/arda/ - Tolkien's Legendarium

I'd rather say it was the Dwarve's own kind of Silmarill. Where Elves crafted theirs from the light that shown in their youth, dwarves cut their own from the rock they were born from. As stunted yet profound as the race that begat it.

Pretty sure Tolkien himself said it wasn't.

Copied this from here: http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Misconceptions#The_Arkenstone_was_a_Silmaril

>"The Arkenstone was a Silmaril, probably the one thrown into a fiery pit by Maedhros, and found its way (geologically?) to the north, to be rediscovered by the Khazad of Erebor. Tolkien wrote that the two lost Silmarils would remain lost until the end of Arda. However, in a partial translation of early Silmarillion texts into Old English Tolkien used the etymologically related term 'Eorclanstanas' ('holy stones') to translate 'Silmarils' - suggesting that he may have borrowed the name and other concepts from the Silmarils in describing the Arkenstone.

A Silmaril is a gemstone hallowed by Varda which would not suffer the touch of mortal or evil hands.[1] It only allowed Beren to handle it, but Beren also lost the hand that held it. Many mortals handled the Arkenstone without a consequence, and they did not all have good intent. It would have burned them and possibly burned Smaug if it were truly a Silmaril. As attractive as this theory is, because it would have made the Arkenstone such a poignant element in The Hobbit, it can only be, at best, Silmaril-like or Silmaril-inspired. The latter being the most likely case. It is not a Silmaril."

Whether Tolkien really verified it himself or not it still stands that the Silmarils themselves could not be touched nor handled by mortals. I personally would have loved the idea of it being worked into the story. Even then though, since the Silmarillion itself is more a chronicle of myths and epics what could be considered fact or fiction to the reality of Middle Earth is up for debate. If you take the Silmarillion as the ultimate final word then by definition the Arkenstone would likely just be it's own special stone

>>497

I would take the Silmarillion as fact. After all, there were people in Middle Earth who had experienced pretty much all of it, save for the very beginning. Galadriel walked in Valinor under the light of the two trees, and Círdan was probably one of the elves that awoke at Cuívienen. Even the very beginning would have come to those two via primary sources, the Valar and Maiar themselves (all of them in Galadriel's case, and Ulmo and Ossë in the case of Círdan).

>>504

I would agree based on that yeah. There are multiple sources in Middle Earth who had been alive long enough to verify this, Gandalf included. Though even then, the specific circumstances of all the stories aren't necessarily understood and not all of these sources were there to witness events besides Manwe himself since he can see most everything.

I'd like to think that everything in the Silmarillion is the truth by all who witnessed it, and it may very well be. In that way it really is sort of a Bible. You can take it as the ultimate word of God (Eru) or as a collection of stories from which Middle Earth takes its lessons (though more verifiable since there were people alive to say they were actually there)

>>504

>Silmarillion as fact

Isn't there a line (I think concerning the origin of dwarves) saying that the Silmarillion is a chronicle by the elves, and they may not be reliable narrators in everything?

And didn't Tolkien frequently talk about the writ-in-stone books as if their accounts were up for conjecture?