Do Balrogs Have Wings?

[narfforc]

Funny you say that, yes, like a red and blue thingy and headlights like bolts of lightning. No we shouldnt joke Saucepanman, this is serious. I am old enough to remember over 35 years of this argument, and all we ever achieve is gain new recruits to either side of the fence, rarely will anyone change their mind. To think this started 50yrs ago, over two sentences in LotR. My own personal view(And there is no basis for this), Is that like most of Tolkiens creations, no two were the same. This has led to speculation that, like most Maiar, they fell into different classes ie the most powerful being Gothmog, could one class have wings and another not, who knows.

I don't know if this has been said before, but it's my reason for thinking that they don't have wings:

Lúthien was able to see Gondolin from the air after their rescue from Thangorodrim. Okay, Ancalagon was the first of the winged dragons, and he didn't show up till the War of Wrath. So... if there was some sort of creature who was really capable of long distance flight like the eagles, couldn't Morgoth have used them to find Gondolin? Especially after Hurín brilliantly half gave the location away?

[Neithan]

Morgoth had flying creatures (such as the vampires), but I believe it was the Eagles who kept them away from Gondolin.

[Keeper of Dol Guldur]

It's "Demon of Might", not "Demon of Flight".

I think it's about time to remind everybody that this is;

"DO BALROGS HAVE WINGS?"

Not;

"CAN BALROGS FLY?"

I realize to some people the questions may go hand in hand, but the fact is, plenty of pro-wingers think that they could have had them, even if they were non-working, and not be able to fly. Others believe they may have been able to fly, even without wings.

Superman could fly, and he didn't have wings. Maybe Jean Grey from X-Men is a better example, since she used her mental power to do it, which is more 'Maiar' spirit-like.

And to further the superhero talk ... "Demon of Might" in no way gives me the sense of wings, flying or what not. A demon is not a devil, or an angel. And Demon of Might sounds more like the Incredible Hulk to me.

But then, once again, they couldn't fly. At least not in the conventional sense. Otherwise they wouldn't be falling to their deaths all the time.

As for the 'they're Maiar, they can do anything they want' nonsense ... no way. Just like Gandalf, they were stuck with the bodies given to them, they can't just wrench their fea away from their hroa like that. They have to die. Sauron couldn't even render himself noncorporeal at will when he was a shapeshifter, he was still stuck switching from one body to the next.

Although there is this possibility (which supports John Howe's paintings to some degree). Balrogs are more chimeric creature than spirit monster, and when the Chamber of Mazarbul collapsed on it, it broke his wings, rendering him flightless.

That's THIN.

None of this flight nonsense.

Hospital buildings have wings ... it just refers to something branching off of the original object. In this case, shadow.

There's 20 different definitions in the dictionary for the word wing. I selected a few;
1. One of a pair of movable organs for flying.
5. An ARM of a human.
7. Something that resembles a wing in appearance or position relative to a
main body.
10. The fender of a car.
12. Either of the projections on the back of a wing chair.
14. A structure attached to and connected to a main building.
16. A group affiliated with a larger organization.
20. An emblem indicating a qualified pilot.

Now, looking at the non-bird / bat wing definitions;

Wings have a very common theme; they are always referring to (in the cases of 7, 10, 12, 14, or 16) outlying parts of a central object. In the case of 7, it fits the Balrog perfectly - shadows and smoke surrounding a 'shape like a man but greater' really fit the bill. But those five definitions give the idea of something that comes along with the main object, but isn't quite the main object.

And on that note, 20. provides a unique notion; a pilot, when he becomes a pilot, gets his metal wings (yes, a pin). The Balrogs, when they became servants of Morgoth, were wrapped in shadow. They got their 'wings', once again the wings are nothing but shadow, even if this time it's a little more metaphorical than 'the wings are made of shadow, but shaped like wings'. Yeah, that's thin too.

I mean ... Gandalf screamed "fly you fools!" at the Fellowship, knowing full well that none of them had wings.

BUT TOLKIEN USED THE WORD "FLY"! THE FELLOWSHIP MUST HAVE HAD WINGS!

See, to me ... that would be the same argument.

Winged; to move on, or as if on wings. To fly. Swift.

The whole thing comes down to Mercury, of Roman myth, who "had wings on his feet" and was the fastest of all the gods.

That part of it is total simile.

That's why he called Aragorn "Wingfoot". Going REALLY FAST. I imagine Balrogs, having a great deal longer legs than humans (if they stood around fifteen feet tall, their legs would be roughly nine feet long), could run INCREDIBLY fast. Much faster than Ents. Many miles an hour faster than Ents. These long legs and the great amounts of muscle they had (judging from the word 'might') would likely enable them to jump INCREDIBLY HIGH as well. Over hill tops? Definitely. Has anyone read the Incredible Hulk, or seen the somewhat horrible movie? Imagine seven black creatures surrounded by shadow doing that, and heading in your direction.

It would look like a thunderstorm, and the echoing boom of their landing, smashing through trees, and so forth, would make all the hills echo.

And I still stand on the point that there's no way of knowing whether they had wings or not, because every instance of the word's use was simile, the lighting in Khazad Dum was little to none because of the Balrog, and the argument has never actually been settled.

[HerenIstarion]

To think this started 50yrs ago

Think Gulliver. And eggs...

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

I've been wondering: would Arien be the representative of the race the Melkor seduced to become Balrogs (before they were Balrogs, that is).

They were both spirits of fire, and it was said that Melkor failed to draw her to his service.

In this case, would the "arising" fire-tempests of Hithlum be the last time a Balrog was discarnate (after all, they were were sorely trounced in the Battle of the Powers, and Morgoth was absent after that to "give" them new forms)?

Then again, how could they have held their whips? Could Morgoth's return have given them new power to reclothe themselves? Since Morgoth remained stuck in one form forever after his meeting with Ungoliant, I have always assumed he could "give power" to whoever is in his vicinity (he must have given a lot to Ungoliant). But still, the whips are a problem. Are they somehow part of their power?

Sorry, just rambling here.

[Keeper of Dol Guldur]

Well, Morgoth, unlike Sauron, didn't rely in his later years on a ring to do his creating, which bound things to it. So, presumably, his "gifts" (and the mark of shadow and being burnt by the sun) lasted forever.

Sauron's werewolves were created long before he thought up rings and Barad-Dur, and Gandalf hinted that several of them were still around, within Barad-Dur. Their construction, or at least genetic tampering, wasn't done with any ring for luck and power, and they had nothing to do with it.

The same would be true of Morgoth, who had the power to make the Music of the Ainur, even if his songs were those of discord and chaos.

The powers given to his disciples were permanent.

Smaug only ever grew stronger, even after Morgoth was cast into the void. The same is true about Sauron. Durin's Bane, presumably, was stronger than before as well.

Anyway, whether it was visible or not, the Balrogs had to have solid mass. They had to be real, vile creatures, and not just phantoms of smoke and shadow. The whips were real whips (and no, Durin's Bane's whip wasn't referred to as flaming ... although I believe Feanor may have been killed by red hot lashes).

The sword of red hot metal was presumably either reflecting the red in the Balrog's eyes, or was heated by the tremendous fiery spirit of the 'Rog. If it erupted in fire at the touch, and burned Gandalf just to touch it, it seems like Balrogs are filled with red hot fire (or magma for innerds, as the movie depicted it).

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

If the Balrog's bodies were permanent during the Battle of the Powers, they would have not survived beyond that time.

Since they were some of Morgoth's best warriors, they would have been in the forefront of the battle, and they would have been slain by the Valar's warriors. If their body is permanent, they would have died with the loss of an incarnate form (cf. Saruman).

So, the body they used before the battle must not have been that permanent.

After Morgoth's return, of course, the bodies became permanent. Ergo, the truly dead Balrogs.

[Aiwendil]

Nilpaurion Felagund wrote:

After Morgoth's return, of course, the bodies became permanent. Ergo, the truly dead Balrogs.

Why would their bodies "of course" become permanent after Morgoth's return?

[Neithan]

I think he was referring to the fact that they were obviously incarnate during the war between the Noldor and Morgoth. I think that it is just as likely that they became incarnate while Morgoth was imprisoned though.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

The idea of the permanence of the Balrogs' later bodies came from obloquy's post in Ëalar and Incarnation (q.v.).

[Estelyn Telcontar]

And Balrog has stormy eyes
That flash at the wingless lies,
For Balrog has wings to fly
Above the chasm...

(*to be sung to the tune of "Windy")

Ahem! We now return you to your regular no-solution, fruitless, angel-pinpoint-dancing arguing...

[Neithan]

The idea of the permanence of the Balrogs' later bodies came from obloquy's post in Ëalar and Incarnation

I don't think that there can be any question that the Balrogs' bodies were permanent, the point of contention is when this happened (not that it really matters that much).

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Neithan

I don't think that there can be any question that the Balrogs' bodies were permanent, the point of contention is when this happened (not that it really matters that much).

Agreed. After all, the Balrogs killed by Ecthelion, Glorfindel, and Gandalf did NOT return to a corporeal form, as they surely would have, had they been able.

[narfforc]

Sorry DAVEM, but the old flamethrower theory is a non starter. I recently attended the AGM (Lincoln) where Mr Garth was guest speaker. The questions that were aimed at the poor man after his speech, must have left him thinking that the lunatic asylum had let out its patients. These were some of those questions:-

1 Do you think Tolkien based The Eagles on The R.A.F (Appararently because they saved us all)
2 Do you think Tolkien based The Mumakil on Tanks (Appararently because some were decorated with horns)

Now don`t get me wrong, Tolkien must have been affected by The Great War, but these things are stretching it a bit far, when Tolkien has all the source he requires in Northern Mythologies ie-Norse. I suggest people read this, and look up the name Surt (with the flaming sword) and his connection to a certain bridge. Stop trying to guess what Tolkien was thinking, by looking at things through your eyes, Tolkiens love of Language brought him into contact with these mythologies a long time before The 14-18 War.

Respect. Hope to see you in Brum.

[davem]

Narfforc

I'm not sure the Surt connection, which undoubtedly is there, is the whole explanation for Balrogs. I'd say Surt provided part of their origin & Tolkien's experiences on the Somme the rest. If you read Garth's analysis of The Fall of Gondolin you can see that his wartime experiences played a major part in forming that tale.

Orcs & balrogs, however, are not enough to achieve the destruction of Gondolin. 'From the greatness of his wealth of metals & his powers of fire' Melko constructs a host of 'beasts like snakes & dragons of irrisitible might that should overcreep the Encircling Hills & lap that fair plain & its fair city in flame & death'. The work of 'smiths & sorcerers', these forms (in three varieties) violate the boundary between mythical monster & machine, between magic & technology....a third variety, the iron dragons, carry orcs within & move on 'iron so cunningly linked that they might flow... around & above all obstacles before them...

The more they differ from the dragons of mythology, however, the more these monsters resemble the tanks of the Somme....

In 1916, Tolkien was anticipating the dictum of Arthur C Clarke that 'Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.' From a modern perspective, this enemy host appears technological, of futuristic; the 'hearts of blazing fire' of its brazen dragons remind us of the internal combustion engine.But to the Noldoli the host seems the product of sorcery. 'The Fall of Gondolin', in Tolkien's grand unfolding design, is a story told by an elf; & the combustion engine, seen through enchanted eyes, could appear as nothing other than a metal heart filled with flame.

So, I think we have Tolkien seeing the horrors of the Somme 'through enchanted eyes'. Of course his reading of northern myth was mostly responsible for the 'enchantment', but what he 'saw' was tanks, enemy soldiers with flame throwers, poison gas clouds & the wanton destruction of both ancient cities & countryside.

In other words, while I don't think we can explain Balrogs as 'only' German soldiers with flammenwerfers, neither do I believe we can totally account for them by reference to norse fire giants. Certainly Garth shows that Tolkien's pre-WW1 'mythology' was a very 'tame' thing & only began to take on its true depth as a result of his wartime experiences. If Surt is the source of the Balrog it is Surt with his flaming sword in one hand & a flammenwerfer in the other.

Looking forward to Brum....

[narfforc]

Yes I do take your point on Tolkien being affected by the horrors of The War, and surely anyone surving that horror was changed in some way or another. During the mid 70s when I joined the Army, I got the chance to visit some of our veterens at The Royal Hospital (Chelsea). What struck me most, was the humour of the old fellows. There is a common bond that bridges generations within the Military family, I spent 24yrs surviving a few horrors myself, and have been affected. So yes Tolkiens story becomes more dark after the war, yet as he got older look at the humour within LotR. I think the stories were already there, because he had read versions of them all his life. The Balrog existed in the form of Surt, as the Valar are in the forms of Hephaistos/Aule or Demeter/Yavanna and Artemis/Nessa. All the source material to Sub-Create is already there like Fenrir/Carcharoth or even Atlantis/Atalante, but if I where looking for the origins of the Balrog, I know that starting with the Edda`s would be a dead Surt.



I hope you know some good restaurants in Brum.

[Nirvana II]

the question is not "Do Valaraukar have wings?",but "Are Valaraukar solid?" . Think of what a Balrog is made of. Darkness and fire. If they really are made of that, then they could probably choose to have wings or not to have wings.

[Keeper of Dol Guldur]

Shape-shifting of any variety was something Tolkien made a habit of mentioning.

The only few examples came from ... Beren, Luthien and Sauron, and Beorn and his offspring.

He went out of his way to say that these were special instances of that sort of power being used ... nothing like that was even mentioned referring to Balrogs.

Anyway, Morgoth was the one who wrapped them in their shadows, they just volunteered for the super-villain makeover. They couldn't just change at will ... it's not like they were made of smoke. Just surrounded by it.

[Hot, crispy nice hobbit]

Somehow, I kept getting shot down...

But why won't anyone subscribe to the theory I put forth?

'Yet it has a bottom, beyond light and knowledge,' said Gandalf. 'Thither I came at last, to the uttermost foundations of stone. He was with me still. His fire was quenched, but now he was a thing of slime, stronger than a strangling snake.'

1. The Balrog that Gandalf fought can swim.

2. The same Balrog is a slimy creature... not just something of darkness and fire.

3. The same Balrog was awaken by Pippin's itchy fingers.

Pippin felt curiously attracted by the well. While the others were unrolling blankets and making beds against the walls of the chamber, as far as possible from the hole in the floor, he crept to the edge and peered over. A chill air seemed to strike his face, rising from invisible depths. Moved by a sudden impulse he groped for a loose stone, and let it drop.

Mind you, this was a well with water in it.

It point to something fishy - something so grosteque as to be attributed only to the perverted mind of the foul Enemy of the World, who in ages past twisted and mocked all that came within his grasp. The 'wings' that the Balrog had are fins that that Morgoth manufactured.

While these measly 'evidences' can hardly support the grounds that Balrogs in general have fins, they do create the basis for beliefs that Balrogs have wings that serve no other purpose than decoration.

Ahem... You can stone me now.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Hot, crispy nice hobbit

While these measly 'evidences' can hardly support the grounds that Balrogs in general have fins, they do create the basis for beliefs that Balrogs have wings that serve no other purpose than decoration.

Ahem... You can stone me now.

So...

Was the Balrog a "flying fish"? Or just the swimming kind?

[Hot, crispy nice hobbit]

While I can hardly claim any expertise on Balrogs, I am skeptical as to the relationship between fishes and Maiar...

I am more of the opinion that Evil Bio-engineer Professor Morgoth mutated the excess appendages of his deluded servants into something too obsene to be imagined...

"How's my pretty demon-fish roasting?" - Morgoth

[Morsul the Dark]

I have thought of an interesting idea....maybe wings on balrogs are gender specific Like most birds are colored differently depending if they are male or female and such

Maybe female balrogs have wings while males don't or vice versa??

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Morsul the Dark

I have thought of an interesting idea....maybe wings on balrogs are gender specific Like most birds are colored differently depending if they are male or female and such

Maybe female balrogs have wings while males don't or vice versa??

Were there even any female Balrogs??

[Morsul the Dark]

I dunno but who's to say they don't really get too gender specific when it comes to beasts

Edit:So now we'll argue whether or not there were female balrogs instead of if they had wings

[the guy who be short]

Balrogs are Maiar...

I was going to leave the reply there, until I realised I'd be invading Burra's position.

Anywho, the Ainur didn't have genders in the way we know them, if I recall correctly. They simply took genders in Arda because they were mirroring the Children.

This isn't 100%. I recall something like this in the Silm, but it's oh, 10 paces away. Can't be bothered with that now, can we?

[Morsul the Dark]

Originally Posted by the guy who be short

Balrogs are Maiar...

I was going to leave the reply there, until I realised I'd be invading Burra's position.

Anywho, the Ainur didn't have genders in the way we know them, if I recall correctly. They simply took genders in Arda because they were mirroring the Children.

This isn't 100%. I recall something like this in the Silm, but it's oh, 10 paces away. Can't be bothered with that now, can we?

Tahat's right they took shapes so dosnt that mean some could be form with wings and some without?

my evidence is the fact that radagast gandalf and saruman dont look exactly the same and they too were maiar

[Folwren]

Originally posted by Morsul the Dark:
my evidence is the fact that radagast gandalf and saruman dont look exactly the same and they too were maiar

That logic makes no sense. Horses are animals and they're different from birds, that are also animals, and although two horses are never going to look exactly alike, no horse will ever have wings (like a bird). Of course those three wizards looked different than eachother!

I vote that Balrogs do not have wings. I only have the LotR to draw from because I've not read any of the other books all the way through and haven't read about any other Balrogs... Be that as it may, in the LotR, it says:

His enemy halted again, facing him, and the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings.

Okay, guys, in that second part of the sentence (and the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings) what's the subject? The shadow is the subject. Not wings. The Shadow is compared to Wings, but the Shadow is not Wings. Tolkien was an English Teacher, he studied the language, he taught it, and he was an awesome writer - he's not going to write something like that and want it to mean that the Balrog had wings and go off and make the shadow the subject.

And, if you don't like that reasoning, why didn't it fly? It didn't have to walk across that bridge and fall when the stone broke. You could say it didn't have room, but what are the chances of that in the huge hall they were in?

- Folwren

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by Folwren

Oh, come on! That's the most retarded bit of logic I've heard on the subject. Horses are animals and they're different from birds, that are also animals, and although two horses are never going to look exactly alike, no horse will ever have wings (like a bird). Of course those three wizards looked different than eachother!

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

[the guy who be short]

What it was could not be seen: it was a great shadow, in the middle of which was
a dark form, of man-shape maybe, yet greater.

Men don't have wings.

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

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


For what it's worth....

[Folwren]

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

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

- Folwren

[Morsul the Dark]

Originally Posted by mithrandir094

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


For what it's worth....

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

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

[the guy who be short]

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

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

[Gurthang]

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

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

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

[Bêthberry]

I don't see why balrogs wouldn't have wings, although they might prefer buffalo chips and hamburgers as more substantial fare. Think of the crispy fries!

[Kuruharan]

Does anybody have any idea what Zimmerman's Balrog looked (or would have looked) like?

If we could find that out I think we'd have our answer right there.

Just for the record (even though I think I've said this elsewhere) there are two primary objections I have to Balrog wings.

A) If the Balrog had wings that spread all the way across the 2nd Hall, how did it manage to get those wings into the Chamber of Mazarbul? This “folding” the wings business does not hold water because the Balrog has arms which would be mightily in the way of folding. And even so, hundreds of feet of wingspan are not going to just fold into a nice small package. They would at the very least have to be wrapped around the Balrog several score of times so that it would be essentially tied up. If the Balrog folds the wings on its back rather than its sides that is going to create one Udun of a pile of stuff on his back that is probably not going to easily fit through anything.

Besides if the Balrog has a wingspan a hundred feet wide then they will probably stretch far above its head when folded creating another set of problems in getting through doors.

B) If the Balrog had wings that spread all the way across the 2nd Hall, how did it manage to get the body necessary to support those wings into the Chamber of Mazarbul?

I've never seen a good response to these points. Usually when they are brought up the pro-wingers start humming and hawing and try to change the subject.

If one assumes no wings and a Balrog whose actual body was no more than 10-15 feet tall (and probably at the lower end of that), all problems with interpreting the texts suddenly vanish (like a Balrog falling into an abyss).

Also, I’m not so sure that most of the Fellowship, aside from Gandalf, really got a good look at the thing. It’s chief characteristic was it’s darkness. Darkness is a bit hard to see through. Note that when the Balrog takes a stab at Gandalf, the Fellowship can’t even see it’s flaming sword because of the shadow until it slices at Gandalf. I don’t think they could really see it.

Now, I'm perfectly well aware that all of these things have already been said, however, repetition and beating one's own chest are themes of this type of debate...so there!

EDIT: I used to be a member of the pro-wing camp but I found it impossible to successfully answer the above points and was thus forced to change my position.

[Gurthang]

Here's a new thought that I certainly haven't heard: Shape-shifting.

Beorn in The Hobbit was able to change completely into a bear. A Balrog, presumably a more potent(I use that to mean having more power of spirit or Fea or might, whatever you want to call it) creature than Beorn, could very plausibly 'create' these wings at need and then simply 'uncreate' them to fit into a tight spot. I mean to say that he would simply push his shoulders out to make the wings and then the Balrog would simply shed them away. And since shape-shifting was not unheard of in Middle-Earth, this could easily have happened.

Now, I know you are all shouting 'but a Balrog is stuck in that form!' Well, who's to say that it couldn't slightly alter its form? I mean, what difference would this be from say, reaching out with it's arm? It simply extends part of itself; stretching out sideways, if you will.

Well, I think it would work. I'll just sit back now, and let you all ridicule me for my strange possibility.

[Kuruharan]

The problem with this idea is that when somebody is capable of shape-shifting we know and there is no doubt about it. A shape-shifting Balrog doesn't have any textual support (at least that I can remember off the top of my head).

Hint: The only real problem with the belief that Balrogs don't have wings is how they managed to get to Lammoth from Angband quickly enough to save Morgoth. I admit I find this to be a bit difficult, but I find the problems of space and movement underground to be the decisive factor in the matter.

[HerenIstarion]

My impression is, the winged balrog simply looks cooler, and thus pro-winger camp does not want to give up on such a sweet dude

Giving a little twist to the thread here, let me invite you to follow the link of Hookbill the Goomba's current signature: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...ba/Balrogs.jpg

Nice joke, to my liking, but looking at it I've notices also a strange thing dangling behind both figurines, suspiciously resembling no less than a tail!

Wings? Legs? Nope - tail!

I suppose it's tied up with wonderfully wrong 'winged theory' - as flying creature presumably would require some kind of tail for steering, but, gawks, whoever heard about a tail on a balrog? Hang that PJ (not an appeal I usually issue, but that was outrageous! )