[Marky Lazer]

The Case Against Balrog Wings

If there's no undeniable case for Balrog wings, it's important to realize that neither is there any undeniable evidence against them. Instead, the contrary argument is based on a range of objections: references that apparently contradict the idea of Balrog wings. Of these, there are two particularly strong examples.

Objection One: Balrogs Don't Fly
There is no point anywhere in Tolkien's work where he describes a Balrog as flying. Even in situations where it would be a huge advantage to take to the air, the Balrogs remain earthbound. To illustrate, consider Gandalf's encounter with Durin's Bane. This Balrog faces two obstacles, a fiery fissure, and then a chasm crossed by a narrow bridge. These should present no problem to a winged creature, but its reaction is instructive.

[6] "Then with a rush it leaped across the fissure."The Fellowship of the Ring II 5 The Bridge of Khazad-dûm
...and then...
"It stepped forward slowly on to the bridge..."The Fellowship of the Ring II 5 The Bridge of Khazad-dûm

Later, that same Balrog finds itself on a mountain-top, fighting for its life. According to Gandalf's report of the incident:

[7] "I threw down my enemy, and he fell from the high place, and broke the mountain-side where he smote it in his ruin."The Two Towers III 5 The White Rider

If he could fly, the Balrog could easily have saved itself. Instead, he crashes through the air to his doom. Durin's Bane isn't the only non-flying Balrog, either:

[8] "Many are the songs that have been sung of the duel of Glorfindel with the Balrog upon a pinnacle of rock in that high place; and both fell to ruin in the abyss."Quenta Silmarillion 23 Of Tuor and the Fall of Gondolin

The obvious question is: if Balrogs have real wings, why don't they use them?
There are two counterarguments. First, it is often suggested that 'with winged speed' (4) is a unique case where Balrogs are described as flying. We've already considered this point - it needn't detain us here.
The more common counterargument is that, in each case, the Balrogs were somehow prevented from using their wings. According to this position, Durin's Bane leaps the fissure and steps onto the bridge not because he has no wings, but because his wings were so vast that they were cramped and unusable. Against the two cases of Balrogs falling from mountains, it's suggested that they were exhausted from fighting, or their wings were somehow damaged. It's also sometimes put forward that Balrogs had real wings, but couldn't use them at all, or could only glide short distances rather than actually fly. This counterargument takes many forms, but all have one feature in common - once again, it presumes that the wings must exist.
There is, of course, a much simpler explanation for the Balrogs' apparent inability to fly. If we take the position that they just didn't have wings, the entire problem vanishes.

Objection Two: The Question of Scale
How big is a Balrog? If we follow the pro-wings side of the debate, and assume that it had real wings, it's possible to come up at least some minimum figures. This is because of the classic 'its wings were spread from wall to wall' (2), which means that its wingspan must be at least the width of the hall in which it was standing. What do we know about the hall itself?

[9] "Before them was another cavernous hall. It was loftier and far longer than the one in which they had slept."[10] "He turned left and sped across the smooth floor of the hall. The distance was greater than it had looked."[11] "...a slender bridge of stone, without kerb or rail, that spanned the chasm with one curving spring of fifty feet."All from The Fellowship of the Ring II 5 The Bridge of Khazad-dûm

The hall is gigantic. If the chasm is fifty feet wide (11), then the entire hall must be at least several hundred feet long. A 'chasm' is by definition longer than it is wide, and the chasm's length defines the width of the hall. So, we can derive a fairly reliable minimum width somewhere in the region of seventy-five to one hundred feet. This is supported by the text, which tells us that the hall was so wide that it needed pillars down the centre to support the roof:

[12] "Down the centre stalked a double line of towering pillars. They were carved like boles of mighty trees whose boughs upheld the roof..."The Fellowship of the Ring II 5 The Bridge of Khazad-dûm

If the Balrog's wings were real, and literally spread 'from wall to wall' (2), its minimum wingspan is also somewhere approaching one hundred feet. This gives us a Balrog the size of a house, and remember that these are minimum values - it might be even bigger. Many would accept this without a problem - the idea of a gigantic Balrog is quite common, and it's often depicted as being thirty feet high or more, which is consistent with these estimates.
This is an important point, so we'll emphasise it. If the Balrog's wings are real, it follows necessarily that it must have been a monstrous creature with the wingspan of a small airliner.
The objection this raises is quite significant: it's very hard to explain how this behemoth had lived for more than a thousand years in an underground city designed for Dwarves. As a specific example, consider the Chamber of Mazarbul, which appears just before the Company's encounter with the Balrog. There's plenty of textual evidence about the entrance to this room. For example:
[13] "...orcs one after another leaped into the chamber."The Fellowship of the Ring II 5 The Bridge of Khazad-dûm
(our italics)
...and, a moment later, they...
[14] "...clustered in the doorway."The Fellowship of the Ring II 5 The Bridge of Khazad-dûm

This is obviously a fairly narrow opening. Somehow, though, the Balrog manages to follow the orcs into the Chamber through this entrance. If a Balrog is built on the huge scale we've just discussed, it could not possibly have used this narrow entrance.
The logic of this seems inescapable: we have to scale down the Balrog to get him through the door. He can still be of 'a great height' (2) - say ten feet tall or so - but he can't realistically be much larger than this. This idea is supported to an extent by this description from the The History of Middle-earth:

[15] "[the Balrog] strode to the fissure, no more than man-high yet terror seemed to go before it."The History of Middle-earth Volume VII (The Treason of Isengard), X The Mines of Moria II: The Bridge
(our italics)

This is a rejected draft, so it can't be put forward as any kind of proof. It does give some insight, though, into the kind of scale that Tolkien had in mind for the Balrog. It's also borne out by the fact that he had to 'leap' (6) across the fissure, and that he stepped onto a bridge (7) so narrow that Dwarves could only cross it in single file. These are the actions of a more-or-less man-sized creature, not a giant.
The question of scale is a serious objection to real Balrog wings. If 'its wings were spread from wall to wall' (2) literally refers to real wings, then the Balrog must have been gigantic. For it to get into the Chamber of Mazarbul, though, it can't have been gigantic. If the Balrog isn't gigantic, then 'its wings were spread from wall to wall' (2) can't refer to real wings.
For the anti-wings faction, this is probably as close to a 'proof' as it's possible to get.

Summing Up
These are by no means the only objections to real Balrog wings, but they're probably the strongest. Most others are circumstantial in nature and don't really advance the argument far (for example, 'imagine a creature with huge wings, spread wide, trying to handle a whirling whip of flame').
The two major objections, though, are very significant. Why don't Balrogs use their wings, if they have them? How does a house-sized Balrog get through an orc-sized doorway? These awkward questions only arise if Balrogs have real wings - if we assume that they don't, it's easy to escape these inconsistencies.
It's probably fair to say that there is no incontrovertible evidence for real wings, and that there at least two strong objections to their existence. Given the current state of the argument, then, the weight of evidence seems to come down pretty heavily on the 'no wings' side of the debate. 'Weight of evidence', though, isn't proof: there's always room for research and reinterpretation.
Wherever the evidence lies, it's a fact that nobody knows for sure what the answer is. Only Tolkien himself could have told us, and he never made a definite statement on the topic. It seems appropriate, then, to finish with the most definite description of a Balrog he did provide:
[16] "What it was could not be seen: it was like a great shadow, in the middle of which was a dark form, of man-shape, maybe, yet greater; and a power and terror seemed to be in it and to go before it."The Fellowship of the Ring II 5 The Bridge of Khazad-dûm