-
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
Trøndelag. The alliance between the Church and the Magnus faction was thus
temporary and did not form an essential part in the formation and continued
existence of the faction.
The second ideological issue concerns the opposition between traditional
monarchy or monarchy of the people , and the new, authoritarian and
ecclesiastical ideas of kingship by the grace of God. The latter ideology is clearly
expressed in Magnus s unction and coronation and the alliance between his faction
and the Church in the 1160s, and further, in the speeches Sverris saga attributes to
Magnus to defend his right to the throne against Sverre s attacks. Logically, Sverre
ought to embrace more traditional ideas, of which there are also traces in his
propaganda, notably his defence of the traditional principle of succession, allowing
all sons of a king, whether or not they were legitimate, to ascend to the throne. This
idea also accords with the more general attitude in Sverris saga, of the king as the
best man , i.e. the reason for choosing a king from the royal line is that this line is
likely to produce the men with the best qualifications, and thus that Sverre s
31
Gunnes, Kongens ære; S. Bagge, Oratio contra clerum Norvegiae , Medieval Scandinavia. An
Encyclopedia, edited by Ph. Pulsiano (New York, 1993), p. 455.
32
S. Bagge, The Political Thought of The King s Mirror, Medieval Scandinavia. Supplements 3 (Odense,
1987), pp. 113 154.
Scand. J. History 24
Downloaded by [Uniwersytet Warszawski] at 05:34 24 January 2014
312 Sverre Bagge
victories become evidence of his royal descent.33 However, Sverre also takes over
the authoritarian and monarchical ideology, applying it far more consistently than
his adversaries, in the form of explicit propaganda in A Speech against the Bishops, and
in actual practice in his new organization of local government. In this field, we are
dealing with an ideological escalation rather than with two factions fighting one
another with different ideological weapons.34
The third issue may be regarded as a subdivision of the other two, Sverre
defending the principle of agnatic succession, Magnus that of legitimate birth and
coronation. The former principle corresponded more or less exactly to
traditional ideas, the latter to the new ideas introduced by the Church and
expressed in the documents issued in connection with the alliance between
Magnus s faction and the Church in the 1160s. The opposition between the two
principles is brought forward very clearly in Sverris saga. However, even this
ideological division proved temporary. Magnus s faction later acclaimed a number
of alleged illegitimate sons of Magnus as kings, while Sverres s faction in 1204 chose
as its king a son of Sverre s daughter. Moreover, Sverre himself was crowned in
1194 and afterwards seems to have used his coronation as an argument for his right
º º
to the throne. Both he and his grandson and successor Hakon Hakonsson made
great efforts to obtain divine support in this way.35
Despite the number of ideological issues involved during the struggles of the
second half of the 12th century, there are no permanent ideological distinctions
between the factions, and it is difficult to see that ideology could be an important
factor in keeping a faction together and distinguishing the factions from one
another. The only really constant line of division between the factions has to do
with dynastic allegiance: the Birchlegs favoured the line of Sigurd and é ystein,
their adversaries the line of Inge or, mostly, they supported kings who were said to
descend from Magnus Erlingsson. Fortunately for both sides, Sigurd and Magnus
were both known for their many affairs with women, so it was not difficult to make
a convincing claim for some obscure boy being the son of one of them. We thus
seem to be left with some kind of personal attachment linking the factions together.
What was the exact nature of this factor?
7. Personal relationships: kinship and friendship
Kinship was adduced by the other great Marxist historian, Halvdan Koht, as an
additional explanation of the class struggle, instead of the regional one (see above).
A more extreme variation of the same theory is to regard the period of the civil wars
as essentially a development from a society of kindred to a society of state ,
inevitable tensions between kindred groups or family clans leading to civil war,
which is finally remedied by the victory of the state and the suppression of the
33
Bagge, Society and Politics, p. 130 and From Gang Leader, p. 57.
34
S. Bagge, Kingship in Medieval Norway. Ideal and Reality , in H. Duchhardt et al., eds. European
Monarchy. Its Evolution and Practice from Roman Antiquity to Modern Times (Stuttgart, 1992), pp. 41 52.
35 [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ] - zanotowane.pl
- doc.pisz.pl
- pdf.pisz.pl
- matkadziecka.xlx.pl