Hobbit family trees
Jul. 26th, 2005 05:37 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dreamflowerA week from today, I am supposed to post my last Chapter of the Week summary to rec.arts.books.tolkien and alt.fan.tolkien. (It would have been this week,but we're behind schedule.)
Anyway, I finished the summary, but as it's for Appendix C: the Hobbit Family Trees, it is not exactly your average chapter summary. So, I thought I'd try it on first here in LJ land. That way if I've made any major bloopers or missed anything, maybe someone can give me a heads up.
It's rather long and technical, but it's all about hobbits, so I hope there's some interest.![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
marigoldg I mention you, though not by name, if that's all right with you.
Chapter of the Week: Appendix C, the Hobbit Family Trees
This is not a chapter that readily lends itself to summary, so I apologize in advance for my unconventional treatment of it. I hope it’s not too long, but the more I worked on it, the more fascinated I became.
The family trees as shown in Appendix C serve to give even more depth to JRRT’s creation of the Shire and Hobbits. In the introduction to the chapter, JRRT says “The names given from these trees are only a selection from many.”
He makes note that most of the names were attendees at Bilbo’s Last Birthday Party or their ancestors. Actual guests are marked with an asterisk.
In addition to Baggins, we also have Took, Brandybuck and Gamgee (Gardner) family trees.
We know from various sources, particularly Vol. XII of HoMe that JRRT gave a good deal of time and effort into the family trees of the hobbits.
He went through several revisions of the included family trees, as well as some which were not ultimately included. (Bolgers and Boffins)
I have some observations on each one of the family trees, and I put them forth for discussion.
BAGGINS:
In spite of JRRT’s claim that there are names not included on these family trees, I feel that the Baggins chart is fairly complete for a number of reasons. Comparing it to the Took and Brandybuck charts, we do *not* see any names followed by “many descendants” “unnamed daughters”, etc. with the sole exception of--*not* Bagginses, but Goodbodies (“[various Goodbodies]”) In other words, there are no gaps where unincluded names could fit. A careful examination shows that the Baggins family name dead-ends with Frodo. Frodo’s descent is from the common ancestor Balbo Baggins’ fourth child, Largo, who was his great-grandfather. Largo’s only son was Fosco, who fathered Dora (a female), Drogo (Frodo’s father) and Dudo. Dudo’s only child was a daughter, who married a Boffin. Balbo’s third child, Ponto, had one son and one daughter. The daughter married into the Tooks, and became a common ancestress for Merry and Pippin. The son, Polo, had one son, one daughter. Of Polo’s two sons, the oldest had only a daughter, while the second one remained unmarried. His third child was a daughter and married into the Burrows. Balbo’s oldest child, Mungo, sired three sons and two daughters. His oldest son was Bilbo’s father. Bilbo, of course, had no issue. His next son, Longo’s line ended with the deplorable Lotho Sackville-Baggins, and his youngest son’s line ended with a granddaughter who married a Bolger.
IMHO, this was all very deliberate. First of all, it renders Frodo as the only possible heir to Bilbo (according to the rules of inheritance set up in Letter #214--it’s another debate entirely as to whether he thought the rules up to fit Frodo or the other way around) and it means that there are *no* male Bagginses left with the exception of the rather elderly Ponto and Porto to dispute *Sam’s* inheritance of Bag End.
There are some other interesting things to be gleaned from this family tree. For example, a comparison of the family tree with the Tale of Years shows that *Otho Sackville-Baggins* would not have been of age at the time of Bilbo’s return from Erebor. Therefore it is likely that the effort to declare Bilbo dead and take over Bag End was spearheaded by his father Longo, rather than Otho himself. If he and Lobelia were married at that time, it meant they wed before they came of age, something that appears to have been rather unusual among hobbits, going by the other indicated dates.
Another item of interest is that the family that appears to have been married into most often by the Bagginses was the Bolgers.
TOOKS
The Tooks seem to have been very prolific, with the notable exception of a few who died without issue, such as Isengrim III and Ferumbras III. It is *this* which renders Pippin, the descendant of the Old Took’s fourth child Hildigrim, as eligible for the Thainship. It is among the Tooks that we find many of the gaps into which unnamed relatives could fit: Isembold, the Old Took’s fifth child is simply listed as having “many descendants”; so is Bandobras the Bullroarer, though it does specify that he was ancestor to the North-tooks and Pippin’s wife Diamond. Paladin’s father had 3 unnamed daughters before he had Paladin and Esmeralda. It is also among the Tooks that we learn of who those hobbits Gandalf was accused of luring away on adventure were.
One other thing to make note of: if we go solely by the date of death of Ferumbras III it appears that Pippin’s father Paladin had only been Thain for three years before the Quest. Makes his success in keeping Ruffians out of Tookland quite remarkable, and might go some way to explaining some of Pippin‘s behavior.
BRANDYBUCKS
Again, we find the spots where extra relations could be found. The common ancestor Gormadoc’s oldest son Madoc is Merry’s ancestor, but he had two other sons who had “various” or “many” descendants. We can take note that the Masters of Buckland went in for nicknames: “Proudneck”, “Broadbelt” and “Scattergold” are but a few. There is something rather Saxon about this, and is a reminder that Merry thought there were things that Buckland had in common with Rohan.
The naming practices of the Brandybucks are also interesting: *all* male names end in -oc, -ac, -ic, or -as. And *all* the *born* females in the Brandybuck line have flower/plant names. (The other families do have some, but also include jewel names and fanciful names.)
It is also of note that early editions of the Brandybuck genealogy did not include Merry’s marriage to Estella Bolger (sister of Fredegar). [As a side note, a friend of mine received a letter from JRRT at the time when he still answered such questions, and explained that the marriage was originally left off by the publishers due to space considerations. He also told her that Merry’s son was named “Periadoc”.]
GAMGEE (GARDNER)
Unlike the previous three families, whose genealogies begin with a single ancestor of a common name, Sam’s begins with three: Hamfast of Gamwich, Holman the Greenhanded, and Cottar (no byname). Like the Baggins family tree, there are no gaps for unnamed relatives to fit except perhaps on the maternal side. If I have counted correctly, it appears that Sam and Rose are fourth cousins, both descended from Holman the Greenhanded.
Sam has *no* relatives in common with any of the other three. He is clearly of a completely different social circle.
We are given Sam’s complete family: thirteen children, with the year of birth for each of them.
We are not told if Sam’s sister Marigold, and her husband, Rose’s brother Tom, have children, but if they did, their children and Sam’s would have been double cousins.
As a measure of how far Sam’s family has risen in social stature, his middle daughter Goldilocks marries Pippin’s son Faramir, who will become Thain.
Is this something the Gaffer would *ever* have foreseen?
Just as a matter of interest, here are some websites I looked at while preparing for this chapter.
http://www.mycinnamontoast.com/frodo/
http://www.obliquity.com/family/misc/cousin.html
http://www.genealogy.com/16_cousn.html
http://genealogy.about.com/library/tips/blcousins.htm
Anyway, I finished the summary, but as it's for Appendix C: the Hobbit Family Trees, it is not exactly your average chapter summary. So, I thought I'd try it on first here in LJ land. That way if I've made any major bloopers or missed anything, maybe someone can give me a heads up.
It's rather long and technical, but it's all about hobbits, so I hope there's some interest.
marigoldg I mention you, though not by name, if that's all right with you.Chapter of the Week: Appendix C, the Hobbit Family Trees
This is not a chapter that readily lends itself to summary, so I apologize in advance for my unconventional treatment of it. I hope it’s not too long, but the more I worked on it, the more fascinated I became.
The family trees as shown in Appendix C serve to give even more depth to JRRT’s creation of the Shire and Hobbits. In the introduction to the chapter, JRRT says “The names given from these trees are only a selection from many.”
He makes note that most of the names were attendees at Bilbo’s Last Birthday Party or their ancestors. Actual guests are marked with an asterisk.
In addition to Baggins, we also have Took, Brandybuck and Gamgee (Gardner) family trees.
We know from various sources, particularly Vol. XII of HoMe that JRRT gave a good deal of time and effort into the family trees of the hobbits.
He went through several revisions of the included family trees, as well as some which were not ultimately included. (Bolgers and Boffins)
I have some observations on each one of the family trees, and I put them forth for discussion.
BAGGINS:
In spite of JRRT’s claim that there are names not included on these family trees, I feel that the Baggins chart is fairly complete for a number of reasons. Comparing it to the Took and Brandybuck charts, we do *not* see any names followed by “many descendants” “unnamed daughters”, etc. with the sole exception of--*not* Bagginses, but Goodbodies (“[various Goodbodies]”) In other words, there are no gaps where unincluded names could fit. A careful examination shows that the Baggins family name dead-ends with Frodo. Frodo’s descent is from the common ancestor Balbo Baggins’ fourth child, Largo, who was his great-grandfather. Largo’s only son was Fosco, who fathered Dora (a female), Drogo (Frodo’s father) and Dudo. Dudo’s only child was a daughter, who married a Boffin. Balbo’s third child, Ponto, had one son and one daughter. The daughter married into the Tooks, and became a common ancestress for Merry and Pippin. The son, Polo, had one son, one daughter. Of Polo’s two sons, the oldest had only a daughter, while the second one remained unmarried. His third child was a daughter and married into the Burrows. Balbo’s oldest child, Mungo, sired three sons and two daughters. His oldest son was Bilbo’s father. Bilbo, of course, had no issue. His next son, Longo’s line ended with the deplorable Lotho Sackville-Baggins, and his youngest son’s line ended with a granddaughter who married a Bolger.
IMHO, this was all very deliberate. First of all, it renders Frodo as the only possible heir to Bilbo (according to the rules of inheritance set up in Letter #214--it’s another debate entirely as to whether he thought the rules up to fit Frodo or the other way around) and it means that there are *no* male Bagginses left with the exception of the rather elderly Ponto and Porto to dispute *Sam’s* inheritance of Bag End.
There are some other interesting things to be gleaned from this family tree. For example, a comparison of the family tree with the Tale of Years shows that *Otho Sackville-Baggins* would not have been of age at the time of Bilbo’s return from Erebor. Therefore it is likely that the effort to declare Bilbo dead and take over Bag End was spearheaded by his father Longo, rather than Otho himself. If he and Lobelia were married at that time, it meant they wed before they came of age, something that appears to have been rather unusual among hobbits, going by the other indicated dates.
Another item of interest is that the family that appears to have been married into most often by the Bagginses was the Bolgers.
TOOKS
The Tooks seem to have been very prolific, with the notable exception of a few who died without issue, such as Isengrim III and Ferumbras III. It is *this* which renders Pippin, the descendant of the Old Took’s fourth child Hildigrim, as eligible for the Thainship. It is among the Tooks that we find many of the gaps into which unnamed relatives could fit: Isembold, the Old Took’s fifth child is simply listed as having “many descendants”; so is Bandobras the Bullroarer, though it does specify that he was ancestor to the North-tooks and Pippin’s wife Diamond. Paladin’s father had 3 unnamed daughters before he had Paladin and Esmeralda. It is also among the Tooks that we learn of who those hobbits Gandalf was accused of luring away on adventure were.
One other thing to make note of: if we go solely by the date of death of Ferumbras III it appears that Pippin’s father Paladin had only been Thain for three years before the Quest. Makes his success in keeping Ruffians out of Tookland quite remarkable, and might go some way to explaining some of Pippin‘s behavior.
BRANDYBUCKS
Again, we find the spots where extra relations could be found. The common ancestor Gormadoc’s oldest son Madoc is Merry’s ancestor, but he had two other sons who had “various” or “many” descendants. We can take note that the Masters of Buckland went in for nicknames: “Proudneck”, “Broadbelt” and “Scattergold” are but a few. There is something rather Saxon about this, and is a reminder that Merry thought there were things that Buckland had in common with Rohan.
The naming practices of the Brandybucks are also interesting: *all* male names end in -oc, -ac, -ic, or -as. And *all* the *born* females in the Brandybuck line have flower/plant names. (The other families do have some, but also include jewel names and fanciful names.)
It is also of note that early editions of the Brandybuck genealogy did not include Merry’s marriage to Estella Bolger (sister of Fredegar). [As a side note, a friend of mine received a letter from JRRT at the time when he still answered such questions, and explained that the marriage was originally left off by the publishers due to space considerations. He also told her that Merry’s son was named “Periadoc”.]
GAMGEE (GARDNER)
Unlike the previous three families, whose genealogies begin with a single ancestor of a common name, Sam’s begins with three: Hamfast of Gamwich, Holman the Greenhanded, and Cottar (no byname). Like the Baggins family tree, there are no gaps for unnamed relatives to fit except perhaps on the maternal side. If I have counted correctly, it appears that Sam and Rose are fourth cousins, both descended from Holman the Greenhanded.
Sam has *no* relatives in common with any of the other three. He is clearly of a completely different social circle.
We are given Sam’s complete family: thirteen children, with the year of birth for each of them.
We are not told if Sam’s sister Marigold, and her husband, Rose’s brother Tom, have children, but if they did, their children and Sam’s would have been double cousins.
As a measure of how far Sam’s family has risen in social stature, his middle daughter Goldilocks marries Pippin’s son Faramir, who will become Thain.
Is this something the Gaffer would *ever* have foreseen?
Just as a matter of interest, here are some websites I looked at while preparing for this chapter.
http://www.mycinnamontoast.com/frodo/
http://www.obliquity.com/family/misc/cousin.html
http://www.genealogy.com/16_cousn.html
http://genealogy.about.com/library/tips/blcousins.htm