Talk:Hobbit

Can anyone confirm the stuff from the last edit? Ausir 19:13, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

If that's the rant about trademarks - no. Much of it is nonsense. In particular, Tolkien thought he coined the word 'Hobbit', but wasn't sure. He spent much of his life trying to find a source for it but failed to track it down. This is evidenced by 'letters'. Morwen - Talk 08:53, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hobbit Origins

Hobbits are obscure creatures from Western European folklore. The only known reference comes from the “Denham Tracts (Volume 2)” in 1895 by Michael Denham, re-edited by James Hardy.This term appeared in a long list of creatures, from the mythology and folklore of the Celtic and Scandinavian areas of Europe. Although no description is given, it can be inferred by the meaning of the Old English word "hob" (or the Old English prefix "hob-") that these were small creatures, probably related to elves.

Tolkien was not the original creator of hobbits. This is an historical fact. At least one reference to a "hobbit" exists in folklore before Tolkien ever began to imagine his created world. It is not a "rant", it is simply an historical, irrefutable truth. Just because Tolkien himself failed to track it down before his death in the 1970's (three decades ago) doesn't invalidate the fact that at least one earlier mention of this creature exists. Any Tolkien-worshippers who would rather ignore this fact are free to do so, but to omit the fact from an encyclopedic resource simply because of some romanticized notion of Tolkien's infallible originality is not only abhorrently ignorant, but shows a complete lack of intellectual integrity.

It's a cliche, I know, but honesty really is the best policy. --user:209.206.169.229

Claiming Tolkien's Hobbits have anything to do with the "spirits" called Hobbits by Denham is extremely ignorant. There is absolutely no relation between Denham's "Hobbits" and Tolkien's halfings. 'Hobbits' appear in Denham's Volume 2 (1895). They come 154th in a list of 197 kinds of "supernatural creatures" which includes several repetitions, and no futher mention is made of hobbits. The index says of them, as of almost all the items in the list, only 'A class of spirits'. Tolkien's hobbits, of course, are anything but 'spirits'. Hobbits do not appear in any European folklore. It is possible JRRT had once read the work and remembered the name, but in view of other evidence this is unlikely. Denham's Hobbits were certainly not described as 'small Elves'. Check your sources please! Anárion 09:40, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Denham's Hobbits (which are unlikely his own invention) are not described as "small Elves", but, as stated, small stature is implicit in the name itself. As far as "a class of spirits" is concerned -- what do you think elves, dwarves, faeries, and even orcs originally were? I'm not doubting that Tolkien's hobbits bear little if any resemblance (other than small stature) to the creature listed in Denham's book, nor do Tolkien's orcs resemble, in any way, earlier references to the same creatures.

Tolkein's hobbits may have been a great departure from the original, and Tolkien himself may not have even been aware of the existence of the original, but the fact remains that Tolkein's hobbits were most decidedly not the original.

I at least have a shred of evidence backing up my position, from several decades before the publication of "The Hobbit". You have nothing other than Tolkien's own words in some published "letters". And judging by the Tolkien Estate's treatment of TSR's homage to Tolkien's works, I am left to assume that a party with obvious interest in financial gain over such matters can hardly be considered an objective source. After all, if at some point before his death, JRRT had conceded that he was not the inventor of hobbits, this would not necessarily have appeared in a public compilation of his letters -- for if it did, Christopher Tolkien might stand to lose a bit of those movie, cartoon, and merchandising royalties. --user:209.206.169.229

Small stature is not implied by Hobbit per sè: it may as likely be a coinage from 'rabbit'. In any case as there is no proof Tolkien's Hobbits were inspired by Denham's (and this is in fact very unlikely) or are related to the Denham Hobbit at all in any way more than the name (which, if derived from 'hob'=small can be proven as being hardly original), the Tolkien Hobbit can not be described as 'a great departure from the original' as there is no original. Denham's Hobbit does not appear anywhere else, and like most other 'spirits' from his list Denham is the only source of the names. Anárion 10:14, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. It is wrong for us to say that the trademark should be regarded invalid. If you want to argue your case in a courtroom please find one. If you want to stick a small note at the bottom saying 'the name 'hobbit' appeared in a "list of spirists" by Michael Denham, but there no evidence to suggest Tolkien was aware of this" that would be fine. 80.229.39.194 09:43, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Agreed. The "should" remark was out of place. As for the small note, I doubt this Morwen character would even allow that much. --user:209.206.169.229

"Hobbit" not "hobbit"

Looking through an assortment of articles, I have found a great deal of confusion regaring the proper capitalization of the word Hobbit.

In thie Prologue to Fellowship, Tolkien always uses Hobbit (the same as Dwarves, Elves, Men). I recommend that we do likewise, at least when we are referring to Tolkien's Hobbits.

Yes, I know I'm setting myself up for a lot of editing to make this standard. I'll give folks a chance to disagree before I start the mass edit... --Aranel 18:51, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Doesn't he also always capitalize Men and Elves? Ausir 18:57, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yes, that was my point (maybe it wasn't clear). Actually, it would occasionally be proper to say men, as in "the men of Rohan went to war and the women stayed behind". "Men" is a stand-in for a Westron word that means "human beings". One could technically refer to male Elves as men. Quenya has Atan "Man, human being" and nér "man, adult male". But Men is a special case here, since English does not make the distinction (seeing as we have only one sentient species). Tolkien today would probably write Human for Atan. --Aranel 20:01, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)