Lord Lorien - Your use of the Nazgul as an analogy is perfectly apt. He only named one and also gave an exact number, which perfectly illustrated my point. That was his style.
I was not suggesting in any way that there were thousands of Balrogs running around, just that the range of 3-7 conflicts with the accounts given in the Silmarillion. The impressions of their numbers in the battle with Feanor and at Gondolin seem to suggest that there were dozens, given Tolkien's style of writing; which doesnt conflict with the fact that they were maiar at all. We know that Morgoth had a host of maiar in his service.
TM supplied this quote in another thread:
The meeting of the hosts of the West and of the North is named the Great Battle, and the War of Wrath. There was marshalled the whole power of the Throne of Morgoth, and it had become great beyond count, so that Anfauglith could not contain it; and all the North was aflame with war. 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; and the uncounted legions of the Orcs perished like straw in a great fire, or were swept like shrivelled leaves before a burning wind. (The Sil)
The math and the language do not match. With Gothmog and another balrog slain and a maximum of 7 balrogs that would mean that 'some few' would be most likely 3 and that only 2 were actually slain in the War of Wrath. It just seems unlike Tolkien to write 'The Balrogs were destroyed...' when referring to 2 of them.
So I am not saying that Tolkien did not change his mind about how many Balrogs there were, but rather that the way they are presented in the Silmarillion does not reflect his change in thought. The letters he wrote are not the history of Middle-Earth as it was published.
-- Edited by Celethil at 20:48, 2006-08-29
__________________
Therefore I say that we will go on, and this doom I add: the deeds that we shall do shall be the matter of song until the last days of Arda
and what should he have said? the last Balrogs? a few Balrogs? some Balrogs? would it have really made a difference? I think not. From a literary point of view I think Tolkien did very well...short, clear and precise. War of Wrath. Balrogs were destroyed. That's all there is to it. It was not only the end of the last Balrogs, but also the end of the Balrogs as Melkor's best servants. And then of course follows the account about Durin's Bane and his escape from the ruin of Beleriand.
Many might also debate about the use of "some few fled", as it was only 1. But again, remember the Elves didn't know all, and it is a fact they believed that there were some other Balrogs left except Durin's Bane. As Celeborn says in HOME TOI, the Elves thought some Balrogs might be hidden near Orodruin Of course there were no more other Balrogs, but again, Elves are only characters and are not omniscient.
One the one side you say that the use language does not matter and then in the same discussion you would doubt the use of a plural phrase AND speculate on the validity of the history.
To suggest that the phrase 'some few' means 'only one' just isn't acceptable as an answer.
If you call into doubt the Elves account of the events at which they were present then you cannot form a coherent argument one way or the other.
If you are trying to fit the 3-7 number from the letters into the Silmarillion then your argument carries a little more weight, but if that number was not given in that letter then you would not come to that conclusion from what is written in the Silmarillion.
Regardless of what Tolkien's later thoughts were on the subject, what is presented in the Silmarillion does give the impression that the number of Balrogs was greater than a few.
__________________
Therefore I say that we will go on, and this doom I add: the deeds that we shall do shall be the matter of song until the last days of Arda
I am amazed this point has not been brought up before.
There CANNOT be less than 5 Balrogs.
2 were killed before the War of Wrath. Then we know that 'the last balrogs were all destroyed save the Balrog later slayed by Gandalf'.
So we have 2. Then we know there must be at least 2 that fought in the War. But of those 2 died in the War of wrath. Finally we have the escapee which is Durin's bane.
Thank you MoS for perfectly illustrating my point.
I am not disputing that Tolkien changed his mind about the amount of Balrogs that were in his world. His letter clearly states his intent.
What I am saying is that the accounts of Balrogs as presented in the Silmarillion clearly conflicts with his intent.
Perhaps CT did not know about the letter at the time the Sil was published, that's human error and no fault of his for not knowing all of his father's thoughts.
__________________
Therefore I say that we will go on, and this doom I add: the deeds that we shall do shall be the matter of song until the last days of Arda
This topic recently flared in my head again. Since looking in another forum and debating with someone else who "knew" there are only 7 Balrogs, I went back and did some more research.
The note in the margins of the writings that would become Morgoth's Ring is the only mention of this 3-7 number that I came across. If there are other references then I would appreciate if someone would please share.
If not, then it seems unreasonable to impose such a number upon the Silmarillion.
__________________
Therefore I say that we will go on, and this doom I add: the deeds that we shall do shall be the matter of song until the last days of Arda
There was only one Balrog that survived the First Age and the War of Wrath:
"The Balrog is a survivor from the Silmarillion and the legends of the First Age. So is Shelob. The Balrogs, of whom the whips were the chief weapons, were primeval spirits of destroying fire, chief servants of the primeval Dark Power of the First Age. They were supposed to have been all destroyed in the overthrow of Thangorodrim, his fortress in the North. But here is found (there is usually a hang-over especially of evil from one age to another) that one had escaped and taken refuge in the mountains of Hithaeglin (the Misty Mountains)." (Letter #144)
Notice that it says that "one had escaped". It's very clear - only one Balrog escaped period. As for the War of Wrath quote, it comes from a different time period of Tolkien's writing than the quote from BoLT II. Therefore, assuming that at least 2 Balrogs were destroyed there is not wise, since Tolkien imagined that more Balrogs had existed at that point. However, it is logical to assume that at least one Balrog fought in the battle and was killed, therefore it is my personal belief that 4 is the likely number of Balrogs that existed - but certainly only one survived the First Age.
I agree...partially We have a quote in the Sil: "The Balrogs were destroyed, save some few and hid themselves..." Now, I agree on the fact that only one, and not some few escaped. However, since the words "the balrogs" are used, I get the idea that more then 1 balrog died in the War of Wrath, at least 2, which would, in my mind at least bring the total to 5. of course, one could say that the intention here is to speak of the Balrogs as a group, so Gothmog and the Balrog killed by Glorfindel would also be included, justifying the use of plural. I however think it refers to those that actually fought in the War of Wrath, those that were left, so it would mean at least 5 Balrogs existed.
That is why I stated there cannot be less than 5 Balrogs in existance. However I would have said that probably 3 would have battled in the War of Wrath, but we only have enough evidence to validate 2.
There has been at least one argument (not mine) on the web that Tolkien possibly intended to have Glorfindel fight a type of 'demon' other than a Balrog, for example. That argument aside for now, it brings up the point that, generally speaking, revisions both great and small were still possible with respect to Tolkien's theoretical 'ultimate' Silmarillion. Anyway, in the end we never arrive at an ultimate or published choice with matching descriptions (so to speak) but I suppose it might be fun or interesting to date the references (those noted in this thread at least) where possible:
1) Silmarillion Christopher Tolkien noted in HME V: 'In my view there is no question that the words (not in Q) 'save some few Balrogs that fled...' preceded by a good while the Balrog of Moria'
1a) It is noted in The War of the Jewels that Tolkien later made a slight alteration to some wording in the greater passage, but nothing that affected the earlier description, as worded, about Balrogs; and it is probably too much to say that passages simply left unaltered at this time were thus certainly being 'accepted'. See Christopher Tolkien's characterization in WJ.
2) Tolkien's letter is dated 1954, '... that one had escaped and taken refuge under the mountains...' and so on.
3) The Annals of Aman (Morgoth's Ring) Christopher Tolkien comments: 'It is notable that the Balrogs were still at this time, when the Lord of the Rings had been completed, conceived to have existed in very large numbers.' (regarding 'a host of Balrogs')
3a) Christopher notes the 'late scribbled change': 'a host of Balrogs...' altered to 'his Balrogs...' . Then we have JRRT's marginal note mentioned here, which reads 'There should not be supposed more than 3 or at most 7 ever existed.' JRRT
Again, this is not intended to cover every reference in any case, but might help with an external timeline.
(...) So, this then was the 'turning point'. Yet there is no way of knowing whether this idea of a limited number of Balrogs would have been retained. Given the difficulty in precisely dating these texts it is even possible that the Grey Annals reference to 'Balrogs a thousand' post-dated the Annals of Aman note saying there were 'at most seven'.
According to my understanding of the material in HME, this theory would mean that Tolkien wrote Annals of Aman (AAm) (host of Balrogs), had someone else make a typescript of it -- then made the marginal note (three or at most seven) to the AAm typescript before even writing GA (Balrogs a thousand) and having a typescript made of this. If this is the case he would be either forgetting or revising his marginal note to the typescript of AAm of course.
I know Tolkien often changed his mind, but this seems a bit more forced than the timing given by CJRT, considering too that the typescript to AAm is thought to have been made at the same time as the typescripts to the Later Quenta Silmarillion and the Grey Annals.
The timing according to Christopher Tolkien, despite that he can't be certain about it, seems more likely to me: Tolkien wrote AAm and GA at about the same time, early 1950's (lots of Balrogs in both), he expresses in a later letter that he intends to get copies made of copyable material -- has copies made by a typist of AAm, LQS, GA (with carbon copies), and in 1958 makes marginal note on AAm, revising 'host' of Balrogs so that great numbers are not described.
Celethil wrote: I am not arguing the the small number of Balrogs was not the intent of Tolkien, but it is not what was published.
Interestingly the published version was altered in the same manner as Tolkien's one revision, because while JRRT did not revise certain Balrog passages in QS, Christopher Tolkien did -- altering references to large numbers of Balrogs so that they would be much more vague for the 1977 Silmarillion.
Tolkien's own revision to the Annals did not include a specific number. He changed the word 'host' so that 'very many' would not be imagined (the specific numbers were in a marginal note to himself, not necessarily intended for any Readers). Again, Christopher Tolkien basically did the same thing to other passages, not necessarily to answer the question I think, but arguably rather to keep things vague.
The War of Wrath, being the end of QS especially, was never updated by JRRT in any significant way, and the reference to 'some few' Balrogs hailed all the way back to the late 1930s (though as has been said, this conception of many Balrogs persisted to at least the early 1950s in any case).
While it hardly works perfectly with 7 Balrogs, on the other hand the War of Wrath quote is still essentially vague, and fits with the rest of the 1977 version. So here I think CJRT just decided not to tinker with the wording and Readers of the Silmarillion would not wonder. And in 1977 CJRT had no idea he would be producing twelve volumes of The History of Middle-Earth of course.
