This article explores the connection between the four legendary sagas collectively known as the Hrafnistumannasögur. Through analysis of their entire manuscript transmission it is investigated how the saga group is transmitted historically, and it is argued that the 15th century manuscript AM 343 a 4to has had a significant impact on the reception of the sagas as a group. An analysis of literary elements and parallels between the sagas reveals substantial differences in genre, themes, and literary style, which appears to contradict the idea that the group was originally connected. The article argues that the Hrafnistumannasögur cannot without hesitation be treated as a group, and it is proposed that the sagas have been grouped together in some manuscripts not due to inherent thematic parallels but because of historical and cultural circumstances that favored the genealogical ties between saga heroes. It is argued that the connection, however fragmentary and instable, was formed initially between Ketils saga hængs and Gríms saga loðinkinna, after which these sagas were grouped with Örvar-Odds saga. Finally, Áns saga bogsveigis was added to the group, and it is hypothesized, that this last connection presumably happened around the time of the writing of the important manuscript AM 343 a 4to (ca. 1450–75).
这篇文章探讨了被统称为Hrafnistumannasögur的四个传奇故事之间的联系。通过对他们整个手稿传播的分析，研究了传奇群体是如何在历史上传播的，并认为15世纪的手稿AM 343 a 4to对传奇作为一个群体的接受产生了重大影响。对这些传奇的文学元素和相似之处的分析揭示了它们在体裁、主题和文学风格上的巨大差异，这似乎与它们最初是有联系的观点相矛盾。本文认为Hrafnistumannasögur不能被毫不犹豫地视为一个群体，并提出在一些手稿中，这些传奇被归类在一起不是因为内在的主题相似，而是因为历史和文化环境有利于英雄之间的宗谱联系。有人认为，这种联系最初是在Ketils saga hængs和Gríms saga lo - inkinna之间形成的，尽管这种联系是不完整和不稳定的，之后这些传奇被归为Örvar-Odds saga。最后，Áns saga bogsveigis被添加到该组中，据推测，这最后的联系可能发生在重要手稿AM 343 a 4to(约1450 - 1475)写作的时候。
{"title":"En fædrene forbindelse?: Om sammenhængen mellem de fire Hrafnistumannasögur","authors":"Pernille Ellyton","doi":"10.33112/gripla.32.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.33112/gripla.32.4","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores the connection between the four legendary sagas collectively known as the Hrafnistumannasögur. Through analysis of their entire manuscript transmission it is investigated how the saga group is transmitted historically, and it is argued that the 15th century manuscript AM 343 a 4to has had a significant impact on the reception of the sagas as a group. An analysis of literary elements and parallels between the sagas reveals substantial differences in genre, themes, and literary style, which appears to contradict the idea that the group was originally connected. The article argues that the Hrafnistumannasögur cannot without hesitation be treated as a group, and it is proposed that the sagas have been grouped together in some manuscripts not due to inherent thematic parallels but because of historical and cultural circumstances that favored the genealogical ties between saga heroes. It is argued that the connection, however fragmentary and instable, was formed initially between Ketils saga hængs and Gríms saga loðinkinna, after which these sagas were grouped with Örvar-Odds saga. Finally, Áns saga bogsveigis was added to the group, and it is hypothesized, that this last connection presumably happened around the time of the writing of the important manuscript AM 343 a 4to (ca. 1450–75).","PeriodicalId":40705,"journal":{"name":"Gripla","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69502375","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In 1787, Grímur Thorkelin, the secretary of the Arnamagnæan Commission, gave the manuscript collector Thomas Astle two paper manuscripts and a parchment bifolium. After Astle’s death, these manuscripts found their way into the Stowe collection and are now kept in the British Library. The paper manuscripts contain transcriptions of texts found in a manuscript in the Arnamagnæan collection and were probably written by Thorkelin himself. The bifolium was, however, written in the fourteenth century. It contains a compilation of short stories about English bishops, mostly archbishops of Canterbury, preceded by a short prologue. For the compilation, the compiler has gathered and adapted material from sources that were already available in Old Norse-Icelandic translations, including Árni Lárentíusson’s Dunstanus saga. However, not all the texts in the compilation are known to exist elsewhere in Icelandic translation. An examination shows that the bifolium was written by the same scribe who wrote parts of Reynistaðarbók in AM 764 4to, and a closer look reveals that the bifolium was once a part of that same manuscript. The last narrative on the bifolium tells the life of St Cuthbert, but its conclusion is now at the top of f. 36r in AM 764 4to. Furthermore, catalogues of the Arnamagnæan collection compiled in the first third of the seventeenth century show that tales about archbishops of Canterbury were included in AM 764 4to, but they are now missing. It thus appears that Thorkelin, who had easy access to Arnamagnæan manuscripts, removed the bifolium before journeying to England, causing its text to fall into oblivion for over two centuries. In the article, the history of the bifolium is discussed, and the script and orthography of its scribe examined and compared to that of scribe E in AM 764 4to. The sources of the compilation’s texts are traced, and the compiler’s methods are analysed. Finally, a diplomatic edition of the texts of the compilation that is now split between the Stowe bifolium and AM 764 4to is presented.
{"title":"Anecdotes of several archbishops of Canterbury: A lost bifolium from Reynistaðarbók – Discovered in The British Library","authors":"B. Ásgeirsson","doi":"10.33112/gripla.32.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.33112/gripla.32.1","url":null,"abstract":"In 1787, Grímur Thorkelin, the secretary of the Arnamagnæan Commission, gave the manuscript collector Thomas Astle two paper manuscripts and a parchment bifolium. After Astle’s death, these manuscripts found their way into the Stowe collection and are now kept in the British Library. The paper manuscripts contain transcriptions of texts found in a manuscript in the Arnamagnæan collection and were probably written by Thorkelin himself. The bifolium was, however, written in the fourteenth century. It contains a compilation of short stories about English bishops, mostly archbishops of Canterbury, preceded by a short prologue. For the compilation, the compiler has gathered and adapted material from sources that were already available in Old Norse-Icelandic translations, including Árni Lárentíusson’s Dunstanus saga. However, not all the texts in the compilation are known to exist elsewhere in Icelandic translation. An examination shows that the bifolium was written by the same scribe who wrote parts of Reynistaðarbók in AM 764 4to, and a closer look reveals that the bifolium was once a part of that same manuscript. The last narrative on the bifolium tells the life of St Cuthbert, but its conclusion is now at the top of f. 36r in AM 764 4to. Furthermore, catalogues of the Arnamagnæan collection compiled in the first third of the seventeenth century show that tales about archbishops of Canterbury were included in AM 764 4to, but they are now missing. It thus appears that Thorkelin, who had easy access to Arnamagnæan manuscripts, removed the bifolium before journeying to England, causing its text to fall into oblivion for over two centuries. In the article, the history of the bifolium is discussed, and the script and orthography of its scribe examined and compared to that of scribe E in AM 764 4to. The sources of the compilation’s texts are traced, and the compiler’s methods are analysed. Finally, a diplomatic edition of the texts of the compilation that is now split between the Stowe bifolium and AM 764 4to is presented.","PeriodicalId":40705,"journal":{"name":"Gripla","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69502737","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article argues that Belgsdalsbók (AM 347 fol.: Jónsbók and other texts) may have been the law book that was listed as “damaged” in the 1525 inventory of the property of Hólar bishopric. Three reasons suggest this conclusion. First, its earliest known owner was Steinunn Jónsdóttir, the daughter-in-law of the last Catholic bishop of Hólar. Second, its date and circumstances of production suggest that Bishop Jón Eiríksson skalli might have been its commissioner. Third, Belgsdalsbók contains unusual texts of interest to an ecclesiastical owner. In addition, the article suggests that another copy of Jónsbók, GKS 3269 a 4to, may also have belonged to Hólar bishopric.
文章认为Belgsdalsbók (AM 347)是错误的。(Jónsbók和其他文本)可能是在Hólar主教教区1525年财产清单中被列为“损坏”的法律书。有三个原因可以得出这个结论。首先，它最早的主人是Hólar最后一位天主教主教的儿媳斯坦农Jónsdóttir。其次，它的制作日期和环境表明主教Jón Eiríksson skalli可能是它的专员。第三，Belgsdalsbók包含了教会所有者感兴趣的不寻常的文本。此外，文章还指出，另一份Jónsbók, GKS 3269 a 4to，也可能属于Hólar主教辖区。
{"title":"Hólar and Belgsdalsbók","authors":"Anders Winroth","doi":"10.33112/gripla.32.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.33112/gripla.32.6","url":null,"abstract":"The article argues that Belgsdalsbók (AM 347 fol.: Jónsbók and other texts) may have been the law book that was listed as “damaged” in the 1525 inventory of the property of Hólar bishopric. Three reasons suggest this conclusion. First, its earliest known owner was Steinunn Jónsdóttir, the daughter-in-law of the last Catholic bishop of Hólar. Second, its date and circumstances of production suggest that Bishop Jón Eiríksson skalli might have been its commissioner. Third, Belgsdalsbók contains unusual texts of interest to an ecclesiastical owner. In addition, the article suggests that another copy of Jónsbók, GKS 3269 a 4to, may also have belonged to Hólar bishopric.","PeriodicalId":40705,"journal":{"name":"Gripla","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69502382","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Gísla saga súrssonar (thirteenth century) is famous for the tragic destiny of its main character, the Norwegian settler and outlaw Gísli Súrsson, a destiny that to some extent is predicted by the many dream stanzas Gísli utters in the saga. In one of these stanzas, Gísli refers to himself as Egða andspillir ‘confidant of the Egðir’, i.e. the people of the Norwegian region of Agder. This kenning has puzzled skaldic scholars and editors of Gísla saga, and no satisfactory explanation has so far been proposed. In the present article, this kenning is explained as a við(r)kenning, that is, a description in terms of a person’s attributes, which is based on factual knowledge about the person involved. I evaluate the stanza as authentic, and so implying that Gísli actually was the friend of people in Iceland in the tenth century who could be called Egðir. I show that these Egðir most likely were members of the family of Ingjaldr in Hergilsey, who according to the saga hid Gísli from his enemies for three years, and whom Gísli mentions in one of his other stanzas. Landnámabók tells us that Ingjaldr’s paternal grandfather came to Iceland from Agder together with the chieftain Geirmundr heljarskinn, and that Geirmundr and his men had to flee from Norway because of the new centralized rule of Haraldr hárfagri. The story about Haraldr’s ofríki (‘harsh rule’) is probably exaggerated in the Icelandic tradition, but there is support in the sources for the hypothesis that a retinue of men who lost against Haraldr in the battle of Hafrsfjord (ca. 900) left Agder for Iceland. The fact that Ingjaldr and his family could be considered Egðir two generations and more than sixty years after they had left Agder calls for an explanation. This article argues that the special background of these families in a lost kingdom of Agder may have contributed to strengthening their identity as a special group of people in the recently populated Iceland.
{"title":"Gísli Súrsson as Egða andspillir. An Obscure Kenning and its Implications for Tribal Identities in Tenth-Century Iceland","authors":"Klaus Johan Myrvoll","doi":"10.33112/gripla.31.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.33112/gripla.31.7","url":null,"abstract":"Gísla saga súrssonar (thirteenth century) is famous for the tragic destiny of its main character, the Norwegian settler and outlaw Gísli Súrsson, a destiny that to some extent is predicted by the many dream stanzas Gísli utters in the saga. In one of these stanzas, Gísli refers to himself as Egða andspillir ‘confidant of the Egðir’, i.e. the people of the Norwegian region of Agder. This kenning has puzzled skaldic scholars and editors of Gísla saga, and no satisfactory explanation has so far been proposed. In the present article, this kenning is explained as a við(r)kenning, that is, a description in terms of a person’s attributes, which is based on factual knowledge about the person involved. I evaluate the stanza as authentic, and so implying that Gísli actually was the friend of people in Iceland in the tenth century who could be called Egðir. I show that these Egðir most likely were members of the family of Ingjaldr in Hergilsey, who according to the saga hid Gísli from his enemies for three years, and whom Gísli mentions in one of his other stanzas. Landnámabók tells us that Ingjaldr’s paternal grandfather came to Iceland from Agder together with the chieftain Geirmundr heljarskinn, and that Geirmundr and his men had to flee from Norway because of the new centralized rule of Haraldr hárfagri. The story about Haraldr’s ofríki (‘harsh rule’) is probably exaggerated in the Icelandic tradition, but there is support in the sources for the hypothesis that a retinue of men who lost against Haraldr in the battle of Hafrsfjord (ca. 900) left Agder for Iceland. The fact that Ingjaldr and his family could be considered Egðir two generations and more than sixty years after they had left Agder calls for an explanation. This article argues that the special background of these families in a lost kingdom of Agder may have contributed to strengthening their identity as a special group of people in the recently populated Iceland.","PeriodicalId":40705,"journal":{"name":"Gripla","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42073808","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article argues that Fóstbrœðra saga constitutes a link between kings’ sagas and sagas of Icelanders, and that it is the first prosimetrical saga of Icelanders. It evaluates Sven B.F. Jansson’s arguments regarding the long and the short version and whether the 'digressions’ were found in the archetype. It is argued that Jansson’s analysis is partly flawed, but that his claim that the digressions were found in the archetype is probably right, except for the last five. In addition, Theodore Andersson has argued convincingly against Jónas Kristjánsson that Fóstbrœðra saga must be older than Heimskringla. The present author accepts Andersson’s arguments, but since Fóstbrœðra saga – like most sagas of Icelanders – offers few dating criteria, additional parameters would be valuable. Under favourable circumstances, the poetry in the sagas may offer some clues, and this article takes two poetic features into account. Fóstbrœðra saga is unique among sagas of Icelanders both in its high proportion of authenticating quotations of poetry, which is reminiscent of kings’ sagas, and in using kennings that require skaldic competence as part of the overblown language of the digressions. A comparison with the treatment of poetry in the kings’ sagas suggests that these features indicate an early, experimental approach.
{"title":"Fóstbrœðra saga: A Missing Link?","authors":"Mikael Males","doi":"10.33112/gripla.31.3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.33112/gripla.31.3","url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that Fóstbrœðra saga constitutes a link between kings’ sagas and sagas of Icelanders, and that it is the first prosimetrical saga of Icelanders. It evaluates Sven B.F. Jansson’s arguments regarding the long and the short version and whether the 'digressions’ were found in the archetype. It is argued that Jansson’s analysis is partly flawed, but that his claim that the digressions were found in the archetype is probably right, except for the last five. In addition, Theodore Andersson has argued convincingly against Jónas Kristjánsson that Fóstbrœðra saga must be older than Heimskringla. The present author accepts Andersson’s arguments, but since Fóstbrœðra saga – like most sagas of Icelanders – offers few dating criteria, additional parameters would be valuable. Under favourable circumstances, the poetry in the sagas may offer some clues, and this article takes two poetic features into account. Fóstbrœðra saga is unique among sagas of Icelanders both in its high proportion of authenticating quotations of poetry, which is reminiscent of kings’ sagas, and in using kennings that require skaldic competence as part of the overblown language of the digressions. A comparison with the treatment of poetry in the kings’ sagas suggests that these features indicate an early, experimental approach.","PeriodicalId":40705,"journal":{"name":"Gripla","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69502650","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Plainchant originated within the Roman-Catholic liturgy, but continued to be sung in Lutheran church services alongside more recent hymns from Germany. This article discusses the sources for plainchant in Iceland after the year 1550, both printed books and manuscripts. The Icelandic Graduale (the official missal of the Icelandic church, first printed in 1594) contained a substantial number of such pieces, yet did not fully adhere to the Danish Graduale, published in 1573. In some cases, the Icelandic bishop chose different chants altogether, while other chants were sung in Icelandic, to a far greater extent than seems to have been the case in Denmark or Germany. This suggests that the Icelandic Lutheran chant tradition was partly fuelled by a local interest in producing ambitious translations, including alliteration and end rhyme not always found in the original texts. A substantial number of chants not found in Icelandic printed books have survived in local manuscripts. They include chants possibly derived from the medieval Nidaros tradition, as well as chants from the Danish hymnal (1569) and Graduale, which were transmitted via manuscripts in Icelandic translations well into the eighteenth century.
{"title":"Sléttsöngur í lútherskum sið á Íslandi 1550–1800","authors":"Á. Ingólfsson","doi":"10.33112/gripla.31.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.33112/gripla.31.10","url":null,"abstract":"Plainchant originated within the Roman-Catholic liturgy, but continued to be sung in Lutheran church services alongside more recent hymns from Germany. This article discusses the sources for plainchant in Iceland after the year 1550, both printed books and manuscripts. The Icelandic Graduale (the official missal of the Icelandic church, first printed in 1594) contained a substantial number of such pieces, yet did not fully adhere to the Danish Graduale, published in 1573. In some cases, the Icelandic bishop chose different chants altogether, while other chants were sung in Icelandic, to a far greater extent than seems to have been the case in Denmark or Germany. This suggests that the Icelandic Lutheran chant tradition was partly fuelled by a local interest in producing ambitious translations, including alliteration and end rhyme not always found in the original texts. A substantial number of chants not found in Icelandic printed books have survived in local manuscripts. They include chants possibly derived from the medieval Nidaros tradition, as well as chants from the Danish hymnal (1569) and Graduale, which were transmitted via manuscripts in Icelandic translations well into the eighteenth century.","PeriodicalId":40705,"journal":{"name":"Gripla","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69502640","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：