Murder in a "Christian" Household

Njal’s saga’s setting is uniquely positioned around the Christianization of Iceland. This allows us to see the author's interpretation of how the Icelanders adapted to this fundamental change in their society. Using violence to solve problems (like blood feuds) holds contrast to the modern-day values of Christianity. In the saga, men who have adopted Christianity also hold on to the violent problem-solving methods common to the sagas, like blood feuds. This blog will talk about the interesting contradictions to Christian doctrine that shows up when the Icelanders convert. From revenge killing in the name of God, to planning to kill a family in the same room that your holy objects are in, this saga sees it all.

.           Almost immediately after the switch to Christianity, the saga has a killing in the name of God. Hoskuld’s son, Amundi the Blind, confronts his father’s killer. The killer refuses to offer him compensation for his father’s death. Amundi replies “I don’t know that to be just before God” …” seeing that you struck so close to my heart. I can say this-if I were sound in both my eyes, I would either have compensation for my father or take blood revenge, and may God now settle between us.” Amundi walks out of the booth and turns around to find that his vision has returned to him, he says “Praise be to God, my lord. Now it can be seen what He wants.” Amundi then rushes back into the booth and buries his axe in his father’s killer’s head. Even though he is a Christian he still kills in revenge. In this saga, killing someone isn’t a relatively villainous thing to do but even the real antagonist of the saga converted.

19th-century rendering of the Law Rock in Þingvellir. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Althing

            Mord Valgardsson, the antagonist of the saga, converted to Christianity. Its known to the people of Iceland that Mord is an evil person. He was partially responsible for the killing of Njal’s friend Gunnar. Mord’s father returns home and tells his son that he needs to kill the Njalssons to regain his authority, a classic villainous plan. After this planning Mord says “I wish, father, that you would accept the faith” … “you’re an old man.” Mord’s father replies “I don’t want to.” … “and in fact, I would like you to renounce the faith and see what happens.” Mord’s father then proceeds to break Mord’s holy objects. He dies soon after that Even though Mord is a true villain, he is Christian. He plots to kill a family in the same room he has holy objects in.

                                                  a broken crucifix on white background. 

            The adoption of a new religion is bound to be met with a little friction. This saga is set in a time that allows it to document the relatively odd and Anti-Christian practices of the Icelanders who call themselves Christians. This saga sees men kill others for revenge in the name of God and the antagonist of the saga plots the death of a family in the same room he holds his holy objects in. Controversy and friction experienced when adopting a new religion like Christianity makes sense, but the way these Icelanders make it work is something else.

The Role of Female Characters and Female Bodies in Pop Culture “Viking” Media

After reading Njal’s Saga, we get a clearer, more diversified picture of what female characters can, should, and will do in their lives. Based on Ibn Fadlan’s account alone, we would get an extremely limited and unrepresentative portrait of women in Viking cultures. When characters like Hallgerd and Bergthora are added to this tableau, however, we begin to see that while their environments are distinctly male-dominated and patriarchal, women still have opportunities to exercise power and influence events in major ways. This does not seem to have translated into pop culture, and the entertainment industry takes advantage of female characters for the benefit of a primarily male audience.

            If you were to ask someone at random today what their most recent or memorable encounter with Viking culture in the media was, they would probably point towards TV shows such as Vikings or The Last Kingdom, or perhaps even video games like God of War, For Honor, or The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. I personally only have experience with the first and last of these examples, so this is where this blog will be focused.

            First, let’s talk about armor. Specifically, let’s talk about the difference between “male armor” and “female armor” in media. Here, I’ll be using pictures from Skyrim to illustrate what it is I’m talking about, and I’m sure most if not all of you already know what I’m going to point out.

            The point of armor is to keep you protected from various forms of danger, like someone wanting to take care of your backache with an axe, or a formerly-blind man trying to chop your head off, just to name a few… This makes perfect sense, unless of course you’re designing armor for your video game or tv show characters. In these cases, it obviously (sarcasm) makes sense to make armor for female-bodied characters more… non-existent, because the most important thing about these characters is obviously the fact that they are female-bodied (sarcasm) and we need to remind consumers of this media of that fact by having them walk around in metal bikinis in frigid temperatures. This is totally what any sane person would do in a real situation (S A R C A S M). This approach goes in complete opposition to characters like the Valkyrie Brynhild/Sigrdrifa, who are portrayed as fully-armored, sword-in-hand, and ready to kick your butt straight to Valhalla.

Sure, this gendering of armor doesn’t always happen, but it happens often enough for us to notice a pattern and for things like “bikini armor” to become a defining aspect of the video game world. Additionally, you may want to point out that in a lot of pop culture material, Viking armor shows a lot of skin regardless of the sex of the person wearing it. Yes, it is true that shirtless berserkers and longaxe-wielding barbarians with exposed arms and legs. However, think about how this exposed skin is often used and sexualized. For males, the exposed skin accentuates their muscular bodies. For females, the exposure is done primarily to show off body parts that are often sexualized (cleavage, thighs, lower back, etc…). So it’s not just about the exposed skin and subsequent uselessness of their “armor,” but also about the purpose of exposing said skin.

Let’s shift gears and talk about the roles and personalities of female characters in a TV show like Vikings, and compare them to some female characters from Njal’s Saga. Vikings is known for having some “strong female characters,” and characters like Lagertha or Astrid certainly challenge the housewife/damsel in distress archetype by participating in “masculine” activities such as warfare and leadership. However, this comes at a cost. First, it implies that women’s only avenue to power or respect (from other men) is by becoming more like men. Yes, it challenges gender role archetypes, but it doesn’t actually challenge gender norms. While we don’t see as many physically strong female characters in the saga, we do see women subvert the plans and expectations of the men around them. Hallgerd, for example, is not described to be physically dominant; however, she is responsible for the deaths of countless people, including several husbands and a foster-father. She is able to work within the patriarchal system to exert power over others, especially men. Characters like Hallgerd and Bergthora are able to challenge the notion that women should be subservient, meek, and deferent towards men, not by being men, but by using the system itself to their advantage.

Lastly, I want to talk about sexuality and female characters in media. Focusing on Vikings, I have noted that most if not all female characters in the show are sexualized for the benefit of a heterosexual male viewer. If the women are not having sex with a man in the show, they have some sort of lesbian relationship. While portraying LGBT characters is admirable, it should be noted that we rarely (never in Vikings) see anything other than heterosexual or lesbian relationships, and the lesbian relationships we do see are fetishized or sexualized to please heterosexual men.

Is Njal a God-like Figure?

In Njal’s Saga, Njal is representative of some kind of higher power that is consulted but not always followed, creating this air of religious construct away from that of Christianity. From the very beginning, he is a person very different from that of the normal Icelandic man. He is seen as a man of power and great wisdom, far more than any other man seen in previous sagas. He was always odd considering that “no beard grew on him” (pg. 35). Men of Iceland were always known for being very large physically as well as hairy. Njal is envisioned as someone who is genuinely different and could represent a sort of god-like religious figure within the democratic structure.

            Despite the growing presence of Christianity in Iceland, there was still a continuous need for a wise being within the realm of the law. He consulted constantly throughout the saga, especially in cases that involve consequences and advice. When Bergthora and Hallgerd were doing their best to get people killed all because of a seat on a bench, Njal provided several pieces of advice, noting it probably wasn’t a good idea and he didn’t want to get involved. And when kinsmen of those who had been taken victim demanded that a settlement be created, Njal was always involved. Even with all of this wisdom and prestige, his friends and his family still wouldn’t listen to him. This mirrors that of what occurs in Christianity, the bible and other instances, where humans betray the given advice of God, despite the possibility of the outcome.

            He also has a magical ability to “see” the future, making his wisdom far more superior. He is able to predict the death of Gunnar and also of himself, claiming they were incredibly unexpected. He is able to see into the past and into the future, settle scores and bring peace. This ability makes him stand out from other men. The breadth of knowledge that Njal has is used by several men and women throughout the saga. They constantly ask him for help and consult on matters, but when it comes to providing advice that they don’t necessarily agree with, they don’t always take it, which is similar to that of Christianity or other religions. When faced with the odds of what is right versus what is wanted, people tend to abandon correct advice.

            Njal is a very complex person, with insane abilities that no other person has. He is so well read in laws that no one can match his settlements and rulings. He is able to see into the future and predict what’s going to happen. He can see into the past with vast memories. Even with the ability and unrelenting stream of advice for those who ask for it, people still disobey him and end up suffering the consequences. This is shown several times when people refer to their Gods in any sort of religion. Despite a clear image of what is seen to be right, they disobey. Njal acts as a democratic god-like figure for those in Iceland, with powers beyond those that are human. 

Famous Warriors of the Vikings

 1: Rollo Ragnvaldsson. Rollo, like many Vikings, raided western Europe. He laid siege to Paris in 885 to 886. The siege ended when the army of France lead by Charles the Fat (what a name, right?) forced the Vikings to continue up the Seine river and raid elsewhere. Charles, seeing the potential usefulness of having a Viking ally, offered land for Rollo at the mouth of the Seine river in an area that came to be known as Normandy (which pretty much translates to Northman-land). Now Duke of Normandy, Rollo would defend the lands he so recently was raiding (while also extorting money from the French monarchy). (Left: statue of Rollo in modern day Paris). Bonus fact: I am possibly related to Rollo as one of my ancestors was a companion of William the Conqueror, his descendant.

 2: 

 The ancient Vikings were feared fighters that raided and fought from the Byzantine Empire in Turkey to the coast of Canada in the Americas. Obviously, as this class discusses, their culture was far more complex but the fact remains that they had a long held military tradition. With warriors featuring heavily in the sagas, such as Grettir, it's worth exploring a few that stand out.

Lagertha doing what she does best, fighting.

Lagertha. The real story of beloved Vikings character Lagertha is a little harder to detail. The chronicler Saxo Grammaticus wrote down most of what we know about her life, and Saxo was known for his... creative liberties with accounts. What we know about her from him is this: Fro, King of Sweden, invaded Norway and killed Siward the Norwegian King. Ragnar Lodbrok, the famous Viking hero (who also might have had an exaggerated life) came to avenge his grandfather Siward and fought alongside Lagertha as they killed Fro in revenge. The two married and had several children, though Ragnar later divorced her both for political reasons and because she did kind of sic a bear and dog on him to test his courage. She retained her feelings for him however, and came to his aid during a civil war and rescued both Ragnar and his son also named Siward. While the real Lagertha might not have been sole Queen of Norway or lead an armada of 120 ships to save her old love, like many tales there is no doubt an ounce of truth at the heart of the story about this fearsome shield-maiden.

















3: Harald Hardrada. With a last name that literally means "hard ruler" one can kind of guess how Harald was a bit of an intense fellow. Early on in his life, Harald was forced into exile and sent to Russia where he became a military leader of the Kievian Rus (think Russians with Viking influence). But Harald wanted more in life and joined the famous Varangian Guard of the Byzantine Empire. The Varangians were the personal bodyguards and military commanders of the Emperor, and Harald proved his talents leading forces in Anatolia, Sicily, and Bulgaria. Harald, sensing he kind of liked this whole leadership thing, Harald returned to Scandinavia and began raiding Denmark. His nephew, Magnus, was king of Denmark (long story) and he granted Harald Norway and co-ruled alongside him. Until Magnus died. So Harald became king of Norway AND Denmark. Sensing that he was on a roll, Harald tried invading England and claiming the throne there (while it was also being invaded by William the Conqueror, descendant of Rollo). Harald died at the battle of Stamford Bridge, thus ending the Viking Age by many accounts, but his legend and exploits lived on.

The man at Stamford Bridge

I am a history major and I love reading historical accounts of warriors doing crazy badass things, and just about one of the craziest I have ever heard occurred at Stamford bridge in England.

The Norse had come in force in an attempt to conquer England, and in a feat of courage, the King of England, Harold Godwinson, agreed to capitulate and yield soil- "Seven feet of English ground, as (They) are taller than other men." This set the stage for the battle, as the message was delivered by a single rider that Tostig, an Earl, claimed to recognize as the King from earlier talks.

The Norse formed into a half circle, and were quickly routed and forced to flee eastwards over the Stamford bridge, a narrow stone construct spanning the Derwent. The majority of their forces were across, and followed in hot pursuit by the English, when possibly the single coolest thing in history occurred.

A single, giant viking with a five foot long dane axe blocked the crossing, and held off the ENTIRE ENGLISH ARMY FOR HOURS. He killed forty men, and gave the Norse time to reform their shield wall and continue the battle on the eastern bank. Now, thats just a last stand. Unusual, still cool, but not total, sylvester stallone-esque badassery. It is then important to remember that the entire norse army had abandoned their armor in order to move more quickly, and that the troops sent to beat the viking weren't peasants or conscripts, but actual, full blooded knights, reknowned for their prowess and with the best weapons and armor available during the age, and furthermore, the vikings had finished celebrating harvest end the night before the battle.

When all that comes together, you have a single man that held off an army bare chested while hung over, fighting against the best warriors of a class of warriors that trained for combat since the age of 5.

They managed to kill him in the end, with typical English shenanigans. They put a peasant in a half barrel with a spear, floated him under the bridge, and he stabbed the viking in the anus. The Norsemen lost the battle and were nearly killed to a man, which means that this guy was so cool he was recorded for his badassery in the annals of a country that absolutely hated his entire people to the point of war.

➼The Man’s Bow and Arrow: How Hallgerd and Merida Challenge Gunnar, Legolas, and Hawkeye➻

D

id you know that the bow and arrow is a symbol of masculine strength?

              This isn’t a crazy suggestion. Well, at least, not according to scholarly research based on several different cultures (http://www.atarn.org/chinese/seligman/seligman.htm).

              In southern India, the Assam state in northeastern India, and China, the bow and arrow is used for fertility rites in which it is associated with masculinity. In southern India, a husband physically gives his pregnant wife an arrow, thereby tangibly representing his role as a father in relation to the mother in the partnership. In northeastern India, a bow and arrow is put up next to the door of a house to publically declare the birth of a boy in the family. And in certain parts of China, a celebration ceremony for a royal prince requires a bow and arrow. However, having kids is just the beginning. The bow and arrow is also related to political transfers of power.

              In areas of Africa and the Far East, a bow and arrow signifies ownership. An African king ascribing to such traditions shoots arrows in the cardinal directions of land that he has recently acquired in order to emphasize his possession. Inhabitants of the Far East have been known to connect the bow and arrow with male death: arrows are fired to call back the souls of departed men, or miniatures of them are sacrificed to ancestors to protect the arrival of a newborn son.

              What does this mean? Why does it matter that the bow and arrow is all about boys as children, or about boys getting the throne and either being summoned home or allowed to stay on Earth?

              It matters because real-world evidence consequently says that the bow and arrow is widely seen as an indicator of manhood. And that changes how we read.

              For example: Gunnar in Njal’s Saga. Do you remember the weapon that his life depends on? Yep—his bow and arrow. His exact words, my friends, are, “[My attackers will] never be able to get me as long as I can use my bow” (128).

              Substitute the concept of “manhood” for “bow.” The sentence now becomes, “My attackers will never be able to defeat me as long as I am still a man—still have authority, still wield the symbolic embodiment of my fighting prowess, still am mastering my defined gender role in our medieval Icelandic society.”

              It’s a mouthful. Anyway, the picture of Gunnar’s request has been altered. As soon as he turns to Hallgerd, he is actually, surprisingly, asking—from a literary perspective—for his spouse to not only provide him with the locks of hair that will enable him to create a new bowstring and save his life from his pursuers, but also, in essence, his manhood. The loss of control of his bow and arrow is the figurative loss of his manhood.

              Hallgerd, of course, refuses to grant him the hair he needs. As a result, she defies his manhood. She flips the script; she turns the tables. The reason is simple—once she is in charge of the usage of the bow and arrow, she is the man. She is the person who decides the rules, and she is no longer merely a housewife (albeit a shockingly spiteful and underhanded one). Does she deny him the hair due to a slap she received many years earlier? Yes. Is she murdering her well-renowned partner, who has always been true to her, over a trivial slight? Yes. Her choice is unjustifiable, morally speaking.

              Even so, she is doing something few women in her time frame do: seizing a chance to call the shots and metaphorically oppose sexist standards. She’s not a child-bearing housecleaner. She’s a powerful female prepared to step into traditionally male shoes—and she does it the second she first objects to the marriage that her father arranges for her, as well as continues to do so with every nuptial agreement thereafter, being present and negotiating her own terms (19-20, 27-28, 52-53).

              Thus Hallgerd, in addition to being evil, is a boss.

“Nope.”

              Along the same lines, Disney’s animated movie Brave, featuring the fiery Scottish Merida as the lead, contradicts stereotypes both openly and subtly. Merida voraciously objects to her kingdom’s age-old custom of marrying princesses off to neighboring princes to afford for state interests and fights her mother, the queen, on the practice over and over again. She likewise engages in a brilliant shooting contest wherein she illegally vies for her own hand and, in an emblematic sense, outperforms her princely suitors with a bow and arrow to illustrate that she can be a “man” as well as or better than they can. In terms of running a country, she’s as fit to wear a crown independently, and to make decisions, as any of her supposedly hardier competitors are.

              Hence, each time Merida ignores her mom’s demands that she abandon her love of the bow and arrow, she is taking their argument concerning her duties and purpose in life to a metaphorical level. She is yelling Éowyn’s line from the Lord of the Rings on the battlefield—“I am no man!”—and proving that the conventional understanding of manliness preventing her from reaching her full societal potential is a joke.

              In the moment that she is readying herself to land the bullseye on the last of the three targets lined up for her suitors, one per man—she gets all of them, not satisfied with simply acing one—her mother orders her not to loose another arrow.

              Merida draws a deep breath, focuses on the target, and, in slow motion, releases her final arrow. Neither she nor Hallgerd were born to conform. They were born to rebel.

              Step aside, Gunnar, Legolas, and Hawkeye. You have some girls to compete with.

              And they’re not taking no for an answer.

             

             

             

             

HBO’s Game of Thrones Mirroring Njal’s Saga

HBO took George R.R. Martin’s famous book series, Game of Thrones and made a television series. The show and book series have a ‘Dungeons and Dragons’ theme to the storyline and consists of various characters that can be compared to numerous ones in Njal’s Saga. Both consist of feuds that turn bloody, powerful women murderers, and honorable men that have their honor get them destroyed. It is interesting to see how the two follow similar paths in plot. Certain characters featured in Game of Thrones are the Starks (Ned Stark and Arya Stark), the Lannisters (Cersei Lannister), Daenerys, and Littlefinger. These mentioned characters unintentionally reflect the Njalssons, the Sigfussons, Hoskuld Thrainsson, the burning at Bergthoshvol, Hallgerd, and Bergthora. While some of these merely compare to conflicts and events, some characters follow a similar archetype to that of the other. These similarities are important to hold into consideration because they can provide a deeper understanding of the text and pop culture.  

The Starks and The Lannisters

The Starks are a prominent family within Game of Thrones. Throughout the series, the Starks act as the protagonists within the story. They have a hostile feud with the Lannisters that last throughout all seasons and books, much like the Njalssons and Sigfussons do in Njal’s Saga. The Lannisters are also a prestigious family within the series, and primarily act as antagonists. This strife between the two lead to great bloodshed and numerous conflicts.

Ned Stark

Ned Stark is a main character in the first book and season in GOT and his most noticeable character trait is his honor. He is known for being an honorable man, and always trying to do the right thing. No reader or viewer can deny that he is innocent of any bloodshed or any feud, and this innocence, this honor of his, is what led him to his unfortunate and undeserving death. This can be compared to the murder of Hoskuld Thrainsson, whom is also innocent and undeserving.

Arya Stark

Arya Stark is one of Ned Stark’s daughters who begins the show as a defenseless girl who refuses to be a damsel and later turns herself into a weapon of destruction. Her ruthlessness and gift of grudge-holding reminds us of Bergthora. Berthora arranges six killings in revenge while Arya kills for revenge as well. 

Littlefinger

Littlefinger is a character as well in GOT. His clever mind sets feuds and murder into motion through his persuading words and gossip. Mord Valgardsson spreads enough gossip to get Hoskuld Thrainsson killed just as Littlefinger gets Ned Stark executed.

Cersei Lannister

Cersei Lannister is introduced to readers and viewers as Queen of the Seven Kingdoms (the setting in GOT). Her first husband, King Robert Baratheon, was physically abusive to her. While Cersei is not a moral woman to begin with, she was still a victim of domestic abuse. Because of this, and many other plotlines, she murders her husband. This makes us recall Hallgerd and her reasoning for not giving her husband a hair for his bow, eventually leading to extreme bloodshed, all because he hit her. 

Daenerys

Daenerys is another powerful female figure in GOT. She acts as a born leader, survivor, and fighter. She is made to be a protagonist; however, in recent episodes she burns two innocent men alive, despite her advisor’s heeding. She does so irrationally and to demonstrate her power. This relates to the burning at Bergthorshvol because both were unjustifiable actions/events.