more than 9?

[Formendacil]

I've been curious about this too, but I have a theory. Here goes:

The Nazgul are enslaved to the Nine Rings, which are in turn bound to Sauron/the One Ring. Sauron could control the Nazgul either through the One Ring (and thence into the Nine) or else through the Nine Rings directly, once they had become wraiths.

Therefore, since Sauron did not have the One Ring during the Third Age, it was necessary to have the Nine Rings to control the Nazgul. Had he given them out, he would have lost control of the wraiths, who would have likely sought out and killed the new keepers of the Rings, desiring them for themselves (think Gollum here).

Now, the only thing that I know of that could CERTAINLY make this theory fail is if Sauron didn't take back the Nine until the Third Age. If he took them back in the Second, then there is no obvious problem. But if he did it in the Third, the question is when, and was he strong enough to do so? After all, I don't see the Nazgul giving them up willingly if he didn't have the One Ring to control them, since they would have been as jealous of the fates of their rings as Gollum.

[radagastly]

I remember this thread discussed this possibility some. My own opinion is that the nine rings (and probably the seven and the three as well) were bonded to their owners in much the same way that the One Ring was part of Sauron. Their power could not be easily transferred to another, and would diminish the link with the original possessor if attempted. Certainly, after the death of a Nazgul, like the Witch King, Sauron might have decided to replace him with another corrupt mortal, but that would take time, perhaps a hundred years or more, before he could take the ring back and keep it with himself and expect the kind of blind obedience that he got from the rest of the Nazgul. That's just my opinion though. I can't back it up with anything textual.

[A_Brandybuck]

Originally Posted by radagastly

My own opinion is that the nine rings (and probably the seven and the three as well) were bonded to their owners in much the same way that the One Ring was part of Sauron.

I don't think so. The One Ring was part of Sauron, because he forged it and while forging he put lots of his own (power) in it. That is, why the One Ring is such evil.
The lesser Rings were not forged by their bearers, the bearers were betrayed by the Rings and made the dependent of the Master-Ring, but I think that is uniidirectional, because nothing from the bearer is in the Ring.

Originally Posted by radagastly

Certainly, after the death of a Nazgul, like the Witch King, Sauron might have decided to replace him with another corrupt mortal

Wasn't it so, that a Nazgul can't die, before the One Ring is not destroyed. By killing his physical shape, you could only diminish him to a 'spirit'.

Originally Posted by Formendacil

If he took them back in the Second, then there is no obvious problem.

hmmm... I see a problem with the physical shape of Sauron and physical holding the Rings. Am I right, thinking that the diminshed spirit Sauron could not hold the physical rings? Where were the Nine Rings? It must be happened in the Third Age, when Sauron beginned to take shape.

[Boromir88]

I take Formendacil's stance, that Sauron kept the Nine Rings so he could control the Nazgul, even without the one. A rather older thread done by Kransha (here is the link ) goes into what if Frodo claimed the ring? And was able to wrest power from Sauron, becoming the new "Ring-lord." Tolkien addresses this answer in Letter #243. That eventhough Sauron was not in possession of the one, he was still able to control the Nazgul. The Nazgul were enslaved to their Nine Rings, and Sauron kept them so he could control them, even without the One.

[alatar]

Didn't the rings require time and use to enslave the owner? I assume that the men who took the Nine weren't idiots, and if I remember the text regarding the same it says that they fall to Sauron's dominion over time.

Assume an addictive substance. Some people partake, find nothing therein and walk away. Others get a rush of some kind, and so take additional hits. Wow! This makes me feel sooo good! After a while they need the substance just to be normal. Finally, they completely lose all willpower and so are enslaved to the substance.

It would be silly to say that alcohol, crack-cocaine, a Ring, etc enslaves the addict, as we are talking about inanimate objects with no life, will, souls, minds. It is the user that does the enslaving, yet one normally says that one is controlled by the substance.

And if the good feeling is wealth (dwarves) or control of other wills (men) or paradise/stasis/whatever (elves) or dominion (Sauron), over time one becomes addicted. Galadriel and Elrond were addicted to what their Rings provided; when the Rings finally failed, they left Middle Earth. Each Ring extracted payment for what it gave; some such payments may not be readily seen and also may be worth paying.

I assume that the Nine enjoyed the power, status, abilities and 'things' that the Rings gave them, but obviously they thought that they could skip out on paying the bill. Instead of living out their allotted time, they continued on and on and on as wraiths, under the domination of Sauron, feared by their former kind, desiring yet hating life - sounds wonderful.

Even Sauron, by dumping some of himself into the One Ring made himself an Achille's heel by which he was finally destroyed. Though his abilities were enhanced by the Ring he also was then able to lose it.

You'd think that maia would know better.

Sorry to deviate from your main subject here, but I've been wondering. If Sauron captured however many (3 or 4) of the seven Dwarf rings, and the others were consumed by dragon fire, what did Sauron do with those Dwarf rings. He used the nine to enslave the Nazgul, why then did he not use those additional rings?

[Boromir88]

Turin, I believe it's in the conversation between Gandalf and Frodo in the Shadow of the Past. Sauron for some reason wants to gather all the rings. He's already got the nine, he's got the dwarven rings that weren't eaten by dragons, and he's been looking for the three. However, whatever his plans are with the rings of power, won't matter if he gets the one back. I think he just wanted all the rings as in a way to be more powerful

"So it is now: the Nine he has gathered to himself; the Seven also, or else they are destroyed. The Three are hidden still. But that no longer troubles him. He only needs the One; for he made that ring himself, it is his, and he let a great part of his own former power pass into it, so that he could rule all the others."~Gandalf, The Shadow of the Past.

I think it's just Sauron trying to gather whatever power that he can from the rings that are left, but now that he's getting closer to catching The One, the other rings don't matter.

alatar, very neat post about addiction. In an interview with Andy Serkis he said he did Gollum's character based off a person addicted to drugs or alcohol. That's how Gollum was, only instead of drugs/alcohol he had a ring addiction, and on a side note I think Serkis nailed the role well.

[A_Brandybuck]

Originally Posted by alatar

Even Sauron, by dumping some of himself into the One Ring made himself an Achille's heel by which he was finally destroyed. Though his abilities were enhanced by the Ring he also was then able to lose it.

You'd think that maia would know better.

I think, that Sauron would have never thought, that someone could take his Ring from him. That's a good example, how someone could be blended by his own power.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by A_Brandybuck

I think, that Sauron would have never thought, that someone could take his Ring from him. That's a good example, how someone could be blinded by his own power.

Isn't that usually the case in which one is one's worst enemy?

And regarding the 'other' rings: my assumption has always been that except for the dwarven Seven that the other rings were worn by the owners. Elrond, Galadriel and Gandalf wore theirs; Sauron did until he got an Isuldurian manicure, and I assume that the Nine had theirs, and so Sauron had no need to physically hold them. The 'control' of the Nine was via the Rings - like a cell phone that (1) you couldn't get rid of, (2) you always had to answer, and (3) you had to do whatever the caller told you to do ("Hi...ya, this is the Eye...hey, go to the Shire and find some midget called Baggins...").

The Dwarves, immune to becoming wraiths, were able to 'give up' their Rings - not that they did so until the very end, and of course not willingly, but my point is that they were not held by the Rings as were the Nine. Sauron collected what remained of the Seven so that, if necessary, he could use them again to corrupt a new family of Dwarves.