At the time of the prince’s accession to the throne, the people had some hope of him. The germ at least of great qualities was in him; and his understanding, which was above the average, had been developed by the care of his teachers. He was well acquainted with literature, with mathematics, philosophy, and foreign languages.[[494]] His figure was well formed; he was a good rider, a good swimmer, a good dancer, and a good soldier. He spoke pleasantly and was agreeable in his intercourse with others. But in the depth of his nature was a temper strange, distrustful, suspicious, and fierce, which might on a sudden display itself in outward acts calculated to excite at once both pity and horror.
Burrey, who had been appointed to instruct the prince in letters and in science, was not entrusted with the department of religion. This belonged to the archbishop, Lawrence Petersen, and to the Lutheran ministers named by him. Erick was to be a good Lutheran; but the French Protestant, convinced of the truth of Calvin’s principles, made them known to his pupil. Calvin himself, doubtless through the medium of Burrey, was in correspondence with Gustavus in 1560, towards the close of the king’s life.
Disputes About The Supper.
In Sweden the Calvinists gave especial prominence to the doctrine of the Lord’s Supper. Burrey, who appears to have apprehended the doctrine in the way of logic rather than of spiritual insight, maintained it by syllogisms. He said—‘All who eat the flesh of Christ and drink his blood have eternal life. Now the ungodly have not eternal life. Therefore the ungodly do not eat the flesh of Christ.’[[495]] The Apostle John says nothing about the corporeal mastication, it but speaks only of the spiritual. Therefore, he recognizes no other mastication but that which is by faith. Christ gives his body and his blood only to those who show forth his death. But the ungodly do not show forth. Therefore he does not give it to them. The Frenchman maintained these doctrines in a Latin work. He had of course a right to do so; but he had no right to attack as he did the archbishop, brother of Olaf, a zealous defender of the Lutherans, or to allege either in conversation or in his writings that the prelate was a papist. The true Protestants, and foremost among them Zwinglius and Calvin, generally expressed great respect for Luther and for all his disciples, acknowledging them as brethren in the faith. But the sectarian spirit, unfortunately, was beginning now to take the place of the Christian spirit.
The influence of the French Protestants, however, made itself felt in other respects and in a wholesome way. Erick, shortly after his accession to the throne, abolished the festival days which were connected with a superstitious system, and the Catholic rites which had been retained in the divine service. He went farther, and made it everywhere known that his kingdom was a free state, open to all persecuted Protestants. Many Protestants, therefore, especially French, came to Stockholm and were kindly received by the king, becoming even particular objects of his favor. This gave rise to jealousies and suspicions. The question was raised whether the king was not a Calvinist in disguise. Wine having become scarce in Sweden, in consequence of the obstacles thrown in the way of the trade by Denmark, it was asked whether it would not be permissible to make use of some other fluid at the Lord’s supper. The Frenchman, Burrey, held the opinion that it would, and this increased the grief of good Lutherans. The archbishop especially declared himself strongly and with good reason against this fantastic proposal, and published a Latin work on the subject.[[496]]
These controversies gave rise to much agitation in Sweden; but they were superseded by troubles of a graver kind. Duke John, Erick’s younger brother, having put forward claims which Erick would not satisfy, and having even caused the king’s envoys to be arrested, and invited the inhabitants of Finland to take an oath of fealty to him and to defend him, was made prisoner on the 12th of August, 1563.[[497]] A rumor was afterwards current of a conspiracy of the Sture family, who had exercised, before the reign of Gustavus, the royal power as administrators of the kingdom. Their intention, it was said, was to overthrow the house of Vasa and restore the hereditary kingdom to their own family. Erick having met in the street a servant of Svante Sture carrying a gun, this unfortunate man was sentenced to death at the beginning of January, 1567, and several of the Stures and of their friends were thrown into prison. With this incident began the great misfortunes of the prince. Infelicissimus annus Erici regis, he said, speaking of this year in his journal.
Madness Of Erick.
On May 24 Svante Sture and another of the prisoners had asked pardon of the king and had received a promise of early liberation. In the evening, as the king was walking with Caroli, ordinary (or bishop) of Calmar, some one ran up and told him that his brother, Duke John, had made his escape and had raised the standard of rebellion. In a state of great excitement, he returned to his castle. His mind wandered; he fancied that every one was a conspirator; he saw himself already hurled from the throne; and, beside himself, he went, dagger in hand, into the room in which Nils Sture was confined.[[498]] He rushed upon the unhappy man and pierced him in the arm; one of his guards gave the fatal stroke. At this moment the prison of the father of Nils Sture opened, and the king, overpowered at the sight, fell at his feet and cried—‘For God’s sake pardon me the wrong that I have done you!’ The old man, who did not know what he meant, answered—‘If any thing should happen to my son, you are responsible to me before God.’ ‘Ah,’ said the king, whose thoughts were wandering more and more, ‘you will never pardon me, and for this reason you must share the same fate.’ He then fled precipitately, as if the castle were full of assassins and every prisoner loaded with chains were pointing a dagger at him. He took the road to Floetsund, attended by some guards; and in a little while one of these returned with an order to put to death all the prisoners in the castle ‘except Sten.’ Two of them bore this name, and considering the uncertainty, both of them escaped, but the rest perished. Ere long the unhappy Erick was seized with horror at the thought of his crime. He believed himself pursued by the ghost of Nils Sture, whom he had slain. Filled with distress and remorse he plunged into the forest. Burrey, who had left the castle at the moment when the order to execute the prisoners arrived, immediately set out in the track of the prince, whom he desired to recall to his senses, and from whom he intended to obtain, if possible, the revocation of the cruel order. He at length came up with him in the middle of the wood; but the raving man fancied that his old teacher had shared in the conspiracy of those whose lives he wished to save. A prey to the most violent madness, he gave an order to one of his guards, and the Frenchman whom he had loved so well, to whom he owed so much, fell at his feet, pierced through and through.[[499]] The unhappy man then got away from his guards, who were still accompanying him, and fled alone. He threw away his kingly apparel, and wandered about in the woods, in the fields, and in the loneliest places, with a gloomy air, wild eyes, and fierce aspect. No one knew where he was. Like the king of Babylon, he went up and down in the land afar from the haunts of men; his dwelling was with the beasts of the field, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven. At length, on the third day after the murder, he made his appearance in the garb of a peasant in a village of the parish of Odensala; and presently several of his men who were in search of him ran up to him. ‘No, no,’ said he on receiving the acknowledgments of those who respectfully saluted him, ‘I am not king.’[[500]] ‘It is Nils Sture,’ he added, ‘who is administrator of the kingdom.’ This was the man that he had assassinated. They endeavored in vain to pacify him. ‘Like Nero,’ he exclaimed, ‘I have slain my preceptor.’ He would neither eat nor sleep; all entreaties were fruitless. At last Catherine Maenstochter, to whom he had been strongly attached and who soon became his consort, succeeded in persuading him. He now became more calm and allowed them to take him to Upsala. On June 3 he was taken back to Stockholm. He was in a state of great agitation when he entered the town; his heart rent with remorse, his eyes and his hands raised to heaven. It was a long time before he entirely recovered his reason.
Negotiations were set on foot between Duke John and the unhappy king. The former requested an interview with his brother, and this took place on October 9 at Wantholm, or, according to some authorities, at Knappforssen, in Wermeland.[[501]] The brothers met under an oak tree, which is still called the King’s Oak. They had a second interview shortly after at Swarhjo. Erick, who was perpetually haunted by the thought that the murders which he had ordered had deprived him of the crown, fell at his brother’s feet and hailed him king. From this time he considered himself a dependent on his brother and spoke sometimes as if he were king and sometimes as if he were a captive. He appeared, at the beginning of 1569, before the States assembled as a high court of justice, and there energetically defended himself, sparing no one, and least of all, the nobility. When John interrupted him by telling him that he was out of his mind, he replied, ‘I have only once been out of my mind, and that was when I released thee from prison.’ He was deprived of the crown on the ground that he had lost his reason, and was sentenced to perpetual confinement, but with royal treatment.
His Treatment In Prison.