Fingolfin vs. Feanor

Originally posted by King-Fingolfin
Yeah. Like, a thousand balrogs. There is no proof that Feanor fought ALL the balrogs ALL at once.

According to Tolkien there were very few Balrogs. Initially he stated they were less than 10 Balrog (he mentioned they were only 7), emphasizing their power and uniqueness.

It would be sensible to assume they were less than 40 Balrogs at the height of their strength.

The height of their power was during the time of Utumno, when there were a thousand. Only about 5 or 6 balrogs stopped Ungoliant from killing Melkor. Feanor killed 5 or 6 most likely, maybe less. But they are very unique.

The number and level of strength attributed to them does seem to change a lot as he writes the saga. Anyone know what the final number he wrote actually was?

(At one point he had balrogs' stature at little more than a man, and the 'wings debate' is still unsettled, as far as I know.)

His final number was round a thousand again, give or take a hundred. He could be very busy in corrupting maiar. =-)

Originally posted by Incanus
His final number was round a thousand again, give or take a hundred. He could be very busy in corrupting maiar. =-)

Where was it stated that they were a 1000?

Originally posted by King-Fingolfin
Quote from the Silmarillion

Quote from History of Middle Earth on Feanor:

"[Thingol was the] mightiest of the Eldar save Feanor only."

I read in Unfinished Tales or in the Valaquenta that there were round 1000 balrogs at 2 times.

Fingolfin wins because Fingolfin was said to be the strongest, most steadfast, and most valiant of Finwë's sons.

Doubt it. The Silmarillion explicitly says Feanor was the best of the Eldar. Read the direct quote from ares on the previous page. Fingolfin is very very strong and a good warrior, and it would be an epic fight, but Feanor wins more often than not.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Doubt it. The Silmarillion explicitly says Feanor was the best of the Eldar. Read the direct quote from ares on the previous page. Fingolfin is very very strong and a good warrior, and it would be an epic fight, but Feanor wins more often than not.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Which is interesting, because The Silmarillion also explicitly states that Fingolfin was the strongest, most headstrong, and most valiant of Finwe's children. Feanor by comparison is said to be the most skilled of mind and hand, referring to his gem crafting abilities.

[list]"For Fëanor was made the mightiest in all parts of body and mind: in valour, in endurance, in beauty, in understanding, in skill, in strength and subtlety alike: of all the Children of Ilúvatar, and a bright flame was in him."
― The Silmarillion, Of the Sun and Moon and the Hiding of Valinor[/list]

I get that Fingolfin was badass strong, and probably has a wealth more combat experience, so reflecting on that last point, he definitely has that in his favor. However, without any concrete knowledge to go off of, Feanor is implied by the narrator to be the best of the best. Certainly the strongest Eldar in the First Age, save Thingol.

"Feanor was the mightiest in skill of word and of hand, more learned than his brothers; his spirit burned as a flame. Fingolfin was the strongest, the most steadfast, and the most valiant. Finarfin was the fairest, and the most wise of heart; and afterwards he was a friend of the sons of Olwe, lord of the Teleri, and had to wife Earwen, the swan-maiden of Alqualonde, Olwe's daughter."
- The Silmarillion, Of Eldamar and the Princes of the Eldalie

According to this, Feanor was not as strong as Fingolfin, nor as fair as Finarfin.

Yes, and if there was a weight lifting beauty contest, Fingolfin would win.

Fingolfin's feats also happen to be better. Both fought epic battles where the other die, Fingolfin just happened to do so against Morgoth himself.

So the stuff about Feanor being mightiest in valour, endurance, etc. should be disregarded out of hand?

Yes, because the statement is blatantly contradicted.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Yes, because the statement is blatantly contradicted.

Except, Feanor has several of these quotes to his name. He has the one Moose posted and he has the one Allankles posted ("mightiest of the Eldar save Feanor only"😉. But he has more he is mentioned as being "of all the Noldor, then or after, the most subtle in mind and the most skilled in hand” and "the mightiest of the Noldor, of whose deeds came both their greatest renown and their most grevieous woe". (And of course several quotes citing him as the greatest of the Eldar/Noldor.)

All of those I'd say outweigh the one quote about Fingolfin.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Fingolfin's feats also happen to be better. Both fought epic battles where the other die, Fingolfin just happened to do so against Morgoth himself.

The feats are entirely comparable. If anything, holding out against the Balrogs is even more impressive considering they drove back Ungoliant. Something a presumably more powerful version of Morgoth was unable to do.

The other quotes are about his intelligence and skill at gem-making.

As for "mightiest", he probably did achieve the most of any Noldor. Just not martially.

We have one quite comparing them. Fingolfin is stronger. Deal with it. 👆

Holding out against how many Balrogs? Did he even wound them?

Originally posted by NemeBro
The other quotes are about his intelligence and skill at gem-making.

Prove it. The book calls him the "most skilled in hand" not "the most skilled at gem-making" (which he also is).

Originally posted by NemeBro
As for "mightiest", he probably did achieve the most of any Noldor. Just not martially.

We have one quite comparing them. Fingolfin is stronger. Deal with it. 👆

So Fingolfin can throw a sack of flour farther. Good for him.

Feanor, however, is "the mightiest', "the greatest", "the most skilled in hand", and "mightiest in all parts of body and mind".

Originally posted by NemeBro
Holding out against how many Balrogs? Did he even wound them?

Don't know. But "long he fought on" so he held his own for quite awhile.

Is this a competition between what is more combat-relevant: skill (of hand) or strength? Is there any quote that better describes what "skill of hand" means? Because paired as it is with skill of "word" it can easily be interpreted as combative (in sword use) juxtaposition of speech, or it can be interpreted as a skill of art--just as speaking (oration/poetry) is.

F*ckin' authors and their flowery, vague language, man. It's like the "Greatest or most powerful Sith Lord" shit all over again.