Древняя Русь и Скандинавия: Избранные труды

The narration contains numerous indications to the political relations of Rus’ and Norway and to the trade connections of the two countries in the form of both author’s statements and depiction of events caused by the state of aff airs. The author’s summary of the political situation, i.e. his declaration about the absence of peace between Jaroslav and Svein, stands apart from the enormous bulk of the «Russian evidences» of the sagas. The characteristic of political situation in Rus’ was irrelevant for the saga authors as travels to Rus’ and Eastern Baltic were always presented as private enterprises organized and carried out on the personal basis with no interference of the authorities. The only other survey of the political situation in Rus’ can be found in «Eymundar þáttr». Eymund’s decision to go to Rus’ and to serve with Jaroslav’s army is motivated by a feud between the sons of great prince Vladimir, and the description of the causes of the feud and the aims of each of Vladimir’s sons provides the outline of the political turbulence in Rus’ after the death of Vladimir the Saint[1257]. This summary, correct in its essence but wrong in many details, was highly appropriate in a saga telling about a viking who participated in all these events profi ting by opposing interests of the Russian rulers. However, even this survey has nothing to do with the international relations of Rus’. Eymund’s voyage was his personal adventure and of no concern of Norwegian authorities.

On the contrary, the survey in «Magnúss saga góða ok Haralds hardráða» is a characteristic of political relations between Rus’ and Norway. It is a brief declaration of the absence of peace (úfriðr) between Jaroslav and Svein after the death of Olaf Haraldsson. The state of úfriðr meant a war or hostility between the partners and it seems, in spite of the lack of corroborating evidence in Old Russian and Old Norse sources, that the enmity did exist at that time. Rus’ became an asylum for Svein’s enemies who had earlier supported Olaf Haraldsson. Jaroslav was bringing up Olaf’s underage son Magnus who later expelled Svein and became the king of Norway. Another prominent relative of Olaf, Harald the Hard-Ruler, who participated in the battle at Stiklastadir found refuge in Rus’ and later married Jaroslav’s daughter. In this context, the characteristic of the relations between Jaroslav and Svein in the saga does not seem wrong. The hostility to Danish Norway in the early 1030s was a continuation of Jaroslav’s policy in the Baltic in the second half of the 1020s. The idea of the state of úfriðr is further elaborated in the saga by literary means. Jaroslav’s negative attitude to Norwegians is expressed in a number of speeches of Jaroslav and Magnus and in the retelling about Jaroslav’s treatment of Björn and Karl on their arrival to his court. According to the saga, Jaroslav’s hostility to the Danish ruler of Norway was accompanied by his hatred to all Norwegians. He is said to accuse them of betraying their lord, Olaf Haraldsson, to regard them worth the most cruel punishment, and to execute all the Norwegians coming to Rus’. Though the speeches, as well as probably the episode of the arrest of Karl and Björn are nothing more than illustrations and literary embodiment of úfriðr their introduction is signifi cant as an indication of the author’s position.

Another manifestation of the úfriðr was the break of trade. The saga author makes a special note of the absence of trade peace (kaupfriðr) for some time (noccora stvnd). This is the only occasion to my knowledge that a rupture in trade between Rus’ and a Scandinavian country is mentioned in a saga. Trade voyages like all other voyages to Rus’ were represented as private enterprises even if a konung participated in the partnership (félag) with his money. The success or the failure of a merchant therefore was depicted as depending utterly on his own abilities. In «Magnúss saga góða ok Haralds hardráða» on the contrary, the offi cial status of the break in trade is stressed. It is kaupfriðr between Jaroslav and Svein, the rulers of the states, i.e. between the two states, that is suspended. Like the úfriðr, the absence of kaupfriðr is regarded as a governmental action. Thus, both the situation itself and its presentation in the saga is quite diff erent from the traditional stereotypes. In the context of the actual deterioration of political relations between Rus’ and Norway, the prohibition of trade activities could have really taken place.