Narn I Chîn Húrin 1: Túrins Fostering

[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.