Ch 3. "Three is Company" - Pt 3: Sale of the Century

[Humbert]

When discussing the scenes of Frodo getting rid of Bag End in preparation for his adventure, there’s very little of actual substance to delve into. Nonetheless, this section contains my favorite material of the chapter and I’d like to take a little look at it right now.

Part of what I love about it is that it contains some of the last bits of hobbit-whimsy, some delightful Tolkien humor, as well as a kind of melancholy. No real hints of doom, just real identifiable longing and yearning.

Bag End has been sold to the Sackville-Bagginses, and Lobelia arrives with her son Lotho to triumphantly claim the hole.

’Ours at last!’ said Lobelia, as she stepped inside. It was not polite; nor strictly true, for the sale of Bag End did not take effect until midnight. But Lobelia can perhaps be forgiven; she had been obliged to wait about seventy-seven years longer for Bag End than she had once hoped, and she was now a hundred years old.

Despite her comic arrogance, I like how the narrator here tries to elicit some sympathy - well in advance of that we will gain for her come the end.

Does it surprise you that Lobelia was only 23 years old in The Hobbit when she thought she was getting Bag End in the auction?

Do you find the Sackville-Bagginses amusing here, and elsewhere, or merely obnoxious? Are you able to sympathise with Lobelia as does the narrator?




There is some debate among the gossip-prone hobbits as to how much money was involved in the sale.

“For a nice price too,” is one version. “At a bargain price,” is the other, “and that’s more likely when Mistress Lobelia’s the buyer.”

Given the S-B’s desire for Bag End, but also Frodo’s lack of need for money where he’s going, which theory do you subscribe to?




Otho Sackville-Baggins is said to have previously died “at the ripe but disappointed age of 102.”

Why do you think Tolkien has killed off Otho at this stage?

I love the phrase “ripe but disappointed age.”

What was disappointing to Otho? The fact that his age was not ultimately noteworthy? Or the fact that he never got into Bag End?




We are told that a few of the hobbits “held the theory... that Frodo’s money was running out.” In HoMe, we learn that for a long while Tolkien indeed intended that Frodo’s (actually Bingo’s) lack of funds was a motivating factor in his departure.

What do you think? Could Bilbo and Frodo have spent all the wealth? Or like the majority of the hobbits, are you inclined to believe in their unending treasure store?




Frodo is helped in his moving by Merry, Pippin, Fatty and Folco. But Gandalf, despite his promise, has not yet arrived - not even when the group sets out after the birthday meal.

Now Gandalf’s absence is beginning to be worrying. Or did he just not want to help Frodo pack?

If you weren’t unnerved before now, has this finally convinced you that Gandalf has run into trouble? Are you confident of Frodo’s ability to cope without him at this early stage?




As they prepare to leave, Frodo calls after Sam.

“ ‘Coming, sir!’ came the answer from far within, followed soon by Sam himself, wiping his mouth. He had been saying farewell to the beer-barrel in the cellar.”

No question. Just one of my favorite moments!




Frodo takes one last look around his former dwelling.

Bag End seemed sad and gloomy and dishevelled. Frodo wandered round the familiar rooms, and saw the light of the sunset fade on the walls, and shadows creep out of the corners.

I find this a very evocative description. Although for myself, when I move out of a home, I am struck by how bright and empty it looks, rather than “gloomy and dishevelled”.

Does this passage evoke the same strange kind of melancholy in you? Have you ever had to move house somewhat unexpectedly, and does this remind you of such feelings?



I realise it isn’t the most thrilling passage to discuss, although for me it’s the most memorable of the chapter. How do you feel about it overall?

 

[Curious]

Does it surprise you that Lobelia was only 23 years old in The Hobbit when she thought she was getting Bag End in the auction?

I always assumed that her parents were alive at that time, and that she would have moved in with them.

Do you find the Sackville-Bagginses amusing here, and elsewhere, or merely obnoxious?

Amusing.

Are you able to sympathise with Lobelia as does the narrator?

Does the narrator really sympathize with her here? I don't think so. I think the narrator is making fun of her.

There is some debate among the gossip-prone hobbits as to how much money was involved in the sale.

“For a nice price too,” is one version. “At a bargain price,” is the other, “and that’s more likely when Mistress Lobelia’s the buyer.”

Given the S-B’s desire for Bag End, but also Frodo’s lack of need for money where he’s going, which theory do you subscribe to?

I would guess a fair price, since Frodo did not want to raise suspicion and Lobelia really did want Bag End. The fact that the rumors went both ways (high and low) lead me to believe it was neither too high nor too low.

Why do you think Tolkien has killed off Otho at this stage?

Perhaps the better question is why Lobelia is still alive. Bilbo outlived all of his contemporaries, and most of the people younger than him at the time of The Hobbit. Lobelia creates a connection between The Hobbit and LotR, but as you note she had to be pretty young -- still in her tweens -- during The Hobbit in order to make it work.

Considering the dearth of female characters in LotR, why did Tolkien focus on Lobelia, rather than Otho? Lobelia is a strong woman, but not a pleasant one. Her influence on Lotho is not healthy. Yet in the end she redeems herself, which is rare in Tolkien's world (although she did pay heavily for her sins).

Although Galadriel and Shelob are both mothers, we don't see them as mothers in this book. Galadriel's daughter has left Middle-earth, and we don't see her interact with Arwen. Shelob's children are not seen in this book. (Actually I'm assuming Shelob has children like the spiders in Mirkwood, but I'm not sure Tolkien confirms that assumption.) So until Rose has Elanor at the end of the tale, Lobelia is the picture of motherhood in LotR! And we don't even really see how Rose raises Elanor or her other 12 children.

Tolkien portrayed several other flawed mothers in his fiction, too. In fact, I would venture to say that every time Tolkien focuses on motherhood, he focuses on a flawed mother. Good mothers are taken for granted, and, if seen at all, are rarely seen in their roles as mothers. Flawed mothers, on the other hand, have a profound effect on their children, and usually not a good effect.

So perhaps Tolkien shows us Lobelia in order to help explain Lotho, just as in Children of Hurin Tolkien showed us Morwen in order to help explain Turin, or just as in The Silmarillion Tolkien told us the story of Míriel to help explain Feanor. What this says about Tolkien's own psyche I will not venture to guess.

What was disappointing to Otho? The fact that his age was not ultimately noteworthy? Or the fact that he never got into Bag End?

No Bag End.

What do you think? Could Bilbo and Frodo have spent all the wealth? Or like the majority of the hobbits, are you inclined to believe in their unending treasure store?

Frodo and Sam seem to be independently wealthy when they return from their adventure, and indeed we know that the only reason Frodo sold Bag End was to leave the Shire, so I don't think he lacked for wealth. The source of that wealth, on the other hand, remains mysterious.

Now Gandalf’s absence is beginning to be worrying. Or did he just not want to help Frodo pack?

Of course Gandalf's absence is worrying.

If you weren’t unnerved before now, has this finally convinced you that Gandalf has run into trouble? Are you confident of Frodo’s ability to cope without him at this early stage?

I was unnerved before. The whole idea is to build up the tension. I'm sure Frodo will run into trouble. And I am equally sure he will get out of it somehow. It seems to be that kind of tale -- until the end, when we learn to our surprise that Frodo could not live happily ever after in the Shire.

Frodo takes one last look around his former dwelling.

Bag End seemed sad and gloomy and dishevelled. Frodo wandered round the familiar rooms, and saw the light of the sunset fade on the walls, and shadows creep out of the corners.​

I find this a very evocative description. Although for myself, when I move out of a home, I am struck by how bright and empty it looks, rather than “gloomy and dishevelled”.

Does this passage evoke the same strange kind of melancholy in you? Have you ever had to move house somewhat unexpectedly, and does this remind you of such feelings?

It doesn't remind me of my own moves, no, but I do find the shadows creeping out of the corners an evocative picture foreshadowing the Nazgul, and the general motif of the growing Shadow.

 

[hobbitlove]

She was far too young to become obsessed with this one thing. Wasn't she already married, land-owning, and well known?
Frodo was 21 when he became Bilbo's heir. He did not spend his years at Bag End acquiring more money, land, or status. Instead, he spent them becoming a better hobbit, imho; learning to love that which he was fitted to love. Sure, Frodo had plenty, lucky guy, but it did not define him or the way he lived his life.
Apparently, at her young age, Lobelia could not overcome her disappointment when Bilbo returned. She spent over 70 years making herself miserable for what she didn't have, instead of enjoying what she did have. During those years she raised her son to be envious and grasping, too.
We see clearly that the S-Bs reaped what they sowed.
Lotho came into overt power in the Shire on this day. Envious or not, I imagined Lotho making his mum's last years happy because she finally got what she wanted and could be comfortable and satisfied. Of course, neither of the two could ever do that. Further, and Frodo didn't know this, Lotho had already made his 'pact with the devil'. He had allied himself with Saruman.
I guess like minds....

Ah, there is lots and lots and lots of stuff underneath the narrative.
Love this story! Thanks, Humbert, for this wonderful stuff on the sale of Bag End. People just rush through it, but there's a great deal going on.
Cheers,
hob

 

[Finding Frodo]

Nothing to add -- I just enjoyed reading your portrait of Lobelia.

 

[N.E. Brigand]

Shelob's children are not seen in this book. (Actually I'm assuming Shelob has children like the spiders in Mirkwood, but I'm not sure Tolkien confirms that assumption.)

In fact he does. From "Shelob's Lair":

Far and wide her lesser broods, bastards of the miserable mates, her own offspring, that she slew, spread from glen to glen, from the Ephel Dúath to the eastern hills, to Dol Guldur and the fastnesses of Mirkwood. But none could rival her, Shelob the Great, last child of Ungoliant to trouble the unhappy world.

 

[Curious]

Still, we don't see her mothering any children like Lobelia does, and in fact I doubt very much that Shelob does any mothering beyond the minimum spawning of her brood.

 

[Menelwyn]

That line about Sam is a favorite of mine too!

Does it surprise you that Lobelia was only 23 years old in The Hobbit when she thought she was getting Bag End in the auction?
Yes, mainly because I never bothered to do the math. It does seem rather young, particularly considering that hobbits don't come of age until 33.

Do you find the Sackville-Bagginses amusing here, and elsewhere, or merely obnoxious? Are you able to sympathise with Lobelia as does the narrator?
Mainly obnoxious, although as Tolkien says, I might be able to "forgive" Lobelia--Bilbo did thwart her rather neatly in his adoption of Frodo!

Given the S-B’s desire for Bag End, but also Frodo’s lack of need for money where he’s going, which theory do you subscribe to?
Well, I certainly don't think Frodo overcharged her. But I doubt he would just let her have the place either. Aside from the personal relationships between them and Frodo's need to get out of Bag End (with an excuse), really letting her get the place too cheap would cause even more talk than whatever he actually did charge her. He would want to avoid as much talk as possible, and a moderate price is what would do that.

What do you think? Could Bilbo and Frodo have spent all the wealth? Or like the majority of the hobbits, are you inclined to believe in their unending treasure store?
Neither. I'm sure that Frodo still had some store of money, whether it was from Bilbo's treasure or not. I also don't assume it was too much--Bilbo makes it clear that he didn't have all that much treasure, and that he got rid of a good deal of it. But I really don't think Frodo is exactly impoverished, or even very hard up for money. There is undoubtedly some family wealth there.

Does this passage evoke the same strange kind of melancholy in you? Have you ever had to move house somewhat unexpectedly, and does this remind you of such feelings?
Yes, definitely. I've never had to move unexpectedly, but I have had to move frequently, especially in my childhood. And even when I'm excited or happy about the move, I find that having the old place packed up does seem a bit depressing. There's always something left behind when you move, and the more you pack up, the more you feel that. And when the boxes and furniture are all out, it becomes time to say goodbye to the old place, and yes, there is definitely something melancholy in doing so. That's especially true if you loved the place.

 

[SilentLion]

The geneologies in Appendix C of ROTK offer some insight into the Sackville-Baggins claim to Bag-End

Bilbo was the only child of Bungo Baggins who in turn was the eldest child of Mungo Baggins, which appears to be the reason he inherited the ancestral family home of Bag-End. Bungo had four younger siblings: Belba, Longo, Linda, and Bingo. All four of Bilbo's aunts and uncles were still living when he returned from his adventure. Since Belba (who married Rudigar Bolger) was apparently not in line to inherit Bag-End, it appears that inheritance followed some form of the Law of Prima Genitor, where property went to the eldest male in direct line of dissent.

Thus, had Bilbo not returned, Bag-End would have gone to Longo Baggins who was married to Camelia Sackville. Longo was alive when Bilbo returned, so presumably he and Camelia would have be the first to use the hyphenated name Sackville-Baggins. The fact that Camelia's name comes first in the hyphenation and that they adopted a hyphenated name at all would indicated that Camelia may have had a stronger personality than Longo. In any event, the initial conflict over Bag-End must have been between Bilbo and his aunt and uncle.

Lobelia's claim to Bag-End would have come through her husband Otho, who was Camelia and Longo's son. At the time of Bilbo's return, he would have been about 31. Since that is close to his coming of age, it may have been that Camelia and Longo never intended to move from their home, but that they hoped to install their son Otho as The Mr. Baggins of Bag-End, a title which evidently carried some prestige to the extent that Hobbits cared about such things.

I don't know if it is certain that Lobelia Bracegirdle was yet married to Otho Sackville-Baggins at the time of Bilbo's return, when the feud started. If she was married, she would have been a very new bride at the time. If they were not yet married, they may have been in the latter stages of courtship and engagement, so she could have been around to witness all the events. Anway, she seems to have been close enough to the situation to maintain the grudge over the possession of Bag-End for all those years.

I would bet that when Tolkien wrote The Hobbit that he didn't envision Lobelia as only 23 years old; however, when he got around to writing Lord of the Rings, that was the way the numbers worked out. Bilbo lives to an extraordinary age (by the time Frodo sells Bag-End, Bilbo is almost in the record books). Therefore his contemporary Lobelia has to either also live to a very old age, or else be very young during the events of The Hobbit. Since Lobelia does't have a magic ring, Tolkien doesn't want to confer on Lobelia the 'blessed' status that an unusually long life might imply, so he opts to make her fairly young at the time of the Hobbit.

HobbitLove does a nice job of describing how the conflict might have emotionally affected Lobelia and her family. I would add a couple of things to that description. First, as a very immature 23 year old, she might easily have said and done things at the time that exacerbated the misunderstanding. Second, given her mother-in-law Camilia's strong personality, she might have been influenced by and emulated that personality over the course of her life.

 

[squire]

As has been remarked often enough, Tolkien is vague about the socioeconomics of the Shire. The emphasis in this story is on Bilbo's "fabulous" wealth, i.e. that which he got on his adventures, "gold and jools". Frodo will tell us soon enough that Bilbo had in fact already given it all away, except the Ring.

The Baggins family's obvious inherited wealth is different. It is epitomized by Bag End itself, the nicest hole in the Shire, built with a dowry long before the Dwarves arrived at its door. Little is said of Bilbo's means (and Frodo's, as "master of Bag End") beyond such traditional English euphemisms as "comfortable" and "well to do". These obviously connote unearned income, and in a precapitalist society like the hobbits' this must mean rents from lands farmed by tenants or peasants.

It is interesting that Tolkien worked this out a bit more in his drafts of these early chapters than he ever allowed into the final text. In the so-called "Fourth Version" of the "Long-expected Party" chapter, I recently noticed that Frodo's (then Bingo's) deed of sale to Otho (not Lobelia) is actually written out and includes this passage:

Bingo Bolger-Baggins Esqre. departing hereby devises delivers and makes over by free gift the desirable property and messuage or dwelling-hole known as Bag-end Underhill with all lands thereto belonging and annexed to Otho Sackville-Baggins Esqre. and his wife Lobelia... (Return of the Shadow, p. 39)​

The mention of "lands thereto belonging and annexed" must ape a standard convention of English title deeds. Tolkien and his audience would take it for granted, but it is the only indication I've ever seen that the Bagginses actually owned and rented productive lands, the sole source of income in a traditional agricultural society. And Tolkien took it out of the published text. Too explicit? Too realistic? Too detailed? Not funny? Too much in conflict with the happy image of hobbits as a society of independent yeomen farmers?

The added insult* from the same draft, "Bingo was not a lawyer, and he merely put things that way to please Otho Sackville-Baggins, who was a lawyer", is another odd gem that went by the wayside in the course of revision!

*No offense, of course!

 

[Kimi]

This particular joint name seems to have started with Otho, going by Letter 214:

"In other great families the headship might pass through a daughter of the deceased to his eldest grandson (irrespective of the daughter's age). This latter custom was usual in families of more recent origin, without ancient records or ancestral mansions. In such cases the heir (if he accepted the courtesy title) took the name of his mother's family – though he often retained that of his father's family also (placed second). This was the case with Otho Sackville-Baggins. For the nominal headship of the Sackvilles had come to him through his mother Camellia. It was his rather absurd ambition to achieve the rare distinction of being 'head' of two families (he would probably then have called himself Baggins-Sackville-Baggins) : a situation which will explain his exasperation with the adventures and disappearances of Bilbo, quite apart from any loss of property involved in the adoption of Frodo."

 

[Owlyross]

Does it surprise you that Lobelia was only 23 years old in The Hobbit when she thought she was getting Bag End in the auction?
It does, but I’m always surprised by the amount of time that has passed since the Hobbit. It’s almost a lifetime.

Do you find the Sackville-Bagginses amusing here, and elsewhere, or merely obnoxious? Are you able to sympathise with Lobelia as does the narrator?
Snapping her fingers as she walks in really gets to me. I think if someone did that to me there would be violence…

Given the S-B’s desire for Bag End, but also Frodo’s lack of need for money where he’s going, which theory do you subscribe to?
Frodo’s happy to get rid… But all of this points to leaving without coming back. He mentions it a few other times. Is Frodo thinking about staying in Rivendell for ever, or does he have portents about his future and eventual sailing. He walks around saying “I’ll never walk this walk again” “I’ll never see this again”. Is this prescience? I’m not sure.

Why do you think Tolkien has killed off Otho at this stage?
Because Lobelia is more interesting to him?

I love the phrase “ripe but disappointed age.”
What was disappointing to Otho? The fact that his age was not ultimately noteworthy? Or the fact that he never got into Bag End?
He was disappointed with not getting into Bag End. If he thought his age was disappointing, Tolkien would have written “disappointing age” rather than “disappointed” and would not have contradicted himself by putting “ripe” before it.


What do you think? Could Bilbo and Frodo have spent all the wealth? Or like the majority of the hobbits, are you inclined to believe in their unending treasure store?
I think that it was easily possible to spend the money. We are told that Bilbo gave a lot away, and that he fostered Frodo, and gave money to the needy, gave mathoms, big parties etc… So, he could have easily spent all the gold… But of course there’s the property and assets… And the mithril shirt in particular… If he wanted money, there’s more than enough there.

If you weren’t unnerved before now, has this finally convinced you that Gandalf has run into trouble? Are you confident of Frodo’s ability to cope without him at this early stage?
This is unnerving… I remember the first time of reading thinking, uh oh, something’s going wrong here.


“ ‘Coming, sir!’ came the answer from far within, followed soon by Sam himself, wiping his mouth. He had been saying farewell to the beer-barrel in the cellar.”
No question. Just one of my favorite moments!
I like the turn of phrase “saying farewell to the beer-barrel” Good man!


Does this passage evoke the same strange kind of melancholy in you? Have you ever had to move house somewhat unexpectedly, and does this remind you of such feelings?
Whenever I’ve moved unexpectedly, it has been due to unscrupulous landlords, so I’ve never had that feeling per se… But yes, I can understand the moving out and the emptiness… Like seeing my University house for the first time and thinking how cold and empty it looked compared to my home.

 

[elostirion74]

Given the S-B’s desire for Bag End, but also Frodo’s lack of need for money where he’s going, which theory do you subscribe to?

Given Frodo's desire not to rouse suspicion, I think the price was moderate.


I love the phrase “ripe but disappointed age.”

What was disappointing to Otho? The fact that his age was not ultimately noteworthy? Or the fact that he never got into Bag End?

The latter, I believe. Some people hardly live for anything but property and their inheritance, and Otho may well have been of the kind.


What do you think? Could Bilbo and Frodo have spent all the wealth? Or like the majority of the hobbits, are you inclined to believe in their unending treasure store?

I wouldn't think their treasure store was unending, but I still believe they had kept some of it. Bilbo would have given away his share of the troll's plunder, as it came from robbers, but he would still have kept a small part of his "share" of the treasure of the dwarves. Bilbo's and Frodo's income otherwise was probably, like Squire has argued, from land owned and rented. At this time Frodo only wants to make up a passable story to keep his going away unnoticed.

Now Gandalf’s absence is beginning to be worrying. Or did he just not want to help Frodo pack?

Unlike Dumbledore Gandalf has no packing tricks up his sleeve. Gandalf going away unexpectedly is one thing, but failing to return at the promised time is another. At this time I was quite sure that Gandalf had run into trouble

Are you confident of Frodo’s ability to cope without him at this early stage?

I have no reason not to be confident, as I know nothing of the Black Riders as yet and I haven't seen anything to suggest that Frodo isn't able to take care of himself. It's also important for the story that Frodo is left to fend for himself at this stage.


“ ‘Coming, sir!’ came the answer from far within, followed soon by Sam himself, wiping his mouth. He had been saying farewell to the beer-barrel in the cellar.”

No question. Just one of my favorite moments!

Agree


Bag End seemed sad and gloomy and dishevelled. Frodo wandered round the familiar rooms, and saw the light of the sunset fade on the walls, and shadows creep out of the corners.

I find this a very evocative description. Although for myself, when I move out of a home, I am struck by how bright and empty it looks, rather than “gloomy and dishevelled”.

Does this passage evoke the same strange kind of melancholy in you? Have you ever had to move house somewhat unexpectedly, and does this remind you of such feelings?

I've moved so often that I rarely feel any kind of melancholy; I usually enjoy the opportunity to give away or get rid of things I don't feel attached to anymore. It's different with Frodo who is forced into exile, leaving a place he truly loves and not expecting to ever return. I find the shadows creeping out of the corners a bit unsettling and I'm a little worried about Frodo because he waits for so long before leaving.

 

[a.s.]

Does it surprise you that Lobelia was only 23 years old in The Hobbit when she thought she was getting Bag End in the auction?

Yes, as others have said, it always surprises me when it feels like Tolkien "backfitted" something. For instance, I doubt he thought of Lobelia as only 23 (a very young age for hobbits, surely) in the Hobbit, but had to do that to make the math work.

But part of this whole expectation of property and inheritance, etc, rings true to anyone who has read 18th century novels focused on the English gentry and inheritance/disinheritance/property/entailments, etc. It's not in the details, necessarily, as in the unwritten expectations that property and the inheritance of same is a source of considerable concern and lifelong obsession among extended families of the upper middle class (which is how I imagine Bilbo and his relations).

“For a nice price too,” is one version. “At a bargain price,” is the other, “and that’s more likely when Mistress Lobelia’s the buyer.”

Given the S-B’s desire for Bag End, but also Frodo’s lack of need for money where he’s going, which theory do you subscribe to?

It was probably a fair price that drew no one's attention one way or the other during the sale (not the parties involved, or the legal representatives or anyone involved in the property exchange). Too low, it would be very suspicious. Probably Lobelia had to "bargain" it down, or it would have just been too remarkable and caused more inquiries, etc. Frodo may have been ready to part with it at any price in reality, but he was trying to cover his tracks.

What do you think? Could Bilbo and Frodo have spent all the wealth? Or like the majority of the hobbits, are you inclined to believe in their unending treasure store?

As squire says, I always assumed that Bilbo and Frodo had family income somewhere prior to and in addition to their treasure trove. What Frodo will do when he returns home, though, after having sold off his "property" to the S-Bs, is always a question in my mind. I suspect, as always, he doesn't really think he'll will be returing home to the Shire. He's getting ready to go and never return.

Does this passage evoke the same strange kind of melancholy in you? Have you ever had to move house somewhat unexpectedly, and does this remind you of such feelings?

I've had to move and never come back--not even to just "drive by and see the old place", which is what this feels like here even before I read Frodo's words as he stands looking back at Hobbiton a few pages later: "I wonder if I shall ever look down into that valley again".

I realise it isn’t the most thrilling passage to discuss, although for me it’s the most memorable of the chapter. How do you feel about it overall?

It makes me understand how human and frail at heart this brave hobbit is, how much he is sacrificing the ordinary everyday comforts of home and rest and daily living. And how he isn't sacrificing these in exchange for adventure or thrills with the expectation of returning eventually, but giving them up for good, for a mission he is caught up in but never chose.

a.s.

 

[Curious]

which was not really a will at all since he was not dead, was a remnant of these hobbit lawyers. Lawyers always seemed out of place in the Shire, since we hear of no courts. But the Sackville-Baggins always seemed out of place in the Shire as well. It's because of people like Otho that Bilbo needed a good lawyer, and it seems that he retained a good one! So I'm not insulted at all. For every Otho there are also Messrs. Grubb, Grubb, and Burrowes, or whoever succeeded them sixty years later. And note that Aragorn was quite a lawyer himself, as shown when he adjudicated Beregond's case.

 

[SilentLion]

As with real families, there's a lot of family history that lies hidden within the geneaologies, with the dates and placement of names offering tantalizing clues into family relationships.

 

[FarFromHome]

probably belonged to Bag End, since the S-B's were able to evict the Gaffer and his neighbours, and "redevelop" the area.

 

[Penthe]

Lotho also has built quite an empire by buying up property, both agricultural and industrial. So lands are not necessarily firmly attached to families or clans of hobbits, but are fully freehold it seems. Frodo can buy the cottage in Crickhollow easily enough too.

This seems pretty odd given the Took attitude to their lands, which seem to be run by the Thain as his own domain.

But if Frodo's comfortable income is entirely derived (like Mr Darcy's) from land ownership, then how on earth can he convince the other hobbits that his wealth has run out and he needs to retire to Crickhollow? The cottage, presumably, does not come with tenants and so on. How does he invest his remaining capital from the sale of Bag End so that it is available for use to ensure a comfortable retirement in Buckland? The Shire, and the rest of Middle-Earth except perhaps Laketown, does not have a banking system in evidence. He travels with a bag of gold to Bree, but that would not be enough to live on for the rest of his life in a cottage.

Does he retain some properties? Bilbo has spent a fortune on his party, and imports many goods from outside the Shire, which shows he had something of value (gold?) to trade? Did Bilbo, in fact, run a flourishing trade empire with Dale and Laketown and the Mountain? Why did he give away all the treasure? The troll treasure is understandable, but he had two sturdy boxes of mountain treasure as well, which presumably was willingly given by those that Smaug stole it from? But how could he invest this wealth in any realisable form?

Did he buy up mills and forges and so on as well, and have employees as well as tenants?

Now I'm worried.

 

[Curious]

It soon becomes obvious that Tolkien put no thought into it, except to gloss over it.

 

[squire]

Curious is right.

 

[Penthe]

I am not used to paying much attention to the economics of Earth or Middle-Earth. It's just now that I've thought of it I can't stop. Something else will take over shortly.

I don't think Tolkien glosses over the economics, exactly. I just don't think it enters into his worldview. One of the things he needed to escape from was the economic reality of his own experience in Britain in very tough times. By merely having his hobbits 'comfortable', and by having most of his other characters exist in an idyll of complete independence or an idyll of nature providing all that is needed without much labour, he avoids having to allow economic want into his world.

Except when it suits the plot, of course.

Escapism, in this sense, allows him to focus on the things he perceives as more important, such as emotions, spirituality, scholarship and so on. Escapism in this sense is a tangible good, because it enables freedom of expression.
We have become very strongly trained in interpreting the world in material, economic terms. It's the economy, stupid and so on. But I don't think that particular discourse influenced Tolkien in the same way as other authors from the early to mid twentieth century. Which is, of course, one of the many reasons he was seen as anti-modernist.

Sorry, not particularly insightful here, but I'm trying to think of how to express Tolkien's attitude to the material realities of Middle-Earth as a positive rather than as a lack. This is a rather cross-grained interpretation for me I suppose. I'm used to thinking within a post-Marxist framework. I don't mean to look at the political conservatism either, that's not what I'm thinking about.