Would a Dwarf have been better as the Ring bearer?

[Fenir_LacDanan]

Alright kids...

I contend that a dwarf would have been a better choice than a hobbit for the Quest of Mount Doom.

I know that their are similar threads out there, but to hell with them.

A dwarf, (for the sake of argument, lets say Gimli's mate's mate) would be able to sustain the hardships inflicted by a journey over the plains of Gorgoroth (et al), just as well as a hobbit, if not better.

And a Dwarf, would have been able to fight the power of the One Ring better, or at least as well as a hobbit, and would have been at least useful in a conflict situation...

Come on, takers? I'm not here for a hair cut, after all...

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

I disagree I think a hobbit could resist the Ring better than a dwarf.

[Valandil]

I wonder if keeping the One Ring on him would fuel a dwarf's lust for gold even more than one of the Seven Dwarf Rings would...

[Beren3000]

Originally Posted by Valandil

I wonder if keeping the One Ring on him would fuel a dwarf's lust for gold even more than one of the Seven Dwarf Rings would...

Along the same line of thought, this lust for gold would turn the dwarf's attention from his real quest.

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

If it was Gimli imagine him at the Glittering Caves.

[Fenir_LacDanan]

But note that Samwise, when he posesses the One ring, he sees great gardens for him to command, all though he proves better than the ring.

Hobbits are just as tempted as Dwarves...

See, from Sil:

"And Aulë made the Dwarves even as they still are, because the forms of the Children who were to come were unclear to his mind, and because the power of Melkor was yet over the Earth; and he wished therefore that they should be strong and unyielding"


Well?

[brownjenkins]

a dwarf may have done well... but i think another aspect of hobbits that dwarves did not have was that general easy-going, peaceful nature that helped to temper the rings evil influence

[Valandil]

You have some kind of case, but I'm still not buying.

Sure Sam was tempted - who wouldn't be? But he DID quickly reject that temptation as nonsense. What if the Ring had managed to get its Dwarven keeper to start thinking about all the gold and jewels it could help him acquire?

[Fenir_LacDanan]

Oh indeed.

Shall we assume these premises...

A ring must be carried 1000 miles (sic), and it itself will both get heavier and corrupt the carrier. And the 1000 miles (sic) will be hard and dangerous.

So the Ring bearer must be able to (a) literally carry the One ring and not be destroyed by it, (b), be able to travel long distances with said burden, and (c), be able to take care of anything that may cause them grief, such as ooohhhh.... Orcs, Trolls, Balrogs, spidery beings and alike.

And of course the biggest question here is, would the said Dwarf/man/hobbit, be able to surrender the Ring for destruction at the conclusion of the quest?

Both Hobbits (frodo) and Men (Isuldur), failed...

[Fenir_LacDanan]

Originally Posted by Valandil

You have some kind of case, but I'm still not buying.

Sure Sam was tempted - who wouldn't be? But he DID quickly reject that temptation as nonsense. What if the Ring had managed to get its Dwarven keeper to start thinking about all the gold and jewels it could help him acquire?

Just on Sam and Frodo.

Sam had the ring for a matter of hours...

And Frodo, did NOT surrender the ring for destruction. Only fate and chance save middle earth.

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

Originally Posted by Fenir_LacDanan

(c), be able to take care of anything that may cause them grief, such as ooohhhh.... Orcs, Trolls, Balrogs, spidery beings and alike.

That is why there was a Company not just one or two hobbits plus look how long Frodo carried the Morgul wound, what would have happened to a dwarf in that situation.

[Fenir_LacDanan]

Originally Posted by Telcontar_Dunedain

That is why there was a Company not just one or two hobbits plus look how long Frodo carried the Morgul wound, what would have happened to a dwarf in that situation.

Too many open parameters...

Perhaps a Dwarf would not have even been wounded at Amon Sul? He may have, instead of cowering in a corner with the ring on, he may have drew his broad axe and fough his enemies?,
Perhaps a dwarf, with the injury would have lasted longer (which is what I believe)??

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

I don't think one dwarf would have been a match for 5 Nazgûl.

[Valandil]

Well... good thing it worked out OK after all... with just a hobbit and all, ya know!

[Fenir_LacDanan]

Originally Posted by Telcontar_Dunedain

I don't think one dwarf would have been a match for 5 Nazgûl.

I agree.

So what good were four Hobbits?

Perhaps four dwarves, clad in mail, would have served better?

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

But the hobbits weren't there to kill everything that moved, they went to help Frodo.

[Fenir_LacDanan]

But thats an age old question...


What ACTUAL assistance did the hobbits give frodo, on his journey??

Merry and the Witch King was, entertaining, not helpful...

Pippin and his slaying of the troll at the Battle of the Black Gate...?
Apart from saving Aragorn? what?

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

Well Sam took the Ring so the orcs of Cirith Ungol didn't take it and he was the only reason Frodo made it from Cirith Ungol to Mount Doom.

[brownjenkins]

And of course the biggest question here is, would the said Dwarf/man/hobbit, be able to surrender the Ring for destruction at the conclusion of the quest?

no one could do that... dwarf, hobbit or maia... gandalf and elrond knew this, their goal was to get it there and trust in 'fate'

[Attalus]

The hearts of the Dwarves were hard to fathom, but this I know: lust for gold and realm was easily wakened in their hearts. This is the way the Ring would have worked, especially in Moria. Remember how excited Gimli was? Can you imagine the temptation to clear Moria of evil, people it with Dwarves, ruling the world from beneath the mountain? I think a dwarf would be most unsuitable.