Piotr Piatrouski / Shutterstock.com
By Keith Ruiter / 03.30.2017
PhD Candidate in Scandinavian Studies
University of Aberdeen
It has been suggested that Donald Trump āmay get his assertive rather than passive manner from his allegedĀ Viking ancestorsā. Or so says Russian genealogist Aleksey Nilogov, who has been finding some traction for his beliefs on nationalistic eastern European news sites such as theĀ Estonian World Review.
Leaving aside the issue of genetic predispositions, as a scholar of Viking-Age Scandinavia, I take issue with this claim. The Vikings were a product of their time and ā in that context ā were a much less objectionable bunch than these suggestions imply. Delving into the Old Norse language helps us to better understand some of the ways that medieval Scandinavians might have viewed theĀ overbearingĀ andĀ isolationistĀ rhetoric dominating the international stage of late. In fact, just such an analysis suggests that Trump would probably not have had a great time navigating the political intrigue presented in the Icelandic Sagas.
Despite popular depictions of medieval Scandinavians as gruff, aggressive raiders, the sources from medieval Scandinavia reveal a complex society possessed of nuanced understandings of morality, law and honour.
Thingvellir National Park ā where the first Viking Icelandic parliament (althing) seated.Ā Shutterstock
An overbearing man
The key to understanding these concepts in their contemporary context lies in the language of the early Scandinavian sources that survive to us. Sometimes, a single word can unlock a cluster of semantic and conceptual understandings.
Take, for example, the Old Norse wordĀ Ć³jafnaĆ°armaĆ°r. Broken into its constituent parts, the word could be rendered in English as āun-even-personā. But in the contexts ofĀ Eyrbyggja saga, one of the Sagas of Icelanders focusing on a locality in the north-west of the island, itās clear that the unevenness being described is a disregard for fairness, equality, justice and the rights of others. This has led scholars to render the word as āan overbearing manā. AnĀ Ć³jafnaĆ°armaĆ°r, such as Styrr ĆĆ³rgrĆmsson inĀ Eyrbyggja saga, is fundamentally a social bully of the type who uses force and cunning to better their own position at the expense of those around them, save for a small group of loyal supporters drawn to their ruthless approach and success.
This certainly sounds like Trumpās infamous tactics: from hisĀ Twitter tirades, to his promises to bully Mexico into paying for aĀ border wall, even to his ludicrouslyĀ alpha handshake. His myopic focus on building himself up and cutting others down, even his vision of āAmerica firstā, certainly bear the hallmarks of the conduct of anĀ Ć³jafnaĆ°armaĆ°r.
ĆjafnaĆ°armaĆ°rĀ Trump.Ā Andrew Harrer / Pool / EPA
The problem is that theĀ Ć³jafnaĆ°armaĆ°rĀ was not someone to emulate or even admire in early Icelandic society, but someone to bring to heel. In the harsh, isolated climes of medieval Iceland, mutual aid from community and kinship were relied upon to rise to the challenges of the day. With no respect for reciprocity or the honour and rights of others, theĀ Ć³jafnaĆ°armaĆ°rĀ was fundamentally destructive to the fabric of their society ā and their antisocial tactics, described in the sagas, tended to cut them off from their communities.
This most often ended up leaving them with precious few friends or allies to help when they inevitably got in over their head. This is certainly the case with Styrr, who needed to marry his daughter, who he loved more than anything, off to an old rival to help him get out of trouble with twoĀ berserkersĀ (fierce Norse warriors).
Donāt bark at your guests
The condemnation of tactics used byĀ Ć³jafnaĆ°armaĆ°rĀ characters is also mirrored in the Old Norse poemĀ HĆ”vamĆ”l, āSayings of the High Oneā (Carolyne LarringtonāsĀ translationĀ quoted below). These verses conclusively deride such things as being disrespectful, overly aggressive, and lack of social engagement, even to those you might distrust.
In fact,Ā HĆ”vamĆ”lĀ contains rebuttals for several of Trumpās early executive actions. As just one example, consider stanza 135 in the context of Trumpās adamant support of a travelĀ banĀ on citizens of seven Muslim-majority nations. The poem warns: āDonāt bark at your guests or drive them from your gate, treat the indigent well!ā This seems to stand in stark opposition to Trumpās closed-door vision on immigration.
In a medieval Scandinavian context, this bullying bravado and disregard for hospitality and reciprocity was inherently isolating on a social level. And it is in relation to isolationism and responsible engagement with wider society thatĀ HĆ”vamĆ”lĀ takes a very clear stance. Stanza 50 says it best:
The fir-tree withers that stands on the farmstead,
Neither bark nor needles protect it;
So it is with the man whom no one loves,
How should he live for long?
Clearly antisocial tendencies such as isolationism or bullying were recognised as wholly unsuitable in the societies of the medieval Scandinavian milieu. Active social engagement was incredibly important. In no place is this clearer than in the early laws of Scandinavia, whereĀ outlawryĀ ā legally imposed exclusion from the community ā was considered one of the gravest punishments a criminal could endure.
As the world continues to shrink thanks to modern technology, these old points of wisdom are worth revisiting in the global village of today to remind us of the importance of mutual respect, collaboration, conciliation and strong social bonds with all those around us.
One thing is clear. Any āVikingā ancestor that might be responsible for Trumpās personality would likely not have done that well in his own time.
Originally published by The Conversation under a Creative CommonsĀ Attribution/No derivativesĀ license.