THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

VIKING SOCIETY FOR NORTHERN RESEARCH TEXT SERIES

GENERAL EDITORS
Alison Finlay and Carl Phelpstead

VOLUME XVIII

GUTA LAG
THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

GUTA LAG THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Translated and edited by Christine Peel

VIKING SOCIETY FOR NORTHERN RESEARCH UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON

2009

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

The printing of this book is made possible by a gift to the University of Cambridge in memory of Dorothea Coke, Skjaeret, 1951.

The cover motif is based on the image from a seal, found in Bro parish in Gotland. The image is dated 1280 and the seal is considered to date from circa 1225ñ50, which makes it the oldest recorded of all the Scandinavian provincial arms. The image is encircled in an inscription: GUTENSES: SIGNO: XPISTVS: SIGNATUR: IN: AGNO. The first half of this has been variously translated ëI represent the Gotlandersí, ëI am the symbol of Gotlandí and ëThe Gotlanders are represented by this sealí. The second half has been translated: ëChrist is represented by the lambí and ëChristís symbol is the lambí. Later versions, in particular for the town of Visby, show several variations, including a reversal of the image and a gloria on the ram, both of which are considered to be more usual. See KL, s.v. Landskapssegel; Siltberg 2005, 284ñ98.

Printed by Short Run Press Limited, Exeter

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION vii

I Gotlandís medieval historical background vii

II Preservation of Guta lag xiv

III Nature and content xxii

IV Origins xxxiii V Date, place and circumstances of composition xxxvi

VI Editions and translations of Guta lag xl

TRANSLATION 1

NOTES 64

MANUSCRIPT PAGES

B 64 191

AM 54 4to 192

APPENDICES

A. Comparison of manuscript contents 193

B. Chronology of historical events 196

C. Monetary system 198

D Penalties exacted 200

E. Oaths and witnesses required 216

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS 220

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

PREFACE

After the publication of Guta saga in the Viking Society Text Series, I was encouraged by Professor Richard Perkins to continue my research work with a PhD thesis. This addressed the body of the manuscript of which Guta saga formed an addendum, the fourteenth-century law codex called Guta lag ëthe law of the Gotlandersí. The study also involved comparison with a later manuscript, a copy of a lost fifteenth-century original. It was always the ultimate aim to have this thesis published by the Viking Society, and when it was accepted in 2006, I started to consider how best to present it.

It was decided at an early stage to publish only the translation, and to omit the Gutnish texts and the glossary. This decision was made with regret, but to include these would have made the publication beyond the scope of the Text Series. Most of the remaining content of the thesis has been included, with necessary re-formatting and improvement. The manner in which the two major documents were to be presented was also not decided upon immediately, and the final result is to some extent a compromise. The text of the fourteenth- century B 64 Holm has been taken as the basis and minor deviations in AM 54 4to have been presented in footnotes, with major differences shown in separate Additions. This is similar to the manner in which Schlyter presented the material in his volume.

We were fortunate in obtaining a generous grant from the Dorothea Coke Memorial Fund, which has enabled us, amongst other things, to reproduce pages of the manuscripts to a high quality.

I owe a debt of gratitude to Dr Perkins for his original suggestion and supervision of my studies, to Dr Carl Phelpstead for his helpful and percep- tive editorial assistance on the content of the work and to Dr Alison Finlay for her patient and thorough editing of my manuscript and her uncomplaining acceptance of my last-minute thoughts.

My husband again showed exceptional patience during my studies and the production of this volume. His proofreading, particularly of lists of amend- ments, has been invaluable, but the remaining errors are my own.

Finally, I would like to thank the staff in the libraries in London, Stock- holm and Copenhagen who helped me to satisfy the requirements for chapter and verse, which it has become so much a part of my nature to insist upon.

Christine Peel

INTRODUCTION vii

INTRODUCTION

THE KINGDOM OF SWEDEN first began to take shape in the Viking Age when a number of independent provinces around and to the north of Lake M‰lare acknowledged the same king and principal heathen temple at Uppsala. There was no central administration, however, and each province had its own assembly, law and legal system. To the south and west of these provinces lay V‰stergˆtland and ÷stergˆtland and, still further south, provinces belonging to Denmark, each again with its own laws. The island of Gotland also had its own law and administrative system and was more or less independent. The two most important of the provincial laws, and those that form the basis for the other preserved law texts, were those for ÷stergˆtland and Uppland (the province in which Uppsala lay).

Although all the preserved redactions of the provincial laws are post- Conversion, most exhibit traces of older traditions. The extent to which they do so depends not only on the age of the manuscripts in question but also on the extent to which they retain independence from the two main provincial laws. Guta lag, the law of the Gotlanders (subsequently referred to as GL), differs radically in a number of respects from any of the mainland provincial laws. The differences are not only in the con- tent but also in the presumed administrative structure in force at the time. These differences are discussed in detail in sections III and IV of this Introduction.

Mainland provincial laws were all superseded by a national law, Mag- nus Erikssons landslag (MELL), between 1347 and 1352, and at some time before 1357 this was supplemented by a town law, Magnus Erikssons stadslag (MEStL). The former was revised to some extent under King Kristoffer of Bayern (1440ñ48). These two law codes remained in force until 1734 when a unified Swedish law was established. In contrast to the mainland provinces, Gotland, for reasons laid out below, effectively retained its own provincial law until 1645, when it finally came under permanent Swedish rule.

I Gotlandís medieval historical background

The following brief history of Gotland in the Middle Ages is presented in order to clarify the context in which Guta lag was written. The first

viii

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

known literary reference to Gotlandís belonging to the Swedish state is in the ninth-century description in Old English of Wulfstanís voyage through the Baltic (Orosius, 16, line 28), although WessÈn (SL IV, 306) and others contradict Wulfstanís claim (see GS, xxxiiiñxxxv). In particular, Rydberg (STFM I, 40) argues that Gotland was independent of Sweden in the tenth century. Later runic inscriptions, notably the Tors‰tra stone in Uppland (U 614) from the second half of the eleventh century, indicate that there was conflict between Gotland and mainland Sweden during that period, and tribute was collected from the islanders. By the twelfth century Gotland was certainly subject to Sweden in some respects. A document in Latin from the time of Pope Callixtus II, which lists bishoprics in a number of countries, including those of Scandina- via, is held in the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana in Florence. This document is dated to c.1120 and forms part of the Ashburnham collec- tion; it is catalogued as Codex (Laurenzianus) Ashburnham 1554. The library acquired the collection in question in 1878 on the death of Lord Bertram, fourth Earl of Ashburnham. The text of the document, commonly called Florensdokument in Swedish, was first published by Delisle (1886, 70ñ75). As well as enumerating the Swedish bishoprics, it lists Guthlandia as one of the insulae of Sweden. Although the usual sense of insula is ëislandí, the list includes other, non-insular districts. Since, however, the document contains a number of obvious errors, its reliability on the matter of Gotlandís relationship to Sweden must also be questionable (Delisle 1886, 75; Fabre and Duchesne 1910, Introduction, 41ñ43; Tunberg 1913, 28; DS Appendix 1, 3, no. 4; GV, 449ñ51).

A lost document from the reign of Emperor Lothar III (1125ñ37) apparently gave Gotlanders statutes of rights and freedom, but the oldest preserved such document is the Declaration of Artlenburg (Artlen- burgprivilegiet or Artlenburgfˆrdraget in Swedish), drawn up in 1161 (or possibly 1163) by Henry the Lion, Duke of Saxony and Ba- varia. This document, in Latin, contains various reciprocal provisions relating to trade, inheritance, personal protection, and fines for viola- tions against the person, but none of these is mentioned in GL. The oldest extant copy is dated 1225, the year in which Mariakyrkan in Visby was consecrated. It was originally kept in that church but is now preserved in the town archives of L ̧beck. The document is edited in Sveriges traktater med fr‰mmande magter (STFM) I, 78ñ79, no. 42 (Yrwing 1940, 109ñ37; 1978, 109ñ16; SL IV, lxxxi; KL s. v. Handelsfred; GV, 455ñ59).

INTRODUCTION i x

Although Gotland does not figure in the corpus of West Norse litera- ture to any great extent, it is mentioned a number of times in connection with St Olaf. Snorri in Chapter 77 of ”l·fs saga helga links it with ÷land under the bishopric of ÷stergˆtland (ÕF XXVII, 109). Accounts of visits by St Olaf to Gotland are to some extent contradictory, but it seems certain that he visited the island on at least two occasions and possibly three (ÕF XXVII, Chapters 7 and 192; GS, xxxviñxxxviii). The purpose of Olafís first visit in 1007 or 1008, when he was twelve, was to exact tribute, but later visits seem to have been incidental to his voyage to and/or from Russia in 1029 and 1030. One of these later visits may have resulted in the introduction of Christianity to Gotland, or at least in the baptism of individual Gotlanders, but it is questionable whether a general conversion of the whole of the popula- tion resulted. Gotland took St Olaf as its patron saint, but this may have been influenced more by colourful legend than by an historical event. Church building in Gotland seems to have been initially the result of private initiative (see Chapter 3, lines 22ñ23). It cannot have started later than about the middle of the twelfth century, since by that time Gotland was evidently incorporated into the See of Linkˆping. The Cistercian monastery of Beata Maria de Gutnalia was founded at Roma in 1164, a daughter house to that of Nydala in SmÂland, which implies that Christianity was firmly established in Gotland by that date and that there were already close links with Sweden (Pernler 1977, 57, 61ñ62, 65).

In 1195, at the instigation of Bishop Meinhard of Livonia, Gotlanders apparently took part in a crusade in Livonia, which embraced what is now southern Estonia and northern Latvia (Yrwing 1940, 59; 1978, 123; Christiansen 1997, 81, 114). It appears that shortly after this, or at the beginning of the thirteenth century, commitment to an annual levy (lai ̨ingr) for the Baltic crusades was established in Gotland, although Rydberg (STFM I, 71) dates this arrangement to c.1150 (Yrwing 1940, 58ñ59; 1978, 21ñ22). The Gotlanders agreed to supply seven manned warships for these crusades, or, alternatively, pay forty marks in coin for each ship not provided. One ship was to be funded by each sixth district (siettungr) and the seventh ship, it is assumed, by the inhabitants of Visby. These included both Gotlanders and Germans. The latter had been part of the resident population of merchants, probably from the twelfth century, before the Hanseatic League was formed (see pp. xiñxii below). The option of a payment in money rather than men was presum- ably offered in deference to the importance of trade between Gotland

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

and her Baltic neighbours (see Yrwing 1978, 21). Details of these arrangements appear in Guta saga, the short legendary history of Gotland that forms an appendix to the manuscript B 64, although there is no record of when they were put in place (see GS, 12ñ14 and notes). There are further records of Gotlanders actually refusing to take part in crusades, such as those in 1199 to Livonia and in 1226 to the Baltic island of ÷sel, presumably because they were unwilling to jeopardise their trading relationships with these countries (Bjˆrkander 1898, 27ñ28; Yrwing 1963, 94; Pernler 1977, 62, 108; Yrwing 1978, 124; 1991, 164).

Although Gotland was attached to the See of Linkˆping in ÷ster- gˆtland, it was Archbishop Andreas Suneson of Lund, a Danish province at that time, who appears to have taken most interest in the island. He visited Gotland in 1207, a circumstance that has led to the supposition that it was he who initiated the writing of the first manuscript of GL. A letter from Pope Innocent III dated 1213 (DS I, 178, no. 152) concerns the abbot of Gotland and rural deans of the northern and southern dis- tricts (Northlanda and Sutherlanda), linking them to the diocese of Lund. Pernler (1977, 153ñ54) argues that Lund is in this document most probably an error for Linkˆping, and as the Archbishop of Lund was primate of Sweden at the time, superior to the Archbishop of Uppsala, a mistaken reference to the archdiocese here, instead of the diocese, might be understandable. Eight years later, in 1221, Archbishop Suneson, together with Bishops Karl and Bengt of Linkˆping, wrote a letter (DS I, 690, no. 832) setting out the arrangements relating to visitations by the bishop to Gotland. The contents of this letter may be compared with information given by Guta saga on the same topic (see GS, 10ñ12 and notes).

During the thirteenth century, there was considerable correspondence from the papacy concerning the level and distribution of tithes payable in Gotland. In 1217 Pope Honorius III confirmed tithe laws previously arranged for Gotland between Archbishop Suneson and Bishop Karl of Linkˆping (DS I, 190, no. 168). No document containing the original agreement survives, but the laws apparently differed from those in other Swedish provinces, where the bishop normally received a third of the remaining tithe, after a third had been paid to the parish priest. The parish church and the poor then each received the same proportion as the bishop (i.e. two ninths of the whole). It seems that allocation of a portion of the tithe to the bishop was a later innovation, perhaps replac- ing ad hoc payments for individual services rendered (e.g. church

INTRODUCTION x i

consecrations). GLís is the only tithe law in Europe with no modifica- tion in favour of the bishop. That arrangements for Gotland occasioned some dissatisfaction in Linkˆping is suggested by a letter from Pope Gregory IX in 1230 confirming them (DS I, 257ñ58, no. 256), against protests from Bishop Bengt. In 1253 Pope Innocent IV had to issue the same edict to Bishop Lars (DS I, 366, no. 411). At the same time he issued statements of protection relating to the people and clergy of Gotland (DS I, 365ñ66, no. 410). He also confirmed the right of the priests to elect their own rural deans and the people to select their pas- tors (DS I, 366ñ67, nos 412 and 413). Whether Gotland succeeded in resisting later encroachments into the various elements of the tithe is doubtful and in all probability some of the tithe collected for parish churches was diverted to building the cathedral at Linkˆping. Since, however, there are no parish accounts covering the fourteenth and fif- teenth centuries, this must remain a matter for conjecture (SL IV, 247ñ48 note 14; Pernler 1977, 133ñ44).

So far as the secular, as opposed to the ecclesiastical history of Gotland is concerned, it is evident that trade, in particular into and out of Visby, was of strategic importance in the late twelfth and early thirteenth cen- turies. A dramatic rise in Baltic transit trade in the eleventh to thirteenth centuries is possibly related to the decline in the importance of Birka, activity by Gotlandic merchant farmers (farmannabˆnder) fill- ing the resulting vacuum (Yrwing 1978, 104ñ05, 138ñ40). The goods most traded were skins, but wax, iron and weapons were also significant. That Gotlanders had been trading in the Baltic and beyond during the Viking period is supported by finds of silver in almost every parish on the island and by finds in the Baltic countries of artefacts of Gotlandic design. The existence of a Gotlandic trading station in Novgorod and documentary evidence of trade with England in the form of customs declarations and literary references also show that trade flourished over a wide area before Visby emerged as a Hanseatic town (HansUB I, 270, 283, 281, 322; Bugge 1899, 151ñ71; Bohman 1951, 35). In 1229 Pope Gregory IX wrote to the Bishop of Linkˆping, the Cistercian abbot of Gotland and the rural dean of Visby to ask them to prevent trade first with the Russians (DS I, 253ñ54, no. 250, 27th January 1229), who were harassing Finnish converts, and then with unconverted Finns (DS I, 255ñ56, no. 253, 16th February 1229). The first request in all probability referred to Gotlandic merchants; the latter did so explic- itly and was an attempt to enforce a previous interdict by Honorius III in 1221 (DS I, 220ñ21, no. 206, 13th January 1221). This is again evidence

xii

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

that the Gotlanders valued their Baltic trade and were reluctant to relinquish it, even in the cause of defending Christianity (see Pernler 1977, 196ñ97).

The building of Mariakyrkan in Visby started in the early thirteenth century and this ambitious project must reflect the success of the town itself, largely as a result of its association with the Hanseatic League. According to a letter dated 1225 from Bishop Bengt (DS I, 241, no. 231), which is the first written record of a German population in Visby, the church was to be consecrated as a parish church for both resident Germans and visiting merchants involved in Hanseatic trade. Bjˆrkander (1898, 88ñ89 notes 2, 3, 4) considers that the church was built primarily for the new German visitors, but that it was not their only church. Yrwing (1940, 223ñ38; 1978, 114ñ15) argues that the reference is to both a permanent and a transient German population and that Germans had started to inhabit Visby from the twelfth century and had possibly had an earlier church on the same site.

From about the middle of the thirteenth century, tension began to rise between the merchant farmers of the countryside and the largely German inhabitants of Visby. This was initiated by the actions of L ̧beck and Hamburg in 1252, when they declared themselves representatives of the merchants of the Holy Roman Empire and excluded the Gotlandic mer- chants. Although the latter were granted safe conduct through Saxony in 1255, and their rights as expressed in the Declaration of Artlenburg (see p. viii) were reiterated, by 1280 the German inhabitants of Visby had made their own arrangements with L ̧beck and later Riga to the exclusion of nonñGerman merchants. Trade with England had also been reduced considerably by 1255, with only one Gotlandic merchant men- tioned in records of fur trading (HansUB I, 475; Yrwing 1978, 28, 138). In 1282 the situation worsened and Frisians and Gotlanders were forbid- den to trade in the North Sea. There was even an attempt to prevent the English trading in the Baltic.

By 1288, conflict between Visby and the rest of Gotland was inevitable and there was a bitter civil war. This resulted in a victory for the inhabit- ants of Visby, who then raised a wall around the town. Magnus LadulÂs took advantage of the situation to punish the townspeople and force them to confess that they had broken their duty to the king in building the wall without permission. For this they paid a fine of 2,000 marks of silver with further sums at regular intervals, and agreed to allow the other Gotlanders to send messengers to the king. The viability of foreign trade by the merchant farmers of the countryside had, however, been

INTRODUCTION xiii

destroyed. At the same time Magnus confirmed his sovereignty over Gotland, as well as new tax laws, which he had introduced in 1285, i.e. an annual levy tax to be paid whether the fleet was called out or not. The inhabitants of Visby retained their independence from the rest of Gotland, but at the expense of a humiliating surrender to the king of Sweden (Yrwing 1978, 27ñ33). One advantage that they did gain was their own law in German, Visby stadslag (the town law of Visby, VStL), which appears to have been set down in the early part of the fourteenth century. As a result, ordinary Gotlanders were slowly reduced to a population of domestic freehold and leasehold farmers, a situation that considerably worsened when King Valdemar Atterdag of Denmark invaded Gotland in July 1361.

In 1360 Valdemar had retaken SkÂne and Blekinge from Magnus Eriksson and, early the following year, he had invaded ÷land and cap- tured the castle of Borgholm. On 27th July a well-equipped Danish force defeated an army of farmers, inflicting heavy losses. The citizens of Visby seem to have taken no part in the fighting and two days later Valdemar confirmed their ancient rights and privileges (DD III:6, 65ñ 66, no. 69), simply replacing Sweden with Denmark in the agreements drawn up (Yrwing 1978, 46ñ49). The situation in the remainder of Gotland is less clear, and on 26th July 1364 Albrekt of Mecklenburg, who had seized power from Magnus, appeared to be in a position to pledge Gotland to Count Henry of Holstein for 4,000 marks of silver, or at least to be able to promise to do so (STFM II, 337ñ43, no. 368). This promise was never fulfilled, however, and in 1389 Albrekt lost power in Sweden to Queen Margareta. In the period from 1395 to 1398, Albrekt had regained con- trol of Visby, while the remainder of the island was in Danish hands under Sven Sture. The latter cooperated with the Vitalian Brotherhood, a band of pirates in the pay of members of the Mecklenburg family. They were at that time destabilising the Baltic, and in 1396 Albrektís son Duke Erik took command of the Vitalians in Gotland, and of Sven Sture himself. When Erik died of the plague in the following year, Sven Sture took over both the Vitalians and, effectively, Gotland (see Yrwing 1978, 51ñ52).

The damage to Baltic trade that this piracy caused, and advances made by Margareta in creating a Scandinavian superpower, led in 1398 to intervention by the Teutonic Order. They seized power in Gotland and took responsibility for both Visby and the rest of the island from Duke Johan of Mecklenburg on behalf of Albrekt, confirming that open trade was permitted in Visby and that taxes would not be imposed by the

xiv

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Order, or by anyone to whom the island was pledged (STFM II, 585ñ87, no. 424, 5th April 1398). In the following year, Albrekt pledged the island to the Order in return for 30,000 gold nobles. Of these, 20,000 were to be waived in respect of the costs incurred by the Order in the rescue operation. This arrangement was clearly intended to prevent Queen Margareta from claiming Gotland from either party. In this it failed and finally, in 1407, Margareta agreed to pay the newly appointed Grand Master 9,000 nobles in respect of the castle of Visborg, which the Order had started to build in Visby. In November the following year, the Grand Master confirmed that he had received the sum named and was content to hand both Gotland and the castle to Erik of Pommern, joint monarch of the Union with Margareta, on the sole condition that Visby retain its ancient rights and privileges. All outstanding claims by the Teutonic Order for the cost of rescuing, maintaining and defend- ing Gotland (i.e. the 20,000 nobles mentioned above) had been abandoned, as the task had become an economic liability, which they were perhaps only too relieved to surrender (see Sch ̧ck 1945, 199ñ205; Yrwing 1978, 53ñ54).

The power struggle over Gotland continued through the fifteenth and the first quarter of the sixteenth centuries, but in 1526 it finally ceased to be a bone of contention in Scandinavia and became an unimportant Danish province for 119 years. More than two hundred years of conflict and uncertainty, during which Visby lost its place in the Hanseatic League as early as 1470, had completely obliterated Gotlandís impor- tance in Scandinavian and Baltic trade (Sch ̧ck 1945, 205ñ20).

II Preservation of Guta lag

The text of Guta lag, the law of the Gotlanders, is preserved in eight manuscripts. Two of the medieval manuscripts, one vellum and one paper, are in Gutnish and it is these that are presented in the translation here. The others consist of a vellum manuscript in a mixture of Middle High German and Middle Low German, two Danish paper manuscripts, a paper manuscript containing a number of later provisions in Danish and two eighteenth-century paper manuscripts in Gutnish. All eight manu- script traditions are taken into consideration when attempting to construct a stemma.

There are four further manuscripts that contain only the historical appendix to the law, referred to as Guta saga. These are not considered in the present study, but are described in the introduction to Guta saga. The History of the Gotlanders (xiiñxiv).

A. Holm B 64

INTRODUCTION x v

This octavo vellum-bound manuscript, held in Kungliga Biblioteket (the Royal Library) in Stockholm, is the only medieval vellum manu- script of GL in the original Gutnish. The text of Guta lag covers forty-two leaves, followed by eight leaves containing the text of Guta saga (GS, x). Schlyter (CIG, i , iv) dates this manuscript, which he calls ëAí, to about the middle of the fourteenth century. WessÈn (LG, xxvi) and oth- ers support this dating. The manuscript was discovered in Gotland c.1680 and taken to Stockholm, where it was passed to the archive of antiquities by Professor Andreas Spole (Ü1699) and subsequently used by Johan Hadorph for his edition (1687). Hadorph states elsewhere that the manuscript (B 64) was ënÂgra Âhr sedan igen funnin uthi en Kyrckia der pÂ Landet ibland orenligheet, sÂsom en fˆrkastat Tingí (several years ago found in a church in the province, amongst the rubbish, like a thing rejected). The chapter numbers in the table of contents, which is written in two columns, have been inserted by a later hand and the table of contents itself differs slightly from the content. The nature of the differ- ences (e.g. the inclusion of references to slaves, missing from the text) suggests that the table reflects an earlier redaction of the text. The lan- guage of three chapters (62, 63 and 65) and of Guta saga is later than that of the other chapters. Chapter 64 (24f in this translation) has been omitted from its proper place (according to the table of contents) and inserted between Chapters 63 and 65 (GU, viiñx; GLGS, viiñxii; SL IV, lxv). The same scribe is responsible for the whole manuscript and it seems likely, as WessÈn suggests, that most of these inconsistencies existed in his original. This manuscript is hereafter referred to as B 64 and its content, perhaps unfortunately, as the A-text, following Schlyterís designation.

B. AM 54 4to

This paper manuscript, bound in vellum, is in Den ArnamagnÊanske HÂndskriftsamling at the University library in Copenhagen and is desig- nated ëBí by Schlyter (CIG, xii). According to a statement on folio 55r, David Bilefeld copied it in 1587 from a manuscript (no longer extant) dated 1470. AM 54 4to consists of fifty-seven numbered leaves. On folios 55v to 57v is a table of contents. A further leaf at the front is inscribed Anno Dei MDLXXXVII, and a separate leaf attached to the manuscript has a note by ¡rni Magn ̇sson repeating the information on folio 55r. David Hansson Bilefeld was born in Denmark and received a German education. He came to Gotland in 1569 as tutor to the sons of

xvi

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

the Danish governor Jens Bilde and in 1571 was appointed headmaster in Visby. At the date of the production of AM 54 4to he was parish priest in Barlingbo and rural dean (proastr) of the northern riding ( ̨ri ̨iungr) of Gotland. Bilefeld was appointed suffragan Bishop of Gotland in 1592 and died in 1596 (Pipping 1901a, 72; Lemke 1868, 22ñ23). The text of Bilefeldís manuscript differs from the A-text in that sections relating to the children of priests and to the sale of and theft by slaves missing from B 64 appear in AM 54 4to. The provisions concerned seem to be older than those in sections where the texts agree, and were thus likely to have been deliberately omitted from B 64 or its original (see GLGS, xviii; SL IV, lxvi). This circumstance supports an assumption that AM 54 4to, and hence the manuscript of 1470, although of a later date than B 64, repre- sents an earlier state of the law. The text of AM 54 4to is hereafter referred to, again perhaps unfortunately, as the B-text.

C. Holm B 65

This is an octavo vellum manuscript, lacking covers, from 1401, held in Kungliga Biblioteket, Stockholm, and containing a medieval German translation of GL. It contains the text of the law and a German translation of Guta saga. Following the vellum leaves are attached thirteen paper leaves, the first nine and last two of which contain two sets of Danish statutes, written in a mid-sixteenth-century hand. One set is dated Christ- mas Eve (helig afton) 1492 and the other 1537. The first is complete, but only the first two and a half chapters of the latter are included. Accord- ing to information in the manuscript itself, the German translation was prepared under instructions from Johann Techewicz, who was captain (houptman) of the Teutonic Order in Gotland. The translation itself was executed by Sunye (known only by his given name), recorded in June 1402 as superintendent at St Georgeís Hospital, Visby (SD I, 143, no. 195) and later apparently as rural dean of the northern riding of Gotland (see Pernler 1977, 167). Schlyter (CIG, xiv) considers that the text is a mixture of Middle High German and Middle Low German, such as was probably spoken by the German residents of Visby, but this has been challenged by Ekelund (1906, 9, 32, 34) and others. The translation contains the chapters concerning the sale of and theft by slaves, but not the other extra provisions in AM 54 4to, nor the three additional (latest) chapters in B 64. The last thirteen chapters are in a different sequence with respect to both B 64 and AM 54 4to. The translation in B 65 is designated tyGL by WessÈn (SL IV, lxvi). The manuscript Holm B 65 is hereafter referred to as B 65 and its content as tyGL.

D. AM 55 4to

INTRODUCTION xvii

This mid-sixteenth-century paper manuscript, containing a Danish translation of GL, is held in Den ArnamagnÊanske HÂndskriftsamling at the University library, Copenhagen. It is bound in a paper cover, inscribed Den gamle Gullands Low. On the title page, as well as the words Gullans Lovf, is the name of the owner: Claudius Christophori F. Lyschander and ëÜ 1623í. The first two leaves contain a table of contents, which does not wholly agree with the text itself and is written in a different hand. The text of the law is followed by some notes on coinage in the same hand and an outline, in a later hand, of an alphabetical index, which has not been completed. WessÈn, who designates the text in the manuscript daGL, thinks that the translation might have been made in connection with a declaration by King Hans I in 1492, confirming the validity of ëthen gamble Gudlandtz loughí (the old Gotlandic law), supplemented by certain other provisions contained in manuscript Holm C 81 4to described below (see SL IV, lxvii, lxxxvii). According to Schlyter (CIG, xvii), however, the manuscript was probably written out by the translator himself, which would place it approximately fifty years later in date. Three chapters present in the medieval Gutnish manuscripts are missing from this translation; it contains, however, seven chapters that do not appear in the other texts and three that differ in content from similar provisions elsewhere in the text. The last thirteen chapters are in a different sequence from the last fourteen of the three preceding manuscripts and the chapter on taxes is omitted. The provision concerning the sale of slaves is present, but not that concerning theft by slaves. AM 55 4to therefore evidently follows a tradition independent of the three manu- scripts previously described, and is of value in respect of the provisions not found elsewhere, since it in all probability throws light on a lost Gotlandic original.

E. Holm C 81 4to

This paper manuscript from the late sixteenth century, bound but lacking covers, is held in Kungliga Biblioteket, Stockholm. It contains in complete form the two sets of Danish statutes, which are to be found in truncated form in B 65. On one of two blank leaves at the beginning a later hand refers to the first set of statutes as that laid down by King Hans I in 1492. The second set of statutes was, according to its rubric, drawn up in 1537 by King Christian III Frederiksson.

xviii

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

F. GKS 3363 4to

This vellum-bound paper manuscript is held in Den Gamle Kongelige Samling (GKS) of Det Kongelige Bibliotek (the Royal Library) in Copen- hagen. A number of supplementary notes are inserted at the end of the manuscript. It has two title pages, one inscribed Lex Gothlandica 1470 scripta and the other Exaratum Anno MDLXXXVII. The catalogue details state: ëLex Gothlandica, ad exemplar 1470 exerat, manu O. Sperlingii jun. 1687í. This date is presumably the date assigned to the manuscript. It is an imperfect, although largely careful copy made by Otto Sperling (Ü1715), a professor in Copenhagen, and was intended to consist of the Gutnish text with a Latin translation on facing pages. Only the first two and a half chapters and the chapter headings have been translated, how- ever. Since it gives the years 1470 and 1587 on the title page, the Gutnish would appear to be a copy of Bilefeldís manuscript, AM 54 4to, as stated by Schlyter (CIG, xix), and thus does not represent an independent tradi- tion. This manuscript is not listed in Gigasís catalogue (1903ñ15) of Scandinavian manuscripts in Det kongelige Bibliotek.

G. Kall 650 4to

This unbound paper manuscript is held in Kalls Samling of Det Kongelige Bibliotek, Copenhagen. The collection was the property of Professor Abraham Kall (Ü1821) and was inherited by Det kongelige Bibliotek in 1821. The Gutnish of the manuscript (on the verso pages) is an exact copy, apart from a number of misreadings, of GKS 3363 4to and hence ultimately of Bilefeldís manuscript. Kall 650 4to was executed at almost the same time as GKS 3363 4to (i.e. late seventeenth or early eighteenth century). This manuscript is likewise not listed in Gigasís catalogue (1903ñ15).

H. Holm B 68 4to

This paper manuscript, also bound in paper, and held in Kungliga Biblioteket, Stockholm, is a Danish translation of GL from the begin- ning of the seventeenth century and is a copy of AM 55 4to. Schlyter (CIG, xix) considers the scribe to be Swedish on the grounds of his handwriting and orthography. There are a number of spaces left in the manuscript, presumably for later insertions that were never completed.

Stemma

From an analysis of the preserved manuscripts of GL described above a tentative stemma may be proposed:

*A1
*A2 c.1260

*A2

B65 c.1401

INTRODUCTION *GL

xix

*A2

z *A4

z1 c.1490

AM 55 4to c.1550

B68 4to c.1600

c.1220 u

*GS
x c.1250

*A3
wx1 y1

w1 c.1470

AM 54 4to

c.1587

B64

c.1350

GKS 3363 4to c.1700

Kall 650 4to c.1800

The argument in favour of a single, ëoriginalí, manuscript for Guta lag, probably written at the instigation of Archbishop Suneson of Lund, is presented in section V. Correspondence between the archbishop and others in the early thirteenth century suggests that no written law code existed for Gotland before that time. This being the case, it seems rea- sonable to assume that the outcome was a single manuscript, which was then copied, added to and translated as circumstances changed and the

○○○○○○○○○○○○○

○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

need arose. The consistency of the core statutes in all the extant manu- scripts also supports this assumption.

Following WessÈnís suggestions (SL IV, lxivñlxviii), it seems likely that the surviving complete manuscripts that are not obviously copies (AñD above) represent four different traditions, here designated w, x, y and z. Of these, w and x are assumed both to be derived from a common source v. Two arguments for this are: (1) the presence of some errors common to B 64 and AM 54 4to, such as that noted in the footnote to Chapter 32, lines 12ñ13, and (2) the identical sequence of the fourteen later chapters, which is not the case in the other two traditions. Pipping points out (GLGS, xviii note 1) that Bilefeld could have had B 64 to hand when he made his copy and been influenced by it. He certainly had access to B 64 at some time, since he has made annotations in it, e.g. the number 27 in the margin on folio 22r, which is in his handwriting (see Pipping 1904, 16ñ18). Pipping observes, however, that Bilefeld appears to have had access to a third manuscript (which Pipping calls X) when making his copy of the one dated 1470 (see GLGS, xviiñxviii). Pipping reaches this conclusion in his edition of AM 54 4to, where he considers various marginal notes that Bilefeld made in his manuscript and points out their differences in orthography both from the main text (and hence presumably from the manuscript of 1470) and from B 64 (see Pipping 1901a, 73ñ81). In addition, the number ë27í written by Bilefeld on folio 22r of B 64, alongside Chapter 20, does not refer to the equivalent chap- ter in AM 54 4to, which is 26, and so, argues Pipping, must refer to the equivalent chapter in X. Since Pippingís X has not survived, there is little that can be conjectured concerning its content or age, and it has been excluded from the stemma.

If it is assumed that the first manuscript of GL dated from c.1220, there must have been a later manuscript group, designated u, that contained the provision, designated *A1 on the stemma, relating to inheritance by daughters of non-Gotlandic (i.e. Swedish) men and which is present in all the extant manuscripts (e.g. at the end of Chapter 24 in B 64 and in Chapter 36 in AM 54 4to). Manuscript group u can be dated to the second half of the thirteenth century at the earliest, since the inheritance law could not have been included prior to 1260, when Birger Jarl intro- duced it into Swedish law (Pipping 1926, 247ñ50).

The miscellaneous provisions (designated *A2 on the stemma) con- tained in Chapters 48ñ61 of B 64, which WessÈn also considers to be later than the main corpus, must have been added after the writing of u, and independently in each of the traditions v, y and z (as indicated) since

INTRODUCTION xxi

these fourteen chapters are in different sequences in three of the four complete manuscripts, but in the same sequence in B 64 and AM 54 4to. The late fifteenth- and early sixteenth-century Danish statutes, which are present in B 65 and Holm C 81 4to, clearly represent a separate tradition, outside that of the main text. They are not included in the stemma.

The w tradition represents an early version of the law, deriving from v, which retained the specific provisions relating to slaves and the chil- dren of priests. At some point various additions to existing provisions concerning hair pulling, toasts at weddings, and inheritance by women (designated *A3 on the stemma) were absorbed into the text. A copy of this version, dated 1470, was used by Bilefeld in writing AM 54 4to, the B-text, and this in turn was copied by several later scribes (e.g. as GKS 3363 4to and Kall 650 4to).

The x tradition derives similarly from v but omits the provisions con- cerning the children of priests and the sale of and theft by slaves, presumably when clerical celibacy was enforced, and slavery became less common because of economic, rather than moral, circumstances. Lis Jacobsen (GGD, 6) infers from this that x represents a later stage of the law than w, y or z. The first manuscript with these omissions, shown by a broken line from v, Pipping assumes was made c.1300, i.e. shortly before B 64 was written. Since the table of contents in the latter refers to the provision relating to the sale of slaves not contained in the text, it seems that B 64 was written at a time of transition in the law. At some point, represented by x1, the heterogeneous additions (*A3) made to the w tradi- tion were included, but not absorbed into the body of the text as they were in the w tradition, appearing instead in Chapters 62, 63 and 65. Whether this happened before or after the omissions in question were made is not possible to determine, since no change was made to the table of contents to incorporate them. Guta saga (*GS), which was not part of the w tradition, was also appended at or around this stage. The x tradi- tion is represented only by B 64, the A-text.

The y tradition, represented by B 65 (tyGL), contains some of the older provisions, namely those concerning the sale of and theft by slaves, but not the additions (*A3) found in the w and x traditions. On this basis, Jacobsen considers that the German translation represents the oldest preserved content. At some point, however, say y1, the text of Guta saga was translated and incorporated into B 65.

Finally, the z tradition, which is represented by AM 55 4to and its copy B 68 4to (daGL), omits some of the provisions that might be

xxii

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

regarded as original, shown by a broken line from u. Some, but not all, of the provisions assumed to have been later additions are included (shown by the dotted line leading from *A3) as are others that have no equiva- lents elsewhere (designated *A4 and forming Chapters 13, 52, 54, 55 and 57ñ59 of the named manuscripts).

As a supplement to the stemma, Appendix A contains a table showing the differences in content and sequence of chapters in the four principal manuscripts (AñD above) and thus the four manuscript traditions.

III Nature and content A. The nature of Guta lag

There are three scholarly opinions concerning the character of the origi- nal text of Guta lag, and thus the existing manuscripts. Richard Steffen (1943, 40) contends that the ëoriginalí text of GL was produced by a priest, and that it was partly theoretical in nature, reflecting an ideal rather than an achieved legal framework. In support of this view Bengt Sˆderberg (1956, 13) points out that a wergild of twenty-four marks of silver must have been equivalent to a large farm complete with its con- tents and movables. Since only wealthy landowning families could have considered paying such a fine, it might be assumed that for others the price must have been their life or liberty, a process that started when the killer fled to an area of asylum with his close family. Such an assump- tion, i.e. that the fines were unrealistic, changes the balance of the law as presented in the manuscripts. Instead of fines taking precedence over other forms of punishment, the old system of retaliation would seem still to hold good, in defiance of the new principle of reconciliation.

Karl Westman (1912b, 16ñ18) uses the terms r‰ttsbok and lagbok in the context of Swedish provincial laws. He defines the former as a record of the law in force at a particular date, recorded from the words of law speakers as an aide mÈmoire. A suitable English translation of r‰ttsbok might be ëjustice bookí. Westman cites the older law of V‰stergˆtland (ƒVgL) and the law of ÷stergˆtland (÷gL) as examples of this type. He contrasts these with a number of other provincial laws, particularly those from Svealand, that is, the laws of Uppland, Sˆdermanland and H‰lsing- land (UL, SdmL and HL), which he designates lagbˆcker. Westman defines these as systematic, normalised codes prepared by lawmakers from ex- isting written records. These were presumably designed to incorporate the complete legal process. Lagbok would be usefully translated as ëstat- ute bookí.

INTRODUCTION xxiii

Westman does not classify GL, or certain other provincial laws, for example those of Dalarna and V‰stmanland and the younger law of V‰stergˆtland (DL, VmL, YVgL). Hafstrˆm (1970, 25, 27) holds that all the law texts from Gˆtaland were justice books and by implication in- cludes GL in this category, but WessÈn (LG, xix) places GL in the second of Westmanís categories rather than the first, and refers to the conclud- ing words of the law:

fia en nequarar atbyr ̨ir kunnu ̨ar ver ̨a sum ai hittas hier, ̨a skulu ̨ar slitas mi ̨ domera tali ok ̨air ̨et sueria et ̨et sein ret guta lag ok si ̨an skrifas hier i.

If some occurrence should take place, which is not to be found here, then it must be decided by the majority of judges, and they are to swear that these are proper laws of the Gotlanders, and then they are to be written down here.

On the basis of this provision he holds that GL appears to be a formally accepted and applied text. He contrasts this with the older law of V‰stergˆtland and the law of ÷stergˆtland, which he agrees with West- man to be private records of the law at a particular date, written by men involved with legal matters as aides mÈmoires, i.e. justice books. On the other hand, Holmb‰ck (SL I, xvñxvi; MELLNT, xivñxvi) considers that GL as preserved represents a private record of the law that applied in the province at a specific time (i.e. a justice book rather than a statute book). He includes the law of Dalarna in this category, but designates the law of V‰stmanland and the younger law of V‰stergˆtland as statute books, the result of ëomfattande bearbetning av den tidigare r‰ttení (comprehen- sive revision of the earlier law code). Holmb‰ck (MELLNT, xv note 4) leaves open the question of how many changes took place when the justice books were prepared from the recited law.

A glance at the table of contents of B 64 (taking into account the small differences between that and the text) reveals how unstructured GL is. Matters of civil law are interspersed with matters of criminal law, and provisions covering related topics appear at various points in the con- tent. From the fact that, in the main, the chapters in the text agree with the table of contents at the start of the manuscript, and that the new provisions at the end of B 64 are not included in that table, it seems likely that the sequence of provisions is original. The arrangement of the content in the manuscript gives the impression of a document that records, somewhat randomly, what an individual or individuals remem- bered. Reading the body of the text gives a similar impression: there are omissions, repetitions and slight inconsistencies such as one would expect if memory were the chief source of the information. These

xxiv

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

observations militate against Steffenís suggestion that the text was writ- ten as an unrealised ideal, and it certainly does not have the characteristics of a theoretical work.

If one assumes that GL is to some degree practical rather than theoreti- cal the opposing conclusions of WessÈn and Holmb‰ck (i.e. that GL is either a statute book or a justice book) are equally worthy of serious consideration. Although GL as it is preserved has clearly undergone certain revisions, it does not seem to be a systematised set of statutes as WessÈn contends. It is not organised into sections and chapters (Swed- ish balkar and flockar) in any logical manner and certainly could not be said to cover the whole legal process (Amira 1882ñ95, I, 711). Some chapters are relatively lengthy and unstructured, covering a number of different provisions (e.g. those on wounding and inheritance) whilst others (especially those towards the end of the text) are extremely short, frequently containing only one provision. The law relating to property is split across several chapters, scattered throughout the text (see SL IV, lxxivñlxxv). GL could therefore be described as a more or less selective record by an individual or individuals of the law in force in Gotland at a particular moment, amended and copied at various times to give rise to the preserved manuscripts; in other words it is more nearly a justice book than a statute book.

B. Legal system as reflected by Guta lag

A discussion of the legal system contained in GL might usefully start with what is not included, since that is what distinguishes it most markedly from the mainland Swedish provincial laws. The most obvious omission is a section relating to the pledge of royal involvement in local law (Swedish edsˆreslag, see p. xxxviii), and indeed there is no mention of the king at all in either GL or the town law of Visby. No fines are stated as payable to the king, and although taxes are referred to in Guta saga (GLGS, 64, 68), there is only an unspecific mention of them in GL (Chap- ter 53). There is no reference to Sweden, although it has been assumed by modern scholars that the non-Gotlandic people referred to in GL were residents of Swedish origin. Reciprocal arrangements between Gotland and Sweden are mentioned in Guta saga (GLGS, 64) and the forty-mark wergild, which is payable for non-Gotlanders, appears to be an import from the mainland provincial laws. WessÈn notes that this same level of fine appeared in the Declaration of Artlenburg (see pp. viii, xii above) and considers that in this latter case it reflected the existing law in Gotland (see SL IV, lxxixñlxxxii).

INTRODUCTION xxv

Another omission from GL is any element of commercial or maritime law, despite the apparent importance of trade to Gotland; indeed Visby is named only once, and that in passing. Yrwing (1978, 105) suggests that this omission is explained by the existence, at the time of writing of GL, of special laws covering these matters, and cites the provision relat- ing to the redemption by a foreigner of a captive Gotlander as an indication that this was the case (see Chapter 28, lines 54ñ58). Provi- sions relating to ships are included (Chapter 36) but these cover only the responsibilities of their owners to take due care to protect them from theft.

Although there are a number of provisions relating to the church (tithes, observance of the Sabbath, the duties of priests, etc.) there is no specific church law section covering the dedication, care and ringing of bells, forbidden degrees of kinship in marriage, trial by ordeal or bishopís visitations and courts such as appear in other Swedish provincial laws and in the Danish law of SkÂne (SkL). The fact that arrangements for the bishopís visitation are described in detail in Guta saga, however, sup- ports WessÈnís contention (LG, xviii) that the latter is ëett naturligt komplement till lagení (a natural complement to the law) in that it in- cludes relevant matter not present in GL itself.

A further example of Guta saga complementing GL may be noted. There is no reference in GL to the commission (n‰mnd), which forms an important element in mainland provincial laws. In Guta saga, however, an oath given by commissioners or nominees (nemnda ai ̨r) is described in reference to the failure of the islanders to send troops to the levy (lai ̨ingr). Significantly it is stated in this context that the only such oath permitted is this particular oath to the king (SL IV, lxxix; GLGS, 69).

GL contains very few descriptions of the legal process itself, how assemblies were organised, their frequency and constitution. One insti- tution that seems to have been absent from Gotland, however, is that of lawspeaker (lagman). This office was also lacking in the Danish legal system, whose law texts are similarly less structured than those of main- land Sweden. WessÈn (SL IV, lxxxvi) suggests that there might have been a college of judges (domerar) in Gotland determining the legisla- tive programme. One may infer that there were three or more ( ̨ings)domerar in each sixth (see Chapter 19, lines 120ñ21) and that a number of these were designated as siettungsdomerar. There also seem to have been a number of provincial judges (lanzdomerar), who had some legislative power. Such an arrangement is certainly implied by the

xxvi

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

second half of Chapter 61, the conclusion of the oldest section of the law text. On the other hand, Sˆderberg (1956, 12) thinks that there was a speaker at the general assembly, i.e. the lanzdomeri, who was the highest authority. He may have been the highest judicial voice, but one cannot infer that he was the sole lawmaker. The only instance of the word lanzdomeri in GL (Chapter 19, lines 7ñ8) suggests that there was at least one of these officials for each sixth (siettungr), possibly chosen from amongst the ( ̨ings)domerar or siettungsdomerar. A similar phrase later in the same chapter uses domeri alone, however, and Steffen (1943, 39 note 2) maintains that lanzdomeri referred only to the judge who pre- sided over land alt, i.e. the general assembly.

In another contribution Steffen (1945, 229) suggests that a particular lanzdomeri might have been simultaneously a judge in lower levels of the judiciary. If the first manuscript of GL were written as a private docu- ment, the writer might have had in mind a specific situation in which the provincial judge was a local sixth judge when he wrote the provision. Yrwing (1978, 80ñ81) states that all the judges attended the general assembly and that until about the middle of the fifteenth century the three rural deans also attended. It appears at least possible that the redactor of GL was misled by this arrangement into thinking that all the judges attending the general assembly were designated lanzdomerar. It is also possible that the cited use of this word is simply an error, but if so it is an error common to all four manuscript traditions of GL. It is worth noting that there is no specific reference in GL or other contemporary sources to ̨ri ̨iungsdomerar.

GL was a law designed for a closed, self-governing, farming commu- nity with a need to maintain estates at a viable size, despite the necessity of providing younger sons with a living and daughters with a dowry. Other classes were the lease-holding farmers who rented land, the land- less, who were obliged to provide unpaid labour at harvest time, servants and slaves. Elsa Sjˆholm (1976, 170ñ73) in her discussion of the date of origin of GL makes much of the importance of the Gotlandic aristocracy, but other scholars (e.g. WessÈn in SL IV, lxxxiii) argue that there was, in effect, no aristocratic class in Gotland, and it is difficult to find evidence of such a class. Even the priests were answerable to the assembly of the people, and the power of parishioners in general seems to have been quite extensive.

As well as the native people, there was evidently a considerable for- eign population (ogutniskt fulk) who were permitted to own land and who had their own rules of inheritance and their own levels of wergild.

INTRODUCTION xxvii

This population is considered by most scholars to have consisted of Swedish people from other provinces, since the laws that relate to them coincide with the provincial laws of mainland Sweden, rather than those of Germany (GGD, 45 note 1; SL IV, lxxx). A similar expression, vtlÊnsker ma ̨er, is used in this sense in the older law of V‰stergˆtland (ƒVgL Md 5 ßß 4, 5). On the other hand, Sjˆholm (1976, 167) seems to argue that the group referred to was the population of Visby, or at least the (mainly German) merchants who lived there while visiting Gotland. She admits, however, that the lower level of wergild applicable to this group contra- dicts earlier agreements relating to compensation for travelling merchants.

Although information is sparse, at least three levels of judicial assem- bly are recognised in GL. The highest level was the general assembly (gutnal ̨ing). This was thought, by tradition, to have been held at Roma, in central Gotland, although this is not mentioned in the Gutnish manu- scripts of GL, and has now been called into question. It is possible, for instance, that the word Rume used in the German translation of Guta saga (CIG, 164) referred simply to an open space, possibly near Visby (see Steffen 1945, 246, 250; Sˆderberg 1956, 12). Steffen (1943, 37, 45ñ46) suggests that there might not have been a fixed site for the assembly, but that it was held at the farm of the presiding provincial judge. Yrwing (1978, 81 note 3), however, dismisses this as extremely unlikely in the early Middle Ages, although circumstances might have changed later (Wildte 1926, 212, 215ñ16, 219ñ21; 1931, 181; 1933ñ 34, 171ñ72). The number of general assemblies held in the course of a year is not specified in GL but would seem to be more than one, since the ëassembly next following the Feast of St Peterí is specified in Guta saga (GLGS, 69). According to later laws, the frequency of assemblies varied between weekly and twice yearly province by province. The older law of V‰stergˆtland, however, like GL gives no details (Sjˆberg 1969, 60, 81ñ82). By the end of the fifteenth century Visby was represented by burgomasters and local magistrates, an innovation by Gotlandís Danish rulers. A place referred to in the sources as Gutestue in Visby was the occasional site of assemblies and of meetings between representatives of the town and the Danish crown (see Yrwing 1978, 80). Although King Hans I specified in 1492 that only one assembly a year was to be held, in 1618 there were four a year, one at Gutestuen and three at Roma.

The next level is commonly thought to have been the riding ( ̨ri ̨iungr) assembly. According to this theory, the island was divided into three ridings with an assembly for each, presided over by a judge (Tunberg

xxviii

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

1911, 48ñ49, 135ñ36). There is no contemporary support for this (see p. xxvi), and Steffen (1943, 41) argues that the original ridings were purely ecclesiastical, each headed by a rural dean, and that the administrative function of ridings only came into being after 1645. Three of the four references in GL to the riding assembly appear, however, in the context of the redemption of lost or straying animals. The fourth reference is a general one to the maximum fine that could be extracted at the assembly:

(1) en ̨ri ̨iungr til siex marka (Chapter 31, lines 11ñ12)

And the riding assembly up to six marks.

(2) ̨a skal hafa til tyggia ̨inga ok ̨ri ̨ia ̨ri ̨iungs ̨ings (Chapter 41, lines 3ñ4)

He is to take them to two assemblies and the third time to the riding assembly.

(3) ̨a hafi til tyggia ̨inga ok ̨ri ̨ia ̨ri ̨iungs ̨ings ok haiti upp um ̨ry ar ok taki lausn eptir ̨i sum ̨ri ̨iungr hafr fyr vana hapt (Chapter 42, lines 2ñ5)

He is to take them to two assemblies and the third time to the riding assembly and declare them for three years and claim a fee such as has previously been the custom for the riding.

(4) at tuaim ̨ingum ok ̨ri ̨ia ̨ri ̨iungs ̨ingi um ̨ry ar (Chapter 45a, lines 2ñ3)

(Must be declared) at two assemblies and the third time at a riding assembly for three years.

It appears to be difficult to deny, therefore, that assemblies for the ridings did have some judicial as well as an ecclesiastical function at the time GL was written, since these provisions seem to have no ecclesiastical significance (see Yrwing 1940, 108; 1978, 83 note 1). Pernler (1977, 186ñ89) reaches the same conclusion and observes at the same time that GL remained in force effectively until 1645, despite King Christian IVís attempt to introduce the law of SkÂne to Gotland. This persist- ence, he infers, would hardly be likely if GL were a theoretical work by a cleric, with no practical application (see pp. xxiiñxxiv above). Ecclesiastical matters that were not resolved at the appropriate riding assembly were referred to the general assembly (see GLGS, 68). Although there are no contemporary records naming the sites at which the riding assemblies were held, Lindstrˆm (1895, II, 482ñ83) suggests that these were at Tingst‰de church for the northern riding, at Roma for the middle riding and at Suderting for the southern riding. Pernler (1977, 189) points out, however, that Suderting was actually in the middle riding. Suderting does not survive as a place-name, but it was situated in a property called Ajmunds (or Ejmunds), in the parish of M‰sterby, south- west of Roma, and was an assembly site for the Hejde sixth (see Steffen 1945, 250ñ53).

INTRODUCTION xxix

Gotland was further divided into sixths (siettungar), which Lindstrˆm (1895, II, 480ñ83), Steffen (1943, 21, 22) and others consider to be pre-Christian in origin. The boundaries of these districts do not, how- ever, exactly coincide with those of the ridings from which it was assumed they were created (see Steffen 1945, 236). Sixths seem to have had some administrative significance in that a number of judges were allo- cated to each. These judges apparently had the authority to adjudicate in cases in which the fine did not exceed three marks, but there is no reference in GL to an assembly for a sixth, which weakens Steffenís argument that such assemblies were part of the judicial structure at the time that GL was written. Yrwingís suggestion (1940, 107) that by this time the function of the sixth assembly had been taken over by the lower, district assembly seems in part to be supported by provisions elsewhere in GL relating to three-mark fines. He goes further, however, in a later article (1978, 83) to put forward the theory that sixths only became important as areas for taxation, and later the levy, under Swedish rule and did not have any judicial significance before Danish occupation. Pernler (1977, 188) supports Yrwing in this assessment, pointing out that the first unambiguous mention of a sixth judge occurs in 1511. He interprets the phrase ann lanzdomeri af sama siettungi to mean that there were judges who represented each sixth at the general assembly, rather than assuming that there were assemblies for each sixth. The Danish sixth assemblies and their judges were abolished when Gotland was recovered by Sweden in 1645 (see Yrwing 1978, 86 note 6).

The third level of assembly that is mentioned specifically in GL relates to a further division of the sixths into local districts or hundreds. The word hunderi appears in five contexts, in Chapters 19, 28, 31, 32 and Addition 8, but is not recorded in relation to Gotland outside GL. The word ̨ing alone is used elsewhere in Gotlandic documents (see Yrwing 1978, 86ñ87). Tunberg has argued that the word hunderi in GL may be an import from mainland Sweden (Tunberg 1911, 138ñ39, 202ñ03; SL IV, lxxxivñlxxxv). In GL it appears that each such district had a number of local officials, consistently called ra ̨menn (Chapters 19, 31, 32 and the B-text addition to 38). Steffen (1943, 41) questions the origin of the use of this word and suggests that it reflects a failed attempt to introduce the n‰mnd, alongside a system of local judges. Since the latter are not mentioned in GL, this theory lacks sufficient support and it seems more probable that the term ra ̨menn was used deliberately to distinguish local officials from those appointed to the riding assemblies. At least

xxx

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

three ra ̨menn were chosen for each hunderi and it seems likely that they acted as local magistrates (see Addition 8 and Chapter 31). The termi- nology is, however, ambiguous and ra ̨menn might have just assisted a single domeri, appointed for the hunderis ̨ing (Amira 1882ñ95, I, 21; SL IV, lxxxvñlxxxvi, 280ñ81 note 1). Although Hegel (1891, I, 302), noting various three-mark fines payable by the parish, considers that the hundred was an administrative authority in Gotland, this interpretation is challenged by Yrwing (1940, 104). While other laws, for example the law of Uppland (UL Rb 1), mention rÊtter ̨inxsta ̨er ëproper assembly sitesí in relation to the hundreds, there is no indication of such fixed assembly sites in GL.

It might be inferred from GL that the lowest administrative and judi- cial body was at parish level. This body appears to have been of considerable practical importance, although Steffen (1943, 41) consid- ers that it was, rather, the lowest level of ecclesiastical court, below the riding court and the consistory court. Certainly many of the cases re- ferred to the parish were ecclesiastical in nature, or at least related to crimes committed in or near the church, but some of the duties of the parishioners were of a secular character. Examples are: (1) witnessing the freeing of a slave after his period of service (Chapter 16, lines 23ñ26), (2) witnessing the statement of a woman relating to a child born as a result of an illicit liaison (Chapter 20, lines 114ñ16) and (3) valuing a debt for which surety has been given (Chapter 30, lines 4ñ5). Yrwing (1940, 93, 95ñ98, 107) suggests that as the number of parishes increased and their importance developed, the power exercised by the sixth assemblies was passed to the parishes. These latter then became the local assemblies (called simply ̨ing, see p. xxix), the mani- festation of the so-called hundred assemblies (SL IV, lxxxiiñlxxxviii, xcñxcviii).

Magnus Erikssonís national law for Sweden (MELL) was drawn up in the mid-fourteenth century to replace individual provincial laws pre- vailing in Sweden (outside the towns) with a single law. This replacement did not occur simultaneously in all parts of Sweden: the law of H‰lsingland, for example, was still in force in 1436. In Gotland circum- stances were such that GL remained in force until 1645 when Sweden finally recovered Gotland from Denmark. As noted above, in 1595 King Christian IV of Denmark ordered that all his subjects in Gotland should follow the provincial law of SkÂne, but how far this was enforced is unclear and the attempt to replace GL seems to have been a failure (see Westman 1912b, 21).

INTRODUCTION xxxi C. System of fines and non-monetary punishments

The system of fines in GL is a complex one and in some sections seems to be confusing and contradictory: Appendix C sets out the monetary system used and Appendix D, table (ii) offers an analysis of fines im- posed for different offences, showing the variations depending on the perpetrator and the victim. Wennstrˆm (1940, 74ñ95, 259ñ63) analyses the fines on the basis of the amount extracted.

Theft and adultery seem, to some extent, to have been regarded as more despicable crimes than killing, presumably because they were crimes that broke down trust in the farming community. An isolated killing resulting from a fight between two adult males, if admitted to and compensated for, might be forgiven or at least accepted. The danger came when compensation was not paid and a blood feud could start. One noteworthy aspect of the law relating to what might be called sexual harassment is that the woman appears to have been assigned some responsibility for protecting herself against unwanted advances, since fines for these diminished according to the intimacy of the advance. Such advances were clearly distinguished from straight- forward indecent assaults, which were (as would only seem right to modern eyes) punishable in relation to the degree of exposure the woman suffered. This difference, so tersely described, gives us, perhaps, an insight into the prevailing relationships between men and women in thirteenth-century Gotlandic society. There are no similar provisions in other Swedish provincial laws for comparison, but one cannot infer from this that attitudes to women were therefore different.

The levels of compensation extracted for various criminal acts can be used as an indicator of the relative value of the goods involved. Wennstrˆm (1931, 25ñ26) suggests that a cow was worth nine ˆrtugar of silver (3/8 mark) in thirteenth-century Halland. The definition of ëfull theftí, punishable by death or payment of wergild, in most other provin- cial laws is half a mark of silver (twelve ˆrtugar), or alternatively a cow (see ÷gL Vb 32 pr, ß1). In GL the limit for ëfull theftí is one mark, and if this were equivalent to two cows or more, the full wergild of twenty-four marks would probably have been equal in value to the estate and movables of a considerable farm (see Note to Chapter 3, line 4). Only the very rich would have been able to afford to pay it; the remainder of the population might have had to forfeit their lives or liberty (see p. xxii). There is, however, an indication that this extreme was not always the case. In Chapter 14 we have the following:

xxxii
Hittir ma ̨r sakar at giera ler ̨r e ̨a oler ̨r, ̨a byti engin frammar firi annan,

̨an hans kustr vindr at.
If a man, whether ordained or not, commits a crime, no one shall be fined more

for another than his resources can cover.

This provision appears to refer specifically to cases in which someone has inherited an obligation to pay a fine for anotherís crime, in particular the children of priests. Later in the same section there is an implication that the maximum that a person could be liable for was his or her per- sonal share (hafu ̨lutr) of their inheritance. If these provisions applied more generally (and the rather disorganised nature of the preserved texts does not preclude such a possibility) then this throws a completely dif- ferent light on the structure of compensation.

In comparison to some other Swedish provincial laws, there is little detail in GL concerning non-monetary punishments meted out to wrong- doers. Such punishmentsóexcommunication, prolonged slavery, outlawry, loss of inheritance, branding, mutilation, hanging, and other capital punishmentsówere, however, inflicted in certain cases, particu- larly for theft, adultery and misuse of property. The circumstances in which they were applied are tabulated in Appendix D, table (i).

Where slaves had offended, they could not be expected to pay com- pensation themselves, and hence an alternative had to be found if the master were not to carry all the burden of restitution, as was usually the case. To extend the slaveís period of bondage, or to execute the slave were the most obvious options, although in the latter case his or her owner would again be the loser. Where a killing (other than infanticide) was involved, the slave himself was offered as part of the wergild. In cases of infanticide and Sabbath-breaking (both considered to be eccle- siastical crimes), the period of slavery was extended, and for the rape of a Gotlandic woman the slaveís life was forfeit, unless she preferred to receive compensation.

So far as residents of Gotland other than slaves were concerned, excommunication was imposed for damage to monastic property and as an interim punishment for violence during church festivals, until com- pensation had been paid. If compensation for a killing (including infanticide) was not paid within the specified time, the killer was out- lawed, but this penalty is not mentioned in any other context. Selling oneís farm illegally led to loss of oneís inheritance and reduction in status to a non-Gotlander. If one misappropriated land worth three marks in rent, the punishment was even more severe: execution for a man and loss of her pew in church for his wife. Working in another manís woodland

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

INTRODUCTION xxxiii

led to confiscation of oneís tools, material and draught animal, which would have been a severe penalty.

Branding was the punishment for theft of an amount between two ˆre and one mark of silver. Theft of greater amounts (including land), or a second theft of a smaller amount, resulted in a shameful death by hang- ing. The other crimes leading to physical punishment were adultery, abduction and rape. The provisions were complicated, ranging from loss of a hand or foot for discovered adultery with an illegitimate daugh- ter of mixed Gotlandic and non-Gotlandic parentage, to execution for the rape of a married woman. In most cases the woman could choose wergild or other payment as an alternative. No information is given in GL concerning the form of execution imposed, but as the neck is men- tioned in at least one situation, it was probably death by either hanging or beheading (see Notes to Chapter 21, lines 15ñ20).

The complex provisions relating to killings, and the killerís circle of safety, seem to be unique to Gotland. They are described in detail in the Commentary to Chapter 13.

D. Oaths

In parallel with the punishments there was a system of oaths to be taken or arranged by the parties in a dispute. This system is summarised in the table in Appendix E, which shows that the person or group to whom the oath was given and the number of supporting witnesses or oath-takers varied considerably with the crime or misdemeanour involved. Oaths were in many cases sworn rather in the nature of character witnesses (see Note to Chapter 2, line 15).

E. Laws of inheritance

The inheritance provisions in GL have been justifiably described as extremely complex. Holmb‰ck (1919, 12ñ51, 219ñ41) has made a detailed analysis of them, particularly in relation to legitimacy and in comparison to other Swedish provincial laws. He sees, in the inconsist- encies, evidence of an organic growth in the provisions and a gradual improvement in the position of women in relation to inheritance. Guta lag thus offers a valuable insight into the social history of the period not available in the mainland provincial laws (Holmb‰ck 1919, 48ñ51).

IV Origins

A consideration of the origins of the content of a legal text differs from a consideration of the sources of material in a narrative or poetic

xxxiv

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

work, whether historical or otherwise. Two questions that have to be asked are (1) whether this law was influenced by any other law formu- lated earlier (which might assist with dating) and (2) whether this particular redaction was a record of the law as it was enforced in a particular place and at a particular time or was an idealised representa- tion of how the redactor felt that the law should be. This latter issue has been touched on to some extent in the preceding section, but in the case of GL, the questions of origin and nature and those of date and author- ship are so closely bound together that it is difficult to separate the arguments.

Although an oral recited law (the older sense of the word lagsaga) may be presupposed, according to WessÈn (SL IV, lxxiii), the lack of the office of lawman or lawspeaker in Gotland might be a counter-argument to the suggestion that GL was a lawmanís aide mÈmoire for his oral discourse (see pp. xxiiñxxiii above). It might still, however, have been a private record prepared by a judge or some other person involved in the legal process. Whatever their provenance, there must have been some earlier form of the law than the written manuscripts that have been preserved and, if Lis Jacobsen is correct in her assumptions concerning the age of the language in the A-text (GGD, 13), there must have been a pre-Christian law containing at least some of the material in that manuscript. Despite the largely non-poetic language, there are many alliterative phrases and some residual rhythmic passages. If there were no single lawman reciting the law, then perhaps the duty rotated among the elders, and GL originated as a result of a group of them agreeing upon a text to be recited. This might explain some slight inconsistencies and apparent repetitions, to be found within each of the manuscripts.

The opening words of GL, invoking Christianity and revoking heathendom, provide us with a clue to the origin of the text. There are remarkable similarities between these words and those of the older law of Gula ̨ing (GulL), the oldest manuscript of which dates from about the middle of the thirteenth century. The latter states:

fiat er upphaf laga varra at ver scolom luta austr oc biðia til hins helga Crist ars oc friðar. Oc ̨ess at vÈr halldem lande varo bygðu. Oc l·nar drotne varom heilum. Se hann vinr varr, en ver hans. En Guð se allra varra vinr. fiat er nu ̨vi nest . . . (NGL 1, 3)

This is the beginning of our laws: that we should bow to the east and pray to the holy Christ for good harvest and peace; and that we retain our settled land. And keep our liege lord in health. Let him be a friend to us and we to him. And let God be a friend to all. The next thing is . . .

INTRODUCTION xxxv

It has been suggested that this similarity can be explained by assuming that the Christian section of the Gotlandic law was composed during a visit to Gotland by St Olaf in 1030 or thereabouts and his conversion of the Gotlanders to Christianity. Schlyter, however, who considers GL to date from the last quarter of the thirteenth or first quarter of the four- teenth centuries, suggests a later influence from Norway and this view is supported by Pernler (see CIG, viñvii; Beckman 1920, 12ñ13; WessÈn 1945a, 160; Sch ̧ck 1945, 182; SL IV, lxxiiiñlxxiv; Pernler 1977, 16ñ19).

A later borrowing of certain selected passages seems to be a possible explanation for the similarities, since the church laws in the older law of Gula ̨ing differ quite fundamentally from those (such as they are) in GL. Had St Olaf been involved in the initial development of the law in Gotland, the relevant provisions would surely have been more exten- sive. It is noticeable also that penalties for infringing church laws are much more severe in the older law of Gula ̨ing than they are in equiva- lent passages in GL. In particular, total forfeiture of property and banishment are frequently imposed as punishments in the former, whereas GL only implies banishment (but not outlawry) for a woman who cannot pay the fine for infanticide, i.e. as a punishment of last resort. The sec- tions relating to the exposure of children in a number of Norwegian law texts begin in a similar manner to that in GL (Chapter 2, lines 2ñ3:

fiat er nu ̨vinest. At barn huert scal ala a lande varo er boret verðr (GulL 21; NGL 1, 12).

The next thing is that every child born in our land should be nurtured.
Ala skal barn huÊrt, er boret uÊrðr en Êngu spilla. Sina sÊng for skal huÊr

kona uita, oc lata barn til kirkiu bera (EidsL I (B-text), 1; NGL 1, 375). Every child born shall be nurtured and none killed. Every woman must

acknowledge her childbed and allow the child to be taken to church.
Ala skal barn huart, er boret er ok Êngo spilla. SinÊ sÊngfor skal huar kona

vita, ok lata barn til kirkiu bera (EidsL II (C-text), 1; NGL 1, 394).
Every child born shall be nurtured and none killed. Every woman must

acknowledge her childbed and allow the child to be taken to church.

The older law of Gula ̨ing, however, contains the proviso that severely deformed children might be exempt, and detailed laws concerning bap- tism, completely absent from GL. On the other hand, the B-text of the older Christian law of Eiðsiva ̨ing (EidsL) is particularly close to the text in GL (Beckman 1920, 11ñ12).

One of the greatest differences between Norwegian and Gotlandic society was the hierarchy that seems to have existed in the former. Below

xxxvi

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

the king and two levels of aristocracy were three levels of free, landown- ing farmers. There is no indication in GL of any inequality between people apart from that between the free, slaves and non-Gotlanders. Admittedly, tenant farmers had different obligations from landowning ones, but there are no provisions that appear to have affected their status in any other regard. The conclusion would seem to be that, while the law makers might have borrowed phrases from other laws with which they were familiar, including those of Norway, the content of the law and the punishments applied were very much their own. This content was affected by the society to which the law was applied, as well as the priorities of the lawmakers, as is discussed below.

V Date, place and circumstances of composition

There are four principal theories concerning the date of composition of GL in written form. The first is that it was composed between 1220 and 1250 at the instigation of Andreas Suneson, the second that it was com- posed towards the end of the thirteenth century, the third that it was composed in the first half of the fourteenth century, perhaps as a response to the production of Magnus Erikssonís national law, and the fourth that it originated in the twelfth century or even earlier. This last is subscribed to by Hadorph (Gothlandz-Laghen, Introduction), Schildener (G-L, xxvi), Nordstrˆm (1839ñ49, I, vii) and S‰ve (GU, x). (See also SL IV, lxxiii note 1.) There is no concrete evidence to support such an early dating of a writ- ten law, although there is internal evidence to suggest that some of the individual provisions date from a period not long after the adoption of Christianity in the early eleventh century, and that others are pre- Christian in origin, as Jacobsen (GGD, 6ñ7) indicates.

Arguments for a dating in the second half of the thirteenth century, or rather later, were first put forward by Schlyter (CIG, vñxi) and have been supported by Maurer (1878, 168ñ170), Amira (1913, 98) and others. They are based principally on the existence of the provision relating to the inheritance rights of non-Gotlandic (i.e. Swedish) daughters in which two sisters received the same inheritance as one brother (Chapter 24d, lines 2ñ3). This must indeed have been included in GL after Birger Jarl introduced it into Swedish law, namely in 1260, at the time of the wed- ding of Valdemar Birgersson to Sofia, daughter of the murdered Danish king Erik Plogpenning (SRS I:1, 25, 86; SRS III:1, 5). The circumstances are referred to in Erikskrˆnikan (26, ll. 458ñ61). Schlyter takes this date as a terminus post quem for the first written version of GL, thus placing it in the last quarter of the thirteenth century. On the other hand, WessÈn

INTRODUCTION xxxvii

thinks that this particular provision, even though it appears in all four traditions, might have been a later addition, *A1 on the stemma, first included in the manuscript group represented by u on the stemma. Ac- cordingly, the first, ëoriginalí, manuscript of GL (*GL on the stemma) could have been considerably older (SL IV, lxixñlxx). Two further pieces of evidence in support of this theory are (1) the fact that the provision in question is to be found in the chapter concerning weddings, rather than in the chapter concerning inheritance, in which there are other specific provisions relating to females, and (2) that there appear to be slight differences (noted by Pipping; GLGS, xiiñxiii) between the language of that particular provision and that in most of the rest of the A-text, sug- gesting that it originated from a different part of Gotland (see L‰ffler 1878, 288ñ89).

More recently an even later dating, namely the fourteenth century, has been forcefully argued by Elsa Sjˆholm (1976, 170ñ73). She like- wise argues on the basis of the provision relating to the inheritance rights of non-Gotlandic (Swedish) females, but an inconsistency in her argument is that she initially uses a different interpretation of the expression ogutniskt fulk, namely that it refers to the (mostly German) inhabitants of Visby (see pp. ix, xiiñxiii, xxviñxxvii above). In that context she points to the lack of any reference to maritime law in GL in order to place it in time after the separation of the town of Visby from the rest of Gotland in 1288 (see pp. xiiñxiii above), by which date she considers that farmers were no longer seafaring merchants. The main thrust of Sjˆholmís argument in the present context, however, is that the very fact that Gotlandic laws of inheritance differ from those of Magnus Erikssonís national law indicates that GL was written in order to empha- sise Gotlandís independence at the time of the development of a common Swedish law. This, she contends, was because any change in inheritance provisions would have led to a collapse of the social order in Gotland, which required that landholdings should not become excessively frag- mented. She consequently dates GL, in what she calls ëseine endg ̧ltige Formí (its final form) (1976, 171ñ72), to as late as the second or third quarter of the fourteenth century, i.e. some one hundred years later than Schlyterís dating. Sjˆholmís expression, which is similar to that used by Lis Jacobsen (ësin endelige Redaktioní (its final redaction); see GGD, 80 note 1) in reference to the date of GL, leads one to ask what Sjˆholm considers the earlier forms of GL were and when they came into being. She appears to ignore the fact that there were in all probability written redactions of GL, as opposed to an oral law, earlier than the manuscripts

xxxviii

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

that have been preserved, and it is the date of the first of these (*GL on the stemma) that is of principal interest in the present context. Further- more, since the oldest surviving manuscript (B 64) has been dated to about the middle of the fourteenth century, Sjˆholmís argument would lead one to the conclusion that, in the manuscript B 64, GL was close to ëseine endg ̧ltige Formí. Inconsistencies and errors in B 64, however, and the fact that the text of AM 54 4to seems to represent an earlier form of GL, militate against such an assumption. On internal evidence, B 64 would appear to be a copy of an earlier manuscript, which was itself more consistent and did not contain as many errors.

It seems that there are equally strong arguments for the earlier dating proposed by WessÈn (SL IV, lxxii) and several other scholars (Skov 1946, 114ñ16; Mitchell 1984, 151). They suggest that GL was composed in the first half, if not the first quarter, of the thirteenth century. The most recent challenge to Sjˆholmís arguments comes from Dick Harrison of Lund University (2002, 164ñ69, 602). He summarises her arguments and those of Lindkvist (1989, 415ñ17) concerning the dating and nature of the provincial laws, and he concludes that the core of these laws must have been in existence prior to the laws of Magnus Eriksson, and that they reflected local conditions independently of centralised influence.

The fact that there is no mention of the kingís person or rights, nor of the royal commitment (konungens edsˆre) to punish crimes that threat- ened the general peace and that were regarded as too grave to be subject to fines alone, might indicate a date prior to 1280 (see Notes to Chapter 5, lines 7ñ9, Chapter 12, lines 9ñ10, Chapter 22, lines 2ñ3, Chapter 22, lines 26ñ28, Chapter 39, line 2). The law concerning edsˆre was first set in place during Birger Jarlís regency (1250ñ66) and confirmed by Magnus LadulÂs in the Statute of Alsnˆ (1280), which also freed from taxes those who undertook to bear arms for the king. The concept of crimes desig- nated edsˆresbrott only finally disappeared from Swedish law with a major revision in sentencing enacted on 16th February 1864 (Westman 1912b, 106; Hemmer 1928, 269ñ86; Yrwing 1940, 68; KL s.v. Konungs edsˆre).

Part of the agreement relating to edsˆre was that fines for breaking any of the relevant laws would be payable to the king in addition to or instead of to the victim and the relevant assembly. Sjˆholm would no doubt cite the purpose she perceives in GL of upholding Gotlandic inde- pendence as a reason for the omission.

Another circumstance that suggests a date prior to 1300 for the first redaction of GL is the set of laws relating to slaves, particularly in the

INTRODUCTION xxxix

B-text. The laws of V‰stergˆtland and ÷stergˆtland contain provisions relating to the sale of slaves, but the later laws of Svealand (e.g. the law of Uppland) forbid the purchase and sale of slaves. Magnus Eriksson abolished slavery in V‰stergˆtland in 1335 in the Statute of Skara (see NevÈus 1974, 158ñ59), and it therefore seems unlikely that GL would have originated after c.1300. Sjˆholmís argument that the exclusion from the A-text of provisions concerning the sale of and theft by slaves supports the idea that GL in ëseine endg ̧ltige Formí post-dated the prohibition seems to be a circular one; it surely only indicates that the manuscript itself, or the one of which it was a copy, post-dates it.

Provisions relating to the children of priests (Chapter 5, lines 2ñ6, Addition 1, lines 1ñ7) must be considered in the light of the Synod at Sk‰nninge in 1248 (see GGD, 32 note 4; SL IV, lxix). The papal legate, Cardinal William of Sabina, declared the marriage of priests forbidden, and that those currently married, with some exceptions, had to separate, thereby confirming the decision of the Lateran council of 1139. It is clear that this law did not come into force immediately, as is witnessed by provisions in the law of ÷stergˆtland relating to children of bishops. Furthermore, Lars, Bishop of Linkˆping, had to remind Gotlandic priests and people of the rules in a letter dated 18th June 1255 (DS I, 375, no. 426), and it was not until about 1280 that clerical celibacy finally became the norm in Sweden. The detailed nature of the provisions in GL makes it unlikely, however, that they were devised and written long after the synod (Hegel 1891, I, 300 note 5).

The case has been made by the present author for a date between 1220 and 1275 for the composition of Guta saga (see GS, xlixñliii). Since the language of the majority of the law text in B 64 appears to pre-date the language of Guta saga in the same manuscript (Pipping, GLGS, viiñxii), a date of c.1220 for the earliest manuscript of the law, as WessÈn pro- poses, seems not unreasonable.

There is no direct statement of the place of composition of GL, but sufficient indirect evidence to suggest that it was actually written in Gotland. The principal indication is clearly the use of the Gutnish lan- guage. It is unlikely that this would have been employed had the text been composed in mainland Sweden. The opening sentence of GL con- tains the expression i lagum orum ëin our lawí. This makes it highly probable that the writer was himself a native of Gotland. There are, moreover, references to circumstances peculiar to Gotland, such as the three churches of asylum for killers, in Far ̨aim (Fardhem), fiingste ̨i (Tingst‰de) and Atlingabo, which might not have been familiar to a

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

non-Gotlandic writer. Frequent references to non-Gotlanders (ogutniskt fulk) are evidence that the redactor was aware that different laws applied to such people, but as he does not define who they were, he must have assumed that his audience would know to whom he referred. This also might be taken as an indirect indication that GL was written in Gotland for Gotlanders.

There is no external evidence of the authorship of GL as it is preserved, but if it is assumed that it was written at the instance of Andreas Suneson, it seems likely that a priest would be responsible. It cannot be ignored, however, that lack of a coherent church law section argues to some extent against a clerical redactor and the whole law has an element of earthy practicality that seems less clerical than one might expect if Bishop Suneson were responsible. It is possible, of course, that the writer in question was one of the last married priests in Gotland and that he delib- erately wrote in this manner to emphasise his closeness to and feeling for the community as a whole. Indeed, the most emotive passages are those that refer to the dilemma of a priestís offspring having to take up a compensation case on behalf of his father and the painful choice between Christian forgiveness and honour that this duty implied.

What is clear is that the redactor (or redactors) was a Gotlander. This is manifested initially in the language, but also in the manner in which non-Gotlanders are referred to throughout: not disparagingly, but as a separate group. The closing sentences of the oldest section of the pre- served text also suggest that it was intended to be a living document to be updated as circumstances dictated, rather than a fixed record at a particular time (but see pp. xxiiñxxiv).

VI Editions and translations of Guta lag A. Previous editions

The earliest printed edition of GL, covering only the A-text (including Guta saga), is that of Johan Hadorph in 1687, not long after the discovery of the manuscript B 64 in around 1680. The edition, Gothlandz-Laghen, is described in detail by Schlyter (CIG, xxñxxii). It contains certain errors and includes an introduction coloured by a romantic view of its subject matter, but it is important in that it raised awareness of GL at a time when the manuscript was in danger of being lost and has an index of statutes and levels of fine, together with a number of glossary entries.

The second edition is that of Karl Schildener in 1818, Guta-Lagh das ist: Der Insel Gothland altes Rechtsbuch (G-L), the main purpose of which was to present the text of tyGL. Schildener takes this from a copy

INTRODUCTION xli

of B 65 prepared by an unnamed German-raised and educated scribe (ë[einer] in Deutschland erzogenen und gebildeten Litteratorí) and sup- plied to him by Lorenzo Hammarskˆld (1785ñ1827), philosopher and copyist at Kungliga Biblioteket in Stockholm, who had supervised the work (G-L, vi, 89; CIG, xxii). Schildener includes, in parallel, a copy of Hadorphís reading of the A-text. The medieval German text is incom- plete in that, although it contains the Danish statutes (see above, p. xvi), it lacks most of Guta saga, which is found in full in B 65 (see CIG, xxiii). Alongside these two texts Schildener gives a German translation. The derivative nature of the content, and the fact that the A-text has been presented in a sequence altered to match that of tyGL, makes this edition of less value than others.

In 1852 C. J. Schlyter published the first critical edition of all the major manuscripts of GL, Codex iuris Gotlandici (CIG), as the seventh volume of his series Corpus iuris Sueo-Gotorum antiqui (CIS). His edi- tion contains a more or less diplomatic account of the A-text, with the B-text reading in footnotes. Schlyter also gives the full tyGL text from B 65, the daGL text from AM 55 4to and the Danish statutes from B 65 with alternative readings and the completion of the second statute from Holm C 81 4to. Each of these has footnotes indicating where equivalent statutes can be found in the others, and in the A-text. The edition con- tains a detailed description of all these manuscripts and the above-mentioned editions, a glossary (into Swedish and Latin) and an index of proper names of firstly the A-text and secondly tyGL. The tex- tual apparatus is in Latin and there is a parallel translation into Swedish of the A-text. Schlyterís edition is consequently the most thorough avail- able and his readings and translations have been accepted by most subsequent editors and commentators, often in preference to later edi- tions. This preference is probably motivated by the fact that Schlyter edited all the Swedish provincial laws, thus facilitating comparison of them with GL by direct reference to his editions. Schlyterís comprehen- sive glossary, Glossarium ad corpus iuris sueo-gotorum antiqui (CISG), is particularly valuable, covering as it does all the Swedish provincial laws; this enables comparison to be made between their equivalent pro- visions and vocabulary.

In 1859 Carl S‰ve published his academic thesis Gutniska urkunder: Guta lag, Guta saga och Gotlands runinskrifter sprÂkligt behandlade (GU). The text of B 64 is to a certain extent normalised without comment, but emendations are clearly noted. Major additions in AM 54 4to are given at the end of the text and differences between the two manuscripts

xlii

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

appear in footnotes. S‰veís introduction consists to a great extent of an analysis of the language of the manuscripts and inscriptions he has taken as his subject. He relies heavily on Schlyterís edition (CIG) but offers useful alternative readings in a number of instances, partly in footnotes and partly in a short commentary. S‰ve also makes comparisons with the contemporary Gotlandic dialect (GutamÂl).

Some extracts of GL, less radically normalised than S‰veís text, appear in Noreenís Altschwedisches Lesebuch (AL, 36ñ37), first published in 1892ñ94.

In 1901 Hugo Pipping published Gotl‰ndska studier, which contains a diplomatic account of the B-text of GL, followed by a short commen- tary and a detailed examination of some linguistic features of the text. This is the only complete edition of the B-text, and is therefore a valu- able contribution. In 1905ñ07 Pipping published a diplomatic account of the A-text of GL and Guta saga, which includes apparatus showing the B-text variants and additions, a detailed study of the language and a complete glossary of the text. These two editions offer useful alternative readings of the manuscripts to those of Schlyter, S‰ve and Noreen.

A facsimile edition, Lex Gotlandiae svecice et germanice (LG), of B 64 and B 65, edited by Elias WessÈn was published in 1945 in the series Corpus codicum Suecicorum medii aevi (CCS). There is no facsimile edition of AM 54 4to.

The most recent edition of GL is that edited by Tore Gannholm in 1994. The text is presented in a form close to a diplomatic reading of B 64, using some of the emendations suggested by Schlyter (CIG), but with a number of peculiarities (e.g. ̨ is rendered as th throughout). Gannholm also offers a parallel translation into Swedish, which clarifies some points left ambiguous in the translation by WessÈn (SL IV), which he has used as a basis. The edition is useful in some respects, although the arguments in Gannholmís introduction do not always bear scholarly scrutiny.

B. Translations

The first modern translation of GL (as distinct from the medieval transla- tions into German and Danish) is that which appears in Hadorphís 1687 edition (Gothlandz-Laghen, see above). While there are some inaccura- cies and misunderstandings, the translation is serviceable.

Schildenerís parallel translation into German (G-L) is described and evaluated by Schlyter (CIG, xxiiiñxxiv) and he implies that it, too, con- tains some inaccuracies. Schlyterís own parallel translation into Swedish

INTRODUCTION xliii

is vigorous and illuminating. It was the last translation into Swedish before the appearance in 1943 of the volume by Åke Holmb‰ck and Elias WessÈn, the fourth in the series Svenska landskapslagar (SL IV).

This latter translation, which covers the A-text, the additional provi- sions found in the B-text and the Danish statutes found in the other manuscripts, is clear and straightforward. It is supported by a full intro- duction and detailed notes and references, which have been useful for the present work. The editors analyse in detail the content and signifi- cance of the texts, with reference to the other provincial laws, and they also evaluate previous editions and translations (see SL IV, lxxxviiiñ lxxxix).

A further translation into Swedish of all the provincial, city and mari- time laws, including some appendices not translated in Svenska landskapslagar, was published as an omnibus edition by Åke Ohlmarks in 1976: De svenska landskapslagarna. I komplett ˆvers‰ttning, med anm‰rkningar och fˆrklaringar. His translations are close to those of Schlyter, and Ohlmarks claims that, despite his use of more contempo- rary language, they follow the sense and vocabulary of the originals more closely than those of Holmb‰ck and WessÈn. Ohlmarksís intro- duction discusses stylistic features of the laws and he includes a number of notes. Although his work is useful in many respects, his approach is not as scholarly as might be hoped and some of his translations are inaccurate.

The remaining translation is that of Lis Jacobsen into Danish. Her Guterlov og Gutasaga (GGD) appeared in 1910 and is largely based on Pippingís edition. In indicating Danish equivalents to Gutnish expres- sions, Jacobsen provides useful insights into the meaning of the latter and her translation is valuable for the interpretation of a number of otherwise obscure words and expressions. Jacobsen draws particular at- tention to the alliteration, rhythm and other poetic features found in the text, as well as including an index, and footnotes clarifying her interpre- tations.

C. The present translation

This is the first English translation of GL. It is a continuation of the work by the present author on Guta saga (GS 1999) and takes into account the two medieval manuscripts of the law in Gutnish. The presentation is broadly based on Pippingís edition of the A-text (GLGS), but uses his edition of the B-text (Pipping 1901a) to record further variant readings as indicated below.

xliv

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Where there are possible differences affecting the accuracy of the text or the translation between Pippingís reading and the manuscript of the A-text, or the readings of other editors, this is indicated in a footnote and, as appropriate, discussed in the Commentary.

Since the aim is to produce a single, readable translation, the follow- ing criteria have been applied:

1. A difference only in orthography (e.g. final j for i, single final conso- nant for a double or vice versa), form or word order between the A- and B-texts is not indicated if it makes no semantic distinction in the translation.

2. Words missing from the A-text that can be inferred from the reading of the B-text are inserted in angled brackets, if they correct an error. If an alternative B-text reading is preferred to the A-text, this is presented in italics. In both cases a footnote shows the origin of the emendation and the A-text reading.

3. Editorial additions to the A-text (e.g. letters or words accidentally omitted by the scribe) not derived from the B-text are also inserted in angled brackets with a footnote showing the A-text reading. Editorial corrections to the A-text reading not derived from the B-text are inserted in italics with a footnote showing the A-text reading.

4. Editorial augmentations necessary for grammatical sense in the trans- lation are inserted in square brackets.

5. Differences in reading of words or short phrases between the A-text and the B-text that have a bearing on the sense or accuracy of the trans- lated text are indicated by the use of footnotes. The preferred reading is shown in the text and the alternative A- or B-text reading in the footnote, together with the readings of previous editors, if relevant.

6. Any words or passages missing completely from the B-text are recorded in a footnote.

7. Longer passages missing from the A-text but present in the B-text are recorded in a footnote and are presented as Additions, pp. 57ñ59, 60ñ63. Editorial emendations follow the conventions in 3.

8. Where there are extended differences between the A- and B-texts, the A-text reading is recorded in the translation with a footnote, and the B-text reading is presented as an Addition, pp. 59ñ60.

9. A number of provisions in the A-text are generally considered by all editors to be later additions, because of their language and orthography. These are indicated in a footnote.

INTRODUCTION xlv

10. Differences in the reading of the B-text that are considered by Schlyter and others to be scribal errors have not been noted.

11. Pippingís edition of the B-text differentiates between additions in the margin of AM 54 4to signalled by a dagger (Ü), and those by a caret mark (^). These marginal additions have only been indicated in a foot- note if they differ from the reading of the A-text.

The chapter headings require special comment. They do not always agree with the table of contents, which in the case of the B-text is a later addition. Two tables of contents have been constructed (pp. 1ñ5), one for the A-text and one for the B-text. The A-text headings have been inserted in the translation, with details of the B-text chapter divisions and headings in footnotes.

The translation retains as far as possible the tenses and moods of verbs in the original. It also uses, if relevant, familiar legal concepts, where they reflect those of the original. The aim has been to include as much elucidation of the sense of the text as is possible in a translation. Where applicable, this elucidation, preceded by ëi.e.í, has been included in parentheses. Punctuation and capitalisation follow modern English practice.

xlvi

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

INTRODUCTION xlvii

GUTA LAG
THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

xlviii

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 1

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

<1> Here begins firstly.
<2> Concerning children
<3> Concerning tithes
<4> Concerning sacrifice
<5> Concerning priests
<6> Concerning holy days
<7> Concerning monksí property
<8> Concerning personal rights
<9> Concerning universal sanctity
<10> Concerning springtime sanctity
<11> Concerning assembly sanctity
<12> Concerning homestead sanctity
<13> Concerning manslaughter
<14> Concerning inherited cases
<15> Concerning menís wergilds
<16> Concerning wergilds in connection with the peace circle <17> Concerning unruly animals

<18> Concerning battered women
<19> Concerning wounds
<20> Concerning inheritance
<20a> Concerning men discovered in the act of illicit intercourse <21> Concerning adulterers

<22> Concerning rape
<23> Concerning assaults on women <24> Concerning weddings
<24a> Concerning funeral feasts
<24b> Concerning fine woollen cloth <24c> Concerning riding clothes
<24d> Concerning Gotlandic women <24e> Concerning non-Gotlandic people <24f> Concerning travellersí pathways

<1> See Introduction, xlv. The table is unheaded and the chapters unnum- bered in the table in A.

2 GUTA LAG

<25> Concerning disputes over woodland <26> Concerning shared fences
<27> Concerning wells
<28> Concerning land purchase

<29> Concerning debts
<30> Concerning surety
<31> Concerning assemblies
<32> Concerning a money claim
<32a> Concerning the purchase of slaves
<33> Concerning the purchase of oxen
<33a> Concerning the purchase of cows
<34> Concerning the purchase of horses
<35> Concerning horse theft
<36> Concerning the care of ships
<37> Concerning house searches
<38> Concerning the law of theft
<39> Concerning insults
<40> Concerning unbranded small livestock <41> Concerning pigs
<42> Concerning tame sheep
<43> Concerning uncastrated unshorn rams <44> Concerning uncastrated shorn rams
<45> Concerning billy- and nanny-goats
<45a> Concerning cattle and horses
<46> Concerning over-branding
<47> Concerning fields
<48> Concerning turnip fields
<49> Concerning shipwrecks
<50> Concerning fire
<51> Concerning carried fire
<52> Concerning road repair
<53> Concerning taxes
<54> Concerning the watch
<55> Concerning houses and household servants

<32a> A omits chapter in the text. See Addition 7. <38> theft A: thieves

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 3

<56> Concerning harvesters
<56a> Concerning those who have no arable land <57> Concerning squirrels
<58> Concerning hares
<59> Concerning tree fruits
<60> Concerning failure to read mass
<61> Concerning gambling
<62> <Concerning bald patches>
<63> <Concerning woodland>
<65> <Concerning womenís rights>

List of regulated laws

1 Concerning children
2 Concerning tithes
2 If you rent a field or meadow
3 Concerning sacrifice
4 Concerning priests and priestsí children
5 Concerning holy days
6 Concerning monksí rights
7 Concerning personal rights
8 Concerning universal sanctity
9 Concerning springtime sanctity
10 Concerning assembly sanctity
11 Concerning homestead sanctity
12 Concerning manslaughter
13 Concerning the offering of compensation for a man
14 Concerning inherited cases
15 Concerning menís wergilds
16 Concerning wergilds in connection with the peace circle 17 Concerning unruly animals
18 Concerning battered women
19 Concerning wounding

<62>ñ<65> <Concerning bald patches . . . womenís rights> Table of contents in A omits these.

List . . . laws This heading comes from AM 54 4to.

4 GUTA LAG

20 Concerning bald patches
21 If you damage anotherís clothes
22 Concerning open wounds
23 If a man blocks anotherís path
24 If slaves fight
25 Concerning all inheritance
26 If the male line is broken
27 Concerning womenís inheritance
28 Concerning illegitimate children
29 Concerning discovery in the act
30 Concerning adultery
31 If a woman is dishonoured on the road 32 Concerning assaults on women
33 Concerning the wagon-ridersí procession 34 Concerning funeral feasts
35 Concerning womenís rights
36 Concerning Gotlandic women
37 Concerning pathways
38 Concerning disputes over woodland
39 Concerning shared fences
40 Whoever cuts wood illegally
41 Concerning wells
42 Concerning land purchase
43 If a man is taken hostage

If some profit falls to one more than to the other 44 Concerning Gotlandic menís sons

45 Concerning debts
46 Concerning surety

47 Concerning assemblies
48 Concerning a money claim
49 Concerning the purchase of slaves 50 Concerning the purchase of oxen 51 Concerning the purchase of horses 52 If you ride another manís horse

35 Concerning womenís rights This covers chapters 24b and 24c in A.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 5

53 Concerning the care of ships 54 Concerning house searches 55 Concerning the law of theft 56 Concerning insults

57 Concerning unbranded small livestock 58 Concerning pigs
59 Concerning tame sheep
60 Concerning uncastrated rams

61 Concerning shorn rams
62 Concerning billy- and nanny-goats
63 Concerning cattle and horses
64 Concerning over-branding
65 Concerning fields
66 Concerning turnip fields
67 Concerning shipwrecks
68 Concerning fire
69 Concerning carried fire
70 Concerning roads
71 Concerning taxes
72 Concerning the watch
73 Concerning houses and servants
74 Concerning harvesters
75 Concerning those who have no arable land
76 Concerning squirrels
77 Concerning hares
78 Concerning tree fruits
79 Concerning failure to read mass
80 Concerning gambling
81 Concerning usury with townspeople
82 Concerning woods and all land taken in pledge

55 theft B: thieves

1 2

This is the first beginning of our law: that we should reject heathen ways and accept Christianity and all believe in one almighty God, and pray to him that he grant us good harvests and peace, victory and health. And that we should uphold our Christianity and our proper faith and the province in which we live and that we should each day do, in our deeds and desires, those things that are to the honour of God and which most benefit us, both in body and soul.

<2> Concerning children

Now the next thing is that each child born in our province should be raised by us and not cast out. Every woman should know her own bed in which she is to lie in labour. She should call on two women to be witnesses with her, the midwife and a neighbour, to witness that the child was stillborn, and that she had no hand in its death.

If a free woman is found guilty of having killed a child, then she is fined three marks as soon as it comes before the parishioners, unless she has previously confessed her crime, and the priest bears full witness to it. Then she must complete her penance, and no one has a right to claim compensation. If she denies the case, and it comes before the assembly members, then if she is found innocent, she shall receive three marks from those who charged her, and an oath of rehabilitation from six men. If she is found guilty, she must pay three marks to the parish, if the parish can demand it. If the case comes before the assembly members, she is to pay three marks to the assembly, and another three to the

1/1 <1> B: 1 This chapter has no number in the table of contents in B. None of the chapters is numbered in the text of A.

1/1ñ2 and it says firstly this B omits.
1/5 and pray B: and all pray
2/1 <2> B: 2 Note that this does not agree with the table of contents in B. 2/4 in which B: when
2/18 another three B: another three marks

6 GUTA LAG

<1> Here begins the law of the Gotlanders and it says firstly this

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 7

rural dean, if she is found guilty. If the case comes before the general assembly, and if she is then found guilty, she incurs a fine
of twelve marks to the general assembly. If she has no money to 21 pay, then she must go into exile and every man is to be fined three marks who shelters or houses her, or gives her food. If she will
not take an oath, she is nevertheless considered condemned in the 24 case.

If those who have accused her abandon the case, and refuse to
put down <money>, one should deem her to have no case to 27 answer and clear her of the charge. The accusers should, however, confirm her honour by oath and remove the slander, which they
laid on her. If she admits that she was the mother, and says that 30 the child was stillborn, then they do not need to put down any money, if they disbelieve her, and if she did not have any female witnesses with her when she was in labour. 33

If such a case is brought against someoneís female slave, no
one is to lay any higher fine against her than six ˆre in coin. If she
is found guilty, then her master is fined six ˆre in coin on her 36 behalf, and six years are added after her time of slavery is complete.

<3> Concerning tithes

The next thing is that everyone shall have services and pay tithes, where he has taken part in building a church, or to [the church to] 3 which his farm was allocated from the outset. The priest must carry out all Christian offices for him, whether he may demand them early or late. Thus all men are in agreement that every man 6 should pay his tithe before the feast of the Annunciation (i.e. 25th March), both the part to the priest and the part to the church. Each

2/26 If B omits.
2/27 <money> B; A omits.
2/32 any B: two
2/35 in coin B omits.
2/36 six ˆre in coin B omits.
3/1 <3> B: 3 Note that this does not agree with the table of contents in B. 3/3 has B omits.

1 2

1 5

8 GUTA LAG

man must pay his tithes by the stook. Thus no one shall be able to say that the tithe has not been threshed when Annunciation comes. And after Annunciation, the priest is to make a declaration for three Sundays, and lock the church door on the fourth Sunday and withhold services from the parishioners until such time as all the tithes are fully paid. And a three-mark fine is incurred by each man who was not willing to pay his tithe previously. All should be obliged to prosecute this and all should be party to it. The parishioners should be entitled to a third, the church a third and the priest a third. If a tenant goes from one parish to another with the tithe unpaid, then he is liable to [pay] three marks to the priest, the church and the parishioners, and still to bring back his tithe (i.e. to his former parish), though it is late.

If someone wants to build himself a church for greater con- venience than he had previously, he must do it from the remaining 24 nine parts. And the church shall receive its tithe and the priest his, until the new one is consecrated. But afterwards, he is to pay the tithe where he most recently built the church. He may 27 not later return to the previous church, if he has made another new one. And he may not go from the previous church to the new one later than the day on which the bishop consecrated it. If 30 disagreements arise between them (i.e. the person who moved and the priest and people of the old parish) in the first or the second year, then he shall himself declare with an oath, and with two 33 parishioners, whom his opponents wish to nominate, that he was involved in the church-building and the consecration, and in all things as other parishioners. When three years have passed or 36 more than three, then he shall have both parishionersí witness that he was with them in the church-building, and the priestís own witness that he has ever since paid him the tithe as every other

39 parishioner.

3/15 previously B omits.
3/20 the church B omits.
3/26 the church B omits.
3/34 church-building B building

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 9

If a man rents a field or a meadow from another parish, and there are no houses on it, he is to leave the corn-tithe in the place
(i.e. parish) where the field was allocated, but take home hay or 42 hops with him, and give tithes from them to the priest whom he visits for services, and from whom he receives all Christian offices. If there are houses there, he is to leave everything behind. 45 The priest who is at the church there is to have tithes from it, and
the church has its portion, as the priest his.

<4> Concerning sacrifice

Now the next thing is that sacrifice is strictly forbidden to all men, together with all those old customs that belong to paganism. 3 No one may pray to either groves or howes or heathen gods, nor
to holy places or ancient sites. If someone is found guilty of this,
and it is proved against him and confirmed with witnesses that he 6 has invoked something of this sort with his food or drink, contrary
to Christian practice, then he is to be fined three marks to the parishioners, if they win the case. All should be obliged to prosecute 9 this and all should take a share in it: priest and church and parishioners. If suspicion falls on someone, then he is to defend himself with a six-man oath. If the parishioners do not win the 12 case and it comes before the assembly members, then he must defend himself again with a six-man oath, or pay a fine of three marks to the assembly. If it comes before the general assembly, 15 then <he> is to pay a fine of twelve marks to the authorities, if he does not win with the defence of a twelve-man oath.

<5> Concerning priests and priestsí wives, and their children

Now the next thing is that priests and the wives of priests and their ordained children (i.e. those that are later ordained) are equal 3

4/1 <4> B: 3
4/9 should be B: should also be
4/10 all should B omits.
4/16 <he> B; A omits.
5/1 <5> B: 4 priestsí wives, and their children B: priestís children

10 GUTA LAG

in the matter of assault and manslaughter and in all respects to

the children of farmers, but the lay children are treated in the 6 same way as the family of their mother.

If a man, whether ordained or not, commits a crime no one shall be fined more on behalf of another, than his (i.e. the

9 wrongdoerís) resources can cover.

<6> Concerning holy days

Now the next thing is that all those days that the bishops have 3 declared holy, and which all men have accepted, should be considered sacred by men. No one must do other work on Sundays, or other holy days, but attend holy office, or hear Godís service, 6 but he has permission to ride round his farm after mass has been sung, or the holy office has finished. No one may have more on his wagon on a Sunday than a lispound weight following a pair of 9 oxen, or half that following a horse. If he has more, one may confiscate his load until he has paid six ˆre, and in addition he is to pay six ˆre for Sabbath-breaking, unless an emergency arose 12 and the priest was asked. Then the latter may ascertain what is necessary and give permission that he (i.e. the farmer) may travel in his parish, so that he is not blamed or accused about it. If he 15 wants to travel further, then he must always seek permission from the priest who has control of the church parish (i.e. the one he wishes to pass through), if he wants to be unchallenged about it. 18 One has permission to ride to the marketplace with prepared food, cheese and butter and all dairy produce, fish, fowl and those beasts that one is to sell on the market square, with baked bread but not 21 with flour or barley, and not with other wares, without risking

5/5 children are treated B: children, they are treated
5/6 mother See Addition 1, which also includes the following sentence. 6/1 <6> B: 5
6/2 those B omits.
6/3 men B omits.
6/7 have B: transport
6/14 blamed B omits blamed (but retains or).
6/18 ride B: travel or ride

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 11

both the load and six ˆre. Half the fine goes to the one who apprehends him, and half to the priest and parishioners of the place where he was when he was apprehended with the goods. If 24 a man is riding and carrying a burden (i.e. has a pack on the horse), one may not blame him or impose a fine on him for it, if

he is sitting himself (i.e. he is riding the same horse). If the draught 27 horse is in a train, or he is leading it with a pack, that pack may legally be seized, if it is more than half a lispound, and in addition
a six-ˆre fine for Sabbath-breaking is incurred. If a free man or 30 woman is found doing work on a Sunday or other holy day, then

all the work is to be seized, which is found in their hands, and they are in addition to be fined six ˆre for Sabbath-breaking. Half of this is to go to the man who apprehended them, and half to the priest and church and parishioners. If a male or female slave is caught working on a holy day, their master is fined three ˆre for them, and they are to have their time of slavery extended by three years.

<7> Concerning monksí property

3 3

3 6

The next thing is that if someone is found guilty of felling [trees] in a wood belonging to monks, or knocking down boundary 3 fences, or harming them, or their property, then he is to be excom- municated and pay a fine twice as much as that payable by one farmer to another. And he is to pay the fine before the first assembly 6 next following. If he waits for the assembly, he is to pay a fine of three marks to the general assembly, and he is still to pay the fine
to them as laid down in the law, although it is later. 9

If a man who is childless gives himself to the monastery, he retains authority over his property; he may neither sell nor transfer
it during his lifetime. When he dies, one third remains with the 12 monastery, but two thirds revert to his kinsmen. If he has children,

6/31 woman B: free woman
7/1 <7> B: 6 property B: rights 7/8 still B omits.
7/9 to them B omits.

12 GUTA LAG

he has command over his personal share. If <any> layman wishes 15 to leave property to the monastery or to a church, then he may give a tenth of his property in land, but no more, unless his kinsmen

permit it.

<8> Concerning personal rights

The next thing is that an individualís right to peace and security is 3 in force on all those days designated ëholy daysí, from the time of sunset on the eve of the day until dawn on the third day. Fourteen days at Christmas are days of peace and security; seven weeks in 6 Lent, and the whole of Easter Week; three Rogation days; and the whole of Whit Week. If you kill a man during these periods of peace and security, the fine is three marks. If you wound a man, 9 the fine is twelve ˆre. If you strike <a man> with a staff, or an axe hammer, the fine is six ˆre. If you manhandle someone, or push him, or take him by the hair, or punch him with your 12 fist, the fine is three ˆre, if it is done in anger. If a slave is involved, the fine does not exceed three ˆre, if he is made to bleed. The fine is always to be paid where the deed was done, 15 and not where the perpetrator lives. The priest shall withhold holy offices, and close the church door, to all those who have broken the sanctity of God, for excommunication always follows Sabbath- 18 breaking. The ban shall subsequently be lifted immediately he pays the fine stipulated, and the parishioners consider it advisable. All are obliged to bring the action for the fines, and all should take 21 a share in them. Parishioners are to have one third of the fines, the church another, and the priest a third, provided that fines are not payable to the general assembly. But fines to the 24 general assembly are not payable for Sabbath-breaking, unless a man is killed inside a church, in which case there is a fine of forty

7/14 <any> B; A omits. 7/16 in land B omits.
8/1 <8> B: 7
8/9 <a man> B; A omits. 8/21 of the fines B omits.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 13

marks. This fine is paid to the general assembly. The rural dean
has three marks of this for pronouncing excommunication. 27

All churches in the province are equally sacred, if a man is killed inside them. Three churchyards, however, are considered
in law to be the most sanctified. In these a fugitive should have 30 protection both on rectory land and in the churchyard. There is a
fine of forty marks if a fugitive is killed in this sanctuary. But of
all other fines, those that are smaller, and those that are not payable 33 to the general assembly, the parishioners are due one third, and
the church a second part, and the priest another. If you strike a
man in a church with a staff or an axe hammer, or wound him in 36 a churchyard, the fine for this is six marks. If you punch a man
with your fist or push a man or take him by the hair in a church, or strike him in a churchyard with a staff, or an axe hammer, the 39 fine is three marks. If you punch a man with your fist in a churchyard, or take a man by the hair, the fine is twelve ˆre for Sabbath-breaking. The one who has desecrated the church shall 42 always be liable for the reconsecration, and cleanse that which
he has made unclean by a payment of three marks.

<9> Concerning the universal sanctity

Now there are, moreover, two other periods of peace and security, which principally exist in order that one should observe an 3 individualís right to protection. In these cases there is no excommunication and no fine to the bishop, unless the deed was done on a holy day. This is the universal sanctity. It runs from 6 fourteen nights after Easter and five nights after Midsummer and lasts for ten nights and ten days in each case; it both starts and

8/26 marks B adds or in a churchyard, in which case there is a fine of twelve marks

8/32 killed B; A: captured
8/33 not B omits.
8/34 due B: always due
8/35 another. B: another part.
8/39 or an axe hammer B: or with an axe hammer 8/41 churchyard B adds or push a man

9/1 <9> B: 8

1 2

1 5

14 GUTA LAG

ends at sunrise. If you kill a man during these periods of peace and security, the fine to the general assembly is as great a wergild as he whom you killed is worth. No peace circle will protect you before you have paid the fine. If you wound a man or strike him during these periods of peace and security, the fine is three marks. During these periods of peace and security no one may destroy anotherís house or boundary fence, without being liable for a fine of three marks.

<10> Concerning the springtime sanctity

Now there is then, in addition, the springtime sanctity. It runs from a fortnight before the general sowing time, and lasts until a fortnight thereafter. During that period of peace and security no one may seize from another either horse or ox in payment of debt, since a farmer needs these every day on his fields, without being liable for a fine of three marks. If a debt is [outstanding] between men and it is legally claimed, the one is to claim from the other his house, cattle or possessions, and not his working beasts, which he needs at the time.

<11> Concerning the assembly sanctity

Next there is in addition menís assembly sanctity. The assembly- men must prosecute the action for [breaking] the assembly sanctity. If you take a man by the hair, or punch him with your fist, at the assembly, the fine is three marks for breaking the assembly sanctity and in addition a legal fine (i.e. for the assault). If you strike a man with a staff, or an axe hammer, or cause injury, the fine is three marks. If you kill a man, or maim him, the

9/10 is as great B: is always as great 10/1 <10> B: 9
10/6 these B: both these
10/8 it is B omits.

11/1 <11> B: 10
11/2 in addition B omits.
11/7ñ8 cause injury B: cause a man injury

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 15

fine is six marks, unless the man was killed in revenge. A criminal is in force.

9 may not rely on the assembly sanctity, unless a universal sanctity

<12> Concerning the homestead sanctity

Next there is in addition the sanctity of the homestead for all men. If you kill a man at home on his farm, or maim him, the fine is twelve marks to the general assembly, and another twelve to him, and wergild in addition. If you strike a man with a staff or an axe hammer, or cause him injury, the fine is three marks to him, and three more to the community, and in addition the legal fine. If a householder is struck at home on his farm, or more people, only the one who is valued most highly is to take the fine for an attack in the home, but no others. All should, however, receive legal fines.

<13> Concerning manslaughter

The next thing is that, if the misfortune should occur through the devilís agency that a man should happen to kill another, his father, son and brother shall flee with him. If none of these exist, then his nearest kinsmen should flee with him for forty days to a church that all men have taken as a sanctuary, that is Fardhem and Tingst‰de and Atlingabo. There they shall have safety and sanctuary, both on rectory land and in the churchyard. And when that time has expired, he must ride to the place where he wants to draw up his peace circle, and draw it around three farms, and so far into the wood from the three homesteads that it lies equidistant from other (i.e. from these and the other) homesteads, which lie on the other side of the wood, if he has (i.e. should he in any case have) permission from those who own

12/1 <12> B: 11
12/2 in addition B omits.
12/9ñ10 fine for an attack in the home B: case for homestead sanctuary 13/1 <13> B: 12
13/8 and sanctuary B omits.

16 GUTA LAG

15 the property. The circle may not be drawn around a place of assembly or a marketplace, nor around more than one church, the one in which he took refuge. Then he has sanctuary within his

18 circle, and someone else may negotiate compensation [on his behalf]. And he is always to draw it during the period of peace and security that is next after Easter, but until that time the peace

21 circle, which he drew up when he first put himself in danger, shall protect him. That is called the testified safety circle. No one may dispute any peace circle, which remains for a year, when a

24 year has expired. But a man has freedom to remain in his circle or go abroad on a pilgrimage to a shrine, to atone for his sins. He shall have eight days respite to take to his ship, and then travel in peace

27 on his pilgrimage. And when he comes back, he also has eight days to travel back to his circle in peace. If a man commits a crime (i.e. a killing) in his home parish, he must flee from there,

30 and draw his circle somewhere else, where neither mother nor daughter nor sister (i.e. of the victim) live. Meanwhile he must take himself to another church, since they must not both visit the

33 same church. Half the tithe is to go to the church he visits for services and half remains with the church to which his farm was allocated. If a man commits a crime at the homestead that he

36 himself lives in, then he is to flee immediately from there and draw a peace circle elsewhere, if he wants peace and security, since they may not both live in the same farm. If a non-Gotlandic man

39 kills another non-Gotlandic man, then he is to draw a circle in the same way as a Gotlander, if he lives on his own farm in Gotland. He (i.e. the killer) is to offer compensation for the man, if he 42 can afford it, when the year is past, and always leave a year

13/15 the property B omits.
13/24 But a man B omits. has freedom B: has then freedom
13/25 to a shrine Literally to the saints
13/29 home parish B: own home parish
13/34 his B omits.
13/36 immediately B omits.
13/39 man B omits.
13/41 B has a new chapter here: 13 Concerning the offering of compensation

for a man

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 17

between, and offer three times in three years. And the other is a
man without dishonour if he accepts it the first time it was offered.
If he does not wish to accept it the first time nor at the second, 45 then he is to take it the third time, when three years have passed.
If he will not accept it then, then they (i.e. both parties) must be taken to the assembly, before all the people. He (i.e. the plaintiff) 48 may still accept there, if he wishes. If he does not wish to, then
all the people take counsel over the money (i.e. distribution of the money), but he (i.e. the defendant) is then free from guilt. If the 51 plaintiff says that the period had not expired, but the defendant
who is offering the wergild says that it had, then the one who says
that it had expired has the right to substantiate this, with the 54 evidence (i.e. corroboration) of three men who were with him at
the farm and offered compensation three times in three years.
And he is to confirm it with a twelve-man oath that there was 57 always a yearís grace allowed between each. If a man does not
wish to offer wergild and all the time limits have expired, the authorities shall deem him to be an outlaw, and liable to discharge 60 the wergild on a specified day after a period of a month, and liable for six marks of silver to the plaintiff and another six to the authorities. The same fine applies to him who does not keep within 63 his peace circle. There is no appeal against this [extra penalty]:
all of the fine will be extracted.

<14> Concerning inherited cases

But concerning claims for compensation (i.e. wergild) inherited from father or brother or kinsmen, all shall negotiate compensation 3 until such time as they are able to offer wergild. But the plaintiff
can accept immediately, if he wishes, and not be dishonoured. If

13/43 the other B omits.
13/44 time B omits.
13/45 time B omits.
13/51 guilt B: shame
13/55 with him B: at home with him 13/59 offer B; A: pay

18 GUTA LAG

6 he does not wish to accept so quickly, then they must offer it three times before the same time the following year, and then take it to the assembly before all the people. He may, if he wishes, take

9 the offer there, or else the whole assembly decides the sum of money, but they (i.e. the kinsmen) then become blameless.

If two or more conspire together and kill one man, then they 12 must all have the same peace circle until one of them admits to

the killing.
All those who will inherit a portion (i.e. with him) and wish to

15 do so [may] take revenge on behalf of a minor. Then it is [lawfully] avenged if any one of them takes revenge for him, whether male or female. That revenge is valid, just as <if> he himself took

18 revenge. They shall also take the wergild, if the inheritor is young, when it has come to the time that the defendant who is involved in the case can make an offer, and free himself from it.

21 If a Gotlander kills a non-Gotlander and can afford to offer wergild, then he neither has to flee nor draw a peace circle. If a non-Gotlander kills a Gotlander, then he is not protected by a

24 peace circle, unless he can afford to offer wergild.
If a minor causes the death of another, the fine is twelve marks

of silver.
27 If a pregnant woman is killed and her child also dies and men

can confirm with an oath that the child was alive in her womb,

then her husband is to swear to it, if he is alive. If he is <not> 30 alive, then the one most closely related to her shall bear witness with three landowning Gotlanders from the same parish, and in addition so many as to make up twelve men, all of equal birth to 33 her. Then the fine for the unborn child is twelve marks of silver,

but for the woman a full wergild.

14/6 wish to B omits.
14/8 may B: may still
14/11 man B omits.
14/14 B inserts A kinsman may take revenge, if he wishes, on behalf of a minor. 14/17 <if> B; A omits.

14/20 offer B: offer of money 14/29 <not> B; A omits. 14/32 all B omits.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 19

<15> Concerning menís wergild

Further, there are now menís wergilds. A Gotlandic man is to be compensated with a wergild of three marks in gold, if he is killed. 3 All other men are to be compensated with ten marks of silver, except that a slaveís wergild is to be four and a half marks in
coin. If a Gotlandic man marries a non-Gotlandic wife, her full 6 wergild compensation is to be paid for her, but the children are treated in the same way as their fatherís family in the matter of compensation. If a non-Gotlandic man marries a Gotlandic 9 woman, each keeps their own level of wergild compensation and
the children are treated in the same way as their fatherís family
in the matter of compensation. 12

<16> Concerning wergild within the peace circle

The wergild for a Gotlandic man within the peace circle is twelve marks of silver; that of a non-Gotlandic man is five marks of 3 silver, and that of a slave is six ˆre in coin.

All are equal in the matter of fines, until maiming occurs. If maiming occurs, then the hand or foot of a <non-Gotlandic> man 6 is to be paid for with ten marks in coin, and similarly all other disfigurements, which are paid for with wergild.

If someoneís slave kills a Gotlandic man, then the master is to 9 take the killer bound to the farm (i.e. the plaintiffís farm) within
forty days, and in addition nine marks of silver. If the killer cannot
be produced, then he (i.e. the master) is to pay twelve marks of 12 silver and no more. If a slave kills a non-Gotlandic man, then his master is to pay two marks of silver for him and lead the slave

15/5 is to be B: is to be paid at 15/6 full B omits.
15/7 her B; A: him
15/8 their B omits.

15/12 in the matter of compensation B omits. 16/3 is B omits.
16/6 <non-Gotlandic> B; A: Gotlandic
16/14 for him B omits.

20 GUTA LAG

15 bound to the farm (i.e. the plaintiffís farm) within forty days. If the killer cannot be produced, then he is to pay a fine of five marks of silver. And swear (i.e. in all cases swear) him a six-

18 man oath that he neither advised nor caused the deed. If the master cannot swear this oath, then he is to pay the full wergild, both for a Gotlandic and a non-Gotlandic man. If a slave kills a slave, the

21 master cannot be compelled to give the killer in compensation, if he offers four and a half marks in coin.

But a slave who has worked through his time of slavery is to 24 embrace his freedom at the church door with the witness of the parishioners and then the slave is himself responsible for his

1 2

1 5

A five-year-old uncastrated ox also carries a liability for com- pensation of twelve marks (i.e. of silver) from the farmer owning him, if it causes the death of a man. A horse must be tied up, when one comes to visit a farmer, between the fourth pair of fence supports from the entrance pillars, and four paces from the manís door. Then he (i.e. the owner) is responsible for nothing except for the near fore (i.e. if it kicks out), and its teeth, if it bites. If you travel to a farm or to a storehouse, tie the horse to the gable end or the back wall, then you will not be responsible for more than stated above. A boar is the third (i.e. animal carrying a liability), if it is over three years old and uncastrated. A dog is the fourth. One is always responsible for everything, if it causes damage, whoever owns it. Everyone is answerable for these four dumb animals (i.e. if they cause a death) on their own farm to the sum of twelve marks of silver.

actions.

<17> Concerning unruly animals

If a dumb animal is the cause of the death of a man of lesser 18 value than a Gotlander, then two thirds of his wergild is written off, but one third is paid by the owner of the beast. It is called ëwergild subject to claimí if a dumb animal causes the death of a 21 man or maims him in the limb. One shall demand the wergild

17/11 boar B: branded boar

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 21

(i.e. from the animalís owner) and not take revenge (i.e. upon the owner); [one shall] lay a legal claim to it like other debts (i.e. against the owner). If a dumb animal causes a man a wound or 24 maims him, then two thirds of the compensation is written off,

but a third is paid by the owner of the beast, apart from a dog bite;
then each tooth-mark, up to four, is paid with two ˆre. 27

<18> If a man strikes a woman

If a man strikes a woman so that her unborn child is miscarried,
and it was alive in her womb, then the fine is half a wergild. If 3 she accuses someone, but he denies it, then she is to prove it against him with two witnesses, those before whom she declared herself on the third day after she was struck, or those who were 6 present, who are also landowning men, together with the evidence
(i.e. corroboration) of two women that the child was stillborn after she had been struck. And she must herself bear witness, 9 with a six-person oath, that it had been alive.

A woman must take care of her child at every feast, put it in its cradle and have it by her, or have it in her lap, or lay it on the bed 12 and lie down herself. In that way every woman shall provide care
for her child for three winters. If any man causes the death by misadventure of the child during this period of care, he is to pay 15 the full wergild. If a woman lays the child on the floor or in a
chair unsupervised, or lays it on the bed, again unsupervised, then
no compensation is to be paid for the child come what may. If a 18 woman goes with a child into a bed in which drunken men are already lying and the child is smothered in the throng or by the bedclothes, then no compensation is to be paid for that child, even 21 though the woman herself lay down.

17/26ñ27 apart from . . . ˆre B omits. See Addition 2. 18/5 she B; A: he
18/7 who are also B omits.
18/14 for three B: three

18/16ñ17 in a chair B: a chair
18/17 lays it B omits. again unsupervised, B omits.

1 2

1 5

22 GUTA LAG

<19> Concerning wounds

If a man wounds another, with one wound or several, a thumb- nailís breadth deep, then he is to pay half a mark for each thumb-nailís breadth, both in depth and in length, up to eight marks, and half less if it is not a thumb-nailís breadth deep, but still needs medical treatment. The man who received the wound shall get the witness of two magistrates in the same hundred and one district judge from the same sixth and himself swear with six men, with their evidence (i.e. the judgesí corroboration) but not their oath, if the fine is more than three marks. If the fine is three marks or less, then it is a three-man oath. If he has more than one wound, then he may swear as he wishes, against one man or several, but the compensation is the same. All wounds that have penetrated the abdominal or breast cavity are compensated with a mark of silver. If one man wounds another with a knife, he is to pay two marks of silver. If a man throws a stone or some other object at another, who is wounded as a result, he is to pay three marks. If a

18 man is wounded with a blow, which does not cause blood to be spilt, so that the blow is visible (i.e. leaves a visible mark), the compensation is half a mark for each blow up to four but with the

21 same witness as for a wound (i.e. an open wound). If a man is wounded through his nose or lip, the compensation is two marks in coin and in addition for the facial defect, if it has healed over.

24 If it is open so that it cannot heal, then the highest compensation is paid in full. But for an ear, the compensation is halved. If one can see a scar or facial defect from the opposite side of the road

27 and a hat or hood does not hide it between beard and brow, the compensation is half a mark of silver. If it can be seen from right across the assembly, then the fine is a mark of silver

30 and wound compensation in addition. A split scalp is paid for with one mark in coin. If the skull is visible, then the fine is two marks in coin. If the skull is indented or cracked, then it is a mark

19/1 wounds B: wounding
19/12 wishes B: rather wishes
19/22 lip, the B: (ver, ̨a); A has a scribal error (ver ̨a).

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 23

of silver. If the membrane is visible, the fine is two marks of 33 silver.

For each bone, which rings in the bowl, there is a fine of a mark
in coin up to four bones. Each larger bone splinter, which can 36 carry an ell-long thread over a five ell-high beam, is subject to a
fine of two marks in coin for each of up to four bones. Each finger, which is cut off, is subject to compensation of four marks 39 in coin. A thumb is <fined at> two marks of silver. If a finger is
so stiffened that it has no holding power, then the fine is the same
as if it were lost. If a man is damaged in one hand, but can still 42 hold a sword or a sickle but cannot lift the weapon, then the fine
is two marks <of silver. If a man is incapacitated so that he cannot
walk or run, then the fine is two marks> of silver. If he is damaged 45 in the sinew of the heel or neck, then the fine is also two marks
<of silver. Each toe is fined at two marks> in coin, if it is lost. If ahandorafootislostoraneyeisout,thereisafineofsixmarks 48 of silver for each of them. If a man assaults another and cuts off
both of his hands, or both of his feet, or pokes out both of his eyes,
and the man nevertheless survives afterwards, the payment is 51 twelve marks of silver for each. If a man has his nose cut off so
that he cannot keep back his mucus or snot, the fine is also twelve marks of silver. If a manís tongue is pulled out of his head and 54 cut off, so that he cannot talk with it, then that also incurs a fine
of twelve marks of silver. If a man is damaged in his genitals, so
that he cannot father a child, then the fine is six marks of silver 57 for each testicle. If both are damaged, then the fine is twelve marks of silver. If the <whole> penis is cut off, so that the man cannot satisfy a call of nature other than sitting like a woman, 60 then the fine is eighteen marks of silver.

19/36 up to B: for each up to
19/40 <fined at> B; A omits.
19/44ñ45 <of silver . . . two marks> B; A omits. 19/46 also B omits.
19/47 <of silver . . . two marks> B; A omits. 19/51 nevertheless B omits.
19/59 <whole> B; A omits.

24 GUTA LAG

Each rib is to be fined at two marks, up to four ribs. Cutting off 63 or splitting a smaller bone in the hand or foot is fined at a mark in coin. If a larger bone is broken in either foot or hand, the fine is a mark of silver, if it heals without defect. If disability ensues, the 66 fine is two marks of silver. If a man has a visible mark from a blow on the hand, and says that he has lost the use of it, then he is to prove this with the same witnesses as for a wound. If there is 69 no visible mark from the blow, then the defendant has the right to substantiate his denial. It is the least deformity in the hand, if one cannot tolerate heat or cold as previously. That is fined at a mark

72 in coin and it is to be verified by self-witness.
If the hearing is struck out of a manís head with a blow leaving

a visible mark <so> that he can neither hear a dog on its leash nor 75 a cockerel on its perch, nor a man when he calls at the door, the fine for that is twelve marks of silver and he is to prove this himself with a six-man oath and with the same witnesses as for a wound. 78 If a manís hearing is damaged in one ear so that he does not hear with it, if he covers the other, then the fine is six marks of silver. If a manís ear is cut off, the fine is one mark of silver. But if the 81 ear is damaged, then the fine is two marks in coin. If you strike a manís teeth from his head, then you are to pay a fine for each tooth according to its worth: the two upper front teeth are fined at 84 two marks in coin each, the two next to them at one mark in coin each, and then each at a mark in coin including molars and all. But the lower teeth are all valued at a half less from first to last. 87 If you take a man by the hair with one hand, you are fined two ˆre. If you use both hands, you are fined half a mark. If you shake a man, you are fined two ˆre. If you push a man, you are fined 90 two ˆre. If you throw ale in a manís eyes, you are fined eight ˆrtugar for the insult. If you kick a man, you are fined two ˆre. If

19/62ñ66 Each rib . . . two marks of silver. B rewords. See Addition 3. 19/74 <so> B; A omits.
19/80 one mark of silver B: two marks of silver
19/80ñ86 But if the ear . . . first to last. B rewords. See Addition 4. 19/81 damaged A: damaged damaged

19/91 If you kick . . . two ˆre. B omits.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 25

you punch someone with your fist, you are fined two ˆre. If you admit to one blow, then he has the right to substantiate an accusation of four blows. If you do not confess, then you have the right to substantiate your denial as the defendant. If you strike a man with a staff, the fine is half a mark for each blow up to two marks. A man is not fined more from his property for a blow that does not cause blood to be spilt, unless disability ensues. That is the law of the Gotlanders.

A manís beard is subject to the same fines as other hair pulling. For a bald patch on which one can put a finger, the fine is eight ˆrtugar. If you can put two fingers in it, the fine is half a mark. If there is place for the thumb as a third, the fine is one mark in coin. If the bald patch is so large that the flat of the hand can be put on it, then the fine is two marks in coin. If all the hair is pulled off, the fine is one mark of silver, but one does not pay more even if each hair is pulled out. If a piece of scalp and hair is cut from a manís head the fine is one mark of silver.

If you tear apart a manís clothing, the fine for outer garments is one ˆre. The kirtle is two ˆre, undergarments eight ˆrtugar, and all the manís clothes are to be repaired and as good as they were before. Undergarments are a manís vest and shirt, trousers and hat. All cost the same, whichever is torn. If the skin is involved and a wound is caused, you are fined both for the wound and the clothing.

A man is to be answerable for open wounds for a year and a day. If a man is wounded with a blow which does not cause blood to be spilt, and he lies in the same bed and does not get up in the interim, but still has full use of his senses, then he is to take the witness of four landowning men and three district judges from the same sixth and as many more as to make up twelve. If he

19/100 B has a new chapter here: 20 Concerning bald patches
19/100 A manís beard . . . hair pulling. B omits these sentences at this point. 19/105ñ08 If all the hair . . . silver. See Addition 5 for differences in B. 19/109 B has a new chapter here: 21 If you tear apart someoneís clothing 19/116 B has a new chapter here: 22 Concerning open wounds and closed

wounds

102

105

108

111

114

117

120

26 GUTA LAG

does not have full use of his senses, then his heir has the 123 right of substantiation of the case, with the same evidence (i.e. corroboration). But if he gets up in the interim, the defendant has

the right of substantiation of his denial.
126 If a man blocks anotherís way, grasps a horsemanís bridle, or

takes a pedestrian by the shoulders and turns him from his path,

then he is fined eight ˆrtugar for the insult. But if he does violence 129 to him and forces him to go further with him (i.e. in the opposite direction), then he is to pay him three marks for the violence and

another three to the community.
132 If someoneís slave fights with a free man, then if he (i.e. the

slave) always receives two blows to one (i.e. against the other),

then it is considered even between them. If the slave gets more 135 blows than two against one, then each blow up to four is fined at two ˆre. If the free man gets more blows than one against two, then each to him up to four is fined at half a mark. If the slave 138 gets a jerking or a shaking or a pushing, then the fines to him are always half those to the free man. If it comes to wounds, then the fines are the same as to a free man, up to three marks and no 141 more. No one pays fines for insults to a slave and similarly a

slave does not pay fines for insult to anyone.

<20> Concerning all inheritances

If there are minors, who are young, after their fatherís death, and 3 also sons who are grown men, then the eldest must not part from the youngest, even if need may arise, before he (i.e. the youngest)

19/126 B has a new chapter here: 23 If someone blocks anotherís way 19/126 horsemanís B: manís
19/131 another three B: three marks
19/132 B has a new chapter here: 24 If slaves fight

19/132 if he B: if
19/136 blows B omits.
19/137 to him B: blow
19/142 The paragraph at 20/40ñ45 appears here in A, evidently misplaced, but

in the correct place in B, although in the margin. 20/1 <20> B: 25

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 27

is of age. They are to have enjoyment of everything undivided
until he is fifteen years of age. Then he is to take his scrip and his 6 scales and each have responsibility for himself, if they no longer
wish to be together. If need arises, so that they have to part with
land to buy food before they are all of age, an equal amount shall 9 be taken in pledge from each, the eldest as well as the youngest,
and <not> sell it outright. Should someone take the young minor
as a ward, however, whether a male or a female, and feed him 12 until he is of age, then he (i.e. the minor) keeps his portion, even
if the others are forced to part with their land to buy food. If a father marries his son off and the son dies and leaves behind 15 daughters, they shall remain in their grandfatherís care and await
their portion. If the head of the family dies and there are no surviving sons, the daughters and sonsí daughters divide the 18 inheritance according to their numbers. If the man has other sons,
the sonís daughters (i.e. the daughters of the deceased son) inherit
their fatherís portion between them. In the same way inheritance 21 is passed from the fatherís mother if she lives longer than her
son. If an heiress has inherited land, then the one inherits from
the other however many generations there might be, whether male 24 or female, while her descendants exist. When the line has run out
and has included two male descendants but not a third, then the inheritance reverts to the farm from which it first came. If it has 27 included a third and all three follow each other, then it remains
with the farm to which it has come, even if the line has died out.
If an heiress has inherited her portion and leaves no sons, then the 30 next of kin inherits. If both are equally close, a man and a woman,
then the man inherits and not the woman.

If there are no sons on the farm, then the daughter inherits her 33 maternal inheritance and her fatherís maternal inheritance after
her father. If her paternal aunts survive, married or single, then

20/5 They are B: They are all
20/11 <not> B; A omits.
20/12 however A has a superfluous not here.
20/28 it remains B: remains
20/33 B has a new chapter here: 26 If the male line is broken

28 GUTA LAG

36 they take her fatherís maternal inheritance (i.e. a share in this inheritance). If some are unmarried, they take an eighth of the monetary value of the paternal inheritance (i.e. of their niece)

39 after debts have been paid.
If there are no sons on the farm, then the kinsmen each inherit

their per capita share to the fourth generation. If it (i.e. the relation- 42 ship) is more remote, then they take an eighth part after debts are paid. A woman, however, is to take as much from the farm as she has put in, if it is written down in the first year. If it is not written

45 down, then the farm has the right of substantiation of its case.
If there is no male heir and a widow remains at the farm, then she is to have, as provisions at the farm for a year, a bushel of rye 48 and another bushel of barley each month, if she does not die or marry away. But as to the property that she brought to the farm, she is to take out of the farm that which she brought to it. If a 51 woman marries into several farms and has children in several, then all children inherit their maternal inheritance equally, both land and movables. And brothers receive for their full sisters, 54 whether they are married or unmarried. If a woman is married out of the farm with a dowry and has no male heir, then it (i.e. the dowry) reverts to the farm from which she married. If there are 57 no male heirs to the farm then the next of kin inherits, whether male or female, but in the case of a woman no further than the fourth generation. If they are both of equal degree, however, the 60 man inherits. It is also the law that a woman inherits consolation and provision from her husband. If she stays for a longer time on the farm with her sons <and> her sons die, leaving no male heir 63 after them, before eight years have elapsed, she is to take a mark

20/40ñ45 This paragraph should be here, as indicated by the reading of B, where it appears in the margin. In A it appears at 19/142.

20/41 their A: which B omits. share B adds with the daughters
20/43 paid B adds and the womenís portions are discharged she B; A: he 20/45 then B omits.
20/53 full B omits.
20/60 It is also . . . B has the words Hogsl oc id (ëConsolation and provisioní)

in the margin at this point, as a side heading. 20/62 <and> B; A omits.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 29

in coin for each year while her sons lived. But if she marries
again while her sons are still alive, she is to receive consolation
and provision and no more. A widow who is childless is to have 66 board and lodging, if she wishes, in the same farm into which she married. If she does not want this, she is to have half a mark in
coin for each year <up to> sixteen years and receive it year by 69 year.

But in the case of female inheritance, a daughter or daughterís children inherit. If there are none of these, then the sister or sisterís 72 children inherit. If there are none of these, then the fatherís sister
or fatherís sisterís children inherit. If there are none of these,
then the next blood relatives down to the fourth generation inherit, 75 but no further. If there are none of these, the female inheritance remains in the farm estate with the kinsmen. If there are no male
heirs and it has passed to the female line, whether it is through a 78 brother or a sister, and they are both equal in blood relationship,
then they both inherit. Should both father and son be burned alive
in the same house, both drown in the same ship, or both fall in the 81 same battle, then sisters are considered equal to daughters. If
more than one son survives a man and the family grows from all
of them, but one (i.e. if it happens that one) dies without sons, 84 then all (i.e. the others) are equally near in inheritance down to
the fourth generation. Anyone who sells his ancestral home and disposes of everything within the farmstead will be separated 87 from inheriting with the kinsmen and brothers and will be assigned
the wergild of a non-Gotlander. But his sons will remain within
the line of inheritance and the legal entitlements of their kinsmen, 90 if they obtain land again worth three marks in rent.

No illegitimate son can obtain the right to inheritance unless it
is the case that both his father and mother are trueborn Gotlanders, 93

20/69 <up to> B; A omits.
20/71 B has a new chapter here: 27 Concerning womenís inheritance 20/72ñ73 If there are . . . inherit. B omits.
20/81 both drown B: or both drown
20/92 B has a new chapter here: 28 Concerning illegitimate children 20/92ñ93 it is the case that B omits.

30 GUTA LAG

and he confirms it with what is written in a genealogical table, to

the effect that three successive female ancestors are trueborn 96 Gotlanders. Then the son of the third in line can inherit with the kinsmen. If a Gotlandic man begets an illegitimate child with a Gotlandic woman and he has no (i.e. no legitimate) male heir and 99 he is survived by illegitimate children, sons and daughters, then they divide their paternal movables according to their number with the legitimate daughters, if there are any. If there are none, then 102 they divide their fatherís movables amongst each other according to their number. But if a Gotlandic man begets illegitimate sons with a non-Gotlandic woman, then he must support them until 105 they are of age. If they do not wish to remain with their father any longer, then he is to give three marks in coin to each of them and battle weapons and bedclothes, bedcover and under-blanket and 108 pillow and fifteen ells of broadcloth for walking-clothes. If he has illegitimate daughters, then he must support them until they are eighteen years of age; he has the right to give them in marriage if 111 someone requests it. But if they remain unmarried and no longer wish to remain with their father when eighteen years have passed, then he must give a mark of silver to each, and bed- and walking- 114 clothes and a cow according to his means. The entitlements of illegitimate children must always be administered with the

corroboration of the parishioners.
117 If a Gotlandic man begets an illegitimate daughter with a non-

Gotlandic woman and if someone is charged with violation of

that illegitimate daughter, then he (i.e. the violator) is to give her 120 four marks as consolation, whether he <is> Gotlandic or non- Gotlandic. If a man is found in flagrante delicto with this daughter, then he must redeem his hand or foot with three marks of silver. 123 If a Gotlandic woman gets an illegitimate daughter with a non- Gotlandic man, then she has the same rights as have just been

laid out.

20/102 they B omits.
20/116 corroboration B: witness or corroboration 20/120 marks B: marks in coin <is> B; A omits.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 31

<20a> <Concerning men discovered in the act of illicit intercourse>

If a man is discovered in flagrante delicto with an unmarried 3 Gotlandic woman, then he may be placed in the stocks and be captive for three nights and send word to his kinsmen. They (i.e.
the kinsmen) are to redeem his hand or his foot with six marks of 6 silver or he (i.e. the wronged party) [can] have it cut off if he (i.e.

the miscreant) cannot afford to redeem it. If he is not discovered
in flagrante delicto with her, but if a child is presented to him and 9 the woman says that the child is his, but he denies it, then he is to
take two resident men from the same parish as the woman was
in when the child was conceived and swear, with a six-man oath,
that they never heard word or rumour of the matter before the
child was born. Then the right to substantiate his denial is in his favour, if he enlists two resident men. If he fails and does not get
the right to substantiate his denial, then the woman has the right
to substantiate her accusation with six men, all of equal birth
with her, that he is father to the child. And he is then to adopt the
child and take responsibility for the mother, if he is willing. If he
does not wish to or cannot, then he is to give her full consolation,
if she is a Gotlander. If a Gotlandic man is discovered in flagrante delicto with a non-Gotlandic woman, then she is to have three marks from him but only if he is discovered in flagrante delicto where her bed and home are. If a non-Gotlandic man is discovered
in flagrante delicto with a Gotlandic woman, then he is to pay the
same fine as a trueborn Gotlander. If he is not discovered in the
act, but nevertheless begets a child with her, he is to give her 27 eight marks in consolation and bring up the child himself. If
the woman says the child is his but he denies it, then he is to defend himself with the same evidence (i.e. corroboration) as a 30 Gotlander. But the child is to be raised by those who have the

20a/1 B has a new chapter here: 29 Concerning the discovery of illicit inter- course. A has no heading, despite listing the chapter in the table of contents.

20a/6 are B: are then 20a/17 all B omits.

1 2

1 5

1 8

2 1

2 4

32 GUTA LAG

right to collect the consolation, father or brother, if she is unmarried. 33 If a <non-Gotlandic> man begets a child with a non-Gotlandic woman, then he also is to give her consolation of three marks and raise his child. If he is discovered in flagrante delicto with her,

3 6

1 2

1 5

1 8

then he is also to give her three marks, even if there is no child.

<21> If a man commits adultery

If a man commits adultery, he is to pay three marks to the assembly and six marks to the complainant. If a man, <whether a priest or> a layman, commits double adultery then he is to pay twelve marks to the authorities and another twelve to the complainant. If a married man commits adultery with an unmarried woman, he is to pay her consolation. If a lawfully married woman commits adultery with an unmarried man, he is not to pay her consolation. If a man, priest or layman, is discovered in flagrante delicto with another manís wife then he is liable for forty marks or his life and the complainant decides, however, which he would prefer, the money or his (i.e. the defendantís) life. If a man seduces another manís daughter or one of his wards into betrothal without the authority of her father or kinsmen, then he must pay forty marks to the complainant; of this the authorities take twelve marks. If a man takes (i.e. takes in marriage) a woman or maid by force or violence, without the authority of her father or kinsmen, then those who prosecute her case shall decide between his neck or wergild, if the woman is Gotlandic; the authorities take twelve marks of the wergild. If the woman is not Gotlandic, then those who

21 prosecute her case shall decide between his neck and ten marks of silver; the authorities take twelve marks (i.e. in coin) of the wergild.

20a/32 she B: he [i.e. the brother]
20a/33 <non-Gotlandic> B; A: Gotlandic
20a/35 with her B omits.
21/1 <21> B: 30 If a man commits B: Concerning 21/3 <whether a priest or> B; A omits.
21/5 twelve B: twelve marks
21/10ñ12 and the complainant . . . life B omits.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 33

<22> <Concerning rape>

If a woman is dishonoured in a wood or elsewhere and forced
into sexual intercourse, she must pursue the man with a shout, if 3 she does not want to endure the shame, and follow him to where
he goes. If someone hears her cry, he must provide her with full
and complete evidence, as if he had been present and was an 6 eyewitness. If no one hears her cry, she must declare her case before witnesses immediately on the first day, in the place where
she comes to habitation and say the name of the man. She can 9 also benefit from their evidence, if their witness is valid. If she delays and does not make an accusation, then it is best to remain
silent about it. The defendant has the right to substantiate his denial. 12 If a man is found guilty of such an offence and there is evidence
for the woman, then he is fined twelve marks of silver for a Gotlandic woman but for a non-Gotlandic woman five marks of 15 silver and for a slave six ˆre in coin. If the case involves a lawfully married woman, Gotlandic or non-Gotlandic, then he forfeits his
life or redeems himself with as much wergild as the woman is 18 worth. If the woman does not know the man, but declares her
case before witnesses on the first day after she has come to habitation, and then claims to have known the man when a longer 21 time has passed, he can then defend himself with a twelve-man
oath. If she is pregnant and it happened at the time that she declared
her rape before witnesses, she has the right to substantiate her 24 accusation with a twelve-man oath and the witnesses before whom
she declared her case. If a manís slave commits such a crime with
a Gotlandic woman, it does not suffice that the master pays the 27 wergild penalty, unless she would rather the wergild than his life.

22/1 A had no title for this chapter originally, simply an enlarged initial letter. Concerning the shaming of women has been inserted in the margin. B: 31 If a woman is dishonoured on the road

22/15 non-Gotlandic woman B: non-Gotlandic
22/16 slave B: slave woman
22/20 she B; A: he
22/23 oath B: oath if she is not pregnant at the time B: at the same time 22/28 rather B: rather accept

1 2

1 5

34 GUTA LAG

<23> Concerning asaults on women

And concerning assaults on women, the law is as follows. If you strike the headdress or wimple from a womanís head, in a way that is not accidental, and her head is half-bared, then you are to pay a mark in coin; if it is completely bared, you are to pay two marks. She has the right to substantiate her accusation with the witnesses who saw it, to say whether her head was completely bared or half. An unfree woman, however, receives payment for blows, and no more. If you pull the buckle or clasp from a woman, you are to pay eight ˆrtugar. If you pull both away, you are to pay half a mark. If it (i.e. the garment) falls to the ground, then the fine is a mark. If you pull the laces from a woman, the fine is half a mark for each to the maximum fine. And you must give everything back to her. <She> is to confirm herself when all has been returned. If you push a woman so that her garments fly out of place, compared to how they were previously, the fine is eight ˆrtugar. If they fly halfway up the shin, the fine is half a mark.

18 If they fly up so that one can see the kneecap, the fine is a mark in coin. If they fly up so high that one can see both loins and private parts, the fine is two marks. If you seize a woman by the

21 wrist, you are to pay half a mark, if she wants to lay a complaint. If you seize her by the elbow, you are to pay eight ˆrtugar. If you seize her by the shoulders, you are to pay five ˆrtugar. If you

24 seize her by the breast, you are to pay an ˆre. If you grasp her by the ankle, you are to pay half a mark. If you grasp her between the knee and calf, you are to pay eight ˆrtugar. If you grasp her

27 above the knee, you are to pay five ˆrtugar. If you grasp her still higher up, that is an indecent grasp and it is called a madmanís grasp; no cash compensation is payable for it; most will endure it

30 when it has gone that far. If this happens to a non-Gotlandic

23/1 <23> B: 32 A has rubric, exceptionally, in margin. 23/6 marks B: marks in coin
23/11 then B omits.
23/14 <She> B; A omits.

23/18 so B: so high 23/21 she B; A: he

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 35

woman, you are to pay her half the amount for all assaults compared to a Gotlandic woman, if she is a free and freeborn woman. 33

<24> Concerning weddings

Concerning the wagon-ridersí procession, no more than two shall travel in each wagon; but the ride of the relatives is abolished. 3 The nuptial mass is to be sung where the bridegroom is and
the wedding breakfast is to be held. The bridegroom shall send
three men to his bride and the chief bridal attendant shall wait 6 where the nuptial mass is to be sung and the wedding breakfast
held. And the wedding feast shall be held with drinking for two
days with all the people (i.e. guests) and gifts are to be given 9 by everyone who wants to according to their inclination.
But contributions by the guests to the wedding feast have been abolished. On the third day they (i.e. the bridal couple) have 12 the right to invite the wedding hosts and the masters of the feast
and their closest kinsmen to stay. As many toasts as the householder wants shall be drunk prior to the toast to the Virgin 15 Mary. But after the toast to the Virgin Mary, then everyone has permission to leave and further ale is not brought in. Everyone
who breaks this rule must pay twelve marks to the authorities. 18 And whoever comes uninvited to a wedding or feast is to pay
three ˆre.

<24a> <Concerning funeral feasts>

All funeral feasts are abolished. But those who wish to may give clothes and footwear to the parishioners in memory of the 3 deceased.

23/32ñ33 if she is . . . woman B omits.
24/1 <24> B: 33
24/1 weddings B: the wagon-ridersí procession
24/20 ˆre B: ˆre in coin
24/20 See Addition 6 and 63/14ñ17.
24a/1 <24a> B has a new chapter here: 34 Concerning funeral feasts A has no

heading, despite listing the chapter in the table of contents.

36 GUTA LAG

<24b> <Concerning fine woollen cloth>

All fine woollen cloth and wall coverings of black cloth that exist 3 are to be used, but no more are to be added to them once they are

worn out, neither second-hand nor new.

<24c> <Concerning riding clothes>

Saddlecloths and riding cushions are not to be divided into smaller 3 than quarters.

<24d> <Concerning Gotlandic women>

This is also stipulated concerning Gotlandic women: that each 3 brother shall take responsibility for his sisterís wedding. If he does not wish to do that, he must give her an eighth portion of his property to support herself under the supervision of <his> closest 6 kinsmen and parishioners, so that she does not use her possession

ill advisedly.

<24e> <Concerning non-Gotlandic people>

But concerning non-Gotlanders, then the stipulation is that two 3 sisters should inherit the same as one brother. If the inheritance falls between siblings or the children of siblings, they divide it like their paternal inheritance or their maternal inheritance. If it 6 goes to more distant relatives, then those who are closest in blood

inherit.

24b/1 <24b> B has a new chapter here: 35 Concerning womenís rights and includes the majority of the first nine sentences from 65/2ñ15. A has no heading, despite listing a separate chapter in the table of contents.

24c/1 <24c> A has no heading, despite listing a separate chapter in the table of contents. B has the initial letter of Reidkledi (ëSaddleclothsí) enlarged and in red, indicating a new section.

24d/1 <24d> B has a new chapter here: 36 Concerning Gotlandic women A has no heading, despite listing the chapter in the table of contents.

24d/4 her B omits.
24d/5 <his> B; A omits.
24e/1 <24e> A has no heading, despite listing a separate chapter in the table of

contents. B has the first four words in red, indicating a new section.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 37

<24f, 64> Concerning travellersí pathways

And this is the law concerning travellersí pathways: if a man owns land which nowhere borders a right of way, he shall have 3 the right himself to cross open ground (i.e. anotherís open ground) where the latter has a right of way. If he owns land bordering a right of way, that is open ground, he has no right of crossing over 6 anotherís open ground. But if he has enclosed land, he has rights over anotherís open ground. If men wish to create grazing enclosures from grazing land by a road, they must leave a path 9 fifteen paces in width (i.e. between the fences). In that way they may protect their enclosure, but not otherwise. If a man creates
an enclosure across anotherís right of way, then he must create a
gap for him and he is to have passage as before. If he fences across a path that is another manís lawful right of way, the one who owns the fence is to create the gap, but the one who owns the right
of way is responsible for the gap (i.e. the security of the gap).

<25> Concerning disputes over woodland

If two men dispute about a wood, then one shall bring two types
of evidence: the evidence of neighbours and evidence as to work. 3 That one collected firewood in springtime, or cut fencing wood
and laid it on stumps, or cut off branches and gathered them together and let them dry there until autumn, is sufficient evidence 6 of work. He who has the stronger neighboursí evidence that work
was done in the area has the right to substantiate his case. One of those who owns most shall present his oath first. If he does not 9 wish to swear an oath, then his witness will not benefit either party. But concerning cultivated land one must also have two types of evidence: the evidence of kin (i.e. distant kin) and evidence

24f/1 <24f, 64> B: 37 The chapter Concerning travellersí pathways, which in A appears after Chapter 63, should appear here, as in B and the table of contents in A. See also CIG, 61 note 56.

24f/1 travellersí B omits. 25/1 <25> B: 38
25/6 there B omits.

1 2

1 5

1 2

38 GUTA LAG

as to work for three years. Those who own the neighbouring land

shall provide the evidence as to work. If one owning neighbouring 15 property disputes this, those shall bear witness, who own the property next nearest. Kin witness is not borne by anyone nearer

related than the fourth generation.
18 If cultivated land and woodland and marshland meet, then the

cultivated land (i.e. the settlement containing the cultivated land)

takes two thirds and the woodland and marshland (i.e. that 21 containing the woodland and marshland) a third (i.e. of the unclaimed land). Woodland and marshland then take half each of infertile land where they meet between stump and tufts of sedge. 24 And neither may witness concerning the other, not woodland with

marshland and not marshland with woodland.
No man may give another leave to fell in shared woodland, or

27 cut down fen sedge on shared marshland without being liable for a fine of three marks to the injured party and another three to the community. No man may presume to work in another manís

30 woodland or marshland without that which he travels with being legally taken from him, building material and draught animal. But if he says that the other has seized it illegally, he is to prove it

33 with an eyewitness. When someone gets an injury (i.e. suffers a loss) in a wood or on other property, and wishes to suspect (i.e. accuse) someone of something, then no one can decline another

36 (i.e. the accuser) the right to conduct a search and inspection without [incurring] a fine.

Anyone who damages boundary land inside or outside the 39 enclosure is liable to a fine of three marks to the injured party and another three to the community. No man shall also presume to enclose shared property without being liable to [pay] three marks 42 to the injured party and another three to the community. Everyone is responsible for the enclosure that he has fenced in; the one who

25/18ñ20 The words and woodland and marshland and then the cultivated land takes two thirds appear in the margin in A, possibly a 16th-century correc- tion. See CIG, 62 note 15.

25/19 cultivated B omits. 25/24 witness B omits.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 39

owns the land bounding a road [is responsible] for the fence along
the road. But the one that does not own land bounding a road is 45 responsible for fences between fields or meadows. Everyone is
to redress the damage caused by the fence for which he is responsible. If several keep a fence in a bad state, then all pay 48 damages who do not have a lawfully acceptable fence. No one
gets damages for his injury unless he himself keeps a lawfully acceptable fence. No one may demonstrate damage on anotherís 51 bad fence unless he himself has a good one.

<26> Concerning shared fences

If someone asks another for a shared fence, then he must tell the
other with a neighbour or parishioner as witness. And the 3 parishioners shall decide each share within a week. You then
take your share yourself with the neighbours as witness, if the
other party does not wish to be present, and erect a fence in the 6 place you are given your share. And the other party then has a yearís grace (i.e. to erect his fence) from the day of division. If
farm animals (i.e. belonging to him) later get in, take them indoors 9 and do not release them before the other pays for the damage and deposits half a mark towards the fence. He is to have the fence
made good within a fortnight and then redeem his pledge. If he 12 does not do this within a fortnight, then he loses his half mark and
you take another half mark as pledge until the work is done. He
must continue to pay for the damage as long as the fence is not 15 made good. For ëgood fences make good neighboursí.

Whoever takes a creature indoors is to answer for the creature
until he has informed the one who owns it with the witness of 18 neighbours. If he (i.e. the owner) then does not wish to redeem
the creature, then he must himself bear the damage if the creature
is worse, or indeed dead. When all have been lawfully informed, 21

25/48 keep B: own or keep 25/50 keeps B: keeps or owns 26/1 <26> B: 39
26/7 then B omits.

40 GUTA LAG

the one who has the bad fencing is answerable for the damage. If

someone has an unruly animal and it breaks in through a lawfully 24 acceptable fence, one must inform him with neighbours as witness and bid him tether his beast. If it subsequently does damage, then one must take the creature into the house, and he who owns the 27 creature is to pay for the damage. If an ox breaks a fully tied fence, even if it is not lawfully acceptable, then you are to pay for the damage. If it jumps over it, you do not pay unless the fence is 30 lawfully acceptable. An ox is lawfully tethered if it has a horn hobble around its hind foot and its horn. No fence is lawfully acceptable unless it is bound with two bands and is two and a half 33 ells in height to the upper band, but this nevertheless applies to those creatures that jump over, and not to swine or those creatures that crawl underneath. Each must take care of geese and pigs 36 themselves, provided that the fence (i.e. the neighbourís fence) is

lawfully acceptable.
If a man cuts down wood illegally in enclosed woodland and

39 travels there (i.e. to collect it), then he is liable to [pay] three marks to the <injured> party and another three <to> the community. But if he carries it home from the wood, then he is liable to a fine

42 of eight ˆrtugar and complete restitution. If the wagon axle or other driving equipment breaks on the road, then a man may without penalty cut wood on anotherís land if he does not himself own

45 land so near that he can see yoke <and> wagon, or draught horse and cart [from it].

If you tear up another manís fence so that you break the upper 48 tie, then you are to pay half a mark. But if you tear up a further fence section the fine is eight ˆrtugar (i.e. in addition). If you tear up a third, the fine is four ˆrtugar (i.e. in addition). If you tear a 51 wide enough gap to drive through, then you are liable to a fine of two marks and no more. And you are to make good his fence

26/33 nevertheless B omits.
26/38 B has a new chapter here: 40 Whoever cuts wood illegally 26/40 <injured> B; A omits. <to> B; A omits.
26/45 <and> B; A omits.
26/51 then B omits.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 41

again, as good and long as it was before, and be responsible for
any damage during the time it was down. 54

If you take a manís firewood or fencing wood or timber in
his woodland, the fine is six ˆre. If the other (i.e. the owner)
has driven it to the road, then the fine is three marks, if one does 57 not leave oneís own behind. And you are to give the other all his
own back, as good and as much, if you are found guilty of the crime. He is to confirm himself by oath when all has been 60 returned.

<27> Concerning wells

A well is the responsibility of the one on whose farm it is, unless
a wheel or trapdoor covers it; then the one who goes away leaving 3 it open is responsible. If you dig a well in your meadow or [on another part of] your land, you are to make the path and track as good away from it as to it, or you are responsible for a manís 6 beast if it suffers injury.

<28> Concerning land purchase

No one may sell land unless pressing need arises. Then he is to inform those kin most closely related and the parishioners and 3 the family members, and they are to test the need. But whoever
gives money for land without this test, has forfeited his money
and is to pay a fine of twelve marks to the authorities and another 6 twelve to the close-related kin, who are invalidating the agreement.
But property is never legally purchased without the discretion of
the assemblymen, and the kinsmanís portion shall be offered for 9 a year. One shall pledge with the same witnesses as for purchase.
If men divide property, they are to declare the division to the assembly, with both present. If someone disbelieves them, they 12 are to investigate in the same year. When the close-related kin cannot purchase the property from the one who is forced to sell,
then kinsmen from another branch of the family are to buy it, or 15

27/1 <27> B: 41 28/1 <28> B: 42

42 GUTA LAG

family members (i.e. those more distant), with the same test as

laid out above. But land may never be bought out of the family. If 18 men, Gotlandic or non-Gotlandic, who are not in the same family, have land (i.e. in common) and are forced to sell, they are to sell to those who should inherit, if they are able. If they are not able, 21 then the land must be bought by the men of the hundred in which the property lies. Whoever infringes against this, is to pay a fine of twelve marks to the authorities. When a man more distant than 24 the nearest buys it, one must submit a kinsmanís portion to the hundred assembly in which the land lies and, before one submits the portion, lawfully inform the one who is to take up the kinsmanís 27 portion, and who is outside the assembly area, in the presence of his own parishioners. If someone sells his land, then the kinsmanís portion is to be taken up both by men and women who would 30 inherit, but not those who share the use of the land with him. But kinsmen (i.e. close kin), or men from another branch of the family are to buy the land. If they do not wish to, then the female members 33 are nearer than men outside the family. If, however, a man sells his land and buys other land of the same value to his benefit, then the kinsmanís portion is not extracted. Land is never free (i.e. 36 otherwise) of a kinsmanís portion unless everyone makes a sale, or it is forfeited as wergild, or land bringing a mark in rent as a dowry is promised at the betrothal meeting, or it is forfeited as a 39 fine for theft. If there are a number of brothers or brothersí children, or other close-related kin, and they have divided their inheritance and several sell their land, then none of them is to take a kinsmanís 42 portion from the other, apart from the one most closely-related

who retains his land.
If someone is taken hostage and he ransoms himself with his

45 land or property, then his nearest kinsman is to redeem it, if he wishes, and pay the money for it once the other comes home. If a farmerís son is captive, or a minor, no one may ransom him for

48 more than three marks in silver, unless authority exists from his father or kinsmen; and he is to receive (i.e. from them) a third for

28/44 B has a new chapter here: 43 If someone is taken hostage

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 43

himself in addition to the sum he put down, in the same currency.
But he does not have the right to more than three marks of silver 51 if there is a dispute about it. But he who has inherited land and is
not a minor is to take up his own case as best he may. What he
does himself, stands. It is the law between countries that a foreigner 54 never ransoms a Gotlander dearer than three marks of silver, unless he has the authority of his father or kinsmen, and he is to
take a third in addition, in the same currency he has put down. If 57 a brother travels abroad with undivided property and falls captive,
then his brother is to ransom him (i.e. with money) from the undivided property. If he travels with divided goods then he is to 60 ransom himself. A brother must ransom another from captivity
as long as the property has not been divided between them.

If some profit falls to one (i.e. one brother) more than to the 63 other, or some find is made on his portion, then all should have a share, while it (i.e. their property) is undivided. If brothers possess undivided property and one of them kills a man, then each is 66 answerable for his actions: the one who killed pays the fine.

No son of a Gotlandic father may have his portion from his father, although he ask for it, unless his father is willing or he 69 marries with his fatherís consent. If he wants to make division,
then he is to take his personal share in money after the drawing
up of accounts, but his father is to keep his farm undivided and he 72 is to give his son the land rent from it, as well as his personal share in money; and the son is himself to have the authority to go where he wishes. If they have several farms, then the son is to go 75 to one of them at the drawing up of accounts, if he wishes, so
long as the father does not prove to be unreasonable. If a non- Gotlandic man has married or unmarried sons, they are never to 78 get a division of property from their father, unless the father proves
to be unreasonable.

28/64 some B omits.
28/68 B has a new chapter here: 44 Concerning the sons of Gotlanders 28/68 portion B: property portion
28/70 consent B: counsel and consent
28/72 is to keep B: is then to keep

44 GUTA LAG

<29> Concerning debts

Whoever gets into debt ill advisedly forfeits his portion and no 3 more. And no one is to pay out a debt after his death more than his

own means can bear.

<30> Concerning surety

If you take surety from a man for a true debt, then you are to summon him to the church or the assembly, and he is to redeem it at the legal time, otherwise the parishioners or the men of the assembly will make a valuation.

<31> Concerning assemblies

This is also agreed: that all assemblies shall commence before midday. Magistrates shall judge at the hundred assemblies. Whichever of them does not arrive by midday is to pay three ˆre to the assembly. If none of them has arrived by midday, they are liable to [pay] three marks to the first one to bring a case forward and another three <to> the community. But judgements may not be judged longer and oaths not taken later than sunset. Whoever infringes this is to pay a fine according to the level of the assembly. The sixth assembly may not impose a fine of more than three marks, and the riding assembly up to six marks and the general assembly up to twelve marks. If the cases concern ownership, then anyone is lawfully dismissed who does not come at the same time that the assembly is held.

29/1 <29> B: 45
30/1 <30> B: 46
30/2 you take B: a man takes
30/4ñ5 or the men of the assembly B omits. 31/1 <31> B: 47
31/4 three A: three iii
31/7 <to> B; A omits.
31/8 longer B omits.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 45

<32> Concerning a money claim

If a claim for money arises between men, then neither gets a higher oath from the other than from six men if disagreement 3 arises between them. But it may be from up to eighteen men in respect of land disputes, if there is disagreement relating to as much as a mark in gold (i.e. land to that value), and similarly 6 even if more is involved. If they disagree (i.e. about the value involved), then the hundredís magistrates shall decide without an
oath, if the disagreement concerns a mark in gold, and he (i.e. the 9 plaintiff) is now to take the initial summons with a monthís grace
from then. If he (i.e. the defendant) wishes to postpone this, he
must postpone it within the first fortnightís <period and move it 12 by another fortnightís period> forward to the third (i.e. six weeks
from the outset). When disputes concern less than a mark in gold
(i.e. land to that value), then a six-man summons shall be taken 15 out initially for a fortnight. If he (i.e. the defendant) wishes to postpone this, then he is to postpone it before a week is up, and move it by another week forward to the third (i.e. three weeks 18 from the outset). But summonses may not be moved by more without the agreement of both parties.

<32a>
<33> If you buy an ox

If you buy an ox, then try it for three days. Two faults may be found with it (i.e. to warrant its return). One is if it does not pull, 3 the other if it breaks out.

32/1 <32> B: 48
32/10 now B omits.
32/12ñ13 <period . . . period> This text must be understood, by comparison

with 32/18. It is missing from both A and B. Cf. SL IV, 282 note 5.
32a/1 <32a> B: 49 See Addition 7. A omits chapter, despite listing it in the table

of contents.
33/1 <33> B: 50 If you buy an ox B: Concerning the purchase of oxen

1 2

If you buy a cow, then test her for three milkings. Two faults may be found with her. One is if she kicks so that she cannot be milked, the other if she is lacking in milk.

<34> If you buy a horse

46 GUTA LAG

<33a> <Concerning the purchase of cows>

If you buy a horse, then try it for three days and lead it back with the fault if you find one. Three faults may be found with a horse. One is if it is moonblind, the second is if it bites, the third if it kicks out with its forefeet. If you have it for longer, then the vendor is not to take it back, even if faults are found, unless he himself wishes.

<35> Concerning horses

If you take a manís horse at pasture or elsewhere, without leave of him who owns it, and ride it or drive it, then you are to pay three marks to the complainant and another three to the community, if you are found guilty of being on the horseís back, and [must] always return <everything> undamaged. If you take a manís horse tied to a fence and do not leave one behind, you are also to pay three marks to the complainant and another three to the community, unless you have made a mistake and left another one behind. If you have made a mistake, then you are to pay eight ˆrtugar and bring it back unharmed before the third day.

33a/1 A has no heading, despite listing a separate chapter in the table of contents. B has the first three words in red, indicating a new section.

33a/2 then B omits.
34/1 <34> B: 51 If you buy a horse B: Concerning the purchase of horses 35/1 <35> B: 52 Concerning horses B: If you ride another manís horse A has

hesti (ëhorseí) in the singular. 35/3 ride it B: ride
35/6 <everything> B; A omits. 35/11 back B: back home

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 47

<36> Concerning the care of ships

And concerning the care of ships, the law is as follows: merchant ships, those that have thirteen ribs in them and three crossbeams, 3 are to be cared for out on the beach. But a cargo vessel shall be fastened through a bollard or rib or through a plank to a house in which people are sleeping. There must be a padlock and a key, 6 which the housewife or farmer carries. The chain is to be no
more than three links in length and the fourth shall be an iron crosspiece. Each link shall weigh two marks or stretch over three 9 ribs. And one is not responsible for the action of the sea. If someone finds an unattended small vessel out on the shore, then
the one who has found it is to take possession of it, if the other 12 (i.e. the owner) is not so near that he hears his shout, if he has shouted three times. A boat is not to be without supervision, otherwise whoever wishes may take it. If someone takes a manís
boat, which is at the landing-place, and takes it out, then he is to
pay a fine as if he had ridden another manís horse.

<37> Concerning house searches

If men come to a manís farm and ask to search the house, then
no one can forbid the search. If he wishes to have his neighbours 3 present, then they (i.e. the searchers) must wait for them, if they
do not wish to do him an injustice. Each is to nominate a man to
go inside. They are to go in loosely girded and coatless to perform 6 the search. If someone denies another a search, then his door is
not protected, and he receives no recompense (i.e. if someone forces their way in), even if no stolen goods are found inside. If 9 something is found inside of that which they have a suspicion about, they are to enquire about its acquisition. If he confesses at once and explains his acquisition, the warrant for ownership must
be traced (i.e. to the assignor) and his acquisition tested. If he
gets full corroboration from the person to whom he first referred

36/1 <36> B: 53
37/1 <37> B: 54
37/3 no one B: no one else

1 5

1 2

2 1

2 4

2 7

48 GUTA LAG

(i.e. as assignor), then he is innocent in the case. If he acquired the goods from another and did not know that they were acquired <illicitly> then, if the one to whom he has traced the goods (i.e. the assignor) takes responsibility, he himself is then free of suspicion. If the other denies it, then he has to take evidence from those who were there (i.e. at the purchase or receipt). This evidence will condemn him (i.e. the assignor) if he cannot lawfully defend himself. If someone carries stolen goods to a manís farm and house, which has a lock, and means in that way to betray him, then he is to forfeit everything that he carried in. And then he is to pay wergild to him, as much as he to whom he took the goods is worth, and in addition three marks to the assembly. But if he did this to a Gotlandic man, then he is to pay a fine of twelve marks to the authorities.

<38> Concerning the law of theft

And concerning the law of theft the legislation is this: whoever steals two ˆre or less than two ˆre, is to pay a six-ˆre fine for petty larceny. If he steals between two ˆre and a mark of silver, he will be taken before the assembly and marked and be committed to pay wergild (i.e. that of the victim). If he steals again after he has been marked, even if it be less, then he shall be hanged. If he steals as much as a mark of silver or more, then he shall also hang.

<39> Concerning insults

There are four insults relating to a man: thief, murderer, violent robber and murdering arsonist. And of a woman there are five: thief, murderer, adultery, witchcraft and murdering arsonist. When

37/17 <illicitly> B; A omits.
37/22 B has the first word of the sentence in red, indicating a new section. 37/26 But if B; A reading ambiguous here.
38/1 <38> B: 55 Both A and B have thieves for theft.
38/8ñ9 B omits the final sentence. See Addition 8.
39/1 <39> B: 56

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 49

someone is subjected to such insults, then he is to travel to the
farm of the one who has spoken the insult and lawfully summon 6 him to the church and request that he take back the words, which
were spoken in the heat of the moment, in a quarrel, or in drunkenness. If he denies it, he is to swear with three men before 9 parishioners that he never said those words. If he cannot substantiate the oath, then he is to pay a fine of three ˆre and restore the manís honour with a three-man oath in church. If a 12 man abuses another with such insults before the whole parish or
at the assembly or at a summons and does not get their veracity proved, then he is to pay a fine to the other of three marks and 15 restore his honour with a six-man oath at the assembly. This (i.e.
this type of case) shall be prosecuted at the lawful time in respect
of women as well as men. 18

<40> Concerning small <unbranded> livestock

If an unbranded small farm animal comes to someone, then he is
to take it to church and to one assembly. If it is not recognised, 3 then he is to let it be valued and take an assembly fee in respect
of it and the parishioners shall divide what is over.

<41> Concerning swine

If swine larger than piglets come to someone, branded or unbranded, he is to take them to two assemblies and the third 3 time to the riding assembly, and receive an ˆrtug for each assembly.
If they are not recognised, then the parishioners shall value them <and he (i.e. the finder) is to take an assembly fee from that 6 sum,> and the <parishioners> divide what is over.

39/13 such B omits.
40/1 <40> B: 57 <unbranded> B; A omits. 41/1 <41> B: 58
41/4 each B omits.
41/6ñ7 <and he . . . that sum> B; A omits. 41/7 <parishioners> B; A omits.

50 GUTA LAG

<42> Concerning tame sheep

If tame sheep come to someone, he is to take them to two 3 assemblies and the third time to the riding assembly and declare them for three years and claim a fee such as has previously been the custom for the riding. But any offspring shall go to the one

6 who has fed them.

<43> Concerning uncastrated unshorn rams

If an unshorn uncastrated ram comes to someone, he is to take an 3 ˆrtug in redemption fine (i.e. from the owner). If it is not identified,

then he is to take a fee as for other sheep.
<44> Concerning uncastrated shorn rams

If a shorn uncastrated ram gets loose after the feast of St 3 Simon and St Jude (i.e. 28th October), up to the time that it is usual to release them, then it has rendered itself forfeit by wandering. But one shall nevertheless offer it back to 6 the one who released it with his parishioners as witness. If he does not wish to redeem it, then the one who captured it can have it, and put his brand on it, with his own parishioners as

9 witness.

<45> Concerning nanny- and billy-goats

<One> must declare billy-goats and nanny-goats for two years, 3 then they shall be redeemed: a nanny for six pence for each

assembly and a billy for an ˆrtug.

42/1 <42> B: 59
43/1 <43> B: 60 unshorn B omits. 43/3 fine B: fee
43/4 fee B; A: fine
44/1 <44> B: 61 uncastrated B omits. 44/2 shorn B omits.
45/1 <45> B: 62
45/2 <One> B; A omits.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 51

<45a> <Concerning cattle and horses>

Cattle and horses must be declared at two assemblies and
the third time at a riding assembly for three years. If not identified 3 at the first assembly, they must be valued and then declared,
and the finder is to have two ˆrtugar for each assembly. Those cattle or horses that can be worked may be, with the knowledge 6 of the parishioners. But one is not to travel to Visby with them, but ride with them to the assembly, or lead them, and remove their saddle and tie them up, with all the animals that 9 are to be declared, so far away that one can see the assembly-
site poles.

<46> Concerning over-branding

Whoever puts a brand <on> anotherís creature without having bought it or received it as dowry and is found guilty, he is to be 3 fined three marks.

<47> Concerning fields

If several men own a field between them and some wish to let it
lie fallow and some to sow it, the ones who own more of it have 3 the say and are to declare, before the feast of the Annunciation, which they would prefer to do, allow it to lie fallow or sow it. If
the tenants exchange farms, the one who moves away receives 6 six pence for each bushel-land, of those fields that he may not sow, from the one who comes in. And at haymaking time they
are to make room, each for the other, space for as many hay 9 loads as the farmland is worth in marks.

45a/1 B has a new chapter here: 63 Concerning cattle and draught horses A has no heading, despite listing the chapter in the table of contents.

45a/7ñ8 with them B omits.

45a/10ñ11 so far away . . . poles B: so far from the assembly-site poles that one may see

46/1 <46> B: 64 over-branding B; A: brands 46/2 <on> B; A omits.
47/1 <47> B: 65

52 GUTA LAG

<48> Concerning turnip fields

Every farmer who has arable land is to leave a bushel-land for 3 turnips every year. But those who have no arable land, but have a house, must have half a bushel-land for turnips, and the one who

owns the land is to put it to the yoke. Everyone who does not 6 adhere to this is liable to a fine <of> three ˆre to the parish. And every parish, which does not enforce this, is liable to a fine of

three marks when it comes before the assembly.

<49> Concerning shipwrecks

If a man finds jetsam on land, then he is to retain every eighth 3 penny of the find. If he finds flotsam at sea and it needs boat and oars (i.e. to salvage it), or he finds it on the seabed and it needs boat hook and grapnel, then he retains a third of his find. If he 6 finds it out of sight of land, then he retains a half of what he has

found.

<50> Concerning fire

If the misfortune occurs that injury results from a fire, which is 3 laid in the hearth or in the kitchen, and [which] flies to another farm and does damage, the fine is three marks, if the damage is up to three marks. If several farms are damaged, then they must

6 all be satisfied with those three marks.

<51> Concerning carried fire

When injury results from carried fire, then the one who carried 3 the fire is to pay half his own wergild. When this results from the

actions of a minor, then the one who sent him is to pay.

48/1 <48> B: 66
48/5 land B: field
48/6 <of> B; A omits.
49/1 <49> B: 67
50/1 <50> B: 68
50/3 in the kitchen B: the kitchen 51/1 <51> B: 69

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 53

<52> Concerning road repair

It is also agreed that roads shall be made good every year in all parishes. Every parish which does not make good its roads is to 3 pay a fine of three marks to the assembly.

<53> Concerning tax

It is also agreed, if one must collect taxes for the requirements of
the province, then they should be collected according to the value 3 in marks, both of property and money and not of manufactured valuables.

<54> Concerning the watch

Everyone who is twenty years old [or over] shall sit watch and he shall provide himself with a weapon, and answer for all expenses, 3 and pay the watch-money in Easter Week.

<55> Concerning houses and household servants

Anyone who raises a house without the permission of the parish
is liable <to> a fine of three marks to the parish and is to pull it 3 down the same year. Anyone who takes in household members, without the permission of the parish, is liable to a fine of three ˆre.

<56> Concerning harvesters

Each harvester who is in the pay of the farmer, and who goes away from the farm on a working day without the permission of 3 his employer, is to pay back an ˆrtug for each day of his hire and complete the dayís work (i.e. for the missing day).

52/1 <52> B: 70 road repair B: roads 53/1 <53> B: 71
54/1 <54> B: 72
55/1 <55> B: 73

55/3 <to> B; A omits. 56/1 <56> B: 74

54 GUTA LAG

<56a> <Concerning those who have no arable land>

Each person who has no arable land in the parish has no excuse 3 for not harvesting seed for the farmer. And they are to receive six pence for each bushel-land of corn and five pence for rye and oats, and they are to feed themselves. And the farmer instructs 6 them with the right of law. Each one who refuses (i.e. to work) is

liable to a fine of three ˆre.

<57> Concerning squirrels

Anyone who catches a squirrel before the feast of St Simon and 3 St Jude and after the feast of the Annunciation is to pay a fine of three marks. And no one is to catch a squirrel within an enclosure

without the ownerís leave.

<58> Concerning hares

No one is to catch hares with a gin after the feast of the 3 Annunciation or before the feast of St Simon and St Jude without

risking a fine of three marks.

<59> Concerning tree-fruit

This is also agreed: that all tree-fruit shall be protected until 3 the feast of the birthday of the Blessed Virgin Mary (i.e. 8th September). Whoever infringes this is to pay three ˆre to the

parishioners. Of this the one <who> brings the action takes half. 6 If a minor infringes this, the fine is less by a half.

56a/1 <56a> B has a new chapter here: 75 Concerning those who have no arable land A has no heading, despite listing the chapter in the table of contents.

56a/4 five A: five five 57/1 <57> B: 76
58/1 <58> B: 77
59/1 <59> B: 78

59/5 <who> B; A omits.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 55

<60> Concerning failure to say mass

It is also an ancient law that for every failure to say mass on a Sunday or other holy day, the priest is liable to a fine of three 3 marks to the rural dean, and another three marks to the parish. If
the failure to say mass be on a Friday or on a feast day on which nine lessons should be read or held, then the priest is liable to 6 [pay] twelve ˆre to the dean and another twelve to the parish.

<61> Concerning gambling

Gambling is prohibited. Whoever gambles is liable to a fine of three ˆre to the parish. If the parish does not wish to prosecute, 3 then the parish is liable to a fine of three marks to the assembly.

It is also agreed that this is the law, which is written here. All men should abide by this. If some occurrence should take place, 6 which is not to be found here, then it must be decided by the majority of judges, and <they> are to swear that these are proper laws of the Gotlanders, and then they are to be written down 9 here.

<62> Here is what was most recently adopted concerning bald patches

If the bald patch is more than the flat of the hand will cover, then 3 the liability is a mark of silver. If every hair is gone, then the liability is two marks of silver.

60/1 <60> B: 79
60/5 be B: should be on a A: and B: other
61/1 <61> B: 80
61/4 B inserts more here. See Addition 9.
61/5ñ10 The final sentences in this chapter constitute the end of B. They follow

Chapter 83 in B. The words Teth ier oc sempt sik: At (ëIt is also agreed thatí) are in red, with an enlarged initial T, indicating a new section.

61/7 here, then B: herein
61/8 <they> Supplied by GU, 30. Both A and B omit.
62/1 This chapter occurs only in A. It appears to be a later addition. The content

appears in Chapter 20 of B. See Addition 5.

56 GUTA LAG

<63> Concerning woodland

Whoever cuts wood in another manís woodland, within an 3 enclosure or without, and travels there, is liable to [pay] three marks in coin and is to make full restitution. Whoever pulls down anotherís fence to pass through it, is liable to [pay] three marks in 6 coin. Whoever passes illegally over anotherís property, is liable to [pay] three ˆre. If someone tears an opening in anotherís fence,

he is liable to [pay] the same.
9 Concerning all land held in pledge: it is to be redeemed or taken

in payment (i.e. of the debt) in the same expiry period, or be

pledged again then. Whoever misappropriates land valued at three 12 marks rent, without coercion, has forfeited his neck and his wife her place in church and she must stand at the back, in the belfry. To in-laws and wagon-riders no more than three toasts are to be 15 drunk, and no vessel larger than a half bowl at the most is to be used. And whoever abuses this, is liable to a double fine and twelve

marks to the authorities.

<65> Concerning womenís rights

Concerning the rights of women it is also agreed that they should 3 take cattle up to five pairs, draught horses and sheep as many as they brought to the farm (i.e. at their wedding). All gilding is abolished except on buckles. Gilded copper shall be melted down 6 where it is found. Golden headdresses and satin ribbons, other

63/1 <63> B: 82 This chapter appears to be a later addition in A.
63/5 to pass B: in order to pass
63/9 Concerning all land held in pledge B has these words in red, indicating a

new section.
63/14 In B the closing words (61/5ñ10) follow here, together with details of

Bilefeldís copy.
63/14ñ17 To in-laws . . . authorities. B does not have these two sentences at this

point. See Addition 6. This provision belongs in the chapter Concerning weddings; cf. the note to 24/21.

63/17 A has the chapter <24f, 64> Concerning travellersí pathways here.

65/1 <65> B: 35 See the note to 24b/1. Concerning the two last paragraphs, see following footnotes. This chapter appears to be a later addition in A.

65/4 All B omits.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 57

than plaited laces, are all abolished. Old gilded vessels and belts
are permissible, such as there are, but not to add to them (i.e. one
is not to add to them by purchasing more). The dowry shall be 9 two marks in gold, and no more: no more may be given and no
more requested. Wall coverings of blue cloth are abolished and wedding canopies, and nothing may be given between farms 12 except in white linen. Fine woollen cloth is also abolished. No
one may buy fine woollen cloth, neither new nor old, and no one
may at the time of the marriage exchange it between farms. 15

Silver bands and underskirt decorations are also abolished.

Buying on credit from town-dwellers is also forbidden. No one
is to buy more than he can afford to pay for. Whoever infringes 18 any of this is liable to a fine of twelve marks to the authorities.

ADDITIONS

1. (B: Note to 5/6. Cf. Pipping 1901, 9ñ11; CIG, 104: Additamenta 1, 2.)

And then, furthermore, all the subsequent generations, both female
and male, are always treated as Gotlandic families, unless he marries beneath him and so debases his birth (i.e. by marrying a 3 slave); and his rights are also the same as farmers or the children
of farmers. If the lay son of a priest commits a crime or commits manslaughter, he must defend the claim for compensation himself 6 while he lives, whether he is at home or abroad.

If a man commits a crime, whether ordained or not, no one shall be fined more than his (i.e. the wrongdoerís) resources can 9 cover. If he (i.e. the wrongdoer) dies and an ordained man inherits
the claim for compensation (i.e. wergild) after him, he is to offer

65/7 vessels and B omits.
65/12 and B omits.
65/13 also B: entirely
65/14 neither new nor old B omits.
65/15 may at . . . the marriage B omits.
65/15 B adds but keep it at the [original] farm See also Addition 6. 65/16 B omits this sentence.

65/17ñ19 B rewords these three sentences. See Addition 9.
Addition 1/5 son of a priest B: priest who
Addition 1/8ñ10 If . . . cover This sentence also appears in A Ch. 5/7ñ9.

58 GUTA LAG

12 compensation immediately, since no priest may negotiate compensation in a case, and the other may accept this at once without shame, if he wishes, since it is not right for him to kill an

15 ordained man, or to bear him ill-will. If he does not wish to accept compensation, he (i.e. the priest) must take the claim to the general assembly, where the other may accept it if he wishes; otherwise

18 all the people decide on the compensation, but he (i.e. the priest) shall then be free of guilt. If he (i.e. the plaintiff) should take revenge when it (i.e. compensation) has been offered, he is to pay

21 the full wergild, and forty marks to the general assembly.
If two brothers inherit a claim for compensation, the one ordained and the other not, and the ordained brother wants to pay 24 compensation and the other does not, then the ordained brother is to leave his personal share with a surety man, whom the general assembly shall nominate, and then be protected, and the other, 27 who did not wish to pay compensation, shall defend the claim. If

wergild is offered, then each is to pay his personal share.
If an ordained man, who may not take revenge, inherits a claim 30 for (i.e. to receive) compensation, he must accept compensation immediately, when it is offered. If he does not want to accept compensation, but prefers to take revenge, then the other (i.e. the 33 defendant) must take it before all the people at the general assembly. There he (i.e. the priest) can still accept it if he wishes, otherwise they (i.e. the assembly members) shall be responsible 36 for the payment, and the man (i.e. the accused) shall be guiltless. If he does not want to offer the ordained man compensation, then the latter is to go before all the people at the general assembly 39 and there plead his case, saying, ëI am a priest, and ordained to the service of God; I may not take part in blows or battle; I will take compensation if it is offered, but I will not be put to shame.í 42 Then the people of the general assembly shall study it (i.e. the case), and compel the man to offer him compensation, just as he (i.e. the priest) would be forced to pay compensation to others, 45 since a priest can neither demand compensation, nor answer a

Addition 1/45 neither B: at what time, which makes little sense.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 59

demand for compensation, without Christianity falling into disrepute.

2. (B: Note to 17/26ñ27. Cf. Pipping 1901, 23; CIG, 107: Additamentum 3.)

In respect of cattle and draught horses and swine, a man shall not
be liable for more than the animal is worth, if it causes injury to someone. If it is an unruly animal and someone (i.e. the owner) 3 has been informed of this in front of the church door and before
the parishioners, and it then does (i.e. damage) through carelessness, then the fine is twice as much as the case is worth. 6 If the damage is less than the creature is worth, then the fine is
half as much. Dogs are the fourth creatures (i.e. carrying a liability): one is always answerable for it for everything, if it does 9 damage, up to half a wergild, whoever owns it. For a dogís bite,
one is to pay a fine for each tooth-mark up to four, two ˆre each.
If it causes a wound or maiming, then the fine is half the maximum
fine. One must demand the fine and not take revenge; lay a legal claim to it like other debts.

3. (B: Note to 19/62ñ66. Cf. Pipping 1901, 27; CIG, 39 note 50.)

Cutting off or splitting a smaller bone in the hand or foot is fined
at two marks in coin. Each rib is to be fined at two marks in coin,
if it is broken. If disability ensues, the fine is two marks of silver. 3 As many blows as are visible are each fined at half a mark in
coin.

4. (B: Note to 19/80ñ86. Cf. Pipping 1901, 28; CIG, 41 note 63.)

But if an ear is damaged, then the fine is a mark of silver. A shinbone or a forearm is fined at two marks of silver if it is broken.
If you strike the teeth out of a manís head then you are fined for 3

Addition 2/1 The first letter of Naut (ëcattleí) is in red, possibly indicating a new section, although earlier in the manuscript the initial letters of some paragraphs are indiscriminately in red.

1 2

60 GUTA LAG

the two upper and lower front teeth at a mark of silver. And then each is fined at two marks in coin, including molars and all.

5. (B: Note to 19/105ñ08. Cf. Pipping 1901, 28; CIG, 43 note 79.)

20 Concerning bald patches

If the bald patch is more than the flat of the hand can cover, the 3 fine is one mark of silver. If every hair is gone the fine is two marks of silver. If a manís scalp is cut, the fine is one mark of

silver. A manís beard incurs fines as for other hair pulling.
6. (B: Notes to 24/20, 63/14ñ17 and 65/15. Cf. Pipping 1901, 40;

CIG, 60 note 41.)

To in-laws and wagon-riders no more than three toasts are to be

drunk, and none of them larger than half a bowl goes into at the 3 most. And whoever abuses this, is to pay a double fine and twelve

marks to the authorities.

7. (B: Note to 32a/1. Cf. Pipping 1901, 51ñ52; CIG, 108: Additamentum 4.)

49 Concerning the purchase of slaves

If you buy someoneís slave on your farm, then test him for six 3 days and on the seventh pay his purchase price or lead him back if he does not satisfy you. If the one who sold him will not take him back, but wants to hold you to the agreement that you should have 6 him and <not> lead him back, whether he satisfy you less or more, and if you have a counter-claim that you were permitted to lead him back within a period of grace, if he did not satisfy you, then 9 you, who lead him back and follow the law, have the right to

Addition 5 The majority of these statutes occur in 62/3ñ5.
Addition 6 This statute occurs in A at the end of Chapter 63.
Addition 6/1 The first letter of Magum (ëTo in-lawsí) is in red, indicating a new

section.
Addition 7/1 A lists this chapter in the table of contents after Concerning a

money claim but omits it in the text.
Addition 7/6 <not> Supplied by CIG, 108. B omits.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 61

substantiate your accusation. If you have the man longer, and
want to lead him back later, after the period of grace has expired,
and you say that you have made this agreement, then he who 12 made the legal sale has the right to substantiate his case: you
must pay him, and keep what you bought. But the vendor must subsequently answer for three faults: epilepsy, and bed-wetting, 15 for which he is responsible for a waxing and waning, and if his
(i.e. the slaveís) leg hurts, for which he is responsible for a year;
and then for an ownership claim for all time. If he (i.e. the slave)
is claimed while in your possession, you are to call to the vendor
and lead him (i.e. the slave) to him; he is then to defend your right
to the man, or give you back as much as you previously paid for
him. If there is a dispute between you, he (i.e. the vendor) saying
that he made the sale under conditions, you saying that you bought
with a firm purchase, then he who buys with a firm purchase, and follows the law, has the right to substantiate his case.

8. (B: Note to 38/8ñ9. Cf. Pipping 1901, 55ñ57; CIG, 109: Additamentum 5.)

If a manís slave steals an ˆre or less, then each owner is to pay a
fine for him of three ˆre, if the owner of the stolen goods discovers
the goods himself. If the stolen goods are worth more than an ˆre, 3 then he is in each case to get his property back, and in addition a
fine three times as much as the value of the goods. If several slaves steal one ˆre, then each master is to pay a threefold fine 6 for his slave, if he does not discover the goods himself. If not all
the stolen goods remain, then the one who has lost the goods must testify how much there was, but still only when house or lock 9 was broken into. If it was not taken from somewhere locked, and neither bar nor bolt is broken, then he (i.e. the injured party) is to
take the slave and torture him, and not pay any compensation. He
(i.e. the accuser) is to bring him back to his master whole in bone
and breathing and not pay any money for him, even if he gets no admission from him. If there is no material evidence, but simply

Addition 8/1 The first three words in red, indicating a new section

1 8

2 1

2 4

1 2

1 5

62 GUTA LAG

suspicion, then a deposit must be put down before the slave is

tortured. He is to bring him back uninjured and pay a fine of six 18 ˆre for the wristbands <if he does not confess. If he confesses, and there is no material evidence, then he (i.e. the accuser) is still to pay a fine for the wristbands of> six ˆre. In need someone 21 forced says things [that] he has not done. If someone goes with evidence to a farm, and charges the manís (i.e. farmerís) slave with theft, then the master shall permit a house search and shall 24 himself bind the slave, and not stand in the way; then he is not liable to the triple fine. If the man does not wish to bind his slave himself, or permit a house search, and the stolen goods are 27 nevertheless found in the house, then he is to pay a triple fine to the owner of the stolen goods <that> he has now discovered. If the goods are so valuable that he cannot afford to pay a triple fine, 30 then the one who owns the stolen goods shall take the slave. He (i.e. the owner) cannot forfeit through theft more than his (i.e. the slaveís) whole worth. If someone else, and not the one who owns 33 the goods, discovers the stolen goods, and takes the thief and binds him, he is to have a reward, an eighth of the value, both of the thief and the fine. If the slave is on the run, and has been 36 proclaimed at the church, or at the assembly, then he is a fugitive. And no one is to pay a triple fine for anyone who steals food for themselves, but each shall have their own back, if it remains. If it 39 has been eaten, then no one is to make amends for the fugitive. If a slave is recaptured, [someone must] redeem him again for two ˆre, if he is on land (i.e. Gotland), and for three ˆre if he has got 42 toaboat,andforhalfamarkifhehascomeoutofthesightof land. The one who owns the ship is to redeem the slave, unless it was lawfully secured. If he has seized anything, then the slaveís 45 owner is to return the things he has taken. If the ship was lawfully secured, or locked up, then the one owning the slave redeems the ship, and similarly all the things that he seized, but not more than

Addition 8/18ñ20 wristbands <if he . . . wristbands of> Something is miss- ing here. Cf. CIG, 110 note 24. The text in brackets is suggested by WessÈn, SL IV, 284 note 10.

Addition 8/28 <that> Supplied by GU, 38. B omits.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS 63

to the sum of three marks. If he flees in a ship, which was not 48 protected, or drowns in the sea, so that the owner of the slave
loses him, then the one who owns the ship is to pay for the slave.

If a man is bound in the absence of material evidence, then 51 three magistrates are to investigate, and hear his statement, whether he is guilty or innocent. These three magistrates should come from the same hundred, or the same sixth (i.e. as he does). 54 They shall witness what they hear, <whether> he is guilty or innocent. And the same thing applies if there is material evidence.

9. (B: Notes to 61/4 and 65/17ñ19. Cf. Pipping 1901, 64; CIG, 112: Additamentum 6.)

81 Concerning purchase on credit from town-dwellers

Purchase on credit from town-dwellers is also forbidden. No one
is to buy more than he can afford to pay for. All property taken in 3 pledge should have a period of grace of three years for debts more than a mark of silver (i.e. to be paid). One is not to give the value in money, if the other does not wish, but in land, and he is 6 still to have a period of grace of three years.

Addition 8/55 <whether> Supplied by CIG, 112 note 29. B omits. Addition 9/2 The start of this chapter occurs in A, 65/17ñ19.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

NOTES

The chapter numbers in this commentary are those used for the text of B 64 in the present translation. They correspond largely to those used by WessÈn in SL IV and earlier editors. Chapter breaks occur- ring only in the B-text are recorded in footnotes in the translation. The Gutnish chapter titles in the A-text are given, in angled brackets if the chapters are only distinguished in the table of contents. Note that ëGutnishí (abbreviated to Gtn) is used throughout of the medi- eval language of Gotland whereas ëGotlandic dialectí is used of the modern dialect(s), as recorded by the brothers S‰ve, Herbert Gustavson and others.

Table of contents

The table of contents in B 64 originally lacked numbering, although numbers have been inserted by a later hand, beginning with ëCon- cerning childrení (Af barnum) as Chapter 1. Schlyter (CIG, ii and 3 note 2) considers these numbers to be from the fifteenth century, but it seems more likely, as Pipping (GLGS, 1 note 1) suggests, that they are in Bilefeldís hand, as are other notes and numbers in the same manuscript. Jacobsen (GGD, 21 note 1) suggests that the table of contents is older than the edition of GL represented by the A-text. She reasons that (1) more chapters are listed and they are more logi- cally arranged; (2) the chapter concerning the purchase of slaves is listed; (3) the chapter concerning paths is in its original place and (4) the three later chapters and Guta saga are not listed.

The numbers have, to a greater extent, been erased from B 64 and a numbering system starting with the opening chapter has been adopted by most editors, though they all differ in minor respects. The chap- ter numbers adopted for this translation are shown in angled brackets in both the table of contents and the text.

The body of the text of B 64 lacks contemporary chapter numbers, but a sixteenth-century hand, probably Bilefeldís, has inserted them in the margin. The headings in the table of contents not represented by separate chapters in the text are indicated by suffixed letters in the numbering system. These headings are shown in the translation in angled brackets. The chapter ëConcerning travellersí pathwaysí (Af farvegum manz), which appears out of sequence in the text with respect to the table of contents, has been put in its proper place in this translation. Chapters in B 64 regarded as later additions and not listed in the table of contents have been given chapter numbers

NOTES 65

continuing the sequence established and titles shown in angled brackets in the table of contents.

The table of contents in AM 54 4to appears at the end of the manuscript and is numbered. These numbers match those in the body of the text, apart from the first three chapters. Even where the con- tent corresponds between the A- and B-texts, chapter divisions are not always the same. These differences and the chapter numbers (and additional chapter headings) in the B-text are recorded in footnotes.

Page 1, last line. In B 64 chapter <24f> has been omitted either by the scribe or the writer of his original and appears following the later chapter ëConcerning woodlandí (Um skoga). In AM 54 4to, this chapter appears in its proper place and this placing has been followed in the present translation.

Page 3/11 and footnote. The heading of the table of contents in AM 54 4to is in Danish and probably does not represent a heading from Bilefeldís original.

Page 3/13, 14. This incorrect duplicate numbering is present in AM 54 4to.

Chapter 1: Hier byrias lag guta ok segia so at fyrstum

1/3. The expression ëfirst beginningí (fyrst upphaf) appears to be tautological.

1/3ñ4. An account of the acceptance of Christianity and the influ- ence of St Olaf is to be found in Peel (GS xxxviñxlvi, 8ñ10).

1/5. The phrase ëgood harvests and peaceí (ar ok fri ̨r) was a stand- ard expression, which originated in the worship of NjÜrðr and Freyr. It combined concepts of material and spiritual well-being and similar phrases are found in GulL 1 (NGL 1, 1) and in SdmL Mb 36 (cf. WessÈn 1924, 178ñ81).

1/7. The word land has a number of different senses, but here ëprov- inceí seems to be a reasonable translation. It is clearly Gotland as an administrative area that is referred to and it offers proof that the writer was a resident, writing for islanders. ModSwe land in the sense ëcountry, realmí is rendered by riki.

Chapter 2: Af barnum

2/2ñ3. A child was considered to be a possession of his father, who thus had the right to dispose of it, and exposure of children (espe- cially females) seems to have been common practice from the earliest

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

times. Lis Jacobsen suggests, however, that child exposure was regarded as shameful in Scandinavian countries even before the advent of Christianity (see GGD, 23ñ24 note 4). Banning the prac- tice was one of the first changes in the law after the introduction of Christianity, but GL is the only Swedish-related provincial law to mention it explicitly. Jacobsen (GGD, 23 note 1) does not think that one can infer from the inclusion of this provision that parts of GL originated as early as the conversion. She considers that these customs took a considerable time to suppress and that an explicit prohibition could have been equally relevant in the thirteenth cen- tury. In DL Kkb 6 there is an implicit assumption that deformed children might be disposed of and this is also reflected in some Norwegian laws (cf. BorgL I 3 (NGL 1, 339)). Swedish provincial laws that incorporate provisions specifically forbidding infanti- cide are ÷gL Kkb 26 and DL Kkb 12.

2/4. Beckman (1920, 13) suggests that ëbedí (seng) should be changed to ëcoming to bed, confinementí (sengfar), and cites EidsL I ßß1, 3 (NGL 1, 375): Sina sÊng for skal huÊr kona uita ëEach woman shall know [the time of] her coming to bedí and Um sengfor kono ëConcerning the coming to bed of womení. He interprets this as referring to the date of confinement and a need to make prepara- tions, and suggests that the passage in GL was an inaccurate borrowing from Norwegian law. This certainly makes more sense than Schlyterís interpretation (CIG, 8 note b) that a woman should ëknow her own bedí, with the implication that she should give birth there and not elsewhere, in secret. Beckman refers to tyGL to support his proposal, but admits that it appears that the amend- ment there was made by the translator, while the original Gutnish text he was following had seng only. Jacobsen and WessÈn have followed Schlyter in their notes. Both interpretations have attrac- tions, but Schlyterís seems to match the context of the following provisions more closely.

2/5. The exact function of a gri ̨kuna ëmidwifeí is not unambiguous; she was possibly a slave or a house servant, responsible for spin- ning hemp and washing (cf. Note to 2/34). In Norwegian laws a griðkona is a free woman without her own home, who has right of residence in anotherís home (presumably in return for work done) and sometimes designates a witness, in company with a griðmaðr, a man of similar status (cf. GulL 255 (NGL 1, 83ñ84); BjarkR 132 (NGL 1, 327ñ28)). In respect of the context in GL, one can compare

NOTES 67

BorgL I 3 (NGL 1, 340): Griðkonor oc grankonor skulu vera uið sengfor huerrar kono til barn er foðt ëFree women and female neighbours shall be present at the confinement of every woman until the child is borní. In the Danish and German translations of GL, words corresponding to midwife (iordemoder and hebemuter respectively) are used (see SL IV, 245 note 3). Axel Kock (1918, 361ñ63) suggests that the person referred to should be a freeborn woman living on the premises, as opposed to a neighbour (grankuna) living nearby, but outside the family. The translators of GL would probably not have known the word (which occurs nowhere else in East Norse). Kock conjectures that gri ̨kuna acquired the sense ëmidwifeí by association with a Gtn verb grai ̨a ëprovide help during childbirthí. In FrostL II 10 (NGL 1, 134) the term grið is used, amongst other things, of the peace and security enjoyed dur- ing certain times of the year. Jacobsen (GGD, 24 note 2) states that grið is found in OldDan, but not griðkone.

The grankuna was a female neighbour. In BorgL I 3 and III 1 (NGL 1, 340, 363ñ64) there are provisions similar to those in GL relating to childbirth and the necessity for witnesses that a child was safely suckling before they left. Neighbours as witnesses of each otherís veracity were frequently important in the legal process.

The two female witnesses together were both expert witnesses and witnesses as to fact. They had to be present at the birth and be knowledgeable in the matter of childbirth so that their evidence was reliable if anything went wrong with the delivery. Females were often specifically excluded from bearing witness, so this instance, which is the only one recorded in Swedish-related provincial laws, indicates a possible relationship between GL and the laws of Norway.

2/8. The expression at ̨i san et (B-text ath thy san at) used here was a common Scandinavian expression meaning ëfound [unquestion- ably] guilty ofí. On the change of sense of sannr from ëtruthí to ëguiltí in this context, see Jacobsen (GGD, 24 note 4 and refer- ences). ModSwe retains the meaning ëtruthí in sanning.

2/9. A fine of three marks in coin seems to have been usual for church law transgressions. Elsewhere in GL the word penningr is used to classify a mark as ëin coiní rather than by weight, usually of silver. If no qualification is given, as here, a mark in coin is usu- ally intended, an exception being at 17/3. A mark of silver seems to have been equivalent to four marks in coin. This assumption is based on the fines for loss of and damage to an ear respectively (19/80ñ81).

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

The former is valued at one mark of silver and the latter at two marks in coin. The inference is that the latter was worth half of the former, since in most cases partial damage carries a compensation of one half of total loss (cf. GGD, 25 note 1; Wennstrˆm 1940, 239, 259ñ60, 287; SL IV, 245 note 4, 254 note 2 to Chapter 12). On the other hand a coining from Gotland in 1211 gave a norm of 41⁄2 marks in coin to one mark of silver and King Hans of Denmark in his statute of 1492 suggests that there were 22/3 marks in coin to a mark of silver (cf. Hauberg 1891, 9ñ10; CIG, 227). A mark in coin was presumably originally a silver coin with a weight of one mark, but a gradual debasement of the coinage occurred during and after the Viking period. The oldest evidence of difference between a mark silfr and a mark penningar is in ƒVgL Md 1 ß3 where the phrase hete ̨rer ok Êru tuar ëcalled three but is twoí gives a relationship of 1:11⁄2. The monetary system of GL is summarised in Appendix C.

2/10 The verb skripta used here carries the senses both of confessing and of submitting to punishment meted out by the church. It is related to English ëshriveí, but that verb also refers to a priestís function as confessor and in giving of penance and absolution.

2/13. Jacobsen (GGD, 26 note 4) assumes that the assembly members ( ̨ingsmenn) referred to here are those of the local assembly, that is, all the mature men in the hunderi. This was the next level of jurisdiction above the parish, but the reference at 2/17 would suggest that the riding assembly was intended in both instances, and that the case passed directly there from the parish. See Note to 2/17.

2/13ñ14. The word skir, here meaning ëfound innocentí, is found as an element in Swedish sk‰rtorsdag ëMaundy Thursdayí. On this day, according to early Catholic rite, sinners who had undergone a course of penance during Lent were granted remission of their sins.

2/15. An oath of rehabilitation (symdarai ̨r) was sworn by a group of people who had insulted anotherís honour by accusing them of a crime. The concept occurs again in Chapter 39/12. An analysis of the various types of oath sworn, and witnesses required, appears as Appendix E.

Jacobsen (GGD, 26 note 7) points out that the six men (or women) swearing the oath were not witnesses as to fact, but character wit- nesses as to the trustworthiness of the one of their number who was the principal in the case (see Notes to 3/36ñ38, 16/23ñ26, 19/6ñ8). In this instance the principal was the one who had accused a woman of infanticide and who was now retracting and apologising.

NOTES 69

2/16. A sokn ëparishí was an area within which inhabitants had the right and duty to attend church services and receive ministrations from the priest. Parishioners were on their part obliged to pay tithes and other dues to the church and priest. Not all of Gotlandís ninety- seven parishes had their own priest, and how many churches were built on private initiative is unknown. Chapter 3/22ñ24 mentions church building for the convenience of the lay people, and one can assume that there was at least some private input. Although the term sokna ̨ing or the equivalent is not used in provincial laws, the concept is at least as old as those laws. It appears, however, that Gotland was the only province in which parishioners had judicial duties. Here the parish was able to pass judgements in a number of cases, including infanticide (Chapter 2), personal attack (Chapters 6, 8), fruit picking (Chapter 59), gambling (Chapter 61), unlawful house building or employment (Chapter 55). Road maintenance (Chapter 52) and oaths in respect of cases of dishonour (Chapter 39) were also parish matters. See Introduction, pp. xi, xxv, xxx.

WessÈn (SL IV, 246 note 9) points out that the three-mark fine is a repetition of that recorded in 2/9, and suggests that it was divided between priest, church and parishioners.

2/16ñ17. The precise implication of the phrase en sokn vindr sykt ëif the parish can demand ití does not appear to have been considered by other editors. Since the main clause is a repetition, it probably refers back to the situation in which ëno one has a right to com- pensationí, that is when the woman had confessed. In that case the parish (and presumably everyone else) lost their right to demand a fine. Three marks was also the maximum payable to the sixth assembly (31/10ñ11). See Introduction, p. xxx.

2/17. These assembly members must be the same as those referred to at 2/13, unless there is some text missing from all surviving manu- scripts. WessÈn (SL IV, 246 note 10) assumes that the riding assembly is referred to here, since the rural dean or archdeacon (Latin prÊpositus), of whom there was one for each riding, is also men- tioned. The riding assembly received three marks and the dean another three, presumably in addition to the three that went to the parish. Similar additional fines, if a case were referred to a higher authority, are laid down in Chapters 4 and 7.

2/18ñ19. The fine for infanticide went to the rural dean rather than to the bishop, as did the excommunication fine for killing in a church (8/26ñ27) and that paid by a priest for failure in his duties

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

(60/3ñ4, 7). Bishops are only mentioned in GL in relation to church consecration and the designation of church feasts, although excommunication for killing on a feast day is referred to indirectly as a case for the bishop (biskup sak) (9/5). This suggests that rural deans performed at least some of the bishopís duties in Gotland for practical reasons.

2/20 The phrase allir ly ̨ir used here is one of several used for (mem- bers of) the general assembly (Gutnal ̨ing). Another phrase, landar allir, is used in the following clause, allir menn occurs in the following chapter (3/6) and elsewhere, whereas in Chapter 31/12 the phrase used is land alt. Twelve marks was the maximum, and usual, fine to the general assembly (see Chapter 31). Normally it seems to have been the severity of a case that determined whether it was heard first by the parish, the local (hunderi), the riding ( ̨ri ̨iung) or the general assemblies, but in this instance there seems to have been an escalating appeals procedure.

2/21. Allocation of fines to the countrymen (landar allir) of the wrongdoer as compensation for the inconvenience caused by bringing a case is mentioned on a number of occasions in GL and also in mainland provincial laws and in the national law (cf. ÷gL Db 1, 2; ƒVgL Md 5; MELL Tjb 4). In these latter fines were allocated to the crown, whereas in semi-independent Gotland the money was presumably used by the community.

The most frequent meaning of fÊ ëmoneyí in Scandinavian laws was ëproperty in generalí and this seems to be the case in the laws of Iceland and Norway, the early Danish laws, ƒVgL and GL (see Ruthstrˆm 2002, 73ñ75). Jacobsen (GGD, 27 note 3) observes that the word, although used of money and other property, was never used specifically of livestock in GL, although it seems to have been on occasion in Danish and Norwegian laws. Ruthstrˆm (185ñ 87), however, argues that the accepted etymology of fÊ as deriving from a word for sheep is incorrect and that it derives from one meaning ëmoneyí or ëpropertyí. There are a number of instances in GL where fe is used unambiguously to refer to ëproperty in gen- eralí, such as in the laws of inheritance (e.g. 28/58ñ59), and a number where it must be assumed that liquid assets are intended (as in this instance and elsewhere where fines and ransom are speci- fied in terms of marks or other currency). There is also one instance in which there is an explicit distinction between fe as a designa- tion for liquid assets and aign as a designation of ëreal estateí in

NOTES 71

relation to disputes about property (32/2ñ6). See Ruthstrˆm (2002,

65ñ70, 85ñ90 and 240).
2/22ñ23. Although a woman who could not pay the fine imposed

was forced into exile, and could not be fed or harboured, it does not seem that she was to be treated as an outlaw. There is, for instance, no mention of her being at risk of being killed (cf. Hasselberg 1953, 253).

2/23ñ25. As WessÈn (SL IV, 246 note 13) points out, it is clear neither how an accused woman could defend herself against a charge of infanticide, nor how the charge was to be proved. In some cases, an oath would possibly not have been sufficient.

2/26ñ30. The accusers had presumably to put down a deposit, equiva- lent to the compensation due to a woman wrongly accused, before they could pursue their case, unless the woman concerned had no witnesses. If they did not wish to do this, they had to declare her innocent. Much stress is put on this: it is repeated three times in different wording.

2/34. An ambatn (OWN amb·tt) was a female slave who did indoor work on a farm, varying from driving the mill to washing and spinning hemp (cf. Note to 2/5). Despite their low status, there is evidence that they were given time off after childbirth (ƒVgL Gb 6 ß3).

2/35 and footnote. All but two instances of oyrir in GL refer to coin, either explicitly as here, or by implication. It was, however, a measure- ment of weight going back to the early Iron Age, the OWN equivalent being eyrir, plural aurar, related to Latin aureus. The standard weight given for an ˆre was 26.8 grams, very close to the Roman ounce (Latin uncia) of 27.29 grams and also closely equivalent to an imperial ounce of 28.35 grams (see Jansson 1936, 12). The equivalence of eight ˆre to one mark (whether in coin or weight) was universal in Scandinavia (cf. Notes to 53/3ñ5, Addition 9/5ñ6).

2/37. The word mali used here means ëa fixed period of timeí. As Jacobsen (GGD, 28 note 6) remarks, the fact that slavery was not for life indicates that the system was in the process of dissolving at the time GL was written down (cf. SL IV, 260ñ61 note 11). The arrangement seems to have been unique to Gotland, as opposed to the rest of Scandinavia (cf. NevÈus 1974, 65ñ67). The relationship between levels of fine paid by the slave master and the number of extra years added to the slaveís term suggest that slavery, in at least some cases, was a means for a defaulter to pay off a debt.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Chapter 3: Af tiunt

The date when tithes were first introduced to mainland Sweden is unknown, but it seems probable that the tithe in Gotland was organised independently, possibly at an early stage, since the rules there were different. Exhortations to pay tithes issued in the bulls of 1171ñ72 indicate that tithe payment was not at that date fully established in Sweden, but tithes were certainly being paid in Gotland by 1217 (Introduction, pp. xñxi). Jacobsen (GGD, 29 note 1) refers to this chapter as ëaf forholdsvis sen Oprindelseí (of relatively late origin), and suggests that it could significantly postdate the introduction of tithes themselves.

3/2. The word ti ̨ir meaning ëreligious servicesí echoes the Latin horÊ canonicÊ ëcanonical hoursí. The monastic services were Matins, Lauds, Prime, Terce, Sext, None, Vespers and Compline; the non- monastic services differed slightly in detail, and were said privately by the parish priest; the laity only attended mass. A priestís obli- gation to say holy office is mentioned in several provincial laws, e.g. ÷gL Kkb 5, which records his duty to sing ottu sanger ëmatins and laudsí, mass, aptunsanger ëvespersí and all ti ̨ir.

3/4. The word bol meant originally simply ëa property on which someone livedí. It later came to mean a farm of a certain size, valued at twenty-four marks of silver and taxed at twenty-four ˆrtugar (cf. GGD, 29 note 3; Notes to 20/91 and 28/35ñ39; Introduction, p. xxxi).

3/5ñ6. The two main sacraments represented by the phrase arla e ̨a si ̨la ëearly or lateí were Holy Communion and Extreme Unction. 3/9. In Gˆtaland, SkÂne and Gotland (barley) sheaves were assem- bled into conical stooks (rˆker or raukr), one of a number of methods of stacking the harvest, perhaps after preliminary drying on racks (cf. DL Bb 22 ß1). The number of sheaves in each stook varied; figures of thirty-two and forty are recorded, but in the beginning of the last century a rauk, in certain parts of Gotland at least, consisted of thirty sheaves. Every tenth stook was to be paid in tithe, counted while it was still standing, but threshed before it was delivered. This was done during winter and the time limit set by the Feast of the Annunciation (25th March) was thus a reason- able one since by then all the grain should have been processed (cf. SL IV, 246ñ47 note 4). The loft above the west porch in Garde church is fitted for use as a tithe barn and the large towers charac- teristic of many churches in Gotland and ÷land were also used for this purpose. For example, in Etelhem church, a hoist mechanism

NOTES 73

in an opening in the west face of the tower, enabled grain to be raised to the first floor. In Alskog and Lye churches there are par- titions, clearly medieval in origin, on the first floor of the tower, designed for grain storage. The fixing and payment of farm rents by Lady Day is clearly a remnant of this practice. Jacobsen (GGD, 29 note 6) suggests that the method of reckoning the tithe recorded here, which continued in Denmark until tenancy reforms, was very unfavourable to the farmer, but does not explain why she thinks that this is the case.

3/11ñ14. A lesser punishment, called interdictum locale, involving exclusion from church sacraments, except baptism and extreme unction, seems to have been more frequently applied than full excommunication. From the context, this punishment was clearly temporary and was discharged after appropriate payments were made (cf. Note to 8/17ñ19).

3/16ñ18. WessÈn (SL IV, 247 note 6) observes here that it is fines (rather than tithes) that are referred to in the threefold division. 3/18. A tenant (laigulenningr) was someone who rented land. The

sense is the same as landboi ësomeone living on or using anotherís land on payment of a leaseí. WessÈn (SL IV 247 note 7) considers that the word is derived from the combination leigu-land ëland put out to leaseí (cf. also WessÈn 1932, 83ñ88). It is perhaps sig- nificant that the concept of legal moving days (fardagar), when a tenancy expired, does not occur in GL.

3/19ñ20 and footnote. According to Jacobsen (GGD, 30 note 2) and WessÈn (SL IV, 247 note 8) one mark of the fine went to each of the priest, church and parishioners.

3/22ñ39. From the content of this paragraph it seems that the build- ing of private chapels, equivalent to Old Norwegian húgindiskirkjur, was not wholly extinguished in Gotland, although it is not men- tioned in Swedish provincial laws. The principle was that churches should be independent and self-supporting. Where new churches were built, ëfor greater convenienceí, they seem to have been funded initially by a group of farmers and adopted in the sense that tithes were paid to them; they still had to be consecrated by the bishop. Only those who contributed to the building of a church could transfer their tithe duty to this new church and parish. As WessÈn notes, there does not seem to have been an obligation on builders to apply first to the bishop (or the king) for permission, as was the case on the Swedish mainland (cf. UL Kkb 1 ß1; YVgL Kkb 2; ÷gL

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Kkb 1ñ2). This is less surprising in view of the fact that the bishop was not readily available for such consultation and also that he was not party to the division of tithes. It could also be that by the time the law was written, parish boundaries were finalised (cf. SL I, ÷gL, 21 note 1, 34 note 4; SL IV, 247 note 13 and references).

3/30. The disagreements referred to would have been between the parishioner and the priest in his original parish who was claiming tithe payments.

3/36ñ38. The witness borne by parishioners in the case was witness as to fact and that borne by the priest was almost in the category of expert witness. Witness as to the truthfulness of a plaintiff or defendant, but not as to fact was more frequent and there was also official witness to an act, for reference in the future (cf. Notes to 2/15, 16/23ñ26, 19/6ñ8).

3/42ñ43. As well as the barley (corn) tithe, there was a tithe of hay and hops. No mention is made of a tithe of livestock. It is worth noting that rye is not specifically mentioned in this context. Hops were used for flavouring ale and were the subject of tithes in other provincial laws (cf. UL Kkb 7 ß5).

Chapter 4: Af blotan

4/2. The reference to sacrifice (blot) is unspecific, but seems to be an allusion to animal sacrifice followed by a pagan feast (4/7). There is no mention of human sacrifice in GL, although it is described in Guta saga (see GS, xxxiiñxxxiii, 4/18ñ19 and notes).

4/2ñ5. WessÈn (SL IV, 248ñ49 note 2) remarks on the rhythm and alliteration in the opening clauses of this chapter. Cf. also a simi- lar passage in Guta saga (GLGS, 63 lines 20ñ23).

4/4. Legends and customs involving a haugr ëhowe, cairní occur frequently in Old Norse literature. The practices referred to here can be compared to those in the first chapter of the U redaction of Hervarar saga ok Heiðreks, which may refer to the public worship of heathen gods (cf. Heiðreks saga, 66ñ67).

The context in which vi is used, as one of five objects of the verb haita ëcall uponí, suggests that it might mean something more concrete and specific than simply a ëholy placeí, but no assump- tions can be made from any archaeological finds (cf. Olsen 1965, 77ñ78, 84, 278ñ82). A summary of the theories surrounding the relationship between vi and the town name Visby is to be found in Peel (GS xliiñxliii, 43ñ45).

NOTES 75

Prohibition of sacrifice, witchcraft and other heathen practices is laid down in UL Kkb 1, in GulL 29 (NGL 1, 18) and in GulKrR 3 (NGL 2, 307ñ08). It is forbidden in EidsL I ß24 (NGL 1, 383) to have a stafr ëpillarí in oneís house and another version of that law occurs in GulL supp. (NGL 2, 495ñ96), referring to a skaldstong, a pole raised as a totem. Kock (1912, 205ñ06 note) records that Lithuanian and Latvian have similar words to stafr meaning ëpil- larí or ëimageí. Sacrifice to a raised stone is described in Kristnisaga, Chapter 2. Whilst there are several instances of a stafr being for- bidden by post-Christian laws, with the assumption that these were objects of worship, whether or not they were actually engraved with heathen images, the stafgar ̨r seems to have been a uniquely Gotlandic phenomenon. A full study of stafgar ̨r has been made by Olsson (1976; 1992) and a short rÈsumÈ of his conclusions appears in GS, 28ñ29 note to 4/18.

4/8. The Gtn expression here, sakr at, means more precisely ëliable to a fine ofí. Jacobsen (GGD, 32 note 3) observes that sak is gen- erally used in provincial laws to mean ëfineí, rather than ëlegal caseí (cf. its use in ModSwe) for which the word used is mal. Cf. also 9/5, ëfine to the bishopí.

4/13ñ14. Cases such as this, in which a defendantís provision of oaths was alone sufficient defence against a charge, still occurred when it was more usual to have an independent edg‰rdsman, someone who swore an oath as to the truthfulness of one of the parties (cf. SdmL Mb 5 ß1; UL Mb 25 ß1; VmL Mb 21 ß1; Note to 13/54).

Chapter 5: Af prestum ok prestkunum, ok ̨aira barnum

5/1 and footnote. The reference to the wives and children of priests, and its implications for the dating of GL, are touched upon in the Introduction, p. xxxix. The omission of the majority of the rele- vant provisions from the A-text (although they are referred to in the chapter title and in the opening paragraph) suggests a date for the original of this manuscript later than for the original of the B- text. It could indicate (GGD, 32ñ33 note 4) that such children were not regarded as legitimate by the time that the former was written. WessÈn (SL IV, 249 note 1) observes that tyGL and daGL follow the A-text.

5/4. WessÈn (SL IV, 207, 249 note 2) initially translates at allum lutum ëin all respectsí as ëi alla delarí (in all parts), but then explains this as referring to ëandra vÂldsg‰rningarí (other violent acts). It

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

seems unnecessary to narrow the scope of the equality with farm- ersí families by limiting the sense in this way. A similar provision occurs in ƒVgL Md 5 ß5.

5/7ñ9. The provision preventing fines being paid on behalf of an- other beyond what could be afforded, which occurs in both the A-text and the B-text, seems to be out of context. Its content may be compared to that of the provision in the edsˆreslag (cf. Intro- duction, p. xxxviii; Note to 12/9ñ10): that no one was to be fined for the crime of another (cf. ÷gL Eb 9; Note to 29/3ñ4). WessÈn (SL IV, 249 note 9) links this with the provision at Addition 1/27ñ28, that when compensation was offered, everyone was to pay his or her personal share. The B-text omits the phrase firi annan ëon behalf of anotherí, which supports WessÈnís suggestion.

5/9. The word kustr ëresourcesí is used in GL for both movable and immovable (24d/6) property. Whilst it was a term that, in the time of the provincial laws, was in the process of being replaced in Danish and mainland Swedish by eghn and cognates, the reverse seems to have occurred in Gotland. Ruthstrˆm (2002, 97ñ98, 173ñ74) explains this by pointing to the relative timings of links to the See of Linkˆping (and the Archbishop of Lund) and to Uppsala and the Swedish crown. Svealand retained koster longer than Gˆtaland and Denmark. Having imported eghn/aign from the latter two areas during the conversion, Gotland then appears to have imported koster or kustr during the process of political integration. Alternatively, the two words might simply have been borrowed independently as functional terms.

Chapter 6: Af helgum dagum

6/3. WessÈn (SL IV, 250 note 1) draws attention to the fact that the agreement of the population was to some extent sought in setting feast days.

6/5. The clause ëattend holy office, or hear Godís serviceí (ti ̨ir at hafa e ̨a guz ̨ianistu at ly ̨a) is another instance of parallelism, which occurs quite frequently in GL (cf. SL IV, 250 note 2).

6/8. Schlyter (CIG, 287) and Pipping (GLGS, Ordbok) interpret punz ̨ungi ëweight of a poundí here as a lispund, but Jacobsen (GGD, 36 note 3) suggests that no such assumption can be made. The lispund was a Baltic unit of weight, the Livonian pound. (Livonia extended roughly over modern Latvia and Estonia.) Although its actual weight varied from time to time and region to region, a

NOTES 77

lispund was usually between 6 and 9.5 kg, as opposed to a skÂlpund of 0.4154 kg (cf. Jansson 1936, 17ñ18, 23ñ24). This is a relatively moderate weight to be drawn by two oxen, even on a Sunday, and Schlyter queries whether twenty of these units are intended. A skeppund, used for cargoes, was equal to 24 (later 20) lispund and there were twelve of these to a (ship) load (see Jansson 1936, 23, 36). The pund was also a unit of capacity rather than weight, equiva- lent to 8 spann of 72 litres (12 spann in northern Sweden where the latter was smaller) and thus 16 laupr (cf. Jansson 1936, 17ñ18, 26ñ28; Note to 20/47ñ48). There were again twelve of these pund to a load, and it is possible that the weight of goods of that capac- ity was intended, although this seems less likely. DS II, 54ñ55, no. 970 (9/8/1288) refers to a gotenense pondus, which might indi- cate that a special pund was prevalent in Gotland. The lispund is recorded as a Scottish unit of weight, which was adopted in Ork- ney and Shetland for grain, malt and butter, varying from 12 to 30 pounds (5.44 to 13.60 kg) (cf. SND s. v. lispund).

6/8ñ9. The word oykr was apparently originally an adjective mean- ing ëcapable of being hitched toí, later developing into the noun for a pair (yoke) of oxen (see Bugge 1877ñ78, 274ñ75). Cf. Notes to 26/45 and 48/5.

6/10ñ11. It seems that the miscreant had to pay six ˆre to redeem his confiscated load and a further six for his crime, although as WessÈn (SL IV, 250 notes 3 and 4) points out there is a certain ambiguity. See 6/27ñ30 and 6/30ñ33 for similar penalties.

6/11. Provisions relating to Sabbath-breaking (helgisbrut) varied con- siderably between the Scandinavian provincial laws. In Norwegian law, twenty-one feast days were subject to a six-ˆre fine if broken. In YVgL Kkb 52 the feast days especially mentioned number about twenty-four in all, in addition to all Sundays. The fine for breaking these was eight ˆrtugar unless one presented a defence with a twelve- man oath. Exceptions were that one could transport hay and grain after the middle of the afternoon. ÷gL Kkb 22 has slightly differ- ent provisions, and more circumstantial descriptions of the times when holy periods started and ended. The penalty for striking anyone during these times was three marks (to the bishop) or again a defence with a twelve-man oath. ÷gL Kkb 23 records specific days that were subject to exceptional fines of forty marks, for instance if one struck or killed someone on the way to particular feasts. UL Kkb 16 (VmL Kkb 24) gives various exceptions. In addition fishing

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

was allowed on feast days that did not fall on Sundays (in the fishing season), and spring and autumn work could be done after mass on such days when appropriate (UL Kkb 14 ß9). SdmL Kkb 17 allowed work up to sundown on the afternoon of the eve of certain feast days during sowing and harvest seasons (otherwise the fine was three ˆre), but working on a feast day itself incurred a fine of three marks. All these fines fell to the bishop. GL seems to repre- sent a more liberal (and possibly older) situation in which laymen had a right to suggest which days were to be included, and were allowed more latitude in what could be done. Cf. GulL 10, 15ñ18 (NGL 1, 7ñ8, 9ñ11), where there are similar dispensations.

6/18 and footnote. Jacobsen (GGD, 36 note 4) and Schlyter (CIG, 270) translate kaupung as ëbyí (town) rather than ëhandelspladsí (marketplace), but this interpretation is rejected by WessÈn (SL IV, 251 note 6 to Chapter 6), following Bjˆrkander (1898, 36 note 1). The word kaupungr for ëmarketplaceí is older than in the sense ëtowní (UL Mb 8 pr). The only town in Gotland was Visby, but there were certainly more marketplaces, some possibly having a temporary existence. Under Magnus LadulÂs, trade became con- centrated in the town, although remote areas were permitted greater freedom. Conflict between the inhabitants of Visby and the farm- ers of rural Gotland, which culminated in 1288 with the building of Visby town wall, was possibly occasioned by this freedom (cf. Introduction, pp. xiiñxiii). In GL kaupung more closely relates to a marked, a local market for produce and barter. Cf. Note to 13/16.

The B-text has a parallelism here: ëtravel or rideí.
6/18ñ20. The goods that one was permitted to take to market on a Sunday were those that were perishable, or which had been pre-

pared in some way.
6/18. The torg was the area where the market was actually held, the

ëmarket squareí.
6/21. Barley (korn) was the most common bread grain and was also

used for malting. Gotland must sometimes have been short of grain because in 1276 Magnus LadulÂs (PRF I, 1) gave Gotlanders the right to import grain from Sweden except in years when there was a general export ban.

Chapter 7: Af munka aigum

7/2. The provision here is one of a number relating to cutting timber (cf. 25/26ñ37; 26/38ñ46; 26/55ñ61; 63/2ñ4).

NOTES 79

7/4ñ5. Concerning the clause ëhe is to be excommunicatedí (liggr hanum vi ̨r bann), Jacobsen (GGD, 38 note 1) points out that liggia vi ̨r originally referred only to fines and meant íto be subject to (a fine)í. Here the sense has been extended to excommunication as a punishment in respect of stealing or damaging monastery property.

7/5. Excommunication (bann) was not a punishment laid down in the earliest provincial laws, although it was later applied along- side other punishments. Fines to the bishop were the more common punishment for breaking church law. Elsewhere in GL the word bann is used only where the interdictum locale appears to be intended (cf. Note to 8/17ñ19).

7/5. The Gtn halfu mairi meant literally ëhalf moreí, but the actual sense was ëtwice as muchí, the ëhalfí referring to the relation of the initial amount to the final amount (cf. Addition 2/6).

7/9. Delay in paying the fine did not result in an additional penalty. See 3/21 in relation to tithes.

7/11. The strong noun aign is the one most commonly used in the A-text, although not in the B-text, for ëproperty in the form of landí. The weak feminine aiga is used occasionally, whereas land and ior ̨ do not occur with this meaning. Ruthstrˆm (2002, 77, 96, 97ñ98) provides evidence that aign was in the process of being replaced by kustr in the sense of possessions in general, as opposed to land (cf. Note to 5/9).

7/13ñ17. WessÈn (SL IV, 251 note 7 to Chapter 7) examines the significance of the inheritance arrangements following the death of a man who has entered a monastery in adult years. If he divided his property with his sons, taking one per capita portion for him- self, it is possible that on his death the whole of that could have been inherited by the monastery. This would seem to imply that a man with one son could give a half, and one with two sons one third of his property to the religious house. WessÈn considers the former, at least, unlikely and that in that case the limit of one third still applied. Jacobsen, however, translates ̨a valdi hafu ̨lut sinum as ëda raade de over deres Lodí (then they had control over their personal share), referring to the children. This gives no hint as to the division of the personal share of their father.

7/14. WessÈn (SL IV, 250 note 21) defines hafu ̨lutr as ësÂ stor del av ett arv, som uppkom, om det delades i lika delar efter huvuden (per capita)í (as large a part of an inheritance as would be obtained if it were divided equally per capita). The same word is used in

(cf. Iuul 1941, 103, 106; Note to 20/40ñ41).
7/16 and footnote. Jacobsen (GGD, 38) incorrectly gives ëen Tredje-

delí (a third) for tiunda lut ëtenth partí, obviously influenced by the previous paragraph. WessÈn notes that Pope Gregory IX in a letter dated 23/1/1230 (DS I, 258, no. 257) confirmed a previously prescribed limit on donations to a religious house of one tenth of oneís liquid assets. UL Kkb 14 and SdmL Kkb 11 have similar limits, but ÷gL Kkb 24, ƒVgL ƒb 9, YVgL ƒb 13 and SkL 38 (CISk I 37) differ (cf. SL IV, 252 note 8 to Chapter 7 and references). Note that the A-text here, and here only, clarifies the property referred to by specifying ior ̨aign ëproperty in landí (see Ruthstrˆm 2002, 97). The B-text does not specify ëlandí.

Chapter 8: Af mannhelg

8/2. The concept of mannhelg ëpersonal rightsí is closely linked with that of fri ̨r ëpeace and securityí. The origins of the laws on ëpeaceí or ëtruceí are not absolutely clear. It is possible that they developed from the periods during cult festivals when no one took up arms (cf. Tacitus 1914, 51) and were later connected with mar- kets and trade. They might, on the other hand, have originated in the twelfth century under the influence of Pope Hadrian IV (Nicholas Breakspear). The word mannhelg occurs almost exclusively in law texts. It referred to the ëhuman rightsí (a translation suggested in conversation by Helle Degnbol at Copenhagen University) of free men and women (but not slaves) under law. That is, the protection a citizen had for the personal rights of life, liberty and honour, particularly during periods when there was an enhanced respect for these rights (cf. Gr ̄nbech 1955, 2: 104ñ08). Mainland provin- cial laws have similar provisions (cf. UL Kkb 17 pr, 22 ß1; SdmL Kkb 18 pr). Temporary loss of these rights, short of full outlawry, could result from certain infringements (cf. FrostL IV 7 (NGL 1, 159ñ60); MLLL IV 11 (NGL 2, 56ñ58)).

8/3ñ4. As Jacobsen (GGD, 38 note 7) points out, holy days lasted for two nights and a day. Reckoning such days from sunset on the eve of the feast seems to have its origin in Jewish practice, when the Sabbath started at sunset on Friday. It was customary, in any event, to count days from one evening to the next.

8/5ñ6. The ëseven weeks in Lentí include Holy Week, the week immediately preceding Easter. The Gtn paskavika must therefore

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Chapters 4 (B-text only), 20 and 28, all in relation to inheritance

NOTES 81

be Easter week, the week following Easter Sunday. The word ëpÂskveckaí in ModSwe means Holy Week, and this is the transla- tion that WessÈn (SL IV, 210) uses. Pipping (GLGS) does not translate the whole word. Schlyter (CIG, 287), on the other hand, translates it as hebdomas paschalis v. festum paschae proxime antecedens (the week after (literally the seventh day of) Easter, or immediately before the Easter feast) but simply as ëveckan n‰st efter pÂskí in his (later) concordant glossary (CISG, s. v. Paska vika). He was clearly not initially sure of the meaning. Sˆderwall (OSMS II, 200 s. v. paskar) cites Old Norse p·skavika, which is translated as ëEaster Weekí in Cleasby Vigfusson. There remains an ambiguity, how- ever, since in Chapter 9/7ñ8 aldra manna fri ̨r is said to last from fourteen nights after Easter for ten days. Is this from fourteen nights after the end of the Easter peace, or is it from fourteen nights after Easter Sunday, i.e. seven nights after the end of the Easter peace? The latter seems to be more likely, but it is not certain.

8/6. Rogation days (gangdagar) were the days on which penitential processions were held carrying crosses, icons and censors around the community, and prayers were said. The three principal Rogation days were the Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday following the fifth Sunday after Easter, that is the days leading up to Ascension Day. These were called sÌðari gangdagar in OWN, as opposed to gangdagher litli or fyrri, the feast of St Mark on 25th April (cf. GulL 18 (NGL 1, 10)).

8/7. Although Schlyter (CIG, 264) thinks that helgudagavika ëWhitsun weekí in the text is an error for pingizdaga vika, Wimmer (1887b, 63ñ64 note 3) points out that it was a specific Gotlandic dialect word for Whitsun, which also appears, albeit in a corrupt form, in the runic calendars (Lithberg and WessÈn 1939, 15 note 20). Thomsen (1870, 135) draws parallels with Finnish-Lappish heluntai f. ëPentecostí, Swedish-Lappish helutagh, noting that hela f. was a pre-Christian Finnish festival.

8/8. The three-mark fine, and subsequent ones in this chapter, were clearly additional to the normal wergild or other compensation payable.

8/12. The proviso that the action was done in anger (i rai ̨i) rather than accidentally seems to have applied only to cases in which no weapon was involved.

8/12ñ14. The limit here on the compensation for injuring a slave contrasts with the provision in GulL 215 (NGL 1, 73) where a slave

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

is to have board and lodging while wounded, be given leech treat- ment, and his master is to have compensation for loss of labour. See also 19/137ñ141, where in certain cases a slave is paid half compensation and in other cases his compensation is limited.

8/14ñ15. The provision stated here is a general one and the reason for it becomes clear when one reads that the parishioners, church and priest of the injured party all shared the fines paid (cf. Note to 8/21ñ23).

8/17ñ19. The bann ëexcommunicationí referred to here is most prob- ably an interdictum locale, as defined at 3/11ñ14. The provisions also seem to allow certain latitude and to permit the excommuni- cation to be revoked as soon as the fine outstanding was paid to the satisfaction of the parishioners. This appears to be another example of the relative independence of the parish priest in Gotland, since a fine was paid to him for the ban, rather than to the bishop (cf. SL IV, 252 notes 8 and 9 to Chapter 8). It is not clear if ëexcommunication always follows Sabbath-breakingí (e fylgir bann helgisbruti) refers only to violence during periods of church feasts recorded in this chapter, or if it also covers other forms of Sabbath- breaking listed in Chapter 6.

8/21ñ23. Division of fines in this threefold way was unique to Gotland. WessÈn (SL IV, 252 note 10) refers to further examples in Chapters 3 and 4.

8/25ñ26. There are five occasions on which a fine of forty marks in coin is referred to in GL, apart from as wergild for a non-Gotlander. In three cases (1ñ3 below) the fine was payable to the general assembly (presumably in addition to the applicable wergild) and in the remaining two to the complainants: (1) for killing in a church as recorded here; (2) for killing a fugitive in sanctuary (8/31ñ32); (3) for killing a priest who had already offered compensation (Addition 1/19ñ21); (4) for discovered adultery with a married woman (21/ 9ñ10); (5) for forcing an unmarried girl into marriage without her parent or guardianís consent (21/12ñ15). There are two opposing theories relating to the origin of the forty-mark fine: Wennstrˆm (1931, 86ñ88; 1940, 294ñ300) and Schwerin (1941, 484) suggest that it was a later introduction, which came into being as a result of devaluation and the increased severity of fines, whereas Hj‰rne (1929, 102 note 4; 1947, 17, 18ñ21) and Hafstrˆm (1949, 190) contend that it was an old Swedish fine connected with the levy (ledung, Gtn lai ̨ingr). In defence of the latter theory it can be mentioned

NOTES 83

that this level of fine occurs in Article 1 of the old Russian law Pravda Russkaia (MRL, 26), which, it has been suggested, was subject to early Swedish influence. In any event, the forty-mark system eventually replaced the three-mark system in Swedish law (cf. ÷gL Db 1; UL Mb 9 ß2; VStL I 9 pr, ß1). Hasselberg (1953, 217ñ18) also considers the forty-mark system to be foreign to the Gotlandic system of justice (cf. Bjˆrling 1893, 113; Note to 11/6). WessÈn (SL IV, 253 note 11) agrees that in the case of GL this level of fine was almost certainly imported from the Swedish mainland, where it was the standard wergild. In a similar situation in the following chapter (9/9ñ11) the extra fine to be paid to the assembly was the wergild value of the man killed. The question then arises whether these provisions have been inserted (or revised) at a later date than the first written edition of GL. The fact that one reference (3) occurs in a passage found only in the B-text (with its presumed earlier origin) would seem to argue against this supposition, in that particular case at least, although the B-text as it is preserved may itself have been subject to later influences. What links all instances of the forty-mark fine is the fact that an alternative pun- ishment was explicitly, in case (4), or might originally have been, death, bearing in mind the severity of the crime and the element of betrayal involved (cf. Note to 21/9ñ12). A gradual move from capital punishment and revenge killing could have been accompanied by the importation of levels of fine from the mainland.

8/26ñ27. For the most serious crime in a church, killing, the rural dean rather than the priest received the excommunication fine. 8/28ñ30. WessÈn (SL IV, 253 notes 12 and 14) considers the first

sentence of this paragraph to belong to the preceding paragraph, but this does not seem to be a necessary amendment. The opening sentence seems simply to be an introduction to what immediately follows (an excursus relating to the killing of sanctuary seekers in sanctuary churches). The three churchyards are those of the parish churches of Fardhem (Far ̨aim), Tingst‰de (fiingste ̨i) and Atlingbo (Atlingabo), referred to in Chapter 13.

8/31. The OldSwe kirkiugar ̨er denoted both the area immediately surrounding the church and the fence that enclosed it. The area was used both for burials and as a place for preaching, marriages, meetings and trials.

The rectory land or glebe (prestgar ̨r) was the holding from which a priest fed himself (and his family). In some Swedish

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

provincial laws the extent of it is defined in detail. In GL it was included within the compass of the sanctuary provided at the three sanctuary churches, in addition to the churchyard. The dimensions of several rectory grounds in Gotland have been preserved in par- ish records; some had an imposing entrance arch. Although gar ̨r was originally a word for an enclosing fence, then the area en- closed (as here and at 13/8), it came to include all the buildings within a farmís fence. Both residential and working buildings lay within the enclosure. These might have included buildings for several families, but in Gotland and mainland provinces, farms were iso- lated and not situated in villages.

8/32 and footnote. The A-text reading given by Pipping is fangin ëcapturedí, but as the word has been almost obliterated other read- ings are possible. Schlyter (CIG, 21 note 43) gives vengin. The B-text reads vegin ëkilledí, which Jacobsen (GGD, 40 note 2) points out must be the original reading, both from the context and from the fact that the German and Danish translations both have expres- sions meaning ëkilledí.

8/32ñ35. The distribution of fines seems to be a repetition of the earlier provision at 8/21ñ23, as an introduction to additional pun- ishments for assaults in churches and churchyards (cf. SL IV, 252 note 10).

Chapter 9: Af aldra manna fri ̨i

9/8ñ9. Jacobsen (GGD, 41 note 1) notes that periods of universal sanctity run from morning to morning in contrast to the sanctity in force on holy days described in the previous chapter. That they had no association with the church is clear from the fact that pen- alties laid down in the previous chapter did not apply. WessÈn (SL IV, 253 notes 1 and 2 to Chapter 9) suggests that these two periods of sanctity might have coincided with general assemblies, although the wording at 11/10ñ11 indicates that there was also a separate assembly sanctity. The timing of the first period, a fortnight after Easter, would have placed it at or shortly after the time of the new moon, when small local assemblies might have been held. The timing of the second period of peace, five days after midsummer, places it immediately after the final day for sailing on the levy (lai ̨ingr), 29th June (see GS, 59 note to 14/8). Several interpreta- tions might be placed on this timing: (1) that it would have provided ten days of protection for the families of those taking part in the

NOTES 85

levy from opportunists who had not been called up; (2) that if the levy did not get called out at the end of June, or no favourable wind came, the provision would offer protection from armed men who had become frustrated with waiting and might have been look- ing for trouble; (3) that any killing or assault done while the levy was out would inconvenience and endanger the province propor- tionally more than at other times. It seems unlikely, despite WessÈnís suggestion, that the general assembly would have been timed to coincide with the departure of the levy fleet. In KrLL Rb 8 it states that one of the assembly times must be between Walpurgis Night (30th April) and Midsummer Day.

9/10ñ11. The word vereldi ëwergildí does not occur elsewhere in Scandinavian legal sources, but it is related to w‰rold, in HL, with the same sense. There are equivalents in other West Germanic languages and the first element of the word is related to OWN verr ëmaní. The second element is related to OWN giald, OldSwe gi‰ld ëpay- mentí. WessÈn (SL IV, 250 note 20) suggests that both vereldi and w‰rold were loan words from a West Germanic language. The usual word in Swedish provincial laws is manbˆter and cognates, although arvabot is frequent in ƒVgL, whereas OWN has vÌgsbútr. It was a means by which a wronged family could obtain satisfaction from wrongdoers without resorting to a blood feud. Swedish provincial laws demonstrate how the latter was gradually replaced by a system of compensation. Levels of wergild are defined in Chapters 14 and 15.

9/14ñ16. The additional provision relating to the destruction of prop- erty seems particularly to suggest that protection of the vulnerable was intended. This would apply both to times when people were absent at a local assembly and when their able-bodied men were away on the levy.

Chapter 10: Af varfri ̨i

10/2. The spring peace (varfri ̨r) might have had Christian origins. The ëgeneral sowing timeí in Gotland was St Urbanís day on 25th May (Lithberg and WessÈn 1939, 62), so the springtime sanctity lasted from 11th May until 8th June. It coincided with the period during which men might be making ready for the levy, but before the first departure date (see GS, 59 note to 14/8). Similar argu- ments apply to those suggested in Note to 9/8ñ9 concerning its purpose. Other provincial laws have periods of sanctity in spring: ÷gL Bb 22, UL Rb 14, VmL Rb 24, SdmL Rb 11, HL Rb 14.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

10/5. The Gtn verb vir ̨a appears to have two meanings. One is ëseize in payment of a debt, claim [something] from [someone]í and this is the meaning here, at 10/8, 63/9ñ10 and Addition 9/5ñ6. The other meaning is ëmake a valuationí, as at 30/5, 32/8, 40/4 and in similar contexts. Cf. Notes to 30/4ñ5, 63/9ñ11 and Addition 9/5ñ6.

10/6. The word bondi, meaning both ëhusbandí and ëfarmerí, is the only one in GL used of a group of free farmers, apart from landboi (cf. Note to 47/6). Bondar owned their land and made up the ma- jority of the population of Gotland outside Visby during the thirteenth century.

10/7ñ8. The word gield is commonly used in provincial laws mean- ing a legal debt or contractual obligation between two parties. The party who was owed the goods could lay a legal claim (he could lagry ̨ia), but the debtor also had protection (cf. Amira 1882ñ95, I, 32ñ39).

10/9ñ10. A distinction is drawn here between stock kept for food (soy ̨ir) and those for draught (ortasoy ̨ir). The latter were not included in the property valuation for the purposes of settling a debt, since their confiscation would affect the ability of a farmer to run his business. Both oxen and horses were used for draught in Gotland.

Chapter 11: Af ̨ingfri ̨i

11/2. The assembly peace ( ̨ingfri ̨r) was directly related to (heathen) cult and market and was ancient in origin. Assembly sanctity as described here applied at the place of the assembly and for its duration. Increased compensation for personal injury during an assembly is otherwise mentioned in Gr·g·s I ß56 (LEI 1, 99) and the severity of breaking the sanctity is stressed in ƒVgL Urb ß1 (cf. Almquist 1942, 61ñ62). A three-mark fine, in addition to the usual compensation, applied to insults offered at the assembly (Chap- ter 39).

11/6. The legal fines (laga bytr) for an offence were distinct from the additional fine for breaking the peace. According to Hemmer (1928, 67 and note 1, 74 and note 7, 247ñ49), GL shows a transitional stage in which movement from a system of wholly private compen- sation to one including community fines was starting to take place. There were still no fines to the crown. Fines were in marks of gold, of silver (1/8 mark of gold) or in coin (1/4 mark of silver). The original

NOTES 87

pattern of fines clearly had a three-mark basis and the occasional forty-mark fine lay outside the usual system (cf. Note to 8/25ñ26). Hasselberg (1953, 217 note 47) dismisses assumptions made by Wilda (1960, 445ñ46) and Amira (1882ñ95, I, 372ñ73) that com- munity fines were imposed in all cases where the fine was three marks or more, even if it was not stated explicitly. Delin (1926, 258ñ59) takes a similar view. German medieval laws seem to have included fines to the community either separately imposed, or as part of the total fine (see Hasselberg 1953, 218ñ26).

11/9. The exclusion of revenge killing (hemd) from this provision demonstrates that the substitution of compensation for blood revenge was not complete by this time (cf. Note to Chapter 13; KL s. v. H‰mnd).

11/9ñ11. The final provision implies that certain assemblies were held during the periods of universal sanctity referred to in Chapter 9. These would possibly have been held after Easter, rather than after midsummer (cf. Notes to 9/8ñ9, 10/2).

Chapter 12: Af haimfri ̨i

12/2. The concept of home peace (haim(a)fri ̨r) seems to have origi- nated in pre-Christian times and to have been connected with a homeownerís ëhigh-seatí. An attack on a man in his own home was deemed to be a nÌðingr-crime in Norway, punishable by outlawry and loss of all property (cf. GulL 178 (NGL 1, 66)). Such crimes were considered to be particularly shameful and could not be atoned for by compensation to the victim. An attack in the home was apparently regarded much less seriously in Gotland and mainland Sweden.

12/3ñ5. The householder received additional compensation for an attack in his home, while the remaining members of the household had to be content with their normal compensation (12/7ñ11) (see GGD, 42 note 6). The total fine payable for an attack on a Gotlandic man in his own home was ninety-six marks in coin (three marks of gold), plus twelve marks (to him) plus twelve marks (to the gen- eral assembly). This gives a total of 120 marks in coin, which was three times the usual Swedish wergild of forty marks. This triple fine was usual in Swedish provincial laws in such cases (cf. UL Mb 12 ß1; SdmL Mb 27 pr; VmL Mb 11 ß1). The equivalent for a non- Gotlandic free man was forty marks plus twelve marks plus twelve marks, giving a total of sixty-four marks in coin. Hemmer (1945,

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

235) suggests that community fines payable for injury to the house- holder were a later addition to the laga bytr (cf. Note to 11/6) payable to all injured parties. As WessÈn (SL IV, 254 note 2 to Chapter 12) observes, similar additional fines were payable in cases of double adultery (Chapter 21) and selling land without going through the required procedures (Chapter 28). See also Bjˆrling (1893, 112ñ13) and Hemmer (1928, 74 and note 6).

12/7. In GL, Schlyter translates mogi ëcommunityí as ëhela (gotl‰ndska) folketí (all the people (of Gotland)), and it seems always to be used in a similar context to the general assembly, otherwise called land (alt) ëthe (whole) provinceí or ̨ing firi alla ly ̨i ëassembly of all the peopleí. Hasselberg (1953, 217 note 48) agrees with Holm- b‰ck (SL IV, xciii note 1), however, that it referred only to members of the assembly relevant to the context. The translation ëcommu- nityí has been chosen to distinguish this usage. Neither al ̨ing nor Gutnal ̨ing is used in GL.

12/9ñ10. The word haimsokn covers only harm caused in a personís house or its immediate neighbourhood (in GL and ƒVgL Md 9 the house only), the crime thus being a specific form of attack on a personís haimfri ̨r. In the laws of V‰stergˆtland, anyone attacked in his or her own home could, without fear of penalty, kill the attacker in self-defence. The extent to which the original intent of the perpetrator had to be criminal in this instance is uncertain. In ÷gL Eb 1 ß1ñ4, 6 there has to be criminal intent for the crime to come under the edsˆreslagstiftning (laws relating to the oath taken by the king to punish certain crimes that threatened the general order); if there were no intent, the milder provincial law applied (cf. Introduction, p. xxxviii). Self-defence killing or wounding applied more widely in ÷gL than in ƒVgL. Haimsokn was origi- nally considered to have been a group crime, but in some provincial laws it was extended to include an attack by one person.

Chapter 13: Af mandrapi

In the Early Middle Ages drap ëkillingí was seen not just as a crime against the person killed, but also as dishonour against the family of that person, one that could only be countered by blood revenge. Immediate right of revenge continued until there was a formal reconciliation, which formed the basis for attempts to replace per- sonal revenge with a legal process. The concept of drap originated in circumstances of battle, but later expanded to include all situations

NOTES 89

resulting in the admitted death of another and incorporated special rules relating to involuntary killing and conspiracy. In GulL 156 (NGL 1, 61) and the oldest section of this chapter of GL, only two possible choices exist for the family of a victim: revenge or com- pensation. Norwegian provincial laws put a much heavier stress than Swedish laws on revenge, which could be taken for a considerable number of crimes (cf. GulL 152, 171 (NGL 1, 60ñ61, 65); FrostL prologue 8 (NGL 1, 123)). In GL there is clearly an attempt to steer the wronged party away from taking revenge and towards a judicial solution. In this way it differs markedly from SkL 85ñ121 (CISk I 84ñ118) (see SL IV, 66ñ69). A number of scholars, principally Wilda (1960, 495) and Amira (1922, 27, 30), suggest that anyone commit- ting a murder or other crime punishable by death automatically made himself an outlaw and thus liable to be killed himself. This view has been disputed by, for instance, Hemmer (1928, 39ñ45) who sees a clear distinction in later laws between crimes resulting in outlawry, which could be rescinded, and indefensible crimes (OldSwe orbotÊ mal) for which compensation could not be paid (cf. Wennstrˆm 1936, 274). The concept of charging a dead man with a crime that ren- dered the killing justified and thus not subject to compensation (obyttr) does not occur in GL (but see Note to 18/16ñ22) and was no longer in force by the time of MELL and MEStL (see WallÈn 1958, 246ñ49). To avoid being accused of hidden murder (mor ̨), which was often punishable by death, the killer had to declare the act at the assembly (cf. UL Mb 19 ß3). In GL, however, the term mor ̨ingi is used only in the provision relating to insults, and in ƒVgL the word does not occur at all. See WessÈn (SL IV, 254ñ56 and references) for a summary; also Hasselberg (1953, 270ñ74) and Note to 15/3.

13/4. A number of Swedish provincial laws, although not GL, gave the right to the relatives of a murdered man to charge a number of people in connection with the killing (cf. ƒVgL Md 1 ß1, 3 ß2 and notes). It is possible that this arrangement was a means of dividing responsibility in the same way as the responsibility of paying fines was shared between family members (cf. YVgL Db 8, where it is relationship with the killer, rather than presence at the crime, that is the deciding factor). In GL this law might be reflected in the fact that, when a man who had committed a killing drew up his secu- rity circle (banda), he was to take his nearest available male relatives with him. From this one could infer that they might be considered to be at risk of accusation as well.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

13/7. Of the three listed churches, Far ̨aim ok fiingste ̨i ok Atlingabo, Far ̨aim (now Fardhem) lies in the southern riding, fiingste ̨i (now Tingstede) in the northern and Atlingabo in the middle riding. They were centrally situated in each third and therefore conven- ient places of asylum. The churches at Atlingabo and Far ̨aim are mentioned in Guta saga (GLGS, 66 lines 18ñ19) as respectively the second and third parish churches to be built in Gotland. fiingste ̨i is not referred to in this context, either as a place or a parish. WessÈn (SL IV, 256 note 2) thinks that the forty days for which a killer had to take refuge constituted the period of time during which blood revenge could be taken and that the case was subsequently subject to legal process. Chapter 16/9ñ11 has a similar provision concerning killing by a slave. The concept of a holy place as a refuge for criminals was at least as old as Graeco-Roman culture and is mentioned in the Pentateuch (cf. Exodus 21 v. 13; Num. 35 vv. 6ñ8, 11ñ15; Deut. 4 vv. 41ñ43, 19 vv.2ñ4; Olsen 1965, 64ñ 65). Mosaic asylum laws applied only to manslaughter (killing ëunawaresí of someone not previously an enemy, as clearly intended in this context) and not to premeditated killing. Medieval asylum rights were linked to church law, but their origin might have pre- dated the introduction of Christianity. The resemblance between provisions in GL and the later VStL might be as a result of a com- mon concept, rather than a direct influence, but GL was certainly the most advanced of the laws of Gˆtaland (cf. VStL I 36 ß2; Wennstrˆm 1946, 188; Hasselberg 1953, 277). While a wrongdoer was in a prescribed holy place, he was under the protection of the church until it was decided whether he was to be handed over for lay justice or be dealt with by the church authorities.

13/7ñ8. Jacobsen (GGD, 43 note 5) considers ësafety and sanctuaryí (helg ok heli) to be an example of the parallelism common in the A-text, the phrase as a whole meaning ëa place of sanctuaryí. Since the B-text, which it has been argued represents an earlier stage, omits the second half of the phrase, this seems a reasonable assumption. On the other hand, the B-text has parallel expressions not found in the A-text at 6/18, 25/48 and 50 and at 28/70 (cf. also Notes to 19/33, 21/16ñ17, 25/48 and 50, 60/6). The word helg originally meant ëthat which brought luckí, but the normal sense of the related Gtn adjective hailigr is ësacred, protectedí. It is possible, considering the concept ̨inghelgi in OWN, that helgi originally had religious connotations. De Vries (1957, I, ß240ñ42)

NOTES 91

notes that heil means ëwholeí and that heilagr and helgi are related

concepts.
13/9ñ22. The singular provisions in GL relating to peace circles

may find echoes on the Swedish mainland. There is evidence from a tenth-century runic inscription that certain places in ÷ster- gˆtland had rights of asylum (cf. Holmb‰ck 1919, 10ñ11; Delin 1926, 258ñ64; NordÈn 1931, 346ñ49; von Friesen 1933, 152ñ53). The procedures for drawing up a peace circle and the area that it could cover are not entirely clear in GL, but the boundary presum- ably lay equidistant between each of the farms included and those bordering them, in the uncultivated land between.

13/13. The sense of the expression annanveg skogs in the A-text is made clearer in the B-textís annan wegh til schogs ëon the other side of the woodí.

13/13ñ15. The clause ëif he has permission from those who own the propertyí (en hann loyfi far af ̨aim sum aign aigu) refers to the preceding clause: ëand draw it around three farmsí (ok dragi um haim ̨orp ̨ry). That is, a killer had to obtain permission from farm owners to include their land in his circle at all, rather than just in respect of its precise limits.

13/16. Jacobsen again translates kaupung as ëbyí (town), but it seems likely that ëmarketplaceí was intended (cf. Note to 6/18). The intention behind the prohibition against including an assembly site, marketplace or more than one church in a peace circle was to avoid the possibility of the killer and the family of the victim meeting. Cf. the provision in SkL 97 (CISk I 96).

13/19ñ20. The ëperiod of peace and security that is next after Easterí (fri ̨r sum nestr ier eptir paskar) is either that referred to in Chap- ter 8/6 or, more probably, 9/6ñ7.

13/22. Theí testified safety circleí (vatubanda) was a provisional legally witnessed or testified safety circle, later replaced by a more permanent one drawn up during the general period of peace fol- lowing Easter. Of the provincial laws, this word occurs only in GL. Schlyter (CISG, 695) thinks that vatu- must be the genitive of vatn f. ëwaterí, since this form appears in other combinations, but he does not suggest what its meaning might be here. WessÈn (SL IV, 256ñ57 note 9) agrees with Kock (1918, 364ñ68) in finding this derivation unlikely. Kock suggests a relationship with Norwe- gian vÂtta ëtake notice of; sufficeí, giving vatubanda as ëa circle of safety that one took notice ofí, or which ësufficed for the time

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

beingí. WessÈn thinks that a more likely root is a Gtn vatta or vata f. with a meaning related to OldSwe vat, vatt f. ëthe twelve men collectively swearing an oath; the oath itselfí or vatter, vÊtti m. ëone of the twelve witness; the witness statement itselfí. Cf. vattum minum and vattum sinum in ƒVgL Md 1 ß2, 3 pr; Gb 7 and YVgL Kkb 3; Tjb 1. The vatubanda was therefore a ëwitnessed safety circleí since the provisional circle would presumably have been confirmed by witnesses, pending the declaration at an assembly of an official peace circle, although this is not specifically stated. Amira (1913, 238) draws parallels between GLís vatubanda and Icelandic fjÜrbaugsgarðr ëlesser outlawryí, and there are certain similarities between the provisions. In the case of the latter, a mis- creant had three years in which to arrange a passage abroad from Iceland, during which time he was confined to an area that offered a limited protection, provided he abided by certain rules (cf. Gr·g·s I ßß51ñ53 (LEI 1, 92ñ95)). In GL, however, a killer was not truly outlawed while he was in the peace circle, but was given three years in which to offer compensation and close the case. Only if he refused, or left the peace circle, was he outlawed.

13/23ñ24. The word atmeli ëperiod of a yearí does not occur else- where in the provincial laws. Schlyter (CISG, 51) thinks that it is possibly a contraction of ater mali, meaning ëthe return of the timeí, referring to the time elapsing between the same season one year and the next. The concept is similar to that in iemlangi (cf. Note to 14/6ñ7).

13/25. In 1171 Pope Alexander III issued a bull to the Swedish church prescribing penance of a pilgrimage to Rome for patricide, amongst other crimes, but the pilgrimage suggested here seems to have been of a more general nature. From about the end of the seventh cen- tury, a pilgrimage was often prescribed as penance by a shriving priest for a grave crime, particularly a killing.

13/28ñ33. A killer must not attend the same church as the family of his victim, for obvious reasons. WessÈn (SL IV, 257 note 11) queries whether the mother, daughter and sister mentioned are those of the killer or the victim, but it seems more likely that they are the latter, since the killer is elsewhere enjoined to take his family with him.

13/38ñ40. The non-Gotlandic man referred to is most likely Swed- ish, rather than German (cf. GGD, 45 note 1; Introduction, pp. xxiv, xxviñxxvii). WessÈn (SL IV, 257 note 13) considers that this

NOTES 93

provision belongs more logically with those in the following chapter

at 14/21ñ24.
13/41 and footnote. The B-text has a new chapter (13) here. 13/41ñ42. Of the clause ëif he can afford ití (en hann orkar) WessÈn

(SL IV, 257 note 16) rightly points out that there is no indication of what action was taken if a killer could not afford to pay com- pensation. It is probable that the killer was permanently subject to blood revenge in this case, but judging by the situation regarding a slave woman committing infanticide, exile seems to be another likely option (2/21ñ23). The circumstance where he did not wish to pay is covered at the end of the chapter (13/58ñ65). The B-text variant bella for orka was current as the verb b‰lla in, e.g., the dialect of J‰mtland, at least in the early part of the last century (cf. ÕO s. v. bella3).

13/42ñ43. In the expression ëalways leave a year betweení, Pipping (1904, 3) argues that ai here means ëalways, each timeí, rather than ënotí.

13/44. The statement that a person accepting the first offer of com- pensation is ëwithout dishonourí (oskemdr) is evidence that there had previously been a certain stigma attached to immediate ac- ceptance and that blood money was still a doubtful form of compensation. In VStL I 36 ß2 a similar phrase, ane laster unde ane scande ëwithout blame and without shameí is used and the initial procedures involved are the same, although the subsequent ones are much simplified (cf. Hasselberg 1953, 274, 276ñ78). In other provincial laws, the killer has to swear an oath of parity (Swedish likst‰llighet). Although in principle the provision of compensation took away the right of revenge, it seems that it was still possible for a wronged party to take revenge: in the laws of Gˆtaland as an alternative to compensation, and in the laws of Svealand provided he paid the kingís and provinceís part of the compensation himself.

13/49ñ51. The phrase ëthen all the people take counsel over the moneyí ( ̨a ra ̨in allir ly ̨ir firi fe) is not unambiguous. Jacobsen (GGD, 45 note 5) translates: ëda skal Tingfolket trÊffe Bestemmelse om Bodens Fordelingí (then the assembly members shall reach an agreement on the division of the fine). Schlyter (CIG, 28) and WessÈn (SL IV 213) both translate: ërÂde allt folket ˆver bˆtení (all the people shall take counsel concerning the fine), without further comment. In Addition 1/17ñ19, relating to priests, there is

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

a similar phrase, which Schlyter expands as ëD. ‰. folket tage botení (That is, the people take the fine). It seems likely that the same provisions applied in the present case and that the fine rejected by the claimant was nonetheless collected and distributed by agreement.

13/51 and footnote. Once payment was made the defendant was ëfree from guiltí (mandr osakr), or, in the B-text, ëshameí (madír oschemdír). Delin (1926, 261ñ62 note 1) interprets the law in such a way that a killer always had the right to pay the community for his crime with wergild. He considers this to result in the strange concept that the community valued each of its members only at their wergild price, and that any killing could be compensated for simply by a standard payment. He thinks that this was unlikely to have been acceptable to the relatives of a victim and that the right to revenge must still have been retained. On the other hand, wergild must have been a significant deterrent to the farmers of Gotland, amongst whom there were probably none sufficiently rich and powerful for the sum to be inconsequential. WessÈn (SL IV, 257 note 19) com- ments that the three-year movement restriction placed on a killer was in itself a form of punishment. He also thinks that Delin has missed the point that in all probability the provisions concerning circles of safety applied only to accidental killings or manslaugh- ter, and not to premeditated murder.

13/54. The ëright of substantiationí (vitor ̨) was the right in particu- lar to bring forward witnesses to prove oneís case, whether as plaintiff or defendant. It was regarded thus rather than as a ëdutyí, and only one of the parties had this right (see GGD, 45 note 8). If a case was more or less clear, the plaintiff had the right of proof, whereas in other cases it was the defendant. The defendant was found guilty if either the plaintiff brought sufficient witness or the defendant failed to do so. By the time most of the Scandinavian provincial laws came into being, this one-sidedness had disappeared. The system, known later as the edg‰rdsed, had led to criminals escaping jus- tice by gathering like-minded witnesses. A papal letter of 1218 from Honorius III to the Archbishop of Lund (DS I, 196, no. 176, 28/5/1218) refers to this situation as a ëpestilence that militates against all justiceí (cf. SL I, xxvñxxxii). In ÷gL there is early evi- dence of oaths being taken by both opposing sides. Gradually, proof through means of a n‰mnd ëbody of nomineesí replaced the edg‰rdsed, but it was several centuries before this was universal and there were a number of intermediate stages (cf. Note to 4/13ñ14).

NOTES 95

In GL, although the old system was clearly still current, vitor ̨ had also come to mean ërightí in a more general way, for example the right to return an unsatisfactory slave (Addition 7/9ñ10).

13/58ñ65. This is the only place in GL where being outlawed (fri ̨laus) is mentioned as a punishment, although banishment is prescribed for an infanticide who cannot pay her fine. A killer who failed to offer compensation within three years was given a month to pay the full wergild for the victim and, in addition, a further half wergild (twelve marks of silver), divided between the claimant and the community. The same additional penalty applied to anyone breaking the terms of his or her restriction of movement. There was no ap- peal against these fines and if they were not paid the outlawed person was more or less ostracised from society; revenge taken against him could not in turn be avenged by his relatives. It was, in fact, a means of putting a stop to family feuds and the purpose was to encourage the wrongdoer to offer compensation. GL does, however, still seem to recognise the right to self-judgement in certain ëinheritedí cases (14/14ñ20).

13/60. Hasselberg (1953, 252ñ53 note 26) questions the generally accepted translation of utretta here as ëclaim, demandí, or ëexemptí. The verb is not known from medieval Swedish law texts, or in the sense given by Schlyter elsewhere in Old Swedish. The Middle Low German verb utrichten, which occurs in the equivalent pas- sage in tyGL, does not have either of these senses, but rather means ëpay, dischargeí (cf. 20/43 footnote). The B-text reading wt reyda suggests a connection to OldSwe re ̨a, which has the same mean- ing. Hasselberg suggests that this offers a more acceptable grammatical construction in which the verb dyma governs all three elements of the judgement, rather than the first and third only. It also follows the general rule in GL that wergild could not be demanded, but had to be offered. This suggestion has been fol- lowed in the present translation.

13/62. Although the mark was a weight of silver (or gold), the means of paying was more frequently in other goods: homespun, cattle or other property up to the required value. It is difficult to be certain of the value of these in precious metal at any particular time. In ÷gL (Db 16 ß2; 21) ninety-six ells of ordinary homespun are equi- valent to a mark of silver, whereas in Gr·g·s (I ß78 (LEI 1, 126)) six ells of marketable homespun, new and unused, are equivalent to an ounce or ˆre (1/8 mark). This implies either that Icelandic

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

homespun was twice as good, or the mark half the value of the Swedish equivalent. The ˆre equivalent of homespun with russet stripes, clearly of better quality, was only five ells. Elsewhere (Gr·g·s II ß246 (LEI 2, 207)) two skins of old tomcats were worth one ˆre, six shorn wether skins were worth an ˆre, and so on. The concept of marketable means of payment is also laid down here. For a cow to satisfy the requirements it had, amongst other things, to be between three and ten years of age, capable of bearing a calf, in milk, horned and free from defects. Jacobsen (GGD, 25 note 1) thinks that these and similar conditions, although not stated in GL, would have been current throughout Scandinavia.

Chapter 14: Af lutnum sakum

As Jacobsen (GGD, 46 note 4) remarks, this chapter refers specifi- cally to cases in which wergild was due to be paid and where the killer died before the claim had been fulfilled. In this case the rela- tives (presumably those who fled to sanctuary with him) inherited the obligation to pay compensation, which was probably already being negotiated on his behalf (13/17ñ19). Responsibility both to pay and demand compensation was inherited (cf. YVgL Add 11 ß4, 17ñ18). As is frequently the case in GL, information is limited and the full process involved is not clear. In fact only the first and third paragraphs refer to this situation. The remaining paragraphs belong either with the previous chapter or refer to particular instances of killing (see SL IV, 258 note 1).

14/2ñ5. The process for negotiating a settlement is not stated, but the implication seems to be that relatives of the killer should not be forced to pay more in compensation than they could afford. Further- more, they were to be given time to accumulate the money required. Again, the relatives of the victim could accept what was offered without shame. The fact that this is stressed on several occasions implies that it was not the customary attitude at the time.

14/6ñ7. Three offers were to be made within a year and a day (until the day was the same length (iemlangi) as the one on which the first offer was made). Jacobsen (GGD, 46 note 7) observes that there is a similar expression (dagh oc iamling) in JL1 I ß9. This provision differs from that in Chapter 13/41ñ43 where the killer was given three years to make his three offers of compensation.

14/11ñ13. This paragraph presents a difficulty, noted by Jacobsen and WessÈn, in connection with the sense of the word bani. In

NOTES 97

previous scholarship this has led to translations meaning (1) ëuntil someone admits to the killingí (Delin 1926, 267; Hadorph Gothlandz-Laghen, 11); (2) ëuntil one [of them] takes in the killerí (Schlyter CIG, 29ñ30; Jacobsen GGD, 47) and (3) ë. . . one accepts the charge of murderí (Schlyter CIG, 379; CISG s. v. bani). The present translation follows Delin and Hadorph but the alterna- tive, ëadmits to being the killerí, would retain the usual sense of bani as ëkillerí. Elsewhere in GL there are several instances in which the literal translation of bani as ëkillerí would result in clumsy English and an alternative has been used. It is worth not- ing in connection with this provision that no mention is made of extra compensation for killing (or wounding, Note to 19/11ñ13) by a group of people. This principle, common from Germanic law, distinguishes GL from Swedish provincial laws and from VStL. The difference is so marked that Westman (1902/1905, 50ñ51) thinks that GL must represent a different legal system in which the family as a whole was not held responsible for an act by one of its members (cf. Delin 1926, 291ñ94; GÊdeken 1934, 105ñ07; Hasselberg 1953, 198ñ99; SL I, UL, 120ñ21 note 43; SL II, DL, 42ñ43 note 32; SL III, SdmL, 194 note 155; SL V, ƒVgL, 44 note 47, YVgL, 266 note 22).

14/14 and footnote. The first sentence of this paragraph in the B- text does not appear in the A-text, tyGL or daGL.

14/14ñ17. Schlyter (CIG, 30 note f) interprets this passage as ëom de som, j‰mte ˆfvermage, taga sÂdant arf, hvarom h‰r ‰r frÂga, vilja h‰mnas Â hans v‰gnar . . .í (if those who (together with the minor) take such an inheritance as is in question here want to take revenge on his behalf . . .). WessÈn (SL IV, 258 note 9), following Delin (1926, 264), offers the interpretation ëom nÂgon av dem som, j‰mte omyndig n‰rmaste arvinge, ha att taga del i arvet, vill h‰mnas pÂ hans v‰gnar . . .í (if one of those who (together with the minor nearest heir) have the right to take part in the inheritance wish to take revenge on his behalf . . .). There seems to be little material difference between the two interpretations, although WessÈn remarks upon it. This passage, together with Addition 1, stresses the right to revenge more than is done elsewhere in GL (cf. Note to Chapter 13).

14/14ñ20. Jacobsen (GGD, 47 note 5) cites these sentences as an example of the more expansive style of later provisions in contrast to the earlier, terser style.

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

14/15. According to most Swedish laws, the age of majority was fifteen years (cf. YVgL Add 7 ß29; ÷gL Eb 15 ß1, Vb 15 ß3; UL Kkb 19 ß2, Mb 2 pr, Jb 4 ß5; SdmL Mb 18 pr; BjR 14 ß20; GL 20 pr; MELL Jb 8, Eb 32, Db (II) 13, Sb (I) 17 pr; MEStL Db (II) 10, Sb (I) 19; KrLL Jb 8 ß1). On the other hand, in SdmL Kkb 11 pr, it seems that children over the age of twelve, but who had not received their inheritance, were treated differently in some respects from those who were younger. Minors (and in certain circumstances women) had considerable protection from the full force of the law in many cases: they could not be outlawed or hanged and were subject to lower fines in cases of theft (cf. KL s. v. Myndighedsalder; ⁄magi). See also Note to 20/6ñ7.

14/18ñ20. The relatives of a minor who was claiming compensation had to pursue his portion of the wergild, as well as their own, once the killer was able to pay the claim (i.e. after a year had passed) (see GGD, 47 note 6).

14/22ñ24. This must refer to a non-Gotlander having property in Gotland of sufficient value to pay the wergild (cf. WessÈn SL IV, 259 note 12).

14/25. Killing by a minor was valued at a half of the standard wergild, the same as for death caused by a dumb animal (Chapter 17). Con- trast this with damage by fire (Chapter 51) where payment was made by the responsible adult, presumably at the full price.

14/27. ëAlive in the wombí (quikt i qui ̨i) was a standard expression, indicating that a woman was pregnant with a live foetus.

14/33ñ34. A pregnant woman was valued at 11⁄2 standard wergilds. It is implicit that a Gotlandic woman is referred to here.

Chapter 15: Af vereldi manna

15/2ñ6. As in several other provincial laws (ƒVgL ƒb 22, JL1 III ß12) one mark of gold is equivalent to eight marks of silver in GL. This is not stated explicitly, but may be inferred from paral- lels between 15/2ñ6, 16/2ñ4 and 22/13ñ19, where it is clear that twelve marks of silver are equivalent to 11⁄2 marks of gold (half the wergild of a Gotlander). Here marks of gold, of silver and in coin are mentioned in the same context and this is the first in- stance in the text of the qualification markr penninga, clearly inserted to avoid confusion in relation to the slaveís wergild, since even 41⁄2 marks of silver would be less than the wergild of a non-Gotlander.

NOTES 99

15/3. The Gtn phrase at dau ̨um drepin (perhaps equivalent to ëdone to deathí) implies that the verb drepa might not mean ëkillí in every instance. The noun dˆ ̨sdrap, ëkillingí, occurs in UL Mb 2 ß1, SdmL Mb 2 ß1, VmL Mb 2 ß1, Tjb 15, HL Kgb 10, Mb 10, BjR 14 ß16 (CIS VI, 123 note 6) and MELL Rb 21 ß2. Hellquist (1980) notes that the original sense of the verb in other Germanic lan- guages was ëhit, strike, come up againstí. He suggests that the uniquely Scandinavian meaning ëkillí developed from the origi- nal sense either directly, or via a form with a now lost prefix. Schlyter (CISG s. v. DrÊpa) gives ëstrikeí as the first meaning and cites this instance in GL and those in SdmL and VmL. The Danish translation (daGL) reads slagin tiil dˆdz here.

15/4. The lower level of wergild for non-Gotlanders should be con- sidered alongside the principle stated in ƒVgL Tjb 12 ß2: fiylik lagh ok rÊt, sum utlÊnskir mÊn gˆra os, ̨ylikÊn vilium vir ̨Êm gˆrÊ ëThe same law and right, which foreign men render to us, the same would we wish to render to themí. Gotlanders could not there- fore expect their own higher levels of wergild in Sweden.

15/6ñ12. There seems to be an ambiguity over the wergild to be paid for a non-Gotlandic woman married to a Gotlandic man. The expression at vereldi sinu ëher wergildí most probably refers to the ten silver marks she would have been worth if unmarried, but the addition of fullu, which occurs only in the A-text, could mean that three marks of gold is intended, under the assumption that mar- riage had given the woman the status of a Gotlander. The principle that the male partner in a marriage could raise the status of his wife, but not vice versa, is common. On the other hand, the fact that a Gotlandic woman married a non-Gotlander did not preju- dice her own status, although her children were treated as non-Gotlandic. The equal rating of men and women so far as com- pensation is concerned corresponds to concepts of gender equality elsewhere in Scandinavia, although these did not extend as far as laws of inheritance (cf. SL IV, 259 notes 3 and 4).

Chapter 16: Af banduvereldi

16/2ñ4. The wergild payable for a man killed within his peace circle (banduvereldi) was, for both Gotlander and non-Gotlander, half that normally payable. For a slave, only six ˆre in coin was pay- able. This was one-sixth of the normal wergild payable (41⁄2 marks in coin, i.e. 36 ˆre). In respect of the element banda in banduvereldi

100

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Pipping (GLGS, Ordbok, 9) refers to OWN vÈbÜnd n. pl. ëropes surrounding the assembly or courtí. The concept in GL is again of a prescribed area. Details of how the assembly area was set up and the fines for trespass within it are listed in GulL 91 (NGL 1, 44ñ 45). The fines were: three marks to the king, twelve ˆre to a jarl, six to a baron, three to a hauldr (landowner of a class slightly higher than that of a freeman), 11⁄2 to a freeman, one to the son of a freedman and to a freedman (cf. FrostL I 2 (NGL 1, 127ñ28); MLLL III, 2 (NGL 2, 34ñ35)).

16/5ñ8. Jacobsen (GGD, 49 note 4) remarks that this clause is obscure. The wergild payment was frequently used as a unit of fine; half the standard wergild was a common level. Jacobsen finds Schlyterís interpretation (that compensation was to be ten marks in coin for all occasions on which full wergild would normally have been paid) unsatisfactory, as the last phrase would then be misleading. WessÈn agrees with this objection and notes that the rubric Af banduvereldi only refers to the first paragraph of the chapter. He thinks that the next paragraph refers to maiming (lastr or lestr) in general and that the purpose was to state that in all cases where compensation was based on a proportion of the wergild for a Gotlander, the same proportion applied for a non-Gotlander (he cites one quarter for a hand as an example). He points out that it is not clear what action was taken in cases where the fine in relation to a Gotlander was two marks or less of silver, i.e. one twelfth or less of the wergild. If maiming did not occur, all (allir) were treated equally. The paragraph should form the end of Chapter 19 (cf. 19/ 47ñ61; SL IV, 260 note 4; Hasselberg 1953, 218 and references).

16/6 and footnote. The B-text reading seems to be the correct one here. 16/9ñ13, 13ñ17. If the slave in question had been killed or had fled then half the wergild was to be paid, both for a Gotlander and a non-Gotlander. This provision places a value on the slave himself of three marks of silver (twelve marks in coin), since nine or two marks of silver respectively were to be paid if he could be handed over. This valuation must be compared with the wergild for a slave

of 41⁄2 marks in coin, only three-eighths of that amount.
16/17ñ18. The oath was obviously to be taken in both the stated

cases.
16/23ñ26. This paragraph is not directly relevant to the chapter ru-

bric. It makes clear that a slave usually had a limited period of slavery, after which he was publicly granted his freedom. The witness

NOTES 101

borne by the parishioners in this case was for use in the future (i.e. that the slave had been freed on such a date) rather than in con- nection with a past event or a personís truthfulness. The witnesses were acting in a more or less official capacity (cf. Notes to 2/15, 3/ 36ñ38, 19/6ñ8).

Chapter 17: Af osoy ̨um

The prefix o- in osoy ̨r, literally ëa bad creatureí, is not the usual negation, but pejorative, as in Swedish otyg ëwitchcraft, nuisanceí (cf. Note to 39/8). For related provisions, albeit less detailed, see SkL 102, 105 (CISk I 100, 103).

17/2. The word fastr in the sense ëentire, not castratedí is still used in Gotland (see GO s. v. fast). Jacobsen (GGD, 50 note 7) notes that, at the time she wrote, the word was used with this meaning in Jutland. The normal OldSwe word for ëcastratedí is snopr, from a verb meaning originally ëinsultí.

17/5ñ6. The Gtn word staurgulf originally seems to have denoted the central space between the rows of supporting columns of a hall, as opposed to the aisles between these columns and the walls of a building. The word could also be used to denote the space between two of the columns, making room for a place to sit or a bed, the best being the ëhigh seatí (OWN stafgÛlf) (cf. KL s. v. SkÂle). In GL the meaning is either the space between a pair of uprights in a fence, or else the pair of uprights themselves (cf. CIG, 33, 66; GGD, 50 note 9, 85 note 4; SL IV, 261 note 3 to Chapter 17). The former sense is still current in Gotland, with vari- ous dialect forms (see GO s. v. stˆr). Wennstrˆm (1936, 357ñ61) argues that in the context of GL the sense of staurgulf must be ëthe space between a pair of uprightsí. A horse, certainly, would not be tied up to a pair of uprights, but rather to a horizontal rail between them. In provisions relating to damage to fences staurgulf denotes a section of fencing between uprights (26/49).

17/6ñ7. WessÈn (SL IV, 261 note 3 to Chapter 17) suggests that ok fiugur stig ëand four pacesí could be an error for e ̨a fiugur stig ëor four pacesí, making the inference that the average distance between the uprights in a fence was about a stride (one metre) and if no such fence existed, four strides would give the same safety margin. This would certainly be a reasonable practical assumption and would merely be another example of parallelisms common in

102

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

GL. The distance between supports in a lawful fence in FrostL XIII

21 (NGL 1, 246) is three ells, about 1.5 metres.
17/7ñ9. Horses were and are handled mainly from their left (or near) side.

The owner was thus only responsible for his horseís reactions to the

normal actions of tacking up and mounting when performed by others. 17/9. The word kleti for ëfood storeí occurs only here in Scandinavian sources. S‰ve (GU, xxxñxxxi) considers it most likely to have been introduced to Gutnish by Swedes resident in Estonia. He assumes that they borrowed the word, not from the Finnish-speaking Esto- nians, but from Lithuanian or Latvian speakers and cites the forms klÍti in Lithuanian and klÍts in Latvian, meaning ëgrain storeí. The word might, however, be an error for klefi, for which there is an

OWN equivalent with a similar sense.
17/17ñ19. Although half the wergild was paid for a Gotlander killed

by an animal (17/2ñ4 and 17/14ñ16), as if the creature were a minor, only one third was paid for a non-Gotlander (i.e. 31/3 rather than five marks of silver). This discrepancy seems unusual in that the proportion of wergild payable for injury to a non-Gotlander was commonly the same as for a Gotlander (cf. Note to 16/5ñ8). In respect of wounds and maiming by animals, the proportion seems to have been the same for both classes of person, however, at one third of the ordinary rate (cf. 17/25).

17/19ñ21. Compensation demanded for death or injury that was to be pursued as a normal debt and could not justify revenge was called krafarvereldi. WessÈn (SL IV, 261 note 10) points out that the word is used both for killing and for maiming, implying that a proportion of the wergild was paid for injury (cf. Note to 16/5ñ8).

17/23. The word gieldeti ëdebtí appears only in GL and seems to refer to the responsibility for a debt (see LidÈn 1911, 273ñ77).

Chapter 18: Ber ma ̨r kuna

The title strictly refers only to the first part of the chapter, and then only to pregnant women who lose their children as a result. The content of the second half is, however, related in that it deals with the proper care of small children.

18/3. Half the standard wergild seems to have been the usual amount payable for an unborn child (cf. 2/21, 14/32). The amount would possibly have varied depending on whether the father was a Gotlander or not, although this is not stated. What is also not specifically

NOTES 103

stated is the level of wergild for a minor (under fifteen), although it seems that the full fine was paid from the time that they were born (18/16). Minors committing crimes, however, sometimes paid half the normal fine (cf. 14/25, 59/6).

18/5. The phrase ëtwo witnessesí is the first use in the text of vitni without qualification referring to a personal witness as opposed to an abstract concept. Witnesses might, but did not need to be, eye- witnesses. In this case they were named as those who were to be called by a woman immediately after she had been the victim of an attack, in order to declare that she was telling the truth.

18/5ñ6. The verb skirskuta (OWN skÌrskota ëappealí, literally skuta ëwipe awayí plus skir ëcleaní) is used reflexively in GL in the context of either a plaintiff or defendant calling witnesses, as opposed to an earlier usage in the context of a defendant attempting to prove innocence (cf. GGD, 52 note 7; SL IV, 262 note 4 to Chap- ter 18 and references, 272 note 2 to Chapter 22). The verb was common in Scandinavian laws (cf. ÷gL Eb 26; SL I, ÷gL, 51 note 39; SdmL Kgb 6 pr; SL III, SdmL, 58 note 28). It is also used in GulL 37, 40, 266 (NGL 1, 22ñ24, 24, 86ñ88) with the preposition undir to indicate the formal calling of witnesses.

18/8. This is the second occasion in GL on which two female wit- nesses are mentioned. As the evidence they were to give was in respect of a miscarriage, it seems likely that they were the same witnesses that the woman would have called to witness a birth (cf. Note to 2/5).

18/10. It is also significant that the expression ̨iau ̨a ai ̨r ëperson oathí rather than manna ai ̨r is used of the six witnesses confirm- ing the womanís statement that the child was alive before the attack. This seems to imply that some at least of those witnesses could be female. These six oath-takers were clearly neither the same as the two witnesses referred to at 18/5, nor the two female witnesses. A similar distinction is drawn in the case of a woman falling preg- nant to a rapist (see 22/23ñ26).

18/14ñ15. Jacobsen (GGD, 53 note 4) takes va ̨i ëby misadventureí as meaning a deliberate act, but with unforeseen consequences, rather than an unintentional, accidental one, and the full compen- sation payable justifies this assumption. Swedish provincial laws clearly differentiate between vÂdaverk and viljaverk: the latter were acts of deliberate malice and the former more or less unintentional, although culpable. There is no mention of the former in GL, although

104

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

reduced fines for killing by a minor (14/25) or a dumb animal (17/ 2ñ4; 17/14ñ16; 17/17ñ19) might be considered to reflect a view of these acts as accidental. Amira (1882ñ95, I, 711) regards the lack of provisions for accidental acts as evidence that GL, as pre- served, is incomplete (cf. Introduction, pp. xxiiñxxv).

18/15ñ16. ëHe is to pay the full wergildí ( ̨a bytir hann vereldi fullu). It appears from this that the half wergild was only applicable in certain cases and that if the child itself were subject to (albeit unintentional) violence it would be apportioned full compensa- tion, provided that the mother had taken all necessary precautions.

18/16ñ22. The concept of a dead person as obyttr ënot subject to compensationí usually applied in cases in which they could be said to have committed a crime warranting their death (cf. Note to Chapter 13). In this instance, however, it is the mother who forfeits her right to a claim through her own negligence.

Chapter 19: Af sarum

Apart from the section on inheritance, this is the most complex sec- tion of GL. There are a certain number of inconsistencies, which are noted below, but otherwise GL is notable for the variety of levels of compensation and the absence of an explicit concept of OldSwe full sar or fullsÊri (a major wound requiring treatment and subject to full, i.e. maximum, compensation). This concept appears in several Swedish provincial laws as well as in VStL and in Norwegian laws (cf. ƒVgL Sb 1; GulL 195 (NGL 1, 69ñ70)). There is, however, an implicit equivalent in GL, see following Note. Appendix D (ii) tabu- lates the various fines exacted for different acts of wounding.

19/2ñ6. The measurement of a mundr (a thumbís width or notional inch (2.54 cm)) for the depth of a ëfull woundí is used in VStL I 13 ß1. It is not absolutely clear how the calculation of compensation was made, but evidently two dimensions (depth and length) of each wound were taken into account and compensation paid in respect of the total, up to a maximum of eight marks in coin for sixteen mundr (or more) of wound at least a nailís breadth in depth. If the depth was less than a nailís breadth, but treatment was still needed, the maximum fine was four marks (cf. GGD, 54 note 2; SL IV, 262 note 2; Hasselberg 1953, 285ñ86). An analysis of fines that would have been payable based on the sum, as opposed to the product, of the two dimensions makes it seem more likely that the former would have been used. According to this formula only the

NOTES 105

very largest and deepest wounds would lie outside the eight-mark range and these would probably have resulted in permanent dis- ability or been fatal, in which case other compensation provisions would apply. Eight marks in coin (two marks of silver) were equiva- lent to one twelfth of the wergild for a Gotlander. This was also the fine for any knife wound and for injuries resulting in four bone fragments of a certain size having to be removed (see Notes to 19/15ñ16, 19/36ñ38).

19/5. The expression ëhalf lessí (halfu minna) means simply a half (see also 19/25, 23/31, 59/6, Addition 2/8).

19/6ñ8. The choice of witnesses on this occasion, two ra ̨menn ëmagis- tratesí and a lanzdomeri ëdistrict judgeí, suggests that they were official witnesses to a legal process (cf. Notes to 2/15, 3/36ñ38, 16/23ñ26).

19/7. The hundreds (hunderi, equivalent to hundaren in Svealand or h‰rad in Gˆtaland) were entities for legal, defence and military activities, but Guta saga, where the levy is described, does not use the word and GL uses it only in respect of the hunderis ̨ing as a legal entity. The term ra ̨ma ̨r for a local judge at a hunderis ̨ing is unique to Gotland (cf. GGD, 91 note 7; 31/3; Addition 8/ 51ñ54). The structure of the legislature and judiciary is further described in the Introduction, pp. xxviiñxxx.

19/9. As WessÈn (SL IV, 262 notes 3 and 4) indicates, officials were only asked to bear witness to the nature and extent of the wound itself. The perpetrator was charged by the injured party and his peers.

19/11ñ13. The number of assailants did not affect the compensation payable, which depended on the wounds themselves (cf. Note to 14/11ñ13).

19/15ñ16. The maximum fine was always payable for knife-wounds. Several Swedish provincial laws prescribe increased fines for knife injuries (cf. SL IV, 262 note 7). Presumably the extent of the wound was in this case irrelevant, as in the case of a wound involving internal organs (hulseri).

19/16ñ17. The fine for throwing a stone at someone and wounding them was three marks in coin, equivalent to the fine for a wound of about six mundr.

19/18. ëA blow which does not cause blood to be spiltí (lukahagg). Schlyter (CIG, 278 s. v. lukahagg) suggests that the first element is the same as OWN l ̇ka ëflat of the handí. In that case the

106

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

meaning would be a slap, but this hardly seems to apply to this provision. The provision is missing from tyGL and daGL (cf. SL IV, 262 note 9).

19/23. The word litvan ëfacial defectí is known only from GL. Although Rydqvist (1850ñ83, V, 243ñ44, VI, 272), following Hadorph (Gothlandz-Laghen, 16), has suggested likvan ëbodily disfigurementí, Tamm (1883ñ84, 311) in his review of Rydqvistís work considers that the form in the A-text can stand and that it refers to facial disfigurement, the element lit occurring in several words relating to the face (cf. ModSwe anlete ëcountenanceí). WessÈn takes the first element as litr m. ëcolour, appearance and the second element as a noun derived from OWN adjective vanr ëlackingí. The extra compensation to be paid for such disfigurement is laid down at the end of the provision. If no healing took place, the full two marks of silver was paid for a nose or lip and half that for an ear.

19/25ñ30. The criteria given here for judging the severity of a facial disfigurement, whether it could be seen across the road or across the assembly and whether it could be masked by a hat or hood, are similar to those in several Swedish provincial laws, the Old Danish laws and VStL (cf. VmL Mb 21 ß1; SdmL Mb 5 pr; SkL 95 (CISk I 94); JL1 III ß29; VStL I 15 ß6ñ7).

19/30. The phrase ëand wound compensation in additioní (ok ̨au sara bytr), indicating that compensation for the initial wound was additional, applies to both the preceding criteria (cf. VStL I 15 ßß6ñ7; SdmL Mb 5 pr).

19/33. The Gutnish text has himin e ̨a hinna for ëmembraneí. Schlyter (CIG, 379; CISG, 274) considers himin ëmembraneí to be a scribal error, corrected by the scribe to e ̨a hinna, but Pipping (GLGS, 24 note 2) and WessÈn (SL IV, 263 note 14) argue that the two expres- sions supplement each other. Cf. the parallelisms noted by Pipping at GLGS, 58 line 17 and 68 line 5 (in Guta saga), which are also taken by Schlyter (CISG, 415 and 273) to be scribal amendments, and the Notes to 13/7ñ8, 21/16ñ17, 60/6. There are further exam- ples from B-text at 6/18, 25/48, 25/50 and 28/70.

19/35ñ36. The singular method of measuring the size of a bone frag- ment by dropping it into a bowl and hearing if it rang (i skalu skieldr), seems to have been common in Scandinavia. It also occurs in the Frisian laws (see SL IV, 263 note 15). Similar regulations appear in ÷gL Vb 19, Eriks SjL1 Text 1 II ß39, GulL 185 (NGL 1, 67ñ68) and FrostL IV 49 (NGL 1, 172). These last two read

NOTES 107

respectively Eyri firi bein hvert er Ûr leysir, ef skellr i skalom and er bein leysir or s·ri manns, ̨Û at alllÌtit se oc skellr · skilldi, ̨· scal eyrer uppi. Larson (1935, 139 and note 11) translates the first as ëan ˆre for every [bit of] bone that has to be removed if the silver rings in the scalesí and interprets this as meaning that the ëmoney is ready for paymentí. This, however, seems to be a misun- derstanding, since the word ësilverí does not appear in the original text. Similarly, in FrostL, Larson (1935, 277 and note 11) trans- lates oc skellr · skilldi as ëand [the coins] rattle on the shieldí with a footnote that this means that ëthe money is ready for paymentí. Again, this does not seem to be the correct interpretation. Both instances seem to refer to the bones themselves rattling in a recep- tacle as a measure of their size.

19/37. The form eln ëellí is recorded on a standard (half) ell measure found at the church at StÂnga, a parish in the southeast of Got- land: hitta ier ret gota eln ëthis is the true ell of Gotlandí. The length of an ell varied from time to time and place to place, but the ell at StÂnga is about 55.36 cm. Two further ell measures from the same part of Gotland, at Havdhem and at Hemse Church, are similar in length, but there is evidence of a shorter ell (52.1 cm) in use in the twelfth century (see Jansson 1936, 44). In 1863 the last recorded Swedish ell measured 59.38 cm (about 231/3 inches). In England an ell was 114.3 cm (45 inches), approximately double that measurement.

19/36ñ38. This stipulation is obscure and may be corrupt. There is no record elsewhere of a similar method of measuring larger bone shards than those in the previous sentence. The German transla- tion, tyGL, provides the interpretation that the shards had to be so large that with an ell-long thread attached, they could be thrown over a five-ell (2.75 metre) high roof beam. S‰ve (GU, xxx) sug- gests that ri ëpillarí or ëbeamí is a loan from Estonian, transmitted to Gotland by the Swedish population of Estoniaís western sea- board and islands. See SL IV, 263 note 16 and references.

19/38ñ40. WessÈn (SL IV, 263 note 17) points out that iiii markum penninga equates to a mark of silver and this is the fine quoted in daGL. In tyGL, which mistakenly gives one mark in coin as the fine for a finger, it states that a thumb is equal to all the other fingers, instead of counting it as equivalent to two fingers. If the fingers of both hands are included, valued at one mark in coin each, the total would be eight marks in coin, or two marks of silver

108

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

as in GL. Loss of a thumb was thus valued at one third of a hand (19/48ñ49), as opposed to a half in the majority of Swedish pro- vincial laws (cf. ƒVgL Sb 4; ÷gL Vb 18 pr).

19/43ñ47 and footnotes. Pipping (1904, 10ñ12) provides detailed commentary on these lines. The thrust of his argument is that Schlyter (CIG, 38ñ39 and notes) has made an error in saying that the Gtn for ëtoeí is ta (written in error as ̨a on occasions). Pipping argues that neither is correct and that tia is the correct form. By a careful comparison of the A- and B-texts, Pipping shows convincingly that the scribe of the former has omitted two separate phrases, which are found in the latter (and so identified in this translation), by skipping from one occurrence of an abbreviation of marcum to the next. This supposition, supported by WessÈn, removes any objec- tion to the word ok ëalsoí in line 46, since the fines concerned are both two marks of silver (cf. GGD, 56 note 9; SL IV, 263 notes 20 and 22). It also renders unnecessary Schlyterís change of the pre- ceding ̨a to ta in the disputed sense ëtoeí and replaces the emendation that gave rise to it. The B-text form thia follows a practice common in that manuscript of writing th for t as well as for ̨. WessÈn points out additionally that although loss of use of a finger was considered as serious as its being cut off, only one third of the compensation was paid for disablement of a hand or foot as for its complete loss, for which one quarter of a wergild was due (cf. SL IV, 263 notes 20 and 23).

19/46. Jacobsen (GGD, 56 note 8) points out the implied alliteration in ̨an hels e ̨a (h)nakka ëthe heel or neckí and that this could date the phrase to the period prior to the loss of the initial h in the latter, i.e. c.1100. Schlyter (CISG s. v. hÊl) points out that earlier translations mistakenly take hels to mean ëthroatí, whereas it is the genitive of hel.

19/47ñ49. The six marks of silver that were payable for loss of hand, foot or eye was one quarter of a wergild, in contrast to the one half that was stipulated in VStL (I 24 ß1, 28 ß1, 18). The reduced level has parallels in German regional laws (cf. Brunner 1906ñ28, II, 823 note 77; Wilda 1960, 762ñ63; Hasselberg 1953, 305 note 12 and references; Notes to 16/5ñ8 and 17/19ñ21).

19/49. The sense ëassaultí for the verb laika, alongside ëplayí, is common in other Scandinavian languages, the most infamous example being HÂtunaleken in 1306, when King Birger was imprisoned by his brothers at the estate in HÂtuna (cf. GGD, 57 note 1).

NOTES 109

19/49ñ52. WessÈn (SL IV, 263 note 25) points out that the fine for the loss of two hands, feet or eyes is ambiguous. The issue seems to be whether the fine is twelve marks for the two (i.e. simply twice the fine for one) or twelve marks each, giving the equivalent of a wergild for the loss of both hands, both feet or both eyes in one attack. WessÈn thinks that the latter is the more likely, since other- wise there would have been no need to differentiate between this situation and that relating to the loss of one hand, foot or eye.

19/58. ”lafur HalldÛrsson (1990, 115, 121ñ22, 130) notes that, in a series of riddles in a sixteenth-century Icelandic manuscript, uÌgnyrum, from vÌgn ̋ra n., means ëtesticleí and compares this to vigniauri m. ëtesticleí in GL. He comments that these are the only instances of this word, but that n ̋ra is recorded by Ivar Aasen in his Norsk ordbog in the sense ëtesticleí, as is hvÌtan ̋ra in Faeroese, particu- larly of rams and bulls. There is a single instance in Icelandic of n ̋ra, in M·bilar rÌmur, where the sense is obviously ëtesticleí.

19/58ñ61. The fine for the removal of both testicles (i.e. castration) is twelve marks of silver (half a wergild) and it is only if the penis is cut off that the fine rises to æ wergild. For the crime of castration ƒVgL Sb 4 ß6 sets nine marks of silver for the disfigurement and nine for the wound, two wergilds in total (as were payable for a killing), while in YVgL Urb 2 ßß7, 16 the act is regarded as a despi- cable act (ni ̨ings vÊrk) and the fine is fifty-four marks of silver or six wergilds. In ÷gL Vb 5, the crime is considered to be the ëmost seriousí wound (as it is in the laws of Svealand) punishable with a forty-mark fine in coin for the wound and another forty for the disfigurement. This amount is doubled by the addition of forty marks for an unborn son and forty for an unborn daughter, giving a total of 160 marks in coin or four wergilds. The laws of Svealand fall into two groups: UL Mb 30 pr and HL Mb 15 pr give self- judgement, and failure to pay results in the perpetrator losing both hands and helpers one hand as a retaliatory punishment. SdmL, DL, VmL follow ÷gL, with slight variations (see SL IV, 263 note 27). The relatively lenient fine stipulated in GL might suggest that this provision belonged to an early form of the law.

19/63. The verb tielga (here ësplití) has led to discussion and two translations: (1) ëcut, scoreí, related to OWN telgia (Schlyter (CIG, glossary) and Kock (LÂle II, 348)) and (2) ësplití, related to OWN tialga (Noreen 1897, 26; 1904, ß231 note). From the context, relating to damage to bones, this latter seems to be preferable. Note that

110

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

the present translation, which refers to a ësmaller boneí, follows all

previous editors, but is not explicit in the text.
19/67. The definition of onytr ëuselessí must be related to the use of

sword and sickle as defined at 19/43 (see SL IV, 264 note 31). 19/69ñ70. The right (as well as the obligation) of proof fell to a defendant if there was no visible damage. The clause ëthe defend- ant has the right to substantiate his denialí (hafi ̨an vitor ̨ sum vers), which occurs three times more, was a standard legal expres-

sion (see GGD, 58 note 4).
19/72. Swearing an oath on oneís own behalf was unusual and an

exception to the procedure set out at the start of the chapter (see SL IV, 264 note 34). It is the only instance of ainsyri ëself-witnessí in GL although there are a number of occasions on which only one person has to give witness: a priest supporting a womanís claim to have been shriven of infanticide (2/10ñ11), a man stating that he had witnessed a womanís cry of ërapeí (22/5), a woman confirming that all the laces on her clothing had been restored (23/14ñ15), someone whose property has been stolen confirming how much had been taken (Addition 8/7ñ9).

19/73ñ79. Provisions relating to deafness caused by blows do not occur in Swedish provincial laws, but equivalents are to be found in VStL I 15 ßß1ñ4.

19/75. This is the only reference to fowl in GL. In contrast to geese, they are mentioned infrequently in provincial laws, although a limit of a cockerel and two hens is set in DL Tjb 17.

19/77. A deleted wi preceding the phrase siex manna ai ̨i ësix-man oathí appears to be an example of the scribe deciding to substitute the word siex, having already written the Roman numeral. In an- other case (31/4), he has not noticed his error and has not deleted the latter. Pipping (1901a, 95 note 1) argues that the A-text possibly originally had Roman numerals throughout for numbers greater than one.

19/80ñ86 and footnote. Further differences in fines laid down between the A- and B-texts are in evidence here. The fine for loss of an ear is two marks of silver in all manuscripts of GL apart from B 64, and that for damage to an ear without its loss is one mark in the B- text and in daGL. It is not clear why eyeteeth are singled out for mention, since the fine for them was the same as for other teeth in the same jaw. It is possible that there was a time when they were valued differently. The B-text, incidentally, lacks the differentiation

NOTES 111

found in the A-text (and tyGL) with regard to upper and lower

teeth. See also Addition 4/3ñ5.
19/90ñ91. The concept of a non-verbal insult ( ̨unki) occurs several

times in GL, even if the word itself is not used in every instance. Apart from throwing ale in someoneís face, insults included man- handling a person riding or walking on the highway (19/128), making a minor attack on a manís beard or hair (19/100ñ02), damaging a manís inner clothing (19/110), knocking the clasp of a womanís clothing to the ground or displacing her clothing slightly (23/9ñ10, 23/15ñ17), grasping her elbow or knee (23/22, 23/25ñ26). The fine was eight ˆrtugar in each case. Carrying off wood from an- other manís forest (26/38ñ46), breaking his fence (26/48ñ49) or taking his horse in error, leaving your own instead (35/10ñ12) incurred the same penalty, which gives an insight into the impor- tance that was attached to these non-verbal insults (cf. SL IV, 264 note 38). Wennstrˆm (1936, 57 notes 66 and 67; 1940, 310ñ12) compares ̨unki in GL with OldSwe ̨okki, which he relates to the OldSwe verb ̨ykkia ëthinkí (see CISG s. v. ̨okka bot, ̨okki).

19/91. Ertaug was the Gtn equivalent of OldSwe ˆrtugh (ModSwe ˆrtug). As a weight it was recorded from Viking times as 1/24 mark or1/3 ˆre.Themark,ˆreandˆrtughadthesamerelationshipall over Scandinavia, but the number of pennies (i.e. coin) to an ˆrtug, and thus to a mark, was variable over region and time. A fine of eight ˆrtugar is common in GL, although fines of a half, one, four and five also occur. Eight ˆrtugar were equivalent to 1/3 mark in weight or coin (see SL IV, 264 notes 38 and 44). This is confirmed by the fact that the sum is greater than two ˆre (o mark, cf. fines for damage to clothing, 19/110) and less than 1⁄2 mark (cf. fine for striking off a womanís buckle, 23/9ñ10). See Appendix C for fur- ther details of the monetary system in Gotland.

19/92ñ94. It is worth noting that admitting to one blow laid one open to an accusation of up to three further blows and gave the initiative to the plaintiff, whereas if one did not admit to an attack, one had the right to present oneís defence.

19/97ñ98. From the context, lukahagg is clearly not a blow with the flat of the hand (cf. Note to 19/18), but presumably any blow that did not draw blood, although it might in other cases leave the person disabled (cf. GGD, 59 note 6; SL IV, 264 note 40).

19/98ñ99. The words fiet iru lag guta ëThat is the law of the Gotlandersí must previously have signalled the end of a major section of the

112

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

law. The B-text has the singular of the verb (ier), which seems to

be more correct grammatically after ̨et.
19/100 and footnote. The B-text has a new chapter (20) at this point. 19/100ñ08 and footnotes. It is possible that the stringent laws against

pulling out hair were related to a belief that magic could be wrought using hair (cf. BorgL I 16 (NGL 1, 350ñ51)). Hair and nails were considered to have magic properties as they grew visibly, and a bald person was regarded as a possible subject of black magic (cf. de Vries 1957, I, ß202 and ß239). Note the additional references to pulling hair at 8/11, 8/38 and 41, 11/4, 19/87 and 62/3ñ5, and the variations in the B-text given in Addition 5.

19/101ñ05. The detailed compensation relating to hair-pulling is reflected only in VStL I 15 and not in Swedish provincial laws.

19/105ñ08. See Note to Addition 5/2ñ5.
19/109 and footnote. The B-text has a new chapter (21) at this point.

The yfirkle ̨i ëouter garmentsí were a cloak or cape, probably the same as the gangkle ̨i ëwalking-clothesí referred to at 20/108 and 20/113ñ14.

19/110. Although Pipping (GLGS, Ordbok, 46) translates kurtil ëkirtleí as ëkjortel, underkl‰dningí (kirtle, underclothing), it more prop- erly referred to a gown worn over a likvari ëundergarmentí, but under any cloak or outer garment, the equivalent of modern ëindoor clothingí (cf. Falk 1919, 145).

Bugge (1877ñ78, 267) derives likvari ëundergarmentí from lik ëbodyí and verja ëto dressí. The meaning is thus the clothes near- est the body.

19/112. It is not clear whether the author is distinguishing between serkr ëvestí and skyrta ëshirtí, or if this is simply a synonymous alliteration. The two garments seem to have been similar, made of sheep wool, but Falk (1919, 141ñ45) believes that a serkr was possibly sleeveless, although longer than a skyrta, which had long sleeves. Pippingís Swedish translations ëlinne, lintygí (vest) and ëskjortaí (shirt) might be anachronistic, but will serve as a distinction.

19/116 and footnote. The B-text has a new chapter (22) at this point. 19/120ñ21. Witnesses were required only to confirm the veracity of

the injured manís story, not to give evidence of his injury.
For an account of the system of judges, see Introduction, pp.

xxvñxxvi, xxixñxxx.
19/126 and footnote. The B-text has a new chapter (23) at this point. 19/132 and footnote. The B-text has a new chapter (24) at this point.

NOTES 113

19/134ñ36. Two ˆre is o mark, which is half the fine for extra blows to the free man in the fight.

19/139ñ41. It is worth noting that minor wounds to slaves, for example a blow with a stone, attracted the same compensation as to a free man. 19/141ñ42. A slave could neither give nor receive an insult, the latter because of his lack of status and the former because any adverse comment from such a person would presumably have been

regarded as unworthy of consideration.
19/142. The paragraph that follows this in the A-text has been moved

to its proper place in Chapter 20 (Chapter 26 in the B-text). Chapter 20 Af allum lutum

The laws of inheritance in Gotland as recorded in GL are complex and to some extent contradictory. The most thorough analysis of them is to be found in Holmb‰ck (1919, 219ñ41), where previous studies by Pipping (1904), Delin (1909) and others are taken into account. The following notes relate to specific aspects in individual provisions.

20/6. Jacobsen (GGD, 63 note 1) suggests that the use of ar ëyearí instead of vintr ëwinterí here might indicate that this provision is younger than others in the law.

20/6ñ7. The phrase skiau ̨a ok skalar ëscrip and scalesí might be a fixed expression for the possessions that a younger son took away from the farm. Schlyter (CIG, 46), referring to Schildenerís German translation ëPferd und Schaaleí (horse and cup) (G-L, 211), sug- gests the noun sciaut n. ëdraught animalí should be substituted for skiau ̨a f. S‰ve (GU, 14) follows Schlyter. Bugge (1877ñ78, 269) thinks that the latter is not an error but that the wordís sense has been forgotten and that it was a leather bag for keeping oneís possessions in, comparable to OWN skjÛða. The English word scrip has the same sense, but probably a different origin. In this particu- lar context, WessÈn (SL IV, 265 note 2 and references) suggests that the bag could be one in which scale weights were stored. The implication is that when a young man attained his majority, he took charge of weighing out his portion. Although the age of majority appears to have been fifteen here for men, they were not liable to take part in the defence of the province, for which they had been provided with weapons (20/107), until they were twenty years of age (54/2). See also Note to 14/15.

114

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

20/8. The verb selia is used here to mean ëtransfer, make over, entrust, part withí since the context makes it clear that outright sale is not in question.

20/11ñ12. In the phrase nequar taki ungan oformaga til sina ësome- one takes the young minor as a wardí Jacobsen (GGD, 63) interprets nequar as referring to one of the heirs, but this does not seem to be a necessary assumption, and makes the following clause ambiguous (referring either to the guardian or the ward), whereas WessÈn (SL IV, 266 note 4) argues that it was the minor who retained his full portion. Indeed, it would seem logical that the guardian must have been outside the farm, since his or her action would not otherwise have relieved the situation. Compare this action to that in respect of an illegitimate child by a non-Gotlandic (20/103ñ05, 20/108ñ10, 20a/33ñ35) or a Gotlandic woman (20a/27ñ28, 20a/31ñ32), where the obligation seems to be only to raise the child and not to ëtake it as oneís owní.

20/16. ëRemain in their grandfatherís careí (Gtn sitia i karls skauti). The literal meaning is ësit in a manís lapí. The word karl is used of the head of a family, in this case the paternal grandfather of the girl or girls. The action of taking a child into oneís lap signified adop- tion or acceptance (especially of an illegitimate child), and the granddaughters would have been treated as daughters of the house- hold, as is clear from inheritance arrangements that immediately follow (cf. GGD, 63 note 6, 64 note 1; SL IV, 266 notes 5 and 6).

20/19ñ21. If there were surviving sons (in addition to any who had predeceased their father) then division of the inheritance gave the daughters of each deceased son their fatherís notional share between them (see GGD, 64 note 2).

20/21ñ23. The property referred to here is evidently the property that the deceased woman possessed in her own right. See Note to 20/71ñ80.

20/24. All translators and commentators agree that the clause i hueria quisl sum ̨et kumbr means ëto whichever branch [i.e. generation] it has comeí, that is, ëhowever many branches [generations] there might beí.

20/24ñ26. The Gtn lindagyrt e ̨a gyr ̨lu- ëmale or femaleí has been the subject of considerable debate. It is clear that one of these (feminine or neuter singular) participles refers to the male (line) and the other to the female. The equivalents in OWN were baug- gildismaðr ëagnatic kinsmaní and nefgildismaðr ëcognatic kinsmaní (cf. GulL 37 (NGL 1, 22ñ24)). The English equivalents are ëdistaff

NOTES 115

sideí and ëspear sideí. Both lindi and gyr ̨la have the sense ëbelt, girdleí, but neither is unambiguously used of female or male dress in medieval sources. Around the beginning of the fourteenth century a type of belt, called in Swedish a l‰ndb‰lt or l‰ndgˆrdel, was introduced. This fitted lower down (literally around the loins) and was sewn to the garment (see KL s. v. Gˆrdel och gˆrdelmakare). It is possible that women more commonly used this type, and that the earlier waist-fitting girdle was a male accessory, particularly as it would have been more useful for kilting garments for work. The previous scholarship may be summarised as follows. Those who argue that lindagyrt refers to the female (line) and thus translate tua linda- gyrta as meaning ëtwo [male descendants] of the female lineí are (1) Schlyter (CISG, 396ñ97) and (2) Hadorph (Gothlandz-Laghen, 21). Schlyter states that a linda was a womanís girdle. He refers to Sˆderwall (OSMS I, 531 s. v. linde) and hence to the legend of St George (MD, 192 ll. 219ñ22), a passage about the nuns of St Birgitta (HBU V, 42), Ett fornsvenskt legendarium (FL IñII, 501 ll. 15ñ19) and to Ihre (1769 s. v. garland) who states that linda was any belt, especially one worn by a virgin. Schlyter nevertheless acknow- ledges that Ihre has the opposite interpretation under Linda and Hadorph has the reverse translation in the earlier phrase. Those who take lindagyrt to refer to the male (line) and thus translate tua lindagyrta as meaning ëtwo [male descendants] of the male lineí are (1) Pipping (1904, 7ñ10); (2) WessÈn (SL IV, 266ñ67 note 12) and (3) The Low German translation of Guta lag (tyGL 21 ß2). Pipping argues that the male would be mentioned first and that Hadorph is inconsistent. He also cites Fritzner (1891, 531), who lists instances in which lindi is used of male clothing, and Ihre (1769 s. v. Linda), who refers to the priestís girdle in YVgL Kkb 2. WessÈn argues that the grammatical form of tua lindagyrta means that it must be male and cites MLBL, VIII ß8 (NGL 2, 271) where lindi is used of a male garment. In tyGL lindagyrt(a) is translated ëmannes namení and gyr ̨lu(gyrt) ëvrouwen namení. Jacobsen (GGD, 64ñ65 note 7), however, retains the ambiguity of the original. She is unconvinced by Pippingís first argument and notes that in GL the female is three times referred to before the male. In the present translation Pippingís argument has been accepted with some reluc- tance, but a certain ambiguity has been retained.

20/25. The word bloz (translated ëdescendantsí) means direct heirs of the female in question, i.e. the bloodline. The genitive serves in

116

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

this case as a nominative (cf. OldSwe goz, ModSwe gods ëestate; propertyí). S‰ve (GU, xviii) considers the possibility that bo ̨s-kyn or blo ̨s-ett was intended. Relatives not in the direct bloodline were given different designations (cf. Note to 28/13ñ17).

20/25ñ29. This provision may be summarised as stating that if there were three male heirs in successive generations, following inherit- ance from a female, before the direct line ran out, the property in question stayed in the farm where it now resided, following nor- mal inheritance rules, otherwise it reverted to the farm from which it came (cf. GGD, 65 note 3; SL IV, 267 notes 13ñ17).

20/30. This provision could refer to property not in the form of land (lutr as opposed to aign), or it could simply refer to a situation in which an heiress leaves no male heirs, in which case lutr refers to all forms of inheritance (cf. CIG, 47; SL IV, 267 note 18). The latter seems more likely, since this situation is not otherwise provided for.

20/33 and footnote. The B-text has a new chapter (26) at this point. ëIf there are no sons on the farmí (fiar sum gangs i gar ̨i). This and similar expressions are taken by WessÈn (SL IV, 266 note 6) to refer to the end of the male line at a farm. Holmb‰ck (1919, 223ñ27) argues that this expression refers only to lack of surviving sons and that in these circumstances their sons and grandsons were included in the general division of inheritance. Cf., however, Note

to 20/71ñ80.
20/36ñ37. As WessÈn (SL IV, 267 note 21) points out, ëtheir fatherís

maternal inheritanceí (sett fa ̨urmy ̨rni) must mean their own (and

their brotherís) maternal inheritance.
20/38. The word penningr is used here to mean ëcoin, currency, that

which could be countedí as opposed to other property.
The ëpaternal inheritanceí refers to the father of the daughters

(af fe ̨rni sinu), that is, the brother of the unmarried aunts. 20/40ñ45 and footnotes. WessÈn (SL IV, 265 note 65) gives two circumstantial explanations for this paragraph appearing at the end of Chapter 19/142, footnote), rather than in its proper place here. The more likely, in view of the fact that the B-text has this para- graph in the margin, is that the originals for the A- and B-texts (both assumed to derive from v on the stemma on p. xix) already had this paragraph misplaced. The scribe of the former presumably simply copied what he had in front of him, whereas Bilefeld (or the scribe of his immediate original) observed the error. He then either decided to show the error in his original by means of a

NOTES 117

marginal note, or intended to insert the paragraph at the proper place but subsequently forgot to do so and had to insert it in the margin. The paragraph appears in its proper place in tyGL and daGL.

20/40ñ41. From the context, Holmb‰ck (1919, 223ñ27) argues, ëthe kinsmen . . . fourth generationí (ni ̨iar . . . a fiar ̨a mann) must refer to kin in the male line. He then considers what the last part of this phrase might mean, and comes to the conclusion that the de- ceased was included in the generation count, although this was not always the case in Swedish provincial laws. This means that the fourth remove from the deceased father was (1) amongst his ascendants his paternal grandfather; (2) amongst his descendants his great grandsons in the male line and (3) amongst collateral kin his brotherís sons and fatherís brothers. These all inherited equally with the deceasedís daughters (see following note) but how this division functioned in practice is not known. Diplomas show that during the thirteenth century farms were divided into small, barely supportable, holdings and occasionally it appears that the smaller of these, if sold, returned to the mother farm. The provision in Chapter 28/71 relating to the division of property seems specifi- cally to be limited to liquid assets.

Concerning the form burnum ëdaughtersí in the B-text, Schlyter (CIG, 247) argues that this variant reading should be ignored, but Valter Jansson (1935, 7ñ8, 10ñ13) in a study of a runic inscription from Bro parish in Gotland, offers evidence from other inscriptions that borna means ëdaughterí. He cites the fact that tyGL has myt den tochteren ëwith the daughtersí and the Danish, daGL, medt burne in support of his suggestion. On this basis WessÈnís accept- ance (SL IV, 267 note 23) that mi ̨ burnum means ëwith the daughtersí has been followed here.

20/43 footnote. ëand the womenís portions are dischargedí (ok quinna lutir iru ut rettadir). WessÈn (SL IV, 267 note 25) thinks that this clause was original, although it is missing from the A-text, since it relates to the immediately following provision. A widowís claim was treated as a debt to the estate, payable before the inheritance was divided (cf. Note to 13/60).

20/43 and footnote. The masculine form hann instead of the femi- nine appears again at 22/20, also corrected by S‰ve in GU (cf. Pipping 1904, 15). The B-text continues with the plural here: En qwindi takin slict yr gardj sum thar i haffdu ëBut women take

118

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

those things from the farm that they brought to ití. The reference is to the widow of the owner of the farm and to the return of the dowry (haimfylgi) she brought to the marriage.

20/44ñ45. If a dowry claim was not properly laid out in the year immediately following her husbandís death, the estate had the right to withhold payment, or at least the right of proof if a case were brought (see SL IV, 268 note 27). Iuul (1941, 174ñ77) suggests that dowry provisions in GL represent an earlier situation than those in mainland provincial laws.

20/46ñ47. The widow of a family where the male line had expired received support for just one year, if she did not remarry. It seems to be tacitly assumed that she was free to do this if she wished, as she would have been in Svealand. In Gˆtaland, she would have had to have agreement from her giftoman (the one who received her bride-price). The provisions here seem to be less generous than those laid out at 20/66ñ70, but they may have been granted in addition to the latter.

20/47ñ48. Grain and other produce were normally measured by ca- pacity rather than weight in the Middle Ages. A laupr was o barrel, roughly equivalent to a bushel (circa thirty-six litres). It has the same derivation as Old English leap ëbasketí. The word laupr for grain measure was apparently unique to Gotland and it is still current (cf. GGD, 105 note 4; GO s. v. *lˆp1; Gustavson 1940ñ42, 1948, 217; 1936, 300ñ01). The capacity measure normally in use, equivalent to half a barrel, was variously called a sk‰ppa or a spann, depending on the part of Sweden (cf. AakjÊr 1936, 211; Jansson 1936, 2, 5, 22). Neither is used in GL, but spannamal and variants are found in Gotlandic dialect.

On the evidence of pollen analysis, rye began to be cultivated in Scandinavia in the early Iron Age, but did not become a signifi- cant crop until the Viking Age. It was more resistant to drought and less demanding in terms of soil quality, and its good baking qualities caused it to advance over other types of grain in the sixteenth century. The oldest provincial laws all mention rye, it being the only seed crop referred to in ƒVgL (cf. ƒVgL ƒb 81; YVgL ƒb 33; ÷gL Kkb 2 pr). It also occurs in UL Kkb 7 ß5, SdmL Kkb 5 pr; Bb 13 pr, VmL Kkb 6 ß4. Rye seems to have been grown as an autumn crop and MELL Jb 29 refers to rye in such a context that winter rye must be intended. In southern Sweden rye seems to have been sown after 14th October (about a week later by the

NOTES 119

Gregorian calendar), that is, at the start of winter. Rye was also the

crop sown on newly cleared land (cf. Note to 48/2ñ3).
20/50. ëas she has put iní (han i quam). The reference is to property that the wife brought to a marriage, not to the wife herself. Pipping (GLGS, 31 note 1) expands on Schlyterís translation (CIG, 48), considering it to be a misreading. Cf. ëas many as they brought to

the farmí (sum ̨ar ̨et i gar ̨ flyttu) at 65/3ñ4.
20/52. The Gutnish expression for ëall children . . . equallyí is so

barn sum barn, literally ëeach child the same as the other; child for

childí.
20/53ñ54. This provision is obscure, but has presumably to be read

in conjunction with the provision at 24d/2ñ7 concerning the pro- tection given to sisters by their brothers before their marriage, and the portion given to them afterwards.

20/54ñ56. Normally a widow would have a right to her dowry (haimfylgi) and bride price (morgongÂva, hogsl in GL, see Note to 20/60ñ61), her bed and best clothes and then that part of the inheritance which fell to her on its division: one third of the liquid assets and land bought during the marriage, up to half the estate. In VStL IV 3 ßß4ñ6, for instance, full property sharing rights existed with a man receiving two thirds or a half of the property on the death of his partner and a woman a half or one third depending on the number of offspring. In GL, however, there seems to have been no such division and, in the case of a widow left childless, her family reclaimed the dowry. This could represent a much older system of inheritance than was in place on the mainland, perhaps regarding the dowry as an advance on the womanís inheritance (see Amira 1882ñ95, I, 528ñ30).

20/60ñ61. ëConsolation and provisioní (hogsl ok i ̨). The word hogsl is used later in the text of a sum of money paid in compensation to an unmarried mother by the father of her child (Chapter 20a). Al- though no level of payment is mentioned in connection with a widow, full hogsl for an unmarried mother was eight marks in coin (two marks of silver). The translator of tyGL has related this word to Middle Low German hˆger ëhigherí, but it might have resulted from a loan word: Middle Low German hogen ëgladden, comfort, consoleí (cf. CISG, 279; Amira 1882ñ95, I, 521ñ22; GU, xxvii; GLGS, cxiii; GLGS, Ordbok, 38 s. v. hogsl). This interpretation would suit both situations in which the sum was to be paid: a consolation either for loss of a husband or loss of oneís honour.

120

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

The word hogsl occurs only in GL and seems to be equivalent to the morgongÂva paid by a bridegroom to his bride, according to other provincial laws, on the morning after the wedding (the price for her virginity). This latter also reverted to the woman if she were widowed. S‰ve (GU, xxvii) offers several alternative deriva- tions and relationships for hogsl, including one to OWN hÛgr ëfriendly, gentleí, which he thinks might support a sense equiva- lent to that of the morgongÂva.

The word i ̨ means literally ëoccupation, industriousnessí and it seems likely that this sum was paid in recognition of the work that a widow had contributed to the farm during her years of marriage, although it might have simply been a provision for her new un- supported state (see SL IV, 268 note 31). Schlyter (CISG, 279 s. v. hogsl) suggests that the phrase might be an example of parallelism and that the two sums were not separate. There do, however, seem to have been distinct payments that were applicable. A widow certainly, according to the following provision, received payment for care of her family for the first eight years after her widowhood, if she did not remarry, and if her sons died leaving no heirs during that time. This has led to speculation that the i ̨ might also have varied and been proportional to the length of the marriage (cf. GLGS, cxii; GGD, 67 note 2; Holmb‰ck 1919, 221ñ22).

20/63ñ64. The presumption is that the widow could, in addition to hogsl ok i ̨, claim a mark in coin for each year, up to eight, that she remained on the farm supporting her sons or their offspring. It is implied that the sum was taken at the end of the period, rather than year by year and that, even if any sons survived beyond that time or left offspring, she would not have been entitled to further money from the estate, although the wording is ambiguous.

20/66ñ70. A childless widow received board and lodging (but no payment for care of her family) for as long as she wished, or 1⁄2 mark in coin a year up to sixteen years, payable on an annual basis, if she chose not to remain on the farm. The total amount was the same as that for a widow with children and presumably the latter also received her board and lodging if she stayed on the farm. These two provisions seem to be at odds with that at 20/46ñ49 also relating to childless widows where it is implied that they only received support for a year. It is possible, however, that both were applicable. Previous editors have not commented upon this inconsistency.

NOTES 121

20/71 and footnote. The B-text has a new chapter (27) at this point. 20/71ñ80. The first half of this paragraph, together with the provi- sions at 20/23ñ25 and 33ñ59, are taken by Westholm (2007, 72ñ73) to be evidence of the relatively high status of women in Gotland. She suggests that there might have been farms run and owned by women, giving rise to the Gotlandic farm or estate name KvinnogÂrde. 20/79. ëAnd they are both equal in blood relationshipí. See Notes to

20/24, 20/25 and 20/25ñ29.
20/82. The provision that sisters are equal to daughters presumes

that the son died before his father in the fire (cf. the provision at 20/14ñ16), whereas a more modern supposition is that the older person died first, in which case the provisions at 20/33ñ37 would have applied.

20/87. In the expression innan staurs ëwithin the farmsteadí, staur appears to have been not just a single pole or stake, but a series of poles that marked the boundary of the home farm. The enclosed area had certain rights associated with it, which were important in legal terms, but which were sometimes equally applicable to land lying outside the boundary (cf. 25/38ñ39, 57/4, 63/2ñ3).

20/91. The word for land yielding a certain rent was laigi and was originally used in connection with the rent to be paid by a tenant farmer. The expression marka laigi came later to be used in refer- ence to any area of land that would fetch a mark of silver in annual rent, if tenanted, the equivalent of markland in UL and elsewhere in mainland provincial laws. This usage seems to have continued into the eighteenth century in Gotland. In UL Jb 1 rent is stated to be one twenty-fourth of the freehold value of the land. According to this valuation, a mark laigi would thus have been land to the freehold value of twenty-four marks of silver or three of gold (cf. Note to 3/4). One mark of gold in terms of freehold land would thus have been equal to 1/3 of a mark laigi and nine marks of gold, three markar laigi. The basis for land taxation was freehold value, but this could also be expressed in acreage, varying from district to district depending on the fertility of the soil (cf. SL III, SdmL, 95ñ96; Note to 28/35ñ39). Land worth one mark of silver was subject to a rent of one ˆrtug (1/24 mark) and was called an ˆrtugland. Lˆnnroth (1940, 87ñ101) summarises five different theories relat- ing to the origin of the term markland and concludes that it was an assessment unit for land (in relation to inheritance), which eventu- ally became a measure of obligation to taxation. Cf. CISG s. v.

122

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

laigi; Styffe 1864, 64ñ66; Jacobsen (GGD, 68 note 8); Thulin 1911, 122; Sandstrˆm 1927, 41ñ42; Ambrosiani 1939, 162ñ63; WessÈn (SL IV, 269 note 39 and references); Dovring 1947, 357ñ58.

20/92 and footnote. The B-text has a new chapter (28) at this point. The prefix ̨y- used in GL to denote illegitimate children was a word for a female servant, female slaves frequently being taken as concubines. The word ̨ysun (similarly ̨ydotir and ̨ybarn) thus originally meant ëson of a slave womaní, but here it includes the illegitimate son of a free man and woman (cf. Holmb‰ck 1919, 228ñ31). The coming of Christianity brought about a differentia- tion between children born to married and unmarried parents, particularly after the Synod of Sk‰nninge in 1248. Provincial laws other than GL imply that such a child could only inherit from its

mother, if at all (cf. ƒVgL ƒb 8, YVgL ƒb 11ñ12; ÷gL ƒb 4). 20/93. The adjective a ̨al is used in two contexts in GL, here meaning ëtrueborní and in Chapter 25 concerning land meaning ëcultivatedí as opposed to ëwoodlandí. In the present chapter there seem to be two senses, both related to ëtrueborní: Gotlandic as opposed to non-Gotlandic and legitimate as opposed to illegiti-

mate (20/101).
20/94ñ96. This provision presupposes that written genealogical ta-

bles were common in Gotland, although none survive (cf. SL IV, 269 note 43). They did not come into use elsewhere until later in the Middle Ages, although there are genealogical elements on some runic inscriptions, in diplomas and in literature, e.g. Erikskrˆnikan (ll. 202ñ31). It is worth noting that it was the female line of an illegitimate son that had to be Gotlandic for him to inherit. This presumably excluded both non-Gotlandic women and slaves (cf. Notes to 20/92, 20/93).

20/103ñ05, 20/108ñ11. The responsibility taken by a father for the support of his illegitimate children by non-Gotlandic women, as well as Gotlandic, contrasts with certain mainland provincial laws in which they were the responsibility of their mother (cf. ƒVgL ƒb 8, YVgL ƒb 11ñ12; ÷gL ƒb 4). The laws of Svealand distribute responsibility between the parents (cf. UL ƒb 23 ß2; 24 pr; HL ƒb 14 ß2).

20/107ñ08. It is possible to detect an alliterative passage behind the list of items to be provided: fulkvapn ok sengakle ̨i, faldu ok legvitu ok vengi, ok femtan elnar kle ̨is til gangkle ̨a. Such alliteration would have been an aid to memory.

NOTES 123

20/107. The battle weapons (or equipment) for the levy in defence of the province (fulkvapn) were distinguished from murder weapons, or weapons used by knights. In HL Rb 14 ß2, the folkvapen are named as sword or axe, iron helmet, shield, brynia or musa (chain mail helmet or hood), bow with three dozen arrows. These last were also considered (at least potentially) to be murder weapons (cf. SdmL Mb 26 ß3; DL Mb 19; SL II, DL, 45 notes 61 and 62). Sometimes a spear and club were included, although these are not mentioned in provincial laws and the axe was considered to be the most important weapon of the levy (Grieg 1943b, 124; Hellsten 1943, 186). The shield was originally round and made from lime wood, but this later proved ineffective and was superseded (Grieg 1943a, 69). The word fulkvapn occurs also in SkL 88 (CISk I 87), with respect to breaking and entering, and elsewhere in Danish and Swedish provincial laws. Cf. GGD, 69 note 7; SL IV, 269 note 48; SL IV, 72 note 15 and references.

The top covering of a bed (falda) was made of skins, but another skin might have been used under the sleeper to cover the straw (cf. Neogardís collection, Gautau-Minning; SL IV, 270 note 49).

Mattress fillings were, for example, down, feathers, hair, hay, moss, seaweed, leaves or chaff, according to the social status of the family and what was available. Hay and straw were most common. S‰ve (GU, xxviii) describes beds as having first a straw mattress, then an under sheet (ëunderkl‰deí), then a wool or homespun blan- ket called the ël‰gitaí or ëlegtaí and lastly a sheet, but this conflicts with alternative suggestions. According to Bugge (1877ñ78, 266ñ67) legvita was still current in nineteenth-century Gotland to desig- nate a woollen blanket put on a bed between the under sheet and the top sheet. He thinks that the word derives from elements mean- ing ëa white blanket for lying oní. The final blanket or bedcovering (sengakle ̨i) was sometimes the sleeperís cloak.

20/108. The vengi mentioned may have been a pillow for the bed, or else a rai ̨vengi ësaddle cushioní.

From the context, kle ̨i in this single instance means not ëgar- mentsí, but ëclothí. It was fine woollen material (cf. English ë(broad)clothí) in contrast to native homespun (Swedish vadmal), of which there is, curiously, no mention in GL, although the term appears in ÷gL Bb 9 pr and in MELL Jb 9.

20/108ñ14. The assumption that illegitimate daughters remained at home until they were eighteen years of age implies that this was

124

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

the age of majority for women (as opposed to fifteen for men, 20/6). There is, however, no other support for this in GL. Daugh- ters received an extra mark in coin and a cow instead of weapons, which suggests that the latter were worth at least a mark more than a cow.

20/114ñ16. The rights of illegitimate children had to be honoured in the presence of the parishioners and with their given witness (cf. SL IV, 270 note 51).

20/118. The expression ëcharged with violationí (fallas vi ̨r) is an extension of the usual sense of the Gtn, which is ëbe found guiltyí (cf. OWN fallerask ëprove falseí, (of a woman) ëfallí).

20/120. The compensation (hogsl) given here was four marks in coin (one mark of silver), half of the maximum, whereas eight marks in coin (two marks of silver) were payable to a Gotlandic woman (20a/20ñ21). Cf. hˆgsl, hˆgen in tyGL (CIG, 134, l.24; 136, l.17); Note to 20/60ñ61.

20/121ñ22. The difference in penalty applicable to intercourse that was not discovered (a fine, in effect, of one mark of silver) from that in which the couple were innitakin ëcaught in the actí (mutilation or a fine of three marks of silver) is striking. Both these fines were half of what would have been payable for a wholly Gotlandic woman. The mutilation here and in the next chapter, loss of a hand or foot, was a shaming punishment, but it was not regarded as a mirroring or symbolic punishment, which was only meted out for a specific crime (e.g. loss of the nose for seduction or adultery, hanging for theft) or a retaliatory one, which repeated the result of the crime (e.g. loss of a corresponding limb for a wounding). Burning alive for an arsonist could be considered either symbolic or retaliatory (cf. Brunner 1906ñ28, II, 767ñ68; Hasselberg 1953, 235ñ42; KL s. v. Speglande straff). This provision is first in a series relating to sexual misconduct and, unusually, mixed relationships are men- tioned before wholly Gotlandic ones (see SL IV, 270 note 54). As WessÈn also points out, it provides a link between the provisions relating to inheritance and those relating to adultery and other sexual misdemeanours. This arrangement is typical of the organic structure of GL, with no strict division into sections and with an almost seamless transition from one subject to the next.

20/123ñ25. It is worth noting that the provisions were the same whether the father of an illegitimate daughter was Gotlandic and her mother non-Gotlandic, or vice versa.

NOTES 125 Chapter 20a: <Af manni innitaknum>

This new chapter (29) in the B-text is not signalled in the A-text, although the chapter title appears in the table of contents. The complex provisions relating to sexual misconduct in this and the following chapter reflect a little of the gradually changing attitudes to marital fidelity. In older Germanic laws it was only the husband who was considered to be shamed by the behaviour of his wife, and not vice versa. The Christian view that both parties to a marriage were equally responsible was slowly introduced into Scandinavian law, although equality of treatment is not evident in GL or in Swedish provincial laws, and in GL no fines to the bishop or other church official are mentioned (cf. Brunner 1906ñ28, II, 854ñ55; Wilda 1960, 821ñ22; Hemmer 1928, 241ñ42; Hasselberg 1953, 332ñ33).

20a/4ñ5. This is the only instance in GL in which loss of liberty, as opposed to life, status or money, is mentioned as a punishment. Stocks were used temporarily to hold a wrongdoer until he/she was redeemed by the family. It was only with the development of towns that prisons came into being. Originally, it was the duty of the injured party to keep a wrongdoer at his farm and conduct him to the assembly. As the very act of detention and binding was a seri- ous infringement of personal rights, there were carefully constructed rules surrounding this procedure, and the wrongdoer had to be caught in the act of committing a serious offence (cf. ÷gL Db 2 ß1; VmL Mb 26 ß5). On the other hand, if the injured party let such a person escape, they were themselves subject to fines (cf. Hasselberg 1953, 328ñ29 and notes 5 and 6; Thomson 1972, 89ñ90; Note to Addition 8/17ñ20).

20a/5ñ8. The fine of six marks of silver with which an offender could redeem his hand or foot was o of a manís wergild, but also the sum payable in compensation for loss of a hand or foot (see 19/47ñ49). This sum was presumably paid to the womanís family (as opposed to the hogsl paid to her if she became pregnant).

20a/12ñ14. The six men were to swear to the truth of the witness statement by the two parishioners, that no word had been heard of the manís involvement in the conception of the child before its birth. They were thus swearing to the truthfulness of the accused man himself (see SL IV, 270 note 60).

20a/14ñ15. The accused man was entitled to obtain a six-man oath if he could obtain two resident parishioners as witnesses. Jacobsen

126

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

(GGD, 71 note 3) offers the interpretation that the six men were to include the defendant and the two parishioners, but WessÈnís trans- lation appears more likely.

20a/17ñ18. Men of equal birth with the woman would in this instance presumably have been of Gotlandic birth (see SL IV, 270 note 62).

20a/18ñ21. If the man was unmarried as well as the woman, he might be expected to marry her, but if not he had to pay her full compen- sation (eight marks in coin) as if she were his widow.

20a/22ñ23. The three marks referred to here are most probably three marks in coin, as silver is not specified (see SL IV, 271 note 64). This payment is strikingly low in comparison to the sums payable to Gotlandic or (illegitimate) half-Gotlandic women for a discov- ered seduction (six or three marks of silver respectively). It is possible that three marks of silver was intended, which would have been equal to the amount payable in respect of an illegitimate half- Gotlandic woman (20/121ñ22). The sum is, however, the same as that payable by a non-Gotlandic man in similar circumstances, again with no reference to silver or coin (cf. Note to 20a/24ñ31, 33ñ36).

20a/23ñ24. Schlyterís punctuation, with a semicolon after ëdiscov- ered in flagrante delictoí (innitakin), does not seem to be correct. The meaning appears to be that the non-Gotlandic woman must be a resident and not a camp follower or a prostitute. Cf. GGD, 71 note 8; SL IV, 271 note 65.

20a/24ñ31 33ñ36. Compensation rules depended on the status of the woman in the case, and not on that of the man. If the woman were Gotlandic, her ëconsolationí was eight marks in coin (two marks of silver), which was one twelfth of her wergild (twenty-four marks of silver). If she were non-Gotlandic, it was three marks in coin, which was just a little less than one twelfth of her wergild of forty marks in coin (see SL IV, 271 note 71).

20a/27ñ28. Since the fine payable in all these cases depended on the status of the woman involved, and a Gotlandic woman is again under consideration here, one can infer from the expression hogsl atta markar here that fult hogsl (20a/20), compensation payable for undiscovered intercourse resulting in pregnancy, was also eight marks in coin.

20a/32 and footnote. Although the A-text has ë. . .if she is unmarriedí (en han ogipt ier), S‰ve (GU, 16) and Pipping (GLGS, 34 note 4)

NOTES 127

prefer the reading of the B-text and replace ogipt with ogiptr, read- ing han in the A-text as an error (or an alternative) for hann (nominative singular masculine). Both tyGL and daGL follow the reading of the A-text and Schlyter (CIG, 54), Jacobsen (GGD, 72 note 2) and WessÈn (SL IV, 271 note 69) consider that there is no need to make a change. The sense is quite clear without any amend- ment: if the woman was unmarried her father or, if he were dead, her brother was to take charge of the compensation and raise her child, but if she were married, then her husband presumably did so. Since the B-text has han for the masculine nominative pronoun and haan for the feminine nominative pronoun, it seems possible that an error existed in the manuscript Bilefeld was using and that this led to his writing ogipter rather than ogipt. It is worth noting that in this case the (Gotlandic) woman was not expected to marry the (non-Gotlandic) man.

20a/33 and footnote. The B-text reading ogutnischir ënon-Gotlandicí is probably correct, although the circumstance of a Gotlandic man having a child with a non-Gotlandic woman is not previously referred to either. Both tyGL and daGL have this same reading.

Chapter 21: Gierir mandr hor

This chapter continues the theme of the end of the previous one, covering provisions relating to cases in which one or more of the parties was married, or in which seduction or violence were involved. It is significant that the chapter title refers specifically to the male partner, and that no punishment is suggested for an erring wife. This is in contrast to some mainland provincial laws. In ƒVgL Gb 5 she has to leave home in her everyday clothes and in YVgL Gb 5 and 6 she is shamed in her banishment from the house by having her clothes cut if caught in the act, but otherwise must leave in her everyday clothes. The woman also forfeited her morgongÂva ëbride priceí and everything she received at her marriage. Adultery was usually the sole reason for divorce, although there is an exception in ÷gL Kkb 27, where incompatibility seems to have been permissible as a rea- son. In SdmL Gb 4 and VmL ƒb 6 a woman catching her husband in adultery, in her marriage bed, could maim her rival or tear her clothes and in UL and VmL (ƒb 6 ß1) she has the right to kill her rival. There is no mention in GL of any similar punishments.

The Swedish provincial laws with the sole exception of GL have provisions forbidding sexual relations with kin closer than the fifth

128

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

degree (cf. ƒVgL Gb 8, YVgL Kkb 52 and Urb 3, ÷gL Kkb 15 pr). There could be two reasons for this omission: GL totally lacks a section relating to church law, and/or the law was codified during the period preceding the Lateran Council of 1215, when the fourth degree limit was imposed, relaxing a previous limit of the sixth degree. This uncertainty could have led to the exclusion of any related statutes.

21/2ñ3. The first provision of this section refers, by a process of elimination, to payment by a married man committing adultery with an unmarried woman in addition to her consolation (21/5ñ7), or by an unmarried man committing adultery with a married woman but not caught in the act by her husband. The amount payable was only nine marks in coin, of which six went to the family of the woman or her husband.

21/4. Despite Jacobsenís doubts (GGD, 72 note 3), it is clear that yfirhor means ëdouble adulteryí and this is confirmed by the read- ing in tyGL, which is czwevald obirspil also das sy beide echte lute synt. This concept came into being with the introduction of Christianity and more equal responsibility for faithfulness between partners (cf. UL ƒb 6). The existence of married priests is implied by the phrase lerdir ella olerdir in the B-text, which all editors consider should be applied as an emendation to the A-text, by comparison with tyGL and daGL and with 21/9 (cf. CIG, 54; GLGS, 34 note 6; SL IV, 271 note 2). The wronged party, malsaigandi, was always the husband of the woman in the case. If the womanís seducer was a married man, rather than a single man, the husband received double the compensation and the community four times. Whether different recipients were intended by the use of the word land as opposed to ̨ing is unclear, but cf. 31/10ñ12. The punish- ment for discovered adultery was different (see Note to 21/9ñ12).

21/5ñ8. The compensation paid by a married man to an unmarried woman (in addition to that to her family) seems to have been the same as if an unmarried man fathered a child with an unmarried woman, that is hogsl, presumably dependent upon the status of the woman (eight marks or three marks). This is the sole instance of the word hogsl used in a circumstance in which no child is involved, and perhaps compensated for the manís inability to marry his vic- tim. If the situation were reversed, nothing was payable to the woman, who was considered to be partly culpable in this case, just to her husband (21/3).

NOTES 129

21/9ñ12. No differentiation between the treatment of a married and an unmarried man is made for discovered adultery with a married woman. Community fines do not seem to have been paid in such cases. The right of a cuckolded husband, who catches his wife in the act of adultery, to kill the male offender occurs in several main- land provincial laws (e.g. ÷gL Eb 26, Vb 30). In earlier laws, it was not necessary for the pair to be caught in the act (cf. ƒVgL Md 11; YVgL Db 22). In the provincial laws of Svealand, but not of Gˆtaland, the woman could also be killed, but suitable proof had to be taken to the assembly (cf. VmL ƒb 6). WessÈn (SL IV, 271 note 5) thinks that the option of the wrongdoer redeeming his life for forty marks (the wergild of a non-Gotlander) was borrowed from mainland laws and the sum involved seems to support this suggestion. The clause giving the husband the right to choose between the punishments occurs only in the A-text, but this might be presumed to have been the case.

The death sentence is mentioned in GL only in connection with five specific types of action: (1) for discovered adultery with a married woman as detailed here; (2) for abducting an unmarried girl without her parent or guardianís consent (21/15ñ20, 20ñ22); (3) for rape (22/16ñ19, 26ñ28); (4) for theft of property over a certain value, or subsequent theft (38/6ñ9); (5) for misappropria- tion or abuse of land of a certain value (63/11ñ12). The punishment is unconditional only in cases (4) and (5), otherwise the wronged party can choose compensation instead. Loss of oneís neck, pre- sumably decapitation, was the punishment for cases (2) and (5), and a shameful death by hanging is specifically mentioned for theft, but not otherwise. Medieval German laws showed a gradual increase in use of the death penalty from about the middle of the thirteenth century, together with a greater variety of means of execution. Swedish provincial laws as well as VStL show a similar trend (see Hasselberg 1953, 226ñ31). GL thus exhibits an older pattern of punishment, although a move from direct revenge for crimes of honour is reflected in its provisions (cf. Note to 8/25ñ 26). A number of theories have been proposed concerning the relationship between the death penalty and sacrifice. Mogk (1909, 642ñ43) concludes that Germanic sacrifice was a cult act, not a punishment, while Amira (1922, 57ñ64) argues that there was a link between sacrifice and the death penalty, supported by the observation that offences punishable by death were sacrilegious or

130

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

shameful in some way. Wennstrˆm (1936, 505ñ07) and Rehfeldt (1942, 164ñ66) reject this suggestion and Strˆm (1942, 277ñ78) thinks that superstitions that surrounded the act of killing itself, even judicial killing, led to the development of rituals that made such a death appear to be voluntary and self-inflicted. Strˆmb‰ck (1942, 67ñ69), after a study of new evidence, thinks that there might have been a connection in some cases between sacrifice and punishment. Cf. Hemmer 1928, 55ñ57; 1960, 188ñ89; Notes to 21/15ñ20, 22/13ñ19, 22/26ñ28, 38/6ñ9, 63/11ñ13.

21/12ñ15. The implication in this and the following provision is that the agreement of father and close kin was necessary for a daughter to enter into a lawful marriage. Luring a girl into betrothal, although not as serious as abduction and forced marriage, was regarded as a crime. WessÈn (SL IV, 271 note 6) thinks that this provision was borrowed from ÷gL Gb 6 ß1, where the fine was 131/3 marks to the h‰rad ëhundredí. The word festa in the sense of ëbetrothalí is not used elsewhere in GL, nor are there any specific provisions relating to procedures for entering into marriage. This is in marked contrast to the provincial laws of the mainland, where there are detailed provisions concerning pay- ments to be made by the various parties. Hildebrand (1879ñ1953, I, 90ñ100) summarises these procedures and implications of mar- riage for the extended family (dynasty, clan or tribe) in Swedish provincial laws.

21/15ñ20. Abduction, without the finesse of seduction, was usually regarded as a serious crime, not a normal precursor to marriage, and the punishment was frequently outlawry (cf. UL, VmL, and HL ƒb 1 pr). The penalty imposed in GL for abduction of a Gotlandic woman was either the life or the wergild of the offender (vereldi hans), i.e. twenty-four marks of silver (three marks of gold) if the man were Gotlandic, otherwise ten marks of silver. The principle was usually, however, that the wergild of the victim applied, as in the following clause: if the woman were non-Gotlandic, the sum was ten marks of silver (her wergild), whatever the status of the man (cf. Delin 1926, 268 note 1). The sum payable to the general assembly from each fine was twelve marks, presumably in coin, although this is not explicit (cf. Delin 1926, 269 note 2). The abduction of a Gotlandic woman by a Gotlandic man was thus compensated much more generously than the three other possible cases. For other instances of compensation or punishment to some

NOTES 131

extent depending upon the status of the perpetrator of the crime, see Chapters 22/26ñ28, 38/6ñ9, 51/3ñ4 and 59/6. Whether the general assembly received anything if the family of the woman chose the abductorís life is not recorded. The form of execution was prob- ably beheading, but GL does not state this (cf. Notes to 21/9ñ12, 63/11ñ13).

21/16ñ17. The word ran ë[by] forceí generally meant ë(open) rob- beryí, less despicable than ̨iaufna ̨r meaning ë(secret) theftí, in Swedish provincial laws, but this meaning does not occur in GL. The implication here is the same as in ÷gL ƒb 8, where taka kunu rane means ëforce a woman to sexual intercourseí, although other forms of violence (vald) seem to be included in the crime. Alterna- tively, one might take this as another example of parallelism (cf. Notes to 13/7ñ8, 19/33, 25/48 and 50, 60/6).

Chapter 22: <Af quinna skam>

22/1 and footnote. This chapter (31 in the B-text) has no rubric in the A-text, although it appears in the table of contents. Most edi- tors number it Chapter 22, although Jacobsen (GGD, 73) numbers it 21a and subsequent chapters 22 onwards. The content of this and the following chapter should be compared with provisions in ÷gL Eb 3 pr; UL Kgb 6; VStL I 43ñ47.

22/2ñ3. The noun symni ëforced intercourseí occurs only in GL. It is related to the verb sufa ësleepí (cf. GU, xxix; GGD, 73 note 5). GL is the earliest of the Swedish provincial laws to recognise rape as a separate crime before the instigation of edsˆreslag (cf. YVgL Ub 1 ß7, which is not found in ƒVgL Ub; SL IV, 272 note 10; Note to 12/9ñ10). In mainland provincial laws, the expression taka kunu mÊ ̨ vald implies not only rape but also the forcible abduction of a woman, particularly one about to be married to another (cf. 21/ 15ñ17; ƒVgL Gb 3; YVgL Gb 2). GulL 199 (NGL 1, 71) specifies an even higher fine for rape (forty marks) or outlawry plus a double wergild to the woman. Westholm (2007, 73ñ74) notes that a woman does not appear to have been considered legally liable in the case of unlawful intercourse, even if rape was not involved (cf. 21/2ñ12) and suggests that this is further evidence of the higher status of women in Gotlandic society compared to other Swedish provinces.

22/3ñ4. It was important that a woman proclaim her attack publicly at the first possible opportunity, if she was to receive compensa- tion. A shout was a common legal device, often associated with

132

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

counteracting witchcraft (cf. ÷gL Eb 3 pr; UL Kgb 6; SdmL Kgb 6 pr; VmL Kgb 3 pr; HL Kgb 3 pr; MELL Eb 14 pr; MEStL Eb 11 pr; Eriks SjL1 Text 1 II ß20; Holmb‰ck 1920, 13ñ14). The use of a shout with legal effect is also evident in Chapter 36/13ñ14 in connection with an abandoned boat and, as a means of witness, is considered by some researchers to be a feature of early Germanic law. Hammerich (1941, 70ñ79) postulates, however, that it might have come about as a result of church law in the twelfth and thir- teen centuries, referring to Deut. 22 vv. 25ñ27, although he considers Saxon law a more likely influence (see Westman 1944, 52ñ56). The notion that a woman who had just been raped would be physi- cally or emotionally able to run after her assailant and name him (22/9) is perhaps an indication of how unusual this law was and how little understanding the lawmakers had of the circumstances involved. That said, it is much more likely that the woman would be able to name her attacker in a close rural community, such as GL applied to, than in a town. The idea that the woman might claim to recognise her attacker later (22/21ñ22), having been unable to do so earlier, is perhaps not so unusual, however.

22/7ñ12. If there was no witness to her shouting, the victim had to declare her attack before witnesses and name the attacker at the nearest habitation within twenty-four hours. She could then use the inhabitants as witnesses to the truth of her claim (that she had declared the attack). If she delayed, it was advisable to keep silent as the accused then had the right of defence.

22/9, 21. Jacobsen (GGD, 74 note 1) remarks that the word by ëhabi- tationí occurs only here in GL and that it means a farmstead or other inhabited place rather than a town. Byama ̨r (65/17, Addi- tion 9/1), on the other hand, means ëtown-dwellerí, more specifically an inhabitant of Visby.

22/13ñ19. The penalty for rape was half of her wergild for a free woman (the amount depending on whether she was Gotlandic or non-Gotlandic) and one-sixth of her wergild for a slave. In each case, this was the same amount as would have been payable for killing a woman within her circle of safety. If the woman was married, the man could be killed (presumably by her husband, although this is not explicit); alternatively he could pay her full wergild. Slave women are excluded from this provision since they could not be lawfully married. The wording seems to imply that the offender could offer to pay compensation in return for his life,

NOTES 133

whereas in the previous chapter it is the family of the victim who

had the choice (cf. Delin 1926, 268 note 1).
22/20 and footnote. This is one of a number of instances in which

the use by the B-text of the feminine nominative pronoun haan assists in reading the A-text; others are at 15/7, 18/5, 20/43, 23/21 (cf. Pipping 1904, 15). See also second Note to 20/43.

22/26ñ28. The phrase ëpays the wergild penaltyí (Gtn mi ̨ vereldi vert hann, literally ëprotects him with a wergildí) is ambiguous in that it is not clear whose wergild was involved. Jacobsen (GGD, 75 note 2) assumes that it was the womanís wergild, whereas WessÈn (SL IV, 272 note 9 to Chapter 22) assumes that it was the slaveís. If it were the slaveís wergild, the amount would be 41⁄2 marks in coin, which would seem to be derisory. Earlier in the chapter (22/13ñ19) the compensation relates to the status of the woman. One can com- pare this provision to another in which a slaveís master made payment: three ˆre for a theft of up to an ˆre, three times the value plus the property for greater amounts (Addition 8/1ñ3). In this case the owner was not responsible for more than the value of his slave (Addition 8/30ñ32). This value seems to have been set at three marks of silver or twelve marks in coin (cf. 16/9ñ13, 13ñ17). In Chapters 21/2ñ8, 38/6ñ9, 51/3ñ4 and 59/6, penalties also seem to be related to the status of the wrongdoer. WessÈn compares these provisions with those in ÷gL Eb 3 pr and UL Kgb 6, which represent edsˆreslag (cf. Note to 12/9ñ10). Other points of interest are that it is not clear whether a married or an unmarried victim is under consideration and that no mention is made of rape by a slave of a non-Gotlandic woman. This last would appear to be an error of omission.

Chapter 23: Um quinna gripi

23/3. A tuppr (OWN toppr m.) was a pointed linen hood worn by married women and a huifr was possibly a headscarf, similar to a wimple, worn underneath this.

23/5ñ6. In an agreement dated c.1199 between the governor of Novgorod and the Germans and Gotlanders trading there (STFM I, 106ñ07), a provision relating to a similar incident set a fine of six old grivna for the insult. The value of a grivna is not clear, as there were several kinds (as there were of mark) (cf. MRL, 24ñ25; SL IV, 272 note 3 to Chapter 23).

23/8ñ9. The clause excepting slave women from compensation for anything but injury, which applies to the whole chapter, is

134

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

consistent with the statement in Chapter 19/141ñ42 that slaves

can neither insult nor be insulted.
23/9. The alliterative phrase nast e ̨a nestli refers to the two parts of

a clasp that fastened a womanís clothing, the hook and the eye respectively (cf. GGD, 75 note 5; SL IV, 272 note 5 to Chapter 23). In Laxdúla saga, Chapter 75, nist f. is taken to be the fasten- ing of HalldÛrrís gown, whereas nist n. was a pin or brooch (cf. ÕF V, 219 note 2).

23/11ñ12. The hook and eye or clasp can hardly be the hann ëití referred to; this must be the cloak to which they are the fastenings. 23/12ñ14. Reference to the maximum fine must be to the maximum fine in this chapter, that is, two marks in coin. The laces presum- ably fastened a womanís bodice. The provision that everything must be returned to the woman refers to all the previously men-

tioned items (see SL IV, 272ñ73 notes 7 and 8).
23/15ñ30. The provisions in this part of the chapter fall into two

sets. The first set relates to manhandling of a generally boorish nature, with fines rising from eight ˆrtugar (1/3 mark) to two marks. The second set relates to approaches of a more sexual nature, with fines falling from 1⁄2 mark to nothing depending on the intimacy of the area involved, under the assumption that a woman should have registered her protest at the first opportunity, if she was to receive maximum compensation. When a man committed what would to- day be termed an indecent assault, a woman was held to have agreed to it by implication (see GGD, 76 note 3).

23/21. The verb kera ëplead [a case]í is common in early Danish law, but has later been replaced both there and in Swedish law by klaga, from German klagen (cf. GGD, 35 note 4).

23/27ñ28. Bugge (1877ñ78, 262ñ63) rejects the translation in tyGL and by Schlyter (CIG, 58) of handar mair as ëen hand l‰ngre uppí (a hand further up), and proposes instead that the whole expres- sion means ëvidere, lÊngere bortí (further, further away), taking handar to be related to OWN handan, meaning ëon the other sideí and handar mair as a comparative (cf. Noreen 1894, 138; OSMS I, 463 s. v. handarmer; Rydqvist 1850ñ83, II, 443, 450).

23/28ñ29. The lack of any compensation for indecent (ohai ̨ver ̨r) assault, despite the fact that it is called a ëfoolís gripí, is puzzling. The sequence of fines clearly reflects the notion that a woman should protest at the first opportunity, but in that case one might query why the most invasive assault is described in the way it is.

NOTES 135

23/32. The alliterative phrase frels ok fri ̨vetr ëfree and freeborní occurs in Swedish provincial laws (e.g. UL Rb 9 ß4, SdmL Rb 9 ß4, VmL Rb 18 ß3). The adjective frels and the noun frelsi n. ëfreedomí derive from fri hals, someone who did not have the neck ring that denoted a slave. The person concerned might be a freed slave. On the other hand, fri ̨vetr meant ëfree-borní (cf. ÷gL ƒb 24: frÊls ok fri ̨Êtta), or ëknown to be freeí (cf. GGD, 76 note 4; SL IV, 273 note 10). The expression in HL Kkb 2 pr in relation to the tax-free state of a church is fult och frÊlst forÊ allom wtskyldom ëfully free from all taxesí. Cf. also Note to 16/23ñ26.

Chapter 24: Af bryllaupum

Only the first section of this chapter in the A-text strictly refers to weddings, as can be seen from chapter divisions in the B-text and the table of contents in the A-text. The remainder of the chapter (the final one in the section covering family law) contains a miscellany of provisions, a number relating to inheritance. It is possible that at least some of these were later additions.

The concept behind the wedding ceremony described was that a bride was taken from her family home to her new home. There is little detail relating to marriage laws and customs in GL, but there must have been traditions and accepted forms of ceremony (cf. Spegel, 53). Chapter 21/12ñ14, 15ñ17 implies that a woman is only lawfully married if she has the agreement of her father and family, and Chap- ter 20/15 that a father might arrange a marriage for his son. Only if he had his fatherís agreement could he have a share in his inherit- ance to put into the marriage (Chapter 28/69ñ71). Reading the banns was instituted as a necessary precursor to a lawful marriage in 1215 by Pope Innocent III at the fourth Lateran council and imposed in Sweden on 5/4/1216 (cf. DS I, 182ñ83, note 156; UL Kkb 15 ß2). Banns and church weddings took time to become established, how- ever, and it was only with Laurentius Petriís church statute of 1571 that church weddings became obligatory for a lawful marriage. In Sweden the church law that replaced the statute in 1686 was insti- tuted as a civil obligation only in 1734, thus the omission of any mention of banns does not provide evidence of an early date for GL.

24/2ñ3. The custom of having a bride accompanied by male mem- bers of her family on horseback in a mÂgf‰rd or magf‰rd ëprocession of in-lawsí was an enduring one and is noted by Spegel (53), who interprets the word as derived from makaf‰rd ëspouse processioní,

136

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

and by Neogard in his collection Gautau-Minning (cf. Amira 1882ñ

95, I, 536ñ39; GO s. v. mÂg, mage).
24/2. In contradiction to Schlyter (CIG, 302), Bugge (1877ñ78, 272ñ73)

argues that the second element of vagnikil ëwagon-riderí is related to the verb aka ëtravelí. The noun thus refers to ëwagon-travellersí who followed the procession of the dowry. This was done with a certain ceremony, as elsewhere in northern Europe (see GGD, 77 note 1). Picture stones from Alskog and Grˆtlingbo (ninth cen- tury) and Levide and Ekeby (eleventh century) show the earliest pictorial evidence of a wagon being used to transport people.

24/3. The pronoun huar, used here, as has been pointed out by S‰ve (GU, viii), means ëeach of twoí. It is rarely confused in older sec- tions of GL with huer, meaning ëeach of three or moreí, although this confusion occurs in later sections of the text. The implication is thus that only two wagons were permitted, with two travellers on each. The B-text, however, has the dative of huer and S‰ve emends to hwerium here (cf. Pipping 1904, 5; SL IV, 274 note 3).

24/4ñ5. Weddings originally took place outside the church and were followed by a nuptial mass (bru ̨messa) in the church. This cus- tom was later forbidden and a church ceremony had to be the centre of the proceedings. Wedding rings, candles, bridal canopies and eventually the bridal crown were all later (re)introductions, although a pell ëcanopyí is mentioned at 65/12 and was abolished as part of the sumptuary laws.

24/6. Bugge (1877ñ78, 260) suggests that the second element of bryttuga ëchief bridal attendantí relates to a verb meaning to guide or lead. The brideís representative at a wedding was called the brudef ̄rer in West Norse sources. This person was thus the ëleader of the brideí. The person who usually dressed and decorated a bride for weddings in Gotland was the priestís wife and a bride was only dressed in her bridal clothes when she arrived at the place where she was to be married (see SL IV, 274 note 5). No other helpers of the bride are mentioned, nor any formal gifts to the bridal couple. There is also no equivalent of a gift to the spon- sor of the bride by the bridegroom, although it occurs in mainland provincial laws (e.g. ƒVgL and YVgL Gb 2).

24/8ñ10. Although wedding guests were henceforth forbidden to bring food for the feast, they were invited to bring voluntary gifts for the couple. These gifts are unusual in that they seem to have been given without obligation. The custom of guests bringing an

NOTES 137

edible contribution (fˆring) to a feast or party is still current in Gotland and other parts of Scandinavia (cf. Amira 1882ñ95, I, 524ñ 25, 533ñ34; GGD, 77 note 7).

24/13. The host (drotsieti) led each of the guests to his seat, and the ruler of the feast (gier ̨ama ̨r, cf. John 2 v. 9) organised events and arrangements (cf. GGD, 78 note 1; SL IV, 274 note 8). It appears from ƒVgL Gb 9 ß1 and YVgL Gb 9 ß2 that one of the duties of the latter was to give the speech that finalised the marriage. He was called the kunem‰dre in Gotlandic dialect (Spegel, 53). The word gier ̨ama ̨r was also used of a spokesman for the witnesses to other legal proceedings, such as a land purchase and pledging. Later his function was taken over by the church, just as in the case of land purchase it was taken over by the civil authorities.

24/17ñ18. WessÈn points out that the high level of fine for breaking the provisions regarding weddings and the fact that payment was not to the parish, but to the province, indicate that this was a later insertion. The drinking of toasts in Sweden was usually associated with guilds and the practice of drinking a toast to the Virgin Mary as the final toast of the wedding feast is unique to GL, although toasts to St Catherine are mentioned in other sources (cf. Stadga, 150; Amira 1882ñ95, I, 539; SL IV, 274 note 9).

Chapter 24a: <Af erfisgier ̨um>

24a/1 and footnote. This new chapter (34) in the B-text is not sig- nalled in the A-text.

24a/2ñ4. The prohibition on funeral feasts might have been to avoid any suspicion of ancestor worship. A suggested donation of cloth- ing and footwear to the innansoknafulk, presumably the poor of the parish, as an alternative would seem to indicate that this was not simply another element of the sumptuary laws.

24a/3. Lis Jacobsen (GGD, 79 note 1) comments that kle ̨i ok sky ̨i ëclothing and footwearí is ëet af de sjÊldne Exempler paa forsÊtligt Enderim i Lovsprogí (one of the rare examples of intentional end rhyme in legal language). The noun sky ̨i appears only here and Schlyter suggests it was coined for the sake of a rhyme (see CISG s. v. Sky ̨i).

Chapter 24b: <Af skarla ̨i>

24b/1 and footnote. A new chapter is not signalled in the A-text. The B-text has at this point (the start of Chapter 35) the first nine sentences of Chapter 65 (the third of the additional chapters in the A-text).

138

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

24b/2. The coupling of fine woollen cloth and wallcoverings (skarla ̨ ok bladragning) suggests that both words relate to hangings, and Jacobsen (GGD, 79 note 3) assumes that both refer to funeral hangings. OWN bl·r was the colour of mourning, although the word seems to have been used of both ëblackí and ëblueí. The latter often referred to fine cloth, since blue was an expensive dye. Falk (1919, 23) suggests that the word is related to Old English bleo ëcolour; dyeí, although a connection is usually made with Old English blÊw (cf. C-V s. v. bl·r). In RÌgs ̨ula, verse 29, sÌðar slúðor, serc bl·f·n, the fine shift must be blue (cf. Edda, 284). In GulL 223 (NGL 1, 75), however, bl·-feldr, listed as legal tender, must be black sheepskin, not blue (cf. Falk 1919, 23ñ24, 40).

The practice of decorating the walls for a funeral was common in Scandinavia, but such decorations were also used at weddings, when black would have been inappropriate. It is possible, there- fore, that the skarla ̨ cloth in fact referred to hangings in red or some other festive colour used at weddings (cf. GGD, 79 note 4; SL IV, 274 note 13). The cloth called skarla ̨ was known from the beginning of the thirteenth century in Scandinavia as a costly imported woollen cloth, which was of various colours: brown, blue, white, although chiefly red. It was a smooth cloth, of a fine and delicate texture, produced by a complex process. That imported from Lincoln was particularly prized, although it was also pro- duced in Germany and the Netherlands. Geirmundr, Kjartan and Bolli Bollason in Laxdúla saga, Chapters 29, 40 and 63, each wear a skarlatskyrtill rauðr ëa red kirtle of scarletí, and Bolliís cloak in Chapter 77 is a skarlatsk·pa rauð ëred cloak of scarletí, all of which imply that skarlats- describes not the colour but the fabric (cf. Falk 1919, 54ñ55; ÕF V, 79, 118, 187, 225). The prohi- bition of this cloth and other hangings in GL might stem from the time of the conflict between the town of Visby and the country- side (1288) and be symptomatic of the economic problems that this tension caused. These provisions appear to be later additions, since the A- and B-texts differ in their disposition of material just here, and the provisions at 65/11ñ13 are certainly later.

Chapter 24c: <Af rai ̨kle ̨um>

24c/1 and footnote. This chapter is only indicated in the table of contents of the A-text.

NOTES 139

24c/2. Saddles were not used by farmers during the period of GL. A thick blanket was used for riding, augmented by cushions for a pack animal. The significance of this provision, which is marked as a new sub-section in the B-text, but without a rubric, is unclear. Cutting saddlecloths and cushions into parts (whether more or fewer than four) seems to make little sense and no editor offers any explanation (cf. GGD, 79 note 6; SL IV, 275 note 16).

Chapter 24d: <Af gutniskum kunum>

24d/1 and footnote. This new chapter (36) in the B-text is not sig- nalled in the A-text.

24d/2ñ5. This provision clearly relates to a situation in which the father of a woman has died. If her brother or brothers were not willing to arrange a marriage and a dowry for her, they were obliged to commit one-eighth of their land to her. She was to manage the property with advice from her kinsmen and other parishioners. WessÈn (SL IV, 275 note 18) compares this to provisions in JL1 I ß8 and ÷gL Gb 4 and to those in Chapter 20/33ñ39. In the latter an un- married sister of deceased brothers, without male heirs, inherited one-eighth of the property once debts were paid and before any further distribution.

Chapter 24e: <Af ogutnisku fulki>

24e/1 and footnote. This chapter is only indicated in the table of contents of the A-text.

24e/2ñ3. Since this provision occurs in all extant manuscripts, the redactions lying behind these texts, including the A-text, would appear to have a date no earlier than 1260 (cf. Introduction, pp. xx, xxxviñxxxvii).

Chapter 24f (64): Af farvegum manz

24f/1 and footnote. This chapter (37 in the B-text) was omitted from its proper place by the scribe of the A-text (or possibly by the scribe of his original) and inserted between the last two of the later chapters (63 and 65 in the present translation) (cf. CIG, 61 note 56; GLGS, 38 note 6). It appears preceding the chapter concerning disputes about woodland in the table of contents in the B-text and in tyGL, but is absent from daGL. All previous editors leave this chapter at the end, whereas WessÈn in his translation places it where

140

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

it belongs. This latter arrangement has been adopted (cf. SL IV,

226, 275 note 1).
24f/2ñ8. A farvegr seems to have been a public right of way across

privately owned land that was wide enough for wheeled vehicles. The word ta means a road or path of any width (see GGD, 82 note 9). A fence bordering a road was thus a tagar ̨r. If a landowner had no property bordering a road (tafastr), he had the right to cross the land of a neighbour, if that bordered a road (ypin), to gain access to that road. As WessÈn (SL IV, 275 note 4) remarks, this is an inter- esting provision, in that it seems specifically to exclude general access to a neighbourís property other than in this particular circum- stance. This provision runs counter to current Swedish right of access (allemansr‰tt), which applies to most land, provided that damage cannot result and that private land around a house (e.g. the garden) is not encroached upon. The reason behind this stricture in GL could be that farming was intensive and that farmers did not wish too much

of their land to be lost to unnecessary footpaths of convenience. 24f/4. Schlyter (CIG, 91) translates varst as ëjordí (ground, land), but S‰ve (GU, xxixñxxx) thinks that the primary sense relates to an enclosed or fenced-in area. This interpretation conflicts, how-

ever, with the adjective ypin ëopení.
24f/9. The talaut was grazing land, outside the farm boundaries, and

situated alongside a path or road.
The Gutnish word used for ëpathí is related to the Gotlandic dialect

word kv‰iar, a narrow path, road or track between two boundary fences, often leading to a single farm or property (cf. GO s. v. kv‰iar). Fifteen paces (about fourteen metres) seems a generous width for a ënarrow pathí, but presumably this would have been necessary for the movement of sheep, cattle and timber. The provision could also be regarded as an active discouragement from fencing in land bordering a right of way. The width of a similar path between two boundary fences, together with a means of calculating it, is speci- fied in GulL 90 (NGL 1, 43ñ44) as about 2.75 metres. In ƒVgL Jb 12 it is seven ells, that is, about 3.85 metres. Both of these are narrower than the width specified in GL. It is possible, however, that they were not intended for the movement of stock, but merely

for access by foot or on horseback.
24f/12. Jacobsen (GGD, 112 note 4) interprets hagi ëenclosureí as

ëindhegnet GrÊsgangí (enclosed grass path), but points out that etymologically it was any enclosed place.

NOTES 141

24f/13. The li ̨ ëgapí that had to be made would have been closed by an easily manipulated slip-rail (cf. SL IV, 275 note 7).

24f/14. Although the B-text reading lad could be a straightforward scribal error for laga ëlawfulí, S‰ve (GU, xxxiñxxxii) offers an alternative explanation. He suggests that the writer intended la ̨- farvegr, a track to or over a la ̨ or la ̨r. S‰ve takes this latter to be related to OWN l·ð n. ëgrasslandí, ëgrazing landí or simply ëlandí. The meaning of la ̨-farvegr could therefore be ëtrack through the landí. Since all tracks have to go through some sort of land, a more circumscribed sense, ëtrack to grazing landí perhaps, would seem to be a more likely alternative. The difference between this provi- sion and the immediately preceding one is subtle and not entirely clear. Both relate to fencing placed across anotherís right of way and the provision of a gap for access, but in one case an enclosure is mentioned and in the other simply a fence. It is probable, how- ever, that the second provision simply clarifies the responsibilities: the owner of a fence for the provision of a gap, but the owner of a right of way for its security (cf. Note to 25/48).

24f/15ñ17. The owner/user of a right of way was responsible for ensuring that the gap was properly closed in order to shut out stray animals (cf. GulL 83 (NGL 1, 41)).

Chapter 25: Af skoga brigslum

In general, those with a share in common (oskiptr) (wood)land could cut down wood from non-fruit bearing trees irrespective of the size of their holding. Swedish provincial laws have similar provisions in that if someone became dissatisfied with the behaviour of others, they could demand that the land be divided (cf. YVgL Fnb 12; ÷gL Bb 30 ß1; UL Bb 14 ß12ñ13; DL Bb 43; VmL Bb 14 ß11).

25/3. The precise sense of liksvitni ëevidence of neighboursí is dis- puted, but it clearly refers to evidence equivalent to the evidence of kin provided in cases involving cultivated land as opposed to woodland (25/12). Schlyterís suggestion that it was the evidence of neighbours seems not unreasonable, but he admits that he does not know what the element lik- means here (cf. CIG, 276; GGD, 80 note 3). The word ortarvitni is immediately explained in the text as a ëwitness as to work doneí, but the only deduction that one can make about liksvitni is that it involves the testimony of certain persons (cf. SL IV, 276 note 1). Hald (1975, 55ñ56) suggests an original form *liz-, genitive of *li ̨ ëevidence from a group of people,

142

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

neighboursí, and that this provides a parallel to the evidence of

kin in the following provision.
25/4ñ7. Three types of forestry crop are mentioned here: vi ̨r

ëfirewoodí, tro ̨ur ëfencing woodí and quistir ëbranchesí. These are translated by WessÈn as ëvedí, ëg‰rdsleí and ëgrenarí and are equivalent to the three types of wood listed at 26/55: ëa manís firewood, fencing wood or timberí (vi ̨ manz e ̨a garz virki e ̨a timbr).

25/6. LidÈn (1892, 94) suggests that OWN h· could mean ëafter grass, grass left overí. If this were the derivation of the first ele- ment of hafall, the whole could mean ëtime of the cutting of the grass left overí, i.e. ëhaymaking time, autumní, a sense that fits the context.

25/7ñ8. WessÈn (SL IV, 276 note 2) observes that tyGL offers a trans- lation that is a misunderstanding of this sentence.

25/8ñ9. The expression ëone of those who owns mostí (an af ̨aim sum mest a) could not refer to the parties in the dispute, but must refer to the one amongst the witnesses who was the greatest land- owner (WessÈn). If this witness did not wish to swear, then his evidence was not valid for either of the disputing parties.

25/10ñ11. The translation ëeither partyí for huargum (dative singu- lar masculine of huargi, ëone or other of twoí) is derived from Pipping (1904, 6) and from WessÈnís ënÂgonderaí (SL IV, 276 note 3). Schlyterís translation (CIG, 61) ëaldrigí (never) is rejected.

25/14ñ16. Jacobsen (GGD, 81 note 3) interprets Brig ̨r ̨an sum kringum a ëif one owning neighbouring property disputes thisí as referring to a situation in which one of the neighbours was in- volved in the dispute; he would then not have been permitted to give evidence. She infers from this that the clause cannot refer to disputes about cultivated land, since ëneighbourí witnesses were not required in such cases. It seems simpler to assume that one of the neighbours asked to provide evidence of work on cultivated land disputed that work had been done. The next nearest neigh- bour would then have been approached for his support.

25/18ñ25. This entire provision is obscure, but Holmb‰ck (1920, 18ñ19 and note 4) offers the following explanation. He first assumes that when there was a dispute of this type, it was between communities or settlements, in relation to common woodland or other uncultivated land, rather than between individual landown- ers. He considers that the latter would have been such a rare

NOTES 143

occurrence that it would not have been provided for in GL. He further suggests that if, at the point where the two settlements abutted the disputed woodland, their land was of the same type then they would have divided the unclaimed land equally. If one settlement had cultivated land up to the disputed area and the other uncultivated, then the latter took one third of the unclaimed land and the former the remainder, since it would not presumably have exercised all its right to available woodland. Holmb‰ck also assumes that the provisions for the settlement of disputes in the first section of this chapter also refer to that between residents in different com- munities.

25/18ñ20 and footnote. The words ok skogr ok myr, ̨a takin a ̨al ior ̨ tua luti ëand woodland . . . two thirdsí were evidently omitted by the scribe because consecutive lines in his original began with oc scogr. The phrase has been added in the margin, according to Schlyter by a sixteenth-century hand.

25/23. Schlyter (CIG, 62) translates millan stumbla ok star ̨ufur as ëemellan stubbar och starrtufvorí (between stump and tufts of sedge), which WessÈn (SL IV, 276 note 5) interprets as meaning ëat the boundary between tree-bearing land and marshlandí.

25/24ñ25. Schlyter (CIG, 62) interprets this as meaning that owners of woodland or marshland could not give evidence as neighbours in matters covered by the immediately preceding provisions. The sense, however, is not clear.

25/26. Woodland and marshland described as oskiptr was that in shared ownership (cf. 25/41). Swedish provincial laws all contain penalties for cutting wood illegally, often with the power of con- fiscating equipment (cf. ƒVgL Fns 2; YVgL Fnb 3ñ10; UL Bb 13ñ14; ÷gL Bb 29, GL 26 ß9; SdmL Bb 15ñ17; VmL 14; HL Bb 13; MELL Bb 17). For related provisions, see 7/2ñ9, 26/38ñ46, 26/55ñ61, and 63/2ñ4.

25/27. The sedge called Cladium mariscus (Gtn agr) was formerly in common use for roofing in Gotland (cf. HRSH29, 388 note; SL IV, 276 note 7).

25/29. The verb yrkia refers to the type of work just described. 25/31. There have been a number of translations of anbol (here ëbuild- ing materialí): Schlyter (CIG, 62) and Pipping (GLGS, Ordbok, 5) have ëkˆrredskapí (driving harness); Jacobsen (GGD, 82 note 1) and WessÈn (SL IV, 276 note 8), have ëvirkeí (raw material for woodworking, etc.). They cite a Gotlandic dialect ambul with wide-

144

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

spread usage (cf. GO s. v. anbol, amble). Hald (1975, 53ñ55) argues that anbol has the specific sense ëbuilding materialí, the result of the forestry work, and that this would naturally have been forfeit along with the means of transport (Gtn faruskiaut).

25/32. Pipping (GLGS, 39 note 6) prefers the plural of the verb ëproveí (vitin) in the A-text to the singular (vitni) in the B-text, since both parties were witnesses to the act. He refers to instances at 13/57ñ58, 14/28 and 18/9. The singular seems, however, to be preferable as it agrees with the first half of the sentence.

25/33. The reliance on an eyewitness, sometimes a professional wit- ness or judge, to provide evidence in property disputes or other cases may have originated in Danish law (cf. Eriks SjL1 Text 1 II ß68) and was apparently native to Scandinavia. Further examples are to be found in HL Kkb 18, ƒVgL Jb 16 and UL Bb 17 ß4 (cf. Westman 1912a, 208ñ12; Almquist 1923, 39ñ40).

25/45ñ46. See Note to 24f/2ñ8.
25/46ñ48. The person responsible for a fence was fined if damage

was caused by lack of proper upkeep to it.
25/48 and 50 and footnotes. The extra words ella hafa and ella

eygir appear in the margin in the B-text. They possibly indicate a correction by the scribe, or that the original Bilefeld was using had both words. The scribe of the A-text has dropped the parallelism and used the verb hafa in each case (cf. Notes to 13/7ñ8, 19/33, 60/6).

25/48. The gar ̨r originally denoted the fencing put in place to protect crops from grazing cattle, but later came to refer to the fenced-in area itself. When crop rotation was being practised, various different fencing methods were used. Fences were com- monly built of verticals and horizontals, but the halfgier ̨i, which marked a shared boundary between fields or pasture, consisted of timber palings (OWN skÌðgarðr, Swedish skidg‰rdesgÂrd) on top of a low stone wall, called a vast in Gotland. The provincial laws have various rules about the construction of lawful boundary fences. ÷gL Bb14 gives a detailed description of how strong and high a lawful boundary fence should be and how a gate should open inwards and not outwards. HL Bb 5 gives rules simi- lar to those in GL. The stated purpose of a fence in all provincial laws apart from GL, where the purpose seems to be to protect crops from people and animals, was to divide two villages and there were complex rules about responsibility for its upkeep. Cf.

NOTES 145

also GulL 80, 82ñ84 (NGL 1, 40ñ41); FrostL XIII 18ñ22 (NGL 1, 245ñ46).

The adjective aumbr ëin a bad stateí is cognate with Swedish ˆm ësore, sensitive, delicateí, which, as Jacobsen (GGD, 83 note 3) remarks, is only used of sentient beings.

The preceding provisions form a bridge to the following chapter.

Chapter 26: Af halfgier ̨i

Once again the rubric applies only to the first part of the chapter; the remainder contains provisions relating to cutting of wood on some- one elseís property.

26/3ñ4. The parishioners were to determine where a fence should be placed, i.e. where the boundary between the two properties in ques- tion ran.

26/7ñ14. The defaulting party had a year to fulfil his obligation of fencing, after which he had to deposit a pledge of 1⁄2 mark, as well as paying for any damage, if his animals broke out. This process con- tinued, the deposit being forfeited each fortnight, until the fencing obligation had been fulfilled. The lutadagr ëdivision dayí is the equivalent of the garðskipti or gerðing in GulL 82 (NGL 1, 40ñ41).

26/16. The expression gar ̨r ir granna setir ëa fence is a mediator between neighboursí is translated by Hadorph (Gothlandz-Laghen, 30) as ëlaggill h‰gnat gˆr godh Grans‰miaí. The same expression occurs in GulL 82 (NGL 1, 40ñ41) and there is a Danish proverb, GÊrde gj ̄r Grander saate (Mau 1879, I, no. 3342) (cf. SL IV, 277 note 6; Pipping 1938, 43).

26/17. There is a new chapter in tyGL at this point. This could have been present in the original used by the scribe of tyGL, since it follows a proverbial expression, which seems to form a natural break, but there is no similar indication in the other manuscripts of GL.

26/21ñ22. It was the responsibility of a landowner to have a viable fence, once he had been warned (cf. 25/46ñ48).

26/22ñ30. These provisions are an extension of that at 26/8ñ11, with the addition of payment for other damage done by the animal.

26/30ñ31. A hobble (hornband), which tied one horn to a back foot, was still used for bulls in the early twentieth century (see GGD, 84 note 3). Cf. the fines for straying animals in Chapters 40ñ46.

26/33, 26/47ñ48. S‰ve (GU, xix) argues that the two instances of banda (in ë[upper] bandí) come not from band (cf. Schlyter, CIG,

146

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

242), but from bandi m., which exists in Gotlandic dialect with the sole meaning ëosier switch, withyí. The dative plural bandum (in ë[two] bandsí) occurs at 26/32 (cf. L‰ffler 1878, 287).

The height of the upper tie of a lawful fence was approximately 1.38 metres.

26/34ñ37. Different, although unspecified, rules clearly applied to fencing for animals that were liable to fly over or crawl under standard fences, or dig holes under them. Suin (as here) was the normal word for domesticated pigs, (sma)gris being reserved for piglets. Pigs were reared chiefly in richer agricultural areas, but in the medieval period were still relatively small and similar to wild pigs in appearance.

26/38 and footnote. The B-text has a new chapter (40) at this point. 26/38ñ42. The meaning here is that if the wood cut was so much that it could not be carried away by hand, the fine was three marks to the owner and three to the community, but if the thief carried it home the fine was only 1/3 mark. Presumably he had to make full restitution in either case (cf. SL IV, 277 notes 14ñ 17). For related provisions, see 7/2ñ9, 25/26ñ37, 26/55ñ61 and

63/2ñ4.
26/45. The reading of the A-text (oyk vagn) is taken by WessÈn (SL

IV, 277 note 18) to refer to a wagon drawn by a pair (yoke) of oxen, although his translation is ëˆk och vagní ([yoke of] draught animal[s] and wagon). This latter is the reading of the B-text, which seems to be more likely in that it balances the smaller rus ok kerru ëhorse and cartí, or ëpony and trapí that follows. In CISk V (5 A 15, 17, 19ñ20) it is suggested that a kerra was half the size of a vagn in terms of load capacity, which may also be inferred from GL Chapter 6/8ñ9. In Old Danish laws, ̄k means ëmareí, but there is no evidence that this sense was ever current in Gotland (see GGD, 85 note 3). Cf. also Notes to 6/8ñ9 and 48/5.

26/50. Pipping emends iiii (ertaugar) to xiiii, following Schlyter (CIG, 66 note 33) and daGL. WessÈn (SL IV, 277ñ78 note 20) rejects this and agrees that the fines were cumulative: 1⁄2 mark (twelve ˆrtugar) for the withy in the first pair of uprights, plus 1/3 mark (eight ˆrtugar) for the next pair, plus one-sixth of a mark (four ˆrtugar) for the third pair, totalling one mark, almost certainly in coin (cf. Hemmer 1928, 188 and notes; Wennstrˆm 1936, 355ñ61; 1940, 78). Hemmer suggests that even if the lower of the two ties between a pair of supports were also broken, there would have

NOTES 147

been no additional fine. He comments on the fact that the (addi- tional) fine is reduced with the amount of extra damage. Wennstrˆm broadly agrees, but suggests that the fines concerned were in marks of silver (see following note).

26/50ñ52. The word lids-meli or liss-meli occurs in Gotlandic dialect with an original sense ëgap the width of a trackí, from the elements lid ëtrackí and mela ëmeasureí (cf. GU, xxviii; GO s. v. led1). It is now used of any gap in a fence of unspecified width, not necessar- ily for a track, but also of a ride in woodland, particularly one offering a vista (cf. Rietz 1862ñ1955 s. v. lid (3); Wennstrˆm 1936, 355ñ57). The later provision (63/4ñ6), apparently relating to dam- age to fences in woodland (as opposed to farmland) wide enough for passage, stipulates a fine of three marks in coin, which was greater than the two marks in coin here, but less than two marks of silver. WessÈn (SL IV, 278 note 21) thinks that the difference merely records an increase in the fine, but Wennstrˆm (1936, 358ñ59) argues that provisions here, referring to farmland, must have intended marks of silver. His reason is that fences in farming land would surely have been valued more than those in woodland, although he also questions whether Chapter 63 refers only to woodland fenc- ing. The devaluation of the coinage over time should probably also have been taken into consideration and this might restore the balance between the two instances, even if this earlier provision were in coin (cf. Wennstrˆm 1940, 299).

26/55. Three types of wood are listed in increasing size. Firewood (vi ̨r) was probably lightweight or short in length, fencing timber (garz virki) might have been equivalent to paling, although substantial enough to keep out stock, and timber (timbr) was probably more substantial wood for buildings, ships, tools and uten- sils. Although farm buildings in Gotland were not universally wooden as those on the mainland were, timbr would have had other uses on the farm and elsewhere. Cf. ModSwe ved, virke and timmer and the three types of forestry work listed at 25/4ñ6, and for related provi- sions, see 7/2ñ9, 25/26ñ37, 26/38ñ46, and 63/2ñ4.

26/57ñ58. ëif one does not leave oneís own behindí (en hann ekki laifir sett atr). This clause refers to the offender in the third person, whereas surrounding clauses are in the second person. The impli- cation is that if an offender left his own wood behind, he could have taken anotherís in error (see GGD, 86 note 2). A similar assumption is made relating to horse theft (35/6ñ12).

148

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

26/60ñ61. Wennstrˆm (1936, 220 note 70) considers Schlyter and Jacobsen mistaken and that it was the offender who had responsi- bility for swearing that full restitution had been made, but cf. 23/ 14ñ15, where a woman whose clothing has been disturbed has to declare that everything has been returned to her.

The provisions concerning cutting wood in the final paragraph of this chapter seem to be related to those in Chapter 25/26ñ37.

Chapter 27: Af sau ̨i

27/4ñ5. Jacobsen (GGD, 86 note 5) observes the alliteration in i engium e ̨a aign ëin a meadow or [on another part of] your landí and the fact that the whole chapter is very rhythmical and full of alliterations.

27/5. The expression gangr ok gata ëpath and trackí is probably a synonymous alliteration (or parallelism), although the former is used of a narrower path for animals and the latter for a wider track for wheeled vehicles (see GGD, 86 note 6).

27/5ñ6. The expression iemgo ̨r fran sum til ëas good away as to- wardsí presumably means not that two separate paths had to be made, but perhaps that the path had to be wide enough for two animals or groups of animals to pass.

Chapter 28: Af aignakaupi

28/2. That land could only be sold in time of need was a principle no doubt enforced to prevent the fragmentation of farms (cf. DL Bb 1). It seems as if in Gotland ownership of land still mostly lay in the hands of individual farmers, sometimes larger landowners, but not the crown or the church, during the time of GL.

28/4ñ7. The principle of caveat emptor seems to have applied to land purchase in thirteenth-century Gotland as now. The main loser in any illegal sale was the potential purchaser, who not only lost the land price, but was also subject to a fine.

28/8ñ10. The assembly had to agree any land purchase, presumably with the support of witnesses in cases of dispute. There are no surviving deeds of transfer of land from Gotland, from which one may infer that they were not customary (see SL IV, 278 note 2).

28/9. The masculine noun afra ̨r ëkinsmanís portioní was a pay- ment made to the nearest kin of the seller of a piece of land if that kinsman were not the purchaser. This recognised his right of pre- emption in the purchase and amounted to an eighth of the purchase

NOTES 149

price, according to tyGL (cf. CIG, 146; SL IV, 278 note 3). This right is only mentioned in GL and afra ̨ n. means ëannual rentí in mainland provincial laws (see CISG s. v. afra ̨). If a kinsman did not take up his right within a year, thus approving the sale and confirming that he could not or did not wish to purchase the land, the payment lapsed and the sale was validated by default. Various exceptions are listed at 28/33ñ35 and 28/35ñ39. Arrangements for placing land in surety for a loan were the same as for an outright sale. There are further details of these arrangements in Chapter 63.

28/13ñ17. Three (or possibly four) different types of blood relation- ship were recognised: skyldir menn ëclosely related kiní, quislarmenn ërelations from another family branchí and etarmenn (more distant family members, those who ëbelongedí). The terms frendi and ni ̨i were used of (male) kinsmen in general, with the context, or an adjective, determining how closely related they were. At 25/ 16ñ17, for instance, it seems that ni ̨iar refers to more distant relatives, whereas at 28/31 more closely related kin are intended. In Gotland, as on the mainland, the concept of land as a birthright to be kept within the family prevailed (cf. ƒVgL Jb 3; YVgL Jb 5 and 6; ÷gL Jb 3; UL Jb 1, 2 ß4). The frendar seem particularly to have been involved in approving marriages (e.g. 21/14, 24/14) and other legal arrangements, such as ransoming captured family members (e.g. 28/48ñ49, 56ñ57). A woman passed from one family to another on her marriage, as did the property she took with her. Any stock, for example, could be rebranded (see 46/3). The provi- sions in the present chapter should be compared with those in Chapters 20/86ñ89 and 63/9ñ13. Although it is specifically stated that land may not be sold outside the family, it seems that in ex- tremis such a sale was legal, but resulted in the seller losing his rights of citizenship (cf. DL (and VmL) Bb1; HL Jb 1; SL IV, 278ñ 79 notes 5 and 6).

28/22ñ23. As WessÈn (SL IV, 279 note 7) states, lack of any relevant kin meant that only a twelve-mark fine to the assembly was applied. 28/32ñ33. The phrase ̨a iru quindismenn nerari ̨an utanmenn ëthen

the female members are nearer than outsidersí suggests that land sales could be made outside the family (cf. Note to 28/13ñ17). The word utanma ̨r is, however, unique to GL and similar words in mainland provincial laws refer to people outside the province (utlÊnzker man) or outside the village (ut byamÊn), who might still have been members of the family (cf. VgL III 87, 117).

150

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

28/33ñ39. The apparent contradiction between the two juxtaposed provisions is explained by the fact that in the first case, land was exchanged value for value, for the convenience of the owners, and no sale occurred that reduced the value of the estate (see SL IV, 279 note 11).

28/35ñ39. The first provision exempting a sale from afra ̨r covers a situation in which the whole family sells the estate and the second that in which land must be sold to pay wergild. The fourth exemp- tion allows land to be sold to pay compensation for theft. The third provision, relating to dowry in the form of land specifies land yielding a maximum of one mark in rent (see Notes to 3/4, 20/91). WessÈn assumes that the freehold value of a mark laigi of land was calculated to be twenty-four marks of silver or three of gold (cf. SL IV, 273 note 1, 281 note 2 to Chapter 32). Since three marks of gold was the wergild for a Gotlander, WessÈnís assump- tion is reasonable in this context and that of 20/91. A comparison should, however, be made with the provision in Chapter 65, which specifies a maximum of two marks of gold for the value of a dowry, although what form it may take is not specified. WessÈn (SL IV, 279 note 12) states this to be equivalent of two mark laigi, but it should, of course, be 2/3 mark laigi (cf. Note to 65/9ñ11). Schlyter (CIG, 273) observes that in one Gotlandic source from 1527 it appears that a mark laigi was equivalent to twelve marks (presum- ably of silver) in land value, that is, 11⁄2 marks in gold (cf. Note to 32/6). It is obvious from these differing opinions that the rental value of a plot of land with a certain freehold value varied consid- erably with time and it is not possible to determine an exact equivalence.

28/37ñ38. According to ƒVgL Jb 1, haimfylgi to a daughter was one of five lawful ways of passing property from one person to an- other. The others were: inheritance, hemgÊf to a son on his marriage, purchase and by gift. According to MELL Jb 1, the five ways were: inheritance, exchange, purchase, gift, and mortgage (provided the mortgage was of long standing). This second list is enshrined in the law of 1734 and is still current in Sweden.

28/38. The mala ̨ing ëbetrothal meetingí was a meeting at which a mutual promise of marriage was confirmed, and a dowry agreed, with a ceremonial feast and exchange of gifts. The word is related to OWN m·l ̨ing ëinterviewí, but it seems here to have had judi- cial importance (cf. Amira 1882ñ95, I, 80, 266, 278). A dowry

NOTES 151

could be up to one third or even half of the inheritance of the sons, and was probably no less than one-eighth of the total value of the farm, which a daughter would have received if unmarried (24d/3ñ 6) (cf. Amira 1882ñ95, I, 528ñ30). It included stock (65/2ñ4) as well as household goods, jewellery, precious metals and land (cf. SL IV, 273 note 1).

28/44 and footnote. The B-text has a new chapter (43) at this point. No differentiation was normally made between combatant and non-combatant hostages. Non-combatants were often sold as slaves in the medieval period, although combatants could be executed. The idea of a hostage as the property of the victor is confirmed by the fact that he or she could be released by payment of a ransom as

described here.
28/45. Jacobsen (GGD, 89 note 2) suggests that the use of e ̨a instead

of ok in the synonymous expression ior ̨ e ̨a aign ëland or propertyí is remarkable, since both mean property in the form of land, as opposed to money or movables. There are, however, fur- ther examples of e ̨a where ok would seem more natural.

28/47ñ48. The maximum sum that a third party could redeem anoth- erís son for unchallenged was the same as the value of a slave (cf. ÷gL Gb14 ß1; Note to 28/44). A limit was presumably set because, in addition to the money to pay the ransom, the third party received a third of that sum for himself, making a maximum of four marks in all. It seems that this was a courtesy payment and that if the over- all sum, including his third, exceeded three marks of silver the relations could contest it.

28/54ñ57. What appears to be some sort of international agreement is not referred to elsewhere (cf. SL IV, 279 note 16).

28/63ñ80. The remainder of this chapter contains provisions relating to inheritance and more properly belongs in Chapter 20. There is a link, however, between the first of these provisions and the imme- diately preceding ones, which has clearly influenced the existing sequence. WessÈn (SL IV, 280 note 25) gives a more detailed explanation of the provisions, which expands upon his translation. Cf. also Kock 1926, 12ñ31.

28/65ñ67. Cf. provisions in SkL 85ñ86 (CISk I 84ñ85) and SkL Add II (CISk Add B 5).

28/68 and footnote. The B-text has a new chapter (44) at this point. 28/69ñ70. The implication here seems to be that the marriage of a son, as well as that of a daughter, had to be with the agreement of

152

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

the family (cf. Note to 21/12ñ15). The B-text has the parallelism

ëcounsel and consentí here.
28/71. Division of property on a per capita basis is considered by

some to represent an older custom than that exhibited in mainland

provincial laws (cf. Iuul 1941, 113ñ15, 122ñ24).
28/74ñ75. Schlyter (CIG, 71), and Pipping (GLGS, 46) take their emendation (Gtn rai ̨i to ra ̨i) from the B-text to give the reading ëhave the authorityí (ra ̨i). Kock (1904, 72ñ73), however, does not think that the A-text reading rai ̨i need be changed. He believes that it comes from a verb rai ̨a (cf. OldSwe re ̨a), meaning ëpre- pare himselfí. This would give the clause rai ̨i sielfr firi sir fara huert hann vil the sense ëprepare himself to travel where he wishesí. Kock observes that this makes as good sense as ëhave the author-

ity to go where he wishesí.
28/75ñ80. The remainder of this chapter appears in the margin in

the B-text, and is not found in tyGL. There do not seem to be any mainland provincial laws that contain the provision set out here. Both ÷gL and UL ƒb 8 pr, however, exhibit a reduced right of sons to demand a division of property (cf. Holmb‰ck 1919, 64ñ 65; SL IV, 280 note 25). On a sonís right to inheritance in advance, see Kock (1926, 12ñ13). The rights of daughters to dowry are covered in Chapter 24.

28/77. Schlyter (CIG, 71) and Pipping (GLGS, Ordbok, 61) translate ora ̨ama ̨r ëunreasonable personí as ëen obet‰nksam m‰nniskaí (an inconsiderate person). WessÈn (SL IV, 279 note 24) suggests that the word, as well as meaning a father who makes an unfair division of property, could also mean someone who was foolish (perhaps suffering from dementia) or a bad householder. Jacobsen (GGD, 90 note 5) translates it as ëurimeligí, which could have either sense. Kock (1926, 16) thinks that the passage means that if a father was considered to be asking too high a rent (for the farm that the son inhabits), a property division should occur at once (cf. ÷gL Gb 19).

28/77ñ80. For non-Gotlanders, rules were more stringent in that, even if they were married, sons could not force a division of the estate except in the case of their father being ëunreasonableí, in whatever sense. In both this and the previous provision, the verb skynias ëprove to beí suggests that outside evidence was required, possibly from relations or parishioners (cf. GGD, 90 note 6).

NOTES 153

Chapter 29: Af gieldum

29/2ñ3. A person could become indebted up to the extent of his personal share in his inheritance. His fellow heirs were not liable for any of his debt (cf. GGD, 91 note 1).

29/3ñ4. Payment for a deceased personís debts could not exceed his liquid assets (cf. UL ƒb 25 pr; GGD, 91 note 2; Note to 5/7ñ9).

Chapter 30: Af ve ̨ium

30/2ñ4. Jacobsen (GGD, 91 note 6) infers that the one who had taken the surety (ve ̨) kept what he had taken, but was to pay back to the debtor the difference between the value of the surety and the (out- standing) debt (cf. UL Kmb 7). Cf. the provision in 63/9ñ11 and the accompanying note.

30/3. The stefn was a summons in a civil case. It is assumed that judgement took place under the leadership and on the advice of one or two legal experts, who obtained unanimous agreement from the rest of the assembly. Later this responsibility passed to special judges. The cases considered were originally only those that af- fected society in general, while others were decided between the respective families. If agreement was not reached, or was not hon- oured, a wronged party could resort to ëself counselí (independent judgement).

30/4ñ5. Other examples of parishioners (or assembly members) mak- ing a valuation occur in respect of stray animals (40/4, 41/5, 45a/ 4) and concerning land valuation (32/8). For the alternative mean- ing of Gtn vir ̨a ëseize in payment of a debt, claim [something] from [someone]í, see Notes to 10/5, 63/9ñ11, Addition 9/5ñ6.

Chapter 31: Af ̨ingum

31/4 and footnote. Pipping (1901a, 95 note 1) thinks that the scribe has here inserted ̨ria and then in error also copied iii from his original (cf. Note to 19/77).

31/8ñ9. A similar restriction concerning the duration of the assem- bly occurs in ÷gL Rb 12 pr. Cf. also UL Rb 5 ß3.

31/10ñ11. A three-mark fine (in coin) to the (local) community (mogi) is referred to in Chapters 12/7, 19/131, 25/28ñ29, 40, 42, 26/40, 31/7, 35/4ñ5, 9 and, by implication, 36/17. In these instances a similar sum was paid to the complainant. WessÈn (SL IV, 281 note 4) assumes that the sixth assembly was referred to in these cases,

154

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

but cites further instances of fines at that level where the riding ( ̨ri ̨iungr) assembly might be intended: see 2/17, 4/14ñ15, 11/5, 21/2, 37/26, 48/8, 52/4 and 61/4.

31/11ñ12. A six-mark fine is mentioned in respect of unpaid wergild (see 13/62ñ63) and unspecified fines to the ̨ri ̨iungr for lost ani- mals (see 41/4, 42/3, 42/5, 45a/3).

31/12. Fines of twelve marks to the general assembly (land) are mentioned a number of times, but despite the limit laid down here, fines of forty marks are stipulated on a number of occasions (cf. Appendix D (ii)). The forty-mark fine may well have originated later than the present chapter, under influence from the mainland.

Jacobsen (GGD, 92 note 2) assumes that the limits simply apply to the listed misdemeanours committed at the assembly. This is a possible explanation, although it seems rather narrow.

31/12ñ14. Further provisions concerning legal procedures are given in Chapter 8/18ñ21 and Chapter 32.

Chapter 32: Af fearkrafi

32/2ñ20. These provisions do not specify which party had the right of proof.

32/6. The phrase mark gulz refers to land worth a mark of gold freehold. Chapters 47/10, 53/3ñ4 and, presumably, 65/10 refer to the same method of land valuation, whereas Chapters 20/91, 28/37 and 63/11ñ12 refer to land valued in terms of the rent that it will yield (mark laigi).

32/12ñ13 and footnote. The phrase ëforward to the thirdí (fram til ̨ri ̨iu) relates to an assumed ëanother period of a fortnightí (*half mana ̨ frest a ̨ra), which is missing from both the A-text and the B-text. The phrase in angled brackets is supplied from tyGL, by comparison with the following provision, which refers to disputes relating to land worth less than a mark of gold. The implications of these provisions seem to be that if a defendant did not appear after six or three weeks (depending on the value of the property in dispute) a plaintiff either took his oath in his absence (if he had the right of proof) or possibly won his case by default (if the defendant had the right of proof) (cf. SL IV, 282 note 5 to Chapter 32). WessÈn assumes that in each case a defendant could move the oath-taking twice from the original four or two weeks. It seems more likely, however, that he could move it once, to give himself half as much time again (making a total of six weeks or three weeks), provided

NOTES 155

that he did this within the first fortnight or week respectively. He would be ëmoving it by a fortnight (or a week) to the third fort- night (or week)í from the date of the summons. This interpretation is adopted by both Schlyter and Jacobsen.

32/15. WessÈn interprets the phrase vi manna stemnu ëa six-man sum- monsí as meaning that one summoned the defendant to take a six-man oath.

Chapter 32a: Af manna kaupi 32a/1 and footnote. See Addition 7.

Chapter 33: Kaupir ̨u uxa
33/3ñ4. Concerning oxen ëbreaking outí, see 26/27ñ30.

Chapter 33a: <Af kauptri ko>

33a/1 and footnote. In the table of contents in the A-text, but not the B-text, a separate chapter Af kauptri ko ëConcerning a purchased cowí is recorded, although there is no equivalent indication in the text. There is a new chapter in tyGL.

33a/4. If a milking cow was dry, this was regarded as a sign of witch- craft. Witches were supposedly able to steal milk from the cow of a stranger (cf. Heurgren 1925, 297ñ98; SL IV, 283 note 3 to Chap- ter 33). In GulL 57 (NGL 1, 29) it is specified that a slave may be returned to the vendor if he sucks cows. Also in GulL 44 (NGL 1, 25) one hidden fault listed in a cow is that it suckles itself. This could be regarded as the same problem, expressed differently, in that one assumes she was then lacking in milk for her owner. DL Bb 31 pr is alone in setting a value on the quarters of a cowís udder: one ˆre for one quarter, two ˆre for two and the option of returning the cow for faults in three quarters.

Chapter 34: Kaupir ̨u hest

34/4. The form of blindness termed starblindr ëmoonblindí usually refers to cataracts (Swedish grÂstarr), although the word can be used figuratively to mean ëpurblindí. Cataracts in horses can occur as a result of periodic ophthalmia, which is a well-docu- mented equine disease, probably viral in origin. It was first recorded in the fourth century and called ëmoon-blindnessí because symptoms

156

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

appear at roughly regular intervals, with periods of remission. The effects are progressively more severe and the horse eventually becomes totally blind in the affected eye. In view of the fact that the periods of remission could last for several months at a time, the three days allowed for detecting the problem seem less than generous (cf. Hayes 1968, 167ñ68). FrostL X 48 (NGL 1, 228) lists the following faults related to horses: deafness, blindness, being disabled (ëbroken downí), permanent lameness, shying or stub- bornness. A purchaser had five days within which to return the horse. HL Kmb 3 refers to lameness or noko annÊr laster ëany other disablementí.

Chapter 35: Af hesti

The chapter titles in the tables of contents in the A-text and in the B- text are more specific: Af hestatekt ëConcerning the taking of horsesí and Ridir tu annan mans hest ëIf you ride another manís horseí respec- tively.

35/6ñ12. Presumably if one left oneís own horse behind, one could simply have made a mistake. There was still, however, a fine at- tached to this action (35/10ñ12). Compare this to taking wood from another person (26/57ñ58), where there does not seem to have been a fine if an equal amount were left.

35/11. Jacobsen (GGD, 96 note 2) assumes that, in the phrase kum hanum hailum haim atr, the pronoun hanum refers to the owner of the horse (ëbring [it] back unharmed to himí), but kuma in the sense ëbringí takes the dative, so hanum in all probability refers to the horse.

Chapter 36: Af skipa gezlu

36/2ñ3. The generic term for any vessel, ëshipí, in which one put to sea was skip, but there were many terms to designate the size and type of vessel. The general term for a merchant ship of a smaller type (thirteen ribs and three benches as it states here) was kaupskip (see Hj‰rne 1929, 103). Trade between Gotland and the Baltic countries had begun by the end of the Viking Age, but during the eleventh century trade with Russia was of increasing importance and this continued into the twelfth century. With the rise of the Hanseatic League the focus changed and trade was more directed to the south and west. Gotland had few natural resources but farmers

NOTES 157

dealt in weapons, ships, horses and provisions, all referred to in a papal letter of 1229 (DS I, 255ñ56, note 253, 16/2/1229). This trade was also recognised in 1285 by Magnus LadulÂs. The mer- chant vessels were principally sail-driven, although they would have had a few oar-benches fore and aft (three in the case of the kaupskip described here). They were wide-beamed, deep-keeled and seaworthy, as opposed to the narrower, faster and more tender ships for the levy (cf. KL s. v. Skibstyper).

36/4. A cargo vessel was a byr ̨ingr, a term covering ships of various sizes, from those used for coastal traffic to larger cargo ships, even- tually succeeded by the kogge. Jacobsen (GGD, 96 note 3) remarks that forms of the word byr ̨ingr are still used in the Baltic of cargo vessels and that in Eriks SjL1 Text 1 III ß58 the word is used of a small ship for freight, larger than a baat. In MLBL, VI ß17 (NGL 2, 250ñ52) a byr ̨ingr is stated to be smaller than a knarr and it seems generally to have been a small, broad-beamed coastal ves- sel. In tyGL it is glossed as a cargo boat. The word bir ̨akiR on inscription G 351 from Visby is interpreted by SnÊdal (2002, 87ñ88) as byr ̨ing (cf. Br ̄gger and Sheteling 1950, 284ñ85; AEW s. v. byr ̨ing; KL s. v. Handelssjˆfart).

36/5ñ6. The expression hus ̨et sum ̨iau ̨ sufa i ëa house in which people sleepí, describing the building to which a byr ̨ing had to be tied, refers in all probability to the sort of seasonal fishing hut (e.g. the fiskiahus mentioned in HL) found along the coastline in all Scandinavian countries (see Erixon 1955, 132ñ33).

36/6ñ7. This, the only reference to a housewife in GL, implies that she was more likely to have the keys than her husband. In UL ƒb 3 pr there is reference to a wife having the right til lasÊ ok nyklÊ ëto lock and keyí as a symbol of her control over the care and protec- tion of the house. This right was claimed for her by her own family, before the marriage act itself and brought with it great responsibil- ity, as much of the wealth of a household would be in the silver and jewels to which she had access.

36/11, 14, 16. The relative sizes of the two types of vessel referred to, a ësmall vesselí (myndrikkia, 36/11) and a ëboatí (batr, 36/14, 16), are obscure. It may be that no distinction is intended. Both were cer- tainly small coastal vessels, probably driven by oar or paddle only. S‰ve challenges Schlyterís translation of myndrikkia (based on the text of tyGL) as ëmindre skutaí, a small sailing vessel or ferry for cargo. He suggests that a myndrikkia might originally have been a

158

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

small vessel propelled with a single oar by a backward-facing boat- man. He further suggests a derivation from OldSwe mynda ërow backwardsí and that the second element meant either ëdrive for- wardí or ërock to and froí (describing the mode of propulsion of the vessel). S‰ve agrees it is logical to assume that the vessel was slightly larger than a boat (batr), and not just a punt (flat-bottomed boat), since the sequence of vessels mentioned appears to go from the larger to the smaller. The way in which the provision is phrased, however, is ambiguous: a batr could have been valued more highly than a myndrikkia. The former should not be left on the shore without supervision, or anyone could claim it, whereas the latter could be left if the owner were within shouting distance, otherwise it could again be taken with impunity. Furthermore, if a batr were taken from a landing place or mooring, the theft was treated in the same way as that of a horse, whilst no penalty seems to be attached to the taking of a myndrikkia if accepted procedures were fol- lowed. Cf. GU, xxviiñxxix; GO s. v. mynn-vricka; KL s. v. Myndrik. Another word for a small boat was fluti (cf. Addition 8/42).

If a vessel was found var ̨alaus ëunattendedí it could be treated as a wreck to all intents and purposes in certain cases, and the finder could claim a higher proportion of the value (cf. BjR 19 pr).

36/13ñ14. On the use of a shout as a legal instrument, see Note to 22/3ñ4.

36/15ñ17. This provision seems to contradict the previous one, un- less one assumes that a ëlanding placeí was always under watch, or was deemed to be so, or that at sta ̨um specifically means ëtied up at a mooringí, i.e. that the boat was obviously owned by someone who intended to return to it.

For further responsibilities with regard to ships and boats, see Addition 8/39ñ50.

Chapter 37: Af ranzsakan

37/6ñ7. Tracing property by means of house-searches has ancient origins (see Westman 1912a, 223ñ24). The reason for the insist- ence on the searchers being loosely girded and without coats was to avoid the possibility of evidence being planted. A similar stipu- lation is made in MLBL, VIII ß8 (NGL 2, 271): ̨eir skulu ganga in linda lausir ëthey should go in ungirdedí (cf. ƒVgL Tjb 5 ß1; UL Mb 47 ß1). Jacobsen (GGD, 97 note 4) suggests that the kapa referred to (in ëcoatlessí) might have been a hooded cloak. This

NOTES 159

implies that the searchers were to be easily recognised, as well as unable to conceal evidence (cf. Hammerich 1959, 196ñ99; Wenn- strˆm 1936, 148ñ64). The provisions relating to house-searches varied considerably between different Swedish provincial laws and in MEStL Tjb 2 ß1 anyone wishing to search without official per- mission had to lay down a deposit of forty marks.

37/7ñ9. The removal of immunity, effectively haimafri ̨r (cf. Note to 12/2), from the dwelling of a person who refused a house-search was a serious matter. The doors could be broken down without redress, irrespective of whether stolen goods were found (cf. ƒVgL Tjb 5 pr, 6; YVgL Tjb 30, 34; ÷gL Vb 32 ß4).

37/12ñ13. According to WessÈn (SL IV, 283 note 5 to Chapter 37) ̨a al lai ̨znum fylgia ëthe warrant for ownership must be tracedí is a standard Scandinavian legal expression. The meaning is that proof of ownership must be traced from the previous owner to the person now in possession of the goods. WessÈn (SL IV, 233) inserts the explanatory word ëfÂngesmaní (assignor) in his translation of this passage. This person was the one who had granted the right in property (of whatever type) to the assignee (in this case the person under suspicion).

37/14. ëThe person to whom he first referredí ( ̨ar sum hann fyrsti til skiautr). WessÈn (SL IV, 283 note 6 to Chapter 37) and Jacobsen (GGD, 97) call the person to whom the accused refers the ëhemulsmaní (Swedish) or ëhjemmelsmandí (Danish). This was the person who had a legal obligation to defend a buyerís right to goods against a challenge and to defend a buyerís innocence if he consequently lost ownership; in many circumstances this would have been the previous owner or keeper. It is not clear from WessÈnís notes if he intends this person to be the same as the assignor referred to in his note 5, but Jacobsen (GGD, 97 note 6) assumes only one person is involved. The circumlocutions of the text make this pas- sage rather obscure, but a translation assuming a single third party, the assignor, from whom the accused person claims he received the property, makes perfect sense.

37/22ñ24. It appears from the context that the goods planted by the miscreant were assumed to be his own, which he was intending to accuse his neighbour of having stolen, rather than goods he him- self had taken and was trying to dispose of.

37/24ñ26. The wergild to be paid would be three marks of gold for a Gotlander, or ten marks of silver for a non-Gotlander.

160

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

37/26. The emended words, ëBut ifí, derive from Pipping (GLGS, xxxvi note 4) who prefers the B-text reading ̨ar til, en ë. . . in addition . . . Ifí to the A-text reading ̨ar til et ëuntil, unlessí. Schlyter (CIG, 78) and S‰ve (GU, 25) accept the A-text reading. WessÈn (SL IV, 233 and 284 note 11 to Chapter 37) follows these two but acknowledges Pippingís alternative interpretation, which is perhaps to be preferred; it would be unusual to mention a fine relating only to a non-Gotlander before that to a Gotlander. The twelve marks to the general assembly were according to Pipping in addition to the three marks payable to the (presumably) local assembly, rather than instead of them (see also Jacobsen GGD, 98).

Chapter 38: Af ̨iaufa ret

Theft ( ̨iaufna ̨r) was secret theft of movables, as opposed to open robbery. Although it is sometimes assumed that in pre-Christian times this crime was regarded as a particularly serious offence against the community at large, alongside murder and rape, and had to be atoned for to the gods with the life of the perpetrator, there is little evidence of this in the provincial laws. Admittedly, the worst crimes were punishable by death, but the limit varied between the provinces: ƒVgL Md 8 sets the limit at two ˆre, GL at one mark of silver, the remainder of the laws at 1⁄2 mark (two marks in coin). GL, SdmL, UL and HL are the only provincial laws that rely purely on monetary value to judge the severity of a theft, indicating the generalised use of coinage in these areas (cf. Hemmer 1928, 159ñ64; Wennstrˆm 1936, 58ñ65; Hasselberg 1953, 341ñ47).

38/3ñ4. The word snattanbot in the sense ëfine for petty larcenyí does not occur widely in medieval Scandinavian law (cf. Wennstrˆm 1936, 17).

38/5ñ6. ëAnd [be] marked and be committed to pay wergildí (ok merkia ok til vereldis dyma). The thief was to be branded (which was normally done on the cheek), or possibly had his ears cut off, as a visible punishment. Whether merkia always signified one or other punishment is a matter for conjecture (cf. Brunner 1906ñ28, II, 788; Hemmer 1928, 62 note 9; Carlsson 1934, 102; Wilda 1960, 514ñ15). A thief also had to pay a fine of either three marks of gold or ten of silver. Schlyterís note (CIG, 79 note c) is ambiguous on how this was determined: ëD. ‰. till lika stor bot, som hade skolat erl‰ggas om han hade blifvit dr‰pení (That is, to a fine as great as would have been paid if he had been killed). The use of the passive

NOTES 161

gives no indication of the principal of han ëheí. Jacobsen (GGD, 98 note 8) assumes that the sum was determined by whether the person robbed was a Gotlander or not. On the other hand, WessÈn (SL IV, 284 note 2) assumes that the sum depended on whether the thief was a Gotlander or a non-Gotlander. In view of the fact that the immediately previous mention of wergild related specifically to the status of the wronged person, Jacobsenís interpretation seems the more likely, although some payments for abduction, rape, fire damage and damage to fruit trees depended on the status of the person inflicting the injury (see Chapters 21/2ñ8, 22/26ñ28, 51/3ñ4 and 59/6). Hasselberg (1953, 231) assumes that if a thief could not pay the wergild, he lost his life, but there is no direct evidence of this.

38/6ñ9. Wennstrˆm (1936, 76) points out that GL is the only Swedish- related provincial law to follow the Germanic laws in stipulating hanging for a subsequent theft of whatever value. Hanging, as opposed to beheading, was a shameful death and even female thieves were not hanged (cf. ÷gL Vb 35). Hanging is the only means of execution specified in GL, but there are examples from mainland provincial laws of other forms, for example stoning on a beach (cf. DL Tjb 2 pr; KL s. v. Dˆdsstraff; Notes to 21/9ñ12, 63/11ñ13). A summary of non-monetary punishments appears in Appendix D (i).

38/8ñ9 and footnote. The B-text omits this final provision but has further provisions relating mostly to theft by slaves, presumably omitted from the A-text for the same reason that provisions regard- ing the purchase of slaves were omitted. These are given in Addition 8.

38/9. Schlyter in his glossary (CIG, 310) suggests that ̨au ënever- thelessí be emended to ̨a ëthení. Pipping (GLGS, 50 note 7) rejects this and refers to Kock (1895, 126) for corroboration. The meaning is that a thief who took a mark of silver or more was to hang, even if this were his first offence.

Chapter 39: Af oque ̨insor ̨um

The fines for verbal insults in VStL I 53 pr are double those for the most serious bodily injury, whereas here in GL they are equivalent to those of a more minor wound. The punishment was more severe in Iceland: lesser outlawry and a fine of six marks of silver, irrespective of the social standing of the person insulted (cf. Gr·g·s II ß237 (LEI 2, 195)). In Norwegian laws, the fine for a similar offence was three marks for a landowning farmer, and on a sliding scale for other so- cial classes (cf. GulL 98, 178, 196 (NGL 1, 46ñ47, 66, 70)).

162

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

39/2. The insult mor ̨ingi ëmurdererí refers to a killer who does not admit his or her killing and attempts to hide the crime, or perhaps accuse another. Here it is equated with the shameful epithets thief ( ̨iaufr) and highway robber (rauferi), which were punishable by death if serious enough, or second offences. The word is not used elsewhere in GL, where bani is the usual word for a killer.

39/2ñ3. The term ran has been translated elsewhere as ëopen robberyí, and was not originally considered as shameful as secret theft. It usually (but not always) involved a greater or lesser degree of vio- lence, and provincial laws differed in the weight they gave to the two elements of the crime. Over the period covered by the provin- cial laws, the punishment became more severe and in the national laws rÂn was treated as an edsˆresbrott, a crime against the kingís peace (cf. Introduction, p. xxxviii; Note to 12/9ñ10). It seems that in GL it was regarded as equal in severity to secret theft.

39/3. The word kasnavargr ëmurdering arsonistí is also found in Swedish provincial laws (cf. ÷gL Eb 31 pr; Wennstrˆm 1936, 270ñ 74, 301). The table of contents of VmL (CIS V, 80) has kaxnawargh, which prompts S‰ve (GU, xxxi) to speculate whether the first ele- ment of the word had its origins in a form k‚x ëlanding place, place for boatsí, which he takes to be Estonian. If this were the case, he suggests, kasnavargr could originally have meant ëburner of boatsí, vargr being the perpetrator of a violent action, criminal or outlaw. The connection seems tenuous, however, and Schlyter (CISG, 340ñ 41) offers a number of alternatives for the origin of the element kasna- amongst which are Latin casa ëhouseí, OldSwe kasa ëto pile upí and Swedish dialect kase ëbed warmerí. WessÈn (SL I, ÷gL 51 note 50) offers the explanation that kase meant ëhˆg av ris, ved, stubbar o.d. att br‰nnas, bÂl (vÂrdkase)í (pile of brushwood, fire- wood, stubble or similar for burning, pyre (beacon)), but gives no source for this information. No punishment for the crime itself is given in GL, or in SdmL 34, where it is also listed as a punishable insult. In Norway, however, actual murderous arson was consid- ered to be an ̇bÛtam·l, that is, an injury not able to be reconciled by fine, and the perpetrator was called a brennuvargr (cf. GulL 98, 178 (NGL 1, 46ñ47, 66)).

39/4. Jacobsen (GGD, 102 note 2) rightly points out that hordombr ëadulteryí and forde ̨skepr ëwitchcraftí are abstract nouns and do not refer to the person committing these acts, as do all the remain- ing nouns. S‰ve speculates whether the B-text reading fordenschepír

NOTES 163

reflects an older fornskapr, comparing it with fyrnska ëold cus- toms, superstitioní at 4/3. The word used in Guta saga (GLGS, 64 line 13) to describe Avair Strabain is fielkunnugr ëskilled in many thingsí, and this word and its equivalents were also used, frequently with a positive connotation, to indicate ëskilled in magic artsí, especially in OWN sources. The word forde ̨skepr and its equiva- lents were more often used negatively in the sense ëwitchcraft, black artsí. In the Christian law provisions, all forms of witchcraft, white or black, were forbidden although sometimes the punish- ment for the two was different. Both Norwegian and Swedish provincial laws vary in the severity of the punishment to be meted out to witches, including the death penalty. The stricter attitude stems from the southern tradition of Christianity and church law. The more moderate punishments laid down are closer to those of the Irish church. GL refers only to forde ̨skepr as an insult against women, and not to the crime itself.

Insulting a woman by calling her an adulteress implies that this was considered to be disgraceful behaviour, but as noted earlier (Note to Chapter 21) GL prescribes no punishment of the woman for it. On the other hand, accusing a man of such an act does not seem to have been considered an insult, although his life might be forfeit (21/10).

39/8. Jacobsen (GGD, 102 note 4) observes that the prefix o- in osinum, literally ëat a bad time, untimelyí, is not the usual negation, but pejorative, as in Swedish otyg ëwitchcraft, nuisanceí (cf. Note to Chapter 17). It (osinum) seems to be the dative of a noun meaning ëa bad timeí. Insults offered when the speaker was drunk would be treated leniently if they were duly retracted and compensated for.

39/9ñ12. Once summoned to the church, a person accused of slander must either defend himself or offer restitution, both accompanied by a three-man oath, sworn by parishioners. Public apology is demanded for insults in GulL 196 (NGL 1, 70) and VStL I 53 pr, but is not mentioned in Swedish provincial laws, although sham- ing punishments are laid down for other crimes. The involvement of a parish in the legal process is also incorporated in Chapter 30, relating to surety.

39/13. The expression sokn all means ëall the parishionersí in the same way that land alt means ëthe general assemblyí.

39/15ñ16. The more public insult incurred a much higher penalty. WessÈn (SL IV, 285 notes 4 and 5) compares the fines and procedures in these provisions (the siex manna ai ̨i ësix-man oathí) with those

164
for breaking the assembly peace (Chapter 11) and to accusations

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS
against women (Chapter 2). Cf. CISk IV 21ñ22 for insults in general.

Chapter 40: Af smafile ̨i

In the table of contents, and in the B-text, it is made clear that this chapter refers specifically to unbranded (omerkt) small livestock. The word omerkt in the B-text has, however, been added later and may not have been in the manuscript from which Bilefeld made his copy. By elimination, only immature stock is covered by this provision since adult pigs, sheep, goats, cattle and horses are specifically named in later, and different, provisions. Otherwise, sheep, goats and other small livestock were normally included in the concept of smafile ̨i, OldSwe sˆ ̨er.

40/3. The assembly intended here must be the sixth assembly, since the riding assembly is mentioned specifically in later chap- ters where relevant.

40/4, 41/6, 42/4, 43/3 and 43/4 and footnotes. Bugge (1877ñ78, 265ñ66) gives an account of possible forms: -lausn and -launs, concluding that the latter is an appropriate correction for all in- stances of -laun in the manuscripts of GL. He notes that lausn rather than launs is used in Guta saga (GLGS, 67 line 18), but takes this to be an example of linguistic differences between the two texts. He considers the form laun to be incorrect, the sense not being a reward to the finder, but a fee to secure the release of the animal. Pipping (GLGS, 53 note 8) follows this correction, but notes that daGL offers two different translations: lˆn for the first and third occurrences and lˆsen for the last (cf. L‰ffler 1878, 287ñ89; GLGS, xlii note 4). Although daGL recognises a difference, the translation appears to be inconsistent. WessÈn (SL IV, 285 note 3 to Chapter 40) implies that the ̨inglaun (of one ˆrtug per visit) was compensation for taking an animal to the assembly if it were unclaimed, and that this was different from the heptalauns, paid by the owner of a stray animal to redeem it (see Chapter 43). WessÈn does not, however, maintain this distinction; he translates ̨ing(s)laun as ëtinglˆsení and (hepta)launs as ëlˆsení. A translation lˆn ërewardí appears to be more appropriate for the former, in the same way that a fundarlaun (Addition 8/34) is the compensation or reward paid to a person who returns a slave and the goods he has stolen. Inci- dentally, Pipping has not suggested a change to the latter. It is entirely possible that two different words, ( ̨ing)laun or ( ̨ings)laun,

NOTES 165

related to OWN laun n. pl., Swedish lˆn ëpayment, rewardí, and (hepta)launs, related to OWN lausn f. pl., Swedish lˆsen ëfee, ran- somí, are involved, and have become confused. This assumption has been followed in the present translation.

40/4ñ5. In neither this chapter nor in the following one is it stated what happened to the animal(s) in question if unclaimed. Presum- ably the finder kept the animal(s), paying to the parishioners the difference between their valuation and the ̨inglaun ëassembly paymentí due to him.

Chapter 41: Af suinum

41/4. Specific mention of the riding assembly in relation to the third presentation of the beasts in this and the next chapter suggests that the sixth assembly is intended elsewhere in this section.

41/6ñ7 and footnotes. The clause and word in angled brackets are supplied from the B-text.

Chapter 42: Af bolambum

The eventual fate of stray sheep is even more ambiguous in this chapter, nor is it clear what was paid by an owner to a finder, although this can perhaps be assumed to have been an ˆrtug, as in Chapter 43. No mention is made of valuation, only of the ownership of any lambs carried by the ewes. These went to the finder, presumably regardless of whether the sheep itself were claimed. The word bolamb refers to a tame sheep as opposed to the utegÂngsfÂr of Gotland, which lived out all year round. These retained several primitive char- acteristics, such as the mane and genetically inherited extra horns (encouraged by selective breeding) on the tups or rams. Selective breeding was made possible by the fact that the ewes were frequently kept indoors. It is reasonable to suppose that a bolamb was such a housed ewe or possibly a castrated ram, reared for meat.

Chapter 43: Af fastum ve ̨uri okliptum

The use of the participle (o)klipt ë(un)shorní in 43/1, 43/2, 44/1 and 44/2 is to some extent ambiguous in the B-text since kliptr can itself have the meaning ëgeldedí. (See relevant footnotes.) The A-text, however, refers in both Chapters 43 and 44 to ungelded (fastr) rams: unshorn (okliptr) and shorn (kliptr) respectively, and this reading seems preferable.

166

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

43/3 and footnote. The word heptalauns (literally ëtethering ran- somí) clearly means a fee paid by a legal owner to redeem his animal, as opposed to a payment (in effect for expenses) to the finder simply for bringing an (unclaimed) creature to the assembly (cf. Note to 40/4, 41/6, 42/4, 43/3 and 43/4; GGD, 103 note 4). Various forms of restraint were employed to prevent straying and it is possible that a fine was imposed because the animal had been inadequately tethered. Schlyter (CIG, iv) takes heptalauns as an example of the degradation of the language in that the genitive form has been used instead of the accusative following the preposition firi. S‰ve (GU, xvii) takes it for a scribal error, whereas Pipping (GLGS, 53 note 8), following Bugge, accepts the manu- script reading (cf. L‰ffler 1878, 287).

43/4 and footnote. The form launs instead of laun in this instance has been taken by earlier commentators (Bugge and L‰ffler referred to above) to support the argument that the latter was incorrect in all cases. S‰ve (GU), on the other hand, following the B-text, uses the form laun throughout. The differentiation suggested in the pre- ceding Notes is preferred.

Chapter 44: Af fastum ve ̨uri kliptum
Whilst an unshorn ram seems to have been treated similarly to a

bolamb, a shorn ram was not, because of the season of the year.

44/2ñ3. The feast of Saints Simon and Jude is October 28th, so the case imagined is one of a breeding ram being loose over the winter period. 44/3ñ4. The clause ëup to the time that it is usual to release themí must qualify the phrase ëafter the feast of St Simon and St Judeí and not the intervening clause in GL, ëit has rendered itself forfeit by wanderingí. The normal time for the release of the ram with the ewes was in the early spring, possibly on Lady Day, the 25th March

(cf. Note to 57/2ñ3).
44/6ñ9. In this case it appears that the animal was not taken to the

assembly and valued. The finder neither received expenses nor paid anything to the parishioners. His reward was simply the ram itself, unless his owner redeemed him (for an unspecified fee).

Chapter 45: Af gaitum ok bukkum

Goats do not seem to have been widely kept in Sweden, but they were important elsewhere in Scandinavia. They were clearly not highly

NOTES 167

valued in Gotland since the price for redeeming a goat was half that of a horse or cow and much less than for a sheep, but in Norway and Denmark they were kept as milk-yielding animals, giving profitable cheese, and for their meat and skins.

45/3ñ4. ëThen they shall be redeemed: a nanny for six pence for each assemblyí (so skal atr loysa gait firi siex penninga a hueriu ̨ingi). This provision implies that an owner redeeming his goats paid according to how many assemblies the finder had attended. The previous reference to payments by an owner (Chapter 43) does not mention multiple assembly visits, so it is not possible to infer that this was the rule in all cases. The finder, however, received expenses for each assembly visit, so it seems to be a logical conclusion.

45/3ñ4. The penningr ëpennyí was the lowest unit of currency in Scandinavia up to the end of the thirteenth century. It is referred to only here and in Chapters 47, 49 and 56a. The number of pennies per ˆrtug and thus per ˆre and mark varied from area to area, although no records exist earlier than the end of the thirteenth century (cf. GGD, 25 note 1; Jansson 1936, 65; KL s. v. ÿrtug). Contemporary sources state that the Gotlandic system was taken over by Riga (cf. the letters of the Bishop of Riga HRSH29, 1ñ14) with an ˆrtug divided into twelve pennies. The same system is recorded for ÷land, although later the sixteen-penny standard current in Gˆtaland was in use (cf. DS I, 456, no. 549 (6/4/1271); DS I, 591ñ93, no. 736 (29/12/1281)). In Svealand, from around 1300 there was a unification of the system: a mark was eight ˆre, each of three ˆrtugar, each of eight pennies, giving 192 pennies to a mark (in coin), i.e. half as many as in Gˆtaland. Norway adopted the same system at about this time. Although the consensus amongst scholars appears to be that there were eight pennies to an ˆrtug in Gotland during the period of GL, other rates have also been proposed and the relation- ship between the fees for a nanny-goat and a billy-goat might suggest a rate of twelve pennies to an ˆrtug (see Appendix C).

Chapter 45a: <Af nautum ok russum>

45a/1 and footnote. The chapter title occurs in the table of contents, but not in the A-text, although a new chapter occurs in both the B- text (63) and tyGL.

45a/7ñ8. ë. . . not travel to Visby with themí (. . . fari ai til Visbyar mi ̨). This is the only reference to Visby in GL. It is not clear

168

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

what the implications are of this provision. It might be that there was a horse fair at Visby and that the finder of a horse or pony was not to take it there for recognition or possible sale, but to the assembly. It could also mean that, whilst they might use the horse on their farm, they were not permitted to use it for travelling longer distances until they had presented it three times at an assembly.

45a/10ñ11 and footnote. A motstukkr was one of the posts at the centre of the assembly, possibly marking an area with legal significance. Four tingstockar are mentioned in several medieval sources from SkÂne (e.g. CISk IV 21) (cf. CISk IV, 408 note 8; SL IV, 200 note 22). Stray cattle and ponies were to be tied up within sight of these, but a distance away so that they were not confused with animals belonging to the people attending the assembly. It is possible that the assembly was in a natural hollow and that by having the animals a distance away the men holding them could see the posts over the heads of others at the assembly, or alterna- tively that potential claimants could see the beasts (cf. GGD, 105 note 1; SL IV, 286 note 2 to Chapter 45a).

Table iii in Appendix D summarises the provisions in chapters 40ñ45a.

Chapter 46: Af merki

46/2ñ4. The crime referred to here is that of altering an existing earmark on a sheep, or other creature, to one for a different owner. Such earmarks have been used until relatively recently to distin- guish sheep grazing on common land and are still used on the reindeer herds of the Sami. Altering a mark was equal to theft in some provincial laws (cf. VmL Mb 26). Obviously, if an animal had been purchased or received in dowry, a change was quite lawful.

Chapter 47: Af akrum

47/6. Jacobsen (GGD, 105 note 2) remarks that a landboi ëtenantí was someone who leased or rented land, as opposed to owning it freehold. The word land was not generally used to describe prop- erty (Ruthstrˆm 2002, 128) and the original form seems to have been lanbo, meaning someone living on leased property (related to the word for ëloaní). This changed as a result of folk etymology to landboi, a word that occurs only here in GL. The common OWN equivalent laigulenningr occurs at 3/18 (cf. SkL 238ñ39 (CISk I 225)). Tenancy conditions were fixed and for a limited period,

NOTES 169

with an initial payment and often an annual rent. Jacobsen also points out that the only other word for farmer in GL is bondi. This is in contrast to the several words used for different classes of landowner in Danish and mainland Swedish laws.

47/7. The standard area measure for arable land in Gotland appears to have been laupsland, the land upon which a bushel (about 36 litres) of seed corn (barley) could be sown. One equivalent, recorded in early fourteenth-century Norway, was 1/3 markebol (cf. Steinnes 1936, 142; Note to 20/47ñ48).

47/8. Haymaking generally ran from the first weekday after St Peterís day (29th June) and could continue until St Michaelís day (29th September). After this, cattle could graze on the meadows, just as they could graze on arable fields after the harvest (cf. UL Bb 10; DL Bb 8).

47/9ñ10. Unlike other instances of lass ëloadí, the reference here is to a specific volume. The standard conversion for a shipís cargo was that a lass or l‰st was twelve skeppund and the same relation- ship appears to have been current with the lispund. This does not, however, give an absolute volume, since the capacity of a pund varied from time to time and place to place (cf. Note to 6/8).

47/10. The expression at markum refers to the calculated value of the land according to the same principles as those in Chapter 32. WessÈn (SL IV, 286 note 4 to Chapter 47) uses the word marktal, equivalent to Gtn markatal (cf. Note to 53/3ñ5). The word refers to weighed marks, despite the element -tal.

Chapter 48: Af rofnakrum

48/2ñ3. Turnips were introduced to Scandinavia at an unknown date, but by the Middle Ages they were a significant crop and numer- ous statutes related to their cultivation occur in the provincial laws, except for VgLL and SkL, the very earliest laws. UL, SdmL, DL, VmL have several less categorical statutes mentioning the cul- tivation of turnips. UL Kkb 7 ß5 names turnips as one of the crops on which tithe was to be paid and this occurs also in some Norwe- gian laws. In ÷gL Bb 28 ß5 there is a description of crop rotation on clearings: turnips (for a year), then rye (for two years), the land to be left fallow after three harvests.

48/3ñ4. Those ëwho have no arable land, but have a houseí (se ̨alaust fulk sum hus hafr) were crofters who perhaps only kept livestock (see Chapter 56a). It is not clear from the wording whether the

170

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

land for the turnips was part of the holding, or extra land provided by the landlord, but he was clearly expected to provide the means of cultivation. The provision given here for care of the poor in a parish seems to be unique to GL.

48/5. This is the only case where oykr refers to ploughing in particu- lar, as opposed to draught in general. Yoked oxen did this work in southern Sweden, whereas in the north of the country a horse and chest harness was used. Cf. Notes to 6/8ñ9 and 26/45.

Chapter 49: Af hafreki

For all the provisions in this chapter, it must be assumed that (as was the case in respect of stray animals) the remainder of the find was returned to the owner of the property, or to the parish or assembly if no owner was determined. The sliding scale of payments to a finder of jetsam, flotsam and lagan reflects the risk involved in recovering the goods, and the likelihood of determining the original owner. Similar provisions are to be found in Swedish provincial laws and in VStL (cf. UL Mb 54 pr; VStL III iii 13; Hasselberg 1953, 117ñ18).

49/6. The expression yr lanzsyn ëout of sight of landí is rendered in tyGL as us der kennunge, the same expression as is used in VStL III iii 8 to indicate that a sea voyage has properly started.

Chapter 50: Af eldi

50/3. The word skurstain ëhearthí appears in Gotlandic dialect as kurstain or kustain and is a loan word from Middle Low German scorsten. It meant originally the whole of the covered hearth and chimney (but now only the latter). This former sense was current in Danish as late as the early nineteenth century and according to Lis Jacobsen (GGD, 106 note 6) survived in Danish dialects a century later. The form of fireplace with a covered chimney arrived in Scan- dinavia in the Middle Ages and this reference in GL is one of the earliest (see SL IV, 287 note 1 to Chapter 50).

In MELL Bb 28, if fire broke loose from a stova ëdwellingí, stekara hus ëkitchení or kˆlno hus ëmalt kilní, the farmer was not liable.

Chapter 51: Af bierueldi

51/2. It was previously common to take burning material from one place to another to kindle further fires or ovens, because of the difficulty of starting a fire (see GGD, 107 note 1). One might even

NOTES 171

have to borrow fire from a neighbour, carrying it from one farm to another. Similar provisions occur in UL Bb 24 ß1, DL Bb 45 ß4, VmL Bb 24 ß1, SdmL Kkb 2 pr and SdmL Bb 18 ß7 (cf. SL IV, 287 note 1 to Chapter 51).

51/3ñ4. For further occasions on which compensation to some extent depended upon the status of the perpetrator of a crime, see Chap- ters 21/2ñ8, 22/26ñ28, 38/6ñ9 and 59/6.

Since the wergild of a minor was the same as that of an adult (cf. 18/16), the compensation payable by the responsible adult was the same. This is the reverse of the situation at 14/25, relating to killings and 59/6 relating to damage to fruit trees, where compen- sation is halved if a minor commits the crime.

Chapter 52: Af broagier ̨

52/1. The verb bro ëmake a bridgeí or ësurface a roadí survives in Gotlandic dialect (cf. GO s. v. bro1). Here bro is a noun meaning a filling of stones, branches or other material placed annually across a track to make marshy and otherwise inaccessible places passable.

52/2. The routes concerned were recognised summer roads, as opposed to simple cleared tracks in the forest, and their upkeep was a com- munal responsibility. Only in later times was the whole track surfaced (cf. GGD, 107 note 3; SL IV, 287 note 1 to Chapter 52). Most mainland provincial laws (e.g. ÷gL Bb 4 and 5) contain statutes concerning roads, road building and road repair (broagier ̨) (cf. Yrwing 1940, 104). One important purpose of these constructions was to provide routes to the parish churches, mills and other necessary destinations. ƒVgL Jb 12 and YVgL Jb 26 mention markv‰gar and kyrkov‰gar, but also (Fnb 32) quÊrnÊuÊgher and allmannÊvÊgher, which foreshadow the more detailed statutes of the national law. In Uppland alone seventy-five runic inscriptions commemorate bro builders.

52/4. The three-mark fine extracted for default was presumably paid to the sixth assembly.

Chapter 53: Af skuti

As Jacobsen (GGD, 107 note 4) comments, the taxes referred to in this chapter are those funds gathered together from contributions made during time of need. The word survives in the Swedish fˆrskott ëadvanceí, sammanskott ëcollectioní and tillskott ëcontributioní, each relating to a contribution in some form (see SL IV, 287 note 1 to Chapter 53). The annual tax (skattr) to the Swedish crown and the levy

172
tax (lai ̨ingslami) are described in Guta saga, but are not referred to

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS
in GL (cf. GS, xxxiiiñxxxvi, xlviii, 32 note to 6/12, 59 note to 14/5).

53/3ñ5. Despite the fact that the words markatal and tald mark were used elsewhere in Scandinavia to mean marks counted (i.e. in coin, rather than weighed), it seems that the Gotlandic tax based on markatal was calculated on the gold or silver value of property and liquid assets, rather than on the penningr value. This would have had the effect of taking into account any devaluation of the currency in respect of liquid assets. WessÈn (SL IV, 287 note 2 to Chapter 53) simply refers to the value of the land in marks (as described in Chapter 32) and liquid assets, but by implication intends weighed value, e.g. ounces (oyrar) of gold, silver and other goods that could legally be used as currency. The phrase ai af garrum gersemum ënot of manufactured valuablesí specifically excludes such items, but covers manufactured household chattels of gold and silver. Gradually, (lˆs)ˆre came to apply to all movables (see Ruthstrˆm 2002, 141ñ42, 180). Later sumptuary laws (Chapter 65) forbade the purchase of gold and silver items, presumably since this would constitute tax avoidance, as they were non-taxable as- sets (cf. Notes to 2/35, Addition 9/5ñ6).

53/4ñ5. The word g ̄rsomme in the sense ëvaluablesí was still found in Danish dialect when Lis Jacobsen produced her translation in 1910 (GGD, 108 note 1).

Chapter 54: Af var ̨i

Provisions relating to the watch are to be found in UL Kgb 12, SdmL Kgb 12 and HL Kgb 9. Farmers in coastal areas carried a particular responsibility. The duty of the watch was to light beacons to summon troops in case of an attack. Those sitting watch paid their own expenses, and any fines due if they failed in their duty. The level of the fine is not given in GL, but in UL it is forty marks. In SdmL and HL the fine varies depending on the nature of the failure in duty. The Danish translation (daGL) records an increasing level of responsibility with the increase in the age of the person from eighteen to twenty-two years. Another aspect of defence was the lai ̨ingr, referred to in Guta saga (GLGS, 68).

54/2ñ4. Although Pipping (GLGS, Ordbok) defines the var ̨penningar as ëen Ârlig skatt, som erlades af alla vapenfˆra m‰ní (an annual tax, paid by all men capable of bearing arms), comparison with

NOTES 173

mainland provincial laws suggests that it refers to fines payable

for not keeping proper watch.
54/3. The skyldir ëexpensesí were usually communal taxes, but it seems

more likely that expenses incurred in keeping watch are intended here. Chapter 55: Af husum ok hus ̨iau ̨um

55/1. The hus ̨iau ̨ ëhousehold servantsí were people working in the (farm)house itself, perhaps specifically as opposed to those doing outside farm work, referred to in the following chapter.

55/4. WessÈn (SL IV, 288 note 2 to Chapter 55) observes that the scribe of manuscript B 65 (tyGL) has here mistaken (hus) ̨iau ̨ for ̨iaufr ëthiefí and inserted a new chapter heading, Van husdyben ëConcerning house thievesí. This provision probably refers to per- manent members of a household, rather than seasonal workers, but the reason for it is obscure. Since those who did not grow their own crops could be pressed into service by any farm for harvest- ing, it might have been regarded as unethical to subsume people into oneís household, thus making them unavailable for this work.

Chapter 56: Af byrslufulki

56/4. The payment for a dayís hire is set out in the following provi- sion, Chapter 56a. The byrslufulk ëharvestersí were hired seasonal workers who received daily wages.

Chapter 56a: <Af se ̨alausu fulki>

56a/1 and footnote. This new chapter (75) in the B-text (and in tyGL) is not signalled in the A-text, although the chapter title appears in the table of contents.

56a/2. The se ̨alaust fulk (with no arable land) were crofters, as described in the notes to Chapter 48.

56a/3ñ5. Payment was according to the area worked and the grain harvested and did not include provisions. The barley and rye would have been for flour and food and the oats possibly to feed horses and perhaps make porridge and soup (see KL s. v. Havre; Korn; RÂg).

Chapter 57: Af ikornum

57/2ñ3. Only the winter pelts (grÂverk) of squirrels were valued as currency, so the close season coincides with the period when they were in their summer coats (routhskyn). The open season was usually

174

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

from 13th October (28th October in Gotland, 1st November in Uppland) to 14th April (25th March in V‰stmanland and in Gotland, 2nd February in Sˆdermanland). Forty skins were equivalent in value to one timber. Sources from 1235 mention rights granted to four Gotlandic fur traders to trade toll-free in England for three years, and payments to Gotlandic merchants for these skins are recorded in 1237, 1242, 1244, 1248 and 1250 (cf. HansUB I, 270, 283, 322, 359, 333, 395).

Chapter 58: Af herum

58/2ñ3. Once again the close season for hare trapping was the summer half year. Although a gin is referred to, the usual method for catching hare in the winter was in a snow-pit, loosely covered with brushwood (see KL s. v. Harar; Jakt). GL is the only provin- cial law that specifies a close season for catching hares, although hares are mentioned in ƒVgL Fnb 7 ß1, YVgL Utb 15 and ÷gL Bb 36 ß5 in relation to who owned a hare that had been caught.

Chapter 59: Af skafli

59/1. The word ska(f)vel is used in Gotlandic dialect for fruit from trees, e.g. apples (cf. GO s. v. skavel). Schlyter (CISG, 550) and Jacobsen (GGD, 109 note 4) think that edible fruit in general might be meant in this instance. The word skafl occurs in UL in the table of contents against Chapter 49 of Mb and in HL in the chapter heading of Mb 32 referring to one who steals any edible crop (e.g. turnips, peas). In UL Bb 14 ß6 and other provincial laws there are fines for felling another personís fruit trees, with varying levels of fine depending on whether a tree was in fruit or not. The fine in GL for picking fruit before September 8th appears to apply even to the owner of the trees in question, or it might refer to trees on com- monly owned land. The date might suggest the type of fruit that was cultivated in Gotland (possibly apples), or the time when the fruit concerned was ripe. Cf. KL s. v. FrugttrÊer.

59/6. Further instances of variable penalties depending on the per- son committing an offence are to be found in Chapters 21/2ñ8, 22/ 26ñ28, 38/6ñ9 and 51/3ñ4.

Chapter 60: Af messufalli

60/5ñ6. A feast of nine lessons in the Catholic Church was one on which nine lessons (Bible or other readings) were included in the

NOTES 175

service of Matins. These services were reserved for the more

important minor feast days, others having fewer readings.
60/6. Schlyter (CIG, 379; CISG, 415) takes e ̨a hafas ëor heldí as a scribal correction for lesas ëreadí, rather than a parallelism, but cf.

Notes to 13/7ñ8, 19/33, 21/16ñ17, 25/48 and 50.
60/7. The fine for omitting to say mass on a Sunday or major feast

day was twice that for a Friday or lesser feast day.

Chapter 61: Af dufli

61/4 and footnote. The sixth assembly is presumably intended here as elsewhere. Dicing is forbidden in MEStL, which has a separate Dobblara balker, and in MLLL VIII 28 (NGL 2, 165), but there is no equivalent in any of the mainland provincial laws. WessÈn (MEStLNT, 292) assumes, therefore, that the phenomenon was one encountered in towns rather than in the countryside. For the B-text version, see Addition 9.

61/5ñ10. The second half of this chapter forms the closing section of the B-text (following Chapter 83). Neither there nor in the A-text is there a separate chapter heading, nor is the section listed in the table of contents of either text as an independent chapter. It is this paragraph that seems to suggest that GL, as it has been preserved in the two Gutnish manuscripts, was either a living statute book or a justice book, rather than merely a scholarly work.

61/6ñ10. WessÈn compares this passage to the final words of the preface to VStL: unde queme en niye recht dat in dem boke nicht were, dat scolde man richten also id recht, unde scriuen dat in beyde bˆke ëand if there comes a new law, which was not in this book, then one should judge what the law should be, and write it in both booksí. He also makes the not unreasonable assumption that additions following this paragraph in the A-text have been made in just the manner described. In the B-text, following the chapter on gambling and preceding these closing words, there are chapters covering purchases on credit (absent as a separate chapter from the A-text) and misuse of woodland (the first half of Chapter 63 in the A-text). The remainder of the additions in the A-text have been absorbed (in appropriate places) into the body of the B-text and the chapter on tracks and paths appears in its proper place.

61/7ñ9. WessÈn (SL IV, 288 note 2 to Chapter 61a) points out that legislation would have taken place at the general assembly.

176

62/1 and footnote. Cf. Chapter 19/104ñ07, where the fines are half of those stated here. The content of this chapter appears in Chapter 20 of the B-text (cf. Addition 5).

Chapter 63: Um skoga
The title of this chapter covers only the first provision. The remain-

der of the chapter contains a miscellany of provisions.

63/2ñ4, 4ñ6. Cf. provisions in Chapter 26/38ñ40 and 50ñ52, and for related provisions see 7/2ñ9, 25/26ñ37 and 26/55ñ61. The older provision relating to tearing down a neighbourís fence limits the fine to two marks, rather than the three stated here. On the implica- tions of the difference, see Note to 26/50ñ52.

63/7. A glugga was an opening, not large enough for passage with a vehicle and possibly no larger than a window, but perhaps large enough for a person on foot to crawl through.

63/9ñ11. It seems that a pledge was originally a sale with right to purchase back within three years (as in the B-text of GL, Addition 9/3ñ7). This gradually changed to a much shorter period and Chapter 30/2ñ5 suggests that change: the pledge-holder is instructed to call the pledge-giver to the church or assembly to redeem the pledge on a certain date. If he did not, the pledge should be valued by the parishioners or men of the assembly, although the creditor would still obviously receive payment.

WessÈn (SL IV, 289 note 4 to Addition A) suggests that the Gtn verb vir ̨a here means ëto sellí rather than ëto valueí. The transla- tion offered in the present translation, ëto take in payment (of a debt)í, is intended to cover both senses. Cf. Notes to 10/5, 30/4ñ5 and Addition 9/5ñ6.

63/11ñ13. Further examples of loss of status or money as a result of a misdemeanour in relation to land occur in Chapter 25/26ñ29 and Chapter 28 (e.g. lines 22ñ23). The penalty here seems particularly harsh (hanging or beheading) but the crime was one of theft of land or misappropriation of it in some other way, and in particular a breach of trust, since the miscreant was presumably a steward of the land in question. Although later editors translate firigiera as ëfˆrˆdaí (lay waste, devastate), Schlyter translates it as ëfˆrskingraí, which is particularly associated with a breach of contract or duty in respect of the misappropriation of property. This latter, trans-

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Chapter 62: Hitta ier ̨et sum nylast var takit um loyski

NOTES 177

lated as ëmisappropriationí, seems to be preferable, although the former is also a recognised crime in current law, involving the poisoning of land or animals. On the means of execution, see also Notes to 21/9ñ12, 38/6ñ9.

63/12. The expression at ̨ranglausu ëwithout coercioní implies that there might be cases in which such an action was permissible. Schlyter assumes that this meant that a sale was forced by strait- ened circumstances (Swedish trÂngmÂl). There is, however, a Swedish legal concept of tvÂng ëcoercioní and this might be intended.

Both kirkiurum and kirkiustedr (in the B-text) refer to an allo- cated pew. Most preserved early medieval church pews in Sweden are from Gotland. The designation of pews to particular people is not recorded before the end of the fifteenth century on the main- land (see KL s. v. Kirkestole).

63/14ñ17. Cf. the provisions in the first section of Chapter 24 (i.e. lines 14ñ17), where the number of toasts is unlimited. The B-text has this material only in Chapter 33 (Chapter 24 in the A-text).

63/15. There is no record of the size of en half skal ëhalf bowlí nor of whether this measure covered the entire quantity of drink offered or that offered to each guest.

63/16. The exact level of a double fine (tuibyt) is not clear. This is the only occasion on which such a fine is specifically referred to and no previous editor has suggested an amount. On various instances of twibote in VStL and other contemporary laws, including Bjarkˆ- r‰tten, see Hasselberg 1953, 62ñ65, 168ñ72. These, however, refer mainly to acts of violence in church or market, or in a bathhouse or latrine. Wennstrˆm (1931, 45ñ46, 77ñ80) suggests that the three- mark fine evolved as double an older twelve-ˆre fine (cf. Bjˆrling 1893, 104 note 3; Hemmer 1928, 71; Wilda 1960, 345). It is pos- sible, therefore, that a three-mark fine is intended here.

Chapter 65: Af quinna ret

65/2ñ4. Cf. the provisions concerning widows in Chapter 20/43ñ45. Even if a widow had brought more than ten oxen with her, she could not take more away. She could, however, take as many horses and sheep as she had brought, presumably even if the actual ani- mals were no longer alive.

65/3. The word band ëpairí here must mean the same as oykr else- where, i.e. yoke joining a pair of oxen, and hence, by transference, the actual pair of animals.

178

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

65/5. The word *tassal is unknown elsewhere, but must have the sense ëbuckle, claspí. Schlyter (CISG s. v. tassal) relates it to Eng- lish tassel. According to CODEE, this comes from Old French tas(s)el. It is first recorded in English in the thirteenth century in the sense ëclasp, fibulaí and only from the fourteenth century as ëpendant ornament with a fringe attachedí. Schlyter, in the light of the fact that gilding is in question, seems correct in assigning the earlier of these meanings and rejecting Ihreís translation (1769 s. v. tassal), which follows the later sense. Schlyter also refers to FrostL IX 9 (NGL 1, 210, 211; 282) where gullað appears alongside assala. He suggests that the latter must mean the same as tassala. S‰ve (GU, xxix), citing the same reference, suggests further alternatives, in- cluding snˆre ëlacesí.

65/6. The word gulla ̨ ëgolden headdressí describes a circlet for the head, such as was worn both by men and women. Bolli Bollason in Laxdúla saga, Chapter 63, has kn ̋tt gullhlaði um hÜfuð honum (cf. Falk 1919, 114ñ15; ÕF V, 187). WessÈnís translation, ëguldbr‰mí (gold edging), assumes that the adjective slungin ëplaitedí applies to this word as well as silkisband, and that fringes with gold thread woven into them are intended (see SL IV, 240). This description seems more likely to apply only to silfrband referred to below.

65/7. Jacobsen (GGD, 113 note 3) translates slungin silkisband as ëSn ̄relidserí (laces). These were presumably laces to fasten a wom- anís bodice, and plaited silk would have been the strongest, most durable material available, and therefore valuable. Cf. the refer- ence in Chapter 23/13ñ14 to the fact that the laces had to be returned to their owner if they were pulled out. They are in this case called sno ̨ir, but they were probably the same item.

65/9ñ11. In relation to the value of a haimfylgi ëdowryí, see Chap- ters 20/54ñ56, 28/37ñ38 and Notes, also Notes to 3/4, 20/91, 28/ 35ñ39. WessÈnís assumption in his note to Chapter 24 (SL IV, 273 note 1) is that the amount of the dowry in this later provision relates to property in movables only.

65/11. The bladragning ëwall covering of blue clothí referred to in this instance was no doubt of the same quality and value as that referred to in Chapter 24b, but would hardly have been black for a wedding, which is the subject here. It is possible that the cloth was scarlet, since this is referred to in the following sentence, or it might have been blue, which was another expensive dye (cf. Note to 24b/2).

NOTES 179

65/12. The word pell ëcanopyí derives from Latin pallium ëcover; mantleí, not pellis ëhide, skiní. In OWN, pell was any type of expensive cloth, originally specifically satin from China or India, used as a bed-cover or to cover a bier (see Falk 1919, 67ñ69, 73). It could also be material used for clothing. In Laxdúla saga, Chapter 77, it is said that Bolli Bollason vildi engi klÊði bera nema skarlats- klÊði ok pellsklÊði ëwould wear no clothes that were not of scarlet and satiní (ÕF V, 225). Here the sense is either a festive altar cover- ing, or a canopy held over the bridal couple at a particular point in a wedding ceremony. This is still done in some Eastern Ortho- dox churches.

65/12ñ13 and 15. Linen was one of the currencies in which tithes or fines could be paid (cf. UL Kkb 6 ß5; ÷gL Vb 6 ß1). The prohibi- tion against expensive gifts was presumably intended to prevent the impoverishment of farms through marriage, and possibly to reduce any chance of dispute when wives were widowed.

65/16. The silver bands (silfrband) referred to were most probably decorative ribbons or bindings that had silver thread woven into them (cf. Note to 65/7). Silver wire had been used in the costliest materials from the time of the Vikings, as witnessed by the Gokstad find, and silver was used in a variety of ways to decorate fabrics. Towards the end of the Middle Ages, new techniques developed, and were imported from Italy and elsewhere.

The underskirt decoration (kurtilbona ̨r) was any decoration on the kirtle or gown.

65/17ñ19. The normal method of purchase in the medieval period was in currency (coin or otherwise). The word burgan ëbuying on credit, related to OWN borga ëborrowí, had various senses apart from the one here ëpurchase against a promissory noteí. It could also mean ëhostageí or ëbailí, as well as a promise of service rather than money. One could avoid arrest for debt by raising a surety (borgen) with a borghans ma ̨er (OWN borganarmaðr) (cf. SdmL Kmb 9 pr; VmL Rb 12 ß2). No interest appears to have been pay- able, although this was not forbidden by the church. The prohibition against borrowing from the people of Visby was probably a later addition, motivated by the conflict between them and the farming population outside the town (see Introduction, pp. xiiñxiii, xxxvii; Addition 9/2ñ7). The twelve-mark fine might apply to an infringe- ment of any of the provisions in this chapter, since no other fines are prescribed.

180

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS Addition 1: Aff prestom och prestbarnom

Addition 1/2ñ3. The phrase han taki i verra ëhe marries beneath himí is possibly corrupt, as Jacobsen (GGD, 33 note 4) suggests. The meaning is, however, that a priest by marrying a woman who was not free lost his right to the status of a Gotlander.

Addition 1/8ñ10 and footnote. As indicated in the Note to 5/7ñ9, this sentence, which is also on the A-text, is out of context. The han ëheí who is assumed to have died is the wrongdoer, the lay son of a priest (prestson oler ̨r) referred to at the end of the previous paragraph (SL IV, 249 note 10).

Addition 1/14. The fact that it is stated that a claimant (in this case against a priest rather than a lay person) can accept compensation without shame makes it clear that immediate acceptance of com- pensation was regarded as less honourable than taking revenge. Even after the abolition of blood vengeance, protracted negotia- tions were considered to be desirable before compensation was accepted (see SL IV, 249 notes 12 and 14).

Addition 1/19ñ20. Pipping explains the whole phrase Tha en han hempn at eyger so budit ëIf he should take revenge when it has been offeredí by assuming it to be a mechanical translation from a statute in medieval Latin: Si vindicatum habet, (damno) sic prÊbito, . . . He considers it very likely that a provision relating to priests would first have been formulated in Latin. WessÈn (SL IV, 250 note 19), on the other hand, thinks that the text is corrupt. Schlyter (CIG, 105 note 9) and S‰ve (GU, 36) suggest the emendation hempnar, ̨a so ier budit ëtakes revenge, when [compensation] is offeredí.

Addition 1/21. The priest was to be compensated for with his full wergild, despite the fact that the killing was blood vengeance.

Addition 1/25. A taki ësurety maní was a receiver of a promise (cf. OWN taka ëbailí and tykr ëforfeití, 6/29). The nearest equivalent to a taki as referred to in GL would be a Swedish lˆftesman, who went bail for the person concerned to the effect that he would bring witnesses to his innocence. In mainland provincial laws a taki is mentioned where a case concerns goods claimed by the plaintiff. He had responsibility for the fulfilment of any oath taken and had to live in the same hundred and be accepted by the parties in- volved. A farmer could not refuse to take on this responsibility (cf. ƒVgL Tjb 8ñ12; YVgL Tjb 39ñ44; ÷gL Rb 6ñ8).

Addition 1/35ñ36. It is not quite clear what procedure was intended by ra ̨in ̨eir fyrir fe ëbe responsible for the paymentí. Schlyter

NOTES 181

(CIG, 106) offers the translation ërÂde de om godsetí, but then adds as a note ëD. ‰. folket tage botení. The first could mean that assembly members ëdiscuss the level of compensationí or ëtake custody of the compensationí, but the note implies that assembly members received the fine itself. How the money was then distrib- uted is not stated. Cf. the provision at Addition 1/18ñ19 (see SL IV, 250 notes 17 and 24).

Addition 1/39ñ41. This is the sole instance in GL in which direct speech and the first person singular are used. The first person plu- ral is used in the introductory section, (1/3ñ9) but not otherwise. This passage is similar in style to some of the oldest Swedish provincial laws, so it seems reasonable to assume that it formed part of the earliest edition of GL.

Addition 2: Aff osoydom

Addition 2/1. Swedish nˆt is used of beef cattle, both on the hoof and at table. The word rus (cf. OWN hross m.) is used here in the B-text where hestr occurs earlier in the chapter, and in the A-text. Whilst it is possible that no significance can be attached to this difference, rus is used only of draught animals and hestr is used in only two cases out of eleven (6/9 and 10/5) in a context that precludes reference to a riding horse. The modern Gotlandic pony, the skogsruss, is descended from animals native to Gotland since the Stone Age. They are small, tough animals that perform well in harness, but are not of traditional riding type. As late as the fif- teenth century, horses from Gotland were exported to the Teutonic Order. They, like the horses from ÷land, were particularly tough and hardy, since they came from herds that lived out all year.

Addition 2/6. The expression than sakir wird ëthan the case is worthí has led to a number of translations, several involving amendments to the text. Schlyter (CIG, 107) offers the reading warder for the manuscriptís wird and translates ësom varder sakerí (who keeps the thing [the animal in question]). S‰ve (GU, xxiv) considers this change too radical and takes sakir to be genitive and wird to be a noun meaning ëv‰rdeí (worth, value). He translates ë‰n sakens v‰rdeí (than the value of the thing), but further expresses doubts as to the meaning of sak that this interpretation imposes, and thinks that the context could alternatively carry the usual sense of sak ë(legal) caseí. Wadstein (1894ñ95, 14ñ15) suggests a reading sak ir for sakir, with no further changes necessary, and translates ë‰n saken

182

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

uppskattas tillí (than the case is valued at). This requires minimum change and retains the usual sense of sak. Pipping (1901a, 23 note 5) offers palaeographic support for this and it has been followed in the present translation. The seemingly overriding provision that no one was to be liable for more than the value of the creature involved cannot have applied in the case of carelessness, other- wise this latter provision would make no sense.

Addition 2/7ñ8. Jacobsen (GGD, 52 note 4) observes that the sen- tence fia en minni lastir . . . halfu minna ëIf the damage . . . half as muchí is far from clear. It appears to mean that if damage was less than the creature was worth, the owner was liable to half of the actual value of the animal. This might, of course, be less than the value of the case, and can thus hardly apply to cases involving carelessness, which were to be doubly penalised. The structure of the sentence makes it possible that Bilefeld has made a scribal error and omitted a clause.

Addition 2/10ñ14. The latter part of this paragraph gives an alterna- tive version of fines payable for injuries by dogs to that laid out in the A-text.

Addition 3: Aff sara farom

These provisions offer a slightly different reading from the equiva- lent ones in the A-text (19/62ñ66). The following differences are apparent in the level of fines.

Addition 3/1ñ2. Damage to bones in a hand or foot are valued at two marks in coin instead of one. The provision in the A-text relating to more bones being broken but a full recovery being made does not appear in the B-text. There is however, evidence of a scribal amendment to the latter at this point, and it is possible that Bilefeld derived this clause from a third manuscript (see Pipping 1901a, 27 note 1).

Addition 3/2. Each rib is valued at two marks in coin, as in the A-text, but there is no limit set on the number of ribs to be counted for compensation.

Addition 3/3. The compensation for disability is two marks of silver as in the A-text. The provision is here inserted in the margin, according to Pipping from a lost manuscript other than that of 1470, as touched on in the Introduction, pp. xviiiñxx.

Addition 3/4ñ5. The provision relating to visible wounds does not occur in this form in the A-text.

NOTES 183

Addition 4: Aff sara farom

These provisions offer a slightly different reading from the equiva- lent ones in the A-text (19/81ñ86). The following differences are apparent in the level of fines.

Addition 4/1. The fine for a damaged ear is two marks in coin in the A-text, rather than a mark of silver, i.e. half as much.

Addition 4/1ñ2. Fines relating to shinbones and forearms do not appear in the A-text. They appear in the margin of the B-text, which lends support to Pippingís theory that Bilefeld had a third manuscript to hand when he was writing AM 54 4to (see Introduc- tion, pp. xviiiñxx).

Addition 4/3ñ5. Fines for teeth in the A-text are two marks in coin for each of the two central upper teeth, one mark in coin for each of the eye teeth and one mark for each of the other teeth in the upper jaw. Teeth in the lower jaw were valued at half of this throughout. The B-text does not differentiate between the upper and lower jaw and the fines are twice as much as the A-text specifies for the upper jaw.

Addition 5: Aff loyski

Addition 5/2ñ5. These provisions offer a slightly different reading from the equivalent ones in the A-text (19/104ñ08, 100 respec- tively), but they correspond exactly with Chapter 62, a later addition in the A-text. Specifically, the fine for pulling out hair more than the flat of a hand can cover, or all the hair, is doubled in both cases. The remaining provisions are repeated unchanged. For the different treatment of these additions in the two manuscripts, see Introduction, pp. xv, xvi, xx and SL IV, 264 note 47.

Addition 6: Aff wagnikla ferdir
Addition 6/1ñ4. These provisions correspond exactly to those at the

end of the A-text addition, Chapter 63/14ñ17. Addition 7: Af manna kaupi

This chapter, although listed in the table of contents in the A-text, following Chapter 32, does not appear in that text. Addition 7 is taken from the B-text, where it appears in the position expected in the A-text. The chapter appears in tyGL and daGL. Schlyter (CIG, viiiñix) thinks that the reason for the omission of this chapter, and sections of the chapter on theft, can be found in an assumption that

184

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

slavery was no longer current when the A-text manuscript was writ- ten. He considers that slavery was dying out even when GL originated, since the period of slavery was limited (2/37ñ38). Jacobsen (GGD, 93 note 4) observes that the word ̨rel ëslaveí, although used else- where in GL, does not appear in this chapter. She also remarks that the chapter was most probably present in the manuscript from which the scribe of the A-text made his copy. For an analysis of the provi- sions relating to slaves in GL, see NevÈus (1974, 54ñ67).

Addition 7/2. S‰ve (GU, xx) does not interpret mandr as ëslaveí, but simply as a ëman belonging to anotherí. The translation ëslaveí in this particular context does, however, make the meaning clearer.

Addition 7/8ñ10. WessÈn (SL IV, 282 note 5 to Chapter 32a) remarks that in Gotland it appeared to be the one who followed usual legal process who had (the right) to substantiate his claim, rather than the one who deviated from it.

Addition 7/15. The symptoms of epilepsy or falling sickness (brut- fall) were described in accounts of miracles as early as 1134 and appear in detail on the gravestone of Abbot Vilhelm in Æbelholt from c.1205. One description mentions frothing at the mouth, clench- ing of the teeth and the following coma, lasting several hours. The patient was cured by drinking from the holy well at Haraldsted (see KL s. v. Ligfald). In GulL 57 (NGL 1, 29) and FrostL V ß41 (NGL 1, 182) epilepsy was, as in GL, considered to be a fault in a slave for which the seller was responsible for a month. The OWN word for the condition is stiarva or stjarfa.

Jacobsen (GGD, 94 note 5), unlike other editors, is clear about the implications of bedroyta, describing it as bed-wetting, whether deliberate or through negligence, which would indeed have rotted the straw in a bed. In GulL 57 (NGL 1, 29) a slave can be returned if he is incontinent in any way, not just in his bed.

Addition 7/16. The phrase ny ok ni ̨an, referring to the waxing and waning of the moon, was used in a number of contexts to denote a month, although mana ̨r is more usual (cf. GulL 56, 57 (NGL 1, 29); ƒVgL Tjb 19; YVgL Tjb 54). The two Swedish instances also are in connection with the detection of faults in a bought slave.

Addition 7/17. The nature of the illness represented by the phrase beyni verkir, literally ëhe hurts in the bone or legí, is not clear. WessÈn suggests that it was benrˆta ëcariesí, or something similar. Arthritis is another possibility. The parallel passage in GulL 57 (NGL 1, 29) specifies oc við stinga ëa stitch in the sideí.

NOTES 185

Addition7/18. The word brigsl ëownership claimí has a number of meanings, but here it clearly means a dispute relating to owner- ship. The vendor was deemed responsible in perpetuity for the legal ownership of a slave he was selling in ƒVgL Tjb 19 and in GulL 57 (NGL 1, 29ñ31) (cf. SL IV, 282 note 9).

Addition 7/23. The expression mid mala, translated here as ëunder conditionsí, seems to imply that the sale was temporary, for a limited period of time; the agreement was effectively a lease. It is not clear whether this provision relates specifically to the immedi- ately preceding one or not, but presumably the argument presented by the vendor was that the purchaser had to return the slave after a stipulated period. Whether the slave was his to sell or not was thus irrelevant, since he would expect eventually to be able to return him or her to the legal owner. Right appeared always to have been on the side of the person who believed that the transac- tion was a straightforward purchase, and they had the right of proof (cf. Note to Addition 7/8ñ10).

Addition 8: Aff tiaufa rethi
The contents of this addition occur also in tyGL. The provisions refer

to theft by slaves, which accounts for their omission from the A-text.

Addition 8/1ñ3 and 3ñ5. WessÈn (SL IV, 284 note 4) observes that the implication in each of these cases seems to be that if the owner of the slave (rather than the victim) detected his theft and returned the goods, he had nothing further to pay.

Addition 8/6. A ̨rigildi ëtriple fineí is referred to only in the B-text and not in mainland provincial laws.

Addition 8/8. The noun ̨iaufna ̨r is here a synonym for ̨ypti (Addition 8/2) ëstolen goodsí. The noun can also mean the abstract concept of ëtheftí itself. At Addition 8/28, either meaning would make sense.

Addition 8/11. The translation ëbar nor boltí (hun ella hell) reflects the alliteration of the original Gutnish, but previous scholarship has led to a number of translations. (1) hun ëtakÂsí (roof ridge) and hell ëtrˆskel . . . stení (threshold stone) (Schlyter (CISG s. v. hun, hell); GO s. v. hun); (2) hun ëbomí (bar) and hell ëh‰ngsleí (pad- lock) (Wadstein 1890ñ92, 228ñ29); (3) hell ëtr‰nagel varpÂ dˆrren vrider sigí (wooden pintle on which the door rotates) (LidÈn 1892, 89ñ90); (4) hun ëd ̄rrskoddeí (door shutter), related to OldDan

186

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

hund, and hell ëtvÊrbjÊlkeí (cross-timber) related to OWN hÊll and Danish dialect hÊl in t ̄jre-hÊl ëmooring pegí (Jacobsen GGD, 99 note 4); (5) hun ella hell, ëhun och h‰lí (lock mechanism and bolt) (WessÈn SL IV, 284 notes 6, comparing to VmL Kkb 5 pr and SL II, VmL, 23ñ24 note 12). A concrete translation is preferred to an abstract interpretation of Schlyterís translation: ëif the house is undamaged from top to bottomí. The inference drawn from the fact that no part of the door lock was damaged was that no break-in had taken place. Either the owner had failed to secure his property, or his own household people were involved.

Addition 8/12. The use of torture to extract a confession where the goods concerned were not under lock and key seems to be excep- tionally harsh, but is another example of betrayal of trust being regarded as particularly reprehensible. The assumption is that at least some of the stolen items were found (cf. Addition 8/15) and that there was reason to suspect the slave. Although instances of torture in Scandinavian medieval laws are uncertain, it formed part of Roman law, and there is a suggestion of it in VStL I 41 (cf. Munktell 1939, 103ñ05; Hasselberg 1953, 67 note 1).

The concept of vi ̨rlag, vÊ ̨ or witÊ ëcompensation, deposití occurred across the Scandinavian laws. It meant either a forfeit (pant) or a deposit in relation to a legal case, so that one could charge a slave on suspicion. Both parties placed deposits with a taka either at the beginning of a case, or at the end of a case after judgement had been passed, in which case the judges and the per- son who had lost the case laid down money with the taka. The result of the appeal determined if the appellant or the judges received the deposited money (cf. KL s. v. VeddemÂl). In the first instance, the accuser forfeited the money if the case was not proved. The vi ̨rlag referred to here is the six-ˆre deposit demanded under other circumstances.

Addition 8/13ñ14. Jacobsen (GGD, 99 note 7) takes bainheilom ëwhole in boneí to refer to the slaveís joints, rather than his bones in general.

It is not certain what is meant by brustheilom ëwhole in . . . breathingí, but it was clearly part of a stock phrase that has an exact parallel in that used of horses: sound in wind and limb. In other words, the slave had to be in a state in which he could resume his duties.

Addition 8/15. In reference to the meaning of agripr ëmaterial evi- denceí, WessÈn (SL IV, 284 note 9) questions that offered by Schlyter

NOTES 187

and Pipping: ëtjufgods, hvarmed nÂgon blifvit befunnení (stolen goods with which someone has been discovered). He thinks that this might be a possible translation here, but not at Addition 8/22. He suggests a translation meaning in general ëitems left behind by or taken from a suspected thief, which are to be used as evidenceí. For the meaning of OldSwe agriper or agreper, see DL Kkb 9 ß3; SL II, DL, 17 note 57.

Addition 8/17ñ18. ëBring him back uninjured and pay a fine of six ˆreí. There is an apparent corruption in the B-text at this point. The suggested interpretation by Pipping (GLGS, Ordbok, 45) does not entirely solve the problem as an auxiliary verb appears to be missing and the subject of byti ëpay a fineí cannot be the slave. If the sense of kuma is ëto bringí, with the dative object (the slave) understood (as in the parallel passage at Addition 8/13ñ14), the verb should be in the third person singular subjunctive (as is byti). This interpretation has been used in the translation.

Addition 8/17ñ20 and footnote. ëBring him back uninjured and pay six ˆre for the wristbands . . . six ˆreí (Kumi ok hailum atr ok byti vi oyra fyri baugband . . . vi oyra). Schlyter (CIG, 110 note 24), Jacobsen (GGD, 100 note 3) and WessÈn (SL IV, 284 note 10) recognise that the scribe has omitted a line of text. WessÈn recon- structs the missing text from tyGL and this reconstruction has been incorporated in the present translation in angled brackets. The fine for unlawful imprisonment is low here in comparison to that in Swedish mainland provincial laws and in VStL, where it was forty marks, i.e. the equivalent of a wergild. Even a slaveís wergild of 41⁄2 marks in coin was considerably higher than the six ˆre offered here (cf. Hasselberg 1953, 326ñ29 and note 6).

Addition 8/18. There appears to be no description of wristbands (baugband), and they may have been no more damaging than a pair of handcuffs with which a thief was restrained for presentation before the assembly (see Wennstrˆm 1936, 131). This in itself was considered to be a severe infringement of a personís rights and so could not be done on mere suspicion (or at least not without pay- ment of a deposit). It is, however, possible that baugband were an instrument of torture or punishment, which would explain why an accuser had to pay for inflicting them upon the slave, even if a confession were extracted. Thieves were sometimes bound with their hands behind their backs, which was considered extremely insulting, or with their hands in front of them, which was less so

188

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

(cf. KL s. v. F‰ngelse). Although Åke Ohlmarks (1976, 613) glosses baugband as a strap around the elbows (which, if fastened behind the back, would have been particularly uncomfortable), baugli ̨r ëwristí seems to be a more likely connection than *albugi ëelbowí. A combination tjuva-band ëthief bandí is listed as occurring in Gotlandic dialect, but no meaning or instances cited (cf. GO s. v. band). On the other hand, a bÂg-band is defined as a tie to fasten an animal in a barn, while baug is found in Gotlandic dia- lect in senses relating to the training and restraint of oxen and horses (cf. GO s. v. bÂge, *bˆg).

Addition 8/20ñ21. ëIn need someone forced says things he has not doneí (I nau ̨ segir nau ̨ugir, ̨et han ey valdir). The implication here is that one could not take a confession extracted under torture as proof of guilt if there were no material evidence to support it (see SL IV, 284 note 11 to Chapter 38).

Addition 8/21ñ28. Further to notes on agripr at Addition 8/15, WessÈn (SL IV, 284 note 12) argues that a person who had had his property stolen could clearly not bring the latter when he was conducting a house-search. What must be referred to here is further material evi- dence against the slave in question: enough to instigate a search of his masterís farm. If the farm owner refused a search, but one was nonetheless conducted and stolen goods were found, he was liable to a triple fine. There is thus no question of the stolen property having been brought to the scene by the accusers. Receipt of sto- len goods (as here by the master of a slave) was treated in some mainland provincial laws as equal with theft itself (cf. ƒVgL Tjb 4; YVgL Tjb 29; ÷gL Vb 32 ß5). The laws of Svealand, however, seem to differentiate between the two (cf. SdmL Tjb 10 ß1; VmL Mb 31; 26 ß9; HL Mb 31 ß4). See also Notes to 37/7ñ9, 37/12ñ13 and 37/22ñ24.

Addition 8/28ñ30. If treble the value of the stolen property exceeded the value of the slave, then the master was not expected to pay this amount, but to relinquish the slave instead.

Addition 8/30ñ32. This sentence reinforces the meaning of the pre- ceding one. The verb firistiela means ëforfeit as a result of theftí. Cf. the use of the verb firibiera (37/24).

Addition 8/34ñ35. One-eighth of the value appears to have been a usual reward for finding stolen property (cf. 49/2ñ3). No specific mention is made of a portion of the value of the goods themselves being paid, but it is possible that fundarlaun ërewardí is also intended

NOTES 189

to cover this. The alag ëfineí referred to was presumably the three- fold fine that the owner of a slave had to pay to a victim of theft, since no other fine is mentioned. Elsewhere in OWN ·lˆg usually refers to an extra payment made if a deal settled by a handshake is not honoured.

Addition 8/36. The expression mulslaghu (or muslaghu) ma ̨Êr ëfu- gitiveí appears also in ÷gL Bb 34 ß1 in relation to an escaped slave and the suggestion by Ihre is that the first element derives from a verb musla meaning ëhide, abscondí. Schlyter, however, thinks a simpler derivation from mus ëmouseí and liggia ëlieí is more likely. Such men were fugitives and had to lie low as far as they were able to avoid detection, ëas quiet as a mouseí (cf. CISG, xiii and s. v. muslaghu ma ̨er). Once the slave was on the run, his masterís responsibility for his actions in regard to his survival ceased and no compensation was paid for any theft of food that he might commit.

Addition 8/41. ëon landí (a landi). This means in Gotland, that is, before he had escaped overseas.

Addition 8/43ñ44. Provisions relating to the lawful securing of ves- sels of various types are contained in Chapter 36. It is notable that the owner of an unprotected ship was responsible to a slaveís owner for his safety, even if the slave were a thief (Addition 8/48ñ50).

Addition 8/44ñ45. The clause specifying that a slaveís owner had to redeem (i.e. pay recompense for) any goods stolen by the slave while he was on the run appears to contradict the clause at Addi- tion 8/37ñ39, but this latter refers presumably only to food.

Addition 8/51. ëin the absence of material evidenceí (agripslaus). This is translated by Pipping (GLGS, Ordbok, 2) as meaning ëone on whom no stolen goods have been foundí. WessÈn, on the other hand, takes the view that this has the broader sense of the Swedish utan avt‰kt. This means strictly ëin the absence of the right by a property owner to confiscate tools, weapons or stolen goods held by a thiefí, but ëin the absence of material evidenceí is probably a preferable translation (see SL IV, 285 note 22).

Addition 8/51ñ56. Jacobsen (GGD, 101 and note 9) assumes that ëa maní (naquar madir) in Addition 8/51 refers to a slave and sup- ports this theory by pointing out that this final paragraph is also missing from the A-text. On the other hand, WessÈn (SL IV, 285 note 24) considers that this paragraph is clearly a continuation of provisions in Chapter 38 relating to free men and that it was

190

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

inadvertently omitted when the A-text was constructed. Since no mention of assemblies occurs otherwise in the section on theft by slaves, WessÈnís interpretation seems preferable.

Addition 8/56. The action to be taken in the case of material evi- dence being available was to be the same as if there were none. Schlyter, in line with his interpretation of agripr, and with differ- ent punctuation, translates this passage thus: ëDe skola vitna det som de hˆra, om han ‰r skyldig eller oskyldig, sÂ ock om han ‰r funnen med tjufgodsí (They should bear witness of what they hear, if he is guilty or innocent, even if he is discovered with stolen goods). See Note to Addition 8/15.

Addition 9: Af burgan vi ̨r byamen

Addition 9/2ñ3 and footnote. These two provisions coincide with those in the addition to the A-text, Chapter 65/17ñ18. No fine is laid down here, although the fine implied in the A-text is twelve marks to the general assembly.

Addition 9/3. The verb betala ëpay forí is a loan word from Low German; in the A-text, gielda is always used.

Addition 9/5ñ6. This provision relates to the one in the addition to the A-text (63/9ñ11), but expands upon it. Cf. the use of the verb vir ̨a in these passages, where it means ëtake in (or make) payment (of a debt)í to those at e.g. 30/4ñ5 and 40/4, where it seems to mean ëplace a value oní. (Cf. Notes to 10/5, 30/4ñ5 and 63/9ñ11). As the provision here is a later one, it is possible that the meaning of vir ̨a changed over time. The whole expression carries the implication that liquid assets (oyrar) and real estate were not inter- changeable in respect of debt payment, except by agreement (cf. Notes to 2/35, 53/3ñ5).

NOTES 191

Stockholm, Kungl. biblioteket, MS B 64, 2r (reproduced by permission of Kungl. biblioteket)

192

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Copenhagen, Den ArnamagnÊanske Samling, MS AM 54 4to, 41r (reproduced by permission of Den ArnamagnÊanske Samling)

APPENDIX A 193

APPENDIX A: COMPARISON OF MANUSCRIPTS (i) Manuscript content comparison

Manuscript	B64	AM 54 4to	B65	AM 55 4to
Content	B64	AM 54 4to	B65	AM 55 4to
Oldest statutes	Chapters 1ñ47	Chapters 1ñ65	Chapters 1ñ59	Chapters 1ñ67
Later statutes	Chapters 48ñ61	Chapters 66ñ80	Chapters 60ñ75	Chapters 68ñ80
Priestsí children	No (Chapter 5)	Yes (Chapter 4)	No (Chapter 5)	No (Chapter 5)
Rights of betrothed women	ñ	ñ	ñ	Yes (Chapter 13)
Extra clauses relating to unruly animals	No (Chapter 17)	Yes (Chapter 17)	No (Chapter 17)	No (Chapter 18)
Clause concerning bruising	Yes (Chapter 19)	Yes (Chapter 19)	No (Chapter 19)	No (Chapter 21)
Clause concerning partial disability	Yes (Chapter 19)	Yes (Chapter 19)	Yes (Chapter 19)	No (Chapter 21)
Clause concerning hidden disability	No (Chapter 19)	No (Chapter 19)	Yes (Chapter 19)	No (Chapter 21)
Clause concerning ale throwing	Yes (Chapter 19)	Yes (Chapter 19)	No (Chapter 19)	Yes (Chapter 21)
Clause concerning slaves fighting	Yes (Chapter 19)	Yes (Chapter 19)	Yes (Chapter 20)	No (Chapter 22)
Clause concerning inheritance of childless man	Yes (misplaced in chapter 19)	Yes (Chapter 25)	Yes (Chapter 21)	Yes (Chapter 23)
Statutes concerning seduction	Yes (misplaced in Chapter 20)	Yes (Chapter 29)	Yes (Chapter 23)	Yes (Chapter 24)
Clause concerning displacing a womanís coif	Yes (Chapter 23)	Yes (Chapter 29)	No (Chapter 26)	Yes (Chapter 27)

194

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Concerning travellersí pathways	Yes (Chapter 64, misplaced from after 24)	Yes (Chapter 37)	Yes (Chapter 31)	ñ
Purchase of slaves	No (although in Contents)	Yes (Chapter 49)	Yes (Chapter 43)	Yes (Chapter 43)
Care of ships	Yes (Chapter 36)	Yes (Chapter 53)	Yes (Chapter 47)	ñ
Statutes relating to theft by slaves	No (Chapter 38)	Yes (Chapter 55)	Yes (Chapter 50)	No (Chapter 49)
Gilded items	cf. Chapter 24	cf. Chapter 35	cf. Chapter 28	Chapters 51, 30, 81
The sale of ale	ñ	ñ	ñ	Yes (Chapter52)
Watch duty	cf. Chapter 54	cf. Chapter 72	cf. Chapter 63	Chapters 53, 71
Cutting down specific trees	ñ	ñ	ñ	Yes (Chapter 54)
Cutting down trees in someoneís enclosure	ñ	ñ	ñ	Yes (Chapter 55)
Taking timber	cf. Chapter 26	cf. Chapter 40	cf. Chapter 36	Chapters 56, 35
Cutting down a slip rail	ñ	ñ	ñ	Yes (Chapter 57)
Cutting down doors	ñ	ñ	ñ	Yes (Chapter 58)
Cutting down posts or supports	ñ	ñ	ñ	Yes (Chapter 59)
Concerning taxes	Yes (Chapter 53)	Yes (Chapter 71)	Yes (Chapter 62)	ñ
Epilogue	Yes (Chapter 61)	Yes (after Chapter 82)	Yes (after Chapter 75)	Yes (Chapter 75)
Concerning hair pulling	Yes (Chapter 62)	Yes (Chapter 20)	ñ	Yes (Chapter 82)
Concerning woodland	Yes (Chapter 63)	Yes (Chapter 82)	ñ	Yes (Chapter 83)
Clause limiting toasts at weddings	Yes (mis- placed in Chapter 63)	Yes (Chapter 33)	No (Chapter 27)	No (Chapter 28)
Concerning womenís inheritance	Yes (Chapter 65)	Yes (Chapter 35)	ñ	Yes (Chapter 81)
Forbidding credit	Yes (first clause ends Chapter 65)	Yes (Chapter 81)	ñ	Yes (first clause ends Chapter 81)

Where a clause does not appear in a certain manuscript, the chapter containing the related clauses, if any, is shown; otherwise a dash appears in the table.

APPENDIX A 195 (ii) Chapter sequence comparison of the fourteen later statutes

Manuscript	B64	AM 54 4to	B65	AM 55 4to
Chapter	B64	AM 54 4to	B65	AM 55 4to
Concerning turnip fields	48	66	60	77
Concerning shipwrecks	49	67	74	68
Concerning fire	50	68	72	69
Concerning carried fire	51	69	73	70
Concerning road repair	52	70	61	79
Concerning taxes	53	71	53	ñ
Concerning the watch	54	72	63	71
Concerning houses, etc.	55	73	64; 65	78
Concerning harvesters	56	74; 75	66; 67	76
Concerning squirrels	57	76	68	72
Concerning hares	58	77	69	73
Concerning tree fruits	59	78	70	74
Concerning failure to read mass	60	79	75	75
Concerning gambling	61	80	71	80

196

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

APPENDIX B: CHRONOLOGY OF HISTORICAL EVENTS Outline of Gotlandís history and related mainland Swedish events

1164 Swedish archbishopric, under that of Lund, founded in Uppsala Cistercian monastery of Beata Maria de Gutnalia founded at Roma

1195 Henry of Livonia leads a crusade against Kurland including Gotlanders

1203 Name Wysbu appears in the Chronicle of Henry of Livonia Andreas Suneson, Archbishop of Lund, visits Gotland

Battle of Lena. Sverker defeated and Erik Knutsson assumes Swed- ish throne

Letter from Pope Innocent III concerning the rural deans in Gotland

1216 Johan Sverkersson king of Sweden
1217 Gotlandís tithe distribution law confirmed by Pope Honorius III

1221 Letter from Andreas Suneson and Bishops Karl and Bengt concerning the relationship between Gotland and the See of Linkˆping
1222 Erik Eriksson king of Sweden

1225 The name Visby appears in a letter from Bengt, Bishop of Linkˆping

Records relating to Riga mention ius Gutorum as applying there

1230 Gotlandís tithe law again confirmed by Pope Gregory IX

1248 Birger Magnusson appointed Jarl
Papal legate Vilhelm of Sabina declares priestly celibacy at Synod of Sk‰nninge
1249 Erik Eriksson dies; Birger Jarl governs Sweden
1250 Valdemar Birgersson crowned; Birger Jarl regent

1253 Tithe arrangements again confirmed by Pope Innocent IV

1255 German and English merchants start to take over Gotlandic trade

1260 Law of inheritance makes two daughters equal to a son in Sweden

1266 Birger Jarl dies; Valdemar Birgersson rules in his own right

1275 Magnus Birgersson (LadulÂs) king; position of jarl replaced by sveahertig

1285 Annual lai ̨ingslami tax declared; Gotland effectively under Swedish rule

APPENDIX B 197 1288 King Magnus intervenes in civil war between Visby and the farmers

Visby stadslag put in place
1290 Magnus Birgersson dies
1298 Birger Magnusson king of Sweden
1310 Sweden partitioned; Birger Magnusson assigned Gotland

1313 Taxes in Gotland increased
Battle of Rˆcklingebacke; Birger defeated in his attempt to annex Gotland

1318 Birger flees to Gotland, then Denmark
1319 Magnus Eriksson king, but with a minority government
1320 Taxes in Gotland reduced to previous levels

1322 Visbyís privileges confirmed

1332 Magnus Eriksson king in his own right

1335 Slavery abolished under the Statute of Skara

1347 Magnus Erikssons landslag replaces mainland provincial laws

1350 Black Death in Visby

1361 Valdemar IV Atterdag of Denmark invades and conquers Gotland

1398 The Teutonic Order seizes power in Gotland from the Vitalian Brotherhood

1408 The Teutonic Order returns Gotland to Erik of Pommern
1645 Gotland finally returned to Swedish rule at the peace of Brˆmsebro

198

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

APPENDIX C: MONETARY SYSTEM

Units of Value

Denomination	Standard	Equivalent	Reference
Mark (weight)	gold	8 silver marks	e.g. Chapter 15/3
Mark (weight)	silver	4 marks in coin	e.g. Chapter 13/62
Mark (counted, Gutnish mark penninga)	coin		e.g. Chapter 15/5ñ6
Half mark	usually coin, once silver		e.g. Chapter 19/3, 28
÷re (Gutnish oyrir)	usually coin	1/8 mark	e.g. Chapter 2/35
÷rtug (Gutnish ertaug)	usually coin	1/3 ˆre (i.e. 1/24 mark)	e.g. Chapter 19/91
Penny (Gutnish *penningr)	coin	8, 10, 12 or 16 to the ˆrtug	e.g. Chapter 45/3

For the relationship between the mark of gold and that of silver, see WessÈn (SL IV, 259 note 1). There is little doubt that his conclusion is correct. The exact relationship between the silver mark (a unit of weight, also divided into 24 ˆrtugar) and the coined mark (a counted unit) is far from unambiguous and interpretation is not assisted by the following circum- stances: (1) the definitions silfr and penningr are often omitted; (2) the manuscripts of GL occasionally give different fines for the same offences (Wennstrˆm 1940, 74ñ75). Jacobsen (GGD, 25 note 1) suggests that the silver mark was ëmere end det dobbelte af en Mark Pengeí (more than double a mark in coin), whereas WessÈn (SL IV, 245 note 4) equates a silver mark to four marks in coin and there is certainly internal evidence (19/80ñ81) to suggest this. It seems to be generally the case that, if a qualification is omitted, a mark in coin is intended (cf. SL IV, 245 note 4), but this assumption must naturally be made with circumspection and there is certainly one instance in which this is not the case (see Appendix D (ii) note 2). Lilienberg (1908, 12) states that Birger Jarl introduced a stand- ard in mainland Sweden of two marks in coin to one of silver as shown in ÷gL, whereas in the time of Magnus LadulÂs the relationship was three to one. By 1303 there were four marks in coin to one of silver and, by 1311, five.

The number of pennies to the ˆrtug in Gotland has been given vari- ously as:

APPENDIX C 199

8	Schlyter (CIG, 287), Pipping (GCGS, Ordbok, 62), Jacobsen (GGD, 25 note1)
12	Hildebrand 1879ñ1953, I, 893, 941; Jansson 1936, 65; N. L. Rasmusson in KL s.v. Penning
16, later 8	Hauberg 1891, 9ñ10
ëprobablyí 8	Thordeman 1936, 17
8 or 10	Wennstrˆm 1940, 15
10	Lilienberg 1908, 11, referring to the period 1013ñ22; Hasselberg 1953, 204 n. 1, referring to the time of VStL

Jansson (1936, 12) states that a weighed ˆrtug was 7ñ9 grams with an ˆre being 24ñ27 grams. He also holds (1936, 65) that there were twelve pennies to the ˆrtug in Denmark, Gotland, and ÷land and in the rest of the Baltic. Jacobsen (GGD, 25 note 1) states, however, that the number of pennies to the ˆrtug was ten in Denmark as in Norway, and this is confirmed in Andreas Sunesonís translation of SkÂnelagen (e.g. SkLAS 119; CISk II 65). Suggestions that there were twelve pennies to the ˆrtug in Jylland during the medieval period are unsubstanti- ated. In Svealand there were eight pennies to the ˆrtug, in Gˆtaland (particularly V‰stergˆtland) initially 16 (although later 8). It was thus possible that the penning coin was originally considerably smaller in size in some areas, and a mark was respectively 288 (Gotland, ÷land and possibly Jylland), 240 (Denmark), 192 (Svealand) and 384 (V‰ster- gˆtland) pennies. Rasmusson in KL states that there were four, not three ˆrtugar of twelve penningar to the ˆre in Gotland, but this is not supported elsewhere. The standard of Svealand gradually took over in Sweden after 1300.

200

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

APPENDIX D: TABLE OF PENALTIES EXACTED (i) Non-monetary penalties

Chapter and line	Crime	Penalty
2/37	If a female slave commits infanticide	Six extra years of bondage (plus a fine paid by her master)
6/10	Carting more than permitted on the Sabbath	Confiscation of the load until redeemed
6/37ñ38	If work is done on the Sabbath by a slave man or woman	Three extra years of bondage (plus a fine paid by the master)
7/5	Damaging or stealing monastic property	Excommunication
8/15ñ18	Killing or wounding during Church Festivals	Withholding of church offices (excommunication) until fines are paid
13/60	Refusing to offer compensation for a killing within the specified time	Outlawry (and see below for additional fines)
16/9ñ11	Killing of a Gotlandic or non- Gotlandic man by a slave	Master to bring slave bound to the farm of the dead man within forty nights
19/133ñ 134	A slave fighting a free man	Two blows to the slave equate to one and matters are considered even
20/87ñ89	Selling the family farm illegally	Loss of inheritance shared with siblings and reduction of weregild to that of a non-Gotlander
20/122	Adultery of any man with the illegitimate daughter of a Gotlandic man with a non-Gotlandic woman (or vice versa) when taken in flagrante delicto	Loss of a hand or foot (or payment of three marks in silver as stated below)
20a/4	Adultery with an unmarried Gotlandic woman when taken in flagrante delicto	Placing in the stocks for three nights, followed by loss of a hand or foot (or payment of six marks in silver by his family)
21/10	Adultery with a married woman	Life (or 40 marks as chosen by the wronged husband)
21/18	Carrying off a woman without her familyís consent	Life (literally ëneckí) (or his wergild if she is Gotlandic or ten silver marks otherwise)
22/17ñ18	Rape of a married woman, whether Gotlandic or not	Life (or the wergild set on the woman)
22/28	Rape of a Gotlandic woman by a slave	Life (unless the woman prefers to be paid her wergild by the slaveís master)

APPENDIX D 201

The non-monetary punishments could be summarised as: 1. Hanging
2. Other unspecified method of execution.
3. Outlawry

4. Excommunication
5. Loss of inheritance and status
6. Loss of a hand or foot
7. Branding or other disfigurement
8. Placement in the stocks
9. Temporary withdrawal of church offices
10. Increase of period of bondage
11. Confiscation of goods involved in offence

(ii) Monetary penalties

25/30ñ 31	Working in another manís woodland or marsh	Confiscation of the result of his work and his draught animal
38/5	Stealing more than two ˆre and up to a mark in silver	Presentationn before the assem- bly and branding (as well as a wergild fine)
38/6ñ9	Recidivist theft, or theft of a mark in silver or more	Hanging [considered a shame- ful execution]
63/11ñ 13	Misappropriating land worth three marks in rent, without cause	Life (literally ëneckí) for the man and loss of her church pew for his wife

Chapter and line	Crime	To whom paid (if not clearly the victim or his heirs)	Fine (in coin unless stated otherwise)
2/9	Infanticide by a free woman	Parishioners, returnable if she is found innocent	Three marks
2/18ñ19	as above	(Local or hundred) assembly members, if the case goes further, and the dean	Three marks to each
2/20ñ21	as above	General assembly	Twelve marks
2/22ñ23	Sheltering a child killer	Unspecified	Three marks
2/35	If a slave commits infanticide		Six ˆre (paid by the master, and see above)
3/19	Failure to pay tithe on time, or before moving parish	Parishioners, church, priest	Three marks
4/8	Heathen practices	Parishioners	Three marks
4/14ñ15	as above	(Local) assembly	Three marks

202

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

4/16	as above	General assembly	Twelve marks
6/10	Overburdening an animal or transporting forbidden goods on the Sabbath	Half to the informant and half to the priest and parishioners	Six ˆre to redeem the load and six ˆre in fine
6/33	Working on the Sabbath by free men or women	Half to the informant and half to the parish, priest and church	Six ˆre and the loss of the work done
6/36	Working on the Sabbath by slave men or women	Unspecified	Three ˆre in fine to be paid by the master (and see above)
7/5	Damage to or theft from monastic property		A fine twice that payable to a farmer (and excommunication as noted above)
7/8	Damage to or theft from monastic property	General assembly (if it comes that far)	Three marks (above the fine to the cloister)
8/8	Killing during Church festivals	Parishioners, church, priest	Three marks
8/8ñ9	Wounding during Church festivals	Parishioners, church, priest	Twelve ˆre (three if done by a slave)
8/10	Striking with a blunt instrument during Church festivals	Parishioners, church, priest	Six ˆre
8/10ñ 12	Scuffling or punching in anger during Church festivals	Parishioners, church, priest	Three ˆre
8/25ñ 26	Killing in a church	General assembly	40 marks (Ten marks in silver)
8/26 foot- note	Killing in a churchyard [and it might be assumed wounding in a church]	General assembly	Twelve marks (of which three go to the dean)
8/32	Killing a criminal in sanctuary in one of the three sanctuary churches, churchyards or rectory grounds	General assembly	40 marks
8/36ñ 37	Bruising in church or wounding in a church- yard	Parishioners, church, priest	Six marks
8/37ñ 40	Scuffling in a church or bruising in a churchyard	Parishioners, church, priest	Three marks
8/40ñ 42	Scuffling or punching in a churchyard	Parishioners, church, priest	Twelve ˆre
8/42ñ 44	Reconsecration after the above	Church	Three marks
9/9ñ11	Killing during the universal sanctity	General assembly	As much wergild as the man is worth (as well as the normal payment to the heirs)

APPENDIX D 203

9/11ñ12	Wounding or attacking during the universal sanctity	Unspecified (presum- ably the general assembly)	Three marks
9/14ñ16	Destroying property during the universal sanctity	Unspecified (presum- ably the general assembly)	Three marks
10/4ñ7	Taking a manís horse or ox as surety during the spring sanctity	Unspecified	Three marks
11/4ñ6	Taking someone by the hair, or punching them during the assembly	Unspecified	Three marks (in addition to fines for the crime)
11/7ñ8	Striking someone with a blunt weapon or causing a wound at the assembly	Unspecified	Three marks
11/8ñ9	Killing or maiming a man, except in revenge, at the assembly	Unspecified	Six marks
12/3ñ5	Killing or maiming a man at his home	General assembly and the victim or his heirs	Twelve marks to each (in addition to wergild in the case of death)
12/5ñ7	Striking someone in their home with a blunt weapon or causing a wound	The community and the victim	Three marks to each (in addition to the normal fine)
13/61ñ 65	Refusing to offer compensation for a killing within the specified time, or not keeping to his circle of truce	General assembly and the claimant	Six marks in silver to each
14/25	Killing by a minor		Twelve marks in silver (i.e. half a wergild)
14/32ñ 33	Killing a pregnant woman		Twelve marks in silver for the child and full wergild for the woman
15/2ñ3; 7ñ9	Killing a Gotlander or the child of a Gotlandic man	His or her heirs	Three marks in gold (i.e. 24 marks in silver, 96 marks in coin)
15/4; 15/11ñ 12	Killing a non- Gotlander or the child of a non-Gotlandic man	His or her heirs	Ten marks in silver (i.e. 40 marks in coin, as in Sweden)
15/5ñ6	Killing a slave	[His master, presumably]	Four and a half marks1

1 This does not seem to be the same as the value of the slave, which appears to be three marks in silver.

204

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

16/2ñ3	Killing a Gotlander in his circle of truce		Twelve marks in silver (half a wergild)
16/3ñ4	Killing a non- Gotlander in his circle of truce		Five marks in silver (half a wergild)
16/4	Killing a slave in his circle of truce	[Presumably the victimís master]	Six ˆre (a sixth of a slaveís wergild)
16/6ñ7	Maiming a non- Gotlanderís hand or foot		Ten marks in coin (1/4 wergild)
16/7ñ8	Other maiming		[1/4 wergild, presumably]
16/11	Killing of a Gotlandic man by a slave		Nine marks in silver (plus the slave, valued at three marks in silver)
16/12ñ 13	Killing of a Gotlandic man by a slave who then escapes		Twelve marks in silver (i.e. half the wergild for a Gotlander from the slaveís master)
16/13ñ 14	Killing of a non- Gotlandic man by a slave		Two marks in silver (plus the slave)
16/15ñ 17	Killing of a non- Gotlandic man by a slave who then escapes		Five marks in silver (i.e. half the wergild for a non-Gotlander)
16/18ñ 19	In both the above cases, if the master does not get an oath to deny his own involvement		Full wergild for the dead man (24 or ten marks in silver)
16/20ñ 22	Killing of one slave by another	[Presumably the victimís master]	Four and a half marks in lieu of the slave himself1
17/2ñ4	Killing of a man by an uncastrated ox of five years old or more		Tweve marks [in silver], i.e. half his wergild2
17/14ñ 16	Killing of a Gotlander by an ox, horse, three-year-old or older boar or dog		Tweve marks in silver
17/17ñ 19	Killing of a non- Gotlander in the same circumstances		One third of his wergild, i.e. 131/3 marks in coin (31/3 marks in silver)3
17/24ñ 25	Wounding, etc. by animals		One third of the normal fine

2 This is one of the few instances in which ësilverí is not stated explicitly, but is clearly intended.

3 This is quite specifically at odds with the practice for a Gotlander, where half the wergild is offered.

APPENDIX D 205

17/26ñ27	Dog bites	Two ˆre per bite, up to four
18/2ñ3	Striking a woman so that she miscarries	Half a wergild
18/14ñ16	Killing a properly supervised child under three by accident at a gathering	Full wergild
19/2ñ4	Causing a wound one or more nail-breadths deep	Half a mark for each nail-breadth in length and depth [c.one inch] up to eight
19/5ñ6	Causing a wound less than a nail-breadth deep, but needing treatment	A quarter of a mark for each nail-breadth in length
19/13ñ15	Causing a body wound	One mark in silver
19/15ñ16	Stabbing with a knife	Two marks in silver
19/16ñ17	Throwing stones or other missiles	Three marks
19/17ñ20	Causing a visible wound that does not bleed	Half a mark for each blow up to four
19/21ñ23	Causing a wound through the nose or lips that heals	Two marks and then extra for the scar
19/24ñ25	As above, when it does not heal	Maximum price for a wound (i.e. two marks in silver)
19/25	As above two entries, for an ear	One mark (and extra for the scar if applica- ble) or one mark in silver if it does not heal
19/25ñ30	Causing a scar on the face between hat and beard	Half a mark in silver or a mark in silver if the scar is very noticeable
19/30ñ32	Splitting the scalp	One mark (in coin) or two if the skull is visible
19/32ñ34	Cracking the skull	One mark in silver, or two if the membrane is visible
19/35ñ36	Each sizeable fragment of bone chipped off	One mark
19/36ñ38	Each larger bone	Two marks for each up to four bones
19/38ñ40, 40ñ42	Each finger lost or badly damaged	Four marks (in coin)
19/40, 42ñ44	Loss of a thumb, or damage to the hand so that it is partly disabled	Two marks in silver (i.e. twice as much)

206

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

19/44ñ47	Loss of mobility or breaking the heel or neck	Two marks in silver
19/47	Each toe lost	Two marks
19/47ñ49	Loss of hand, foot or eye	Six marks in silver for each (of these different things)
19/49ñ52	Loss of both hands or both feet or both eyes in a survived attack	Twelve marks in silver for each (of these different pairs of things, disagreeing with SL IV, 263, note 25)
19/52ñ54	Loss of the nose	Twelve marks in silver
19/54ñ56	Loss of the tongue	Twelve marks in silver
19/56ñ68	Loss of a testicle, resulting in infertility	Six marks in silver
19/58ñ59	Loss of both testicles	Twelve marks in silver
19/59ñ61	Loss of the penis	Eighteen marks in silver
19/62	Each broken rib	Two marks for each up to four
19/62ñ64	Smaller bones in hand or foot	One mark
19/64ñ65	Larger bones in hand or foot	One mark in silver, or two if disability results
19/70ñ72	An invisible injury resulting in minor disability	One mark
19/73ñ76, 78ñ79	Injury resulting in deafness	Twelve marks in silver, or six if it is partial
19/80ñ81	Loss of an ear	One mark in silver; two marks in coin if the ear is retained damaged4
19/81ñ86	Loss of teeth	Two marks for each upper front tooth, one for every other upper jaw tooth; lower teeth at half this rate
19/87ñ89	Hair-pulling	Two ˆre (1/4 mark) if done with one hand, otherwise half a mark
19/89ñ90, 91ñ92	Shaking, pushing, kicking or punching someone	Two ˆre
19/90ñ91	Throwing ale in someoneís eye	Eight ˆrtugar (1/3 mark), for the insult

4 A silver mark is thus more than two marks in coin, probably twice as much.

APPENDIX D 207

19/95ñ97	Striking someone with a staff		Half a mark per blow up to two marks unless disfigurement results
19/101ñ 105	Creating a bald patch the size of a finger, two fingers, two fingers and a thumb, hand		Eight ˆrtugar, half a mark, a mark, two marks5
19/105ñ 107	Pulling out all a manís hair		One mark in silver4
19/107ñ 108	Removing a manís scalp		One mark in silver
19/109ñ 113	Damage to outer clothing, kirtle, undergarments		One ˆre, two ˆre, eight ˆrtugar, plus repair to the clothing
19/126ñ 128	Blocking someoneís way, or turning them aside		Eight ˆrtugar (for the insult)
19/128ñ 131	Violently forcing a man to abandon his route	The victim and the community	Three marks to each
19/134ñ 136	A slave getting more than two blows for one from a free man	[The slaveís master, presumably]	Two ˆre per blow, up to four blows
19/136ñ 137	A free man getting more than one blow for two from a slave		Half a mark per blow, up to four blows
19/137ñ 139	Any non-injuring attack on a slave		Half the free manís compensation
19/139ñ 141	Any injury to a slave		The same as for a free man up to three marks
20/118ñ 121, 123ñ125	Seduction by any man of the illegitimate daughter of a Gotlandic man with a non-Gotlandic woman (or vice versa)		Hogsl of four marks
20/121ñ 122, 123ñ125	Any man taken in the act of seduction of the illegitimate daughter of a Gotlandic man with a non-Gotlandic woman (or vice versa)		Three marks in silver (to avert the loss of a hand or foot)

5 Eight ˆrtugar must thus be less than half a mark and more than a quarter of a mark. This shows that there were most likely three ˆrtugar to the ˆre (1/8 mark) in Gotland as elsewhere.

208

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

20a/5ñ8; 24ñ26	Any man taken in the act of seduction of a single Gotlandic woman		Six marks in silver (to avert the loss of a hand or foot)
20a/18ñ 21	If a Gotlandic man loses a paternity case, when he was not taken in flagrante delicto		Maintaining the mother and child, or full hogsl, if she is Gotlandic
20a/21ñ 24; 35ñ 36	Any man taken in the act of seduction of a non-Gotlandic woman in her home		Three marks
20a/26ñ 28	If a non-Gotlandic man is not taken in flagrante delicto with a Gotlandic woman, but has a child with her		Eight marks in hogsl (and brings up the child), if he acknowl- edges it
20a/28ñ 32	If a non-Gotlandic man loses a paternity case, when he was not taken in flagrante delicto		Full hogsl, if she is Gotlandic, the child being maintained by her father or brother if she is unmarried
20a/33ñ 35	If a non-Gotlandic man has a child with a non- Gotlandic woman		Three marks in hogsl (and he is to bring up the child)
21/2ñ3	Adultery (presumably by an unmarried man)	The wronged party (presumably the husband) and the (local) assembly	Six marks and three marks respectively
21/3ñ5	Double adultery	The wronged party and the general assembly	Twelve marks to each
21/5ñ8	Adultery by a married man with an unmarried woman, but not vice versa	The unmarried woman	Hogsl
21/9ñ12	Adultery by any man taken in flagrante delicto with a married woman		40 marks (or execution, as decided by the cuckolded husband)
21/12ñ 15	Luring a woman to marriage without her familyís agreement	Father or guardian and the general assembly	40 marks, of which twelve went to the assembly
21/15ñ 20; 20ñ 23	Taking a woman by force without her familyís agreement	Father or guardian and the general assembly	Manís wergild (or ten marks in silver if she was non-Gotlandic), of which twelve (in coin) went to the assembly (otherwise his neck)

APPENDIX D 209

22/13ñ15

22/16ñ19

22/26ñ28

23/2ñ6

23/9ñ12

23/12ñ13

23/15ñ17

23/17ñ20

23/20ñ 21; 22ñ 24

23/24ñ 25; 25ñ 27

23/27ñ30

24/17ñ18

24/19ñ20

25/26ñ29

Rape of a woman: Gotlandic, non- Gotlandic or slave

Rape of a married free woman

Rape by a slave of a Gotlandic woman

(Half) uncovering a womanís head (of a free woman only)

Striking off a clasp or buckle or both, or knocking them to the ground

Pulling off a womanís lacing

Pushing a woman so that her clothes are displaced

If clothing is displaced to mid- calf, knee, loins

Grasping a woman by the wrist, elbows, shoulders, breast

Grasping a woman by the ankle, lower leg, thigh

Grasping her higher up

Providing more than the stipulated ale at a wedding

Gate-crashing a wedding or other feast

Giving leave for another to cut wood or reeds in unallocated wood or marsh

The general assembly

The wronged party and the community

Twelve marks, five marks or six ˆre respectively (cf. the banduvereldi)

Her wergild value (in return for his life)

Her (or his) wergild (from his master) only if the woman allows this instead of the slaveís life

(One) two marks

Eight ˆrtugar or 1⁄2 mark or one mark

1⁄2 mark for each up to the maximum [probably two marks] and the return of them

Eight ˆrtugar

1⁄2 mark, one mark, two marks

1⁄2 mark, eight ˆrtugar, five ˆrtugar, one ˆre; half this if the woman is not Gotlandic

No fine, as the woman is held responsible by this time

Twelve marks

Three ˆre

Three marks to each

1⁄2 mark, eight ˆrtugar, five ˆrtugar; half this if the woman is not Gotlandic, but freeborn

210

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

25/33ñ37	Refusing to allow a search for property taken from anotherís wood or other property		Unspecified fine
25/38ñ40	Damaging another personís property	The wronged party and the community	Three marks to each
25/40ñ42	Enclosing unallocated land	The wronged party and the community	Three marks to each
26/8ñ14	Not having a stock- proof fence, resulting in animals breaking through		1⁄2 mark (towards the fencing), exacted again each fortnight if the fence is not made good
26/25ñ27	Animal breaking through a legally constructed fence		The damage caused (due from the animalís owner)
26/27ñ29	Ox breaking through a fence of any sort		The damage caused (due from the oxís owner)
26/29ñ30	Ox jumping over a fence, but only if it is legally constructed		The damage caused (due from the oxís owner)
26/38ñ40; 41ñ42	Cutting wood on anotherís property	The wronged party and the community	Three marks to each and an extra eight ˆrtugar if he takes it home and full restitution
26/47ñ48; 48ñ49; 49ñ50	Breaking a manís fence at the top tie, then a second section or a third		1⁄2 mark plus eight ˆrtugar plus four ˆrtugar (i.e. one mark in all)
26/50ñ52	Breaking open a whole fence section		Two marks (and the mending of the fence)
26/55ñ56; 56ñ58	Stealing firewood, fencing or timber		Six ˆre (three marks if he has driven it to the road) plus full restitution
28/4ñ7	Purchasing land unlawfully	The wronged parties and the general assembly	Twelve marks to each. The purchaser also lost the price of the land
28/22ñ23	Selling outside the family or parish	The general assembly	Twelve marks
28/47ñ49	Maximum ransom for a farmerís son, etc.		Three marks in silver, whoever is paying the ransom
28/66ñ68	Brothers possessing undivided property and a killing occurring		The appropriate fine (by the brother who does the killing)
31/4ñ5	Any magistrate (ra ̨- ma ̨r) not attending the assemby by midday	The hundred (local) assembly	Three ˆre

APPENDIX D 211

31/5ñ7	If all the magistrates are absent	The first person bringing an action and the community	Three marks to each
31/9ñ10	Continuing cases after sunset		The highest fine that the assembly concerned can command: three, six or twelve marks
35/2ñ5; 6ñ9	Horse theft	The wronged party and the community	Three marks to each
35/10ñ12	Taking the wrong horse by mistake		Eight ˆrtugar
36/15ñ17	Taking a boat from its moorings and using it	The wronged party and the community	Three marks to each (by implication)
37/22ñ26; 26ñ28	Planting stolen goods on another	The wronged party and the (local) assembly respectively	The personís wergild and three marks (or twelve marks to the general assemby for a Gotlander)
38/2ñ4	Theft of two ˆre or less		Six ˆre for petty theft
38/4ñ6	Theft of up to a mark in silver		Wergild (plus branding as detailed above)
39/10ñ12	Specific insults at church level		Three ˆre
39/12ñ16	Specific insults repeated at a higher level		Three marks
46/2ñ4	Altering a brand on an animal neither bought nor inherited		Three marks
48/5ñ6	Not planting turnips	The parish	Three ˆre
48/6ñ8	A parish not enforcing turnip-planting	The assembly	Three marks (from the parish)
50/4ñ5	Causing damage to other farms from your fire	The affected farms (to be divided between them)	Three marks (maxi- mum)
51/2ñ4	Causing damage with fire carried into a manís farm (to light his fire)		Half the wergild of the perpetrator or responsible adult
52/3ñ4	A parish not maintain- ing roads	The (local) assembly	Three marks (from the parish)
55/2ñ4	Building a house without permission	The parish	Three marks (and demolish the house)
55/4ñ5	Employing indoor workers without parish permission (presum- ably during harvest)	Unspecified	Three ˆre

212

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

56/2ñ5	Harvest workers taking unauthorised leave	The farmer	One ˆrtug per day and an extra dayís work
56a/6ñ7	Crofters refusing to work at harvest time	The farmer	Three ˆre
57/2ñ4; 58/2ñ4	Hunting squirrels or trapping hares between the Annun- ciation and the Feast of Simon and Jude	[Presumably the parish]	Three marks
59/4ñ5	Harvesting fruit too early	Parishioners, with half to the inform- ant	Three ˆre (11⁄2 for minors)
60/2ñ4; 4ñ7	Failure to say mass on Sunday or feast day; on Fridays or days when the litany is said	The dean and the parish	Three marks to each; twelve ˆre to each
61/2ñ3	Gambling	The parish	Three ˆre
61/3ñ4	A parish not prosecuting a gambler	The (local) assembly	Three marks
62/3ñ5	Revised punishment for pulling out hair to the size of a palm or completely		One mark in silver and two marks in silver respectively
63/2ñ4	Cutting wood in anotherís woodland		Three marks plus restitution
63/4ñ6	Breaking down anotherís fence to pass through		Three marks
63/6ñ8	Trespassing or tearing a gap in anotherís fence		Three ˆre
63/16ñ 17	Providing too many drinks at a wedding	The general assembly	A double fine and twelve marks
65/18ñ 19	Buying on credit from town-dwellers	The general assembly	Twelve marks
Addition 1/8ñ10	Cases in general		No fine is to be greater than the perpetrator can afford
Addition 1/19ñ21	If a priest inherits a defence in a murder case and the complainant does not wish to accept compensation	The complainant and the general assembly respectively	Full wergild; 40 marks

APPENDIX D 213

Addition 1/27ñ28	If two brothers, one ordained and the other not, inherit a case and need to compensate	Each their own personal portion
Addition 2/1ñ3	Personal injury caused by cattle, horses or pigs	The value of the animal at the most
Addition 2/5ñ6; 7ñ8	Injury caused by an animal declared at church and to the parish to be a rogue animal	Twice the normal fine for the injury, but half as much if the injury is normally fined at less than the animalís value
Addition 2/9ñ10	Dog causing damage	Up to half wergild
Addition 2/10ñ11	Dog bites	Two ˆre per bite up to four
Addition 2/12ñ13	Dog causing wounds or maim- ing	Half the maximum fine (not revenge)
Addition 3/1ñ2; 2ñ3	Small bones broken in the foot or hand; each rib	Two marks
Addition 3/3	Disability follow- ing the above	Two marks in silver
Addition 3/4ñ5	If so many bones are broken that the damage is obvious	1⁄2 mark per bone
Addition 4/1	If an ear is damaged but not totally cut off	One mark in silver (this was two marks in coin in the A-text)
Addition 4/1ñ2	If the long bones of the leg or arm are broken	Two marks in silver
Addition 4/3ñ5	If teeth are knocked out	One mark in silver for each of the two central upper or lower teeth, otherwise two marks in coin
Addition 5/2ñ4	If hair is pulled out leaving a bald patch larger in size than a palm; total hair loss	One mark in silver; two marks in silver6
Addition 5/4ñ5	If the scalp is cut	One mark in silver

6 This series suggests that a mark in silver was worth four times a mark in coin at this period.

214

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Addition 6/3ñ4	Providing too much ale for the wedding party	The general assembly	Twelve marks
Addition 8/1ñ3	Stealing by a slave or slaves of an ˆre or less		Three ˆre, payable by each master, the stolen goods being already recovered
Addition 8/3ñ5	Stealing by a slave of more than an ˆre		The stolen goods plus three times the value of the goods
Addition 8/5ñ7	Stealing by more than one slave of an ˆre or less		Three times the value of the missing goods (payable by each master)
Addition 8/15ñ20; 10ñ15	For taking a slave on suspicion without proof, even if he confesses		Six ˆre, unless there was no sign of a break-in (which constitutes proof)
Addition 8/23ñ28	Stealing by a slave of more than one ˆre [assumed], where there is material evidence		Three times the value (up to the value of the slave), plus the goods themselves (payable by the master unless he allows a search, in which case there is no triple fine)
Addition 8/23ñ28	For a theft greater than the slaveís owner can afford		The slave to be handed over to the owner of the stolen goods
Addition 8/35ñ38	If a thief goes on the run		No triple compensation for food stolen, but return of what remains
Addition 8/39ñ43	Redeeming a slave: on land; in a boat; out of sight of land		Two ˆre; three ˆre; 1⁄2 mark
Addition 8/43ñ44; 48ñ50	If a slave escapes in an unlocked boat, or drowns at sea		Compensation is paid by the owner of the boat (to the owner of the slave) Three marks maximum
Addition 8/44ñ48	If a slave, in escaping, has stolen goods		from the slaveís owner for the goods stolen

The maximum case a siettungr (sixth, district) assembly could hear was for three marks, the ̨ri ̨iungr (riding) assembly six marks and the gen- eral assembly twelve marks. No fine limit is given for the local or hundred assemblies.

APPENDIX D 215 (iii) Fees and rewards for stray animals

Chapter and line	Type of animal	Number and type of assembly	Fine from owner if claimed	Fee per assembly if unclaimed	Paid for beast by finder	Paid to whom
40/2ñ5	Small livestock	Two, church plus (presum- ably) local assembly		Assembly fee	Value less the assembly fee	Parishioners
41/3ñ4; 6ñ7	Swine	Two local plus riding	÷rtug per assembly	Assembly fee	Value less the assembly fee	Parishioners
42/2ñ5; 5ñ6	Tame sheep	Two local plus riding	The offspring	Riding assembly fee	No amount specified	Not applicable
43/2ñ3; 3ñ4	Unshorn rams	Unspecified	÷rtug	ëAs for other sheepí	No amount specified	Not applicable
44/5ñ7; 7ñ8	Shorn rams in winter	Unspecified, possibly none held in winter	Unspecified	The ram itself	No amount specified	Not applicable
45/2ñ4	Goats	Two over two years; presumably riding assemblies	÷rtug for a billy-goat and six pence for a nanny per assembly	Not specified	No amount specified	Not applicable
45a/2ñ5	Horses	Two local plus riding	Two ˆrtugar per assembly	Not specified	No amount specified	Not applicable

216

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

APPENDIX E: OATHS AND WITNESSES REQUIRED (i) Oaths

Page and line	Circumstances of ëcharacterí oaths	Number of oath-takers
2/15	rehabilitation oath (symdarai ̨r) in respect of innocence of infanticide	Six
2/28ñ30	as above, in the case where prosecution witnesses fail to put up their deposit	not specified
4/11ñ12	in respect of a man defending himself if accused of pagan practices	Six
4/12ñ14	as above at the local assembly	Six
4/15ñ17	as above at the general assembly	Twelve
13/57ñ58	in respect of a man claiming that he has offered compensation three times, with a year between each offer in respect of a manslaughter case; this was an oath in addition to actual witness as to fact (see below)	Twelve
16/17ñ18	in respect of the master of a slave claiming that he had nothing to do with the killing perpetrated by the slave, if the latter is not present to carry the case	Six
19/8ñ10	in respect of a wound compensated at more than three marks	Six, including the injured party
19/10ñ11	in respect of a wound compensated at three marks or less	Three, including the injured party
19/73; 76ñ77	in respect of a man injured so that he loses his hearing	Six, plus the same factual witness as for a wound (see below)
22/21ñ23	in respect of the defence of a man accused of rape, where the woman initially claims not to have recognised the assailant, but changes her mind	Twelve
22/23ñ27	in respect of a woman, who claims rape, being pregnant and giving birth at the appropriate time for it to have been the result of the rape	Twelve, plus her witnesses (see below)
32/2ñ4	in respect of a demand for payment in money, where there is disagreement over the sum involved	Six (at the most)

APPENDIX E 217

(ii) Witnesses as to fact and juries

32/4ñ7	in respect of a demand for payment in land, where the value involved is a gold mark or greater	Eighteen
39/9ñ10	in respect of the defence of a man charged with slander	Three, with the witness of the parishioners
39/12	in respect of the remedy by a man found guilty of slander at parish level	Three, in church
39/16	as above, but when the insult is more public and is brought to the local assembly	Six, with the witness of the assembly

Page and line	Circumstances for the witness as to Number of witnesses fact; those marked * also swore oaths as to the facts
2/4ñ7	in respect of a woman claiming that her child was stillborn	Two (i.e. three with herself)
2/10ñ11	in respect of a woman guilty of infanticide having confessed and done penance	One (the shriving priest)
3/32ñ34*	in respect of proof that a man has lawfully taken part in the building and consecration of a new church	Three parishioners (including himself)
3/35ñ39	as above, when three or more years have passed	Two parishioners and the priest
4/5ñ7	confirmation that someone had held a sacrificial meal	Unspecified number of witnesses
13/53ñ56	in respect of a man claiming that he has offered compensation three times, with a year between each offer in respect of a manslaughter case	Three (who were present when the offers were made)
14/26ñ 28*	in respect of a woman killed while pregnant	Husband or, if he is not alive, closest relative with two more landowners and a further nine of equal birth
18/4ñ7; 7ñ9	in respect of a woman who has a miscarriage as a result of being struck	Two landowners to witness the blow and her complaint and two female witnesses to witness the miscarriage
18/9ñ10*	as above, swearing that the child was alive when she was struck	Herself and five others; note that this says ëperson-oathí rather than ëman-oathí, indicating, perhaps, that some of the witnesses in this case might be women
19/6ñ8	witness (as to the fact of the wound) but not swear the oath	Three (two local magistrates and one district, i.e. sixth, judge)

218

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

19/71ñ 72	in respect of a hand damaged so that it cannot tolerate hot and cold	Self-witness
19/117ñ 121	in respect of a non-open wound causing the injured person to be bedridden for a year or more	Four landowners and three judges from the same sixth and then others to make up twelve in all
20/92ñ 96	in respect of an illegitimate childís claim to inheritance, that his father and three successive female ancestors were trueborn Gotlanders	A genealogical table
20a/ 9ñ14*	in respect of a man denying a paternity suit, claiming that he had not been named before the child was born	Six (including two landowners from the womanís parish)
20a/15ñ 18*	as above, in support of the woman, when the case is not found in favour of the man	Six (all of equal birth with her)
22/5ñ7	in respect of a woman being raped, whose shout immediately after the attack is heard	One, the witness to the ëshoutí
22/7ñ10	in respect of a woman being raped, whose shout after the attack is not heard	An unspecified number of witnesses to her complaint, made within a day, who may also act as witness to her attack
22/23ñ 26	in respect of a woman, pregnant as a result of being raped, to confirm the date of her rape	An unspecified number of witnesses to the fact, as in the previous entry
23/6ñ8	in respect of attacks upon a woman resulting in whole or partial removal of her headdress, according to witness	Unspecified number of eye- witnesses, including herself
23/14ñ 15	in respect of laces being removed as to whether compensation and restitution have been made	The woman herself
25/2ñ3; 8ñ11*	in respect of disputes about woodland; the witness had to swear on oath, or it was invalid	Two: a neighbour and a work witness
25/11ñ 17	in respect of disputes about cultivated land	Two: a (distant) kin witness and a work witness owning neighbouring land
25/32ñ 33	in respect of the taking of timber from anotherís wood, to deny the justification to confiscate the oneís property	The disputing parties and an eyewitness
26/60ñ 61*	in respect of the taking of timber from his wood, that he has received restitution	Self, on oath
32/7ñ9	in respect of a dispute about the value of property owed, if of a mark in gold or more	Unspecified number of magistrates in the hundred to decide

APPENDIX E 219

32/14ñ16	in respect of a dispute about the value of property owed, if less than a mark in gold	Sixñman jury to decide
37/11ñ15	in respect of the possession of disputed goods where their origin is agreed	The assignor
37/19ñ22	in respect of the possession of stolen goods, when the knowledge of their having been stolen is denied, and responsibility laid on the supplier	An unspecified number of those who were present when the goods were handed over, if the assignor denies responsibility
Addition 8/7ñ9	in respect of a theft in which the stolen goods are not to hand, how much has been taken	Self-witness
Addition 8/51ñ56	in respect of a man caught without the relevant stolen goods in his possession, to witness to what is said	Three magistrates from the same hundred or sixth to decide or witness

(iii) Official witness for reference in the future in case of dispute

Page and line	Circumstances for the official witness	Number of witnesses
16/23ñ25	in respect of a slave who has worked out his bondage time	Unspecified number of parishion- ers, perhaps all of them
20/114ñ 116	in respect of the rights of illegiti- mate children	Unspecified number of parishion- ers, who will administer their rights
26/2ñ3; 4ñ5	in respect of declarations being made in a claim for a party fence; erection of a party fence	One neighbour or parishioner; an unspecified number of neighbours
26/17ñ 19, 22ñ 25	in respect of animals straying or breaking through a lawful fence being offered back to the owner	Unspecified number of neighbours
28/8ñ10	in respect of the sale or mortgage of property and the offering of the kinsmanís portion	Unspecified number of (assembly members as) witnesses
28/25ñ28	in respect of property sold to a more distant relative and informing the receiver of the kinsmanís portion	Unspecified number of parishion- ers
44/5ñ6, 7ñ9	in respect of a stray ram found before covering time and its being offered for redemption, and re- branded if unclaimed	Unspecified number of parishion- ers
45a/5ñ7	in respect of a stray bullock or draught pony being found and its being offered for redemption, and being available for use if unclaimed	Unspecified number of parishion- ers
61/8ñ9	that any new laws are true Gotlandic laws	The majority of the judges

220

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used throughout for Swedish provin- cial laws and for the sections (balkar) within them. They are to a great extent those used in the series Svenska landskapslagar (SL), since these are widely current in the literature referenced. Where page numbers are given, they refer to the indicated volumes in the series Corpus iuris sueo-gotorum (CIS). Schlyterís editions of the laws of Magnus Eriksson (CIS X and CIS XI) are abbreviated to MELL and MEStL. The Swedish translations of these laws are referred to as MELLNT and MEStLNT. These two abbreviations are listed in the Bibliography, as are abbreviations of law texts in volumes in the series Norges gamle love indtil 1387 (NGL) and Danmarks gamle Landskabslove (DGL).

BjR
DL (ƒVmL)

daGL

GL
HL KrLL MELL MEStL SdmL SkL CISk I CISk II

CISk IV CISk V

tyGL UL

VgL III VgL IV VgLL

The town law for Bj‰rkˆ (CIS VI, 111ñ34)
The law of Dalarna (older law of V‰stmanland) (CIS V, 1ñ 66)
Danish translation of the law of the Gotlanders (CIS VII, 169ñ218)
The law of the Gotlanders (CIS VII, 1ñ112)
The law of H‰lsingland (CIS VI, 1ñ93)
Kristofferís national law (CIS XII)
Magnus Erikssonís national law (CIS X)
Magnus Erikssonís town law (CIS XI)
The law of Sˆdermanland (CIS IV)
The law of SkÂne (in general, regardless of edition)
The law of SkÂne (CIS IX, 1ñ238)
Andreas Sunesonís Latin text of the law of SkÂne (CIS IX, 239ñ354)
The town law of SkÂne (CIS IX, 397ñ434)
Miscellaneous additions to the law of SkÂne (CIS IX, 435ñ 500)
German translation of the law of the Gotlanders (CIS VII, 113ñ168)
The law of Uppland (CIS III)
Lydekinusí excerpts and notes on the laws of V‰stergˆtland (CIS I, 255-281)
Notes by the priest of Vidhem and the monk of St John on the laws of V‰stergˆtland (CIS I, 283ñ344)
The laws of V‰stergˆtland as a group

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS 221

VmL The (younger) law of V‰stmanland (CIS V, 67ñ239)
VStL The town law of Visby (CIS VIII, 1ñ182)
YVgL The younger law of V‰stergˆtland (CIS I, 77ñ253, VgL II) ƒVgL The older law of V‰stergˆtland (CIS I, 2ñ74, VgL I)

÷gL The law of ÷stergˆtland (CIS II)

Add Additions (to YVgL, etc.)
Bb The section concerning building (SdmL, MELL, etc.)

The section concerning community (village) law (HL, UL) Db The section concerning manslaughter (YVgL, ÷gL, MELL,

MEStL)
Eb The section concerning the Kingís oath
fl. flock, chapter of the law
Fns The first section concerning honour (ƒVgL) Fnb The second section concerning honour (ƒVgL)

The section concerning personal injury (YVgL) Gb The section concerning matrimony

Jb The section concerning land
Kgb The section concerning the monarchy
Kkb The section concerning church or Christian law
Kmb The section concerning trade
Mb The section concerning personal and property rights (UL, etc.) Md The section concerning killing (ƒVgL)
pr principium (first or principal paragraph in each chapter) Rb The section concerning slaves and outlaws (ƒVgL, YVgL)

The section concerning the legal process (UL, VmL, MELL, etc.) Sb The section concerning wounding (ƒVgL, MELL, MEStL) Tjb The section concerning theft
Urb The section concerning outlawry cases (ƒVgL, YVgL)
Utb The section concerning off-farm activities (YVgL)
Vb Concerning accidental injury (ƒVgL, YVgL)

The section concerning accidental injury, wounding, adul-

tery, robbery and theft (÷gL)
ƒb The section concerning inheritance

222

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Manuscripts and unpublished works

Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Florence. Codex Laur. Ashburnham, 1554. c.1120. The so-called ëFlorensdokumentetí; list of bishoprics, church provinces, etc.

Det kongelige Bibliotek, Copenhagen. Den gamle kongelige samling (GKS) 3363 4to. Late 17th or early 18th century. Lex Gothlandica 1470 scripta.

Det kongelige Bibliotek, Copenhagen. Kalls samling 650 4to. Late 17th or early 18th century. Copy of Lex Gothlandica 1470 scripta. Kungliga Biblioteket, Stockholm B 64. 14th century. [Gottlandz landz-

lagh.]
Kungliga Biblioteket, Stockholm B 65. 1401. [Gottlands landslag

pÂ Plattyska.]
Kungliga Biblioteket, Stockholm B 68 4to. Early 17th century. [Van

gamla gullands love 4to.]
Kungliga Biblioteket, Stockholm C 81 4to. Late 16th century. [K

Hanses recess paa Gullands lov 1492 4to.]
Neogard, Lars Nilsson 1732. Gautau-Minning, Thet ‰r, NÂgot om

then ofgamla Gautaun ell Gjˆtiska ÷n Guthiland, nu kallad Gothland, Med nÂgon dryg tidspillan sammanhemtat af Lars Neogard 1732. Copies held in the libraries of Visby L‰roverk and Uppsala University.

University Library, Copenhagen. Den arnamagnaeanske hÂndskrift- samling AM 54 4to. 1587. Guta lag. Copy by David Bilefeld of a lost manuscript from 1470.

University Library, Copenhagen. Den arnamagnaeanske hÂndskrift- samling AM 55 4to. Mid 16th century. Den gamle Gullands Low. Danish translation from c.1492.

Printed works

AakjÊr, Svend 1936. ëMaal, VÊgt og Taxter i Danmarkí. In NK XXX, 175ñ282.

Aasen, Ivar Andreas 2003. Norsk ordbog med dansk forklaring. Ed. Kristoffer Kruken and Terje Aarset.

AEW = Jan de Vries 1961. Altnordisches etymologisches Wˆrterbuch. AL = Adolf Noreen 1904. Altschwedisches Lesebuch. Mit Anmerkungen

und Glossar. Zweite Auflage.
Almquist, Jan Eric 1923. Det processuella fˆrfarandet vid ‰gotvist:

studier ˆver jordabalkens 14 och 15 kapitel.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS 223

Almquist, Jan Eric 1942. ëOm formerna fˆr tingsfridens lysning i Sverige under ‰ldre tidí. In Historiska studier till‰gnade Sven Tun- berg, den 1 februari 1942. Ed. Adolf Sch ̧ck and Åke Stille, 61ñ81.

Ambrosiani, Sune 1939. ëMark och markland. ìMarcaî and ìmarca terrÊîí. Rig. Tidskrift utgiven av Fˆreningen fˆr svensk kulturhistoria 22, 153ñ65.

Amira, K. von 1882ñ95 (reprint 1973). Nordgermanisches Obliga- tionenrecht. 2 vols.

Amira, Karl von 1913 (3rd revised and enlarged edn). Grundriss des germanischen Rechts.

Amira, Karl von 1922. Die germanischen Todesstrafen: Unter- suchungen zur Rechts- und Religionsgeschichte.

Beckman, Natanael 1920. ëGutalagens inledningsord och Gotlands kristnandeí. Minnesskrift utgiven af Filologiska samfundet i Gˆteborg pÂ tjugoÂrsdagen av dess stiftande den 22 oktober 1920 in Gˆte- borgs hˆgskolas Ârsskrift 26:2, 9ñ14.

BjarkR = Den Êldre By-lov eller Bjarkˆ-Ret 1846. Ed. R. Keyser and P. A. Munch. (NGL 1, 301ñ36).

Bjˆrkander, Adolf 1898. Till Visby stads ‰ldsta historia. Ett kritiskt bidrag.

Bjˆrling, Carl Georg Emanuel 1893. Om bˆtesstraffet i den svenska medeltidsr‰tten.

BoG = Boken om Gotland 1945. Ed. (Vol. I) MÂrten Stenberger, (Vol. II) Richard Steffen. 2 vols.

Bohman, Lennart 1951. ëGotlands fˆrbindelser med Stockholm fˆre Kalmarunionení. GArk 23, 30ñ56.

BorgL = Den Êldre Borgathings- eller Vikens-Christenret 1846. Ed. R. Keyser and P. A. Munch. (NGL 1, 337ñ72).

Brunner, Heinrich 1906ñ28 (2nd edn). Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte (2. Aufl. / neu bearbeitet von Claudius von Schwerin). 2 vols.

Br ̄gger, A. W. and Shetelig, Haakon 1950. Vikingeskipene: deres forgjengere og etterf ̄lgere.

Bugge, Alexander 1899. ëGotlÊndingernes handel paa England og Norge omkring 1300í. Historisk tidsskrift utgitt av Den norske historiske forening RÊkke 3, Band 5, 145ñ80.

Bugge, Sophus 1877ñ78. ëSproglige Oplysninger om Ord i gamle nordiske Love. I. Svenske Ordí. Nordisk Tidskrift for Filologi 3 (Ny rÊkke), 258ñ75.

Carlsson, Lizzie 1934. ëBˆdels‰mbetet i det medeltida Stockholmí. Samfundet S:t Eriks Ârsbok 32, 95ñ118.

224

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

CCS = Corpus codicum suecicorum medii aevi. . . 1943ñ67. Ed. Elias WessÈn. 20 vols.

Christiansen, Eric 1997. The northern crusades.
CIG = GL, tyGL and daGL. In Codex iuris Gotlandici, cum notis criticis,

variis lectionibus, nova versione suecana, glossariis et indicibus nomi-

num propriorum. Gotlands-lagen 1852. Ed. C. J. Schlyter. (CIS VII). CIS = Corpus iuris sueo-gotorum antiqui . . . Samling af Sweriges gamla lagar 1827ñ77. Ed. (Vols IñII) H. S. Collin and C. J. Schlyter;

(Vols IIIñXIII) C. J. Schlyter. 13 vols.
CIS I = Codex iuris Vestrogotici, . . . Westgˆta-lagen utgifven av H.

S. Collin och C. J. Schlyter [Facsimile edition with an addendum by Otto von Friesen, Our oldest manuscript in Old Swedish] 1976. Ed. Gˆsta Holm.

CIS II = Codex iuris Ostrogotici, . . . ÷stgˆta-lagen utgifven av H. S. Collin och C. J. Schlyter [Facsimile edition with addendum by the main part of Emil Olson, ÷stgˆtalagens 1300-talsfragment (reprint) and Carl Ivar StÂhle, De Liedgrenska fragmenten av ÷stgˆtalagens C-text (first print)] 1980. Ed. Gˆsta Holm and Carl Ivar StÂhle.

CIS III = Codex iuris Uplandici, . . . Upplands-lagen 1834. Ed. C. J. Schlyter.

CIS IV = Codex iuris Sudermannici, . . . Sˆdermanna-lagen 1838. Ed. C. J. Schlyter.

CIS V = Codex iuris Vestmannici, . . . Westmanna-lagen 1841. Ed. C. J. Schlyter.

CIS VI = Codex iuris Helsingici; Codicis iuris Smalandici pars de re ecclesiastica; et, Juris urbici codex antiquior. Helsinge-lagen; Kristnu-balken af SmÂlands-lagen; Bj‰rkˆa-r‰tten 1844. Ed. C. J. Schlyter.

CIS VIII = Codices iuris Visbyensis urbici et maritimi. Wisby stadslag och sjˆr‰tt 1853. Ed. C. J. Schlyter.

CIS IX = Codex iuris Scanici, . . . SkÂne-lagen 1859. Ed. C. J. Schlyter. CIS X = Codex iuris communis Sueciae Magnaeanus. Konung Magnus

Erikssons landslag 1862. Ed. C. J. Schlyter.
CIS XI = Codex iuris urbici Magnaeanus. Konung Magnus Erikssons

stadslag 1865. Ed. C. J. Schlyter.
CIS XII = Codex iuris communis Sueciae Christophorianus. Konung

Christoffers landslag 1869. Ed. C. J. Schlyter.
CISG = Glossarium ad corpus iuris sueo-gotorum antiqui. . . Ordbok

till samlingen af Sweriges gamla lagar 1877. Ed. C. J. Schlyter. (CIS XIII).

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS 225

CODEE = The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology 1986. Ed. T. F. Hoad.

C-V = Richard Cleasby and Gudbrand Vigfusson 1957 (2nd edn William A. Craigie). An Icelandic-English dictionary.

DD III = Diplomatarium Danicum (1340ñ1412) 1958ñ82. Ed. C. A. Christensen (and Herluf Nielsen for later volumes). RÊkke III, 9 vols. Delin, Carl 1909. Om o‰kta bˆrd samt om o‰kta barns r‰ttst‰llning

enligt ‰ldre svensk r‰tt.
Delin, Carl 1926. ëOm blodsh‰mnden och gˆtalagarnas straffbest‰m-

melser fˆr enkelt viljadrÂpí. In Skrifter till‰gnade Johan C. W. ThyrÈn vid hans avgÂng frÂn professors‰mbetet den 31 maj 1926, 238ñ305.

Delisle, M. LÈopold 1886. Notice sur des manuscrits du fonds libri conservÈs . . . la Laurentienne, . . . Florence.

DGL = Danmarks gamle Landskabslove med Kirkelovene 1933ñ61. Ed. Johs. Br ̄ndum-Nielsen and Poul Johs. J ̄rgensen. 8 vols and a supplement to vol. 4 edited by Eric Buus.

Dovring, Folke 1947. Attungen och marklandet: studier ˆver agrara fˆrhÂllanden i medeltidens Sverige.

DS = Diplomatarium Suecanum 1829ñ1995. Ed. John Gustaf Liljegren et al. 8 vols and 2 appendices.

DS I = Diplomatarium Suecanum 1829. Vol. I. Ed. John Gustaf Liljegren et al.

DS II = Diplomatarium Suecanum 1834, 1837. Vol. II. Ed. John Gustaf Liljegren.

DS Appendix 1 = Diplomatarium Svecanum appendix. Acta pontificum Svecica. Acta cameralia. Auspiciis archivi regni Sveciae 1936ñ 42. Vol. I. Ed. L. M. BÂÂth.

Edda = Edda: Die Lieder des Codex Regius nebst verwandten Denk- m‰lern I: Text 1962 (3rd edn, revised Hans Kuhn). Ed. Gustav Neckel. EidsL = Den Êldre Eidsivathings-Christenret 1846. Ed. R. Keyser

and P. A. Munch. (NGL 1, 373ñ406).
Ekelund, Samuel 1906. Studien ̧ber eine mitteldeutsche ‹bersetzung

des altgutnischen Rechtes. Akademische Abhandlung.
Eriks SjL1 = Eriks sjÊllandske Lov Text 1ñ2 1932. Ed. Peter Skautrup.

(DGL 5).
Erikskrˆnikan = Erikskrˆnikan enligt Cod. Holm. D2 1921 and 1963.

Ed. Rolf Pipping.
Erixon, Sigurd 1955. ëDen till fÂngstn‰ringarna knutna rˆrliga

bebyggelsení. In NK XIñXIIA, 124ñ35.

226

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Fabre and Duchesne 1910 = Honorius III, Pope [Cencio Savelli] 1910.

Le Liber Censuum de lí...glise Romaine. PubliÈ avec une prÈface et un commentaire par . . . P. Fabre . . . et L. Duchesne. (G. Mollat). Ed. Paul Fabre and Louis Duchesne. (Guillaume Mollat). 3 vols.

Falk, Hjalmar 1919. Altwestnordische Kleiderkunde: mit besonderer Ber ̧cksichtigung der Terminologie.

FL = Ett forn-svenskt legendarium: innehÂllande medeltids kloster- sagor om helgon, pÂfvar och kejsare ifrÂn det I:sta till det XIII:de Ârhundradet efter gamla handskrifter 1847ñ58, 1874. Ed. George Stephens. 3 vols.

Friesen, Otto von 1933. ëII De nordiska (yngre) runorna: 3 De svenska runinskrifternaí. In NK VI, 145ñ248.

Fritzner = Johan Fritzner 1883, 1891, 1896 (reprint 1954). Ordbog over det gamle norske sprog. Vols IñIII [Third volume includes íBemÊrkninger af Sophus Buggeí, 1101ñ1110]. Vol. IV: Finn H ̄dneb ̄ 1972. Ordbog over det gamle norske sprog af Dr. Johan Fritzner. Rettelser og tillegg.

FrostL = Den Êldre Frostathings-Lov 1846. Ed. R. Keyser and P. A. Munch. (NGL 1, 119ñ300).

G 351 = Inscription 351 in SnÊdal 2002, 87ñ88.
Gannholm, Tore 1994. Guta lagh med Gutasagan.
GArk = Gotl‰ndskt arkiv. Meddelanden frÂn fˆreningen Gotlands

fornv‰nner 1929ñ.
GGD = Guterlov og Gutersaga paa dansk 1910. Ed. Lis Jacobsen. Gigas, E. 1903, 1906, 1911ñ15. Katalog over Det store kongelige

Bibliotheks Haandskrifter vedr ̄rende Norden, sÊrlig Danmark. 3

vols.
G-L = Guta-Lagh das ist: Der Insel Gothland altes Rechtsbuch 1818.

Ed. Karl Schildener.
GLGS = Guta lag och Guta saga j‰mte ordbok 1905-07. Ed. Hugo

Pipping.
GO = Gotl‰ndsk ordbok pÂ grundval av C. och P. A. S‰ves samlingar

1918ñ40, 1941ñ45 (facsimile reprint in 1991). Ed. G. Danell (añ

ba), A. Schagerstrˆm (beñben) and Herbert Gustavson. 2 vols. Gothlandz-Laghen = Gothlandz-Laghen pÂ gammal Gˆthiska 1687.

Ed. Johan Hadorph.
Gr·g·s = Gr·g·s: IslÊndernes Lovbog i Fristatens Tid udgivet efter

det Kongelige Bibliotheks Haandskrift 1852ñ70. Tr. into Danish

and ed. Vilhj·lmur Finsen. 2 vols.
Grieg, Sigurd 1943a. ëSkjoldene i middelalderení. In NK XIIB, 67ñ89.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS 227

Grieg, Sigurd 1943b. ëHugg- og st ̄tvÂpen fra middelalderení. In NK XIIB, 90ñ133.

Gr ̄nbech, Vilhelm Peter 1955. Vor folkeÊt i oldtiden. 2 vols (new edition).

GS = Guta saga. The History of the Gotlanders 1999. Ed. and trans. Christine Peel.

GU = S‰ve, Carl 1859. Gutniska urkunder: Guta lag, Guta saga och Gotlands runinskrifter sprÂkligt behandlade. Academisk afhandling. GulKrR = Den nyere Gulathings Christenret 1848. Ed. R. Keyser

and P. A. Munch. (NGL 2, 306ñ38.)
GulL = Den Êldre Gulathings-Lov 1846. Ed. R. Keyser and P. A.

Munch. (NGL 1, 1ñ118.)
GulL supp. = Supplement to Gulathings-Lov 1848. Ed. R. Keyser

and P. A. Munch. (NGL 2, 493ñ523.)
Gustavson, Herbert 1940ñ42, 1948. GutamÂlet: en historisk-deskriptiv

ˆversikt. 2 vols.
GÊdeken, Poul 1934. Retsbrudet og Reaktionen derimod i gammel-

dansk og germansk Ret.
Hafstrˆm, Gerhard 1949. Ledung och marklandsindelning. Hafstrˆm, Gerhard 1970 (4th revised edn). Land och lag.
Hald, Kristian 1975. ëTre ord fra Gutalagení. In Nordiske studier.

Festskrift til Chr. WestergÂrd-Nielsen pÂ 65-Ârsdagen den 24.

november 1975, 53ñ58.
Hammerich, Louis Leonor 1941. Clamor: eine rechtsgeschichtliche

Studie.
Hammerich, Louis Leonor 1959. ëWas ist germanische Rechts-

geschichte?í Saga och sed. Kungl. Gustav Adolfs Akademiens Ârsbok,

177ñ99.
HansUB I = Hansisches Urkundenbuch 1876ñ1916. Vol. 1 of 11.

Ed. Konstantin Hˆhlbaum et al.
Harrison, Dick 2002. Jarlens sekel. En ber‰ttelse om 1200-talets Sverige. Hasselberg, Gˆsta 1953. Studier rˆrande Visby stadslag och dess

k‰llor.
Hauberg, P. 1891. ëGullands myntvÊsení. Aarb ̄ger for nordisk

Oldkyndighed og Historie 26 (II rÊkke, 6 bind), 1ñ72.
Hayes, M. Horace 1968 (16th revised edn). Veterinary Notes for Horse Owners. A manual of horse medicine and surgery. Revised

by J. F. Donald Tutt.
HBU = Heliga Birgittas Uppenbarelser efter gamla handskrifter 1857ñ

98, 1860, 1861, 1862, 1883ñ84. Ed. G. E. Klemming. 5 vols.

228

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Hegel, Karl 1891. St‰dte und Gilden der germanischen Vˆlker im Mittelalter. 2 vols.

Heiðreks saga = The saga of King Heidrek the Wise: Saga Heiðreks konungs ins vitra 1960. Ed. and trans. Christopher Tolkien.

Hellquist, Elof 1980 (3rd edn). Svensk etymologisk ordbok. Hellsten, Nils E. 1943. ëF‰ktning i norden under forntid och medeltidí.

In NK XIIB, 173ñ92.
Hemmer, Ragnar 1928. Studier rˆrande straffutm‰tningen i medeltida

svensk r‰tt.
Hemmer, Ragnar 1945. ëHemfridens lokala utstr‰ckning enligt svensk

landskapsr‰ttí. Svensk juristtidning 30, 232ñ58.
Hemmer, Ragnar 1960. ëRecension av Per-Edwin WallÈn: Die Klage

gegen den Toten im nordgermanischen Rechtí. Tidskrift utgiven

av Juridiska fˆreningen i Finland (FJFT) 96:4, 186ñ94. Heurgren, Paul 1925. Husdjuren i nordisk folktro.
Hildebrand, Hans 1879ñ94, 1884ñ98, 1898ñ1903, 1953. Sveriges

medeltid: kulturhistorisk skildring. 4 vols (Vol. 4 is an index edited

by Sven Tunberg).
Hj‰rne, Erland 1929. ëVederlag och sjˆv‰sen. Ett bidrag till det danska

statsskickets ‰ldsta historiaí. NoB 17, 83ñ116.
Hj‰rne, Erland 1947. ëRoden. Upphovet och namnet. Om rÂdet och

jarlení. NoB 35, 1ñ96.
Hkr = Snorri Sturluson 1941, 1945, 1951. Heimskringla. Ed. Bjarni

Aðalbjarnarson. 3 vols. ÕF XXVIñXXVIII.
Holmb‰ck, Åke 1919. ƒtten och arvet enligt Sveriges medeltidslagar. Holmb‰ck, Åke 1920. ëStudier ˆver de svenska allm‰nningarnas

historia. 1. R‰ttsreglerna fˆr intaga av jord vid den fasta bos‰tt- ningen. Uppkomsten av s‰rskilda slag av allm‰nningarí. Uppsala universitets Ârsskrift. Juridik 1, 1ñ34.

HRSH = Handlingar rˆrande Skandinaviens historia (From vol. 11 Nya handlingar rˆrande Skandinaviens historia and renumbered from 1) 1816ñ60, 1865. 40 vols plus an index.

HRSH29 = Nya handlingar rˆrande Skandinaviens historia 1848. Vol. 29 (19).

ÕF = Õslenzk fornrit 1933ñ.
Ihre, Johannes 1769. Glossarium Suiogothicum. 2 vols.
ÕO = ¡sgeir Blˆndal Magn ̇sson 1989. Õslensk orðsifjabÛk.
Iuul, Stig 1940. FÊllig og Hovedlod.
Jansson, Sam Owen 1936. ëMÂtt, mÂl och vikt i Sverige till 1500-

talets mittí. In NK XXX, 1ñ57.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS 229

Jansson, Valter 1935. ëRunsten frÂn Bro socken, Gotlandí. Acta Philologica Scandinavica 10, 1ñ13.

JL1 = Jyske Lov Text 1: NkS 295 8vo 1933. Ed. Peter Skautrup. (DGL 2). KL = Kulturhistoriskt lexikon fˆr nordisk medeltid 1956ñ78. 22 vols. Kock, Axel 1895. ëStudier i fornnordisk grammatikí. Arkiv fˆr nordisk

filologi 11 (ny fˆljd 7), 117ñ53.
Kock, Axel 1904. ëBidrag till nordisk ordforskningí. Arkiv fˆr nordisk

filologi 20 (ny fˆljd 16), 44ñ75.
Kock, Axel 1912. ëEtymologisk belysning av nÂgra nordiska ord

och uttryckí. Arkiv fˆr nordisk filologi 28 (ny fˆljd 24), 167ñ218. Kock, Axel 1918. ëBelysning av forndanska och forngutniska ordí. In Studier tillegnade Esaias TegnÈr den 13. januari 1918, 355ñ68. Kock, Ebbe 1926. Om hemfˆljd (fˆrtida arv) i svensk r‰tt t.o.m. 1734

Ârs lag.
Kristnisaga = Kristnisaga. In Kristnisaga. fi·ttr fiorvalds ens vÌðfÜrla.

fi·ttr Isleifs biskups Gizurarsonar. Hungrvaka 1905. Ed. B. Kahle. Larson, Laurence M. 1935. The Earliest Norwegian Laws.
Laxdúla saga 1944. ÕF V. Ed. Einar ”l. Sveinsson.
LEI = Laws of early Iceland, Gr·g·s: the Codex Regius of Gr·g·s

with material from other manuscripts 1980, 2000. Tr. and ed. Andrew

Dennis, Peter Foote, Richard Perkins. 2 vols.
Lemke, Otto Wilhelm 1868. Visby stifts herdaminne, efter mestadels

otryckta k‰llor utarbetadt.
LG = Lex Gotlandiae svecice et germanice e codicibus B 64 et B 65

Bibl. Reg. Holm. Suecice et Britannice praefatus 1945. Ed. Elias

WessÈn. (CCS V).
LidÈn, Evald 1892. ëSm‰rre sprÂkhistoriska bidragí. In Uppsalastudier,

79ñ96.
LidÈn, Evald 1911. ëOm nÂgra fornsvenska lagordí. Arkiv fˆr nordisk

filologi 27 (ny fˆljd 23), 259ñ85.
Lilienberg, V. E. 1908. Om svenska mynt och myntv‰rden. (Offprint

of Fˆredrag i Numismatiska klubben den 4. dec. 1907.) Lindkvist, Thomas 1989. ëMedeltidens lagar. [Review of Sveriges medeltidslagar. Europeisk r‰ttstradition i politisk omvandling by Elsa Sjˆholm]í. Svensk historisk tidskrift 109; 51 (2: e fˆljd), 413ñ20. Lindstrˆm, G. 1892, 1895. Anteckningar om Gotlands medeltid. 2

vols.
Lithberg, Nils and WessÈn, Elias 1939. Den gotl‰ndska runkalendern. LÂle = 1889ñ94; 1891ñ92. ÷stnordiska och latinska medeltids-

ordsprÂk. Peder LÂles ordsprÂk och en motsvarande svensk samling.

230

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Ed. (Vol. I) Axel Kock and Carl af Petersens, (Vol. II) Axel Kock.

2 vols.
L‰ffler, Leopold Fredrik Alexander 1878. ëBidrag till svensk sprÂk-

historiaí. Antiqvarisk tidskrift fˆr Sverige 5, 216ñ94 (1ñ79 in the

s‰rtryck).
Lˆnnroth, Eric 1940. ëStatsmakt och statsfinans i det medeltida Sverige:

studier ˆver skattev‰sen och l‰nsfˆrvaltningí. Gˆteborgs hˆgskolas

Ârsskrift 46:3.
Mau, Jens Christian Eduard Theodor 1879. Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat,

eller Ordsprog, SkjÊmtesprog, Rimsprog, Mundheld, Talemaader,

Tankesprog. 2 vols.
Maurer, Konrad 1878. Udsigt over de nordgermaniske Retskilders

Historie.
MD = Svenska medeltids dikter och rim 1881ñ82. Ed. G. E. Klemming. MELLNT = Magnus Erikssons landslag i nusvensk tolkning 1962.

Ed. Åke Holmb‰ck and Elias WessÈn.
MEStLNT = Magnus Erikssons stadslag i nusvensk tolkning 1966.

Ed. Åke Holmb‰ck and Elias WessÈn.
Mitchell, Stephen A. 1984. ëOn the composition and function of

Guta Sagaí. Arkiv fˆr nordisk filologi 99, 151ñ74.
MLBL = Den nyere Bylov (Magnus lagab ̄ters bylag) 1848. Ed. R.

Keyser and P. A. Munch. (NGL 2, 179ñ290).
MLLL = Den nyere Landslov (Magnus lagab ̄ters landslag) 1848.

Ed. R. Keyser and P. A. Munch. (NGL 2, 1ñ178).
Mogk, E. 1909. ëDie Menschenopfer bei den Germanení. Abhand-

lungen der philologisch-historischen Klasse der kˆniglich

s‰chsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften 57, Part 17, 601ñ44. MRL = Medieval Russian laws 1979. Tr. George Vernadsky. Munktell, Henrik 1939. ëTortyren i svensk r‰ttshistoriaí. Lychnos.

L‰rdomshistoriska samfundets Ârsbok, 102ñ35.
NevÈus, Clara 1974. Tr‰larna i landskapslagarnas samh‰lle. Danmark

och Sverige.
NGL = Norges gamle love indtil 1387 1846ñ95. Ed. Rudolph Keyser

and Peter Andreas Munch. 5 vols.
NK = Nordisk kultur 1931ñ56. 32 vols.
NK VI = Runorna 1933. Ed. Otto von Friesen.
NK VIII: A = Litteraturhistoria: Danmark, Finland och Sverige 1943.

Ed. Sigurður Nordal.
NK XI/XII: A = FÂngst, jakt och fiske 1955. Ed. Sigurd Erixon. NK XII: B = Vapen / Vaaben 1943. Ed. Bengt Thordeman.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS 231

NK XXIX = M ̄nt 1936. Ed. Svend AakjÊr.
NK XXX = Maal og vÊgt 1936. Ed. Svend AakjÊr.
NordÈn, Arthur 1931. ëEtt r‰ttsdokument frÂn en fornsvensk offer-

lundí. Fornv‰nnen 26, 330ñ51.
Nordstrˆm, Johan Jacob 1839ñ40. Bidrag till den svenska samh‰lls-

fˆrfattningens historia. 2 vols.
Noreen, Adolf 1894. Abriss der urgermanischen Lautlehre mit beson-

derer R ̧cksicht auf die nordischen Sprachen zum Gebrauch bei

akademischen Vorlesungen.
Noreen, Adolf 1897. Svenska etymologier.
Ohlmarks, Åke 1976. De svenska landskapslagarna i komplett ˆver-

s‰ttning, med anm‰rkningar och fˆrklaringar.
”l·fs saga helga 1945. ÕF XXVII. Ed. Bjarni Aðalbjarnarson. ”lafur HalldÛrsson 1990. ëfivÌ fl ̋gur kr·kan vÌðaí. In GrettisfÊrsla.

Safn ritgerða eftir ”laf HalldÛrsson gefið ̇t · sjˆtugsafmÊli hans

18. aprÌl 1990, 111ñ34.
Olsen, Olaf 1965. ëH ̄rg, hov og kirke: historiske og arkÊologiske

vikingetidsstudierí. Aarb ̄ger for nordisk oldkyndighed og historie. Olsson. Ingemar 1976. Gotlands stavgardaróen ortnamnsstudie. Olsson, Ingemar 1992. ëStavgardsproblemetó‰nnu en gÂngí. Forn-

v‰nnen 87, 91ñ97.
Orosius = The Old English Orosius 1980. Ed. Janet Bately.
OSMS = Sˆderwall, K. F. 1884ñ90, 1891ñ1918, 1953, 1953ñ73. Ordbok ˆfver

svenska medeltids-sprÂket. 4 vols (vols 3 and 4 supplements edited

by K. F. Sˆderwall, W. Åkerlund, K. G. Ljunggren and E. WessÈn). Pernler, Sven-Erik 1977. Gotlands medeltida kyrkolivóbiskop och prostar. En kyrkor‰ttslig studie. Mit einer deutschen Zusammen-

fassung.
Pipping, Hugo 1901. Gotl‰ndska studier.
Pipping, Hugo 1904. ëNya gotl‰ndska studierí. Gˆteborgs hˆgskolas

Ârsskrift 10, 3ñ24.
Pipping, Rolf 1926. Kommentar till Erikskrˆnikan. (Skrifter utgivna

av svenska litteraturs‰llskapet i Finland 187).
Pipping, Rolf 1938; 1954; 1960; 1962; 1963. ëOrdsprÂksstudier Iñ

IIí. Studier i nordisk filologi 28; 43; 50; 52; 53.
PRF = Privilegier, resolutioner och fˆrordningar fˆr Sveriges st‰der

1927ñ85. Ed. (Vol. I) Nils Herlitz. 6 vols.
Rehfeldt, Bernhard 1942. Todesstrafen und Bekehrungsgeschichte. Zur

Rechts- und Religionsgeschichte der germanischen Hinrichtungs- br‰uche.

232

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Rietz, Johan Ernst 1862ñ67, 1955. Svenskt dialekt-lexikon. Ordbok ˆfver svenska allmogesprÂket.

RS3 = R‰ttshistoriska studier 1969. Ed. Kjell ƒ. ModÈer. (Skrifter utgivna av Institutet fˆr R‰ttshistorisk Forskning grundat av Gustav och Carin Olin. Serien II 3).

Ruthstrˆm, Bo 2002. Land och fÊ. Strukturellt-r‰ttsfilologiska studier i fornnordiskt lagsprÂk ˆver beteckningar fˆr egendom i allm‰n- het med underkategorier.

Rydqvist, Johan Erik 1850ñ83. Svenska sprÂkets lagar. 6 vols. Sandstrˆm, J. 1927. ëMarkland och bˆrdsr‰tt: till frÂgan om marklands- uppskattningens uppkomst i svea-landskapení. Upplands fornminnes-

fˆrenings tidskrift 10, Bilaga 3.
Sch ̧ck, Adolf 1945. ëGotlands politiska historia intill Brˆmsebro-

fredení. In BoG I, 178ñ225.
Schwerin, C. von 1941. ë[Review of] T. Wennstrˆmís Brott och bˆterí.

Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung f ̧r Rechtsgeschichte Germanistische

(Romanistische, Kanonistische) Abteilung 61, 480ñ85.
SD = Svenskt diplomatarium frÂn och med Âr 1401 1875ñ1904. Ed.

Carl Silfverstolpe and K. H. Karlsson. 4 vols.
Siltberg, Tryggve 2005. ëGotlands landskapssigill och ‰ldre judiciella

sigillí. In Landsarkivet i Visby 1905ñ2005. Ed. Tommy Sundberg,

277ñ370.
Sjˆberg, Sigfrid 1969. ëOm tingstider under landskapslagarnas och

landslagarnas tid fˆre 1614í. In RS3, 49ñ103.
Sjˆholm, Elsa 1976. Gesetze als Quellen mittelalterlicher Geschichte

des Nordens.
SkL = SkÂnske Lov 1933. Ed. Svend AakjÊr and Erik Kroman. (DGL

1:1, 1ñ199).
SkL Add = SkÂnske Lov: TillÊg til SkÂnske Lov 1933. Ed. Svend AakjÊr

and Erik Kroman. (DGL 1:2, 719ñ818).
SkLAS = SkÂnske Lov: Andreas Sunes ̄ns parafrase, SkÂnske Kirkelov

m. m. 1933. Ed. Svend AakjÊr and Erik Kroman. (DGL 1:2, 467ñ667). Skov, Sigvard 1946. ëAnders Suneson og Guterlovení. In Festskrift til Erik Arup: den 22. november 1946. Ed. Astrid Friis and Albert

Olsen, 107ñ17.
SL = Svenska landskapslagar tolkade och fˆrklarade fˆr nutidens

svenskar 1933ñ46; reprint 1979. Ed. Åke Holmb‰ck and Elias

WessÈn. 5 vols.
SL I = ÷stgˆtalagen och Upplandslagen 1933; reprint 1979. Ed.

Åke Holmb‰ck and Elias WessÈn.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS 233

SL II = Dalalagen och V‰stmannalagen 1936; reprint 1979. Ed. Åke Holmb‰ck and Elias WessÈn.

SL III = Sˆdermannalagen och H‰lsingelagen 1940; reprint 1979. Ed. Åke Holmb‰ck and Elias WessÈn.

SL IV = SkÂnelagen och Gutalagen 1943; reprint 1979. Ed. Åke Holmb‰ck and Elias WessÈn.

SL V = ƒldre v‰stgˆtalagen, Yngre v‰stgˆtalagen 1946; reprint 1979. Ed. Åke Holmb‰ck and Elias WessÈn.

SND = Scottish national dictionary 1929ñ76. 10 vols.
SnÊdal, Thorgunn 2002. Medan v‰rlden vakar: studier i de gotl‰ndska runinskrifternas sprÂk och kronologi = While the world wakes: studies in the language and chronology of the runic inscriptions

of Gotland.
Spegel = Haquin Spegel 1901. Rudera gothlandica. Kort beskrivning

om then ̄ ̄n Gothland. Anno 1683. Ed. O. v. Wennersten.
SRS = Scriptores rerum svecicarum medii Êvi 1818, 1871, 1876. Ed. E. M. Fant, E. G. Geijer, J. H. Schrˆder and Claudius Annerstedt. 3 vols. Stadga = Stadga fˆr S. Karins Gille i Bjˆrke socken pÂ Gotland 1443. In SmÂstycken pÂ fornsvenska 1868ñ81. Ed. G. E. Klemming. Steffen, Richard 1943. Gotlands administrativa, r‰ttsliga och kyrkliga

organisation frÂn ‰ldsta tider till Âr 1645.
Steffen, Richard 1945. ëGotlands indelning och organisationí. In BoG

I, 226ñ53.
Steinnes, Asgaur 1936. ëMÂl, vekt og verderekning i Noregí. In NK

XXX, 84ñ154.
STFM = Sveriges traktater med fr‰mmande magter jemte andra dit

hˆrande handlingar 1877ñ1934. Ed. Olof Simon Rydberg. 15 vols. Strˆm, Folke 1942. On the sacral origin of the Germanic death

penalties. Tr. Donald Burton.
Strˆmb‰ck, Dag 1942. ëHade de germanska dˆdsstraffen sakralt ursprung?í

Saga och sed. Kungl. Gustav Adolfs Akademiens Ârsbok, 51ñ69. STUAGNL = Samfund til udgivelse af gammel nordisk litteratur 1880ñ

1976. Vols 1ñ67.
Styffe, Carl Gustaf 1864. Framst‰llning af de sÂ kallade grund-

regalernas uppkomst och till‰mpning i Sverige intill slutet af sextonde Ârhundradet med anledning af den uppdiktade ber‰ttelsen om ett riksdagsbeslut pÂ Helgeandsholmen Âr 1282.

Sˆderberg, Bengt G. 1956. ëDen gutniska bonderepublikení. In FrÂn farmannabonde till fˆreningsbonde. Ed. Valton Johansson, 1ñ16. Sˆderwall, K. F. 1870. Hufvudepokerna af svenska sprÂkets utbildning.

234

THE LAW OF THE GOTLANDERS

Tacitus, Cornelius 1914. De vita Iulii Agricolae, De origine et moribus Germanorum. Ed. J. H. Sleeman.

Tamm, Fredrik August 1883ñ84. ëGermanska sprÂk. [Review of J. E. Rydqvist. 1883. Svenska sprÂkets lagar. Kritisk afhandling. Volume 6. Ed. K. F. Sˆderwall]í. Nordisk revy. Tidning fˆr vetenskaplig kritik och universitetsangel‰genheter 1, No 10, 310ñ11.

Thomsen, Wilh. 1870. ‹ber den Einfluss der germanischen Sprachen auf die finnisch-lappischen: eine sprachgeschichtliche Unter- suchung.

Thomson, Arthur 1972. I stocken. Studier i stockstraffets historia. Thordeman, Bengt Johan NerÈn 1936. ëSveriges medeltidsmyntí. In

NK XXIX, 1ñ92.
Thulin, Gabriel 1911. Historisk utveckling af den svenska skifteslag-

stiftningen med s‰rskildt afseende Â frÂgan om delningsgrund vid

skifte.
Tunberg, Sven August Daniel 1911. Studier rˆrande Skandinaviens

‰ldsta politiska indelning.
Tunberg, Sven August Daniel 1913. ëEn romersk k‰lla om Norden

vid 1100-talets bˆrjaní. SprÂkvetenskapliga s‰llskapets i Uppsala fˆrhandlingar. Bil. B; F. in Uppsala Universitets Ârsskrift. Filosofi sprÂkvetenskap och historiska vetenskaper 1, 14ñ34; 96ñ98.

U 614 = Inscription 614 in UR3. (Sveriges runinskrifter 8). Uppsalastudier = Uppsalastudier tillegnade Sophus Bugge 1892. UR = Upplands runinskrifter 1940ñ43; 1943ñ46; 1949ñ51; 1953ñ58.

Ed. Elias WessÈn and Sven B. F. Jansson. (Sveriges runinskrifter 6ñ9.) UR3 = Upplands runinskrifter 1949ñ51. Ed. Elias WessÈn and Sven

B. F. Jansson. (Sveriges runinskrifter 8).
Vries, Jan de 1956ñ57. Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte. 2 vols. Wadstein, Elis 1890ñ92. ëRecension: Ordbˆjning i V‰stmannalagen

I. Substantivets bˆjning. Akademisk afhandling fˆr vinnande af filosofisk doktorsgrad af Karl K:son Siljestrand. Linkˆping 1890í. Nordisk Tidskrift for Filologi 10 (Ny RÊkke), 226ñ33.

Wadstein, Elis 1894ñ95. ëFˆrklaringar och anm‰rkningar till forn- nordiska lagarí. Nordisk Tidsskrift for Filologi 3 (Tredie RÊkke), 1ñ16. WallÈn, Per-Edwin 1958. Die Klage gegen den Toten im nord-

germanischen Recht.
Wennstrˆm, Torsten 1931. Studier ˆver bˆter och myntv‰rden i V‰st-

gˆtalagarna.
Wennstrˆm, Torsten 1936. Tjuvnad och fornÊmi: r‰ttsfilologiska

studier i svenska landskapslagar.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS 235

Wennstrˆm, Torsten 1940. Brott och bˆter: r‰ttsfilologiska studier i svenska landskapslagar.

Wennstrˆm, Torsten 1946. LagsprÂk och lagtexter: r‰ttsfilologiska studier ˆver medeltida svenska lagar.

WessÈn, Elias 1924. ëStudier till Sveriges hedna mytologi och forn- historiaí. Uppsala universitets Ârsskrift. Filosofi, sprÂkvetenskap och historiska vetenskaper 6, 1ñ198.

WessÈn, Elias 1932. ëOm nordiska inbyggarnamní. In Germanska namnstudier till‰gnade Evald LidÈn den 3 oktober 1932, 71ñ89. WessÈn, Elias 1945. ëGutasagan och Gotlands kristnandeí. In BoG I,

153ñ64.
Westholm, Gun 2007. Visby 1361 invasionen.
Westman, Karl Gustaf 1902/1905. ëOm delaktighet i drÂp enligt de

svenska landskapslagarnaí. Antiqvarisk tidskrift fˆr Sverige 17: 2,

1ñ53.
Westman, Karl Gustaf 1912a. Den svenska n‰mnden. Dess uppkomst

och utveckling. Vol. 1.
Westman, Karl Gustaf 1912b. De svenska r‰ttsk‰llornas historia:

fˆrel‰sningar.
Westman, Karl Gustaf 1944. ëMagiskt rop i svensk folktro och i

forntidsr‰ttení. Saga och sed. Kungl. Gustav Adolfs Akademiens

Ârsbok, 52ñ56.
Wilda, Wilhelm Eduard 1960 (facsimile of 1842 edn). Geschichte

des deutschen Strafrechts I. Das Strafrecht der Germanen. Wildte, Fridolf 1926. ëTingsplatserna i Sverige under fˆrhistorisk

tid och medeltidí. Fornv‰nnen 21, 211ñ30.
Wildte, Fridolf 1931. ëV‰stergˆtlands medeltida tingst‰llení. Rig.

Tidskrift utgiven av Fˆreningen fˆr svensk kulturhistoria 14, 174ñ84. Wildte, Fridolf 1933ñ34. ë÷stergˆtlands tingst‰llen fˆre Âr 1600í. Meddelande frÂn ÷stergˆtlands Fornminnes- och Museifˆrening,

171ñ88.
Wimmer, Ludvig Frans Adalbert 1887. D ̄befonten i Åkirkeby kirke. Yrwing, Hugo Nilsson 1940. Gotland under ‰ldre medeltiden: Studier

i baltisk-hanseatisk historia.
Yrwing, Hugo Nilsson 1963. ëBiskop Bengts brev fˆr Mariakyrkan i

Visbyí. In Historia kring Gotland. Ed. Å. G. Sjˆberg, 71ñ99. Yrwing, Hugo Nilsson 1978. Gotlands medeltid.