mark12_30 and
davem, to my mind, bring up an interesting point.
Poverty might only be in comparison with the wealthy hobbits. It does not necessarily mean that the poorest hobbits lacked the means of survival. Even if a poor hobbit’s extended family could not be of help, I think that other members of the community would step in to prevent crippling deprivation.
Quote:
|
I would speculate that large areas of the Shire were either not owned by anyone or owned in common
|
I agree that there were likely large areas held in common, but it has always been my notion that the Shire was a fairly well-populated area. I don’t mean to say that I think the hobbits were crowded, but I think that at least most of the farmable areas would have had some form of ownership.
However, I don’t know if there is much to support either view. A glance at the map of the Shire shows that the hobbits were at least spread out over the area, but I suppose that does not necessarily imply that they were thick on the ground everywhere.