Of Bombadillos and Balrogs [Archive] - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

The Barrow-Wight

02-08-2001, 01:20 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Wraith of Angmar
Posts: 1829</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

Durelen is right that cover art done by an artist after JRRTs death (or before, even) cannot be used as proof for or against wings. You must turn to the text. If you relied on artists renditions, you'd soon believe that Legolas wears wigs or colors his hair, for he is seen with several shades of long tresses in the various pictures I have seen.

The Barrow-Wight (RKittle)
<font size="2">I usually haunt http://www.barrowdowns.comThe Barrow-Downs</a> and The Barrow-Downs http://www.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgiMiddle-Earth Discussion Board</a>.</p>

Impaler00

02-08-2001, 07:13 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Pile o' Bones
Posts: 12</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

"And I think Balrogs had Wings, for many reasons but one inparticular is on the Book of Lost Tales 1 cover it has Glaurung and two Balrogs behind him crouching, and they had Wings."

I said 'FOR MANY REASONS BUT ONE INPARTICULAR' not just that one but many, and I was in a hurry so I did not name them.

</p>

Mithadan

02-08-2001, 07:45 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Spirit of Mist
Posts: 588</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

S'ok I think they have wings too.

--Mithadan--
"The Silmarils with living light
were kindled clear, and waxing bright
shone like stars that in the North
above the reek of earth leap forth." </p>

The Barrow-Wight

02-08-2001, 08:03 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Wraith of Angmar
Posts: 1834</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

I am still undecided on the wings issue though I lean heavliy no-wing, but since you only specified the one 'proof' its all I could comment on.

The Barrow-Wight (RKittle)
<font size="2">I usually haunt http://www.barrowdowns.comThe Barrow-Downs</a> and The Barrow-Downs http://www.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgiMiddle-Earth Discussion Board</a>.</p>

Oliphaunt

02-08-2001, 08:38 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Animated Skeleton
Posts: 28</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

I don't think Bombadil is Illuvatar; didn't it specifically say that He never went into the circle of Arda? I think that we (the Tolkien-reading public) aren't supposed to question TB's origin. Tolkien put him in there for his own reasons, and its those reasons we should try to figure out, not his classifications. People say that Tom is an embodiment of the vanishing Oxford countryside, but I never really made the connection. Was there a man with a blue coat and yellow boots with songs of "derry doll" in the vanishing Oxford countryside?

I first read "The Fellowship of the Ring" and imagined Durin's Bane with fiery wings long before I knew there were people devoting hours of thinking and arguing about those wings. Perhaps Tolkien kept the descriptions unclear and contradicting so the reader could imagine the more natural for him/herself.

</p>

Impaler00

02-09-2001, 05:02 AM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Pile o' Bones
Posts: 14</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

If a Balrog did not have wings then it would just be a giant up-right walking goat.

I believe they had wings but that their wings weren't strong enough for them to fly, so they just walked or 'glided' or they probably just used some mysterious dark power to make them fly.

Hehe :P (it's 5 am here i just woke up)

</p>

Chattizard

07-14-2001, 10:59 AM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 1</TD><TD><img src=http://www.geocities.com/Lord_Zard2001/ankkaperhe.jpg WIDTH=60 HEIGHT=60></TD></TR></TABLE>
<img src="http://www.barrowdowns.com/images/posticons/narya.jpg" align=absmiddle> Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

Well, I think that Balrogs have wings... It sounds so logical to me. But Tom... I don't know. I think he's not Iluvatar.

Balrogs are giant beasts with fiery eyes... So somehow, I think they also have big wings.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Muistattekos sen faktan siitä Roope-sedän numerosta 43 kun Roope sanoi..."
mailto:Darth_Zard@hotmail.comLord Zard</a>
http://LordZard.cjb.netLord Zard's Galaxy</a></p>

Turambar6

07-14-2001, 11:10 AM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 4</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
<img src="http://www.barrowdowns.com/images/posticons/narya.jpg" align=absmiddle> Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

You can't use the text of The book of lost tales either when looking at Balrogs. The picture on the book of lost tales is probably based on the text where Balrogs had wings.

<a href=http://pub75.ezboard.com/barda61763>The Tolkien Discussion Board</a></p>

Fingolfin

07-15-2001, 07:54 AM

Impmog2001

07-19-2001, 11:11 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 1</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
<img src="http://www.barrowdowns.com/images/posticons/redeye.jpg" align=absmiddle> Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

Who cares whether or not Balrogs fly? They're Maiar of a sort anyway, so they probably have some other form of transportation other than walking, whether it's flying or not!

</p>

Mithadan

07-20-2001, 06:56 AM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Spirit of Mist
Posts: 931</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

Welcome to the Downs Impmog!

Bombadil is not Iluvatar. In Letters, JRRT specifically states that Iluvatar has not entered Arda. HoME X leaves the door open for Iluvatar entering Arda at the end of the world.

Re: Maiar and their ability to travel in a "magical" fashion, see the thread "One hand tied behind their backs" which discusses the abilities of Maiar and how their powers are restricted when they are incarnated in a body. While the Valar/Maiar would not need wings to fly or travel "magically" when they are not incarnated, once they have a body they use more mundane methods of travel. Thus the Istari arrive in ME by ship; they do not fly over or "materialize". Without crossing swords on the issue of whether Balrogs have wings, if they can fly they would need wings (or an airplane, etc.) because they possess bodies.

--Mithadan--
"The Silmarils with living light
were kindled clear, and waxing bright
shone like stars that in the North
above the reek of earth leap forth." </p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://www.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_profile&u=00000004>Mithadan</A> at: 7/20/01 8:58:34 am

Impmog2001

07-20-2001, 12:21 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 10</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
<img src="http://www.barrowdowns.com/images/posticons/redeye.jpg" align=absmiddle> Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

I stand corrected.

</p>

Mithadan

07-20-2001, 01:37 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Spirit of Mist
Posts: 932</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

Don't accept my position just because I say so, Impmog. <img src=wink.gif ALT=";)"> If you check out the thread I mentioned, you'll find there's plenty of room to discuss/argue the points. If I believed all of what people posted on discussion boards, I'd think that Tom is the Witch King of Angmar!

--Mithadan--
"The Silmarils with living light
were kindled clear, and waxing bright
shone like stars that in the North
above the reek of earth leap forth." </p>

Mister Underhill

07-20-2001, 03:48 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Dread Horseman
Posts: 782</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
<img src="http://www.barrowdowns.com/images/posticons/redeye.jpg" align=absmiddle> Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

You mean you don't?!!! Tom is SO clearly the Witch-king.

Okay, Mith, you and me. Start a new thread. It's the Scrap on the Map! It's the Fight to See Who's Right! It's the Showdown on the Barrow Down(s)! It's on!

</p>

onewhitetree

07-20-2001, 04:22 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Wight
Posts: 112</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
<img src="http://www.barrowdowns.com/images/posticons/redeye.jpg" align=absmiddle> Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

The age old topic, back again, eh? I firmly stand on the No-Wings side of the battle, just to let you all know. My reasons are clearly stated elsewhere and by others on this site, so there's no reason for me to reiterate such a well-worn stand.

<p align=center>Every leaf a miracle ~ The woods are lovely, dark, and deep
I am Administrator at <a href=http://pub43.ezboard.com/bfangornforest>Fangorn Forest</a> and <a href=http://pub29.ezboard.com/btolkiencommunity87810>Planet Tolkien</a>.</p></p>

Mister Underhill

07-20-2001, 04:28 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Dread Horseman
Posts: 783</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
<img src="http://www.barrowdowns.com/images/posticons/redeye.jpg" align=absmiddle> Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

Hmm... perhaps, Kate, you weren't witness to my recent pro-wing offensive that started late in the "Were Balrogs Winged?" thread. If you keep an open mind, you might just become a convert! <img src=wink.gif ALT=";)">

</p>

Fingolfin

07-21-2001, 08:36 AM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haunting Spirit
Posts: 53</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
<img src="http://www.barrowdowns.com/images/posticons/redeye.jpg" align=absmiddle> Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

I just heard something which I found quite interesting. Aparently literary devices such as "winged speed" are infact not used when describing winged creatures becasue it introduces an uncomfortable redundancy such that saying

The eagles passed with Winged spped of hitlim

doesn't feel right

ANy thoughts? <img src=smile.gif ALT=":)">

</p>

Halbarad

08-23-2001, 06:45 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Animated Skeleton
Posts: 49</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
<img src="http://www.barrowdowns.com/images/posticons/redeye.jpg" align=absmiddle> Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

1.Speed like a winged thing?

2.Tom could have been the fool/jester of Iluvatar -always singing and wearing ridiculously large boots. I'm more confused about Goldberry- doesn't fit with Fangorn's rhyme

3.I must say that I used to think balrogs had wings because it had one in the animated film picture book. Anyway, if the Balrog had wings it could have flown out of the chasm (which was plenty wide enough for it to spread its wings no matter how large) after dragging Gandalf in with him. Drop the whip and fly out- the chasm was very very deep so plenty of time to fly on out of there...sorry, just a new thought that came to me.

"A little people, but of great worth are the Shire-folk. Little do they know of our long labour for the safekeeping of their borders, and yet I grudge it not."</p>

Eldar14

08-24-2001, 09:51 AM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Wight
Posts: 122</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

Why is everybody stuck up on the idea that Balrog's are large creatures?!? It doesn't give any reasons anywhere that I know of that would make one believe Balrogs are large.

My personal picture of a Balrog is not a devilish looking thing, but something that looks pretty much like a very evil Istari. I used to see them as ethereal, but I've since changed my views. I think they might have black cloaks, and of course black eyes and hair. I completely agree with obloquy about the knowledge of weapons and the mental stuff he described. Of course, the description I just gave is a no-wing stance.

I also don't think this argument will ever end; everybody's view of the Balrogs is diffferent

</p>

obloquy

08-25-2001, 09:33 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haunting Spirit
Posts: 61</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

Here you go, Eldar14:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> Then Glorfindel's left hand sought a dirk, and this he thrust up that it pierced the Balrog's belly nigh his own face (for that demon was double his stature);...<hr></blockquote>

From BoLT2 Fall of Gondolin.

Also, FoTR tells us that the Balrog was "of man-shape, maybe, yet greater..."

</p>

Elenhin

08-26-2001, 12:14 AM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Animated Skeleton
Posts: 36</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

Balrogs in the BoLTs are somewhat different from the later Balrogs. There were thousands of them, they were made by Melko, they had no shadows surrounding them, and they were greater in size than later Balrogs.

In an early version of "The Bridge of Khazad-Dum" Tolkien wrote that the Balrog was not only man-shaped, but man-sized as well. After writing that, he wrote a note to himself: "Change the description of the Balrog. It felt larger than it looked."

To make it feel larger, he introduced the shadow-cloak and the words "yet greater". While it could be argued that these two words mean that the Balrog was giant-sized, I don't think that, in the light of the earlier version, it is very probable.

--
Elenhin

"My god, it's full of stars!"</p>

obloquy

08-26-2001, 01:44 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haunting Spirit
Posts: 62</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

We know that the number of balrogs was reduced and they became much more powerful later, but there is nothing specifically said about a reduction in stature.

Because I don't have the volume you're referring to, I can't form an argument based on the text you cite. However, I wouldn't personally rely on a rejected draft for information. It can give us an idea in some cases, but remember: originally Aragorn was a booted hobbit named Trotter. Perhaps earliest conceptions of the "Bridge..." chapter didn't involve a balrog at all.

So I am going to politely disagree with you. <img src=smile.gif ALT=":)">

Edit: Also, from the pro-wings standpoint (an opinion that I would not dare call less respectable than my own), the Balrog would have to be huge. To sum up a section of the essay I pointed to, since the Bridge spanned what was described as a "chasm", it must be longer than it was wide, because a "chasm" is defined as being "narrow". We know from the text that the width was fifty feet. So to be considered "narrow", we would have a length of no less (says the essay, and I agree) than one hundred feet. A pro-wings position demands that the 'wings spread from wall to wall' passage be taken literally, which gives the Balrog a wingspan of no less than one hundred feet. That simply would not work on a being of man-size.

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://www.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_profile&u=00000090>obloquy</A> at: 8/26/01 3:56:53 pm

Elenhin

08-27-2001, 10:53 AM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Animated Skeleton
Posts: 42</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

Well, obloquy, that's one of my arguments against the Balrog wings <img src=wink.gif ALT=";)">
But we shall not debate that now.

Anyway, I'll have to politely disagree with you as well <img src=smile.gif ALT=":)">
The rejected draft of "the Bridge" at least 20 years later than the BoLT text, so I think say it's a much more reliable source. And we know that it was a Balrog out there because it says so in the text...

--
Elenhin

"My god, it's full of stars!"</p>

jimmyjhjr

08-31-2001, 04:26 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 6</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Balrogs

I've always thought about why wouldn't the Balrog fly out of the chasm. Actually, I just finished the books yesterday, when I first came here and heard someone say something about Balrogs with wings, I was around that part of the book, lol. Anyway, that's why I've never thought they had wings (by never, I mean for a couple of weeks, lol).

</p>

Tinuviel

08-31-2001, 06:34 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 3</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
re-wings

Hi new here ! On the wing thing, I've always seen them this way.

The text describes a shadow about it reaching out like two vast wings.

two paragraphs later it says "it drew itself up to a great height and it's wing were spread from wall to wall.

So wings ,yes, but they are shadowy and too insubstancial for flight.

From the text mentioning it "drew itself up to a great height" could it be it is somewhat of a shape changer?

Not able to change from one thing to another, but able to increase and decrease it's size?

</p>

Glorfindel the resurected

09-04-2001, 05:35 AM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 2</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

Maia can choose any form they want can't they? So is it not feasible that some had wings and some didn't? Why must their be general fixed image witch all the balrogs took? I really think that the whole winged balrog topic has been hacked to death at this stage anyway. The answers await us in the halls of Mandos.
As for Tom Bombadil? I don't know, I'll never be certain, but right now I'm thinking Aule. I'm not going to get fully into why now but it stems from his freedom from want of possesion of the ring. This is a trait of Aule's. Above someone said that we aren't supposed to question TB's origins. I disagree. Tolkien said that he left TB in to act as an "enigma". I think this means he's there as a discussion piece. Enigmas are there for people to try and solve them. No doubt Tolkien knew himself given his obsessive attention to detail. But he probably left him in to give us something more relevant to discuss than whether balrogs had frickin wings are not.

</p>

Hunter Two One

09-04-2001, 10:23 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 1</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

IF a balrog had wings and IF it could use them to fly, it most certainly does not guarantee that it could do so (fly) in Khazad-Dum. why?

1. its wingspan already spread from wall to wall (as per the text). if the balrog were moved off center (which it did when it fell to one side of the bridge), there wouldn't have been enough space to flap its wings.
2. it was off balance from Gandalf's attack, and therefore, it would not have had sufficient time to react appropriately to the fall. this disorientation would certainly misorient the balrog sufficiently that it could not correctly align itself for flight.
3. this is inside a mountain, how much clear space could you have inside it without the mountain collapsing all over that clear space? this implies that there would have been less clear space as the balrog (and Gandalf) fell.

</p>

Elenhin

09-05-2001, 08:03 AM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Animated Skeleton
Posts: 50</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

I don't think that the Balrogs could freely change their forms.

1. We know that some Ainur, particularly the evil ones (Morgoth and Sauron for example), may become so dependent on their bodies that they can no longer function without them or change them.

2. All the Balrogs, during all the ages, are described as being similar and no distinction between different kinds of Balrogs is ever made.

3. The reasoning Tolkien used to put Balrogs into the stories wasn't "Melkor must have some Maia servants (usually they're fiery demons)" but "Melkor has fiery demons as his servants (they could be corrupted Maiar)". In Tolkien's mind the Balrogs existed long before the Maiar did, and so the Balrogs may not have gained all the "Maia-abilities" when they were changed from Melkor's creations into Ainur.

--
Elenhin

"My god, it's full of stars!"</p>

Adunakhor

09-05-2001, 02:39 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 1</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

Hi all,

I saw this discussion about the Balrog wings and I checked for some info in LoTR and it says (free swedish translation): "Slowly it walked across the bridge, until it suddenly raised itself to a great height with wings, which spanned from wall to wall.."

So the Balrogs had wings, and if they spanned from wall to wall they must have been huge, which makes me believe they could have been able to fly, a slow, not very gracious flight it must have been tho.

Halbarad wrote:
"...Anyway, if the Balrog had wings it could have flown out of the chasm (which was plenty wide enough for it to spread its wings no matter how large)"

In my first quote from LoTR it is said that the wings were very large, from wall to wall, how could it fly once it had fallen into the chasm then?

"Drop the whip and fly out- the chasm was very very deep so plenty of time to fly on out of there...sorry, just a new thought that came to me."

Well, as I imagine the balrog and Gandalf were pretty entangled and I wouldnt believe it could have flown out even if it had been able to spread it wings.

</p>

Eldar14

09-05-2001, 04:27 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Wight
Posts: 133</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

If their were wings though, and huge ones they must be if they strectched wall to wall, why couldn't those huge wings have lifted both the Balrog AND Gandalf out of the chasm. Also, why would the Balrogs take form as devilish winged creatures, when all others of their kind (maiar and valar) chose forms at least possibly human or elf (including the evil ones like Morgoth and Sauron) As I've stated before, I think that Balrogs are pretty much REALLY evil looking human-type creatures (kinda like the Istari, but evil looking instead of sage-like)

</p>

obloquy

09-05-2001, 06:58 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haunting Spirit
Posts: 64</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

The Swedish translation appears to leave less room for doubt than the original English.

</p>

Hunter Two One

09-05-2001, 08:01 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 5</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

eldar14, i believe i've outlined reasons why a possibly winged and flying balrog couldn't flap its wings and fly to hover in the chasm, even if it could support its own weight, its weapons and Gandalf ... i'm re-posting it below:

1. its wingspan already spread from wall to wall (as per the text). if the balrog were moved off center (which it did when it fell to one side of the bridge), there wouldn't have been enough space to flap its wings.
2. it was off balance from Gandalf's attack, and therefore, it would not have had sufficient time to react appropriately to the fall. this disorientation would certainly misorient the balrog sufficiently that it could not correctly align itself for flight.
3. this is inside a mountain, how much clear space could you have inside it without the mountain collapsing all over that clear space? this implies that there would have been less clear space as the balrog (and Gandalf) fell.

</p>

Sauron

09-11-2001, 10:06 AM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 6</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

I believe that Balrogs had wings but I don't think it matters much. Hunter Two One, you mentioned just about everything I was going to say about why it did just fly out. Now I think it could fly but it also may not have flown. Look at the ostrich, it has wings but doesn't fly. I think that Tolkien wrote all things about the Balrog perfectly. I think he didn't really care if they had wings or not, I believe that Tolkien wanted us to draw our own conclusions about it. I mean come on, if each of us has our own idea about what the Balrog looks like it makes the books that much more personal.

As for Tom, I don't think Tolkien himself knew who he was. I am an aspiring writer and I understand where I am coming from on this. I write in something I have heard called free form. You write down your thoughts into a story which you have to make sure it all fits together. Some times when I write I don't really understand what I put down until I go back and re-read it. Writing like that allows you to learn everything that is going on along with the reader. Maybe this is what Tolkien did with Tom and it could be possible that he knows as much about Tom as the rest of us do.

</p>

Eldar14

09-12-2001, 06:02 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Wight
Posts: 139</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

Yes, but even if Tolkien did create Balrogs as a creature to be created by the imagination of each reader, he himself must have had his own opinion of what it looked liked. I feel as if his view would probably be considered the actual form by the majority of the Tolkien community.

Personally, even if Tolkien originally wrote in Tom not knowing what exactly he was, he would probably have eventually created an idea of what Tom was. He did everything else so thorough, why would he leave a wide gap right in the middle of it all? I myself think that Tom is NOT a representation of some country-side in Britain, but that he actually does fit in with ME. Maybe he was some sort of creature that was around the same time Ilu was, just kind of floating around the void (I say this as if he was NOT created by Ilu)

</p>

jallanite

09-16-2001, 12:21 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Moderator
Posts: 82</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

A writer can quite easily create a mysterious stranger, and keep him as a mysterious stranger, even mysterious to himself. Many have.

Another example: JRRT certainly didn't know the history of the Ring Bilbo found when he wrote The Hobbit, and if the people at Allen & Unwin and pressed him for a sequel staring Beorn instead of more hobbits, he might never have tried to work out its earlier history and what else it might be (and we would now be talking about a work named The Lord of the Bears).

Writing is somewhat like dreaming, the characters come alive and seem to act on their own, new ones appear that you never consciously decided to create, and often you don't know who they are or what they are, just the short part they play in the tale you see.

Consider the two "other" wizards. They apparently continued to remain vague to Tolkien. He invented some material about them to go into the Appendices and Index to The Lord of the Rings, though in the event the material was never used. Then in The Peoples of Middle-earth (HoME 12) in chapter XIII, "Last Writings", indicating "A note made on their names and functions seems now lost ..." he re-invented many of the details, but they still remain vague.

Reading that material I don't get the impression that JRRT knew anything more about these wizards than the very short notes he put down, and even that was rather tentative and not truly a clear view.

In the same way he seems not to really have known anything much more about Amroth or Celebrimbor than appears in The Lord of the Rings when they appeared suddenly entered his tale when he was in the heat of inspiration. Later expansions on these characters in Unfinished Tales and "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age" are minimal, contradictory, and suggest a great lack of solidity about anything connected with them except the parts afforded them in LR.

If JRRT did continue to consider Tom Bombadil an enigma, in his own mind, desiring he remain so as part of his literary effect, then any explanation given, no matter how plausible, cannot be right, if by "right" we mean the explanation that JRRT himself would have given.

</p>

Halbarad

09-16-2001, 04:02 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haunting Spirit
Posts: 57</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Of Bombadillos and Balrogs

I think this would be a good time to mention that JRRT struggled with the whole story and that the writing process was very drawn out, not only by the war and his university work, but because he had no clear storyline- no basic plot in mind from the outset. ME in the time of the ring was not a great world that existed before Tolkien 'told' the story- it was painfully and laboriously invented, and it does not seem that JRRT had clear ideas about everything, even after the book was published
I would agree with jallanite on most of his points. However I would argue this: Bombadil existed before the writing of the LotR so he is less enigmatic than your writing about mysterious characters would imply.

"A little people, but of great worth are the Shire-folk. Little do they know of our long labour for the safekeeping of their borders, and yet I grudge it not."</p>

Gwaihir the Windlord

09-17-2001, 09:42 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Essence of Darkness
Posts: 846</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Tom the Maia

Why does no one consider Gandalf's words, at the end of LotR...

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> 'He is a moss-gatherer, whereas I have been a stone doomed to rolling.'<hr></blockquote>

So far, I've not noticed that this point has not even been considered. It's not proof, but it does suggest that there was a bond between the two. Gandalf is a Maia, but one who indeed was doomed to roll, forever working (until the Fourth Age). Does this passage not then hint that the two took diferent paths, but were kindred or at least of the same type in the beginning?
I believe Tolkien thought about this passage carefully before he wrote it.

</p>

Halbarad

09-18-2001, 03:08 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haunting Spirit
Posts: 58</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Tom the Maia

I never thought about that, but when I do Gandalf also said he wanted to have a good long talk with Tom which I find significant. When Gandalf's business in ME is finished he goes to talk to Tom, not Elrond or Radagast or Cirdan. Q: What does Gandalf do in his spare time? A: Talks with Bombadil. So Gwaihir your point about a bond seems convincing to me

"A little people, but of great worth are the Shire-folk. Little do they know of our long labour for the safekeeping of their borders, and yet I grudge it not."</p>

GandaIf The White

09-19-2001, 08:39 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Shade of Carn Dûm
Posts: 376</TD><TD><img src=http://www.herr-der-ringe-film.de/HdR/crewmckel.JPG WIDTH=60 HEIGHT=60></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Tom the Maia

Time to copy what I said at another board! <img src=smile.gif ALT=":)">

"I would draw some of the great tales in fullness, and leave many only placed in the scheme, and sketched. The cycles should be linked, to a majestic whole, and yet leave scope for other minds and hands, weilding paint and music and drama."

When Tolkien specifically stated that Tom was an enigma, I think he did it for a reason. In my opinion, it is not our place to call him one thing or another, but to gather facts about him and see him in that manner. Conjecture is useful, but you have to draw the line somewhere.

As for the Balrogs/Wings discussion, I am very confused and cannot go either way. But, for the people using the "The wings are so big that the balrog wouldn't have the energy to fly" argument - We are talking about a Maia with no restrictions on the power it could use in its pysical form on the Middle Earth. Gandalf, who was restricted in strength and power, was obviosly stronger than the old man he looked to be. I remember reading a passage in the Unfinished Tales that said it took 2 strong dwarves to push open the doors of Moria from the inside, and that a dwarf lord may have been able to do it by himself. Well, when you consider that Gandalf travelled through Moria and pushed open the doors himself - it is suprising. Im just saying that a Maia would obviously be much stronger than a normal beast and could have controlled the very large wings.

"Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends."</p>

Gwaihir the Windlord

09-19-2001, 09:39 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Essence of Darkness
Posts: 849</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
What utter tosh

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> When Tolkien specifically stated that Tom was an enigma, I think he did it for a reason. In my opinion, it is not our place to call him one thing or another, but to gather facts about him and see him in that manner. Conjecture is useful, but you have to draw the line somewhere.<hr></blockquote>

Well it's still fun to speculate. Tom must have some explanation attached, what what?

</p>

GandaIf The White

09-20-2001, 05:30 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Shade of Carn Dûm
Posts: 378</TD><TD><img src=http://www.herr-der-ringe-film.de/HdR/crewmckel.JPG WIDTH=60 HEIGHT=60></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: What utter tosh

Most think that he is an embodiment of Arda, created with or as part of The Flame Imperishable.. truly making him the eldest. That is personally what I think.

Have you ever pondered about what Tom said to the hobbits, even though they couldn't have known the depth of what he was saying. "He knew the dark under the stars when it was fearless—before the Dark Lord (Melkor) came from Outside. (The Void)"

And I thought this was a good post by Salmar.
<blockquote>Quote:<hr> There are some very conclusive arguments against Tom being a maia.
One of these is that his existence is bound to the Earth, which is symbolized by Tom being bound to a specific region.
As a maia he would have existed before and outside Arda. It is is clear that he did not, cannot and will not exist outside of Arda.

The most probable theory in my opinion is that Tom is a transmaterialization of the word Ea, the word with which Eru gave reality to the music of the Ainur. Maybe he has indeed some intrinsic relation to Eru's Flame Imperishable. The Flame is with Eru, but Tom's Realm is its reality in and on Earth.
Tom is not a creator like the Ainur, he is a creature. He symbolizes creation.
To the struggles of the powers, Ainur and Elves and Men, he is neutral as creation itself.
Nothing would tempt him to participate in these struggles or to travel beyond his realm. He does not strive, he just is....Tom. Quite intendedly left by Tolkien to be an enigma. Sure, we can discuss this enigma. But we should not want him to fit at all costs in our division of the powers into orderly categories.<hr></blockquote>

There are many possibilities, but no certainties. I guess some things are better left unexplained. <img src=smile.gif ALT=":)">

P.S. I am getting some of these words from another site, so I think it is appropriate to give a link to it out of respect. http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/thevalarguildclubs.yahoo.com/clubs/thevalarguild</a>

"Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends."</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://www.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_profile&u=00000064>GandaIf The White</A> at: 9/20/01 7:32:45 pm

Vorechoriel

09-22-2001, 09:11 PM

my opinion: Balrogs had wings, they were fairly large, and they were surrounded in a shadow of evil which most likely skewed one's perception of it's real form...

i'm done now smilies/smile.gif

IthaJoy

10-03-2001, 08:51 AM

the balrog did have wings. It says so in FOTR, when it says that "its wings sretched from wall to wall" or something like that. He wouldn't have said that its wings stretched if it didn't have them, would he?

Voronwe

10-03-2001, 09:05 AM

Ahh, but the 'something like that' makes all the difference in this case. Have a look at the passage.

-Voronwe

Joe Harrison

10-04-2001, 04:01 PM

It certainly doesn't say that it's wings stretched out from wall to wall. In FotR it says, "the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings." Five paragraphs before that FotR states," It was like a great shadow, in the middle of which was a dark form, of man-shape maybe, yet greater and a power and terror seemed to be in it and to go before it." This first paragraph is describing the power that seemed to fill the air around the Balrog. It even had a physical form like a shadow that spread out before it. When it came up to the fire the shadow seems to even have caught fire and blazed. The description of the shadow reaching out is like it has set its power loose after its prey.
It is a powerful description of a powerful entity. It certainly doesn't imply a winged creature.

"If the enemy opens the door, you must race in."

Mithadan

10-04-2001, 05:09 PM

Welcome to the Barrow Downs, Gorolithion and Monti.

Actually, two paragraphs after the "shadow about it reached out like two vast wings" quote, it says "and its wings were spread from wall to wall".

These two quotes represent both sides of the debate. Is it a shadow or is it wings?

[ October 04, 2001: Message edited by: Mithadan ]

Mithadan

10-04-2001, 05:10 PM

Humphh. My thousandth post was in a Balrog-wings thread? How anti-climatic. smilies/rolleyes.gif

Joe Harrison

10-04-2001, 05:34 PM

Yes, it does state that it's wings were spread from wall to wall. The next line also states that Gandalf could still be seen through the glimmering in the gloom.
He is still using "wings" to describe the reaching out of the shadow.
Like so, "reached out like two vast wings which spread from wall to wall, but Gandalf could still be seen glimmering through the gloom."
I find the seeking shadow like power of the balrog to be a rather effective way of describing how menacing and powerful they were.

"If the enemy opens the door, you must rush in."

Halbarad

10-06-2001, 10:28 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gorolithion:
[QB]The next line also states that Gandalf could still be seen through the glimmering in the gloom.
He is still using "wings" to describe the reaching out of the shadow.
Like so, "reached out like two vast wings which spread from wall to wall, but Gandalf could still be seen glimmering through the gloom."

-No, it says that there were wings. In addition to the wings there was a cloud of shadow that filled the room.The Balrog was cloaked in shadow, and the wings spread from wall to wall. There is no ambiguity in the statement. It does not say that Gandalf was surounded by the shadow and obscured by the wings. At the battle of Helms deep Gandalf was 'shining in the rising sun' so he could glimmer in a little light no? When Gandalf was glimmering in the doom he was not obscured by the wings or the shadow that looked like wings. What you have said makes little sense. smilies/confused.gif
Wings and Shadow

[ October 07, 2001: Message edited by: Halbarad ]

Elenhin

10-07-2001, 01:09 PM

The text says that there were wings.
It does not say what the wings are made out of (shadow or flesh?), or if the word "wing" is used metaphorically (to describe a wing-shaped shadow in a more lively fashion).

In other words: the Moria passage does not directly tell us whether the Balrog had real wings or not. However, when looking at the whole chapter and other texts of Tolkien's mythology, it can be clearly seen that the Balrogs can't have real wings. (At least, they can't use them to fly.)

That's what I think, anyway.

[ October 07, 2001: Message edited by: Elenhin ]

Gwaihir the Windlord

10-14-2001, 11:37 PM

Created with part of the Flame of Arda... just as all Maiar were. I believe he was a Maia; the first one to venture into the new kingdom of Arda. That would make him 'First'. Then, he wandered around among the forests, being Tom Bombadil and not having much to do with the other Valar and Maiar.

Sounds a good enought theory to me. Don't know why everyone disagrees with it. smilies/smile.gif

[ October 15, 2001: Message edited by: Gwaihir the Windlord ]

[ October 15, 2001: Message edited by: Gwaihir the Windlord ]

Elrian

10-16-2001, 06:54 PM

When arda was created Tom may have been the sent as a caretaker along with others. Aiding the Valar when they came and taking over when they left. smilies/smile.gif Just my humble opinion.

Gwaihir the Windlord

10-18-2001, 11:35 PM

Lot of members with 'E' names around these days, isn't there?

Welcome to the downs.

Halbarad

10-28-2001, 05:16 PM

Is ther ea translation for some of these E names or are they just made up? (Mind you I have no idea what Halbarad is translated.)

Witch King of Angmar

11-14-2001, 07:43 PM

I do not think that Balrogs had wings. I believe that the Balrog was a huge beast of monsterous proportions composed mostly of fire. smilies/biggrin.gif

I also think that certainly Tom was not an Iluvatar. He might have been a Valar and Tom was the form that the Valar took, though I could not be certain.

Elrian

11-14-2001, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by Halbarad:
<STRONG>Is ther ea translation for some of these E names or are they just made up? (Mind you I have no idea what Halbarad is translated.)</STRONG>

ELrond celebRIAN
ELRIAN
star wandering I think it translates to?

Elrian

11-14-2001, 08:17 PM

Originally posted by Witch King of Angmar:
<STRONG>I do not think that Balrogs had wings. I believe that the Balrog was a huge beast of monsterous proportions composed mostly of fire. smilies/biggrin.gif

When they are at the bridge of Khazad-Dum the book says the Balrogs wing spread from wall to wall.

I also think that certainly Tom was not an Iluvatar. He might have been a Valar and Tom was the form that the Valar took, though I could not be certain.</STRONG>

Bombadil wasn't Illuvatar, nor a Vala, He was more like a Maia. Maybe of Yavannah.

Gwaihir the Windlord

11-14-2001, 10:34 PM

If he was a Maia (which he was..) then he was a 'free agent', not one of Yavanah's people.

Orald

11-15-2001, 10:27 PM

Why is it that you people insist that Tom was a maia, there being no more proof that he is one than him being something else.

Praps even less proof.

Elenhin

11-17-2001, 05:47 AM

We know that Tom was not one of the following: Man, Elf, Dwarf, Hobbit, Orc, Troll, Ent, Vala, Eru, etc. etc.
We are left with only two reasonable suggestions for Tom's origins: he can be either a Maia or something which Tolkien never mentioned elsewhere. I believe in the latter alternative, but I can certainly see why some people like to think of him as a Maia.

KayQy

11-18-2001, 02:07 PM

Okay, how about this:

Tom is a Space/Time traveller. Eventually he came to Arda (before the darkness was filled with fear or whatever the quote is, of course) fell in love with it, and settled down. He is either an alien species with immortality or ridiculous longevity, or he just pops into different time periods whenever he feels like it. I think the alien would be more likely, especially since it would help explain why the Ring had no power over him.

Or maybe he's a mass hallucination. smilies/smile.gif

PS. Why is one of the message icons suddenly a Portugese ad for Telefonica? It makes about as much sense as what I just wrote.

Gwaihir the Windlord

11-19-2001, 10:32 PM

Actually, D, I've uncovered a lot of quite fascinating evidence to suggest that Tom is a Maia. Look back.
And if I hadn't taken a side -- if I kept just throwing random evidence around but didn't reach a conclusion -- what kind of eagle would that make me? smilies/tongue.gif smilies/tongue.gif

Elrian

11-20-2001, 09:08 PM

Originally posted by Gwaihir the Windlord:
<STRONG>If he was a Maia (which he was..) then he was a 'free agent', not one of Yavanah's people.</STRONG>

All the Maia served at least one Vala, I have never seen any "free agents" in the book. Melian was a Maia of Este and Vana, gandalf of Nienna and so on.
smilies/rolleyes.gif

Gwaihir the Windlord

11-20-2001, 10:31 PM

Ah, but Tom was different, wasn't he? Different enough to make people question what he was. Perhaps he just enjoyed his own company. If he was a Maia and the First, but belonged to a Vala... well then the Vala would be First rather than bombadil.

Eol

12-18-2001, 01:00 PM

It is a great deal of hard workign writing a story as involved and developed at Tolkien- I should know- I am writing a novel of my own with another author.
In responce to who looked like what- that is the fun part about books- there is never one single, correct interperation. As a writer I am thrilled and eager to see another's intereperation- even if it differs from my intial idea when writing. It is insightful.

Concerning Legolas- I have seen people paint him with black hair- is it true that there is no true writing indicating that the elves have ears? I have yet to find one.

Tarlondeion Of Gondolin

12-21-2001, 01:53 PM

I think that Tom Bombadillo was Beren and his wife was Luthien.

Balrogs? It can't, be proved. Its an unceasing argument that we can't solve.

Mithadan

12-21-2001, 02:09 PM

Hmmmm. "...and Beren and Luthien, having assumed their new identities, lived happily ever after, singing songs and collecting water lilies..." While your novel theory (nice to hear a new Bombadil theory for a change) has some visceral appeal, how could Beren be considered "eldest" and wasn't Goldberry blonde whole Luthien was brunette?

Elrian

12-21-2001, 11:57 PM

Bombadil may have been the first Maia to enter Arda, But the Maia still served the Valar, who served Eru. It couldn't have been Beren as he wasn't one of the firstborn of his kind.

Orald

12-23-2001, 12:17 AM

Ah, but was not it Melkor who was the first of the Ainur to enter into Ea, therefore disproving this already very flawed Bombadil is a maiar theory, if it could even be called a theory.

obloquy

12-23-2001, 12:42 AM

Here's a theory for you: Bombadil bounces around and rhymes much like the Riddler from the Batman movie. Riddler's real name was Edward Nygma. E. Nygma. Bombadil = Enigma = Riddler.

? ?
? ? ? ?
? ? ?

Elrian

12-23-2001, 08:53 PM

Melkor was the first Valar to enter Middle Earth, Bombadil was a Maia.

John of the Race of Men

12-23-2001, 10:12 PM

I know Im new here but it seems to me that Tom is just an enigma. JRRT included him in the book at the beginning to make his kids happy and didnt really have a background for him. Its unfortunate because JRRT had explanations for almost everything else. But this one thing he forgot to make up an explanation for. There is no explanation for Tom.

Also Balrogs do not have wings. Their shadow is LIKE wings. Dont you think its scarier for them to have a huge "shadow" instead of real wings?

inglorion

12-24-2001, 02:37 PM

Ok people, let´s face it: there are passages in the book that imply the Moria-Balrog has wings, however they are not very conclusive. There are passages in the book that imply the Moria-Balrog has no wings, however they are not very conclusive either.
So, in my humble opinion there is no final answer possible, only what you believe to be the right one, and that belief is founded on your own imagination. Strange are the workings of our brains that we can interpret things so differently, but that of course is the whole fun of it; how dull would life be if we all had the same imagination.

As for Tom I have no solution either I´m afraid, but if you insist on classifying him then I would put him in the same section as Ungoliant (probably the only two in that section I can think of): under U of Unexplained smilies/wink.gif

greetings, gildor

Orald

12-26-2001, 11:26 AM

Okay then Elrian, you find me the text that states this and I will give up and agree with you that Tom is a maia, but until I see where it says that Melkor was the first of the Valar, not anything else, to enter and Tom was the first maia, then I will keep believing that he is not a maia.

Enedcolloion

12-28-2001, 03:17 AM

why discuss weather Balrogs have wings...there isnt enough description to make any definte statements about them...

Mithadan

12-28-2001, 09:04 AM

Wisdom from the mouths of newbies..... smilies/wink.gif

Welcome Enedcolloion!

Eol

12-28-2001, 01:53 PM

The subject concerning Tom being a maia...the anwser is very simple...there is no direct anwser. Someone either stated this in a previous comment or I read it somewhere that Tom was a prexisting character before Tolkien wrote Lord of the Rings.The case of having a prexisitng character is that there are unseen gaps beause they are developed differently then the rest of the surrounding characters.
There are many things that cannot be clarified because the author himself does not know for sure himself. I have the same flaws with my own fictional characters...

obloquy

12-28-2001, 03:46 PM

That doesn't really hold up. If Tolkien had wanted to, or if he'd seen Tom's placement in the story as a flaw, he could have made up some history for him. He had rationalized errors away before. Tolkien specifically and intentionally let Tom's nature remain mysterious.

[ December 28, 2001: Message edited by: obloquy ]

Beren

12-28-2001, 06:43 PM

Why is it that Tom is such a fascinating individual to all who read these books?

Yaish

01-01-2002, 07:28 PM

I know I shouldnt, but I am. I'm wieghing in on this thread you had all hoped died and went away.

First, I am getting my source on the Balrog wings from LoTR ISBN0-618-00222-7. Its a pretty recent edition, with the most accurate revisions based on JRRT's own notes and finished copies. There are several errors in many other editions, and some in this one too no doubt, but here's what it says.

First, as to size I thing Balrogs were mostly man-sized, but a little larger. Several reasons. First, the balrog was on the other side of the "great fissure" that had cut off the orcs. Now orcs being of roughly less than man size couldnt leap it. The Balrog did, but it states he did so in a rush, implying that he needed a running start. A truly humongous creature would have just stepped across. Second as to size, he is able to stand ON the bridge, which is stated as to be narrow enough to force enemies to cross single file. If he is substantially larger than a man he wouldnt likely be able to stand on the bridge. Next, he and Gandalf exchange a sword blow. Glamdrind shatters the balrogs blade but Gandolf is swayed by the blow. In other instances Gandalf is shoved, pushed, pulled, etc like a normal man of his size, so the Balrogs blow must not have been so immense as to simply sweep him off the bridge. As well, it says "drew itself up to a great height" implying that before it was NOT a great height, but now was. Also "drew up" simply means to straighten, so this was its natural maximum height. This seems to indicate a being not much larger than a human that it could be not a great height one minute and a great height the next, simply by straightening. (I am thinking a sort of hunched, brooding pose at first). Next, "the thongs lashed and curled about the wizards knees, dragging him to the brink" Dragging, not knocking him. This means the whip, with balrog holding it was twined about Gandalfs knees. Since it then states he hung for a moment, and was drug, that the balrog cannot have any great weight. So, I would say no more then twice the size of a man.

Ok, wings:
"...and the shadow about it reached out LIKE two vast wings" ok, metaphor. Then, two paragraphs later "... but the darkness grew..its wings were spread from wall to wall."
Unless JRRT uses metaphor significantly different than most authors, he is still talking about the shadow. Since wall to wall fleshly wings on a 12 ft high being dontmake sense (what, were they rolled up before?) he seems to imply that the wings were the shadow he spoke of earlier, the darkness that grew.

Ok, Tom. Ever make something and have parts left over? Or better yet draw something and all of a sudden you notice there is something in the drawing you didnt make, like a face in the bark of a tree, or a pattern in the reflection off the lake? Thats Tom Bombadil. I think he was accidentally created from the leftover magic used in the shaping of middle earth. Not the creator, nor anyone else, just there since the beginning, and wholly unique.

Enedcolloion

01-02-2002, 05:57 AM

Tom put the ring on a didn't dissapear i just remembered that! And in the movie Sauron does the same thing!

Elrian

01-02-2002, 07:53 AM

True, but all you see of Sauron in the movie is a suit of armor, and a staff that could throw many warriors clear across a battlefield! The invisibility effect might have only happened to those of no power.

Phil The Balrog

01-03-2002, 01:20 AM

Does anyone every think about the fact that the name Tom Bombadil is pretty unique? Every other middle earth name is fairly similar - Elrond, Frodo, Gandalf, Morgoth, etc etc etc. They all have that middle earth likeness. Tom Bombadil is pretty strange compared to Fingolfin and the like. Maybe he's not from Middle Earth at all. Perhaps he just visiting.

Arvedui

01-05-2002, 12:04 AM

When the Hobbits are with Tom, it is petty clear that the ring does nothing to Tom. He is not tempted by it, he does not become invisible, nothing happens, and he really doesn't care about it. Since Sauron's power has no effect on Tom, then Tom is a superior power and more powerful than the Dark Lord. So it wouldn't be a stretch to say that Tom could be a Vala. He wouldn't be a Maia, because Gandalf and Saruman are said to be Maiar several times in the books, and they are tempted by the ring. So Tom is obviously more powerful than a Maia. The only thing more powerful than a Maia is a Vala.