Cross and Scepter (6 page)

Olav's namesake and successor, Olav Haraldsson, another Viking chieftain, presents a largely similar case. He managed to conquer Norway in 1015, at a time when Sven's son and successor, Cnut the Great, was busy conquering England, and ruled for thirteen years (1015–1028). Despite an alliance with Sweden against Cnut the Great, the ruler of Denmark and England, he was defeated and exiled and at his return in 1030 was killed in battle against his Norwegian adversaries. This time, however, the Danes introduced direct rule, which backfired. A rebellion brought Olav's son Magnus on the throne. At about the same time, Cnut the Great died in Winchester (November 1035), after which his empire was divided among his sons. Ten years later, they were all dead.

When Cnut's last son, Harthacnut, died in 1042 without leaving a descendant, he was succeeded by King Magnus of Norway. According to the sagas, this was because of an agreement between the two kings that the one of them who lived longer should succeed the other. However, there is no contemporary evidence of this, and it seems more likely that when Harthacnut had left for England to become king there (in 1040), Magnus simply used the opportunity to take over the Danish throne and then kept it at his rival's death. Nevertheless, Magnus was soon challenged by Sven Estridsen, who belonged to a sideline of the old dynasty and succeeded in establishing himself after a prolonged struggle with Magnus and his successor Harald. The result was a settlement in 1065 that became the basis for the permanent division between the two countries.

We know less of the third kingdom, Sweden. Most probably, the real unification of Sweden did not take place until around 1250, although there may have been moves in this direction earlier. The Swedish king who participated in the Battle of Svolder, Olof Skotkonung, is probably a historical person, but we know neither how far his kingdom extended nor what relationship he had to King Sven of Denmark. Whereas Olof, possibly because of personal links to King Sven, supported the Danes in the battle of Svolder, his successor, Anund Jakob, took the attitude that later became normal for Swedish rulers of seeking a balance of power between the two neighboring countries, thus supporting Norway against Denmark. On the other hand, the importance of sea power meant that Sweden was a less attractive target for Danish expansion than Norway and thus played a less prominent part in the inter-Nordic struggles in the early period.

Although hardly regarded as a decisive shift at the time, the events of the mid-eleventh century settled the division between the three countries, thus confirming the trends that had begun to make themselves felt in connection with the Battle of Svolder. The borders between them would not change in their basic outlines until the great shifts of the mid-seventeenth century. The Oslofjord area was contested between Norway and Denmark as late as in the second half of the twelfth century, but eventually came to belong to Norway. There was no geopolitical inevitability in this outcome, but it may be explained by the fact that the king of Norway likely gave higher priority to this aim than his Danish counterpart, who had other fields of expansion, in England, Northern Germany, and the Baltic area.

The Viking expeditions were an obvious factor in the radical change that took place around this time. They contributed to military specialization, as well as to the creation of an economic base for stronger principalities by providing chieftains with the
gold, silver, and luxury items that they needed to gain followers. Gift exchange was an important political and economic factor in the Viking age and beyond, and both royal generosity and the precious objects that changed hands are celebrated in the skaldic poetry. Wealth from the Viking expeditions made it possible for chieftains to attach more men to their service than was possible in earlier times, and the added manpower could then be used to procure further wealth. The mobilization of large fleets in the later phases of the Viking Age may have had important internal consequences, too, providing lessons in political organization, and foreign conquest may have worked in the same direction, giving Scandinavians familiarity with administrative practice in other countries as well as experience in local government. Finally, the Viking expeditions increased the Scandinavians' contact with Christianity. Those who settled abroad normally converted, and some of them, notably the Norwegian Viking kings, tried to introduce the new religion in their home country.

However, there were some differences between the countries in this regard. As we know so little about Denmark in the period between about 850 and 950 and of the origins of the Bluetooth dynasty, it is difficult to give a precise account of the importance to this country of the Viking expeditions. Though there can hardly be any doubt about the profitability of raiding expeditions from the late eighth century onwards, the climax of the Viking Age in Denmark, the conquest of England, was a consequence of, rather than a precondition for the unification of the country. Thus, there was no abrupt break but rather a smooth and gradual transition from the Viking Age to the period of an established monarchy in Denmark. From early on, the Danish king had a firm base in cultivated land, as well as in the trading center of Haithabu, near present-day Schleswig, and, by combining these resources with surplus from Viking expeditions, was able to embark on ambitious projects of foreign conquest, beginning in the late tenth century.

Denmark's relations with Germany were another important factor. The conquest of Saxony by Charlemagne made the Carolingian Empire Denmark's neighbor to the south and exposed the country to Carolingian conquest or penetration, while at the same time presenting a model for an ambitious conquering king. In a similar way, the final conversion of the country to Christianity around 965 is clearly connected to the rise of Ottonian power to the south, coming just after Otto I's victory over the Hungarians at Lech in 955 and his invasion of Italy and imperial coronation in 962. It also coincides with the conversion of Poland, traditionally dated to 966, and was preceded by the conversion of Bohemia some decades earlier and followed by that of Hungary some decades later. After Otto I's death in 973, war broke out between Harald and Otto II. First Harald attacked Saxony. Otto made a counterattack in the following year and conquered Dannevirke and possibly larger parts of Jutland, which, however, Harald was able to regain after the Saracens defeated Otto in 983. The Christianization of Germany's neighbors, about which we have very little information, may alternatively be regarded as the result of increasing German influence or as a countermeasure to avoid being absorbed by German power, thus in both cases as provoked by increasing German strength. The unification may be regarded in a similar way. Germany may have served as a model for the conquering king, who could then use German pressure to gain support for himself; the magnates and petty kings being forced to choose between submitting to the Germans or to a national conqueror.

Viking surplus probably also played a part in the rise of the kingdom of Sweden, although, given the inland character of this country, the degree of its importance is more doubtful. Norway, on the other hand, is the Viking kingdom
par excellence,
as all of its rulers between around 930 and 1066 had a Viking or mercenary background, and most of them came directly from abroad
to take power in the country. The two Olavs as well as Harald Hardrada are the preeminent examples. However, Viking wealth likely increased the number of chieftains as well as the number of their followers and consequently did not necessarily lead to larger political units. Nor did the surplus have to be spent on creating national kingdoms. Many chieftains preferred to establish themselves abroad in the British Isles, Normandy, or Russia. Moreover, as long as it was easy to profit from Viking expeditions, the principalities that emerged were likely to be unstable: new chieftains with fresh resources might easily expel the old ones. This pattern seems to apply to the series of Viking kings taking power in Norway, whereas the Danish king eventually managed to monopolize the Viking expeditions by conquering England.

Consequently, it would seem that in Norway and to some extent in Sweden, the Viking expeditions made a greater surplus available to be invested in lordship, created greater ambitions among the chieftains, and led to more intense struggles between them, but did not directly lead to consolidated kingdoms. The latter appear rather as a result of the
end
of the Viking expeditions. When the strengthening of feudal Europe in the eleventh century had put an end to the Viking exploits, the only place for ambitious chieftains to gain wealth and power was within Scandinavia. In the case of Norway, this period coincided with large parts of the aristocracy and the people rallying around indigenous kings who resisted Danish dominance. In this respect, Norway resembles the kingdoms of East Central Europe whose emergence also coincides with the end of the raiding expeditions against Germany and other parts of Western Christendom: the Slavs were defeated by Henry I in 929 and 933, and a Polish duchy emerged a few decades later. The Hungarians were defeated by Otto I in 955, and the principality (or kingdom, from 1000 AD) of Hungary was established towards the end of the century.

However, we also have to take into account the internal relationship between the countries. Denmark, by far the strongest of them, is likely to have influenced the consolidation of the two others. As we know so little about the early history of Sweden, it is difficult to assess the importance of Denmark for this country, but there is clear evidence of it in the case of Norway. Here, as we have seen, the final consolidation of the kingdom was a direct consequence of the rebellion against Danish rule in the 1030s. There is evidence from Carolingian sources of Danish control of southwestern Norway already in the early ninth century, and it has also been suggested that Harald Finehair's conquest was a reaction against previous Danish dominance. The importance of Denmark in turn points to the importance of Germany; we can imagine a chain reaction in the form of German pressure leading to the consolidation of Denmark, which in turn resulted in the consolidation of Norway and possibly Sweden.

The main factors in the formation of the Scandinavian kingdoms were, first, the Viking and trading expeditions, the surplus from which was invested in clients and political power at home. Second, the pressure from Germany contributed to the unification of Denmark and thus indirectly influenced the two other kingdoms. Third, the competition between the centers of power in Scandinavia eventually led to the division into three kingdoms with borders determined by the fact that the conquests were carried out by sea power. Finally, Christianity served as an instrument in the monopolization of power. As in East Central Europe, conversion to Christianity coincided with the formation of kingdoms in Scandinavia, but a causal relationship between the two phenomena is not easy to ascertain. Most likely, there was coalescence between the two factors, rather than a distinct cause and effect. Moreover, the greatest impact of Christianity probably came in the following period, partly in its contribution
to the continued existence of the kingdoms, partly in its role in their further development.

As we have seen, the formation of the Scandinavian kingdoms parallels developments in East Central Europe at about the same time. The three new kingdoms there were also neighbors of Germany, which served as a model as well as a threat, stimulating unification under one ruler. In contrast to Denmark, however, the Eastern principalities had no sea power and lacked the natural borders that made the division of Scandinavia relatively uncomplicated. Although the three East European kingdoms continued to exist for several centuries, until they were conquered or entered into unions with neighboring kingdoms, their borders changed significantly more than the ones between the Scandinavian kingdoms.

The Continued Division of Scandinavia: Foreign Policy until around 1300

From the mid-eleventh century onwards, historians normally regard Scandinavia as consisting of three kingdoms, discuss the relationships between them, and distinguish between internal and foreign policy. Indeed, the approximate borders that were established at the time remained basically the same until the mid-seventeenth century. Nevertheless, there is little to suggest that those borders were regarded as final, nor is there evidence of any distinction between internal and foreign policy. The three kings who fought one another at Svolder certainly made no such distinction, and it is impossible to point to an exact date when it might have become relevant. Politically, the most important factor was that the strongest of the three kingdoms, Denmark, largely abstained from interfering in the two others. Admittedly, a Danish prince tried to become king of Sweden in the early
twelfth century, and the Danes tried to get hold of Viken, the part of Norway to the east of the Oslofjord, in the mid-twelfth century and interfered in the internal conflicts in the country in the following period. However, none of these interventions had any lasting effect. And conversely, neither of the two other countries would normally have been in a position to interfere in Denmark. As the long border between Norway and Sweden mostly consisted of mountains and uninhabited land, both countries were also likely to give priority to expansion in other directions. There were as well internal conflicts in all three countries in this period, although these were not attempts to form independent principalities in opposition to the king, but instead concerned the succession to the throne of the country as a whole. Thus, from the mid-eleventh century onwards, we can begin to distinguish between internal and foreign policy and discuss the relationship between the Scandinavian kingdoms and the surrounding area.

During the eleventh century, England ceased to be a target for Scandinavian expansion. The Norwegian king Harald Hardrada attempted to gain the English throne when Edward the Confessor died without issue in 1066, but he was defeated by Harold Godwinson at Stanford Bridge. Three weeks later, William the Conqueror defeated Harold at Hastings and founded the Norman dynasty in England. King Sven of Denmark remained at home in 1066, but his successors made several unsuccessful attempts to regain control of England. The last of them was St. Knud's mobilization in 1086, which came to nothing because of the rebellion that cost the king his life (below, p. 40).