The effect of the Great Rings upon Men

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

I will simply add that Cirdan voluntarily and with great foresight surrendered a "Ring of Power" to Gandalf himself. And Gil-Galad entrusted Vilya, the most powerful of the three Elven rings, to Elrond. Those were both prior to Bilbo giving up the One Ring.

Next.

I think often statements that sound complete and encompassing aren't meant to be taken as literal fact. You have Gandalf's statement about Bilbo giving up the Ring:

'A Ring of Power looks after itself, Frodo. It may slip off treacherously, but its keeper never abandons it....But as far as I know Bilbo alone in history has ever gone beyond playing, and really done it.~The Shadow of the Past

its keeper never abandons it...and Bilbo alone in history I don't think are meant to be interpreted as absolute fact. Compare that to a statement about the Grey Company

"He led the Company forth upon the journey of greatest haste and weariness that any among them had known... No other mortal men could have endured it, none but the Dunedain of the North, and with them Gimli the Dwarf and Legolas of the Elves.".~The Passing of the Grey Company

Elladan and Elrohir seem to be forgotten in this statement. They were indeed with the Grey Company and endured the Paths of the Dead. If we interpret this statement literally, than Elladan and Elrohir weren't there at all. I think sometimes with these absolute statements, Tolkien just went with what sounded better, or what flowed better on the page. And he wasn't really thinking about whether speaking in absolutes were literal fact.

"its keeper never abandons it" and "Bilbo alone in history" just flows better than "Bilbo, Cirdan, and Gil-galad, alone in history..." Similar to the Passing of the Grey Company "and with them Gimli the Dwarf and Legolas of the Elves," is more poetic than say..."and with them Gimli the Dwarf, and Legolas of the Elves, and the sons of Elrond, Elladan and Elrohir." It's just my opinion to interpret these types of absolute statements as hyperbole, and what flows better on the page.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

its keeper never abandons it...and Bilbo alone in history I don't think are meant to be interpreted as absolute fact.

What about the Seven, which apparently were passed on from keeper to keeper voluntarily as a matter of course?

I think Gandalf was mainly talking about the One when he told that to Frodo. After all, that was the Ring with which they were mainly concerned at that time.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

What about the Seven, which apparently were passed on from keeper to keeper voluntarily as a matter of course?

I think Gandalf was mainly talking about the One when he told that to Frodo. After all, that was the Ring with which they were mainly concerned at that time.

Precisely my point when replying to a nitpicker picking nits with nary a nit to pick.

Gandalf expressed to Frodo exactly what he needed to know. He didn't at all refer to the separate powers of preservation evident in the three Elven Rings. He didn't mention them at all, because it was not Frodo's business - he must concentrate on the lures of the One in order to combat its effects. He needed to know that the Nine were drawn to the One like moths (albeit invisible moths) to a dark flame.

The Three were hidden and remained so until Galadriel revealed hers to Frodo. In any case when Gandalf refers to giving up a Ring of Power willingly, he was not talking about the Three, as they were given up quite readily by their previous possessors.

Technically speaking, the Seven Dwarven Rings were bequeathed from father to son as well, although maybe the sons had rip the rings from their fathers' cold, dead clutches.

[Findegil]

At least Thror gave his ring to Thrain bevor his death.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Faramir Jones]

Morthoron and Findegil, you made some good contributions about the Seven Rings given to the Dwarf lords.

The only dwarf lord family we know of, who had one of those rings and its disposal being talked about, was the House of Durin. It was made clear that its head, Thror, before he went to Moria and was killed by Azog, gave his ring to his son and heir Thrain II; but Thrain did not in his turn give it to his son Thorin II, it being taken off him by Sauron after he had imprisoned and tortured him.

It is reasonable to assume that such rings were passed on by the head to his heir, usually his son, as a matter of course. Perhaps the heir had to take it from the body of the deceased lord, or perhaps it was passed on by the lord on his deathbed. What evidence we have suggests that, on at least one occasion, this passing on happened earlier, if the head felt that he would be killed and his body plundered by enemies.

The point about the Seven is that, unlike the Nine, Sauron was unable to control the Dwarf lords as he had the nine Men, eventually turning them into wraiths. As those rings, from his point of view, didn't 'work', he appeared to have decided either to destroy them, which happened with four, or to take them, which happened with three, the one he took off Thrain being the last.