Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: The Arena:
Balrog vs. Smaug

Keebler the Elf
Rivendell

Mar 3 2008, 9:50pm

Post #1 of 17 (5199 views)
Shortcut
Balrog vs. Smaug Can't Post

Which one will win? They both have fire.


Padster
Bree

Mar 4 2008, 9:25am

Post #2 of 17 (1053 views)
Shortcut
Smaug, if only just. [In reply to] Can't Post

Both achieved similar things, i.e.: they both destroyed huge Dwarven mansions, but I get the impression that Smaug took his mansion easier than the Balrog did, but Erebor was probably smaller than Moria. However, this is still a very difficult battle to decide on, and I don't think it would definitely swing one way or the other.

My instincts would say the Balrog because they were without question Maiar, and they killed just about everything that fought. There were only 7 Balrogs, and their power increased in the mind of Mr T as time passed showing the importance he placed in them as servants of Morgoth. There were loads of dragons at the time of The War or Wrath and this concept was maintained as the legendarium progressed as far as I am aware.

However the REAL hard dragons (i.e.: Ancalagon and Glaurung) did tend to be REALLY HARD, lead battles and were very trusted by Morgoth to independently go out into the wide world to wreak havoc. Much more so than Balrogs, it appears, as they only turned up for the real big battles. Maybe thatís an additional indication of the significance of the Balrogs, in that Morgoth wouldnít risk them when he could use more expendable (?) servants.

Dragons were much more independent. Maybe this was because dragons were more intelligent, or more cunning maybe? In which case I think this muddies the water even more, for this conflict.

Both were large and powerful, although Smaug was certainly a fair amount larger, and the Balrog was probably only huge to humans (9 to 10 feet maybe, certainly not the 25feet+ in the movies). The Balrog was without question, a powerful spell caster. He ripped up Gandalfís holding spell on the door in Moria. Smaug didnít show any spell casting/magic ability in The Hobbit, unless you can count knowing when a single penny of his treasure goes missing a kind of magic ability. But dragons in the past had shown significant magic ability, such as Glaurungís obvious spell like ability when dealing with Nienor and Turin, so it would be safe to assume that Smaug had significant magic ability.

So when all other things seem equal (strength, power, spell-like ability, etc.) but there is one factor that differentiates the combatants, i.e.: size in this case, then the one with the advantage wins the fight. Simple as that.

So I think Smaug would win the day, but it would be a combat worthy of legend.

Cheers


Padster


Keebler the Elf
Rivendell

Mar 4 2008, 4:34pm

Post #3 of 17 (1025 views)
Shortcut
Well............... [In reply to] Can't Post

Then again, if the Balrog was 25 feet plus, he may be able to win. Although Gandalf the Grey beat the Balrog, and he couldn't have beaten Smaug. Now that brings up another battle............


nudge
Bree


Mar 5 2008, 2:51am

Post #4 of 17 (1056 views)
Shortcut
Smaug [In reply to] Can't Post

Wow, I really like this one, though I would have to give it to Smaug simply on size advantage.

The Balrog might be able to win by using magic but that is debatable. As far as physical combat, I think smaug has it won every time. He's got pointy point teeth!

Check out my sites: Hobbit Central & Journey of the Ring


Ataahua
Superuser / Moderator


Mar 5 2008, 9:04am

Post #5 of 17 (1083 views)
Shortcut
The Balrog. [In reply to] Can't Post

If this is one of the dragons that can fly, then that would make the battle very difficult - given that Balrogs can't fly *nails colours to mast* - but I reckon the deciding factor is the Balrog's ability to bring some pretty lethal weapons into play, such as a whip or a sword of fire.

Celebrimbor: "Pretty rings..."
Dwarves: "Pretty rings..."
Men: "Pretty rings..."
Sauron: "Mine's better."

"Ah, how ironic, the addictive qualities of Sauronís master weapon led to its own destruction. Which just goes to show, kids - if you want two small and noble souls to succeed on a mission of dire importance... send an evil-minded b*****d with them too." - Gandalf's Diaries, final par, by Ufthak.


Ataahua's stories


Padster
Bree

Mar 5 2008, 12:19pm

Post #6 of 17 (1036 views)
Shortcut
Since both Dragons and Balrogs... [In reply to] Can't Post

...can fly (Sound: hammer hitting a nail. Expression: tounge out as a result of concentration in the way only attributable to the male of the species)......the issue of flight is null and void.

Cheers


Padster

Taken from Michael Martinez Balrog Wings FAQ
Q8) Did Balrogs fly?
Not in the 1916 story "The Fall of Gondolin". However, in a passage of "Quenta Silmarillion" which was not completely included in the published SILMARILLION, Tolkien wrote the following sentence:

"Swiftly they arose, and they passed with winged speed over Hithlum, and they came to Lammoth as a tempest of fire."

To date, all attempts to show that this passage can mean something other than that the Balrogs were flying have been unsuccessful. The sentence indicates the Balrogs were travelling very fast ("swiftly", "winged speed"), but their arrival in Lammoth indicates they came out of the sky (as a "storm of fire"). "Tempest" can mean something other than "storm", most notably "tumult", but a tumult is a great noise or confusion, and the sentence makes no sense if you substitute "tumult" (or great noise) for "tempest".

Since the Balrogs were flying, "winged speed" may be more literal than figurative. Hence, Tolkien's use of the phrase here is another indication of the wings on the Balrogs.


Keebler the Elf
Rivendell

Mar 6 2008, 4:46pm

Post #7 of 17 (990 views)
Shortcut
Listen to Padster [In reply to] Can't Post

Smaug is the winner here. But, there are a few things we have to know to get to this conclusion.

Q: Are we talking about the movie Balrog or the book Balrog?

A: The book.

Q: Where would these guys fight?

A: Out in the open across a huge field, and through the air.

So then with these conclusions. we have a 10 foot tall Balrog vs. a HUGE dragon who belches flame, and has a wicked tail bash. Basically its flame vs. flame. But Smaug with his magic and fire and tail and whatnot will win.

Now we need to wait until 2011 to see the Hobbit, and then decide who would win the movie matchup.


Gurtholfin
Bree

Mar 14 2008, 7:16am

Post #8 of 17 (982 views)
Shortcut
Wait a minute here... [In reply to] Can't Post

A Balrog is a Maia spirit of ancient power. It is in effect a minor god.

In the Hobbit, Gandalf mentions not being able to find a warrior these days to deal with Smaug. This hints that a man could take out Smaug.

Smaug was taken out by a single arrow, albeit a kill shot.

Glaurung was killed by a man.

Dragons, when in an army, were commanded by Balrogs.

Dragons were mortal creatures created by Morgoth.

I think it's a real stretch to think that a Dragon could kill a Balrog. Size doesn't mean a thing in a battle like this. I get the impression that Balrogs were fairly impervious to blunt force trauma. If this is the case, then Smaug would have a real hard time hurting the Balrog. Even his breath weapon would have ZERO effect since the Balrog was a fire elemental in some ways.

You can't hurt what you can't hit and a Balrog was made of shadow and flame. Smaug's tail, talons and teeth wouldn't have had any effect on the him. The Balrog's sword would cut Smaug though.

Balrog's were Morgoth's most terrible servants. They would kick a dragon like a dog.

All the dwarves in the world probably couldn't have killed the Balrog, but they certainly could have killed Smaug. They just needed a good archer.


Keebler the Elf
Rivendell

Mar 16 2008, 5:53pm

Post #9 of 17 (1043 views)
Shortcut
GO BALROGS!!!!!!!!!!! [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes, Balrogs were powerful. Its hard to really say who'd win between them and dragons, because they never did fight each other.


Padster
Bree


Mar 16 2008, 9:08pm

Post #10 of 17 (969 views)
Shortcut
I think you're making FAR too many assumptions. Most wrong! [In reply to] Can't Post

Gandalf's comments are:

ďThat would be no good,Ē said the wizard, ďnot without a mighty Warrior, even a Hero. I tried to find one; but warriors are busy fighting one another in distant lands, and in this neighbourhood heroes are scarce, or simply lot to be found...Ē

Gandalfís comments could be in reference to an Eldar Lord/Hero as much as a mighty human warrior.

Smaugís death at Bardís hands was a fluke, and an attack made from a distance, so Bard was in no direct peril from being barbecued. Glaurung was similarly slain in circumstances that did not involve a frontal assault. Turin sneaked up on him and stabbed him in the belly. The one time that Turin DID face Glaurung up front and personal, he was totally under the dragonís spell. Earendilís slaying of Ancalagon was basically the same as Bardís slaying of Smaug, i.e.: from a distance without any personal danger.

When Glaurung was young again it was distance shots, and lots of them that drove him off:

...Again after a hundred years Glaurung, the first of the Urulůki, the fire-drakes of the North, issued from Angband's gates by night. He was yet young and scarce half-grown, for long and slow is the life of the dragons, but the Elves fled before him to Ered Wethrin and Dorthonion in dismay; and he defiled the fields of Ard-galen. Then Fingon prince of Hithlum rode against him with archers on horseback, and hemmed him round with a ring of swift riders; and Glaurung could not endure their darts, being not yet come to his full armoury, and he fled back to Angband, and came not forth again for many years. Fingon won great praise, and the Noldor rejoiced; for few foresaw the full meaning and threat of this new thing. But Morgoth was ill-pleased that Glaurung had disclosed himself over-soon; and after his defeat there was the Long Peace of wellnigh two hundred years...

Where do you get the idea that Balrogís commanded Dragons?

In the front of that fire came Glaurung the golden, father of dragons, in his full might; and in his train were Balrogs, and behind them came the black armies of the Orcs in multitudes such as the Noldor had never before seen or imagined.

Now this was, I believe, the time when Mr T envisaged many more Balrogs than he finally ended up thinking existed, which finally settled on the numbers 3 or 7. And if he had gotten round to re-writting the entire Silmarillion, then maybe he would have removed a paragraph which seemed to suggest Balrogís were second to really GREAT dragons. But since he didnít any suggestion that he would is pure conjecture.

Finally, Glaurungís full strength is realised when in The Fifth Battle, he wups the Eldar and Men, splitting the hosts of Fingon and Maedhros seemingly single handed. The paragraph mentions Balrogs in the same paragraph, but it is the terror and strength of Glaurung that Mr T focuses on:

There came wolves, and wolfriders, and there came Balrogs, and dragons, and Glaurung father of dragons. The strength and terror of the Great Worm were now great indeed, and Elves and Men withered before him; and he came between the hosts of Maedhros and Fingon and swept them apart.

One occasion where one of the free peopleís faces a dragon mono-e-mono is where Azagh‚l faces Glaurung during The Fifth Battle. Which is a real DO OR DIE moment for the free peoples:

Last of all the eastern force to stand firm were the Dwarves of Belegost, and thus they won renown. For the Naugrim withstood fire more hardily than either Elves or Men, and it was their custom moreover to wear great masks in battle hideous to look upon; and those stood them in good stead against the dragons. And but for them Glaurung and his brood would have withered all that was left of the Noldor. But the Naugrim made a circle about him when he assailed them, and even his mighty armour was not full proof against the blows of their great axes; and when in his rage Glaurung turned and struck down Azagh‚l, Lord of Belegost, and crawled over him, with his last stroke Azagh‚l drove a knife into his belly, and so wounded him that he fled the field, and the beasts of Angband in dismay followed after him.

So it seems to me that anyone in the business of killing dragons, knew not to face them up close and personal, otherwise they died.

What about Balrogís? Well there seems simply loads of occasions, in comparison, where mighty warriors face up to a Balrog and make a good account of themselves. Indeed FŽanor shows that he can last, for a while at least, against several Balrogs, or at least that is how it COULD be interpreted:

Thus it was that he drew far ahead of the van of his host; and seeing this the servants of Morgoth turned to bay, and there issued from Angband Balrogs to aid them. There upon the confines of Dor Daedeloth, the land of Morgoth, FŽanor was surrounded, with few friends about him. Long he fought on, and undismayed, though he was wrapped in fire and wounded with many wounds; but at the last he was smitten to the ground by Gothmog, Lord of Balrogs...

FŽanor was surrounded, and the fact that he was wrapped in flames, suggests that maybe more than one Balrog was present at FŽanorís defeat.

Also Fingon was having a good time with Gothmog, until ANOTHER Balrog came up behind and stopped the fight, allowing Gothmog to strike him down:

At last Fingon stood alone with his guard dead about him; and he fought with Gothmog, until another Balrog came behind and cast a thong of fire about him.

Finally it is well know that both Glorfindel and Ecthelion slew Balrogs. ďAt the cost of their own lives!Ē I hear you cry.

So what!?!

Iíll tell you ďSo what!?!Ē. They killed a Balrog each, unaided. Glorfindelís at least MUST have been achieved without any other intervention of others, where as Ecthelionís fight could conceivably have been aided by missile fire from friendly forces given he fought Gothmog in the middle of Gondolin.

So what is Dragonís were mortal. So were men, and there were men who could defeat all but the mightiest of the Eldar, who were immortal. The difference between immortals and mortals is nothing to base the result of a combat on.

Balrogís COULD be hurt. They WERE hurt, by blades and magical power, just like Dragons. The deaths of three Balrogís, including the Lord of Balrogís Gothmog, at the hands of Eldar Lords and Gandalf is ALL the evidence you need for that.

If one of the mighty Eldar Lords could kill a Balrog, then a mighty Dwarven Lord supported by a load of his folk could too. Maybe youíre thinking that Durinís Bane defeat of Moria contradicts this, but then Durinís Bane was aided by an army of orcs too.

I think Balrogís were among Morgothís mightiest servants, as much as anyone does. But dragonís were too, and there is plenty, that is to say PLENTY of evidence to suggest that the mightiest dragons were a match for a Balrog.

Easily a match for a Balrog.

Cheers


Padster


Gurtholfin
Bree

Mar 17 2008, 5:26am

Post #11 of 17 (985 views)
Shortcut
Are you saying that you disagree? [In reply to] Can't Post

Very tactful subject line!

To your first point that it could be a powerful Eldar Lord/Hero I would say that there weren't powerful Eldar Lord/Heroes fighting in distant lands at that time in Middle Earth unless you count the sons of Elrond who would have maybe been campaigning with Aragorn in Rohan. I don't think that anyone would call the sons of Elrond powerful amongst the Eldar though. Certainly they were good warriors, but they were pups compared to the other Eldar. That leaves Gandalf's reference to heroes to the Lords of Gondor or maybe Rohan. No doubt humans all.

Your comments about Smaug and Gluarung being killed by either lucky or unopposed shots almost makes my point for me. I could almost guarantee that absolutely no shot from Bard with that arrow, even if it hit the Balrog in his privates, could have harmed it. Likewise, Turin's sword in a Balrog's gut wouldn't have killed a Balrog either.

If a lucky shot could bring down a Balrog, don't you think that there would have been some mention of one dying at some point in one of the many battles? Wouldn't Feanor have killed at least one? What about Ungoliant? If they were able to be dispatched, I would think that Tolkien would have made some of the good guy's deaths more heroic by having them at least take a few with them. That he doesn't, except for Ecthelion and Glorfidel, makes me believe that they were awfully hard to kill. And as you know, Ecthelion and Glorfidel had to sacrifice themselves to win.

In terms of Gluarung leading the attack that you quote, that simply means that he could do the most damage to a large number of opponents at one time. Obviously, he wasn't making tactical decisions for Morgoth's army. By lead, I didn't mean that the Balrogs were leading the charge. And the fact that a dragon could do more damage to a large amount of enemies at one time is not what we're debating here either. It's who would win one on one. I agree that a Dragon would be the more impressive adversary on a battlefield and that is why Glaurung dismayed and routed the good army.

In terms of the dwarf king getting the best of Glaurung, once again it shows that Dragons had weaknesses that could be exploited. A knife in the belly sends the Father of Dragons from the field? That's what being mortal can do to an otherwise overpowering being. Glaurung felt real pain and possibly feared for his life. Why else run? If he wasn't in mortal danger wouldn't he have just gotten madder and finished off the dwarves?

It doesn't say anywhere that either Fingon or Feanor were actually winning in their contests with the Balrogs, only that they were battling. It's quite possible that the Balrogs were just waiting them out, something that the more powerful in a fight can do with little risk to themselves. I don't think that Fingon or Feanor are even credited with wounding their opponents. If they had scored hits, I would think that there would have been mention of it. Certainly Fingolfin's wounding of Morgoth was well documented.

When I said that a Balrog is immortal, I didn't mean it in the sense that they live forever unless killed, like elves. I should have been more clear in saying that they were minor god-like creatures that had been around since the beginning. They were spirit-creatures who no doubt could not be harmed by normal means. Are Dragon talons enchanted with spells against the creatures of Morgoth? I believe that elvish blades were. Wouldn't a Dragon's talon just be a really big spear? Deadly to a human or elf no doubt, but could it hurt a creature that didn't actually have a physical body? Obviously the fire breath weapon would have no effect. What else ya got?

Now I can't get inside Tolkien's head, but he was a big studier of folklore and most stories about dragons allowed for the Dragon to be killed by the knight in shinning armor. I believe that Smaug was an example of that, even if he died in an unconventional way from a lucky shot. As I said before, Gandalf hints that a HUMAN hero could take out Smaug. Tolkien never hints that anyone but the most powerful of good guys could defeat a Balrog and this always at the cost of their own corporeal lives.

To sum up, I can see how the Balrog could hurt Smaug, I just don't see how Smaug(coz we weren't actually talking about Glaurung or Ancalagon initially although to be fair I brought up Glaurung) could hurt the Balrog.

Take that dragon lover! ; )


Padster
Bree


Mar 17 2008, 2:02pm

Post #12 of 17 (950 views)
Shortcut
Yes, I disagree, to some degree. Hopefully lightheartedly... [In reply to] Can't Post

Considering your comments and thinking in it some more Iíd have to agree with you regarding Gandalf speaking of a mannish warrior. Of course you are not considering the possibility of the reincarnated Glorfindel, who would have dwelled in Rivendell at the time, and COULD have been out and about at the time. But then Mr T didnít even KNOW Glorfindel lived in Rivendell when he wrote The Hobbit. However he would have had to work it in somehow. And given it is likely that Glorfindel WAS in Rivendell rather than out and about, then I would have to concur that Gandalf is speaking about mannish warriors/heroes being far away, and Gondor would be a good place to look, I guess. I just canít see any man being able to mix it up close and personal with Smaug.

Iím about to go off on several tangents here, but hopefully some of it makes sense.

The key problem with your position is that you seem to be saying that Balrogís are invulnerable to anything unless it has a magical component. Thatís just not rational or realistic. And Mr T was a very rational person (with the possible exception of his Faith) and he tried to ensure, to my mind, that what he wrote had some basis of realism.

Yes, he was well versed in folklore. In folklore bad nasty creatures tend to have an Achilles Heel, by which they can be defeated, such as a dragonís weak-spot over its heart. Mr T NEVER envisaged Balrogs as being invulnerable. Indeed the early stages of the mythology saw Balrogs as weak in the extreme. In the Book of Lost Tales, Tuor, an Edain Hero (and certainly not someone you would consider a Balrog Beater) slew FIVE Balrogs and Ecthelion THREE. Now this was the time when Balrogs were numbered in the hundreds and MUST have been individually FAR less powerful than Mr T envisaged a Balrog like Durinís Bane to be. And I donít think their power has anything to do with age.

That Balrogís could only be harmed by magic is not realistic......OK itís a bit strange to be using the term realistic in this context, but bear with me.

To a peasant with a pitchfork, and knight in plate armour would be invulnerable. Give the peasant a gun and the knight is one dead sucker. Dress the knight in ballistic armour and he becomes, again, pretty much invulnerable to our gun swinging peasant, until the peasant gets hold of the nearest heavy calibre machine gun and uses the knights rapidly disappearing butt for target practice. Put the knight in a tank and the peasant is toast, until he lays his hands on his local A10 Tank Buster (and obviously learns to pilot it).

The point is, itís simply a matter of scale and power, and it doesnít take magic. Magic really is just an illusion, and I think Mr T was going down these lines with his numerous references to Elven magic, not being Ďmagicí, even though it seems like it to the ignorant and uninformed. Certainly Mr T sought for scientific explanations for his mythology as time passed in his life and we began to understand much more about our own world and how it came to be.

Now donít get me wrong, I am one of the biggest supports of Balrogís being rock hard, and it grates me when people think their favourite hero could take one on. Indeed all other things being equal, i.e.: there is no story to fulfil; I donít think Ecthelion or Glorfindel would have killed their Balrogs. To my mind only Gandalfís battle with Durinís Bane is a REAL reflection of how tough it was to kill a Balrog. And that took him eleven days. Oh, and he STILL died finishing the Balrog off.

However, Glaurung was MOST CERTAINLY a being that led armies (the Fall of Nargothrond) and masterminded many a conflict for Morgoth. The same cannot be said for ANY Balrog at any time, until Durinís Bane took Moria. It was Glaurung that Morgoth trusted to lead the attack against Beleriand after The Fifth Battle. Not as a brutal sledgehammer, though Glaurung could do this too, by with cunning and magic.

Also, Turinís sword could MOST CERTAINLY have killed a Balrog. In certain texts about Middle-earthís Ragnarok style ending, the cannon of which will have to remain up in the air unless Mr T gets resurrected, it is Turinís sword that kills Morgoth. Are you saying that it couldnít kill a Balrog? Come on.

It doesnít say whether or not FŽanor or Fingon were winning, but the fact that a second Balrog came up behind Fingon and aided Gothmog, to me, suggests that Gothmog certainly didnít have the upper hand and needed aid. That is after all what happened. And the fact that it could be seen as FŽanor faced multiple Balrogs shows that they were not all powerful (although this one is pretty weak).

Anyway, as it seems for you, the same is the case for me, that Balrogís ARE, on balance, the top of the food chain and ARE awfully hard to kill.

But there HAS to be scope for certain uniqueish beings to be able to match or exceed them. And dragons are hard to kill too, and they were by FAR the most successful and useful of Morgothís GREAT servants. Not only were they ROCK hard, but they were cunning and versatile, as Glaurung proved. And I think the likes of Ancalagon, Glaurung AND Smaug are good candidates for being up to Balrog beating. Even if it killed them to do it.

Cheers



Padster


Gurtholfin
Bree

Mar 18 2008, 5:16am

Post #13 of 17 (1004 views)
Shortcut
I'd forgotten that I was such a big geek.... [In reply to] Can't Post

I wrote this out earlier and somehow it didn't post, so here goes again. I can't believe that I wrote this all twice...

I look at debating as a fun form of competition. I enjoy playing the devil's advocate and saying, "Okay, but did you think about this." I rarely get personal and don't take disagreement personally. I even enjoy it when I'm proven wrong. I'm also okay if we agree to disagree. By your posts that I've read, you seem to be similar.

I also don't argue against facts and you are obviously correct about Glaurung leading several of Morgoth's campaigns. It's been a couple of years since my most recent reading of the Silmarillion and I sometimes forget certain details. You are clearly more up on it than me.

My thoughts about Balrogs come from what I've read, re-read and thought about over the past 30 years or so after first reading the Hobbit. I don't say that as some sort of qualification, I'm just saying that my perceptions on certain aspects of Middle Earth are fairly ingrained at this point.

To me a Balrog is a spirit creature that has taken on a partial physical existence on Earth. He exists on both plains, physical and elemental(spirit world) at the same time. This is the same for all creatures like him including Sauron, the Istari, and also the undead such as the Nine and Barrow Wights. Of course the undead's other plain of existence is different than the Maiar, but it's the same sort of relationship. In addition, there are varying degrees or ratios to how much a creature is here and there, if you see what I mean....

This being the case, I believe that to kill a Balrog, one would have to not only defeat it's physical manifestation, but also it's spiritual one. Call it magic if you like,but I see it as more of an essence quality. And it could only be done by a being who also exists on both plains at the same time such as Gandalf or by a very powerful form of magic. I believe that Gandalf fought both the Balrog's physical AND spiritual(magical) entities when he defeated him. He was aided with the use of a weapon that was enchanted to harm creatures from the spirit world. I would surmise that Glamdring was made to fight ALL of Morgoth's servants, so it would have this power in addition to its mastery over orcs.

Dragons on the other hand exist ONLY in the physical plain of Earth, just like orcs, trolls, humans, chickens and mice. They are of course about as powerful an Earth-bound creature as is possible. That said though, they could be hurt to their very core in the here and now. No need to go to the spirit world. Now I don't mean go to the spirit world in a literal sense, I just mean that their essence was all right here on Earth.

The gist of my argument against Smaug lies in the distinction I just made. I don't believe that Smaug had the spiritual/magical might to defeat a Balrog. I do believe that a Balrog had the physical strength to kill Smaug though.

I'll give you Glaurung and Ancalagon because their creation probably involved being imbued directly with some of Morgoth's power. They were probably more than a match for any of Morgoth's other servants sans Sauron. Smaug was an extremely powerful creature in the context of the Third Age, but that was a time when most of the other powers were greatly diminished. In the first age, he would have been just one in the Host, even in his Third Age prime. That said, how impressive must that Host have been?

Here's another example. Let's say that Oberon, King of the Faeries is real. He can and does take human form and walks at times here on Earth. I don't believe that even a nuclear bomb could destroy him because he is a spirit/magical creature. The blast might shred his form a bit and possibly bump him back to Faerie, but it couldn't destroy him. Only a more potent spirit or a powerful form of magic could do that.

So I disagree that scale has any bearing on a fight when spirit creatures or magical creatures are involved. I believe that you must have powerful magic to wield against these creatures. I just don't believe that Smaug had magic of a potent enough nature.

As a side, I've never really liked tales about dragons because of the nature of their almost always certain deaths. I don't believe that a knight on a horse could ever kill a dragon, which is essentially an ultra-intelligent flying t-rex that can breathe fire. Bard with an arrow? Please. Smaug was in existence for thousands of years and a town guardsmen kills him. I know Smaug was arrogant and that Tolkien loves the little guy to do heroic things and I don't have any issues with that, but that arrow shot would be nearly impossible.

In addition I agree with you that neither Glorfidel nor Ecthelion should have been able to kill a Balrog. I would have prefered for them to sacrifice themselves for the good of others in a delaying tactic.

In regards to your comments on Fingon's battle, I just think that it shows that you cannot trust a Balrog to fight with honor when victory can be had through trickery and deceit. Most evil creatures care nothing for battlefield honor and only want to win. All the better to win by cheating... they are EVIL afterall. The Enemy has a long track record of fighting dishonorably and through deception. Same with Feanor's case although he is one of the Eldar who I believe could possibly have defeated a Balrog in a fair one on one fight. Unfortunately for him, the Balrogs would give him no such opportunity.

As far as Durin's Bane(DB) goes, you say that he had aid in routing the dwarves in Khazad-dum, but he didn't right away. When the dwarves first dug him up, they would have had several battle's worth of opportunities to defeat him alone, but they couldn't do it. Even at the height of their power and facing only one Balrog, it was a lost cause. Due to the presence of mithril, they would have had the best possible weapons and armor, but unfortunately, not the right kind of magic. Eventually, DB would gather an army to himself and that was that.

So there you have it. I enjoy conversing with you. Let me know where I'm wrong.

John


Keebler the Elf
Rivendell

Mar 19 2008, 12:10am

Post #14 of 17 (950 views)
Shortcut
Welcome, Welcome, One and All Longwinded [In reply to] Can't Post

Its good to hear from the longwinded. Keep it up, guys!!!!!!!! Wink


Monkeysee
Registered User


Jun 5 2009, 8:37am

Post #15 of 17 (885 views)
Shortcut
BALROG [In reply to] Can't Post

Padster I gotta say you're wrong on this one for these reasons, granted some opinion, some fact:

Glaurung led several battles because of his size and 'glance' that terrified his enemies. Balrog's terrified their enemies but not so much. So Glaurung leads because of his ability to destroy and terrify Edain and Noldor, not because of his ability to beat a balrog.

Glaurung's main weapons, his breath and 'glance' a Balrog is impervious to.

Balrog's were Maiar which means little in regular combat but in combat where magic is involved means a great deal.

Shelob threatened Morgoth, Morgoth was afraid and it was the Balrogs that saved him.

Balrog's weapons would work against a dragon, including their range weapon, a whip of fire, if for nothing than to entangle the dragon.

The fight would go something like this:

They both fly to a destination and Glaurung tries the 'glance' on the Balrog. Balrog sits there bored. Glaurung blows fire or breath on Balrog, Balrog smiles. Glaurung realises only way to kill Balrog is to bite or claw but Balrog has a sword. Glaurung flies away, Balrog uses his whip to entangle Glaurung who falls back to the earth. Balrog smotes Glaurung with his sword and then stomps him into pieces in the mud.

Balrog wins.


balinman
Rivendell


Nov 13 2009, 1:18am

Post #16 of 17 (3830 views)
Shortcut
GO BALROGS!!!!!!!!!!! [In reply to] Can't Post

the balrog would so win because i mean think about it the balrog is fire and if smaug breathed fire it would just make him strongerCool


(This post was edited by balinman on Nov 13 2009, 1:19am)


AncalagontheBlack
Rohan

Jun 29 2013, 3:48pm

Post #17 of 17 (505 views)
Shortcut
smaug [In reply to] Can't Post

 

 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.