King Elessar's Folly?

[Lord Melkor]

For quite a while now I've been puzzled by Aragorn's decision to forbid entrance to the Shire to non-Hobbits. Though at first it may seem like a benevolent gesture ensuring the Hobbits' survival, when you start to look more closely this policy may very well have contributed to the sorry state of the Hobbit race as described by Tolkien (hiding in the wild, fleeing from any human they encounter). Let us take a closer look, shall we?

Hobbit society has always been rather non-adventurous, with very few Hobbits ever leaving the confines of the Shire. In fact, almost the only contact the Hobbits have with the rest of Middle-earth is with traders and travelers passing through the Shire. With the Closing of the Shire these travelers and traders will no longer use the Great East Road through the Hobbit's homeland, thus depriving the already insular Hobbits of their contacts with the other peoples of Middle-earth. How is is anything but a bad thing is beyond me and I'm surprised that Aragorn did not anticipate this.

There is of course also a major economical problem with Aragorn's decision. The Great East Road is the major east-west trade route of Eriador (and extends into Rhovanion across the Misty Mountains). However, with one fell swoop of his pencil Aragorn effectively cut off the Blue Mountains (with their Dwarf settlements) and the Grey Havens from the rest of Middle-earth, effectively blocking the major traderoutes in western Middle-earth. This will mean new roads will have to be contructed, either to the north or to the south of the Shire in order to reconnect these lands with the rest of trading Middle-earth. Looking at the map a new southern road would be the most practical. This would allow connection to the Greenway to Gondor and the lands north of the Shire are rather hilly, making road construction more cumbersome. All things considered, this will be another costly expense for the Gondorian treasury, for although Aragorn may not have much interest in 'counting coppers', a healthy economy is paramount to the survival of the empire.

Now let us take a look at the non-existing benefits of Aragorn's decree. His decree was based on protecting the Hobbits from those big bad Humans, who would seek to burn off the hair of his beloved Hobbits' feet with hot pincers if he didn't do something to protect his furryfooted friends. His decree however, is a waste of parchment. Aragorns reign and the subsequent clearing of the woodlands of Eriador would've ensured the Hobbits' safety, thus invalidating the need to turn the Shire into some kind of 'Forbidden Land'. During the reign of Elessar I the Hobbits would've been perfectly safe from harm, well protected by living in the strong reunited kingdom of Gondor and Arnor. But, as history shows, good things rarely last long, and even this kingdom will eventually disintergrate in 500-1000 years or so. By this time however, the Hobbits, having lived in an artificial mini-Arda of their own, shielded from outside influences by armed forces at their borders, will be in for a nasty surprise. The disintergration and collapse of the kingdom will mean that those forces protecting them in their little shell will no longer be there and sooner or later, aggresive forces (be they human or otherwise, like Orcs), will march into the Shire for new lands and loot. The pampered Hobbits of the Fourth Age, who by this time have all but forgotten what a human looked like (the vast majority will have never seen anything else but Hobbits, due to the insular and introspective nature of Hobbit society), will be overwhelmed by the invading hordes and be crushed, slaughtered, enslaved or driven away.

My conclusion is that Aragorns' decree, although intended as a protective, if slightly paternalistic ("Awwww, the poor widdle Hobbits can't take care of themselves...." ) and economically unsound measure to ensure the Hobbits survival in the Fourth Age, probably ensured the Hobbits' demise as a civilized race after the fall of his kingdom.

[Formendacil]

An important thing to remember is that the Shire was the greatest economic force in Eriador at the moment. In the long run it might be more costly to isolate the Shire in the way that Elessar was ordering, but at that point, it was essential to win over the trust of the Hobbits.

With the exception of the Fellowship and a few Bree-ward travelling Bucklander, the Hobbits knew the Big Folk pretty much from Saruman's marauders. And the Hobbits didn't have a great opinion of the Big Folk to begin with, if one goes by the Prologue.

If the re-established Arnor was to be successful in its early years, it needed the aid of the Shire to supply food and goods. Quite simply, Bree, Rivendell, and the Ered Luin dwarves and Elves aren't nearly enough of a force to support them, and Rohan and Gondor are quite distant. In this atmosphere, the good will of hobbits is essential.

And although Sam, Merry, and Pippin will soon fill the top positions in the Shire, one has to remember that the Shire didn't REALLY have a government, and if the Hobbits decided that they didn't want to trade with the Big Folk, it's unlikely that Captain Merry or any of the others could convince them otherwise.

So Elessar's move makes very good sense for the establishment of a new Arnor. Ultimately it might become a rather bad thing, but at the time I would say that it was well-merited, in that it did a very good job of gaining the hobbits' trust.

[alatar]

By Big Folk, did Aragorn mean Elves and Dwarves? If not, then the Dwarves could still traverse the Shire in order to continue trade. Also, those border Hobbits with a bit of greed could offer to transport goods across the Shire for the Big Folk for a bit of coin.

On the other hand, after a few centuries when the big bad folk eventually decide that they are hungry enough to start eating those fat little Hobbits (never seen but spoke of in tales of lore), they might break the ban to find that no Hobbits exist, just a bunch of somewhat shorter people who obviously got there first. Hmmm...

Or Eru could step in again like when the Big Folk violated that other Ban...

[Kuruharan]

I seriously doubt the Elves cared two straws about the decree. Who would be able to stop them frolicking where they chose anyway? Besides, I don't think Aragorn would have intended the decree to apply to the Elves. He held them in such high regard that they could probably do what they wished.

The ban might more plausibly have applied to Dwarves.

Lord Melkor has brought up an interesting thing to ponder.

[The Saucepan Man]

I wonder if Tolkien, when conceiving Aragorn's decree, had in mind the effect of colonisation on indiginous peoples. Perhaps he was uncomfortable with the possibility of the Shire being colonised, and its resources plundered, by the Big People. I'm not suggesting any kind of allegory here (God forbid ), but the circumstances of places like Africa and the Indian Sub-Continent may have guided his thoughts, given that many former (UK and other European) colonies were seeking, or being given, their independence at the time that he was writing LotR.

[Gwydion]

I believe that the ban only applied to Humans and not elves or dwarves. And yes the ban might one day be broken, but as proved in ROTK, the hobbits are a fierce folk when provoked and some hobbits,Tooks, would still go outside the borders, so they would not be totally isolated. The dunadain would most likely still travel to the Shire by leave of the king and the folk of Bree would probably still enter the Shire.

I also agree with Alatar that some hobbits would allow the Big Folk to pay them to transport their goods across the Shire and I say again the ban probably applied only to Humans because the Elves and Dwarves were not under the rule of Gondor or Arnor or any other kingdom of men no matter how high and mighty they may be.