The White Council

: : I've checked this and there are a few loopholes in the : : anti-feudal argument for "Suza".

: The definition is:

:

 :   a sphere of occupation (as of the land claimed by a family :   or clan), of office, or business : 

: : The term as defined (fairly loosely) by Tolkien seems to allow : : for it to be used for any type of recognisable region, which : : its inhabitants see as distinct from the outside world, though : : having the presumption that the region in question was not a : : usually a state in itself. This is a very undefined term which : : could include feudal or non-feudal connotations, the form of : : society is not specified at all. In this respect the feudal : : specificity of the term fief might be lessened (or might not - : : see below), though the possibility of feudalism within a Suza : : is not ruled out.

: I see nothing "loose" in the definition. He says:

Perhaps a chose my wording a little inaccurately - whatever you think of the specificity of the definition you would have to agree that the TERM AS DEFINED above is very loose indeed. It could mean anything from sphere of office - the purview of a customs clerk (if such existed), business - a laundry in Minas Tirith , sphere of occupation - a hill farm with half a dozen sheep - up to the province of a state — That's what I call a loose term!

:

 :   In Gondor the word suza was still applied to the :   divisions of the realm, such as Anorien, Ithilien, Lebennin, :   for which in Noldorin (read, Sindarin) the word lhann :   was used : 

: That's pretty specific.

A moderately specific single use of a very vague term.

: : Furthermore the specific examples (Lebennin, Ithilien, Anorien) : : given by Tolkien to illustrate what a suza is do not include : : any of the regions of Gondor known to have had a greater lord : : (pre-Faramir at any rate). The term "Fiefs of the south" might : : therefore not have referred to suza at all, these regions may : : have had a different name in Westron...

: No other word has been offered by Tolkien. Lebennin, at the very least, is enumerated among the "fiefs of the south" (although I'm not sure of where you are getting that phrase from -- the only place I can find "fiefs" is in Letter 347):

Fief(s) occurs a number of times in LOTR as does, to the best of my memory, the specific phrase "Fiefs of the south." No other Westron word is given, though whether SUZA could be applied to any other than the examples given by Tolkien is open to question due to the apparent difference between these and the other sub-divisions of Gondor , ie the lack of greater lords.

:

 :   ...It may be noted that at the end of the Third Age there were :   prob. more people (Men) that knew Q., or spoke S., than there :   were Elves who did either!  Though dwindling, the population :   of Minas Tirith and its fiefs must have been much greater :   than that of Lindon, Rivendell, and :   Lorien. : 

: Here he speaks of Minas Tirith's fiefs.

He is speaking very generally and without, I might say, much precision. Imagine telling someone from Texas he lived in a province of Washington! The fiefs were self evidently Gondor's - Minas Tirith only being the capital of the state not the state. By his own suza definition the suza of Minas Tirith could only have included the "Townlands" enclosed by the Rammas.

: : ...I have reason to believe that these areas, together with : : Calenardon, formed the core of the Kingdom of Gondor and were : : probably ruled directly, as a form of Royal Demesne Lands...

: Well, actually, the original five areas of Gondor appear to have been Anorien, Ithilien, Calenardhon, Belfalas, and Lebennin. I have long suggested that there were three princely houses (ruling Calenardhon, Lebennin, and Belfalas) beside the House of Elendil in Gondor.

: In "Minas Tirith" Tolkien mentions "the great fief of Belfalas".

That would seem to belong to the Princes of Dol Amroth and so would not be a core area of the State of Gondor by my reckoning.

: : ...Though I would add that in addition to royal estates and : : urban areas these regions would have had lesser lords and : : gentry whose feudal relations would have been to the sovereign : : directly rather than through the intermediary of a greater : : lord.

: No such lords are ever referred to, however. One can suppose many things must have existed in Middle-earth, and argue that since Tolkien never said they did not exist it is reasonable to say they did or could have. But the system of government was much less sophisticated than all that. The Numenorean system was based on priest-kings, and European feudalism had nothing like that.

The Mediaeval Byzantine emperor was "Christ's Vice-Gerent on Earth" and "Equal to the Apostles" which is pretty much sacerdotal in character (more than the Pope claims anyhow). Western European rulers were anointed, which was a feature taken from the ceremony of priest-making.

: : Indeed the fact that The Shire, Calenardon and Ithilien were : : all given away to new inhabitants by Dunadan sovereigns : : suggests a subsidiary meaning for suza as "Royal Lands" could : : be postulated - perhaps originally appearing as Ar-suza (or : : whatever means royal in Adunaic)?!

: The Shire wasn't "given away" in the sense that Calenardhon was. Nor was Ithilien given away.

Both were disposed from direct crown control. The only distinction for Calenardon was that, in addition, the state relinquished all claims to sovereignty over it.

Are you referring to Legolas' people? They did not take Ithilien for their own. There is no connotation of "royal lands" in Tolkien's definition of "suza". The lands which became the Shire were indeed once a "royal demesne" as you suggest, but Tolkien doesn't appear to use the term in the feudal sense. It was never "Ar-Suza" (or whatever). It was simply a suza, a suza of the hobbits, after they were given permission to settle there.

A mere possibility, given that all the regions which Tolkien gives the name suza to appear to have been ruled directly by the crown at some time, as far as we can tell.

: [big snip]

: : : : Pippin's oath, for instance, was to Denethor and : : : : Gondor, and not just to Denethor.

: [big snip]

: : : Pippin's oath (of fealty) was very personally worded, and : : Denethor did not merely accept his oath - he also became : : oath-bound in a very personal sense, these are essential : : features of feudality.

: First of all, Pippin did swear fealty, but to Gondor before anyone else:

:

 :   'Here do I swear fealty and service to Gondor, and to the Lord :   and Steward of the realm, to speak and to be silent, to do and :   to let be, to come and to go, in need or plenty, in peace or :   war, in living or dying, from this hour henceforth, until my :   lord release me, or death take me, or the world end.  So say :   I, Peregrin son of Paladin of the Shire of the Halflings.' : 

: Were Gondor not named first and foremost, I could easily agree this was an oath of personal fealty between a lord and his personal servant. But Gondor is named first, and so Pippin's fealty is more to Gondor than to Denethor (who is not even named -- only his office is given). When Beregond first meets Pippin he says, "I am told you have been sworn to the service of the Lord and of the City." Again, Pippin's service is not recognized as a personal allegiance to Denethor.

Feudal fealty often had clauses in it specifically citing another binding oath. A man might swear fealty to a lord - "saving my duty to the king". This enshrines the duty of a vassal to his immediate superior for anything except an act of outright treason. The clause about Gondor could be seen in this light.

: : If a person becomes a naturalised citizen of a country (UK or : : USA) they make oaths of allegience but neither the Queen nor : : The President or any representative make oaths in reply - here : : is a basic distinction between a feudal relationship and a : : non-feudal one.

: Denethor really doesn't give an oath:

:

 :   'And this do I hear, Denethor son of Ecthelion, Lord of Gondor, :   Steward of the High King, and I will not forget it, nor fail :   to reward that which is given: fealty with love, valour with :   honour, oath-breaking with vengeance.' : 

: He swears nothing, whereas Pippin swears fealty and service to Gondor and its Steward.

He acknowledges his side of the relationship in what sounds a very binding speech, he says he will love, honour and if necessary punish his protégé. He admittedly does not utter the words oath or swear - but the meaning and gravity of his words are clear.

: [snip]

: : : : On the other hand, Faramir discharged his duties as an : : : : officer in the army of Gondor, and not as a feudal vassal. : : : : He was indeed a "prince" and the heir of his father, but : : : : he was addressed as "Captain" and not by some political : : : : title. How does one show that Faramir was (or was not) the : : : : heir of a feudal lord?

: : William the Marshall was Earl of Pembroke (as far as I can : : remember - he was certainly an earl) but was also The Marshall : : Of England one of the highest military commands responsible for : : administering the Royal Host when it was called out. Bertrand : : Du Guesculin was a Breton lord but he was also Constable of : : France. Lordship and military rank were not mutually : : exclusive.

: But Faramir has no lordship. He is merely a prince, a man of noble, son of the House which rules Gondor. If Faramir was a feudal lord under Denethor then he had a fief: what was that fief? None is mentioned.

I answered what I took to be your original point, by saying that a high-born man in a feudal society could also be a military officer. The "Crown Prince" in a feudal state may or may not have been separately invested with his own lands, as far as Faramir is concerned we do not know. However, his being a "Captain" in the Gondorian army is not a bar to him holding land or title.

: [snip]

: : : : There are no indications of hereditary military leadership : : : : in Gondor. Was Angbor's father given the same : : : : responsibilities for defense that he was? We don't know. : : : : We cannot say. Even in its last decline (under Denethor) : : : : the army of Gondor maintained multiple field commands. It : : : : was not Denethor's army. That, I think, is a most : : : : compelling fact about Gondor. The Stewards refused to : : : : assume the kingship because of their loyalty to the ancient : : : : traditions. Nor did they attempt to assert authority over : : : : the Lords (princes) of Dol Amroth. The political : : : : necessities didn't demand feudalism. Gondor lost its : : : : kings, not its armies. As the population declined so the : : : : number of soldiers declined, but the military structure did : : : : not break down. What purpose, then, would feudalism have : : : : served?

: : On the military front feudalism would have given the state : : ready access to many more reasonably well-trained soldiers than : : it could support as a regularly paid army...

: Here you are assuming that Gondor could not support as many soldiers as it required, and yet previously (in a section I have snipped for brevity) you agreed that Gondor had a standing army for most of its history. Were you then implying you don't think Gondor had a standing army under Denethor? I have already shown he had a large and diverse force with several commands. The army appears indeed to have been a standing force in his time.

I think it is self evident that Gondor's regular forces were inadequate for the emergency of the Mordorian invasion. Why else call out the followers of the provincial lords? No doubt Gondor's standing army was adequate for patrolling borders against small-scale raids, for garrisoning key fortifications and carrying out "Policing" duties. However, for emergencies having a readily mobilisable force of trained warriors, which normally would not be a drain on the state resources, would be a great asset. The Late Anglo-Saxon system was exactly analogous. The king had his standing army of Huscarles and Butsecarles (marines) adequate for the King's and state's day-to-day needs, but when a serious threat emerged the King would levy the Select Fyrd and maybe the General Fyrd, thereby perhaps quintupling (or more) his forces. The select Fyrd consisted of the semi- feudal regional elite of Thegns and Drengs, all well armed and armoured and usually seasoned soldiers. The General Fyrd was more like a folk-army and less well equipped and useful. So - no am not saying that Denethor did not have a standing army, just that it was self evidently inadequate, on its own, to deal with a major invasion.

: The soldiers brought from the coastlands may or may not have been regular forces, but they need not be feudal forces if they were not regular soldiers.

These soldiers are represented as the followings of the various lords, which tends to suggest that they were not regular soldiers. If Tolkien had said "Lord Angbor Captain-General of the Coasts with his regiment" the opposite would be true, but this is not the impression given. Having said this, the alternative to these soldiers not being feudal levies is to have the provincial lords merely hereditary militia-leaders. Which rather leaves these poor souls in a political limbo and goes against their apparent importance and prominence in the narrative.

: : ...The military followers of the lords were probably largely : : part-time soldiers and were no doubt materially supported by : : their own lands or subsidy by their lords, a very attractive : : proposition for a hard pressed state.

: There is great reason to doubt such a system existed in Gondor. The fact none is mentioned is foremost in my mind, but also the descriptions of the men who marched to Minas Tirith indicates most were not land-holders, or leaves them in an ambiguous state:

:

 :   And so the companies came and were hailed and cheered and :   passed through the Gate, men of the Outlands marching to :   defend the City of Gondor in a dark hour; but always too few, :   always less than hope looked for or need asked.  The men of :   Ringlo Vale behind the son of their lord, Dervorin striding :   on foot: three hundreds.  From the uplands of Morthond, the :   great Blackroot Vale, tall Duinhir with his sons, Duilin and :   Derufin, and five hundred bowmen.  From the Anfalas, the :   Langstrand far away, a long line of men of many sorts, hunters :   and herdsmen and men of little villages, scantily equipped save :   for the household of Golasgil their lord.  From Lamedon a few :   grim hill-men without a captain.  Fisher-folk of the Ethir, :   some hundred or more spared from the ships.  Hirluin the Fair :   of the Green Hills from Pinnath Gelin with three hundreds of :   gallant green-clad men.  And last and proudest, Imrahil, Prince :   of Dol Amroth, kinsman of the Lord, with gilded banners bearing :   his token of the Ship and the Silver Swan, and a company of :   knights in full harness riding grey horses; and behind them :   seven hundreds of men at arms, tall as lords, grey-eyed, dark- :   haired, singing as they came. : 

: Much has been made of the knights of Dol Amroth, but the fisher-folk from the Ethir, the "few grim hill-men" from Lamedon, the "gallant green-clad men" of Pinnath Gelin, and the "hunters and herdsmen and men of many little villages" don't sound at all like feudal land-holders, let alone semi-professional soldiers.

The appearance and few numbers of the provincial soldiery only indicates the poverty and depopulation of Gondor. It also seems that the Fiefs (in general) did not send their best or greatest number - in a rather ambiguous statement Tolkien says that only a tithe (tenth part) of their strength came to Minas Tirith. In which case around 27,000 other troops stayed in the southlands - plenty of room in that number for more troops in the mould of the Swan-Knights.

: : On the social front feudalism would have given Gondorian : : society a measure of stability and given its leaders a personal : : hold over its folk even at two or three times removed (notice : : Bergond's son's apparent attachment to the Lord of Lossarnach : : his family's ancestral lord).

: Stability amidst what sort of chaos? Where was the social breakdown which should have led to feudalism? Gondorian law was ancient and hale even at the end of the Third Age.

There seem to have been some inner tensions in Gondor - between pure-bred Dunedain and "Lesser men" between the north and south - or at least between Minas Tirith and the provinces. A large part of the south seem to have placed their interests vis-a-vis the Corsair threat higher than any duty to protect the capital.

: You assume many things to support the idea of feudalism, but the very requirement of making so many assumptions underscores the great weakness in the feudalism argument. This is not Tolkien's Middle-earth but another one quite different from what he described.

Quite the contrary it, a semi-feudal polity, is the best-fit we have given the primary data.