• Caro Visitante, por que não gastar alguns segundos e criar uma Conta no Fórum Valinor? Desta forma, além de não ver este aviso novamente, poderá participar de nossa comunidade, inserir suas opiniões e sugestões, fazendo parte deste que é um maiores Fóruns de Discussão do Brasil! Aproveite e cadastre-se já!

Asas dos Balrogs

Balrogs Tinham asas

  • SIM

    Votos: 79 47,3%
  • NÃO

    Votos: 73 43,7%

    Votos: 15 9,0%

  • Total de votantes
Hauhauhauhahauhau :lol: :think::lol:

Super Chernabog


Achado graças a esse artigo aí:

Feito por esse artista ( homem) apesar do nome Leslie aparecer como feminino em outros lugares.

@Finarfin @Ragnaros. @Haran
Última edição:
Outra piada parecida, essa aqui feita pelo outro lado e em 1915

Onde frequentemente se contrapunham a Aranha e a Águia... :P :think: :think:


Última edição:
E o próprio Michael Martinez, hoje em dia, gosta de ponderar sobre a ligação entre o Dúrin's Bane e o Chernabog de Fantasia:

Tolkien’s description of the Balrog as it approaches and presents its full terrifying presence to the Company of the Ring is one of the most perfect of many transitions from vagueness to clarity with which he enrichens his literature. And I think it should be noted that many people have compared the appearance and enlargement or transformation of the Balrog of Moria (its transition from vague, distant threat to close, identified terror of an ancient age) to the “Night on Bald Mountain” sequence in Disney’s 1940 movie “Fantasia” (the only Disney movie about which J.R.R. Tolkien had anything positive to say, so far as I know):

Which is not to say that one should necessarily picture the Balrog as looking like Chernabog the demon, but did you notice how he extends his power through that shadow-like darkness toward the town and the graves? In fact Chernabog himself assumes the shape of a mountain peak, so the entire sequence is about transitions: from peak to demon, from day to night, from darkness to light, from light to darkness, from demon to peak, and from night to day. I have always wondered (as have others) if this sequence did not have a profound impact on J.R.R. Tolkien’s imagery.
Última edição:

Steuard Jensen​

15 de set. de 1998, 04:00:00

Quoth Michael Martinez <Mic...@xenite.org>:

> The problem with the "might be right" issues that the TEXTS only
> point one way. There is nothing in the texts which suggest the
> Balrogs were wingless, where the texts do say they had them. So, I
> can see that the other side wants Balrogs not to have wings, but I
> don't see how they *might* be right.
I've said this before, but I think it deserves saying again here. I
don't believe that _Tolkien_ was consistent in his thoughts on Balrog
wings. More on how this might be smoothed over at the end of the
I believe that the phrasing of the "winged speed" passage, while not
absolutely unambiguous, strongly indicates that Balrogs have wings.
(The combination of "winged", "over", and "tempest" in a single place
finally convinced me, despite my reluctance.) Yes, all of these words
can be easily interpreted in ways that do not involve literal wings,
but having all three together makes the literal interpretation the
most likely, to my mind. Also, it cannot be denied that wings or no
wings, there's a lot of "wingish" imagery associated with Balrogs in
On the other hand, I am quite convinced that the description of the
Balrog in Moria involves _only_ non-corporeal "wings" of shadow (and
hence not the sort of thing that would allow one to fly). I simply
cannot bring myself to believe that Tolkien would have been so
careless in his use of language as to use the phrase
"the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings"
two short paragraphs before

"its wings were spread from wall to wall"

without the "wings" referring to the same thing.
I have given more detailed discussion of this point in earlier
incarnations of this thread, but this is the crux of the argument.
While it is possible that Tolkien did indeed mean for these passages
to be taken seperately (which must be Michael's assertion when he
states that "the texts do say [Balrogs] had [wings]" in relation to
this passage), it is AT LEAST as valid to assert that Tolkien intended
the second passage to be read in light of the first.
As an example of the importance of context, consider this text:
"Billy flew out of school like a hawk intent on its prey. When
he flew into his house minutes later, he voraciously devoured the
cookies his mother had made for him."
It is clearly _not_ valid to assert that Billy could fly based only on
the phrase "When he flew into his house". While this doesn't prove
that this was Tolkien's intention in the Balrog's case, it DOES prove
that the in-context, "wings-as-metaphor" assertion is a very valid way
of reading the text. As I firmly believe it to be the reading that
Tolkien intended, I believe that this passage very strongly indicates
that Balrogs do not have wings in any usual sense of the word.
Of course, this flatly contradicts my reading of the "winged speed"
passage, as I noted from the start. My current preferred
interpretation of this is as follows: Balrogs in the First Age
probably had wings. However, realizing that a spirit of fire would be
awfully easy for the Valar to find in the air or on the ground, the
Balrog of Moria decided to hide out underground. While hibernating,
playing solitaire, eating Dwarves, and whatever else it did down
there, it probably had very few uses for those wings, which would be
more of a hinderance than anything else.
Being an Ainu, even if a low-grade one, it was able to slowly modify
its physical form, reducing its wings from their former flight-capable
state to an ominous, shadowy, rather wing-shaped cloud. That sort of
thing would be both more manageable and more useful underground than
actual flappy wings. (The shadow probably remained winglike in shape
because the Balrog was still somewhat bound to its habitual form, as
discussed in the latest issue of Vinyar Tengwar.) Of course, when the
bridge broke, it would not have had the years or centuries required to
fully remanifest the wings to the point of flight. (I would think
that it would have done so if it could have, as Gandalf wasn't going
anywhere but the rest of the Fellowship was about to get away.)
At any rate, that's the best explanatory story that I've been able to
construct to date. I won't say that it's "right", but it's the best
fit to the seemingly contradictory passages that I've been able to
work out. What is _does_ show is that the pro-wings and anti-wings
sides can actually co-exist, if both are willing to concede a few
reasonable points. Three cheers for compromise!
Steuard Jensen

17 de set. de 1998, 04:00:00


Barrie Cameron wrote:
>Nice sauce, but where is the meat (clear evidence of "wings")? ;-)
>Barrie I. CAMERON

Aside from the heretical image I just got of a vegetarian Balrog...
In my first encounter with LOTR, I took the imagery of wings stretching
across the cavern rather literally. In subsequent readings, I formulated
the impression of a psychic/occult/magic aspect to this particular creature.
That is: that it existed on more than one plane. In this view, the flaming
whip is not only of fire to burn flesh but a magical device to sear mind and
soul as well.
Further adventures with Jung and J. Campbell opened an entirely new approach
to all mythopoeic literature for me. There are strong currents of the
mythic/anthro/psychological running thru LOTR.
The gist of the thread, IMO, is more about the authors intent and the
relationship of that intent with the impressions produced by the reader than
about specific proofs. I haven't read enough of Tolkien's letters to know
how dogmatic he was regarding specific appearances. Even if he were
dogmatic, he provided little in the way of material regarding Balrogs at
all. So much of LOTR is inferred in nuance and cues that I've accepted
that there will be quite a bit of variation in imagery from reader to
reader; again I fail to see how JRRT discourages the imagination of the
reader in service of a detailed set of views.
ie. how long was the fiery whip? what color (blue, yellow, white etc.)? Was
the Balrog male or female? What was the texture of the Balrog's skin? Did
it have pointy ears? Was it the first cousin to Fantasia's Night on Bald
Mountain demon? The information JRRT provided leaves these questions open
for varying degrees of educated guesswork. IOW, JRRT didn't feel the need
to provide evidence of literal wings or not. How important is it?
The importance of the scene is that of a "demon" arising from the deepest
caverns of the collective unconscious to challenge the hero - unto the
death, (IMO, this is the most dramatic scene in the novels). The hero's
struggle, rebirth and transformation is the significant event. This is a
motif common to most hero myths. JRRT reaches way back (in time), in
pulling this scene out for us.
Beyond the Minotaur.


16 de set. de 1998, 04:00:00


Barrie Cameronwrote:
>A very good summary of the debate so far, Ken, and if there were no
>other references to Balrogs in TLOTR and Silmarillion, I would agree
>with your conclusion that there was some doubt over the existance or
>otherwise of Balrogs having real wings.
>However, as there appears to be no references anywhere else in Tolkien's
>writings to Balrogs having wings (or at least no one seems to have
>reported any such references on this News Group) the arguement in favour
>of the Balrogs being wingless (aerodynamically speaking, that is) seems
>overwhelming. Particularly when considering some of the descriptions of
>battles in the Silmarillion.

>As to Maiar being able take on "shapes", is there any evidence that they
>could fly?
Emerging from eons of lurking at this ng, I admit I have not been so amused
since hearing the Christian theologians arguing the dancing angels on a
pinhead theorum. I suppose some of the source of my amusement lies in my
failure to recall where Tolkien states that Balrogs have identical/uniform
attributes *and* that these attributes are not subject to metamorphosis or
As for myself, I envision a winged Balrog confronting Gandalf, the wings
being both corporeal and supernatural/occult/psychic. Further (and more
important to my mind), I would say that, ultimately, this Balrog would have
certain attributes that reside within G himself! (identification etc.)
The Balrog is an expression of the Shadow archetype. In this case a fire
demon (G naturally enough, is associated with fire.); the challenge within
himself that G must master before becoming Gandalf the White. While not
specifically a warrior, G is most decidedly a hero, and as long as heroes
are heroes they must pass tests and meet challenges, largely in the form of
their personal connection to the collective unconscious. My basic
interpretation is that Tolkien borrowed a bit of mythopoeic psychology from
C. J. Jung in the creation of Gandalf's Balrog. As for Glorfindels' Balrog,
I would quite imagine that he would be as different from Gandalf's as the
two hero figures differ from each other. All the while retaining a certain
Balrogian character.
As to debating the imagery -as presented- by Tolkien. I doubt seriously
that JRRT would object to the imaging of either winged or sans-wings
Balrogs, as he didn't invest much time in presenting a clear description.
I'm quite sure everyone has the image of an Ent ready to mind, however, do
these images match, in detail, that in Tolkien's mind? The same could be
said of almost all the characters. BTW, I don't recall whether the Brothers
Hildebrandt did a Balrog image, anybody seen one?
P.S. Of course, it's common knowledge that 469 Class III angels can dance
on the head of a #6 pin. What's the hubbub, bub?
Interessante que uma das mensagens citadas acima mencione o Minotauro. Uma das páginas do livro de Mazarbul lembra uma cabeça de touro mesmo:

E há quem sugere que "Mazarbul" é uma piada filológica ou um trocadilho histórico com Maze's Bull ( O labirinto do Touro)

Última edição:
Chat, os balrogs têm asas?

Essa é uma questão bastante debatida entre os fãs de "O Senhor dos Anéis" de J.R.R. Tolkien. Nos textos de Tolkien, a descrição dos Balrogs não é totalmente clara em relação às asas.

Originalmente, em "O Silmarillion", Tolkien descreve os Balrogs como seres alados, indicando que possuíam asas. No entanto, em suas notas e escritos posteriores, a questão tornou-se mais ambígua. Algumas interpretações sugerem que as asas poderiam ter sido perdidas durante a guerra e que, na era de "O Senhor dos Anéis", eles poderiam não tê-las mais. Outras interpretações argumentam que as asas poderiam ser uma manifestação mais simbólica de sua habilidade de sombra e escuridão, em vez de estruturas físicas reais.

Portanto, não há uma resposta definitiva da parte de Tolkien sobre se os Balrogs têm asas ou não. Isso permite interpretações variadas e tem levado a muita especulação e discussão entre os fãs.
A posição do GPT parece refletir exatamente a mensagem do Steuard Jensen, de 1998, a primeira citada no meu post acima. Tende a concluir que a revisão tardia da "passagem de Hithlum" sugere a consolidação da noção dos Balrogs como alados na época da Primeira Era e que o uso delas pra vôo teria sido uma habilidade perdida nos períodos subsequentes.

Basicamente, também a posição que eu mesmo adotei em 2009, embora só tivesse topado com essa mensagem do Jensen ontem. A linha de raciocínio foi basicamente a mesma.

A coisa que o GPT parece ter "entendido" meio errado é o fato de que os escritos mais antigos do Tolkien ( notadamente a Queda de Gondolin que nunca foi revisada na parte em que eles aparecem) realmente caracterizavam os balrogs como sem asas e que a evolução (inclusive retroativa) pra forma alada ocorreu da redação do Senhor dos Anéis "pra frente".
Última edição:
O Balrog com asa cientificamente explicado :D


6 de set. de 1998, 04:00:00

> ) Gandalf, didn't take wing at the peak of Zirak-zigil.
The answer is remarkable simple, and it will allow us to tie together a
few other threads.
First to review the quotes: "It was like a great shadow..." Not "it was"
but "it was like".
"And its wings were spread from wall to wall..."
"The sun shone fiercely there..." but very quickly "...A great smoke rose
about us, vapour and steam. Ice fell like rain." So the incident solar
radiation was quickly masked before any signficant warming could occur;
and the ambient temperature was at or below freezing.
From the Silmarillion, "...their hearts were of fire, but they were
cloaked in darkness..."
And in not altogether irrelevant observation from 2001, Floyd observes
that after sunrise, his shadow is cannot be seen on the TMA-1, and he
calculate the monolith is absorbing vast amounts of energy. I've mislaid
my copy, and I don't remember the precise calculation, but it is
sufficient, apparently, to power an interstellar radio burst.
Finally, as others have pointed out, it is aerodynamickally impossible for
a dragon to fly as birds do, but instead they must have been enormous
gasbags. A similar calculation shows that it is unlikely Balrogs could fly
as birds do.
But what about a hot air balloon?
An enormous, shadowy black membrane could efficiently absorb all incident
radiation and ambient warming and use that to heat enough air within a sac
to become buoyant.
I propose the sequence of events,
(1) The Balrog enters the Chamber of Records. In order to fit within the
smaller chamber, it first deflates its airsac.
(2) At the Second Hall, its mane is ignited, the hot exhaust gasses
collect into the airsac as shadowy membrane inflates (enlarges).
(3) Bridge collapses before it has acheived buoyancy. It falls instead of
(4) "His fire was quenched." In under-Moria, the Balrog cannot generate
enough heat, nor is there any incident radiation. The Balrog is unable to
inflate its airsacs.
(5) Once up in Moria again, buoyancy would be useful, but the passageway
is too restricted.
(6) On Zirakzigil, the Balrog springs out in flame and bright sunlight.
Undoubtably it hopes to quickly achieve flight. However the air is so cold
it takes longer than expected to heat up. Then in the conflict, the
sunlight is lost. And ice and water fall upon it, cooling it and trapped
air further. The Balrog hopes to take flight, but fails.
Did Gandalf really throw down his foe? He was, after all, in the form of
an old man. Perhaps it was failed take-off attempt, or even Moria's
version of the Hindenburg disaster. As Gandalf says, nobody else saw the
battle. Was Gandalf stretching the truth in order to impress his allies?
O Balrog e o Crime Noir

O. Sharp​

6 de set. de 1998, 04:00:00

!**?#!#$ (smj...@my-dejanews.com) suggests:
: Did Gandalf really throw down his foe? He was, after all, in the form of

: an old man. Perhaps it was failed take-off attempt, or even Moria's
: version of the Hindenburg disaster.

So it was... the Hindenbalrog? :) :) :)
: As Gandalf says, nobody else saw the

: battle. Was Gandalf stretching the truth in order to impress his allies?

The old cliche' line "And after we kill him, we can make up any story we
want" comes leaping to mind. :)
o...@netcom.com "And after the War was over, the West defeated and the
Ring recovered, the mind of Sauron was free to turn to other
matters. Who had killed the Balrog? There were no witnesses,
the murder scene was broken and the evidence smashed, and
the only one who would talk about it was some crazed old
man who claimed _he_ did it. I knew the Balrog, and I
knew some old codger wasn't a match for him. He also said he
had died and come back to life, which certainly didn't add
credence to his story. So there I was: Nick Archer, my
business in Minas Tirith a shambles, hired on by Sauron. I
didn't like him, but I didn't like a lot of my clients,
and anyway a guy's gotta have money for booze..."
-from _The Valarauka's Long Sleep_ by Raymond Chandler
Última edição:

Proof that balrogs *can* fly (Part 4)

Proof that Balrogs *can* fly (or maybe not) 5
Última edição:

Valinor 2023

Total arrecadado
Termina em: