The right to social welfare in early medieval Iceland

Martina Stein-Wilkeshuis

As a rule poor relief in mediecal Europe was practised in the form of charity by Church, mon- asteries and rich people. They distributed their alms to the poor, who receiued them grateful& and humbly. From early medieval Iceland elaborate social laws have come down to us that are remark- able in their originality for the peqiod. We shall describe these laws, and investigate their history, development and the reason of their existence.

From about the year 870 Iceland, thus far pracrically uninhabited, was colonized by Norwegian settlers. It was largely King, Harald’s policies that forcrd thrm to Icilvr their own country. This king, quite in con- formity with western European ideas of tllr time, tried to found a large, centrally gov- erned empire, and in order to attain his end hr deprived many local chi& of thc+r authority and of their landed property, the so-callrd 66~1 (inalicnablr llcriragc), and imposed taxes. Rather than su!)mit to tht new order, many prominent men left thr country with their familics and subordinates and settled, sometimes after long wandrr- ings, in Iceland. It is arsumcd tllat tllc colonization was completed by the year 930, when the gcncral assembly or alping was founded, and the number of inhabitants by that time is cstimatcd at some 30-35,000 pcoph~, for the greater part of Norwegian origin. It goes without saying that among thr settlers wcrc a good many adventurers and outlaws from the mainland of Scan- dinavia who likewise sought their fortune in the newly discovered island. A not insignificant p.\rl of the population was formed by Irisli people, specially in the class of the slaves (Mussct 1951, Foote 1973, Jones 1973).

Scandinavian culture as a whole cxperi- enced few influences from Roman civiLa- tion, and Christianity was introduced in thr northern European area relatively late. This explains why civilization in the ninth and tenth century was still marked by clear Old Germanic characteristics. This means, for instance, that people were heathen, and considered the f:\mily - in the sense of linr*age, not of household - as the standard unlit of their society. An individual was not

.Journ,d of Mc~ditwl Hirtory 8 (i982) 343-352. North-Holland Publirldng

0904-4181/82/oooO-0/~02.75O 1982 North-Holla;ld 343

considrrcd a separate bring as much as 11r is

today, but he was looked upon as a link in

the long family chain. This attitude can, for instance, bc obsrrvrd in the lengthy gcncal- ogirs that occur in thr Icelandic sagas. It was the family that was responsible, not the individual. A man’s honour and that of his family was very highly cstimatrd and con- scqurntly very vulnerable. Whcncvcr this honour was violated, the ins&cd family had to inflict thr same kind of off&cc on thr opposing family. Blood rcvengc ultimately was based on the notion that the honour of one’s family had to stay intact.

Thesr ideas the scttlcrs took with them on leaving Scandinavia, and because of Iceland’s isolated position, thcsr ideas werr rctainrd in a purer form than in any other Scandinavian country. On the other hand adaptations to local circumstances could lead to surprising dcvclopmcnts.

In their nrw coursry the colonists created extensive estates of pri\,1tr property, and formed an agrarian, democratically orga- nized society. Life for thr settlers was not always easy though, for in several respects circumstances differed trom those they had been used to in Norway. The soil, covrred largely with volcanic material and glaciers, and an unfavourablc climate, permitted agriculture on a limited sciilc only, and the most important means of ::ubsistencr wcrc cattle-breeding (sheep, cows and horsrs) .1nd trade. Such rxport products as thcrr wcrc - fish, hidrs and wool - were cxchangcd fbr instancr for ccrcals. AFrt from born1 indigenous barky no ccrc*al-growing wa\ possiblr on the island.

From thr outsrt 111~ absrncc of wood caused the Icclandcrs many problems. In the first period of colonization somr small

birch trees grew on thr island, but these soon vanished as a consequence of the sheep’s appetite. All the wood required for IIOUKS and ship-building had to be fctchrd from Norway, and in Old Norse literature thrsc trips with thrir risks and advcnturcns arc rcpratedly drscribrd. It is clear that for food and wood supply tradr and shipping wrrr of vital importance for the islanders.

Clima1c, too, often caused difficulties. In Old Norse litcraturr the winters of 975 and 985 arc particularly dcscribrd as having br1.n so scvcrc that many proplc died of starvation. Foxes and ravens wcrc ratcn and in tl1c last resort the killing of aged pcoplr .1nd thr cxposurr of young childrrn wcrr considcrrd.

An account of the introduction of Christi- anity, in the year 1000, also indicatrs difficult social situations. As long as pcoplc wer1 hcatllrn they wcrr allowrd to practisc birth control by way of exposing or killing ncw- born babies. Nrithcr practice was punishabh. as long as thr child had not brcn sprinkled with water and a name had not bran given to it. After this ceremony had been prr- formed, the abandoning of children was con- sidered a crime. Christianity as a rule wl~olly forbade cxposurc and killing of childrrn, but in Iceland a different situation dcvelopcd (Stein-Wilkeshuis 1970:17ff, 1976:367-g). The new religion was introduced in Iceland by way of law, and a passage in an account of the conversion runs as follows (i)KzJvsaga c.229) :

Both articles were abolished in the year 1016. In the year 1056 a srrious famine brgan

and the Icelandic historian Snorri Sturluson rrlatcs (Haraldssaga c.36) :

Gradually - mainly in thr twelfth and rhirteenth century - a deterioration of social and economic circumstancrs can br ob- served. Internal political lroublrs rrsuhing from corruption among the go&r (godi, pl.

godar, was an Irclandic chief) made the situation of the hmcrs worse, so much thr

more because no cxecutivc power cxistcd. Thr shifting of sea routes advcrsrly afTcctrd the economic position and caused an almost complete isolation of the island. The growth of population was a third factor in this process, which ultimately led to the island’s loss of indcpendcncc and its submission to the Norwegian crown in dlc year 1262, for the Norwegian kings used Iceland’s internal political instability and its rconomic deprnd- encc to iay their hands on the island. One of the conditions of the submission was the king’s promise to try to improve the cco- nomic situation by sending six boats a year to the island (Diplomat. Islandicum 1857 :602).

many artich dating b.lck to II~;I~IIW hncz,

wl~cn legal knowlrdgc* W;I\ ~r.~n\mirtcd

oral!y. Tl~r law-book .IS it ComCs down LO US

Forms a survey of Ic~lantlic law existing in

lli: srcond l~;dfol’tllC Iwclfd\ Cc-lltury.

Anorhcr SOUrCC hr our invc*c\rig,llion .tr(’

tlrc Islendingn .M&w, Icc4,~ndiC lJrc,-c~ LII~-s, \(*I

in tJ)c so-ciillcd \iilaib ;I%(’ (9:V.l I OYO), but

grnCr;ill~ put 10 parchnicnr in 11(1* lliirtcc*ntll

crutury, by autllors WIIO r-,i.tdr ,nurll UV‘ (11 oral traditions. This vrry cxlc*n+ Y litc~ra~ulc contain< ~r*j:li llistoric,ii IniltcTii~i dntl givvb

ub v;duablc inform.ltion .~hout IIIC ~l.~~l(mc~trt ilsclf .md .lspccth of liti, in pq+~:l \ocic’ly thcrc (Hallbcrq 1963). ‘1’11~ ,:m(1unt of in- formation for our purpose’, Iloti~~vcr, i\ limited bccausr .IS a rule tlic S++IS dc,d wit11

tllr upprr CIilXkt’> Of’ society. Miltrrial fiJr

comparison is provided by th Jhbtik, di( IcAmdic Cod,,, \iill in IIW, introduced in

1280 aftrr thr loss of indcpcndcncr, .IIICI

babcd on tllr Norwegian Landlllov (Grcgcr$csn l937), and somr Old Norwqginn law-hook+ of thr Gulathing and Froslalhing (Larson 1937).

In northern Europr as a wholr poor rclicf in the early middle ages ~,a’, a filmily affair (foamily again in thr srnsr of linf’agc, and not that of household). if somchody was rcduccd to poverty, then his f,lmily was obligrd to support or to maintain him, and this duty first of all rcstrd on dlc next of kin. Thr Icelandic law-book Grcigri.9 (c. 128) is very clear in this rrspcct :

345

Similar laws existed throughout Scan- dinavia (Ku@~/tisforisk leksikon, articles on Framfoersla, Umagi, Fa#igv&d and FlatJbing). In Iceland in particular, every detail of poor relief was regulated by law. A person not able to maintain himself was called 6magi (pl. Gmagar) literally “not able”. An bmagi wits anyone who was very poor, unable to work, young (under fifteen or sixteen yrars), old, ill, disabled or a lunatic. The help to be given to these people depended on one’s property and the degree of kinship. If the next of kin owned means of support for at least one year, he was obliged to take care of the bmagi, and ifhis means were insufficient to maintain his mother and father, he had to approach his nearest kinsman and offer to work as his slave in order to earn the means required. As to his children, he could choose either to work as a slave himself or to send them to work as slaves.

Poor relief, as the laws cited above make apparent, was always connected with in- heritance. Danish and Swedish laws for instance stipulate that kinsmen rather than non-kinsmen should take in an aged or poor relative, and in return they have a right to inheritance. If a Norwegian farmer is re- duced to poverty, then he gee? with two- thirds of his children to his own next of kin, and his wife with the other third to hers, like the heritage. Icelandic laws stipdlatc that the poor bc distributed like any hrritagc.

There were two ways of maintaining the poor: to take them into onc’s own house, or to commit them to the care of somconc else in return for payment.

In the course of time, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, poor relief in northern Europe gradually spread to non-kinsmen. This probably happened under the influence of the Christian Church, which p~cachcd charity and neighbourly love. The last of the above-mentioned regulations in the Gr@tis: “he must maintain his former slave”, indi- cates that in twelfth century Iceland poor relief was no longer exclusively a matter involving one’s own family, but applied albo to those who were dependent on that family.

A peculiar Norwegian legal regulation points to the same development: “But if they [the members of the household of a freed slave] arc in need, they .lre grafgangs- menn : one has to dig a grave in the church-

yard, and put them in to die. The former owner has to take out the one who lives longest and 1937 :83).

take care of him” (Larson

As the middle ages advanced, on the mainland of Scandinavia monasteries, churches and guilds continued the trend of sustaining non-kinsmen, so that poor relief became less exclusively a family mat- ter. At the same time the character of poor relief changed: just as in the early middle ages in northern Europe poor relief was a duty that rested on each family, and it was something every needy person had a right to, so in the later middle ages alms (derived from Greek i%oc = pity) &rc dispensed by charitable cloisters and merciful kings, and doubtless often accepted with a feeling of shame and humiliation.

A special institution related to poor relief, the hre/~/~, a sort of commune, developed in medieval Iceland (JBhannesson 1956). The *yard hrcp/.w is of Old Norse origin, and its meaning is: geographically bounded piece

346

of land. Compare ‘rape of Brambcr’ in Sussex, England - the word ‘rape’ is ctyniol- ogically cognate with hreppr (Cleasby 1969). In Norwegian dialects the word is still in USC in the sense of hamlet or group of f&ms.

of tllr hreppr’s tasks and organization we turn to the laws (~234) :

A separate section of the Grcigris, entitled Urn Hreppa-ski1 (c.234.-6), is devoted to this commune, and to form for ourselves an idea

inhabitants of this housr then had to forward it to the* nrxt farm, mentioning tht* tim:. and

summon the people to arms.

the place,

Tbr hreppa-d6mr (court of LIW cornmum)

and so “cvrrybody Ilas lo forward the cross as hr who carved and cut it, and it

could bc convoked for all kinds of otlhcc~s.

must go round till darknrss fall>” (Gr(igos

c.234). This kross#r is comparable with the Scottish ‘fiery cro\s’, and the* hcathrn her&,

the. war-arrow to br sent round in order to

II i\ ktatrd in our law that thrw hll bc Icg.11 corn-- mum3 in this counrry. And wmrthing i\ A Icg;d The .tbovc-mentioned so’knarmenn wrrr to rommunc if ic conbi\h or twrnty liwmrr\ or mow. summon the accused to tllc court at the Tllcrc may only br liiwrr fwmcn than rh if the

members of IIK law court have givrn thrir pcrmiGm. plaintiffs rrqurst. Thr court was convoked

Thr farmers paying Pingfirarkoupa we qu;Afirtl For on a spot at a bowsllot’r distanrr from tllc

membrrhip of ;I hreppr. fence of tlrc accused’s farm. Both partic,s chose three judges, five neigbbours acted a5

Three twenty farmers had to live as closely witnrssrs, and sc*ntcncc* was given within together as possible ‘tnd the commune was one day by a majority of votes (c.234). geographically limited. The hreppr, and this The hreppr’a main task was to supervise is characteristic, possessed self-government the observance of the legal provisions in and was fully indeprndcnt of the gobar.

All members of the hreppr were obliged to attend three meetings a year. During the general ping in spring five overseers, called hreppssbknarmenn, were chosen, all of them being landowners and acting on a basis of equality in executing their function. From their midst three sbknarmenn were charged to accuse offenders. For their work they did not receive any payment. Other meetings were held in autumn, when goods were distributed, and during Lent. The right to vote was the privilege of the farmers paying thing-tax.

In addition to d,ese common meetings it was possible to call special meetings. The calling of these was regulated by law. The initiator had to make a cross out ofwood and carry it to the next house, announcing the place and the tiine of the meeting. The

Punishable too was anyone who prrnGttrd his dmagar to beg. And anybody who wit)+ drew from his obligations by moving secretly into another hreppr, or by leaving the country, ran the risk of being sentrnccad to three years’ outlawry. Maintaining people from outside the commune was punish.tble, and the same applied to anyone not handing on the cross.

347

If, in spite of legal provisions and supcr- vision, any poor were left unprovided for, then the hreppr acted as supporter in the second resort (c.235). This rrfcrs to people without relatives, and strangers who had entered the country without guarantees fo: their maintenance. These stranrrs were in the first instance chargeable to the ship’s captain who had brought them with him, otherwise to the Rrebkt, the Jj6rbungr (a

quarter: Iceland was divided into four quarters), or the whole country (c.139). Rclati ‘es of persons condemned to outlawry wet-c in most cases a charge upon the jj6tikngr (~50). If it was a question of three ycarr’ outlawry, then on the outlaw’$ return his dmagar came under his cart again.

These so-called hrepps-dmagar, poor under the care of thr hreppr, were distributed among the farmers by ballot. The maintl:nancc, manneldi, was always temporary, and it was usually contracted for two half-year periods. After this the hrepps-dmagur changed their accommodation. In these cases tlJo, the supporter’s property determined thy. extent of the help given. Balloting as well as changing from one farm to another were st-ictly regulated and always took place under supervision of the hreppr. Special care was taken that a man and woman of fruitful age wcrr not lodged at one addrcsa. It the poor wrrc very old, young or ill, then they usually had a fixed accommodation.

The commune not only exercised super- vision of poor relirf, and took over the maintenance of the poor in the second resort, it also supported the purfamenn (a

,burfum@r is a poor or needy person). They wcrc free farmers, having a domicile, but not being able to maintain their dependants without any help. Thcsc people were sup

ported by the hreppr in order to prevent them from being reduced to complete pov- rrty, and they ITad a right to the PurJcman-

natiund (a tithe). We shall return to this benefit when discussing the commune’s in- come.

There was one population group that could not claim social welfare. These were the beggars and vagabonds (gfingumenn and _firumenn), and the responsibility of dealing with them belonged to the hrefip (c.234 and 235). Icelandic laws in this respect are very similar to the Norwegian ones (Larson 1937:357). Generally in Old Germanic society a domicile was essential, and ptoplc were obliged to work. Without a fixed domicile a man could not be summoned, and became more or less rightless. Beggars and vagabonds not only had no fixed domicile, they also withheld from society their badly needed manpower, and they caused social problems. Beggars, because of their way of living, lost their right of in- violability and the right of inheritance (Stein-Wilkeshuis forthcoming). Thus we lind stern measure4 the Grigds (c.82): ’

against people in

If it man wanders aboa and accc-pts .rlms, br half d monh or more, or pass the light whrrevcr IW find5 an opporruaicy, ttlrn IIC iu ~1 beggar. If v,rnvonc brgs from onr IIOUW 10 Ihc ohrr, though hr is hrohhy and

LO capable hat hc mighr grt himarlf work for a wh& year, if hr wishrd to. thrn hr muat br arnrcncrd to full outhwry. And proplr have a right to .*ummon him on hc spot whcrc hr pa*\ed the nigh For thr hat cimr.

It was not permitted to shelter a beggar nor to feed him; only clothes and shoes could be provided. One was allowed to thrash bcg- gars, and to castrate them cvcn if they sustained lethal wounds thereby.

At the yearly assembly or alping large groups of beggars seem to have been an

348

annoyance to the c.131):

participants (Grcrg~c.c T.I~ organiz.ition of obligatory mutu,ll fire and calth. insuran:.c was also among t1Ic

of emergency (~~rirgiis Stabarhblsbbk c.47). cattle wcrc rcgulatrd in the same way: in A mcasurr directed against the unlimited both cases no more than half the los\ WA\

immigratior. of’ poor people is the abovc- mentioned provision that ship’s captains were rcsponsiblc for passengers without means of subsistencr. Women wc’rc not allowed to go to fishing ha&ours, nor to contact the crews of foreign ships (Grigas Studurhblsb6t. ~48). The prohibition against lodging a needy man and woman in a single accommodation should also be intcrprcted as reflecting concern for an unlimited growth in the number of needy.

made good, and no more often than thrc :’ times to one and the samr person. T!Ic~ premium was ncvrr higher than one pcrrcnt of one’s propertics. If in onr year srvrral farmers suffered a loss, the benefits w( it’ divided proportionally.

Two other tasks of the hreppr that should bc mentionrd hrre relate to farming: the organization of the yearly sheep round-up, and thr inspection of thr sheep owners’ marks.

349

.4s the main source of income of the hrejbr, tlw Cnigris mentions a part of the tithe. Thr tithe was an income tax, institu- ted by the Church in Iceland in the year 1097, but right from the start fully organized by the hreppr, as to valuation, collection an d distribution. The tithr was divided into four quarters, intended for bishop, priest, church and poor rrsprctive; , . A tithe less than six rlls of woollen Lbrir remained undivided and was intended for the poor. These benefits were called the purfaman-

natiund, the poor-tithe (mentioned above) and were distributed at the thing in autumn (Diplomat. Islandicum I 857 : 70- 162).

Another source of income were the matgjajr, gifts in food. Here the amount of food concerned was that which was saved during three Lenten days a year by members of the household. Here too. valuation took place according to property, and the hreppss6knarmenn saw to collection and dis- tribution (Grigds c.256).

Unfortunately, written records dating from heathen times do not exist. Neverthe- less some other evidence ca.1 help us to trace the hreppr’s history. It is fairly generally acknowledged nowadays that the hreppr was carried by tbc settlers from Norway to Iceland, and that we may date Iceland’s division into hreppor back to heathen times. Arguments that support this theory come from Norway, the homehrnd of the greater part of thr colonists. Here too, the hrepp

(repp) was a loosely-knit co, operative organi- zation, occupying itselfchi‘.fly with agrarian activities: the gathering cf the sheep, the building of fences, and so forth. There are indications too, that occasionally some mutual aid was given in ca:,eofnced (Maurcr 1874:291, 322). In the Lundrutmabbk, which

is considered the most reliable Icelandic document concerning the colonization period, we find some support for this view, for geographical names occur here like Hrunamannahreppr, Kaldnesingahreppr, Gnii~ver-

jnhrcppr, among others (Lundncimab~k c. I 1). The hreppr’s income, however, the tithe

and matgj@ir instituted in the year 1097, bear a clear Christian signature. This fact might bc interpreted as an indication that social tasks wcrc laid on the commune at the instance of the Church, after the introduction of Christianity on the island. In all prob- ability, however, already in pre-Christian timrs die hreppr was charged with poor relief and social tasks, and did not confine itself to farming matters only. For this WC !,ave some literary evidence from the Islendinga sfigur, all of which indicate social activities at an early date. In srveral of thcsc sagas the word hreppr occurs, and the autumn meetings are mentioned in relation to the 6magar. We read of the bygbarleyfi, and of a charge of begging.4 WC shall turn later to some sociological considerations in favour of this view.

The number of hrepfiar in the middle ages is supposed to have been about 190, being the number obtained by dividing the known number of thing tax farmers by twenty @lending&k c. IO). After the submission to the Norwegian crown a new code was introduced in the year 1280, the j%nsbR,

based on the Norwegian Landlov. This law- book is still in use in Iceland. Generally the laws concerning poor relief remained the same as they were before: it was a family matter in the first instance, Nor did the hreppr’s tasks in relation to the maintcmancc of the poor undergo important cha‘igcu. But in several other rcspccts the hreppr’s tasks

350

rfflect political changes. Insurance matters disappear, probably as a consequence of internal political unrest in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and the hreppr is charged from now on with the collection of taxes for the Norwegian king. Additionally, the hreppr participated in the executive power, non- existent in Iceland till 1262, but, as elsr- where in Scandinavia, introduced by the monarchy. Directives are issued for instance on how to treat a thief taken red-handed.

In the later middle ages a representative of the Church was appointed as one of the overseers of the hreppr. In the year 1315 the Church, as a result of a papal letter, tried to lower the limit of the undivided tithe (see above), which would mean a considerable reduction of the jurfamanna-tiund. As a con- sequence social byskups c.35) :

unrest (Laurentiussagr

It was a restless winter and spring in thr bishopric 01 H&r. Rcbcllious vagabonds gatherrd around thr SkagaljBrdr and refused to accept thcsr measurr~. They laid an ambush for the bishop in Hii~BahBlar and the situation was so dangerous that they would havr captured him if Hrafn Jbnsson from Glaumbocr, and many priests, had not promisrd &at the tithe would be divided as it had bern of old, and that an amount less than six rlls in its entirety was intended for the purJ&zmn.

The division into hreppar - poor law districts - still exists in Iceland, and the meetings are still held.

Icelandic poor relief as compared with that of the mainland of Scandinavia and with western Europe surprises us by its striking character, its scope, and its mod- ernity for the period. In Norway, Sweden aud Denmark poor relief, by a gradual development from family matter io Church matter, is brought into the western European sphere and acquires the character of charity,

with few legal provisions. In Ice!and, on the contrary, we find in the national law-book so much more detailed legislation concerning social welfare, that we must ask ourselves the question why this was the case.

In the preceeding pages we have pointed out that poor relief of old in northern Europe had a purely Old Germanic charac- ter and was a family matter. As a result of the emigration to Iceland many Family ties had been broken, and the tr.lditional way of support could in many cases no longer be realized in Iceland. Naturally, this was all the more important because people had settled in a country where the struggle for life was often hard. It was sheer necessity for them to regulate and supervise poor relief strictly and, in order to realize this, the organization of the hrcppr, knowu from Norway, was set up. The commune also acted as supporter in the second instance. In fulfilling this task the hreppr in fact broke through the lineage system. In other Scan- dinavian countries, in a different way, this was done by Church and guilds.

Our conclusion is that shortly after the colonization of Iceland poor relief became such a serious problem for the Icelanders that it seemed appropriate to take measures. Supervision and legal provisions were tightened up, and the hreppr was charged with social tasks. We noticed that social and economic circumstances in Iceland did noi improve in the course of time, and un- doubtedly the laws and the commune’s tasks underwent many changes and adapta- tions: the laws that are known to us are in no sense primitive. On the introduction of Christianity, the Church found the organiza- tion of poor relief ready to hand, participated in it, instituted the tithe, and no doubt made

351

improvements and changes. But on the whole the hrepp was responsible for main- taining the character of social welfare as a civil right, no1 as a favour.

Notes

English tranbl.ttion of 111~ G‘rrr~a~ i* in pru- Dennis. P. Footr and R. Perkins (wand. I

i980. L aw of rarly Icrhmd, GrBgh*. I. UnivrrGcy of Manitoba Icrlandir studies. Winnipeg. Thr work will consist of thrcr volumes. t Unlrsa statrd othrrwiw G‘nrgas rrfcrs IO Grrrgnl Konungsb6k. I A fee for trawlliug IO thr afthing, or ., lax to br paid by farmers whose pow%ions rxcrcdcd a crrtain lrvcl of prosperity. 4 Valla-Ljtitssaga, 52. i&dingo sagur 8 : 237 -69; i’atnsdotlasa~a, c. 18. Islmdingasc?gw 7 : I - 127 ; i!@igs

p&r, cl. lslmdinga s@ur 9:121-8; Haraldssaga Har- M&a, ~103. FomamannasQw 6.

Literature

Byskupa siigur. 1948. C. J6nsaon (cd.). 3 ~01s. Reyk- javik.

Clcasby, R. and G. Vigfusson 1969. An Icclandic- English dictionary. Oxford.

Diplomatarium Islandicum. 1857-7tb Y. Sigurdswn (cd.). 8 vols. Ksbcnhavn-Rcykjavik.

Foote, P. G. and D. M. Wilson. 1973. The Viking .&irwment. London.

Fornamannasiigur. 1825-37. 12 vol\. Kebcnhavn. Gr&& KonungsMk. 1852, repr. 1974. V. Finwn (cd.).

Kebenhavn. GrBg&s Stadarhblsbirk. 1879, repr. 1974. V. Finwn

(ed.). Kebmhavn. Gregcrscn, A. 1937. L’lslandc, sun Stitut & travers Irs

Ages. Paris. Hallberg, P. 1963. The Icelandic saga, Lincoln. Haraldssaga. 1977. M. Magnuseon and H. P;ilsson

(rransl.). k.ing Harald’s saga. Harmondsworrh. i&ndingaWk. 1953. G. Jbnsson (cd.) &ndinga

tigur, I. Rrykjavik. islending siipu.. 1953. G. Jbnsson (cd.). 12 ~01s.

Rcykjavik. J6hanncsson, J, 1956. Hrcppar ug Gildi, islcndinga

\aga I : 103-9. Reykjwik. Jones, C. 1973. A history of the Vikings. Londun. Kulturhisrorisk lrksikou for Nordivk middelaldcr.

1956-78. 22 vols. Kebcnhavn.

L.wdnPmabbk. 1953. G. Jbnwm (rd.). islending., siigur, I. Rcykjavik.

Lwwn, L. M. (transl.). 1937. Thr cwlicst Norwegian law, bring the Guhtthing .md the* Fnstathing Law. New York.

L.*urmtiur saga. 1948. G. Jbnwm (rd.). Byskup.~ w%rur :~:I-153.

M&r, K. 1874. Island VC’I wincr crrtrn Entdrckung hi> zum tintrrganec dcs Frcista:w. .Mhnchrn. . . .I

Muwr, 1.. 1951. Lt.3 pruplrs Sc;wdinavca .w moycn zigr. Pa&

illhf’saga Tryggvasonar. Fornamanna~ur. I. Kctbmhavn.

Stein-Wilke~lluis, ,M. W. 1970. Hrt kiud in dr Oudijslaudar ~.tmc*nlcving. Groningcn.

Strin-Wilkrsl,uis, $1. W. 1976. Thr juridical position 01 childrrn in Old lcrlandic wt icty. Rccucila dr I.1 So&t6 Ican Bodin 36:363 -79.

Y

Swin-%‘ilkr&ui\, M. W. (Forthcoming) From dcmoc- racy to kingdom. Fund.nnental ri& in medic\ .d Sc.lndinavin. Rccurih dr 1.1 Soci& Jran Odin.

352