• 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
Towards quotes, I understand your point of view. It was the point of view of many who aren't around as much, I agree. There are still some who enjoy a well-placed quote. I have never been one, much to the annoyance of many. I have the books close at hand. I look up all the quotes you people give. I'm just too lazy to go hunting for my own, which I know is in there someplace. Yes, giving quotes can make debates easier for my opponents, but I see no need to do that. We've read the same stuff. They should be able to prove me wrong, whether I spoon-feed the locations of counterpoints to them or not.

Towards that Tolkien guy's views versus unsubstantiated ones, are you of the opinion that only those two options are available? Either we agree with Tolkien or our opinions are meaningless, when speaking of his inventions? Craziness. The guy wasn't perfect. And, sure, there are plenty of threads that only ask for people's opinions, but some also ask for reasons behind the opinions. Those opinions are oftenly based on what Tolkien wrote (gasp! Wait. You truly didn't know this?), which makes them plenty substantiated, whether they agree with Tolkien or not.

Anyways, Mel grabbed spirits via some horrible as well as unfair magic, or mayhaps spiritual ears are so clogged with honey that anybody's voice is just too swee to resist, and jammed them into those dragon things that had lots of fun with destroying Gondolin. You don't remember this? You require a quote for that? I can find the thing and type it all down, but I don't think that it's necessary, since I believe that we both remember reading it. Also, when elves die, and if they don't head for Mandos, Mel was then able to easily mess with them. You don't remember reading that, either? Because they were so easy for Mel to mess with, I don't see why he couldn't employ them for all sorts of things. Them, or other spirits. I already wrote some other stuff pertaining to this in that other thread about souls. oh well.

Towards who comes with more potence, first of all of the points I'm going to make on the subject, calm down. Secondly, let me go back and look at some of that stuff that we typed earlier. There was the bit about balrogs being the oldest and most potent of Mel's servants. Luckily, he never compares the power of his old and powerful guys to his young and most powerful guys. Also, balrogs signed up for Mel's army. They decided to be servants because they were loyal roadies that loved his music. Dragons were more independent. Partners, maybe? Mercenaries? Allies, not servants.

Either way, there are many kinds of power, and Tolkien doesn't define either race's very much. Maybe a balrog's flames are hotter than a dragon's. At the least, they are always on, while a dragon has to take another breath. Mayhaps their fear ability makes people more unnaturally afraid than even a dragon could make somebody via their creepy hypnosis power. A balrog could be more powerful than a dragon in various ways and vice versa, with the quote still being correct.

And! ---> Even if a balrog is somehow stronger than a dragon (which makes little sense), more intelligent than a dragon (an idea for which we only have evidence to the contrary), and better in every other way, a dragon could still kill a balrog. It happens all the time, that the weaker defeats the stronger, so whatever proof we have that one is better in some way than the other, the odds can only be in favor of one, and the odds don't always determine the outcome of a battle. And since we're talking about fiction, the more sympathetic character usually wins. Who doesn't like Smaug?

Towards Shelob, yep, it does seem that she might be a little afraid of the light. Makes sense. "Augh! The deaths of many eye cells!" No? Anyways, the light is the light of a silmaril, which hurts evil types. The fact that she was afraid of it doesn't prove that she was incapable of eating light.

Towards your jest about Smaug's personality, got it. I request forgiveness for assuming that you were being serious. I understand that many people could come up with all kinds of crazily differing opinions via reading the same book. I challenged the views that you expressed, just as I challenge a view with a quote. I don't see why one should be seen as more valid than another, while dealing with a fellow intelligence of any level.
 

You have Ancalagon, Glaurung and Smaug to go on in the incessant determination of Dragon Intellect. Saying that "Tolkien's Dragons are intelligent animals" is completely unsubstantiated and what's more: biased. You'll also have to direct me to where you derived your inference that Balrogs were unintelligent because Melkor desired that they be subservient solely to his will. I've established above that of The Great Descendants any procreation exhibited by Maiar entails the dissipation of their being as they become increasingly earthbound. Generations thus become weaker (i.e. less potent or impotent). It seems as though it was almost a trade-off between their fëar and hröar. Thus any descendant of Glaurung would not be as potent and so forth... Balrogs maintained their intrinsic potency as they neither procreated nor did they expend their powers interchangeably with the erma of Arda.


Let me redirect you to your assumption:

chrysophalax said:
Of course he didn't! He chose those he knew would do his bidding. The Dragons around at that time might have refused, or decided it wasn't worth their while.
Click to expand...

Sounds like someone's been doing a little assuming.

chrysophalax said:
So, unless there is definitive proof that I have not found in either work ( which are the only works cogent to this discussion), that says my interpretation is erroneous, I'll be sticking with it.
Click to expand...

The only works cogent to this discussion? This isn't amateur hour, chrysophalax. The only reason you assume that these works are the only relevant ones to the discussion is because you simply don't want any discussion that requires an elaboration of the complexities of Tolkien's world that may conflict with your conclusions based on your personal taste... not the contentions of Tolkien apropos of his creations: The Dragons of Morgoth. As for definitive proof?

And here... we... go.




Ahhhh, it's a veritable quote-fest!!!

Now, as to your precioussss Dragon Intellect Theory - here's a little bite-sized quote (oh no!):


So, we have:

  1. Balrogs are more potent than Dragons.
  2. Through the practise of procreation whilst embodied the Úmaiar (and Maiar - cf. Melian) dwindled in force and thus grew progressively impotent.
  3. Ilúvatar would not provide fëar for Dragons and thus Melkor must procure them; and through the expenditure of his will upon them through the perversion to continual procreation (breeding the brood) they would dwindle in force again and again...
  4. Talking is not a sign of a rational soul or fëar. Without fëar creatures in Middle-earth are nothing more than animals and essentially deprived of an intellect; not imbued with a great intellect as Melkor could only sub-create and great intellect requires a rational soul. As animals they have as much independence as a dog or horse and hence the ability of Morgoth to dominate them wholly would have required little effort and virtually no expenditure of his will in their domination whasoever. Read the passage in Myths Transformed as to the Orcs being incapable of action without the mind of Melkor directing them.
  5. The talking was much like that of a parrot!!! Smaug could've been nothing more than a gifted mimic!!!

Conversely, we have Balrogs. Ainur in origin, capable of assuming demon-form, most potent of Melkor's servants, demanded enormous expenditure of will by Melkor to enslave and pervert them to Darkness (implying not only great intellect but also great power) and never dissipated their being through interaction with Arda itself!

I certainly know what team I'm batting for!
 

We may have read the same stuff; but that is completely irrelevant in the discussion of that stuff. Thousands of Uni students can read the same stuff, sit the exam and yet we still get a wide variety of results. Funny that...


Yes, that is exactly what I'm purporting to say. However, what Tolkien left out (to our enormous benefit) was the answer to every possible question that could potentially be asked about his incredible works. This thread wouldn't exist if there had been an epic battle between the Balrogs and Dragons. There are a myriad of little nooks and crannies that remain undiscovered in the world of Tolkien and a mission statement of a forum like this is to investigate these dark places with the brightest light available to us; and the brightest light are the opinions of Tolkien himself on a range of matters that do not give us a simple yes or no to these questions - but simply what we can infer, derive and conclude based on these assertions. These are the ingredients of a cogent, coherent and ultimately fruitful discussion and even (heaven forbid) elaboration on the works of Tolkien. Haven't you ever just sat back and wondered where the hell a discussion was going? When you drive your car you usually have a destination in mind; but it appears that many members on this forum simply want to drive for the sake of driving; bereft of destination. Ultimately? Destination Unknown.


Now I truly don't want to be insulting here Yay, as I like you; your a fun (albeit completely insane ) guy so I'll say this as nicely as possible. You're right, I remember the Fall of Gondolin; what I don't understand is a cogent and coherent point. All you've said here is: Mel jammed spirits into Dragons and they destroyed Gondolin. The End.

And??? ... ??? ... ???

I might actually need a quote to see where you've actually made a point, Yay. The crazy thing, you see Yay, is that I couldn't actually find anywhere where it says: Mel jammed spirits into Dragons in The Fall of Gondolin (in The Silmarillion ).


This isn't such a bad assertion Yay, as here I actually know what you'e referring to here! But, with your photographic knowledge of Tolkien's works than I'm sure you can tell me where this quote comes from:

The fëa is indestructible, a unique identity which cannot be disintegrated or absorbed into any other identity.
Click to expand...

Whoa! Hold on there! Did Tolkien just say that fëar CANNOT BE ABSORBED INTO ANY OTHER IDENTITY??? Surely you disagree Yay as Melkor couldn't possibly not have had the power to be able to absorb an Elvish fëa into a Dragon.

Now I know you remember this one too... it's a Large Whopper with Extra Fries:


Not another quote from that Tolkien person!!! It was only Eru through the agency of the Valar that could allow an Elvish fëa to assume a new identity. I guess that just ties in with that other dastardly quote:


Guess Melkor just couldn't get that Elvish Undead Recruiting Agency (EURA) up and running due to competition in the marketplace.


Most potent in its context is a comparison to all servants of Melkor. There is no timeline in Myths Transformed. Re-read the quote... again.


Potency is not just a reference to power, but also might as it is inherent in the meaning of the word potent. Might is comparable between any agent of Morgoth, be it Dragon or Balrog. Might infers an ability to overcome physically. You can keep attempting to decontextualize quotes Yay; it doesn't change the intrinsic meaning.


So the point of the thread is what then? I like Balrogs so Balrogs would win? Stimulating.


It does say continually that Shelob's hungry. What better way to gorge herself? Instead of going: "Dinner? And Dessert? Baggins Catering Service is the bomb..." she says: "No, I'm not in the mood for light today, it's a little scary. I'll just have the hobbit thanks." Yeah, I can totally see the logic there.


That's cool Yay. No need to worry.
 
Originally Posted by chrysophalax
Of course he didn't! He chose those he knew would do his bidding. The Dragons around at that time might have refused, or decided it wasn't worth their while.

Posted by Ulairi "Sounds like someone's been doing a little assuming."

I wrote might, thereby making a supposition, not an assumption, And now, having procured a copy of Morgoth's Ring, I can rebutt your "parrot" slander with this:

Myths Transformed, VIII: What of talking beasts and birds with reasoning and speech? These have been rather lightly adopted from less 'serious' mythologies, but play a part which cannot now be excised. They are certainly 'exceptions' and not much used, but sufficiently to show they are a recognised feature of the world. All other creatures accept them as natural if not common.

Whether they have souls or not is not addressed here, but it appears to me that Dragons would fall nicely into this category of reasoning beasts, wouldn't you say?

We must remember also that The Hobbit was published in 1937, whereas the Histories were, as written on the flyleaf of Morgoth's Ring, "From the time when his father turned again to 'the Matter of the Eldar Days' after The Lord of the Rings was at last achieved." To me, this indicates that his published versions were the definitive ones, though some may choose to disagree.
 
Originally posted by Ithrynluin

Where does it say that?
Click to expand...


Exactly! The same point all of us have been making; but we get no direct answer (because there isn't one). All we get is the usual long-winded circumvention of actual evidence.



Originally posted by chrysophalax

And now, having procured a copy of Morgoth's Ring, I can rebutt your "parrot" slander with this
Click to expand...


Parrot slander indeed!


I have never seen such a dense, concentrated, steaming pile of malarkey compacted into a single post in my life. Talk about spin! However; knowing you’re a Law student, I must say that you have chosen your niche wisely. If circumstances and timing were changed, you probably could have coughed up enough smoke to get O.J. off the hook again .
 
Last edited:
Ithrynluin said:
Where does it say that?
Click to expand...

ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? I KNOW YOU'RE ALL INTELLIGENT, SO HOW CAN ALL OF YOU BE THIS DENSE???

Illuin said:
Exactly! The same point all of us have been making; but we get no direct answer (because there isn't one). All we get is the usual long-winded circumvention of actual evidence.
Click to expand...

I'm gonna come right out and say this. For someone who harps on incessantly about knowing the works back-to-front; you sure don't have the faintest idea where I'm getting all these made-up quotes from. I expected more from someone like you who keeps professing his flawlessly photographic knowledge. What's worse, is that this has been posted more times than I can remember; and none of you can recall it. It's mind-blowing!

I...
HAVE...
POSTED...
THIS...
CLOSE...
TO...
TEN...
TIMES...


THAT IS THE LAST TIME THAT WILL BE POSTED. All you've accomplished here is proving that in a time where quotes are purported to be meaningless; we now need them more than ever. Balrogs were Maiar and his oldest servants. Thus they were the most potent. Quod erat demonstratum.

chrysophalax said:
I wrote might, thereby making a supposition, not an assumption, And now, having procured a copy of Morgoth's Ring, I can rebutt your "parrot" slander with this:
Click to expand...

A supposition? Fair enough. I'll take that. If were going to throw c r a p at each other then perhaps we should start a sentence with "Assumption:" or "Supposition:"


I never claimed they couldn't reason. Animals can reason - I often wonder if my cat's been genetically enhanced - some of the things she can work out is incredible. There's also the crow experiment. Wanna know how they proved that crows are the third (or fourth?) most intelligent creature on the planet. They put a piece of meat in a jar with an opening in the lid not large enough to get their beaks through. The scientists (they could have been physicists! ) left a piece of malleable wire. Wanna know what the rational beasts did? They bent the wire into the shape of a hook and used it to get the meat out of the jar! This quote simply proves they were rational beasts. They were still devoid of rational souls and, as I said, great intelligence - such as the intelligence you constantly purport the beloved Smaug to have.


These are incorruptible commentaries on works already published! It would be more idiotic if Myths Transformed were published before the others as there would be nothing to comment on!!! These myths are, as far as I'm concerned, gospel. In The Silmarillion Arda Sahta ('Arda Marred') is mentioned twice or at best thrice. In Myths Transformed the elaboration given by JRRT was critical to a greater and in-depth knowledge of a magnificent concept. Tolkien was an incredible philosopher; especially when it came to commentaries published after his works had been achieved. To stand there and discredit them in such a fashion proves only one thing to me; you've run out of ideas in which you can establish the greater inherent power of Dragons.

Until people start getting their facts and heaven forbid, quotes straight; I'm gonna do something that'll make you all ecstatic. I'm not going to post in here anymore. Yippee!!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally posted by Úlairi
you who keeps professing his flawlessly photographic knowledge
Click to expand...

When did I ever say that. I said I was a physicist, that was all; and your imagination did the rest (I’m impressed, I was beginning to wonder if you had one). Anyway, please don’t put words in my mouth. I’m a humble guy and only revealed my profession because I was angry about what you said to Fir (still think it would show some integrity if you apologized).


This is the crux of the argument that we dense folk have a problem with. We are very familiar with the quote, so it was unnecessary to quote it again. The flaw in your argument stems from the fact that no specific Maiar are named (except Orcs that seemed to live on and on). In The Children of Húrin it states, "Against them he sent his formidable servant, Glaurung, a powerful spirit in the form of a huge wingless dragon of fire." Who is to say that the "powerful spirit" here was not of the Maiar? If it wasn’t a Maia, then it must have been a Vala; no? It certainly wasn’t the spirit of an Elf from the Halls of Mandos, or the spirit of a Man from who knows where. Can you not see the gray area here; and the hole in your argument; or are you subconsciously blocking this from your mind?

Let me put this in your language. If you read between the lines a little bit, you should realize that part of my post addressed to you was meant to be a compliment. To someone who does not particularly care for Lawyers and their ilk; it would have been somewhat insolent on my part. But since you aspire to be a Lawyer, I was merely commending your tactics. Take this case for example: Smaug vs. Balrog. You pose a neat, well organized, well researched, well thought out, well written, thorough, convincing argument for the Balrog - your client. You have done everything a good Lawyer could possibly do to win his case; leaving no stone unturned. Unfortunately…..you’re wrong; the evidence is not there to support your arguments; and you would lose in court .
 
Last edited:
Hmmm...yes, I suppose that I should be an evil moderating type and moderate the language of that post a bit. There's some kind of rule about that, yes? I've ignored other stuff, but this seems more capable of getting people annoyed. If I had been here, I would have pointed the ithrynluin person to your points, Ulairi person. Either way, it was kind of funny. Not everyone reads through all of the posts that have come before them. No large deal, dude. Or mayhaps the points you made weren't clear enough? Ah! Or mayhaps I'm just messing up the ithrynluin person's awesome attempt of exasperating you out of a thread.

Anyways, to answer for the sake of completing things, here is a quote from that The Fall Of Gondolin story (I do them every now as well as then. Just not too often) ---> "...others of bronze and copper were given hearts and spirits of blazing fire,"

Towards not being able to stick spirits into stuff, besides that quote, there's also this, from that The Silmarillion book ---> "...and Sauron brought werewolves, fell beasts inhabited by dreadful spirits that he had imprisoned in their bodies."

Towards potence, yet again, sure, I will happily admit that the quotes seem to support your argument. I am merely pointing out loopholes that take your victory away. Also, there's this, from that Unfinished Tales book ---> "His power is rather in the evil spirit that dwells within him than in the might of his body, great though that be." The vaguely-defined potence that you figure to be enough to defeat a dragon isn't so great. Balrogs have flame and steel for bodies (or somehow incorporeal but not really?) and vaguely-defined power. Would you admit that a dragon's body is way better than a balrog's? So, even if (and I wouldn't admit it) a dragon's spirit is less potent than a balrog's, that, combined with the body, easily wins.

And towards Shelob (just for fun), what? There's logic in that. Tolkien never goes into details on what her favorite foods are. She eats Orcs every now and then. None have come back alive to observe her eating light. The superly boring Frodo's light hurts evil types, so mayhaps she was logical enough to not contemplate downing something that might be too spicy for her? And Tolkien barely tells us anything about the Mirkwood spiders, either. There were a lot of them, though, and it was pretty dark up in there. Makes sense, to myself.
 
I'm thinking the wisest course may be to agree to disagree in this case. The scent of philosophical blood is in the air and it would be best not to spill it.
 
Ulairi said:
ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? I KNOW YOU'RE ALL INTELLIGENT, SO HOW CAN ALL OF YOU BE THIS DENSE???
Click to expand...

I am neither kidding you, nor are we being dense, we're just in disagreement with your sweeping statements, such as:


So, we have:

1. Balrogs are more potent than Dragons.
Click to expand...

We in fact have no such thing, you just made several leaps that do not necessarily follow one another, but seem to suit your fancy; which is fine, as long as you're not trying to palm it off as fact. For the record, I also voted Balrogs way back when, even if I am now more or less in two minds about the subject.

Anyhow, those Myths Transformed quotes do not mention dragons. There's plenty of room for interpretation, e.g.:

a) Dragons were all Maiar corrupted by Melkor
b) Only some of the dragons were Maiar (e.g. the greatest ones, such as Glaurung, Ancalagon, ?Smaug...), whereas most other dragons were just oversized lizards/soulless beasts
c) Only some of the dragons were Maiar who took on the shape of dragons and bred with other such beasts to create progeny whose Maiaric blood would in time become diluted
.
..
...
 
I fail to make any connection between an undefined 'potence' and the outcome of a one on one physical fight
 

Illuin earlier said:
You do realize that most of us have read all of these books a thousand times over; and most of us are very familiar with all of your quotes as well ...
Click to expand...

Fir and I are working things out in our own good time Illuin, there's no need to concern yourself with that.


Now the reason I've decided to post back in here again is because you raise valid and cogent point that require redress. Whether specific Úmaiar are named or anonymous is inherently irrelevant: only one Balrog has a name. Now a big problem for me is that I, admittedly, have not read The Children of Húrin eek. That quote is quite interesting, but if I can kindly direct your attention to previous posts of mine... again... then you will see that I never disputed that some of the Dragons were initially Maiar. I simply said that through the practice of reproduction they became increasingly earthbound through expenditure of power (a feature inherent in myth) through interaction with erma which resulted in their dissipation of inherent being. I don't see a grey area here; as there is no hole. We (as I have been reminded incessantly) are looking at Smaug in particular; who is unequivocally a descendant of Glaurung. Thus due to the abhorrent practice of Úmaiar-istic procreation and from the sheer magnitude of information I provided via. quotes above Smaug may have been nothing more than an automaton reeling off records and has dwindled to the point where he is simply an animal, bereft of a rational soul. Thus this whole Intelligence Theory is the one with potential holes in it, and not mine. If I were to subconsciously block anything from my mind Illuin, it would hopefully be the coherency of your argument.


Well thank you for the compliment; I was aware of it at the time but my indignation and fury drowned out the warm, fuzzy feelings I get when someone adulates my work. I don't see how I've lost the argument at all, however. I must just be blocking it out.


You might just be more evil than I am, Yay. That's terrifying.


You see what happens when you quote Yay? Your arguments make more sense? Amazing.


Dreadful spirits in this context would (and I know what you're ALL going to say) certainly be Úmaiar or Ainur of lesser degree. As can be seen from the quotes from Myths Transformed neither Elves nor Men had a choice to re-inhabit hröar without the permission of Ilúvatar through the agency of the Valar (i.e. Mandos). As for Men the fact that they could not re-inhabit can also be found in Morgoth's Ring. It's interesting as purely a sidenote that it mentions Sauron's practice of this and yet not Morgoth's; who supposedly engaged in the same activity.


You'll admit it supports my argument??? *faints*

Yes, there are certain loopholes that take victory away; but they are small and all of you desperately cling to them like infant Urulóki sucking on the teet of Glaurung's mate. The quote, whilst interesting, actually supports my argument that despite the physical might; inherent might comes from the fëa or the spirit per se. Thanks for that quote Yay. This actually requires less of a comparison between their physical bodies and more a comparison of the inherent might of the fëa; which, as delineated on a myriad of occasions; is greater intrinisically than that of a Dragon; as Dragons are actually mortal Illuin (see above). To qualify to be a Maiar in origin to be the most potent of Morgoth's servants; one actually has to be immortal - like the immortal Orcs. Closing those annoying little holes again...


You can interpret this however you wish; I believe Tolkien in Cirith Ungol made it abundantly unequivocal that Shelob couldn't consume light; and the fact that she was continually hungry would imply that she would devour it if capable. Ungoliant actually crept slowly toward Valinor to be nearer to the Two Trees; whereas Shelob dwelt in dark places deep under the world.
 

Thanks for the vote, son. These several leaps were coherent, ordered and ultimately logical in derivation. I've explained it so many times above I just can't be bothered going through it all again.


  • Whilst they are not mentioned; they are alluded to through the use of that beautiful word etc. The logic is simple:
    • A Úmaiar that procreates produces offspring with no fëa.
    • An offspring with no fëa has no rational or reasoning soul.
    • A Úmaiar per se is the oldest and MOST POTENT of ALL Morgoth's servants.
    • An offspring with no fëa is not a Úmaiar.
    • A Úmaiar that produces offspring becomes earthbound and dwindles in force.
    • A Balrog produces no offspring as they remain in demon-form and thus do not dissipate their inherent being.
  • Thus a Balrog is more potent and thus mightier in spirit than an offspring of a Dragon or a Úmaiar that practices procreation.
  • It is thus ir-rel-e-vant if the Dragons are Offspring or Úmaiar as they either have no fëa or have dwindled from their original stature.
  • Q.E.D.
  • The End.

Prince of Cats said:
I fail to make any connection between an undefined 'potence' and the outcome of a one on one physical fight
Click to expand...

I fail to make any connection between relevance and your post.
 
I find your characterization not entirely accurate.

In Morgoth’s Ring, there is a specific warning not to engage in conversation or interaction of any sort with the Houseless Elves. Part of the warning says that the Houseless could, apparently on their own and of their own power, possess the body of another person – one presumes that the warning is directed to Men and not other Elves – in other words, they could inhabit the bodies, the hröar, of others. This an evil act: but these Houseless Elves are often evil. (I.e., not all Elves are good, as we generally assume in Tolkien. BTW, the text does not say all Houseless Elves are evil, only that some of them are; but rejecting the summons to Mandos is a sign of the taint of evil, and so they must not be trusted; and it leaves them open to a powerful counter-summons by Sauron or his followers.) The text also says that Sauron – The Necromancer – and his servants engaged in enslaving these Houseless Elves, putting them to nefarious purposes, and such acts are sorcery and necromancy. The Barrow-wights are such works, I strongly suspect.

As for Maiar that inhabited other forms, there is the example of Boldog in Lays of Beleriand, a lesser Maiar that took the form of an Orc and acted as an Orc captain for Morgoth. After all, if Melian can do it, or Olórin, why not the fallen Maiar, too?

The Balrogs were “spirits of fire.” Nowhere does Tolkien say that these were the only Maiar that fell and followed Morgoth. Some of them were definitely not spirits of fire: Ossë fell and then repented, although he remained rather wild and sometimes unreliable afterwards. And there were apparently others, too, that owed no allegiance to Morgoth, but served their own ends, yet still in rebellion against Eru: Ungoliant, for instance.

Finally there is Carcharoth, the Red Maw, the body of a wolf inhabited (or possessed or infested) with a ravenous spirit of some sort by Morgoth in order to overcome the minor Maia Huan the Hound. Now, even Wolf-Sauron could not overcome Huan: the spirit in Carcharoth must have been powerful and ferocious indeed. This cannot have been even a Houseless Elf, I think: it must have been a fallen Maia of some sort.
 
Sucking at the teat of Glaurung's mate?!? What was she, a cow or a goat? *tries to imagine any combination thereof and fails utterly* How little you know of we reptiles!
 
Haha Dangit! Who put those two votes in for the Balrog!?! That was pretty interesting it was a dead tie for a while

In the recent Tolkien vs. Shakespeare thread someone (forgive my not looking up who it was, especially you who it was) said that Tolkien's work could be less great because it is too confining - everything is already determined or something like that and less room for role playing (I think I am remembering who it was ). Though this thread, for better or worse, came to a match of sorts I don't see either side having 'won' in determining the answer to the topic. In addition, I've seen some new members here who, when reading their posts, seem to have a delightfully foreign to me feel of Tolkien and that uncerainty in Tolkien's world and room for interpretation I really enjoy.

One of my favorite parts about reading the Hobbit and the first few books of the Lord of the Rings was how there was so much history so little touched upon, you knew there was this rich and immense history from the ruins they encountered. I'm also fascinated by them set sort of after the great civilizations had seemingly crumbled. I've never had the pleasure of visiting Europe and here in America you can't find things like stone ruins or whatever and Tolkien really opened me up to fantasies about the past.

So yeah, I guess I mean to say that this thread reminds me both of how there is still unknown in Tolkien's world and reminds me of how that unknown (the kingdoms of the barrow-wights?) got me so sucked in in the first place.
 
Alcuin said:
I find your characterization not entirely accurate.
Click to expand...

Well I'm glad someone in here still wants to talk about something remotely relevant. Funny how people resort to petty insults when they have nothing of substance or value to say. This really ain't The Tolkien Forum anymore, is it? That's fine, you guys can b*tch all day, it's all you're good for from what I'm seeing anyway.

Ithrynluin said:
Thank God for small favours, eh?
Click to expand...

Well, if a Mod's allowed to take a shot than I guess the gloves can come off...

What was it Illuin said? Oh yeah...

Illuin said:
Hallelujah AMEN!
Click to expand...

I'm looking forward to it. Come on guys, come and stomp this fool out! Throw the book at me. Oh, I forgot, you don't actually use them... oh well.

Back to the only person on the forum (apart from a few unnamed others) worth confabulation:


True but false. However I believe the first sentence may have contextualized the rest of the statement and thus what you have elucidated may all be true.

For a houseless fëa to possess the hröa of an Eruhín the Eruhín must (obviously) first commune with it; but that's not all:


Thus for one of the Houseless must be enabled to disposses a person from their hröa through the fundamental requisite of communication with them. Subcreation of any the Valar (or even Maiar) will never have possession of a fëa unless it is first granted by Ilúvatar. Aulë's Dwarves were not living, breathing conscious beings with volition until Eru granted them rational souls. Yavanna also requested Eru's permission to house fëa within trees to create the Ents (note: this was not a finalized literary decision of Tolkien's; but it makes a lot of sense). Thus any subcreation of Morgoth's would be fëa-less; bereft of a rational soul. None of the Houseless could thus possess an empty vessel as they were not one of the Living; and to do so must first be granted by the will of Ilúvatar. That being said; I like the way you think Alcuin.


Whilst I agree with you (to an extent) here; the only textual evidence I could find in Morgoth's Ring was from above and below (the continuation) of the paragraph I quoted above:


So Sauron and his servants (and arguably Morgoth himself) could simply commune with the Houseless and potentially:

  1. Wrest the fëa from another member of the Living (i.e. an Incarnate; a creature already with a pre-existing fëa and re-house the dispossessed hröa, or
  2. Arguably force an Incarnate to be possessed with a co-existing, rehoused fëa.

As already aforementioned, any subcreation of the Ainur remains without a fëa until it is granted by Eru. Thus the Houseless cannot possess hrávë unless it is already sentient.


Never said they couldn't Alcuin.


Never said that either. I'm aware of Boldog and Ungoliant. In The Silmarillion section, there is an Ungoliant thread. Have a look at my post there.


Agreed. However, you can find in Morgoth's Ring that Tolkien grappled with the concept that Huan was actually a Maia. Whilst I believe he was, all that is said of Huan's Origin in The Silmarillion is that "he came from the Blessed Realm" and also refers to his speech as that of "the speaking of beasts" in Morgoth's Ring.

So, despite these chillingly execrable practices of Necromancy by Sauron & Co, it could only be achieved through beings with pre-existing fëa. Any procreative acts by Úmaiar-Urulóki that became increasingly earthbound through long exposure to 'Arda Marred' through the erma of hröa were inherently enervated. Their offspring would be deprived of fëa and could thus not be possessed through any acts of Necromancy unless this was, of course, the will of Ilúvatar; which is was not.
 
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…