Gollum questions.

[TheLostPilgrim]

It is said that prolonged ownership of the Ring will eventually turn one into a wraith. Yet Gollum had the Ring for around 400 years and I am sure used it numerous times in that time--to sneak, to explore, to kill and eat--yet he never became a wraith. Why did he never become a wraith?

Also, was Gollum a Hobbit, or were the Stoors simply the forefathers or cousins of Hobbits in the way that Neanderthals were like humans, but were cousins of us? Or were they actually Hobbits?

Was Gollum at all aware that there was some racial kinship between him and the Hobbits? Or had he even forgotten what exactly he was?

Finally, was there any hope for him to be saved? Was he evil to begin with, or simply weak that the Ring took hold of him so quickly?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I would say all of your questions are more or less exactly the same as the ones Gandalf answers to Frodo in the second chapter of the Fellowship of the Ring. Especially your questions 1, 3 and 4 are the ones Frodo asks him, or implicitely asks him, and Gandalf replies precisely these exact questions. I think the book, or Gandalf, answers it much better than anyone here could, because if you paraphrase it, you're certain to leave something out.

Your question #2 is effectively answered too, although not as openly... the main trouble comes, I believe, from understanding what one means by the term "Hobbit". If by "Hobbit" you understand only the Hobbits from the Shire, then obviously there is a difference. But effectively, there were the halflings - the Hobbits - who had three branches, one of which were the Stoors, and another were the Harfoots (the Shire-Hobbits). Imagine it the same way there were several kinds of Elves: the High-Elves (Noldor), the Grey Elves, the Wood-elves... yet all were Elves.

The differentiation of the Hobbits into several groups happened only a couple of thousand years before the War of the Ring, so I think you can't even think about the distance similar to Neanderthalians and such.

[jallanite]

Legate of Ammon Lanc well points out where the answers to three of TheLostPilgrim’s questions may be found.

As to the question of whether Sméagol was a Hobbit, Gandalf in his explanation of Sméagol’s origin says:

Long after, but still very long ago, there lived by the banks of the Great River on the edge of Wilderland a clever-handed and quiet-footed little people. I guess they were of hobbit-kind; akin to the fathers of the fathers of the Stoors, for they loved the River, and often swam in it, or made little boats of reeds.

Gandalf is represented here as being somewhat pedantic in his choice of words. Earlier when asked by Frodo how long Gandalf has known what he has related about the Ring, Tolkien gives to Gandalf this reply:

‘Known?’ said Gandalf. ‘I have known much that only the Wise know, Frodo, But if you mean “known about this ring”, well I still do not know, one might say. There is a last test to make. But I no longer doubt my guess.’

Similarly there is no reason to think that Gandalf doubts his guess about Sméagol’s origin. Of course the possibility exists that Sméagol might be of Orkish kindred, or even possibly of another branch of hobitkind than the Stoors, but of a clan who, though not closely related to the Stoors, had developed customs in respect to swimming and boating similar to the later Stoors.

Whether Sméagol thought of himself as a hobbit is doubtful. In Appendix F Tolkien writes:

The origin of the word hobbit was by most forgotten. It seems, however to have been at first a name given to the Harfoots by the Fallohides and Stoors, and to be a worn-down form of a word preserved more fully in Rohan: holbytla ‘hole-builder’.

Sméagol might have thought of himself primarily as a Stoor or a Halfling, Halfling being the normal English version of the true Westron name used for all the folk that were later came to be called hobbits in the Shire and in Buckland and in Breeland.

[Mithalwen]

Would they have referred to themselves as halflings? I suppose it depends on their proximity to other races but I wonder if they thought they were normal and the other races giants.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

Would they have referred to themselves as halflings? I suppose it depends on their proximity to other races but I wonder if they thought they were normal and the other races giants.

For what it's worth, the UT section The Hunt For the Ring says that Gollum's perception of his own race was a factor in Sauron not knowing precisely who or where "Baggins" was.

Gollum would not know the term "Hobbit," which was local and not a universal Westron word. He would probably not use "Halfling" since he was one himself, and Hobbits disliked the name.

[Mithalwen]

Thanks inzil, I had an idea there was an issue with the term.

[Galin]

Hey when you're three foot six and a seven foot Numenorean calls you Banakil you just say 'thank you' and bake him some tarts.

Or something

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Galin

Hey when you're three foot six and a seven foot Numenorean calls you Banakil you just say 'thank you' and bake him some tarts.

Or something

Or if you're Pippin, maybe you'd say "At least I'm not a half-wit."

[jallanite]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

I recalled this statement from Unfinished Tales but did not remember that it occurred there. A search through the indices of some volumes of HoME proved fruitless, so I gave up the search.

Thanks.

Note that in Bree Men were known as “Big Folk” and Hobbits were often known as “Little Folk”. The same terms appear to be sometimes used in the Shire. At least when discussing the Black Rider in the chapter “Three Is Company” Pippin and Frodo both use the term “Big People” and Sam recalls his father using the term “Big Folk”. In the chapter “The Scouring of the Shire” one of the ruffians uses the term “little folk”.

[Mithalwen]

Oh that is true enough and I suppose it is a fine distinction in practice, but psychologically there is a difference between acknowledging one is smaller than other races and defining oneself as half sized.

[jallanite]

I quite agree.

The names Perian and its translation Halfling were doubtless not popular because the names suggest that those who bare them are only half the size of proper people: Men and Elves.

It is not surprising that these people eventually preferred the non-Westron name Hobbit which had no such negative meaning.

That “Little Folk” was also popular in Breeland is not surprising as neither it nor “Big Folk” indicates that either size is necessarily the proper one.

[Galadriel55]

Instead of hobbits calling themselves halflings, it would be more logical for them to call the Big People doublings.

Just thought I'd put the weird thought out there, because I agree with the above comments and have nothing else to add.

[jallanite]

Agreed.

I suppose that Doubling, unlike Halfling, might have seemed too obviously a politically correct invention to catch on.

I suppose the hobbits might instead have been called beardless-dwarves. But that name may have been too long for comfortable use: “‘A very nice well-spoken gentlebeardlessdwarf is Mr. Bilbo as I’ve always said’, the Gaffer declared.”

[Mithalwen]

Yes, Galadriel, I wondered if the y might regard men as giants which would perhaps have misled Sauron.
Also the halfling term true when Numenoreans were at their tallest compared to not the tallest hobbits. Now the same UT note clarifys that Shire Hobbits at the time of LOTR were 3 to 4 foot and the exceptions were taller.

So assuming that the diminished dunedain were still generally six foot plus and taller than the Rohirrim who were in turn taller than Breelanders.. it ia likely that the current Britih average height for a man of 5"10 would have been tall for Bree and maybe standard around 5"6 . So with Hobbits benefitting from several generations of settled farming tending closer to four, it means that in and around the Shire and Bree most inhabitants are likely to be between 3"6 and 5"6 and with dwarves around bridging the still noticeable division between big and little, it is too much of continuum for a term such as halfling to be meaningful. Focussing on another distinction such as beardlessness does seem quite plausible in that context.

[Alfirin]

Wouldn't that mean that to a Harfoot or a Fallowhide, Stoors (who could grow beards) would be considered one of the Big Folk, as opposed to one of their own?
On a related note, would I be right in that, much as the Stoors were somewhat more hairy than the Harfoots (if they can grow beards, the rest of their hair is likely to be thicker and more plentiful as well) The Harfoots tend to be more hairy than the Fallowhides. I keep thinking of the Fallowhides as being the least hair of the three Hobbit Races, though I amit this is probably being colored by both them seeming to be "Elvish hobbits" (in the same way Stoors are "Mannish Hobbits") and of course the modern meaning of the word "fallow" (Tolkien being far better versed in language than I, I suppose he could have taken the word "fallow" from some other unrelated root or meant it in a now archaic meaning I am not aware of)

[jallanite]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

So with Hobbits benefitting from several generations of settled farming tending closer to four, it means that in and around the Shire and Bree most inhabitants are likely to be between 3"6 and 5"6 and with dwarves around bridging the still noticeable division between big and little, it is too much of continuum for a term such as halfling to be meaningful.

But the name Halfling was coined when those who were later known as Hobbits still lived in the upper Vales of the Anduin, very far from Bree. Presumably the name Halfling was meaningful to those who invented the name, whether the Sindarin rendering Perian or the Westron rendering Banakil or a rendering in some other Elvish or Mannish tongue was the oldest rendering. Presumably those who first coined the name and those who continued its use felt that the name was useful for application to a people who were close to being half their size, even smaller than the Dwarves.

One reason the later Hobbit may have disliked the name halfling is that they saw it as a gross exaggeration of their smallness. But banakil and perian remained the name of this people in standard Westron and in Sindarin. And both meant ‘halfling’, regardless that the term was not precisely suitable.

Originally Posted by Alfirin

Wouldn't that mean that to a Harfoot or a Fallowhide, Stoors (who could grow beards) would be considered one of the Big Folk, as opposed to one of their own?

Tolkien never writes that any Stoors could grow beards. In his Prologue he writes only:

But they [the hobbits of Eastfarthing] were well known to be Stoors in a large part of their blood, as indeed was shown by the down that many grew on their chins. No Harfoots or Fallohide had any trace of a beard.

Some down on the chin is hardly comparable to the full and luxurious beards of the Dwarves or the beards that most Men could grow.

On a related note, would I be right in that, much as the Stoors were somewhat more hairy than the Harfoots (if they can grow beards, the rest of their hair is likely to be thicker and more plentiful as well)

Maybe, and maybe not. Tolkien only mentions that some of the Stoor-descended hobbits at the end of the Third Age had down on their chins while other hobbits had no trace of a beard. This suggestion is at the best only possible, but not provable.

I amit this is probably being colored by both them seeming to be "Elvish hobbits" (in the same way Stoors are "Mannish Hobbits") and of course the modern meaning of the word "fallow" (Tolkien being far better versed in language than I, I suppose he could have taken the word "fallow" from some other unrelated root or meant it in a now archaic meaning I am not aware of)

From J. R. R. Tolkien’s “Nomenclature of The Lord of the Rings”, currently available in Hammond and Scull’s The Lord of the Rings: A reader’s companion, pages 750–82:

Fallohide This has given difficulty. It should if possible be translated, since it is meant to represent a name with a meaning in CS, though one devised in the past and so containing archaic elements. It is made of E. fallow + hide (cognates of Ger. falb and Haut) and means ‘paleskin’. It is archaic since fallow ‘pale, yellowish’ is not now in use, except in fallow deer; and hide is no longer applied to human skin (except as a transference back from its modern use of animal hides, used for leather). But this element of archaism need not be imitated. See Marcho and Blanco. See also note on relation of special Hobbit words to the language of Rohan [in Appendix F, p. 1136, III: 414].

The element fallow ‘brownish yellow’ used here derives from Old English fealo ‘dull-coloured, yellow, yellowish red, brown’ from the Indo-European base *pel- ‘dark-coloured, grey’. It is not at all related to fallow ‘land plowed but left unsown’ from Old English fealg ‘harrow’ from Indo-European *polkā- ‘something turned’ from another base *pel- ‘to turn’.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by jallanite

One reason the later Hobbit may have disliked the name halfling is that they saw it as a gross exaggeration of their smallness. But banakil and perian remained the name of this people in standard Westron and in Sindarin. And both meant ‘halfling’, regardless that the term was not precisely suitable.

I think that the detail of "half" is not particularly important. The Big Folk would have continued using halfling from habit and because it really does not matter if it is halfling or threequarterling, as long as it gets the point across. The hobbits would continue to be offended because halfling and threequarterling alike are diminutive in their nature, regardless of how accurate. No people wants to be named relative to another, since to each people they are the norm.

[Alfirin]

Originally Posted by jallanite

[/INDENT]The element fallow ‘brownish yellow’ used here derives from Old English fealo ‘dull-coloured, yellow, yellowish red, brown’ from the Indo-European base *pel- ‘dark-coloured, grey’. It is not at all related to fallow ‘land plowed but left unsown’ from Old English fealg ‘harrow’ from Indo-European *polkā- ‘something turned’ from another base *pel- ‘to turn’.

You know since I know what a fallow deer is, and why it is called so, I should have known this. I though it has something to do with "pale" but though I was getting fallow confused with "sallow"

[Mithalwen]

i did say that halfling had been accurate when coined. The point i was trying to make as i rambled was indeed that it would have seemed a bit cheeky for a five foot six Bree man to call a nearly four foot hobbit Halfling.

Terms which were originally merely descriptive becoming perjorative are clearly not a modern phenomenon.

[jallanite]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

I think that the detail of "half" is not particularly important. The Big Folk would have continued using halfling from habit and because it really does not matter if it is halfling or threequarterling, as long as it gets the point across. The hobbits would continue to be offended because halfling and threequarterling alike are diminutive in their nature, regardless of how accurate. No people wants to be named relative to another, since to each people they are the norm.

True. I very much agree.

In Breeland the names “Big Folk” and “Little Folk” are both accepted for different peoples, perhaps because in Breeland both of the peoples are considered to be equally Bree folk. In Breeland the name “Hobbit” is also used.

Those who were the ancestors of those called Hobbits must have come to a decision over whether their people should be reckoned as Men with some differences from normal Men in terms of size, normal length of life, and hair on their feet, or they should be reckoned as a separate people entirely, as different from Men as Elves and Dwarves. This decision was probably not taken at a single place and time, but emerged gradually. We see the results in the title gentlehobbit and when Merry and Pippin explain what kind of being they are to Treebeard, never thinking to explain that they are a special kind of Men and that Treebeard need not change his Old Lists.

Tolkien himself says in Letters, in a footnote to Letter 131 to Milton Waldman:

The Hobbits are, of course, really meant to be a branch of the specifically human race (not Elves or Dwarves) – hence the two kinds can dwell together (as at Bree) and are called just the Big Folk and Little Folk.

On names of peoples, Tolkien writes in Unfinished Tales, page 496: “Since Ghân-buri-Ghân was attempting to use the Common Speech he callled his people ‘Wild Men’ (not without irony); but this was not of course their own name for themselves.”

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

i did say that halfling had been accurate when coined. The point i was trying to make as i rambled was indeed that it would have seemed a bit cheeky for a five foot six Bree man to call a nearly four foot hobbit Halfling.

True. Except we do not know where and when the term halfling was coined. The term was almost true when in respect to the Númenóreans, but it seems to me very dubious that this was a term coined by Númenóreans who are never mentioned, either before or after the sinking of Númenór as ever present in the area of the upper Vales of Anduin, where the folk later known as Hobbits were first recorded as dwelling.

Presumably the earliest records of these people would be written in Sindarin and would use the name perian. But perian might well be a translation of the name used by their Mannish neighbours, who may have spoken Westron or may have spoken some other Mannish tongue.

But you are quite right that whether coined by an Elf or Man, the term halfling does seem insulting.

[Inziladun]

I haven't got the books with me, but when Pippin and Merry are speaking with Treebeard about being added to his song of the creatures of Middle-earth, one of them suggests "half grown hobbits, the hole dwellers".

And later, Pippin seems to be rather unconcerned with his given title "Prince of the Halflings" in Minas Tirith, seeing it as no insult. Perhaps the feelings of Hobbits about the term "halfling" are really more connected to the apparent intent of the speaker.

[jallanite]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

I haven't got the books with me, but when Pippin and Merry are speaking with Treebeard about being added to his song of the creatures of Middle-earth, one of them suggests "half grown hobbits, the hole dwellers".

Good point! So Pippin is not really bothered by being called “half”-size, presumably recognizing it is only an approximation. Still, Tolkien does say in Unfinished Tales that Hobbits disliked the name Halfling. Possibly it was because the precise term Halfling had been used as an insult. Using “half
grown” in in a formal way would remove much of the vindictiveness, something like referring to someone as a “religious fundamentalist” as opposed to a “fundy”.

And later, Pippin seems to be rather unconcerned with his given title "Prince of the Halflings" in Minas Tirith, seeing it as no insult. Perhaps the feelings of Hobbits about the term "halfling" are really more connected to the apparent intent of the speaker.

Yes. Yet when King Théoden first meets the Hobbits and recognizes them as “Halflings”, Pippin corrects him, saying, “Hobbits, if you please, lord. Or perhaps Pippin is correcting the term “Holbytlan” that Théoden also uses.

I have no difficulty in believing Tolkien when he says that Hobbits disliked the name Halfling but also am not surprised to see them accept the name when there is obviously no offence intended. Indeed Pippin introduces himself to he boy Bergil as “a halfling, hard, bold, and wicked!” When in Gondor speak as a Gondorian, when one can.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by jallanite

Yet when King Théoden first meets the Hobbits and recognizes them as “Halflings”, Pippin corrects him, saying, “Hobbits, if you please, lord. Or perhaps Pippin is correcting the term “Holbytlan” that Théoden also uses.

That seems to me to have been indeed just a minor correction to Théoden's "Holbytlan". At any rate, Pippin shows no sign of being affronted.

[Inziladun]

As an aside, I have to wonder how hobbits in general were called "halflings" enough to have an aversion to the name. The other races they were normally in contact with, the Men of Bree and the Dúnedain (if Aragorn is typical) use "hobbit". Who else had dealings with them. Dwarves? Who were they to call someone "halfling"?

[Belegorn]

Hobbits were Halflings to the Dwarves because of their girth.

[Pervinca Took]

I suppose they hadn't met Will Whitfoot.

[jallanite]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

As an aside, I have to wonder how hobbits in general were called "halflings" enough to have an aversion to the name. The other races they were normally in contact with, the Men of Bree and the Dúnedain (if Aragorn is typical) use "hobbit". Who else had dealings with them. Dwarves? Who were they to call someone "halfling"?

Those whose descendants were to be called hobbits are said to be “first mentioned in the records” in Appendix B in the year 1050 of the Third Age. Their language at the end of the Third Age still contains many words not from the Common Speech related to the speech of the Rohirrim, probably dating to an earlier period when those whose descendants were later to be called hobbits lived in the upper vales of Anduin, neighbours to the ancestors of the Rohirrim. One of these words was hobbit, related to Rohirric holbytla ‘hole-builder’ which referred to the same people who now called themselves hobbbits.

The largest group of Hobbits at the end of the Third Age was in the Shire, Buckland, and Bree-land, but some lived elsewhere in smaller communities. Tolkien notes in the chapter “At the Sign of the Prancing Pony”: “There were probably more Outsiders scattered about in the West of the World in those days than the people of the Shire imagined.”

In The Peoples of Middle-earth, page 311, Tolkien notes that while it was quite likely true that at the end of the Third Age Bree-land was the only place where Men and Hobbits lived together, that in earlier times those who were later called Hobbits “liked to live with or near to Big Folk of friendly kind, who with their greater strength protected them from many dangers and other hostile Men, and received in exchange many services.”

In short, in the past, the ancestors of those called Hobbits at the end of the Third Age had many relations with many Men, and the Common Speech name for these people was banakil ‘halfling’. Presumably other Mannish tongues which spoke of them rendered the name by a translation of the same meaning.

Many different sorts of Men other than Bree-men and Rangers had before the last days of the Third Age had contact with Hobbits. The normal Common Speech name for them was banakil ‘halfling’ in Gondor and elsewhere and as such they were known in such traditions as were preserved about them. Only in the Shire, Buckland, and Bree-land was the name Hobbit found.