money in middle earth

[Formendacil]

I would explain it, thought it is speculation, thusly...

The Bagginses, as we are shown by Tolkien, were an aristocratic family, of the same nature as the Tooks, Brandybucks, Bracegirdles, Sackvilles, indeed, most of the big families we are given reference to in the Books.

These large families each, in origin, had their own homeland. Some families, the Tooks and the Brandybucks are notable here, continued to live mainly in their homeland, but it is said of the Bagginses that they were somewhat dispersed by the time of Bilbo- but we are told that their homeland was in the centre of the Shire, about Hobbiton and Bywater.

Now, I relate this tidbit of Hobbit history to show that the great hobbit families had homelands. And who was the head of the Baggins family? Bungo Baggins, followed by his son Bilbo, followed by his heir Frodo- who usurped the place of Otho Sackville-Baggins, whom we are told had the rather greedy desire to be head of two families: the Sackvilles and the Baggins (and would thus have become, amusingly, Otho Baggins-Sackville-Baggins).

So, the great families have homelands and they have heads. I consider these points of information to be important, because it seems likely that, in origin, the lands of each great family were owned by the family- who's head would therefore have been, as head of the family, the ultimate owner of the land.

Now, this would probably have changed by the time of Bilbo and Frodo- to use Tolkien's statement of the Baggins have become somewhat dispersed as evidence. However, if we assume that the Baggins head still retained a certain ownership in the lands that were once the Baggins homeland, then it doesn't seem all that unlikely that he received a nominal fee or tithe from the people who actually farmed the land.

And so I would explain how Frodo had an income without actually working. He was the chief landlord in a very fertile and product region, and even nominal fees would keep him satisfied.

Obviously, I believe the Hobbits at this time had currency. They did in Bree, evidently, and I see no reason for the much larger Shire to not have had the same.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

And so I would explain how Frodo had an income without actually working. He was the chief landlord in a very fertile and product region, and even nominal fees would keep him satisfied.

I forgot that the Baggins' might get 'tribute,' to use a somewhat harsher word, from those that worked their lands. I just don't see any example of it taking place (though it may have).

And as the children that greet Gandalf and Bilbo when Gandalf returns to the Shire (pre-Party) expect some pennies, I would say that there is coin currency within the Shire. Lotho buys up a bunch of land and exports the crops south for more wealth, allowing him to buy more land and begin controlling much of the state of the Shire. Who then enforces the laws, as it seems to me that the community is ruled by hobbit-sense, which in a way makes me feel that they really had no need for money.

Hope that that is somewhat clear.

[Lalwendë]

I would presume that if someone like Bilbo came back to The Shire with a lot of gold that was not in the form of Shire currency then he would have had to exchange it in some way. Now, if The Shire had currency, then it would also need the bullion to make it from, which presumably would not be all that easy to come by! Therefore, Bilbo could well have passed his bullion on to the 'treasury' or 'mint' in exchange for coinage.

I am not sure if there were banks though, so maybe Bilbo dd have to hide his money in the cellars of Bag End?

I interpret the class structure of The Shire differently. It is clear that the Bagginses are solid Middle Class. Tolkien made it clear that they were quite ordinary, with conservative views, just well off. Bilbo is a fantastically well observed, and gently satirical representation of an English middle class male: likes to read, suspicious of strangers, keen on routines such as teatime, likes small pleasures such as a nice cake. I'm not sure whether his type is dying out nowadays. Putting those things together these days might be seen as creating a less sympathetic character.

Merry and Pippin are clearly of the 'old' aristocratic class, together with the teeming family and the sprawling family home (the 'country estate'). The Sackville Bagginses are a joke of Tolkien's either on the part of Middle Class intellectuals (like the Bloomsbury set, which included Vita Sackville West and Virginia Woolf), or on those who were Middle class and sought to make themselves more aristocratic e.g. by acquiring a double-barrelled name. I've heard Tolkien was quite sporty in his youth and slightly suspicious of more 'aesthetic' types.

Frodo may well have earned much income from quiet investments, maybe a little rent here and there on property or land. Was he left with any money of his own after his parents died?

The Shire is not feudal, it is more advanced. It is more like turn of the century (19th/20th, not 20th/21st!) Britain, but without a Government and all the machinery of State.

[Frodo Baggins]

Perhaps just like the Hobbits used the calendar set up in Gondor by the king (i.e. King's reckoning) they used some sort of "universal" currency also set up by the kings and/ or stewards? Perhaps this currency was used among most settlements of Hobbits and men. Though I doubut that elves or dwarves used such currency, as stand-offish as they can be.

Wealthy families like Bagginses and Tooks I'm sure had a system like the old days of the humans. The weathy people owned scads of land and had other people work it for them. The landlords in turn got a percentage of whatever money the peasants made or grew. They also may have collected rent from people living on their land. For all we know, the Gamgees of Bagshot Row may have been paying rent to the Bagginses!!

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

The Shire is not feudal, it is more advanced. It is more like turn of the century (19th/20th, not 20th/21st!) Britain, but without a Government and all the machinery of State.

I agree that it is not feudal- hence my attempt to suggest that Frodo's position as chief landlord in the Hobbiton area- if the case at all- is more of a lingering effect of the once more-feudal Baggins homeland. All that would be needed is for Frodo to own a few substantial farms and maybe a Bagshot Row or three, and someone as modest in needs as he was would probably be set.

What difference does it make if Frodo comes by these "investments" as you call them, through the investment of money or through his inheritance?

And call the Bagginses middle-class stereotypes if you like, but to me Bag-End smacks more of a manor house suited to a beknighted peer than something truly middle class.

[davem]

Clearly Hobbits did use coins

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

And call the Bagginses middle-class stereotypes if you like, but to me Bag-End smacks more of a manor house suited to a beknighted peer than something truly middle class.

But the Bagginses are definitely middle class while the Tooks are "gentry"/aristocracy. There is a huge difference in mentality if not finance. Maybe it is hard also to realise how (ridiculously) this mattered then but it is barely a century since my great grandmother was disowned by her family for marrying "in to trade" - she was also spat at in the streets for being so immodest as to ride a bicycle ..... Bit of a Belladonna Took herself

[A_Brandybuck]

I think, that the behaviour of Lotho is crucial in this discussion.

Return of the King, The Scouring of the Shire:
He'd funny ideas had Pimple. Seems he wanted to own everything himself, and then order other folk about. It soon came out that he already did own a sight more than was good for him; and he was always grabbing more, though where he got the money was a mystery: mills and malt-houses and inns, and farms, and leaf-plantations. He'd already bought Sandyman's mill before he came to Bag End, seemingly.
'Of course he started with a lot of property in the Southfarthing which he had from his dad; and it seems he'd been selling a lot o' the best leaf, and sending it away quietly for a year or two. But at the end o' last year he began sending away loads of stuff, not only leaf. Things began to get short, and winter coming on, too. Folk got angry, but he had his answer.

Farmer Cotton clearly stated, that there is money in the Shire. At least Lotho bought some buildings with money. The question came up, where he got all the money and it seems clear, that he had some tradings with Isengard, which is (for me) obviously the source of his money.
Farmer Cotton didn't know, where the money came from, so I think, that this was very 'normal' money, which seems to look not very exotic. I mean Farmer Cotton didn't explicitly mention that this was money from elsewhere or that there was such a rumour. In this case he would clearly have mentioned it, because this had (at least partly) answered the question, where he got that money.

And alone the possibility the Lotho could make such deals with some foreigners could mean, that there must be a shared basis, of which the tradings underlie.

[Rumil]

One source of cash, or precious metal, for the Shire must have been derived from their dealings with the Dwarves.

The Dwarves often travelled through the Shire and seem to have bought agricultural produce from the hobbits, probably sometimes by barter for 'ironmongery' of various types, but conceivably with coins. The Dwarves were not farmers and had a similar sort of relationship with the men of the second age. I seem to remember this from UT where Gandalf explains his dealings with Thorin and 'of Dwarves and men'.