Bilbo´s treachery

[Faramir Jones]

You suggested, Ivriniel, that Bilbo ''Arkenstoned' himself to exile, a-purpose'. My view is that Bilbo, after handing over the Arkenstone, didn't have to go back to the dwarves. He had carried out the terms of his contract, including taking his reward; so he had no further legal obligations towards them and Thorin. However, he wanted to return to those he regarded as his friends.

[Ivriniel]

Originally Posted by Faramir Jones

You suggested, Ivriniel, that Bilbo ''Arkenstoned' himself to exile, a-purpose'. My view is that Bilbo, after handing over the Arkenstone, didn't have to go back to the dwarves. He had carried out the terms of his contract, including taking his reward; so he had no further legal obligations towards them and Thorin. However, he wanted to return to those he regarded as his friends.

I suppose some legal-ese can be applied to the analysis, and that was somewhat of it in the book. I recall Tolkien was a little tongue in cheek about the contract. Bilbo signed something at the Unexpected Party.

I'm not sure the Arkenstone was "one fourteenth" of the treasure. How Dwarves reckon it and the cultural emphasis on valuation of the wealth would matter, I suspect.

I don't seem to remember Gandalf being overly upset about the 'theft' of the Stone, and so, Bilbo declaring the theft was somewhat washed clean of the grime of the manipulation.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Ivriniel

I don't seem to remember Gandalf being overly upset about the 'theft' of the Stone, and so, Bilbo declaring the theft was somewhat washed clean of the grime of the manipulation.

Gandalf's comment on the matter to Bilbo was "Well done!" If that wasn't an absolution for Bilbo, what else could one possibly ask for?

[Galadriel55]

I don't think that Bilbo's deed was honest, in respect to the Dwarves. He does not think so either. But he knew it was necessary, which is why he did it, and why Gandalf approved. Sometimes doing the ultimately right thing isn't necessarily doing what might be right in an isolated moment. In the modern times, if your friend, who lives by a lake, is on hallucinogens and decides that he can walk on water - lock him up in his room, and preferably restrain him from doing too much damage. You might be a jerk to your friend, in that moment, but you're doing the right thing. And if it's a good friend, they'll thank you after.


Debating whether or not Bilbo's act qualifies as stealing is, in my opinion, an unfruitful argument. It was dishonest. It was not nice. But it was the right thing to do, and the Dwarves, including Thorin, saw that in the end. The contract - it's technical rubbish. Bilbo and the Dwarves might use it to throw "technically" arguments at each other to justify their behaviour, especially in times when their behaviour is most questionable, but at the end of the day they believe in greater things than petty legal technicalities. Why would a well-bred hobbit do such a dishonest thing? Because this particular well-bred hobbit agreed to go god knows where in the company of thirteen unknown men who trashed his house. If Bilbo has enough Took in him to step over that line, he might be one of the few who have enough adventurousness to rise above other rules as well. Was it a good act? Yesno: depends how you argue. It was certainly not good in that it was dishonest, and Bilbo did betray Thorin&co's trust, but it was good in that it was ultimately the right thing to do.

[Ivriniel]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

I don't think that Bilbo's deed was honest, in respect to the Dwarves. He does not think so either. But he knew it was necessary, which is why he did it, and why Gandalf approved. Sometimes doing the ultimately right thing isn't necessarily doing what might be right in an isolated moment. In the modern times, if your friend, who lives by a lake, is on hallucinogens and decides that he can walk on water - lock him up in his room, and preferably restrain him from doing too much damage. You might be a jerk to your friend, in that moment, but you're doing the right thing. And if it's a good friend, they'll thank you after.

<--snip--The contract - it's technical rubbish.--snip-->

*chuckles* erm, I suppose that's prolly more to the point about it in Middle Earth-ian terms......

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

I don't think that Bilbo's deed was honest, in respect to the Dwarves. He does not think so either. But he knew it was necessary, which is why he did it, and why Gandalf approved.

I think the taking of the Arkenstone was really a betrayal of Thorin as an individual rather than the whole company, as Bilbo would see it.

It was Thorin who had given the order to all the others that he alone had the rights to the jewel, and it seems it was mainly fear of Thorin's wrath that bothered Bilbo about keeping it secret.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

I think the taking of the Arkenstone was really a betrayal of Thorin as an individual rather than the whole company, as Bilbo would see it.

It was Thorin who had given the order to all the others that he alone had the rights to the jewel, and it seems it was mainly fear of Thorin's wrath that bothered Bilbo about keeping it secret.

Ye-es. I agree that it was mainly Thorin that was problematic, but at the same time you can't call Bilbo's deed completely honest in respect to the other Dwarves. It's true that the others wouldn't mind Bilbo taking the Arkenstone as much, and they wouldn't see his act as such a betrayal. But the nature of Bilbo's act groups the Dwarves into one group, like it or not. One rotten apple spoils the bunch?

So yes, I agree that he's mostly going behind Thorin's back, but he's acting behind all of the Dwarves' backs. He may not be as much of a jerk to the others, but it's still hardly honest.

[Leaf]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55;702826[...

But the nature of Bilbo's act groups the Dwarves into one group, like it or not. One rotten apple spoils the bunch?

Well, in this case, yes. This particular apple is the proclaimed and recognized leader of their company and the bunch doesn't do anything to stop him. I know that a few of them are disagreeing with Thorin, but they remain idle, while the rest of the bunch is supporting his course.

Thorin's course of action might easily lead to their death, either trough starvation and illness (due to the siege), or due to a battle, even though there isn't a real necessity or profit, at the time. Thorin and company are willingly gambling their own well-being for a surplus of a few percent. I think that justifies Bilbo (or any of the dwarves) to act against said course of action. Being 'dishonest' is a reasonable price to pay in this situation.