Ring's sentience and Ring detection

[Gordis]

We know that evil creatures (orcs to some extent, but mostly Nazgul) were drawn to the ring. It stands to reason to suppose that the Ring, even when NOT worn, emitted some sort of “homing” signal, drawing the nazgul to it. The question is whether the Ring emitted its signal all the time, or only when it "knew" that the target (a nazgul) was nearby? And if the latter is true, then how could the Ring "know" it?

I don't think the Ring had any usual senses: sight, hearing, smell etc. More likely, it could only process the feelings of its holder – Isildur, Gollum, Bilbo, Frodo.

When Frodo saw the nazgul or knew the nazgul are (or might be) nearby, he got frightened and the Ring sensed it and started to emit its signal. When Frodo was completely unaware of the danger, even when a nazgul was really quite near, then the Ring couldn't sense the nazgul either and didn't emit its signal.

That might explain the incidents with the Gaffer (Frodo was not yet frightened at all, he even considered revealing himself to the stranger) and on the road in the Shire (there Frodo was only slightly frightened and not yet quite sure of what, and the nazgul stopped, also feeling something - but not yet sure what exactly, maybe he only smelled some hobbit flesh nearby).

The following night, Frodo was already quite frightened when he saw the nazgul, so the Ring's signal was stronger and the nazgul was much more "tuned" to the signal - he dismounted and went in the right direction. Also it has happened at night, when nazgul were more powerful. But for the Elves, Khamul would have found the Ring.

After that, the Ring, feeling Frodo's fear, must have been emitting its signal almost constantly, and indeed as we can see in the "Hunt for the Ring", published in the Reader's companion: "But [the Witch-king and Khamûl] remain watching Weathertop. Thus they become aware of the approach of Frodo on Oct. 5." And that is one day before Frodo actually reached Weathertop! Not bad...

Unfortunately the incidents that happened later (Emyn Muil, Dead Marches), are more difficult to explain. Well, perhaps there were lesser nazgul involved, whose ability to sense the Ring was no match for the WK's and Khamul's.

As for the incident in the Morgul Vale, I think it proves my theory.

First Frodo sees the WK and gets frigtened. (Here the Ring likely goes off "like a fire alarm". Then and only then the WK senses the signal and stops. (Note that the WK had time to ride from the Gates down to the Bridge before he felt anything - because Frodo was unaware of him and the Ring was not emitting).

'Even as these thoughts pierced [Frodo] with dread and held him bound as with a spell, the Rider halted suddenly, right before the entrance of the bridge, and behind him all the host stood still"

The Wk stops and tries to locate the source of the signal. Then the Ring "asks" to be put on. Frodo almost complies. But then Frodo finds Galadriel's Phial and gets shielded: As he touched it, for a while all thought of the Ring was banished from his mind. He sighed and bent his head.
Likely, as Frodo's mind becomes blank, the Ring's signal stops and the WK looses it. The Morgul Lord is in a hurry and has no time to investigate the matter - but for the war, the WK wouldn't have been deterred so easily. He had sensed the Ring all right.

Does it fit?

[Earniel]

So what do you see as the actual trigger: Frodo's fear for recognizing the nazgul (and fearing capture), or Frodo's recognition of the nazgul itself?

[The Gaffer]

Yes, I think it fits.

The other thing to factor in, perhaps, is Frodo's experience on Weathertop. Remember Gandalf's observation in Rivendell that he looked "transparent" (or something)?

Anyhow, that experience changed him. His spirit was stronger and he knew the dangers of putting the ring on. I think that must have "dampened" the Ring's "signal" somewhat, and might explain how he could carry it all the way through Mordor, scared witless, without attracting any attention.

Also, I don't think it was an "attraction" for evil creatures per se. Remember the Sam confronting the orc in Cirith Ungol: the orc perceived a threat and a source of great power, which terrified it.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

Also, I don't think it was an "attraction" for evil creatures per se. Remember the Sam confronting the orc in Cirith Ungol: the orc perceived a threat and a source of great power, which terrified it.

This case was hardly "attraction" - just the opposite. The orc was scared of the ringbearer, not drawn to the ring.
I think it is the rare case of a hobbit (unknowingly) using the Ring for something else than hiding. Sam was in combat mood, detirmined to get to Frodo despite all odds. And the Ring (even unwielded) helped him - because what is an orc to its power?

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Gordis

Isn't it the same thing? recognizing a nazgul means fearing him

Very funny.

I ask specifically because I think it could define the ring's intentions differently. If fear was the actual trigger, then Ring might have put on it's homing signal to attract a more powerful bearer whose greater ambitions and power may be be easier to manipulate.

If the recognition of the nazgul was the trigger, than the motive is far more obvious, the nazgul were servants of the Ring's master and would enable a very speedy return. In this case the ring could actively understand what the Nazgul were and react on it. This would imply more intelligence but IMO it makes more sense.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Eärniel

I ask specifically because I think it could define the ring's intentions differently. If fear was the actual trigger, then Ring might have put on it's homing signal to attract a more powerful bearer whose greater ambitions and power may be be easier to manipulate.

If the recognition of the nazgul was the trigger, than the motive is far more obvious, the nazgul were servants of the Ring's master and would enable a very speedy return. In this case the ring could actively understand what the Nazgul were and react on it. This would imply more intelligence but IMO it makes more sense.

I think the Ring knew the nazgul pretty well, maybe could even tell one of them from another. Wasn't Sauron manipulating their minds for centuries via the One Ring he wore?

I believe fear in general was a trigger, but not so powerful trigger as an image of a nazgul. Take the case of the Watcher. The Watcher was sitting quietly in his pool, but Frodo said he was afraid of the pool. (Here I think it was his extra sensitivity to danger gained from the Morgul wound). Frodo was afraid - the Ring started emmitting signal, just in case - the Watcher felt it and chose to grab Frodo out of the company of nine.

The Gaffer: yes, I think you are right.

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by Gordis

This case was hardly "attraction" - just the opposite. The orc was scared of the ringbearer, not drawn to the ring.
I think it is the rare case of a hobbit (unknowingly) using the Ring for something else than hiding. Sam was in combat mood, detirmined to get to Frodo despite all odds. And the Ring (even unwielded) helped him - because what is an orc to its power?

More like the Ring responding to its owner, surely?

The ring grants the bearer power according to his stature.

or something; can't recall the exact quote.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Eärniel

So what do you see as the actual trigger: Frodo's fear for recognizing the nazgul (and fearing capture), or Frodo's recognition of the nazgul itself?

Isn't it the same thing? recognizing a nazgul means fearing him

Or did you mean simple fear of something: e.g. Old Man Willow or even Lobelia? - No, I think the ring started emitting signal when ot got a nazgul image from Frodo's mind.

[Mari]

This may be a bit off topic, but what interests me is: Why a ring? Why not a necklace or artifact of power? Rings are easy to lose and since they didn't really have specific features it needs a trained and suspecting eye to recognize it as a ring of power, thus once lost it would probably remain lost forever.
Wouldn't a necklace or par ex. a sword make more sense?

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

As far as "why a ring", in Anglo-Saxon Britain they symbolized the bond between warriors and their chiefs. There are two traditional motifs in religious imagery, sometimes refered to in astrology as "the cross of matter and the circle of spirit." In the Christ story, those manifest as cross and halo, but they're represented in other traditions as well, and may have their ultimate origin in ...aherm... biology. Rings are often contrasted with swords or wands. There was a sword...so there was a ring. It's also, as a matter of story telling, much easier to conceal.

The ring would be imbued with its creator's essence. That's essential to magical lore. Those stories are full of sorcerors who have placed their vulnerability in an object, (interestingly, often a fingerbone) only to see the object destroyed. Therefore, some 'awareness' on the part of the object might be assumed, particularly as the representative of the extremely aware creator, in this case. It takes power to separate a whole, so there would always be some movement towards joining. Going to Morder with it was "flowing down-hill", as it were. It's a tropism, like sunflowers, rather than a taxis.

[Mari]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

As far as "why a ring", in Anglo-Saxon Britain they symbolized the bond between warriors and their chiefs. There are two traditional motifs in religious imagery, sometimes refered to in astrology as "the cross of matter and the circle of spirit." In the Christ story, those manifest as cross and halo, but they're represented in other traditions as well, and may have their ultimate origin in ...aherm... biology. Rings are often contrasted with swords or wands. There was a sword...so there was a ring. It's also, as a matter of story telling, much easier to conceal.

Thank you for that explanation. It's interesting then that in more contemporary (as in from the 1995's or so) books, the things of power used are often necklaces or weapons rather then rings. But Tolkien came from a different background then I guess.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by Mari

Thank you for that explanation. It's interesting then that in more contemporary (as in from the 1995's or so) books, the things of power used are often necklaces or weapons rather then rings. But Tolkien came from a different background then I guess.

For that, I'd refer you to Thorstein Veblen.

You see the quartered circle in the "Dark is Rising' series, for example.

[Jon S.]

Originally Posted by Mari

This may be a bit off topic, but what interests me is: Why a ring?

As a married man, the choice of a ring to control all others seems obvious to me.

P.S. Just joking, really.

[ecthelion]

[QUOTE=Jon S.;599782]As a married man, the choice of a ring to control all others seems obvious to me.

LOL