Dragons vs. Balrogs?
 

Which are actually the mightiest? For instance, if Gothmog would have challenged Glaurung in a duel back in the old days, who would have won? I can't remember I've read anywhere which are the most powerful. My call would be for the dragons though, since they seem to have a bit more intellectual skills than the balrogs. And why not, Glaurung could just fly up in the air and breath fire at Gothmog, but seriously, would that do any damage since balrogs are practically made of flames? If giving this a thought, you would maybe vote for Gothmog since he wouldn't have so hard hurting Glaurung, just a little slash with the wip and the sword, and he's out of the game? Glaurung would probably, if the flames don't work, have to attack with claws or bite Gothmog or something, and that probably wouldn't have been too successful since he would probably have burned himself (if dragons dont have some sort of natural resistance to fire too, even though they're scales alone are very protective). But, Glaurung is also a powerful spellcaster, for example he made Morwen forget all about her life with Húrin and the rest of her family and former life. So what do you think? Gothmog or Glaurung?

Well, Glaurung could not fly, but some dragons could.

There is one point when Voronwe and Tuor are passing the Spring of Ivrin where Voronwe says that Glaurung was the "most fell" of the servants of Morgoth. Glaurung is the most prominant of the Morgothers in the Wars of Beleriand, after Sauron went into hiding.
The attack of Ancalagon the Black and the other winged dragons drove back the forces of the Valar, but that may have been due to the shock of seeing flying dragons.
On the whole the dragons seem to be more feared by the Elves, or at least more prominant in the stories.
However, Balrogs seem to have been something of the guard of Angband, so they would not be free to rampage about and reek havoc across the lands like the dragons were.

I guess at the moment I'll cast my vote for dragons, but I reserve the right to change it at a moments notice. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

Dragons all the way! [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] Of course I am a bit biased, but here's why I think they are more dangerous.

Dragons are not contained creatures like Balrogs are. I see the point about a dragon breathing fire would do no damage to something practically made out of fire! Even though they don't appear in Tolkien's works, dragons don't only breathe fire. Ice, acid, and even electricity and more are options, well, depending on the species (and age, anywhere from wrymling to wrym.) of dragon. Dragons also have other weapons, teeth, claws, and some have completly different habits all together. Dragons are intelligent creatures and can be powerful spell casters. This comes from a dragon expert. I'd love to hear an argument from the opposite side though, supporting the Balrogs. (Whom I certainly don't believe to be harmless butterflies, but terribly dangerous creatures in their own right.)

For now, I say dragons. So my vote is for Glaurung, the wrym. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

Because the Balrogs are Maia's, I believe that they would be the strongest.

It's possible that the spirits of dragons were Ainur as well.

In the Lord of the Rings it is said that besides Sauron, Balrogs were the greatest of Morgoth's servants. I'm sorry I can't provide the exact quote for you.

Darn, can't think of any quotes for the dragons now, but, um...I'll find something! Eventually...

Lets consider the facts:
1. All those that kill a Balrog are themselves killed in the process.
2. Every person who killed a Dragon survived.
3. Look at the types of people it took to kill a Balrog. Ecthellion, Glorfindel, and Gandalf. Two of the greatest and most powerful elves ever to exist and Gandalf, enough said.
4. Bard was able to kill Smaug, no offense to Bard but he's no Gandalf.
5. The Balrogs have quite an impressive resume of slain elf lords; Feanor, Fingon, Glorfindel, and Ecthellion. They took Maedhros and Hurin (the greatest mortal warrior ever) hostage. Dragon's haven't even killed any lords of men, let alone someone like Gandalf.
6. Just because Balrogs don't speek doesn't mean they are not smart. A few Balrogs knew to get out of Beleriand during the War of Wrath, the dragons just flew out to be destroyed by the Valar. The Balrogs definatly have wills of their own, where as the Dragons probably were wholly under the power of Melkor, at least at first.

The Dragons might be more physically impressive, capable of doing considerable damage to an army for example, but in Tolkien's works it is spiritual or magical power that is of more significance. Gandalf and Denethor never clash physically; fireballs don't shoot from their eyes, their wills clash like unseen swords. It is this unseen power that is the real measure of how strong one is in Middle Earth. The Nazgul have this dark spiritual aura that is matched by the white light that comes from Glorfindel and Gandalf. In all of the major confrontations in the Lord of the Rings (Gandalf and the Balrog, Glorfindel and the Nazgul, Gandalf and the Witch King, and even Sam and Shelob) the real battle is fought in the spiritual or if you prefer magical realm. Sam doesn't defeat Shelob with his physical strength, his spirit is given a boost by the Phial of Galadriel. It is not clear whether or not Dragons are inhabited by Maiar or are beasts with the power of Melkor infused into them. Even if Dragons are Maiar they are still only inhabited by Maiar, the Balrogs are in a more "pure" form. In Tolkien's works, as a creature becomes more bound to a body it becomes less powerful. The Balrogs are pure spirits of shadow and fire; their aura of power is not masked by any bodily form, it emanates from the center of the shadow that they weave about themselves. On the other hand the Dragons are not described as having an evil or dark aura surrounding them, they are merely terrible to behold. One on one I doubt that even Ancalgon the Black would be a match for a Balrog.

[ February 26, 2002: Message edited by: Thingol ]

Once again, Thingol, you and I shall meet on the battlefield of perpetual Balrog dispute. Here's the new issue:

Are you intending to imply that Balrogs are just fear, "unhoused"? Or even just "clothed" fear? If this was the case, Balrogs would never have been killed. Rather, they would have simply been bereft of their raiment until they could fashion another one. This re-embodiment would help answer some questions (specifically the much disputed AAm note), but it is also a quite widely rejected notion. No, Balrogs were slain, and it is never suggested that they were re-embodied. This means they must have been not merely clothed, but permanently incarnate.

Well, after seeing all the quotes and wise words ;-), I must agree that balrogs seems to be a harder opponent. And by the way, sorry that I wrote that Glaurung had wings, since Morgoth first released winged dragons just before he was captured. Quite hard to imagine a dragon without wings, isn't it? Anyway, balrogs seem to have won the "duel" ;-). And as someone said, the people who have killed balrogs are much more powerful than those who have killed dragons (maybe except for Túrin, he was quite powerful, but that was Glaurung), for example if you would compare Glorfindel and Bard. How powerful wouldn't then Ecthelion be, since he slayed Gothmog after already having battled a long time? Then on the other hand, Húrin slayed 70 trolls when he covered the retreat of Turgon...I'm gonna quit now, this is a different subject :-). But just a last note: Gothmog would probably have slayed 70 trolls without any problems, no matter if they were Olog-hai or "normal" trolls, but the Olog-hai didn't exist at that time, so...

Just adding my input - Balrogs all the way, won't bore you again with all the reasons, they've been posted.

But what a fight! Tolkien missed that potential! (though what they'd fight over, who knows? The best dark hole to hide in, probably!)

Airetauriel

I'd like to point out that Hurin's heroic slaughter of trolls is actually somewhat questionable. This bit conflicts with all the available texts we have describing the last stand of the Nirnaeth, and the text from which it was lifted remains unfortunately unpublished. I don't mean to say we can't take Christopher at his word that this piece exists, just that the original is not available for examination. There's a little more detail about this in Underhill's phenomenal article on the Olog-Hai of the First Age, found here.

I'm also personally of the opinion that, like "true" mythology, there is no reason that these tales cannot exist simultaneously in several forms -- some exaggerated, some more realistic -- told by various loremasters and storytellers. I certainly believe the mighty Hurin was capable of such a noble massacre!

Well, since nobody else is taking up for the poor dragons I guess the task falls to me.

This would be a true statement, except for one little thing. We do not have the deaths of all the Balrogs and Dragons described to us. For death's of Balrogs we have Gothmog, the one that Glorfindel killed, and Durin's Bane. We don't know the exact circumstances of the death's of the other four (or however many, I personally think that seven Balrogs is a bit low, but that's another thread.) For Dragons we have Glaurung, Smaug, and Ancalagon the Black. The Balrogs that we know of were killed when they were fighting against one opponent and concentrating on that one opponent. The Dragons in the list were killed when they were leaping over gorges, or town baiting, and in the War of Wrath. Earendil was no mere mortal man and he had a Silmaril which was no doubt of great aid to him. The other two dragons were killed when they were not fighting a single opponent (or not fighting at all) and distracted. (Not that I'm finding fault with Turin and Bard, the best way to kill an enemy is when they are not expecting it, especially when that enemy is a dragon.)

I refer you to my answer of point 1. We don't know for sure.

Yes, but do we know if any of the above ever faced and fought a dragon? I would hardly say that Turin was a slouch at the fighting either, even if he was a puny man.

Ah, yes the seeming weak spot. However, as I stated above, Bard shot Smaug when he was "town-baiting" not when he was fighting Smaug face to face. Gandalf as far as we know never even saw Smaug, we don't know what would have happened if he had.

Ever notice how when Balrogs (notice the plural) kill an Elf-lord and so forth, they rarely did it by themselves. It took the whole pack of them to off Feanor, Fingon was holding his own until another Balrog snuck up behind him and cast a thong of fire about him, Maedhros was ambushed and outnumbered, and Hurin was exhausted from fighing all day and night, and Gothmog was not the one to take Hurin but Hurin was buried underneath orc arms until he could not move. That (as far as we know) Dragons have not killed someone like Gandalf is true and I can't find anything to say to it except...
I always thought that some Maiar spirits in incarnate form were in the army of Valinor (I might be wrong about that) and they seem to have given way to the Dragons and some of them may have been "killed."

I agree entirely with the part about Balrogs speaking. However, some Dragons were also smart enough to get out of Beleriand, or there would have been no Smaug. Ancalagon's group did not fly out to be destroyed by the Valar, they drove the host of the Valar back, they were (or some of them were) destroyed by Earendil and the Great Eagles. While we're on that we don't know that some of the Great Eagles (who apparently had Maiar spirits) were not also killed in this battle. Dragon's most certainly had a will of their own. Remember that Glaurung disobeyed Morgoth by appearing too early (and almost breaking the Seige of Angband). Glaurung is also spoken of gratifing his own malice in his tormenting of Turin, not just the malice of his master. We never hear one word (except for the escape at the end, which seems to have been something of a general rout) of Balrogs doing anything disobedient or particularly independent.

*Whew!* I think I'll stop now!

P.S. Not that I am totally convinced that Dragons were more powerful than Balrogs, but I did not want Dragons to go down without somebody trying to defend them. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[ February 27, 2002: Message edited by: Kuruharan ]
Drat my inability to spell, I must learn to proofread my posts!

[ February 27, 2002: Message edited by: Kuruharan ]

[ February 27, 2002: Message edited by: Kuruharan ]

You read too much into my posts obloquy, [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] I wasn't trying to suggest that the Balrogs are pure Fear, but that they contructed their own forms. The Balrogs seem to have less substance to them and are definatly less attached to their body's and more connected with the spiritual world than the Dragons are. There are two plains of existance in Middle Earth, the physical and the spiritual or magical. The way I see it is that on the physical plain Dragons have no rival in plain destructive power. However, in the spiritual realm Balrogs take the cake. As I pointed out earlier it seems to me that Tolkien considered the power one posses in the spiritual realm as more indicative of the overall power of the individual. On a side note it seems that as one gets closer to death, ones connection with the spiritual realm becomes stronger, hence Glorfindel and Ecthillion were able to slay Balrogs. Tolkien regarded those deeds as one of the greatest, if not the greatest deeds of all the children of Illuvitar.

[ February 27, 2002: Message edited by: Thingol ]

Okay, I was going to put my vote in for the Dragons, but Thingol there made it a little hard for me to do so with his/her statement on Balrogs.... darn... ohwell, I still love Dragons anyway! [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

I'm a he, so it would be his [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] We do know who killed the other Balrogs [ February 27, 2002: Message edited by: Thingol ]

And I was forgetting the way that Glaurung blasted his way through the hosts of Nargothrond. True, Orodreth was no Finrod, Fingon, or Feanor, but he was still a son of Finarfin and a mighty elf-lord. No Balrog is described as personally blowing his way through a host.

However, on the whole I think that your theory on physical v. spiritual power may have something to it.

However, all of this has done little to answer the question of who would win a fight between a Dragon and a Balrog.

Hmm...Balrogs may be pure fear, but dragons are still mightier. Though, perhaps Tolkien prefered Balrogs and wanted them to be more powerful than dragons. But I have numerous sources stating that dragons are the most powerful and dangerous of beasts. I'll list them on my next post, I don't have access to them now.

Well Balrogs are not pure Fëa, they created their own body (Hroa) I guess my post was confusing. [img]smilies/redface.gif[/img]

lol, I just noticed that obloquy. I love debating Balrogs with you but I think we agree on most points. We just midunderstand eachother's posts sometimes (this post being an example). Plus, it seems that we both like to argue. [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img]

Whew, I got tired just reading this [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] Personally I would lean more towards Balrogs in a fight. Dragons are tough and all, but die too easily.

How on earth can a dragon die easily? If anything dies easily, it's a human! [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img]

Thingol said
---------------------------------------------
Lets consider the facts:
1. All those that kill a Balrog are themselves killed in the process.
2. Every person who killed a Dragon survived.
3. Look at the types of people it took to kill a Balrog. Ecthellion, Glorfindel, and Gandalf. Two of the greatest and most powerful elves ever to exist and Gandalf, enough said.
4. Bard was able to kill Smaug, no offense to Bard but he's no Gandalf.
5. The Balrogs have quite an impressive resume of slain elf lords; Feanor, Fingon, Glorfindel, and Ecthellion. They took Maedhros and Hurin (the greatest mortal warrior ever) hostage. Dragon's haven't even killed any lords of men, let alone someone like Gandalf.
---------------------------------------------

This is what I meant. Compared to Balrogs, Dragons go down without much difficulty. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[ March 03, 2002: Message edited by: Gorin Icearms ]

I'd have to vote for the Balrog. After all, dragons are basically lizards, whose fire comes from within. Balrogs are demons made of fire, something conceived in the bowels of hell. If you make a dragon pink and give it puppy eyes and eyelashes, it automatic becomes tame. It becomes more like a Barney dragon. Make a Balrog pink...HA! I dare you to even try.

...and when Glaurung sallied forth at the Dagor Bragollach, the Balrogs were in his train as if they were escorting him. Seems like if they were escorting Glaurung, the dragon might have been the more powerful and important figure rather than the other way around.


(Yes, I know that I don't know when to quit! [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img] )

Look's like we are going to have a battle of the dueling Elves, but Voronwe (who would probably know better than Legolas) said,

Technically the Balrogs are not creatures of the enemy. The Balrogs were not made by Melkor, on the other hand Melkor infused the dragons with his own power. Its still not definate that Maiar inhabited dragons at all, so concievably Voronwe's statement can be reconciled with a little bit of word twisting. Legolas' statement is a little more definate.

Exactly, you're twisting the words around to try and make them conform to your point of view rather than taking them at face value. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

Creatures does not necessarily mean that he created them. Remember that Melkor created nothing himself, he warped things that others made and 'twisted' them to his own purposes. He took Elves, beasts, or whichever you prefer to make orcs. He took the spirits of Maia and changed them into terrible demons of fire or monsters in the forms of spiders (ugh!) or dragons. So he actually did not create anything.

He also infused Balrogs with his power as well.

If somebody who was not in the midst of this discussion read that passage, they would probably include Balrogs in the list of Morgoth's creatures.

[ March 03, 2002: Message edited by: Kuruharan ]

Okay, let's take a Balrog - say the one that Gandalf fought, and a dragon - day Smaug. List their fighting/power qualities.

In this corner we have Balrog, a big dark shadowy demon (maiar) which is made of fire, with huge wings, a sword of fire, and a whip. The balrog has horns, a toothy maw, two arms to wield sword and whip, and two legs on which to walk. It doesn't speak, but it not stupid. Fear goes before it.

In the other corner we have Smaug, a huge wyrm whose leathery skin is encrusted in gems (except for one spot), armed with breath of fire, not to mention sharp teeth, has a tail he can probably use to lethal effect, walks on four limbs, and has wings big enough to carry his body high and fast. And he can speak. He is clever and wise, and admittedly vain. Fear goes before him as well.

Okay. First off, the Fear that goes before them both is probably neutralized by the fact that both are tough beings; and if Fear does affect them, it's moot to say whose will do worse to the other.

Since the Balrog does not speak it will not attempt to take advantage of Smaug's vanity. Since Smaug is incredibly smart he knows the Balrog does not speak and wouldn't listen anyway, so he doesn't waste words on them.

They both see each other's wings, so they know they can both fly. So they're not going to avoid each other's weapons that way.

Smaug's fire breath can reach his enemy from a distance, whereas the Balrog's greatest weapon from a distance is its whip. Problem (as pointed out already): Smaug's won't do much against a fire-demon, so he must resort to teeth, limbs and tail.

The Balrog's whip will get to Smaug before Smaug can close in on the Balrog, so Balrog either tries to cut Smaug with the whip-tip (which it must know won't do much good) or tries to wrap Smaug up. Balrog being no dummy, it tries to wrap Smaug up.

Smaug gets wrapped around the maw (it being closest) before he can close in on Balrog. Teeth or immobilized. All four sets of claws come to bear. Balrog's whip being occupied, its fire-sword comes down.

Hmmm - here's an interesting question: can a Balrog fire-sword cut through dragon-hide? through gems? If Balrog's sword is a physical entity, my guess is that gems melt, but after repeated hits. Then dragon hide, being not as tough as gems, gets cut pretty quickly. If Balrog's fire-sword is a spiritual entity, discussion over. Smaug is wounded with each hit.

But if Balrog's fire-sword is only physical, Smaug has time. Can Smaug's claws scratch a Balrog raw enough to kill it? If an elf-lord could slay it without a magical sword, yes. (unless all elf-swords are by definition magical but then maybe dragon claws may be just as magical).

Then it may be that both Balrog and Smaug naturally use their wings and they plummet to earth and they both wham against bedrock and break whatever crust they crash against and both wind up dead.

There you have it, a draw.

But seriously (if this can be considered serious at all), it all does depend on how spiritual we consider Balrogs to be and dragons NOT to be. Maybe dragons are more spiritual than we're giving them credit for being....

Enough already. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

Just to stoke the already raging fires here...

I'm not convinced that what Tolkien said about the Balrog not speaking in that particular instance at the Bridge meant that Balrogs could not speak at all. (Although I'm open to suggestions about it.)

The wings business is seemingly permanently up for debate.

You overlooked the Dragon's spell from their eyes, and the size of a Dragon's tail. It would probably have greater reach than a Balrog's whip, but obviously be rather unwieldy.

It never says anywhere that Melkor let any of his power pass into the Balrogs. Everyone is still describing a fight between a Balrog and a Dragon in physical terms. If the Dragon clawed the Balrog, or if the Balrog could penetrate the Dragon's hide. In the scene where Gandalf fights the Balrog the only physical contact is their swords clashing once. They don't shoot fireballs or lightning bolts at each other. The real battle is on a plain that we can't see. This is where the real battle takes place. Obloquy pointed out to me in a different post that general combat that occurs during a battle is different than a duel between 2 great beings of power. Considering that Tolkien is one of the most descriptive author's of all time it is important to note that his description of the major duels (notice duels, like Glorfindel and the Nazgul, Gandalf and the Balrog, Gandalf and the Nazgul, Sam and Shelob, not battles like Pellanor Fields or the Hornburg) is lacking in physical description. This is not because Tolkien was not capable of it, it was a conscience choice. Notice when Sam fights Shelob, Tolkien only gives 3 lines to Sam's actual physical sword attack on Shelob. On the other hand he gives whole paragraphs to the light of the Phial of Galadriel. The spirit of Sam (enhanced by the phial and his closeness to death) sets the Phial's potency in motion and it blazes forth. It is the light of the phial that defeats Shelob, not Sam's strength. The same principles must be applied to a fight between a Balrog and a Dragon. Tolkien would not have spent time describing the physical fight between two such powerful creatures. He would have described the reflection on the physical world of the spiritual or magical battle that is taking place. Like the duel between Gandalf and the Balrog. Gandalf is a white light surrounded by a dark cloud. As I have mentioned before, the dragon is a being of pure physical power, made that way by Morgoth as to do the most damage to armies and such. The Balrogs are more akin to Sauron, beings of extreme spiritual potency. Tolkien clearly put more emphasis on the importance of spiritual power, that is why I believe the Balrog would win in a duel.

[ March 03, 2002: Message edited by: Thingol ]

Note the "in the land" part. Tolkien, though he may have admired dragons, prefered Balrogs. When it comes to this matter, you can't just consider LOTR, it may be a biased book (no offense meant at all!!). Granted, all books are biased, but use other references to figure this out! Dragons still rock. And if they breathe ice, couldn't they just freeze the balrog, then send it crashing off a cliff so that it shatters into a million pieces and is dead?

Ok, so I know this isn't supportive of my side but, did Gandalf kill the Balrog he took on or not? Or did he just follow it up the stairs?

[ March 03, 2002: Message edited by: avarerniliel ]

Yikes! Pretty serious debate here! I was trying to lighten things up. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] Not to mention everything I'd read up to my first post on this thread was pretty theoretical. Sorry if I offended. [img]smilies/eek.gif[/img]

Oops! Okay:

Smaug hits Balrog with Eye of Terror from all the way across the - ahem - PHYSICAL - battle field. Balrog being much mightier - SPIRITUALLY - is not dissuaded. No, the opposite. It comes forth in its cloud of night and flying toward Smaug, flings its looooooooonnnnnng whip, closing Smaug's snout shut.

Ya know, it's looking more and more like the Balrog's the tougher dude.... at least in Tolkien's scheme.

I'm writing my own unpublishable tome in which dragons are spirits in wyrm shape, and are much tougher than Tolkien's dragons. More akin to Chinese, I suppose.

Don't let the fun get snuffed by theoretical fumes! [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

*sigh* Even though I think it's getting to the point where we are talking around in circles and not getting anywhere I'll give it one more go.

Thingol:
This is an obvious statement looking back over the course of the discussion, but I'm going to make it anyway. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] I think that you are putting a bit too much emphasis on the spiritual over the physical.

Now before I continue, let me clarify so to make sure that I am not misunderstood. I don't mean to say that the spiritual is not important. In fact I agree that the spiritual is more important than the physical. However, I think you are overstating the importance of the spiritual. Let us take for instance the battle between Sam and Shelob. Yes, Tolkien spent much more time discussing the internal battle inside Sam than on the actual events. However, this is because what physically happened does not take much to describe. The internal struggle is much more complex and dramatic, and it requires much more description. Sam physically wounded Shelob's eyes. And it was not Sam who really wounded Shelob in the gut, all he did was hold the sword over her head. Shelob's brute physical strength trying to crush Sam drove the blade in. Then the light from the phial caused her intense physical pain. In a small aside, I can almost feel sympathy for Shelob in that condition because I have had a bright light shined in my eye after it's been damaged, the pain that causes is intense beyond words! But anyway, yes the spiritual is immensely important. In the case of Sam and Shelob, Sam's spirit caused the phial to burn brightly, which ultimately drove Shelob off. However, the point is that the enemy must still be physically defeated. Shelob would not have fled if Sam had not so severely damaged her person.

Back to Dragons and Balrogs, I still find it hard to believe that a Balrog would be able to spiritually cow a Dragon sufficiently to impair their fighting skills enough to have such a decided advantage. I still remain unconvinced that the spirit and terror of a Balrog was that much greater than a Dragon. The Balrogs do have an impressive record of victories, but as I said before, they normally did it in a group. Dragons would blast through entire armies by themselves. As you say, Balrogs were probably not designed for army busting, and Dragons probably were. However, if you set the two of them against each other (one on one), I just don't see the Balrog having an overwhealming advantage. The Balrog may (and I'm not necessarily conceding the point) have had a greater spirit of terror, but I think that even in this case the Dragon would have had sufficient spiritual strength to compensate, and that it had greater physical force to make up the difference.

What we probably have here is a push. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

littlemanpoet:
Just funnin' ya! [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] I should have put some smile thingies in my post to make that clear. Anytime I'm talking about Balrog wings I'm usually only kidding. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

I toook no umbrage, bro! [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

I theeeenk you have a lot of good points there, Kurubuddy. Jus' one theeng. Eet occurs to meee zat 'ol Smaug and maybe other dragons are not only vain but cowards, too. They would never fight an opponent unless they were (however arrogantly & wrongly) convinced that they could win without any trouble. I intend to read up on Glaurung to see how he fits this characterization, but both Smaug and Chrysophylax (from Farmer Giles) were BOTH vain AND cowardly. All this to say that if a Tolkienian dragon ever saw a Balrog coming near with intent to warring, it would scoot the other way fast as its wingies could tek it. A Balrog, by comparison, does not have this cowardly streak. 'Course, mebbe it knows it's just the hottest thing this side of Udun. Eh? [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[ March 04, 2002: Message edited by: littlemanpoet ]

Of course Balrogs could vocalize. Maiar were not beasts.

Good quote, Kuruharan, but I don't think Balrogs should be classified as "creatures of the Enemy." They're not his creatures, they're spirits of the same order as Morgoth. Granted, they're his servants, but there's a distinct difference between the farmworker and the pig. Still, I would hesitate to group Dragons in with the likes of Orcs and Trolls.

Grey Annals §116

The Balrogs allied themselves with him of their own free will, being nearly coeval with Morgoth himself. However, Dragons, as suggested by the above quote, were somehow bred by the Enemy.

The impression we get of Dragons is that they are more like beasts than anything else. They never do much more than wreak havoc, and they are not exactly 'fit' and agile. They're tanks, while Balrogs are generals.

Balrog versus Dragon? Balrog, by a mile. Balrogs versus Dragons? Balrogs, still. But the hypothetical scenario in which Dragons excel is Dragon versus village or army. I'd be willing to wager a Dragon would slaughter more on his own than would a Balrog. On the flipside, in one-on-one combat, regardless of the opponent, I'd always put my money on the Balrog.

I won't even go into the spiritual aspect of it, since we don't know what sort of fea resides within the Dragon shell. But I will say that Balrogs have much more apparent spiritual potency, and the fear that 'goes before' Dragons isn't the same as that which accompanies Balrogs.

Thingol:
Interesting...elaborate, please.

[ March 05, 2002: Message edited by: obloquy ]

It seems that as men, elves, hobbits, dwarves, etc... get closer to death they become more powerful. The characters just seem to get a boost of energy when they are in hopeless situations. Take Fingolofin when he rides out to challenege Melkor for example; he is compared to Orome. Maybe it is just the fact that he is really angry, and the anger sets his spirit in motion, not his closeness to death. But when reading the fight between Shelob and Sam and it says that Sam sees his death in Shelobs eyes. He reaches for the phial and his spirit blazes forth. Its tough to describe, its just that when Tolkien's characters are faced with death they become more grim and powerful. Tolkien uses the word fey several times when describing Eomer during the battle of Pellanor Fields. Subsequently he does not recieve a single wound. Again perhaps this is more because of anger than closeness to death. When Glorfindel fights the Balrog he is desperate and I'm sure Ecthellion felt the same way. They both probably knew they were going to die. I'm not doing a very good job of explaining it, but when reading the passages where characters fight a desperate battle it seems that they gain a boost of power. I've always attributed this boost of power to the characters getting closer to death.

(Dang it! My hi-liter is running out of ink! Dumb research paper!)

Anyway,

littlemanpoet:

"Jus' one theeng. Eet occurs to meee zat 'ol Smaug..."

Not only are we now talking in circles, we are seemingly just a bit intoxicated too. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

Moving on to more serious matters, while I love Farmer Giles of Ham, I really don't think that you can take Chrysophylax as an example of Middle earth dragons.

When is Smaug cowardly? He flew by himself and single handed and destroyed two kingdoms. Sounds rather brave to me.

The Balrog ran from Gandalf and it fled from the War of Wrath. Of course fleeing from the War of Wrath was sensible, but not exactly brave.

obloquy:

Perhaps I have failed to understand something. Why? It seems to have been generally agreed that the physical strength of a Dragon was greater. You have not come up with a convincing reason to make me think that a Balrogs spiritual power would be able to daunt a Dragon, in a battle between a tank and a general it is always best to bet on the tank. It is better suited for fighting. Is that not the situation being discussed here?

Thingol:

So, drawing on the Suicide in Middle Earth thread, on the eve of battle should warriors give themselves a 'Marc Antony' fatal wound and then be able to perform great feats of heroics? [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

Actually, I sort of understand what you are saying. I think what you mean is that the individual in question has gone beyond the point where they have anything to lose. If you have nothing to lose, then you can fight without fear or concern because all you have to think about is trying to accomplish something great before you die.

This is the same sort of idea that Sun Tzu advocated in certain situations in The Art of War because once soldiers get in this frame of mind they become almost impossible to defeat.
This is also the idea that the French Foreign Legion operated on. The recruits had no future except the Legion, best to fight and die and accomplish something great because there is nothing else to gain.

(Somebody needs to start a thread about Farmer Giles of Ham sometime.)

[ March 04, 2002: Message edited by: Kuruharan ]

One word: Balrog.

One reason: Picture Smaug being shot down by Bard the Bowman aiming his one trusty arrow at the dragon's weak spot.

Now picture Bard the Bowman destroying the Balrog by shooting it in its exposed chest with his one trusty arrow.

Nah, didn't think so [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img].

*Sigh*

I already answered this...