About the Icelandic Republic and its decline E-Book

Carl Joh. Jac. Keyser

• Herausgeber: Books on Demand
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 83

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2023

Beschreibung

The history of the Icelandic Republic is the story of refugees, adventurers and free spirits who escaped an ambitious autocrat and built their own state on this distant island of fire and ice. By 930, the new state had developed enough to establish the Althing, the national assembly of all Icelanders of voting age. It has survived all the turmoil of time to this day. But the history of the Icelandic Republic is also a history of failure. Aristotle is reported to have said that "democracy arises from the pursuit of freedom and equality for all citizens, taking into account the number of citizens but not their peculiarities". These idiosyncrasies, such as vanity, greed for power and the concentration of wealth through ruthless and selfish behaviour, led to the collapse and downfall of this progressive and exemplary social order of the Vikings. The laughing stock was the Norwegian king, under whose rule the republic eventually came to be. The medieval Icelandic Republic can be seen as a historically early failed democratic state. And that is what makes the downfall of the Icelandic Republic so relevant today. When individuals take advantage of a system for their own benefit, it becomes dangerous for everyone.

Leseprobe

úr Njáls sögu: „með lögum skal land byggja“

from the Nials Saga:

„with laws the country should be built up“

Understanding - Tolerance - Realisation

Table of Contents

Foreword

About the Icelandic Republic and its decline

Specification of sources

Trolle's Glossarium

Foreword.

When "Janne" Keyser wrote his treatise, as he himself called it, on the Icelandic Republic and its decline in 1848, a revolution was raging on the continent in the small German states in order to achieve what the Icelanders had already achieved in 930, namely a national assembly.

But Keyser also describes how the privilege of a people (in those days only men of fighting age) deciding their own destiny was once again given away.

It was all about vanity, greed for power and the concentration of wealth. When each individual thinks only of himself, even the most progressive social order disintegrates. And that is why the failure of the Icelandic Republic is still so relevant today. When individuals take advantage of a system for their own benefit, it becomes dangerous for everyone...

”Democracy arises when one strives for freedom and equality of all citizens and takes into account the number of citizens, but not their specific nature.”

Aristoteles (384 until 322 BC), Greek universal scholar

In the translation I have tried to follow the original text closely. But I have also tried to put it into words that can be understood today. Another aim was to preserve something of the ancient language and its character, and thus make the thoughts of the ancients visible.

For a better understanding, and because some of the words and events are not so familiar to us today, I have included an extensive glossary.

This work is dedicated to my family and especially to my wife for her endless patience and understanding.

Albert George Viktorsson Trolle,

Iarnwith in Juli 2023

About the Icelandic Republic and its decline.

Just as Ingiald IllrådaA burned Uppsala in order to break the power of the fylke kings and make himself and his successors the sole kings of the entire Svear kingdom, so Harald HårfagerB about a century later worked to establish his sole rule in Norway, finally breaking the rule of the petty kings with the victory at Hafursfjord. It should come as no surprise that the change in circumstances displeased many, especially those who felt humiliated by it. Both those who hated the king as an overwhelming victor and those who saw him as a high-handed autocrat immediately seized every opportunity to escape his oppressive sceptre. One such opportunity was the recent discovery of Iceland. This island was now to be the refuge of those who had been deprived of their freedom and rights at home. Discovered around 860 by Gardar SvafarssonC, it was later visited during a passing voyage by Naddod and finally (in 868) by Floke, who had purposefully set out on this voyage. However, as he did not feel comfortable there in view of the harsh climate (which is why he also called the island Iceland), he returned to Norway after some time. The existence of Iceland was now, after so many visits there, beyond any doubt; but it did not acquire permanent inhabitants until 874, when two Norwegians, Ingolf and LeifD, made their second journey to it and settled there.

The reason for their journey and emigration was due to individual circumstances. They were the grandchildren of murderers, had committed manslaughter themselves and, as outlaws, were forced to leave their homeland. That outlaws were not absent from the great exodus between 874 and 934, the extent of which is attested to by Are FrodeE when he tells us that the Wise Men said that Iceland would be full after 60 winters, as it had never been before1 , is quite probable. However, it is a great mistake to assume that the majority of these emigrants were adventurers and outlaws, for it is certain that they came from the most distinguished families in Norway and were those who possessed sufficient wealth to equip themselves for such a long journey in search of peace, comfort and independence in faraway Iceland.

--- This is also confirmed by GeijerF when he says: "Various circumstances made Iceland a desirable place of refuge." He added: "Many gave up their fatherland rather than submit to his (Harald Hårfager's) yoke, and great emigrations took place from Norway."2 The excellent Danish historian Peterson also agrees in this respect when he writes: "The immediate cause of the emigration was given by the conquests of Harald Haarfager in Norway; he forced the most respectable men to submit or go into exile, seized all the land property, even the lakes and forests, and made all the peasants his liegemen."

"This was outrageous to many rich and powerful Norsemen; they retreated to the Faroe Islands, the archipelago and other islands in the West Sea, from where they plundered the coasts of Norway in the summer and usually retreated to Iceland"3.

As for the nature of this island, which became a new Scandinavian settlement, for the Swedes and Danes also found their way to these remote shores4, the first explorers, as we have already mentioned, gave very different descriptions.

Of these, the closest to the truth was the one that described Iceland as a country whose surface was mostly covered with snow and ice, but in whose interior a fierce volcanic fire raged, which from time to time broke through the ice and snow and flooded the surrounding districts with rock and water --- as a country in which there were valleys where, protected from the cold of the sea by large forests, grass could grow and grain (though not sufficient for the needs of the country) could be grown and harvested --- as a land, finally, that was certainly suitable for livestock and fishing, as the cattle could feed themselves in winter, the waters were rich in salmon and all kinds of fish, and the coasts were favourable for whaling.

This is a brief description of the nature of Iceland at the time when the Scandinavian emigrants took possession of it.

For the seizure itself and the events observed during it, we think it best to refer to Petersen and Geijer5. What followed was the emergence of the HäradG.

This arose around the leader, who, having divided among his companions the ground previously consecrated, continued to be, as during the voyage, so now on land, the first man among his own. As such he was high priest and judge at the Thing, and was therefore called Godordman, or orator in the name of the gods, and the oldest designation for such an area was GodordH. As such he also made laws together with his circle [of followers], which as a whole was distinct and separate from other circles as a small whole for themselves.

--- In this way, a series of small communities emerged which were isolated from each other and had no connection with each other6. It was natural that under such conditions situations arose in which questions of public interest were raised by which the need for a link uniting all these individual links into a coherent chain was recognised and such a link was missed. It was no less natural that between the chiefs themselves, as the defenders of their own circles [ / followings, ed.], quarrels arose from the desire of one to encroach upon or interfere with the rights of his neighbour, or from the fact that one saw himself at a disadvantage through the rights of the other.

Moreover, as there was no common law, there was no obstacle to these courtiers permitting themselves any wrong against each other. All this, the one with the other, made that it was seen to be necessary and useful, at the suggestion of the old and wise UlfliotI, to establish a general assembly and supreme court common to all the Godords of the land, to be held annually, and called the AlthingJ. --- This was done in the year 928. --- This Althing was to be the supreme court to which cases should be referred from places of jurisdiction of the Godords for final decision; and in this respect it was a superior court [court of appeal]. Moreover, general matters were to be discussed and decided there, and laws for the whole country were to be passed and publicly announced there with the consent of the whole people; and in this respect the Althing was a common general assembly. --- The chairman was the "Lagman"K. He was the highest secular official on the island, and his office at first lasted as long as his lifetime. Later the office was reduced to a "comfortable" period, i.e. it lasted as long as the chiefs and the people were satisfied with him. Three years, however, seems to have been the usual term of office7. --- Thus the separate parts of Iceland had been united into a whole; but the measures and steps taken were not sufficient to produce fully the effects they intended. Still remained the many chiefs of equal dignity, but of differing strength and spirit, now no more bound by the law than before. Nothing was more natural, therefore, than that all quarrels among themselves should continue as long as the rights of the weaker were not secured against the encroachments of the stronger.

Extract from: Keulen, Johannes van, „De Zee Custen van Noorwegen, Finmarcken, Laplant, Ruslant, Spitzbergen en Yslandt“, Amsterdam 1681; Det Kgl. Bibliotek, kbk_2_45_01_028, 2021-10-12

Iceland, thus torn apart by internal disagreements and conflicts, was meanwhile the object of Norway's incessant lustful gaze. Attempts at unification were not disregarded either, albeit with varying degrees of success. For this reason, too, Olof TryggvasonL