Editiones Arnamagnæanæ. Series A - 01.06.2003, Blaðsíða 170
128*
INTRODUCTION
words. The practice of Hand A in Stock. 5 appears to be closer to this
last custom. Further attention to this type of <e> in Stock. 5, Hand A,
has been drawn by Karl G. Johansson. He denotes it <e2) (as it will be
called here from now on) and relates it to a similar letter-form in
Codex Wormianus, where on p. 108 the scribe abandons his regular
bookhand and writes some 18 lines in a semi-cursive script. Johansson
finds particular parallels in 10, nrs 37 (Hólar, 1365), 38 (Þingvöllur,
1366), and App. 6 (Hólar, 1364; preserved as a Þingeyrar document).
The first two of these are in closely related hands and they share nu-
merous other characteristics with Hand A of Stock. 5, while App. 6
differs from them in several respects. Johansson is inclined to believe
that the <e2) is a form distinctive of charter-hand practice in the North-
em diocese (Hólar, Þingeyrar) and suggests that this Northem feature
may indicate that Stock. 5 was not all written in one place (see the re-
marks on provenance, pp. 159*-60*, 179*).
Various observations may be made. As Johansson acknowledges,
<e2) is not restricted to the sources so far cited. 10, nrs 30 (1358,
Kvíabekkur, Ólafsfjörður), 32 (1360, Hólar), 35 (1363, Vatnsfjörður,
ísafjarðarsýsla) and 36 (1365, Hólar), all show the form and, as in
Cod. Worm. and 10, nrs 37, 38 and App. 6, the writers use it freely in
initial and medial positions as well as finally. <e2> is found in Hand D
of Stock. perg. 4:o nr 18, thought to have been written probably not
later than c. 1350 (EIM XVI, 43), but only where <e> stands alone or in
final position (EIM XVI, 29).4 It also occurs in Hands 3 and 5 of
Stock. 5 (Hand B of Jóns saga and the scribe of Játvarðar saga, see
pp. 136*, 171* below); their use of it is virtually restricted to final <e>
and ‘er’ and thus resembles that of Hand A here and Hand D in Stock.
perg. 4:o 18, but all differing from the charters just listed. Hands A and
B and the writers of the documents so far mentioned further differ
from the scribe of Cod. Worm. inasmuch as the bar in their <e2> forms
is contained within the roundel while the latter may make the bar tran-
sect the lower rim and project briefly below the line.5 The same sort of
transection appears in IO 44 (1373, Þingeyrar) and in a few instances,
4 This copy of Gunnlaugs saga might be of northern provenance if the ‘viæn-’ spel-
lings of the scribe are counted a likely indicator; cf. J. Oresnik, Gripla V (1982), 191.
5 Judging by the relative breadth of the nib-strokes in each case, one would say that the
<e2) type in Hand A of Stock. 5 and that in Cod. Worm. were probably differently drawn.