Corporeality of the Nazgûl?

[Radaghast]

There's a question on Quora asking, "What's the big deal about the Nazgûl losing their horses?" Of course, this is taken to mean the horses and Ringwraiths being washed away in the flooding of Bruinen. Strangely, one answer states that the Witch-king manages to save his horse, even though there is nothing in the book to suggest this is the case. Unfinished Tales also gives no indication that this is the case. I think the answerer is going by the fact that the Witch-king rides up to the gates of Minas Tirith riding a horse. But there's nothing special about the horses, other than that they've been trained to endure the Ringwraiths. It's therefore easier to make the assumption that the Witch-king got a new horse rather than assuming he evaded the flood.

Perhaps even more strange, however, is the other answer which states the Ringwraiths don't have corporeal forms without clothing 🧐 Bizarrely, Tolkien Gateway enforces this notion. The site also states that the Ringwraiths' bodies are destroyed in the flood and return to Sauron to get new ones 😳 I will use this site sparingly, at best, from now on.

Anyway, back to the other Quora answer, the excerpt from the book used to support this odd notion is the following (includes book excerpt in italics):

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.”

- Excerpt from the Chapter “The Ring Goes South.”

Hmmmm… does anyone know of any entities that cause cold and unease to those in its presence? Could this wispy, wraithlike shadow be one of the unhorsed, de-cloaked Nazgul returning the Mordor? Not only is it a possible explanation, but I think it is the most probable explanation. This is too specific and deliberate of a exchange for it to have truly been a “wisp of cloud” passing over head.

SO. WHY DOES THIS MATTER? Let me explain.

This scene takes place several weeks after the Fellowship had left Rivendell, and shortly after they entered the region of Hollin. Gandalf mentions that they had traveled 45 leagues (~135 miles) as the crow flies from Rivendell to that point. We already know that the Fellowship spent a month at Rivendell, and 16 or 17 additional days traveling. We also know that the Ringwraiths were caught in the flood immediately prior to Frodo arriving in Rivendell. This tells us that it has taken this specific Ringwraith well over a month and a half to travel 45 leagues from Rivendell. There is a reason that the next time the Fellowship runs into one of the Nine isn’t until much later in the story, namely, that it takes the Nazgul AGES to get anywhere if they do not have transportation or something to give them physical form.

First off, the book itself contradicts this notion. If the thing is fast, why would it take "ages" to get anywhere? My feeling is that this is a foreshadowing, giving the reader something to feel uneasy about. I think the thing is actually a Nazgûl on a winged mount.

But, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe there is something to suggest the Nazgûl are just "wisps" until they don clothing. Am I wrong? If so, can anyone explain how?

 

[grendel]

This is from the chapter "The Ring Goes South":

Three of the black horses had been found at once drowned in the flooded Ford. On the rocks of the rapids below it searchers discovered the bodies of five more, and also a long black cloak, slashed and tattered.

Since eight horses were accounted for, maybe someone on Quora is assuming one horse survived, and the Witch-King used it to return to Mordor? Just a thought.

 

[Olorgando]

But, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe there is something to suggest the Nazgûl are just "wisps" until they don clothing. Am I wrong? If so, can anyone explain how?

I guess the posters on Quora and Tolkien Gateway need to clarify their concept of wisps - or wraiths.
I mean, how are they to don the clothing without corporeal form? I just thought about trying to hang my jacket or coat on thin air - no, that concept makes no sense to me, seems like an endless circle with no solution.🥴

 

[Radaghast]

This is from the chapter "The Ring Goes South":

Three of the black horses had been found at once drowned in the flooded Ford. On the rocks of the rapids below it searchers discovered the bodies of five more, and also a long black cloak, slashed and tattered.

Since eight horses were accounted for, maybe someone on Quora is assuming one horse survived, and the Witch-King used it to return to Mordor? Just a thought.

That's interesting and might be a decent argument. Tolkien is commonly oblique and subtle in his writing. This would be one of the most extreme examples of such. And if one wanted to provide an argument for the Nazgûl being incorporeal one might look to the paragraph following the one you quoted:

‘Eight out of the Nine are accounted for at least,’ said Gandalf. ‘It is rash to be too sure, yet I think that we may hope now that the Ringwraiths were scattered, and have been obliged to return as best they could to their Master in Mordor, empty and shapeless.

‘If that is so, it will be some time before they can begin the hunt again. Of course the Enemy has other servants, but they will have to journey all the way to the borders of Rivendell before they can pick up our trail. And if we are careful that will be hard to find. But we must delay no longer.’

I don't know if I'd accept this as an argument but "empty and shapeless" can perhaps be interpreted as evidence. According to Unfinished Tales, however, it would seem the Nazgûl have no issue traveling without raiment or horses.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

I think the thing is actually a Nazgûl on a winged mount.

It's an idea, but one explicitly refuted by Grishnakh: 'But the winged Nazgul, not yet, not yet. He won't let them show themselves yet, not too soon. They're for the War -- and other puposes.'

It could be argued that Grishnakh is a "mere orc", but he seems to have some authority. Or that one of the "other purposes" is scouting the lands beyond the river -- though the empty areas of Eregion seems an odd use of a precious resource. And if Grishnakh's knowledge is questionable, we have Gandalf: 'But they have not yet been allowed to cross the River. . ."

My own feeling is that the author was still developing his ideas on the Nazgul at this stage. He may have considered making whatever it was a flying Nazgul, and later changed his mind; or he may have meant for it to be some other kind of creature or spirit. The incident appears in the earliest draft of this section of the story. Christopher's note reads:
This incident was retained in FR, but is not explained. The Winged Nazgul had not yet crossed the River ( The Two Towers pp. 101, 201).

As it stands, it forms one of many ambiguous passages in the story -- as is the question of corporeality.

 

[Radaghast]

It's an idea, but one explicitly refuted by Grishnakh: 'But the winged Nazgul, not yet, not yet. He won't let them show themselves yet, not too soon. They're for the War -- and other puposes.'

It could be argued that Grishnakh is a "mere orc", but he seems to have some authority. Or that one of the "other purposes" is scouting the lands beyond the river -- though the empty areas of Eregion seems an odd use of a precious resource. And if Grishnakh's knowledge is questionable, we have Gandalf: 'But they have not yet been allowed to cross the River. . ."

My own feeling is that the author was still developing his ideas on the Nazgul at this stage. He may have considered making whatever it was a flying Nazgul, and later changed his mind; or he may have meant for it to be some other kind of creature or spirit. The incident appears in the earliest draft of this section of the story. Christopher's note reads:
This incident was retained in FR, but is not explained. The Winged Nazgul had not yet crossed the River ( The Two Towers pp. 101, 201).

As it stands, it forms one of many ambiguous passages in the story -- as is the question of corporeality.

Good point. However, Tolkien expressly stated that the thing Legolas shoots down at the river is a Nazgûl's flying mount, when he said of Legolas:

"He was tall as a young tree, lithe, immensely strong, able swiftly to draw a great war-bow and shoot down a Nazgûl, endowed with the tremendous vitality of Elvish bodies, so hard and resistant to hurt that he went only in light shoes over rock or through snow, the most tireless of all the Fellowship."
— The Book of Lost Tales Part Two, p. 327

And the book's description certainly seems to fit that of the so called "fell beast" fairly unambiguously:

‘Elbereth Gilthoniel!’ sighed Legolas as he looked up. Even as he did so, a dark shape, like a cloud and yet not a cloud, for it moved far more swiftly, came out of the blackness in the South, and sped towards the Company, blotting out all light as it approached. Soon it appeared as a great winged creature, blacker than the pits in the night. Fierce voices rose up to greet it from across the water. Frodo felt a sudden chill running through him and clutching at his heart; there was a deadly cold, like the memory of an old wound, in his shoulder. He crouched down, as if to hide.

— The Lord of the Rings, "The Great River"

I think this is perhaps a flaw in the book? One of those things that flew under Tolkien's radar and was never satisfactorily resolved.

 

[ZehnWaters]

I always assumed they were ghostly terrors when not purposefully enclothed with some kind of form. Kinda like what Ainur can do.

 

[Olorgando]

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.

 

[Radaghast]

I agree. Tolkien may have obfuscated the issue with phrases like "empty and shapeless" but, aside from this being rather vague, in cases where the authors themselves seem uncertain what something definitely is or outright contradicts themselves, logic must bear out. That the Ringwraiths would need clothing to achieve solidity does not seem logical at all.

 

[ZehnWaters]

Were they just completely invulnerable then? How else could they continue to exist once experiencing acts that should have been fatal?

 

[Radaghast]

I would expect so. Just like many undead creatures in fiction they appear to be hard to kill, though perhaps the only attempt Tolkien ever depicted was the successful one attempted by Merry and Éowyn.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Were they just completely invulnerable then? How else could they continue to exist once experiencing acts that should have been fatal?

Don't forget, they were wraiths because of the rings, whose effects made them essentially immortal. Remember Merry's Barrow-blade:

No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will. (emphasis mine)

 

[ZehnWaters]

Don't forget, they were wraiths because of the rings, whose effects made them essentially immortal. Remember Merry's Barrow-blade:

No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will. (emphasis mine)

Hm. So they were effectively invulnerable because their bodies were bound to their spirits?

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

However you want to put it, they were apparently invulnerable to "normal" hazards, unless a counterspell, such as those incorporated into the Barrow-blades, were brought into play. This is what allowed Eowyn to "kill" the Witch-King.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Tolkien expressly stated that the thing Legolas shoots down at the river is a Nazgûl's flying mount

Sorry, I meant to respond earlier. You're right, of course; the question is, did he cross the river? He's flying up from the South, along the river. He does come near the west bank, "almost above" Frodo, but falls on the eastern shore. He was, in fact, the Winged Nazgul Grishnakh said was waiting "northward on the east-bank". So no, I don't think this was a flaw, as it still appears that the Winged Nazgul wasn't intended to cross. It was just coincidence that the Fellowship happened to be there at the time.

"A chance meeting, as we say in Middle-earth".

 

[Radaghast]

Sorry, I meant to respond earlier. You're right, of course; the question is, did he cross the river? He's flying up from the South, along the river. He does come near the west bank, "almost above" Frodo, but falls on the eastern shore. He was, in fact, the Winged Nazgul Grishnakh said was waiting "northward on the east-bank". So no, I don't think this was a flaw, as still appears that the Winged Nazgul wasn't to cross. It was just coincidence that the Fellowship happened to be there at the time.

"A chance meeting, as we say in Middle-earth".

You're right. I got my sequence of events mixed up.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Easy to do, as the author switches back and forth, not only in scenes, but also in time.

BTW, there may be one "flaw", unless I missed something in rereading: when Grishnakh returns to the main Orc-horde, he's taunted by Ugluk:

'What's happened to your precious Nazgul? Has he had another mount shot under him?'

How would he have come by this knowledge? 🤔

 

[Radaghast]

Easy to do, as the author switches back and forth, not only in scenes, but also in time.

BTW, there may be one "flaw", unless I missed something in rereading: when Grishnakh returns to the main Orc-horde, he's taunted by Ugluk:

'What's happened to your precious Nazgul? Has he had another mount shot under him?'

How would he have come by this knowledge? 🤔

Possibly word of mouth would be my guess.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Possible -- though Ugluk's band was traveling west the whole time, and it doesn't appear that news of the Nazgûl's fall could have reached him since Grishnakh's statement. The latter could hardly have made it to the meeting-place and back in so short a time. But maybe he did hear it from some Northerners. I don't know. It just struck me as strange.

But getting back to your OP, the question of the nature of the Nazgûl has been discussed in various ways, on a number of older threads, which you might find it worth looking into. One aspect which has been brought up in this one is the many ambiguous statements about them -- something not limited to the Nazgûl, by any means! -- but tantalizing, if frustrating, for readers. Here's one from Gandalf:

'. . .the black robes are real robes that they wear to give shape to their nothingness when they have dealings with the living.'

How are we to take this? Literally? It wouldn't seem so, as they're able to ride and wield weapons, The Witch-King is even able to wear a crown.

Metaphorically, then? The problem is, with fantasy, it's difficult to sort out the metaphorical from the literal. Or as one critic put it, "In fantasy, there is no safety in metaphor".

BTW, you're not the only one who finds some of the answers on quora a bit "odd".

Or even some of the questions. 😀

 

[ZehnWaters]

Easy to do, as the author switches back and forth, not only in scenes, but also in time.

In Tolkien's defense there are nuanced statements you simply miss when making changes like this. I've done it dozens of times.

But getting back to your OP, the question of the nature of the Nazgûl has been discussed in various ways, on a number of older threads, which you might find it worth looking into. One aspect which has been brought up in this one is the many ambiguous statements about them -- something not limited to the Nazgûl, by any means! -- but tantalizing, if frustrating, for readers. Here's one from Gandalf:

'. . .the black robes are real robes that they wear to give shape to their nothingness when they have dealings with the living.'

How are we to take this? Literally? It wouldn't seem so, as they're able to ride and wield weapons, The Witch-King is even able to wear a crown.

Oh shoot, I just remember that in NoME Tolkien wrote about this some. I'll need to wait until much later tonight before I can get to it. There was a drawing and he was criticizing that they drew a physical hand for one of the Ringwraiths. If I remember correctly he said it should have been gloved and may have gone more into it from there.