--- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, "Patricia"
<originalpatricia@...> wrote:

Ivarr the What??

> Good Grief
> Patricia

Exactly!

Llama Nom



P.S.
Theories I've heard are:

1. he had a disease
2. it was ironic, he had lots of bones
3. he was impotent
4. really legless (crippled?)

Now the sagas do say that he had no children "because of the way he
was: with no lust or love – but he wasn't short of cunning and
cruelty." (So that was alright...) Hann átti ekki barn, því at hann
var svá skapaðr, at honum fylgdi engi girnd né ást, en
eigi skorti hann spekt eða grimmd (Ragnarssonar þáttr). Or
according to The Longest saga of Olaf Tryggvason "it is said that he
didn´t have the desire for that, and it wasn´t in his nature" svá
segiz at hann hefði til þess enga fýst né eðli.

On the other hand, the more fantastically inclined Ragnars saga adds
the detail that he had gristle in place of bones (En sá sveinn var
beinlauss ok sem brjósk væri þar, sem bein skyldu vera.)--due to a
curse brought on by his father having TOO MUCH love & lust (!), and
was carried into battle on a shield, or on poles. Though the
earlier Ragnarssonar þáttr (Tale of Ragnar's Sons) has less
information, it does contain a verse in which Ivar implied that he
is handicapped and has to be carried into battle.

Question for Haukur: is the subjunctive 'væri' here implying "...or
so they say", "he is supposed to have had gristle", or something
like that?