Talk:Rings of Power

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Middle-earth Wikiproject This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle-earth, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to J. R. R. Tolkien, his legendarium, and related topics. Please visit the project talk page for suggestions and ideas on how you can improve this and other articles.
Note: Though it states in the Guide to writing better articles that generally fictional articles should be written in present tense, all Tolkien legendarium-related articles that cover in-universe material must be written in past tense. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earth/Standards for more information about this and other article standards.
Assessment
B
This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High
This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Contents

[edit] The Video Game

Rings of Power is also the title of a 1991 Video Game by Naughty Dog Released for the Sega Mega Drive/Sega Genesis. It was in the RPG genre but used some unique concepts such as all attack actions during combat were regarded as spells regardless of each characters class (e.g.: Knight). The overall storyline of the game involved collecting all 11 rings of power that once reunited make up the rod of creation.

See: [1]

It was also notable for its hidden nudity that didn't cause the media to go ape. [2] --Nintendorulez talk 17:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I move that this paragrpah is moved onto the main page, OR that Rings of Power is listed as a disambiguation.

The Naughty Dog page has a link to Rings of Power (video game), but it hasn't been notable enough for anyone to actually create an article on as yet. There is thus nothing to disambiguate. If someone does eventually create an article then a disambig line or page can be created. --CBDunkerson 17:43, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi, my name is Sailormarcus and I'm currently creating a Rings of Power (Game) article so I added a disambiguation page.

[edit] Seven Rings - Freud

Seven_Rings redirects here. I don't see a page for Freud's Seven Rings, but don't know enough to write one. According to Peter Watson (A Terrible Beauty, London, Phoenix Press, 2000, 505), these were "early colleagues of Freud pledged to develop and defend psychoanalysis, and given a ring by him to symbolize that dedication." See here: http://www.sospsy.com/Museum/pages/page238.htm . Google has further references to Freud and seven rings, including a theory by Jung and connection to Indian Chakras.

[edit] What is this "power"?

I think what this article fails to state is what, if anything, the rings do and why the characters in the books would even bother to wear them. Power shmower... Tronno 02:53, July 29, 2005 (UTC)

This is a good question, and one that is not easily answered. It is addressed in part in the articles concerning the invidual Elven Rings. -Aranel (Sarah) 16:45, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Khamul (Aka the Easterling)

I remember Khamul being mentioned as one of the Nazgul in Unfinished Tales. The Nine Rings section may have to be edited if this is true. - shash 16:01, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Basis for this?

"The power of the three still present of the Seven, the Three Elven rings, and the Nine were all shattered upon the destruction of the One." Rich Farmbrough 16:05, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Likely derived from;
  • "Now the Elves made many rings; but secretly Sauron made One Ring to rule all the others, and their power was bound up with it, to be subject wholly to it and to last only so long as it too should last." - Silm, Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age
  • "...when the One goes, the last defenders of High-elven lore and beauty are shorn of power to hold back time, and depart." - Letters #144
and other similar references. --CBDunkerson 18:33, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Powers of the One

From the article: "it allowed Sauron to quickly corrupt the Numenoreans into evil"

Really? The Númenoreans had already progressed well down that road before Sauron got there; he had merely to encourage an existing tendency. And I don't recall that it was said anywhere by Tolkien that Sauron required the One for this -- but I suppose he may well have, so could somone please point out where if he did? TCC (talk) (contribs) 00:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

"Sauron's personal 'surrender' was voluntary and cunning: he got free transport to Numenor! He naturally had the One Ring, and so very soon dominated the minds and wills of most of the Numenoreans." - Letters #211

The Numenoreans went from 'greedy and somewhat oppressing weaker folk' to 'mass human sacrifice and worshipping Morgoth' in the space of a few decades. That's a pretty radical shift. --CBDunkerson 01:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I was aware of that quote, but had always interpreted it to mean simply that with the Ring in his possession Sauron had all his native power available to him, as opposed to his relatively attenuated condition during the Third Age. I could just as easily read it the other way, I suppose. But I think I would still call this a matter of intensifying a process that was already underway, ending in large-scale open rebellion against the Valar and the One where it had already existed on a smaller scale. The invasion of Valinor was the sign of the former; worship of Melkor and the human sacrifice that went with it was the sign of the latter. In real-world terms, I think the step from inhumane oppression to human sacrifice (for whatever cause, whether on a literal or figurative altar) is fairly small. TCC (talk) (contribs) 01:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


The Silmarillion seems to imply that Sauron did not take The One with him when he was captured and brought to Numenor:

"But Sauron was not of mortal flesh, and though he was robbed now of the shape in which he had wrought so great an evil, so that he could never again appear fair to the eyes of Men, yet his spirit arose out of the deep and passed as a shadow and a black wind over the sea, and came back to Middle-earth and to Mordor that was his home. There he took up again his great Ring in Barad-dur..."

Logically one could also infer that if he had brought the Ring, it would have been lost in the Akallabeth when his body was destroyed. 68.200.39.177 (talk) 23:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

No, Tolkien addresses this in "Letters." I also thought he must have hidden away the One while in Numenor, but Tolkien specifically states that Sauron must have had the One with him, and that his spirit was capable of carrying it back to Middle-earth despite the destruction of his physical body. 169.253.4.21 (talk) 15:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC)TexxasFinn

[edit] Nazgul rings

"Once enslaved, Sauron no longer needed the Nazgûl to wear the rings." Is this claim canonical? JoshuaZ 04:45, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

You could make a strong case that it is. The text isn't entirely consistent on the question. On the one hand, at the Council of Elrond Gandalf says, "The Nine the Nazgûl keep." On the other hand, in "Shadow of the Past" Gandalf tells Frodo, "So it is now: the Nine [Sauron] has gathered to himself...." Supporting that is the fact that we never see a Nazgûl with a ring even when we might expect to. On balance, the idea that Sauron retained the Nine in his possession seems the most likely. TCC (talk) (contribs) 08:29, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
More than that actually: I thought I remembered something else and I found it after I posted the above reply. In Letters #246 Tolkien says outright that Sauron held the Nine Rings and that this is what gave him primary control over their wills. TCC (talk) (contribs) 08:41, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
And also in "The Hunt for the Ring" in Unfinished Tales there's yet another statement to this effect. TCC (talk) (contribs) 08:45, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

we can all agree then that the nazgul did not have their rings with them. Jammi567 15:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I always interperted it to mean that since Sauron had no physical body, that the rings were in his possession through the possession of the rings by the Nazgul. Doesn't Sauron want the One Ring in part to get his physical body to materialize and without his power which is in the ring he only has enough power to materialize an eye? Certainly the poem is consistent with what happened with the Nine: The One Ring to rule them, find them, bring them and in the darkness bind (enslave) them, in Mordor. The Three Rings were not found because their owners took them off, the Seven may have been found, but never were brought to Mordor where their possesors could be enslaved. Right? REL 31 May 2007

Whatever makes you think that Sauron didn't have a physical body? Of course he did. TCC (talk) (contribs) 00:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
After the Fall of Numenor, Sauron lost his "beautiful" form and fled to Middle-Earth. At the end of the Second Age, he fought the Last Alliance in a terrible, evil form. After he lost the One Ring, his much-weakened spirit (without a body) fled to the East of Middle-Earth. It can be safely assumed that the Nine had their rings at this point. After the One was destroyed, the Nine kind of "flamed out" because the power that had been keeping them in existence was gone. A Nazgul would have surely died the moment they took their ring off, much the way Sauron almost perished when the One was cut from his hand. Their Master had barely enough power to remain an evil entity after losing the One, so his minions would have need their own "power sources" if you will. I suppose the argument could be made that they weren't yet Wraiths at this point, but when did Sauron re-form sufficiently to allow him to control and preserve them without the need for rings? Oydman 06:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. After the Nine Rings had done their work by turning living men into wraiths, their importance (the Rings) was much less. Perhaps if the Nine Rings had been physically destroyed, the corresponding Nazgul would have been too. But their relationship to their Rings was not the same as that of Sauron to the One, who had created it and put much of his own life-force into it. Consider what Gandalf said would have happened to Bilbo or Frodo if they had "faded," either due to the Ring or, in Frodo's case, due to his wound. Gandalf said they would have become wraiths, and Sauron would have tormented them for trying to keep his Ring. They would not have "disintegrated" the moment Sauron took the One from them. The Nine Rings turned their wearers into Wraiths, but after that, they were slaves to the One, and their existence depended upon the One. When it went, regardless of whether they had their Rings on or not, they ceased to exist-- or at least were reduced, like Saruman, to whining, shapeless haunts in the desolate wilderness.169.253.4.21 (talk) 15:37, 8 May 2008 (UTC)TexxasFinn

[edit] Terminology

I think the FAQs are wrong here. The "lesser rings" should not be called Rings of Power, while the "Great Rings" should. As Gandalf says,

"In Eregion long ago many Elven-rings were made, magic rings as you call them, and they were, of course, of various kinds: some more potent and some less. The lesser rings were only essays in the craft before it was full-grown, and to the Elven-smiths they were but trifles - yet to my mind dangerous for mortals. But the Great Rings, the Rings of Power, they were perilous." (The Fellowship of the Ring, "The Shadow of the Past")

Of course, I could be wrong. Uthanc 12:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

But you're not. TCC (talk) (contribs) 05:24, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking that maybe Tolkien had changed the terminology later, as shown in a letter or in The History of Middle-earth. Uthanc 09:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
It could be just my hideously poor memory, but I don't recall any extended discussion on the lesser rings anywhere, let alone a redefinition of "Rings of Power". So I edited the text to reflect the correct nomenclature from the book, as you pointed up. TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:19, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
This is how Gandalf deduces that Bilbo's ring is the One. Lesser rings would not confer invisibility to the wearer. Oydman 06:41, 18 December, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Movement

i added something to the picture caption, and it moved the top line of the poem. Does anybody know how to correct this whilst keeping in the addition? Jammi567 15:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Whoever corrected it, thanks Jammi567 12:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] the 5 rings

it makes no sense to me that the rings are 1, 3, 7 and 9..there has to be 5 rings. Meaning the hobbits who are the half-elvens were tricked by sauron to give them up. The half elvens were merry, pippin, frodo, samwise and bilbo who were all tricked to go to the land of mordor to give up the rings. Frodo carried two rings.

The second line should perhaps say:

Five rings for the half-elven in the land beyond Brie

The One ring, thus was never destroyed and Sauron won not only the 9 ring but the 7 and the 5. It's unclear whether the 3 rings were even used at all as the story tells. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.61.230.149 (talk) 23:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Hilarious, but there's one small flaw in your theory. Merry never got anywhere near Mordor. 91.107.169.154 (talk) 20:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
The count goes from Three to Seven because Sauron needed one for each of the heads of the Seven Dwarf houses. He went with Nine for Men because he knew they were ultimately corruptible and would be useful as Captains in his evil army. He might have gone for a higher number for Men if the Elven Smiths would have allowed it. (talk) 18:47, 18 December, 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oydman (talk • contribs) 23:49, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] the 3 rings

The article says that these are the only rings that do not give invisibly, yet it is stated that the rings of power give invisibility only to those who are not powerfully enough to wield them, i.e. mortals (the dwarves and men). So Elves and Gandalf wearing the one of the 3 each would not become invisible but a man or dwarf would.

---

What's up with this: "The Rings apparently granted the ability to see things that are normally unseen, such as Frodo's ability to see Galadriel's Ring while he was wearing the One but his servant Sam could not." I really don't remember him wearing the ring when they're in Lorien. I don't have my copy of Fellowship handy right now, though. Anyone want to find out? Mogwit (talk) 02:25, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

The line should be changed. Frodo did not wear the Ring in Lorien. What the sentence implies (poorly) is that Frodo's previous use of the Ring and his status as Ringbearer had permanently enhanced his perception so that he could see Galadriel's ring even when he wasn't actually wearing the One. There are several other references throughout LOTR to Frodo's enhanced senses even when he is not wearing the One (such as in Moria, when he can see better in the dark).169.253.4.21 (talk) 15:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC)TexxasFinn

[edit] Non Fair Use of Images

Either a critique of the representation of the rings in the Peter Jackson movies is added or I will delete/request for deletion the non-fair use image. I posted on the image's page with no response other than the rationale had removed the laughable argument "it was on another website and they said it was fair use". Frodo Halfpint (talk) 14:55, 19 January 2008 (UTC)