Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.