Our story had a wide circulation also in the North, as one must infer from the number of Scandinavian versions preserved: (1) the old Norweg. fragment of a saga (ed. by G. Storm, _Nordisk Tidskrift for Filologi og Pædagogik_, Copenhagen, 1874, pp. 24-28), (2) the complete Icelandic saga of _Flóres ok Blankiflúr_, (3) the fragments of a second Icelandic Saga (ed. by Brynjolf Snorrason, _Annaler for nordisk old kyndighed og historie_, 1850); (4) the Old Swed. poem (ed. by E. Klemming, _Samlingar utgifna af svenska formskrift-sällskapet_, I., Stockholm, 1844); and (5) the Danish translations from the Swedish (ed. by C. J. Brandt, _Romantisk Digtning fra Middelalderen_, I. and II. København, 1869-77). The distinguishing characteristic of the Northern versions is the conclusion. According to the Norse version, Floris, to refute the charge that he has gained admittance to Bl.’s tower by the use of magic tricks, offers to fight in single combat the bravest of the Admiral’s knights. In the ensuing combat he overcomes the Admiral’s champion, and receives as his guerdon, Blauncheflur. If we accept Herzog’s conclusions (pp. 15, 35, 45-6, 66) we must assume as an original for the Scandinavian versions, a French original, N, with the ending peculiar to the Northern versions. The development from this original is shown by the following plan (also borrowed from Herzog, p. 92).
Fr. N \ \ Norw. M* / \ / \ / \ Icel. M Norw. N* / \ / \ / \ Icel. N Swed. | | Dan. ]
In Italy also the story of Fl. and Bl. enjoyed great popularity. The two chief versions were: (1) the _Cantare_, written by a popular poet in _ottave rime_; and (2) Boccaccio’s youthful production, his first prose romance, _Filocolo_. That the I. version of the story, the one most popular in France, was also current in Italy, we see in these two versions, both of which show, in addition to the special traits of II., many traits peculiar to version I. To determine exactly the interrelations of these two versions is no easy matter. From allusions in the _Filocolo_ we know that the _Cantare_ was the older. Internal evidence, however, forbids the supposition that the _Filocolo_ has sprung from the _Cantare_. Rather the two versions go back to a common source. This Italian, or Franco-Italian, version, which probably had no differences of real moment from the _Cantare_ in its present form, must in many points have been more ample and complete, and in individual instances nearer the French tradition, than the _Cantare_ is.