The Lays of Beleriand. Christopher Tolkien

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ specimen of Túrin (the alliterative poem), the background of which it was written to explain, to Anacapri, where Reynolds was then living in retirement.

My father took up his appointment to the Professorship of Anglo-Saxon at Oxford in the winter term (October–December) of 1925, though for that term he had to continue to teach at Leeds also, since the appointments overlapped. There can be no doubt that at any rate the great bulk of the alliterative Children of Húrin (or Túrin) was completed at Leeds, and I think it virtually certain that he had ceased to work on it before he moved south: in fact there seems nothing to oppose to the natural assumption that he left ‘Túrin’ for ‘Tinúviel’ (the Lay of Leithian), which he began according to his diary in the summer of 1925 (see p. 159 and footnote).

      For the date of its commencement we have only my father’s later (and perhaps hesitant) statement that it was ‘begun c. 1918’. A terminus a quo is provided by a page of the earliest manuscript of the poem, which is written on a slip from the Oxford English Dictionary bearing the printer’s stamp May 1918. On the other hand the name Melian which occurs near the beginning of the earliest manuscript shows it to be later than the typescript version of the Tale of Tinúviel, where the Queen’s name was Gwenethlin and only became Melian in the course of its composition (II. 51); and the manuscript version of that Tale which underlies the typescript seems itself to have been one of the last completed elements in the Lost Tales (see I. 204).

The Children of Húrin exists in two versions, which I shall refer to as I and II, both of them found in manuscript and later typescript (IA, IB; IIA, IIB). I do not think that the second is significantly later than the first; it is indeed possible, and would not be in any way uncharacteristic, that my father began work on II while he was still composing at a later point in I. II is essentially an expansion of I, with many lines, and blocks of lines, left virtually unchanged. Until the second version is reached it will be sufficient to refer simply to ‘A’ and ‘B’, the manuscript and typescript of the first version.

The manuscript A consists of two parts: first (a) a bundle of small slips, numbered 1–32. The poem is here in a very rough state with many alternative readings, and in places at least may represent the actual beginnings, the first words written down. This is followed by (b) a set of large sheets of examination paper from the University of Leeds, numbered 33 ff., where the poem is for the most part written out in a more finished form – the second stage of composition; but my father wrote in line-numbers continuously through (a) and (b) – lines 1–528 in (a), lines 528 ff. in (b). We have thus one sole text, not two, without any overlap; and if (a), the slips, ever existed in the form of (b), the examination sheets, that part has disappeared. In part (b) there are many later emendations in pencil.

      Based on this manuscript is the typescript B. This introduces changes not found in A or its emendations; and it was itself emended both in ink and pencil, doubtless involving several movements of revision. To take a single line as exemplification: line 8 was written first in A:

       Lo! Thalion in the throng of thickest battle

      The line was emended, in two stages, to

       Lo! Thalion Húrin in the throng of battle

      and this was the form in B as typed; but B was emended, in two stages, to

      Lo! Húrin Thalion in the hosts of war

      It is obvious that to set this and a great many other similar cases out in a textual apparatus would be a huge task and the result impossibly complicated. The text that follows is therefore, so far as purely metrical-stylistic changes are concerned, that of B as emended, and apart from a few special cases there is no mention in the notes of earlier readings.

      In the matter of names, however, the poem presents great difficulty; for changes were made at quite different times and were not introduced consistently throughout. If the latest form in any particular passage is made the principle of choice, irrespective of any other consideration, then the text will have Morwin at lines 105, 129, Mavwin 137 etc., Morwen 438, 472; Ulmo 1469, but Ylmir 1529 and subsequently; Nirnaith Ornoth 1448, but Nirnaith Únoth 1543. If the later Nirnaith Ornoth is adopted at 1543, it seems scarcely justifiable to intrude it at lines 13 and 218 (where the final form is Nínin Unothradin). I have decided finally to abandon overall consistency, and to treat individual names as seems best in the circumstances; for example, I give Ylmir rather than Ulmo at line 1469, for consistency with all the other occurrences, and while changing Únoth to Ornoth at line 1543 I retain Ornoth rather than the much later Arnediad at line 26 of the second version – similarly I prefer the earlier Finweg to Fingon (1975, second version 19, 520) and Bansil, Glingol to Belthil, Glingal (2027–8). All such points are documented in the notes.

      A has no title. In B as typed the title was The Golden Dragon, but this was emended to Túrin Son of Húrin & Glórund the Dragon. The second version of the poem was first titled Túrin, but this was changed to The Children of Húrin, and I adopt this, the title by which my father referred to the poem in the 1926 ‘Sketch’, as the general title of the work.

      The poem in the first version is divided into a short prologue (Húrin and Morgoth) without sub-title and three long sections, of which the first two (‘Túrin’s Fostering’ and ‘Beleg’) were only introduced later into the typescript; the third (‘Failivrin’) is marked both in A and in B as typed.

      The detail of the typescript is largely preserved in the present text, but I have made the capitalisation rather more consistent, added in occasional accents, and increased the number of breaks in the text. The space between the half-lines is marked in the second part of the A-text and begins at line 543 in B.

      I have avoided the use of numbered notes to the text, and all annotation is related to the line-numbers of the poem. This annotation (very largely concerned with variations of names, and comparisons with names in the Lost Tales) is found at the end of each of the three major parts, followed by a commentary on the matter of that part.

      Throughout, the Tale refers to the Tale of Turambar and the Foalókë (II. 69 ff.); Narn refers to the Narn i Hîn Húrin, in Unfinished Tales pp. 57 ff.

TÚRIN SON OF HÚRIN & GLÓRUND THE DRAGON

Lo! the golden dragon of the God of Hell,
the gloom of the woods of the world now gone,
the woes of Men, and weeping of Elves
fading faintly down forest pathways,
is now to tell, and the name most tearful	5
of Níniel the sorrowful, and the name most sad
of Thalion’s son Túrin o’erthrown by fate.

Lo! Húrin Thalion in the hosts of war
was whelmed, what time the white-clad armies
of Elfinesse were all to ruin	10
by the dread hate driven of Delu-Morgoth.
That field is yet by the folk naméd
Nínin Unothradin, Unnumbered Tears.
There the children of Men, chieftain and warrior,
fled and fought not, but the folk of the Elves	15
they betrayed with treason, save that true man only,
Thalion Erithámrod and his thanes like СКАЧАТЬ В начало < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 > В конец