Gripla - 20.12.2010, Síða 33

33
Considering the fact that only a few original Latin texts are preserved
in Icelandic manuscripts, it is curious that the poem has not received more
attention. While there was a definite interest in Latin texts from Iceland in
the 18th century, indicated for example by Langebek’s and Suhm’s publica-
tion, this Latin scholarship had apparently fallen in disuse by the end of
the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. A likely explanation is that
the Icelandic Romantic and Independence movements focused largely on
Old Norse-Icelandic texts as the country’s most important cultural
heritage,61 while Latin scholarship took a back seat.62 Strangely enough,
despite the fact that Jón Þorkelsson and Paul Lehmann were both trying to
raise awareness for Icelandic-Latin texts, neither seems to have been aware
of Langebek’s and Suhm’s earlier edition of the poem, while attempting to
decipher the almost illegible manuscript, without the aid of modern photo-
graphic lighting techniques.63 And apparently, only Einar Ól. Sveinsson,
Róbert Abraham Ottósson, and Margaret Cormack have shown interest in
the poem since 1937. This is all the more remarkable, because it is evident
that this Latin panegyric to St Þorlákr is attached to the B-version of
Þorláks saga helga for a reason, to serve as the first poetic invocation in
Latin, St Þorlákr’s institutional tongue, with a plea to the saint to grant the
poet and editor the presence of mind to be able to praise the saint’s deeds,
which, as he claims, are worthy of being written in the vernacular, a rude
language without the backing of schools and clerical learning, because the
ensuing Old Norse-Icelandic saga contains a complete account of St
Þorlákr’s innumerable miraculous workings. Accordingly, the poem should
have been included in the discussion and edition of this version of the saga,
whose virtually only textual witness is AM 382 4to. In the following sec-
tions we print a brief codicological description of AM 382 4to, followed by
our edition of the poem. In the subsequent sections we analyze the poem.
61 Stefán Einarsson, A History of Icelandic Literature (New York: The Johns Hopkins Press
for The American-Scandinavian Foundation, 1957), 220–223.
62 However, the fact that Jón Sigurðsson produced a transcription of the Latin poem, suggests
that while publications focused on the vernacular, the Latin texts were not completely
forgotten in the 19th century.
63 The best images of the page are the black and white photographs taken by Arne Mann
Nielsen at the Arnamagnæan Collection in 1965, two years before the hole in the leaf was
repaired in Copenhagen. See figure on page 35.
THE FORGOTTEN POEM