Háskóli Íslands Hugvísindasvið Medieval Icelandic Studies

A Troll, a Bird, and Mother of Kings Magic and agency in shapeshifting origins and perspectives: Queen Gunnhildur of Norway

Ritgerð til M.A.-prófs í Medieval Icelandic Studies Cassandra Ruiz Kt.: 180195-4329 Leiðbeinandi: Sif Ríkharðsdóttir January 2020

Abstract

The discussion of the Nordic saga corpus has focused mainly on the theoretical analysis of its narrative function, authorship, historical accuracies, and whether they can be viewed as historiographies or not. Until recently, scholars have paid little attention to gender studies and the study of otherness. However, cultural memory remains a pivotal field of study when it comes to sagas. In response, this thesis evaluates how narratives construct gender, otherness, and cultural memory by focusing on a singular character— Queen Gunnhildr. By focusing on family and kings’ sagas, we may gain a different understanding of the cultural views between Icelanders and Norwegians during this time. Nevertheless, it is important to also consider these character depictions to be literary borrowings from the other texts, if they are similar, or that they derive from independent and ultimately oral sources, if they are different. Therefore, I will analyze the different ways Gunnhildr is used as a plot device and how her character morphs in the sagas and is portrayed as either a witch, a sorceress, a woman, an outcast Queen, or other, to shed a light on cultural mentalities of the time they were written; and foreground the uncertainties regarding her origins.

Ágrip

Umfjöllun um norræna sagnaarfinn hefur einkum lagt áherslu á fræðilega greiningu á frásagnartækni, höfundarétti, sögulegri nákvæmni og hvort hægt séað líta á þær sem sagnfræði. Fram til þessa höfðu fræðimenn ekki lagt áherslu á kynjafræðilegar rannsóknir og rannsóknir annarra. Rannsóknir á menningarminningum hafa haft gífurleg áhrif þegar kemur að skilningi okkar á sögunum. Þ ritgerð mun fjalla um hvernig frásagnir móta/fjalla um kyn, annarleika og menningarlegt minni með því að einbeita sér að Gunnhildi drottningu.. Með því að leggja áherslu á íslendingasögurnar og konungasögurnar getum við öðlast skilning á mismunandi menningarhorfum milli Íslendinga og Norðmanna á þessum tíma. Engu að síður er mikilvægt að líta svo á að þessar persónuskilgreiningar séu bókmenntaleg minni ef þær eru svipaðar eða að um sé að ræða sjálstæð minni. Þess vegna mun ég greina mismunandi birtingarmyndir Gunnhildar og hvernig persónan hennar umbreytist frá því að vera norn, galdrakona, kona, drottning eða eitthvað annað til að varpa ljósi á menningarlegt hugarfar og óljós uppruna hennar.

2

Acknowledgements Without the continuous support and understanding of my supervisor, Sif Ríkharðsdóttir, this thesis would not be anywhere near the state it is. Sif helped me understand my own thoughts better by pushing me to explain my ideas in a way that did not make them seem like I was jumping to conclusions. She also made significant contributions to the Icelandic abstract above.

I would also like to thank Emily Lethbridge for pointing me to resoruces for place-names and for helping me embellish my ideas before presenting them to my supervisor.

Torfi Tulinius and Anna Solovyeva helped shape my first inklings for the theme and structure of this thesis. And likewise, Haraldur Benharðsson and other professors in the program led me to interesting topics and books that consequently helped my understanding and influenced the creation of this thesis, by becoming the skeltons of it. I am extremlly grateful for the encouragement and support of my professors, friends, and family; because without them, this thesis would still be in the works, morphing as the years pass.

3

A Troll, a Bird, and Mother of Kings Magic and agency in shapeshifting origins and perspectives: Queen Gunnhildur of Norway

Cassandra Ruiz

4

Table of Contents Acknowledgements ...... 3 List of Abbreviations ...... 6 CHAPTER 1: Introduction ...... 7 CHAPTER 2: Otherness and perceptions ...... 8 CHAPTER 3: family sagas ...... 11 CHAPTER 4: kings´ sagas ...... 22 CHAPTER 5: Different genres, different images ...... 26 CHAPTER 6: Foreginers‘ Perspective ...... 30 CHAPTER 7: Magic/Gender ...... 32 CHAPTER 8: Thrones Foretelling Urban Fame: How to Plant & Twist Roots to Reimagine Spaces . 39 CHAPTER 9: Conclusion and Further Research ...... 42 Works Cited ...... 45 Appendix ...... 48

5

List of Abbreviations Egla …………………………… Egil’s saga Skalla-Grímssonar Njála ………………………….. Njáls saga Fgr …………………………….. Fagurskinna Hkr ………….…………………. Heimskringla I

6

CHAPTER 1: Introduction Genres, or literary traditions, are often defined by specific themes and motifs. These which derive not only from politics and social tensions but more abstract matters and ideologies as well. Social mentalities are influenced by many factors, such as religion, philosophy, and economics. And it is through storytelling that the divide between fiction and fact becomes blurred. Therefore, genre does not come to embody a separation between reality and imagination, but rather a gateway through which their obscure similarities are unveiled. Narratives ranging from romantic courtship to perilous adventures by heroic idolized figures should not be simply dismissed by their genre; on the contrary, their accessibility allows for universality and the possibility to explore heightened realities of the writers’ time. Were these characters an attempt to bridge stories as they may have been idolized and consequently used to springboard into another story? If that were the case, then their usage in oral stories helps explain why some characters transcend into multiple stories as seen in the Old Norse sagas. These sagas were written down centuries after the time they take place. This consideration begs the following question: to which degree is a genre acceptable as an exploration of a given period, if most of its leading figures are the probable result of fantastical concoctions and social mentalities implemented elements that did not exist in the oral tradition? Furthermore, to which extent do regional spaces influence in the construction of specific characters, furthering the divide between reality and fiction in their depictions? Does one genre depict a character differently than another genre even if they have a common source? Or do these conflicting depictions stem from different sources? In the case of Old Norse sagas, its storytelling finds itself subservient to centuries-old traditions, and in most cases, their composition stems from anonymous origins, which only serves to complicate our understanding of fiction and reality. We must then analyze genres within the Old Norse corpus to help us expand our understanding of cultural memory when it comes to reoccurring characters, gender, and otherness. One particular character embodies all of these attributes, which is why my paper will analyze the different perceptions of Queen Gunnhildr. The main texts I will be using are Egils saga, Njáls saga, Fagrskinna, and Heimskringla I. This paper will try to prove that Gunnhildr was a plot device regardless if a person with that name existed given her unknown background and the way she crosses borders. At times, she is capable of inverting borders, not just physical ones but also in terms of agency and power and she is even able to morph into a bird in Egil’s saga. It is then important to distinguish how different genres perceived Gunnhildr, which would give us more insight on the agency a woman held either by being a witch, queen, other or all.

7

CHAPTER 2: Otherness and perceptions Otherness distinguishes two groups, one that is the norm and the other that is discriminated. “To state it naively, difference belongs to the realm of fact and otherness belongs to the realm of discourse. Thus, biological sex is difference, whereas gender is otherness.”1 Otherness simply put depends on the case it situates due to the inability of it confiding in one’s own categories of self or societal norms. Otherness appears to be radically different case by case and therefore cannot be conclusively defined. Lambertus 2 expresses otherness to be that thing that cannot be compared to the norm to which Shildrick responds “what is at stake is not simply the status of those bodies which might be termed monstrous, but the being in the body of us all”3 since the true (societal) fear is to be compared to these other beings that are often depicted as evil or monstrous. The hero must always travel to the other’s geographical area even if their travel is heavily influenced by the other, the other rarely enters the realm of the hero as they remain in the outskirts of society to mark paradigms, exposing an apparent threat and beckoning the hero to their dwelling where a conscious separation of space is displayed. The heroes in family sagas always travel to Gunnhildr’s realm or flee from it; and she further helps the plot advance and grow tension by consequently influencing the protagonists’ travel. The hero must then ascertain his hvatr4 characteristics from the female other when she expresses aggression and does not display blauðr5 characteristics; however, Carol J. Clover discerns that these adjectives are not fixed concepts even though they appear at opposite ends of the Norse gender system.6 However, Íslendingasögur and skaldic poetry7 display hvatr women as “shield- maidens, warrior women, troublemakers, sorceresses, avengers and inciters” but they are rare in other Norse genres.8 If we know what we are by simply knowing what we are not, this may be real reason why a hero or king is afraid of the other. Greycloak does not want to enter the dwelling of his mother and confront her because then he will realize he is more blauðr than her and a puppet king. This may be why Gunnhildur represents the evil queen trope found in fairytales because the king or father is always absent, or dead, and advisors wanted to rule

1 Jean-Francois Staszak,“Other/otherness,” International Encyclopedia of Human Geography, (Elsevier, 2008), p. 22. 2 Hendrik Lambertus, Monströsen Helden und heldenhaften Monstern: Zur Darstellung und Funktion des Fremden in den originalen riddarsögur, (Tubingen & Basel, 2013), p. 3. 3 Shildrick, Embodying the Monster: Encounters with the Vulnerable Self, (Sage publications, 2002), p. 3. 4 Properly meaning vigorous but metaphorically meaning masculine in reference to animals. 5 Properly meaning weak but metaphorically meaning feminine in reference to animals. It can also be a term of abuse to relate modern-day nuances of the words “bitch” or “coward.” 6 Carol J. Clover,“Regrading of Sex: Men, Women, and Power in Early Northern Europe”, in Studying Medieval Women, ed. By Nancy F. Partner, (Cambridge, MA, 1993), p. 78. 7 These two Norse genres are supposedly the oldest and of critical importance to our research. 8 Judy Quinn, “Women in Old Norse Poetry and Sagas,” A Companion to Old Norse-Icelandic Literature and Culture, (Blackwell: 2005), p. 528.

8 alongside a young king instead of having the Queen have power. But does gender affect the view of a tyrant vs. a monster? A depiction of a body speaks volumes and “Oswald argues that ‘because the monsters are reduced only to their bodies, and to their identity that is clearly articulated through their embodiment, we can also recognize how fundamental the body is in constructing medieval identity.’ Whatever else (positive and negative) it may incorporate, the other can never escape the immediate assessment of its body.”9 In this way, we must analyze how the female body inhibits the power a certain gender can obtain before being depicted as evil, a sorceress, or both.

According to Theresa Earenfight, Gunnhildr is usually “depicted as a top-notch politician and femme fatale in the Heimskringla … This work and many other sagas such as the Fagrskinna, Egil’s saga and Njál´s saga, are mostly concerned with the king’s tyranny.”10 However, these sagas focus more on the fictionalization of the histories of Icelandic families and regions than a single individual. Therefore, the descriptions of characters hold more weight than their actions at times. For instance, Earenfight says that „when Gunnhildr is mentioned, she is blamed for inciting violence, but this description of her bears a very strong resemblance to other fictional inciters in Icelandic saga literature calling into question its veracity. But, as in Arthurian literature, the actual historicity is not as important as what it tells us about Norse perceptions of women in power, as fearsome daughters, sisters, wives, and mothers.”11 Whether the sagas have any historical reality to them, “the sagas are first and foremost testimony to how thirteenth century Christian Icelanders understood— and used— their forebear’s’ conduct and beliefs” and therefore more valuable to use in terms of the timeframe they were written in than to explain and reconstruct the mindset of the period the sagas were written about.12 And as to the dichotomy between literature and historical sources, in The Matter of the North, Torfi Tulinius emphasizes the importance of being aware of the context of the time the sagas were written in and to also pay attention to what was happening not just in that region but also in regions that were accessible through trade.13 In the end, Mitchell also comes to a similar conclusion as “representations of past magical practices sometimes also resonate with contemporary realities.”14 Gunnhildr is then to my

9 Sarah Kunzler, Flesh and Word: Reading Bodies in Old Norse-Icelandic and Early Irish Literature, (Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG: 2016), p. 249. 10 Theresa Earenfight, Queenship in Medieval Europe, (Palgrave Macmillan: 2013), p. 118-119. 11 Earenfight, p. 118-119. 12 Earenfight, p. 7. 13 Torfi H. Tulinius, The Matter of the North. The Rise of Literary Fiction in Thirteenth-century Iceland, (Odense: Odense University Press, 2002). 14 Stephen Mitchell, Witchcraft and Magic in the Nordic Middle Ages,( University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011), p. 75.

9 interpretation, the magical embodiment of a contemporary reality dealing with otherness.15 It is then my belief that Queen Gunnhildr, whether she herself was a historical figure or not, serves to represent otherness, as the other lives in the edges of civilization, allowing her to become the physical manifestation of a plot device. Gunnhildr is said to be outlawed but also know fjǫlkynngi, which she supposedly learned from the Finns—another outcast group. Yet Gunnhildr is a Queen of Norway even though she also had to leave Norway for some time due to a power struggle, which may have served as an explanation as to why she appeared in another place in another saga or rather as a plot device to give reason for Egil wanting to go to England before traveling to Iceland, so that he may see Gunnhildr due to her curse.16 As Jesch has pointed out, our image of Gunnhildr stems from later Icelandic writings and is shaped by the function she may have had in these texts: “leaving aside these saga’s accusations of nymphomania and witchcraft, even the more historical kings’ sagas show her as a malevolent, scheming, arrogant woman who outlived her husband to return to Norway and attempt to further the royal ambitions of their sons there before she was once again and for the last time driven into exile in Scotland. It is difficult to penetrate beneath this misogynist picture to discover any facts about Gunnhildr, we are not even sure whether she was Norwegian or Danish.”17

Gunnhildr’s vague origins and gender helps us analyze why women were mainly secondary characters. Gender plays a large role in narratology, where Teresa de Lauretis writes:

the hero must be male, regardless of the gender of the text-image, because the obstacle, whatever its personification, is morphologically female … she is the active principle of culture, the establisher of distinction, the creator of differences. Female is what is not susceptible to transformation, to life or death; she (it) is an element of plot-space, a topos, a resistance, matrix and matter. 18 And if we follow this idea, then it helps explain why most females never have a character arch and remain to fit the descriptions they were introduced as in the text. We then also must question the societal and religious influences on gender as women were the bearers of the cultural heritage; women brought up the children and have a long oral tradition as well as skills that were passed down for not only a culture’s advancement but survival such as cooking, weaving, etc.

15 Sverre Bagge. From Viking Stronghold to Christian Kingdom: State Formation in Norway, c. 900−1350, (Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 2010). 16 Sigurdur Norðal, ed. Egils saga Skalla-Grímssonar. (Reykjavík: Íslenzka fornritafélag, 1979). 17 Judith Jesch, Women in the Viking Age, (The Boydell press: 1991), p. 161-162. 18 Teresa de o Lauretis, “Desire in Narrative”, Alice Doesn’t, (Indiana University Press: 1984), p.118-119.

10

CHAPTER 3: family sagas Family sagas (Íslendingasögur) concerned themselves with prominent Icelandic families and their settlement and fortunes. As there was no king in Iceland, kings, particularly Norwegian ones, were not main characters in these stories. For instance, the Icelanders that served at a king’s court usually did so as court poets; and according to the Garland Encyclopedia of World Music: Europe, Icelandic skalds had established a monopoly by the year 1000 over their elaborate and political oral art as a court poet (hirðskáld). However, it is important to point out that the family sagas had a precursor—the kings’ sagas. And even though the first sagas of this kind were rather dry in their factual tendency, making them resemble analogues before the early 13th century, there was a sudden shift in the narrative style— the depictions of characters and anecdotes relating to the king were exploited in detail. This shift however did not happen suddenly and occurred through the emergence of new genres, such as the legendary sagas, and the influence of romances and their translations. Ármann Jakobsson compares these two predominant genres by stating that: „In the oldest kings’ sagas there are very few characters, apart from the kings themselves. However, the kings’ sagas of the 1220’s are replete with narratives of kings dealing both with each other and with their subjects, Icelanders and Norwegians. A variety of people, common as well as noble, share the limelight with the king. The family sagas bear witness to a similar tendency. They are a new kind of history, one which deals with less exalted people and is thus in a way less public.“19 Therefore, it is not surprising that kings held a predominant role in the earliest family sagas as the leading Icelandic families had a close relation to the king or were a problem for the king to such a scale as though they held equal power, making their fights resemble kinsmen fights instead of someone ruling over the other. Kings therefore served more as a tool to confirm royal blood or nobility of the settling members as well as a source of honor for the Icelanders who would serve them to gain recognition and gifts, though the latter would play a bigger role in the sagas after 1262 where kings act more as patrons to confirm the protagonists worth, especially since gift-giving was so embedded into the culture.

The oldest family sagas are believed to have been composed around 1220’s; this period was also when Morkinskinna, Fagrskinna, and Heimskringla were completed, which are the founding kings’ sagas of the new narrative shift—where the narrative craft peaked and

19 Ármann Jakobsson, “Our Norwegian Friend: The Role of Kings in the family sagas”, in Arkiv för nordisk filologi, (vol. 117, 2002), pp. 145-146.

11 there was detail in everything, especially place-names. Ármann Jakobsson says that these “three voluminous sagas … [amplified] the dry facts of the dates and main exploits of each king with anecdotes and detailed depictions of the main characters. [And that] this new vitality in saga composition coincided with the emergence of new saga genres.”20 It was as if this shift within kings’ sagas created other genres, because it was now more apparent to make distinctions and notice more thematic compositions. For instance, foundation myths were the upmost importance to family sagas, which can be seen through the detailed history of the places its people inhabited. Place-names then served as a vessel to preserve its history in its name. Or, one could argue that the emergence of new genres influenced the shift within kings’ sagas. Two of the most famous Icelandic sagas—Njál´s and Egil’s— demonstrate how no predominate family can escape the King and Queen of Norway as certain interactions with them led to turmoil.

Egil´s saga

Egil’s saga is said to be one of the oldest family sagas, which may be why it still has a lot of settlement myth embedded into its storyline, place names, and the abundance of nature and hunt. But more importantly, Egil’s saga revolves around the relationship between the Norwegian King and the protagonist, who is of course Icelandic. The saga starts with Skalla- Grímir fleeing the tyrantical Norwegian King Harald Fairhair. The saga evolves to showcase what political implications Skalla-Grímir‘s son had to deal with in Iceland regarding Queen Gunnhildr and King Eiríkr, King Harald Fairhair´s son. However, our focus is Gunnhildr and how she is being depicted. She is presented briefly and is always stated as having power even though her husband does not listen to her, especially when concerning Egil´s life. It is this lack of power in speech that causes Gunnhildr to react indirectly with magic, by cursing him and turning into a bird to bring about his demise. Gunnhildr is introduced in the saga with an emphasis on her wisdom in magic. Her magical powers are then witnessed when she places a curse on Egil, after his exil and after her family is forced to flee Norway. However, her involvement with magic is always indirect and said in passing: “Svá er sagt, at Gunnhildr lét seið efla ok lét þat seiða, at Egil Skalla- Grímsson skyldi aldri ró bíða á Íslandi, fyrr en hon sæi hann“ (Egla, 176). It is interesting that the two main curses in the saga are made by a character after they are exiled from Norway regardless if they are primery (Egil) or secondary (Gunnhildr) characters, their curses are the plot´s momentum. And even though Egil‘s curse drives Gunnhildr and her husband from

20 Ármann Jakobsson, “Our Norwegian Friend”, p. 145.

12

Norway, it is clear that Gunnhildr‘s curse also influences Egil‘s travel: „Ok er þeir hittu menn at máli, spurðu þeir þau tíðendi, er Agli þóttu háskasamlig, at Eiríkr konungr blóðöx var þar fyrir ok Gunnhildr ok þau höfðu þar ríki til forráða ok hann var skammt þaðan uppi í borginni Jórvík“ (Egla, 177). And yet even after this, Egil still seeks out the king and Gunnhildr even though he knows his life would be at stake. Therefore, Gunnhildr‘s curse appears to be more powerful than Egil’s, especially since other events such as a power struggle were at play in Gunnhildr’s exile of Norway. However, as Karen Jolly points out, “as in the poetical and mythological context of Hávamal there is no mention of what words are uttered, only a considerable stress on the act of speaking. To chase away the landvættir was obviously the best method of making the king and queen leave. When the spirits were displeased a place was thought to be left without protection and peace. Egil’s níð is not left unanswered, but follows a pattern of action and counteraction [from Gunnhildr].”21 And Jóhanna Friðriksdóttir points out that “in Brennu-Njáls saga, the curse of Queen Gunnhildr on Hrútr sets in motion a chain of events which culminates in the burning of Bergþórshváll. “22 Therefore, Gunnhildr‘s curses, even though they aren‘t lavishly detailed, they are plot driven. However, it is Egil that has more active inolvement in carving runes and casting curses to such a degree that other characters would seek his help in matters of runes and magic. Therefore, there is a clear distinction between gender in regards to magic practices, involving their activism as well to what types of magic they conduct for what purposes and to what degree.

Gunnhildr is only introduced by her wisdom in magic and is claimed to have casted one curse in this particular saga but otherwise, her involvement in supernatural matters is rather nonexistent. And even in Ólafs saga Odds, Gunnhildr is said in passing to have performed “blót” and “fjǫlkynngi” to gather information about her enemies23 and this example is apparently the only mention of North-Norwegian soothsaying in saga literature.24 We can then assume that Gunnhildr‘s inactive involvement with magic displays the dichotomy between “men’s performances [which] took place in the official, public realm, [whereas] women promoted and defended the honor of the household in the domestic, private realm. With the introduction of writing, the boundary between public and private was more

21 Karen Jolly, Witchcraft and Magic in Europe, Volume 3: The Middle Ages, (London: The Athlone Press, 2002), p. 95. 22 Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir, "Women's Weapons: A Re-Evaluation of Magic in the ‘Íslendingasögur,’" Scandinavian Studies 81, no. 4 (2009), p.409-36. 23 (ÓTOdd 2006, 127-131). 24 Lyonel D. Perabo, Here be Heathens, Master's thesis, Háskóli Íslands, 2016, skemman, p. 153.

13 strictly enforced, and women’s participation in the honor system became more restricted;”25 this is further supported by Egil directly interacting with runes whereas Gunnhildr is not. This may however be due to gender. Historically, in Germanic tribes, nīþ is implied with the loss of honor and the status of a villain, where the one affected by this unmanliness stigma is referred to a nīðing, as he was now lower in power than everyone around him; this word is then similar to ergi accounts in Old Norse literature. Jenny Jochens states that: “clearly, it must be seen as the ultimate victory of patriarchy when a society does not acknowledge behavior specific to female roles but only notices a few women able to perform according to male standards and, conversely, scorns men who engage in female conduct. The attempt to demonstrate a historical stage of female hegemony in the Old Norse world is … identifying power as the most admired and powerlessness as the most feared feature in old Norse society … men could afford to admire only those women who conformed to male standards.”26 However, a níðstang or níð-pole is a pole used to curse the enemy, which Egil deploys. By lowering the power of Gunnhildr and her family by casting her out of Norway through this pole, Egil marks Gunnhildr as the villain as he blames her for his banishment. And because she becomes less powerful and unmanly, she must resort to indirect magic to seek her revenge on Egil. Her involvement with magic, marriage, and sexual acts are all then private. Matters held in private should be examined together as they may give insight as to why they are conducted in such a manner. A woman’s passivity towards marriage decisions was even commented by Jenny Jochens, especially in regards to kings‘ sagas. “Most often a man átti or fekk (had or got) his wife. If a woman is mentioned first, she is gipt (given) to her husband.”27 The first observation is usually how Gunnhildr is introduced if her husband is mentioned in the saga. Gunnhildr also appears to not have that much involvement in the lives of her children, which could be explained by Egil’s statement: „þykki mér þat undarligt, ef eigi skal þar koma, at þér þykki Gunnhildr eiga sona uppreist marga“ (Egla, 198). However, Gunnhildr’s husband is the one who decided to baptize his child and name him, after himself of course (Egla, 163), and also marry off his daughther (Egla, 176)—all actions that are expected to be carried out by the mother, which are acts deemed to be a mother‘s main priority but that are also heavily influenced by the father’s constent. Yet Gunnhildr’s main concern in the saga is who is to be killed. The only other mention of Gunnhildr in the saga

25 Zoe Borovsky, "Never in Public: Women and Performance in Old Norse Literature." The Journal of American Folklore 112, no. 443 (1999), p. 6. 26 Jenny M. Jochens, "Feminist Scholarship in Old Norse Studies," Medieval Feminist Newsletter, 19 (1995): 29-30. 27 Jenny M. Jochens, “Consent in Marriage: Old Norse Law, Life and Literature,” Scandinavian Studies 58 (1986), p. 151.

14 influences Egil’s journey yet again: „Egil spurði þau tíðendi austan um haf, at Eiríkr blóðöx hefði fallit í vestrvíking, en Gunnhildr ok synir þeira váru farin til Danmerkr suðr, ok brottu var af Englandi þat lið allt, er þeim Eiríki hafði þangat fylgt. Arinbjörn var þá komin til Nóregs... þótti Agli þá enn fýsiligt gerask at fara til Nóregs“ (Egla, 211-212). However, this control of men‘s actions is also demonstrated in Njál’s Saga, „´vestr til Englands,' segir Sóti, 'ok koma aldri til Nóregs, meðan ríki Gunnhildar er.“28 Gunnhildr seems to affect the travels of men in these two sagas but consequently, in Njál’s Saga, as it is in a timeframe when her husband is dead and therefore demonstrating a more mature Queen that has even more greed, Gunnhildr not only seeks power to control the actions of men, but also their sexuality. This power that Gunnhildr seeks is a serious threat to Church doctrine as expressed by Stephen Mitchell,29 which may be a reason why she appears to have less involvement in her children’s lives in the matters of baptism and marriage— two of the most important Church’s sacraments. Gunnhildr also falls into what Lyonel Perabo describes as a „somewhat larger pool of pagan Hálogalanders and North-Norwegians who are depicted as actively opposing Christianity, Christian kings and the Christianization of their homeland like ... Ólafr Tryggvason,“ who was opposed by Gunnhildr in Ólafs saga Odds from the late 12th century.30

Moreover, what exactly is the connection between women and Christianity in the saga realm? Zoe Borovsky tries to answer this by stating that: „Helga Kress (1993) has cited the presence of the ‘strong woman’ as evidence of an ancient female hegemony— an oral tradition— that was later eclipsed by the emerging Viking patriarchy and finally submerged by the Christian hierarchy … Although scholars continue to debate the extent to which the sagas are the literary products of writers fully versed in Christian, … some folklorists and anthropologists (Bauman 1986, Turner 1971) have viewed the sagas as rich sources of local legends and familial lore that document the transition from an oral-based, pagan Commonwealth to a literate outpost of Christendom.”31 We can then not assume the significance of Gunnhildr’s lack of interaction in the public realm to signify the dichotomy that women faced, or the social changes Christianity emplaced upon her class or gender. It is however important to note that kings’ and family sagas had fewer primary characters that were women, a connotation against independent women; and women are depicted, in most

28 Brennu-Njals saga. Einar Ol[afur] Sveinsson gaf ut. [Illustr.], vol 12 of Íslenzk fornrit, (Hio Islenzka Fornritafelag, 1954), p. 11. 29 Stephen Mitchell, Witchcraft and Magic in the Nordic Middle Ages, p. 27. 30 Lyonel D. Perabo, Here be Heathens, p. 88. 31 Zoe Borovsky, "Never in Public: Women and Performance in Old Norse Literature,” p. 6.

15 cases, like villains, and appear to be powerless either in public spheres (court) or relationships. Therefore, “Mundal concludes that the transition from oral to written culture was a misfortune (ei ulukke) for women, particularly when the oral tradition and its performers lost prestige. Because women were excluded from the more prestigious, intellectual spheres in which literature was written, they could only participate in the anonymous oral tradition, thus making their contributions invisible.”32 These contributions whether it be in magic, sex, marriage, baptism, children affairs, etc. are either said in passing or through a secondary male character such as Gunnhildr’s messenger. It appears as these strong women are only active in their egging, which carries on the gravity of oral tradition, signifying that women’s words are powerful which is why they appear as secondary characters without many lines and yet still have the power to move the plot and the actions of men. Women have the disarming power of enticing and inciting their men while planting the seed of what they want them to do into their heads so that they do it by either having them think it was their idea or having them know that they will have bigger problems at home if they don‘t. Throughout the saga, Gunnhildr is not shy to enjoin others to do her dirty work, which often involves slaying. In chapter 49, Gunnhildr encourages her two brothers to kill one of the sons of Skalla-Grímir, or both if that were possible (Egla, 123). And when Eyvindur informed that they could not get Lord Thorolf, Gunnhildr then told them to kill some of their men rather than let all her plans fail (Egla, 125). But women tend to have this form of agency, especially in Icelandic sagas; women held the throne to the act of egging on their kinsmen to go against their husbands or to even egg their husbands into killing someone as exemplified by Guðrún in Bolli’s killing of Kjartan in Laxdæla Saga. Egging their kin to kill, especially for vengeance, was according to Clover, “the ultimate form of respect, and like the men who take it, the women who urge it are, in so doing, paying due honor to the departed.”33

This power that women held is best exemplified by Gunnhildr as she had power even before her son took the throne. „Egil bjó um várit kaupskip til íslandsferðar; réð Arinbjörn honum þat, at staðfestask ekki í Nóregi, meðan ríki Gunnhildar væri svá mikit" (Egla, 150). And it is also clear that King Eiríkr is forgiving as Gunnhildr is introduced in the saga by her relationship before the king, which is mentioned again in Chapter 56: „Gunnhildr var allra

32 Borovsky, p. 7. 33 Borovsky, p. 16.

16 kvenna vænst ok vitrust ok fjölkunnig mjök. Kærleikar miklir váru með þeim Þórólfi ok Gunnhildi, Þórólfr var þá jafnan á vetrum með Eiríki, en á sumrum í víkingu” (Egla, 94). This forgivness is more subjected to tolerance as it was before his involment with her but this sentiment is expressed equally in the tolerance of Egil; the king‘s forgiveness came from Egil‘s poem and Arinbjorn‘s aid. Not only does Arinbjorn save him for one night by arguing his case that slaying Egil at night would be murder against Gunnhildr‘s claims; he also tells Egil: „Nú vil ek þat ráð gefa, at þú vakir í nótt ok yrkir lofkvæði um Eirík konung; þoetti mér þá vel, ef þat yrði drápa tvítug ok mættir þú kveða á morgin, er vit komum fyrir konung,“ (Egla, 182) which leds to his salvation. Gunnhildr was wise enough to question Arinbjorn‘s loyalty as he was siding with Egil even though he committed transgressions against the king (Egla, 184). And before this event, Egil was exiled, which made him actively curse a pole in the saga through his actions and verse (Egla, 171). Yet it is clear that Egil blames Gunnhildr and her beguile for the turn of events in his life (Egla, 165). And even though King Eiríkr is seen in a better light than his father, the difference in his dealings with Skalla-Grímur and Egil demonstate how kings can be understanding but up to a point, especially when the Queen keeps egging to showcase power. And in the end of the saga, King Eiríkr grants Egil his mercy, showing how benevolent he is especailly when King Hákon, who is seen in a better light than King Eiríkr, does not supprot Egil, which implies that Egil’s claims may not be as just as he wants everyone to believe. Most kings in this saga are not seen in a negative way, apart from Harald Fair-Hair, and therefore many of the leading characters seek to service these foreign kings for honor and gifts, as gift-giving was significantly embedded into the culture and was a subtle form of payment. Arinbörn is able to maintain his friendship with Egil while being a courtier to King Eiríkr. However, the mentalitiy of the farmer overtakes the mentality of the courtier in the first half of Egil´s Saga; it is to my understanding that this mentality is not subjected to a job description but rather spirit and honor of the person in question so this analysis does not fit regarding Egil, especially when he is neither of the two by nature and yet has done both jobs. And even though Egil is the protagonist, King Eiríkr still manages to bounce his image from someone inflicting hostile relations to being mericful and appreciative of poetry in the end of the tale. However, Egil´s saga does more than reveal the fact that kings happen to appreciate poetry, especially if it involved his court, rule, or persona. The saga reveals the treachery and hostility of kings alongside loose-cannon courtiers and the spirit of Icelanders.

Njál´s saga

17

In Njál‘s Saga, Hrútr even asks the king, Harald Greycloak, „hvar skal ek sitja?,“ to which the King answers, „Móðir mín skal því ráðaþ“ (Njála , 15). Gunnhildr gives Hrútr a prominent seat as well as two longships and Ulf the Unwashed. The King even asks Hrútr, „hvern styrk hefir móðir mín til lagit með þér?“ (Njála , 16) And after hearing what Hrútr had to say, the king gave him two more longships after learning how well he was treated by his mother. It is clear that the king and Gunnhildr do not speak or consult each other about their actions and yet the king heavily responds to his mother‘s actions by supporting them; this can be the exemplification of women having power or land but still having to be represented by male kin. For instance, in some manuscripts of Njál’s saga, it has Gunnhildr instead of the king being the one giving Hrútr as much flour he wanted even though the harvest was not as fruitful (Njála , 20). And yet Gunnhildr sends Ogmund, who is called her messenger throughout the story, to Hrútr to inform him that they must see the king before they see her so that it does not look like she overly favors them, which she does; she even gives them noble clothes to wear and supports their claim by calling them clever and ambitious when they request to be retainers before the king. They were instructed to see the king before they saw her yet they saw both the king and Gunnhildr at the same time therefore implying that she may have been referring to a private meeting, which was further fascillated by the king when he tells them to return in half a month as it was the custom and to stay with his mother in the meantime upon listening to their request. „Clover postulates that women had two simultaneous statuses. They were officially powerless in the law codes and the public realm, but, because women were scarce, their unofficial status in the private realm was strengthened.”34 Bauman says, “the more public forms of folklore is largely reserved for males,”35 which we could assume to mean in skaldic poetry as they rarely talk about the women, and if they do, they are usually seen in a negative light, especially if they had power like Gunnhildr. And even though Gunnhildr had a seat at court, like the women that went to the Althing, she appeared to “not have access to performance roles in the center of the social- legal space. The private realm does not seem to be containable or sealed off from the public realm— a separation that would prevent private, local conflicts from escalating into what Turner calls ‘a national crisis had there been a nation.’”36 This may be why egging has such large implications in most sagas, driving the plot to certain tragedies. One such tragedy involved impotence, and as stated earlier, sexuality is more targeted

34 Borovsky, p. 11. 35 Borovsky, p. 12. 36 Borovsky, p. 11.

18 in Njál’s Saga as Gunnhildr is introduced when her husband is dead, which allows her to have pleasures with other men. Carolyne Larrington even states that „twelfth- and thirteenth century Norwegian noble culture seems to have taken female premarital sex and even adultery in its stride, provided that the woman‘s sexual partner was of high enough birth.“37 And considering the fact that Gunnhildr was not committing adultery and was not in child- birthing years, her affairs with men were even less scandalous. Hrútr, Ozarur´s nephew, is sitting on Gunnhildr‘s throne when Gunnhildr enters. Richard Allen says that “there is a reversal of proper order here that should ring an immediate alarm for a medieval audience and which is betokened by Hrutr’s occupation of the Queen’s high seat. The next time in Njals saga that a woman invites a man to take his place on such a seat will be when Hildigunnr maneuvers Flosi into provoking her terrible incitement.”38

However, Gunnhildr tells Hrútr that he will always have that seat as long as he is her guest and tells him to lie-down with her. Gunnhildr was more actively performing in her private space, which was coinsidently the center “and the world outside as the periphery. That implies, as Clover has suggested, ‘a single standard of behavior, a system that obviously advantaged the male but at the same time a system in which, because the strong woman was not inhibited by a theoretical ceiling above which she could not rise and the weak man not protected by a theoretical floor below which he could not fall, the potential for gender overlap in the social hierarchy was always present.’”39 Ulf the unwashed even told Hrútr that he owed a lot to Gunnhildr, to which he responded „‘þess varir mik,´segir hrútr, ‘at þú mælir feigum manni'“ (Njála, 18). But at the same time Hrútr was steamrolled to take Gunnhildr‘s help and even sleep with her because going against her advice or wishes would be even worse. „Því at ek kann skapi Gunnhildar, jafnskjótt sem vit viljum eigi fara til hennar, mun hon reka okkr ór landi, en taka fé okkat allt með ráni, en ef vit förum til hennar, þá mun hon gera okkr slíka soemð hon hefir heitit” (Njála, 12-13). When Hrútr returns, he offers bounty, to which the king takes a third and Gunnhildr reveals that she took Hrútr‘s inheritance back—without revealing the fact that she ordered her son, Gudrod, to kill Sóti— and consequently Hrútr gives her half of his inheritance to demonstrate how thankful he was. And when Hrútr informs Gunnhildr that he wishes to return to Iceland, she helps him get the king to approve,

37 Carolyne Larrington,, “Queens and Bodies” in The Journal of English and Germanic Philology vol.108, no. 4, (University of Illinois Press, 2009), 512. 38 Richard F. Allen, Fire and Iron: Critical Approaches to Njals saga, (University of Pittsburgh Press: 1971), p. 84.

39 Carolyne Larrington, “Queens and Bodies,” 512.

19 however, when he is about to depart, she gives him a gold bracelet and a curse for lying about not having a woman in Iceland. “Ef ek á svá mikit vald á þér sem ek ætla, þá legg ek þat á við þik, at þú megir engri munúð fram koma við konu þá, er þú ætlar þér á íslandi, en fremja skalt þú mega vilja þinn við aðrar konur. Ok hefir nú hvárki okkat vel, þú trúðir mér eigi til málsins” (Njála, 21). This causes Unnar marital dissatisfaction with Hrútr, which she discloses to her father that „en þó höfum vit bæði breytni til þess á alla vega, at vit mættim njótask, en þat verðr ekki“ (Njála, 52). Her father then helps her with divorce precedings by arguing that the marriage is not consummated. Gunnhildr then inadvertently has dealings with marriages without actively getting involved regardless if it‘s her children or former lover‘s. Another instance of this emasculation curse is seen in Kormáks saga, when Kormákr kills a witch‘s son in self-defense, „at síðan þessum ráðum var ráðit, fannsk Kormáki fátt um, en þat var fyrir þá sQk at Þórveig seiddi til, at þau skyldi eigi njótask mega“ (Kork, 223). Furthermore, this fear of emasculation and impotence could also be seen in the eddic poem „Hávamál“ where „fiolkunnigri kono scalattu í faðmi sofa, / svá at hon lyki þic liðom; / hon svá gorir, at þú gáir eigi / þings né þioðans máls; / mat þú villat né mannzcis gaman, / ferr þú sorgafullr at sofa.”40 And even though the poem mentions meetings where men are gathered, it could be implied that this aspect is in reference to talking about women, and if you are having marital and consummation problems that would make you avoid these situations. Nevertheless, it is more implicit that Gunnhildr and Hrútr´s relationship is revealed in the poem‘s admonition against copulation, unmindful of meat, mirthless (in bed), which then leaves Hrútr sorrowful in bed. Stephen Mitchell then says that we then:

find a very close parallel to our historical event from the 1320s in a saga written some 40 years earlier, namely, jealous women who in both instances cure the men‘s genitals in such a way that the weddings between their paramours and rivals cannot be consummated, although the specific results of the spells could apparently not be more dissimilar...[on the other hand] if, indeed, Njál‘s saga presents an abbreviated version of this same curse complex, the reason may be purely pragmatic and pedagogical, or perhaps because the writer‘s knowledge is imperfect.41 Therefore, we then have to also take into account the fact that Gunnhildr´s magical interactions are limited in description and activism due to the writer(s)´s lack of knowledge on the subject, because we can assume them to be influenced by Chrisitanity and not pagan rituals, which is why they are not well versed in the latter.

40 Edda. Die Lieder des Codex Regius nebst verwandten Denkmalern. I. Text, ed. Gustav Neckel, rev. ed. Hans Kuhn, 5th rev. ed (Heidelberg, 1983), p. 35. 41 Stephen Mitchell, Witchcraft and Magic in the Nordic Middle Ages, 22.

20

Additionally, Gunnhildr not only demonstrates time parallels but also the passage of time. The only other time she appears in Njál‘s saga is to inform the readers and characters that there has been a power change in Norway due to the fact that her son and herself were dead and that Earl Hakon was now in control (Njála , 75). Therefore, Gunnhildr‘s role is to help the cause of a main character like Hrútr—making him a retainer and giving him the support he needs to get his inheritence back—, then complicating his life when he goes back to Iceland—as it is a family saga—, and then to inform the audience of the power change due to her death. And yet this latter aspect still influences the journeys of men as it is now more appealing to travel to Norway. Icelanders traveled to Norway for trade and/or because they had a connection with the Norwegien court by being retainers—warriors of weapons and words—, which is why their affairs were often entangled with each other. Hallfreðar saga exists not only as an independent saga but also as a þáttr in Flateyjarbók and yet has many elements which are typically found in family sagas—“two generations, a settlement narrative, repeated feuds and a love story. Nevertheless, the raison d’etre of the saga is the service of an Icelandic poet to his king.”42 Other kings are also mentioned in the saga; however, it is of upmost importance to pay close attention to how the story starts. Hallfreð´s father falls into the wrath of Queen Gunnhildr, who appears to be Egil Skalla-Grímsson´s bigger arch-enemy compared to her husband. So why is Gunnhildr seen in a more negative light than King Eiríkr? Was it because both Egil and Gunnhildr were wise in magic and therefore were rivals, each seeking to get the king to side with them and forgive them for their past transgressions? In a similar manner, Kormáks saga starts off revealing how Kormákr´s father was not on friendly terms with King Eiríkr and Queen Gunnhildr. Yet Kormákr has to maintain good relations with his father´s enemies as a courtier even though it was his choice to do so. Hallfreðar also seems to follow this route and not slain Earl Eiríkr, particulary due to his dream involving King Óláfr whom he had a special relationship with. And even though he does not gain the Earl´s confidence, he is forgiven when he wounds a courtier, demonstrating the importance of his poetry to the Earl and deceased king. Hallfreðar saga also reveals how the life of a courtier could be, one in which it is affectionate and mutually beneficial to both parties involved. Kormákr, on the other hand, “seems to transfer his loyalties to his [king’s] successor without reservations,”43 showcasing how he did not have any special relationship with any king and maintained his position probably due to the benefits, which amplified his indifference to whom he served. Is this due

42 Ármann Jakobsson, “Our Norwegian Friend,” p. 148. 43 Ármann Jakobsson, “Our Norwegian Friend,” p. 148.

21 to the fact that he still wants to receive the protection of the king, whomever it may be, knowing that he will be forgiven even if he acts with bad behavior? The reasoning for this relevation may be due to the fact that kings usually had the tendency to keep poets close to their courts, ready to forgive them if they compose poems in the king’s good light, filled with praise. Poetry had the power to induce the forgiveness and mercy of foregin kings amongst Icelanders, which is why Egil, Hallfreðar, and Kormákr are all forgiven for their bad behavior in the end. It is only Queen Gunnhildr who does not forgive and eggs her husband and kinsmen to showcase their power, probably to get the idea through Icelanders that they should not think that a few words and praise are enough to save them at any given time. Maybe the reason Gunnhildr is always seen in a negative light is due to this apsect, being portrayed to not care what others think or write about her as long as they know she has power. Therefore, it is not surprising to see her as a villain or evil Queen as she stirs the actions of the men around her, causing the plot to unfold.

CHAPTER 4: kings´ sagas Kings’ sagas (konungasögur) are a genre within Old Norse literature, “which were written at the end of the 12th century and in the first half of the 13th century. This genre concentrates on telling about the kings of Norway and they can be compared with other contemporary historiography in Europe.”44 Kings’ sagas are usually more critical of individual kings as family sagas did not have the tendency to question the virtues of the king, since they were less concerned with kingship and are more focused on foundation myth. However, both genres attempt to establish a royal bloodline and genealogies. Kings’ sagas reveal in detail why some kings were not regarded as good or ideal, showcasing more attributes of the king. But to what extent were Queens mentioned in the kings’ sagas? They are rarely a fleshed-out character, remaining secondary, with little to no dialogue attributed to them, while having certain attributes attached to them. Fagurskinna is older than Heimskringla and it has long been debated if they both used the same source or if Snorri used Fagurskinna to some degree; and even though it is quite apparent that Snorri criticizes his sources, he does not overlook the character flaws of various kings, and includes stories not mentioned in the other text. Therefore, kings were usually seen in a better light in Fagurskinna, which will help us explore how Gunnhildr’s reputation varies from the two texts even though they were both supposedly written for King Hákon Hákonarson of Norway and used the original

44 Sirpa Aalto, “Encountering ‘Otherness’ in the Heimskringla,” p. 1.

22

Morkinskinna as a source.45 Gunnhildr as portrayed in Heimskringla I not only follows certain rules but appears to be politically inclined. Not only does she advise her sons about a region (Hkr, 204-5) or gets her son to politically speak on her behalf (Hkr, 236), she also has a love relationship with the enemy, which may seem like a political move: „Þá gerðisk kærleikr mikill með þeim Hákoni jarli ok Gunnhildi, en stundum beittusk þau vélræðum“ (Hkr, 211). Moreover, Gunnhildr is described in a similar manner as Eiríkr in Fagurskinna: “Eiríkr konungr var maðr mikill ok sterkr ok hreystimaðr, fríðr sjónum, áhlýðinn, harðúðigr ok fégjarn, óforsjáll ok sigrsæll ok orrostumaðr mikill… Gunnhildr kona hans var fǫgr sjónum ok tígurlig, (ekki mikil kona), djúphuguð, margmálug ok grimmlunduð, eigi vinholl, oerit gjǫrn til fjár ok landa” (Fgr, 74). The main aspect that distinguishes the couple in this excerpt is the mention of Eiríkr’s good attributes. She is also described in Heimskringla I as “kvinna fegrst” and “glaðmælt ok undirhyggjumaðr mikill” whereas her husband is narrated as: “Eiríkr var mikoll maðr ok fríðr, sterkr ok hreystimaðr mikill, hermaðr mikill ok sigrsæll, ákafamaðr í skapi, grimmr, óþýðr ok fálátr” (Hkr, 149). And even though in the family sagas, and some kings‘ sagas, she appears to not care about her reputation, in Heimskringla I she cares about the reputation of her sons (Hkr, 213). She repeatedly sends spies and messengers like a royal would do and not use her magical skills to know of affairs (Hkr, 227). Moreover, throughout Fagurskinna, Gunnhildr is described through the actions of her husband and children, only existing as a shadow character, allowing her to be that unconscious aspect of their actions. However, we must also consider that shadow characters are nevertheless villains in the story, creating threat and conflict but without them, the plot would not progress as struggle and tension give rise to actions. And Gunnhildr, even though she was a main reason for Eiríkr’s banishment, she was not the first reason why he grew unpopular; it was rather his actions that caused disapproval. In the beginning, it was his insinuation of killing off his brothers so that he could have sole control. But then, his marriage to Gunnhildr did not favor the public. Was it due to her upbringing or wickedness? And if it was either or even both, then why did Eiríkr marry her? Was it because he thought she could help in in other matters? For instance, Eiríkr tells her that Hákon is probably dead after his shipwreck to which she answers in verse: “Hǫ- reið á bak bǫru / borðhesti -kon vestan; / skǫ rungr léta brim bíta / bǫrd, es gramr hefr Fjǫrdu” (Fgr, 75). Eiríkr trusts her because of her skills— „Af vísendum sínum vissi hón, at Hákon hafði fjǫr“ (Fgr, 76)—

45 These two possibilities, though hard to prove, have been supported by scholars. See “The Zenith of the Genre” in A Companion to Old Norse-Icelandic Literature and Culture, p. 395-396, for more information.

23 afterall, in Fagurskinna, he first sees her in the north: „Þá var hón á fóstri ok at námi með Mǫttul Finnakonungiæ sá var allra fjǫlkunnigastr“ (Fgr, 79). Even if Eiríkr values her skills, it is clear that she leads to his downfall. Hákon is alive „ok kom hann sínu skipi heilu við Nóreg; fór með sér vitrliga og listuliga ... Eptir þat girndusk allir til hans, en óttuðusk ofríki ok ólǫg, er á lǫgðusk við landsbúit, ok kenndu allir Gunnhildi, en sá finnsk engi, er í móti mæli, at hón væri þess valdandi ... Eptir þat þá heituðusk boendr við Eiríkr ok vildu eigi lengr illræði Gunnhildr þola“ (Fgr, 76). Apart from this, Gunnhildr may also be one of the reasons for Eiríkr’s nickname if we consider her being accountable for their banishment. In Fagurskinna, it is said that the reason why Eiríkr raided England so much was because he felt he had little authority and less lands than he had before, and therefore went to many battles and got his nickname of Blóðøx. However, besides his nickname, Eiríkr adopted a new religion in exchange for asylum: “Fekk Aðalsteinn Eiríkr konungi at friðlandi ok yfirsókn Norðimbraland. Þar tók Eiríkr skírn ok trú rétta” (Fgr, 76). Gunnhildr’s sons were also baptized: “Synir Gunnhildar er sagt, atoeki skírn á Englandi í oesku, en er þeir kómu í land ok hǫfðu tekit allir konungs nafn, þá brutu þeir niðr hof ok blótskap, en nauðguðu engan mann til kristni, ok ekki er sagt frá trúarhaldi þeira annat en sá var kristinn, er þat vildi, en hinn heiðinn, er þat vildi” (Fgr, 98). It is not mentioned how Gunnhildr felt about inadvertently converting her family— especially since in other sagas she is a strong opposer of Christianity— or how it affected her, but we can infer that the latter part of the quotation above still allowed her to practice magic without there being any negative societal connotation. Despite having asylum in England, “eptir fall Eiríkskonungs óvingask Játmundr konungr Gunnhildi ok sonum Eiríks, finnr þá sǫk til, at Eiríkr herjaði innan lands á ríki konungs” (Fgr, 79). Gunnhildr is often blamed for the actions of men, as being the hidden reason for them, probably due to the impact egging has in family sagas. Therefore, “fór þá Gunnhildr á braut af Englandi með sonum sínum til Danmarkar, fær þar friðland af Haraldi Gormssyni. Hann tók Harald son Eiríks til fóstrs ok knésetti hann” (Fgr, 80). It almost seems that every time Gunnhildr and her family move, they must give up something to seek asylum. At first, it was their religion for Christianity, and then it was in lieu to their right to rule Norway as Haraldr Grey-cloak had to bend the knee for the Danish King. The latter is inferred by the fact that “eptir þessa orrostu flýðu synir Gunnhildar ok hón með þeim vestr um haf á Skotland, ok réð síðan Hákon Nóregi eptir því sem Danakonungr hafði hann til settan, ok var þar mikil vingan þeira á meðal” (Fgr, 116). Alternatively, from the family sagas, Gunnhildr’s appreciation for poetry is seen in Fagurskinna. Gunnhildr’s first active lines are a verse that was composed after using her

24 skills to foretell Hákon´s whereabouts. And “eptir fall Eiríks lét Gunnhildr yrkja kvæði um hann, svá sem Óðinn fagnaði hónum í Valhǫll” (Fgr, 77). This long poem even influenced the poet Eyvindr, as the text mentions how he imitated it for Hákon’s fall (Fgr, 66). It is then more appropriate to evince what we assumed in the family sagas, that Gunnhildr appreciates poetry but does not believe that a poet should be able to get away with transgressions. Gunnhildr is then seen to be more in line to rules and laws, especially when they worked in her favor. And even though her actions may appear harsh or evil (like some laws do) to the public, she does not use poetry to ask for forgiveness, and is unapologetically herself, accepting punishment/banishment when given. It is also striking that Gunnhildr‘s lines in this text are only in verse, which further demonstrates her adherence to oral tradition. And as Jesch states: „Given the overwhelming maleness of skaldic poetry, it is surprising to find that medieval Icelandic traditions record some skaldic poets who were women … We know little enough about these four as poets (in two cases only one stanza or just half a stanza survive) and in three of the four cases very little about them as women. The exception is Gunnhildr.”46 However, it should also be noted that, as stated earlier, Icelanders had a monopoly on skaldic poetry and the fact that Gunnhildr is considered a skald is significant not only in the fact that she is a woman but due to her unknown origins. And these vague origins may be the result of explaining why she was skilled in magic, i.e. she is from the North and learned from the Finns and yet has ties with Denmark. However, the only slight mention of magic in Heimskringla I is when “gera honum banadrykk” and the men think she made Hálfdan svarti bráðdauðr (Hkr, 147). Otherwise, she is attributed to buying poison (Hkr, 147) and described as “fjölkunnigri” (Hkr, 147), while being “vitr ok margkunnig” (Hkr, 149). And even though she was well received by King Harald Gormsson, married her daughter off, and some of her sons went fighting (Hkr, 162), she still wanted to foster Ólafur Tryggvason but was not successful (Hkr, 229). Why would she want to foster him? Was it to have a better hold of the politics of Norway or because even though Haraldr Grey-cloak was the most respected of her sons (Hkr, 198), he was later mocked for being a king only on paper? (Hkr, 212) It is then easy to conclude that Gunnhildr is linked and more involved in politics in Heimskringla I than poetry, religion, magic and sexuality as displayed in Fagurskinna and family sagas. And yet, she remains to be politically inclined in all the texts she is mentioned in, which may shed a light on the possibility of her vague origins being more of a political, or even propaganda, move.

46 Judith Jesch, Women in the Viking Age, (The boydell press: 1991), p. 161.

25

CHAPTER 5: Different genres, different images By and large, King Haraldr Fair-Hair is portrayed as a good king in the kings´sagas, especially for being not only the unifier of Norway but also the ancestor of all future kings of Norway. Both the kings´sagas and family sagas seek to set up genelogies for regions that did not keep records or analoges unlike other regions. Chrisitianity gave rise to genealogies by having a much more defined succession through the establishment of primogeniture, which is why some Scandinavian kings became Christian in order to establish a royal bloodline based on their nuclear family alone instead of including relatives and others that may have been suiteable for the throne beforehand. However, this made it harder for females to have any power, because with primogeniture it also meant that property went to the male kin. However, in Scandinavia, women were able to hold property but had to be represented in cases or property matters by their male kin. This limited power, influenced by wielding their male kin to do their bidding, gave way to using egging in order to gain even more agency. And even though it is not specified how King Eiríkr‘s relationship with Gunnhildr was, she still managed to hold power because men respected and feared her and through her egging and magic, she was able to get away with certain things, wielding her messenger and sons to mainly do her bidding as well. Ármann mentions that „even if not a Christian, in some sagas [Eiríkr‘s father] is portrayed as the opponent of sorcerers and other heathen menaces.”47 This aspect is rather interesting as Gunnhildr is often associated with magic and curses. It is also kings‘ sagas that focus more on which kings converted to Christianity whereas family sagas only mention acts of magic and religion but focus more on other matters. And according to the family sagas, King Haraldr Fair-hair is neverthess the indirect founding father of Iceland, where his oppression lead to the settlement of Iceland. Therefore, he is seen more as a tyrannt in family sagas. He declares his entire kingdom as his personal property and reduces to his citizens as serfs and servants, or even courtiers—all of which are bound by court and its rules. However, Ármann states that “the power attributed to King Haraldr in Egil’s saga is, however, far beyond credibility for any viking ruler of the 9th century. Contemporary evidence offers in fact no firm proof that King Haraldr ever even existed.”48 Though, apart from Egil’s saga, most family sagas don’t give much detail about King Haraldr’s ruling and just build onto the foundation myth. However, the only slight difference occurs in Laxdæla saga, where settlers do no leave due to the King’s harsh rule but for the fact that he wanted to be the sole ruler. This may not be a big enough threat to flee the

47 Ármann Jakobsson, “Our Norwegian Friend,” p. 149. 48 Ármann Jakobsson, “Our Norwegian Friend,” p. 149.

26 country, but in an area that had not been previously unified, this offered enough anxiety and worries to some about the statehood of their lives and property that they turned to settle elsewhere. And as Ármann mentions, “it is interesting to note that one of the oldest family sagas, Egils saga and one of the youngest, Viglundar saga, both depict King Haraldr in strongly negative tonalities. Though he receives milder treatment elsewhere;”49 this may be since they were more desperate in creating a foundation myth and later maintaining said myth. King Eiríkr remains with a similiar portrayal in both genres, where none of it is good or redeeming. He is often described as a great warrior, but who lost popular favor from either killing all his siblings to have sole control or from marrying Gunnhildr, as all bad things that occured were either associated with her or she was nevertheless blamed for it like a scapegoat. Was it her gender, magical abilities, threat to Christianity, or vague background that made her such a favorable target as the scapegoat, representing the other and what the population was trying to evade? On the other hand, King Haraldr Grey-cloak is seen as an ineffective king in the kings’ sagas and is therefore represented as rather unpopular, not for tyranny but for not being as powerful. Is this because his mother had the same amount of power as him, as she quasi-ruled with him? The only kings’ saga that differs from this opinion is Fagurskinna, where Grey-cloak is represented as a great warrior like his father even though he and his brothers don’t fare as well. Gunnhildr also appears to not have power in this saga; the only power she has is in name, Mother of Kings, as her sons were often associated with her name, otherwise she was opposed, and she often had to flee. In the family sagas, however, King Haraldr Grey-cloak is seen positively. He shows great amity to Icelanders, especially those that become his courtiers. He has even sided against his mother in Flóamanna saga when the protagonist, Þorgils, offends Queen Gunnhildr and Grey-cloak even accepts Geir´s payment for killing one of his men in Harðar saga while saying that his mother won´t be as forgiving. It is strange to see how much animosity Gunnhildr has for poets in family sagas, especially due to her own poetic composition in Fagurskinna. Therefore, it is more fitting to assume that Gunnhildr appreciates poems but does not believe them to wield such power as to forgive a poet´s sins or saving their lives, like most kings did at the time. Both genres display a diffferent view amongst these royal men however the view that does not change and remain constant is that of Gunnhildr. Queen Gunnhildr always appears

49 Ármann Jakobsson, “Our Norwegian Friend,” p. 150.

27 as the difficult one and the worse villian of the royal couple, either when paired with her husband or son. If either of these kings became crossed, all an Icelander had to do was write a poem praising the king and he probably would be forgiven, depending on the quality of the poem. The only exception within the family sagas is the fact that the hot temper attributed to Gunnhildr does not appear in Laxdæla saga to the extent the other sagas showcase. Her temper is only seen when others likened to Hrútr, but otherwise she was seen as benevolent as her son, especially in her admiration of Óláfr Peacock. However, Costel Coroban mentions that the exemption of Gunnhildr’s negative reputation in Laxdæla saga is an argument for female authorship of the saga and therefore it’s more considerate of Gunnhildr, especially as she is used as a scapegoat and “guilty for the evils of Haraldr gráfeldr’s rule (especially in Egils saga).”50 But, the problems with her favoritism are better demonstrated in Njáls saga, where Hrútr is seen more as a captive held in court to only please Gunnhildr so when he asks to leave, the king grants that to him; however, the Queen lays a curse on him for being an unfaithful lover and hiding the fact that he had a fiancée in Iceland. And even though she is not seen as a witch or extremely villianous in the saga, the fact that she is very skilled in magic remains and it is this aspect that makes her a more complex character. However, the kings’ sagas paint their opinion of her as an evil woman or witch, where the two are often intercangeable. The only kings’ saga that shows a slight hint of admiration is Heimskringla, where she is being condemned by the amount of power she possesses, either magical or secular, and yet her mere capacity for being able to wield such power is admirable, especially for a woman.

Therefore, Gunnhildr’s successor, not just in rule but portrayal in both genres, according to Ármann, is Earl Hákon who is “nevertheless linked to heathen elements and ‘forneskja,’ i.e. berserks,”51 and troll-like blámadðr, as seen in Eyrbyggja saga and Finnboga saga respectively. If this assumption is correct, then it would tie Gunnhildr more to Denmark, as the Danish King appointed Earl Hákon to rule over Norway. But it would then make more sense to connect Earl Hákon to these negative qualities by not being linked to Gunnhildr but to Denmark itself due to the discontent between both nations. However, it is interesting to note that the youngest family sagas depict Norwegian kings in a more negative manner, particularly King Haraldr Fair-hair and King Hákon, whose wickness resemble the evil aspects in fairytales especially for claiming property that is not theirs to claim. It has also

50 Costel Coroban, Ideology and Power in Norway and Iceland, 1150-1250, (Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2018), p. 156. 51 Ármann Jakobsson, “Our Norwegian Friend,” p. 152.

28 been rendered that Gunnhildr plays a trope in fairytales by displaying an evil, magical Queen who uses posion and other skills, which later evolved to the evil-step-mother character due to her trickery and egging even though she was never a step-mother and even failed to foster a child, which the latter resembled a kidnapping attempt. Gunnhildr, however, throughout saga literature has been regarded as a Far-Northern figure, often originating from Hálogaland. And like most Far-Northern figures, she is even associated with aggressive weather-magic, where in Fagurskinna it was implied that she was the cause of King Hákon goði’s shipwreck. In Heimskringla, it is said that she was fostered by two

sámi magicians, she persuaded Eiríkr to kill them, which resulted, the following day, in a massive storm, implied to have been spawned by the killing of the magicians. This made sailing impossible for Eiríkr’s crew (Hkr 1941-1951, I 135; and ÓT 1860-1868, I, 42-43). This second account might be seen as introducing the very popular Far-Northern motif of what will here be called “The Retaliating Storm” in which a group of Far-Northerners, most often Sámi or Finnic in nature, defend themselves or take revenge against their enemies by summoning a storm.52 And even though magic is more apparent in Fagurskinna, it rarely exists in Heimskringla beyond assumption. Magic, however, is more entangled within family sagas, which may be a result of their folklore element since they all root from foundation myths. Sexuality, magic, and gender have bigger roles in family sagas, because they have strong independent characters whereas kings’ sagas focus mainly on kings. Therefore, Gunnhildr’s appreciation of poetry and her involvement with Christianity is better seen in kings’ sagas, as these two themes are heavily incorporated with kings.

52 Lyonel D. Perabo, Here be Heathens, p. 124.

29

CHAPTER 6: Foreginers‘ Perspective Most texts say that Gunnhildr is from Northern Fenno-Scandinavia, that she is skilled in magic, and that she is the daughter of a certain Ǫzurr toti, if a father figure is mentioned. Oddveria annall is the only text that mentions her as only being a witch. All others say she is evil; where H.D.A.R. Norwagiensium, Ólafs saga Odds, Heimskringla, Egils saga Skalla- Grímssonar, Njáls saga, Ólafs s. Tryggvasonar e. mesta mention that she is both—evil and a witch— and that her father is Ǫzurr toti, which supposedly gives proof that she is a witch. Perabo even mentions that “as is the case with Historia Norwegiae, none of these texts go into any detail regarding her character, except on three occasions when she is said to be either a mischievous woman, or an outright witch.”53A total of 16 pre-Modern texts mention Gunnhildr54: one account locates her coming from Denmark, others recount her being from the Far North (particularly Hálogaland), and the remaining leave her origins unknown. It is not strange that there is a confusion about her origin as she is mainly a secondary character in saga literature.

However, it is important to note that if Historia Norwegiae is correct that her father is the Danish King Gormr inn gamli, then it would present inaccuracies in saga literature. This is because Haraldr Bluetooth would have been her brother, which gives a larger context for providing her family shelter, but Bluetooth is regarded with the Jelling stones, where it is said that he Christianized Denmark. And even though her husband and sons are said to be baptized when they moved to England in the sagas, it is never mentioned if Gunnhildr converted herself; and if she was from Denmark, then how did she learn magic? And how did her husband find her in Finland? Both Fagurskinna and Heimskringla mention how she was fostered. Did she then move to the North to be fostered and to be more in tuned with the religion of her parents? This would be less likely as it seemed that Bluetooth was adamant in converting Danes and Norwegians alike to Christianity even though he had limited success. It would make more sense that he would be willing to protect Gunnhildr’s children. But, if she did not convert, I doubt Bluetooth would have welcomed her with open arms because if he can’t even convert his supposed family, then how is he going convert his people? However, if she was not his sister, then Bluetooth would be a bit more understanding, especially if Gunnhildr was going to marry one of her daughters off. However, many scholars have argued that Historia Norwegiae should not be trusted. Matthew Driscoll notes that “the origin of this

53 Lyonel D. Perabo, Here be Heathens, p. 149. 54 Perabo, p. 148.

30 confusion is not clear, but it may be due, at least in part, to Icelandic hostility toward Gunnhildr, whom they may have wanted to have had more humble origins” (Ágrip 2009, 87). Perabo even argues that “if Gunnhildr’s origin could be manipulated in order to discredit her, why place her in Norway, rather than another more ‘foreign’ land? Furthermore, it has been established that Historia Norwegiae was conceived, in many ways, as an anti-Danish propaganda text (HN 2001, XVIII-XX).”55 Denmark then constituted as a much stronger candidate for the Queen’s origin than Hálogaland, if writers wanted to further demonize her. However, the fact that she gets asylum from Denmark in most sagas, allows her to be attributed and accepted by both regions, which may have gotten her more disdain from a Norwegian/Icelandic standpoint regardless of her actual origins; but this may help explain why she is said to originate from Hálogaland in most texts. Another case to disprove the fact that her father was Gorm is that she rarely exists in early-Medieval Danish historiographical tradition. She is not found in Chronicon Roskildense, Chronicon Letherense, Annales Lundensis, or Annales Ryenses. Only Saxo Grammaticus and Compendium Saxonis, based on Gesta 137 Danorum mention Gunnhildr in passing, but only because they mention King Eiríkr’s marital status. Saxo Grammaticus brushes off Gunnhildr by also mentioning her witchcraft.56 This may seem as not surprising as Saxo was a foreigner, however in the Norwegian histories, Gunnhildr has the same descriptions. “Ágrip af Nóregskonunga sögum tells of her magic and Nóregs konunga tal mentions her skills, Brother theodoricus says she´s evil and bloodthirsty, and in one of the oldest Norwegian histories, Historia Norwegiae, Gunnhildur is given the name she deserves, i.e. the evil troll-woman.”57 But what is the significance of the word troll?

55 Perabo, p. 149. 56 Jóna Torfadóttir, “Gunnhildur and the Male Whores,” (Academia.edu. Accessed December 23, 2019), p. 10. 57 Jóna Torfadóttir, “Gunnhildur and the Male Whores,” p. 2.

31

CHAPTER 7: Magic/Gender The Old Icelandic etymology for the word troll meant being skilled and well versed in magic.58 And in almost every source— foreign and Icelandic alike—, Queen Gunnhildr is said to be wise and well versed in magic. However, if this detail was not revealed, only her cruelty and evil deeds are noted. But what is surprising about the importance of the mention of magic is not the magic itself, but rather where she learned it and what it implies. In Heimskringla, Gunnhildr from Hálogaland is sent to Finnmǫrk to learn magic. Finnmǫrk and the act of traveling north is directly linked with magical practices, such as soothsaying, and is explicitly prohibited in some texts. In “Skáldskaparmál”, „Þóorr ver farinn í Austrvega at berja trǫll. “59 We can then assume that Snorri‘s east referred to east of Iceland, or even Norway, which left the areas east of that to be lumped together, with the border of Hálogaland and Finnmǫrk being particularly mentioned in interactions between Fenno- Scandinavia. However, Naumudalr, Bjarmaland, and other borderlands are at times associated in other texts. Gunnhildr is also directly associated with the Sámi, as she was even fostered by the Sámi King Mǫttull in Fagurskinna. We can then conclude as the examples in the texts indicate Stephen Mitchell’s own conclusion that magical abilities can be taught as they are based on knowledge and are meant to be practiced in order to obtain such skill rather than having an innate power.60 Furthermore, apart from supernatural motifs that link her to Northern Fenno- Scandinavia, poison is one of the most common accusations attributed to Gunnhildr. She is said to have poisoned her political opponent, Hálfdan svarti, who disputed her power in Þrándheimr, both in Heimskringla and Ólafs saga Tryggvasonar. And Perabo states that “in Egils saga Skalla-Grímssonar, Egil is described as only avoiding such a fate thanks to a magic rune he carves on the cup containing the poisoned drink the queen sends him (Egla, 108). While such poisoned drinks are not otherwise associated with the Far-North, other uses of poison in the area can be found in the previously-mentioned 16th-century Schondia where the Sámi are said to be able to shoot deadly poisoned arrows (Ziegler, 14-16).“61 However, Gunnhildr also used curses and other magical skills. Seiðr was performed to put a curse on

58 Einar Ól. Sveinsson has pointed out the noun’s relation with the Icelandic verb trylla, i.e. ‘to fill with magic’, ‘to drive someone to insanity.’ The verb trylla results in the Germanic word form < *trullian < *truzlian, and the old meaning was to accuse someone of magic. This same meaning is still to be found in neighbouring countries, i.e. trylle (Danish), trylla (New Norwegian). 59 normalized from Jónsson 1931. 60Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir, "Women's Weapons: A Re-Evaluation of Magic in the "Íslendingasögur"." Scandinavian Studies 81, no. 4 (2009), p. 411. 61 Lyonel D. Perabo, Here be Heathens, p. 152.

32 someone and Gunnhildr places a curse on Egil—so that he never find peace until he sees her— and Hrútr—so that he cannot consummate his marriage. However, the latter revolves especially on ergi— unmanliness. And one crucial aspect of seiðr was that it was often connected to ergi, which is why Borovsky argued that „the most detailed descriptions of seidr performances are of those performed by women. Strömback (1935) [argued that] it was especially shameful for men to preform it.“62 Andren, on the other hand, mentioned that „the feminine character of spinning also fits with seiðr in other ways.“63 Women spin the plot and actions of men through manipulation, egging, and goading— all of which belonged to the feminine realm. Moreover, there are more literary tropes for the usage of magic, as they still existed in the collective cultural memory but not necessarily at the time of the sagas composition. Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir elaborates the idea of writers/scribes, and consequently their audiences, knowing of historical pagan practices and regarding them effective if we believe women that preformed magic to be based of völur; however, she also says that “this idea is problematic and has been disputed before. John McKinnell, for example, does not think that these concepts were highly recognizable to audiences at the time of the sagas´ composition (III), and Catharina Raudvere warns against reading seiðr-scenes as anthropology, describing the völva instead as a kind of personification of ancient magic‚ a manifestation of old-time lore.‘“64 We can then assume that the mention of magic or such rituals, revolved more on the idea of cultural memory than a way to preserve it as it was known at the writers‘ time, which may explain why magic was usually stated without explicit details. Eldar Heide, on the other hand, argues that the reason „that none of the sources tell us what the seiðr preformer did ... because of the ergi nature of seiðr ... From the eighteenth-century southern Sámi, we know the word naejtiendirre, which corresponds to gandr as a magic projectile, [where the seiðr emissary could be called gandr,] ... [which gives light to] the ‚phallic aggression’ of Old Norse culture, which is based upon the notion that the one who penetrates in intercourse is the strongest.“65 These “phallic aggression” and ergi notions are further demonstrated by an instance in Egils saga where the seiðr victim fidgets, meaning that it makes his bottom itch. Andren also says that it is “possible that seiðr included doing sexual or symbolic sexual acts with the distaff,” which may further explain why Gunnhildr was so closely associated with

62 Zoe Borovsky, "Never in Public: Women and Performance in Old Norse Literature,” p. 22. 63 Anders Andren,Old Norse Religion in Long-term Perspectives, p. 167. 64 Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir, "Women's Weapons," p. 417. 65 Anders Andren, Old Norse Religion in Long-term Perspectives, p. 167.

33 witchcraft and sexual prowess.66 Furthermore, Brit Solli’s research concentrates on the social construction of gender in the practice of seidr whereas Price’s study “looks to provide a unified explanation for the paradox represented by Norse magic with its apparent reliance on gender-bending practices (ergi) carried out in the context of perhaps history’s most explicitly homophobic culture.”67 It is important to note the fact that “witchcraft derives in behavior instead of appearances, or gender;”68 this idea is also supported by Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir as magic— in literary sources— was not used to confine women or show how women should not behave, but rather the negative connotation with women who practiced magic roots from the witch’s attitude towards the main protagonist, hence demonstrating that behavior weighs more than gender.69 However, Mitchell and Jóhanna also mention how magic gave women more agency, especially if they had no male kin to help them in legal matters. It is also important to note that most of Gunnhildr’s curses revolved around action by either limiting or dramatically encouraging it. Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir comes to the same conclusion in her essay by saying: “Although less alliterative and rhythmic, it is clear from the use of the verb leggja á (´´to lay a spell on´´) that this utterance is explicitly a curse and it is reminiscent of the Celtic geis, which is a command or injunction, usually laid by a woman on a man to force or prohibit him to act.“70 We can then assume women did not employ other recourses of action (such as physical violence, the legal system, or their powers of persuasion) due to the fact that they either had no male kin to participate in the medieval Icelandic legal system even if they were the head of the household—which is why Gunnhildr is seen to only goad her sons to enact revenge or killings, persuading men, and carefully giving advice to her son, the king— to preserve their honor. This self-preservation is guided by a range of human emotions but signals the oppression women faced. Friðriksdóttir even states that „to be legally and officially disenfranchised in the public sphere is in effect to be marginalized or oppressed: women cannot employ official, formal power, the prerogative of men, and if they have no men to act for them, magic is one of the very few viable options that saga authors have at their disposal to grant their female characters agency. “71 Without legal power, women still held a sense of freedom through her speech either with magical acts or egging as „these speech acts can clearly have an immense effect on the recipient, which contrasts with

66 Andren, p. 167-8. 67 Stephen Mitchell, Witchcraft and Magic in the Nordic Middle Ages, p. 8. 68 Mitchell, p.14-15. 69 Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir, Women in Old Norse Literature: Bodies, Words, and Power, p. 56. 70 Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir, Women’s Weapons, 421. 71 Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir, “Women’s Weapons,” p. 430.

34 women´s lack of formal power in male-dominated public sphere ... Characters who ... do not have much to gain or lose by their utterances; their main purpose is plot-determined. However, the magic-theme acquired other forms and meanings in literature produced during the thirteenth century.“72 + Therefore, if magic is a form to signify oppression or to be marginalized, then it is understandable that women that employ such skill to be deemed as trolls as they represent otherness, especially in mythology. Vanir are often represented as the other god-like beings that are apart from the Æsir and that are associated with fertility, wisdom, and the ability to see the future— all aspects Gunnhildr is associated with—and most Vanir are usually revealed to be goddesses. We can then infer that Queens were often regarded as the Vanir, as having power but not being as powerful as the Æsir or king, and they were usually the cause for traveling to borders, crossing them, and advancing the plot. Gunnhildr has even more similarities as the gods classified as Vanir were viewed as the other due to the difference in their background, origin, and geographical association from the so-called Æsir.73 The followers of Vanir were then also viewed as the other as their religious practices were different and there is no evidence to which Gunnhildr practiced or if she converted to Christianity when her family did. There is only evidence that she was skilled in magic, practiced “blót” and “fjǫlkynngi.”74

In addition, there is a second meaning for the Old Icelandic word for troll, which is driving someone to insanity.75This meaning amplifies the cruelty and evil deeds of Gunnhildr but at the same time shows she represents both aspects of the word. How do you drive someone to insanity? Gunnhildr would probably say that you either held them captive, made them your sex slave (which in term could affect his dominance), drive them out physically by banishing them, or casting a spell. However, the aspect of keeping someone captive or casting a spell on them are typical ingredigents found in fairytales. And as in later sagas where kings begin to resemble evil-fairy kings, Gunnhildr begins to take on the role of the evil step-mother or the evil-fairy Queen. Fairytale and evil step-mother motifs start making their way with the translations and Romances in the 13th century, however, in 1300 there are full-length sources avaliable. In the oldest source, Ólafs Tryggvasonar saga, Oddur mentions “the dubitable stories about the stepmothers told by herdsmen, which always make the king

72 Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir, “Women’s Weapons,” p. 425. 73 Terry Gunnell, “Blótgyðjur, Goðar, Mimi, Incest, and Wagons: Oral Memories of the Religion(s) of the Vanir,” Part II Local and Neighboring Traditions. 74 Said in various sagas such as Fagurskinna and Ólafs saga Odds. 75 Jóna Torfadóttir, “Gunnhildur and the Male Whores,” p.2.

35 appear very insignificant.”76 This sounds strikingly similar to the relationship between Gunnhildr and her son— who appears insignificant and inefficient especially in the kings’ sagas.

Moreover, to be able to interfere with men’s dominance, one had to not only have power but also be physically attractive. In almost every saga, Gunnhildr is regarded as beautiful even when her husband was seen in a better light. Perabo even states that some witches, “such as Gunnhildr konungamóðir, arguably the most famous and most dangerous female figure in Medieval Norse-Icelandic literature, were said to be excessively alluring and ready to offer their charms to wandering heroes, while others were described as repulsive as a trǫll. While some might strike a man with devastating curses, others could be trusted to aid the champions in their quests.”77 Gunnhildr on the other hand did both, even to the same man such as Hrútr, whose divorce was caused by her curse and causes implications to the central feud which leads to the burning of Bergþórshváll. Women who sought revenge often did vicious acts and were associated to the burning of a farmstead as seen through Gunnhildr and Signy from Volsunga saga. For instance, Sigrid the Haughty, mother of Cnut the Great, refused Harald Grenske and burned him after a feast because he was unfaithful. In addition, these acts of revenge are all held after feasts. Gunnhildr puts a curse on Hrútr after his fare- well feast and Signy feeds her husband their children before everything burns down. The other are often blamed for inexplainable things, which is another form of driving someone to insanity but at the cost of the employer. For instance, Gunnhildr is accused in Oddveria annall for “for the death of King Hákon góði through unspecified sorcery (“Seigia sumir menn ad Gunnhilldur konga modir hafi radit med sinne fiolkyngi Hakoni kongi bana med þui moti”: OddAnn 1888, 462).”78 It is also implied that Gunnhildr had something to do with King Hákon góði’s shipwreck in Fagurskinna, even though there is only evidence of her using magic to gather information.

Gunnhildr is also able to gather information and distract her enemies through another form of magic and therefore brings shape-changing aspects seen in legendary sagas to family sagas through her own transformation in Egils saga. And as Loki is often seen as the trickster and other, he is often regarded for his shape-changing abilities.79 Out of the four cases of Far-

76 „stivp meðra sagvr er hiarðar sveinar segia er enge veit hvart satt er. er iafnan lata konungia minztan i sinvm frasognum“ (Ólafs Tryggvasonar saga, p.17). 77 Lyonel D. Perabo, Here be Heathens, p. 185. 78 Perabo, p. 152. 79 Snorri Sturluson, The Prose Edda, translated by Jesse Byock, (London: Penguin Books, 2005).

36

Northern characters assuming a bird shape, two are performed by women, one of which is in riddarasögur set in Rísaland.80 Riddarasögur are said to bring the tropes, fairytale aspects, and legendary stories from continental Europe to Scandinavia. And if this is the case, we must consider to what degree Celtic stories impacted sagas and the hidden meanings associated with birds and their language from legendary sagas. For instance, in Volsunga saga and the Poetic Edda, Sigurd comes to understand the language of birds, which allows him to outlive his intended killer by gathering information from the birds around him. Hugin and Munin flew around the world and informed Oðin what happened among mortal men. Therefore, it seems adequate that Gunnhildr would transform into a bird to gather information on her enemies, like Egil. However, in the saga, Gunnhildr uses her new form to break the concentration of Egil instead; she makes as much noise as possible so that he is unable to compose his poem in one night, which puts his life at jeopardy. Gunnhildr’s actions then differ from mythological implications of birds as she did not use this form to gather information but rather taunt her enemy so that he is more likely to die. And by leading her enemy to insanity in her new form, she represents the connection associated between jǫtnar and the Far Northerners, as they became increasingly closer in literature considering the notable examples of jǫtnar turning into birds in the earlier mythological material. “[The Sámis’] proximity to and paradigmatic connection with the jǫtnar, or giants (etinns) served to strengthen the association of both with an existence in the chaotic, wild periphery (útgarðr) beyond the boundaries of civilization, and an accomplishment in magic and possession of powerful and dangerous occult knowledge.”81

Moreover, the concept of trǫll is clearly linked to Sáminess, as they represent the ethnic otherness and due to their magic associations. In Bárðar saga, the titular half- trǫll character marries Hálogaland’s chieftan’s daughter, further linking the area to the word. Other examples include the following: “in Ketils saga, Ketill’s father is named Hallbjörn hálftröll. Nonetheless, when Ketill invites his Sámi lover Hrafnhíldr to his estate of Hrafnista in Naumudalr, Hallbjörn reacts very strongly and chases her away, calling her directly a ‘tröll.’ Later, in Gríms saga, Ketill’s and Hráfnhildr’s son, Grímr confronts and ultimately Grímhíldr Jösurdóttir from Finnmǫrk whose sisters are directly called trǫll.”82 Many mythical

80 “Valdimars saga,” In Agnethe Loth (ed.), Late Medieval Icelandic Romances, Vol. I (53-78), (Copenhagen: Munksgaard: 1960), p.75. 81 Troy Storfjell, “The Ambivalence of the Wild: Figuring the Sámi in Pre-Colonial and Colonial Discourse to the Eighteenth Century,” in Kajsa Andersson (ed.), L’Image du Sápmi, Vol. II. Humanistica Oerebroensia. Artes et linguae. (Örebro: Örebro University), p. 550. 82 Lyonel D. Perabo, Here be Heathens, p. 68.

37 and saga accounts linked Sámi to trolls, giants, and other unpleasant physical features. Gunnhildr is never said to be excessivly beautiful. She is stated to be fine-looking but that her charms laid elsewhere. This is notable in sagas especially since most, like Fagurskinna, mention her husband to be the better-looking one between the two. Gunnhildr then seems to represent the image of a supernatural Far-Northern woman and as Perabo mentions: “Gunnhildr is ready to personally engage in the protection and furtherance of her male consort and issue through various magical acts ... In more ways than one, if Hákon Jarl is depicted in saga literature as the archetypal pagan and Þorgerðr is the archetypal of Northern supernatural figure, Gunnhildr could be said to be the quintessential representation of the supernatural aspects of the Norse woman, trǫll-ish, witch-like and unquestionably dangerous.“83

83 Lyonel D. Perabo, Here be Heathens, p. 153.

38

CHAPTER 8: Thrones Foretelling Urban Fame: How to Plant & Twist Roots to Reimagine Spaces Researching areas where Queen Gunnhildr held her seat while looking into the history of place-names and landmarks may help form a better understanding to the significance of these urban centers, as they added no substance to the sagas. In Eyrbyggja saga, Þórgunna decided to be buried in Skálholt because she foresaw that it was going to be an important religious center; there was clear intention of the inclusion of this place-name. What this tells us may lead to an understanding of the local mentality of the writers/scribes, who were writing in a time not closely related to the events and therefore could insert centers that they knew were going to be of great importance in their time or create a history for a space. This not only shows the manipulation of certain facts in the sagas, but also how important it was that not only rulers had a legacy but also certain urban centers. Tracing the centers in which Queen Gunnhildr supposedly held seat will give us a better insight to the predestination of a place as her father-in-law was Harald Fairhair. Gunnhildr is an interesting character to analyze as she brings two important areas together and therefore, we can suspect that the centers surrounding her name to be of importance in the future, such as her seat in Konungahellu. And tracing these centers to present day may reveal different perspectives on space. To start with, in Heimskringla I, Eiríkr had seat in Jórvík after Loðbrókarsynir whereas her sons had seats in in Hörðalandi, Rogalandi, and Harðangri. However, Fagurskinna and Heimskringla I do not mention where Gunnhildr held her seat, if at all. On the other hand, Njál´s saga says: “þau höfðu atsetu austr í konungahellu” (Njála, 11). Most of the kings’ sagas neglect to inform where she held her seat. Was this because she often sat next to her son and gave him advice as witnessed in the family sagas? But if this were the case, then why would a family saga mention where she held her seat? Associating a person with a place signifies authority and power. Was it because she seemed to be more powerful than her son in Njál´s saga? But then why is she rarely giving advice and her sons are rarely in power in kings’ sagas? Treachery is seen in Fagurskinna when Hákon plans to call for Haraldr Grey-Cloak so that Gull-Haraldr— Haladr Knutsson—can kill him for their reign to be over. So, it is not far off from the account Ágrip gives, even how unlikely it may be since the situation in Fagurskinna never came to happen. Ágrip tells of how Jarl Hákon asked the Danish King Haraldr to promise to marry her as a ruse so that she could be killed as soon as

39 she arrived at Denmark, to which they sank her in a bog.84 This story was forgotten until a mummified body of a woman was found in Haraldskjær Bog in Denmark, which N. M. Petersen, historian and philologist, identified it as Gunnhildr. However, later studies have shown that the body is much older than the time it is assumed Gunnhildr lived in.85 Many bodies found in bogs are from violent deaths. So why are there accounts of bogs attached to Gunnhildr? It is never explicitly said in the sagas how Gunnhildr died, which may have been of old age and some bog bodies died of natural causes since bogs were a convenient form of burial. If this is true, then was there no one that wanted to honor her death, did all her sons die before her, or was she extremely hated? Even Heimskringla I does not mention that she died, or how, just that all her sons do (Hkr, 335). It is interesting that some histories mention that Gunnhildr died in 980 in Orkney, the same year Harald Bluetooth stopped ruling over Norway, in which Haraldr Grey-cloak ruled under him until 970 when Earl Hákon took over under Bluetooth´s orders. Furthermore, regardless of her unexplained death, we can trace the significance of having Gunnhildr’s seat in Konungahellu. According to Snorri Sturluson, two crucial royal summits held in Konungahellu concluded the peace between Sweden and Norway. Gunnhildr then signifies a connection between Norway and Hálogaland through her marriage and supposed past, especially when her husband and sons converted to Christianity and she continued her pagan practices because there were more pagan followers in Sweden. However, Snorri was not writing about Konungahellu in reference to Gunnhildr, but the two King Olafs in ca 1020.86 And the second summit was the meeting of three Kings (Sweden, Norway, Denmark) in 1101.87 And in 1111, King Sigurd I Magnusson, the son of the Norwegian King from the second summit, made Konungahellu his capitol.88 A century before Snorri was writing, Orderic Vitalis mentions the city as one of six Norwegian civitates, which was sacked and destroyed by Pomeranians in 1135.89 The city was then moved slightly west but even Snorri notes that Konungahellu was never fully recovered.90 During the early Middle Ages and especially the 13th century, the city was a center of royal authority, serving as the

84 Ágrip af Nóregskonunga sögum, Fagrskinna - Nóregs konunga tal, Bjarni Einarsson gaf út, Reykjavik, Hið íslenzka fornritafélag, coll. Íslenzk fornrit n° 29, 1984, p. 15. 85 Karin Sanders, “A Portal through Time: Queen Gunhild,” Scandinavian Studies, Vol. 81, No. 1, p. 1–46. 86 Ulf Larsen, Harri Blomberg, and Knut Are Tvedt, “Konghelle,” Store norske leksikon. Accessed December 23, 2019. https://snl.no/Konghelle. 87 Ulf Larsen, Harri Blomberg, and Knut Are Tvedt. “Konghelle.” 88 Ulf Larsen, Harri Blomberg, and Knut Are Tvedt. “Konghelle.” 89 Ulf Larsen, Harri Blomberg, and Knut Are Tvedt. “Konghelle.” 90 Ólafur Halldórsson, Text by Snorri Sturluson in Óláfs saga Tryggvasonar en Mesta, (University college London: 2001), p. 73 and 182.

40

Norwegian kingdom’s southernmost outpost while a Franciscan monastery was built and the Kastelle kloster monastery was reconstructed.91 In 1254, Hákon IV of Norway invaded Halland and a castle was built on Raghildsholmen, becoming the most important fort in the region.92 Eric Magnusson of Sweden then made Konungahellu his fief in the early 14th century. But, in 1308, King Hákon V constructed the stronghold Bohus, leading to Raghildsholmen castle’s decline and not being mentioned after 1320, which may be why he gifted it to his son-in-law after receiving his help against King Birger of Sweden.93 There is no further historical data of Konungahellu besides brief mentions like the one found in Njál´s saga, which is why we cannot assume that Gunnhildr held her seat there or if she even had a seat due to her gender. However, archaeological excavations gave rise to evidence of a royal estate slightly north of the city which dates to Gunnhildr’s supposed time-period, “the Viking Era”.94 We can then infer that the destruction of Konungahellu and having it rebuilt west signified westernized allegiance as the Norwegian kings holding power over the region were becoming Christianized, and the royal estate north signified the ancient pagan past that is now further pointed to the other as it was now north-east of the new site. It is not important to know if Gunnhildr was ever in the area but rather what these sites tell about the mentalities of those living in them, especially about the location’s importance, which are seen through the actions of kings giving away castles.

91 “913-914 (Nordisk Familjebok / Uggleupplagan. 22. Possession - Retzia).” - Project Runeberg -. Accessed December 23, 2019. http://runeberg.org/nfcb/0477.html. 92 “913-914 (Nordisk Familjebok / Uggleupplagan. 22. Possession - Retzia).” - Project Runeberg -. Accessed December 23, 2019. http://runeberg.org/nfcb/0477.html. 93 “Norges Klostre i Middelalderen.” Den katolske kirke. Accessed December 23, 2019. http://www.katolsk.no/praksis/klosterliv/artikler/kap_07. 94 “Kungahälla.” Accessed December 23, 2019. http://wadbring.com/historia/sidor/kungahalla.htm.

41

CHAPTER 9: Conclusion and Further Research In essence, actions of royal figures or even characters should not be analyzed by themselves, as there may be other aspects that influence them. Tam Blaxter states that „direct speech in fiction is often designed to highlight the very expressions of social categories in which we are interested in and such expressions may represent an important literary tool to give a narrative a sense of reality and immediacy.”95 In Old Norse literature, women’s main agency is egging. In the sagas, however, Gunnhildr is rarely given direct speech. Labov suggests that “the pattern of female speakers leading change as an indirect effect of a (highly consistent)96 feature of the female gender role;”97 whereas others argue that “female speakers [are] leading change (and also that of female speakers using a greater proportion of standard forms) as a direct feature of gender roles,”98 which could due to the greater role that women play in child-rearing. Therefore, direct speech plays a larger role on magic and gender because magic becomes more powerful when spoken and gender is derived in word choices. And “an analysis of women´s use of magic in late thirteenth-century sagas shows that magic is a weapon available to women in order to pursue their own ends. Their ostensible motives are diverse but can be analyzed in terms of power and social position.”99 Gunnhildr uses magic in order to gain information, distract her enemies, or place impotence curses. However, she is more notorious in her egging and being involved with poison. Magic was usually then employed for self-preservation. Magic was then used by those oppressed, who had limited speech and therefore power due to their gender. Therefore, utterances and small actions resulted in big consequences as they were all plot-driven. Gunnhildr then embodies the other and is used as a plot device to signfy oral and power limitations by being viewed as an unknown woman who was an evil witch. The confusion surrounding Gunnhildr’s origin may be to develop literary tropes that served the purposes of the writers at the time or due to the confusion regarding her husband. The name of the King in York from Life of Cathróe may have been mistakenly supplanted for Amlaíb Cuarán (Olaf Sihtricsson), whose (second) wife Dúnflaith was an Irishwoman, which helps explain some of the Celtic geis parallels.100 Clare Downham, on the other hand, suggests that Eric of Northumbria and Eric Bloodaxe are not the same man. However, it is more plausible that Eric was not strictly monogamous and the existence of two wives need not be mutually exclusive. This latter assumption may help explain why a woman could hold

95 Tam Blaxter,“Gender and Language Change in Old Norse Sentential Negatives: Language Variation and Change,” Cambridge Core, (Cambridge University Press, September 16, 2015), p. 352. 96 Studies show that, in the corpus, ekki occurs proportionately more frequently in female than in male speech. 97 Tam Blaxter,“Gender and Language Change in Old Norse Sentential Negatives,” p. 364. 98 Blaxter, p. 365. 99 Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir, Women’s Weapons, p. 425. 100 W.G. Collingwood, "King Eirík of York," Saga-book of the Viking Club, p. 325.

42 such power from a political standpoint if two women were confused as one. But, evidence of equally powerful women later on helped maintain the idea that Gunnhildr was one person, who was married to Eric Bloodaxe, who then lived in Northumbria after banishment. It is even less likely that Gunnhildr was daughter of Gorm, which would have made her a Danish princess, as she knew magic and was sent to Finnmǫrk to learn such skills from the Sámi. The sagas negative connotation of Gunnhildr may be rooted to her unknown origins, magic, pagan rituals, and association to the Sámi and (supernatural) Far-Northerners, especially considering the fact that most writers/scribes were Christian at the time of the saga´s completion. Gunnhildr then represents the tropes that went against Christianity and usually did not partake in the baptism of her children. Gunnhildr was often presented as being more evil and wicked than her husband or children, assumedly since they all converted.

Gunnhildr posed as a key figure not only in a political sense but by crossing borders, either physical ones (being involved with all regions of Scandinavia) and metaphysical ones by representing the other and stretching the limits of her gender and category to further signify the strong independent mother that are negatively seen in family sagas. And even though some kings´ sagas do not give notification as to what power she held in court or with her son, it is apparent that in family sagas, she ruled alongside Haraldr Grey-cloak. Moreover, in Fagurskinna, it is stated that: “Sveinn konungr var mikill oeskumaðr, fríðr sjónum, ekki grimmhugaðr né ágjarn. 'alfífa móðir hans, er kǫlluð var en ríka Álfífa, hón réð mest með konunginum, ok mæltu þat allir, at hón spillti í hvern stað ok fór fyrir þá sǫk stjórnin illa við landsfólkit, ok svá margt illt stóð af hennar ráðum Í Nóregi, at menn jǫfnuðu þessu ríki við Gunnhildar ǫld, er verst hafði verit áðr í Nóregi” (Fgr, 202). It is also important to note those that threatened Gunnhildr and her sons and their subsequent peril. For instance, in Heimskringla I, Astríðr Eiriksdatter’s husband, Tryggve Olafsson, is said to be killed by Haraldr Grey-cloak. Astríðr and her children then had to flee Gunnhildr and her sons. Gunnhildr even wanted to foster Olaf Tryggvasson, but his mother, Astríðr, does not allow this by hiding in Orkney. Orkney is also one of the supposed places of Gunnhildr‘s death. And even though we do not know much about Gunnhildr‘s death, the political implications that came about it and further research of Orkney as a hiding place has potential. And Olaf Tryggvasson‘s sister, Ingibjörg, gave Kjartan the headdress in Laxdæla saga, which causes major implications and momentum in the central feud like the bracelet Gunnhildr gave to Hrútr.101

101 Laxdæla saga (1934). In Einar Ól. Sveinsson (ed.), Laxdæla saga, ÍF V (1-248). Reykjavík: Hið íslenzka fornritafélag.

43

On the other hand, Alfífa, or Ælfgifu, from northampton marries Cnut the Great, whose mother is in some sources Sigrid the Haughty and his father is a descendent of Gorm. Both of these female characters are either compared or associated to some degree, respectively, with Gunnhildr. And it is Sigrid that rejects Harald Grenske, who then has a child with Ásta Guðbrandsdótti.102 However, this child, named Olaf II Haraldsson, was a descendant of Haraldr Fairhair, not Harald Grenske, and later became known as St. Olaf.103 Olaf Tryggvasson sought to marry Sigrid but she refused to convert to Christianity and so he married Astríðr Olofsdotter.104 It is also interesting to note that after Sveinn’s rule, St. Olaf’s son, Magnus I Olafsson (the good), becomes the starter of the illegitimate trend due to the help of his stepmother, Queen Astríðr Olofsdotter, instead of his mother, Alfhild.105 And from 1093 to 1263, fifteen of eighteen rulers were illegitimate, meaning they were not related or not from a direct bloodline following primogeniture laws.106 There was an apparent power struggle in Norway until Hákon IV and V came into power, and after the latter King, there was a proper succession trend.107 Gunnhildr was more than the strong independent mother that sought power through all means attributed to her gender by being a path maker. She represented the idea of a Queen mother ruling alongside her child in the sagas as well as the implications of gifting an old paramour to bring about his demise. She also began the trend of gaining social capital by marrying a descendent of Haraldr hárfagri, to which Ásta later copied in Gunnhildr´s old age. And after Eric’s death, Gunnhildr sought to gain power through her son, which Alfífa follows. Ásta, Astríðr, and Alfífa were all step-mothers which may help explain why the evil Queen tropes from fairy-tales associated with Gunnhildr evolved to include the term step- mother as the previous females copied Gunnhildr in many ways. A further comparison between the three women may lead to surprising details as to why they identify with a Queen that represents the other and Far-Northerners.

102 Snorri Sturluson, “Heimskringla I”, Heimskringla: Bjarni Aðalbjarnarson gaf ú, vol. 26 of Íslenzk fornrit (1979). 103 Snorri Sturluson, “Heimskringla I.” 104 Sverre Bagge, "The Making of a Missionary King: The Medieval Accounts of Olaf Tryggvason and the Conversion of Norway", The Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 105, (2006), p. 486–487. 105 Thomas Carlyle, The Early Kings of Norway: Also an Essay on the Portraits of John Knox, (Chapman and Hall, 1875). 106 “Den Norske Kongerekken.” Hjem, October 1, 2018. https://www.kongehuset.no/artikkel.html?tid=27626&sek=26982. 107 Thomas Carlyle, The Early Kings of Norway: Also an Essay on the Portraits of John Knox.

44

Works Cited Aalto, Sirpa. “Encountering ‘Otherness’ in the Heimskringla.” Ennen ja Nyt 4 (2004): http://www.ennenjanyt.net/4-04/referee/aalto.pdf Allen, Richard F. Fire and Iron: Critical Approaches to Njals saga. University of Pittsburgh Press: 1971. Ágrip af Nóregskonunga sögum, Fagrskinna - Nóregs konunga tal, Bjarni Einarsson gaf út, Reykjavik, Hið íslenzka fornritafélag, coll. Íslenzk fornrit n° 29. 1984 Ármann Jakobsson. “Our Norwegian Friend: The Role of Kings in the family sagas.” in Arkiv för nordisk filologi, vol. 117, 2002. Blaxter, Tam.“Gender and Language Change in Old Norse Sentential Negatives: Language Variation and Change.” Cambridge Core. Cambridge University Press: 2015. Borovsky, Zoe. "Never in Public: Women and Performance in Old Norse Literature." The Journal of American Folklore 112, no. 443 (1999), p. 6-39. Brennu-Njals saga. Einar Ol[afur] Sveinsson gaf ut. [Illustr.], vol 12 of Íslenzk fornrit, (Hio Islenzka Fornritafelag. 1954. Carlyle, Thomas. The Early Kings of Norway: Also an Essay on the Portraits of John Knox. Chapman and Hall, 1875. Clover, Carol J. “Regrading of Sex: Men, Women, and Power in Early Northern Europe”, in Studying Medieval Women, ed. By Nancy F. Partner. Cambridge: 1993. Collingwood, W.G."King Eirík of York," Saga-book of the Viking Club, 2 (1898-1901), p. 313-27. Coroban, Costel. Ideology and Power in Norway and Iceland, 1150-1250. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2018. “Den Norske Kongerekken.” Hjem, October 1, 2018. https://www.kongehuset.no/artikkel.html?tid=27626&sek=26982. Earenfight, Theresa. Queenship in Medieval Europe. Palgrave Macmillan: 2013. Edda. Die Lieder des Codex Regius nebst verwandten Denkmalern. I. Text, ed. Gustav Neckel, rev. ed. Hans Kuhn, 5th rev. ed (Heidelberg, 1983), Jesch, Judith. Women in the Viking Age. The Boydell press: 1991. Jochens, Jenny M. “Consent in Marriage: Old Norse Law, Life and Literature.” Scandinavian Studies 58: 1986. Jochens, Jenny M. "Feminist Scholarship in Old Norse Studies." Medieval Feminist Newsletter, 19: 1995.

Jolly, Karen. Witchcraft and Magic in Europe, Volume 3: The Middle Ages. London: The Athlone Press, 2002. Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir, "Women's Weapons: A Re-Evaluation of Magic in the ‘Íslendingasögur.’" Scandinavian Studies 81, no. 4 (2009), p.409-36. “Kungahälla.” Accessed December 23, 2019. http://wadbring.com/historia/sidor/kungahalla.htm. Kunzler, Sarah. Flesh and Word: Reading Bodies in Old Norse-Icelandic and Early Irish Literature. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG: 2016.

45

Lambertus, Hendrik. Monströsen Helden und heldenhaften Monstern: Zur Darstellung und Funktion des Fremden in den originalen riddarsögur. Tubingen & Basel, 2013. Larsen, Ulf, Harri Blomberg, and Knut Are Tvedt. “Konghelle.” Store norske leksikon. Accessed December 23, 2019. https://snl.no/Konghelle.

Lauretis, Teresa de o. “Desire in Narrative.” Alice Doesn’t. Indiana University Press: 1984. Laxdæla saga (1934). In Einar Ól. Sveinsson (ed.), Laxdæla saga, ÍF V (1-248). Reykjavík: Hið íslenzka fornritafélag. Mcturk, Rory. “The Zenith of the Genre.” A Companion to Old Norse-Icelandic Literature and Culture. Blackwell: 2005. Mitchell, Stephen A. Witchcraft and Magic in the Nordic Middle Ages. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011. „Norges Klostre i Middelalderen.” Den katolske kirke. Accessed December 23, 2019. http://www.katolsk.no/praksis/klosterliv/artikler/kap_07. Ortnamnen I Göteborgs och Bohus lan IV, Göteborg 1936. Ólafur Halldórsson. Text by Snorri Sturluson in Óláfs saga Tryggvasonar en Mesta. University college London: 2001. Perabo, Lyonel D. Here be Heathens, Master's thesis, Háskóli Íslands, 2016, skemman. Quinn, Judy. “Women in Old Norse Poetry and Sagas.” A Companion to Old Norse-Icelandic Literature and Culture. Blackwell: 2005 Sanders, Karin. “A Portal through Time: Queen Gunhild.” Scandinavian Studies, Vol. 81, No.1. p. 1– 46. Shildrick. Embodying the Monster: Encounters with the Vulnerable Self. SAGE Publications, 2002. Sigurdur Norðal, ed. Egils saga Skalla-Grímssonar. Reykjavík: Íslenzka fornritafélag, 1979. Snorri Sturluson. Heimskringla: Bjarni Aðalbjarnarson gaf ú, vol. 26 of Íslenzk fornrit (1979). Snorri Sturluson. The Prose Edda, translated by Jesse Byock. London: Penguin Books, 2005.

Staszak, Jean-Francois. “Other/otherness.” International Encyclopedia of Human Geography. Elsevier, 2008. Storfjell, Troy. “The Ambivalence of the Wild: Figuring the Sámi in Pre-Colonial and Colonial Discourse to the Eighteenth Century,” in Kajsa Andersson (ed.), L’Image du Sápmi, Vol. II. Humanistica Oerebroensia. Artes et linguae. Örebro: Örebro University, 2013. Sverre Bagge. From Viking Stronghold to Christian Kingdom: State Formation in Norway, c. 900−1350. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 2010. Sverre Bagge. "The Making of a Missionary King: The Medieval Accounts of Olaf Tryggvason and the Conversion of Norway." The Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 105, 2006.

Terry Gunnell. “Blótgyðjur, Goðar, Mimi, Incest, and Wagons: Oral Memories of the Religion(s) of the Vanir [1].” Part II. Local and Neighboring Traditions. Accessed December 23, 2019. https://chs.harvard.edu/CHS/article/display/6846.part-ii-local-and-neighboring-traditions-

46

terry- gunnell-blótgyðjur-goðar-mimi-incest-and-wagons-oral-memories-of-the-religion-s- of-the-vanir Torfadóttir, Jóna. “Gunnhildur and the Male Whores.” Academia.edu. Accessed December 23, 2019, https://www.academia.edu/31720900/GUNNHILDUR_AND_THE_MALE_WHORES. Torfi H. Tulinius. The Matter of the North. The Rise of Literary Fiction in Thirteenth-century Iceland. Odense: Odense University Press, 2002.

“Valdimars saga,” In Agnethe Loth (ed.), Late Medieval Icelandic Romances, Vol. I (53-78). Copenhagen: Munksgaard: 1960. “913-914 (Nordisk Familjebok / Uggleupplagan. 22. Possession - Retzia).” - Project Runeberg -. Accessed December 23, 2019. http://runeberg.org/nfcb/0477.html.

47

Appendix

Ruler of Norway

Harald I Halfdansson (Fairhair) (872-932)

Eric I Haraldsson (Bloodaxe) (929-934)

Haakon I Haraldsson (the good) (934-960)

Harald II Ericsson (Greycloak) (961-970)108

Harald Bluetooth (961-980) [Jelling stone/ made Denmark Christian]109

Earl Haakon Sigurdsson (965/70-995)

Olaf I Tryggvason (995-1000)

Sweyn Forkbeard (1000-1013)

Earl Eric Haakonsson (1000-1015)

Earl Sweyn Haakonsson (1000-1015)

Olaf II Haraldsson (Saint Olaf) (1015-1028)

Cnut the Great (1028-1029)

Sweyn Knutsson with Ælfgifu (1030-1035)

Magnus I Olafsson (the good) (1035-1047) [starter of illegitimate trend thanks to Astríðr]

From 1093-1263, 15 of the 18 rulers were illegitimate. After 1263, there is a proper succession trend.

108 All of Gunnhildr’s sons die 109 Gunnhildr supposedly died in 980 in Orkney

48

Relationships

Harald Fairhair

Olaf Haraldsson

Trygge Olafsson (killed by Harald Greycloak) Astrid

(Saint) Olaf Tryggvason Ingibjörg

Harald Grenske Ásta Guðbrandsdótti

Afhildr Olafr II Haraldsson (St. Olaf) Astriðr (she helps her stepson become King)

Magnus I (the good) Olafsson

Gorm

Harald Bluetooth

Sweyn Forkbeard Sigrid the Haughty

Ælfgifu of northampton Cnut the Great Emma of Normandy

49

Place-names110

110 From Ortnamnen I Göteborgs och Bohus lan IV, Göteborg 1936.

50

51