The White Council

Re: Feudal Reply

Tolkien and Inklings Discussion

: : : Martin, your reply daunts me.

: : Not intended to daunt - merely to convert ;) Repent ye : : unbeliever, embrace feudalism! Millions of Mediaeval Europeans : : cannot have been wrong.

: Such religious zeal. You must be a Crusader! :)

Deus et Sepulchrum!

: : : I don't believe there is any reason to withhold "suza" from : : : the other lands. Gondor had gone through many political : : : changes by the end of the Third Age -- many of its Dunadan : : : families seem to have died out. If all the "greater lords" : : : were Dunedain, their absence is explainable.

: : Suza is a wide enough term ,I admit, to embrace Morthond etc. : : but there is an apparent difference between these districts and : : such as Anorien, which might be expected to be apparent in the : : use of more specific terms - terms, however, we have not been : : given.

: Not yet, anyway. I still have high hopes for seeing more material published.

: : : : 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.

: : : No, I don't think so. Minas Tirith was the chief city of : : : Anorien, just as Minas Ithil was the chief city of Ithilien. : : : After the decline of Osgiliath Minas Tirith became the : : : capitol of the entire kingdom.

: : The capital city of a state is rarely identical with the state, : : if you exclude city-states of the classical model (and Imperial : : Rome which grew from one). The fact that Gondor had two : : capital cities through its history reinforces this point. The : : state of Osgiliath was not supplanted by the state of Minas : : Tirith, the capital of the continuing state of Gondor was : : merely moved.

: I think we're drifting apart here (and the fault is probably mine). I was disagreeing with your saying the Suza of Minas Tirith could only have included the townlands mentioned in the book. I'm saying that Minas Tirith was the chief city of Anorien, not just the chief city of Gondor. As Minas Anor it was clearly the abode of the lord of Anorien (Anarion). It should not have lost that function after Isildur commended care of the kingdom to Meneldil.

I see.

: : : I don't understand what you mean by "core area of the State : : : of Gondor". Are you referring to the autonomy the princes of : : : Belfalas enjoyed after the end of the kingly line? Imrahil : : : appears nonetheless to have been a member of Denethor's : : : council, and not simply an ally. His status with respect to : : : Denethor is unique among the other lords, but as far as I can : : : tell Belfalas is still considered to be part of Gondor (and : : : was one of the original five regions -- in UNFINISHED TALES : : : Tolkien states that Elendil bestowed the title of "prince" : : : on Imrahil's family).

: : I would imagine that the Prince gained the lion's share of the : : revenues of Belfalas, with a subsidiary amount entering the : : state treasury. On the other hand I would guess that the : : revenues of Anorien etc. entered the state purse directly. In : : this regard the regions of Anorien, Ithilien, Lebennin and : : Calenardon would be more important to the state.

: Here we are left totally to guess on our own. Tolkien doesn't speak of revenues, although clearly his representation of Gondor implies there was a monied economy and the government had to operate on something.

: : : : These were not "priest-kings". The Numenorean priest-kings : : : actively led the worship of Iluvatar. They and they alone : : : were the ones who made the sacrifices of first fruits. : : : Aragorn restored this system, according to Tolkien. The : : : closest equivalent I can think of from history would be : : : (possibly) the Mesopotamian priest-kings. Maybe the Egyptian : : : pharoahs had religious duties. I'm not sure.

: : In a society without organised religion or priests, the idea of : : a priest-king is a little anachronistic. That the king had : : some religious functions I don't doubt, but I would see these : : as magnifications of those rites carried out by the heads of : : households and families. So perhaps a patriarchal king would : : be a more accurate term with the state as an ultimately : : extended family.

: Tolkien used the term "lineal priest kings" to describe them. I don't believe the massive populations implied by the sizes of the armies could be culturally viewed as an extended family.

The sense of state as extended family I meant is like the way the Roman Emperor as Pontifex Maximus carried out ceremonies for the good fortune of the state which were essentially extrapolations of those carried out by the "Pater familias" for the well being of his family and household. The state could be as large as the Roman Empire was and the parallel would hold true. Tolkien may have meant priest-king in this type of way which was rather less overt than a true theocracy such as pertained in Sumeria for example.

: Letter 156, which I don't have time to cite here, is the reference I have in mind.

: : : He is not returning oath for oath. He cannot, really, since : : : Pippin is not his personal servant. Pippin is eventually : : : ASSIGNED to attend Denethor, and that pretty much indicates : : : that he was not sworn to Denethor's service to begin with.

: : The interview is personal, the relationship seems to be also - : : why the physical closeness - the sword on lap. Pippin might : : merely have sworn an oath standing holding up his hand or : : clutching his testicles like a Roman (the origin of the term : : testament). This personal content to the ceremony is very much : : in the feudal mode.

: The interview is unquestionably personal. In fact, I think you've overlooked the stronger argument in your favor. Why does Pippin offer his service? To repay the debt he feels for Boromir's sacrifice.

: Nonetheless, I cannot view the oath as a personal oath of service to Denethor based on this evidence alone. Denethor's later words may sway me to that view, but I need to think about this (I refer to his statement, "I have sworn him to my service").

: The question of whether Pippin swore personal service to Denethor, though it cannot prove or disprove overall views of feudalism, would probably make an interesting essay.

It adds to the feudal tone in my view.

: : : But Gondor did not evolve politically and socially the way : : : Anglo-Saxon England did. Harold led a finally united : : : England against William the Conqueror, if you're referring to : : : the army of his day. Going back before the Danish kings, : : : Wessex had only just begun to unite the Anglo-Saxons at the : : : end of the tenth century.

: : The military situation (whatever its historical development) : : does seem to parallel what we can gather of the situation in : : Gondor. That is: a central standing force supported by a : : provincial, probably non-professional, levy. A semi-feudal : : situation like Late A-S England does produce a good fit for the : : information we are given.

: But such forces are found outside of feudalism as well. This is insufficient evidence to speak of feudal arrangements.

: : : : 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.

: : : But they are not represented so.

: : Yes - that's what my point was about.

: No, I mean they are not represented as the personal followings of the various lords.

A matter of viewpoint, admittedly they could be militia, but the general tone of Gondorian society persuades me otherwise.

: : : : 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.

: : : I don't see that it goes against their importance at all. : : : These are the heroes of modern Gondor, men renowned for : : : whatever reason. Aragorn names Angbor "the Fearless" in : : : honor of the latter's courage when the Dead arrived at : : : Ethring. The fact Angbor was defending Linhir in Lebennin : : : may be significant. He was a long way from Lamedon at that : : : point.

: : These men are given implied importance in the society of : : Gondor. If their "Lordship" does not include some measure of a : : feudal-like relationship to the folk of their districts then : : they are reduced to the status of merely wealthy men with : : hereditary leadership of militias, probably acting as : : tax-farmers for the state. Not very heroic or honourable : : positions. There is no evidence of appointed provincial : : governors for the regions of Gondor, so the lords seem to have : : some real measure of rule over their districts. For them to do : : so implies a measure of material interaction with their : : inferiors in mutual dependancy, otherwise what is the point of : : having hereditary provincial governors? The state would just : : appoint the best man available. This does not seem to be so, : : therefore there must have been important local factors placing : : hereditary power into the lordly family - the most obvious : : being ties of interdependance due to feudation of land.

: It is not the positions they hold within their society but the deeds, honor, and courage these men perform and possess which make them great. The feudal relationship arises out of a need for protection and aid, but hereditary lordships in a large state with a strong economy doesn't diminish the stature of the men.

: Let us suggest that France was never feudal. In other words, let us suppose that its economy did not collapse, and that the Franks somehow were able to maintain the Roman system, merely transferring the revenues to their own upkeep. This is completely absurd, but my point is that the Frankish lords still would have subdivided the state among their sons. Clovis would have left behind a system intact but a land divided. The Merovingians therefore would have maintained larger, standing armies.

: Now, how does one reward one's followers in such a society? Be bestowing wealth on them, of course, but does that raise them up above the self-made rich? No. The grant of titles of nobility creates a socially higher class within the society.

: Now, let us suppose this system still brings about the decadence of the Merovingians so the Pepinids take over rule of the state. These men bring an end to the political divisions but appoint counts from the local nobility to command the local defense forces. The counts pass their offices on to their sons and establish a line of hereditary military offices. There is no land exchanged for personal service as the counts are officers in the service of the state.

: This appears to be what happened in Gondor. Nobility doesn't just come with prerogatives, it comes with responsibilities. The armed forces in the local region belong to Gondor, not to the lord. He has a duty to lead or appoint an officer to lead the defense forces in time of war. He also serves on the Great Council and advises the King (or the Steward) on matters of policy and law.

: Furthermore, he may accumulate personal wealth and perhaps hire personal retainers (essentially a company of bodyguards) to accompany him into battle, but not to administer (or defend or police) the Suza which has been given to his care. This can explain the references to the household troops.

: Elendil and his sons must have found many, many people living in Middle-earth. Among them, perhaps, were some relatives to whom Elendil gave the title "prince". What does this mean? It means they were granted recognition of their priority in arrival. They were there first. For whatever reason, they chose not to become kings themselves, but instead accepted the rule and overlordship of Elendil's house.

: The Numenorean system doesn't appear to be feudal. Athough there were Lords of Andunie, they were not appointed feudal vassals for reasons of defense. Who threatened Numenor? No one. They seem rather to have derived ultimately from clan leaders who succeeded the House of Beor in their lordship over the Beorians.

: The real issue is whather Tolkien's definition for "suza" can be extended back to early Numenorean times. The Numenorean system would not have been perfectly preserved in Middle-earth, but it would have survived in some form. Hence, a clan leadership may have been present when the Exiles arrived and was therefore incorporated into the governments of Gondor and Arnor. By recognizing the clan leaders with grants of nobility, Elendil was sustaining their local authority while subsuming it to a royal authority. Hence, no feudal contract would have been put into place.

: It is a simpler system that fits what we know well. I cannot say there are no assumptions involved in this picture, but it eliminates many assumptions which a fully feudal society would require. The issue of who owns the land is negated. There is no need for serfdom (and there appear to be no serfs in Middle-earth) as the free men don't ever have to give up their freedom (and their land) to local lords in exchange for protection. The army of the state was their defense, and clearly Elendil and his successors possessed large armies. Feudal systems don't favor or support large armies.

: I submit that the Dunadan governments were a refinement of a tribal system which evolved in Numenor to a formalized relationship between the king and the clan-lords. Long after the clans lost their significance the system remained in place.

: The emphasis on ethnic divisions in Gondor (especially at the time of the Kin-Strife) implies a tradition of clan loyalties. One is expected to stay loyal to the blood, as it were, and this implies there may have been a strong clan tradition in Gondor -- perhaps strong enough to form the basis for their lordships.

: The definition for "suza" would fit well with this type of arrangement, better -- I think -- than with a purely feudal arrangement.

I think I'll try to answer this as a whole.

The idea of a clan-based society has some merit, though I can think of some possible difficulties with this. I think there are a number of "Choke points" in Edainic history which would compromise a purely clan-based view of their society.

Firstly the Edain no doubt started off in a tribal society almost certainly subdivided into clans. No more sophisticated form of society would really be possible given their rootless state.

However, in Beleriand they came under the influence of Elven society which must have had some modifying influence on their way of life.

I believe that although family and lineage were important to Elves, because of their longevity, personal attachments and friendships assumed greater prominence than clan-like social groups in their society. Also given the long generation times and apparent low procreativity amongst elves the production of a clan claiming descent from a common ancestor would be a very long winded process indeed. I would illustrate this point by citing the sub-division of the followers of Feanor amongst his sons. It is difficult to imagine that this was done on a clan basis, more likely each son had a following of elves who had some personal attachment to them, perhaps in some type of patron-client relationship. The division of Feanor's people would then be a natural process the personal followers of each son taking their immediate family along with them.

So I feel that the clan make-up of the Edain would have had some modification during their stay in Beleriand. Further, thee disasters which forced the remnants of the Edain into mixed groups in the refugee areas of Southern Beleriand would have disrupted a clan system, which I believe could not have survived intact.

I would feel that the initial colonisation of Numenor would therefore not have been by clans - though certain major groupings may have sorted themselves into different settlement patterns ie. most Beorians in certain districts, Druedain in another etc. Rather than clan loyalties being re-asserted under these conditions it seems to me that individuals prominent, for whatever reason, in the mixed society of the Sirion settlements or who became noted in the War of Wrath would attract a following (largely unrelated to the leader) and establish a settlement in Numenor. The resultant societies would establish a sense of common identity over succeeding generations, though, as the people would not be descended from a common ancestor, these district communities would not have particularly clan-like features. Neither would they show any overtly feudal characteristics, but the relations between the prominent line of "Lords" and the people attached to their rule would have a personal basis, probably again in the patron-client mould, which would be reinforced by time and accumulating tradition. I think this type of society would be relatively flexible and could hold the ability to become at least quasi-feudal given the right circumstances.

This society would attract a military character when Numenor became more militant in its later history, by a fairly natural process. The patron or lord would be in an ideal position to raise troops from his clients and, because of their sense of common identity, troops raised from single districts would make effective cohesive military units.

We now come to another choke-point for clannishness in Edain or Dunedain society, the colonisation of Middle Earth. In a situation not unlike that of the refugee areas of Belariand, colonists and later Elendil's escapees would have been thrown together in a new environment. The sort of situation in which it would be difficult to maintain a clan system. Admittedly it could be argued that following each choke point new clans could have been founded by the pioneer generations. However, the fact that within Gondor socio-political entities which contained both Dunadan and non-Dunadan populations arose would, in my estimation, preclude a social system based purely on the clan. In the system I have suggested a composite local community could be relatively quickly generated - the only requirement of the non-Dunadan in order to become a member of the community would be to attach himself to a particular Dunadan leader and his house. For a composite clan to arise large scale intermarriage would be necessary, which we know from Dunadan prejudices would have taken a very long time indeed. That the Dunedain did indeed intermarry with "lesser men" we know, however, it seems to me that this process would have been too slow to allow for the fairly rapid generation of Gondorian national awareness (as distinct from Arnor) and would have left substantial groups of people within Gondor as outsiders within their own land.

A parallel could be seen with Hobbit society. They were originally wandering clans, but after their settlement in the Shire their social system changed - possibly directly affected by Dunadan models - after all they settled within a Dunadan kingdom and presumably accepted Dunadan law. The social system of the Shire retained some fossilised clan features especially in connection to the two prominent and numerous families of Took and Brandybuck. However, in general their society conformed to some features of that I have suggested for the Edanic Peoples. The attachments of the average Hobbit was to his locality and to one of the important families - the two loyalties being usually connected. Thus the folk of Hobbiton would have been loyal to their district and to the prominent Baggins family who were also local, however, they did not constitute a clan - they were not all Bagginses or descended from a the same common stock the Baggins family.

In short I think the Dunedain probably had a long history of societies based around prominent families who had a patron-client relationship with the people. This would tend to become fixed by tradition and localised to a recognisable area. However, it's basic features would allow for flexibility in time of stress and dislocation.

Another attested feature of Dunedain custom is that of primogeniture. As far as we can tell inheritances were not partitioned, certainly not titles or, one assumes, land (with the break up of Arnor as the exception that....). It seems as though the eldest son or child scoops the lot as regards inheritance. This feature would then produce landless younger sons who would move down a notch in society, they could take up a craft, move to cities, work for their elder sibling etc. but I feel that many would become more closely associated with their family's patron or lord in the position of renter or share-cropper or some such situation. In a pre-industrial society wealth is basically found in land, it would be expected that the lord would own the most land in his district. He would not be able to personally farm all this land so logically he would have to have retainers of some description work the land for him. The existence of primogeniture would supply a mechanism for creating a pool of people to meet this need. This would, of course, place these people in a position of greater dependence on the lord and increase his power over them.

I would therefore imagine that Dunedain rural society would consist of lords, yeoman farmers who farmed their own land but owed some duty and traditional respect to the lord as a sort of patron, and lastly a strata of landless people who worked the lands of the lords.

Not a feudal society in the strict sense but one able to assume that character if conditions so favoured it.

I have more thoughts on the subject, but this post seems large enough already!!!