[Aiwendil]

A few comments

I had hoped to get further with this, but I might as well post what comments I do have (up to EX-14).

NA-TI-01: Two thoughts on using the "Aelfwine and Dirhaval" text:

1. Is the use of first person ("But here I will tell as I may a Tale of Men that Dirhaval of the Havens made . . .") out of keeping with the rest of the project? I suppose one could call this a stylistic matter - however, I think that if our work is supposed to be merely an absolute narrative of events, the "I" should go. Who is "I", anyway? If the Aelfwine story is out, the introduction seems a bit out of place.

2. We must decide whether Andvir mentioned here contradicts the story of Turin and the outlaws as it stands in the Narn and the other late sources. I suppose that if one wants to get technical about it, it is nowhere stated that Androg did not have a son nor that none escaped the battle. But the story as it stands certainly suggests, to me at least, that the defeat of the outlaws was complete: only Beleg, Turin, and Mim survived - because they were, respectively, an Elf, taken alive by the Orcs, and a traitor. I am very hesitant to introduce the point that Andvir somehow survived and letting it stand alongside the latest versions of the battle. Also it would be remarkable that such a full text of the Narn omitted all mention of the fact that Androg had a son who was also in the band. So there are three options here:

a. We could decide there is no contradiction after all.
b. We could eliminate Andvir.
c. We could try to edit the Narn so as to resolve the contradiction in favor of the Andvir story.

Findegil wrote:

NA-EX-01: Since we already agreed to use the info given in this passaage, I don’t see any good reason not to use it.

Have we? It may be that we've already gone over these points and the discussion has slipped my mind.

NA-EX-02: The name is only given in text A. It might need a linguistical check.

I think it's perfectly good Sindarin. It is, unfortunately, slightly ambiguous whether the name of the mode is "minlamad thent/estent" or whether Tolkien simply couldn't decide between "minlamad thent" and "minlamad estent".

NA-EX-05: We do not know how this was dealt with inthe original text but in Sill77 the reference of “that battle” is clear from the circumstances but in this place it is not.

I don't think the addition is necessary. Compare GA:

It is said that at this time Hurin and Huor, the sons of Galion, were dwelling with Haleth their kinsman as fostersons (as the custom then was among northern Men); and they went both to battle with the Orcs, even Huor . . .

It's a pity we don't have the original Narn text here - I am tempted to suggest going with GA as the basic text for the section in preference to the '77, but then the latter probably has some features from the Narn version that it would be better to keep.

NA-EX-09: No problem with this, but isn't the source QS37 rather than Q30?

NA-EX-12: I wonder whether this is contradicted by GA:

And Haleth gathered his folk in Brethil, and they whetted their axes; but he died of age ere the war came, and Hundor his son ruled his people.

. . . which suggests that the Halethrim did not send a smaller force out of anger with Celegorm and Curufin. To be safe, I would use the GA version here.

NA-EX-14: I don't understand this. In Q30 and QS37 Maedhros's "first trial of strength" is not present. Whence comes this text and why do we need it?