Gripla - 20.12.2010, Blaðsíða 25

25THE FORGOTTEN POEM
manuscript, Holm perg. 5 fol., which Stefán Karlsson has dated as late as
1350 –1365,19 and it contains a text that is abbreviated, both in the vita sec-
tion and in the miracles, as well as one serious factual error.20 Most impor-
tantly, the original version of the saga, which the redactor of the B-version
refers to in his prologue, is not the text of Holm perg. 5 fol., because
AM 382 4to cites this text verbatim, in chapter 36: “ok vil ek geta nökkurra
orða, segir sá er söguna setti, þeira er hann [Gizurr Hallsson] talaði ok mér
ganga sízt ór minni” [I would like to mention a few words, says he who
made the saga, which were spoken by him (Gizurr Hallsson) and I will
least forget].21 Holm perg. 5 fol. has nothing that corresponds to these
words. Since the vernacular saga is a translation or adaptation of the Latin
vita it cannot be dated by historical references, unless these are shown to
be added by the original translator or later scribes, who copied or made
their own versions of the original. There might be one such reference in
chapter 11 (in ABC and D versions), where King Sverrir of Norway is
spoken of in the preterit,22 who according to his saga by Abbot Karl
Jónsson died on March 9, 1202.23
All the vernacular versions originate from a single adaptation or transla-
tion of the Latin vita, since the texts of the whole tradition are similar
enough to be printed synthetically with variant readings in the apparatus.24
The so-called ‘A-redaction’ is no more than a late and rather inferior copy
of that original translation, probably at a few removes from the original.
Because of AM 645 4to, we know that the earliest vernacular version is at
least as old as 1220. Because of the reference to King Sverrir in the preterit,
we may be able to place it later than 1202. It is possible that we can deter-
mine with even more accuracy the origin of the first vernacular vita. It has
been suggested that the first saga was produced in Skálholt soon after the
19 Stefán Karlsson, ed., Sagas of Icelandic Bishops. Fragments of Eight Manuscripts (Copenhagen:
Rosenkilde and Bagger, 1967), 46.
20 In chapter 19, Bishop Páll is said to have been a priest, when Bishop Þorlákr died, while
in LatIV, he is rightly said to have been a diaconus at the time. – Ásdís Egilsdóttir, Biskupa
sögur II, XLVII.
21 Ásdís Egilsdóttir, Biskupa sögur II, 190.
22 “Ok hafði Sverrir konungr þat opt uppi, er bæði var merkr í máli og spakr at mannviti” [And
King Sverrir often mentioned this, and he was both notable in speech and wise in human
wisdom]. – Ásdís Egilsdóttir, Biskupa sögur II, 65; cf. 156,
23 Þorleifur Hauksson, ed., Sverris saga (Reykjavík: Hið íslenzka fornritafélag, 2007), 280.
24 As is done by Jón Helgason, Byskupa s†gur, 177 et seq.