New evidence for the Arkenstone-Silmaril case

[Landroval]

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]

Firstly– welcome to the Downs, Landroval!

Originally Posted by 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.

Originally Posted by Landroval

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]

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]

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.

[Landroval]

Thanks for the welcome.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

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. 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.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Landroval

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.

[Landroval]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

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."

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by 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. 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]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

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]

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

Originally Posted by Landroval

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]

Originally Posted by Landroval

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.

Originally Posted by Landroval

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.

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. 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.

Originally Posted by Landroval

Out of curiosity, Morthoron, PPC member?

I have no idea what you are referring to.

[Findegil]

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]

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'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.

Originally Posted by Findegil

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]

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.

[Puddleglum]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

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]

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]

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 Morthoron

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.

Originally Posted by Findegil

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]

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]

Originally Posted by Puddleglum

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]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

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.