Gripla - 20.12.2014, Page 94

GRIPLA94
jökull, just like a prominent character in Þorsteins saga. All these pieces of
evidence suggest that at least several of the sagas had a particular connec-
tion to the northwest, and thus that the manuscript was compiled partly as
an expression of regional identity and aimed at an audience in this area.
It will never be known if or to what degree Björn Þorleifsson and his
brother Þorsteinn were involved in choosing the sagas preserved in this
manuscript, but it is an appealing possibility. Given the political and eco-
nomic milieu in which the codex was likely produced, as well as its literary
themes (discussed later in this article), it seems productive to think about
it not as a haphazard compendium of whatever texts were available to the
scribes at the time of production, but rather as the deliberate product of an
individual patron and perhaps his associates. As its size and paratextual fea-
tures suggest, AM 152 fol. is no ordinary manuscript for everyday use, but,
rather, a prestigious, élite codex that was probably intended to encode cer-
tain ethical values and serve an ideological function. As elizabeth Ashman
rowe and Hans Jacob orning have discussed convincingly, the patrons of
medieval Icelandic manuscripts were sometimes motivated and influenced
by issues such as domestic and international politics and ideological de-
velopments, but also their individual subjectivity (determined by gender,
class, and other factors).23 rowe notes that medieval texts demanded an
ethical response from their audiences, and her overall analysis shows that
the purpose behind Flateyjarbók, the most impressive Icelandic codex from
the medieval period, was originally not only to honour the young King
Óláfr Hákonarson of norway with this splendid gift but implicitly to
‘encourag[e] the king to follow the example of his revered namesakes’, i.e.
to be sensitive and responsive to the wishes of Icelanders, and to rule justly
and with respect for the law.24 following these insights, I suggest that a
good deal of thought went into deciding which sagas to include in AM 152
fol., a manuscript that demanded a great amount of materials, expert work
and production time, and that it was likely known and perhaps circulated
beyond its local place of production and target audience.25 At the very least,
23 rowe, The Development of Flateyjarbók, 29 and ch. 1 more generally; orning, ‘Ǫrvar-oddr
og senmiddelalderens adelskultur.’
24 rowe, The Development of Flateyjarbók, 29, 23–24.
25 Nichols and Wenzel, The Whole Book, 2.