Gripla - 20.12.2005, Side 24

GRIPLA22
lowing Astaroth’s admission, the people turn against him, thus displaying the
curative power of Christ’s apostles (a theme that is reemphasized by Bar-
tholomew in his second sermon), yet they are unable to remove the demon’s
idol by force and must rely upon the apostle’s power to expel the demon from
their presence, thus representing the ultimate redemptive power of Christ,
through whom Bartholomew possesses his power, and of the necessity of the
presence of Christ as mankind’s deliverer (*Post.:749.29-750.20). The lesson
concerning the dire nature of false appearances and the worship of ‘things’
rather than their creator is emphasized when Astaroth’s thoroughly false
nature is ultimately exposed (Post.:760.35-761.20); that is, when his true form
is made manifest to the worshippers through the agency of an angel of God
(employed no doubt to emphasize one of the saint’s ‘miraculous’ qualities
given in the previous extended description of him, that angels serve him). The
true nature of the monstrous demon, who had previously falsely ‘shone’ in a
gold and silver shrine, is contrasted with the true appearance and power of the
apostle, who when he was described previously was nowhere to be found and
was little more than a ‘rumor’ come to do harm to the people of Farthest India.
The saga’s major juxtapositions, of Christ’s truth with Satan’s wiles, of
Bartholomew’s healing power with Astaroth’s injurious tricks, are reechoed
and reemphasized by certain minor dualistic juxtapositions or parallels em-
bodied in the narrative, such as the transformation, following the expulsion of
Astaroth, of the heathen temple into a Christian temple through the power of
the word of Christ, or the marking by the angel of the sign of the cross on the
cornerstones of the temple with his fingertip, in order to purify it, followed by
his urging of the people to make the same sign with their fingers upon their
foreheads, to signify their conversion and cleansing/healing (Post.:*749.25-
28; 760.35-761.5).30 This echoing of major and minor dualistic elements is
continued in the passio section of the saga, when both the despotic King
30 Here the Icelandic translator actually makes a distinction not present in the Latin, using hof
for the pre-sanctified pagan temple and musteri for its newly Christianized counterpart, as if
to reflect the conversion in word as well as deed; the Latin uses templum for both. Cp. Latin:
„Sed si uultis ut orem pro uobis et omnes hi sanitatem recipiant, deponite idolum hoc et
confringite, et cum hoc feceritis templum hoc Christi nomini dedicabo et uos omnes in isto
templo Christi baptismate consecrabo“ (A A A II,1:143.5-9), and Icel.: „En ef fler vilit, at ek
bi›ia fyrir y›r, ok flessir allir taki heilsu, er siukir eru, fla leggi fler ni›r skur›go› fletta ok
brioti›, en ek mun helga hofit i Kristz nafni ok skira y›r Kristz skirn i flessu musteri“ [my
italics] (*Post.:749.25-28).