: : There is nothing in any of Tolkien's writings which speaks of, hints at, or points to a separate reality for the disembodied spirits of the Ainur, Elves, Dwarves, and Men. Spirits are a part of the whole world -- Ëa, the World That Is -- what we call the universe. The Ainur can "clothe" themselves in physical bodies, the Elves' spirits are so closely tied to their bodies that they have greater control over those bodies and can still perceive disembodied spirits, and Men's spirits have an aspect which drives them to "seek elsewhere" after a time.

: : The "spirit world" of Tolkien is simply another spectrum or aspect of the whole World he devised. It moves within and is a part of that entire world.

: : [snip]

: : : If he were "No longer really there [Middle Earth]" then surely
: : : he must be at least partly elsewhere - pure sophistry but I
: : : couldn't resist :-)

: : I forgive you. :)

: : Frodo would still be there -- but if his body faded, then it would not be. Frodo was more than a body -- he was a spirit and a body, and in fading he would have lost that part of himself which was the body but that part which was the spirit would still exist.

: : I have actually been investigating this phenomenon through research for an entirely unrelated subject (magic in Middle-earth), and I am more convinced than ever that there was only the one "reality" for Ëa. The key to seeing that is to understand how the Valar (and other Ainur) incarnated themselves at will:

: :

: :   "Now the Valar took to themselves shape and hue; and because
: :   they were drawn into the World by love of the Children of
: :   Iluvatar, for whom they hoped, they took shape after that
: :   manner which they had beheld in the Vision of Iluvatar, save
: :   only in majesty and splendour.  Moreover their shape comes of
: :   their knowledge of the visible World, rather than of the World
: :   itself; and they need it not, save only as we use raiment,
: :   and yet we may be naked and suffer no loss of our being.
: :   Therefore the Valar may walk, if they will, unclad, and then
: :   even the Eldar cannot clearly perceive them, though they be
: :   present.  But when they desire to clothe themselves the Valar
: :   take upon them forms some as of male and some as of female; for
: :   that difference of temper they had even from their beginning,
: :   and it is but bodied forth in the choice of each, not made by
: :   the choice, even as with us male and female may be shown by
: :   the raiment but is not made thereby...."
: : 

: : Note several things here:

: :

: :
1. Tolkien speaks of "the visible World"
   : :
2. He says "even the Eldar cannot clearly perceive them"
   : :
3. He speaks of our "raiment" with respect to the sexes
   : :

   : : Tolkien was speaking of one world in which we (Incarnates) dwell on two levels: the "seen" and the "unseen", the "visible" and the "invisible". The Eldar can perceive "unclad beings", though the perceive the Valar only with difficulty. And even our own bodies are called "raiment" by Tolkien. By extension we can say that without our bodies we have not lost ourselves, just as the Valar suffer "no loss of their being" when they are not Incarnated.

   : : Gandalf says of the Eldar who have lived in Aman that against both the Seen and the Unseen they wield great power. They have learned much from the Valar and Maiar. But the Seen and the Unseen coexist within Ëa in the same reality. There is no division, no concept of separate worlds, except insofar as two people may live and function in different parts of the world and be "in separate worlds" metaphorically.

   : Of course the first question that arises is "Unseen by whom?" - humans presumably.

   : This question aside there seems to me to be a potential for a division even within the unseen world. It is an unescapable truth that the seen world of Tolkien is divided into various spheres of differing reality. Even before the Akkalabeth the reality of Valinor and Middle Earth differed markedly. The Elves did not fade in Valinor and many other natural processes found in Middle Earth (such as physical decay) did not pertain beyond the western sea. This in my view constitutes a differing reality. To me a reality is based on the consistant application of certain laws of cause and effect. I cannot concieve of any other valid definition of this term. The separation in the seen realm is one of physical distance, presumably in the unseen world this would not neccessarily hold true. If in the real, or seen, world separate environments could exist between which the physical laws of existence could vary enormously, then there could be no philosophical objection to the possibility of similar dichotomies existing in the realm of the unseen. Therefore it would remain a formal possibility that the "Wraith-world" mentioned by Gandalf had some level of separateness from both the seen world and other manifestations of the unseen.

   ---Sorry to butt in, but doesn't it say somewhere that the Valar removed Valinor from being accesible by Middle Earth after the fall of Numenor. Doesn't this suggest that things in Ea can exist in both the seen and unseen, and that the 'wrath-world' which, I presume is also the 'unseen world' can be completely seperated from Middle Earth, and so seen as a seperate reality, which can, CAN, coexist with the 'seen' world, but doesn't need to. I'm afraid I'm completely underqualified for this debate, and don't have a copy of the Silmarillion handy, so if I'm just making matters more complicated, please tell me, and I'll quite happily shut myself up. :-)
   Thorongil---

   : : They lost their robes at the Ford. Without the robes, according to Gandalf, they could not function in the physical world. If the sinew spell was weakened at the Ford, it should (by extrapolation) have been weakened by the loss of the robes, and ot the immersion in water. The Nazgul were unharmed, and Gandalf said they could not be harmed by the water.

   : : In "The Ring Goes South" Gandalf and Merry have the following exchange:

   : :

   
   : :   "'I thought they were all destroyed in the flood,' said Merry.
   : :   "'You cannot destroy Ringwraiths like that,' said Gandalf. 'The
   : :   power of their master is in them, and they stand or fall by
   : :   him.  We hope that they were all unhorsed and unmasked, and
   : :   so made for a while less dangerous; but we must find out for
   : :   certain....'"
   : : 

   : : I understand that Merry and Gandalf are speaking of the destruction of Ringwraiths and not something less, but Gandalf does speak of the "hope that they were all unhorsed and unmasked". He makes no mention of their being weakened by the water. When the reports from the scouts are brought in over the next two months, Gandalf concludes:

   : :

   
   : :   "'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 that the Ringwraiths were scattered, and have
   : :   been obliged to return as best they could to their Master in
   : :   Mordor, empty and shapeless.'"
   : : 

   : : I won't argue that Gandalf is the most authoritative source on Ringwraiths -- that would have to be Sauron. But Gandalf's knowledge of the Seen versus the Unseen must be considerable. If he speaks of the Ringwraiths being empty and shapeless after they have been unmasked, then what else can he mean but that without their robes they cannot interact directly with the physical world?

   : I am more inclined to believe that without their robes they may have been rendered impotent by light in all save total darkness, rather than believe that the robes had any inherent magical properties. Which, in defence of this view, no direct claim to this is ever made in any part of the book.

   :
   : : : : There is no mention of Aragorn's carrying anything other than
   : : : : the shards of Narsil during the journey from Bree to
   : : : : Rivendell. Other people have wondered about this as well,
   : : : : but I cannot find any text which dwells on the matter.
   : : : : Fortunately, except for the Nazgul, Aragorn and the Hobbits
   : : : : didn't run into any problems on their way to Elrond's house.
   : : :
   : : : Strange. Particularly as the other Dunedain Rangers were
   : : : described as heavily armed (spear, bow and sword). Presumably
   : : : Aragorn may have had a long-knife, such as a basilard, without
   : : : great notice being taken of it. A sling and shot would also be
   : : : very unobtrusively carried about the person - useful for small
   : : : game for the pot also.

   : : I have no idea. I sometimes get the impression Aragorn could wander off into the brush and come back fuly armed in some fashion if he so wished. And though I doubt he carried the Sword that was Broken all his adult life (what would they have made of it in Gondor?), I suspect in a pinch he could have used the shards to deadly effect against at least a normal Man, ill-armed.

   : : Or maybe he was just a forerunner of MacGyver. I don't know if they air (or have aired) that show in the UK. Richard Dean Anderson (currently starring in STARGATE-SG1) starred in MacGyver in the late 1980s and early 1990s. He was a very resourceful adventurer/agent who refused to carry weapons. He could always come up with some weird solution to just about any problem. A chocolate bar in MacGyver's hands was an effective aid against, say, an acid bath.

   : I have some vague memories of this being shown.

   : : MacGyver and Aragorn might prove to have a great deal in common, given closer inspection (although I don't have the time for that).