Final Thoughts

All in all, I found this class to be very interesting. I learned a lot and I have definitely learned to appreciate the Viking culture more than I did before. There were a lot of Sagas we read this semester. Some were more enjoyable than others, but for the most part, they were very interesting. Of the sagas we read, my favorite was the Saga of Ref the Sly, a fitting one to end the year on. And in this saga, can be found my favorite character, the protagonist, Ref. I found his cunning and outlandish nature to be very fascinating. Many of the scenes were very cinematic, making great entertainment.

The Saga of Ref the Sly

This is truly a great saga to end the year on, definitely my favorite so far.

The Saga of Ref the Sly, to me, stands far above the other sagas we have read. Constant action, an interesting plot, and in stark contrast with many of the other sagas we have read. This saga is universal. I may be wrong, but I felt like every proper noun in the story could have been replaced with another to make the saga pertain to some other culture, and no one would know the difference. Clearly, there are some stylistic quirks that only the viking orators and writers instate, such as poetry and heavy foreshadowing, but that aside, this story is an action adventure that can be told in so many ways. The scene I like the best is the scene in which Gunnar and Bard cut off Ref's water supply and attempt to burn his fortress down. Out of nowhere, the wall falls down and out comes a huge boat, in which they sail away and escape. The visual images I get when reading this are really cool. Great stuff!

The Vinland Sagas

I fund these two sagas very interesting. I found the first saga more interesting though. It definitely seemed more to the point. In the first saga, there is very little delay before people start heading to this new land, which I assume is America. In Eirik the Red's saga, it takes almost three quarters of the saga before they leave. One thing I found funny Eirik's saga, is when he takes back his bedstead boards from Thorgest and they become at odds with one another. In a following scene, Eirik and Thorgest duel, Eirik loses, and then they make peace. This seemed atypical of duels at the time, having a survivor, that is, and then becoming friends of sorts after.

Egil's Saga: Part 2

I found the entirety of Egil's Saga to be very entertaining. In retrospect, my reasoning for this would have to be that we finally get to see almost every aspect of a human. Let me explain. In most of the sagas we have read so far, we are introduced to a character, he does something, and the saga is over. It seems that many of the sagas we have read are concerned with events, more than the people in them. In Egil's Saga, we have Egil, who is definitely a multi-faceted individual. The enjoyable part of this saga was that we got so see almost all of his facets. And although it may not seem like it at a glance, but upon examination, it is clear that he is like any other person with real, raw emotion. He has a clear sense of right and wrong, he is passionate, yet reasonable, and has considerable motivation for anything he does that could be considered a wrongdoing. As Arinbjorn states, "...But as much as Egil has wronged you, you should consider the losses he has suffered at the hands of your kinsmen. Your father king Harald had his uncle Thorolf, a fine man, put to death solely on the grounds of slander by evil men. You broke the law against Egil yourself, King, in favour of Berg-Onund, and moreover you wanted him put to death, and you killed all his men and stole all his wealth. And then you declared him an outlaw and drove him out of the country. Egil is not the sort of man to stand being provoked. Every case should be judged in light of the circumstances."

Egil's depth of emotion and realism as a character are portrayed in many places throughout the saga. However, I feel that one of the best examples of this can be found on page 89, stanza 17, where Egil speaks a verse lamenting the death of Thorolf. It is very fitting.

Egil's Saga: Part 1

I was a bit troubled throughout most of this saga, continually asking myself, where's Egil? That aside, I still enjoyed reading it very much. The character of Thorolf I found particularly intriguing. I definitely sympathized with him as he repeatedly paid for not giving Hildirid's sons any of the inheritance. I found myself wondering how a king could be so easily swayed to believe something that came from people who had motive to slander Thorolf, and without ever consulting Thorolf or others to hear the other side of the story. I enjoyed the scene about King Harald burning down the building and all Thorolf's men running out to fight. It wasn't a long scene but was very descriptive.

Prologue to the Prose Edda

I found this to be a very interesting sort of story. Initially, I was reminded of the first few books of the bible: creation, the flood, etc. However, after the first few paragraphs, things deviated from the traditional biblical story. People such as Thor, Odin, and Baldr are introduced. I also noticed the large incorporation of other historical elements like Troy and the Aesir. Initially, the ideas that Snorri spouts seem far-fetched and unbelievable. But as he progresses on, he begins to incorporate Troy, Turkland, Sweden, and other places we know exist or existed. This, to the casual uninformed reader, would in a sense validate Snorri's previous claims. Snorri's reasoning for attempting to make everything more believable can only be speculated at. Perhaps he thought that by relating the very Christian creation story to Norse mythology, he could in a sense validate Christianity and slander the old beliefs, claiming they were derived from Christianity to begin with. Or perhaps he really believed everything he wrote, although I have a hard time believing that. But maybe he just enjoyed a good story. After all, as they say, the best stories are the ones we weave ourselves.

Norse Mythology

This introduction to Norse Mythology, as many have already stated, was a very tedious read. There was a lot more history than I had originally anticipated, which I generally find rather boring. Unfortunately, this was no exception. However, even though I did not enjoy most of the introduction, there were some parts that I found enlightening. I found it interesting that there are so many takes on Norse Mythology. It seems that there isn't a standard "the way it was." We are even presented with two authors, Snorri and Saxo Grammaticus, contemporaries of one another, who present several differing ideas regarding Norse mythology. Something else I found interesting was the pervasiveness of euhemerism. I will admit that I had to look this word up, having no idea of its meaning. For those of you who know what this is, congratulations, for everyone else, euhemerism is the theory that mythology is derived fro history. Both the authors we are presented with, Snorri and Saxo, apparently make numerous attempts at this. From the tone of the author of this book and the context of the reading, to me it seems that at times Snorri and Saxo are grasping at straws. Attempting to make mythology more relevant by extrapolating information that might have nothing to do with anything and applying it to the myth, rather than accepting it for what it is, myth. Granted, it would seem that there is definite potential that some myths are based on history, and Snorri and Saxo were much greater scholars on the subject than I, so instead of spending the rest of my life validating there facts, I will just accept them. Sorry for the digression.

Anyway, regarding the other entries. Of the ones everyone read, I found the section on Baldr the most interesting. The section gave a lot of interesting information about Baldr, primarily his murdering by Loki. I found it odd that the only thing Baldr was not protected from was mistletoe. It was one of the first times I have seen mistletoe used with a negative connotation, after growing so accustomed to the whole "kiss under the mistletoe" tradition.

Of the other sections, I found the section regarding Buri and Audhumla the most interesting. The idea that the first being in the world was a cow is mind blowing. And then the cow creates Buri, the first god out of a block of salt by licking it. What?!! Ok, thats all.

The Saga of the Confederates

Of the sagas we have read thus far, I definitely found this one the best read. It was interesting the entire way through, never really deviating from the main plot. This saga was definitely a 'feel good' saga, which may explain why I liked it. Odd was a likable character and I was glad to see him rewarded for his honest and truthful nature in the end. It seemed that everyone got what they deserved.

Odd's father was a very interesting character. He was very wise, crafty, and played everyone just right. After reading the saga, even though I liked it, I had a hard time believing it. Everything was so convenient and worked out perfect. The two confederates that he Olfeig picked out played right into his hand. It just seemed odd...

The Saga of Hrafnkel Frey's Godi

The Saga of Hrafnkel Frey's Godi was very unique. Some things that I noticed right away were the complete lack of poetry, and the non-existence of a female voice, and the emphasis on law. This greatly contrasts the other sagas we have read where poetry is ever present, and there is often a female voice. In other sagas, a consideration of how women are portrayed is always necessary, but in this saga, there is nothing to consider, no women. This saga also offers a lot of insight into the Icelandic judicial system. In other sagas, law was always an afterthought, and often times, one had to basically guess at how a situation was "legally' handled. In this saga we see many systems, traditions, and methods of courtly practices. Regarding the legal system, I found whole system very odd. In this saga, after Sam takes over the case, Thorbjorn is almost completely out of the picture. Sam runs the trial, and carries out the punishment of Hrafnkel. When Hrafnkel leaves Adalbol, Sam takes his farm. When Hrafnkel retaliates, he does so against Sam's brother. Thorbjorn, does almost nothing but tag along, when he is the one seeking recompense.

Havamal

In the Havamal, there was definitely a lot of "proverbial-esque" poems. I noticed that there was quite a bit of reference to what a 'wise man' does, and I chose my example from that genre. Also, since we all live in a college atmosphere, I would point out the multiple references to ale, alcohol consumption. From what I read in the Havamal, ancient Icelanders valued the ability to show restraint when consuming. However, from what I have read of the sagas, people often times drank excessively and got very drunk. This leads me to the conclusion that the ideal icelander was one who could drink huge amounts of alcohol, and stay sober enough that it appeared he was showing restraint.

Anyway, I took my example from stanza 57:

57. A brand from a brand | is kindled and burned,
And fire from fire begotten;
And man by his speech | is known to men,
And the stupid by their stillness.

I interpret this to mean that similar to how fire is made from flame, and a burn is left by a brand, the words one speaks, or doesn’t speak, determines the impression left on the minds of others. A man is known to others by what comes out of his mouth. As described in many of the other ‘proverbs,’ a wise man remains silent unless he has something of worth to say. The ‘stupid’ man is somewhat contradicted in this example though. In most cases, a stupid man rambles and babbles incessantly, rarely saying something of use. Here, he is still, a trait previously described as belonging to a wise man.

Gisli Sursson's Saga

Of the sagas we have read thus far, this was my least favorite. It was very long and confusing. I noticed that throughout the sagas, and in the first few chapters especially, many characters were introduced. As I read this, I really began to ponder how people remembered all the names and characters. I know for certain that if I was telling this tale, I would have cut out immense portions of the saga. If I was sitting around a fire listening to this story, I doubt I would care about all the names. And in this aspect, this saga differs from others. It's more of a recounting of people than an actual story. How many of the characters in this story were actual people? As this story was passed down through generations, did it change any?

The Saga of Gunnlaug Serpent-tongue

This saga was surprisingly interesting. I say surprisingly because for most of the saga, I was not at all intrigued. Lots of traveling, which seems typical of the sagas. However, I found the last pages of the saga very powerful. The love triangle between Gunnlaug, Hrafn, and Helga is fascinating. One thing I have noticed so far, is that the sagas are very different from your typical novel. You are left to fill in the blanks with what you think happened, how you would feel in a situation, rather than being explicitly told what to think and feel. I tried to imagine how I would feel if I were Gunnlaug. The saga itself does not give a whole lot of insight, but Gunnlaug was human, and when he returned to find Helga married, probably had very strong human emotions. His situation reminds me of a scene from the movie Cast Away. Tom Hanks' character has just been rescued after several years trapped on an island, where his motivation to live was a picture of his girlfriend, and his sole friend was a volleyball named Wilson . After his rescue, he shows up at her front door, expecting her to run back into his arms, only to find her married with children. I imagine how he felt at that instant must have been similar to how Gunnlaug felt. The whole plot after Gunnlaug's return is great. The battle scene is fun, and Helga's final demise without love in her heart makes one wonder how things could have been. Overall, I really enjoyed this tale. As a side note, I felt the remark on page 567, about the change to Christianity was completely unrelated to anything in the story, and seems to have some political drive to it. Makes me wonder...

The Tales...

In general, one thing I noticed right away, was the stark stylistic contrast between contemporary authors and the authors of the sagas. Contemporary writing, from my experience, is all about fluency and word choice, so that even if the story was terrible, at least it sounds pretty. From what I have read of the sagas, it seems authors are concerned purely about the story line. Obviously, something does get lost in translation. I'm sure that the sagas were much more fluent when read in the native tongue of the Icelanders. But we all know from personal experience, that the most important part of how anything, whether it be a joke, a meal, or a story, is initially reacted to, is the delivery and presentation. When I read these sagas, I see glimmers of potential. It makes me wish I could read them in the form in which they were originally written. But as it stands now, I accept the sagas for what they are. Exceptional stories. I thought that all three of the sagas were interesting. Though the first saga, The Tale of Thorstein Staff-struck, was of most interest to me. I could picture Thorstein being played by Mel Gibson in a movie. The second saga, I found a bit dull. I did, however, appreciate the irony of Halli dying as he ate his porridge. It was kind of funny. The last saga, about Audun, was kind of cheesy, but good. It resembled a biblical parable, and I was happy for the guy. Anyway, that's my response,
Peter