Q: Did Bilbo Have Any Legal Right to the One Ring?
ANSWER: Legal right is established by the authority of law and law is established by the governing authority of any region where rights are asserted. In most legal traditions any random discovery of a lost item may result in the finder acquiring legal ownership of the item assuming some diligent effort is made to find the original owner and return the lost item.
However, these laws apply to inanimate things. What if, however, you were to find a lost child? Could you claim that child as your own? It’s highly doubtful. Certainly not in the British tradition under which J.R.R. Tolkien lived.
So one must ask whether the One Ring was merely an object or if it was something else. J.R.R. Tolkien indicated that Sauron imparted most of his “native strength” to the One Ring — that it was the repository of his self-externalized essence or being. In other words, the Ring was essentially a part of Sauron and was in some ways sentient (such as in its various attempts to return to Sauron or to influence its keepers to take certain actions, or as when it spoke to Gollum on Mount Doom).
Being more than an inanimate object and in fact something which was intrinsically tied to and a part of a “living” being, the One Ring could not possibly have been “owned” like some metal trinket — at least not under any body of law that Bilbo (a citizen of the Shire) would have recognized or submitted to. Hence, had he known what it was Bilbo would not have attempted to assert a claim to the Ring.
On the other hand, in his ignorance of the Ring’s true nature (and that ignorance was shared by Gandalf and the Dwarves of Thorin’s company) Bilbo believed in good faith that the Ring was indeed a solitary, inanimate (although magical) object which could not be associated with any specific being. Under that assumption Bilbo would have been reasonably assured of his proper ownership over the Ring.
But in fact the ownership would only have been incorrectly assumed and any legal consideration of the fact under the laws of the Shire or other appropriate body — given ALL of the facts of the matter as eventually discovered by Gandalf — would have acknowledged that Bilbo could not legally own the Ring.
Nonetheless, having no legal right to claim ownership of the Ring Bilbo was nonetheless the person who had sole care, custody, and (physical) control of the Ring and as such would have been regarded as its rightful or lawful guardian or care-taker until such time as he proved himself incapable of executing such a duty or chose to relinquish that duty to another. In other words, Bilbo had a moral obligation to care for the Ring (although it was clearly evil and inimical to Bilbo’s and the Shire’s own interests). Gandalf, as an emissary of the Valar, probably had the authority to take the Ring from Bilbo but he stated that doing so would have been harmful to Bilbo.
Hence, Gandalf’s refusal to seize the Ring established Bilbo’s legal guardianship over it (although technically Gandalf did not discover the Ring’s true nature until after Bilbo passed it on to Frodo). But by refusing to take or receive the Ring from Frodo Gandalf in effect empowered Frodo to remain the guardian and custodian of the Ring, its “parole officer” as it were; Frodo’s possession of the Ring would therefore have been deemed lawful and in the best interests of all concerned (except Sauron, of course).
Frodo’s attempts to relinquish control of the Ring might have represented inappropriate rings to abandon his custodianship, assuming an informed party might want to question such a transaction. Should Frodo have considered giving the Ring to Sam, would that have been a choice of sound judgement? In fact Frodo only offered the Ring to Gandalf, Aragorn, and Galadriel — all of whom rejected the offer and therefore refused to assert any sort of care, custody, or control over the Ring.
Hence, not only was Bilbo legally entitled to retain possession of the Ring he was virtually incapable of finding anyone other than Frodo who could properly dispose of it; Bilbo relinquished the Ring in ignorance of its true nature but in the full knowledge that it was “magical” and that it was capable of “acting on its own” (it had tried to slip off his finger, such that he had finally attached it to a fine gold chain). Frodo was Bilbo’s principal heir, as far as Bilbo’s legal responsibilities were concerned. Bilbo’s legal obligations toward the Ring were thus transferred to Frodo.
When Sam believed Frodo was dead and he took the Ring from Frodo’s body Sam was inadvertently violating Frodo’s trust and guardianship; however, as he was Frodo’s servant and loyal companion Sam had a moral right to look after his master’s belongings and in fact was an appropriate courier or executor of Frodo’s property. Frodo of course demanded that the Ring be returned to him once he recovered from Shelob’s venom and Sam complied with the demand immediately, so there should be no question about whether Sam should have had any claim upon the Ring; Sam’s actions obviated any such legal question from the situation.
Finally, it must be asked if Frodo actually had the legal right to destroy the Ring. I don’t think this question can be fully and fairly resolved, although the Ring was a spoil of war and as such constituted a levied tribute from Sauron for his misdeeds against the Dunedain of Arnor and Gondor. In fact, Isildur (then reigning High King of the Dunedain-in-Exile) asserted a legal claim to the Ring as a weregild for his father and brother — and Elrond and Cirdan, the only other sovereigns present, did not (apparently) contest Isildur’s claim.
So while Isildur might not (under Arnorian law) be able to own the Ring (although we don’t know if slavery was permitted in Arnor) he was legally free (and perhaps obligated) to seize it as a warden of the state. However, that wardenship would have ended both because of Isildur’s death (and subsequent loss of the Ring) and the failure of the Kingdom of Arnor (although Isildur’s heirs survived). Aragorn refused to assert any claims over the Ring, therefore renouncing Isildur’s own claims and thus avoiding any legal complexities.
Therefore we should probably conclude that either Frodo’s guardianship was based solely upon Bilbo’s finding of the Ring or else it was confirmed by Aragorn’s refusal to ask for or demand the Ring be restored to the Line of Isildur.
Disclaimer: I am not an attorney from the Shire, Arnor, Gondor, Mordor, Rivendell, or Aman; nor do I play one on television, film, stage, or radio. The opinions expressed in this article do not constitute legal advice and should not be construed as such.
# # #
Have you read our other Tolkien and Middle-earth Questions and Answers articles?
For additional discussion, please visit this thread at SF-Fandom.
[…] Did Bilbo Have Any Legal Right to the One Ring? […]