Hfr ErfÓl 19^I

sagði ‘’

(not checked:)
segja (verb): say, tell

Sagðr ‘said’

(not checked:)
segja (verb): say, tell

[1] Sagðr vas: sagðr 54, sagði 325VIII 2 g, Bb

vas ‘was’

(not checked:)
2. vera (verb): be, is, was, were, are, am

[1] Sagðr vas: sagðr 54, sagði 325VIII 2 g, Bb

mær ‘’

(not checked:)
mær (noun f.; °meyjar, dat. meyju; meyjar): maiden

mér ‘to me’

(not checked:)
ek (pron.; °mín, dat. mér, acc. mik): I, me

[1] mér: so 310, 4‑7, 61, 53, 54, 325VIII 2 g, Bb, Flat, mær Holm18

inn ‘’

(not checked:)
2. inn (art.): the

ein ‘’

(not checked:)
2. einn (pron.; °decl. cf. einn num.): one, alone

en ‘’

(not checked:)
4. en (conj.): than

né ‘not’

(not checked:)
né (conj.): nor

[1] né: en 61, inn 53, ein 54, 325VIII 2 g, Bb

meiri ‘’

(not checked:)
meiri (adj. comp.; °meiran; superl. mestr): more, most

mána ‘’

(not checked:)
máni (noun m.; °-a): moon

meira ‘greater’

(not checked:)
meiri (adj. comp.; °meiran; superl. mestr): more, most

[1] meira: ‘mana’ corrected from meira 61, meiri 53

muna ‘’

(not checked:)
munu (verb): will, must

muna ‘’

(not checked:)
munu (verb): will, must

munum ‘’

(not checked:)
munu (verb): will, must

mank ‘’

(not checked:)
1. muna (verb): remember

mín ‘’

(not checked:)
minn (pron.; °f. mín, n. mitt): my

munuma ‘’

(not checked:)
munu (verb): will, must

muni ‘will’

(not checked:)
munu (verb): will, must

[2] muni maðr: mank 310, ‘munum alldr’ corrected from munum a 4‑7, munuma 61, muna menn 53, mín muna 54, Bb, muna 325VIII 2 g

notes

[2] muni maðr ‘a man will’: Ms. 61’s munuma ‘we will not’ gives much the same sense in the context (where 61 has en ‘and/but’ for né ‘not’) and is adopted in Skj B, and it is likely that 4-7’s exemplar contained a similar reading to 61’s, which the scribe of 4-7 subsequently corrected to read munum a(ldrstríð). These readings probably reflect attempts to make sense of a sequence of minims in the exemplar. Ms. 310’s mank stríð af því bíða ‘I will suffer no grief from that’ is unlikely in light of the rest of the stanza.

menn ‘’

(not checked:)
maðr (noun m.): man, person

aldr ‘’

(not checked:)
aldr (noun m.; °aldrs, dat. aldri; aldrar): life, age

muna ‘’

(not checked:)
munu (verb): will, must

maðr ‘a man’

(not checked:)
maðr (noun m.): man, person

[2] muni maðr: mank 310, ‘munum alldr’ corrected from munum a 4‑7, munuma 61, muna menn 53, mín muna 54, Bb, muna 325VIII 2 g

notes

[2] muni maðr ‘a man will’: Ms. 61’s munuma ‘we will not’ gives much the same sense in the context (where 61 has en ‘and/but’ for né ‘not’) and is adopted in Skj B, and it is likely that 4-7’s exemplar contained a similar reading to 61’s, which the scribe of 4-7 subsequently corrected to read munum a(ldrstríð). These readings probably reflect attempts to make sense of a sequence of minims in the exemplar. Ms. 310’s mank stríð af því bíða ‘I will suffer no grief from that’ is unlikely in light of the rest of the stanza.

stríð ‘grief’

(not checked:)
2. stríð (noun n.; °-s; -): affliction

því ‘’

(not checked:)
því (adv.): therefore, because

af ‘’

(not checked:)
af (prep.): from

of ‘’

(not checked:)
4. of (particle): (before verb)

[2] of: af því 310

bíða ‘suffer’

(not checked:)
bíða (verb; °bíðr; beið, biðu; beðit): wait, suffer, experience

‘’

(not checked:)
hím- ((prefix)): [universally]

láði ‘’

(not checked:)
2. láð (noun n.): earth, land

landi ‘’

(not checked:)
land (noun n.; °-s; *-): land

lýðum ‘of people’

(not checked:)
lýðr (noun m.; °-s, dat. -; -ir): one of the people

[3] lýðum: láði corrected from landi 325VIII 2 g, landi Bb

firrðr ‘to be deprived’

(not checked:)
2. firra (verb): keep (from), remove

at ‘’

(not checked:)
4. at (conj.): that

ok ‘and’

(not checked:)
3. ok (conj.): and, but; also

[3] ok: at 53

lýðum ‘’

(not checked:)
lýðr (noun m.; °-s, dat. -; -ir): one of the people

láði ‘realm’

(not checked:)
2. láð (noun n.): earth, land

[3] láði: lýðum 325VIII 2 g, Bb

land ‘The land’s’

(not checked:)
land (noun n.; °-s; *-): land < landvǫrðr (noun m.): land-guardianland (noun n.; °-s; *-): land < landnorðr (noun n.)

[4] land‑: ‘[...]’ 325VIII 2 g

kennings

notes

[4] landvǫrðr ‘the land’s guardian [RULER = Óláfr]’: Here, King Óláfr. This cpd occurs elsewhere in the skaldic corpus (see LP: landvǫrðr), always in reference to the king of Norway.

norðr ‘’

(not checked:)
1. norðr (noun n.; °-s): [Norwegians, north] < landnorðr (noun n.)

vǫrðr ‘guardian’

(not checked:)
vǫrðr (noun m.; °varðar, dat. verði/vǫrð; verðir, acc. vǫrðu): guardian, defender < landvǫrðr (noun m.): land-guardian

[4] ‑vǫrðr: ‑norðr 325VIII 2 g, Bb

kennings

notes

[4] landvǫrðr ‘the land’s guardian [RULER = Óláfr]’: Here, King Óláfr. This cpd occurs elsewhere in the skaldic corpus (see LP: landvǫrðr), always in reference to the king of Norway.

frá ‘’

(not checked:)
frá (prep.): from

fyr ‘across’

(not checked:)
fyr (prep.): for, over, because of, etc.

[4] fyr: frá Bb

sæ ‘the sea’

(not checked:)
sjór (noun m.): sea

[4] sæ: om. 61

norðan ‘’

(not checked:)
norðan (adv.): from the north

handan ‘’

(not checked:)
handan (adv.): across

[4] handan: norðan corrected from handan 61

Væri ‘It would be’

(not checked:)
2. vera (verb): be, is, was, were, are, am

oss ‘for us’

(not checked:)
vér (pron.; °gen. vár, dat./acc. oss): we, us, our

þoslt ‘’

þótt ‘although’

(not checked:)
þótt (conj.): although

[5] þótt: ‘þo(slt)’(?) 325VIII 2 g

ærir ‘envoys’

(not checked:)
1. árr (noun m.; °dat. ár; ǽrir/árar, acc. áru): messenger

kennings

notes

[5-6, 7-8] ærir elds hôklifs hauka ‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks [ARM > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’: This interpretation (that of Skj B, followed by Reichardt 1928, 213 and Ólafur Halldórsson in ÍF 25) means that l. 7 contains elements from three different clauses, a syntactic arrangement which is unique in the skaldic corpus (Gade 1995a, 13, 215-16). Two redistributions of the kenning components to avoid this situation have been suggested. (a) Kock (NN §511) has ærir elds ‘envoys of fire/the sword [WARRIORS]’ and jǫfurr hôklifs hauka ‘lord of the high cliff of hawks [NORWAY > = Óláfr]’. It is conceivable that eldr could mean ‘sword’ (cf. Note to st. 6/4), but Kock’s case for hôklif hauka as a synecdoche for Norway, based on the (inexact) parallels fjǫrðjǫrð ‘fjord-land’ Hókr Eirfl 5/3 and vegr jǫtna ‘way of giants’ ESkál Vell 14/5, is not convincing. (b) Kuhn (1929b, 201) suggests jǫfurr hauka ‘lord of hawks [soldiers]’, i.e. Óláfr (cf. skyldir hauka, st. 2/3 and Note) and ærir elds háklifs ‘envoys of the fire of the shark-cliff [SEA > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’ (or perhaps the same, but with ‘rowlock-cliff’, from hár m. ‘thole-pin, rowlock’). Von See (1980, 28-32; 1999b, 267-8), in surveys of scholarship on this helmingr, rejects Kuhn’s interpretation on the grounds that hár ‘shark’ is only otherwise found in þulur, whereas klif hauka ‘hawks’ cliff [ARM]’ is a habitual collocation, and Kock (NN §2451) had also noted problems with it. Hofmann (1981, 14-15) points out in response that háklif ‘shark/rowlock-cliff’ would in fact be distinct from hôklif ‘high cliff’ in oral delivery due to its different vowel quality, and that parallels for the sea-kenning Kuhn proposes do exist, incorporating both terms for sea-creatures (humra fjǫll ‘lobsters’ mountain’ ÞGísl Búdr 2/4) and nautical terms (stafnklif ‘stem-cliff’ Þloft Tøgdr 4/6). Hofmann’s arguments are convincing, and Kuhn’s interpretation is a viable alternative.

ællz ‘’

ærumz ‘’

(not checked:)
2. æra (verb): make fertile

elds ‘of the fire’

(not checked:)
eldr (noun m.; °-s, dat. -i/-(HómÍsl¹‰(1993) 24v²⁴); -ar): fire

[6] elds: ‘ællz’ corrected from ‘æll’ 4‑7, ‘ell[…]’ 325VIII 2 g, ‘ærumz’ Flat

kennings

notes

[5-6, 7-8] ærir elds hôklifs hauka ‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks [ARM > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’: This interpretation (that of Skj B, followed by Reichardt 1928, 213 and Ólafur Halldórsson in ÍF 25) means that l. 7 contains elements from three different clauses, a syntactic arrangement which is unique in the skaldic corpus (Gade 1995a, 13, 215-16). Two redistributions of the kenning components to avoid this situation have been suggested. (a) Kock (NN §511) has ærir elds ‘envoys of fire/the sword [WARRIORS]’ and jǫfurr hôklifs hauka ‘lord of the high cliff of hawks [NORWAY > = Óláfr]’. It is conceivable that eldr could mean ‘sword’ (cf. Note to st. 6/4), but Kock’s case for hôklif hauka as a synecdoche for Norway, based on the (inexact) parallels fjǫrðjǫrð ‘fjord-land’ Hókr Eirfl 5/3 and vegr jǫtna ‘way of giants’ ESkál Vell 14/5, is not convincing. (b) Kuhn (1929b, 201) suggests jǫfurr hauka ‘lord of hawks [soldiers]’, i.e. Óláfr (cf. skyldir hauka, st. 2/3 and Note) and ærir elds háklifs ‘envoys of the fire of the shark-cliff [SEA > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’ (or perhaps the same, but with ‘rowlock-cliff’, from hár m. ‘thole-pin, rowlock’). Von See (1980, 28-32; 1999b, 267-8), in surveys of scholarship on this helmingr, rejects Kuhn’s interpretation on the grounds that hár ‘shark’ is only otherwise found in þulur, whereas klif hauka ‘hawks’ cliff [ARM]’ is a habitual collocation, and Kock (NN §2451) had also noted problems with it. Hofmann (1981, 14-15) points out in response that háklif ‘shark/rowlock-cliff’ would in fact be distinct from hôklif ‘high cliff’ in oral delivery due to its different vowel quality, and that parallels for the sea-kenning Kuhn proposes do exist, incorporating both terms for sea-creatures (humra fjǫll ‘lobsters’ mountain’ ÞGísl Búdr 2/4) and nautical terms (stafnklif ‘stem-cliff’ Þloft Tøgdr 4/6). Hofmann’s arguments are convincing, and Kuhn’s interpretation is a viable alternative.

elds ‘of the fire’

(not checked:)
eldr (noun m.; °-s, dat. -i/-(HómÍsl¹‰(1993) 24v²⁴); -ar): fire

[6] elds: ‘ællz’ corrected from ‘æll’ 4‑7, ‘ell[…]’ 325VIII 2 g, ‘ærumz’ Flat

kennings

notes

[5-6, 7-8] ærir elds hôklifs hauka ‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks [ARM > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’: This interpretation (that of Skj B, followed by Reichardt 1928, 213 and Ólafur Halldórsson in ÍF 25) means that l. 7 contains elements from three different clauses, a syntactic arrangement which is unique in the skaldic corpus (Gade 1995a, 13, 215-16). Two redistributions of the kenning components to avoid this situation have been suggested. (a) Kock (NN §511) has ærir elds ‘envoys of fire/the sword [WARRIORS]’ and jǫfurr hôklifs hauka ‘lord of the high cliff of hawks [NORWAY > = Óláfr]’. It is conceivable that eldr could mean ‘sword’ (cf. Note to st. 6/4), but Kock’s case for hôklif hauka as a synecdoche for Norway, based on the (inexact) parallels fjǫrðjǫrð ‘fjord-land’ Hókr Eirfl 5/3 and vegr jǫtna ‘way of giants’ ESkál Vell 14/5, is not convincing. (b) Kuhn (1929b, 201) suggests jǫfurr hauka ‘lord of hawks [soldiers]’, i.e. Óláfr (cf. skyldir hauka, st. 2/3 and Note) and ærir elds háklifs ‘envoys of the fire of the shark-cliff [SEA > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’ (or perhaps the same, but with ‘rowlock-cliff’, from hár m. ‘thole-pin, rowlock’). Von See (1980, 28-32; 1999b, 267-8), in surveys of scholarship on this helmingr, rejects Kuhn’s interpretation on the grounds that hár ‘shark’ is only otherwise found in þulur, whereas klif hauka ‘hawks’ cliff [ARM]’ is a habitual collocation, and Kock (NN §2451) had also noted problems with it. Hofmann (1981, 14-15) points out in response that háklif ‘shark/rowlock-cliff’ would in fact be distinct from hôklif ‘high cliff’ in oral delivery due to its different vowel quality, and that parallels for the sea-kenning Kuhn proposes do exist, incorporating both terms for sea-creatures (humra fjǫll ‘lobsters’ mountain’ ÞGísl Búdr 2/4) and nautical terms (stafnklif ‘stem-cliff’ Þloft Tøgdr 4/6). Hofmann’s arguments are convincing, and Kuhn’s interpretation is a viable alternative.

þjóð ‘’

(not checked:)
þjóð (noun f.; °-ar, dat. -/-u; -ir): people

þeim ‘that’

(not checked:)
1. sá (pron.; °gen. þess, dat. þeim, acc. þann; f. sú, gen. þeirrar, acc. þá; n. þat, dat. því; pl. m. þeir, f. þǽ---): that (one), those

[6] þeim: þjóð 53, ‘[…]’ 325VIII 2 g

svikum ‘treachery’

(not checked:)
1. svik (noun n.; °-s; -): deceit, treachery; poison

belldi ‘committed’

(not checked:)
1. bella (verb; °præt. sg. ball): deal with

heilalíkn ‘healing mercy’

(not checked:)
heilalíkn (noun f.): [healing mercy]

notes

[7] heilalíkn ‘healing mercy’: A hap. leg., which all mss write as two words. The identity of the first element is uncertain. (a) It may be related to the verb heila ‘to heal’, although medial <i> rather than <a> would be expected, cf. heilivágr ‘healing balm’ (Sturl Hákkv 28/7^II, and frequently in prose). (b) It may merely be intensifying (Ólafur Halldórsson, ÍF 25), cf. adj. heill ‘whole, complete’, heilmikill ‘very great’. (c) Kock (NN §511) reads heillalíkn ‘fortunate mercy’, with heill f. ‘good luck, whole-making mercy’, as the first element; this produces a regular cpd of gen. pl. noun + noun. Whatever the interpretation, play on ideas of wholeness and health seems fitting given the first helmingr’s portrayal of Óláfr as physically separated (firrðr) from kingdom and subjects.

ef ‘if’

(not checked:)
3. ef (conj.): if

hauka ‘of hawks’

(not checked:)
1. haukr (noun m.; °-s, dat. -i/-; -ar): hawk

kennings

notes

[5-6, 7-8] ærir elds hôklifs hauka ‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks [ARM > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’: This interpretation (that of Skj B, followed by Reichardt 1928, 213 and Ólafur Halldórsson in ÍF 25) means that l. 7 contains elements from three different clauses, a syntactic arrangement which is unique in the skaldic corpus (Gade 1995a, 13, 215-16). Two redistributions of the kenning components to avoid this situation have been suggested. (a) Kock (NN §511) has ærir elds ‘envoys of fire/the sword [WARRIORS]’ and jǫfurr hôklifs hauka ‘lord of the high cliff of hawks [NORWAY > = Óláfr]’. It is conceivable that eldr could mean ‘sword’ (cf. Note to st. 6/4), but Kock’s case for hôklif hauka as a synecdoche for Norway, based on the (inexact) parallels fjǫrðjǫrð ‘fjord-land’ Hókr Eirfl 5/3 and vegr jǫtna ‘way of giants’ ESkál Vell 14/5, is not convincing. (b) Kuhn (1929b, 201) suggests jǫfurr hauka ‘lord of hawks [soldiers]’, i.e. Óláfr (cf. skyldir hauka, st. 2/3 and Note) and ærir elds háklifs ‘envoys of the fire of the shark-cliff [SEA > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’ (or perhaps the same, but with ‘rowlock-cliff’, from hár m. ‘thole-pin, rowlock’). Von See (1980, 28-32; 1999b, 267-8), in surveys of scholarship on this helmingr, rejects Kuhn’s interpretation on the grounds that hár ‘shark’ is only otherwise found in þulur, whereas klif hauka ‘hawks’ cliff [ARM]’ is a habitual collocation, and Kock (NN §2451) had also noted problems with it. Hofmann (1981, 14-15) points out in response that háklif ‘shark/rowlock-cliff’ would in fact be distinct from hôklif ‘high cliff’ in oral delivery due to its different vowel quality, and that parallels for the sea-kenning Kuhn proposes do exist, incorporating both terms for sea-creatures (humra fjǫll ‘lobsters’ mountain’ ÞGísl Búdr 2/4) and nautical terms (stafnklif ‘stem-cliff’ Þloft Tøgdr 4/6). Hofmann’s arguments are convincing, and Kuhn’s interpretation is a viable alternative.

hauka ‘of hawks’

(not checked:)
1. haukr (noun m.; °-s, dat. -i/-; -ar): hawk

kennings

notes

[5-6, 7-8] ærir elds hôklifs hauka ‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks [ARM > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’: This interpretation (that of Skj B, followed by Reichardt 1928, 213 and Ólafur Halldórsson in ÍF 25) means that l. 7 contains elements from three different clauses, a syntactic arrangement which is unique in the skaldic corpus (Gade 1995a, 13, 215-16). Two redistributions of the kenning components to avoid this situation have been suggested. (a) Kock (NN §511) has ærir elds ‘envoys of fire/the sword [WARRIORS]’ and jǫfurr hôklifs hauka ‘lord of the high cliff of hawks [NORWAY > = Óláfr]’. It is conceivable that eldr could mean ‘sword’ (cf. Note to st. 6/4), but Kock’s case for hôklif hauka as a synecdoche for Norway, based on the (inexact) parallels fjǫrðjǫrð ‘fjord-land’ Hókr Eirfl 5/3 and vegr jǫtna ‘way of giants’ ESkál Vell 14/5, is not convincing. (b) Kuhn (1929b, 201) suggests jǫfurr hauka ‘lord of hawks [soldiers]’, i.e. Óláfr (cf. skyldir hauka, st. 2/3 and Note) and ærir elds háklifs ‘envoys of the fire of the shark-cliff [SEA > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’ (or perhaps the same, but with ‘rowlock-cliff’, from hár m. ‘thole-pin, rowlock’). Von See (1980, 28-32; 1999b, 267-8), in surveys of scholarship on this helmingr, rejects Kuhn’s interpretation on the grounds that hár ‘shark’ is only otherwise found in þulur, whereas klif hauka ‘hawks’ cliff [ARM]’ is a habitual collocation, and Kock (NN §2451) had also noted problems with it. Hofmann (1981, 14-15) points out in response that háklif ‘shark/rowlock-cliff’ would in fact be distinct from hôklif ‘high cliff’ in oral delivery due to its different vowel quality, and that parallels for the sea-kenning Kuhn proposes do exist, incorporating both terms for sea-creatures (humra fjǫll ‘lobsters’ mountain’ ÞGísl Búdr 2/4) and nautical terms (stafnklif ‘stem-cliff’ Þloft Tøgdr 4/6). Hofmann’s arguments are convincing, and Kuhn’s interpretation is a viable alternative.

hauka ‘of hawks’

(not checked:)
1. haukr (noun m.; °-s, dat. -i/-; -ar): hawk

kennings

notes

[5-6, 7-8] ærir elds hôklifs hauka ‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks [ARM > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’: This interpretation (that of Skj B, followed by Reichardt 1928, 213 and Ólafur Halldórsson in ÍF 25) means that l. 7 contains elements from three different clauses, a syntactic arrangement which is unique in the skaldic corpus (Gade 1995a, 13, 215-16). Two redistributions of the kenning components to avoid this situation have been suggested. (a) Kock (NN §511) has ærir elds ‘envoys of fire/the sword [WARRIORS]’ and jǫfurr hôklifs hauka ‘lord of the high cliff of hawks [NORWAY > = Óláfr]’. It is conceivable that eldr could mean ‘sword’ (cf. Note to st. 6/4), but Kock’s case for hôklif hauka as a synecdoche for Norway, based on the (inexact) parallels fjǫrðjǫrð ‘fjord-land’ Hókr Eirfl 5/3 and vegr jǫtna ‘way of giants’ ESkál Vell 14/5, is not convincing. (b) Kuhn (1929b, 201) suggests jǫfurr hauka ‘lord of hawks [soldiers]’, i.e. Óláfr (cf. skyldir hauka, st. 2/3 and Note) and ærir elds háklifs ‘envoys of the fire of the shark-cliff [SEA > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’ (or perhaps the same, but with ‘rowlock-cliff’, from hár m. ‘thole-pin, rowlock’). Von See (1980, 28-32; 1999b, 267-8), in surveys of scholarship on this helmingr, rejects Kuhn’s interpretation on the grounds that hár ‘shark’ is only otherwise found in þulur, whereas klif hauka ‘hawks’ cliff [ARM]’ is a habitual collocation, and Kock (NN §2451) had also noted problems with it. Hofmann (1981, 14-15) points out in response that háklif ‘shark/rowlock-cliff’ would in fact be distinct from hôklif ‘high cliff’ in oral delivery due to its different vowel quality, and that parallels for the sea-kenning Kuhn proposes do exist, incorporating both terms for sea-creatures (humra fjǫll ‘lobsters’ mountain’ ÞGísl Búdr 2/4) and nautical terms (stafnklif ‘stem-cliff’ Þloft Tøgdr 4/6). Hofmann’s arguments are convincing, and Kuhn’s interpretation is a viable alternative.

haf ‘’

(not checked:)
haf (noun n.; °-s; *-): sea < hafklif (noun n.)

hauk ‘’

(not checked:)
1. haukr (noun m.; °-s, dat. -i/-; -ar): hawk < haukklif (noun n.)

hô ‘of the high’

(not checked:)
3. hár (adj.; °-van; compar. hǽrri, superl. hǽstr): high < háklif (noun n.): [high cliff]

[8] hôklifs jǫfurr (‘ha cklifs iofurr’): hauk klifs jǫfurr 310, hafklifs jǫfurr 4‑7, ‘hak[…]fur’ 325VIII 2 g

kennings

notes

[5-6, 7-8] ærir elds hôklifs hauka ‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks [ARM > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’: This interpretation (that of Skj B, followed by Reichardt 1928, 213 and Ólafur Halldórsson in ÍF 25) means that l. 7 contains elements from three different clauses, a syntactic arrangement which is unique in the skaldic corpus (Gade 1995a, 13, 215-16). Two redistributions of the kenning components to avoid this situation have been suggested. (a) Kock (NN §511) has ærir elds ‘envoys of fire/the sword [WARRIORS]’ and jǫfurr hôklifs hauka ‘lord of the high cliff of hawks [NORWAY > = Óláfr]’. It is conceivable that eldr could mean ‘sword’ (cf. Note to st. 6/4), but Kock’s case for hôklif hauka as a synecdoche for Norway, based on the (inexact) parallels fjǫrðjǫrð ‘fjord-land’ Hókr Eirfl 5/3 and vegr jǫtna ‘way of giants’ ESkál Vell 14/5, is not convincing. (b) Kuhn (1929b, 201) suggests jǫfurr hauka ‘lord of hawks [soldiers]’, i.e. Óláfr (cf. skyldir hauka, st. 2/3 and Note) and ærir elds háklifs ‘envoys of the fire of the shark-cliff [SEA > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’ (or perhaps the same, but with ‘rowlock-cliff’, from hár m. ‘thole-pin, rowlock’). Von See (1980, 28-32; 1999b, 267-8), in surveys of scholarship on this helmingr, rejects Kuhn’s interpretation on the grounds that hár ‘shark’ is only otherwise found in þulur, whereas klif hauka ‘hawks’ cliff [ARM]’ is a habitual collocation, and Kock (NN §2451) had also noted problems with it. Hofmann (1981, 14-15) points out in response that háklif ‘shark/rowlock-cliff’ would in fact be distinct from hôklif ‘high cliff’ in oral delivery due to its different vowel quality, and that parallels for the sea-kenning Kuhn proposes do exist, incorporating both terms for sea-creatures (humra fjǫll ‘lobsters’ mountain’ ÞGísl Búdr 2/4) and nautical terms (stafnklif ‘stem-cliff’ Þloft Tøgdr 4/6). Hofmann’s arguments are convincing, and Kuhn’s interpretation is a viable alternative.

hô ‘of the high’

(not checked:)
3. hár (adj.; °-van; compar. hǽrri, superl. hǽstr): high < háklif (noun n.): [high cliff]

[8] hôklifs jǫfurr (‘ha cklifs iofurr’): hauk klifs jǫfurr 310, hafklifs jǫfurr 4‑7, ‘hak[…]fur’ 325VIII 2 g

kennings

notes

[5-6, 7-8] ærir elds hôklifs hauka ‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks [ARM > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’: This interpretation (that of Skj B, followed by Reichardt 1928, 213 and Ólafur Halldórsson in ÍF 25) means that l. 7 contains elements from three different clauses, a syntactic arrangement which is unique in the skaldic corpus (Gade 1995a, 13, 215-16). Two redistributions of the kenning components to avoid this situation have been suggested. (a) Kock (NN §511) has ærir elds ‘envoys of fire/the sword [WARRIORS]’ and jǫfurr hôklifs hauka ‘lord of the high cliff of hawks [NORWAY > = Óláfr]’. It is conceivable that eldr could mean ‘sword’ (cf. Note to st. 6/4), but Kock’s case for hôklif hauka as a synecdoche for Norway, based on the (inexact) parallels fjǫrðjǫrð ‘fjord-land’ Hókr Eirfl 5/3 and vegr jǫtna ‘way of giants’ ESkál Vell 14/5, is not convincing. (b) Kuhn (1929b, 201) suggests jǫfurr hauka ‘lord of hawks [soldiers]’, i.e. Óláfr (cf. skyldir hauka, st. 2/3 and Note) and ærir elds háklifs ‘envoys of the fire of the shark-cliff [SEA > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’ (or perhaps the same, but with ‘rowlock-cliff’, from hár m. ‘thole-pin, rowlock’). Von See (1980, 28-32; 1999b, 267-8), in surveys of scholarship on this helmingr, rejects Kuhn’s interpretation on the grounds that hár ‘shark’ is only otherwise found in þulur, whereas klif hauka ‘hawks’ cliff [ARM]’ is a habitual collocation, and Kock (NN §2451) had also noted problems with it. Hofmann (1981, 14-15) points out in response that háklif ‘shark/rowlock-cliff’ would in fact be distinct from hôklif ‘high cliff’ in oral delivery due to its different vowel quality, and that parallels for the sea-kenning Kuhn proposes do exist, incorporating both terms for sea-creatures (humra fjǫll ‘lobsters’ mountain’ ÞGísl Búdr 2/4) and nautical terms (stafnklif ‘stem-cliff’ Þloft Tøgdr 4/6). Hofmann’s arguments are convincing, and Kuhn’s interpretation is a viable alternative.

hô ‘of the high’

(not checked:)
3. hár (adj.; °-van; compar. hǽrri, superl. hǽstr): high < háklif (noun n.): [high cliff]

[8] hôklifs jǫfurr (‘ha cklifs iofurr’): hauk klifs jǫfurr 310, hafklifs jǫfurr 4‑7, ‘hak[…]fur’ 325VIII 2 g

kennings

notes

[5-6, 7-8] ærir elds hôklifs hauka ‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks [ARM > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’: This interpretation (that of Skj B, followed by Reichardt 1928, 213 and Ólafur Halldórsson in ÍF 25) means that l. 7 contains elements from three different clauses, a syntactic arrangement which is unique in the skaldic corpus (Gade 1995a, 13, 215-16). Two redistributions of the kenning components to avoid this situation have been suggested. (a) Kock (NN §511) has ærir elds ‘envoys of fire/the sword [WARRIORS]’ and jǫfurr hôklifs hauka ‘lord of the high cliff of hawks [NORWAY > = Óláfr]’. It is conceivable that eldr could mean ‘sword’ (cf. Note to st. 6/4), but Kock’s case for hôklif hauka as a synecdoche for Norway, based on the (inexact) parallels fjǫrðjǫrð ‘fjord-land’ Hókr Eirfl 5/3 and vegr jǫtna ‘way of giants’ ESkál Vell 14/5, is not convincing. (b) Kuhn (1929b, 201) suggests jǫfurr hauka ‘lord of hawks [soldiers]’, i.e. Óláfr (cf. skyldir hauka, st. 2/3 and Note) and ærir elds háklifs ‘envoys of the fire of the shark-cliff [SEA > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’ (or perhaps the same, but with ‘rowlock-cliff’, from hár m. ‘thole-pin, rowlock’). Von See (1980, 28-32; 1999b, 267-8), in surveys of scholarship on this helmingr, rejects Kuhn’s interpretation on the grounds that hár ‘shark’ is only otherwise found in þulur, whereas klif hauka ‘hawks’ cliff [ARM]’ is a habitual collocation, and Kock (NN §2451) had also noted problems with it. Hofmann (1981, 14-15) points out in response that háklif ‘shark/rowlock-cliff’ would in fact be distinct from hôklif ‘high cliff’ in oral delivery due to its different vowel quality, and that parallels for the sea-kenning Kuhn proposes do exist, incorporating both terms for sea-creatures (humra fjǫll ‘lobsters’ mountain’ ÞGísl Búdr 2/4) and nautical terms (stafnklif ‘stem-cliff’ Þloft Tøgdr 4/6). Hofmann’s arguments are convincing, and Kuhn’s interpretation is a viable alternative.

klifs ‘cliff’

(not checked:)
klif (noun n.; °-s; -): cliff < háklif (noun n.): [high cliff]klif (noun n.; °-s; -): cliff < haukklif (noun n.)klif (noun n.; °-s; -): cliff < hafklif (noun n.)

[8] hôklifs jǫfurr (‘ha cklifs iofurr’): hauk klifs jǫfurr 310, hafklifs jǫfurr 4‑7, ‘hak[…]fur’ 325VIII 2 g

kennings

notes

[5-6, 7-8] ærir elds hôklifs hauka ‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks [ARM > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’: This interpretation (that of Skj B, followed by Reichardt 1928, 213 and Ólafur Halldórsson in ÍF 25) means that l. 7 contains elements from three different clauses, a syntactic arrangement which is unique in the skaldic corpus (Gade 1995a, 13, 215-16). Two redistributions of the kenning components to avoid this situation have been suggested. (a) Kock (NN §511) has ærir elds ‘envoys of fire/the sword [WARRIORS]’ and jǫfurr hôklifs hauka ‘lord of the high cliff of hawks [NORWAY > = Óláfr]’. It is conceivable that eldr could mean ‘sword’ (cf. Note to st. 6/4), but Kock’s case for hôklif hauka as a synecdoche for Norway, based on the (inexact) parallels fjǫrðjǫrð ‘fjord-land’ Hókr Eirfl 5/3 and vegr jǫtna ‘way of giants’ ESkál Vell 14/5, is not convincing. (b) Kuhn (1929b, 201) suggests jǫfurr hauka ‘lord of hawks [soldiers]’, i.e. Óláfr (cf. skyldir hauka, st. 2/3 and Note) and ærir elds háklifs ‘envoys of the fire of the shark-cliff [SEA > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’ (or perhaps the same, but with ‘rowlock-cliff’, from hár m. ‘thole-pin, rowlock’). Von See (1980, 28-32; 1999b, 267-8), in surveys of scholarship on this helmingr, rejects Kuhn’s interpretation on the grounds that hár ‘shark’ is only otherwise found in þulur, whereas klif hauka ‘hawks’ cliff [ARM]’ is a habitual collocation, and Kock (NN §2451) had also noted problems with it. Hofmann (1981, 14-15) points out in response that háklif ‘shark/rowlock-cliff’ would in fact be distinct from hôklif ‘high cliff’ in oral delivery due to its different vowel quality, and that parallels for the sea-kenning Kuhn proposes do exist, incorporating both terms for sea-creatures (humra fjǫll ‘lobsters’ mountain’ ÞGísl Búdr 2/4) and nautical terms (stafnklif ‘stem-cliff’ Þloft Tøgdr 4/6). Hofmann’s arguments are convincing, and Kuhn’s interpretation is a viable alternative.

klifs ‘cliff’

(not checked:)
klif (noun n.; °-s; -): cliff < háklif (noun n.): [high cliff]klif (noun n.; °-s; -): cliff < haukklif (noun n.)klif (noun n.; °-s; -): cliff < hafklif (noun n.)

[8] hôklifs jǫfurr (‘ha cklifs iofurr’): hauk klifs jǫfurr 310, hafklifs jǫfurr 4‑7, ‘hak[…]fur’ 325VIII 2 g

kennings

notes

[5-6, 7-8] ærir elds hôklifs hauka ‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks [ARM > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’: This interpretation (that of Skj B, followed by Reichardt 1928, 213 and Ólafur Halldórsson in ÍF 25) means that l. 7 contains elements from three different clauses, a syntactic arrangement which is unique in the skaldic corpus (Gade 1995a, 13, 215-16). Two redistributions of the kenning components to avoid this situation have been suggested. (a) Kock (NN §511) has ærir elds ‘envoys of fire/the sword [WARRIORS]’ and jǫfurr hôklifs hauka ‘lord of the high cliff of hawks [NORWAY > = Óláfr]’. It is conceivable that eldr could mean ‘sword’ (cf. Note to st. 6/4), but Kock’s case for hôklif hauka as a synecdoche for Norway, based on the (inexact) parallels fjǫrðjǫrð ‘fjord-land’ Hókr Eirfl 5/3 and vegr jǫtna ‘way of giants’ ESkál Vell 14/5, is not convincing. (b) Kuhn (1929b, 201) suggests jǫfurr hauka ‘lord of hawks [soldiers]’, i.e. Óláfr (cf. skyldir hauka, st. 2/3 and Note) and ærir elds háklifs ‘envoys of the fire of the shark-cliff [SEA > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’ (or perhaps the same, but with ‘rowlock-cliff’, from hár m. ‘thole-pin, rowlock’). Von See (1980, 28-32; 1999b, 267-8), in surveys of scholarship on this helmingr, rejects Kuhn’s interpretation on the grounds that hár ‘shark’ is only otherwise found in þulur, whereas klif hauka ‘hawks’ cliff [ARM]’ is a habitual collocation, and Kock (NN §2451) had also noted problems with it. Hofmann (1981, 14-15) points out in response that háklif ‘shark/rowlock-cliff’ would in fact be distinct from hôklif ‘high cliff’ in oral delivery due to its different vowel quality, and that parallels for the sea-kenning Kuhn proposes do exist, incorporating both terms for sea-creatures (humra fjǫll ‘lobsters’ mountain’ ÞGísl Búdr 2/4) and nautical terms (stafnklif ‘stem-cliff’ Þloft Tøgdr 4/6). Hofmann’s arguments are convincing, and Kuhn’s interpretation is a viable alternative.

klifs ‘cliff’

(not checked:)
klif (noun n.; °-s; -): cliff < háklif (noun n.): [high cliff]klif (noun n.; °-s; -): cliff < haukklif (noun n.)klif (noun n.; °-s; -): cliff < hafklif (noun n.)

[8] hôklifs jǫfurr (‘ha cklifs iofurr’): hauk klifs jǫfurr 310, hafklifs jǫfurr 4‑7, ‘hak[…]fur’ 325VIII 2 g

kennings

notes

[5-6, 7-8] ærir elds hôklifs hauka ‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks [ARM > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’: This interpretation (that of Skj B, followed by Reichardt 1928, 213 and Ólafur Halldórsson in ÍF 25) means that l. 7 contains elements from three different clauses, a syntactic arrangement which is unique in the skaldic corpus (Gade 1995a, 13, 215-16). Two redistributions of the kenning components to avoid this situation have been suggested. (a) Kock (NN §511) has ærir elds ‘envoys of fire/the sword [WARRIORS]’ and jǫfurr hôklifs hauka ‘lord of the high cliff of hawks [NORWAY > = Óláfr]’. It is conceivable that eldr could mean ‘sword’ (cf. Note to st. 6/4), but Kock’s case for hôklif hauka as a synecdoche for Norway, based on the (inexact) parallels fjǫrðjǫrð ‘fjord-land’ Hókr Eirfl 5/3 and vegr jǫtna ‘way of giants’ ESkál Vell 14/5, is not convincing. (b) Kuhn (1929b, 201) suggests jǫfurr hauka ‘lord of hawks [soldiers]’, i.e. Óláfr (cf. skyldir hauka, st. 2/3 and Note) and ærir elds háklifs ‘envoys of the fire of the shark-cliff [SEA > GOLD > GENEROUS MEN]’ (or perhaps the same, but with ‘rowlock-cliff’, from hár m. ‘thole-pin, rowlock’). Von See (1980, 28-32; 1999b, 267-8), in surveys of scholarship on this helmingr, rejects Kuhn’s interpretation on the grounds that hár ‘shark’ is only otherwise found in þulur, whereas klif hauka ‘hawks’ cliff [ARM]’ is a habitual collocation, and Kock (NN §2451) had also noted problems with it. Hofmann (1981, 14-15) points out in response that háklif ‘shark/rowlock-cliff’ would in fact be distinct from hôklif ‘high cliff’ in oral delivery due to its different vowel quality, and that parallels for the sea-kenning Kuhn proposes do exist, incorporating both terms for sea-creatures (humra fjǫll ‘lobsters’ mountain’ ÞGísl Búdr 2/4) and nautical terms (stafnklif ‘stem-cliff’ Þloft Tøgdr 4/6). Hofmann’s arguments are convincing, and Kuhn’s interpretation is a viable alternative.

jǫfurr ‘the lord’

(not checked:)
jǫfurr (noun m.): ruler, prince

[8] hôklifs jǫfurr (‘ha cklifs iofurr’): hauk klifs jǫfurr 310, hafklifs jǫfurr 4‑7, ‘hak[…]fur’ 325VIII 2 g

lifði ‘lived’

(not checked:)
lifa (verb): live