[Findegil]

FD-SL-06: Posted by Maedhros:

Ever since our last discussion of the Ruin of Doriath, I have thinked about this and I think that there is a simple way to do this. We can move the scene that Húrin and the Outlaws reached the doors of Menegroth and change it so that they reached some outside part of the Girdle of Melian and that they are transported into Menegroth. That change would involved minimal editorial alterations by our part.

That was what I tried with the secret bridge over Sirion. But it is clearly not quite sufficient since the Gridle protected Nivrim. I am sure that we can find some solution.

FD-SL-08: Posted by Maedhros:

I still think that as Aiwendil suggest way back and CT did is that it would be best for us not remove that battle.

I think the "not" is just a typo. Aiwendil and Christopher Tolkien did suggest to remove the fight. And I strongly agree with that, as you seems to do.

FD-SL-09 & FD-SL-10: I am still not quiet happy with the scene of the departure and the suggestion of some fate for the outlaws. It might be that we need the help such a master of ambiguous writing as Aiwendil to do that in a fashion that satisfies us all.

FD-SL-11: So were are again in a dead lock. Since I can not see Thingol simply dismiss his first impulse to get ride of the treasure just by looking on it again. Further I think that you overestimated the role I would use Ufedhin here. I would have taken him as an Elf that had fallen under the cruse of Mîm and did lure Thingol not to through the gold away, nothing more. When I think about the behaviour of Saeros during the feast he is an good example for an Elf-Lord that would fit the role of Ufedhin I have proposed above.
The later treason of Narthseg (which I only meant to bring Naugladur some info of the hunt so that he could time his machinations to lure Thingol out of the Gridle) is a completely independent issue. It could of course be connected by using one and the same person in both roles, but that would really be to much liberty in creating a new character.

FD-SL-12: Posted by Maedhros:

I think that we are forgetting one very important point in here. The gold that we are talking about here as in the Tale of the Nauglafring was the gold of the simple Rodothlim that were in no way comparable as to the later Ñoldor of Nargothrond. Remember that in the Tale the gold was not worked but it would seem to me unthinkable that the horde of Nargothrond under Finrod Felagund would be in such state. I'm not really sure how much worked that gold would need. To me it would be very beautiful pieces of gold.

That is a valid argument. But even if the people of Nargothrond were the most cunning Noldor-smith of all there would have been the possibility of a big hoard of un-fashioned gold in the halls of Nargothrond. But I must say that in this direction I had overdone it in my version of FoD by taking the descriptions of both results the smithies of the Dwarves together. Maybe we should use the first one to describe the treasure when it is brought forth by Húrin and the Outlaws.
I am not convinced that the Dwarves were only engaged to fashion the Nauglamir.
The other payments demanded by the Dwarves are clearly debatable. But we need something to lunch a quarrel and these demanded payments seemed perfect for that.

FD-SL-14 - The Dwarves already plant treasury.
Oh, sorry a bad misprint of mine. It should read: The Dwarves already planed treachery. Meaning that they lusted for the treasure and sought for a way to get hold on it.

Posted by Maedhros:

I see no reason as to not have a battle between the dwarves and the Elves of Doriath. It can be seen that there was a quarrel between the Elves and dwarves that ended up in a battle between them. It seems perfectly logical thinking about the curse of the gold.

Consider the result of a battle: Dwarves would have been killed. Okay, now the Dwarves that were driven away would reach Nogrod. What ever they tell there they would have to give some account why some of them were slain. From The Hobbit we learn that the Dwarves started the war only for the withheld reward. Thus the Dwarves that returned must have given a tale in which the dead Dwarves were killed justly or the fight would have been re-lunched for revenge and not only for the reward.
Alternative we could consider the statement in The Hobbit to refer to the first fight in Menegroth between the Dwarven-smiths and the Elves. But that would mean that the Dwarven-smith must capture some part of the treasure for which we have no hint at all in JRR Tolkiens texts.

FD-SL-20: Posted by Maedhros:

I don't think that treachery of the elves should be used, instead I would use the idea of Naugladur would know about the hunt. I mean the dwarves had already worked in Menegroth before and it is very plausible that they would know about certain customs in Menegroth, as the hunt.

The plot is workable without the treason of some Elves. But why not use it? The yearly hunt of Thingol (which could have been know about by Naugladur) could have been everywhere in Doriath. An Elf new come from Menegroth would had have the necessary information for Naugladur were to look for Thingol to lure him out of the Girdle.
And up to this point you have been the one that argued with the potency of the cruse of Mîm. Isn't a treacherous Elf a plausibly result of that cruse?

FD-SL21: Posted by Maedhros:

Using the hunt is the way that Thingol is killed outside his borders.

Not really, the hunt would normally be lunched inside the Girdle or at least so I would think. Otherwise there would not be any need to lure Thingol to come out of protection. Which JRR Tolkien clearly saw.

FD-SL-23: Posted by Maedhros:

When Thingol is killed we can follow the TN where Melian feels that her husband is dead, her power of the Girdle is gone, she fleds to find her daughter.

But in TN the girdle is already out of function by the treason of Narthseg. And Melain did not fled to find Lúthien:

Then did Naugladur in his triumph laugh till his beard shook, and bid seize her: but none might do so, for as they came towards her they groped as if in sudden dark, or stumbled and fell tripping each the other, and Gwendelin went forth from the places of her abode, and her bitter weeping filled the forest. Now did a great darkness fall upon her mind and her counsel and lore forsook her, at she wandered she knew not whither for a great while; and this was by reason of her love for Tinwelint the king, for whom she had chosen never to fare back to Valinor and the beauty of the Gods, dwelling always in the wild forests of the North; and now did there seem to her neither beauty nor joy be it in Valinor or in the Lands Without. Many of the scattered Elves in her wayward journeyings she met, and they took pity on her, but she heeded them not. Tales had they told her, but she hearkened not over much since Tinwelint was dead; ...

It is in S and in Q30 that Melain goes from Menegroth to seek Lúthien. And in both versions it is again treachery of the Elves that had removed the girdle. But this was not to the liking of JRR Tolkien as he later stated in TY.
Posted by Maedhros:

JRRT quote doesn't necessarily mean that Melian willingly removed the girdle but as CT imply in his version, that her power over it was gone, and that is why she fled.

I do not interpret the Sil77 version in that way. I think that you changed cause and effect here. Melian is trouble by the death of Thingol and forsook Middle-Earth. She did not remove the Girdle with some purpose but she did not longer care for it. She did not fled because she was no longer able to protect Doriath. She went way because here former life had fallen in ruin and was stripped from its sense for here by the death of Thingol. And last but not least, why should here power over the matter of Arda be gone with the death of Thingol? Do you see Melian acting with Thingol in a way like Sauron with the Ring? Possible but such a interpretation should not be forced on the reader of our version of the story.
Posted by Maedhros:

As to call her witless after such an event is to me unthinkable.

Not so for JRR Tolkien as seen in TN. But in my view you drive it even further by denying here power after the death of Thingol.
Posted by Maedhros:

Why wouldn't a maiar like her, who had not the restrictions that the later Istari had, would not be able to find her own daughter?

I agree on that point, in principle she would have been able to find Lúthien, but see next § of the post. And for Melian not being restricted like the Istari I would say she might even have been more ristricted by her former actions: permanent incarnation, living in the fashion of the Sindar for a very long time, childbirth, gaining power over the matter of Arda (creating the girdle). But that is clearly a argument for nothing since we do not know enough to make a valid comparison.
Posted by Maedhros:

I don't see any pressing evidence as to why Melian should not be the messenger.

To put it simple: The problem is the Girdle. Remove Melian and the problem is solved. Do not remove her, and you have to argue the Girdle away in some very risky fashion.

FD-SL-24: Yes it works well, and we have already done some step in removing the innumerable host of Green-Elves that jumped from behind each tree when Beren sounded his horn. When we workout the passage I will give the purposed further reduction a try and we can see how it works.

At least I have the feeling that we know begin to discuss the core of the problems we have each with version of the other and not only the textual details. Even if I in the moment don't see us move nearer to any agreement.

Respectfully
Findegil