High Elves and the Balrogs

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Gorthaur the Cruel

I know the Balrogs were of the Maiar, but it seems unbelievable that a mere high elf like Ecthelion and Glorfindel could've slain them (more unbelievable is Echthelion who was able to slay 3 Balrogs!). Why is this? Were the maia that joined Morgoth extremely weak that a high elf can slay them? I don't understand because Balrogs are great spellcasters and just totally on a different level. Would this mean that someone like Galadriel could take on that Balrog in Moria even without Nenya? 'Cause it would make sense since she's a high elf and the greatest next to Feanor. And where do the spirits of the Balrog go when they die?

Perhaps wings weakened them, a physiological defect. After all, the energy involved in flapping them and flying must deflect from the energy/power available to produce fire and bat around arms.

[Belegorn]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Perhaps wings weakened them, a physiological defect. After all, the energy involved in flapping them and flying must deflect from the energy/power available to produce fire and bat around arms.

I lol'ed at this one, haha.

[Lalaith]

No average human woman has ever been given any recognition

Hmm...I'm not quite sure what you mean by this, but if you mean what I think you do, then let me say three words to you....Joan of Arc. Led a national army before she was seventeen...good enough?

Anyway, I wonder if part of the problem in these discussions isn't that they are taking place among people who are used to the logic of computer games. This weapon plus that armour plus so many power points and that experience level gives you strength to defeat this monster....
I'm not sure how useful this very logical, gaming-type viewpoint is to understanding Tolkien's world. It was a literary creation, which as many here have pointed out, underwent many changes over the years. So one minute you can have a High Elf defeating a Balrog in just a short battle, and in another, a mighty maia like Gandalf take a week to defeat one in underground combat.
Why - because it makes a good story, I suppose, and Tolkien was a storyteller.

But that is not to say that Tolkien's power hierarchies are not intriguing. How, I always wondered, did a mere Maia like Melian create a stronghold that could keep out Melkor, mightiest of the Valar? Because Tolkien willed it so, is the obvious answer, but still, it did always puzzle me....

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Lalaith

Anyway, I wonder if part of the problem in these discussions isn't that they are taking place among people who are used to the logic of computer games. This weapon plus that armour plus so many power points and that experience level gives you strength to defeat this monster....
I'm not sure how useful this very logical, gaming-type viewpoint is to understanding Tolkien's world. It was a literary creation, which as many here have pointed out, underwent many changes over the years. So one minute you can have a High Elf defeating a Balrog in just a short battle, and in another, a mighty maia like Gandalf take a week to defeat one in underground combat.

I thought about that too, though I think in this discussion it was not as evident from the start, so I didn't bring it up. When you look up, unless you yourself get dragged down in thinking in these "level lines", the question is well posed: the Balrogs are something - and that is clear enough from the Legendarium - completely qualitatively different from the Elves, they are Maiar, Ainur. This is evident and everyone who thinks about someone who was with Eru performing on the Music can be somehow puzzled about all this. I think it's about realizing the different story changes, as you said, and also - very importantly, I think - realizing what the "coming to flesh" in Arda means: that as they are once there, you are technically as capable of slaying a Balrog as a human (no high "lives" here - though he probably is tougher than common man, there are mainly other things that prevent you from killing him). I saw the "game-thinking" problem emerging in many different threads, but particularly in this case I think our problems lie somewhere else. Good you brought it up, though, as it allows people to realize if they are thinking like that, preventing possible misunderstandings.

[Lalaith]

realizing what the "coming to flesh" in Arda means:

Yes, absolutely, I think that's a very interesting point. Did Gandalf's corporeal form, as an old man, lay "heavier" on him than Melian's, do you think, despite the fact that she bore a child while a physical, Middle-Earth presence?
The Valar and the Maia took physical forms while in Valinor, also. Were these forms somehow different to those they took when not there? Is there anything in HoME about this?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Lalaith

Yes, absolutely, I think that's a very interesting point. Did Gandalf's corporeal form, as an old man, lay "heavier" on him than Melian's, do you think, despite the fact that she bore a child while a physical, Middle-Earth presence?

Well, I am not a female, so I cannot judge whether it's more exhausting for the body to give a birth to a child or not to, but be much more aged.

Nevertheless, Melian, I believe, had her "Valinorean" form on her (cf. below) when she met Elwë(is this where your train of thoughts has been going?), so maybe here is the answer to what you wondered about her powers like the Girdle and so on. Also, she was not intentionally bound by the body - that was her own body as she chose it (unlike the Istari, who were given it to reduce their own powers not to contest Sauron by force) or even the Balrogs, who were in fact "forced to hold Melkor's standards", so to say.

Originally Posted by Lalaith

The Valar and the Maia took physical forms while in Valinor, also. Were these forms somehow different to those they took when not there? Is there anything in HoME about this?

As I foreshadowed earlier, I believe that surely they were different; as mentioned above at least with the Istari who took the forms of old men for their journey to Middle-Earth, but surely were not like that back there. The difference would be that probably mostly, in ME the Maiar were limited in their forms - in Valinor they could take on whatever form they wish (the one they chose when coming down to the world). The "dark" Maiar, like the Balrogs, or even Sauron later, as it is well known after some time lost their ability to change their forms and literally degraded as "imprisoned" in the flesh.

I'm not much of a HoME-runner, so to say, but considering the appearance in Valinor, at least I remember in UT Gandalf (Olórin) is mentioned:

Originally Posted by Istari

And Olórin, who was clad in grey, and having just entered from a journey had seated himself at the edge of the council

and in the Silmarillion, resp. Valaquenta:

Originally Posted by Valaquenta

But of Olórin that tale does not speak; for though he loved the Elves, he walked among them unseen, or in form as one of them, and they did not know whence came the fair visions or the promptings of wisdom that he put into their hearts. In later days he was the friend of all the Children of Ilúvatar, and took pity on their sorrows; and those who listened to him awoke from despair and put away the imaginations of darkness.

(emhasise mine) Taking in mind the context of the latter, I'd say the form of Elf refers to Olórin during his stay at Valinor, and not Middle-Earth. The interesting thing is that he was "clad in grey", still, on both sides of the Sea. I'd also like to see what happened when he returned at the end of the Third Age: if he kept his form of Gandalf the White, or changed into something else (Olórin the Gray, Olórin the White...).

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Nevertheless, Melian, I believe, had her "Valinorean" form on her (cf. below) when she met Elwë

I doubt she retained her cloak-like body after felling in love with Thingol. In Myths Transformed, it is said:

Originally Posted by Orcs

...by practising when embodied procreation they would (cf. Melian) [become] more and more earthbound, unable to return to spirit-state (even demon-form), until released by death (killing), and they would dwindle in force.

However, more to the point:

Originally Posted by Of the ruin of Doriath, Silmarillion

For Melian was of the divine race of the Valar, and she was a Maia of great power and wisdom; but for love of Elwe Singollo she took upon herself the form of the Elder Children of Iluvatar, and in that union she became bound by the chain and trammels of the flesh of Arda.

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

I'd also like to see what happened when he returned at the end of the Third Age: if he kept his form of Gandalf the White, or changed into something else (Olórin the Gray, Olórin the White...).

I don't think he had any reason to keep his embodied, severely limiting form, other than sentimental reasons

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by Raynor

I don't think he had any reason to keep his embodied, severely limiting form, other than sentimental reasons

The Valar may have been able to restore Olorin, but it's likely that he had many years of recuperation in Aman ahead of him after separating from his corporeal form. He may not have had much reason to remain incarnate, but the return to his natural form was no small thing.

[Hammerhand]

Originally Posted by Lalaith

Hmm...I'm not quite sure what you mean by this, but if you mean what I think you do, then let me say three words to you....Joan of Arc. Led a national army before she was seventeen...good enough?

I think it was fairly obvious i was refering to Tolkien's work actually... off the top of my head only Eowyn and Morwen were ever depicted in a 'powerful' role - that is ofcourse in reference to humans, there are quite a few Elvish women depicted in such a light also.

Off topic, Joan of Arc only co-led the army i think you'll find with a certain Duke. Furthermore she was burned at the stake for heresy before she managed to finalise her aims - that said, she is an extraordinary example of female leadership, being so young and also, being a woman.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Hammerhand

I think it was fairly obvious i was refering to Tolkien's work actually... off the top of my head only Eowyn and Morwen were ever depicted in a 'powerful' role - that is ofcourse in reference to humans, there are quite a few Elvish women depicted in such a light also.

Here's another: Haleth of the Haladin was a woman considered the equal of any man in battle and led her people courageously.

Originally Posted by Hammerhand

Off topic, Joan of Arc only co-led the army i think you'll find with a certain Duke. Furthermore she was burned at the stake for heresy before she managed to finalise her aims - that said, she is an extraordinary example of female leadership, being so young and also, being a woman.

She did complete her primary aim, the reversal of France's fortunes in the 100 Year's War and almost single-handedly had Charles VII crowned king of France at Rheims. Without her vision and valor, the ineffectual Armagnacs would have eventually crumbled against the English/Burgundian alliance. As far as her heresy trial, it was a political sham, a mockery of justice that circumvented numerous ecclesiastical court procedures. The heresy charges were nullified by Pope Calixtus a mere 25 years after her death (astounding in the fact that the Catholic Church usually takes centuries to overturn previous rulings -- as in the case of Galileo).

[Hammerhand]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

She did complete her primary aim, the reversal of France's fortunes in the 100 Year's War and almost single-handedly had Charles VII crowned king of France at Rheims. Without her vision and valor, the ineffectual Armagnacs would have eventually crumbled against the English/Burgundian alliance. As far as her heresy trial, it was a political sham, a mockery of justice that circumvented numerous ecclesiastical court procedures. The heresy charges were nullified by Pope Calixtus a mere 25 years after her death (astounding in the fact that the Catholic Church usually takes centuries to overturn previous rulings -- as in the case of Galileo).

You just proved what i said lol... almost being a key-word. Alot of what Joan of Arc achieved is hypothetically speaking, "would have" and so on. She did not achieve everything that she set out to do. I'm not trying to make her appear weaker because she is a woman, i'm just trying to prove a point. She was never granted full military control, she had to confer with the Duke of [insert] before any major decisions were made.

She was burned at the stake, whether it was anulled or not, the "mockery" was successful and the mighty Joan of Arc was made a martyr... get over it.

[obloquy]

If I had posted either of the two previous responses it would have been deleted.

[Hammerhand]

Originally Posted by obloquy

If I had posted either of the two previous responses it would have been deleted.

Just clearing up a misunderstanding mate

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Hammerhand

You just proved what i said lol... almost being a key-word. Alot of what Joan of Arc achieved is hypothetically speaking, "would have" and so on. She did not achieve everything that she set out to do. I'm not trying to make her appear weaker because she is a woman, i'm just trying to prove a point. She was never granted full military control, she had to confer with the Duke of [insert] before any major decisions were made.

She was burned at the stake, whether it was anulled or not, the "mockery" was successful and the mighty Joan of Arc was made a martyr... get over it.

Not wishing to go too off-topic here, but please reread what I said. I stated "She did complete her primary aim, the reversal of France's fortunes in the 100 Year's War and almost single-handedly had Charles VII crowned king of France at Rheims." The 'almost' you are referring to does not mitigate her achievement. She did get Charles crowned king, which was her aim, and she did so 'almost' single-handedly (incredible for a teenage girl of the era).

As far as conferring with Duc de Alençon, yes she did, what of it? She eventually became co-commander of an army with him. She also had many heated arguments with Dunois of Orleans over tactics. Had she not prevailed with her strategy, Dunois was ready to retreat before the taking of les Tournelles and the raising of the siege of Orleans would have failed. She completed in nine days what the French army did not do in five months. Bluntly, the French achieved victory because of her choice of tactics over the established leadership's cautious and defeatist attitudes. The raising of the siege of Orleans marked the turning point in the Hundred Year's War. There are no hypotheticals about it.

As far as 'getting over it', please watch your tone. I would hate to see this thread locked because of unnecessary attitude.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Back to Tolkien, please.

[Hammerhand]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Not wishing to go too off-topic here, but please reread what I said. I stated "She did complete her primary aim, the reversal of France's fortunes in the 100 Year's War and almost single-handedly had Charles VII crowned king of France at Rheims." The 'almost' you are referring to does not mitigate her achievement. She did get Charles crowned king, which was her aim, and she did so 'almost' single-handedly (incredible for a teenage girl of the era).

As far as conferring with Duc de Alençon, yes she did, what of it? She eventually became co-commander of an army with him. She also had many heated arguments with Dunois of Orleans over tactics. Had she not prevailed with her strategy, Dunois was ready to retreat before the taking of les Tournelles and the raising of the siege of Orleans would have failed. She completed in nine days what the French army did not do in five months. Bluntly, the French achieved victory because of her choice of tactics over the established leadership's cautious and defeatist attitudes. The raising of the siege of Orleans marked the turning point in the Hundred Year's War. There are no hypotheticals about it.

As far as 'getting over it', please watch your tone. I would hate to see this thread locked because of unnecessary attitude.

Please do not talk to me in such a condescending tone - i actually feel quite annoyed now. Half of the information and debate gathered here is without cause, i havn't commented on Joan of Arc's bad military tactics because i think they were quite excellent - so why would you bring it up like i've disputed it? My only argument against Joan of Arc was that she is given recognition as the sole force that changed the fate of the French Monarchy and decisively won the French victories in the 100 Years War - when in fact she was in no way working alone, she depended on the support of others, being a teenage girl what would you expect?

Actually, alot of the issues concerning Joan of Arc are hypothetically speaking, check your sources again. Because certain things were achieved after her death that she fought for, it does not mean that she alone made it happen.

So i'll beg you again to refrain from the pretentious statements and the argument altogether, i've had my say, as have you - Joan of Arc isn't particularly relevant so i'll carry on with the thread now.

I think it is all very well saying Galadriel could defeat a Balrog by herself, what with the amount of quotations supporting her being the "Greatest" of the Noldor behind Feanor, but whenever a mortal has faced a Balrog, it has been a weapon-in-hand job - Interestingly with Olórin which i now feel compelled to read again, he appears to resume his former shape and do a "power" battle with Durin's Bane. Is it possible to say that Galadriel could equal the Maiar's efforts in power? I'm not sure. I still remain confident that Galadriel would not best a Balrog with a blade, the quotations given just don't define her as a warrior,we have ones of her "greatness" which i believe refer to her mind, and ones of her "athletic ability" and so forth, i could be wrong, but Galadriel only wielded a blade on the odd occasion over the course of thousands of years.

Compare her to Fingolfin, Ecthelion or Glorfindel, each are continuously reputed with their battle skill. Galadriel is in reference to her beauty and mind. I can't see it myself, but their is some evidence there to suggest her military capability, it is just not as clear as with other characters - and so it leads to what we are all doing now, speculating.

Besides, i feel sorry for Celeborn if Galadriel had the power to crush a Balrog :P