New evidence for the Arkenstone-Silmaril case

[bin]

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]

Originally Posted by bin

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.

Originally Posted by bin

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.

Originally Posted by bin

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]

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]

Originally Posted by bin

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.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by bin

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.

Originally Posted by Formendacil

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]

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]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

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.