Dwarves vs Elves

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Andsigil

Then again, overall the elves of the Third Age aren't the elves of the First Age. Fingolfin, Feanor, Maedhros, etc were far more powerful than Legolas. I don't think it's fair to compare Third Age dwarves, who lost Moria, to the dwarves of the First Age.

I wasn't so much denigrating 3rd Age Dwarves, rather, I was showing what a single Noldorin Elf prince (and there was a specificity in the question referring to only three rarified Elves) could do against a Balrog as opposed to what a whole community of Dwarves could not. The comparison was based more on ratios than time periods.

I would have to say in defense of 1st Age Dwarves that, as a group, they were far more formidable than 3rd Age Dwarves. Azaghal did indeed die along with many of his followers, but they wounded Glaurung and the Father of Dragons was no longer a factor in that battle; whereas the Dwarves of Erebor could not drive off Smaug.

Again, the question was specific to Glorfindel, Ecthelion and Fingolfin versus Azaghal. In this instance I would put my money on Fingolfin in single combat every time. Also, I don't see the WitchKing running from any Dwarf, yet he did so against Glorfindel, and Ecthelion defeated Gothmog (or they killed each other, a la Heimdall and Loki). Gothmog was captain of the Balrogs, and not just your run-of-the-mill Joe Six-Pack Balrog, hiding in Moria hoping to reach the age of Balrogian retirement in order to receive his Antisocial Security benefits.

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

In answering this somewhat frivolous question, everyone seems to be forgetting the Ruin of Doriath. This is the best example of the tragedy of elf fighting dwarf, and is told to show such a conflict in that light.

Thus is was that the host of the Naugrim crossing over Aros passed unhindered into the woods of Doriath; and none withstood them, for they were many and fierce, and the captains of the Grey-elves were cast into doubt and despair, and went hither and thither purposeless. But the Dwarves held on their way, and passed over the great bridge and entered into Menegroth; and there befell a thing most grievous among the sorrowful deeds of the Elder Days. For there was battle in the Thousand Caves, and many Elves and Dwarves were slain; and it has not been forgotten. But the Dwarves were victorious, and the halls of Thingol were ransacked and plundered. There fell Mablung of the Heavy Hand before the doors of the treasury wherein lay the Nauglamír; and the Silmaril was taken.

Of the Ruin of Doriath (The Silmarillion, p. 234)

The Dwarves killed Thingol, "Elwë Singollo, King of Doriath, who alone of all the Children of Ilúvatar was joined with one of the Ainur; and he who, alone of the Forsaken Elves, had seen the light of the Trees of Valinor," (ibid, p. 233). They also defeated the Elves of Doriath, including Mablung, Thingol's chief captain and therefore not the least formidable of the Sindar.

We should also bear in mind that when Tolkien wrote The Fall of Gondolin he envisaged many balrogs, each substantially less powerful than Durin's Bane. By the time he wrote LR, he seems to have changed his mind and decided that there were a few significantly more powerful balrogs. In HME XI, Christopher Tolkien reproduces one of his father's notes pertaining to balrogs which he made on a typescript of the Grey Annals: it reads "There should not be supposed more than say 3 or at most 7 ever existed" (The War of the Jewels, p. 134). When Glorfindel kills his balrog at Crissaegrim in BLT 2, he hacks off its whip arm at the elbow and stabs it in the belly, but it is difficult to imagine that such a fight would have been possible with the balrog of Moria. Similarly Ecthelion of the Fountain drowns Gothmog, arguably the most powerful balrog, after having been wounded and with a crippled shield arm. These combats from the original Fall of Gondolin are significantly absent from the 1977 Silmarillion, which of course post-dates Gandalf's description of his fight with a balrog.

'Long I fell, and he fell with me. His fire was about me. I was burned. Then we plunged into the deep water and all was dark. Cold it was as the tide of death: almost it froze my heart.'

...

'...Yet [the abyss] has a bottom, beyond light and knowledge... Thither I came at last, to the uttermost foundations of stone. He was with me still. His fire was quenched, but now he was a thing of slime, stronger than a strangling snake.'

The Two Towers, p. 490

Apparently it was more difficult to drown a balrog than might be supposed from a reading of the original Fall of Gondolin.

Therefore, although a great lord of the Noldor such as Fingolfin, Glorfindel or Ecthelion could probably defeat one of the greater Dwarves, the contest is not such a clear-cut thing as one might imagine. When we consider the years that passed between the writing of Glorfindel's fight and the composition of LR, together with the changes in Tolkien's conception of the number and individual power of balrogs, we can consider the fall of Moria as poor evidence for their relative strengths. As for size playing any significant part, let us remember that Fingolfin managed to wound Morgoth seven times before finally being defeated, and at that time Morgoth "stood before the King like a tower, iron-crowned" (Silmarillion, p.152).

So we know that Dwarves can kill Elves, that the ability of some elf-lords to kill balrogs is not conclusive proof and that taller characters can be beaten by those of lesser stature. I still think that the elf would probably win in a completely even match, but I doubt that a Dwarf would enter such a contest in the first place: it would be idiotic. In any case, it seems to demean Tolkien's work more than a little to reduce his legends to questions of who can beat whom.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by The Squatter of Amon Rûdh

In answering this somewhat frivolous question, everyone seems to be forgetting the Ruin of Doriath. This is the best example of the tragedy of elf fighting dwarf, and is told to show such a conflict in that light.

The Dwarves killed Thingol, "Elwë Singollo, King of Doriath, who alone of all the Children of Ilúvatar was joined with one of the Ainur; and he who, alone of the Forsaken Elves, had seen the light of the Trees of Valinor," (ibid, p. 233). They also defeated the Elves of Doriath, including Mablung, Thingol's chief captain and therefore not the least formidable of the Sindar.

Yes, the question is frivolous, but then so are most of the discussions on this or any Tolkien forum. It is what happens when nearly any and every topic has been repeated ad naseum over many years. *shrugs*

First, Thingol was murdered: "and they [dwarves, plural] rose up about him, and laid hands on him, and slew him as he stood." This indicates to me that Thingol was surrounded and was not able to defend himself properly; therefore, it is not germane to the original, frivolous premise.

Second, the Sindar were not really comparable to the Noldor per Tolkien, as the Elves of Aman were blessed with abilities that the Sindar and other Moriquendi did not possess. In any case, the original question revolved around single combat between named renowned individuals. The answer to the question might be decidedly different, comparatively speaking, if we were discussing combat on a rank-and-file basis among races, irrespective of great heroes.

Originally Posted by The Squatter of Amon Rûdh

So we know that Dwarves can kill Elves, that the ability of some elf-lords to kill balrogs is not conclusive proof and that taller characters can be beaten by those of lesser stature. I still think that the elf would probably win in a completely even match, but I doubt that a Dwarf would enter such a contest in the first place: it would be idiotic. In any case, it seems to demean Tolkien's work more than a little to reduce his legends to questions of who can beat whom.

True on many levels, Squatter, but not every topic can be penetrating or philosophically deep (and obviously most just amount to idle banter and speculation). I don't think anyone is demeaning Tolkien when bringing up questions of who can beat whom (or as the Lord of Swamp Castle would say, 'Let's not bicker and argue about who killed who.'). People who ardently believe in something often take the object of ardor for granted. I am reminded of medieval clerics who held irreverent masses on certain holidays and served black puddings and used old shoes as incense censers and recited doggerel verses in place of scripture. It's not that they hated the church; on the contrary, they loved it, but there was a familarity that breeched what might seem as due respect for the institution. Therefore, we must be indulgent with the lower classes, and inject a little levity where applicable.

P.S. CSteefel, you are entirely correct regarding the weapons of the WiKi. I was merely offering examples that perhaps shed light on the comparative abilities of the various characters we were discussing.

P.P.S. And in regards to Glorfindel and the Balrog (and Tolkien's continual dissembling), when Tolkien finally decided that Glorfindel Balrog-slayer was indeed the ressurrected Glorfindel Inglorion (and not just the misprint of an already used name), I seem to remember Tolkien alluding to Glorfindel being brought back for the very reason he was renowned for slaying a Balrog; however, I am too lazy to look it up.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by The Squatter of Amon Rûdh

The Dwarves killed Thingol, "Elwë Singollo, King of Doriath, who alone of all the Children of Ilúvatar was joined with one of the Ainur; and he who, alone of the Forsaken Elves, had seen the light of the Trees of Valinor," (ibid, p. 233). They also defeated the Elves of Doriath, including Mablung, Thingol's chief captain and therefore not the least formidable of the Sindar.

We should also bear in mind that when Tolkien wrote The Fall of Gondolin he envisaged many balrogs, each substantially less powerful than Durin's Bane. By the time he wrote LR, he seems to have changed his mind and decided that there were a few significantly more powerful balrogs. In HME XI, Christopher Tolkien reproduces one of his father's notes pertaining to balrogs which he made on a typescript of the Grey Annals: it reads "There should not be supposed more than say 3 or at most 7 ever existed" (The War of the Jewels, p. 134). When Glorfindel kills his balrog at Crissaegrim in BLT 2, he hacks off its whip arm at the elbow and stabs it in the belly, but it is difficult to imagine that such a fight would have been possible with the balrog of Moria. Similarly Ecthelion of the Fountain drowns Gothmog, arguably the most powerful balrog, after having been wounded and with a crippled shield arm. These combats from the original Fall of Gondolin are significantly absent from the 1977 Silmarillion, which of course post-dates Gandalf's description of his fight with a balrog.

So we know that Dwarves can kill Elves, that the ability of some elf-lords to kill balrogs is not conclusive proof and that taller characters can be beaten by those of lesser stature. I still think that the elf would probably win in a completely even match, but I doubt that a Dwarf would enter such a contest in the first place: it would be idiotic. In any case, it seems to demean Tolkien's work more than a little to reduce his legends to questions of who can beat whom.

We also know that Elves can kill Dwarves. . . but that does not really get us closer to an answer.

Just as the slaying of Balrogs is not conlusive proof for Elves being mightyier than Dwarves, as unconclusive is the sacking of Doriath. Yes the Dwarves came out on top, but would they also have done so if the Elves had been prepared and organised? I am not so sure. . .
It is kind of like saying that Swedes are better at fighting than Danes and would win in combat because they won the Torstenson War.

[Andsigil]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

We also know that Elves can kill Dwarves. . . but that does not really get us closer to an answer.

Just as the slaying of Balrogs is not conlusive proof for Elves being mightyier than Dwarves, as unconclusive is the sacking of Doriath. Yes the Dwarves came out on top, but would they also have done so if the Elves had been prepared and organised? I am not so sure. . .
It is kind of like saying that Swedes are better at fighting than Danes and would win in combat because they won the Torstenson War.

Well, at least we know that ninjas are better than pirates.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Andsigil

Well, at least we know that ninjas are better than pirates.

NU-UH....not undead pirates or were-pirates!

[CSteefel]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Also, I don't see the WitchKing running from any Dwarf, yet he did so against Glorfindel, .

Don't disagree with most of what you said, but with the Witch King again one has to be careful making this a simple contest of warrior versus warrior. As discussed elsewhere, one of the Witch King's principal weapons is fear, or as Tolkien says in The Hunt for the Ring (Unfinished Tales):

Moreover, their chief weapon was terror.

and of the Eldar (that includes Glorfindel):

They do not fear the Ringwraiths, for those have dwelt in the Blessed Realm live at once in both worlds, and against both the Seen and the Unseen they have great power.

So the Witch King's chief weapon is not really much good against Glorfindel (or against Gandalf, for that matter, Peter Jackson notwithstanding).