ABSTRACT
This paper reconsiders Adam as a source for tenth-century Norwegian history, and argues that his account is unfairly overlooked. Adam’s account of Haccon princeps, commonly equated with Hákon jarl in the Norwegian and Icelandic historical traditions, is examined in detail and it is argued that it is essentially accurate that this Haccon was the first figure to wield power that could be perceived as royal in Norway – even if this Haccon is not accorded a royal title. This is set against the background of the understanding of levels of royal and sub-royal power in late pagan and Christianising North-western and North-central Europe in general. In addition, it is argued that a critical re-assessment of the value of different sources is needed, and that the dominant trend has been too harsh on Adam while too lenient on the Saga tradition.
