Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana - 01.06.1996, Blaðsíða 143
133
these debates on Mary’s chastity at her birth, which were still going on
during his lifetime. In sharp distinction to the Church Fathers known to
him, who did not think it worth speculating about the relationship
between Anna and Joachim - not mentioned in the canonical gospels
and more suited to religious literature of the popular kind - the Old
Norse writer found it important to take into account their human expe-
rience and incorporate it in his - quite original - interpretation of the
Immaculate Conception.
The second example considered in the present paper concerns the
interpretation of the first verse in the Magnificat in chapter 11 of both
versions of the saga. As we know from the first chapter in Luke’s gos-
pel, Elisabeth rejoices at the unexpected visit of her cousin and address-
es her with the words: “Heil ok sæl, eilif mær Maria! fvll af helgvm
anda” (Hail, eternal Virgin Mary! full of Holy Spirit),12 thus using the
same words as Gabriel. As an answer to this greeting Mary utters her
hymn of thanks to the Lord: “Miklar avnd min drottinn” Magnificat an-
ima mea dominum. According to the writer, many Icelanders found it
difficult to understand the correct meaning of the verse and tended to
invert its structure, taking the subject as object and vice versa.13 The
verse would then read: “Miklar drottinn avnd mina” Magnificat domi-
nus animam meam (the Lord doth magnify my soul). Such a rendering
of the Latin text is completely wrong and unjustified, says the Old
Norse author, though it apparently suits our human logic better. In faet,
those people who choose to translate in this way cannot understand how
it is possible for Mary’s soul to magnify the Lord, who by nature can be
neither inereased nor decreased. This sensible objection is solved in
Mariu saga through an allegory originally found in Hugh of St. Victor.
In the meditation entitled De B. Mariae semper virginis praeconiis
(.Miscellanea, book 5 chap. 44),14 he compares the ivory throne of Solo-
mon with the purity of Mary’s womb where Christ lies. This same alle-
gory, though somewhat expanded in its meaning, is applied in Mariu
saga to the first verse of the Magnificat. Just as Solomon, who while
sitting in his ivory throne rose above his subjects without inereasing or
12 Unger, op. cit., p. 36112'13 (2123'24).
13 This brief remark about the tendency of many Icelanders to simplify the reading of
Luke’s gospel is missing in the first version of Mariu saga, which at this point of the nar-
rative is otherwise very similar to the text of the second version.
14 Migne, Patrologia Latina CLXXVII, 770.