Do Balrogs Have Wings?

[Keneldil the Polka-dot]

Wings or no wings, the quote below is the only thing I've ever read that changed the way I imagine Balrogs when I read about them. Not sure if I appreciate that or not, obloquy!

Originally Posted by obloquy

I think in general people make demons out to be much more beastly than they are. The extent of a fallen angel's carnality is stooping to the level of Man. We're not talking about a wild animal who'll bark and growl and roar and drool. Tolkien was very severe with Bakshi's version of the Bridge because Tolkien's intention was for the Balrog to maintain a dignified and sinister silence. There's no need for eye spots, or horns, or spikes, or scary wings. Durin's Bane was intimidating enough to even Gandalf when he had not even seen him yet.

Think about what we're talking about, folks. These are ancient, mighty fallen spirits, not guard dogs.

As for wings, balrogs started as one thing in JRRT's mind and migrated to something else. Hence the confusion. I like H.I.'s ideas about Balrog vs. balrog too.

Regardless, NO VOTE from me because I think later Balrogs had wings, couldn't use them for flight, but could fly if they chose to. A simple "yes" or "no" vote doesn't suffice.

In the beginning, when the greater spirits went down to Arda, they could walk unclothed. If they had appearance at all, it was of their own choosing. It is debatable as to whether or not those choices were fixed when middle earth was sundered from Valinor and the west.
Personally, I believe that the form a Balrog chose was a reflection of their nature and was therefore full of fire and darkness. As you well may know, Melkor often strode the halls of middle earth in whatever form he chose. He is, however, much greater than a mere Balrog. Only at the end did he continually use the dark terrible form he is best known for and even then - it was most likely still his choice.

Balrogs have wings if it suits them. As pure spirits, they can most certainly fly but have no need for wings.

[Hookbill the Goomba]

Originally Posted by Flavius

Personally, I believe that the form a Balrog chose was a reflection of their nature and was therefore full of fire and darkness. As you well may know, Melkor often strode the halls of middle earth in whatever form he chose. He is, however, much greater than a mere Balrog. Only at the end did he continually use the dark terrible form he is best known for and even then - it was most likely still his choice.

But, of course, Melkor lost the ability to change his form in time. Due to one thing and another and his trying to kill everyone.
The counter argument is that Melkor imprisoned the spirits in the bodies of the Balrogs and they were shrouded in shadow and flame. Of course, this has probably been discussed before in this thread but I am, at this time, too tied to go a-looking.

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by Flavius

In the beginning, when the greater spirits went down to Arda, they could walk unclothed. If they had appearance at all, it was of their own choosing. It is debatable as to whether or not those choices were fixed when middle earth was sundered from Valinor and the west.
Personally, I believe that the form a Balrog chose was a reflection of their nature and was therefore full of fire and darkness. As you well may know, Melkor often strode the halls of middle earth in whatever form he chose. He is, however, much greater than a mere Balrog. Only at the end did he continually use the dark terrible form he is best known for and even then - it was most likely still his choice.

Balrogs have wings if it suits them. As pure spirits, they can most certainly fly but have no need for wings.

Friend, this is a fine post and makes good sense. Unfortunately it leaves out an important phenomenon: incarnation. Melkor, Sauron, and the Balrogs all eventually lost the power to shed their corporeal form and "reclothe" that they had in their beginnings. This was due to overindulgence in activities reserved for the Incarnates, and to the overuse of certain forms. Their state was similar to that of the Istari, who shared their discarnate nature in their beginnings; the only difference being that the Istari were intentionally incarnated by the Powers, rather than experiencing it as a side-effect of their activities.

You'll hopefully forgive me for not posting all of my sources for this information. Instead I'll merely direct you here.

[Aiwendil]

Obloquy wrote:

Melkor, Sauron, and the Balrogs all eventually lost the power to shed their corporeal form and "reclothe" that they had in their beginnings.

We have numerous quotes indicating that Melkor and Sauron became permanently incarnated. But do we have any certain evidence that the Balrogs did? I know that a good case can be made for your position (as indeed you did in the post you link to), but I'm afraid I can't see the possibility that the Balrogs still could change their shape as being inarguably disproven. Or perhaps there is some quote that has slipped my mind.

[Hookbill the Goomba]

If there are not quotes, I think that it stands to reason that they would be permanently in their bodies. Or else, they would not be identified as Balrogs but 'evil Maia', their physical appearance would label them as Balrogs instead. That is how it strikes me, anyway...

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Hookbill the Goomba

If there are not quotes, I think that it stands to reason that they would be permanently in their bodies. Or else, they would not be identified as Balrogs but 'evil Maia', their physical appearance would label them as Balrogs instead. That is how it strikes me, anyway...

Which is exceptionally ironic when one considers that the most debated thing about balrogs is their appearance... as this thread goes to show, we don't even know that.

[mhagain]

What I found interesting, and what doesn't appear to have been picked up on (although admittedly I couldn't bear to read the whole thread) was the quote "With a terrible cry the Balrog fell forward, and its shadow plunged down and vanished".

The key point here is the difference between "fell" and "plunged".

What we have is a shadow like wings, which seems to be detachable from the main body of the Balrog. Remember, here the Balrog is only beginning to fall forward, whereas the shadow is already well down into the depths.

So I voted "no".

Wings, definitely not.

Jetpacks, now that's a "maybe"...

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

Obloquy wrote:


We have numerous quotes indicating that Melkor and Sauron became permanently incarnated. But do we have any certain evidence that the Balrogs did? I know that a good case can be made for your position (as indeed you did in the post you link to), but I'm afraid I can't see the possibility that the Balrogs still could change their shape as being inarguably disproven. Or perhaps there is some quote that has slipped my mind.

No, you're right. We don't have any explicit textual support for the idea that Balrogs were permanently incarnate, but I think the finality of their deaths is an important indication. If Durin's Bane had been merely a clothed spirit, his defeat at Gandalf's hand would really have done very little good; likewise with Glorfindel's Bane.

Additionally we recognize the affinity Tolkien's mythos have with biblical stories of the corruption of angels to the service of the devil. In those stories the angels were corrupted not just by affiliating themselves with Satan, but by indulging in activities that were reserved for true incarnates, particularly sex relations. While this is not evidence in itself, Tolkien makes the specific point that an eala could become bound to its hroa by habitual indulgence in such activities (he specifies eating and begetting offspring), and it seems unreasonable to presume that these corrupted Maiar (who were said to be corrupted by dark gifts, if I remember correctly) would have abstained more assiduously than their masters.