Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana - 01.06.2007, Page 99
4-2 Editions and monographs
69
work’, HkrFJ I: i—ii). This edition is extremely significant, though it
may be criticised in some respects. It still stands alone as the only schol-
arly edition of Hkr with a substantial critical apparatus. But a major
weakness is that the genealogical basis for the reconstruction of the
text is not satisfactory: the choice of readings is based to a great extent
on common sense, and in practice Finnur rarely departed from the text
of Kringla except in the case of quite obvious errors, omissions or la-
cunae. If the result is not unacceptable, this is due precisely to the faet
that Kringla’s text is generally the most reliable, as Storm had shown.
There is, however, no doubt that Finnur Jonsson immersed himself
in the source material. He also researched the manuscript stemma with
results which, as far as they go, are in agreement with what more recent
research has found. Finnur Jonsson concluded that the manuscripts
could be divided into two branches, with Kringla, 39 and F on one side
and Jofraskinna on the other. He also placed E and the fragments AM
325 VIII-IX-XI 4to in the same branch as Jofraskinna,39
Finnur Jonsson’s stemma (figure 4.1 overleaf) is defeetive. Several
important manuscripts are not included (G, E, DG3), but the stemma
has nevertheless served as a point of departure for research into the
genealogical relationship between manuscripts of Flkr. In outline one
recognises the stemma developed by later scholars and which we still
use today. The main structure is the same as that which was later estab-
lished, inasmueh as Finnur Jonsson’s *b corresponds to the archetype
of the v-class and *e to that of the j/-class (cf. Bjarni ASalbjarnarson’s
stemma, figure 4.2). Finnur Jonsson noted a connection between the
text of Jofraskinna and the text of Codex Frisianus in the form of “lån,
der findes i sagaerne om Olav kyrre og hans efterfølgere” (‘loans found
in the sagas of Olåfr kyrri and his successors’, HkrFJ F. xlvi). This,
however, is explained by Jonna Fouis-Jensen as mutually independent
loans in thejy-class and F from a redaction of Morkinskinna, not by in-
39 This is not evident from the stemma but from the text itself.