[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Lal

because right at the end of Lord of the Rings we learn something, and that's that it wasn't an Elf, nor was it a Wizard, nor was it a Dwarf, and nor was it a Man who destroyed the One Ring. It was a Hobbit. supposedly the 'lowliest' of Races. It's at that point of realisation that we realise Tolkien's point that no Race was mightier than any other!

I can't say I agree with that. Frodo destroying the Ring does nothing to prove the might of any race or another. It proves that hobbits aren't useless, certainly, and that divinely inspired plans always work when tried no matter how insanely impossible they are.

But prove that all races were equally mighty? Surely not.

Here are some quotes to keep in mind.

Elrond-

This quest may be attempted by the weak with as much hope as the strong. Yet such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are elsewhere

This is obviously pointing towards the hobbits. As you can see from what is said, though the task may be accomplished by the hobbits, they remain "weak", not "strong", and are grouped with "small hands" rather than "the great".

And later-

This is the hour of the Shire-folk, when they arise from their quiet fields to shake the towers and counsels of the Great.

The "Shire-folk" are clearly not "the Great". Elrond's point is that hobbits will impact the world despite not being great.

What I'm trying to say is, Frodo's triumph doesn't, to me anyway, prove that hobbits are as mighty as the Elves. They're not. Elves are taller, stronger, faster, and prettier and make better clothes, boats, weapons, and food. Elves are mightier. And nothing in the story disproves that.

But, the story does indeed prove something about might. Not that all persons are equal in might, but rather...

Might is not always the most important thing.