Cookies on our website

We use cookies on this website, mainly to provide a secure browsing experience but also to collect statistics on how the website is used. You can find out more about the cookies we set, the information we store and how we use it on the cookies page.

Continue

skaldic

Skaldic Poetry of the Scandinavian Middle Ages

Menu Search

Hfr ErfÓl 19I

Kate Heslop (ed.) 2012, ‘Hallfreðr vandræðaskáld Óttarsson, Erfidrápa Óláfs Tryggvasonar 19’ in Diana Whaley (ed.), Poetry from the Kings’ Sagas 1: From Mythical Times to c. 1035. Skaldic Poetry of the Scandinavian Middle Ages 1. Turnhout: Brepols, p. 427.

Hallfreðr vandræðaskáld ÓttarssonErfidrápa Óláfs Tryggvasonar
181920

Sagðr ‘said’

segja (verb): say, tell

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

Close

vas ‘was’

2. vera (verb): be, is, was, were, are, am

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

Close

mér ‘to me’

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

Close

‘not’

né (conj.): nor

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

Close

meira ‘greater’

meiri (adj. comp.; °meiran; superl. mestr): more, most

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

Close

muni ‘will’

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 ‘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.

Close

maðr ‘a man’

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 ‘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.

Close

of ‘’

4. of (particle): (before verb)

[2] of: af því 310

Close

lýðum ‘of people’

lýðr (noun m.; °-s, dat. -; -ir): one of the people

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

Close

firrðr ‘to be deprived’

2. firra (verb): keep (from), remove

Close

ok ‘and’

3. ok (conj.): and, but; also

[3] ok: at 53

Close

láði ‘realm’

2. láð (noun n.): earth, land

[3] láði: lýðum 325VIII 2 g, Bb

Close

land ‘The land’s’

land (noun n.; °-s; *-): land < landvǫrðr (noun m.): land-guardianland (noun n.; °-s; *-): land < landnorðr (noun n.)

[4] land‑: ‘[...]’ 325VIII 2 g

kennings

Landvǫrðr
‘The land’s guardian ’
   = RULER = Óláfr

The land’s guardian → RULER = Óláfr

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.

Close

vǫrðr ‘guardian’

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

Landvǫrðr
‘The land’s guardian ’
   = RULER = Óláfr

The land’s guardian → RULER = Óláfr

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.

Close

fyr ‘across’

fyr (prep.): for, over, because of, etc.

[4] fyr: frá Bb

Close

‘the sea’

sjór (noun m.): sea

[4] sæ: om. 61

Close

handan ‘’

handan (adv.): across

[4] handan: norðan corrected from handan 61

Close

þoslt ‘’

Close

þótt ‘although’

þótt (conj.): although

[5] þótt: ‘þo(slt)’(?) 325VIII 2 g

Close

ærir ‘envoys’

1. árr (noun m.; °dat. ár; ǽrir/árar, acc. áru): messenger

kennings

ærir elds hôklifs hauka
‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks ’
   = GENEROUS MEN

the high cliff of hawks → ARM
the fire of the ARM → GOLD
envoys of the GOLD → GENEROUS MEN

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.

Close

ællz ‘’

Close

elds ‘of the fire’

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

ærir elds hôklifs hauka
‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks ’
   = GENEROUS MEN

the high cliff of hawks → ARM
the fire of the ARM → GOLD
envoys of the GOLD → GENEROUS MEN

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.

Close

elds ‘of the fire’

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

ærir elds hôklifs hauka
‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks ’
   = GENEROUS MEN

the high cliff of hawks → ARM
the fire of the ARM → GOLD
envoys of the GOLD → GENEROUS MEN

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.

Close

heilalíkn ‘healing mercy’

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 28/7II, 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.

Close

hauka ‘of hawks’

1. haukr (noun m.; °-s, dat. -i/-; -ar): hawk

kennings

ærir elds hôklifs hauka
‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks ’
   = GENEROUS MEN

the high cliff of hawks → ARM
the fire of the ARM → GOLD
envoys of the GOLD → GENEROUS MEN

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.

Close

hauka ‘of hawks’

1. haukr (noun m.; °-s, dat. -i/-; -ar): hawk

kennings

ærir elds hôklifs hauka
‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks ’
   = GENEROUS MEN

the high cliff of hawks → ARM
the fire of the ARM → GOLD
envoys of the GOLD → GENEROUS MEN

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.

Close

hauka ‘of hawks’

1. haukr (noun m.; °-s, dat. -i/-; -ar): hawk

kennings

ærir elds hôklifs hauka
‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks ’
   = GENEROUS MEN

the high cliff of hawks → ARM
the fire of the ARM → GOLD
envoys of the GOLD → GENEROUS MEN

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.

Close

‘of the high’

3. hár (adj.; °-van; compar. hǽrri, superl. hǽstr): high < háklif (noun n.): [high cliff]

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

kennings

ærir elds hôklifs hauka
‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks ’
   = GENEROUS MEN

the high cliff of hawks → ARM
the fire of the ARM → GOLD
envoys of the GOLD → GENEROUS MEN

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.

Close

‘of the high’

3. hár (adj.; °-van; compar. hǽrri, superl. hǽstr): high < háklif (noun n.): [high cliff]

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

kennings

ærir elds hôklifs hauka
‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks ’
   = GENEROUS MEN

the high cliff of hawks → ARM
the fire of the ARM → GOLD
envoys of the GOLD → GENEROUS MEN

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.

Close

‘of the high’

3. hár (adj.; °-van; compar. hǽrri, superl. hǽstr): high < háklif (noun n.): [high cliff]

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

kennings

ærir elds hôklifs hauka
‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks ’
   = GENEROUS MEN

the high cliff of hawks → ARM
the fire of the ARM → GOLD
envoys of the GOLD → GENEROUS MEN

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.

Close

klifs ‘cliff’

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

kennings

ærir elds hôklifs hauka
‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks ’
   = GENEROUS MEN

the high cliff of hawks → ARM
the fire of the ARM → GOLD
envoys of the GOLD → GENEROUS MEN

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.

Close

klifs ‘cliff’

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

kennings

ærir elds hôklifs hauka
‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks ’
   = GENEROUS MEN

the high cliff of hawks → ARM
the fire of the ARM → GOLD
envoys of the GOLD → GENEROUS MEN

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.

Close

klifs ‘cliff’

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

kennings

ærir elds hôklifs hauka
‘envoys of the fire of the high cliff of hawks ’
   = GENEROUS MEN

the high cliff of hawks → ARM
the fire of the ARM → GOLD
envoys of the GOLD → GENEROUS MEN

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.

Close

jǫfurr ‘the lord’

jǫfurr (noun m.): ruler, prince

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

Close

lifði ‘lived’

lifa (verb): live

Close

Interactive view: tap on words in the text for notes and glosses

ÓTOdd: Facing defeat at Svǫlðr, King Óláfr leaps overboard, sheds his armour and swims underwater to the Wends’ ship, escaping the battle alive, as is said to be affirmed by Hallfreðr (and, according to 4-7, the otherwise unknown Sóti). ÓT cites this stanza after its description of the battle, as part of a discussion of various accounts of the battle’s final moments and the fate of Óláfr.

In ms. 4-7, sts 18/1-4 and 19/1-4 form a single stanza while st. 19/5-8 is written as a separate helmingr.

Close

Log in

This service is only available to members of the relevant projects, and to purchasers of the skaldic volumes published by Brepols.
This service uses cookies. By logging in you agree to the use of cookies on your browser.

Close

Stanza/chapter/text segment

Use the buttons at the top of the page to navigate between stanzas in a poem.

Information tab

Interactive tab

The text and translation are given here, with buttons to toggle whether the text is shown in the verse order or prose word order. Clicking on indiviudal words gives dictionary links, variant readings, kennings and notes, where relevant.

Full text tab

This is the text of the edition in a similar format to how the edition appears in the printed volumes.

Chapter/text segment

This view is also used for chapters and other text segments. Not all the headings shown are relevant to such sections.