# Isildur's fault ?



## Lhunithiliel (Oct 20, 2002)

Isildur has always been blamed that for his pride and ambitions he did not cast the Ring into fire to destroy it and that he wanted it for himself - to enlarge and strengthen the dominion of his kingdom and of the race of Men.
But here what I've found:


> Elendur went to his father, who was standing dark and alone, as if lost in thought. "Atarinya," he said, "what of the power that would cow these foul creatures and command them to obey you? Is it then of no avail?"
> "Alas, it is not, senya. *I cannot use it. I dread the pain of touching it. And I have not yet found the strength to bend it to my will. It needs one greater than I now know myself to be. My pride has fallen. It should go to the Keepers of the Three*."
> 
> "My King," said Elendur, "Ciryon is dead and Aratan is dying. Your last counsellor must advise nay command you, as you commanded Ohtar. Go! *Take your burden, and at all costs bring it to the Keepers*: even at the cost of abandoning your men and me!"


Which shows that Isildur meant to go from Osgilliath not just to his kingdom, but through the most direct possible way- to Rivendale in order *to leave the Ring with the High Elves!*

Then it apears that he had very good and decent intentions concerning the Ring of Power after he had understood that he was not worthy of wielding the powers within and that this powerful creation could and should be used by the High Elves, who were used to taking councels from the Valar < from Illuvatar. He had understood that he had not yet achieved the power to controll this thing and through it - the fate of the ME; he had understood that higher powers must deal with this object and possibly turn its powers from evil to serve good....

What do you think of all that?


----------



## Gothmog (Oct 20, 2002)

Lhunithiliel,
This is a very interesting point you have brought up. First of all I would like to know where the quote comes from.

But in the meantime let us look at what it shows.


> "Alas, it is not, senya. I cannot use it. I dread the pain of touching it. *And I have not yet found the strength to bend it to my will*. It needs one greater than I now know myself to be. *My pride has fallen*. It should go to the Keepers of the Three."


 It seems from this that Isildur Should must take all the blame for the woes brought about by the ring remaining whole.

He had Taken the Ring not because he was un-able to destroy it, nor did he take it as 'Weirguild' for his father. According to this he took it to use it as a source of power. This he did despite the council of Elrond at Orodruin.

Now that he finds himself unable to weild it he then wants the Elves to take the burden of this responsibility from him. He is even more of a foolish weakling than was at first supposed. Now he sounds like a child caught stealing from the sweet jar and trying to pass the blame onto someone else.


----------



## Lhunithiliel (Oct 20, 2002)

> Now that he finds himself unable to weild it he then wants the Elves to take the burden of this responsibility from him. He is even more of a foolish weakling than was at first supposed. Now he sounds like a child caught stealing from the sweet jar and trying to pass the blame onto someone else


Oh, no, no, no, Gothmog! 

But first things, first.
The quote comes from the UT, “THE DISASTER OF THE GLADDEN FIELDS” .

Now concerning Isildur and the Ring.

I personally understand….or at least think, that when Isildur cut off the Ring he must have almost immediately felt its power and he must have wished at that very moment to wield it against the evil forces and for the glory of the Numenoreans and for the welfare of the ME. This could have happened alright, because the tension at the moment the Ring was cut off was immense - the powers within the Ring, the powers leaving the dying Sauron, the powers created by the presence of the Last Alliance Army… All these powers (the energy) gathered in one place, in one very particular moment – this must have strongly enlarged the power of the Ring. At that very moment (we all know what happened) the euphoria was so great that Isildur could have believed in any idea that those powers provoked in his mind. I think THIS is why at first he refused to destroy the Ring.

It was only later, when that special moment and all the excitement with it had gone, when Isildur had understood that he could not bend the powers within the Ring to his will. He was not some ignorant man, he knew his people’s lore and that of the Elves. He must have then understood that the only ones to know what to do with the Ring were the High Elves, who dwelled in Rivendale. This is how he must have decided to pass the Ring to them – he must have felt that a mortal man, even though great in his deeds and courage (as he was), could not overcome powers much higher than his own.

The third point here comes from the fact that Isildur, from his early years had been taught to cherish the elven objects that had some special powers. Remember he was the one who risked his life to save the “white tree”. So, I was thinking – at the moment I described above, even if urged by an Elf, he just could not destroy sth., that he knew, was SO important.

This is what I think.
And this makes me look at Isildur’s fault from another “angle”.


----------



## Gothmog (Oct 20, 2002)

Thank you. I will look further into this.

Now then you say that he knew the lore of his people and the Elves concerning the Ring. Then why would he think that it should be saved? It was not Elvish it was made by Sauron. Since he found that he could not control the Ring and it was his fault that it had not been destroyed, why then did he think that taking the Ring to Rivendell would put matters right? He had already been told what needed to be done. The Ring had to go into the fire.

What this shows is that he could not listen to the council of the Loremaster of the Elves even at this stage. He took the ring against the advice of Elrond at the time of the downfall of Sauron, he then tried to do what the Elves knew was impossible, that is to master the Ring of Sauron (why else insist on thowing it in the cracks of doom immediatly?), and on proving this to himself, what is his next idea? To go crying to Elrond and begging the Master of Rivendell to make things better.

If as you say "*He must have then understood that the only ones to know what to do with the Ring were the High Elves, who dwelled in Rivendale*", then he should have followed their council. Why did he need to go once more to the well of knowledge? The Ring had not changed nor had the Danger of it. So what could change about the answer? If he had decided that things must be put right, it was he that should have done so.


----------



## Lhunithiliel (Oct 20, 2002)

What I see from your post is that in the above quote you find a contradiction between the long-ago-taken decision of the Elves that the Ring must be destroyed in the fire of Mount Doom and the fact that Isildur was about to take the ring back to them.
Now, let's see.
First, the elves have proven a few times to have taken wrong decisions about some things. And when the "plans changed" they tried to find the best possible solution in the new circumstances. So, why not take the ring back at a moment when Evil has just lost all its powers and turn it for good causes? We, of course, cannot be sure of that, because this particular "convenient" moment has gone. When the Ring apeared once again, it was too late already! 
Second, the Ring WAS elvish, because Sauron forged it having already learned the craft of creating such rings of power from Celembrimbor and his smiths.
Third, I still think Isildur did what he did guided by some decent plans for the Ring of Power.


----------



## Gothmog (Oct 20, 2002)

> What I see from your post is that in the above quote you find a contradiction between the long-ago-taken decision of the Elves that the Ring must be destroyed in the fire of Mount Doom and the fact that Isildur was about to take the ring back to them.


 What is so long ago about 2 years?


> After the fall of Sauron, Isildur, the son and heir of Elendil, returned to Gondor. There he assumed the Elendilmir 1 as King of Arnor, and proclaimed his sovereign lordship over all the Dúnedain in the North and in the South; for he was a man of great pride and vigour. He remained for a year in Gondor, restoring its order and defining its bounds;


 UT
Also


> So it was, as is told in the legends of later days, that the second year of the Third Age was waning when Isildur set forth from Osgiliath early in Ivanneth, 9 expecting to reach Imladris in forty days, by mid-Narbeleth, ere winter drew nigh in the North. At the Eastgate of the Bridge on a bright morning Meneldil 10 bade him farewell. "Go now with good speed, and may the Sun of your setting out not cease to shine on your road!"





> Second, the Ring WAS elvish, because Sauron forged it having already learned the craft of creating such rings of power from Celembrimbor and his smiths.


 Shall we take another look at this?


> It was in Eregion that the counsels of Sauron were most gladly received, for in that land the Noldor desired ever to increase the skill and subtlety of their works. Moreover they were not at peace in their hearts, since they had refused to return into the West, and they desired both to stay in Middle-earth, which indeed they loved, and yet to enjoy the bliss of those that had departed. Therefore they hearkened to Sauron, *and they learned of him many things, for his knowledge was great*. In those days the smiths of Ost-in-Edhil surpassed all that they had contrived before; and they took thought, and they made Rings of Power. *But Sauron guided their labours*, and he was aware of all that they did; for his desire was to set a bond upon the Elves and to bring them under his vigilance.


 Seems to me that it was the smiths of Ost-in-Edhil and Celebrimbor amongst them that learned the arts of the Rings from Sauron.


> 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.


 Not the Actions of a Student in my oppinion.


> Third, I still think Isildur did what he did guided by some decent plans for the Ring of Power.


 Let us take a closer look at the quote you posted. But first we must set the scene. Isildur had left Osgiliath with no comment about taking the Ring to Elrond, He just “*had moreover an urgent need for the counsel of Elrond*.” During the March northward he was set upon by Orcs. The first charge was beaten off. Then there was a pitched battle, But before this battle started we find Isildur and his son talking.


> There was a pause, though the most keen-eyed among the Dúnedain said that the Orcs were moving inwards, stealthily, step by step. Elendur went to his father, who was standing dark and alone, as if lost in thought. "Atarinya," he said, "*what of the power that would cow these foul creatures and command them to obey you? Is it then of no avail?*"
> "Alas, it is not, senya. I cannot use it. I dread the pain of touching it. 23 And I have not yet found the strength to bend it to my will. It needs one greater than I now know myself to be. My pride has fallen. It should go to the Keepers of the Three."
> At that moment there came a sudden blast of horns, and the Orcs closed in on all sides, flinging themselves against the Dúnedain with reckless ferocity. Night had come, and hope faded. Men were falling; for some of the greater Orcs leaped up, two at a time, and dead or alive with their weight bore down a Dúnedain, so that other strong claws could drag him out and slay him. The Orcs might pay five to one in this exchange, but it was too cheap. Ciryon was slain in this way and Aratan mortally wounded in an attempt to rescue him.
> Elendur, not yet harmed, sought Isildur. He was rallying the men on the east side where the assault was heaviest, for the Orcs still feared the Elendilmir that he bore on his brow and avoided him. Elendur touched him on the shoulder and he turned fiercely, thinking an Orc had crept behind.
> ...


 So He was trying to control the Ring and it was not until he was forced by the Orcs that he admitted to being in the wrong about this . And what was this Pride that he felt the need to beg forgiveness for? Let us look at note 24.


> 24	The pride that led him to keep the Ring against the counsel of Elrond and Círdan that it should be destroyed in the fires of Orodruin


----------



## Lhunithiliel (Oct 21, 2002)

Our small discussion is getting more and more interesting, Gothmog!  

Two lines I see:
1/ The Ring - elvish or not >>> history of making; all the abilities of the ring and its influence and importance over the course of the history of ME
2/ Isildur - guilty for his pride or did he after all come to his senses and repented he wished to correct his mistake.

I'd say these are two TOUGH topics of discussion!
As for the Ring, I'll post later.
As for Isildur, for the moment I'd say that the quote I provided and the whole story it comes out from, together with some biographical facts for Isildur surely give a somewhat "lighter" image of him and of his deeds.
I don't say he was free of guilt. I don't say his decision to keep the ring did not bring too much trouble later on... 
But in my country we have a saying:
"Let's not make the Devil blacker than he is!"


----------



## Walter (Oct 21, 2002)

I would like to throw in my 2 cents here...

At the time Isildur cut the OneRing off Sauron's finger, the latter seemed to have been death, perished for good. So, I personally don't doubt that Isildur meant to keep the ring as a were-gild for his father's death, but he also did not at all - not by that time, anyway - want to deliver it to the Elves, moreover he even refused to do so:


> For Isildur would not surrender it to Elrond and Círdan who stood by. They counselled him to cast it into the fire of Orodruin nigh at hand, in which it had been forged, so that it should perish, and the power of Sauron be for ever diminished, and he should remain only as a shadow of malice in the wilderness. But Isildur refused this counsel, saying: 'This I will have as were-gild for my father's death, and my brothers. Was it not I that dealt the Enemy his death-blow?' And the Ring that he held seemed to him exceedingly fair to look on; and he would not suffer it to be destroyed.[/i] And when he decided to go to Rivendell before he returned to his own realm, the North-Kingdom, it was IMO surely not, to deliver the OneRing but rather - as Tolkien states (and as already mentioned by Gothmog)
> 
> 
> > When he at last felt free to return to his own realm he was in haste, and he wished to go first to Imladris; for he had left his wife and youngest son there, and he had moreover an urgent need for the counsel of Elrond.
> ...


----------



## Lhunithiliel (Oct 21, 2002)

First of all, I would like to apologize but this post is going to be VERY long! And yet it is just the beginning (I hope!) of an interesting discussion.

As I have already said, I see two parallel tracks our discussion follows: The Ring(one) and Isildur’s fault(two) (which is the original name of the present thread). But I have to admit that the discussion should stay on both these “tracks” because I see a strong interrelation between them.

In this post I’ll mainly deal with the RING and the matter “Was Isildur’s fault ONLY?” that it was not destroyed “on time”.

First, let’s turn briefly to the history of the Ring:

*Who made the Ring* – Sauron – a Maia, one of the mightiest, but also one of the most skillful too. And where did he learn? 


> Among those of his (Melkor's) servants that have names the greatest was that spirit whom the Eldar called Sauron, or Gorthaur the Cruel. In the beginning he was of the Maiar of Aule, and he remained mighty in the lore of that people."


The main purpose I brought this quote is because I have this theory that if Aule (an Ainu!) taught BOTH – Sauron AND the Elves, the rings created by them had the same origin. I was not quite right to name the Ring of Power “Elvish”, but still Sauron created his ring based on the SAME knowledge that the Elves had too. This – meaning that the original craft of introducing powers into a ring was well known to BOTH – Sauron and the elves. And this is a fact.
But the Elves surely mastered this craft and I don’t find a clear explanation to who was the “teacher” and who – the “student” in this process. They worked together for quite some time (when Sauron was still among them in the image of the “good-will”-messenger of the Valar.)
So, even that I CORRECT MYSELF for saying before that he learned his skills FROM the Elven smiths of Celembrimbor, I was not completely wrong, either.
Consider this:


> '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 still to my mind dangerous for mortals. But the Great Rings, the Rings of Power, they were perilous.





> 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. And much of the strength and will of Sauron passed into that One Ring; for the power of the Elven-rings was very great, and that which should govern them must be a thing of surpassing potency; and Sauron forged it in the Mountain of Fire in the Land of Shadow.



*When was the Ring made?* - 
*c. 1600 of the Second Age*: Sauron forges the One Ring in Orodruin – it is stated in Appendix B; The Tale of Years

Besides:
When Gandalf explains to Frodo about the signs on the ring:


> "'No,' said Gandalf, 'but I can. *The letters are Elvish, of an ancient mode,* but the language is that of Mordor, which I will not utter here.
> 
> It is only two lines of a verse *long known in Elven-lore*


So, it is obvious that the One AND its powers were LONG known to the elves. As we also know, the elves, after they had learned what perilous power had the One, not only hid their most “special” Three, but they also decided (at THAT time !!!) that the only way to get rid of the One is of it to be destroyed in the same place where it had been forged. 
Therefore, it WAS a “long-ago-taken” decision, as I have said in my previous post.
And I understand it that at first the Elves had ONLY this decision at hand that they could think of. But who of them would THEN have ever thought that Sauron could lose his “precious” tool , or who of them THEN could have imagined that the most perilous creation of their enemy could come into their possession at a moment when its master was in his least strength?!

This - leading to my theory that IF Isildur (now jumping onto the parallel track of our discussion) did succeed in taking the Ring to Rivendell, they might have AT THAT PRECISE MOMENT found ANOTHER SOLUTION to fit the new circumstances. 
This - in its turn - leading to my understanding that blaming Isildur for not destroying the Ring into the fires of Orodruin was used by the author ONLY as the "turning point" for the events to follow. BUT!!! It must not obligatorily mean that casting the Ring into the fire was the ONLY possible solution for destroying it.

Based on everything said above, I am not quite sure of what you meant by :


> What is so long ago about *2 years*?


Because:
*3441 of the Second Age* - Sauron overthrown by Elendil and Gil-galad, who perish. *Isildur takes the One Ring.* Sauron passes away and the Ringwraiths go into the shadows. The Second Age ends. - Appendix B; The Tale of Years.

3441 – 1600(see above) = *1841 years!!!!* NOT some 2!

Then, again from the same Appendix:


> _The Third Age_
> These were the fading years of the Eldar. *For long they were at peace wielding the Three Rings while Sauron slept and the One Ring was lost; but they attempted nothing new, living in memory of the past.*


Which AGAIN proves that IF at THAT PARTICULAR moment when Sauron was weak, the Elves had got the Ring back, they could have found another solution for its existence OR destruction.

Which, in its turn, leads to the fact that Isildur’s fault is rather to be shared with the Elves! 

FINALLY, I wish to say that I participate in this discussion out of my desire to *LEARN* rather than to show off with some _unarguable_ facts. I learn both - by reading (Tolkien writings and the posts of my forum-mates) and by participating in some threads.
I am still a JOURNEYMAN Tolkienologist!


----------



## Lhunithiliel (Oct 21, 2002)

Despite of my post which I posted a couple of hours ago, I felt restless not bringing forth the rest of my thoughts on the topic.
So, now, let’s concentrate on Isildur and whether he left for Rivendell with the ONLY purpose of reuniting with his family.

From the UT “The disaster of the Gladden Fields”:


> When he at last felt free to return to his own realm he was in haste, and he wished to go first to Imladris; for he had left his wife and youngest son there, 3 and he had moreover an urgent need for the counsel of Elrond.


A counsel – about WHAT? I think it is precisely about the Ring.

Now, you say that he gave up the ring ONLY when the situation got worse for him. 
However, the above quote may give some reasons to think that after he had experienced the true power of the Ring and after he had understood that he was not able to become its Master, he might have decided to take it to Rivendell and leave its destiny to be decided by the Elves. 
Of course, I understand that there is no DIRECT indication about this. 
And I am sure that some will point out to the same quote, interpreting it that he still did NOT want to give up the Ring, but ONLY to look for an advise of how to wield it.
Two points, two arguments – however neither very thoroughly proved. 

Actually, I think it would be important to include here some assumptions on the “relationship” between Isildur and the ring by the time he set on his journey. This, I think, will at least explain his behaviour up to the moment he decided to take the Ring to the Elves.

At first, I am pretty sure, he was overwhelmed by pride for being the one who had destroyed the Enemy and had become into the possession of his mightiest “weapon”. Knowing what Sauron could do using the Ring, Isildur must have thought that HE could wield the ring’s power for decent cause – at least that’s what he intended to use the ring for.

But here is what is explained about the ring-bearers and their will over the ring’s power:


> _From LOTR; The Mirror of Galadriel_
> 
> 'You have not tried ,'she (Galadriel) said (to Frodo). Do not try! It would destroy you. Did not Gandalf tell you that *the rings give power according to the measure of each possessor? Before you could use that power you would need to become far stronger, and to train your will to the domination of others.*





> _From . Letter to Milton Waldman_,
> Unless some other seized it and became possessed of it. If that happened, the new possessor could (*if sufficiently strong and heroic by nature*) challenge Sauron, become master of all that he had learned or done since the making of the One Ring, and so overthrow him and usurp his place.


Here is the moment to say that I wold like to thank ALL the participants in the thread HERE which I read recently, because there I found some quotes (as the above) from the Letters – a collection of writings which I still have to read and study. 
I only hope they will not get angry with me for using some of the quotes they provided in that other thread. Their discussion I found very educative, too – both concerning knowledge AND “ethics” of debating  !

Now, back to our topic.
What we see from those two quotes above is that the powers of the Ring COULD be wielded NOT ONLY by its creator. 
This, BTW, gives me an explanation to WHY Sauron feared so much that someone else could find and use the Ring.
Did Isildur know however about that? 
I’d say that a true Numenoren, as Isildur was, and having witnessed the destruction of Sauron (TWICE if I’m not mistaken), in spite of the Ring, why could it be so unthinkable for him that HE could not wield the ring himself? 
At that moment he – being a glorious winner, he could have easily be convinced that he could become the new Ring’s Master.
On the other hand, it was he – a MAN, not any of the highly praised Elves, who had defeated the Enemy. 
Taken into consideration, those two facts can explain why he refused to destroy the Ring when “asked” to. He must have felt the rightful “owner” of the Ring. 
There are of course some other things, again related to the specific historic moment, that make me willing to understand rather than to forgive his initial decision to keep the Ring. 

I’m posting all this ALSO because I’ve seen a lot of statements by which people very easily state that Isildur kept the Ring because he had fallen under its spell. Well, he had, I guess, but the truth here cannot be just as simple as that! Whether the Ring controlled its powers itself or they were controlled by its Master (whoever it might be) – this has been an endless discussion as it seems for years.

I understand that the circumstances at that moment were exceptional, extraordinary and extremely complex. Isildur’s decision to keep the Ring I understand as a result out of this complex situation.


----------



## Walter (Oct 21, 2002)

Lhunithiliel,

you have spared neither trouble nor expense  to present your theory and to show us the possible complexity of the emotional or factual situation of Isildur after Sauron had been destroyed by the LastAlliance. Your theory is not less valid than any other theory concerning this topic which cannot be directly falsified.

It may be the situation was as complex as you constructed it, yet it also may be that the situation was as simple as that: Isildur - due to his pride - failed to have the ring destroyed while he had the chance to, and he did not repent or reconsider until it was too late, and hence brought a lot of grieve upon Middle-earth for 3017 more years.

----

...but then again, what would Tolkien have had to write about, if Isildur had given in to Elrond's and Círdan's counsel and actually cast the ring into the Cracks of Doom in the Sammath Naur?


----------



## Grond (Oct 21, 2002)

> _from The Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien, 246 From a letter to Mrs Eileen Elgar (drafts) September 1963 [A reply to a reader's comments on Frodo's failure to surrender the Ring in the Cracks of Doom.]_
> ...I do not think that Frodo's was a moral failure. At the last moment the pressure of the Ring would reach its maximum – impossible, I should have said, for any one to resist, certainly after long possession, months of increasing torment, and when starved and exhausted. Frodo had done what he could and spent himself completely (as an instrument of Providence) and had produced a situation in which the object of his quest could be achieved. His humility (with which he began) and his sufferings were justly rewarded by the highest honour; and his exercise of patience and mercy towards Gollum gained him Mercy: his failure was redressed.


One wonders whether Isildur would have stood by his comments to take the One to Rivendell and surrender it to the Wise. This Letter would indicate that the Ring itself might have something to say in the matter.


----------



## Lhunithiliel (Oct 21, 2002)

> _
> It may be the situation was as complex as you constructed it, yet it also may be that the situation was as simple as that: Isildur - due to his pride - failed to have the ring destroyed while he had the chance to, and he did not repent or reconsider until it was too late, and hence brought a lot of grieve upon Middle-earth for 3017 more years._


_
Well, it is that I always try to "step in one's boots" (do you have such saying?). So, I thought: "what must have this man thought and how must have he felt in such a moment of extremal circumstances?" And there it started....  



Originally posted by Walter ...but then again, what would Tolkien have had to write about, if Isildur had given in to Elrond's and Círdan's counsel and actually cast the ring into the Cracks of Doom in the Sammath Naur? 

Click to expand...

Right! Then, am I not right by saying that the author used Isildur's disobedience JUST as a starting point for his further story? 

Grond, I cannot comment on your post .... because   I could not get the point.  Sorry, it seems my previous posts exhausted my knowledge in English! _


----------



## Gothmog (Oct 21, 2002)

[


> _originaly posted by Lhunithiliel_
> *FINALLY, I wish to say that I participate in this discussion out of my desire to LEARN rather than to show off with some unarguable facts. I learn both - by reading (Tolkien writings and the posts of my forum-mates) and by participating in some threads.
> I am still a JOURNEYMAN Tolkienologist!*



You have brought to this discussion some interesting views. It will take some time to answer you in a suitable way. As myself, I am only a student of Tolkien. However, I am glad that you started this topic and will continue to participate and to learn. I will post again soon.


----------



## Grond (Oct 21, 2002)

Lhun, my point was that Tolkien seems to indicate (IMHO) in the Letters that no one who knew what they actually possessed, would ever be able to give up the Ring. Bilbo didn't know what he possessed, plus he had others pressing him to leave the Ring. Frodo was totally unable to destroy / give up the Ring. I wonder if Isildur would have willingly placed it in Elrond's hand?

That was what I was attempting to say.


----------



## Lhunithiliel (Oct 21, 2002)

Now, Iunderstand, Master.


> I wonder if Isildur would have willingly placed it in Elrond's hand?


You tell me!  You are a man. How would a man react in such a situation? 
I still think that Isildur already had understood he could not wield the Ring. He could not understand how to controll the power within, he could not stand the pain... Why not get rid of it?  
Besides, to compare Frodo to Isildur ...... Mmmmmm.... I wouldn't. Two quite different characters >>> two different perceptions of the powers of the Ring.


----------



## Grond (Oct 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Lhunithiliel _
> *Now, Iunderstand, Master.
> 
> You tell me!  You are a man. How would a man react in such a situation?
> ...


 I totally agree with your statement Lhun. Frodo was an innocent hobbit who undertook a quest at the greatest of risk and cost to him. 

Isildur was an ambitious, kingly and proud Man who had cut the Ring off of Sauron's finger as a were-guild for the death of his father. He did not think he could bear to wield the Ring... but had yet to be pushed to the test. Tolkien makes it clear (at least again IMHO) that the Ring would ultimately overpower any Man who tried to give it up. Especially a Man who knew what he possessed and had actually worn the Ring. Pain be damned, if push had come to shove, Isildur (due to the very inherent greatness he possessed) would be overcome by the desire to keep and use the Ring.

Let's not forget that Gandalf and Galadriel (both greater than Isildur) were terrified of what possessing the Ring would do to them. I think in the end (like Frodo) Isildur too would have failed.

But that's just my opinion.


----------



## Lantarion (Oct 22, 2002)

VERY interesting thread, and excellent arguments! Such perfect threads are scarce these days! 
Yes, in the end all who tried would most probably fail.. The Valar might not be concerned or affected by such little and petty things as greed and desire to rule over others, but other than them everybody would be dooomed. 
And I just want to make sure everybody knows: although Isildur was afraid of the Ring, he did actually use it, on several occasions. He was wearing it right after the slaughter on the Gladden Fields, but it 'slipped 'off. 
But I'm sure this intelligent and quick-witted lot knew that already (except Lhunithiliel).


----------



## Lhunithiliel (Oct 23, 2002)

Oh, Lantarion, I know well enough how the Ring “betrayed Isildur” in the Gladden River  

But let’s try and see this moment from another “angle”. 

First, here how the story was described:

From UT, The Disaster of Gladden Fields:


> So it was that he came at last to the banks of Anduin at the dead of night, and he was weary; for he had made a journey that the Dúnedain on such ground could have made no quicker, marching without halt and by day. 27 *The river was swirling dark and swift* before him. He stood for a while, alone and in despair. Then in haste he cast off all his armour and weapons, save a short sword at his belt, 28 and plunged into the water. *He was a man of strength and endurance that few even of the Dúnedain of that age could equal, but he had little hope to gain the other shore. Before he had gone far he was forced to turn almost north against the current; and strive as he might he was ever swept down towards the tangles of the Gladden Fields.* They were nearer than he had thought, 29 *and even as he felt the stream slacken and had almost won across he found himself struggling among great rushes and clinging weeds.* There suddenly he knew that the Ring had gone.


Now, use your imagination and *see* that scene: It was a dark and fearful night. Isildur was in great pain; he was also exhausted by a heavy battle, by having run quite a long distance… And the river’s current was very strong. Isildur was a strong man himself, yet he had to struggle against the raging waters with all his might…

Don’t you think that in circumstances like these not only a ring can slip off his finger, but the current might have taken his pants off  even! So, the _“treachery”_ of the Ring might have been a pure coincidence – a loss caused by simple natural circumstances and NOT by some mystical powers.?!?

Second: Let’s contemplate on the Ring itself IF we stick to the generally accepted theory of its “special” powers. 
Was the Ring really so powerful as to directly and by its own free will exercise influence over a ringbearer? *And what was the Ring anyway? Why was it created by Tolkien?*
1.
In Letter: 211 To Rhona Beare we read what J.R.R. Tolkien said about the Ring:


> “You cannot press the One Ring too hard, *for it is of course a mythical feature,* even though the world of the tales is conceived in more or less historical terms. *The Ring of Sauron is only one of the various mythical treatments of the placing of one's life, or power, in some external object, which is thus exposed to capture or destruction with disastrous results to oneself.*


2.
And in 109 To Sir Stanley Unwin:


> You can make the Ring into *an allegory of our own time*, if you like: *an allegory of the inevitable fate that waits for all attempts to defeat evil power by power.* But that is only because all power magical or mechanical does always so work. You cannot write a story about an apparently simple magic ring without that bursting in, if you really take the ring seriously, and make things happen that would happen, if such a thing existed.


To me these two passages tell that The Ring was a “tool” in the hands of a most skillful writer, who used it for particular reasons:
1. To have a “convenient” “foundation” on which he could build further on the story of the destruction of Sauron. Meaning, if Sauron had kept all his power to himself and had not transferred a great deal of it _outside_ himself, it would have been difficult to think of a power to stand against him and defeat him.
2. To ACTUALLY introduce a *far more important issue* that the simple dilemma of _“Was the Ring magical and of free will or not?”_. This more important issue, IMHO , is : *"the inevitable fate that waits for all attempts to defeat evil power by power* (see the above quote No:2).

I have often read in the forum statements about the fact that Tolkien himself did not want the characters and the events in his books to be taken as some _allegories_, nor he wished ME to be perceived as some sort of a _“mirror”_ of our own world. But I personally think that this is EXACTLY what has made his writings so popular! Every place, event and character in Tolkien’s ME can be actually “seen” in our reality. And what is even of greater importance – this “reality” is irrelevant of history and time – people in the yearly 70-ies of the past century found in Tolkien’s books the same truths as we do now – in the first years of the new millenium! 

I brought up these thoughts to your attention in order to show that the Ring is not to be taken so simply and easily as just some “mischievous” object that caused so many disasters, nor simply as some “powerful master of fate” either. 
I think that the Ring should be taken more as a symbol of the everlasting struggle between the “good” and “bad” aspects in a human nature rather than the direct cause (as being some perilous magical object) for the degradation human nature.

All above – taken to the topic of the thread: Isildur’s “relationship” with the Ring was a literature method, used to reveal and provoke some deeper and more serious issues.


----------



## Eriol (Oct 23, 2002)

Hi all, I found this a very interesting thread. Of course Isildur's intentions are unknown to us and can be argued either way endlessly, but I think Grond's point is telling: even a hobbit was not willing to relinquish the Ring after using it without outside help (Gandalf and Bilbo, for instance). A Man would probably succumb to its lust and keep it in the end. 

Regarding the Ring's lust, I always had a nagging question in my mind (should I open a new thread?): was Sauron himself exposed to it? I remember that he LEFT his Ring in Mordor when he surrendered to the Numenoreans. Wasn't this a major blunder (from both sides, Good and Evil) in the history of Middle-Earth? I mean, Sauron just leaves it in Barad-dûr and goes to Númenor, risking that some upstart among his followers (a Ringwraith perhaps?) should go for it and achieve dominance. And the Keepers of the Three, KNOWING that Sauron is gone, and their Rings are free for a while, DO NOTHING! They don't even try to invade the Dark Tower and seize the Ring.

What do you think?


----------



## Gothmog (Oct 23, 2002)

As for who made the One Ring and who was the teacher, we have the following quotes.


> It was in Eregion that the counsels of Sauron were most gladly received, for in that land the Noldor desired ever to increase the skill and subtlety of their works. Moreover they were not at peace in their hearts, since they had refused to return into the West, and they desired both to stay in Middle-earth, which indeed they loved, and yet to enjoy the bliss of those that had departed. Therefore they hearkened to Sauron, *and they learned of him many things*, for his knowledge was great. In those days the smiths of Ost-in-Edhil surpassed all that they had contrived before; and they took thought, and they made Rings of Power. *But Sauron guided their labours*, and he was aware of all that they did; for his desire was to set a bond upon the Elves and to bring them under his vigilance.


 Sauron taught the Elves learned.
And also


> Now these were the Three that had last been made, and they possessed the greatest powers. Narya, Nenya, and Vilya, they were named, the Rings of Fire, and of Water, and of Air, set with ruby and adamant and sapphire; and of all the Elven-rings Sauron most desire to possess them, for those who had them in their keeping could ward off the decays of time and postpone the weariness of the world. But Sauron could not discover them, for they were given into the hands of the Wise, who concealed them and never again used them openly while Sauron kept the Ruling Ring. Therefore the Three remained unsullied, for they were forged by Celebrimbor alone, *and the hand of Sauron had never touched them; yet they also were subject to the One*.


 The Silmarillion: of the Rings of Power and the Third age.

For Sauron to be able to make the Three subject to the One Ring meant that he had to know more about the rings than the Elves. He did not know at the time of the forging of the One that the three existed. He only discovered them when he put on the One.

Then we find this:


> while in Lindon Gil-galad shut out Sauron's emissaries and even Sauron himself [as is more fully reported in Of Rings of Power (The Silmarillion p. 287)]. But Sauron had better fortune with the Noldor of Eregion *and especially with Celebrimbor, who desired in his heart to rival the skill and fame of Fëanor*. [The cozening of the smiths of Eregion by Sauron, and his giving himself the name Annatar, Lord of Gifts, is told in Of the Rings of Power, but there is there no mention of Galadriel].
> In Eregion *Sauron posed as an emissary of the Valar*, sent by them to Middle-earth ("thus anticipating the Istari") or ordered by them to remain there to give aid to the Elves. He perceived at once that Galadriel would be his chief adversary and obstacle, and he endeavoured therefore to placate her, bearing her scorn with outward patience and courtesy. [No explanation is offered in this rapid outline of why Galadriel scorned Sauron, unless she saw through his disguise, or of why, if she did perceive his true nature, she permitted him to remain in Eregion.] 7 *Sauron used all his arts upon Celebrimbor and his fellow-smiths*, who had formed a society or brotherhood, very powerful in Eregion, the Gwaith-i-Mírdain; but he worked in secret, unknown to Galadriel and Celeborn. *Before long Sauron had the Gwaith-i-Mírdain under his influence, for at first they had great profit from his instruction in secret matters of their craft*.


 And


> When Sauron learned of the repentance and revolt of Celebrimbor his disguise fell and his wrath was revealed; and gathering a great force he moved over Calenardhon (Rohan) to the invasion of Eriador in the year 1695. When news of this reached Gil-galad he sent out a force under Elrond Half-elven; but Elrond had far to go, and Sauron turned north and made at once for Eregion. The scouts and vanguard of Sauron's host were already approaching when Celeborn made a sortie and drove them back; but though he was able to join his force to that of Elrond they could not return to Eregion, for Sauron's host was far greater than theirs, great enough both to hold them off and closely to invest Eregion. At last the attackers broke into Eregion with ruin and devastation, and captured the chief object of Sauron's assault, the House of the Mírdain, where were their smithies and their treasures. Celebrimbor, desperate, himself withstood Sauron on the steps of the great door of the Mírdain; but he was grappled and taken captive, and the House was ransacked. There Sauron took the Nine Rings and other lesser works of the Mírdain; but the Seven and the Three he could not find. Then Celebrimbor was put to torment, and Sauron learned from him where the Seven were bestowed. This Celebrimbor revealed, because neither the Seven nor the Nine did he value as he valued the Three; *the Seven and the Nine were made with Sauron's aid*, whereas the Three were made by Celebrimbor alone, with a different power and purpose.


 UT

All of the Quotes show that it was Sauron who was the Teacher and the Elves who were the Students. It was only after the Elves had learned from Sauron that they took thought of the Rings of Power, before this they had no idea that such could be done.


> _Originaly posted by Lhunithiliel_
> *Which, in its turn, leads to the fact that Isildur's fault is rather to be shared with the Elves!*


 Not so.


> The Ruling Ring passed out of the knowledge even of the Wise in that age; yet it was not unmade. *For Isildur would not surrender it to Elrond and Cirdan who stood by*. They counselled him to cast it into the fire of Orodruin nigh at hand, in which it had been forged, so that it should perish, and the power of Sauron be for ever diminished, and he should remain only as a shadow of malice in the wilderness. *But Isildur refused this counsel*, saying: 'That I will have as weregild for my father's death, and my brother's. Was it not I that dealt the Enemy his death-blow?' *And the Ring that he held seemed to him exceedingly fair to look on; and he would not suffer it to be destroyed*.


The Silmarillion.

The Elves counseled him to destroy it. Isildur refused this counsel, he kept it and would not permit it to be harmed. Therefore he must also keep the fault himself.


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (Oct 24, 2002)

Whatever the eventual hold the Ring had on Isildur, its first appeal to him - as, incidentally, it was to Gollum - was its beauty. Its very perfection smote his heart and he underwent a physical yearning for the Ring. Gandalf speaks of Gollum being drawn to the Ring and desiring it because the gold was "beautiful". 

All other things aside, the Ring is able to present itself to a possible bearer as a thing of unsurpassing beauty. This is interesting because plain gold rings aren't all that gorgeous. Now a big diamond or ruby might catch the eye, but it appears that the Ring is able to weave a spell of seduction (and that is not too strong a word to use in this case) upon those who first encounter it. Only Bilbo is saved because he picks up the Ring in the dark and perhaps that is why, even though it eventually does affect him, he alone is able to discard it.


----------



## Lhunithiliel (Oct 25, 2002)

The Ring!.... As I said, it is an important "point" in order to determine Isildur's fault.
I, if you have all noticed, tend to look at it from two different angles - the Ring *in* the story and the Ring *outside* the story. 
And you know what?..... The more I look at it from those two different positions, the more I see a striking fact:
If we take into consideration the Ring ONLY *in* the story, Isildur's fault can be determined as undoubtedly present and further on contemplate over how he felt under the spell of the Ring ...etc.
BUT, if we see the Ring *out* of the story (see my previous post) then one can see NO fault of poor Isildur whatsoever! The Ring becomes only a device for continuing the story itself..and Isildur...as it is said "in the wrong time and in the wrong place".
Don't you think so?


----------



## Walter (Oct 25, 2002)

What sometimes amuses me when I read arguments about the ring representing a sentient being is a statement like: "because it was able to change its size and hence could slip off ones finger"...

Well, according to this theory I own the OneRing: It is my wedding ring! At times it doesn't even come off by force and at times I have to be careful that it doesn't slip off, like when I'm washing my hands...

I too think that the ring represents only a tool or a token Tolkien uses to demonstrate the various manifestations of evil influences due to a certain "lust for power" and the ability to "dominate others through power". According to my own philosophy everything one gets or achieves in this world has a prize. 

The prize for "achieving the power of the OneRing" is a certain change in character, the direction and degree of this change varies with the "inherent powers" of the owner. Gollum turned into a slimey creature, Frodo towards the end of the LotR becomes similar possessive of the Ring as Bilbo but also shows a certain affinity towards the power obtainable through the ring, Galadriel - when offered the ring by Frodo - draws a picture of a beautiful, but terrible Queen:


> ... And I shall not be dark, but beautiful and terrible as the Morning and the Night! Fair as the Sea and the Sun and the Snow upon the Mountain! Dreadful as the Storm and the Lightning! Stronger than the foundations of the earth. All shall love me and despair!...


 And not even Gandalf would be immune to the influence of the power obtained through the Ring:


> Gandalf as Ring-Lord would have been far worse than Sauron. He would have remained 'righteous', but self-righteous. He would have continued to rule and order things for 'good', and the benefit of his subjects according to his wisdom (which was and would have remained great).
> [The draft ends here. In the margin Tolkien wrote: 'Thus while Sauron multiplied [illegible word] evil, he left "good" clearly distinguishable from it. Gandalf would have made good detestable and seem evil.'] -- Letters 246



Isildur -IMO - refused to destroy the Ring due to his pride - a trait quite a few the Dúnedain showed more than once throughout their history - his the change of his character would probably lie somewhere in between the Hobbits' and Galadriel's change, but he did not and - IMO - would never not part voluntarily with the ring.

In fact, though Bilbo had become very possessive of the ring he was the only one who would give up the ring - more or less - voluntarily and who seems immune to the temptation to use the ring for its powers to dominate, but maybe this was due to his innocence about the real power the ring represents.

Tolkiens standpoint towards allegory - again IMO - was an ambiguous one and many of his statements, together with the stories he wrote indicate to me the he disliked the term "allegory" rather than anyting else. To give but one example:


> But in spite of this, do not let Rayner suspect 'Allegory'. There is a 'moral', I suppose, in any tale worth telling. But that is not the same thing. Even the struggle between darkness and light (as he calls it, not me) is for me just a particular phase of history, one example of its pattern, perhaps, but not The Pattern; and the actors are individuals – they each, of course, contain universals, or they would not live at all, but they never represent them as such.
> Of course, Allegory and Story converge, meeting somewhere in Truth. So that the only perfectly consistent allegory is a real life; and the only fully intelligible story is an allegory. And one finds, even in imperfect human 'literature', that the better and more consistent an allegory is the more easily can it be read 'just as a story'; and the better and more closely woven a story is the more easily can those so minded find allegory in it. But the two start out from opposite ends. You can make the Ring into an allegory of our own time, if you like: an allegory of the inevitable fate that waits for all attempts to defeat evil power by power. But that is only because all power magical or mechanical does always so work. You cannot write a story about an apparently simple magic ring without that bursting in, if you really take the ring seriously, and make things happen that would happen, if such a thing existed.



And my conclusive statement concerning the topic of this thread: Isildur's fault is Isildur's fault. No one else is to blame for that...

PS: Now that I've written this, my wedding ring will never look the same to me. I guess I'll throw it in the fire tonight and see if any writing appears...


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (Oct 25, 2002)

The Ring certainly contains a type of sentience. Gandalf speaks of it looking to return to its Master, seeking him. It slips off fingers on which it was once tight NOT because the person is washing his hands, but because the Ring is fundamentally false. It lures and then betrays. Tolkien states that it "betrayed" Isildur, and that is not merely an observation of the fact that once it slipped from his finger, he was visible. It INTENDED for him to be visible and hence, killed. The Ring is not merely a talisman of power. If that were so, then any strong willed person could have used it with impunity. It was a font of evil as was the being who poured himself into it. To take away its own brand of sentience is to make the Ring a neutral force in the story and we KNOW that it wasn't that.

As for Isildur's part in the story of the Ring and the blame accruing to him thereby, yes, he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. But lots of people find themselves in such places on a daily basis. The man who sees a bag of money drop from an armored car could be considered to have been in "the wrong place at the wrong time" but that does not excuse his actions if he keeps the money. He will still be considered guilty of theft even though the money came to him rather than vice versa. Unlike Bilbo who accidentally came upon the Ring, Isildur TOOK the Ring. 

Furthermore, unlike Bilbo, Isildur knew full well what the Ring represented and what its destruction would bring about - the passing of Sauron. But he STILL chose to satisfy his own desire for the Ring over what he KNEW to be his duty to his people and to all the folk of Middle Earth. In that, Isildur was certainly "at fault" and the consequences of that fault brought grief and strife to all of Middle Earth until his descendent took part in the Quest which accomplished with great pain what Isildur could have done with so little effort. Was he at fault? You bet!


----------



## Walter (Oct 25, 2002)

IMO Tolkien left the decision, whether the ring was sentient or not, open for the reader to decide. There have already been a lot of threads dealing with this question - with good points made on both sides and I didn't want to go there again.

What I was trying to hint at is, that - at least in real life - it usually is the finger which changes the size (to a higher degree than the thermal expansion of whatever metal the ring was made of), and even in Tolkien's world - until I see proof that Tolkien in certain cases intended things to be different - I tend to apply the same laws of physics we have in this world...


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (Oct 25, 2002)

You are absolutely right! Increased temperature expands things - especially metal - and, conversely, lower temperatures cause things to contract. Soap, lotions and grease reduce friction which will cause things not only to slip OFF one's hands, but OUT OF them as well (cleaning up broken plate off floor!).

However, Gandalf tells Frodo in both the book and the film that the Ring WANTS to be found. Desire is a clear sign of sentience. If one is not sentient, one cannot experience desire. 

Furthermore, in both the film and the book, Frodo often experiences the Will of the Ring to place it on when he is close to forces of the Enemy: when the Nazgul appear in the Shire and when their great Captain leads his army out of the Morgul Valley while the hobbits and Gollum watch. Will, like desire, is a function of sentience. 

Also, the will of the Ring for Frodo to put it on, is present only when an opportunity arises in which it can betray him. He is not constantly being "commanded" to put it on, but he does suffer that pressure when an enemy is near. This means that the Ring's will is selective and able to decide as to when and when not to exercise itself. The ability to recognize situations and make decisions, are both functions of sentience.

I don't think a convincing argument can be made that the Ring is nothing more than a source of power. The mere fact that in both film and book it is recognized and defined as evil, makes that point since evil, too, is a function of sentience.


----------



## Walter (Oct 25, 2002)

Dear Mrs Maggot,

I think we all will agree that the ring is described by Tolkien as something that is more than "just another ring", I mean at least it made some people who wore it invisible. 

But IIRC in the debates about the "functionality of the ring" the main standpoints were whether the ring was sentient on its own or not. In the latter case it would be a tool, dependent on Saurons mind or will or spirit but not sentient (e.g similar to Aulë's dwarves _before_ Ilúvatar approved their creation) on its own. A final conclusion about this IMO cannot be made in general, but is subject to personal interpretation of the facts given by Tolkien. 

Having said this I think we have spent enough of this thread for this little OT debate and maybe should bring the issue back to the topic: Isildur's fault...

Btw. what's for dinner? Mushrooms perchance? Could you share any recipes worth giving a try?


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (Oct 25, 2002)

As you might have noticed, I have commented upon Isildur's fault and found that he was - despite the Ring's machinations - quite at fault in his actions.

As for dinner, ALWAYS mushrooms and turnips and a nice roast with gravy and potatoes (baked, usually, although mashed is nice as well - it makes those lovely little wells for gravy). A nice cheese for an appetizer with cider (a little hard perhaps?) or a grand pint of October brown ale! Cottage pudding for dessert or, at this time of the year, a nice apple cobbler or pumpkin pie! 

That's one of the things I LOVED about the hobbits! Keep your Rings and thrones and bright swords. Give them evenings by a quiet fireside with a good hardy dinner and candles burning on the table, then a nice book with a hot bath and warm bed at the end of the day! These were "people" who REALLY KNEW HOW TO LIVE! We could learn from folks like this!


----------



## Gothmog (Oct 25, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Lhunithiliel _
> *The Ring!.... As I said, it is an important "point" in order to determine Isildur's fault.
> I, if you have all noticed, tend to look at it from two different angles - the Ring in the story and the Ring outside the story.
> And you know what?..... The more I look at it from those two different positions, the more I see a striking fact:
> ...


 Ok. Let's have a look at this then. The Ring Outside of the Story.

Yes it is true that the Ring is just a way of keeping the story going but what you then have to look at is *how* is this to be accomplished?

There seems to me to be three ways that this can be done.

1. You have a minion of Sauron take the Ring and hold it for his master. (yea I can see that happening as well  ).

2. You have one of the 'Good' guys take it. The question is why would he do that?

3. The ring gets lost. Hard to do that at the time. Three people (one man and two elves are watching very closely).

Number 2. looks like the best bet so we then get to the reason. That ends up with the guy refusing to allow the thing to be melted down and walks away with it. So we have someone being at fault for this happening.

So after looking at it as 'only a device for continuing the story itself' we find that in the continuing we put someone at 'Fault'. That someone happens to be Isidur. If it had been Elrond who removed the Ring from Sauron's hand, he would have been at fault and it would have resulted in a new dark lord I expect.


----------



## Beren (Oct 25, 2002)

For six hundred years, he(Sauron) pursued a dual strategy. In the guise of Annatar, the Lord of Gifts, he tutored the Elves of Eregion , teaching them the secret things that only a Maia of Aulë's people could know. From his lore, the Rings of Power were forged.

To blame Isildur would be to blame the man who wins the lottery and spends it as his own. No counsel would seem wise, and all counselors would seem jeolous or greedy.


----------



## Lhunithiliel (Oct 26, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Gothmog _
> There seems to me to be three ways that this can be done.
> 1. You have a minion of Sauron take the Ring and hold it for his master. (yea I can see that happening as well).
> 2. You have one of the 'Good' guys take it. The question is why would he do that?
> ...


Well, if I'm not mistaken, you're speaking about variants of how the story could have gone on if it was NOT Isildur who had taken the Ring.
Let me say that your final conclusion, as well as mine a bit earlier before (Isildur - in the wrong time ...) and the beautifully expressed opinion by Beren - they all agree on one and the same thing - Isildur should not bear the complete fault for the events afterwords. I still stick to my opinion that he should share this fault with the Elves, who for years had not done anything to prevent the rebirth of Evil.

As for a possible scenario for the story (although it should be in my "What if"-game thread rather!  ) , think about a possibility where the Ring is destroyed together with its master. After all, the Ring contained quite a part of Sauron's powers....
-------------
Disregard the last lines - they have nothing to do with the topic of this thread. But if you wish to try your imagination on that idea, keep an eye over the "What if"-game at the Guil of Tolkienology - it may very soon appear there!  
-------------
Walter and Mrs.Maggot could I join you for dinner  I LOVE mushrooms!
BTW, good debate about the sentience of the Ring - really very VERY thoroughly debated over in various threads here!


----------



## Walter (Oct 26, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Mrs. Maggott _
> These were "people" who REALLY KNEW HOW TO LIVE! We could learn from folks like this!


 I could not agree more - and your suggestion for dinner was .... yummi.... 



> _Originally posted by Beren _
> To blame Isildur would be to blame the man who wins the lottery and spends it as his own. No counsel would seem wise, and all counselors would seem jeolous or greedy.


 ...but maybe we should mention that someone else bought the lottery ticket...

----
As my personal conclusion: Isildur wanted all of the fame, so I think it only fair when he has to take allof the blame as well, after he failed. The only thing that could prevent me from blaming him is the saying: De mortuis nihil nisi bene....


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (Oct 26, 2002)

To blame Isildur would be to blame the man who wins the lottery and spends it as his own. No counsel would seem wise, and all counselors would seem jeolous or greedy. <quote>

I would say that Isildur would have been less blameworthy if he had not known that the destruction of the Ring would forever diminish Sauron to the point of impotence. However, he DID know that - and chose to keep the Ring anyway. There is certainly blame there. Of course, the Ring had already begun its seduction using its physical beauty in the same way as it ensnared Gollum so many years later. Still, it should not have been beyond Isildur's ability to overcome the Ring's blandishments and throw it into the Fire unless he were of such a weak nature that within those few minutes of his possession of the Ring, it had overthrown him. Somehow I doubt that he was that weak and feckless or it would have been mentioned somewhere in the writings. So it seems that it comes down to Isildur's concious decision against all worthy advice, to keep the Ring.

As far as blame is concerned, certainly ALL of the blame does not accrue to Isildur. The elves - as was noted - bore at least some of the blame, but, frankly, I believe (and have since reading The Silmarillion so many years ago) that the VALAR have to bear the brunt of the blame. After all, both Morgoth and Sauron are great Spirits; one was himself a Valar and the other a Maia. No elf or man (or group thereof) was their equal (or at least Morgoth's equal) as was seen in the War of the Silmarils. 

But the Valar spent a good deal of their time trying to avoid all those nasty things that were happening in Middle Earth. It reminded me of Gandalf speaking to Frodo when the latter wondered was not even the Shire safe. The Wizard replies with words to the effect that you can wall yourself in (like both the hobbits and the Valar), but you cannot keep the world out! 

Therefore, I am of the opinion that the woes of Middle Earth - while certainly fueled and exacerbated by men and elves - were first and foremost caused by Morgoth and Sauron who were neither man nor elf!


----------



## Lhunithiliel (Oct 26, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Lhun_:
> Walter and Mrs.Maggot could I join you for dinner I LOVE mushrooms!



No answer! No invitation! ... No mushrooms.... No delicious dinner.... 
*cough* *cough* Or was my presence to ruin a tet-a-tet (don't mind my French!), candle-lit, romantic-music-tuned, quiet, Tolkien-inspired-conversation-full evening?  

Back to the topic (I'm hungry, though!). 
You two seem to have given some statements that seemed as "final" concerning your opinions. Do you think it's high time to close this topic?

As for me, I keep on reading and whenever I find sth. related to a topic I like, I mark it and use it as a new argument. For the moment, I have provided all that I thought "related" to Isildur's fault, although I have "stored" quite a few things, concerning the Ring. But as this is not a "Ring"-discussion, I'll leave them aside for now.
I'll be back to this thread (it's my baby, after all!) as soon as I find sth. very suitable ... OR... when somebody provides new arguments to be discussed


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (Oct 26, 2002)

My dear - of COURSE you may come to dinner. In fact, have you ever noticed that the MORE people come to a dinner, the greater the enjoyment for all concerned? My Nana used to say, "We'll put a little more water in the soup!" when unexpected guests appeared. 

One of the most pleasant aspects of all human intercourse is that of hospitality. It's no wonder that the treatment of guests is a very important aspect of many societies around the world across many different ages. 

Such simple joys put to shame all the struggle and pain that are expended obtaining material possessions or power or any of the other "important things" upon which people waste their lives when the simple and relatively inexpensive things of life - like friendship and hospitality - are so much more worthy of our efforts.


----------



## Walter (Oct 26, 2002)

Of course you'd be welcome for dinner...

Maybe someday a TTF get together for dinner?

As for the topic: Yes I have made my mind about "Isildur's fault" based upon the information I have gathered about it so far. 

But when I have made my mind about a certain issue, it doesn't mean that it is carved in stone. Every new information or every new idea - like another meaningful post - which throws a different light at the issue may make me reconsider and maybe change my mind about that issue...


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (May 11, 2014)

> There Sauron took the Nine Rings and other lesser works of the Mírdain; but the Seven and the Three he could not find. Then Celebrimbor was put to torment, and Sauron learned from him where the Seven were bestowed. This Celebrimbor revealed, because neither the Seven nor the Nine did he value as he valued the Three; the Seven and the Nine were made with Sauron's aid, whereas the Three were made by Celebrimbor alone, with a different power and purpose.



So when we talk of the lesser rings, was this outside of the 7 and the 9? or were the 9 considered the lesser rings that the elves crafted before crafting the 3 great Elven rings.


----------



## crabby (May 14, 2014)

Erestor Arcamen said:


> So when we talk of the lesser rings, was this outside of the 7 and the 9? or were the 9 considered the lesser rings that the elves crafted before crafting the 3 great Elven rings.



ok, 'lesser rings' questions - we know that the 9 rings went to men, all were ensnared, all were re-taken by Sauron. the 7 went to the Dwarf Lords - those we know were either re-taken or destroyed, presumably by Dragons - what did Sauron do with the re-taken rings, do we know what the re-taken/destroyed numbers were and which Dwarf kingdoms were effected and what happened to them?

i think i recall Thrain having one, and Sauron tormenting him in Gul Dolgur with its loss... but is that it, is the loss of a ring just a personal torment rather than a societal loss?

its never mentioned, but what of Five - one ring, three rings, seven rings, nine rings? did Tolkien have a plan but never get round to it - Haradrim? Southrons? Easterlings? Hobbits? Wizards?

cheers.


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (May 14, 2014)

crabby said:


> ok, 'lesser rings' questions - we know that the 9 rings went to men, all were ensnared, all were re-taken by Sauron. the 7 went to the Dwarf Lords - those we know were either re-taken or destroyed, presumably by Dragons - what did Sauron do with the re-taken rings, do we know what the re-taken/destroyed numbers were and which Dwarf kingdoms were effected and what happened to them?
> 
> *i think i recall Thrain having one, and Sauron tormenting him in Gul Dolgur with its loss... but is that it, is the loss of a ring just a personal torment rather than a societal loss?*
> 
> ...



Thanks for the reply! Thrain did have a ring but he was brought to Dol Guldur and tormented by Sauron. Eventually Gandalf found him in the dungeon where Thrain gave him the map and key to the Lonely Mountain:



> In TA 2841, he and a group of followers including Balin and Dwalin left their dwelling in the Blue Mountains and journeyed into Wilderland. They were pursued by the servants of Sauron and one morning, in the eaves of Mirkwood, his companions awoke to find that Thráin was missing. They searched in vain for him for days but he could not be found at all. It was later learned that he had been captured and imprisoned in the pits of Sauron's stronghold of Dol Guldur in southern Mirkwood. There he was tortured and Sauron took from him the last of the Dwarven Rings of Power, and left him there to die.


----------



## crabby (May 14, 2014)

so did our burning friend actually do anything with the Dwarven rings he captured?

Mouth of Sauron? 

or did he not 'recycle' them because they proved ineffective? the Dwarves who recieved/had them certainly clung to them and were tormented by their loss, but they were not, as the rings given to Kings of Men were, successfull in bringing the alleigence of the Dwarves to Sauron...


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (May 14, 2014)

crabby said:


> so did our burning friend actually do anything with the Dwarven rings he captured?
> 
> Mouth of Sauron?
> 
> or did he not 'recycle' them because they proved ineffective? the Dwarves who recieved/had them certainly clung to them and were tormented by their loss, but they were not, as the rings given to Kings of Men were, successfull in bringing the alleigence of the Dwarves to Sauron...



The Dwarves natural hardiness made them resistant to Sauron's control. By the time of the Trilogy, four of the rings were consumed by dragon fire and the other three reacquired by Sauron. The only thing that I'm aware that was written about them after this was that after the War of the Ring started, an envoy of Sauron came to The Lonely Mountain, as reported by Gloin at the Council of Elrond:



> “Then about a year ago a messenger came…from Mordor…He asked urgently concerning hobbits, of what kind they were, and where they dwelt.” And finally to obtain and surrender Bilbo’s ring for “it is but a trifle that Sauron fancies…Find it and the three rings that the Dwarf-sires possessed of old shall be returned to you.” – The Fellowship of the Ring



And here is the text from _Unfinished Tales: The Quest of Erebor, _where Gandalf talks about finding Thrain II in Dol Guldur:



> “I understand now that I had heard the last ravings of Thráin II, though he could not speak his own name nor his son’s…he said he possessed a Ring. Nearly all of his ravings were of that: the last of the seven.”


----------



## PaigeSinclaire88 (Dec 19, 2016)

Lhunithiliel said:


> Isildur has always been blamed that for his pride and ambitions he did not cast the Ring into fire to destroy it and that he wanted it for himself - to enlarge and strengthen the dominion of his kingdom and of the race of Men.
> But here what I've found:
> 
> Which shows that Isildur meant to go from Osgilliath not just to his kingdom, but through the most direct possible way- to Rivendale in order *to leave the Ring with the High Elves!*
> ...




Honestly, I like your opinion. I often wondered the same thing after the reading. Unfortunately, the movie over simplifies Isildur and his intent, which in the grand scheme of things just isnt fair, to him or the human race. 
I think it was his honest intent to turn the evil ring in to something good. He wanted to change the system so to speak but he couldnt. And not meaning to get political but maybe it is a metaphor for a system...In Isildur's case mainly. "you cant change the system but the system changes you" it's a cynical look on the system, but mind you he lived during WWI and WWII and I think you can tell during the corruption of man that maybe a bit of his cynicism was showing through, whether he realized it or not or even intended it.


----------

