Note to Þjsk Lv 5I
[5] enn ... þeims ‘but ... the one who’: The emendation of ms. hinn er or hann er to en(n) þeims adopted here was proposed by Finnur Jónsson (Skj B) and followed by most subsequent eds. It is necessary since the line is evidently corrupt, as it lacks one alliterative stave and is syntactically unsatisfactory, and an original conj. enn could have been misunderstood as the article hinn. With the Flat reading hinn er (normalised es) ‘that one who’ the helmingr forms two syntactically viable couplets, but the rel. hinn es has no credible antecedent. It cannot be drengr ‘man, fellow, warrior’ (l. 2), since that is the man who suffered damage, whereas ll. 5-6 refer to the one who burned the ship. The variant hann er/es ‘he who’ is little better since it produces a subordinate clause without a main one.