Studia Islandica - 01.06.1956, Blaðsíða 28

26
Ch. 13-16 together stand in opposition to the rest
of the saga.
In R. however this preference is limited to ch. 26
only; in ch. 23-25 the present tense occurs 173
times, the preterite 247 times.
d. The abundance of direct speech is a feature of ch.
13-16 in V.Gl., but not only of these chapters; in R.
it is limited to ch. 26. Especially in ch. 23-25, the
contents of which is partly to be found in V.Gl., the
author had plenty of opportunity for direct speech.
Instead he uses indirect speech, not less than 17
times in ch. 23 alone.
2.2. On the basis of these observations I think it is safe
to assume for ch. 13-16 of V.Gl. one source X.
Ch. 13-15 are devoted to a story complete in itself; it
is the Kálfr episode, and it too has little to do with the
main theme of the saga. It has been shown to be an
interpolation as well as ch. 16!
The two þættir, the Skúta and the Kcilfr episodes,
most probably have been told as individual units. At one
time or other a writer combined them, and that writer
was not the author of V.Gl., neither the one who wrote
down R.
We feel safe in making such a positive statement, be-
cause all features which both þættir have in common
evidently are symptomatic of one person’s style. It
would be too hazardous to assume that both þættir, in
their individual original oral form, would have been so
strikingly similar. Of course: one story-teller might have
recited both þættir in his own speech-form. The writer,
then, would have written them down just as he heard
them. Our conclusion would be the same.
The whole of X was incorporated in V. Gl.; R., having
1) Cf. Turville-Petre, Introd. p. xxxii—xxxviii.