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.