What was Saruman's ring?
Michael Martinez
>David L Evens (dev...@uoguelph.ca) wrote:
>: In article <402n64$7...@homer.alpha.net> Carl Peterson wrote:
>: : In article <4017ar$f...@ccshst05.cs.uoguelph.ca>,
>: : dev...@uoguelph.ca (David L Evens) wrote:
>: : >I don't think that a Great Ring made AFTER the One would be subject
>: : to
>: : >it. This is because the One was made specifically to control all the
>: : >other Rings in existence at the time, and even at that Sauron had to
>: : >place a HUGE ammount of his power into it to make it work. I doubt
>: : that
>: : >the power of the One would extend to another Great Ring made after
>: : it.
>: : I don't think the One ring had power over all the magical rings
>: : the elves made, just the ones made under Sauron's tutelage.
>
>: Ah, but ALL the Elven rings were under it's power, even the Three, that
>: he NEVER saw, and only felt through the power of the One. I believe that
>: they were under it's control ONLY because they existed at the time of its
>: making and it was designed to control all existing Rings of Power.
>
>I think it only controlled those that existed as part of Sauron's plan,not
>every Ring ever made.
Elsewhere I've gotten into a theoretical discussion about the way magic
worked in Tokien's fiction, and I speculated that Saruman put a lot of
his remaining power into the ring. Something that has been asked but
not adequately answered is: why wasn't Saruman able to use the ring after
Gandalf broke his staff?
It now occurs to me that Saruman probably chose to bide his time at first,
thinking he could wait and see who won the war. If, as I have speculated,
Saruman's ring was subject to the One Ring (by virtue of having been
wrought through the same principles as the Great Rings), then his ring
became powerless when the One Ring was destroyed, and he thus lost most
of the rest of his power at that time.
Recall that the inscription on the One Ring was:
Ash nazg durbatluluk, ash nazg gimbatul, ash nazg thrakatuluk,
agh burzum-ishi krimpatul. "One ring to rule them all, one ring
to find them, one ring to bring them all, and in the darkness
bind them."
Sauron actually spoke those words when he forged the ring, and the
wearers of the Great Rings were aware of him. So, here is an argument
for the supposition that only the Great Rings were subject to the
one. On the other hand, Sauron wanted complete control over Middle-
Earth, so why would he leave out the lesser rings? Weren't they taken
when Ost-in-Edhil was destroyed?
The rhyme which, quoted in full, names the Three, the Seven, and the
Nine is actually just a bit of Elvish lore. Why should it be concerned
with the lesser rings?
Also, John W. McNabb wrote:
>Perhaps (originally) he got information on ringmaking from Sauron
>through the Palantir not realizing that he was opening himself to
>corruption....
I think that's a very good point. Denethor claimed to have a vast amount
of knowledge that would surprise even Gandalf, and when Gandalf realized
that Denethor learned things through the Palantir of Minas Tirith, he
surmised that Sauron had corrupted him through deception because the
Steward had proven too strong to dominate.
In a similar way, perhaps Saruman struggled with Sauron through the
Palantir of Orthanc, gleaning bits of knowledge and yet losing the
battle of wits in the long run.
Anyway, we could argue this one around the block a few times. The facts
remain simple to assess: Saruman wore a ring, he claimed to be a ring-
maker, and by the time the One Ring had been destroyed, about all the
power Saruman had left was his voice.
I apologize for the length of all this, but CompuServe gets really upset
if you try to post an article that quotes more text than the amount
of original text that you write.
--
++ ++ "Well, Samwise: What do you think of the elves now?"
||\ /|| -- fbag...@mid.earth.com
|| v ||ichael Martinez (mma...@basis.com)
++ ++------------------------------------------------------