Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Firefoot
I don't think he needed to say it out loud, and that he would protect Frodo anyway, but he said it to reassure Frodo somewhat.
|
But this is the difference between an act of goodwill - even one driven by necessity - & an oath. An oath is a 'public' declaration. You're right, Aragorn had every reason to help Frodo get the Ring to Rivendell, but he had no reason to swear an oath of protection to him. The oath is specific - 'if by life or death I can save
you, I will' - note, not 'if by life or death I can keep the Ring from Sauron, I will' - which would have been all that was required. He swears to lay down his life to protect Frodo - which would have put him in an awkward position of it had come to a choice like one Nazgul grabbing the Ring & the other grabbing Frodo!
But then Aragorn does tend to be rather free with his oath taking, the only thing that makes it acceptable being that he manages to fulfil them all. He seems to go through Middle Earth commiting himself to aid all those in need - to be expected in a King perhaps.
What I percieve more & more strongly is the necessity of oaths, vows, promises in Middle earth. Victory depends on the fulfilling of oaths, & the greatest chance of defeat arises out of the breaking of oaths. Perhaps, as
Bethberry pointed out in the chapter by chapter thread which started this off, in a world before lawyers, & contracts, order was dependent on people making promises which they kept - or died trying. The alternative was chaos. The weight of an oath, its necessity in keeping civilisation in existence, runs right through the Legendarium.