Editiones Arnamagnæanæ. Series B - 01.06.1962, Page 81
lxxix
are Benedikt’s sole source. The two sets of rímur are in
general agreement and there are often very close verbal
similarities, e.g. VI 57 hann bytur ei par ef bragnar þar /
bera skiött framm ligarnar (MHR VI 34 bitur ecki bœsing
sa / ef bragnar liuga. Contrast this with the text of HÞ
in Hr (2930-31) huerium manne uerdur þad ad bana er
lygur en a þann mann bitur hann ecki er satt seiger); VI
75 eg hef nafne leint alldrey (MHR VI 52 Alldri hefe eg
.... nafni leynt); VI 82 eitthvad gott mun rad i stad,
(MHR VI 60 en mun ytum eitt huertt gott / til urrads
uerda); VI 83 Halfu ver, sem heirdumm vier, / Hemingur
var staddur hier / af radum hara, enn herrann þar / honum
hlyfde og þadann bar (MHR VI 61 halfu uer uar Hemingur
staddur / af hilmis radum and 62 Hlifdi honum so drottinn
dyr)-, VII 23 and 24 Pater Noster, Mariu veþenn (MHR
VI 66 and 67 pater noster, Mariu uers).
There are, in fact, only three points where Benedikt’s
rímur diverge from MHR after the breaking off of the
Flat text. The first is that Benedikt does not give the
incorrect name Ragnhilldr (MHR VI 7) to Edward’s wife.
The second is Benedikt’s VI 30, which relates that King
Edward the Confessor burned twelve kings to death in
one night. MHR VI 10 contains the common version of
the tradition, according to which Sigríðr the Ambitious
burned two kings to death. The MSS in groups V, W
and X also give the number as twelve and the burner as
Edward but they have almost certainly been influen-
ced by the Æfentyr (cf. below p. lxxxi). The final point
is that Benedikt says that Hemingr went to Rome,
entered a hermitage there and remained in it until he
died. MHR have nothing to say on this point and the
source of Benedikt’s information is unknown. He probably
invented it on the strength of Heming’s vow to make a
pilgrimage to Rome (MHR V 17), although this vow is
omitted in Benedikt’s rímur. Although there are these
points of divergence, however, it is hardly necessary to