Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana - 01.06.1999, Page 351
Editor’s postscript
331
The discussion of the history of dating the Eddie poems could not in-
appropriately conclude by demonstrating de Vries’s problems in es-
tablishing a continuous historical description of the topic. The “post
de Vries” period is also so close to our own time that it is difficult to
extract the main lines. I shall therefore confine myself to mentioning
some of the more salient contributions to Eddie scholarship from the
second half of the twentieth century, which seem to me particularly
significant in some respect, without pretending to cover the field in
anything like an exhaustive manner.
The remainder is a one-page draft in Norwegian. From a list of names it
appears that Professor Fidjestøl intended to discuss some of the contri-
butions made by Didrik Arup Seip, Klaus von See, Hermann Pålsson,
Heinz Klingenberg, Aaron Gurevich; possibly also Joseph Harris and
Ursula Dronke. Specific contributions to the question of dating would
also be discussed: Bjom Collinder (1965), Hallvard Magerøy (1965 and
1991) and Bjarne Ulvestad (1954).
Professor Fidjestøl’s draft indicates that he intended to pay special at-
tention to D.A. Seip’s contribution on the question of a Norwegian prov-
enance of Eddie poems. This began with an article by Seip in Maal og
Minne 1951 and was followed up by an extensive and broadly docu-
mented article in Maal og Minne 1957, cf. further bibliographical refer-
ences in the latter, especially pp. 82-86 (Seip 1957). Fidjestøl’s thoughts
on this matter were, however, not committed to paper.
On Klaus von See, Professor Fidjestøl points out that he can be seen
as an adversary of Andreas Heusler. The datings of Heusler are rooted in
an “altgermanisch” point of view, which Fidjestøl felt had been un-
masked by von See. He adds that there are some interesting examples of
new datings - notably on Hamdismdl - in von See’s studies.
According to Fidjestøl, two - or possibly three - positions may be
identified in recent Eddie studies:
1. A modernist position with an anti-Germanic (although obviously not
anti-German) tendency, to which Klaus von See and Hermann Pålsson
belong. A specific variant of this position is characterised by an empha-
sis on the history of the text, possibly influenced by Biblical and Homer-
ic studies. Heinz Klingenberg is mentioned in this context.