Gripla - 01.01.1995, Blaðsíða 143

STEFANUS SAGA IN REYKJAHÓLABÓK
141
perhaps a corruption of „helli“ in Sth. 2 (45ra20; Hms 293:39) and AM
661 (7vl7). The first word in an account of a miracle is corrupt in Sth.
3, which writes <Q>vinna (242:7), when it should be, as in Sth. 2,
Nvnna (48va30; Hms 307:18) (cf. Legenda aurea, p. 465: „Item quan-
dam sanctimonialem ...“). The scribal error occurs, however, also in
AM 661, which writes Kvinna nockur (22v21). In another instance, the
adjective cristna - „haN atte dóttor cristna“ - in Sth. 15 (96r26-27),
Sth. 2 (48va5; Hms 306:34), and AM 661 (22rl7) is misread as a name
in Sth. 3: „hann atte eina dottvr er Kristina hiet“ (243:5). In the mira-
cle sequence the word viðsmiör (Sth. 2: vidsmiór [48vb2; Hms 307:29];
Sth. 15: viþsmior [96v24]; AM 655 XXII: við smor [2v9]) appears in
corrupt form in Sth. 3 as vid sinior (242:20).
Conversely, however, Sth. 3 occasionally has the better reading vis-
á-vis other manuscripts, for example, the name „Jeoretheo" (221:3),
which appears in the corrupt form „seoretheo" in Sth. 2 (45ra22; Hms
294:1) and AM 661 (7vl8). A correct reading in Sth. 3 is at times sup-
ported by AM 661, for example, when Sth. 3 (232:9-10) writes „aa
einvm steine“ and AM 661 (16vl7) follows suit with „a steinne,“ but
Sth. 2 has the scribal error „a sveini“ (47ra35; Hms 301:37). Similarly,
both Sth. 3 (232:26) and AM 661 (17rl4) write kystv - a reading that is
supported by the Latin „Et osculantes relliquias“ (Mombritius, 495:40)
- whereas Sth. 2 deviates with þvstv (47rbl0; Hms 302:12). AM 661
(20v6) supports the correct reading keisaren spyr in Sth. 3 (236:27),
whereas Sth. 2 writes keisar(inn) svar(adi) (48ral6; Hms 305:10). AM
661 (3rl7) writes: „fiwizt hier suo rmTcit um“ and agrees with Sth. 3:
„finnzt þetta so mikit“ (216:22-23), which makes better sense contex-
tually, while Sth. 2 has the variant „finniz her ecki vm“ (44ra9; Hms
289:28).
Even more instructive is a comparison of variants where the texts of
the fragments and of Sth. 15 overlap with those of Sth. 2, AM 661, and
Sth. 3. Scribal carelessness is evident, for example, when we read in
Sth. 3 that Lucianus hears his name called three times in a dream vi-
sion, but the actual words that follow read: „Lvciane Lvciane. fardv j
Jervsalem“ (227:18). Sth. 2 (46rb7; Hms 298:22) and AM 661 (12v22)
have the original reading, however, in which the name is repeated
resembles Rhb 233:3-10 and Hms 302:21-24, but it is longer and apparently not related
to the hagiographic redactions.