Gripla - 20.12.2009, Síða 150

GRIPLA150
Why then was some version of a permanently centralized system armed
with executive power not established in Iceland? I suggest dropping the
romantic explanations that refer to some original “democratic/anti­monar­
chic” ideology of the immigrants, and turning to practical reality. Knowing
the structure and economic foundations of medieval kingdoms, one should
accept the simple fact that monarchy could not have worked in Iceland.
There were several reasons for this, which are based on the country’s geog­
raphy, geopolitics, and economy.
the natural borders of the island and its remoteness from the continen­
tal network of competing territorial kingdoms excluded the important
factor of external political challenge, and the danger of sudden conquest
attempt, which could trigger centralizing defensive counter measures. On
the other hand, Icelandic territorial expansion was also excluded. Therefore,
there were no geopolitical factors which would externally provoke the cen­
tralization of political power necessary for both defensive and aggressive
military actions. Nor was there any indirect impulse for the local elites to
reach for status comparable with the Christian monarchs, who sat too far
away from Iceland to pose a permanent challenge.
However, in my view, economic reasons might have been more deci­
sive. A permanent power centre was a very costly solution because a
Christian ruler with his family, servants, necessary armed forces (retinue)
and clergy (needed for religious and administrative services) must be
financed by the rest of society. this meant the regular collecting of a sub­
stantial fiscal surplus needed not only for daily consumption but also for
the ostentation of the paramount status of the monarch and his entourage.
To sustain regular “taxing”, some sort of collecting body empowered with
executive means must be employed, which adds to the overall running
costs because they themselves were also serious consumers.
This was a really heavy burden that posed problems to many medieval
kingdoms, even in countries with much more fertile agricultural lands and
better climates than Iceland. That was why almost none of the early medi­
eval states (with the significant southern exceptions of Byzantium and the
El Andalus caliphate) had capital towns. A king of that time was a rex
ambulans who was in “permanent” motion. This was not only because the
difficult logistics and the personal character of his executive power which
necessitated a king’s frequent presence in as many places as possible but