Anglo-Danish Empire - A Companion to the Reign of King Cnut the Great

["Chapter 10 Cnut\u2019s Interaction with Winchester: A Reassessment 229 from the church of St. Maurice (Figure 10.6), could likewise date from the period immediately after the death of Cnut rather than from his reign itself.91 Figure 10.6: Fragmentary runic inscription from church of St. Maurice, Winchester. Photograph \u00a9 Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Stone Sculpture: photographer Simon I. Hill. Although Emma was obliged to withdraw to Flanders in 1037, after the full acces- sion of Harthacnut in 1040 she was able to return, and may have based herself in Winchester again.92 She was certainly there in 1043, when Edward the Confessor, her son by her first husband King \u00c6thelred II, came to her unexpectedly and to- gether with his men, in the words of the D version of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: bereafedan hi \u00e6t eallon \u00fean g\u00e6rsaman \u00fee heo ahte, \u00fea w\u00e6ron unatellendlice, for \u00fean \u00fee heo w\u00e6s \u00e6ror \u00feam cynge hire suna swi\u014fe heard, \u00fe\u00e6t heo him l\u00e6sse dyde \u00feonne he wolde, \u00e6r \u00feam \u00fee he cyng w\u00e6re. \u204a eac sy\u00f0\u00f0an \u204a leton hi \u00feaer si\u00f0\u00f0an binnan sittan.93 [deprived her of all the treasures which she owned, and which were beyond counting, because she had formerly been very hard to the king, her son, in that she did less for him 91 Biddle and Kj\u00f8lbye-Biddle, \u201cExcavated Sculpture from Winchester,\u201d 327\u201329. 92 ASC (D), ed. Cubbin, 66 (s.a. 1040); Stafford, Queen Emma and Queen Edith, 246\u201348. 93 ASC (D), ed. Cubbin, 67 (s.a. 1043).","230 Barbara Yorke than before he became king and afterwards as well. And they allowed her to stay there afterwards.]94 It was presumably in Winchester that she died in 1052 and then was buried with Cnut in the Old Minster (see Figure 10.1). Emma was remembered as a great patron of both the Old and New Minsters. The anniversary of her death was observed at both throughout the Middle Ages, and was commemorated in the cathedral with gifts to the poor.95 In addition to the gifts that she had made jointly with Cnut, which William of Malmesbury believed had been largely on Emma\u2019s own initiative, she was also remembered for her own gifts, perhaps made after Cnut\u2019s death.96 She was remembered at New Minster for the gift of her \u201cGreek\u201d shrine with many relics, including the head of St. Valentine, and an estate of thirty hides at Piddletrenthide in Dorset.97 Old Minster received major gifts of silver, gold, and textiles, and on her death, an estate at Hayling Is- land, Hampshire, and part of her tenement in the city, which became known as the \u201cmanor of Goodbegot,\u201d a much valued and profitable donation.98 The depic- tion of her with Cnut in the Liber Vitae of New Minster suggests the type of support she in turn received from Winchester\u2019s religious leaders. The donor portrait may well have been based on Ottonian models, but certain features particularly bolster the position of Emma. The veil an angel holds above her head may allude to her Christian marriage to Cnut, which Emma and her supporters would have wished to contrast with Cnut\u2019s earlier union with \u00c6lfgifu of Northampton, the mother of Harald Harefoot; that union may not have had the same sort of religious compo- nent.99 Although Cnut is the more prominent figure, it is Emma who is in the more privileged position on the right of Christ, the place usually given to the emperors in the Ottonian donor portraits.100 This is, of course, the position of the Virgin Mary in standard Crucifixion scenes, which may in part have provided the model for the presentation of Emma and Cnut.101 In the Liber Vitae depiction, Mary stands 94 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, trans. Whitelock, Douglas, and Tucker, 106 (s.a. 1043). 95 Goodman, Manor of Goodbegot, 5; Liber Vitae, ed. Keynes, 45\u201347, 94\u201395. 96 Gesta Regum Anglorum, ed. Mynors, Thomson, and Winterbottom, I, 322\u201323. 97 Liber Vitae, ed. Keynes, 40\u201341; he notes that, according to ASC (F), the gift of St. Valen- tine\u2019s head was made for the soul of Harthacnut; ASC, trans. Swanton, 163, n. 13 (s.a. 1041). 98 Goodman, Manor of Goodbegot; Harmer, Anglo-Saxon Writs, 399\u2013400 (no. 111); Rumble, Property and Piety, 220\u201322; Stafford, Queen Emma and Queen Edith, 147\u201348. Other possible gifts of land, as well as treasure, are recorded in Annales Monasterii de Wintonia, ed. Luard, 18, 205, but the account is complicated by its inclusion of legendary material (see below). 99 Gerchow, \u201cPrayers for Cnut,\u201d 220\u201330; Bolton, \u201c\u00c6lfgifu of Northampton.\u201d 100 Karkov, Ruler Portraits of Anglo-Saxon England, 123\u201333. 101 Owen-Crocker, \u201cPomp, Piety,\u201d 42, 48\u201351.","Chapter 10 Cnut\u2019s Interaction with Winchester: A Reassessment 231 above Emma, intervening on her behalf (Figure 10.2). Winchester had already played a significant part in developing the depiction of Mary as queen of heaven, and this has been linked with the political support provided by Bishop \u00c6thelwold for Queen \u00c6lfthryth in the reign of King Edgar.102 A case for the succession of \u00c6lf- thryth\u2019s son \u00c6thelred, instead of his elder brother Edward by a first wife, was de- veloped at Winchester on the grounds that \u00c6lfthryth alone was a consecrated queen. Something very similar may have been going on in Winchester towards the end of Cnut\u2019s reign. The superior position of Emma, and consequently the right of her son Harthacnut to succeed in preference to his older half-brother Harald, seems to have been supported by the Winchester church leaders \u2013 although it is by no means certain that this was also Cnut\u2019s view. Emma seems to have been closely associated with Bishop \u00c6lfwine, who over- saw the creation of the special burial place for Cnut and Emma\u2019s family in the Old Minster. Their close relations may date from before his appointment to Winchester. A letter preserved in a manuscript that may have been copied at Abingdon is ad- dressed to a priest \u201c\u00c6lf.,\u201d who is believed to be \u00c6lfwine before his appointment as bishop. It refers to him as being privy to royal councils and in a position to request favors from the queen.103 The later gossip at Winchester, repeated by Richard of Devizes in the (unreliable) Winchester Annals, was that the relationship was scan- dalous, and that Emma had had to clear herself of an accusation of adultery through the ordeal of walking on hot ploughshares.104 The appointment of \u00c6lf- wine, in which Emma well have had a hand, may have been resented by the monks of Winchester because he was not one of their number and not himself a monk.105 The monks of Canterbury also reported unkind gossip about Emma, and Goscelin had heard that she had intrigued with King Magn\u00fas \u00d3l\u00e1fsson of Norway to depose her son, Edward the Confessor.106 Perhaps they resented the fact that after Cnut\u2019s early patronage of Canterbury, the balance had shifted by the end of the reign towards Winchester as a major recipient of gifts in the name of Cnut; per- haps they attributed this to Emma\u2019s influence. 102 Deshman, \u201cChristus rex et magi reges,\u201d 397\u201399; Deshman, Benedictional, 204\u20137; Yorke, \u201c\u00c6thelwold and Politics,\u201d 82\u201385; Karkov, Ruler Portraits of Anglo-Saxon England, 111\u201314. 103 Lawson, Cnut: Danes in England, 149, and 255 for identification of the source. 104 Annales Monasterii de Wintonia, ed. Luard, 20\u201325. 105 One also wonders whether this gossip might have originated with \u00c6lfgifu of Northampton or her supporters in revenge for the stories, promoted presumably by Emma and her support- ers, that claimed Cnut was not the father of either of her sons: Encomium, ed. Campbell, 40\u201341; Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, trans. Whitelock, Douglas, and Tucker, 102\u20133 (s.a. 1035). 106 Rollason, \u201cGoscelin\u2019s Account of St. Mildrith,\u201d 176\u201378 (chap. 18).","232 Barbara Yorke Another major figure with interests in Winchester was Godwine, earl of Wes- sex. Even before he was taken up by Cnut, Godwine seems to have had strong family connections in Hampshire, Sussex, and Kent.107 He was first appointed an earl, probably for these areas, in 1018 and then for the whole of Wessex after the fall of Ealdorman \u00c6thelweard in 1020. He was brought into the family of Cnut when he married Gytha, the sister of Earl \u00dalfr who had married Cnut\u2019s sister \u00c1s- tr\u00ed\u00f0r (see Table 10.1). Winchester would have been one of the major centres of Godwine\u2019s earldom. A writ from King Edward the Confessor confirming his moth- er\u2019s gifts to Old Minster was addressed to \u201cStigand bisceop \u204a God\u01bfine eorl \u204a ealle \u00fea burhmen\u201d (Bishop Stigand and Earl Godwine and all the citizens in Winches- ter).108 It is very likely that Godwine had Danes in his entourage or employ, and, when thinking about Danish influences in Winchester, Godwine should be con- sidered as a possible patron in addition to Cnut or Harthacnut. He could, for in- stance, have been the earl referred to in the Old English inscription associated with the tomb of \u201cGunni eorles feolaga\u201d (Gunni the eorl\u2019s companion) from the Old Minster cemetery.109 Godwine himself died in Winchester on Easter Monday, 1053, after collapsing at a feast in the royal palace.110 He was buried in Old Min- ster, though not, as far as we know, as part of Cnut\u2019s family group. One should also remember that Winchester was a focus for many noble families whose mem- bers might have positions in the minsters or roles in royal administration. Win- chester had been a highly political place throughout the tenth century, and many of those who had major connections with the town were closely involved in the various crises affecting the royal house.111 Conclusion: A Paradox A detailed examination of the interactions of Cnut with Winchester not only allows those relations to come into clearer focus, but also contributes to our understand- ing of the reign of Cnut, as well as to the development of Winchester as an early medieval centre. Cnut\u2019s known patronage of Winchester seems to have fallen into two distinct phases. The first occurred near the beginning of his reign, when Cnut was building his relations with the Anglo-Saxon establishment. The issuing of a 107 Keynes, \u201cCnut\u2019s Earls,\u201d 70\u201374. 108 Harmer, Anglo-Saxon Writs, 399\u2013400 (no. 111); Rumble, Property and Piety, 220\u201322. 109 Biddle and Kj\u00f8lbye-Biddle, \u201cExcavated Sculpture from Winchester,\u201d 278\u201380 (no. 6). 110 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, trans. Whitelock, Douglas, and Tucker, 127\u201328 (s.a. 1053). 111 Yorke, \u201c\u00c6thelwold and Politics.\u201d","Chapter 10 Cnut\u2019s Interaction with Winchester: A Reassessment 233 law code in the Anglo-Saxon tradition at a council in Winchester in 1020 or 1021 was a clear demonstration of his stated aim of reconciliation with his Anglo-Saxon subjects. The restoration of an estate to New Minster enabled him to demonstrate his willingness to act as a protector of major churches if they accepted the new regime. Thereafter, as far as we can see, Cnut had little certain direct involvement with Winchester until 1032, when the royal priest \u00c6lfwine was appointed its bishop. This is also when plans began to be put in place for a mausoleum for Cnut and his family within Old Minster, one that appears to have been inaugurated by the transfer of the body of his fictive \u201cbrother\u201d Edmund Ironside. This marked a significant new stage in Winchester\u2019s royal associations, whose apogee could be seen to be King Edward the Confessor\u2019s consecration as king in Winchester in 1043.112 King \u00c6thelwulf, his sons, and his grandson Edward the Elder may have been aiming for something similar for Winchester, and the family mausoleum de- vised by the same Edward at New Minster was almost certainly the model for Cnut\u2019s in Old Minster. But the death of Edward\u2019s son \u00c6lfweard affected plans for the succession, and his immediate successors were not buried in the city. During the episcopate of \u00c6thelwold (963\u2013984), the city was more closely associated with him and with monastic reform than with the royal house. At the end of his reign, Cnut inaugurated a new phase in which Winchester had a symbolic importance for whoever was ruling England, and thus ensured that Winchester received atten- tion from the early Norman kings. To help ensure the succession, it was desirable to stress Cnut\u2019s links with the West Saxon dynasty; then, in turn, the Normans wished to stress their links with the Anglo-Danish house. Thus, Winchester came to be seen as synonymous with Anglo-Saxon royal power, although in reality its royal links had been more varied and intermittent. In spite of the importance of Winchester in the plans for continuity of the Danish succession within England, Cnut\u2019s gifts of land to the Winchester minsters can only be described as ungenerous in comparison with gifts to other favored communities. The Winchester minsters did well for treasure, though, perhaps because Emma was in fact the one who was responsible for its distribution.113 Emma seems to have been more closely linked with Winchester than Cnut was; it was certainly where she was based after the death of Cnut and it became the center of her operations on behalf of Harthacnut. Arranging family commemoration was also a traditional role for women in the early Middle Ages,114 and Emma is a potential candidate for the inspiration behind the Old Minster mausoleum. These possible roles of Emma are a reminder 112 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ed. Whitelock, 107. 113 For queens as dispensers of treasure, see Stafford, Queens, Concubines, 99\u2013114. 114 Van Houts, Memory and Gender, 65\u201392.","234 Barbara Yorke that references to Cnut\u2019s relations with a place could also be shorthand for those act- ing on his behalf. Recent studies have sought to give Cnut agency, but there is a dan- ger that the desire to put a biographical subject center stage ends up masking the roles of others.115 Cnut himself is a shadowy figure in Winchester\u2019s history, only known definitely to have been in the town at the great assembly that produced the law codes I and II Cnut. Danish influences that have been recognized in Winchester would almost certainly not have been there if Cnut had not become king of England, but they are not necessarily evidence for his direct involvement with the city, and do not have to date only from his reign. We are left with a paradox. Cnut\u2019s reign was undoubtedly important in redefining Winchester as a royal city, but Cnut in his life- time may have had only a limited interaction with the town. 115 Lawson, Cnut: Danes in England; Bolton, Cnut the Great, esp. 6\u20139 for his biographical aims.","Simon C. Thomson Chapter 11 Heroic Legend: Sigmundr F\u00e1fnisbani in the Court of King Cnut It is widely recognized that Cnut\u2019s reign in England saw a major increase in cul- tural, especially Church-centered, patronage, at the same time as it brought Scandinavian culture into the mainstream of southern English life. As Barbara Yorke makes clear in the chapter before this one, Winchester seems to have been one of the centres of such cultural activity: patronage and interest flowed into Winchester from multiple sources, if not often from Cnut himself, reflecting com- peting political and personal interests while simultaneously demonstrating the convergence of different cultural affiliations. Thanks to the archaeological exca- vations led by Martin Biddle, we can now see two focal points of this cultural activity in the great churches of Old and New Minsters, each of which managed and benefited from this interest in its own way. A large fragment of stone found in Winchester in 1965 epitomizes this flowering, this cultural convergence, and this focus: showing a key moment in the story of Sigmundr V\u01eblsungsson, it must have been installed in the Old Minster during or after Cnut\u2019s reign, perhaps initi- ated with his patronage. The sheer unlikeliness of such an idea \u2013 a non-Christian warrior with a strange and savage story decorating the inside of one of England\u2019s oldest cathedrals \u2013 may have contributed to a dearth of discussion concerning this stone and its implications in eleventh-century English culture. But there is, this chapter argues, no reason to be afraid of this carving of a wolf and a man, for the relief merely lends a sharp focus to what we already know from other sources: Cnut\u2019s court had a lively interest in mythic and heroic narrative \u2013 that is, in what we might call Germanic storytelling \u2013 at the same time as it invested heavily in the Church, in connections with Rome, and in the recent English past. Most peo- ple in early medieval England seem not to have seen the contradictions between the vaguely \u201cpagan\u201d and the broadly \u201cChristian\u201d that often preoccupy us, and it is usually best, I suggest below, to believe in the vibrant, productive, complicated mixture that the evidence shows, rather than to erect barriers against it in defi- ance of that evidence. The Sigmundr stone has much to tell us about how Cnut wanted to be perceived and indeed about the cultural tone of England in the elev- enth century. It also has implications for our understanding of the stories of Sig- mundr, of the V\u01eblsungar, and of Beowulf. This chapter, then, aspires to wide horizons, some of which will no doubt remain hazy. But it begins with solid stone (see Figure 11.1). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1515\/9781501513336-012","236 Simon C. Thomson Figure 11.1: The Sigmundr stone: Photograph \u00a9 Martin Biddle, \u201cExcavations at Winchester 1965: Fourth Interim Report.\u201d (Plate LXII). Sigmundr on the Stone In 1965, as part of their extensive excavation of Winchester, Martin Biddle and his team found an unusually large piece of carved stone. It had been discarded during the demolition of Old Minster in 1093; unlike most comparable pieces, it was not reused in the construction of the Norman cathedral which stands today. Now on display in Winchester City Museum, the rectangle of stone is ap- proximately 69.5 cm high, 52 cm wide, and 27 cm deep.1 Three figures are 1 The first report is in Biddle, \u201cExcavations at Winchester 1965,\u201d 325, with description in 329\u201332. Measurements here are taken from Biddle\u2019s most recent description in Tweddle, Bid- dle, and Kj\u00f8lbye-Biddle, Corpus IV, 314.ii\u2013322.i (\u00a788). See the earlier description in Biddle and Kj\u00f8lbye-Biddle, Winchester: Saxon and Norman Art, 12\u201313 (\u00a718); Biddle and Kj\u00f8lbye-Biddle, \u201cDanish Royal Burials,\u201d 216\u201317. A conclusive discussion is forthcoming in Kj\u00f8lbye-Biddle and Biddle, Minsters of Winchester. The piece\u2019s museum reference number is CG62-70 WS98. I am","Chapter 11 Heroic Legend: Sigmundr F\u00e1fnisbani in the Court of King Cnut 237 carved in deep relief on its surface. To the left, a mailed warrior walks away; separate pieces showing his head and the front of his body are lost. To the right, a man\u2019s head faces upwards. His shoulder-length hair curves tightly around his head. A rope around his neck is attached to a tree-like object be- neath him. Above, its face almost pressing against his, is the pointed face of an animal. The lower part of the face is clear, but the top is heavily weathered. A raised paw passes behind its snout; the other is against the man\u2019s chin. The shape of the muzzle and the dew-claw on the lower paw clearly show that the animal is a dog or a wolf. Most crucially, although the stone is heavily weath- ered, it is clear that the animal\u2019s tongue extends towards the man\u2019s mouth. Oddly, the wolf\u2019s tongue seems to be visible for the length of her mouth: the carver has apparently emphasized it. Figure 11.2 shows all lines carved on the stone equally, clarifying what has now been partially worn away. Figure 11.2: Drawing showing all lines carved on the extant fragment. deeply indebted to Professor Biddle for permitting the use of images produced as part of his work and for his support and advice in the development of this discussion.","238 Simon C. Thomson Crisp grooves remain on both the right- and left-hand sides.2 This grooving is contemporary with the image, unlike a plaster-filled lewis-hole which tells us that the stone had been used before its carving. Significantly, the difference in wear between side-grooves and face suggest that most of the wearing of the image took place when it was on display rather than after being discarded. The presence of rebates shows that there were interlocking pieces on either side. These would have continued the narrative to either side, explaining the incompleteness of the repre- sentation of both soldier and wolf. From this single piece, then, we can be sure that a frieze extended in both directions, telling a longer narrative: Figure 11.3 shows what form this may have taken and demonstrates, if this reconstruction can be accepted, how extensive the scene would have been.3 Multiple shards were found around this single piece. Those with discernible carving contain fragments \u201cderived from figures similar to those on the present piece\u201d and therefore probably once showed surrounding events.4 It is an extraordinary piece of luck that this seg- ment survived intact, given the clarity and significance of the moment it depicts. That the soldier\u2019s head and foot are missing makes it probable that additional pieces completed the image above and below. From this single stone, then, we can deduce an image up to 2.6 m long \u2013 and infer the existence of a much longer frieze, telling more than this isolated incident, with a length of about 24.4 m well within the range of possibility.5 This was an imposing piece of work. At its first publication, Biddle\u2019s report proposed that the distinctive scene of a man tied to a tree-like object, while a wolf\u2019s tongue goes into his mouth, corre- sponds with that now preserved in chapter 5 of V\u01eblsunga saga, in which Sigmundr V\u01eblsungsson and his nine brothers suffer slow death at the jaws of a she-wolf who eats one of them each night. Sigmundr, left to the end, kills the wolf by ripping out her tongue. With his hands tied, but with honey on his face, he waits for the wolf to lick his mouth and then bites on her tongue, rips it out and kills her. Biddle\u2019s proposed reading has been broadly, if often reluctantly, accepted.6 And yet, despite 2 Biddle\u2019s Faces B and D, images of which are \u00a7\u00a7642\u201345 in Tweddle, Biddle, and Kj\u00f8lbye- Biddle, Corpus IV. 3 Figure 11.3 is used by kind permission from Kj\u00f8lbye-Biddle and Biddle, Minsters of Winchester. 4 Tweddle, Biddle, and Kj\u00f8lbye-Biddle, Corpus IV, 317.i. The shards form \u00a7\u00a776\u201377, 79, 80, 81, and 84. 5 Tweddle, Biddle, and Kj\u00f8lbye-Biddle, Corpus IV, 317.i and 321.i. Biddle also notes that this is far from the maximum length, because it could have run around several walls and thereby come closer to the Bayeux Tapestry\u2019s 70.4 m. See the Biddles\u2019 more recent discussion in \u201cDan- ish Royal Burials,\u201d 216\u201317. 6 A full bibliography up to 1995 is given in Tweddle, Biddle, and Kj\u00f8lbye-Biddle, Corpus IV at 321.ii\u2013322.i. For more recent discussions see Yorke, Wessex in the Early Middle Ages, 143; Law- son, Cnut: Danes in England, 122; Bailey, England\u2019s Earliest Sculptors, 96; Thompson, Dying and Death, 165; Rowe, \u2018\u201cQuid Sigvardus cum Christo?,\u2019\u201d 168\u201369, n. 4; Townend, \u201cContextualising","Chapter 11 Heroic Legend: Sigmundr F\u00e1fnisbani in the Court of King Cnut 239 Figure 11.3: Suggested completion of the scenes implied by the narrative frieze, showing the degree of extension necessitated by the extant image. the comparative clarity of the crucial elements (man tied to wood; wolf\u2019s tongue coming to his face), a number of alternative possibilities for the incident depicted on the stone have been proposed. Perhaps it could be dogs licking blood from the floor, as in 1 Kings 21:19.7 Alternatively, it may show the king of the Garamantes and his faithful dog-soldiers; there is, after all, a similar disposition of man and dog in a thirteenth-century manuscript.8 It may even, somehow, show St. Dunstan, whose voice is said to have calmed dogs.9 The fact that so many solutions have been offered that do not work bespeaks the desperation of an attempt to reject the Sigmundr reading for its own sake.10 There is nothing in Kings, or in Dunstan\u2019s the Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pur,\u201d 171; Kop\u00e1r, Gods and Settlers, 47\u201351; Biddle and Kj\u00f8lbye-Biddle, \u201cDanish Royal Burials,\u201d 216\u201317; Biddle, \u201cK\u00f6nigsh\u00e4user\u201d; Bardi\u00e8s-Fronty and Dectot, Celtes et Scandi- naves, 67 (\u00a739). 7 The suggestion was made by Jolanta Zaluska and is published in Zarnecki, Holt, and Hol- land, English Romanesque Art, 25, n.7. 8 This suggestion is made rather tentatively in Alexander, \u201cSigmund or the King of the Gara- mantes?\u201d The manuscript in question is London, British Library, Royal MS. 12 F. xiii, with the image fol. 30v. 9 Kop\u00e1r, Gods and Settlers, 51. The scene from Dunstan\u2019s vita is edited and translated in Lap- idge and Winterbottom, Early Lives of Dunstan, 22\u201325 (\u00a76.6). 10 Yorke notes how unlikely the scene would be, but tacitly accepts it in Wessex in the Early Middle Ages, 143.","240 Simon C. Thomson story, that corresponds to the closeness between the faces, or to the man being tied down. More plausible is the indigenous North American folktale in which a young hero lies in wait for a wolf and defeats it by seizing its tongue.11 The king of the Garamantes, of whom the manuscript illustration shows a prostrate man with his face eaten by a dog, is an interesting suggestion in the English context. This scene, however, takes place in battle, the man is not tied down and wears armor, and the beast (more naturally) has its jaws opened around the man\u2019s face rather than some distance away with extended tongue. The discussion (and rejection) of all of these proposals could be pursued at some length, were it not enough to say more simply that the continuing resistance to Biddle\u2019s explanation is absurd. It is time to accept that this piece of stone shows what it appears to show, however surprising that may seem. The story of the V\u01eblsungar is best known today through Wagner\u2019s rendering of the complex and fatal love story of Siegfried and Br\u00fcnhilde, loosely based on Ger- man sources such as the Nibelungenlied of ca. 1200 and the Old Icelandic V\u01eblsunga saga of ca. 1275, which was itself based on the tenth- to twelfth-century heroic lays of the Poetic Edda. In the Icelandic sources this duo is named Sigur\u00f0r and Bryn- hildr, while Sigmundr, the father of Sigur\u00f0r, remains in the background. His epi- sode with the she-wolf, preserved in V\u01eblsunga saga probably on the basis of a poem now lost, precedes Sigur\u00f0r\u2019s birth by a long way and has no equivalent in the Nibelungenlied. Aside from copies later made of it, the saga survives in one manu- script datable to ca. 1400, although it was probably composed earlier, between 1200 and 1270.12 To go over the story, Sigmundr becomes an outlaw in Gautland, kingdom of Siggeirr, when Siggeirr marries Sign\u00fd, who is Sigmundr\u2019s beloved twin sister. Treacherously Siggeirr ambushes and kills their father V\u01eblsungr, capturing all his ten sons. In a desperate attempt to save her brothers, Sign\u00fd begs Siggeirr to give them a slower death by being kept in stocks in the forest. Each night a huge she-wolf, later revealed to be Siggeirr\u2019s enchantress mother, eats one of the broth- ers. Sign\u00fd saves Sigmundr by sending a trusted man to smear honey over his face and into his mouth. The wolf\u2019s interest in the honey enables Sigmundr to destroy her, allowing her own strength to pull her tongue out before she flees to her death. The saga continues with Sign\u00fd\u2019s two sons and the failure of each of them to survive the first stage of training with their uncle Sigmundr, who now lives as an outlaw in the woods. Sign\u00fd breaks the pattern by conceiving a third son by her own brother, 11 As recorded by Curtis, Salishan Tribes of the Coast, 159\u201361. 12 The manuscript is Copenhagen, Kongelige Bibliothek, Ny kgl. Saml. MS. 1824 b 4o, briefly described in V\u01eblsunga saga, ed. and trans. Grimstad, 68\u201369, with a fuller account (in Danish) in V\u00f6lsunga saga, ed. Olsen. The Old Norse text is edited with a facing-page English translation by Finch, Saga of the Volsungs; a more recent translation is Byock, Saga of the Volsungs.","Chapter 11 Heroic Legend: Sigmundr F\u00e1fnisbani in the Court of King Cnut 241 unbeknownst to him. The boy, named Sinfj\u01ebtli, grows up in the care of Sigmundr. Neither knows his kinship with the other, but he and Sinfj\u01ebtli have a wild time as outlaws together, including a period as werewolves, before finally taking revenge on Siggeirr by murdering his and Sign\u00fd\u2019s children and setting fire to their hall. Sign\u00fd, having accomplished vengeance for her father, stays behind to burn with her husband, while Sigmundr and Sinfj\u01ebtli leave Gautland for further adventures. As the saga tells it, this dark episode in Gautland is a prelude to Sigmundr\u2019s mar- riage to Borghildr, with whom he begets Helgi, and then to Hj\u01ebrdis, mother of his third son, Sigur\u00f0r, who is the hero the saga has been waiting for. Sigur\u00f0r goes on to slay the dragon F\u00e1fnir and take his treasure, falling thereafter in love with Bryn- hildr, marrying Gu\u00f0r\u00fan, and initiating some more famous, and equally appalling, storms of vengeance and cruelty. A number of ninth- to tenth-century representations of incidents from the V\u01ebl- sung cycle survive from northern England.13 These almost all show the defeat of the dragon F\u00e1fnir and sometimes the following story in which Sigur\u00f0r acquires the language of birds from tasting the dragon\u2019s blood. Had the Winchester stone shown F\u00e1fnir rather than the wolf, there would have been no challenging its iden- tification, for the dragon fight, also known in Saints\u2019 Lives, was appropriate to Christian communities.14 Today, moreover, it is accepted that the V\u01eblsungar as well as the dragon-slaying hero were regarded by Christians as historical figures, great heroes of the past who happened to have been pagan, rather than icons of pre-Christian religion.15 In the later Icelandic texts, Sigur\u00f0r is sometimes repre- sented as a noble heathen: he is, like Beowulf, constructed as a halfway-house be- tween fiercely pagan figures and true Christian heroes.16 Such applicability in Christian contexts is best shown by the Nunburnholme cross-shaft. This seems to have originally shown the Eucharist and later had a Si- gur\u00f0r scene carved on top, mostly obliterating the explicitly religious moment and demonstrating that \u201cthe tradition of a real or fictitious past could be meaningfully 13 The so-called Sigur\u00f0r-stones are frequently discussed. Probably the most authoritative (and cynical) account of which carvings should be accepted as depicting the legend, and which should not be, is in Margeson, \u201cV\u01eblsung Legend\u201d; a more recent consideration of the key ele- ments is in Stern, \u201cSigur\u00f0r F\u00e1fnisbani,\u201d 899\u2013900. The most recent full discussion is Kop\u00e1r, Gods and Settlers, 23\u201356. See also Lang, \u201cSigurd and Weland\u201d; D\u00fcwel, \u201cSigurd Representa- tions\u201d; Byock, \u201cSigur\u00f0r F\u00e1fnisbani\u201d; and Wilson, Vikings in the Isle of Man. 14 See, for instance, Bailey, England\u2019s Earliest Sculptors, 93. 15 As Biddle notes, \u201cit is the heroic and not the pagan which matters here\u201d (\u201cDanish Royal Burials,\u201d 216). 16 As discussed in detail by Rowe, \u201c\u2018Quid Sigvardus cum Christo?\u2019,\u201d esp. 172\u201385, with her findings summarized at 186\u201388.","242 Simon C. Thomson yoked to Christian ideas.\u201d17 There is no doubt that figures and narratives from pre- Christian mythology decorated Viking-Age churches in northern England, as they did in Scandinavian Christian contexts.18 All of these stone carvings are found in the Isle of Man and Northumbria, areas of Celtic or English Britain with strong Norse connections. Many are in the Scandinavian Ringerike style, and none show the rounded forms of the Winchester piece. Aside from the Winchester carving, all predate the Benedictine Reform of the later tenth century, which saw the English church move towards more regularity and orthodoxy. The northern stones are more closely related to Scandinavian carvings, which Birgit Sawyer suggests could have \u201canswered religious and social needs in a period of transition\u201d from one mythological system to another.19 They are, therefore, relatively easily explained as cultural interactions, part of the Viking Age realignment of Nordic tradition with Christian mythography. The Winchester fragment \u2013 showing a different incident, in a different place, and carved in a different style \u2013 seems to come from another world entirely: both the story it suggests and the style in which the story is told require explanation.20 The scene with the she-wolf does not seem to have been used in other extant stonework.21 That such an unusual scene has been found in one of England\u2019s old- est cathedrals has subjected the material evidence to almost as much pressure as the narrative identification, making it necessary to restate briefly some of the main findings. The site and context of discovery show that the carving must have been produced before 1093, when the Old Minster was demolished and the construction of the current cathedral began. There is no good reason why it could have been produced after 1066, in some sort of abortive restoration of Old Minster, to be dis- carded less than thirty years later. Nor can this find have been produced before ca. 980, given its location in the eastern extremity of Old Minster, which was not 17 See Bailey, Viking Age Sculpture, 125, followed by Thompson, Dying and Death, 167; see also Sawyer, Viking Age Rune-Stones, esp. 125\u201326. The Gosforth Cross and Gosforth Fishing Stone provide further examples of Eddic mythology being used in Christian contexts; the latter may even have been from a line of narrative sculpture like the Winchester carving (Bailey, Vi- king Age Sculpture, 128\u201332). 18 See, for instance, Stern, \u201cSigur\u00f0r F\u00e1fnisbani,\u201d 898. 19 Sawyer, Viking Age Rune-Stones, 124; see also 147 and 152. 20 Bailey emphasizes its Scandinavian attributes and finds the location in Winchester more surprising than its form, England\u2019s Earliest Sculptors, 96. See Yorke\u2019s discussion of the proba- ble importing of Scandinavian style under Cnut, Wessex in the Early Middle Ages, 143. 21 There are, however, some difficult-to-explain four-legged animals on hogbacks; a tenth- century example from Heysham in Lancashire has been interpreted as alluding to Sigmundr and the wolf. Kop\u00e1r dismisses this interpretation, without providing an alternative, in Gods and Settlers, 44\u201345, 48, 52. See Thompson, Dying and Death, 165.","Chapter 11 Heroic Legend: Sigmundr F\u00e1fnisbani in the Court of King Cnut 243 begun until after that year.22 Weathering shows that it was on display for some time before being discarded, dating its creation closer to 1000 than to 1066. De- spite older arguments against this (that the style of the carving means it cannot have been produced so early), the relative certainty of the archaeological evidence for its age has in turn moved the theoretical bounds of Romanesque, pushing the inception of proto-Romanesque style, with its \u201csolid round forms,\u201d back to an ear- lier time.23 It appears in this way that the carving was made under either King \u00c6thelred (978\u20131013 and 1014\u20131016) or King Cnut (1016\u20131035). There are two records of work on Winchester minsters under \u00c6thelred: improve- ments to Old Minster under \u00c6thelwold, described in Cantor Wulfstan\u2019s Vita Sancti \u00c6thelwoldi (ca. 996\u20131005),24 and improvements to the New Minster\u2019s tower.25 Nei- ther record refers to this work, while there are few indications that \u00c6thelred favored Old Minster.26 Although there are fewer sources for the bulk of Cnut\u2019s reign, it is clear that both he and Emma patronized Old Minster to at least some degree; their gifts to New Minster are all well known.27 Cnut is known to have pursued a policy of 22 The fullest review of the finding and the conclusions to be drawn from it are in Tweddle, Bid- dle, and Kj\u00f8lbye-Biddle, Corpus IV, 319.i\u2013ii. A wider discussion of the minsters at Winchester is in Biddle, \u201cWinchester: Development,\u201d 254\u201361; detailed comment on the carving and its relationship to Old Minster is in Biddle \u201cExcavations at Winchester 1965,\u201d 39\u201341, with specific notes on the general aspect of the Minster in \u201cExcavations at Winchester 1965,\u201d 51. 23 Zarnecki, Holt, and Holland, Romanesque Art, 151 (\u00a797; see also \u00a722); Biddle observes that this finding should influence our understanding of Romanesque art rather than defying the archaeolog- ical evidence, in Backhouse, Turner, and Webster, Golden Age of Anglo-Saxon Art, 135 (\u00a7140); Kop\u00e1r also points out the implications of the dating of the fragment as potentially changing our under- standing of the development of Romanesque in England, and on that basis seeks to reject the ar- chaeological evidence (Gods and Settlers, 50); Bailey accepts the archaeological dating and compromises by identifying the carving as an \u201canticipation, in its solid round forms, of Romanesque art\u201d (England\u2019s Earliest Sculptors, 96); see also his comments on the Rothbury Cross, \u201cAnglo-Saxon Art,\u201d 28. Biddle now sees \u201cnothing Romanesque about it at all\u201d (pers. corr. September 11, 2017). 24 Most recently edited by Lapidge and Winterbottom as Wulfstan of Winchester, Life of \u00c6thelwold. 25 Discussed by Quirk, \u201cWinchester New Minster.\u201d See also Biddle, Winchester in the Early Middle Ages, 315; Biddle \u201cExcavations at Winchester 1965,\u201d 41; Cramp, \u201cTradition and Innova- tion,\u201d 145; Dodwell, Anglo-Saxon Art, 122. 26 For example, S 889 and S 836 record gifts of land as a restoration and in return for a gold bracelet respectively, hardly indications of a close relationship. References to Anglo-Saxon charters are by Sawyer number as listed in Electronic Sawyer. 27 Gifts to Old Minster are recorded in S 970, S 972, S 976, in the Annals of Old Minster, and by Henry of Huntingdon. Compare, however, Yorke\u2019s comments in \u201cCnut and Winchester,\u201d in this volume, pp. 232\u201334, on the lack of certain evidence of Cnut\u2019s personal engagement with Old Min- ster, and indeed with Winchester more broadly, beyond the creation of a site of burial. See also Lyon, Constitutional and Legal History, 92; Yorke, Wessex in the Early Middle Ages, 143; Bolton, Empire of Cnut, 95; Townend, \u201cContextualising the Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pur,\u201d 168\u201372; Roffey and Lavelle,","244 Simon C. Thomson ostentatious gift-giving to promote his regime.28 His gift-giving also seems to have followed a pattern of imitating gifts given by earlier English kings; he consistently sought to show that he was part of the same tradition, effectively part of the same family.29 However unlikely it may seem that this frieze could have been displayed in Old Minster, it demonstrably was; its content is more likely to have been appreciated under a new king from Denmark, with his followers invested in the stories of their past, than under King \u00c6thelred.30 As Yorke points out in this volume, such a dating does not tie it to Cnut personally, since both Emma and Godwine, who were active patrons of Winchester, had Scandinavian retinues.31 And yet the sheer ostentation of the carving as it would have been seen at its original size, together with the possibil- ity that it was placed near the tombs of kings, makes a royal involvement rather more likely.32 While the moment and mindset of its origin cannot be established with the same degree of certainty as the story it represents, the strong balance of probability is that the stone was carved during Cnut\u2019s reign and with his knowledge. Sigmundr F\u00e1fnisbani in the Eleventh Century It is widely accepted that at some point Sigmundr occupied a more central position in the V\u01eblsung narrative than he does in the extant saga version.33 V\u01eblsunga saga \u201cWest Saxons and Danes,\u201d 25. The couple\u2019s most famous gift to New Minster was a great golden cross, shown on the first side of the community\u2019s Liber Vitae, now London, British Library, Stowe MS. 944. 28 The deliberately English identity of Cnut\u2019s court is widely commented on. See for instance Loyn, Governance, 81; Yorke, Wessex in the Early Middle Ages, 144\u201345; Bolton, Empire of Cnut, 69, 202; for his reliance on the English, see Lund, \u201cCnut\u2019s Danish Kingdom,\u201d 30; Lawson com- ments on the necessity of such Englishness, in Cnut: Danes in England, 122. 29 The strongest instance is the construction of a relationship with Edmund, described by Wil- liam of Malmesbury in chap. 184 of his Gesta Regum Anglorum, I, ed. Mynors, Thomson, and Winterbottom, and discussed in this volume by Yorke, pp. 224\u201325. See also Lawson, Cnut: Danes in England, 129, 135; Kennedy, \u201cCnut\u2019s Law Code,\u201d 70; Bolton, Empire of Cnut, 95; Thomson, \u201cConfiguring Stasis,\u201d esp. 188. Biddle, in Backhouse, Turner, and Webster, Golden Age, 133 (\u00a7140), followed by Bardi\u00e8s-Fronty, Celtes et Scandinaves, 67 (\u00a739), has suggested that the carving may have commemorated the marriage of Cnut and Emma, marking the union of his family with that of \u00c6thelred, Emma\u2019s first husband. 30 On the influx of Scandinavians and the cultural and linguistic impact, see Yorke, Wessex in the Early Middle Ages, 144\u201345; Townend, Language and History, 193; Roffey and Lavelle, \u201cWest Saxons and Danes,\u201d 18\u201323. 31 See Yorke in this volume, pp. 227\u201332. 32 See Yorke in this volume, pp. 225\u201326. 33 See, for example, Bailey, Viking Age Sculpture, 116; Byock, Saga of the Volsungs, 21.","Chapter 11 Heroic Legend: Sigmundr F\u00e1fnisbani in the Court of King Cnut 245 shows that by the thirteenth century Sigur\u00f0r had become the dominant hero at the expense of his (still heroic) father, Sigmundr, whose role was probably reduced. It is worth noting that Sigur\u00f0r\u2019s status as the primary figure in the later sequence may also be a later feature: it is plausible that the relationship between Sigmundr\u2019s son and Brynhildr was opportunistically deployed to connect an ancient V\u01eblsung narra- tive with the Brynhildr cycle, which ultimately resulted in Sigur\u00f0r taking the central role in both, diminishing the prowess of his father and of his wife.34 It is not clear when Sigmundr\u2019s status started to fade. In Sigur\u00f0ardr\u00e1pa (Eulogy on Sigur\u00f0r), which was probably composed in tenth-century Norway, perhaps in ca. 960, for Earl Sigur\u00f0r H\u00e1konarson of Hla\u00f0ir, the skald Korm\u00e1kr \u01eagmundarson refers to the sword Gramr. The saga has Sigmundr using Gramr, a gift from \u00d3\u00f0inn, before pass- ing it on to Sigur\u00f0r. That Gramr is invoked in a text composed for a Sigur\u00f0r implies that tenth-century Norway had Sigur\u00f0r Sigmundsson at least wielding such a sword, and this makes it possible that he could have become the primary hero by that early date. A contrary implication comes from the flyting between Gu\u00f0mundr and Sinfj\u01ebtli in Helgakvi\u00f0a Hundingsbana I (first lay of Helgi the Slayer of Hun- dingr), in which Gu\u00f0mundr, a coast watchman, taunts Sinfj\u01ebtli, Helgi\u2019s older half- brother and one of the invaders, with having been \u201cbr\u00fa\u00f0r Grana \u00e1 Br\u00e1velli\u201d (a mare for Grani on Br\u00e1v\u01ebllr plain).35 In the extant saga narrative, the stallion Grani is given to Sigur\u00f0r, who is not born until after the death of Sinfj\u01ebtli. Unless the poet lets Gu\u00f0mundr refer to Grani as a generic stallion for a n\u00ed\u00f0 (slander) of this kind, it is plausible that he worked with an earlier version of the legend in which Grani was owned by Sigmundr or Sinfj\u01ebtli rather than by Sigur\u00f0r. Whenever the shift from father to son occurred, echoes of the earlier dispo- sition are clearly visible. A stanza from Eir\u00edksm\u00e1l tells of the arrival of Eir\u00edkr Bl\u00f3\u00f0\u00f8x in Valh\u01ebll: Sigmundr ok Sinfj\u01ebtli, r\u00edsi\u00f0 snarliga ok gangi\u00f0 \u00ed g\u01ebgn grami. Inn \u00fe\u00fa bj\u00f3\u00f0, ef Eirekr s\u00e9i; hans es m\u00e9r n\u00fa v\u00e1n vitu\u00f0. 34 Andersson, in Legend of Brynhild, 80, argues that Brynhildr seems more likely to have been the original central figure and that \u201cwe may more easily imagine that Sigur\u00f0r\u2019s adventures were expanded because of a flattering association with such a powerful heroine.\u201d See also Byock, Vol- sungs, 21\u201322; and North, \u201cMetre and Meaning,\u201d 44. 35 Cited as Helgakvi\u00f0a Hundingsbana hin fyrri, stanza 42, in Edda, ed. Neckel, 136. The Poetic Edda was perhaps compiled in the twelfth century, but it is impossible to know how early its ele- ments were composed.","246 Simon C. Thomson [Sigmundr and Sinfj\u01ebtli, rise quickly and go to meet the prince. Invite (him) in, if it is Eir\u00edkr; it is he I am expecting now.]36 Whether or not this lay was commissioned in honor of Eir\u00edkr Bloodaxe after his death in Stainmoor in 954, it may be dated to the tenth century. As a mighty warrior in this poem, Eir\u00edkr is greeted by the greatest warriors \u00d3\u00f0inn can send him: Sigmundr and his first son Sinfj\u01ebtli, with Sigur\u00f0r not even mentioned.37 Similar and more specific evidence is provided by Beowulf, lines 874b\u2013902a.38 Here, Sigemund (the Old English cognate of Sigmundr) is found worthy of compari- son with Beowulf because he killed a dragon and was \u201cwreccena wide m\u00e6rost \/ ofer wer\u00feeode\u201d (\u201cthe exile most widely famed throughout all peoples,\u201d lines 898\u201399a). Again, no version of Sigur\u00f0r is mentioned, although \u2013 as in Eir\u00edksm\u00e1l \u2013 Fitela (the English counterpart of Sinfj\u01ebtli), a well-known companion of Sigemund, does ap- pear. Bertha Phillpotts, referring to a nineteenth-century discovery of tales from Tele- mark in which Sigmund fulfils the role of Sigurd, considers Sigmundr to have been the older dragon-slayer, as do the editors of Klaeber\u2019s \u201cBeowulf.\u201d39 Because in this poem it is Sigemund who kills a dragon, analogue to F\u00e1fnir, I have taken the liberty of referring to his Norse namesake, Sigmundr, as \u201cF\u00e1fnisbani\u201d in the title to this chapter. The poet\u2019s allusion to Sigemund seems to put the dragon-slaying before the time in which he and Fitela share many adventures in the outlaw style of Sigmundr and Sinfj\u01ebtli, who live as wolves in the forest. The werewolf episode is implicit in Sinfj\u01ebtli\u2019s name, which means \u201ccinder-fetlock\u201d \u2013 that is, \u201cwrist of grey hair,\u201d an allu- sion to wolfish looks;40 the name \u201cFitela,\u201d which appears to be of the same origin, may point to (a suppression of) lycanthropy in the Beowulfian tale. Beowulf\u2019s evi- dence makes it likely that this was just one element in the adventures of \u201cW\u00e6lses eafera\u201d (\u201cW\u00e6ls\u2019 offspring,\u201d line 897) \u2013 that is, the English version of a dragon- slaying Sigmundr and later V\u01eblsungar, in the legendary world. Regardless of the date of Beowulf\u2019s composition, the date of BL Cotton MS. Vitellius A.XV, the only 36 \u201cEir\u00edksm\u00e1l,\u201d ed. Fulk, 1010 (stanza 5). 37 Noted and discussed in this context by Byock, Saga of the Volsungs, 22. See also Phillpotts, The Elder Edda, 90\u201391; Klaeber\u2019s \u201cBeowulf,\u201d ed. Fulk, Bjork, and Niles, 168. 38 References to Beowulf are to Klaeber\u2019s \u201cBeowulf,\u201d ed. Fulk, Bjork, and Niles, by line number. 39 Phillpotts, The Elder Edda, 49\u201350, 161; Klaeber\u2019s \u201cBeowulf,\u201d ed. Fulk, Bjork and Niles, 167\u201368. 40 North, \u201cMetre and Meaning,\u201d 46\u201347. OE fitel-f\u014dt (cognate with Old Saxon fitelf\u00f4t) glosses \u201cpetilus\u201d (perhaps \u201cwhite-footed\u201d), for a horse\u2019s fetlock, in MS. Plantin-Moretus and BL, MS. Add. 32246: see DOE: https:\/\/tapor.library.utoronto.ca\/doe\/. The meaning here, as in the case of Sigemund\u2019s (son and) sister\u2019s son appears to indicate a wrist color at variance with the sur- rounding color.","Chapter 11 Heroic Legend: Sigmundr F\u00e1fnisbani in the Court of King Cnut 247 extant manuscript to contain the poem, falls most probably in the early eleventh century, in the same period as the carving of Winchester\u2019s narrative frieze.41 It is worth noting that if the eleventh-century Sigmundr was a dragon- slayer and the eleventh-century Sigur\u00f0r merely one of his sons who married a continental heroine, the proliferation of Viking Age carvings of the V\u01eblsung story discussed above may have been misnamed. What the nineteenth century would call Siegfried-stones and the thirteenth Sigur\u00f0r-stones, the eleventh cen- tury may well have assumed to be Sigmundr-stones.42 Sigmundr as an Ancestral Figure By the twelfth century, the reason for Cnut wanting to have Sigmundr\u2019s story deco- rating Old Minster would have been perfectly clear: he was a direct ancestor. The heroes of the V\u01eblsung cycle and indeed many other figures with shadowy histori- cal bases, such as Ragnarr lo\u00f0br\u00f3k, had long been brought into the historiographi- cal narrative to provide powerful ancestor figures for royal families. The Icelandic genealogical text Langfe\u00f0gatal has Cnut\u2019s historical great-grandfather, Gormr inn gamli (\u201cthe Old\u201d), also known as H\u01ebr\u00f0akn\u00fatr (Harthacnut), as the son of Sigur\u00f0r ormr-\u00ed-auga (\u201cSnake-in-the-eye\u201d).43 As shown in Table 11.1, this is a potent connec- tion: the latter Sigur\u00f0r was the son of Ragnarr lo\u00f0br\u00f3k and \u00c1slaug, herself the daughter of Sigur\u00f0r Sigmundsson and Brynhildr. In this way, Sigur\u00f0r ormr-\u00ed-auga provides Cnut\u2019s line with descent from both Ragnarr and the V\u01eblsungar. It is clear that Cnut and his family were engaged with the process of establish- ing genealogical connections. Both Cnut\u2019s father, Sveinn tj\u00faguskegg (\u201cForkbeard\u201d), and his grandfather, Haraldr bl\u00e1t\u01ebnn (\u201cBluetooth\u201d), marked their connection with Gormr \/ Har\u00f0akn\u00fatr, whom they regarded as the founder of their dynasty and after whom Cnut was probably named, on the great runestones erected at Jelling.44 41 There is an extensive literature on both poem and manuscript; for a full overview, and a discussion of the dating, see Thomson, Communal Creativity, 1\u20134, 30\u201332, 70\u201377; see also North\u2019s discussion in this volume, pp. 279\u2013281. 42 Thompson, Dying and Death, 163\u201364, notes this difficulty and decides to refer to all repre- sentations as Sigur\u00f0r \u201cfor the sake of simplicity.\u201d 43 Later genealogies (such as that in Ragnarssona \u00fe\u00e1ttr) separate these two figures, making Gormr the son of Harthacnut, while there is a probably more reliable twelfth-century version in Skj\u01ebldunga saga. Langfe\u00f0gatal is in Scriptores rerum Danicarum ed. Langebek, Suhm, Engel- stoft, and Werlauff, 1; it is more readily available and translated in Bruce, Scyld and Scef, 115\u201317. 44 See, for instance, Sawyer, Viking Age Rune-Stones, 147.","248 Simon C. Thomson Table 11.1: The twelfth-century connection between Cnut and Sigmundr. Cnut named his children Sveinn, Haraldr, and Harthacnut in turn,45 and it appears that there was an effort to establish his connection, through \u201cSkj\u01ebldr,\u201d with the Scyld whose place as the ancestor of West Saxon kings was long established in genealogy.46 The connection with the sons of Ragnarr Lo\u00f0br\u00f3k was certainly made in Cnut\u2019s lifetime.47 Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson celebrates Cnut\u2019s conquest of England by equating it with the execution in 867 of \u00c6lle of Northumbria by Ragnarr\u2019s sons, carried out in vengeance for \u00c6lle\u2019s cruel execution of their father in a snake-pit: Ok Ellu bak, at, l\u00e9t, hinns sat, \u00cdvarr ara, J\u00f3rvik skorit. [And \u00cdvarr, who resided at York, had \u00c6lla\u2019s back cut with an eagle.] Ok senn sonu sl\u00f3, hvern ok \u00fe\u00f3, A\u00f0alr\u00e1\u00f0s e\u00f0a \u00fat fl\u00e6m\u00f0i Kn\u00fatr. 45 Noted by Lawson, Cnut: Danes in England, 109. See also Townend, \u201cContextualising the Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pur,\u201d 177. 46 Frank, \u201cKing Cnut,\u201d esp. 111\u201313; see also Thomson, \u201cConfiguring Stasis,\u201d 186\u201388, and North in this volume, pp. 281, 290\u201393. On the performative and semi-official nature of skaldic verse, see also Carroll, \u201cConcepts of Power,\u201d 221. 47 Frank sees it as a fully established \u201cofficial party line\u201d by 1030, in \u201cKing Cnut,\u201d 112.","Chapter 11 Heroic Legend: Sigmundr F\u00e1fnisbani in the Court of King Cnut 249 [And Kn\u00fatr soon defeated or drove out the sons of \u00c6thelred, and indeed, each one.]48 Similarly, Hallvar\u00f0r h\u00e1reksblesi, in his Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pa, describes the England Cnut conquered as \u201c\u00e6ttleif\u00f0 Ellu\u201d (\u00c6lle\u2019s patrimony).49 That is, with both skalds Cnut\u2019s invasion is represented as equal to the historic defeat of \u00c6lle by those Scandina- vians who became known as Ragnarr\u2019s sons.50 The story of Ragnarr\u2019s death at \u00c6lle\u2019s hands justified his sons\u2019 invasion as a matter of family vengeance and, to some degree, the deposition of a tyrannical king. The verses cited above offer evidence of the use of this narrative in early eleventh-century England; it was probably an innovation of Cnut\u2019s reign.51 This could have been intended to give Cnut\u2019s subjects a parallel for his own activities: the portrayal of \u00c6thelred as in- competent and unjust is well-known;52 so too is the St. Brice\u2019s Day massacre of 1002, in which Cnut\u2019s aunt, Gunnhild the sister of Sveinn, may have been mur- dered.53 Clear in the skaldic eulogies is Cnut\u2019s self-representation as an invader with just cause who brings peace and order to an unstable England.54 Although Cnut, in this way, probably considered himself to be Ragnarr\u2019s de- scendant, it is less certain that he took Sigmundr for his ancestor.55 The key ques- tion lying beneath these tangled skeins is whether, in the eleventh century, \u00c1slaug was believed to have been both Ragnarr\u2019s wife and Sigur\u00f0r ormr-\u00ed-auga\u2019s mother. \u00c1slaug\u2019s story seems to have developed and spread in the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries. Her absence from Fagrskinna, a history of the kings of Norway dating from around 1225, suggests that she may have been unknown there, al- though it is possible that a story for her there was suppressed.56 It is not absolutely clear, but she seems likely to have been known to Saxo Grammaticus in Denmark 48 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pa,\u201d ed. Townend, 651\u201352 (stanzas 1\u20132). 49 \u201cHallvar\u00f0r h\u00e1reksblesi: Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pa,\u201d ed. Townend, 233 (stanza 3). 50 Whaley, in Poetry from the Kings\u2019 Sagas 1, 652, notes the \u201cframing\u201d of Cnut\u2019s conquest with \u00cdvarr\u2019s defeat of \u00c6lle in this verse. See North later in this volume, pp. 296\u201397. 51 McTurk, Studies in Ragnars saga, 228\u201334; Rowe, Vikings in the West, 179\u201380. I follow both, particularly Rowe, closely here. The relevant parts of most texts noted are included and trans- lated in Rowe, Vikings in the West. 52 Keynes, \u201cDeclining Reputation of \u00c6thelred\u201d; see, however, Dennis, \u201cImage Making,\u201d 46\u201348. 53 Williams, \u00c6thelred the Unready, 54. 54 Thomson, \u201cConfiguring Stasis.\u201d 55 Contrast with Rowe, in \u2018\u201cQuid Sigvardus cum Christo?\u2019,\u201d who finds that \u201cGenealogies men- tioning Sigur\u00f0r [Sigmundsson] . . . always had the option of including Ragnarr as well\u201d (182) and dates an interest in such ancestry to the late tenth century (188). 56 Rowe, in Vikings in the West, 197, argues that she is suppressed in this history. See also Larring- ton, in whose view the connection between the V\u01eblsungar and Ragnarr\u2019s family was made \u201cas early as a mid-thirteenth-century Norwegian context,\u201d in \u201cV\u00f6lsunga saga, Ragnars saga and Romance,\u201d 15.","250 Simon C. Thomson at around the same time.57 At any rate, the tradition of Skj\u01ebldunga saga shows that \u00c1slaug was known in connection with Sigmundr in Iceland in around 1200, per- haps as a consequence of an older association between them in the English Dane- law, whence P\u00e1ll J\u00f3nsson, the saga\u2019s likely compiler, is believed to have gathered much of his information.58 By 1230 she had become a key figure in Ragnars saga with a fairly complex narrative of her own.59 The basis of this was probably a story about some of Ragnarr\u2019s children having a magical mother: in the Gesta Norman- norum ducum (Deeds of the Norman Dukes), initiated by William of Jumi\u00e8ges in ca. 1060, Bj\u01ebrn Ragnarsson protects himself in battle using magic learned from his mother.60 His nickname, \u201ccostae ferreae\u201d (\u201cironsides\u201d; ON j\u00e1rns\u00ed\u00f0a) is reminiscent of Edmund Ironside, son of \u00c6thelred II, who earned his own soubriquet in a se- quence of battles against Cnut in 1015\u20131016; William\u2019s account may have followed a written Anglo-Scandinavian source.61 What matters here, however, is that there is nothing to make this anonymous woman into \u00c1slaug, valkyrie daughter of Bryn- hildr, until rather later.62 Her absence from Langfe\u00f0gatal implies that she was not known to Pall J\u00f3nsson\u2019s great-grandfather, S\u00e6mundr Sigf\u00fasson, when he pro- duced that text based on English sources in the twelfth century. It is plausible that the development of \u00c1slaug, like that of \u00c6lle\u2019s story, took place during Cnut\u2019s reign, but this cannot be demonstrated conclusively.63 It is not generally safe to 57 McTurk in Studies in Ragnars saga lo\u00f0br\u00f3kar, 146\u201347, notes her absence from Saxo\u2019s account in the Gesta Danorum. Rowe shows that her story is echoed so frequently that Saxo must have known of and sought to suppress her, perhaps because of her pagan connotations, Vikings in the West, 103\u20135. Compare her suggestion, in Vikings in the West, 189\u201390, that Ragnarr is suppressed and Sigur\u00f0r promoted in F\u00f3stbr\u0153\u00f0ra saga\u2019s version of the genealogy, because Ragnarr was known as a monstrous pirate and Sigur\u00f0r the dragon-slayer had semi-Christian associations. 58 P\u00e1ll J\u00f3nsson studied in England, probably in the school of Lincoln Cathedral, in 1175\u20131180: see Bjarni Gu\u00f0nason, \u201cIcelandic Sources of Saxo Grammaticus,\u201d 89, and Danakonunga S\u01ebgur, ed. Bjarni Gu\u00f0nason, xvi\u2013xvii. 59 She is a disguised noble girl kept by peasant parents and known as Kr\u00e1ka, who goes on to impress Ragnarr\u2019s men with her beauty and him with her intelligence. A mother to his best- known sons, she manages to stave off the threat of being replaced by a new wife. As step- mother to his first two sons, she leads the vengeance for their deaths. As valkyrie, she provides protection for her sons, advises Ragnarr against his fatal voyage, and makes him a magic shirt to protect him from snake venom. Larrington, in \u201c\u00de\u00f3ra and \u00c1slaug,\u201d 66, agrees with Bjarni Gu\u00f0nason that she is the central figure in the narrative. 60 Rowe, Vikings in the West, 66\u201367; see also McTurk, Studies in Ragnars saga, 40. 61 Van Houts, \u201cScandinavian Influences,\u201d 114, 117\u201318. 62 Rowe dates her full role to the twelfth century, Vikings in the West, 67; van Houts assumes \u00c1slaug to have been a part of the eleventh-century narrative, in \u201cScandinavian Influences,\u201d 116. 63 For the similarities between the elaboration of the \u00c6lle and \u00c1slaug narratives, see McTurk, Studies in Ragnars saga, 234\u201335; see also 175\u201382.","Chapter 11 Heroic Legend: Sigmundr F\u00e1fnisbani in the Court of King Cnut 251 argue ex silentio, but the fact that \u00c1slaug is mentioned neither in S\u00e6mundr\u2019s gene- alogy, nor in the skaldic verse produced as part of Cnut\u2019s dynastic program, makes it, in my view, unlikely that her significance was recognized at Cnut\u2019s court. This means that, although the connection was theoretically available in stories that cir- culated at the time and although Cnut\u2019s court was actively developing his genea- logical connections, it is not likely that he saw Sigmundr as a direct ancestor.64 Heroic Narrative at Cnut\u2019s Court The lack of an ancestral connection does not, however, make the construction of the narrative frieze any less interesting. Indeed, it makes the choice to use this story in this place more surprising and intriguing. Rather than reflecting Cnut\u2019s construction of his authority and royal heritage, the Sigmundr stone draws our attention to the cultural climate at his court in a more general way. Several differ- ent cultural productions actively celebrate Cnut\u2019s behavior as analogous to the achievements of the heroes of the past, just as Beowulf\u2019s monster-slaying is com- pared with Sigemund\u2019s in the eponymous epic. Along with those discussed above are Hallvar\u00f0r h\u00e1reksblesi\u2019s verses that invoke numerous figures from pre- Christian myth, including a remarkable image of Cnut as Freyr, the old god who \u201chefr \u00ferungit und sik N\u00f3regi\u201d (has forced Norway under him).65 As Roberta Frank has shown, the same poet finds ways to use a \u201cstartling blend\u201d of tradi- tional skaldic forms as part of celebrating Cnut\u2019s Christianity, such as describing God as \u201cvaldr munka\u201d (master ruler of monks).66 Taken together, the skaldic texts, the Winchester carving, the genealogical activity, and the revisions to the story of \u00cdvarr Ragnarsson and his brothers all show an interest in reviving and renewing heroic and semi-historical narrative at Cnut\u2019s court.67 As far as may be established, this does not appear to have been the cultural climate in England before Cnut\u2019s arrival. Leonard Neidorf has argued, primarily on the basis of onomastic data, that there was a decline in interest in pre-Christian 64 Contrast with Biddle, in \u201cDanish Royal Burials,\u201d 216, who makes the most recent restate- ment of the thesis that the stone was intended to invoke dynastic ties. 65 \u201cHallvar\u00f0r h\u00e1reksblesi: Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pur,\u201d ed. Townend, 237 (stanza 6, in prose word order). 66 \u201cHallvar\u00f0r h\u00e1reksblesi: Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pur,\u201d ed. Townend, 238 (stanza 7). On the use of Christian imagery see Frank, \u201cKing Cnut,\u201d whom I follow closely here. Quotation is from 121; see also 116\u201317 and 124. 67 Bardi\u00e8s-Fronty, in Celtes et Scandinaves, 67 (\u00a739), notes that, if Biddle\u2019s interpretation holds, it implies the existence of a \u201cgrand cycle po\u00e9tique\u201d on Sigmundr\u2019s story circulating in England in this period.","252 Simon C. Thomson narrative from the ninth century onwards.68 It is, then, conceivable that Cnut\u2019s reign saw a renaissance of sorts in northern culture. Bailey, indeed, sees the sculpture alone as offering evidence of a possible \u201ctemporary ascendance of \u2018Scandinavian\u2019 tastes in southern England at the time of Cnut.\u201d69 This even pro- vides a conceivable context for the interest in reproducing Beowulf, a poem which Neidorf and others have sought to demonstrate as old and strange by the time of its only extant copy.70 It would have been entirely logical for Cnut to have demonstrated an interest in legendary heroes as part of both his Danish and English lordship for propaganda purposes; the placing of the carving would have been close to the tombs intended for himself and his family.71 What are usu- ally (probably anachronistically) called Sigur\u00f0r carvings are frequently associ- ated with burials, and this frieze may have been deliberately located close to, or even around, the royal tombs at Old Minster; certainly it provides a heroic model fit for emulation by both former marauders and civilized noblemen.72 We are indeed fortunate that the fragment which survived in Winchester is from this specific moment in Sigmundr\u2019s story. Had it simply shown an interac- tion between humans, it could have been entirely opaque; had it shown a dragon fight, this would surely have been recorded as Sigur\u00f0r\u2019s fight with F\u00e1f- nir. If the evidence of this single stone is treated with the circumspection it calls for, we must acknowledge that the narrative frieze around Winchester Old Minster probably depicted not only a she-wolf having her tongue torn out, but also a dragon fight, two werewolves, a hero gaining wisdom from birds, and scenes of incest, kin-slaying, and infanticide. Even if this frieze, in its original form, featured only some of the less disturbing elements, it is unlikely that 68 Neidorf, \u201cGermanic Legend,\u201d 53\u201356. See also Chetwood, \u201cRe-Evaluating English Personal Naming,\u201d 544\u201346, who shows that the same evidence of a decrease in name variation, in an increasingly rigid system, is in line with contemporary shifts across Europe in naming pat- terns: a result of changing social conditions. 69 Bailey, England\u2019s Earliest Sculptors, 96. On the presence of Scandinavian taste under Cnut and in Wessex more broadly, see also Yorke, Wessex in the Early Middle Ages, 143; Townend, Language and History, 193; Townend, \u201cContextualising the Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pur,\u201d esp. 171\u201372 and 175; Roffey and Lavelle, \u201cWest Saxons and Danes,\u201d 18\u201323. 70 Most comprehensively in Transmission of \u201cBeowulf\u201d. 71 Rowe thinks that \u201cinterest in Sigur\u00f0r as an ancestor may date from as early as the second half of the tenth century\u201d (\u2018\u201cQuid Sigvardus cum Christo?\u2019,\u201d 188). On the significance of Old Minster and Cnut\u2019s use of burials see Yorke in this volume, p. 223; Marafioti, The King\u2019s Body, 98, 112. 72 Biddle, \u201cDanish Royal Burials,\u201d 216\u201317; Kop\u00e1r, Gods and Settlers, 49; Stern, \u201cSigur\u00f0r F\u00e1f- nisbani,\u201d 904; Rowe, \u2018\u201cQuid Sigvardus cum Christo?\u2019,\u201d 169; Bailey, Viking Age Sculpture, 123; and 92\u201393 and 96 for the heroic ideals of Sigmundr and sons.","Chapter 11 Heroic Legend: Sigmundr F\u00e1fnisbani in the Court of King Cnut 253 these were absent from the minds of those who viewed it. The lack of any dy- nastic associations between the story and Cnut and his family makes the carv- ing of the legend, and the stories around that, in such a site more, not less, extraordinary. It reminds us that pre-Christian narrative does not necessarily indicate un-Christian thought, and it suggests that a Romanesque narrative frieze probably prompted sophisticated readings, with multiple meanings si- multaneously present but held in shape by a single narrative, as in the case of Viking Age cross shafts, or indeed Beowulf itself.73 The Sigmundr stone offers us a rich, honey-sweet flavour of the complicatedly convergent, multimedial, and multicultural storytelling at the heart of Cnut\u2019s empire. 73 See also Bailey, \u201cAnglo-Saxon Art.\u201d","","Russell Poole Chapter 12 An Icelander in Cnut\u2019s Court: The Case of Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson One skald amongst those who composed poetry about Cnut, namely Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0- arson, furnishes a notable exception to the heathen style which, in Richard North\u2019s view in the next chapter, characterizes most of the skalds in this volume.1 For some of Sigvatr\u2019s output this characterization is admittedly justified, so long as we re- word to \u201cthe macho swagger of Christendom.\u201d His Nesjav\u00edsur (\u201cVerses about [the Battle of] Nesjar \u2018Headlands\u2019\u201d) is an example. In this chapter, nonetheless, it is my intention to point out Christian elements within the Sigvatr corpus that suggest the impress of a more morally inflected discourse. My focus will be on Sigvatr\u2019s role as a king\u2019s agent and intermediary between Cnut and Cnut\u2019s great rival, \u00d3l\u00e1fr Haralds- son of Norway. I will try to show that Sigvatr acted as a medium in the vernacular communication to a Norwegian audience of Christian precepts with proximate ori- gins in the circles of \u00c6thelred and Cnut. That he performed these roles with some degree of independence is indicated by his intermittent censure of both \u00d3l\u00e1fr and Cnut, the latter in particular. The verses I will discuss are excerpted from Vestrfar- arv\u00edsur (Verses on a Journey to the West), Nesjav\u00edsur, the postulated Flokkr about Erlingr Skj\u00e1lgsson, and his lausav\u00edsur (free-standing individual verses). Career of Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson lived and worked in the first half of the eleventh century, and thus in the Late Viking Period.2 With more than 160 stanzas and half-stanzas, his oeuvre is the most fully attested of all the skalds.3 It is remarkably diverse, encom- passing different kinds of encomia not only on King \u00d3l\u00e1fr Haraldsson,4 but also on King Cnut (Kn\u00fatr) Sveinsson5 and the Norwegian nobleman Erlingr Skj\u00e1lgsson.6 1 See North in this volume, \u201cBehold the Front Page,\u201d p. 280. 2 Jesch, \u201cSome Viking Weapons,\u201d 242. 3 Poole, \u201cSighvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson,\u201d 580. 4 V\u00edkingav\u00edsur \u201cVerses about Viking Voyages,\u201d Nesjav\u00edsur \u201cVerses about [the Battle of] Nesjar \u2018Headlands,\u2019\u201d and Erfidr\u00e1pa \u00d3l\u00e1fs helga \u201cMemorial Eulogy for \u00d3l\u00e1fr inn helgi \u2018St. \u00d3l\u00e1fr\u2019.\u201d 5 Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pa \u201cEulogy on Kn\u00fatr.\u201d 6 Poem about Erlingr Skj\u00e1lgsson, Flokkr [informal stanza sequence] about Erlingr Skj\u00e1lgsson. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1515\/9781501513336-013","256 Russell Poole Where Cnut is concerned, the caveat has to be entered that Sigvatr\u2019s principal at- tested poem about this king, Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pa (Eulogy on Kn\u00fatr), is difficult to date and may have been composed after the king\u2019s death.7 Other partially extant works in- clude Sigvatr\u2019s poem of counsel to his godson King Magn\u00fas inn g\u00f3\u00f0i (\u201cthe Good\u201d) \u00d3l\u00e1fsson8 and poems on the Norwegian pretender Tryggvi \u00d3l\u00e1fsson9 and on \u00d3l\u00e1fr Haraldsson\u2019s widow, \u00c1str\u00ed\u00f0r \u00d3l\u00e1fsd\u00f3ttir.10 Sigvatr is also credited with having com- posed for the Swedish king \u01eanundr Jakob \u00d3l\u00e1fsson and the Norwegian chieftain \u00cdvarr inn hv\u00edti (\u201cthe White\u201d), but in these cases there is no surviving text to corrob- orate the testimony of Sk\u00e1ldatal (Enumeration of Poets). Several of Sigvatr\u2019s poems encompass both travelogue and political commentary (Vestrfararv\u00edsur and Austr- fararv\u00edsur [Verses on a Journey to the East]); the latter genre is also well repre- sented in Bers\u01ebglisv\u00edsur and his lausav\u00edsur.11 Although no saga centering on Sigvatr can be shown to have existed, his ca- reer is hinted at by numerous episodes in the various redactions of \u00d3l\u00e1fs saga helga.12 According to these in general unreliable sources, Sigvatr was brought up by his foster-father, a certain \u00deorkell, at Apavatn in south-west Iceland, and first sailed to Ni\u00f0ar\u00f3s (now Trondheim) in Norway as a late adolescent or young adult. Here he is said to have met his father \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0r Sigvaldask\u00e1ld, a poet (as implied by his nickname, \u201cSigvaldi\u2019s poet\u201d) whose primary attested affiliations were with \u00deorkell inn h\u00e1vi (\u201cthe Tall\u201d).13 Sigvatr joined \u00d3l\u00e1fr\u2019s retinue in advance of the lat- ter\u2019s campaign for dominance in Norway and commemorated it in Nesjav\u00edsur, which he composed as a participant. Norway was his base from then onwards and there is no evidence that he ever returned to Iceland.14 Consistent with his affiliation with \u00d3l\u00e1fr, both his own poetry and the prose narratives emphasize his solidarity with the missionary king\u2019s Christianity. Tradi- tion has it that he was instrumental in the naming of King \u00d3l\u00e1fr\u2019s son as Magn\u00fas, reminiscent of Karolus Magnus (i.e., Charlemagne). Tradition also has it that in return, as testified to in his lausav\u00edsa 19, the king sponsored Sigvatr\u2019s daughter T\u00f3fa at baptism.15 A pilgrimage to Rome (1029\u20131030) precluded, as he states in 7 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pa,\u201d ed. Townend, 650\u201351; see also Jesch, \u201cSkaldic verse in Scandinavian England,\u201d 318, and North in this volume, p. 291. 8 Bers\u01ebglisv\u00edsur \u201cPlain-Speaking Verses.\u201d 9 Tryggvaflokkr \u201cFlokkr about Tryggvi.\u201d 10 Poem about Queen \u00c1str\u00ed\u00f0r. 11 Jesch, \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson, Biography,\u201d 532 and references there given. 12 Poole, \u201cSighvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson,\u201d 580. 13 On Thorkell, see also Bolton in this volume, pp. 476\u201381. 14 Jesch, \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson, Biography,\u201d 532. 15 Poole, \u201cSighvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson,\u201d 580.","Chapter 12 An Icelander in Cnut\u2019s Court: The Case of Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson 257 his verses, his participation in the king\u2019s final and fatal battle.16 According to the anecdote in which his lausav\u00edsa 11 is preserved, Sigvatr died on Selja, an island in north-western Norway traditionally associated with the earliest incur- sions of Christianity into Norway, and was buried at Kristskirkja (Kristkirken) in Ni\u00f0ar\u00f3s, the same church to which \u00d3l\u00e1fr\u2019s earthly remains were translated.17 Sigvatr is said to have held the high rank of stallari under \u00d3l\u00e1fr.18 Unfortu- nately, the functions of this office in early eleventh-century Norway remain ob- scure,19 but the evidence internal to Sigvatr\u2019s own poetry suggests that at least in his case it incorporated a role as king\u2019s agent and emissary. For the part he played in this capacity as an intermediary between \u00d3l\u00e1fr and Cnut, the poem Ves- trfararv\u00edsur is our crucial source. This fragmentary and sparsely attested work narrates a diplomatic embassy made by the poet and a colleague on behalf of \u00d3l\u00e1fr to Cnut, probably in the mid-1020s, in the context of Cnut\u2019s attempt to sub- vert followers of \u00d3l\u00e1fr and thus support Cnut\u2019s nephew, the Norwegian earl H\u00e1kon Eir\u00edksson.20 The authenticity of the title Vestrfararv\u00edsur, presupposing a journey to see Cnut in England rather than in Denmark, is assumed by all schol- ars. England is also the destination stated in \u00d3l\u00e1fs saga helga and Heimskringla, in a passage to be discussed presently. The specific location within England is not specified in the few stanzas extant, although the available evidence for Cnut\u2019s English residences suggests London, Canterbury, or Winchester as the ob- vious possible locales for the visit.21 The embassy could also, however, have oc- curred elsewhere in England at one of Cnut\u2019s manors, for instance Nassington in Northamptonshire, perhaps especially if discreet diplomacy was required. Strangely, it seems the one place specified in Vestrfararv\u00edsur is not in Eng- land but in Normandy, namely Rouen: Bergr, h\u01ebfum minnzk, hv\u00e9, margan morgun, R\u00fa\u00f0u borgar b\u01ebr\u00f0 l\u00e9tk \u00ed f\u01ebr fyr\u00f0a fest vi\u00f0 arm inn vestra.22 16 Poole, \u201cSighvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson,\u201d 580. 17 Jesch, \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson, Biography,\u201d 532. 18 Poole, \u201cSighvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson,\u201d 580. 19 Poulsen, Vogt, and J\u00f3n Vi\u00f0ar Sigur\u00f0sson, Nordic Elites, 224. 20 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Vestrfararv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Jesch, 615\u201316. 21 Winchester seems less likely than London or Canterbury at this time: see Yorke in this vol- ume, p. 217. 22 Skjaldedigtning, ed. Finnur J\u00f3nsson, B.I, 226; Heimskringla II, ed. Bjarni A\u00f0albjarnarson, 271 (chap. 146); J\u00f3n Skaptason, \u201cMaterial for an Edition,\u201d 104, 247.","258 Russell Poole [Bergr, we have remembered many a morning how I caused the stem to be moored to the western rampart of Rouen\u2019s fortifications in the company of men.]23 The reference here to Rouen is unmistakable, but before we can investigate its significance within a poem about an embassy to England, we have to take ac- count of a difficulty in the interpretation of the lines quoted above. I have cited them as construed by Finnur J\u00f3nsson (an edition followed by a majority of other scholars). To this traditional interpretation Judith Jesch, in her recent edition for Skaldic Poetry, objects that it \u201cleaves the conj[unction] hv\u00e9 \u2018how\u2019 separated from the clause it introduces.\u201d24 This syntactic feature is marked editorially in the text cited above by the commas on either side of the words \u201cmargan morgun.\u201d Jesch removes the commas and interprets as follows: \u201cBergr, we have remembered how, many a morning, I caused the stem to be moored to the western rampart of Rouen\u2019s fortifications in the company of men.\u201d25 Jesch\u2019s interpretation therefore presupposes that Sigvatr and Bergr have paid numerous visits to Rouen, evi- dently mooring their ship each time. There is otherwise no evidence, however, for multiple visits. It seems preferable to construe \u201ch\u01ebfum minnzk margan mor- gun\u201d as a single verb phrase (verb plus adverbial phrase) despite the intercala- tion of the relative conjunction hv\u00e9, which in prose usage would be expected to stand at the head of the dependent clause \u201cb\u01ebr\u00f0 l\u00e9tk fest.\u201d Contrary to Jesch, there is nothing objectionable about this use of hv\u00e9. Although the separation of a conjunction from the clause it introduces might seem radical, it is not without parallel in Sigvatr\u2019s work26 and more generally in the skaldic corpus.27 A second complication is that \u00d3l\u00e1fs saga helga and Heimskringla, within which the stanzas of the poem are preserved in an intercalated form, state that Sigvatr and Bergr had been in Rouen on a \u201ckaupfer\u00f0\u201d (trading voyage) the pre- vious summer.28 As Heimskringla has it, and \u00d3l\u00e1fs saga helga has essentially the same account, \u201cSigvatr sk\u00e1ld kom \u00feat sumar til Englands vestan \u00f3r R\u00fa\u00f0u af Vallandi ok s\u00e1 ma\u00f0r me\u00f0 honum, er Bergr h\u00e9t. \u00deeir h\u01ebf\u00f0u \u00feangat farit kaupfer\u00f0 it fyrra sumar\u201d (Sigvatr skald came west that summer from Rouen in France to England and that man with him, who was called Bergr. They had made a trad- ing voyage there the preceding summer).29 This statement about the trading 23 My translation, modifying Jesch, in \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Vestrfararv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Jesch, 617. Subsequent translations will be my own, unless stated. 24 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Vestrfararv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Jesch, 617. 25 Text and translation are from \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Vestrfararv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Jesch, 617. 26 See also \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Lausav\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Fulk, 722 (v. 18, line 1), to be cited below. 27 For a partial parallel see \u201cEinarr sk\u00e1laglamm Helgason: Vellekla,\u201d ed. Marold, 292\u201393 (v. 8 line 1). 28 Heimskringla II, ed. Bjarni A\u00f0albjarnarson, 271 (chap. 146). 29 Heimskringla II, ed. Bjarni A\u00f0albjarnarson, 271 (chap. 146).","Chapter 12 An Icelander in Cnut\u2019s Court: The Case of Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson 259 voyage is not corroborated by any other source. While it might be historically based, it might also be a purely ad hoc explanation of the verse on the part of the redactor, arising from the reputation of Rouen as a trading centre.30 This reputation, already considerable by the beginning of the eleventh century,31 had greatly increased by the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries, when Heim- skringla and its antecedent synoptic histories were being compiled. My conclusion is that, despite the interpretations discussed above, Sigvatr and Bergr made just the one visit to Rouen, performed as part of the itinerary of their embassy to Cnut, and it proved memorable for them for some reason. The readiest inference from their landfall at Rouen being so memorable is that their visit was marked by some significant step or development in the diplomatic mission recorded in Vestrfararv\u00edsur. What could that have been? We can start by considering the possible date of the mission. Vestrfararv\u00edsur is difficult to date, although the direct address to King \u00d3l\u00e1fr, who died in 1030, in verses 6 and 8 presupposes that the poem was delivered to him in his life- time. Finnur J\u00f3nsson suggests 1025\u20131026,32 Jesch ca. 1027.33 Following the chro- nology implicit in \u00d3l\u00e1fs saga helga and Heimskringla, Jesch proposes that the visit itself occurred in about 1024.34 The verse singles out new defensive works on the river for mention, as if to signal the city\u2019s strategic importance and status as a power base.35 Certainly from well before this time the city had become an accepted venue for diplomacy. In 990\u2013991 a papal envoy on a mission to recon- cile \u00c6thelred II and Richard I, the third duke of Normandy, was escorted to Rouen by English officials on the last stage of his itinerary.36 In 1003, according to William of Jumi\u00e8ges, Sveinn tj\u00faguskegg (\u201cForkbeard\u201d) visited Richard I\u2019s successor Richard II in Rouen to form a pact of mutual assistance.37 Part of the city\u2019s importance came from its status as a seat of an archbishop. Report has it that the Norman founder Rollo was baptized there in 912.38 Richard I instigated an enlargement of the cathedral at the end of the tenth century, and his son Robert, brother of Richard II, reigned as Archbishop of Rouen from 989 to 1037; indeed, it is argued that the city\u2019s transformation into a center of political, 30 For comparable examples, see Fulk, \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson, Austrfararv\u00edsur.\u201d 31 Stenton, Anglo-Saxon England, 540. 32 Skjaldedigtning, ed. Finnur J\u00f3nsson, B.I, 226. 33 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Vestrfararv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Jesch, 616. 34 Jesch, Ships and Men, 86. 35 Jesch, in Ships and Men and \u201cVikings on the European Continent,\u201d discusses these works. 36 Stenton, Anglo-Saxon England, 376. 37 Jesch, Ships and Men, 85. 38 Haskins, Normans in European History, 45.","260 Russell Poole cultural, and religious significance around the turn of the first millennium was achieved during and as a direct result of Robert\u2019s lengthy episcopate.39 In an- other noteworthy baptism, William of Jumi\u00e8ges states that \u00d3l\u00e1fr Haraldsson, along with a number of his following, underwent this culminating entr\u00e9e into Christianity in Rouen, overseen by Archbishop Robert himself, just before the Norwegian leader\u2019s return to claim the throne of Norway,40 although an alter- native account places his baptism in England.41 Robert advised three genera- tions of dukes \u2013 Richard I, Richard II, and the brothers Richard III and Robert the Magnificent.42 His authority was also recognized by Queen Emma, his sister and the wife of Cnut, as signalled by the gift she made him of an illuminated psalter of English origin.43 These considerations, put together, raise the possibility that the visit of Sig- vatr and Bergr to Rouen was undertaken in order to secure diplomatic support at the highest level for their embassy to Cnut in England, relying on the influ- ence exerted by Emma and her family. Embattled in Norway by Cnut\u2019s agents and recalcitrant members of the elite, \u00d3l\u00e1fr Haraldsson would have needed all the backing of that kind that could be mustered. The Lexical Impress on Sigvatr\u2019s Poetic Corpus from Contacts outside Scandinavia Another indication of Sigvatr\u2019s role as an intermediary or bridge person lies in the marked incidence of foreign words in the Sigvatr corpus. Most of these lexical features have been canvassed in previous scholarship and can just be briefly noted here. A number of them, perhaps the majority by a small margin, are Anglo-Saxonisms.44 Nesjav\u00edsur verse 2 contains the earliest attestation of the in- stitutional word \u201chir\u00f0\u201d (war-band), derived from Old English h\u012bred (household, band of retainers)45 and most probably brought to Norway by \u00d3l\u00e1fr.46 Sigvatr 39 Allen, \u201c\u2018Praesul praecipue, atque venerande.\u2019\u201d 40 Johnsen, Olav Haraldssons ungdom, 20; see also Jesch, Ships and Men, 86. 41 Downham, Viking Kings, 133, n. 159. 42 Van Houts, The Normans in Europe, 57. 43 Van Houts, \u201cNormandy\u2019s View of the Anglo-Saxon Past,\u201d 129. 44 For discussion of these and other possible instances, see Frank, \u201cViking Atrocity and Skaldic Verse,\u201d 339; Hofmann, Nordisch-englische Lehnbeziehungen, 93; Poole, \u201cSkaldic Verse and Anglo-Saxon History,\u201d 268; Poole, \u201cCrossing the Language Divide,\u201d 593, 596\u201397, 600\u2013601. 45 De Vries, Altnordisches etymologisches W\u00f6rterbuch, 228\u201329. 46 Hofmann, Nordisch-englische Lehnbeziehungen, 57, 83.","Chapter 12 An Icelander in Cnut\u2019s Court: The Case of Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson 261 uses it again in his lausav\u00edsa 15. Similar in Nesjav\u00edsur verse 2 may be the case of \u201c\u00fej\u00f3\u00f0konungs\u201d (of the nation\u2019s king); although this word occurs in purportedly earlier skaldic poetry, Sigvatr\u2019s usage, seen also in Erfidr\u00e1pa \u00d3l\u00e1fs helga (Memo- rial Eulogy for \u00d3l\u00e1fr inn helgi, \u201cSt. \u00d3l\u00e1fr\u201d) verse 20, is likely to have been rein- forced by Old English \u201c\u00fe\u0113odcyning.\u201d47 Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pa contains several pointers to English influence. The circumlocution \u201cDana hl\u00edfskj\u01ebldr\u201d (protective shield of the Danes)48 is of a type that occurs frequently in Old English but not in Old Norse- Icelandic.49 The sense of \u201cmeta\u201d (measure [one\u2019s way]), as a variation on ordi- nary words equating to \u201cgo,\u201d50 is characteristic of Old English poetry but does not otherwise occur in Old Norse-Icelandic.51 Old Norse-Icelandic \u201csl\u00e1\u201d in the sense \u201ckill, slay\u201d52 may reflect semantic influence from cognate Old English sl\u0113an.53 In lausav\u00edsa 16 the religious term \u201chelv\u00edti\u201d (hell torment, or simply hell) is clearly influenced by Old English helle w\u012bte, of the same meaning.54 In Erfi- dr\u00e1pa \u00d3l\u00e1fs helga the verb \u201cefsa\u201d (cut, trim), attested for Old Norse-Icelandic only here, is evidently adapted from Old English efesian (clip, shear, cut).55 Fi- nally, in the probably early V\u00edkingarv\u00edsur Sigvatr\u2019s apparent use of the rare adjec- tive \u201cbaldr\u201d (second element of the compound *\u00f3gnbaldr, \u201cbattle-bold\u201d) in the still rarer affirmative sense \u201cbold\u201d signals influence from Old English, where an affirmative sense for beald (bold) is standard.56 The origins of two words in V\u00edkingarv\u00edsur verse 8, namely \u201cpr\u00fa\u00f0um\u201d and \u201cportgreifar,\u201d are less straightforward to determine.57 The adjective \u201cpr\u00fa\u00f0r\u201d (proud) could come from Old English but might instead have been adopted di- rectly from Old French;58 Sigvatr uses it again in Austrfararv\u00edsur59 and elsewhere. The compound \u201cportgreifi\u201d (town reeve) must represent an adaptation from the 47 Hofmann, Nordisch-englische Lehnbeziehungen, 83. See also North in this volume, p. 287. 48 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pa,\u201d ed. Townend, 660 (v. 9). 49 Hofmann, Nordisch-englische Lehnbeziehungen, 92. See also North in this volume, p. 291. 50 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pa,\u201d ed. Townend, 663 (v. 11). 51 Hofmann, Nordisch-englische Lehnbeziehungen, 93. 52 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pa,\u201d ed. Townend, 652\u201353 (v. 2). 53 Hofmann, Nordisch-englische Lehnbeziehungen, 88. 54 Halld\u00f3r Halld\u00f3rsson, \u201cDetermining the Lending Language\u201d; see below for citation of this word in its verse context. 55 Kock, Notationes Norr\u0153n\u00e6, \u00a7658 (discussion of v. 4). 56 The element baldr here rests upon an emendation; see Poole, \u201cSkaldic Verse and Anglo- Saxon History,\u201d 268. Jesch, in \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson, V\u00edkingarv\u00edsur,\u201d 548, opts for \u00f3gnvaldr, with- out considering -baldr, but this choice does not adequately account for the paradosis, where the attested readings are -dval\u00fe(\u0304 r), djarfr, djarfs, valdr, and valds. 57 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: V\u00edkingarv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Jesch, 546 (v. 8). 58 De Vries, Altnordisches etymologisches W\u00f6rterbuch, 428, sv. pr\u00fa\u00f0r. 59 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Austrfararv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Fulk, 600 (v. 12).","262 Russell Poole frequently attested Old English compound of the same meaning, port-ger\u0113fa, but the lack of precise correspondence between the vowels \u0113 and ei precludes direct transfer from Old English to Old West Norse, prompting suggestions of phonolog- ical influence from Middle Saxon.60 A more straightforward explanation, how- ever, is to posit an Old East Norse intermediary *portgr\u0113fa. Etymological \u0113 and ei had already fallen together in Danish,61 opening the way for an Old West Norse speaker who had the word from East Norse speakers to make an incorrect sound- substitution. The apparent simplex, greifi, occurs in Bers\u01ebglisv\u00edsur (Verses of Plain-Speaking) verse 14, this being its earliest attestation,62 but Sigvatr\u2019s use of it to refer to the counts of King Magn\u00fas suggests that a medieval form of German Graf (count), perhaps Middle Low German gr\u0101ve, has been conflated with the Anglo-Saxon term ger\u0113fa (reeve).63 In the case of some other lexis, we can reckon with European origins. The com- pound word \u201cj\u00e1rnst\u00fakur\u201d in Vestrfararv\u00edsur verse 2, denoting either chainmail or protective metal plates,64 contains the element st\u00faka, which probably stems from Middle High German.65 Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pa verse 10 contains a virtuoso example in the shape of three adopted words collocated within a single couplet, where Cnut is praised as \u201ck\u00e6rr keisara \/ kl\u00fass P\u00e9tr\u00fasi\u201d (dear to the emperor, close to Peter). Of these, \u201ck\u00e6rr\u201d (dear) is from a northern dialect of French; \u201ckeisari\u201d (emperor), refer- ring to Conrad II, is from Latin via Old English or German; and \u201ckl\u00fass\u201d (close) is probably also from Latin via Old English or German, while the fourth word, \u201cP\u00e9t- r\u00fas(i),\u201d referring to Pope John XIX (1024\u20131032), is a biblical name in Latinate form.66 In this connection we recall the tradition that Sigvatr chose the Latinate name Magn\u00fas for the son of \u00d3l\u00e1fr. For all four words, this is their first recorded occurrence in skaldic verse.67 Bers\u01ebglisv\u00edsur verse 18 additionally features the hon- orific \u201csinj\u00f3rr\u201d (seigneur, lord), an adaptation of Old French seignor of the same meaning that also occurs, in the form \u201csynj\u00f3rr,\u201d in Erfidr\u00e1pa \u00d3l\u00e1fs helga verse 8. Gade suggests that Sigvatr was personally responsible for introducing the term into 60 See also Jesch, in \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: V\u00edkingarv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Jesch, 546; Hofmann, Nordisch- englische Lehnbeziehungen, 82; De Vries, Altnordisches etymologisches W\u00f6rterbuch, 186, sv. greifi. 61 Br\u00f8ndum-Nielsen, Gammeldansk Grammatik, I, 315\u201316. 62 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Bers\u01ebglisv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Gade, 26. 63 See also de Vries, Altnordisches etymologisches W\u00f6rterbuch, sv. greifi, and \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0ar- son: Bers\u01ebglisv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Gade, 26. 64 Jesch \u201cSome Viking Weapons,\u201d 355 and references there given. 65 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Vestrfararv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Jesch, 619. 66 Frank, \u201cKing Cnut in the Verse,\u201d 118 and references there given. 67 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pa,\u201d ed. Townend, 661 (v. 10).","Chapter 12 An Icelander in Cnut\u2019s Court: The Case of Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson 263 Old Norse,68 which is conceivable, although in principle we might also contem- plate the possible cultivation of a Europeanizing court lexis in King \u00d3l\u00e1fr\u2019s circle. I conclude this survey of lexis with a problematic instance, the form \u201cmelld\u201d found in Vestrfararv\u00edsur verse 2. Jesch explains it as \u201clocked,\u201d following earlier editors, who have regarded the verb mella as having its etymology in Old French mail(l)er (to form a net). She construes the first half-stanza thus: \u00datan var\u00f0k, \u00e1\u00f0r J\u00f3ta andspilli fekk\u2019k stillis, \u2013 melld s\u00e1k h\u00fas fyr hauldi \u2013 h\u00fasdyrr fyrir spyrjask. [I had to make enquiries from outside the main door before I got an audience with the ruler of the J\u00f3tar [DANISH KING = Cnut]; I saw a locked building in front of the man [me].]69 The gloss of \u201clocked\u201d proposed by Jesch on the basis of previous scholarship is hard to extrapolate from the idea of \u201cnet,\u201d as she acknowledges. It also entails an emendation of the manuscript reading, from \u201cher(r),\u201d abbreviated in tran- scriptions of the lost Kringla manuscript (our best witness) and some other wit- nesses but still clearly representing \u201cher(r),\u201d to \u201ch\u00fas\u201d (building). On the other hand, an origin of \u201cmelld\u201d in Old French is likely to be correct, given that no etymon in Old Norse-Icelandic supplies any contextually possible meaning. I therefore propose an alternative solution, where \u201cmelld\u201d is traced back to Old French mailer (to hammer, knock [with a mallet]).70 \u00datan var\u00f0k, \u00e1\u00f0r J\u00f3ta andspilli fekk\u2019k stillis, \u2013 melld s\u00e1k h\u00e9r fyr hauldi \u2013 h\u00fasdyrr fyrir spyrjask. [I had to make inquiries from outside the main door before I got an audience with the ruler of the J\u00f3tar; I saw [it] hammered [= knocked] here in front of the man [me].] The adverb \u201ch\u00e9r\u201d here is not an emendation, simply a different interpretation of the manuscript evidence.71 The past participle \u201cmeld\u201d can be construed as used impersonally, with suppression of both object and agent. A loud and 68 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Bers\u01ebglisv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Gade, 30. 69 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Vestrfararv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Jesch, 618\u201319. 70 Dictionnaire du Moyen Fran\u00e7ais (1330\u20131500), sv. mailler 1: http:\/\/www.atilf.fr\/dmf\/defini tion\/mailler1. See also Anglo-Norman Dictionary, sv. mailler: http:\/\/www.anglo-norman.net\/ gate\/; and Middle English Dictionary s. mal(le (n.): https:\/\/quod.lib.umich.edu\/. 71 For this word carrying alliteration and metrical rise, see Sigvatr, Lausav\u00edsa 6\/2, also in the context of a meeting at a hall, in \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Lausav\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Fulk, 707.","264 Russell Poole insistent door-knock, announcing the arrival of Sigvatr the stallari and king\u2019s emissary, along with his colleague Bergr, would be a natural occurrence. All the adaptations from French and German identified above, along with some of those from English, can be described as cultural adoptions from the courtly world, with its special officers, accoutrements and customs. Semioti- cally, they carry the same prestige as Sigvatr\u2019s \u201chjalm inn valska\u201d (Frankish helmet) and \u201cpeitneskum hjalmi\u201d (helmet from Poitou), which are mentioned in Nesjav\u00edsur verses 5 and 15 respectively. This prestige inheres in both the poet himself and the broader following of \u00d3l\u00e1fr and is conferred in part by their openness to the new world of Christian Europe, to which Cnut had recently se- cured his own entr\u00e9e. Sigvatr\u2019s Use of Sententiae I now move from lexis to larger-scale indicators of Sigvatr\u2019s role as intermediary and bridge-person in channeling key Christian precepts for a Norwegian audi- ence reliant on the vernacular. Once again, some of my examples have been canvassed in previous publications and can be handled in summary form here. Sigvatr\u2019s use of sententiae72 is of key significance. The surviving fragments of Vestrfararv\u00edsur are remarkable for their richness of sententiae, which far out- does the norm in skaldic poetry in general and, for that matter, the rest of the Sigvatr corpus, with a few exceptions. I start with two key instances: Kn\u00fatr hefr okkr enn \u00edtri alld\u00e1\u00f0g\u01ebfugr b\u00e1\u00f0um hendr, es hilmi fundum, H\u00fann, skrautliga b\u00fanar. \u00de\u00e9r gaf hann m\u01ebrk e\u00f0a meira margvitr ok hj\u01ebr bitran golls (r\u00e6\u00f0r g\u01ebrva \u01ebllu go\u00f0 sjalfr), en m\u00e9r halfa. (Vestrfararv\u00edsur 5) [The glorious Cnut, all-noble in deeds, has adorned the arms of both of us finely, Bersi, when we met the king. Wise in many matters, he gave you a mark of gold or more and a sharp sword, and to me half [a mark]: God himself entirely determines all things.]73 72 The structure and incidence of the various sententiae (proverbs, gnomes, admonitions) are analysed more fully in my essay \u201cThe Sentential Turn in Sigvatr.\u201d 73 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Vestrfararv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Jesch, 622. Emphasis mine.","Chapter 12 An Icelander in Cnut\u2019s Court: The Case of Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson 265 The parenthetic sentence emphasized above is a sententia broadly similar in con- tent and manner to various maxims in Beowulf that declare God\u2019s omnipotence: Wundor is to secganne hu mihtig god manna cynne \u00feurh sidne sefan snyttru brytta\u00f0, eard ond eorlscipe; he ah ealra geweald. [It is marvellous to state how mighty God distributes wisdom, land, and nobility to man- kind through his magnanimity; he has power over all.]74 The gist is similar in the lines, \u201cMetod eallum weold \/ gumena cynnes, swa he nu git de\u00f0\u201d (The Lord ruled all of mankind, as he still does now).75 A complementary sententia occurs in the same position in a further stanza from Vestrfararv\u00edsur: Kn\u00fatr spur\u00f0i mik, m\u00e6tra mildr, ef h\u00e1num vildak hendilangr sem, hringa, hugreifum \u00c1leifi. Einn kva\u00f0k senn, en s\u01ebnnu svara \u00fe\u00f3ttumk ek, dr\u00f3ttinn (g\u01ebr eru gumna hverjum gn\u00f3g d\u0153mi) m\u00e9r s\u0153ma. (Vestrfararv\u00edsur 7)76 [Cnut, generous with fine rings, asked me if I would be serviceable to him as to the gra- cious \u00d3l\u00e1fr. I said one lord at a time was fitting for me, and I felt that I made a truthful answer. To each of men sufficient examples are ready [to hand].] Jesch suggests that Vestrfararv\u00edsur could be seen as Sigvatr\u2019s self-justification for having served Cnut, and indeed H\u00e1kon, while still remaining essentially loyal to \u00d3l\u00e1fr Haraldsson, and certainly there is a self-serving tone about the poem.77 The reflections in these two stanzas may, however, not be simply personal but apply more broadly to Cnut\u2019s initiative in offering chieftains and other influential Nor- wegians gold in return for their support against \u00d3l\u00e1fr.78 The thinking behind Sig- vatr\u2019s advocacy derives first and foremost from Matthew 6:24:79 \u201cNemo potest 74 Beowulf, ed. Mitchell and Robinson, 105 (lines 1724\u201327). Translations are my own except where stated otherwise. 75 Beowulf, ed. Mitchell and Robinson, 83 (lines 1057\u201358). 76 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Vestrfararv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Jesch, 625. Emphasis mine. 77 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Vestrfararv\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Jesch, 619. 78 Fidjest\u00f8l, \u201cKongetruskap og gullets makt,\u201d 4. 79 Poole, \u201cCyningas sigef\u00e6ste mid gode,\u201d 277.","266 Russell Poole duobus dominis servire. Aut enim unum odio habebit et alterum diliget aut unum sustinebit et alterum contemnet. Non potestis Deo servire et mamonae\u201d (No man can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one, and love the other: or he will sustain the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon).80 The idea that follows in the verse concerning a sufficiency of examples (i.e., of people who faithfully follow one lord) can be compared with \u00c6lfric\u2019s general homily \u201cMemory of the Saints\u201d (Lives of the Saints, XVI), which ex- plains the importance of Saints\u2019 Lives in precisely those terms: \u201cWe magon niman gode bysne \u00e6rest be \u00f0am halgum heahf\u00e6derum hu hi on heora life gode gecwemdon and eac \u00e6t \u00feam halgum \u00fee \u00feam h\u00e6lende folgodon\u201d (We may take good examples, first from the holy patriarchs, how they pleased God in their lives, and also from the saints who followed the Savior).81 This notion of the provision of abundant good examples pervades \u00c6lfric\u2019s collection of Saints\u2019 Lives.82 In his preface he likens God to a king of this world surrounded by his retainers and stewards, who serve him obediently.83 Sigvatr\u2019s two sententiae in the two stanzas quoted above fit well with Paul Cav- ill\u2019s observation that Old English maxims \u201ctend to encapsulate what might be called the \u2018trade rules\u2019 of the retainer\u201d;84 Cavill also observes that this principle is extended to other vocations in \u00c6lfric\u2019s Colloquy,85 as if their general usefulness towards social cohesion was compelling renewed attention at the turn of the eleventh century. That Sigvatr was deploying sententiae like these quite deliberately and program- matically can be seen in a stanza from his Flokkr about Erlingr Skj\u00e1lgsson, a Norwe- gian chieftain who was killed by King \u00d3l\u00e1fr\u2019s forces around the year 1027: \u00c1sl\u00e1kr hefr aukit (es v\u01ebr\u00f0r drepinn H\u01ebr\u00f0a) (f\u00e1ir skyldu sv\u00e1) (foldar) fr\u00e6ndsekju (styr vekja). \u00c6ttv\u00edgi m\u00e1 eigi (\u00e1 l\u00edti \u00feeir) n\u00edta \u2013 fr\u00e6ndr skyli br\u00e6\u00f0i bindask bornir \u2013 (m\u00e1l in fornu). (Flokkr about Erlingr Skj\u00e1lgsson 7) [\u00c1sl\u00e1kr has increased crime against kindred; the guardian of the land of the H\u01ebr\u00f0ar [= Hordaland > = Erlingr] has been killed; few should cause conflict in such a way. Kin- 80 The Holy Bible: The Douay-Rheims Version. 81 \u00c6lfric\u2019s Lives of Saints, ed. Skeat, I, 336\u201337. 82 \u00c6lfric\u2019s Prefaces, ed. Wilcox, 46. 83 \u00c6lfric\u2019s Prefaces, ed. Wilcox, 121. 84 Cavill, Maxims, 14. 85 Cavill, Maxims, 14\u201316.","Chapter 12 An Icelander in Cnut\u2019s Court: The Case of Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson 267 killing cannot be denied; those born as kinsmen should refrain from violence; let them look to the old sayings.]86 The immediate target of this volley of admonitions is \u00c1sl\u00e1kr Fitjaskalli, who stands accused of the crime of kin-slaying, inasmuch as \u00c1skell, his father, and Skj\u00e1lgr, Erlingr\u2019s father, were cousins. Sigvatr\u2019s censure is couched in the form of \u201cold sayings\u201d about the evil of such deeds amongst kindred; he does not leave the cogency of such sayings implicit but instead issues an express injunc- tion to his audience to heed them. This is the most explicit meta-sententia in his extant oeuvre, reinforcing the pair of more routine sententiae elsewhere in the stanza. With those we can compare a very similar expression in Beowulf: Swa sceal m\u00e6g don, nealles inwitnet o\u00f0rum bregdon dyrnum cr\u00e6fte, dea\u00f0 renian hondgesteallan. Hygelace w\u00e6s, ni\u00f0a heardum, nefa swy\u00f0e hold, ond gehw\u00e6\u00f0er o\u00f0rum hro\u00fera gemyndig.87 [Thus shall a kinsman act, in no way fashion a net of malice with furtive cunning, engi- neer death for his comrade. To Hygelac, stern in attacks, his nephew was most loyal, and each of them mindful of the other\u2019s welfare.] The Theme of Loyalty in Sigvatr As we have already seen, Sigvatr\u2019s material in these verses has comparabilia in Old English sources, not merely in terms of its sententiousness, but also in its emphasis upon loyalty \u2013 or in other words not merely rhetorically but also the- matically. The thematic commonalities can be further illustrated with a verse that focuses on the alleged perjury or treachery of \u00d3l\u00e1fr\u2019s rivals: N\u00e9 h\u0153filig, hreifa, hykk dr\u00f3ttinsvik \u00fe\u00f3ttu, elds, \u00feeims allvel heldu or\u00f0 s\u00edn, vi\u00f0ir, for\u00f0um.88 [Men (trees of the fire of the hand), I think that betrayal of the lord did not seem becoming to those who had in the past kept their word very well.] 86 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Flokkr about Erlingr Skj\u00e1lgsson,\u201d ed. Jesch, 639. Emphases mine. 87 Beowulf, ed. Mitchell and Robinson, 122 (lines 2166\u201371). 88 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Nesjav\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Poole, 575 (v. 13).","268 Russell Poole In a further series of three verses that seems to have been composed for some specific occasion, Sigvatr literally demonizes those who use their wealth so as to buy away and subvert support for \u00d3l\u00e1fr:89 Fjandr ganga \u00fear \u00feengils, \u00fej\u00f3\u00f0 b\u00fd\u00f0r opt, me\u00f0 sj\u00f3\u00f0a, h\u01ebfgan malm fyr hilmis haus \u00f3falan, lausa; sitt veit hverr, ef harra hollan selr vi\u00f0 golli (vert es sl\u00edks) \u00ed sv\u01ebrtu, sinn, helv\u00edti innan.90 [The enemies of the king go there with loose purses; people often offer heavy metal for the head of the leader, which is not for sale; each knows his [reward] inside in black hell- punishment, if he sells his faithful lord in exchange for gold. It is deserving of such.] Kaup var\u00f0 daprt, \u00fears dj\u00fapan, dr\u00f3ttinr\u0153k\u00f0, of s\u00f3ttu \u00feeir es, heim, \u00e1 himnum, h\u00e1s elds, svikum beldu.91 [The reward in heaven was dismal, where they who ventured on betrayal of a lord with acts of treachery sought the deep home of high flame.] Ger\u00f0isk hilmis H\u01ebr\u00f0a h\u00faskarlar \u00fe\u00e1 jarli, es vi\u00f0 \u00c1leifs fj\u01ebrvi, ofv\u00e6gir, f\u00e9 \u00fe\u00e6gi. Hir\u00f0 esa hans at ver\u00f0a h\u00e1ligt fyr \u00fev\u00ed m\u00e1li; d\u00e6lla es oss, ef allir erum v\u00edr of svik sk\u00edrir.92 [Then the household retinue of the leader of the H\u01ebr\u00f0ar (King \u00d3l\u00e1fr) would prove over- weighted towards the earl (H\u00e1kon Eir\u00edksson), when (= if) they accepted money in ex- change for \u00d3l\u00e1fr\u2019s life. It is not edifying for his court to come under this accusation. It is easier for us if we are all clean from deceit.] 89 Fidjest\u00f8l, \u201cKongetruskap og gullets makt,\u201d 6. 90 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Lausav\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Fulk, 715\u201316 (v. 13). 91 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Lausav\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Fulk, 716\u201317 (v. 14). 92 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Lausav\u00edsur,\u201d ed. Fulk, 718\u201319 (v. 15). Emphasis mine. For the identification of v\u00edr \u201cwe\u201d as a Danish form, and its significance, see my forthcoming essay \u201cThe Danish Tongue on Skaldic Lips.\u201d","Chapter 12 An Icelander in Cnut\u2019s Court: The Case of Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson 269 These three verses are tentatively dated within the range 1020\u20131027 by Finnur J\u00f3nsson.93 The compositional process in all three exhibits a conflation of biblical texts.94 From the New Testament we have the allusion to Judas\u2019s betrayal of Christ for thirty silver pennies.95 \u00c6lfric comments on it thus in his Homily for Palm Sun- day (second series): \u201cForwel fela manna onscunia\u00f0 Iudan bel\u00e6winge, and swa- \u00f0eah nella\u00f0 forwandian \u00fe\u00e6t hi ne syllon so\u00f0f\u00e6stnysse wi\u00f0 sceattum. Se H\u00e6lend sylf is eal so\u00f0f\u00e6stnys, and se \u00f0e so\u00f0f\u00e6stnysse beceapa\u00f0 wi\u00f0 feo, he bi\u00f0 Iudan ge- fera on fyrenum witum, se\u00f0e Crist bel\u00e6wde for ly\u00f0rum sceatte\u201d (Very many men shun the treachery of Judas, and yet fear not to betray [literally, \u201csell\u201d] truth for money. Jesus himself is all truth, and he who sells truth for money will be the companion of Judas in fiery torments, who betrayed Christ for vile pelf).96 \u00c6lfric\u2019s use of the commercial terms sellan and (be)ceapian, in \u201csyllon\u201d and \u201cbeceapa\u00f0,\u201d corresponds exactly to Sigvatr\u2019s \u201cselr\u201d and \u201ckaup\u201d respectively. Alongside this ref- erence is one to Matthew 5:12: \u201cgaudete et exultate quoniam merces vestra copiosa est in caelis\u201d (be glad and rejoice, for your reward is very great in heaven).97 The corresponding verse in Luke (6:23) reads: \u201cgaudete in illa die et exultate ecce enim merces vestra multa in caelo\u201d (be glad in that day and rejoice; for behold, your reward is great in heaven).98 Sigvatr\u2019s adjective \u201cdaprt\u201d (dismal) is evidently an irony based on the notion of \u201cgaudete\u201d or its Old English translation \u201cgefag- nia\u00f0.\u201d99 Complementarily, from the Old Testament and its apocrypha we have an allusion to the story of Lucifer\u2019s rebellion.100 Possible English Influences on Sigvatr The evidence presented above leads to the question whether Sigvatr might be channeling a contemporary English predilection for aphoristic statements and 93 Skjaldedigtning, ed. Finnur J\u00f3nsson, A.1, 270. 94 Bedingfield, \u201cReinventing the Gospel,\u201d 14\u201315, 23\u201324; Remley, Old English Biblical Verse, 33, 49\u201350, 59\u201361. 95 Fidjest\u00f8l, \u201cKongetruskap og gullets makt,\u201d 9. 96 Homilies, ed. Thorpe, II, 244\u201345. The translation is Thorpe\u2019s. 97 Old English Version of the Gospels, ed. Liuzza, I, 9: \u201cGeblissia\u00f0 and gef\u00e6gnia\u00f0 for\u00feam \u00fee eower med ys mycel on heofonum\u201d (West Saxon Gospels). 98 Old English Version of the Gospels, ed. Liuzza, I, 111: \u201cGeblissia\u00f0 and gefagnia\u00f0 on \u00feam dagum, nu eower med is mycel on heofonum\u201d (West Saxon Gospels). 99 Fidjest\u00f8l, \u201cKongetruskap og gullets makt,\u201d 7. 100 Heimskringla II, ed. Bjarni A\u00f0albjarnarson, 293 (n. to v. 105).","270 Russell Poole their ideological freight of values of duty and loyalty.101 Loyalty had long been a topic of homilies and scriptural poems in England. The rebellion of the an- gels, for instance, held an acknowledged place in the education and spiritual guidance of both clergy and laymen.102 Genesis B graphically depicts Satan\u2019s disloyalty to God and its repercussions in words that correspond quite closely to those we have seen used by Sigvatr: For\u00feon he sceolde grund gesecan heardes hellewites, \u00fe\u00e6s \u00fee he wann wi\u00f0 heofnes waldend. Acw\u00e6\u00f0 hine \u00fea fram his hyldo and hine on helle wearp, on \u00fea deopan dala.103 [Therefore he had to seek the bottom of cruel hell-torment, because he contended against the ruler of Heaven. He [God] rejected him from his favor then and cast him into Hell, into those deep valleys.] \u00c6lfric\u2019s sermon De initio creaturae describes Lucifer\u2019s descent into \u201chelle wite\u201d after he rebels against God\u2019s lordship; \u00c6lfric goes on to complement it with a lengthy discussion of idolatry \u2013 as a betrayal of God \u2013 and a mention of the betrayal of Christ.104 Similarly, around the year 1000, Archbishop Wulfstan added topicality to \u00c6lfric\u2019s account of Old Testament history by fulminating that the people had brought estrangement from God, the invasion of a heathen army and ultimately the Babylonian captivity upon themselves through their sinful- ness.105 Closest to Sigvatr\u2019s time, Wulfstan, in his Sermo Lupi (1014; although possibly as early as 1009: see Keynes in this volume, p. 107), deplores what he identifies as pervasive failures of loyalty.106 In the peroration his call for a purifi- cation of conscience and for truth and loyalty is immediately followed by an evo- cation of the Last Judgment, much as we see in Sigvatr\u2019s verses: utan word and weorc rihtlice fadian, and ure inge\u00feanc cl\u00e6nsian georne, ond a\u00f0 ond wed w\u00e6rlice healdan, and sume getryw\u00f0a habban us betweonan butan uncr\u00e6ftan; ond utan gelome understandan \u00feone miclan dom \u00fee we ealle to sculon, and beorgan us georne wi\u00f0 \u00feone weallendan bryne helle wites.107 101 Poole, \u201cCrossing the Language Divide,\u201d 600\u2013601. 102 Fox, \u201c\u00c6lfric on the Creation and Fall of Angels,\u201d 199; see also Day, \u201cThe Influence of the Catechetical Narratio,\u201d 59. 103 The Junius Manuscript, ed. Krapp, 12 (lines 302\u20135). 104 Fox, \u201c\u00c6lfric on the Creation and Fall of Angels,\u201d 177. 105 Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, 149\u201350; Godden, \u201cBiblical Literature,\u201d 218. 106 Sermo Lupi, ed. Whitelock, 30, 31\u201332, 42; see also Robinson, \u201cGod, Death, and Loyalty.\u201d 107 Sermo Lupi, ed. Whitelock, 42.","Chapter 12 An Icelander in Cnut\u2019s Court: The Case of Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson 271 [and let us order our words and deeds rightfully, and cleanse our inward thoughts ear- nestly, and faithfully keep to oath and pledge, and have some loyalty between us without deceit; and let us constantly bear in mind the great judgement that we must all come be- fore, and save ourselves earnestly from the surging fire of hell-torment.] Earlier in the homily, there is specific condemnation of \u201chlafordswice\u201d (treach- ery\/treason against one\u2019s lord),108 again in terms, lexical and thematic, that we recognize from Sigvatr. As to sententiousness, I have already noted analogues to the Sigvatr examples in Beowulf, a poem replete with sententiae.109 Its original date of composition noto- riously resists definitive determination, but what matters in the present discussion is that the text is thought to have been copied into the one extant manuscript in the first quarter of the eleventh century.110 Presumably this copying came about in response to somebody\u2019s sense of the poem\u2019s topicality and congruence with cer- tain shades of contemporary taste and opinion.111 Similarly in the case of the Durham Proverbs, the first half of the eleventh century marks an apparent focal point in their collection or compilation, with a bringing together of some individual sententiae that appear to date from much earlier.112 For instance, Cavill compares statements to the effect that \u201cwhen the leader is brave the army is brave\u201d in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle s.a. 1003 (E) and Durham Proverb 31 with the much earlier analogues in a letter by Alcuin and the Alfredian translation of the Regula Pastoralis.113 Thomas D. Hill suggests that ap- parent eleventh-century reworkings like these might have been prompted by con- temporary politics and a national sense of crisis amid faltering leadership.114 The Battle of Maldon, a poem most plausibly from the late tenth century or early eleventh,115 contains what Cavill has termed \u201cquite a high proportion of max- ims for narrative verse.\u201d116 Many of these maxims famously center on a follower\u2019s duty to his lord: for example, \u201cNe m\u00e6g na wandian se \u00fee wrecan \u00feence\u00f0 \/ frean 108 Sermo Lupi, ed. Whitelock, 31\u201332. 109 For a book-length study, see Deskis, Beowulf and the Medieval Proverb Tradition. 110 Ker, Catalogue of Manuscripts, 281. 111 See North, p. 278, and also Thomson, p. 252, in this volume. 112 Arngart, \u201cThe Durham Proverbs,\u201d 289, 300; Arngart, \u201cDurham Proverb 23\u201d; Arngart, \u201cDur- ham Proverbs 17, 30, and 42.\u201d 113 Cavill, Maxims, 65. 114 Hill, \u201c\u2018When the Leader Is Brave\u2019,\u201d 236. I am grateful to Professor Hill for sending me a copy of this article. 115 Cecily Clark, \u201cOn Dating The Battle of Maldon,\u201d 22; see also George Clark, \u201cThe Battle of Maldon,\u201d 54\u201356. 116 Cavill, Maxims, 117.","272 Russell Poole on folce, ne for feore murnan\u201d (The man who intends to avenge his lord in the army can never flinch or care about his life).117 Sententiousness is very much in Wulfstan\u2019s style. Most of Wulfstan\u2019s sermons resist association with specific liturgical occasions and are rather to be regarded as \u201cpublic discourses on religious topics.\u201d118 Notable not merely in his sermons but perhaps more remarkably in his law codes is the pervasively exhortatory tone.119 The following passage in I Cnut 20 is characteristic: utan beon \u00e1 urum hlaforde holde \u204a getrywe \u204a \u00e6fre eallum mihtum his wur\u00f0scipe r\u00e6ran \u204a his willan gewyrcan. For\u00f0am eal \u00fe\u00e6t we \u00e6fre for rihthlafordhelde do\u00f0, eall we hit do\u00f0 us sylfum to mycelre \u00feearfe; for\u00feam by\u00f0 witodlice God hold, \u00fee by\u00f0 his hlaforde rihtlice hold.120 [Let us be true to our lord and faithful and always with all our might exalt his worship and do his will. For all that we ever do out of rightful allegiance to the lord, we do all of it out of great need for ourselves; for assuredly God will be true to him who is rightfully true to his lord.] The tone and expression of Sigvatr\u2019s reflections on allegiance to one lord could easily bear the impress of the archbishop\u2019s style as evinced in a passage like this. Equally, Sigvatr\u2019s exhortatory use of the first-person plural and his focus on the topic of deceit in the admonition \u201cd\u00e6lla es oss, ef allir \/ erum v\u00edr of svik sk\u00edrir\u201d cited above fits well with Wulfstan: as an instance from a Wulfstan hom- ily addressed to a mixed Anglo-Scandinavian audience, we can cite \u201cuton we ealle don swa us \u00feearf is, beorgan us georne wi\u00f0 Godes yrre\u201d (let us all act as is needful for us, earnestly protect ourselves against God\u2019s anger).121 With Sig- vatr\u2019s concept of cleanness or purity, we can compare Wulfstan\u2019s \u201c\u00d0onne is micel \u00feearf . . . \u00fe\u00e6t gehwa his heortan gecl\u00e6nsige\u201d (Then is great need . . . that each person cleanse his heart).122 In Cnut\u2019s Letter to the English of 1019\u20131020, which M. K. Lawson has suggested represents \u201can oral message from the King, put into written form by an ecclesiastic for circulation to the shire courts, and then redrafted into its present state by Wulfstan,\u201d123 passages such as the fol- lowing exhibit a comparably exhortatory tone: \u201cwe sceolon eallan magene \u204a eallon myhton \u00feone ecan mildan God inlice secan, lufian \u204a weor\u00f0ian \u204a \u00e6lc un- riht ascunian\u201d124 (we must with all our might and all our main inwardly seek 117 Cavill, Maxims, 124. 118 Gatch, Preaching and Theology in Anglo-Saxon England, 19. 119 Davis-Secord, \u201cRhetoric and Politics,\u201d 75\u201376; Wormald, The Making of English Law, 345. 120 Gesetze der Angelsachsen, ed. Liebermann, 300. 121 Bethurum, Homilies, 244. 122 Bethurum, Homilies, 248. 123 Lawson, \u201cArchbishop Wulfstan and the Homiletic Element,\u201d 162. 124 Liebermann, Gesetze, 273.","Chapter 12 An Icelander in Cnut\u2019s Court: The Case of Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson 273 the eternal merciful God, love and worship [him], and eschew all wrong). As to Cnut\u2019s Letter of 1027, which postdates Wulfstan\u2019s death by four years and comes closest in time to the probable date-range of the embassy associated with the composition of Vestrfararv\u00edsur, Lawson notes that the exhortations it embodies are strongly reminiscent of Wulfstan,125 who left his sentential im- press upon the discourse. From the above discussion it is clear that comparabilia exist between the Sigvatr corpus and some elements of roughly contemporary English discourse within the circle of Cnut. The most outstanding embodiment of this discourse was in the per- son of Archbishop Wulfstan, bishop of Worcester (1002\u20131016) and archbishop of York (1002\u20131023), a powerful political figure and national spokesman and commen- tator. Having managed to survive and even thrive as a member of the \u201cwitan\u201d (coun- selors) during the turbulent transition between the reigns of \u00c6thelred II and Cnut, Wulfstan became one of Cnut\u2019s trusted advisors and legislators.126 Ryan Lavelle speaks in his chapter in this volume of \u201can ideological determination on the part of Archbishop Wulfstan and those about him who were heirs to the tenth-century reli- gious reform movement to drive the political manifestation of the English identity forward in a polity that could be realized as a \u2018kingdom of England\u2019.\u201d127 Such an imposing orator and homilist is likely to have been an ultimate influence upon Sig- vatr, through a mode of discourse that is distinctively doctrine-based, admonitory, moralistic, and sententious. At the same time, Wulfstan may not have been the proximate influence. The discussion by Zoya Metlitskaya in this volume is a reminder that many voi- ces existed and therefore notions of a unitary linkage can be no more than an approximation.128 The complex conflations and interweavings of scriptural and doctrinal texts seen in some of Sigvatr\u2019s verses can be better likened to the structure of \u00c6lfric\u2019s sermons than those of Wulfstan. The question that remains is the precise point of contact and influence upon Sigvatr. One possible ambience to be taken into account, as posited by Matthew Townend, is a late Anglo-Norse courtly culture in England, at Winchester, or London, or conceivably Canterbury, that had room for skaldic recitation as well as English oration: \u201cIn such a society, in which two vernaculars were being spoken, and literary works in those two vernaculars being recited, one may rea- sonably postulate a variety of different audiences, correlating, in some degree, 125 Lawson, \u201cArchbishop Wulfstan and the Homiletic Element,\u201d 163. 126 Orchard, \u201cWulfstan as Reader,\u201d 311; Davis-Secord, \u201cRhetoric and Politics,\u201d 91. 127 Lavelle in this volume, p. 169. 128 Metlitskaya in this volume, p. 121.","274 Russell Poole with different court-groupings.\u201d129 The work of Townend and Frank has shown the significance of Cnut\u2019s patronage of skaldic poets for a Norse-speaking audi- ence.130 On the English side, it has been suggested that Wulfstan recited the law codes I and II Cnut at a Christmas court in Winchester.131 More than this, a close parallel between Sigvatr\u2019s Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pa verse 2 and the Anglo-Saxon Chroni- cle, s.a. 1017, pointed out by Dietrich Hofmann,132 suggests that identical stories were being told across the language divide, perhaps in a form of official record: Ok senn sonu sl\u00f3, hvern ok \u00fe\u00f3, A\u00f0alr\u00e1\u00f0s e\u00f0a \u00fat fl\u00e6m\u00f0i Kn\u00fatr.133 [And Cnut soon defeated or drove out the sons of \u00c6thelred \u2013 and each one [of them], though.] \u204a Cnut cyning afly<m>de ut Eadwig \u00e6\u00feeling \u204a eft hine het ofslean. [And King Cnut expelled Eadwig the prince and then ordered that he be killed.]134 Lavelle, however, introduces the important qualifier that the surviving Norse po- etry in praise of Cnut coincides with a later period of his reign and may not re- flect the cultural direction of his English court at the start of his reign.135 This being the case, it is more plausible to posit a mediation of English discourse that reached Sigvatr principally in his adopted homeland of Norway and some years prior to his Cnut-related compositions. Christianity in eleventh-century Norway appears to have emanated chiefly from England, albeit with some contribution from Hamburg-Bremen.136 The Norwegian missionary kings benefited in a variety of ways from English support in these proselytizing endeavours.137 \u00d3l\u00e1fr Tryggva- son had \u00c6thelred\u2019s sponsorship at confirmation and possibly also benefited 129 Townend, \u201cContextualizing the Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pur,\u201d 174\u201375; see also Poole, \u201cCrossing the Lan- guage Divide,\u201d 605\u20136. 130 Townend, \u201cContextualizing the Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pur\u201d; Frank, \u201cKing Cnut in the Verse,\u201d 108. 131 Lawson, \u201cArchbishop Wulfstan and the Homiletic Element,\u201d 161; Kennedy, \u201cCnut\u2019s Law Code of 1018,\u201d 74\u201375. 132 Hofmann, Nordisch-englische Lehnbeziehungen, 88\u201390. 133 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Kn\u00fatsdr\u00e1pa,\u201d ed. Townend, 652\u201353 (v. 2). 134 ASC, ed. O\u2019Brien O\u2019Keeffe (C), 103 (s.a. 1017). 135 Lavelle, Cnut: North Sea King, 83\u201385. 136 Abrams, \u201cAnglo-Saxons and Christianization\u201d; Halld\u00f3r Halld\u00f3rsson, \u201cSynd\u201d; Halld\u00f3r Hall- d\u00f3rsson, \u201cSome Old Saxon Loanwords\u201d; Halld\u00f3r Halld\u00f3rsson, \u201cDetermining the Lending Lan- guage\u201d; Hellberg, \u201cTysk eller Engelsk mission?\u201d. 137 Abrams, \u201cAnglo-Saxons and Christianization,\u201d 221.","Chapter 12 An Icelander in Cnut\u2019s Court: The Case of Sigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson 275 from the English king\u2019s provision of English clergy.138 In the next phase, \u00d3l\u00e1fr Haraldsson, having assisted \u00c6thelred\u2019s return to England from exile, then him- self returned to Norway accompanied by English missionary bishops, among them Grimkell and Rudolf (or Rodulf), the latter of whom ended his career as abbot at Abingdon.139 In 1030 Grimkell supported \u00d3l\u00e1fr\u2019s second return to Nor- way after his brief exile. When this initiative ended in the king\u2019s death at the bat- tle of Stiklasta\u00f0ir, Grimkell lost little time in certifying \u00d3l\u00e1fr\u2019s sanctity. Contemporary English styles of preaching and teaching would have been not unsuited to the needs of a newly Christianized Norway. For some decades, English preachers had devoted considerable attention to educating the laity at all levels of Anglo-Saxon society. Hagiography, revived by the Benedictine re- formers, had become \u201cpart of a remarkable movement to provide sermons for the common people,\u201d140 and if \u00c6lfric\u2019s hagiographical writings represent \u201ca kind of managed popularization of the cult of saints,\u201d141 similar comments could be made about his exegesis of Scripture and the liturgy. Old English hom- ilies were remarkable for their \u201cmixed and all-encompassing audience\u201d and \u201cdemocratic stamp.\u201d142 In these efforts of outreach, the vernacular enjoyed an accepted place, as witness the West Saxon Gospels and other early translations of Scripture into English. \u00c6lfric possessed an outstanding ability to use his na- tive language in order to explain \u201cissues in ways which his audience will most readily understand.\u201d143 Additionally, he enjoyed \u201cstrong connections to court through his primary patrons \u00c6thelm\u00e6r and \u00c6thelweard\u201d and placed \u201cincreas- ing emphasis in his later works on using Biblical texts to provide political guid- ance for the king and his counselors.\u201d144 Wulfstan, for his part, incorporated homiletic material into his political and legislative statements, with evident ef- fectiveness.145 The missionary corps in Norway might have extended this policy by using the skills of Danish or Norse native speakers from England.146 Grim- kell, with his Norse name, was possibly an instance.147 On this hypothesis, 138 Andersson, \u201cViking Policy of Ethelred,\u201d 1, 4. 139 Abrams, \u201cAnglo-Saxons and Christianization,\u201d 223; Graham, \u201cA Runic Entry and Abbot Rodulf.\u201d 140 Geoffrey Shepherd, \u201cScriptural Poetry,\u201d 29; Magennis, \u201cWarrior Saints,\u201d 49. 141 Magennis, \u201cWarrior Saints,\u201d 50. 142 \u00c6lfric\u2019s Prefaces, ed. Wilcox, 21. 143 \u00c6lfric\u2019s Prefaces, ed. Wilcox, 20. 144 Klein, \u201cBeauty and the Banquet,\u201d 79\u201380. 145 Lawson, \u201cArchbishop Wulfstan and the Homiletic Element,\u201d 16, and references there given. 146 Abrams, \u201cAnglo-Saxons and Christianization,\u201d 216. 147 Hellberg, \u201cGl\u00e6lognskvi\u00f0a,\u201d 44; Abrams, \u201cAnglo-Saxons and Christianization,\u201d 223.","276 Russell Poole Sigvatr\u2019s adoptions and adaptations of English discourse, discussed above, would reflect the manner and ideological objectives of Grimkell and his follow- ing, who in turn mediated \u00c6lfric and Wulfstan. Sigvatr\u2019s Erfidr\u00e1pa \u00d3l\u00e1fs helga may hint at kindred processes to those postu- lated here. As Anne Holtsmark points out, the Erfidr\u00e1pa, which Jesch dates around 1035,148 late in the poet\u2019s floruit, mentions a \u201cmessa\u201d (feast day) as hav- ing been established for \u00d3l\u00e1fr. Holtsmark takes this as suggesting that the Erfi- dr\u00e1pa existed in relation to a set of ecclesiastical texts, specifically an officium or \u201coffice\u201d for the saint but probably also a vita and an account of his miracles.149 The officium would have supplied a communication of the saint\u2019s merits in Latin, complemented by Sigvatr\u2019s eulogy in the vernacular. This case provides a further indication that Sigvatr served as the vernacular spokesperson for key items of ideology espoused by the English-influenced ruling class and church in Norway. Although this Icelander was perhaps only a fleeting and even an uneasy visitor to Cnut\u2019s court, ultimately his rhetoric can be seen as responsive to developments in the England of Cnut and his predecessor, King \u00c6thelred II. 148 \u201cSigvatr \u00de\u00f3r\u00f0arson: Erfidr\u00e1pa \u00d3l\u00e1fs helga,\u201d ed. Jesch, 664\u201365. 149 Holtsmark, \u201cSankt Olavs liv og mirakler,\u201d 122 (reprinted: 16).","Richard North Chapter 13 Behold the Front Page: Cnut and the Scyldings in Beowulf Did Cnut, while he first sat at Winchester, hear tell of Beowulf or even see it in a manuscript? This question is not as strange as it sounds. In his quest for West Saxon legitimacy, Cnut could have been directed to a version of this poem. Beo- wulf\u2019s sole surviving manuscript, most of what we have in the Nowell Codex in London, BL Cotton MS. Vitellius A.XV, was present in England in his reign (1016\u20131035), whether or not it was copied during this time.1 Until David Dum- ville interpreted N. R. Ker\u2019s dating of this codex, \u201cs. x\/xi,\u201d to mean 997 to 1013 with 1016 as the non plus ultra, Cnut\u2019s reign was included as a possible date for this manuscript, even as late as ca. 1025.2 Since Dumville\u2019s study, however, most scholars date the Nowell codex to the reign of \u00c6thelred II (978\u20131016).3 The bone of contention is the meaning of Ker\u2019s compromise in relation to the date of Scribe B, the second and older of the two scribes, whose hand is Late Old English (or Late Anglo-Saxon) Square Minuscule.4 Whereas Scribe A seems young enough for Cnut\u2019s reign, Scribe B\u2019s style is old enough to predate this by a couple of generations. However, scribal characteristics have been found to vary between scriptoria and earlier characteristics of Square Minuscule some- times reappear in later phases.5 The years 1013\u20131023 were a period of scribal transition in which there was greater variation between hands than before.6 The combination of apparently young and old scribes in the Nowell Beowulf is 1 For arguments that Beowulf was composed at this time, see Kiernan, Beowulf and the Beo- wulf Manuscript, 18\u201323, 270\u201378; Damico, Beowulf and the Grendel-Kin. For the work of skalds, please note that all skaldic verse in this chapter will be set out in long-line format, by which it is more easily read. Translations are mine. My thanks to Alison Finlay, Erin Goeres, and Kevin Kiernan for their comments on earlier drafts. 2 Ker, Catalogue of Manuscripts, 281 (no. 216); Dumville, \u201cBeowulf Come Lately,\u201d 52\u201354, 63. 3 For a summary of the debate, see Orchard, Critical Companion to Beowulf, 19\u201320. For a modern appraisal of Ker\u2019s system, see Leneghan, \u201cMaking Sense of Ker\u2019s Dates,\u201d 5\u20138, and 11: \u201cThere is no compelling reason why a poem such as Beowulf . . . could not have been copied during the reign of \u00c6thelred.\u201d 4 Dumville, \u201cBeowulf Come Lately,\u201d 55\u201356. 5 Stokes, English Vernacular Minuscule, 120\u201363. 6 Kiernan, \u201cSquare Minuscule in the Age of Cnut,\u201d 34\u201341; Stokes, English Vernacular Minus- cule, 94\u201395, 201\u20134. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1515\/9781501513336-014","278 Richard North accordingly less likely to be exceptional. Neither hand is found elsewhere in the extant manuscripts. More particularly, since Dumville and Stokes have both shown that Scribe B\u2019s style is lacking in manuscripts at this later time from the major royal and other West Saxon scriptoria that produced \u00c6lfric\u2019s Catholic Hom- ilies and the works of other reformers, it seems likely that both scribes were em- ployed in a provincial backwater.7 This would be one of the blank spaces on the map of scriptoria with attributable manuscripts, one in which an older hand might continue. Looking into this heart of darkness, we might ask whether Beo- wulf was copied not in Wessex, or in the south, or even in London, but in a house with fewer resources in a region of central Mercia between Watling Street and York. Lichfield was suggested by Kenneth Sisam in 1916 and still looks viable now.8 This essay will propose that the Nowell codex, or most of it, was copied in Mercia for the new regime, and that another text of Beowulf was shown to Cnut, who used its ideology to win the east of Denmark in 1019\u20131027. Aim of the Codex Lately it has been proposed by Leonard Neidorf that the Nowell text of Beowulf was copied near to the end of \u00c6thelred\u2019s reign, when he was losing the war, and in response to VII \u00c6thelred, which is a legislative homily edited by Archbishop Wulfstan from an edict issued in Bath in 1009.9 This text urges the tormented English to pray, fast, and give alms for deliverance. Such principles of valor and loyalty as appear in the poem have been quoted as apposite to the propaganda that was part of this desperate effort: for example, Wealhtheow\u2019s warning to Beo- wulf about her governance of Heorot, or the poet\u2019s praise of Beowulf\u2019s loyalty to Hygelac, or Wiglaf\u2019s rebuke to the cowards.10 And yet this alleged motive for copying Beowulf is not without with its problems. One is the potential irony of using a poem which glorifies Danes, Geats, Swedes, and their kings as a means of arousing patriotic opposition to a prince of Denmark invading England with armies from Scandinavia. Another is the poem\u2019s insistence that Grendel and his mother are destroyed not by the people whose territory they have invaded, but 7 Stokes, English Vernacular Minuscule, 268 (fig. 1). 8 Sisam, Studies, 61\u201364, esp. 62. See further Kiernan, \u201cReformed Nowell Codex and Beowulf Manuscript.\u201d 9 Neidorf, \u201cGenesis of the Beowulf Manuscript,\u201d 120\u201322. On the code, see Keynes, \u201cAn Abbot, an Archbishop,\u201d 179\u201389; Wormald, Making of English Law, 330\u201333, 343. 10 Neidorf, \u201cGenesis of the Beowulf Manuscript,\u201d 122\u201325."]