No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
The progressive publication of Skaldic Poetry of the Scandinavian Middle Ages, a new international edition of the entire skaldic corpus whose first installment appeared in 2007, has now reached the category of skaldic poetry that is probably most familiar to general readers, namely the verses embedded in the Sagas of Icelanders. For that reason this volume has possibly been the most eagerly awaited of all the projected nine volumes.While some genres of skaldic poetry are little known other than to specialists, that is certainly not the case with the verses in the Sagas of Icelanders, many of which have sufficient character and vividness to convey some impact despite a less than robust manuscript tradition and continuing scholarly debates over their authenticity and interpretation. Here we find Hallfreðr's expressions of reluctance to abjure the god Óðinn, who has so favored the poet's kindred in the past; Kormákr's awakening of love for Steingerðr; Grettir's defiance of the small farmers who try to persecute him; Bjǫrn Breiðvíkingakappi's misery in a cave, far from his beloved; Egill Skalla-Grímsson's silent truculence concerning his amours; Steingerðr's enigmatic expression of trust in Kormákr; Þuríðr Óláfsdóttir pá’s incitation to her son Barði Guðmundarson; the warning delivered to Egill on his Vermaland expedition by Ármóðr's daughter and the disparagement directed at him on a different expedition by the daughter of Arnfiðr of Vermaland; Unnr Marðardóttir's intimation of her impending divorce and the reason for it; and Steinunn Refsdóttir's ridicule of the missionary Þangbrandr.Supplementing the verses from the Sagas of Icelanders in this volume are two texts that appear to be saga-related but do not actually appear in a saga: Skáldhelgi Þórðarson's “Address to a Sorceress” and the anonymous Grettisfærsla. Omitted from the volume are some well-known verses by Þormóðr Kolbrúnarskáld that, as part of the kings’ sagas, had already been presented in volume 1 of Skaldic Poetry (as noted on p. 532 of the present volume).The sheer size of this volume testifies to the vast effort that has been put into it, a significant portion of the work having been done during the pandemic. The volume editors are Margaret Clunies Ross, Tarrin Wills, and Kari Ellen Gade. Clunies Ross and Gade, along with Diana Whaley, Edith Marold, and Guðrún Nordal, have been associated with the Skaldic Poetry project from its inception in 1995 as members of the main editorial board. Sadly, Gade did not live to see publication of this volume and she has been replaced by R. D. Fulk, who will continue in this role for subsequent volumes. Contributing editors are Clunies Ross, Fulk, Gade, Marold, Whaley, and Wills, along with Alison Finlay, Colin Grant, Jonathan Grove, Kate Heslop, John McKinnell, Klaus Johan Myrvoll, the late Richard Perkins, Judy Quinn, and Rolf Stavnem. The bibliography is supplied by Hannah Burrows. The lengthy introduction consists of sections contributed by Clunies Ross, Fulk (on the basis of extensive notes supplied by Gade), Myrvoll, and Wills.The verses in the Sagas of Icelanders have been edited and translated numerous times, both separately and in association with the saga texts in which they are embedded. As a result, the present volume must accommodate very extensive commentary, virtually amounting to a full variorum edition. Individual verses not infrequently attract several pages of explanatory matter. The editors do their best to write succinctly while attempting to furnish an inclusive account of previous scholarship and offering fresh ideas and solutions of their own. For the most part they succeed admirably but occasionally the commentary spends too much time on obviously nonviable interpretations or extends into etymological speculations, points of literary criticism, and broader cultural observations that would be better published separately. Conversely, occasionally the inclusivity is not what it might be. From time to time I have had to consult previous editions in order to identify the originator of an interpretation (as in the case of Bandamanna saga verse 2, Víga-Glúms saga verse 1, and Þórðar saga hreðu verse 7), and that, while far from a serious problem, is not consistent with the very full documentation provided elsewhere in this volume. I will return presently to some more worrying lapses in inclusivity.This volume marks a distinct advance over the editions of the individual sagas, the skaldic editions of Finnur Jónsson (Den norsk-islandske Skjaldedigtning, 1912–1915) and E. A. Kock (Den norsk-isländska skaldediktingen, 1946–1950), and the various skaldic anthologies, not to mention the very large tally of articles on individual poets and stanzas. Editorial policy is to select readings with reference to the stemma rather than eclectically, as done by many previous editors. Thus Clunies Ross rejects “arfljúgr” (lying about inheritance), an interpretation of a single manuscript reading adopted by earlier editors in Egils saga verse 26 (pp. 218–19), in favor of the less vituperative “arflyndr” (inheritance-minded, i.e., obsessed with rights to inheritance), which is the reading offered by Wolfenbüttel and other B-redaction manuscripts. Similarly, in Hallfreðar saga verse 11 (pp. 885–86), Whaley rejects the reading “hǫfnum” (we forsake), which, despite being selected by most previous editors, is poorly supported by the manuscript testimony.Contributing editors to this volume have been able to avail themselves of a large body of recent scholarship on the manuscript traditions. It has led in several instances to a reprioritization of witnesses (see, e.g., pp. 523–24). In editing the verses from Njáls saga Fulk avails himself of the ongoing “Project on the Variance of Njáls saga,” refining upon it in his discussion of the derivatives of the lost medieval parchment Gullskinna (p. 1209). Clunies Ross's editing of verses in Egils saga, notably Arinbjarnarkviða, has taken into account a reassessment of the manuscripts by Þorgeir Sigurðsson and other Icelandic scholars, who have used infrared light and multispectral images (albeit with mixed success) in an attempt to recover otherwise indecipherable readings. Transcriptions made by Ólafur Halldórsson with the aid of ultraviolet light are systematically used in Grove's edition of the verses in Grettis saga and Heslop's edition of Grettisfærsla.As in the earlier volumes of Skaldic Poetry, one of the sources of greatest refinement on prior scholarship is the systematic application of metrico-syntactic rules worked out for the dróttkvætt stanza by Hans Kuhn and a number of eminent predecessors, including Eduard Sievers and William Craigie, but with crucial further elaborations by Gade, whose impress on the analysis of verse form is to be seen everywhere in this volume. Consistent application of the rules has enabled the editors to detect textual errors and also to exclude a number of emendations offered by their predecessors. Difficulties arise, admittedly, when one considers the applicability of these rules across different periods. The skaldic corpus contained in the Sagas of Icelanders to across a very from as as the to as late as the editorial has to be made for in as for in a by in editing two late texts (see, e.g., pp. textual is as of are they to an but or a late one and it be or to which of these is of a of the with which some of the rules The editors for to on the of in and in some to that their points to textual or a late to from the (on the more in the kings’ and the a from the time that the dróttkvætt stanza in its which in and in As it has little to about the of or the of the the of the metrico-syntactic the with which the rules in the verses in the Sagas of Icelanders is that is to is a of what we the verses to have been but also a of as verses they in the of dróttkvætt or other verse in the first Fulk to a to this in his analysis of saga verse (pp. in a that all the with the of this Fulk be that this is not an that many of skaldic verse would (p. a when the two of the first of saga verse into have already the of to the It might that the of and by dróttkvætt verse form would but the is more a of in the introduction to this has further of the and to be As the out the for the and their by or are by and with in the first which in the in in including and of distinct we these it is that for a late are in their more than for an For full on or of which we at and the stanza not have been by a of we that the stanza in has been to some during it is in we it that some and the of that full by the whose poetry to be of by and in their to that in to be used in a in is that as have been by late as a that be a that is by in the very late verses in The are so very in the skaldic that that are most to have been of for the first of verse 1 (pp. at is time to of which I have the of and full by might have late poets as of the observations I not to from the that has a of and some the they in other than of of in this volume from to editors a on in to the verses of Egils saga we see rather in a that is less than that of in his The of Icelandic appeared too late to be systematically used in the present it is in the to verse form but the of work to an that editors on in readings or certainly has made a of in her now over a on the Finnur Jónsson edition of the skaldic it will be replaced by a new upon the Skaldic Poetry edition. In the by is the for editors, for better or The is that the which Finnur to in his at the of and and upon which his not to have been crucial to skaldic in the The verses in the Sagas of Icelanders numerous instances of from the of in The also the is not by the are used in to two rather than of in and that are themselves with the of these is in some in the of the but the is that in this volume it is done as rather than as to the for editorial be when a systematic has been these the of in this volume is a with known the to a it has to be with it in saga verse (pp. and in saga verse (pp. the Hallfreðr's verse Poetry, p. Heslop, its Clunies Ross to mention it as a in verse (pp. and so too in Grettis saga verse (pp. two it has the to The of in these two verses in two prior by the present and in the of in The of by and The of Grettis saga these I would the at have of the of the and the of to in the one to the I from edition and in from Poetry, p. by as in to the and both the and the for with their and The of interpretation noted by Gade are we this the of further systematic systematic is the discussion in this volume of for as far more in the verses of the Sagas of Icelanders than in the kings’ The editors are able to to some associated with their (p. by a systematic is the of to which an is (pp. to that are more than most editors have and not be the of For Whaley a case for the of a in Hallfreðar saga verse (pp. The of from the Sagas of Icelanders, as distinct from the kings’ and other one some with a in to be with verses as most of the are to be. might find some in the of in the anonymous which to the kings’ and a by to from an with an to the of in the verses from might that and other as too and not a for skaldic these from are it the case that the of manuscript for many of the Sagas of Icelanders is probably for at some of is by when she for to instances in the verses of saga (p. is very to in skaldic as is by the editors, and it as editorial policy in other volumes of Skaldic Poetry have the number of in the by a of on some or for in saga verse Poetry, pp. a for which be more as or to the as to the is a or is not a on the and of this stanza in volume but rather to the that Myrvoll, who contributed this to this rather a in the of a systematic discussion of we have not be a so much as a expression with of the and in verse (p. also is of the in Poetry, 1, pp. of rather than are by from verses and Poetry, pp. case is the of in about verse Poetry, 2, p. In of further it be as but rather as an for which is in association with is The of so used in poetry and in the corpus to have been in skaldic but of from time to in the The editors of this volume in a significant number of in emendations are and other solutions are The is the is from of the or a in the of all the to that of might to for editorial edition of Njáls saga verse (pp. Grove's of Grettis saga verse 26 (pp. and of Víga-Glúms saga verse (pp. of is that its and scholarly from observations and made by earlier scholars, notably in his the editors to this volume of and occasionally but have been this in a is Clunies Ross's of the entire of the of the in verse (pp. a of and rejects all but to full account of rather that further is that the of the the being that in a and and in the a as to and other is a seen for at The in the is in verse as to the of a from the who a of for and other this is to the of the of the are of that I will is the very time over which skaldic poetry being it to reason that some used in poetry would have or as time an the for in verse (pp. has a as and in the manuscripts. In this be the familiar but more Clunies Ross it as and it as of the that and and the of over a which they as of a a that also in and The of is by to the present it is by and by Finnur Jónsson in his despite basis in is not a as be to the of to these to this in the of for in at be to by or and or or of or or the present verse in this and must have the in verse as having the not In the of is an with of as by in his pp. and on in reference to the present stanza by Kock in his supported by in his edition of Egils saga pp. and in his The led a in the skaldic being by verse verse and verse in a time several The first two have already been by the editors in earlier volumes of Skaldic Clunies Ross to this in her edition of Skáldhelgi Þórðarson's “Address to a Sorceress” verse 1 in the present volume (p. she that the which in this stanza and is also used in verse to a much more be to than to or In to be reason to as Clunies Ross that the of the is or to this be that further of to be Egill as in the skaldic corpus more case in is which I in and has been a in to the verses contained in the Sagas of Icelanders. The editors that they do not attempt to the of all the and would have the volume. this Clunies Ross's from the of dróttkvætt in verses of the Sagas of Icelanders are to to that the of the and for this verse an in their and the main of to The dróttkvætt with its of the of the (p. but would we that the saga themselves the we with Clunies Ross and the other editors, that most of the verses in most of the are on the basis of the for dróttkvætt verse form would from the not the of the Clunies Ross's in the verses by the saga or some as in the case of Njáls saga (as in the discussion on p. an might have selected dróttkvætt as the form in which to verses to the saga, by the dróttkvætt verses already present in The we to with Clunies Ross's would be to that saga had a of verses to of which some in other than but that these for the dróttkvætt is in saga, saga, and elsewhere a verses in other than dróttkvætt do Egils saga is a the do not appear to have part of the saga as dróttkvætt verses are a of verses in other occasionally in the kings’ a small number of from in are is an in the of for a tradition of verses saga a less new solutions and do we find in this In the introduction it is edition is more than most of its predecessors, as far as previous be in the (p. Clunies Ross's of this policy in to the of the verses in saga p. we for new that do not upon a is Grove's of an in Grettis saga verse (pp. the of into of of the will be able to find the little and of the editors had to a of and emendations to this of as whose Icelandic is by with and are in Grove's new interpretation with the two instances of in the of this along with further instances in the other verses by or a on previous editions is Grove's of a of that in Grettis saga verse (pp. the be as an for verse (pp. Clunies Ross out the of in other the in which this as a It has been by previous editors, for as or as some of more in to the we see and in is Clunies Ross's that it to the of skaldic poetry too is and Heslop's new of the in saga verse (pp. a is to in but the editors by as a to and other for in for In their interpretation it is by the of the i.e., in a of of the a of emendations made by all previous editors, for the reading in Víga-Glúms saga verse (pp. and for in saga verse (pp. by a but of the in verse 1 (pp. the a of the volume is about the application of this as by Clunies Ross in her of Egils saga verse (pp. the of the of the of and on the basis of this a reference to in is about the which is one of several emendations of all of Clunies Ross's interpretation by her the as we do not find associated with in of In of these it to put on the as for to other new solutions that upon an is of saga verse (pp. whose of it skaldic of is time for the to the I very the not into will not recover from this the about that, who to over to the at to this verse by the manuscript reading of a that in not the but also to the and the that the saga has the verse from its the of has on the in from his so as to in Þórðar saga hreðu verse as to an and to what has as a systematic to on the part of the on the of Fulk that previous editors have upon the in saga verse 11 (pp. and have been led to errors on the part of the saga as be to the reading which as and as an otherwise is a to noted and might a into account of earlier in this saga verse (pp. Fulk rejects the manuscript reading in probably the an that it in a or of a the basis of which in is Fulk (as the the presented by the stanza at a in Njáls saga verse (pp. Fulk and refining upon a by that be to the form which is in rejects the reading in in favor of the reading of all other manuscripts. The is a that is in both and of the Fulk as i.e., the on the other new the in saga verse (p. to the offered by previous a in verse (pp. the of Grettis saga verse (pp. the about the size of his on a by Kock in saga verse (pp. so as to a that the as a from Clunies Ross the of Egils saga verse (pp. by an in the at from the to the of in the skaldic we do not find a large of new solutions and interpretations in this volume the of saga from the of (p. but it would be to of the verses in the Sagas of Icelanders are to a or in the It is to that entire and of verses as they appear in the best of the manuscripts are the of what we might to be their the Bjǫrn and the of Egill the verses of or mention the most of these the the and of the is a for not the of emendations when so is little to on but also the of readings that might at first to be In the present edition of are not to the as as they might as be by a of some In saga verse 11 (pp. and Clunies Ross the of the as a for that the of the readings in the appear and the by most editors is and accommodate the the is to with as at the the editors do not what might have in this the be to have over the who is that, it to of as the interpretation to the of to the by the for further The that the reading along with other in the is previous editors have emendations but on a saga verse (pp. Gade the in the first as and it as have what this In skaldic a or a but not elsewhere a Gade that the rather (p. Skaldic and the on the skaldic of not in the that we see in as and of to is out by Gade on For the we have little but to the as an for some now as Gade in the the saga verse (pp. Gade as on the basis of a with the that might be but the is of the what would these The to be taken to be in some other so far saga verse (pp. with the of The verse along with the that this be as the that of as a for the not identify the as a it would be a is in the of that the of be to the of other little but to the reading more might possibly be an of some Finnur the would the of the as noted by an association of with be seen in mention one saga verse 1 (pp. is as Whaley in a single and she that is that the be the verse is in the edition the of
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.