not prove to difficult for her, but still it makes you wonder.

At the time of the parting of the hobbits and Gandalf from Galadriel et al, the group had been camped on a "low hill" within sight of the Mountains of Moria, so there was high ground in the area.

Quickly fading into the stones and the shadows the grey-cloaked people of Lórien rode towards the mountains; and those who were going to Rivendell sat on the hill and watched, until there came out of the gathering mist a flash; and then they saw no more. Frodo knew that Galadriel had held aloft her ring in token of farewell.

The description of the lighting as producing "shadows", added to the "gathering mist", makes it possible in my mind that it was sunset. Maybe Galadriel simply held up Nenya, upon which a last glint of sunlight lit.

[Radtech51]

I recently came across a part in the Lord of the Rings during the council meeting in Rivendale where it was specifically stated that the (Nine) rings of power the Ring Wraiths Keep. Perhaps it wasn't known that Sauron took the Nine from them?

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Radtech51

I recently came across a part in the Lord of the Rings during the council meeting in Rivendale where it was specifically stated that the (Nine) rings of power the Ring Wraiths Keep. Perhaps it wasn't known that Sauron took the Nine from them?

Indeed that was spoken by Gandalf at the Council of Elrond. An explanation could be either that Gandalf simply didn't know everything, or that Saruman knew Sauron had kept the Nine, and for his own reasons had sought to hide the truth from the White Council, lying to them.

[jallanite]

The sentence spoken at the Council of Elrond is precisely:

The Nine the Nazgûl keep.

Given the many other passages by Tolkien in which Sauron himself possesses the Nine, it would seem that Tolkien, as he often does, is using inversion here. The sentence has “The Nine” as its subject. What do “the Nine” do? They “keep”. What then do the nine Rings keep? They keep the Nazgûl in line for Sauron.

The sentence would be translated into normal modern word order as “The Nine keep the Nazgûl.”

Christopher Tolkien unfortunately does not cover Gandalf’s explanation in the HoME volumes, as least so far as I have found. So HoME sheds no light on this sentence.

That is the only explanation that I have discovered. I read this suggestion years ago in some fanzine. Tolkien, more used to including inversions in the words of his speakers then most modern readers, might not have noticed that this sentence is ambiguous, especially since he would already know what he meant by it.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by jallanite

The sentence spoken at the Council of Elrond is precisely:

The Nine the Nazgûl keep.

Given the many other passages by Tolkien in which Sauron himself possesses the Nine, it would seem that Tolkien, as he often does, is using inversion here. The sentence has “The Nine” as its subject. What do “the Nine” do? They “keep”. What then do the nine Rings keep? They keep the Nazgûl in line for Sauron.

The sentence would be translated into normal modern word order as “The Nine keep the Nazgûl.”

Christopher Tolkien unfortunately does not cover Gandalf’s explanation in the HoME volumes, as least so far as I have found. So HoME sheds no light on this sentence.

That is the only explanation that I have discovered. I read this suggestion years ago in some fanzine. Tolkien, more used to including inversions in the words of his speakers then most modern readers, might not have noticed that this sentence is ambiguous, especially since he would already know what he meant by it.

The Professor did indeed use inverted, and sometimes archaic sentence structures at times (one of the things I enjoy about his writing). In this case though, I don't think that's the explanation.
In the relevant passage, Gandalf is speaking to the Council of Elrond about the dispositions of the Rings of Power, not the effects on their wearers. So it appears that Gandalf indeed is saying the Nazgûl had possession of their Nine Rings.
Whether that was merely a slip by Tolkien is conjectural, but I think my Saruman explanation is at least possible.

[jallanite]

From The Fellowship of the Ring, book II, chapter 2:

So it is now: the Nine he [Sauron] has gathered to himself; …

This goes back to Tolkien’s earliest drafts. From The Return of the Shadow, (HoME 6), page 78:

Men had three rings, and others they found in secret places cast away by the elf-wraiths: and men-wraiths are servants of the Lord, and they brought all their rings back to him [Sauron]; …

Later Tolkien discarded the idea of elf-wraiths and had nine rings, not three only, given directly by Sauron to Men. But the idea remains that the Men who had been turned into wraiths by the Rings brought their Rings to Sauron.

From The Fellowship of the Ring, Book II, chapter 7, three paragraphs from the end:

You [Frodo] saw the Eye of him that holds the Seven and the Nine.

From letter 246 in The Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien:

… they [the Nazgûl] would have obeyed or feigned to obey any minor commands of his [Sauron’s] that did not interfere with their errand – laid upon them by Sauron, who still through their nine rings (which he held) had primary control over their wills.

This shows what Tolkien considered to be the truth about who actually held the rings.

Your explanations don’t explain why Gandalf at the Council of Elrond has changed his account from what he had earlier told Frodo or why Galadriel’s account agrees with this earlier account, both of which agree with Tolkien’s account in letter 246. Either of your explanations are possible but are very incomplete.

My explanation is also conjectural but at least complete and requires no extra untold explanation about Saruman, which in any case does not explain why neither Gandalf (when explaining to Bilbo) and later Galadriel do not mention the Saruman explanation which is indeed only your own invention.

You might as well invent that Gandalf’s thought processes at the moment were being interfered with by his own ring through which he could access some of Sauron’s thoughts.

Your Saruman explanation requires that Gandalf rejects Saruman’s explanation when talking with Frodo. Presumably Gandalf must have some reason for saying what he does other that his general distrust of Saruman, because at point Gandalf still generally trusts Saruman. Only after he has personally learned that Saruman has betrayed the Council does Gandalf, according to you, put forth a different account of the fate of the Nine, which you suggest came from Saruman. This explanation raises more problems than it solves.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by jallanite

Your explanations don’t explain why Gandalf at the Council of Elrond has changed his account from what he had earlier told Frodo or why Galadriel’s account agrees with this earlier account, both of which agree with Tolkien’s account in letter 246. Either of your explanations are possible but are very incomplete.

In case I wasn't clear, my belief is that Sauron indeed did hold the Nine Rings.

Originally Posted by jallanite

My explanation is also conjectural but at least complete and requires no extra untold explanation about Saruman, which in any case does not explain why neither Gandalf (when explaining to Bilbo) and later Galadriel do not mention the Saruman explanation which is indeed only your own invention.

Your idea would require a puzzling change of subject in Gandalf's words: moving from discussion of what happened to the other Rings of Power to the specific effect of the Nine on the Nazgûl. I see no reason for that abrupt shift.

Originally Posted by jallanite

Your Saruman explanation requires that Gandalf rejects Saruman’s explanation when talking with Frodo. Presumably Gandalf must have some reason for saying what he does other that his general distrust of Saruman, because at point Gandalf still generally trusts Saruman. Only after he has personally learned that Saruman has betrayed the Council does Gandalf, according to you, put forth a different account of the fate of the Nine, which you suggest came from Saruman. This explanation raises more problems than it solves.

I never said it was anything more than a possibility. The most likely explanation is probably that it was merely a slip by Tolkien; a piece of earlier, rejected thoughts that inadvertently slipped into the final text. I was simply looking for something in-world that would explain it.

[jallanite]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Your idea would require a puzzling change of subject in Gandalf's words: moving from discussion of what happened to the other Rings of Power to the specific effect of the Nine on the Nazgûl. I see no reason for that abrupt shift.

I agree. The theory takes the sentence to be an inversion of an already inverted sentence. The sentence reads very awkwardly if interpreted by this theory, more so, I think, than any other sentence written by Tolkien, none of which calls for a supposed re-interpretation which reverses what Tolkien seems to write.

The most likely explanation is probably that it was merely a slip by Tolkien; a piece of earlier, rejected thoughts that inadvertently slipped into the final text. I was simply looking for something in-world that would explain it.

I agree here also. The sentence can be interpreted according to the theory, which might explain why Tolkien never noticed his miswriting. (If so, then that possible misinterpretation perhaps becomes the real interpretation, if it were Tolkien’s interpretation, Tolkien knowing what the sentence ought to mean.)

Unfortunately your former in-world explanation causes still more difficulties, which is why I don’t accept it as a valid in-world explanation.

I don’t recall who came up with this interpretation many years ago. Its sole advantage is that it works perfectly, if the reader is willing to accept that Gandalf is here speaking in an unusually awkward way. Perhaps that is easier to accept than that Gandalf is here simply wrong about something he was right about a few months back when explaining the fate of the rings to Frodo. One might also accept that Gandalf is here making a slip of his tongue such as people often do in real life. But in books generally speakers do not make casual slips of the tongue, except when they are supposed to be noticeably mentally disturbed to some extent which is not the case with Gandalf here.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

The Professor did indeed use inverted, and sometimes archaic sentence structures at times (one of the things I enjoy about his writing). In this case though, I don't think that's the explanation.
In the relevant passage, Gandalf is speaking to the Council of Elrond about the dispositions of the Rings of Power, not the effects on their wearers. So it appears that Gandalf indeed is saying the Nazgûl had possession of their Nine Rings.
Whether that was merely a slip by Tolkien is conjectural, but I think my Saruman explanation is at least possible.

Another even simpler explanation is that Gandalf was not infallible. Perhaps at the time, he believed the Nazgûl kept the Nine. The story, as we know in hindsight, is told through the literary deceit of Hobbitish retelling. It would be nigh impossible for Gandalf to know that Sauron kept the Nine. How would he know beyond a shadow of a doubt? How could it be proved? I don't believe Sauron advertised the fact, and the Nazgûl were certainly not chatty sorts either.

Of the three Gandalf had direct, personal knowledge, of the seven there was anecdotal evidence supporting the idea that Sauron had taken three back (one of these was certainly worn by Thrain II, imprisoned by the Necromancer/Sauron), but the other four were supposedly consumed by dragons.

To say that by inversion the sentence "The nine the Nazgûl keep" means anything other than it implies makes little sense, particularly since Gandalf is presenting his knowledge to the Council of Elrond, where such ambiguity would be counterintuitive. The inversion is for emphasis on the nine, as Gandalf relates the whereabouts of each ring. It is far more ominous using a heightened and alliterative "The nine the Nazgûl keep", than the modern "The Nazgûl keep the nine." There is poetic symmetry in the former and not in the latter.

If Gandalf knew at the time that Sauron held the nine, he would just say so, as he did with the the few of the seven the Dark Lord held.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

The One Ring was most likely on Sauron's finger the whole time, or at least somewhere on his person.

I agree.

If you reread the chapter on Galadriel's Mirror, Galadriel's ring, Nenya, was only visible if she chose to reveal it, and then only Frodo saw it plainly (he being a Ringbearer himself), while Sam saw a light but could not discern a ring.

What do you think of the interpretation that Sam saw Nenya (as in its light) but did not understand what it was, as Frodo did. Sam saw 'something' but earlier he was greatly upset by his vision, didn't want to see any more magic, and a bit later wished Galadriel would take the One and stop 'them digging up the gaffer' and so on (revealing, I think, where his mind and attention was still focused).

I admit the scene at Galadriel's mirror is suggestive of invisibility, but why should the Mirdain or Celebrimbor care to work in the power of invisibility only so that the Rings themselves could be made invisible, and yet not the wearers, and before Sauron's plan was revealed? Why go only that far, considering that if 'invisibility power' were even part of the scenario, the Three were the most powerful of the Elven Rings in any event (though preservation power was admittedly key with these).

Likewise, few even knew Gandalf had a Ring of Power, not even Saruman, who held him in captivity in Orthanc briefly.

I had not considered this before, which does raise the question of why Saruman did not discover Narya at this point if it was visible. But one does not necessarily search for something that isn't suspected in the first place, and Saruman's wrath may have been focused on keeping Gandalf prisoner... a fairly major step to have taken, as it was, and I'm not sure it's noted that he even took away Gandalf's staff.

It's interesting perhaps, that for the revised edition Tolkien added (The Grey Havens, second edition of the 1960s) that Gandalf now openly wore Narya. Of course that could refer to some kind of magic, or that he wore it now in plain view on his finger.

If the latter, this might mean that Gandalf, as the Grey Pilgrim who was out and about more compared to Elrond or Galadriel, could not actually wear his Ring at certain times.

[Pervinca Took]

Originally Posted by Galin

It's interesting perhaps, that for the revised edition Tolkien added (The Grey Havens, second edition of the 1960s) that Gandalf now openly wore Narya. Of course that could refer to some kind of magic, or that he wore it now in plain view on his finger.

If the latter, this might mean that Gandalf, as the Grey Pilgrim who was out and about more compared to Elrond or Galadriel, could not actually wear his Ring at certain times.

What do you think of the interpretation that Sam saw Nenya (as in its light) but did not understand what it was, as Frodo did. Sam saw 'something' but earlier he was greatly upset by his vision, didn't want to see any more magic, and a bit later wished Galadriel would take the One and stop 'them digging up the gaffer' and so on (revealing, I think, where his mind and attention was still focused)..

I agree.

I always had the feeling that the Three Rings were visible if their bearers chose to make them so, more than that Frodo saw them because he himself bore the One. I wonder if he perhaps sensed their presence more than anyone else, though, as a result of being the Ringbearer. I agree with Galin's suggestion that Sam did see Nenya, but just didn't realise what it was - "I saw a star through your finger." Maybe Frodo was able to see Nenya more clearly than Sam could, but anyone could see it if its bearer willed it? Maybe the quality of being able to be concealed at will was a part of the magic of the Three?

It's interesting that Galadriel is the only one to specifically tell Frodo where one of the Three lies: "It is not permitted to speak [of them], but it cannot be concealed from the Ringbearer, and one who has seen the Eye" (rough quotation from memory). Galadriel is known to be strong-willed, and may have many reasons for doing so. I always felt one of the main reasons, though, was that she felt he had a right to know. Perhaps Gandalf and Elrond thought it would be too risky, because such knowledge could be extracted from him by torture, but Galadriel reasoned that if the Ringbearer were captured, the game would be up in any case?

Maybe they also just felt that "he knew enough to be going on with" and didn't see any point in overloading him with more information. Not to mention the added responsibility of guarding further secrets. Plus, of course, the fact that we as the reader learn and wonder about things as Frodo does, and unsolved mysteries add to the richness of the story and keep us guessing.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Galin

It's interesting perhaps, that for the revised edition Tolkien added (The Grey Havens, second edition of the 1960s) that Gandalf now openly wore Narya. Of course that could refer to some kind of magic, or that he wore it now in plain view on his finger.

If the latter, this might mean that Gandalf, as the Grey Pilgrim who was out and about more compared to Elrond or Galadriel, could not actually wear his Ring at certain times.

I don't think the Three had any sort of invisibility. That power is specifically associated with the rings in which Sauron had a direct role in making. Invisibility is the "realm of hidden things", the shadow-world of the Nazgûl. Sauron seems to have endowed the One, the Seven, and the Nine with invisibility power with that in mind.
Why would the Elves had wanted the Three to have it, even if only as camouflage for the rings themselves? When the Three were fashioned, Sauron's plot involving the One was not known. Therefore, the Elves would have felt no call for any secrecy surrounding the Three or their use.

I favor the notion that Gandalf simply did not openly wear Narya at all times, but as Galin notes, Elrond and Galadriel would have been far more secure in wearing their rings, ensconced in secure locations.

[Galin]

Maybe Frodo was able to see Nenya more clearly than Sam could, but anyone could see it if its bearer willed it? Maybe the quality of being able to be concealed at will was a part of the magic of the Three?

I was thinking more along the lines of Inziladun's recent post, that the Three were not connected to 'invisibility power' (which seemingly connects to Sauron's influence) even in this much measure, and that the Mirdain did not know of Sauron's plan when the Three were crafted.

When Galadriel first lifted up her arms: 'Frodo gazed at the Ring with awe; for suddenly it seemed to him that he understood.' We don't know at this point that the Ring was necessarily invisible. Frodo didn't suddenly see a ring, he saw it and suddenly understood -- this connects to Galadriel's question later.

The second time Galadriel lifts her hand the Ring issued a great light that illuminated her alone. Frodo does ask why he cannot: '... see all the others and know the thoughts of those that wear them' but even this isn't exactly 'simple sight' but perception as well. As Ringbearer his 'sight has grown keener' -- not his physical visual powers I think, but his ability to see that which is hidden from the perception of others.

But of course comes the issue of Sam: yet note Galadriel's question compared to what had been noted about Frodo suddenly understanding: 'And did you not see and recognize the ring upon my finger? Did you see my ring?' she asked, turning to Sam.' Granted Galadriel doesn't say 'and recognize' to Sam as well, but I find it notable that 'and recognize' was added to a draft at some point, where the earlier text simply had 'see' for Frodo's question as well.

Sam doesn't actually mention any ring of course, admittedly suggesting invisibility, but he did see something -- and to my mind something connected to what was actually going on too -- he saw 'a star through your [Galadriel's] fingers'.

Again that's something, but perhaps Sam would not 'see' the truth even if he had noticed an actual ring: he wasn't the Bearer of the One, and as a Hobbit in general is 'Halfwise' and simple (and Sam already had said he didn't want 'to see no more magic' even). This would be quite like Tolkien in my opinion: a good way to illustrate perception would be to have Sam see something he thought was something else, and simply not understand what all this talk was about.

I'm not saying this is a clearly correct interpretation (especially if there is other text to consider on this point), however.

[Alfirin]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Sauron would certainly have had the One on his person when captured. However, the Númenóreans probably did not even know of the existence of the Rings of Power at that time. I can see the wily Sauron saying something along the lines of "Please, Great King, this heirloom is all I have left to me. Let me treasure it, since I have nothing else."
Since they were unwary enough about Sauron and his ways to have taken him to their homeland in the first place, I don't see why the Ring would have specially concerned them.

It also probably wouldn't have impressed them enough to be worth taking. Remember, in and of itself, the One Ring doesn't look like much, it's a simple gold band, without stone or (visible) inscription (it's unclear if the insription on the ring is visible perpetually when on Sauron's finger, but I tend to think it isn't, you have to put it in a fire to make the inscription seen. And since this is "old" sauron we are talking about who can still take fair forms, her presumably isn't in a form where his hand is continually on fire.) To the eyes of a Numernorian Royal or noble, it would appear a cheap trifle, the kind of thing they'd fob off on a low foot soldier for some minor service that meritied a token reward for appearances sake. Nothing worth taking.

[Puddleglum]

Originally Posted by Alfirin

it's unclear if the inscription on the ring is visible perpetually when on Sauron's finger, but I tend to think it isn't, you have to put it in a fire to make the inscription seen.

Here's an interesting thought. Gandalf tells (the Council) that Isuldur reported "The Ring misseth, maybe, the heat of Sauron's hand, which was black and yet burned like fire."

So, how did Sauron go around schmoozing the nobility of Numenor with hands that burned on touch?

Possibly his pre-Akallebeth form of flesh "didn't" have burning hands. But that begs the question of how or why his "post"-Akallebeth form's hands *did* burn like fire. If this was a post "feature", was it by choice?

Any thoughts? Or is there anything elsewhere bearing on the question (off hand, I don't think of anything else).

[Alfirin]

Originally Posted by Puddleglum

Here's an interesting thought. Gandalf tells (the Council) that Isuldur reported "The Ring misseth, maybe, the heat of Sauron's hand, which was black and yet burned like fire."

So, how did Sauron go around schmoozing the nobility of Numenor with hands that burned on touch?

Possibly his pre-Akallebeth form of flesh "didn't" have burning hands. But that begs the question of how or why his "post"-Akallebeth form's hands *did* burn like fire. If this was a post "feature", was it by choice?

Any thoughts? Or is there anything elsewhere bearing on the question (off hand, I don't think of anything else).

It probably didn't, the pre-Akallebeth form was counted amoung the "fair" ones, and I rather doubt burning or blackened hands would count as "fair". As for why the Post did, I think the answer is that, when Saurom re-incarnated post-Akallebeth he realized that, given his strength, this was likey the last form he would have, and, limted as he was to "foul" forms by then wanted to go with one that seemed most likey to accompish his goal of conquest. So the form he chose was as close as he could get to the form his former master, Melkorm, had taken (with both we have a "gigantic" (not so big with Sauron, but he is still described as being more than normal man size) human form in black armor. Melkor's hands continually burned (from trying to handle the Silmarils) so Sauron made his hands firey as well. No to mentiond it does add an extra layer of protection to the rings, Isildur got by by chopping the finger off and then taking it, but someone who simply tried to pull the ring(s) off Sauron's hands when he was simply knocked out or asleep, assuming Sauron does sleep (Melkor did, so Sauron probably does) would have to deal with rings that were likely perpetually red hot.

[Radtech51]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Another even simpler explanation is that Gandalf was not infallible. Perhaps at the time, he believed the Nazgûl kept the Nine. The story, as we know in hindsight, is told through the literary deceit of Hobbitish retelling. It would be nigh impossible for Gandalf to know that Sauron kept the Nine. How would he know beyond a shadow of a doubt? How could it be proved? I don't believe Sauron advertised the fact, and the Nazgûl were certainly not chatty sorts either.

Of the three Gandalf had direct, personal knowledge, of the seven there was anecdotal evidence supporting the idea that Sauron had taken three back (one of these was certainly worn by Thrain II, imprisoned by the Necromancer/Sauron), but the other four were supposedly consumed by dragons.

To say that by inversion the sentence "The nine the Nazgûl keep" means anything other than it implies makes little sense, particularly since Gandalf is presenting his knowledge to the Council of Elrond, where such ambiguity would be counterintuitive. The inversion is for emphasis on the nine, as Gandalf relates the whereabouts of each ring. It is far more ominous using a heightened and alliterative "The nine the Nazgûl keep", than the modern "The Nazgûl keep the nine." There is poetic symmetry in the former and not in the latter.

If Gandalf knew at the time that Sauron held the nine, he would just say so, as he did with the the few of the seven the Dark Lord held.

If Gandalf did believe that the nine kept the rings of power that leads me to ask another question. When the king of the ring wraiths fell in battle why did he not then go and seek out his ring?