Narn I Chîn Húrin 1: Túrins Fostering

[Findegil]

Lets count which oppions we have so fare:
Gondowe has offer a no in some way
Aran has said no clearly
Aiwendil is abivalent leaning to no.

I myself offer a clear yes.

Counting we have:
2.5 no
1.5 yes

Even if Maedhros would give a clear yes we only could reach a patt. In that situation savety has to rule. And that means we will not take the additions from the Lay up into our text of the Narn. I will restore them as part of the appendix, which documents the essential parts of our discussions here.

I think we are done with this part of the Narn. Lets move on to Beleg & Falivirn.

[Aiwendil]

I hate to let the rule here be by majority rather than unanimity, but I suppose there's little sense in having a protracted debate about this. If someone changes his mind, it's easy enough to put those excerpts back in.

[Aran e-Godhellim]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

Of course, for those very reasons, one could ask whether anything is really to be gained by adding them. If we view them simply as longer-winded ways of saying what's already less explicitly said in the Narn, then adding them adds nothing of substance to the text (one could argue that it adds something of literary quality to the text, but this is of course question-begging).

While I do agree with your "three arguments," this was actually my main concern. Apologies if that wasn't clear.

[gondowe]

As to the matter above, Findegil is rigth with my vote as I explained, I think the Narn is overall, the final view of the history by Tolkien, and with the finished parts I think we must not do anything. Not with the parts not finished, that fortunately were left in the Lay, (as a premonition, I like to think).
One can say, "so for what reason in a "finished work" like the Valaquenta, you add parts of the LT?". Because I think the descriptions of the houses of the Valar, etc, relly adds a worthwhile information.

Greetings.

[Aiwendil]

Looking back at this I realize there are problems with the excerpt from the Lay used at Mim's death:

RD-EX-11.51b<editorial bridge said Húrin. And it is sung that
><Lay of the Children of Húrin {The}the dawn over {Doriath}[Narog] __ dimly kindled {695}
saw {Blodrin Bor's son}[Mîm the petty-dwarf] __ by a beech standing
with throat thriléd __ by a thrusting arrow,
whose shaven shaft, __ shod with {poison}[iron],
and feather-wingéd, __ was fast in the tree. [5]
He bargained the blood __ of {his brothers}Túrin's band for gold: {700}
this his meed meted - __ in the mirk at {random}[Narog];
by an {orc-}arrow __ his {oath}[curse] came home.>

Lines 696 and 702 no longer alliterate; also, in lines 700 and 702 don't scan so well. For line 696 what occurs to me is this:

saw {Blodrin Bor's son}[Mîm the petty-dwarf] __ {by a beech}unmoving, standing

Nothing jumps out at me for the other two lines, though; I'll look at them again when I have more time.

[Findegil]

Oh yes, these lines were a bit rough edited.

696: I do not like your solution over much what about:

saw {Blodrin Bor's son}[Mîm the betrayer] __ by a beech standing

700: I tried 'the brotherhood' instead of 'his brothers' but that is probably to long. What about:

He bargained the blood __ of {his brothers}[the band] for gold:

701: I believe you mean 701 does not scan well. And I understand your concerns. But I can not find any fitting featur of geographie or soruonding which seemed better. Probably we should change the half line completly:

this his meed meted - __ in the {mirk at random}[meeting with Húrin];

702: Not that easy either. But probably this is a good try:

by an {orc-}[cruel ]arrow __ {his oath}[Andróg's curse] came home.>

to have a probably smoother read, hear a cleared version of complete add from the Lay:

the dawn over Narog __ dimly kindled
saw Mîm the betrayer __ by a beech standing
with throat thriléd __ by a thrusting arrow,
whose shaven shaft, __ shod with iron,
and feather-wingéd, __ was fast in the tree.
He bargained the blood __ of the band for gold:
this his meed meted - __ in the meeting with Húrin;
by an cruel arrow __ Andróg's curse came home.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aran e-Godhellim]

Originally Posted by Findegil

Oh yes, these lines were a bit rough edited.

696: I do not like your solution over much what about:

700: I tried 'the brotherhood' instead of 'his brothers' but that is probably to long. What about:
701: I believe you mean 701 does not scan well. And I understand your concerns. But I can not find any fitting featur of geographie or soruonding which seemed better. Probably we should change the half line completly:
702: Not that easy either. But probably this is a good try:
to have a probably smoother read, hear a cleared version of complete add from the Lay:

Respectfully
Findegil

Not bad, but I'd alter it a bit. I think a new line is needed:

<Lay of the Children of Húrin {The}the dawn over {Doriath}[Narog] __ dimly kindled {695}
saw {Blodrin Bor's son}[Mîm the betrayer] __ by a beech standing[.]
{with}[His] throat {thriléd}[was thriled] __ by a thrusting arrow,
whose shaven shaft, __ shod with {poison}[iron],
and feather-wingéd, __ was fast in the tree. [5]
He bargained {the blood __ of his brothers for gold}[for gold __ the blood of his leige]: {700}
this his meed meted __ in {the mirk at random}[meeting with Húrin];
[Andróg, oathbreaker, __ at last was avenged]
by {an}[a] {orc-}[cruel] arrow __ his {oath}[curse] came home.

I added a line in, and altered the third line to get rid of a literary device Tolkien almost certainly would have removed. (the use of "ed" as a syllable)

I also changed "an cruel" to "a cruel," and proposed my own change to the "blood of his brothers" line. Here's an unmarked version:

the dawn over Narog __ dimly kindled
saw Mîm the betrayer __ by a beech standing.
His throat was thriled __ by a thrusting arrow,
whose shaven shaft, __ shod with iron,
and feather-wingéd, __ was fast in the tree.
He bargained for gold __ the blood of his leige:
this his meed meted __ in meeting with Húrin;
Andróg, oathbreaker, __ at last was avenged
by a cruel arrow __ his curse came home.

[Aiwendil]

Line 696: Findegil's suggestion is:

saw {Blodrin Bor's son}[Mîm the betrayer] __ by a beech standing

Unfortunately, 'betrayer' alliterates on 't', not 'b' (it is stressed on the second syllable). One possibility would be:

saw {Blodrin Bor's son}[the traitor Mîm] __ by a {beech}[tree] standing

Unfortunately, 'tree' is used again in line 699. We could, however, safely emend that to 'trunk'.

697: Aran suggests changing the line to remove the syllabic '-ed'. While I can certainly see the temptation to do so, I think that there is no justification for that in our principles - our goal is not to correct or improve on what Tolkien wrote. So I'm for keeping the original line here.

700: We have Findegil's suggestion:

He bargained the blood __ of {his brothers}[the band] for gold:

And Aran's:

He bargained {the blood __ of his brothers for gold}[for gold __ the blood of his leige]:

Findegil's has the advantage of retaining the full alliteration, but I'm afraid 'the band' is not so clear. Aran's idea to move 'for gold' into the first half-line so that we can alliterate 'bargained' with 'blood' is a good one but it requires the invention 'of his liege'. Also - and now I'm being really pedantic - he actually did not bargain his liege's blood for gold (if his liege is Turin), as he specifically required of the Orcs that Turin not be killed.

A possibility is:

He bargained {the blood __ of his brothers} for gold [__ the blood of his guests

'Guests' referring to the outlaws who were dwelling in his house (and also providing a nice double alliteration). Or, if 'guests' is deemed an unsuitable word, something like:

He bargained {the blood __ of his brothers} for gold [__ the blood of the outlaws

701: I actually think your original suggestion for 701 scans fine, Findegil. I would use it.

Aran suggests adding the line:

[Andróg, oathbreaker, __ at last was avenged]

Certainly, it seems that if Tolkien had written this piece of verse with the story of Androg's curse in mind, some line in this vein would have been included. But I'm afraid adding a line is too great a liberty for us. Also, as it stands it doesn't scan properly; there's no alliterating stress in the second half-line ('avenged' alliterates on 'v' and in any case it must be the first stress of the second half-line that alliterates).

702: Findegil's suggestion (with Aran's correction of 'an' to 'a'):

by a{n} {orc-}[cruel ]arrow __ {his oath}[Andróg's curse] came home.>

I think the addition of 'Androg's' makes the second half-line too long. I wonder if we could simply use:

by a{n} {orc-}[cruel ]arrow __ his {oath}[curse] came home.>

That is, can we use 'his curse' to mean not 'the curse uttered by Mim' but 'the curse upon Mim'? It seems all right to me, if perhaps not ideal.

I also think that we might do away with the editorial 'and it is sung that'.

So my suggested text is:

RD-EX-11.51b<editorial bridge said Húrin.
><Lay of the Children of Húrin The dawn over {Doriath}[Narog] __ dimly kindled {695}
saw {Blodrin Bor's son}[the traitor Mîm] __ by a {beech}[tree] standing
with throat thriléd __ by a thrusting arrow,
whose shaven shaft, __ shod with {poison}[iron],
and feather-wingéd, __ was fast in the {tree}[trunk]. [5]
He bargained {the blood __ of his brothers} for gold [__ the blood of his guests] {700}
this his meed meted - __ in the mirk at {random}[Narog];
by a{n} {orc-}[cruel ]arrow __ his {oath}[curse] came home.>

In plain text:

The dawn over Narog __ dimly kindled
saw the traitor Mîm __ by a tree standing
with throat thriléd __ by a thrusting arrow,
whose shaven shaft, __ shod with iron,
and feather-wingéd, __ was fast in the trunk.
He bargained for gold __ the blood of his guests
this his meed meted - __ in the mirk at Narog;
by a cruel arrow __ his curse came home.

[Aran e-Godhellim]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

697: Aran suggests changing the line to remove the syllabic '-ed'. While I can certainly see the temptation to do so, I think that there is no justification for that in our principles - our goal is not to correct or improve on what Tolkien wrote. So I'm for keeping the original line here.

I thought that might be the ruling. I just mentioned it for the sake of having it there. I've no problem with not using it.

Aran's idea to move 'for gold' into the first half-line so that we can alliterate 'bargained' with 'blood' is a good one but it requires the invention 'of his liege'. Also - and now I'm being really pedantic - he actually did not bargain his liege's blood for gold (if his liege is Turin), as he specifically required of the Orcs that Turin not be killed.

A possibility is:


'Guests' referring to the outlaws who were dwelling in his house (and also providing a nice double alliteration). Or, if 'guests' is deemed an unsuitable word, something like:

I heartily approve of "guests." Excellent idea!

Aran suggests adding the line:


Certainly, it seems that if Tolkien had written this piece of verse with the story of Androg's curse in mind, some line in this vein would have been included. But I'm afraid adding a line is too great a liberty for us. Also, as it stands it doesn't scan properly; there's no alliterating stress in the second half-line ('avenged' alliterates on 'v' and in any case it must be the first stress of the second half-line that alliterates).

Ah! I knew I missed something in that line. Oh, well.

That is, can we use 'his curse' to mean not 'the curse uttered by Mim' but 'the curse upon Mim'? It seems all right to me, if perhaps not ideal.

I'll agree with that as well.

The only problem I still have is with "the traitor Mîm." That line still doesn't flow as well.

[Findegil]

Woo, that is a fast development to a better editing!

I just wonder, can't we us 'trunk' in line 696 and leave 'tree' in line 699?

I am okay with line 697 unaltered.

Also 'guests' for Turin, Beleg and band is okay for me.

'his curse' could even refer to his curse on Andróg, since what came home was the counter curse of Andróg.

I would have wished for Andrógs name to be mentioned here to make the referenc clearer (only a view lines above Mîm curses the hoard of Glaurung), but I can go without. Should the readers work it out by themselves!

If you don't feel we need the bridge, I supose it can go.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aiwendil]

Findegil wrote:

I just wonder, can't we us 'trunk' in line 696 and leave 'tree' in line 699?

I thought of this, but I don't think that 'by a trunk standing' is clear (trunk of what?) . But after the 'tree' is mentioned, it's clear that 'trunk' refers to the trunk of the tree.

But Aran, I believe you still have reservations about "the traitor Mim" in line 696? Do you have an alternative suggestion? We could use any of several variations with the 'tr' alliteration, e.g.:

saw {Blodrin Bor's son}[Mîm the betrayer] __ by a {beech}[tree] standing

or

saw {Blodrin Bor's son}[Mîm the traitor] __ by a {beech}[tree] standing

or

saw {Blodrin Bor's son}[traitorous Mîm] __ by a {beech} [tree] standing

My only reservation about options like the first two is that the alliteration in the first half-line falls on the second stress, which is allowed but generally avoided and rather rarely done by Tolkien.

[Aran e-Godhellim]

saw {Blodrin Bor's son}[traitorous Mîm] __ by a {beech} [tree] standing

This option sits well with me. I can't think of anything better for now.


I did however realize I have two other problems:

1. This is a small thing, but the editorial bridge must either go or be altered, because Tolkien stressed at least twice that the Narns were not "sung."

2. This is more major. How can we justify having this portion of the Lay at all? After all, the later conceptions of the lay ended before the Wanderings of Húrin! I don't see where this fragment comes in.

[Aiwendil]

Aran wrote:

1. This is a small thing, but the editorial bridge must either go or be altered, because Tolkien stressed at least twice that the Narns were not "sung."

Very much agreed.

2. This is more major. How can we justify having this portion of the Lay at all? After all, the later conceptions of the lay ended before the Wanderings of Húrin! I don't see where this fragment comes in.

Interesting question. Of course, if we remove the editorial bridge then we no longer claim that the lines of alliterative verse are an excerpt from the Lay of the Children of Hurin. They could just be an account of Mim's death, with no more 'in-universe' existence than our prose narratives.

But I imagine it very likely that there was a lay that told of Hurin's visit to Nargothrond. For one thing, I find it remarkable that the 'Atanatarion' would cover all the later tales of Beleriand with the sole exception of the Ruin of Doriath. More convincingly, Tolkien called 'The Wanderings of Hurin' the link to 'Sigil Elu-naeth', 'The Necklace of the Woe of Thingol'. Now, we don't know that the tale of 'Sigil Elu-naeth' was a 'Narn' in the same meter as the Narn i Chin Hurin, but it's at least plausible that it was, and that our excerpt comes from that lay.

Personally, I imagine the 'Narn e'Rach Morgoth' to consist of two parts, the 'Narn i Chin Hurin' and the 'Narn Sigil Elu-naeth', just as the 'Narn en-El' consists of 'Narn e-Dant Gondolin' and 'Narn Orthad en-El'. But of course this is just my own fancy.

[gondowe]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

Personally, I imagine the 'Narn e'Rach Morgoth' to consist of two parts, the 'Narn i Chin Hurin' and the 'Narn Sigil Elu-naeth', just as the 'Narn en-El' consists of 'Narn e-Dant Gondolin' and 'Narn Orthad en-El'. But of course this is just my own fancy.

I'm agreed with you, the idea comes possibly from the ancient LT T of Tinuviel ,TT, T Nauglfring, FoG and T of Earendel. But it is not clear what was the last idea of JRRT, because apart from the sentence published in Myths Transf, with the Atanatarion there is a sentence (I don't remember where) that the great tales must be four. Which is the fourth Sigil elu naeth? or Narn en-el?
When I worked on the final chapter and divided in two, I consider in include it after the narn Gondolin, but it's difficult, and still doubt.

Greetings

[Findegil]

First to the text:

'traitorous' sounds by itsself a bit blocky but it alliterates nicely.

I understand why 'trunk' is not good in line 696, but couldn't we use 'beech' from line 696 in line 699?

The editorial bridge is gone, save the closing phrase of Húrins direct speech. The 'singing' in these phrases must be contrilled in the others. Since Aiwendil put the in question generally, I will to have to have a look at them any way.


'Narn Sigil Elu-naeth' as of the Atanatarion: Seem not like a fancy to me but a nice theory. It explains why in the 'Narn i·Chîn Húrin' Húrins further actions are not told.
So the overall structer might have looked like this:

ATANATÁRION
.Narn Beren ion Barahir or Narn e·Dinúviel
.Narn e·mbar Hador
..Narn e·'Rach Morgoth
...Narn i·Chîn Húrin
...Narn Sigil Elu-naeth
..Narn en·Êl
...Narn e·Dant Gondolin
...Narn Orthad en·Êl

Nice, but the more I look at this the more I can understand what dounted the old Professor. If we agree on this I will have to look in to the chapter structer of 'Translation from the Elvish', if it changes anything there.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aiwendil]

I understand why 'trunk' is not good in line 696, but couldn't we use 'beech' from line 696 in line 699?

Good idea! I think we can.

[Aiwendil]

A very small thing I just noticed, but might as well point it out before I forget.

NA-TI-15.5:

<NA; Note 10 Then Algund, the old outlaw who had fled down Sirion from the Nirnaeth Arnoediad, said{ that Túrin}/: ‘Your/ eyes {had}/have/ long reminded {him}/me/ of another whom {he}/I/ could not recall, and{ that} now {he}/I/ knew {him}/you/ for the son of Húrin.

'Knew' should be 'know':

<NA; Note 10 Then Algund, the old outlaw who had fled down Sirion from the Nirnaeth Arnoediad, said{ that Túrin}/: ‘Your/ eyes {had}/have/ long reminded {him}/me/ of another whom {he}/I/ could not recall, and{ that} now {he}/I/ {knew}/know/ {him}/you/ for the son of Húrin.

[Aran e-Godhellim]

Originally Posted by Findegil

I understand why 'trunk' is not good in line 696, but couldn't we use 'beech' from line 696 in line 699?

I personally would rather not. Why loose the effect of the full alliteration when not necessary? It could be also argued that the fact of the tree being a beech was significant due to the fact that the death originally occurred in Doriath, where beeches seem to have been held in high esteem, if not revered. Perhaps it is even so suggestive of Doriath that it needs to go?

[Aiwendil]

Well, 'tree'/'trunk' doesn't alliterate in line 699 so that shouldn't be an issue. But you may have a point about the beech being tied to the earlier location of the scene. Beeches are apparently common in and around Doriath but I don't recall any references to them near Nargothrond. Of course, that's not to say that they couldn't have been there.

[Aiwendil]

A small thing I just noticed: At NA-EX-21 the word 'Enfeng' ('Longbeards') appears several times for the Dwarves of Belegost. Since it was later decided that the Longbeards were Durin's folk from Khazad-dum and not the Dwarves of Belegost, this must be changed. I think we can simply replace it with 'Dwarves' in this case.

[Aran e-Godhellim]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

Well, 'tree'/'trunk' doesn't alliterate in line 699 so that shouldn't be an issue.

I feel so stupid. I must have not been thinking when I said that. Oh, well. You're absolutely right.

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

A small thing I just noticed: At NA-EX-21 the word 'Enfeng' ('Longbeards') appears several times for the Dwarves of Belegost. Since it was later decided that the Longbeards were Durin's folk from Khazad-dum and not the Dwarves of Belegost, this must be changed. I think we can simply replace it with 'Dwarves' in this case.

This brings up an interesting point. Why can't the Ennfeng/Enfeng (either spelling is correct, technically) have been the Dwarves of both Khazad-dûm and Belegost? If they were related to Dúrin's folk, "friendliest to the Elves," it might help explain why they didn't participate in the later attack on Doriath.

[Aiwendil]

I think the discussion of the seven kindreds of Dwarves in 'Of Dwarves and Men' makes it clear that the Dwarves of Belegost and Nogrod are the 'Broadbeams' and 'Firebeards' as opposed to the 'Longbeards' of Khazad-dum - i.e. that each of the three kingdoms is the home of a different kindred. I think that in the earlier post-LotR writings, however, Tolkien may have envisioned more or less what you suggest - a single 'good' race of Dwarves inhabiting both Belegost and Moria.

[Aran e-Godhellim]

But am I incorrect in thinking that that text was ultimately replaced with a different one?

[Findegil]

Well the text was never even considered for publication, but it was never replaced or updated as fare as I remember.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aran e-Godhellim]

Oh, right. I was confusing it with another text.

[Findegil]

After editing the text with all the changes we agreed upon here, I feel the lose of the passages from the Lay more haevily then before. And since not all members old and new have given us their oppinion about these additions I would like to restart the discussion on them. I give them here in full again for your convinience:

Therefore Húrin was brought before Morgoth, for Morgoth knew by his arts and his spies that Húrin had the friendship of the King of Gondolin; and {he sought to daunt him with his eyes. But Húrin could not yet be daunted, and he defied Morgoth. Therefore Morgoth had him chained and set in slow torment; but after a while he came to him,} NA-EX-25.02 <editorial bridge the Narn tells:
><Lay Said the dread Lord of Hell: __ 'Dauntless Hurin,
stout steel-handed, __ stands before me
yet quick a captive, __ as a coward might be!
Then knows he my name, __ or needs be told
what hope he has __ in the halls of iron? {80}5
The bale most bitter, __ Balrogs' torment!'

Then Húrin answered, __ Hithlum's chieftain -
his shining eyes __ with sheen of fire
in wrath were reddened: __ 'O ruinous one,
by fear unfettered __ I have fought thee long, {85}10
nor dread thee now, __ nor thy demon slaves,
fiends and phantoms, __ thou foe of NA-RG-00.01 {Gods}[the free]!'
His NA-EX-25.03 {dark}[doused] tresses, __ drenched and tangled,
that fell o'er his face __ he flung backward,
in the eye he looked __ of the evil Lord - {90}15
since that day of dread __ to dare his glance
has no mortal Man __ had might of soul.
There the mind of Húrin __ in a mist of dark
neath gaze unfathomed __ groped and foundered,
yet his heart yielded not __ nor his haughty pride. {95}20
But Lungorthin __ Lord of Balrogs
on the mouth smote him, __ and Morgoth smiled:
'Nay, fear when thou feelest, __ when the flames lick thee
and the whistling whips __ thy white body
and wilting flesh __ weal and torture!' {100}25
Then hung they helpless __ Húrin dauntless
in chains by fell __ enchantments forged
that with fiery anguish __ his flesh devoured,
yet loosed not lips __ locked in silence
to pray for pity. __ Thus prisoned saw he {105}30
on the sable walls __ the sultry glare
of far-off fires __ fiercely burning
down deep corridors __ and dark archways
in the blind abysses __ of those bottomless halls;
there with mourning mingled __ mighty tumult {110}35
the throb and thunder __ of the thudding forges'
brazen clangour; __ belched and spouted
flaming furnaces; __ there faces sad
through the glooms glided __ as the gloating Orcs
their captives herded __ under cruel lashes. {115}40
Many a hopeless glance __ on Húrin fell,
for his tearless torment __ many tears were spilled.

Lo! Morgoth remembered __ the mighty doom,
the weird of old, __ that the Elves in woe,
in ruin and wrack __ by the reckless hearts {120}45
of mortal Men __ should be meshed at last;
that treason alone __ of trusted friend
should master the magic __ whose mazes wrapped
the children of NA-RG-00.02 {Cor}[Tirion], __ cheating his purpose,
from defeat fending __ Fingolfin's son, {125}50
Turgon the terrible, __ and the troth-brethren
the sons of Fëanor, __ and secret, far,
homes hid darkly __ in the hoar forest
where Thingol was throned __ in the Thousand Caves.

Then the Lord of Hell __ lying-hearted {130}55
to where Hurin hung __ hastened swiftly,
and the Balrogs about him __ brazen-handed
with flails of flame __ and forged iron
there laughed as they looked __ on his lonely woe;
but {Bauglir}[Baugron] said: __ 'O bravest of Men, {135}60
'tis fate unfitting __ for thus fellhanded
warrior warfain __ that to worthless friends
his sword he should sell, __ who seek no more
to free him from fetters __ or his fall avenge.
While shrinking in the shadows __ they shake fearful {140}65
in the hungry hills __ hiding outcast
their league belying, __ lurking faithless,
he by evil lot __ in everlasting
dungeons droopeth __ doomed to torment
and anguish endless. __ That thy arms unchained {145}70
I had fainer far __ should a falchion keen
or axe with edge __ eager flaming
wield in warfare __ where the wind bloweth
the banners of battle - __ such a brand as might
in my sounding smithies __ on the smitten anvil {150}75
of glowing steel __ to glad thy soul
be forged and fashioned, __ yea, and fair harness
and mail unmatched - __ than that marred with flails
my mercy waiving __ thou shouldst moan enchained
neath the brazen Balrogs' __ burning scourges: {155}80
who art worthy to win __ reward and honour
as a captain of arms __ when cloven is mail
and shields are shorn, __ when they shake the hosts
of their foes like fire __ in fell onset.
Lo! receive my service; __ forswear hatred, {160}85
ancient enmity __ thus ill-counselled -
I am a mild master __ who remembers well
his servants' deeds. __ A sword of terror
thy hand should hold, __ and a high lordship
as {Bauglir}[Baugron]'s champion, __ chief of Balrogs, {165}90
to lead o'er the lands __ my loud armies,
whose royal array __ I already furnish;
on Turgon the troll __ (who turned to flight
and left thee alone, __ now leaguered fast
in waterless wastes __ and weary mountains) {170}95
my wrath to wreak, __ and on redhanded
NA-RG-00.03 {robber-Gnomes}[robber-Exiles], __ rebels, and roaming Elves,
that forlorn witless __ the Lord of the World
defy in their folly - __ they shall feel my might.
I will bid men unbind thee, __ and thy body comfort! {175}100
Go follow their footsteps __ with fire and steel,
with thy sword go search __ their secret dwellings;
when in triumph victorious __ thou returnest hither,
I have hoards unthought-of' - __ but Húrin Thalion
suffered no longer __ silent wordless; {180}105
through clenched teeth __ in clinging pain,
'O accursed king', __ cried unwavering,
'thy hopes build not __ so high, {Bauglir}[Baugron];
no tool am I __ for thy treasons vile,
who tryst nor troth __ ever true holdest- {185}110
seek traitors elsewhere.'

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Then returned answer
Morgoth amazed __ his mood hiding:
'Nay, madness holds thee; __ thy mind wanders;
my measureless hoards __ are mountains high {190}115
in places secret __ piled uncounted
agelong unopened; __ NA-RG-00.04 {Elfin}[Elven] silver
and gold in the gloom __ there glister pale;
the gems and jewels __ once jealous-warded
in the mansions of the NA-RG-00.045{Gods}[Valar], __ who mourn them yet, {195}120
are mine, and a meed __ I will mete thee thence
of wealth to glut __ the Worm of Greed{.},'>
and he offered him his choice to go free whither he would{, or to receive power and rank as the greatest of Morgoth's captains}, if he would but reveal where Turgon had his stronghold, and aught else that he knew of the King's counsels. ...

... and though they were now aged they were valiant, and they knew well the lands, for they had journeyed often through Beleriand in former times. Thus by fate and courage they passed over the Shadowy Mountains, and coming down into the Vale of Sirion they passed into the Forest of Brethil.{; and at last, weary and haggard, they reached the confines of Doriath. But there they became bewildered, and were enmeshed in the mazes of the Queen, and wandered lost amid the pathless trees, until all their food was spent. There they came near to death, for winter came cold from the North; but not so light was Túrin's doom. Even as they lay in despair they heard a horn sounded. Beleg the Strongbow was hunting in that region, for he dwelt ever upon the marches of Doriath, and he was the greatest woodsman of those days. He heard their cries and came to them, and when he had given them food and drink he learned their names and whence they came, and he was filled with wonder and pity.}
NA-EX-25.05 <Lay The ways were weary __ and woven with deceit
o'er the hills of Hithlum __ to the hidden kingdom
deep in the darkness __ of Doriath's forest,
and never ere now __ for need or wonder
had children of Men __ chosen that pathway, {350}5
save Beren the brave __ who bounds knew not
to his wandering feet __ nor feared the woods
or fells or forest __ or frozen mountain,
and few had followed __ his feet after.
There was told to Túrin __ that tale by NA-RG-00.05 {Halog}[Grithnir] {355}10
that in the Lay of Leithian, __ Release from Bonds,
in linked words __ has long been woven,
of Beren {Ermabwed}[Erchamion], __ the boldhearted;
how Lúthien the lissom __ he loved of yore
in the enchanted forest __ chained with wonder - {360}15
Tinúviel he named her, __ than nightingale
more sweet her voice, _ as veiled in soft
and wavering wisps __ of woven dusk
shot with starlight, __ with shining eyes
she danced like dreams __ of drifting sheen, {365}20
pale-twinkling pearls __ in pools of darkness;
how for love of Lúthien __ he left the woods
on that quest perilous __ men quail to tell,
thrust by Thingol __ o'er the thirst and terror
of the Lands of Mourning; __ of Lúthien's tresses, {370}25
and Melian's magic, __ and the marvellous deeds
that after happened __ in Angband's halls,
and the NA-EX-25.06 {flight}[fear] o'er fell __ and forest pathless
when Carcharoth __ the cruel-fanged,
the wolf-warden __ of the Woeful Gates, {375}30
whose vitals fire __ devoured in torment
NA-EX-25.07 {them}[there] hunted howling __ (the hand of Beren
he had bitten from the wrist __ where that brave one held
the nameless wonder, __ the NA-RG-00.06 {Gnome}[Elven]-crystal
where light living __ was locked enchanted, {380}35
all hue's essence. __ His heart was eaten,
and the woods were filled __ with wild madness
in his dreadful torment, __ and Doriath's trees
did shudder darkly __ in the shrieking glens);
how the hound of NA-RG-00.07 {Hithlum}[Valinor], __ Huan wolf-bane, {385}40
to the hunt hasted __ to the help of Thingol,
and as dawn came dimly __ in Doriath's woods
was the slayer slain, __ but silent lay
there Beren bleeding __ nigh brought to death,
till the lips of Lúthien __ in love's despair {390}45
awoke him to words, __ ere he winged afar
to the long awaiting; __ thence Lúthien won him,
the Elf-maiden, __ and the arts of Melian,
her mother Mablui __ of the moonlit hand,
that they dwell for ever __ in days ageless {395}50
and the grass greys not __ in the green forest
where East or West __ they ever wander.
Then a song he made them __ for sorrow's lightening,
a sudden sweetness __ in the silent wood,
that is 'Light as Leaf __ on Linden' called, {400}55
whose music of mirth __ and mourning blended
yet in hearts does echo. __ This did NA-RG-00.08 {Halog}[the henchman] sing them:

The grass was very long and thin,
...
__ Since Beren came to Doriath.

This for hearts' uplifting __ did NA-RG-00.09 {Halog}[the henchman] sing them {485}130
as the frowning fortress __ of the forest clasped them
...
Without bread or water __ with bleeding feet
and fainting strength __ in the forest straying
their death they deemed it __ to die forwandered,
when they heard a horn __ that hooted afar
and dogs baying{.}, __ NA-EX-25.08 <Narn {but not so light was Túrin's doom}but Túrin’s dome being 155
not so lightly brought. __ > Lo! the dreary bents {510}
and hushed hollows __ to the hunt wakened,
and echoes answered __ to eager tongues,
...
'Who are ye?' he asked. __ 'Outlaws, maybe,
hiding, hunted, __ by hatred dogged?' 170

'Nay, for famine and thirst __ we faint,' said NA-RG-00.10{Halog}[Grithnir], {525}
'wayworn and wildered, __ and wot not the road.
...
Then Beleg bade them __ be blithe, saying:
NA-RG-00.11 ‘{The Gods have}[Good you] guided[ the boy,] __ {you} to {good}[grand] keeping;
I have heard of the house __ of Húrin undaunted, 185
and who hath not heard __ of the hills of slain, {540}
of {Nirnaith Ornoth}[Nirnaeth Arnoediad], __ Unnumbered Tears!
To that war I went NA-EX-25.09{not, __ yet}[, __ and still} wage a feud
with the Orcs unending, __ whom mine arrows fleeting
smite oft unseen __ swift and deadly. 190
I am the hunter Beleg __ of the hidden people; {545}
the forest is my NA-EX-25.11{father}[fort] __ and the fells my home.'>
And he looked with liking upon Túrin, for he had the beauty of his mother and the eyes of his father, and he was sturdy and strong.
‘What boon would you have of King Thingol?’ said Beleg to the boy.
‘I would be one of his knights, to ride against Morgoth, and avenge my father,’ said Túrin.
‘That may well be, when the years have increased you,’ said Beleg. ‘For though you are yet small you have the makings of a valiant man, worthy to be a son of Húrin the Steadfast, if that were possible.’ For the name of Húrin was held in honour in all the lands of the Elves.
NA-EX-25.12 <Lay Then he bade them drink __ from his belt drawing
a flask of leather __ full-filled with wine
that is bruised from the berries __ of the burning South -
the NA-RG-00.12{Gnome-folk}[Noldor] know it, __ from Nogrod the Dwarves {540}
by long ways lead it __ to the lands of the North 5
for the Elves in exile __ who by evil fate
the vine-clad valleys __ now view no more
in the land of NA-RG-00.13{Gods}[good]. __ There was lit gladly
a fire, with flames __ that flared and spluttered, {545}
...
long leagues to cover. __ Now led by ways
devious winding __ through the dark woodland, {560}
by slade and slope __ and swampy thicket, 25
through lonely days, __ long-dragging nights,
they fared unfaltering, __ and their friend they blessed,
who but for Beleg __ had been baffled utterly
by the magic mazes __ of Melian the Queen.> {570}
{Therefore }Beleg gladly became the guide of the wanderers, and he led them to a lodge where he dwelt at that time with other hunters, and there they were housed while a messenger went to Menegroth. ...

{Then Túrin bowed before them, and took his leave. And soon after he put on the Dragon-helm, and took arms, and went away to the north-marches, and was joined to the elven-warriors who there waged unceasing war upon the Orcs and all servants and creatures of Morgoth. Thus while yet scarcely out of his boyhood his strength and courage were proved; and remembering the wrongs of his kin he was ever forward in deeds of daring, and he received many wounds by spear or arrow or the crooked blades of the Orcs.
But his doom delivered him from death; and word ran through the woods, and was heard far beyond Doriath, that the Dragon-helm of Dor-lómin was seen again. {Then many wondered, saying: ‘Can the spirit any man return from death; or has Húrin of Hithlum escaped indeed from the pits of Hell?’
One only was mightier in arms among the march-wardens of Thingol at that time than Túrin, and that was Beleg Cúthalion; and Beleg and Túrin were companions in every peril, and walked far and wide in the wild woods together.}
NA-EX-27.04<Lay Thus his prowess was proven __ and his praise was noised
and beyond his years __ he was yielded honour,
for by him was holden __ the hand of ruin {755}
from Thingol's folk, __ and NA-RG-00.14 {Thû}[Gorthaur] feared him,
and wide wandered __ the word of Túrin: 5
'Lo! we deemed as dead __ the dragon of the North,
but high o'er the host __ its head uprises,
NA-EX-27.05 its {wings are}worth is spread! __ Who has waked this spirit {760}
and the flame kindled __ of its fiery jaws?
Or is Húrin of Hithlum __ from Hell broken?' 10
NA-RG-00.15 {And Thû}[Gorthaur] who was throned __ as thane mightiest
neath Morgoth {Bauglir}[Baugron], __ whom that master bade
'go ravage the realm __ of the robber Thingol {765}
and mar the magic __ of Melian the Queen',
even {Thu}[that Lord] feared him, __ and his thanes trembled. 15

One only was there __ in war greater,
more high in honour __ in the hearts of the Elves
than Túrin son of Húrin, __ tower of Hithlum, {770}
even the hunter Beleg __ of the hidden people,
whose NA-EX-27.06 {father}[fort] was the forest __ and the fells his home; 20
to bend whose bow, __ Balthronding named,
that the black yewtree __ once bore of yore,
had none the might; __ unmatched in knowledge {775}
of the woods' secrets __ and the weary hills.
He was leader beloved __ of the light companies 25
all garbed in grey __ and green and brown,
the archers arrowfleet __ with eyes piercing,
the scouts that scoured __ scorning danger {780}
afar o'er the fells __ their foemen's lair,
and tales and tidings __ timely won them 30
of camps and councils, __ of comings and goings,
all the movements of the might __ of Morgoth {Bauglir}[Baugron].
Thus Túrin, who trusted __ to targe and sword, {785}
who was fain of fighting __ with foes well seen,
where shining swords __ made sheen of fire, 35
and his corslet-clad __ comrades-in-arms
were snared seldom __ and smote unlooked-for.

Then the fame of the fights __ on the far marches {790}
was carried to the courts __ of the king of Doriath,
and tales of Túrin __ were told in his halls, 40
of the bond and brotherhood __ of Beleg the ageless
with the blackhaired boy __ from the beaten people.
Then the king called them __ to come before him {795}
did Orc-raids lessen __ in the outer lands
ever and often __ unasked to hasten, 45
to rest them and revel __ and to raise awhile
in songs and lays __ and sweet music
the memory of the mirth __ ere the moon was old, {800}
when the mountains were young __ in the morning of the world.>
Thus three years passed, and in that time Túrin came seldom to Thingol's halls; ...

I think still that in these passages we have a lot details that are still valid as part of the legendarium and that were later lost.

For commentaries too the needed changes see my post #23.
For the discussion the relevant postings are:
post #32, post #33, post #34, post #35, post #36, post #72, post #73, post #75, post #76, post #77, post #78, post #79, post #80, post #81, post #82, post #83 and post #84

Respectfuly
Findegil

[Findegil]

Looking into this thread again, I see that it is not so nice to let you jump from post to post by links. I therefore will giv here a summary of the discussion:
So what we discuss about are 4 passages from the Lay. The first is the treatment of Húrin before the talk with Morgoth. The second is the journey to Doriath and the song of Lúthien, the third is the guided entrance to Doriath with the rest at Belegs lodge and the fourth is the praising of Turins powers in the warfare at the marches.
In each part information are given that are not in the text of the Narn. Some of course are only minor details. But especially the first two seem to be more substantial.

The Argument against them was brought forward by Aiwendil: "This is, after all, one of the relatively few places where we have a late, complete 'long version' by Tolkien, and in such cases I think that generally the policy should be (and has been) not to insert earlier material for the sole purpose of elaboration."

That sound principle is established by the meaning of our general principles 2 made clear by the statement at the beginning of principal 3:
“2. Secondary priority is given to the latest ideas found among Tolkien's unpublished texts and letters, except where they:
a. violate the published canon without specifically correcting an error or
b. are proposed changes that do not clearly indicate the exact details that must be changed and how they are to be changed.
3. If no sources that fall under number 2 can be used to form the actual narrative of a section, …”

But it is in part contradicted by the last sentence of our general principles: “A corallary is that we may not disregard any text or note, old idea or projected change, by JRRT unless it is invalidated by one of the above principles, explicitly or implicitly; that is, we must have a REASON for rejecting something.”
This does of course open a wide field of argumentation.

Aiwendil answerd to this:
"But I think a reasonable counter-argument would be that the relevant portions of the lay are contradicted, implicitly, by the Narn. In many cases we must make the difficult judgement of whether a certain detail that appears in an early source but not in a late one was rejected by Tolkien or merely omitted. When the late text we’re dealing with is the Quenta Silmarillion or the Annals, it’s often easy to argue that the detail in question was merely omitted due to compression of the narrative (hence, our retention of the mechanical dragons for example). But here, the late text is the full ‘Narn i Chin Hurin’, the long version of the longest tale of the Elder Days and intended, as we may suppose from ‘Aelfwine and Dirhaval’, as a prose translation of the same primary source that the old lay was supposed to be verse translation of. It seems, then, very reasonable to me to think that when Tolkien omitted a detail that was found in the alliterative lay, it was because he had rejected it.
Despite this argument, I’m still of two minds about this and, to be honest, there are some lovely details in the passages of the lay you excerpt. Maybe we need a third opinion on this (Maedhros, if you happen by here, perhaps you could give us your thoughts?)"

Aran added this thought to the discussion: "It seems to me that the Lay was largely displaced by the Narn. And it cannot be thought to be the "Lay" Ælfwine (or Bilbo) translated either, as many of its details do not match the Narn. Even when it does match and provides more detail, I hesitate in using it, because Tolkien seems to have thought most of the Narn to be finalized. (At least, as final as any of his works ever got!)"
To which Aiwendil added: "If Tolkien omitted from the Narn a detail found in the alliterative Lay, I think there's at least a reasonable case to be made that he did so because that detail had been rejected. In contrast to the more common situation where we have an older 'full version' and a briefer, more compressed later version, here we have a late full version. So I think the usual argument that details found in the older text were not rejected but merely suppressed holds less weight."

Findegil countered that by: "I can see the point of the argument of course. It is just that I do not agree fully to it. Especially when the portions of the Lay that I used replace portions of the Narn that read like summary of the Lay. Let us look at the cases in turn:
NA-EX-25.02: We skip "he[Morgoth] sought to daunt him[Húrin] with his eyes. But Húrin could not yet be daunted, and he defied Morgoth. Therefore Morgoth had him chained and set in slow torment; but after a while he came to him,". Exactly the same story comes along in the Lay more fully told.
NA-EX-25.06 & NA-EX-25.12: We skip: "at last, weary and haggard, they reached the confines of Doriath. But there they became bewildered, and were enmeshed in the mazes of the Queen, and wandered lost amid the pathless trees, until all their food was spent. There they came near to death, for winter came cold from the North; but not so light was Túrin's doom. Even as they lay in despair they heard a horn sounded. Beleg the Strongbow was hunting in that region, for he dwelt ever upon the marches of Doriath, and he was the greatest woodsman of those days. He heard their cries and came to them, and when he had given them food and drink he learned their names and whence they came, and he was filled with wonder and pity." Which is again what we have in the Lay elobarted.
NA-EX-27.04: Skipt are: "Then many wondered, saying: ‘Can the spirit of Hador or of Galdor the Tall return from death; or has Húrin of Hithlum escaped indeed from the pits of Angband?’
One only was mightier in arms among the march-wardens of Thingol at that time than Túrin, and that was Beleg Cúthalion; and Beleg and Túrin were companions in every peril, and walked far and wide in the wild woods together." Which is again what is told in the protion of the Lay that I added.
Now your argument is that Tolkien did not use the details of the Lay by propose. But I am not so sure about this. I think we have no evidence that he acctually had the Lay infront of him composing the Narn, and this, I think, would be a needed to be sure that Tolkien found the details not fiting in the later story (for what ever reason). My impression is that Tolkien wrote the Narn based on his memory and the shorter text he had writen to fit the different versions of The Silmarillion, the Annals and probably his plot sysnopsis. In such a work parts that were told elaborated to his satisfaction before hand would probably catch his mind less then spots that he had not jet told in great maner, or were he felt that a change was needed. I think that once you have told the part fully to your satisfaction the (motion-)picture is definied in your mind and you might be able to recapture it for yourself with only a fiew words. But if you have to work out the secne for yourself you will for sure need more words and therewith transport the scene better to a reader unfamillar with it. If we could find some internal reasons to doubt the valibity of the scenes in the portions of the Lay I added, I would agree that we can not use them. But the outer reason that we have a shorter version in later writen fully told story does not fully convince me."

Aran: "But you see, I don't think Tolkien need even have rejected the details. He just left them out. He told the story one way in the Lay, and another in the Narn. Apparently, he thought the Narn passages sufficient.
He was not trying to relate the whole story in all its detail, he was trying to relate the story as it was formed in that particular text. For instance, the Annals of Aman and the Quenta Silmarillion are parallel often, but Tolkien put details in one that were not in the other. This is not because he rejected the details, or even because he thought that they should be left out. It is simply because they were different documents."

Findegil: " But we do not try to creat the Narn as Tolkien would have written it. Our goal is to tell the story of Middle-Earth in the most possible detailed, 'canon' friendly version. With this goal I don't think it is enough that Tolkien told the story without this details in his latest version of the Narn."

Aiwendil then tried to summe up the counter arguments: "I think there are three distinct arguments being made by Aran and me:
The Canonical concern: Details omitted from the Lay may have been rejected.
The Literary concern: Introducing excerpts from the Lay mars the cohesive narrative of the Narn.
The Textual concern: The Narn and the Lay represent different texts within Middle-earth that should not be mixed.
The Textual argument is, in my opinion, not really a valid one within the context of this project, since we are not making a 'veritable' Narn i Chin Hurin; that is, we're not claiming that the text we produce actually represents the text written by Dirhaval. I would further argue that the Narn and the Lay should not actually be considered distinct intra-Middle-earth documents, but rather that when Tolkien wrote the Narn he intended it as a replacement for the Lay.
The Literary argument is stronger, I think, but again it's not compelling. Granting that the additions detract from the literary value of the Narn (which is debatable), one could argue that our goal is not a text of literary value; rather, it's a text telling the 'true' history of Arda as fully as possible. Now, there has historically been a certain tension inherent in the project between the literary view and the 'true history' view (and I'm sure if Lindil were around he'd argue eloquently in favour of the former). But at least this throws doubt on the argument that the Canonically valid portions of the Narn cannot be altered or added to because they represent Tolkien's finished text (though I admit the argument does have some force for me personally).
We're left with the Canonical argument which at the very least is clearly relevant. But Findegil counter-argues rather persuasively that the further details found in these portions of the Lay are relatively few and that they seem to make explicit things passed over quickly in the Narn, rather than to add any new substance.
Of course, for those very reasons, one could ask whether anything is really to be gained by adding them. If we view them simply as longer-winded ways of saying what's already less explicitly said in the Narn, then adding them adds nothing of substance to the text (one could argue that it adds something of literary quality to the text, but this is of course question-begging).
Not really a critical issue in the end, but this is proving (to me at least) a somewhat vexing question. I remain ambivalent (which I know is not very helpful, but so it goes)."

To this must be added that Findegil had made a faint support argument of Literary concern: "I thought that the inclusion of parts of the poem in the earlier parts of the Narn would help to make the, in my view inascapable, changes between poesy and prosa in the later part more bearable. And I only included parts were the poem has some points of detail to add to the text of CoH and/or Narn.

Gondowe then explained his view in short: "I think the Narn is overall, the final view of the history by Tolkien, and with the finished parts I think we must not do anything. Not with the parts not finished, that fortunately were left in the Lay, (as a premonition, I like to think).
One can say, "so for what reason in a "finished work" like the Valaquenta, you add parts of the LT?". Because I think the descriptions of the houses of the Valar, etc, relly adds a worthwhile information."

At this point of the debate we counted votes:
Gondowe has offer a no in some way
Aran has said no clearly
Aiwendil is abivalent leaning to no.
Findegil offer a clear yes.
Counting we had:
2.5 no
1.5 yes

Neither Aiwendil nor I myself were happy with having to decised by voting. So I thought it might be good to look into this discussion again.
Now I ask any member who has not overed his opinion to let as have his voice if he likes to.

Respectfuly
Findegil

[gondowe]

Good to read you again Findegil, we still are going on.

Well, for me it could be easier to include these parts of the Lay because I can make them prose and insert into the body of the Narn, as was made in the central chaptes of the Narn (here the whole Lay) or in other parts of the TftE.

You could make the same.

Greetings

[Findegil]

Hi Gondowe,

I think the arguments agianst these inserts had not so much to do with the fact that they are verse. It was more focused on the Narn being a very completed text in these parts.

In addition we only in very special cases tried to change prose to verse or the other way. And when ever we did the result was at least questionable. That is better in your case since you are more free with the text since you have to translate them anyway.

Respectfuly,
Findegil

[Findegil]

While working on other texts I found that I possibly over did it in the intro to the Narn. I eliminated all references to English even so some were to the actual text we produce. Since our Product is clearly in English we should probably keep these references. The second § taken von Aelfwine & Dírhaval A would read then:

This version into 'modern' English, that is forms of English intelligible to living users of the English tongue (who have some knowledge of letters, and are not limited to the language of daily use from mouth to mouth) does not attempt to imitate the idiom of {Ælfwine, nor that of} the Elvish which often shows through especially in the dialogue. But since it is even to Elves now 'a tale of long ago', and depicts high and ancient persons and their speech (such as Thingol and Melian), there{ is in Ælfwine's version, and clearly} was in {Dírhavel}[Dírhaval]'s day{,} much archaic language, of words and usage, and the older and nobler Elves do not speak in the same style as Men, or in quite the same language as that of the main narrative; there are therefore here retained similar elements. It is for this reason that, for example, Thingol's speech is not that of our present day: for indeed the speech of Doriath, whether of the king or others, was even in the days of Túrin more antique than that used elsewhere. One thing (as Mîm observed) of which Túrin never rid himself, despite his grievance against Doriath, was the speech he had acquired during his fostering. Though a Man, he spoke like an Elf of the Hidden Kingdom, which is as though a Man should now appear, whose speech and schooling until manhood had been that of some secluded country where the English had remained nearer that of the court of Elizabeth I than of Elizabeth II.>

Since these changes wer never discussed throughly, it seems time to do so. Up to now we skipt the reference to English in the first sentence by replacing it by 'language' and we skipt the comparision of Túrins spech with that of a man of the time of Elizabth I. But I think both is unneccessary. When we take up some linguistic stuff as we probably may do, then we will keep English aquivalances of meaning or sound for sure. Therefore I think we should keep it here as well.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aiwendil]

I think this point needs some consideration. But I think I'd like to hold off on revisiting 'Turin' for the moment - simply because I noticed that some points in my notes on this chapter required further work before I post them. Unless there is an objection, I am hoping to post some notes on 'Tuor' tonight, and tackle the revision of that chapter first.

[Findegil]

That is okay with me. I just wanted to document my thoughts here.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Arvegil145]

Considering the addition of the parts of the Lay, I think I agree with Findegil that they should be included - for the sole reason that those parts of the Narn are very brief - indeed one of the main goals of this project is to give as detailed account possible, as long as the additions do not contradict the later Tolkien's ideas. After all, we are making as detailed account as possible, and, of course, our version of "The Silmarillion" is probably not what Tolkien would have wrote, if he continued working on it. But, unfortunately, we have to do with what we have.


P.S. I don't think that Andróg's "curse" would ever come to fulfilment - to me it's simply a Mannish equivalent of "Ishkhakwi ai durugnul".

[Arvegil145]

I have included the parts of the Lay in my version, and, in my opinion, they work PERFECTLY! Beautiful details - at least according to me - omitted from the Narn for the sake of what I have no clue about - but since Tolkien is not any more in the world of the living - and we are NOT Tolkien - we should include those parts of the Lay.

[Arvegil145]

And yes - what about Lungorthin? Is he still "canon"?

[Findegil]

Do you see anythink speaking against Lungorthin being still valid? As yet nobody here spoke up with such a reason against the passage including him.

Respectfuly
Findegil

[Arvegil145]

Originally Posted by Findegil

Do you see anythink speaking against Lungorthin being still valid? As yet nobody here spoke up with such a reason against the passage including him.

No, but I always want to double-check the concepts in such early stages of development.

[Aiwendil]

I'm going to post my notes on the Narn text in this thread, even though they apply to the whole text, not just the section on Turin's fostering. Hopefully that doesn't cause too much confusion.

Looking at these notes again, I see that I had intended to take a more detailed look at the "Union of Maedhros" section, since I note that I see some problems with it but don't go into specifics. So looking at that section again is something I will try to do.

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

Introduction:

Some of the changes here, made in order to eliminate Aelfwine, seem a bit tortured to me now. What about this:

But should perhaps the whole translator conceit here be removed along with Aelfwine?

'Of the Union of Maedhros': This section suffers from confusions and redundancies as a result of having been put together from multiple texts.

NA-EX-40.4: Typo in the footnote: ‘turture’ for ‘torture’.

NA-RG-29: Here the revision places alliteration on the last stress of the line, which is not allowed (even though it is an 'accidental' alliteration, as it were):

We could simply transpose the half-lines:

In the Finduilas/Gwindor/Turin section there seems to be a lot of redundancy between the prose and verse passages. The information in lines 2173-2212 of the lay is partially repeated in the prose paragraph from the Narn that follows (NA-EX-53); and the prose paragraphs that follow are then partially repeated in the lay extract 2213-2260.

NA-TI-28: The text here follows the QS77, which here is the same as CoH. Presumably, this text comes from the Narn manuscripts. But GA gives a slightly longer speech to Turin here (section 271), and we ought at least to consider whether to take it up:

Since the Narn material for this section is not in finished form, one might suppose that what we have here is omission rather than rejection. (I should admit that personally, I prefer the GA version since it clarifies Turin's attitude toward Finduilas and adds a certain poignancy, but of course that's neither here nor there).

We also miss the statement in GA section 272 (which was taken up in the QS77) that Orodreth gives Turin greater honour when he learns his identity.

NA-EX-55: Missing an apostrophe; also, unnecessary capitalization:

Should be:

NA-EX-58:

In taking this sentence from the Narn appendix, we have lost the antecedent of the 'it' that Glaurung wants to rid Turin of the aid of. I suppose one could construe ‘its’ as referring ahead to ‘his helm’, but this seems a little awkward. Also, I think that since Glaurung has just been named, it would be best to omit his name the second time:

Confused:

Should be:

[Findegil]

Introduction: I like your version, but why skip 'modern' and the part about the analphabetic use of English? I don't think we should skip this completly. What we edit is english and our readers are english speakers, so why we should skip this?

NA-EX-40.4: Corrected.

NA-RG-29: Your version reads good.

Finduilas/Gwindor/Turin: I do not agree that all the passages you mentioned are redundant. Some parts my be but not everything in it. It would be good if you could be more specific.

NA-TI-28: I agree to use GA here. But I we have taken the statement of Orodreth giving Túrin more honore when he learned his Identity:

NA-TI-28 <QS77 But Gwindor answered: 'The doom lies in yourself, not in your name.'>
NA-TI-29c <QS77 When it became known to Orodreth that the Mormegil was in truth the son of Húrin Thalion he gave him great honour, and Túrin became mighty among the people of Nargothrond. But {he had no liking for their manner of warfare, of ambush and stealth and secret arrow, and he yearned for brave strokes and battle in the open; and his counsels weighed with the King ever the longer the more.
In those days the Elves of Nargothrond forsook their secrecy and went openly to battle, and great store of weapons were made; and by the counsel of Túrin the Noldor built a mighty bridge over the Narog from the Doors of Felagund, for the swifter passage of their arms. Then the servants of Angband were driven out of all the land between Narog and Sirion eastward, and westward to the Nenning and the desolate Falas; and though Gwindor spoke ever against Túrin in the council of the King, holding it an ill policy, he fell into dishonour and none heeded him, for his strength was small and he was no longer forward in arms. Thus Nargothrond was revealed to the wrath and hatred of Morgoth; but }still at Túrin's prayer his true name was not spoken, and though the fame of his deeds came into Doriath and to the ears of Thingol, rumour spoke only of the Black Sword of Nargothrond.

NA-EX-55: I can no longer find this, so it seems we have eliminated this change and the passage you mention.

NA-EX-58: Why not insert the Dragon-helm?

Then Túrin sprang about, and strode against him, <CoH and fire was in his eyes, >and the edges of Gurthang shone as with flame{; but}<CoH . But> Glaurung withheld his blast, and opened wide his serpent-eyes and gazed upon Túrin. And NA-EX-58 <Ap Narn {and Glaurung}, desiring to rid Túrin of {its}the aid[u] of the Dragon-Helm[/b] and protection (since he himself feared it), taunted him, saying that surely Túrin claimed to be his vassal and retainer, since he bore his master's likeness on the crest of his helm.

But Túrin never has seen his sister Nienor in our version. Therefor I would edit:

And if thou tarry for Finduilas, then never shalt thou see Morwen again, and never at all shalt thou see Niënor thy sister{<CoH again>}; and they will curse thee.'

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aiwendil]

Originally Posted by Findegil

Introduction: I like your version, but why skip 'modern' and the part about the analphabetic use of English? I don't think we should skip this completly. What we edit is english and our readers are english speakers, so why we should skip this?

In Tolkien's text, there is an intermediate stage in Old English between the Elvish and the modern form we have. It seems pretty clear to me that the reference to modern English is only there to distinguish it from the Old English version of Aelfwine. If the translation is directly from Elvish to English, there's no reason to say 'modern' at all. To make an analogy, one would speak of translating something from, for example, "German to English" - one wouldn't say "German to modern English", because "English" with no qualifier, and no context, implies modern English.

The other phrase here, "that is forms of English intelligible to living users of the English tongue (who have some knowledge of letters, and are not limited to the language of daily use from mouth to mouth)", is an explanation of the word 'modern' for a non-linguistic audience. That is, Tolkien is explaining that he doesn't mean "modern" in the sense of current slang, but "modern" in the sense of English that is intelligible to living, literate, speakers.

Originally Posted by Findegil

Finduilas/Gwindor/Turin: I do not agree that all the passages you mentioned are redundant. Some parts my be but not everything in it. It would be good if you could be more specific.

I'll have to review this again. It was years ago that I wrote these notes.

NA-TI-28: I agree to use GA here. But I we have taken the statement of Orodreth giving Túrin more honore when he learned his Identity:

Ah, I must have missed that. Thanks for pointing it out.

NA-EX-58: Why not insert the Dragon-helm?

Yes, looking at this again I do think the Dragon-helm needs to be explicitly mentioned. I'd edit it slightly differently, though:

Then Túrin sprang about, and strode against him, <CoH and fire was in his eyes, >and the edges of Gurthang shone as with flame{; but}<CoH . But> Glaurung withheld his blast, and opened wide his serpent-eyes and gazed upon Túrin. And NA-EX-58 <Ap Narn {and Glaurung}, desiring to rid Túrin of {its}the aid and protection of the Dragon-helm (since he himself feared it), taunted him, saying that surely Túrin claimed to be his vassal and retainer, since he bore his master's likeness on the crest of his helm.

But Túrin never has seen his sister Nienor in our version. Therefor I would edit:

Yes, I'm not quite sure what I was thinking here. I agree with your edit.