Clerical Celibacy

The last post talked about attempts by popes to "monasticize" parish priests, preventing them from having families that could be a drain on church resources and potentially lead to sons inheriting or being appointed to benefices for which they were not suited. But was there a Biblical argument for clerical celibacy? Moses had Zipporah, after all. 

Modern canon law of the Latin Church (a faction that keeps faith with the papacy) states:

Clerics are obliged to observe perfect and perpetual continence for the sake of the kingdom of heaven and therefore are bound to celibacy which is a special gift of God by which sacred ministers can adhere more easily to Christ with an undivided heart and are able to dedicate themselves more freely to the service of God and humanity.

There are deacons who never intend to take priestly vows who are not bound by this rule, but if they are married and their spouse dies, they are not allowed to remarry.

The Roman Catholic Church states:

All the ordained ministers of the Latin Church, with the exception of permanent deacons, are normally chosen from among men of faith who live a celibate life and who intend to remain celibate "for the sake of the kingdom of heaven." Called to consecrate themselves with undivided heart to the Lord and to "the affairs of the Lord", they give themselves entirely to God and to men. Celibacy is a sign of this new life to the service of which the Church's minister is consecrated; accepted with a joyous heart celibacy radiantly proclaims the Reign of God.

But acknowledges that this is not the case for everyone:

In the Eastern Churches a different discipline has been in force for many centuries: while bishops are chosen solely from among celibates, married men can be ordained as deacons and priests. ... Moreover, priestly celibacy is held in great honor in the Eastern Churches and many priests have freely chosen it for the sake of the Kingdom of God.

Curiously, these rules are not religious dogma; they are understood to be choices imposed by the hierarchy, and therefore are subject to change if authorities pursue that option. Anglicanism, Lutheranism, and Protestantism do not require that their ministers be celibate.

The apostles of Jesus were not required to be unmarried. Matthew 8:14-15 tells us "when Jesus was come into Peter's house, he saw his [Peter's] wife's mother laid, and sick of a fever." So Peter had a mother-in-law. Clement of Alexandria (c.150 - c.215 CE) claimed that Peter and Philip had children. Paul the Apostle, on the other hand, contrasts himself with other apostles by pointing out that some had wives while Paul had never been married. Paul clearly thinks his status is "better" when he write in 1 Corinthians 7:5-8:

Do not deprive one another except perhaps by agreement for a set time, to devote yourselves to prayer, and then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. This I say by way of concession, not of command. I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has a particular gift from God, one having one kind and another a different kind. To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain unmarried as I am. But if they are not practicing self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.

So you can better devote yourself to God if you do not have a woman around seems to be his attitude. Later in that chapter he expresses that an unmarried man can focus on God, but the married man has to deal with worldly things. The 3rd-century Manichaeans (whose enemy was Augustine) saw sex as corruption, as did the Montanists, whom Pope Innocent I tried to quash.

The first person to declare widely—and who had the power to enforce—that all marriages of priests were null and void and the children of such unions were illegitimate was not a pope, but a married man. Let's see who that was tomorrow.

The Children of Priests

Pope Gregory VII (c.1015 - 1085) tried to establish many reforms in the Church, they did not all "stick." One of his reforms was to prevent priests keeping families in the vicarage, and appointing their children to benefices. This problem remained, and Innocent III tried to tackle it in the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215.

Canon 31 was on the sons of parish canons:

In order to abolish a very bad practice that has grown up in many churches, we strictly forbid the sons of canons, especially if they are illegitimate, to become canons in the secular churches in which their fathers hold office. If the contrary is attempted, we declare it to be invalid. Those who attempt to make such persons canons are to be suspended from their benefices.

Illegitimate children were not the stigma that they have become in modern times. A father might acknowledge an illegitimate child because it was a son and all he was having with his wife were daughters. The father would care for them and try to find careers for them. We saw this in noble families all the time. See here and here for examples.

In The Manly Priest, author Jennifer Thibodeaux discusses the difficult attempts to impose clerical celibacy during the period 1066 to 1300. Archbishop Anselm tried twice to prevent priests from having sex with women. One attempt was simply to say priests could not have wives living with them. The priests simply moved their wives to a nearby house.

Innocent's attempt at the Lateran Council was about as effective as Gregory's. His attempts at establishing clerical guidelines regarding dress and morality was one thing, but getting them to give up sex completely was doomed to failure. Thibodeaux calls this "an all-inclusive attempt to formally monasticize the priesthood and to separate them from the laity, while elevating them in status." [link]

In the canons of the Fourth Lateran, number 31 about sons follows number 30, which states:

It is very serious and absurd that prelates of churches, when they can promote suitable men to ecclesiastical benefices, are not afraid to choose unworthy men who lack both learning and honesty of behavior and who follow the urgings of the flesh rather than the judgment of reason. Nobody of a sound mind is ignorant of how much damage to churches arises from this.

It is clear that the two are connected because of the priest's desire to find a career for his son and the only career that the priest knows that he could educate his son about is managing a parish. The opportunity to place one's son in a position for which he was not suited was too great a potential problem.

Tomorrow we'll take a more detailed look at the idea of clerical celibacy and its origins.

The Canons on Responsibility, Part 2

The Fourth Lateran Council called in 1215 by Pope Innocent III had three chief objectives: Church reform, freeing the Holy Land, and eliminating heresy. Part of Church reform was making clear the duties of the clergy to their calling and to their congregation, which you can see in Part 1.

Innocent was not just worried about his clergy being educated and committed to helping their congregation; he also concentrated on their personal behavior. Canon 14 was on clerical incontinence, "incontinence" in the sense of lack of self-restraint:

In order that the morals and conduct of clerics may be reformed for the better, let all of them strive to live in a continent and chaste way, ... Let them beware of every vice involving lust, ... so that they may be worthy to minister in the sight of almighty God with a pure heart and an unsullied body.

Canon 15 became more specific:

All clerics should carefully abstain from gluttony and drunkenness. They should temper the wine to themselves and themselves to the wine. Let no one be urged to drink, since drunkenness obscures the intellect and stirs up lust.

Especially abhorrent were those who engaged in drinking games or competitions:

... abuse is to be entirely abolished whereby in some places drinkers bind themselves to drink equal amounts, and that man is most praised who makes the most people drunk and himself drains the deepest cups.

Clerics were not to indulge in "callings or business of a secular nature" or to "watch mimes, entertainers and actors," nor should they dress ostentatiously, wth gold buckles, for example (Canon 16). Clerics should not spend the night feasting and talking so that they cannot rise early in the morning to begin their duties (Canon 17). They should not store things in their churches that are not church-related; do not store furniture, for instance, and do not allow church vessels or vestments to get soiled (Canon 19).

The next canons involve managing a parish, with rules such not leaving a church without a pastor for more than three months (Canon 23), or keeping Chrism under lock and key (Canon 20), and how to choose a pastor for a particular parish (Canon 24).

Then it gets into the improper election of candidates, and the potential problem with choosing one's son to be a canon (holder of an office) where their father is pastor. Let's take a more careful look at that topic tomorrow.

The Canons on Responsibility, Part 1

The Fourth Lateran Council called in 1215 by Pope Innocent III had three chief objectives: Church reform, freeing the Holy Land, and eliminating heresy. Part of Church reform was making clear the duties of the clergy to their calling and to their congregation.

Canon 6 was about making sure the decisions coming from the Fourth Lateran were followed. It decreed yearly provincial councils:

...in which they consider diligently and in the fear of God the correction of excesses and the reform of morals, especially among the clergy. Let them recite the canonical rules, especially those which have been laid down by this general council, so as to secure their observance, inflicting on transgressors the punishment due.

Clerics themselves were not exempt from examination and correction. Canon 7 decreed:

...that prelates of churches [bishops] should prudently and diligently attend to the correction of their subjects’ offenses especially of clerics, and to the reform of morals.

Of course, this would not be a problem if the clergy are acting appropriately, and Canon 10 tells the bishops:

...are to appoint suitable men to carry out with profit this duty of sacred preaching, men who are powerful in word and deed and who will visit with care the peoples entrusted to them in place of the bishops, since these by themselves are unable to do it, and will build them up by word and example.

And bishops themselves are supposed to be "suitable men." The above is important because bishops might not be able to be everywhere they are needed because of infirmity or war or the size of the diocese:

...or for other reasons-let us not say for lack of knowledge, which in bishops is to be altogether condemned and is not to be tolerated in the future.

Speaking of knowledge, Canon 11 establishes parochial schools for all, including those who could not afford tuition:

Zeal for learning and the opportunity to make progress is denied to some through lack of means. The Lateran council therefore dutifully decreed that in each cathedral church there should be provided a suitable benefice for a master who shall instruct without charge the clerics of the cathedral church and other poor scholars.

Innocent was not only concerned with clergy who lacked knowledge, but more specific grievances. I'll tell you some of those tomorrow.

The Canons on Heresy

The Fourth Lateran Council called in 1215 by Pope Innocent III had three chief objectives: Church reform, freeing the Holy Land, and eliminating heresy. The first Canons addressed the subject of those whose beliefs did not conform to official Church doctrine.

Canon 1 made clear there was only:

...one universal church of the faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved, in which Jesus Christ is both priest and sacrifice. His body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the forms of bread and wine, the bread and wine having been changed in substance, by God’s power, into his body and blood, ...

The doctrine of transubstantiation was made official.

Canon 2 addressed the "error of abbot Joachim." Joachim de Fiore (1135 - 1202), called by one modern scholar "The Man Who Invented the Future" (post) was the founder of a monastic order based on St. John, and he wrote on the apocalypse and the Book of Revelation.  His theory was that the ages of the world mirror the Trinity, and that only in a future third age of the Holy Spirit would humankind truly understand Christianity and become spiritual. He submitted his works to Innocent in 1200, but died two years later before Innocent could reflect on them. Innocent since had decided the works were misguided. Joachim had contradicted Peter Lombard, calling Peter a heretic. Aquinas later condemned Joachim. Dante, on the other hand, placed Joachim in Paradise.

We therefore condemn and reprove that small book or treatise which abbot Joachim published against master Peter Lombard concerning the unity or essence of the Trinity, in which he calls Peter Lombard a heretic and a madman because he said in his Sentences, “For there is a certain supreme reality which is the Father and the Son and the holy Spirit, and it neither begets nor is begotten nor does it proceed”.

Joachim's idea of a progression through history and a lack of understanding of God until some future time did not suit Innocent. A French theologian, Amalric of Bena (see illustration), was likewise condemned in this Canon with a single sentence after about 1000 words against Joachim.

Canon 3 listed what to do about heretics. Suspicion of heresy should lead to excommunication. If a year went by without the person recanting, then they would be called a heretic. Princes were to swear that anyone the Church deemed heretics would be banished from their lands. This Canon was shorter than the one on Joachim.

Tomorrow we will look at more.

The Start of the Fourth Lateran

After years of being pope and asserting his will on the world, Innocent III decided to bring together all the church leaders and establish a new set of rules and policies for unifying the Church's stand on several different matters. To give everyone time to travel to Rome, he announced it in April 1213, to be formally opened on 11 November 1215. It met at the Lateran Palace, and was the fourth such meeting.

The first day began with a Mass, then a plenary session at which Innocent led the song of Veni Creator Spiritus ("Come Holy Spirit"). He also delivered sermons on the need to reclaim the Holy Land and the need to deal with heresy.

Trouble erupted among the bishops because of political issues. Supporters of Simon de Montfort, 5th Earl of Leicester, and those of Raymond VI of Toulouse (whose lands had been granted to Simon by Philip Augustus of France, clashed over the recent hostility between the two nobles. Raymond and his son were there to argue for the return of his lands; Simon's brother Guy and Bishop Foulques objected. Fighting broke out and needed to be suppressed. The outcome was not good for Raymond, who had all his remaining lands confiscated to be held in trust until his death, when they would be granted to his son, Raymond VII.

Innocent also had prepared for the council by refurbishing St. Peter's Basilica, and the fourth day of the Council was to be a celebration of the anniversary of the basilica. It drew so many people that, when Innocent arrived to lead the celebration, he could barely get into the building.

On 20 November, the fifth day, Innocent's sermon about church reform was disrupted by bishops who objected to Frederick II holding the title of King of the Romans (and several other titles).

The Fourth Council of the Lateran finished on the 30th of November. In only two weeks there had been many meetings that produced 71 canons that would be considered law going forward. Tomorrow we'll start looking at some of them.

Innocent Meddling

Pope Innocent III believed in the absolute power of the pope over secular authorities, and he did what he could to assert that power wherever he could.

A couple months after Innocent became pope, in March 1198 Philip Duke of Swabia was elected King of Germany. Another claimant, Otto Duke of Brunswick, was preferred by several princes. Philip was the brother of his predecessor, Henry VI, King of Germany and Holy Roman Emperor. Because Henry had married Constance of Sicily, Innocent was concerned that either Philip or (potentially) Henry's son Frederick would make a claim to not only Sicily, but the Italian Peninsula (Sicily controlled a large part of southern Italy called The Regno). In 1201 Innocent officially supported Otto:

It is the business of the pope to look after the interests of the Roman empire, since the empire derives its origin and its final authority from the papacy; 

..., since three persons have lately been elected king by different parties, namely the youth [Frederick], Philip, and Otto, so also three things must be taken into account in regard to each one... 

...Far be it from us that we should defer to man rather than to God, or that we should fear the countenance of the powerful. ... since Otto is not only himself devoted to the church, but comes from devout ancestors on both sides, ... therefore we decree that he ought to be accepted and supported as king, and ought to be given the crown of empire, after the rights of the Roman church have been secured.

After Magna Carta was imposed upon King John, he appealed to Innocent. John had declared himself a papal vassal (which, of course, pleased Innocent), and pledged to go on Crusade (which gave him and his property papal protection), and John wrote to Innocent to claim that Magna Carta took away some of John's necessary rights as the man working in England on the pope's behalf. Innocent declared Magna Carta annulled, precipitating war with the barons.

The Fourth Crusade, which turned out to be disastrous, was Innocent's idea, and the first time a pope ever forced the clergy across Europe to donate 1/40th of their income to the endeavor.

He called for other crusades. The Albigensian Crusade (leading to the first "mass murder") was at his request (see illustration of him calling for it and knights attacking heretics). He was behind the Livonian Crusade (into modern Latvia and Estonia), which he called for in October 1199.

His inducement for Crusading was to offer indulgences, a forgiveness of sins and a quicker path to heaven upon death. 

In 1204, while the crusade was attacking Constantinople, Innocent excommunicated King Alfonso IX of León for marrying someone who was too close to him according the rules of consanguinity.

In 1210 he formally recognized the Order of Franciscans. He had informally done so when Francis and 12 followers met him in Rome a year earlier, but wanted them to have more followers before he gave his blessing. He had them tonsured, which gave them legitimacy as a Church-approved order. He approved other new orders as well.

One of his biggest accomplishments was the Fourth Lateran Council, which has been mentioned almost as many times in this blog as Innocent himself. Tomorrow we'll start looking at the widespread influence of the Fourth Lateran.

The Sun and Moon Allegory

Pope Innocent III was determined to assert papal authority over every area possible. He made sure that kings, although they had their "local" political power, were still under the spiritual authority of the pope. Elected in January 1198, in November of that year he wrote a letter laying out something called the "Sun and Moon allegory":

Just as God, founder of the universe, has constituted two large luminaries in the firmament of Heaven, a major one to dominate the day and a minor one to dominate the night, so he has established in the firmament of the Universal Church, which is signified by the name of Heaven, two great dignities, a major one to preside—so to speak—over the days of the souls, and a minor one to preside over the nights of the bodies. They are the Pontifical authority and the royal power. Thus, as the moon receives its light from the sun and for this very reason is minor both in quantity and in quality, in its size and in its effect, so the royal power derives from the Pontifical authority the splendour of its dignity...

In the Fourth Lateran Council, called by Innocent in 1215, this philosophy was enshrined in Canon 3:

... if a temporal ruler, after having been requested and admonished by the Church, should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated by the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province. If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the supreme pontiff, that he may declare the ruler's vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled by Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith; the right, however, of the chief ruler is to be respected as long as he offers no obstacle in this matter and permits freedom of action.

The Church was perfectly happy to leave the temporal authorities to do whatever they liked, so long as nothing they did contradicts or offended the laws of the Church.

Pope Boniface VIII (1294 - 1303) issued the papal bull Unam Sanctam ("One Faith") reinforcing this approach to the two estates. Dante argued against this, stating that emperor and pope each has supreme authority in their sphere, but neither is allowed to influence the other. By the end of the 14th century, belief in the pope's authority to meddle in secular matters was waning.

But in Innocent's time, he used it frequently. We'll get into specifics tomorrow.

Pope Innocent III

Finally, the pope mentioned more than any other in this blog gets his time in the spotlight. He was named Lothario at birth, and his father, Trasimondo, was a count in the city of Segni in central Italy, so his Italian name was Lotario de' Conti di Segni. His mother, Clarissa Scotti, may have been related to Pope Clement III (not the antipope of the same name).

Lothario studied in Rome and then Paris. After the death of Pope Alexander III, Lothario returned to Rome and worked for the papacy during the terms of Lucius III, Urban III, Gregory VIII (who made him a subdeacon), and Clement III (who made him a cardinal-priest).

He showed his education and value by writing a work (completed by April 1195) that became very popular for several centuries. De Miseria Condicionis Humane "On the Misery of the Human Condition" survived in over 700 manuscripts, an extraordinary number. It addresses the hardships of the human body, the futility of man's ambitions, and the consequences of death and decay and the Day of Judgment. Geoffrey Chaucer made his own translation of it (now lost). Lothario stated his intention to write a companion piece, On the Dignity of Human Nature, but he never got around to it.

Pope Celestine III succeeded Clement III in 1191. He later wished to resign the position in favor of Cardinal Giovanni di San Paolo—Celestine was in his 90s—but the cardinals would not allow it. Celestine died 8 January 1198, and the cardinals chose Lothario that same day after only two ballots. He was only 37, and took the regnal name Innocent III.

Although he only reigned until July 1216, in those 18 years he accomplished much and was considered the most powerful man in Europe. He used the weapons of interdiction and Crusades and official letters to expand the Church and bring Roman Catholics into line with his policies and preferences.

Next time, we'll examine his attempts to bring the whole world under Catholic dominion.

The Finnish Crusades

Pope Alexander III decided that it was time to tackle the pagans on the southern shores of the Baltic Sea (the Baltic is between the peninsula that holds the Scandinavian countries and the mainland). His papal bull in 1171, Non parum animus noster (Our mind is deeply [troubled]), inspired several Christian countries and Christian military orders to take up the Cross.

Some of the peoples that were targets of these Crusades after the bull (and earlier, to be honest) were the Wends, the Finns, Livonians, Estonians, the Old Prussians, and the Lithuanians. I want to talk specifically about the Finns.

The earliest evidence of a Crusade against the Finns by Denmark comes from a speech given at Christmas 1187 by Esbern the Resolute (1127 - 1204), a chieftain, royal chancellor, and great-grandson of King Canute IV. At the age of 60 he encouraged young people to take up the Cross on behalf of Jerusalem, and mentioned a recent victory over the Finns.

Denmark had conquered at least part of Finland in its quest to increase its Christian population and gain more independent standing in the Church (Denmark was controlled by German archbishops, which Sweyn II tried to change). The Church was happy with Denmark making moves (as early as 1165) against Finns and Estonians.

Evidence is scarce, but it appears there was a Crusade by Danes against Finns in 1191 by King Canute VI (reigned 1182 - 1202); it gets mentioned several times, although details are lacking. A Crusade against the Finns in 1202 may have taken place, led by Bishop Anders Sunesen. Another possible Crusade has been mentioned for 1209.

Sweden also wanted to claim Finland as its own, and the two countries fought over the right to control Finland until 1216 when Pope Innocent III (1161 - 1216) declared that Finnish areas should be under the jurisdiction of Sweden rather than Denmark. Finland stayed part of Sweden until 1809, when the Finnish War was fought between Sweden and Russia, resulting in Finland becoming a grand duchy as part of Russia. Finland gained independence from Russia during the Russian Revolution of 1917, and joined the European Union in 1995 and NATO in 2023.

As for Pope Innocent III: he has more mentions in this blog than any other pope—he was, after all, one of the most powerful popes of the Middle Ages—but no entry of his own. Let's find out more about the man behind the influential Fourth Lateran Council tomorrow.

Finland

950 to 1320 CE saw growth and development in the Scandinavian countries of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, as well as Iceland.

Finland (shown here in dark green, between Sweden and Russia) was different. Its territory was inhabited by three chief population groups—Finns, Tavastians, and Karelians—with a shared language and belief system. There is a lot we don't know about these groups, since they did not develop writing until later, after colonization by their neighbors. They lived in fairly small villages with no centralized government. They possibly had very little local government as well, existing as clans whose chief subsistence was agricultural.

The Kalevala, the national epic poem of Finland, was not composed until the 19th century. It contains numerous stories of Finnish folklore passed down orally, but like the tales recorded by the Brothers Grimm, we cannot be sure of the accuracy of the origin of the ancient beliefs embodied in it. The gods in the Kalevala suggest, however, that the early Finnish concept of a pantheon mirrored that of the Norse deities. (Unless the composer of the poem was influenced by the Norse myths.)

When consistent contacts were established between the inhabitants of Finland and the outside world, the chief item Finns had in abundance for trade was fur. With much of Finland still heavily forested, animals were plentiful, so hunting and trapping to produce furs for commerce gave Finland its most valuable and steady commodity.

Finland became better known to the rest of Europe with the Northern Crusades, a series of invasions by Christian countries into the regions not yet touched by Christianity. Let's see how those affected Finland, starting tomorrow.

Alexander III's Reign

In 1179, Pope Alexander III, now able to function as the recognized pope after his imperial-supported rival popes were suppressed, was in a position to summon clergy from all over to address some reforms in the Church.

The Third Council of the Lateran handled many topics, one of which involved Alexander's papal election itself. They decreed that no one could be elected pope without two-thirds of the cardinals. Once agreed to, it was intended to prevent situations such as he experienced, with a small faction of cardinals breaking away to elect their own pope.

It also decreed that education should be provided for free. In the Parochial School post I explained how Alexander declared that it was the duty of the Church to provide free education "in order that the poor, who cannot be assisted by their parents' means, may not be deprived of the opportunity of reading and proficiency."

The Council also made some changes that would affect all Christian countries. It expanded the Truce of God, the times when fighting was forbidden between Christian armies. He supported crusades against the pagans in Northern Europe, and approved forced conversion in the Baltic region (a cause taken up by Danish king Eric the Memorable).

He was friends with Thomas Becket, of course supporting Becket in his dispute with Henry II of England. (The illustration shows Alexander saying goodbye to Becket as he leaves to return to England.) He canonized Becket not long after the man's death, in 1173, which was seen as a rebuke to Henry. Alexander also canonized Bernard of Clairvaux and Edward the Confessor, although he did not beatify (the first step in recognizing that a person could be declared a saint) anyone during his pontificate.

There were problems for Christians and the Church in Finland; priests and the Church had no respect and were frequently harassed. Alexander's papal bull Non parum animus noster ("Our mind is deeply troubled") promoted a Crusade against pagan Estonians and Finns.

Finland hasn't been addressed in this blog except for references to lutefisk and so-called Moses coins. What was the far north like in the Middle Ages? Let's take a look next time.

Pope Alexander III

A man born in Siena c.1100 grew up to make significant changes to the Roman Catholic Church. His name was Roland, and he studied theology at (probably) Bologna, according to Robert de Torigni. He was made a cardinal-deacon in October 1150 by Pope Eugene III, and a few years later he was the papal chancellor.

He was very busy in that role. He was the leader of the cardinals who opposed Holy Roman Emperor Frederick I Barbarossa. He negotiated the treaty between Pope Honorius II and Roger II of Sicily that ended hostilities between them. He was the initiator of a serious diplomatic incident when he delivered a message from the pope declaring that the Holy Roman Emperor was a vassal of the pope.

When Pope Adrian IV died in September 1159, there was disagreement over his successor. Roland was elected pope a week later and took the regnal name Alexander III. There was, however, a contingent of cardinals who were loyal to the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick, and elected a cardinal priest who took the name Victor IV and is now considered an antipope. (This was actually the second "Victor IV" to be declared an antipope. There was another a generation earlier.)

The emperor had a strong presence in Rome, and Alexander had to live outside of the city while fighting to establish his legitimacy. In 1161, the King of Hungary recognized Alexander as the true pope, followed by kings of France and England. Victor died in 1164, and (it is said) Alexander wept real tears for the death of a fellow cleric, scolding his followers who rejoiced at the news.

Victor was replaced, however, by more antipopes with imperial support: Paschal III and Calixtus III. When Frederick was defeated at the Battle of Legnano in 1176, his grasp on politics in the Italian peninsula waned. Alexander returned to Rome on 12 March 1178 to live out the remainder of his pontificate.

He was also now free to make changes, which I'll tell you about tomorrow.

Eric the Memorable

After Niels, the fourth and last of the sons of Sweyn II to become kings of Denmark, died, the throne passed to the next generation; in this case to Eric II "the Memorable," son of Eric the Evergood.

Born c.1090 to King Eric I and an unknown woman (Eric had a wife, but like his father he consorted with other women), Eric rebelled against his uncle, King Niels, because Niels was considered neglectful as a king, leaving much of the administration to his queen, Margaret Fredkulla. Finally winning against Niels, Eric was made king on 25 June 1134.

Initially losing several battles against his predecessor, he had been name "Harefoot"; it meant "barefoot" and was a derogatory nickname linked to retreating from battle. Once he was elected king, "Harefoot" was replaced with "the Memorable" because of the extremely decisive victory against Niels in the last battle, the Battle of Fotevik, when German mercenaries on horseback took Niels' army by surprise. Denmark had never seen such a large-scale cavalry force.

Eric set about consolidating his power, giving titles and positions to his supporters. His half-brother, Canute Lavard (Eric I's legitimate son) had died in battle, and Eric set about to get him canonized. It is said he wanted to establish in Denmark the notion of the "divine right of kings" and felt making his brother a saint would help link religious loyalty to political loyalty. Canute was canonized in 1170 by Pope Alexander III.

Eric was ruthless to his enemies. He decided to conduct his own Crusade against a non-Christian people living on a Baltic island. He had his men dig a canal near their city that filled with water, draining the aquifer that the city relied on and forcing them to surrender or die from lack of water. He attacked Norway; unsuccessfully, but in the process he burned down Oslo.

His death comes to us in a story by a 16th-century historian, Arild Huitfeldt. At a landsting (meeting of the Danish parliament) in 1137, he was approached by Sorte Plov, a local nobleman carrying a spear that had a block of wood stuck on the tip to render it harmless. When Sorte Plov got close enough to see that Eric was not wearing armor or chainmail under his clothes, Sorte knock the block of wood off and thrust the spear through the king.

Eric's nephew Erik Håkonssøn was present, and drew his sword to deal with Sorte, but Sorte, knowing that Erik was next in the line of succession, pointed out that "A juicy piece of meat hath fallen in thy bowl!" Erik Håkonssøn was crowned Eric III of Denmark (Sorte escaped). (Eric did have an illegitimate son, Sweyn, who after Erik would become King Sweyn III of Denmark, sharing the reign with two other members of that generation of Sweyn II's descendants.)

I am shocked, I say, shocked to discover that I've never told you about Pope Alexander III, even though he has been mentioned several times in this blog. Let me introduce you tomorrow to the man.

The Children of Sweyn, Part 3

After the untimely death of King Eric the Evergood in Cyprus, his brother Niels became King of Denmark, the latest and last of the sons of Sweyn II to become king. He was born c.1063, and his reign began in 1104.

In 1105 Niels married the daughter of Inge I "the Elder," King of Sweden. Her name was Margaret Fredkulla "Maiden of Peace"), and she had previously been married to King Magnus III "Barefoot" of Norway (who died in 1103) as part of a peace treaty. Rumor said Niels was not interested in the details of administration and left many of the affairs of state in Margaret's hands. Margaret even minted her own coins. (The illustration shows a coin with Niels' image.) They had a son, Magnus "the Strong" Nielsen, who became ruler of Geatland in southern Sweden in the 1120s. 

There was trouble with Eric the Memorable, the son of Niels' older brother Eric Evergood. Eric rebelled against Niels' reign, losing several battles against Niels and Magnus the Strong. Eric hoped to make an ally of the Holy Roman Emperor Lothair III, who was busy trying to depose a pope, but later did support him. With the help of Lothair and other allies and German mercenaries, Eric defeated Niels' army in 1134.

Niels died a year later, slain by the townspeople of Schleswig as he sought refuge.

Niels was the last surviving son of Sweyn—whose sons reigned for a combined 60 years—and the reign passed to Eric the Memorable, who reigned as King Eric II of Denmark. He was a ruthless man who met a sudden end after only a few years. I'll share that story next time.

The Children of Sweyn, Part 2

After the death of King Canute IV of Denmark, he was succeeded by his brother Olaf (c.1050 - 1095). Olaf's reign suffered through several consecutive years of very dry springtimes that led to extremely poor growing seasons, which were followed by so much rain in the fall that fields were flooded. The people were reduced to digging for roots to eat. King Olaf I was given the nickname "Hunger" because of this.

The famines were attributed to the unjust murder of Canute, a very saintly man, and helped contribute to his eventual canonization. The contrast between Olaf and his predecessor was noted by the people.

Canute had given Olaf trouble previously. When Canute prepared a fleet to attack England, Olaf was at the assembly point while Canute was delayed. Olaf became the unofficial leader of the waiting Danish fleet, and Canute felt Olaf was taking on too much authority. Olaf in turn was concerned about Canute's son becoming Canute's successor, when Olaf wanted his own chance to be king.

Canute had Olaf arrested by their brother Eric and exiled to Flanders. When news came that Canute had been killed, Olaf was proclaimed king at a council meeting in Denmark, and Olaf was brought back.

When the land was suffering, some religious beliefs held that a sacrifice was needed to turn the tides of their god's favor. Olaf died on 18 August 1095, we do not know how. Saxo Grammaticus (writing decades after the event) reports that Olaf "willingly gave himself to lose the land of its bad luck and begged that all of it (guilt) would fall upon his head alone. So offered he his life for his countrymen." He was a human sacrifice to help Denmark, so Grammaticus believed.

Eric, the brother who was given the responsibility by Canute to get rid of Olaf, became the next king of Denmark. Eric I of Denmark (c.1056 - 1103) was called Eric the Good, or the Evergood. The famines that were such a part of Olaf's reign were over during Eric's.

Saxo Grammaticus records that he was a powerful man who could hold his ground while four men tried to move him, and he was well-liked and a good speaker. He was a man of the people, mixing among them and greeting everyone. He avoided clashing with his nobles, but was ruthless to pirates and robbers.

He managed to get Canute canonized while on a visit to Rome, and achieved his father Sweyn's dream of an archbishopric for Denmark. He traveled to Constantinople where he became ill; he died on Cyprus in July 1103, where he was buried. The illustration is of a memorial stone for Eric in Viborg, Denmark.

Fortunately for Denmark, there were still plenty of Sweyn's illegitimate sons left who could be king, and the crown passed to Niels, who reigned for 30 years. He will be tomorrow's story.

The Children of Sweyn, Part 1

King Sweyn II of Denmark (c.1019 - 1076) had two wives and numerous mistresses, resulting in about 20 children. His first wife was Gyda of Sweden, who we are told by later chronicles was the daughter of King of Sweden Anund Jacob and Queen Gunnhildr Sveinsdóttir. The marriage was short-lived, and Adam of Bremen suspects she was poisoned by Thora, a concubine of Sweyn. His second marriage was to Gyda's mother, Gunnhildr, after Anund Jacob died (c.1050). Although they had a son (Sweyn), Bishop Adalbert of Hamburg ended the marriage by threatening excommunication because the husband was too closely related to his wife/mother-in-law. Gunnhildr returned to Sweden.

Sweyn never re-married that we know of, but that did not stop him from fathering children. His legitimate child by Gunnhildr died young. Of his known children, many survived and become known to history.

Harald Hen, born c.1050, became King Harald III after his father, reigning from 1076 to 1080. The election to succeed Sweyn was between Harald and his brother (who also became king) Canute IV of Denmark (later Canute the Saint). Harald's reign was challenged by his brothers, who were supported by Olaf III of Norway, who might have wanted to carry on the legacy of his father, Harald Hardrada, who hassled Sweyn for much of his reign.

Although Saxo Grammaticus, in his Gesta Danorum ("Deeds of the Danish People"), calls Harald III weak and ineffective, another chronicler says he was beloved by the people. He started no new wars, he standardized Danish coinage, allowed public use of royal forests, and eliminated trial by combat and trial by ordeal, replacing them with the English system of calling other men to swear to your bona fides.

Upon his death, he was succeeded by his brother Canute the Saint (born c.1042; reigned 1080 - 1086). Canute was more ambitious than his brother, and led yet another Danish raid on England. Since his great-uncle Cnut was once king of England, Canute IV considered himself the rightful heir to that crown and considered William I "the Conqueror" a usurper.

Canute IV married Adela, daughter of Robert I of Flanders (an ally of Denmark). With the help of his father-in-law and Olaf III of Norway, he planned an assault on England and assembled a fleet of ships. At the same time, however, Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV was being seen as a growing threat to Denmark and Flanders. The fleet never sailed, because Canute and Robert were afraid to leave Denmark and Flanders undefended against Henry's thoughts of expansion.

Canute was killed in 1086 by a lance thrust in his side during a peasant revolt. Canute had also been a devout advocate for the Church. A famine that followed his death was attributed to the unjust killing of a saintly man.  Miracles were attributed to him not long after. Pope Paschal II confirmed the "cult of Canute," and he became the first Dane to be canonized. (The illustration is of his statue in St. Peter's Church in Odense, Denmark.)

His successor was another illegitimate child of Sweyn's, Olaf Hunger, and his nickname was not in any way flattering. I'll explain tomorrow.

Sweyn's Reign, and Religion

The conflict between Sweyn II of Denmark and Harald Hardrada was called off in 1064, with Sweyn agreeing to recognize Harald as King of Norway. With no more conflict against Denmark, Harald sailed to England to conquer that land, where he died in 1066 at the Battle of Stamford Bridge.

The war with Norway had been devastating economically for Denmark, and recovery was slow. Sweyn's reputation for kindness and generosity went a long way toward keeping the loyalty of his people during difficult times, however. He also created close ties to the Church, reaching out to popes for support and friendship. He tried to get his great-grandfather, the first Christian King of Denmark Harold Bluetooth, canonized as a saint.

He divided Denmark into eight dioceses with papal support, and brought Anglo-Dane clerics from England to prevent the expansion of German influence on Danish churches. Bishop Adalbert of Hamburg (with jurisdiction over Denmark's Christian population) was trying to extend more influence of the German-based Holy Roman Empire to the Scandinavian countries. Sweyn requested of Pope Leo IX to have an archbishop for Denmark to stave off Adalbert. The request was not fulfilled before Leo died in 1054.

Churches were built throughout Denmark with the king's support. The German chronicler Adam of Bremen visited Denmark and wrote about how impressed he was with Sweyn's wisdom and how astounded he was at the hundreds of churches he saw. Originally wooden, hundreds of churches were re-built with stone in the 12th century.

Adam of Bremen interviewed Sweyn, who told him much about his family and life. Much of what we know about Denmark in the 9th and 10th centuries comes from Adam's work, Gesta Hammaburgensis ecclesiae pontificum ("Deeds of Bishops of the Hamburg Church").

Sweyn tried his own hand at taking over England, the land of his birth, after William of Normandy had conquered it. He allied with Edgar Ætheling to challenge William, but after managing only to conquer York, William bribed him to desert Edgar.

Sweyn had two wives, and numerous mistresses. He fathered at least 20 children, many of whom went on to make names for themselves. Perhaps tomorrow we'll visit a selection of his children and their accomplishments.

Sweyn's Close Call

Sweyn's care for his people allowed Harald Hardrada to escape during their sea skirmish, but Sweyn himself had a similar close call. In 1062, at the Battle of Niså off the coast of Halland (a Swedish province), Sweyn was captured and survived due to the sympathy of his captor.

The tale is told by Snorri Sturluson: Harald and Sweyn agreed to meet in a decisive battle. If Sweyn won, Harald would stop trying to invade and conquer Denmark (he had been calling himself king of Denmark for years). The two navies would meet on 9 August. Harald was there, but Sweyn did not show up. Harald kept his formal navy but allowed his non-soldiers—the villagers who were conscripted for the fight—to go home.

That's when Sweyn appeared, seizing what he saw as an advantage. Harald linked all his ships with rope so that Sweyn's ships could not separate them. Sweyn did the same, and the battle lasted into the night. Then Harald's earl, Haakon Ivarsson, detached his ships and started attacking the weakened and tired Danish ships from a new angle.

Sweyn didn't have a way to do the same, and by dawn 70 of his ships were empty and the rest went into retreat. Sweyn leapt into the water to escape being attacked in his recognizable boat. He was actually rescued by Haakon, who did not turn him over to Harald. Haakon had been an ally of Sweyn's in the past, and saved his life.

Sweyn would have been killed or turned over to Harald by anyone else, but Haakon got him to safety. Later, Haakon claimed that Sweyn was in disguise and unrecognizable, but that is unlikely since they knew each other personally. Haakon's actions caused the Norwegians to condemn him. He later became the earl of Halland under Sweyn.

Harald's forces won, but the damage was so great on his side as well that Norway was suffering. The saga would not be concluded for another couple years. We'll wrap this up tomorrow.

Sweyn II of Denmark

Also known as Sweyn Estridsson or Estridsen, because his mother was Estrid, daughter of Sweyn Forkbeard, Sweyn II was King of Denmark from 1047 to 1078. He was also sometimes known as Sweyn Ulfsson because his father was Ulf Thorgilsson.

Born c.1019, he was raised in England where his parents lived under the reign of his uncle, King Cnut. He was raised as a warrior and eventual king, but he also knew how to read and write. Pope Gregory VII, who became a personal friend of Sweyn, described him as an exceptionally educated monarch.

What we know of him (and much of this era in Denmark) we learned from Adam of Bremen and his chronicle Gesta Hammaburgensis ecclesiae pontificum ("Deeds of Bishops of the Hamburg Church"). As king of Denmark, Sweyn invited scholars from all over to make sure Danes were educated in Latin so they could communicate with the rest of the world. We also know that he was of above average height, based on examination of his skeleton (entombed in Roskilde Cathedral).

King of Denmark Harthacnut, Sweyn's cousin, made him a jarl, and for Harthacnut he started an unsuccessful war against king of Norway Magnus I. Magnus claimed the throne of Denmark at Harthacnut's death in 1042, and Sweyn fought on Magnus' behalf, where he had some success and was proclaimed king by the Danish nobles. He could not formally take the reign from Magnus, however, and fled to Sweden for a time.

Harald Hardrada, Magnus' uncle, had been exiled. He returned and joined Sweyn to challenge Magnus. Magnus chose to share Norway with Harald. Magnus died in 1047, declaring that Harald would rule Norway and Sweyn II could be king in Denmark.

Harald, accustomed to sharing Denmark with Magnus, did not want to give it up to Sweyn. The two sides fought for years. In one notable skirmish, Harald attacked and plundered the coast of Jutland, taking goods and prisoners. Sweyn's ships approached, whereupon Harald had his men throw the plunder overboard to delay his pursuers.

Sweyn ordered his people to ignore the floating wares and keep sailing after Harald's ship. Then Harald had the captives thrown overboard. Sweyn ordered the captives to be rescued, knowing that Harald would escape.

At another encounter at sea, Sweyn almost lost his life. I'll tell you that story tomorrow.

Sweyn's Daughter, Estrid

Estrid Svensdatter, daughter of Sweyn Forkbeard and sister of Cnut, was born c.990 and lived at least until 1057. We do not know about her early life, and there is a great deal of speculation about who her mother was.

One story is that she was the daughter of Sigrid the Haughty, the wife of King Eric the Victorious of Sweden. After Eric's death Sigrid married Sweyn. Other stories about Sweyn say his wife was a Polish princess, Świętosława, the daughter of Duke Mieszko I of Poland.

If she were the daughter of Sigrid, it would make her the sister of Olof Skötkonung. Olof, also called Olof the Swede, became King of Sweden. When Estrid's son, Sweyn II, married Gunnhildr Sveinsdóttir, Pope Leo IX annulled it on the grounds of consanguinity. Gunnhildr was the maternal granddaughter of Olof Skötkonung, whose mother we are certain was Sigrid. This is the anecdotal evidence that Sigrid was her mother.

When Sweyn Forkbeard died in 1014, Estrid came under the guardianship of her brother, King Cnut. She had at least three marriages proposed and/or contracted, the order of which is uncertain because they are all mentioned in different sagas and histories. There is no definitive history written of her life by contemporaries.

One marriage supposedly was to a Kievan Rus son of either Grand Prince Vladimir the Great or Yaroslav the Wise, making her a Rus princess. Whomever it was, that prince died shortly after. She seems to have been, married to a Duke of Normandy, either Richard II or his son, Robert I (depending on which chronicler you read), but these seem unlikely, and most Western European chroniclers do not mention this, or they mention it as very short-lived with no children.

The longer-lasting union seems got have been with Ulf Thorgilsson (also called Ulf Jarl), a Danish earl. Their children were Sweyn II Estridsson, Beorn Estridsson, and Asbjørn Estridsson. 

Ulf was a trusted earl, and Cnut even gave his son, Harthacnut, to Ulf and Astrid to raise. Unfortunately, Cnut and Ulf had a falling out, and Ulf was killed, apparently with Cnut's blessing. (I wrote about it here.)

Although Estrid had not been a consort to a king, during the reign of her son Sweyn she was referred to as dronning, which means "queen." She was also known as Estrith, and sometimes as Margaret. We do not know when she died, but it was recorded that Bishop William of Roskilde officiated at her funeral. Since he was bishop from 1057 to 1073, she must have died during those years.

Her son Sweyn II became King of Denmark, and it is he that we will talk about tomorrow.

Sweyn Invades

It may well have been news of the wholesale slaughter of Danes in 1002 that was ordered by King Æthelred that motivated Sweyn Forkbeard to invade England. The St. Brice's Day Massacre is said to have killed Sweyn's sister Gunhilde and her husband, Pallig.

According to John of Wallingford, a Benedictine monk in the early 13th century, Sweyn was behind invasions between 1002 and 1012, many of which were commanded by Thorkell the Tall. Despite the massacre, an apparent arrangement between Sweyn and Duke Richard II of Normandy to sell Sweyn's plunder in Normandy suggests that one reason for invasion was, as always, loot. Of course the Danes were often bought off with Danegeld, and Sweyn accumulated a lot of it in those invasion years.

Sweyn is said to have personally led an invasion force in 1013, accompanied by Cnut. According to the Peterborough Chronicle:

before the month of August came king Swein with his fleet to Sandwich. He went very quickly about East Anglia into the Humber's mouth, and so upward along the Trent till he came to Gainsborough. Earl Uchtred and all Northumbria quickly bowed to him, as did all the people of the Kingdom of Lindsey, then the people of the Five Boroughs. He was given hostages from each shire. When he understood that all the people had submitted to him, he bade that his force should be provisioned and horsed; he went south with the main part of the invasion force, while some of the invasion force, as well as the hostages, were with his son Cnut. After he came over Watling Street, they went to Oxford, and the town-dwellers soon bowed to him, and gave hostages. From there they went to Winchester, and the people did the same, then eastward to London.

London resisted, partly because by then they had Danish help from Thorkell the Tall, who had defected, with many men and ships loyal to him, because he objected to the stoning of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Ælfheah. Sweyn then went to Bath and other locations where they all surrendered. London soon followed, fearing how severe his revenge would be if they continued to resist.

With the capitulation of London, Æthelred went to the Isle of Wight and sent his sons to Normandy. Sweyn started to manage his new kingdom, but he died five weeks later, on 3 February 1014. His body was embalmed and returned to Denmark for burial.

His position in England was taken over by Cnut, of whom much has been said. Who has never been mentioned is Sweyn's daughter, Estrid, who lived a long and not-dull life. Let's talk about her next time.

The Oxford Massacre

One site of the St. Brice's Day Massacre in 1002 seems to have been Oxford. Æthelred called it in a 1004 charter "a most just extermination" of Danes, because of the rumor that they intended to kill him and all his council and take over the entire island, not just the part known as the Danelaw.

The sad part of the situation in Oxford was that the Danes there saw it coming and decided to take advantage of sanctuary. Sanctuary allowed anyone to take refuge in a church. Sanctuary had a time limit of 40 days, but in that time the refugee could get aid from outside to create a defense on their behalf against the persecutors.

The Danes in Oxford went to St Frideswide's Church (now Christ Church Cathedral), which Æthelred's charter tells:

For it is fully agreed that to all dwelling in this country it will be well known that, since a decree was sent out by me with the counsel of my leading men and magnates, to the effect that all the Danes who had sprung up in this island, sprouting like cockle amongst the wheat, were to be destroyed by a most just extermination, and thus this decree was to be put into effect even as far as death, those Danes who dwelt in the afore-mentioned town, striving to escape death, entered this sanctuary of Christ, having broken by force the doors and bolts, and resolved to make refuge and defense for themselves therein against the people of the town and the suburbs;

This should have been recognized as a safe haven for them,

...but when all the people in pursuit strove, forced by necessity, to drive them out, and could not, they set fire to the planks and burnt, as it seems, this church with its ornaments and its books. Afterwards, with God's aid, it was renewed by me.

Were the Danes all stuck inside while it burned? Or did they flee and meet the angry mob outside?

In 2008, an archaeological dig found the remains of 37 people who had been massacred. So far as could be determined, they were all male, between the ages of 16 and 25, and some had scars suggestive of previous injuries such as would be incurred by warriors. There were, however, newer injuries all over the bodies that did not have time to heal, as if attacked by a crowd from all sides. Radiocarbon dating suggests they all died between 960 and 1020 CE.

This was not the only site of aggression against Danes, but the king's decree and stories about St. Brice's Day may have been the impetus for what Sweyn Forkbeard did next. Let's get back to him.

The St. Brice's Day Massacre

Clashes with Danes in England resulted in establishing the Danelaw, originally just the set of Danish laws agreed upon with Alfred the Great (848 - 899) wherein Danes could rule themselves while living on English soil. It later came to refer to a specific geographical territory (the pink area in the illustration).

This created a time of relative peace, with each group largely staying out of the other's way. In the 980s, however, Danes started making raids into English territory. In 991, after the Battle of Maldon, King Æthelred the Unready paid Danegeld, a tribute to the Danes to stop their attacks.

The attacks did not stop, however, and from 997 to 1001 there were savage raids by Danes across Southern England, burning towns and killing Anglo-Saxons.

Then Æthelred learned of a rumor, that the Danes intended to kill him, all his councilors, and then possess the entire kingdom. To put it in the words of the (translated) Anglo-Saxon Chronicle:

...in the same year the king gave an order to slay all the Danes that were in England. This was accordingly done on the mass-day of St. Brice; because it was told the king, that they would beshrew him of his life, and afterwards all his council, and then have his kingdom without any resistance.

Contemporary and near-contemporary and modern historians disagree on the phrase "all the Danes that were in England." Some say it was only those who were warriors, some (like the A-SC) believe it was every Dane they could find.

The massacre took place on the feast day of St. Brice, a Frankish bishop (c.370 - 444) who succeeded St. Martin as bishop of Tours. It took place in Oxford, and a royal charter issued in 1004 by Æthelred called it "a most just extermination."

Part of it involved an act of cruelty that mirrored the much later Clifford's Tower incident, an act so horrendous that it might have been the deciding factor in Sweyn's invasion. I'll explain more next time.

Sweyn Forkbeard

European history classrooms in America often talk about the Danish King Cnut (Canute) and his conquest of England. The modern world also hears about Cnut's grandfather, Harald Bluetooth, from whom the wireless protocol Bluetooth™ gets its name.

Whom we don't hear enough about is the generation sandwiched between these two familiar names, Harald's son and Cnut's father, Sweyn Forkbeard, who managed to be King of Denmark, King of Norway, and King of England (although in England only for a little over a month). He also fathered two kings and a queen.

His birthdate is unknown, but in the mid-980s he was old enough to rebel against his father, Harald, driving Harald into an exile in which he died in either 985 or 986. Despite this treasonous act, the Encomium Emmæ Reginæ ("Encomium for Queen Emma"), written for Emma of Normandy (widow of Æthelred the Unready and later Cnut's wife), claims Sweyn was universally loved:

Sveinn, king of the Danes, was, I declare, as I have ascertained from truthful report, practically the most fortune of all kings of his time, ... The Divine Power granted him such great favor that even as a boy he was held by all in close affection, and was hated only by his own father. No fault of the boy deserved this: it was due only to envy. When he grew to be a young man, he increased daily in the love of the people, and accordingly, his father's envy increased more and more, so that he wished not in secret, but openly, to cast him out, affirming by oath that he should not rule after him.

Some reports say that it was Sweyn embracing Christianity that ultimately turned his father so against him that Sweyn had to depose Harald and take the throne. One German historian, Adam of Bremen, claimed Sweyn was a rebellious pagan, upset that his father embraced Christianity. We also read in some chronicles that Harald was baptized by a cleric named Poppo, who performed a miracle that convinced Harald that Christianity was true. (Other versions claim Poppo performed for Sweyn instead.)

We know about Sweyn's invasion of England in 1003. Now, Danes were frequently invading England, and had established an enormous foothold, an occupied area known as the Danelaw, an agreed-upon compromise between the Danes and Alfred the Great. Was there a reason why Sweyn felt he had to start ravaging other parts outside of the Danelaw?

He might have had a very good reason, we could even say a legitimate reason, because of an incident in November of 1002. Tomorrow we'll learn about the St. Brice's Day Massacre.

Defectors

It must have been a shock when Thorkell the Tall, a leader and warrior of the early 12th-century Danish invasion of England, changed his stance and defected to join the English forces of King Æthelred the Unready, taking 45 ships' worth of loyal men with him. There is some reason to believe that Thorkell was married to a daughter of Æthelred, possibly Eadgyth (Edith).

As mercenaries for Æthelred, the Danes fought in 1013 against their former liege lord, King Sweyn Forkbeard of Denmark and his son, Cnut (whom Thorkell had helped raise and educate). Sweyn was successful, forcing Æthelred into exile by the end of 1013. Sweyn died not long after, however, on 2 February 1014, and Cnut was declared his successor.

The remaining English nobles called Æthelred back from the continent to reclaim the throne (Cnut was back in Denmark). While Cnut was preparing a fleet to re-take England, Æthelred's eldest son Æthelstan died, making his second son Edmund Ironside the new heir to the throne of England.

Cnut's invasion arrived in September 1015 with numerous mercenaries and help from Poland and Sweden. Thorkell decided to leave the employ of Æthelred, defecting to join up with Cnut. While they plundered southern England, the elderly and ill Æthelred left leadership of the army to Edmund. Edmund's army was joined by an army raised by Eadric Streona, but Eadric betrayed Edmund and the English, convincing 40 ships to defect with him and join Cnut.

During a Battle of Otford (near the village of Otford in Kent), Eadric defected from Cnut back to the English. This seems to have been simply a ruse, because at the following crucial Battle of Assandun he defected again, leaving Edmund's army alone to fight Cnut. A majority of English nobility were killed, defeated by Cnut. 

For Thorkell's defection back to Cnut, he received East Anglia. Eadric received Mercia, but Cnut knew he could not be trusted. Eadric must have acted true to form for the dastardly fellow he was, because less than two years later Cnut had him beheaded.

Thorkell, again, had some falling out with Cnut, in 1021. Cnut banished Thorkell, who returned to Denmark. Fearing Thorkell's reputation as a powerful leader, Cnut didn't want Thorkell to defect again to join some enemy of Cnut, so he made him an earl of Denmark and foster-father to Cnut's son, Harthacnut.

Mentions of Thorkell end in 1023. The details of his death are unknown. One of his sons was in the retinue of Harthacnut, but after Harthacnut's death Thorkell's wife and sons were expelled from Denmark, suggesting there was suspicion on the family.

Now: mentioned several times but never discussed in detail, let's talk about Cnut's father and Thorkell's lord, Sweyn Forkbeard.

Thorkell the Tall

The Danish raid on Canterbury in 1011 included a leader named Thorkell the Tall. He was an important enough man that his name was recorded on a few runestones, such as the one pictured here in Sweden, commemorating the taking of Danegeld in England. (I actually mentioned Thorkell, though not by name, 12 years ago; same illustration, it turns out; there aren't many graphics available that can be linked to Thorkell.)

Legend says Thorkell helped raise the young Cnut, taking him on raids and teaching him warfare. The Encomium Emmae Reginae ("Encomium of Queen Emma"), about Emma of Normandy, tells us he was a great leader and warrior.

Landing with an army on the shores of Sandwich in the south-east in 1009, he began a progress through southern England either destroying or getting paid off. Canterbury initially gave them 3000 pounds of silver, which assuaged the Danes and sent them to London for their next attacks.

London's defenses and people were too much, however, and the Danes' siege failed to defeat the city, so they returned to Canterbury. Canterbury was besieged for two weeks. It finally fell due to treachery by Ælfmaer, Abbot of St Augustine's, who (according to William of Malmesbury and others) let the Danes into the city. (Cnut made him Bishop of Sherborne in 1023.) Canterbury Cathedral was burned, and the archbishop of Canterbury, Ælfheah, was captured for ransom. The Danes demanded an additional 3000 pounds of silver to let the captives go.

Ælfheah refused to be ransomed, and over seven months took the opportunity to speak to his captors and persuade many of them to convert to Christianity. On 19 April, during a feast in which the Danes got very drunk, they decided to kill Ælfheah.

Thorkell tried to save the archbishop. He begged the Danes to let Ælfheah live, offering them all that he possessed except his ship. The crowd would not be stopped. Ælfheah was pelted with stones and bones and finally beheaded by one impatient man.

More attacks across southern England produced a total of 48,000 pounds of silver, but Thorkell and men loyal to him split from the other Danes. Thorkell and 45 ships defected and offered themselves to King Æthelred as mercenaries.

This would mean that Thorkell would ultimately wind up on the other side of a battle with his own king and the son of that king, Cnut, whom Thorkell helped raise. I'll tell you how that went tomorrow.