Editiones Arnamagnæanæ. Series A - 01.10.2003, Side 147
Textual features
125*
writing (retracing). For example, 447 reads ‘er rannsokn þcBe’ at 20.28 and
M has ‘er Rannsokn sia nockvd’; ÞJ underlined ‘þesse’ and wrote ‘sia
nockud’ above it. This is entered in the variants to 447 as “28 þeBe] sia
nockud”. The method of cancellation used by ÞJ is not indicated unless
there is no replacement.
In the variants printed here the letters ‘n d’ (not deleted) are included af-
ter the words in a citation where it seems likely that they are to be regarded
as cancelled but where ÞJ has not actually recorded that intention. For ex-
ample, M 17.34 has ‘m[ed\ þess[a] Rannsokn’ and 447 20.30 ‘til ransokn-
ar’; ÞJ wrote above the latter ‘med þc.s.v/ ransókn’ but did not explicitly
cancel the 447 reading; this is entered: “(20.30) til ran soknar] n d med
þessi ransókn”.
Material absent from M may, in 447, be enclosed by ÞJ in a figure like
three sides of a rectangle, as for example 447’s chapter 49 (cf the present
edition, pp. 226-8).
Where ÞJ wished to insert material from M without deleting anything
from 447 he used an insertion sign, usually a caret (A), for brief entries; for
example ‘sðk[in]a’ from M 17.41 was added (without the hook over the
first vowel) with a caret. This is entered (20.36): “framm] + sokina”. He
used marginal notes for longer insertions, often where M has some verse
that is absent in 447; in the latter case he usually used some sign of refe-
rence such as a cross. For example M’s vísa (5) is added at the foot of 447’s
f. 12r, and a double cross (#) refers it to the proper place in the text, i e af-
ter 21.5 ‘maag sinn’ (M 17.127 ‘maag sin«’). Where no sign is present the
apparatus states ‘no ref, for example 20.47: “Korn"gardur] no ref margin
Kagardur.”
Where M was at variance with 447 only in word sequence, ÞJ usually
wrote numerals over each word. These numerals are included in the variant
apparatus of the present edition; for example, where M at 17.28 has
‘e[yre]ndi v[or]t’ 447 reads ‘vort erende’; ÞJ contented himself with ‘2’
over ‘vort’ and ‘1’ over ‘erende’ and the notation in the apparatus is accor-
dingly (20.26): “vort erende] ^2 1.” Sometimes this method was used by
ÞJ in surprising detail. At 58.2 447 reads: ‘Þad var eina nótt, ad þeir Ospak-
ur foru j Þambar dal ...’; the sequence of words in M (45.21-2) is ‘var þat
þa til tekia þe/'ra [a]t þc/'r forv nott eina i Þawbord(al)’. ÞJ starts by insert-
ing, with a caret, at the end of the previous chapter, ‘Var þad þa tiltekia
þe/'rra ad’; he underlines, for deletion, ‘Þad var’, ignores the fact that ‘ad’ is
now present twice and places figures above the remaining words: ‘ 1 ’ above
‘þeir’, ‘2’ and ‘3’ above ‘Ospakur’ and ‘foru’, ‘4’ above ‘nótt’, ‘5’ above
‘eina’ and ‘6’ above ‘j’. The result is a reasonably accurate representation
of M. But he does nothing about 447’s next words ‘15 saman’, for which M