The Icelandic Canadian - 01.06.1967, Side 102

100
THE ICELANDIC CANADIAN
Summer 1967
found in Egils Saga and decided that
It'his description is substantially correct
—accurate in nine particulars and no-
where wrong. Some of these particulars
are of such a nature 'that coincidence
cannot ibe ascribed, as where the saga
mentions cities to both north and south
of the heath, these being fortresses
from the days of the Romans in Eng-
land. (Footnote:—The Scottish Histor-
ical Review Vol. VII. The Saga of Egil
was not reduced to writing until 250
years after the battle.)
In certain parallel instances the ac-
counts in Icelandic Sagas may be com-
pared with those of foreign historians.
The story of the battle at Vinheidi is
remarkably in accord with Anglo-
Saxon authorities, although inaccur-
acies may be found, and Egils Saga
places the date as the year 925. —In
the King Alfred the Great's trans-
lation of the works of Orosius,
Historia Adversus Paganos, may be
found an appraisal of Norway in the
ninth century, Which may be compared
with the first section of Egils Saga. In
the main the two are in harmony; one
the work of a Norman in England
prior to 900, Ithe other written in Ice-
land 300 years later. In Njals Saga a
lengthy interpolation describes the bat-
tle of Glontarf in 1014, which cor-
roborates Erse accounts of this battle
in main particulars. Knytlinga Saga
tells of incidents which are likewise
found in the Danish History of Saxo
Grammaticus. These are in parts at
wide variance, Where Saxo is patently
the more reliable historian; in others
they are in agreement, with similar
words and phrasing, the one in Latin,
the other in Icelandic.
When it can be shown that descrip-
tions of foreign places and tales of in-
cidents which transpired in far lands,
where no local associations could aid
the memory, were preserved in oral
form for two or three centuries and
emerged approximately unaltered, the
assumption is strengthened that ac-
counts in the better Icelandic Sagas
and Sagas of the Norse Kings of
incidents of antiquity are subtantial-
ly correct.
▲ ▲ A
Some of the Sagas are unreliable
as Histories
It has been shown above, and in-
stances cited, how accounts were pre-
served in oral form without modifica-
tion for two or three centuries, until
reduced to writing. Conversly it may
be shown that some other accounts
were unreliable in whole or in part.
Some of the sagas are, in 'this respect, a
mixture of truth and fiction. A few are
doubtless reliable in all main particu-
lars. The younger sagas are in every
respect less reliable. When the trad-
itional tales came to be written the
originals had characteristics of changed
times, and scribes were more free with
interpolations. In like manner some
of the older sagas suffered at the hands
of transcribers. Some of the verses are
thus not of the tenth 'but of the thir-
teenth century. When the latest of the
sagas came to be written, the art of
saga-writing had reached the stage of
decadence and sagas were bodied forth
without a tittle of tradition at their
base.
AAA
The Sagas as Literary Works of Art
Although the sagas are not common-
ly regarded as authentic historical
records, all are in agreement upon