Saga - 1972, Page 59

GOÐAR OG BÆNDUR
57
farmers was ever fundamentally different from what it was in the
twelfth century.
V- Xn the thirteenth century there are a few examples of farmers
eing strongly independent of goðar. In general the goðar did not
take power without first assuring themselves of the approval of the
farrners in the district, and at times the farmers hint that it is best
to have no goði. This has been interpreted as a remnant of the old
freedom of the farmers, and it has been concluded that this freedom
Was greater before the great chieftains and large-scale wars of the
hirteenth century. But closer consideration reveals that it was
esPecially the so-called big farmers or „best men“ whom the chief-
ains turned to for support, and that the smaller farmers followed
e bigger ones. It is likely that these big farmers assumed the
aaership over other farmers when the goðar became fewer in
e tMrteenth century and their personal contact with the individual
armers diminished. The big farmers then took the place of the goðar
0 some extent. The goðar could be more harmful than useful, for they
Were often at war and the farmers often had to support them with
?ertain expenditures. The big farmers, on the other hand, seem to
ve been wealthy men who lived on prosperous church farms and
n'^de a profit by managing the church’s property. Some of these men
^gured in the struggle for power between the goðar families, nd
e of ^ke Sturlunga sagas, Svínfellinga saga, tells of a prosperous
VTCh farmer who killed his goði.
■ These remarks lead to the conclusion that, so far as we know,
blU;COmm0n farmers never enjoyed any democratic rights in the Repu-
*c- But on the other hand, the goðar gave them security against
ny kinds of dangers and difficulties, and this was worth more than
íreedc
cracy.
°m m a society which had no conception of representative demo-