Tolkien question: What if the One Ring had been destroyed at the end of the Second Age?

Cafe Society
1

As we all know, the events of LOTR unfold as they do because of a critical mistake Isildur, son of Elendil, made at the end of the Second Age. After his father and Gil-galad threw down Sauron, Isildur cut the ring from the fallen Maia’s hand and claimed it as wergild. Unlike some, I don’t hold that failure against Isildur; he did not know of the Ring’s evil potential and likely did not realize that Sauron’s death was only apparent: i.e., that it was only his body that had perished, and that his spirit would in time reform and re-incorporate. Likewise, he did not know that the Ring would prey upon him and likely hasten his death.

What if things had gone a little differently?

I can think of several possible scenarios. The campaign of the Last Alliance versus Sauron’s forces was a long one; there might have been an opportunity for Isildur to learn more of ring-lore than he did before that last battle, and if he had he might have been better prepared. Or, alternatively, if he and/or Elrond had joined in the Gil-galad’s and Elendil’s final contest with Sauron, the battle might have ended with all of them alive, and Gil-galad may have been wise enough and strong enough to resist the Ring’s lure long enough to destroy it. Or there may be another possibility I haven’t conceived.

How would the history of Middle-Earth have unfolded in that circumstance? The first two things that occur to me is that Gondor would have had a much easier time of it, but the Elves–at least the Lothlorien elves–would have gone to the Blessed Lands much more quickly.

Thoughts, anybody? Bueller?

2

Uhh… you’re basicall;y asking what happens if the defining moment of their “more or less recent” history was altered. And that’s impossible to know. The only immediate change would be that Isildur would have lived and possibly semi-united the realms of Men, but we can’t know what would ahve happened otherwise.

3

Which is why I’m calling for speculation. Forexample: in this scenario, the Valar don’t seem to have a reason to send the Istari to Middle-earth; thus Olorin never becomes Gandalf. This presents problems for the Hobbits in surviving the Long Winter.

4

Yeah, I have to agree with smiling bandit here. Sauron and the Ring were quite inactive for about 2500 years, so I think we can probably assume that events among Men would have largely ensued the same. Your point about the elves seems valid; many, perhaps most elves east of the Anduin might well have gone to the Blessed Lands - or not. It’s not clear to me that the elves were hanging around for three thousand years to pull Middle Earth’s chestnuts out of the fire. If they were, they seem to have been curiously passive in the entire affair of the Ring; their participation was hardly central to events, and seems largely to have consisted of repelling attacks against their own lands.

Presumably the Wise would not have been sent. I can’t see events as having panned out by any means identically to how they actually did, but I suspect the general trend of the Numenoreans’ decay over time would have occurred with only slight alterations in time. I suspect that two or three thousand years after the beginning of the Fourth Age, things would have gone the same way. The big difference would be that there would have been no unifying factor to gather and coordinate the evil in the world. The evil folks would still exist, still contend against the good (who, let’s face it, weren’t always all that good), but would not have the driving force and coherence that Sauron added.

5

1st thought: Not sure how Galadriel would have redeemed herself. She might have ended up exiled in Middle-Earth until Dagor Dagorath.

6

As it happens, I do fault Isildur for failing to destroy the One Ring. Elrond warned him to cast it into the flames of Mount Doom, but he didn’t, leading to terrible suffering, death and devastation when Sauron rose again.

Had the Ring been destroyed then, Isildur would probably still have been killed at the Battle of the Gladden Fields, as I don’t recall anything in Unfinished Tales to suggest that the orc army which attacked his small force was drawn to the Ring, as such. He wouldn’t even have had even the chance of trying to escape with the help of the Ring’s invisibility. As his sons died in the orc attack, so too would Isildur likely have been slain.

Sauron’s utter destruction so much earlier would’ve meant that there would’ve been no Necromancer in the time of The Hobbit, of course, so maybe Thorin gets his Erebor map sooner, straight from his father’s hands and not from Gandalf. Without Sauron, there’s no such powerful locus of evil in later ages (unless you suppose that the Black Numenoreans, maybe someone like the guy who became the Mouth of Sauron, stepped into the role, although none of them would’ve had even a fraction of his Maia power). The Nazgul, without the guidance and malign will of Sauron, or the One Ring to imbue them with power, would’ve been destroyed just as they (very likely) were when Gollum fell into the lava. Barad-dur would’ve been brought low much sooner, and Mordor might eventually have become a more pleasant place, if still not exactly paradise.

I agree that Gondor, as the state that bore the brunt of Sauron’s military power over the centuries, would’ve been much better off. More broadly, without Sauron’s emissaries to recruit them, the Easterlings might’ve kept to themselves more. Aragorn or even one of his Dunedain predecessors might have taken the throne of Gondor sooner - although then again, without the opportunity of proving himself during the War of the Ring, Aragorn might’ve remained just an obscure warrior.

I don’t think that the Elves would’ve necessarily have left any sooner. The Three Rings would’ve been safe to use, and there were many Elven-folk who still enjoyed the woods, mountains and trees of Middle-earth.

Would the Valar have still sent over the Istari or Wizards? Maybe not, without Sauron to oppose. Gandalf’s absence alone would change a lot of things down the timeline.

Interesting question.

7

I’m a little surprised that you didn’t mention the fact that Nenya no longer works in this timeline, and thus Lothlorien is no longer kept timeless.

Heir, you may be right about Isildur still dying at Gladden Fields.

8

Hobbits would still be, for the most part, unknown. Bilbo would have stayed in his hobbit-hole and Frodo would have been your generic, or maybe slightly Tookish, angsty tween.

Someone would come along to replace Sauron. I guess, the main bad guy for the Third Age would be the Balrog or something.

Dwarves would have got into a few wars with elves or men. These wars and the lack of reproduction would have probably sealed their faith.

Ent populations wouldn’t be so low. I’m not sure if the Ent-Wives would be around or not though.

9

If Sauron was destroyed with the Ring when the chance presented itself?

On the Hobbits, well the Witch King would not have existed to destroy the North Kingdom and thus likely that extremely valuable farming paradise known as the Shire would not have been available to them. Further they would have had less reason to move west. So the Shire would probably not have been. Bree might still have happened somewhat the way it did and there might well have been other towns and cities with Hobbits, perhaps even as far south as Tharbad on the Greyflood. But I think the Hobbit would have stayed near the Anduin if not for Dol Guldur. Life appeared to be pretty easy for the Hobbits there.

The North would have likely stayed a thriving Kingdom and not split up if not for outside forces.

The Dwarves may have done better but the Dragons might still have done them in. It is hard to say. They still would have awoke Durin’s Bane as I do not see that horror being tied to Sauron.

Gondor would have probably prospered and grown and thus Rohan would never have happened. Those that became the Eorlings would have eventually come under either Arnor or Gondor. Without an outside enemy these two Kingdoms might well have clashed eventually. Arnor in particular would have had less room to grow.

Greenwood would have stayed a thriving Elven Kingdom and probably been even greater. Lothlórien would have faded without the power of the Ring, but would the Ring have failed then as it did 3000 years later. I suspect so, but perhaps not.

Elrond might well have stayed around. I don’t know if he only stayed to guard against the return of Sauron. I feel he liked his valley.

What of the Ents, would their fate and sundering have been different. It was suspected the Entwives moved to the fertile fields that later became the Brown Lands. If the devastating war never destroyed these lands, would the Entwives had been there when the Ents went looking? I think so.

10

Well, this being Tolkien, Sauron’s top lieutenant (Gothmog?), would rise to take his place. That seems to be the eeevil career path in Middle-Earth. That’s how Sauron did it, and he had a good run.

11

That would depend on what sort of being Gothmog was, I expect. If he was a Nazgul, then his power would be dependent on his Ring and ultimately the One Ring; he would have discorporated along with his master once the One went into the lava.

12

Bilbo would have gone on the quest with the troop of dwarves, but after getting seperated from them in the goblins’ caves, he would not be able to escape and thus remain trapped there - either the goblins would eventually ferret him out and kill him for his part in slaying the goblin king, or he would retreat into the caves and become a gollum like creature, living off the lesser creatures that exist down in the depths, eventually going mad from isolation.

The dwarves, without Bilbo’s help, are devoured by the giant spiders in Mirkwood - except for Thorin, who rots in the Elven King’s dungeons.

Smaug lives on for countless ages, his constant menace preventing the development of human civilization in that area of the world.

Eventually, a new goblin king arises who rallies his forces and increases his stronghold on the mountain paths. Eventually, their realm extends all throughout Mirkwood.

Smeagol never descends into the caves to become Gollum, and instead lives a happy, uneventful life, probably spending a lot of time with his brother Deagol.

Frodo, Sam, Merry & Pippin all live uneventful lives in the hobbit shire.

13

In the started but barely followup to the LotR, Tolkien seemed to have the next great crisis be internal rot. Rather than a Lt. of Sauron, it was men that would be the problem. Of course he never got very far and so may well have written of how the Mouth of Sauron rose from the rubble and put together his evil plan or how the #2 Ring Wraith survived the destruction of the Ring and took his time to recover and build power.

14

Doesn’t this imply that Gandalf is in Middle-earth? Why do the Valar send him?

I think What Exit? is correct that the Hobbits never get to the Shire anyway.

15

The big difference I see is the power vacuum. The Wizards are never sent over, since there’s no longer the threat of Sauron. With the Elven rings now powerless, Lorien and Rivendell fade, and Galadriel and Elrond likely head West sooner rather than later.

While Isildur doesn’t die heirless, and Arnor won’t fall to Angmar, I still figure that internal rot will eventually weaken those kingdoms (especially with no major threat to stand against).

16

I think What Exit? has the right of it.

Except, perhaps, that as there are still dragons and a balrog around, I think Morgoth’s will upon Arda would have caused either or both to have been the next crisis on Middle-Earth, instead of the inevitable internal rot.

There’s also the Easterlings to consider; out from under Sauron’s dominion, they’d’ve probably become a threat to Gondor.

17

It’s implied in The Lord of the Rings that Bilbo and the Ring were brought together by divine intervention, and that Frodo was divinely appointed to bear it to Mount Doom. And I think Tolkien says in a letter that Gollum got a bit of a nudge at the end.

I get the sense that the entire race of Hobbit-kind is designed to deal the death blow to Sauron. Doesn’t the way they just “appear” well into the Third Age seem a little strange, given the detailed backgrounds of most of the peoples of Middle-earth? They play no part in history, at least nothing significant enough to draw much attention from the other races, except for adventures relating directly to the Ring. Suddenly they rise to enormous prominence, and then they just sort of fade away or dwindle back into insignificance.

I suggest that had there been no Ring, there would be no Hobbits.

[Of course Tolkien created Hobbits and the Shire and Gollum and Gandalf and Smaug before conceiving of the ruling ring, but he wasn’t above retconning anything and everything to fit the larger tale.]

18

Isildur’s heir was Valandil, his 4th son. He was very young when his father died, and was kept at Rivendell during the war.

Had Isildur & company survived the Gladden fields disaster, his 1st son Elendur (who died there too, along with sons 2 & 3) would have been his heir, and heir to the title of King of the Numenoreans in exile.

Valandil was technically King over all too, but given the disaster of Gladden fields, he never had the power to act as such.

19

I remembered a line from the books that Sauron is not the evil, but merely an emissary. Hence I think that someone more bad-ass than Sauron will turn up. And without the growing influence of Sauron, would the ancestors of the Hobbits even migrate to what is now the Shire? They may be pony-riders along with the Riders of Rohan!

20

No, the greater evil was Morgoth who had already been dealt with.