http://saga.library.cornell.edu/saganet/?MIval=/SinglePage&Manuscript=100256&Page=199&language=english

Other variants mentioned here: 'havada' and 'höfda'. Does anyone out
there have access to Jón Helgason's critical edition of the saga.
That should tell us where the form 'Harvaða' comes from. If not in R
(early 15th c.) or U (mid 17th c., but "ill-written and extremely
corrupt" according to Christopher Tolkien), that just leaves AM 203
fol. (17th c.). I would be curious to see what's written there,
although the verse in question doesn't occur in one of the sections
which have independent value according to Christopher Tolkien
(Turville-Petre: Hervarar saga ok Heiðreks, p. xviii), that is to say,
those sections where 203 is based on a precursor to U.

For more background on the various versions of the saga and how they
are related, see Alarik Hall's paper "Changing style and changing
meaning: Icelandic historiography and the medieval redactions of
Heiðreks saga" [ http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/2889/ ].

--- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, "llama_nom" <600cell@...> wrote:
>
> --- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, "naddr_risi" <emironen@> wrote:
>
> > Before establishing an etymology of this word it is not
superfluous to
> > specify its form: various printed editions and MSS have rather vage
> > spelling: Hærvaða and even Hávaða.
>
>
> Good point, naddr_risi. I've just checked Turville-Petre's edition;
> he notes: "In R the form Harvaða has been altered to Hærvaða. Other
> forms are Handafjöll and Hanaðafjöll (U)." I'm afraid I know no more
> than that, so all further information is welcome. Is there in fact
> any manuscript authority for this form Harvaða that appears in the
> normalised texts? Or is it just a (partially) reconstructed form
> based on the assumption that it refers to the Carpathian Mountains.
> If so, I've been building speculation on top of speculation; not
> always a firm foundation! Sorry about that.
>
>
>
> --- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, "Patricia" <originalpatricia@>
> wrote:
> >
> > When this question was originally answered by LN he used the most
> commonly found spelling IMO
>
>
> I'm afraid I simply used the spelling found in modern editions. I
> should been more careful and checked to see what I could find out
> about the forms actually attested. Thanks naddr_risi for bringing the
> matter to our attention. Patricia: even if we did establish the "most
> commonly found" spelling, this wouldn't be significant in itself if it
> happened that most common spelling could be traced to a
> mutation/alteration/error, not shared by some older manuscript from
> which these were copied.
>
> LN
>