Studia Islandica - 01.06.1956, Qupperneq 68

66
went to this trouble as regards Fluga. When he men-
tions it in other chapters, he takes it for granted that
the weapon was an axe. In ch. 20 Skúta strikes a deadly
blow at Þórir með gocinni Flugu. In the strife between
Skúta and Óláfr in ch. 22 we are told that Skúta was
without a weapon, því at Fluga stóð við vegg.
V. Gl., in both M and V, but especially in M, gives the
straight-forward tale. Should it be supposed that the R.
text as we have it is not the original version as it came
from the pen of its author, the critical digressions might
be ascribed to a subsequent revisor. This however is a
moot question without any bearing on our research.
19.1. We are now in a position finally to test the schemes
drawn up in section 5, and to eliminate those that are
impossible or highly improbable.
Against the supposition of either V or R. being the
most original version, implied in schemes 1-6, militate
the following:
1. the pithy style, characteristic of both þættir, com-
bined in X, is less marked in V and R. than it is in
M. This is evident from:
a. the average length of periods and phrases in
the whole chapter (section 11 and statistics in
Part I).
b. the use of the tenses (section 10).
2. in both V and R. we discern the hand of two
authors,
a. as regards length of periods and phrases,
b. as regards the use of the tenses.
It is the difference in both respects of the extra
passages in V and R. as compared with the rest of
the chapter, which is responsible for the higher
average length of periods and phrases as well as
for the difference in the use of the tenses.