Dwarves vs Elves

[Morthoron]

Hmmm...Ecthelion, Glorfindel or Fingolfin against Azaghal? I think any of the three Elves mentioned would mop the floor with the dwarf. My reasoning? Simple. Glorfindel and Ecthelion fought balrogs singlehandedly and Fingolfin squared off alone against Morgoth (yes, they were all three killed, but in the first two cases, they also killed the Balrogs, and Fingolfin so badly wounded Morgoth that he walked with a limp everafter and never fought in combat again). Azaghal proved very brave against Glaurung, but he didn't fight him singlehanded and he died even with other dwarves' support, while Glaurung lived to fight another day. And as far as Balrogs, it seems an entire dwarrow of Dwarves could not defeat a Balrog.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

On all accounts this is a difficult question to answer, because what kind of combat are we talking about?

Are they fighting with no weaponry and armour? If they do have weapons, what kind and is it in some sort of arena or in random terrain?

All of these things matter in a fight, not to mention strength and wits. . .the sad thing is we can only guess and not even very qualified. At least I cannot.

Yes the elves killed Balrogs and the dwarf died without killing the dragon, but we do not really know the specific sercumstances for these killings. Who knows, maybe Glorfindel was very lucky and Azaghal very unlucky?

Personally I think that the elves would win, they just seem to have more strenghts than the dwarves. Maybe the dwarves could carry heavier armour, but I doubt that would win them the combat.

[Tuor in Gondolin]

One should consider where combat would be enjoined.
In caves, fortresses, in open fields?
The dwarves did rather well in Menegroth.

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

Type of weapon does seem to be something of a factor; witness the contest between Gimli and Legolas at Helm's Deep. Legolas got a lead when he was able to use a distance weapon, a bow, but the gap closed when it came down to hand-to-hand in a melee situation. Dwarves (to me) have always seemed like the sort who would be good in brawls, in close-quarter situations where height and reach aren't necessarily able to be used to their best advantage. Dwarves do seem to favor weapons that would be most useful under those circumstances.

And I would also consider the source. These tales of valor are being written from the point of view of Elves or Men, or even hobbits. We never really get to hear a tale told from the Dwarven point of view. I'm willing to bet they'd sound considerably different!

[Boromir88]

I'm willing to bet they'd sound considerably different!~Ibrin

True, that does put a slant on things. And Aragorn was at least impressed with Gimli's fighting prowess:

"That must be my hope," said Legolas. "But I wish that he had come this way. I desired to tell Master Gimli that my tale is now thirty-nine!"

"If he wins back the caves, he will pass your count again," laughed Aragorn. "Never did I see an axe so wielded."~Helm's Deep

So, weapons involved and the type of combat would definitely play into the situation.

Then again the question is asking about really some of the greatest warrior elf-lords, let's not forget about 'Elf-magic,' because it takes more than being a skilled fighter to kill a Balrog. Also, I've never imagined Dwarves as being the one-on-one single combat type, like the powerful elves.

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Then again the question is asking about really some of the greatest warrior elf-lords, let's not forget about 'Elf-magic,' because it takes more than being a skilled fighter to kill a Balrog. Also, I've never imagined Dwarves as being the one-on-one single combat type, like the powerful elves.

No, we didn't hear Thorin calling out Bard or Thranduil to take them down in single combat in The Hobbit, did we? The closest thing to that I can think of is Gimli inviting Eomer to get off his horse so he could teach him better manners when speaking of Galadriel. I don't think that the Dwarves lack the courage to do so, but that they are more pragmatic about their odds in warfare. When you're shorter and/or fewer in numbers than just about every other sapient being on the planet, there are some risks you may not be willing to take.

And when it comes to Songs of Power... well, that's something only the Elves and Ainur appear to get into. Though I do wonder if the Dwarves have any tales about mighty feats of Durin the Deathless that they keep to themselves. Hmmm.....

[skip spence]

How would a mighty Dwarf Lord like Azaghal fare in combat against the likes of an Echtelion, Glorfindel, or Fingolfin?

The Dwarf would not fare well against the Elf, I'm afraid.

Dwarves are very tough and fight Orcs gladly but would struggle against much taller opponents. The great height and reach advantage of the Elves would be the deciding factor I believe.

Consider this:

Originally Posted by TT; Helm's Deep

'I followed you to shake off sleep', said Gimli, 'but I looked on the hillmen and they seemed over large for me, so I sat beside a stone to see your sword-play'.

If Hillmen are too large for Gimli's liking great Elven lords - presumably much taller still - would be a very tough cookie for a Dwarf to handle in single combat.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel

And when it comes to Songs of Power... well, that's something only the Elves and Ainur appear to get into. Though I do wonder if the Dwarves have any tales about mighty feats of Durin the Deathless that they keep to themselves. Hmmm.....

I don't think that Dwarves are the kind of people who would keep tales of mighty feats to them self, if there ancestors did something truly great then they would surely make sure that the world knew.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

I don't think that Dwarves are the kind of people who would keep tales of mighty feats to them self, if there ancestors did something truly great then they would surely make sure that the world knew.

Well, they did keep a whole language to themselves. I do think it would be quite interesting to see "The Secret History of the Dwarves",


I also think that the elves would win, but only because of the particular ones chosen. If, maybe the dwarves had gone to Valinor, or if it was Durin the Deathless, it could have been a different result. Against those elves that hadn't been to Valinor (except for maybe a few) and their descendants an average Dwarf vs Elf could be even (or at least, much closer).

The problem is that ultimately, the Elf will never die, while the Dwarf will. If it was a very extreme case, an elf killed by a Dwarf might be permitted to return to Middle-Earth to kill the Dwarf. Or is there reincarnation in Dwarves. I don't think there is any real information about what happens to Dwarves after they die, only speculation and belief. But if reincarnation for Dwarves does exist, that would mean that none of them would ever totaally die.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel

And I would also consider the source. These tales of valor are being written from the point of view of Elves or Men, or even hobbits. We never really get to hear a tale told from the Dwarven point of view. I'm willing to bet they'd sound considerably different!

Yes, Tolkien was always a wicked propagandist against the Dwarves. It was always Elves, Elves, Elves with him.

[Andsigil]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Hmmm...Ecthelion, Glorfindel or Fingolfin against Azaghal? I think any of the three Elves mentioned would mop the floor with the dwarf. My reasoning? Simple. Glorfindel and Ecthelion fought balrogs singlehandedly and Fingolfin squared off alone against Morgoth (yes, they were all three killed, but in the first two cases, they also killed the Balrogs, and Fingolfin so badly wounded Morgoth that he walked with a limp everafter and never fought in combat again). Azaghal proved very brave against Glaurung, but he didn't fight him singlehanded and he died even with other dwarves' support, while Glaurung lived to fight another day. And as far as Balrogs, it seems an entire dwarrow of Dwarves could not defeat a Balrog.

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.

[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).