• MDCCCLV@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    The shire was founded under the rule of the king of arnor, as a semi independent shire. So aragorn was technically king of the shire.

  • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Every time I see this meme, I’m reminded of this, which basically argues that the shire is just a specific type of feudal system, that looks like a place of rulerless plenty because the main characters are mostly that systems informal equivalent of nobility.

    • Drusas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Full disclosure: I have not read your link yet, but I intend to.

      How can a gardener be nobility? Frodo, definitely could see. But then there are the Tooks and Brandybucks going out and stealing produce and foraging for mushrooms? Not exactly nobility activities.

      • RedSnt 👓♂️🖥️@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        But then there are the Tooks and Brandybucks going out and stealing produce and foraging for mushrooms? Not exactly nobility activities.

        Another way of looking at it is that they don’t have to work and is using their past time doing crime just for kicks. That kind of dickishness sounds very much like that of the spawn of nobles.

        • Ecen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          And to add to this, yea Sam is the only one in the Fellowship who isn’t a Maia, heir to the king/steward, heir in a noble family or just rich enough not to have to work, and actually has a normal job.

  • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    The line of stewards were kings in all but name as a hereditary monarchical position with all the duties and authority of the king. They theoretically had to give up power if a member of the royal family ever came back to claim the throne, but Aragorn wasn’t exactly chomping at the bit to do so and only took over after Denethor killed himself with his two heirs being either dead or too injured to lead. The stewards had ruled Gondor for over a thousand years and a well liked one could have easily gotten the people behind them to reject Aragorn’s claim and formally taken the title of king.

    • Hoimo@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      The people rejecting a rightful claim to the throne is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a pure bloodline and a big sword, not from some farcical democratic ceremony.

  • A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Look Tolkein liked monarchy, what can you do about it. The Shire is still an anarchist commune, when it’s not on fire

    • snax23@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      dont be! Tolkien was an anarcho-monarchist. Something like monarcho-socialism but more radical, with highly symbolic but powerless monarchs and lots of good ritual, combined with anarcho-federalism and Mutualism