The King of the land: Saint Óláfr

Háskóli Íslands-Lestur Fornsagna

Nicolas Jaramillo

“Se había dejado caer al suelo siendo un débil joven

y se levantó hecho un duro combatiente;

de ello tuvo conciencia y lo sintió de

pronto en el momento de su éxtasis.”

Dostoyevsky1

Introduction.

That Saint Óláfr of Norway and not, for example, Óláfr Tryggvason, was the first Saint

of Norway may seem somewhat odd. Óláfr Tryggvason pursued with the conversion of

Norway with the same, or more eagerness, than Óláfr helgi. It can be argued that the

victorious aspect of the conversion, as Heimskringla relates that Óláfr helgi succeed where

Óláfr Tryggvason didn’t, is the definite aspect that make him a Saint, relating the imagery

of Christ in the Viking Age with the action of the king.2

But in this essay my goal is to argue that the central idea that shaped the holiness that

surrounds Óláfr helgi is due to concepts that link the well-being and prosperity of the

kingdom with the body of the king. This relationship provided the foundation for the claims

of sanctity, since the state of the realm was considered prosperous, and the possibility of

1
Fiódor Mijáilovich Dostoievski, Los hermanos Karamazóv, (Barcelona: Editorial Planeta, S.A., 1988) 457.
2
Robert Ferguson, The Vikings: A History, (Nueva York: Penguin Books, 2009). 201.
having access to the body of the king make the state of affair different from a religious

point of view in the case of the two kings mentioned.

To expose my idea, I’ll use two sections of Óláfs saga helga in Heimskringla, which

illustrate important aspects of the idea of Óláfr as a Saintly figure. 3 The first section will

display how his missionary undertaking before the battle of Stiklestad not only wins him

new soldiers, but allows him to win souls to God and reintegrate them into the society of

good Christians. This process of conversion and redemption of lost people before the battle

is an important aspect of the sanctity of Óláfr helgi because recomposes the society around

the conversion. The second aspect is the miraculous body of the king, that allows faithful

people to come closer to the holiness of God, and makes the kingdom Christian.

Walking towards doom: the path to heaven.

Heimskringla presents Óláfr helgi as the last, successful heir to a long tradition of

Norwegian kings that intended to introduce an impose Christianity in the realm. There are

two historiographical considerations that one must have in mind when we analyze the roll

assigned to the kings in the process of Christianization in the Middle Ages: first, the

sources necessarily present the process, through the concepts and mental framework of the

Age; for that reason, the roll of the kings in the process is absolute: many philosophers and

patres ecclesiae used the figures of king David and king Salomon from the bible to portrait

the king not only as the individual appointed as primus inter pares to rule in God’s name

the realm, but also as the pater familias that should guard the kingdom and the subjects,

especially in the spiritual aspect. Secondly, the writing culture in the Middle Ages is linked

3
Snorri Sturluson, Heimskringla. Vol II: Óláfr Haraldsson (the Saint), trans. Alison Finlay and Anthony
Faulkes (London: Viking Society for Northern Research, 2014)
to the church and the stablished power. For that reason, it reflects mainly the successful

imposture of Christianity and the banishment of other cults as the central narrative of

conversion.4

While Snorri Sturluson acknowledges in the narrative of Heimskringla that there were

other kings that intended, or even thrive in imposing the new faith, the honor of stablishing

an unchallenged Christianity rest only in Óláfr in the narrative. Of course, this is

problematic from a historiographical point of view, since the process of conversion, the

uproot of old beliefs and values and the interiorization of new values implies a process and

a time-lapse of syncretism.5

But for the purpose of this essay this is not fundamental, because I am pondering on the

way that the author, and may be the society of the time, embraced, represented and recall

the holiness of Óláfr helgi. The fundamental aspect that differentiates Óláfr, seems to me to

be, in first instance, the way to his final battle. In his way, he encounters many and different

people that accept to join him. Among the first he encounters, are a group of godless

outlaws commanded by Gauka-Þórir and Afra-Fasti that not only submit themselves to the

king, but also find great pain in being rejected for not being Christians.

Men are mentioned by name, of whom one was called Gauka-Þórir

(Cuckoo-) and another Afra-Fasti (Buttermilk-). They were outlaws and
the greatest robbers, having with them thirty men […] And when they
come there, then they go with their band of men before the king, and
their companions had their full armour. They greeted him. He asked
what sort of men they were. They gave their names, saying that they
were natives of the country. They presented their business and offered

4
Paul J. E.Kershaw, Peaceful Kings: Peace, Power and the Early Medieval Political Imagination, (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2011) 47-52.
5
Anders Winroth, The Conversion of Scandinavia: Viking Merchants, and Missionaries in the Remaking of
Northern Europe, (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2012) 115-116.
 the king to go with him. The king says that it seemed to him that there
would be good support in such men. ‘I am keen,’ he says, ‘to take on
such men. But are you Christian people?’ he says. Gauka-Þórir answers,
saying he was neither Christian nor heathen. ‘We comrades have no
other faith than that we believe in ourselves, our strength and our luck
in victory, and that does us all right.’ The king replies: ‘A great pity that
such useful-looking men should not believe in Christ, their creator.’
Þórir replies: ‘Is there anyone in your company, king, a man of Christ,
that has grown more a day than we brothers?’ The king told them to
have themselves baptised and accept the true faith with it.6

In the Norse culture the outlaws were sometimes called vargr implying that the outlaw

was a níðingr. The legal term survived the Viking Age and appears in Grágás in a section

called Tryggðamál, peace sayings; there appears in poetic form as follows:

Þá skal hann
Svá víða vargr,
Rækr ok rekinn,
Sem men víðast
Varga reka.
[Then he will be a vargr repulsive and driven off as far as men drive vargar off.]7

Sabine Baring-Gould defined, in his book about the werewolves the concept of vargr in

this terms: “The word vargr, a wolf, had a double significance, […] Vargr is the same as u-

argr, restless; […] It signified a wolf, and also a godless man.” 8 In the original form, vargr

was simple the name of a monstrous wolf, and maybe for that reason it was used in the

legal texts of the ancient Germanic peoples as well, meaning that the association of

werewolf and outlaw is very ancient. The Lex Ripuaria of the VII century says “Wargus sit,
6
Snorri, Heimskringla II, 233-234.
7
Bernt Øyvind Thorvaldsen, “The Níðingr and the Wolf”, Viking and Medieval Scandinavia 7 (2011), 184-
185. Also the section of Tryggdamál is quoted from this text.
8
Sabine Baring-Gould, The Book of Werewolves, (N.C: Forgotten Books, 2008) 26.
hoe est expulsus.”9 “Wargus is, who is expulsed.” And the Salic Law “Si quis corpus jam

sepultum effoderit, aut expoliaverit, wargus sit.” “If any one shall have dug up or despoiled

an already buried corpse, let him be a varg”10

Gabriel Turville-Petre supposes that, this function of the vargr concept of marking an

outlaw as a beast had made these men renounce not only their ties to other men, but also to

any god: “Men like these, cut off from society, were also cut off from the religion of their

ancestors and, for them, the cult of the gods had lost its meaning.” 11 Turville-Petre may be

right if his theory is situated in the pagan times, but at the time of Óláfr helgi, and

moreover, in the time of Snorri, this relation must reflect the reality of men deprived of the

sacraments of the church, men that are not part anymore of the City of God, to use the

image of Augustine of Hippo . Is in this instance that the presence of Óláfr helgi is more

important, because his presence as a holy man that not only have visions, avoid spoiling the

land and crops of the farmers he finds and converts people, allows those whom have being

lost to the Christian faith as the prodigal son. He does not only convert them, but allows

them to stay under his banner, close to him, in a similar way that the father of the biblical

narration dresses and acknowledges the son that has been lost as his son and heir.12

It is this disposition of the king that redeems these men from their state of

dehumanization, of isolation of the society, and of God. But it is also important that the

king does not only redeems men, but regrets that his army have destroyed the harvest of a

free framer and makes a miracle: “Then he complained to the king about his loss and the

bad behaviour of the king’s men when they had broken down and trampled all his

cornfields. […] He rode around it and after that said: ‘It is my expectation, farmer, that God
9
Baring-Gould, The Book of Werewolves, 26-27. The translation is mine
10
Baring-Gould, The Book of Werewolves, 27.
11
Gabriel Turville-Petre, Myth and Religion of the North, (Westport: Greenwood Press, 1975), 264.
12
Snorri, Heimskringla II, 234-237.
will put right your loss, and this cornfield will be better after the space of a week.’ And this

turned out to be the best crop, as the king had said.” 13 Afterwards, Finnr, one of the King’s

men, advised to ravage and plunder the land, so that the farmers that are fighting against

him should detached themselves from the battle. But the narrative presents the king under a

saintly light because, although he recognizes that that is a good strategy, and that he had

done what Finnr advised in the past, he had only done that for the sake of the farmers’

souls, and because they were rejecting the alliance with their true lord but is willing to

forgive them and spare them pain:

Now this treason against their lord is much less important, even though
they do not keep faith with me, and yet this will not be thought seemly
for those who want to be decent men. Now I have here somewhat more
right to treat them with some leniency when they are acting badly
against me, than when they were displaying hatred of God. Now what I
want is that men should go easy and do no plundering. I will first go to
see the farmers. If we are reconciled, well and good, but if they engage
in battle against us, then there will be two possibilities facing us, and if
we fall in battle, then it will be a good idea not to go to it with proceeds
of plunder14

It is possible to question that the values that are represented are not genuinely Christian,

and that the close relation of the beliefs that Óláfr helgi had as a pagan child impulses his

actions, or a mere practical formality is at display. But that presupposes that Snorri is

making a perfect, objective and true account of the actions, words and deeds of Óláfr,

things impossible to claim: for Snorri as a Christian author, narrating the life of the saint

implies highlight the Christian values of the saint, and the presence of God throughout his

life. That the values, and the way those values are expressed doesn’t necessarily coincide
13
Snorri, Heimskringla II, 235.
14
Snorri, Heimskringla II, 238-239.
with our modern understanding of the Christian values, it is natural that the values are

differently expressed, lived and influenced by different cultures. That there were values that

the Christian Snorri and other Christians of the Middle Ages cherished highly, that were of

pagan origins, doesn’t mean that they were not Christian, because those values were

reshaped, or placed within a Christian System of Values.

So, although the first part of the rule of Óláfr helgi in Norway may be linked to the

ancient ideas of the link between prosperity and kingship,15 since the arrangement made by

Snorri of the division of time, space and historical information, responds to a creative and

analytical use of the sources by Snorri, 16 the idea must be related to hagiographical ideas

about saintly kings.

It is the same with the gesture of the king, that gives the order that money should be

given to churches for the souls of the men that fall fighting against him, so that they will be

all saved together, his men and his enemies and a new man that coverts just before the

battle. It seems implied that the men that the king turned Christians are also saved, since

they all die in the beginning of the battle. In his final moments Óláfr is depicted unarmed

praying to God just before the worse men that battle against him inflict him each a death

wound.17 In my opinion, the fundamental set of scenes, starting with the conversion and

redemption of the outcasts (vargar) aforementioned, and finishing with his death are central

in the idea of Óláfr helgi as a saintly king, since represent correctly the roll of a good king,

a good Christian, and a good warrior that fight justly for a valid cause, since he was not

only the legitimate king of Norway, but the real and lastly hero in the conversion of the

realm.
15
Turville-Petre, Myth and Religion of the North, 191-193.
16
Sverre Bagge, “Warrior, King, and Saint: The Medieval Histories about st. Óláfr Haraldsson”, Journal of
English and Germanic Philology 109, n° 3 (2010), 286-288.
17
Snorri, Heimskringla II, 247, 254, 257.
Miracles and holiness: the body of a saint.

Óláfr helgi died in the battle of Stiklestad, but Snorri didn’t finish his narrative about the

saintly king there. The great difference between Óláfr Tryggvason and Óláfr helgi is

presented in the preserved body of saint Óláfr, that granted access to the holiness of the

saint. This is exemplified when just after the battle the body is taken to a hut, where a

beggar blind man searching for goods touches the water in which the body have been

cleaned he recovers the sight miraculously. 18 But at the same time, the prosperity of the

land died away, and the taxes imposed by Sveinn Knútsson pressed the people to action. 19

This is related to ancient conceptions of kingship in the Germanic culture, for the roll of the

king implied prosperity for the land and the maintenance of the ancient laws,20 as well as to

the conception of kingship that the Church had in the period around 1200.

Nevertheless, the claims for sainthood start from the popular opinion, and the people

stating their opinion against the king Sveinn Knútsson and his mother Álfífa, and

comparing the hard ruler ship of the Danish crown to the soft, loving, legitimate and just

ruler ship of Óláfr Haraldsson hin helgi: pain:

The next summer there came to be much talk of King Óláfr’s sainthood,
and public opinion about the king all changed. There were now many
that affirmed that the king must be saintly who previously had opposed
him in absolute enmity and not let him in any respect get a fair report
from them. People now began to turn to criticising the men that had
most urged rebellion against the king. As a result Bishop Sigurðr was
much blamed. People there became such great enemies of his that he
saw his best course as to go away and west to England to see King
18
Snorri, Heimskringla II, 264.
19
Snorri, Heimskringla II, 267-268.
20
Turville-Petre, Myth and Religion of the North, 192.
 Knútr. After this the Þroendir sent men and messages to Upplǫnd for
Bishop Grímkell to come north to Þrándheimr. King Óláfr had sent
Bishop Grímkell back to Norway when the king went east to Garðaríki.
Bishop Grímkell had since then been in Upplǫnd. So when this message
came to the bishop, then he immediately got ready for this journey. A
large part of the reason why he went was that the bishop believed that it
must be true what was said about the performing of miracles and the
sainthood of King Óláfr.21

It is first the popular opinion the one that shed light over the reason that Óláfr helgi was

chosen as a Saint: his actions and the miracles attributed to him are devices that grasp this

opinion and represent the holiness that the people placed on the king, thing that the Anglo-

saxon Chronicle stating that in the year 1030 the Norwegians killed, and then declared the

king holy.22

The preservation of the body thus, gave the proof of holiness that the mere popular

claim could not. This is a very important feature in the history of sanctity, since the body is

in some sense an expression of the state soul, and gave a medium through which the

faithful could get access to the grace of God. This is related to the reason why in the

Catholic Church and other Christian denominations, the altar is endorsed with a relic of a

saint. For this reason the saga states:

Then the bishop went inland to Kaupangr. There all the ordinary people
welcomed him. He enquired in detail about the miracles that were
related about King Óláfr. He received good information about this.
After that the bishop sent messengers in to Stiklarstaðir to Þorgils and
his son Grímr and summoned them out to the town to see him. The
father and son did not neglect this journey. They went out to the town to
see the bishop. They tell him all the signs that they had discovered, and
21
Snorri, Heimskringla II, 269.
22
Ferguson, The Vikings, 358.
 also where they had taken the king’s body. The coffin had now more or
less come up out of the ground. It was then proposed by many people
that the bishop should have the king interred at Clemenskirkja. So when
twelve months and five nights had passed from the death of King Óláfr,
then his holy relics were dug up. The coffin was now still nearly come
up out of the ground, and King Óláfr’s coffin was brand new as if it had
been freshly planed. Bishop Grímkell then went up to where King
Óláfr’s coffin was being opened. There was a glorious sweet smell
there. Then the bishop uncovered the king’s face, and his countenance
was in no way changed, such redness on his cheeks as would have been
if he had just gone to sleep. In this people perceived a great difference,
those who had seen King Óláfr when he fell, that since then his hair and
nails had grown almost as much as they would have done if he had been
alive here in the world all the time since he fell. Then there went up to
see King Óláfr’s body King Sveinn and all the leading people that were
there.23

The evidence of the holiness of king Óláfr helgi is presented then, as the two sides of the

same coin: the people praise the actions and the miracles of the saint, and the incorrupt

preservation of the body are proofs enough. This is different from the account of Óláfr

Tryggvason, that have some saintly features, but lacks the gestures of Christian values than

abound in the account of the last battle of Óláfr helgi. The death of Óláfr Tryggvason is a

heroic death, but the death of Óláfr helgi is the death of a martyr, that is concerned that his

enemies may lose their souls for fighting against their legitimate lord. But the most

important difference is the preservation of the saintly remains 24 that allows the grace of

God to reach the faithful through the relics of his saint.

23
Snorri, Heimskringla II, 269-270.
24
Ferguson, The Vikings, 348-363.
 Is also important that the saintliness of Óláfr helgi was acclaimed, because it gave the

opportunity of stabilizing a monarchy in Norway and of stablishing a new set of relations

between the two agonizing kingdoms of Norway and Denmark, that had been alternating

it’s dominion over the territories that were considered Norway. It that spirit, the later

transformation of the king Óláfr helgi Haraldsson in the Rex Perpetuum Norvegiæ, king of

Norway forever.25

Conclusions.

Óláfr helgi is, in the narrative of Heimskringla by Snorri Sturluson, a through fully

saintly Christian. His actions before the Battle of Stiklestad are the actions of a pious

Christian that is prepared to renounce to his life in the name of justice and of his God. This

attitude allows him to convert and redeem the outlaws, men that in this narrative represent

the lost sheep of the gospels that the Messiah had come to save, and, in this case, the saint

is an intercessor between this outlaws and the Christian God.

It is also of great importance that the body of the king was preserved and, that after a

year, the remains are incorrupt, so that the narrative could provide a proof of the sanctity of

Óláfr helgi beyond any doubt. These two aspects are, in my opinion, the foundations for

signaling Óláfr as a Saint.

25
Ferguson, The Vikings, 359.
 Bibliography

Snorri Sturluson. Heimskringla. Vol II: Óláfr Haraldsson (the Saint). Translated by Alison

Finlay and Anthony Faulkes. London: Viking Society for Northern Research. 2014.

Bagge, Sverre. “Warrior, King, and Saint: The Medieval Histories about st. Óláfr

Haraldsson”. Journal of English and Germanic Philology 109, n° 3 (2010): 281-321.

Baring-Gould, Sabine. The Book of Werewolves. N.C: Forgotten Books. 2008.

Ferguson, Robert. The Vikings: A History. Nueva York: Penguin Books. 2009.

Kershaw, Paul J. E. Peaceful Kings: Peace, Power and the Early Medieval Political

Imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2011.

Thorvaldsen, Bernt Øyvind. “The Níðingr and the Wolf ”. Viking and Medieval

Scandinavia 7 (2011): 171-196.

Turville-Petre, Gabriel. Myth and Religion of the North. Westport: Greenwood Press. 1975.

Winroth, Anders. The Conversion of Scandinavia: Viking Merchants, and Missionaries in

the Remaking of Northern Europe. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. 2012.