[Kuruharan]

Dragons are only spoken of as being devised or bred by Melkor. How is that any more revealing than what we know of Goldberry?

It is at least a statement regarding their origins and maker. We have none of that for Goldberry other than a fanciful statement about her being a river's daughter, which may or may not be literal. We know where Dragons came from if not what they were made from or what type of soul they had.

Are you saying you doubt whether Goldberry has a fea?

That was not what I meant by that statement at all. That statement was referring to Dragons as having a spirit of some type.

When it comes down to it, it does not explicitly say that Goldberry had a fea, so, following your usual line of reasoning, perhaps she did not.

and thus bound in life and death to their hroar.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But didn't we just establish that Balrogs were also bound to their bodies?

Yeah, so?

So they would perhaps be bound in life and death to their body.

They have a hybrid spirit

A hybrid with what? It is also said (I believe) that beasts do not have souls. So, what would the Maiar spirit be mingled with? If there was no soul to mix with, then the spirit would of necessity be pure Maiar.

(Oh, and with the Orc thing, you're drawing a parallel more tenuous than any I have made. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img])

because they did not survive the death of their hroar.

Where does it say that on some level they do not? And for the sake of making a comparison, where does it say that Balrogs do?

This is why the above quote (Glaurung speaking by the spirit within him) doesn't quite fit with the Maiarin origin theory. The passage is written as if Glaurung is merely a vessel.

It could be the phraseology that Tolkien used for the sake of variation. In the passage with Nienor Glaurung is also referred to as, "putting out his power against her," as if he actually possessed it himself.

[ May 28, 2002: Message edited by: Kuruharan ]