Balrogs DO have wings!!!

[piosenniel]

As I was searching the internet for some piece of Tolkien info, I ran across this reference concerning Balrog's and Wings. It is by the author Michael Martinez. I have not looked into the exact references for his assumptions, but I thought I would share them:

Do Balrogs have wings? Do Balrogs fly?

No questions seem to incite greater fear in online Tolkien fandom than these two, because the Great Balrog Wings debate began innocently enough in late 1997 and has raged ever since, each time someone just discovers a new discussion group, or they work up their courage to ask the question again and again. Why the great fear? Because few people ever give in and change their minds. And those who do change their minds may do so more than once. The Balrog Wings debate has led to a great deal of name-calling and casting of slurs. It all becomes very childish too quickly.

And, unfortunately, recent efforts to portray the debate in a "fair" and non-judgmental way have been spectacular failures because the third-parties don't present all the facts. It is difficult to condense a discussion which roars over 2 or 3 weeks before dying down to a concise summary. It is difficult to be sure of which points are proven and which are discarded. The Great Metaphor and Simile debate arose out of the Great Balrog Wings debate, and if nothing else provided much evidence that people cannot agree on anything. Many who had stood firmly together on the wings issue fell to bickering over what constituted metaphor and simile, and how they are normally used, and how they should be used, and how J.R.R. Tolkien used them.

This page is concerned only with the original questions. Did Balrogs have wings? Did Balrogs fly? And the answers are...

Yes, Balrogs had wings...from about 1940 onward.

Yes, Balrogs flew...from at least 1940 onward, maybe from 1948 onward, or possibly from 1952 or thereabouts onward.

The Origins of Balrogs
Tolkien used the word "Balrog" to describe a terrifying type of warrior he invented for THE BOOK OF LOST TALES, the first story of which was written in 1916/1917. This was "The Fall of Gondolin". There were hundreds or even thousands of them. In some battle descriptions Tolkien wrote about 1,000 Balrogs riding across the field (they were a cavalry force).

THE BOOK OF LOST TALES was Tolkien's attempt to create a mythology for England, and he abandoned the project in 1925, about the time he decided to create a wholly new mythology which reused the themes and many characters from THE BOOK OF LOST TALES. So this new mythology, which he called the "Silmarillion", was a very primitive version of the collection of stories Christopher published as THE SILMARILLION in 1977, but it wasn't directly related.

The "Silmarillion" mythology retained the Balrogs, and in the 1930s Tolkien rewrote it, producing the fullest version of "Quenta Silmarillion" that he would ever write. Christopher actually used some portions of this text for the book, and that unfortunately has contributed to the confusion many people experience about Balrogs.

A New Balrog Emerges
When Tolkien began work on THE LORD OF THE RINGS he really wanted to get his "Silmarillion" published (now conceived of as THE SILMARILLION, but still only very little in concept like the final book). He had no real inclination to write any more books about hobbits, but as he got rolling on the new hobbit story the idea of marrying the world of the hobbits to the world of the "Silmarillion" appealed to him, and he believed it would eventually help him publish THE SILMARILLION.

So Tolkien began creating what we today know as Middle-earth (it did not exist before then, and Tolkien had only rarely used the name "Middle-earth" in the 1930s, and it does not appear in any published text from before the 1930s). As part of that world he needed a series of perils that Frodo and his companions would encounter, and one of them was set in the ancient mines of Moria, which THE HOBBIT had established was now abandoned and in the possession of Orcs (or had been).

The peril in Moria started out as something other than a Balrog (Tolkien wasn't sure of what it should be at first), and when he decided it SHOULD be a Balrog he became dissatisfied with the way he had portrayed Balrogs in the past. Tolkien had already begun the process of transforming the Balrogs into fallen Maiar but this decision would not be put into written form until 1948. Nonetheless, he changed the physical description of the Balrog in Moria and altered its abilities substantially from those assigned to the Balrogs of earlier (now abandoned) stories.

This Balrog had wings, and was capable of exercising great power, and was nearly invincible. The Balrog detected Gandalf's spell as he tried to block the exit from the Chamber of Mazarbul, and the Balrog itself began a counter-spell, according to Gandalf. So the wizard used a Word of Command to break the down, and the result was a partial cave-in which buried the Chamber of Mazarbul and apparently the Balrog with it.

The Balrog survived the cave-in and rejoined its army, which converged with the Company of the Ring in the Second Hall of Khazad-dum by an alternate route. There the Balrog revealed itself fully, and the darkness with which it cloaked itself expanded. The wings were either shielded by the darkness or formed by the Balrog on the spot or else the darkness (or part of the darkness) was reshaped by the Balrog to take on the form of wings (and thus BECAME wings).

Objections to Balrog Wings
Here is where many people make their first mistake. They argue that since Tolkien introduces the wings with a simile, saying, "the shadow around it reached out LIKE two vast wings", the wings cannot be real. But the argument is flawed, because Tolkien also introduces the darkness (the "shadow") with a simile as well: "what it was could not be seen: it was LIKE a great shadow, in the middle of which was a dark form, of man-shape maybe yet greater". If Tolkien's use of the word "like" here means that there were no wings, then it follows that there was no shadow, and if there was no shadow then it could not possibly have "reached out like two vast wings".

So, in order for there to be a shadow there must be wings, because later on Tolkien writes "it stepped forward slowly on to the bridge, and suddenly it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings were spread from wall to wall." The Company of the Ring clearly saw the wings by this point, and what Tolkien was doing with the two similes (and other parts of the passage) was providing a transition from vagueness to clarity. Nothing more.

Objections to Flying Balrogs
People then ask, "Why didn't the Balrog fly over Gandalf if it could fly?"

The answer is that the author gives no indication that the Balrog wanted to do anything other than attack Gandalf. It never once tries to go after Frodo and the Ring. Many people assume it wanted the Ring, but there is no basis for making such an assumption. The closest indication we have that anything other than Sauron and Saruman might have been actively pursuing the Ring is when the Watcher in the Water grabs Frodo. But there is no obvious connection between the Watcher and the Balrog.

And if the Balrog COULD have flown with those big cavern-spanning wings, how was it to do so inside the Second Hall of Khazad-dum anyway? There were two rows of HUGE carven pillars, reaching from floor to ceiling, marching down the center of the hall. The Balrog could not have flown toward the Company of the Ring with those wings fully extended.

Then people ask, "Well, why didn't it try to save itself when it fell into the chasm?"

The answer here begins with another question: "Why should we assume it would want to save itself?" The Balrog had just crawled out from under tons of rock which would have killed Gandalf, Aragorn, Boromir, and all the rest of the Company. What, exactly, did it have to fear? Why should it have tried to "save" itself when the author has just shown the reader that Balrogs don't die so easily?

Furthermore, the first thing the Balrog does is lash out at Gandalf and drag him downward. Clearly its foremost thought is to continue the attack on Gandalf. Even if there were room in the chasm for the Balrog to fly out, why should it drag Gandalf down with it if it intends to get out of the chasm anyway? Why not just "save" itself and let him fall with the bridge? Because Tolkien didn't write it that way. Obviously he envisioned the Balrog as an active creature, not a reactive one.

Gandalf's description of the battle with the Balrog also makes it clear that they fought all the way down, and that they fell for a long time. So the Balrog was at the very least encumbered with Gandalf and more likely was actively trying to burn him to death (Gandalf does say he was burned).

And then we have to turn to the question of why it took so long for them to reach the water. Some people have argued that it was a LONG way down. Maybe, but if Tolkien knew anything about the rate of falling bodies (and he probably did), then he would understand that Gandalf's words wouldn't make any sense if the wizard and the Balrog really fell at a normal speed.

So it seems apparent that their rate of descent was slowed, probably by the Balrog, but clearly these were both beings of great power who, if they wished to, could move through the universe at will. Their existence and ability to affect the universe did not depend on their physical bodies (although it has been noted that late in his life Tolkien decided many of the fallen Maiar probably became trapped in their bodies due to engaging in biological activities).

Hence, there is little reason to ask why the Balrog didn't fly out of the chasm. It obviously had other things on its mind, and the battle Gandalf describes is not the kind of battle that any normal flesh-and-blood creature would be expected to survive (and he himself was not a normal flesh-and-blood creature). The battle lasted for 11 days, and it culminated with the clash of powers on the mountaintop.

Could a Flying Balrog Save Itself?
There one more objection is raised: "Why didn't the Balrog save itself when it fell from the mountainside?" The answer is that dead and dying Balrogs, like dead and dying dragons, don't fly. When Earendil cast Ancalagon from the sky the dragon was finished and it smote Thangorodrim in its ruin just as the Balrog of Moria smote the mountainside in ITS ruin. And when Bard's arrow pierced Smaug's breast, the great dragon fell from the sky and hit the ruins of Laketown in HIS ruin.

Gandalf threw down his enemy. That expression is one of Tolkien's pseudo-archaisms, and clearly refers to Gandalf's vanquishing the Balrog. It was either too physically exhausted after having been whacked on with an Elvish sword and blasted with lightning bolts for 11 days or it was dead or in the process of dying when it took that fall off the cliff. If the Balrog could have acted to save itself at all by that point, it would at least have taken Gandalf with it, if not actually turn the tables on him. How many times during their 11 days together did either Gandalf or the Balrog NEARLY kill his opponent? Tolkien doesn't say. He leaves it to the reader to imagine how terrible the battle must have been. But he makes it clear that Gandalf won because the Balrog could no longer attack him.

But Can Balrogs Really Fly?
Then we turn to the question of whether Balrogs really CAN fly. The short answer is that they were Maiar and that Maiar can whatever they please. The long answer is that Tolkien DOES provide one example of flying Balrogs, and that is when they flew over Hithlum to rescue Morgoth from Ungoliant.

Here many people raise objections by dissecting a single sentence and taking specific phrases out of context. "winged speed", they say, can be used as a metaphor. Yes, it can, but there is no indication in the text that Tolkien used it so. "Arose", they say, can refer to the act of flying up into the sky or simply climbing out of an underground abode, and the Balrogs were indeed underground when they heard Morgoth scream. Yes, that is so. But there is no indication in the text that this is what Tolkien meant to imply without also implying flight.

"Passed over" doesn't necessarily mean flight, either, they say. Fingolfin's horse passed over the plain of Anfauglith after the Dagor Bragollach, and the horse obviously was not flying. True, but "passed over" must be given a context to have any meaning.

What J.R.R. Tolkien actually wrote was "swiftly they arose, and they passed with winged speed over Hithlum, they came to Lammoth as a tempest of fire." Unfortunately, only part of this text was used by Christopher Tolkien in THE SILMARILLION. What he wrote "and now swiftly they arose, and passing over Hithlum they came to Lammoth as a tempest of fire."

Here is a link to the entire article:

Wings?

[Kuruharan]

And the next question is, how did such a huge Balrog with such big wings fit inside the Chamber of Mazarbul? Granted it is described as being a reasonably sized room, but nothing to compare with the First Hall where the wings were "spread from wall to wall."

[Aragost]

It clearly states that the Balrogs had wings.I checked it in FOTR. [img]smilies/cool.gif[/img] [img]smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img]

[NicktheOrc]

Balrogs have wings for pete's sake. This discussion is old. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img])

[NicktheOrc]

I think Balrogs are cool! THEY HAVE WINGS!!!
[img]smilies/frown.gif[/img] (

[*Varda*]

Aragost, look back to the beginning of the thread, and you will see that it DOES NOT clearly state Balrogs had wings.

And the shadow about it reached out LIKE two vast wings

This does not mean Balrogs had wings. That is used as a simile, to create a better picture.

This is the quote I assume you were referring to:

And it's wings were spread from wall to wall

After the previous quote, this could just be an extension of the aforementioned simile. It's not hard evidence for the Balrogs having wings.

Now read the rest of the thread and see what others have to say on it. I just wanted to make those two points clear.

~*Varda Elentari*~

[Daniel Telcontar]

I agree, Varda. If the balrog had wings, it didn't use them (read the article by RonKittle). And then the wings can only have been used to inspire fear. And then, the wings could just as well have been shadowwings as fleshwings.

[Fingolfin of the Noldor]

No!!!! :'( [img]smilies/frown.gif[/img] Please no!! at the time I wrote that I had, as yet, not put much effort into my argument. Indeed, it seems, that thread has become the bane of my existance. Please read this instead:

On Balrogs...

This at least is cogent. It really had to be as i originally wrote it for a class [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img](though the arguements and evidence, was collected in some for before)

[ July 14, 2002: Message edited by: Fingolfin of the Noldor ]

[The Balrog-Durin's Bane]

If it did indeed have useable wings, then it would have saved itself from hitting the bottom, and thus avoiding gandalf, so the bridge breaking would have no effect. And dont give me any bs on how it didnt have room, the "hole" more crevass, below the bridge was HUGE and the wings already were out if it did indeed have wings.

My [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] Angry [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] Two Cents

[Ulairi]

This comes from "Tolkien, The Illustrated Encyclopedia"...

Huge and hulking, the Balrogs were Man-like demons with streaming manes of fire and nostrils that breathed flame. They seemed to move within clouds of black shadows and their limbs had the coiling power of serpents.

This was one of the most detailed description of a Balrog I've seen. And there is not one mention of wings.

I believe its "wings" are a metaphor for the aura of evil and darkness it emitted.

As for their size I would say a little over twenty feet tall. I wouldn't really consider ten or so feet "Huge". Someone mentioned earlier they were about ten feet because of the size of the doors of Moria. But if you remember this Balrog was entombed thousands of years before the formation of Khazad-dum. Maybe it was entombed through use of undergound tunnels or the door it was put through was completely sealed so you could not see where it was afterwards. It was probably horrible luck the dwarves released it.

[ July 15, 2002: Message edited by: Ulairi ]

[Fingolfin of the Noldor]

I must say that I disagree with Michael Martinezes arguement in its entirety. Not only does most of it's foundation lie in conjecture but certain basic elements are mischaracterized from the beginning. Have not you noticed that he makes very few citations and has few relevant sources?

For example: saying that the the simile used to describe the Balrog 'great shadow' sets the stage for something of parallel structure to that in the Bridge is erroneous on its face:

'great shadow' is a simile for the Balrog
THEN:
the word 'shadow' is used to describe something about that the Balrog

the use of the term is clearly distinguished(as opposed to the passage in question and the passages in my quotes) and as such a valid counter-example has not been produced.
No wonder Mr. Martinez chose not to produce any quotes [img]smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img]

Even Further I think his unwarrented dogmatism is quite offputting. In my formal presentation I maintain throughout that this is my opinion I simply, provide a great deal of evidence to show why exactly it is.

The fact is there is NO answer and unless CT publishes something and unforeseen there will never be one. BUT the eivdence does point in one direction I feel it points toward mine:

On Balrogs...

I am not so arrogant as to think that my supposition even when based on what I see to be a great deal of evidence in my favor as fact

[ July 15, 2002: Message edited by: Fingolfin of the Noldor ]

[Amanaduial the archer]

Ghost Prince Of Cardolan
Posts: 562

I suppose they could be proverbial wings if u get what i mean. Its like shakespeare said the faeries in Midsummer Nights Dream didnt have wings, yet they wer refered to a couple of times...i think....well, i know what i mean...
Or if they had wings, considering the size of Balrogs theres very little chance they would use them to actually fly. Possibly like dodos. heehee, just got a vision of little flaming dodos with glowing fiery eyes. heehee....
What is the obsession with this topic tho?!

[ July 15, 2002: Message edited by: Amanaduial the archer ]

[The Barrow-Wight]

I finally went back and read my own Did Balrogs Have Wings? article, and I think it still provides fairly good argument for the 'no-wingers', even if I refused to make a final call on the question. In my mind, Gothmog's troll-guard seem to be the best example. That would be like having a tank batallion protecting an F-15.

[piosenniel]

Thank you Fingolfin of the Noldor for the textual support of your argument. That was a big stumbling block for my acceptance of M. Martinez' arguments.

You say, in conclusion:

In conclusion I believe that Balrogs have no wings. A great deal of circumstantial evidence for this theory and against a literal interpretation of the passage in question seems to make quite evident that neither the structure nor the actual wordage point to actual real wings of any sort. The earlier drafts, also, support this not-so-much foundationless conjecture through the complete and total absence of any indication of the conceptualization of literal physical wings as thought of by Tolkien and cast great doubt on the idea that the “great wings” was anything other than a literary device ( as has been established as having been used every time this specific structure was present). All this, in my humble opinion, renders any belief in such large broad appendages wishful thinking pure and simple.

In BW's article, he posits that the conclusion as to them having wings is still unclear, and could be seen as:

It's wings were merely an affectation to intimidate

It's wings were only decoration

but that the textual references do indicate that with or without the actual appendages, they did not use flying as a mode of travel.

So, perhaps the 'wings' were more than just a literary device, but no more useful than one.

***************************
Thinks to herself: & here I've ordered up a vat of sauce, and there'll be no Balrog Hot Wings to dip in it!

[*Varda*]

<font color=white> My opinion is that at the moment, wings or no wings, balrogs certainly didn't appear to fly.

Part of me feels this argument is pointless, as the only person who would be able to clear it up is Tolkien himself. The other point, is that Tolkien's view of Balrogs changed over the years, as stated in Michael Martinez's essay. Saying this however - he didn't actually provide any textual evidence so it's debatable.

In the final analysis, one must accept that the Balrog of Moria had wings because J.R.R. Tolkien said it had wings

I would agree with that. It still doesn't answer the question - Did Tolkien anywhere clearly state Balrogs had wings?

~*Varda Elentari*~

[ July 15, 2002: Message edited by: *Varda* ]

[Fingolfin of the Noldor]

I would agree with that. It still doesn't answer the question - Did Tolkien anywhere clearly state Balrogs had wings?

No he did not. Tolkien never actually answered the question.

[*Varda*]

<font color=white>

No he did not. Tolkien never actually answered the question.

Then, may I ask, who are we to decide? We can form our own humble opinion but there will never be a proper answer. It is my opinion that Tolkien's view of Balrogs clearly changed several times over many years, and perhaps even at the time of his death wasn't sure.

If this is the case - we will never know. We can have our own ideas which won't be the same as other peoples. Such is the power of books - Your views and images of places, people etc. are different from those of others. So why debate it endlessly, searching for a right or wrong answer, when clearly there is none?

~*Varda Elentari*~

PS. YAY!! I'm a shade of Carn Dum! [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[ July 15, 2002: Message edited by: *Varda* ]

[piosenniel]

Because it is unclear we can debate it - not to mention it is fun and interesting to see how and what other people think!

[Fingolfin of the Noldor]

Yes I do agree tha there is no answer(or at least none that we can know) [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] BUT there is evidence [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]. Hence the debate:

[*Varda*]

<font color=white> *sigh* BUT if HE didn't know himself - how will we ever find out? The evidence is pretty much 50:50 on both sides we'll never know

*sighs again* Sorry, I just HATE Balrog/wings debate. It's been done to death.

Have fun endlessly repeating what's been said many times before you realise you'll never come to a definite conclusion. [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img]

Namarie!

~*Varda Elentari*~

[The Barrow-Wight]

Ain't it great!? [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] And ain't this a terrible waste of a post? The type I always complain about? [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img]

It's not, really, because this topic has gone on a short tangent to discuss why people enjoy arguing this particular part of Middle-earth. And just like you said, because the evidence is just short of making it not worth arguing.

[Amanaduial the archer]

Barrow wight, im just wondering, and sorry that its completely off topic, but if ure member #2, who is member #1?

**** Barrow-Wight Note ****
Yes, extremely off-topic and already discussed more than once. See one of the threads HERE.

Back to Balrog Wings!

[ July 16, 2002: Message edited by: The Barrow-Wight ]

Yes Balrogs do have wings.Proof: 'The Balrog made no answer.The fire in it seemed to die,but the darkness grew.It stepped foward slowly on to the bridge,and suddenly it drew itself up to a great height,and its wing were spread from wall to wall;.....'The Felllowship of the Ring,Chapter 5 The Bridge of Khazad-Dum,page 345.
Notice the word'wings'.Anyone who challenges the fact that Balrogs have wings challenges J.R.R Tolkiens' writings.

[piosenniel]

I can't resist one more post in response to nura:

Part of Malbeth's prophecy about the Paths of the Dead, includes a description of Mount Doom in which he foresees the darkness spreading across the western lands - the dark shadow expelled by the Mount prior to the Balttle of the Pelennor Fields.

From: The Return of the King V 2 The Passing of the Grey Company -

Over the land there lies a long shadow,
westward reaching wings of darkness.

This surely doesn't mean that Mount Doom also has wings?!

Ok...heres the thing....see we're all nutters! So anyways, yes Balrogs do have wings. Becuase In the Fellowship of the Ring when theyre wandering the banks of the anduin, something flew over head, and Legolas, shot it down on the eastern bank. Remember?

~Aria~ [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Morima]

Yeah but that wasn't a Balrog, was it? I thought it was one of those nasty Nazgûl birds. Anyways, I think it's stated clearly in the FotR that the Moria-balrog had wings, so why discuss that, or say that it's a metafor? That the Mount Doom had wings is obviously a metafor, but about balrogs; there are bird species that have wings, but doesn't fly. Even fish species. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] Sorry if all this is said before. Just came to my mind.

[ July 19, 2002: Message edited by: Morima ]

[Mithadan]

*Takes deep breath and carefully moves cursor away from the 'close topic' button*

Let's see. Summary of argument to date:

"They have wings."

"No they don't"

"Tolkien said they did."

"He didn't mean it."

Conclusion: They absolutely, positively, definitely and incontrovertably either had wings or didn't.

Can we talk about Tom Bombadil now? [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[Fingolfin of the Noldor]

Anyways, I think it's stated clearly in the FotR that the Moria-balrog had wings, so why discuss that, or say that it's a metafor?

It is not that simple if it were that simple then there would be no debate please click on the link in my post above for why exactly I feel that term cannot be taken as anything other than a metaphor.

[Feanaro]

I have come at long last to answer this troubling question forever. I have taken the liberty of picking vague and controversial quotes to aid my statements.

To begin my argument, I shall go back to the beginning.

"Of the Enemies: For of the Maiar many were drawn to his splendour in the days of his greatness, and remained in that allegiance down into his darkness; and others he corrupted afterwards to his service with lies and treacherous gifts. Dreadful among these spirits were the Valaraukar, the scourges of fire that in Middle-earth were called the Balrogs, demons of terror."

There you have it ladies and gentlemen. Balrogs were in fact Maiar. What's that? I'm supposed to prove whether balrog's have wings or not? Very well then. If balrogs were truly Maiar, they could change their form to suite their whims. Of course I just quoted that the balrogs were scourges of fire, which would give them a uniformity. Considering that Melkor's "specialization" was in fire and ice (don't ask me where this is stated for I cannot remember), it would seem only natural that this be one of their "treacherous gifts." What has this to do with anything? Well considering that balrogs are fallen Maiar, the question of whether or not they have wings would seem to have to apply individually to each balrog.

Now then, I shall get to Durin's Bane later. First we shall take a look at some famous balrog battles from the past.

The glory of Feanor against the might of Gothmog:

"Thus it was that he (Feanor) drew far ahead of the van of his host; and seeing this the servants of Morgoth turned to bay, and there issued from Angband Balrogs to aid them. There upon the confines of Dor Daedeloth, the land of Morgoth, Feanor was surrounded, with few friends about him. Long he fought on, and undismayed, though he was wrapped in fire and wounded with many wounds; but at the last he was smitten to the ground by Gothmog, Lord of the Balrogs, whom Ecthelion after slew in Gondolin."

Never fails that a tear should form at my eye every time I read that passage. But enough with nostalgia, I have a point to make! If Balrogs indeed had wings (which is not stated in this passage) it must be assumed that those wings were not functional. Balrogs were some of Morgoth's fiercest minions, save perhaps dragons. To be beset by a large number of these demons all at once and sucessfully fend them off for a long time with little support is pretty amazing. But however amazing Feanor was, I highly doubt that he (or anyone for that matter) could fight a long battle against a horde of airborne balrogs. The sheer advantage to be gained by flight would offset any amount of skill possessed by a lone fighter stuck on the ground. Such a case is similar with Ecthelion during the siege of Gondolin, so we shall hop over that story and move straight for Glorfindel!

The duel upon the mountain:

"There was a dreadful pass, Cirith Thoronath it was named, the Eagle's Cleft, where beneath the shadow of the highest peaks a narrow path wound its way; on the right hand it was walled by a precipice, and on the left a dreadful fall leapt into emptiness. Along that narrow way their (the survivors of Gondolin) march was strung, when they were ambushed by Orcs, for Morgoth had set watchers all about the encircling hills; and a Balrog was with them. Then dreadful was their plight, and hardly would they have been saved by the valour of yellow-haired Glorfindel, chief of the House of the Golden Flower of Gondolin, had not Thorondor (big eagle) come timely to their aid. Many are the songs that have been sung of the duel of Glorfindel with the balrog upon a pinnacle of rock in that high place; and both fell to ruin in the abyss."

*Whew!* First thing to get out of the way:
pinnacle- 1. A lofty peak. 2. a lofty eminence or position. 3. the highest or culminating point. 4. any pointed, towering part or formation, as of rock.

There, now that that's out of the way, I can continue. The battle between Glorfindel and the Balrog took place upon the pinnacle of the mountain, which would be the highest point ending in a cone shaped peak, so none of that "well it was a narrow space" nonsense! If a balrog truly had functional wings, I think it might have used them in a situation such as this! I suppose you could argue, "Well it fell into a narrow place," to which I would respond, "Ha! But the actual duel took place upon the lofty peak where flying would give a balrog an infinite advantage over the non-winged Glorfindel!" And yes, the point that Balrogs could not fly does tie in to my argument somewhere.

Now the time has come at long last to focus in upon that troublesome Balrog that fled to Moria in ages past, none other than Durin's Bane. Now I shall use those age old quotes that have been thought of as vague and controversial for many years, until now!

"His (Gandalf) enemy (the Balrog) halted again, facing him, and the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings."

Here is a simile saying that the actual shadow surrounding the balrog stretched out, as a dragon would stretch out its own wings to fly. This is not to be contested, it is a simile and nothing more at this point. All that this quote is saying is that the shadow around the balrog grew wider.

"The fire in it (the Balrog) seemed to die, but the darkness grew. It stepped forward slowly on to the bridge, and suddenly drew up itself up to a great height, and its wings were spread from wall to wall.."

Wait a minute! Now the Balrog does have wings? What just happened? Where did these now physical wings come from? This quote, unlike the last, does not have to be looked at as a simile or metaphor, for the answer has nothing to do with grammar and sentance structure, but Middle-earth mythology! If you remember, Balrogs were in truth Maiar that had been corrupted by Morgoth. Being Maiar, the Balrog's could thus alter their form at will. Case in point, Sauron fighting Huan way back in the day. Another case in point, Sauron changing into Annatar. Could we just have witnessed a Maiar altering its physical form? I say yes.

"The bridge cracked. Right at the Balrog's feet it broke, and the stone upon which it stood crashed into the gulf, while the rest remained, poised, quivering like a tongue of rock thrust out into emptiness. With a terrible cry the Balrog fell forward, and its shadow plunged down and vanished."

Hmm.. so the Balrog did have physical wings, and yet it fell? "Well it was in a narrow space." Don't be foolish! I've already given the answer: Balrogs couldn't fly. I've already stated arguments for this case, but I haven't explained why. Don't worry, I indeed have a theory for that as well, and have been saving it just for this moment! As stated earlier, Balrogs were Maiar that were corrupted by Melkor--with the most emphasis being placed upon the word "corrupted." As I earlier theorized, perhaps one of the negative effects of this corruption was the dulling of the Maia's ability to sucessfully alter its body. And here it comes, the answer to the age old question. Durin's Bane, the balrog in question, does have wings, but these wings are made of shadow, because that's what the rest of the creature's body was made of, having been corrupted by the powers of Morgoth. I cannot imagine wings made of shadow to be very stable, hence the lack of flying around. But of course the original question was not whether or not Balrog's could fly, but whether or not they have wings.

I realize just how evil I am by reviving this thread, but I couldn't resist throwing my theory into the fray.

Forgive the many typos that no doubt have snuck into this post, for it is 2:30 in the morning here and I am most weary.

[ July 28, 2002: Message edited by: Feanaro ]

[ July 28, 2002: Message edited by: Feanaro ]

[obloquy]

If balrogs were truly Maiar, they could change their form to suite their whims.

No, Balrogs (post Battle of the Powers) were incarnate Maiar, and were thus unable to change their shape. Evidence of this is that their deaths were final, and they were not re-embodied after being slain. For more discussion of this particular point, see Dragons vs. Balrogs.

Of course I just quoted that the balrogs were scourges of fire, which would give them a uniformity. Considering that Melkor's "specialization" was in fire and ice (don't ask me where this is stated for I cannot remember), it would seem only natural that this be one of their "treacherous gifts."

I doubt this. I think they were 'spirits of fire' by nature, like Arien the Maia:

Arien the maiden was mightier than [Tilion of the Moon], and she was chosen because she had not feared the heats of Laurelin, and was unhurt by them, being from the beginning a spirit of fire, whom nonetheless Melkor had not deceived nor drawn to his service.

Though perhaps it was Melkor's specialty in ice and fire that attracted mostly fire spirits.

Anyway, I have theorized in the past that the 'treacherous gifts' spoken of were probably incarnates given to these Maiar for sexual purposes. This theory ties in to their incarnation (which, if we assume was finalized sometime after the Battle of the Powers, handily explains our AAm '3 or 7' note), qualifies as 'treacherous gifts', and parallels the Biblical account of the origin of demons.

For of the Maiar many were drawn to his splendour in the days of his greatness, and remained in that allegiance down into his darkness; and others he corrupted afterwards to his service with lies and treacherous gifts. Dreadful among these spirits were the Valaraukar, the scourges of fire that in Middle-earth were called the Balrogs, demons of terror.

So many were drawn to him in the days of his greatness (Sauron, probably, but who else?), but these were not the Balrogs. The Balrogs he corrupted later with lies and 'treacherous gifts.' This theory does have a problem in the timeline. It appears that, according to the Annals of Aman, the spirits who became Balrogs were already serving Melkor at least 1,050 years before the Elves awoke, and thus before he had any such gifts to give. Still, I don't think the theory can be entirely ruled out. Perhaps they were merely promised such gifts to begin with, but didn't receive them until later.

More likely, I think, is the possibility that these 'gifts' were not necessarily 'humanoid' incarnates (i.e. the Children of Iluvatar), and maybe this is tied in with the devising of Dragons, which Melkor is said to have bred. Consider this excerpt from an Annals of Aman revision:

And in Utumno he multiplied the race of the evil spirits that followed him, the Úmaiar, of whom the chief were those demons whom the Elves afterwards named the Balrogath.

He was apparently breeding these (embodied, but not yet incarnate) spirits with something, unless he could somehow replicate discarnate spirit creatures.

In any case, I believe "treacherous gifts" must be a reference to their incarnation, whatever the means. I can't think of any other gift Melkor could give that would be considered "treacherous."

[Manwe Sulimo]

Here's another view (if it's been introduced before, please forgive me)

At the fall of Thangorodrim, a few Balrogs escaped. Given how "Anfauglith could not hold the battle" (or something like that) of the War of Wrath, do you REALLY think a Balrog could've walked/ran away from Angband. And if it did get through the battle, would it have been able to get past Belegost, Nogrod, and all the Silvan Elves and Drúedain on foot? And, since Khazad-dûm was already inhabited at the time of the War of Wrath (yes, there are quotes backing that up, I'm just too lazy to look for them right now), could the Balrog have entered it by any conventional means? It is most likely that he/it had to fly to Zirak-zigil and descend by way of the Endless Stair to the "depths of Moria". If he/it had entered Khazad-dûm by a gate or a door, then the Dwarves would've killed it (or at least recorded its presence). There are also quotes from Unfinished Tales and some of the HoMe books in which Balrogs have flown (like I said, I don't want to try to find these right now. If I feel like it, I may find some later [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] ). Unless they have propellers, this indicates that they do, in fact, have wings.

[Feanaro]

I do not doubt there are quotes using the term "fly" with Balrogs, but I am positive Tolkien uses the term fly to mean flee or travel with great haste. Otherwise many elves would also have been soaring about the heavens over the course of Middle-Earth's history.

Here's a quote from HoME 5:

"In my view there is no question that the words 'save some few [Balrogs] that fled and hid themselves in caverns inaccessible at the roots of the earth' preceded a good while the Balrog of Moria (there is in any case evidence that a Balrog was not my father's original concept of Ganfalf's adversary on the Bridge of Khazad-dum). It was, I believe, the very idea--first appearing here--that some Balrogs had survived from the ancient world in the deep places of Middle-earth that led to the Balrog of Moria. In this connection a letter of my father's written in April 1954 (Letters no, 144, p. 180) is intersting:

[The Balrogs] were supposed to have been all destroyed in the overthrow of Thangorodrim... But it is here found... that one had escaped and taken refuge under the mountains of Hithaeglin."

[obloquy]

Here's a little piece that I have not seen used in this debate before:

The eagles dwell out of reach of Orc and Balrog, and are great foes of Morgoth and his people.

It's old -- from the The Earliest 'Silmarillion' chapter in HoMe vol. IV. Michael Martinez would no doubt dismiss it, since he would consider it a reference to the pre-1940s Balrogs, at which time they had no wings and could not fly. I think most of us, however, welcome any little bit of textual support to our camp.

[ July 28, 2002: Message edited by: obloquy ]