Tolkien’s Picture of a Balrog - A Winged One

Discussions in Middle-earth lore, language and books.
Post Reply
Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
If we are brutally honest, even those of us with the staunchest of views ought to be able to admit that The Fellowship of the Ring text describing the Balrog at the Bridge of Khazad-dûm does possess ambiguity when it comes to its winged state. Physically winged or not - it cannot be decisively proven (either way) through rigorous textual analysis. And so though some of us might want to continue with this line of inquiry, we should (even if begrudgingly so) acknowledge a stalemate has now resulted. Grammatical scrutiny is insufficient for further progress.

But perhaps there is another way?

To resolve this perplexing issue perhaps we should abandon a focus on some much debated lines? Perhaps we should look elsewhere? Perhaps, somewhat surprisingly, we should consider the idea that Tolkien left us a picture of a Balrog? A tantalizingly vague one that all have missed - because it was intended to be a kind of hidden riddle. Yes, another ‘riddle in the dark’!

Of all the records that might have relayed Tolkien’s own visual impression of a Balrog, there is only one I have discovered which offers a viable possibility. And that pertains to the three loose leaves of the blood-stained, burnt and slashed Book of Mazarbul which Tolkien spent so much effort in forging.

Of the three, on the last parchment we have an image. A game changing image, perhaps!

I want you all to zoom in on the very last internal cutout and enlarge it if you can (it would be nice if someone could post a cropped enlargement on my behalf - for I do not have the necessary skill). By the way, I have purposely chosen the earliest example I can find (from the The Lord of the Rings Calendar of 1977) which thus has the least chance of having sustained damage. Certainly the manuscript pages are delicate artifacts.

Image

What I see (and I am sure all of you will be able to visualize the same without difficulty) is the side profile of a strange upright creature. Clearly one can discern a head and two indistinct legs. On the left side is what looks like a long cloak (of mail?). And then on the right side we have the unmistakable jutting out of a ‘wing’.

Surrounding the cut-out is a black and brown zone which looks representative of ‘shadow’. So then using reasonable logic, what we have - must be a physical wing!

For those who have studied Tolkien’s works in great detail - an awareness must have arisen that our professor undoubtedly possessed a crafty humorous side. No one should deny his calligraphic skills, nor his propensity to bemuse the reader with the ‘Mooreeffoc’ effect. Then as a kind of subtle joke, did Tolkien leave teasing picture evidence of that which haunted the darkest dreams of the dwarves?

Now as well as the image itself, there are a number of other strong pointers that tell us that indeed this was meant to be Durin’s Bane.

......

The first four below, discuss leading clues within the forged manuscript.

(A) The image is of a semi-humanoid in a perfectly upright position. Meaning there is no need to rotate it to understand it. One might presume that the orientation was purposely effected. The odds of this being a random placement seem remote.

(B) The cut-out certainly isn’t a pattern one would expect from a burn, slash or stabbing. If it really was Tolkien’s idea of a ‘stabbing’ or ‘slashing’, it hasn’t penetrated through to the earlier pages - one must note! So one might deem that our particular ‘hole’ was specially created with purpose in mind. Indeed my close examination of the original at The Bodleian exhibition in 2018 revealed no indication that it was created by burning.

(C) The cutout of interest is very different to all the other internalized ones in any of the three parchment pages. Those other holes are of simpler shape, being generally ovoid and of ‘aerofoil’ cross-section. Whereas our cutaway is far more complex. Why, we must ask ourselves, is that?

(D) The singeing or ‘shadow’ is far more pronounced around our image of interest than around the other cutouts. Why? Was it purposely done to represent a ‘great’ shadow?

......

The next three examine evidence left in Fellowship text. For Tolkien, I believe, left some worded pointers too:

(E) Tolkien included, I believe, a magnificent pun. Using Gandalf’s end words - “There is nothing more.”, Tolkien slyly clued-in a double meaning. Of course we were meant to realize: ‘There is more in the nothing’ !

(F) Gandalf tells us that he did not have time to “puzzle out the last few pages”. Which, one must note, is the only use of “puzzle” or “puzzle out” in the entire The Fellowship of the Ring. Leaving the curious reader to contemplate and then discern that indeed there was a ‘puzzle’ present. In fact, I would say, left was a jigsaw puzzle where we, as the reader, were left to figure out the missing piece!

(G) An alert for the reader to be attentive is provided through Gandalf’s words. “Wait! Here is something:”

Which is then followed by an explanation “a large bold hand using an Elvish script.”

The first statement could have been a hint for the inquisitive to sit up and take notice. While the second was simply meant to be a confirming anagram, which when deciphered revealed the answer to who the last remnant of the besieged dwarves faced.

‘Plan gives us Balrog hidden in last char.’

Hmm ... so was this Tolkien’s great plan?


Surely then in deep consideration of items A to G, not withstanding pondering the image itself, the offered evidence is rather overwhelming.

Surely ‘the devil is in the detail’. And to employ a phrase Tolkien once used - surely we should be “giving the devil his due”?

Then what has been found and exposed is worth a laugh of admiration. A search for ‘The Holey Grail’ of Tolkien mysteries is at an end.

Yes - immortally resident for us:

‘In a hole in a parchment there lived a Balrog!’

Istari Savant
Points: 302 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed May 27, 2020 8:35 pm
That's an arm. He's waving at you. Probably thinks you're rude for not waving back.

Master Torturer
Points: 1 136 
Posts: 840
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 2:10 am
Welcome to the Plaza! You don't by any chance post in TheOneRing.net's "Reading Room" forum, do you? 🤔

In any event, a strikingly original contribution to the tradition of "creative" Lore theories.
Loremistress Emerita | she/her

Khazad Elder
Points: 3 057 
Posts: 2145
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2020 3:32 pm
Image

Welcome to the plaza!
Hmm, I make it out, but and
I See Things
, it is a long stretch; If only there were a whip.
The world was fair in Durin's Day

Istari Savant
Points: 302 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed May 27, 2020 8:35 pm
Oh, that's what we're talking about? I thought it was the smaller of the black smudges in the upper right.

Khazad Elder
Points: 3 057 
Posts: 2145
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2020 3:32 pm
Well, I am assuming this is the very last internal cutout, as was mentioned in Priya's post? :shrug:

I am not sure but have we interacted before Priya? :smile:
The world was fair in Durin's Day

Istari Sage
Points: 1 978 
Posts: 954
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2022 5:02 pm
You know when you're staring at a wall that has a pattern on it, or some trees in the woods, and you start seeing faces? I believe there's some scientific research that says humans are predisposed to try and see things like that in otherwise randomness in case of predators. That is, you're more likely to survive by assuming that's a Jaguar in the trees and moving away, than not, and so we're more-or-less hardwired to "see things" in the randomness. Just my take.

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Eldy Dunami & Drifa: Thank you for a warm welcome.
Drifa: Truly appreciate you posting that enlargement. Really shows off that second Moria-based ‘riddle in the dark’!

Eldy Dunami & Drifa: I don’t believe we have crossed paths before. Unless contact was made via E-mail concerning articles on my Tolkien related web-site ([email protected]). The Plaza is the only forum where I have posted. Being utterly consumed in Tolkien research, I’ve shied away from actively engaging in discussion. My father (the true inspiration behind my love for JRRT’s works) long ago posted on the Old Plaza and the Barrow Downs forum but not, I think, The One Ring venue.

Drifa: I think it would have been a feat of immense skill to incorporate a multi-thonged whip into the cutout. Possibly something which was even beyond Tolkien’s ability.

Romeran: I too am aware and astute enough to be leery of just seeing things because ‘I want to’. But it’s not just about the picture. It is those seven extra clues - that considerably strengthen this case. Also, quite importantly to my mind, several others who have no knowledge of Tolkien or his works to whom I have posed the question ‘what do they see’ - have also replied affirmatively. In particular, some have said the cutout resembles Batman - with that ‘wing’ being his cape. So I certainly am not the only one to visualize a humanoid being with ‘extra stuff’.



Gentlemen/Gentlewomen

I think that we tend to forget how much Tolkien was involved in the fields of cryptography and puzzle-creation. Extraordinarily so compared to any other author I know. From his early code letters to Father Francis, to his formal training in encryption techniques in WWI, to Michael Tolkien’s accounts of his love of puzzle creation, to the riddles in The Hobbit, to Clyde Kilby's reports of his consummate skill in crossword solving along with hints of intentionally hidden things within his works - Tolkien really possessed an arsenal of necessary skills to be the most masterful of riddlers. So I think my line of investigation is entirely legitimate and should not be lightly dismissed.

What’s needed is some time to dwell on matters. Keep staring at the cutout Is my suggestion - and keep pondering those clues I identified. But though they say ‘a picture is a worth a thousand words’, it should also be noted how intensely Tolkien was consumed in creating the forged parchments. So much so that he voiced great displeasure when they were rejected for publication on the grounds of cost. He practically begged for their inclusion - in the end beseeching to include at least one - the last one! He spent so much time on minute detail - surely he would have noticed that the last cutout (however it was created) resembled a winged humanoid creature? Surely he would have altered it if he had not wanted to convey what I have proposed? So here we have yet more evidence - tentative though it might be - that Tolkien was up to something!

For those who are open-minded enough to be convinced Tolkien was up to ‘no good’ with ‘word play’, there is a little more evidence I can produce. From The Hobbit days, the good professor certainly knew readers would try to decipher his runes. He also knew that his beloved Anglo-Saxons had left acrostics in their writings. Cynewulf was a prime example of the author embedding his own name within his writings. Tolkien then in order to emulate an ancient ‘tradition’, might have gone a step further by conjuring up a dual acrostic and anagram. If we take the first letter of each line (and figure out the missing ones) on the third parchment, we can anagrammatically form:

‘Take Mr T 4 a wag’


(In other words, we should take Tolkien for a ‘joker’ - Tolkien’s affiliation to words beginning with ‘wa ...’ per his stint at the NED is well-documented).

Was Tolkien having a good laugh at our expense then? Or is this just another case (in a long string) of pure coincidence? Who knows how cunning a wordsmith the professor truly was?

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Continuing on with the theme of an Anglo-Saxon dimension per my last post - it’s curious to note that Tolkien’s grandson Michael, who knew him better than any of us, brought up the following about his grandfather:

He loved riddles, posing puzzles and finding surprising solutions. Riddles have rules. They are an art form in Anglo-Saxon. He liked the challenge of the rules and challenging you with them.”

Where did the Anglo-Saxons get such riddles and puzzles? Had they invented them from scratch or did their origins lie much further back in history? Surely then one can deduce that the hidden ‘art form’ in one of the Mazarbul pages is a ‘surprising solution’!

What is quite revealing is that Tolkien singled out ‘Gandalf’ as being intricately involved in conveying a riddle and its answer.

“But like Gandalf he'd often triumph by telling you there were ways of bypassing the rules without necessarily breaking them.”

Hmm ... I detect there is something devious about Tolkien’s personality/psyche from this. In any case it is Gandalf who is key. Surely then, Gandalf’s speech: “there is nothing more” & “there is no time to puzzle out ...” along with the deciphered anagram “plan gives us Balrog hidden in last char” - are ways of ‘bypassing the rules without necessarily breaking them’ ?

So when Clyde Kilby, who again met and spent a summer with Tolkien, related that

“if I would hold it confidential, he would put more under my hat than he had ever told anyone.”

Doesn’t that make you wonder what Tolkien had been up to with his published works?
Doesn’t that make you wonder what he may have hidden inside?

Was the image then - a continuation of a ‘riddles in the dark’ theme? Where quite obviously the missing part of the cutout (supposedly burnt black) was left for us to puzzle out. Just like the Gates of Mazarbul picture (originally meant to have the writing as white against a black background) was technically a ‘riddle in the dark’ - could the Balrog image in the cutout meant to have been one too?

⭐️

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
The theme of ‘riddles in the dark’ was one that I contend - was never far off from Tolkien’s thoughts. Several who knew of his habits better than any of us (including Clyde Kilby & Humphrey Carpenter) tell us how fixated he was with doing the crossword. And what else, we must ask ourselves, is the solving of the white squares on a black ground - but multiple ‘riddles in the dark’ ! Perhaps such symbolism has escaped many of us - but not Tolkien, I would have thought.


Image

What we must also recognize is that cutouts were used in medieval times to cunningly display images. It was part of European historic roots. Perhaps Tolkien knew it? The parchment below dates from the 9th century, and remarkably, for us, reveals a monster! Perhaps a Balrog in a cutout is not so strange then?


Image

Loremaster of the Herd
Points: 1 555 
Posts: 955
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:18 am
@Priya I want you to know that I love this all so much — even if it does have something of an air of hunting for the illuminati about it.
In the deeps of Time, amidst the Innumerable Stars

Melkor
Melkor
Points: 1 560 
Posts: 1043
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 2:40 am
I always did find it unrealistic that the balrogs sped over from angband to the lammoth like The Flash to save Melkor. Unless Ungoliant was a big food prep spider and was planning on making brisket out of Melkor

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Androthelm - Thank you for your kind and encouraging remark. Illuminati might be a stretch but hopefully in posts to come I will illuminate more on a rarely discussed angle - with some new and intriguing insights - which just might make you vigorously scratch your head and wonder!

The Elf Imperishable - Yes, I quite agree. I prefer to use logic when it comes to journeys, to fill in the missing information, in the manner Tolkien himself recommended. And who of us can argue with his philosophy?

When it came to a reader (Letter #268) asking whether Shadowfax had accompanied Gandalf to the Havens, Tolkien basically said use ‘logic’:

“many facts that some enquirer would like to know are omitted, and the truth has to be discovered or guessed from such evidence as there is”.

So when it comes to the Balrog’s passage across Hithlum - with the destination (Lammoth) being hundreds of miles away (from Angband) - a solid approach is that the reader employs Tolkien’s own approach!

As there were multiple mountain ranges to overcome, plus with some of the terrain having a reputation for being misty - it doesn’t appear feasible to accomplish a traversal rapidly by running. Aerially the Balrogs had a much better chance of homing in on Morgoth’s great cry and the subsequent echoes. So when Tolkien updated the account (LQ II) after TLotR to state the feat was done: “with winged speed” - I believe that by then, having already equipped Durin’s Bane with corporeal wings - Tolkien wished to convey that flying was the particular mode of locomotion taken of the two available. For clearly Balrogs could run - yet he wanted to make it clear the rescue wasn’t made ‘with footed speed’.

.......

However, the main thing I want to discuss for this post is the darker region or ‘shadow’ that surrounds the cutout. One must note that it completely surrounds the corporeal ‘core’ form including the ‘wing’.

Does that make sense?

I think so. It seems improbable that Tolkien would have created a creature which only partially had its body surrounded by shadow. Besides, the shadow appears to have been large:

“It was like a great shadow in the middle of which was a dark form”

So then, when the text stated:

“and the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings”,

surely the reader is entitled to wonder why the spread shadow took the shape of ‘wings’ ?
And why the number two?

Why not: ‘like a vast storm cloud’?
Or: ‘like nine coiling tentacles’?
Or: ‘like multiple groping arms’?
etc. etc.

One then might infer that the ‘two’ and the ‘wings shape’ had purpose.
Don’t you think Tolkien, who was such a pedant, thought carefully about his unique creation and the right words to use to describe it?

So then, perhaps two smaller corporeal wings lay within the two vast shadow wings?
Had this then been intentionally left for us as another ‘riddle in the dark’?

If we look back earlier in the text, Tolkien told us there was more to the Balrog’s core than just a human shape. What did Tolkien mean by:

“in the middle of which was a dark form, of man-shape maybe, yet greater

What did he mean by ‘yet greater’? Clearly he wasn’t referring to the shadow.
And it seems unlikely that he was alluding to armament. And grammatically ‘larger’ doesn’t substitute for ‘greater’, because it’s the Balrog’s core ‘shape’ that is the subject matter.

To me, Tolkien has already hinted that there was more to the core than a basic humanoid form. There was something extra present. A pair of folded wings perhaps?

Can anyone think of what else Tolkien might have meant by ‘yet greater’ ?

In any case - the Mazarbul parchment cutout has certainly firmed up my opinion that the Balrog indeed possessed corporeal wings!

Arien
Arien
Points: 2 267 
Posts: 1848
Joined: Thu May 07, 2020 8:56 pm
I’m hugely enjoying this :lol:

Let’s play along: why would you say greater wouldn’t refer to size? And greater might easily refer to “more powerful” as well. Where else does Tolkien use the word Great? Let me see - there are the Great Eagles, but that doesn’t help hugely, as Eagles both great and ordinary have wings anyway. Then there are the Great Tales, which aren’t necessarily longer than ordinary tales, but more significant and meaningful. There’s also the Great Plague, which has the same kind of connotations in my mind.
cave anserem
Image

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Silky Gooseness - Thank you for your kind compliment. Hopefully, others find the topic interesting too. Fortunately, I believe, there are some intriguing eye-openers to come.

As to “of man-shape maybe, yet greater” - I’m not an expert in English grammar, but to me given the presence of a comma before the “yet greater” (as well as the “yet”) indicates that the “yet greater” is an aside to the “man-shape” and is a directly related ‘qualification’ to it.

The key part of the two word hyphenation is shape’. Thus, ‘larger’ than “man-shape” doesn’t make grammatical sense in this situation. Neither would ‘more powerful’ be contextually appropriate. At least that is how I read things.

......

Now in a previous post I quoted Tolkien’s grandson who provided some remarkable insight into how ‘passionate’ Tolkien Sr. was when it came to riddles and puzzles. From Michael Tolkien’s autobiographical lecture, once again:

“He loved riddles, posing puzzles and finding surprising solutions. Riddles have rules. ... He liked the challenge of the rules and challenging you with them. But like Gandalf he'd often triumph by telling you there were ways of bypassing the rules without necessarily breaking them.”

It’s hard not to believe that such games were played with some of his other grandchildren as well as his own offspring. Was this habitual to his thought process? Possibly so - even probably so! But what I want to focus on is Gandalf, and his role in riddles.

Why Gandalf? Surely the wizard was one on the noblest, truest and most honest of characters in the whole tale. But maybe not?

So then - how exactly did Gandalf bypass the rules?
Surely the Moria gate riddle wasn’t a case where rules were circumvented?

The Moria Gate writing constituted a straightforward instruction - deemed in the story to be a puzzle that eventually Gandalf ‘decoded’. And a puzzle in the loosest sense. For all that was needed was to guess a password. To my mind there was no rule sidestepping here. For it would stretch my imagination to reconcile this as an incident that Michael Tolkien might have been indirectly referring back to.

But was there another occasion which might yield fruitful results? Other than of course, his deceptive words regarding the Mazarbul manuscript which I have already exposed.

Hmm ... indeed there is!

After Gandalf’s return from his fight with the Balrog, the wizard is accused by Aragorn of deception:

“you still speak in riddles”.

His answer was an emphatic denial.

“What? In riddles? ... No!”

Was Gandalf telling a little ‘white’ lie here, or perhaps built in was an underlying undiscovered subtlety? So could this have been a situation where the wizard was “bypassing the rules”?

Hmm ... to “speak in riddles”. That should get us thinking! Then was part of Gandalf’s speech a riddle? Hidden within his reply was there something covert?

It’s at this point that I want to emphasize that there are very few ways that one can hide a secretive message or code within a text without making it obvious.

‘Ugh’ - I can sense your reaction.
‘Rearranging letters - not another anagram’ - I can hear you groan.

But for now I want to you bury such thoughts. There maybe a very good reason for Tolkien using such a technique. And besides there are some methods available to test for legitimacy - which will be discussed and deferred to another post.

So back to Gandalf’s reply. Quite remarkably rearrangement of “What? In riddles? ... No!” gives us:


Ronald T! I hid news??



Hmm ... isn’t this crazy? Did Tolkien really hide something? Did he ask us to think long and hard about it?

Then what on earth was this news? And where was it hidden?

Well ... We shall soon see ...

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Some Plaza folk will still be leery of the ‘Balrog Image’. Naturally, ‘wing’ predispositions are hard to shed. I certainly have an uphill struggle to change ingrained views.

But who knows? Perhaps some supplementary evidence will convince. I have some more to offer after this post - but what I want right now - is to ask the reader to consider the ‘image’ as part of a set of circumstantial evidence. There is more to ponder-over than just those two conundrum-like phrases:

“and the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings”

“and its wings were spread from wall to wall”


Being separated by two paragraphs - one cannot grammatically prove the second mention of wings is conjugal to the first. It could be - but there again - it might not be. In any case - as I have argued in a previous post - even if Tolkien had meant the second ‘wings’ mention to be wings of shadow - even then the Balrog could still have possessed a set of corporeal wings.

Exasperating isn’t it?

In order to help solidify views - I want to turn back to The Elf Imperishable’s views on the ‘Hithlum journey’. Once again, I recommend that a better approach is that the reader uses Tolkien’s own philosophy for filling in the gaps to journeys.

So similarly for Gandalf and the Balrog:

How did Gandalf, who was so vulnerable in human form, survive the water impact at the end of the abyss? Water should have acted like concrete after such a long fall.

Deus ex machina ? - A bit early for that - don’t’ you think!
A spell, perhaps? - Doubtful I deem. There is no evidence Gandalf’s magic could defy gravity!
But did he turn his cloak into the world’s first parachute - lol.

How then?

Perhaps the Balrog was corporeally winged then, and Gandalf held on to it? Perhaps it managed to regain some control after its initial plunge, such that a reasonably soft splashdown resulted? Seems the most reasonable explanation to me.

Then we also have the journey up the Endless Stair in Gandalf’s superhuman chase.
We know Gandalf caught up to the Balrog at the summit and ‘summoned’ weather that simply wasn’t conducive to flying:

“Ice fell like rain.”

But why did the Balrog choose to climb the staircase in the first place?
To look at the view? Or perhaps it finally had an urge to engage in some outdoor activities - lol? Yet there’s no mention of the creature carrying mountaineering gear or a pair of skis!

So more likely is the tower served as the last available exit from Moria. Seems to me that a logical reason for the climb was to spread corporeal wings and soar away, in a last ditch attempt to flee from a more powerful foe. But Gandalf catching up and forcing a confrontation prevented it stretching and preparing those seldom used appendages.

Overall - my view, given an Occam’s razor approach, is that an existence of corporeal wings is the simplest solution that solves the mysteries behind all 3 of those journeys!

———————————

So back to the little quest: Ronald T! I hid news??

In order to advance - we need to ponder on the embellishments to Gandalf’s and Tolkien’s monograms. In particular the significance of ‘dots’ ....

Chief Counsellor of Gondor
Points: 2 090 
Posts: 997
Joined: Fri May 29, 2020 3:09 am
Hello, Priya. I don't know, it seems to me possible that when Gandalf reveals his true nature before his fall, that was in a way of unveiling, or uncloaking his true power:

"You cannot pass," he said. The orcs stood still, and a dead silence fell. "I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor. You cannot pass. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udun. Go back to the Shadow! You cannot pass." (The Fellowship of the Ring: The Bridge of Khazad-dum)

We know the Istari were forbidden from matching Sauron's power, with their own power, hence appearing in the forms of old men. However, in the confrontation against the Balrog, he is breaking that rule. By announcing himself as a "servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor" he is breaking the rule and revealing his true nature. That's just my interpretation though, for Gandalf not only being able to survive the fall, but the flames (he says he was burned as well), and surviving the battle of the Peak in general, until he defeated his enemy.
A Loquacious Loreman.
he/him
Tis the season of Sean Bean prequel shows

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Hi Boromir88 - Glad to have you join the conversation.

When it comes to Gandalf’s battle with Durin’s Bane, my understanding is that the wizard broke no ‘Rules’. Tolkien makes no mention of his defiant words on the bridge (or his display of power) breaking or bypassing any ‘Rules’. In fact the act of self-sacrifice, to give the remaining Fellowship a chance to rid the world of Sauron, actually conformed to the Rules. At least that is my interpretation of what Tolkien wrote in Letter #156 (see my underlining below):

“it was for him a sacrifice to perish on the Bridge in defence of his companions, less perhaps than for a mortal Man or Hobbit, since he had a far greater inner power than they; but also more, since it was a humbling and abnegation of himself in conformity to 'the Rules':”

It seems to me that Eru accepted Gandalf’s oral and physical actions in their entirety; thus allowing to return from death.

But let’s talk a little bit more about ‘Rules’ in regard to Gandalf and the Balrog. For I have been pondering whether Michael Tolkien, in his autobiographical lecture, might have taken that encounter as the basis for his remarks:

¶19 He loved riddles, posing puzzles and finding surprising solutions. Riddles have rules. They are an art form in Anglo-Saxon. He liked the challenge of the rules and challenging you with them. But like Gandalf he'd often triumph by telling you there were ways of bypassing the rules without necessarily breaking them. His talk about words and their origins was often like this.

I’m sure you’ll agree that the ‘Rules for riddles’ are quite different from the ‘Rules by which Gandalf was constrained’.

These are ‘apples’ and ‘oranges’ to us and I’m sure to Tolkien Sr. himself. I doubt very much that the professor would have made and mixed in comparisons on these quite different types of Rules to his grandson when playing riddling games. If we carefully read Michael Tolkien’s account, the subjects of this particular paragraph are ‘riddles and puzzles’. Thus I find it unlikely that Tolkien would have embroiled more serious ‘higher matters’ - which, one might note, he barely alluded to or explained in detail in the ‘trilogy’ itself.

Besides - I do not view the wizard’s battle with the Balrog as necessarily a ‘triumph’. The plan failed - and was only put back on course by the intrusion of a higher Authority - namely Eru. Neither Manwe or Gandalf had foresight that this would happen. Certainly the final outcome was not engineered by Gandalf. Thus, this doesn’t align well with Michael Tolkien’s statement about Gandalf’s triumph.

After all this, I’m still inclined to think that Gandalf had another side to him that we are all unaware of. And with that I want to turn to the wizard’ signature.


—————



Within the text of TLotR we have only one affirmative example of a monogrammatic signature. It’s observable that it pertains to Gandalf. The wizard’s runic logo/monogram - call it what you will - at first sight looks unremarkable and appears understandable. But is it?


Image



Certainly the rune is fully explained. But it is not the G-rune which makes the signature special. For that could apply to anyone with G in their forename or surname. What identifies it as specifically Gandalf’s Mark - are the dots.

Most curiously there are four of them and they are arranged in a specific ‘diamond’ pattern.

Why?

Tolkien, I have become accustomed to believe, never did anything without a reason? Then does anybody else know why?

Dots, we know, played an important part in his life. In the Somme he communicated his whereabouts in letters to Edith via a secret code of dots. And then we know as a Signals Officer he’s was taught to use The Morse Code - a system of dots and dashes.

It is quite possible that he was aware that an anagram of:

The Morse Code


is:

Here come dots !



So dots were something, one might assume, as important and significant. So much so, that at some stage they were incorporated into his monogram.


Image


Hmm ... four dots arranged in the same pattern as Gandalf’s. This time twice over. And we can’t dismiss this as just a post TLotR design because two sets of four ‘diamond shape positioned dots’ bridging his initials had appeared in art work as early as 1913. Then Gandalf and Tolkien appear to have an affinity (beyond the obvious), don’t you think?

But what does it all mean?

And how does this help us find the ‘hidden news’?

More to come ....

Arien
Arien
Points: 2 267 
Posts: 1848
Joined: Thu May 07, 2020 8:56 pm
@Priya, I believe the four dots represent Morse code. Morse Code began to be used in WW1 around this time so it’s not unlikely Tolkien would’ve known of it. Four dots represent, of course, H, so hidden amongst Tolkien’s symbol are the initials “HH”. This is surely a reference to Harry Houdini and are a sly joke regarding Gandalf’s upcoming escape and of Tolkien himself breaking free from the established myth to build something new.
cave anserem
Image

Khazad Elder
Points: 3 057 
Posts: 2145
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2020 3:32 pm
Was Tolkien a fan of Houdini?

This is interesting. They have some old artwork. But, they spelled Tolkien's name wrong. :googly:

The JRR Tolkien Logo explanation - Fun facts monogram drawing
The world was fair in Durin's Day

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Hello Silky Gooseness. Thanks for an interesting idea. Not sure whether ‘Harry Houdini’ was tongue-in-cheek. But yes, the dot symbols may have something do with The Morse Code - though some might view my offering - as a stretch!

And also Drifa - thank you too. For years I’ve looked for reasonable and plausible ideas explaining the monograms. I just haven’t found any which are that compelling. So I came up with my own.

———


To me, Tolkien’s monogram is just a puzzle. A basic puzzle with a riddling twist maybe - but nonetheless it’s undoubtedly a puzzle. Who can argue with that? For, of course, each overlayed initial stands for one of his four names. And we are left to figure the answers out. But not everybody, perhaps even some fans, might be familiar with all of them - or the history behind them. However, to Tolkien - I believe, these initials were a fairly important part of his internal ‘make up’.

JIRT - rhyming with ‘dirt’ was a nickname used by some of his friends. To others he was known as JR squared. It is beyond interesting to note that Humphrey Carpenter in his biography emphasized how:

“To those not so close ... he was often known as ‘J.R.R.T.’ Perhaps in the end it was those four initials that seemed the best representation of the man.”


Then if the initials were that important - don’t you think the dots might be too?

So back to contemplating on them.

Who out of any of us - have not played ‘join the dots’. One of the most basic of all puzzles, many of us encounter them straight after learning our numbers. So naturally the urge is within us to join them up. Well maybe Tolkien would have expected us to do so. But there are no numbers assigned to guide us. Then how?

By making a diamond shape?

But what significance would that have had to Tolkien? Besides if we were to do that with Gandalf’s signature - it would cut into the rune. That doesn’t make sense!

Alternatively if we were to join the dots in a horizontal and vertical fashion - at least we can make some kind of logical case for the ensuing pattern(s). And to boot - The Morse Code for two dots is simply an ‘I’ - which would compel us to join the four dots (of each set) both horizontally and vertically.

For Tolkien’s monogram:

We end up with two separated crosses. And if we draw an imaginary line joining the theoretical mid node of each cross - remarkably we end up bisecting the ‘heart’ of his four initials. That is a significant observation, I feel. Precise dot positioning was designed in - one might presume!

So this is what I believe.

Tolkien’s monogram encapsulated the very essence and spirit of the man. The two ‘encoded’ crosses signified the two things that were the most important drivers and loves in his life. No, he needn’t symbolize family - because we all have family, and they are at the top of everyone’s list. But it was these two other things that moved him beyond anything else. So these were:

Firstly Christianity - whose most famous symbol is undeniably the Cross upon which Jesus was crucified.
And secondly England - that country symbolized with the cross on the Flag of St. George.

The mini flame, of course, emphasized his spirit/soul (the ‘secret fire’ that burned within him) was encapsulated by his initials and bound to the ‘hidden code’ of the crosses.

Gandalf’s monogram dots too, in my opinion, symbolized much the same.

We must remember that Tolkien wrote in Letter #131:

“... the religious element was absorbed into the story and the symbolism.”


This is aptly, one of three ways (the others will be revealed in a forthcoming thread) that Tolkien included cross imagery in the novel. For I think that he deliberately decided to provide pointers that foreshadowed our real world’s great salvation history to come. In Letter #147:

“... long ago certain truths and modes ... were discovered and must always reappear.”


And secondly - Gandalf (as a kind of guardian angel), held the Shire (and its inhabitants) specially in his mind. This representation of ancient England and its peoples would also be aptly represented by a foreshadowing St. George type cross.


———



Hmm ... a lot to ponder on, I know.

But how does all of this fit into our little quest to discover what Tolkien may have ‘encoded’ within the book? What had he hidden via:

Ronald T! I hid news??


Well the astute might have noticed that what has been uncovered so far is a ‘Jigsaw’ riddle (understanding the missing part of the Mazarbul manuscript), followed by a ‘Rearrangement’ riddle.

Admittedly we have precious little to work with - so we are left with little choice but to use the few clues available. The Jigsaw riddle - is a riddle in the dark (the image has been burnt away). While the Rearrangement riddle (of ‘What? In riddles? ... No!) was made from speech during daylight.

Hmm ... that should get us thinking about ‘riddles in the dark’ - a hit theme of The Hobbit and a linking theme to TLotR !

What we have then is a: ‘J’ for a Jigsaw riddle and a reverse ‘R’ for a Rearrangement riddle ‘in the light’.

Precious few clues I know. But if we think about it, there are very few ways an author can hide things within a document and convince the inquisitive reader that indeed he/she was on the right discovery track. Perhaps Tolkien really was the Master Riddler! Perhaps ‘JRRT’ was his stamp of authority!

So just maybe contemplating on the JRRT monogram has helped. Using that logic, having uncovered the ‘J’ and the reverse ‘R’, at least we know that it is probable, the next step in the quest is to find another Rearrangement riddle. This time, as the next letter in the signature sequence, it would have to be a ‘riddle in the dark’. More than likely it would involve Gandalf. And it would be further along in the novel from Gandalf’s uncovered riddling statement: “What? In Riddles? ... No!”.

Like it or not - this is all we have to find the hidden ‘news’.

But where? Where, oh where?

I realize some might be getting impatient? Time is not on my side.

Or is it ???



To be continued .....

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Enough of chasing encrypted stuff for the moment. What I’d like to discuss in this post is a couple of rarely (if ever) remarked upon points about Tolkien’s terrible demon.

—————

I’ve already touched on the Balrog’s shadow in a previous post. But what I haven’t emphasized: is it’s three dimensional form.

Clearly the shadow entirely surrounded the creature. Clearly it wasn’t ‘flat’, like a 2D cast one, and certainly it extended beyond its corporeal ‘flesh and blood’ physique.

“It came to the edge of the fire and the light faded as if a cloud had bent over it.”

“From out of the shadow a red sword leaped flaming.”


It appears to have been conceived as an innate part of its being, and it could grow or diminish according to its mood or will. But it appears that this ‘shadow’ - that really wasn’t one in the conventional sense - was more an aura of darkness imbued with a ‘will’ that had the effect of projecting fear. Yet one might deduce that Tolkien’s overriding purpose was for the substance to visually obscure the creature’s body. After all, if you don’t know what your enemy completely looks like - how can you exploit any weaknesses? And really, that lack of knowledge induces fear itself.

So given that supposition, what reason would the Balrog have had to form a pair of 3 dimensional wing ‘structures’? For 3D they must have been - and two vast ones at that! Surely not just to intimidate? Or perhaps Plaza folk can think of others?

Don’t you think that Tolkien felt that having given his creation a vast shadow purposely surrounding its man-shape core, that two vast wing-shaped 3D shadow structures would be necessary to surround much smaller corporeal wings?

————


So with that we ought to look favorably at those ‘wings’ being spread from wall to wall across the chasm being ‘structures’ of shadow - containing physical material within. Nonetheless, we really do not possess any dimensions as to Tolkien’s idea of ‘vast’.

Was it 25 ft, 50 ft? Or was it as much as a 100 ft? Well - more or less? Who knows!

Still, a frequent argument used against corporeal wings: that the wings that were spread from wall to wall were too large to have been corporeal - really doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Not after we conduct a reasonable analysis of the surroundings. And that is what I briefly want to pass along.

Firstly, we need to understand what shape Tolkien gave the opening into which the Balrog fell. He called it a chasm and a gulf. But most importantly a ‘pit’.

“The Company stood rooted with horror staring into the pit.”

One can reasonably deduce then that it was just an irregular shaped hole which was a naturally occurring feature - run across by the Dwarves during their early excavations in Old Moria.

Once we deduce that, knowing that the dwarves did little to shape it (apart from perhaps smoothing the side walls above it), it becomes obvious that this chasm must have been a very local feature, visible in its entire extent, at the end of a very long hall.

So really it’s absurd that such a natural feature would have dictated the entire width of the 2nd Hall.

Indeed, that is totally ludicrous!

In other words the chasm, though legitimately large enough to be part of the 2nd Hall, may well have possessed side walls which were narrower than the walls of the majority of the hall. These logically should have blended or dog-legged into each other at the discontinuity.

Then, the next consideration is to understand its location. Was the ‘pit’ located centrally relative to the main hall sidewalls? Or was it skewed over to one side?

If we look critically at the text, the most likely location of the abyss is towards the left hand side of the main hall - down the side which the Fellowship fled. There is no evidence the Company crossed any of the two lines of pillars that divided the Hall in two - in their run to the Bridge. Nor is there any evidence the huge pillars obscured the enemy when the Fellowship looked back while on the Bridge or before they crossed over it. We don’t hear of any enemy arrows bouncing off the pillars - indeed they appear to form no kind of obstruction whatsoever. So, to me, it’s unlikely that Tolkien envisaged the pit as ‘centrally’ sited with respect to the main hall side walls. Then given the scant evidence that we have, the location of the chasm is, in my opinion, towards the left hand side of the main hall side walls.

How wide the chasm was (and thus the distance between its sidewalls) cannot be textually determined. But I deduce that its width was narrower than that between the main hall walls. Not everyone will agree. But nevertheless - the possibility most definitely exists. So given all that has been relayed - it’s impossible to convincingly use the argument that the Balrog’s wings must have been ‘shadow’ because the distance across the chasm ‘must’ have been enormous. That simply doesn’t ‘fly’!

————


Finally - my next post - I will reveal the textual location of the encryption!

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Turning back to the anagrammatic rearrangement from a few posts ago:

RONALD T! I HID NEWS??


One ought to ask - is this just a silly quest? Is it all a matter of sheer coincidence?
I’m sure those thoughts are going through your minds - as, of course, they went through mine.

But don’t you think that would mean a tremendous string of coincidences with what’s come to light so far?

Also as a counter, we know Tolkien was versed in cryptographic techniques way beyond the ordinary. He was definitely familiar with the cryptic nature of works by Arthur Conan Doyle. Almost certainly he had vetted The White Company which, as a chaperone, he allowed two Mexican minors to read during a visit to France in 1913. And then we are told that Conan Doyle’s books (those featuring Sherlock Holmes) were among the most popular to be borrowed by students at King Edward’s in Birmingham.

So - such knowledge and accompanying techniques had been ‘infused into his blood’ from early years, and I feel, was necessarily - almost reflexively included into his magnus opus.


“It is written in my life-blood, such that it is, thick or thin; ...”. (Letter #109)



The trouble is - right now we are faced with a double dilemma: both solving a puzzle, and one whose location first needs to be tracked down.


———-




Maybe some of you have already figured out where it’s textually located? It took me quite a while. Cogitating over many weeks - led me to conclude that this was going to take time.

And then something clicked. Perhaps Tolkien wanted us to take the ‘time’ Gandalf didn’t have in initially figuring out the Balrog Image? And perhaps even more ‘time’ for others?

“ ... there is no time to puzzle out the last few pages.”


For it’s time that we have, but he didn’t.

Hmm ... ‘time’ - curiously the answer to a ‘riddle in the dark’ in The Hobbit. And we know, Tolkien made ‘riddles in the dark’ a linking theme to TLotR (see Chapter: The Shadow of the Past in The Fellowship of the Ring).

With that thought, we ought to search for a sentence with ‘time’ in it. Logically, as Gandalf has been key in this investigation, it would likely be speech by the wizard and be forward in the text from the last revealed anagram.

Surely, if all of this rotated around Tolkien’s ‘fabulous’ invention: the Balrog - then the speech would have to be about Gandalf’s battle with the creature. What exactly happened on the way down in the dark of the abyss? How did Gandalf survive? Surely that, for us, is a ‘riddle in the dark’?

The information is pretty scant. But Tolkien would undoubtedly have left clues. Perhaps in Sherlock Holmes style. The text would have to be carefully combed. Double meanings would have to be sought.


From The Two Towers:

Time is short. But if there were a year to spend, I would not tell you all.” ...

“Long time I fell,” ... “Long I fell, and he fell with me. His fire was about me. I was burned. ...” ...

“We fought far under the living earth, where time is not counted. ...”.


Hmm ... with three occurrences of ‘time’, this cluster was suspicious. It was possible that the general location had been uncovered.

Now Tolkien had Gandalf practically repeat “Long time I fell,”.
But purposely he omitted ‘time’. Why ... the inquisitive cryptologist might ask himself?

Hmm ... which sentence is ‘short’ of ‘time’? Which sentence can we not ‘count’ ‘time’?

Even the most amateur of sleuths can only conclude that - there is just one!

LONG I FELL AND HE FELL WITH ME


OK... surely this it! But if this truly was our sentence to be rearranged - what ‘hidden news’ would it reveal?

.... to be continued very shortly

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
One thing that might clue us into whether our selected sentence:

LONG I FELL, AND HE FELL WITH ME

has been deliberately contrived with a secondary motive in mind - is the drafts Christopher Tolkien provided us.

In The Treason of Isengard, Christopher Tolkien points out that this is precisely when Tolkien Sr. halted his draft chapter, and of course - it’s when our conjectured riddling evidence begins:

“How my father ended ‘The White Rider’ ... is not entirely clear ... it seems probable that he stopped at Gandalf’s words of the Balrog ... ‘Name him not!’: ‘and for a moment it seemed that a cloud of pain passed over his face, and he sat silent, looking old as death.’”.

Hmm ... guess what comes next!

Yes: “Long time I fell.” ....

Hmm ... don’t you think that is kind of suspicious? Another coincidence then? How many coincidences are we going to suffer - before we capitulate and acknowledge something clandestine could have been afoot?

So it seems to me that something triggered Tolkien to halt right there. Perhaps at this juncture he was contemplating how to fit in the third riddle and second anagram?

We will probably never know for sure, but if he had - this ‘wild goose chase’ that has been embarked upon - does seem to be something Tolkien could well have dreamt up. Clearly he had a formidable arsenal of cryptic techniques at his fingertips along with the necessary skill to both invent and clandestinely hide riddles. So perhaps we should not be so surprised if ‘stuff’ has been secretly hidden within his opus. At this point, I’m reminded of what Clyde Kilby relayed when Tolkien offered up:

“... if I would hold it confidential, he would ‘put more under my hat’ than he had ever told anyone.”

Unfortunately Kilby also related:

“... any discussion of his most deeply private world was simply impossible for him.”

These statements are interesting in that they were made in 1966. And if Tolkien indeed told the truth (there really is no reason to doubt him, or Kilby’ account) then nobody knew of the true depths of TLotR - not even his son and chief collaborator, Christopher. That’s how secretive Tolkien Sr. could be!


———



So turning back to the deduced sentence of interest:

LONG I FELL, AND HE FELL WITH ME


What news would Tolkien have wanted to tell us? Surely it would have been related to happenings in the abyss. With that logic the sentence rearranged yields the following:

MINE HOLE FALL, HELD LEFT WING


Isn’t that astonishing! Even astounding?

So, if this is true, Tolkien told us that Gandalf held a physical wing - and so that’s why they eventually fell together. Perhaps the wings weren’t on fire (there is no evidence they were) and relatively cool compared to the creature’s body? Is that how the wizard escaped incineration?

But Tolkien, I postulate, was far cleverer than any of us. Indeed in a wholly different league!
So adept was he at word play and letter manipulation - that he left us a dual solution - just so that we would be absolutely sure. Congratulations, would of course be in order to the solver!

WELL DONE, MINE FALL FLIGHT EH


So there we are! We were told the Balrog didn’t just plunge. There was another phase to the journey down. That’s why the fall didn’t result in Gandalf’s death. Perhaps an unbalanced Balrog finally managed to gain some measure of control such that a reasonably soft landing occurred. Is that the conclusion we were meant to come to? Did Tolkien tell us to put our thinking hats on and logically figure out what must have happened?

‘Bah anagrams!’, I can already sense the reaction.
‘But one can make a lot of things out of those letters’, I can hear you complain. And rightfully so.

But to address the validity of the presented ‘solutions’ - there are a number of tests that can be conducted.

... And that is what will follow!

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
So I have a feeling that some of the readers at the inception of this thread - expected this all to turn into a kind of hoax. But as shown - the clues are there, the taken paths are logical and they lead to a somewhat bemusing conclusion. Like it or not, the ‘solutions’ to a set of puzzles do exist.

Of course we can choose to believe or not. Yes, some folk will utterly dislike them and claim it all to be a matter of coincidence. And no matter how I portray the evidence - it will be dismissed, even maybe with scorn. But the intent was never to try and convince everybody; it was only to get get some head scratching and bemusement among those who possess some flexibility to their nature.

Now as to the anagrams - of course they need to be attacked. Nobody in their senses should immediately capitulate and agree with them without due consideration. It would be right to treat them with suspicion.

I’m not going to any great length to try and pull them apart - because there are many methods, and frankly it would bore most of us. So - I’m only going to touch on two.

(1) Take just my last anagram-laden sentence: LONG I FELL, AND HE FELL WITH ME

Note how short each of the words are - and how easy it would have been for Tolkien to contrive this with an anagram in mind.

However, using Anagram solver software, with the premise of no repetition of the original words - nothing of ‘substance’ can be formed from its sister sentence.

LONG TIME I FELL

which is made up of equally short words.


(2) Of the presented solutions,

MINE HOLE FALL, HELD LEFT WING
WELL DONE, MINE FALL FLIGHT EH

Note how situationally they align with Gandalf’s story. Fluke or not?
Well of the two anagrams, clearly WING and FLIGHT are the most important words to us.

Given the 24 letters in Gandalf’s ‘crucial’ sentence - one might wonder how common would it be to form such meaningful anagrammatic arrangements from other portions of Gandalf’s speech. That would be a reasonable test.

In such an exercise - I decided to take the first 100 of Gandalf’s spoken sentences in The Fellowship of the Ring which were between 20 and 32 letters in length (the average working out to be 25 (which is reasonably close to my aim of 24, yet results in a slightly conservative evaluation).

To cut to the chase - only TWO sentences allowed for the formation of both WING and FLIGHT. Yes a mere 2 percent. And none of those two, using Anagram solver software, allowed for formation of anything meaningful such as:

MINE HOLE FALL, HELD LEFT WING
WELL DONE FLIGHT IN FALL, EH

What does that tell us?

I can only conclude that if the anagrams were not contrived - then it’s an incredible coincidence. A fluke of all flukes!

———————


Coming up - Now that we have the ‘J’, ‘R’, ‘R’ - what about the ‘T’ ?

Khazad Elder
Points: 3 057 
Posts: 2145
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2020 3:32 pm
Welcome back, Priya! I have been reading your posts from the beginning and enjoy them all very much. I look forward to seeing what you come up with regarding the 'T' .
The world was fair in Durin's Day

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Drifa - Thank you so much. I’m much encouraged by your continued interest!

Getting back to the ‘quest’.

“This is madness! Utter and total madness!”, I can imagine some readers actively grumble.
“Tolkien, may have enjoyed riddling - but he would never have gone so far”.

Those maybe some of your thoughts, but there again we must ask ourselves - do any of us really fully know Tolkien’s mind. Yes, we have many of his letters and an official biography - but in reality they just skim the surface. There was, we must admit, so much more to the man.

We know that Tolkien could not possibly have revealed his monogram-based encoding to the public at large because the first letter (‘J’) was ‘lost’ with the publisher’s refusal to print the Mazarbul facsimiles. In any case - full disclosure would have destroyed the inner consistency of reality to his sub-created world. This would have been a disaster - a step too far.

So then - why, we must ask ourselves, why would Tolkien have done such a thing? Although we are well aware of his riddling skills and his Army training in cryptographic techniques - we are perhaps less cognizant of his nature to ‘self-amuse’. Could it be that his purpose lay in ‘self amusement’?

Tolkien once humorously wrote: “I am a very serious person and cannot distinguish between private amusement and duty”. And “I only work for private amusement, since I find my duties privately amusing.”

And, believe it or not - there is evidence that (I have yet to produce) that the Professor embedded in some of his works quite a bit of hilarious parody. And he was not prepared to reveal it to anybody - even to his closest confidantes. One day, if I can get round to it, I will try and relay how I believe ‘The Troll Song’ (in its original form) made fun of Elizabethans: William Shakespeare, John Heywood and Thomas Heywood. While the names of the Trolls: Bill, Bert and Tom in The Hobbit parodied William Shakespeare, Robert Greene and Thomas Nashe from the ‘Upstart Crow’ controversy - which also happened in Elizabethan times. But that is to come. For now I need to return to the ‘T’ of ‘JRRT’.
——————
Now what would the ‘T’ have been about? That’s the first dilemma we face.

It’s at this point, we need to take a step back and ponder on Tolkien’s probable intent. We need to chew on the main focus of the clues uncovered so far. Which, it seems to me, predominantly revolve around the ‘Balrog’ and the theme of ‘Riddles in the Dark’. Naturally then, Tolkien’s unique creation and its ‘dark’ side ought to be our focus.

What else then - would the reader want to know about Tolkien’s fearsome but fabulous invention? Certainly one isn’t able to trot off down to the local public library and find out more. No encyclopedia is able to help. Right now, only the text offers up potential for covert information being surreptitiously buried.

Once again - what would we really like to know? If given the option, what would we have liked to ask Tolkien about a creature named by John Mullan in The Guardian (2010) as one of the 10 best literary monsters?

Some might wonder whether there were female Balrogs, and could they reproduce?
Others might want to know whether Balrogs ate coal for breakfast?
Or, if under their long manes, they had pointy ears?

Joking aside - I think the majority of us would want to know how big they were?

More specifically how tall was the fully erect physical flesh and blood form of Durin’s Bane?

When the “The fire in it seemed to die, but the darkness grew”, as “it drew itself up to a great height” - what was that height?
Another riddle in the dark, perhaps?

Well the puzzle is solvable. Fortunately there is, purposely provided, enough textual information present (using scaling and drawing - as Tolkien hints at). What he have then is ‘T’ for a Trigonometric Riddle to solve!

More to come ......

Guardian of Imladris
Points: 275 
Posts: 92
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2020 6:00 pm
Hello @Priya and welcome back to the plaza :smile:

I've been observing this topic for a while now and have now decided to break my silence and speak my mind. I have to admit (and I'm trying to formulate this as moderate as possible) that I assume you are perfectly aware that there is no Balrog visible in the photo you shared. I asked a few friends outside of the plaza about this, and when I explained the background to my question, their reactions were just as I expected. This is nothing but feedback, so I hope you can handle it. However, if it should actually be the case and you surprisingly recognize something in this specific hole, then of course I have nothing against it - on the contrary, it would indicate that you have a blossoming imagination.

No offense and I don't want to make any assumptions about you but I personally question your train of thought on this topic. There are other holes on the paper, why don't you analyze those? Does the larger hole on the right look like a wing itself or perhaps a vertical flame, or is the upper right black spot supposed to be a metaphor for Morgoth, who wants to bring Arda to his knees by spreading darkness? Again, I'm sorry if I offend you with my directness and you take my feedback as an attack, which is not my intention but I find your thesis too far-fetched and from a personal point of view really not worth further discussion.

Last but not least concerning your statement regarding that we cannot really know Tolkien's intentions and thoughts: Thank you for revealing the obvious. That's actually how it is with all people Priya. You will never know a person's intentions or thoughts with 100% certainty. If it was Tolkien's intention to use this hole to represent a "winged" Balrog, then he probably did it in the most abstract and unrecognizable way possible. To be honest, this discussion also feels more like a conversation about a conspiracy theory. Not every triangle that you see out on the street needs to be related to the "pyramid and the all-seeing eye of the Illuminati".

Edit: @Androthelm I just noticed that you seem to share that feeling.
"Mae govannen mellon nin."

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Greetings Legolas - O far sighted one. But it is your near-sightedness that I question - lol.

I am not at all offended by your push back. In fact I am surprised there hasn’t been more from Plaza members.

Three things.

Firstly - are you sure you can’t see (or imagine) a humanoid long-cloaked and winged figure in the cutout? Please try - and please be honest. Many, I know, can see it quite easily. Also, I’m not sure why you have declined to mention how at least one Plaza member has been able to - yet cite/highlight unknown non-participants in this discussion.

Secondly - please read my very first post carefully. I stated I did perform analysis - and included data from all 3 Mazarbul facsimiles (see items (c) & (d)). Something you might have failed to consider is that placing in something non-Moria based such as a covert ‘Morgoth image’ would not make situational sense. However given the foreboding text: “drums in the deep ... they are coming” - a Balrog, certainly would. To labor the point - I wouldn’t expect an extremely intelligent Professor to slyly have left imagery of a surfboard, an elephant, Tulkas, Belladonna Took etc. etc. Would you?

Thirdly - conspicuously absent was any verdict on all the peripheral clues. Did they amount to nothing? Surely it’s their existence which make my case so compelling?

——————

p.s. Of course “Not every triangle that you see out on the street needs to be related to the pyramid and the all-seeing eye of the Illuminati.”

However, on occasions they are; and perhaps you should acknowledge that.

Triangles on paper were of some significance to that other great British fantasy author - J.K. Rowling. Something indiscreet - namely the Deathly Hallows (in particular the triangle signifying the Cloak of Invisibility) was ‘hidden’ in plain sight and - yet was of importance to the storyline.

Most interestingly as well, is that the evil protagonist was given an anagrammatic twist: TOM MARVOLO RIDDLE is rearrangeable to I AM LORD VOLDEMORT. Then might Rowling have followed in the footsteps of Tolkien? Maybe they possessed similar mindsets? The difference being that Rowling revealed her secrets while Tolkien didn’t. So is this enamor with clandestine shapes and anagrams perhaps a British thing?

In any case, I would like to change your way of thinking. Given a man who was into riddles and trained in cryptography - surely he was more likely to include ‘secret stuff’ than Rowling - who we know did!

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Hi Legolas

As I stated in an earlier post - some folk have seen ‘Batman’ imagery in the cutout. Below is a view of the caped crusader whose profile might help you (and others) to better visualize - the ‘Balrog’ (further down).


Image


Image

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Before moving on to the ‘T’ - with the criticism recently received, what’s kind of appropriate right now is to share some forensic analysis of the three parchments. To that end, I’ve posted all 3 Mazarbul pages below for ease of reference.

Image
Image
Image


Now a fair few studies have been published on the runes themselves. But my analysis doesn’t discuss the symbols or their translation. Instead, its focus was on the parchment aesthetics and the inflicted damage. Some of this stuff is quite obvious - but some might be new to you - particularly items (f), (g) and (h):

(a) The binding holes are intermittently visible on all pages.
(b) The Mazarbul parchment page views in order are RHS, LHS, RHS.
(c) The dwarves used both sides of a page.
(d) The uppermost tiny hole in the third page (visibly blue) is an elongated tear of a binding hole.
(e) Some damage is penetrating.
(f) The lower hole on the first page is a mirror of the hole on the second.
(g) Item (f) is confirmed by the close-by (and directly above) matching ‘estuary shape’/slash to the two parchments’ edges.
(h) Item (f) holes are a continuation from the larger internal damage on the last parchment page.
(i) Damage from item (f) holes resulted from back cover side.
(j) First parchment page center hole probably emanated from front cover side.
(k) Holes are are all ovoid apart from the last in the third parchment.
(l) All holes show similar periphery burn damage apart from the last in the third parchment.
(m) Per items (k) and (l) the last hole of the parchments is peculiar.

So from what I can tell, Tolkien thought deeply about the internal holes in the three pages. We can can conclude from items (f) and (h) that he must definitely have given thought to both the shape and position of the lower holes on the first and second parchments, as well as the largest hole in the third parchment. It seems unlikely then, that our ‘Balrog hole’ was an idly ill-conceived random puncture. Given its added complexity (it has far more distinct vertices than any of the other hole shapes) and the unique dark charring around it - don’t you think it stands out like a flashing beacon? Don’t you think Tolkien would have paid attention to the very last detail in the 3 unit production?

From Artist & Illustrator by Wayne G. Hammond, Christina Scull:

“Of all the art he attempted for The Lord of the Rings, nothing occupied his attention more than these three ' facsimiles ' , ... “.

Lastly, for this post, it’s curious that Ori was chosen as the supposed writer of the elvish part to the runes. Now as we all know, the dwarves were modeled with the Jewish people in mind:

“The dwarves of course are quite obviously, constructed to be Semitic wouldn't you say that in many ways they remind you of the Jews? Their words are Semitic obviously, constructed to be Semitic” - BBC Interview with Dennis Gerrolt, 1971

But given Tolkien had an extensive set of Jewish friends and was knowledgeable in Hebrew, it’s quite possible that (despite the Dvergatal) he knew in Hebrew Ori meant ‘My Light’ or just ‘Light’.

So when Ori wrote “They are coming” - was there left a subtle pointer to shine ‘his light’ on the cutout below? Would Tolkien have expected that ‘light’ to have revealed to the curious reader - a vague image of the Balrog?

In researching Tolkien and his works - I have become accustomed to seeing a hidden secondary, even tertiary, layer to his chosen words. But more of that to come!

Arien
Arien
Points: 2 267 
Posts: 1848
Joined: Thu May 07, 2020 8:56 pm
Some fascinating attention paid to the details on these facsimiles @Priya! Bookbinding notes aside: do you think Ori saw it? Given his exquisite penmanship, why would he not have illustrated it?
cave anserem
Image

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Hi Silky Gooseness

Glad to see you’re thinking the same way as I have thought. Did Ori indeed create the image? So was the image meant to be a desperate message to any future dwarf colonists poring over the book that this is the terror they faced? This was Durin’s Bane - at least a best impression!

Perhaps Tolkien meant to pseudo-replicate the classic case of the dying victim leaving clues to identify the murderer? And we, as readers, would be placed in the role of detective? Who knows for sure - but if indeed Tolkien thought that way - then we must try and solve (or at least propose) the method by which Ori would have done it.

Any ideas? Or for that matter - opening it out to all interested Plaza members - how would Ori have created the cutout and surrounding blackened zone?

Arien
Arien
Points: 2 267 
Posts: 1848
Joined: Thu May 07, 2020 8:56 pm
I presume Ori, named for light, would have had a candle or lamp or lantern of some sort, and possibly this is what caused the scorching: that or embers perhaps scattered during a ruckus
cave anserem
Image

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Silky Gooseness - Thank you for bringing to our attention Ori’s “penmanship” - seemingly an acquired skill beyond much dwarven folk.

Tolkien was one who certainly pored over medieval manuscripts - extracting everything he could from the available clues. Perhaps, in Sherlockian fashion, he would expect us to do the same?

Here is a possible scenario:

Undoubtedly Ori had a pen and ink at hand to draw an outline of the core form.
Yet there was more than the core. There was the shadow. How could that be best communicated?

One can imagine Ori took a knife and carved out the ink drawn core profile. Then using some kind of object with a triangular end, he inserted it into a flame (a nearby torch or fire) and singed the paper to create a dark overlay.

To me the dark black triangular zone surrounding our cutout looks like a singe or charring - but not one randomly created from an open flame. The gradation from black to orange is too abrupt. Besides, there is no penetration from the third to second parchment page - which is kind of odd.

What device created the triangular singe with three rounded corners is beyond me. But it is peculiar that the ‘O’ and ‘I’ in dwarf runes Angerthas Moria) - when put together can form a triangle shape, while the ‘R’ as an upward arrow points to the last handwriting - which is, of course, Ori’s!


Λ ↑ I



Did Tolkien put together elements of another puzzle for the reader to solve? One which pointed the finger at Ori as the creator of the triangular patch and all within?

Still - all of this remains in the realm of speculation. Though, of course, we have a curiosity - for some, there won’t be enough conclusive evidence to pinpoint Ori as the culprit.

Nevertheless, he’s at the top of my suspect list!

Arien
Arien
Points: 2 267 
Posts: 1848
Joined: Thu May 07, 2020 8:56 pm
What’s interesting to me is that around that shape in particular the paper is very much charred and burnt a dark, blackened colour. This isn’t true of all the holes in the paper. The first sheet has holes in the paper presumably also caused by fire damage, but if that’s so, why no charred edges, as appear in the other holes? Hmmm.
cave anserem
Image

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Silky Gooseness - yes there several matters associated to the parchments that make one wonder. Especially when one looks in detail.


————————————


Finally on to the ‘T’.

‘T’ for Tallness riddle.
‘T’ for Trigonometric riddle.
‘T’ for Text Transformation riddle.

Call it what you will, but what we need - is to establish the fully erect height of Durin’s Bane.

Before I start, I need to emphasize and bring attention to four things:

(a) Tolkien’s sense of perspective and scale.

Obviously reflected in his many drawings and paintings.

(b) A knowledge of geometry.

In order to gain entry to gain entry into King Edward’s Grammar, Tolkien’s mother home-tutored him:

“... except in geometry which I was taught by her sister.” - Letter #295.

(c) An understanding of algebra.

“How stupid everything is!, and war multiplies the stupidity by 3 and its power by itself: so one's precious days are ruled by (3x)2 when x=normal human crassitude” - Letter #61

(d) An employment of mathematical principles in The Lord of the Rings.

Clyde Kilby asked how had Tolkien invented the hundreds of names and places. The reply was:

“... he did it by a ‘mathematical’ system.”

Now the solution I arrived at involves successive drawings and scaling. It is based on the clash scene on the Bridge of Khazad-dûm, and relies upon textually provided information/dimensions. Though it makes use of principles from (a) and (b), unfortunately it is too complex to relate by posting. So instead I’m going to put forward a solution posted by Balfrog (a member of the old Plaza) which actually does an equally good job, and which employs aspects of (c) and (d).

There are a mixture of facts and assumptions which were needed to be made for the scene of the swords clashing:

(a) Mathematically Gandalf is located centrally on a bridge with a span of 50 ft.
(b) The arc of the bridge is shallow.
(c) The Balrog takes one step on to the bridge - after which it rises up and swords clash.
(d) The Balrog has humanoid limb/torso proportional characteristics.
(d) The Balrog’s Step is approximately: 0.5 x Balrog Height
(d)The Balrog’s Reach (arm length + sword length to clash) is approximately the same as its height.

Three equations were arrived at:

Balrog Step + Balrog Reach = 0.5 x 50

Balrog Step = 0.5 x Balrog Height

Balrog Reach = Balrog Height


Solving the above leads to a mathematical height of 16.7 ft.

In my opinion - this is probably an upper end estimation. But still, it is in line with my drawing approach. The calculated value puts the creature’s height in the same league as larger trolls and ents.


More comments to come ....

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
So additional to the Balrog’s calculated height of circa 16 feet, Balfrog deduced the shadow belonging to Durin’s Bane extended (at the Bridge) about 8 feet in front of its humanoid core. That value assumed the Balrog’s arm was approximately the same length as its sword. And that the arm reach was the limit of the forward extension of the shadow:

“From out of the shadow a red sword leaped flaming.”

Curiously - one might notice - is that Tolkien’s friend, C.S. Lewis, gave his ‘monster’ a shadow too; or so it might seem. Tash, as drawn by Pauline Baynes and approved by Lewis, has a secondary darkness associated to it.



Image



From The Last Battle - the initial description of Tash is:

“At first glance you might have mistaken it for smoke, for it was grey and you could see things through it. ... Also, this thing kept its shape instead of billowing and curling as smoke would have done. It was roughly the shape of a man ...”.

To me, that is comparable to Tolkien’s:

“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, ...”.

In any case, I think that far too many people are fixated on the Balrog’s ‘shadow’ being 2D. The evidence there is tells us it wasn’t. Tolkien appears to have conceived it as an amorphous 3D part of its being that completely surrounded its humanoid form. Once that is properly digested, one might view the ‘wings’ debate from an entirely different angle.

...........


Getting back to Lewis and Narnia - it is noteworthy that Tash also possessed wings!

Is it possible that Lewis and Tolkien traded ideas? Quite probably I would have thought. What ever the truth - it’s just as likely, per Tolkien’s habit, that much was derived and linked from literary fragments of early English lore. Sewn together by Tolkien himself - an attempt to deliver the ‘real truth’ from philological enquiry - was undoubtedly an underlying aim.

Scholars have speculated that the root of the Balrog’s shadow lay in Beowulf and the monster Grendel. But had Tolkien also given his monster facets from his investigative 1932/1934 paper: ‘Sigelwara Land’?

Joe Abbot pointed out in Mythlore: Tolkien's Monsters: Concept and Function in The Lord of the Rings (Part 1) The Balrog of Khazad-dum, 1989 - the likeness of the black sooty bodied Ethiopian demon - the Sigelwara, whose mouth emitted sparks and whose nostrils belched smoke, to the Balrog in The Lord of the Rings. Transposed from the Old English Martyrology:

(... to him [Bartholomew] appeared a great Ethiopian whose face was blacker than soot, and the beard and the hair on him were to the feet [on both] sides, and the eyes were like fiery iron, and sparks sprang from the mouth, and foul smoke went from his nostrils, and he had wings like a rod of thorns, and his hands were bound together with fiery chains, and he cried out loudly with a terrible sound and flew away and never afterward appeared.)


Given the creature had ‘wings’ and on top ‘flew away’ after letting out a ‘terrible’ cry - isn’t that kind of reminiscent of Durin’s Bane?

“With a terrible cry the Balrog fell forward, ...”.

Even Abbot commented:

“It is very possible that this - or one of any number of similar passages cited by Tolkien in his article - inspired the "wings" characterizing the Khazad-dum Balrog.”

That seems entirely reasonable to me. The dual characteristic of wings/flight would be feasible details accurately passed down through history. While maybe others weren’t. Then ‘wings’ and ‘shadow’ - pictured in and around our cutout, tie in very nicely to ancient real-world records!

So one might presume the Professor made use of what little was available. Because from what I understand, Tolkien believed that truth was to be found in literature. And that:

“ ... there was always a kernel of fact behind a legend.”

More so than even The Hobbit - he had to maintain a:

“... literary pretence of historicity and dependence on record ...”.

For he refused to allow his writings to degenerate into jumbled tales lacking authenticity:

“The Lord of the Rings cannot be garbled ...”.

In my estimation, Tolkien’s final conception of the TLotR Balrog mainly used the ‘Old English Martyrology’ as the last ‘long-lost’ descriptive memory of Morgoth’s Balrog. A fabled creature who had the barest of traces left in Old English words, and whose name was probably originally derived by Tolkien from a combination usage of Anglo-Saxon terminology:

bæl - fire, flame

BRÓGA - monster, terror




.... more on the way

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Additional to the ‘cloak of darkness’ surrounding our terrifying monster, one might want to contemplate the ‘cloak’ which Durin’s Bane appears to be wearing per the LHS of the cutout.

Image

I think this is an easy item to accept, as we know Balrogs (as pointed out by Christopher Tolkien) wore armor in their early conception. Per The Book of Lost Tales 2:

“The Balrogs are 'demons of power' (p. 181); they are capable of pain and fear (p. 194); they are attired in iron armour (pp. 181, 194), ...”.

Tolkien having equipped Durin’s Bane with a whip and sword must have known the creature couldn’t have held these constantly. It must have had a scabbard and holster - which necessitates a belt (of which there is the slightest hint in the cutout). But I do not believe the Professor would have limited it to just that.

A bestial creature running around virtually ‘naked’ in its own hide with just an extraneous weaponized belt doesn’t seem probable to me. So that logic leads me to suspect the Balrog was ‘clothed’. But, of course, only something such as iron armor would suffice. One could also surmise that it would have been permeable to allow a greasy flammable ‘slime’ (presumably secreted by controllable skin ‘glands’) to ooze through and ignite as and when it desired. That would be consistent with:

“The fire in it seemed to die, but the darkness grew.”,

&

“... he was a thing of slime, ...”.

Besides, it seems to me that Gandalf’s formidable Elven sword would have sliced through anything that was pure hide or flesh - but heavy-duty iron chain-mail could well have negated his continuous hacking:

“... ever I hewed him, ...”.

Also, given a substantial height disparity - if some of the wizard’s blows landed outside of the water (the text is ambiguous) then they would have been low ones. The Balrog’s mail would have had to hang close to the ground to shield against Gandalf’s onslaught. Plus it being loose - would not have hindered the considerable athleticism displayed at the fissure.

So, given all of this, I can reconcile the Balrog’s long ‘cloak’ as depicted in the cutout as an entirely reasonable feature. Others might disagree - as I admit, that despite the logic - much is conjecture.



... time to wrap up, next ...

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Getting back to the ‘T’ solution - the height of a humanoid creature, supernatural though it may be, is a natural curiosity high up on any inquisitive reader’s list. Surely there shouldn’t be too much argument about that?

Tolkien told us of Sauron:

“The form that he took was that of a man of more than human stature, but not gigantic.”

“He also relayed that the largest of Orcs were:

“... almost man-high ...".

Not to mention Trolls and Ents:

“... twelve feet or more in height ...”.

But disappointingly there was nothing explicitly mentioned in TLotR about the Balrog. Didn’t you ever wonder how large the creature was?

But if not explicit then perhaps its height was calculable - being part of a covert plan? So a deliberate embedment confirming the story of Durin’s Bane is my take! And here is my thought.

According to Tolkien every character in the book, presumably including Durin’s Bane, had a background:

“... give me a name and it produces a story, ...”.

A deeper unrelated story (each of which would take a mini-book in itself to adequately pass on) was within Tolkien’s possession. What I have uncovered was the story of Morgoth’s Balrog. It was about its physical/ethereal characteristics and its battle with Gandalf. For realistically that is all Tolkien (via Gandalf) could tell us. But it had to be in the form of a puzzle, because that was a splendidly clever way to convey the full tale. It was a ‘super-puzzle’ left for adults to solve - and whose overall solution was meant to be confirmed by his personal signature.

So there we have it. The solution to four puzzles that are initialized JRRT.

Accidental and cases of coincidence? A set of flukes? Contrivances on my part?

Or something more?

Image


Lastly - returning to the cutout itself. This, in my opinion, was a deliberately planted example of the ‘mooreeffoc’ effect Tolkien described in his 1939 On Fairy-stories lecture. We were meant to do a double take. To look again and scratch our heads. Mooreeffoc, as Tolkien noted, was the term :

“... to denote the queerness of things that have become trite, when they are seen suddenly from a new angle.”

But still, despite Tolkien implying that he used this fantasy creation method in TLotR, and despite all my evidence - some will still be unpersuaded.

What might help is showing how effectively Tolkien employed ‘mooreeffoc’ with another most mysterious character. It’s time to re-examine ‘Goldberry’. Just like Durin’s Bane - we need to understand her story. And to do that - we have to look at her in a completely different manner than anyone else has ever done!

Arien
Arien
Points: 2 267 
Posts: 1848
Joined: Thu May 07, 2020 8:56 pm
@Priya I love this calculation of the Balrog’s height, but it doesn’t seem to take into account the length of the Balrog’s sword. Is it not possible that the Balrog had a very long sword? I’m not certain that we can state with confidence that its arms and reach were exactly proportionate to that of a human, either.
cave anserem
Image

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Hi Silky Gooseness

First let me apologize for the lengthy delay in replying.

Actually, the sword length is pseudo included in the analysis. For swords to clash, per the last ‘assumption’ in my post of 30 January 2023:


The Balrog’s Reach (arm length + sword length to clash) is approximately the same as its height.



The Balrog’s ‘sword length’ itself would be greater than the ‘sword length to clash’.
Though Balfrog never stated it explicitly - my reading is that with any smiting, the normal intent of a swordsman is to squarely strike the opponent - not just make contact with the sword’s very tip.
Of course, Balfrog’s analysis is based on approximations. And we will never be able to ascertain, for certain, the length of the Balrog’s arm or its sword.


But if one wants, one can vary (to one’s taste) the current factor of 1.0 and adjust for a different combination of arm + clashing sword lengths (shorter or longer).

Nonetheless, I think what Balfrog’s analysis highlights, is the vast distance between the two opponents at the point of initial weapon contact. So I think this member’s conclusion is reasonable - that the Balrog must have been much larger than a normal human male.
And I also think a verification is provided later on - in the creature breaking the mountainside in its ruinous fall. I can’t imagine something human-sized causing any appreciable damage - at least to an extent worth mentioning by Gandalf.

—————

So, given a gap of a few months between postings, I wonder if any of the Plaza naysayers have pondered, and even better - changed their minds, on what I call the Balrog cutout.

Now that I’ve provided indisputable evidence that Tolkien contemplated the size, position and shape of some of the Mazarbul cutouts, is anyone still unwilling to believe the last cutout is special?

Guardian of the Golden Wood
Points: 2 891 
Posts: 1995
Joined: Sun May 17, 2020 7:54 pm
Priya wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 8:46 pm The theme of ‘riddles in the dark’ was one that I contend - was never far off from Tolkien’s thoughts.
Priya, i was not around when you were posting this. It will take me a whole while to get my head round the discussion - and as yet i cannot see this balrog at all. But i certainly think that some of what i am reading here is on the right track.

From my own study of the early drafts of LotR the journey in the dark through Moria is the place in which a sort of return through The Hobbit opens up into LotR - with Galadriel awaiting at the next stop. I've long been fascinated by the doors here. Bilbo begins with a door with a queer sign and ends up going through a hidden door; now a hidden door becomes a door with queer signs - but where Bilbo never saw the sign on his door, now it is the turn of the wizard to stumble with the signs on a door.

I also think you are quite correct to place so much emphasis on the chapter 'Riddles in the Dark' in The Hobbit and the idea of Moria as a sort of replay makes sense. And certainly there is a parallel between Gollum and the Balrog - Bilbo finds Gollum at the root of the Mountain, but now in this story it is a Balrog at the root (but note that Moria is where Gollum reappears).

So that is just to say that - if i understand what i have read - i find where you seem to be coming from very right and proper and correct. I've got a lot on my plate atm, but i will do my best to read and hunt for the balrog image and get back with a more considered verdict.
Eat earth. Dig deep. Drink water.

Guardian of the Golden Wood
Points: 2 891 
Posts: 1995
Joined: Sun May 17, 2020 7:54 pm
Priya, is not the thing to do isolate the manuscript you are presenting in time? i would have to go back to my notes to give precise details, but the Tomb of Balin is one of those places that Tolkien paused for a long time. And as a matter of fact, only when he started writing again did the story become the one we know - Trotter the Hobbit became Aragorn the heir of Elendil. But more to the point, although really just another expression of the same thing, it was now that Tolkien took a significant linguistic step: the runes of The Hobbit are Anglo-Saxon runes, but now we have a step into Tolkien's own scripts - not merely a linguistic change but one of alphabet (which i think relates to what you seem to be getting at).

In terms of composition, we are at a turning-point. All of which is why I am sure you are right about something here. Now, i still have not had time to inspect the image that you say is a Balrog. But my basic response at present is why assume you are seeing a Balrog? It is in this long pause in writing (1939-1940) that the Gateway to Moria becomes what it is today - which is to say that it is in this pause that the other strand of the story of the 2nd Age is invented, with the story of Celebrimbor, Sauron, and the Rings of Power. Given the centrality of Celebrimbor to the 'riddle' now being worked up, the Elf who is the grandchild of Fëanor, who invented the alphabet, i would suggest that images on the Book are just as likely to be of Fëanor than of a Balrog.

The thing is, if i may say, your riddle and cryptography approach seems in general good with Tolkien and extremely astute right here in Moria; but i have a sense you are seeking the codes in more complex and convulated ways than you need. Here is a link to The Alphabet (1883) by Canon Isaac Taylor, one of the more remarkable of the now unjustly forgotten liberal Anglican scholars whose work provides a forgotten context to Tolkien's thinking. For myself this book reveals the real cryptography we are presented with by the story in Moria, which concerns the alphabet, and points to the overlooked vision of Tolkien, who made Fëanor the maker of the Silmarils, hinted that he may well have made the palantíri, but also imagined him as the Elf who invented the amazing art of making sounds appear as images - an art that appears bound up Fëanor's analogy of a spoken word in terms of the walls of a house, and the space inside.
Eat earth. Dig deep. Drink water.

Melian
Melian
Points: 266 
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:00 am
Greetings Chrysophylax Dives

Glad to have you join chime in.

If you’ve, as yet, only casually looked at the posts, and can’t quite visualize the Balrog in the cutout of interest - then the picture (with some added embellishments) in my post of April 29 ought to help. Clearly - Feanor is an impossibility. Unless the Noldo had wings or wore a cape worthy of Batman!

If you can find a quiet and extended time to absorb all the multiple posts - that’s probably best.
You will find - that when it comes to runes - Tolkien did hide a coded message. At least that is my contention!

Post Reply