Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana - 01.12.1957, Blaðsíða 308

306
The statement in K (Ib. p. 56) that Ofeigr took his kinsmen with him
from SkqrS to the hili of the law has no sequel in the rest of the story,
and is inconsistent with the normal pattern for Ofeigr’s exploits, which
otherwise is always to the effect that he overcame all opposition alone and
unaided (Cf. pp. 87-88).
In addition, the K-text has a number of obvious mistakes in places where
the M-text is correct. Examples:
Ib. p. 629 cedikolls K (for hcerulangs M, ib. p. 613~14). (Cf. pp.
26-27).
Ib. p. 1316 19. A wrong pedigree (p. 32).
Ib. p. 50. The information about the sons and daughters of I>orgils
Arason is inconsistent with what we know from other and better sources
(p. 80).
Ib. p. 63 f. Text K has the number ‘30’ in several places instead of ‘13’.
(Cf. ib. p. 63, K note 1).
Ib. p. 7020 norSr K (for vestr M, ib. 702). (Cf. p. 101).
Ib. p. 73. K States erroneously that the case against Ospakr was reift on
a farm in North Iceland. reifing could only take place at a Thing, and
Ospakr was convicted at the Al thing. (Cf. p. 106).
The chief argument of those who have maintained that type K is the
more original, has been that a number of specific descriptions of Ofeigr
in text M must to a smaller or greater extent be interpolations. The pas-
sages referred to are more particularly: Ib. p. 2914—303, 4012-19, 495-9,
568-i°j 5811-14. n0 one has ever given exact grounds for the assertion
that these passages in the text are interpolations. They have merely been
described in general terms as being “in post-classical style”. What is appar-
ently meant is the marked use of stylistic parallelism, antithetical construc-
tions and alliteration in the said passages. On doser study of the text,
however, one sees that the passages cannot have been inserted haphazardly
or independently of each other, inasmuch as they serve conjointly to indi-
cate a definite development in the interaction of Ofeigr’s mentality and out-
ward appearance: a consistently delineated crescendo that is one of the
characteristic traits in the artistic quality of this saga. Further on in the
paper it is shown that the Bandamanna Saga diverges in a number of ways
from the traditional type of the Icelanders’ sagas; and also that the styl-
istic peculiarities in question are much more widely distributed in the saga,
appearing in both of its forms. Thus the stylistic argument for considering
the passages interpolated cannot be sustained. It is important that items
of this characterization are to be found in K as well (ib. pp. 2930-3021,
5832-33). This is direct evidence that the above-mentioned way of depict-
ing Ofeigr’s aspect is an original feature of the saga.
In several cases one can see how text K begins to diverge from type M,
but is then approximated to M’s form by an addition. Examples:
At the beginning of the saga (Ib. p. 5) Oddr’s good fortune at sea is
illustrated by emphasizing that he always made land relatively near his