Farmer Maggot's Dogs

[Moonraker]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Your idea of "appropriate fashion" is revisionist to be sure. Farmers/landowners have been chasing trespassers off their lands with dogs for millenia.

This is Middle Earth, not the UK or any other civilised nation with laws to protect farmers and the public alike.

Maggot was in a foul and shaken mood after the encounter with the Nazgul (not too many of these have been seen in England), and he upped his security stance to the highest level when he said to Merry he nearly set his dogs on the trespassing Frodo and company. The Nazgul was seen as the last straw, as though Maggot had encountered many other trespassers before (Frodo was one of them, but some years go). It is not known whether the dogs would have been used to merely chase trespassers off from then on, if indeed that was all Maggot trained them for. If the trespasser presented any retaliation, then the guard dogs would of course attack without hesitation.

Ultimately, I think Maggot would not have used his dogs to kill anyone or anything, not unless he could clearly see it was life vs death situation. The encounter with the Nazgul may have just made him extra paranoid and anxious, and angry almost to breaking point. He suspected the Nazgul would return, and was not far away.

[Belegorn]

Originally Posted by Moonraker

This is Middle Earth, not the UK or any other civilised nation with laws to protect farmers and the public alike.

You do realize what you said on the other thread about Aragorn arresting Gandalf? I'm not sure how you can say this here to other posters after you implemented laws of our world into M-E.

[Moonraker]

Originally Posted by Belegorn

You do realize what you said on the other thread about Aragorn arresting Gandalf? I'm not sure how you can say this here to other posters after you implemented laws of our world into M-E.

I believe I said I was not saying Middle Earth had a widespread legal system with lawyers. Rohan and Gondor did have formal laws, however. And stealing the One Ring is a major crime, in any world. That is a different thread, little point trying to merge it with Maggot and his dogs.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Moonraker

This is Middle Earth, not the UK or any other civilised nation with laws to protect farmers and the public alike.

I would suggest reading further regarding Tolkien's intentions for the Shire. The Shire, according to Tolkien, was indeed England, or at least the long gone England of his youth. There is every reason to believe that Farmer Maggot was a cantankerous but wise rustic fellow that Tolkien met during his time in Oxfordshire (and perhaps chased him out of his fields -- something that occurred to me once in a farmer's cornfield). Other Hobbits were certainly modeled after folks Tolkien knew or were at least architypical of rustics Tolkien recalled from his youth.

Originally Posted by Moonraker

I believe I said I was not saying Middle Earth had a widespread legal system with lawyers. Rohan and Gondor did have formal laws, however. And stealing the One Ring is a major crime, in any world. That is a different thread, little point trying to merge it with Maggot and his dogs.

There is no textual evidence that there were any "lawyers" in either Rohan or Gondor. However, and quite amusingly, there is every indication that Messrs. Grubb, Grubb and Burrowes, the firm that oversaw Bilbo Baggins' estate auction, were indeed attorneys-at-law. The Shire was quite anachronistic with its post office, wills and umbrellas.

[Nerwen]

Let's break this down a bit.

1. "Supernatural". Look Moonraker, you are free to use words in the way you prefer, but please don't "correct" me for not following suit. I employed the word in accordance with both the dictionary and common usage, and will continue to do so.

Originally Posted by the Concise Oxford Dictionary

supernatural adj. attributed to or thought to reveal some force above the laws of nature; magical, occult, mystical.

As you see, it's a very broad term. In the specific context of Middle-earth, I'd have far more reservations about using it to describe, say, Elven "magic" than anything to do with Sauron or his minions.

1. a. What's the point of this, anyway? Earlier you were arguing that Farmer Maggot was being very foolish in even considering his dogs could handle such a formidable supernatural being. Now apparently Khamul's just some old bloke in a sheet, and Maggot's at fault for overreacting. I mean come on, at least make up your mind!

[Moonraker]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Let's break this down a bit.

1. "Supernatural". Look Moonraker, you are free to use words in the way you prefer, but please don't "correct" me for not following suit. I employed the word in accordance with both the dictionary and common usage, and will continue to do so.


As you see, it's a very broad term. In the specific context of Middle-earth, I'd have far more reservations about using it to describe, say, Elven "magic" than anything to do with Sauron or his minions.

1. a. What's the point of this, anyway? Earlier you were arguing that Farmer Maggot was being very foolish in even considering his dogs could handle such a formidable supernatural being. Now apparently Khamul's just some old bloke in a sheet, and Maggot's at fault for overreacting. I mean come on, at least make up your mind!

The power of the Nazgul is sourced from a supernatural power, Sauron. Without his input the Nazgul would have been as powerful as the Old Took when he met Maggot. They are not all independently supernatural, unless they practised sorcery from their pre-Nazgul days.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Moonraker

The power of the Nazgul is sourced from a supernatural power, Sauron. Without his input the Nazgul would have been as powerful as the Old Took when he met Maggot. They are not all independently supernatural, unless they practised sorcery from their pre-Nazgul days.

Once again: this is your personal way of using the word; it is not mine and I am not obliged to conform to your wishes.

Besides which, it's a side issue.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Moonraker

It is never a case of being right or wrong, more so what you learn from the different arguments for and against, if presented in a courteous and respectful manner to begin with, and not resort to swipes.

Of course, which is why you could have said, "Well, personally I prefer to use "supernatural" only to mean such-and-such, but whatever", and just moved on to address my, you know, actual points.

As for "resorting to swipes"- have I done this? It hasn't been my intention,

[The Barrow-Wight]

Everyone,

Alright, the conversation has gone off topic (probably a long time ago, really) and is now about HOW we are discussing rather than what we are discussing. When you start deconstructing previous posts line by line without adding anything to the actual topic, you are doing it wrong. Let's stop being argumentative, defensive and offensive.