Where did Hobbits come from?

[Morwen]

Originally Posted by Feanorsdoom

If one were to trace a 'true' mythological history of the Hobbits, I think it would be more true to the flavor of the Legendarium to place them apart from Men, Elves, Dwarves, and all others in origin, because of their eventual role in the ending of the Third Age. .....Surely, the prominent position of the Halflings among them deserves a more dignified origin than 'short humans'. JRRT didn't write of their origins explicitly, but then he didn't write explicitly of Man's emergence, either.

Tolkien himself makes the link between Men and Hobbits and the idea of hobbits being a type of Man seems similar to the idea that there can be dwarves and petty dwarves, i.e., main race and a subset/offshoot of that main race.

Originally posted by Feanorsdoom

If I were asked what the origin of the Hobbits should be, I would put it something like this: After the downfall of Numenor, one amongst the Valar, presumably Yavanna (or perhaps Vana, the "queen of flowers"), is so distraught at the destruction of Middle-earth by Men and Elves that she asks Manwe permission to create a race whose sole purpose would be to care for the living things of their world. Manwe, knowing the consequences of the misjudgement of Aule in creating the Dwarves, councils against it, but Eru changes his heart. She is allowed to bring them to life, but with the understanding that they would be the weakest race, afraid of interactions with others and utterly helpless in the face of battle, yet that this would be coupled with an inner strength against corruption of evil. Possibly, she might be given the cryptic promise that their fate would be to stand alone against that evil when all others prove unable to resist it.

Neither Yavanna nor any other Valar can bring a race to life. When Aule takes it upon himself to create the Dwarves, Eru is very clear it isn't just that Aule lacks authorisation but that he, Aule, lacks the ability to create a race that is independent of his will.

"Why hast thou done this? Why dost thou attempt a thing which thou knowest is beyond thy power and thy authority? For thou hast from me as a gift thy own being only, and no more; and therefore the creatures of thy hand and mind can live only by that being, moving when thou thinkest to move them, and if thy thought be elsewhere, standing idle." Silmarillion, Of Aule and Yavanna

Also,apart from Aule and excluding Melkor, do any of the Valar possess the capacity to physically construct new beings? All the Valar may have desired to see the Children but I think that it is only Aule, coming from the part of Eru's mind concerned with the creating of things, who could attempt to create physical forms and even so his creation was imperfect.

Whatever the precise origins of hobbits I think that they would have to be Eru's creations.

[Feanorsdoom]

Very good points, Morwen. Your Silm quote does show, however, that the Hobbits can be created as the Dwarves were; half-alive, as it were, although the character of them in LotR surely belies any notion of them having no freedom of will. What you say about Aule going against Eru's will is true, but Eru (and Manwe and the rest of the Valar besides) is notorious for getting angry but not really undoing the bad things his underlings do. The Hobbits, on the other hand, would not have been made 'behind Eru's back' like the Dwarves, but would have been allowed as a partial answer to the unending destruction of M-e by Elves and Men. Otherwise, to have them be whole Children of Iluvatar in their own right, would of necessity force an inconsistancy in the Ainulindale itself, where they are not mentioned at all.

[Morwen]

Very good points, Morwen. Your Silm quote does show, however, that the Hobbits can be created as the Dwarves were; half-alive, as it were, although the character of them in LotR surely belies any notion of them having no freedom of will. What you say about Aule going against Eru's will is true, but Eru (and Manwe and the rest of the Valar besides) is notorious for getting angry but not really undoing the bad things his underlings do. The Hobbits, on the other hand, would not have been made 'behind Eru's back' like the Dwarves, but would have been allowed as a partial answer to the unending destruction of M-e by Elves and Men. Otherwise, to have them be whole Children of Iluvatar in their own right, would of necessity force an inconsistancy in the Ainulindale itself, where they are not mentioned at all.

If hobbits are a type of human/man, then the fact that hobbits are not expressly mentioned in the Ainulindale is not a problem. They fall within the category of Man and are therefore accounted for.

If the hobbits are an independent creation, I don't think this is necessarily inconsistent with the Ainulindale, which, though important, is not the be all and end all with respect to Arda and its fate. The Ainulindale is the direct product of the Ainur and "because of the knowledge that each has of the music that he himself made, the Ainur know much of what was, and is, and is to come, and few things are unseen by them" (Silmarillion, The Ainulindale)

However,

Yet some things there are that they (the Valar) cannot see, neither alone nor taking counsel together; for to none but himself has Iluvatar revealed all that he has in store, and in every age there come forth things that are new and have not foretelling, for they do not proceed from the past. (my emphasis) Simarillion The Ainulindale

Now if ever a passage allowed for hobbits I think it is this one. Their creation would then fall into the category of things that Eru knew about but did not reveal to the Valar rather than an idea that proceeds from the Valar themselves and receives the blessing of Eru.

[Finduilas]

So, from what I can tell, most of you think that Hobbits were made at the same time as Men, classified as Men, and since they did nothing they were ignored till Bilbo came along.

[Feanorsdoom]

Ah, but Morwen, I still don't think you quite see how having Hobbits arise as a new race equally considered Children of Iluvatar would be too important not to be mentioned in the Ainulindale. And having them be nothing more than oddly-shaped Men would make one wonder what the cosmic significance is of having them in the Fellowship. I fully believe Tolkien never meant their origin to be more than either of these scenarios, but a further meddling by one of the Valar in order to help look after and protect Arda itself would fit so much better to the feeling of the story. The way you project it, the Hobbits have no special significance; they just happen to exist. If they are a result of a request to redress the wounds to the land inflicted by thousands of years of war, then they are fulfilling divine destinies.

[Morwen]

But I think the quote I earlier provided suggests that there are significant things that Eru means to occur that are NOT mentioned in the Ainulindale, those conceived by Eru alone and only revealed at at a time of his choosing. In fact one might argue that Eru may wish to keep some of his more significant plans to himself as a way of safeguarding them. Rather than being so important that they must be mentioned, their importance requires that they should not be mentioned.

As for the significance of the hobbits, how exactly is their significance lessened by being part of Eru's specific design? I would think that hobbits as created and designed by Eru and Eru alone actually have greater significance than hobbits as a mere afterthought, the result of a latter day request by the Valar.

[Feanorsdoom]

It's exactly this dichotomy that a request by the Valar would diffuse. And such a request would not be just an "afterthought". Beren and Luthien, anyone? On the contrary, having Hobbits just 'pop up' in the middle of the Third Age is just an afterthought. If they are important enough to have such an impact on the Third Age built in to their very origin, then they would merit mention at least as much scrutiny as Men, who in the end are mostly cannon fodder for Elves and Big Bad Guys. Beyond Beren and Isuldur, who among them really became the vehicles for fate?

But this is all idle, wishful imaginings. Of course Hobbits are only pigmy Men. Tolkien never said any different; quite the contrary. But is it so wrong to think that it could have been done better?