Last Blog: Favorite Character

I believe one of my favorite characters in all the sagas we've read was Ofeig, Odd's father. I thought he was a very noble man, and cunning too. While we begin the Saga of the Confederates not knowing much about Ofeig and why he dislikes his son so, when we read on, we see Ofeig showing his true, quite admirable, colors. I personally did not have much respect for Ofeig at first seeing as he did not give his son the proper attention he deserved and allowed their relationship to become estranged. However, when Odd is grown and successful, he is cheated and subject to loose all of his wealth simply because of a small loophole in the law and a couple exploitative and greedy landowners. When this happens, Ofeig really comes through, he puts aside this grudge he has held and lets go of his ego to not only stand up for his son at the Althing, but also take many risks to cunningly go about and deal with other powerful men to hopefully sway their opinions in favor of Odd. In the end he is successful and there is a happy ending with the reuniting of father and son.

The Saga of Ref the Sly

My initial response after reading this saga was that it was incredibly entertaining. The storyline was very easy to follow since there were few tangents and it flowed at a relatively fast pace forward throughout. I agree that this saga seems to have more of an influence from continental European literature, mainly in the sense that it included a character which was very strongly portrayed as the protagonist, which contrasts with other Icelandic sagas. I found Ref very easy to relate to and I found myself hoping for his wellbeing throughout the saga. While he may have been rather harsh about compensating for losses and wrongdoings against him, I felt like he behaved very rationally and never acted unprovoked. Whenever Ref planned his vengeance, he made sure he had accommodate for his family's safe keeping first, which I found very admirable.
Also, I did think that this saga seemed a lot more romantic than other sagas which are much more cut-and-dry. There was certainly an element of fantasy in the great feats that Ref achieves as well as in his sort of Cinderella story where he transforms from a useless lump to a heroic and talented individual. Also, the happy ending for the protagonist seemed rather romantic and more similar to other European works than Icelandic/Viking sagas to me.
I did think it a little strange that the King seemed to have a good deal of respect for Ref but after he was influenced by Bard, he immediately lost that respect and even gave Bard advice on how to potentially defeat Ref, despite the fact that he thought Ref was innocent. The King seemed like such an intelligent man, one who would appreciate Ref's cleverness and ingenious instead of making him a target and enemy of the state.

The Vinland Sagas

While it was highly impressive to learn about the great seafaring skills displayed by numerous voyages into uncharted territory that these Vikings bravely made, what I found most noteworthy about these two sagas was how each compared to one another. They seemed to me to be the same tale simply highlighting the adventures of different characters for the most part. Though, while many of the descriptions and characters appeared in both sagas, there were noticeable differences in the telling of this story of North American discovery. One example of this is in the simple event described where Eirik is riding down to join Leif on his journey and is injured. In The Saga of the Greenlanders, Eirik injures his foot in the fall and interprets this as a sign that he should not embark on the voyage, sending his son off alone. In Eirik the Red's Saga, Eirik hurts his ribs and shoulder which signifies that hiding away some of his wealth while he is gone was a poor idea and so he tells his wife to remove it from the hiding place and leaves on the journey to Vinland nevertheless. Another noteworthy discrepancy is in the portrayal of Freydis. While she is certainly described as being strong-willed and harshly critical in both tellings, The Saga of the Greenlanders portrays her as a much more manipulative, demanding, and overbearing than in Eirik the Red's Saga.
While these discrepancies may seem miniscule and insignificant, there are certainly enough of them to inspire curiosity about the way sagas are written down and how reliable they are as historical insights. Can the discrepancies simply be chalked up to translational errors or were there simply many versions of the same story circulating? To me, it seems that the Vinland Sagas just goes to show how one story, because of various versions in the oral tradition, can take such different forms. Because of the oral tradition in the culture, it seems that stories must have evolved through time, perhaps become more extravagant or had more influence from Christianity. These are only two of the versions and it is stated in the introduction that there were several others both preceding and following these two. It makes you wonder how different those versions might be from the two in this book. Would they differentiate significantly more the further they are from the original chronologically? What other sagas have we read that have other versions that might differ noticeably from those we are now familiar with?

Egil's Saga Part II

What stood out to me about the life of Egil was how much loyalty and keeping one's word was valued by everyone, especially Egil. While sometimes it seemed that Egil was acting rashly or else displaying the "shape shifting" traits of his father and grandfather, almost always, he was really acting to protect, avenge, or help someone he was very loyal to. In this respect, it was rather amazing to see how long Egil's friendship with Arinbjorn lasted.
Another thing I noticed was the complexity of Egil's array of emotions. While some of his decisions (especially in his younger years) seemed rather immature and rash, we are shown throughout the sagas how wise and talented Egil is. And while he has the capacity to kill many people in cold blood while on raids, he still retains the fundamental human emotions which cause him to mourn the death of his sons.
Finally, a characteristic of Egil's life which I noticed was how Stigma and rivalry can be passed down through the generations. While both Thorolfs attempted to resolve the feud between their family and the royalty of Norway, they perished in the attempt which only served to intensify the stigma towards the other. I have to wonder if, after he has lost his sons as well, Egil still believed that the feud was worth it?

Egil's Saga: Part I

Firstly, I wanted to note that I found it rather strange that Egil was not even introduced until 50 pages into the saga, such was the extent of the background story of how the feud began between his family and King Harald. While other sagas generally give a more brief overview of preceding events, Egil's Saga went very in depth, seeming to accentuate the significance of the roots of this feud that is passed through the generations.
I noticed that Egil and all of his kin were portrayed as very noble, righteous men with strong morals as well as physique. They seem to be very prosperous and good leaders who can accomplish most anything they might put their minds to. Because of this those like Thorolf are taken advantage of or slandered by those less industrious and successful. Also, it seems as though in every generation of Egil's family, of the two sons born, one is strong and handsome in appearance while the other is talented, but described as being rather ugly.
As a side note, I was wondering if when the saga states that Egil and his brother, Thorolf, were sprinkled with water if that was a reference to Christianity and baptism?

Prologue to Prose Edda

What struck me most about this piece was the incredibly close resemblance to the creation story in Genesis. The prologue differed so greatly from anything else we have read, even from those written after the saga age, mainly because the blatant conversion to Christianity. This prologue seems to be an adaptation of the biblical story meant to relate more to the Scandinavians than the original text. It takes on a very historical and educated air when explaining not only how God made earth, but also how people migrated and paganism arose.
I found it interesting that Snorri made room for the pagans in his account and how he did not demean them or call them heathens, he simply portrayed them as a people who, over time, strove to find meaning in life and thus found God again. The mapping of the different philosophies was intriguing in that it was delivered very matter of factly and showed a very logical progression. And finally, I thought it was worth noting how Troy was not only mentioned in this prologue, but it seemed to be an integral part of this historical story.

The Saga of the Confederates

Despite having been pointed out in the intro, I thought that it was rather evident that this saga was written after the designated, traditional Saga Age. One clue to this is that the Saga of the Confederates has very few episodes and is fundamentally based around a sole sequence of events, which differs from previous sagas which often include many tangent stories and semi-superfluous background information. Another hint is that there are hardly any allusions to pagan rituals or beliefs and also, the Christmas holiday is mentioned, indicating that Christianity had been accepted and infused into Icelandic culture by the time this saga took place. Also, this saga was written rather satirically and with a slightly sarcastic sense of humor, which differs greatly from the other, more straight-forward sagas. Finally, I found that the system of law in this saga to be much more detailed and procedural. Generally, cases brought to the Althing in other sagas seemed to be mainly a popularity contest in which all forms of cheating and bribery were common place. In this saga, however, we are shown that the law is much more strictly defined to the extent that people could find loopholes in the judicial process in order to manipulate the law.
As a side note, I found it rather funny that once Ospak was outlawed, Odd simply stood up and announced to the people around him this new decision and gave a pretty vague description of Ospak which I thought could easily have described half the Icelandic men in that day. I simply thought it a strange way of following through on a such a formal court sentancing.

The Saga of Hranfnkel Frey's Godi

This saga definitely differed from other sagas in how it incorporated intense imagery and realistic description which is usually absent in the stereotypical saga. While much of the writing was still very blunt and straight forward, it was obvious that the writer had gone to extra lengths to include these vivid descriptions. One area where I especially noticed this element of realism was when Sam and the Thjostarssons attacked Hrafnkel at his farm and tortured his men to humiliate him. (As a side note, I thought it a little peculiar that the character's name was Sam--I wouldn't expect to see such a common name in an Icelandic saga, especially one which isn't full of consonants.) I also thought the imagery and descriptions of the bogs and lava fields that Hrafnkel chases Eyvind through were uncharacteristically lengthy and in depth. To me, reading this saga felt much more similar to reading an early 20th century novel than your average saga.
It was interesting to me that the protagonist position in this saga seemed to shift as the writer encouraged the reader to shift his/her sympathies between opposing characters. In the beginning, I felt strongly allied with Hrafnkel's side and thought that he was not out of line for keeping his word, even if he perhaps could have been more lenient. I believed that he had made a fair offer and that Thorbjorn was simply being greedy. However, after Sam and Thorbjorn won their case with the help of the Thjostarsson brothers, I felt that they deserved it and I hoped they would be able to live on a happy life, even if they too went to extremes in getting vengence. However, once Hrafnkel finally won back his homestead and pride, I found myself rooting for him. To me, this shift of loyalties and sympathies made the saga that much more interesting because you were always involved and invested in the well being of a particular character and you could never rest easy about their well fare until the very end.

The Hovamol

I found the Hovamol very interesting in that it seemed to give a great deal of insight into the key values in Viking culture. I was intrigued by the discussion on drinking in which the stanzas seemed to stress moderation as the proper habit when enjoying alcohol. In stanza 12, lines 3-4, it states, "For the more he drinks | the less does man /Of his mind the mastery hold" warning that one is likely to act irresponsible when heavily under the influence. Stanza 19 advises, "Shun not the mead, | but drink in measure", likely good advice--to anyone. Other values which seemed to be highlighted in this poem were wisdom, honor, trust, friendship/kinship, and the importance of being a polite guest.

Of these, the stanza I found most insightful was 34:

Crooked and far | is the road to a foe,
Though his house on the highway be;
But wide and straight | is the way to a friend,
Though far away he fare.

I interpreted this to mean that while the path to making an enemy is rather tretcherous, it is nonetheless the path most traveled. Meanwhile, the road to friendship is not a difficult one, but because of investments such as time and caring, fewer people choose to take it, despite the fact that it is simpler and definitely more worthwhile.

Gisli Sursson's Saga

While there were many themes in this saga, I found the most interesting to be that of the portrayal of women. The three main women in this saga were Aud, Asgerd, and Thordis. It seemed to me, by the way they were described, that Asgerd was rather more devious than Aud, who was depicted as an honest, loyal wife. Asgerd was not only willing to lie to her husband about her affair, denying it flat out, but when he became upset with her, she threatened to divorce him and take back her dowry. She seriously had the upperhand in this situation and was not afraid to use it to her advantage. Aud, on the other hand, uses her leverage to protect her husband while he is in hiding. Instead of divulging Gisli's whereabouts and keeping the silver for herself, she not only refuses to aid the mercinaries in anyway, but blatantly humiliates Eyjolf in front of all his men. I thought this, above all, showed her amazing bravery and inner strength. Finally, there was Thordis who, while she was the one to incriminate her brother to begin with, had the courage (or perhaps foolhardiness) to attempt to avenge his death by attacking Eyjolf. These examples simply show the chutzpah that these women in this saga had, which I, personally, found rather impressive and inspiring.

The Saga of Gunnlaug Serpent-Tongue

In this Saga, one can make several observations which lead to insights into the cultural context of the story as well as the historical context of the period which this Saga was recorded. One of these observations is of a strong influence by Christianity in the telling of the story which seems to be more insightful to the time period this Saga was written than to the actual time which the story takes place. An example of this is on page 567 where it states, "...it was about the time that the best thing ever to have happened in Iceland occured: the whole country became Christian and the entire population abandoned the old faith." To me this particular quote stood out from the narration in that it offered a very opinionated perspective which is absent in the writing in the rest of the saga.
Another observation I made note of was the dynamics between the genders and the definitions and descriptions of masculinity vs. femininity throughout the Saga. While there is some mentioning of strong, independent women (especially Jofrid), the patriarchal rule of the Icelandic society is quite evident. More interesting, however, are the adjectives chosen to portray gender roles and characteristics. For men, masculinity is described with words like important, manly, well-respected, brave, rich, powerful, just, and well thought of. Words associated with women and their femininity, however, seem to focus on more physical attributes such as fair, beautiful, and pretty. Throughout this saga, the qualities of masculinity seem to be stressed as desirable and admirable and required in order to gain respect from all. For women though, it simply seems that their looks determine the level of femininity and don't particularly increase their influence.
As a side note, I thought it was really interesting that this saga refered to William the Conquerer of 1066 as William the Bastard--it seems to show some bias on the part of the writer of this piece.

Reading Response #2: Icelandic Tales

The six tales we read for this assignment all seemed very unique and yet there was an underlying thread that connected them all. They were all similar in the style of writing in which each person was referenced by listing his or her notorious kinsmen and the way they were written very simply yet still employed clever twists and irony. There was also a cohesiveness in the way each tale tended to describe the Icelandic characters as stubborn, rather rowdy people.
The stories themselves were interesting because they showed how big a role honor, respect, and family played in the lives of these people. In the Tale of Thorstein Staff-struck, it is evident what a large role family honor and pride played and introduced the concept of compensation for losses as a form of restoring such honor if lost. To me this idea of receiving monetary or material compensation for the loss or dishonoring of a family member was slightly bizzare because it seemed such a callous way of dealing with the situation. However, put into the context of that time period and culture, it is understandable for all practical purposes.
While these tales helped to shed light upon a softer more personal side of these people, they also helped affirm the stereotype of their violent and harsh nature to some degree.