New evidence for the Arkenstone-Silmaril case - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

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.

01-26-2012, 05:43 AM	#11
Findegil King's Writer Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 1,721	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.