Читать книгу History of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway (Vol. 1&2) - S. A. Dunham - Страница 11

According to the Heimskringla, the oldest and best authority for Swedish history, when Odin arrived in the north he found a monarch named Gylfo in possession of the supreme power.^[138] Was this Gylfo of the Gothic or of the anterior race? This question cannot be answered. From one circumstance, viz., his alleged proficiency in magic science, we should infer that he was a Finn, were it not doubtful whether the Goths did not also cultivate this pretended science, and whether, from the facility of his intercourse with Odin, and from the locality which he occupied, he was not of a race kindred with that of the Swiones—one that had immigrated into these regions from Asiatic Scythia centuries, perhaps, before “this king of the Turks.” Gylfo is said to have ceded to the strangers a portion of his territory, and that they settled to the north of him. This statement, again, confirms the inference of his Gothic descent. However, from that day down to the permanent union of the two nations—the Goths and the Swedes—under one head (temporary unions had been frequently effected), the more southern people had their own king, their own government and laws. By what degrees the Swiar obtained the ascendancy over the Goths may be easily conjectured. The latter were, at an early period, induced to embrace the religion of the former, or, we should rather say, a modification of that religion; for that they, like the Norwegians, combined a few more ancient tenets with the faith of Odin, may be inferred from many passages. And with all due allowance for this circumstance, we cannot but feel surprise at the facility with which both Norwegians and Goths were brought to the temples of the new faith. This could scarcely be the result of force, since the Swiar do not appear to have been very numerous in comparison with the rest of the population. Like the Saxons in England; and the Scots in Ireland, and the Mohammedans in India, they were the dominant caste, and no doubt their individual valour was superior to that of the natives. Still, in the earliest Norwegian and Danish accounts of these remote transactions, we do not read of the physical so much as of the moral influence of Odin and his immediate successors. They might be numerous enough to obtain possession of any neighbouring province, or even to defeat the petty chiefs with which the country swarmed; but they would scarcely be sufficient to make both Goths and Norwegians embrace a new faith. Between temporal and religious domination there is a wide difference; and all history proves that men will fight more willingly, more perseveringly, for speculative opinions, than for the most substantial social advantages. The comparative ease with which Odin, or rather his immediate successors, thus forced the positive or modified observance of their religious system on a great population, has led some northern writers to assume that before his arrival another Odin had been there, the apostle of a kindred faith.^[139] But this assumption is gratuitous; we have no good reason for it; and even if we had, the question would still occur, “By what means did this former prophet procure the ascendancy of his religion?” There is but one mode of solving this difficulty, and this is hypothetical. Probably, as both Goths and Swedes—perhaps, too, a considerable portion of the older race—had come from the same Asiatic Scythia, there was between some of their religious opinions an affinity, if not an identity; and this affinity would naturally facilitate the progress of the new faith. If to this consideration we add the pomp with which the sacrifices were conducted—the splendour of the temple—the crowd of officiating priests, with the king at their head—the imposing solemnity of the scene—the alleged godlike descent of the pontiff chief—the reputation which all the Asser priests enjoyed for supernatural knowledge—we shall scarcely be surprised at the rapid progress of the Odinic worship. As a prophet, too, especially one so highly descended, Odin must have pretended to the gift of miracles, or, what is the same thing, to the power of effecting wonderful results by his knowledge of nature’s mysteries. This combination of circumstances must have imposed on the Goths, as on the Norwegian and other ancient tribes. It may account for the facility with which both nations embraced the new faith, and ultimately acknowledged even the temporal superiority of the Swiar. It is certain that as early as even the time of Tacitus, the latter were the dominant tribe; yet, as they occupied the sea-coast—the usual locality of the last comers—we may doubt whether they had been there above two centuries. But this superiority being of a moral, not of a physical nature, was often resisted by the Gothic kings, who did not hesitate to march on Upsal, to put the half divine pontiff to death, and to ascend his throne.^[140]

|A.C. 70 to A.D. 260.|

The names, succession, and chief exploits of these sacerdotal kings, from Odin to Ingiald Illrada, we have, thanks to the industry of Snorro, been able to lay before the reader. But over those of the royal Goths a cloud hangs which time can never remove. All that can now be done is, from Saxo Grammaticus and the Heimskringla itself, to reserve a few scattered names. Gylfo we have already mentioned; and from the alleged fact—which we have no reason to dispute—that Scania was previously ceded by Odin to his son Heimdal, the seat of Gylfo’s empire must have been in one of the Gothlands. He was followed by Frode and Sigtrug; the former, remarkable for his liberal presents to the great temple of Sigtuner; the latter, for his misfortunes. Gram, a Danish king (probably the ruler of Scania), having carried off the daughter of Sigtrug, a war followed, which proved fatal to the Gothic king, who was dethroned and slain. That he reigned in Gothland is expressly affirmed by Saxo Grammaticus^[141], who relates a graphic incident illustrative of ancient manners. Gram, says the Danish historian, had heard that the princess was affianced to a giant, and he resolved to rescue her from the humiliation; he therefore went into Gothia, and found the royal maiden, with some of her female train, washing at one of the rural streams. Of course she became the prize of the victor, and so did the Gothic kingdom. But Gram did not use his success with moderation; and by Swibdager, a king of Norway, he was slain in his turn.^[142] Swibdager was now the lord of three states—of Scania, Gothia, and his hereditary one; but the first he resigned to Guthrum, son of Gram. It was the lot of Swibdager to fall, untimely, by the hands of Hadding, another son of Gram.^[142] In his Gothic and Norwegian states he was succeeded by his son Asmund, who, desiring to avenge the death of the father, was also slain by Hadding. Uffo, the son of Asmund, succeeded to the quarrel, though not to the throne, of his two predecessors. That throne was in possession of Hadding; but he was able to raise forces and make a diversion, by landing on the coast of Scania (or, perhaps, Jutland), and forcing the Danish king to return to the defence of his dominions. As it was not Uffo’s design to risk a battle in a foreign state, he sailed for Gothland, and took possession of his hereditary dignity. But with the returning spring Hadding resumed his desire of conquest, and, with a considerable force, landed on the Gothic continent. His followers, however, were soon exhausted by hunger and fatigue; and in the ensuing battle he was signally defeated, and compelled to retreat into Denmark.^[143] Unable to accomplish the destruction of his enemy by force, Hadding had recourse to treachery: he sought an interview with Uffo, and removed that prince by assassination; but, according to the Danish account, he placed Hunding, the brother of Uffo, on the vacant throne. The Swedes, however, assert that it was their nation, not the Danes, who thus acted; and their statement is far more credible. Probably there was, as the former assert, a fierce war between the two; and when both found that no advantage was to be expected from it, they eagerly made peace, and were thenceforward more distinguished for their friendship than they had been for their animosity. In the fabulous spirit of the times, it is said that, when one of them heard of the other’s death, he killed himself through grief. We may, however, admit that they died within a short interval of each other. We may add, that this Hadding is not admitted into the list of Danish, that is, of Zealand kings, by the best critics; and that for his actions we are indebted to Saxo. Probably he did not reign at Ledra.^[144]

|About 260 to 448.|

Ragnar, the son of Uffo, succeeded to the throne of the Goths, but not until he had rescued it from the domination of his step-mother. His queen was Swanhita, sister of Frode, a king of Denmark; but this alliance did not preserve a good understanding between the two countries. Frode invaded Gothland, but perished in the expedition—not, observes Saxo, by the hands of the enemy, but through a fever, occasioned alike by the heat and the weight of his armour. On the death of Ragnar, the sceptre of the Goths was seized by Holward, or Hodbrod, who was a warlike prince. In his expedition to Denmark, which was then governed by Helge and Roe, he left the latter sovereign dead on the field. But he himself, after his return to Gothland, was mortally wounded by Helge, and his kingdom became the prize of the victor. But Attil I., the son of Hodbrod, by marrying the daughter of Helge, and, still more, by the bravery of the Goths, was raised to the throne. The issue of this marriage, Hoder, became, in the sequel, king of Scania, no less than of Gothland. This is the Hoder of whom Saxo—so absurd in his chronology—makes the contemporary and rival of Balder, the son of Odin.^[145] Ruric, the son of Hoder, was also monarch of both states. He, as we have before related, was the grandfather of Hamlet, through the marriage of his daughter with Horwendil, prince of Jutland.^[146] He governed Denmark through his viceroys, and always remained in Gothland; for this reason, he has been often omitted in the list of Danish kings. Of Attil II. we merely know that he was assassinated by a Danish emissary; of Hogmor and Hogrin, who reigned conjointly, that they perished in a battle with the Danes. But Alaric, their successor, appears to have been identical with Elrec, prince of the Swedes, the brother of Eric^[147]; and this conjecture is confirmed by the statement of the Swedish historians—that the Goths and Swedes were at this time united. Probably Elrec ruled one nation, Eric another. In the Swedish annals, too, Eric ranks as the brother and successor of Alaric;—a confusion of chronology common enough in the historians of this period. Halfdan (or Halden) succeeded, who was, probably, the Alf of Snorro.^[148] This conjecture, too, is strengthened by the statement of the same Norwegian authority, that Yngve and Alf shared the government of the Swedes. Both would scarcely reign at Upsal; and we have strong reason for inferring that, while Yngve held that throne, Alf, or Halfdan, reigned over the Goths. And there is another confirmation in the fact that, on the death of Alf, the two people obeyed different rulers. In the reigns of Siward, Eric, Halfdan II., Ragnald, Asmund, and Haquin (or Hako), we observe few points of coincidence between the history of the Goths and the Swedes: probably they were kings of the former people only, with the occasional superiority over Scania. But the name of Hako must not be dismissed without adverting to an incident which the author of Macbeth has admitted into the greatest of his dramas. Hako, resolved to avenge the death of his brothers who had been assassinated at the Danish court, descended with a strong armament on the coast of Zealand, and marched towards the residence of the Danish king. On his way, to avoid observation, he passed through the woods; and when the path diverged into the open plain, he ordered his men each to cut down a large branch, that the paucity of his followers might not be discovered. Great was the wonder of the sentinel, to see a forest approaching the royal fortress, and he immediately carried the information to the king. The latter inquired how far the moving wood was distant from the walls; and, being answered that it was near, he felt that his last hour was also at hand. Issuing from the fortress to meet the foe on the open plain, he met the fate which he had foreseen.^[149]

|448 to 623.|

We now approach historic ground. Egil Auniff, the next king of the Goths, is, beyond all doubt, Egil, the son of Aun, whose exploits we have recorded in a former page of this chapter.^[150] Those exploits are the same, both in the narration of Snorro, and in that of later historians of the country: the cause and the result were the same. Egil, therefore, was king of the Goths and the Swedes. The Gothar of the Swedish writers, the successor of Egil, is also the Ottar of Snorro: the circumstances of their lives are identical.^[151] Adel is the Adils, Ostan the Eystein, of the Heimskringla: in both histories, as the former was killed by the fall of his horse, so the latter was burned to death.^[152] The only difference in the relation is the circumstance that led to the death of Eystein; the Norwegian authority attributing it to Solve, a Jutish pirate; the Swedish, to the rebellion of a Gothland chief. The Ingvar of the Swedish writers is indisputably the Yngvar of Snorro; and the Asmund of the former is the Onund, or Braut-Onund of the latter. In this latter reign, we perceive the same encouragement of industry; but the death of the king is variously related. Snorro, as we have before related, attributes it to an avalanche^[153]; but the Swedish writers make him fall in battle against a body of rebels. Of the two next rulers mentioned by the Swedish writers—Siward and Hirvt—we have no mention in the annals of the Ynglings. The reason is, that they were kings of Gothland only, and, probably, dependent on the monarchs of Upsal: the latter, indeed, is expressly called the king of the Goths. Ingel, the next sovereign in the Swedish annals, is, beyond all doubt, the Ingiald Illrada of Snorro Sturleson, who was king of the Goths and the Swedes: his exploits, and tragical death, are the same.^[154]

We have thus brought down the contemporary monarchy of the Goths, from the century before Christ to the conquest of Sweden by Ivar Vidfadme, in or about the year 623. By regarding these dynasties as separate, and endeavouring to distinguish kings whom all preceding historians have confounded, we have made the subject intelligible to the reader. The path, in which we have been the first to venture, will, we have no doubt, be traversed by other writers, until it is as well known as any other part of ancient Scandinavian history. It is yet a dark one; and criticism, aided by an extensive use of manuscript authorities, can alone enlighten it.

|623 to 794.|

The four next monarchs of the Swedes and the Goths were also kings of the Danes. Of these, Ivar Vidfadme, the conqueror of Ingiald Illrada, was one of the most celebrated. The saga relates of him that he subdued all Sweden, which he joined with Denmark; a great part of Saxland, all Estland, and a fifth part of England. There is, doubtless, some exaggeration in this statement; but this very exaggeration establishes the fact of his conquests. The part of England to which the saga alludes, is said to be Northumbria. No mention, indeed, of such a descent is to be found in the Saxon chronicle, or in Bede; and the silence of this Northumbrian historian, especially, may be a strong argument against its truth. Still, in the troubled state of the times, while the Saxons were struggling with the native Britons for the possession of the territory, the arrival of a new chief might well be overlooked, especially if the conquests of Ivar were confined to that part of Northumbria which lies north of the Tweed. It could not well be south of that river in the time of St. Oswald. But, whether this prince was in England, or not, no doubt can be entertained of his courage. His hereditary domain comprehended Scania only; Jutland he soon added to the rest; but we have no proof that he ever sat on the throne of Ledra. As king of Gothland and Sweden, however, without including his conquests on the coasts of the Baltic, he was a powerful monarch. “From him,” says Snorro, “henceforth descend the kings of the Danes and the Swedes.” On his death, the sceptre of these states was inherited by Harald, his grandson, surnamed Hildetand, or the Golden-toothed. This monarch far exceeded the former in glory. He appears, from the relation of Saxo, to have had some trouble with the Goths, and also with the Swedes; and for his success over them he was, according to the same veracious authority, indebted to the councils of Odin, who honoured him with a personal interview. From several passages in this historian, and in the sagas of a later age, we may infer that the Goths, dissatisfied at once with the Danes and the Swedes, repeatedly proclaimed their independence. They belonged not to the divine race of Odin; and the freedom which their ancestors had enjoyed before the arrival of “that wizard king,” was often the stimulant to bold deeds. As they had revolted from the Swedes, so they were equally troublesome to the Danes during the four reigns which are now before us. But Harald triumphed, and governed both nations through his royal kinsman. Other parts of the world witnessed his valour: but it was his fate to die in battle, and in his old age, against his nephew Sigurd Ring, who wished to expel him from the throne of Denmark. In the north of Europe, the battle of Bravalla is celebrated as any in ancient or modern times. Saxo, with much care, enumerates the royal chiefs who fought on both sides; but their number, no less than that of the common men, exceeds all belief. The aged and blind Harald was carried about in a war chariot; and, from time to time, he inquired how the battle proceeded. Above all, he was struck with the admirable manner in which Sigurd Ring had drawn up the hostile ranks; and he expressed his conviction that this arrangement was not the result of mortal science, but of Odin’s peculiar favour. The charioteer whom he addressed was no other than Odin, under the form of a Danish chief; and, by the hands of that deity, he received a deadly blow, and was thrown on the ground. According to Saxo, he was succeeded by Olo and Omund, in succession; but the Icelandic authorities, who make the conqueror Sigurd, or Siward Ring, his successor, are more entitled to credit. Probably Olo and Omund were viceroys only, though they might be of royal origin. Many, according to Saxo, were the kings who intervened between Harald Hildetand and Ragnar Lodbrog; while the more critical historians of modern times, supported by Icelandic authorities, pass at once from the one to the other. At this distance, and without the aid of documents clearer than any that have yet been published, it is impossible to say which of the lists is the true one: but the probabilities are in favour of the Icelanders; for, though the kings enumerated by Saxo may have ruled in some parts of Denmark, they were, it is believed, rather viceroys than monarchs. By means of local governors, indeed, the four princes whose names fill this paragraph must have reigned; their states were too numerous, too extensive, for personal superintendence, especially when, as was generally the case, they were absent on foreign expeditions. To the exploits of Ragnar we have scarcely alluded, even in the Danish portion of the history; the reason is, that we can see in them little which is consentaneous with truth—little which is not a monstrous outrage of probability.^[155]

|794 to 1001.|

On the death of Ragnar, the throne of Sweden fell to one of his sons, Biorn I., surnamed Jarnasido. Of him we know little more than that, in his reign, the first attempts were made to christianise the Swedes. Biorn was not averse from toleration; and he allowed St. Anscar to teach, baptize, and preach unmolested. But the good thus effected was transient: Anscar returned to Germany, to procure from pope and emperor some amplification of his authority; and, during his absence, the mission entirely failed. When Anscar paid a second visit to this kingdom, he found a king named Olaf in possession of the throne. Who was he? Olaf Trætelia had been dead near two centuries, and Olaf Skotkonung did not reign until above a century afterwards. Either, therefore, we have a sad confusion in chronology, or there must have reigned a king whom modern criticism does not acknowledge. The probability is, that Olaf was a king of Gothia, who, in the numerous insurrections of the period, had seized on the royal authority in Sweden, no less than in the more southern provinces. Eric I., the son of Biorn, is next classed among the Swedish kings; and, after him, Eric II., surnamed Raefilson, who was, probably, either a Gothic king, or an usurper. Emund and Biorn II.—the one ruler of the Gothlands, the other of Sweden—next ascended the throne, and were followed by Eric III., the son of Emund; but the reigns of all were short, and they have left no records for posterity. Indeed, the number of kings during the ninth century is so considerable, that we are compelled to infer the existence of separate kingdoms amongst the Goths, while we are unable to distinguish the two dynasties of kings. Biorn III. (923) enjoyed a long reign; Eric IV., surnamed the Victorious (993), one still longer; and Eric V., surnamed Arsaell (1001), closes the list of pagan kings:—not that he was a pagan; on the contrary, as we shall perceive in the chapter devoted to the introduction of Christianity into the north, he died for the new faith. But he had been reared a pagan; at his death the greater part of the kingdom was pagan; and it was reserved for his son, Olaf Skotkonung, to render Christianity the established religion of Sweden and Gothland.^[156]

The confusion at this period of Swedish history, viz., from the close of the eighth to that of the tenth century, is greater than at any former period. No fewer than sixteen kings are said, by different historians, to have swayed the Swedish sceptre in little more than two centuries. The cause of this confusion is very obvious. Not only were the kings of Gothland, when that province happened to have a separate king, enumerated with those of the Swedes, but the successors of Olaf Trætelia were equally confounded with them: in other words, the royal chiefs of three contemporary states have been classed as kings of the Swedes only—as the sovereigns of Upsal. This confusion has rendered it scarcely possible to distinguish either the royal names of each state, or the actions attributed to them. We may, however, assert, with confidence, that Olaf Trætelia, and Ingel (or Ingiald), his son, were not kings of the Swedes; on the contrary, they were sovereigns of a state far to the west—Vermeland and Raumarik.^[157] If, as some historians assert, a king named Charles reigned at this time in Sweden, his seat could not have been Upsal; it must have been some town of East or West Gothland. The same may, we think, be asserted of Emund, who reigned in the south, while Biorn reigned at Upsal, or Birca. But Eric IV., surnamed the Victorious, was certainly king of both the Goths and the Swedes. The successful wars in which he engaged, and which procured him that epithet, are too obscure to be distinguished from the chaotic events of this period. Eric V., surnamed Arsaell, or the Happy-born, the father of Olaf Skotkonung, was also king of the two provinces. He embraced Christianity, and was baptized in public at Upsal, together with many of his nobles. It was, probably, as much for this reason, as for the extraordinary abundance which Sweden enjoyed in his time, that he obtained the epithet that posterity has attached to his name. There is much obscurity over this monarch’s reign. By some writers he is said to have been so alarmed at the murmurs of his people, for his abandonment of the old religion, that, to pacify them, he reverted to it. By others, again, it is asserted that he stedfastly adhered to the new faith; that he laboured, with some success, to withdraw his subjects from the errors of idolatry; that he went so far as to demolish the heathen temples; that at Sigtuna he met with little opposition; but that, when he ventured to lay hands on the magnificent temple of Upsal, the people arose and put him to death. To reconcile these contradictions would be a vain attempt. All that yet remains to be communicated respecting this, and one or two preceding reigns, may be found in the chapter devoted to the origin of Christianity in these regions.^[158]