J. Presentation of (evidence for) reconstruction
This is not currently part of the peer-reviewed material of the project. Do not cite as a research publication.
1. As already noted above, a brief account of the evidence for the reconstruction of each extended poem should be included in the Introduction to that poem. This should distinguish clearly between different kinds of evidence (see A-1 above).
Further comments on localised difficulties or conflicting evidence from the prose sources may also be necessary in the Context to individual verses constituting extended poems.
2. Individual verses formerly considered (especially in Skj) to form part of an extended poem but no longer accepted as such in the new edition should also have a brief Introduction explaining the reason(s) for rejecting the previous assignment.
3. The Introduction to a set of verses preserved, for instance, in one of the Íslendingasögur, and presented there solely or mainly as lausavísur should briefly state the case for regarding them as lausavísur (see A-2) and / or if appropriate outline reasons for suspecting that some of them may represent the breaking up of pre-existing poems. (Some sagas also contain verses presented as belonging to extended poems, e.g. the Grámagaflím in Bjarnar saga or the longer poems in Egils saga, and these will also need to be discussed.)