Why Frodo?

I have been reading Christopher Tolkien's books on the creation of the Lord of the Rings and maybe I 'm a bit confused. But I wonder..
Sauron knew (from Gollum) that BILBO or at least some Baggins had found the ring.
In the case he knew that BILBO Baggins was the ringbearer, the ringwraiths should have been informed that he vanished 30 years ago, and search for him (since it was almost impossible for anybody to part from it wllingly)
In the second case (if he knew only the name BAGGINS, anyone under this name was a suspect.
WHY DID THEY INQUIRE ABOUT AND CAME IMMEDIATELY AFTER FRODO?
Or am I confused after reding so many different versions of the story?

[Mithadan]

They did not inquire after Bilbo, but rather after "Baggins". Perhaps Gollum, when interrogated in the Dark Tower, only recalled or gave that name.

Welcome to the Barrow-Downs, Michael!

[ April 18, 2002: Message edited by: Mithadan ]

[Arwen Imladris]

I don't remember from the books, but in the movie, Gollum only said 2 words : Shire and Baggins. I do not remember the wraiths ever saying specificly Frodo. It may have been posible that they got information like that after they found out that a Baggins had it. It sounds like Frodo is at least one of the more well known baggins in the shire, some frigtened hobit may have said it, or the birds or other beasts might have told them.

[Elenya]

I think that Gollum purposely only gave those two words because:
1) If he had said something else, and Sauron had found out that whatever Gollum told him was a lie, Gollum would be killed

and 2) Gollum still wanted the ring, so when he got free or "was set loose" he could go after it for himself

[Aralaithiel]

I agree with you, Elenya! Pretty smart thinking on Gollum's part.

[Tigerlily Gamgee]

Well, they originally just went to the Shire to search for a hobbit named "Baggins".
After that, I imagine they sensed the ring's prescence and knew where to go from there.

I never thought of it that way (about Gollum's response), that little devil is a little too cleaver (I am bitter about the Shelob incident).

[Orodhromeus]

Kalos irthes, Michael! (welcome)

Maybe the Hobbits that the Nazgûl asked information from pointed them to Frodo. Frodo was considered as the weirdest of Hobbits, the one who cares the most of the outside world (after Bilbo), and the casual Hobbit would think of him when being asked directions to a Baggins from a mysterious creepy tall rider.

[Sophia the Thunder Mistress]

I don't think Gollum knew Bilbo's first name... I could be wrong but didn't he introduce himself in the Hobbit as Mr. Baggins?

[VanimaEdhel]

I seem to recall that in the books, Gollum said "Shire...Baggins" as well. And the riders, after seeing that Frodo was not in the Shire (nor the ring...nor Bilbo for that matter) probably tried to follow the power of the ring, which would (of course) lead them to good ol' Frodo Baggins (aka Mr. Underhill).

[Kalimac]

Actually Bilbo did tell Gollum his full name; in "The Hobbit" his opening statement to Gollum (so to speak) is "I am Mr. Bilbo Baggins. I have lost the dwarves and lost the wizard, and I don't know where I am and I don't want to know, if only I can get away." Come to think of it, Bilbo managed to give away an awful lot in one sentence, if Gollum had cared to spend time extrapolating. Anyway, this is pretty much the only time at which Bilbo gives Gollum any personal information at all, and it's a lot to take in all at once when you're in Gollum's situation and haven't really spoken to anyone except yourself for the past half millennium.

While I do like the theory that Gollum deliberately withheld information from Sauron's minions so as to equivocate - lie without lying, so speak - it doesn't seem very likely - he doesn't seem like the type to think ahead quite that way. He has no hesitation about lying even to someone he's afraid of (he's afraid of Frodo and Sam, but doesn't mind saying that Cirith Ungol is unguarded) as long as there's a reasonable certainty that the lie won't be discovered by the time he escapes/is let go. And if he doesn't think he's going to get out (and Gollum didn't, remember that he was convinced that he had escaped by luck, and by himself) then why not spill everything he knows to avoid torture? If it's not going to help him out personally, then why care?

So why did Gollum only give those two bits of information? I'm afraid my guess is rather anticlimactic; he just couldn't remember anything else. When he was captured by Sauron it had been about fifty years since he saw Bilbo, and all the information he had about Bilbo came from that one sentence Bilbo had said at their first meeting. Gollum's first reaction to that was probably "Baggins? Dwarves, Wizards, what are those, precious? Lost? Hmm, is it tasssty?" It's more than likely, especially considering what happened subsequently, that Gollum very quickly forgot all of it except for two things; the name Baggins, which just stuck in his head, and of course the Ring. Bilbo didn't even mention the Shire at that point, that was something that Gollum found out later on after he had left the mountains and was skulking around.

So the Black Riders only had "Baggins, Shire" to work with, and thus there's no particular reason they should have gone after Bilbo especially, especially since Frodo was now "THE Mr. Baggins of Bag End." In Hobbition if someone asked for "Baggins" probably it wouldn't occur to anyone that they could be looking for anyone OTHER than Frodo, since Frodo was very much the local well-known gentleman. Bilbo's name would never even come up except possibly afterwards, as when the Gaffer told Sam "Likely enough it's Old Mr. Bilbo they were wanting news of." And the Ringwraiths would probably never hear of Bilbo's "disappearance" it was a nine-days'-wonder, of course, but very much a local one.

Sorry about the length. Just wanting to be thorough [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img].

[VanimaEdhel]

Nothing wrong with being really thorough! Believe me: you should see my essays in school. They are way over the minimum length usually (and I get all A's, so it seems to work). Thoroughness is good, for it completes a thought (that's at least what I thing). And I have found that it is easy to stretch out if you don't have a lot to say. That is kind of what I am doing with this post...don't ask me why...I am just feeling talkative!