Quote:
Originally Posted by gondowe
Could it be that this manuscript is assumed erroneously to be from 1964, as it is attached to the letter, although Tolkien expressly says in it that he attached the said "screed" that "I wrote in answer to your remarks about the poem called The Hoard"?
|
It is possible, but not by much. "Concerning" makes direct mention of the Preface to
Adventures of Tom Bombadil, which was published in 1962. The very earliest theoretical point "Concerning" could have been written is to send to the publishers along with the Preface, to randomly explain one of the 16 poems in depth (and then not sent, of course). It seems more likely it was written in direct response to a query - as Tolkien says, that he wrote it in answer to Mrs. Elgar's questions.
Some of the discussion over in the New Silmarillion thread has got me thinking about the timeline of the Nauglamir texts. Does this look right?
- 1917-20: "The Tale of the Nauglafring", Book of Lost Tales
- 1926: "Sketch of the Mythology 14"
- ca. 1930: "Quenta Noldorinwa 14" (the 1930s Silmarillion)
- ca. 1951: "Grey Annals 501", given in preface to "Wanderings of Hurin". Cuts off with Hurin seeking Nargothrond and the hoard.
- 'somewhat later': "Narn i Chin Hurin synopsis", also in "Wanderings" preface. Ends with the killing of Mim, and Hurin and the outlaws taking the treasure to Doriath.
- late 1950s: "Kilby slip", mentioned in note 56 to "Wanderings". Slaying of Mim and mention of the ruin of Doriath.
- 1962-4: "Concerning The Hoard"
- 2017: footnote to "Beren and Luthien", in which Christopher Tolkien asserts that there is "a later version" (than the 1930s Quenta) of the story in which the Nauglamir was made for Finrod, and was brought alone to Doriath by Hurin, matching the published Silm.
I think the text referred to in the B&L note (the New Silm folks call it "Text X") most likely predates the Narn synopsis in the mid-1950s. "Text X" has to be a modification of the 1930 Quenta version, in which Hurin's outlaws die off on the road and Hurin has to get Thingol's help to carry the gold - in "Text X", this help is eliminated by having Hurin only bring one thing (or possibly only take one thing all the way, having to abandon the rest of the treasure).
But the Narn synopsis and "Concerning" both revert to the older story of the outlaws going all the way to Doriath. The Narn synopsis isn't 100% explicit on this - it says the outlaws take the treasure to Doriath, but only names Hurin as being admitted - but "Concerning" is. I don't find it plausible that Tolkien would have removed the outlaws, added them back, and then removed them again!
I think the "Kilby slip" stands as an explanation for this: in it, Tolkien notes at some length that the outlaws are significant characters: they are Asg(r)on and his men, who help Turin escape Dor-lomin in the UT version of the Narn, and accompany Hurin during "Wanderings". In BoLT, the 'outlaws' were "wild elves"; it was these characters that Tolkien tried to remove, with the Sketch (which doesn't mention outlaws at all), the Quenta (which kills them along the way), and Text X (which reduces the treasure to a single necklace). But when he expanded the end of the Narn, Tolkien realised that he could restore the outlaws by connecting them to another set who already existed; and there's no evidence he ever walked that decision back again.
hS