8/13/2019 Cor Mack

1/8

Margaret Cormack

Egils saga, Heimskringla,and the Daughter of

Eirkr blx*

alvssml 10 (2001): 6168

H

eimskringlaor more precisely, the manuscript Kringlahas long

dominated scholarship in two areas: medieval Norwegian history andsaga studies. Although it is known to be based on earlier writings,1

Heimskringlas popularity in both medieval and modern times has causedit to be held up as a standard against which other historical writing is judged. The

fact that it is attributed to Snorri Sturluson, a well-known literary figure and a

prominent player in the power politics of thirteenth-century Iceland, adds to its

attraction. Since the proposed author is also given credit for one of the best known

(and perhaps the earliest) of the Icelandic family sagasEgils saga Skalla-Grms-sonar2as well as theEdda,we appear to have examples of the works of a known

author unparalleled in medieval Iceland. The temptation to draw biographical orliterary-historical conclusions on the basis of these attributions is almost irresist-

able. It should, however, be resisted. In the following I will argue that Snorris author-

ship ofEgils sagaandHeimskringlashould not be taken for granted, and that recentarguments reversing the traditional dating of the two works should be rejected.

If Egils sagaand Heimskringlaare assumed to have been written by Snorri,scholars are faced with certain questions. Textual critics must explain why, although

Egils sagaandHeimskringlahave many passages in common, there are also signifi-

* Versions of this paper were presented at a meeting of the Society for the Advancement of Scan-

dinavian Study in Amherst, Massachusetts, in 1991 and at the Tenth International Saga Conference inTrondheim, Norway, in 1997.

1. As Theodore Andersson has pointed out, Heimskringlais by no means a first formulation, buta final fusion. It is a synthesis in a very narrow, almost editorial, sense (1993, 12). Lars Lnnroth seesits author as primarily a patron of literature and the centre of a large network of scribes, informantsand collectors of traditional material (1965, 14). In spite of these caveats, Snorris authorship ofHeims-kringlais still spoken of in the same way as Sturla rarsons authorship of slendinga saga,in contrastto the enterprises of the compilers of Sturlunga sagaand Flateyjarbk.

2. The suggestion that Snorri Sturluson was the author of bothEgils sagaandHeimskringlawas firstmade by Grundtvig in the introduction to his translation of Heimskringla (Grundtvig 1818, xxix). Theidea was kept alive by Gubrandur Vigfsson and received its first scholarly treatment at the hands ofBjrn Magnsson lsen (1904). Since receiving the stamp of approval of Sigurur Nordal in his edition

ofEgils sagaas the initial volume of the series slenzk fornrit, Snorris authorship of both works is oftenaccepted without comment. For the history of scholarship on the subject, see lason 1968.

8/13/2019 Cor Mack

2/8

62 Margaret Cormack

cant differences between them. Literary scholars and historians must account forthe fact that the two works evince opposite attitudes toward the kings of Norway,

who are the heroes inHeimskringlaand the villains inEgils saga.Finally both worksmust be provided with a plausible context in terms of Snorris life and activities.

The most recent studies of these questions are those of Jnas Kristjnsson(1977) and Melissa Berman (1982). Regarding the textual relationship between thetwo works, both Berman and Jnas Kristjnsson show conclusively that it is impos-sible to derive eitherEgils sagaorHeimskringlafrom the other; instead, both mustdepend on a common source which was also used inHlfdanar ttr svarta in Flat-eyjarbk (Vigfsson and Unger 186068, 1:56176). This conclusion confirms thatreached by Gustav Gjessing, who argued that the source used was Ari orgilssons

Konunga vi(1873, 6772, 11012; 1885). Where Berman and Jnas Kristjnssondiffer from previous scholarship is in their view of the relative chronology ofEgilssagaandHeimskringlaand their dates of composition. The general consensus hadbeen that Egils sagawas the earlier work. Jnas Kristjnsson, followed tentativelyby Berman, argues that Egils sagawas composed afterHeimskringla,when a disil-lusioned Snorri returned from Norway to Iceland in 1239. He bases his argument onthe fact thatEgils sagaclearly makes use of a work likeHeimskringla,whileHeims-kringla contains no references to Egills family. This argument loses force in viewof the evidence (adduced by Jnas Kristjnsson himself) thatEgils sagamakes usenot ofHeimskringlabut of a common source; the differences in choice of materialin the two works, as well as their differing attitudes towards the kings of Norway,can be explained by the aims and interests of the author(s). Jnas Kristjnsson

plausibly suggests thatHeimskringlawas composed with a Norwegian audience inmind,Egils sagafor an Icelandic one (1977, 47172).

In a response to Kristjnsson 1977 and 1990, Kolbrn Haraldsdttir (1991) haspointed out that reliable conclusions about the relationship and dating of thesetexts must be based first and foremost on careful textual comparison. She reviewsthe evidence for a common source and advocates the traditional ordering of three

works attributed to Snorri: Egils saga, the Separate Saga of St. lfr,and Heims-kringla.(The Separate Sagais generally agreed to have been composed before themain body of Heimskringla.) There is additional evidence that Egils sagaand the

Separate Saga of St. lfrpredateHeimskringla:their accounts of the final years ofEirkr blx and of the marriage of his daughter, Ragnhildr.

It will be worthwhile to summarize the relevant information concerning theactivities of Eirkr and his sons starting with the the synoptic histories:Historia deantiquitate regum Norwagiensiumby the monk Theodoricus (Storm 1880, 168),

Historia Norwegiae (Storm 1880, 69124), and grip af Nregs konunga sogum(Einarsson 1985, 154). These works represent an earlier stage of historical writingthanHeimskringla.All of them know that Eirkr died in England, but they differ intheir accounts of the route by which he arrived there. Theodoricus, who is known

to have used Icelandic traditions, has Eirkr sail to England and die on the sameday as he is received by King Athelstan (Storm 1880, 7). Theodoricus is aware that

8/13/2019 Cor Mack

3/8

Egils sagaandHeimskringla 63

Eirkrs son Haraldr grfeldr was brought up by King Haraldr Gormsson of Denmark(Storm 1880, 11).

Historia Norwegiaeidentifies Eirkrs wife, Gunnhildr, as the daughter of KingGormr of Denmark. In this version Eirkr flees to England, where he is received and

baptized by Athelstan and then put in charge of Northumbria. When the Northum-brians will suffer him no longer, he dies on Viking expedition in Spain, after whichGunnhildr takes her children to her brother in Denmark (Storm 1880, 1056).

grip,which has a close textual relationship to both Theodricus andHistoriaNorwegiaeand was itself used by the authors of Heimskringlaand Fagrskinna, hasEirkr flee first to Denmark [til Danmarkar fyrst] (Einarsson 1985, 8), althoughthis text apparently knows nothing of Gunnhildrs Danish connection. It makes herthe daughter of oneOzurr lafskegg (whose homeland is not mentioned) rather thanGormr. After following the career of Eirkrs brother Hkon to its end and discuss-ing his battles with Eirkrs sons,gripreturns to Eirkr, commenting that when hefled the land he went west to England. As in Historia Norwegiae,Gunnhildr bearsthe ultimate blame for the revolt of the Northumbrians against Eirkr, who dies inSpain; she and her sons then return to Denmark, where they remain until the sonsare mature [rosknir menn mjok sv at aldri] (Einarsson 1985, 12).

The synoptic historians were interested primarily in Norwegian events andonly incidentally in Eirkrs activities overseas. The longer sagas of the Norwegiankings incorporate poetry regarding foreign campaigns, as well as genealogical lore

which recorded the fact that Eirkr and Gunnhildr had a daughter who marrieda son of the earl of Orkney. This information is incorporated in different ways in

Fagrskinna, the Separate Saga of St. lfr,andEgils saga.Fagrskinnas initial description of Eirkr and his family resembles that ofgrip

in naming Ozurr lafskegg (here from Hlogaland in northern Norway) as Gunn-hildrs father. It lists the couples six sons and a daughter, Ragnhildr, who marriedto the Orkneys [giptisk Orkneyjar] (Einarsson 1985, 74). The fact that the nameof the islands is in the accusative indicates that Ragnhildr ended up in the Orkneys,but says nothing about where the wedding took place. If it had occurred on theislands themselves, the dative rather than accusative case would have been used. Ina later passage (Einarsson 1985, 76) we are told that Eirkr went to England and was

received by Athelstanhis baptism is also mentioned, as it is in Historia Norwe-giae.Inserted abruptly and without introduction of any sort is the statement thatThe sons of Earl Torf-Einarr are Arnkell, Erlendr, orfinnr hausakljfr. Hvarr,a son of Torf-Einarr, married Ragnhildr, the daughter of King Eirkr [eir erusynir Torf-Einars jarls Arnkell, Erlendr, orfinnr hausakljfr. Sonr orfinns, Hvarr,fekk Ragnhildar, dttur Eirks konungs] (Einarsson 1985, 77). Since both the pre-ceding and following sentences describe the military activities of Eirkr blx,

we must assume either that an account which introduced the earls family hasbeen omitted, or that the sentence just quoted has been interpolated. It is loosely

connected with the following passage, which informs us that one summer Eirkrharried Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and then England. He was defeated and slain in

8/13/2019 Cor Mack

4/8

64 Margaret Cormack

battle along with Arnkell and Erlendr, sons of Torf-Einarr, and five kings; the memo-rial poem mentioning the kings is quoted (Einarsson 1985, 7779). After Eirkrsdeath, Gunnhildr departs for Denmark with her sons, as she does inHistoria Norwe-

giaeandgrip.There they receive sanctuary from Haraldr Gormsson, who fosters

Haraldr Eirksson at his court while his older brothers go harrying (Einarsson 1985,80). It is not until the twentieth year of Hkons reign that the Eirkssons appear tochallenge his claim to the throne (Einarsson 1985, 81). Thus Fagrskinna mentionsRagnhildrs marriage without having Eirkr actually set foot on the Orkney Islandsand allows a significant interval to pass between Eirkrs death and the arrival of hissons as claimants to the Norwegian throne.

In the brief history of St. lfrs kindred which introduces the Separate Sagaof St. lfr,Eirkr actually stops off in the Orkneys to gather troops before attack-ing England. Athelstan then offers him Northumbria as a means of resolving theconflict between Eirkr and Hkon, Athelstans foster son. Eirkrs death is said tohave occurred on a Viking expedition in the west [ vestrvking] (Aalbjarnarson194151, 2:430). Eirkr and Gunnhildrs children are then listed, first their sons andthen their daughter Ragnhildr, here said to have married Earl Arnfinnr, son of Earlorfinnr. From this brief account one might infer that the wedding took place (orat least that it was arranged) when her father was in the islands recruiting troops.

Egils sagas account of Eirkrs movements on his departure from Norwaymakes this assumption. It follows the Separate Saga of St. lfrin having Eirkr goto England via the Orkneys and explicitly inserts Ragnhildrs marriage to Earl Arn-finnr at this point (Nordal 1933, 176). His daughter disposed of, Eirkr harries in

Scotland and England. Athelstan moves against him, but hostilities are avoided andan agreement is reached whereby Eirkr is to hold Northumbria from Athelstan anddefend it against the Scots and Irish. We are told that Egill Skalla-Grmsson avoidedthe Orkneys, which he believed to be under Eirkrs power, but that due to the spellsof Gunnhildr he ran up against Eirkr in York. After his adventure there, he learnedthat Eirkr had been slain on a Viking expedition in the west [ vestrvking] and thatGunnhildr and her sons were in Denmark (Nordal 1933, 211).

Egils sagaalso includes information (presumably from the common sourcementioned above, as it recurs inHeimskringla) that Eirkrs son Haraldr grfeldr was

born about the time Haraldr hrfagri appointed Eirkr as his successor (Nordal 1933,163). The older Haraldr died three years later (Nordal 1933, 164), and Eirkr ruledone year after that before Hkon Aalsteinsfstri arrived from England (Nordal1933, 175). He ruled for an additional winter along with Hkon, then fled to Eng-land. From this information we can calculate that Haraldr grfeldr was not muchmore than five years old when his father became king at York.

Before examining Heimskringlas text, let us assess the evidence so far. Theearliest texts (Theodricus, Historia Norwegiae,and grip,all of Norwegian prov-enance) send Eirkr blx to England directly or (in grip) via Denmark, as does

Fagrskinna. Fagrskinna is the only Norwegian work which is aware of the existenceand Orkney marriage of Ragnhildr Eirksdttir, and it presents this information in

8/13/2019 Cor Mack

5/8

Egils sagaandHeimskringla 65

isolation from any narrative which might date or locate the event it describes. Inall these texts Gunnhildr is an important figure, and at least some of her sons growup at the Danish court. The Icelandic texts, the Separate Saga of St. lfrandEgilssagawhich are either unaware of, or uninterested in, the fate of Gunnhildr and

her sonsstate or imply that Eirkr married off his daughter in the Orkneys enroute to a harrying expedition. In these texts, Athelstans offer of Northumbria is aresponse to aggression rather than a generous offer to an exile with whose familyhe is on good terms.

Heimskringlapresents yet another scenario. Once again, Haraldr hrfagri livesthree years after appointing Eirkr his successor and is said to have given his nameto his grandson and sprinkled him with water, although this event is not assignedto any particular year (Aalbjarnarson 194151, 1:147). As in Egils saga, Eirkrgoes first to the Orkneys, where he gathers troops before harrying in Scotland andEngland (Aalbjarnarson 194151, 1:152). Eirkrs relationship to Athelstan is heredescribed as friendly, reflecting the situation in the synoptics rather than that ofthe Separate Saga of St. lfr,Egils saga,or an earlier passage inHeimskringlaitself.The enemies anticipated by Athelstan are the Danes, not the Scots and Irish ofEgilssaga.Eirkr and his entire family are baptized as part of the agreement.

We are then informed of Athelstans death and the succession of his brotherEdmund, which caused Eirkr to set out on his final, fatal expedition. He collectsfrom the Orkneys Arnkell and Erlendr, sons of Torf-Einarr, who are slain in his finalbattle (Aalbjarnarson 194151, 1:154). Some of the five kings who accompaniedhim are named, although the erfidrpais not quoted. When they learn of Eirkrs

death, Gunnhildr and her sons [au Gunnhildr] head to the Orkneys and settledthere for a time [stafestusk ar um hr]. In fact, they took over and used theOrkneys as a base for raiding.Heimskringlacites a verse by Glmr Geirason describ-ing this activity in which the unnamed protagonist is just a child [barnungr](Aalbjarnarson 194151, 1:155). Exactly what this term implies is difficult to ascer-tain. Ingibjorg Sturludttir, thirteen years old at the time of her wedding feast atFlugumri, could still be considered barn at aldri [a child in age] (slendinga sagachap. 174; Jhannesson, Finnbogason, and Eldjrn 1946, 1:494). The chronology ofthe saga suggests that Haraldr grfeldr Eirksson was about seven years old. When

Gunnhildr and her family hear of the hostilities between Haraldr Gormsson of Den-mark and Hkon Haraldsson of Norway they marry Ragnhildr to Arnfinnr, son oforfinnr. At this time Gamli was oldest [of Eirkrs sons] by a little bit, but nonethe-less he was not a mature man [Gamli Eirksson var nokkuru ellstr, ok var hann

eigi roskinn mar] (Aalbjarnarson 194151, 1:162).There is no way of knowing to which of Eirkrs sons Glmrs poem refers;

Bjarni Aalbjarnarson suggests that it is really about Eirkr himself (194151, 1:156note to verse 60). There is, however, a definite tension between the early accountof Eirkrs sons harrying in the Orkneys and Heimskringlas subsequent statement

(agreeing with Fagrskinna, with which it has certain verbal similarities) that HaraldrGormsson adopted Haraldr grfeldr, who grew up at the Danish court. In Denmark,

8/13/2019 Cor Mack

6/8

66 Margaret Cormack

some of Eirkrs sons went on harrying expeditions when they were old enough,and obtained wealth for themselves, and harried on the Eastern Way. They werehandsome men early on, and mature in power and accomplishments rather than

years [Sumir Eirkssynir fru herna, egar er eir hofu aldr til, ok ofluu sr

fjr, herjuu um Austrveg. eir vru snimma menn frir ok fyrr rosknir at afli okatgrvi en at vetratali] (Aalbjarnarson 194151, 1:162).Aside from the contradiction, what is striking about both these accounts is

their concern with the ageor rather youthof Eirkrs family when they departfrom Britain. They would have been that much younger when they arrived there. Tothe compiler of this text, a marriage for Ragnhildr at such an early date may haveseemed out of the question. The second stay in Orkney may have been invented,and Ragnhildrs marriage dated to that occasion, to make the narrative conform tothe authors conception of their ages. Such revision would be consistent with his

practice in the saga of lfr Tryggvason as shown by Theodore Andersson (1977).I am concerned not with the actual ages of Eirkrs offspring, but rather with

the implications of the statements concerning Ragnhildrs marriage for the author-ship of three worksEgils saga, theSeparate Saga of St. lfr, and Heimskringla.Assuming all three are by a single hand, the agreement concerning Eirkrs itiner-ary and the actual or implied dating of Ragnhildrs marriage inEgils sagaand theSeparate Saga of St. lfr,compared with the addition of a second stay in Orkneyand explicit statements about the precocity of Eirkrs sons in Heimskringla,sug-gests that the first two texts are more closely related to each other than either isto Heimskringla.The agreement between the Separate Sagaand Egils saga could

be presumed to reflect the state of that authors knowledge at an early stage of hishistorical studies, when he was interested only in specific members of the royalfamilyEirkr blx in Egils saga, St. lfr in the Separate Saga. To an authorconcerned primarily with St. lfr or with Eirkrs conflicts with the descendantsof Skalla-Grmr, received tradition or an educated guess suggested a stopover onEirkrs trip from Norway to Northumbria as the appropriate occasion for his daugh-ters marriage. The author ofHeimskringla,however, had to examine in detail notonly the life of Eirkr but that of his son Haraldr grfeldr. He would thus have hadto give serious consideration to the age of Haraldr and his siblings and would have

been aware that they grew up at the Danish court. While I can imagine the authorofEgils sagaor the Separate Saga of St. lfrrevising his earlier ideas as he workedout the chronology of Haraldr grfeldrs life and placing Ragnhildrs marriage as lateas possible, I cannot imagine the author of Heimskringlajettisoning his carefully

worked-out chronology for a simplified one that made the age problem even worse.In any case, Egils sagas account of Eirkrs movements agrees not with Heims-kringlabut with the Separate Saga of St. lfr,which scholars agree precededHeims-kringla.

Of course if it is not assumed thatEgils sagaandHeimskringlaare by the same

author, the difficulty vanishes; the existence of a common source solves the prob-lem. To my mind, neither the assumption of common authorship ofEgils sagaand

8/13/2019 Cor Mack

7/8

Egils sagaandHeimskringla 67

Heimskringlanor the identification of that author with Snorri Sturluson should betaken for granted. The similarities that caused scholars to identify Egils sagaand

Heimskringlaas proceeding from the same pen are no more than could result fromcopying a manuscript whose style might have influenced copyists even when they

were not using it as an exemplar. Further, it has recently been argued by Jon GunnarJrgensen (1995) that the attribution ofHeimskringlato Snorri Sturluson dependson the assumption that the early translators, Laurents Hanssn and Peder Claussn,both knew a lost manuscript ascribing the work to Snorri. Jrgensen points outthat if this were the case, the publisher of Claussns translation would not havehad to use Hanssns translation of the prologue. The attribution thus rests solelyon Hanssns statement, unsupported by any manuscript evidence.

The acceptance of Snorri as author ofHeimskringladespite the paucity of evi-dence is the more striking because the name of another Icelander isassociated withthe text by medieval manuscript evidence: Ari orgilsson inn fri. In Codex Fri-sianus (AM 45 fol.) the heading that follows the prologue reads: Her hefr vpp kon-vnga bok eftir savgn Ara prestz froa. Oc hfr fyrst vm riivnga skipti heimsins.En sidan fra avllvm Noregs konvngvm [Here begins the book of kings accordingto the account of the priest Ari the Learned. And it begins with the division ofthe world into thirds, and then (tells) about all the kings of Norway] (Unger 1871,3.13). Codex Frisianus has been dated to ca. 13001325, less than a century afterSnorris death (Degnbol et al. 1989, 432).

The suggestion that Ari was the author of the lost text used by Egils saga,Heimskringla,and Flateyjarbk was made by Gustav Gjessing as early as 1873. It is

rejected by Jnas Kristjnsson (1977, 45253) on the grounds that it is based on asingle phrase common to the first two works, stukku msir [i.e., Jarl Hkon and thesons of Gunnhildr] r landi, which is preceded inHeimskringlaby an attribution toAri of the chronology of Jarl Hkons reign and the hostilities between him andthe descendants of Haraldr hrfagri. This is indeed a weak argument on which tohang an authorial attributionalthough perhaps no weaker than the reasoning

which has attributed Heimskringla and Egils saga to Snorri for all these years.More recently Else Mundal (1984) has argued that the emphasis given to Ari in the

prologue suggests that his work was a major source for Heimskringlarather than

merely a chronological framework; the redactor of Codex Frisianus clearly thoughtthat this was the case.

Ari cannot have been the author ofHeimskringlain its entirety. The prologuestoHeimskringlaand the earlier Separate Saga of St. lfrshow that he had reliableinformation about the reign of St. lfr. The prologue to the Separate Saga begins

with a description of Aris writings, only later discussing skaldic verse as a histori-cal source. This order is reversed in the prologue of Heimskringla,where the dis-cussion of Aris contribution immediately precedes the description of the world.Arguably this prologue could itself have suggested his authorship to the scribe of

Codex Frisianus. Then again, that scribe may have used a manuscript which madethe attribution. At the very least, his heading should serve as a reminder of the

8/13/2019 Cor Mack

8/8

68 Margaret Cormack

complexity of a work which relies extensively on earlier writings and of the uncer-tainty involved in assigning medieval works to individual authors.

Bibliography

Aalbjarnarson, Bjarni, ed. 194151. Snorri Sturluson, Heimskringla.3 vols. slenzk fornrit 2628. Reykjavk: Hi slenzka fornritaflag.

Andersson, Theodore M. 1977. The Conversion of Norway according to Oddr Snorrason andSnorri Sturluson.Mediaeval Scandinavia10:8395.

. 1993. Snorri Sturluson and the Saga School at Munkaver. In Snorri Sturluson: Kol-loquium anllich der 750. Wiederkehr seines Todestages,ed. Alois Wolf, 925. Tbingen:Gunter Narr.

Berman, Melissa. 1982. Egils sagaandHeimskringla.Scandinavian Studies54:2150.Degnbol, Helle, et al. 1989. Ordbog over det norrne prosasprog // A Dictionary of Old Norse

Prose. Registre // Indices.Kbenhavn: Den arnamagnanske kommission.Einarsson, Bjarni, ed. 1985. grip af Nregskonunga sogum, FagrskinnaNregs konunga tal.

slenzk fornrit 29. Reykjavk: Hi slenzka fornritaflag.Gjessing, Gustav A. 1873. Undersgelse af kongesagaens fremvxt.Vol. 1. Oslo: A. W. Brgger..1885. Egils-sagas forhold til kongesagaen.Arkiv fr nordisk filologi2:289318.Grundtvig, Nikolai Frederik Severin, trans. 1818. Norges konge-krnike af Snorro Sturlesn.

Vol. 1. Kbenhavn: Bekostet for menig-mann af Krnikens danske og norske venner.Haraldsdttir, Kolbrn. 1991. Hvenr var Egils sagaritu? In Yfir slandsla: Afmlisrit til

heiurs Magnsi Stefnssyni sextugum, 25. desember 1991,ed. Gunnar Karlsson and Helgiorlksson,13145. Reykjavk: Sgufrslusjur.

Jhannesson, Jn, Magns Finnbogason, and Kristjn Eldjrn, eds. 1946. Sturlunga saga.2 vols.

Reykjavk: Sturlungutgfan.Jrgensen, Jon Gunnar. 1995 Snorre Sturlesns Fortale paa sin Chrnicke: Om kildene til opp-

lysningen omHeimskringlasforfatter. Gripla9:4562.Kristjnsson, Jnas. 1977. Egilssagaog konungasgur. In Sjtu ritgerir helgaar Jakobi Bene-

diktssyni, 20. jl 1977,ed. Einar G. Ptursson and Jnas Kristjnsson, 2:44972. Rit 12.2 vols. Reykjavk: Stofnun rna Magnssonar.

. 1990. Var Snorri Sturluson upphafsmaur slendingasagna?Andvari115:85105.Lnnroth, Lars. 1965.European Sources of Icelandic Saga-Writing. Stockholm: Thule.Mundal, Else. 1984. slendingabk, ttar talaog Konunga vi. In Festskrift til Ludvig Holm-

Olsen p hans 70-rsdag, den 9. juni 1984,ed. Bjarne Fidjestl et al., 25571. vre Ervik:

Alvheim & Eide (Akademisk forlag).Nordal, Sigurur, ed. 1933. Egils saga Skalla-Grmssonar. slenzk fornrit 2. Reykjavk: Hi

slenzka fornritaflag.lason, Vsteinn. 1968. Er Snorri hfundurEgils sgu?Skrnir142:4867.lsen, Bjrn Magnsson. 1904. LandnmaogEgils saga.Aarbger for nordisk oldkyndighed og

historie,167247.Storm, Gustav, ed. 1880.Monumenta historica Norvegiae, latine conscripta. Latinske kildeskrif-

ter til Norges historie i middelalderen. Oslo: A. W. Brgger.Unger, Carl R., ed. 1871. Codex Frisianus: En samling af norske konge-sagaer.Oslo: P. T. Malling.Vigfsson, Gubrandur, and Carl R. Unger, eds. 186068. Flateyjarbk: En samling af norske

konge-sagaer med indskudte mindre fortllinger om begivenheder i og udenfor Norge samtannaler.3 vols. Oslo: P. T. Malling.