Gripla - 01.01.1979, Qupperneq 205

OLD NORSE COURT POETRY
201
tradition. Lord (1974:28-29) mentions that Jugoslav singers stress that
they can sing a song exactly as they heard it. Upon examination this did
not turn out to be the case, and it was apparent that their notion of
what was the same song was rather a question of subject matter than
of a word to word correspondence, as would be the case in a literate
society or among philologists. Vansina (1973:56) deals with the same
problem in Africa:
It does, however, sometimes happen that a tradition which an
informant declares to be cast in a fixed form is found to have
variants when other versions are recorded. But the intention is
that it should have a fixed form, and the predominating tendency
is to keep to the fixed form.
Shoolbraid (1975:4-5), in discussing epic tradition in Siberia and
in Central Asia, has this to say about the veracity of texts handed down
orally:
The primitive (i.e., the unsophisticated preliterate) does not relish
change and is likely to resist it strenuously. He is by nature con-
servative, traditionally oriented. Yet change does occur in his
society; despite the forces of opposition, a gradual shift of values
and evolution in material culture and language can be observed.
The very gradual nature of this shift will, often enough, prevent
the primitive from noticing it. “This is my grandfather’s axe; my
father gave it a new haft, and I have given it a new head” is a
reflection of his stubborn traditionalism in the face of all civilized
logic; the eternal changelessness of things will be dogmatically
insisted upon, no matter how evident is the contrary.
The “primitive” may rationalize these obvious changes in his
society, ignoring them and denying their existence. The bard of
this society can hardly be blamed for insisting, as he does, that
there have been no changes in his recitation, that all is as it has
ever been. He is not guilty of bad faith, for without written records
he has no opportunity of “correcting” his version according to the
“received text”.
So while deliberate change is anathema to the reciter, uncon-
cious modification can and will occur in his tale, although most
likely it will be denied by its perpetrator. After centuries of this