Week Fifteen: Last Blog

After reviewing all of the sagas we've read, I've come to the conclusion that one of the most intriguing characters for me has been King Harald. He is not particuarly involved in any one saga, but it is his presence across many sagas that makes him interesting to me. He is never portrayed as exactly the same character, but is different in each one according to his relationship to the main protagonist of that saga. But if the sagas have had one overall contribution to our understanding of the political aspects of this historical era, I think it is their depiction of this incredibly important king. Harald united all of Norway, and while some historians would rather learn about the daily lives of ordinary people (which the sagas give plenty of insight into), it is also important to understand the leaders of kingdoms who shaped the larger currents of their kingdoms.

I also think another reason I liked King Harald so much was because I know that he was portrayed accurately, despite the many different perspectives. Because each person perceives another person differently according to the circumstances surrounding their meeting. Harald also never seemed larger than life, just wise and strong and adept, if sometimes weak and prone to believing other peoples' gossip. He was a fascinating character to follow all semester throughout the many sagas.

Week Fourteen: The Saga of Ref the Sly

This saga, more than any other we've read, seems like an actual story told for entertainment. I enjoyed the storyline, and can see how it would be a good nighttime tale told around a fire. There were a number of indications beyond the introduction stating this saga to be fantastical. Gest suggests that Ref should "have a story written about [his] journey, because it will seem noteworthy to some people" (605). Greenland is presented as a sort of mythical, ambiguous place, especially compared to its description in the Vinland Sagas. Ref kills Thorgils by splitting his head open down to his shoulders, which seems impossible to me. Ref's house can't be lit on fire because he has devised a system of running water, which I would guess is around the time when the Romans first build aqueducts.

In addition to all of these details, I felt like this stanza on page 604 was a little red flag, alerting the audience that this is more a story than a history: "The stroke this day was struck / I felled the famous man. / I reckon two blows revenged / and hot blood won for the raven. / Such deeds are told in stories, / related by wise men." This is the first reference I've noticed in the sagas of stories actually being told, and of someone acknowleding that those stories are sometimes exaggerated. While there has been a lot of talk about poems and telling the deeds of kings, this specifically points out stories. I feel like this stanza is sort of a self-referencing joke, because the audience would know that this story is more for entertainment than historical or cultural value.

Some other tidbits I noticed included the first mention of homosexuality. It has never been remotely brought up before, so I sort of assumed it was not a concern in this culture. Calling Ref homosexual seemed to have the same insult implied as today, which shows one way in which we have not progressed over the past thousand years. Also, Thorgerd's and Gest's reactions to Ref telling each of them that he killed someone echo Egil's mother's reaction in Egil's Saga, when she says that he is such a good little Viking. Last thing- King Harald is characterized as much smarter in this saga than any other: he guesses the secret of Ref's house, and deciphers his gibberish after killing Grani. Propaganda, perhaps?

Week Thirteen: The Vinland Sagas

The introduction to The Saga of the Greenlanders and Eirik the Red's Saga focuses on the ways in which the two sagas are similar in storyline, which I can agree with, but I found the biggest difference between the two was in style. The Saga of the Greenlanders was quite different than most sagas we've read in that it was straightforward and focused, whereas Eirik the Red used the same narrative structure and detail that prolong simple events, like a marriage proposal, to paragraphs or even pages.

These differences resulted in a change in my perception of the story; I try to visualize what I read, and while the events of the stories were congruent, I pictured very different scenes simply because of the style of storytelling. The Saga of the Greenlanders was a lot more vague and fleeting; I pictured the main characters to be a band of travellers who never really settle in a place. There were also a lot less characters to keep track of, as the saga did not go into the usual detail describing every persons' lineage. Eirik the Red's Saga had a lot more dialogue and detail, and ths made the characters seem more settled to me. Even when they are in Greenland, they seem more persistent in establishing farms, because of the details that are omitted in The Saga of the Greenlanders.

Looking beyond the stylistic events, I found these sagas very interesting because they describe the first Europeans in America. I thought their exchanges with the natives proved beyond a doubt that they were in fact in America. There is no way they could have imagined people as savages in a different continent who sound so similar to the Native Americans without having seen real Native Americans. I think this section was also interesting because I remember learning about Erik the Red and Leif Eriksson as these great Viking explorers when I was younger; but they seemed to take the backseat to other explorers, and I wonder why their names persisted above others who undertook the same feats as they did.

Week Twelve: Egil's Saga, ch.49-89

Now that I've read about Egil's entire life, what stands out the most to me is how long it is!! So much happens in his life, and I started wondering if Snorri combined elements of other heroes' lives into this one penultimate hero, to make his life more exciting. But for one person to see that much in one lifetime is just crazy. Maybe the saga just seems so long because it does cover many generations, and Egil's stories did not begin until halfway through. Either way, it's very long. I am also curious about how any person could remember the details of this story and repeat it for the few hundred years between its occurrence and when it was written down. People in oral cultures are supposed to have superior memory, but to remember the finite details of Egil's Saga and be able to repeat it must have been an amazing feat.

For my stanza to read in class, I chose the last stanza of the poem Egil calls 'The Loss of My Sons'. It is about his sadness over so many deaths, and his outlook on waiting for his own death. I thought it was odd since Egil and Thorgerd just tried to commit suicide, that he in poetry would then say he is willing to wait for his own death. And then "Egil began to recover his spirits as he proceeded to compose the poem" (158) about death?! Odd person, if you ask me.

Week Eleven: Egil's Saga, ch. 1-48

First off, I have to say that I am rather enjoying this saga, despite the fact that once again, everyone has the same names. I am surprised no one has ever made a Hollywood movie out of this, especially the first part concerning Thorolf Kveldulfsson and his fall from the king's grace, and the battles and revenge of his kin. It could be good.

Egil and his kinsname can be defined by some of the same characteristics, although Thorolf Kvedulfsson and Thorolf Skallagrimsson share more likeable traits, while Egil, Skallagrim, and Kveldulf share less likeable traits. They are all eager for glory, as evidenced by the two Thorolfs who join the king's men just to find favor, while Egil is eager for glory though battle. In chapter 46, when Egil and his men have escaped imprisonment and run off with booty, Egil insists on going back and killing their captors, because otherwise it would have been a cowardly plunder.

The most important trait this family shares is an inherent ability to anger the king. Thorolf Kveldufsson had been on his good side, but when he refused to rejoin the king's men and abandon his own followers, he set the tone for the rest of the saga and the struggle between his family and the Norweigan royals. Skallagrim wanted to return the axe that the king had sent, but thankfully one of his sons threw it into the ocean, therefore avoiding that potential catastrophe. Thorolf Skallagrimsson and Egil inherit this quality, as Thorir remarks, "'But you, Egil, have inherited your family's gift for caring too little about incurring the king's wrath, and that will be a great burden for most people to bear'" (71).

Some other traits Egil's family share, that are evident throughout most of the sagas and therefore important Viking qualities, are being proud, stubborn, determined, strong, poetic, difficult, short-tempered, loyal to friends, and having a strong intuition about the future.

Week Ten Reaction: Prologue to the Prose Edda

What strikes me as most significant about the prologue to the Prose Edda is the excuses the author makes for ancient humans forgetting the Christian God. This by itself would not seem so extreme if then the excuse was not stretched to explain how they could remember to worship a vague deity who they perceived controlled earth and the heavens. And, "that they might fasten it in memory, they gave names out of their own minds to all things", which they could then remember? I just found that section a little sketchy, but I can guess that the connection between the two religious views had to be inserted so that later Christians would not feel they were being pagans in learning about the old gods of the unconverted heathens.

I also found it curious that Asia is described by men from northern Europe as "the centre of the earth; and even as the land there is lovelier and better in every way than in other places, so also were the sons of men there most favored with all goodly gifts: wisdom, and strength of the body, beauty, and all manner of knowledge." I would think the culture would try to bolster its own importance, aside from the fact that they are claiming descent from Troy (which is what the Romans did too.... interesting). I would think most cultures would say they were the best, but perhaps this idea is tainted by my American background.

Week Nine Reaction: Norse Mythology

I enjoyed the introduction to the Norse Mythology book, mostly because it is such a departure from the Icelandic Sagas we have been focusing on. The most mystical element of those sagas has been dreams, and the demon in the privy at night, and some vague references to the gods. In contrast, this section was full of gods and elves and giants-- reminded me a lot of Lord of the Rings, which I have to admit I am a big fan of. I can totally see how Tolkien was influenced by Norse mythology. The story on page 14 where a dwarf turns into stone when the sun rises completely parallels a scene in The Hobbit. And the reference on page 19 to a "gold and cursed ring that plays a large role in heroic legend"... but I digress.

Some of the historical elements I found particuarly interesing were the origins of the Goths, Vandals, and Anglo-Saxons (all from Scandinavia), as well as the integration of Trojan warriors Priam and Agamemmnon into Snorri's version of Thor's parentage, and the Viking influence in naming Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. I also liked the section which described poetry, although I was very surprised to learn that meter is a factor in composing poems, because I had considered all the ones we've read so far free verse. The elements of meter must get lost in translation.

I found the entry on Baldr particuarly fascinating, mostly because there are two completely different stories involved. Although the author attempts to find similarities, the only real connection between the two is vengeance, which as we have seen is an element in the majority of the Icelandic Sagas. I thought that Frigg, Odin's wife, showed extreme stupidity in readily telling Loki, disguised as a woman, that the only living thing that can kill Baldr is mistletoe. That kind of thing should be kept secret if you go to the great trouble of getting an oath from every living thing, in my opinion.

I also read the entry on the Ginnunga Gap, which is the "primeval void that existed before the creation of the cosmos" (141). Snorri essentially writes that human beings emerged from poisonous ice that melted in an evil wind. A person called Ymir was created, and then his body formed the cosmos. I find creationism stories fascinating and thought this one was pretty unique.

Week Eight Reaction: The Saga of the Confederates

There were many small indications that this saga was written after the 'Saga Age' sprinkled throughout the text. There were absolutely no references to Pagan gods, premonitions, dreams, or fate, all themes which had been central in sagas that took place during the Saga Age. Instead, the characters all seemed to understand that they were completely in charge of their own actions, and had to rely on their wit, intelligence, and luck in order to find success.

The focus on the legal matters at the Althing also differed from sagas where the Althing was presented as a side-show, almost a silly invention of man meant to combat the will of the gods and fate. Here everyone seems aware that the old order is corrupt, making me wonder if this story could possibly have been meant as an allegory showing that the old Pagan ways were corrupt and Christianity was responsible for ushering in true justice.

Additionally, the poetry seemed very dry and un-inventive compared to poetry from the Saga Age, and only Ofeig composes poetry. When he first recites two verses to Egil, he moves directly from poetry into prose discussion without skipping a beat, and Egil seems hardly to notice. It is only later that Egil comments "That is not likely to happen, but you are a good poet" (481), which is quite an unenthusiastic response compared to the great gifts poets received from reciting during the Saga Age.

Week Seven Reaction: Hrafnkel Krey's Godi

Hrafnkel Krey's Godi raised some interesting points, in my opinion. It is definitely the most graphic saga so far, between the men being strung up by having a hole torn behind their ankles, and the horse that is led off the cliff with a bag over its head.

I was curious that since Hrafnkel had already killed so many, no one had yet tried to avenge the dead by killing him, instead of simply taking their grievances to the Althing. In other sagas, characters skip the legal issues and go straight to eye-for-an-eye, so it's interesting how different they can be. I thought the legal system at the Althing was fascinating. Sam (the most non-Viking name so far) was able to act as a prosecution lawyer, and the support of the godis seems to parallel juries or judges, but then Hrafnkel was not allowed to defend himself before sentencing. Very peculiar.

Week Six Reaction: Havamal

I found Havamal very bizarre, mostly in that it changes abruptly so many times, and interweaves proverbs, stories, and multiple characters as speakers. I was once again struck by how similar some of the Viking proverbs are to ours. The similar themes of friendship, honor, and especially wisdom are cross-cultural. I was not able to pick a favorite stanza, but have a few (sorry- I tried to narrow it down!):

12. Less good there lies than most believe
In ale for mortal men;
For the more he drinks the less does man
Of his mind the mastery hold.

I would not have expected anti-drinking stanzas, because I guess I was thinking the holding of liquor would be another manly quality, but this stanza surprised me. I think it is very wise. I did notice, however, that some other stanzas contradicted this one (like 19) in upholding honor of drinking everything a host places before you.

58. He must early go forth who fain the blood
Or the goods of another would get;
The wolf that lies idle shall win little meat,
Or the sleeping man success.

I got really excited when I read this one because it is like their version of “the early bird gets the worm.” I know I’ve said this before, but I find the fact that such sayings span oceans and centuries is so fascinating. Of course the first two lines of this stanza seem to imply battle or stealing instead of nature’s work, but I am certain the meaning is the same as ours today, however pastoral it may be.

94. Fault with another let no man find
For what touches many a man;
Wise men oft into witless fools
Are made by mighty love.

The girl in me had to put this one- the last line reminds me of a line from Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice: “We are all fools in love.” Despite some of the other anti-feminist messages in Havamal, like never trusting a woman’s word, I think this stanza shows that the Vikings were still emotional beings who could get giddy and slightly idiotic when they fell in love, and were able to acknowledge that in their culture.

Week Five Reactions

This week we read The Saga of Gisli Surrson, and Njal’s Saga. The Saga of Gisli Surrson was very long and complicated, with way too many characters having the same names, especially all of those derived from ‘Thor’. For me, one of the most perplexing points in this saga was the inclusion of slaves. The slave in chapter 1, Kol, is given as part of a marriage dowry, and even owns his own sword that people have to ask to borrow. Later in the story, Gisli forces a dim-witted slave to die so he can escape. In another instance, he frees two slaves who help him, even though they have to do so at their master’s bidding. I am very curious about who these slaves were- descendants of people captured in war? People too poor to care for themselves? The slave in chapter 1, Kol, is given as part of a marriage dowry, and even owns his own sword that people have to ask to borrow.

This was the first saga we have read with an actual sorcerer, a human with supernatural powers. His curse on Gisli was very wise, but I found it odd that his magic only pertained to men who tried to help Gisli on the mainland. It was also interesting to see how far outside the main four men who first were involved in this conflict the story spread. By the end, I forgot who Eyjolf was or why he cared so much about killing Gisli.

Njal’s Saga, which is centered on Thangbrand, raises some interesting questions as well. The Christianity of the tenth century, of course, was very different from our version of Christianity today, but still many elements of this story were bizarre. The Christian missionaries killed some men who opposed them. They still believed the old Norse Gods existed, but only because the Christian God allowed them to. They believed in the power of sorcery. They lied to the King Olaf to force the conversion of Iceland. All of these small details combined make the conversion seem like a very different process than what I typically imagine, based on the Bible and stories of conversion in eastern Europe, especially Rome.

Week Four Reaction: The Saga of Gunnlaug Serpent-Tongue

I was very interested in the aspects of this saga that reflect myths of other cultures concerning love triangles and prophecies. I find it fascinating that the same types of stories evolve in places isolated from each other in time and distance. The themes that can be traced in multiple cultures’ stories must reflect elements of human life that are the most commonly shared experiences by all people.

I also found it easier this week to navigate the story without an objective narrator. The characterization was more obvious to me. I found fate to be the most important theme of this saga. I was also interested in how Helga contributed to the image I have of Viking women, and in the proverbs listed throughout the saga. These proverbs are insightful because they reflect what the society valued as a whole.

The writing style is simplistic and easy to understand, but I find that it also takes away some of the dramatic effect. This story, told in modern prose, would most likely induce a more emotional response because of the tragedy. As it stands, I as a reader felt slightly detached from the emotions of the characters because I was more focused on other elements of the story.

Week Three Reactions: 6 Short Tales

This week we read 6 short tales from The Sagas of the Icelanders, and I found some common themes among them, both regarding the stories themselves and my reactions to them.

First off, I struggled as a reader to navigate these stories without a narrator. In many of the tales there were two sides of an argument, and I did not know which side I was meant to sympathize with because I just had to go off of the dialogue. This problem was compounded by the fact that in most cases, the men on both sides of a dispute had visible flaws, many times the same ones of pride and stubbornness.

King Harald of Norway appears in most of these tales, and in each one he is presented differently. He is not a very likeable man in some, like when he makes his court stop eating before they are finished and no one will tell him they are still hungry. In others he seems very kind, like when he gives Halldor Snorrason a ship to sail home to Iceland, but then when Halldor doesn’t have a crew Harald tells a lie to all the other men preparing to sail home in order to get Halldor a ship.

The Tale of Audun from the West Fjords and the Tale of the Story-Wise Icelander made me question how the Vikings felt about King Harald, whether they re-told tales of his actions because they admired him, or despised him. In the Tale of Audun, Audun somehow sails from Greenland to Norway to Denmark with a bear on his longboat, and refuses to give the bear to King Harald, even though Norway and Iceland were close, and Denmark was an enemy. In the Tale of the Story-Wise Icelander, neither the king or story-teller were named. Given how important lineage was to the Vikings, I found this extremely surprising. Halldor Snorrason is mentioned, however, leading me to believe the king that is so kind to the anonymous storyteller is in fact King Harald. After reading 5 tales he is in, I am still uncertain of Harald's personality, motives, and popularity amongst his people.

The introduction to this book led me to believe that these stories would be about ordinary men living ordinary lives, but all of the tales except The Tale of Thorstein Staff-Struck concerned men following the kings around, living the courtly life. Also, the Tale of Thorstein Staff-Struck directly opposed the preconceived notion of Vikings as bloodthirsty savages. The men in the story did fight, but they also had mercy and wanted to avoid fighting despite the societal pressure to do so to defend their honor.

I am very curious about why these particular stories were re-told for years, especially the shorter ones. Unlike Aesop’s fables, they do not seem to present a moral or significant insight into Viking life. They do not seem particularly entertaining, or to recount Viking history like Homer’s Iliad. I am very puzzled about this.