|1001 to 1026.|
All writers agree that at the opening of the eleventh century Olaf, surnamed Skotkonung, or the Tribute-king, reigned over Sweden. He was the ally of Denmark in the destruction of Olaf Trygvasen, king of Norway[[170]]; and with Denmark he shared the possession of that kingdom.[[171]] The enemy of St. Olaf, he would not, though commanded by the states of his kingdom, give his daughter Ingigerda to that king.[[172]] Contrary to his wish, however, his second daughter Astrida was married to his royal neighbor.[[173]] Probably this was the first of the Swedish princes that felt himself strong enough to contend with his pagan subjects, who prior to his time had held the ascendancy. His ardour, however, is said to have been mitigated by his diet, which at length decided for liberty of conscience.
|1026 to 1051.|
Emund I. (or Omund), surnamed Colbrenner, succeeded to his father. Towards his unfortunate brother-in-law, St. Olaf of Norway, he acted with severity[[174]]; and by all writers testimony is borne to his virtues. Thus Adam of Bremen informs us that he excelled all his predecessors in wisdom and piety, and was more beloved by his people. Of his actions, except his hostilities in alliance with St. Olaf against Canute the Great, we are ignorant. Shrouded in equal obscurity are the actions of his immediate successors.
|1051 to 1148.|
Emund II. (1051–1056) was unpopular; first, because he had no zeal for religion; and, secondly, because in a treaty of limits between Sweden and the Danish province of Scania, he did not uphold the national interests, but abandoned a considerable territory to that rival people. To repair this disaster, and to prove that he was not afraid of the enemy, he raised an army and invaded that province; but he was vanquished and slain. On his death the Swedes and the Goths, who were often hostile to each other, disagreed about the succession—the former raising Stenkill (1056–1066), the latter Hako the Red, to the throne. Thus there were two kingdoms, two courts—the one reigning over the eastern, the other over the western and southern provinces. Similar partitions, as we frequently observed in the former volume, had taken place, so as to confound the chronological succession of the kings. The Goths and the Swiar had never perfectly amalgamated, from the period when Odin had led the latter into Sweden, and expelled the former from the coast to the interior of the country. But, on the other hand, experience had taught both of them the destructive effects of disunion; and on the present occasion, now that Christianity had made so considerable a progress among them (more however in Sweden than in Gothland), they felt more sensibly the impolicy of their conduct. The heads of the two people met together, and agreed that Hako should continue to rule over the Goths, but that on his death his kingdom should cease to have a separate existence, and be re-merged into that of Sweden. We shall, however, see that the same moderation did not always govern the two parties; and that double elections continued to agitate the commonweal long after this period. But this circumstance does not detract from the merit of the men who sanctioned the present agreement. In thirteen years Hako paid the debt of nature, and in conformity with the agreement his crown reverted to the prince of the Swedes. Of Stenkill the national historians speak with praise. Of gigantic size, unrivalled strength, and indomitable courage, he was yet one of the mildest princes of his age. Over Sweyn II., king of Denmark, he is said by the Swedish historians to have frequently triumphed; but of such triumphs we have no record in the historians of the rival nation. Equal honour is accorded to his successor Inge I., surnamed the Good. In his wars this prince is said to have exhibited great valour; but he was more distinguished for his attachment to Christianity, and for the zeal with which he extirpated paganism. In this great work he probably evinced more ardour than discretion, if it be true that he was murdered in bed by his idolatrous subjects. Halstan, the brother and successor of Inge, if indeed they did not reign conjointly over different parts of the kingdom, had the same mild virtues. Philip and Inge II. were equally worthy of the diadem. Distinguished alike for his piety and for the rigour with which he punished the banditti who infested his western provinces, and the pirates who ravaged his coasts, Inge, in particular, reigned in the hearts of his people, except those whose ill deeds he punished. To the hatred of a faction he became a victim. That faction raised to the throne Rognerald, a chief of gigantic dimensions and of fiercer qualities. His yoke was soon felt to be intolerable: he was removed by violence; and a double election followed,—the Swedes choosing a chieftain named Kol; the Goths Magnus, son of Nicholas king of Denmark. The former soon perished in battle; the latter, a great tyrant, reigned seven years only (1148), when the suffrages of the people fell on one who had neither birth nor connections to recommend him, but who had the great qualities becoming the dignity. This was Swerker I. It is worthy of remark that Hako the Red and Rognerald, and Kol and Magnus, are not usually classed amongst the Swedish kings—at least by modern historians.
|1148 to 1154.|
The reign of Swerker was pacific and admirably adapted to the interests of the kingdom. He was a wise and patriotic monarch. But he had one grievous fault—blindness to the vices of his son. Never, if contemporary chroniclers are to be credited, did a youth so richly merit the curses of the people. At the head of a licentious gang, he violated the persons of the noblest virgins and matrons; he was addicted to every species of riot; and the insolence of his manners gave a more odious shade to his vices. In vain were remonstrances made to the father, whose first duty, as the people thought, was to insist that his own family set the first example of obedience to the laws. Indignant at this guilty toleration, the people arose and murdered the prince. Swerker’s own end was tragical; but whether he died through the influence of the same conspirators, or through the avarice of a domestic, is doubtful. On his death, the same ruinous division took place as in the preceding century: the Goths elected Charles, another son of Swerker; the Swedes made choice of St. Eric, who had married the daughter of Inge the Good—a name dear to the people. As civil war was so much to be deprecated, the heads of both parties met and agreed to this compromise—that Eric I. should retain both crowns during his life, and on his death both should be inherited by Charles. But what was to become of the rights of their children? To prevent future disputes, the descendants of each were to rule alternately, without prejudice, however, to the elective suffrage of the people. It would have been impossible to devise any expedient better adapted to produce the contrary of what was intended.
|1155 to 1167.|
The reign of Eric was one of vigour. The Finns, who had declared themselves independent, he reduced to subjection; and he also forced them, we are told, to forsake idolatry for Christianity. We may, however, doubt whether his efforts in this respect were so general as the chroniclers would have us believe: certainly, they were not very permanent; for there are pagans amongst them at this very day, and those who pass for Christians worship other gods. Probably they did as most barbarians do in similar circumstances—they submitted while the victor was near them, but reverted to their ancient superstitions when he had left. That he had idolaters nearer to him than Finland, and more immediately subject to his sway, is evident from the distinction he was accused of making between the worshippers of Odin and those of Christ. The former he deprived of the rights which the law conferred upon them. For this conduct he naturally incurred their indignation, and he also made enemies of another party—the licentious, the disturbers of the public tranquillity, who were scarcely less numerous. Both conspired against him; and as their own strength was inadequate to the object, they invoked the aid of the Danish king, offering, as it appears, the crown of Sweden to the son of that monarch. A Danish army arrived, and being joined by the malcontents, marched towards Upsal. They were soon met by Eric who, though he performed prodigies of valour, was defeated and slain. His tragical death was one of the causes that led to his canonization. Another was the zeal which he showed in the extirpation of idolaters, whom he pursued with fire and sword. Add that he was the founder of monasteries and churches, and we have reasons enough for his deification. By most readers he will be valued, less for his unenlightened devotion, than for his compilation of a code of laws—“St. Eric’s Lag.” Yet the provisions which it contains are deeply impressed by his dominant characteristics. Against pagans they are sanguinary; and they visit offences against the Christian religion and the Christian worship with stern severity.