the title ‘farmer’ does not do justice to the fact that some of the farms over which the
bandur
ruled in the Saga Age, and for some centuries afterwards, were as large as whole villages. The ‘farmer’ may have had as many as fifty or sixty men working for him and a household of over a hundred persons.)
The society described in the
Íslendinga sögur
comes about as close as medieval society ever did to the middle-class society of eighteenth-century Europe, in which the novel arose as an important narrative form. The society imagined by the
Íslendinga sögur
is as precisely observed as those of Daniel Defoe and Jane Austen. The quality that underlies the social realism in these two similar fictional worlds is the ability to view the lives of normal human beings as serious and problematic. Even weddings and business partnerships could involve them in behaviour for which they were morally and socially accountable and from which, without ever being lectured to, the reader has things to learn.
The intense focus of the sagas on the incidents of everyday life is the reason that some of the most acute observation on their plots and settings has come in recent years either directly from social scientists or from literary scholars who have been influenced by their methods and insights. Whether the actual society of tenth-century Iceland was in fact as uniform, coherent and conventional as the one presented in the
Íslendinga sögur
may be doubted. Still, modern methods of ethnography, political science and legal and social history are usefully applied to rationalizing and generalizing the representation of society in the sagas. In particular, such an approach enables us to understand the behaviour of the characters as going either with or against the cultural norms in such matters as compensation for an injury, conflict resolution, gift-giving, gender roles, hospitality, family loyalty and personal honour. From the sagas we learn not only the history and geography of Saga Age Iceland in minute detail, but also precise details of prices, money, ships and boats, the layout of houses and outbuildings, weapons, clothing, sports, agricultural practices and domestic manufacturing.
Honour (
sœmd
) is to the conception of character in the sagas as feud is to the plot. Honour does not consist merely of avoiding shame or disgrace. It is the more powerful desire for approbation, good reputation, distinction. Its social function is to forge and maintain bonds of kinship, marriage,friendship and political alliance. Its narrative function is to keep the saga moving forward, in accordance with ethical rules that give the feud plot a sense of heroic inevitability. Men are drawn into the plots through the operation of social laws over which they have little individual control. As the sagas’ emphasis on genealogy attests, the extended family (
œtt
) was a more important social and historical institution in medieval Iceland than it is in most modern Western societies. The branches of blood-relationship that govern the inheritance of property also govern the degree of obligation a man has to seek compensation for injury done to a kinsman. A man’s closest relationship according to the laws is (1) his father, then (2) his son, (3) his brother, (4) his father’s father, (5) his son’s son and so on all the way to (14) the son of his mother’s sister. Viewed in this way, the Icelandic extended family is ‘ego-centred’, with a man’s relationship to it changing as other members come into the family or leave. This is indicated by the ‘I’ at the centre of the chart.
A person’s more immediate family or household often included relationships outside the
œtt
, with important implications for honour. Many saga characters have ‘foster’ relationships, in which an adult (usually a male, as the head of a family) will assume responsibility for raising another person’s child. The foster-father is regarded as the social inferior of the
bandur
ruled in the Saga Age, and for some centuries afterwards, were as large as whole villages. The ‘farmer’ may have had as many as fifty or sixty men working for him and a household of over a hundred persons.)
The society described in the
Íslendinga sögur
comes about as close as medieval society ever did to the middle-class society of eighteenth-century Europe, in which the novel arose as an important narrative form. The society imagined by the
Íslendinga sögur
is as precisely observed as those of Daniel Defoe and Jane Austen. The quality that underlies the social realism in these two similar fictional worlds is the ability to view the lives of normal human beings as serious and problematic. Even weddings and business partnerships could involve them in behaviour for which they were morally and socially accountable and from which, without ever being lectured to, the reader has things to learn.
The intense focus of the sagas on the incidents of everyday life is the reason that some of the most acute observation on their plots and settings has come in recent years either directly from social scientists or from literary scholars who have been influenced by their methods and insights. Whether the actual society of tenth-century Iceland was in fact as uniform, coherent and conventional as the one presented in the
Íslendinga sögur
may be doubted. Still, modern methods of ethnography, political science and legal and social history are usefully applied to rationalizing and generalizing the representation of society in the sagas. In particular, such an approach enables us to understand the behaviour of the characters as going either with or against the cultural norms in such matters as compensation for an injury, conflict resolution, gift-giving, gender roles, hospitality, family loyalty and personal honour. From the sagas we learn not only the history and geography of Saga Age Iceland in minute detail, but also precise details of prices, money, ships and boats, the layout of houses and outbuildings, weapons, clothing, sports, agricultural practices and domestic manufacturing.
Honour (
sœmd
) is to the conception of character in the sagas as feud is to the plot. Honour does not consist merely of avoiding shame or disgrace. It is the more powerful desire for approbation, good reputation, distinction. Its social function is to forge and maintain bonds of kinship, marriage,friendship and political alliance. Its narrative function is to keep the saga moving forward, in accordance with ethical rules that give the feud plot a sense of heroic inevitability. Men are drawn into the plots through the operation of social laws over which they have little individual control. As the sagas’ emphasis on genealogy attests, the extended family (
œtt
) was a more important social and historical institution in medieval Iceland than it is in most modern Western societies. The branches of blood-relationship that govern the inheritance of property also govern the degree of obligation a man has to seek compensation for injury done to a kinsman. A man’s closest relationship according to the laws is (1) his father, then (2) his son, (3) his brother, (4) his father’s father, (5) his son’s son and so on all the way to (14) the son of his mother’s sister. Viewed in this way, the Icelandic extended family is ‘ego-centred’, with a man’s relationship to it changing as other members come into the family or leave. This is indicated by the ‘I’ at the centre of the chart.
A person’s more immediate family or household often included relationships outside the
œtt
, with important implications for honour. Many saga characters have ‘foster’ relationships, in which an adult (usually a male, as the head of a family) will assume responsibility for raising another person’s child. The foster-father is regarded as the social inferior of the
Similar Books
