Gripla - 20.12.2005, Blaðsíða 31

STYLISTICS AND SOURCES OF THE POSTOLA SÖGUR 29
text with more thematic unity (and even more drama) than it originally pos-
sessed. The saga of James the Greater adds to the AM 645 account of the
apostle’s passio introductory and concluding material derived from the
Speculum Ecclesiae of Honorius of Autun, while John’s saga is a compilation
of material derived from Pseudo-Abdias, Pseudo-Melito, the Gospels, and
Eusebius (along with some original material). The sagas of Andrew and John
display at various times the thematic unity of the Group A sagas as well as the
focus on the saint’s sublimity characteristic of the Group B sagas, and both
sagas include extended accounts of the saints’ martyrdoms (or in the case of
John, his assumption), which is uncharacteristic of the Pseudo-Abdian
accounts.39 Philip’s saga is an outstanding condensed version of a typical
Pseudo-Abdian romance, yet it too incorporates material from other sources,
whereas the saga of James the Less in its Pseudo-Abdian form is in fact de-
rived from Hegesippus as quoted by Eusebius; both of these sagas deviate as
39 The saga of the apostle John is distinguished from the others in Group A and Group B by its
adherence to an excessively rhetorical style, most prominently seen in the consistent use of
the demonstrative and hyperdemonstrative: „Dominicus keisari var sa hinn ovinsælasti,“
Post.:417.18; „[...]. hans hit haleitasta nafn,“ Post.:417.31; „[...] hans hit helgasta briost,“
Post.:413.31-32; „[...] fletta hit fyrsta sinn,“ Post.:414.29-30, etc.; superlatives: óvinsælasti,
háleitasta, helgasta (from the previous examples); „[...] hinni hæstu dyr›,“ Post.:417.39-40,
etc.; pronounced use of adjectival and adverbial constructions: „[...] me› grimmum var›-
holldum,“ Post.:417.35; „[...] me› oumrø›iligu litillæti,“ Post.:429.31; „[...] akafa haleitr,“
Post.: 420.32; „[...] ri›r sysliga,“ Post.:429.12, etc., and an excessive predilection for the
sublimity of the subject: „[...] flat hit haleita embætti,“ Post.:417.8; „[...] flessi hans haleiti
astvinr,“ Post.: 414.9-10; „[...] flessa hina haleitu gu›s postola,“ Post.:416.29-30; „[...]
haleitari dyr›,“ Post.: 414.16. The saga also displays more Latinate constructions than are
normally found in the Icelandic translations of Pseudo-Abdian material; for instance, at
Post.:426.18-20 (Stacteus’ description of the afterlife), the Icelandic reproduces the anaphora
of the Latin: „[...] en fengit ykkr fla sta›i i moti, er fullir eru af myrkrum, fullir af drekum ok
gnistondum logum, fullir af kvπlum ok ollum oumrø›iligum piningum, fullir af otta, fullir af
πskurligri ogn“; cp. „[...] et acquisiuistis vobis loca tenebrarum, plena draconibus, plena
stridentibus flammis, plena cruciatibus, et incomparabilibus poenis, plena doloribus, plena
angustiis, plena timore et tremore horrifico“ (Faber:65r26-65v1).
The sagas of the apostles Andrew and Matthias (Group C) display some of these heightened
rhetorical characteristics, although the rhetorical tone in the latter two is not sustained to quite
the same degree as in John’s saga. The sagas of John and Andrew share combinations of
edificatory and aretalogical moods, while the sagas of John and Matthias display an interest
in allegorical exegesis (although to a lesser degree in the former). The qualities shared by all
three sagas (especially by the sagas of John and Andrew) are enough to suggest that these
sagas may have been composed by the same translator, or at least that they were composed at
the same time and that their translators were perhaps of the same school.