Martin Chase 2007, ‘(Introduction to) Einarr Skúlason, Geisli’ in Margaret Clunies Ross (ed.), Poetry on Christian Subjects. Skaldic Poetry of the Scandinavian Middle Ages 7. Turnhout: Brepols, pp. 5-65.
Einarr Skúlason’s Geisli ‘Light beam’ (ESk Geisl) was almost certainly composed in 1153. Einarr had been associated with Haraldr gilli, who ruled Norway from 1130-6, and after Haraldr’s death he composed poetry for his sons Eysteinn, Sigurðr and Ingi, who reigned jointly for a time. Einarr was particularly associated with Eysteinn, who made him his stallari or marshall. Internal evidence (sts 8 and 71) indicates that Eysteinn commissioned Geisl, and that it was performed in the Trondheim cathedral, with the three kings Eysteinn, Sigurðr and Ingi, as well as Archbishop Jón Birgisson, among the assembled crowd (sts 8-11). A famous passage in Mork (Mork 1932, 446) describes the event:
Einarr Skúlason was in the company of the brothers Sigurðr and Eysteinn, and King Eysteinn was a great friend of his. Eysteinn asked him to compose a poem in honor of Saint Óláfr, and he did so. He presented it north in Þrándheimr [Trondheim] in the very confines of Christ Church, and it was accompanied by great miracles. A sweet fragrance rose in the church, and people say that there were intimations from the king himself that he thought well of the poem (Andersson and Gade 2000, 393).
The poem refers to the see of Trondheim as an archbishopric (st. 65), which means that it was composed after the elevation of the see in the spring of 1153, and cannot have been composed later than the summer of 1155, when Ingi killed Sigurðr. The brothers were already feuding in 1154, which makes 1153 the likely date of composition. Geisl may have been commissioned for performance on the feast of S. Óláfr, 29 July, in that year. The establishment of an archbishopric in Norway meant more power for the church and less for the king. It also meant closer ties with Rome: Cardinal Nicholas Breakspear, the future Pope Adrian IV, travelled from Rome to Trondheim to consecrate Jón Birgisson as the first archbishop.
Geisl is the earliest skaldic drápa to have survived intact. It comprises an introductory section (sts 1-17), a central section in which the refrain (stef) appears, called the stefjabálkr (sts 18-45), and the conclusion or slœmr (sts 46-71). For an extended discussion of the poem’s structure and metrics, see Chase 2005, 16-20.
Einarr Skúlason artfully demonstrates his facility with the skaldic techniques later codified by Snorri Sturluson, but he also shows his knowledge of the Lat. religious poetry of Western Europe. He celebrates the military exploits of Óláfr the Viking much as earlier skalds praised earlier kings, and at the same time celebrates the holiness of Óláfr the saint using all the conventions of Lat. hagiography. For a detailed discussion of these and the miracles attributed to Óláfr in Geisl and various prose sources, see Chase 2005, 21-44. Geisl can be viewed both as a nationalistic work celebrating the great king who unified and brought Christianity to Norway, and as a celebration of the universal church, where national boundaries fade into the background and Óláfr the saint becomes another Christ (the light beam of the Sun of Righteousness), the ruler and protector of all believers. The earliest mentions of the poem refer to it as Óláfs drápa (Mork 1932, 446; Hkr, ÍF 28, 271), but the name Geisli is at least as old as Flateyjarbók, in which the text is preceded by the rubric Geisli er Einarr Skulason quad vm Olaf Haraldsson ‘Geisli which Einarr Skúlason composed about Óláfr Haraldsson’.
Only one medieval ms., Bergsbók, Holm perg 1 fol (Bb), contains a complete text of Geisl, but Flateyjarbók, GKS 1005 fol (Flat), contains all but sts 31-3, which are here edited from Bb. Flat has been chosen as the base text for this edn, though readings are frequently taken from Bb, when Bb’s readings are clearly superior or Flat’s cannot be satisfactorily construed. While neither ms. possesses a clear advantage, the arrangement of sts in Flat is judged to be better than in Bb. Both mss are highly corrupt, but the language and orthography of Flat are more regular. Both date from the late C14th and are thus considerably later than Geisl itself. In addition to the texts in Flat and Bb, individual sts are quoted in three important works: SnE, Hkr and the saga of S. Óláfr known as The Great Saga (ÓH). The five primary mss of SnE (Codex Regius, GKS 2365 4° [R]; Codex Trajectinus, Traj 1374ˣ [Tˣ]; Codex Wormianus, AM 242 fol [W]; Codex Upsaliensis, DG 11 [U]; AM 748 I b 4° [A]), contain portions of sts 1 (in TGT: A, W), 16 (R, Tˣ, W, U, A) and 59 (W). St. 37 appears in various versions of Óláfs saga helga in Flat; Bb; AM 63 folˣ (Kˣ); Eirspennill, AM 47 fol (E); AM 39 fol (39); AM 73 aˣ (73aˣ); Tómasskinna, GKS 1008 fol (Tóm); Holm perg 2 4° (Holm2); Holm perg 4 4° (Holm4). Hulda, AM 66 fol (H), contains sts 28 and 30 in its version of Óláfs saga helga, and the related ms. Hrokkinskinna, GKS 1010 fol (Hr), contains sts 28, 29 and 30. Geisl is preserved in eleven C17th and C18th mss: AM 1009 4°ˣ; AM 72 folˣ; Thott 1498 4°ˣ; Oslo UB 262 folˣ; Trondheim DKNVSB 3 4°ˣ; Bodl Boreal 102ˣ; Lbs 444 4°ˣ; JS 260 4°ˣ; JS 406 4°; Edinburgh Adv 21 2 9ˣ; Edinburgh Adv 21 8 14ˣ. All these mss are transcripts of Flat and have not been used in this edn.
A full listing and description of previous eds of Geisl can be consulted in Chase 2005, 5-8. In the present edn, reference is made to the eds of Finnur Jónsson (Skj A and B) and Kock (Skald and NN), Cederschiöld 1873 and Chase 2005.
This page is used for different resources. For groups of stanzas such as poems, you will see the verse text and, where published, the translation of each stanza. These are also links to information about the individual stanzas.
For prose works you will see a list of the stanzas and fragments in that prose work, where relevant, providing links to the individual stanzas.
Where you have access to introduction(s) to the poem or prose work in the database, these will appear in the ‘introduction’ section.
The final section, ‘sources’ is a list of the manuscripts that contain the prose work, as well as manuscripts and prose works linked to stanzas and sections of a text.