(The following article by Prof. Torgrim Titlestad of the University of Stavanger [pictured above] was published by Saga Bok Publishers on their website here. What follows is my translation, posted here at the request of Saga Bok. lw)

Changes in attitudes toward the sagas

Up until the 1900s, the sagas were regarded as highly reliable, and Norway had several eminent professors in the field, such as Gustav Storm and Alexander Bugge. But in the past century the sagas have been regarded as generally unreliable as historical sources. Instead, they have been described as brilliant romances. Progressive historians like Lauritz Weibull (of Sweden) and Halvdan Koht (of Norway) promoted this view through most of the 20th Century. Nevertheless it appears that, beginning in the 1990s, this trend has begun to change, and Prof. Sverre Bagge of the Univ. of Bergen was the first, in 1995, to publicly point out the damage caused by this “hyper-critical” view of the sagas. “The early middle ages and the Viking Age remain the most neglected fields in medieval history in Norway. This is arguably the result of source difficulties in the wake of the destructive attack on the sagas at the beginning of that century.” Prof. Vidar Sigudsson of the Univ. of Oslo renewed this critique in 2010: “The harsh criticism which was directed against the use of the sagas as sources resulted in that aspect of our past being neglected.”

The Weibullian and Kohtian view that we must reject the sagas was that, by and large, they are not contemporary records, but were written down about 300 years after the events described. This “modernist” view ruled out any appreciation of the sagas as the product of oral culture: That is, that both Norway and Iceland, as mostly illiterate societies (though runes were used for shorter messages) had developed specialized mnemonic techniques in order to preserve historic events. In this context the unusual skaldic poems must be emphasized. Their unique form (“as if carved in stone”) testifies to the historical confidence of the Vikings, and their trust that this technique of oral memorization would permit memories to live on for a long time. (Similar techniques can be found, and continue to be found, in other mostly illiterate cultures.)

The six pillars of saga reliability

An important stimulus to a new assessment of saga reliability lies in the ground-breaking work of the American professor Albert B. Lords from 1960, The Singer of the Tales. With the introduction of the concept of oral history as opposed to documentary history, he broke new ground for insight into saga literature. His most important student in the saga field in the North may be Gisli Sigurdsson. None of this new wave of researchers, who ascribe great importance to the sagas as sources, believe that the sagas ought to be employed as they were prior to 1900. Modern source criticism and scientific adjuncts, for instance archaeology, are viewed as central.

The essential reliability of the sagas

Developed by Prof. Gisli Sigurdsson (1858- ) of the Univ. of Iceland in his doctoral dissertation, in which he analyzes the sagas as well as archaeology, in particular in relation to the discovery of Vinland (North America). The chief points of the sagas benefited the archaeology.

Historical accounts of victors and vanquished

Developed by Prof. Torgrim Titlestad (1947- ) of the Univ. of Stavanger, especially in reference to the saga treatment of the Battle of Hafrsfjord, ca. 1872 (872, tr.). The Icelandic family sagas (histories written by the losing side) rival the kings’ sagas (victors’ accounts) in providing detailed descriptions of Harald Harfager’s political opponents, while the kings’ sagas touch on them only in passing.

The conversion hypothesis

Developed by Prof. Knut Liestol (1881-1952) of the Univ. of Oslo. Demonstrated in his dissertation, with the help of Norwegian family sagas from the 1600s, compared with written records from the late 1800s, that oral memories can essentially be preserved for over 300 years. Through transposing this principle to the 13th Century, we may understand that the sagas can in fact provide essential knowledge going back to before the 10th Century, as a number of sagas were written down in the 1200s. This hypotheses has received support from Prof. Bjarne Hodne in his doctoral thesis in Oslo in 1976.

Narrators and controllers

Developed by docent Olafia Einarsdottir (1924- ). In the evenings, when stories were being told, the old people made certain that historically correct facts were preserved by the younger generation. [This provides] a certain guarantee against the idea that the development of tradition necessarily obliterates what had been regarded as factual sources in the past. An example of persistent human historical certainty.

Collective, open recollection as opposed to individual, monopolistic (documentary)

Also developed by Olafia Einarsdottir — different communities produce different kinds of sources: In a mostly illiterate society there existed a genuine collective memory up until the 14th Century, during which time written sources were scarcely to be found. Collective memory is secured to a great degree by independence from sources. A comprehensive human reservoir of memory existed and was accessed orally, often influenced by the district in which the memories survived. New memories could be constantly introduced by new individuals who imported information (dialogue). At the arrival of literacy, information was transformed into a settled and fixed monologue, found in a document.

Freedom-based memory cultures as opposed to regimented



Especially in Iceland, a strongly freedom-based society (culturally based on political refugees from Harald Harfager’s regime, lacking a king or a standing army) offered greater diversity in the preservation of sources than church- and emperor-based communities where monks aimed at the preservation of tradition and political correctness.

(c) 2010 Torgrim Titlestad