A family murder in Great Smials?

[Inziladun]

This is quite an interesting topic, and not something I can recall ever considering before.

A nice case: no witnesses or evidence, but possibly a motive. What was the ME equivalent of a polygraph? Perhaps being tied to a chair with a basket of mushrooms in front of Pearl would have loosened her tongue!

Originally Posted by Formendacil

One would either have to appeal to a higher authority or let the Thain's substitute fill in, both of which have problems. Regarding the substitute, we have no evidence that being the Thain was onerous enough to have any formally appointed deputies and even if he did, as a "royal family" of sorts, the obvious deputies are the Thain's own heirs, who are implicated in exactly the same situation he is--there is no suggestion at all that an unrelated Deputy Thain of Westfarthing (or something similar) existed.

I agree that the Mayor wouldn't seem to have a place in such an investigation.
As for the Thain, the question of partiality notwithstanding, he looks to my eye to be more of a military leader, organizing resistance to outside threats.
Hobbit-justice would seem to be a private matter in the books, for families to sort out themselves. Legal matters generally seem to be so: who decides when a will is "correct"? Or whether the sale of property is lawful? It appears to be the populace themselves. Bilbo needed no higher authority to approve of his adoption of Frodo.
Granted, that's civil matters against a possible criminal case, but still: criminal matters were so rare, maybe there just wasn't a pressing need for any higher authority to be set to investigate them.
On a related note, was the "accidental" drowning of Drogo and Primula Baggins afforded any general suspicion? I would think not, owing to the skepticism of the Gaffer to Sandyman's words in FOTR.

[Lalwendë]

What might the motive be though? Anyone who watches Morse/Lewis knows that barring madness, there must be a motive!

I can't think of one (it would take someone pretty nasty to commit murder to get her hands on a necklace), so it was likely accident, and if Pippin was a clumsy young oaf then it's likely his sister was too. No doubt it would cast suspicions upon her, and a large helping of shame upon the family too in the gossipping Shire, hence this might be why they would seek to bar her from big events and keep things hush-hush. Of course after a decent time she would be forgiven for making a tragic mistake and the jewels could even have been promised as part of a will. Was the gossip about them something which stemmed from the Tooks or from the general population?

And yes, they do have lawyers in the Shire - they were in the process of selling off Bag End at the very moment Bilbo returned!

Originally Posted by Faramir Jones

While Tolkien presented the Shire as a more idealised version of a village in the English Midlands c.1897, he cleverly did not present it as some kind of utopia.

Indeed, and one of the nastier aspects of village life is the ridiculous level of idle gossip, in fact it's one of the nastier aspects of British life full stop!

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

I agree that the Mayor wouldn't seem to have a place in such an investigation.
As for the Thain, the question of partiality notwithstanding, he looks to my eye to be more of a military leader, organizing resistance to outside threats.

If I may make a sidebar of this, I would dispute that the Thain is solely a military leader. For one thing, there's no evidence that a Thain ever organized a military action after the fall of Fornost--the only military activity attested was directed, not by the Thain, but by his larger-than-life brother Bandobras Bullroarer. Admittedly, he may well have been exercising his brother's authority, but that's a side point.

My real evidence is that "Thain" is clearly to be equated with "thegn," the Anglo-Saxon equivalent (give or take--I'm hardly claiming to be either a medieval or Old English expert) of "baron." One has but to look at the "Thane of Cawdor" in Macbeth to see the parallel usage. If I remember aright, Ivanhoe's father is also called a thane, denoting his Saxon nobility, in post-Conquest England (though, of course, Scott is no historian; nonetheless, he illustrates the usage).

A thegn/thane therefore is a vassal in the feudal system of the king, and is lord over a portion of the kingdom. This describes well enough what we know of the Shire: it is a portion of the kingdom of Arnor and it is ruled by a Thain--but under the King. After all, the Shire has sayings such as "they have not heard of the King" and when a King finally does come, the Shire acknowledges his overlordship.

Granted, a thegn/thane/thain in a feudal system is obviously going to have a marked military character; one of his major duties to the king is to raise troops (such as the alleged Hobbit archers who went up to Fornost). Nonetheless, thain is not a military title but a noble title. What is more, the circumstances surrounding the appointment of the first Thain Oldbuck show that he was basically appointed with powers of Regent, not unlike the Stewards of Gondor--a parallel that shows that plenipotentary, hereditary regencies had precedent under the laws of the Dúnedain.

It is, of course, an entirely pedantic nitpick, and as Inziladun even made the caveat of "more of a military leader," it was perhaps unnecessary of me to make it. But that's the joy of this site.

[Inziladun]

I have no particular qualm about debating side issues, at least until the thread starter becomes irate about it.

Originally Posted by Formendacil

Nonetheless, thain is not a military title but a noble title. What is more, the circumstances surrounding the appointment of the first Thain Oldbuck show that he was basically appointed with powers of Regent, not unlike the Stewards of Gondor--a parallel that shows that plenipotentary, hereditary regencies had precedent under the laws of the Dúnedain.

Maybe that was part of the Thainship when it began, but by the time of the War of the Ring it appears to be a military (though, due to the nature of the Shire and its perpetual guarding by Outsiders, a mainly ceremonial) post.

The Thain was the master of the Shire-moot, and captain of the Shire-muster and the Hobbitry-in-arms, but as muster and moot were only held in time of emergency, which no longer occurred, the Thainship had ceased to be more than a nominal dignity.

LOTR Prologue

Though the issue of Laila's death would have been a scandel, and a talking point for 99 days, I can't see it being an "emergency".
At any rate, there's no mention in the Prologue of the Thain having anything to do with law or criminal matters.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

At any rate, there's no mention in the Prologue of the Thain having anything to do with law or criminal matters.

There's also no mention of the Mayor having much to do with a bureaucracy, though I put his duties in those terms. In fact, it's spoken of in much the same terms as the Thain: "a nominal dignity." I certainly don't dispute that the Thain would be unlikely to exercise any regal prerogatives; my point is more that, in Hobbit law, he'd still have them. After all, I agree that there wouldn't be a murder trial anything like what we would recognize as one--let alone an investigation we'd recognize. The Thain might never have to exercise his authority beyond the nominal military musters, but he'd still have that authority if it was ever required.

[Galadriel55]

When it really comes down to an emergency hobbits would give the authority to whoever is most capable to deal with it. Merry and Pippin were no Thains or Mayors or even heads of families, but they had the right abilities for hobbits to obey them. Not forever, although they were forever held in high respect, but for the time of the emergency they had all the power that was needed to deal with it.

[Faramir Jones]

I'm very interested in the comments about what could have happened if Lalia's death was a murder, and if so, what steps could have been taken to deal with it, given her prominence, and the fact that the Shire had little government.

This is my (very speculative) opinion on what could have been done, based on the information given. Tolkien said in 'Concerning Hobbits' in LotR, that the Mayor was 'elected every seven years at the Free Fair on the White Downs at the Lithe, that is at Midsummer'. (The Lord of the Rings, (London: HarperCollins Publishers, 1995), p. 10)

It appears that what was originally a fair then took on a political function: the election of a mayor. The question then arises about whether that Fair also has other political functions. Does it, for example, make laws (legislative acts) and deal with important legal cases (judicial decisions)? Early parliamentary bodies not only had legislative functions; they also functioned as courts of law. The UK Parliament, for example, also operated as a court of law until 1st October 2009; because a committee of its upper house, the House of Lords, composed of peers appointed to carry out its judicial responsibilities, was the UK's highest court of appeal.

In dealing with such a murder, it is possible that the Free Fair, either itself, or at the instigation of the Mayor, could appoint one or more temporary judges to deal with the specific case. Perhaps they could be drawn from the lawyers that exist in the Shire. (Bilbo's posessions were being sold at the end of The Hobbit by either an auctioneering firm, or a law and auctioneering firm; and there are references to lawyers in drafts of the first chapter of LotR.) A public prosecutor could also be selected, perhaps from among the lawyers, again to deal with that specific case.

There is then the question of whether a jury would be involved. Considering Tolkien's emphatic statement that the Shire was based on an English Midlands village c.1897, it would be reasonable for juries to be appointed in such a case. Perhaps they are selected by some kind of lottery system.

What do people think?

[Puddleglum]

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.