The Book of Lost Tales - J. R. Tolkien [42]
Glorund is the name of the dragon in the Tale of Turambar (Glaurung in The Silmarillion).
In the tale of The Chaining of Melko there is no suggestion that Tulkas had any part in the making of the chain (there in the form Angaino): I. 100.
(iv) The influence of the Valar
There is frequent suggestion that the Valar in some way exercised a direct influence over the minds and hearts of the distant Elves in the Great Lands. Thus it is said (p. 15) that the Valar must have inspired Beren’s ingenious speech to Melko, and while this may be no more than a ‘rhetorical’ flourish, it is clear that Tinúviel’s dream of Beren is meant to be accepted as ‘a dream of the Valar’ (p. 19). Again, ‘the Valar set a new hope in her heart’ (p. 47); and later in Vëannë’s tale the Valar are seen as active ‘fates’, guiding the destinies of the characters—so the Valar ‘brought’ Huan to find Beren and Tinúviel in Nan Dumgorthin (p. 35), and Tinúviel says to Tinwelint that ‘the Valar alone saved Beren from a bitter death’ (p. 37).
II
TURAMBAR AND THE FOALÓKË
The Tale of Turambar, like that of Tinúviel, is a manuscript written in ink over a wholly erased original in pencil. But it seems certain that the extant form of Turambar preceded the extant form of Tinúviel. This can be deduced in more ways than one, but the order of composition is clearly exemplified in the forms of the name of the King of the Woodland Elves (Thingol). Throughout the manuscript of Turambar he was originally Tintoglin (and this appears also in the tale of The Coming of the Elves, where it was changed to Tinwelint, I. 115, 131). A note on the manuscript at the beginning of the tale says: ‘Tintoglin’s name must be altered throughout to Ellon or Tinthellon = Q. Ellu’, but the note was struck out, and all through the tale Tintoglin was in fact changed to Tinwelint.
Now in the Tale of Tinúviel the king’s name was first given as Ellu (or Tinto Ellu), and once as Tinthellon (pp. 50–1); subsequently it was changed throughout to Tinwelint. It is clear that the direction to change Tintoglin to ‘Ellon or Tinthellon = Q. Ellu’ belongs to the time when the Tale of Tinúviel was being, or had been, rewritten, and that the extant Tale of Turambar already existed.
There is also the fact that the rewritten Tinúviel was followed, at the same time of composition, by the first form of the ‘interlude’ in which Gilfanon appears (see I. 203), whereas at the beginning of Turambar there is a reference to Ailios (who was replaced by Gilfanon) concluding the previous tale. On the different arrangement of the tale-telling at this point that my father subsequently introduced but failed to carry through see I. 229–30. According to the earlier arrangement, Ailios told his tale on the first night of the feast of Turuhalmë or the Logdrawing, and Eltas followed with the Tale of Turambar on the second.
There is evidence that the Tale of Turambar was in existence at any rate by the middle of 1919. Humphrey Carpenter discovered a passage, written on a scrap of proof for the Oxford English Dictionary, in an early alphabet of my father’s devising; and transliterating it he found it to be from this tale, not far from the beginning. He has told me that my father was using this version of the ‘Alphabet of Rúmil’ about June 1919 (see Biography, p. 100).
When then Ailios had spoken his fill the time for the lighting of candles was at hand, and so came the first day of Turuhalmë to an end; but on the second night Ailios was not there, and being asked by Lindo one Eltas began a tale, and said:
‘Now all folk gathered here know that this is the story of Turambar and the Foalókë, and it is,’ said he, ‘a favourite tale among Men, and tells of very ancient days of that folk before the Battle of Tasarinan when first