New evidence for the Arkenstone-Silmaril case

[oddkins]

Originally Posted by blantyr

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]

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]

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]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

I am not sure why this inane debate continues.

Is not insane debate the purpose of these forums?

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by blantyr

Is not insane debate the purpose of these forums?

But redundant?...

[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?

[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.

[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?