In his most recent contribution to the field of Scandinavian studies, eminent scholar Theodore M. Andersson revisits medieval Icelandic sagas, tracing the literary development of saga writing in the formative period between 1180-1280. This effort is conceived of chronologically, organized in ten chapters that map out the changing aesthetic landscape of the saga tradition. The main argument of Andersson’s work is that sagas written within this time frame increasingly came to reflect contemporary political and ideological concerns in Iceland as saga authors exerted more editorial control over the content and organization of saga texts. Throughout this volume, Andersson guides the reader from the earliest sagas that are little more than unorganized assemblages of oral tradition toward literary sagas that are carefully crafted narratives with a critical edge. Leading the reader through a century of saga texts, Andersson links Iceland’s growing independence from Norway and the emergence of an Icelandic national identity with stylistic and thematic transformations in saga writing.
In his introduction, Andersson provides a detailed critical history of saga scholarship and outlines some of the key problems that still motivate saga research. Of particular concern to the author are issues of textuality as they relate to the saga tradition, chiefly the interplay between oral and written literature in medieval Iceland. Andersson argues that saga writers drew not only upon oral tradition but also upon previous saga texts, and these written texts in turn influenced the living oral tradition. What emerges from this argument is the idea that saga writers shared a common tradition that spanned both literary and oral mediums, but traditional material in any medium was subject to the shaping influence of individual tellers.
This notion carries throughout Andersson’s work and is first explored in chapters 1 and 2, which lay the groundwork for the rest of the volume. Here, Andersson looks at the conventions of early saga writing, focusing his attention on Odd Snorrason’s Saga of Olaf Tryggvason and The Oldest/Legendary Saga of Saint Olaf. The texts themselves are messy and largely unstructured, composed of an amalgamation of literary and oral sources that read “as if [the saga authors] had taken fieldnotes and then copied them into their books” (99). The result is more biographical than literary, centering on the exploits of two Norwegian kings and threaded into a narrative that is often repetitive and contradictory.
This biographical aspect of the early sagas is expanded upon in chapter 3, wherein the author examines five sagas about Saga Age Icelanders. This shift from Norwegian settings and characters toward Icelandic ones is emblematic of the developing independence of Iceland from Norway that shapes later sagas and is a central premise of Andersson’s work. The protagonists in the five texts that Andersson considers differ in ways other than their origin. Whereas the two Olafs of earlier sagas act little more than types with no real internal motivation or personal agency, the heroes of these sagas have fully fleshed-out personalities that shape their actions.
In chapter 4, Andersson surveys a major shift in saga writing marked by The Saga of King Magnús and King Harald. Although still biographical in nature, the organization of this text foregrounds particular political concerns that are further emphasized through the saga’s comparison of two kings. In effect, the text gives the impression of a truly authorial presence that organizes sources around a central theme in order to convey a particular meaning. Egils saga Skallagrímssonar, the subject of chapter 5, continues this trend. The author of Egils saga expands the biographical dimension of previous sagas by providing a genealogical context for the protagonist, a technique that would later become standard practice in saga tradition. In focusing on an entire lineage, Egils saga has a broader scope than previous saga texts, and this allows the author to position the deeds of Egil Skallagrímsson and his family within the larger context of Iceland’s colonization. Andersson argues that Egils saga, with its ambiguous protagonist and highly idiosyncratic style, further illustrates the growing creative control authors exerted over traditional materials.
Andersson contends that Ljósvetninga saga, the subject of chapter 6, is illustrative of a turning point in saga literature in that it is pointedly about Iceland rather than Norway. The saga takes the critical edge shown in the sagas about King Harald and Egil Skallagrímsson and hones it even further on the protagonist of Ljósvetninga saga, Gudmund the Powerful. What Andersson marks as the success of this saga is its ability to impose an interpretation upon traditional materials, to make them work for the saga author in the elucidation of principles of conduct.
The sagas explored in the remaining four chapters increasingly question the relationship between Norway and Iceland in different ways. Andersson analyzes Laxdœla saga in chapter 7, noting its expansive scope, delving even further back into Icelandic history to span seven generations. The saga is particularly probative of Iceland’s relationship with Norway at a time when Icelandic independence was coming to an end. Chapter 8 offers two sagas nearly opposite in their styles and treatment of Icelandic history. One, Eyrbyggja saga, offers a bleak picture of feuding families written in a sparse and realistic style, either the result of poor storytelling or a deliberate attempt to discredit saga conventions in favor of a historical style that lies closer to life. The other, Vatnsdœla saga, mimics the grand style of Laxdœla saga and looks favorably on Iceland’s Norwegian past. The three short sagas examined in chapter 9 defy the grand historical portrait presented by Vatnsdœla saga and instead offer criticism of the ruling chieftain class.
Njáls saga holds a distinguished place among the sagas and is considered to be the pinnacle of the saga form by some critics. However, Andersson departs from this conception in chapter 10, where he argues that rather than representing the culmination of the saga tradition, Njáls saga intentionally subverts it in order to draw attention to the failings of previous conventions. Intensely focused on Iceland, Njáls saga simultaneously showcases the distinctiveness of the Icelandic saga tradition, while at the same time criticizing the institutions upon which it rests. As such, the saga marks a burgeoning Icelandic national identity that is able not only to organize traditional materials into a cohesive and effective narrative, but also to use them subversively to criticize traditional institutions.
Andersson’s work is generally accessible to novices to Old Norse literature, although it is more likely suited for a specialist audience. The sheer number of sagas the author covers (seventeen) has the potential to leave some readers overwhelmed with unfamiliar names and places. More conspicuous is the lack of historical context provided by Andersson, a lack especially felt because of the complex interrelation between the saga texts and the political environment of Iceland during their composition. Despite these criticisms, the strengths of this volume are many and manifold.
Andersson convincingly argues in his epilogue that the sagas portray the evolution of an “Icelandic self-consciousness” (204). The author is enormously successful in tracing this development through a textual mapping of political and cultural changes onto an artistic tradition that in turn comments upon these changes. The detailed textual analysis that Andersson undertakes in order to arrive at his argument is rare in saga scholarship, and his close reading of individual sagas is nearly as useful as his tracing of their stylistic developments. Although not overtly a book about folklore, this volume is useful to folklorists for the rich intertextual practices that Andersson surveys--practices that muddy the boundary between oral and literary texts and demonstrate the sophistication of medieval performers.
--------
[Review length: 1255 words • Review posted on May 29, 2008]