plik

Grettis saga and the iudicium dei

Andrew Hamer

The author of Grettis saga

seems to have delighted in the opportunities for

synthesis and development of material that are afforded by cultural contacts. The saga

combines elements taken from native folklore and Romance fabliau with material

concerning the early history of Iceland taken from Landnámabók and the sagas of

Icelanders

. The tone of the saga is mixed, and is in turns humorous, grotesque,

gothic, parodic and pious.

Grettir‟s character, too, is mixed: he has been variously

described as a trickster, bully, „overbearing and arrogant to one person, kind and
helpful to another‟

, and as

„having in his composition something of Óðinn,

something of Þórr, something of Loki, something of the giants‟

. It is b

ecause „his

character is of such complexity, in part because of its oscillations, that we respond to

him more as if he were a real person‟

Summarised to the brevity

of an abstract, the saga‟s account of Grettir‟s life is

bleak: a journey from unpromising childhood to death as an outlaw with a price on his

head. But the author leaves it to another voice, that of Sturla Þórðarson the Lawman, to

speak the last words on Grettir.

Among those of Grettir‟s qualities that Sturla identified

as being particularly worthy of mention are his intelligence, which enabled him to

remain at large for a longer period of time than any other outlaw, and the great

physical strength that made him better able than other men to deal with revenants and

ghosts

. Grettis saga asks how it could be that so intelligent a man should perish as an

outlaw, a hero moreover who had destroyed malignant spirits and predatory vikings.

The story of Grettir forms the central biography (chapters 14

– 84) of a saga

which is usually described as having a tripartite structure, the other parts being a

prologue (chapters 1 - 13), and an epilogue (chapters 85 - 93)

. The action of the

prologue and of the central biography takes place mainly in Iceland and Norway, while

Quotations from Grettis saga, cited with page number, are from Guðni Jónsson, ed., Grettis saga

Ásmundarsonar, Bandamanna saga, Odds þáttr Ófeigssonar , Íslenzk Fornrit (ÍF) 7 (Reykjavík: Hið
Íslenzka Fornritafélag, 1936).

For a discussion of the written and oral sources of Grettis saga, see ÍF 7, pp. xvii-xxxi; xlii-lx.

Hume, „Thematic Design‟, p. 469.

Poole, „Old Norse/Icelandic Myth, p. 398, with reference to Hastrup, „Tracing Tradition‟, p. 310.

Hume, „Thematic Design‟, p. 480.

ÍF 7, pp. 289-290.

Clover, The Medieval Saga, pp. 45-46 sees Grettis saga

as bipartite: a „“main” story‟ followed by a

„revenge plot‟.

the epilogue, the so-called Spesar þáttr

(„story of Spes‟) is mainly set in Constantinople.

This epilogue is so different from the rest of the saga in tone and subject-matter, as

well as setting, that it was once thought to have been the work of another author, but it

is included in all manuscripts of the saga, none of which dates from before the

fifteenth century, and it is now generally agreed that Spesar þáttr was included as part

of the saga from the time of its writing

, traditionally thought to have been shortly

after 1300

, and the work of an anonymous author.

Guðni Jónsson‟s examination of the saga‟s sources led him to suggest that the

author had access to a good library, and that he was therefore probably a priest, or at

least had had an ecclesiastical education. Guðni identified as the man most likely to

have written Grettis saga the priest Hafliði Steinsson (1253-1319), who was educated

at, and later served for a period at the monastery of Þingeyrar, a notable centre of

learning, with a good library. There is some supporting evidence for this suggestion:

in one of the early manuscripts of Grettis saga, a contemporary hand has written that

„the brother of Björn Þorleifsson wrote this saga‟; Björn‟s family was directly

descended from Hafliði Steinsson. In addition, it is not unlikely that Hafliði knew

Sturla Þórðarson (d. 1284), whose views are quoted in the saga, as stated above

Recently, however, there has been renewed speculation concerning the date of the

saga‟s composition. Örnólfur Thorsson, noting the fifteenth-century date of the

earliest manuscripts of the saga

, draws attention to the appearance in the narrative of

a number of late loan-words, which he feels indicates a fifteenth-century date for the

saga

‟s composition also

. Accepting this argument, Kate Heslop suggests that the

writing of Grettis saga

was part of the „late medieval surge of Grettir-related

composition described by [Kirsten] Hastrup and Guðvarður Már

‟

The principal concern of the present paper will be a discussion of the

relationship between narrative structure and theme in Grettis saga, but this will lead

to some remarks

concerning the date of the saga‟s composition. The particular

narrative theme to be discussed here, as having consequences for the structure of the

ÍF 7, pp. xv-xvi.

ÍF 7, pp. lxix-lxx.

See Guðni‟s discussion in ÍF 7, pp. lxxii-lxxv.

„Skinnhandrit sögunnar eru öll rituð á 15. öld‟ (ÍF 7, p. lxxvi).

„Grettir sterki og Sturla lögmaður‟, pp. 918-924.

„Grettisfærsla‟, p. 78, referring to Hastrup, „Tracing Tradition‟ and to Guðvarður Már Gunnlaugsson,

„“Grettir vondum vættum, veitti hel og þreytti”: Grettir Ásmundarson og vinsældir Grettis sögu‟,
Gripla 11 (2000), pp. 37-78.

saga, is the one identified by Peter Foot

e as being a „central problem‟ that

„preoccupied‟ the author: „the causes for Grettir‟s downfall … decisive for the

construction of the saga

‟

. This paper will focus upon

Grettir‟s dealings with the

undead, the effects of the curse Glámr puts upon him, the events that lead to his being

declared an outlaw, and the manner of his death; the course of the discussion will also

involve a re-examination of the structural links between the three parts of the saga.

Grett

ir‟s first confrontation with a malevolent undead occurs after he has

broken into a grave-mound in search of treasure (chapter 18). His interest had first

been aroused one evening when he had seen fire gushing out on a headland, to him a

sure sign that treasure had been buried there. Despite being warned not to discover

more about the controller of the fire, Grettir descends into the grave, where he is

attacked by the undead occupant, Kárr the Old. The two of them wrestle, Grettir

defeats Kárr and cuts off his head, which he places against the corpse‟s buttocks, an

act which prevents the undead from walking again

. He recovers a great deal of

treasure from the grave-mound, including a magnificent short sword. This treasure he

returns to its rightful owner; he is later given the short sword („Kárr‟s gift‟) as a

reward for saving the women of the household from being raped, and the farm from

being robbed, by a group of twelve berserks, whom he destroys single-handed.

The great turning-

point in Grettir‟s fortunes, and the episode which some

consider to mark the high point of the whole saga

, is Grettir‟s second encounter with

an undead, his fight with the murderous Glámr (chapter 35). As was the case in his

confrontation with Kárr, Grettir intervenes despite having been warned not to. The

struggle against Glámr almost costs Grettir his life, but he finally defeats the monster,

who, before he is finally destroyed, curses him: Grettir will never grow stronger than

he is at present, and will only have half the strength he would have had if he had not

encountered Glámr;

Grettir‟s acts will bring him misfortune, and he will be outlawed;

he will always have before

him the terrible vision of Glámr‟s eyes, so that he will not

be able to bear being alone, and this will cause his death. Grettir then cuts off Glámr‟s

head and places it against his buttocks, as he had done with Kárr the Old. Following

Foote, Grettir the Strong, p. x.

ÍF 7, p. 122, note 1, and references there.

So for example Guðni Jónsson, ÍF 7, p. xii;

Guðmundur Andri Thorsson, „Grettla‟, p. 109.

his encounter with Glámr Grettir is terrified of the dark

, and is afraid to go anywhere

alone after nightfall.

Glámr‟s curse begins to take effect when Grettir accidentally sets fire to a

house, and the occupants, the sons of Þórir of Garðr, are burnt to death inside. There

are no witnesses, so there is no-one to speak for Grettir and to say he did not burn the

men deliberately. Grettir is offered the opportunity to clear his name through the

ordeal of carrying hot iron, which he is very willing to do. The ordeal is aborted,

however, when a boy stands up in church and insults Grettir: Þá hljóp fram piltr einn

frumvaxta, heldr svipligr … Hann fór at Gretti

(p. 133:

„then a boy in his early youth

jumped forward, rather unpleasant-

looking … He went for Grettir‟). Grettir strikes the

boy such a heavy blow that he is rendered senseless, and some people believe him to be

dead; uproar breaks out in the church, and the ordeal is aborted. The boy disappears from

the church during the uproar, and „people consider it most likely, that he had been an

unclean spirit (óhreinn andi)

sent to bring misfortune on Grettir‟. Because the ordeal

cannot now proceed, Grettir is unable to prove that he did not murder the sons of Þórir,

and the latter has him outlawed at the Althing. The issue to be determined is the

extent to which Grettir‟s „misfortune‟ (ógæfa) is caused simply by his own over-
reaction to the boy‟s provocation, or whether he is indeed guilty of some more serious

offence. The discussion can usefully begin with a brief examination for comparative

purposes of the careers of two of Grettir‟s relatives, both of them more „fortunate‟
than him, whose lives are recounted in the saga‟s prologue and epilogue.

The prologue relates the doings of Grettir‟s great-grandfather, Qnundr tréfótr

(„wood-leg‟), who is initially described as being víkingr mikill ok herjaði vestr um haf („a
great viking, who used to raid across the North Sea‟). Qnundr fights against Haraldr

Fine-hair at the battle of Hafrsfj

rðr, where he earns his nickname when one of his legs

is sliced off at the knee. In another battle he defeats two dangerous vikings. Some years

later, like many another well-born saga hero who has made an enemy of King Haraldr,

he leaves his ancestral lands in Norway and emigrates to Iceland, where he founds a

dynasty. Robert Cook has suggested that the story of Qnundr‟s „exciting life‟ is
summarised „in such a dry and straightforward way‟ that it „will strike most readers as
routine stuff‟, commenting that „even the most dramatic episode in his [Qnundr‟s]

The meaning of the name Glámr

„wavers between “dark” and “light” … we may connect Glámr‟s

name with the liminal

ity and doubleness of the twilight‟ (Poole, „Old Norse/Icelandic Myth‟, p. 400).

Fox and Hermann Pálsson translate fór at

as „went up to‟, while Hight has „went at‟. The phrase suggests

an aggressive approach: see the entry under fara in Cleasby-Vigfusson, Icelandic-English Dictionary.

career, the fight with the vikings Vígbjóðr and Vestmarr (ch. 4) has been called a typical

víkingasaga, probably invented by the author on the model of similar stories in other

sagas‟

Kathryn Hume, however, sees in Qnundr‟s story „similarities to Grettir‟s own

adventures [that] may well be significant‟

. She notes that Qnundr, like Grettir,

possesses „extraordinary strength‟; that he, like Grettir, puts his strength to good use in
destroying “bad” vikings; and that like Grettir, Qnundr burns men to death in a house
(albeit Qnundr‟s act is one of deliberate arson, committed to gain revenge for the death

of a friend). Hume suggests that the prologue to Grettis saga depicts a world where

„harrying and raiding, taking part in pitched battles, defeating “bad” vikings, and hall-
burning had been the normal activities‟

; she concludes that the author‟s thematic

purpose includes contrasting Qnundr‟s world, a world in which Grettir would have
succeeded, with the „more complex‟ society into which he is born, and which rejects

him

Critics have, however, overlooked one episode which comes exactly at the

moment where the author describes Qnundr as being rammr at afli (p.

12: „mighty in

strength

‟), and is also the moment when the story of Qnundr ceases to be „a typical

víkingasaga

‟. It marks the turning-point in the battle against the two vikings, Vígbjóðr

and Vestmarr:

Qnundr‟s killing of Vígbjóðr. Before their encounter, Qnundr‟s men

provide him with extra support for his damaged leg: þeir skutu tréstubba n

kkurum

undir kné Qnundi, ok stóð hann heldr fast. Víkingrinn sótti aptan eptir skipinu, allt þar

til er hann kom at Qnundi, ok hjó til hans með sverði, ok kom í skj

ldinn ok tók af þat, er

nam; síðan hljóp sverðit í stubban, þann er Qnundr hafði undir knénu, ok varð fast

sverðit

(„They shoved a tree stump under Qnundr‟s knee, and he stood pretty firm. The

viking attacked, moving aft along the ship until he reached Qnundr, and struck at him

with his sword. The blow struck the shield and sheared off a part where it hit. The sword

then glanced off into the tree stump which Qnundr had under his knee, and stuck fast

‟).

The argument below will lead to the conclusion that this episode provides the

most significant point at which the stories of Qnundr and Grettir may be compared.

Meanwhile, the epilogue tells the story of

Grettir‟s brother Þorsteinn drómundr

(„galleon‟), who avenges Grettir‟s death at an assembly of the Varangian guard in

„The Reader‟, p. 134.

„Thematic Design‟, pp. 478.

„Thematic Design‟, pp. 479.

„Thematic Design‟, pp. 484-85.

Constantinople. His action violates the sanctity of the assembly, and he is arrested and

incarcerated in a dungeon until such time as he dies or someone pays his ransom.

Already in the dungeon is another man, by now „half-dead‟ (p. 274: hálfdauðr).

Þorsteinn sings each evening, and his fellow prisoner is much cheered by his singing.

A well-

born woman, Spes, is attracted by Þorsteinn‟s singing, and buys his freedom –

although Þorsteinn only accepts her offer after she agrees also to ransom the other

prisoner.

Spes does so, although she suspects that Þorsteinn‟s companion will not

prove to be a bargain. Þorsteinn and Spes, who is married, fall in love and have a

sexual relationship. Her husband becomes suspicious, and she takes an oath of

compurgation, in order to clear her name. On her way to the church to submit herself

to the ordeal, she is carried over a swamp by the disguised Þorsteinn, and as a result

of what then happens is able to fulfil the letter, if not the spirit of the law, by swearing

an ambiguous oath. Þorsteinn and Spes can be said to have duped both her husband,

whom Spes now divorces, and the law. They marry, have children, and enjoy many

years as married partners, but as they enter their old age, they have to reckon with the

fact that their marriage is founded upon a lie,

Spes‟ ambiguous oath. They make

provision for their children, travel to Rome as pilgrims, confess their sins, and humbly

submit themselves to the penance imposed upon them. They receive absolution and

live the rest of their lives in retreat, in separate stone-built cells.

Since the appearance of Guðni Jónsson‟s edition, critics have generally agreed

that Spesar þáttr is an integral part of Grettis saga

. Kathryn Hume and Guðmundur

Andri Thorsson

both suggest that the trajectory of the life of Þorsteinn drómundr

contrasts with that of Grettir

, while Paul Schach has drawn attention to the fact that

both Spes and Grettir agree to submit themselves to the ordeal, in order to clear their

names

. Schach notes an ironic cont

rast between the two episodes: „whereas even

Saint Óláfr was powerless to exonerate Grettir from the false accusation of murder,

tyrannical King Haraldr [Sigurðarson] had no difficulty in effecting the exoneration of

Þorsteinn and Spes from the true charge

of adultery‟

. The tone here is certainly

ironic, but any cynicism is not

the author‟s, but Spes‟ and Þorsteinn‟s, and they later

repent of it. Years later they make a journey to Norway, where Þorsteinn is urged to

ÍF 7, pp. xiv-xvi.

Hume, „Thematic Design‟, pp. 479-480; Guðmundur Andri Thorsson, „Grettla‟, p. 111.

„Spesar þáttr … is the exact and necessary counterpart to Chapter 39 of the saga, in which Grettir

appears before King Óláfr the Saint to request permission to undergo the ordeal of the hot iron‟ („The

Influence‟, p. 117).

Schach, „The Influence‟, p. 118.

go to King Haraldr and give him his allegiance, but Spes counsels against it, and

recommends that they turn their thoughts to God and their own salvation (pp. 286-87):

“Þat vil ek, Þorsteinn … at þú farir eigi á fund Haralds konungs, því at vit eigum

ðrum konungi meira vangoldit, ok þarf fyrir

því at hugsa” ( „I do not want you to go

to meet King Haraldr, Þorsteinn, because we two have a greater debt to another king,

which we must now think about‟).

The author of Grettis saga has an overall moral seriousness of purpose, and

the morally complex Spesar þáttr, largely created by his reworking of what is

essentially a „frivolous romance plot‟

, contributes to that purpose. This reworking is

evident in the departures he takes from the source for the equivocal oath episode,

Tristrams saga ok Ís

ndar

. In Tristrams saga the hero, disguised as a mendicant

pilgrim, offers to carry Ís

nd over some water. Just as they reach the other side, he

stumbles, and „immediately fell down upon her [viz. Ís

nd, who] had lifted up her

skirts‟. In Grettis saga, however, the hero‟s actions are depicted more as a premeditated

sexual assault: at the moment when Þorsteinn falls as he carries Spes: tekr kann þá

saurugri hendi upp á kné henni ok allt á lærit bert

(„he then grasps her knee with his

filthy hand, and right up her

naked thigh‟). The act leaves Spes (apparently) angry: hon

kvað hann vera inn mesta bragðakarl

(p. 283: „she said he was a most crafty fellow‟).

At the corresponding moment in Tristrams saga, however, Ís

nd shares a sexual joke

with her companions:

“Nú, er þat undr, þó at pílagrímrinn vildi leika sér ok þreifa um

hvítu lær mín?

” („Now, is it any wonder if the pilgrim should want to play around and

grope my white thighs?‟) The author of Grettis saga makes one further, apparently

trivial change, which may be noted here: the replacement of

the plural „white thighs‟

with the singular „naked thigh‟.

This change will be discussed below. Another, more obvious difference

between Spesar þáttr and Tristrams saga has caused a good deal of critical comment.

In the Thomas branch of the Tristan story, the heroine undergoes the ordeal of

carrying hot iron, whereas Spes is required to clear her name merely by swearing an

oath that she has not been unfaithful to her husband.

„Several scholars … [see this] as

evidence that the ambiguous-oath motif must have been borrowed from a pre-Thomas

Clover, The Medieval Saga, p. 40.

For a good discussion of the relationship between Tristrams saga and Spesar þáttr

, see Schach, „The

Influence‟, pp. 111-121.

stage of the story‟

. Schach, whose explanation for the difference is that it is a

deliberate change made by the author of Grettis saga, gives two arguments to support

his case: that the orde

al of carrying hot iron „seems to have been restricted to men‟,

and that

„it is preposterous to believe that a haughty noblewoman like Spes would

submit to an ordeal‟

. Both these arguments are refuted by a single case, taken from

such scanty evidence as exists: according to Hákonar saga, ch. 14,

King Hákon‟s

mother, Inga of Varteig, went through the ordeal of carrying hot iron in the year 1218, in

order to prove that the father of her son was Hákon III. The story may not be historically

true, but it proves that, as far as the Norse world was concerned, noble women were

willing to undergo the ordeal of carrying hot iron, at least in works of literature.

Schach‟s arguments therefore cannot help in deciding whether the substitution of

the ambiguous oath for the carrying of hot iron was a deliberate change made by the

author of Grettis saga. There is another, obvious question, however, one which is

ignored by Schach and other critics: why would the author of Grettis saga choose to

change the nature of the ordeal, when by simply retaining the ordeal of hot iron he could

have made a direct

contrast between Spes‟ successful accomplishment of the ordeal and

Grettir‟s failure at it? The issue is cogent, since the author placed Grettir‟s failure to

undergo the ordeal at the centre of his thematic and structural concerns. The ordeal

provides an important narrative link between the stories of Grettir and Þorsteinn

drómundr, as Schach has shown, but the author uses it also to structure the main

biography, highlighting its narrative importance by a series of lexical repetitions, which

serve to

link Grettir‟s death both with the event that leads to his being granted the ordeal,

namely the burning of the sons of Þórir of Garðr, and with his failure to undergo that

ordeal. The first example of lexical repetition involves the word glaumr.

Grettir‟s pursuers are able to attack him in his natural fortress on the island of

Drangey because his slave, Þorbj

rn Glaumr, falls asleep without pulling up the ladder

that provides the only means of access to the cliff-top. While he sleeps,

Grettir‟s

enemies, led by Þorbj

rn Q

ngull („hook‟), climb the ladder. They take Glaumr by

surprise, and attack Grettir and his brother Illugi in their hut. The saga explains why

Þorbj

rn should have the cognomen

„Glaumr‟: En með því, at þessi maðr var

umfangsmikill ok inn mesti gárungr, átti hann kenningarnafn ok var kallaðr glaumr (p.

224: „But because this man bustled about a lot and was a great buffoon, he had a

Schach, „The Influence‟, pp. 118-119.

„The Influence‟, pp. 118-119.

nickname and was called „Glaumr‟ - “noisy merriment”.‟) To the extent that Glaumr

neglects his duties and falls asleep on his watch, he is responsible for the final attack on

Grettir. But the word glaumr is used to describe the merry-making of the sons of Þórir of

Garðr, immediately before Grettir

‟s fatal arrival in search of fire: Hann [Grettir] lagðisk

nú yfir þvert sundit ok gekk þar á land; hann sér þar standa eitt hús ok heyrði mannamál

ok glaum mikinn

(p. 130: „He now struck out across the channel and went ashore there.

He sees one house stand

ing there and heard men‟s voices and much noisy merriment.‟)

Lexical repetition creates narrative symmetry:

Glaumr is part of Grettir‟s destruction, but

Grettir had earlier put a very sudden end to glaumr.

It had been Glaumr, too, who had brought home the bewitched log that was to

cause Grettir‟s self-inflicted fatal wound. Hurling it down with a loud crash, he

challenges Grettir to do as good a job in chopping it up as he had done in carrying it

home. Gretti varð skapfátt við þrælinn ok tvíhendi øxina til rótarinnar, ok eigi geymði

hann, hvat tré þat var.

(p. 251: „Grettir lost his temper with the slave, and struck at the

tree-root two-handed with his axe. And he paid no

attention to what tree it was.‟) The

fatal log is lexically linked with the aborting of

Grettir‟s ordeal, as the phrase, Gretti

varð skapfátt, also occurs when the boy intervenes in the ordeal and insults Grettir:

Gretti varð skapfátt mj

k við þetta, ok gat þá eigi st

ðvat sik (p. 133:

„Grettir completely

lost his temper at this, and was una

ble to restrain himself.‟) On each occasion, Grettir

strikes a blow that inflicts an injury on himself: his first blow damages his reputation in

the eyes of the law, and ultimately leads to his being declared an outlaw, while the

second injures his right thigh, and ultimately leads to his death.

Repetition of the phrase sendr/sent til óheilla strengthens this narrative link

between the bewitched log and the demonic boy. The saga states of the latter: þat ætla

menn helzt, at þat hafi verit óhreinn andi, sendr til óheilla Gretti

(p. 133:

„People

consider it most likely that that was an unclean spirit, sent to bring misfortune to

Grettir.‟) Grettir passes comments on the log: “Illt tré ok af illum sent, ok skulu vit

annan eldivið hafa ... því at þat er sent ok

kr til óheilla” (p. 250: „An evil tree and sent

by evil, and we two shall have other fir

ewood … because that is sent to bring us

misfortune.‟) The boy and the log are two potential causes of „misfortune‟ for Grettir,

but on both occasions it is his own self-destructive personality that makes the

Óhreinn andi translates the Latin spiritus immundus in hagiographical texts. The Latin phrase is also

found fourteen times in Scripture (all but one of these occurrences in the Gospels, and the other in
Apocalyse), but so far as I know there are no extant Old Norse / Icelandic translations of the relevant
verses.

misfortune actual, rather than potential. The two episodes are each a part of the

author‟s consistent moral assessment of Grettir, and whether the reader of Grettis

saga will agree with Robert Cook, who states that

„the fact that the boy is referred to

as an óhreinn andi

… places Grettir in a good light‟

, will depend on how Grettir‟s

ultimate fate, his death from the self-inflicted wound in the thigh, is to be interpreted.

The phrase that describes the ordeal of hot iron, at bera járn, directly links the

opportunity Grettir is given to clear his name with the moments immediately

following his death. King Óláfr tells Grettir:

“Unna vilju vér þér at bera járn fyrir

þetta mál, ef þér verðr þess auðit” (p. 132: „We wish to allow you to carry [hot] iron

for this case, if this is destined for you

‟); Grettir‟s brother Illugi tells Qngull: “En eigi

muntu né kerling, fóstra þín, dœma þessi mál, því at galdrar ykkrir ok forneskja hafa

drepit Gretti, þó at þér bærið járn á hann dauðvána

” (pp. 262-3: „But neither you nor

your foster-mother the old woman will judge this case, because your witchcraft and

heathenism have killed Grettir, although you carry iron at him [viz. attack him with

weapons] when he was on the point of death

‟). Illugi‟s remarks carry a truth of which

he himself is unaware: as the lesson of Spesar þáttr and the Latin name for the ordeal,

iudicium dei, both make clear, no human being can judge the outcome of a case that is

tried by ordeal, and although a king may make the preparations for the ordeal, any

debt of guilt will have to be paid

ðrum konungi

(„to another king‟).

The above examples of lexical repetition adequately demonstrate that it is

Grettir‟s failure to undergo the ordeal, rather than Glámr‟s curse upon him, that

echoes in the events that lead inevitably to his death. And the manner of his death is

unique among Icelandic saga heroes. It is the festering of a self-inflicted wound that

kills him; he is denied a last, heroic stand against his enemies, and it is his brother and

companion Illugi who fulfils the role of a hero in this way

. It is, of course, quite

possible that the historical tradition concerning Grettir which was passed down to the

author of the saga included information, both that Grettir prepared to undergo an

ordeal which was aborted, and that his death resulted more from sepsis in the thigh

than from wounds inflicted by his enemies. Whether or not these were elements of

traditional knowledge,

the author uses the manner of Grettir‟s dying for his own

narrative purpose

s, as the culmination of his ponderings over „the causes for Grettir‟s

„The Reader‟, p. 151.

Guðmundur Andri Thorsson, „Grettla‟, p. 100.

downfall‟

: Grettir‟s septic thigh may be seen as the manifestation in his body of his

failure at the ordeal, the proper test of his innocence.

The employment of the ordeal as the means of trying Grettir is appropriate on

two counts: the nature of the charges against him, and, in the absence of witnesses, the

lack of any clear evidence

against him. To deal with the second of these first: „the most

significant limitation on the use of the ordeal was that it was only employed when other

ways of discoveri

ng the truth were not available … It is clear that the ordeal was a last,

not a first, resort. It was used only if there were no

“certain proof” … As it was stated in

twelfth-century England

, “the ordeal of hot iron is not to be permitted except where the

naked tru

th cannot otherwise be explored”. Or, in the words of the Sachsenspiegel of

ca.1220: “It is not right to use the ordeal in any case, unless the truth may be known in

no other way

”.‟

King Óláfr Haraldsson expresses the uncertainty surrounding whether

the burning of the sons of Þórir was accidental, or a deliberate act on Grettir‟s part:
“Œrit ertu gildr, en eigi veit ek, hverja gæfu þú berr til at hrinda þessu máli af þér; en

líkara væri, at þú hefðir eigi viljandi mennina inni brennt

” (p. 132: „You are worthy

enough, but I do not know what luck you will have in clearing yourself of this charge.

But it would be more likely that you did not deliberately burn the me

n inside‟).

The nature of the charges against Grettir also indicates that he should be tried in

this way. „The legal records of Europe are full of references to the ordeal. One good

example is provided by the series of laws issued by English kings, from the laws of

Edward the Elder, in the tenth century, to the Assizes of Henry II in the twelfth. In these

laws the ordeals of hot iron and cold water are prescribed for a wide range of offences,

including murder, fire-raising, witchcraft and forgery,

as well as simple theft‟

. The

crime of which Grettir is rightly or wrongly accused is a compound of the first two of

these (brennumorð). The appropriateness

in Grettir‟s case of trial by ordeal suggests that

the author of the saga either simply used an existing tradition which stated that Grettir

had been offered the ordeal, or that he had particular knowledge concerning when the

ordeal would provide the appropriate test.

It is doubtful whether any such knowledge could have been gained from oral

sources w

ithin the author‟s own society. The ordeal to which Grettir agrees to be

Foote, Grettir the Strong, p. x.

As Schach notes, the ordeal was introduced into Norway from England and Germany („The

Influence‟, p. 119).

Bartlett, Trial, p. 26.

Bartlett, Trial, p. 25.

subjected, that of carrying hot iron, is hardly known in Icelandic sources, which suggests

it was used there extremely rarely, if at all

. Norwegian sources appoint its use

particularly in sexual cases: where there are charges of bestiality (Frostathing Law 3.18),

sodomy, or sexual intercourse within the forbidden degrees (Gulathing Law 24 and

158)

. Moreover, the fourth Lateran Council, held in 1215, abolished the ordeal

although there is evidence that the practice was not immediately discontinued in all

areas, surviving in Norway until 1247

. Nevertheless, „by 1300 [i.e. around the time that

Grettis saga is usually held to have been written] it [viz. the ordeal] was everywhere

vesti

gial‟

. It may be concluded, therefore, that the author of Grettis saga had no

first-hand knowledge of the ordeal by hot iron, and that the oral tradition concerning

Grettir probably did not include any such ordeal, so that its appearance as the appropriate

test of innocence in Grettir‟s case is the author‟s own invention, and comes from his

antiquarian knowledge, gained from written sources.

Two details in the saga‟s account of the preparations for Grettir‟s ordeal suggest

that the author‟s historical knowledge was accurate: Grettir is described as fasting in

readiness for the ordeal, and the ordeal is to be held in a church. The regulations for the

ordeal stipulated that the accused should fast for three days once he had been lawfully

charged, and that the iron should be placed before the altar prior to being heated

Moreover, it seems likely that a third detail, this one found in the account of the

preparations for Spes‟ ordeal by oath, is also based upon the author‟s historical

knowledge, though in this case the knowledge is possibly muddled. It concerns the

organising role in the ordeal that is given to the bishop, who first decides whether Spes

should be allowed the opportunity to clear her name through an oath of compurgation,

and then determines the appropriate form of the oath she should swear

. Gilbert of

Limerick states that it was a bishop‟s function to consecrate the iron used in the ordeal

;

It is mentioned in Snorri‟s Óláfs saga helga, ch. 145, where the accused is charged with the murder of

his foster-brother.

As with Grettir‟s case, this is an ordeal held under Norwegian law, and has nothing to do

with Icelandic legal process.

Larson, Norwegian Laws, pp. 252, 254, 260.

Hexter, Equivocal oaths, p. 61, n. 96; the relevant statement will be found at canon 19 of that

Council.

Schach, „The Influence‟, p. 119.

Bartlett, Trial, p. 15.

Liebermann, Gesetze, vol. 1, p. 427.

The saga also mentions that the bishop accompanies the king to witness Grett

ir‟s ordeal (p. 132).

De Statu Ecclesiae, at PL clix, col. 1002: see Barlow, English Church, p. 134.

and in England, from the time of the Conqueror, „the ordeal - or possibly only the ordeal

of hot iron - [

was] under the exclusive control of the bishop‟

The author clearly had access to generally accurate information concerning the

organisation of and preparations for the ordeal. In all probability, the information came

to him from ecclesiastical literature, and a number of passages in the saga would appear

to contain verbal echoes from a rituale, such as those which survive from a number of

dioceses

. These prescribe that, following the ordeal, the hand should be bound up for

three nights, and then examined: Manus sigilletur, sub sigillo seruetur et post tres noctes

aperiatur. Et si mundus est, Deo gratuletur; si autem insanies crudescens in uestigio

ferri inueniatur, culpabilis et inmundus reputetur

(„The hand is to be bound up, kept

under seal, and [the dressings] are to be opened after three nights. And if it is clean,

thanks are to be given to God. If, however, pus should be found increasing in the mark of

the iron, he is to be considered guilty and unclean.‟) This passage may be compared with

the following, which would seem to indicate an optimistic outcome for Grettir: Þá tók

Illugi ok batt um skeinu Grettis, ok blœddi lítt, ok svaf Grettir vel um nóttina, ok svá liðu

þrjár nætr, at engi kom verkr í sárit; en er þeir leystu til, var skeinan saman hlaupin, svá

at náliga var gróin um (p. 251:

„Then Illugi set to and bound up Grettir‟s wound. It bled

little, and Grettir slept well during the night. And three nights passed in this way, that

there was no pain in the wound. And when they loosened [the dressings], the wound had

closed up, so that it had almost grown together

‟). Any such optimism rapidly proves

unfounded, however, as the wound becomes septic, the sepsis spreading so that by the

time of his death there is corruption from thigh to torso.

It may be

argued at this point that Grettir‟s death seems to have little to do with

the failed ordeal, despite the sepsis in the wound: firstly, his death occurs perhaps

nineteen years after the ordeal was arranged

; secondly, the wound is caused by a log

that had been cursed by a witch, rather than a piece of iron that had been blessed by a

priest; and thirdly, the sepsis is in the thigh and lower belly, not in the hand. The

immediate cause of Gretti

r‟s injury, the log of wood, has a strange appearance at the

moment when it is found by the old woman who will bewitch it: Þar lá fyrir henni

rótartré svá mikit sem axlbyrðr. Hon leit á tréit ok bað þá snúa fyrir sér; þat var sem

sviðit ok gniðat

ðrum megin

(p. 249: „There was lying before her a tree-root, as big as

Barlow, English Church, p. 159.

See Kirsch, „Ordeals‟, section 3.

Liebermann, Gesetze, vol. 1, p. 407.

ÍF 7, p. 262, note 1.

cou

ld be carried on a man‟s shoulders. She gazed at the tree and asked them to turn it

round before her; it looked as if it had been singed and rubbed on the other side‟). The

question now, therefore,

is whether a „singed and rubbed‟ log could have anything to do

with the ordeal ritual.

At the point in the ceremony when the hot iron was lifted out of the fire, and

before the accused should take it up, it was placed on a log for some time

. The log

would be smoothed to form a surface on which to rest the iron, and would naturally be

scorched where the iron was in contact with it

– indeed a scorched log was evidence that

the iron had at least been properly heated

. During the ritual of the ordeal by hot iron,

the prayer was made that the iron would be cool for an innocent man, but hot for a guilty

one. For anyone other than an innocent accused who had to pick up the iron (namely a

guilty accused, or the officiating priest), the only safe way to do so was with tongs: Post

accusacionem legitime factam

…sacerdos … ferrum ante altare positum forcipe accipiat

… ad ignem deferat

(„After the charge has been legally made, the priest is to take up

with tongs the iron, that has been placed before the altar, an

d is to bring it to the fire‟).

At a point in the saga which comes very shortly after the account of

Grettir‟s

failed ordeal, the author provides a scene in which he makes an explicit contrast between

Þorsteinn drómundr and Grettir. The scene is intended to be memorable, since it marks

the brothers‟ last meeting, and is also the occasion when Þorsteinn predicts that he, if
anyone, will avenge Grettir‟s death. The two compare their arms. Looking at Grettir‟s,

Þorsteinn is easily able to understand that

“m

rgum verði þung h

gg þín” („for many

your blows must

be heavy‟), an unconsciously ironic comment, since it had been just

such a heavy blow that had caused the failure of the ordeal. Þorsteinn wishes that his

brother‟s arms had been „thinner, but somewhat more lucky‟ (n

kkuru gæfusamligri).

Grettir‟s reply, on seeing Þorsteinn‟s arms, is: “eigi þykkjumk ek slíkar tengr sét hafa,
sem þú berr eptir, ok varla ætla ek þik kvenstyrkvan.” ... Skilðu þeir brœðr með vináttu

ok sáusk aldri síðan (pp. 137-

8: „“I do not think I have seen such tongs as you carry, and

I think you‟re scarcely as strong as a woman.” … The brothers parted on good terms,
and never saw each other again‟). To have arms like tongs is apparently a sign of gæfa

Barlow, English Church, p. 160.

„Escapes from condemnation must often have been with the connivance of the church. Failure to heat

the iron to the correct temperature, heavy sprinkling with holy water, or a protraction of the service

while the metal cooled were obvious devices‟ (Barlow, English Church, p. 163).

Liebermann, Gesetze, vol. 1, p. 427.

(good fortune), the quality which Spes and Þorsteinn are repeatedly said to share,

following her successful accomplishment of the ordeal of oath-swearing.

It would appear that Þorsteinn carries in his body the sign of a successful

outcome in Grettir‟s ordeal: metaphorically, he has the ability to handle the hot iron

without injury. This cross-reference between the relative fortunes (gæfa and ógæfa) of

the two brothers is reciprocated in the condition of G

rettir‟s body, which bears the marks

of an unsuccessful outcome in the ordeal of oath-swearing to which Spes is subjected.

This ordeal, as noted above, marks a departure from the source, Tristrams saga, in which

the heroine undergoes the ordeal of hot iron. There is no need, however, to attempt to

explain the change by positing a lost source, whether that might have been a French lai,

an orally reworked Byzantine romance, or some version of the Tristan story different

from any in the Thomas branch

Spes is accused of adultery. The author of Grettis saga would have known from

his ecclesiastical sources that the ordeal of oath-swearing for a woman accused of this

sin was based on Scripture: Numbers v, 11-31. Verses 20-22 include the following: Sin

autem declinasti a viro tuo, atque polluta es, et concubuisti cum altero viro

… Det te

Dominus in maledictionem

… putrescere faciat femur tuum, et tumens uterus tuus

disrumpatur

… et utero tumescente putrescat femur („If however you have turned away

from your husband and are defiled, and have had intercourse with another man

… may

the Lord give you into cursing … may he make your thigh become rotten, and may your

belly, swelling, be burst asunder

… and may your thigh rot, with swelling of the belly‟).

These symptoms are also those of Grettir: Eptir þat gengu þeir at Gretti; var hann þá

fallinn áfram. Varð þá engi v

rn af honum, því at hann var áðr kominn at bana af

fótarsárinu; var lærit allt grafit upp at smáþ

rmum

(p. 261: „After that they [his

enemies] went for Grettir; he had then fallen face down. There was no resistance from

him, since he was already on the point of death from the wound in his leg: his thigh was

all suppurating right up to his lower belly

‟)

Grettis saga gives the reader the stories of two brothers who carry in their bodies

cross-

references to each other‟s ordeals. Þorsteinn, the man with arms like tongs, is

certainly guilty of adultery with Spes

, but he is a „lucky man‟ (gæfumaðr), who survives

and thrives. Grettir, the „unlucky man‟ (ógæfumaðr), dies partly from wounds, but

For these theories see Schach, „The Influence‟, pp. 114-115.

O Icel. smáþarmar and Latin uterus both referred specifically to an internal abdominal organ and,

more generally, to the lower belly (smáþarmar) or belly (uterus). See the entries for these words in
Cleasby-Vigfusson, Icelandic-English Dictionary, and Lewis and Short, A Latin Dictionary.

mainly from a rotted thigh, suggesting he is guilty of some offence, although it seems

unlikely that he had committed any crime against his fellow men serious enough to

warrant a sentence of outlawry. As was seen above, King Óláfr Haraldsson considered it

líkara (p. 132:

„more likely‟) that Grettir had not deliberately murdered the men when

the house burnt down; and it was the view of many at the time that the sentence had

been passed

„more by force than according to law‟ (meir g

rt af kappi en eptir l

gum:

p. 147).

The sentence of outlawry passed on Grettir proves, therefore, that human

justice can be cheated, a lesson that will be repeated in Constantinople, when Spes

swears her equivocal oath. God‟s judgement, however, is universal and infallible. Spes

and Þorsteinn, who are well aware of this, confess their former sins and do penance for

them, and having received absolution, end their lives as penitents. Grettir, however, dies

of a rotted thigh, having failed at the iudicium dei, a fate that suggests that, since he is

not guilty of any major crime against human society, he has committed some offence

against God. Support for this view comes from the preparations for the ordeal, which

included the reciting of Psalm 88 (Vulgate numbering), verse 23: Nihil proficiet inimicus

in eo, et filius iniquitatis non apponet nocere ei

(„the enemy will not be able to do him

violence: the son of wickedness w

ill not come near to hurt him‟). It was understood,

therefore, that during the ordeal, God would protect the innocent from the assaults of the

devil. Augustine‟s commentary on this verse, in his universally familiar Enarrationes in

Psalmos, begins: Saeuit quidem inimicus, sed non proficiet in eo; solet quidem nocere,

sed non nocebit … Exercebit, non nocebit

(

„The enemy rages indeed, but will not be

able to do him violence. He is indeed accustomed to hurt, but he will not hurt … he will

exer

cise him, not hurt him‟). The fact, therefore, that the „unclean spirit‟, in the shape of

a boy, is able aggressively to approach Grettir

and „exercise‟

him, is itself proof that he

is not innocent in the eyes of God; and it is inevitable, before Grettir even enters the

church, that he will not be able successfully to undergo the ordeal.

The demonic

boy has apparently been sent from the same source as Grettir‟s

earlier enemy, Glámr, another óhreinn andi (p. 122: Þórhallr lofaði guð fyrir ok þakkaði

vel Gretti, er hann hafði unnit þenna óhreina anda

– „Þórhallr praised God, and thanked

Grettir warmly for having defeated this unclean spirit‟). Glámr‟s curse, and the boy‟s

Dekkers and Fraipont, Enarrationes in Psalmos, p. 1231.

Exercere

also had the meaning „to harass‟ in medieval Latin. See the entry under this word in

Latham and Howlett, Dictionary of Medieval Latin.

intervention in the ordeal, are to be seen as complementary, the former leading

ultimate

ly to Grettir‟s submitting himself to the ordeal, and the latter ensuring that he

will not succeed in it. The two episodes demonstrate that those who first choose

willingly to have dealings with unclean spirits will later be unable to resist their

„exercisings‟, and will be „hurt‟ by them. Grettir, corrupted from his dealings with

unclean spirits, has taken on their defining quality: the ordeal demands that when sepsis

follows the carrying of hot iron, the accused must be considered „guilty and unclean‟

(culpabilis et inmundus reputetur). Robert Cook has suggested of Grettir that by the time

he is sentenced to outlawry,

„the reader will have put together … a fairly coherent

picture … of a truly extraordinary man who is more sinned against than sinning‟

. But

the aborted ordeal proves Grettir a sinner, and his festered thigh and belly are evidence

that still, at the moment of his death, he remains inmundus / óhreinn.

The final chapter of Grettis saga begins as follows (p. 289): Hefir Sturla

gmaðr svá sagt, at engi sekr maðr þykkir honum jafnmikill fyrir sér hafa verit sem

Grettir inn sterki

(„Sturla the Lawman has said that in his opinion no outlaw has been so

great as Grettir the Strong‟), while the man who claims to have killed Grettir, Þorbj

ngull, boasts that he had killed kappa þann, er Grettir hét inn sterki

(p. 272: „that

champion who was called Grettir the Strong‟); Þorsteinn drómundr, arrested for killing
of Qngull, claims he did it because he was „the brother of Grettir the Strong‟ (p. 273:

bróðir Grettis ins sterka). Grettir has strength as his own defining quality, almost indeed

as part of his name. For this reason, the fact that a verse of Psalm 88 was prescribed

reading during the preparations for the ordeal has a special relevance in his case.

Augustine‟s commentary on Psalm 88 opens with a quotation of verse 1: eruditionis

Aethan Ezraitae

(„of the instruction of Aethan the Ezrahite‟), and continues: Videris

enim quis homo fuerit, qui vocabatur Aethan; interpretatio tamen nominis huius

Robustum indicat. Et nemo in hoc saeculo robustus est, nisi in spe promissionis Dei;

quantum enim adtinet ad merita nostra, infirmi sumus; quantum ad eius misericordiam,

robusti sumus. Itaque iste infirmus in se, robustus in misericordia Dei, inde coepit.

(„For you see who the man will have been, who was called Aethan. The interpretation of

this name, however, indicates Strong. But nobody is strong in this world, except in the

hope of God‟s promise. For as much as pertains to our own merits, we are weak; for as

„The Reader‟, p. 152.

Dekkers and Fraipont, Enarrationes in Psalmos, p. 1220.

much [as pertains] to his mercy, we are strong. And so that one [viz. the Psalmist], weak

in himself, strong in God‟s mercy, begins from there.‟)

Augustine asks his audience to „interpret this psalm [to be] about the hope which

we have in our Lord Jesus Chr

ist‟ (psalmum istum … accipite de spe quam habemus in

Christo Iesu Domino nostro). To the Middle Ages, the subject of this psalm was spes.

The man who succeeds at the ordeal does not trust in his own strength when „exercised‟

by his enemy, but hopes for salvation through the mercy of God. This is precisely what

Grettir cannot do: when he is provoked by the boy, he relies on his own anger-driven

strength and strikes the boy so hard that he apparently dies from the blow. His brother

Þorsteinn, however, though also a sinner, has Spes as his constant companion, and

towards the end of their lives he and she take steps to reconcile themselves to God: they

give money to the church, confess their sins, undertake a pilgrimage to Rome, and do

penance. They are admonis

hed by the church „to live cleanly‟ (p. 288: hreinliga) from

the time that they are granted absolution, and they do so, living out their final years as

penitents, in separate stone cells. They prepare for death

in the hope of God‟s mercy,

therefore, and the author comments (p. 288): Þóttu þau vel ok vitrliga farit hafa

(„they

were thought to have acted well and wisely‟).

When Þorsteinn‟s fortunes are at their lowest ebb, and he is placed in a fúlt ok

kalt

(„stinking and cold‟) dungeon, apparently awaiting death, he sings (p. 274). This

marks the turning-point in his fortunes. The effect of his singing is to bring Spes to him,

and to restore to his „half-dead‟ companion his sense of pleasure (gaman). The

revivification of this prisoner may be compared with the despair of Grettir, from whom

all strength drains away when he first sees Glámr fiercely rolling his eyes,

so that „he lay

more or less between life and death

‟ (p. 121: lá náliga í milli heims ok heljar). The

author‟s last word concerning Þorsteinn‟s fellow prisoner is that Spes buys his freedom;

Grettir, though, following the turning-point in his own fortunes, is doomed always to see

Glámr‟s eyes before him, and to be terrified of the dark.

Grettir‟s descent into the grave-mound of Kárr the Old marks his first entry

into darkness. He is initially attracted by the idea of entering the grave-mound when,

„very late one evening … he saw a great fire erupting on the headland that was down
below Auðunn‟s farm‟ (p. 57: eitt kveld harðla síð … hann sá eld mikinn gjósa upp á
nesi því, er niðr var frá bœ Auðunnar), a fire which, he assumes, signifies that there is

treasure buried in the mound. The

„great fire‟ that bursts out from the mound

apparently does not illuminate the interior of the grave, which the author describes,

with some understatement,

as „dark and not sweet-smelling‟ (p. 57: myrkt ok þeygi

þefgott). In contrast with

Þorsteinn drómundr, who is thrown into his „stinking and

cold‟ dungeon, with its half-dead criminal occupant, Grettir chooses to enter the

grave-mound, despite being warned that its occupier, Kárr the Old, is an evil revenant.

The grave, with its corruption, is directly opposed to an aspect of the power of

Christ which was celebrated during the ritual of the ordeal of hot iron. While the

heated iron rested on the log, prior to being carried by the accused, the priest who

officiated at the ordeal read the Gospel of John, i. 1-14

. In this lectio, familiar from its

also being read on Christmas Day, the Evangelist speaks of lux vera quae inluminat

omnem hominem venientem in mundum (v. 9:

„the true light, that lights every man who

comes into the world‟). The fiery light that attracts Grettir emanates from the world of

the dead, whereas the Gospel states

that „life was the light of men; and the light shines in

darkness‟ (vv. 4-5: et vita erat lux hominum. Et lux in tenebris lucet). In choosing to

enter the world of the undead, Grettir physically turns his back upon the light, and in

doing so spiritually rejects Christ and life.

Grettir dies still g

ripping the sword „Kárr‟s gift‟, a trophy from this first

confrontation with an undead, and a favourite weapon: Grettir mátti eigi af knjánum

rísa; greip hann þá saxit Kársnaut

(p. 260: „Grettir was unable to rise from his knees; he

then seized the short s

word “Kárr‟s gift”‟)

. Once Grettir is dead, Þorbj

ngull uses

this sword to cut his head off, taking „two or three‟ strokes to do so (pp. 261-262). To
Qngull‟s companions the deed „is unnecessary, since the man was already dead‟, and a

subsequent Althing takes a dim view of the whole attack on a man who was already

„half-dead‟ (p. 268: hálfdauðum). The author of Grettis saga draws a careful distinction
between „half-dead‟ and „undead‟, but Qngull apparently does not discriminate so finely,

and treats Gr

ettir‟s corpse in the same way that Grettir had dealt with the defeated bodies

of Kárr the Old and Glámr:

“Nú veit ek víst, at Grettir er dauðr” (p. 262: „Now I know

for certain that Grettir is dead‟).

Grettis saga is more than a morality tale

: the genre is mixed, there is nothing

heavy-

handed in the author‟s treatment of the Christian moral, and Grettir, who

Liebermann, Gesetze, vol. 1, p. 429.

Cook, „The Reader‟, p. 153, note 2, comments that „it is especially curious that a minjagripr like the

sword, a family heirloom [ÍF 7, p. 59],

should be placed in a burial mound‟. He points out that „Boer

(Grettis saga 1900, 66n.) explains these contradictions by claiming that Kárr was not originally the

father of Þorfinnr)‟.

See Guðmundur Andri Thorsson, „Grettla‟, pp. 110-116 for a reply to Hermann Pálsson, who „reads

Grettis saga

as a Christian exemplary text‟ (les Grettlu sem dæmisögu).

performs many socially useful acts

, is more than simply a sinner. But the prologue,

central biography, and epilogue of Grettis saga offer a paradigm of three lives that

may be compared: Qnundr tréfótr, a pagan, is outlawed, survives a leg-wound, his life

is saved because a weapon strikes and becomes fixed in a log of wood, he makes a

new start, is reintegrated into society, marries (twice), and dies a valued member of

the community (one whom no less a person than Auðr the Deep-minded asks for help

in arranging the marriage of her grandson, Óláfr feilan

); Grettir, a Christian, fails to

make a new start when he does not undergo the ordeal, is outlawed, has a number of

uncommitted sexual encounters

, loses his life because of a leg-wound which turns

septic (caused when a weapon strikes and glances off a log of wood), and dies as an

outcast from God and society; Þorsteinn, a Christian, is outlawed, makes a new start,

has an illicit sexual relationship, is reintegrated into society, regularises his sexual

relationship by marrying his partner, confesses his sins, and dies on good terms with

his fellow men and reconciled to God.

It is a measure of the compositional skill of the author of Grettis saga that he was

able to combine comedy, tragedy, parody, grotesque, piety, fun and farce into a narrative

with a generally serious tone. In chapter 10 he makes explicit reference to

Laxdœla saga

as a source

, a saga with an equally serious moral message composed of equally

disparate materials

. Gísli Sigurðsson has demonstrated that

Laxdœla saga, which

„seems to have been written in the closing years of the Icelandic commonwealth‟ (i.e. ca.

1260)

, was an important influence among writers of sagas of Icelanders: his careful

study of the literary relations between

Laxdœla saga, Gunnars saga Þiðrandabana and

Fljótsdœla saga has proved the likelihood that Laxdœla saga was used as a source for

the other two

. Theodore Andersson, meanwhile, has gone so far as to suggest that

Laxdœla saga might well have provided a new narrative model for later saga authors to

imitate:

Zimmermann, „Vorbildliches Verhalten‟, pp. 337-38.

ÍF 7, pp. 24-25.

„Grettir‟s heterosexual associations are constructed as of short duration or little enduring

consequence. His sexual feats … are spasmodic and exhibitionistic‟ (Poole, „Old Norse/Icelandic

Myth‟ p. 407).

ÍF 7, p. 25; for a summary account of the likely influence on Grettis saga of

Laxdœla saga see ÍF 7,

p. xxv.

For a suggestion as to the nature of the moral message of

Laxdœla saga, see Njörður Njarðvík,

„Laxdœla saga - en tidskritik?‟ Andersson, Growth, pp. 132-149, provides a recent discussion of the

saga‟s themes and the disparateness of its material.

Andersson, Growth, p. 148, and references given there in note 29.

The Medieval Icelandic Saga and Oral Tradition, pp. 231-45.

It is quite conceivable that

Laxdœla saga, a popular saga as attested by a

relatively large number of manuscripts, established something akin to a
school of saga writing, best represented by Eyrbyggja saga and

Vatnsdœla

saga.

Elsewhere, I have suggested that the author of

Laxdœla saga was the first to use

a new model for the writing of sagas of Icelanders, when he constructed a narrative

which had, incorporated within it, allusions to church liturgy and ritual; and that the

author of Njáls saga (written ca.1275-95

) also alluded to liturgy within his own

narrative

. Both authors, it was suggested, were probably monks. That study only

examined those two sagas, however, and therefore could not state definitely that the

shared methodology was due to direct influence of

Laxdœla saga on Njála, rather than

simply being a product of coincidence. A conclusion to be drawn from the present paper,

however, is that since the author of Grettis saga also makes allusions to ecclesiastical

liturgy and ritual, and given that he refers explicitly to

Laxdœla saga as a source, it now

seems not unlikely that

Laxdœla saga provided a model of narrative technique for later

authors, and that the authors of Njáls saga and Grettis saga both followed that model.

It is not possible to be certain of a date for the composition of Grettis saga, but

if the author did indeed follow

Laxdœla saga in using liturgy to help structure his

narrative, a date late in the classical period of saga-writing would seem reasonable.

The author clearly had access to liturgical books, which suggests an ecclesiastical

library, and a clerical author. In short, the traditional view of an early fourteenth-

century date for the saga certainly fits with the evidence presented in this paper, and

Guðni Jónsson‟s suggestion, that the priest Hafliði Steinsson was the author, remains

very credible

Andersson, Growth, p. 207.

Vésteinn Ólason, Dialogues, p. 191.

Njáls saga and its Christian Background: it is there suggested that

Laxdœla saga alludes to the

liturgy and ritual for the Thursday preceding Easter (Maundy Thursday), and to the liturgy for the
following Thursday; and that Njáls saga makes several allusions to the liturgy for Michaelmas (29

September). The arguments concerning

Laxdœla saga in chapter 1 of this study develop ideas first

suggested in my „Liturgical Echoes in Laxdœla saga‟.

ÍF 7, pp. lxxiii-lxxv.

References

Andersson, T. M., The Growth of the Medieval Icelandic Sagas (1180-1280) (Ithaca,
N.Y. and London: Cornell University Press, 2006).

Arent, A. M., „The Heroic Pattern: Old Germanic Helmets, Beowulf, and Grettis saga‟,
in E. C. Polomé, ed., Old Norse Literature and Mythology: A Symposium (Austin:
University of Texas Press, 1969), pp. 130

– 199.

Barlow, F., The English Church 1066 - 1154 (London: Longman, 1979).

Bartlett, R., Trial by Fire and Water: The Medieval Judicial Ordeal (Oxford: Clarendon,
1986).

Cleasby-Vigfusson: An Icelandic-English Dictionary, initiated by Richard Cleasby,
subsequently revised, enlarged and completed by Gudbrand Vigfusson, M.A., Second
Edition, with a Supplement by Sir William Craigie (Oxford: Clarendon, 1969).

Clover, C. J., The Medieval Saga (Ithaca, N.Y. and London: Cornell University Press,
1982).

Cook, R., „The Reader in Grettis Saga‟, Saga-Book of the Viking Society 21 (1984-5),
pp. 133

– 154.

Dekkers, D. E., O.S.B. and J. Fraipont, eds., Sancti Aurelii Augustini Enarrationes in
Psalmos li-c (CCSL 39, Turnhout, Brepols, 1956).

Foote, P. G., The Saga of Grettir the Strong, translated by G. A. Hight, edited with an
Introduction by Peter Foote (London: J.M. Dent and Sons Ltd., 1965).

Fox, D., and Hermann Pálsson (trans.),

Grettir’s Saga (University of Toronto Press,

1977).

Glendinning, R. J., „Grettis Saga and European Literature in the Late Middle Ages‟,
Mosaic 4 (1970), pp. 49

– 61.

Guðmundur Andri Thorsson, „Grettla‟, Skáldskaparmál 1 (1990), pp. 100 – 117.

Guðni Jónsson, ed., Grettis saga Ásmundarsonar, Íslenzk Fornrit 7 (Reykjavík: Hið
Íslenzka Fornritafélag, 1936).

Hamer, A. J.,

„Liturgical echoes in Laxdœla saga‟, in Via Crucis: Essays on Early

Medieval Sources and Ideas in Memory of J.E. Cross, ed. Thomas N. Hall, with
assistance from Thomas D. Hill and Charles D. Wright (West Virginia University
Press, 2002), pp. 377-392.

Hamer, A. J., Njáls saga and its Christian Background: a Study of Narrative Method
(forthcoming, Mediaevalia Groningana).

Hastrup, K., „Tracing tradition: an anthropological perspective on Grettis saga
Ásmundar

‟, in Structure and meaning in Old Norse literature: new approaches to

textual analysis and literary criticism, eds. J. Lindow, L. Lönnroth and G. W. Weber
(Odense University Press, 1986), pp. 281

– 313.

Helmholz, R. H., Canon Law and the Law of England (London: Hambledon, 1987).

Hermann Pálsson, „Sermo datur cunctis. A learned element in Grettis saga‟ Arkiv för
nordisk filologi 94 (1980), pp. 91

– 94.

-----------

„Glámsýni í Grettlu‟, Gripla 4 (1980), pp. 95 – 101.

-----------

Úr hugmyndaheimi Hrafnkels sögu og Grettlu, Studia Islandica 39

(Reykjavík, 1981).

Heslop, K., „Grettisfærsla: The Handing on of Grettir‟, Saga-Book of the Viking Society
30 (2006), pp. 65 - 94.

Hexter, R. J., Equivocal oaths and ordeals in medieval literature (Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard University Press, 1975).

Hight, G. A.: see Foote.

Hume, K., „The Thematic Design of Grettis Saga‟, Journal of English and Germanic
Philology 73 (1974), pp. 469

– 486.

Jakob Benediktsson, ed., Íslendingabók, Landnámabók, Íslenzk Fornrit 1, 2 vols.
(Reykjavík: Hið Íslenzka Fornritafélag, 1968).

Jónas Kristjánsson, „The Roots of the Sagas‟, in Sagnaskemmtun: Studies in Honour of
Hermann Pálsson on his 65

birthday, 26

May 1986, eds. R. Simek, Jónas

Kristjánsson, and H. Bekker-Nielsen (Vienna, Cologne, Graz: Hermann Böhlaus, 1986),
pp. 183

– 200.

Jorgensen, P. A., „Icelandic Analogues to Beowulf‟, in Sagnaskemmtun: Studies in
Honour of Hermann Pálsson on his 65

birthday, 26

May 1986, eds. R. Simek, Jónas

Kristjánsson, and H. Bekker-Nielsen (Vienna, Cologne, Graz: Hermann Böhlaus, 1986),
pp. 201 - 208.

Kirsch,

J. P., „Ordeals‟, in The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 11 (New York: Robert

Appleton Company, 1911).

Kroesen, R., „Ambiguity in the relationship between heroes and giants‟, Arkiv för
nordisk filologi 111 (1996), pp. 57

– 71.

Larson, L. M., The Earliest Norwegian Laws: Being the Gulathing Law and the
Frostathing Law (New York: Columbia University Press, 1935).

Latham, R. E. and D. R. Howlett, eds., Dictionary of Medieval Latin from British
Sources (London, for the British Academy: Oxford University Press, 1986).

Lewis, C. T., and C. Short, A Latin Dictionary (Oxford: Clarendon, 1879).

Liebermann, F., Die Gesetze der Angelsachsen, 3 vols. (Halle A.S.: Niemeyer, 1903 -
1916).

de Looze, L., „The Outlaw Poet, the Poetic Outlaw: Self-consciousness in Grettis saga
Ásmundarsonar

‟, Arkiv för nordisk filologi 106 (1991), pp. 85 – 103.

Njarðvík, Njörður P., „Laxdœla saga - en tidskritik?‟ Arkiv för nordisk filologi 86
(1971), pp. 72-81.

Óskar Halldórsson, „Goðsögnin um Gretti. Nokkrar athuganir‟, in Sjötiu ritgerðir,
helgaðar Jakobi Benediktssyni 20. Júli 1977, eds. Einar Gunnar Pétursson and Jónas
Kristjánsson, (Reykjavík: Stofnun Árna Magnússonar, 1977), vol. 2, pp. 627 - 639.

Poole, R., „Old Norse/Icelandic Myth in Relation to Grettis saga‟, in Proceedings of the
11

International Saga Conference, 2-7 July 2000, University of Sydney, eds. G. Barnes

and M. Clunies Ross (Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Sydney, 2000), pp.
398-409.

Richardson, P., „“Vera varð ek nökkur”: The reader, the women, and the berserks in

Grettir‟s saga‟, Arkiv för nordisk filologi 113 (1998), pp. 65 – 75.

Schach, P., „Some observations on the influence of Tristrams saga ok Ísondar on Old

Icelandic Literature‟, in Old Norse Literature and Mythology: A Symposium, ed. E. C.
Polomé (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1969), pp. 81

– 129.

Vésteinn Ólason (trans. A. Wawn), Dialogues with the Viking Age: Narration and
Representation in the Sagas of the Icelanders (Reykjavík: Heimskringla, 1998).

Viðar Hreinsson, „Hver er þessi Grettir?‟ Skáldskaparmál 2 (1992), pp.77 – 106.

Örnólfur Thorsson, „Grettir sterki og Sturla lögmaður‟, in Samtíðarsögur: The
Contemporary Sagas (Preprints of the Ninth International Saga Conference), 2 vols.,
eds. Sverrir Tómasson et al. (Akureyri, 1994), vol. 2, pp. 907 - 933.

Zimmerman, G., „Vorbildliches Verhalten? Zum Thema der Grettis saga‟, in
Sagnaskemmtun: Studies in Honour of Hermann Pálsson on his 65

birthday, 26

May

1986, eds. R. Simek, Jónas Kristjánsson, and H. Bekker-Nielsen (Vienna, Cologne,
Graz: Hermann Böhlaus, 1986), pp. 331 - 350.