# Smaug the Dragon vs. The Balrog of Moria



## Glaurung (Jan 27, 2002)

Who wins in this battle of titans? Assume that the fight takes place out in the open where each opponent has total freedom of movement.


----------



## Valar (Jan 28, 2002)

Balrog would win, no contest.


----------



## Uminya (Jan 28, 2002)

Pah! Smaug would bend that scrawny Balrog over his golden knee and spank him like a 4-year-old in K-mart.


----------



## Mormegil (Jan 28, 2002)

The Balrog would kick Smaug's butt*.
Smaug wouldn't be able to harm the Balrog by breathing fire at him. The Balrog is partly made of fire.
The Balrog's flame whip would make short work of Smaug.

*edited by Grond


----------



## JeffF. (Jan 28, 2002)

*Since the Winged Dragons...*

...in the Silmarillion were able to temporarily repulse the host of the Valar prior to the breaking of Thangorodrim and since their host included Maiar with a similar level of power to the Balrogs as well as Valar it seems likely that Smaug would have defeated a balrog. At the very least he would have killed its physical form.


----------



## Valar (Jan 28, 2002)

Well i don't no, it took a simple arrow to take out smaug ( well a very well placed arrow) It took Gandalf to defeat the balrog.


----------



## JeffF. (Jan 28, 2002)

*That is a good point...*

...but it wasn't really a simple arrow. It was a very special arrow. It seems that ME has many such special weapons around right when a good guy needs them.


----------



## Valar (Jan 28, 2002)

That is also a fair point, wasn't it the black arrow of his father (not to sure, i have not read the hobbit in ages).
Still gandalf says that sword are no more use against this enemy, so surley the balrog is more powerful, because he can not be affected by such mortal weapons.


----------



## JeffF. (Jan 28, 2002)

*I'm not sure...*

...that Gandalph said the weapons would be useless. He did say that this was "an enemy beyond any of you." I'll of course, chek when I get back home. Another thing to consider though, Morgoth was vulnerable to Fingolfin's sword Ringil suffering a number of wounds from it and crying out (making his own armies quail each time) as well as receiving a wound from the eagle who recovered Fingolfin's body. If a Valar could suffer wounds from a 'conventional' weapon like a sword I find it impossible to believe that a mere Balrog would be invulnerable.


----------



## Beleg Strongbow (Jan 28, 2002)

*Re: I'm not sure...*



> _Originally posted by JeffF. _
> *...that Gandalph said the weapons would be useless. He did say that this was "an enemy beyond any of you." I'll of course, chek when I get back home. Another thing to consider though, Morgoth was vulnerable to Fingolfin's sword Ringil suffering a number of wounds from it and crying out (making his own armies quail each time) as well as receiving a wound from the eagle who recovered Fingolfin's body. If a Valar could suffer wounds from a 'conventional' weapon like a sword I find it impossible to believe that a mere Balrog would be invulnerable. *




Smaug fo sure. The balrog would have not be able 2 peirce his armour and all take the heat. What about Gothmog and Ancalagon?


----------



## Eomer Dinmention (Jan 28, 2002)

I voted for Balrog because of what you all said


----------



## Grond (Jan 29, 2002)

If we were talking about Glaurung or Ancalagon against the Balrog of Moria, my answer would be very different.... but we're not. The question is Smaug or the Balrog? Given the premise that Scatha (also a lesser wurm as was Smaug) was slain by a man (Fram, son of King Frumbar of the Eotheod, of whom Theoden and Eomer were descendents) in martial combat, I would think a Balrog would have had little trouble in defeating him.


----------



## Uminya (Jan 29, 2002)

But Glaurung was also slain by a man, was he not? Tuor slew at least 6 Balrogs in Gondolin. Smaug could just smack the Balrog with his tail or come crashing down on it.


----------



## JeffF. (Jan 29, 2002)

*Glaurung and Ancalagon...*

...were also slain by men, Turin and Earendil respectively, and there is little reason to believe that Smaug is a lesser drake simply because he is of a more recent age. There is no quantifiable data (achievements/conquests/individual combats) to compare them Glaurung and Smaug both destroyed underground kingdoms, both were nearly invulnerable to conventional weapons. In Book of lost Tales II, in the story of the Fall of Gondolin the balrogs fall in significant numbers to the elves and Tuor. Only one dragon is killed. That seems to be strong evidence that they were harder to kill than balrogs. 

In fairness though, there is a footnote in that very story where Christopher Tolkein claims his father intended to change the bit about balrogs. He claims his father wrote him a note stating that the hosts of balrogs in the Silmarillion and in The Fall of Gondolin would be changed to reflect that Morgoth never had more than seven total balrogs (a change which if JRRT ever got around to it would significantly affect the Silmarillion).

While this is a fun discussion and I'm open to arguments to the contrary I can't help but wonder if we would ever have said that Gandalph the Grey could defeat a balrog if we didn't already know from the story that he could. I don't mean to start another discussion or branch this one away from the topic at hand, just thinking out loud (I mean in print).


----------



## Glaurung (Jan 29, 2002)

I have to give this fight to the Balrog. Its been stated, I believe, that except for their undersides, dragons are practically invulnerable and Smaug had most of his underside protected by jewels, except for that one little spot that was uprotected. From what I've read, it doesn't appear that Smaug has a significant size advantage against the Balrog, but that is debatable. I don't believe that Smaug would be able to harm the Balrog with his fire, since the Balrog was essentially akin to fire. No, to harm the Balrog, Smaug would have to get close and fight with tooth and claw. The Balrog would be able to ward off the dragon with his feared whip, powerful enough to harm Ungoliant herself, and would be able to get close enough to drive his sword into the dragon's weak spot. If Smaug didn't have that one weakness however, I'd have to give the fight to him.


----------



## Elenciryaquen (Feb 2, 2002)

The Balrog would for sure, no doubt, no question, kick Smaugs butt!


----------



## Snaga (Feb 2, 2002)

I think the Balrog, for the same reasons as everyone else. Smaug might have an advantage - flight! The Balrog has wings, but they don't seem to do much good. However. if Smaug's fire doesn't hurt the Balrog, it just means he can make a quick getaway!


----------



## Beorn (Feb 2, 2002)

Well...The Balrog was a Maia...dragons were, just dragons. I don't remember how they came into existence, but I doubt whether they were as powerful as a Balrog...

I think the fight would be similar to a fight between an enraged man and a child in a temper-tantrum... The child being Smaug...


----------



## TheJospeh (Feb 6, 2002)

*Obviously Smaug.*

Keep in mind Tolkien's very tight internal logic when constructing his world. If Gandalf could take out a Balrog when he was so weakened why didn't he take out Smaug? Gandalf arranged Thorin and Bilbo's quest specifically so kill Smaug because he was worried what Smaug would do under Sauron's control. That's in the appendix.

That alone suggests Smaug was more powerful. Also your arguments that Smaug couldn't hurt the Balrog through fire apply in reverse, as well. A creature that breaths fire won't be hurt by it.

Also, many an Elf Lord killed a Balrog, or at least a few did. No Elf Lord EVER killed a dragon. So, I assume Man is better equipped to kill certain opponents than Elves are. I know it sounds weird but how else do you figure out the dragon slaying?

Also, in the Tolkien bestiary David Day--who I guess is an expert on Tolkien--says that Balrog's are second only in power to Dragons among the evil creatures of the world.

Sincerely,
The Joseph


----------



## Grond (Feb 6, 2002)

Your argument is sound TheJoseph, but you do make one misquote. Earendil (an Elf at the time because he had chosen shortly before to be numbered of the Elven race) slew Ancalagon the Black in the air above Angband during the final battle with Melkor in the First Age. He had the aid of the Eagles but the text is pretty clear that it was Earendil that sent him crashing to his doom.


And the question is not between one of the great worms and a balrog, it is between Smaug and a balrog. I don't know why, but I always felt that the Dragons had diminished in power with time but I could be wrong and will research the matter further. Your quote from the bestiary is quite correct and maybe Tolkien comments on the relative power of the two in his letters. I'll look.


----------



## TheJospeh (Feb 6, 2002)

*They had.*

The dragons had diminished in power. However, Smaug was the last dragon of any great power left on middle-earth. Tolkien does mention that the most powerful dragons were the type that ran along the ground like the "Big Guy" who Turin slew and whose name I cannot remember. I am also too lazy to look it up since I don't have my bestiary or "The Silmarillion" at school with me. So Smaug wasn't the most powerful kind of dragon but he was deadly. Gandalf mentions something about him being the last great dragon capable of using his fire to consume the ring.

Yes, I had forgotten Earendil. Good point.

Well, we better not let Daisy see this or we'll never hear the end of it.

Sincerely,
The Joseph


----------



## Uminya (Feb 7, 2002)

Aye, I agree with The Joseph on this one. The Balrog and his puny whip would be useless against a gem hide.


----------



## Beorn (Feb 7, 2002)

*Re: Obviously Smaug.*



> _Originally posted by TheJospeh _
> Keep in mind Tolkien's very tight internal logic when constructing his world. If Gandalf could take out a Balrog when he was so weakened why didn't he take out Smaug? Gandalf arranged Thorin and Bilbo's quest specifically so kill Smaug because he was worried what Smaug would do under Sauron's control. That's in the appendix.
> 
> That alone suggests Smaug was more powerful. Also your arguments that Smaug couldn't hurt the Balrog through fire apply in reverse, as well. A creature that breaths fire won't be hurt by it.



So you're saying that Gandalf wanted the dragon dead because he might fall under the power of Sauron, and since the Balrog wasn't touched that he wasn't as important?

The dragon was known to be in Erebor, and had been there for a short time. The Balrog (are we supposed to capitialize it? 'Balrog' is used as a name for it, even though it is the species of it....) was only speculated upon being there, and Sauron did not know of it.

Sauron also may have had trouble keeping the Balrog under his dominion because the Balrog was also a Maia. Even though the Balrog was a weapon of Melkor, and Sauron was Melkor's lackey, the Balrog might not accept its new ruler, Sauron (should Sauron attempt to control it).

So...if you've followed any of my ramblings, I congratulate you...


----------



## TheJospeh (Feb 7, 2002)

*Yes, but*

what I was saying was that Gandalf wanted Smaug dead. Why he wanted him dead wasn't so important. The question is why didn't Gandalf just go and kill Smaug. Presumably because he couldn't.

Sincerely,
The Joseph


----------



## Grond (Feb 7, 2002)

Gandalf's edict from the West was that he couldn't directly interfere with the goings on of Middle-earth. aka: challenge or confront evil directly. I would argue that Gandalf was not able to directly confront Smaug because of this. He could, however, protect his charges (Fellowship) when confronted by the Balrog. It's the classic, self-defense defense.


----------



## TheJospeh (Feb 7, 2002)

*Then why worry about Smaug.*

Just wait for the war to start and walk up and finish him off. Or better yet wander into the lair with Bilbo at his side and when Smaug tries to kill Bilbo Gandalf steps in and kills Smaug.

Sincerely,
The Joseph


----------



## legoman (Feb 8, 2002)

'I say, whats that noise I hear over yonder hill?'

'Oh its just Smaug kicking some Balrog to Kingdom-come.'

please note that the people quoted here just see the beating the Balrog took as an everyday occurance.

Plus, Smaug is feared by all (well most... and was) and lived alone. The Balrog lived with loads of Orks in a big Cave.


----------



## Nazgul_Lord (Feb 8, 2002)

Smaug, the Balrog would not be able to pierce his armor, so eventually smaug would win, plus he can fly, and although the Balrog had wings, in the Sil, or LOTR it says that they can not fly


----------



## Glory (Feb 8, 2002)

I voted for the Balrog  because I think  it  is more powerful than smaug 
The Balrog  wins 



> *The Balrog would kick Smaug's butt*.
> Smaug wouldn't be able to harm the Balrog by breathing fire at him. The Balrog is partly made of fire.
> The Balrog's flame whip would make short work of Smaug.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mad Adski (Feb 8, 2002)

Sorry, but I agree with David Day and his beastiary. Smaug would kill the Blarog, as Dragons are said to be the most ancient and powerfull beasts , and all the evidence: 

1/ Fire wouldn't hurt a dragon.
2/ The Balrog could not fly.
3/ Smaug's inpenetrable armour.
4/ The fact that Smaug has other fearsome strengths, aside from fire.
5/ Smaug is suarve and charming, and strangly Sean Connery-like, and just rocks to much to lose to the Balrog!


----------



## Valar (Feb 9, 2002)

Gandalf didn't kill Smaug because he was to busy driving sauron out of mirkwood.


----------



## TheJospeh (Feb 9, 2002)

*Wrong.*

He's at Erebor when Smaug dies.

Sincerely,
The Joseph


----------



## Grond (Feb 9, 2002)

Sorry Joe my man but Gandalf didn't reappear in the Hobbit until the night before the Battle of the Five Armies. He revealed himself to Bilbo in the host of the Elvenking. That was a week at the least after Smaug was slain.


----------



## TheJospeh (Feb 9, 2002)

*Yes I know.*

But why couldn't he kill Smaug then? The time frame wasn't so close that a week wouldn't make a difference. Hell, he had 60 years.

Sincerely,
The Joseph


----------



## Mormegil (Feb 12, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Mormegil on another thread _
> *The reasons that I think a Dragon would be no match for a Balrog are as follows...
> 
> 1. Balrogs were originally Maiar, corrupted by Melkor in the
> ...



These are my feelings on the subject.

It was correctly pointed out to me that allthough Dragons don't use swords, they do have teeth and claws which would harm the physical body of a Balrog. But I still think that a Balrog could beat a Dragon.


----------



## Uminya (Feb 12, 2002)

Here are some quotes from Silm:



> _But it availed him not. The Balrogs were destroyed, save some few that fled and hid themselves in caverns inaccessible at the roots of the Earth...
> 
> Then, seeing that his hosts were overthrown and his power dispersed, Morgoth quailed, and he dared not to come forth himself. But he loosed upon his foes the last desperate assault that he had prepared, and out of the pits of Angband there issued the winged dragons, that had not before been seen; and so sudden and ruinous was the onset of that dreadful fleet that the host of the Valar was driven back, for the coming of the dragons was with great thunder, and lightning, and a tempest of fire._



It goes on to say how Earendil came with the Great Eagles and threw down Ancalagon, but this proves that the dragons were mightier than the Balrogs since they were actually able to beat back the Host of the Valar for a time.


----------



## Beleg Strongbow (Feb 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Mad Adski _
> *Sorry, but I agree with David Day and his beastiary. Smaug would kill the Blarog, as Dragons are said to be the most ancient and powerfull beasts , and all the evidence:
> 
> 1/ Fire wouldn't hurt a dragon.
> ...





Thats right


----------



## Nazgul_Lord (Feb 21, 2002)

My thoughts Exactly


----------



## chrysophalax (Mar 4, 2002)

I agree unequivocally! toothy dragon grin


----------

