Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana - 01.06.2005, Page 433
Bevussrimur and Bevusar tættir
423
(21) St. 33,2 repeated at 37,2 - and cf. 28,2, only in A - vantirin
(thus A; vant er tær by aural corruption B). This represents
vantrivning(ur), a Faroese loanword of Danish rather than Ice-
landic provenance. It must be a relatively recent intruder in the
tradition, replacing Icelandic ribballdi og jllmenne, jlla fol og
skiptingur (Bevers saga MS y, ch. 4,38, 4,50).
(22) St. 43,2 meistari(n). See above, p. 419.
(23) St. 54,2 skrivari. As observed by Cederschiold, this is a corrup-
tion of Icelandic skviari ‘squire’.60
Lastly, there is disorder in the three final stanzas of both versions. Sts.
52-53 introduce the Egyptian princess and State that ‘they’, i.e. the hea-
then merchants, hånd Bevus over to her, whereupon the second canto
apparently ends (st. 53,3-4):
fingu henni tann (B: fingu henni) frfSa svein,
nu fellur um sinn (B: fallin er nu) riman ein.61
Another stanza in the first person follows, where the speaker promises
Bevus preferment at the Egyptian court, and here the poem abruptly
breaks off. A glance at the saga shows that the original story was a dif-
ferent one: the merchants deliver Bevus to the king, not his daughter
(Bevers saga MS y, ch. 5,13-14 til pessa kongz komu heidingiar med
Bie(uiss) og færdu hann kongenum), and he at once offers to make Bev-
us his squire (see (23) above). Here a chapter of the saga ends, and only
in the next chapter - or, as far as the lost Bevussrimur and the original
Faroese ballad were concemed, the next canto? - does the princess
come on to the scene. Like the common errors listed under (17)-(23),
these additional mistakes of order and sense must have been in the im-
mediate hyparchetype of A and B. Genealogical information can help
us to locate that hyparchetype in space and time.
60 Bevers saga MS B, ch. 5,34; Fornsogur Sudrtanda (as n. 54).
61 For the formula compare e.g. Geiplur IV, st. 58,4 Geiplur skulu kar falla nidr.