Well, randomly-encountered trolls can have talking purses (with similar dialect as their owners, so probably not dwarf-make), and any Old Took can have magic self-tying diamond cuff links, so maybe not *that *rare.
Why, yes, I’ve started rereading The Hobbit today, why do you ask?
I can understand that approach, but it seems to me he risks having the Nazgul slowly weaned from his will without the rings attached to them. There is no reason that the rings would have to be left behind if their more overtly physical manifestations were damaged, such as at the ford; presumably the ring can remain attached to the less corporeal, more totally wraithlike version of themselves they would have had to employ.
Not that I want to restart that debate here… 
Many ring questions may be answered by perusing the {url="http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm"FAQ of the rings.
Here you’ll see that Sauron held the 9 himself, so the Witch King wouldn’t have lost it on the Fields of Pellenor.
It also addresses that Sauron did have the ring in Numenor, and how carrying it back would have been simple for him (per quotes from JRRT himself).
Lotsa other fun stuff there too! Check it out!
Stupid coding error!
Arien, I believe that Merry’s sword had its origins in Arnor, not Numenor.
My insights into Tom? Basically the same as JRRT’s, from what I’ve read:
Where the F**K did he come from?
No, magical. I don’t think they had cannon powered rings in Middle Earth
If you want to read some trippy stuff about Sauron’s rings, read the earliest versions of LOTR (in HOMES) where Sauron made buckets of 'em and handed 'em out left and right, and as a result, elf-wraiths were wandering thru Eriador!
If I remember right, the wording was that the blade flashed with white fire. This is pretty common metaphor, not meant to be interpreted literally.
And about the glowing of Sting and Glamdring: It’s another example of the magic of elven items being due to their affinity to the Elves rather than a intentional enchantment. Being an Elven weapon, the swords inherently “hate” the Elves racial enemies.
Of course Andúril does mean “Flame of the West”, and Narsil has the Quenya’s root words of “fire” and “white light”.
We also know that Elven forged blades did indeed glow. So Andúril’s glowing is by no means out of the question.
Jim
I’m not doubting their magic. Just the nature of it. It’s perfectly possible that elven mages cast “Glow” spells on swords to increase the retail price or scribed magic words upon them to give them added cutting power. But this seems like a modern day, D&D-based interpretation. JRRT seemed to use an older idea of magic, that certain items were inherently magical rather than being specifically enchanted with a spell. This is the same kind of thinking as the inherent superiority of noble or royal blood. Some people are just “Better” than others without any kind of outside improvement needed.
We know that at least one was taken from Thráin II when he was imprisoned and tortured by The Necromancer (aka Sauron).
“Far, far below the deepest delvings of the Dwarves, the world is gnawed by nameless things. Even Sauron knows them not. They are older than he.” ~ Gandalf ~
But, ringwraiths, even if not outright destroyed will suffer no less than the same diminisment of power that was expected for the weilders of the Three, which did not lie under Sauron’s direct control. The nine were able to keep their wearers in a half living state, from which fear could be used as a weapon, but that half life was entirely under the will of Sauron. His will, given into the One, at its making was broken as the ring was distroyed. Without Sauron, they have no will.
Tris
In other words, the RWs are Sauron-dominated zombie ghosts? That explains why they were always seeking “Bagginnssssss,” “Baggins” of course, being the Nemenorian vernacular for “brains.”
I checked it out. It’s full of contradictory crap.
Example: The Nine couldn’t be wearing rings because they were partially visible. This of course totally ignores the fact that the wearers of the Three weren’t ever invisible. :rolleyes:
The whole concept of rings of power giving invisibility hinges on one statement made by Gandalf in Shadow of the Past.
Which brings me to my favorite answer to those who go totally insane over the wealth of material now available (much of it on my own bookshelves (well, it WOULD be if I had my books on shelves right now, but that’s another issue entirely)) about Tolkein’s creation of LotR and his post-creation thoughts.
The ONLY thing we can be certain of is what made it into print. The rest merely represents JRRT’s thought process at any given moment. These thoughts tended to change with time; to try and pin his idea of a thing down to any specific answer is almost impossible. Ask him in the 20’s what he thought about a thing, he said x; ask him about the same thing in the 60’s and he said not-x.
As to what made it into print, well, there were inconsistencies and unexplainable situations. Tom Bombadil was never explainable under what we know about either in LotR or the Silmarilion. We just have to shrug our shoulders and wonder. If we want to know what rationalizations Tolkein came up with later, we can look to all the crap published by his son, but even then we won’t know for certain. 
Yeah, that is pretty sloppy reasoning. My understanding of it is that any person untrained in ringlore would turn invisible on wearing any Great Ring, as e passed over partly into the Spirit World. But someone experienced in the use of a Ring (like, say, Galadriel, or a Nazgul) could effortlessly suppress this effect, as well as using the Ring for other purposes.
And I still maintain that “Who is Tom Bombadil?” “He is.” is not only the only explanation there is for Tom, but that it’s entirely sufficient as an explanation. He’s without a father because he’s Tom Bombadil, and Tom Bombadil is without a father. He’s not subject to the Ring because he’s Tom Bombadil, and Tom Bombadil is not subject to any power. And so on.
Actually, this is also addressed–quite reasonably, I think–in the FAQ. It’s in this answer in the invisibility section.
I read through the whole FAQ, and while I’m not necessarily convinced by their reasoning on some matters, I certainly wouldn’t say it’s crap. For the most part, when there’s contradictory evidence, they list the evidence on both sides, and offer an opinion.
I would also note that it was Qadgop who posted the link, and I hold considerable respect for his knowledge on this subject. If he thinks the FAQ is good enough to link to it, I’m inclined to take it seriously. (Not as gospel, of course, but seriously.)
I’ve consulted that Ring FAQ before and was impressed by it. Seemed well-researched, thoughtful and, while recognizing the ambiguities in much of what Tolkien wrote, offered opinions where that was possible.
For a thread I started last year on the “magicalness” of artifacts such as Anduril, see: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=328716&highlight=anduril
Not sure I buy that. We know that those who have been in the undying lands (and Maiar like Gandalf) already exist in the spirit realm and therefore would likely not be shifted. Had the other two owners of the Elven rings been to the undying lands?