Of Sheep and Shepherds

Flammifer

Well-Known Member
In response to Bilbo’s question, Lindir laughs, “To sheep other sheep no doubt appear different. Or to shepherds. But mortals have not been our study. We have other business.”

The Biblical reference is to John 10:11-18: “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. He who is a hired hand, and not a shepherd who doesn’t own the sheep, sees the wolf coming, leaves the sheep, and flees.”

So, what should we, the readers think when Lindir implies that the Elves are neither sheep nor shepherds?

First, we might wonder; Should the Elves be as shepherds to mortals? Then, we might wonder; Or should the Elves and Mortals both be seen as sheep?

I think, as first time readers, we don’t really know which yet (though later, the ‘both are sheep, as both are children of Iluvatar’ seems more likely).

However, we should certainly think that the Elves should be either sheep or shepherds, and that they consider themselves to be neither is ‘wrong’, and evidence of ‘Arda marred’, (which we don’t know anything about yet).

Shouldn’t it jar us, when we hear Lindir proclaim that Elves are neither sheep nor shepherds?

Perhaps, Frodo, later telling Bilbo that his song ‘fit’ with the earlier Elvish song, is a hint that Frodo perceives both as sheep, and not so different after all?
 
In response to Bilbo’s question, Lindir laughs, “To sheep other sheep no doubt appear different. Or to shepherds. But mortals have not been our study. We have other business.”

The Biblical reference is to John 10:11-18: “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. He who is a hired hand, and not a shepherd who doesn’t own the sheep, sees the wolf coming, leaves the sheep, and flees.”

So, what should we, the readers think when Lindir implies that the Elves are neither sheep nor shepherds?

First, we might wonder; Should the Elves be as shepherds to mortals? Then, we might wonder; Or should the Elves and Mortals both be seen as sheep?

I think, as first time readers, we don’t really know which yet (though later, the ‘both are sheep, as both are children of Iluvatar’ seems more likely).

However, we should certainly think that the Elves should be either sheep or shepherds, and that they consider themselves to be neither is ‘wrong’, and evidence of ‘Arda marred’, (which we don’t know anything about yet).

Shouldn’t it jar us, when we hear Lindir proclaim that Elves are neither sheep nor shepherds?

Perhaps, Frodo, later telling Bilbo that his song ‘fit’ with the earlier Elvish song, is a hint that Frodo perceives both as sheep, and not so different after all?
Maybe the Elves are 'goats'?
 
So, what should we, the readers think when Lindir implies that the Elves are neither sheep nor shepherds?
I don't think that's what Lindir is saying. I think he is saying Elves are neither Men nor experts on Man.

“To sheep other sheep no doubt appear different." (but we are not "sheep" (Men), so we don't see these small differences between them) "Or to shepherds. But mortals have not been our study." (we might see these small differences if we studied Man as closely as shepherds study sheep, but we've not done that).
Shouldn’t it jar us, when we hear Lindir proclaim that Elves are neither sheep nor shepherds?
Not a bit. And I'm not entirely convinced that the biblical quote is even relevant.
 
Hi Jim,

Lindir is not talking about Men, but about Mortals. In Middle Earth, there are mortals and immortals. They are either all 'Children of Iluvatar', and thus, all sheep. Or, perhaps, the immortals are meant to look after the mortals and lay down their lives for them, in which case, they are shepherds (we don't really know which yet, if we are first time readers).

But, if they are neither sheep nor shepherds, then what are they? Children of Morgoth? It seems unlikely.

That Lindir considers Elves to be neither sheep nor shepherds should alarm us. Elves 'should' be either sheep or shepherds. That Elves (or some Elves) don't see themselves as such is worrying.

By the way, if you think that Tolkien referring to sheep and shepherds is not a Biblical reference, I think you may vastly underrate the importance that his Catholic faith brings to the work.
 
Hi Jim,

Lindir is not talking about Men, but about Mortals. In Middle Earth, there are mortals and immortals. They are either all 'Children of Iluvatar', and thus, all sheep. Or, perhaps, the immortals are meant to look after the mortals and lay down their lives for them, in which case, they are shepherds (we don't really know which yet, if we are first time readers).

But, if they are neither sheep nor shepherds, then what are they? Children of Morgoth? It seems unlikely.

That Lindir considers Elves to be neither sheep nor shepherds should alarm us. Elves 'should' be either sheep or shepherds. That Elves (or some Elves) don't see themselves as such is worrying.

By the way, if you think that Tolkien referring to sheep and shepherds is not a Biblical reference, I think you may vastly underrate the importance that his Catholic faith brings to the work.

To extend the metaphor there are other Bovids than just sheep.

You could see the Dwarves as 'cattle', Elves as 'goats', and Men (and Hobbits) as 'sheep'. (Maybe the Valar are the 'cowherds, goatherds, and shepherds'). An imperfect but useful comparison.
While goats and sheep can mate and produce offspring that are fertile, it is rare (as is the interbreeding of Elves and Men) and the subsequent generations will then favour the parentage of a goat or sheep that the hybrid mates with.

Half-Elves are rare in Middle-Earth and the only example we see of Half-Elves marrying and having offspring is Eärendil and Elwing which is too small a sample size to be definitive. However, their children (Elrond and Elros) go on to marry an Elf and a Mortal respectively, with the next generation favouring the 'pure' parent's kind; None of Elrond's children are known by the epithet 'Half-Elven' even though they seem to have the concomitant choice available to them.

Cattle cannot interbreed with either goats or sheep, which could help explain (along with the isolationism and secrecy of the Dwarves) the apparent complete lack of Dwarf-Man or Elf-Dwarf hybrids.

Using individual Biblical references to interpret Tolkien's work is fraught:
In Ezekiel 34 the shepherds of Israel are accused of mistreating the sheep, and God will sort sheep from sheep (some good, some bad).
In Daniel 8 a ram represents the kings of Media and Persia, with a goat representing the King of Greece.
In Matthew 25 the sheep represent the faithful with the goats representing the damned.

These are just three further examples to show that the Biblical use of imagery (familiar to the people of the time) is not consistent and so Tolkien's use of similar imagery cannot be directly interpreted from any one of these, no matter how suitable it may appear to the reader.
 
Lindir is not talking about Men, but about Mortals. In Middle Earth, there are mortals and immortals. They are either all 'Children of Iluvatar', and thus, all sheep. Or, perhaps, the immortals are meant to look after the mortals and lay down their lives for them, in which case, they are shepherds (we don't really know which yet, if we are first time readers).
I think it's worth noting that this isn't so much a "first time reader" thing as a "Lord of the Rings exclusivity" thing. That is, most Tolkien readers never read more than his famous novels; and if all you read are the famous novels, you really don't ever get the sense of religiosity referred to here, no matter how often you traverse their pages.

But, if they are neither sheep nor shepherds, then what are they? Children of Morgoth? It seems unlikely.

That Lindir considers Elves to be neither sheep nor shepherds should alarm us. Elves 'should' be either sheep or shepherds. That Elves (or some Elves) don't see themselves as such is worrying.
I don't think it follows that these are the only two options, or that we ought to be worried, alarmed, etc. My impression is that the emphasis here is that elves are 1) Wholly other; 2) Not responsible for the course of mortals moving forward, if they ever were. I do ultimately think that the Christian associations a reader probably has could increase the feeling of alienness Tolkien intended for the elves. But a (close to) one-for-one imposition of Christian narrative is, I think, too intrusive, and not supported by the text.

By the way, if you think that Tolkien referring to sheep and shepherds is not a Biblical reference, I think you may vastly underrate the importance that his Catholic faith brings to the work.
Of course, Tolkien was a devout Catholic, and did famously say that LoTR is a fundamentally Catholic work, and that the religious element--though never explicitly present--is embedded in the story and symbolism (Letter 142). We might thus extrapolate that the elves, passing before the age of man truly begins, are not saved by the grace of the Lamb, Jesus, or simply not a part of that story at all, in which sheep/shepherd metaphors do appear. Or, I think, we might not conclude any of that. We might instead say this is a reference to a primitive beast and a pastoral lifestyle, looked down upon, and demonstrates elvish distant superiority/arrogance. Or, I think, we might not. Applicability, freedom of the reader, etc.
 
Last edited:
Hi Anthony and Beech,

If we, as readers, are familiar with the Bible and with the European 'fairy story' tradition, then, I think that Lindir's metaphor of sheep and shepherds must cause us to wonder about what is the relationship between Elves, Men, Dwarves, Hobbits, etc. in TLOTR.

There were not many clues to this relationship in 'The Hobbit'. But, this reference to sheep and shepherds invites the speculation, and particularly the speculation on the relationship between Mortals and Immortals.

We know that in Medieval Fairy Tale tradition, there was a lot of speculation as to the metaphysical nature of Elves. Were they lesser angels? Fallen angels? Demons? Spirits of the Dead? Or, an intelligent species distinct from humans and angels (called 'Elementals' by the alchemist Paracelsus)?

Now, the minute we read Lindir's metaphor about sheep and shepherds, I think we must immediately start thinking Biblically and metaphysically about the relationship between Mortals and Immortals, and the relationship between Elves and Mortals and Elves and the Divine.

If Elves are, like Men, creatures created by God, in the image of God, children of God, then they are also 'sheep', and the proper relation between all of God's children in an unfallen world should be brotherhood and love. (Not the relationship, according to Lindir.)

If Elves are, unlike Men, created as angels, then the proper relationship of them to Mortals is as shepherds. (Not the relationship either, according to Lindir.)

So, I think we should then wonder about two possibilities:

  1. Elves are something other than fellow children of God, or angels. So, what are they?
  2. Elves are either fellow children of God with Mortals, or Angels, but the fallen nature of Middle Earth (we are pretty sure that evil is alive and well and that the world is fallen by this point) has corrupted them to the point where they have lost sight of their proper relationship to Mortals.
So, if we are first time readers, I don't think we can draw conclusions yet, but I do think that this passage by Lindir invites us to wonder about the nature of Elves, and the relationship between Elves and Mortals.
 
So, if we are first time readers, I don't think we can draw conclusions yet, but I do think that this passage by Lindir invites us to wonder about the nature of Elves, and the relationship between Elves and Mortals.
I agree with this conclusion completely, and that readers probably bring fairy tale and Christian associations to the reading.

But I don't think we can superimpose the Christian framework so clearly. Readers haven't been told anything about Illuvatar, and have not been lead to believe that the Christian God has dominion over Middle Earth. I think we might, based on the text thus far, instead infer that elves worship Elbereth, whose power Frodo called upon to great use.

Of course, with enough context outside of the novel, we know that elves do in fact share a creator with mortals; and yet the sheep/shepherds quote isn't negated. They're just very different--not damned, and not abdicating divine responsibility.
 
Last edited:
Hi Beech,

I like your thinking here. I agree, that we don't yet know much about divinity in Middle Earth at this point. However, I think that the 'sheep & shepherds' metaphor does invite us pretty clearly to 'superimpose' a Christian framework at this point.

It leads us to wonder if the Christian framework, or some close analogy, might apply in Middle Earth.

I believe that the metaphor of sheep and shepherds must suggest the Bible to Western readers, and therefore invite speculation on the nature of the relationship between Mortals and Immortals, and between both and the Divine.
 
I believe that the metaphor of sheep and shepherds must suggest the Bible to Western readers, and therefore invite speculation on the nature of the relationship between Mortals and Immortals, and between both and the Divine.
I would prefer not to jump to any such conclusion. If Lindir had spoken of "cows" and "cowherds", or "goats" and "goatherds", he would be making the exact same point but without any such implication as you are trying to draw.

He's basically saying "animals which famously look all alike to us still know each other, and so do people who spend their lives tending them". I fear you are getting carried away by the precise animal JRRT chose into treacherous waters dark and deep…
 
I believe that the metaphor of sheep and shepherds must suggest the Bible to Western readers
I agree, but as a Jewish teenager when I first read the book, the main sheep/shepherd references in my own mind were The Boy Who Cried Wolf (Aesop) and The Wolf in Sheep's Clothing (not sure if this predates the Bible). I took Lindir's comment straight. And after the first reading, I correlated it with Treebeard's:
Treebeard in The Two Towers said:
"We are tree-herds, we old Ents. . . Sheep get like shepherds, and shepherds like sheep, it is said: but slowly, and neither have long in the world. It is quicker and closer with trees and Ents, and they walk down the ages together."
Treebeard goes on with a very interesting and apropo discussion of the differences between Elves and Men, culminating in his song of the willow meads. Probably my second-favorite set of passages, after Ithilien.
 
Just for kicks, I've looked to see if there are any other mentions of sheep in the text. (That is, other than in Rivendell, and Treebeard's speech.). There's only this one, in the house of Bombadil.

Suddenly Tom’s talk left the woods and went leaping up the young stream, over bubbling waterfalls, over pebbles and worn rocks, and among small flowers in close grass and wet crannies, wandering at last up on to the Downs. They heard of the Great Barrows, and the green mounds, and the stone-rings upon the hills and in the hollows among the hills. Sheep were bleating in flocks. Green walls and white walls rose. There were fortresses on the heights. Kings of little kingdoms fought together, and the young Sun shone like fire on the red metal of their new and greedy swords. There was victory and defeat; and towers fell, fortresses were burned, and flames went up into the sky. Gold was piled on the biers of dead kings and queens; and mounds covered them, and the stone doors were shut; and the grass grew over all. Sheep walked for a while biting the grass, but soon the hills were empty again. A shadow came out of dark places far away, and the bones were stirred in the mounds. Barrow-wights walked in the hollow places with a clink of rings on cold fingers, and gold chains in the wind.’ Stone rings grinned out of the ground like broken teeth in the moonlight.​
I won't even sarcastically use this to put forward the "Bombadil is God" argument. (But I did think about it.)
 
I would prefer not to jump to any such conclusion. If Lindir had spoken of "cows" and "cowherds", or "goats" and "goatherds", he would be making the exact same point but without any such implication as you are trying to draw.

He's basically saying "animals which famously look all alike to us still know each other, and so do people who spend their lives tending them". I fear you are getting carried away by the precise animal JRRT chose into treacherous waters dark and deep…

Hi NotACat,

I would point out that Tolkien (perhaps pointedly) did not have Lindir speak of cows and cowherds nor of goats and goatherds. While it might be true that Lindir would have been making the exact same point had he done so. I think it is indisputable that by choosing for Lindir to speak of sheep and shepherds, Tolkien is making a very different point than if he had had Lindir use other animals as his metaphor.
 
Hi NotACat,

I would point out that Tolkien (perhaps pointedly) did not have Lindir speak of cows and cowherds nor of goats and goatherds. While it might be true that Lindir would have been making the exact same point had he done so. I think it is indisputable that by choosing for Lindir to speak of sheep and shepherds, Tolkien is making a very different point than if he had had Lindir use other animals as his metaphor.

Sorry Flammifer,

It is absolutely disputable, as has been quite sensibly by a number of us.
 
So the elves are neither the sheep nor the shepherds, but might they possibly be llamas -who are not sheoherds but are often used to help guard the sheep?
 
Sorry Flammifer,

It is absolutely disputable, as has been quite sensibly by a number of us.

Hi Anthony,

Of course it is disputable. All interpretations are. However when an author, known to be a devout Catholic, throws a Biblical reference at us, I think the Wise will listen.
 
So the elves are neither the sheep nor the shepherds, but might they possibly be llamas -who are not sheoherds but are often used to help guard the sheep?

Hi Kitfinn,

Sure, the Elves might be llamas. That would fit with my hypothesis number 1 in one of the posts above: Elves are neither children of God, nor Angels. However, that still brings up the question; "What are llamas?" "What should the relationship of llamas be to Mortals or to the Divinity?"
 
Hi Anthony,

Of course it is disputable. All interpretations are. However when an author, known to be a devout Catholic, throws a Biblical reference at us, I think the Wise will listen.
As I've pointed out before, even if it is a Biblical reference it needed be from John's writings.
The Wise know when to recognise their assumptions as distinct from supportable facts.
 
As I've pointed out before, even if it is a Biblical reference it needed be from John's writings.
The Wise know when to recognise their assumptions as distinct from supportable facts.

Come on Anthony. It's an obvious Biblical reference. If it is not to John 10, then it is to Psalm 23, which would have a similar import (though perhaps not quite as powerful). However, I guess the reference is to John 10.
 
Come on Anthony. It's an obvious Biblical reference. If it is not to John 10, then it is to Psalm 23, which would have a similar import (though perhaps not quite as powerful). However, I guess the reference is to John 10.
I'm sorry, but no it's not an obvious Biblical reference. Sometimes sheep are just sheep; all looking the same within the herd.

Try reading it again without your preconceptions, as a first time reader would, and you'll see that there is insufficient basis for your assertions.
 
Back
Top