This should sound familiar to most if not all heathens...in one form or another... for it is usually used at the end of a ritual while the offerings are being libated, immolated what have you.
But what does it mean? I mean I know what it means but what does gifting actually mean to modern heathens? Is it something we do only when making offerings to the gods, wights or ancestors or is it much more than that. What about gifting amongst heathens? That is the topic for today and it comes about from some gifts that young Harry has already received from some people I admire and respect so let's go shall we...
We have copious examples of gift exchange in the sagaic sources and gift giving was something that is inexorably intertwined with the society and culture of the time. Gift exchange was something that was done by habit as well as by ritual but as can gleaned from the material it was a sociable undertaking but it was also not free from conflict. For example, feasts were often occasions where gifts were exchanged but also were sources of insult and slighted sensibilities amongst those gathered as well as for the intention of eating, drinking and fostering and renewing the bonds of blood as well as alliance.
In Njals saga it is said that the friendship between Hoskuldr Hvitanessgodi and Njal's family was so great that they invited each other to a feast every fall and handsome gifts were exchanged between them. There are examples in Ljosvetininga saga, Landnamabok, Vapnfirdinga saga and Reykdoela saga of gift exchange that runs the gamut from friendship, attempting to win protection for outlaws by presenting chieftains with gifts, for attending a funeral banquet, placating an opposing chieftain as well as trying to maintain peace.
So was that it? You gave a gift because someone was a good friend? Or you wanted to buy protection for someone or were thanking them for attending a feast? Well yes...and no.
While the idea of reciprocal ( you just didn't give gifts and expect nothing in return, reciprocity was key) gift exchange was something deeply ingrained and was a societal and cultural norm, it was far from being that simple. One of the subtle...or not so subtle...nuances of gift exchange was the premise that if a gift was not compensated for by a gift of equal value that it would make the recipient dependent on the donor and in turn this would not only humiliate him but it also could endanger his honor, his freedom and even his life. The donor could triumph over his rival in this way by asserting his own prestige and this is because the objects (gifts) that were bestowed were not regarded as inanimate and inert objects but were thought to have contained part of the individual who bestowed them and therefore a connection would be established between the donor and the recipient of a gift and that would make the latter put under an obligation to the former.
In the game of gift giving it was the giver who gained prestige and power from the exchange, he was in fact showing how rich and or powerful he was to those either in his retinue or those he wished to make subordinates and the giver exacted deference from the receiver and obliged him to reciprocate. Another nuance of the exchange that may seem odd or foreign to us is that the amount and place of return but more importantly it's timing was left totally to the discretion of the gift's recipient, mind you however that the discretion was guided by normative and contextual restraints. Time was not something that burdened the debtor with any concern about increases in the value of his obligation, there was no "accrued interest" to speak of, the gift he was to reciprocate did not increase the longer "he waited" to repay the original gift. The time to reciprocate was totally at his discretion and could be manipulated accordingly to readjust or redefine the relationship between himself and the gift giver.
He could choose from a few different options one of which being he could decide to insult the giver by refusing the gift or by reciprocating too hastily. He could choose to excessively delay the return or make no return whatsoever and depending on the circumstances surrounding the parties, this could signal either utter contempt for him or permanent subordination. Social relations, the definitions of and the determination of status is much of what motivated gift exchange. The Norwegian Gulathingslov and Icelandic Gragas both set rules regarding the reciprocity of gifts as well as their disposition amongst heirs. The rule of obligatory compensation for gifts was observed in practice and men in fact were extremely wary about accepting the possessions of others without proper compensation for fear of becoming independent on the donor can be found in the Icelandic sagas when important persons moved to Iceland they refused to accept portions of land from the original inhabitants without paying for them as not to become indebted to them and many settlers thought it preferable to seize land by force rather than receive it from someone as a gift.
I will continue this before the week's end but for more reading on this topic I give you the following sources where this information comes from. I hoped to make this an ECT class but with lil' Harry here it is not going to happen this year.
- Wealth and Gift Bestowal Among the Ancient Scandinavians: A. Gurevich
- Medieval Iceland and Feud in the Icelandic saga: Jesse L. Byock
- Bloodtaking and Peacemaking: Feud, Law and Society in Saga Iceland: William Ian Miller
- Gragas (Icelandic Law Codes)
No comments:
Post a Comment