Quote:
Originally Posted by William Cloud Hickli
Hammerhand: I' think you're confusing the meaning of 'early' and 'late' Balrogs. What folks are trying to say is that Balrogs *in JRRT's early writings* are more numerous and less individually powerful than they would become *in Tolkien's later writings*- not that from an internal perspective Balrogs became more powerful over time.
Canonicity: If we're going to confine ourself to works published before 1973, then the Balrog of Moria is the *only* one. If on the other hand we take the more reasonable approach of trying to deduce from existing writings what Tolkien's considered opinion was, then we see that as late as ca. 1970 Glorfindel's duel was still in effect; and as late as the work on 'Maeglin' Glorfindel and Ecthelion are paired as the great captains of the Hidden City. What we can't do is conclude that the old Tale remains canonical, notwithstanding certain elements of Tuor's journey which would endure: the heraldry of 1917 was gone by 1951, as were (almost certainly) the mechanical dragon-tanks, and any linguistic structure that would allow an Elf to be named "Rog."
|
So if the Balrogs were less powerful, would that mean Gothmog was less powerful than Durin's Bane? Furthermore, if there were only seven Balrogs at a time in ME, how come we never hear of any besides Durin's Bane in the third age? and why didn't they help Sauron? Doesn't really make sense to me.
My previous point concerning Fingolfin was solid. If a powerful elf can wound a Valar, why wouldn't one be able to wound or kill a 'later' Balrog? Say for example that Ecthelion fought Durin's Bane, would you conclude that Durin's Bane would triumph? Swap Ecthelion with Glorfindel or Fingolfin, would you draw the same conclusion? Alot of this topic is hypothetical, being that half of the people being debated never fought a Balrog, and most of those that did, fought 'early' Balrogs.
I also think personally, that if there is an elf named "Rog", and it was published, we can only assume it was meant to be - maybe Tolkien, the lawmaker, didn't want a Nordic representation of him? I am not a linguistics expert, it just seems to me that though most of the names in ME have a 'meaning' as such, does it make it obligatory?