Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sauron the White
I am not arguing that the main bridge was not destroyed. I am saying that it was not one of the bridges which could have been cut because the illustration Tolkien gave us - which is far more detailed than any text description with words - shows a substantial structure built on thick plyons and not a supsension bridge upheld by ropes to be cut.
|
Then, Sauron, you are still arguing that the picture is misleading; as it not only depicts a bridge that doesn't look as though it can be
cut, but one that doesn't look as though it can be destroyed in "little time" at all, something the text tells us was done. So, any way you slice it, either that bridge was destroyed (and the picture is misleading), or it was not (and to make this assumption reasonable, we'd need to explain why only some bridges would be destroyed).
Regarding the idea that Smaug had more advantages in an air attack, consider that his fire-breath was probably not like gunfire from a plane - it would have most likely had a far shorter range. This would mean he would have to fly very close to the town before being able to ignite it, and then would have only had a brief moment to do so before having to veer away to avoid a crash. Also consider that he possessed immense strength and size, as well as a tough hide - features that wouldn't be particularly useful for a predator designed primarily to rely on agility and speed while hunting. Considering this, and also the lack of wings among some dragons and the well-known vulnerability of their undersides (I mean, come on - even
hobbits heard about it!), it's quite likely they preferred to attack, in general, from the ground, probably using flight more for transportation and, if it was ever necessary, defense (their underside might be exposed, but if they intended to make a quick retreat rather than an attack, this would present little danger).