Musings on Thorin
Dec. 5th, 2018 04:51 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
grundyscribblingAnyone who follows me on Tumblr saw my back and forth with Mainecoon76 about Thorin and the siege of Erebor immediately prior to the battle of Five Armies.
I feel the need to clarify that I'm not coming at this from an anti-dwarf or anti-Thorin perspective so much as a 'was he effective?' perspective. And unfortunately, I find myself agreeing with Gandalf's assessment of Thorin - he was not cutting a very splendid figure as King under the Mountain.
As King, Thorin should be thinking about how to achieve the best possible outcome for his people. But Thorin seems to somehow* have gotten it in his mind that keeping the entire treasure is the best outcome. It's not. The best outcome is a stable and prosperous restored Kingdom under the Mountain. (Thorin should be able to recognize this - he has, after all done the difficult work of restoring his people to some degree of prosperity and pride prior to setting out on his quest to the Mountain.) He can keep all the gold, but it's not going to matter if he has to constantly be keeping an eye on the enemies on his very doorstep or nominally ruling people he can't feed.
Roäc - who is hardly anti-dwarf and as best as I can determine acts in the interests of the dwarves of the mountain initially, and thereafter in accordance with Thorin's wishes - advised Thorin immediately after giving him news of Smaug's death and the gathering of those who looked toward the treasure in the mountain to deal with Bard, bypassing the Master of Laketown. This is sound advice. It might cost him more treasure than Thorin would like in the short term, but it would buy him a lasting friendship that will be vital for the Mountain in the long term.
The Lake-men are in desperate straits after the destruction of Laketown. They've got most of their population, their livestock, pastures, and fields, but that's about it. They don't have adequate shelter or food, and people who survived the initial disaster are dying of hunger, cold, and sickness.
Thorin obviously can't provide much for them in the way of food or manpower, not when he only has 12 dwarves plus Bilbo and they're on short rations themselves. What's more, he's right to prioritize fortifying the Mountain for its defense, even if his immediate reasoning as to why he's doing so is wrong. But buying the goodwill of the Lake-men with a pledge of a portion from the treasure at this point, before Bard and Thranduil even arrived, would be smart dealing on his part.
First of all, not all the treasure was the dwarves' in the first place - Smaug added his plunder from Dale and its environs to what was in the Mountain. Thorin's argument that it belongs to the dwarves because Smaug deprived them of life and home doesn't hold water when Smaug did much the same to Dale long before the destruction of Laketown, and trying to make that argument publicly makes Thorin look bad. (Appearances do matter in public diplomacy.) Moreover, the Lake-men helped Thorin's company when they arrived in Laketown in similarly desperate straits - wet, cold, hungry, with little but what they had on their backs. Now would be a good time to pay back - especially when the dwarves stand to gain much from it.
The good will of the Laketown survivors (and potentially the people of a restored Dale) is important for more than just the moment. Recall what Thorin said at the outset of The Hobbit about the glory days of the Mountain: Fathers would beg us to take their sons as apprentices, and pay us handsomely, especially in food supplies, which we never bothered to grow or find for ourselves. [Emphasis mine.] The Mountain is a kingdom that is not self-sufficient in terms of food! It depended on trade to feed itself - and even if the dwarves had the area and security required to produce enough food for a repopulated mountain, it's likely they don't have the necessary knowledge of farming or livestock husbandry. That institutional knowledge didn't exist before Smaug destroyed most of their population; the survivors have since been working as miners and smiths, not farmhands. Thorin is missing a golden opportunity to lay a solid foundation for a good relationship with the very people who should be the Mountain's natural trade partners. (The Lake-men also urgently need things the dwarves are well placed to produce if the two people aren't at odds - metalwork in the form of tools, building goods such as nails and hinges, and domestic goods like pots and pans, in decent quantities. Given the Lake-men have little else to trade at the moment, the dwarves stood to get back much of any of the treasure they gave the Lake-men fairly quickly!)
What's more, any argument that Bard and Thranduil were somehow wrong to approach the mountain with their armies ignores that Thorin at no point informed them that he and his people were alive. Without that knowledge, they're not intentionally marching into another leader's territory - which could be considered an act of war - they're marching into unheld territory. (Territory Dain of the Iron Hills could potentially claim, but in his absence, there's no one with a clear right to it and more importantly no one defending it.) It's absolutely sensible of them to approach with caution - just because they've moved fairly quickly doesn't mean someone worse wasn't quicker. That Thorin treats their conduct as unwarranted and hostile ignores the reality of the situation - in the power vacuum created by Smaug's death someone is going to move to claim the Mountain, and given the current geopolitical situation there's a range of unpleasant possibilities for who 'someone' might be, ranging all the way from goblins to Sauron. I will grant that Thorin couldn't have known about the potential Sauron aspect, but he's sharp enough that he should recognize that a prize like the mountain won't sit around empty for long, and that there are worse groups likely to take interest than the Lake-men and elves of Mirkwood.
Thorin could perhaps justify his 'greeting' in the initial contact with Thranduil and Bard's subordinates, but again, what does it gain him? Was it effective? By treating them as potential enemies rather than potential allies, all he achieved was creating needless ill-will. Again, recall that while the Lake-men can't currently feed themselves, Thorin and company are eating cram! Civil words and assuring his 'friends' who were coming to check on him that he and his folk are well sets a much better tone for negotiation than "who are you that come as if in war?" This is not about being nice, it's about getting what Thorin wants, and what his people need - and you get more from folk who believe you consider them friends than people who recognize you are treating them as enemies.
Demanding that Thranduil withdraw is provocative no matter what perspective one adopts - it wouldn't matter if Thranduil had personally slaughtered Thorin's favorite puppy, when allies come to the table together, you're asking for trouble by openly and publicly trying to separate them. It's foolish and bad diplomacy, and again, not effective. Sure, it's possible that it might work, but it's a long shot. It's far more likely that Bard feels he can't ask Thranduil to leave under the circumstances for fear of giving offense, not to mention concern that doing would demonstrates that he will cave to such bad behavior and give up his ally - in short, proving himself easy pickings. As for Thranduil, if he voluntarily retreats, he leaves a man new to leadership dealing with an opponent who is to all appearances not acting in good faith. (Thranduil became king when his father died in battle. He may know a thing or two about the problems of new leaders who weren't expecting to be in charge in a tense situation.) In short, there are solid reasons for both to wish to continue negotiations as a team rather than Bard going it alone. And even if Thorin feels this is vital, his approach is highly unlikely to succeed. Again, all he achieves is creating ill-will.
Moving from 'not good' to worse, Thorin was the first of the three leaders to threaten violence ("Begone now ere our arrows fly!") in negotiations, and the first to actually use it - and against messengers, at that. Assaulting messengers in a situation like this is an act of war. This is not only egregious on its face, it's absolutely disastrous as far as achieving a good outcome for the dwarves of the Mountain. There is no reasonable expectation from any perspective that Bard and Thranduil can or will let such an action slide; a non-violent siege is actually a very measured response. But beyond that, even once he discovers Thranduil and Bard had been given the Arkenstone, Thorin was still set on trying to keep all the treasure and regain the Arkenstone.
Again, what do Thorin's actions do to achieve a good outcome for his people? What was his path to his idea of winning? Being besieged when they're already short of food is not a good situation. Depending on Dain to be able to evade or break the siege to get into the Mountain is not a solid plan. We are told Dain was bringing "at least five hundred" dwarves. Even if you discount Thranduil's assessment that the men and elves have superior numbers (and I don't), given Balin's reaction to the camp of the men and elves - 'very great' - and that this is a camp of a picked body that we are told left behind women, children, the sick, and the old, meaning it's only fighting fit men/elves, it's unlikely that Dain outnumbers the besieging forces. At best maybe he achieves parity. But defenders generally have an advantage unless they're in a bad position (no indication Bard and Thranduil were), and Dain's forces are just off a long march at a quick pace - so no advantage to Dain. Thranduil is old enough to have seen the War of the Last Alliance. This is not his first battle. Counting on him to make stupid or rookie mistakes is not a solid strategy. Moreover, however good Dain may be, there's no indication he's fought anything but goblins before. He certainly hasn't fought elves - there hasn't been a war between dwarves and elves in his lifetime. While one might accuse Thranduil of overconfidence, given his experience, it's likely his assessment that their strength of numbers will give him and Bard the upper hand if it comes to a fight is accurate. All of which is to say that Thorin's 'strategy', such as it is, involves a lot of wishful thinking and best-case scenario - generally not the mark of a good leader.
Thorin simply wasn't making the moves he needed to make for the good of his people and his kingdom, regardless of anything Bard and Thranduil were or weren't doing. And it nearly led to disaster for the dwarves. I'm not contrasting Thorin with Bard and Thranduil. I'm contrasting him with his cousin Dain - the dwarf who ended up King under the Mountain after Thorin's behavior cost not only his own life, but the lives of his sister-sons, ending the line of Thror. Dain actually did the things Thorin should have but didn't: honored his word, and forged a close relationship with Bard and the Lake-men/men of Dale that benefited both peoples and carried all the way through the War of the Ring. And it's with that in mind that I'm finding Thorin's behavior from the time of regaining the Mountain until the Battle of Five Armies rather lacking.
*The book offers the effects of 'gold upon which a dragon has long brooded' as a reason, and given that previously Thorin was shown to be a good leader who took care of his people - Bilbo included, Peter Jackson! - I'm inclined to go with it.
I feel the need to clarify that I'm not coming at this from an anti-dwarf or anti-Thorin perspective so much as a 'was he effective?' perspective. And unfortunately, I find myself agreeing with Gandalf's assessment of Thorin - he was not cutting a very splendid figure as King under the Mountain.
As King, Thorin should be thinking about how to achieve the best possible outcome for his people. But Thorin seems to somehow* have gotten it in his mind that keeping the entire treasure is the best outcome. It's not. The best outcome is a stable and prosperous restored Kingdom under the Mountain. (Thorin should be able to recognize this - he has, after all done the difficult work of restoring his people to some degree of prosperity and pride prior to setting out on his quest to the Mountain.) He can keep all the gold, but it's not going to matter if he has to constantly be keeping an eye on the enemies on his very doorstep or nominally ruling people he can't feed.
Roäc - who is hardly anti-dwarf and as best as I can determine acts in the interests of the dwarves of the mountain initially, and thereafter in accordance with Thorin's wishes - advised Thorin immediately after giving him news of Smaug's death and the gathering of those who looked toward the treasure in the mountain to deal with Bard, bypassing the Master of Laketown. This is sound advice. It might cost him more treasure than Thorin would like in the short term, but it would buy him a lasting friendship that will be vital for the Mountain in the long term.
The Lake-men are in desperate straits after the destruction of Laketown. They've got most of their population, their livestock, pastures, and fields, but that's about it. They don't have adequate shelter or food, and people who survived the initial disaster are dying of hunger, cold, and sickness.
Thorin obviously can't provide much for them in the way of food or manpower, not when he only has 12 dwarves plus Bilbo and they're on short rations themselves. What's more, he's right to prioritize fortifying the Mountain for its defense, even if his immediate reasoning as to why he's doing so is wrong. But buying the goodwill of the Lake-men with a pledge of a portion from the treasure at this point, before Bard and Thranduil even arrived, would be smart dealing on his part.
First of all, not all the treasure was the dwarves' in the first place - Smaug added his plunder from Dale and its environs to what was in the Mountain. Thorin's argument that it belongs to the dwarves because Smaug deprived them of life and home doesn't hold water when Smaug did much the same to Dale long before the destruction of Laketown, and trying to make that argument publicly makes Thorin look bad. (Appearances do matter in public diplomacy.) Moreover, the Lake-men helped Thorin's company when they arrived in Laketown in similarly desperate straits - wet, cold, hungry, with little but what they had on their backs. Now would be a good time to pay back - especially when the dwarves stand to gain much from it.
The good will of the Laketown survivors (and potentially the people of a restored Dale) is important for more than just the moment. Recall what Thorin said at the outset of The Hobbit about the glory days of the Mountain: Fathers would beg us to take their sons as apprentices, and pay us handsomely, especially in food supplies, which we never bothered to grow or find for ourselves. [Emphasis mine.] The Mountain is a kingdom that is not self-sufficient in terms of food! It depended on trade to feed itself - and even if the dwarves had the area and security required to produce enough food for a repopulated mountain, it's likely they don't have the necessary knowledge of farming or livestock husbandry. That institutional knowledge didn't exist before Smaug destroyed most of their population; the survivors have since been working as miners and smiths, not farmhands. Thorin is missing a golden opportunity to lay a solid foundation for a good relationship with the very people who should be the Mountain's natural trade partners. (The Lake-men also urgently need things the dwarves are well placed to produce if the two people aren't at odds - metalwork in the form of tools, building goods such as nails and hinges, and domestic goods like pots and pans, in decent quantities. Given the Lake-men have little else to trade at the moment, the dwarves stood to get back much of any of the treasure they gave the Lake-men fairly quickly!)
What's more, any argument that Bard and Thranduil were somehow wrong to approach the mountain with their armies ignores that Thorin at no point informed them that he and his people were alive. Without that knowledge, they're not intentionally marching into another leader's territory - which could be considered an act of war - they're marching into unheld territory. (Territory Dain of the Iron Hills could potentially claim, but in his absence, there's no one with a clear right to it and more importantly no one defending it.) It's absolutely sensible of them to approach with caution - just because they've moved fairly quickly doesn't mean someone worse wasn't quicker. That Thorin treats their conduct as unwarranted and hostile ignores the reality of the situation - in the power vacuum created by Smaug's death someone is going to move to claim the Mountain, and given the current geopolitical situation there's a range of unpleasant possibilities for who 'someone' might be, ranging all the way from goblins to Sauron. I will grant that Thorin couldn't have known about the potential Sauron aspect, but he's sharp enough that he should recognize that a prize like the mountain won't sit around empty for long, and that there are worse groups likely to take interest than the Lake-men and elves of Mirkwood.
Thorin could perhaps justify his 'greeting' in the initial contact with Thranduil and Bard's subordinates, but again, what does it gain him? Was it effective? By treating them as potential enemies rather than potential allies, all he achieved was creating needless ill-will. Again, recall that while the Lake-men can't currently feed themselves, Thorin and company are eating cram! Civil words and assuring his 'friends' who were coming to check on him that he and his folk are well sets a much better tone for negotiation than "who are you that come as if in war?" This is not about being nice, it's about getting what Thorin wants, and what his people need - and you get more from folk who believe you consider them friends than people who recognize you are treating them as enemies.
Demanding that Thranduil withdraw is provocative no matter what perspective one adopts - it wouldn't matter if Thranduil had personally slaughtered Thorin's favorite puppy, when allies come to the table together, you're asking for trouble by openly and publicly trying to separate them. It's foolish and bad diplomacy, and again, not effective. Sure, it's possible that it might work, but it's a long shot. It's far more likely that Bard feels he can't ask Thranduil to leave under the circumstances for fear of giving offense, not to mention concern that doing would demonstrates that he will cave to such bad behavior and give up his ally - in short, proving himself easy pickings. As for Thranduil, if he voluntarily retreats, he leaves a man new to leadership dealing with an opponent who is to all appearances not acting in good faith. (Thranduil became king when his father died in battle. He may know a thing or two about the problems of new leaders who weren't expecting to be in charge in a tense situation.) In short, there are solid reasons for both to wish to continue negotiations as a team rather than Bard going it alone. And even if Thorin feels this is vital, his approach is highly unlikely to succeed. Again, all he achieves is creating ill-will.
Moving from 'not good' to worse, Thorin was the first of the three leaders to threaten violence ("Begone now ere our arrows fly!") in negotiations, and the first to actually use it - and against messengers, at that. Assaulting messengers in a situation like this is an act of war. This is not only egregious on its face, it's absolutely disastrous as far as achieving a good outcome for the dwarves of the Mountain. There is no reasonable expectation from any perspective that Bard and Thranduil can or will let such an action slide; a non-violent siege is actually a very measured response. But beyond that, even once he discovers Thranduil and Bard had been given the Arkenstone, Thorin was still set on trying to keep all the treasure and regain the Arkenstone.
Again, what do Thorin's actions do to achieve a good outcome for his people? What was his path to his idea of winning? Being besieged when they're already short of food is not a good situation. Depending on Dain to be able to evade or break the siege to get into the Mountain is not a solid plan. We are told Dain was bringing "at least five hundred" dwarves. Even if you discount Thranduil's assessment that the men and elves have superior numbers (and I don't), given Balin's reaction to the camp of the men and elves - 'very great' - and that this is a camp of a picked body that we are told left behind women, children, the sick, and the old, meaning it's only fighting fit men/elves, it's unlikely that Dain outnumbers the besieging forces. At best maybe he achieves parity. But defenders generally have an advantage unless they're in a bad position (no indication Bard and Thranduil were), and Dain's forces are just off a long march at a quick pace - so no advantage to Dain. Thranduil is old enough to have seen the War of the Last Alliance. This is not his first battle. Counting on him to make stupid or rookie mistakes is not a solid strategy. Moreover, however good Dain may be, there's no indication he's fought anything but goblins before. He certainly hasn't fought elves - there hasn't been a war between dwarves and elves in his lifetime. While one might accuse Thranduil of overconfidence, given his experience, it's likely his assessment that their strength of numbers will give him and Bard the upper hand if it comes to a fight is accurate. All of which is to say that Thorin's 'strategy', such as it is, involves a lot of wishful thinking and best-case scenario - generally not the mark of a good leader.
Thorin simply wasn't making the moves he needed to make for the good of his people and his kingdom, regardless of anything Bard and Thranduil were or weren't doing. And it nearly led to disaster for the dwarves. I'm not contrasting Thorin with Bard and Thranduil. I'm contrasting him with his cousin Dain - the dwarf who ended up King under the Mountain after Thorin's behavior cost not only his own life, but the lives of his sister-sons, ending the line of Thror. Dain actually did the things Thorin should have but didn't: honored his word, and forged a close relationship with Bard and the Lake-men/men of Dale that benefited both peoples and carried all the way through the War of the Ring. And it's with that in mind that I'm finding Thorin's behavior from the time of regaining the Mountain until the Battle of Five Armies rather lacking.
*The book offers the effects of 'gold upon which a dragon has long brooded' as a reason, and given that previously Thorin was shown to be a good leader who took care of his people - Bilbo included, Peter Jackson! - I'm inclined to go with it.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-06 08:22 pm (UTC)Once Dain and his dwarves are inside the mountain along with the supplies they were carrying, the Mountain becomes that much more defensible, and can make ready for the next round of reinforcements. Dain's 500 were experienced warriors he was able to bring quickly for the express purpose of securing the mountain, not the total expected long term. That's part of the reason Bard and Thranduil were determined not to let him pass - if Dain and his people get inside, besieging or attacking the Mountain gets more difficult, even with superior numbers. The dwarves could and would open and fortify other gates and then bring in further reinforcements as the news spread. (Dain was the closest, being immediately to the east in the Iron Hills, with no mountain ranges or rivers between them and the Mountain. Thorin still has his people back in the Blue Mountains, who he presumably intended would join him once he had reclaimed their former home.)
I agree that Thranduil wanted the Mountain secure, but there's nothing in the text indicating he wanted to establish himself there. So I believe Thranduil would be unlikely to risk his own people to secure it if someone clearly not on the side of goblins or Sauron was already holding the Mountain, willing and even eager to bleed for it. The Mountain is nothing to Thranduil and his people but a strategic position, whereas the dwarves actually care about the idea of the Kingdom under the Mountain, which means they'll fight much harder for it.
If the risk you're referring to is 'risking his people in a fight against goblins when they show up', I don't see where Thranduil has much choice. It's nothing to do with keeping his word - once the goblins are on the scene in such force, it's imperative to defeat them, regardless of how much elves and dwarves may not like each other. The goblins are their mutual - and much more serious - enemy. Letting goblins get entrenched anywhere in the region is not in anyone's interest - elf, man, or dwarf.
I wondered if there might have been clashes between dwarves and elves toward the end of the Second Age or in the early to mid Third Age, but I can't find anything indicating that was the case. Everything I can find about dwarves' wars in the Third Age is them fighting dragons or orcs. The dwarves were on good terms with Eregion in the Second Age, fought against Sauron, and then retreated into Moria and took no further part. So maybe this is just one of those 'both sides have long memories and hold grudges like champs' deals?
no subject
Date: 2018-12-06 09:01 pm (UTC)I suppose the key thing in this scenario is: just how much does Thranduil dislike and distrust Dwarves? If it's only a distant first-age sort of dislike, which should really be focussed on Nogrod anyway, then I agree it would be reasonable for him to leave the Mountain to Thorin & Dain. (I'm not sure about the idea of bringing people from the Blue Mountains. I assume they did in the end, but that was because the Misty Mountains had helpfully sent all their goblins to be slaughtered in a pitched battle. I wonder if they had the force to get through the passes and through Mirkwood if that hadn't happened)
But if Thranduil's pride was offended by the escape from his cells, if he has some more direct reason to distrust Dwarves; perhaps even believing they might ally with Sauron... things might be different. He might have reason to want to occupy the Mountain before Dain arrived. I think that could go either way, since we don't really know what Thranduil's backstory is in detail, or what the relations of the House of Durin are with the Sindar and the silvan elves.
Amdir of Lorien seems to have got on OK with Moria, but then, Amdir got on well with Galadriel too. If Thranduil and Oropher were among the Doriath elves who left Lindon to get away from the Noldor, it might make sense for them to be less warm to the allies of the Noldor in Moria too. But I don't think there's any info on that. ALAS.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-06 09:43 pm (UTC)I suspect bringing people from the Blue Mountains was doable - it's said earlier there's nothing a dwarf will stop at to regain his own, so I can't see 'needing to secure a few passes over the Misty Mountains or take the long way around through the Gap of Rohan' stopping them once they know the Kingdom under the Mountain is back in business.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-07 08:42 pm (UTC)But we do get told that there were some Dwarves on the side of Sauron in the War of the Last Alliance:
"All living things were divided in that day, and some of every kind, even of beasts and birds, were found in either host, save the Elves only. They alone were undivided and followed Gil-galad. Of the Dwarves few fought upon either side; but the kindred of Durin of Moria fought against Sauron." (Silmarillion: Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age). I think there are also a few other bits here and there.
So there is a possible scenario of a Thranduil who had faced Dwarves serving Sauron in battle there that is supported by canon, I think. One could make something of that.
There's the bit where Gimli says that Thranduil's halls were built partly with Dwarvish help, but it is possible that was before Dagorlad, I suppose.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-08 12:44 am (UTC)Huh. I missed that there were a few dwarves on Sauron's side. But a few dwarves in the middle of all that hardly counts as a dwarf-elf war I would think. I mean, you say 'dwarf-elf war' and I expect a throwdown that's more or less between them, not a sprinkling of dwarves in Sauron's forces...
But even assuming that Thranduil's fought dwarves serving Sauron, Thorin and company are descendants of Durin, and so were a) allies in that fight and b) not part of the dustup in Menegroth back in the First Age either. The only complaint I can see that anyone could level against the Longbeards is waking up Durin's Bane, and I don't recall that causing issues for the elves, only for the dwarves of Moria themselves.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-08 01:12 am (UTC)Presumably Thranduil would have no idea that Sauron was stomping up and down cursing the stiff necks of Dwarves (a delightful image, which presumably we have courtesy of Galadriel poking through his unconscious thoughts?), and might reasonably assume that Ring-ownership was intrinsically suspect. After all, they are very Noldor objects.
I completely agree that Thranduil has no reasonable grudge against the Longbeards, who seem to have been thoroughly respectable and upstanding as a family, but then, the fact that he arrested them does suggest he could be somewhat unreasonable.
I would love to know if at any point the Dwarves mentioned they had come from Rivendell and had help from Elrond. If they had, that would really shed a fascinating light on relations between Thranduil and Elrond.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-08 01:25 am (UTC)I don't think the dwarves mentioned much of anything to Thranduil - Thorin told him they didn't attack, they were starving, and wouldn't answer the question "what were you doing in the forest in the first place" with so much as "trying to get to the other side", and it says Thranduil got 'little more news out of [the other dwarves] than out of Thorin' so I doubt they had any chats about Elrond. They were pretty much refusing to tell him anything.