Was Smeagol truly evil to begin with?

[BalrogRingDestroyer]

I know he killed his friend, but Gandalf says something about what happened to him being all too likely to have happened to quite a few Hobbits in the Shire had they been in his place.

This seems odd, since the number of evil Hobbits that we know of in the Shire we can probably count on one hand.

Is it also possible that his obsession with new things and roots and beginnings made him particularly vulnerable to the Ring? Bilbo was willing to part with the gold of Erebor in order to make peace. He was quite resistant (I'm not sure if he was fully immune) to the dragon sickness too. So he, perhaps, more virtuous than your average Hobbit.

 

[Eebounnie]

I'm not sure I want to affirm that he's evil but I do think he was not a good person. When Déagol found the Ring Sméagol almost immediately, fell to the power of the ring and demanded it as a birthday present (then killed his cousin and banished by his people).

If he was truly good I don't think the Ring would have this big of an influence on him.

 

[Elaini]

I agree Eebounnie. An average hobbit appreciates other things than gold and power which makes the effect of the Ring on them slow. Sméagol however fell very quickly and even killed his cousin - both are things that are usually unheard of in the Hobbit community.

Lobelia stole Bilbo's silver spoons, but at least she didn't kill anyone over it.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Don't forget Hugo Bracegirdle, who never returned borrowed books.

Pure evil. Grr!