[Aiwendil]

RD-EX-49: Nauglath > Naugrim again.

RD-EX-51

and he did{ Fangluin} jeer at them mightily on their return

I would prefer:

and did he { Fangluin} jeer at them mightily on their return

. . . preserving the original word order.

RD-SL-20

I don't see the need for this deletion. We have changed the story so as to eliminate in actual fact the treachery of the Elves. But this is just a general statement that without the aid of treachery from within, the Girdle cannot be breached.

I'm just slightly perplexed here:

§33 (§17) {Therefore gathering new forces in Nogrod RD-SL-18 {and in Belegost} they returned at length, RD-SL-20c {and aided by the treachery of certain Elves on whom the lust of the accursed treasure had fallen} they RD-SL-21a{passed into Doriath secretly.}}

Am I correct that RD-SL-18, RD-SL-20c, and RD-SL-21a indicated here are completely irrelevant, since the whole passage is deleted? It's only that I don't see the point of putting those changes in in such a case.

RD-SL-18

Secretly he let send to {the Indrafangs}[Lord Bodruith his kin] RD-SL-18 asking <Sil77 aid from Belegost, but it was denied them, and the Dwarves of Belegost sought to dissuade them from their purpose>,

We need, for the grammar, to make this:

Secretly he let send to {the Indrafangs}[Lord Bodruith his kin] RD-SL-18 asking <Sil77 aid from Belegost, but it was denied {them} [him], and the Dwarves of Belegost sought to dissuade them from their purpose>,

Also I think perhaps a more straightforward substitution for "the Indrafangs" would be simply "Belegost".

RD-EX-55

The "did" for past tense here sounds a bit awkward to me (and this is an editorial addition if I read it right). I would rather say:

But the Dwarves of Nogrod prepare[d] their host against a day that {he}[Naugladur] would name

RD-EX-56

Same thing here.

Now Naugladur {learnt of that Elf Narthseg, whose name is bitter to the Eldar yet}[did know], that the king would fare a-hunting at the next high moon but one

I would say:

Now Naugladur {learnt of that Elf Narthseg, whose name is bitter to the Eldar yet} [knew], that the king would fare a-hunting at the next high moon but one

RD-EX-58

I don't understand the addition of "at that time".

§37a (§20) There {they}[the dwarves] surprised Thingol upon {a} these hunt with but small company of arms

"These" should be "this". But actually I would prefer "the", since there's no possibility of confusion concerning which hunt we are talking about.

The addition from TY is, of course, awkward. The phrase "somehow it must be contrived" was obviously never intended to stand in any narrative, and it's straightforward replacement "somehow they contrived it" is no better. But I suppose any emendation would have to be called stylistic. Nevertheless, I would in at least this particular case prefer a minor fix, like:

§37a (§20) 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} was lured outside or induced to go to war beyond his borders and {is} there {slain by the Dwarves.}>

Still awkward, but not quite as bad.

RD-EX-60

{Now is} But now it must be told, that when the king was far in the woods with all his company, and the horns grow faint in the deep forest, {but}did {Gwendelin}[Melian] {sits}sit in her bower and foreboding {is}was in her heart and eyes.

Couldn't we change this to present tense more straightforwardly with:

Now {is} [was] the king far in the woods with all his company, and the horns {grow} [grew] faint in the deep forest, but {Gwendelin}[Melian] {sits} [sat] in her bower and foreboding {is}[was] in her heart and eyes.

RD-EX-60

But the queen made answer: ‘Yet meseems there is a editorial change{rat that gnaws the threads}thread[ is riven] and all the web has come unwoven.’

This does not work as written. Perhaps what was meant was:

But the queen made answer: ‘Yet meseems {there is a rat that gnaws}the threads [are riven] and all the web has come unwoven.’

RD-EX-61

Even at that word> RD-EX-61 <Sil77 Melian sat long in silence {beside Thingol the King}[in her bower]

The words "Even at that word" seem not to fit if they introduce Melian sitting long and in silence. I would delete them.

This long addition from QS77: does it have a source? If so, I'd rather follow the source than the '77. If not, I don't see any need to use all this text of CRT's invention here. We could, in fact cut straight from "Even at that word" to "Thingol lay dead", so:

Even at that word, <<SQ77 Thingol lay dead, and his spirit had passed to the halls of Mandos; and with his death a change came also upon Melian. Thus it came to pass that her power was withdrawn in that time from the forests of Neldoreth and Region, and Esgalduin the enchanted river spoke with a different voice, and Doriath lay open to its enemies>.

RD-EX-62

Again - wouldn't it be preferrable to use Q here rather than the '77? We shouldn't use CRT's text simply because we prefer it or because it's more vivid.

RD-EX-63

and suddenly it grew to a fierce noise{ ...} by the clash of steel.

This does not really make grammatical sense, I think. We could change "by" to "of". I don't have HoMe II at hand to check the original context of the prepositional phrase.

Also, another Nauglath > Naugrim here.

§40b (§25)

‘and whatso remains of goods or folk may the, Orcs <editorial addition of Morgoth plunder>{keep}, or slay, as they desire.

Am I wrong, or does this refer to the Orcs that accompaniede the Dwarves in the original TN? I don't see how the editorial addition helps. I would delete this whole piece.

Thinking about the storyline discussion again, I wonder whether it would be better to attempt an ambiguity as to whether the girdle failed because Melian departed or Melian departed because the Girdle failed. We could add at the end of §37b (§21) a simple statement that Melian departed, and then remove her from the following material (which would necessitate significant curtailment) - that, I think, would achieve such an ambiguity.

The names "Naugladur", "Bodruith", and "Nielthi" all need thought ("Fangluin" is another old name, but I think it works fine in later Sindarin). I will research the latter two when I get a chance. "Naugladur" is interesting. If it is to be fit into later Sindarin it surely must mean "Dwarf-servant". One could suppose that it was a later name used anachronistically here, given because he entered into the service of Thingol (if only through his craftsmen). But all other "-dur" names I can think of denote friendship or service to the first element in the name. "Isildur" means "servant of the Moon", not "a Moon that is also a servant". So "Naugladur" ought to mean "servant of the Dwarves" - a very curious name for the lord of Belegost.

But that may be irrelevant. It's hard to see how the name fits, but unless some other etymology exists in Gnomish (and not in Sindarin), this is Tolkien's problem, not ours.