Studia Islandica - 01.06.1956, Page 63

61
he should visit the well-known Viga-Glúmr, and not an-
other Glúmr.
Yet, any hearer or reader of the saga could not well
make such a mistake, or even think of the chance that
the einhleypingr might make it. Glúmr is the hero, no
namesake of his occurs in the saga, as it does in R.
The use of the prefix in connection with Glúmr is strong
evidence for it having been taken over from the þáttr.
The þáttr then should also have covered the same
ground as ch. 16 of V. Gl. ,In ch. 26 of R. both heroes
are denoted by their simple names throughout, just like
in the preceding chapters, except in ch. 23.
It has been argued by Lotspeich that the prefix of
V. Gl. ch. 16 in both instances was taken over from R.
ch. 23. Ch. 23-26 of R. would have to be taken as one,
a longer þáttr, condensed in V. Gl. into one chapter.
Such an assumption can be proved to be untenable
(cf. sections 2 and 5.2).
Should a long þáttr have been the model for ch. 23-26
of R., a residue of its stylistic features, so prominent in
ch. 26, would inevitably reappear in ch. 23-25 as well.
The common source for R. and V. Gl. in the cor-
responding chapters 26 and 16 was a short þáttr.
That this þáttr began where R. ch. 26 begins, and
that the introduction of M ch. 16 is a later addition by
the author of V. Gl., will be shown in the next para-
graph.
In R. the prefix Víga- is applied to Skúta in ch. 1
of part I, the Vémundar saxja kggurs; the hero Áskell
is mentioned as one of Eyvind’s sons: ÁsTcetl goði, er bjó
í Hvammi, faðir Víga-Skútu ok Þorsteins.
In ch. 17, the first chapter of part II, Saga Víga-
Skútu sonar Áskels, Skúta is mentioned in the second