• Welcome to The Tolkien Forum! Connect with fellow Tolkien enthusiasts and join a community that is over two decades old, and still going strong. We look forward to meeting you.  Register

Who would win, Smaug or a Balrog

Who would win

  • Smaug

    Votes: 26 47.3%

  • a Balrog

    Votes: 29 52.7%
  • Total voters
    55
Aright everybody, you win. Ya got me FoolofaTook. Im not worty of your superiority... hehe.
 
I'm not sure what the outcome would be, but just using pure logic, it doesn't follow that because a man can take on (and defeat) a dragon but a "greater being" than man (i.e an elf or maia) can't usually survive a fight with a balrog that a balrog would neccessarily beat a dragon.

This would be the same as assuming that because a rock would beat scissors and scissors beat paper then rock should beat paper. This we know to be untrue.

Dunno if this makes sense but its just a point someone might to like to try to tear apart

On a practical note we could suppose that a balrog is less suited to fighting a dragon than it is to fighting an elf. However, i don't know how a dragon could fight a balrog as the dragons main fire-breathing attack would be pretty pointless!
 
Did everyone forget the War of Wrath? Was it a host of Balrogs that drove the Valar themselves back? No, it was a host of dragons. If dragons can fight off the Valar themselves, then I wouldn't put them down as much as some people have been.

And as far as Smaug is concerned, please remember that when Tolkien wrote the hobbit, he was writing it as a single story. And as a single story if the dragon did not die then it would be a bad ending. As far as a simple man killing him, people must put into perspective the intentions of the author at the conception of the story. I still stand by Samug as the victor.
 
How many Balrogs do you think there were originally? Not too many I would say. And how many Balrogs were left when the War of Wrath was at hand? Gothmog was gone, and so was "Glorfindel's" Balrog.
It was not possible to breed Balrogs, their numbers were finite, whereas Melkor created the dragons. Glaurung, the Father of Dragons, was first seen when half of the first Age was over. Melkor enhanced his breeding methods until the War of Wrath, and he could breed as many dragons as he wanted (or so it appears). I suppose Melkor bred a whole fleet of dragons before the War, and the chief of these was Ancalagon. No use in saying then "Was it a host of Balrogs that drove the Valar themselves back?" The Balrogs were too few to have led an (aerial?) assault.

Balrogs were far more priceless and precious than dragons. The only dragons that could stand up to the Balrogs in some respects, are Glaurung and especially Ancalagon (since he appears to be more warlike than Glaurung, and therefore a good opponent for a Balrog, who was a warlike creature).
 
Really old thread, but...


Shouldn't the context be considered? All the balrog encounters were (presumably) "fair fights" that took place in the midst of battle: just two combatants going at it face to face.

The dragon encounters are different. Turin stabbed Glaurung from beneath when the big guy didn't even know he was there. In their first encounter, which was in a battle, Turin and his men were routed by Glaurung. In their second encounter, Glaurung bewitched Turin by looking into his eyes. Turin only won with preparation time, a sneak attack, and favorable conditions, and even with all this he was poisoned by Glaurung's blood and fell into a coma until Niniel (or was it Brandir) healed his hand. In Children of Hurin, Turin even told his men that attacking the dragon head on would only bring their deaths.

I'll give you Earendil and Fram, though the details of those battles are even vaguer than the balrog encounters, which is saying something.

As with Glaurung, Smaug was killed by an enemy whom he didn't even know existed. Bard would have been a pile of ash if he tried fighting Smaug in a more straightforward manner.

Anyway, if balrogs can be killed by errant elves who ram their helmet spikes into their chests, I don't see why a dragon, who's better armed and armored than any elf and among the physically strongest denizens of Middle-Earth, would fare any worse.

This is not to say that dragons would win every time, of course, or even most of the time. Glaurung was driven from battle once by the dwarf Azaghal who managed to get in a good stab at his unprotected underbelly, and since iirc the dwarf only managed to get this close because of his somewhat fire-proof dwarven armor and face-mask, it stands to reason that a balrog (being constantly on fire himself) would be even more resistant to dragon-fire and thus have a better chance of exploiting this weakness common to almost all dragons.

However, we were discussing Smaug here, whose formerly vulnerable underbelly is encrusted with layers of hard, protective jewels, and has only one small, unprotected patch. The question then is whether the balrog would notice this weakness in time, before he got crushed or bitten in half or smacked to smithereens by Smaug's tail. It's also an open question whether the balrog would be able to mortally wound Smaug by stabbing deep into one of his eyes or something. It'd be a good fight, without an obvious victor in my opinion.
 
Well, since I haven't played yet, might as well have a little fun and throw in my two cents.

There has never been a battle between a Balrog and a Fire Drake, so all of the aforementioned battles between Elves vs. Balrogs, Men vs. Dragons, Gandalf/Dwarves vs. Durin’s Bane etc.; regardless of the outcome are irrelevant. Just like sports, it’s all about how opponents match up. The first place team might always lose to the last place team simply because the match up doesn’t jive. You have to look at the opponents for what they are, and the abilities they have. The fact that a Balrog is a Maia and a Dragon is not has nothing to do with the battle; it’s only relevant in the afterlife, when the battle is over. Let's see:




Fire Resistant: Smaug-Yes / Balrog-Yes

Ability to Fly: Smaug-Yes / Balrog-No

Projectile Flames: Smaug-Yes / Balrog-No

Thick Armor: Smaug-Yes / Balrog-No

Deadly Whip: Smaug-Yes (tail) / Balrog-Yes

Enormous in stature: Smaug-Yes / Balrog-No

Highly Intelligent: Smaug-Yes / Balrog- ?

Rips, Tears, Eats: Smaug-Yes / Balrog-No (may eat)

Breaks Spells: Smaug- ? / Balrog-Yes

Casts Spells: Smaug-Yes / Balrog- ?


Well, it’s obvious the Balrog has a substantial disadvantage. Also, why did Morgoth wait so long to attack during the Siege of Angband? Couldn’t he have just sent Gothmog out there to break the siege? Probably, but he wasn’t confident with that strategy. He instead wanted to be sure he was going to have the victory; so he patiently waited for his deadliest weapon to mature; Glaurung! And it worked; the Battle of Sudden Flame was devastating . And personally, I think Smaug would have no problem taking out Glaurung if circumstances arose.

So, do I think a Balrog could take Smaug?....not a chance in hell.
 
Last edited:
Well said, Illuin

As with any fight it would definitely depend on the circumstances. As pointed out, the deaths of Glaurung and Smaug are no indication of their power, unless you mean to say it took a whole villiage (down to their last arrow) or an assassin's blow to finally take them
 
Belrog.

Belrogs lasted the ages, dragons wither and die. I think it has more to do with strategy than strength.

If a belrog and a Smaug had a battle, it would be of Smaug's choosing, because a Belrog wouldn't leave it's lair (unless ordered), which gives him an upfront and immediate advantage.
 
Huh. I never wrote in this thread? Apparently I voted, probably for dragons. Both sides of this debate seem to be very confident that they are correct. I haven't seen any devastating blows being dealt (at least, nobody took them as devastating and responded in kind). Anti-climactic, yo. But then, it's less of a showy debate and more of a meandering argument. Both sides have already used plenty of great points, but they aren't attacking the other side, really.

1. Balrogs are Ainur type things. So what? Some people use this as an argument and leave it at that. Sometimes they add that, because of their race, they can't be killed. That part is craziness. Plenty of Ainur type things have been killed. They (just like any other race) can only come back via special circumstances. It seems that these people believe that because they are immortal and have lots of creepy powers, that they are in an entirely different class and to compare them to other races is laughable. I see no evidence of this when Ainur type things have been killed by other races plenty of times, via the same tactics they'd use on anything else (I admit that if I had to worry about such matches, I'd be worried about all kinds of terrifyingly powerful Ainuric possibilities, but, from what I've read, it seems that my fears don't matter too much).

2. Everyone died with their balrog opponent. So what? As the Illuin person points out, in a contest between two sentients, the odds can be figured, but the results are never definite. There's not enough written about most of the balrog and dragon fights for me to prove that one is generally weaker than another. The reason that balrog opponents always died tells me more about the opponents than about a balrog's strength versus a dragon's. Those opponents were either idiots, too focused on fighting past the balrog's fear ability to think more clearly, or the balrog just didn't seem scary enough to warrant more planning. It is obvious to those up against dragons that they will most probably die. The things easily take out armies. Thought is employed.

Is there some other point I should move my attention towards? I just popped in really quick.
 
Unfortunately I don't share the sentiments of the dragon-lovers of the forum. What's even more peculiar is that this thread is five years old!

First it is necessary to look at the origins of Dragons and Balrogs and their respective ancestries (or lack thereof).


The Silmarillion: Of the Return of the Noldor

...Glaurung, the first of the Urulóki, the fire-drakes of the North, issued from Angband's gates by night.
Click to expand...

Tolkien never once referred to the dragons (to my knowledge) as being any of the Ainur, it is therefore safe to assume that the Balrogs, as Maia, were the greater of the two. The above quote is the first mention of any Dragon in The Silmarillion.

Let's have a look at the resumés of the greatest of each of the two species nevertheless:


Gothmog
Glaurung

  • - Glaurung, scarce half-grown and got his a** handed to him by Fingon with his group of Elvish archers.
    - Slew Noldor and Men and crushed the hill-forts of the Noldor at Ard-galen with the help of balrogs.
    - Overcame Maehdros' defence at the great fortress at the Hill of Himring which closed the Pass of Aglon preventing entrance into Beleriand and subsequently destroyed all the lands between the arms of Gelion.
    - Wounded by Azaghâl of the Naugrim (Dwarves), Lord of Belegost in the Nirnaeth Arnoediad but nonetheless killed him.
    - Defiled the Eithel Irvin and burned the Talath Dirnen aka the Guarded Plain between Narog and Teiglin.
    - Overcome Nargothrond, the fortress of Finrod Felagund. He then cast a hypnotic spell upon Túrin and subsequently got his eyes stabbed out.
    - Temporarily blinded Mablung, chief captain of Thingol.
    - Laid a spell of darkness and forgetfulness on Nienor, who subsequently married her brother Túrin and consequently committed suicide.
    - Slain by Túrin at Cabed-en-Aras.

    All Glaurung was really good for was storming fortresses, he was a battering-ram; nothing more. Gothmog slew three of the greatest of the Eldar. If I was taking the interview, it seems to me that Gothmog and thus the balrogs would get the job.

    One argument that I would put forward is that Smaug it seems, according to contemplations of JRRT, would have been recruited into the services of Sauron:

    Unfinished Tales - The Quest of Erebor

    The Dragon Sauron might use with terrible effect.
    Click to expand...

    It may, IMO, have been a little more difficult for Sauron to seduce a Balrog into his service, as they are spiritual equals, despite Sauron having the greater power.

    Smaug was defeated and slain by King Bard of the line of Girion in The Hobbit, whereas the Balrog encountered in Moria slew and was slain by Gandalf, a Maia or angelic being.

    Smaug, aka the Worm of Dread would be sent back to Erebor with his tail between his scales after being severely whipped by the Balrog who would follow him there and then open a baitshop for passing tourists on their way to the Long Lake to charter a fishing boat from the Men at Esgaroth.

    "Durin's Bane's Baitshop: Best Bait this side of the Misty Mountains!"
 
Are the more specific points supposed to be evidence that the first one makes any sense, or is there some proof hidden elsewhere that being an Ainur type thing automatically makes you more powerful than a dragon?

Looking over these resumes, it seems that Gothmog's most notable accomplishments are all along the lines of striking the final blow while some guy is already surrounded and tired. I am wondering if the beings themselves made these resumes, or if they just hired someone not very flattering to do them. Whether you think of Glaurung as a mere battering ram or no, is there evidence that he couldn't just easily batter Gothmog to death? I don't see him as merely a battering ram, though. Most battering rams have only one form of attack and must be carried around by those with brains. Glaurung had more forms of attack (including the super impressive and far more refined than a balrog's evil power to mess with people's brains) than Gothmog and I would guess that he was smarter, mostly because I have read nothing of Gothmog's personality. Did Tolkien ever write anything to even suggest Gothmog's level of intelligence, besides the fact that he had some high rank (for which there could be all kinds of reasons)? Glaurung killed plenty of formidable opponents, too. It just would have been more tragic if Tolkien had taken the time to tell us each of their names and stories.

Towards Smaug, that quote tells us little. Sauron could have used a balrog with terrible effect, too. Does it tell us that Smaug was easy to control? No. Actually, he seems to me to be more along the lines of an Ungoliant. Independent. The pathetic balrog hiding out in Moria used to work for Mel, so he probably knew that Sauron was his right hand Ainur type thing. I don't see why reviewing Sauron's resume would stop him from helping the guy out. Smaug had a good thing going by himself, though. He seemed plenty to content to stay where he was, and Sauron wouldn't have been able to force him into helping out. Of course, we have Sauron's vaguely defined ability to draw evil. It is too vaguely defined for me to worry about Smaug falling under its spell. With little information on how intelligent balrogs were, I wouldn't know who would be more likely to be swayed by it.
 
by Belegûr
Let's have a look at the résumés of the greatest of each of the two species nevertheless
Click to expand...


The résumé theory is irrelevant; as I have explained in post #30 (and rather not explain again ). Also, the fact that Smaug isn’t a Maia and the Balrog is has no bearing in a battle. A Balrog (Maia) can be slain (physically) just as easily as an Elf, Dwarf, Man etc. (as many were).

PS - Ancalagon was the greatest of the Dragons; Glaurung was simply the first .
 
Ulairi...fresh returned and disrespecting Dragons already? Unwise, old friend, unwise.

Your references to Glaurung and Gothmog aside, let us consider Smaug and his death. Had his "jeweled waistcoat" been complete, I fear Bard would have gotten the roasting he so richly deserved. Alas, in his pride, he failed to assure his invincibility before flying to the attack.

Smaug was the perfect killing machine, as Gandalf was well aware, curse him. Wings, fangs, claws, thick armour, intelligence far superior to all but the divinely wise and endowed with magick, it took a conspiracy to slay him. The slaying of a Balrog cold be accomplished by one person, be he mortal or otherwise.

Had he lived and fought such a battle with a Balrog, the advantage of flight alone would have ensured his victory, as his manueverability would have been excellent. Combine that with flame-throwing and said Balrog is no more!
 

Not necessarily, a snake will always be victorious over a mouse.


In any ancient military construct the strongest soldiers were always the leaders.


The "other monsters of divers shapes" would likely include dragons. The following passage is of enormous interest to me for various reasons:


Here Tolkien is discussing the quintessential concept to most myth and fantasy based on religious premise that created creatures cannot themselves create, they can only twist and mar that which already is in existence. He concedes that even if Morgoth were capable of 'making' things, they could never match the power of the Valar through delegation (delegation in this context meaning the passing of power or will from one being to another which Tolkien in another letter explains is inherent in myth - Sauron's power passed into the Ring and Morgoth did the same through his Ring - Arda). I am and never will be JRR Tolkien, but I firmly believe that if I ever got the opportunity to ask him this question I know what the answer would be. If we substitute Valar for Maia or possibly Ainur in the above quote then the dragons could never match the power of the Ainur (or Maia). I know that's speculative, but I believe what Tolkien in this passage is fundamentally driving at is the impregnable concept that sub-creation cannot create and thus cannot match that which already is; and you'll see exactly why below. Fëanor's Silmarils were works of art but were simply imitations of light of the Two Trees. The Two Trees did not 'create' their own light but generated the light already present in the world after the Flame Imperishable was kindled in the Void:

The Silmarillion - Of the Beginning of Days

In that guarded land the Valar gathered a great store of light...
Click to expand...

Myths Transformed sheds even greater light on the subject aforementioned.


Here Tolkien acknowledges that through perpetuation of physical form, the "corrupted Maia" eventually became earthbound to the point that they could not exercise the greatness of their power, which includes even a demon-form: a form which the Balrogs constantly possessed. Subtextually Tolkien evinces that even a demonized form is greater than the physical form possessed by dragons.


And there you have it: Maiar are crucial to the discussion as they are greater in being than artificial sub-creations such as Orcs and Dragons. Thus Balrogs are more powerful than Dragons; but I am not going to leave it at that, oh no...

The Silmarillion - Of the Return of the Noldor

He was yet young and scarce half-grown, for long and slow is the life of the dragons.
Click to expand...

Dragons conversely, were mortal creatures and thus of lesser potency (or power - they have the same meaning). Even the Quenya form of Balrog - Valarauko - means 'Demon of Might'. Another salient point is that Balrogs didn't appear to re-produce and thus did not confine themselves to physical forms. In determining the number of Balrogs left, Christopher Tolkien notes that this note of JRRT's was discarded and the number of Balrogs was therefore quite small:


From CT's notes it appears that Tolkien changed his mind and considered that only 3 or 7 at most existed. I understand the fault in that logic, but it is irrefutable that he considered the number to be far smaller as he developed The Silmarillion.

Thus this argument:


Becomes irrelevant. The Balrogs were simply smaller in number than the dragons, they were however, corrupted and immortal Maiar, the "most potent" and "chief servants" of Morgoth Bauglir, whereas dragons, including Glaurung and as...

Illuin said:
Ancalagon was the greatest of the Dragons; Glaurung was simply the first...
Click to expand...

...they are nought but cheap imitations of created beings twisted and marred by Morgoth and consequently "dwindled in force". Despite Smaug being the last of the great dragons, he was still part of the brood and therefore less in potency, might and power, than that of the lowliest Balrog.

As for Ancalagon being the greatest Illuin, you are absolutely correct; but Ancalagon's achievements were far outshadowed by that of his ancestor Glaurung and therefore it is my own personal contention that Glaurung remains the first and the greatest of all dragons, which is another topic of discussion.


True but nowhere does Tolkien express that point of view, and Gandalf potentially concludes that Smaug as an agent of Sauron may be a certainty:


If Olórin considered that a possibility and used the quest for the Arkenstone as an ulterior motive to overcome Smaug, then I would indeed infer there was a strong possibility that Smaug would be recruited into Sauron's service.
 
chrysophalax said:
Ulairi...fresh returned and disrespecting Dragons already? Unwise, old friend, unwise.
Click to expand...

chrysophalax, how very nice to hear from you after all this time. What a pleasure it is hear from you again. I made a statement earlier that TTF has become another Moria, but even so, I'm glad you're still here to revitalise our Khazad-dûm to its former splendour and glory.

chrysophalax said:
Your references to Glaurung and Gothmog aside...
Click to expand...

Yes, I acknowledge it was a contrived and slightly constipated effort, but I am, as with you and other members of TTF, becoming slowly re-acquainted with a dear old friend: The Silmarillion. I haven't touched a Tolkien novel in about six years.


And Illuin made a similar point in his post. However, another (clever) member also noted that all dragons seem to be slain by none other than Mortal Men, the lesser forms of creation in comparison to the Elves and the Ainur; which implies to my mind that dragons also, must therefore be lesser than the Immortals, and if you see my post above Tolkien certainly agrees with me as well.


Yes, yes... he is a veritable 007 flashing his Walter PPK and that winning smile that Balrogs can do nought but swoon amorously. However, there were no Balrogs slain by men (to my knowledge and I am open to correction - but be careful, I am still Úlairi and have a notorious temper when corrected ) and resultantly I just can't agree with you there. The only reference I'm aware of is Húrin who fought off an entire host but was ultimately defeated and then dragged into Angband by Gothmog.


You seem to forget that Balrogs were demons of fire; I seem to remember something from my repressed childhood about fighting fire with fire...? Hmmmm...

Nonetheless, I consider Letters and Myths Transformed to be the definitive answer on the matter, regardless of whatever else I may have said or implied.
 
It is true that a snake would normally obtain victory over a mouse, but what if the mouse is much smarter than the snake?

Towards the idea that a creation of Mel's couldn't be stronger than something Eru made, I point out that we don't know where dragons came from. There were all kinds of monsters in Middle Earth, made by who knows at who knows what time. They could have been captured and bred and enhanced by Mel. Or he could have constructed a shell stronger than most other people's bodies, then inserted subordinate Ainur type spirits. No problems.

The bit about the balrog's demon form always being shown is no large deal. It just says that if they used up their power like Mel did, they would lose the ability to change or get out of their clothes. It seems that the balrogs never wore their more conventional clothes and always went around in their demonic ones. Wearing a physical form didn't constantly use up power. This is the first I've heard of the demonic brand of clothing in Tolkien's universe, though. Is there some other quote that tells me that wearing that brand is a constant drain? Mel and Sauron just lost some of their clothes-wearing abilities due to losing too much power by doing crazier things.

Towards the bit about dragons not being immortal and therefore a race of lesser power, dang. I mean, um, the quote says that they have long and slow lives. Immortal is undeniably long and slow. I win! Additionally via semantics, one quote says that the oldest and most potent were immortal. It doesn't say oldest and slash or most potent, so the balrogs were merely some of the most potent of his oldest servants, which doesn't mean that they are more powerful than some of his younger servants.

Towards Smaug again, I see no strong possibility that Smaug would have joined up with Sauron. There is certainly any possibility at all, but I see little to be certain about. It would be plenty dangerous if the two teamed up, the evil torturer Gandalf saw any possibility at all, and decided to prevent it. What evidence is there that Sauron was even thinking about recruiting Smaug, besides that, yes, it would have been a good idea? The evil torturer Gandalf thinking that Sauron planned on it could just be a crazy inference of his, and helping Dwarves out is always a good thing. Either way, the surmization that Sauron could recruit Smaug doesn't really help much in the argument that Smaug couldn't beat a balrog in a fight.

And towards your separate post, your evidence that dragons are weaker than balrogs is that dragons have been killed by humans, and balrogs haven't? You think that a balrog couldn't be killed by a human just because there has been no documentation of such a thing? But when others did it, they employed things like swords, which humans also have the ability to employ. Balrogs seem to go down about as easily as most. Dragons, as I already typed, require a bit more thought, luck, or magical boats and blinding headgear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Similar threads

Who delved deeper?
Replies
0
Views
538
Frandîr
Evil women in The Lord of the Rings
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
AaronSecret
Durin's Folk in the Grey ⛰️Mountains
Replies
3
Views
1K
Valandil
D
Tolkien trivia: how deep does your knowledge go?
Replies
5
Views
1K
Amalcarin
Fanfiction from a long time ago: The Mellon Chronicles
Replies
4
Views
457
Vardarianna
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…