Do Balrogs Have Wings?

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

OK, so let’s settle this once and for all. Read the following threads, decide for yourself, and then vote.

The Balrog Theorem

Balrog Sprinters?

Ah, so maybe they did have wings…

Balrogs DO have wings

Do Balrogs have wings? What Color is Legolas's Hair? What is Tom Bombadil? Entwives?

Decisive proof the Balrogs had wings!

balrogs and wings debate

Arien, Balrogs and wings

I do realise that I could simply have added a poll to an existing thread, but which one? I figured instead it would be better to start “afresh.”

And may Eru (and the Wight) have mercy upon me.

[Durelin]

Balrogs! What fun! *recalls a fateful day when Balrog wings did fly through the air...*

Regardless of whether a Balrog's wings are figurative or literal, they have what are called 'wings.' And of course they're not going to use them to fly! They're just to look more imposing! It's like when a lizard puffs up at you to make himself look bigger, or when a cat's fur stands on end. Why bother to flap those wings if they can just hang there behind you and make you look like a badder demon than you already are? Besides, I'd find it very difficult to chop the wings off the Balrog I have in my mind...

[Mister Underhill]

Downers who are seriously interested in getting to the bottom of the wings question will no doubt find an essential addition to Fordim's not quite exhaustive bibliography in this thread, despite its shattered condition (the result of several wars and violent migrations):

Were Balrogs winged?

Make sure to lay in a supply of strong coffee and powerful aspirin before you begin...

P.S. -- Wight, I admire your tenacity -- still hanging on to the no-wing dream after all these years. It's over, Johnny! It's over!

[Lindolirian]

I voted for "Yes" because I still hold to the theory that as Maiar, they can change their form and thus have wings if they wish, but I think that there is too much evidence against their ability to fly. So yes to wings and no to flight. And now I'm done with this evil, evil debate. Edit: Evidently not... O well!

[The Barrow-Wight]

Just so you pro-wingers aren't confused, I'm pretty sure Fordim was talking about the books, so you might want to reconsider

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Does it mean working wings? Because a child could wear cardboard shaped like angel-wings, and they still are wings.

For me, Balrogs can have wings, but they're vestigial.

[Lhunardawen]

First and foremost...

Originally Posted by davem

Sorry, but I can't join my esteemed colleagues. I don't recall any mention of Balrog's wings in The Sil, of Balrog's flying (other than 'metaphorically' to Morgoth's aid). I do think they may have had pointy ears, though.

davem said a joke. DAVEM POSTED A JOKE! In the BOOKS!!!

Okay, I'll stop now. Back to the topic...

First Age says Balrogs flew. They might have had wings. Third Age recounts no Balrog flight. They might not have had wings.

The only idea I can glean from these (loose) observations is this:

Balrogs did fly, with wings. Somehow Morgoth's defeat removed the ability and made the wings merely vestigial. Didn't Morgoth give them this gift for their service to him? But since he was thrust into the Void, the gifts became void (bad pun, yes).

[Fingolfin II]

Originally Posted by Lhunardawen

Didn't Morgoth give them this gift for their service to him?

But isn't it said in HoME (not sure which) that Morgoth would kill the Eagles and use their wings in an attempt to fly, but that for all his power he could never master flight? And as well as this, I don't think it would be in Morgoth's power to bestow gifts that alter the physical being of an Ainu.

Also, let me throw another argument - that's bound to have been already mentioned in one of the other Balrog threads - if Gothmog could fly, what use would his troll-guard be to him? I'm assuming that trolls can't fly and that if Balrogs had wings and could fly that they would do that, which would give them a much greater speed and strategic advantage over their opponents than if they fought on the ground.

[Mister Underhill]

Hey Sono! Nice to see you back posting. Both you and mark12_30 demonstrate your keen intelligence (not to mention good taste) once again.

My own exhaustive (some might say exhausting) research on this topic has convinced me beyond a reasonable doubt that Tolkien conceived of Balrogs as winged creatures, at least at the time of the writing of LotR. There is compelling evidence of First Age wingers, too, but I won't rehash arguments I've made of old in the linked threads here.

I will, however, note that the Silm "troll-guard" reference is suspect to say the least. See this section of my Olog-hai article for a comprehensive investigation -- or just let me sum it up for you: this section of the published Silm was constructed from various source texts by Christopher. Not one of Tolkien's source texts as published or described in HoME refers to trolls, so how they got into Christopher's Frankenstein version is anybody's guess. This instance is also the sole mention of trolls in the entire published Silm as far as I know.

So troll-guard references in relation to the Balrog debate are simply not compelling.

[Esgallhugwen]

Ok here's my pathetic attempt at giving my humble opinion after humming and hawing over my fellow BDer's posts.

In my opinion they did have wings.

Now to incorporate some proof to my flimsy theory, I agree that evolution would be out, though at first my proof and opinion was going to be that, [I]well Ostriches and Emus are huge birds but their weight and over all proportions prevent them from flying to any extentso yes the Balrogs could have had wings, but aside from evolution the weight theory can still be put into effect for obvious reasons, they were freakin' huge!

Now for them being able to have changed forms, Morgoth's Maia, very much like himself, would have lost their ability or capability to perform certain tasks, after all due to Morgoth's downfall he was only able to pervert and contort and not make things of his own. Perhaps it could be the same for his followers, maybe after a period of time they were unable to change to anything else and unable to use their wings in flight due to them no longer being of the Light, or perhaps the wings could potentially be in a stunted form from their inability to have changed further due to their degradation, thus not allowing them flight.

So I believe the Balrogs had wings but were unable to fly.
I think thats all I have to say for now untill I think of something better.

[HerenIstarion]

Ah, for the fifth year we disagree on this subject

On balrog origins, see here (One Hand tied behind their backs by Mithadan, post #32)

I consciously avoided wings issue in the article linked to.

But I still hold they did not have wings

Arguments (not touching on traditional 'like wings' quote from LoTR, for it may be used as pro and contra argument likewise.

Balrogs may have had wings originally (that is, as Tolkien envisioned them, as 'fallen angels'. Allegedly, angels having wings and balorgs too. Excuse me drawing in this inappropriate imagery, but have you played Heroes of Might and Magic IV? I suppose you must have, Mr.U? Remember 'angels' and 'demons' of that game? Former have feather wings and the latter leather wings - but that is part of the whole Western mythic imagery - as bats (leather wings) are associated with vampires (Evil) and dove (feather wings) with Holy Spirit, basilisk (leather wings) is scared away by cockerel (feather wings) etc.

But winged angels (besides two first orders, cherubs and seraphs, who have four and six ccorrespondingly), appearence is not confirmed by any sacred text. It's just a popular belief, kind of an 'urban legend' for first Christians (see link to mark 12_30's post below). So I hold that as Tolkien 'conscioulsy' revised his work, he changed his mind (as it may be misleading to imagine things which are spiritual, and may actually have no physical 'look' at all)

What am I driving at? As was discussed in many good threads around the Downs (Ëalar and Incarnation by obloquy for one, it is in Haudh-en-Ndengin, Do Ainur have wings by Estelyn for two, mark (pun intended) mark 12_30's post there). Ainur, in general, do not need physical bodies for travel, unless they are tied to their bodies (Deliberately for Istari, habitually for balrogs - practicing incarnate activities making the bondage unbreakable - see excerpts from Osanwe-Kenta on the subject here - The Ainur and their physical forms by Neithan)

But once they 'grow' incarnate, their physical forms are:

1. What they chose in the beginning and grew accustomed to
2. Reflection of their inward status - hence Sauron being only 'terrible' after some point

And another very grave but - BUT in both cases, biological functionality plays the major part - i.e. spirits who fly take form of eagles - i.e. physical apparatus designed for flight. Humanoid form, however, is an apparatus specifically designed for upright walking. Wings on it look as out of place as they would on a seal or a snail. Biological inconsistency, so to say. (Or John Travolta with a bottle of whiskey by the fridge)

And there is also age old argument of mine about two duels with balrogs. (Gandalf and Glorfindel). In both cases balrogs do fall down the abyss. Why should they fall, if the are winged and able of flight? In Gandalf's case it may be argued that the abyss below the bridge is too narrow for such a huge flier to spread its wings, but in Glorfindel's case the abyss is quite wide - enormous Thorondor flies down and up it to recover Glorfindel's body after the battle is over.

[narfforc]

Many years ago, whist I was still a young pup, I asked this question to a grey beard during Oxonmoot (Tolkien Society). His answer was What does the good book say. Here is what it says exactly, His enemy halted again, facing him, and the shadow about it reached out LIKE two vast wings. It does not say, its two vast wings reached out. A few sentences later are the words that have made this one of the most asked questions over the years, it drew itself up to a great height, AND ITS WINGS were spread from wall to wall. What Tolkien is talking about here are the Balrogs SHADOW wings. So the answer to this question is yes and no, the wings were there for show, like a politicians smile.

NOMOREIHERE

[Kransha]

Ah, a question I have carefully avoided answering, despite the debates, ceaseless as they are, that sway my opinions.

Now, though, in the culminating resolution (in poll form, no less), raised by the scholarly Professor Hedgethistle, I must cast my die...or something.

I try to use logic when thinking over the problem, rather than diggin through references. Usually, I like debates with supportive facts, but the Balrog-wings debate is no simple debate, so I only use straight book-reference, no Letters or Silmarillion extras. Those are my grounds. Here are, in my mind, the different supported cases that could be argued, regardless of illogic:

Case #1 - Balrogs have no wings, and the description of Balrogs is completely metaphoric.
Case #2 - Balrogs have "shadow projections," wing-like structures that are not really wings, but kinda are.
Case #3 - Balrogs have useless wings, like some flightless though winged animals.
Case #4 - Balrogs have vestigial wings for intimidation purposes
Case #5 - Balrogs have capes, ala Batman (copyright DC Comics, 19something5)

Well, now I must go through the process of approval or dissaproval.

Case #1 seems senseless when taken literally. Obviously the Balrogs had SOMETHING that the Fellowship saw, and weren't just big flaming giants. So, this case is illegimately disproved. I think that, despite Tolkien's penchant for metaphor, despite cordial dislike of allegory, he was not trying to indicate that Balrogs had no protrusions of any kind. To me, that puts the kibosh on Case #1.

Case #2 is a pretty legit deal. Shadowy, semi-magical projections are, in essence, a good case to plead for. They would not allow the Balrogs to fly in principle, but still match the description fit, and are, via the invention of the simile; "like wings." In order, though, to research the use of the term "wings" ala Balrogs one must discover what wings are. Even though this principle analysis of wings may have been conducted before, I'll do it again for the benefit of others.

According to Webster's Seventh New Collegate Dictionary, published in 1961 (one of the nearest publications to the time of the books' publication, I believe), a wing is:

1. a; one of the moveable feathered or membranous paired appendages by means of which a bird, bat, or insect is able to fly; b; any of the various organic structures (esp. of a flying fish or flying lemur) providing means of limited flight; 2. an appendage or part likened to a wing in shape, appearance, or position, as a: a device used for swimming attached to the shoulders; b: a turned-back or extended edge on an article of clothin; c: a sidepiece at the top of an armchair; d: a foliacious, membranous, or woody expansion of a plant; e: a vane of a windmill or arrow; f: a sail; g: one of the airfoils that develope. . .et cetera

Most of that is just misleading. Just wipe from your minds definitions 2:a-2:g, though the actual second definition is intriguing. Perhaps the term wing does apply to Balrog appendages using Definition 2 or 1:b (means of limited flight i.e. flying fish - lemur). The definitions provide evidence for Case #3 and #4 in a sense, but you have to analyze and re-analyze to discover if ol' dead Webster was actually in agreement with one or the other. Vestigial or useless wings are semi-common (vestigial wings are not, but it is not an inane or foreign concept).

In fact, Case #4 goes hand in hand with Case #2. If Balrogs have vestigial wings, they function on the same principle as shadowy extra appendages, intimidating/scaring/just being there sorts of things that serve little more purpose. But, were Balrogs designed to be scary or effective? Melkor seemed to be pretty with the idea of effectiveness in his monsters, but he did sacrifice intelligence when making orcs, possibly, as well as the ability to withstand sunlight, which means that maybe he was more concerned with making scary creatures that couldn't fly. But, it is awfully silly to give something wings that don't work, or to have wings that don't work. Balrogs may not have been created by Morgoth literally, or they may have been, but it seems that, in a world of villainous, fiendish efficiency, the Pits of Utumno and realm of the Dark Enemy, things with wings would fly. So, perhaps they really didn't have anything that allowed them to fly. So, Case #4 is assimilated into Case #2. Case #3 went bye-bye a while back. That leaves:

Case #1 - Doubtful
Case #2 - Strange, but plausible
Case #5 - Just plain weird...but...

If I may entertain a totally serious idea – maybe Balrogs wear capes?

Hey, it’s possible. This is, of course, far more of a humorous prospect, but it does make sense, to a degree; giant capes, possibly bionic or grafted onto their shoulders. Some artists have depicted Balrogs as wearing clothes of a sort, armor and the like. Trolls and orcs wore clothes, or so we are led to believe, on occasion. Maybe Balrogs did too? Maybe Morgoth had them fitted with trended, wing-like capes, clipped to their elbows and wrists so they could flap about and look as if they had wings. Maybe they just liked the feel of capes, and kept them around, which provided a shadowy illusion, as well as intimidation, as well as the ideals of wings, as well as the concept of fire-resistant material. Maybe….

Or maybe I’m off my rocker.

But, seriously, there is my contribution. Balrog capes.

As far as the Balrog in Moria, I like to think that it had wings but, because it had spent so much time underground in a relatively confined space, its wings no longer allowed it to fly. Perhaps Morgoth’s original Valarauka could fly, but the Moria Balrog could not, and thus, fell (on several occasions) to some degree of doom. Poor balrog. Jerry Springer would’ve had a field day.

So, I cast a vote for Balrog Capes.

For the poll, I vote yes…unofficially.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

I have yet to see a convincing argument against Underhill's thesis. It seems logical that if members of the Fellowship, who have just seen a Balrog up close and personal, mistake a flying creature for a Balrog, Balrogs must a) have wings and b) be capable of flight. (SoN)

Gimli wasn't officially a Balrog expert. And he didn't actually see the Balrog fly.

Perhaps he did see wings, and thought they work.

So, maybe they did have wings.

[Lalwendë]

Now it's my turn to have a go...

Much in the manner of David Frost on Through The Keyhole (or perhaps not...) "Let's look at the evidence so far..."

The dark figure streaming with fire raced towards them. The orcs yelled and poured over the stone gangways. Then Boromir raised his horn and blew. Loud the challenge rang and bellowed, like the shout of many throats under the cavernous roof. For a moment the orcs quailed and the fiery shadow halted. Then the echoes died as suddenly as a flame blown out by a dark wind, and the enemy advanced again.

'Over the bridge!' cried Gandalf, recalling his strength. 'Fly! This is a foe beyond any of you. I must hold the narrow way. Fly!' Aragorn and Boromir did not heed the command, but still held their ground, side by side, behind Gandalf at the far end of the bridge. The others halted just within the doorway at the hall's end, and turned, unable to leave their leader to face the enemy alone.

The Balrog reached the bridge. Gandalf stood in the middle of the span, leaning on the staff in his left hand, but in his other hand Glamdring gleamed, cold and white. His enemy halted again, facing him, and the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings. It raised the whip, and the thongs whined and cracked. Fire came from its nostrils. But Gandalf stood firm.

'You cannot pass,' he said. The orcs stood still, and a dead silence fell. 'I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor. You cannot pass. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udun. Go back to the Shadow! You cannot pass.'

The Balrog made no answer. The fire in it seemed to die, but the darkness grew. It stepped forward slowly on to the bridge, and suddenly it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings were spread from wall to wall; but still Gandalf could be seen, glimmering in the gloom; he seemed small, and altogether alone: grey and bent, like a wizened tree before the onset of a storm.

From out of the shadow a red sword leaped flaming.
Glamdring glittered white in answer.

There was a ringing clash and a stab of white fire. The Balrog fell back and its sword flew up in molten fragments. The wizard swayed on the bridge, stepped back a pace, and then again stood still.

'You cannot pass!' he said.

With a bound the Balrog leaped full upon the bridge. Its whip whirled and hissed.
'He cannot stand alone!' cried Aragorn suddenly and ran back along the bridge. 'Elendil!' he shouted. 'I am with you, Gandalf!'

'Gondor!' cried Boromir and leaped after him.

At that moment Gandalf lifted his staff, and crying aloud he smote the bridge before him. The staff broke asunder and fell from his hand. A blinding sheet of white flame sprang up. The bridge cracked. Right at the Balrog's feet it broke, and the stone upon which it stood crashed into the gulf, while the rest remained, poised, quivering like a tongue of rock thrust out into emptiness.

With a terrible cry the Balrog fell forward, and its shadow plunged down and vanished. But even as it fell it swung its whip, and the thongs lashed and curled about the wizard's knees, dragging him to the brink. He staggered, and fell, grasped vainly at the stone, and slid into the abyss.

'Fly, you fools!' he cried, and was gone.

The first description of the Balrog says the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings. This does not say it had wings, but the shadows looked like wings.

The second description says suddenly it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings were spread from wall to wall. This suggests that it did have wings, but what have we already read? That it was the shadows which looked like wings; we cannot take this out of context.

Finally, when the Balrog falls, With a terrible cry the Balrog fell forward, and its shadow plunged down and vanished. So why, when the bridge collapses, does the Balrog not put his 'wings' into action? If he does have wings, then they are certainly not useable ones, and has already been said, evolution is not a factor in Middle earth so why would he have merely vestigial wings?

Now, the Balrog is a creature of shadow and fire, he (and we assume it is a 'he', it could indeed be a female Balrog but I won't open that can of worms) is not made of flesh and blood. So when the shadow about him 'reached out like two vast wings' then I would think that the Balrog absorbed some of this shadow into his own being, thus making it indeed appear that he had wings! The picture which comes to mind is the old film Nosferatu where the vampire appears enormous by way of using his shadow to impressive effect. In the case of the Balrog, he uses the shadow to actually make his own being appear different. So no, he does not have wings, but he does appear to have them.

[Hookbill the Goomba]

Much as I would like Balrogs to have had wings, (I.e. they would look cooler) I have to say no. Among all the obvious arguing about how the Proff wrote that fateful scene in Moria, I have one view that sets it for me.

Here is my little theory of sorts.

Melkor, who we all know and love, made the Balrogs, yes? It is my reading that suggest that they were among the first creatures he... invented?.... and I do not think that had the Balrogs had wings then the appearance of Ancalagon and the flying dragons would not have been met with such fear and horror. It is my opinion that flying Balrogs would be slightly more frightening than the dragons. Also, perhaps winged creatures were a later thought of Melkors, and they were not given to another of his creatures (Unless I messed something).

However, This theory does not throw away the theory of later Balrogs having wings. Melkor could have improved on his original design. Bit I do not think he did. For surely if he did, then the armies of the elves would have been wiped out completely very early. As powerful as Balrogs were, give them wings and they are near invincible. Yes they were Mair and thus originally could change shape. But I like to think that Melkor constrained them so they could not change his own (as he may call it) perfect vision of fear.

As for winged but flightless, I think about it this way; if I were Melkor, would I waste time on wings that did not work? What would be the point?

In summery; Balrogs no wings. Wings reserved for Dragons like Ancalagon. Balrogs first thought, wings after thought.

Mind you, I could be wrong. Fell free to criticise.

[drigel]

ugh i dont want to get sucked into this but.. metaphors people lol
IMHO:
Balrogs "flying" in the Silm would be the same as the fellowship flying after Gandalf fell: "Fly you fools!".... one of many examples, like, why arent we asking: did Shadowfax have wings?

The parallels of both the LOTR balrog's and Gothmog's demise are curious, but one aspect says it all for me. They both involve: (drumroll)... falling.
thats it - no more poetry

[The Saucepan Man]

Didn't Gothmog drown in the Fountain of Gondolin after being impaled on Ecthelion's helmet? I suspect that his shadow wings got soggy and weighed him down.

It was the Balrog that Glorfindel fought that fell.

I have never read either actual passage. Would anyone care to submit them for analysis?

[Lalwendë]

But even as it fell it swung its whip, and the thongs lashed and curled about the wizard's knees, dragging him to the brink. He staggered, and fell, grasped vainly at the stone, and slid into the abyss.

This could suggest that the Balrog flung his whip (or whatever it is you do with a whip) because he hoped to catch hold of Gandalf and so save himself from falling! Yet in an almost comic moment, Gandalf lets go, and so the Balrog too falls.

There have been a few people who have weighed in on the issue in the thread but who have failed officially to cast their vote. I wonder if they are pretending to achieve a resolution and then losing their nerve when it comes to actually nailing their colours to the masthead, as it were, in the form of a vote.

Do we get fined if we don't vote? I forgot to, but I will do so right now.

[drigel]

SPM
I think your right. But doesnt 3 make a trend? Ecthelion's helm was the final blow that snuffed Gothmog.
I think there would be more votes if there was a catagory for "had wings, but not used for flight".

[Mister Underhill]

The second description says suddenly it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings were spread from wall to wall. This suggests that it did have wings, but what have we already read? That it was the shadows which looked like wings; we cannot take this out of context.

The old "like" chestnut. If you want the whole context, back up a few paragraphs, where the Balrog is first seen. "It was like a great shadow..." By the logic of the "like" argument, we must conclude that the "shadow" is metaphorical.

In past battles, evidence has been presented that Tolkien frequently uses "like" to create a mood, especially when introducing his evil characters. There are a few long posts ranging over this ground in the Were Balrogs winged? thread, starting out around page 3. See this post in particular for a list of examples.

Balrogs most certainly were creatures of flesh and blood -- you'd have a tough row to hoe arguing otherwise: "His fire was quenched, but now he was a thing of slime, stronger than a strangling snake. We fought far under the living earth, where time is not counted. Ever he clutched me, and ever I hewed him..." We could get into a whole fëa/hröa thing here, but I'll desist.

As to how a winged Balrog might fall during a battle -- it's no mystery. Wings may be hewn as easily as limbs or necks, I reckon.

P.S. -- Gandalf only lets go in the movie.

[The 1,000 Reader]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

Didn't Gothmog drown in the Fountain of Gondolin after being impaled on Ecthelion's helmet? I suspect that his shadow wings got soggy and weighed him down.

It was the Balrog that Glorfindel fought that fell.

I have never read either actual passage. Would anyone care to submit them for analysis?

I believe that Gothmog was gravely injured from his wound and the fountain extinguished his fire, weaking him enough to kill him. I don't think he drowned.

I think Balrogs had wings, but they were for show. That, or they couldn't support the heavy Balrogs when they were falling straight down without any preparation.

[The Sixth Wizard]

I (being an impatient person) have read only the first and last pages of this thread, but has Tolkien ever actually described a Balrog other than in LOTR? He says they are only fire-demons. Thus, are all Balrogs actually the same? Being Maiar, could they all alter their form at creation to suit their own wishes? Maybe the only Balrog with wings was in LOTR but didn't use them being caught up with Gandalf.

Another note, I don't know many Morgoth-creatures that could fly, barring the dragons. Manwe is the lord of the air and had birds in his dominion, but Morgoth was not. Perhaps the Balrogs could not fly because of this hatred of the air and sea, they bar themselves to the ground.

I had more opinions regarding this, I'll look again when I have the time.

SIXTH WIZARD.

[Keeper of Dol Guldur]

I've done years of pondering on this.

I started out as a pro-winger, using the 'if they don't, why'd Tolkien use the word 'wings'' argument.

Then I saw the movie, and thought 'hey, if the movie people think they had wings, they must have researched it clearly, right?'

I also thought since John Howe thought they had wings, and he must have scanned this in detail to do his sweet art, it was an option.

Then, in the last year, after reading the books a few more times, I went anti-wing. I can't remember my reasoning why. I'm sure it was legit ... it doesn't matter now.

Because here is the unyielding, unchanging, inarguable truth about Balrogs ...

Are you ready?

Here goes;

Balrogs have NO discernable features whatsoever.

That's right. And Tolkien wanted it that way, otherwise he would have been more clear in his description, just like how he was clear in EVERYTHING else's descriptions.

Imagine some smoke. Imagine slightly man-shaped even darker smoke in that cloud of smoke. Throw some glowing red eyes in the vicinity of the face. Light the smoke trailing off the 'headish cloud' on fire.

That's a Balrog. Yes, I personally think it's a solid being. Yes, I think the sooty, ashy movie Balrog's skin is a pretty accurate interpretation. Yes, both arguments for and against wings are good.

But logic dictates that if neither argument has a definitive, inarguable proof of being the correct truth, than neither of them can themselves be true.

The argument is irrelevent.

Thanks for coming out.

[Finwe-89]

Ok, Balrogs did NOT have wings, Tolkien made own pictures of his books, here's a link to a picture of a Balrog that as been made by Tolkien:


http://img-fan.theonering.net/rolozo...ith/bridge.jpg

[Mister Underhill]

That painting is not by Tolkien; it's by Ted Nasmith.

[Keeper of Dol Guldur]

Ugh ... Nasmith.

He couldn't resist the scales and tail, and reptilian feature. And who ever said Balrogs had horns? And yet EVERYBODY draws them with horns, or paints them with horns. And I see the "devil" influence even goes to that pointy end on it's tail.

Oh well, at least Nasmith got the size about right. But it seems awfully ... Trollish.

And it's scales look like the creature from that episode of Star Trek, you know the one, the evil puddle who kills Tasha Yar.

If it was darker and all you could see was Gandalf, the fiery mane, and the eyes and nose, it'd be better. That evil shadow is supposed to shut out even the brightest, Gandalfiest of light.

I don't know if anyone has brought this up before, but Arien, the Maya chosen to guide the vessel of the sun, is a spirit akin to the balrogs. to quote the sil: she was "from the beginning a spirit of fire, whom Melkor had not deceived nor drawn to his service." i've always wondered how she traversed the heavens. perhaps wings? then couldn't balrogs also have wings?

personally, i've always been an anti-winger, based on the fact that Balrogs are Maiar and therefore can change their shape. So i always thought they had or didn't have wings depending on their choice of shape.


For what it's worth....

[Folwren]

Originally posted by obloquy:
excuse me, but as a retard, I must object to your use of the word "retarded" in this context.

I am very sorry that I offended you. It was entirely unintentional. I'll be more careful in my choice of words next time I feel like...being not exactly nice.

- Folwren

[Morsul the Dark]

Originally Posted by mithrandir094

So i always thought they had or didn't have wings depending on their choice of shape.


For what it's worth....

I'm sorry falwren this quote was more what I meant

and also if all balrogs are maiar right and they all formed the same, then why wouldnt the five wizards also form exactly the same and vice versa.

[the guy who be short]

The Balrogs were fallen Maiar. Generally, a fallen Maia or Vala would become stuck in one form, sort of as a punishment (well, more as a plot device really). So I'd argue against Balrog Shapeshifting.

The Istari took the likeness of human forms - but they could presumably strip themselves of these at need. Thus, Gandalf the Grey Uncloaked.

[Gurthang]

Well, Balrogs have always had wings to me. The whole 'shadow spreading from wall to wall like wings' quote and then one of those threads that Fordim linked for us provided me with more evidence to support my decision.

But I want to point out that wether they have wings or not is not really found in the text. It seems that if we believed that Balrogs did have wings before all these debates, we read all the text in a way that supports our conclusion. Likewise, if we didn't believe before, then we are inclined to see the writings as discounting the possibility. So really, I've always thought they had wings, and I think that any reference would just support my side. Yet that same reference will support the other side, because they will read it so.

So this debate is really just how we have felt from the beginning, not how it really is.

[Thinlómien]

I voted for no, because I haven't read anything that says that they have wings.

[Morsul the Dark]

on a lighter note I asked my manager(a so-called lotr fan) whether she thought balrogs have wings or not and this so-called fan said something that would offend any self-respecting fan....

she said that the balrog had wings...(but the reasoning is the bad part)...they havew wings because balrogs are actually dragons!

I was appauled

as i said no matter where you stand on this issue we at least know dragons and balrogs are not the same

[Hookbill the Goomba]

Although, Morsul, one has to ask (perhaps for another topic) were Dragons captains over Balrogs or vice versa?

they have wings because Balrogs are actually dragons!

But even then, not all dragons have wings.

The whole Balrogian Wings debate is hard to resolve. In reading this topic, I personally have changed my opinion thrice, from no wings, to wings, and back to no wings again. It would be interesting if someone found a letter by the professor telling us a) how may wings Balrogs have and B) who Bombadill is, thus stopping all this silliness.

[Morsul the Dark]

maybe bombadil is a balrog? think about it he turns off the fireworks and boom hes a hobbitish woodsman hes kind of like the human torch ...sorry off topic

[Neithan]

How could anyone disagree with such unassailable logic?

Good God Fordim you can be irksome. You will excuse me, I hope, for taking a torch to your straw man but the example you gave misrepresents the argument.

Having proved incontrovertibly with the above sentence that the great shadowy forms that look like wings are in fact not wings

Notice that Tolkien says that "the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings" not "the two vast wings reached out like shadow" or even that the "shadowy forms", as you put it, reached out. The subject of the sentence is "shadow" not "wings" or "shadowy forms".

we can finally interpret the extraordinarily ambiguous claim that "its wings were spread from wall to wall" as meaning "its great wing-like shadows spread out from wall to wall".

It is not uncommon to refer to something(shadow) by a metaphor(wings) that you used earlier.

[HerenIstarion]

Originally Posted by Aiwnedil

Yes, but if "Balrog" is the cognate of "Valarauko" then the "Bal" comes not from NGWAL- but from BAL-

Probably. I suppose you're right, but it still does not eliminate the possibility that the Sindarin word may be simple blend of both stems (like to the Orthank, or Galad[h]riel connotations)

Thanks for the link - I enjoyed evening of remembrance, re-reading that 'clash of civilizations' there . In case we move or update again, and the link is lost (as most of my linking of yore was), I repeat it here with the title and author:

Bye bye Balrogs by jallanite is the place Aiwendil invited us to visit

cheers

[narfforc]

I flew down the motorway last month, the policeman that stopped me didnt care if I was a shadow or not, he still booked me.

[The Saucepan Man]

Just before he stopped you, did you catch sight of something bright in your rear-view mirror like flashing headlights?