Gandalf’s Possible Inaccuracy in the chapter “The Shadow of the Past”

[jallanite]

Tolkien writes on page 59:

Yes, alas! through him [Gollum] the Enemy has learned that the One has been found again. He knows where Isildur fell. He knows where Gollum found this ring. He knows that it is a Great Ring, for it gave long life.

This implies that only the “Great Rings” give long life to a mortal, whether Man or Hobbit, not one of the lesser rings or some other ring-shaped charm. Earlier, on page 47, Gandalf refers to “the Great Rings, the Rings of Power”, as though they are synonyms for the same things. Now we are told that they alone give “long life”, for Gandalf makes the gift of “long life” evident proof that the Ring possessed by Sauron is one of the “Great Rings.”

But could Gollum’s Ring be one of the other nineteen “Great Rings” which also give long life? Gandalf indicates not. Tolkien makes Gandalf continue immediately following on the same page:

He [Sauron] knows that it is not one of the Three, for they have never been lost, and they endure no evil.

Also the Three, according the Waldman letter, “did not confer invisibility”. But Tolkien is not discussing such matters, only the ability of all the Great Rings and only the Great Rings to give long life.

Gandalf is made to continue:

He [Sauron] knows that it is not one of the Seven, or the Nine. for they are accounted for.

Gandalf has earlier explained on page 51:

Seven the Dwarf-kings possessed, but three he [Sauron] has recovered, and the others the dragons have consumed. Nine he gave to Mortal Men, proud and great, and so ensnared them.

So Gandalf now makes clear:

He [Sauron] knows that it [the Ring won from Gollum by Bilbo] is the One.

Yet Gandalf on page 55 declares of “A Ring of Power”, which is elsewhere in this chapter a synonym for “Great Ring”, has never in all history been freely given up by its keeper save when Bilbo gave up the Ring of Power he possessed to Frodo.

Hammond and Scull state:

This is true of the One Ring, but not of all Rings of Power, of which Gandalf seems to be speaking generally. Celebrimbor gave away the Three Rings. Círdan gave his Ring to Gandalf, Gil-galad (when dying) gave his to Elrond, and Thrór gave his Ring to Thráin.

I have restated the problem more clearly as I see it.

Zigûr’s attempted answer seems to me to depend on Gandalf using “Rings of Power” to refer only to Sauronic rings, which I don’t see on further study. And he does not account for Thrór giving up his Ring to Thráin. See #21 in the thread “The Effect of the Great Ring”.

Findegil answer in the thread “The Effect of the Great Ring” seems to me to merely accept that Gandalf is lying, but for good reasons. This works, but seems to go against Gandalf’s truthfulness elsewhere. See #30 in the thread “The Effect of the Great Ring”.

Inziladun’s explanation does not fit with Gandalf’s own explanation of the powers of the Rings.

Morthoron’s attempt at explanation I do not understand at all. He asks:

So why would Gandalf confuse Frodo with provisos, quid pro quos, caveat emptors and various other Latin phrases that may or may not have anything to do with what Gandalf was talking about and what he needed to impress upon Frodo so that the Hobbit could achieve his mission?

Gandalf doesn’t do this and no-one, certainly not me, thinks he should.

My own answer would be blamed by me for changing the text which many would call cheating. Very weak.

[Zigûr]

Originally Posted by jallanite

Zigûr’s attempted answer seems to me to depend on Gandalf using “Rings of Power” to refer only to Sauronic rings, which I don’t see on further study. And he does not account for Thrór giving up his Ring to Thráin. See #21 in the thread “The Effect of the Great Ring”.

Didn't I argue that Thrór was able to pass on his Ring because he was a Dwarf and not a Man?

Originally Posted by Zigûr

Perhaps Gandalf knew or assumed that, as a Dwarf, Thrór would be more resistant to some of the effects of the Ring, and thus more capable of passing it on to his son?

Also I just argued that "Rings of Power" seems to be a vague term with no rigid definition, which seems to refer to different groupings of Rings from usage to usage. I wasn't trying to give a hard and fast answer and I don't think I can.

[jallanite]

Originally Posted by Zigûr

Didn't I argue that Thrór was able to pass on his Ring because he was a Dwarf and not a Man?

That works if you don’t take Gandalf’s words literally. Gandalf says:

It may slip off treacherously, but its keeper never abandons it. At most he plays with the idea of handing it on to someone else’s care – and that only at an early stage, when it first begins to grip. But as far as I know Bilbo alone in history has ever gone beyond playing, and really done it. He needed all my help, too.

Replace “keeper” with “mortal keeper”. But then someone will point out that Dwarves are mortal too.

For me the problem is the mainly the phrase “alone in history” which suggests any kind of being.

Also I just argued that "Rings of Power" seems to be a vague term with no rigid definition, which seems to refer to different groupings of Rings from usage to usage. I wasn't trying to give a hard and fast answer and I don't think I can.

I would argue that “Rings of Power” refers to any of the “Great Rings” and therefore may be used when Sauronic rings alone are being discussed, something like the word colour which does not refer normally to any particular colour. But at the same time, if I say the sky was dark coloured today, I obviously don’t mean a dark red colour or a dark brown colour or even a dark green colour. I mean dark blue or cloudy.

But if I say “Ring of Power” with no context, I would be understood to mean any one of the 20 Great Rings, not only a Sauronic Great Ring. So when Gandalf says “A Ring of Power looks after itself, Frodo”, he should be understood to mean any of the Rings of Power, not specifically a Sauronic Great Ring.

I understood you were attempting to show that Ring of Power was possibly comparable to the word corn, which has different primary meanings in U.S. English and British English, that Gandalf might mean Sauronic Ring primarily by Ring of Power, at least on occasion. But my examination of the evidence does not bear this out. Possibly you might present evidence that I had not considered. Note I do not think it valid to interpret the crux passage as evidence. One could more legitimately interpret the crux passage as a slip of the tongue.

I am not challenging you or anyone to find a solution. I don’t believe there is one. You at least have made an attempt.

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by jallanite

For me the problem is the mainly the phrase “alone in history” which suggests any kind of being.

Perhaps Gandalf was hyperbolizing combined with a slip of the tongue.

Also, he may not have been thinking of Thrór giving his ring to Thráin during that conversation. Admittedly, the weak point of that argument is it would be hard for Gandalf to not be thinking of his own possession of a ring during that conversation.

[Gothmog, LoB]

I don't see a huge problem there:

1. Gandalf isn't exactly an expert on Ringlore.

2. Círdan and Gil-galad giving away the Three isn't really a problem because the Three were most certainly not used by Galadriel, Gil-galad, Elrond, or Círdan during the Second Age. Thus they wouldn't have had any power over them.

3. Círdan may not have used Narya at all even during the Third Age - or else he might have had problems parting with it. But then, the impression we get is that Narya's main purpose was effecting its wearer's and other people psyches (perhaps originally conceived to fight the inevitable melancholy that would trouble the Eldar over the years?). Círdan most likely had no use of an artifact like that in Lindon where the Eldar usually only came when they were ready to leave Middle-earth anyway. Not to mention that he might have been smart enough to not use the ring even after Sauron had been seemingly defeated.

4. The Seven clearly didn't really work on the Dwarves. They apparently couldn't even prolong their lives or transform them into wraiths. Now, we know that Thrór passed his ring on the Thráin but Thráin did not pass it on to Thorin. Could be that Thrór was stronger than Thráin or that Thrór felt death approaching already or knew that going to Moria with one of the Seven in his possession was too great a risk. In any case, Durin's line must have passed on its ring quite a few times during the ages, and we have no reason to believe that the kings always took the ring from the corpses of their predecessors.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Threadomancy here.

But since it's back from Mandos, I would approach this, as I tend to do, externally: the chapter "The Shadow of the Past" (originally "Ancient History") was one of the earliest written, and although subsequently emended Tolkien wasn't doing so with a fine-tooth comb; moreover, much of the history of the Great Rings (especially the Three) didn't arise until the Appendices, written well after the main narrative and, although Tolkien did attempt some revisions to square things up, this was done in a tearing hurry during the rush to publication 1954-55.

Besides, both Tolkien and his loremaster alter egos (Gandalf, Elrond and Faramir) tend to speak in sweeping generalities which aren't necessarily precise to three decimal places. Is Treebeard or Bombadil the "oldest living thing?" If Gandalf thought it important, he could have added a verbal footnote with all the fine print on Great Ring ownership.

"Ring use may be habit-forming. Gwaith-i-Mirdain Ltd disclaim all liability for damages direct or indirect associated with Ringbearing. All Rings non-transferable (except the Three Rings and/or if the bearer is an Elf, or in accordance with Subparagraph 17(g)(1) 'Dwarf-Lords and their Heirs.' Batteries not included."

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by jallanite

Morthoron’s attempt at explanation I do not understand at all. He asks:

So why would Gandalf confuse Frodo with provisos, quid pro quos, caveat emptors and various other Latin phrases that may or may not have anything to do with what Gandalf was talking about and what he needed to impress upon Frodo so that the Hobbit could achieve his mission?

Gandalf doesn’t do this and no-one, certainly not me, thinks he should.

At the risk of putting words into another poster's mouth: pretty sure he means Gandalf was giving Frodo a simplified version, leaving out unnecessary details- cf WCH's last post.

I believe this will do as an in-story explanation, if one is needed (though I am also inclined to agree it's really an oversight on the part of Tolkien).