Evil animals?

[Sarde]

Is a Balrog innately evil? And fell beasts or mumakil? I know the horses of the Nazgûl are not evil in and of themselves and it seems to me that Tolkien greatly loved animals. Most of them have names. Do the Balrog and the fell beasts have names?

Could it have something to do with the division herbivore-carnivore? Balrogs, fell beasts and wargs are obviously carnivorous; horses and mumakil aren't.

Any theories?

 

[Gildor]

Tolkien's writings seem to often revisit the idea that nothing is innately evil. The Balrogs and even Sauron himself weren't "born" evil, they became that way after being influenced and manipulated, or after falling victim to their own greed and desire for power. And yes, Sauron and the Balrogs are indeed very evil, but they weren't always that way.

Balrogs are more spirits than animals, so they're not really comparable to wargs or other (semi) natural creatures. All animals do what is in their nature. Most any animal could be trained or enslaved by Men or Orcs and used for evil purposes, but that doesn't make it evil, just a tool.

 

[Sarde]

All animals do what is in their nature. Most any animal could be trained or enslaved by Men or Orcs and used for evil purposes, but that doesn't make it evil, just a tool.

When it comes to Mumakil and Wargs I can see your point. But was the Balrog trained or enslaved by anyone? Was it under the control of Orcs or perhaps even Sauron? Not Orcs probably since they too were afraid of it. Or maybe it's just because the Balrog was a 'shadow creature'...

Something comes to mind... Since Elves can communicate with 'all good beasts' (this does imply that there are 'bad beasts' too...), couldn't Legolas have had a chat with the Mumakil and tell them to sod off?

 

[Gothmog]

No the Balrog was not trained. And it was not under the control of any one. In fact, so far as the orcs are concerned it would be the orcs under the control of the Balrog.

The Balrogs were Ainur who were Corrupted and then followed Melkor, later called Morgoth. They were of the same order of being as Sauron, that is in Middle-earth they were Maiar.

 

[Sarde]

An answer from the Lord of Balrogs is good enough for me

 

[Gildor]

Yes, the Balrogs were what you could call demons, beings who were intelligent and more powerful than just about anything else in Middle Earth except Sauron.

There are evil beasts, like the Crebain and Wargs. They are similar in appearance to normal animals, but they are smarter and more cunning than normal crows or wolves and are also much nastier.

I imagine that Legolas could have tried reasoning with the Mumaks if they had been in the mood for talking, but it wouldn't have looked as cool.

 

[Gil-Galad]

Well,about animals.Just like all creatures they were not naturally born evil,they became evil.They were probably dressed by Mekor and Sauron's servants.

 

[Laurelin]

Sarde, everyone else who posted in this thread has done a wonderfully thorough job of answering most of your questions. I just thought I would touch on something that no one else has mentioned yet.
You asked if the Balrogs and fell beasts have names. Indeed, some of them do. However, while all of them may (or may not) have names, it seems that Tolkien only makes a point of mentioning the names of the strongest or most powerful ones. For example, in the Silmarillion, "Gothmog" is the name given to the Lord of Balrogs (hence Gothmog's handle here on the boards.)

 

[Inderjit S]

All animals can of course be corrupted. In the Annals of Aman (HoME 10) we hear of beasts fighting amongst themselves. In the Athrabeth we hear of beasts and birds shunning Men after their rejection of Eru and their self-inflicted Melkorism.

We get beasts fighting for Sauron too. Aragorn comments on the possibility birds and beasts being used to spy upon them, which rather distresses Sam, and Gandalf tells Frodo that Sauron has many servants, animals and Men. (This is after Frodo questions why the Nazgûl’s horses can stand them. They were stolen from Rohan, or their sires were stolen from Rohan and they were raised in Mordor.) Also note the Fell Beasts and the enslaved beasts who were at the Battle at the Front of the Black Gate, and the Mumakil. There were also said to be bad-natured Eagles, and the Bears who met outside Beorn's house. The Crebain of Dunland, the bad-natured birds who Quickbeam was referring to when he was talking to Merry and Pippin.

The Eagles were said to be the servants of Manwë and the ravens were friendly with some Dwarves, though the Dwarves didn't keep pets and didn't ride horses.

 

[Gil-Galad]

According to "The Hobbit" dwarves did have relationships with birds.They kept them not exactly as pets,but still they used them.
I just cannot find the quote now from The Hobbit(My book is not next me).

 

[Inderjit S]

Yes, the Dwarves seem to have set up a pseudo-pet relationship with certain birds, who seem to have acted like some kind of messengers for Dwarves. Some Men (Bard) seem to understand the 'tongue' of birds (the Thrush) and some birds could speak Westron (Roac) whilst the Elves used birds as messengers too. (Gildor and his company may have used animal messengers to spread the word about Frodo to Aragorn, Bombadil and Rivendell.) Some Elves (Celegorm) knew the 'tongues' of animals because of their acquaintance with Oromë.

 

[Lantarion]

Great points Inder.
And don't forget Radagast. I believe that he was not idle the whole time he was in Middle-earth; I believe that he may have taught the tongues of beasts and birds to some.

 

[Inderjit S]

Radagast always struck me as a introvert; though doubtless he had some friends who he may have taught and they passed on some of his knowledge. He was acquainted with Beorn though I don’t think they had been in touch for some time. But then again Beorn was a bit of a introvert as well. It may be that he knew one of the lords of Dale and they passed on the knowledge to their children and thus Bard knew the language of some animals.