Quote:
Originally Posted by Galadriel55
Merry and Pippin were no Thains or Mayors or even heads of families
|
True, to a point. However both were the actual heir-apparents (not that that term would be used) of their respective families.
Pippin was the eldest son and heir of the current Thain (Paladin) and Merry was the eldest son and heir of the current Master (of Buckland), Sarradoc.
So, while they WERE the best equipped by training (from their quest experiences) to lead the fight - they were *ALSO* (serendipitally) two with some of the strongest positions within the Shire hierarchy to lead the fight (esp given that the Thain was already engaged in a guerrilla war in Tookland; the Master was a good 40 miles away and bottled up in Buckland; and the Mayor was in prison in Michel Delving.
--------------
As far as Laila is concerned, it sure seems to me that Hobbits operated mostly within a "family" or "clan" structure where matters of justice would be handled within the clan/family structure - thus, mostly, obviating the need or drive toward a formalized, shire-wide judicial structure.
Obviously this is just personal opinion - but in this regards the judicial structure may be more modeled after the highland clans of Scotland, than over the "Kings Court" structure of medieval England.
- Partly because of the emphasis placed in several places on Family Headship:
- Otho heading the Sackvilles and desireing to also inherit the Baggins headship from Bilbo (Tolkien wrote somewhere of Otho's desire be rise to the rare position of heading TWO families at the same time)
- Merry's comment to Frodo about how the gate guards would probably try to deny entrance to the Nazgul "until they could get a message to the Master (the head of family) at Brandy Hall" (not that they could hold them off for long, even if they tried).
- The significance of Bilbo making Frodo his "Heir" (the new Baggins head of family - "THE Mr. Baggins").
- The Thain's (head of Took family) ability and authority to "Raise the Tooks" and lead them against the Ruffians in and south of Tookland.
- Partly from the absence of any indication that there was any Shire-wide mechanism for resolving legal (much less criminal) disputes.
- And partly from the apparent lack of any "occupation" or "job" held by the family heads - which would be consistent with a "clan leader" whose "job" includes leading the family and resolving any disputes (quietly and "within the family")
Anyway, my two cents worth.