"Concerning... 'The Hoard'" revealed

[Huinesoron]

Originally Posted by Mithadan

Clearly, CRRT did not have access to this letter (or overlooked it) when preparing The Silmarillion for publication.

My understanding is that the only copy of the letter is the one that was sent - it looks like it wasn't even known to exist until 1984, when it was first put up for auction. Christopher may well never have read it!

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

I don't think that the solution CT and Guy Kay came up with was a bad one at all- although evidently CT felt guilty about it.

Absolutely, especially since Christopher didn't have access to this letter. Something needed to be done about the breach in the Girdle, and JRRT had left no indication of what. I do think he would probably have adopted the letter's version if he had had access to it, though: the "we don't know" concept fits very nicely in my view.

Originally Posted by Mithadan

Here, perhaps the discussions of the timing of Thingol's death, when the Dwarves were passing through Doriath's borders, Hurin's attitude towards Thingol and what happened to his band of bandits (for lack of a better term) were not necessarily a "final conception" but rather his best recollection of what he had written before (maybe combined with some real time revision).

This is definitely a good point, and links to Form and Findegil's comments about the differences in Thingol. Comparing the three stories, I think JRRT was actually largely ignoring the 1930 Silmarillion in this 1960s note: there are a bunch of new ideas in the Quenta which go completely unmentioned:

• The 'folk of Mim' appear to be occupying Nargothrond, and are killed in the battle.
• The idea of Hurin's outlaws dying along the road, and Hurin sending to Thingol for help carrying the treasure.
• The first battle with the dwarves in Menegroth, where many of them are slain. In the Quenta this was the origin of the Mound of Avarice, which in BoLT was raised over the slain outlaws.
• Melian leaving Doriath to seek aid from Beren and Luthien. In BoLT this was actually Huan's role, while The Hoard attributes it to elves fleeing the battle.

There don't appear to be any specifically Quenta elements which carry across to The Hoard, though there are things from BoLT which are dropped in all later versions (notably the elvish traitor who brings the dwarves to Thingol). It's possible Tolkien didn't have the Quenya with him when writing it, but was going on his memory of it, coloured by BoLT. But there are also a lot of new elements that exist only in "Concerning The Hoard":

• Thingol locks the treasure in a deep chamber.
• The whole concept of dwarvish honesty. In BoLT, the dwarves demand massive rewards after the fact, and Thingol punishes them for it. In the Quenta, they try to take all the treasure and there is a battle. In The Hoard, they were promised a specific amount, never demanded more than that, and (other than the Silmaril) took only that much after their victory.
• The Nauglamir being made of silver. In BoLT it was made of gold.
• Thingol's specific desire for silver thrones. BoLT has the dwarves make him whatever they want; the Quenta doesn't specify.
• The weakening/opening of the Girdle to allow the dwarves inside. Previously they were led in by traitor elves.
• The apparent death of Thingol in Menegroth itself. Both previous versions have him out hunting, and the sack of Menegroth after his death; The Hoard says "his halls were violated and he himself slain".

I don't think we can write all that off as mis-remembering or off-the-cuff elaborations. The 'dwarvish honesty' was clearly constructed to reconcile the older stories with The Hobbit, and Tolkien goes into a lot of detail over it. The silver thrones, too, are a highly specific element which can't have just come out of nowhere. The whole focus on silver (rather than the gold which is the emphasis in BoLT) also sounds like a reaction to The Hobbit, where it is said of Thranduil that "If the elf-king had
a weakness it was for treasure, especially for silver and white gems". I think either Tolkien had a copy of The Hobbit in front of him when he wrote the letter - or the mention of silver in The Hobbit indicates that he had already decided when he wrote it that Thingol had a thing for silver, and thus his spiritual successor had as well. In either case, it looks like a lot of thought went into "Concerning... 'The Hoard'".

Does Thingol, in the 1964 version of his last acts, come across as noble? Not particularly! But he's not worse than Turgon, who still spends the published Silm sulking in his tower while Morgoth's armies burn it down; and he's definitely doing better than Hurin, who seems to get more destructive each time Tolkien comes back to him.

Thingol's death was a confluence of every curse at play in Beleriand at the time: lust for the Silmaril, dragon-gold, a dwarvish curse, and Morgoth's power over Hurin and his children. I don't think it's out of line with the later Silmarillion for all of that to send him into the state shown in "Concerning... 'The Hoard'", even to the point that Melian herself might be moved to reject him and withdraw her protection.

(Not that Mr. 'I won't kill you, now go invade Angband while I lock my daughter in a tree' was the most noble elf around to start with...!)

hS