Gripla - 20.12.2009, Side 43

43A MutAtInG PeRIPHeRy
above analysis, the positive aspects and connotations of kingship, as por­
trayed in the sagas, are unsurprising. there is, nevertheless, solid evidence
of a distinctive, detached and to some extent de­mystifying attitude to the
ascendant monarchies of the Nordic world. Sverre Bagge argues, to my
mind convincingly, that there was a “greater emphasis on politics and
explanation in old norse historiography” than in the dominant european
traditions (Bagge 1997, 428; see also Bagge 1991). The shift towards intel­
ligible political meanings and motives was a major innovation – not a leap
beyond the medieval universe of discourse, but a new opening within it.
And if Heimskringla appears as the paradigmatic example of the political
turn, that is also because it tells us more about what Canetti called the
“entrails of power” (see the chapter “Eingeweide der Macht” in Canetti
1996, 237–263) than did the mainstream Christian historiography of the
times. This is particularly clear when it deals with the violent progress of
Christianization: the underside of a story that already existed in more
hagiographic versions is brought to light (see also von See 1999, 311–344).
Another aspect of Bagge’s analysis is worth mentioning; as he sees it,
Snorri perceived and portrayed the Norwegian political scene in light of
his own political lifeworld, i.e. the conflict-ridden and collapsing Icelandic
freestate (Bagge 1991, 237–240). this approach stands in marked contrast
to the emerging self-representation of the Norwegian monarchy, systema­
tized in the Speculum regale, and may be seen as a way of cutting the mys­
tique of king, court and sacred order down to size. There are other clues
that point to similar conclusions. In recent scholarship (e.g. Sverrir
Jakobsson 2005), attention has been drawn to the uniquely eminent posi­
tion of the Byzantine emperor – not only in the kings’ sagas, but also in
narratives whose main action takes place in Iceland. It would not seem far-
fetched to understand this continuing reverence – prima facie surprising in
the Western Christian context – as a way to downgrade closer neighbours.
The Byzantine summit of kingship was prestigious enough to overshadow
lesser figures and remote enough to pose no threat.
there is, of course, still room for controversy on Icelandic visions of
and attitudes to monarchy. Ármann Jakobsson’s recent works on this sub­
ject (Ármann Jakobsson 1997, 2002) contain an unequalled wealth of infor­
mation drawn from the whole range of the sources, but his conclusion that
the kings’ sagas “all show kingship in a favourable light” (Ármann