Frodo's Barrow Dilemma

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Eönwë

But Frodo could see the bones, not the spirit itself. I think the spirit, not the physical body (or rather, bones) could see him with the ring, as spirits are on the Other Side.

Would a mere skeleton be described as a 'tall dark figure like a shadow'? Wouldn't you think Frodo would have described bare bones, if that's what he'd seen?

It seems the 'What are Barrow-wights?' question once again rears its ugly head.
The wights must have had a corporeal form.

Round the corner a long arm was groping, walking on its fingers towards Sam, who was lying nearest....

FOTR Fog On the Barrow-Downs

That arm was not described as 'skeletal' either.
I've heard arguments that what Frodo saw in the barrow were the animated remains of who was buried there, and the same spell that preserved the weapons and treasure it contained also kept the remains from corruption. It is unlikely the arm was merely dead flesh, however.

Some say that the mound in which the Ring-bearer was imprisoned had been the grave of the last prince of Cardolan, who fell in the war of 1409.

ROTK App A

In the days of Argeleb II....an end came of the Dúnedain of Cardolan, and evil spirits out of Angmar and Rhudaur entered into the deserted mound and welt there.

ROTK App A

Argeleb II's reign presumably began upon the death of his father, Araphor in 1589, and Argeleb died in 1670. Therefore, those remains had to have been in the barrow at least 180 years, plenty of time for advanced decomposition before the Wight arrived, so the arm Frodo saw could not have been part of the corpse.

[Findegil]

Don't forgett that we talk about a Númenorean Prince. The Númenoreans had developt the art of precerving the flash for long times in Númenore and the Exiles brought that art to Middle-Earth.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Boromir88]

Would a mere skeleton be described as a 'tall dark figure like a shadow'? Wouldn't you think Frodo would have described bare bones, if that's what he'd seen?~Inziladun

Playing too much WW? That logic may be reasonable to use there, but not sure I like it being used with the books. No one is really in a position to argue what Frodo 'should' have said (or Tolkien 'should' have written) if he saw a bunch of bones, or whatever it is he saw.

'dark figure' is a generic descriptor that was used for lots of things in LOTR.

"the shadow" and "dark figure" were interchanged for the Balrog.

Sauron was a "dark figure" taking the shape of a man...'"yet greater." (Letter 246)

The beasts that attacked the company were first described as "dark wolf-shapes."

And I'm sure the Ringwraiths were referred to as "dark figures" more than once.

A few paragraphs before the dark was described as "near and thick," Frodo is terrifed, fell on the ground, and seconds away from conking out. We have no clue about the details of the Barrow-wight, because Frodo has no clue. It's tall, dark, a figure, and cold. It could be a spirit inhabitting some guys bones, or it could have been a nargle for all Frodo knew.

You expect Frodo (and Tolkien) to give us a clear description of every evil creature, spirit, or thing out there that Frodo and our heroes encounter? Ha.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

You expect Frodo (and Tolkien) to give us a clear description of every evil creature, spirit, or thing out there that Frodo and our heroes encounter? Ha.

I don't expect all to be crystal clear; indeed that takes some of the magic away from the story. But I can't help thinking that a skeleton and a more solid form are different enough in appearance that Frodo would have used different wording if what he was seeing was empty bones. He was not viewing the wight in total darkness, but against the stars.
To be sure, there's still some ambiguity. That said, I don't see why the wight must possess no solid form of its own.
As to the 'embalming' question, the Númenóreans certainly took actions to preserve the bodies of at least their kings and rulers after death. However, the death of that unnamed prince occurred during a time of desperate fighting, and I have to wonder whether taking the time to embalm him would have been wise or feasible at that time.

[Alfirin]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

As to the 'embalming' question, the Númenóreans certainly took actions to preserve the bodies of at least their kings and rulers after death. However, the death of that unnamed prince occurred during a time of desperate fighting, and I have to wonder whether taking the time to embalm him would have been wise or feasible at that time.

Well, there is my theory that the Downs are in fact a peat bog (or at least were when the bodies were buried)and that, when the water table is high the insides of the barrows are filled with peat juice effectively pickling the bodies naturally. The only catch I can think of is that the swords would still need some sort of preserving enchantment, since acidic peat juice would pit the hell out of iron and steel.

[Boromir88]

I don't expect all to be crystal clear; indeed that takes some of the magic away from the story. But I can't help thinking that a skeleton and a more solid form are different enough in appearance that Frodo would have used different wording if what he was seeing was empty bones.~Inziladun

But that's my point Frodo didn't describe empty bones, because he didn't know what he saw other than an ambigious 'dark figure' which has been used to describe many things veiled in darkness or shadow. Could have been a spirit animating a skeleton, or a nemotoad, or any thing you could call a 'dark figure' (so...virtually anything).

The Balrog, Ringwraiths and such, we encounter more, and there is the chance for more description. Frodo doesn't get this with the Barrow-wight, just as Gandalf doesn't tell us anymore about the 'dark gnawing' creatures at the bottom of the bottomless pit. We don't get more from Gandalf, because he was having Balrog issues and probably didn't care to investigate into more detail about the Moria critters.

I'm not saying you aren't correct, maybe there was more than just bones to the wight, but pointing out because you think Frodo would have described empty bones differently, if he had seen just empty bones, I don't agree with that type of argument. Because all Frodo described was a dark figure (not surprising in a dark, foggy area) and a cold hand grasped him tight.

[Gothbogg the Ripper]

I doubt they would have seen him. Whereas the Ringwraiths were cunning enemies and the cream of Sauron's crop, the Barrow-Wights were merely puppets. Called up by the Witch-King if I am not mistaken.
And whilst the Nazgul were neither dead nor alive, the Barrow-Wights were most certainly dead. So, no ring-vision for them!