Why so secret, Rangers?

[Flammifer]

“If simple folk are free from care and fear, simple they will be, and we must be secret to keep them so,” says Aragorn to the council about the role of the Dunedain of the North.

But why?

Now, we know that when the Kingdom of Arnor ended, in the war with Angmar, “the Dunedain passed into the shadows and became a secret and wandering people.” “For the Dunedain were now few and all the peoples of Eriador diminished.” (Appendix A)

So, the Dunedain were few, and became secret and wandering.

There are not many economies that can support a wandering people. Hunting and gathering (like pre-agriculture tribes); herding (like Mongols, or other steppe nomads); living by trading skills with more settled people (like Romany gypsies), or, some form of slash and burn agriculture (like some forest dwelling societies).

As “all the peoples of Eriador diminished”, it is less likely that the Dunedain sustained themselves whilst wandering by trading with more settled agriculturalists. How they did sustain themselves is unclear. But we do know that both hunter gatherer economies and herding economies are attractive to their participants, who are loth to give them up to adopt agriculture. This may explain why the Dunedain remained wandering, long after they could (presumably) have settled down.

Still, from the fall of Angmar, until the Council of Elrond was 1,043 years (Appendix B). In that span of time, one would have thought that the numbers of the Dunedain of Eriador would have grown vastly, which might well have caused (or compelled) them to adopt more productive economies and settled more.

This is especially the case, if threats and dangers to an expanding Dunedain population were not severe. Which they seem not to have been. Appendix A indicates that though there were sometimes threats from Orcs and wolves in Eriador, “the Chieftains (of the Dunedain) for the most part lived out their long lives”. Threats in Eriador do not seem to have been high enough to suppress natural population growth, despite Aragorn’s implication that the Dunedain did protect Eriador from “dark things that come from the houseless hills, or creep from sunless woods”.

The population of England grew from an estimated 1.25m in 1000 AD to 60m in 2020. Of course England was a settled agricultural society in 1000, and went through the industrial and post industrial technological revolutions in that millennium. Still, in the 800 years to 1800 (before the industrial revolution got going), the population of England grew from 1.25m to 10m in 1800.

This included many periods of famine, war, and Black Death. One would have expected the Dunedain population to grow by at least 10x over the millennium between the fall of the Kingdom of Arnor, and the Council of Elrond. Probably more, if they had transitioned from a wandering people to a settled and agricultural people.

Yet they seem to have remained few. When Halbard joins Aragorn in Rohan, he brings with him 30 of the Rangers of the North. “All of our kindred that could be gathered in haste.” Well, that’s not many. Let’s say that a society can rarely devote more than 10% of it’s population to war, and that maybe only 10% of that 10% could be ‘gathered in haste’. That would imply that the entire wandering Dunedain society had a total population of only 3,000. That is an incredibly low population after 1,000 years of history. (Hobbits arrived in The Shire 400 years before the fall of Arnor. They turned from a wandering people to a settled and agricultural people, and certainly seem to have grown their population greatly over the millennium.)

Yet the Dunedain may have remained few, even though it is unclear why.

Being ‘few’ is a possible reason to remain ‘secret’. As a small and vulnerable population might be best served by remaining obscure and unobtrusive. But, that is not the role of the Dunedain according to Aragorn. They are protectors, and defenders of the North. “Hunters ever of the servants of the Enemy.” Those whom the ‘dark things’ “fly from”.

So, the Dunedain are not really secret as far as the ‘servants of the Enemy’ are concerned. They know enough to “fly from us”.

They are ‘secret’ from the other inhabitants of Arnor. (Which are mainly the Hobbits of the Shire, and the Men and Hobbits of Bree, though they may include others.)

Why?

The Hobbits of the Shire are not children. They can protect themselves (and have done in the past). The people of Bree also protect themselves during the War of the Ring. And, what were all those Rangers who could not be ‘gathered in haste’ doing? Why was their protection of the Shire and Bree not better maintained?

So, what’s up with the Dunedain of the North? Why has their population not grown? Why do they remain a ‘wandering people’ after 1,000 years? Why do they remain secret? Why do they stop protecting the ‘simple folk’ as soon as their Chieftain heads off South to Minas Tirith?

 

[Anthony Lawther]

“If simple folk are free from care and fear, simple they will be, and we must be secret to keep them so,” says Aragorn to the council about the role of the Dunedain of the North.

But why?

Now, we know that when the Kingdom of Arnor ended, in the war with Angmar, “the Dunedain passed into the shadows and became a secret and wandering people.” “For the Dunedain were now few and all the peoples of Eriador diminished.” (Appendix A)

So, the Dunedain were few, and became secret and wandering.

There are not many economies that can support a wandering people. Hunting and gathering (like pre-agriculture tribes); herding (like Mongols, or other steppe nomads); living by trading skills with more settled people (like Romany gypsies), or, some form of slash and burn agriculture (like some forest dwelling societies).

As “all the peoples of Eriador diminished”, it is less likely that the Dunedain sustained themselves whilst wandering by trading with more settled agriculturalists. How they did sustain themselves is unclear. But we do know that both hunter gatherer economies and herding economies are attractive to their participants, who are loth to give them up to adopt agriculture. This may explain why the Dunedain remained wandering, long after they could (presumably) have settled down.

Still, from the fall of Angmar, until the Council of Elrond was 1,043 years (Appendix B). In that span of time, one would have thought that the numbers of the Dunedain of Eriador would have grown vastly, which might well have caused (or compelled) them to adopt more productive economies and settled more.

This is especially the case, if threats and dangers to an expanding Dunedain population were not severe. Which they seem not to have been. Appendix A indicates that though there were sometimes threats from Orcs and wolves in Eriador, “the Chieftains (of the Dunedain) for the most part lived out their long lives”. Threats in Eriador do not seem to have been high enough to suppress natural population growth, despite Aragorn’s implication that the Dunedain did protect Eriador from “dark things that come from the houseless hills, or creep from sunless woods”.

The population of England grew from an estimated 1.25m in 1000 AD to 60m in 2020. Of course England was a settled agricultural society in 1000, and went through the industrial and post industrial technological revolutions in that millennium. Still, in the 800 years to 1800 (before the industrial revolution got going), the population of England grew from 1.25m to 10m in 1800.

This included many periods of famine, war, and Black Death. One would have expected the Dunedain population to grow by at least 10x over the millennium between the fall of the Kingdom of Arnor, and the Council of Elrond. Probably more, if they had transitioned from a wandering people to a settled and agricultural people.

Even England's population, indeed Europe's population, varied over that period.
Some sources show that England's population was 4.5 million in 1300 dropping to around 2.25 million in 1370 and not exceeding that on a sustained basis until the 1520's.

Someone looking at England's population in 1500 could easily ask many of the population questions you are asking, and yet it was an agrarian society. What will the Dunedain population be in another 500 years? We don't really know, but could expect it to be either higher now that the threats that we know about are eliminated and they can settle down, or lower due to the extended campaigns into the South and the East that follow Aragorn's crowning.

Yet they seem to have remained few. When Halbard joins Aragorn in Rohan, he brings with him 30 of the Rangers of the North. “All of our kindred that could be gathered in haste.” Well, that’s not many. Let’s say that a society can rarely devote more than 10% of it’s population to war, and that maybe only 10% of that 10% could be ‘gathered in haste’. That would imply that the entire wandering Dunedain society had a total population of only 3,000. That is an incredibly low population after 1,000 years of history. (Hobbits arrived in The Shire 400 years before the fall of Arnor. They turned from a wandering people to a settled and agricultural people, and certainly seem to have grown their population greatly over the millennium.)

I have a problem with your maths: You give 10% of 10% as an upper bound of those that could be gathered in haste, and then give a population of only 3,000. That 3,000 is the lower bound of their population. If the grey company represent 1% of 1% then their population swells to 310,000 (Halbarad counts too) which is unlikely to be maintained in secrecy unless widely scattered.

Equally, The Dunedain, being longer-lived, could be excused for having a lower population after 1000 years in the same conditions as a shorter-lived group, as there are fewer generations to grow the populace.

Yet the Dunedain may have remained few, even though it is unclear why.

Being ‘few’ is a possible reason to remain ‘secret’. As a small and vulnerable population might be best served by remaining obscure and unobtrusive. But, that is not the role of the Dunedain according to Aragorn. They are protectors, and defenders of the North. “Hunters ever of the servants of the Enemy.” Those whom the ‘dark things’ “fly from”.

So, the Dunedain are not really secret as far as the ‘servants of the Enemy’ are concerned. They know enough to “fly from us”.

One can have a small, vulnerable population size and still be actively hunting the servants of your enemy: Glorfindel is a Noldo and there's possibly no smaller, more vulnerable (to extinction) population group in Middle-Earth, but he rides alone against the chief servants of the enemy (because he is just that awesome). Aragorn never claimed that they were secret from the servants of the enemy, only to the people that they protect (and serve).

They are ‘secret’ from the other inhabitants of Arnor. (Which are mainly the Hobbits of the Shire, and the Men and Hobbits of Bree, though they may include others.)

Why?

The Hobbits of the Shire are not children. They can protect themselves (and have done in the past). The people of Bree also protect themselves during the War of the Ring. And, what were all those Rangers who could not be ‘gathered in haste’ doing? Why was their protection of the Shire and Bree not better maintained?

So, what’s up with the Dunedain of the North? Why has their population not grown? Why do they remain a ‘wandering people’ after 1,000 years? Why do they remain secret? Why do they stop protecting the ‘simple folk’ as soon as their Chieftain heads off South to Minas Tirith?

The Hobbits of the Shire are not children, but they have many child-like qualities.

All those other Rangers are doing what they've always done: searching for evidence of the works of the enemy and trying to stop them. I could see a number of them being tied up attempting to prevent the spread of orcs, wolves, and trolls from the misty mountains and trollshaws into lands that they protect. Protection of the Shire and Bree may have been maintained at the same sort of level, but the level of threat may have increased.

Aragorn explains why, and we see the evidence: When the watch on the Shire and Bree is apparently reduced (or stripped) then the people of those places have to step up to defend themselves, and in the process they change.
Those of us who have rendered military service understand this. We could arm our families and stand shoulder to shoulder against the threats, but those who have seen child soldiers understand what a tragedy that loss of innocence is.
Ultimately, the Dunedain make a sacrifice of service to allow the simple folks to remain simple.
This is not seen easily through the lens of the everyday people of developed nations, precisely because we have volunteers in military service affording civilians the same protection. Does that mean the military are treating civilians like children?

Much of your questioning seems to be founded on a modern mindset of the act of protecting someone being somehow belittling of the protected party.

To answer your summary questions:
They remain few because they aren't recruiting and they suffer losses, and they aren't home every night to try making more babies.
They are a wandering people so that they can be reactive and go where the trouble takes them. Guerrilla warfare.
They remain secret to allow others to live with the fiction that the world is generally safe, and scary stories are just stories.
They stop protecting the 'simple folk' when they do for the same reason that Aragorn heads south, and Boromir heads north: because it is important, and it is time.

 

[Flammifer]

Good points Anthony,

They could all be valid.

On the subject of numbers, if a population can devote 10% of its people to military endeavors, (which is high), then a population of 3,000 might be able to field 300 'fighters, protectors, defenders'. If only 10% of those warriors could be 'gathered in haste', then Halbard's 30 Dunedain might indicate a population of 3,000 Dunedain.

I am just trying to get some ball-park feeling for how many Dunedain of the North there might be. I do not regard 10% of 10% as an upper bound on those who could be gathered in haste. I would really expect the Dunedain to be able to gather more than 10% of their warriors to venture south.
Let's assume that the message goes out to the Dunedain to begin planning soon after the Council of Elrond. So, say October 27. Halbard's company joins Aragorn on March 6. As Halbard says (of Rohan), "We seek that land in haste". I guess that their journey from Rivendell should have taken about 20 days, indicating a departure from Rivendell on about February 16. So, the Dunedain might have had 103 days, between October 27 and February 16 to alert, plan, organize, and muster the southern expedition.

Of course, we don't know how far or scattered across Eriador the Dunedain might have been. However, given the geography of Eriador, 103 days should have been enough to assemble as many Dunedain warriors as desired and possible in Rivendell. Certainly, the Rangers would not have sent all their warriors south. They should retain enough to protect their own non-combatants, and to protect the 'simple folk' of Eriador. Still, I would have thought that 20% to 33% of warriors sent on the crucial southern expedition might have been more likely than 10%. If this was so, then it might lead to an estimate of only 900 - 1,500 as the total Dunedain population. However, the other estimate, that the Dunedain might be able to commit 10% of their population to the job of warrior could well be high. Most societies cannot (or do not) devote such a high percent of their population to full time military. So, reducing this percentage would increase the total population estimate.

So, if guessing the numbers of the Dunedain of the North, from the limited evidence, I think that 3,000 (with a wide margin of error) is not a bad ball-park estimate.

I do find that a surprisingly low number after 1,000 years. However, although it is fun to speculate about such things when reading TLOTR, it is really just an amusing diversion.

The more important question, when engaged in close reading, is, I think, the question about why do the Dunedain secretly protect the 'simple folk'?

Protection is fine. A duty (not always observed) of the Nobility. But why secret? Is this good for the 'simple' folk? Is it right? How does this action by the Dunedain compare to the actions of the Valar (who frequently seem loth to protect the Children of Illuvatar - especially the Second Children), and when they do act to protect them often seem to do this secretly (or at least masked and obscured, shrouded through prophecy or dream, implemented through providence or Eagles).

I guess the real question I am interested in is: Why the secrecy? What is the meaning or message of 'secret protection' in TLOTR, and why does it seem to be a recurring theme?

 

[amysrevenge]

The fighting protects their lives and homes, the secrecy protects their innocence.

 

[Flammifer]

Hi amysrevenge,

Yes, that may be true. But should innocence be protected via secrecy, or would transparency and honesty be a better policy? Also, what is 'innocence'? Men, whom the Valar (occaisonally) seem to protect, though secretly, can hardly be described as 'innocent' in Middle Earth. I don't really think that Hobbits can be either?

 

[Anthony Lawther]

Remaining secret also prevents the likes of Bill Ferny from reporting the movements of the 'Protectors' (not 'Rangers') to any group that wants to defeat them and take over the area.

Innocence came to English from the Latin 'In nocere' meaning 'to not hurt' in the sense of 'to not cause harm'.

While innocence carries many nuanced meanings now, I think the innocence being protected here is best described as: the first response to a new experience being curiosity rather than fear and violence.

Fatty Bolger was pre-warned that pursuers might come looking for Frodo, so rather than simply thinking to himself 'I wonder who could be knocking at this time of night' he seems to instead think 'They're here!'
Even Harry the gatekeeper at Bree's west gate seems more concerned with why they've come after dark (and seemingly, if these are the Hobbits he's been warned to look out for) rather than if this is some invasion in the making.

Without the secret protection of the Rangers it is likely, in the opinion of the Rangers, that this would not be the case.
The Rangers don't have to be right about this.

The Rangers do have many attitudes in common with modern military organisations, including the need for secrecy in certain areas. The Wikileaks people felt that total transparency and honesty was for the greater good, and they don't have to be right about this either.
People may have come to harm (including loss of life) by the actions of the Wikileaks people, but most of us will not know for decades because even that information is likely to be classified.

It is never as simple as transparent honesty being good, and secrecy being bad.

 

[Flammifer]

The secret help of the Dunedain, whether wise or not, is more explicable to me than the secret help of the Valar.

The Dunedain could be trying to protect the 'innocence' of the inhabitants of Eriador, and help their societies grow free from fear.

The secret help of the Valar seems different. Instead of trying to preserve innocence, they seem to be trying to 'toughen up' the people of Middle Earth (a different policy from that applied to the Elves sheltered in Valinor). 'They should learn to stand on their own feet," seems to be the attitude. "If we openly helped them it would not be good for them". "Here's the policy. The only help allowed will be mysterious Istari, dreams and visions, and the veiled application of providence."

So, we have now two examples of 'secret' protection, but they seem to be motivated quite differently. They are also implemented quite differently. The Dunedain are active protectors. "Hunters ever of the servants of the Enemy." They are causing the dark things to "fly from us". The approach of the Valar is different. The people of Middle Earth will have to do the hunting and and causing flight themselves. The protection of the Valar will not be direct and active. It will be delivered indirectly, through veiled nudging. So, we now see two very different, but both secret, approaches to protecting the 'simple folk'.

Why? What is Tolkien exploring?

 

[Beech27]

It would be getting into the weeds a bit, but it's probably useful to mine the extensive philosophical discourse on the "problem" (quotes because many Christians argue that it isn't) of divine hiddenness.

In short, if God could make Himself known emphatically, such that atheism or other religious commitments were rationally impossible, why doesn't he do so? Doesn't his relative hiddenness allow damning non-belief and sin to flourish, and mustn't that represent a real failure on his part?

Well, no.

The answer usually goes something like this: 1) He's not actually hidden if you know where and how to look; 2) Compelled belief is not really belief at all, and God values humans as rational actors; 3) It's actually mercy, since frequent and emphatic Godly intervention would both rob humans of the desire/ability to affect positive change in the world, and it would ensure they must be more severely punished when they fail to do so.

This is a topic I'm not equal to writing about well in this--or any--amount of space, but I do think it's a useful reference when considering the Valar's intervention (or lack thereof).

 

[Jim Deutch]

Let's assume that the message goes out to the Dunedain to begin planning soon after the Council of Elrond.

No; the message was sent out later, by Galadriel, after the Company got to Lothlorien. But that doesn't alter any of your conclusions.

I see the explanation for the Rangers' low population more in their Numenorian culture. How many children did the average Numenorian King have? I'm not sure we have much information, but it wouldn't surprise me if the number were quite low. The few details we do have seem to indicate an heir, but not usually a spare, would be the norm. The default assumption in Numenor seems to have been that a child will almost certainly survive to adulthood, which would be true in a land without war, famine, or disease. Not even their mariners were ever lost at sea until near the Downfall. If this culture of few children persists among the Rangers then there would be no expectation of exponential population growth. The wonder is that the line of Elendil never failed through the Third Age.

 

[Flammifer]

It would be getting into the weeds a bit, but it's probably useful to mine the extensive philosophical discourse on the "problem" (quotes because many Christians argue that it isn't) of divine hiddenness.

In short, if God could make Himself known emphatically, such that atheism or other religious commitments were rationally impossible, why doesn't he do so? Doesn't his relative hiddenness allow damning non-belief and sin to flourish, and mustn't that represent a real failure on his part?

Well, no.

The answer usually goes something like this: 1) He's not actually hidden if you know where and how to look; 2) Compelled belief is not really belief at all, and God values humans as rational actors; 3) It's actually mercy, since frequent and emphatic Godly intervention would both rob humans of the desire/ability to affect positive change in the world, and it would ensure they must be more severely punished when they fail to do so.

This is a topic I'm not equal to writing about well in this--or any--amount of space, but I do think it's a useful reference when considering the Valar's intervention (or lack thereof).

Hi Beech 27,

Yes, I thought about that discourse in Christian theology (though I am by no means up to speed on it). I do suspect, however, that it plays directly into Tolkien's depiction of the actions of the Valar. It is something to keep thinking about as we go through the book I think.

But, where we are right now, with Aragorn's tale of the deeds of the Dunedain of the North, is that we are getting a very different model of 'secret protection'. Why the two? Is Tolkien using the Dunedain model to contrast or criticize the Valar model? Or, vice versa? Or something else?

Which leads me to another question: At the point of the Council of Elrond, how much do we know or can deduce about the Valar model of 'secret protection'? Most of us know so much from the rest of TLOTR and later publications, that it is hard to ignore that, and difficult to figure out how much we would know at this point as first time readers. We know that providence and 'chance, if chance you call it' operates favorably (especially in 'The Hobbit'). We have clues about Elbereth. We have clues from Bilbo's Earendil poem. We have dreams and prophecies sent to Frodo and Boromir. But it is tricky to think what we really might know or guess about the Valar model of 'secret protection' at this point. Do we know enough for Tolkien to have meant us to wonder about the differences when Aragorn is speaking? (Of course, he might have meant us to remember this and wonder about the differences later).

 

[Anthony Lawther]

Another thing to consider: If the Rangers were not secret then we should have already run into at least a mention of them in the Hobbit. Maybe the secrecy of the Rangers is (at least in part) an act of retcon.

 

[NotACat]

Which leads me to another question: At the point of the Council of Elrond, how much do we know or can deduce about the Valar model of 'secret protection'? Most of us know so much from the rest of TLOTR and later publications, that it is hard to ignore that, and difficult to figure out how much we would know at this point as first time readers. We know that providence and 'chance, if chance you call it' operates favorably (especially in 'The Hobbit'). We have clues about Elbereth. We have clues from Bilbo's Earendil poem. We have dreams and prophecies sent to Frodo and Boromir. But it is tricky to think what we really might know or guess about the Valar model of 'secret protection' at this point. Do we know enough for Tolkien to have meant us to wonder about the differences when Aragorn is speaking? (Of course, he might have meant us to remember this and wonder about the differences later).

I'm not sure that when the first-time reader arrives at this point in the book, they would have the slightest inkling of the existence of such a thing as a Vala. Indeed, how often are they mentioned, by name or otherwise, throughout the whole of the LOTR?

 

[No One in Particular]

Elbereth is named several times, usually in songs and invocations. The Vala as a group are mentioned exactly once that I recall, when the rangers of Ithilien are hoping the mumak will decide to sweep left instead of stomping them flat into the ground. I can't say about the appendices though, they might have gotten mentioned there.

 

[NotACat]

Elbereth is named several times, usually in songs and invocations. The Vala as a group are mentioned exactly once that I recall, when the rangers of Ithilien are hoping the mumak will decide to sweep left instead of stomping them flat into the ground. I can't say about the appendices though, they might have gotten mentioned there.

Yes, you're right about Elbereth, but do we know that she is a Valië? Likewise, when Théoden is compared to Oromë, are we told that he is a Vala? We'll have to keep an eye out…

 

[Flammifer]

Hi NotACat and No One in Particular,

I think you are both right, that we don't know much about the Valar so far, if we are first time readers. But, we do have some clues. The most clues are from Bilbo's Earendil poem, where we have learned about 'Valinor' and 'Eldamar' , as components of 'Elvenhome'. We also learn of an 'Elder King', and receive more on Elbereth.

We have had Elbereth in poems from Gildor and Rivendell Elves, as well as from Frodo.

We have also seen Providence working. As well as dreams and visions.

We know some. How much?

 

[No One in Particular]

We (the reader) know that Elbereth seems to be held in high esteem by the elves. I had completely forgotten that Theoden was compared to Orome. We don't know who the Vala are either I guess, only that the rangers of Ithilien seem to think they could throw some help their way in the warding of wayward mumakil. It really is hard to put myself in the place of a first time reader.

 

[JJ48]

Being ‘few’ is a possible reason to remain ‘secret’. As a small and vulnerable population might be best served by remaining obscure and unobtrusive. But, that is not the role of the Dunedain according to Aragorn. They are protectors, and defenders of the North. “Hunters ever of the servants of the Enemy.” Those whom the ‘dark things’ “fly from”.

So, the Dunedain are not really secret as far as the ‘servants of the Enemy’ are concerned. They know enough to “fly from us”.

Do the servants of the Enemy know their actual identity, though? Sure, having a group of guys hunting orcs might be irritating for Sauron, but he's unlikely to drop everything and move to crush them just to save a few goblins. It's enough to make the local dark things fly from them, but not enough to involve the Dark Lord himself. If he knew there was a group in whom the blood of Numenor still ran true, though, that would be quite a different matter.

On the other hand, what reason would they have to advertise their actions? To get help from those they protect? That sounds rather counterproductive if the goal is to allow such folk to live peaceably. To receive thanks and praise? That's not the point of protecting them, either. I am reminded of Matthew 6:2-4 "So when you give to the poor, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be honored by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. But when you give to the poor, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving will be in secret; and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you." (NASB)

The only real problem that I see with remaining secret is that the simple folk were unprepared for the Rangers' departure. However, this is really a trade-off. Either the Rangers prepare the people for when they depart (When? Who knows how many generations it'll be before they actually need to fight?) or they let the people live in peace until they know for sure that such will no longer be possible. They went with the second option, and I can't really say that I fault them for it.

 

[JJ48]

We (the reader) know that Elbereth seems to be held in high esteem by the elves. I had completely forgotten that Theoden was compared to Orome. We don't know who the Vala are either I guess, only that the rangers of Ithilien seem to think they could throw some help their way in the warding of wayward mumakil. It really is hard to put myself in the place of a first time reader.

I'm somewhat of a speed-reader, so I never really grasped the fact that the Valar were mentioned in TTT until just a few years ago. I would add that in the passage, we just have Damrod saying, "May the Valar turn him aside!" which doesn't even tell us if "the Valar" is singular or plural.

I think you are both right, that we don't know much about the Valar so far, if we are first time readers. But, we do have some clues. The most clues are from Bilbo's Earendil poem, where we have learned about 'Valinor' and 'Eldamar' , as components of 'Elvenhome'. We also learn of an 'Elder King', and receive more on Elbereth.

We hear the names, certainly, but we still don't have much information about them, and even less to indicate that they're not Elven. Elbereth has been invoked a lot, but this in itself doesn't tell us much about who or what she is. At the Ford, Frodo invokes both Elbereth and Lúthien the Fair, and we know that the latter was an Elf.

I think it's not until the parting song as the Fellowship departs Lothlórien that we really hear enough about Elbereth to begin to infer that she's much more than just some important Elf.

 

[DolorousStroke]

One thing I don't think anyone has mentioned (sorry if it has been), is that Rangers aren't the only practitioners of secrecy. The mission of the Istari, their identity as Maiar, what their exact role and limits are, is something Gandalf seems happy to have cloaked in mystery. Gandalf could say "I'm here, I'm an angel from Eru, and my powers are X Y Z." He could tell people his main job is not, in fact, firecrackers. He doesn't do so perhaps because knowing what he is/where he comes from/what he can do would change his role from being a quiet counterbalancer to being a tool to be used by the mortals; and he might be privy to a plan that mortals might thwart by trying to "wield" him in a way that is not in his mission.

Also, interestingly, Gandalf and Aragorn as has been noted take different views of what will scare the hobbits silly. Gandalf tells them little about e.g. the Black Riders, fearing they won't even start; and Aragorn tells them a lot, fearing they aren't scared enough. So Rangers (or at least one Ranger) don't seem to have a problem scaring people.

 

[Forodan]

There are several reasons for the Istari to be secretive about their nature and mission. First, they have a bad precedent to evade/avoid -- that of someone calling himself "Aulendil" and offering to teach the Noldor of Eregion some fancy magical lore. Openly claiming to be a servant of the Valar is not likely to win friends and allies in this historical context. (In fact, one must wonder just how the Istari convinced the few leaders of the Eldar whom they revealed their mission to that they were not just more meddlers, perhaps other survivors of the fall of Thangorodrim come out of hiding.) So it's not surprising that they would be told to keep quiet about who they really were when they were sent off to assist in the effort to oppose Sauron. But also, there are some pretty clear implications in Elrond's statements during the Council that direct intervention has been recognized by Elves and Valar alike as a poor option.

"And they who dwell beyond the Sea would not receive it; for good or ill it belongs to Middle-Earth; it is for us who still dwell here to deal with it."

That sounds like Elrond might have already had conversations with Gandalf, and probably Saruman before his corruption, about options should the One Ring turn up again. And the idea of getting direct intervention seems to have been already ruled out.