. His relations with Ingigerd are depicted in sagas as dominated by her. In the narration under discussion, Ingigerd suggests to invite Olaf’s son not only to compensate the insult but to humiliate Jaroslav too. She stresses the fact that the one who upbrings a child is of lower status than the child’s father.
The whole episode thus fi ts the Old Norse tradition. It is in full agreement with the saga stereotype images of Ingigerd and Jaroslav and might well derive from the tradition dealing with the marriage and the married life of Ingigerd. The reliance on stereotypes makes the historical authenticity of this narration questionable. It looks more like a variation of a traditional theme than an account of real events.
The «Morkinskinna» romantic version of Magnus’s coming to Rus’ diff ers cardinally from the «Heimskringla» version. On leaving Norway (in 1028), Olaf was followed by a number of retainers, his wife Astrid and his son Magnus. He left Astrid with her relatives in Sweden and went to the east taking Magnus with him. While returning to Norway he preferred his son to stay with Jaroslav. The situation, as presented in «Heimskringla», lacks the romantic fl avour and is devoid of stereotype motifs. It is the version accepted in modern historiography.
The second episode of «Magnúss saga góða ok Haralds hardráða», the stay of Magnus in Rus’, is also constructed as a combination of several traditional motifs. He is said to occupy a honorary position at Jaroslav’s court, to succeed in sports and war games, and to kill his off ender after a quarrel at a banquet. These characteristics belong to the stereotype description of a konung in Rus and can hardly be applied to Magnus who, according to Arhor Jarlaskald returned to Norway at the age of eleven. A similar story about the murder of an off ender is also told about Olaf Tryggvason who spent his young years in Rus’[1253].
The third episode, containing the information about a possible trade treaty, and the fourth episode, diff er from the preceding two in their lack of situational stereotypes. They are devoted to the events directly connected with the return of Magnus to Norway. According to «Magnúss saga góða ok Haralds hardráða» as well as other sagas including «Heimskringla» Magnus’s inthronization in 1036 was prepared by a common resentment of Danish rule in Norway. Snorri elaborated the theme of Danish suppression in Norway and provided a long list of laws introduced by Svein which aroused special anger of the Norwegians. He also stressed personal dissatisfaction of Einar Thambarskelfi r and Kalf Arnason who were later deceived by Knut.
«Morkinskinna» premises the retelling about the embassy of Kalf and Einar with a narration about a voyage of two brothers Karl and Björn. In spite of the absence of peace (úfriðr) between Svein and Jaroslav, they went to trade to Rus’, came across the hostility of the local population and were compelled to meet Jaroslav who, on Magnus’s insistence, invited them to stay at his court for a winter. In spring, Jaroslav suggested their return to Norway to persuade prominent Norwegians to support Magnus in his claim for the throne. Jaroslav is also said to have supplied money to suborn those hesitating. The brothers came back to Norway and met Einar Thambarskelfi r who promised to go to the east. In this way the compiler of «Morkinskinna» connected both missions and made Karl and Björn the initiators of Einar’s embassy. Then the brothers went to Nidaros where Karl was captured by Svein’s men. Björn escaped and made a second voyage to Rus’ to report their progress to Jaroslav and Magnus.
The narration about Jaroslav’s participation in the restoration of Norwegian supremacy attracted attention of specialists in Old Russian history who viewed it as a testimony of Jaroslav’s active policy in the Baltic (Grekov et al.). However, E. A. Rydzevskaja, a prominent Russian specialist in Old Norse sources for Russian history, severely rejected the very possibility of using this episode in historical studies. She wrote, «… saga researchers have established long ago that the interference of Jaroslav was an invention of the compiler of “Morkinskinna” The fact that this role is attributed to a Russian prince, is certainly not devoid of interest and importance, but all the same, it is not a historical fact»[1254]. Her verdict put an end to using this episode for historical purposes. Nevertheless, Rydzevskaja’s estimation of this episode was not based on a special study, neither was it discussed against a background of politics in the Baltic Sea area and the activities of Jaroslav at that time.
To get accepted or rejected as a historical source, the episode needs a special and thorough investigation which is far beyond the scope of this article. Still, it is worth noting that even the episodes which can be believed the compiler’s own compositions on even more serious grounds, like that retelling about the quarrel of Ingigerd and Jaroslav, turn out to derive from a current tradition. Recent studies of Jaroslav’s policy in the Baltic in the 1010s and 1020s showed his acute interest in the situation there and his eff orts to secure the interests of Rus’. Suffi ce it to mention a few facts. In 1018 or 1019 Jaroslav married his son Ilia to Estrid, the sister of Knut the Great, and in 1019 he himself married Ingigerd, the daughter of the Swedish konung Olaf. The matrimonial connections fastened political and military alliance between Rus’, Denmark and Sweden directed against Poland[1255]. In the early 1020s the situation in Scandinavia changed, and a new Swedish konung Anund-Jacob (since 1022) united with Olaf Haraldsson which led to military confrontation between Denmark and a Swedish-Norwegian coalition. In this new political context Rus’ supported the latter as in 1028 Olaf Haraldsson, defeated by Knut, could fi nd refuge in Rus’. The death of Olaf in 1030 did not seem to change the relations between Rus’ and Scandinavian countries. Magnus’s stay with Jaroslav until 1035 and the mentions of hostility between Jaroslav and Svein Alfi fason in many sagas speak for the pro-Norwegian orientation of Jaroslav. The banishment of Svein and the restoration of Olaf’s son agree well with the policy of Jaroslav. If this is the case, the narration about Jaroslav sending men to campaign for Magnus might have been derived from a genuine tradition. Like the previous episodes, this one might also be not an exact account of real events but rather an elaboration of the tradition which grew on the basis of and refl ected a real situation. Consequently the narration, probably invented, presented if not the truth of facts, then the truth of the situation.
However, be the trustworthiness of the retelling about Jaroslav’s participation in Magnus’s return to Norway as it may, the narration about the brothers’ voyage to Rus’ constitutes a special story in itself. A trade voyage to Rus’ was a topic widely spread in kings’ and family sagas as trade connections of Scandinavian countries and Rus’, fi rst and foremost Novgorod, were regular and numerous. Descriptions of these voyages are usually stereotyped. They stress the richness of the Novgorodian market, the profi tability of the trade for Scandinavians, and name the most desirable merchandise, Russian furs, Byzantine cloths, Arabic precious utensils. The narration about the voyage of Karl and Björn lacks all these stereotypes and provides a picture quite diff erent from the usual one.
Nv er vfriþr milli Sveins Alfi fosonar oc Jarizleifs konvngs. þvi at Jarizleifr konvngr virði sem var at Noregsmenn hof þo nizc a enom helga Olafi konvngi. oc var þar noccora stvnd eigi cavpfriþr i milli. Maðr er nefndr Karl en annarr Biorn. þeir voro bröðr.ii. litils hattar at bvrþom oc þo framqvemþarmenn. verit salltmenn enn fyrra lvt efi sinnar oc afl at sva peninga. en nv var sva orþit at þeir vorv rikir kavpmenn… þa tok Karl til orða oc melti við haseta sina… ec etla at fara i Austrveg cavpferþ. en nv fi rir sakir vmmela Sveins konvngs oc Jarizleifs konvngs oc þess vfriþar er i milli þeira er. þa ma þat kalla eigi varlict…
Oc þetta taca þeir raþs. fara nv með honom vnz þeir koma i Austrriki oc leggia þar at viþ eitt mikit cavptvn, oc vildo þeir kavpa ser navðsynia lvti. En þegar er landzmenn visso at þeir voro Norðmenn, þa fengo þeir þeim at siþr cavp at þegar helt viþ bardaga oc vildo lanzmenn veita юeim atgongo. Oc er Karl sa at i oeni for þa melti hann til lanzmanna. Þat mon metit til hvatvisi oc noccot sva diorfvngar at taca slict fyrir hendr konvngi yðrom at meiþa vtlenda menn eþa rena. þott her comi meþ cavpeyri sinn oc gere yþr engan ofriþ. oc vitit aldri hvart konvngr geri yþr þocc fyri eþa eigi. nv er yðr vitrligra at biþa konvngs atqveþa vm slict. Viþ þetta sefaz lanzmenn oc verþr eigi at þeim gengit með ollo. þo ser Karl at þat endiz eigi sva bvit. hann gerir þa ferþ sina a konvngs fvnd.
Er eigi getit vm ferþ hans fyrr en hann cømr fyrir Jarizleif konvng oc qvaddi hann. Konvngr spyrr hverr hann er. Ec em norrønn maþr einn segir hann litils verðr oc kominn hingat með goþom peningom oc felagar minir [með góðum friði. – Hulda]. Konvngr melti. Hví vart þv sva diarfr at søkja hingat. hyggr þv noccot þina gefo meiri enn annarra manna. oc hyggr þv at þv munir her draga fram cavpeyri þinn en aðrir fa eigi haldit lifi nu. oc hafa þeir Noregsmenn aldri sva illt af mer at eigi se þeir verra verþir. [Karl melti. Eigi mono allir iafnir i þvi. ec em saltkarl einn litils verþr. þo at nv hafa ec peninga. hefi ec avalt verit til noccors hentogleika en aldri var ec i moti Olafi konungi i huga minom. þat mon ec etla segir konvngr. at þv monir reynaz sem allir aþrir Noregsmenn. Konvngr bað taca hann ok setia þegar i fi otra. oc sva var gert. Oc siþan segir konvngr Magnvsi fostra sinom oc spyrr hann raðs vm hverso scipa scal við Norðmennina. Magnvs svarar. Litt hafi þer fostri minn haft mic viþ raþin her til. en seint ventir mik at raþiz at minn verþi Noregr ef sva scal at fara at drepa þa alla er þaðan ero ettaþir. en vel mvndot þer vilia fostri minn. þvi at þeir mego at retto allir callaz minir þegnar. –