This is 86 of our ongoing series about Viking Age Iceland. For centuries, this island country, unique in Medieval Europe, operated with no king, no great lords, no foreign policy, and no defense forces but which developed legal and judicial systems to limit the violence of bloodfeud and protect the rights of freemen. Far out in the North Atlantic, Iceland was where the famous sagas developed. To explore Iceland’s place in the medieval world, we present selections from Jesse Byock’s Viking Age Iceland that investigate the history, archaeology, culture, systems of feud, and sagas of this magical place.
The Old Icelandic legal and narrative texts about the Free State contain many terms for arbitrators and arbitration. Sometimes arbitration is referred to as jafnaðardómr, a case judged by one or more umpires. More often the term görð, meaning simply arbitration, is used. A settlement or reconciliation brought about through arbitration was called sætt or sátt (the forms are used interchangeably; the plural for both terms is sættir), and arbitrators or peacemakers were frequently called sáttarmenn or görðarmenn. Arbitrators were often influential advocates who possessed the wide-ranging family and political alliances required to arrange compromises. So it is in the example above from Hallfred’s Saga; Thorkel, after having taken on Hallfred’s case, chooses to seek an arbitrated settlement rather than to defend his client in court: “Now men came to the thing. When Hallfred and Galti arrived they went to Thorkel’s booth and inquired what was to happen. Thorkel replied, ‘I will offer to set up an arbitration [görð], if both sides will accept this. Then I will try to arrange a settlement [sætt].’”
In many instances when arbitration had a chance of success, supporters of both sides united to aid the arbitrator. A famous example is from Eyrbyggja saga (Chapter 10)[IS1] where Thord Gellir arbitrates between two local groups, the people of Thórsnes (Thórsnesingar) and the descendants of Kjallakr (Kjalleklingar). Usually the farmers and chieftains who backed the arbitrator were concerned with achieving a compromise that adjusted for the new status quo but did not seriously disturb the existing balance of power. Here again consensus came into play, since compromise resolutions often involved many people. These and other sættir had a chance of success because they were based on a common standard of compensation or blood money recognized throughout the island as suitable recompense for torts and physical injury. Like advocacy, which in many instances served to promote the common good, arbitration was intended to accomplish specific goals.
— Jesse Byock, Viking Age Iceland
