Do Balrogs Have Wings?

[Bêthberry]

Obviously what is needed is a full linguistic compilation of all of Tolkien's uses of the word "fly". We need to see his pattern of collocation, the cognates he uses, his contexts, etc etc.

For now, here's this from CoH, a somewhat new source from which to extract more chapter and verse:

Originally Posted by Turin

"The Valar! They have forsaken you, and they hold Men in scorn. What use to look westward across the endless Sea to a dying sunset in the West? There is but one Vala with whom we have to do, and that is Morgoth; and if in the end we cannot overcome him, at least we can hurt him and hinder him ... Though mortal Men have little life beside the span of the Elves, they would rather spend it in battle than fly or submit.

My bolding and, to be pedantically precise, I've picked this up quoted by a review, not from the book.

[Aiwendil]

they would rather spend it in battle than fly or submit.

Turin preferred to keep both feet on the ground.

It's good that he didn't live to see Earendil take to the sky . . .

[Finduilas]

But couldn't resist pointing Finduilas' overlooking of Tolkien's famous use of the word "fly."

Lol. Yes I entirely understand that Tolkien does do that more than once. I'm glad that people disagree with me as to the proof of this statement.

I would also like to clarify something I said a few post ago.

Since I now have conflicting good arguements for both sides, I will withdraw myself from this debate, no longer convinced that they don't have wings, but not quite able to say they do.

I still think that they do not have wings. I have not abandoned the hosts of non wingers, but I am trying to abandon this thread... But I will wait till people are tired of abusing my silly comment on flying/fleeing

--Fin--

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

The problem isn't with whether one believes Balrogs have wings or not. But seeing as this is a forum, we are to discuss, debate, and argue our views. Instead of debating the topic and trying to understand the other side, we (I include myselfh ere too) have all gotten lazy and just cast everything aside as 'I'll believe whatever I want and no one can convince me otherwise.' If that's going to be the way discussions are handled on this forum (the books), I lose all motivation to post. As there really is no more purpose to post if no one is willing to think about and consider all relevant arguments.

Boromir, while I agree that the books forum is not at its most vibrant currently, and while some topics are more interesting to those for whom they are a brave new world while the longer dead smile and say " 'tis new to thee". I don't think this topic has that much mileage to get so worked up about.

I always had the impression that the Balrog had wings but I also had the impression that elves didn't have pointy ears and that the hobbits foot hair was on the soles... the films made me reread more carefully and corrected me of those latter two misapprehensions. This thread made me reread from my initial vote of "yes" and while the "like two vast wings" made me reconsider, I still think the jury is out. The text is ambiguous in my opinion, and I think there is reasonable doubt as to the whether Durin's bane had wings.

In the quote, yes the shadow stretches out "like two vast wings". That is clearly a simile and not debatable in itself. However the presence of shadow wings and actual wings are not mutually exclusive... and if we are going to be so literal, I might point out that a shadow is created by a physical object preventing light from falling in a place ..... what might cast a shadow like big wings ... well wings perhaps .

Taken in isolation, the second quote seems to refer to actual wings. It is only by reference to the other that one might think that these are metaphorical not literal wings. So for me even on the text alone there is scope for doubt. However, Balrogs are spirits of fire. The description is rather like that of Gandalf in " a long expected party" when he threatens to uncloak:"He seemed to grow tall and menacing; his shadow filled the little room" , and also of Galadriel when she is offered the ring. There are many instances of powerful beings - especially those whose fea is dominant over their hroa - Istari, ancient and reborn eldar, - seeming other than they are when they are roused. A balrog must have some physical form but I don't see why it should be fixed. Certainly if they are winged, I would think they are good for gliding more than gaining height - they seem to fall too much for that. They may be like dragons - some winged some not... but for me the bottom line is that it IS ambiguous and I don't actually care that much - I am still traumatised by the hobbits hairy ankles and bearded baby dwarves but I don't lose sleep over this one. There are so many wore interesting things to talk about and I shall perhaps find a few to start threads on but this is like flogging Snowmane after his encounter with the fell beast ...

[Thinlómien]

I've always known that winged balrogs are no good and recent experiences have enstrengthened the belief...

[Lord Halsar]

Forgive me if this has already been presented, but I recently found this little bit of information in the RotK appendix A.
"Thus they roused from sleep a thing of terror that, flying from Thangorodrim, had lain hidden at the foundations of the earth since the coming of the Host of the West: a Balrog of Morgoth."
Whether this is like Gandalf's use of the word meaning to flee or retreat, or if it truly does mean to fly, I do not know.

[Lord Gothmog]

The Balrog and Wings.

Ok, I know that every possible quote has been offered and no doubt 'done to death' in this thread. I have debated in more than one of these .

I give now only my views on the matter. When I first read the LotR and stood with the Fellowship at the chasm of Khazad-dûm, the impression that I got of the Balrog was of a large, Man-shaped, demonic being without wings. Nothing in the writing showed me a creature with 'Wings'.

When I first saw a debate on wings for a Balrog I could not understand why anybody thought the Balrog had any. So I did some thinking, perhaps I was wrong and re-read the books (again). I still see a very large creature (perhaps as much as 14ft tall) surrounded by a 'cloak-like' shadow that it could extend at will, similar to the darkness that surrounded Ungoliant though not as thick. Further reading and thought found no definite case of a Balrog travelling in the manner of birds in flight. They seemed at all times to be 'Ground Troops'.

So I asked myself "Why would any creature that could choose its own form saddle itself with ungainly great appendages that have no real purpose?"

This is what I came up with.

The Only creditable reasons given for wings are
a) To increase its apparent size to intimidate.
b) To Fly or Glide.

a) This is a pointless reason as the Balrog is intimidating enough due to the fear that goes before it and the fact that to increase its apparent size to look more terrible it has the Shadow which it can spread.

b) There is at no point in the writings any evidence that the Balrog could fly or even Glide. Indeed the best time for either of these actions would have been during the battle above Gondolin where there was no restriction due to space and every reason to use wings due to the height at which this battle took place. Yet even before the fight between Glorfindel and the Balrog took place we find this :-

Already the half had passed the perilous way and the falls of Thorn Sir, when that Balrog that was with the rearward foe leapt with great might on certain lofty rocks that stood into the path on the left side upon the lip of the chasm, and thence with a leap of fury he was past Glorfindel's men and among the women and the sick in front, lashing with his whip of flame.

The Book of Lost Tales: The Fall of Gondolin.

Rather than flying or gliding to get past Glorfindel's men it did so by "Leaping" A creature capable of gliding would no doubt have "Leaped Up" from where it was but then would have glided from there to the front of the line.

In the absence of any definite evidence in favour of flight, to me Occam's razor amputates the wings.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Tolkien also tells us that before the appearance of the Winged Dragons in the War of Wrath, Morgoth had never before essayed to bring war to the upper airs. This is related to the observation that at Gondolin the Balrogs needed the dragon-tanks to surmount the city walls- hardly necessary for flying creatures!

Tolkien uses 'fly' so often and so regularly in its sense of 'flee, run away,' dozens and dozens of times, that no significance at all can be attached to its use in connection to Balrogs.

Besides, the leading cause of death among Balrogs (100% of known cases) is plummeting.

[Sardy]

If nothing else, is it not true that Gandalf the Grey's final words should lay this debate to rest?: "It flies, you fools!"

jk

[Lord Gothmog]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hickli

Besides, the leading cause of death among Balrogs (100% of known cases) is plummeting.

Although, to be fair, Gothmog's plummet was very short (and wet), and no doubt having the spike of Ecthelion's helm stuck in his guts probably did not help

[TheGreatElvenWarrior]

Originally Posted by Sardy

If nothing else, is it not true that Gandalf the Grey's final words should lay this debate to rest?: "It flies, you fools!"

jk

Didn't he say, Fly you fools!not it flys

anyway, Balrogs have shadows that look like wings I am pretty sure!

[Gwathagor]

Maybe they were vestigial...wings made of shadow couldn't have been too useful, while they certainly would been imposing/ridiculously trendy.

[Lord Halsar]

Ugh! The person who started this thread said that this would potentially settle the matter, and yet here we all are, still bickering over the same usages of words and phrases, getting nowhere with the topic. My hopes for this matter to ever be laid to rest are dead (unlike the topic) and I hope that all of you will realize that we may never know.

[Lord Gothmog]

I hope that all of you will realize that we may never know.

Of course we will know.

Some (like me) will know that Balrogs do Not have Wings!

Some will know that Balrogs Do have Wings!

In this, each reader puts their own Demon into the shadowy area marked out by Tolkien.

[Lord Halsar]

Originally Posted by Lord Gothmog

In this, each reader puts their own Demon into the shadowy area marked out by Tolkien.

Finally! Someone finally gets it!

[obloquy]

Originally Posted by Lord Halsar

Ugh! The person who started this thread said that this would potentially settle the matter, and yet here we all are, still bickering over the same usages of words and phrases, getting nowhere with the topic. My hopes for this matter to ever be laid to rest are dead (unlike the topic) and I hope that all of you will realize that we may never know.

The thread had been inactive since April of '07.

[Finduilas]

Originally Posted by obloquy

The thread had been inactive since April of '07.

Yes indeed, but it always pops back up. Not all threads do that.

[obloquy]

The point is that the nerd whining about the issue never being put to rest is the one who resurrected it after 7 months of inactivity to post a quotation that first entered this particular discussion back on page 2.

[Groin Redbeard]

Why are there threads all over the Down's dedicated to the subject of Balrog's wings? Isn't it common sense that Balrogs of wings?

[Lord Gothmog]

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

Why are there threads all over the Down's dedicated to the subject of Balrog's wings? Isn't it common sense that Balrogs of wings?

No, it is common sense that Balrogs do not have wings.

However, Common sense is an oxymoron.

Sense in not at all common.

[Lord Halsar]

Originally Posted by obloquy

The point is that the nerd whining about the issue never being put to rest is the one who resurrected it after 7 months of inactivity to post a quotation that first entered this particular discussion back on page 2.

First off: You say nerd like it's a bad thing.
Second: I wasn't whining (per se), and the only reason I did was because I had yet to realize that entering anything in hopes to end it would be a futile effort.

[skip spence]

Couldn't resist replying on this thread...

As some others already stated: no where in any writings of Tolkien is there any description of Balrogs with wings... I guess this misconception comes from in the mention of wings in Moria. But those of you who believe they are actual wings as opposed to a wing-shaped shadow must have poor English reading skills indeed or you haven't read the books at all.

Don't remember the exact words in the bridge of khazad dum passage now but wasn't is something like "it's wings spread from wall to wall..."?

Now correct my if I'm wrong, but wasn't this episode in one of the greatest (if not THE greatest) halls of Moria. If they were actual physical wings this would imply the Balrog was immensly tall. This huge size would also imply that:

The balrogs sword and whip would have been redundant as it would have been able to crush Gandalf like a bug.

The wings would also have been made redundant as it would have been able to step over the gorge as if it were a pothole.

Now as you all know the balrog walked (!) out on the bridge (which was just wide enough to pass one man at a time) where Gandalf fought it and cast it down in the abyss by raising the bridge.

All this would have been impossible if the Balrog was gigantic, let alone had wings.

Now there's absolutely nothing in this passage that implies that the Balrog had wings. Sure you could argue that it had wing but was flightless you could also argue that it had a leather jacket. If I said Balrogs wore leather jackets you would call me crazy though.

[HerenIstarion]

It's been so long I forgot my own position back at the time... lucky it gives one their own choice in italics, so I must have been of the no-winger party if this software is to be trusted...

But, skip spence, surely you don't imply that whatever walked out at Gandalf and Co was nothing more than an undersized excuse for a balrog that only grew in the telling over the ages the tale has been told? Why should we diminish its stature in order to get rid of its wings (if any)?

[obloquy]

I don't think there's any written evidence that balrogs were--or Durin's Bane was particularly--gigantic. Greater than a man in size, for sure, and capable of flaring their silhouette to demoralizing effect, but not so large as to be unable (obviously) to make their way through the less spectacular doorways and hallways of Moria. Greater than Sauron in physical form? It seems unlikely. After a certain point, size becomes impractical for an intelligent creature, especially if we assume that, as Maiar, balrogs were probably accustomed to more comfortable dwellings than holes in mountains such as dragons made use of (note: Moria was not just a hole in a mountain).

[HerenIstarion]

Originally Posted by obloquy

I don't think there's any written evidence that balrogs were--or Durin's Bane was particularly--gigantic. Greater than a man in size, for sure, and capable of flaring their silhouette to demoralizing effect, but not so large as to be unable (obviously) to make their way through the less spectacular doorways and hallways of Moria. Greater than Sauron in physical form? It seems unlikely. After a certain point, size becomes impractical for an intelligent creature, especially if we assume that, as Maiar, balrogs were probably accustomed to more comfortable dwellings than holes in mountains such as dragons made use of (note: Moria was not just a hole in a mountain).

Hello, old man :J

I didn't say Balrogs were 'gigantic', did I? Was just interested in train of thought behind the conclusion

In fact, it must have been of moderate size (scene of Ganlalf holding the door being an evidence), just it seemed somewhat strange to mee that people would need to rely on abstract reasoning and law of physics and the such when textual evidence is there to make use of, few pages back from the bridge scene

`As I stood there I could hear orc-voices on the other side: at any moment I thought they would burst it open. I could not hear what was said; they seemed to be talking in their own hideous language. All I caught was ghâsh; that is "fire". Then something came into the chamber – I felt it through the door, and the orcs themselves were afraid and fell silent. It laid hold of the iron ring, and then it perceived me and my spell.
'What it was I cannot guess, but I have never felt such a challenge. The counter-spell was terrible. It nearly broke me. For an instant the door left my control and began to open! I had to speak a word of Command. That proved too great a strain. The door burst in pieces. Something dark as a cloud was blocking out all the light inside, and I was thrown backwards down the stairs. All the wall gave way, and the roof of the chamber as well, I think

Italics mine

Indeed, something capabale of 'laying hold of the iron ring' designed by dwarves and for dwarves' use, could not have been more than a few times larger than a dwarf, let alone problem of squeezing into the hall in the first place. Note also that the door is shattered not by a physical force that would have been a natural choice for a creature that large rather than 'words of command' and 'counter spells' (to be quite truthul, the door is, in the end, shattered by physical force of the 'roof of the chamber' falling down, but I'm talking cause here)

Anyway, even if I seem to be repeating Skip's argument's to an extent (though with greater eloquence I dare to believe), it was his somewhat harsh ranking of all pro-wingers to a man under 'poor English skills' file that made me want to tease him a bit.

[obloquy]

ehe.

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by HerenIstarion

But, skip spence, surely you don't imply that whatever walked out at Gandalf and Co was nothing more than an undersized excuse for a balrog that only grew in the telling over the ages the tale has been told?

That's a very creative interpretation of my post (the first on this forum I believe) and how you came to it I can't guess. Perhaps my writing isn't eloquent enough to comprehend?

The physical appearance of a Balrog is never directly described, nor is its size. Tolkien probably wanted to allow the reader to make a mental image of the creature far scarier than what he'd be able to conjure up. If you imagine the Balrog with wings there's nothing wrong with that. Nor is it right.

Originally Posted by HerenIstarion

Why should we diminish its stature in order to get rid of its wings (if any)?

I'm not trying to diminish it's size. Where have I said anything like that? And if you really can't follow my train of thought, you too must have rather poor English reading skills. Seriously.

[Nerwen]

Actually, it depends on the sex of the Balrog. As with fireflies, only males have wings. (See Letter #144, and "Morgoth's Ring" p. 70.)

Mind you, I'm not sure if this is strictly canonical. At the time Tolkien was playing with the idea that Morgoth had bred the Balrogs from a species of insect, a concept that he later abandoned.

[HerenIstarion]

Originally Posted by skip spence

That's a very creative interpretation of my post

Mea culpa, confiteor. Maybe I tend to see depths below surfaces where none have been intended. Still

I'm not trying to diminish it's size. Where have I said anything like that?

Few posts up . Consider:

If they were actual physical wings this would imply the Balrog was immensly tall

If my logic be correct, this statement in itself implies its reverse that would be, roughly, as follows: 'if they were not actual physical wings, this would imply the Balrog was diminutively short'

Of course, I may have been taking it a bit too far, but your own post did not contain an indicator as to what definition opposed to immensely tall would you have stopped at yourself, so the scale of immensely tall - diminutively short is open to be used according to my liking.

And if you really can't follow my train of thought, you too must have rather poor English reading skills. Seriously.

That may well be the case. Yet, within this sentence you claim that your position reflects the truth (or is closer to the truth) not because it is based on fact, but because your perception ability is of superior quality. Huh?

As I've mentioned earlier, I believe [mark the verb used] Balrogs were not winged. Still, your uncompromising (to say the least) manner, merciful Sir (M'am?) forces me to argue with you over an issue we, apparently, agree upon

-----------------------------------------------

Nerwen, you must have the wrong letter there, at least all letter 144 says about Balrogs is as follows:

The Balrog is a survivor from the Silmarillion and the legends of the First Age. So is Shelob. The Balrogs, of whom the whips were the chief weapons, were primeval spirits of destroying fire, chief servants of the primeval Dark Power of the First Age. They were supposed to have been all destroyed in the overthrow of Thangorodrim, his fortress in the North. But it is here found (there is usually a hang-over especially of evil from one age to another) that one had escaped and taken refuge under the mountains of Hithaeglin (the Misty Mountains). It is observable that only the Elf knows what the thing is – and doubtless Gandalf.

As far as I'm concernend, letters don't contain any further mention of Balrogs but one as follows:

The Balrog never speaks or makes any vocal sound at all. Above all he does not laugh or sneer. .... Z may think that he knows more about Balrogs than I do

Letter 210

Can't remember male/female wings/fireflies concept either, would be glad to be directed

[Nerwen]

Sorry, I meant Letter #134.

The firefly reference is from the second section of "Annals of Aman" (Morgoth's Ring):

And in Utumno he wrought from the creeping and flying insects of Yavanna the race of demons whom the Elves after named the Balrogs. And they were like unto fireflies, though much greater; those that were male among them had wings, but those that were female had not.

[HerenIstarion]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Sorry, I meant Letter #134.

I'm afraid not

134 From a letter to Rayner Unwin 29 August 1952

I am at last turning to my own affairs. The situation is this: I am anxious to publish The Lord of the Rings as soon as possible. I believe it to be a great (though not flawless) work. Let other things follow as they may. But as the expense of typing proved prohibitive, I had to do it all myself, and there is only one (more or less) fair copy in existence. I dare not consign that to the post, and in any case I am now going to devote some days to correcting it finally. For this purpose, I am retiring tomorrow from the noise and stench of Holywell to my son's cottage on Chiltern-top while he is away with his children.1.... I shall return on September 10th. After that I could call with my burden at Museum Street2 on some date convenient to you .... or, if that is not asking too much, you could call on me (as you so kindly suggest might be possible). ....
I have recently made some tape-recordings of pans of the Hobbit and The Lord (notably the Gollum-passages and some pieces of 'Elvish') and was much surprised to discover their effectiveness as recitations, and (if I may say so) my own effectiveness as a narrator, I do a very pretty Gollum and Treebeard. Could not the BBC be interested? The tape-reel is in the possession of George Sayer (English Master at Malvern) and I am sure he would forward it for your or anyone else's trial. It was unrehearsed and impromptu and could be improved.3
I should love to come to London, if only for the purpose of seeing you and meeting your wife. But I am cutting even the 'seventh International Congress of Linguists' (Sept 1), of which I am an official – time is so miserably short, and I am tired. I have on my plate not only the 'great works', but the overdue professional work I was finishing up at Cambridge (edition of the Ancrene Wisse); the W. P. Ker lecture at Glasgow; Sir Gawain; and new lectures! But your continued interest cheers me. I have a constant 'fan-mail' from all over the English-speaking world for 'more' – curiously enough often for 'more about the Necromancer', which the Lord certainly fulfils.

The firefly reference is from the second section of "Annals of Aman" (Morgoth's Ring

Thanks

Still can't seem able to locate it, will require a little bit of time I guess

[Nerwen]

Hang on, maybe I'm thinking of Letter #143.

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by HerenIstarion

If my logic be correct, this statement in itself implies its reverse that would be, roughly, as follows: 'if they were not actual physical wings, this would imply the Balrog was diminutively short' Of course, I may have been taking it a bit too far, but your own post did not contain an indicator as to what definition opposed to immensely tall would you have stopped at yourself, so the scale of immensely tall - diminutively short is open to be used according to my liking.

Once again your deduction astounds me. Let me see if I understand your point of view: You're saying that since my statement the Balrog wasn't immensly tall is possible to interpret as the Balrog was diminutively short you have the freedom to do so? And also that you are forced to argue with me as my position in this current debate is too uncompromising?

You are indeed free to come up with wild interpretations of what I'm writing to make a forced argument but this isn't very constructive, nor does it make you look very clever. Do you know the opposite of clever? Use the same logic as before and see what comes up.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Nerwen maybe wasn't evil in the beginning, but she obviously is now. You made it up, confess! I am not a HoME expert, but there are surely many around here, and I'd really wonder if such an argument as you quote existed, that it would not have been quoted here, even though if it were, surely there will be a debate whether it is or is not canonical.

[skip spence]

^Yes, I suspect that HerenIstarion must have misinterpreted Nerwen's post slightly, despite all his eloquence and masterful command of the English language, .

[Nerwen]

Letter #243 also contains information about Balrog reproduction. Apparently a Balrog is born every minute.

[skip spence]

There's a sucker born every minute, PT Barnum once said. I wasn't aware he was talking about Balrogs.

[Nerwen]

Well, now you know better.

[HerenIstarion]

I suspect that HerenIstarion must have misinterpreted Nerwen's post slightly, despite all his eloquence and masterful command of the English language

You suspect correctly, admit being caught there

this isn't very constructive

The following isn't either:

But those of you who believe they are actual wings as opposed to a wing-shaped shadow must have poor English reading skills indeed or you haven't read the books at all

Basically, to 'wildly interpret' you once again, what you say here boils down to 'all who don't agree with me on the issue are silly (to use the most mild expression). Even, as I've said earlier, I agree with you on the matter of absence of wings, I don't think your type of argument is valid enough to uphold it.

Do you know the opposite of clever?

I may forward educated guess, and sometimes I admit fitting the description, but not this time I'm afraid (apart from Nerwen's prank. I guess my knowledge of HoME is getting a bit rusty with years )

[Thinlómien]

Nerwen, you're evil. You know, you had me finding my this far unread copy of Morgoth's Ring and skim through the Annals of Aman thinking "Nerwen just can't be serious about it"... The good thing is that skimming the book made me sure I must continue my HoME reading project soon, not "when I have time".

But, if Balrogs were like fireflies, then we would have an interesting and valuable piece of information: Durin's Bane was a girl.