more than 9?

[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.