Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana - 01.06.1977, Side 18

16
logous to those described in the Bjarni-story, though here on shore.
GulaJ)ingslog § 100 says this of wayfarers and shelters10:
Nu er salo hus ollom monnom iamheimillt. Nu er vel ef aller
megu inni væra. oc fot Jieirra. En ef eigi megu aller inni væra
oc fot l>eirra firi Jjrong. }>a scolo aller ut bera fot sin. ]pa er vel
ef j:)eir hava ba rum. E>eir scolo aller inni væra ef Jjeir hava
setu rum aller. Nu ef nokorer hava verit .iij. netr nau&synia
laust. scolo }ieir ut ganga. ellar scolo Jseir luta mann ut. ba
er vel ef ]ieir vilia ut ganga er lutu. En ef J>eir vilia eigi ba ero
Jjeir seckir at rånbauge. er ut lutu at ganga. oc villdu eigi.
J)eir scolo giallda hina fullum giolldom aptr. ef beir deyia uti
er inni lutu at væra.
The law recognises the possibility that superior force might af-
fect its application but it pays no regard to mannvirding. A lendr
madr has no more right than a bondi in this situation.
Bjarni at first yields in terms of the mannvirding or public value
which the Stoic outlook would allow made it more appropriate
for others to yield to his claim to rescue. His generosity is in better
keeping with Ambrose’s Christian recommendation. Having laid
aside rank, he then sees himself in the Stoic position, where chance
is regarded as the only possible arbiter between equals. Everything
seems straightforward when he is one of nearly half the whole
company who draw a place in the boat. Then the unnamed Ice-
lander reminds him of a promise which evidently did not allow
for such a parting as is now in prospect. Bjarni had evidently
persuaded himself that, by renouncing any advantage of mann-
virding and recommending a lottery, he was absolved from other
obligations. This Icelander disagrees.
10 R. Keyser and P. A. Munch, Norges gamle Love I (1846), 47. There appears
to be no parallel to this text and according to Sverre Steen, “Hele bestemmelsen
har et meget gammeldags preg”, see Ferd og fest, 2. ed. (1942), pp. 398-99. Visby
Stadslag (c. 1340) has an article on rights of use of a ship’s boat in emergencies (§
12.1), similar to Hamburg and Liibeck regulations (of 1292 and 1299) but unpa-
ralleled in other Scandinavian law; see Gosta Hasselberg, Studier rorande Visby
Stadslag och dess Icdllor (1953), p. 136; lightening ship was a majority decision in
Icelandic and probably Norwegian law, ibid., p. 131, note 36.