Gripla - 2023, Blaðsíða 130

128 GRIPLA
nonetheless endured them for a while. The bishop arrived at Múli,
and Ívarr hosted him impeccably. There was a respectable veizla,
which Ívarr clearly offered without affection. They parted on good
terms, however, and the bishop went on his way ...
Ívarr quickly gathered men before the bishop returned, this time drawing
them up for battle:
En at þeim viðrbúningi ríðr biskup í tún.
Spyrja þeir Eyjólf [who was with the bishop], hvat safnaðr þessi
skal.
En Ívarr segir, at þeir skuli nú at keyptu komast, áðr þeir fái eign
hans, ok segir, at nú skal fara allt saman, karl ok kýr.
The bishop rode into the home-field as the arrangements were be-
ing carried out.
They asked Eyjólfr what was up with the crowd.
Ívarr said this time they would have to pay full price before get-
ting hands on his property, it would be over his dead body.
Reluctance to host the bishop under comparable circumstances is widely
discernible in Sturlunga.37 In a general sense, this is akin to slimesitting, as
violent exaction of hospitality is by nature. However, Guðmundr’s inten-
tion was hardly to impose his political authority on inferiors by demon-
strative action, the kind of which legislators had in mind when prohibiting
slimesitting. Rather, he demanded Christian and communal responsibility
for the maintenance of their bishop and his flock, which plainly counted
many people of humble social and financial standing.
Examination of the political culture that is described in Sturlunga saga
and other relevant narratives for the commonwealth period quickly re-
veals that, unlike Norwegian political culture and most other premodern
political cultures in Western Europe to which we have referred, it was not
characterized by regular or systematic exaction of hospitality by political
superiors. On the contrary, such practice is noticeably absent. Feasting
and gift-giving remained native expressions of bonding among peers or
37 See, e.g., Sturlunga saga, 1: 272‒77, 317‒18, passim.