ÚlfrU Húsdr 6^III

Full ‘The most’

(not checked:)
2. fullr (adj.; °compar. -ari, superl. -astr): full, complete < fullǫflugr (adj.)

kennings

ǫflugr ‘powerful’

(not checked:)
ǫflugr (adj.): mighty, strong < fullǫflugr (adj.)

[1] ‑ǫflugr: ‘‑aufligr’ Tˣ

kennings

lét ‘let’

(not checked:)
láta (verb): let, have sth done

fellir ‘killer’

(not checked:)
fellir (noun m.; °-s, dat. -i): slayer, feller

kennings

fjall ‘of the mountain’

(not checked:)
1. fjall (noun n.): mountain < fjallgautr (noun m.)

kennings

notes

[2] fjall-Gauts ‘of the mountain-Gautr <man of the Gautar> [GIANT]’: A giant-kenning based on the pattern ‘people of the mountains’, in which ‘people’ is replaced by a specific ethnicity (in this case Gautar, the inhabitants of Götaland, Sweden). Comparable kennings are collected in Marold (1990a, 109-10). Although Gautr is also a name for Óðinn, it is less likely to represent the god here, because deity-names are rarely base-words in giant-kennings (see Meissner 258).

fjall ‘of the mountain’

(not checked:)
1. fjall (noun n.): mountain < fjallgautr (noun m.)

kennings

notes

[2] fjall-Gauts ‘of the mountain-Gautr <man of the Gautar> [GIANT]’: A giant-kenning based on the pattern ‘people of the mountains’, in which ‘people’ is replaced by a specific ethnicity (in this case Gautar, the inhabitants of Götaland, Sweden). Comparable kennings are collected in Marold (1990a, 109-10). Although Gautr is also a name for Óðinn, it is less likely to represent the god here, because deity-names are rarely base-words in giant-kennings (see Meissner 258).

Gauts ‘Gautr’

(not checked:)
2. Gautr (noun m.): Gautr, Óðinn < fjallgautr (noun m.)

kennings

notes

[2] fjall-Gauts ‘of the mountain-Gautr <man of the Gautar> [GIANT]’: A giant-kenning based on the pattern ‘people of the mountains’, in which ‘people’ is replaced by a specific ethnicity (in this case Gautar, the inhabitants of Götaland, Sweden). Comparable kennings are collected in Marold (1990a, 109-10). Although Gautr is also a name for Óðinn, it is less likely to represent the god here, because deity-names are rarely base-words in giant-kennings (see Meissner 258).

Gauts ‘Gautr’

(not checked:)
2. Gautr (noun m.): Gautr, Óðinn < fjallgautr (noun m.)

kennings

notes

[2] fjall-Gauts ‘of the mountain-Gautr <man of the Gautar> [GIANT]’: A giant-kenning based on the pattern ‘people of the mountains’, in which ‘people’ is replaced by a specific ethnicity (in this case Gautar, the inhabitants of Götaland, Sweden). Comparable kennings are collected in Marold (1990a, 109-10). Although Gautr is also a name for Óðinn, it is less likely to represent the god here, because deity-names are rarely base-words in giant-kennings (see Meissner 258).

hnefa ‘fist’

(not checked:)
hnefi (noun m.; °-a; -ar): fist

skjalla ‘slam’

(not checked:)
1. skjalla (verb): slam, bang

ramt ‘a mighty’

(not checked:)
rammr (adj.; °compar. -ari, superl. -astr): mighty

mein ‘injury’

(not checked:)
mein (noun n.; °-s; -): harm, injury

vas ‘was’

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

þat ‘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

[3] þat: so all others, om. R

reyni ‘of the tester’

(not checked:)
2. reynir (noun m.): tester

kennings

notes

[3] reyni ‘of the tester’: This base-word is unusual in a giant-kenning, but is paralleled by gætir ‘keeper’, vǫrðr ‘guardian’ and váttr ‘witness, knower’ (see Meissner 258).

reyrar ‘of the reed’

(not checked:)
1. reyr (noun f.): reed

[4] reyrar: so all others, ‘reyrǫz’ R

kennings

notes

[4] leggs reyrar ‘of the bone of the reed [STONE]’: This kenning is presumably constructed according to the pattern ‘bone of the water’ or ‘bone of the land’, but it cannot be established whether reyrar ‘of the reed’ represents ‘water’ or ‘land’ here (Meissner 89-90). That reyrr may be used in the sense ‘land’ is suggested by snake-kennings with base-word þvengr ‘strap’ where reyr- ‘reed’ and sef- ‘rush’ occur as determinants in variation with terms for ‘land’ (Mogk 1880, 326; Meissner 115). (b) Frank (1978, 111) gives a completely different explanation of leggs reyrar as ‘the shaft of the twisted cord’, deriving reyrr from the weak verb reyra ‘tie, fasten, wind around’. The entire giant-kenning would then mean ‘tester (or enemy) of the fishing-line’ and would be well suited to the context because it would relate to the giant’s severing the line from which Miðgarðsormr was hanging. However, neither leggr nor reyrr is attested in the meanings assumed by Frank.

reyrar ‘of the reed’

(not checked:)
1. reyr (noun f.): reed

[4] reyrar: so all others, ‘reyrǫz’ R

kennings

notes

[4] leggs reyrar ‘of the bone of the reed [STONE]’: This kenning is presumably constructed according to the pattern ‘bone of the water’ or ‘bone of the land’, but it cannot be established whether reyrar ‘of the reed’ represents ‘water’ or ‘land’ here (Meissner 89-90). That reyrr may be used in the sense ‘land’ is suggested by snake-kennings with base-word þvengr ‘strap’ where reyr- ‘reed’ and sef- ‘rush’ occur as determinants in variation with terms for ‘land’ (Mogk 1880, 326; Meissner 115). (b) Frank (1978, 111) gives a completely different explanation of leggs reyrar as ‘the shaft of the twisted cord’, deriving reyrr from the weak verb reyra ‘tie, fasten, wind around’. The entire giant-kenning would then mean ‘tester (or enemy) of the fishing-line’ and would be well suited to the context because it would relate to the giant’s severing the line from which Miðgarðsormr was hanging. However, neither leggr nor reyrr is attested in the meanings assumed by Frank.

leggs ‘of the bone’

(not checked:)
leggr (noun m.; °-jar, dat. -; -ir): limb

[4] leggs: logs Tˣ, W

kennings

notes

[4] leggs reyrar ‘of the bone of the reed [STONE]’: This kenning is presumably constructed according to the pattern ‘bone of the water’ or ‘bone of the land’, but it cannot be established whether reyrar ‘of the reed’ represents ‘water’ or ‘land’ here (Meissner 89-90). That reyrr may be used in the sense ‘land’ is suggested by snake-kennings with base-word þvengr ‘strap’ where reyr- ‘reed’ and sef- ‘rush’ occur as determinants in variation with terms for ‘land’ (Mogk 1880, 326; Meissner 115). (b) Frank (1978, 111) gives a completely different explanation of leggs reyrar as ‘the shaft of the twisted cord’, deriving reyrr from the weak verb reyra ‘tie, fasten, wind around’. The entire giant-kenning would then mean ‘tester (or enemy) of the fishing-line’ and would be well suited to the context because it would relate to the giant’s severing the line from which Miðgarðsormr was hanging. However, neither leggr nor reyrr is attested in the meanings assumed by Frank.

leggs ‘of the bone’

(not checked:)
leggr (noun m.; °-jar, dat. -; -ir): limb

[4] leggs: logs Tˣ, W

kennings

notes

[4] leggs reyrar ‘of the bone of the reed [STONE]’: This kenning is presumably constructed according to the pattern ‘bone of the water’ or ‘bone of the land’, but it cannot be established whether reyrar ‘of the reed’ represents ‘water’ or ‘land’ here (Meissner 89-90). That reyrr may be used in the sense ‘land’ is suggested by snake-kennings with base-word þvengr ‘strap’ where reyr- ‘reed’ and sef- ‘rush’ occur as determinants in variation with terms for ‘land’ (Mogk 1880, 326; Meissner 115). (b) Frank (1978, 111) gives a completely different explanation of leggs reyrar as ‘the shaft of the twisted cord’, deriving reyrr from the weak verb reyra ‘tie, fasten, wind around’. The entire giant-kenning would then mean ‘tester (or enemy) of the fishing-line’ and would be well suited to the context because it would relate to the giant’s severing the line from which Miðgarðsormr was hanging. However, neither leggr nor reyrr is attested in the meanings assumed by Frank.

við ‘against’

(not checked:)
2. við (prep.): with, against

eyra ‘the ear’

(not checked:)
eyra (noun n.; °eyra; eyru/eyrun, gen. eyrna): ear

Víð ‘The Víð’

(not checked:)
(non-lexical) < Viðgymnir (noun m.)

kennings

notes

[5, 6] Víðgymnir vaðs Vimrar ‘the Víðgymnir <giant> of the ford of Vimur <river> [= Þórr]’: This kenning alludes to an episode described in Eil Þdr sts 5-8 and in Skm (SnE 1998, I, 24-5). On his way to meet the giant Geirrøðr, Þórr must wade across a mighty river. Þdr 8 does not call it the Vimur, rather, the name comes from a stanza of an otherwise unknown eddic poem cited in Skm (SnE 1998, I, 25). The prose narrative and the stanza might also explain why the poet uses a giant’s name as the base-word in this Þórr-kenning. The river swells up until it reaches Þórr’s shoulders, at which point he addresses the river (loc. cit.): Vaxattu nú, Vimur, | … veiztu ef þú vex, | at þá vex mér ásmegin | jafnhátt upp sem himinn ‘Do not grow now, Vimur, … you know that if you grow, then the power of an Áss will rise in me just as high as the sky’. At the same time the kenning, in which Þórr appears as the ‘giant’ of the river, corresponds to the kenning pattern ‘hostile creature/enemy of sth./sby’. There is no satisfactory explanation for the name Víðgymnir, but the prose context of the Húsdr stanza indicates it is a giant’s name (SnE 1998, I, 17): Hér er hann kallaðr jǫtunn Vimrar vaðs ‘Here he is called the giant of the ford of the Vimur’. Sveinbjörn Egilsson (LP (1860): Viðgymnir) explains the word as the appellative transgressor ‘one who crosses’; cf. also SnE 1848-87, I, 258; LP: Víðgymnir.

gymnir ‘gymnir’

(not checked:)
(non-lexical) < Viðgymnir (noun m.)

[5] ‑gymnir: ‘‑gymrir’ Tˣ, W, ‘‑genrir’ U

kennings

notes

[5, 6] Víðgymnir vaðs Vimrar ‘the Víðgymnir <giant> of the ford of Vimur <river> [= Þórr]’: This kenning alludes to an episode described in Eil Þdr sts 5-8 and in Skm (SnE 1998, I, 24-5). On his way to meet the giant Geirrøðr, Þórr must wade across a mighty river. Þdr 8 does not call it the Vimur, rather, the name comes from a stanza of an otherwise unknown eddic poem cited in Skm (SnE 1998, I, 25). The prose narrative and the stanza might also explain why the poet uses a giant’s name as the base-word in this Þórr-kenning. The river swells up until it reaches Þórr’s shoulders, at which point he addresses the river (loc. cit.): Vaxattu nú, Vimur, | … veiztu ef þú vex, | at þá vex mér ásmegin | jafnhátt upp sem himinn ‘Do not grow now, Vimur, … you know that if you grow, then the power of an Áss will rise in me just as high as the sky’. At the same time the kenning, in which Þórr appears as the ‘giant’ of the river, corresponds to the kenning pattern ‘hostile creature/enemy of sth./sby’. There is no satisfactory explanation for the name Víðgymnir, but the prose context of the Húsdr stanza indicates it is a giant’s name (SnE 1998, I, 17): Hér er hann kallaðr jǫtunn Vimrar vaðs ‘Here he is called the giant of the ford of the Vimur’. Sveinbjörn Egilsson (LP (1860): Viðgymnir) explains the word as the appellative transgressor ‘one who crosses’; cf. also SnE 1848-87, I, 258; LP: Víðgymnir.

laust ‘struck’

(not checked:)
2. ljósta (verb): strike

Vimrar ‘of Vimur’

(not checked:)
Vimur (noun f.): Vimur

kennings

notes

[5, 6] Víðgymnir vaðs Vimrar ‘the Víðgymnir <giant> of the ford of Vimur <river> [= Þórr]’: This kenning alludes to an episode described in Eil Þdr sts 5-8 and in Skm (SnE 1998, I, 24-5). On his way to meet the giant Geirrøðr, Þórr must wade across a mighty river. Þdr 8 does not call it the Vimur, rather, the name comes from a stanza of an otherwise unknown eddic poem cited in Skm (SnE 1998, I, 25). The prose narrative and the stanza might also explain why the poet uses a giant’s name as the base-word in this Þórr-kenning. The river swells up until it reaches Þórr’s shoulders, at which point he addresses the river (loc. cit.): Vaxattu nú, Vimur, | … veiztu ef þú vex, | at þá vex mér ásmegin | jafnhátt upp sem himinn ‘Do not grow now, Vimur, … you know that if you grow, then the power of an Áss will rise in me just as high as the sky’. At the same time the kenning, in which Þórr appears as the ‘giant’ of the river, corresponds to the kenning pattern ‘hostile creature/enemy of sth./sby’. There is no satisfactory explanation for the name Víðgymnir, but the prose context of the Húsdr stanza indicates it is a giant’s name (SnE 1998, I, 17): Hér er hann kallaðr jǫtunn Vimrar vaðs ‘Here he is called the giant of the ford of the Vimur’. Sveinbjörn Egilsson (LP (1860): Viðgymnir) explains the word as the appellative transgressor ‘one who crosses’; cf. also SnE 1848-87, I, 258; LP: Víðgymnir.

vaðs ‘of the ford’

(not checked:)
vað (noun n.; °-s; *-): [ford, surge]

kennings

notes

[5, 6] Víðgymnir vaðs Vimrar ‘the Víðgymnir <giant> of the ford of Vimur <river> [= Þórr]’: This kenning alludes to an episode described in Eil Þdr sts 5-8 and in Skm (SnE 1998, I, 24-5). On his way to meet the giant Geirrøðr, Þórr must wade across a mighty river. Þdr 8 does not call it the Vimur, rather, the name comes from a stanza of an otherwise unknown eddic poem cited in Skm (SnE 1998, I, 25). The prose narrative and the stanza might also explain why the poet uses a giant’s name as the base-word in this Þórr-kenning. The river swells up until it reaches Þórr’s shoulders, at which point he addresses the river (loc. cit.): Vaxattu nú, Vimur, | … veiztu ef þú vex, | at þá vex mér ásmegin | jafnhátt upp sem himinn ‘Do not grow now, Vimur, … you know that if you grow, then the power of an Áss will rise in me just as high as the sky’. At the same time the kenning, in which Þórr appears as the ‘giant’ of the river, corresponds to the kenning pattern ‘hostile creature/enemy of sth./sby’. There is no satisfactory explanation for the name Víðgymnir, but the prose context of the Húsdr stanza indicates it is a giant’s name (SnE 1998, I, 17): Hér er hann kallaðr jǫtunn Vimrar vaðs ‘Here he is called the giant of the ford of the Vimur’. Sveinbjörn Egilsson (LP (1860): Viðgymnir) explains the word as the appellative transgressor ‘one who crosses’; cf. also SnE 1848-87, I, 258; LP: Víðgymnir.

af ‘off’

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

frônum ‘the gleaming’

(not checked:)
2. fránn (adj.): bright, shining

[6] frônum: frǫmum U

naðri ‘serpent’

(not checked:)
naðr (noun m.): snake

hlusta ‘of the ears’

(not checked:)
hlust (noun f.; °-ar; -ir): [ears]

kennings

grunn ‘the ground’

(not checked:)
1. grunnr (noun m.): bottom, shallows

[7] grunn: grun U

kennings

við ‘near’

(not checked:)
2. við (prep.): with, against

hrǫnnum ‘the waves’

(not checked:)
hrǫnn (noun f.; °; dat. -um): wave

Hlaut ‘received’

(not checked:)
hljóta (verb): alot, gain

notes

[8] hlaut svá innan minnum ‘thus [the hall] received [decoration] inside with memorable pictures’: This clause, which reappears in st. 10/4, is the poem’s refrain (stef). It refers to the images that inspired the poem, but as it stands, it is problematic for several reasons. The subject is missing, and minnum (dat. pl.) cannot be the object of hlaut, because hljóta is construed with the acc. (see the examples in Fritzner: hljóta). Faulkes (SnE 1998, II, 313) translates the phrase as ‘come to be decorated (with)’, and notes that it is ‘probably only half the refrain, which would then have been a klofastef ‘split refrain’; the rest of the sentence, including the object, would have appeared in the last line of another (lost) stanza’. If so, the sentence can be completed as follows: ‘Thus [the hall] received [decoration] inside with memorable pictures’. Faulkes’ suggestion is plausible, and it is supported by a similar construction in Edáð Banddr^I, where the finite verb occurs in position 1 of the first line but the corresponding subject is suspended until the next stef-line (cf. Note to Edáð Banddr 9/1, 2^I and NN §1853A).

innan ‘inside’

(not checked:)
innan (prep.): inside, within

notes

[8] hlaut svá innan minnum ‘thus [the hall] received [decoration] inside with memorable pictures’: This clause, which reappears in st. 10/4, is the poem’s refrain (stef). It refers to the images that inspired the poem, but as it stands, it is problematic for several reasons. The subject is missing, and minnum (dat. pl.) cannot be the object of hlaut, because hljóta is construed with the acc. (see the examples in Fritzner: hljóta). Faulkes (SnE 1998, II, 313) translates the phrase as ‘come to be decorated (with)’, and notes that it is ‘probably only half the refrain, which would then have been a klofastef ‘split refrain’; the rest of the sentence, including the object, would have appeared in the last line of another (lost) stanza’. If so, the sentence can be completed as follows: ‘Thus [the hall] received [decoration] inside with memorable pictures’. Faulkes’ suggestion is plausible, and it is supported by a similar construction in Edáð Banddr^I, where the finite verb occurs in position 1 of the first line but the corresponding subject is suspended until the next stef-line (cf. Note to Edáð Banddr 9/1, 2^I and NN §1853A).

svá ‘Thus’

(not checked:)
svá (adv.): so, thus

notes

[8] hlaut svá innan minnum ‘thus [the hall] received [decoration] inside with memorable pictures’: This clause, which reappears in st. 10/4, is the poem’s refrain (stef). It refers to the images that inspired the poem, but as it stands, it is problematic for several reasons. The subject is missing, and minnum (dat. pl.) cannot be the object of hlaut, because hljóta is construed with the acc. (see the examples in Fritzner: hljóta). Faulkes (SnE 1998, II, 313) translates the phrase as ‘come to be decorated (with)’, and notes that it is ‘probably only half the refrain, which would then have been a klofastef ‘split refrain’; the rest of the sentence, including the object, would have appeared in the last line of another (lost) stanza’. If so, the sentence can be completed as follows: ‘Thus [the hall] received [decoration] inside with memorable pictures’. Faulkes’ suggestion is plausible, and it is supported by a similar construction in Edáð Banddr^I, where the finite verb occurs in position 1 of the first line but the corresponding subject is suspended until the next stef-line (cf. Note to Edáð Banddr 9/1, 2^I and NN §1853A).

minnum ‘with memorable pictures’

(not checked:)
1. minni (noun n.; °-s; -): memory

notes

[8] hlaut svá innan minnum ‘thus [the hall] received [decoration] inside with memorable pictures’: This clause, which reappears in st. 10/4, is the poem’s refrain (stef). It refers to the images that inspired the poem, but as it stands, it is problematic for several reasons. The subject is missing, and minnum (dat. pl.) cannot be the object of hlaut, because hljóta is construed with the acc. (see the examples in Fritzner: hljóta). Faulkes (SnE 1998, II, 313) translates the phrase as ‘come to be decorated (with)’, and notes that it is ‘probably only half the refrain, which would then have been a klofastef ‘split refrain’; the rest of the sentence, including the object, would have appeared in the last line of another (lost) stanza’. If so, the sentence can be completed as follows: ‘Thus [the hall] received [decoration] inside with memorable pictures’. Faulkes’ suggestion is plausible, and it is supported by a similar construction in Edáð Banddr^I, where the finite verb occurs in position 1 of the first line but the corresponding subject is suspended until the next stef-line (cf. Note to Edáð Banddr 9/1, 2^I and NN §1853A).