Essay 8 Summary

In David Kyle Johnsons Tolkiens Just War, the pacifist and non-pacifist approaches are analyzed to hypothesis if the Battle of Five Armies is justified. Johnson also emphasized the recurring question; Did Tolkien believe in the just-war theory (104)? Johnson said pacifists believe war is an unacceptable method to resolve differences while non-pacifists argue that sometimes war is necessary in cases such as self-defense (105, 106). According to Johnson, non-pacifists use the just-war criteria, requiring legitimate authority, a necessary military objective, and the prevention of war on noncombatants, to advocate a just war (107). There are three standards of the just-war theory, but Johnson said a battle may not meet all standards and still be considered a just-war (108). Johnson then examined whether the Battle of Five Armies in Tolkiens The Hobbit was a justified battle (109). Johnson stated that the dwarves, elves, and men in the battle have a valid commander (109). The dwarven's leaders are Thorin and Dain while the elves and Lakemen have Thranduil and Bard (109). Johnson then analyzed if the motive of each army was rational. He stated that Bard has a legitimate reason to go to war; to obtain his fair share of gold to reconstruct the town (109). Johnson said the dwarves do not have a just reason to fight since they have an option to give away some gold and never fight the war (110). Their motive is full of pride and greed (110). Johnson said the wolves, goblins and the dwarves are acting selfish in the Battle of Five Armies, fighting purely for revenge (111). Johnson then stated it is unsure if Tolkien fully supported the classic standards of the just-war theory (111). Johnson said Tolkien created characters such as Frodo or Bombadil to exemplify pacifistic behaviors, although it is stated in the essay that readers can not conclude that Tolkien was a true pacifist (111). Johnson said Tolkien's Christian beliefs were portrayed throughout the Middle Earth tales, such as when Bilbo did not kill Gollum when he had an opportunity to do so (112). If Bilbo, who was not in fear of his life, would have stabbed Gollum, the act could not be justified (113). Johnson quoted a letter from Tolkien to his son who was engaged in bomber pilot training, describing Tolkiens stance on a just-war (114). Johnson then extracted the main points of Tolkiens letter and reiterated Tolkiens belief that however tragic and destructive, war can sometimes be justifiable (115). Johnson pointed out that Tolkien may not have agreed with all of the criteria for a just war, specifically to only fight in a war where the outcome of winning overshines losing (115). On the contrary, Johnson also proposed that Tolkien might have disagreed with the need-for-success aspect of the just-war theory (115). As an example, Johnson exemplifies the Battle of Morannan, where Tolkien proposed the justification of the battle, due to Frodo destroying the ring to save Middle Earth (115). In this case, Johnson said the Battle of Morannan was used for distraction, not primarily one for Aragorns company to win (115). Johnson then concluded that Tolkien clearly avoided stating his opinion on just-war (116). Despite never being clear about his stance, Tolkien strongly believed there is some good in the world and its worth fighting for. (116).

Works Cited

Bassham, Gregory, and Eric Bronson. Tolkiens Just War. The Hobbit and Philosophy Ed. David

Kyle Johnson. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2012. 103-117. Print.