SAGA-BOOK - Viking Society Web Publications

Treatment of Sources in the Volsunga saga 327
change of braarom tveim (at bana veroa) to hoerjum. (at
bana veroa), (VS 26/7).
i vatni (pu drukknar) iFm, II/4): where else but in water
would a man drown? This is quite superfluous and does
not appear in the Saga (VS 31/33).
Brynhild's reasons for wanting Sigurd's young son dead
are sufficiently obvious to make a direct statement of
them superfluous, and they are not to be found in the Saga
(Sg. 12/5-8, d. VS 57/12-13). A number of other passages
could be viewed in a similar light.
The avoidance of repetitive phrases has already been
noted (d. (31) above and also p. 326), but words that are
superfluous because they repeat or echo the idea expressed
in a preceding or following phrase or an earlier passage in
the narrative may be considered to form a sub-category
of their own. A few examples: HH 2/7-8 repeat the idea
expressed in the preceding lines, viz. the noms' statement
of Helgi's future distinction. The Saga omits them (VS
14/13). Fm. 29/6 is a poetic variation of the word 'sword'
(sverz) in Fm. 29/4, and it is discarded by the compiler
(d. VS 33/16). Sg. 17/7-8 are little more than a
repetition ot the immediately preceding svarna eioa and
they do not appear in the Saga (ct. VS 57/23). The whole
of Sg. 37 which tells of Brynhild's deliberations as to
whether she should agree to Atli's demand that she should
marry, along with those parts of Sg. 36 and 38 which
mention the pressure that Atli brought to bear on her
and her final acquiescence, are entirely omitted (VS
60/1-3). The lines in question can be thought of as
superfluous in that a very similar passage occurs in VS
53/9-13 (the source is lost). Am. 32/2 mentions that
Glaumv6r is Gunnar's wife. This is omitted (VS 68/5)
since this fact has already been stated (VS 65/37 : Am.
6/6).
Superfluous from the point of view of saga style are
personal reflections on the part of the author and these the
compiler also excises, e.g. (Am. 30/8) huga: var pvi illa :