Corporeality of the Nazgûl?

[Olorgando]

...
Tolkien didn’t create any Syllabus at Leeds AS A STUDENT (Nor as a first year Professor).

Hello??? JRRT, as a university student, never was anywhere but Oxford! (In the US, where I went to school 1966 to 1973, the term student was also used for those attending high school at least, in my case 1969-1973).

His first university appointment at the Leeds English School on 01 October 1920 was to a Readership! And he very much developed the almost nonexistent language section there. As a result of his efforts he was appointed to a new Professorship (aka "Chair") of English Language at Leeds on 16 July 1924. C. Scull and W.G. Hammond, "The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion and Guide - Chronology", 2006 two-volume edition (second volume being "Reader's Guide").

And if you mean, when you mention Carl F. Hostetter (not Hofstetter! And also not Douglas, I'm guessing you're getting that mixed up with the D.A. Anderson of the "Annotated Hobbit" among other publications), his "The Nature of Middle-earth", then you'd better get every punctuation mark right in your quotes, because I also have that book and can check them (and I also have Shippey's "Author of the Century", and the second and third editions of his "Road to Middle-earth").

But once again, you seem to have missed my point: I'm not arguing with any specific quote of yours from Hostetter or others. I take serious issue with your grandiloquent claims, as I feel you are implying, of what one should have read - a decidedly massive "syllabus" - in secondary and tertiary "sources" to understand JRRT's writings. To which implication I have a two-word reply: baloney slices.

JRRT's own term of "applicability", residing "in the freedom of the reader", from the foreword to the LoTR second edition, is basically a sharp slap in your face - and possibly JRRT's own too, which he may or may not have realized. That famous quote in a letter (to a Jesuit priest) about LoTR being a fundamentally Catholic work - never mind that in what JRRT may have considered exclusively Catholic (if he did so - my guess is yes) would have been in error, badly so as far as the other Christian denominations are concerned, and also to a lesser degree for the other "Abrahamic" faiths, he did not - could not - realize that for the human fundamentals that are to be found in his magnum opus, there are innumerable other applicabilities that the millions of his readers have found based on the experiences of their own lives.

And as to that "fundamentally Catholic work" - would JRRT have been able to write it (even more so the Silmarillion material he worked on for decades) solely on the basis of his Catholicism?

Hell, no!

Take away all of that "Norse stuff" that fascinated him al least in his youth, up to perhaps his middle years ... what would be left?

 

[Matthew Bailey]

Hello??? JRRT, as a university student, never was anywhere but Oxford! (In the US, where I went to school 1966 to 1973, the term student was also used for those attending high school at least, in my case 1969-1973).

His first university appointment at the Leeds English School on 01 October 1920 was to a Readership! And he very much developed the almost nonexistent language section there. As a result of his efforts he was appointed to a new Professorship (aka "Chair") of English Language at Leeds on 16 July 1924. C. Scull and W.G. Hammond, "The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion and Guide - Chronology", 2006 two-volume edition (second volume being "Reader's Guide").

And if you mean, when you mention Carl F. Hostetter (not Hofstetter! And also not Douglas, I'm guessing you're getting that mixed up with the D.A. Anderson of the "Annotated Hobbit" among other publications), his "The Nature of Middle-earth", then you'd better get every punctuation mark right in your quotes, because I also have that book and can check them (and I also have Shippey's "Author of the Century", and the second and third editions of his "Road to Middle-earth").

Oh no! Punctuation and Spelling errors!

Yes, I got Carl’s name wrong (thank you Apple for being so helpful in correcting me O_º), and the issue with Tolkien’s Student years.

Which are beside the point, thank you for pointing that out.

But once again, you seem to have missed my point: I'm not arguing with any specific quote of yours from Hostetter or others. I take serious issue with your grandiloquent claims, as I feel you are implying, of what one should have read - a decidedly massive "syllabus" - in secondary and tertiary "sources" to understand JRRT's writings. To which implication I have a two-word reply: baloney slices.

Good for you.

JRRT's own term of "applicability", residing "in the freedom of the reader", from the foreword to the LoTR second edition, is basically a sharp slap in your face - and possibly JRRT's own too, which he may or may not have realized. That famous quote in a letter (to a Jesuit priest) about LoTR being a fundamentally Catholic work - never mind that in what JRRT may have considered exclusively Catholic (if he did so - my guess is yes) would have been in error, badly so as far as the other Christian denominations are concerned, and also to a lesser degree for the other "Abrahamic" faiths, he did not - could not - realize that for the human fundamentals that are to be found in his magnum opus, there are innumerable other applicabilities that the millions of his readers have found based on the experiences of their own lives.

That seems to contradict Carl’s point on NoM-e.

And as to that "fundamentally Catholic work" - would JRRT have been able to write it (even more so the Silmarillion material he worked on for decades) solely on the basis of his Catholicism?

Hell, no!

Take away all of that "Norse stuff" that fascinated him al least in his youth, up to perhaps his middle years ... what would be left?

It has been my impression now for you last few replies that you don’t know what am I arguing, nor the subject at hand, given that you have yet to accurately articulate what I am claiming.

Not an uncommon thing.

Please feel free to declare victory and brag about it.

MB

Edit:

And, yes, you would tend to object to the Truth of something that you are actively disagreeing with, while not even understanding the claim made. That bias might be accompanied by problems with understanding, being motivated toward a bias but not understanding why the domain to which it applies does apply….

I think David Dunning and Justin Kruger made some sort of statement regarding that, not to mention being predicted by Bertrand Russell and others before them.

 

[JPMaximilian]

Frodo looked up at the sky. Suddenly he saw or felt a shadow pass over the high stars, as if for a moment they faded and then flashed out again. He shivered.
“Did you see anything pass over?” he whispered to Gandalf, who was just ahead.
“No, but i felt it, whatever it was,” he answer. “It may be nothing, only a wisp of thin cloud.”
“It was moving fast then,” muttered Aragorn, “and not with the wind.”

Anyone recall if this happened before or after the crebain flew over them? In either case, I've normally thought of this as being a flock of other bird-spys of Saruman either those same crebain or another group of crebain or other birds. I don't have much in the way of supporting evidence other than the relative proximity of this happening with the crebain.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

It happened the night after the appearance of the crebain, or rather just before dawn. The episode was in the first draft, but was never explained. One idea is that it was a winged Nazgul, and even Christopher "suspected" that to be the case, but this is refuted by statements later in the story.

Of course, the author may have originally intended that, later changing his mind, and just never altered it.

From the whole section, I don't get the impression it was crebain coming back, but your guess is as good as mine.

 

[Elbereth Vala Varda]

Frodo looked up at the sky. Suddenly he saw or felt a shadow pass over the high stars, as if for a moment they faded and then flashed out again. He shivered.
“Did you see anything pass over?” he whispered to Gandalf, who was just ahead.
“No, but i felt it, whatever it was,” he answer. “It may be nothing, only a wisp of thin cloud.”
“It was moving fast then,” muttered Aragorn, “and not with the wind.”

Anyone recall if this happened before or after the crebain flew over them? In either case, I've normally thought of this as being a flock of other bird-spys of Saruman either those same crebain or another group of crebain or other birds. I don't have much in the way of supporting evidence other than the relative proximity of this happening with the crebain.

For my part, I altogether quite enjoyed and marveled at this mysterious incidence, and questioned what the dark figure may have been. I feel as though the mystery, if you truly pondered it, could provide a bit of insight into how Frodo may have felt as he witnessed this strange occurence.

I also wondered if it had been bird-spies of Mordor or Crebain, and yet I think I landed positively that it had to have been the Nazgul. I thought this of course, because it said that the stars were hidden. Not your typical flock of birds. If the stars are hidden, then what flies before them must be something large and dark. I also thought this because Gandalf says he "sensed" it. Being a Maia, Gandalf would be quick to sense the presence of Evil, and yet for it to so greatly disturb him, it would need to be intense. Before, the Crebain coming near did not startle him by any account of the book, and we are told that the Crebain followed them for long.

Then, we must gather that this dark figure was a greater Evil than that of the Crebain. Orcs? I think not. While not as immensely dumb as Peter Jackson portrays them, Orcs are not clever nor cunning enough to fly over stars as a wisp of cloud. They just don't have that kind of power.

So, I settled that it was in conclusion, the Nazgul. A rather fair and fully possible conclusion, as indeed the Nazgul had been after Frodo since his departure from The Shire. But then, we turn back to the original title of this thread; Corporeality of the Nazgul.

We know that the Nazgul can take on some sort of form, as they ride great steeds, something that would not be essential if they did not take any form. And yet what form they take is not specified. For my part, I believe that the Nazgul would have been able to take on many dark forms, and even to take no form at all. I feel that they would have dark power, akin in ways to that of the Maia, and yet dark and weaker, for Evil cannot create, but only weave mockery out of what has already been made.

This whole topic is very interesting and I am very glad to see a thread about it.

Thank you for this post!

Elbereth Vala Varda

 

[Olorgando]

You are looking for quotes that take decades of reading to understand, and would take me years to explain.

The last twenty plus years I spent with "my" company involved explaining, so I know how to do that. If it would take you years to explain anything, perhaps you need one or several refresher courses on pedagogy. 😈

 

[Elbereth Vala Varda]

The last twenty plus years I spent with "my" company involved explaining, so I know how to do that. If it would take you years to explain anything, perhaps you need one or several refresher courses on pedagogy. 😈

This must be an ongoing argument....

 

[Olorgando]

This must be an ongoing argument....

"Argument" is putting it very nicely ... 😈

 

[Elbereth Vala Varda]

"Argument" is putting it very nicely ... 😈

I see... Don't tell me this is another "Do Balrogs have wings?" Thread, just on a different topic...

 

[Olorgando]

"Argument" is putting it very nicely ... 😈

I see... Don't tell me this is another "Do Balrogs have wings?" Thread, just on a different topic...

The topic is practically irrelevant. The ... what was that term Nixon's press secretary Ron Ziegler used back a while before Tricky Dick resigned? ... oh, right, "operative term" ... is megalomania. 😈

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

 

[Elbereth Vala Varda]

View attachment 14327

That's cute, but I am not sure it will calm down the fight... This one seems quite aflame.

 

[Olorgando]

That's cute, but I am not sure it will calm down the fight... This one seems quite aflame.

Not as far as I'm concerned - it's become irrelevant, can't be bothered anymore ... 😩

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

 

[Olorgando]

View attachment 14329

Humph!
And you complained about my calling you (an myself, IIRC) an "old coot" in another thread a while ago ... 🐔😁

 

[Erestor Arcamen]

 

[Olorgando]

So what else is new? ... 😩😁🤪😅

 

[Ent]

I must say that the concept of disembodied Nazgûl just doesn't convince me. They became invisible, yes - that seems to be one side effect of a Great Ring on Humans (Big and Little Folk). Now I've stated before that I consider The Hobbit, author-published though it be, to be shaky as canon. But when things get threatening at the Battle of Five Armies, Bilbo puts on the One Ring - but still gets conked on the head and passes out. Sauron may have been able to convert the Nazgûl into a perverted form of Elves, with their unnatural wraithing (natural for very old Elves), but that he could by those Great Rings have converted into something like very junior Ainur - no way! I don't buy the "embodiment by clothing" theory. They were "simply" (permanently) invisible. Yes, they seem to have been invulnerable to bodily hurts massively more so than they would have been in human form (here any visible raiment seems to have been totally irrelevant), but they couldn't walk through walls like "popular" ghosts - say Casper (who was friendly, anyway 😁 ). I can't recall where, but their ability to perceive our world seems to have been dimmed - so them taking time to get back home through territory they can only imperfectly perceive - sort of through a kind of fog - makes sense.

I must say that the concept of disembodied Nazgûl just doesn't convince me. They became invisible, yes - that seems to be one side effect of a Great Ring on Humans (Big and Little Folk). Now I've stated before that I consider The Hobbit, author-published though it be, to be shaky as canon. But when things get threatening at the Battle of Five Armies, Bilbo puts on the One Ring - but still gets conked on the head and passes out. Sauron may have been able to convert the Nazgûl into a perverted form of Elves, with their unnatural wraithing (natural for very old Elves), but that he could by those Great Rings have converted into something like very junior Ainur - no way! I don't buy the "embodiment by clothing" theory. They were "simply" (permanently) invisible. Yes, they seem to have been invulnerable to bodily hurts massively more so than they would have been in human form (here any visible raiment seems to have been totally irrelevant), but they couldn't walk through walls like "popular" ghosts - say Casper (who was friendly, anyway 😁 ). I can't recall where, but their ability to perceive our world seems to have been dimmed - so them taking time to get back home through territory they can only imperfectly perceive - sort of through a kind of fog - makes sense.

Spoken by Strider to the Hobbits at Weathertop.
"They themselves do not see the world of light as we do, but our shapes cast shadows in their minds, which only the noon sun destroys; and in the dark they perceive many signs and forms that are hidden from us: then they are most to be feared."

Indeed, 'embodiment by clothing" is also not the case. Gandalf to Frodo after he wakes up at Rivendell:
"‘They were terrible to behold! But why could we all see their horses?’ ‘Because they are real horses; just as the black robes are real robes that they wear to give shape to their nothingness when they have dealings with the living.’

The cloaks are nothing more than a tool.