What if it wasn't The One Ring?
 

What if Sauron had created more then one The One Ring, of course then it wouldn't be The One Ring, say ten, note that I don't say that he could, just if. Would then all the rings power be uesd if you wear them all? By the way, can you wear more than one of the Rings at a time, can you have more than one on the same finger? Could you then be able to have all the rings at the same time? If you couldn't have them all on your finger maybe you can have them on your toes? Does that work, can you have one of The Rings on your toe? I know that it's many questions and I don't expect you to answer them all.

[ January 10, 2002: Message edited by: Manwe ]

I think a crucial characteristic of the One Ring is that it is unique. Thus it is impossible to have ten of them.

You ask what would be true if there were ten One Rings. Fact is: Everything would be true. For you can proove everything starting on an absurde assumption ("Ex falso quodlibet"). That's pure logic.

You could, for example, proove that Pippin is a wizard. How? Well, if 10 rings = 1 ring, 10 = 1. The company of the ring plus Galadriel are 10 persons, thus 1 person. As Pippin is in the company and Gandalf, too, it follows that Pippin = Gandalf. Thus Pippin is a wizard, qed.

Ghâshgûl

Yes, but that implies that you go against proven matemathical theories. You would be creating a new cosmos (of course, that's allowed in fantasy, but Tolkien has stated that M-E is actually this world, only long ago - imagined, of course).

As for the philosophic-logical side of this, and my reference to math, remember that math has a great deal to do with philosophy; some of the world's greatest philosophers are (or were) also among the greatest mathematicians.

There's an equation which shows that if you say that 1=2 (or 1=10, for that matter, you have to divide by 0, which has no meaning. Can't remember the equation, though).

Anyone ever read the Molesworth books?

"I draw a massive Angle A and make it equal to Angle B... Pythagoras could make an elephant equal to a flea."
Geoffrey Willans, from 'Back in the Jug Agane'

Sorry. I'll go and do some work until I have something relevant to say.

Got it.

If Sauron had made several ruling rings, they'd have contained so much of his power that without them he wouldn't be able to stand up to an elderly gnat with a bladder complaint.
The One Ring is probably like many things in ME, such as the Two Trees and the Silmarils: once made, never to be replicated.

Plus there's a question of job division: If we have several Ruling Rings, it begs the question: wouldn't they each want to rule the others?
Do Rings bicker? If so, wouldn't Sauron end up like an harassed mother surrounded by squabbling children? Viz: "Look, if you buggers don't stop it this instant, we're all going to take a little walk to the Cracks of Doom!"

Just a thought.

I didn't say that 1 = 10. What I was saying is that if 1 = 10, then you can conclude everything from this, even the greatest nonsense. That's why it is not really a good idea to assume 1 = 10.

One of the thrilling things in Tolkiens cosmos is that it is wholly consistent. It is, in my opinion, nonsense to ask what would happen if we add some obviously inconsistent assumpion, like "There are 10 different rings, each of them beeing the mighties of all rings".

*roflbtcdicajttwadbsihpwtrhitsbkabayb*
(=rolling on the floor laughing biting the carpet dancing in circles and jumping through the window almost dieing by smashing into HP who's then running horrified into the street beeing killed accidentally by a yellow bulldozer)

Ghâshgûl

Sauron with toe rings? Somehow I can't imagine that. Why have 10 lesser ones when you can have one master one?

There can only be one Master.

Awesome, Squatter. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

(Ludicrous music-hall voice)I thank you.

Of course it would be an empty threat (cf my comment about geriatric ephemeroptera).

There's something strangely compelling about Sauron with toe-rings. It conjures up an image of a Dark Lord wearing Roman sandals, which makes me wonder what the "fair form" was that he wore when dealing with the smiths of Eregion: Hippie-Sauron, with long hair, purple sunglasses and a goatee?

...And he came to them in fair form, arrayed as a lover of trees, saying "Hey, man, groovy rings. Can anyone make them? That would be cool."... [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

Somehow I think not.

[ January 11, 2002: Message edited by: Squatter of Amon Rudh ]

Here I turn my back on the topic for a day or two and when I come back I find you discussing about mathematic problems and hippie-Sauron, not to mention mother-Sauron. Well, I have to addmit that I had a good laught Squatter that part and roflbtcdicajttwadbsihpwtrhitsbkabayb, I like that one. However, I'm asking again, is it possible to wear more than one of The Rings at a time? One of them who excists not the other nine of The One Ring just now trying to allocate Sauron and after many years find it's bioligical mother, left all alone in an other dimension find by a evil-guy and enslaved that world.

Yes, we have digressed a little...

I can't see any reason why one couldn't wear more than one of the rings of power, although there is hope for those who don't like jewellery. All The Silmarillion has to say on the matter of the powers of the Three in general is that
Which implies to me that one doesn't need to wear one of the Great Rings to exercise at least some of its powers (this is borne out by Frodo's experiences with the One, which exerts its force on him even when he isn't wearing it). One merely need have it in one's keeping, and Sauron at least had hopes of using all three (in concert, presumably, with the One). Even evil fades in Middle-earth.
The question is: What's the point in having all of them? Presumably the Three have slightly different preservative powers, as the following is said later:
and later, Cirdan's words to Mithrandir on the passing over of Narya:

What I see here is an implication that Rings work best when used by people whose personal attributes complement their powers, but that these powers are enhanced by the action of the Rings. For example, Gandalf's worth listening to in any case, but Narya enhances his credibility and Galdriel is beautiful and powerful anyway, but Nenya gives nature a hand.

So that's the long version of my opinion: Yes, you can probably wear more than one of the rings (provided you're up to it, of course), but I don't think that everyone would get the full benefits of all three.

As for the other rings, I don't know enough about them to make a decent guess, although I postulate that the Nine have identical powers, and that most of those are for Sauron's benefit.

[ January 11, 2002: Message edited by: Squatter of Amon Rudh ]

Or if he had all 20 rings, and a fur coat he could be Liberace. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

Seriously though if he was able to get his own back plus the other 19 or 15 (minus the ones consumed by dragon's) I think he would be more powerful than with just the one ring.

Or a cockney spiv:

(Sauron opens coat, displaying large array of rings) Can I interest any of you gentlemen in a Ring? Enhance your power; become great in the estimation of the world and impress the ladies. Once-in-a-lifetime offer and all for the trifling sum of your eternal subservience to my will. Did I say eternal subservience? I meant twelve silver pieces.

Probably so. Of course the rest of the Seven would have been a useful bargaining tool with the Dwarves, but with the One on his finger and Gondor crushed, I don't expect he'd need to bargain with anyone, so it's reasonable to assume that he wanted the Dwarf-rings for their own sake. What really would have set the seal on his authority would have been the acquisition of the Three.
Come to think of it, although they'd enhance his power, I'm not sure that Sauron would have got the full benefit of the Elven-rings (cf my earlier comments about personal characteristics).

This is by-the-by, but it occurred to me when I was thinking about Sauron bargaining with the Dwarves. I wonder if he'd been touting that Moria offer around all the great Dwarf-lords. It would be just like him to offer that to everyone, to try and stir up some sort of internecine dispute.

If he'd wear all of them, there would be a danger of him being robbed. There were robbers all around. After all they were Orcsses. Don't you think Souron's RINGS would become more like Horcruxes? The power of the One Ring would be divided into many-say ten-as you said. Then all four hobbits would get one Ring for each to get them destroyed, Gandalf and Aragorn would be able to destroy two of them. Two others would be destroyed by Elrond and Galadriel, one would be destroyed by Faramir. Okay one will go to poor Smèagol. LotR's happy ending. :D

Ten one ring?and all of those will be made by sauron alone?that would make him so weak that he wont have enough power to command the nazgul.and if he distribute it,ME would be a nightmarish place to live.

Oh, no. How can it be ONE Ring, when it is split in TEN? I don't know why but this post made me giggle. Commanding Nazgùl wouldn't be that hard as his powers are still there, but instead it being in just one object is divided in ten. All the Rings will not be as powerful as the One, destroying them might seem easier.

Oh yeah,thanks for reminding me lotrelf.

What if there were sixteen (now seventeen!) replies to a post that made no sense on any level?:smokin:

I mean, seriously, what was the OP trying to say? I can’t work it out at all.

As pointless as it is to reply to some thread from a lapsed user from twelve years ago (it's a bit worrying that 2002 was so long ago), nonetheless:
Well if he had ten rings then he wouldn't be Sauron, would he? He'd be the Mandarin from Marvel Comics.

Thats so true zigûr.

http://flyingmoose.org/tolksarc/theories/metech.htm

Hey guys,take a look at this

But it has unearthed a couple of absolute gems from the Squatter which since they predate my joining here I am delighted to discover... if anyone can cope with lunacy..

To shift the argument the other way......
 

What do you think would have happened if Sauron had made NO ruling ring, or more accurately if he hadn't NEEDED to? That is, what do you think would have happend if Sauron had twisted the making of the lesser rings in such a manner that he could control all of them and thier owners DIRECTLY, without the One Ring as an intermediary? In other words, if we were in a situation where the Power of the Ring and the Power of Sauron himself the entity were not and could not be seperated in any sense, where he COULDN'T be "diminished" that way.
I think in a sense, we get a little of this in the Nazgul themselves. They are tied to the one ring in the sense that they can only exist so long as it does (in a certain sense, it is powering their continued life) but the fact that Sauron has no trouble calling them back to him when he techically does not posses the one ring, and the fact that, should they ever get the one ring the would automatically bring it back to Sauron without any thought of even TRYING to claim it for themselves indicates pretty strongly to me they are bound more to Him than It (and while we here much specualtion on it, there is really no tangible proof in, that, if someone else claimed the ring and tried to challenge Sauron, the Nazgul would come and serve them.)
But imagine if that sort of bond occured to ALL the rings more or less instantaneously, where as long as Sauron existed, anyone who had one of the lesser rings was his instant and total slave the moment they put one of them on, where the corruption of the rings was irresistable. In other worlds, where Sauron had not only the Nine Nazgul under his ethernal control, but seven great dwarf kings (since one would assume the rings would not pass down in this case, and I don't have my books with me, I'm not sure WHICH seven kings. Presumaby in this case, Sauron would see them distributed to the head of each of the Seven Houses of Dwarves, so as to have most of dwarfdom under his ultimate control.) And More imporatanty three of the most powerful Elves in ME and thier peoples; a world where Elrond, Galadriel and Cirdan were Sauron's slaves (again, I don't have my books here, so if I've screwed up who were the intial three recipients, my apologies.)

I did get one ring...excuse me, one THING out of this thread I'd never realized before: Clearly Sauron made the One, the Three, the Seven, and the Nine--no more, and no less--to fit one each on his little evil fingers and evil little toesies.

Pre-Isildur, of course.

Oh yeah,came to think of it,there is 20 rings in total.

Except, of course, that Sauron did not make the Three... :p

What, you couldn't tell by "made" I really meant "made one, helped make sixteen, and didn't even get within a metric Bree-land spittin' league of three? :o

Anyway, let's not get mired down in technicalities, we're drawing the big connections in this thread. Ponder the ring poem for a moment...

Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne:
Not that we're counting, but that makes 20 for his dark fingers n' toes-en,
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie,
And Twenty is a Score!

One Ring to rule them all, most likely from the right thumb,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
To each of their respective nineteen piglets, but don't let's nitpick.
And here's a bonus Rhyme for the poem Guys,
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.

You missed the one ring to find them all part.

Thank God! I wasn't the only one who thought so. :D