Ætt og saga: Um frásagnarfræði Sturlungu eða Íslendinga sögu hinnar miklu (review)

As the author indicates in his preface (7–8), this book has a thirty-year history extending back to the author’s studies in Oslo and Berkeley. It thus represents a mature scholar’s return to his dissertation topic. Indeed, he has never been away. The extensive bibliography (269–94) cites twenty works by Úlfar (291–93) spanning an eighteen-year period, many of them expressly concerned with Sturlunga. The author justifies the book-length treatment as an attempt to address the purpose of the compilation more thoroughly (8).

The emphasis in this book is on the agency of the individual compiler, in this case most likely Þórðr Narfason of Skor (d. 1308), in shaping the text, as well as his use of written sources. An individual molds his text for political ends using cultural resources available to him from both written sources and oral tradition. In this case the aim is to promote a positive model of rule by leading families as one solution to the turmoil in Icelandic society at the time of compilation. The view taken of the compilation thus reflects the Icelandic school of saga scholarship and integrates insights from other approaches to saga narration.

The first chapter, “Flestar allar sögur voru ritaðar” [Nearly all sagas were written] (13–39), situates Sturlunga within the genres of Old Icelandic saga writing (13–5) and discusses its manuscript and publication history (15–9), its name (19–20), the history of scholarship on its compilation (20–8), and its nature (28–35), concluding with an overview of the structure of Úlfar’s book (35–9).

Chapter 2, “Menn kunna að telja ættir sínar: Viðhorf til frásagnarhefðar og sagnaritunar” [People know how to recount their lineages: Attitudes toward the narrative tradition and saga writing] (41–66), begins with a discussion (41–51) of the famous description of the entertainment at the wedding in Reykhólar in 1119 found in Þorgils saga ok Hafliða and the views scholars have taken of its authenticity. Úlfar argues that the episode is so jarring in its context that it must be included for a purpose, as an exemplum (50). This provides a point of entry to native conceptualizations of narrative. He discusses (51–61) the genealogies in the narrative, their sources, and the reasons for their inclusion and organization. There is a scholarly consensus that the compiler added genealogies. Úlfar suggests that genealogies formed for the compiler an organizational principle for history and that the account of the wedding at Reykhólar serves to justify the inclusion of genealogies reaching far back (57). Finally, he discusses the secular emphasis of the text (61–6).

Chapter 3, “Það er í frásögn haft: Atburðir og frásögn” [It is put into narrative: Events and narration] (67–91), discusses the descriptions of events in the compilation as narratives, preserved in oral form and believed to reflect historical events, deliberately selected by the compiler. The narrative tradition is shared with sagas of the Icelanders. North American scholarship on the structure of saga narration and its background in oral tradition features prominently in this chapter.

Chapter 4, “Nú hefir fleira orðið senn en einn hlutur: Samsetning veraldlegra samtíðarsagna” [Now several things have come together as one: The compilation of secular contemporary sagas] (93–104), discusses the structure of Guðmundar saga dýra (93–8) and Þórðar saga kakala (98–104) and the process of their compilation as it can be reconstructed drawing on Carol J. Clover’s (The Medieval Saga, 1982) theories of stranded narrative.

Chapter 5, “Þeim er sögurnar eru frá: Persónulýsingar” [Those that the stories are about: Character descriptions] (105–40), discusses key elements of the representation of character in the compilation, as in saga narrative generally: genealogies, presentations, predictions or omens regarding a person’s character, dreams as...