envious of one another; governors who fly at the first shout of battle.” This weak and vicious king had the felicity to convert his friends into enemies at the very time he most needed their assistance. In 1002 he married the princess Emma of Normandy; but his behaviour to her was so grossly offensive, so brutal, that her father, duke Richard I., joined in making him still more contemptible by imprisoning or killing his subjects who happened to pass through Normandy. The pirates of Sweyn soon returned to consummate their work. In 1006 a heavy sum was paid them; the following year they demanded an equal sum, and declared that, in future, it must be annually paid by way of tribute. Some feeble efforts were made to defend the country; but the leaders of the fleet which had been raised turned their arms against one another. Thus fell the hopes of the nation, which prepared its neck for the most galling yoke that had ever afflicted it.[113]
|1010.|
In the year 1010 the Danes were in possession of sixteen English counties, and they exacted forty-eight thousand pounds for sparing the rest. But such moderation was not in their policy; and no sooner was the money theirs, than their atrocities recommenced. The condition of Kent—which was that of half England—is more graphically described by the biographer of St. Elphege, archbishop of Canterbury, than by all the chronicles of the period. When that city was first besieged, there was some prospect of a defence; the walls were strong, and there were many strong arms eager to defend their cathedral, their bishop, their wives and children. But a traitor (and England was full of them) set fire to about twenty different houses: to extinguish the flames many of the defenders left their posts; one of the gates was broken open, and the pirates rushed into the city, while the flames spread on every side. The men were cut down in the streets, or they were thrown into the devouring fire; women were violated and speared; children were tossed like balls from the points of the lances. As a last resource, St. Elphege and his clergy had taken refuge in the cathedral; but he could not hear of these excesses without endeavouring to stop them. Rushing from the sacred pile into the midst of the pirates, he exclaimed, “Spare the city! at least, if you are men, spare the helplessness of infancy! Turn your weapons against me, only, who have always condemned your crimes!” They gagged him, bound him, and led him to witness the fate of his church, to which thousands of the people had now resorted in the vain hope that its sanctity would impress even pagans. It was soon on fire; the smoke ascended in clouds; the flames spread; and as the unfortunate people, forced by the burning liquid lead, issued from the building, they were cut down by the ferocious pirates. Of eight thousand inhabitants, about a tenth of the number were spared, in the hope of ransom; and such as were unable or unwilling to pay it were put to a cruel death. Among them was St. Elphege, who might have raised the sum demanded for him—three thousand pieces of gold—had he signed an order to the churches of his diocese to pay the money from their treasuries. But he refused to allow that which had been raised for the poor to be expended on him: he would not, he said, purchase life on terms so disgraceful. He who, throughout life, had begged for the indigent, would not be the means of plundering them in his old age. After being detained for some time, kept in a loathsome dungeon, starved, tormented, beaten, in the view of subduing his inflexibility, he was martyred, his last ejaculations being for his flock, his country, his very enemies.[114]
|1013 to 1014.|
In 1013 Sweyn arrived, with new reinforcements, to take possession of the whole island. On landing in the north, the earl of Northumberland and the whole province submitted. Proceeding to the south, Oxford, Winchester, Bath, with all the towns of the west, and all the great thanes, sent in their allegiance. For some time London held out, because Ethelred was in it; but that doughty hero, having ascertained that duke Richard of Normandy would receive him for the sake of his wife, precipitately fled to Rouen, leaving his capital and kingdom in the hands of the invaders. Sweyn was king of England; and he used the title, though, owing to the short residue of his life, he was not crowned. That he exercised all the rights of sovereignty, fully as the Saxon kings had ever done, is admitted by our own historians. His reign is said to have been one of severe exaction. He died at Gainsborough in one year after his elevation, under circumstances of suspicion. The northern annalists declare that he was killed by prince Edward, afterwards the Confessor; but no English authority confirms the report. This was not the work of Edward; but it might be that of Edmund Ironside.[115]
Many years before his death Sweyn probably reverted to Christianity, and persevered in it unto his death. But whether pagan or Christian, he was a ferocious warrior and a stern king. With natural talents of a high order, with indomitable courage, with unwearied activity, he obtained advantages which none of his predecessors had enjoyed. We have already alluded to the diversion which his son, with Olaf Trygveson, king of Norway, created in favour of England. After the death of that hero (1000), he seized a portion of Norway, while the Swedish king seized another; and this augmentation of his power no doubt rendered him more able to conquer England.[116]
CHAP. II.
SWEDEN.
A.C. 70 to A.D. 1001.
UNCERTAINTY AND CONTRADICTION IN THE CHRONOLOGICAL SERIES OF KINGS EXPLAINED BY THE FACT THAT THE GOTHS AND SWIONES WERE UNDER DISTINCT RULERS—HENCE THEIR CONFUSION.—THE YNGLINGS, OR SACRED FAMILY OF ODIN, REIGN AT UPSAL.—KINGS OF THAT RACE: ODIN—NIORD—FREYR—FREYA—FIOLNER—SWEGDIR—VANLAND—VISBUR—DOMALD—DOMAR—DYGVE—DAG—AGNE, ETC.—FATE OF THE PRINCES OF THIS HOUSE, OF WHOM MOST DIE TRAGICALLY.—LEGEND OF AUN THE OLD.—INGIALD ILLRADA.—CONQUEST OF SWEDEN BY IVAR VIDFADME.—GOTHIC KINGS FROM GYLFO TO IVAR VIDFADME.—KINGS OF THE SWEDES AND THE GOTHS.
In the Introduction to the present volume we have added the tabular list of kings by archbishop Joannes Magnus, as illustrative of the difficulty which must accompany all researches into the ancient history of Sweden.[117] The exploits of those kings, their chronological order, their very names, rest under a deep cloud. Where, indeed, no two authors agree—where the names, not merely of two or three sovereigns, but of nearly one half, are as different as the actions ascribed to them—what can be inferred but this, that little dependence is to be placed on any one of them? Compare, for example, the list given by the archbishop with that which modern Swedish critics approve[118]; and what must be the reader’s surprise to find—110 in the former case, and 37 in the other; the names, too, for the most part, dissimilar as the number! If we take that given by the authors of our Universal History[119], we shall, indeed, have some approximation in respect to the number, but little in regard to the names, of the kings. Other lists might be produced equally contrasting with the one contained in the Norwegian authorities. Whence this diversity, which modern historians have pronounced to be hopelessly irreconcileable? It arises from a very simple cause. When the Swiones, the attendants of Odin—his companions from his Asiatic kingdom—arrived in the north, they found a Gothic tribe, the Gothones, under Gylfo their king, seated along the maritime coast, and extending to the centre of Sweden. How long this tribe had been settled there when the Swiones arrived would be vain to inquire. By what means Odin and his followers obtained a portion of the country, and established the seat of his new empire at Upsal, has been already related. Here, then, were two distinct tribes, the Gothones or Goths, and the Swiones or Swedes, to say nothing of the original tribes, or, at least, fragments of those tribes, who had been located in these regions many centuries before the arrival of the Goths. Now the kings whom Joannes Magnus, Torfœus, Loccenius, the authors of our Universal History, and other writers enumerate, were the kings of the Goths and Swedes, while those contained in the Landfedgatal, the Heimskringla, and other Icelandic authorities, were sovereigns of the Swedes only. That the two people, and, consequently, the districts which they inhabited, were for many centuries under distinct rulers, is one of the best ascertained facts of history. The former called themselves kings of the Goths, or of Gothland, only; the latter, now kings of the Swedes, now of Upsal. This distinction was not only observed from the very dawn of their history, but
