--- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, "llama_nom" <600cell@> wrote:
>
>
> > 1. The ON word is of genuine PG, and further of PIE, origin
> > 2. The ON word is a borrowing
> > 3. The ON word does NOT mean "Carpathians"
>
> If the earliest record of the name in ON isn't just a chance
resemblance (3), then maybe the sequence of events went like this:
The name was borrowed into PG, before the time of the first consonant
shift, from another IE language where it was perhaps invented using a
PIE root [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpathian_Mountains ]. It
survived in at least some some dialect or dialects of East and/or
West Germanic until it became attached to stories about conflict
between the Goths and Huns. The name then travelled north with
these stories to Scandinavia (where it might have been known
already, or might have been known once but forgotten after contact
was lost with the East Germanic peoples who formerly inhabited the
region; or maybe it was never known in Scandinavia till it arrived
with the legends).
þess galt hón gedda
fyr grafór ósi
es heiþrekr vas veginn
und harvaþa fiollum
The 3 surviving texts (all incomplete or interpolated) of this saga
(R, U, H) show that this saga was written once (best represented by
the surviving R sections), then somewhat radically re-written by
someone else (best represented by paper-copy U), and then re-written
again by mixing older lost originals behind R and U and appreviating
(represented by H). Now, this is making a very complex situation
somewhat simple, but it should suffice for our purposes. Harvada
(see the poetic fragment above, her in conservative spelling - note
that ó in hón and gen. ór are hooked ó, as is o in fiollum) occurs
in R, but the letter 'a' has a small superscript æ over it (by a
different hand?). It could be hárvaða (hórvaða), hérvaða (hærvaða)
or harvaða. In this case, I suspect that harvaða is the correct
form, based on extant etymological/comparative information. The form
hávaða, found in other versions, is quite unlikely to be correct.
Not surprisingly, grafá also occurs as greipá, gripá, etc. (U and H
plus paper-copy variants). Another problem ;)
> Another name for mountains in the poem 'Jassar fjöll' has been
connected with German 'Gesenke', from Slavic 'Jeseník'
(Turville-Petre, p. 88). But I don't think this narrows down the
date it could have been borrowed at. Although initial /j/ inherited
from PG was lost c. 600 in Proto-Norse, /e/ underwent a later
development to /ja/ in certain circumstances (when followed in the
next syllable by a non-nasal /a/).
> Regarding the origins of the material, Turville-Petre mentions a
couple of words used in the verses in meanings which are unusual for
ON, but match the meanings of their cognates in West Germanic
('skálkr' "servant", rather than "rogue"; 'skattr' "treasure", rather
then tribute), which "may be due to continental influence" (pp. 84-
85,p. 86).
Does Turville discuse the intricate issue of the name-variants here?
Anyway, I have been intermittantly working on a somewhat stripped
down text of this saga (mostly based on R), reading and re-reading
the often wildly different versions of events in the 3 surviving
text-lineages (R, U, and H - see Jón Helgason's Danish edition for
all 3 texts, variants and commentary - it's in very good, harmonious
Danish, published 1924 København). R is the most original, but has a
lacuna also and lacks almost all of the closing part, which includes
*hlaðar kviða heiðreks arfa (as I call it, as the gen. sg. of hlöðr
would *hlaðar, which I think Helgason points out). As the story
goes, R was (once upon a time) a reasonably good copy of a well-
written original (in melodious language, likely from early 13th
cent.), but only survives in an incomplete copy, which can only be
filled in from U (a late, paper-copy of a revised saga that was re-
written, but also in large part deriving from the same lost source
as R). The Ur-text is lost, together with any part(s) of the ancient
story not found in the extant versions, but the wording is, beyond a
doubt, in part preserved in sections where R and U match either word-
for-word or (more usually) nearly so. So what happened during the
write-re-write process? Well, it was likely thought (not without
reason) that the original (now best represented by R) made some
omissions in the story (particularly in the intro, as it lacked info
on Arngrímr's family-background, omitted the story about how the
sword Tyrfingr was aquired from the dwarves, attributed the
aquisition of the sword to Sigrlami instead of to Svafrlami, his son
in U and H, but not mentioned in R, etc.etc.etc.) and that it got
some things wrong (Hjörvarðr woes the swedish king's daughter and
fights Hjalmarr in R, instead of Angantýr in U and H), etc.etc.etc. -
(note: the problem was never solved, as if Angantýr were really the
suitor, then it is absurd that he should be found marrying
Bjartmar's daughter and having a daughter of his own (Hervör) in the
next chapter (on the way to his duel in 2 versions), as he had just
sworn that he would have the king's daughter or _no one else_(!)
and even agreed to a duel with Hjalmarr after she chooses Hjalmarr
instead of him; on the other hand, if Hjörvarðr is the suitor, then
this, too, would be absurd, as Hjalmarr fights Angantýr in the duel
(attested in the ancient verses cited in both Heiðreks Saga and
Örvar-Odds Saga) - yet, either way, Hervör is Angantýr's daughter
(also attested in verses, as well as in R, U and H) and will avenge
him as his dutiful, warrior-daughter (she gets his sword in all 3!).
There are far too many issues, inconsistencies and interpolations
(changes in the story) here to simply begin explaning what I have
been able to gather thus far in a post, but what I can say for
certain is that this unresolved saga is a viking-romance based on
surviving stories and verses about a Gothic king (Heiðrekr), whose
story goes from the cradle to the grave and who is the one central
character, and which includes some introductory stories and verses
about his heroic mother and her heroic father, etc., and which ends
with his son Angantýr taking over his kingdom after his death, and
then killing his half-Hun-brother Hlöðr in a Gotho-Hunic war. The
material (both the stories about Heiðrekr and company, and the
ancient, beautiful poetry used), as well as its antiquity, makes
this one of the most treasured surviving texts in ON. The problem is
that the extant redactions are greatly at variance with on another
(on many essential points of the story, its language and contents,
etc.), are incomplete (or interpolated), and raise more problems
than almost any other comparable text. That the extant story is
illogical/contradictory/incomplete has certainly occured to everyone
who as read the versions (or just any one version) closely (R, U or
H). Perhaps no ancient editor/author found the time, or had the
interest, to really do justice to this material, which could easily
have become one of the very best written stories in ON. I suppose we
will never know. Sadly, someone even decided to interpolate the gods-
migrating-from-Troy story into the introduction, as if it were in
any way relevant to the story. Anyway, I am now steadily becoming a
good source on this saga, which material I admire, and am working on
a clean, stripped down version (see above - based mostly on R and
including all the relevant verses, but and in very conservative, old
language from c.1100). The point is simply to tell the story strait
and in bare, clear language (based on systematic comparison of the U
and H wording to R). Naturally, I think that this story warrents the
finest treatment (something which I can only hope to acieve) - thus,
I will willingly give any interested, critical parties copies of
parts (or the whole, if completed) for review and criticism (which I
will credit upon any publication). I think that it would be fabulous
in Gothic, too, if things were to evolve that far ;)
Regards,
Konrad