Dragon's Flame, Magical?

[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.

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

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".

Originally Posted by Litlle Green

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!

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! When Gandalf says that, is he implying that there are still dragons in Arda?

Originally Posted by Aganzir

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]

Originally Posted by The Might

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?

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by The Might

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:

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.

It is clearer than day that the One was held together by something more than just inter-molecular connections.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

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 Legate of Amon Lanc

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

[A Little Green]

Originally Posted by Lommy

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.

Originally Posted by Legate

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 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:

Originally Posted by Letter #144

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.

Originally Posted by Might

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)?

Originally Posted by Greenie

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.