Arcane Topic Warning: Part the Third

[Kuruharan]

What's important is they were 'retentive of the memory of injuries (and of benefits), so they remembered grudges or friendships. Which, I think could factor into whether dwarves fight with 'evil' or not.
-Boromir88

But I wonder about this. Why were there no grudges remembered from the time of the Last Alliance during the War of the Dwarves and Orcs? This was the question that basically launched my questioning in this area.

They had succumbed, but they were able to maintain the appearance of normalcy.
-mark12_30

I think the principle involved between the Dwarf Houses was probably similar, at least as far as activities appearing "normal" to peoples far sundered from each other. Most of them were a long way apart. It would have been hard for them to know what the others were doing, even if they were all that interested in keeping tabs on each other.

However, I think there would have been a problem maintaining this appearance of normality over a long period of time, after all we are talking about a period of time stretching across several millennia. We know that the Dwarves visited each other from time to time. Sooner or later some Western Dwarves (probably Longbeards) were bound to go far enough East to see what the Stonefoots and Blacklocks were up to. I’m kind of curious as to how the Western Dwarves reacted when they saw what had happened.

Also-- isn't the phrase "Free Peoples", not "Good Peoples"?
-mark12_30

True. I realize now that, given the nature of this topic, I should have provided a more specific definition of evil to give the topic a baseline.

Maybe something like “Acceptance of Melkorian influence and values and adopting them as a basic part of the culture.” I think this definition may hold some validity as it would exclude people like the Noldor who, while obviously influenced by Melkor, did not accept him as the source and inspiration for their culture. On the other hand, evil tribes of Men and the King’s Men in Númenor would qualify under this definition. I’m personally inclined to think, given their location and Tolkien’s implication, that some of the Eastern Dwarves probably did the same to some extent.

Of course, that also brings up the issue of how much of their original culture they retained. I think it is also safe to say that they probably did retain some of their original instruction from Aüle although it would have provided for an interesting mix of cultural influences, but no more odd than many we see in the real world.

Gold and mithril enslaved many Dwarven hearts; hence, evil. Thorin was in danger of it, but was saved in the end.
-littlemanpoet

Also true that each individual had the potential for evil, I’m just curious about how this developed on a societal level.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Also true that each individual had the potential for evil, I’m just curious about how this developed on a societal level.

This is beginning to remind me of the Elven government/culture thread. As is typical in Tolkien's Legendarium, Patriarchal hereditary leadership is the modus operandum for societal dynamics. This is probably more so in Dwarven culture. As goes Thorin, so go the others, even Balin. Not one of the Dwarves in Erebor gain-said their leader. In the part of The Hobbit I am speaking of, Tolkien was writing pretty seriously; no more of the pratfalls and silliness with Trolls and Spiders ... so this I think can be construed as typical societal dynamic for Dwarves.

[Boromir88]

so this I think can be construed as typical societal dynamic for Dwarves.~lmp

And I think it fits along with why the Dwarves united against the Orcs in the war. Despite what battles, arguments, disagreements the dwarves had with eachother...Thror was gruesomely killed and this enraged all the dwarves into sending aid and helping eachother.

[Saurreg]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

This is beginning to remind me of the Elven government/culture thread. As is typical in Tolkien's Legendarium, Patriarchal hereditary leadership is the modus operandum for societal dynamics. This is probably more so in Dwarven culture. As goes Thorin, so go the others, even Balin. Not one of the Dwarves in Erebor gain-said their leader. In the part of The Hobbit I am speaking of, Tolkien was writing pretty seriously; no more of the pratfalls and silliness with Trolls and Spiders ... so this I think can be construed as typical societal dynamic for Dwarves.

As a citizen from a quasi-patriachal state, I can tell you that concerns or rather, fears of the patriarch going rogue is of the uptmost concerns of both the citizens and government. As such there are measures adopted to prevent absolute power from falling totally into the hands of one man. Hence Singapore has two deputy Prime Ministers and three Ministers for Defence.

That stated I wonder if the dwarven houses had such fail safe mechanisms in place. What would happen if a leader of a great house turned rogue and perhaps "evil" as we have more or less defined in this thread? Could the other dwarves of the same house have stopped this leader from committing undersirable acts? Or would a possible culture of respect to elders, strict social hierarchy, apolitical lifestyles and strong centralized rule dissuade such a self-righting course?

Magna Carta anyone?

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Saurreg

That stated I wonder if the dwarven houses had such fail safe mechanisms in place. What would happen if a leader of a great house turned rogue and perhaps "evil" as we have more or less defined in this thread? Could the other dwarves of the same house have stopped this leader from committing undersirable acts? Or would a possible culture of respect to elders, strict social hierarchy, apolitical lifestyles and strong centralized rule dissuade such a self-righting course?

Magna Carta anyone?

Seems unlikely... Dwarves were more of a patriachal people than either Men or Elves. The vengeance of the Dwarves for Thrór is unmatched in Arda- even the vengeance of the Noldor for Finwë doesn't quite compare, in that it is only the Noldor, and not all the Eldar, who follow Fëanor into exile and revenge. With the Dwarves, Thráin has Dwarves of many (all?) houses at his back. The Elven equivalent would have required the Vanyar and the Teleri to have marched with the Noldor.

Furthermore, one can see from The Hobbit that Thorin exercised absolute authority over the Longbeards. We not only see this in the actions of Balin and the rest of the Unlucky Thirteen, but in the actions of Dáin and the Dwarves of the Iron Hills. Dáin was a pretty independent lord, as things go. He'd been lording it over the Iron Hills Dwarves since the Battle of Azanulbizar, and without his troops Thorin was in a pickle and no mistake- but despite being a clearly more levelheaded Dwarf (as we see from his post-Thorin's death actions), and a senior, powerful lord in his own right, he does not waver a bit from obeying Thorin.

So checks and balances? Seems unlikely.

[Saurondil]

Originally Posted by Saurreg

As a citizen from a quasi-patriachal state, I can tell you that concerns or rather, fears of the patriarch going rogue is of the uptmost concerns of both the citizens and government. As such there are measures adopted to prevent absolute power from falling totally into the hands of one man. Hence Singapore has two deputy Prime Ministers and three Ministers for Defence.

That stated I wonder if the dwarven houses had such fail safe mechanisms in place. What would happen if a leader of a great house turned rogue and perhaps "evil" as we have more or less defined in this thread? Could the other dwarves of the same house have stopped this leader from committing undersirable acts? Or would a possible culture of respect to elders, strict social hierarchy, apolitical lifestyles and strong centralized rule dissuade such a self-righting course?

Magna Carta anyone?

## Perhaps the constitution of Numenor, so far as it is recoverable, would be enough to ensure that kind of culture. It seems to depend on custom, much more than on statute. In an ideal state, there would be no law - it would not be needed;custom - as among the Hobbits, who were influenced by the Dunedain - would be enough.

Originally Posted by Inziladun

I agree that Dwarves would have been the primary source of outside commerce for the Shire in the time of the War of the Ring. However, there's a variable in Saruman. He had been covertly buying tobacco for some time leading up to the War, and it is said that the "money" he paid for the merchandise was corrupting the hobbits with whom he was doing business. That would seem to be a fair amount of coinage, and I wonder what sort of currency he would have used.

## Might the invention of money be another of Saruman's bad deeds (and a form of likeness to Sauron, by trying to dominate others) ? It would require technology, too - and Tolkien is not overly keen on technology. Corrupting the Sackville-Bagginses (& other Hobbits ?) with cash would fit TLOTR well enough. Barter OTOH, with perishable goods, would allow a comparatively trouble-free economy, one closer to nature. Cash might count as a mathom, to put in the mathom house at Michel Delving. (TLOTR as anti-capitalist fable ? Maybe not.) This would indicate a contrast between Hobbits and dwarves - the latter are inclined to possessiveness, the former are not (unless tempted by the Ring or Saruman).

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Saurondil

## Might the invention of money be another of Saruman's bad deeds (and a form of likeness to Sauron, by trying to dominate others) ? It would require technology, too - and Tolkien is not overly keen on technology. Corrupting the Sackville-Bagginses (& other Hobbits ?) with cash would fit TLOTR well enough.

I don't think Saruman introduced currency to the Shire.
For one thing, Gandalf kept an eye on the place, and such a societal change would surely have been noted by him. Saruman was buying pipe-weed on the sly, but that was more easily accomplished covertly.

Also, there is a reference in The Hobbit that leads me to believe hobbits were used to currency.

Bungo, that was Bilbo's father, built the most luxurious hobbit-hole for her (and partly with her money) that was to be found either under The Hill or over The Hill or across The Water, and there they remained to the end of their days.

An Unexpected party

Originally Posted by Saurondil

Barter OTOH, with perishable goods, would allow a comparatively trouble-free economy, one closer to nature. Cash might count as a mathom, to put in the mathom house at Michel Delving. (TLOTR as anti-capitalist fable ? Maybe not.) This would indicate a contrast between Hobbits and dwarves - the latter are inclined to possessiveness, the former are not (unless tempted by the Ring or Saruman).

I think the Dwarves likely did trade with the Shire mostly by barter. I can see them trading metal items for food.

[Zigûr]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Also, there is a reference in The Hobbit that leads me to believe hobbits were used to currency.

There are several, in fact:

"Bilbo could never remember how he found himself outside, without a hat, a walking-stick or any money, or anything that he usually took when he went out" (p. 29)

"I have come without my hat, and I have left my pocket-handkerchief behind, and I haven't any money." (p. 30)

In regards to trade between Hobbits and Dwarves, I wonder if the Dwarves were more buyers or sellers. It seems to me that the Hobbits were accomplished enough with the simple machinery they used and the construction of their own dwellings; and that the primary produce of value to the Dwarves would have been food, pipe-weed and the like. One can perhaps imagine them selling to the Men of Dale in the East and buying from the Hobbits in the West. I'm no economist though so I personally can't speculate too much.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Zigûr

In regards to trade between Hobbits and Dwarves, I wonder if the Dwarves were more buyers or sellers. It seems to me that the Hobbits were accomplished enough with the simple machinery they used and the construction of their own dwellings; and that the primary produce of value to the Dwarves would have been food, pipe-weed and the like. One can perhaps imagine them selling to the Men of Dale in the East and buying from the Hobbits in the West. I'm no economist though so I personally can't speculate too much.

Maybe the Dwarves supplied the Shire with everyday metal items like candlesticks, cutlery, and farm tools. Sure, hobbits probably could have fashioned things like that themselves. However, anything metal made by Dwarves was likely of superior quality, and their products could have been preferred, by the richer families especially , as status symbols.