Kommentar zu den Liedern der Edda. Volume 1: Götterlieder. Part I. Vǫluspá [R]. Hávamál. Volume II: Vafþrúðnismál, Grímnismál, Vǫluspá [H], Zwergensverzeichnis aus der Gylfaginning by Klaus von See†, Beatrice La Farge and Katja Schulz (review)

The booklet that inaugurated this grand project (Skírnismál) appeared in 1993, and it took the learned team only twenty-six years to complete it. “Only” is used here without the slightest touch of irony: for the huge scope of the work done, a quarter of a century (or, counting the preparatory period, three decades) can indeed be called a short period. Since two or more projects run parallel to this colossal edition (for example, the skalds and the reception of Old Norse literature), it won’t be an exaggeration to say that at no time have students of medieval Scandinavian literature been armed with such first-rate reference materials.

The format of these final volumes will be familiar to the regular users of the Kommentar: a short introduction to every text, a list of abbreviations, a section on the bibliographical sources, one more on the transmission of the text, a section on the progress of the research and the state of the art (Forschungsgeschichte), and a line-by-line annotated translation.

By way of illustration, consider the items discussed in the Forschungsgeschichte of Vafþrúðnismál: a possible religious importance of the song, the chances that it was used for didactic purposes, and its role as an example of a wisdom contest in pagan Scandinavia. Indeed, such songs (Vafþrúðnismál, Grímnismál, and Alvíssmál) must have been pieces of old lore, exercises in riddling games, and “texts” for initiates. The section closes with a detailed analysis of I. Sverdlov’s interpretation of the seemingly innocent refrain fjǫlð ek fór, etc. (Much have I traveled, etc.) characteristically in the galdralag (the meter of charms), which turns out to be a magic formula that overpowers the opponent. As always, Óðinn wins by cunning and deceit. The editors refrain from endorsing Sverdlov’s conclusion, but the space devoted to it and the absence of counterarguments imply that they accept it.

“The History of the Plot and Its Echoes in Later Texts” is equally detailed and instructive. It is followed by a section on the general idea underlying Vafþrúðnismál and develops the previous one. The chapter concludes with a glance at the composition, versification, vocabulary, stylistic peculiarities, and the history of the text. A similar format has been chosen for every song. The result is a series of excellent instructive essays.

The editors could not be expected to solve all the cruces and explain all the dark places: theirs is an informed variorum edition. Although they never insist on their interpretations, they reject a few and, as we have seen, favor others. Indeed, some questions are like the one with which Óðinn vanquished Vafþrúðnir. We are not expected to know what he said to Baldr on the funeral pyre, and we have an equally small chance of guessing the etymology of Embla, the name of the first mythic woman. Is Embla a garbled version of Eva (a very old hypothesis), with m borrowed from Adam?

By contrast, Muspell is probably transparent, and some older researchers’ efforts to make this name obscure look wasteful. Indeed, mu- (or mū-) means “earth,” while -spell refers to destruction. Here again the editors chose the most reasonable way: they did not list every work dealing with this name, but referred to the survey in Braune-Ebbinghaus’s Althochdeutsche Grammatik. Jan de Vries did the same. (With regard to the root mu I may...