Ruin of Doriath - Final Part

[Findegil]

Before I start editing an updated version for the private forum, lets settle some points:

RD-SL-03.5: The Nauglamír made for Felagund or Thingol? as Said before I am open both ways. And since in Books Forum and here some strong opinions have be raised against a pre-existing Nauglamír I will prepare the text with the Necklace made for Thingol.

RD-SL-05: Okay, we skip the quarrels on the road, even so I found them a nice example of how the curse of Mîm did work.

RD-SL-12: The 'weight beyond belief of gold was used in the making' of the Nauglamír: Sorry, my bad, this must for sure be changed to silver, but the argument that the 'beyond belief' is a supporter for the strife about the agreed 'price of one tithe of the unwrought metals' is none the less valid.

RD-SL-13: Okay, I see what you mean here. As nothing in the newer sources shades any doubt on the earlier decision, the two smithies are out and the dwarves work just once to fashion all the nice things and the Nauglmír.

RD-SL-21: I agree to the last proposal that only the evil deeds should be taken as a reason. I see the logic behind the argument that Húrin brings the curse of Morgoth over all that he deals with even so that will not be mentioned in our text. But more weight has the curse of Mîm and Glaurung on the treasure: Letting Húrin in is done out of pity and can't be an evil deed (it nonetheless can be foolish as Aiwendil said). But in dealing with the treasure Thingol and his Elves start to act evilly: They argue with Húrins men about it (Avarice) and thus in the end kill them (Wrath). And when Melain steps in to warn Thingol about the treasure he still does not follow her advice and hoards it (Pride, Gluttony). Then he goes even farther by inviting the Dwarves to work on it and thus making some use of it, which means showing it forth as his own (Pride). So we can find at least 4 of 7 cardinal sins done inside Doriath by Thingol all trigerd by the accursed hoard.

RD-SL-22: The hunt had been controversially discussed even before we got the new material. Now at the long last I must agree, there is no longer any reason for the hunt of being useful for the story line. I would wish that we could still hold some of the details of Thingols death being caught with the Nauglamír in a bush and rendered helpless in that way, since it is again an excellent example of how Mîm's curse works, but I don't see how we could do that inside Menegroth.
Any how my reasoning for reinstalling Melain’s scenes was that they fitted very well with the girdle being rendered useless and the attack on Menegroth coming as a surprise. I agree that the plan of Naugaldur to carry her is to be skipped. But Naugladur bringing Thingols head on a pole and Melian thus learning of his death and blaming Naugladur and in the same instant telling him that he has domed himself (by taking the Nauglamír) seem very much in agreement with the later conception.

RD-SL-54: I do not see why this shouldn't be said. That the Downfall of Doriath brought some lasting estrangement between Elves and Dwarves is matter of fact. And shown in many conversations in [i]LotR[/b]. And that some Dwarves sided with the evil forces before and after these events is as well attested in earlier and later writings.

I will prepare the text for the private forum to reflect this stand of the discussion, but mark it as 'in progress'.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Val Balmer]

Originally Posted by Findegil

Before I start editing an updated version for the private forum, lets settle some points:


RD-SL-22: The hunt had been controversially discussed even before we got the new material. Now at the long last I must agree, there is no longer any reason for the hunt of being useful for the story line. I would wish that we could still hold some of the details of Thingols death being caught with the Nauglamír in a bush and rendered helpless in that way, since it is again an excellent example of how Mîm's curse works, but I don't see how we could do that inside Menegroth.
Any how my reasoning for reinstalling Melain’s scenes was that they fitted very well with the girdle being rendered useless and the attack on Menegroth coming as a surprise. I agree that the plan of Naugaldur to carry her is to be skipped. But Naugladur bringing Thingols head on a pole and Melian thus learning of his death and blaming Naugladur and in the same instant telling him that he has domed himself (by taking the Nauglamír) seem very much in agreement with the later conception.
Respectfully

Findegil

Sorry if I came back to this point, but I don't understand why we should remove the hunt. In absence of any explicit statement of Tolkien removing it, I would keep the whole scene as in TN. The theme of tragedy during important festival is important to Tolkien. Furthermore the fact that Thingol cannot organize the defense of Doriath, explains better why the dwarves are able to sack it.

[Aiwendil]

RD-EX-54: That the ruin of Doriath led to an estrangement between Dwarves and Elves is not, I think, in dispute. The part I object to is "and drawn more nigh in friendship to the {kin}[following] of {Melko}[Morgoth]". Even if some Dwarves did turn to Morgoth, in the later conception this seems to have been an infrequent thing, and it doesn't seem appropriate to state it here as if it applies broadly to all or most Dwarves. Whereas "Concerning 'The Hoard'" says of the Dwarves that they were "no servants of the Evil Vala".

So I would make this:

RD-EX-54 <TN This then was the design; and by his deeds have the Dwarves been severed in feud for ever since those days with the Elves{, and drawn more nigh in friendship to the {kin}[following] of {Melko}[Morgoth]}.

Originally Posted by Val Balmer

Sorry if I came back to this point, but I don't understand why we should remove the hunt. In absence of any explicit statement of Tolkien removing it, I would keep the whole scene as in TN. The theme of tragedy during important festival is important to Tolkien. Furthermore the fact that Thingol cannot organize the defense of Doriath, explains better why the dwarves are able to sack it.

"Concerning 'The Hoard'" strongly implies, to me at least, that Thingol was killed during the attack on Menegroth. Reintroducing the hunt from TN seemed justified to me as a way of implementing the idea of Thingol being lured beyond the Girdle. With that idea gone, I don't see any compelling reason to reintroduce it, and I see a reason against it in "Concerning 'The Hoard'".

[Val Balmer]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

"Concerning 'The Hoard'" strongly implies, to me at least, that Thingol was killed during the attack on Menegroth. Reintroducing the hunt from TN seemed justified to me as a way of implementing the idea of Thingol being lured beyond the Girdle. With that idea gone, I don't see any compelling reason to reintroduce it, and I see a reason against it in "Concerning 'The Hoard'".

The only passage in CtH related to the death of Thingol is this:
"The dwarf-host entered Doriath and most of Thingol’s warriors perished. His halls were violated and he himself slain."

It is so much compressed that it cannot imply anything, at least for me

Furthermore, in the original tale it does not seem to me that Thingol is lured outside the girdle, but only outside of Menegroth, and this justifies the lack of organisation of the elven armies.

[Findegil]

RD-EX-54: Agreed on the part of the estrangement. But I still find the "drawn more nigh in friendship to the {kin}[following] of {Melko}[Morgoth]" justified. Look at the senece in Rivendell: Gloin came there to ask for some counsel but nearly he did broke up the Council of Elrond by bring up some old grudge against King Thranduil. We can read in his report of Dain's dealing with the messenger from Mordor that he is temped to buy that peace giving out some information. And Dain is the king of the Longbeards, the one house of Dwarves most friendly with the Elves.

I agree that the statment is very general, but that is rather an argument to include it than for execlusion. It is not said that all Dwarves were from that point onward under the shadow nor that any particular Dwarves were. It rather said that overall the Dwarves tended more to side with the forces in oppostion to the Elves. And that is found true easily: Already we know from Dwarves and Men that probably 3 of the 7 Houses were under the shadow. Up to that point the two Beleraindic Houses and the Longbeards could be called freindly to the Elves. Thus it needs nothing more than the Nogrod Dwarves estranged from the Elves to make that statement true.

About the hunt: The question here is, if it is an removal or if the hunt was removed by Tolkien. Q30 still includes the hunt, CtH does not. But CCtH is very condensed and if I compare Q30 to the The later Annals of Beleriand from the same time, we can see that compression can lead to the lose of details such as the hunt without them being skipped. But in The later Annals ... still the sequence of events is the same:
- Dwarves invade Doriath
- Thingol was slain
- Thousand Caves were plundered
And that is true even in the later Tale of the Years. In all of its versions from A to D. But the dating of these versions is not given so that we can only deduce from the story of Celegorm and Curufin fighting against the Dwarves at the Ford that they were written between 1951-2 (when the Grey Annals were written) too 1963 (when the fight at the Ford was given Back to Beren).
But it is changed now in CtH were it is:
- Dwarves entered Doriath
- Thousand Caves were violated
- Thingol was slain
This is an evidence for a changed story. But it does not rule out the hunt absoultley. What seem more telling for me is the fact the the violation of his halls and Thingols death are mentioned in one single sentence, while the enterance to Doriath and the perishing most of Thingol's warriors is in a seperated sentence.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Findegil]

Just to let of all you know: I have posted the text of this chapter as it stands now in the private forum. You will find both: a text with editing marked and a plain text. Enjoy the read.

Respectfully
Findegil

[gondowe]

Concerning the hunt, I agree with Findegil that the hunt still works.

Greetings

[Arvegil145]

About the hunt: while I'm not sure about its relevance in the later version, I still think the hunt in itself is a nice piece of worldbuilding, which, even if we cut it out from the ruin of Doriath, should be mentioned somewhere.


Also, Findegil, I see on the private forum that you decided to keep the part where Thingol offers the outlaws a share of the treasure - but given what we've seen in 'Concerning... The Hoard', I can't help but disagree.

While the new version is pretty condensed, I think that the gist of it is that the outlaws didn't just want a few trinkets here and there: they claimed the entire hoard, as did Thingol!

The outlaws, released from the presence of Húrin, claimed that it was theirs, won by their weapons and labour. Fighting broke out, even in the inviolable halls of Thingol.

This quote IMO implies that there was never any possibility of a compromise (or payment to the outlaws short of the whole treasure) - probably due to the curse(s).


Additionally, I think we should replace all the references to Thingol's obsession with gold in The Nauglafring with silver (as per 'Concerning'): such as references to a helm of gold, a hilt of gold, golden trappings for his steed, etc.

I also have a problem with this line:

...and indeed it was one of their grievances of old against the Eldar that they had hunted and slain their lesser kin, who had settled in Beleriand before the Elves came there. Therefore Naugladur vowed to rest not ere Mîm was thrice avenged...

Given the sheer contempt in which the Petty-dwarves were held by by their 'greater' counterparts in the later writings, I find this part implausible.

It's true that in the 'Concerning' there is this line:

Also (they now urged) the treasure had been taken with violence and murder from a Dwarf (though Mim was not in fact akin to the Dwarves of the eastern mountains).

But judging by the context, this is merely a rationalization for them taking more than is their due. I seriously doubt that Naugladur would care one bit about Mim - certainly not to the point of publicly proclaiming that he would avenge him thricefold.