An Examination of Physical Impairment in Norse Myth and Icelandic Saga

By: Caitlin Scally

Definitions of disability and the disabled, as we know them today, are a relatively modern concept. Disability, as explored in the growing field of disability studies, is merely a social construct – an interpretation of the corporeality and capabilities of the body based on what is considered the norm in society. (1) Psychological or physiological difference in the body is thus termed ‘impairment’, while the social construct preventing these individuals taking part in society at an equal level is a ‘disability’. (2) Consequently, throughout this essay I will be using the word ‘impairment’ rather than ‘disability’ as I explore literary examples in Norse myth and Icelandic sagas, and examine to what extent impairments can be indicative of societal access.

Almost all the Old Norse gods described in the Poetic and Prose Eddas, are impaired or altered in some way. There are also multiple examples of physically impaired individuals present in Icelandic sagas, most of which are set in the settlement period of Iceland, though they were recorded in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. I will be using examples of physical impairment from some sagas together with Old Norse myth found in the Eddas in order to come to a general conclusion about medieval Icelandic society’s attitude to the physically impaired, and who would be considered ‘disabled’. I will begin with an exploration of medieval society, including laws concerning impairment contained in the Icelandic law book, the Grágás.

Because a society’s views of disability and physical impairment is such a massive area of study, and far more than I can fit into this brief essay, I will be focusing on eyesight and speech, rather than impairments that can be seen in the material record. I will be examining these individually, focusing first on the mythology and then saga evidence. I will briefly explore the place of gender in this area and in Icelandic society. To the people who created and consumed it, myth was reality – forming a shared pre-history and presenting idealised bodies and behaviours. (3) Concurrently, characters in Icelandic Sagas were very often real people, reflecting at least some aspects of society and the social norms and expectations of the authors. While it is unwise to take these sources as unchallenged truth, I believe that these stories and histories reflect aspects of belief and social norms in medieval Icelandic society, and can shed light on many areas of study, including attitudes to physical impairment.

Lois Bragg, in her 1994 article, states that Icelandic society and Nordic peoples in general lacked the sense of shame felt by other Western societies over ‘disfigurements and disabilities. (4) She goes on to explain that while these impairments were largely ignored, they were not unnoticed, appearing and distinguishing individuals in the bynames that litter the written sources for the period, along with the more general bynames of digri (stout), rauði (red), and fróði (wise). (5) While bynames indicating exceptionalities such as deafness or a crippled leg are present in genealogies, there is no information on the nature of the condition. For example, as Bragg points out,

‘Ásbjorn daufi might (1) be congenitally deaf, (2) have been deafened by a head injury or illness, (3) have been temporarily deaf due to an ear infection at some crucial event in his life, (4) be normally hearing but absentminded, (5) have failed to have heard something important at one time, or (6) ironically, have acute hearing or be extraordinarily attentive and sharp.’ (6)

This point brings to attention, that while we do have sources for the period, we do not have the complete picture and there are many ways to interpret the material. Injuries from warfare and battle would have been common in Viking Age society, and in Icelandic Sagas when combat is mentioned, it is rare for a character to escape without suffering some physical impairment. (7) According to the World Health Organization, individuals with physical or mental impairments contribute to around ten percent of the modern world population, while the archaeological record suggests that the numbers were similar in the medieval period. (8) Physically impaired individuals were functioning and integrated members of society because legally they had to be. The law of medieval Iceland contained in the Grágás, states that every member of society needed to be attached to a household or they would be fined, enslaved, or outlawed. 9 Being part of a household meant contributing to the functioning of that household. Protection and defence for members of a ‘family’ was provided in exchange for work. Stanza 71 of the Hávamál, a poem espousing advice and social wisdom, states that,

‘The lame man rides a horse,

the handless man rides a herd,

the deaf man fights and succeeds;

to be blind is better than to be burnt:

a corpse is of no use to anyone.’ (10)

Thus, one’s success and survival in Icelandic society was dependant on their ability to function and contribute to society. Impairment was judged, as with everything else in Icelandic society, on a case by case basis, depending on contribution to community. Though the physically impaired do not seem to have been shunned, it was unacceptable to purposely disfigure or impair others. It was dishonourable to hurt or disable the elderly, and shameful to prolong a death in this way, as an opponent should be left to live with the shame of defeat and injury. (11) Individuals guilty of disfiguring or impairing another were expected to make recompense. (12) In the Grágás, lesser outlawry was the punishment for someone who taunted or claimed that another had a disfigurement, along with giving someone a ‘name he did not have before’, even if it was true. (13) Though not purposely maligned, it is true that an implication of physical impairment could be understood as a weakness, which could cause a loss in opportunities and social status. Certain traits are indicative of social class in Norse society. In the eddaic poem Rígsþula, Heimdallr, in disguise as Ríg, travels the countryside and visits with all levels of human society. People with high social rank are fair-haired, tall, and handsome, while the lower status individuals are clumsy, ugly, and with physical impairments (for example, ‘crooked back’ in stanza 8), and only suited for hard, physical labour. (14) Social status, at least in the written sources, was characterised by appearance; which is shown in the sagas where the heroes are usually tall, blond, and fair, while those with dark, curling hair are viewed with suspicion, and very often likened to trolls. (15) Social status was obviously an important aspect of medieval life, and contributes to how an impaired individual lives and contributes to society. As Michael Lawson points out in their 2019 thesis, higher-status individuals were often treated as heroic characters while those of lower status were pitiable or accused of faking their impairments. 16 Wealth and social status is and was an important factor in how an impaired individual was viewed and treated, contributing to the ability to raise a child with congenital impairments or being able to alter one’s lifestyle to accommodate impairments gained later in life.

The element of sacrifice is extremely important to the framework of Norse mythology, and many of the gods are impaired or lose a piece of themselves as sacrifice, either in return for a greater ability or in service of the community. Óðinn is the clearest example of this as he sacrifices an eye to Mímir’s well in exchange for knowledge. (17) Óðinn gains second sight and knowledge of runes and the spirit world from this sacrifice. Mímir is supposed to be dead as he was decapitated by the Vanir, to whom he had been sent as a political hostage by the Æsir. Mímir’s head was then returned to Óðinn, who preserved it with spells and herbs. 18 Mímir is thus connected to the underworld and has knowledge of a realm in which Óðinn himself is blind. Eyes in Norse myth are symbolic of masculine strength and status; Óðinn is called the fire-eyed, while Þórr has strong, blazing eyes that he is unable to hide. (19) Annette Lassen suggests that the knowledge Óðinn wants to achieve belongs to the realm of the feminine – connected to disorder, death, and sexuality. (20) He must then sacrifice an aspect of his masculinity in order to gain this insight. Óðinn gives up his previous one-sided knowledge of the male realm, in exchange for the two-sided knowledge of the feminine and masculine, in service to the community in order to try and prevent Ragnarök – the doom of the gods.

In Egils saga, Egil cuts off the beard and pokes out an eye of a man who had humiliated his men. The man had served extremely strong drink the previous night, challenging the masculinity of Egil and his men. A beardless man was seen as weak and ineffectual while eyes were symbols of strength and masculinity, especially in a ruler. (21) Egil’s actions then serve to repay the man’s insult and diminish his masculinity. In the Grágás, blinding, castration, and klámhfgg (a stroke on the buttocks) are punishments used in tandem, often for sexual offences and have been connected to níð – accusations, often of a sexual nature, questioning a person’s manhood. (22) Blinding and castration, used together or interchangeably, deprive the victim of his social power and his masculinity, leaving him unable to take part in society as he once did. (23) Though Óðinn has sacrificed an eye and an aspect of his masculinity, this does not lower his status in the community. I would argue that the main difference is that Óðinn removed his eye himself in sacrifice, rather than having it removed in punishment. The men in the sagas lose their place in the community and become ‘disabled’ through forced blinding and the resulting loss of masculinity.

Though there are very few myths concerning him, and as such we cannot know for sure, Óðinn’s son Höðr can be assumed to have been born blind and is not impaired through sacrifice or injury, unlike the other gods, as there is no account of the loss of his sight. Höðr’s true blindness does not seem to prevent his access to the community as he is present at their gatherings (though he stands outside the ring of the gods in Gylfagynning), however, his ability to take part in society is hindered. The myth involving Höðr is his involuntary murder of his brother Baldr through Loki’s trickery. The Æsir amuse themselves by throwing things at Baldr, but Höðr cannot take part due to his blindness. Loki uses Höðr’s desire to take part in society proper and hands him a stick of mistletoe, guides Höðr’s arm, and kills Baldr. (24) Annette Lassen in her 2000 article interprets Höðr’s blindness as indicative of weakness and moral blindness. (25) His blindness reveals his effeminacy and his níðinsskapr, the murder of his brother. He is described as physically strong, but due to his blindness he is unable to understand Loki’s character and deception. He is thus easily led and swayed in addition to being a danger to the community, making him a social pariah. Eloquent and articulate speech was an important quality in medieval Iceland. Gaining power and advancing in society often depended on the ability to speak well and cleverly in public, while being eloquent was necessary to become a lagamaðr, a lawyer. Loki is well known for his speech and verbal abilities, and his meddling in the community of the gods. In the eddaic poem Lokasenna, he insults each of the gods in turn, accusing them of taboo deeds. (26) The gods all try to make him silent but they are unable to stop his speech; Kevin Wanner has suggested that speech is part of his power, as Þórr tells him to ‘shut up’ four times without him stopping, while the one time Loki commands Þórr to ‘þegi þú’, Þórr does not speak for the rest of the poem. (27) Loki eventually has his lips sewn together and the edges torn off in punishment. There is no real literary evidence for Loki being known for his damaged mouth, though there are cross lines on the face on the Snaptun forge stone found in Denmark, which could indicate scars or a stitched-up mouth. (28) The resulting ragged edges of his mouth when it was torn open would almost certainly be disfiguring and, as Kevin Wanner has suggested, result in a speech impediment. (29) Loki’s place in the community is difficult to ascertain, as he is ‘the originator of deceits and the disgrace of all gods and men’, while he also saves the Æsir and fixes their problems (usually ones he had caused in the first place), he is Óðinn’s blood brother and attends the assembly. (30) Loki is not denied access to the community or a place in society, though he is despised by the gods for his damaging speech, for which they physically impair him.

Þorgils skarði Boðvarsson from Sturlunga saga is described as handsome, big-shouldered, with a fair complexion and hair. He was also born with a cleft lip, which caused him to be nicknamed Þorgils skarði – harelip. (31) Lois Bragg argues that in a society primarily reliant on subsistence farming a child born with a harelip would most likely usually have been exposed. The child would need to be hand-fed, as a hare-lip would make it difficult to nurse properly, and as such the mother would have been unable to perform her other duties and chores for the year in order to care for them. (32) Bragg points out that Þorgils would have been unable to pronounce labials which would not have prevented him from speaking Icelandic coherently, though it would have prevented him from being ‘eloquent’. (33) As stated above, eloquence and speech were almost essential to gaining power in medieval Iceland, Þorgils however, says little and instead cultivates a persona of bold-ness and action in order to acquire respect and resolve his disputes. This is demonstrated in a scene where Þorgils has a wax tablet sent to King Hákon rather than speaking to him in person. This is interpreted as pride by the king, who is impressed and makes Þorgils his retainer. (34) Þorgils’ impairment and inability to speak eloquently might have affected his place in the community and caused him to be unable to take part in society, had he not altered his behaviour and character to account for it. Of course, Þorgils’ later behaviour and pursuit of power, even against his own family, reveals Þorgils as a man of aberrant behaviour, whose impairment was possibly a metaphorical early indicator of his twisted speech. (35) As many of the sources that we have today were produced and circulated by Norse skalds, who made a living speaking eloquently, it is no wonder that this quality would be emphasised in the sources, and we should be aware of bias. However, the ability to speak well and eloquently was incredibly important in medieval Icelandic society and affected one’s ability to take part in society.

There is a noticeable lack of female bodies in saga literature, and when women are introduced very little time is spent on describing their appearance, in contrast to the men of the sagas. Thus, impaired female bodies are even less present. Yngvildr Þorgilsdóttir in Sturlunga saga elopes by cutting her hair and dressing as a man. Lois Bragg suggests that Yngvildr’s actions in cutting her hair and ‘unnatural’ dress constitutes a kind of disfigurement indicating societal dysfunction. (36) Dressing as the opposite gender was a social taboo and was grounds for divorce in some cases. (37) In Skalskapermal, Loki cuts Sif’s, Þórr’s wife, hair off during the night. Seeing this, Þórr threatens Loki’s until Loki has the black elves make Sif a wig of pure gold, that grows on her head like real hair. (38) The cutting of Sif’s hair, and Þórr’s reaction (Sif’s reaction is never related), indicate that this action has mutilated or impaired her, and could have resulted in some form of social disfunction. In her 1993 article, Carol J. Clover argues that there was no defined concept of masculinity or femininity in Norse society, rather only manly or unmanly qualities, characterised by the words hvatr and blauðr. (39) Men were usually hvatr (active, brisk, vigorous) (40) , while women were blauðr (‘[1]weak, cowardly… [2] feminine, opposite to hvatr but only used of animals.’) (41) , though it could be the other way around and very much depended on character, agency, and social situation. However this is a rather simplified view, with selective reading of saga sources, and does not take into account manifestations of female power in others. (42) A last interesting note is that bynames suggesting disability or impairment are a male phenomenon, again indicating that women were not social agents in medieval Iceland but also possibly insinuating that women, by virtue of sex, were already disfigured in regard to the male norm. (43) Though women could be and were active in the community, because of their gender they were unable to take part fully in society, such as being unable to vote in assemblies. (44)

There are so many more aspects of physical impairment and social roles to explore than could be addressed in this short essay. For example, a more in- depth and period sensitive examination of impairment in the Icelandic sagas, further examination of gender and social access, as well as an exploration of physical impairment in the material record and burial evidence would be valuable. However, in this essay I have highlighted how physical impairment and the ability to take part in society very much depended on ability, character, and social status. The ability to contribute to the community is incredibly important, highlighted in law codes, Norse myth by the theme of sacrifice of the gods, and stanzas in the Hávamál. Physical impairments did not make a person disabled in medieval Icelandic society, though it was a case of individual circumstance.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

PRIMARY SOURCES

- ‘hvatr’, in A Concise Dictionary of Old Icelandic ed. Geir T. Zoëga (New York: Dover

Publications Inc., 2004), 217.

- Sturluson, Snorri, Edda trans. Anthony Faulkes (London: Everyman, 1995).

- Sturluson, Snorri, Heimskringla Volume I, ed. by Alison Finlay and Anthony

Faulkes (Exeter: Viking Society for Northern Research, 2016).

- The Poetic Edda trans. Carolyne Larrington (Oxford: Oxford University Press,

2014).

SECONDARY SOURCES

- Arwill-Nordbladh, Elisabeth, ‘Ability and Disability, On Bodily Variations and

Bodily Possibilities in Viking Age Myth and Image’, in To Tender Gender The Pasts

and Futures of Gender Research in Archaeology, ed. by Ing-Marie Back Danielsson

and Susanne Thedéen (Stockholm: Stockholm Studies in Archaeology, 2012), pp.

33–60.

- Bragg, Lois, ‘Disfigurement, Disability, and Dis-Integration in Sturlunga Saga*’,

Alvíssmál, 4 (1994), 15–32.

- Clover, Carol J., ‘Regardless of Sex: Men, Women, and Power in Early Northern

Europe’, Representations, 44 (1993), 1–28.

- Friðriksdóttir, Jóhanna Katrín, ‘Gender’, Academia, 226–39

https://www.academia.edu/39952949/Gender_Routledge_companion_.

- Lassen, Annette, ‘Höðr’s Blindness and the Pledging of Óðinn’s Eye: A Study of

the Symbolic Value of the Eyes of Höðr, Óðinn and Þórr’, The 11th International

Saga Conference: Old Norse Myths, Literature & Society, 2000, 220–28.

- Lawson, Michael David, ‘Children of a One-Eyed God: Impairment in the Myth

and Memory of Medieval Scandinavia’ (East Tennessee State University, 2019).

- Sanmark, Alexandria, ‘Women at the Thing’, in Nordic Women in the Viking Age,

ed. by N. Colman and N. L. Løkka (Scandinavian Academic Press, 2014), pp.

85–100.

- Sigurðsson, Jón Viðar, ‘Becoming “Old”, Ageism and Taking Care of the Elderly in

Medieval Iceland’, in Youth and Age in the Medieval North, ed. by Shannon Lewis-

Simpson (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2008), pp. 227–42.

- Wanner, Kevin J, ‘Sewn Lips, Propped Jaws, and a Silent Áss (or Two): Doing

Things with Mouths in Norse Myth’, The Journal of English and Germanic

Philology, 111 (2012), 1–24.

1 Arwill-Nordbladh, ‘Ability and Disability On Bodily Variations and Bodily Possibilities in Viking Age

Myth and Image’, in To Tender Gender The Pasts and Futures of Gender Research in Archaeology, ed. by Ing-

Marie Back Danielsson and Susanne Thedéen (Stockholm: Stockholm Studies in Archaeology, 2012), 35.

2 Lawson, ‘Children of a One-Eyed God: Impairment in the Myth and Memory of Medieval Scandinavia’

(East Tennessee State University, 2019) 123.

3 Ibid, 23.

4 Bragg, ‘Disfigurement, Disability, and Dis-Integration in Sturlunga Saga*’, Alvíssmál, 4 (1994) ,22.

5 Ibid.

6 Ibid.

7 Lawson, ‘Children of a One-Eyed God: Impairment in the Myth and Memory of Medieval Scandinavia’, 28.

8 Ibid, 60.

9 Sigurðsson, ‘Becoming “Old”, Ageism and Taking Care of the Elderly in Medieval Iceland’, in Youth and

Age in the Medieval North, ed. by Shannon Lewis-Simpson (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2008), 239.

10 ‘Sayings of the High One’, in The Poetic Edda trans. Carolyne Larrington (Oxford: Oxford University

Press, 2014), 23.

11 Lawson, ‘Children of a One-Eyed God: Impairment in the Myth and Memory of Medieval Scandinavia’,

61.

12 Ibid, 61.

13 Ibid, 62-63.

14 ‘The Lay of Rig’, in The Poetic Edda trans. Carolyne Larrington (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014),

238-244.

15 Lawson, ‘Children of a One-Eyed God: Impairment in the Myth and Memory of Medieval Scandinavia’,

40.

16 Ibid, 66.

17 ‘Seeresses Prophecy’, in The Poetic Edda trans. Carolyne Larrington (Oxford: Oxford University Press,

2014), 7.

18 Sturluson, Heimskringla Volume I, ed. Alison Finlay and Anthony Faulkes (Exeter: Viking Society for

Northern Research, 2016), 8.

19 Lassen, ‘Höðr’s Blindness and the Pledging of Óðinn’s Eye: A Study of the Symbolic Value of the Eyes of

Höðr, Óðinn and Þórr’, The 11th International Saga Conference: Old Norse Myths, Literature & Society,

2000, 225.

20 Ibid.

21 Lawson, ‘Children of a One-Eyed God: Impairment in the Myth and Memory of Medieval Scandinavia’,

78.

22 Lassen, ‘Höðr’s Blindness and the Pledging of Óðinn’s Eye: A Study of the Symbolic Value of the Eyes of

Höðr, Óðinn and Þórr’, 222.

23 Ibid, 221.

24 Sturluson, Edda trans. Anthony Faulkes (London: Everyman, 1995), 48-49.

25 Lassen, ‘Höðr’s Blindness and the Pledging of Óðinn’s Eye: A Study of the Symbolic Value of the Eyes of

Höðr, Óðinn and Þórr’, 223.

26 ‘‘Loki’s Quarrel’, 80-92.

27 Wanner, ‘Sewn Lips, Propped Jaws, and a Silent Áss (or Two): Doing Things with Mouths in Norse Myth’,

The Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 111 (2012), 6-7.

28 Ibid, 8.

29 Ibid.

30 Sturluson, Edda, 26.

31 Bragg, ‘Disfigurement, Disability, and Dis-Integration in Sturlunga Saga*’, 15.

32 Ibid, 16.

33 Ibid.

34 Ibid, 17.

35 Ibid, 18.

36 Ibid, 31.

37 Ibid.

38 Sturluson, Edda, 96.

39 Clover, ‘Regardless of Sex: Men, Women, and Power in Early Northern Europe’, Representations, 44

(1993), 15.

40 ‘hvatr’, in A Concise Dictionary of Old Icelandic ed. Geir T. Zoëga (New York: Dover Publications Inc.,

2004), 217.

41 ‘blauðr’, in A Concise Dictionary of Old Icelandic, 57.

42 J. Friðriksdóttir, ‘Gender’, Academia, 226–39,

https://www.academia.edu/39952949/Gender_Routledge_companion_

43 Bragg, ‘Disfigurement, Disability, and Dis-Integration in Sturlunga Saga*’, 24.

44 There were certain situations where woman were able to take part in assemblies though this was not

the norm. See: Sanmark, A., ‘Women at the Thing’, in Nordic Women in the Viking Age, ed. by N. Colman

and N. L. Løkka (Scandinavian Academic Press, 2014), pp. 85–100.