Studia Islandica - 01.06.1956, Qupperneq 61

59
Other phrases containing a form of the verb segja,
like: Þat segja menn, sumir segja, þat er nú at segja, er
fyrr var frá sagt occur 21 times.
In ch. 26 svá (þat) er sagt occurs twice. In the com-
mentary on the weapon Fluga the verb segja is used
four times: segja menn, sumir segja, en sumir segja,
sem hér er sagt.
The wording of this commentary is strikingly similar
to the one in ch. 22, especially in its last phrase.
V. Gl. is extremely averse to the use of such a phrase.
In ch. 16 it does not occur, neither in V nor M. The
only addition of this type in V is: en nú er frá Skútu
at segja.
The þáttr in ch. 26 of R. has been adapted in style,
however slightly, to the rest of the saga.
What is the value of these formulae?
It seems as if the author of R. cannot do, without
them. Being an antiquarian he wants to make the im-
pression of having listened to or read every possible
form of tradition. The frequent use of such formulae may
be one way of justifying himself as a reliable historian.
In some instances at least we have to take his words
seriously, especially where he comments on different
versions of an episode.
To a certain degree however the formulae are stereo-
typed and a mannerism. Even frá segja, which occurs 4
times in the saga, always in the phrase sem (er) áðr
(nú) var frá sagt, should not necessarily be taken as a
reference to oral tradition. Neither should frásggn, in
the story about Þorlaug in ch. 25,1 or at the end of the
saga in ch. 30: hgfum vér nú hér lok þessarrar frásagnar.
1) Cf. Lotspeich’s opinion about fráSQgn, section 5.2.