Isildur's fault ?

[Gothmog]

As for who made the One Ring and who was the teacher, we have the following quotes.

It was in Eregion that the counsels of Sauron were most gladly received, for in that land the Noldor desired ever to increase the skill and subtlety of their works. Moreover they were not at peace in their hearts, since they had refused to return into the West, and they desired both to stay in Middle-earth, which indeed they loved, and yet to enjoy the bliss of those that had departed. Therefore they hearkened to Sauron, and they learned of him many things, for his knowledge was great. In those days the smiths of Ost-in-Edhil surpassed all that they had contrived before; and they took thought, and they made Rings of Power. But Sauron guided their labours, and he was aware of all that they did; for his desire was to set a bond upon the Elves and to bring them under his vigilance.

Sauron taught the Elves learned.
And also

Now these were the Three that had last been made, and they possessed the greatest powers. Narya, Nenya, and Vilya, they were named, the Rings of Fire, and of Water, and of Air, set with ruby and adamant and sapphire; and of all the Elven-rings Sauron most desire to possess them, for those who had them in their keeping could ward off the decays of time and postpone the weariness of the world. But Sauron could not discover them, for they were given into the hands of the Wise, who concealed them and never again used them openly while Sauron kept the Ruling Ring. Therefore the Three remained unsullied, for they were forged by Celebrimbor alone, and the hand of Sauron had never touched them; yet they also were subject to the One.

The Silmarillion: of the Rings of Power and the Third age.

For Sauron to be able to make the Three subject to the One Ring meant that he had to know more about the rings than the Elves. He did not know at the time of the forging of the One that the three existed. He only discovered them when he put on the One.

Then we find this:

while in Lindon Gil-galad shut out Sauron's emissaries and even Sauron himself [as is more fully reported in Of Rings of Power (The Silmarillion p. 287)]. But Sauron had better fortune with the Noldor of Eregion and especially with Celebrimbor, who desired in his heart to rival the skill and fame of Fëanor. [The cozening of the smiths of Eregion by Sauron, and his giving himself the name Annatar, Lord of Gifts, is told in Of the Rings of Power, but there is there no mention of Galadriel].
In Eregion Sauron posed as an emissary of the Valar, sent by them to Middle-earth ("thus anticipating the Istari") or ordered by them to remain there to give aid to the Elves. He perceived at once that Galadriel would be his chief adversary and obstacle, and he endeavoured therefore to placate her, bearing her scorn with outward patience and courtesy. [No explanation is offered in this rapid outline of why Galadriel scorned Sauron, unless she saw through his disguise, or of why, if she did perceive his true nature, she permitted him to remain in Eregion.] 7 Sauron used all his arts upon Celebrimbor and his fellow-smiths, who had formed a society or brotherhood, very powerful in Eregion, the Gwaith-i-Mírdain; but he worked in secret, unknown to Galadriel and Celeborn. Before long Sauron had the Gwaith-i-Mírdain under his influence, for at first they had great profit from his instruction in secret matters of their craft.

And

When Sauron learned of the repentance and revolt of Celebrimbor his disguise fell and his wrath was revealed; and gathering a great force he moved over Calenardhon (Rohan) to the invasion of Eriador in the year 1695. When news of this reached Gil-galad he sent out a force under Elrond Half-elven; but Elrond had far to go, and Sauron turned north and made at once for Eregion. The scouts and vanguard of Sauron's host were already approaching when Celeborn made a sortie and drove them back; but though he was able to join his force to that of Elrond they could not return to Eregion, for Sauron's host was far greater than theirs, great enough both to hold them off and closely to invest Eregion. At last the attackers broke into Eregion with ruin and devastation, and captured the chief object of Sauron's assault, the House of the Mírdain, where were their smithies and their treasures. Celebrimbor, desperate, himself withstood Sauron on the steps of the great door of the Mírdain; but he was grappled and taken captive, and the House was ransacked. There Sauron took the Nine Rings and other lesser works of the Mírdain; but the Seven and the Three he could not find. Then Celebrimbor was put to torment, and Sauron learned from him where the Seven were bestowed. This Celebrimbor revealed, because neither the Seven nor the Nine did he value as he valued the Three; the Seven and the Nine were made with Sauron's aid, whereas the Three were made by Celebrimbor alone, with a different power and purpose.

UT

All of the Quotes show that it was Sauron who was the Teacher and the Elves who were the Students. It was only after the Elves had learned from Sauron that they took thought of the Rings of Power, before this they had no idea that such could be done.

Originaly posted by Lhunithiliel
Which, in its turn, leads to the fact that Isildur's fault is rather to be shared with the Elves!

Not so.

The Ruling Ring passed out of the knowledge even of the Wise in that age; yet it was not unmade. For Isildur would not surrender it to Elrond and Cirdan who stood by. They counselled him to cast it into the fire of Orodruin nigh at hand, in which it had been forged, so that it should perish, and the power of Sauron be for ever diminished, and he should remain only as a shadow of malice in the wilderness. But Isildur refused this counsel, saying: 'That I will have as weregild for my father's death, and my brother's. Was it not I that dealt the Enemy his death-blow?' And the Ring that he held seemed to him exceedingly fair to look on; and he would not suffer it to be destroyed.

The Silmarillion.

The Elves counseled him to destroy it. Isildur refused this counsel, he kept it and would not permit it to be harmed. Therefore he must also keep the fault himself.

 

[Mrs. Maggott]

Whatever the eventual hold the Ring had on Isildur, its first appeal to him - as, incidentally, it was to Gollum - was its beauty. Its very perfection smote his heart and he underwent a physical yearning for the Ring. Gandalf speaks of Gollum being drawn to the Ring and desiring it because the gold was "beautiful".

All other things aside, the Ring is able to present itself to a possible bearer as a thing of unsurpassing beauty. This is interesting because plain gold rings aren't all that gorgeous. Now a big diamond or ruby might catch the eye, but it appears that the Ring is able to weave a spell of seduction (and that is not too strong a word to use in this case) upon those who first encounter it. Only Bilbo is saved because he picks up the Ring in the dark and perhaps that is why, even though it eventually does affect him, he alone is able to discard it.

 

[Lhunithiliel]

The Ring!.... As I said, it is an important "point" in order to determine Isildur's fault.
I, if you have all noticed, tend to look at it from two different angles - the Ring in the story and the Ring outside the story.
And you know what?..... The more I look at it from those two different positions, the more I see a striking fact:
If we take into consideration the Ring ONLY in the story, Isildur's fault can be determined as undoubtedly present and further on contemplate over how he felt under the spell of the Ring ...etc.
BUT, if we see the Ring out of the story (see my previous post) then one can see NO fault of poor Isildur whatsoever! The Ring becomes only a device for continuing the story itself..and Isildur...as it is said "in the wrong time and in the wrong place".
Don't you think so?

 

[Walter]

What sometimes amuses me when I read arguments about the ring representing a sentient being is a statement like: "because it was able to change its size and hence could slip off ones finger"...

Well, according to this theory I own the OneRing: It is my wedding ring! At times it doesn't even come off by force and at times I have to be careful that it doesn't slip off, like when I'm washing my hands...

I too think that the ring represents only a tool or a token Tolkien uses to demonstrate the various manifestations of evil influences due to a certain "lust for power" and the ability to "dominate others through power". According to my own philosophy everything one gets or achieves in this world has a prize.

The prize for "achieving the power of the OneRing" is a certain change in character, the direction and degree of this change varies with the "inherent powers" of the owner. Gollum turned into a slimey creature, Frodo towards the end of the LotR becomes similar possessive of the Ring as Bilbo but also shows a certain affinity towards the power obtainable through the ring, Galadriel - when offered the ring by Frodo - draws a picture of a beautiful, but terrible Queen:

... And I shall not be dark, but beautiful and terrible as the Morning and the Night! Fair as the Sea and the Sun and the Snow upon the Mountain! Dreadful as the Storm and the Lightning! Stronger than the foundations of the earth. All shall love me and despair!...

And not even Gandalf would be immune to the influence of the power obtained through the Ring:

Gandalf as Ring-Lord would have been far worse than Sauron. He would have remained 'righteous', but self-righteous. He would have continued to rule and order things for 'good', and the benefit of his subjects according to his wisdom (which was and would have remained great).
[The draft ends here. In the margin Tolkien wrote: 'Thus while Sauron multiplied [illegible word] evil, he left "good" clearly distinguishable from it. Gandalf would have made good detestable and seem evil.'] -- Letters 246

Isildur -IMO - refused to destroy the Ring due to his pride - a trait quite a few the Dúnedain showed more than once throughout their history - his the change of his character would probably lie somewhere in between the Hobbits' and Galadriel's change, but he did not and - IMO - would never not part voluntarily with the ring.

In fact, though Bilbo had become very possessive of the ring he was the only one who would give up the ring - more or less - voluntarily and who seems immune to the temptation to use the ring for its powers to dominate, but maybe this was due to his innocence about the real power the ring represents.

Tolkiens standpoint towards allegory - again IMO - was an ambiguous one and many of his statements, together with the stories he wrote indicate to me the he disliked the term "allegory" rather than anyting else. To give but one example:

But in spite of this, do not let Rayner suspect 'Allegory'. There is a 'moral', I suppose, in any tale worth telling. But that is not the same thing. Even the struggle between darkness and light (as he calls it, not me) is for me just a particular phase of history, one example of its pattern, perhaps, but not The Pattern; and the actors are individuals – they each, of course, contain universals, or they would not live at all, but they never represent them as such.
Of course, Allegory and Story converge, meeting somewhere in Truth. So that the only perfectly consistent allegory is a real life; and the only fully intelligible story is an allegory. And one finds, even in imperfect human 'literature', that the better and more consistent an allegory is the more easily can it be read 'just as a story'; and the better and more closely woven a story is the more easily can those so minded find allegory in it. But the two start out from opposite ends. You can make the Ring into an allegory of our own time, if you like: an allegory of the inevitable fate that waits for all attempts to defeat evil power by power. But that is only because all power magical or mechanical does always so work. You cannot write a story about an apparently simple magic ring without that bursting in, if you really take the ring seriously, and make things happen that would happen, if such a thing existed.

And my conclusive statement concerning the topic of this thread: Isildur's fault is Isildur's fault. No one else is to blame for that...

PS: Now that I've written this, my wedding ring will never look the same to me. I guess I'll throw it in the fire tonight and see if any writing appears...

 

[Mrs. Maggott]

The Ring certainly contains a type of sentience. Gandalf speaks of it looking to return to its Master, seeking him. It slips off fingers on which it was once tight NOT because the person is washing his hands, but because the Ring is fundamentally false. It lures and then betrays. Tolkien states that it "betrayed" Isildur, and that is not merely an observation of the fact that once it slipped from his finger, he was visible. It INTENDED for him to be visible and hence, killed. The Ring is not merely a talisman of power. If that were so, then any strong willed person could have used it with impunity. It was a font of evil as was the being who poured himself into it. To take away its own brand of sentience is to make the Ring a neutral force in the story and we KNOW that it wasn't that.

As for Isildur's part in the story of the Ring and the blame accruing to him thereby, yes, he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. But lots of people find themselves in such places on a daily basis. The man who sees a bag of money drop from an armored car could be considered to have been in "the wrong place at the wrong time" but that does not excuse his actions if he keeps the money. He will still be considered guilty of theft even though the money came to him rather than vice versa. Unlike Bilbo who accidentally came upon the Ring, Isildur TOOK the Ring.

Furthermore, unlike Bilbo, Isildur knew full well what the Ring represented and what its destruction would bring about - the passing of Sauron. But he STILL chose to satisfy his own desire for the Ring over what he KNEW to be his duty to his people and to all the folk of Middle Earth. In that, Isildur was certainly "at fault" and the consequences of that fault brought grief and strife to all of Middle Earth until his descendent took part in the Quest which accomplished with great pain what Isildur could have done with so little effort. Was he at fault? You bet!

 

[Walter]

IMO Tolkien left the decision, whether the ring was sentient or not, open for the reader to decide. There have already been a lot of threads dealing with this question - with good points made on both sides and I didn't want to go there again.

What I was trying to hint at is, that - at least in real life - it usually is the finger which changes the size (to a higher degree than the thermal expansion of whatever metal the ring was made of), and even in Tolkien's world - until I see proof that Tolkien in certain cases intended things to be different - I tend to apply the same laws of physics we have in this world...

 

[Mrs. Maggott]

You are absolutely right! Increased temperature expands things - especially metal - and, conversely, lower temperatures cause things to contract. Soap, lotions and grease reduce friction which will cause things not only to slip OFF one's hands, but OUT OF them as well (cleaning up broken plate off floor!).

However, Gandalf tells Frodo in both the book and the film that the Ring WANTS to be found. Desire is a clear sign of sentience. If one is not sentient, one cannot experience desire.

Furthermore, in both the film and the book, Frodo often experiences the Will of the Ring to place it on when he is close to forces of the Enemy: when the Nazgul appear in the Shire and when their great Captain leads his army out of the Morgul Valley while the hobbits and Gollum watch. Will, like desire, is a function of sentience.

Also, the will of the Ring for Frodo to put it on, is present only when an opportunity arises in which it can betray him. He is not constantly being "commanded" to put it on, but he does suffer that pressure when an enemy is near. This means that the Ring's will is selective and able to decide as to when and when not to exercise itself. The ability to recognize situations and make decisions, are both functions of sentience.

I don't think a convincing argument can be made that the Ring is nothing more than a source of power. The mere fact that in both film and book it is recognized and defined as evil, makes that point since evil, too, is a function of sentience.

 

[Walter]

Dear Mrs Maggot,

I think we all will agree that the ring is described by Tolkien as something that is more than "just another ring", I mean at least it made some people who wore it invisible.

But IIRC in the debates about the "functionality of the ring" the main standpoints were whether the ring was sentient on its own or not. In the latter case it would be a tool, dependent on Saurons mind or will or spirit but not sentient (e.g similar to Aulë's dwarves before Ilúvatar approved their creation) on its own. A final conclusion about this IMO cannot be made in general, but is subject to personal interpretation of the facts given by Tolkien.

Having said this I think we have spent enough of this thread for this little OT debate and maybe should bring the issue back to the topic: Isildur's fault...

Btw. what's for dinner? Mushrooms perchance? Could you share any recipes worth giving a try?

 

[Mrs. Maggott]

As you might have noticed, I have commented upon Isildur's fault and found that he was - despite the Ring's machinations - quite at fault in his actions.

As for dinner, ALWAYS mushrooms and turnips and a nice roast with gravy and potatoes (baked, usually, although mashed is nice as well - it makes those lovely little wells for gravy). A nice cheese for an appetizer with cider (a little hard perhaps?) or a grand pint of October brown ale! Cottage pudding for dessert or, at this time of the year, a nice apple cobbler or pumpkin pie!

That's one of the things I LOVED about the hobbits! Keep your Rings and thrones and bright swords. Give them evenings by a quiet fireside with a good hardy dinner and candles burning on the table, then a nice book with a hot bath and warm bed at the end of the day! These were "people" who REALLY KNEW HOW TO LIVE! We could learn from folks like this!

 

[Gothmog]

Originally posted by Lhunithiliel
The Ring!.... As I said, it is an important "point" in order to determine Isildur's fault.
I, if you have all noticed, tend to look at it from two different angles - the Ring in the story and the Ring outside the story.
And you know what?..... The more I look at it from those two different positions, the more I see a striking fact:
If we take into consideration the Ring ONLY in the story, Isildur's fault can be determined as undoubtedly present and further on contemplate over how he felt under the spell of the Ring ...etc.
BUT, if we see the Ring out of the story (see my previous post) then one can see NO fault of poor Isildur whatsoever! The Ring becomes only a device for continuing the story itself..and Isildur...as it is said "in the wrong time and in the wrong place".
Don't you think so?

Ok. Let's have a look at this then. The Ring Outside of the Story.

Yes it is true that the Ring is just a way of keeping the story going but what you then have to look at is how is this to be accomplished?

There seems to me to be three ways that this can be done.

1. You have a minion of Sauron take the Ring and hold it for his master. (yea I can see that happening as well ).

2. You have one of the 'Good' guys take it. The question is why would he do that?

3. The ring gets lost. Hard to do that at the time. Three people (one man and two elves are watching very closely).

Number 2. looks like the best bet so we then get to the reason. That ends up with the guy refusing to allow the thing to be melted down and walks away with it. So we have someone being at fault for this happening.

So after looking at it as 'only a device for continuing the story itself' we find that in the continuing we put someone at 'Fault'. That someone happens to be Isidur. If it had been Elrond who removed the Ring from Sauron's hand, he would have been at fault and it would have resulted in a new dark lord I expect.

 

[Beren]

For six hundred years, he(Sauron) pursued a dual strategy. In the guise of Annatar, the Lord of Gifts, he tutored the Elves of Eregion , teaching them the secret things that only a Maia of Aulë's people could know. From his lore, the Rings of Power were forged.

To blame Isildur would be to blame the man who wins the lottery and spends it as his own. No counsel would seem wise, and all counselors would seem jeolous or greedy.

 

[Lhunithiliel]

Originally posted by Gothmog
There seems to me to be three ways that this can be done.
1. You have a minion of Sauron take the Ring and hold it for his master. (yea I can see that happening as well).
2. You have one of the 'Good' guys take it. The question is why would he do that?
3. The ring gets lost. Hard to do that at the time. Three people (one man and two elves are watching very closely).
Number 2. looks like the best bet so we then get to the reason. That ends up with the guy refusing to allow the thing to be melted down and walks away with it. So we have someone being at fault for this happening.

So after looking at it as 'only a device for continuing the story itself' we find that in the continuing we put someone at 'Fault'. That someone happens to be Isidur. If it had been Elrond who removed the Ring from Sauron's hand, he would have been at fault and it would have resulted in a new dark lord I expect.

Well, if I'm not mistaken, you're speaking about variants of how the story could have gone on if it was NOT Isildur who had taken the Ring.
Let me say that your final conclusion, as well as mine a bit earlier before (Isildur - in the wrong time ...) and the beautifully expressed opinion by Beren - they all agree on one and the same thing - Isildur should not bear the complete fault for the events afterwords. I still stick to my opinion that he should share this fault with the Elves, who for years had not done anything to prevent the rebirth of Evil.

As for a possible scenario for the story (although it should be in my "What if"-game thread rather! ) , think about a possibility where the Ring is destroyed together with its master. After all, the Ring contained quite a part of Sauron's powers....
-------------
Disregard the last lines - they have nothing to do with the topic of this thread. But if you wish to try your imagination on that idea, keep an eye over the "What if"-game at the Guil of Tolkienology - it may very soon appear there!
-------------
Walter and Mrs.Maggot could I join you for dinner I LOVE mushrooms!
BTW, good debate about the sentience of the Ring - really very VERY thoroughly debated over in various threads here!

 

[Walter]

Originally posted by Mrs. Maggott
These were "people" who REALLY KNEW HOW TO LIVE! We could learn from folks like this!

I could not agree more - and your suggestion for dinner was .... yummi....

Originally posted by Beren
To blame Isildur would be to blame the man who wins the lottery and spends it as his own. No counsel would seem wise, and all counselors would seem jeolous or greedy.

...but maybe we should mention that someone else bought the lottery ticket...

----
As my personal conclusion: Isildur wanted all of the fame, so I think it only fair when he has to take allof the blame as well, after he failed. The only thing that could prevent me from blaming him is the saying: De mortuis nihil nisi bene....

 

[Mrs. Maggott]

To blame Isildur would be to blame the man who wins the lottery and spends it as his own. No counsel would seem wise, and all counselors would seem jeolous or greedy. <quote>

I would say that Isildur would have been less blameworthy if he had not known that the destruction of the Ring would forever diminish Sauron to the point of impotence. However, he DID know that - and chose to keep the Ring anyway. There is certainly blame there. Of course, the Ring had already begun its seduction using its physical beauty in the same way as it ensnared Gollum so many years later. Still, it should not have been beyond Isildur's ability to overcome the Ring's blandishments and throw it into the Fire unless he were of such a weak nature that within those few minutes of his possession of the Ring, it had overthrown him. Somehow I doubt that he was that weak and feckless or it would have been mentioned somewhere in the writings. So it seems that it comes down to Isildur's concious decision against all worthy advice, to keep the Ring.

As far as blame is concerned, certainly ALL of the blame does not accrue to Isildur. The elves - as was noted - bore at least some of the blame, but, frankly, I believe (and have since reading The Silmarillion so many years ago) that the VALAR have to bear the brunt of the blame. After all, both Morgoth and Sauron are great Spirits; one was himself a Valar and the other a Maia. No elf or man (or group thereof) was their equal (or at least Morgoth's equal) as was seen in the War of the Silmarils.

But the Valar spent a good deal of their time trying to avoid all those nasty things that were happening in Middle Earth. It reminded me of Gandalf speaking to Frodo when the latter wondered was not even the Shire safe. The Wizard replies with words to the effect that you can wall yourself in (like both the hobbits and the Valar), but you cannot keep the world out!

Therefore, I am of the opinion that the woes of Middle Earth - while certainly fueled and exacerbated by men and elves - were first and foremost caused by Morgoth and Sauron who were neither man nor elf!

 

[Lhunithiliel]

Originally posted by Lhun:
Walter and Mrs.Maggot could I join you for dinner I LOVE mushrooms!

No answer! No invitation! ... No mushrooms.... No delicious dinner....
*cough* *cough* Or was my presence to ruin a tet-a-tet (don't mind my French!), candle-lit, romantic-music-tuned, quiet, Tolkien-inspired-conversation-full evening?

Back to the topic (I'm hungry, though!).
You two seem to have given some statements that seemed as "final" concerning your opinions. Do you think it's high time to close this topic?

As for me, I keep on reading and whenever I find sth. related to a topic I like, I mark it and use it as a new argument. For the moment, I have provided all that I thought "related" to Isildur's fault, although I have "stored" quite a few things, concerning the Ring. But as this is not a "Ring"-discussion, I'll leave them aside for now.
I'll be back to this thread (it's my baby, after all!) as soon as I find sth. very suitable ... OR... when somebody provides new arguments to be discussed

 

[Mrs. Maggott]

My dear - of COURSE you may come to dinner. In fact, have you ever noticed that the MORE people come to a dinner, the greater the enjoyment for all concerned? My Nana used to say, "We'll put a little more water in the soup!" when unexpected guests appeared.

One of the most pleasant aspects of all human intercourse is that of hospitality. It's no wonder that the treatment of guests is a very important aspect of many societies around the world across many different ages.

Such simple joys put to shame all the struggle and pain that are expended obtaining material possessions or power or any of the other "important things" upon which people waste their lives when the simple and relatively inexpensive things of life - like friendship and hospitality - are so much more worthy of our efforts.

 

[Walter]

Of course you'd be welcome for dinner...

Maybe someday a TTF get together for dinner?

As for the topic: Yes I have made my mind about "Isildur's fault" based upon the information I have gathered about it so far.

But when I have made my mind about a certain issue, it doesn't mean that it is carved in stone. Every new information or every new idea - like another meaningful post - which throws a different light at the issue may make me reconsider and maybe change my mind about that issue...

 

[Erestor Arcamen]

There Sauron took the Nine Rings and other lesser works of the Mírdain; but the Seven and the Three he could not find. Then Celebrimbor was put to torment, and Sauron learned from him where the Seven were bestowed. This Celebrimbor revealed, because neither the Seven nor the Nine did he value as he valued the Three; the Seven and the Nine were made with Sauron's aid, whereas the Three were made by Celebrimbor alone, with a different power and purpose.

So when we talk of the lesser rings, was this outside of the 7 and the 9? or were the 9 considered the lesser rings that the elves crafted before crafting the 3 great Elven rings.

 

[crabby]

So when we talk of the lesser rings, was this outside of the 7 and the 9? or were the 9 considered the lesser rings that the elves crafted before crafting the 3 great Elven rings.

ok, 'lesser rings' questions - we know that the 9 rings went to men, all were ensnared, all were re-taken by Sauron. the 7 went to the Dwarf Lords - those we know were either re-taken or destroyed, presumably by Dragons - what did Sauron do with the re-taken rings, do we know what the re-taken/destroyed numbers were and which Dwarf kingdoms were effected and what happened to them?

i think i recall Thrain having one, and Sauron tormenting him in Gul Dolgur with its loss... but is that it, is the loss of a ring just a personal torment rather than a societal loss?

its never mentioned, but what of Five - one ring, three rings, seven rings, nine rings? did Tolkien have a plan but never get round to it - Haradrim? Southrons? Easterlings? Hobbits? Wizards?

cheers.

 

[Erestor Arcamen]

ok, 'lesser rings' questions - we know that the 9 rings went to men, all were ensnared, all were re-taken by Sauron. the 7 went to the Dwarf Lords - those we know were either re-taken or destroyed, presumably by Dragons - what did Sauron do with the re-taken rings, do we know what the re-taken/destroyed numbers were and which Dwarf kingdoms were effected and what happened to them?

i think i recall Thrain having one, and Sauron tormenting him in Gul Dolgur with its loss... but is that it, is the loss of a ring just a personal torment rather than a societal loss?

its never mentioned, but what of Five - one ring, three rings, seven rings, nine rings? did Tolkien have a plan but never get round to it - Haradrim? Southrons? Easterlings? Hobbits? Wizards?

cheers.

Thanks for the reply! Thrain did have a ring but he was brought to Dol Guldur and tormented by Sauron. Eventually Gandalf found him in the dungeon where Thrain gave him the map and key to the Lonely Mountain:

In TA 2841, he and a group of followers including Balin and Dwalin left their dwelling in the Blue Mountains and journeyed into Wilderland. They were pursued by the servants of Sauron and one morning, in the eaves of Mirkwood, his companions awoke to find that Thráin was missing. They searched in vain for him for days but he could not be found at all. It was later learned that he had been captured and imprisoned in the pits of Sauron's stronghold of Dol Guldur in southern Mirkwood. There he was tortured and Sauron took from him the last of the Dwarven Rings of Power, and left him there to die.