461

two main group~ of changes ch I have so considered

in this Jiscus ion - the first one being up of revisions de-

vo.ted to er the translation more exact in stance, style,

and :.action and the secon:::i one be cornpos

the purpose- of 'L tr'ot only the

nusson's er

i?S C

are on the ·

senms to

or otherwi e

son, ec

tl

total

correct

0

were r 0

ance

th OU

ions

1 c

2. ee

3.

the r a ce

eat j ity of the

of f of

but 0 most

8

2 i

most

t 1. 0

on

on 8 9-

of terat~ons e.for

arc c·c or - con-

es s e

t 88 erations.

eat, is v sma

es e

is

t rec-

9

, we

c i

h

1 t c I,A,

8 1 te c I I , '1 ..

462

tions. 'ili.s we have already seen, he was usually painstakingly .

literal in h,i.s own translation, even when the resulting rendering

was awkward; we now find, however, that when in

he encountered unidiomatic expressions

for the sake exactness, frequent

and insert in ir place trans ions

cally correct less iteral.

pr ly not result of a c ion in

l:=.ttion t the result the ct

sanie tti tu<ie son'

he revis

sentence + u t or

tent on to ori nal c l

th a fre re

position to z un

Lat after he

s.n:'i put it to t

e time

d not

t t

t

of s

0

h

Dro

lit but on

ch had ~een introduced

rejected e r

ch ·.-vere smooth

s on iGtency was r

s princ es of trans-

he :i heve the

s his own. e e

re each

thout pay at-

_:_us to material

was

li e

ot

8-

ex-

at on

\T r in

0 ion

cue on t

n 0

t

in

, I

translation really were. These 1

discussed more.ful later.

es in the p~inted te~t will

463

In revisions in ich _,is rejected •-··9""'"""~~-u-

tre_ns lat

principles

ce of

were exact but

were less li

le, he sacrific 2

1

or l~ n most

no vrha tsoever ws s f~u,.. more

on 0 k

essions c Oilfj t C'UC t on

to e; a c se r

T""T .l. '; '

sor:,e

' not so

up

/ 1 ..

2. e

Se

in t

0

8

c

e low, 4

es

t

0

repl.::w them with

to ern

eli to :3aYJ 0r

g.c:i cases t e can be

s to u_q CXS.C t-

ioF~at c ex--.

ed h e: att

note, fo 1 '

is

'I a vi i

1 ' .. L

t

not serious-

con c iv an

enc

c

) ' ) ' ) .

st r re the chedJ s

sentence son d

ture 1, in

sentence into

s t

t

l 7

c

be 1

i

t 2.

( r

i

uni

t' 1

464

the sentence

sont

on's

l e '

in lt

(

J 466

!! r 11 Si were obviously simolv J. ~

slips .. d it$ mist es spell g, ho~ever, in 25 ' \.

c ses.. Four of se sspel'lings consist use small

letters· in e£id capit s t e be of oper nouns or I

szdj ecti ve·s rived om orrect v;r e

r H g 11 on oc f r i st n, :i

•'ho r i spell-

" ing r 11 f a 11 bot q for Hbo:1 t ~ i r

is er" c se.s,

for '' re ll !! ,

r II

•1 for

of t se·mi s el incs

re

1

I

d ,, ' it

0 + C' 'l ...,...,. or i1

en fo

e oin d

out, ve been mere sli s, sp lle

11 see,u

34 correc

less or

oint out

p rts·

s" c rr

s listed

in o

i d i

/

n~.son'

se c~l ter: ion

32 c

ant ce or

non-res ictive cl use once to set

to ca e re d t

s co comma be e

s es.

ion· o

no c

pre ic te

f po

1 c e

cl es

tence, t once 0 c d colon e d

a similar si t1on ..

i ,~ro

, · I lk: 11 . s r ~ 1 y

een

be re

t 1.' \Ti;:. v ""J 5 times

serte

com d sen-

2:"" comma in

In the fourth aup of revi ions i rri$ m& in

re conce

ciples he

1.

cri t transl tion I

the form

rris

e, for lnuts"

llowe

le, · 11 b

II, 12.

pl ced

3 pr er nouns.

I on s

s

r

n

ir ran 1 tion in

ti VI, 8, II 6 t1

ce to

rin-

0

names of p ces persons, n to course of

them c cal~ or else, rtly, or not

i c se vernacul~r form is ret d shorn its 1 ,

termination if it d one." me ns

t s orris·us i forms t

nouns t e red occo.sional

poss le to so, transl te d rse

nei se proce s ea ible, pt

1 le s f

rse. t rris c proper nouns

son's s t on re evi e re t of

f e 1 is rt roe d es

le e

li nan1es. 9 13 lterutions

e c; no 1 ' rn form o:t'

se

ion d ror e te d of e ori i~al r .. ~-,, Ld

d once he e l ~'or e nam in pl ce yi a ........

·467

at

11;

t

lective

t some-

er

s

t

e ori-

Old

d be

c -'-'

~ld

nsl

•2lf '

ern

/

L1S-

0

11 tra se ee e revision:

XII,

I~ 50 ene;ss

}{ j 3, Jor l 1

2

evi t

ei

/

e isl

e b on

7

) s 6

concerned i

or

d int d to use re

s ut did not not b

789,,, 1)..

ei

rnespings

pl ce mes ris

jar";

r mo rn i

c int

er » 1.

J

with the Eng1ish l~nguage, that as a noun t~e name was always 1

used in 'the plural.

In the changes that he made in the form of personal na~es 1 ise

in Magntlsson's translation, Morr s~~howed a distinct prsference

for the use of the modern English f orni.,s, >:; of his al terati'ons

involving p~rsonal naraes being devoted to introduction of the

normal, modern fo:ems in place of the 0 2

- orse names or of partly

Anglicized forms; thus, fo~ example,

VIII, 1, Rodger : Roger· XV, 11, the Church of _Nicolas NichQl~s-church - - - -

the / o ,o, 3, Ro 1671, 10-1, ik ju

In the last s 0 preferred t sl i

Norse word 0 Norse name itself:

XVI I, 9, the son of Shave hew ( '? 01'1 11 you 672, · 13, rather have ? ) : the- son of Shave-hew

3efore losins my discussion of this

wish to c attention to the fact that the changes list

sson

here

46~

are by no means the_ only ones that Morris e in the form of prop-

er nouns. I_ have already treated in thee ier rouos revisions

that T~orris made in the names of persons and places and in personal

epithets for the apparent purpose nf reproduc - ,,

the Old Norse more e~actly, or of imitating the Old i~orse compact­

ness of exp-ression, or of introducing cognates -of the words in ~he

original, or of_ tating the compounds used in the text, or of

improving the quality of. the English of the translation;_ in the

group I have just. discussed are listed only those -alterations. J~n-

1. See below, on page 790, the changes listed under TV, A, 4.

2. See below, on pa~e 790, the changes listed under IV, B, 1.

469

"-volving proper nouns in the making, of which ~~·orris 1 s regulaN

motives could not and did not play any part. and for wb.ich ·::orri,s 1 s

only .reason was that he disagreed with ~T.agnusson as to which .-orse

names should lJe iven in their moiern .liinglish form, which should

be translated, and which ~hould be kept in their or inal form.

As I pointed.out at the beg of my discussion of is's

changes in ~agnusson's translation, revi-

sions for ch it is imposs e to ascertain wi any def it SS

his exact motive but, for v1htch one can est one or several pos-

sible reasons. I have found 1 such alterations; I have list

them all n the Aopendix in t I of oup V under G

r1 .. r,l M1SC8

. 111 s Changes. Inasmuch as I e c upon each

one of se revisions the Appendix, it is not necessary to

discuss s group of alterations e as a le; a f'.3W of se

changes, however, are especially iriterest serve th er

treatme at this point ..

Yve have already seen that ··:orris 1 to e s

' -transl ion as literal as possible, that of the r sions

he made with this end in view reveal that ~e~had a thorough and

e.cc·ura te knowl e of the Old Norse 1 t ions

·which show in a striking manner how well cquainte~ .~orris was

with Old Norse inflections and syntax are found in ?art I o

Group V:

XX, 3, people could tfa.ve but lit e talk with him : folk mi;:3;ht have but 1 i ttle of hiS' XX, to win for yourse a still ~reater realm get thee yet more

1. See 7 2-812.

674, · 4, m~tti l!tt nj6ta tals hans

674, 25-6, ok afla enn me r!kis

470

Here Morris evidently used 11 talk :i and 11 realm 11 as the; obJects of .\.

the preposi ion· "o.f'' because 11 tals 11 ans i1r!kis 11 in ~he original

\

were genitives; it ts significant that even when h::i we,.s hurriedly

11 t · '\'!,,.. .< n' tr 1 ti 1 co a ing i·,,Lagnusso s g,ns a or th the original text hB no-

ticed that tl1es s were in t itive case although

t·;.ey \YEH"'e both used as t objects of verbs. · .. To oe sure, d

not reproduce the o Nors construction exactly in his own ren-

ler· , because he maite "of his talk" dependent on 11 little 11

pendent on ea

tives were J. nt on the ver :.-)s; ~:.. t is of course ssi e to

sterr.c.ine ther Morr~s misunderstood Icelandic construction

or ther he felt it imposs e to imi.tate s construction

exactly in t .!.8 1 translation.

In great majority of hi s-::orris show that l:e

cons tions used.

:'n one of t revisions in oup V, however, seems to have mis-

i:rterpret the sense of. the 0 ~~ors e; is alteration is extreme-

ly important, for in 'SC.ript

the on case 1.n which one of is's

tion efinitely inaccurate.

, 21-3, And towards this end mighty men there began by taking oath of fealty from all the ople : AnJ. f st towards this end mighty men swore thece troth-oath at the behalf of all the folk

In this pas from the account of how King

s is

the trans la-

571, 34 - 672, l, T6ku fyrst til pessa m~ls r!kismenn par tr~na6a~ei~a

811u folkinu .

stein won the al-

1 iance of the men of Iamtland, ris incorrectly thought that

Snorri meant that the chief men of t ovince·swore allegiance

to ste as representat es of the p le, ereas t Snorri

s s here ts t the chiefs e the ople swear to

471

later Snorri relates that the leading ~en ~ant to the Kin~ and

pledged allegiance to him.. In the prtnte::i text I'Ior.ris •·s mistrans-

lation has been corrected, and the sentence there reads thus: ''And

first toward:s this end took mighty men there troth-oii"th of all the

.,l d f folk~' In another change inclu ed Part Io Group V Eorris

replaced a literal translation with a very free rendsring, but

here he probably Jeliber e depart om the or inal for the

purpose of making an obscure tl18 0 Norse a little

clearer. In Chapter. , ir the account of er-

pretation of S igur,j' s dream, son translated t encl ,,,..

Norse nen er per .sjndist CHafr konungr koma meo bl! i . ,,, l O-lafi

konungi our okkrwn, par mun hann lifa skemst ok mun hann eiga

gott fyr hCJndum, er hann er vinsvll ok ok + yf ir licit, , \..J

2 te as er it seemed to ,0

v ok mun Olafr konungr hj~lpa

that King O came th great bli t.1±8--l'}ess towar,J.s our bro the;,,·', :J

that me s, that he ve the shortest, and 11.have bliss

swait him; he is we 01r young s come in for few

trials, and Olaf 11 vouchsafe h hi ava Ii 3 , ~- 1 ; wnen .i.•~orr s

read son's rendering of is he evidently felt dis-

satisfi with the c e u and come for few trials,tt for

~ .he wrote on the blank left-hand cf t manuscript, opposite

this passage, 1811tteral[siiJ of fatt yfir li t? 1' v likely he

felt that the sentence as it stood was not entirely logical, since

~t did not necessarily follow that Olaf should be especi fy

favored because he had 11 come _for few ials. 11 The fault, however,

li n the translation but in the or inal, for Magndsson's

____________ ... _ ·----·-~----------·

1.

2. Unger's

472

J expression is___an accurate and exac.t rendering of< the .Old Norse.

Th.e _tendency towards terseness and compactness in the Icelandic

has been here carried so far tha~. only part of the thought has~-

been expressed, ·and the rest has been left to be supplied by the

reader. The full meaning of the pas:4age evidently is that Olaf

was subjected to few trials and c0nsequently seldom erred. e

find in the manuscript that Morris rejec ed Magndsson 1 s rendering

1'and has come in for f sw trials 11 e:.l j_n its place 11 and l

in few things ha th he f~l len ie; -·-i·t is not }{nown ther .,:orris in-

traduced this translation the course of s first revision or

.gfter he consult son about the literal mean of the

Old Norse. is 1 s version of cour~-:e reproduce;:-: this ticular

phrase much ess exactly than son's render it ex-

presses the meaning of the whole sentence more clearly. It is

interesting to note that many of the o er translators of the

the expreseion in a manner very simi

to Morris' it was traans

but little ii 2 into excess,

~

J\un faa, 11./ and

!+ exce SP ep . 1

'

:fonsen

1 by

p - . ith as

I have already Uiscus~ed two c

which indicate that 1''.orris was we

flections. In two other alterations

as s f~one

·:unch a s Forseelser ere

It '.1 an ct few

es t I of ""roup V

acquainted 01d Norse in-

this class, however,

1. See Morris's tr~nslation in Part I of hppendix I, Chapier lines 50-51.

III, l 8.

i t 1859-1 l~, I, 459 60.

' p 1

r.,. -· .~

473

seems to have misinteroreted the construction, in the original ~ .'-,,

either through ignorance or through carelessnsss.

III, 2-3, =ang Sigurd went with h·is compa­ny : fared King Sigurd his folk v, 4, Spain christian and Spain heathen : Spain christened, and Spain heathen ·~-.,.,

662, 6-7, for Siguror konungr li5i s!nu

,663, 25, Span kristna jok Span iona I

I.n the first of these changes ris d ect obj ct

of II ~ 'I 11 '\ • fared.· although ·1iu1 s!nu 11 is in Ciat case.

seems to have be~n gained by e al ter,:1 t ion. use of 11 to e

with a direct. obJect ufo it is not ar ic; e c-

t ionarv cites no such use of 11fare '1

---··----"'-In

fact ere seems to be no reason at all for e 6 SS Vf 9

suppose he failed to notice t ive

case, not the accusative, thought t he W9,S his ans-'

ation more exact by hi~ revision. 7n e s c

:I .i..

L>O

tened !I ld ·h~rse JI re a ·"" no

was through e rf3Vision. cas of first

chq,n;:_i:e, it is i·~1poss i s to suggest other reason for the

terat but that he sint et the 0 Norse, that, think-

ing that ''kristna" was a past participle, he e revision for

the purpose of rendering the translation more exact.

As I have alreaiy pointed out, there are, ition to

these changes for which it is poss e to suggest one or

reasons but impossible to determine

exact motive, a number of minor, un ortant alterations for ich

it is impossible even to suggest- any l ely.~e~son. ese 0 1

revis ons form Pa~t II of Group V. It is very likely that

·----·----·------ ___ __,_---.::::,-______ _ See below, s 812 817.

making most of these changes liorris himself did ~ot have any

definite reason in mind for preferring hi$ translation to Magntls-

son's rendering. In some cases he may have felt. vaguely that his

version made the rhythm of the sentence or phrase smoother or

made the English more effective in some , or, possibly, that

his ·rendering brought the trans on c ser to the or inal.

Inasmuch as the eat ~ajority of these alterations have no s

nificant effect upon the c acter of e translation and in view

'of the fact that the motives underly are so unclear, I

have considered it idle to ma JS about ~~orr·is 1 s possi-

T e ace or ~l ly liste l. ble aims in se revisions,

them in th:::: thou t any corr.': '

exc a f,3V\f in--

stances. the exceptiot'l as '

ich are 8 ilar in

nature, none of these ter.ations ·ieserve co~r:ment here~

were ... such as x:vr, 21, under the XVI, 23-4,

done many th f t2.ble) :

was 12rofita .. ble o the QOWer

ion or Kiniz, - - ··---swore him t

svrnre him the ~omini.Q_n

.... such as ! 671, -2-3' ui mart wrought much ert ... ~at er tsaml

var ste 671, 33-4, und r!ki

s te L1s k:onungs £O~e~ .2, 2, ok s6ru honwn

i

·474

Here ~orr s seems to h~ve pro~eed d ect contrary to the prin-

ci es he !enerally followed in chaos s diction. :sually, as

we have a eady seen, he av or to use on 8 le and d ect

words in s trans :_at ion. e, however, f~r- no apDarent reason,

he rejected. the wor s 11useful 11 and "power, 11 which, though non-~"f~

:· .. :ermanic in or harmoniz,e th tone of the rendering.,

and inserted instead 11 profi table 11 and 11dominion, u which, because

they are arned and literary in tone and obvim.1sly of Latin or in,.

are ent e~y out of keeping with the en simplicity and con-

475 ''!

of his diction. It is of course pos~i~le that Morris

had sorn~ motive for thef>e changes ch.in his opinion

justified the use of such words, but it is impossible to suggest

any such motive ..

the discussion ch I .j le revi ons I

t is ma gnusson's sl tion r lf

the

cl s rris n visurt' occurr

the mater studi reason ese terations

s te t c A r i re '-4

apart from others is ld. Fir r c r

sive s s's a as a t is of course es sen-

ti al exam revisions e not

pro of son's version b etical s::a s, it /

is t is en e bee.n red metrical

conside ons in ca his iples

of t it is ace on sis

changes- prose t we can best form an ace e est te

s a tor.. Se , as a re t listing th~

alt o rs one

we can e r is did succeed

foll s re tion even he was

consi ions me e lli ration ..

As I po out scription manuscri

on i this study is ,

gn.usson s t:r,

the "vl.sur" in

fir wri t.he Old rse in order by

then p his i r r ernea it, WO r word;

J

a

s

on

of 1 es as

s

rest

a

I cons

ee

eon's

it 0

1

se

1 a

uneven

measure, axe

son's se

was

ma

s's

8

cour e

ona;

of

came a

ion

0

cour e

revisions

i

•i

me

a.me

course

I

d

e 1

c

2

477

make soiely or primariiy for the pur,.pese.,~ of fi t\ing. gnusson' s

prose to a metrical tern; these 118 alterations, as I shall

now show, fa into same groups as re sions.in 1

prose .. ,,

In Group I there are 49 s .. 19 se is re-

produced more literal , mean or s e of Old Norse;

in the other re more close racter 3

di on of orig 1 .. At first it seems g

made erations .... 15 1 1

purpos r r more exactly sense

cen se were this e

ever, reasons r e scarci revisions poe

are ous fir p r

"visur1t was even more literal s 1 ion e,

and conse d less occas e a erations

s e .. c ct t to fit his r r to

a c in ical form pre ca his

. -~ insistence on exac ss s in se .. r

es f 1rst I are 4

a speci tran at d Norse /

gnusson usual a ve lite first c verse

r an e tion or er version

his orig l translation; ne ess is a

l.For a complete

See below, pages 819

e low, ges

4.. e below, on. IV, Visa V, 3 7 X, Visa , 4 5;

se c s-se. below, pa s

l

9- , es III, Visa II, 8; sa XIII, 2 and 4; X, Visa , 2 5; Visa XVII, 1.

l /

J

chose the moroe exact rendering if he. could. pos~i bly fit it into c,..

his verse.. Note, as examples, the following al teratio·ns:

river's== goldi IV, Visa V ,, 3 11 the slinger of Van's day : 1663, 19a-20a,

The slinger of th~ Vari's day :V~nar dagsl

~ . ongv1r

I

' hand •s ield ld , lOb, ha

/

-fr6ns

Iv:agnO.sson tells us the Pre ce to the last volume of The

is was very fond se kennings; he

quaint of f cy _ t mani sts itself ese ~

app d is' imacinative would on no

account slur over them by giv g in· the transl ti on what 2.

meant·, i t of what said.,"

-rema 8 es in "first part, roup I-are

similar in nature to the alterations is type t rris· made

i the. prose, conse t not call r

here. In of these revisions rri.s make

corrections ..

The es the second pa .of 0 I are

numerous. 2 of these 30 t er at ions · r.: or r i s

words as a translation of compounds in Old

28 he insert co es of wo s used in ori

1 comment

0 t ..

more

the other 4

1. The 2

compounds introduced are "Al ielder's" p ce of "king's" for

valds'I "slaughter-slingers 11 'in plo-CE; of ttc;et::;pul ts" for ~

nva 1 meaning of the first these words is entire

clear; second one, however, which rris evident coined,

1 .. r a script ion of the form I used in quoting in "v1sur, H see below,

2 .. VI, ix.

3. e below, on page. 8 21 » s listed under I,B,1.

4. See low,. on pa e .... a22, the changes list under I,B,2.

makes the transl ion obscure.. The 28 cognates Morris in_troduced

, fall into

prose changes .. l

same

sense, 5 are words 2

rare, 9 are modern ~--t--.1 3

rare sense~

As case

se not

on; a f

are

co

ssesas the cognates erted in his

7 are modern wo

a now

co

e

used· in their modern

archaic, tic., or otherw_i

ic, po ic, or o

an ire

0

e on

four

ise 4

la-

79

r,

make the unclear even sl e r· le,

the fol al rat ,

v, sa I, l

VI, V , 1,

Of ec ion

nate d u ir

it t so wel

Norse l tions rec z

iciple n even was st , son's orig

ir ve is se

s an or

1 .. e ow, on r (1).

.. 3. e

4 .. 8

5.

,, the s number

s er

s number

,, pa e

., /. (3).

(2).

(4) ..

ions

io

c

d

so 28

for the 5

s num-

J ·.480

prose only 14 _____ of the revisions seem to hav~ been made for

this purpose. Of·these changes, 6 al tions which l

the diction e direct;

the translation an a ic

chan·ges in whi s 3

or rat

replaced t were l 4

nature to

for spe . comment.

chaic tone r 11

the t:Gan i ress

0 rwise rare, 10 se sol:e

an ar c ctical cons

majori ll

us d re i

s1ons which g 2

6 comprise 4

in other

lite

se re sions are s

se, t call

t an

ee c sses: 11 br

are

ec onal 7

on ...

ic or

common

e

e

tro-

and i le. Five re words are 8

d

are curr

a ·sense

1.

2 ..

i

e below, on

e be 11 on

are now re

a 1

are now us

ct

s lis listed

II,B,l,

2

ic sense b

ical 9

si. ons.

i

II,A ..

I , B ..

r II,A,l.

r II,B,. ..

r II,B,3 ..

.u.!~"

s num-

J 48·1 Only 4 of thes·e 11 words are vwrds that are employed in a definite­

l ly archaic sense. Of the 11 changes

only 1 that is decidedly objectionable:

- IV, Visa V, ~-2,

sts use course

doub eat majori readers

s il

it is

re t ies tf

6 of 10 cases rri " .

flectional used common r 2

,~~b 3·alterations

se forms eit ·

rev i i

tive end

ar ic ctical. con,s

use s le rsonal

refl .5

, uvisurt• r

low, on number ) .

pa s

... .

se

823

s

r

. ~

s first class, there ~

18a , Nu ska! t>~ .. u. aior

,-- " Joi , er varu'~a

e it as mean

r

cat es t

sole

sole

e

pres ica-

ti on i r ed

as a

i

II,,B,l,

2. e low, on pa r II,B,2, er (1).

3. e (

4. e III, visa II, 7 ..

5. e on 8 11 d r II,B,3.

J

l English of the translation, there are 18 alterati.,ons. It is

not surprising

large number ·

Morris found it neces

ons this

total, as compar. th 8

already po

due

e

f

,,., out,

literal

diomatic

not

tion ..

18 i

to make such a

re .... 15 cent

se -, for, as I

of

d n~e

d be re d,

is oved

of correc , uncl r, or

0 2

son.

wa

of

e

1 ..

2 ..

3.

4 ..

5 ..

6 .

we

ressions or

se alterations, we

8cases sacri c 4

ons. reject c

s 5

on ..

avo

3 F

corre on

rations s

tions 6

Al

is

because it li

See

e

e be~ow,

.. ' on

e d II

pa

c

r III~ ..

r III,A,l, s number (2) ..

s 1 d

li d r III,B ..

us

·3 tion and·

les

III are

rev sions

prose.

e 1 d-

son

$

er III,A,2

Morris prepared their translations:

VI / SI VlStl

It is very

~"'iz, point-wrea storms

ing

~ po

483

' ''"' j666, 2a, odd-hr

e us

translation Old Norse·· ifnr!o," mean e

The does cite

"wrea s sense rn 1 ition "A

bank or snow; a snow~wrea

g .. ( ) on li d 1

proa s even ven t

close.r is one

i swirl;

ove or up wi snow." use

e'\len senses,

is 1 It conse-·

s not 'seem

1 s its mean

fit r·cons it s

com-

we

f fol rema s. a )/ o.-rr 3

si Scote North. ~ ' is it

on saw s it was t 1 to ~-r·

1.. "wrea ," I,2,c.

2, .!·.!· "wrea

484

use the lt1ord "wrea th 11 in his translation? Equal inweresting

is Morris's rejection 0£ "point-wrea in favor of ttpoint-storms."

It seems extremely unlikely that he could have understood

gn6sson•s render wreath" t

Old Norse tthr1on was us s

the se a hs

rt hr or d

word an Ice i

di i wi on•s·trans

st ions seems more 1

ti on; o r re t rris ma

rr occ snonal 1

c

poeti 1

nouns,

d

was

ca

.tera ons

s exact 4

reasons, but

1.

2.

3 .. e

4" e

sson'S se

s

1 1

consi

d

'Ji j

the te

ive; for

r 8 no 11

ovep for

' on

below, s

below, pages

6 alte

se were

of

se ns 2

mot

e'

re,"

lit 1 of"

1

se

sec

ly to be correct

in son's

to ct onaries in

v

ire or t 1 t

1 revision

re,

a

e

s one can s 5

4 'Ji •

rence

er

t

below,

wi

i-

s·

is

s 4

J 85

these revisions demands comment here ..

The alteration referr to is one of most eres

of 1 the Morris ma t~ • .

IV,

nir

is s sl ion

the Old No . raises seve st1ons ..

1860 ition e ti on

son i

as t-~ ,, . ~ ti on c

as " ni ,

s r 11 1

cosus. " is s ion •t 1 son

seems ve a re, H

be us s , as insertion

above it s, sens sea or

s as s ori 1 ion

t ti . ' e ve

c.lose mean rm, . )

ascr Norse ori cause ri

be se i

ver on, an ire

e e s is

's

486

If Morris the "Fi r's-rote'•" to "of the roofs

of Fiolnir" thout ~he of Magnusson - and there is nothing ~.

whatever in manuscript ,to

consultation t.h s col

to s dictiona for his· new.

irtt

we

t e

as I

j

pos b

Did

in

r as I

l~

be

as

e are

i

s

e

text 1

son

elds. t'

a r

said.

ati

is

it

led

r

raises

en e to ascer

v,

t

i it r

-, was 1 ly

r ' it d be

s

3 s on s en

is e s rev si

fir c ' d it

r is

was

ti on

s; it was

1

on

own ili

j i

's.·

ie

' so

s e ti on

cone s

never b re ea pri t.

ori s 1

r

· .. r t ~-!

te i

i

j

s e no

ov r, none

) '

J

488

expl&ined the expression in this way.. Eleven of'< these works 1 .

omit the word Hhrbt" entire the 1860 edition of

Po~ticum, as I al re po ed out, def s it as "protella,"

and Vigfuss·on dictiona as I e also stated,, ove, ren-

d.ers as n ro " does not HFj s

I hrots." S e 1

in 1895, however, n en d as u

the me s d S H ld~" - one

F son s ice

same r in his re s editions ti cum,

and once by .. Kock R ..

1'o 1 es is new now er al

k jB s n was first

1.. The foll ionaries do uuomundr son and u.s J.. senius, (Copenhage , ·1683); The 1866);

· ·1867); J6n son, 1876)~ J6n Thorkelsson, Sam1ing( ykjav , 1879 Hjaltal!n Or5asafn .~·r i tzner, OrdJog over· 188b-1896 );J n Thor1.(e son

Mt$bius,

Tr ed ,j e Sa.ml ing ( Reyk j av !k, 0 Hr6t, u is listed Bil:Jrn Haldorsson, Danicum(Copenhagan, 1814), I, 397 Ordb.QE. (c nhagen, 18b}) , p.. 251.

ir

acce d ianation

son ..

2. See Heimskringla.. N6re8._§! KoniJn~ , ed. .. Finnur ..,.~ Jonsson(Copenhagen, 1893-1901), IV, 250; Sve orn ~gi son and .tt·innur J6nsson, icon Poeticum(Copenhagen, 1913-1916), p. 286, ~· v. uhr6t u; • ( :dnd9d: .. ;Qopenhagen: S .. L. lers Bogtrykkeri, 1931), p. 287, .. v. ·•hr6t''; and. ~.A.Kock and H. .. Me sner, ~kaidisches Lesebuch( Halle, - Niemeyer Verlag, 1931), II, 8:2.. i us H~gstad and Alf Tor ' Gama.lnorsk Ordbog mac! Nyno~sk ~d1ng(Christian1a, 1909)

S s Is lands~'-.ua:ris 1~ Ord bog (Copenhagen and Lihr tiania: H. chehoug and Company, 1920-1924) define uhr '~ as uroof, u but do not interpret the kenning.

~

So far this discussion of

tion we have idered the changes

the prose

de ring of

add ion

consi

ris

lat i

but cane

f r

and is

t

as

-- type

If we

f

I

s own

and the first

a ..

own trans

, were

ve

s

as 's r l

. course

e changes have I; see be , pages

alterations that Magnusson taken into

out their have in

iptroductory

s

489

e's prine1ples la-

M.orrls ,, in both

of Magndseon's ran-

manuscr er

son

of

e, er

course

or SS is

a di

ssion i c

a new

1 on

s own corr

a as

c si-·

ons son's

e

·----------....... --............................ -\----~ J

the ·~aga; this set of revisions is in many respects the more l

interesting of the two.

Very surpris is the compara ve

ations .. gnus son de - 29 a

2 give hi on ter

that is a -

as poss

was sati i wi e

se 29 alterati

produce more exact mean rm

for le 11 revisions·:

some case di e e be en

Si if ican ~

' orious .been

' Ship

e

son

WO

d

al

1 ..

2.

3 ..

' j

r

1

sue re

. interest are 0 se

a more exact trans ation

se alterat

e. below,

e below,

d , the --

show

smalle

3

r

-(j

a

number of al r-

99 .... in order

s

as literal

rris

tions.

orig

' b

er

s

in i

il:

re-

1, as,

i

t is

his own the

' 490

---i

"' .

XII., 32, : . ;{XI I, l 24 , over the rnea t -board : meat-board

In 2 7 ining changes

491.

:669', 12, ef the !679' 20' at matbor

Group I

have ied to e his render

ori 1·~ough the

In the ot_he 5 ems 2

the t one se 1

est

' ' for sought to

is not t all i t

p ce for" as a s

1N8S using ression

s tOU i

ve rare

a so f t

for

a 2 ions-

ple dire once rejec

favor a rmanic WO once

orig r e

in 3 cases

a introduc

l alteration an

are a

ma

h

1. e be , on

e low, on

ens

i

s

is

8, til p s

se

ir til," son

arned

is's wo

5 s. s

t r tone or

ction s

e ori

r lac a WO e

was le s learned itera

g r an

c or poetic

ic construction.

the re sions

4 Engli

of

s liste under I, B.

s 11e r I, c.

eon·

J 4

these un-

a e 2

too 0 e e.

or

cae r

t

e1 es

r ae

seem

on or

son r

I'

r

ei ;,

t 1

to 13

1 .. See , on s (1) i··,

2 .. ee 1111 '

)

3. .. ' 3) ..

4. ee '

on II '

·'°'.

determined to employ a different construction, apparently be-

·cause he found, ,t.he fir one too

follow the original:

XIII, 13-5, And now come·s .hie favourites and a are honour in comes sit down man if old

his

our

case

I, bend

a

was more

ti on

et

cone

3

e ca.see

se

' it is

was.

rej

name ..

4 cases

se.

same reason,

s

u

, Morris pref erred to

and and now

our e

now comes

are

us

an a.r

son:

i

nouns;

rev is

ser

son·

own

l

u

93

one·

494

for the .use of consonantal "'i ti" instead ~in two Norse names, i-

changing n jorg1' to rt iorg" "Fjolnir•s~" to "Fiolnir's- .. ~

Finally, re are 36 alterations for ich it is impossible

to dete wi , . .

initeness Magnusson•s exact motive or, in

some cases, impos le even to st like reat!on .. some

of these es wrote li le s fir slation

that we a seer 1 r

passa st we cannot erm

why he orig r is

r i r less n

clear .. c li al re-

vis v D. some

cases,

serve

WO

t

s.,

course

11

17 4

it more exact ..

pr e more lite

se

71

s

see

10

sions are

ea is was

or the orig

1 .. e low, on

2. 0

3. , 6

4 .. e low, on • 5. below, on pa •

s ..

son• 3

s Q

d s

se a erations

or

ra r

s

1 ..

6 """ 6

se alterat

is e s own

i f

so as

because

eve

came

s lis in

es li d e list

re-5

s

gnus sob• s

IV.

Group I .. Group I,A ..

...

/\

rendering ·•and. went to the cave, which was in sheer sea./-rocks, ..

Morris first. cancelled "sheer sea-rocks·· for berg .. ; then,

evidently because the· Old N.Q_?"Se had bergi ndkkuru, u '.~

·•a berg·· to ·~a. certain berg, ae although ··certain° was not 1

all·neces to s .r e com".'"'

·pletely the 1

it seems, to to

a rendering

t

·because he did

trans ion:

X, JCV', T:!fa.de t huge broad folk ed fast his burg. king abid~d XI, V!sa XVI dye th

work

-8, Or ever ips of Acre .. ever the

to Acre 1

e

se seems

6 h

t e

s only one r in e own

purpose reproducing

this changed

for Old Norse 1

coneia the use of es· common

1 .. This change occurs VI,

2. See the discuss·ion this change should also like to point out here-that in Morris made in hie own work, I have

, chapter and line or the which the change occurs in Morris's in Part A of Appendix I; then I sion,~and followed that with the s hand column I have stated page and the Heimskringl~ which original

Old Norse its f. ~

an

es

of 3

e en-

mere

s

as

munn-

95

/'\.

Iri 6 cases Morrie changed h1a original translation appar-

ently for the purpose of 1nt·roduc1ng cognates of the Old Norse l

words he was· rendering.. One al terat , '4Moored u

for H , ·~ occurs ,u and en

the demands ot the

Morris was use ever

when, course e came to

.. though

1

text and 1 e• was used

his

was s

-came

Old

and then, ly

nal, · changed this

It is rather f

rev g 5

a suitable or e .. one Be

1. ' on 8, s 11

2 s change occurs X, , 6 ..

3. This occurs I'

4 .. e occurs xx, 18 ..

5 .. See '

on 8 changes 11s

meet 2

e

origi-

5

ing

ions

I,C.

496

II ..

497 . ' 1'

seems io have tried to make the diction simple concrete t

replacing a word Romance origin a Germanic word; in the

others he endeavored to ve the sl ion an a ic tone,

by introduc three· cases a ic or poetic WO and es-

ions once an ar ic tion ..

8 cases r 1

se li 3

se ion,

in one a c d 0 r 4

the r s r

pr inc se ens are not rti

r t

al is or even .con-

s tions r

e or - Old se 0

co d re

i '

oc S.i 1 rom usual

ciples t g ions il rm to

i is

s

i r r 11

alterations were e .. ...~-

' I d 1 s 41 /

0 r s 8 own course s

son vs but e it is ei oss e to

s exact mo ve or ossible even st any 1 ly

1. low~ on 11 Group III.

reason. Just as Magn6sson did in some of his ,iterations~ so

Morris in several of_his revisions wrote out so little of the

first form

he orig

-and it .is conse

rendering.. I

are c le

it is extreme_ly icult to asce

t to translate the passage

ssible to e

in just

iont

, as well as

neve less

se

clear, in some cases l

a fe·w wo s s are r

four sets al ta.rations i I e so r dis USS

name s's revision son's prose~ rris's s

s e ions s own transl

Gs revisions s. own wo 1 all

f manuscr t er consi on .. ill

s tion b re ·a rations, ever, were ....-'./'..\

l t was 1 i re l form ren ring

as it wi version ven

pr d ~ we t re are a great SC ies

be '

e er enc es are ex

i te was re pon~li. ble for se / )

c s .. ace ive , Pr e to 2

Vo VI me ~~·

fol . does

es not ca r it \lVaS or

tr ion its ult on piece of rnal evidence

98

i ti on I come across is a no at t of

1 .. e be s

J 99

the first pag.e of the manuscript ·of the Morris-Magnusson trans-la-, .1_, 3 ~

tion of the Olafs saga halga; this note, which was itten care-

lessly in pencil and has been partly_ obliterated and is conse-

quently scarce Se to read." .. 1 to M. ' •

.l prof [a.lg] to w. r ing ..

it was ev

for poss e s s f

sheets manuscr from

work of col , er to det r

or not the ge e a was sat is 1 same

procedure was case· of

considerat·ion .. men took 0 is

obvious from nature of s ; as I

iscussion these rev ions are of

a character must son

th the son,

e is. is OUS. ,·.

men ed labor of can be

no doubt it was 1 cases

cisions and was re e ed as we it

e I ed to an is of 9 ias be 2

the manuscr and pr in t ' I like out.$'

that the maj ty of a 1 same groups

as the alterations we a cons , but un-

situation in the of changes, most numerous

of are those seem have em a

1. This manuscript is now in the Brotherton Library. Le s, ,~ .... ,..,-1,. ...... .a..l-....; for a descr1p·t1on of 1 "tt, see above, '.'Jage s 3 5.

literary ·

its theses.·

own

rea r may

. Ill

-.·,. . .,, .

use

3

J

. '

purpose' of the quality of and in most

of a in ma.nu-

script more exac were re-

jec se revisions a.re course mo es ting

the most ones s set, scr e

e scussion .. ·

1 s seem

s

·t ·r sers. 2

more 11 g ; it is

e s son is most

A few· se are . correct in-

ac ale l is

one 3

I

it 1ncorre i

in

was

so it conv s

can

s s by ta.king oath of

P.eople men swore

r of t

1.

2. See

3 .. See 5 470

lit

li

in I ,A.

s sion

- 672' 1, pessa.

truna

d in I ..

500

1<_

ioa