New evidence for the Arkenstone-Silmaril case [Archive]

Gwaihir the Windlord

12-04-2002, 03:12 AM

Compiled by yours truly. Well, not really evidence as such, simply some decent reasoning (or at least I hope so) I've come up with. Anyway, please take the trouble to read it and see what you think. Some points are left out, obviously, like Galadriel's glass; but they are open to discussion. For those who weren't around for that rather old thread on this topic (which it might be a good idea to have a look at), this can serve as introduction.

(In fact I've sent a copy of this to Kittle, to be hopefully published as an article -- it was about a month ago I think -- but, busy as he is I suppose, he hasn't even got back to me, let alone actually done anything with it. Which is a bit of a bugger, but it doesn't matter. You can see it now...)

=============

Was the Arkenstone of Thráin really Maedhros’ lost Silmaril?
Gwaihir the Windlord

While rereading The Hobbit, a few weeks ago, I suddenly recalled an old discussion thread I had (lightly) taken part in, a year or so back. It’s topic was that upon which I am now writing. As I remember, the general conclusion of the thread had been that no, the Arkenstone was not the Silmaril lost by Maedhros at the end of the First Age. Then I was inclined to agree; but reading The Hobbit that night I changed my mind. And so I reopen the debate.

At the end of the First Age, after the War of Wrath and the recapture of the two remaining Silmarils, Maedhros and Maglor – driven by the Oath of the Sons of Fëanor – took it upon themselves to steal the Silmarils from the camp of Eönwe. In this they succeeded. However the pain that the Silmarils inflicted upon them (as they did on all unlawful handlers of the gems was so great that Maglor cast his Silmaril into the sea, and Maedhros, despairing, threw himself and the Silmaril he was carrying into a fiery chasm. So it was that both the great jewels were lost. Lost, but not destroyed; the Silmarils are indestructible.

‘And they knew that those jewels could not be found and brought together again, unless the world be broken and remade.’

Perhaps not all found and brought together, but I believe that one of them at least was found – the Arkenstone. Could it be that Meadhros’ stolen Silmaril, sucked into the molten bosom of the world, was swirled around and moved by subterranean forces until it resurfaced in Erebor? We do not know where the ‘fiery chasm’ in which Maedhros found his death was; it could have been anywhere. It doesn’t matter though. The convection currents that constantly spin inside the mantle of the Earth can transport matter for thousands of miles, to be forced out in the eruptions of volcanoes.

Volcanoes, for example, like Erebor. The Lonely Mountain was certainly an extinct volcano; all alone in the plain, and with a distinct pointy summit. So the setting for a Silmaril re-surfacing is ideal. The gem found it’s way under Erebor as aforementioned. The next eruption saw it inside the mountain, and when the dwarves came they dug it up. Erebor was long dead by the time the dwarves arrived. (The eruption that carried the Arkenstone was probably the last, weak burst of activity from a volcano that had been ailing for some time.) The gem was even found exactly where it would be, had it been put there in an eruption – at the ‘heart of the mountain’, close to or inside the central lava pipe found in all volcanoes. So as you can see, the setting for a discovery of the Silmaril is near perfect. If the Arkenstone had been found, say, in earth in some shallow mine near Hobbiton, then that would have probably cut the debate off from the start. As it is I have laid out half of the supporting evidence already.

Now let’s look at the similarities between the two stones themselves. First the descriptions, which are amazingly similar…

This is the Silm’s description of the Silmarils:

‘Like the crystal of diamonds it appeared, and yet was more strong than adamant, so that no violence could mar or break it within the Kingdom of Arda. Yet that crystal was to the Silmarils but as is the body to the Children of Illuvítar: the house of its inner fire, that is within it and yet in all parts of it, and is its life. And the inner fire of Silmarils Fëanor made of the blended light of the Trees of Valinor, which lives in them yet, though the trees have long withered and shine no more. Therefore even in the darkness of the deepest treasury the Silmarils of their own radiance shone like the stars of Varda; and yet, as were they indeed living things, they rejoiced in light and received it and gave it back in hues more marvellous than before.’

And in The Hobbit, the Arkenstone:

‘It was the Arkenstone, the Heart of the Mountain. So Bilbo guessed from Thorin’s description; but indeed there could be no two such gems, even in so marvellous a hoard, even in all the world. Even as he climbed, the same white gleam had shone before him and drawn his feet towards it. Slowly it grew to a little globe of pallid light. Now, as he came near. It was tinged with a flickering sparkle of many colours at the surface, reflected and splintered from the wavering light of his torch. At last he looked down upon it, and he caught his breath. The great jewel shone before his feet of its own inner light, and yet, cut and fashioned by the dwarves, who had dug it up from the heart of the mountain long ago, it took all light that fell upon it and changed it into ten thousand sparks of white radiance shot with glints of the rainbow.’

No two such gems, even in all the world? Perhaps this was only Bilbo’s wonder at seeing it, but perhaps it really was true, that the Arkenstone was the most brilliant jewel on Earth. In which case, of course, it was a Silmaril. Both stones shine of their own inner radiance; both reflect light falling upon them, making it more brilliant than before; even in the darkness, they both gleamed. What gem, other than the Silmarils themselves, actually produced light of their own creation?

There are, however, two things in these passages which seem slightly contradictive to this. The material that the Silmarili were forged from – Silma – could not be scratched, marred or broken ‘by any violence within the Kingdom of Arda’. Yet it is said that the Arkenstone was ‘cut and fashioned by the dwarves’. Obviously, if it was a Silmaril, this would not be true. It can be argued that it isn’t. No-one actually knew (maybe some High Elves had suspicions but didn’t disclose them, Gandalf and Saruman may have known, but the general public didn’t) that the Arkenstone (if it was) was a Silmaril. It was simply dug up from the earth, impossible that it should have been cut and polished before the dwarves got to it. And that had happened so long ago, many lives of Men. The shrouding of time and myth, and the thinking of common sense, says that the dwarves were the ones who fashioned it; so that’s what was believed.

The only other point worth wrangling about here is the strength of the light each stone gave. One shone like ‘the stars of Varda’, the other was a ‘white gleam’, a ‘pallid globe’. An explanation can, though, be offered. The Arkenstone had been lying in the darkness of Smaug’s hoard for many, many lightless years; perhaps it was depressed. It’s energies would have been at a low ebb. While Feanor’s Silmarils were kept in a vault, I am sure he would have taken them out for an airing quite often, more than he let on about anyway, and at least a lot more than the Arkenstone was left in the hoard for. So they were joyous and kept shining like the stars, while the Arkenstone – not seeing much light in the Earth for all those millennia, then just sitting in the blackness of Smaug’s lair – shone with a lower wattage.

Another similarity between the Arkenstone and the Silmarili was that they both seemed to affect people, to take a hold on them. The Silmarils, in the First Age, had a great hold on various people around Beleriand – the Sons of Fëanor most notably –and were generally the cause of great chaos and conflict all throughout that Age.

The Arkenstone had the same property, but interestingly it was somewhat more focused. Focused largely on Thorin Oakenshield, but also, to a lesser extent, on Bilbo Baggins the Thief. Thorin was clearly extremely fond of the Arkenstone. When the dwarves reached the hoard of Smaug it was practically all he could think about, and when Bilbo gave it to the Lakemen, he was willing first to pay a very great sum of money for it, and then to fight a large (and likely disastrous) bloody battle over it. It’s hold on him, in fact, was so great that he was driven almost to killing his close companion Bilbo in pure revenge for its loss. Of course, thankfully, he did not in the end commit any great acts of rashness – he had sworn a powerful oath – but still, his good judgement and nature were severely clouded by his lust for the stone. This in turn had an effect on the other dwarves who had come on the expedition.

Bilbo also experienced the attraction of the Arkenstone, although to a far lesser extent. The fact that he was a hobbit probably helped in this. Apparently, he felt the real pull of the gem only on one occasion, related here:

‘Even as he climbed, the same white gleam had drawn his feet towards it… suddenly Bilbo’s arm went towards it, drawn by its enchantment…’

But even after that, he was still somehow reluctant to give it back to the dwarves.

So you see the Arkenstone did have an attraction for people, although, through the aforementioned ‘focused’ effect, not an incredibly great one except for those it was focused on (Thorin and his twelve dwarves). Bilbo submitted to his sense in the end, giving the stone up. When it came to Thorin’s burial, the dwarves were perfectly happy to throw it onto his coffin and cheerfully shovel several feet of rock on top of it. (In fact this carefree burial of the Arkenstone was, as I remember, the main ammunition for the ‘against’ side in the forum. Would they have done this if it was a Silmaril? Perhaps they would.

‘And thus it came to pass that the Silmarils each found their long homes; one in the airs of heaven, and one in the fires of the heart of the world, and one in the deep waters.’

And as Mandos had prophesied:

‘The fates of Arda, earth sea and air, lay locked within them.’

From these two passages we can see that Maedhros’s Silmaril was meant to stay in the Earth; it was its destiny. So it was, maybe, that the dwarves buried it. The period it spent in the air in the halls of the dwarves was but a respite. When it came to Thorin’s burial, the dwarves felt no pull to keep the Arkenstone and put it back into the Earth once more. That was, after all, where it belonged if it was a Silmaril. The dwarves were simply playing their part in the ‘fates of Arda’. This seems solid enough – it explains why the stone was attractive only to certain people, for a start; by being so, it’s fate was completed.

Admittedly, burial under just a few feet or so of rock doesn’t really come close to the ‘fires of the heart of the world’. This, I suppose, would be a bit of a flaw in the theory, but still it was not simply buried in the open ground. Thorin’s tomb was laid under a deep chamber in the roots of the Mountain – certainly more than just six feet under. Who knows? A small rockfall in that part of the tunnel, a geological shift, some slight volcanic activity; once again, the stone is inaccessibly buried. Rocks do move around over time, especially those under mountains.

And there is one more point worth discussing in these passages. In the second one, Mandos’ prophesy, given again for reference:

‘The fates of Arda, earth sea and air, lay locked within them.’

It is easy to miss, but there is a possible interpretation of this other than that readily apparent. It is in the wording. Mandos does not say that the fates of the Silmarils are locked within Arda – meaning simply that the gems themselves are destined to stay within the confines earth, sea and air, of Arda – but the other way around. The fates of Arda, in fact, are contained within the Silmarils.

Does this not mean that the Silmarili will each have a part to play, in the destiny of the world? One in air, one in the sea, one in earth? It is very possible that this is what Mandos actually meant. The Silmaril of air, for one, was certainly important in the fate of Arda. Were it not for Eärendil, and the Silmaril he bears in Vingilot in the heavens, the War of Wrath could not have been won; for the dragons of Morgoth would surely have vanquished Eönwe, if Vingilot had not appeared and overcome them at the last minute. Moreover it is largely Eärendil, wielding the light of his Silmaril, that guard against the return again of Melkor from the Timeless Void:

 ‘…and Eärendil keeps vigilance (against Morgoth’s return) upon the ramparts of heaven…’

The Silmaril that Maglor cast into the sea has not yet played it’s part (not that we know of, anyway). But if the Arkenstone was a Silmaril – the Silmaril of Earth – then it has, I think, performed it’s duty already. Clearly the Quest of Erebor and the after effects had gigantic consequences for Middle-Earth. The finding of the Ring, the reinstating of the King under the Mountain, the slaying of Smaug… how much of this was down to the Arkenstone’s pull on Thorin?

Probably not all that much. His desire to reclaim his old kingdom was probably fiercer because of it, to be sure, but still he would have most likely gone anyway. But what about the events that took place after Smaug’s death? The hostilities between Dwarves, Elves and Men, the Battle of Five Armies, the balance of power that took place between them – they were all tied up with the Arkenstone. Who knows? If the Arkenstone wasn’t present, perhaps the Battle of Five Armies would have been lost.

I wonder whether Tolkien deliberately made this connection between the Arkenstone and the lost Silmarili. Maybe he did; but then again, he may not have. The theory is tantalisingly possible though, regardless.

It is my hope, with this article, to have added a bit more depth to the issue than was there previously (a little one sided perhaps, but then that does happen to be my viewpoint), not to mention resurrecting it from a long-forgotten grave. I haven’t seen any more topics on this plane in the forum after that first one anyway (excuse me if there has been one, I’ve been away from the downs for quite some time…) and it is, in my opinion, a very interesting one. We will never know the answer, of course, but we may have an idea; from the information given us, I am inclined in this case to the affirmative.

=============

[ December 04, 2002: Message edited by: Gwaihir the Windlord ]

MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie

12-04-2002, 03:23 AM

Um....I can't see your quotes. Is it just me or is it like that for others too?

Sorry

Gwaihir the Windlord

12-04-2002, 03:32 AM

Sorry, I screwed up the HTML coding for the colour... try it now.

Sharkû

12-04-2002, 06:07 AM

77, almost verbatim from QS: "Yet their [i.e. Eönwë's and the host's] joy in victory was diminished, for they returned without the Silmarils and the light before the Sun and Moon, and they knew that those jewels could not be found or brought together again until the world was broken, and re-made anew."

[ December 04, 2002: Message edited by: Sharkû ]

Sauron999

12-04-2002, 06:09 AM

My dear Gwaihir!
You have given us quite something to think about, I guess. After reading your article, I think that you could be right, but I haven't even given a thought to this Arkenstone-Silmaril-thing before.
For my part, i guess that was just another hint of Tolkien that he put into the story to give people who read it for more than entertainment something to think about. Or maybe this similarity of the Arkenstone to the Silmaril was accidental, maybe he just thought about a really impressing crystal and described it after his style (which I have been admiring since I have read the LotR for the first time).
All in all this is a subject like "Is Bombadil a Maya?", or "Do Balrogs have wings?": You will never get a precise answer to those questions. But your attempt to give an answer to it was really great!

Bill Ferny

12-04-2002, 08:29 AM

Excellent article, Gwaihir. I’m inclined to agree with you, especially as I think the Arkenstone is not just a pretty jewel fashioned by dwarves. You handled the “cut and polished” by dwarves bit very well, as well as the problem of it being laid to rest with Thorin. However, Sharkû’s quotation is a major sticking point. It would be one thing if the Silm said “and”, but instead it says “found or brought.” I read this as the silmirili cannot be found at all unless the world be broken.

the mortal elf

12-04-2002, 10:38 AM

I read this as the silmirili cannot be found at all unless the world be broken.

Someone can probably prove me wrong here, but I'm going to try to say something intelligent anyway. Was the lonely mountain (as a volcano) created after the Silmarils were lost? Is it possible? If that's the case, doesn't a huge hunk of rock ripping up through the crust of the earth could as at least part of the world being broken? That way, the Arkenstone could be a Silmaril and the quote could still hold true.

I more than halfway believe that the Arkenstone is a Silmaril, but (I don't know if this is from the books or just my strange imaginings) I always imagined the Arkenstone to be rather large as compared to the Silmarils. Possibly the size of a Palantir? It's probably just the picture I made for myself before reading the description carefully, but it may have some relevence. I'll leave it to the experts, though. smilies/wink.gif

Curulin

12-04-2002, 02:11 PM

If it was prophisised in the silmarillion that the silmarils would not be found again until the earth was broken, does not the bending of the seas, numenor being sucked into a huge chasm and the removal of valinor from the "circles of the world" at the end of the second age count as the world being broken? in which case, by the time the dwarves came to find he arkenstone under erebor, the world would have long been "broken" since Maedros and his silmaril's fall into the deep places of the world? This would make it possible for the arkenstone to be a lost silmaril even following what was said in the silmarilion. Thats just my interpretation, please feel free to tell me im wrong.
Curulin.

Manwe Sulimo

12-04-2002, 03:01 PM

Excellent reasoning, the mortal elf and Curulin. The world was indeed broken, if that is the word, by the departure of Valinor and Elenna, as well as the sinking of Beleriand. Since the sketchy writings of the Dagor Dagoroth only include Eárendil's Silmaril, and the "flattening of the Pelóri", the reference to Aulë and the Dwarves rebuilding the world could just mean fixing, since it doesn't seem to have been too much destroyed. I, in any case, now believe that the Arkenstone was a Silmaril, even though I had never thought of the comparison before. Great essay, Gwaihir the Windlord!

Westerly Wizard

12-04-2002, 03:39 PM

The fact that the dwarves cut and refashioned the Arkenstone does more than conflict with the idea that it is a Silmaril. Something can't be the same if it lacks such a property of not being able to be cut or scratched. Furthermore, if the Arkenstone was a Silmaril, not even the dwarves would dare try to alter it (and they certainly couldn't better it), as it would already be the finest jewel in the world.

Keeper of Dol Guldur

12-04-2002, 04:21 PM

Westerly and all the rest who bring up the point of the "cutting," remember that it said that in Bilbo's tale, which can hardly be counted as 100% accuracy towards the history of Middle Earth. Remembering that the dwarves actually killed king Elu Thingol to get their hands on the Silmaril of Air, their lust for it in ages past could have indicated a basis for a lie, even if it was a completely different clan of dwarves and a completely different Silmaril and situation.

Oh, and those parts the Silmaril's were destined to help play out, well I think they were used to kill the Uruloki (actually the winged fire drakes, not just fire drakes). Earendil's quest killed Ancalagon and Bilbo's destroyed Smaug. Who knows? Maybe Melkor had intended to attack Ulmo's realm as well out of his hatred for the sea and inability to conquer it. Maybe that's where sea serpents came from. The Gargouille, the Gargent Serpent of european legend was powerful enough to compare with those two heavy hitters. But then, it wouldn't be a fire drake would it. Still, maybe in Middle Earth's oceans there were merfolk that had a struggle against some great serpent, and the Silmaril of Maeglin came into play. All just theoretical nonsense, but whatever.

Gwaihir the Windlord

12-05-2002, 02:05 AM

The cut and fashioned bit was discussed in my essay. That's my opinion on the explanation here.

Good points about the world being 'broken and remade anew', although I think that probably referred more to the time when the world will indeed be shattered by Morgoth, and remade again after his supposed defeat in the Last Battle. I remember a quote in the Sil that talks about the Dwarves having a legend that says they will assist Aule in building the world again after the Last Battle; don't have the book to hand, so I can't give you it exactly. You probably know what I'm talking about.

No; it's a good theory, but I don't think it fits. The Drowning of Beleriand happened right after the War of Wrath; why would Eonwe worry about not finding the Silmarils until after that, only a life of Men or less ahead? The removal of the Undying Lands from the physical world may constitue a breaking and renewing of the world, though. But I don't think Beleriand, internal Earthly turmoils or Numenor would mean much to that effect. Another explanation could also be that Eonwe was simply mistaken -- who said he was infallible?

Thanks for the comments on the essay, and Sharku for correcting my post. All I want is Ron in here so I can get the damn thing published on the main site...

Voronwe

12-05-2002, 04:37 AM

It is true, as Gwaihir says, that Sharku's quote refers to the breaking of the world after the Last Battle.

From the (somewhat notorious) Second Prophecy of Mandos in HoME V:

Thereafter shall Earth be broken and re-made, and the Silmarils shall be recovered out of Air and Earth and Sea; for Earendil shall descend and yield up the flame which he hath had in keeping.

While I would be extrememly hesitent to accept whole of the Second Prophecy as Canon, I think it at least makes it clear what Tolkien was refering to in the quote from the Silmarillion.

Arwen_Evenstar

12-05-2002, 05:37 AM

Oh.My.God. What an essay! Rock on Gwaihir!
Well this has probobly already been posted but: If in the First age, the dwarves slew Thingol out of Lust for a Silmaril, why would they now(not the same dwarves obviously, but still...) just throw it in ontop of Thorin and bury it?
I am a very ameture Tolkien-ologist so feel free to point out my mistakes, Its the only way Ill learn smilies/smile.gif
Thanks
*Arwen Evenstar*

Keneldil the Polka-dot

12-05-2002, 10:33 AM

Great idea Gwaihir. The way you get around the “cut and fashioned” part is interesting, and the theory put forward about “breaking of the world” is a good angle, even if I don’t necessarily agree. All very thought provoking. I like the whole arkenstone = silmaril idea a lot. I think it would be a neat added twist, but I lean toward thinking they are not the same jewel for reasons already given by others in this thread.

One other maybe minor point:

The Lonely Mountain was certainly an extinct volcano; all alone in the plain, and with a distinct pointy summit.

Now I’m not a geologist or anything, but I am under the impression that extinct volcanoes are not pointy. From Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

CALDERA: a volcanic crater that has a diameter many times that of the vent and is formed by collapse of the central part of a volcano or by explosions of extraordinary violence

Volcanoes that erupt violently don’t seem to be pointy. A volcano that erupted slowly would seem to have sloping sides. As the lava flowed slowly down the sides it would cool and layer up. And it would also have the crater in the top.

I guess this does not necessarily disprove that the dwarves may have mined and found a Silmaril, but it does seem to suggest Lonely Mountain is not an old volcano. I’m no volcano expert though.

Angry Hill Troll

12-05-2002, 11:54 AM

Interesting idea Gwaihir, you present a very convincing case!

I want to make a few observations on what has been said before in this thread...

1. When the Second Prophecy says that the Silmarils shall be recovered out of Air and Earth and Sea I don't think that necessarily means that they had to be lost before, certainly we know where Eärendil's is to be found. Alternately a Silmaril could be found for a time and then lost again, perhaps during the Last Battle itself.

2. Volcanoes typically have a central "plug" of lava which is much harder and more resistant to erosion than the surrounding rock. An active volcano has a crater in the center, but after it goes extinct and experiences some erosion, the plug (just below the crater) is exposed and gives the mountain a pointed top (for instance, Devil's Tower in Wyoming, USA).

3. Would Bilbo know a Silmaril if he saw one? At the time, no. In fact he probably didn't even know what a Silmaril was. Since The Hobbit is presented as having written by Bilbo, the statement of the dwarves having fashioned it does need to be taken with a grain of salt. Note, however, that the final editing of Bilbo's account happened when he was living in Rivendell, at the same time as he was translating The Silmarillion. Certainly by this point he did know about Silmarils... Maybe (assuming the Arkenstone was a Silmaril, it just never dawned on Bilbo. Or maybe it did, but having learned the lessons of the 1st Age in the course of doing his translation, he realized that telling the elves that a Silmaril was buried with Thorin would just compound the animosity between elves and dwarves. Maybe he did tell Gandalf, who just decided to keep it quiet until the Ringbearers crossed the sea.

A really bizarre possibility is that the deeper purpose behind Bilbo and Frodo's adventures was to inform the Valar of the location of one of the lost Silmarils...as opposed to the deeper purpose of Bilbo's journey being to find the One Ring.

Keneldil the Polka-dot

12-05-2002, 12:01 PM

but after it goes extinct and experiences some erosion, the plug (just below the crater) is exposed and gives the mountain a pointed top

Hmm... I didn't know that. Some erosion? Sounds like that much erosion would take a LONG time. Longer than from when Maedhros jumped in the fire to when the Lonely Mountain would have become a volcano and spewed up the Silmaril. Just how long would it be between those two events anyway, theoretically?

Tirinor

12-05-2002, 03:19 PM

As far as I know, volcanoes are not good for mining. Although useful for forging rings of power, a volcano does not yield any useful of precious rock but only cooled lava.
If this is true, it would be a poor place for dwarves to make their home. And since they did make their home there, it could be assumed that it is not an extinct volcano. Of course this all depends on how reliable my geological knowledge is. This doesn't nessessarily destroy the theory. Dwarves, as we all know, delve deep, and regardless of if the lonely mountain was a volcano or not, dwarves are capable of mining to a place where a silmaril could have ended up.

Also, I may be gramatically in error, but could "found or brought together" be logically divided into "found together or brought together"? if so, the prophesy does not pose an obstacle to the Arkenstone being a silmaril, since the arkenstone/silmaril was not together with any other silmaril.

-Imrahil-

12-05-2002, 06:43 PM

Impressive article Gwaihir the Windlord. It has definitely given us all something to think about. I happen to agree with you, after the evidence you have shown, and the guesses you have made. The reasoning is sound, the facts are there, but we will truly never know.

Great contribution to the board!

Gwaihir the Windlord

12-06-2002, 10:04 PM

Again, I thank you for your comments. It's very morale-boosting, especially just after my rather bad exam results...

Near where I live -- a couple of hours drive away or so -- there are a collection of small extinct volcanoes scattered over a plain. They are conical in shape, and are certainly pointy; their points are somewhat rounded, but pointy nonetheless. Now they are very old volcanoes, a lot older than Erebor would be, but still I think the Loneley Mountain was almost definetely a volcano. It was not surrounded by other moutains for a start, which points to this, and it is conical. Slow-erupting volcanoes don't have very big craters anyway, so it wouldn't have taken that long for the crater to erode away (especially after being blasted by Smaug).

*taps fingers impatiently* (Where has that Wight got to...)

The ideas people have posted in this thread are very good as well. They add a lot to the essay; thankyou for them.

Nuranar

12-06-2002, 11:10 PM

As far as I know, volcanoes are not good for mining...a volcano does not yield any useful of precious rock but only cooled lava.

Tirinor, I remember reading in one of my high school science books that diamonds are often found in "lava pipes." I just did a tad of research to make sure I had not been imagining things:

Diamonds were probably formed millions of years ago in molten lava. As the lava flowed to the Earth's surface through vents known as pipes, it cooled and solidified into kimberlite, a blue rock. Kimberlite contains the diamonds and is known to diamond miners as blue ground. ( source (http://www.xs4all.nl/~diamond/diaminfo.html))

A diagram of these formations is here (http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/diamonds/kimberlite.html).

This example is solely for diamonds and also concerns their theoretical origins. Nevertheless, I believe it indicates that it would be possible for the Silmaril to resurface in an eruption of Erebor.

Gwaihir, this is a fascinating subject! My compliments for an excellent discussion. Can you tell me where on earth you live? It's not everyone who has volcanoes for neighbors! smilies/biggrin.gif

[ December 07, 2002: Message edited by: Nuranar ]

Tirinor

12-07-2002, 01:15 AM

interesting note about the diamonds, Nuranar. Nevertheless, it would seem odd to me for dwarves to make such a significant dwelling in a place that would only produce diamonds. All other evidence for the Lonely mountain being a volcano is convincing, and the Silmaril theory is quite compelling, but the impracticality of a volcano for mining persuades me, at least, to believe that it was not one.

I like the idea that the Arkenstone may have been a silmaril, and regardless of whether the lonely mountain was a volcano or not, I think the case is strong. And, as I said earlier, unless someone can gramatically prove otherwise, I interpret the Silmaril prophesy to be directed mainly at the prospect of more than one Silmaril being in the same place at once - brought together, or found together.

Good thoughts, Gwaihir the Windlord. And thanks again for the geology lesson, Nuranar.

Manwe Sulimo

12-07-2002, 10:30 AM

Sounds like that much erosion would take a LONG time. Longer than from when Maedhros jumped in the fire to when the Lonely Mountain would have become a volcano and spewed up the Silmaril. Just how long would it be between those two events anyway, theoretically?

The time between the end of the First Age and the finding of the Arkenstone could not have been less than 5033 years (since the Kingdom-under-the-Mountain was founded in TA 1999). Volcanos have grown, erupted, and decayed in much less time than that. I remember (but don't have sources) learning about a volcano in Mexico that started in a corn field, erupted, and grew to some great height in about 50 years. Erebor going from active to extinct in 5000 isn't that dificult to concieve....but who says that the Silmaril was cast into Erebor itself? It might have floated around underground for a while, until it hit a vent and was spewed forth....

kharank

12-07-2002, 11:07 AM

Fantastic arguments have been put forward here. I never considered that the Arkenstone could be a Silmaril until now!
The sticking point for me though is that if Erebor is not a volcano, its more unlikely for the Silmaril to have resurfaced there. The Atlas of Middle-Earth tells us that the mountain had a wealth of gold and jewels, but makes no mention of volcanic activity.
Nevertheless, a great suggestion, definitely worth thinking about...

Tinuviel of Denton

04-26-2003, 05:55 PM

Here's my take on the "cut and fashioned" bit.
If the Silmaril had been floating around in magma for a long time, wouldn't it have become crusted with lava? Then the dwarves could have basically scraped it off. That could account for the cutting and fashioning could it not?

The Saucepan Man

04-26-2003, 06:36 PM

Great article from Gwaihir. Thank you, Tinuviel, for unearthing it (from the heart of the Downs, as it were smilies/wink.gif).

I would reallly like to believe that the Arkenstone was a Silmaril. It would be a great twist. But, despite Gwaihir's powerful arguments, I alas cannot.

First, a gut feeling. I just don't think that JRRT would allow one of the items central to the history of ME to end up in Thorin's grave. It just doesn't strike me as an appropriate resting place for a Silmaril.

Secondly, whatever might be said about There and Back Again having been written by Bilbo, JRRT, the real author of the book as opposed to the fictional Bilbo, tells us that the Arkenstone was cut and fashioned by Dwarves. This being a statement in one of the published works, it surely counts as canon. And, if so, how can it be said that the Arkenstone was a Silmaril?

Feanor of the Peredhil

04-26-2003, 07:55 PM

I rather like this thread, it has a lot of good points, but some are a little incomplete, off, or confusing:

"I just don't think that JRRT would allow one of the items central to the history of ME to end up in Thorin's grave."

Why not, Saucepan Man? He allowed the One Ring into the hands of a boring little Hobbit, why wouldn't he allow a different 'central item' into the hands of a Dwarven lord?

"Nevertheless, it would seem odd to me for dwarves to make such a significant dwelling in a place that would only produce diamonds."

Volcanic eruptions yield not only diamonds, but also peridot, and if my memory serves me, rubies and other such gems.

"If the Silmaril had been floating around in magma for a long time, wouldn't it have become crusted with lava? Then the dwarves could have basically scraped it off. That could account for the cutting and fashioning could it not?"

No. It's so hot 'floating around in magma' that it would impossible for it to cool long enough for a crust to form. And, although scraping of lava could account for cutting and fashioning alone, technically they wouldn't be fashioning the stone itself.

These points argue both for and against the Silmaril theory, but my question is, if the Arkenstone is NOT a Silmaril, then what type of stone could it be made of? A moonstone perhaps, since they are said to glow as does the moon, hence the name? An actual many faceted diamond (and that brings my question 'how did Dwarves cut diamonds?' into play), perhaps?

A very interesting thread. My regards, Gwaihir.

Vanimeldë_Lalaith

04-26-2003, 09:14 PM

Impressive article. smilies/smile.gif Personally, I think that the Arkenstone isn't a Silmaril. I mean (I think someone already brought this up...) if the Dwarves in the First Age lusted for the Silmaril so much that they killed Thingol in his own halls, why would the Dwarves in the Third Age just plop it in the garve of their lord? OK, I know that Tolkien never really said that the Dwarves killed Thingol in Menegrtoh (it was his son), but still.

As to what it could be: I really don't know the history of Erebor well enough to prove this, but could it have been another jewel made by another Elf that had been lost? If I remember right, the Elessar (made either by Celebrimor (sp?) of Eregion or Enerdhil (sp?) of Gondolin) shone somewhat with it's own light...

The Saucepan Man

04-26-2003, 09:29 PM

Why not, Saucepan Man? He allowed the One Ring into the hands of a boring little Hobbit, why wouldn't he allow a different 'central item' into the hands of a Dwarven lord?

As I said, just gut instinct. It doesn't feel right to me. As for the Ring, it did not remain with Bilbo and, I think, most certainly did have a fitting end. smilies/wink.gif

Sophia the Thunder Mistress

04-26-2003, 10:23 PM

A really bizarre possibility is that the deeper purpose behind Bilbo and Frodo's adventures was to inform the Valar of the location of one of the lost Silmarils...as opposed to the deeper purpose of Bilbo's journey being to find the One Ring.

I love this thought!

I don't necessarily agree with it though. I just really like the flip of our whole perspective around when you say, 'oops! we're not even thinking of the right powerful object in all this!' It is bizarre, and fascinating.

The only major objection I have to the idea of the Arkenstone's being a resurfaced Silmaril is the idea of distance. Maedhros seems to have waited a relatively short time to chuck himself in a canyon (half the time Maglor did, perchance? he only had half as many hands to burn...) it's a long way for a rock to move under the earth from Beleriand to Erebor.

But I don't know... I've thought a lot about what would happen if Maglor's Silmaril washed up on a beach somewhere, or if Maglor himself showed up (his death isn't recorded). It deserves more thought. As Saucepan Man says though, it just doesn't feel canonical to me.

Sophia

the phantom

04-27-2003, 05:24 PM

A really bizarre possibility is that the deeper purpose behind Bilbo and Frodo's adventures was to inform the Valar of the location of one of the lost Silmarils...as opposed to the deeper purpose of Bilbo's journey being to find the One Ring.
I love this thought!
Me too. smilies/smile.gif

On the subject of volcanoes, yes they are very often broad and rounded, but they certainly don't have to be. Mt Rainier is volcanic, and it's pretty sharp looking.

Also, though I can't remember for sure, I seem to recall from one of my geology classes, as stated by Feanor of the Peredhil, that eruptions can indeed yield other sorts of jewels besides diamonds.

As far as the dwarves cutting and fashioning it, I'm totally with you on that Gwaihir. That statement just doesn't hold any water, so we can entirely discount that in this debate.

Someone mentioned earlier a size discrepancy. I, too, always thought that the arkenstone was larger. Anyone want to shed any light on that question? Maybe find places where someone is holding the jewel and see how large it sounds.

So far, I can't see anything that would conflict with this theory. I don't believe it myself, but I'd be willing to let others believe it unless the theory is soundly refuted.

("or if Maglor himself showed up (his death isn't recorded"
I've considered that too. I've always thought it would be neat if he came out of nowhere leading an army and helped fight Sauron. That would be cool. smilies/smile.gif )

Sophia the Thunder Mistress

04-27-2003, 05:33 PM

This is one thing I thought of that speaks against Arkenstone=Silmaril. The hallowing of Varda:

And Varda hallowed the Silmarils, so that thereafter no mortal flesh, nor hands unclean, nor anything of evil might touch them, but it was scorched and withered; and Mandos foretold that the fates of Arda, earth, sea, and air, lay locked within them. Now in Beren and Luthien's tale, it is specifically said that the Silmaril didn't burn him: As he closed it in his hand, the radience welled through his living flesh, and his hand became as a shining lamp; but the jewel suffered his touch and hurt him not. Nowhere in the Hobbit is it mentioned that the Arkenstone was hot, that it burned any of the Mortals who touched it (Bilbo, Thorin, the dwarves who buried Thorin). If it was a Silmaril it surely would have burned, wouldn't it? Something like a hallowing by Varda doesn't wear off.

Sophia

Voralphion

04-27-2003, 08:23 PM

A very interesting discussion. If it were a silmaril, surely Gandalf would have recognised it as one and quite possibly the elves of Mirkwood, if they did they would never allow a dwarf to have a silmaril. Also because of the great possessive nature of the holders of the silmarils when Bilbo gave the arkenstone to the men of laketown they would have not returned it to the dwarves nor should they have been able to touch it because of the hallowing be Varda.
I too also considered the arkenstone to be much larger than a silmaril, by the way does it ever say how large a silmaril actually is?

The Saucepan Man

04-27-2003, 08:46 PM

As far as the dwarves cutting and fashioning it, I'm totally with you on that Gwaihir. That statement just doesn't hold any water, so we can entirely discount that in this debate.

Why? JRRT tells us that the Arkenstone was cut and fashioned by the Dwarves, so why should it not be true? Or are we free to disregard anything written in the Hobbit that tells of things that happened long in the past but cannot be sustantiated by a character with first hand knowledge or corroborated by evidence elsewhere in JRRT's writings?

Sophia the Thunder Mistress

04-27-2003, 09:28 PM

I someone was to make the 'cut and fashioned' argument (which I think is a legitimate one) I'd say that one could say (contrary to the opinion that someone had previously expressed) that the cutting and fashioning could be the scraping off of accumulated gunk from the surface of the gem. Even though while the Silmaril floated around in the lava it wouldn't accumulate crud, it would certainly harden on as the lava cooled, would it not? You can't argue that the dwaves pulled it out of the still hot lava...

But as to why someone would dismiss that statement without even thinking about the crusting rates of lava, Saucepan Man, I don't know... smilies/smile.gif

Is there somewhere in the Hobbit where it says expressly how big the Arkenstone was?

Sophia

the phantom

04-27-2003, 11:01 PM

Or are we free to disregard anything written in the Hobbit that tells of things that happened long in the past but cannot be sustantiated by a character with first hand knowledge or corroborated by evidence elsewhere in JRRT's writings?
Sounds good to me. smilies/smile.gif

Well, actually, I suppose I wouldn't agree with that every time, but in this case, yes. I thought Gwaihir did an excellent job in his first post addressing this issue.
And that had happened so long ago, many lives of Men. The shrouding of time and myth, and the thinking of common sense, says that the dwarves were the ones who fashioned it; so that’s what was believed.
I, too, don't believe that the text about the arkenstone's creation can be taken as concrete, which means it can't be used to refute or support an arguement. It would merely be speculation (which much of this theory is, of course).

So I figure, let's just toss it out and focus on other aspects of the debate, to see if we can hit on some concrete evidence (which is why I suggested, in my last post, looking for the sizes of the jewels).

MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie

04-28-2003, 12:11 AM

Well, JRRT came out with The Hobbit before the Silmarillion. So, the arkenstone was, in reality, created (by JRRT) before the silmarils were. If JRRT wanted to have the arkenstone be a silmaril, then he would not have made the point that the silmarils could not be fasioned or cut, as the arkenstone was.

And I agree with The Saucepan Man in regards to taking the Hobbit serious in it's text. it was written by JRRT, so why should we disregard it? If anything, we should disregard text from the Silmarillion, since although JRRT did write it, Christopher Tolkien edited it.

The Saucepan Man

04-28-2003, 06:22 AM

So I figure, let's just toss it out and focus on other aspects of the debate

Woah! Hang on a moment. Sorry to bang on about this, but I think that it is pretty vital to the question of interpreting JRRT’s works.

JRRT, in describing the Arkenstone, tells us that it was cut and fashioned by Dwarves. This is not another character relating to Bilbo the history of the Stone. Nor is it a product of any assumption made by Bilbo. It is JRRT’s description, plain and simple. On that basis, can it really be legitimate to dismiss this description as one which cannot be regarded as accurate because the truth or otherwise of it is lost in the mists of time? Phantom, you rely on the explanation originally given by Gwaihir:

And that had happened so long ago, many lives of Men. The shrouding of time and myth, and the thinking of common sense, says that the dwarves were the ones who fashioned it; so that’s what was believed.

Surely this is something that can be said about many of the events described by JRRT in his writings. If we can say in this case: “Well this is just an old myth and not necessarily true”, why can we not apply the same reasoning in other cases? Why should it be restricted just to the Hobbit? Why should we not be free to apply it to LotR too? And the Silmarillion ...

It just seems to me that, if one were free to dismiss a description of an item given by JRRT in one of his published works on this basis, then one would be free to dismiss a good many other things in the published works besides. And there is no knowing where that might end.

I, too, don't believe that the text about the arkenstone's creation can be taken as concrete, which means it can't be used to refute or support an arguement. It would merely be speculation (which much of this theory is, of course).

I am not sure how it can be regarded as speculative relying on a statement that is there in one of JRRT's published works. Personally, if JRRT tells us that the Arkenstone was cut and fashioned by Dwarves, then I am willing to believe that it was cut and fashioned by Dwarves and not created by Feanor.

Btw, Sophia, I would think that cutting and fashioning a Gemstone would involve more than simply cleaning the detritus off it. It suggests influencing the shape and characteristics of the Stone itself.

the phantom

04-28-2003, 09:42 AM

it was written by JRRT, so why should we disregard it?
If anything, we should disregard text from the Silmarillion, since although JRRT did write it, Christopher Tolkien edited it.
Surely this is something that can be said about many of the events described by JRRT in his writings. If we can say in this case: “Well this is just an old myth and not necessarily true”, why can we not apply the same reasoning in other cases? Why should it be restricted just to the Hobbit? Why should we not be free to apply it to LotR too? And the Silmarillion ...
I am not sure how it can be regarded as speculative relying on a statement that is there in one of JRRT's published works.
Hmm...I believe I'm hearing the footsteps of a problem that has stalked hundreds, no thousands, or maybe millions of Tolkien debates.

The age old questions "What is real?", "What is literal?", "What was the final version?", "What were his final ideas?", and so on. I'd rather not open up that can of worms in yet another thread, which is why I suggest sticking to things less open for interpretation.

I'll refer back to a point made by The Saucepan Man..
Or are we free to disregard anything written in the Hobbit that tells of things that happened long in the past but cannot be sustantiated by a character with first hand knowledge or corroborated by evidence elsewhere in JRRT's writings?
Well, that sort of describes the way I view things. Not that I completely disregard statements like that, in fact I usually accept them, but I do not accept them unconditionally. I prefer to say "I believe JRRT's statement, but I suppose by a great stretch of the imagination it might perhaps, maybe, just possibly not be 100% concrete, so I'll let other people believe differently".

Remember, I said earlier that I didn't (and still don't, and probably never will) believe the arkenstone was a Silmaril, but I'm willing to let others believe it. I like things to be left open to people's imagination. It's more fun that way. Look at how much fun we're having with this topic. smilies/smile.gif

drigel

04-28-2003, 11:44 AM

I agree with Saucepans well written arguments. It's a nice speculation but not quite at the level of "balrog's wings" ..
I think there is a better chance of the other silmarill sitting on Ulmo's lap than the Arkenstone being a slimarill..

The Squatter of Amon Rûdh

04-28-2003, 01:35 PM

If the Silmaril had been floating around in magma for a long time, wouldn't it have become crusted with lava? Then the dwarves could have basically scraped it off.

the cutting and fashioning could be the scraping off of accumulated gunk from the surface of the gem.

I think this idea can be discounted with relative ease. 'Cutting' is the process of chipping away pieces of a raw gemstone once it has been freed of the rock in which it has been found, and were this not enough Tolkien adds 'and fashioned': the Arkenstone had been cut and polished just as any stone must be if it is to achieve the visual effect that the gem has on Bilbo. Both the author of the work and the Dwarves who found the Arkenstone would have been well aware of that fact, but even if the phrase "cut and fashioned" was intended to mean "cleaned of enclosing material" one would expect there to be some memory of this: finding a ready-cut gemstone in a natural seam would be like digging out a complete candelabrum from a vein of silver. There is simply no such thing as a naturally-occurring cut stone, and to find one would be so great a marvel that it would be remembered in legend for centuries, even millennia. This is why it is a stumbling block to the Arkenstone being a Silmaril.

Another block in my opinion is the absence of any evidence that Tolkien intended this. The recovery of one of the Silmarils by the Dwarves appears to run counter to all his predictions about them, and one would expect there to be some mention of so major a divergence somewhere in The History of Middle-Earth or his letters explaining it or at least indicating that he was considering making the connection. I just don't see the similarity between the Arkenstone and the Silmarils as a particularly compelling piece of evidence: Silma is also (according to the Silmarillion) "Like the crystal of diamonds", and I think we're all agreed that a diamond is not a Silmaril. Perhaps the Arkenstone is a diamond.

As for the longing of Thorin and his folk, and the great avarice pertaining to the Arkenstone, why need we look any further than the fact that it was a huge gem, cut by a master craftsman? Imagine the Second Star of Africa from the Imperial State Crown, only twice the size and up for grabs and you can probably imagine the severity of the "dragon sickness" it could cause. If it were part of an ownerless hoard that made a combination of Sutton Hoo, the Mildenhall Treasure and the Crown Jewels look like the contents of a second-rate pawn shop it becomes a lot easier to appreciate how battles might be fought over it. They have certainly been fought over less.

I'm not about to discount the parallels between the Arkenstone and the Silmarils, though. Thorin almost echoes the Oath of Fëanor when he says in Chapter XVI ...I will be avenged on anyone who finds it and withholds it.
To me, though, this is not an indication that the Arkenstone of Thráin is a Silmaril, but evidence that Tolkien had the great Fëanorian jewels very much in his mind when writing The Hobbit. The 1930s were a time during which he was writing the Lay of Leithian and revising the extant Silmarillion with a view to publication, so it seems to me not at all surprising that he should include a great gem that causes strife. In any case the divisive effects of great wealth was a matter close to Tolkien's heart, as we can see from its frequent embodiments, and indeed from this passage:
...he did not reckon on the power that gold has upon which a dragon has long brooded, nor with Dwarvish hearts. Long hours in the past days Thorin had spent in the treasury, and the lust of it was heavy on him. Though he had hunted chiefly for the Arkenstone, yet he had an eye for many another wonderful thing that was lying there, about which were wound old memories of the labours and the sorrows of his race.

The Battle of the Five Armies arises from the regrettable fact that rather too many people have a claim on the treasure, not least the men of Dale, who have killed the dragon, and whose stolen goods are intermingled with the treasure of Erebor. Only to the Dwarves is the Arkenstone a great temptation, and that because it is an heirloom of Thorin's house that has become a symbol of the Kingdom Under the Mountain. For me, though, the Heart of the Mountain is no more a Silmaril than Thorin is Maglor.

[ April 28, 2003: Message edited by: The Squatter of Amon Rûdh ]

*Varda*

04-28-2003, 02:14 PM

I couldn't find many references to the size of the Arkenstone, but it did manage to fit in Bilbo's deepest pockets. Also, it is said that

His small hand would not close about it

This makes the Arkenstone seem quite big, in terms of jewels, even if hobbit hands are quite small.

Considering that the Silmaril could be set in the Nauglamir, it sounds as though the Arkenstone was probably larger. I don't see a stone in a necklace being of such a size that a hand couldn't close around it.

Sophia the Thunder Mistress

04-28-2003, 03:45 PM

smilies/wink.gif Well, it's smaller than a basketball then (which is about the sized I'd pictured it the first time I read the Hobbit).

I'd actually always pictured the Silmarils as looking horrid in the Nauglamir, because they have always appeared in my mind about the size of tennis balls. A bit gaudy for a necklace in my opinion.

But with the idea of tennis ball sized Silmarils, a tennis ball sized Arkenstone seems ok too.

Disclaimer: I'm interested in the idea, but very highly doubtful smilies/wink.gif

Sophia

lindil

04-28-2003, 03:53 PM

Saucepan wrote: Well, JRRT came out with The Hobbit before the Silmarillion. So, the arkenstone was, in reality, created (by JRRT) before the silmarils were. If JRRT wanted to have the arkenstone be a silmaril, then he would not have made the point that the silmarils could not be fasioned or cut, as the arkenstone was.

Even though the Hobbit was published after the Silmarillion, the silmarilli had already been written about in detail and in synopsis long before.

My own take on it is that Tolkien sub-conciously felt the Lost Tales/Silmarillion to be 'buried' and the Arkenstone was something of a sub-concious symbol of the whole earlier work, coming to the 'surface'.

The Saucepan Man

04-28-2003, 03:57 PM

The age old questions "What is real?", "What is literal?", "What was the final version?", "What were his final ideas?", and so on. I'd rather not open up that can of worms in yet another thread, which is why I suggest sticking to things less open for interpretation.

I can understand there being debate when talking about JRRT's unpublished and/or incomplete works or where there is ambiguity in the published works (for example, concerning Balrog's wings). But my understanding is that anything stated in the published works completed by JRRT, even the Hobbit, may be taken as canon.

And, if I am wrong on that, I still prefer to rely on what JRRT did write, rather than what he didn't. smilies/wink.gif

Excellent post, as always, Squatter. I find myself in complete agreement with everything that you have said. smilies/smile.gif

Edit: Just so there is no misunderstanding, it was MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie that wrote that, lindil. smilies/smile.gif I was aware JRRT had written many elements of the Silmarillion prior to conceiving the Hobbit.

[ April 28, 2003: Message edited by: The Saucepan Man ]

Findegil

08-16-2007, 03:15 AM

I unbury this very old discussion because I think "Return to Bag-End" can give some more fuel for this discussion. The editor John D. Rateliff brings up strong linguistical connections and points out that the importance of the Silmarils was much less developed in the earlier phases of Tolkiens work on the legends of the First Age. Also he makes a strong point that up to that time the fate of the Silmarils was often changed.

What he does not address are the contrary arguments. Therefore that seems to be or task.

Three arguments I will address in one stroke
- The dwarves are recorded to cut and fashion the Arkenstone
- The Arkenstone seems to be greater the the Silmaril
- The Silmaril are much brighter then the Arkenstone

Considering that we already discussed the ability of volcanoes to create gemstones, I would say that an indestructible crystal (like a Silmaril) flouting in the magma would be a perfect core of crystallisation for such gemstones (equally if we are here speaking of crystallization out the fluid or recrystallisation of already solidified material). If that is accepted, I would imagine the dwarves to find a big but “normal” gemstone in which the Silmaril was embedded. As such they had to cut and fashion it like any other gemstone to get nice a looking crystal out of it. Since it is one of the goals of jewel smiths get a big gem, the dwarves did not totally remove the crust of normal gemstone completely.
Thus the Arkenstone was cut and fashioned by the dwarves, it was larger and since the crust did blur the pure light of the Silmaril it gave much less bright light.

Respectfully
Findegil

Lindale

11-17-2007, 10:50 AM

Nice arguments everyone, for those pros and cons the silmaril-being-the-arkenstone. Although little Lindale's opinion is this:

‘And they knew that those jewels could not be found and brought together again, unless the world be broken and remade.’

Logically, an argument with an AND has to have all its premises true to make it valid. So... the Arkenstone can't be a Silmaril, it just isn't valid at least logically. Even if we take the argument that the world has been remade by the fall of Numenor.

I don't know how to put links, but you can Google it: pictures of our very own Mayon Volcano, a perfect cone. Unless I am heavily mistaken it is on the plains of Bicol region. So I can't think it's valid to assume that the Lonely mountain is an inactive volcano. Then again, how many volcanoes are there in Middle Earth? Mount Doom, if you will the Lonely Mountain, and what else? I've read somewhere back in high school earth science that if the earth had no volcanoes, then random parts of the land would have lava gushing upwards (I can't find the right words, but I hope you get it.)

And this. At some point in the past, the lonely mountain, if it is truly a volcano, should have erupted at least once in over five thousand years. After the fall of Beleriand Elves have lived in Rivendell, Lorien, Mirkwood, and Eriador, not to mention the mortals in Dale and the ancestors of the Rohirrim--do they not have any records of any eruptions, anyone noticing that smoke and lava running down the slopes? But if it isn't a volcano, then how did the Arkenstone come from the Lonely Mountain? Unless it was an extraterrestrial diamond (though it is unlikely): a meteor or an asteroid, one of Varda's stars (because where would it have come from anyway, but whether it is Varda's star or not is quite irrelevant), falls (remember that Eol got his black metal, what's it called again, from a meteorite) and thus delivers a carbonado kind of diamond.

So there. I might be really wrong about this, but... I disagree with the Lonely Mountain being a volcano and the Arkenstone being a Silmaril. Oh well. A fun thread!

Aiwendil

11-17-2007, 12:00 PM

Logically, an argument with an AND has to have all its premises true to make it valid. So... the Arkenstone can't be a Silmaril, it just isn't valid at least logically. Even if we take the argument that the world has been remade by the fall of Numenor.

I don't quite follow you. Forgive the completely irrelevant foray into logic, but meseems that this quote:

‘And they knew that those jewels could not be found and brought together again, unless the world be broken and remade.’

. . . would be parsed thus in sentential logic:

~(Br & R) -> ~(F & BT)

. . . where 'Br' is 'The world is broken', 'R' is 'The world is remade', 'F' is 'The Silmarils are found', and 'BT' is 'The Silmarils are brought together again'. Strictly speaking, the statement allows the Silmarils to be found (even if the world is not broken and remade) as long as they are not brought together again. And if the world was indeed 'broken and remade' then nothing whatsoever is ruled out.

Of course, that kind of literal-minded reading is rather out of place here.

Anyway, I still haven't finished Return to Bag-End, but I look forward to what Rateliff has to say about the Arkenstone.

Lindale

11-22-2007, 12:57 PM

Touche, Aiwendil, about the lgic thingy. I'l have to review it again!!

Palrun-Enda

03-05-2009, 01:27 AM

I have to agree with Findegil here. When I first read the Hobbit, after the Silmarilion, The fact that the Arkenstone had its own light made this idea occure to me.

We know that the elves were able to essentially mass produce gems in Valanor. Baring the constant assistance of a Valar or Maya, they had to have been able to produce the heat and pressure necessary to create these stones.

If they could do this in their forges, I don't see how the heat of the fires of the worlds heart and the pressure from thousands of tons of rock couldn't do the same.

I recall a passage in the Silmarilion where it talks about the steps in the creation of diamond which I recall had opal and pearl as intermediate steps. Also, in the description of the creation of the silmarils there was a comment about how the other gems of the elves had no inner light.

These two fact, to me, point to the Arkenstone being a silmaril. I disagree that the long darkness was the cause of its dimness. All three silmarils were in Angband in an essentially light less state for centuries. Instead, I belive this is further evidence for the Arkenstone as the silmaril of Earth.

If the silmaril was in the molten heart of the earth, a layer of lesser gems could have accumulated on it. This substance would be softer then the silmaril (although everything is softer then the silmarils) and would have been a less perfect transmitter of light to and from the gem.

The other substance might also explain the lack of lusting after the gem. As elves and men were not effected everywhere in Arda by the silmarils so there must have been a factor of distance. Also when in the bowels of Carcharoth the hunters did not lust after the gem. This points to other material insulating the children against the desire to possess the silmarils.

I do wonder though why Ulmo or Osse have not gotten the other one. I mean they have free reign of the ocean and the thing is impossibly valuable and extraordinarily beautiful. It seems like lazyness that they haven't recovered that one.

Or perhaps they have and Tolkien didn't relate it. Or perhaps the Valar have some knowledge we were not given.

Just my ideas.

Trumpkin Mahalul

10-27-2009, 06:29 PM

The following essay was composed four years ago or so, originally for the LotRPlaza boards. It is written as addressed to Dwarves living late in the Fourth Age or after:

What do we know about the Heart of the Mountain, gentle-dwarves and ladies of the Khudzul? It was found by the children of Durin beneath the Lonely Mountain, and it shown with its own inner light, as even the hobbits attest in the Red Book of Westmarch (p. 201). It was cut and fashioned by Dwarven hands after it was dug from the mountain, but the internal fire was native to its crystal. It is said that when Thorin II, Oakenshield returned to the Mountain, (he with whom the stone was buried at last), the only light visible in the great hall of the dwarves when the dragon had fled was from the Arkenstone. The Hobbits’ records also relate that it took all light that fell upon it and changed it into ten thousand sparks of white radiance shot with glints of the rainbow—the sort of flowery writing a Hobbit would use, of course, but not inaccurate. The Hobbit was by his own account drawn by its enchantment. Baggins also states that there could not be two such gems, … in all the world. More on this later.
When King Thranduril of the Elves of Mirkwood gazed upon the Arkenstone it is said that he stood up in amazement, although in his long reign his eyes were used to things of wonder and beauty. This qualifies the Arkenstone as a very wondrous jewel indeed. What kind of a stone must it be to raise an Elf-king, even a lord of the Green Elves and not of the great Eldar, to his feet by the unveiling thereof. This response has been seen before.
Among the Sindar of Beleriand there was held for a time another jewel so beautiful. It is said that it was brought to Thingol of Doriath out of the Iron Crown by the work of Beren Ermabwed, at the cost of his hand and of his life. Beren brought it as dowry for the hand of Luthien Tinuviel whose lay the Elves so often sing, and the tales of the First Age and the Lost Tales of the Elves say much more on these things. Later it passed into the possession of the Dwarves of Nargothrond for the making of the unhallowed Nauglamír or Nauglafring from the gold of Mím, chief among the Noegyth Nibin who cursed his hoard at his death. More tales surround that one gem than all others, and even now its radiance can be seen as Eärendil shines in Kheled-zâram at our eastern gate.
In the records of the Eldar’s Elder Days, it is said that the Three Stones of Fëanor even in the darkness … of their own radiance shown like the stars. But at the same time, they rejoiced in light and received it and gave it back in hues more marvelous than before. It is also said of their substance that like the crystal of diamonds it appeared, and yet was more strong than adamant, so that no violence could mar or break it within … Arda, that is, within this world beneath the heavens. Also is it recorded among the Lost Tales (at The Coming of the Elves) that when that jewel-smith of Kôr made the first of the Silmarilli, that it shown with its own wizardous radiance in the uttermost dark; and he set it therein and sat a very long while and gazed at its beauty. Men and Elves, a Vala and Maiar, have in turns beheld and desired these most beautiful of jewels. Even our own fathers from Tumunzahar (named Nogrod by the Elves of Doriath) coveted the one they set in Dwarven (though long before, Elvish) gold. But from the days when the Silmarilli were lost at the breaking of the world, no other gem has burned thus with its own fire, and none has forced an Elf-lord to his feet, but the Arkenstone of Thrain.
But the Arkenstone was cut and fashioned by the dwarves, according to Baggins’ record, who had dug it from the heart of the mountain. Thus it is apparently not a Silmaril, as these were unbreakable and, by extension, uncuttable. But look at this: among the Lost Tales it is told that the body of a Silmaril was of such perfect glass as [Fëanor] alone could make to contain the light of the Trees of Valinor. Thus the crystal is of a perfect and hardened glass, unmarred by the violence of this world. But how do we re-temper steel, but with fire? And what does our weak and ordinary glass do when fire consumes the room? It melts. The longer the glass is immured within the fire, the softer it becomes, the more of its shape is lost. Even the perfect glass of Fëanor may be weakened by fire, given enough heat, and enough time. It is told in the last chapter of the Records of the Elder Days that after the battle that overthrew the Enemy in Thangorodrim, the two sons of Fëanor who yet lived sought to steal the last of the Silmarilli from the camp of the Valar, but their claim upon them was lost, and the hand of Maedhros who incited the theft was burned by the one he took for himself, as was his brother’s hand who cast the third Silmaril into the sea at last. But of Maedhros is written that, being in anguish and despair he cast himself into a gaping chasm filled with fire, and so ended; and the Silmaril that he bore was taken into the bosom of the earth. Thus we are given a Silmaril dropt into fire beyond that of any dragon, or of ANY forge of Elves or Dwarves. The fire within assuredly protected it in part form the fire without, but not utterly to my mind. The crystal was changed, and the stains of evil hands were burned away. There were from the fall of the Hells of Iron to the founding of the Kingdom of Erebor more than an Age—to be precise, the Second Age. It was thirty-four hundred years, and twoscore and one, from the loss of the Stones of Fëanor to the war of the Last Alliance that ended the Second Age. Thereafter were a score of centuries, less one year, before Thrain I was crowned first as King Under-the-Mountain, and it was in his days that the Arkenstone was found. In sum it is fifty-four centuries and twoscore years from the loss of Maedhros in the fire to the finding of the Arkenstone of Thrain, and while there is no record of where Maedhros fell, all Khazad know of the treasure of Erebor and where, in Thorin’s Tomb, may still be found the Heart of the Mountain. Let no one desecrate the King’s tomb for even such a stone!
Yet I propose that even so, the Arkenstone that lies on Thorin’s breast beneath the Mountain is older than the mountain itself. Fifty-four hundred and forty years may have demeaned its perfect tempering, that the Dwarves who found it in latter years might cut it to their own hearts’ vision, but the fire in its heart was still that true fire from beyond the world: mayhap when the Western Lands were lost and Elvenhome was sundered from the mortal shores, (and from all mortal ships save one, and that Eriol’s), the Silmaril itself upthrust in the place where it had fallen—or the place to which the streams of the earth had carried it—and as the Meneltarma of the Númenoreans sank below the sea, the Lonely Mountain of the Dwarves rose up where Maedhros fell, and at its heart the Arkenstone shone in the darkness, the Silmaril of the Khazad.
— Trumpkin Mahalul

[References as follows:
Tolkien, J. R. R. The Hobbit or, There and Back Again. Houghton Mifflin: Boston. (1966. etc.) Not at Home; A Thief in the Night.
----- The Fellowship of the Ring. Houghton Mifflin: Boston. (1954, etc.) Prologue I: Concerning Hobbits.
----- The Return of the King. Houghton Mifflin: Boston. (1955 etc.) Appendix A, III: Durin’s Folk; Appendix B: The Tale of Years (Chronology of the Westlands).
----- The Silmarillion. Christopher Tolkien, ed. Del Rey / Ballantine: New York. (1977 etc.) Of the Silmarils and the Unrest of the Noldor; Of Beren and Lúthien; Of the Ruin of Doriath; of the Voyage of Eärendil and the War of Wrath; Akallabéth.
----- The Book of Lost Tales I. Christopher Tolkien, ed. Houghton Mifflin: New York. (1983 etc.) The Coming of the Elves and the Making of Kôr; Gilfanon’s Tale: The Travail of the Noldoli and the Coming of Mankind.
----- The Book of Lost Tales II. Christopher Tolkien, ed. Del Rey / Ballantine: New York. (1984 etc.) The Tale of Tinúviel; The Nauglafring; The History of Eriol or Ælfwine and the End of the Tales.
----- The Lays of Beleriand. Christopher Tolkien, ed. Del Rey / Ballantine: New York. (1985 etc.) The Lay of Leithian.

Inziladun

10-27-2009, 07:10 PM

Interesting essay.
I've never bought the idea of the Arkenstone being a Silmaril. Most of the reasons why not can be read here.
Also, wasn't Thranduil a Sindarin Elf, probably from Doriath? It is said in UT that he fashioned his halls after Menegroth, and I wouldn't think that likely if he'd never seen Thingol's home.
Assuming Thranduil had dwelt in Doriath before its ruin, I think the odds are for his having laid eyes on a Silmaril at some time. Therefore, he would know whether the Arkenstone was one, or just another supremely beautiful jewel.

Badenov

02-01-2011, 07:25 PM

Alfirin

02-01-2011, 08:07 PM

I just finished rereading The Hobbit, first time rereading since having read the Silmarillion some 25 years ago (I know, poor showing for a fan!), and I immediately jumped to the same conclusion: That gem seems awfully like a Silmaril!

So I jumped on the internet to see if anyone else had thought so, and Google brings me directly to this forum and this thread some nine years after its creation.

The parallels between the Arkenstone and the Silmarils are uncanny, and in addition, there is a great desire in any scholarly pursuit to unearth hidden connections.

A couple things first that seem important:

1. The size of the Arkenstone: It had to fit in Bilbo's pocket. And a hobbit's pocket can't be that big. Thorin was obsessing over the Arkenstone, if Bilbo had a big lump wrapped in a cloth in his pocket, Thorin would presumably have inquired. If not held him upside down and shaken him. It may not have fit entirely in the hand of a 3-foot person. But for a human, that's 2-4 years old. So, not a large hand at all. Age 3-6 years, if we assume a 3.5 foot height. So, much larger than your diamond wedding ring, but certainly no larger than, for instance, a superball. This isn't really perinent to if it's a silmaril, but I wanted to bring it up.

2. The others' reactions: The elvenking was wildly surprised, Gandalf not so much. Presumably Gandalf knew, or knew of, the Arkenstone from before Smaug drove the dwarves out of the Lonely Mountain. But he never mentions anything useful to regular folks, so what he keeps to himself could be anything.

3. No other stone that was made shone with inner light (I read that in this thread, and no one seemed to take issue with it).

4. While there's a lot of discussion on both sides of the 'the dwarves cut and shaped the Arkenstone' vs 'chipped off rock to expose what was inside', I think that 'finding a perfectly shaped stone in a shell of rock' would be remarkable enough in its own right to be remembered that way.

So I find my own opinion swaying from the initial OMG, it's a Silmaril!

But ...

What if the Arkenstone was a naturally occuring stone with it's own inner light? Not light from the Two Trees, but some natural source (Moonstone, or what have you). A similar stone might in turn have inspired the creation of the Silmarils, but brought to its most magnificent possible state, using the light of the Two Trees as its source rather than whatever lay within the Arkenstone type gem. Very little is said about their creation and what was going through Feanor's mind when he did so, even The Silmarillion presents his motives phrased as speculation.

Silmaril or not, it'd certainly catch the attention of the Elven king, for the similarity it shares. Even if he'd seen a silmaril, a naturally glowing gem has to be pretty unique. (I at first thought that since he was a Dark Elf and had not been to Valinor, he would not have seen a Silmaril before, but I gather from the posts in this thread that he had in fact seen them.)

And if the Arkenstone was a naturally-occuring (if wildly rare) gem, it might then have been possible for the dwarves to shape the raw gem into its magnificent state.

This actually may bring up an interesting point. You have mentioned two possibilites for the Arkenstone, that is is a Simaril or natural. However there exists in ME a third possibility sort of in the middle,namely that the Arkenstone is not a Silmaril but it IS an Elf Gem, a product of Noldor craftmanship. Just bear with me now.
We know that the Noldor had the skills to make gems that while no where near a Silmaril in majesty were yet far fairer than any found naturally in the ground. Moreover many of these gems have unsual properties with regards to light. Some can transmit light (i.e. images), Such as the Palantiri, assuming you consider the Palantiri "gems" (they are described as being made of crystal, so they presumably fall into the definition). Some seem to be able to magnify light, like the Ellesar (The fact that Aragorn, when the fellowship parts at Isengard, is able to hold up the Elessar have the sun hit it and make a green fire so noticeable that it is remarked upon as being like fire by individuals sitting on horses a fair distance away from him indicates properties above and beyond those of an ordinary chunk of emerald or even a green diamond (my own personal belif of what sort of stone the Ellesar is). There is Galadriel's vial (again it's crystal, so that may mean "gem" or not) which can call up light on cue (of course that light likey comes from the water but the case may help). Finally and most convicingly, I remeber reading somwhere in the Unfinished Tales in one of the footnotes, that some elves had gems that did as the Arkenstone did, produced light continually and were, kept in filligree holders and used as lanterns. Granted these don't match up exactly to the Arkenstone (they're described as blue and the Arkenstone is white) but the elves may have made more than one kind. Such a lantern gem, lost by an elf (they were made to sound fairly common and utiliarian at some point in elf history) buried deep and then found by the dwarves might fit the Arkenstone defintion nicely

Nerwen

02-02-2011, 01:18 AM

And this. At some point in the past, the lonely mountain, if it is truly a volcano, should have erupted at least once in over five thousand years. After the fall of Beleriand Elves have lived in Rivendell, Lorien, Mirkwood, and Eriador, not to mention the mortals in Dale and the ancestors of the Rohirrim--do they not have any records of any eruptions, anyone noticing that smoke and lava running down the slopes.

But if it isn't a volcano, then how did the Arkenstone come from the Lonely Mountain? Unless it was an extraterrestrial diamond (though it is unlikely): a meteor or an asteroid, one of Varda's stars (because where would it have come from anyway, but whether it is Varda's star or not is quite irrelevant), falls (remember that Eol got his black metal, what's it called again, from a meteorite) and thus delivers a carbonado kind of diamond.

So there. I might be really wrong about this, but... I disagree with the Lonely Mountain being a volcano and the Arkenstone being a Silmaril. Oh well. A fun thread!

Apart from the fact that volcanoes go extinct eventually, they can also be dormant longer than five thousand years. There are many like that near where I live. So I don't think we need an "extraterrestrial" origin for the Arkenstone.

But, like you, I also disagree that the Arkenstone is a silmaril, because a.) it is my belief that Tolkien would have left much more definite hints if it were the case, and b.) the "for" case relies on what seem to me some very strained arguments, as:

I'd say that one could say (contrary to the opinion that someone had previously expressed) that the cutting and fashioning could be the scraping off of accumulated gunk from the surface of the gem.

If the silmaril was in the molten heart of the earth, a layer of lesser gems could have accumulated on it. This substance would be softer then the silmaril (although everything is softer then the silmarils) and would have been a less perfect transmitter of light to and from the gem.

The other substance might also explain the lack of lusting after the gem. As elves and men were not effected everywhere in Arda by the silmarils so there must have been a factor of distance.

All very ingenious, but my general feeling is that if you have to jump through so many hoops in order to make your case, it's probably wrong.

(And sorry, Alfirin, but the same applies to Arkenstone-as-Fëanorian lamp.)

Morthoron

02-02-2011, 10:54 AM

Simply put, on a number of occasions a Simaril is referred to as a "holy jewel", and burns the hands of those who, shall we say, are not worthy of handling it. I would be hard put to find a reason for Thorin, ultimately a very greedy dwarf, being worthy of holding a Silmaril.

In addition, Maglor and Maedhros rid themselves of their Silmarils along the shores of the Belegaer, not eastward over two mountain ranges and several hundred miles inland near Erebor; therefore, it really is nonsensical to even have this discussion. Silmarils do not have the ability to fly, which is what would be required to support such a hypothesis.

Eönwë

02-03-2011, 04:40 PM

In addition, Maglor and Maedhros rid themselves of their Silmarils along the shores of the Belegaer, not eastward over two mountain ranges and several hundred miles inland near Erebor; therefore, it really is nonsensical to even have this discussion. Silmarils do not have the ability to fly, which is what would be required to support such a hypothesis.

Just to play devil's advocate...
If the Silmaril really did get carried by magma, couldn't it easily get carried by the convection currents in the mantle? (If we assume that Middle Earth at that point worked in the same way that our world does.)

Findegil

02-04-2011, 05:42 AM

If the Silmaril really did get carried by magma, couldn't it easily get carried by the convection currents in the mantle?Especially if we consider that at the same time Beleriand was sinking very rapidly which for sure did create very turbulent movements underneath.

Respectfuly
Findegil

Nerwen

02-04-2011, 06:16 AM

I'm sorry, but that's just another example of what I'm talking about, and has already been suggested– in fact as I understand it, the "Silmaril-Arkenstone" theory assumes something of the kind. Again that's what's wrong with it– it rests on a whole series of improbabilities.

Let's just examine the whole case, shall we?

*If the Silmaril got carried hundreds of miles beneath the Earth's crust to Erebor

and

*if it somehow became completely coated with "lesser gems" in the process

and

*if this took place *really quickly*, between the War of Wrath and whenever Erebor became inactive (which can't have been long afterwards and was just as likely earlier)

and

*if the dwarves, despite being master craftsmen, somehow failed to recognise they were dealing with a cut stone, even while they were shaping it themselves...

...you see the problem?

skip spence

02-04-2011, 09:20 AM

Badenov

02-07-2011, 09:51 AM

I'm with Nerwen here, it's highly unlikely that the Arkenstone is meant to be one of the Silmarils.

That said, there are sure lots of similarities between the two gems and they are hardly coincidental. Tolkien probably had the Silmarils in mind when he described the Arkenstone - he of course created the backstory of the Silmarillion long before he ever thought of Hobbits - and recycled that particular idea (a beautiful, radiant gem-stone that stirs up greed despite it's pure origins) for his new children's book, among many other recycled ideas from the Silmarillion, a work he probably never thought would see the inside of a printing press anyway.

Based on facts, I agree with you. But there is a part of me that says in the face of logic that Prof. T was never that freewheeling with his subjects, there has to be something there.

But in that line of thinking, if there was any connection, however remote, some footnote would find the light of day. The conclusion that remains, is that there is no connection whatsoever and that the subjects are so remote and disparate that Prof T wasn't thinking about the Silmarils at all when describing the Arkenstone.

Or ... the idea that the Arkenstone was related to the Silmarils in whichever way (it was one, was related to one, reminded someone of one, they were glowy), he felt, would overshadow even the importance of the One Ring, and in any event would take quite a lot of pages for the backstory to explain what one of these Holy Jewels was.

On a side note, in rereading Silmarillion, in Of the Flight of the Noldor, Morogoth holds all 3 Silmarils in a crystal casket in one hand. So they're not the size of apples unless he has really huge hands. Which I suppose he could have, if he wanted. But I'm reimagining them the size of marbles now.

Galadriel

02-14-2011, 07:34 AM

I'm completely with Nerwen and Morthoron.

Plus, I don't think Tolkien was the type to leave things like that. If the Arkenstone truly were a Silmaril, then it would have played some bigger part than being taken out of the earth, only to be put back again. I'm pretty sure it would have popped up somewhere else (like the Ring did).

And, well, I just don't think Dwarves (or anyone else) could have actually cut the Silmaril. Also, the fact that it actually lay by a dead Dwarf...it just doesn't fit. If a Silmaril had to be anywhere, it would either be in Valinor or in the depths of the earth, unfound. I think that's where it belongs. *sigh* Don't take me seriously. I'm rattling nonsense.

However, after reading this:

"Arkenstone is a modernization of an ancient word which appears in the Edda as jarknasteinn and in Old English as eorclanstán.

Note that Tolkien used the word eorclanstánas to refer to the Silmarilli in Old English texts by Eriol"

I'm not so sure. Tolkien played with words like little boys play with knives...

Galadriel55

02-14-2011, 04:21 PM

I'm completely with Nerwen and Morthoron.

Seconded!

And, well, I just don't think Dwarves (or anyone else) could have actually cut the Silmaril. Also, the fact that it actually lay by a dead Dwarf...it just doesn't fit. If a Silmaril had to be anywhere, it would either be in Valinor or in the depths of the earth, unfound. I think that's where it belongs. *sigh* Don't take me seriously. I'm rattling nonsense.

I think you have a very good point, actually. I agree that it's unnatural for such a powerful thing as a Silmaril to just slip out of a story like that. A silmaril needs a more 'dramatic' end, that wouldn't really be an end, just more of a pause... well, now I'm rattling nonesense! :p But something grand like the end of The Silmarillion.

And another point on the same note: The way the silmarilli ended up were in the water, the sky, and the ground/fire. That creates a perfect balance. *Note to self: the Elven Rings were also lke that.* If you look at some early cultures, you'll find a similar balance of nature. If one of the silmarilli was to be taken away from it's proper place, the balance would be broken, wouldn't it? And Eru knows what consequences that could cause!:eek:

Galadriel

02-15-2011, 12:46 AM

well, now I'm rattling nonesense! :p But something grand like the end of The Silmarillion.

And another point on the same note: The way the silmarilli ended up were in the water, the sky, and the ground/fire. That creates a perfect balance. *Note to self: the Elven Rings were also lke that.* If you look at some early cultures, you'll find a similar balance of nature. If one of the silmarilli was to be taken away from it's proper place, the balance would be broken, wouldn't it? And Eru knows what consequences that could cause!:eek:

Yes, I have that effect on people.

And I think we do know what would happen if the balance was disturbed. *cough* Global warming *cough* Except if we were in ME the Sea would have swallowed us up by now :p

Mellon

08-06-2011, 06:25 AM

Why? JRRT tells us that the Arkenstone was cut and fashioned by the Dwarves, so why should it not be true? Or are we free to disregard anything written in the Hobbit that tells of things that happened long in the past but cannot be sustantiated by a character with first hand knowledge or corroborated by evidence elsewhere in JRRT's writings?

I've never actually posted an online opinion before and I am certainly no expert like many people here seem to be but I'd like to raise an issue I have reading the posts that dismiss the idea of the Arkenstone being a Silmaril simply because of the 'cutting and fashioning' statement. As I understand it the arguments against are these
1) a Silmaril cannot be marked/cut in any way
2) it is not possible/plausible for the Silmaril to have become encrusted with lava/gems
3) the fact that Tolkien actually wrote those words is more important than the fact that the story related in 'The Hobbit' is supposed to be Bilbo's account
4) from statements 1-3 it must be accepted that Tolkein intended to convey the impression that the Arkenstone had been cut by dwarves and therefore could not be a Silmaril

In favour of the for argument I submit the following
1) I think we can all agree that the Silmarillion makes clear that the Silmarils are peerless gems, the most incredible ever seen
2) IMMEDIATELY before (about 8 lines to be precise) the words 'cut and fashioned' appear is this statement 'indeed there could not be two such gems...even in all the world' (emphasis is mine)

I submit that the doubters can't have it both ways, either Tolkien chose each word himself and intended the Arkenstone to be an even greater gem than the Silmarils (being natural, and without peer when the Silmarils are 3) OR the statement about the Heart of the Mountain being 'cut and fashioned' was merely a confused and overwhelmed Hobbit's assumption on being presented with a hoard of dwarf-wrought treasures; just as the statement about the Arkenstone being one of a kind was.

I'm not a student of Tolkien, or of literature. As is probably evident from my post I'm in law, and perhaps someone can counter this but that is my take on the matter, for what it is worth.

Nerwen

08-06-2011, 06:46 AM

Welcome to the downs, Mellon!

Unfortunately, I'm not at all clear what your argument is, here– unless it's that "well, Bilbo isn't necessarily a reliable witness". Which may be so, but which is hardly a "case" in itself, and anyway cancels itself out, if you see what I mean.

Or is it that

"If

Arkenstone = marvellous jewel

And

Silmaril = marvellous jewel

Then

Arkenstone = Silmaril"?

–Which is simply re-stating the original case.

And if it's neither of those, then would you mind explaining again?:)

Nerwen

08-06-2011, 07:09 AM

Mellon, I think what's really confusing me is that your "for" argument could just as easily be an "against" argument.

See, if you're going to take the "indeed there could not be two such gems...even in all the world" literally, (as if it were, oh, I don't know, given under oath or something;) ), then I should say it completely demolishes the Silmaril-Arkenstone case through simple arithmetic.

Wish I'd thought of that one!:smokin:

Mellon

08-06-2011, 07:17 AM

Inziladun

08-06-2011, 07:43 AM

Welcome indeed, Mellon!

Personally, I think it's rather thorny to describe how the Silmaril that Maedhros had dropped in or near Beleriand even got to Erebor. That's a bit like dropping a wedding ring into a geyser at Yellowstone and having it found later in Montreal.

Galadriel55

08-06-2011, 07:54 AM

Welcome to the Downs, Mellon!

In my view this is implausible as it would also impute that Tolkien intended to suggest that the Arkenstone was rarer than the Silmarils themselves!

Possibly rarer, as the Arkenstone is one and the Silmarili are three.* However, the Arkenstone is just a jewel found in stone, like any other jewel, except bigger. The Silmarili are unique from all other stones because they are unbreakable, and also because they shine with the light of the Two Trees.

*But the fact that the Silmarili are the most beautiful jewels ever can still hold.

Nerwen

08-06-2011, 08:36 AM

Thanks for the welcome!

My point is this;
the key argument that those who DON'T believe that Arkenstone is a Silmaril seem to be making is that the text of the Hobbit says that it was cut by the dwarves which would not be possible were it in fact a Silmaril.

But in the same paragraph it is described as being without peer in all the world which would, I agree, be inconsistent with it being a Silmaril (since there are three of those) but would also contradict the idea of the Silmarils being the most amazing gems in existence (which is, I think we can agree, explicitly stated in the Silmarillion) as it would suggest that the Arkenstone was MORE RARE being as it were one of a kind.

The argument goes, at least as I understand it, that Tolkien was stating that the Arkenston had been cut, rather than that being Bilbo's opinion. In my view this is implausible as it would also impute that Tolkien intended to suggest that the Arkenstone was rarer than the Silmarils themselves!

Thanks for the clarification, Mellon.

My argument in my previous post was not meant to be taken seriously, of course– just to point out that an implausibility is better than an impossibility. The thing is, *both* problems only arise if you take the bit about the Arkenstone's uniqueness as being absolutely literal and authoritative (which is what your argument rests on, as I understand it).

Now, let's look at the context.

It was the Arkenstone, the Heart of the Mountain. So Bilbo guessed from Thorin's description: but indeed there could not be two such gems, even in such a hoard, even in all the world.
That's just showing Bilbo's reasoning process: "Oh right, this thing must be the Arkenstone! Can't be two of them!"

Then (in slight "flashback") we get a detailed description of him finding the jewel, and of the jewel itself:

The great jewel shone before his feet of its own inner light, and yet, cut and fashioned by the dwarves, who had dug it from the mountain long ago, it took all light that fell upon it and changed it into ten thousand sparks of radiance shot with glints of the rainbow.

At this point the narrative has shifted modes: we're being given that information directly, not as a "guess" or "thought" of Bilbo's. Otherwise it would probably go something like, "Bilbo guessed that it had been cut by the dwarves..."

In other words, one is subjective third-person, the other objective– and so there is actually no contradiction.

But perhaps I just really want them to be one and the same.....it makes the whole adventure more magical somehow!
Let me put it this way: the Arkenstone can be thought of as a Silmaril "by ancestry". We know Tolkien had The Silmarillion in mind when writing The Hobbit. (In fact, there is good evidence (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=15402) that he originally conceived it as taking place much earlier, and in Beleriand.) I don't know enough about this to say whether or not he ever intended to include an actual Silmaril in The Hobbit, but he must at any rate have based the Arkenstone's description on them.

EDIT: I know The Hobbit is presented as Bilbo's autobiography, ("There and Back Again"), but again I wouldn't take that too literally, since within the story, the omniscient narrator is certainly not Bilbo. (Not unless Bilbo is supposed to be suffering from Gollumesque level of insanity, anyway!)

FlimFlamSam

08-06-2011, 09:57 AM

Mellon spoke: [But perhaps I just really want them to be one and the same.....it makes the whole adventure more magical somehow!]
An excellent and the best written essay I have seen on this topic can be found in The History of the Hobbit: Part 2 Return to Bag-End pgs. 603-609.

Needless to say, also reading the development of The Hobbit itself.
If you get a chance to ever pick up these two books (Part 1 entitled Mr. Baggins) it is a worthy purchase.

As an aside, it is also one of the few places where the original text of Riddles in the Dark pre-Lord of the Rings can be found as there were apparently only about 17,000 copies made collectively in the UK and US before it was revised to conform with the Lord of the Rings; along with essays on Gollum himself, the riddles, the Ring, and historic influences regarding magical invisibility in this chapter. The books have essays on relevant topics for each chapter, including the aforementioned Arkenstone/Silmaril/Gem-necklace of Girion/Nauglamir essay.

Galin

08-06-2011, 10:38 AM

Rateliff does write a good article on this, but I don't think he uncovered any text or marginal note, for example, that shows Tolkien even questioning whether the Arkenstone might be a Silmaril (not that anyone said he did in the first place, or that Tolkien necessarily needed to note it on paper). John Rateliff notes the sense of finality (that the Silmarils were lost) in the 1926 Sketch of the Mythology and various versions of the 1930 Quenta Noldorinwa...

'Despite the sense of finality in the passages just quoted, Tolkien had in fact changed his mind four times in the previous fifteen years about the holy jewel's fate...' J. Rateliff

I think that's a rather notable 'despite,' because the Sketch and the 1930 Qenta are still relatively close in date to the writing of The Hobbit.

'Just as the sword of Turgon King of Gondolin had somehow survived... it is thus more than possible that Tolkien was playing in The Hobbit with the idea of having one of Feanor's wondrous jewels reappear,...' J. Rateliff

But 'more than possible' isn't saying much in my opinion. No doubt Tolkien changed his mind enough times, so the implication here seems to be that Tolkien might change his mind about this finality once again. OK, possible, but is there textual evidence to show that he did for his new story? Another implication appears to be that since an item like Turgon's sword survived, maybe one of the Silmarils might too. Well again, that only goes so far I think.

A further element of the evidence appears to be the word arkenstone -- but as Rateliff himself notes, this word fits for 'precious or holy jewel', and is found in Beowulf and The Christ, for examples in Old English. Tolkien's use of the term is fitting in both cases, but this 'connection' is nothing new at this point, as the Old English snippets of the Silmarillion writings were published some time ago now in The History of Middle-Earth series.

With respect to possibly new information gleaned from drafts for The Hobbit, Rateliff notes that the Arkenstone evolved out of the Gem of Girion, which was a gem given by Girion of Dale to the Dwarves (although it is not told how Girion got this gem in any case). And as for the compared descriptions (how both jewels looked, or dealt with light), even Rateliff notes than any similarities here do not prove that the Arkenstone was intended as a Silmaril.

I realize Rateliff's commentary, however one takes it, hinges on a combination of things, and to be fair, it should be read in full, but here we have jools that an author wished to set apart as particularly notable and beautiful, so to my mind even a measure of borrowing of description would not be unexpected.

Some measure of 'literary borrowing' (or a better term that I can't think of at the moment) does not necessarily make the arkenstone a Silmaril, and I think we are still wanting textual evidence -- at least something direct I mean -- that Tolkien was actually playing with the notion of making this gem a Silmaril specifically, as there doesn't seem to be any confirming text or note in the draft stages of The Hobbit (which would be new to the case, so to speak).

Formendacil

08-06-2011, 11:35 AM

For what it's worth, the peerless quality of the Arkenstone could be precisely because the Dwarves cut it. When Bilbo recognises that there could not be two such stones in the whole world, he might be noticing the flawless gem-cutting craftsmanship of the Dwarves as well as the enormous size of the flawless jewel. This would be congruent with Tolkien's general presentation of Middle-earth as beset with the "long decline" from original greatness into later imitation. It would be entirely consistent for the Dwarves to never again be capable of cutting so well another Arkenstone--even if one ever turned up again to be cut. The Dwarves of Thorin and Dáin's day were no longer the Dwarves who had lived in Moria (as they would have been in Thráin I's day) or even those of pre-Smaug Erebor. The Kingdom Under the Mountain would flourish again... but it would not be the Golden Age.

Also, as a somewhat impish aside, the comment that there could not be two such things in the world need not indicate at all that the Arkenstone is the greatest or most beautiful gem in the world... though it is clear from the text that the Arkenstone wasn't the ugliest gem in the world... :p

Nerwen

08-06-2011, 06:31 PM

Some measure of 'literary borrowing' (or a better term that I can't think of at the moment) does not necessarily make the arkenstone a Silmaril, and I think we are still wanting textual evidence -- at least something direct I mean -- that Tolkien was actually playing with the notion of making this gem a Silmaril specifically, as there doesn't seem to be any confirming text or note in the draft stages of The Hobbit (which would be new to the case, so to speak).
Okay, that was just a speculation– and of course even direct evidence wouldn't make the Arkenstone itself a Silmaril.

blantyr

08-07-2011, 01:39 AM

The Silmarili are unique from all other stones because they are unbreakable, and also because they shine with the light of the Two Trees.

I would also note that at Smaug's liar, the third time Bilbo went down the tunnel, was described as absolutely dark. Once torches were lit, the Arkenstone reflected light, but it did not glow on its own.

Is the Arkenstone ever described as giving off light on its own?

oddkins

08-07-2011, 06:49 AM

I would also note that at Smaug's liar, the third time Bilbo went down the tunnel, was described as absolutely dark. Once torches were lit, the Arkenstone reflected light, but it did not glow on its own.

Is the Arkenstone ever described as giving off light on its own?

Well, this quote does seem to imply that...

Originally Posted by The Hobbit

The great jewel shone before his feet of its own inner light, and yet, cut and fashioned by the dwarves, who had dug it from the mountain long ago, it took all light that fell upon it and changed it into ten thousand sparks of radiance shot with glints of the rainbow.

blantyr

08-07-2011, 02:54 PM

Another relevent quote from The Hobbit.

Near the bottom, as well as he could judge, Bilbo slipped on his ring and went ahead. But he did not need it: the darkness was complete, and they were all invisible, ring or no ring. In fact, so black was it that the hobbit came to the opening unexpectedly, put his hand on air, stumbled forward, and rolled headlong into the hall!

There he lay face downwards on the foloor and did not dar to get up, or hardly even to breathe. But nothing moved. There was not a gleam of light -- unless, as it seemed to him, when at last he slowly raised his head, there was a pale white glint, above him and far off in the gloom.

This would confirm that the Arkenstone is a light source, not just a reflector. The description of the light intensity is not convincing, though, nor are there tales of the Arkenstone burning the hands of any evil one who holds it.

I remain dubious. The Arkenstone just is not described as bright enough to be placed in the sky as a star.

Morthoron

08-07-2011, 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by The Hobbit

The great jewel shone before his feet of its own inner light, and yet, cut and fashioned by the dwarves, who had dug it from the mountain long ago, it took all light that fell upon it and changed it into ten thousand sparks of radiance shot with glints of the rainbow.

I would suggest that the Dwarves could not possibly "cut and fashion" a Silmaril. It would be impervious to their earthly tools. Again, the Silmarils are sacred, and Morgoth himself was caused great agony at the jewel's touch, it burned Charcharoth's stomach, and burned the hands of Maedhros and Maglor. It would certainly cause pain in the hands of any greedy Dwarf, Thorin included. And even Bilbo, who walked about with the Arkenstone in his pocket, had no effect from the stone -- in direct proximity to the One Ring! One would think that such a sacred and living jewel would certainly react to the presence of such an abominably evil thing in direct opposition to it.

As someone mentioned "literary borrowing" in the case of the Arkenstone, wherein Tolkien transfered some of the qualities of a Silmaril to describe a gem of like appearance, he did the same when describing the ElfKing's subterranean manse in Mirkwood, which is a near identical description to Menegroth, the city of King Thingol in Doriath. Like but not identical.

I am not sure why this inane debate continues.

blantyr

08-07-2011, 09:30 PM

I am not sure why this inane debate continues.

Is not insane debate the purpose of these forums? :Merisu:

Galadriel55

08-07-2011, 09:31 PM

Is not insane debate the purpose of these forums? :Merisu:

But redundant?...

Landroval

01-25-2012, 03:37 AM

I was quite pleased to discover your article Gwaihir. After my most recent reading of the Silmarillion, I reached a similar conclusion. I also enjoyed the fact that as I was reading most of the arguments presented against your theory that they were already addressed by yourself, Findegil, Palrun-Enda, and others in much the same counter-points I would have raised. Trumpkin Mahalul, I also quite enjoyed your dwarvish in-universe account.

Some have already made up their minds on the issue of the Arkenstone being the Earth-Silmaril and the issue won't be resolved by anything less than the Professor himself rising from the dead and settling the matter, but I would point out that the One Ring finding its way to the Bagginses rested with a who series of improbabilities. The events in Tolkien's works are based around numerous, mysterious coincidences, happenstances, and strange chances. If some of us, choose to believe in one more, I don't see what harm is done.

In any case, the point of the Silmarils being used against the dragons inspired a theory of my own. I don't believe that the Jewel is as passive in the downfall of smaug as previously speculated. In fact, it is tied in with chief point that has not been properly addressed: If the Arkenstone is a Silmaril, why did it not burn Thorin and Smaug?

Be warned: if Hobbitses finding rings of doom, age old weapons brought forth to slay fire and shadows once more, and ancient sunken jewels resurfacing seems far-fetched, then this theory is not for you.

First off, I do not believe this particularly low opinion of Thorin Oaken-Shield is warranted. Thorin may be arrogant, possessive and vengeful, but I hardly believe that puts him on par with the Sons of Feanor. The fell elves had killed their kin on not one, but three separate occasions. Thorin is flawed, but certainly not more so than dwarves who murdered Thingol for the Silmaril he possessed. In fact King Greymantle, himself displayed the same traits as Thorin, yet no indication that he, nor his dwarven assailants were unable to abide touching the stone. Thorin did threaten to throw Bilbo to the rocks in a fit of rage. In the end, he proved himself to be noble in spirit, despite his flawed nature.

What of Smaug? Dwaves aside surely the golden, impenetrable dragon as a servant of Morgoth would suffer just as Carcharoth, who was driven mad by pain when he consumed a Silmaril. Why did the Arkenstone not burn him if it is truly one of the Jewels of Feanor?

Well... who's to say it didn't?

Perhaps it did burn, all those long years as it lay atop Smaug's bed of gold and jewels, beneath the old worm as he slumbered. Yet it did not become encrusted in the dragons belly as were other gems and pieces of gold. Perhaps it even burned a hole in that armor, say a patch in the hollow of his left breast.

After all, which is more likely: That Smaug naturally grew with a discernible weakness in his defeated, or that his armor was damaged by an outside force. Thus, if the Arkenstone was in fact a Silmaril it might have brought about Smaug the Golden's defeat, even as Earendil and Jewel of air brought about the end of Ancalagon the Black.

_________________________________________________

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends."

Nerwen

01-25-2012, 04:32 AM

Firstly– welcome to the Downs, Landroval!

I realize that those who have already closed their minds to the possibility of the Arkenstone being the Earth-Silmaril won't be be convinced by anything less than the Professor himself rising from the dead and settling the matter.
Nah, pretty sure we'd settle for a bit of, you know, actual evidence n' stuff. Or– who knows– just a scenario that didn't have multiple holes in it. Which, you know, hasn't been forthcoming thus far.

I would point out that the One Ring finding its way to the Bagginses rested with a who series of improbabilities. The events in Tolkien's works are based around numerous, mysterious coincidences, happenstances, and strange chances. If some of us, choose to believe in one more, I don't see what harm is done to the naysayers.
None– but some of us might just get a bit irritated at being characterised as "those with closed minds", mightn't we?;)

Nerwen

01-25-2012, 04:51 AM

The thing is, Landroval– you can indeed just choose to believe it's a Silmaril, regardless– I mean, who's stopping you? However, I see you're *also* trying to make an actual "for" case in the same post– I don't think you can have it both ways, can you?

Inziladun

01-25-2012, 06:44 AM

Let me also welcome you to the Downs, Landroval.

I still think this theory is incorrect. There's been so much said of this already, but let's look at the descriptions of the Silmarils and the Arkenstone.

Like the crystal of diamonds [a Silmaril] appeared, and yet was more strong than adamant, so that no violence could mar it or break it within the Kingdom of Arda. The Silmarillion Of the Simarils (emphasis mine)

The great jewel shone before [Bilbo's] feet of its own inner light, and yet, cut and fashioned by the dwarves, who had dug it from the heart of the mountain long ago, it took all light that fell upon it, and changed it into ten thousand sparks of white radiance shot with glints of the rainbow. The Hobbit Not At Home (emphasis mine)

Note that the Silmarils could not been "marred". I would think "marring" would be read for any sort of alteration to the gem. Since the Dwarves did accomplish that with the Arkenstone, it cannot be a Silmaril.

Rune Son of Bjarne

01-25-2012, 06:20 PM

What of Smaug? Dwaves aside surely the golden, impenetrable dragon as a servant of Morgoth would suffer just as Carcharoth, who was driven mad by pain when he consumed a Silmaril. Why did the Arkenstone not burn him if it is truly one of the Jewels of Feanor?

Well... who's to say it didn't?

Perhaps it did burn, all those long years as it lay atop Smaug's bed of gold and jewels, beneath the old worm as he slumbered. Yet it did not become encrusted in the dragons belly as were other gems and pieces of gold. Perhaps it even burned a hole in that armor, say a patch in the hollow of his left breast.

After all, which is more likely: That Smaug naturally grew with a discernible weakness in his defeated, or that his armor was damaged by an outside force. Thus, if the Arkenstone was in fact a Silmaril it might have brought about Smaug the Golden's defeat, even as Earendil and Jewel of air brought about the end of Ancalagon the Black.

That weakness in Smaug's armor always annoyed me, but then again he did need a weakness in order to get killed.

My problem with the theory presented is that never before have I encountered evidence of the Silmarils "gem melting potential". If it burned in such a manner, then surely it would also melt gold and gems underneath it and eventually end up in the bottom of Smaug's treasure pile? Or have I misunderstood your theory?

Also it is true that other pieces of gems and gold became encrusted, where as the Arkenstone didn't. However I am quite sure that the vast majority of gems and gold did not become encrusted, like the cup that Bilbo took. The point is that by not becoming encrusted, the Arkenstone is actually doing exactly what the average piece of jewellery would do in such a situation.

Morthoron

01-25-2012, 06:57 PM

I realize that those who have already closed their minds to the possibility of the Arkenstone being the Earth-Silmaril won't be be convinced by anything less than the Professor himself rising from the dead and settling the matter. I would point out that the One Ring finding its way to the Bagginses rested with a who series of improbabilities. The events in Tolkien's works are based around numerous, mysterious coincidences, happenstances, and strange chances. If some of us, choose to believe in one more, I don't see what harm is done to the naysayers...

Your entire post is littered with theories, suppositions, what ifs and maybes that are not borne out in the story itself, much like the illogical hypotheses of other proponents of the faulty Arkenstone=Silmaril argument. When referring to Tolkien's works as "based around numerous, mysterious coincidences, happenstances, and strange chances," I would agree; however, there is an inner consistency and logic even in Tolkien's happenstance approach. There are no ends that fit the means in supposing the Arkenstone is a Silmaril, no overarching storyline that connects the original Silmarillion story to The Hobbit in that sense. Small coincidences collect into greater eucatastrophes in Tolkien's storyline, whereas the Arkenstone reaches a dead end on the breast of a deceased Dwarf, Thorin.

Does it make sense that a Dwarf ends up with a Silmaril as part of a burial reliquary? Taking the obvious tack of adding in storylines that were not in The Hobbit, wouldn't a Sindarin Elf like Thranduil (only identified as ElvenKing in TH) recognize and immediately demand the Arkenstone/Silmaril as a sacred Elvish gem stolen by the Dwarves from Menegroth after they murdered Thranduil's sovereign Lord, King Thingol? Wouldn't this, in fact, cause a second war between Elves and Dwarves?

Also, Gandalf (otherwise known elsewhere as Olorin the Maia) had spent the entire space of time prior to the 3rd Age in Valinor. Knowledgeable as he was of all things Elvish, he wouldn't immediately recognize a Silmaril and know its history and importance?

Are you not straining the bounds of incredulity to the point of farcical fan-fiction nonsense?

Landroval

01-25-2012, 07:04 PM

Thanks for the welcome.

None– but some of us might just get a bit irritated at being characterised as "those with closed minds", mightn't we?;)

Yes, poor choice of phrasing on my part, and bad foot to get off on in a first post. :o I suppose that's what happens when one is posting when one should be sleeping. I'll edit in the hope of avoiding further offense. Please accept my apologies, in any case.

I don't believe I was trying to have my cake and eat it to, was merely postulating, for the sake of argument, that if the Arkenstone was a Silmaril, it might have then directly led to Smaug's downfall by providing a weakness in his defenses.

The One Ring also could not be unmade "by any craft we here possess," yet could be destroyed in the fires from which it was made. That being the case, I don't see why Trumpkin Mahalel's point that time in the fires of the world's mantel would not be allow a Silmaril to be marred during the period where it was cooling down once more.

Landroval

01-25-2012, 07:24 PM

That weakness in Smaug's armor always annoyed me, but then again he did need a weakness in order to get killed.

My problem with the theory presented is that never before have I encountered evidence of the Silmarils "gem melting potential". If it burned in such a manner, then surely it would also melt gold and gems underneath it and eventually end up in the bottom of Smaug's treasure pile? Or have I misunderstood your theory?

Also it is true that other pieces of gems and gold became encrusted, where as the Arkenstone didn't. However I am quite sure that the vast majority of gems and gold did not become encrusted, like the cup that Bilbo took. The point is that by not becoming encrusted, the Arkenstone is actually doing exactly what the average piece of jewellery would do in such a situation.

Yes, I may not have explained the idea probably. Basically, the Silmarils as hallowed items burn those of evil spirit who touch them. Morgoth was able to wear them in a crown with no ill effect to the crown itself, but when he touched them his hands were burned black. Others have also been be burned by them such as the wolf Carcharoth and the Sons of Feanor. Others were not, such as King Thingol, who might be seen as just as arrogant and possessive as Thorin.

Therefore the Arkenstone (providing its a Silmaril) could burn Smaug, as he was one of Morgoth's creations but would not be melting the gold beneath.

The idea of a Silmaril being able to be reshaped if it was exposed to the mantel for long enough was a separate issue and not related to the idea of burning a hole in Smaug's armor.

I hope that clarifies my point, and doesn't make it more confusing. :)

Side note, I don't believe the cup that Bilbo took as on top of the hoard, seeing as Smaug was in the chamber at the time.

_________________________________________________

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends."

Landroval

01-25-2012, 08:04 PM

Does it make sense that a Dwarf ends up with a Silmaril as part of a burial reliquary? Taking the obvious tack of adding in storylines that were not in The Hobbit, wouldn't a Sindarin Elf like Thranduil (only identified as ElvenKing in TH) recognize and immediately demand the Arkenstone/Silmaril as a sacred Elvish gem stolen by the Dwarves from Menegroth after they murdered Thranduil's sovereign Lord, King Thingol? Wouldn't this, in fact, cause a second war between Elves and Dwarves?

Also, Gandalf (otherwise known elsewhere as Olorin the Maia) had spent the entire space of time prior to the 3rd Age in Valinor. Knowledgeable as he was of all things Elvish, he wouldn't immediately recognize a Silmaril and know its history and importance?

There are several reasons why Thranduil might not not have recognized a Silmaril. Thingol was very possessive of the Jewel and may not have allowed others to study it at great length. Thranduil and his father Oropher may not have dwelt in Menegroth aside from occasional visits. Thranduil might even have believed, as some here, that the lost Silmarils could not be recovered, and certainly wouldn't believe one might resurface in the east.

Orcrist, while certainly not of the same value as a Silmaril, was an ancient Elvish weapon from the fall of Gondolin, yet the Elvenking allowed it be buried with Thorin.

If Gandalf did recognize it as such and knew that by sharing that knowledge he would risk a new war between Elves and Dwarves over the Jewel, what motive would he have to reveal this knowledge?

Out of curiosity, Morthoron, PPC member?

Galadriel55

01-25-2012, 09:01 PM

I add my welcome to those before me, Landroval. Enjoy the Downs!

Basically, the Silmarils as hallowed items burn those of evil spirit who touch them. Morgoth was able to wear them in a crown with no ill effect to the crown itself, but when he touched them his hands were burned black. Others have also been be burned by them such as the wolf Carcharoth and the Sons of Feanor. Others were not, such as King Thingol, who might be seen as just as arrogant and possessive as Thorin.

I think there are some problems with this assumption. The Silmarili burn flesh, that's true, but that does not mean that they give off heat such as would melt everything around them. To explain this, let me use an analogy - a wound burns, even though the substance that it's in (air, water, alcohol, medicine of some sort, etc) is not hot and not terribly corrosive. Moreover, Thingol wore the Silmaril on his chest when he spoke haughtily with the Dwarves. That was no good deed, but the Silmaril didn't burn through the Nauglamir.*

That also brings me to my next point. I wouldn't say that touching the Silmarils is denied only to evil spirits. I would change that to people a) with evil intentions, and/or b) who have no right to the Silmarili. Once again using the example of Thingol, he had nothing nice in mind when he was with the Dwarves, but he had a claim to the Silmaril, through Beren.

In support of this theory, is support it be called, I'll say this. When The Hobbit was written, JRRT was thinking of his First Age mythology. I believe TH was originally supposed to happen in Beleriand, and if you look at the geography it makes sense. JRRT couldn't publish The Silmarillion, so he published a book "about" The Silmarillion. TheArkenstone was probably modeled on a Silmaril - so it is the fourth of the kind, if you really want to think this way. (Maybe not a Silmaril, but something very similar, since we know that no one could replicate them) But still - I don't believe it's a Silmaril by their true definition; it's not one of Feanor's three.

Morthoron

01-25-2012, 10:01 PM

There are several reasons why Thranduil might not not have recognized a Silmaril. Thingol was very possessive of the Jewel and may not have allowed others to study it at great length. Thranduil and his father Oropher may not have dwelt in Menegroth aside from occasional visits. Thranduil might even have believed, as some here, that the lost Silmarils could not be recovered, and certainly wouldn't believe one might resurface in the east.

Again, this is conjecture which is not part of the story. For such a far-fetched theory as you present, there must be something more tangible than "might not", "may not", "may not" and "might". Besides, Dior, son of Beren and Luthien, wore the Silmaril openly in Doriath.

You completely ignore that the Silmaril would have to travel hundreds of miles in magma in the earth's mantle, beneath a massive mountain range with no purported volcanic activity, and then settle beneath Erebor sometime in the late 1st Age (again, no evident volcanic activity there either). It then becomes encased in rock (in a few thousand years), and then the dwarves cut facets into it:

The great jewel shone before his feet of its own inner light, and yet, cut and fashioned by the dwarves...

Which directly contradicts the description of the Silmarils:

Like the crystal of diamonds it appeared, and yet was more strong than adamant, so that no violence could mar it or break it within the Kingdom of Arda.

Daft.

Orcrist, while certainly not of the same value as a Silmaril, was an ancient Elvish weapon from the fall of Gondolin, yet the Elvenking allowed it be buried with Thorin.

Orcrist was Noldorin, from Gondolin. It played no part in the history of the Sindar (and the Sindar had little liking for the Noldor, in any case). The Silmaril and the Dwarves murdering Thingol was a pivotal piece of history for the Sindar, and although there is not a direct reference to the episode of the sacking of Menegroth, there is a decided dislike between Elves and Dwarves in The Hobbit. If Thranduil had the slightest inkling that this jewel was the Silmaril, given his temperment, he would have acted on his belief. But as I emphasize, these are elements that are not part of Tolkien's writing of The Hobbit. The Arkenstone was not a Silmaril; if anything, it was a Similar.

If Gandalf did recognize it as such and knew that by sharing that knowledge he would risk a new war between Elves and Dwarves over the Jewel, what motive would he have to reveal this knowledge?

One would think that the retrieval of such an item would be important for when Olorin would return to Valinor. A Silmaril carries the light of the bliss of Valinor. A Silmaril blazes on the brow of Eärendel as he traverses the sky in Vingilótë. This is not something you leave with a dead, and in the grand scheme of things relatively unimportant, Dwarf.

This is particularly true since Mandos prophesied that the world will be changed and the Valar will recover the Silmarils. A Maia under the direction of Manwe would be derelict in his duty to leave such a sacred relic behind. It is the most important item of the entire 1st Age of Arda, and utterly integral in healing the world at the end of time, when Feanor surrenders the Silmarils to Yavanna and she breaks them open and revives the Two Trees. But, again, none of this has anything whatsoever to do with The Hobbit. Which is the point, I suppose.

Out of curiosity, Morthoron, PPC member?

I have no idea what you are referring to.

Findegil

01-26-2012, 05:43 AM

Okay there no question that this is only and can only be a 'it could be possible' theory.
That means there is no hard evidence for it in the texts and some evidences against it which must circumvented with possible explainations to make the theory work.

But that said, I at least find it a bit unfair if the supporters are demanded not to raise 'what if' arguments but the contradicter do so as freely as they will.

To discuss what Thranduil or Gandalf would have done recognising a Silmaril is no better counter argument then a possible theory of how the Silmarill could be transported from the broken Beleriand to Erebor is an supporting argument. Either both are allowed in the discussion or both are out. Only if both are out, discussions like this are dead from the start, which would be a shame (in my oppinion at least).

Respectfuly
Findegil

P.S.: If you like, please ignore this post, since it seems I am supporting a 'illogical hypotheses' anyway.

Morthoron

01-26-2012, 08:22 AM

But that said, I at least find it a bit unfair if the supporters are demanded not to raise 'what if' arguments but the contradicter do so as freely as they will.

I've added a caveat to my entire rebuttal: "But, again, none of this has anything whatsoever to do with The Hobbit. Which is the point, I suppose." Importing ideas from the Silmarillion to fit in the context of The Hobbit is fraught with peril. There are elements that Tolkien used from his larger mythos in the story, but these are consistent with his then unpublished work and clearly labeled (the Gondolin swords, for instance are indeed directly referred to in an applicable manner).

However, Tolkien does not call the gem of the Dwarves a "Silmaril", which is clearly of Elvish design and lineage, but he calls it the "Arkenstone" (Old English earcanstān, Old Norse jarknasteinn, for "precious stone"). The Arkenstone is derived from Old English poetry, and is in keeping with Tolkien's use of pre-existing ancient literature in the story's naming conventions (just as "Gandalf" and all the Dwarves' names are derived from the Voluspa). The Arkenstone shares a luminescence with the Silmaril, but unlike the Silmaril, it has been faceted and shaped, whereas the Silmaril cannot be marred or changed. The Silmaril is referred to as a "holy jewel" and obviously affects those who see and touch it (to the point where Eärendel is allowed admittance to the Blessed Realm merely by wearing one). The Arkenstone is pretty, but it has no profound effect on those who are near it. Bard holds it, Bilbo holds it, Thorin holds it. No big deal.

To discuss what Thranduil or Gandalf would have done recognising a Silmaril is no better counter argument then a possible theory of how the Silmarill could be transported from the broken Beleriand to Erebor is an supporting argument. Either both are allowed in the discussion or both are out. Only if both are out, discussions like this are dead from the start, which would be a shame (in my oppinion at least).

In a farcical debate, shouldn't one rebut nonsense with nonsense? But even being nonsensical, some logic should apply. Is it reasonable that Gandalf, a Maia who had seen the Two Trees and had been in Valinor since its inception would know what a Silmaril looked like? Is it logical that Thranduil, the ElvenKing, who patterned his underground manse to replicate Menegroth, would be aware of a Silmaril when he saw it? Or is it logical that a "Silmarill could be transported from the broken Beleriand to Erebor", when Beleriand broke off at a point west of the Ered Luin Mountains (Lindon), so that the Silmaril would have to traverse under the Ered Luin, the Misty Mountains, the Anduin River, and somehow settle under Erebor, then gain an encrustation of rock in a few thousand years? Would rock even adhere to a Silmaril, or would it remain inviolate and unchanged?

There is nonsense, and then there is Nonsense.

blantyr

01-26-2012, 12:43 PM

Morthoron

01-26-2012, 01:55 PM

While the Arkenstone was migrating under the Misty Mountain, there would be some chance it would have had to pass through the Balrog's wings. As there is no explicit mention of a hole in the Balrog's wings, this makes the theory less probable.

Do you think the Silmaril's migration was annual? Like the albatross? You also didn't take into account that, perhaps, the Balrog was on a skiing trip to Mount Gundabad at that point in time. Maybe Balrogs liked to ski. It could be a possibility. Tolkien never said Balrogs didn't ski. Or luge. Or take up needlepoint in their old age. I always think of Balrogs in tutus and pointe shoes doing ballet manuevers when I hear The Rite of Spring by Stravinsky. I'm sorry, I seem to be wandering. Random even.

Puddleglum

01-26-2012, 06:19 PM

A Maia under the direction of Manwe would be derelict in his duty to leave such a sacred relic behind.I don't think that follows.
From the published Sil, we have a Maia (Fionwe) permitting TWO Silmarils (that had actually been under his control) to be carried off when all he had to do to keep them was permit the armed murders who had stolen them to be slain rather than escape. Clearly, there are other things the Valar considered more important than recovery of the Silmarils.

Also, throughout the history of the West (and LOTR) great value is placed upon subordinating ones (even valid) desires to the wishes of rightful owners of relics.

Frodo notes, in the UT essay on Erebor, that not only was Gandalf not permitted to force Bilbo (or Frodo) to undertake the quest (or to take the ring himself) to destroy it - he was not even permitted to TRY.

The Arkenstone was already seen as the rightful property of the Dwarves (except for Bilbo's claim to take it as his "rightful" payment for coming on the quest). Even if it "were" a Silmaril (which I don't believe), Gandalf wouldn't have popped in and said "The Sil's are the rightful property of the Valar" (they never were in the first place) "so I'm going to take this from you and deliver it". Fate (Providence, if you wish) had already placed the Arkenstone where it was, and the Dwarves had unearthed and shaped it on their own. The Valar would have respected that.

But, again, if it is NOT a Sil (as I believe) then all arguments about reclaiming it for Valinor are moot.

Indeed, the prophecy is that, at the end, when the Sils are finally brought back together, they will be delivered to Feanor (coming finally from Mandos) and he, as the rightful owner, will break them so that Yavanna may, with their light, rekindle the Two Trees.

Until Feanor reaches that point of growth and humility (and maturity) it's not really all that important or crucial whether the Silmarils are kept safe (a) in the Sea-depths and Fires-of-the-earth; or (b) in a vault in Manwe's house in Valinor (or even, for that matter, on Thorin's breast in his grave in Erebor). No one can destroy them - No one without the right to hold can touch them without great pain/anguish - And if someone "did" find one and try to claim it, the results would like constitute their own punishment for the presumption).

Galadriel55

01-26-2012, 07:11 PM

The Silmarili hold the fate of Arda. What significance would that give to your cases?

Personally, for me such an object belongs deep in the ground. In the ground, not on a dead Dwarve's chest under a mountail. Deep, deep, deep in the earth. It has to be there, and stay there, until Arda will be remade. From my POV, the Silmarils cannot remove themselves from their "proper" places - sky, sea, and earth/fire, the elements often associated with life and fate. You can't take one out of the ground. It's impossible. It won't let you do it. The Silmarilli aren't just dead stones - they have a will and power of their own. They would not allow themselves to be removed from their "homes".

Nerwen

01-26-2012, 07:42 PM

Originally Posted by Findegil
But that said, I at least find it a bit unfair if the supporters are demanded not to raise 'what if' arguments but the contradicter do so as freely as they will.
I feel that's a bit of an exaggeration, Findegil– you seem to be referring to this exchange:
Originally Posted by Landroval
If Gandalf did recognize it as such and knew that by sharing that knowledge he would risk a new war between Elves and Dwarves over the Jewel, what motive would he have to reveal this knowledge?
One would think that the retrieval of such an item would be important for when Olorin would return to Valinor... etc.

In this particular case, Landroval had asked a question that could *only* be answered in hypothetical terms.

For the rest, I hardly think you can say that the "anti" camp have been raising "what if" arguments "as freely as they will". The problem, anyway, is not simply that the "for" people put forward "what if" cases, but that that's basically *all* they put forward. Further, many of these cases, just taken individually, have serious issues regards logic and plausibility. I don't see what's wrong with pointing this out.

P.S.: If you like, please ignore this post, since it seems I am supporting a 'illogical hypotheses' anyway.
I think it is illogical, yes. Please don't take that as a personal insult, Findegil. (I mean, if you are taking that way, that is.)

Morthoron

01-26-2012, 08:42 PM

I will only add the lines Tolkien wrote after Maedhros tossed his Silmaril (and himself) into a chasm of fire, and Maglor threw his Silmaril into the sea:

And thus it came to pass that the Silmarils found their long homes: one in the airs of heaven, and one in the fires of the heart of the world, and one in the deep waters.

There is a finality there that precludes long distance gem-migrating, Dwarf-delving, jewellers-faceting, dragon-hording, Hobbit-thieving, and funerary-betokening.

The Silmarils found their long homes. As eloquent an end as one could ask for.

Inziladun

01-26-2012, 08:52 PM

For me the matter is akin to saying Elvis Presley is alive and working at a Dairy Queen in New Jersey.

It's theoretically possible in a faint way, but it sure ain't very likely.

I agree that the clear inference in The Silmarillion is that the Silmarils would not be retrieved until the End.

Galin

01-26-2012, 09:02 PM

The Silmarils found their long homes. As eloquent an end as one could ask for.

Right. And as I noted earlier: 'John Rateliff notes the sense of finality (that the Silmarils were lost) in the 1926 Sketch of the Mythology and various versions of the 1930 Quenta Noldorinwa...' but notes: 'Despite the sense of finality in the passages just quoted, Tolkien had in fact changed his mind four times in the previous fifteen years about the holy jewel's fate...' J. Rateliff

To which I responded: I think that's a rather notable 'despite,' because the Sketch and the 1930 Qenta are still relatively close in date to the writing of The Hobbit.

Anyway I agree: this finality is fitting, this is what Tolkien landed on, but yet some seem to want it to be otherwise, as even Rateliff seems to want to connect these things.

Sea, Earth and Sky. Works for me :D

Inziladun

01-26-2012, 09:05 PM

The Arkenstone was already seen as the rightful property of the Dwarves (except for Bilbo's claim to take it as his "rightful" payment for coming on the quest). Even if it "were" a Silmaril (which I don't believe), Gandalf wouldn't have popped in and said "The Sil's are the rightful property of the Valar" (they never were in the first place) "so I'm going to take this from you and deliver it". Fate (Providence, if you wish) had already placed the Arkenstone where it was, and the Dwarves had unearthed and shaped it on their own. The Valar would have respected that.

While the Silmarils weren't the responsibility of Gandalf or any of the Istari, I don't think it likely Gandalf would have allowed one to remain at Erebor.
Look at all the mischief they caused in the First Age. They seem to have engendered a lustful desire to possess them almost on the level of the One. Even old Elwë couldn't resist the lure.

Galadriel55

01-27-2012, 06:25 AM

While the Silmarils weren't the responsibility of Gandalf or any of the Istari, I don't think it likely Gandalf would have allowed one to remain at Erebor.
Look at all the mischief they caused in the First Age. They seem to have engendered a lustful desire to possess them almost on the level of the One. Even old Elwë couldn't resist the lure.

But then if he tried to take it - if it was a Silmaril - imagine the consequences. I don't think this argument works against the Silmaril case, because, personally, I think Gandalf decided that a tomb and a secret were better for a Silmaril than:

-everyone knowing what it is
-even if not, suspicion from those involved in the story
-where would he then place it? Carry it around with him?
-how long before Sauron gets it, or at least news of it, and figures out it's a Silmaril?
-another war among Dwarves and Elves and Men
-No sense of finality to TH :( (no, this one's purely literary)

But that same note of finality has to keep the Silmarils where they belong: air/sky, water/sea, and fire/earth. Not involving themselves in politics of warring Dwarves and Elves.

blantyr

01-28-2012, 04:22 AM

But that same note of finality has to keep the Silmarils where they belong: air/sky, water/sea, and fire/earth. Not involving themselves in politics of warring Dwarves and Elves.

I don't hold it to mean much of anything, but do note two of the last options considered for handling the One Ring. One might take it on a ship, head out to sea, and cast it into the deeps, or one might toss it into a volcano.

SofieVandepitte

08-26-2013, 03:24 AM

(This is actually my first post ever on this forum, oeh, exciting!)

During the past few days, I've been reading The Hobbit and immediately, the reference to the Silmarilis hit me, when reading Bilbo's description of the Arkenstone in Smaug's lair.

At first, I was inclined to believe it was indeed one of two lost Silmarils, but after thinking about it a while, it just doesn't fit with me. I don't truly like the idea of it.

First, I had this feeling the Silmarils should have a more, eh... grand role to play in the Ages after Melkor's defeat and the Fall of Thangorodrim. Don't get me wrong, I think Erebor's fate is important, but I don't think Tolkien would have let the Dwarves or Erebor find one of three most important jewels in the history of Arda. (Especially when you consider the rather nasty business between the Dwarves and Thingol.)

Plus, like some other people noted before, I don't think Tolkien would let the Silmaril be buried with Thorin. Again, this doesn't fit nicely to me.

But, alas, these first arguments are my pure opinion. I love to see Holy Jewels in Holy Places or deep in the fundaments of Arda, not in a Dwarf's resting place.

But to get more theoretical:

I always thought the Silmarils burned those who wanted to touch them with Bad Intentions (so, not bringing them back to Valinor).

Morgoth, the most powerful of the Ainur, suffered from immense pains whenever he tried to touch them. Of course, Thorin isn't as dark & evil as Morgoth, but he's a mere Dwarf, when Morgoth's a very powerful ex-Vala.

The sons of Fëanor, Maedhros & Maglor, suffered, too. They also couldn't touch the gems.

So, I ask you, dear discussion partners, how could Bilbo touch the Arkenstone, when considering it is a Silmaril? How could the Dwarves (eg. Thorin) of Erebor have touched it?

How was Smaug not hurt by it? I don't have my copy of the Sil right now, but I do remember Silmarils haven't got soothing effects on dragons.

The gems are hallowed by Varda, I don't think that sort of enchantment wears off after spending some time in Arda and then being spewn out by a vulcano. That sort of magic is permanent, just like Valar in themselves are. Just like the Two Trees should have been, if Melkor hadn't destroyed them.

And then, if we choose to ignore the rather tedious touching-part, wouldn't it be kind of... weird of Gandalf in the first place to just let the Arkenstone be buried next to Thorin, if he knew it to be one of the Holy Gems? I know the Valar can't do anything with two of the three Sils, they need all three of them, but still, I think it rather obvious that they would've wanted the gem to be secured in Aman, instead of a Dwarf's grave.

Especially because Sauron is establishing his Dark Power once more in Middle-Earth. Manwë is very much aware of that; he sent the Istari to protect the peoples of ME against Sauron in the first place.

And if Sauron suddenly realized that Erebor holds a Silmaril, one of the gems that lead to the downfall of his Master before him, that the Valar crave for, I think he would've done everything in his power to steal it from Thorin's grave. I don't even want to think about what Sauron would've been capable of, if he owned a Silmaril.

Gandalf knows this all, so, to me, it would be, bluntly put, idiotic to leave such a power in Erebor, no matter what.

Plus, there is another person present who knows what a Silmaril looks like: Thranduil. I doubt the elf-king of the Woodland Realm would appreciate the knowledge of one of the Sils being buried with a Dwarf, Thorin Oakenshield of all people.

So, next to gut-feeling, I don't agree with the notion of the Arkenstone being one of the mighty Silmarils. ;)

(I hope I was a bit useful.)

Mithalwen

09-05-2013, 12:26 AM

Good points Sofie, welcome to the Downs.

Nerwen

09-05-2013, 09:16 AM

Welcome to the Downs, Sofie!

Quibbling for quibbling sake here: the deal with the Silmarils isn’t precisely that they burn "those who wanted to touch them with Bad Intentions (so, not bringing them back to Valinor)”; neither does it have anything to do with how powerful someone is– it’s this:

“no mortal flesh, nor hands unclean, nor anything of evil will might touch them, but it was scorched and withered,"

That is, the reason this “Arkensil" should have burned Bilbo and Thorin is simply that they’re both mortal. (It should, however, indeed have burned Smaug on moral grounds.)

Devium

09-01-2014, 10:27 AM

Let me first say that ever since I found and subsequently devoured every word a 1st edition copy of The Silmarillion in a box of old books in our basement as a 15 year old, I have longed to be able to converse about the intricacies and mysteries of Middle-earth history with someone without them looking at me like I was crazy. So I'm glad I found this site.

As for the Arkenstone=Silmaril debate, here are some of my thoughts on the theories put forth in this thread:

- The Lonely Mountain being a volcano - Many people have claimed at volcanos can't be conical with a pointy peak. This is not true at all. There are three types of volcanos, Cinder Cones, Composite Volcanos, and Shield Volcanos. The make up an appearance of these are quite different from each other based entirely on the type of eruptions that form them. Shield volcanos are not conical at all and are formed entirely by continuous lava seepage and cooling (think parts of Hawaii). There is very little pressure release in this type of volcanic eruption due to the proximity of the magma chambers to the earths surface, therefore there isn't very much ash or particulates released into the atmosphere. But the other two types, Cinder Cones and Composite volcanos, are characterized by violent eruptions due to the pressure and magma having to breaking through dense rock covering the magma chambers. This causes lots of particulate and ash to be flung into the atmosphere and settle along the slopes. Over many eruptions and coupled with lava flows, this causes a very conical mountain to rise. Then, as the volcano goes dormant, the ash and particulate weather faster that the solid, cooled magma lining the central vent, giving the appearance of a chimney at the top. So it is very much is possible for the Lonely Mountain to be a volcano.

-Gems can't form in volcanos- plenty of crystallization forms in magma chambers and is then pushed to the surface in eruptions. Some examples are diamonds and obsidian. Furthermore, there are enough heat and pressure in there that many metals such as gold and silver can be refined. Who knows, maybe even mithril ;).

My overall thinking after spending the better part of the past two evenings reading through all these theories and looking back at the books is that I am almost certain the Arkenstone as it stands in the Hobbit is not a Silmaril. Too many characters would have recognized it as such. Galadriel (Fëanors niece), Gandalf and Thranduil to name a few. Galadriel may have been content to leave it be considering her experience with the pain it caused. I doubt Gandalf would try to take it seeing as he generally takes a hands off approach when it comes to influencing the destiny of middle earth, preferring to assist and observe rather than take direct action himself. Thranduil's reaction could range anywhere from strong desire (he may not have seen it in the past, but would surely know what a Silmaril should look like) to outright lust to get from the dwarves. Certainly though, if it was a Silmaril, it wouldn't be regarded with the seeming apathy that it is from these three characters.

However, I have an inkling that had JRRT been given the opportunity to solidify, refine and publish his own version of the Silmarillion, the Arkenstone would have become a Silmaril. The Hobbit was published when JRRT was still formulating his Silmarillion mythos and as such he probably didn't have the Silmarils' qualities or fates set in stone (pun not necessarily intended). So the Arkenstone and the Silamarils could have grown out of the same place in his mind. I think had he been given more time to really distill his world into a cohesive canon, I have no doubt that is where the Arkenstone was heading.

But, as of now, let me introduce my own theory on the origin of the Arkenstone:

Fëanor, being the perfectionist he was, had to go through many inferior versions before he was able to create the three final Silmarils. One of those versions just wasn't quite indestructible, didn't have quite enough of the light of he trees, wasn't quite the right size for his tastes. So he threw it in the trash. Some Maia probably saw it, thought it would fetch a pretty penny, and hawked it to one of those rube Avarian elves still hanging out near lake Cuiviénen. Over the ages, it got lost among the markets and pawn shops of the Sindar until one Lorien elf dropped it on a weekend hiking trip and it fell into the caldera of the lonely mountain. Fast forward to the dwarves digging it up, naming it the Heart of the Mountain, and proclaiming that there is no other one like it. Thus, it becomes another example of the "little-man" syndrome that the dwarves harbor (passed down to them even from their very creation by Aulë) in their relationship with the elves: Their great gem that bestows a divine right to rule is just a cheap knock off of the real deal.

Sorry for the long windedness and thanks for bearing with me.

Nerwen

09-01-2014, 09:33 PM

Welcome to the Downs, Devium!. And we're fine with long posts here.

Now for some quibbling:
- The Lonely Mountain being a volcano - Many people have claimed volcanos can't be conical with a pointy peak.

-Gem can't form in volcanos- plenty of crystallization forms in magma chambers and is then pushed to the surface in eruptions. Some examples are diamonds and obsidian. Furthermore, there are enough heat and pressure in there that many metals such as gold and silver can be refined. Who knows, maybe even mithril .
Unless I've skipped over something, two people made the first claim and one person the second; both statements were contradicted by other posters. So I wouldn't say that's "many". Anyway, the problem with the "Arkensil" case is that it uses vulcanism as a sort of "handwave" to explain away all the discrepancies between Arkenstone and Silmaril ("it floated all the way from Beleriand", "they weren't really cutting it, they were scraping off the crust" etc). Meanwhile, of course, it completely ignores the rather greater probability of the jewel having formed in said volcano naturally.

Which brings me to your theory (yes I realise you're not serious, but let's pretend). Now, it does avoid the "Arkensil" problem of *distance*, but still requires that the dwarves, despite being master craftsmen, be unable to recognise a cut stone when they see one. Which I just don't think will *do*, sorry.:Merisu:

Finally- I haven't read "The Hobbit" for quite a while, but is all that about the Arkenstone "bestowing the divine right to rule" actually in it? I thought it was just a movie thing.:confused:

Zigûr

09-01-2014, 09:59 PM

Finally- I haven't read "The Hobbit" for quite a while, but is all that about the Arkenstone "bestowing the divine right to rule" actually in it? I thought it was just a movie thing.:confused:
It's definitely just a film thing. In the book the Arkenstone is a beautiful gem, but nothing more.

Personally I don't think Professor Tolkien would ever use such a hackneyed phrase, nor does it remotely fit with his own ethos. It's pretty lazy writing on the part of the filmmakers looking for a cheap MacGuffin, I would argue - a cliché that doesn't even fit because in the films (much like the non-Silmarillion books, really) there's no explicitly-defined concept of God or the divine, especially among Dwarves, which renders the phrase virtually nonsensical. Surely the only person who really has a 'divine right to rule' in the books would be Manwë. Thorin can't just be after the stone because he's greedy, because that wouldn't fit with their profitable, cliché tragic hero motivation.

I digress.

In regards to all this Silmaril-Arkenstone business, don't we have enough evidence to perceive that the Dwarves were sufficiently mighty craftsmen to be able to unearth and shape such a stone themselves? It's not like the Noldor had a monopoly on beautiful and precious things in Arda.

Belegorn

09-01-2014, 10:17 PM

don't we have enough evidence to perceive that the Dwarves were sufficiently mighty craftsmen to be able to unearth and shape such a stone themselves? It's not like the Noldor had a monopoly on beautiful and precious things in Arda.

I present to you the Nauglamír.

It was a carcanet of gold, and set therein were gems uncounted from Valinor; but it had a power within it so that it rested lightly on its wearer as a strand of flax, and whatsoever neck it clasped it sat always with grace and loveliness.

And it becomes a dwarf/elf combo.

the greatest of the works of Elves and Dwarves were brought together and made one; and its beauty was very great, for now the countless jewels of the Nauglamír did reflect and cast abroad in marvelous hues the light of the Silmaril amidmost.

Then Dior wears it and it makes him very fair to behold.

Then Dior arose, and about his neck he clasped the Nauglamír; and now he appeared as the fairest of all the children of the world , of threefold race: of the Edain, and of the Eldar, and of the Maiar of the Blessed Realm.

Devium

09-02-2014, 06:17 PM

Unless I've skipped over something, two people made the first claim and one person the second; both statements were contradicted by other posters. So I wouldn't say that's "many". Anyway, the problem with the "Arkensil" case is that it uses vulcanism as a sort of "handwave" to explain away all the discrepancies between Arkenstone and Silmaril ("it floated all the way from Beleriand", "they weren't really cutting it, they were scraping off the crust" etc). Meanwhile, of course, it completely ignores the rather greater probability of the jewel having formed in said volcano naturally.

I had read the many (many) posts on the subject in this thread, however, one poster would try say "yes, volcanos can be conical" and then another poster would rebut with "no, what about this example" and point to a shield volcano. I had not read anyone definitively state why certain volcanos could be conical an some wouldn't be. I do agree with the second part of your statement though in that it is far more likely to have formed in the volcano than it is that a Silmaril made its way thousands of miles using only the geologic cycle. However, two unanswered issues do arise:

1. It is never stated which fiery chasm Maedhros jumped into. It could have been in Beleriand or it could have been further east.
2. What process would cause a singular, unique gem to form with its own inner light in the magma chamber of a volcano? Just about every other artifact in Tolkien's universe was crafted by supreme skill or sorcery.

Which brings me to your theory (yes I realise you're not serious, but let's pretend). Now, it does avoid the "Arkensil" problem of *distance*, but still requires that the dwarves, despite being master craftsmen, be unable to recognise a cut stone when they see one. Which I just don't think will *do*, sorry.:Merisu:

I feel odd arguing for my comical, hair brained theory, but here we go :p
If the Arkenstone is an early attempt by Fëanor that was tossed out, specifically one that wasn't quite indestructible, once the dwarves found it, they could just cut it to whatever shape they desired whether it was previously cut or not. So there ya go.

Finally- I haven't read "The Hobbit" for quite a while, but is all that about the Arkenstone "bestowing the divine right to rule" actually in it? I thought it was just a movie thing.:confused:

I apologize. I may have pulled the "divine right" phrase from the movies which I didn't mean to. However, if I'm not mistaken, Thorin has claim to it as the king in the line of Durin. The Arkenstone is an heirloom of the ruling line of Durin's Folk. So naturally, whomever dwarf possesses it is the King of Durin's folk. That's more what I meant. Sorry for the confusion.

As an aside, it sure seems like PJ is building the Arkenstone up to be a Silmaril based on comments made by Thranduil thus far in the first two movies...

Tar-Jêx

09-03-2014, 05:37 PM

Most of the arguments for the Arkenstone=Silmaril are basically convenient scenarios or a different and obscure understanding of the text. I like to follow the text above all else.

If the Arkenstone was a Silmaril, and floated under the crust for a long time to eventually make its way into the Lonely Volcano (which I doubt is a volcano), it would take a very long time. Whilst a long time has passed, it seems illogical that this would actually happen.

For the carving on the stone, removing the stone off of a gem would be a formality, a common practice, so while the idea of removing the stone makes sense, it is a bit silly. Wouldn't dwarves want to clean all of their finds before cutting them and making them beautiful?

Seeing as how they found it in the mountain, and were said to cut it, this leads me to believe it was found in a similar fashion to diamond, just a big clump of it with no proper shape. Carving this stone into a shape would make sense.

If the Arkenstone was a Silmaril, many more parties would undoubtedly try to get their hands on it, especially the remaining Noldor. Thranduil would have recognized it, and Gandalf would have known, or feared, it was a Silmaril before the quest was begun.

I agree with the notion that if Tolkien had the chance to revise the Hobbit, he would potentially have more hints and inferences that the Arkenstone may be a Silmaril, or another stone of similar sort.

As it stands, I believe the Arkenstone to not be a Silmaril, but just a really pretty stone.

Nerwen

09-05-2014, 04:25 AM

I had read the many (many) posts on the subject in this thread, however, one poster would try say "yes, volcanos can be conical" and then another poster would rebut with "no, what about this example" and point to a shield volcano. I had not read anyone definitively state why certain volcanos could be conical an some wouldn't be. I do agree with the second part of your statement though in that it is far more likely to have formed in the volcano than it is that a Silmaril made its way thousands of miles using only the geologic cycle. However, two unanswered issues do arise:

1. It is never stated which fiery chasm Maedhros jumped into. It could have been in Beleriand or it could have been further east.
Well, that brings the distance problem back in. Not as badly as the supposition that the thing somehow floated all the way by itself, but you think it would have been mentioned that Maedhros had chosen to go on such an extremely long trek prior to doing away with himself… I know! Maybe the Silmaril fell out of his pocket and was scooped up by an eagle. The bird of course intended to take it back to Valinor, but, overcome by lust for the jewel, flew off with it in the opposite direction– only to have the hallowed crystal burn its now-unclean talons, forcing it to drop it into the crater of the then-active Erebor. (The eagle, not daring to show its beak in Aman and, went off to skulk in some mountains somewhere and possibly became the progenitor of the Fell Beasts.) There! Problem solved! :smokin:

2. What process would cause a singular, unique gem to form with its own inner light in the magma chamber of a volcano? Just about every other artifact in Tolkien's universe was crafted by supreme skill or sorcery.

I double-checked this, and the book is quite clear that the Arkenstone was *fashioned* by the dwarves. i.e. is a product of craft – it’s only on this thread that people seem to have decided they found it basically “as is”. Nonetheless the description does leave it open that its glowing is an inherent property of the stone itself (i.e. rather than the result of dwarven magic). However, I don’t see why that can’t be a freak of nature– after all Middle-earth possesses a metal, mithril, with special properties.
I feel odd arguing for my comical, hair brained theory, but here we go :p
If the Arkenstone is an early attempt by Fëanor that was tossed out, specifically one that wasn't quite indestructible, once the dwarves found it, they could just cut it to whatever shape they desired whether it was previously cut or not. So there ya go.
Ah, but my point is that they would know whether it was previously cut or not– again, these are supposed to be skilled craftsmen.

As an aside, it sure seems like PJ is building the Arkenstone up to be a Silmaril based on comments made by Thranduil thus far in the first two movies...
You may be right there. At any rate it’s certainly a bigger deal than it is in the book.

I agree with the notion that if Tolkien had the chance to revise the Hobbit, he would potentially have more hints and inferences that the Arkenstone may be a Silmaril, or another stone of similar sort.
But he had decades in which to do so and didn’t…

Galin

09-05-2014, 09:22 AM

I double-checked this, and the book is quite clear that the Arkenstone was *fashioned* by the dwarves. i.e. is a product of craft – it's only on this thread that people seem to have decided they found it basically "as is". Nonetheless the description does leave it open that its glowing is an inherent property of the stone itself (i.e. rather than the result of dwarven magic). However, I don’t see why that can't be a freak of nature– after all Middle-earth possesses a metal, mithril, with special properties.

Yes! And as I may have added before in this thread, I think it's notable that the gem still shone with its inner light when it was the gift of Girion to the Dwarves (in payment for the arming of his sons), with no information as to how Girion got the gem in the first place:

'It was a great white gem, that shone of its own light within, and yet cut and fashioned by the Dwarves to whom Girion had given it, it caught and splintered...'

This is actual 'new' evidence, or at least something not known until the relatively recent The History of The Hobbit was released, and to my mind it illustrates that Tolkien had no great problem giving this property to a gem used to 'pay' for the arming of Girion's sons.

Of course some will, or might, say the Gem of Girion only 'evolved' into a Silmaril in any case, as it evolved in the making of the tale.

Not me but some ;)

Ivriniel

12-05-2015, 07:38 PM

Do you think the Silmaril's migration was annual? Like the albatross? You also didn't take into account that, perhaps, the Balrog was on a skiing trip to Mount Gundabad at that point in time. Maybe Balrogs liked to ski. It could be a possibility. Tolkien never said Balrogs didn't ski. Or luge. Or take up needlepoint in their old age. I always think of Balrogs in tutus and pointe shoes doing ballet manuevers when I hear The Rite of Spring by Stravinsky. I'm sorry, I seem to be wandering. Random even.

I had to laugh out loud at this one. It was spontaneous and I couldn't stop it once the hilarity of the post struck me.....perhaps, Morothon, it wasn't a ski trip. Perhaps Balrogs enjoyed the equivalent (with lava flow) of our waterslides in Fun Parks. Perhaps they dropped the Silmaril from moving through too narrow a channel of lava flow on one of their 'fun rides'.

@Landrovel and the other ***awesomely brave*** posters who are tackling an unorthodox theory. I love youZ for it, and I'm going to - for the total sake of fun, take the 'side' in Debate with Landrovel's team.

Okay:

1. Lava flows in subterranean conduits, do indeed, transport items, for many, many kilometres.
2. When Maedhros hurled the Silmaril (the silly MAN woops ELF for all the kinslaying) he couldn't even touch his father's 'precious' Silmaril -- at all -- by end of FA.
3. Morgoth COULD touch it. Somehow, it seems, that Evil (c.f. evil) beings could bear the 'heat' of the touch of the Silmaril, if their Evil power was MAXED past, I dunno, 'exactly' what setting, but some 'thermostat' control seemed to apply.
4. Gothmog was pretty amped up, in terms of, ya know, Evil zshoo zshoo.
5. UNGOLIANT. hahahaha, DRANK all that fluid from the Trees and seemed to quite enjoy it.
6. Ergo, obviously, SPIDERS and possibly DRAGONS and BALROGS are all candidates for a 'Migrating Silmaril'....and I'll be cheeky, HYPOTHESIS.
7. I wonder what happens when, say, Balrogs, (between big battles) get BORED while their Dark Lord does this and that, and Dagor This and That readying. Perhaps, they found (was it Maedhros???Hahaha) Silmaril....thing....and said to each other (ya know lads, when I touch that darned thing, it hurts, and so, I peddle faster in our lava boat race).

Thus, in conclusion, perhaps a Balrog of lesser stature than Gothmog (e.g. the one in the Misty Mountains) used the Silmaril in a "Balrog Lava Race" and got into really big trouble, coz he dropped it, when he overshot, and popped up in Erebor, before smelling Dwaves in Khazad Dum.

And the more serious version - there are indeed, a number of ways a Silmaril can migrate through subterranean routes. And Master Tolkien was very good at giving us all Temporal Causality Loop headaches. That is, by the time he finished every darned one chapter at a time, poor Chris has a very big headache, trying to give dates, times, and annotations to emendations in the various headaches he must have had releasing post LotR works.

It's not -- entirely -- out of the question that the prof could have varied his story about the Silmarils, to say, allow for A SECOND one to be found, as the precursor to the Last Battle and Remaking of Arda. (that aweseome time when Teleperion and Laurelin are REKINDLED!)

AND Morothon, actually to use one of your own prior arguments (see the Bilbo thread), wait, I'll go get it and see for yourself.

AMEN

Ivriniel

12-05-2015, 07:50 PM

http://forum.barrowdowns.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=703077

<--snip-->So what does Tolkien do after publishing The Hobbit? In writing a sequel, he magnifies the tale of Bilbo Baggins and the other characters. Gandalf goes from pitching pinecones to defeating a Balrog. Cozy Erebor becomes the decrepit but magnificent Khazad-dum. The dispossessed Bard with the black arrow becomes the dispossessed Aragorn with shards and a lineage that predates the Age. Oh, and a magic ring that grants invisibility becomes the One Ring, the manifestation of all evil, created by an eternal foe, Sauron, who was borrowed from the 1st Age, but now was hiding out as a necromancer in Dol Guldur but really has a far greater keep in Mordor.<--snip-->

Ergo, by your own contrivance, we have a --theoretical-- tool to 'amp up' the 'dumbed down' "Hobbit-ish--bedtime-story-to-serious-tale" variation.

Let's add in this:

adapting Morothon's concepts

And the Arkenstone is magnified into the glorious Holy Jewel - A Silmaril in the book entitled.

Of The Tale of The Years of The Silmarils' Migration

(Holy Ghost Publications, Heavenly Year - Temporal Causality Loop A-La Tolkien, channelled by Grace AMEN)

Ivriniel

12-05-2015, 10:39 PM

I had read the many (many) posts on the subject in this thread, however, one poster would try say "yes, volcanos can be conical" and then another poster would rebut with "no, what about this example" and point to a shield volcano. I had not read anyone definitively state why certain volcanos could be conical an some wouldn't be. I do agree with the second part of your statement though in that it is far more likely to have formed in the volcano than it is that a Silmaril made its way thousands of miles using only the geologic cycle. However, two unanswered issues do arise:

1. It is never stated which fiery chasm Maedhros jumped into. It could have been in Beleriand or it could have been further east.
2. What process would cause a singular, unique gem to form with its own inner light in the magma chamber of a volcano? Just about every other artifact in Tolkien's universe was crafted by supreme skill or sorcery.

I feel odd arguing for my comical, hair brained theory, but here we go :p
If the Arkenstone is an early attempt by Fëanor that was tossed out, specifically one that wasn't quite indestructible, once the dwarves found it, they could just cut it to whatever shape they desired whether it was previously cut or not. So there ya go.

I apologize. I may have pulled the "divine right" phrase from the movies which I didn't mean to. However, if I'm not mistaken, Thorin has claim to it as the king in the line of Durin. The Arkenstone is an heirloom of the ruling line of Durin's Folk. So naturally, whomever dwarf possesses it is the King of Durin's folk. That's more what I meant. Sorry for the confusion.

As an aside, it sure seems like PJ is building the Arkenstone up to be a Silmaril based on comments made by Thranduil thus far in the first two movies...

:cool: post.

Was it you upstream or elsewhere where I read the really interesting stuff about Volcanism?

I reckon Balrogs can travel through lava flows, actually. So - after Beleriand sank-ed, who knows, where Maedhros ended up. We know he fell into a chasm or some such "the earth" nigh the water, and it's been so long since I read it, I can't quite remember exactly where.

Just recall seeing a really awesome Ted Nasmith of Maedhros hearling the Silmaril. I'll fetch it shortly.

[Taking a Liberty]Thence, after the sinking of Beleriand, much lava burst forth from the ruin of that great battle, as the swords of flame of Elves of Eldamar were hurled forth, in a great chorus of Elvish song, as the lands sank, so also Maedhros's*** resting place was consumed by great lava of heats.

Thence, that Balrod, who contrived in some long time in the future, to devour the Seven Fathers in Moria, did submerge himself in the great heats of lava, and so, escaped the Sinking of Beleriand.

Thence, as Fate would chance it, he happened to spy the glowing Silaril in the great subterannean lava flows and he grabbed the Holy Jewell. It burned the Balrog so very greatly, and so hotly, yet he bore it many a year, as he sojourned, lost in the deeps of the lava flows.

Thrice thence, over-thenced, or in accordance with Ring Lore of the Three-thence, thrice-ly thenced, and were it but for the Silmaril, he would have not have been UNlost (and not UNgoliant-ed). For so did he surface after such a journey in Erebor, and yet, could not bear the touch of the SIlmaril ever again. And so, in anguish, he hurled the gem into the bowels of Lonely Mountain, before making his way, overland to Moria in the stealth of night, and by the distractions allowed by Sauron, in the fifty years he was in Morder, in 1600 SA, (plus or minus 100 years or so as I can't quite remember off hand) during the forging of The One.

And so - coordinated his assault with Sauron upon the Dwarves when the Ring Spell was uttered--and Thrice-ly Thence, the Third - Celebrimbor TH-eard woops, I mean H-eard only the Ash Nazg thingy...not the Balrog thrice thing.[/Liberty]

***Canon-ITE-Warning - Informed Consent hahahaha

Ivriniel

12-05-2015, 11:05 PM

*M*A*G*L*O*R* throws the Simaril

http://tednasmith.poverellomedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/TN-Maglor_Casts_a_Silmaril_into_the_Sea.jpg

Nerwen

12-17-2015, 06:27 AM

Morthoron

12-17-2015, 04:38 PM

Now. I just got angrily neg-repped for a post I made here *two years ago*, so I think this could be a good time to remind everyone not to get *too* emotionally in the subject.:rolleyes:

Would you have complained if someone gave you a positive rep for a two year-old post? :D Sometimes, I get a positive and negative rep for the same post. There's no pleasing everyone.

IxnaY AintsaY

12-17-2015, 10:20 PM

Would you have complained if someone gave you a positive rep for a two year-old post? :D Sometimes, I get a positive and negative rep for the same post. There's no pleasing everyone.

Maybe that was me. Sometimes I give positive and negative rep to the same post. In my head. ;)

Nerwen

12-20-2015, 05:41 AM

Would you have complained if someone gave you a positive rep for a two year-old post? :D Sometimes, I get a positive and negative rep for the same post. There's no pleasing everyone.

You don't understand, the Arkensil is serious business!

Ivriniel

12-26-2015, 05:25 PM

This will never end, will it?:eek:

Now. I just got angrily neg-repped for a post I made here *two years ago*, so I think this could be a good time to remind everyone not to get *too* emotionally invested in the subject.:rolleyes:

Cool picture, Ivrin!

Thanx Nerwen :)

A little red square has come my way, of course as well over time here they're, I dunno, sometimes a 'badge of honour' and other times a 'thorn in my side'. But it's interesting what Morth<...>oron said about green and red for the same posts. Yes, there is no pleasing everyone.

This has been a very --hilarious-- thread to post at, and in fact, I thoroughly enjoyed the Arken-maril um, no, erm, the Silkenstone, um, not that!! The Sil-Ark-ril-enstonean ideas that have really assisted in my deepening of appreciation of Albatross ski trips with lava-resistant feathREs (c.f. spectREs), for flying thru subterranean lava conduits which.....morphed....the original Maedhros (woops, Maglis, um, no Maeghros's) Arkmeril that he hurled. That's how the dwarves found it.

bin

05-02-2021, 02:38 AM

I realize I am several years late to the party at this point, but I was just now reading about the Silmarils and how some have posited that it is possible that the Arkenstone is one of them. I read this thread and went back to the Silmarillion and in my mind it seems possible, if improbable. However, in the world of fiction anything that is possible may happen if the author deems it, and without the word of Tolkien for or against the theory, I don't believe we can conclude either way that it is or isn't.

Obviously any evidence for the Arkenstone being one of the Silmarils is purely circumstantial: they are both shiny rocks that glow and hold sway over the wills of those around them. I am not here to discuss evidence that they are the same — simply to argue against the evidence to the contrary.

Two of the most common arguments that they must not be the same stone in this thread are as follows: Silmarils burn not only the hands of any evil being that holds them, but also any mortal; and that it is said the dwarves cut and refined the Arkenstone. Both are taken directly from the Silmarillion. However, upon further inspection, they are not the rock solid rebuttals they seem.

First, while it is indeed said upon the creation of the Silmarils that they will burn the hands of any mortal that holds them, however, later it is said that the stone "suffered [Beren's] touch and hurt him not". This clearly contradicts the account that Varda rendered them untouchable by morals, and leaves room for the possibility that the stone could have also been touched by the later mortals that came into contact with the Arkenstone without being burned.

As for the claim that the stone could not be cut and refined by the dwarves, in the passage describing the stone it says "Like the crystal of diamonds it appeared, and yet was more strong than adamant, so that no violence could mar it or break it within the Kingdom of Arda.". First of all, we already know that adamant can be cut into a jewel due to the crafting of Nenya by the elves. Second, it says that violence cannot mar it, but by cutting facets it can be argued that far from impairing the Arkenstone, they refined the appearance. Finally, we know that it cannot be broken, but they Arkenstone still exists and its power remains intact, so this line of reasoning is unclear at best.

These are my responses to the most common issues with this idea. Let me know if there is anything glaring I have missed as this is my first post (if anyone will notice this on such and old thread).

Inziladun

05-02-2021, 04:04 AM

I realize I am several years late to the party at this point, but I was just now reading about the Silmarils and how some have posited that it is possible that the Arkenstone is one of them. I read this thread and went back to the Silmarillion and in my mind it seems possible, if improbable. However, in the world of fiction anything that is possible may happen if the author deems it, and without the word of Tolkien for or against the theory, I don't believe we can conclude either way that it is or isn't.

First off, welcome to the Downs!

This question is, of course, open-ended, like the Balrog "wings" discussion, and the nature of Tom Bombadil.
In this thread many years ago, I conceded that it was technically possible for the Arkenstone to be a Silmaril, but highly unlikely.

The way that in The Silmarillion the Silmarils are grouped together when describing their fate, intimates that all were placed beyond the reach of the denizens of Arda.

And thus it came to pass that the Silmarils found their long homes: one in the airs if heaven, and one in the heart of the world, and one in the deep waters.

That has an air of finality.

First, while it is indeed said upon the creation of the Silmarils that they will burn the hands of any mortal that holds them, however, later it is said that the stone "suffered [Beren's] touch and hurt him not". This clearly contradicts the account that Varda rendered them untouchable by morals, and leaves room for the possibility that the stone could have also been touched by the later mortals that came into contact with the Arkenstone without being burned.

To that, I would argue that Beren was a very special case, meant (as Gandalf would say) to accomplish certain tasks. Melian noted that her power

shall not restrain him, for doom greater than my power shall send him.

He was "suffered" to touch the Silmaril, because the Directing Power wished it so.

As for the claim that the stone could not be cut and refined by the dwarves, in the passage describing the stone it says "Like the crystal of diamonds it appeared, and yet was more strong than adamant, so that no violence could mar it or break it within the Kingdom of Arda.". First of all, we already know that adamant can be cut into a jewel due to the crafting of Nenya by the elves. Second, it says that violence cannot mar it, but by cutting facets it can be argued that far from impairing the Arkenstone, they refined the appearance. Finally, we know that it cannot be broken, but they Arkenstone still exists and its power remains intact, so this line of reasoning is unclear at best.

Well, all right. The question I have, though, (aside from how the stone could have made its way to Erebor to begin with) is why Dwarves would be been allowed to not only touch, but alter a Silmaril. They clearly were a unique work, bound with high matters affecting the fate of the world. Why would one be fated to end up in a relatively insignificant place, at one time sharing space with a dragon?

bin

05-02-2021, 05:17 PM

First of all, I am shocked at how quickly you responded after this thread being dead for so long.

I do acknowledge that there is definitely a suggestion that each of the three Silmarils will remain in their respective elements until they are recovered before the end of days. In my eyes, as the Arkenstone never passed beyond the hands of the dwarves, only passed between their halls, and was ultimately reinterred in the earth it can possibly be seen to not have been recovered, but moved — as long as the stone lies within the halls or hands of the dwarves, it belongs to the earth. As we do not know what comes to pass at the end, it is even possible that this movement was necessary for the future recovery of the stones in the first place, much like how Sméagol/Gollum was needed for the recovery and destruction of the ring. This could also explain why the dwarves were allowed to possess the stone despite their arguable unworthiness.

Your argument that Beren was the exception, not the rule is certainly a possibility. However, as far as I can tell (I may have missed something), there are no instances of any of the Silmarils burning someone simply because they are mortal. The two stones taken by Malgor and Maedhros both burned their new owners, but it is made clear that the reason for this is their evil, not because they are mortal. It is even said that "[Maedhros'] right thereto had become void", speaking of his right to the stone. This implies that the brothers would have possibly had a valid claim and right to the stones but for their evil actions. To me, this, and the lack of any being burned purely because of their mortality is evidence enough to suggest that the initial description of the hallowing of the stones is inaccurate.

Formendacil

05-02-2021, 06:06 PM

First of all, I am shocked at how quickly you responded after this thread being dead for so long.

The Dead rise to fulfill their oaths. ;)

I don't think there's any real in-canon support for the Arkenstone being a Silmaril. This is fairly clearly intended to not be the case. As much as it's impossible to prove a negative, Tolkien would clearly have mentioned this somewhere.

That said...

First, I think it's pretty clear from Rateliff's History of The Hobbit that Tolkien borrowed a lot of things wholesale from his mythology when writing The Hobbit and there is not much stretching involved to say that the Arkenstone is an ersatz Silmaril. When The Hobbit gets integrated into the mythos "for real" with the writing of The Lord of the Rings, these connections are either decanonised or rewritten or recast--Mirkwood cannot BE Taur-nu-Fuin, nor the Great River Sirion.

Secondly, although my opinion is that it is clear that "in the canon," (or the finished version... etc.) the Arkenstone cannot be a Silmaril, I don't think there's actually enough text on the matter to prove it definitively. All the fate of the Silmaril texts (i.e. anything in The Silmarillion after Túrin's death is reworked early material. The War of Wrath and the disposition of the Silmarils is from ca.1930 Qenta Noldorinwa and some later notes worked in. As far as my memory is concerned, the Appendices go into so little detail about the First Age that the Silmarils are barely mentioned, let alone their individual dispositions. So, if you want to make a case that the Christopher Tolkien-edited Silm is too flimsy to argue against the "Arkenstone is a Silmaril" theory... well, I have a thread for you (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=19500).

Rune Son of Bjarne

05-04-2021, 02:52 PM

As for the claim that the stone could not be cut and refined by the dwarves, in the passage describing the stone it says "Like the crystal of diamonds it appeared, and yet was more strong than adamant, so that no violence could mar it or break it within the Kingdom of Arda.". First of all, we already know that adamant can be cut into a jewel due to the crafting of Nenya by the elves. Second, it says that violence cannot mar it, but by cutting facets it can be argued that far from impairing the Arkenstone, they refined the appearance. Finally, we know that it cannot be broken, but they Arkenstone still exists and its power remains intact, so this line of reasoning is unclear at best.

I am firmly in the "no obviously it is not a Silmaril" camp, but I accept that a flimsy case could be made for the Arkenstone being a Silmaril. Though in my view it entails more than one leap of faith to arrive at that conclusion.

Anyways, I guess it could be that the dwarves, due to their origin and unknown destiny, were allowed to handle a Silmaril. However arguing that they should be able to do damage to a Silmaril, just as long as they made sure to categorize it as "improvements" seems like one such leap.

Furthermore I think it undermines the very core of the Silmarillion if Feanor's work could so easily be improved. These are jewels so fair that the very fate of Arda depends upon them, and apparently they could also do with a bit of a refurbishment...

It is one thing to have the skill to bring about the Nauglimir or other items that could compliment the Silmaril, another thing completely to alter something the Valar had hallowed.

The Dead rise to fulfill their oaths. ;)

I don't think there's any real in-canon support for the Arkenstone being a Silmaril. This is fairly clearly intended to not be the case. As much as it's impossible to prove a negative, Tolkien would clearly have mentioned this somewhere.

That said...

First, I think it's pretty clear from Rateliff's History of The Hobbit that Tolkien borrowed a lot of things wholesale from his mythology when writing The Hobbit and there is not much stretching involved to say that the Arkenstone is an ersatz Silmaril. When The Hobbit gets integrated into the mythos "for real" with the writing of The Lord of the Rings, these connections are either decanonised or rewritten or recast--Mirkwood cannot BE Taur-nu-Fuin, nor the Great River Sirion.

This I like, and in this respect I would be willing to concede that the Arkentone is a Silmaril of sorts.

William Cloud Hicklin

05-08-2021, 03:06 PM

In this case there is no doubt about it, not even the shadow of a penumbra in which Balrog wings exist.

Tolkien tells us that Feanor made the substance of the Silmarils "more strong than adamant, so that no violence could mar or break it within the Kingdom of Arda." But we are told of the Arkenstone that "the Dwarves had cut and shaped it into myriad facets."

Nope. No Dwarf or anyone else in Arda is shaping and faceting a Silmaril.

Morsul the Dark

05-08-2021, 04:36 PM

Tolkien tells us that Feanor made the substance of the Silmarils "more strong than adamant, so that no violence could mar or break it within the Kingdom of Arda." But we are told of the Arkenstone that "the Dwarves had cut and shaped it into myriad facets."

Where are you getting that last quote? I’m searching but can’t find a source for its making.

Inziladun

05-09-2021, 05:14 AM

I haven’t examined this thread thoroughly enough to know if this quote has been added already, but it seems to lay the matter to rest.

The Noldor also it was who first achieved the making of gems; and the fairest of all gems were the Silmarils, and they are lost. The Silmarillion Of the Beginning of Days

How much more finality does one require?

Morsul the Dark

05-09-2021, 05:44 AM

I haven’t examined this thread thoroughly enough to know if this quote has been added already, but it seems to lay the matter to rest.

The Silmarillion Of the Beginning of Days

How much more finality does one require?

I’d argue the The Silmarillion was written before The Hobbit and set before it by a wide margin. If we take the approach that these are all just translations vs Tolkien’s writings I put very little stock in the finality of its authors.

I mean I can write “my headphones are lost” does this mean I will never find them? Ever? “Lost” only has finality as a euphemism for death. And in Tolkien’s world that’s not even a definite.

“But what was lost may yet be found”-Gandalf council of Elrond

In fact the entire debate about the ring is losing it won’t be good enough. Eventually it’ll be found even from the deepest oceans.

As for shaping it, I easily interpret that as it being in a volcano rock that they chipped away to reveal it.

Is the Arkenstone a Silmaril? I don’t know. I do know arguments against it aren’t the most compelling I’ve read, after reading most of this thread.

Inziladun

05-09-2021, 11:54 AM

I’d argue the The Silmarillion was written before The Hobbit and set before it by a wide margin. If we take the approach that these are all just translations vs Tolkien’s writings I put very little stock in the finality of its authors.

To me, that points at the "canonicity" issue, and if we're going there, then all bets are off, and anything is possible.

I mean I can write “my headphones are lost” does this mean I will never find them? Ever? “Lost” only has finality as a euphemism for death. And in Tolkien’s world that’s not even a definite.

Yet, the Silmarils are consistently written as being important to a specific time in the history of Arda, with no indication they would ever again be a matter for the Children of Ilúvatar to be concerned.

As for Gandalf's remark at the Council of Elrond, for one thing, he was merely quoting Saruman's thoughts on Sauron's ideas about the One Ring's whereabouts.
Second, that comment was certainly valid for the Great Rings, as Gandalf told Frodo they "had a way of being found". But they were Sauron's work, and their propensity for attracting potential "owners" was due to a malevolent power.
I do not see the same characteristic in the Silmarils, because from all indications in the annals of Arda, their purpose was accomplished: they were in secure places where they would indefinitely preserve the light of the Trees, while being safeguarded from all, whether good, bad, or in-between.

Morsul the Dark

05-09-2021, 02:14 PM

Yet, the Silmarils are consistently written as being important to a specific time in the history of Arda, with no indication they would ever again be a matter for the Children of Ilúvatar to be concerned.

That’s certainly an interpretation, but again I’m not sure that’s an argument against their reappearance. Again I haven’t studied the Silmarillion or even read it so I only have surface level understanding through this thread and some articles, but it does seem to me the reemergence of light from the trees is if nothing else an excellent symbolic sign of strength. And we do know the stone is said to burn the unworthy Bilbo’s inherent place in the War of the Ring would make him worthy and Thorin (iirc) doesn’t handle it until he learns the wisdom of Bilbo.

Annoyingly I think if I were to stake a position on the affair it’d be agnosticism to say for sure it’s a Silmaril is equally a folly as to say it’s not.

As for everyone who keeps comparing this discussion to whether or not Balrogs have wings well, that is far more clear with one side being definitively wrong.:p

Morthoron

05-09-2021, 08:48 PM

That’s certainly an interpretation, but again I’m not sure that’s an argument against their reappearance. Again I haven’t studied the Silmarillion or even read it so I only have surface level understanding through this thread and some articles, but it does seem to me the reemergence of light from the trees is if nothing else an excellent symbolic sign of strength. And we do know the stone is said to burn the unworthy Bilbo’s inherent place in the War of the Ring would make him worthy and Thorin (iirc) doesn’t handle it until he learns the wisdom of Bilbo.

Annoyingly I think if I were to stake a position on the affair it’d be agnosticism to say for sure it’s a Silmaril is equally a folly as to say it’s not.

As for everyone who keeps comparing this discussion to whether or not Balrogs have wings well, that is far more clear with one side being definitively wrong.:p

*Sighs* The thread that refuses to die. I will give you some finality, anything further is simply arguing for arguing's sake. Direct quote:

"And thus it came to pass that the Silmarils found their long homes: one in the airs of heaven, and one in the fires of the heart of the world, and one in the deep waters."

1.The Silmaril tossed by Maglor into a fiery pit was in Beleriand, which no longer exists on a map. That whole wrath of Eru thing. It's not going to traverse thousands of miles away, under at least 2 mountain ranges and end up in Erebor.

And two other quotes:

"The great jewel shone before his [Bilbo's] feet of its own inner light, and yet, cut and fashioned by the dwarves..."

"Like the crystal of diamonds it [a Silmaril] appeared, and yet was more strong than adamant, so that no violence could mar it or break it within the Kingdom of Arda."

2. If a Silmaril can't be marred, how can it be cut and fashioned? How was Thrain, who certainly was not worthy of holding it in his hand, able to not only carry it about, but bequeath it to later unworthy dwarves so they could handle it?

And finally,

3. How could Olórin, a Maia of Valinor and accounted wisest of the Istari, not immediately recognize a Silmaril when he handled it? You think he forgot what it looked liked from back in the day in Valinor? The greatest of all the works of the Elves (and of the Istari, he was closest to the Elves)? He certainly knew the One Ring, and was a Ring-wielder himself. You don't forget a Silmaril once you see it. Plus, leaving it in Erebor would have its own inherent danger of being taken by Sauron, who did indeed attack Erebor during the War of the Ring.

4. According to the Final Prophecy of Mandos, after Melkor's defeat in the Dagor Dagorath, the Silmarils will be recovered by the Valar. Then Fëanor will be released from the Halls of Mandos and give Yavanna the Silmarils and she will break them and with their light she will revive the Two Trees. A Silmaril is, as has been said countless times, a "holy jewel" bound to the revival of the Two Trees at the end of all things.

5. Do you think when the Valar and Maiar are searching in vain for the third Silmaril, Gandalf will say, "Oh yeah, I almost forgot, it's buried in a crypt with a dead dwarf in Erebor several thousand mile east of here. I gave it back to him a while back. Ummm....why are all you guys glaring at me like that?"

To consider a Silmaril to be the Arkenstone not only strains credulity, it shatters it into tiny shards, fit to be broomed up and dumped in a waste bin.

Morsul the Dark

05-10-2021, 04:59 AM

*Sighs* The thread that refuses to die. I will give you some finality, anything further is simply arguing for arguing's sake. Direct quote:

"And thus it came to pass that the Silmarils found their long homes: one in the airs of heaven, and one in the fires of the heart of the world, and one in the deep waters."

1.The Silmaril tossed by Maglor into a fiery pit was in Beleriand, which no longer exists on a map. That whole wrath of Eru thing. It's not going to traverse thousands of miles away, under at least 2 mountain ranges and end up in Erebor.

And two other quotes:

"The great jewel shone before his [Bilbo's] feet of its own inner light, and yet, cut and fashioned by the dwarves..."

"Like the crystal of diamonds it [a Silmaril] appeared, and yet was more strong than adamant, so that no violence could mar it or break it within the Kingdom of Arda."

2. If a Silmaril can't be marred, how can it be cut and fashioned? How was Thrain, who certainly was not worthy of holding it in his hand, able to not only carry it about, but bequeath it to later unworthy dwarves so they could handle it?

And finally,

3. How could Olórin, a Maia of Valinor and accounted wisest of the Istari, not immediately recognize a Silmaril when he handled it? You think he forgot what it looked liked from back in the day in Valinor? The greatest of all the works of the Elves (and of the Istari, he was closest to the Elves)? He certainly knew the One Ring, and was a Ring-wielder himself. You don't forget a Silmaril once you see it. Plus, leaving it in Erebor would have its own inherent danger of being taken by Sauron, who did indeed attack Erebor during the War of the Ring.

4. According to the Final Prophecy of Mandos, after Melkor's defeat in the Dagor Dagorath, the Silmarils will be recovered by the Valar. Then Fëanor will be released from the Halls of Mandos and give Yavanna the Silmarils and she will break them and with their light she will revive the Two Trees. A Silmaril is, as has been said countless times, a "holy jewel" bound to the revival of the Two Trees at the end of all things.

5. Do you think when the Valar and Maiar are searching in vain for the third Silmaril, Gandalf will say, "Oh yeah, I almost forgot, it's buried in a crypt with a dead dwarf in Erebor several thousand mile east of here. I gave it back to him a while back. Ummm....why are all you guys glaring at me like that?"

To consider a Silmaril to be the Arkenstone not only strains credulity, it shatters it into tiny shards, fit to be broomed up and dumped in a waste bin.

1. Speculation on both sides

2. The Hobbit is written by Bilbo out of his understanding. As has been said chipping it out of volcanic rock will be sufficient explanation of this as misunderstood by Bilbo.

3. Since when has Gandalf been open about anything? His quest and mission was as a guide and his current task was keeping as many people alive as possible. Arguably getting The Lonely Mountain up and running would’ve been, to him, the best way to keep the thing safe. Also I’d say a quick text search of the Silmarillion only mentions Olorin a couple times, did he ever actually see or interact with them? He’s not omniscient.

4. “In those days the Silmarils shall be recovered from sea and earth and air,” it’s still in the Earth buried with Thorin. This doesn’t contradict the prophecy in any shape or form.

5. If they aren’t “searching in vain” then what does “lost” mean. If they supposedly know exactly where they are they’re not lost, just in storage. This interpretation completely contradicts getting rid of the things in the first place.

There’s plenty of reasons to doubt it’s a Silmaril. Plenty of reasons to believe it is. It only stretches Credulity if you’ve already set yourself dead against it.

Morthoron

05-10-2021, 06:48 AM

1. Speculation on both sides

2. The Hobbit is written by Bilbo out of his understanding. As has been said chipping it out of volcanic rock will be sufficient explanation of this as misunderstood by Bilbo.

3. Since when has Gandalf been open about anything? His quest and mission was as a guide and his current task was keeping as many people alive as possible. Arguably getting The Lonely Mountain up and running would’ve been, to him, the best way to keep the thing safe. Also I’d say a quick text search of the Silmarillion only mentions Olorin a couple times, did he ever actually see or interact with them? He’s not omniscient.

4. “In those days the Silmarils shall be recovered from sea and earth and air,” it’s still in the Earth buried with Thorin. This doesn’t contradict the prophecy in any shape or form.

5. If they aren’t “searching in vain” then what does “lost” mean. If they supposedly know exactly where they are they’re not lost, just in storage. This interpretation completely contradicts getting rid of the things in the first place.

There’s plenty of reasons to doubt it’s a Silmaril. Plenty of reasons to believe it is. It only stretches Credulity if you’ve already set yourself dead against it.

1. Speculation? :rolleyes: It is not speculation. Beleriand no longer exists. Drowned. Broken in the War of Wrath, and what little remained was destroyed by Eru. That whole drowning Numenor flap. Look it up. Also, traveling east from what once was Beleriand, you have to traverse a wide swathe of sea, pass beneath 2 mountain ranges, Ered Luin and Hythaiglir, and ford several rivers to reach Erebor. Jewels do not migrate.

2. So, in a matter of a few thousand years, a jewel suddenly gets a coating of volcanic rock? Well, if we are abandoning millions of years of geological record altogether, how fast did the Silmaril migrate to Erebor? Was it unladen? Did it stop for tea in Hobbiton, perhaps spend a weekend at a B&B in Bree?

3. We know quite a lot about Gandalf in Valinor. We know he was quite close to the Elves, for instance. And that Manwë himself requested Olórin to be one of the Istari. It's rather disingenuous to be dissing Gandalf at this point. But it amuses me to no end that folks will willfully argue that a Silmaril could be the Arkenstone, throw up nonsensical suppositions, and just as willfully ignore everything about the very nature of the Silmaril that would preclude it from being the Arkenstone, cut up and faceted and handled by dwarves and a precocious hobbit. Per the text:

"All who dwelt in Aman were filled with wonder and delight at the work of Fëanor. And Varda hallowed the Silmarils, so that thereafter no mortal flesh, nor hands unclean, nor anything of evil will might touch them, but it was scorched and withered; and Manwë foretold that the fates of Arda, earth, sea, and air, lay locked within them."

"Like the crystal of diamonds it [a Silmaril] appeared, and yet was more strong than adamant, so that no violence could mar it or break it within the Kingdom of Arda."

"And thus it came to pass that the Silmarils found their long homes: one in the airs of heaven, and one in the fires of the heart of the world, and one in the deep waters."

"Thus spake Mandos in prophecy, when the Gods sat in judgement in Valinor.... Thereafter shall Earth be broken and re-made, and the Silmarils shall be recovered out of Air and Earth and Sea; for Eärendil shall descend and surrender that flame which he hath had in keeping. Then Fëanor shall take the Three Jewels and he will break them and with their fire Yavanna will rekindle the Two Trees, and a great light shall come forth."

So Tolkien, who spent the better part of his life lavishing a great chronicle on the utmost importance of the holy jewels for the whole of Arda in the Quenta Silmarillion, suddenly pawns them off to a few shady dwarves in a second-rate backwater dwarven stronghold? One would think the migrating Silmaril would have taken up residence in a snazzier dwarven pad like Khazad-dûm (it would be on the way eastward on its long migration to Erebor).

Needless to say, if you wish to ignore the very nature of a Silmaril, its very specific story and attributes, how it effects those who are not meant or unworthy to touch it (and that would include Morgoth, Carcharoth, Maglor and Maedhros), and the finality by which Tolkien lays them to rest, then further discussion is fruitless.

Huinesoron

05-10-2021, 08:54 AM

Needless to say, if you wish to ignore the very nature of a Silmaril, its very specific story and attributes, how it effects those who are not meant or unworthy to touch it (and that would include Morgoth, Carcharoth, Maglor and Maedhros), and the finality by which Tolkien lays them to rest, then further discussion is fruitless.

Are we allowing or ignoring voice of the author? Because yeah, Tolkien is pretty clear that the Silmarils stayed where they were put. On that basis I don't think there's an argument to be made (other than the one about the Arkenstone 'being a Silmaril' in the same sense that Mirkwood 'is' Taur-na-Fuin and the Elvenking 'is' Thingol).

But if we treat the Silmarillion as a historical text, then the chronicler (Noldorin or Numenorean) would have no way of knowing! And it's actually feasible for Maedhros' Silmaril to wind up in Erebor - but not to be mined there.

Let's imagine Maedhros' "fiery chasm" is, or shortly after gave rise to, a rhyolitic volcanic eruption. That's the kind of eruption that forms obsidian - black volcanic glass. The Silmaril could have easily been encased in the stuff, and fairly near the surface. Of course, you'd need to be a miner to retrieve it, and fireproof to boot.

Last of all the eastern force to stand firm were the Dwarves of Belegost, and thus they won renown. For the Naugrim withstood fire more hardily than either Elves or Men, and it was their custom moreover to wear great masks in battle hideous to look upon; and those stood them in good stead against the dragons.

Oh yeah them. ^_^ Obsidian is probably the sharpest blade you can get - in modern times there have been experiments with using it for surgical scalpels - so I can easily imagine the dwarves of the Blue Mountains finding it and going 'score!'. So they chip away at it, hauling it away in chunks - and then they find a piece which seems to glow with its own light...

We know from Gimli's comments on the Glittering Caves that dwarves didn't just hack up rocks to get to the most valuable treasures. Depending on how much obsidian a Silmaril can shine through, this could be a substantially larger chunk - I think it plausible they would have carved a larger globe around it, not coming close to the actual Silmaril. Cutting facets into obsidian would require remarkable skill, but oh yeah, dwarves.

So now we have the Arkenstone in the Blue Mountains, but, like... it's pretty obviously a Silmaril, right? I mean, the dude who had one of them went for a lava bath, and now the same lava produced a glowing rock. And Silmarils are holy objects. So they wouldn't keep it in the minor holdings the Blue Mountains had become - they would have taken it east, to either Khazad-Dum - or Gundabad, sacred place of the Dwarves.

If it was in Moria, it's hard to see how it couldn't have been common knowledge - but Gundabad is a different story. That fastness was taken by Orcs in the middle of the Second Age. There's a pattern of Silmarils being spirited away from realms under attack - Doriath, the Havens - and with Khazad-Dum locked down at the time, it would have had to be carried east, towards the Iron Hills.

But it's a long way to the Iron Hills, and the Grey Mountains were infested with Orcs. What if the fleeing dwarves never made it that far, but holed up in a single, lonely mountain until at last they were destroyed...?

Three thousand years pass. The Arkenstone, already known only to a few, passes out of all memory - or does it? The Heirs of Durin are known to be able to keep secrets about precious treasures over that timescale - they kept their Ring hidden! They could also have passed down the tale: we once held a Silmaril; it left Gundabad but never arrived in the Iron Hills. It must be somewhere...!

And so, when Nain I is killed by an ancient evil, and Thrain I flees Moria, he decides that his people could really do with a holy relic to gather around. Rather than moving his throne to the already-settled Iron Hills, he heads for the #1 prospect as the resting place of the Arkenstone - the Lonely Mountain. (Being a dwarf, he also hedges his bets and sends some of his people into the Grey Mountains, but he's pretty sure it's Erebor he wants.) And lo and behold, down in the deepest cavern, clutched perhaps in the brittle skeletal hand of an ancient Longbeard, he finds it: the Arkenstone, the Silmaril, the Heart of the Mountain Kingdom.

And no, he doesn't tell anyone what it is - there's a grumpy elf in the forest next door who is noted for all but outright claiming to be the Heir of Doriath. You do not want him repeating Thingol's antics. No, Thrain decides, we'll just claim we mined this up - it's just a random glowing rock, nothing for anyone else to get excited about...

Or something like that. It works only if you treat the texts as historic documents - it's flatly against the will of the author. :D But sometimes that can be fun to play around with.

(As to Gandalf: well, he did fail to identify the One Ring, which was imbued with power akin to his own, even while picking it up to put in its envelope. But also, given how much trouble the Arkenstone had caused when everyone thought it was just a shiny rock, sticking it unidentified in a tomb was probably the best place for it!)

hS