[Macalaure]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Bard saying "cut the bridges" is confusing becuase - according to the drawing of Laketown - I see nothing to cut. This is not some suspension bridge. Perhaps "cut the bridges" was a shorthand way of saying something else.

However, I do think the drawing - done by the same man who wrote the text so he certainly knew what he felt Laketown looked like - gives support to my initial position that Smaug did not need the bridge for any reason. He had plenty of space on the dock s around the buildings and they run the length and width of the town providing ample space to both take off and land. And they do look rather wide.

Text and picture obviously do not match (just take the number of bridges). Therefore, one must be faulty. Since I think Tolkien was much more careful about what he wrote than he was about what he drew, in the case of contradiction I would take the description and discard the depiction.

And even if we take the picture, landing on those docks looks dangerous, considering Smaug's speed and the fact that one misstep would make him end up in the lake.

Originally Posted by Sauron

If anyone is going to postulate that they will not support Smaugs weight, that would then apply also to the entire town since its all on the same foundation. Those support pillars go right up to the edge of the docks.

It would support the weight, but perhaps not the impact. He did crash through it when he died, and do we know whether he was able to sufficiently slow down before landing? I still think it is believable that Smaug was not able to land inside the town, but apart from the fact that it is said that he was unable to, there appears to be no evidence to either side.

Originally Posted by Sauron

But it is my contention that Smaug - being a creature who is much faster in the air - would stick to a fast and quick aerial attack because that is where his advantage lied. You can speculate about food and additional treasure all you want, but the idea of a massive dragon walking foot by foot through this rather crowded looking town while many armed people attacked him at close range, defies logic for him to take that approach. There is simply no advantage to him doing that as opposed to his great advantage in the air.

My armour is like tenfold shields, my teeth are swords, my claws spears, the shock of my tail a thunderbolt, my wings a hurricane, and my breath death!

Consider this and tell me why Smaug should be afraid of many armed people attacking him at close range? Smaug's only advantage in the air is speed and mobility. If you consider yourself invincible, this is only little advantage. To the contrary, he is much more deadly when he can engage in closer "combat", which he is unable to do while flying.

Originally Posted by Sauron

There is no reason to destroy that bridge against a creature who is attacking you from the air. When the Germans did their lengthy bombing of England in WWII, was anyone heard to say "quick, the Lutwaffe is coming, destroy London Bridge". Seems rather silly does it not.

Seems a silly analogy indeed. It would be analogous if there had been a bridge over the channel, and if there had been one, you can bet it would have been torn down in a minute.