Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana - 01.06.1999, Síða 158
138
Part One
Bugge to have been Norwegian, and also Giipisspå, the “Shorter VqIu-
spå”, Alvis smal, Hyndluljod and Svipdagsmål.
It is interesting to note that Heusler was more hesitant about the age
of Vafprudnismål and Gnmnismdl. In the main he agreed with Jessen,
who had underlined their leamed character; they were more like a cate-
chism than an expression of living heathendom. As such they might be
assigned to the 12th century - the first half, Heusler added, without re-
vealing his reasons for preferring the first to the second half. It is hard to
explain, however, in what manner such a large amount of mythological
knowledge could survive four generations of Christianity, unless
sources of the same kind were postulated, but this would only mean a
duplication of the poems in question. Sijmons thought that their didactic
spirit might indicate a late heathen period, still untouched by the con-
frontation with Christianity. According to Heusler, the matter-of-fact
spirit of these poems was also possible in Iceland about 1030-1050,
however. At this period the old mythological knowledge had not yet
withered away: the very preservation of the old mythological poetry tes-
tifies to an enduring interest in old lore. Heusler does not adduce tan-
gible arguments against a dating to an earlier heathen period. Religious
faith is not to be found in these poems, he maintained; and there is no
parallel to be found in the period of Egill or Kormåkr to the spirit of
these learned collectors. He admitted, however, that there is a problem
in so far as it is equally difficult to point to parallels in the period
1030-1050.
In general, Heusler’s criticism is guided to a great extern by his high-
ly developed artistic sensibility, but I think it is fair to say that he had a
more solid grip on heroic narrative than on religious lore, where he
failed to find any point of personal attachment. VQluspå had been the
subject of Heusler’s first publication in 1887, but his treatment of this
poem, which according to his conviction was made by some cleric for
the sake of entertainment without any commitment to its mythological
content, is nevertheless curiously unimaginative. VQluspå is a fine piece
of art, but its religion is artificial, he maintained.54 As for the dating, he
suggested (1941: 190-91) a connection with the apocalyptic sentiments
54 “Auch in der Voluspa haben wir ‘Kunstreligion’, so gut als in den Gottemovellen [...]
Es ist ein Unterhaltungswerk mit dem Riickgrat geschichtlicher Belehrung. Da ein
Dichter dahintersteht, wurde es mehr als ein frostiges Schulstuck” (Heusler 1941: 190;
cf. Heusler’s letter to Wilhelm Ranisch, 25.7.1911: “Als ich in den letzten Wochen die