Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron
I wonder, when Tolkien says "Monarchy", would his ideal state of Monarchy be a later Anglo-Norman model of hereditary rule, or an earlier English elective Monarchy, where - as I understand it - Kings needed the consent of a Witan, a primordial parliament, in order to be crowned?
I agree with such a model myself, as I see the title of "King" or "Queen" as having deep cultural significance here in England. But I can not believe that Tolkien would overlook the problems of hereditary rule, the growing detachment from real people and the like.
For instance, when one looks at say Prince Charles, could you say he was connected with his people? Or had ever undergone real hardships? Whereas an earlier King like Alfred was not so removed from the plight of his people, and was both military commander and judge. Why, there is even a story of two common folk coming to the King to resolve a land dispute, but the King was in the bath, and so, as he sat in the tub, he heard their cases and rendered judgement then and there! Could you imagine a modern day Windsor monarch being so at ease with the English working classes?
Tolkien was an educated man, but one shaped by hardship, who bettered himself and pulled himself up by the bootstraps. Would he really have liked a decadent Royal class who worked half as hard as he, and reaped twice the benefits?
|
I was interested in what you said here,
Aaron.
To be fair to Tolkien, he does give us bad monarchs. In particular, most of the later monarchs of Númenor turned against the Valar and the Elves, the last one leading an attack on Valinor, an act of '
blasphemy' according to Tolkien. However, he is clear to point out that the acts of Ar-Pharazôn and most of his immediate predecessors were supported by most of their people, with the Faithful being a minority. This minority, under the leadership of Elendil, rebelled against the summons to attack Valinor, and escaped the Downfall to Middle-earth.
There's also the issue of Arnor being divided into three, among the sons of one king, which didn't help when fighting against external enemies. In Gondor, there was the Kin-strife, with one king, Eldacar, having his throne usurped by his relative Castamir, on the grounds that his mother had been one of '
inferior race'. The 'half-breed' Eldacar had to go into exile, but was able to gain back the throne due to Castamir behaving like a tyrant for 10 years, being called 'the Usurper', and losing the support of the people.
Tolkien may have felt that hereditary monarchy was preferable, but showed in his writings that bad monarchs existed, and that it was justified to rebel against a monarch who had become a 'heretic', and had engaged in 'heretical' behaviour.
About Tolkien, yes, he was of middle-class background, his father being a bank manager; but he and his brother Hilary lost both their parents at an early age. Both served in the First World War, Ronald losing all but one of his close friends; and he had to work hard to get into Oxford, and to then become a don. It's interesting that what has come out, in discussions among those close to him when they were young, is that they considered Ronald to be 'disadvantaged' compared to themselves, in terms of being both an orphan and lacking money. Like Captain Wentworth in Jane Austen's novel
Persuasion, he had '
nothing but himself to recommend him'. He made this quite clear in a letter to his son Michael during the Second World War, in which the latter was serving, dated 12 January 1941, Letter 42 of the published
Letters:
I was a young fellow, with a moderate degree, and apt to write verse, a few dwindling pounds p. a. (£20 – 40), and no prospects, a Second Lieut. on 7/6 a day in the infantry where the chances of survival were against you heavily (as a subaltern). She [Edith] married me in 1916 and John [Michael's elder brother] was born in 1917 (conceived and carried during the starvation-year of 1917 and the great U-Boat campaign) round about the battle of Cambrai, when the end of the war seemed as far-off as it does now. I sold out, and spent to pay the nursing-home, the last of my few South African shares, 'my patrimony'.