Acceso usuarios
Van Emden executed numerous corrections in his edition of the Cam-bridge version ofThe Song of Roland(2005). However, these amendments are of-ten insufficiently justified and cannot stand up to a rigorous and detailed exami-nation from the standpoint of historical linguistics. In most cases, van Emdenmodified the text of the manuscript in order to « restore » metrically correct versesthat, to his mind, should have been included according to the model followed bythe Cambridge copyist. Van Emden accomplished his stated task by simulta-neously rejecting and retaining modernized forms or words. Sometimes, he sub-stituted an archaic form or word for a modernized term, even when the former hadfallen into disuse long before the time the Cambridge manuscript was redacted.This paper does not merely list such contradictory or unsuccessful amendments.Instead, it shows that a common methodological problem is present in all theproblematic corrections: van Emden was not entirely aware of the stage of textualevolution that he aimed to reinstate. By contrast, the author of the present paperbegan elaborating the methodology for his new edition of the Cambridge manu-script with precisely this question.
