Heill Konráð!

> Does Turville discuse the intricate issue of the name variants here?

Variants are mentioned, but there isn't a comprehensive listing of all
forms and where they appear. E.g. he mentions the amendation from
Harvaða to Hærvaða, and that "other forms are Handafjöll and
Hanaðafjöll (U)". Similarly with other names: R Dampár, U Dapstaðir,
Dampstaðir, 203 Dampstaðir, Dampnar-. R myrkviðir, U myrkviðr.

> As the story
> goes, R was (once upon a time) well written (in melodious language,
> likely from early 12th cent., but only survives in an incomplete
> copy,

Alaric Hall [ http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/2889/ ], if I remember rightly,
suggested that the language of R is closer to an oral style of
storytelling, and that H represents a compromise: an attempt to tell
the more elabourate story of the U version but in a simpler way. But,
even setting aside the learned introduction, I don't think the others
come close to R for rhythm and pace of the prose, that plainness and
ferocity. U is very cluttered by comparison and so loses the fierce
drive of R, while H is much abbreviated (although it has more riddles
and some entertaining asides lacking from R); on the other hand, while
H cuts down on detail, it shares a lot of the complexities of U, such
as the greater number of names, so that in places it seems like a summary.

> But then it was likely thought (not without reason) that
> 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, and atributed
> the aquisition of the sword to Sigrlami instead of to Svafrlami, his
> son in U and H, but not mentioned in R, etc.)

It seems logical that the story of the dwarves making the sword went
missing from the precursor of R, since it's alluded to at the
beginning. But I wonder if the king's name might have been Sigrlami
after all in the earliest version, and then a father Svafrlami
invented for him in the ur-U, and the story of the sword transfered to
the father?

> and that it got some
> things wrong (Hjörvarðr woes the kings daughter and fights Hjalmarr
> in R, instead of Angantýr in U and H) - but note that 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, as he had
> just sworn that he would have the kings daughter or _no one else_
> and even agreed to a duel with Hjalmarr after she chose Hjalmarr
> instead of him; on the other hand, if Hjörvarðr is the suitor, then
> this would be absurd, as Hjalmarr fights Angantýr in the duel (also
> attested in the ancient verses cited in both Heiðreks Saga and Örvar-
> Odds Saga)

I suppose it's easier to rationalise the fact that Angantýr fights
Hjálmarr, if Hjörvarðr is Ingibjörg's suitor (maybe Angantýr does so
on his brother's behalf because he (Angantýr) knows himself to be the
better warrior?), than it would be to account for Angantýr going off
an marrying someone else on the way to the duel (if he was Ingibjörg's
suitor)!

> - 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 (the incident never occurs in any of
> the extant versions, but she gets his sword in all 3!).

Pity... It could have been the Old Norse "Kill Bill!" Well, if this
is anything to go by: [
http://www.heimskringla.no/faeroysk/folkekvad2/arngrimssynir.php
]--the Faroese ballad of Arngríms synir, in which (under the name
Hervík) she does go on to track down Arrow-Odd. I wonder how that
would have been dealt with in the saga. We know that she spent time
in raiding and warfare after she left Glæsisvellir, so anyone
reconstructing the story might put an encounter in there. But it's
tricky because the plot of Hervarar saga implies that Hervör survives,
while that of Örvar-Odds saga obviously depends on him surviving and
presumably outliving Hervör. But maybe there's a precident there for
a tantalisingly unresolved or ambiguous encounter; compare Odd's
eventual truce with his monstrous son.

> There are
> far to many issues here to simply begin explaning what I have been
> able to gather thus far in a post, but I can say for certain is that
> this unfinished 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 stories and verses about his heroic mother and her
> heroic father, etc., and 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 various ancient, beautiful poems used), as well
> as its antiquity, makes this one of the most treasured surviving
> texts in ON.

I can't argue with that!

> The problem is that the extant redactions are greatly
> at variance on a great number of essential points, are incomplete,
> and raise more problems than almost any other comparable text. That
> the extant story is illogical (and somehow incomplete) has occured
> to everyone who as read any version closely (R, U or H). Perhaps no
> ancient editor/author fould 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. Sadly, someone also decided to
> mix the gods-migrating-from-Troy story and other nonsense into the
> intro, as if it were in anyway relevant. 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 (something like an urtext-
> reconstruction with all verses intact and in very conservative, old
> language from c.1100). The point is simply to tell the story strait
> (without the wild interpolations and mix-and-match) in bare, clear
> language.

When I was trying to do exactly that, mix-and-match, one thought I had
was to make the dwarves curse apply not to the king, but to his
descendents--compare the curse that the elf woman puts on King Helgi
in Hrólfs saga kraka. A bit arbitrary, admittedly; it would be a
blatant alteration of the text that survives (for aesthetic rather
than scholarly reasons!), but it seemed to me a rather efficient way
of combining the dwarves and their curse with the basic plot of R, and
avoids more radiacal changes or inconsistencies further down the line.
Then if you keep the incident from H where a bystander is
inadvertantly killed in place of "Gestumblindi" at the end of the
riddle match, that just leaves the bit with the fishermen as an
anomaly where the sword is drawn but doesn't kill anyone--unless the
pike is a person...

> I think that it would be fabulous in Gothic, too ;)

Oh yes, at the risk of straying off-topic here:

Brikan skal ik airis, broþar,
so blikahveito linda
jah kalds gais
qiman wiþra anþarana
jah managai gumans
in gras sigqan
þau ik Humlugg
halba letan
aiþþau Tairwiggans
in twa dailjan.

...

Ik *sunþrana qam
(du) qiþan spilla þo:
gabrannida ist alla marka
jah Mairqiwidaus haiþi,
dribana alla gutþiuda
gumane bloþa.