# Why three races of hobbits?



## Greenwood (Mar 27, 2005)

I was just rereading the Prologue of LOTR and got to thinking about the three races of hobbits: Harfoots, Stoors and Fallohides. The question that came to mind is: "Why did Tolkien choose to make three races of hobbits?" Hobbits don't appear in The Silmarillion so this was not a carry over from his larger legendarium. The existence of three races never seems to have any great significance in LOTR. Yes, Gandalf scandalizes Frodo by suggesting that Smeagol/Gollum was a kind of hobbit (akin to the fathers of the Stoors, if I remember correctly), but this hardly seems to justify creating three races of hobbits.

My own conclusion is that it is another one of Tolkien's little touches of adding what is really extraneous and unneccesary detail (and we are given quite a bit of detail about the three races) to give a greater feeling of reality to the tale. In other words, the only reason for there being three races of hobbits is to make it seem as if there is a long history behind the tale; a long enough history of this imaginary world that different races of hobbits had developed. I know Prof. Shippey has suggested that Tolkien did all sorts of things that a professional writer would not have done and that a professional writer would have told him not to do, but that turned out to be part of the genius of Tolkien's creation. The three races of hobbits strike me as being that sort of thing. A complicating detail that really is unnecessary to the story, but that for that very reason adds to the feeling of reality of Tolkien's created world.

Any thoughts, anyone?


----------



## Henniden (Mar 27, 2005)

Greenwood, I think you answered fully your question. Tolkien was fascinated by Hobbits, so probably he just felt the inner need to imagine them as a whole 
world - they are very different from other races of Middle Earth. I find amazing, btw. the passage from a kind of XIXth century rural life in Hobbiton to a Medieval world of Rohan and Gondor. Nobody but Tolkien could have done it. It would be just ridiculous in any other fantasy story.


----------



## Ithrynluin (Mar 27, 2005)

The existence of three groups of Hobbits may not be a crucial addition to the story, but it was a very nice touch, which further reinforces the feeling that Tolkien's history is deep and elaborate.

It seems that the three kindreds of the Hobbits are supposed to represent the three peoples of Arda:

1. Harfoots - Dwarves. 



> The Harfoots were browner of skin, smaller, and shorter, and they were beardless and bootless; their hands and feet were neat and nimble; and they preferred highlands and hillsides.





> The Harfoots had much to do with Dwarves in ancient times, and long lived in the foothills of the mountains. They moved westward early, and roamed over Eriador as far as Weathertop while the others were still in the Wilderland. They were the most normal and representative variety of Hobbit, and far the most numerous. They were the most inclined to settle in one place, and longest preserved their ancestral habit of living in tunnels and holes.



2. Stoors - Men



> The Stoors were broader, heavier in build; their feet and hands were larger, and they preferred flat lands and riversides.





> The Stoors lingered long by the banks of the Great River Anduin, and were less shy of Men. They came west after the Harfoots and followed the course of the Loudwater southwards; and there many of them long dwelt between Tharbad and the borders of Dunland before they moved north again.



3. Fallohides - Elves



> The Fallohides were fairer of skin and also of hair, and they were taller and slimmer than the others; they were lovers of trees and of woodlands.





> The Fallohides, the least numerous, were a northerly branch. They were more friendly with Elves than the other Hobbits were, and had more skill in language and song than in handicrafts; and of old they preferred hunting to tilling. They crossed the mountains north of Rivendell and came down the River Hoarwell. In Eriador they soon mingled with the other kinds that had preceded them, but being somewhat bolder and more adventurous, they were often found as leaders or chieftains among clans of Harfoots or Stoors. Even in Bilbo's time the strong Fallohidish strain could still be noted among the greater families, such as the Tooks and the Masters of Buckland.


----------



## OldTomBombadil (Mar 27, 2005)

Greenwood said:


> The three races of hobbits strike me as being that sort of thing. A complicating detail that really is unnecessary to the story, but that for that very reason adds to the feeling of reality of Tolkien's created world.


 I agree completely. That is a very Tolkien-like thing to do and, as you suggest, a part of his genius.



Ithrynluin said:


> It seems that the three kindreds of the Hobbits are supposed to represent the three peoples of Arda...


 That's a very astute observation, Ithrynluin, and gives strength to observations about Frodo's "Elvish quality" that are given in _The Lord of the Rings_.


These different strains (or "breeds" as they are called in the prologue to _The Fellowship of the Ring_) also aid the understanding of why the various Hobbit settlements are so different and regard each other with suspicion, oft remarking "folks are queer in those parts". For example, the Bucklanders use of boats (evidently a Stoor quality) was scandalous to those of the the common Harfoot strain. It was Bilbo's latent Tookishness (the Tooks were Fallowhides) that the tale told by Thorin and Company appealed to-- 
_



Far over the misty mountains cold 
To dungeons deep and caverns old
We must away ere break of day
To seek the pale enchanted gold...

Click to expand...

 _and caused him, against his better judgement, to accompany them on their quest for dragon's gold.


----------



## Hammersmith (Mar 27, 2005)

"Three" is the biblical number of completion, and as such has ingrained itself in the consciousness of western civilisation just like 7, 12 and 10 (though I can't recall their significances  ). Three is often used as a convenient number because of the connotations of it, as a landmark number, though the user may not know the reasons behind it. This could be why there are also three emphasised races in Middle Earth.


----------



## Ardamir the Blessed (Mar 27, 2005)

I have done much research on the history of the Hobbits, and I quite strongly believe that the Harfoots have Dwarvish blood, the Stoors Mannish blood and the Fallohides Elvish blood. I know that Hobbits are Men, but I think that the Stoors have received a Mannish strain ('Big People strain') that makes them specifically Stoors. How the Harfoots received their Dwarvish strain is a bit problematic though, since then Dwarves must be the same race biologically as them.

I have not (yet) managed to find out when this split into three strains occured, but it is reasonable to assume that it happened when the Hobbits were living in Rhovanion (not necessarily when they were living in the vales of Anduin). The Fallohides must have received their Elvish strain from the Elves of Mirkwood, since there are no other Elves in the area (unless Elves lived in Dorwinion, but I do think that Tolkien most likely had the Elves of Mirkwood in mind). The Stoors got their Mannish strain from Men in the vales of Anduin (*not* the Éothéod, since the Hobbits moved to Eriador around TA 1000 and the Éothéod did not come to the vales until in the late 2nd millennium), Men of Dale/Esgaroth, and/or the Northmen east of Mirkwood. In fact I believe that the Hobbits, or a group of them, lived close to or among the Northmen east of Mirkwood in the 1st millennium of the Third Age or even earlier. The Harfoots must have received their Dwarvish strain from Dwarves on the eastern side of the Misty Mountains, in the Grey Mountains, and/or at Erebor. I have been thinking that the Erebor and Esgaroth area would be the best for the mingling of Hobbits to happen: they would be close to Dwarves, Elves and Men. But I am not sure if Erebor was inhabitated in early TA or late SA.

This should all be covered by a good and long essay/post with quotes instead, and I am working on this. In the meantime I can add though, that Frodo, Sam, Merry, Pippin and Bilbo all had Elvish blood.


----------



## Greenwood (Mar 28, 2005)

Thank you all for your comments. Just the sort of thing I was hoping for. I had not meant my original question to stress the number three. I had merely meant why have multiple races of hobbits instead of just one. However, Ithrynluin, you make a very interesting suggestion that the three races of hobbits were meant to reflect the three kinds of free peoples of Middle Earth: dwarves, elves and men. I believe hobbits are supposed to be a small form of men, but that the three kinds might represent in some way dwarves, elves and men is indeed interesting. In his Prologue, Tolkien says:


> It is plain indeed that in spite of later estrangement Hobbits are relatives of ours: far nearer to us than Elves or even than Dwarves. Of old they spoke the languages of Men, after their own fashion, and liked and disliked much the same things as Men did. But what exactly our relationship is can no longer be discovered.


Certainly hobbits being a form of men would fit with Tolkien's broader cosmology of elves and men being the Children of Iluvatar and dwarves being a creation of Aule (then given independent life by Eru). That cosmology really doesn't leave any room for another independent creation for hobbits. Of course, none of this negates your interesting idea, Ithrynluin, of the three kinds of hobbits mirroring the three free peoples.

Ardamir,

I look forward to hearing your evidence for any hobbits having either dwarvish or elvish blood.


----------



## Helm (Mar 29, 2005)

We all know how Elves Man and Dwarves became "alive" but how did Hobbits become "alive"? Maybe Ardamir could cover this in his long post?


----------



## Ithrynluin (Mar 30, 2005)

Helm said:


> We all know how Elves Man and Dwarves became "alive" but how did Hobbits become "alive"?



Since they are supposedly an offshoot of the race of Man, I don't think they would come into existence the same way the other three races have, i.e. by awakening. I would say they gradually got separated from 'the Big Folk' and developed their own traits, both physical and mental, through evolution.


----------



## Gothmog (Mar 30, 2005)

Ithrynluin said:


> I don't think they would come into existence the same way the other three races have, i.e. by awakening.


I think that it is likely that the Hobbits did come into exixtence in exactly the same way and the same time as Men. Eru knew the whole of the Music of the Ainur plus what he was going to add. So he would also know what Sauron would do in making the Ring and what would be needed to deal with it. Since Tolkien says that Hobbits are closer to Men than any other race, perhaps when they awoke they looked little different to the rest of Men and then changed acording to the design of Eru in the time between the moving of Men from their place of awakening and the time that they were first noticed as 'Halflings' in the vales of Anduin.


----------



## Alatar (Mar 30, 2005)

I have always belived hobbits to be some breed of men like uruk-hai are a breed of uruks.
The 3 races mirroring the 3 people is a good idea and i think it works.
I look forward to the paper on the actuall drawish strain and man and elf strains.
BTW


> 1999 ThrainI comes to erebor and founds a dwarf kingdom "under the mountain


"


----------



## Sam_Gamgee (Apr 8, 2005)

Why not hobbits rule....and tolkien rules for making countless details for us to discuss and enjoy


----------



## Alcuin (Apr 8, 2005)

These hobbit groups are not “races” in the way that we understand that term in the early 21st century. I think they would be better understood as three “tribes” of related peopled. 

For instance, the “Anglo-Saxons” were a composite of three tribes, the Jutes (who came from what is still called Jutland, the narrow peninsula where Denmark joins Germany), who settled in the southeast in which is now Kent; the Angles, who settled mostly north of the Thames; and the Saxons, who settle mostly south of the Thames and west of the Jutes. These three tribes intermingled, intermarried, and together constituted England (“Angle-land”). (Even this view is simplistic: it leaves out the Danes, who were relatives of the Jutes, Angles, and Saxons, who seized and settled areas originally settled by the Angles, a region called the Danelaw.)


----------



## Starbrow (Apr 8, 2005)

Ithy made some really good points.

The three types of hobbits also brings to mind the three kindreds of the elves: the Vanyar, the Noldor, and the Teleri. I wonder if Tolkien consciously chose to divide the elves and the hobbits into threes. Or is it part of his Western upbringing to prefer the number 3 over other numbers.


----------



## Alcuin (Apr 9, 2005)

Starbrow said:


> The three types of hobbits also brings to mind the three kindreds of the elves...


And Three Houses of Men.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Apr 9, 2005)

Greenwood said:


> "Why did Tolkien choose to make three races of hobbits?"
> Any thoughts, anyone?



At the risk of being facetious: why not? He made up different elf races and man races also, the same question is applicable there as well. Three kinds of hobbits is no different. Racial diversity is real, and Tolkien's fantasy was, above all, "real."

Barley


----------



## Gothmog (Apr 9, 2005)

Starbrow said:


> The three types of hobbits also brings to mind the three kindreds of the elves: the Vanyar, the Noldor, and the Teleri. I wonder if Tolkien consciously chose to divide the elves and the hobbits into threes. Or is it part of his Western upbringing to prefer the number 3 over other numbers.


While it is possible that he had a preference for the number 3, he did not use that number only, There were three clans or peoples of Elves and there were 7 houses of Dwarves.


Alcuin said:


> And Three Houses of Men.


Three Houses of Edain. There were more than three houses of Men as some did not come into Beleriand until later. Perhaps there were even 9 Houses of men, maybe this was the reason for the different number of Rings given by Sauron to the different peoples of ME.


----------



## Inderjit S (Apr 9, 2005)

> There were more than three houses of Men as some did not come into Beleriand until later. Perhaps there were even 9 Houses of men, maybe this was the reason for the different number of Rings given by Sauron to the different peoples of ME.



That was a matter of consequence. Sauron managed to obtain 16 (or 15) rings, 7 of these (or 6) went to the Dwarven lords (except for Dúrin, maybe) whilst the rest (9) went to Men. Three of these were said to have gone to Númenórean lords. One went to an Easterling. I am sure there were more than nine _houses_ of Men. 

As for the three seperate races of Hobbits-multicultarilism was alive and kicking in Middle-Earth!


----------



## Gothmog (Apr 9, 2005)

Inderjit S said:


> I am sure there were more than nine _houses_ of Men.


Why are you sure that there were more than nine houses of Men? I am not sure that there were as many as Nine.

The only reason that I gave that number as a posibility is that Tolkien set the number of rings for each of the peoples.

Three Rings for the Elven kings under the sky
Seven for the Dwarf-Lords in their halls of stone
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die

Tolkien also decided that the Elves would have Three Clans or Houses or Peoples, that the Dwarves would have Seven Houses but he never stated how many Houses Men had. Unless of course it is implied in the Lore of the Rings of Power.


----------



## Ingwë (Apr 14, 2005)

Very interesting. Why three races of Hobbits. 

I agree with Ithynluin. Elves, dwarves, men. The hobbits are something like mix of other races. But if the three hobbit division are descendants of the three races the quetion is how did they become so equally? Tolkien himself didn't give us a lot of information about the origin of the hobbits. We mustn't forget that Frodo, Ring bearer, is a hobbit. Maybe Tolkien want to tell us something interesting. He wrote LotR after the WW 2 or during the War. Maybe he want to tell us that together we are stronger. Elves, dwarves, men in one race against the Evil. Isn't it interesting? Why these small creatures saved the world? Why didn't Frodo fall when he was wearing the Ring? Why? Together we are stronger!


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Apr 14, 2005)

Ingwë said:


> ...Together we are stronger!



A most excellent point! 

Barley


----------



## Ingwë (Apr 14, 2005)

Barliman Butterbur said:


> A most excellent point!
> 
> Barley


 
Thanks. This is true.


----------



## Greenwood (May 3, 2005)

Barliman Butterbur said:


> At the risk of being facetious: why not? He made up different elf races and man races also, the same question is applicable there as well. Three kinds of hobbits is no different. Racial diversity is real, and Tolkien's fantasy was, above all, "real."


I missed many of the posts in this thread while I was away for a few weeks. Interesting posts everyone. As to the different races of elves and men in Middle Earth, the individual races all play important, and different, roles in the history of Middle Earth. Thus there are obvious reasons for Tolkien creating them as part of the story. There seems to be no such justification for the races of hobbits. After their introduction in the opening material of LOTR, they are virtually never mentioned again. Certainly there is no indication that the three kinds of hobbits played different roles in the history of Middle Earth. I continue to view the creation of the three kinds of hobbits as another example of Tolkien filling his work with extraneous, some would say unnecessary, detail the true purpose of which was to give a feeling of a complex, real world. Something in which he succeeded doing incredibly well.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (May 3, 2005)

Greenwood said:


> ...I had merely meant why have multiple races of hobbits instead of just one...



Taking up a notion from another thread: this might have been a kind of "natural selection" (and so had a genetic component of some sort) in play. After all, in the real world, the various races of man (_and_ animals _and_ plants, not to put too fine a point on it) evolved as a function of interaction with local geography, climate, and survival conditions over geologic time.

Barley


----------



## Greenwood (May 3, 2005)

Barliman Butterbur said:


> Taking up a notion from another thread: this might have been a kind of "natural selection" (and so had a genetic component of some sort) in play. After all, in the real world, the various races of man (_and_ animals _and_ plants, not to put too fine a point on it) evolved as a function of interaction with local geography, climate, and survival conditions over geologic time.


Barley,

Yes, but as you also said in that other thread, we should not forget that we are dealing with a wholly fictitious world here, created from the mind of one man. As I said earlier, my view is that Tolkien created all this extraneous and often unnecessary detail so as to make Middle Earth feel like a real world, where as you say there are different races of men, animals and plants that have evolved in interaction with their environment. Of course, Middle Earth is not old enough for all its diversity to be the result of real world evolutionary processes, but it is a created universe. Recently, in rereading The Silmarillion, I was struck with how much of the creation stories of Middle Earth could be reconciled as mythic versions of the actual scientific theories of the formation of the earth and the evolution of its flora and fauna. I suspect Tolkien was fairly well read in more than his own field of languages and linguistics. Undoubtedly, he was also drawing on the many creation myths he knew of.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (May 3, 2005)

Greenwood said:


> Barley...we should not forget that we are dealing with a wholly fictitious world here, created from the mind of one man. As I said earlier, my view is that Tolkien created all this extraneous and often unnecessary detail so as to make Middle Earth feel like a real world...



Exactly. And this is precisely why I rarely delve into the sort of conjecture we've been dealing with (the genetic element, etc.). I know that it's a great deal of fun for many TTFers to play the "what-if", "why not" and "how come" games, but for me, such speculation only leads to more of the same in infinite regress (or progress, depending on your view). That's why I prefer simply to read the tales, read books by JRR & C _about_ the tales, see the movies, and be entertained! 

Barley


----------



## Greenwood (May 3, 2005)

Barliman Butterbur said:


> Exactly. And this is precisely why I rarely delve into the sort of conjecture we've been dealing with (the genetic element, etc.). I know that it's a great deal of fun for many TTFers to play the "what-if", "why not" and "how come" games, but for me, such speculation only leads to more of the same in infinite regress (or progress, depending on your view). That's why I prefer simply to read the tales, read books by JRR & C _about_ the tales, see the movies, and be entertained!


Barley,

Yes, as we have discovered in the past, our interests and viewpoints overlap to a large degree.  

Note, my question in this thread was about why Tolkien created more than one race of hobbits. It was not about some theoretical evolution of hobbits in a supposedly real Middle Earth. Like you I recognize that many people like to discuss such "what if" questions. My own response to many such questions is that the answer is Tolkien didn't write it that way.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (May 3, 2005)

Greenwood said:


> ...our interests and viewpoints overlap to a large degree. ...I recognize that many people like to discuss such "what if" questions. My own response to many such questions is that the answer is Tolkien didn't write it that way.



Another kindred soul! 

Barley


----------



## Ingwë (May 5, 2005)

Greenwood, Tolkien himself didn't mention what happened with that three races but then the quetion is why did he create this races? There are three Houses of the Edain, three races (groups) of the Elves and... three races of hobbits. As I previously mentioned, I agree with Ithryinliun about the 'relations' with the Elves, Dwarves and Men. And now I agree with you that the different kindreds of Hobbits didn't play role in the events (as Harfoots, Stoors... but as *Hobbits*). Then I would say that TOlkien relly wanted to tell us that when we are together we are stronger. Three in one: three races mixed in one race. Hobbits are small creatures but they are important people in the Third are.


----------

