Sacri canones servandi sunt

Ius canonicum et status ecclesiae saeculis XIII–XV

curavit Pavel Krafl

Praha: Historický ústav AV ČR, v. v. i., 2008

(Opera Instituti historici Pragae, series C – Miscellanea, vol. 19)

The Peace of God in Iceland in the 12

th

and 13

th

centuries

Sverrir Jakobsson

I. The Peace of God Movement in Europe. – II. The Archbishop’s message and Peace of God. – III. The Church
as a Sanctuary. – IV. Sacred assemblies and days. – V. The Church and the End of the Icelandic Commonwealth.

This article focuses on one of the most strife-ridden periods of Icelandic history, the

Age of the Sturlungs (1220–1262) and the Church’s endeavours to bring about peace.
With an emphasis on the relationship between 13

th

-century Icelandic society and

medieval European society, it is argued that the peace effort was shaped by international
concepts which had been developing from the 10

th

century.

I. The Peace of God Movement in Europe

The Peace of God movement originated in France. From there it spread to Germany

and south to the Italian peninsula. Conditions in France in the 10

th

century furthered the

development of its ideology; state power was in chaos but vassals (castellani)
strengthened their position. The century is characterised by noblemen’s private wars, but
the unrest also affected farmers. Vassals campaigned in each other’s regions but avoided
assailing the adversary himself who sat secure in his castle. Scholars have called such war
feud.

1

The strength of those with the means to steal from churches and use force against

clerics and monks increased. So-called protectors (advocati) of the Church dispersed its
assets at will and attacked servants of the Church, defying the law, and unarmed clerics
had little means of defending themselves against such aggression. Bishops and abbots
benefited from securing the peace but few managed this until it occurred to them to appeal
directly to the war-ravaged populace who always desired peace.

2

The first peace assemblies were held in Aquitaine and Burgundy in the last quarter

of the 10

th

century. Knights and armed farmers (milites ac rustici) swore to respect the

sanctity of churches and the poor. Those attacking clerics, stealing church property and
farmers’ livestock were excommunicated.

3

The movement spread all across France and

205

1

J. M. WALLACE-HADRILL, The Bloodfeud of the Franks, in: The Long-Haired Kings, London, 1962,
p. 121–147; Stephen D. WHITE, Feuding and peace-making in the Touraine around the year 1100,
Traditio 42, 1986, p. 195–263; Geoffrey KOZIOL, Monks, Feuds and the Making of Peace in Eleventh-
Century Flanders, in: The Peace of God. Social Violence and Religious Response in France around the
Year 1000, ed. Thomas Head – Richard Landes, Ithaca–London 1992, p. 239–58. On feoud in Iceland cf.
Jesse L. BYOCK, Medieval Iceland. Society, Saga, and Power, Berkeley–Los Angeles–London 1988;
William Ian MILLER, Bloodtaking and Peacemaking. Feud, Law and Society in Saga Iceland, Chicago
–London 1990 and Helgi ÞORLÁKSSON, Hvað er blóðhefnd?, in Sagnaþing helgað Jónasi Kristjánssyni
sjötugum 10. apríl 1994, Reykjavík 1994, p. 389–414.

2

Hartmut HOFFMANN, Gottesfriede und Treuga Dei, SchMGH 20, Stuttgart 1964, p. 11–13.

3

Joannes Dominicus MANSI, Sacrorum consilium nova et amplissima collectio, XIX., Florentiae 1774, col. 89–90.

bishops and personages all around held assemblies to restore the peace and strengthen the
organisation of the holy faith. Between the Church Councils in Charroux in 989 and
Clermont in 1095 there’s hardly a decade when the laity’s eagerness to uphold the peace
wasn’t reaffirmed at such councils. The atmosphere of pious and religious sentiment
which prevailed at these councils was fertile ground for peace agitation. Rodulfus Glaber
describes how bishops, abbots and “other holy men” gathered together mobs at
assemblies and showed them mortal remains of saints and other holy relics.

4

Initially,

knights’ oaths were the only guarantee that Church Council resolutions would be
followed, but in 1038 Archbishop Aimon of Bourges urged all believers over fifteen to
declare themselves enemies of those who violated the resolutions and take up weapons
against them.

5

Peace leagues emerged to which the general public was party. Public

enthusiasm bears witness to growing social awareness at this time. Clerics wanted to
channel this new power in safe directions and the laity was affected by peace agitation and
the messages of the first assembly about the Peace of God.

6

Pax and Pactum pacis are mentioned in 994 and, later, restauratio pacis et iustitiae

and convenienta pacis, and around 1040 Pax et treva Domini was abbreviated to Pax Dei
(Peace of God). To define the concept more closely, Peace of God was aimed at protecting
those who didn’t fight: men of the cloth, hermits, herdsmen, craftsmen, traders, women,
children and the elderly. Bringing a halt to combat altogether was not its aim. In the 11th
century the Church Council went further and proclaimed Truce of God (Treuga Dei) from
Thursday to Sunday and on major Church festivities. At the Narbonne Church Council in
1054 it was decided that war and vengeance killing could only take place 80 days a year.
Ideally, no Christian man should ever kill another Christian man, because in doing so he
spilled Christ’s blood. Yet the majority of theologians considered it useless to limit so-
called just wars, even if fighting took place on holy days. On the other hand, the general
public had a tendency to frown upon fighting on the holiest days of the year. So-called
heretic movements, popular among the common people, were typically adherents of the
absolute dictum that it was a sin to kill Christian men. The role of kings had for a long
time been to protect their subjects, but in nations which were in a state of chaos, such as
10

th

-century France, such protection fell short. The peace movement of the 11

th

century

offered heads of state a welcome opportunity for revival. French kings adopted a new
ideology, “haute justice”, and sought exclusive control of judicial power.

7

In Germany,

local parliaments publicly declared Landfriede (public peace) in a particular region,
applying the death penalty when it was breached. In 1103 the Emperor established
Landfriede for his whole realm to endure for four years. This entailed protection for the
same groups and area which enjoyed the protection of Peace of God, with the same
guarantee, the oath of noblemen and knights. Such associations became part of the
development and growth of state power in Germany in the 12

th

century.

8

206

S

VERRIR

J

AKOBSSON

4

Raoul GLABER, Les cinq livres de ses histoires, ed. Maurice PROU, París 1886, p. 103–105.

5

Les miracles de saint Benoît écrits par Adrevald, Aimon, André, Raoul Tortaire et Hugues de Sainte Marie,
moines de Fleury, ed. Eugène de CERTAIN, Paris 1858, p. 192–198.

6

Cf. Loren C. MACKINNEY, The People and Public Opinion in the Eleventh-Century Peace Movement,
Speculum 5, 1930, p. 181–206.

7

Thomas BISSON, The Organized Peace in Southern France and Catalonia, ca. 1140 – ca. 1233, AHR 82,
1977, p. 290–311.

8

Herbert Edward John COWDREY, The Peace and the Truce of God in the Eleventh Century, PPr 46, 1970,
p. 42–67.

Medieval society’s increasing demand for justice, as opposed to a clash of interests,

led to Landfriede being established. Kings took on public protection, usurped the powers
of older institutions, such as farmers’ assemblies, and increased their revenue from
penalties, fines and appropriations. The Church backed kings by reiterating the divine
nature of their power and received benefits in the form of part of the revenue from
protection, and fines for those violations covered by Church canon law.

9

The lower

aristocracy lost the most from these changes. The knights in their castles now began to
recognise the tutelage of kings and in the process relinquished some of their rights. An
ideal of knightly behaviour emerged from this group’s existential difficulty. Previously,
there had been a great division between noblemen and uncouth soldiers, but in the 10th
and 11

th

centuries that difference began to diminish. Knights became soldiers of Christ

(milites Christi) and a clearly defined group within society. They should be true to their
Lord and protect him with their lives, protect the poor, widows and orphans, not plunder
nor break oaths. Knights were above the commoners (rustici) and there was an emphasis
on maintaining the lines of knights’ families. Those descended from knights would not
consider marrying into a lower class. Great numbers of young unmarried men belonged
to the class of knights. They sought purpose in life from wanderlust, restlessness and a
desire to fight. These became themes of the rapidly growing body of literature in the
vernacular.

10

God’s knights were not permitted to fight the poor or disturb the peace in society.

They took on a new role. The First Crusade was preached at the Council of Clermont in
1095, where the Peace of God was the main item on the agenda. The enthusiasm over
Pope Urban II’s speech which raptured people in the final days of the Council, was typical
for a Peace of God assembly earlier in the century, but now the Pope and heads of state
had entered the game and taken up these assemblies’ policies. This corresponded with the
concept within Western Christianity that a holy war pleased God. Europe’s problem with
what to do about the hyperactive group of warriors was shifted to the near East with tragic
results. Arguments for war against heathens were also used to justify war against heretics.
In the 13

th

century knights fought commoners at the will and agreement of the Church.

The Peace of God movement reached Iceland after an archbishopric was founded in
Norway in 1152 or 1153. The new archbishop became head of the Icelandic Church. With
the establishment of the archbishopric, canon law was promoted, including provisions
that men of the Church should not bear weapons and that they were exempt from the
public levy (leidang). Clerics could still take part in negotiations and war if a heathen
army invaded. In 1147 Pope Eugene III and Bernhard from Clairvaux equated war against
the Wends with crusades. Priests could also urge men to fight against excommunicates
and outlaws, but priests themselves were exempt from carrying weapons.

11

Landfriede legislation followed in the wake of the establishment of the

Archbishopric. When Magnus Erlingsson took power in 1161, the Church and the
monarchy joined hands. Magnus was just a child and was not a King’s son, but the son of
King Sigurd Jorsalafare’s daughter. His position was weak and the support of the Church

207

The Peace of God in Iceland

9

H. HOFFMANN, Gottesfriede und Treuga Dei, p. 179.

10

Philippe CONTAMINE, War in the Middle Ages, Oxford 1984, p. 271–280, 292–294; Georges DUBY, La
société chevaleresque, HSMA 1, Paris 1988, p. 47–53.

11

Walter HOLTZMANN, Krone und Kirche in Norwegen im 12. Jahrhundert, DA 2, 1938, p. 341–400 (esp.
p. 378). Cf. Arne Odd JOHNSEN, Opprettelsen av den norske kirkeprovins, in: Nidaros erkebispestol og
bispesete 1153–1953, Oslo 1955, p. 38–53.

was vital to him. The Church considered his legitimacy more important than whether he
had descended from the female or male line. Ecclesiastical freedom was one of the
premises of Magnus Erlingsson’s kingdom.

12

Succession laws from 1162 were intended

to put an end to the civil war that had raged in Norway since 1130 by having a single king
in power. They were created in the interests of the King and the Church. Magnus was
granted the right to defend the crown from challengers but at the same time aimed at
heralding the Church’s peace program and ensuring its political influence. This law is an
example of Norwegian Landfriede legislation based on a European model. During
Magnus Erlingsson’s reign, Church rules were also established which meant an increase
in ecclesiastical liberties from secular control and a prohibition of various things which
were regarded as part of the secular domain, such as armed clerics. These Church laws are
important in Iceland’s history because archbishops in Trondheim were quick to apply the
same laws to Iceland. In Norway, Church efforts to strengthen the king’s power initially
intensified conflict but ultimately led to conciliation during the rule of Håkon Håkonsson
(1217–1263).

13

II. The Archbishop’s message and Peace of God

Peace of God meant that particular social groups enjoyed immunity from war,

especially those not armed. In the early 12

th

century it seems this message of the Church’s

peace movement hadn’t reached the ears of Icelanders. This was, however, about to
change. In 1173 the Archbishop in Trondheim sent a letter because it had come to his
attention “that here are situated some men who have fought priests, some wounded and
some killed”, and that was in clear violation of the Peace of God. He banned priests from
taking part in legal proceedings or factions and ordered them to be lenient with the
unlearned. He directed bishops to ensure that those who had failed to heed the ban on this
conduct did not get away with flouting it, pointing to the bishops’ duty to obey.

14

There

were disputes at this time between King Sverre in Norway and men of the cloth, and
clerics took part in campaigns against the King’s men. The Pope banned this in a letter
from 1189 and the ban was restated in 1194 and 1198. Those who didn’t comply were
threatened with losing their position.

15

In 1189 Archbishop Eirik Ivarsson sent bishops

Þorlákr and Brandr a letter in which he reminds them that they owe “obedience to God
and the Saint Peter and me” and directs them to undertake “only those obligations that are
they are obliged to and do not require the use of weapons”.

16

In 1190 the Archbishop sent

a letter to bishops and principal Icelandic leaders and reiterated a ban on raping women
and wounding scholars or monks. In that very letter, he also points out that the same
applies to men who “deliberately injure someone within a church or churchyard”. The
Bishop puts forward a recommendation to assuage violence against clerics.

17

In order to

establish the sanctity of priests, chieftains were not to be priests. The role of chieftain was
to protect their clients and thus they could not be immune. After 1190, chieftains were

208

S

VERRIR

J

AKOBSSON

12

Fredrik PAASCHE, Kong Sverre, Oslo 1920, p. 140.

13

Knut HELLE, Norge blir en stat 1130–1319, HNH 3, Bergen–Oslo–Tromsø 1974, p. 41, 62–65.

14

DI I., p. 221–223.

15

Guðrún Ása GRÍMSDÓTTIR, Um afskipti erkibiskupa af íslenzkum málefnum á 12. og 13. öld, Saga 20,
1982, p. 28–61 (esp. p. 47).

16

DI I., p. 285–289.

17

DI I., p. 290–291.

thus not ordained in Iceland. Direct links between the country’s clergy and chieftains were
broken and priests could increasingly withdraw from secular preoccupations. The
prohibition of armed clerics made them more innocuous than unsanctified men and made
them ideal messengers of peace and reconciliation.

One of Guðmundr Arason’s concerns, as Bishop at Hólar 1203–1237, was that

priests come under his jurisdiction. But the Bishop had armed clerics under his
protection.

18

In Guðmundr’s disputes with chieftains, clerics are prominent in both

groups and killed no less often than others. This priest-killing and the behaviour of
chieftains towards Bishop Guðmundr provoked Archbishop Tore in Trondheim to send
principal chieftains in Iceland a letter in 1211, protesting about their conduct towards
Guðmundr: “no man passes judgement on him except the Pope and us on his behalf and
he has driven away from his bishopric, thus putting many souls at risk, men killed by him
including several priests – but no one can absolve for such a crime except the Pope
himself”.

19

There was a break in the violence towards priests for a while, since Bishop

Guðmundr was abroad. After his return, at Grímsey in 1222, the chieftains Sighvatr
Sturluson (1170–1238) and Sturla Sighvatsson (1199–1238) slew many of Bishop
Guðmundr’s men, including one priest, castrated two priests and manhandled Bishop
Guðmundr. He turned to God and asked Him to avenge him, “because I may not”.

20

This

refers to the fact, that men of the cloth could not take revenge with weapons. In the
aftermath, the chieftains were less violent towards the bishop but clerics in his service
were still being killed in 1232. Then priest Knútr was slain, who “always rode with
weapons because he was unruly and without office”.

21

In 1232 came tidings that father and son, Sighvatr Sturluson and Sturla Sighvatsson,

were summoned abroad for “Grímsey and more antagonism against bishop Guðmundr”
and Sturla went on behalf of both.

22

The historian Guðrún Ása Grímsdóttir believes that

the father and son’s killing and maiming of priests in combat with Guðmundr at Grímsey
were the main reasons for the summons abroad.

23

The Church had had enough of the

maltreatment against its servants. Sturla received “absolution for all their sins in Rome
with much atonement. He was led barefoot between all the churches in Rome and
thrashed before most of the main churches.”

24

After this treatment Sturla was presumably

deeply aware of the repercussions of killing priests. It may be that Sturla’s humiliation
also had a dissuasive influence on other chieftains. The next winter Kolbeinn the young
(1209–1245) spared the young life of a Jón Markússon apparently because he was
a priest.

25

Kolbeinn himself went to Rome in 1235 but the nature of his business is not

mentioned. Historian Helgi Þorláksson has argued that Kolbeinn’s trip to Rome, as well
as the summons and trip of Órækja Snorrason (c. 1205–1245) a year later, had been
punishment for killing a man who was a deacon.

26

He believes that the trips mark a shift,

209

The Peace of God in Iceland

18

Sturlunga saga, Árna saga biskups, Hrafns saga Sveinbjarnarsonar hin sérstaka, ed. Örnólfur
THORSSON, Reykjavík 1988, p. 214, 216.

19

Sturlunga, p. 226.

20

Sturlunga, p. 278.

21

Sturlunga, p. 323.

22

Sturlunga, p. 347.

23

G. Á. GRÍMSDÓTTIR, Um afskipti erkibiskupa, p. 44.

24

Sturlunga, p. 351.

25

Sturlunga, p. 355.

26

Helgi ÞORLÁKSSON, Rómarvald og kirkjugoðar, Skírnir 156, 1982, p. 51–67 (esp. p. 55–59).

that killers of deacons had not needed to seek absolution in Rome before.

27

Sturla

Sighvatsson’s compliance with the church had been an incentive for its servants to
continue on along the same path. After Sturla Sighvatsson’s 1233 journey to Rome there
is only one example of the killing of a priest; Benedikt Hesthöfðason killed a priest
Ásgrímr Illugason but drowned in 1253 on the way to Rome to seek penitence.

28

There

are also much fewer examples after 1233 of Icelandic clerics participating in combat,
though the general violence in the country was on the increase.

III. The Church as a Sanctuary

The oldest source about Church sanctuary in Iceland would be Archbishop Eirik’s

aforementioned letter from 1190 prohibiting killing in churches or churchyards.

29

Carrying weapons in churches is banned in some manuscripts dealing with Christian law,
but Icelandic historian Jón Jóhannesson believed this ban to be from the final years of the
Commonwealth Age.

30

The ban on killing in churches was an attempt to ensure that those

in strife could get safe refuge. Those defeated in battle increasingly sought churches for
sanctuary.

31

In Guðmundur Arason’s disputes with chieftains, clerics’ sanctity was often

not respected and the same applied to the sanctuary of the Church. Thus in 1206 the
Bishop had two chieftains banned for taking a man from a monastery, and inflicting
injuries and mutilation.

32

The chieftains who besieged the see of Hólar in 1209 gave the

Bishop an ultimatum, “otherwise they would kill all those who were in church and spare
no one” but when the Bishop had left they went “to the church with weapons and urged
the others out who were inside to get out, [...] otherwise said they would attack them or
starve them in the church.”

33

In the following years Church sanctuary was sometimes

upheld, sometimes not.

34

Though there is an increase in strife during the Age of the Sturlungs, there is little

to suggest that Church sanctuary was often broken after the Bishop Guðmundr matter
calms down. In 1237 there was a battle near the church in Bær in Borgarfjörður, but those
who sought sanctuary in the church were spared.

35

After the battle of Örlygsstaðir in 1238

some on the losing side fled to the church at Miklabær but the chieftains Gissur Þorvaldsson
(1209–1268) and Kolbeinn the Young drove them out. All except six were spared. Gissur
actually threatened to burn down the church, but in the end they came out and were
slain.

36

Though Church sanctuary was formally recognised, this did not mean it was

always respected in reality. In 1242 the bishopric in Skálholt was twice threatened when
men sought refuge there. Both times the bishop intervened to stop the attacks. The

210

S

VERRIR

J

AKOBSSON

27

H. ÞORLÁKSSON, Rómarvald og kirkjugoðar, p. 61–62.

28

Sturlunga, p. 630.

29

DI I., p. 291.

30

Grágás. Lagasafn íslenska þjóðveldisins, ed. Gunnar KARLSSON – Kristján SVEINSSON – Mörður
ÁRNASON, Reykjavík 1992, p. 43; Jón JÓHANNESSON, Íslendinga saga I. Þjóðveldisöld, Reykjavík
1956, p. 304–305.

31

Sturlunga, p. 152, 169, 175.

32

Sturlunga, p. 214–215.

33

Sturlunga, p. 222–224.

34

Cf. Sturlunga, p. 229, 250–251, 256, 257, 273. On violence in churchyards cf. ibidem, p. 260–261, 277.

35

Sturlunga, p. 324, 353, 378, 392.

36

Sturlunga, p. 422–424.

chieftain Þórðr kakali (c. 1210–1256) was one of those who threatened Skálholt that year,
but he later acted as guardian of women and churches. At a feast at Mýri in 1243 he
swears “an oath to never have a man taken from a church, whatever the offence, and he
kept that oath.”

37

Another chieftain, Kolbeinn the Young, was considered more vicious.

He had people led from church and killed, his men searched for men in churches with
swords drawn and pillaged churches. At another time, people fleeing him were said to
have “managed to get to church with great duress” so that Kolbeinn respected the sanctity
of the Church at that time.

38

Later on, when the chieftains Sæmundur Ormsson (c. 1220–1252) and Guðmundur

Ormsson (1234–1252) intended to kill the farmer Ögmundur Helgason, in 1250, he took
advantage of the close proximity of his farm to the church at Kirkjubær and went to the
church with his armed followers. Although Ögmundur had the Ormssons killed in 1252
he was not slain in revenge, partly because he “lived so close to the church” that he was
untouchable.

39

When the chieftains Sturla Þórðarson (1214–1284) and Hrafn Oddsson

(1226–1289) went to seek out Þorgils skarði (1226–1258) in Stafaholt in 1252 they were
reminded that the church belonged to St. Nicholas and they could not do the saint such
a disgrace.

40

Sturla Þórðarson didn’t want to let horses graze in the field at Reykholt

because the apostle Peter owned the hay.

41

There are exceptions from the general rule that

Church sanctuary was respected in Iceland, especially from the years 1208–1222, when
disputes of the Icelandic chieftains with Bishop Guðmundr were the most severe, and in
the years 1238–1244. The Archbishop in Trondheim actually placed a ban on the
inhabitants of the Northern Quarter in 1245.

42

It may be that the reason for the

Archbishop’s ban was that they had repeatedly disrespected the sanctuary of the church.
After the custom of granting sanctuary in churches had been generally acknowledged in
Iceland, there was little change over the next centuries. This custom was repealed in
Frederik II’s letter of 2

nd

July 1587 as a sign of Catholic heresy.

43

Churches and chapels

in Iceland were no longer safe houses for rogues and criminals. The position of the church
in relation to state power had by then become very weak in Iceland.

IV. Sacred assemblies and days

According to Kristni saga, in the parliament in 1120 “there was so little weapons-

carrying that there was only one steel helmet at the Alþing”, but the account was written
down long after the events it describes took place and is not credible.

44

Annals claim that

by 1154 the carrying of weapons at the parliament ceased.

45

But it seems to have been

taken up again soon after because in 1163 fighting took place there, one was killed and

211

The Peace of God in Iceland

37

Sturlunga, p. 472, 496, 498.

38

Sturlunga, p. 480–482, 488, 525–528, 530.

39

Sturlunga, p. 555–556.

40

Sturlunga, p. 597.

41

Sturlunga, p. 684.

42

Islandske Annaler indtil 1578, ed. Gustav STORM, Christiania 1888, p. 131, 189, 328.

43

Biskupasögur Jóns Halldórssonar, ed. Jón ÞORKELSSON – Hannes ÞORSTEINSSON, II., Reykjavík
1915, p. 37. Cf. Már JÓNSSON, Blóðskömm á Íslandi 1270–1870, Reykjavík 1993, p. 121–123.

44

Kristnisaga, þáttr Þorvalds ens viðfƒrla, þáttr Ísleifs biskups Gizurarsonar, Hungurvaka, ed. Bernhard
KAHLE, ASB 11, Halle 1905, p. 54.

45

Islandske Annaler, p. 115, 475.

many injured. That summer was called ‘stone-throwing-summer’ because of the stone-
throwing at the Alþing, but after that chieftains had stone-throwing banned.

46

Yet

weapons at the parliament in the 12

th

century and at the start of the 13

th

are widely

recounted. Carrying weapons at parliament seems to have been common and little needed
to happen before men would draw weapons, such as at the parliament in 1231.

47

In 1234

“chieftains and many men rode to parliament” but “Bishop Magnús banned all men from
carrying weapons to court. Men then went to court unarmed when a case was
underway.”

48

The Bishop’s ban on weapons seems to have marked the end of killing at

the parliament. Yet there were often big crowds and troupes at parliament, for example in
the years 1241, 1252 and 1259, without them coming to battle.

49

Probably, the parliament

had become respected as a sanctuary by then.

The Truce of God entailed a ban on carrying weapons on holy days, including the

feastdays of saints. Such a proscription is seldom referred to in the Icelandic sources;
quite often fighting occurs on big Church festivities, such as Sundays or the feastdays of
Saints.

50

Exceptions are found on occasions, where a reference to a holy feast is used to

prevent fighting, such as in 1211 and 1236.

51

Following the killing of the historian and

chieftain Snorri Sturluson (b. 1179) in 1241, his son Órækja went to Reykholt on
Christmas Eve and captured his adversary, Klængr Bjarnarson (c. 1215–1241) shortly
after midnight. Klængur and his men “pleaded for mercy. But Órækja said they should
have mercy on the holy day which now was upon them”. Klængur was then killed on the
day after Christmas.

52

The sanctity of the weekend had not received general recognition

when Icelanders submitted to the Norwegian King in 1262. It seems that the Icelandic
Church had hardly started to fight for the sanctity of the „long weekend“, which was an
integral part of the movement for the Truce of God elsewhere in Europe.

V. The Church and the End of the Icelandic Commonwealth

It appears that the Church in Western Europe had considerable profit from kings

establishing Landfriede. For the Icelandic church, there were two alternatives in bringing
this about: it could promote one chieftain or family to power in the country, or it could
support endeavours of the Norwegian King to bring Iceland under its control. Yet the
church did not take the initiative to strengthen the power of the Norwegian King until the
Icelandic chieftains had begun to flock to his side. King Håkon Håkonsson worked
vigorously to promote knightly culture among his retainers in Norway and Iceland. At his
initiative, the first romance was written down in the Nordic language in 1226 and many
more followed in its wake. Ideas of courtly behaviour were promoted in the Old Norse
King’s Mirror. Courtiers should be moderate in their behavior, punish disturbers of the
peace but avoid killing, except for the sake of the King. They should love God and the

212

S

VERRIR

J

AKOBSSON

46

Sturlunga, p. 104.

47

Sturlunga, p. 330–331.

48

Sturlunga, p. 360.

49

Sturlunga, p. 436, 566–567, 743.

50

Cf. Sturlunga, p. 24, 54–55, 68, 136, 146–147, 168, 174, 183, 218–219, 229, 235, 260–261, 268, 273, 281,
293–294, 301–302, 307–308, 352–353, 371, 380–381, 427, 737.

51

Sturlunga, p. 239, 376–380; Kristján ELDJÁRN, Textaskýringar, in: Sturlunga saga, I., ed. Jón
JÓHANNESSON – Magnús FINNBANDASON – Kristján ELDJÁRN, Reykjavík 1946, p. 568.

52

Sturlunga, p. 442.

Church.

53

King Sverre wanted his men to protect churches and King Håkon attached great

importance to Church sanctuary being respected.

54

His son Magnús’ legislation contains

provisions for church peace and for the protection of women.

55

In contemporary Icelandic

narratives, the king’s courtiers are described as moderate and respectful of the immunity
of clerics, churches and women. The chieftain Kolbeinn the Young, who was not a
retainer of the king, is blamed for lacking such moderartion. Kingsmen were to be
supportive of the Peace of God but the church in turn was expected to support the king’s
endeavours to subdue the country.

The year 1247 marks a turning point in this respect. The Italian Cardinal William

was sent to Norway by Pope Innocent to crown King Håkon. This event marked the final
reconciliation between the Norwegian king, of the family of Sverre, and the church. From
then on the church and king worked together, strengthening the position of both, not least
in relation to Icelandic chieftains. Previously, Håkon’s interventions in Icelandic matters
had generally been at the initiative of some Icelandic chieftain.

56

In 1247 two retainers of

the king, Gissur Þorvaldsson and Þórðr kakali, were at the royal court, and appealed to
King Håkon to settle their differences The King had Cardinal Vilhjálmur decide their case
and he judged in Þórðr’s favour. The King had previously been inclined to support
Gissur’s cause so the Cardinal’s opinion clearly made a significant difference.

57

The

Cardinal considered it important that one man be in charge of securing peace for the
country. It was on his advice that Þórðr kakali and Bishop Heinrekr of Hólar (r.
1247–1260) were sent to Iceland to help bring the country under the government of the
King. This was finally brought about in 1262/1264, but by then Þórðr’s adversary, Gissur
Þorvaldsson, was again in a key position and became the first and only Earl of Iceland.
How did the new authorities reward the Church for its support for their cause? When
Gissur Þorvaldsson had again become the most powerful man in the country, at an
assembly in 1253, it was agreed upon that the local law would never again be put above
church law. The independence of the Church was now ensured. But the great triumph of
the Church was that now peace prevailed throughout the land.

213

The Peace of God in Iceland

53

Konungs skuggsjá. Speculum Regale, ed. Finnur JÓNSSON, Copenhagen 1920, I., p. 152, 164–166,
283–289.

54

See e. g. Sverris saga efter Cod. AM 327 4°, ed. Gustav INDREBØ, Kristiania 1920, p. 88, 178. Det
Arnamagnæanske Haandskrift 81a Fol. (Skálholtsbók yngsta), ed. Albert KJÆR – Ludvig
HOLM-OLSEN, Oslo, 1910–1986, p. 569.

55

NgL II., p. 435.

56

Cf. Ármann JAKOBSSON, Hákon Hákonarson – friðarkonungur eða fúlmenni?, Saga 33, 1995, p. 166–185
(esp. p. 176).

57

Sturlunga, p. 545–547.