Hrafnkel Trial Paper

Hrafnkel, in the eponymous Hrafnkels Saga, by modern standards would acceptedly be considered a ruthless gainer. However, it is necessary to take into regard the time period and culture of this historic Scandinavian saga. The entirety of the Icelandic cosmos was illiterate and as such(prenominal) the rightness system established in tenth century Iceland was based mostly on a system of wonder and violence. The rights of Iceland were non actually written down, but or else kept alive communicatively. An unwritten cursing was considered to be a legally vertebral column contract.This system was a weak try at avoiding bloody feuds and altercations among the common people, amidst a governing system of honor and trust. Hrafnkel, the agonist of Hrafnkels Saga, demonstrated this skewed judge system by asserting himself as a Chieftain and bringing choler upon his enemies or anybody who crossed his expression. Thus, when Einar broke his oral agreement with Hrafnkel, Einar esse ntially broke a legally binding contract and was whence subject to the full penalty of their agreement.Therefore, Hrafnkel, who concord to come out anybody who rode his be deald vaulting horse, Freyfaxi, was then non guilty in committing murder as he was non breaking any Icelandic laws and was simply committing to his contract with Einar. Hrafnkels murder of Einar was justify in a myriad of elbow rooms. Upon hiring Einar to be his sheepherder, Hrafnkel explicitly told him that he could ride any horse he pleased, but Freyfaxi But I essential warn you against one thing I want you never to ride this horse, unless urgent the need may search to you, for Ive sworn an pesterer to defeat anyone who rides him. (40)In the era to which Hrafnkel lived, there were no such things as laws, government, policemen, or jails. Peoples word was the law and when a verbal contract was broken, it was like breaking the law in a modern sense. Einar, all the way acknowledging this agreement, swore to abide by this and said he would never be so dreadful as to ride the one horse which was forbidden to him. At this time in Icelandic culture, one who kept his word was held in high regard. Once again, Hrafnkel, reiterated the size adaptedness of an oral agreement and stated that precedent wards off blame.Since Einar did indeed ride Freyfaxi, he was inevitably responsible for his own death. nevertheless more(prenominal) so, Einar decided to ride Freyfaxi in spite of having several otherwise horses to choose from evening though the other horses ran away he did not put any motion into mounting onto another horse. Einars murder was simply the ultimate punishment for his erroneous belief and breaking the law between Hrafnkel and him. single may begin to wonder wherefore Hrafnkel had even subject Einar to such a preposterous and bizarre agreement. However, this agreement was not made in vain.Hrafnkel, had sworn an oath to dedicate half of Freyfaxi to the diety, Freyr, whom he loves higher up all others. Fundamentally, this meant only Freyr and Hrafnkel himself, were allowed to ride Freyfaxi. At the actually start of the saga, Hrafnkels love for the beau ideal, Freyr was shown When Harnkel had settled at Adalbol, he had a large temple built and held enormous sacrifices to the gods. He loves Frey above all the other gods and gave him a half-share in all his outgo treasures. (36) In fact, it is because of his intense affection for this god that Hrafnkell gained the title Freysgodi.As exemplified earlier, Freyr, played an extremely alpha part in the chieftains religion. Thus, Einars choosing to ride Freyfaxi was near irreverent in Hrafnkels eyes. Upon seeing a dirty and sweaty Freyfaxi, Hrafnkel considered the horse ill and abused, and promised to avenge his friend. Ultimately, even though Einar seemed like skinny hard-working man and Hrafnkels actions were harsh, Hrafnkel broke no laws while Einar broke the oral agreement, a legally binding co ntract, and harmed Freyfaxi.Primarily, just the interrupt of contract with Einar was enough plea to kill Einar, but even more so the culture of Iceland survived on a certain type of trust and honour system. It was this enter of trust that gave Hrafnkel the authority and decent justification to kill Einar. If Einar was to be untrusted, this was the only way to ensure peace and order in the community. Furthermore, Hrafnkel even fulfilled the Icelandic vocation to scissure some kind of hire for the grieving family. Hrafnkels compensation offer for food and items to Einars father, Thorbjorn, was extremely generous.In this respect, Hrafnkel was formerly again following the laws and traditions of Icelandic society. On another note, Hrafnkel was consindered to be the hero of Hrafnkels Saga. A saga according to multiple sources from the internet is a long story of deed and tells the tales of worthy men. In this sense, Hrafnkel can not be deemed guilty by his Icelandic people or r eaders. After close-fitting examination of the text of Hrankels Saga it is very clear that Hrafnkel was completely innocent in the killing of Einar. Based on tenth century Icelandic ideals on justice, Hrafnkel was able to punish Einar for breaking their oral agreement.In effect, by breaking this agreement, Einar was also breaking Hrafnkels sworn oath with the deity, Freyr, whom he dual-lane Freyfaxi with. As cruel and insane Hrafnkels violence may seem low todays standards, it was all justified under the Icelandic system of law. It is strategic to understand the civilization that had once existed rather than to judge the tale as a story of murder and dictatorship. In the proper light, Hrafnkel was a hero who upheld Icelandic tradition, law, and honor who in the process grew into a more understanding, respectable, and wealthier Chieftain.