Vargr:
The Institution of Outlawry
David
Smith, 2004
The
institution of outlawry for punishment of severe crimes was practiced
throughout the Viking age. Further, the
concept of outlaws being equivalent to or associated with wolves was widespread
throughout northern
What
was Outlawry?
Although practiced throughout northern
Often, rather than leaving the country, the
outlawed man would take refuge in the heath or forest. For this reason, such men were often known as
forest-dwellers.
The term of banishment could vary widely. A man’s friends and family could petition the
Thing for removal of the penalty, while the family of the slain could urge its
extension.
Grettir
decided to go on to the Thing, and to the Thing he went. The matter was taken
up by the heirs of the man slain. Thorkell gave his
hand to pay the compensation and Grettir was to be
banished for three years. (2)
In fact, Grettir’s banishment lasted a total of twenty years.
In 982 Eric
the Red was outlawed for three years and used his period of banishment to
organize an expedition and explore
The outlawed man could not petition the
Thing, nor could he be named as a defendant.
If he was encountered in the land from which he was banished, he could
be killed without fear of reprisal, for he was literally outside of the
protection of the law. It was common for
the friends or family of a slain man to put a price on the head of the
slayer. In addition, the outlawed man
lost all property.
Though I use the term ‘outlawed man’ throughout
this essay, there is evidence that a woman could also be punished in this
manner.
"If a man slays a woman he shall be outlawed just as
if he has slain a man. If a woman slays a man, she shall be outlawed, and her
kinsmen shall remove her from the land" (3)
Crimes
There were a number of crimes and
offenses for which a man could be made an outlaw. These include:
Murder (cited above)
Theft:
"If a
well-born woman steals, she shall be driven out of the land into another
kingdom. (4)
Harboring an outlaw:
Grettir stayed but a few nights with Grim, for
he did not want it to become known that he was about to travel North across the
Heath. Grim told him to come back to visit him if he needed protection.
"Yet," he said, "I would gladly avoid the penalty of being
outlawed for harbouring you." (5)
Grievously insulting
another man:
There are
three words from maliced verse between men, which are
punished with full outlawry. If a man calls a man ragr or stroðinn or sorðinn. And they shall be punished as fully
slanderous words, and a man is given the right to kill for these words. (6)
Going berserk (as stated in Christian law in
1123):
If someone
goes berserk, he is punished with lesser outlawry and the men who are present
are also banished if they do not bind him. (7)
Outlaws as wolves
The association of outlaws and wolves is
very strong in the Germanic cultures. The Old Norse word vargr (OSw: varghær, OHG: warg, OE: wearg ) has been translated in a number of ways, and
several Indo-European root words have been claimed as its source. These include
*wergh (“strangle”, via the Germanic *wargaz) (8) and the Germanic “wacrer”
(to wander). The latter is the root for
the modern English word vagrant. From the fact that the major component of
outlawry was banishment, this last option seems to be the most likely
source. Those who transgress against
society are forced to wander from their homeland.
After the Christianization of Northern
Europe, an additional aspect of being outside of the faith as well:
_Vargr_ is the same
as _u-argr_, restless; _argr_
being the same as the Anglo-Saxon _earg_. _Vargr_ had its double signification in Norse. It signified
a wolf, and also a godless man.(9)
One author holds that the association
between wolves and outlaws seems to be a later phenomenon particular to the
Norse cultures:
…it is only late, and mostly in
Norse, that vargr (cognate with warg)
acquires the meaning "wolf" along with "criminal." In Old
English, wearg means almost exclusively
"criminal" or "accursed being." (10)
In Anglo-Saxon lands, the term “wolf’s-head”
became an accepted term for criminals (11). This connection itself is not so simple as it may seem.
At first view, it seems to be made due to the similarity in temperament
between wolves and criminals. However,
deeper meanings to this connection have been suggested. Some authors have suggested that the
condemnation of an outlaw as vargr is a symbolic pronouncement that the man is
now a wolf, and is worthy of strangulation (12).
Thus it is well seen that Sigi
has slain the thrall and murdered him; so he is given forth to be a wolf in
holy places , and may no more abide in the land with
his father (13)
Völundur,
Egill and Slagfinnur, the
third son of Ívaldi, chose to become outlaws, and travelled all the way to the northernmost edge of the
world, to Úlfdalir (Wolf-dales), where Gods never go.
(14)
One author
has suggested that there is also a symbolic connection between the
transformation of men into wolves, and the feminization of men through the
practice of Seidr magic and in playing the passive
role in sodomy. The term ergi, may have applied to both of these receptive roles (15).
Conclusion
Outlawry as
a social institution allowed society to pass judgment and punish criminals
while avoiding the authoritarian and logistical dilemma of incarceration. In a family-based society without clearly
defined leaders, it provided a social mandate for punishment that was
well-suited to the temperament and attitudes of the people. The
threat of being placed outside the bound of society’s protection and ejected
from the homeland was a strong deterrent to discourage anti-social or
destructive behavior.
The
association between wolves and outlaws is a complex one, which is not
necessarily clarified by analysis of linguistic structures. The relationship comes in part due to the
temperament and unpredictability attributed to both entities, but also carries
an aspect of unholiness. As the wolf threatens the safety of the
flock, so does the outlaw threaten the stability of society.
Both were dwellers in the literal and metaphorical wild lands, or utangards. Both were to be regarded with a sense of
dread, as both were outside of the social construct of normal behavior. The inability to predict the motives or
actions of such protean beings would greatly unnerve members of a culture based
on established social, familial and traditional patterns of conduct.
References
(1)
‘Ordered Anarchy: Evolution of the Decentralized Legal Order in the
(2) Grettir's Saga,
Section XVI, (14th c. A.D.) G. H. Hight trans.
(3)
The Earliest Norwegian Laws,
(4)
Ibid.
(5) Staðarhólsbók of
Grágás, Selvårv Stigårð trans. 1999.
(5)
Grettir's
Saga, Section XLVII.
(7) The Viking Achievement, P.G. Foote &
D.M. Wilson.
(8)
‘Hellhounds, Werewolves, and the
Germanic Underworld’, Alby Stone, 1994.
(9)
‘The Book of Were-Wolves’, Sabine
Baring-Gould, Project Gutenberg, 2002
(10) ‘Wolf and
Werewolf’, Online Etymology Dictionary.
(11) ‘Bums in Brigantia:
Sacred Gender-Variance in Ancient Germanic and Celtic Cultures’, Phil Hine.
(12) ‘Hellhounds, Werewolves, and the Germanic
Underworld’, Alby Stone, 1994.
(13) Volsunga
Saga, ch. 1 (13th c A.D.)
William Morris and Eirikr Magnusson trans.
(15) ‘Bums in Brigantia:
Sacred Gender-Variance in Ancient Germanic and Celtic Cultures’, Phil Hine.