[Nogrod]

Tolkien's world seems to be fatalistic by nature. What happens, happens under the guidance of providence of Eru - or whatever term you wish to apply here.

That means that things went as they did because they were meant to go that way. That's why Gollum was left alive or Faramir let Frodo go etc. So a divine plan of sorts.

Keeping this in mind no one else but Boromir could have fallen because everything was prescribed. Aragorn fought against the weakness of his humanity but was meant to overcome it as well as Gandalf was meant to die and overcome the seduction of the Ring and Frodo was not to fail even if it required the help of his mate Sam in the end. But that was all preordained. Nice and tidy in a universe whose creator meant it to be nice and tidy under this divine guidance the author created himself to work under that presupposition.

~*~

But if we go for the "what if?" scenarios and forget the providence Tolkien weawed into his world I'd say that Gandalf, Legolas, Aragorn and Gimli could be the ones the Ring could have lured.

Why not the hobbits? Well, what would they have done with it? I think they were too much afraid of it - and seeing Frodo's transformation they were even more sure that was none of their bussiness (remember Pip played with the Palantír because he didn't know what it was... of the ring he knew it was something too big for him). Sam surely is a questionmark. Had Frodo died in the hands of the orcs he might have tried to fulfill the mission but what would have followed?

And we should remeber that fex. Gandalf (and possibly even Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli together) would have been able to deal with a "Ring-master Merry gone wrong" anytime.


Now Gimli could have taken the ring to protect the dwarf-kingdom and that might have proven a real challenge for Sauron. The same goes with Legolas. He could have raised a formidable fight against the dark forces, not in front of Minas Tirith but around Lorien or something... gathering all the forces of good under the same banner (Cirdan with his borrowed ring included). But the corruption argument bites here as well. In the end it would have turned evil and looking at this one would say Gimli would be less knowledgeable than Legolas to that effect.

So Legolas with his knowledge of the world and it's history probably would not have taken it but Gimli then? Without Tolkien-scripted providence Gimli might have taken it?

But Gandalf is there too. He stood against the seduction in Hobbitton but what if he had lived later and things had looked grim enough? He knew the dangers but in the situation where there seemed to be no hope anymore, would he have been lured to try the ring? Who knows? He was dead and out of game at the moments when the real decisions were made...

I'd say Gimli would not be as aware of the dangers and might have used the ring and Gandalf might have been persuaded by the graveness of the situation to use it even if he knew the hazards.

So Gimli or Gandalf?

Or Aragorn?

Without the providence of Eru Aragorn is the number one aim of the Ring and the one who should indeed use it. He should be the human hero trying to save his people with the help of the ring! Looking at Boromir's death he should be awaken to the debt he owns to the humankind and he should have taken to the tracks of Frodo bringing the ring to Minas Tirith. Why follow some "insignificant hobbits" when the fate of the whole world was at stake?

He should take it if he was to be a king.

But Tolkien wished it otherwise. There was the providence of Eru to twist his mind from the good of his kin (the human kind) to sidetrack him to help the hobbit-friends he had made and that decision later led to the final victory. That's the providence Tolkien wrote denying believability of the characters.

So Aragorn it is.

Without the pre-decided fate (by the author) he would have taken the ring as it was the only decent possibility back there at the shores of Anduin.