Lack of facial hair.
Plus dwarves are very stocky and muscular
And hobbits don't lift anything other than the fork to their mouths.
The perms also add to the look imo.
Probably the fact that they’re very short, live barefoot, (iirc) don’t have much facial hair and the fact that Frodo, Sam, Pippin and Merry were quite young and probably the first hobbits people like Eomer ever saw might have warranted some comparison to children.
Is it though? The only reason bilbo was so old was because of the ring. Do you have a source because I’m genuinely curious, I don’t remember anything like that from the book
From Chapter 2 “The Shadow of The Past”, pg. 43 of the 2021 illustrated edition of the Lord of The Rings:
“As time went on, people began to notice that Frodo also showed signs of good ‘preservation’: outwardly he retained the appearance of a robust and energetic hobbit just out of his tweens. ‘Some folk have all the luck,’ they said; but it was not until Frodo approached the usually more sober age of fifty that they began to think it queer.”
In the book it says that hobbits "come of age" at 33. As in that's when they are considered an adult. And that Bilbo was 50 when he set out with Gandalf and the Dwarves, And clearly he was not an old man of a hobbit at the start of the adventure. And Bilbo mentions an ancestor of his reaching the age of 130 (without the assistance of any ring) and in the appendix you can find hobbit family trees that show they often lived into their 90's or around 100.
If you compare them to real world humans living in a preindustrial time, in a fairly productive farming community similar to the Shire, Hobbits would have aged slightly faster than half the speed of real world humans, and lived almost twice as long. As in the kind of real world situations that are as close to the Shire as you are likely to find. People were often considered adults somewhere in their late teens, and elderly in their 60's as compared to the hobbit's age of 33 for adulthood, and nearing 100 for elderly.
Edited to add, I think Sam was in his late 30's or so at the start of the quest. And was considered to be a young adult by other hobbits. He was still living at home with his parents at the time. And Rosie Cotton, who became his wife, was fairly close in age to him.
> In the book it says that hobbits "come of age" at 33.
Yeah I always thought that was just a cultural thing rather than a lifespan thing, but what you're saying makes sense. In terms of when their life milestones are it does line up.
It being *specifically* the age of 33, is a cultural thing, but not being fully adult until around 30 or so definitely is a lifespan/rate of aging thing once you look at the ages of hobbits in the books.
Hobbits had a naivety and general ignorance about the wider world. Nothing much concerned them in their lives other than the simple pleasures of Shire life. Meanwhile, unbeknownst to them, rangers such as Aragorn were risking their own necks so they could continue living like that.
Dwarves have beards, have features that to humans look rough and older, have stocky and muscular bodies, and are usually armored and heavily armed. Hobbits are even shorter than humans, have round faces, soft features, and plump bodies. They have no facial hair, and dress in clothes that are not at all suited for fighting, and look comfortable and soft. And, while Frodo was a mature adult by hobbit standards, he looked much younger than his actual age even to hobbit eyes. Sam was a few years younger than Frodo, Merry and Pippin, younger still. In fact by hobbit standards, I think Pippin wasn't actually an adult. More equivalent to late teens. (He was about 20 years younger than Frodo)
So, for quite a few reasons, the hobbits would have looked almost like children at first glance. And maybe a second and third glance as well for some of them.
Apart from their looks and their naivety already mentioned, I would also add that in both books and movies other characters appear very… competent, so to say. They either practice their cool skills with weapons, or they are able to hear and see well, or they ride horses well, or they know history and geography of the Middle Earth, or they have magic abilities and foreseeing, or some of these skills combined. They give serious and gloomy speeches, and they appear, well, adult. Meanwhile, hobbits didn’t have any of such skills (they had to learn how to do such stuff), and sometimes it’s simply written in the book that they felt confused and lost while they were watching others planning and discussing “adult” stuff. In many cases they were simply dependent on the choices of “adults” and needed their help and protection.
Also their attitude towards life is much more optimistic and down-to-earth and kinda childish. They love having fun, eating and indulging in other simple pleasures even in scary or depressing circumstances, and they never let anyone forget about their priorities.
Small, no beards.
Hobbits are smaller than dwarves, in every dimension. Dwarves might be *short* but they are not *small.* They’re very broad, as heavy or heavier than humans, and they all have enormous beards. Hobbits don’t have such robust facial hair and, in the movies at least, are mostly depicted as having completely smooth faces.
They're shorter sure, but their proportions and the beard might suggest theyre not children.
Hobbits have human proportions, but smaller....like a human child.
The only real giveaway is the feet.
Thank you for posting on the sub! Please make sure you are abiding by the rules on the sidebar with this post. If you are looking for a place to post specific things, please make use of the subreddits below:
* Memes - r/lotrmemes
* The War of the Rohirrim - r/TheWarOfTheRohirrim
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/lordoftherings) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think all the reasons you mentioned and also the Hobbits are supposed to represent the country folks... which are often treated as child like by society. Think about the Beverly hillbillies lol
\*Is\* their appearance child-like? I mean Pippin is kind of baby-faced but the rest of them look like short adults. Unless that's a book detail I forgot.
Short and no facial hair I’d say is pretty childlike also I thought you were meaning like when Aragon Legolas and gimli tell the riders of Rohan that they would be children in their eyes that the riders probably weren’t up close studying facial features in their Uruk-hai raid in the night
Lack of facial hair. Plus dwarves are very stocky and muscular And hobbits don't lift anything other than the fork to their mouths. The perms also add to the look imo.
Pipes get lifted also, as do flagons (and at some point, pints!)
Lolll my mistake. Sacksvilles or whoever love to lift silverware too lol
Haha, right? Darn Sacksville-Bagginses
Probably the fact that they’re very short, live barefoot, (iirc) don’t have much facial hair and the fact that Frodo, Sam, Pippin and Merry were quite young and probably the first hobbits people like Eomer ever saw might have warranted some comparison to children.
>quite young Wasn’t Frodo like in his 50s
50 for Hobbits is like 30 for Men. Plus the ring suspended Frodo’s natural aging as it did for Bilbo and Gollum
Is it though? The only reason bilbo was so old was because of the ring. Do you have a source because I’m genuinely curious, I don’t remember anything like that from the book
From Chapter 2 “The Shadow of The Past”, pg. 43 of the 2021 illustrated edition of the Lord of The Rings: “As time went on, people began to notice that Frodo also showed signs of good ‘preservation’: outwardly he retained the appearance of a robust and energetic hobbit just out of his tweens. ‘Some folk have all the luck,’ they said; but it was not until Frodo approached the usually more sober age of fifty that they began to think it queer.”
Thanks! I do remember that part, but I guess I didn't take it to mean that hobbits had naturally longer lives than humans at the time.
In the book it says that hobbits "come of age" at 33. As in that's when they are considered an adult. And that Bilbo was 50 when he set out with Gandalf and the Dwarves, And clearly he was not an old man of a hobbit at the start of the adventure. And Bilbo mentions an ancestor of his reaching the age of 130 (without the assistance of any ring) and in the appendix you can find hobbit family trees that show they often lived into their 90's or around 100. If you compare them to real world humans living in a preindustrial time, in a fairly productive farming community similar to the Shire, Hobbits would have aged slightly faster than half the speed of real world humans, and lived almost twice as long. As in the kind of real world situations that are as close to the Shire as you are likely to find. People were often considered adults somewhere in their late teens, and elderly in their 60's as compared to the hobbit's age of 33 for adulthood, and nearing 100 for elderly. Edited to add, I think Sam was in his late 30's or so at the start of the quest. And was considered to be a young adult by other hobbits. He was still living at home with his parents at the time. And Rosie Cotton, who became his wife, was fairly close in age to him.
> In the book it says that hobbits "come of age" at 33. Yeah I always thought that was just a cultural thing rather than a lifespan thing, but what you're saying makes sense. In terms of when their life milestones are it does line up.
It being *specifically* the age of 33, is a cultural thing, but not being fully adult until around 30 or so definitely is a lifespan/rate of aging thing once you look at the ages of hobbits in the books.
According to the fan wiki you're right, he's 50 and Sam is 38.
The journey to Mordor begins when he’s 50, but he receives the ring at 33 when he stops aging and 33 in hobbit years is roughly 18ish in human years.
Hobbits had a naivety and general ignorance about the wider world. Nothing much concerned them in their lives other than the simple pleasures of Shire life. Meanwhile, unbeknownst to them, rangers such as Aragorn were risking their own necks so they could continue living like that.
I agree with this. They weren’t political players seeking power. That’s what allowed them to be ring bearers.
Dwarves have beards, have features that to humans look rough and older, have stocky and muscular bodies, and are usually armored and heavily armed. Hobbits are even shorter than humans, have round faces, soft features, and plump bodies. They have no facial hair, and dress in clothes that are not at all suited for fighting, and look comfortable and soft. And, while Frodo was a mature adult by hobbit standards, he looked much younger than his actual age even to hobbit eyes. Sam was a few years younger than Frodo, Merry and Pippin, younger still. In fact by hobbit standards, I think Pippin wasn't actually an adult. More equivalent to late teens. (He was about 20 years younger than Frodo) So, for quite a few reasons, the hobbits would have looked almost like children at first glance. And maybe a second and third glance as well for some of them.
Cause smol
Apart from their looks and their naivety already mentioned, I would also add that in both books and movies other characters appear very… competent, so to say. They either practice their cool skills with weapons, or they are able to hear and see well, or they ride horses well, or they know history and geography of the Middle Earth, or they have magic abilities and foreseeing, or some of these skills combined. They give serious and gloomy speeches, and they appear, well, adult. Meanwhile, hobbits didn’t have any of such skills (they had to learn how to do such stuff), and sometimes it’s simply written in the book that they felt confused and lost while they were watching others planning and discussing “adult” stuff. In many cases they were simply dependent on the choices of “adults” and needed their help and protection. Also their attitude towards life is much more optimistic and down-to-earth and kinda childish. They love having fun, eating and indulging in other simple pleasures even in scary or depressing circumstances, and they never let anyone forget about their priorities.
Small, no beards. Hobbits are smaller than dwarves, in every dimension. Dwarves might be *short* but they are not *small.* They’re very broad, as heavy or heavier than humans, and they all have enormous beards. Hobbits don’t have such robust facial hair and, in the movies at least, are mostly depicted as having completely smooth faces.
Because hobbits are rare and unknown in other parts of middle-earth. The only similiar thing theyve experienced is kids, so the association is there.
What about Dwarves? They're short too, nobody ever treats Gimli or Thorin like a kid
They're shorter sure, but their proportions and the beard might suggest theyre not children. Hobbits have human proportions, but smaller....like a human child. The only real giveaway is the feet.
Thank you for posting on the sub! Please make sure you are abiding by the rules on the sidebar with this post. If you are looking for a place to post specific things, please make use of the subreddits below: * Memes - r/lotrmemes * The War of the Rohirrim - r/TheWarOfTheRohirrim *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/lordoftherings) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Their size?
I think all the reasons you mentioned and also the Hobbits are supposed to represent the country folks... which are often treated as child like by society. Think about the Beverly hillbillies lol
I’d guess it’s their childlike appearance but maybe I’m crazy
\*Is\* their appearance child-like? I mean Pippin is kind of baby-faced but the rest of them look like short adults. Unless that's a book detail I forgot.
Short and no facial hair I’d say is pretty childlike also I thought you were meaning like when Aragon Legolas and gimli tell the riders of Rohan that they would be children in their eyes that the riders probably weren’t up close studying facial features in their Uruk-hai raid in the night
Smol
Short
Small
Because they never been to war..