RD-SL-27: I've just read through our discussion of this from years ago, and it is such an obscure and complex issue that I can easily believe that a reasonable person could come to either conclusion based on the evidence we have. In the end, I still think I agree with the conclusion we adopted. But I am still far from 100% certain about this conclusion. Christopher Tolkien's opinion is obviously not to be simply discounted, but without any new evidence I don't see any particular reason to change our conclusion. I remain unsure, though, and could certainly be persuaded by a strong argument one way or the other.
About the Nauglamir:
This is indeed puzzling and has potentially very important repurcussions for our text. In particular, I find it difficult to reconcile this statement with two things from "The Wanderings of Hurin".
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Christopher Tolkien
For the story of the Nauglamîr and the destruction of Doriath, the fall of Gondolin, the attack on the Havens, we must return through more than a quarter of a century to the Quenta Noldorinwa (Q), or beyond.
|
This would seem to state that no version of that story later than Q exists.
Quote:
Some interesting remarks of my father's concerning The Wanderings of Húrin are found on the back of one of the slips on which Professor Clyde Kilby wrote comments and criticisms of the work:
"The criticisms seem to me largely mistaken - no doubt because this is a fragment of a great saga, e.g. Thingol and Melian are mentioned as objects of Morgoth's malice, because Húrin's next exploit will be to bring ruin to Doriath. The outlaws are not a 'device', but already accounted for - and play a part in the story of Túrin when he came to Dor Lómin. Húrin does pick them up again and they are the nucleus of the force with which he goes to Nargothrond and slays Mîm and seizes the gold of the dragon.
As for 'too little action,' 'too much speech', I have re-read this quite impersonally after many years when I had practically forgotten it - the speeches are bitter and pungent and in themselves exciting. I thought the whole business from the entry of Húrin not only moving but very exciting."
The reference to Thingol and Melian arose from Professor Kilby's taking exception to their only being mentioned in one place (p. 259). The response that his remarks (written, I believe, in 1966) elicited is particularly interesting in that they show that the story of Húrin's seizing the treasure of Nargothrond was still fully in being, although my father never even approached it again. Very striking is his phrase, 'Húrin's next exploit will be to bring ruin to Doriath'.
|
This indicates that, at least as of 1966, Tolkien intended Hurin to be accompanied by a band of men on the journey to Nargothrond and, since he "seizes the gold of the dragon", it would certainly seem that at this point it is the full hoard, not just the Nauglamir, that is brought to Doriath.
In the absence of any further evidence of this "later story", I don't think it would be wise for us to change the story here.