King Elessar's Folly? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Mithalwen · 06-17-2005, 12:15 PM

In Appendix B it says the edict is that "Men are not to enter the shire" which solves the Elf/Dwarf issue. I doubt that Elves would have taken any notice - and lets face it they had been passing discreetly through the shire for ages without anyone really taking much notice (apart from Bilbo and Frodo). Dwarves had been passing through more conspicuously but non threateningly I would say ( I mean people must have noticed Thorin and Co and the Dwarves who were around at the time of the party but I cannot think of any examples of anyone being overly disturbed by dwarves in transit. I imagine that most dwarves had removed from the Ered Luin to Erebor after the downfall of Smaug so I doubt they would be an issue either.

This leaves men - and to an extent how you interpret enter. My air travel tends to be planned at the last moment and the cheap options tend to involve changing planes and so I have an unenviable breadth of experience of transit lounges. So while I have physically been in (during the course of one journey!) Austria, Abu Dhabi, Singapore & Indonesia (2 airports!), I didn't actually legally enter another country after leaving the UK until the second stop in Australia. So I wonder if he meant enter and settle (remember how worried Butterbur was about people coming up from the south) rather than not allowed to pass through.

However I am suggesting this as a vague possibility rather than something I am convinced about - blame the fact that I am working for Lawyers at the moment that I am hypothesising that it is possible to interpret black as white!!!!

With regard to the roads, with the re-establishment of a settlement at Lake Evendim I expect roads would be re-established from both the end of the road from sarn Ford skirting the far downs, and from Fornost. Allowing most of the likely traffic to "by-pass" the Shire. However a strict "no men must set foot in the Shire" rule becomes more impracticable when the Westmarch is added to the shire and means a more lengthy (and hilly) detour left and right when the most direct route is straight on. It is really not a sensible way to run a kingdom having a self inflicted no-go area smack bang in the middle. So I have a suspicion that it is more a symbolic gesture than anything... like our own dear Queen being given a pair of ducks every time she sets foot in the Channel Islands

Lord Melkor · 06-18-2005, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

In Appendix B it says the edict is that "Men are not to enter the shire" which solves the Elf/Dwarf issue. I doubt that Elves would have taken any notice - and lets face it they had been passing discreetly through the shire for ages without anyone really taking much notice (apart from Bilbo and Frodo). Dwarves had been passing through more conspicuously but non threateningly I would say ( I mean people must have noticed Thorin and Co and the Dwarves who were around at the time of the party but I cannot think of any examples of anyone being overly disturbed by dwarves in transit. I imagine that most dwarves had removed from the Ered Luin to Erebor after the downfall of Smaug so I doubt they would be an issue either.

This leaves men - and to an extent how you interpret enter. My air travel tends to be planned at the last moment and the cheap options tend to involve changing planes and so I have an unenviable breadth of experience of transit lounges. So while I have physically been in (during the course of one journey!) Austria, Abu Dhabi, Singapore & Indonesia (2 airports!), I didn't actually legally enter another country after leaving the UK until the second stop in Australia. So I wonder if he meant enter and settle (remember how worried Butterbur was about people coming up from the south) rather than not allowed to pass through.

However I am suggesting this as a vague possibility rather than something I am convinced about - blame the fact that I am working for Lawyers at the moment that I am hypothesising that it is possible to interpret black as white!!!!

With regard to the roads, with the re-establishment of a settlement at Lake Evendim I expect roads would be re-established from both the end of the road from sarn Ford skirting the far downs, and from Fornost. Allowing most of the likely traffic to "by-pass" the Shire. However a strict "no men must set foot in the Shire" rule becomes more impracticable when the Westmarch is added to the shire and means a more lengthy (and hilly) detour left and right when the most direct route is straight on. It is really not a sensible way to run a kingdom having a self inflicted no-go area smack bang in the middle. So I have a suspicion that it is more a symbolic gesture than anything... like our own dear Queen being given a pair of ducks every time she sets foot in the Channel Islands

Hmmm, I agree that neither the Elves or the Dwarves would've paid much notion to the edict ( I should note however that the fact that the Elves and Dwarves aren't part of the Reunited Kingdom doesn't necessarily mean that they can ignore it's laws while traveling through it's lands). Of course, the Elves are pretty much a non-factor in trading Middle-earth, so even if they were not allowed to enter it would not have much of an effect. The fact that the dwarves are allowed passage ensures that the Hobbits have at least some connection to the outside world, but it still leaves out the most prominent race of all: Men. Considering that the Fourth Age signals the beginning of the rule of Men shutting of the Shire would seem like a bad move.

As to the nature of the edict: In HoME IV , Sauron Defeated, there is an excerpt dealing with this. Sam receives a letter from Aragorn, stating that he is going to pay a visit to the Shire. In the letter Aragorn states he desires to meet his friends at the Brandywine river, for not even the King himself should break his own edicts (as Elianna pointed out). This passage clearly shows that even traveling through the Shire was forbidden to Men. I'm not sure how symbolic this was. It may be that the ban wasn't enforced that much, and that Aragorn was merely showing off in this case (Look at me! I'm such a benevolent and wise King that I even follow my own laws! Go me!). It is obvious that the development of New Arnor would be hindered massively if the Shire would've remained off-limits to all human traffic.

littlemanpoet · 06-19-2005, 06:01 PM

I think that Meriadoc, Samwise, and Peregrin, the three most powerful Hobbits in the Shire in the early years of the Fourth Age, had enough clout to provide the trust of the Hobbits to Elessar.

There were no Men to the west of the Shire, to my knowledge, so the reason for an alternate road west for Men would not have materialized unless the Elves and Dwarves turned to tourism.

It seems that if there was trade between the Dwarves of the Ered Luin and Men of Bree and other parts of Eriador, the Dwarves, not subject to the ban, would have done well.

All that said, I still agree with Lord Melkor that it was a shortsighted, paternalistic mistake on the part of Elessar. Rather than a Ban, he shoulded have granted the Hobbits legal suzerainty of the Shire, and offered border protection in cooperation with Hobbits' efforts to keep their borders safe.

You can be sure that a brand new trading center or town would have popped up on the eastern side of the Stownbow Bridge over the Brandywine, where Hobbits would have made a killing in tarriffs and tolls.

Mithalwen · 06-20-2005, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Melkor

Hmmm, I agree that neither the Elves or the Dwarves would've paid much notion to the edict ( I should note however that the fact that the Elves and Dwarves aren't part of the Reunited Kingdom doesn't necessarily mean that they can ignore it's laws while traveling through it's lands).

Yes but the point is since they are not men they are not bound by it...

Tuor of Gondolin · 06-28-2005, 09:55 AM

An interesting topic.
Given that an obvious original growth area in New Arnor would be
around Annuminas and Lake Evendim, and that Bree would clearly
grow and prosper, and that there would eventually be a rush to get
primo seashore properties (already somewhat developed) when Cirdan's
lads left the Grey Havens

, The Shire couldn't be economically and
politically isolated forever. For one, an economic/political alliance of the Shire and Bree would be potent.

P.S. Oh, and who would be Aragorn's governor in New Arnor and what would be his powers. In a generation or two a situation could easily arise akin to
Charlemagne's descendants.

P.P.S. Since hobbits are somewhat distant relations of Men, what about
mixed marriages of hobbits and "short people" (who certainly have the right
to live

). Perhaps hobbits evolved back into Men, aside from the remnant
JRRT tells of in modern times. Hmm?

P.P.P.S. Some of the above is rumored to be not totally serious.

06-17-2005, 12:15 PM	#1
Mithalwen Pilgrim Soul Join Date: May 2004 Location: watching the wonga-wonga birds circle... Posts: 9,461	In Appendix B it says the edict is that "Men are not to enter the shire" which solves the Elf/Dwarf issue. I doubt that Elves would have taken any notice - and lets face it they had been passing discreetly through the shire for ages without anyone really taking much notice (apart from Bilbo and Frodo). Dwarves had been passing through more conspicuously but non threateningly I would say ( I mean people must have noticed Thorin and Co and the Dwarves who were around at the time of the party but I cannot think of any examples of anyone being overly disturbed by dwarves in transit. I imagine that most dwarves had removed from the Ered Luin to Erebor after the downfall of Smaug so I doubt they would be an issue either. This leaves men - and to an extent how you interpret enter. My air travel tends to be planned at the last moment and the cheap options tend to involve changing planes and so I have an unenviable breadth of experience of transit lounges. So while I have physically been in (during the course of one journey!) Austria, Abu Dhabi, Singapore & Indonesia (2 airports!), I didn't actually legally enter another country after leaving the UK until the second stop in Australia. So I wonder if he meant enter and settle (remember how worried Butterbur was about people coming up from the south) rather than not allowed to pass through. However I am suggesting this as a vague possibility rather than something I am convinced about - blame the fact that I am working for Lawyers at the moment that I am hypothesising that it is possible to interpret black as white!!!! With regard to the roads, with the re-establishment of a settlement at Lake Evendim I expect roads would be re-established from both the end of the road from sarn Ford skirting the far downs, and from Fornost. Allowing most of the likely traffic to "by-pass" the Shire. However a strict "no men must set foot in the Shire" rule becomes more impracticable when the Westmarch is added to the shire and means a more lengthy (and hilly) detour left and right when the most direct route is straight on. It is really not a sensible way to run a kingdom having a self inflicted no-go area smack bang in the middle. So I have a suspicion that it is more a symbolic gesture than anything... like our own dear Queen being given a pair of ducks every time she sets foot in the Channel Islands __________________ “But Finrod walks with Finarfin his father beneath the trees in Eldamar.” Christopher Tolkien, Requiescat in pace Last edited by Mithalwen; 06-17-2005 at 12:20 PM.

06-28-2005, 09:55 AM	#5
Tuor of Gondolin Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Pennsylvania, WtR, passed Sarn Gebir: Above the rapids (1239 miles) BtR, passed Black Rider Stopping Place (31 miles) Posts: 1,548	An interesting topic. Given that an obvious original growth area in New Arnor would be around Annuminas and Lake Evendim, and that Bree would clearly grow and prosper, and that there would eventually be a rush to get primo seashore properties (already somewhat developed) when Cirdan's lads left the Grey Havens , The Shire couldn't be economically and politically isolated forever. For one, an economic/political alliance of the Shire and Bree would be potent. P.S. Oh, and who would be Aragorn's governor in New Arnor and what would be his powers. In a generation or two a situation could easily arise akin to Charlemagne's descendants. P.P.S. Since hobbits are somewhat distant relations of Men, what about mixed marriages of hobbits and "short people" (who certainly have the right to live ). Perhaps hobbits evolved back into Men, aside from the remnant JRRT tells of in modern times. Hmm? P.P.P.S. Some of the above is rumored to be not totally serious. __________________ Aure Entuluva!

06-19-2005, 06:01 PM	#3
littlemanpoet Itinerant Songster Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: The Edge of Faerie Posts: 7,066	I think that Meriadoc, Samwise, and Peregrin, the three most powerful Hobbits in the Shire in the early years of the Fourth Age, had enough clout to provide the trust of the Hobbits to Elessar. There were no Men to the west of the Shire, to my knowledge, so the reason for an alternate road west for Men would not have materialized unless the Elves and Dwarves turned to tourism. It seems that if there was trade between the Dwarves of the Ered Luin and Men of Bree and other parts of Eriador, the Dwarves, not subject to the ban, would have done well. All that said, I still agree with Lord Melkor that it was a shortsighted, paternalistic mistake on the part of Elessar. Rather than a Ban, he shoulded have granted the Hobbits legal suzerainty of the Shire, and offered border protection in cooperation with Hobbits' efforts to keep their borders safe. You can be sure that a brand new trading center or town would have popped up on the eastern side of the Stownbow Bridge over the Brandywine, where Hobbits would have made a killing in tarriffs and tolls.