New evidence for the Arkenstone-Silmaril case

[The Saucepan Man]

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I can understand there being debate when talking about JRRT's unpublished and/or incomplete works or where there is ambiguity in the published works (for example, concerning Balrog's wings).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. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

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

Edit: Just so there is no misunderstanding, it was MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie that wrote that, lindil. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] 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 ]