Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana - 01.06.1981, Síða 106

Her subsequent irritation at his departure - Plus li poise et plus li des-
heite/Quant il ne viaut plus demorer (vv. 3328-29 ‘The more it irritates and
aggrieves her that he does not wish to remain longer’) - is therefore
understandable in the romance. Only this latter passage found its way
into the conclusion of the episode in the vellums.
From the perspective of the ending above, the modification in the
seventeenth-century redaction, Stockholm 46, can be explained as an
effort to provide reasonable motivation for a protagonist’s reaction that
seems excessive and out of place under the circumstances. The paper
manuscript even rewrites the ending - in keeping with the lady’s wistful
soliloquy; after a peaceful settlement has been reached with the earl, the
lady turns to Iven and makes an unambiguous offer, as. she declares, Ek
gefr ydr mik ok mitt riki i ydvart vald (99:23-24 ‘I give you myself and my
realm into your power’). Iven rejects the offer of self and kingdom in just
as blunt and unambiguous fashion by responding that neither gold nor
lands interested him, and that he had not been moved by love (Amor!).
And he departs, leaving the lady in tears - she sat eptir gråtandi (100:24).
The last words of the episode echo the comment at the conclusion of her
soliloquy, Petta taladi hon jafnan ok grét (97:26-27 ‘She kept on saying
this and cried’). The Earl Alies episode in Stockholm 46 represents an
intentional and thoughtful revision of the episode as we know it from the
French romance and from the Icelandic vellums. The decision to re-write
this section of the narrative is understandable given the puzzling and
unmotivated conclusion of the episode in the vellums. The manuscript
that was the basis for the Stockholm 46 redaction may also have repre-
sented a fuller text than either of the vellums, and this longer text may
have contained a translation of verses 3317-19 in Yvain. In faet, an allu-
sion to the lady’s connubial, or at least amatory interest may have been
just what inspired a copyist to recast the encomiastic speech.
The form taken by the Earl Alies episode in the seventeenth-century
redaction of Ivens saga represents a clear case of scribal exegesis or
interpretation. Since portions of the scene in the vellums correspond to
the French source, we can with certainty attribute the discrepancies in the
paper manuscript to an Icelandic redaetor. Where such evidence is not
available, we can only hypothesize when we attribute discrepancies in
one manuscript or another to either the translator or a copyist. An ex-
ample of an ambiguous relationship to the source and to the Norwegian
translation is provided by another episode in Ivens saga, that depicts
Iven’s infatuation with the widow of a knight he has just killed.
Iven has pursued the mortally wounded lord of the spring into the
92