"to be rid of the name of thief that was put on me"

[DolorousStroke]

My gut says this primarily refers to Gollum screaming "thief" at Bilbo as he escapes to the dwarves out of the mountain past Gollum. But no one was there to hear Gollum. If so, Bilbo internalized Gollum's criticism, which suggests that the legality/legitimacy of ownership/possession of the Ring is quite important to holders, as we already knew from Smeagol's justification re the "gift" from Deagol, and so forth.

Interestingly Bilbo's role as part of the Lonely Mountain campaign was "burglar." It could be that burglar was felt to be more honorable--risking danger, kind of cool and romantic, like the cat burglar (called "the Cat") in "To Catch a Thief" (oddly called a thief, though). Whereas a thief was dishonorable; and Bilbo cast himself as thief by dishonorably becoming invisible to steal a cup?

A bit unsure of the significance of this line of Bilbo. (Sorry if I was distracted during any discussion of this in class.)

 

[Kate Neville]

With this sort of question, I like to go to the dictionary. Burglary is actually “the act of entering another’s premises without authorization in order to commit a crime, such as theft.” [my emphasis] So Bilbo’s purported value to Thorin’s Company was not simply in getting the treasure, but in getting them into Erebor without being discovered — which he actually does on Durin’s Day. An honest burglar, then, might be one who only helps others get back what was taken from them, or someone who only takes from thieves. Bilbo also did both burglarize and thieve from the Elven King, and his gift of the emerald necklace might be seen as taking away the ‘theft’ part of his action — leaving him simply an 'honest burglar.' [FYI, the word burglar is related to ‘burg’ — which in place names first indicated a fortified hill, and eventually just a fortified town.]

Theft, on the other hand, is “the unlawful taking of the property of another; larceny.” I think Bilbo has residual guilt that although he did not exactly take the Ring, he did keep it. And it did not belong to him. A judge might say that Gollum, having reneged on the agreement to not eat Bilbo if he lost the Riddle Game, did owe Bilbo something. Certainly, Bilbo did not intentionally take Gollum’s property. But was his action unlawful? Gandalf seemed to think that Bilbo was meant to find it, keep it and give it to Frodo -- which is the closest we get to an authoritative judgment.

For your further consideration: was Deagol meant to find the Ring? Was he meant to die? “Many that die deserve life…”

 

[Anthony Lawther]

Do we blame Déagol's sharp eyes, Sméagol's murderous acquisitiveness, or chance if chance you call it?