Skip to main content

tolkiens legendarium - Were there any differences between the Rings of power given to the Dwarves and the Men?



Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,



Were the Seven Dwarf-destined rings actually different (aside from possibly physical fit due to finger size differences) from the Nine Ringwraith rings?


Or were all 16 fully identical?


NOTE: We know that the the same Ring of Power can have different effects on different people (witness different effects of The One on bearers), so merely citing "well, Dwarvish rings had different end result on bearers" is not sufficient proof of the fact that the rings differed.



Answer



Tolkien's clearest statement on the Rings suggests that all of the Rings made in Eregion with Sauron's help, both Great and lesser, differed at most in potency; it was only the Three made solely by the Elven-Smiths that were really unlike the others.




The chief power (of all the rings alike) was the prevention or slowing of decay (i.e., 'change' viewed as a regrettable thing), the preservation of what is desired or loved, or its semblance -- this is more or less an Elvish motive. But also they enhanced the natural powers of a possessor .... And finally they had other powers, more directly derived from Sauron ... such as rendering invisible the material body, and making things of the invisible world visible.


The Elves of Eregion made Three supremely beautiful and powerful rings, almost solely of their own imagination, and directed to the preservation of beauty: they did not confer invisibility.



from "The Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien"


This passage suggests that the later a Ring was made, the more potent it was: the Three Rings, made after Sauron left Eregion and therefore without his help, were nevertheless "supremely powerful" because the Elven-Smiths had become more skilled in ring-making. Gandalf says much the same:



In Eregion long ago many Elvin-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...



from "The Shadow of the Past" in "The Fellowship of the Ring"



Were some of the Seven and the Nine, then, more powerful than others? It seems likely, but perhaps not markedly so. Certainly any differences in strength between them were not nearly as large as the differences between the Great Rings and the lesser rings.


Per Saruman (as recalled by Gandalf), the Rings of Power -- with One notable exception -- were different in design from the lesser rings:



"The Nine, the Seven, and the Three," he said, "had each their proper gem. Not so the One. It was round and unadorned, as it were one of the lesser rings..."



from "The Council of Elrond" in "The Fellowship of the Ring"


The final chapter of "The Lord of the Rings" describes the Three Rings as each having a gem of a different color; Galadriel's ring is in addition made of mithril, implying the others were not. Likely enough the Seven and the Nine also differed from one another to at least some extent in ring material and gem.


Addendum: it's specifically mentioned of Thror's Ring -- and by extension, all of the Seven -- that it had an ability to multiply wealth:



Of the Ring he said to Thrain at their parting: 'This may prove the foundation of new fortune for you yet, though that seems unlikely. But it needs gold to breed gold.'




from "Durin's Folk", Appendix A, Part III to "The Return of the King"



It is said that the foundation of each of the Seven Hoards of the Dwarf-kings of old was a golden ring...



from "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age" in "The Silmarillion"


The One would also have had this ability, the Three certainly would not. It's not stated whether the Nine or the lesser Rings did.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

languages - Do we ever see written English in the Star Wars films?

In Empire Strikes Back , we see a transcription of what R2's beeps and bloops mean, but it's not English (sorry for the low quality, it's from the 2004 DVDs): I'd assume it's what Basic looks like when written, but is there some point in the the Star Wars films we see written English instead? (This sort of spun off from a discussion in How do people understand astromech droids? .) Answer At one point there was English but it has been phased out in subsequent versions of the films. Chris Gould at DVD Active did a comparison of all versions of each of the Star Wars films, and in his comparison of Episode 4 , there are a couple of screenshots showing how the power gauge for the Death Star tractor beam was changed. I imagine there are probably more to be found in his other comparisons but I haven't got around to reading those yet.

Was the "pure soul" of Harry's what had really hurt Voldemort?

In the Order of the Phoenix, Voldemort possesses Harry, and it hurts. Greatly. I think that Dumbledore explained that it was because Voldemort's rotten soul was incapable of assimilating Harry's pure soul, that Voldemort didn't understand the love and friendship etc that Harry has in his heart. But, I think it was a lie. Remember that in Deathly Hallows, while looking for information regarding Horcruxes, it is discovered that it is in fact possible to merge a soul fragment back, but that the process was extremely painful. Now then, if Voldemort tried to possess Harry, and Harry had a fragment of Voldemort's soul, I think that it could have been the true cause of Voldemort's pain: the fact of having his soul so close of another fragment. I think that Dumbledore knew that fact, but had to lie to Harry because it was inappropriate to let him know that he had one of Voldemort's soul fragments at the moment. Is that right? Or was it truly the pure soul of Harry's...

star wars - What "exactly" happens when someone turns to the Dark Side?

When I saw the original Star Wars saga as a kid, the concept of the Dark Side imprinted in me was quite simple. You did a bad thing, so you're a bad person so you go to the Dark Side and keep doing bad things. Now, obviously this doesn't hold true in reality. In my mind it is perfectly reasonable for Luke to kill the Emperor and Vader and then just flee the Death Star and rejoin the Alliance. After all they are at war, those are enemy officers that have captured him and are taunting him by threatening with death of all loved ones and the whole operation was intended to kill the Emperor anyway. The same would hold true for Anakin. He could have killed Mace Windu to save the Chancellor and Padme but that doesn't mean he's going to then go mad and kill all Jedis including children. It doesn't add up from a merely psychological point of view. He had a set of objectives and that made him want to keep the Chancellor alive (quite valid by the way, Mace Windu is quite clums...

star trek - Warning regarding forward saucer section in Nemesis?

In Star Trek: Nemesis , just before the Enterprise rams into the Scimitar, Picard sends a text message from his captain's chair arm pad to Troi — who is manning the helm in lieu of the crewman who was just blown out through what was once the view screen — indicating that she should put full impulse on standby. (Literally, if you watch the scene closely, Troi's console prefaces the order with "TXT MSG" !) My question is: Did Picard also somehow warn crew members in the forward saucer section about what was about to happen? The ramming of the Scimitar was a heat of the moment decision. Considering that he also resorted to calling the auto-destruct sequence shortly after (which ended up being offline), he probably was of the mindset that any losses would be acceptable in order to hault Shinzon's march to Earth. Still, I'm curious. Answer The original script indicates that he called for the crew to " brace for impact ". Whether that call (or the comma...