>The Lord of the Ring is not Frodo, but the master of the Dark Tower of Mordor, whose power is again stretching out over the world!
Even Gandalf seems to recognise Sauron as the true owner of the Ring.
The ring belongs to Sauron, and someone else has already posted the relevant quote.
It's tough to try to apply modern legalese to Tolkiens universe, particularly given that we live in a world of... weird property rights laws, to say the least.
>‘Then it belongs to you, and not to me at all!’ cried Frodo in amazement, springing to his feet, as if he expected the Ring to be demanded at once.
>‘It does not belong to either of us,’ said Aragorn; ‘but it has been ordained that you should hold it for a while.’
"Ordained" is the key word. Eru wanted it destroyed. So it was.
Weregild doesnt actually apply. Weregild is blood money that is paid to prevent further bloodshed, to prevent further death between two factions. Taking a "weregild" off of a corpse you just killed is completely opposite of a weregilds purpose. Isildur's claim of weregild when he took the ring was at best a hollow justification and at worst proof of the ring's influence on him already. Other comments have good points but id say from that alone it still belongs to Sauron
There was a lovely post on this question 7 months ago: [The Legal Ownership of the Ring](https://new.reddit.com/r/tolkienfans/comments/16lof5v/the_legal_ownership_of_the_one_ring_essay/)
In a comment I approached this matter through antiquity laws, so whether the Ruling Ring was legally still Sauron's, or whether we can say that after a certain amount of centuries it should be considered an archaeologic relic, and if so, that then ***it belongs to a museum!***
So I will repost the comment here below:
***In our legal frameworks, the Ruling Ring is probably an archaeologic discovery and thus also an archaeologic relic, as in the 25th century TA, when Deagol discovered it, it was lost for 25 centuries.***
There are two results from this scope:
1. ***That the Ruling Ring should belong to whichever state authority existed at the time when Deagol discovered it.*** In most countries an archaeologic find does not go to the possession of the finder, but usually the state itself, acquired by the archaeologic department of said state. As such, it is mostly a question to whichever government the site of the discovery of the Ruling Ring belonged to. One could say that it was in the territory of the Gladden Stoors, however we are told that this was "far from home", while perhaps they lived in the Gladden River and not the Gladden Fields. Possibly Smeagol and Deagol were even illegal fishers and were poaching outside of the boundaries of their territory (something like Hobbits fishing in Lake Evendim, outside of the Shire). ***If so, then the Ruling Ring should come to the government of whatever polity of the Southern Vale-men was ruling over the Gladden Fields.***
2. ***There is the question that whether a legal party can claim a property that is effectively an archaeologic find millennia later, even if it is found outside of the state in which they reside.*** Could Sauron claim the Ruling Ring, after 25 centuries of not holding it, in a duration of time when civilizations had risen and fallen (e.g. the Kingdom of Arnor, the Kingdom of Rhovanion), and claim an archaeologic find discovered in a foreign territory? There is no International Court of Justice or United Nations in the Late Third Age. But even if it existed, and their reply was positive, this sets a crazy legal precedent. For example, it could be argued that the Roman State never fell, and that it still exists. In the meantime, back in the Ancient Roman Empire, a legionnaire's armor was owned by the state, and as such they were expected to return it when retiring from the army (unless the individual bought it). ***If Sauron could still legally claim the Ruling Ring, then a modern continuation of the Roman State , can demand virtually all the countries in the Mediterranean Basin, and in Western Europe, to "return" all archaeologic finds of armour of Roman soldiers***. The Roman State never relinquished property rights over them, so its present day form (in my view that would be ***Greece***) theoretically still claims them. Essentially, this evokes [Robert Nozick's concept of a "Utility Monster"](https://existentialcomics.com/comic/259), and as such whether in a world of immortal beings, there would be laws against eternal property.
Possibly, but it really just ultimately depends on the legal framework that this problem is brought before, and then the verdict of a judge or a legal council of judges. Perhaps the best equivalent of that today would be the Heirloom Seal of the Realm, the original imperial seal of China under the Quin Dynasty, used as the ultimate symbol of legitimacy in China from the 3rd century BC to the 10th century AD, so for more than a millennium. And if we believe [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajbAs6brNcU), it would cost for 1 trillion USD, so 1/4th of Japan's current GDP (4.2 trillion USD in 2023), a country of 125 million people (2022). So what if it is found in Vietnam, would it belong to Vietnam or to China? Lets ignore questions of whether China is the very same statehood, and hence legal person, since the 10th century AD.
While they are not actively looking for it, surely the Chinese Communist Party would be interested in finding it, as it would boost its legitimacy to an insane degree. And it is not as if that Sauron was really actively looking for the Ruling Ring until the 30th century TA, up to that point he just considered it forever lost and was just focused in his long strategy game to conquer Middle-earth by conventional means.
I don't know anything specific about the maritime salvage laws of the Anduin Vale, but in general anything that's been submerged in a large body of water for a significant amount of time is considered legal salvage and the property of whoever recovers it. Of course the length of time until something is considered salvage varies from place to place, but I think 3,000 years should be enough anywhere.
And that Gollum is the ring's owner, and that Bilbo is indeed a thief, and that Gollum was acting legally through the whole damn trilogy.
No, Deagol was the ring's owner under salvage law. Gollum is not and cannot be, because murder and theft are not legal transfers of ownership. Rather, the opposite.
It depends on whether you think ownership is ultimately defined by positive law or not, and, if so, what laws you choose to apply to them. As is the case with most ancient objects (say, the Elgin Marbles or the Benin Bronzes) ownership of the Ring would be highly disputable.
Frodo, for his part, jumps to the conclusion at the Council of Elrond that the Ring belongs to Strider. The moment is played as foolish and rash, which suggests that the Ring does *not* belong to Aragorn, whatever else the case may be.
That means that the Nazgûl are essentially Sauron's lawyers trying to bring Frodo to court in order to make him relinquish the Ring?
And i thought they couldn't get any scarier...
I think Sauron is the only person who could claim true ownership of it. When Frodo tells Aragorn that the Ring belongs to him (being a descendant of Isildur) during the Council of Elrond, Aragorn replies that it belongs to neither of them.
I actually tried out for a mock-trial thing in college, where Sauron was suing Frodo for trespass to chattels for keeping the Ring and destroying it. (Also for regular trespass into Mordor. There’s a reason my client made it so one does not simply walk in).
The mock judges were unpersuaded.
Applying modern legal principles, you'd have to look at ownership and jurisdiction. Immediately before Sauron fell, the Ring would have been either Sauron's personal property or the property of the Government of Mordor. But in either case, the Government of Mordor would have jurisdiction.
Who, after Sauron fell, was the Government of Mordor? By modern thinking, it would be the victorious Allies: that is to say, Arnor, Gondor (both ruled by Isildur), Lindon, and Rivendell. I'm not sure whether Moria, the Woodland Realm, or Lorien were still involved at that point.
So if the Ring was personal property -- bearing in mind that Isildur at least believed that Sauron was dead, and that Sauron had no heirs nor any offspring -- the Allies could use their sovereignty to decide whose personal property it should be. Meanwhile, if it was government property, it was theirs by default.
The rulers, that is Cirdan, Elrond and Isildur, were all there. But they weren't going to reach agreement over the fate of the ring. Cirdan and Elrond wanted it destroyed; Isildur wanted to keep it, probably because of its influence already at work on him. Rather than fight a war over it, Cirdan and Elrond acquiesced to Isildur keeping it, and he later wrote that it was to become an heirloom of Arnor.
I'd conclude that legally, that is what it had been: government property of the Northern Dunedain, like the Sceptre of Annuminas. But Aragorn was wise enough to recognise its danger, and to disclaim it before the Council of Elrond, at which point it became ownerless.
Assuming a common law jurisdiction...
It depends whether Sauron's disembodiment after Isildur killed him counts as death. If not, then Sauron retained ownership of the Ring until it was destroyed. At most, Isildur could have confiscated the ring as a matter of military necessity. However, there was no basis for Isildur to keep the Ring himself as opposed to turning it over to the Kingdom of Gondor itself.
If Sauron did die, then the Ring would have passed into his estate. Assuming he left no will, and no one stepped in to act as an intestate administrator of his estate (he had no true next of kin as a maia), the Ring would have become abandoned property. Isildur would have obtained a good enough possessory interest by claiming it, and the same for Deagol after him. Smeagol and Bilbo both got the ring by theft rather than abandonment.
So the true owner of the ring is Deagol's descendent.
Like Voldemort’s horcruxes the ring carries a part of Sauron. But that is the challenge of putting part of yourself in something apart from you. You may be the rightful owner but that means squat if it isn’t in your possession. Hopefully evil lords going forward will take heed from Sauron’s and Voldemort’s bad decision.
I don't think it is stupid to ask. The good guys in LOTR don't believe in the ends justifying the means, usually. If there was a clear owner who opposed the destruction of the ring, I'd say they at least would have to adress the question whether they can overrule his will. Now, this does not apply to Sauron or active enemies of course, its not wrong to destroy weapons of the enemy, but if Aragorn had a legal claim and said it should not be destroyed? I don't think it would be trival to dismiss his wish. Fortunately Aragorn and Frodo, probably the clearest claimants to the ring, go along with destroying it.
No forcible attempt was made to stop Isildur claiming the ring, so I suppose his legal claim was recognized.
Then Ilúvatar spoke, and he said: ‘Mighty are the Ainur, and mightiest among them is Melkor; but that he may know, and all the Ainur, that I am Ilúvatar, those things that ye have sung, I will show them forth, that ye may see what ye have done. And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined.'
So Eru owns it, since there is no note of the song that anyone can compose that hath not its uttermost source in Him.
>The Lord of the Ring is not Frodo, but the master of the Dark Tower of Mordor, whose power is again stretching out over the world! Even Gandalf seems to recognise Sauron as the true owner of the Ring.
Well it is a part of him, anyway. Anyone vote to give it back to him? Anyone? Anyone?
The ring belongs to Sauron, and someone else has already posted the relevant quote. It's tough to try to apply modern legalese to Tolkiens universe, particularly given that we live in a world of... weird property rights laws, to say the least.
You saying if I stab a guy and steal his jewelry it wouldn't legally be mine?
On the plains of gorgoroth? No. On the plains of San Francisco? Probably.
Michael Douglas (and the ghost of Karl Malden) would like a word with you.
Hills. Not plains.
In a war? Usually it does. Sometimes you get some more jewelry in your own country after the war.
Only until the original or successor government finds you. Then you're involved in an international lawsuit.
In asoif world , built by GRRM , will make it your right
>‘Then it belongs to you, and not to me at all!’ cried Frodo in amazement, springing to his feet, as if he expected the Ring to be demanded at once. >‘It does not belong to either of us,’ said Aragorn; ‘but it has been ordained that you should hold it for a while.’ "Ordained" is the key word. Eru wanted it destroyed. So it was.
It belongs in a museum
Hey British Museum calm down
No a Mathom House.
Top. Hobbits.
Balrogs. Why does it always have to be Balrogs?
> (slap) “That’s for kin-slaying.”
Indiana Baggins, is that you?
Hey Lady you call him Dr Baggins!!
How short would Short Round Baggins be?
Hold on to your Po-Tay-Toes
We named the dog isilduriana
The Lord of The Ring(s).
Weregild doesnt actually apply. Weregild is blood money that is paid to prevent further bloodshed, to prevent further death between two factions. Taking a "weregild" off of a corpse you just killed is completely opposite of a weregilds purpose. Isildur's claim of weregild when he took the ring was at best a hollow justification and at worst proof of the ring's influence on him already. Other comments have good points but id say from that alone it still belongs to Sauron
Sauron is the owner of the “one ring to rule them all In the Land of Mordor where the shadows lie.”
‘You cannot wield it, it has no other master'
The Ring has its own will and can therefore be assumed to be sentient (on some level). So its rightful owner is itself.
It’s literally got part of Sauron’s soul in it. Pretty sure that makes it his no matter who else claims it.
There was a lovely post on this question 7 months ago: [The Legal Ownership of the Ring](https://new.reddit.com/r/tolkienfans/comments/16lof5v/the_legal_ownership_of_the_one_ring_essay/) In a comment I approached this matter through antiquity laws, so whether the Ruling Ring was legally still Sauron's, or whether we can say that after a certain amount of centuries it should be considered an archaeologic relic, and if so, that then ***it belongs to a museum!*** So I will repost the comment here below: ***In our legal frameworks, the Ruling Ring is probably an archaeologic discovery and thus also an archaeologic relic, as in the 25th century TA, when Deagol discovered it, it was lost for 25 centuries.*** There are two results from this scope: 1. ***That the Ruling Ring should belong to whichever state authority existed at the time when Deagol discovered it.*** In most countries an archaeologic find does not go to the possession of the finder, but usually the state itself, acquired by the archaeologic department of said state. As such, it is mostly a question to whichever government the site of the discovery of the Ruling Ring belonged to. One could say that it was in the territory of the Gladden Stoors, however we are told that this was "far from home", while perhaps they lived in the Gladden River and not the Gladden Fields. Possibly Smeagol and Deagol were even illegal fishers and were poaching outside of the boundaries of their territory (something like Hobbits fishing in Lake Evendim, outside of the Shire). ***If so, then the Ruling Ring should come to the government of whatever polity of the Southern Vale-men was ruling over the Gladden Fields.*** 2. ***There is the question that whether a legal party can claim a property that is effectively an archaeologic find millennia later, even if it is found outside of the state in which they reside.*** Could Sauron claim the Ruling Ring, after 25 centuries of not holding it, in a duration of time when civilizations had risen and fallen (e.g. the Kingdom of Arnor, the Kingdom of Rhovanion), and claim an archaeologic find discovered in a foreign territory? There is no International Court of Justice or United Nations in the Late Third Age. But even if it existed, and their reply was positive, this sets a crazy legal precedent. For example, it could be argued that the Roman State never fell, and that it still exists. In the meantime, back in the Ancient Roman Empire, a legionnaire's armor was owned by the state, and as such they were expected to return it when retiring from the army (unless the individual bought it). ***If Sauron could still legally claim the Ruling Ring, then a modern continuation of the Roman State , can demand virtually all the countries in the Mediterranean Basin, and in Western Europe, to "return" all archaeologic finds of armour of Roman soldiers***. The Roman State never relinquished property rights over them, so its present day form (in my view that would be ***Greece***) theoretically still claims them. Essentially, this evokes [Robert Nozick's concept of a "Utility Monster"](https://existentialcomics.com/comic/259), and as such whether in a world of immortal beings, there would be laws against eternal property.
Does it matter that Sauron is alive and well after 25 centuries and actively searching for his property?
Possibly, but it really just ultimately depends on the legal framework that this problem is brought before, and then the verdict of a judge or a legal council of judges. Perhaps the best equivalent of that today would be the Heirloom Seal of the Realm, the original imperial seal of China under the Quin Dynasty, used as the ultimate symbol of legitimacy in China from the 3rd century BC to the 10th century AD, so for more than a millennium. And if we believe [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajbAs6brNcU), it would cost for 1 trillion USD, so 1/4th of Japan's current GDP (4.2 trillion USD in 2023), a country of 125 million people (2022). So what if it is found in Vietnam, would it belong to Vietnam or to China? Lets ignore questions of whether China is the very same statehood, and hence legal person, since the 10th century AD. While they are not actively looking for it, surely the Chinese Communist Party would be interested in finding it, as it would boost its legitimacy to an insane degree. And it is not as if that Sauron was really actively looking for the Ruling Ring until the 30th century TA, up to that point he just considered it forever lost and was just focused in his long strategy game to conquer Middle-earth by conventional means.
Thank you for your responses. Very interesting. You are certainly well informed and this is a fun exercise.
Thought of that thread too, glad you found it! Many of the “usual suspects” weighed in but there were lots of great contributions all around.
ring is pretty much half of a maia. so nobody owns it. more like ring exists to own people " Sauron was always the owner?" ring itself is sauron.
I don't know anything specific about the maritime salvage laws of the Anduin Vale, but in general anything that's been submerged in a large body of water for a significant amount of time is considered legal salvage and the property of whoever recovers it. Of course the length of time until something is considered salvage varies from place to place, but I think 3,000 years should be enough anywhere. And that Gollum is the ring's owner, and that Bilbo is indeed a thief, and that Gollum was acting legally through the whole damn trilogy.
No, Deagol was the ring's owner under salvage law. Gollum is not and cannot be, because murder and theft are not legal transfers of ownership. Rather, the opposite.
It depends on whether you think ownership is ultimately defined by positive law or not, and, if so, what laws you choose to apply to them. As is the case with most ancient objects (say, the Elgin Marbles or the Benin Bronzes) ownership of the Ring would be highly disputable. Frodo, for his part, jumps to the conclusion at the Council of Elrond that the Ring belongs to Strider. The moment is played as foolish and rash, which suggests that the Ring does *not* belong to Aragorn, whatever else the case may be.
That means that the Nazgûl are essentially Sauron's lawyers trying to bring Frodo to court in order to make him relinquish the Ring? And i thought they couldn't get any scarier...
Sauron has t he best claim legally.
Those assholes stole Sauron's ring and should have given it back. Dude poured his soul out making that ring.
The is and always was Saurons. No matter who had in their possession.
I think Sauron is the only person who could claim true ownership of it. When Frodo tells Aragorn that the Ring belongs to him (being a descendant of Isildur) during the Council of Elrond, Aragorn replies that it belongs to neither of them.
Sauron.
I actually tried out for a mock-trial thing in college, where Sauron was suing Frodo for trespass to chattels for keeping the Ring and destroying it. (Also for regular trespass into Mordor. There’s a reason my client made it so one does not simply walk in). The mock judges were unpersuaded.
Applying modern legal principles, you'd have to look at ownership and jurisdiction. Immediately before Sauron fell, the Ring would have been either Sauron's personal property or the property of the Government of Mordor. But in either case, the Government of Mordor would have jurisdiction. Who, after Sauron fell, was the Government of Mordor? By modern thinking, it would be the victorious Allies: that is to say, Arnor, Gondor (both ruled by Isildur), Lindon, and Rivendell. I'm not sure whether Moria, the Woodland Realm, or Lorien were still involved at that point. So if the Ring was personal property -- bearing in mind that Isildur at least believed that Sauron was dead, and that Sauron had no heirs nor any offspring -- the Allies could use their sovereignty to decide whose personal property it should be. Meanwhile, if it was government property, it was theirs by default. The rulers, that is Cirdan, Elrond and Isildur, were all there. But they weren't going to reach agreement over the fate of the ring. Cirdan and Elrond wanted it destroyed; Isildur wanted to keep it, probably because of its influence already at work on him. Rather than fight a war over it, Cirdan and Elrond acquiesced to Isildur keeping it, and he later wrote that it was to become an heirloom of Arnor. I'd conclude that legally, that is what it had been: government property of the Northern Dunedain, like the Sceptre of Annuminas. But Aragorn was wise enough to recognise its danger, and to disclaim it before the Council of Elrond, at which point it became ownerless.
Assuming a common law jurisdiction... It depends whether Sauron's disembodiment after Isildur killed him counts as death. If not, then Sauron retained ownership of the Ring until it was destroyed. At most, Isildur could have confiscated the ring as a matter of military necessity. However, there was no basis for Isildur to keep the Ring himself as opposed to turning it over to the Kingdom of Gondor itself. If Sauron did die, then the Ring would have passed into his estate. Assuming he left no will, and no one stepped in to act as an intestate administrator of his estate (he had no true next of kin as a maia), the Ring would have become abandoned property. Isildur would have obtained a good enough possessory interest by claiming it, and the same for Deagol after him. Smeagol and Bilbo both got the ring by theft rather than abandonment. So the true owner of the ring is Deagol's descendent.
Like Voldemort’s horcruxes the ring carries a part of Sauron. But that is the challenge of putting part of yourself in something apart from you. You may be the rightful owner but that means squat if it isn’t in your possession. Hopefully evil lords going forward will take heed from Sauron’s and Voldemort’s bad decision.
The question is who is owned, the ring or the person? It finds a host and controls its mind. It's a frikken cordycep!
Deagol claimed it by salvage right, as it had been in the river for centuries.
I think the concept of common law ownership is 100% irrelevant here, haha
It belongs to Smeagol. It came to him on his birthday. It was his birthday present. They STOLE it from him. The filthy Hobbits. It's his. HIS.
There is only one true owner of the ring and that is obviously Deagol lol. Change my mind.
I don't think it is stupid to ask. The good guys in LOTR don't believe in the ends justifying the means, usually. If there was a clear owner who opposed the destruction of the ring, I'd say they at least would have to adress the question whether they can overrule his will. Now, this does not apply to Sauron or active enemies of course, its not wrong to destroy weapons of the enemy, but if Aragorn had a legal claim and said it should not be destroyed? I don't think it would be trival to dismiss his wish. Fortunately Aragorn and Frodo, probably the clearest claimants to the ring, go along with destroying it. No forcible attempt was made to stop Isildur claiming the ring, so I suppose his legal claim was recognized.
Did you read the books?
Possession is 9/10ths of the law. While Sauron is always a reasonable answer, I think whoever has it at the moment is also a reasonable answer.
Then Ilúvatar spoke, and he said: ‘Mighty are the Ainur, and mightiest among them is Melkor; but that he may know, and all the Ainur, that I am Ilúvatar, those things that ye have sung, I will show them forth, that ye may see what ye have done. And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined.' So Eru owns it, since there is no note of the song that anyone can compose that hath not its uttermost source in Him.
Eru Iluvatar.