Updated Narn in Alliterative Verse

[Findegil]

U1: Why do you change the sence here? What about:

Ye Valar veiled your vast domains
with moveless pinnacles, mountains pathless,

U3: Why is Erithámrod skipted?

Bauglir => Baugron where does that change come from?

U4: I don't think that the reference here ist to the Silmarili. Therefore I wouldn't change anythink here.

U5: Morgoth is ofcourse a fiend of Manwe, but why not the Valar in general?

U7: I would not skip the passage completle. It seems clear that the reference is to the phrophecy of the north. And treason was a doom proclaimed there in. I would skip after 'Fingolfin's son'

A1: Nice but I would put it before U7.

A2: I would hold the passages you did skip in which Húrin denies Morgoth and is then tried with gold. After 'the wrath of the Gods roused in anger.' I would put in A2 missing the first line, A3 and A4.

A5: I would again hold more of the original text and would mix it with your new verse.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aran e-Godhellim]

Originally Posted by Findegil

U1: Why do you change the sence here? What about:

Well, I had considered keeping the original form as:

Ye Valar who veil your vast domains
with moveless pinnacles ...

But I'm not sure if "veil" is a suitable substitute for "gird" in this sense.

U3: Why is Erithámrod skipted?

As a word meaning "unbending," I don't believe it's acceptable in modern Sindarin. I should think "unbending" would rather be "algun" or something of that sort.

Bauglir => Baugron where does that change come from?

That's from Morgoth's Ring, a note to the later Valaquenta (I believe). It fits the modern Sindarin pattern of "-on" as a masculine ending (e.g., Sauron, Daeron) from older -ondo.

U4: I don't think that the reference here ist to the Silmarili. Therefore I wouldn't change anythink here.

Okay.

U5: Morgoth is ofcourse a fiend of Manwe, but why not the Valar in general?

Because "Manwe" intrudes one syllable fewer than "the Valar."

U7: I would not skip the passage completle. It seems clear that the reference is to the phrophecy of the north. And treason was a doom proclaimed there in. I would skip after 'Fingolfin's son'

I (agreeing with Christopher Tolkien) am not so sure. It references "men" specifically, and the Prophecy of the North made no such specific reference to men, so I'm hesitant to use it. It may be a case of Professor Tolkien's adding in a new element, and then later scrapping it again.

A1: Nice but I would put it before U7.

If I did keep U7, then I wouldn't really need it. I added A1 to compensate for the loss of U7.

A2: I would hold the passages you did skip in which Húrin denies Morgoth and is then tried with gold. After 'the wrath of the Gods roused in anger.' I would put in A2 missing the first line, A3 and A4.

That could work. The only reason I removed them is because they intrude into the story laid out in the Narn. I'll think on it.

A5: I would again hold more of the original text and would mix it with your new verse.

This I may do.

[Aran e-Godhellim]

You know, the more I look at the prose Narn, the more I appreciate the Professor's skill. It's like he wrote it so that it looks as if it could have been taken from an alliterative verse in reality! Take Niënor's cry at the Taeglin, for instance:

A Túrin Turambar turún' ambartanen:
master of doom by doom mastered!

These are lines of alliterative verse!