The White Council

Re: Feudalism was Gildor Inglorion

Tolkien and Inklings Discussion

: : : Tolkien's usage in this matter is not clear, and he sometimes : : : uses words or idioms in non-standard ways. He used the word : : : "fief" to refer to specific areas of Gondor, for instance, : : : and many people have argued this means Gondor is somehow : : : feudal. But in the material prepared for the Appendices : : : Tolkien said the Gondorian regions were called by suza : : : in Westron, the same word used as the name for the Shire, and : : : he defined its meaning as "a sphere of occupation (as of the : : : land claimed by a family or clan), of office, or business." : : : (See page 45 in THE PEOPLES OF MIDDLE-EARTH). "Fief" is not : : : defined that way in the feudal sense. Tolkein seems to have : : : had the non-feudal meaning of the word in mind when he : : : referred to the "fiefs" of Gondor.

: : Fief is a linguistic variant of feudum. The connection is a : : strong one. Whatever the internal linguistic derivation, : : Tolkien's use of the word fief in the text of LOTR is a telling : : one.

: I'm sorry, but the usage is no more "telling" than Tolkien's use of the word "Elves" to refer to the Quendi is telling. His explanation for the word "suza", which is used to refer to the fiefs, shows that there is no feudal connection.

The term Elves is telling - it gives a glimpse at the origins of Tolkien's creatures from the Alfar of Teutonic mythology (largely lost or scrambled)and their Celtic cousins (better attested in surviving literature).

: In modern usage "fief" (and/or "fiefdom") simply refers to "anything under a person's complete control or authority". There is strong evidence in Tolkien's definition for "suza" that this is the usage he had in mind when he said "fief".

However, Tolkien is not using the word fief in a modern setting but in the setting of a pre-industrial "Heroic World." I think an important distinction.

: : Shire is a more loose term probably derived in most cases from : : the territory controlled by a tribe or dynastic leader in the : : early Anglo-Saxon period. Later used as an administrative : : unit. When England was feudalised (either before or after 1066) : : the shire was brought into that system. The Sherrif or : : Shire-reeve was the crown's administrator in the shire, but he : : had to work within the feudal society which existed there. : : : : In the fiefs of Gondor there isn't even the hint of a royal : : officer of such a type, only hereditary lords. Hereditary : : lords who furnish troops to the state in time of war - sounds : : rather feudal to me.

: There was certainly nothing feudal about the practice in Roman times, so I don't see why we must assume feudalism within Middle-earth. As I've pointed out in past discussions, there are no mentions of homages and enfeofments, no references to land-tenants or tenures, no benefices, no contracts of personal service -- in short, virtually none of the criteria for Medieval feudalism appear.

The Romans had a sort of unofficial "Feudalism" in the cliental system, though this is a side issue.

Roman Antiquity had rather precise rules for the inheritance of private property though decidedly not for public offices or rulership. The Roman/Byzantine Empire did not fully establish the hereditary principal for the imperial throne until the Macedonian Dynasty in the late 9th C. Even after this date army backing could over-rule the succession of an heir. The Emperors tried to get round their constitutional difficulties with heredity by officially proclaiming their heir co-emperor in their lifetime, though this did not always succeed. Indeed the only official necessity for legitimacy was to be proclaimed by the Roman Army, or at least a substantial part of it - compliance by the Senate could be obtained later.

At no time in the Roman Empire (here distinct from the Byzantine) did lords (domini of latifundia estates - the nearest Roman equivalent to a feudal lord) lead a military following to war on the state's behalf. The only thing they were expected to do was provide individual conscripts for the army from their tennants (and they often attempted to avoid this).

As you say, the fine-detail of a feudal system, in the High Mediaeval, sense is not given in Tolkien. However, many of its more general features are shown. Hereditary lords, apparently (as far as can be ascertained), have both civil and military functions in relation to both their folk and the state. The state can create these lordships (Principality of Ithilien) and presumably remove them, though force of tradition and local sentiment probably would mean it was a rare event, possibly reserved for treason. When invested with the P. of Ithilien one of the first things we hear of is the new principality being given a military component. That this is just about the only thing we hear of in connection to the new principality is a strong argument for the intimate connection between hereditary lordships and military function in the state of Gondor. All of the above hold true for a feudal state. None are found in the non-feudal state of Rome.