Why didn't Elrond kill Isildur?

[Techmagss]

They both were there when Isildur could have thrown it into the fire. When Isildur refused to throw it in, Elrond could have just pushed him in or fought with him and be done with it. Elrond's decision, while it turned out with the Ring being destroyed (many years later) did not make sense. Why let the man who refused to destroy one of the most powerful and corrupted things in existence live when he refused it? On a side note, how did Isildur become corrupted by the Ring so quickly? He only had it in his possession for around a few minutes, or even a couple hours, yet he refused to throw it in! I understand that Elrond's choice made for good plot, but still.

[SaintRidley]

One reason would be that it's kind of bad to be a kinslayer.

[DigoDragon]

One reason would be that it's kind of bad to be a kinslayer.

That was my thought. Friends generally don't throw each other into a volcano. Might be a bit hard to explain that one to the troops.

[Traab]

Because that would have started a war between men and elves 30 seconds after the war between morodor and the forces of good ended. Also because it only happened that way in the movie. In the book they never even got into the mountain. Isildur just went, "lol nope!" and claimed the ring. I dont think he actually fell under its control, possibly not beyond "nah, i dont wanna destroy it"

[Zevox]

In the actual books, the two were not at the Cracks of Doom - the place where the ring can be unmade. They were upon the slopes of Mount Doom, where the final fight with Sauron took place. It would not be a simple matter of pushing Isildur anywhere - he'd need to attack him and take the ring by force. At which point he too would be unable to throw it in anyway.


One reason would be that it's kind of bad to be a kinslayer.
True - though it's not certain if Isildur and his people remember that little detail by that point, Elrond surely hasn't forgotten. Also, Isildur was now the rightful king of Arnor, who were at that time Elrond's allies and essentially neighbors (Arnor was situated in the lands between the Shire and Rivendell). It's generally not a good idea to murder someone like that.

[Soras Teva Gee]

The guy so lacking in mortal fortitude kills the Ringbearer near the Ring's center of power... gee that clearly wouldn't say you were vulnerable to its corruption no sireee Tulkas.

Note in the books its not explicit they were right in the Cracks when Elrond tried to sway Isildur. I'd argue Tolkien's intent was to mirror Boromir's more subtle corruption. Oh and men are canonically more corruptible then Hobbits too.

As for Elrond the more power you have the more temptation. Galadriel almost fell simply being from in its presence remember. Elrond is maybe half her stature so perhaps less corruptible, but not someone that should be shelping the Ring up the slopes of Mount Doom.

I also doubt forcibly hauling another would nessecarily work, remember the Ring is only destroyed by chance (aka Iluvatar's will)

[An Enemy Spy]

I've always held the theory that once you take the Ring to the Cracks of Doom, it is nearly impossible to actually throw it in. Seems like the Ring would be at the place of its greatest power and could have the strongest effect on the person carrying it. Add to the fact that Isildur is a powerful and ambitious man, well the Ring has a lot to work with there. Not like Sam, the least ambitious person in Middle Earth.

[Techmagss]

Thanks for all the help, guys. Never even noticed that they weren't in the Cracks Of Doom- description was a bit lacking.
Also, I have another couple of questions.
One: Are the events of 'Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor' canon or noncanon? They haven't said, at least not from what I can find.
Two: Why did the crew in the Movies of LOTR portray the Mouth of Sauron as so ugly, especially when he's negotiating or whatever. (Also, why are all of Sauron's servants so twisted? I understand it's an intimidation effect, but still.)
Three:
What would have happened if Saruman, while still serving Sauron, came in possession of the ring? Would he take it for himself, deliver it to his master...?

[Legato Endless]

Because that would have started a war between men and elves 30 seconds after the war between morodor and the forces of good ended.

Yeah, that's kind of an issue. Why Elrond didn't take the Ring assumes he actually could do so. This isn't the films, Isildur didn't just wander off his own, his army is right there while this conversation is being had. So even if we assume Elrond is willing to slay his kinsman, and possesses the ability to resist the Ring's influence (which according to Tolkien, he was one of the most vulnerable to it of the wise), it's still really not going to happen.

So let's say Elrond goes all murder hobo on Isildur right there and treats this like a typical session of DnD, and he critically wounds his friend, killing him instantly. Then he picks up the ring but in violation of a basic theme of the setting, is able to resist. Cool. At which point, the remains of Gondor's forces charge, and he's the primary target. So now Elrond has to survive the onslaught, win the battle, and prevent the Ring from slipping off in the pandemonium, at which point it will enthrall some random guy and coerce him to get out of Mordor. So even for a ruthless plot resolution Elrond, the possibility of actually destroying the Ring right there is rather remote.

1. Shadow of Mordor is not canon.

2. Because it makes him visually distinctive, and therefor memorable. And since this guy only gets one 3 minute monologue, he needs all the stylistic help he can get. Also the Mouth is probably the most cartoonishly evil character in the setting, so it makes some sense you'd go full creepy with him.

3. Saruman had intended to usurp the Ring from Sauron's control by the time of Fellowship, and that's despite never having come into contact with it.

[Traab]

Thanks for all the help, guys. Never even noticed that they weren't in the Cracks Of Doom- description was a bit lacking.
Also, I have another couple of questions.
One: Are the events of 'Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor' canon or noncanon? They haven't said, at least not from what I can find.
Two: Why did the crew in the Movies of LOTR portray the Mouth of Sauron as so ugly, especially when he's negotiating or whatever. (Also, why are all of Sauron's servants so twisted? I understand it's an intimidation effect, but still.)
Three:
What would have happened if Saruman, while still serving Sauron, came in possession of the ring? Would he take it for himself, deliver it to his master...?

2) Is actually something covered in the books. The basic gist of it is, sauron cannot create something new, he can only twist and corrupt beings that already exist. Thats why his followers are all ugly foul beings.

3) Had sarumon gotten the ring before his staff was broken, and keep in mind this is only theory, he may have been able to supplant sauron. Its highly doubtful he would have handed it over.

[TheThan]

What would have happened if Saruman, while still serving Sauron, came in possession of the ring? Would he take it for himself, deliver it to his master...?

The ring would eventually get to sauron, remember it’s trying to return to him. So I imagine Saruman would try to use the ring, but eventually he would be crushed by sauron and he’d claim it for his own and be back. OR he’d somehow be persuaded to turn it over to him. Either way sauron gets the ring back.

[Zevox]

One: Are the events of 'Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor' canon or noncanon? They haven't said, at least not from what I can find.
I've only the vaguest notion what those events are, but I can guarantee you they're not canon. A big part of why I avoided that game is because even the basic description of it from when it was revealed convinced me that the writers weren't trying very hard to make it work as a Lord of the Rings story, rather than just a generic fantasy story that happens to be using a setting from LotR.


Two: Why did the crew in the Movies of LOTR portray the Mouth of Sauron as so ugly, especially when he's negotiating or whatever. (Also, why are all of Sauron's servants so twisted? I understand it's an intimidation effect, but still.)
Sauron's original master, Morgoth, was responsible for creating most or all of the evil in the world, and he was incapable of truly creating anything new - in fact, it was the desire for that power that drove him to evil in the first place. He could only alter things that already existed, twisting and corrupting them in the process. Orcs, Balrogs, Dragons, Wargs, basically anything you'd associate with evil in Middle-Earth was created by him in that way. After his defeat, Sauron became essentially the de-facto lord of such beings, having been Morgoth's top lieutenant.


Three:
What would have happened if Saruman, while still serving Sauron, came in possession of the ring? Would he take it for himself, deliver it to his master...?
Saruman had every intention to take the ring for himself. He never really had any intention of working for Sauron, though he feigned as much so that he wouldn't be attacked by his forces.


The ring would eventually get to sauron, remember it’s trying to return to him. So I imagine Saruman would try to use the ring, but eventually he would be crushed by sauron and he’d claim it for his own and be back. OR he’d somehow be persuaded to turn it over to him. Either way sauron gets the ring back.
Not necessarily. The one thing Sauron truly feared, to the point that it blinded him to the possibility that his enemies would even try to destroy the Ring, was that someone with sufficient power would get ahold of it and claim it for his own. While the ring would corrupt them in the process (if they weren't already, as is the case with Saruman), it would be possible for someone powerful enough to take control of it. If that happened, they'd have essentially have taken Sauron's place - it would have been possible for them to take control of his forces, destroy him, and basically take over where he left off. And Saruman would definitely be among those powerful enough to do that.

[Soras Teva Gee]

One: Are the events of 'Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor' canon or noncanon? They haven't said, at least not from what I can find.

Ya wanna really split hairs The Silmarillion is less canon then The Adventures of Tom Bombadil.

So nope. Honestly googling the plot sounds like the exact sort of thing Tolkien would avoid like Ringwraith.


Two: Why did the crew in the Movies of LOTR portray the Mouth of Sauron as so ugly, especially when he's negotiating or whatever. (Also, why are all of Sauron's servants so twisted? I understand it's an intimidation effect, but still.)

All of Morgoth's servants trend toward the ugly because of the fatal hubris of trying to usurp the rightful order and in attempting to create without the right they can ultimately only corrupt and ruin before they destroy themselves.


Three:
What would have happened if Saruman, while still serving Sauron, came in possession of the ring? Would he take it for himself, deliver it to his master...?

Presumably as at least originally of the same order of beings Saruman could conceivably be acknowledged as lord of the Ring and usurp his Master. That was his plan anyways, its impossible to be sure.

Would probably end up strictly less then Sauron himself in doing so, but that wouldn't really matter for everyone else.

[factotum]

Would probably end up strictly less then Sauron himself in doing so, but that wouldn't really matter for everyone else.

I disagree with the first part of that. Remember, Saruman was of the same order as Sauron (a Maia), and he still had all his original power, whereas Sauron had transferred most of his into the Ring. So, once he had the Ring under his control, he'd effectively have the power of two Maia on tap, which would make him pretty much the most powerful being to walk Middle-earth since the War of Wrath ended with the destruction of Beleriand.

[Juntao112]

That was my thought. Friends generally don't throw each other into a volcano. Might be a bit hard to explain that one to the troops.

He slipped.

What?

Accidents happen all the time.

[Talakeal]

This assumes that Elrond was both capable of killing Isildur and then resisting the ring long enough to through it in himself. The first is likely, but the second is not, I am not sure anyone in middle Earth, even Sauron himself, could have intentionally tossed the ring into the fire at the height of its power.

You know what though? This thread has given me the idea of an awesome "What if?" scenario where the big conflict in the third age is not between the Free Peoples and Sauron but between Men and Elves as the murder of one people's leader by the other shattered their alliance and dragged all of middle Earth into a war between them.

[Hopeless]

When I re-watch that scene from the movie in my head I wonder why Elrond didn't just toss Isildur and the ring into the volcano after all he can rightly claim the ring made Isildur mad and well being a half elf he nimbly stepped aside and oh maybe he accidentally tripped Isildur sending him over the edge... (well either he just threw him over the edge or just put his boot to his backside but well you know!:smallsmile:) anyway that's when it struck me... obviously Isildur put the ring on and ran for his life!:smallamused:

Wouldn't you?

He just p***ed off one of the most powerfulest elven allies his father had and basically betrayed all of Middle Earth for a ring that was already attuned to humanity via the nine rings so Numenorean or whatever he was far worse effected than Boromir who clearly wasn't the best Gondor could have sent.

Sorry Sean but I still rate Faramir higher!:smallwink:

[Legato Endless]

I disagree with the first part of that. Remember, Saruman was of the same order as Sauron (a Maia), and he still had all his original power, whereas Sauron had transferred most of his into the Ring. So, once he had the Ring under his control, he'd effectively have the power of two Maia on tap, which would make him pretty much the most powerful being to walk Middle-earth since the War of Wrath ended with the destruction of Beleriand.

Same order but not the same league, like the Valar, the Maiar vary considerably in potency. Sauron was far mightier than Saruman. Also, and this is often forgotten, he did not possess all of his original power because he had crafted his own ring of power. That's a significant part of why he's so diminished when we see him again in RotK, it isn't just because Gandalf broke his staff.


"But I rode to the foot of Orthanc, and came to the stair of Saruman; and there he met me and led me up to his high chamber. He wore a ring on his finger."


"For I am Saruman the wise, Saruman the Ring-maker, Saruman of many Colours!"

[pendell]

There's another reason as well. In the books Isildur claimed the ring as weregild for his father. It seems that by the laws of elves and men he had the right to possess the ring. And because he has that right, Elrond would no more take it from him than he would skip on a hotel bill. Something an old-school gentleman like Tolkien would be really serious about is respect for law and property, so it would make sense that his heroic characters would as well.

Respect for law, custom, and tradition is bone-deep in LOTR. There's another scene (in the books, not in the movie) when Aragorn is bade to surrender his weapon before approaching the king of Edoras. His response is that "I would do as the master of the house bade me, were it no more than a woodman's cot, if I bore any sword but Elendil." Again, it's that deep respect for tradition and custom.

And so Elrond stays his hand because he has no right to murder a man in lawful possession of his property, simply because he doesn't agree with the use the man is making of it. I strongly doubt it even crossed his mind.

After all, none of them actually knew at that point that Sauron would survive through the ring. For all they knew, Sauron had been vanquished on the slopes of Mount Doom, never to rise again, and confirmation that this was not true wouldn't come until Gandalf visited Dol Guldur in the time of the Hobbit, thousands of years later.

And so Elrond has to stay his hand. If we were to ask him, I think he would say that he choose to do what he believed was right and trusted that , in a world fashioned by Eru Illuvatar and governed by the Valar, the right choice would eventually be proved to be the correct choice as well. And a new world order which began with a murder wouldn't be a new world order worth building.

Gandalf believed the same as Elrond, that's why he disagreed with Frodo that Bilbo's action to spare Gollum was misguided. He believed that the act of pity would , in the long run, turn out better even if it was a tactically stupid thing to do. In the shortest term, it meant that Bilbo took possession of the ring in a moment of pity and mercy rather than murder, and this initial act set the tone for his entire possession of the Ring, which is why he got off so lightly compared to others.

In the longer run, of course, Bilbo's sparing of Gollum meant Frodo's survival and the survival of Middle Earth. If Gollum had been absent in the culminating chapter either Sauron would have won or Frodo would have been killed along with the Ring.

Third example: Pippin offers his sword to Denethor. Again, a sequence in the books almost missing from the movies. Gandalf tells us that he disagreed with this, but he did not hinder the deed because 'generous deed should not be checked by cold counsel'.


All three of these actions stem from the same root: Elrond and Gandalf inhabit a world fashioned by a good god and governed by holy angels. In such a world, acts of pity and mercy will always turn out well in the long run even if they are shortsighted or stupid in the short term. Thornbushes do not grow from figs and thistles do not grow from grape vines. Likewise, acts of violence and murder, lying and deceit, will always make the world a worse place no matter how noble the aims. That's why Gandalf and the other noble characters avoid doing those things if they possibly can.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Zevox]

After all, none of them actually knew at that point that Sauron would survive through the ring. For all they knew, Sauron had been vanquished on the slopes of Mount Doom, never to rise again, and confirmation that this was not true wouldn't come until Gandalf visited Dol Guldur in the time of the Hobbit, thousands of years later.
Oh, they certainly knew. Sauron's body had been destroyed earlier in the Second Age too, after all, in the Fall of Numenore, and he returned from that. And his ability to do so had nothing to do with the Ring - Maiar simply aren't mortal, and do survive the loss of their bodies (which they don't actually need in the first place save as a way to interact with mortals). It's only the extreme and permanent loss of power that he suffers when the Ring is destroyed that prevents Sauron from doing so again after the Third Age, even.

Besides, Gandalf and the other Istari were specifically sent to Middle-Earth to help guard against Sauron's return. As such, they certainly knew full well that it would happen, and would've told Elrond and the others of the Wise as much in the unlikely event that they didn't. Finding him in Dol Guldur was just the point when they discovered that he had returned, not that he could.

[Eldariel]

Sauron feared the ring ending up in the hands of someone else because that someone would essentially become a new Sauron (I believe Galadriel says as much even in the movies; the book covers the topic multiple times). A new Sauron who would have little trouble killing the ringless Sauron and taking over in his place as the overlord of the Middle-Earth. True, only Sauron can subjugate the ring, but other can certainly use it, just at the cost of essentially having the ring corrupt them and turn them to evil. That's why Gandalf, Elrond, Galadriel and even Aragorn all have to refuse it.

I believe it's also stated in some letter or some other source that Sauron knows there's nobody in Middle-Earth who could cast the ring to the fire; and he's right. After all, the only way for the ring to be destroyed is for Gollum to take it and slip; Frodo couldn't do anything to destroy it (the movies of course changed this to essentially have Frodo destroy the ring but even for a hobbit, that would apparently be quite impossible at the heart of Mordor). As such, I doubt Elrond could've done anything more had he tried. Or Isildur for that matter. So in addition to the whole kinslaying business and such, it would've all been pointless. The ring does show the power to corrupt people in its vicinity too after all, not just the bearer: the whole fellowship is subjected to this with Boromir cracking. I can only imagine that power would be amplified near Mount Doom and the effect greatly enhanced for the great of the Middle-Earth with great plans and great desires.

[Bulldog Psion]

Everyone's already covered it, but here's my take:

1. They weren't at the Cracks of Doom, and the elves would have had to attack and kill Isildur in order to take possession of the Ring.

2. Isildur was their friend, and furthermore they just fought side by side to defeat the Dark Lord himself. After going through that together, you'd need a pretty psychotic personality to just up and murder your comrade-in-arms and friend in order to take a piece of gold from him. Even if they intellectually knew the Ring was dangerous, psychologically I doubt they could have done it unless they were serial killers.

3. Isildur was pretty formidable and had his army with him. I'm not sure it would have been easy to take the Ring from him. Fatally dangerous is more like it.

4. Bilbo remained uncorrupted because he started his ownership with an act of mercy. Start it with an act of betrayal and murder? Yeah ... I'm pretty sure Elrond would have been hissing about "my preciousssss!" and using the Ring to kill the other Elf-Lords about 5 minutes later. Then setting himself up as a Ring-Lord until Sauron re-corporealized and dominated him, and became the undisputed king of Middle Earth forever.

5. Judging by the ambush of Isildur described in the Book of Lost Tales, he was still high, noble, and Numenorean at the time. The Ring had its hooks in him but it was very subtle, and was going to work over time. It's not like he was showing any signs of instant corruption; he said he was taking the Ring as weregild, and since he was still apparently the same person, it probably seemed fairly convincing.

6. The Ring may have been influencing Elrond also. This is a powerful, powerful artifact; right at the heart of its "place of power," too.

Add all those factors together and I'd say it's extremely unlikely Elrond would even consider killing Isildur over the ring.

[MLai]

All three of these actions stem from the same root: Elrond and Gandalf inhabit a world fashioned by a good god and governed by holy angels. In such a world, acts of pity and mercy will always turn out well in the long run even if they are shortsighted or stupid in the short term. Thornbushes do not grow from figs and thistles do not grow from grape vines. Likewise, acts of violence and murder, lying and deceit, will always make the world a worse place no matter how noble the aims. That's why Gandalf and the other noble characters avoid doing those things if they possibly can.
How fortunate, then, that world wars are fought against Orcs and Goblins who are inhuman and born evil. Grey acts of wisdom would have preempted all of the subsequent wars, but why prevent the wars when the other side needs killin'? This way, all the acts of shortsighted stupidity only led to righteous slaughter of beings who have nothing positive to contribute and no right to live.

I agree what you describe is what Tolkien had in mind. But a little fridge logic leads to the above.

[Eldan]

Everyone's already covered it, but here's my take:

1. They weren't at the Cracks of Doom, and the elves would have had to attack and kill Isildur in order to take possession of the Ring.

2. Isildur was their friend, and furthermore they just fought side by side to defeat the Dark Lord himself. After going through that together, you'd need a pretty psychotic personality to just up and murder your comrade-in-arms and friend in order to take a piece of gold from him. Even if they intellectually knew the Ring was dangerous, psychologically I doubt they could have done it unless they were serial killers.

3. Isildur was pretty formidable and had his army with him. I'm not sure it would have been easy to take the Ring from him. Fatally dangerous is more like it.

4. Bilbo remained uncorrupted because he started his ownership with an act of mercy. Start it with an act of betrayal and murder? Yeah ... I'm pretty sure Elrond would have been hissing about "my preciousssss!" and using the Ring to kill the other Elf-Lords about 5 minutes later. Then setting himself up as a Ring-Lord until Sauron re-corporealized and dominated him, and became the undisputed king of Middle Earth forever.

5. Judging by the ambush of Isildur described in the Book of Lost Tales, he was still high, noble, and Numenorean at the time. The Ring had its hooks in him but it was very subtle, and was going to work over time. It's not like he was showing any signs of instant corruption; he said he was taking the Ring as weregild, and since he was still apparently the same person, it probably seemed fairly convincing.

6. The Ring may have been influencing Elrond also. This is a powerful, powerful artifact; right at the heart of its "place of power," too.

Add all those factors together and I'd say it's extremely unlikely Elrond would even consider killing Isildur over the ring.

Don't forget 7:
Both elves and men have just lost their kings and probably a lot of soldiers, too. While also barely defeating what they thought was the last holdout of evil in the world. They might not have been thinking too straight at the time.

[Soras Teva Gee]

I disagree with the first part of that. Remember, Saruman was of the same order as Sauron (a Maia), and he still had all his original power, whereas Sauron had transferred most of his into the Ring. So, once he had the Ring under his control, he'd effectively have the power of two Maia on tap, which would make him pretty much the most powerful being to walk Middle-earth since the War of Wrath ended with the destruction of Beleriand.

No no no.

All the Istari gave up most of their power, being Maia is about the least important thing about them. Their purpose is to guide not oppose in strength. That's why you don't see them doing anything like what Melian did for Doriath. Which Saurman could really have used against the Ents no? They don't because they can't. Sure more then men but Galadriel is the most powerful member of the White Council, probably without her ring because born in the light of the Two Trees is a purer source then an echo of Feanor's craft. Anyways for Saruman betraying that purpose won't net Saruman more power anymore then for anyone else that betrayed their role, except if you are of Man maybe and free of such chains in the first place.

Don't think Gandalf did all that much more then formalities either.

Also Sauron wouldn't have ever made the Ring if he wasn't also loosing his power and looking around for other sources of power. Even with it his strength was less then that of the First Age, note how he was taken down by men and elves. The Rings of Power are all ultimately tools to attempt to forestall a natural end, even the elven three are effectively doomed in this way. Its debatable what before all his losses to men and elves he would have poured into the tool, its the biggest part of his power because he's lost most of the rest. Any other wielder wouldn't be getting Sauron's full might, just what was left.

Its also debatable if that would come to much more then commanding evil creatures though that's enough to cover the world in darkness until the Valar come forth in strength and sink a continent again or whatever.

[pendell]

Don't forget 7:
Both elves and men have just lost their kings and probably a lot of soldiers, too. While also barely defeating what they thought was the last holdout of evil in the world. They might not have been thinking too straight at the time.


Not to mention most people find it hard to immediately turn around and kill someone they've fought alongside of for years if they aren't themselves being attacked. It's not like a D&D party where doppelgangers and mind control magic can turn any member of your party at a second's notice.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Flickerdart]

Also, and this is often forgotten, he did not possess all of his original power because he had crafted his own ring of power. That's a significant part of why he's so diminished when we see him again in RotK, it isn't just because Gandalf broke his staff.
What was the point of making a ring, if it makes you weaker?

[Traab]

What was the point of making a ring, if it makes you weaker?

A horocrux perhaps? I mean, thats basically how it worked for sauron, as long as the ring exists, he couldnt be truly destroyed. And so long as he has the ring, his might isnt much lower than normal. Im probably wrong, I dont read the various notes and similarion and whatnot.

[Bulldog Psion]

A horocrux perhaps? I mean, thats basically how it worked for sauron, as long as the ring exists, he couldnt be truly destroyed. And so long as he has the ring, his might isnt much lower than normal. Im probably wrong, I dont read the various notes and similarion and whatnot.

Yes, I'd agree that it did have that function.


Fruitless did I call the victory of the Last Alliance? Not wholly so, yet it did not achieve its end. Sauron was diminished, but not destroyed. His Ring was lost but not unmade. The Dark Tower was broken, but its foundations were not removed; for they were made with the power of the Ring, and while it remains they will endure.

It was also to dominate the other ring users, as he hoped, which worked with the Men, semi-worked with the Dwarves, and failed with the Elves. But the Ring did seem to act to preserve his might as well, and to effectively enable him to resurrect himself.

(Incidentally, I always figured that Barad-Dur was actually a work of sorcery, as witness the fact that it fell in ruin the moment the Ring was destroyed. I've had a mental image for a long time of Sauron's dark shape taking form in the bleak Mordor desert again, and on the horizon the Dark Tower's stones flowing up out of the ash and dust over the course of several days to form the soaring pinnacles of Barad-Dur as he returns.)


How fortunate, then, that world wars are fought against Orcs and Goblins who are inhuman and born evil. Grey acts of wisdom would have preempted all of the subsequent wars, but why prevent the wars when the other side needs killin'? This way, all the acts of shortsighted stupidity only led to righteous slaughter of beings who have nothing positive to contribute and no right to live.

I agree what you describe is what Tolkien had in mind. But a little fridge logic leads to the above.

I would say "hindsight is 20/20," and also that this case about the orcs and goblins appears overdrawn to me. A couple of points to make here:

1. I'm not sure it's a "gray act of wisdom" to turn around and kill your friend, comrade, and ally over what you think is an unfortunately tainted trinket when you believe that Sauron is gone for good. He was gone for 2,500 years after that fight.

2,500 years ago, Tarquin, the last king of Rome, was defeated at the Battle of Lake Regillus. Julius Caesar was about 450 years more recent. It's only the immortality of Elrond that makes the time seem short to us. There was enough time there for mortal kingdoms and empires to rise, expand, exist in great power for centuries, fall, and be forgotten. That's a long, long time Sauron was gone.

You're assuming these people had perfect information about something that wouldn't be revealed for as long in the future as Tarquin stood from us. I kind of doubt that the leader of the proto-Romans, Aulus Postumius Albus, had any idea, say, that a moon landing would occur ~100 generations later.

From the information they had, Sauron was gone and Isildur's actions were more of a gaffe than a catastrophe. Like I said, only a psychotic would have killed Isildur over the information they had at the time; it's kind of like killing one of your best friends because they pass port in the wrong direction.

2. As far as the statement about it being fortunate that the world wars are only fought against orcs and goblins, this seems like more of the recent fad for portraying Tolkien as racist at any cost than anything to do with the books.

Sauron had many human armies, as did Saruman in the Third Age. The Mouth of Sauron was a corrupt Numenorian (totally unlike "Jaws" in the movie), the Ringwraiths were human originally, the Witch-King of Angmar led the Men of Carn Dum, etc. etc. The observation is readily disproven by the books themselves, at many points.

There's even a passage wherein Sam muses sorrowfully on the death of an enemy, and how he was probably a decent sort coerced into the war with lies or threats, shortly before the Mumak shows up.

I dispute that "fridge logic" leads to the conclusion you described. It's more like:

"How fortunate that people who don't know what's going to happen 2,500 years in the future don't randomly murder their friends and allies in order to steal trinkets from them like Belkar, thus becoming the new Dark Lord immediately instead of creating 2,500 years of relative peace."

[Legato Endless]

What was the point of making a ring, if it makes you weaker?

Ah, let me clarify. Saruman was weakened because when the One Ring was destroyed, the other rings of power died as well as they were under it's dominion.

A Ring of power actually augments the abilities of a wielder, including it's maker. But it also incurs severe risks, such as if another claims it, or if it's destroyed, in which case the creator is considerably weakened.

Every Ring of Power works on the following principle. You give up a portion of your natural potency to gain an unnaturally greater influence around you. Forestalling the passage of time is the most commonly seen effect, but it's bourn out of this idea. So with a ring, you're effectively more powerful, exerting greater control, but the price it comes at a cost to your self. Your sovereignty. This is the reason Tom Bombadil is immune to the ring. He can't effect anything outside his little forest, but he's inviolate to corruption. He belongs to no one but himself. It's the whole metaphor about the transfiguration of power, ends men will chase, etc. This is the same thing which happened to Morgoth as he spread his essence throughout the world. He diminished as an individual entity, losing the ability to daunt his brother for example, but gained a more pervasive influence in the world than any other Vala.


Sauron feared the ring ending up in the hands of someone else because that someone would essentially become a new Sauron (I believe Galadriel says as much even in the movies; the book covers the topic multiple times). A new Sauron who would have little trouble killing the ringless Sauron and taking over in his place as the overlord of the Middle-Earth.

Indeed, though it would have taken a bit of time to master the One. Which would also be an entertaining what if scenario. Someone does claim the One, and Sauron is racing to defeat them before they grow too powerful.

[Flickerdart]

Ah, let me clarify. Saruman was weakened because when the One Ring was destroyed, the other rings of power died as well as they were under it's dominion.
Why would a ring Saruman made be under the One Ring's dominion? Or did it automatically take over all rings of power, even those made afterwards or by someone else?

Didn't Gandalf have a ring - the fire one?

[Zevox]

How fortunate, then, that world wars are fought against Orcs and Goblins who are inhuman and born evil. Grey acts of wisdom would have preempted all of the subsequent wars, but why prevent the wars when the other side needs killin'? This way, all the acts of shortsighted stupidity only led to righteous slaughter of beings who have nothing positive to contribute and no right to live.
Yeah, not how that works. The major wars of Middle-Earth were fought against Morgoth and Sauron first and foremost - Orcs and other such creatures were just their tools for those wars, as they were Morgoth's servants, twisted to his will. In their absence conflicts occasionally arose with Orcs, but typically because of aggression on the Orcs' part, not that of the other races.

And there was conflict among the other races, too. Harad and Rhun were enemies of Gondor whether Sauron was around or not, and Dwarves and Elves fighting over a Silmaril caused the fall of Doriath, which lead to their races' subsequent unfriendliness with each other. Numenore was looking to become an expansionist, military power even before Sauron gained influence there, too - that's why they came to Middle-Earth and "captured" him in the first place. Elves even fought among themselves a couple of times, in the Kinslaying, and when the Oath of Feanor drove his sons to attack Dior's people at Doriath.


A horocrux perhaps? I mean, thats basically how it worked for sauron, as long as the ring exists, he couldnt be truly destroyed. And so long as he has the ring, his might isnt much lower than normal. Im probably wrong, I dont read the various notes and similarion and whatnot.
That is not at all how that works. Ring or no, Sauron cannot truly be destroyed. He is a god, and just as immortal after its loss as he always was. What its destruction did is cost him so much of his power that he can never again take physical form or influence the world. He is stuck in his natural state, as a being of spirit only, and unable to do anything to the rest of the world until the Last Battle at the end of time.

The reasons Sauron created the One Ring are twofold: first, it enhanced his power directly when worn (without it he was diminished, but he had no intention to be without it anyway). Second, it would enable him to exert control over the bearers of the other Rings of Power, which he had helped the Elves forge before creating his own - and they were the leaders of their people. Unfortunately for him the bearers of the Three realized what he was up to and removed their rings the moment he put his on, and the Dwarves proved resistant to their effects, being driven to extreme greed by their rings but not being put under his full control. Which left him only with the nine men, who became the Ring-Wraiths. And the failure of that plot is why he wound up trying to conquer Middle-Earth directly instead, leading the wars of the Second Age, which he attempted to resume at the time of LotR.


Why would a ring Saruman made be under the One Ring's dominion? Or did it automatically take over all rings of power, even those made afterwards or by someone else?
All of the Rings of Power were under the One Ring's thrall, even those not made with Sauron's help. The Three, the Elven Rings, were also made independently of him, but were bound to the One anyway.


Didn't Gandalf have a ring - the fire one?
Yes, one of the Three, given to him by Cirdan when he arrived in Middle-Earth.

[SowZ]

Everyone's already covered it, but here's my take:

1. They weren't at the Cracks of Doom, and the elves would have had to attack and kill Isildur in order to take possession of the Ring.

2. Isildur was their friend, and furthermore they just fought side by side to defeat the Dark Lord himself. After going through that together, you'd need a pretty psychotic personality to just up and murder your comrade-in-arms and friend in order to take a piece of gold from him. Even if they intellectually knew the Ring was dangerous, psychologically I doubt they could have done it unless they were serial killers.

3. Isildur was pretty formidable and had his army with him. I'm not sure it would have been easy to take the Ring from him. Fatally dangerous is more like it.

4. Bilbo remained uncorrupted because he started his ownership with an act of mercy. Start it with an act of betrayal and murder? Yeah ... I'm pretty sure Elrond would have been hissing about "my preciousssss!" and using the Ring to kill the other Elf-Lords about 5 minutes later. Then setting himself up as a Ring-Lord until Sauron re-corporealized and dominated him, and became the undisputed king of Middle Earth forever.

5. Judging by the ambush of Isildur described in the Book of Lost Tales, he was still high, noble, and Numenorean at the time. The Ring had its hooks in him but it was very subtle, and was going to work over time. It's not like he was showing any signs of instant corruption; he said he was taking the Ring as weregild, and since he was still apparently the same person, it probably seemed fairly convincing.

6. The Ring may have been influencing Elrond also. This is a powerful, powerful artifact; right at the heart of its "place of power," too.

Add all those factors together and I'd say it's extremely unlikely Elrond would even consider killing Isildur over the ring.

Elrond might have been one of the top dozen most powerful souls in the world at that time. Definitely top two dozen. I'd give it even odds he would have been able to craft a defense against Sauron by the time he returned, making Elrond a viable contender for ruler of Middle Earth.

[Technetium]

7. To elaborate a little on the kinslaying: let's step back to the Silmarillion for a bit; after the Noldor slew the Teleri for their ships, they were scarred. Distraught. Absolutely shocked at what they had done; they vowed never to do it again. Elrond has strong Noldorin lineage, so that's one point against killing Isildur. Isildur himself was descended from Elrond's brother Elros, who decided to be of the race of Men rather than an Elf, and so he's obviously quite strongly related to Elrond, so again, no killing Isildur. Kinslaying is a no-no for the Elves, and especially Elrond, with his Noldor lineage.

Oh, and Gandalf kept the fire ring Narya (I think that was the name) during the course of LOTR because of its inherent power; but the true keeper was really Cirdan the Shipwright. He returned it after the War, and the ring was taken with Elrond's and Galadriel's to Valinor.

[GloatingSwine]

I've always held the theory that once you take the Ring to the Cracks of Doom, it is nearly impossible to actually throw it in. Seems like the Ring would be at the place of its greatest power and could have the strongest effect on the person carrying it. Add to the fact that Isildur is a powerful and ambitious man, well the Ring has a lot to work with there. Not like Sam, the least ambitious person in Middle Earth.

Tolkien explicitly said this in one of his letters. Nobody could have intentionally destroyed the Ring, in the book it is only destroyed by accident because nobody could have really thrown it in or pushed someone holding it in.

[hamishspence]

Oh, and Gandalf kept the fire ring Narya (I think that was the name) during the course of LOTR because of its inherent power; but the true keeper was really Cirdan the Shipwright. He returned it after the War, and the ring was taken with Elrond's and Galadriel's to Valinor.

I thought Cirdan might have remained behind?

http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/C%C3%ADrdan

I don't recall anything saying Gandalf gave Cirdan back the Ring.

[Bulldog Psion]

Yes, the Ring is just too powerful. Elrond could have taken it, but then he would have kept it for himself, even had he meant to destroy it initially.

It's a really insidious artifact the way Tolkien portrays it.

[hamishspence]

Indeed:

"A Ring of Power looks after itself, Frodo. 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. And even so he would never have just forsaken it, or cast it aside."

[Starbuck_II]

What was the point of making a ring, if it makes you weaker?

Actually, the world's magic was dying.
Every year, there is less and less magic that can be used., Unless you have a ring of power (these maintain yoiur magic).
Gandalf doesn't have to fear because he has his ring of fire, Nanya I think.
The elves have their rings of magic.

And thus, Sauron feared he'd one day be magic-less so while having the ring is a tiny weakness as it can be separated from him: it maintains his magic from then on.

This is why most elves run away at the end: magic will soon be gone, and so the age of men must start (since few men can use magic anyway).

I guess Dwarfs don't mind losing magic so they stayed.

[Technetium]

Ah, sorry, hamishspence. Thanks for pointing that one out. What I meant to say was that the ring went to Valinor, which it did, of course.

Then Cirdan led them to the Havens, and there was a white ship lying, and upon the quay beside a great grey horse stood a figure robed all in white awaiting them. As he turned and came towards them Frodo saw that Gandalf now wore openly upon his hand the Third Ring, Narya the Great, and the stone on it was as red as fire. Then those who were to go were glad, for they knew that Gandalf would also take ship with them.

Starbuck_II: I'd say it's less running away than knowing that all ages must come to pass, and that the course of things must take their natural path. Elves are a wise race, and they know that they truly belong in Valinor; the only reason why some stayed in Middle-Earth after their birth is because 1. Early on, some got enchanted by the beauty of the woods and decided not to go on to Valinor (Sindar), and 2. Revenge against Morgoth and Sauron. (Noldor). Just take their final song on Middle Earth (yes, I know that's my signature, but that's not the point!)

A! Elbereth Gilthoniel!
silivren penna miriel
o menel aglar elenath,
Gilthoniel, A! Elbereth!
We still remember, we who dwell
In this far land beneath the trees
The starlight on the Western Seas.

Middle Earth is the far land; what they remember and are going back to are the Western seas and the shores of Valinor.

[1dominator]

Presumably because he is not a utilitarian nut, and has moral beliefs outside of 'The greatest good for the greatest number, BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY!'

[Technetium]

Presumably because he is not a utilitarian nut, and has moral beliefs outside of 'The greatest good for the greatest number, BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY!'

Wow...imagine an elven utilitarian nut. The closest I can get is Fëanor, and he was a great warrior simply with a lot of anger in his heart, and so therefore hell bent on destroying Morgoth and his armies for what they had done to Valinor...but still, not a utilitarian nut at all.

[Zevox]

the only reason why some stayed in Middle-Earth after their birth is because 1. Early on, some got enchanted by the beauty of the woods and decided not to go on to Valinor (Sindar), and 2. Revenge against Morgoth and Sauron. (Noldor).
And the Elves who rejected the Valar's invitation in the beginning and never left on the journey west from where they awoke - the Avari, the first Moriquendi.

[Bulldog Psion]

Don't have anything to add at the moment -- just wanted to say how refreshing it is to frequent a spot where others who have a lot of Tolkien knowledge are to be found. :smallsmile: