View Single Post
Old 10-09-2017, 12:23 PM   #115
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,146
Aiwendil has been trapped in the Barrow!
§37a: I think my main problem with this section is still the insertion of the note from the Tale of Years, which was obviously never intended to stand in any narrative, and sounds out of place. I also think the insertion from note 12 to the TN is a little clumsy. I propose:

§310 (§37a) There {they}[the dwarves] surprised Thingol upon {a}the hunt with but small company of arms {and Thingol was slain} <HoME11; The Tale of The Years{Somehow it must be}for they {contrived it that Thingol is} lured him outside {or induced to go to war beyond} his borders and {is} there {slain by the Dwarves.}> RD-SL-22 <TN the king and his company were all encircled with armed foes. Long they fought bitterly{ there} among the trees, and the {Nauglath}[Naugrim] - for such were their foes - had great scathe of them or ever they were slain. Yet in the end were they all fordone, and {Mablung and} the king[‘s thanes] fell{ side} by[ his] side - but RD-SL-23 <TN, Note 12 {Against this sentence my father wrote a direction that the story was to be that} the {Nauglafring}[Nauglamír] caught in the bushes and held the king>, and Naugladur it was who then swept off the head of {Tinwelint}[Thingol] {after he was dead}, for {living}[so long as Thingol could fight] he dared not so near to his bright sword{ or the axe of Mablung}.>
I've done two things here:

- The TY note presents two options: that Thingol was lured outside his borders or that he was induced to go to war beyond his borders. It reads poorly to keep both these alternatives, but hitherto we did so in the interest of ambiguity and not "inventing" definite facts. However, it now seems to me that in our version, where this all occurs after Thingol has gone out hunting, the second alternative is impossible. That is, if Thingol was "induced to go to war", he would not have ridden beyond the Girdle with just a "small company of arms"; he would have gone back first to Menegroth, raised a war band, and then gone forth. Therefore, I think we should eliminate the alternative and merely say that he was lured outside.

- It seems to me to make more sense to insert note 12 to TN before we say that Naugladur swept the king's head off, instead of adding it afterward as a retroactive explanation. Not a big point, but I think it reads much better this way.

One small point - in "Long they fought bitterly{ there} among the trees", I'm not sure I understand why "there" was removed.
Aiwendil is offline   Reply With Quote