Studia Islandica - 01.06.1956, Blaðsíða 73

71
hand of the authors of V and R. can be seen in the
digressions.
As told in M, the clash between Glúmr and Skúta is
not accounted for in a very satisfactory way. The story
of what happened, as briefly stated in M, is criticized in
R. and replaced by a better one. The introduction of
the þáttr, as found in M, was probably taken over from
X or from oral tradition.
The þáttr was incorporated in V. Gl. as a fascinating
episode in Glúm’s life, although one can hardly find he
gets the better of it in his clash with Skúta. Yet, there is
enough of Glúm’s well-known astuteness for the reader
to admire the hero of the saga. It’s just this clevemess
and superior intellect which are Glúm’s outstanding
qualities throughout.
This episode was told for its own sake and judged on
its own merits, its hero being introduced as Víga-Glúmr.
Just like in the case of other short tales or episodes, in
prose or poetry, the hearer is supposed to know about
the hero, in order to be interested from the outset and
to appreciate the narrative. In this the Skútu-þáttr is
just as interesting and illuminating as for instance the
Finnsburg episode in Beowulf. In Iceland circumstances
were especially favourable for a story-teller who had
such episodes in his repertory, his audience being well-
acquainted with their famous co-patriots and ever dis-
playing the liveliest interest in their adventures.
21. Glúma ch. XXVII.
Its story has been the subject of much learned dis-
cussion, as Turville-Petre puts it (Introd. XXIX). He
remarks that ’the last two chapters are not, in fact, out
of keeping with the saga in the same way as the other
interpolations are. Indeed they give the impression of
having been added by the author himself, after the bio-
graphy was in other respects complete’.