Heill, Hróðbjartr!

Translate a strophe from
the Hávamál, eh? :)


Bugge's version is available
on the web. This is, more or
less, the text of the manuscript.


Bugge:

Þat kann ec et setta,
ef mic serir þegn
a rótom rás viðar,
oc þann hal
er mic heipta qveþr,
þann eta meín heldr enn mic.

As opposed to the version you gave us.

Rob:

Þat kann ek it sétta
ef mik saerir þegn
á rótum hrás viðar,
ok þann hal
er mik heipta kveðr,
þann eta mein heldr en mik

The important difference is
in the emendation "rás" to "hrás".

For the heck of it I'll type
up the other versions of this
strophe I can find.


Netútgáfan (online):

Það kann eg ið sétta:
Ef mig særir þegn
á rótum rás viðar,
og þann hal
er mig heifta kveður,
þann eta mein heldur en mig.

The spelling has been modernised here.
The emendation to "hrás" is not accepted.


Foreningen Forn Sed (online):

Þat kann ek it sétta:
ef mik særir þegn
á vrótum hrás viðar,
ok þann hal
er mik heifta kveðr,
þann eta mein heldr en mik.

Here's a stupid typo; "vrótum"
instead of "rótum".


Gísli Sigurðsson 1987 (book I have):

Það kann eg ið sjötta
ef mig særir þegn
á rótum rásviðar,
og þann hal
er mig heifta kveður,
þann eta mein heldur en mig.

Even more modernisation; "sjötta"
instead of "sétta". More importantly
the problematic "rás viðar" has been
run into one word "rásviðar".


Gísli Sigurðsson 1998 (another book):

Það kann eg ið sétta
ef mig særir þegn
á rótum rásviðar,
og þann hal
er mig heifta kveður,
þann eta mein heldur en mig.

Gísli has changed "sjötta" back to
"sétta" in this version.

It is interesting to look at different
versions of the same strophe. Every editor
will have his/her own opinion on how to
spell and emend it. Even the same editor
cannot be counted on to write the same
strophe in the same way twice:)

Hermann Pálsson 1999 (a book):

Það kann eg ið sétta:
Ef mig særir þegn
á rótum rás viðar,
og þann hal
er mig heifta kveður,
þann eta mein heldur en mig.

Hermann does not emend to "hrás",
yet his notes seem to assume such
a reading. I don't get it.

I'll try and give my own opinion
on "hrás" versus "rás".

The third line of a "ljóðaháttr"
strophe has to have two alliterators.
Since "r" and "hr" do not alliterate
the emendation to "rás" seems illegal.

(Wait a moment. Maybe "hrás" is what
it says in the ms and everyone else
(Bugge included) emended to "rás" for
this reason. I have no way of checking
this without going to the library.)

If the strophe were from 12th century
Norway or so, there would be no problem.
The Norwegians lost their "hr" to "r"
early on. Compare the Norwegian rune poem:

Reið kveða rossum vesta.
Reginn sló sverðit besta.

(A wagon is said to be worst for horses.
Reginn forged the best sword.)

This stanza would not work in Icelandic:

Reið kveða hrossum vesta.
Reginn sló sverðit besta.

The alliteration is DOA.

But I haven't seen anyone
argue that the Hávamál was
composed _late_ in Norway,
and it doesn't seem very probable.

You can also just accept the lack
of alliteration - it is sometimes
lacking in other strophes of the
Hávamál

36.

Bú er betra
þótt lítið sé...


Anyhow, let's translate the strophe.
If "hrás" is accepted it goes like this:

I know that the sixth
if a thane wounds me
on the roots of raw wood,
and that man
that curses me,
sufferings will eat him rather than me.


Glossary:

þat pronoun neuter singular accusative that

kann verb 1p sg present know

ek pron. sg nominative I

it article the

ef conjunction if

mik pron. sg. acc. me

saerir verb 3p. sg. pres. wounds, hurts

þegn noun masc. sg. nom. thane

á prep. on (many other possible)

rótum noun fem. pl. dat. roots

hrás adj. masc. sg. gen. raw

viðar noun. masc. sg. gen. wood

ok conj. and

þann pron. masc. sg. acc. that

hal noun masc. sg. acc. man

er pron. (nom.) that

mik as before

heipta fem. pl. gen. hate

kveðr verb 3p. sg. says

kveða heipta phrase curse

þann as before

eta verb infinitive eat

mein noun neut. pl. nom. something damaging,
injury, sickness etc.

heldr adv. rather

en than

mik as before

If you prefer "rás" to "hrás" you're probably
best of running it into "viðar".

Gísli explains:

"rásviður hefur ekki verið skýrt svo að vel sé
en gæti átt við tré sem er magnað upp líkt og í
Grettis sögu þegar fóstra Þorbjarnar önguls risti
rúnir á rótartré og lét reka út í Drangey.
rás getur líka þýtt skora í tré og þá er rásviður
tré sem hefur verið rist með rúnum."

My translation:

"rásviður has not been satisfactory explained
but could refer to a tree that is made magical
as in Grettis saga when the foster mother
of Þorbjörn öngull carved runes on a root
tree and had chased out to Drangey.
rás can also mean notch in a tree and
then rásviður is a tree that runes have
been carved into."

Hope that helps.

Haukur