[Aiwendil]

Looks like I will be going through the text piece by small piece. Further comments up to NA-EX-26:

NA-EX-16 {The Words of Húrin and Morgoth} <Sil77 Of the Fifth Battle: Nirnaeth Arnoediad> Many songs are sung and many tales are told by the Elves of the Nirnaeth Arnoediad, the Battle of Unnumbered Tears, in which Fingon fell and the flower of the Eldar withered. If all were retold a man's life would not suffice for the hearing

Isn't the source for this GA note 2 rather than QS77? Not that it really matters.

Then Fingon looked east and his elven-sight saw far off a dust and the glint of steel like stars in a mist, … … Then in the plain of Anfauglith, on the fourth day of the war, there began the Nirnaeth Arnoediad, all the sorrow of which no tale can contain.

Isn't there a section from either QS77 or GA in between here? It's not marked in the full text. I think we have:

. . . But the Captain of Morgoth in the west had been commanded to draw out Fingon from his hills by whatever means he could. <GAHe marched on therefore until the front of his battle was drawn up before the stream of Sirion . . .

And then back to GA note 2 with "Then in the plain of Anfauglith . . ."

Of all that befell in the eastward battle NA-EX-18<editorial additiononly a little should be told here>: {of the routing of Glaurung the Drake by the Naugrim of Belegost;}

I don't see the need for this sentence; I'd rather delete it than alter it.

NA-EX-19<GA {But even as}When the vanguard of {Maidros}[Maeðros] came upon{ the Orcs}, Morgoth loosed his {last}[greatest] strength{, and Angband was emptied}. There came wolves, and wolfriders, and there came Balrogs{ a thousand}, and there came worms and drakes, and Glaurung, Father of Dragons. And the strength and terror of the Great Worm were now grown great indeed, and Elves and Men withered before him; and he came {between}[upon] the hosts of {Maidros}[Maeðros]{ and Fingon} and swept them apart.>

The deletion of "the Orcs" in "came upon {the Orcs}" leaves an ungrammatical sentence.

NA-EX-21 , -22: I don't understand why sections 231 and 232 of GA have been switched; indeed, it makes senseless the "yet" in "Yet neither by wolf, balrog, nor dragon . . ."

Findegil wrote:

Thus the course of the battle is based on the Narn version, but we must consider these changed course ot the battle. It might prove to be unworkable.

Indeed, we must decide about the whole issue of Uldor's machinations. The Narn excises them entirely - at least, so it seems; it's difficult to be sure, since the Narn focuses only on the western battle. It is a little difficult to determine what was rejected from the earlier accounts and what was simply omitted in this version. It is also difficult to integrate GA and the Narn at points, particularly with regard to the coming of Turgon and the relation of the eastern battle and the western battle. This might be easier if we had the whole Narn text. I think it may turn out to be best to revert to the GA story with regard to the events unfolding in the east. At least, Christopher Tolkien seems to think that the new story is unworkable.

Another general consideration is to what extent we can trust that the QS77 text is an accurate presentation of the Narn text. Christopher tells us that "other features of the story as told in The Silmarillion that are not found in GA are derived from the Narn", and gives a few specific examples. Yet I can't help but to wonder whether any further changes were made. Actually, it would be quite uncharacteristic of his general procedure in the '77 to use a large passage from any text without at least a few modifications. Mister Underhill has noted (some time ago) that the whole element of Gothmog's "troll guard" (which may raise several problems with regard to trolls functioning in sunlight) is found nowhere but in this passage in the '77, which we can only guess comes from the Narn.

Findegil wrote:

Aiwendils 1. point: I wondered about the first person style here myself. If we decide not to use it that way we could also use the older version of the text instad of reforming the newer version.

Actually, the problem is larger than that, I think. Aelfwine is out in our version. With that in mind, I must say that the whole introduction starts to seem quite out of place.

The problem with Andvír is even greater: As Christopher Tolkien points out the text is clear that it is not Andvír that survived the battle of the sumit of Amon Rûdh but Andróg himself. From what I have understand in Aelfwine and Dírhaval even the first version of the text is younger than all accounts of the battle we have. Thus I think we have Andróg as the single survivor. And I did introduce that into the text (NA-SL-02).

Ah, right. I should never trust my memory. I will comment on the changed storyline in due course.

NA-EX-02: From the text and its representation in Aelfwine and Dírhaval Version A and the information in note 3 to that chapter it seems clear to me that the name is "minlamad thent/estent".

CRT thinks so, anyway. I don't think the other view is entirely out of the question, but I suppose I agree that it is most likely the full name.

NA-EX-05: I still think the addtion is neccesary. In GA and in Sil77 the battle of the Orcs against the combined forces of Brethil and Doriath is discriebed just before. But here in the Narn we do not tell about that battle at all. And in our work a full chapter of about 100 pages has gone by since that battle.

I suppose you're right.