Flammifer
Well-Known Member
We almost got into a discussion of the word ‘trove’ in last night’s class. So, in case we go there next week, let’s jump the gun.
‘Trove’ means ‘found’. It is the past principle of the French verb ‘trover’, ‘to find’. It came into English from French or Norman French specifically connected to ‘treasure’ in the phrase ‘treasure trove’, meaning found treasure.
As such, it is an accurate description by Galdor to call the Ring, “the halfling’s trove”.
However, the description would not have been accurate under English Common Law. ‘Treasure Trove’, under English common law was defined as gold or silver in any form, which had been hidden and rediscovered, and which no person could prove ownership. Treasure trove, in common law, belonged to the Crown.
Bilbo’s find was not treasure which had been hidden (with the intent of being re-claimed), it was lost (by Gollum). Legally (under common law) this made it not ‘treasure trove’, but subject to the ‘law of finders’. Under this law, property is ‘lost’ if it is found in a place where the true owner did not intend to set it down, and where it is not likely to be found by the true owner. Found lost property can be claimed by the finder against any other than the true owner or any previous possessors. However, the land- owner of the land where the lost item was found also has a claim to the item. Landowner’s claims prevail if the finder is trespassing, or if the find is on ‘private’ parts of the landowner’s land.
All this indicates that although Bilbo found the Ring, and thus it is ‘trove’, it is not legally ‘treasure trove’. Nor is Bilbo’s legal title to it clear. (At least under English common law. Who knows what the laws and customs of the Shire, or the Kingdom of Arnor, or the laws of the Elves said about such things?)
Others with potentially valid legal claims to own the Ring include:
Gollum: As the ‘true owner’.
Aragorn: As heir to Isildur as ‘true owner and previous possessor’.
Sauron: As ‘true owner and previous possessor’.
The Goblins: As owners of the land on which the lost property was found.
If the Ring had been ‘treasure trove’ (which it was not, as it was lost property), then legal ownership would go to the Crown, which might have been the Crown of Arnor (and thus Aragorn), the Crown of Rivendell (and thus Elrond), the Crown of the Goblins of the Misty Mountains (and thus the heirs of the Great Goblin), the Crown of Gondor (and thus Denethor), depending on which sovereign power had the best claim to the territory. Or, of course, it might legally belong to the Valar, as sovereigns of Arda?
Had ownership of the Ring been litigated, rather than fought over, the lawyers would likely have made lots of money.
Having covered the definition of the word ‘trove’, and the legal implications (under English Common Law) of the term ‘treasure trove’, what might Galdor have implied by using the phrase, “the halfling’s trove”? And, what might we, the readers, be expected to infer?
Those are the three implications of Galdor’s use of the word ‘trove’ that I can think of. Are there any more?
‘Trove’ means ‘found’. It is the past principle of the French verb ‘trover’, ‘to find’. It came into English from French or Norman French specifically connected to ‘treasure’ in the phrase ‘treasure trove’, meaning found treasure.
As such, it is an accurate description by Galdor to call the Ring, “the halfling’s trove”.
However, the description would not have been accurate under English Common Law. ‘Treasure Trove’, under English common law was defined as gold or silver in any form, which had been hidden and rediscovered, and which no person could prove ownership. Treasure trove, in common law, belonged to the Crown.
Bilbo’s find was not treasure which had been hidden (with the intent of being re-claimed), it was lost (by Gollum). Legally (under common law) this made it not ‘treasure trove’, but subject to the ‘law of finders’. Under this law, property is ‘lost’ if it is found in a place where the true owner did not intend to set it down, and where it is not likely to be found by the true owner. Found lost property can be claimed by the finder against any other than the true owner or any previous possessors. However, the land- owner of the land where the lost item was found also has a claim to the item. Landowner’s claims prevail if the finder is trespassing, or if the find is on ‘private’ parts of the landowner’s land.
All this indicates that although Bilbo found the Ring, and thus it is ‘trove’, it is not legally ‘treasure trove’. Nor is Bilbo’s legal title to it clear. (At least under English common law. Who knows what the laws and customs of the Shire, or the Kingdom of Arnor, or the laws of the Elves said about such things?)
Others with potentially valid legal claims to own the Ring include:
Gollum: As the ‘true owner’.
Aragorn: As heir to Isildur as ‘true owner and previous possessor’.
Sauron: As ‘true owner and previous possessor’.
The Goblins: As owners of the land on which the lost property was found.
If the Ring had been ‘treasure trove’ (which it was not, as it was lost property), then legal ownership would go to the Crown, which might have been the Crown of Arnor (and thus Aragorn), the Crown of Rivendell (and thus Elrond), the Crown of the Goblins of the Misty Mountains (and thus the heirs of the Great Goblin), the Crown of Gondor (and thus Denethor), depending on which sovereign power had the best claim to the territory. Or, of course, it might legally belong to the Valar, as sovereigns of Arda?
Had ownership of the Ring been litigated, rather than fought over, the lawyers would likely have made lots of money.
Having covered the definition of the word ‘trove’, and the legal implications (under English Common Law) of the term ‘treasure trove’, what might Galdor have implied by using the phrase, “the halfling’s trove”? And, what might we, the readers, be expected to infer?
- As the word ‘trove’ is almost always connected to the word ‘treasure’ in English, Galdor is implying, and we are meant to infer that the Ring is a ‘treasure’. Of value. Precious.
- In common usage in English, ‘trove’ is often taken to mean ‘hoard’ (as most ‘treasure trove’ is found not as single items, but as ‘hoards’ of treasure). Hoard, particularly in TLOTR with reference to Smaug, has connotations of treasure guarded and gloated over. Not treasure used to create beauty or prosperity. An implication, or inference, could be that the Ring is this type of mis-used and mis-guided treasure.
- By using the word ‘trove’ to suggest ‘treasure trove’, Galdor might be implying (and we might be inferring) that Bilbo’s (and Frodo’s) claim to the Ring is by no means firm?
Those are the three implications of Galdor’s use of the word ‘trove’ that I can think of. Are there any more?
