Studia Islandica - 01.06.1989, Page 241

239
Bare i ytterste n0d kaster han et blikk ned i gapet, nevner en ubestemt
„trondersk overlevering“ og „oplandske sagn“. Men gapet omslutter
ham pá alle kanter, det er begynnelsen og slutten, og vi blir mere og me-
re nyssgjerrige efter á fá vite hvordan det egentlig ser ut der nede.“
12. Vgl. z.B. L. Lönnroths kritische Stellungnahme (Scandinavian Studies
39, S.379) zu S. Ellehpjs Dissertation: „One of the reasons why I feel a
little hesitant is perhaps that the book is so rigidly confined to placing the
texts in a network of direct copying from one author to the next. Isn’t it
possible, after all, that oral transmission can explain some of the paral-
lels that he regards as a sign of copying? Isn’t it also natural to suppose
that many links in the chain are now hopelessly lost and can never be re-
constructed? Maybe it is even safer to discuss trends, traditions, and de-
velopments in general terms without trying to tie the discussion to one
specific theory about the genealogy of sources and influences? In any ca-
se, it is certainly less laborious.“
13. Vgl. z.B. auch Bjarni Aðalbjarnarson: Om de ..., S. 54. S. Ellehoj: Stu-
dier ... , S. 145-174, 266-276. Bjarni Einarsson: íslenzk fornrit.XXIX,
S. XI-XIII.
14. A. Holtsmark: „Om de norske kongers sagaer", S. 160-161. Zum Pro-
blem der Wechselbeziehungen zwischen Mundlichkeit und Schriftlich-
keit und zum Phánomen der Fluktuation uberhaupt siehe z.B. auch D.
Hofmann: „Vers und Prosa in der múndlich gepflegten mittelalterlichen
Erzáhlkunst ...“,S. 135-175. „ZurLebensformmúndlicherErzáhldich-
tung des Mittelalters S. 191-215.
15. Siehe Kapitel I úber Historia Norvegiœ, Anmerkung 82.