Dragons vs Balrogs

[easterlinge]

Anyone nothiced that all the Dragons ever killed in Middel-earth were offed by humans? Turin killed Glaurung, Earendil killed Ancalagon, Scatha was killed by Fram, Smaug shot by Bard.....

Sure, Glorfindel tackled Balrogs, and Fingolfin went toe-to-toe with Morgoth himself, but Dragons seem to give Elves the willies.....

I also noticed that at the Nirnaeth Arnoediad, Azaghal and his band of merry dwarves saw off a troop of dragons. Stood up to Glaurung himself. But in the 3rd Age, a single Balrog appears in khazad-dum... and the Dwarves are forced to evacuate. What gives?

If Balrogs are that much more powerful than Dragons, why would Morgoth bother breeding them, especially when the operation would dilute his powers even more, if I've understood Michael Martinez's article "Understanding Magic" properly.

And when Glaurung, Morgoth's first working prototype dragon showed himself prematurely, I'd have thought the Elves would suspect something was cooking in Angband. How come they didn't develop any anti-dragon defences? Even after Dagor bragollach, the elf-kingdoms were mostly intact. They'd know about dragons for sure by then. And even after Nirnaeth Arnoediad, Gondolin, Nargothrond, were still there.

But then maybe they did. Bard's Black arrow may date back to the first age, and designed as a dragon killer....


Music.... maketh the Ainur..... come together.... yea.....

[Finn]

I always assumed Dragons were bred because of their powers of flight. I also assumed that Balrogs are more or less subject to Morgoth's will (or Sauron's) and dragons could go out on their own and be generally destructive. The difference between a grenade and a semi-automatic. Control.

[Xivigg]

A dragon alone can be devastating to an armies
a Balrog, while as powerfull or maybe more powerfull, can only progress by foot or by flying short distance and he can't help the battles much while flying

[Eruve]

The original dragons (notably Glaurung) didn't fly. Winged dragons didn't show up until the War of Wrath.

[easterlinge]

Balrogs are renegade Maiar in service of Morgoth...... that makes them pretty autonomous, and a touch below Sauron (himself a corrupted Maia) himself.

At least, the Silmarillion says theyr'e renegade Maiar...

I suppose that's why a single balrog sent those dwarves packing, Maiar are pretty powerful beings, Queen Melian fenced off Doriath with magic single-handed.... still why would morgoth bother with dragons? Maybe he wanted creatures under his complete control? Maybe the Balrogs, being independent, could ignore orders..... but then again, Glaurung went from Angband without orders sometime before Dagor Bragollach, really lousy discipline....nearly ruined Morgoth's surprise. I never heard of a Balrog breaking discipline.

Too bad the Elves ignored Glaurung's significance. A special band of tough Elves lugging heavy crossbows firing depleted-mithril bolts would have been effective against land-based dragons.... an anti-dragon squad. But noo, it's up to us Men to see off the scaled menaces.....

[Finduilas]

And they were menaces all the way into the Third Age. Perhaps even longer.

[Inoldonil]

Balrogs were deffinitely Maiar Demons. There's no (revised) text that says otherwise. If you pay attention closely when Tolkien introduces Arien, you discover Arien is actually what the Balrogs would have been had they never become part of the people of Morgoth. Arien evidently was a pure Valarauko.

Have you ever read Michael Martinez's recent essays on Dragons? They're very good.

[Durelen]

I wanted to keep myself from posting over here on entmoot, but I have failed. I have to say that no where in Silm. does it say that dragons are "renegade maiar". You shouldn't assume things like that, there are several other possibilities. I am not disagreeing with you on dragons being maia but still, it is debatable.

I have been in a discussion on Balrogs vs. Dragons over at the Barrowdowns( take a look if you like, it is about 3 pages back), and we decided basically(or at least I did) that dragons had more "fire power" but were also more vunerable. Dragons were basically more destructive but could die much easier than a balrog, but not becasue they were weaker. Dragons were very vain, and this would make them vunerable by giving them a feeling of invincibility. Whereas Balrogs were not proud creatures(fled from the War of Wrath and hid in the Misty Mountains). This would give them an upper hand over dragons, because they know that they can die and it keeps them on there toes. So I believe Dragons were deadlier in large scale battle, but not in dueling.

[Inoldonil]

"I wanted to keep myself from posting over here on entmoot, but I have failed. I have to say that no where in Silm. does it say that dragons are "renegade maiar"."

I should certainly say so, we said _Balrogs_, NOT Dragons!

Dragons and Balrogs I think are rather incompatable. I think your average Dragon would probobly be slain by a Balrog. A Dragon's fire is much the same as a Balrog's they're both destructive consumers, and the incarnate body of a Balrog is shrouded in shadow and covered in flame. They also don't seem to exhibit a permanent look. Yet they have some bad-ass weapons, and wouldn't be effected by the hypnotic eyes of a Dragon. I think the Balrog would win, but it largely depends. Who would win, a Man or a Troll? You really can't say.

On the other hand, Gandalf would have had no chance against Smaug. If he could march in there and stick Glamdring through his heart, he probobly would have. But Gandalf (though valiant and dangerous) does not specialize in combat, and he would have either died slaying Smaug, or he would have been burned and consumed. A Wizard is more vulnerable to a Dragon, esp. a Winged Uruloki, than would be a Balrog.

[Sephiroth9611]

Balrogs were on par with the Nazgul of the Third Age. They led armies and so on. Dragons, while under Morgoth's dominion, were more like freelance agents. Once Morgoth was banished into the Void, the dragons were pretty much on their own.

The only known balrog to survive into the Third Age would most likely have been under some influence from Sauron, but was also on its own, being the last of its kind.

As for how they were killed, I don't think elves or dwarves were intended to be better equiped in fighting each. Rather, it was more or less by chance.

[Lief Erikson]

I'm afraid I must beg to differ. The Silmarillion states that several balrogs survived, burying themselves deep within the mountains so that they would avoid the wrath of the Valar and their hosts.

I'm afraid I must also disagree with you about Sauron controlling the one balrog that did show it's face, but that is discussed on another board.

I agree with you about the dragons, though. Once Morgoth was banished, they did go out on their own. And also Glaurung certainly showed that he had a mind of his own, leaving Morgoth's Lair without Morgoth's permission.

[Inoldonil]

I also would like to respectfully disagree about Elves and Men. A Calaquenda will always be more equipped than an Adan of the First Age in battling Balrogs, or any other ill being, in general. There can certainly be exceptions. But ultimately, Elves have a better chance. E.g., who has a better chance against Durin's Bane, Glorfindel or Aragorn? If you (and you said you do) think that Balrogs are on par with the Nazgul, than you must admit the answer is Glorfindel.

As for "chance", I feel many times "chance" is a euphemism for Eru's grace. An appointed action aided by courage, valour, strength, etc..

[Lief Erikson]

I agree, Glorfindel would probably be better equipped to fight a balrog than Aragorn. It's a difficult question, but that's the only logical answer. I think that Glorfindel's strength in combat is probably of a different nature from that of Aragorn's. He seems to have a different sort of power, and it's probably his magic that is his greatest weapon, cause I can't imagine him facing and defeating Aragorn in a duel.

But the balrogs and the Nazgul are difficult to compare. They each have power, but to me, Nazgul don't seem as strong as the balrogs. Aragorn and his company drive off five of the Nazgul on Weathertop, while the balrog nearly kills Gandalf, Boromir and Aragorn in Moria.

I think that while the balrogs are good and strong in hand to hand combat, the Nazgul's greatest weapon is fear, and they don't often fight. They overwhelm their foes with their evil, and make them flee in terror, but you don't see them attacking the heroes very much. The only time that they did, in the battle of Minas Tirith, their leader is slain. Not to say they can't fight, its obvious they can. But they are more like wraiths of night and the shadows, only attacking when they have the upper hand, and not with the reckless strength that the balrogs show in the Silmarillion, and the Lord of the Rings.

[Inoldonil]

Exactly. I think militarily (is that a word?) the Nazgul, well, the Witch-King leastways is stronger than the Balrog of Moria. But in face-to-face combat, it's much more difficult, indeed not far from impossible to defeat a Balrog. On the Dagorlad, the Witch-King against the Balrog, the Balrog would win. Technically speaking, the Witch-King could not be defeated without the destruction of the ring or the slaying of him after the sinews of his will has been broken (which could be done by a blade of Westernesse), but the Balrog would probobly destroy his "body" and send him back houseless to his master.

Someone with the air of Aman has to defeat a Balrog, and a Nagul couldn't do that. An interesting question would be if the Balrog could be afraid of the Witch-king. Was he startled by Boromir's horn, or just surprised?

Or was it just the power of the horn, of Araw or something else that held him back?

[Lief Erikson]

Yes, in a strategical front, the Nazgul would be the greater weapon because of the terror they give, and that would weaken the firmness of the hearts of the enemy, making them more ready to turn and run. But if it were Gandalf attacking my ranks, I'd be more willing to send the balrog.

I think that the balrog was probably just briefly surprised at Boromir's horn. But it wouldn't have been effected if he had blown it a second time.

[easterlinge]

When you guys mentioned Glorfindel, was it the First Age one or the Third Age one?

I agree that Nazgul are weaker than Balrogs. I mean Balrogs are Maiar originally, choosing to serve the Dark One.... I mean Morgoth. And the Forsaken , I mean Nazgul are just Men altered by Sauron.

When did the Nazgul first appear anyway? I suppose the Witch-King (some call him Khamul I believe) appeared after Sauron corrupted the Numenoreans and made them into Darkfriends....

Did Sauron give the Nine Rings all at once? Or did he choose his candidates carefully?

I still think Balrogs are more powerful than Dragons simply by virtue of Dragons being killed by Men wielding swords and shooting bows, while Balrogs tend to be killed by First Age Elves and a visiting Third Age Maiar by magical weapons.

Basically Sauron's just a Balrog who chooses to use his brains instead of brute power. Lasted three Ages that way, and became Morgoth's lieutenant instead of cannon fodder.

[Lief Erikson]

I tend to think of Sauron as more similar to Melkor. For instance, in the Silmarillion, he was able to disguise himself as a handsome elf, or something, and was able to get into Numenor and corrupt the Numenoreans. He is able to take on different appearances, like Melkor. That's probably one of the reasons that he was Melkor's lieutenant, and the other balrogs were more like warriors, or bodyguards.

In the Silmarillion, I don't think it really tells where or how the Nazgul arose, so I don't know. If you have the Tolkien Companion, though, you could probably look them up and find out in there.

[Inoldonil]

The First Age Glorfindel is the very same as the Third Age one. He's Glorfindel returned from the Halls of Mandos. In one version, he comes back to Middle-earth in the Second Age with the power of Sauron rising again, around the same time as the Blue Wizards (in the latest of Tolkien's Wizard concepts leastways).

We don't really know the Witch-King's name. (Or I don't). Khamul was the second in command. But the Nazgul appeared in the Second Age sometime, when exactly I don't know (I mean, the information is there, I just don't know myself). Perhaps the answer is simply in the Tale of Years.

All the Maiar at one time or another could change form at will. Morgoth lost it soon after the murder of Finwe when he invested himself further into the hroa (substance) of Arda, and Sauron lost the ability when he invested himself into the One Ring, (in which case each time he fell, he was only able to take on a new form in "rebirth", until the Ring was destroyed). I think Sauron ended up being Morgoth's lieutenant because as is said (I think in the Valaquenta), Sauron was the greatest of all the Maiar. Indeed elsewhere it is said of him (in The Silmarillion) that he was only lesser than Morgoth in power because he didn't serve him from the outset (originally he was a person of Aule). Even the Balrogs could still change themselves a little, their shadows and flames seem to expand, recede, leap and quench dynamically (although maybe the latter wasn't at their will). And when exposed to water they became creatures of slime.

[Michael Martinez]

Sauron never lost the ability to assume different forms while the One Ring existed. He lost the ability to assume fair forms after he was killed the first time (in the Downfall of Numenor). He was able to take shape again and initiate the war which brought on his second death at the end of the Second Age, but he took shape again in the Third Age.

It's highly unlikely that any dragon could actually match a Balrog in power, since the Maiar were angelic beings who could essentially move mountains. Remember, most of Beleriand was destroyed in the final war with Morgoth. That destructive force had to come from the clash of great powers fighting on both sides. Most of Morgoth's Maiaric followers probably met their ends during that war.

And we do know that Maiar could be killed, so it doesn't really matter who is more powerful than whom. If someone was willing and able to go up against an incarnated Maia, the Maia was most likely risking death.

Death for the Ainur was not like death for Men. The Ainur were spirits who were bound to the Halls of Ea. If their bodies were destroyed they were greatly weakened, essentially because they were overcome with emotion, or consumed with anger. Unless they could regain control of themselves they wouldn't be able to incarnate themselves again. But they didn't cease to exist. They became "spirits of malice", as Tolkien put it. Only a very few truly powerful Maiar would have been able to reincarnate themselves. But Sauron had an advantage because he had invested most of his native strength in the Ring. Hence, when he was slain, the greater part of his strength remained intact. He was therefore able to literally return from the dead, whereas other fallen Maiar couldn't.

[Lief Erikson]

I think that the Balrogs are certainly very powerful creatures, and capable of doing massive damage, killing almost anyone they set their minds to killing. But as for them being stronger then dragons, well, that's where I'm afraid I must disagree with you.

In the Silmarillion, it talks about how Glaurung left Angband prematurely, and was forced back into Angband's gates. But it took many, many men to do this, and it caused damage. I cannot see a Balrog doing that, and the dragon wasn't even at full power, being not fully grown.

[Michael Martinez]

Glaurung was young when Fingon drove him back. No Balrog is ever "driven back" in The Silmarillion. And the tales of Balrogs being slain at Gondolin are non-canonical, as Christopher Tolkien went all the way back to The Book of Lost Tales to write that chapter. He had no way of knowing (as we have no way of knowing) what his father would have done with the story of Gondolin after Tuor reached the seventh gate.

It is very probable, however, that NO Balrogs would have died at Gondolin, had J.R.R. Tolkien finished rewriting the story. He had already decided, by the time he started work on "Of Tuor and his Coming to Gondolin", that there had probably only been 7 Balrogs at most.

In "The Fall of Gondolin" there were at least 1,000 Balrogs. They were fierce and terrible warriors, but they were not the fallen angelic Maiar of the later Silmarillion.

[Lief Erikson]

I haven't even read the Book of Lost Tales, and whether or not any would have died there is purely speculation. When Glaurung was driven back, it took many spearmen, and it wouldn't have happened if he hadn't been young and cocky. He had weaker scales, and that was what caused it. Later on, it showed that he had magical eyesight, and was responisible for many evil deeds before he was killed by Turin. He was one of the leading creatures in Morgoth's final attack in the breaking of the siege of Angband. It took many Balrogs to kill one elf lord, and certain dragons could melt rings of power.

I know that Balrogs are very strong, and can strike terrible fear into people's hearts, and destroy almost any mortal. But dragons are capable of leveling whole cities, and the first fight against Glaurung was called the one of the great battles of the siege of Angband.

[easterlinge]

Well... still, Glaurung did end up killed by Turin, and other dragons have been slain by Men wielding fairly conventional weapons. And Azaghal's Dwarves did stand up to a troop of dragons. And Balrogs still required an Elf of exceptional prowess or a Maiar, wielding marvellous enchanted weapons...

seems Balrogs are more powerful, no contest. OK, how about freewill? Is a Balrog or a Dragon more autonomous? Some of you say Balrogs were less aoutonomous, others refute this by saying they were Maiar. Some say Dragons, being creations of Morgoth are chained to his will, others say they are freer agents than the Balrogs. I think this is the main issue?

Then again, maybe dragons are not all alike... maybe the most powerful dragons like Ancalagon the Black could beat a Balrog easily, while the lesser dragons were much weaker than your average Balrog. And these lesser dragons were the ones killed by Men of later Ages?

[Lief Erikson]

Is Azaghal from the Book of Lost Tales? Cause I've never heard of him either.

It's true that dragons can be killed by conventional weapons, if they strike the right spot, and that is a great weakness to dragons. I don't think Balrogs have any particular weak spot.

I think that the difference between dragon and Balrog power is also depending on what the situation is. A dragon could lay waist to a city, and destroy everything around it. I don't think a single Balrog could do that. They aren't built for massive destruction like the dragons, although they certainly are capable of doing massive damage.

[Nimruzir]

RE: Is Azaghal from the Book of Lost Tales? Cause I've never heard of him either
Azaghal can be found in THE SILMARILLION. The Index will give you proper page numbers.

[Lief Erikson]

Thank-you. I guess its been too long since I read the book.

[Michael Martinez]

...When Glaurung was driven back, it took many spearmen, and it wouldn't have happened if he hadn't been young and cocky. He had weaker scales, and that was what caused it...

It might help to actually refer to the book.

Again after a hundred years Glaurung, the first of the Uruloki, the fire-drakes of the North, issued from Angband's gates by night. He was yet young and scarce half-grown, for long and slow is the life of the dragons, but the Elves fled before him to Ered Wethrin and Dorthonion in dismay; and he defiled the fields of Ard-galen. Then Fingon prince of Hithlum rode against him with archers on horseback, and hemmed him round with a ring of swift riders; and Glaurung could not endure their darts, being not yet come to his full armoury, and he fled back to Angband, and came not forth again for many years....

...Later on, it showed that he had magical eyesight, and was responisible for many evil deeds before he was killed by Turin...

"Magical eyesight". Sorry, that's not in the text, either.

...He was one of the leading creatures in Morgoth's final attack in the breaking of the siege of Angband. It took many Balrogs to kill one elf lord, and certain dragons could melt rings of power....

Yes, Glaurung led the attack, but he wasn't the only creature in the attack. And there is no passage in The Silmarillion which states or implies it took many Balrogs to kill one Elf lord. On the other hand, Legolas does mention in The Lord of the Rings that the Balrogs were the most deadly of all Elf-banes.

The Balrog of Moria destroyed the Dwarven civilization. Even Smaug didn't accomplish as much. And Glaurung needed armies to accomplish the destruction of the Noldorin forces which opposed him.

[Lief Erikson]

All right, I was wrong about the spearmen. But it really doesn't sabatoge my theory at all that it was archers instead. It says in your quote that he was not yet come to his full armory. I said that in my last post. He had not yet the strong scales. He wasn't to his full strength, and it was with youth and cockiness that he issued forth from Angband against Morgoth's instructions. Why else would he go?

Now, when I was talking about magical eyesight, I was thinking of the time when Turin's sister was hypnotized by his gaze. He does in that way have magical eyesight, either that or a the vision that certain snakes have on their victims. When a small animal looks into the eyes of certain types of snakes, they are hypnotized. Perhaps that is what it was.

I will have to find the section about the elf lord. As I said earlier, its been too long since I read the book.

Now let me point out that when the Balrog captured Moria, he started out inside it, and took it with an attack that came from complete surprise. If he had started out outside its walls, he would have most assuredly been turned aside. It's true that this victory did basically destroy the Dwarf civilization, but that's because of the importance of the target.

When Smaug took the Lonely Mountain, he did it from outside, and the warriors had plenty of time to fight back. Even so, they were all destroyed, with barely any survivors escaping the carnage. There were massive halls, caverns and riches inside the Lonely Mountain. Although most of Smaug's treasure was stolen later, the loss of the Lonely Mountain was a crippling blow to the Dwarves. It was one of their best and strongest places.

How else could the small company of dwarves hold off the mighty armies of the elven kingdom and Dale all by themselves?

And now about Glaurung. Glaurung was not a flying dragon, and how could he destroy all of the Noldorin forces by himself? There were hundreds of thousands of trained and experienced warriors there, come from Valinor. Even a fully armored and powerful dragon would think twice before taking on all that by himself.

But on the other hand, when he swept out of Angband the first time, he hadn't seen the enemy hordes yet. That and delusions of grandeur are the only reasons I can see for that move.

[Michael Martinez]

...Why else would he go?

Being outwitted and herded like a wild animal probably had something to do with young Glaurung's retreat.

Now, when I was talking about magical eyesight, I was thinking of the time when Turin's sister was hypnotized by his gaze. He does in that way have magical eyesight, either that or a the vision that certain snakes have on their victims. When a small animal looks into the eyes of certain types of snakes, they are hypnotized. Perhaps that is what it was.

"Magical eyesight" implies that he's got something like x-ray vision. But Nienor wasn't hypnotized by Glaurung's gaze. Turin seems to have been. At least, the story says "straightaway he fell under the binding spell of the lidless eyes of the dragon".

When Nienor looked into Glaurung's eyes, the story goes: "Her will strove with him for a while, but he put forth his power, and having learned who she was he constrained her to gaze into his eyes, and he laid a spell of utter darkness and forgetfulness upon her, so that she could remember nothing that had ever befallen her, nor her own name, nor the name of any other thing....[/quote]

Is that hypnotism? I don't think so. Glaurung was exercising some of Tolkien's "magic", working will against will.

Now let me point out that when the Balrog captured Moria, he started out inside it, and took it with an attack that came from complete surprise. If he had started out outside its walls, he would have most assuredly been turned aside. It's true that this victory did basically destroy the Dwarf civilization, but that's because of the importance of the target.

Who was the more surprised, the Balrog or the Dwarves? However, the Balrog didn't conquer Moria in a day. Appendix A to LOTR says: "Durin was slain by it, and the year after Nain I, his son; and then the glory of Moria passed, and its people were destroyed or fled far away."

After a year the element of surprise isn't going to help anyone very much. It took the Balrog at least a year to destroy the Dwarven civilization.

When Smaug took the Lonely Mountain, he did it from outside, and the warriors had plenty of time to fight back. Even so, they were all destroyed, with barely any survivors escaping the carnage. There were massive halls, caverns and riches inside the Lonely Mountain. Although most of Smaug's treasure was stolen later, the loss of the Lonely Mountain was a crippling blow to the Dwarves. It was one of their best and strongest places.

Smaug attacked a much smaller community of Dwarves than the Balrog took on, and a lot of them still got away. Erebor was hardly a match for Moria in either size or population. But the Dwarves still had other places to retreat to. That Thror and his son didn't go to the Iron Hills or the Grey Mountains doesn't mean the Dwarves were completely destitute.

How else could the small company of dwarves hold off the mighty armies of the elven kingdom and Dale all by themselves?

No small company of Dwarves did any such thing. If you're referring to the standoff in The Hobbit, Bard and the Elvenking were merely reluctant to storm Erebor. Why risk getting men killed when they could just starve the Dwarves out? Or so they thought. They didn't know that Dain was on the way with help and supplies until Bilbo told them. So Erebor's defensability was hardly proven by Thorin and Company.

And now about Glaurung. Glaurung was not a flying dragon, and how could he destroy all of the Noldorin forces by himself? There were hundreds of thousands of trained and experienced warriors there, come from Valinor. Even a fully armored and powerful dragon would think twice before taking on all that by himself.

Glaurung did no such thing. He led armies into battle, and it was the overwhelming strength of his armies which turned the tide against the Noldor.

[Michael Martinez]

I think I know what you're thinking of, with respect to the Elf Lord. Fingon was slain by Gothmog in the Nirnaeth Arnoediad:

But now in the western battle Fingon and Turgon were assailed by a tide of foes thrice greater than all the force that was left to them. Gothmog, Lord of Balrogs, high-captain of Angband, was come; and he drove a dark wedge between the Elvenhosts, surrounding King Fingon, and thrusting Turgon and Hurin aside towards the Fen of Serech. Then he turned upon Fingon. That was a grim meeting. At last Fingon stood alone with his guard dead about him; and he fought with Gothmog, until another Balrog came behind and cast a thong of fire about him. Then Gothmog hewed him with his black axe, and a white flame sprang up from the helm of Fingon and it was cloven. Thus fell the High King of the Noldor; and they beat him into the dust with their maces, and his banner, blue and silver, they trod into the mire of his blood.

That is hardly "many Balrogs", and Fingon was in any case the High King of the Noldor. His father Fingolfin had fought Morgoth and wounded him eight times before he died. Was Morgoth less powerful than a dragon? I don't think so.

[Lief Erikson]

I wasn't talking about Fingon. I was thinking of someone I remember being surrounded by Balrogs and killed.

Whose side are you on anyway? Although you're arguing with everything I say, several of the posts you put above were pretty much saying the Balrogs were less strong. Thanks for keeping our facts clear about what happened in Moria, but you just shot yourself in the foot.

Now the Lonely Mountain was hardly a minor dwelling place. When it held off the armies of the elves and men, they settled in for a seige partially because they knew that it would take a lot of men to defeat their opponents, in this strong place. It's also because of the fact that they could do it much more easily that way. And at the time when there were hundreds of dwarves mining in the Lonely Mountain, at the time Smaug attacked, the place wasn't in disrepair, like it surely must have been by the time the dwarves took it. Sure, they built it up quite a bit, but they couldn't possibly have brought it back to the full state of defense that it probably was at by the time Smaug arrived. I know that the dragon hit them by surprise, and this had something to do with its victory, but surely all of those dwarves in the fully built up place of defense could do better against their enemy than the Thorin and company could have against the elven army. But they still kept the elves and men at bay, and the elves and men didn't attack the place even when they had word of Dain's approach, which shows that it wouldn't be an easy victory.

In your quote about the magical eyesight, you can't be disagreeing with me too much if you acknowledge the fact that this happened to Turin. And when it says 'he constrained her to look into his eyes,' that sounds like hypnotism to me, or at least something very similar to it. And if it isn't, there still is a lot of other proof that he has magical eyesight. It says that he 'put forth his power.' Not just any creature can wipe someone's memory out. You can take the term 'magical eyesight' in more ways than simply X-ray vision. That is not what I was thinking of when I said he did have it.

I know Melkor was stronger than a dragon. One single man can kill a dragon, depending on what the circumstances are. This was proved quite effectively by Bard.

I can't understand what I said about Glaurung that you disagree with. I haven't said anything against the fact that he led the armies that attacked the hosts of the Noldor. I agree with you that being outwitted and herded were some of the factors that led to his retreat, along with the pain of elven arrows.

[Michael Martinez]

Whose side are you on anyway?

I'm not on anyone's side. I saw some comments that needed correction and I offered what corrections I could. It just so happened that one of my own comments required correction.

On the other hand, I'm not saying that Balrogs were less strong than dragons. Dragons and Balrogs are two different kinds of things. Balrogs are Maiar and Dragons are creatures bred in Arda. The scale of difference between the two is immense, and it's heavily in favor of the Balrogs.

And, yes, the Lonely Mountain was a minor realm compared to Khazad-dum. Khazad-dum extended for miles underneath SEVERAL large mountains.

Furthermore, you're making wild assumptions about what the Dwarves were capable of doing when Smaug attacked. You point out he took them by surprise. That's right. He took them by surprise. They weren't exactly looking for a war. And it didn't take Smaug a year to root them out of their kingdom. Erebor was simply not Khazad-dum, not in size, not in population.

In your quote about the magical eyesight, you can't be disagreeing with me too much if you acknowledge the fact that this happened to Turin....

I didn't quote anything about magical eyesight. For lack of a better term, I would say you are overinterpreting. It's not like rays of magic burst from Glaurung's eyes. He exerted his will against Turin and Nienor, and he cast spells upon them. The book doesn't say he cast spells by looking at them.

[Lief Erikson]

With one arrow, Smaug was finished. It only takes one blow, in the right place, and Thorin said that immense wealth was collected in the Lonely Mountain. By dwarvish standards, that's quite a bit. I'm not saying it's as great as Moria. Far from it. Moria was the greatest mithril production place of all Middle Earth, and it took a great amount of effort to conquor. I still say that the Lonely Mountain had to be a pretty defensible spot, and that helps to show that the dragon was proved to be very strong in being able to take it so easily. Although that is already proven, by the fact that he wiped out all Dale, as well as laying waste to the entire country side.

Other then this, as you didn't disagree with any of the other opinions I gave above, it appears that the magical eyesight is the one remaining dispute that is left.

I don't see Glaurung as being an enchanter, one that can cast spells on people without even seeing them. If dragons could do that, why didn't Smaug do it on Bilbo? When they and the person and the dragon lock gazes, the dragon can exert their will upon their minds. As he is a very great and powerful beast, it makes sense that he could do it. I don't think that his being the first dragon makes the power exclusively his.

I never said that rays of magic left his eyes.

[Captain Stern]

I think the reasons that 1 Balrog finnished the Dwarf Civilisation of Moria was because none of the Dwarfs there had weapons that were magical enough to harm him, if they had magic weapons at all that is. Wasn't Moria cleansed by the Balrog before the Noldorian Elves even arrived on Middle Earth? and none in Middle Earth before they came had any magical weapons?
Dragons can indeed be harmed by non-magical weapons but their attacks are themselves magical ( they were created by Morgoth and he failed to make them non magic immune like the maiar and the valar)

I think Dragons were more anti-personel than Balrogs simply because they were much bigger, which means than in a large scale battle a Dragon would be able to kill more than a Balrog but when you put a Dragon against a Balrog I don't see the Dragon winning.

Remember some of the characters in the Silmarilion were increadibly mighty ( Fingolfin stood toe to toe with Morgoth and he was no where near as powerful as Feanor who was 2nd in might only to Morgoth at full power ) even some of the humans came near in might to the mightiest of the Elves e.g Hurin who was the mightiest of all men and Turin his son who killed the Father of all Dragons who was probably equal in might to Gothmog Lord of the Balrogs.


Why did you die Tolkien?!?!

[Michael Martinez]

You're obviously not reading the book, and I'm not saying that to be condescending or provocative. Smaug killed the Dwarven warriors as they emerged from the gates of Erebor. And because Smaug had set fire to the mountain and flamed the river, turning it to steam, he create a huge veil of smoke and fog in which he was able to destroy the army of Dale.

Most of the survivors fled the region. Smaug didn't kill them all by any means (Bard, for example, was a descendant of King Girion of Dale).

And regardless of whether you see Glaurung as an enchanter, Tolkien said he was casting spells. I'm not inclined to pursue that any further because what the author says of his fictional characters is true and any objections to what the author says are, in my opinion, pointless.

[Michael Martinez]

I think the reasons that 1 Balrog finnished the Dwarf Civilisation of Moria was because none of the Dwarfs there had weapons that were magical enough to harm him, if they had magic weapons at all that is. Wasn't Moria cleansed by the Balrog before the Noldorian Elves even arrived on Middle Earth? and none in Middle Earth before they came had any magical weapons?

Whether Balrogs could only be slain by magical weapons is pure speculation, but the Dwarves were capable of making plenty of magical weapons.

And the Balrog of Moria didn't reside there until after the end of the First Age. The Noldor had returned to Middle-earth more than 600 years before that time, and the Dwarves had been living in Khazad-dum for thousands of years (or the equivalent -- I'd rather not get into the calendar systems again).

The Balrog of Moria destroyed the Dwarven civilization more than 5,000 years later.

Dragons can indeed be harmed by non-magical weapons but their attacks are themselves magical ( they were created by Morgoth and he failed to make them non magic immune like the maiar and the valar)

I don't understand where you are getting these ideas from. There is nothing in the books about anyone having immunity to non-magical weapons. Gandalf, when he returns as the White Rider, cannot be harmed by weapons. Aragorn, at the very least, was in possession of a "magic" sword, and Gandalf indicated even Aragorn's weapon couldn't harm him.

But that immunity appears to have been granted by Iluvatar as a special assistance.

[Lief Erikson]

I never objected to anything that Tolkien said. I agree, that would indeed be pointless.

And I never said that the entire population of Dale were destroyed either. I know that many escaped. What you said about the conquest of the Lonely Mountain doesn't disprove anything I said earlier.

I've read The Hobbit several times, as well, although not recently.

The question of whether Glaurung used his eyes to cast the spells or not is obviously very possible to toss back and forth with many different arguments, for and against. But it obviously has something to do with his vision, as otherwise Smaug would have used it on Bilbo.

[Michael Martinez]

I don't think it has anything to do with his vision. I get the impression from the text that his eyes had some sort of mesmerizing effect for anyone who looked into them.

For what it's worth, I generally try to refer to the books before commenting on Tolkien. That's no guarantee I'll find all relevant passages or have the time to cite them. But I don't trust my memory (despite what people say about its being encyclopedic).

[Captain Stern]

Sorry I couldn't be more wrong about the times: Dwarfs came much later than when the Noldor arrived once again on Middle Earth.

I haven't seen in any JRR Tolkien book some where where it says Dwarfs could make magical weapons. Perhaps there have been instances where a Dwarf has used a magic weapon but it was probably a gift of the Elves.

I and other people I have talked to off the Internet get the impression that any Vala or Maia can only be harmed by magic or magic weapons.

Sauron when he battled Gil Galad and Isildur ( rusty on the names ) they used magic weapons.

In the Silmarilion when Morgoth heard that the Noldor were marching against him he wasn't sure whether to be worried or not because "he had no proof of the swords of the Noldor" ( but it turned out he had every reason to be worrried )

No where in the works of Tolkien is there an instance where a Maia or a Vala is harmed by an ordinary weapon, but if you find one by all means tell me.

I worked out that the Dragons attacks were magical because Morgoth created them as very powerful creatures imbued with much of his power and when they were his last ace up his sleeve in the War of Wrath they had to have magical attacks to harm the Vala and the Maia.

About Glaurung. You are right about his mesmorising gaze. That's what it says in The Silmarilion! That doesn't mean all Dragons had this gift, indeed it doesn't look like any of them did. It might be unique to Glaurung. He was the first and most powerful Dragon after all.

[Michael Martinez]

I haven't seen in any JRR Tolkien book some where where it says Dwarfs could make magical weapons. Perhaps there have been instances where a Dwarf has used a magic weapon but it was probably a gift of the Elves.

Nope. The Dwarves made magical weapons and devices, too. The Dragon-helm of Dor-lomin, the sword Narsil, the gates of Moria (both east and west), the secret door of Erebor, etc.

I and other people I have talked to off the Internet get the impression that any Vala or Maia can only be harmed by magic or magic weapons.

I assure you there is no reason to get such an impression as far as anything written by J.R.R. Tolkien goes.

Sauron when he battled Gil Galad and Isildur ( rusty on the names ) they used magic weapons.

Sauron attacked Gil-galad, and there is no indication that Gil-galad actually got a chance to strike a blow with his spear (Aiglos). Elendil came to Gil-galad's aid, using the sword Narsil (made by Telchar of Nogrod in the First Age).

However, Sauron was also beaten by Huan. No magical weapons there. And Sauron was slain in the destruction of Numenor. No magical weapons there. Nor were there any magical weapons involved when Gollum fell into the fire and brought Barad-dur crashing down, killing Sauron for the third and last time.

In the Silmarilion when Morgoth heard that the Noldor were marching against him he wasn't sure whether to be worried or not because "he had no proof of the swords of the Noldor" ( but it turned out he had every reason to be worrried )

He won the war, they lost. However, "he had no proof of the swords of the Noldor" is a poetic turn of phrase. Although it MAY imply the Noldorin weapons were magical, the passage speaks more of the warriors who carried those swords.

No where in the works of Tolkien is there an instance where a Maia or a Vala is harmed by an ordinary weapon, but if you find one by all means tell me.

Well, there is the black dagger that Beren uses to cut the Silmaril from the iron crown. Nothing in the text says it was magical, and yet it was able to cut the iron, sending a fragment to knick Morgoth on the cheek. Was the iron crown magical? The book doesn't say so.

I worked out that the Dragons attacks were magical because Morgoth created them as very powerful creatures imbued with much of his power and when they were his last ace up his sleeve in the War of Wrath they had to have magical attacks to harm the Vala and the Maia.

Well, the flaw in that logic is that you have assumed only magic can hurt the Valar and Maiar. Tolkien in fact wrote that they could be hurt in their incarnate forms, even killed, just like Men and Elves. He didn't make any distinctions about magical weapons.

About Glaurung. You are right about his mesmorising gaze. That's what it says in The Silmarilion! That doesn't mean all Dragons had this gift, indeed it doesn't look like any of them did. It might be unique to Glaurung. He was the first and most powerful Dragon after all.

He was the first, but Ancalagon the Black seems to have been the most powerful. We don't really know if Smaug had a similar ability, however, because Bilbo refused to look directly in his eyes.

There IS a hint, however, that Smaug had some sort of active magical vision. It may be that this is where people are getting the idea that dragons (or Glaurung) had such vision.

[Lief Erikson]

Now I must tell you my main reasons for my belief in dragon's magical eyesight. Now if you say that only Glaurung had the power to cast spells and such, then this proof is useless. But if you think all dragons can do what Glaurung did, then I can't see how you will refute it.

Glaurung constrained Nienor to gaze into his eyes. He must have had a reason for that, why else would he want to do it? Just to terrify her? I think that he did that so that he could cast the spell upon her. Turin was frozen by his gaze, and not until the Dragon had broken their eyesight connection did he snap out of it. Glaurung wouldn't maintain the steady gaze unless he had a good reason for it, as there were probably many other more useful things he could do at the moment then stare at Turin.

Now for the capstone of my theory. If the eyesight wasn't important, then Smaug surely would have cast a spell on Bilbo. Bilbo was invisible, and if it weren't for this, Smaug would have used his spells to defeat him. But as it was, he couldn't.

Even if the magic isn't in the eyes, obviously it is channeled through them.

[Michael Martinez]

Relating material in The Hobbit to The Silmarillion is very difficult, but I think in this case Smaug's "power" or "ray vision" or whatever you want to call it is probably indicative of a standard dragon trait Tolkien had devised.

I had not checked The Hobbit before my last post. I was only consulting The Silmarillion.

I will concede that probably WAS some sort of active vision power the dragons possessed.

Call it magical eyesight if that makes it work for you. :)

[Lief Erikson]

Good. Magical eyesight perhaps was a bad choice of words, but it was generally what I meant. Their magic isn't only in their eyes, but the vision of the dragons certainly has something to do with it, and I'm glad that we agree on that point.

In our discussion, your opinions have made me adjust a few of mine, and have certainly given me a great deal of knowledge I hadn't considered before about the Silmarillion. But now, unless you want to look back at my previous posts and find other things wrong with them, I believe that our rather drawn out argument is over.

[Michael Martinez]

I don't go looking for things to "correct". If something leaps out at me I may say something. Otherwise, I just leave it as is.

So, I think my part in this thread is done.

[Lief Erikson]

That makes two of us. I'm gone as well.

[Captain Stern]

A lot of you'r are just speculation as well.

You said that Huan was able to defeat Sauron yet he had no magic weapon but you oversaw the fact that Huan himself was a Maia ( a magical creature ) so he was in effect a magical weapon.

How do you know Morgoths crown wasn't magical? Exactly you don't know for sure.

[Tar Elenion]

Can you provide a citation in which JRRT says that Huan is a Maia?

[Inoldonil]

Captain, Huan was not a Maia. He was the Hound of the Valar (Orome I think to be exact), but what was not a Maia in any way. I think the passage says pretty well Huan didn't use any magic. He was just a very couragous, (physically) powerfull, mighty Hound ordained to battle against the greatest Wolf of Middle-earth. He was too much for Sauron, and all his forms he took and changed were for naught.

[Michael Martinez]

The Silmarillion says that Huan was just a hound given to Celebrimbor by Orome (I wouldn't go so far as to call him "the Hound of the Valar").

In Morgoth's Ring there is an essay where Tolkien briefly speculates that Huan might have been a Maia.

[Captain Stern]

But Huan was as intelligent as all the Maia's. He could speak! Ok he was only allowed to speak 3 times in his life but he was still able to speak and it wasn't mindless sentences like scooby doo but well thought out conversations.

[Inoldonil]

I didn't know about that essay in Morgoth's Ring (never read it), but it's important to remember most of the Kelvar express superior intelligence to those of our reality. Huan did not show anymore intelligence than did the Eagles, the Fox in The Shire that observes the sleeping hobbits, the animals in the Old Forest that Tom Bombadill told the Fellowship about, Wargs and Werewolves, bears, ravens, thrushes, crows and other birds and beasts.

[easterlinge]

While we're on the topic of whether or not dragons can wield magic... seems that Balrogs too can use magic. Gandalf tried to lock the door in Moria using a spell to keep the Orcs from pursuing the Company. The Balrog's counter-magic shattered the door. Fortunately it also brought down the roof, blocking the passage and burying the Chamber of Mazar-bul, or the company would have been caught.

I'm inclined to say that Balrogs are indeed more powerful (and evidently sometimes don't know their own strength). But the question remains: why did Morgoth bother breeding dragons when this would dilute his powers even more?

Something to do with numbers perhaps? Maybe there were only a limited number of Maiar who followed the Valar down to Arda, and thus even fewer who were corrrupted into Balrogs? So Morgoth decided to breed a "main battle tank" that he could produce in great numbers.

Maybe. Does Tolkien elaborate on the powers of Ancalagon the Black? Sil only mentions him appearing at the very end of the War of Wrath, and LOTR briefly mentions him as the most powerful ever, and possibly able to destroy the One Ring were he still around.

As for the size of Khazad-dum, I recall that it was some time before the Dwarves finally abandoned their greatest city. It must have been spooky living with a Balrog, kind of like when the Grendel stole warriors and ate them in "Beowulf". But Moria must have been huge for the Dwarves to be able to stay there awhile after the Balrog showed up. If it had turned up in Erebor, the Dwarves would flee immediately.

[Michael Martinez]

I only know of two references to Ancalagon, and neither speaks of his powers, except for Gandalf's comment concerning melting Rings of Power.

[Inoldonil]

I think he's reffering to the Silmarillion's refference to him as the greatest Dragon that ever was--which can be interpreted as 'most powerful', i.e., greater powers, but I don't know.

[easterlinge]

I meant how powerful/strong he was. He was pretty darn BIG, that's for sure. When Earendil killed him, Ancalagon crashed on the twin peaks of Thangorodrim. The peaks were destroyed by the impact. Considering Thangorodrim was still intact during the Valar-Maiar's holy onslaught, Ancalagon must have been massive. Unless he exploded on impact.

Hmmm... seems my judgment is now leaning in favour of dragons. On the other hand, Ancalagon may have been exceptional, one of very few dragons that could match a Balrog.

[Captain Stern]

Aigh I think you are right easterlinge.

[Lief Erikson]

Michael, the person I was talking about was Feanor, when I mentioned the fight between one person and several Balrogs. I couldn't remember his name earlier, but well, there it is.

I think that's the last string of the previous conversation which was left at a loose end.

[easterlinge]

Hmmm.... all I've got to go on is "Silmarillion". It gave a very brief account of the War of Wrath, and I got the impression it was over in a flash, with the the Valar blitzing all the way to Angband, perhaps in one week or even less. Not very satisfying. Does Tolkien elaborate on the War of Wrath?

[easygreen]

A footnote in the appendices of LotR hints that the Balrog in Moria was awakened by the "malice of Sauron."

About Smaug. Gandalf postulates that Sauron would've used the dragon to devastate the North (Rivendel etc). in the War of the Ring, had it survived.

It seems to me that Sauron had the power and the authority to command both of these "evils of the ancient world" (to use Legolas's phrase).

[easygreen]

Michael Martinez writes:

"Balrogs are Maiar and Dragons are creatures bred in Arda. The scale of difference between the two is immense, and it's heavily in favor of the Balrogs."

That would be true except for one thing. Morgoth's power has gone into dragons. They aren't just creatues of Arda, they have been lent the immense power of the mightiest of all the Ainur.

About Glaurung Turin says: "His power is rather in the evil spirit that dwells within him than in the might of his body, great though that be." (UT 135). Not just a creature of flesh and blood, then, but a creature of great physical strength in which the evil of Morgoth is housed as a living flame.

In the War of Wrath, its the onset of dragons that almost turns the tide against the host of the Valar after the Balrogs have already been virtually destroyed.

I'm far from convinced that "the scale of difference between the two...[is] heavily in favor of the Balrogs."

[Captain Stern]

But there were far more Dragons than Balrogs. Later on there were only 7 Balrogs and these were the mightiest of all the Maiar save Sauron.

[Inoldonil]

Not just a creature of flesh and blood, then, but a creature of great physical strength in which the evil of Morgoth is housed as a living flame.

Glaurung was only alive and independent of Morgoth because of the latter's will and power. The evil spirit that dwells within him was this will and power.

That would be true except for one thing. Morgoth's power has gone into dragons. They aren't just creatues of Arda, they have been lent the immense power of the mightiest of all the Ainur.

Morgoth's power went into them in order for them to really be, as a result they have a particular 'magic' of their own. But the Valaroukar were already naturally a part of that Unseen Realm, they themselves as Morgoth were there before Time began, incarnation for them in the beginning atleast were as clothes, and truly they were spirits, unlike the Dragons whose bodies were the houses of the will of the greatest of those spirits, that which allowed the houses to continue. The bodily form of the Balrogs like the rest of their Race was a testimony to their personality, the shape of the Dragons came about through Morgoth. By your reasons the Dragons become greater than Sauron.

In the War of Wrath, its the onset of dragons that almost turns the tide against the host of the Valar after the Balrogs have already been virtually destroyed.

It is not really a good idea to use such examples because those Balrogs belong to the older mythology. Tolkien's final word about it was that there were actually only seven Balrogs altogether, which never touched the narratives. The Balrogs you hear about in the Quenta Silmarillion are echoes of those of The Book of Lost Tales. Christopher Tolkien just used the old texts when there was nothing else, and cut out all the stuff he could that was at variance with the new conception of Balrogs, without radically altering what his father wrote or completely eliminating it. So in the texts Christopher Tolkien had to use you get thousands of man-sized Balrogs as cavalry riding into battle, while Tolkien's intention was to have seven great mighty Balrogs, four of which by the time of the War of Wrath had been destroyed, one of which was to survive into the Third Age.

The result is that details about the natures of Balrogs are pretty much vacant, but there are Balrogs, and lots seem to be there and lots seem to get destroyed.

I just read Captain Stern's post. Looks like he covered this in shorter form, but no less precisely.

I think Dragons are closer to Eagles than Balrogs.