Well, in my theoretical there isn't any real reason besides the approach, that is: characterizing
Qenta Noldorinwa as not an old, abandoned version of later Quenta Silmarillion texts (where they overlap at least), but as an
internal variation of 'another' Quenta Silmarillion -- in other words, of the same nature as the Drowning of Anadune compared to AK.
And from that characterization alone, I then argue a different family tree existed, for example, because 'now' I have two internal competing texts. That's the analogy to the Amroth matter that made me jump in here in the first place: unintended uncertainty? yes unintended, and thus external.
But, for example, I can (and have) used DA in round versus flat world discussions, because DA is
not an older abandoned version of AK, but a variation of the same tale within the legendarium.
If I characterize QN as internal, I think
that is going to be the first target of the blunderbuss... and how would you suggest one ignore that theoretical sting?
