Dragon's Flame, Magical?

[Groin Redbeard]

This is a question I've been thinking about lately and I'd like to see what you guys think about it.

It has been said that dragon-fire could melt and consume the Rings of Power, but there is not now any dragon left on earth in which the old fire is hot enough.
It was also said somewhere in the Silmarilion that the dwarves had built some type of armor that could withstand a dragon's flame.

Is dragon fire have magic in it in order to destroy the rings of power? And if that is true does that mean that dwarves can build magical armor?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Let me answer to you with a question.

What do you imagine under the term "magical"?

It is necessary for anyone who ventures further into the realms of Arda to throw away all his images of "magic" from other fantasy books, films, games (the latter mainly) etc. because magic in Middle-Earth... well, if you ask me, I'd say that it's better to say that there is no magic in Middle-Earth at all, it is at least closer to truth than coming here with the idea of magic one brings in from elsewhere.

Galadriel (to Sam; about her mirror):
For this is what your folk would call magic, I believe, though I do not understand clearly what they mean; and they seem also to use the same word of the deceits of the Enemy. But this, if you will, is the magic of Galadriel.

Lórien elves on Elf-cloaks:
"Are these magic cloaks?" asked Pippin, looking at them with wonder.
"I do not know what you mean by that," answered the leader of the Elves. "They are fair garments, and the web is good, for it was made in this land. They are elvish robes certainly, if that is what you mean."
The Elf is obviously confused and does not know what Pippin is asking about; and I think his stance is pretty much the same now as mine towards your question. So if you ask this way, yes, the dragon fire was magic and the dwarven armours, likewise, were magic. Relatively spoken.

[The Might]

No, I only think that it is really hot.

[Aganzir]

I think I've read some fantasy books in which the dragons spit acid instead of fire, and at least to me that sounds a thousand times more credible than fire-spitting dragons.

I'm not particularly sure about Tolkien's dragons (dragons are creatures of which I never bother to find anything out as I don't really like them), but were they fire spirits like the balrogs? If yes, I wouldn't question their ability to spit fire nor to have magical powers (just like Gandalf and Sauron, for instance, had) or even "magical fire".

A poisonous acid might explain the dwarves' armours, though. Even if a fire-spitting dragon couldn't melt their armours, the heat would have killed them. It's easier to be safe from acids.

edit: crossed with Leggy and Miggy

[A Little Green]

Interesting question, Groin. Actually, the points you brought up made me think about an additional question. If dragon flame could consume rings of power but not dwarven armour, then is the dwarven mail actually stronger (or rather, more endurant) than a ring of power?

I don't know about magic, though - I'd rather talk about power. The dragons were, after all, beings of a different time, a time when everything was greater, fairer, and younger. I find it perfectly reasonable to think that beings as mighty as the dragons would be able to destroy rings of power. It's the comparison to the dwarven mail thingy that feels problematic.

By the way - the passage "but there is not now any dragon left on earth in which the old fire is hot enough" somehow makes me awfully sad.

Sorry, Groin - instead of answering your question I just made another. :( What is this, answering a question with a question? Brings me in mind of Rosencranz and Guildenstern...

[The Might]

Oh, xed as well.
As for the armors, this brings to my Science of M-e thread.

Not really sure what could be used to make some heat resistand outfit, but as long as some like that exist today I see no reason why the Dwarves would not have been able to make something liek that as well.

[A Little Green]

I just cross-posted with, what, three people? Gosh, your thread is popular, Groin...:)

Oh, and sorry for the flood, but Aganzir's I'm not particularly sure about Tolkien's dragons (dragons are creatures of which I never bother to find anything out as I don't really like them), but were they fire spirits like the balrogs? made me think more about the dragons. What actually were they? Who made them, and for what purpose? I guess that if some letters/HoME scholar had an explanation for that first, the rest should work out.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

I do not think that dragon fire was magical in the sence that it could destroy specially chosen items like ring of power, that otherwise could not be destoryed by fire. It must be (like the might says) that dragon fire is so much hotter than other kinds of fire (save the fire of mount doom) that enables it to destroy mighty/magical objects.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Interesting question, Groin. Actually, the points you brought up made me think about an additional question. If dragon flame could consume rings of power but not dwarven armour, then is the dwarven mail actually stronger (or rather, more endurant) than a ring of power?

I don't know about magic, though - I'd rather talk about power. The dragons were, after all, beings of a different time, a time when everything was greater, fairer, and younger. I find it perfectly reasonable to think that beings as mighty as the dragons would be able to destroy rings of power. It's the comparison to the dwarven mail thingy that feels problematic.

Well, I think concerning the dwarven armour, it's rather a matter of "technology" - the mail was made on purpose to resist dragon fire. Think about all the military developement, or for a more peaceful example, the research of cures and antidotes. The Rings were not made as something that should resist dragon fire (like that you'd make an anti-dragon shelter from a pile of Rings or create for yourself a Ring-mail ;) ), their resistance to fire is a "side power".

EDIT: x-ed since LG's post I am replying to. Yay, this is almost as a WW game thread! :D

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

This reminds me of the first thread I started. . .
http://www.forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=12245

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Oh, and sorry for the flood, but Aganzir's made me think more about the dragons. What actually were they? Who made them, and for what purpose? I guess that if some letters/HoME scholar had an explanation for that first, the rest should work out.

Dragons were something like animals, rather, only twisted by Morgoth and with stronger spirits inside them. Similar to werewolves, though please correct me if I am wrong; or Eagles, or even Ents. I wrote longer post about that in my early days around here, let's see if I can find it... here (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showpost.php?p=498733&postcount=30) (that is the last post in the thread).

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

If they where just "animals" twisted by Morgoth, what animals where they then?

I have always seen them as creatures like Balrogs or as you say Ents ect.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

You did not understand me. See that post I linked to for more. I don't mean that they were animals, but that they were some sorts of "construction from flesh and bone" inhabited by vile spirits. And be careful about mixing Balrogs into it, Balrogs were fallen Maiar. It's a matter of difference in "acquiring" the body; the Balrogs chose their own form and later it degraded and they could not change it anymore, while the dragon and similar spirits were "trapped" in a body prepared for them.

[Groin Redbeard]

Let me answer to you with a question.

What do you imagine under the term "magical"?

Little Green came up with an interesting thought on power instead of magic. Now that I think about it, I think power would be a better word than "magic".
Actually, the points you brought up made me think about an additional question. If dragon flame could consume rings of power but not dwarven armour, then is the dwarven mail actually stronger (or rather, more endurant) than a ring of power?
I like that idea very much! I wouldn't put it past those dwarves!:D

By the way - the passage "but there is not now any dragon left on earth in which the old fire is hot enough" somehow makes me awfully sad.

That is also another question I have, thanks for bringing that up LG:D! When Gandalf says that, is he implying that there are still dragons in Arda?


I'm not particularly sure about Tolkien's dragons (dragons are creatures of which I never bother to find anything out as I don't really like them), but were they fire spirits like the balrogs?
I think dragons are just creatures, just like the fell beasts. Since they were made by Melkor, he already had his servents. That's another question, are fell beasts related to dragons

Ahhh, so many questions!

EDIT: Maybe these are too many questions for one thread. Let's just stick to the topic at hand.

[The Might]

About the mail, considering that it has to be heat resistant I think it also has a lot to do with what it is amde of and not how it is made.
What about a heat resistant alloy?

It seems that gold melts at 1064°C so that is pretty much what you would need to destroy the One Ring.
Superalloys that are not only quite heat resistant but also have great mechanical strength (making them good for armor) take up to 1100°C.

What if dragons were only capable of lesser temperatures? That is an explanation I believe.


About the dragons, yes, there certainly were some left.

And finally about their origin.
In the Silmarillion they are presented as a corrupted stock, another of Morgoth's creations like the fell beasts the Nazgul used in the War of the Ring.
However, in a later passage from the Children of Húrin they are called "great spirits", which kind of implies that they, or at least some of them, might be fallen spirits, similar to the balrogs.

[Nogrod]

It seems that gold melts at 1064°C so that is pretty much what you would need to destroy the One Ring.
Superalloys that are not only quite heat resistant but also have great mechanical strength (making them good for armor) take up to 1100°C.Or what if mithril and the One Ring were made of something more heat-resistant we people of these ages of decay do not know anymore? :D

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

It seems that gold melts at 1064°C so that is pretty much what you would need to destroy the One Ring.
Superalloys that are not only quite heat resistant but also have great mechanical strength (making them good for armor) take up to 1100°C.

What if dragons were only capable of lesser temperatures? That is an explanation I believe.


If it was that simple, then surely Lord of the Rings should be a guide to build a forge. . .

[Thinlómien]

I agree with Nogrod and Rune. Unfortunately, I don't have my LotR here and I can't remember the exact quote about destroying the ring in a Dwarven forge (at least not in English ;)), but however it is phrased, it always sounded to me like Dwarves could make ordinary gold melt, but not the One Ring.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I hope no one is suggesting here that The One Ring is as easy to melt as the other Rings, that is one of the basic LotR axioms! I don't see any problem with TM's idea that the dragon fire was hot enough to melt normal gold, and therefore, also the Rings of Power, but the One was held together by something else. I could almost quote that from my memory only, but for the sake of further clarity, here is the whole quote:

Your small fire, of course, would not melt even ordinary gold. This Ring has already passed through it unscathed, and even unheated. Not even the anvils and furnaces of the Dwarves could do that. It has been said that dragon-fire could melt and consume the Rings of Power, but there is not now any dragon left on earth in which the old fire is hot enough; nor was there ever any dragon, not even Ancalagon the Black, who could have harmed the One Ring, the Ruling Ring, for that was made by Sauron himself.
It is clearer than day that the One was held together by something more than just inter-molecular connections.

[A Little Green]

I can't remember the exact quote about destroying the ring in a Dwarven forge (at least not in English ), but however it is phrased, it always sounded to me like Dwarves could make ordinary gold melt, but not the One Ring. True - here's the passage (I think) you are referring to: But there is no smith's forge in this Shire that could change it at all. Not even the anvils and furnaces of the Dwarves could do that. It is said that dragon-fire could melt and consume the Rings of Power, but there is not now any dragon left on earth in which the old fire is hot enough; nor was there ever any dragon, not even Ancalagon the Black, who could have harmed the One Ring, the Ruling Ring, for that was made by Sauron himself. This made me think about the fell spirit-thingy... I can't think about the dragons as "just creatures, just like the fell beasts" like Groin said. The thought of dragons being maiar-sort of creatures is much more intriguing, but as little reasonable. Gandalf's "for that was made by Sauron himself" indicates to Sauron being much more powerful than the dragons, so if Sauron is a maia, and if dragons indeed are somewhere close, then, well, Saorun must be just an uncommonly powerful maia, and the dragons weak. The former is certainly true, the latter I'm not so sure of.

The Rings were not made as something that should resist dragon fire (like that you'd make an anti-dragon shelter from a pile of Rings or create for yourself a Ring-mail), their resistance to fire is a "side power". Good point :D Didn't think about it that way...

EDIT: Oh good, x-ed with Legate... Just how popular is this thread, anyway?

[Aganzir]

Just to clarify:
Dragons. They had not stopped; since they were active in far later times, close to our own. Have I said anything to suggest the final ending of dragons? If so it should be altered. The only passage I can think of is Vol. I p. 70: 'there is not now any dragon left on earth in which the old fire is hot enough'. But that implies, I think, that there are still dragons, if not of full primeval stature.

What about a heat resistant alloy?
How can that prevent the dwarves from dying? They would still die of the heat. Ha, unless their blood had a very high boiling point! When it comes to dwarves, nothing is impossible. ;)

But how did the dragons themselves stand the heat? I would imagine Glaurung had quite a sore throat after burning some trees... I'm rather sure even Melkor couldn't make them as heat-resistant bodies as they needed. Even though they were 'lesser spirits', is there any evidence against the idea that they had 'chosen' their form themselves (though forced by Melkor)?

Gandalf's "for that was made by Sauron himself" indicates to Sauron being much more powerful than the dragons, so if Sauron is a maia, and if dragons indeed are somewhere close, then, well, Saorun must be just an uncommonly powerful maia, and the dragons weak.
Could Gandalf destroy the One Ring? Could a balrog, for instance, have done that? On the other hand, Melkor could destroy the Trees and the Lamps.
Sauron would not have risen to the rank he had, had he not been an exceptionally powerful maia. He was definitely more powerful than the dragons, and thus I find it totally credible that no dragon could have destroyed a ring with Sauron's powers in it.

To me, that's a sufficient answer to why dragons couldn't have melted the One Ring, but I'm still rather baffled about dwarven armours.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

On the other hand, Melkor could destroy the Trees and the Lamps.

Just to clarify: the Lamps were probably destroyed by the combinated effort of Melkor's fallen-Maia hosts, and with the Trees, he needed the help of Ungoliant.

[A Little Green]

But how did the dragons themselves stand the heat? I would imagine Glaurung had quite a sore throat after burning some trees... I'm rather sure even Melkor couldn't make them as heat-resistant bodies as they needed. Come on, it's fiction, not science :D If we start looking for too scientific explanations, all we'll result with is most likely a headache. For me, it is enough to think that if a dragon's body can produce flame then it must be able to stand the heat. It's like... umm... well, like the poison a snake secretes doesn't harm the snake itself, because it has an immunity to it.

Do I make sense?

[skip spence]

Reading Tolkien I had a compelling vision af how Glaurung, the first dragon, was 'made'.

I imagine that on some high cliff up on Thangorodrim Morgoth and his Balrogs had a great reptile bound with heavy iron chains. There, under the dark, starless sky, they would chant a long and powerful spell, summoning a fire spirit of the kind that was corrupted by Melkor in ages past. By his crafts, Morgoth would then command the spirit to possess the struggling creature. When it had successfully done so, the reptile, now Glaurung the father of dragons, could feed on noldorin thralls growing ever larger and more cunning.

As for the dragon's fire beeing magical, I think it depends on what you mean by magical. A fire-breathing great lizard with a mind far more powerful than a man's is certainly a 'magical' creature, I would say. The fire itself is merely very hot, I imagine. I also think that the dwarven armours could withstand dragons fire to a certain degree, and from some distance. If a dragon blasted a dwarf from point blank range he would no doubt fry like a marshmallow.;)

[The Might]

A Little Green, as long as there is a book out there called "The Science of Middle-earth" I wouldn't be so hasty to discard the whole scientific explanation part. So no, to me you're not making that much sense.
Tolkien was no the kind of person to write stuff without thinking it at least a little bit through and everything there has a certain explanation.

Now to the dragon idea, the basic theory in pretty much all newer dragon works is that the fire is only created in their mouths through the mixture of two separate chemical substances. And this makes quite a lot sense. Anything that can be pierced by a sword isn't probably capable of taking that much heat. Thus, a dragon himself wouldn't really need to take that heat himself.

Aganzir, indeed good criticism. I had not really taken that into account. As I am not really an expert in material qualities I can't really say what would work, but if workers in foundaries have something like that it could be an idea.
Although I don't understand what you mean by "lesser spirits", in CoH they are "great spirits" implying Ainur.

And I also see no reason why they should not have been. After all Sauron was one of the most powerful Maiar and one of the best smiths. Their weakness is relative.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

A Little Green, as long as there is a book out there called "The Science of Middle-earth" I wouldn't be so hasty to discard the whole scientific explanation part. So no, to me you're not making that much sense.

Miggy, nothing against the scientific view, as you say, Tolkien tried to make everything even scientifically explainable if possible - however, there may be people who don't care whether there is a scientific explanation of things like dragon fire, which has its roots in folklore, and as Tolkien says in his essay On Fairy-Stories:
The mind that thought of light, heavy, grey, yellow, still, swift, also conceived of magic that would make heavy things light and able to fly (...) we may cause woods to spring with silver leaves and rams to wear fleeces of gold, and put hot fire into the belly of the cold worm. But in such "fantasy", as it is called, new form is made; Faerie begins; Man becomes a sub-creator.
It is a matter of view, no one takes you the right to try to find a scientific conclusion on this - but you need to have in your mind also that "dragons spit fire because Morgoth made them do that" (with no particular scientific explanation) is also an answer.

[The Might]

Indeed, I now realise I was quite hasty there myself.

Especially after finding this (I was actually looking for something to support my idea):

"But the land of Merlin and Arthur was better than these, and best of all the nameless North of Sigurd of the Volsungs, and the prince of all dragons. Such lands were pre-eminently desirable. I never imagined that the dragon was of the same order as the horse. And that was not solely because I saw horses daily, but never even the footprint of a worm. The dragon had the trade-mark Of Fairie written upon him. In whatever world he had his being it was an Other-world. Fantasy, the making or glimpsing of Other-worlds, was a profound desire. I desired dragons with a profound desire."

So seems that fantasy did play a great part in this.
Still, I am trying to find some explanations.

[skip spence]

Now to the dragon idea, the basic theory in pretty much all newer dragon works is that the fire is only created in their mouths through the mixture of two separate chemical substances. And this makes quite a lot sense. Anything that can be pierced by a sword isn't probably capable of taking that much heat. Thus, a dragon himself wouldn't really need to take that heat himself.


Well, from Tolkiens description of dragons it's clear that their bodies were strong heat sources even while not breating fire. Smaug indeed seemed to glow steadily, like burning charcoal, bringing heat as well as light to his hall. Also, when Glaurung enters the river outside Nargothrond, the water boils, and vast steams and blinding vapours cover the area. If a dragons cools down, it seems to be unable to breath fire and is less potent, more resembling a great, slimy lizard.

In that movie with dragons in it "Reign of Fire", the fire was caused by a mix of chemicals as you described. I don't think Tolkien imagined his dragons to be anything like those creatures.

[Farael]

In that movie with dragons in it "Reign of Fire", the fire was caused by a mix of chemicals. I don't think Tolkien imagined his dragons to be anything like those creatures.

There was a documentary on the Discovery Channel where they made a (fake obviously) documentary about dragons, trying to make it look as realistic and plausible as possible. One of the things they said is that the dragons would scratch and eat certain rocks which then would be processed by bacteria in their stomach to produce Hydrogen gas. This would allow them to be lighter for flying and also to breathe fire.

Some combination of that idea and (other) chemical reactions could have explained the dragons fire breathing.

However, I think there is a misconception here. When Galadriel or the Elves say that there is no such thing as magic, they do so from within Middle Earth itself. However, the land of Middle Earth is magical on itself, there are gods walking around and actively interfering with the life of lesser beings, there are dragons and elves and dwarves and mithril and hobbits.... there are also swords that light up when a special kind of enemy is near, there are stones that allow you to spy on your neighbour and there are pieces of jewlery that will let you, if used properly, dominate all beings in existance. Oh, and little crystals that make elves go insane... and as a side-effect, shine with the essence of light itself

Surely there is something magical about that?

Even though Tolkien made a great effort to make sure that nothing on his tales could be answered by simply "it was magic" or "a wizard did it" it does not mean that everything can be explained by Real Life logic. To me, Middle-Earth has self-consistency but it does not mean that it has consistency with the Real World.

I think this is good enough for a new thread, but my point here is the folowing:

Dragon-fire it wasn't magic for Middle Earth. They were probably monsters inhabited by fell spirits of fire and made/corrupted through the craft and cunnign (not magic) of a god-like figure. However, for all real life intents and purposes, it was magic. Like we call magic the tricks of an entertainer at a party when we cannot explain it, but we call it a trick when it is told to us. However, we cannot explain "magic" in Middle Earth because the rules we take for granted here do not quite apply to Middle Earth.

[Aganzir]

Just to clarify: the Lamps were probably destroyed by the combinated effort of Melkor's fallen-Maia hosts, and with the Trees, he needed the help of Ungoliant.
I just wanted to point out that even though ainur have, in some cases, been able to destroy the works of the other ainur (although the comparison was not completely valid, as at least to my knowledge any of the valar didn't shed their power to the Lamps), I don't think it makes much difference whether the dragons were of maia origin or not, as Sauron was more powerful than them anyway.

I have a feeling I'm being rather unclear today.

Come on, it's fiction, not science
I know, and while writing my previous post I actually stopped to think why I try to find solutions to things that may be contradictory just because also Tolkien was just a human.
But isn't that what we fans must do? Although Tolkien is dead, we are still creating and completing Middle-earth, no matter if all we do is to try to find logical solutions to things that don't make sense otherwise.

Although I don't understand what you mean by "lesser spirits", in CoH they are "great spirits" implying Ainur.
I was referring to the post Legate linked, to somewhat disagree with his theory about dragons being spirits that were trapped to bodies prepared for them.

Surely there is something magical about that?
Well, if you go to some isolated native tribe in the Amazonian rainforest, they will surely find your mobile phone and car magical. But when you've lived there long enough, they are suddenly thinking that those are common every-day objects.

[Groin Redbeard]

Come on, it's fiction, not science :D If we start looking for too scientific explanations, all we'll result with is most likely a headache.

I think I just got one.:rolleyes: I do believe that we are looking into this just a little too much. As Farael said there are certain things in Middle Earth which are undoubtedly magical, and I don't believe that everything that Tolkien created can be explained by science.


It seems that gold melts at 1064°C so that is pretty much what you would need to destroy the One Ring.
But there is more holding the One Ring together than just the obvious. Does it take the same amount of effort to destroy the other rings of power as it does the One Ring?

[Estelyn Telcontar]

But there is more holding the One Ring together than just the obvious. Does it take the same amount of effort to destroy the other rings of power as it does the One Ring?


Originally Posted by Gandalf, Shadow of the Past
Your small fire, of course, would not melt even ordinary gold. This Ring has already passed through it unscathed, and even unheated. Not even the anvils and furnaces of the Dwarves could do that. It has been said that dragon-fire could melt and consume the Rings of Power, but there is not now any dragon left on earth in which the old fire is hot enough; nor was there ever any dragon, not even Ancalagon the Black, who could have harmed the One Ring, the Ruling Ring, for that was made by Sauron himself. (my emphasis)


*shakes head - reading previous posts is a highly recommended method for answering your questions! ;)

[Groin Redbeard]

*shakes head - reading previous posts is a highly recommended method for answering your questions! ;)

I've read Legate's post on the One Ring. My question is how about the other rings. Would it be the same with those?

But you're right Estelyn , I do seldom fully read other peoples posts.:)

[Estelyn Telcontar]

But that quote from the book does say something about the other rings - read the sentence that begins with "It has been said..." Apparently dragon fire (though not of the cooler dragons existing at the point of time the War of the Rings took place) could melt the other Rings of Power, but not even the strongest (dragon) fire could melt the One Ring.

[Alfirin]

First a question, since all of the rings of power are accounted for at the beginning of the LOTR (the nine men's are on the nazgul, the seven dwarves are in sauron's keeping the three eleven are on Elrond's Gladriel's and Gandalf's fingers and the one is in Frodo's keeping) how exactly does anyone know that dragon fire will melt the lesser rings?
on the main note of this post I seem to recall that there were two kinds of dragon fire in ME. Most dragons fire was red-orange-yellow and I tedn to think that this was simply ordinary fire. But I beive tolkein said that some dragons could also breathe Green flames. Since fire does not, under normal circumstaces burn green (unless the dragons were eating a LOT of copper salts) I think that those flames may have had some sort of additonal power and could be considered "magic" in some manner." As for the Dragonproof armor of The Dwarves I've always just assumed that dwarves, being wise in nature of minerals simply know where to find asbestos and how to wave it into fireproof cloth which could be incroprted into armor. I also seem to recally that a key part of the armor was metal scrresn over the visors which gave the dwarves the advatage of being able to see through the dragons fire without buring their faces off

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

First a question, since all of the rings of power are accounted for at the beginning of the LOTR (the nine men's are on the nazgul, the seven dwarves are in sauron's keeping the three eleven are on Elrond's Gladriel's and Gandalf's fingers and the one is in Frodo's keeping) how exactly does anyone know that dragon fire will melt the lesser rings?
Well, "it is said", says Gandalf - it may not be true. However, you are not right about the Seven Rings of Dwarves. Sauron recovered only (darn, I never remember whether he recovered three and four remained or he recovered four and three remained), who cares, some of them, and the rest was consummed by the dragons. Here you go.

But I beive tolkein said that some dragons could also breathe Green flames. Since fire does not, under normal circumstaces burn green (unless the dragons were eating a LOT of copper salts) I think that those flames may have had some sort of additonal power and could be considered "magic" in some manner."
I believe you are referring to this:
he soared blazing into the air and settled on the mountain-top in a spout of green and scarlet flame
Yes, this seems the most "magic" part of all. Though, who knows what happened inside the dragon's belly - but it was not a "normal" fire in any case. Btw, I'm not that knowledgeable on this field, but isn't the colour here saying something about the temperature? Ee, in case of gases probably not, huh?

[Alfirin]

But heat alone can't make fire turn green; the color/heat pattern for fire is the same one (quite logically) for magnitute of stars. From coolest to hottest it goes- red,orange,yellow, white, blue-white. Fire can't burn green witout help

But thanks for the ring clarification, that would explain how people know that dragon fire melts rings

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

But heat alone can't make fire turn green; the color/heat pattern for fire is the same one (quite logically) for magnitute of stars. From coolest to hottest it goes- red,orange,yellow, white, blue-white. Fire can't burn green witout help

Oh yes, of course (silly diletant :rolleyes: )

[Groin Redbeard]

Sauron recovered only (darn, I never remember whether he recovered three and four remained or he recovered four and three remained), who cares, some of them, and the rest was consummed by the dragons. Here you go.

Thank you Legate!:D That certainly proves that dragons can destroy rings of power. Although the dragons could have just eaten the rings.:cool:

Alfirin, thanks for mentioning the green dragon fire. I think ya'll have just answered my questions!:D

[Eönwë]

By the way - the passage "but there is not now any dragon left on earth in which the old fire is hot enough" somehow makes me awfully sad.

Yes, I've always thought that too. In Tolkien's world, everything deteriorates. He is quite traditionalist (And he kept to being a strict CAtholic, and looked with scorn at anyone who bent the religion a bit).

Morgoth is like an inventor. If he creates dragons that are made to destroy, they destro. Their fire goes under the same rule. It is obviously very hot and the green flames maybe mean that something is special in that fire that is not the same as in normal fire. Glaurung almost destroyed Gondolin by himself. ALso, how can you compare dragons to animals? (and I mean the regular type).
Here dragons can talk and think, and if I remember correctly, hypnotise people just by people looking in their eyes. That takes some brainpower.
The fire is obviously very hot, but mithril armour, in its nature, is magical to us. It may have had a very high melting point.
The rings, once made, could not be destroyed by the same heat that would melt gold, because they were infused with magic/power of an Ainu. This would mean that it would require more magic/power to destry it. Magic vs magic. And since the dragons were made to destroy, the rings would melt. But the one ring was made not to be destroyed, or a t least, Sauron infused it with so much magic that nothing except him, or the heat which made it (And could melt it in the first place) could destroy it.

So, as previous people havesaid, dragon magic is magic for us, but not in ME. They were made to destroy so they destroy*.



*this might be a bit irrelevant but it might be like a placebo. If you think you are better, you are better. If you think you can destroy a ring of power you can. There was once a man who held up a truck for a hours, until an ambulance came to save the person trapped inside. When you need to do something, your body finds away to do it.

[Dwarven Warrior]

But heat alone can't make fire turn green; the color/heat pattern for fire is the same one (quite logically) for magnitute of stars. From coolest to hottest it goes- red,orange,yellow, white, blue-white. Fire can't burn green witout help.

But no other dragon other than Smaug has ever done this. I'm scurrying through my LotR books here, and I can't find anywhere else that it says that.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

But no other dragon other than Smaug has ever done this. I'm scurrying through my LotR books here, and I can't find anywhere else that it says that.

But it is probable the others did too, even though it isn't mentioned. Generalising is often dangerous, but at this time I believe we can take it granted for all dragons. In Roverandom, if I recall correctly, the Dragon of the Moon also did breathe green flames, even though it isn't a M-E story, it shows that Tolkien was quite fond of green fire so we could expect it from other dragons in his works as well. (Personally, I think it is some sort of expression from Tolkien to give "fairytale" quality to a "normal" fire - I wouldn't put it past him - and in that case, our question is solved: of course it was a "magic" fire.)

[cesar.ewok]

Túrin has some information regarding the spirit and the body of the dragon:

His power is rather in the evil spirit that dwells within him than in the might of his body, great though that be.

Though it's Túrin's own conclusion, if true, it would strongly suggest that the "fire" and the "hypnotizing" abilities come from the spirit, for the dragon proper is refered to as just the body (compare Túrins words: "His power is rather in the evil spirit that dwells within him").

Morgoth probably transferred subcreative power and lore to the drangon's spirit; a similar process took place with Sauron and the Witch-King:

There, put in command by Sauron, he [the Witch-king] is given an added demonic force.

Therefore, this wouldn't require the body of the dragon to possess an "indwelling fire" at all: the fire would be produced at the spitting. But, of course, the body would have to be strong enough to withstand the fire next to which it would stand.

Many suggested that the indwelling spirit would be lesser Maiar-like, but I found something possibly contrary in the Silmarillion:

He [Glaurung] was yet young and scarce half-grown, for long and slow is the life of the dragons, but the Elves fled before him to Ered Wethrin and Dorthonion in dismay; and he defiled the fields of Ard-galen.

Would this suggest that dragons die, for "long and slow" are their lives? Would this be possible being them Maiar?

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Moreover dragons are born (or at least hatched), which militates against the Maia-theory.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Moreover dragons are born (or at least hatched), which militates against the Maia-theory.

This is why I thought they are rather similar to Eagles or Ents, about whom we know had some sort of spirits in them, yet they bred, grew and probably also died of old age. Similarly, we don't know, I believe, what kind of "spirits" dwelt inside the Werewolves - I believe it might have been the same. And in all cases, these were NOT maiar.*

Just for reference, that thing I meant about Ents is here (spoken by Manwë to Yavanna):
When the Children awake, then the thought of Yavanna will awake also, and it will summon spirits from afar, and they will go among the kelvar and the olvar, and some will dwell therein.

And we know the Ents could breed, have children, the same goes about Eagles (Gwaihir and his kin were only descendants of Thorondor; and you can check that Landroval is said to be Gwaihir's brother in RotK).

*It remains a question where is the border between animal spirit and this kind of spirit. Because I just thought that the animals, given their nature in M-E, probably also have simply some spirit "summoned from afar", though of different, "lesser" kind (reminds me of Aristotle); and now see, you have eagles, who are messengers of Valar and everything, but you have also let's say hawks, who are not that different from eagles, but they are "only" animals.

[cesar.ewok]

Legate, Tolkien actually states that the Eagles had no spirit:

The same sort of thing may be said of Huan and the Eagles: they were taught language by the Valar, and raised to a higher level - but they still had no fëar.

Can we assume this is a canonical conclusion? Tolkien states it very conclusively, and it is, as far as I know, his last word on the subject.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Alright, thanks for bringing that up. Well, whatever you wish. Personally I was not using HoME, because I don't possess it. Anyway, I think the point is clear from the above, it wasn't about Eagles, but about Dragons - and if not Eagles, then use the Ents as example.

[The Might]

Just short about the Eagle thing.
It may be that that is said in Morgoth's Ring and Myths Transformed are later writings but as CT remarks there these passages show a lot of debate in the Professor's mind and you can't clearly say that he would have chosen eagles without fear over those from the Sil.