Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana - 01.06.1957, Síða 196
176
NOTES
I 9434 Hako ] Hakonus 1022; 9628 me] 1022 omits; 1101 cum]
1022 omits; 1 x 113 felicitate] facilitate 1022; 12525 Regis] 1022
omits; 1278 assumpto . . præcipuo] assumpta . . præcipua 1022;
13832 animadvertit] advertit 1022; see also the variants at 9713,
995, 1014, 1033, 10627, in4, 11918, 1261, 1297, 13425, 13734, 13820.
There are also a number of errors common to both manuscripts,
which clearly go back to their common original. One or two such
are corrected in 1022, evidently by the copyist himself: at 9516
1778 has Haqvinus, in 1022 Haqvin was first written but then
altered to the correct Haraldus; the original must obviously have
had Haqvinus. At 10732 a ‘se’ must evidently have been lacking in
the original: both copyists have added it but each in a different
position. At 1318 1778 has Summaria, which was first written in
1022 also but then corrected to Sunnmairia. These examples de-
monstrate as clearly as one could wish that 1778 cannot be des-
cended from 1022, but that both manuscripts must have been
copied from the same original. As we have already shown, this
original must itself have been a copy and by no means free of
errors. As well as the mistakes already mentioned, reference may
be made to variants at I 937, 9722) 9831, 9930, 10230, 1089, m19,
11420, 12211-12, 12526, 13212, 1345, 13511—12-—There is no need
here to give instances of error in 177^ where 1022 has a better
reading; a glance at the textual notes will reveal sufficient ex-
amples.
It remains for us to speak of Vedel’s summary of AJ’s trans-
lation which we mentioned earlier (p. I7i).ltis found in GI. kgl.
sml. 2434 4to, leaves i8v—25V, written in Vedel’s own hånd. The
other contents of this manuscript are described elsewhere in the
present volume (see Appendix I). The summary of Jåmsvikinga
saga is very brief and for the most part of no value to us for
comparative purposes. It is consequently only used in the textual
apparatus here for the list of the battle-leaders at Hjgrungavågr
(see I 1328-24). No attention has been paid however to differen-
ces in orthography or to minor inaccuracies of a similar kind.
In the present edition 1022 is made the basis for the text and
its orthography is retained exactly, although some inconsistent
use of initial capitals and punctuation has been normalised. All
variants from 1778 are quoted, with the exception of insignifi-