VIKING SOCIETY FOR NORTHERN RESEARCHTEXT SERIESGENERAL EDITORSPeter Foote and Anthony Faulkes
VOLUME IX
THE WORKS OF SVEN AGGESEN

THE WORKS OF

SVEN AGGESENTWELFTH-CENTURY DANISH HISTORIAN

TRANSLATEDWITH INTRODUCTION AND NOTESBYERIC CHRISTIANSEN

VIKING SOCIETY FOR NORTHERN RESEARCH
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON
1 992

 Eric Christiansen 1992
Printed in the University of Birmingham
ISBN 978 0 903521 24 6

The cover illustration is based on part of a mural, painted c.1200, inÅl church, 8 miles west of Varde, W. Jutland (cf. p. 41).

CONTENTS
PREFACEINTRODUCTION(i) The Author(ii) The Text and its Congeners(iii) Lex Castrensis(iv) Historia Compendiosa(v) The Lost Genealogy(vi) Translations
THE LAW OF THE RETAINERS OR OF THE COURT
SUPPLEMENT TO LEX CASTRENSISA SHORT HISTORY OF THE KINGS OF DENMARKNOTESTo the Introduction
On the Law of the Retainers
On the Supplement to the Lex Castrensis
On the Short History
APPENDIX — SVEN’S FAMILYABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
INDEXES

vii
1
1

4
7
18
26
27
31
44
48
75
75
86
103
104
141
146
165

GENERAL EDITORS’ NOTE
The forms of early Danish personal names in this volume usually follow
the spelling of them found in the headwords of Danmarks gamle Personnavne. Patronymics have been normalised throughout in -sen. West
Norse names and other words appear in conventional Old Icelandic form.

The printing of this volume is made possible by a gift to the
University of Cambridge in memory of Dorothea Coke, Skjaeret, 1951.

PREFACE
But where is the text? To publish a book in a Text Series without one
seems perverse. The excuse is that Sven’s own words can never be
established with certainty, because they have been transmitted along twovery defective conductors. One was a scholarly scribe of the late thirteenth century, who improved, clarified and paraphrased the text he wascopying. Even his manuscript is lost; a version of his version was printed
in 1642 and was accepted as Sven’s own work until the late nineteenth
century. The other copyist was a post-Reformation student, who barely
understood the early manuscript he had been commissioned to copy andmisinterpreted about one word in ten.
As a result, the best text is a reconstruction published in 1915/16 by thegreat Svendborg filolog, Martin Clarentius Gertz. It was a masterly
reconciliation of two flawed versions, but it is always open to further
imaginative emendation, or to pedantic criticism. There seems no point
in reprinting the work of Gertz when it has appeared three times, and partof it four, this century.
Consequently I have not attempted a general discussion of Sven’s
latinity, which would be futile without the concurrent versions of what hewrote and would add little to the critical commentary of the 1915/16
edition. I offer only a halting English translation, with an introduction
and notes, hastily compiled, treating some of the problems presented by
Sven’s works in their surviving form.
Sven is bound to be of interest to students of medieval Scandinavia, but
his writings may also be of interest to students of medieval historiography and legal apocrypha. The ‘Military Law’ of King Canute has been
an irritating shadow on the fringes of Anglo-Saxon history for some time,and has been of more substantial importance in the discussion of thedevelopment of the Danish state. Sven’s Historia Compendiosa is a
tempting fruit of the international culture of the twelfth-century Westernchurch, and in the notes I attempt to explain this connection rather thanviii

Prefaceprobe at length the possible Nordic antecedents of the work. Sven borrowed from the Icelanders, but it was his classical and legal schoolingwhich taught him his art.
I am most grateful to Professor Peter Foote for suggesting and nursing
this book, and to Dr Anthony Faulkes, his fellow-editor, for trenchantcriticisms. The Revd D. H. N. Carter has been generous with his help, andI am indebted to the Warden and Fellows of New College, Oxford, for the
expenses of research in Copenhagen.
Eric Christiansen
New College
July 1990

INTRODUCTION(i) The Author

Nothing is known of Sven Aggesen other than what he wrote of himself
in the works attributed to him. He mentioned Saxo, the more famous of
the two medieval Danish historians, as his associate; but Saxo nevermentions Sven by name, even though he often mentions members of his
family and made use of his work.1
Sven came from a great dynasty, which had played a leading part inDanish politics for nearly a century until 1176, when five of his cousins
were implicated in a supposed conspiracy against King Valdemar I. Notlong afterwards the chief of the clan, his uncle Eskil, archbishop of Lund,
resigned his see and retired to Clairvaux, where he died in 1181. The
metropolitan see, held by the family for nearly 90 years, passed to Bishop
Absalon, who established his authority in Scania after a period of open
revolt and civil war. Eskil’s heir presumptive, Asser Svensen, provost of
Lund cathedral, was dead by 1194, after a long exile; Sven’s othercousins were no longer a force to be reckoned with. (On Sven’s family
see the Appendix, pp. 141–5.)
So who was he? A nephew of Eskil, son of Eskil’s brother Aggi, anda man who was alive in 1185, when he witnessed the surrender of the
Pomeranians to King Knut VI, Valdemar’s son. That much is certain; andhis own pride of ancestry reveals more. It suggests mixed feelings: pridein his father, misgivings about his grandfather and great-uncles, andcomplete silence about the great Eskil.
Kristiarn Svensen, the grandfather, had been a powerful and highly
respected man, along with his brothers, in the first third of the twelfth
century; but he had set a bad example of lawless violence to others. His
son Aggi (not the same name as Aghi and Aki but already confused withthem in Sven’s day) had fought heroically against the forces of King
Nicolaus in 1132. According to Saxo, he was still fighting 25 years later,
for King Sven III against Valdemar: he gave the advice to attack which
led to the annihilation of his own side on Grathe Heath.2
It is possible that Aggi was on bad terms with his brother the archbishop. The Cistercian memoir of Eskil3 tells how the old prelate saw oneof his dead brothers in a vision:

2

Sven Aggesen
He had fallen slain under the sword of an enemy, and had not been shriven
before he died. While he lived, he had once offended the archbishop for nojust cause, and had not been reconciled to him or made amends before hedied.

The brother is not named but he is called both ‘uterine’ and ‘by the same
father’, and must thus be either Sven Kristiarnsen or Aggi; and Aggi wasstill fighting for Sven III in 1157 when Eskil had abandoned the king in
1153.4 If this connexion could be substantiated, it would be significant:it would make Sven Aggesen the son of a casualty, as well as a hero, inthe sword-play he hoped to curb in his Law of the Retainers. It might help
to explain why he ignores his uncle in his Short History.
There is another story, only in Saxo (GD, 436–7; EC, 454), of how
King Valdemar threatened to hang one of Eskil’s nephews, who wasbeing educated at Esrom abbey, unless the garrison surrendered one of
Eskil’s castles. That was in 1161/2. The castle was handed over to theking, but the archbishop was very angry, for his response had been ‘that
he was more concerned for his castle than for his nepotes, and that theirlives were on no account to be put before its safety.’
It is tempting to identify this boy with our Sven, but the odds areagainst it: nepos means both ‘nephew’ and ‘grandson’, and at the time
Eskil had two young grandsons and at least three young nephews. We
cannot conclude that Sven’s education involved nearly being hanged by
King Valdemar, but his work suggests that it included the study ofclassical autores, the art of composition, civil and canon law, and theBible and liturgy. Gertz concluded that he went to Paris for at least partof this education, like other well-connected Danes;5 again, the possibility
exists, but there is no sign that his acquaintance with any of thesebranches of learning was deep or detailed, or evidently the result of
attending Parisian lectures, or of reading whole works rather than florilegia and compendiums.
He described Saxo as his contubernalis, which means they had somekind of association or fellowship at the time of writing: that is, post 1185.
It has often been pointed out that Saxo was probably much younger than
Sven. His grandfather had fought for Valdemar I, perhaps after 1157,
while Sven’s father had been a leading warrior as early as 1132. Therefore this contubernium is unlikely to have been a school.
The primary meaning of contubernalis is military: ‘tent-companion’. It
has often been assumed that Sven and Saxo served together as knights or
clerks in the households of the king or Archbishop Absalon.6 Sven drew
up a version of the king’s household laws, and he witnessed the surrenderIntroduction

3of the Pomeranians on the campaign of 1185: he must therefore have
served as a retainer of the king, and the same must be true of Saxo.
The fallaciousness of this deduction has been demonstrated more thanonce, most recently by Karsten Friis-Jensen, who summarized the manyreasons for not making soldiers or royal retainers out of either historian.
Their interest in military and political affairs is fully compatible withwhat we know of the outlook of Danish clergy at the time, and their
historical vision is no more secular than that of other twelfth-century
clerks in the rest of Europe. The obvious conclusion to be drawn fromtheir language and learning is that they were both ecclesiastics. Educatedlaymen existed but they did not at this period compose Latin histories,
unless they were Italians.
Friis-Jensen goes farther and identifies Saxo with the canon of Lund
who witnessed charters in 1180/3 and 1197/12017—or at least he presents
the argument for a probable identification. If he is right, Sven’s identity
is not lost. A Sveno archidiaconus is eighth in the list of canon-deaconsin the Lund necrology, between Esbiorn, who was in office from c.1174,
and Provost Asser, Sven Aggesen’s cousin, who was exiled in 1176/7 but
remained titular head of the chapter.8 It appears from a document summarized by Hamsfort in the sixteenth century that Archdeacon Svenattended Absalon’s great synod of July 1187, along with Andrew, deacon, and Martin, priest, as representatives of the Lund chapter. The post
he held had been instituted by Archbishop Eskil in 1145 ‘for the lawsuits
and administration of episcopal rights in the city’,9 and he may have beeneffective leader of the canons in the absence of the provost. When he diedhe left the community property worth half a mark—less than his cousin
Asser, who made a bequest of at least two estates, in Scania and Sjælland.10
A necessary knowledge of law; membership of a contubernium towhich Saxo may also have belonged; high rank in a chapter once dominated by Sven Aggesen’s family. That may not seem enough on which
to base an identification, even if we add the well-known propensity ofarchdeacons to write history. However, Lund is the obvious place for
Sven. Danish annalists were at work there as early as the 1140s, andhistorical writing persisted there for over two centuries, as Anne K. G.
Kristensen has demonstrated. So obvious is the connexion that it wasmade in the eighteenth century, by Lagerbring and Langebek, and later
by Velschow in his introduction to Saxo (1858).11
The hypothesis was abandoned for lack of positive evidence in its
favour, and in deference to the view that Sven must have been a roughdiamond, the voice of the lay nobility rather than of the clergy. In my

4Sven Aggesen

reading of his work I have found nothing to support this view and muchthat is consistent with the career of a learned clerk with legal responsibilities and a comfortable prebend in the chapter of Lund. As a survivorof the régime of Eskil who had made his peace with Absalon, he could
put his legal expertise, such as it was, at the service of the new archbishop
in an endeavour to tame the royal household; and employ the records ofLund to supply the new Danish monarchy with a rather topical history.
I believe that Sven has been misrepresented by those who suppose that
he wrote for a particular social or political group: for the traditional
values of the war-band, for aristocratic privilege, or for the ‘Valdemarine
establishment’, all three of them very nebulous concepts.12 He was evidently a witty, humane, and slightly pretentious pioneer, who supplied
the Danish king with three types of composition commonly used toglorify other twelfth-century monarchies: a law treatise, a political history in outline, and a royal pedigree. This hardly makes him a propagandist, unless the term be used to cover any work in which a politicaltendency is discernible. None of his work is openly dedicated to any
patron, even if he compliments his king and his metropolitan in the Lawof the Retainers.13 He claimed to be writing spontaneously, and I can findno internal evidence with which to contradict his claim. An archdeaconof Lund (if such he was) and a scion of Denmark’s highest nobility, he
was entitled to express his own views on matters of public interest, andon the beauty of the Queen Mother too, if he chose.14 He was no ideological purist, but a man with an interesting mind.
(An excellent summary, in English, of all that is known about Sven
Aggesen may be found in Joaquín Martínez-Pizarro’s 1988 article listed
in the Bibliography, p. 158.)(ii) The Text and its Congeners

Sven’s works survive in two versions, neither of which is an accurate
copy of what he wrote.
A is AM 33 4to, an inexpert copy probably commissioned by Claus
Lyschander (1558–1624) of an early and authentic manuscript.
S is the improved and corrected version of another early manuscript bya scribe of the late thirteenth century and by Stephan J. Stephanius, theeditor of the first printed edition, published at Sorø in 1642. The manuscript was lost in the great Copenhagen fire of 1728, and it is therefore
impossible to be certain whether the improvements and omissions weremade by the medieval scribe or by Stephanius or by both. This version

Introduction

5

was reprinted by Langebek, the Short History in SRD, i (1769), the Lawof the Retainers in SRD, iii (1774), with useful notes, and by Gertz as oneof parallel texts in 1915/16 and in SM, i 56–143 (1917/18). Although thesuperiority of this text was challenged by Waitz in 1887, it remained thecommonly accepted version down to 1915/16.
Then M. Cl. Gertz published En ny Text af Sven Aggesøns Værker
with four parallel texts:(i) An almost perfect transcription of A, AM 33 4to, as it stands,
blundered and obscure.
(ii) His own reconstruction, with conjectural abbreviations and sigla, of
the original appearance of the manuscript travestied by the A scribe.
(iii) His reconstruction of X, the lost manuscript behind A.
(iv) The S text.
An exhaustive critical commentary and comparisons between the two
versions established X as the ‘best’ text, and Gertz reprinted it with
amendments in SM, i.
The X version of Sven Aggesen’s Lex Castrensis (LC hereafter) reappears with critical apparatus and some further emendation in DR, 6–24.
The text used for the present translation is referred to as X, and any
deviations from the Gertz 1915/16 version are noted.
Saxo Grammaticus also included a version of LC in the tenth book of
his Gesta Danorum (GD hereafter), and this is most conveniently printed
in DR, 34–41, as edited by Erik Kroman. It is translated into English fromthe 1514 editio princeps of GD in EC, 36–44. Saxo’s LC is almost
certainly later than Sven’s, and differs in scope and style; on which see
Riis, 31–47.
This leaves the Danish text entitled Witherlax ræt (WR hereafter),which is preserved in at least fourteen manuscripts of the period 1400–
1650; it was published from two lost manuscripts in 1672, 1740, 1774,
1827 and in 1971 in DR, 1–5. An English translation from this last printis given on pp. 44–7 below.
In the following I use the well-known Danish word Vederlov as a
general term for the body of regulations reflected in Sven’s LC, Saxo’s
LC, and WR.
WR cannot however be allowed any independent importance. It consists of a set of eight regulations, with proem and epilogue, purporting tobe the original rules drawn up by Knut VI and Archbishop Absalon forthe hird, a work to which Sven also refers as his source (see p. 31 below).
According to Jørgensen, 56–7, WR is a later version of that Absalonic6

Sven Aggesen

code, and in 1971 Kroman thought ‘there can scarcely be any doubt butthat its provisions were really once the law of the Danish hird ’ (DR, 1).
It has however often been pointed out that this cannot be so. Firstly, all
the regulations but one in WR coincide with those in Sven’s LC. Sven has
more, but still admits that his work is incomplete. So WR must be evenmore so. Secondly, WR omits the passage on outlawry by sea which isalso missing in Sven’s LC, although present in Saxo. Thirdly, the proem
and epilogue simply condense Sven’s own proem and commentary on theinfraction of the old law.
For these reasons WR must be rejected as anything other than a neat
historical reconstruction, based solely on Sven’s LC, or on the Saxo
version in one detail. It was probably made in Scania at some time in thethirteenth century (the language and style are believed to suggest acomparatively early date; Diderichsen, 55–7). In 1974 Gordon Albøge
attempted to vindicate the status of WR as a version of Absalon’s code
rather than a précis of Sven’s, but his mainly philological arguments
cannot dispose of the three objections listed above. Nevertheless, others
agree with him.
The table below shows the order in which Sven, Saxo and WR deal
with the various regulations. The differences are discussed with theutmost delicacy in Riis, 31–47.

Regulation
On horses’ work-loads
On horses’ fodder
On seating in hall
On watering horses
On the king’s patronage
On the king’s duties to men
On transfer of homage
On prosecution for insult
On jurisdiction of court
On cases of land-right and theft
On choosing jurors
On killings and woundings
On blows
On purgation
On accidental woundings
On treason and outlawry

Sven
1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16, 17

Saxo
2
3
1

4

–
–

WR
–
–
–
–
–
1

9

4

–
–
–
–
5, 7, 8
–
–

–

6
5

6
7
–

5

–
–
–

2, 3

Introduction

7

Saxo also gives regulations on wrong seating, on annoying jests anddrink-splashing, on sleeping sentries, and on the inadmissibility ofcounter-oaths.
The transmission and survival of Sven’s text were discussed mostfruitfully by Karsten Christensen in 1978.
(iii) Lex Castrensis

Although it is in the king’s power to issue or change laws, we do not issue
this law as a new one; rather, as a law established from ancient times, which
has been obscured by the clouds of ignorance, and which we are recalling to
the memory of man, darkened over by the passage of many years, which is
the mother of oblivion.

So runs the conclusion of the earliest surviving example of royal Danish
law-making, the decree on homicide issued by Knut VI for the benefit of
the province of Scania on 28 December 1200.15 The device of lawmaking by rediscovery was well suited to the Northern world, where law
remained largely unwritten until the twelfth century. It was what the goodmen at the provincial law-meetings could remember. Here, the king isremembering for them.
Hitherto kings had played little part in this business. At their accessions
they may have sworn to uphold ‘the good laws of King Harald’ (i.e.
Harald Whetstone, d. 1080), and they attended some law-meetings andtrials. They were entitled to fines for aggravated forms of homicide, andto a redemption payment for outlaws (frithkøp); but the system recordedin the earliest provincial law codes depends on collective responsibility
and private prosecution, not on royal attempts at peace-keeping.16
Under Valdemar I (1157–82) there are signs of change. He may have
had some part in the codification of the Sjælland laws which goes by his
name,17 and he held a meeting in 1171 at which laws were revised andimproved.18 Before 1161 he had eased restrictions on mortmain bequests,
at least in favour of Tommerup abbey.19 He conducted prosecutions anda show-trial for treason (1167 and 1177). Nevertheless, when he died, thekingdom lacked any official law-making body, and the king was peripheral to the execution of the laws. Even ecclesiastical law was a matterof negotiation between bishops and the provincial law-communities;20
the bishops, not the king, seem to have initiated the recording andmending of law.
It was left for Valdemar’s sons, Knut VI and Valdemar II, to begin
issuing royal ordinances and to move, by way of tentative reforms,

8

Sven Aggesen

towards the great Jutland code issued by the king in 1241.21 Meanwhile,laws had to be found somewhere, preferably in the past, to deal with the
problems created by the assertive monarchy of the Valdemarine kings,
who appear to have had ample private resources but somewhat undeveloped public powers. Thus, by 1230 Valdemar II enjoyed an income
comparable with that of the king of England;22 but until the 1190s hisfather and brother had faced open defiance by magnates and commons inpeace and in war. They had no formal exchequer, no royally appointed
judges, and no tenurial hold on their upper classes.
The only central institution which the king controlled was his own
household, the staff of followers who travelled with the royal family.
Saxo usually calls it the clientela of the king; modern historians call it thehird, using a word not often found in Danish sources but common in
Norway. By c.1270 the Norwegian hir› was a three-tier organization ofknights, officials, and servants, described in Konungs skuggsjá and governed by the surviving Hir›skrá;23 but the size, composition and nature of
the Danish hird remain uncertain.
Twelfth-century sources indicate several sorts of people who might befound attending the king as part of their duties. They included his immediate family and kinsmen; intimate counsellors, lay and clerical; chaplains, plain clerics or doubling as scribes and physicians; stewards,
bailiffs, and officers with outside duties; household officers, the stallers,a chancellor, a treasurer, a chamberlain, a marshal, a butler; knights or
guards; servants, grooms, huntsmen, technicians, and presumably themusicians and ‘mimics’ denounced by Saxo.24
The witness-lists of charters single out the more important of the king’s
followers. The ‘suitable witnesses’ are named in Valdemar I’s privilege
to St Knut’s, Odense (6 Feb. 1180; DD, i:3, no. 89); but at Ringsted in
1177 there were ‘many other knights and priests and monk-brothers’(DD, i:3, no. 62). In 1145 a grant of Erik III referred to seven named
witnesses and ‘many of my curiales’ (DD, i:3, no. 91). The four ‘stallers’(stabularii) of Knut VI must have had some authority over other curials,
if not over the clerics, who would have looked to the notary or chancellor.
There must always have been bishops in attendance, but the military
following was presumably the most indispensable: the royal knights were
the only force at the king’s disposal all the year round.
He could count on the occasional use of the public levy (lething) andof the retinues of bishops and magnates, but his own guard provided thecore of the army in wartime and the only police force in peace. (Jutland
was already a famous horse-breeding peninsula, and the Saxons had

Introduction

9taught the Danes their knightly skills.) The battle record of the king’s
knights over the twelfth century was good. Their performance as asecurity force was not. In 1134 King Nicolaus and his knights had beenmobbed and murdered by burghers in Schleswig. In 1137 Erik II had
been assassinated at a law-meeting when surrounded by his escort, andall but one of his aulici had run off (GD, 370–1; EC, 355). According toSaxo, Erik III had paid too highly for the services of his followers: they
helped him win a civil war but proved useless against the Slavs (GD, 374;
EC, 360). Sven III had recruited upstarts and foreigners to attend him,
and had been loyally served up to a point; but in the crises of 1153 and1157 his knights were out of control.
Valdemar’s knights were suspected of favouring a conspiracy against
the king in 1174–6: according to confessions extracted from the principals, some had known about the plot without revealing it (GD, 503–12;
EC, 549–64). In 1180–2, when the Scanians defied both the king andArchbishop Absalon, some courtiers sided with the rebels, until the kingsent them away (GD, 528–9; EC, 588–90). When the Scanians rebelledagainst Knut VI in 1182, several of the king’s knights preferred ‘to feign
ignorance and stay at home’ (GD, 538; EC, 604).
Reading Saxo, we find it difficult to believe that this volatile assemblage of paid fighters, officials, and clerics formed the law-bound corporation of Sven’s treatise on the Vederlov. When Saxo dealt with thoselaws in his tenth book, he placed the system he described back in the timeof ‘old’ King Knut, for ‘the princes of our own time have thought it noshame to break this rule.’25 The only time the king’s knights appear as aself-regulating body in his narrative of twelfth-century history falls during the troubled 1150s, when there were two rival royal followings. Sven
III’s men refused to arrest his rival, young Valdemar, when ordered to doso; and when Sven gave up the struggle in 1153, the loyal remnant of his
followers attempted to change his mind with strong words, and finallycondemned him, perhaps as a nithing, and resolved to fight on withouthim.26 After his defeat and death in 1157, the warriors of Valdemar andKnut V attempted to decide the fate of the defeated Sven’s adherents andto deter the king from showing mercy; a compromise was reached
between their ‘law’ and his, but only after Ulf of Ribe had virtually been
lynched.
None of these examples suggests that the laws and privileges of thehousehold were an important political fact in the time of Valdemar I.
There is no suggestion that the supposed conspirators of 1176/7 weretried or condemned according to the processes of Sven’s LC; the chief of10

Sven Aggesen

them, Magnus Eriksen, was threatened with the ordeal, which plays nopart in these processes. He stood trial before the nobles and bishops of thewhole kingdom, not before any huskarlastefna; then, and at a second
hearing in private, he was convicted by written and verbal evidence, andescaped sentence by confessing. The procedure seems to have been
entirely at the king’s pleasure.
By contrast, there is evidence that something like LC was applied in thethirteenth century. Three royal ordinances attributed to the 1250s (KingAbel’s, King Kristofer’s, and Super Crimine Lese Maiestatis) and King
Erik Glipping’s Treason Law of 9 October 1276 27 indicate that there
actually existed a body of courtiers (hofmæn) and magnates (høfthinge(r) ),known collectively as the Witherlagh. They were liable to pay triple
fines, as well as compensation, for injuries inflicted on each other, after
a hearing before the king, at which they were entitled to the support oftwelve oath-helpers chosen from among their fellows. A third of the fine
was distributed among the ‘community of the court’. In cases of treason,a fifteen-man oath was to be selected by two respectable residents of thesyssel from which the accused came. In 1276 this oath was reduced to
twelve men, selected in threes from each of four worthæl (‘wards, watches’,
ON var›hald ). In such cases, conviction meant capital punishment andthe forfeiture of lands and goods.
The details are not dissimilar to those found in Saxo and Sven, and it
looks as if LC was dealing with the same institution at an earlier period,
with intentions that were not quite the same as the royal legislation after
1250. The code in Danish on which it was based seems to have been an
attempt by the archbishop to introduce writing and royal authorization
into what had previously been a self-regulating, if not autonomous,
system of house-rules. As with the Scanian ordinance of 1200 (p. 7
above), the attempt was justified by an appeal to the past.
But why to the days of ‘old’ King Knut? The English code known as
II Cnut did contain one law, ch. 59, for the royal household: ‘If anyone
fights in the king’s court, he is to forfeit his life, unless the king wishes
to spare him’ (Liebermann, i 350–1). It was a repetition of Alfred, ch. 7,
remote in date, scope and intention from anything in LC, and Absalon
was almost certainly unaware of its existence. It was a law againstfighting in the king’s vicinity, not a law for the king’s following.
It is possible that the whole story of Knut’s law-making originated with
Sven, but it is more likely that Absalon, whose historical interests arewell attested by Saxo (GD, 3, 5, 459–60; PF, 4, 6, EC, 486–7), attachedthe name to the new code to justify whatever innovations it contained. No

Introduction

11

other Nordic source of the twelfth or thirteenth century gives any hint that‘old’ Knut was remembered as a legislator, although Sven’s contemporaries in Iceland attributed a fictional law-code to Pálnatóki for the
regulation of the Jómsborg Vikings (and a later Icelandic source associates Knut’s father, Sven Forkbeard, with similar rules).28 Saxo went evenfarther back and presented the mythical kings, Frothi and Regner, as lawmakers. If Nordic tradition played a part in the subterfuge, it was mostprobably derived from Norway, where Hákon A›alsteinsfóstri was remembered as the originator of the Gulathing law and St Olaf was creditedwith giving laws to his subjects and, by Snorri, to his own household aswell.29
On the other hand, Knut was respected in twelfth-century England as
the compiler of English law in the ‘pandect’ form of the Consiliatio
Cnuti, and as the imagined author of the Forest Law.30 His wide conquests and his large professional army were a living memory, at least in
London, and the influx of Englishmen to Denmark in the reign of Valdemar I will have brought the tradition to Absalon’s notice. However,what Sven Aggesen made of this connection was a historical olio which
had nothing to do either with the laws of the Danish king’s following orwith the ascertainable facts of Knut’s military arrangements in England.
This last point would not be worth making if it were not so frequently
asserted that Knut’s army was a legally autonomous institution or gild,regulated by its own husting in accordance with rules similar to those of
LC.31 Sven Aggesen’s text cannot be allowed as evidence: it depends onan absurd presumption of continuity between a paid army, not exclusively of Scandinavians, stationed in England before 1050, and a small
force of knights serving in Denmark over 130 years later. As for the gild,
there is no evidence from the time that Knut’s ﬂingamannali› was organized in a gild-like way. Nor, despite the ﬂing element in its name, that it
was governed by an autonomous assembly or court.
Husting is a loan from ON húsﬂing. It was used by the Anglo-Saxon
Chronicler to describe the meeting of Thorkel’s army which tried to
intimidate Archbishop Ælfheah in 1012, but it reappears in the twelfth
century to describe the normal Monday Court of the leading Londoners
who met at the royal hall. Neither of these usages proves that there wasa gild.32 Nor is there any implication in the Scandinavian sources that theword connotes any form of civil or military gild-meeting. References inprose are too late to be relevant, but early Norse poetry makes it clear thata húsﬂing was a council between a leader and his chief men and usually,
it appears, when they were on a war footing.33 If Knut’s London army was

12Sven Aggesen

governed by a húsﬂing (and there is no evidence that it was), it was
because it was governed by Knut.
But why was it called ﬂingali› or ﬂingamannali› or, in Sven’s LC,
Tinglith? The names are well attested, and in calling its members ﬂingemanni the Leges Henrici Primi (ch. 15, 1; a collection completed by orin 1118) agree with ﬁór›r Kolbeinsson’s term, ﬂingamenn, in Eiríksdrápa(st. 11; c.1015).34 The word ﬂing usually means a law-moot, an assemblyat which a court might be constituted, but it is not usual to name an army
or its members after an assembly or law-court, quite apart from thedifficulty posed by the first element in the early compounds, ﬂinga, which
can hardly be counted as anything but a genitive plural. The problem has
produced some strange answers but no convincing solutions.
One is that the word ﬂingamenn is a borrowing of OE ﬂeningmenn (seeBosworth–Toller, s.v. ﬂegnung-mann), or even that the first element isfrom OE ﬂeg(e)n.35 ﬁeningmenn are servants of a lord or king, or nobles
attendant at a court. It is unreasonable to assume that members of Knut’sarmy would be known by the same name as the courtiers of King
Ethelred; in the circumstances, some distinction would have to be made.
Any connection with the word ﬂegn, as used either in England or in
Scandinavia, can be ruled out by the difference in sound and meaning
between ﬂegn and ﬂing, and the supposed compound, ﬂegn-ma›r, isunattested and extremely unlikely. The word ﬂing has other meanings
than ‘assembly’, ranging from ‘encounter’ or ‘muster’ to ‘object’ and‘contract’ or ‘agreement’, and one of these must lie behind the compound
ﬂingama›r.36
By the time Sven Aggesen and the authors of kings’ sagas were writing
the original sense of the compound will have been obscured by the muchcommoner usage of ﬂing as law-moot or assembly for public affairs.
Hence the prominence of the warriors’ court in LC, a court whichallowed Sven to interpret the puzzling term tinglith (older ﬂingali› =ﬂingamannali› ) and provided a dignified origin for the domestic assembly, the huskarlastefna, of the late twelfth century. Sven employed thismisunderstanding to good effect. His tinglith was an army ruled by law,and the law had been made by the greatest of Danish kings. The warriorsof Knut VI might therefore be expected to obey it, as an inheritance fromthe more glorious days of Danish empire in Western Europe.
Nevertheless, LC is a strange production. It purports to be a Latin
rendering of a code of rules in Danish recently rediscovered and written
down. But it isn’t. It is a legal-historical tractatus, which explains how
these rules originated and underwent modification in the course of time.

Introduction

13

The emphasis is on methods of trial and punishment and on the ethics ofthe system; not on the regulations themselves, which appear only in partand virtually in parenthesis.
Those rules which the author singles out are for the most part obsolete
or fanciful.37 Most carry conviction neither as ancient nor as modern. The
stated aim, in the proem and the conclusion, is to edify young students of
Latin composition, and to inspire them to improve and consummate thework. It is not made clear why they should wish to do this.
The regulations, whether ancient or modern, are intended to curb
indiscipline and brutality. Yet, in effect, they confer rights, privileges andstatus on the trouble-makers. The only penalties they have to face foroffences short of wilful homicide or treason are loss of dining-rights, selfabasement, or fines. Traitors can be ceremoniously outlawed, but not
executed unless they attempt to return or happen to meet any of theirformer comrades.
The ancients are commended for their keeping of the good old law, andinfractions of it are attributed to the work of the Devil. Nevertheless, thechief law-breakers are ‘old’ Knut himself and the author’s own grandfather, Kristiarn Svensen, whom he appears to admire. He seems toendorse the old commonplace of modern degeneracy, and then to draw
back: to commend Archbishop Absalon and the king for reviving ancientcustoms, and then to demonstrate that the ancient customs no longer
apply. When Saxo came to deal with the same subject, probably during
the period 1201–16, he produced a simpler and more rational picture, of
a good system which had been followed in the remote past and abandonedin modern times, to the detriment of the king’s service.38 By contrast,
Sven appears to be confused and equivocal. Whose side is he on?
I cannot explain these difficulties. Too little is known about Svenhimself, or about the court politics of the reign of Knut VI, to allow morethan speculation. LC relates to a lost text in Danish, and to an ill-defined
body of litigants over an uncertain number of generations. All that can beattempted is description.
LC is a tractatus. Not in the usual sense of a treatise about one aspectof law—penance, evidence, judicial privilege—but about a particularsystem of law; not extensive enough to justify a summa, but sufficiently
important to deserve analysis and comment.
It is not a military law in any sense recognized by Roman or twelfthcentury legists, that is, a disciplinary code concerning the waging of war
and the duties of a soldier.39 Such codes were applied by later medieval

14

Sven Aggesen

Danish kings, and appear in the form of ‘the old gaardsret ’, i.e. laws of
the king’s residences,40 which are immediately recognizable as serious
garrison orders:

If a man slays another man, then he shall give life for life . . . if a man beatsor strikes or stabs another man and draws blood, he shall lose his hand . . .
if a man calls another thief, he shall lie in the tower for a month with bread
and water . . . if any man steals as much as two øre’s worth, he shall hang for
it; and if he steals one øre’s worth, he shall be flogged and fined one øre.

This is not the language or outlook of LC. When Sven called it
militaris, he must have meant ‘knightly’ rather than ‘military’, and if it
was castrensis, the castrum was not the camp but the king’s hof. This is
a form of civil law, and the way he handles it is consistent with someknowledge of Justinian’s Code and the methods of twelfth-century law
students. To begin with, he imitates the proem of the Institutes. Knut’s
legislation, like Justinian’s, comes as the sequel of his imperial conquests—‘Imperial Majesty should not only be graced with arms but also
armed with laws’—and Knut sets to law-making invicto conamine, like
Justinian after bellicosos sudores. In the same way as Justinian, Svenclaims that he brings to life many old laws that have fallen into disuse;41
and he ascribes the framing of the old code to a committee of Knut, Øpiand Eskil, just as Tribonian, Theophilus and Dorotheus were the named
compilers of the Institutes. He also insists on the unifying effect of Knut’s
code on the differing nationalities and customs of his warriors.
The usages he then describes are of course wholly un-Roman. He uses
some terms of art that show he was familiar with at least the vocabularyof the civil law student;42 since he was writing in Latin, these could hardly
be avoided. He begins with the legist’s interrogative style, ‘who . . . why. . . where?’; refers to his own work as ‘enucleation’, from a verb
characteristic of the civilian;43 and in the course of it he poses several
quaestiones. Even so, the influence of the canonists is stronger.
Sven has usually been described as a resolutely secular author. He
seldom mentions a priest or bishop by name in his Short History, which
has been summarized as ‘a brilliant, occasionally hyperbolical, panegyricof princely power’ (Johannesson, 313). However, Johannesson has also
demonstrated how thoroughly Saxo and to a lesser extent Sven were
immersed in the learning of the church, and how they applied it to theirown ends. Whether Sven was educated in France or not, his only way tothe study of jurisprudence was through canon law, which was a living
system in Denmark as elsewhere.44 When Birgit Sawyer (1985b, 689)

Introduction

15

writes that his ‘conventional style does not obscure the secular nature of
his work, but it made it easier for leading churchmen to read,’ she seems
to overstate Sven’s detachment from clerical concerns.
Indeed, he had little choice in the matter. Phrases from the Codex wereornamental, but esoteric. Not only the language but the concepts of canon
law were a force that touched the lives of all the clergy and many laymen.
Writing about law without using this force would have been virtually
impossible, as the framers of Valdemar II’s Jutland code were to demonstrate, even though they wrote in Danish.
According to Sven’s more accomplished younger contemporary, Archbishop Anders Sunesen, Hex., 2982, ‘it is just that the lesser handmaiden
should obey the greater lady, and that the civil law should yield to thecanon.’ Sven would probably have agreed. In the civil law the principles
and application of laws were studied outside the political system where
they had originally prevailed. This was useful in explaining proceduresthat were supposed to have evolved over a period of 150 years; but thetreatment of issues raised by these procedures owes more to the reforming impulse of the canonists than to the strict equity of the civil lawyers.45
It is as if penalties were devised to avoid or minimize the rigour of thelaw; to prevent rather than punish wrongdoing; to inspire fraternity rather
than impose discipline.
Breaches of the Vederlov in earlier times are twice attributed by Svento the work of the Devil, once to the ‘human condition’, which is always
prone to error. To defeat Satan and repair human frailty, LC offers‘remedies’, ‘antidotes’, and the possibility of relaxing their rigour byformal emendation, by ‘new constitutions’. This is canonist teaching: law
as physic, and the view that ‘penalties may be changed if the commutation be more acceptable to God’ (Damasus, no. 97; cf. p. 92, n. 44,
below).
The reservation of all suits between retainers to the household muster,in colloquio, quod dicitur Huskarlestefne, resembles the privilegium fori,
which Danish clerics had enjoyed since the early twelfth century. Like
church courts, this meeting had to be dignified above the level of othersecular assemblies, and so the erring legislator, King Knut himself,
prostrates himself before it, begging for indulgentia, for a dispensatio to‘expiate’ his crime.46
The huskarlastefna was entitled to shed blood, unlike church courts.
But Sven almost rules out the possibility of capital punishment by dwelling on the more ‘temperate’ alternatives of outlawry and public disgrace.
Even disgrace is mitigated in the case of Kristiarn Svensen: for him the16

Sven Aggesen

principle of atonement or amends, satisfactio, is introduced—not theroutine bot, compensation, of the provincial laws but a massive apology
to the whole association and its lord. In his case, as in Knut’s, thesequence of lapsus—poenitentia—satisfactio—reconciliatio replaces therigour of simple crime and punishment. For lesser offenders the clericalpenalty of kneeling becomes a satisfactionis formula, and for small
incivilities the table-rules of the monastic refectory are the rods of
discipline (cf. pp. 90, 91, nn. 33 and 37, below). Inadvertent wounding
is assessed by the confessional criterion of intention rather than by theextent of the injury as in ordinary law (cf. p. 99, n. 91, below). Only thetraitor appears to be denied the possibility of redemption, but his is not
the plain svik of secular life. It is the ‘crime . . . of Judas the traitor’, first
specifically identified with political treason in the report of the papal
legates to Pope Hadrian I, after the English synods of 786:
Let no one dare to conspire to kill a king, for he is the Lord’s anointed, andif any . . . bishop or anyone of the clerical order take part in such a crime, let
him be . . . cast out . . . as Judas was ejected . . . and perish in the eternal fettersof anathema . . . associated with Judas the traitor.47

When Saxo came to deal with this code, he recognized only two gradesof crime and punishment: minor, subject to demotion at table, and major,
subject to expulsion and outlawry. He recognized neither monetary compensation (except in the case of Knut himself) nor kneeling as suitablepenalties. He aimed to describe not an actual system of law but an ideal
code in the past, which modern indiscipline had breached (see pp. 77–8,
n. 25). Saxo’s LC was adapted to fit into the tenth book of his national
history, and to remind the unruly moderns of what they had lost.
By contrast, Sven’s laws relate to modern conditions, even if they are
not equally valid. In the light of school jurisprudence they justify asystem of restraint which the king hoped to apply both to his retainers
within the household and to his homagers outside it, be they magnates orbailiffs. They could thus not be Draconian: that would wound the senseof honour which acted as the spur of knighthood.48 This could not be acomprehensive code (pace Holberg, 130), because the sovereignty of lex
scripta was not yet established. It could still reinforce, albeit in terms
which may not have meant much to most royal retainers, what Kai Hørby
calls ‘a special legal condition which was different from and stricter thanthat which applied to the rest of the king’s subjects’.
Peter Kofod Ancher’s pioneering history of Danish law, published in
1769, carried on the title-page a symbolic engraving of the leafy tree ofthe law, fed by four tap-roots with LEGES CANUTUM inscribed on theIntroduction

17

first. The grammar may be questionable, but the message is not entirely
fanciful. Sven’s Lex was an important step towards the creation of a
unified rather than a diversified legal system.
Was it also a statement of aristocratic privilege, as Niels SkyumNielsen insisted? Hardly, for while it dealt tenderly with the rights of therich and the powerful, it concerned men who were apt to escape therigours of the ordinary courts in any case—as Knut VI’s homicide decree
put it:locupletes quos sibi consanguineos annumerant, licet extraneos, rapinis etdepredacionibus violentis ad satisfaciendum secum quantum exigunt compellentes (DGL, i:2, 775).49

The Vederlov was meant to control them, even if the controls weremoderate. The only way they could enjoy this moderation was by serving
the king.
Insofar as it concerns less distinguished retainers, it certainly freed
them from the care and expense of suing each other in provincial courts;
but it trebled their liability in cases of wounding, humbled their pride in
the punishment for plain assault, and brought them under a heavy-handed
treason law. This is not aristocratic privilege, unless we assume that more
popular courts had been less tender with the great and the unruly—anunwarranted assumption.50
However, I stray from Sven’s text to the text that inspired it. We shallnever know exactly how Absalon disciplined the royal following, orwhether irony and subversion lie hidden in Sven’s treatise. It seems clear,
however, that in LC he envisaged a cure for the malheur du guerrier,which had dogged the makers of Danish history whom he celebrated in
his other work, and which made his own century a period of mutualslaughter for kings, bishops, nobles and knights. Holberg (267 and 130)
argued that he took an essentially antiquarian law code from Archbishop
Absalon and the king, and added modifications made after the time of‘old’ Knut and further ‘new constitutions’ to turn it into a statement of
current practice. I would prefer to align LC with other spurious law
codes, as a text aimed partly at the reinforcement and partly at theamendment of the prevailing system, with its historical dimension justifying its newness. The evidence cited above of a properly functioning
Vederlov in the thirteenth century indicates that Sven’s LC, aided by
Saxo’s and the earliest vernacular recension, met with some success. The
lack of evidence that such a system prevailed before 1185 indicates thesolid worth of pseudo-legislation.

18

Sven Aggesen(iv) Historia Compendiosa

The title appears in the Stephanius edition of 1642: COMPENDIOSAREGUM DANIAE HISTORIA. It is lacking in A, and may not be Sven’s
own. However, since he referred to the work in his preface as written subcompendio, he probably used this or a similar title. I have translated it as‘A Short History of the Kings of Denmark’ but commonly use HC as theabbreviation for it.
Historical abridgements were common among the clergy of Englandand France in the twelfth and thirteenth century. They were not necessarily short. William of Malmesbury described his five large books on the
kings of the English as a ‘compendium of histories’, and Radulphus
Diceto called his substantial annals ‘abbreviations’; in the 1230s Rogerof Wendover was to promise his readers that his immense historicalcompilation would be brief and concise. This was partly because such
abridgements embraced whole libraries of earlier sources; partly because
the affectation of brevity was a rhetorical topos employed by nearly all
historians of that period.
Sven’s brevity was not affected. It reflects the fewness, not the abundance, of his sources. It comes also from the deliberate narrowness of his
aim: to trace the survival of one royal dynasty, with few ramifications,over many generations, and to summarize notable royal achievements
which his colleague Saxo was to elaborate. He relegated the full genealogy of his kings to an appendix, now lost.51 His geographical andchronological references are rudimentary. All he offers is a rapid review
of some 35 reigns, enlivened by two good anti-German anecdotes, akidnapping, two and a half royal martyrdoms, and concluding eulogies of
the king and the king’s mother and father.
Sven was not the first historian of Denmark. He was merely the firstto say he was the first. Adam of Bremen’s fundamental work on the two
centuries before his own time was completed outside Denmark, in the
1070s. Within Denmark the pioneers were English monks, using theiralien craft to honour or admonish their patrons.
At Odense in the 1120s the emigré Canterbury monk Ælnoth had
written the life of the martyr-king, Knut IV. He surveyed the reigns of all
the kings from 1047 to 1086, and so began recording the Danish past in
the medium of hagiography. Sven made use of his Gesta Suenomagni
regis, up to a point; he must have found his ‘high style’ enviable, if oldfashioned, and both he and Ælnoth put kings foremost, even in spiritualIntroduction

19

matters. After Ælnoth and the other English hagiographer, Robert of Ely,came the anonymous author of the so-called Chronicon Roskildense (CRor the Roskilde Chronicle hereafter), completed in 1141: a highly original
history of the Danish church and kings from 826 to that date, with anemphasis on the bishops of Roskilde and the tribulations of the clergy.
Not a congenial tutor for Sven, and he may only have known the workat second hand. He certainly knew the equally original Chronicon Lethrense(CL; the Lejre Chronicle), which was composed under Valdemar I (1157–
82), probably as a retrospective introduction to the Roskilde Chronicle.
It is a brief collection of legends and names from the pre-Christian past,
the work of an eccentric entertainer with slight intellectual ambition.
However, if it were not for his simple narratives of Dan, Ro, and Raki the
Dog-king, neither Sven nor Saxo could have written as they did.
Other kinds of historical writing were practised before Sven, if only ina small way. The first annals and king-lists were drawn up, probably at
Lund, and a set of Lundensian annals was carried over to the new
Cistercian house of Kolbacz in Pomerania.52 It has been claimed that
passages of Danish history found chiefly in the first universal chronicle
by Ralph Niger (c.1200) were borrowed from a full résumé of Danish
history, and this putative lost work has been given the name of ‘The
Chronicle of Knut Magnusen’,53 because the unlucky Knut V, murderedin 1157, was treated sympathetically in Niger’s source. Knut’s son,
Valdemar, became bishop of Schleswig in the early 1180s, and such achronicle could have been dedicated to him. It is conjectured that its
somewhat critical treatment of Valdemar I may have led Sven to reply inkind, in defence of the monarchy. It is possible that such a text existed,
but as its exact date, shape and wording are unknown, Sven’s reaction to
it is doubly difficult to define. He may have used it as a source for earlier
periods, rather than going directly to Adam of Bremen and the Roskilde
Chronicle.
Thus a Danish historical tradition of sorts existed before 1185, andSven made some use of it. He was not the lonely retriever of halfforgotten deeds portrayed in his preface. Nevertheless, he broke new
ground in two ways.
First, he wrote a history of the Danish monarchy as an inheritance fromvery early times which had been vindicated by the courage and wisdomof most of the present king’s ancestors. To our way of thinking, this wasan obvious distortion of the past for the purpose of supporting current
political arrangements. To Sven’s contemporaries it was nothing of thesort. The past was expected to reflect the present. It was also expected to20

Sven Aggesen

reflect, or at least to match, the better recorded pasts of other monarchies,
also interpreted as inheritances through ruling dynasties. It was in thenature of kings to avoid sharing power, as Sven observed in his accountof the murder of Knut Lavard; the ensuing civil wars of 1131–57 were
contests for supremacy over the whole people, not for liberty or justice.
Valdemar’s emergence as sole king in 1157 was God’s verdict on theright political order.
Sven’s second new departure was his bringing pre- and post-conversion history together into one continuous sequence, with no dramatic
break. The Lejre Chronicle had apparently introduced Latinists to a ‘lostworld’, or vice versa: now it was possible to reconnect this lost world tothe present, as the Icelanders did, by the device of linear genealogy.
Sven’s unbroken line from Skiold to Knut VI owes much to the learned
pedigree-fakers of the Oddaverjar,54 who had increased their own standing in the early twelfth century by claiming descent from Danish kings.
Sven introduced his monarch to a less confident version of the spectacular ancestry that had been fabricated for the Kn‡tlingar by Sæmundr hinn
fró›i: less confident because influenced by the Lejre Chronicle and by
Sven’s own anxiety not to be caught ‘stringing together the reigns ofkings’ in too neat a fashion.
The king may have been amused to discover how long his pedigree hadgrown. If so, he made no use of the discovery when in 1193/4 he had tocommission an official genealogical tract to exonerate his sister, thequeen of France, from the charge of consanguinity with her husband,
King Philip Augustus. This work by Abbot William55 begins with a brief
list of pre-Christian kings, mostly not in Sven’s history. The principle ofhereditary monarchy, which Valdemar I had introduced for his son’s
benefit, had no practical need of the roots in primeval Denmark which
Sven supplied. Rather the contrary: unbroken descent from heroic
antiquity glorified all who could claim it, including many of Knut
VI’s potential rivals.56 Here, Sven’s inspiration was more likely to be thefashion for ancestry in Iceland and elsewhere than the aspirations of
his king.
He also claimed that his stories from the remote past were supplied by‘aged men’ and ancient traditions. This claim has often been taken at facevalue, and some of his tales have been accepted as native Danish legends
handed down independently of the materials used by Icelandic sagaauthors. This was a natural assumption for most nineteenth-century scholars, and both Axel Olrik and H. M. Chadwick wrote memorable works
on the strength of it: Danmarks Heltedigtning (1903) and The Origin ofIntroduction

21

the English Nation (1907) use Sven and Saxo as terminals connected withthe fifth and sixth centuries by a process of oral transmission.
Scepticism about the nature of oral transmission has undermined thisbelief, and Sven’s legendary material is patently bookish. Most of his
deviations from Skjo≈ldung matter in Icelandic sources can be accounted
for by reference to the Lejre Chronicle or to the St Albans Vitae duorum
Offarum (see p. 107, n. 16 below). The story of Thyrwi is his own
embroidery of the Jelling epitaph, a fashionable model (p. 117, n. 62
below). His account of Sven Forkbeard’s capture and ransom elaborates
what he could read in the Roskilde Chronicle (SM, i 19) or extrapolate
from the Jómsviking myth of the Icelanders. The appeal to oral testimony
was another commonplace of twelfth-century historians’ rhetoric, andhere it was an opaque disguise for artistic invention.
For Sven exploited the remote past as a theatre in which to re-enact
current affairs. There he was free to recount anti-German, patriotic
episodes, which ought to have taken place under Valdemar I and his son,reigning under the shadow of the Hohenstaufen, but were in fact uncharacteristic of Sven’s modern Denmark. Most recorded Danish rulers since
the conversion had done all they could to ingratiate themselves withGerman kings and kaisers, and when they failed, they had submitted toinvasion and chastisement. Even the reigning king, who had rejected
imperial overlordship soon after 1182, hoped until 1187 to hand over his
sisters and his mother as pledges of alliance with the Hohenstaufen and
the Ascanians. Knut VI was himself married to Henry the Lion’s daughter, and when his relations with the emperor soured, his relations withother German princes remained cordial. In practice, maintaining thesouthern frontier, and after 1187 extending it, meant rewarding andpleasing and coaxing the Teuton, not insulting and cheating him, as Sven
seems to recommend.
His scorn and mistrust of Germans could either be a reaction against
the bombastic imperialism of Frederick Barbarossa, or against Danish
courtiers with German leanings. Yet no German army had invaded theDanes since 1157; no influx of German place-hunters yet took an unfair
share of patronage in church or government. Only as merchants andartisans were they numerous within the kingdom, and Sven takes no
notice of such people. Some distaste for German fashions at court isevident in Saxo, and he may be following Sven in that; but it was a
distaste more probably learnt in the fastidious schools of France thanderived from the ancestral virtue these two were apt to preach. In any
case, Sven’s prejudice cannot have recommended him to the rulers of22

Sven Aggesen

Denmark, even after the Queen Mother came home in 1187, humiliatedand ill used by her Thuringian landgrave. Such simple antipathies wereunhelpful to a foreign policy that grew more and more expansive.
Sven honours his king, but he was not therefore promoting a particularrégime or policy. His review of modern history is even-handed, if notexactly open-minded. He naturally accepts the death of the king’s grandfather, Knut Lavard, as a martyrdom; but he comes nearer than any other
Danish writer to presenting the death of Knut V at Roskilde in the samelight. As for Knut’s avenger, the brutal Erik II, he is simply an unworthy
instrument: God inspired him to rebel, he broke God’s law, God destroyed him. Not a comfortably royalist doctrine. Nor is the elective
element in royal inaugurations ever condemned or criticized. The reignof the elected Erik III is noted as prosperous, and the rise of Valdemar is
explained by his middle position between rivals rather than by his hereditary claim. Valdemar is lavishly praised, but he is also criticized, apparently for his cruelty (see pp. 137–8, n. 195, below); and the praise is
nicely balanced by some tender words about the beauty of his wife. Sven
ignores the royal unction of 1170, although he notes that Knut VI succeeded in 1182 ‘by hereditary right’.
The work concludes on a triumphant but slightly insecure note. Duke
Bugislav of Pomerania submits to Knut VI, but at the same hour athunderstorm almost drowns the new vassal-prince along with the heir to
the Danish throne. It is a warning of the power of the ‘old Prevaricator’,which leads to a final prayer for God’s help. Peace is the ultimate goal;the ‘tranquillity of peace’ is the most frequently used phrase in the book(cf. p. 112, n. 46, below). Yet the history of the dynasty is the history ofviolence, and the contribution of Sven’s father and grandfather to that
violence is proudly noted. Peace comes through victory, victory throughhereditary valour, helped by God. God denies his help to those who breakhis law, even the brave and the royal: Magnus, son of King Nicolaus, Erik
II, Sven III. ‘Goodness,’ Sven complains, ‘is always suspect to kings.’
Nothing is secure, in a degenerating world.
Certainly Sven was unsure of his own position as a historian. In his
preface he refers anxiously to possible critics, who might accuse him ofpresumption and over-inventiveness. A topos, no doubt, but heartfelt all
the same, because much of the ‘lost’ past was indeed his own invention.
Later he announces that he will skip the central part of his ‘ancienthistory’ for fear of being disbelieved. When he reaches recorded times,
he reveals that his colleague Saxo is covering the same ground ‘at greater
length’. With such misgivings, why did he write the book at all?

Introduction

23

Early in the following century Arnold of Lübeck was to write on the
new breed of educated Danes:
They are no less profound in the study of letters, for the nobler ones of theland send their sons to Paris, not only to be advanced as clerks but also to be
instructed in secular affairs. There, having been imbued with the literatureand language of that country [he means Latin], they are deeply versed not
only in arts but also in theology . . . 57

‘Deeply versed’ is too strong for Sven, who may never have gone toParis; but he had certainly ‘drunk from the spring’ of literature, and it isworth asking whether it could have been the well-wrought histories of theWestern world that moved him to bring order to the chaos of his own
country’s past. The hagiographers had somewhat civilized or sanitized
the post-conversion period. The author of the Lejre Chronicle had essayed a few anecdotes from the pagan past. If other tales from thatdarkness survived in Denmark (and the evidence for that is certainly not
in Sven), they had no connection with the life of the gens or the rulingdynasty. The folklore of landscape, demoted gods, trolls and priapic
supermen needed a Saxo to be harnessed to the service of the state.
However, by 1185, writers living under the French and Angevin monarchies habitually drew on the far past to justify the ambitions of their kingsand nobles. And it was not only the local past of Geoffrey’s ‘British
History’, Draco Normannicus and Hugh of Fleury, but also the classicalpast reinvigorated by Walter of Châtillon and Joseph of Exeter and thecosmic fantasy of Alan of Lille.
Here was an intellectual challenge of which Sven may have been aware(some possible echoes of contemporary Latin literature are suggested in
the notes on Sven’s text). However, the obvious analogue of the ShortHistory is no Western work, but the Historia de antiquitate regum
Norwagiensium completed by the monk Theodricus at some date between 1176 and 1188, and dedicated to Archbishop Eysteinn of Trondheim.
There are no chronological objections to Sven’s having read this book,and the presence of Norwegian exiles in Denmark in the 1180s strengthens the possibility.58
The similarities between the two works are less noticeable than the
differences. Both authors apologized for their uncultivated style andclaimed to be writing ‘briefly’. Both claimed to be restoring to memory
the famous deeds of old neglected through the shortcomings of native
writers. Both respected the historians of other lands and mentioned the
Icelanders as a source. Both cited Ovid, Statius, Vergil and Lucan, andboth showed a general knowledge of ancient history and the Bible. All of24

Sven Aggesen

this can be explained by the probability that both accepted the normal
historiographical conventions of the time, rather than as imitation.59
Both lamented the jealousy and quarrelsomeness of kings: a shared
Nordic experience as well as a commonplace. Both declined to set down
the lineage of their kings, Theodricus at the beginning, Sven in the
middle, but for slightly different reasons. Both begin with sole monarchs,
who are followed by fratricide successors, and both celebrate modern
kings by itemizing their public works and conquests.60
This does not amount to much. I have been unable to identify any directreferences to the text of Theodricus in Sven, and most of their common
ground is crowded with other twelfth-century authors.61 In other ways
they stand apart. Theodricus has a much wider range of learned reference
and intellectual interest. His ecclesiastical bias is stronger. He is learnedin chronology, cosmology, geography and philosophy, and his digressions are elaborate. His language is less strained, his critical sense moreacute; his criterion of the good ruler is more positively moral. He makes
conversion a central rather than a peripheral event. He avoids the warfareof his own time as an unedifying subject. He is no admirer of women, andno lawyer.
Where Norwegian and Danish history intersect, Theodricus and Svenare in sharp opposition. Thus in Theodricus, chs. 4–6, the evil Queen
Gunnhildr appears as the widow of King Eiríkr, fratrum interfector andthe bane of his successors, until Hákon malus persuades the king ofDenmark to propose marriage to her: ‘He claimed that Denmark would
be fortunate to have such a queen.’ Deceived by the proposal, with‘womanly folly, too credulous’, Gunnhildr accepted, and was drowned ina bog by the deceitful suitor, which put an end to her ‘malignity’. Thereis no mention of this in Sven; instead, in the same period, there is anelaborate celebration of ‘womanly astuteness’ and the ‘cunning’ of thegreat Queen Thyrwi, who deceived her wooer and so freed her country.
It was the German emperor who told her, deceitfully, that ‘she ought, forher beauty and wisdom, to be empress of the Romans.’ That emperor was
Otto, praised by Theodricus as christianissimus imperator and conquerorof the Danes, whom he converted to Christianity. To Sven he is ascheming seducer, foiled by superior female guile.
In Theodricus, ch. 16, St Olaf is the saintly and patriotic hero whorecords the laws of Norway in the vernacular, and loses his kingdom tothe ungovernable ambition of the Danish king. Sven refers to him once,in parenthesis, as the begetter of King Magnús by a concubine; even theconquest of Norway is alluded to only in passing. In Theodricus, ch. 18,

Introduction

25

Knut of England and Denmark is a rapacious land-grabber, whose machinations inspired the author to lament the ‘unlucky and woeful cupidity ofmortal men’. For Sven he is admirable both for his ‘elegant’ conquests
and for his achievements as legislator and evangelist. He merely ‘deputes’ his son to rule Norway and sends missionaries there and, indeed,
all over the North.
For Theodricus, Magnús the Good is a peaceful inheritor of the Danish
throne, by arrangement with Harthaknut. He saves the Danes from theSlavs, but is attacked by the rebel Sven Estrithsen, and in the end hebequeathes Denmark to Sven in recognition of his hereditary claim. Sven
Aggesen presents Magnús as an invader of Sven’s peaceful realm. He
says nothing of his great victory over the Wends and in his Short Historyomits Magnús’s by-name, ‘the Good’, although he used it in LC. Magnús
dies in mid-career of a fall from his horse; recalling passages in Theodricus(chs. 28, 30) on the ominous falls of Haraldr har›rá›i and Charlemagne.
These contrasts may be accidental. Gudrun Lange has recently argued
that Theodricus and the Norwegian ‘synoptics’ used a variety of written
Icelandic sources, and it may seem rash to conclude that Sven wrote
against Theodricus’s History itself rather than against any other versionof the stories it contains. Nevertheless, Sven’s persistent contradiction of
Theodricus wherever the Norwegian deals with Dano-Norwegian relations is remarkable. If Sven needed an example and a spur for his ShortHistory, this was it: an equally urbane and useful summary of Scandinavian history which placed the Danes in an unfavourable light and drewattention to the dignity and piety of their chief Northern rivals.62
Sven may also have been moved to write by contemporary events. That
raises the question of when did he write?
The last event he mentions is the surrender of Prince Bugislav to theDanes in the spring or early summer of 1185. After that, he says, ‘We
rowed home with immense jubilation. May the Ruler of all things orderthis conclusion in His peace.’ These are not the words of a man writing
ten or fifteen years later, as some have suggested: they reflect anxiety
about what is going to happen not long after the Pomeranian surrender.
Danish-Pomeranian relations are now peaceful—but they might turn out
otherwise: there is not yet any final settlement. And there was no firm
settlement until 1189, owing to the death of Bugislav on 18 March 1187
and the succession of two young sons under the rival guardianship of
their mother, a cousin, and the neighbouring prince of Rugia. There was
every chance of war between the two Danish dependencies of Rugia and
Pomerania until an expedition from Denmark went south in 1189 and26

Sven Aggesen

imposed a joint guardianship on the boy-rulers, Kazymar II and Bugislav
II, and a careful partition of their territories. Thereafter tension was
reduced; which narrows the time of writing to 1185–9.63
The tales of Uffi and Thyrwi provide other dating clues, assuming they
are topical. They seem to reflect the events of 1187, a crowded year inwhich Knut VI finally ended the prospect of a Hohenstaufen marriage
alliance by refusing to pay the full dower for his sisters and the Queen
Mother Sophia returned home, repudiated by her German husband.64 It
ended with the knighting of the king’s brother, Valdemar, in preparation
for his guarding the southern frontier as duke of Schleswig.65 This, too,
was the year in which the emperor, Frederick I, returned to Germany
from Italy, still nursing a grudge against the Danes for refusing to accept
client status under his protection.66 Until the emperor left North Germany
at the end of 1188, en route for the Holy Land, his proximity troubled
both King Knut and his father-in-law, Henry the Lion.
Once he had gone, everything changed. First the Welfs and then theDanes were able to take the offensive against the emperor’s friends in the
North. Lands to the south of the River Eider were claimed by Bishop
Valdemar of Schleswig, King Knut’s cousin, and a variety of competing
territorial claims began a train of events which were to bring about fullscale Danish intervention in both Holstein and Mecklenburg.67 After
1188 the ‘liberation’ of Denmark, which is the theme of both Thyrwi’s
story and Uffi’s, was no longer a live issue: the boot was on the other foot.
The adjustment of these stories by Saxo to fit in with the new mood of
Danish aggression is one indicator of the change.
For these reasons, it is possible to claim 1188 as the most likely year
for the composition of Sven’s Short History—always bearing in mind
that it need not have been a topical work, and that the evidence is wholly
circumstantial.
(v) The Lost Genealogy

At the end of the prologue to LC, Sven promised that circa finem huius
opusculi he would ‘unravel the pedigrees of the kings and the order inwhich they reigned’. The reference must be to HC, in which Sven does
what Rodulfus Glaber refused to do: ‘recite the genealogy in the historical fashion’.68 However, in the course of HC Sven breaks off the narration(p. 55 below) and declines to trace in detail the royal succession in the‘centuries’ during which it passed through nepotes rather than from father
to son. So he reached the end of HC without having fulfilled his initialpromise.

Introduction

27

In Stephanius’s edition a full pedigree appears after HC, introduced bya sentence in the first person purporting to be Sven’s. Unfortunately, thepedigree is too full: it goes down to 1259, and is evidently based on thework of Saxo and his interpreters. Known as ‘The Genealogy of theKings of Denmark by an Unknown Author’, it is printed in Gertz, 112–
14 (and in SM, i 186–94), with any Svenonian phrases clearly marked:
for the Unknown Author made some use of Sven’s language, even while
rejecting his reconstruction of the royal lineage. His work is an important
document for Danish history after 1250 (it is discussed by Hoffmann,
1975, 188–92), but it has survived at the expense of the more original
work which it superseded.
For the brief introduction in S is evidently based on a longer passage
which is found after the conclusion of HC in A (Gertz, 111; SM, i 142),
and runs thus:
Although the deeds of our earliest princes and kings were immense anddeserving of eternal commemoration,69 they are . . .70 being wrapped in the
shadow of oblivion, because no one has devoted attention to their accuratetransmission, and once out of fashion they will slide into the labyrinth offorgetfulness.71 However, lest the established sequence of kings and theirreigns should also perish without being handed down, I will endeavour tounravel no more than the names of each [Gertz adds: of the kings] and theirsuccessions to the kingdom, so that our successors may strive to proclaim
from honeyed throats and golden mouths72 whomsoever infamy made remarkable, just as they may . . . highly adorn the noble deeds of each.73

With this Sven could be announcing a king-list, rather than a pedigree,
but he promised a genealogy, and a genealogy was supplied by the
Unknown Author to replace what was there.
It is worth noting that in HC Sven produced two fourteen-generation
sequences, one from Skiold to Olaf, and one from Sighwarth’s father-inlaw to Knut VI. In the first chapter of St Matthew there are three fourteengeneration pedigrees from Abraham to Jesus; it is quite possible that, in
accordance with the new political fashion of Imitatio Christi,74 Sven’s
middle section also consisted of fourteen generations. The details are
irretrievably lost.
(vi) Translations

The overwhelming reputation of Saxo restrained would-be translators ofSven for 150 years after the first edition. Stephanius, the editor, warned
his readers ‘not to expect too anxiously any elegance or refinement ofdiction in this our author’, who had composed his ‘illiterate historical

28

Sven Aggesencompendium . . . more modestly than effectively’. The complimentaryverses by Vitus Bering praised the editor more highly than the author,
whose style he compared to a ‘tattered cloth’ and an ‘unworthy prison’.
The text was published on inferior paper in undersized volumes, unfit
to associate with the folios of Saxo and his Danish translation by Vedel.
Langebek, the next editor, made a lightly annotated Danish version
of HC and some of LC before he died in 1774, but it was never published.
The manuscript survives in the Royal Library, Copenhagen (Ny kgl.
saml. 872 4to), and has been consulted, to little advantage, for thepresent work.
Since that time Sven has usually appeared to his fellow-countrymen in
moments of national distress. Thus Dr Odin Wolff (1760–1830), a tireless journalist, lexicographer and plagiary, was inspired by the growing
patriotic fervour of the Napoleonic years to publish a translation of Sven,at first in the periodical Iris and then as an offprint, Den förste Danske
Historieskriver Svend Aagesens kortfattede Danmarks Historie. The year
was the year of disaster, 1807. Anxiety over the future of the country andthe monarchy led others, notably Ove Malling, to look back into history
for examples of Danish heroism, and Wolff used Sven for this purpose.
He followed the conventional opinion that Sven ‘certainly cannot be
set beside . . . great Saxo,’ but recommended him to the public for two
reasons. First, because there were so few twelfth-century authors worth
reading, other than Saxo, ‘the literary wonder’, and Abelard. Second,
because Sven was a Dane and a patriot, and so deserved to be cherishedby all patriotic Danes. Although his style was ‘hard, stiff and laboured’,
it was ‘concise and original’, and Wolff aimed to present him literally, ‘in his ancient dress, not in modernized costume’. He was naturally
unaware that the text of the 1642 edition was itself a modernization, orat least a revision, of Sven’s words; apart from that, he achieved his aim.
By 1842 the Wolff translation was a rarity. However, this was a yearof intensified nationalist and Scandinavianist fervour: the year of Orla
Lehman’s ‘Eider policy’, and the launching of the journal Almuevennen
to agitate the masses over the Schleswig question. In such circles it was
felt that Danish history must be inculcated in schools to raise national
consciousness. So the theological student, Rasmus Theodor Fenger (1816–89), came out with Svend Aagesens Danmarks Krøniker, oversat og
oplyst as the first-fruits of a long harvest of church-historical, educationaland controversial writing. He decided that Wolff’s translation was ‘nolonger suitable for popular reading, since the language seems insufficiently entertaining and forceful for the common people’. Not as enter-

Introduction

29

taining and forceful, he meant, as the language in which his master,
Grundtvig, had presented Saxo in his Danmarks Krønike (1818–22).
Fenger wanted Sven’s History to become a national ‘school-book’, a firsttext for Danish history lessons, for ‘there is nothing which concerns
childhood and youth so much as . . . the description of the childhood andyouth of the nation.’ Sven’s professed respect for oral tradition recommended him highly to a Romantic generation, and Saxo-criticism had
somewhat raised his reputation as an independent and earlier source.
Nevertheless, the schoolmasters appear not to have taken Fenger’s hint.
Jørgen Olrik’s translation, Sven Aggesøn: Danernes Historie (in KV,
1900–1), was a final attempt to give an accurate rendering of the style of
the S text, in a series of source-translations partly commissioned by the
Ministry of Church Affairs and Education. Introducing the series,
A. D. Jørgensen (1879, [iv–v]) wrote that it was ‘first necessary to awakena taste for the history of the Fatherland, or of the world, by means of alively and lucid narration’; then ‘to exercise the critical sense’ by presenting various versions of the same events. So the serious educational
impetus of the post-1864 generation embraced Sven as one of a range of
medieval sources, and Olrik’s work included a rendering of LC. This had
already appeared in Danish as an appendix to Holberg’s Dansk
Rigslovgivning (1889), and was by then accepted as a document ofconstitutional importance for the twelfth rather than for the eleventh
century.
Meanwhile, the ‘critical sense’ was demoting the S text to second-best.
Gertz accompanied his reconstituted version of 1915 with Sven Aggesøns
historiske Skrifter in Danish (published 1916/17), which included thetwo main works and the introduction to the lost genealogy. As a scholarly
rendering by the architect of the X text it cannot be bettered, and it would
be misleading to link the appearance of this translation with the renewed
threat of German aggression during the Great War. However, the threat
existed, and with the recurrence of national misfortune came the need fora ‘little more fluent’ translation of Sven’s History. At the beginning of1944 the leading Venstre journalist Paul Læssøe Müller published his
Kortfattet Historie om Danmarks Konger in response to the humiliationsof the German occupation: an illustrated edition, limited to 50 copies, formembers of the Bibliophile Club. In his epilogue Læssøe Müller stressed
the importance of the work as ‘an expression of the Nation’s selfconsciousness, a word taken in its full sense’—as a code-word, he meant,for Resistance. Whether this small and luxurious edition served its political
purpose may be doubted, but it is remarkable that it was published at all.

30

Sven Aggesen

English interest has been mainly confined to LC as a supposed reflection of the customs of King Knut’s army, and to the story of Uffi in HC
as an analogue to the Offa legend in England. The part of HC from Skiold
to Uffi appears in G. N. Garmonsway and J. Simpson, Beowulf and its
Analogues (1968), but translated from the S text rather than from X.
Summaries of LC were given in John Kemble, The Saxons in England(1876), and in two books by L. M. Larson, The King’s Household in
England before the Norman Conquest (1904) and Canute the Great(1912), but I have been unable to find a full translation.
As noted earlier, the translation of Sven’s works in the present volume
is made from Gertz’s reconstructed X text. A few technical terms andnames, italicized in the translation, are retained, in the form they have in
X or given a standard spelling based on that text; and some words are
similarly treated in the translation of the Old Danish Vederlov. Rarepassages printed in square brackets have their source indicated in thenotes.

THE LAW OF THE RETAINERS
OR OF THE COURT
Preface
The men of ancient times left many things to their posterity, for
us to study with diligence,1 and they also took care to makeprovision for the unity and brotherhood of the court, lest
undisciplined young warriors who were serving together 2should enjoy too much freedom, and should be allowed to
provoke each other with insults and escape punishment. To
restrain the boldness of the unruly ones3 they authorized andpromulgated a law, which they called the Witherlogh 4 in theirlanguage. Although it is a less appropriate name, we can callit ‘the law of the retainers and the knights’ or ‘the law of thecourt’ in the Latin language.5
As time passed, this law went out of date and was forgotten,
because from then onwards there were very few who remembered the achievements even of the glorious men of old. It was
only Absalon, the illustrious metropolitan of the whole kingdom of the Danes,6 with his usual desire for knowledge andafter careful and far-sighted consultation with his pupil (thatis, with King Knut,7 son of the first Valdemar), who wrote it
down in a document.8 For what is held to be out of date andantiquated can often be brought to life with the help of writing.
So, as I had found this recorded very briefly in our own
language, I approached my task without much confidence in
my learning or ability, for I was always afraid that I should
seem to have forestalled, with arrogant presumption, thosewith greater learning than mine. However, I will still attempt
to the best of my ability to translate the matter into Latin,
however inelegant the style, for the sake of those fine young
men who are making a successful study of the rules ofcomposition. And at the end of this little work I shall unravel

32

Sven Aggesen

the pedigrees of the kings and the order in which they reigned,9as far as I have been able to trace them from what has beenreliably handed down by aged men.
First, therefore, I will explain about the makers of the lawsof the court: who made them? why? and where?10[1] Knut, the son of King Sven Forkbeard, came into hisancestral inheritance like a raging lion,11 and by his undefeated endeavour he nobly enlarged the boundaries of his
empire from farthest Thule to the empire of the Greeks,
outdoing Geryon of Hesperus12 by the force of his valour andalmost equalling the great Alexander;13 for he had annexed
England, Norway, Slavia, and Finland14 to his own kingdom,and so increased his might and power with ample splendour.
And when he had subjected all the surrounding countries to thegovernment of his own kingdom, warriors came flooding inon all sides, their number comparable to the garlands ofDodona,15 on account of their reputation for courage andvictory; and they impetuously vied with each other in doing
him homage.
However, they came to him in so great a multitude that it
became apparent that they were not all equally worthy, and in
the end the king came to the following resolution. He decreed
that, whereas his force of warriors had been thrown together,as it were, without any difference of rank, they were to be
divided according to their merits and their proven virtue, andthose of outstanding virtue were to be brought closer tohimself. He wanted to be on more familiar terms with those
who he knew were entitled to claim high descent and who
rejoiced in plentiful wealth, so that those who came from thebetter lineages should try to excel in virtue; and they would not
be embarrassed by lack of equipment for the wars inasmuch as
they had been brought up in richer households.16[2] Therefore he published an order and proclaimed by aherald that only those men who honoured the king and adorned

The Law of the Retainers

33

the force of warriors by shining resplendent with gilded axeheads and sword-hilts17 were to approach the clement kingwith the privilege of a closer association.18 For it would dohonour to the prince if a lordly throng should escort him,
attended by a guard of brothers-in-arms.19 And when thisresolution had been published, those who were pressed by lackof private means decided that they would be out of place in thephalanx of the richer men.
And all at once, the cities echo with the sound of hammeringfrom the smithies. For every ornament already made of shining gold is melted down to ingots by sweating smiths, so thatthe metal which the proud warriors formerly esteemed uselessshould be made to grace axe-heads and sword-hilts by the
choice artistry of goldsmiths. So it happened that the humantendency20 to ambition made them unwilling to spare any
expense, and they attempted to outdo their companions in the
more elegant workmanship of their weapons. For it is obviousthat elegantly decorated weapons are appropriate for those
who are brought up under more favourable auspices.
And when the numerous phalanx was gleaming with its new
finery, it was decreed that the strength of this band should be
fixed by a precise calculation of their number. The total was
three thousand picked men. It was decided to name this bodythe Tinglith in their own language.21[3] Now he had brought together men of such divergent
national customs into the one household, his task was this:how, within the army of so great a king, gathered, as it were,from various peoples (that is, from all the kingdoms which had
been subjected to his authority) and with a variety of usages
that jarred against each other,22 the warriors were to put theirquarrels and differences to rest, forbear mutual wrangling, andserve together with equal devotion, as befits honest messmates23 with the same lord. Untainted by division, malice andenvy, they must rather be ready with one accord to obey the

34

Sven Aggesencommands of the king, like limbs subject to one head.24 As
faithful men, they must conceive no hostile mistrust one ofanother. However, it was no easy matter to pacify a crowd of
so many quarrelsome men unless he checked them by punishment from falling into misconduct, so that the correction itself
should be severe enough to restrain their bold delinquency.25[4] Therefore, when the army was all assembled in Englandand the king was resting amid his warlike enterprises in thecalm of peace,26 he sent for the wiser men; and those he had
previously discovered to be wisest of all were Øpi the Wise ofSjælland and his son, Eskil.27 He had no fear of disclosing his
own secret counsels to either of these men, because he had
proof of their worldly wisdom28 on account of his earlier
choice of them as his privy councillors. With careful deliberation he inquired how to check the unruliness of the young men
by a discipline that would restrain their high spirits in futureand deter any man, whomsoever he be, from annoying anyother with insults. And since human nature is inclined to fall
into wrongdoing,29 the task was to make careful provision sothat appropriate remedies could be provided for every case of
misconduct.30 So they decided to deal very minutely with thedeterrence of lesser as well as of greater offences.
In order that we may move on more expeditiously to theharsher remedies, we will first consider the small ones.31 For
in their wisdom the ancients tried to eliminate the smallest
occasions of dispute, and they applied their best efforts to unite
in the bond of brotherly love all those men whose spirits wereseething with lust for combat.
[5] This then was the custom among the retainers of times goneby (they call them knights nowadays32): each man served theother alternately, and took turns in attendance without any
squires or grooms. So they decided that, if a man should lead
his comrade’s horse to water with his own, he should ride theone horse going there and the other coming back. If it hap-The Law of the Retainers

35

pened that he drove his own horse to water while riding
another man’s, whether it was work-horse, pony, hack or
charger,33 and he was led by dishonourable meanness to comeback riding the same horse, and if he was charged three times
with the same dishonest offence and convicted on the testimony of two fellow-warriors, it was decided that he should beseated one place downwards in the dining hall. For it was thecustom that the warriors should sit in places assigned to themaccording to their claim to worth, whether by seniority in age
or by the higher nobility of their descent, so that the elders andbetters took the more honourable places.34 Clearly, therefore,
no man could be moved from his usual seat without shame anddishonour.
A similar sentence befell any man who fed his own horsewith his comrade’s palfrey and on three occasions should be
convicted by the testimony of two men, as above, of having
offered the ears of corn to his own steed. They also decreed thatthe same punishment should await any warrior who went
upstream against the current while they were watering horses
and disturbed the water so that the others could only drink
muddy water—always provided that the same testimony established that this had been done three times. He incurred thesame sentence, because the same punishment befalls a similar
fault.35
Furthermore, if any man’s persistent audacity should markhim as incorrigible after three offences, and he should refuse
to come to his senses, they decreed that he should be seated lastof all, and pelted with bones at any man’s pleasure.36 Moreover, no man will share either food or drink with him. He is tobe content with his own dish and cup, all by himself.37
However, if his excellency the king should decide to protect38 a man from prosecution, to the extent of placing him in
the first seat and making him his own neighbour, they allowed
him this as an act of clemency by the prince, but with this36

Sven Aggesen

condition added: that he be entirely deprived of the support ofhis fellow-warriors and relieved of his former rights and duties
under the law.39[6] But while the law had to be made to cover many matters,
it came into being primarily as a result of the respect in which
the prince was held. Just as he laid down the pattern and ruleof obedience for his men, so his own conduct should begracious and familiar.40 Therefore it was enacted that the kingwith an army in attendance,41 or anyone else entitled to thesame honour, should himself display the loyalty he demandedfrom them. He should present a cheerful countenance, anddeny none of them a courteous reception.42 He was also to givethem the reward of their labour and pay his warriors theirwages without delay or any kind of argument, whenever it wascustomary or when they were short of money. Once they hadreceived their pay, the men would show the same goodness
and generosity in return43 towards their lords, and would be
prepared to obey whatever commands they gave and not failto carry out their orders. For the man who does not pay what
he owes asks in vain for what he wants.44[7] The men of old did not forget to prescribe a method bywhich any man would be able to transfer his homage to anotherlord, while leaving the majesty of the prince unimpaired andthe honour of the warrior undiminished. They decided that on
the eve of the Circumcision, which is when the New Year
begins according to the superstitious assertion of the gentiles,46 it was proper for the tried warrior seeking a change oflordship to depute two of his comrades to go to the lord from
whose lordship and authority he wished to be free, and they
were to resign to him that man’s homage and service. Thus it
was agreed that he should be able to resort to another homage
without any shaming reproach or disrespect to the lord.47[8] However, quarrels and insults stir up and encourage ageneral unruliness, and the men of old in their wisdom re-

The Law of the Retainers

37

solved to prevent the common bond of brotherly union frombeing disrupted by divisive anger and weakened by insults
offered among the men. They therefore served up a magicalantidote for cases of this kind,48 in order to anticipate thediscord at source and so eliminate it. As Ovid puts it,
Stop! ere you start; med’cine’s too late to stay
Sickness encourag’d by a long delay.49

For those wounds, ‘that by mere poultices will not be heal’d’,must be lanced with the knife.50 And so it was decreed that, if
any man were to abuse or insult his comrade or start any sortof quarrel by offering a visible affront,51 all his fellow-warriors
were to be called together in the presence of the king, and theplea was to be heard in the meeting which is called Huskarlastefna.52 Because if the plaintiff were able to prove with thewitness of two of his fellow-warriors that his comrade was
guilty of having insulted him as a Witherlogh man,53 and thewitnesses confirmed their testimony with an oath sworn on thesacraments, then it was ordained that the convicted man
should be seated one place downwards in the dining hall.54
And it was determined by a general ordinance55 that all
disputes arising between the warriors should not be ended or
conducted anywhere except in that same assembly.
[9] It was also laid down by a general ordinance that all
disputes arising between fellow-warriors over farms andfields,56 or even over robbery from houses, which is called
Boran in our language,57 should be raised and settled within theassembly mentioned above. The man entitled by the judgmentof his fellow-warriors to make good his claim to property58 is
obliged to prove that he has been in continuous occupation of
the land with the help of six men drawn by lot from hiscompany, that is from his Fjarthing,59 or that his prescriptive
title is protected by the appropriate law.60
Now it was decided to settle lesser disputes with the testimony of two fellow-warriors, and by the old arrangement it

38

Sven Aggesen

was with the testimony of the two who in the dining hall sat oneither side of the man concerned.61 However, the men of today
decide that the rigour of the law ought to be softened in many
respects, so that even in the matter dealt with in the present
clause they bring the case to judgment with the help of two
fellow-soldiers got from anywhere in the hall.
[10] The law had not been established for long when the one
who lies in ambush for the blood of mankind, the hater ofprosperity, the perverter of justice,62 made an attack on thehigh standing of the prince. He tried to persuade the king toevade the law, so that once the head had been infected withaconite, the corrupting poison would spread through the rest of
the limbs.63 For while he was still in England, enjoying peace
and tranquillity, the maker of the law, King Knut himself, fell
into a passion64 and drew his sword and killed one of his own
warriors. At this, the whole phalanx was convulsed with rage;
the legions came pouring in on all sides and ran to arms
without delay. But when they discovered that the hand of theking had committed this killing, they gathered into a body andmade careful inquiry into what they were to do.
For their opinions were divided, and their verdict was
doubtful and uncertain: whether to punish the king with deathon account of the novelty of the crime, or was he entitled topardon? 65 For if the king were to undergo the prescribed
sentence, they would be driven out of this foreign country as
leaderless fugitives; but if they were swayed by their reverence for the king, the example of their corrupt indulgencewould enable others to commit the same offence.
In the end this sentence was passed by the whole cohort, andno wrong conclusion66 was to be drawn from it thereafter. The
throne was to be placed in the middle of the assembly, and his
grace the king was to prostrate himself before it and there await
a decision either for pardon or for severity. When that had been
done and the king’s grace had made atonement and all further

The Law of the Retainers

39

consequences of the crime had been eliminated, they raised
him up and pardoned him, and all together shouted theirunanimous confirmation.67
However, any man who committed this kind of misdeed infuture was to be disqualified from any dispensation, nor was
he to make compensation for the crime. He was to expiate thegravity of the offence by submitting to an inexorable sentenceof death, or at least, were the law to be relaxed, he was to departfrom the whole association of warriors as an exile and afugitive and an utter outcast, named by the shameful word of
Nithingsorth.68[11] After the great king had expiated the crime of which he
was guilty in the manner recorded above, the code was loyally
maintained and remained continuously unbroken through thereigns of eight kings. That is to say, during the time of old
Knut, who was also the maker of the law, and of his son Knut,surnamed ‘the harsh’ or ‘the hard’—although he never succeeded to the kingdom of his forerunner, he was a sort of helper
during the time his father had command of the helm of state,
as we shall explain more clearly afterwards.69 And then during
the reigns of Magnus the Good and Sven Estrithsen and Harald
Whetstone; and of Knut, who was crowned with martyrdom inthe church at Odense, and of Olaf, his brother, and of Erik theGood; and it was not violated until the reign of the ninth king,that is of Nicolaus.70 Then Kristiarn Svensen71 drew his sword
and wounded Thuri Doki,72 and he was the first offender tobreak the law of the retainers and the knights after the king had
made his amends.
After that, the king was faced by a difficult decision. For hethought it would be harmful to the authority of his government
and would undermine its security, if Kristiarn were to be
expelled from the court with the shameful name of Nithingsorth. It would also offend all the man’s kinsmen, who were themost powerful men in the realm, and all the more so because

40

Sven Aggesen

two of his brothers were greatly renowned bishops at the time.
Asser, the elder, was the first archbishop of the see of Lund,73
and the second was Sven, bishop of Viborg.74 The other two
brothers, Eskil75 and Aggi, and their revered father Sven, sonof Thrugot, were also respected in their day as foremost among
the leaders of the kingdom.76
These men were more concerned to preserve their honour
than their wealth, and they decided that, however heavy theaward, it was better to pay compensation for the crime that had
been committed than to put their good name in jeopardy. So
they made a careful investigation, and in their penetratingenquiries they consulted Bo Hithinsen from Vendel, bothbecause he was very old and because he had been a famous
warrior of old Knut, who is held to have made and publishedthose laws.77 They also brought in the older men of the day,those who were used to committing the doings of past times tomemory, and asked them whether any of them could remember any similar offence which had been made good by compensation alone. And when they had made diligent inquiry andwere unable to remember any similar breach of the law, thatsame Bo of Vendel replied with this advice: ‘It has not been
precisely settled by any man’s estimate78 hitherto. It is worth
our trouble79 to prescribe to our posterity a fixed method ofcompensation now. Therefore let a penalty be laid down sosevere that it will deter all our successors from daring to breakthe law.’
And so, with the consent of the whole court and with the
king’s agreement, he promulgated a new ordinance, that
‘hereafter whosoever shall dare to violate by his rash andpresumptuous audacity the ordinance of the present law—that
is, the Witherlogh—by inflicting a wound on his fellowwarrior shall make satisfaction to the king of forty marks, andshall appease the man he injured with another forty, adding as
proof of his shame at his own misconduct two marks weightThe Law of the Retainers

41of gold—called Gyrsum 80 in our common speech—and heshall also hand over a third forty marks to all his fellowwarriors bound by the terms of the same law.’81
However, the human condition is always prone to evil,82 andsome time after this Aggi Thver 83 followed the corrupting
example and wounded Esger Ebbesen, who had been thebailiff at Varde,84 while Esger was under the wing of King
Nicolaus, in the house of Withi the Staller at Borg.85 When that
happened, the king was enraged, and he ordered Aggi’s arrestat the wish of nearly all his fellow-warriors, but Withi objected
and spoke against it. Now he offered the same sort of compensation and made the same amends as we recalled above that
Kristiarn had made. And this is said to have happened in
Lime86 at Bo Ketilsen’s house. After this, time passed and,with evil deeds growing more frequent,87 corruption graduallycrept in and such payments became rather numerous, following the example of the first payment in reparation for theabove-mentioned crime.
[12] However, the inflexible rule of the old law was that, if any
man should happen to strike his fellow-warrior in anger witha fist or with any weapon whatsoever, and the fact should besubstantiated with the testimony of only two fellow-warriors,then no compensation was to be payable thereafter.88 It is themoderation of the men of today which has brought about thesoftening of this rule under a new law. Thus, if the fact is wellestablished by evidence or testimony and the accused is unable
to defend himself by any sort of denial, it is settled that he mustkneel89 at the feet of the man to whom he has given offence by
his insult, so that the most abject shame may be duly expunged
by the most humiliating form of reparation. However, if theplaintiff fails to convict the accused with witnesses, it is a
general ordinance that this man who brought the charge may
remove the infamy with the oaths of six of his fellow-warriors.90

42

Sven Aggesen[13] Provocations to violence are as diverse as the suggestionsof the Old Serpent. For it often happens that a man inflicts awound on another man, either wittingly or in ignorance:91
sometimes he wounds his own comrade, whom he recognizes,
but sometimes he thinks that his comrade is not his comrade.
If any man ignorantly and unknowingly wounds his fellowwarrior while trying to wound another, or hurts him byaccident, and is sued for it, he may vouch with two fellowwarriors92 that he inflicted the harm in ignorance and unwillingly. But if he fails at the oath-taking, he shall make satisfaction by the procedure mentioned above.93
But when a man wounds his fellow-warrior knowingly anddeliberately but unaware that he is bound to that man by thelaw cited above, it was enacted that this kind of ignorance did
not exonerate him from liability for the offence.94 For by thesame law it was provided that95 . . . all disputes involving alegal hearing96 are to be settled either with a group of six
fellow-warriors, for the more serious, or, for those that aremoderately grave, with two or three, as we have explained
above.
[14] Now that we have run through the laws by which lesser
disputes are to be settled, it remains for us to pass on to greater
matters.
Seeing therefore that by his continual watchfulness the wily
foe knows how to circumvent us, he leads us up the ladder ofundutifulness to the last step of damnation.97 For while by his
baleful suggestions he finds work for his followers in small
matters, he is always urging them on to attempt greater infamy.
Indeed, he who has been already trained to quarrel with his
fellow-warriors at the risk of bloodshed proceeds at the lastboldly to contrive the death or betrayal of his lord and prince.98
So if any man should incur this abominable disgrace, andshould be stained with the curse of Judas the traitor 99 andcommit a crime like his and be sentenced and condemned for

The Law of the Retainers

43

making plans to betray his own lord, that man, they decreed,
was to lose his life and all his property.100
To this end they ordained that, if the king were to [accuse]any man of treason or of the crime101 . . . the wind should fill
the sail and remove it out of sight of the onlookers; and if theWest Wind’s favour102 was not granted, then he had to row
across the sea until the oars were seen no longer, while they
had to wait on the shore. So, while he was hidden far out to sea,
they yelled three times as if giving a signal for battle, and it was
decreed that the rights he enjoyed as a former confederateshould be annulled.103
Furthermore, if he should dishonour himself by the aforesaid crime while in his native land104 and should be convicted
of it, as above, the whole band of warriors was obliged toescort him to a dense wood and wait on the edge of the wood
while he withdrew from them and pursued his course intosome dark wilderness where he was unable to hear the din of
their shouting.105 Then all his fellow-warriors are called together in a body, and with all their might they give their yellthree times in unison. And after that they are held bound by thislaw: that whichever one of them meets that man thereafter andhas the advantage of him by one man or one weapon at the leastand does not attack him, then he shall incur the same penalty
of ignominious discharge.106
So far I have unravelled the law of the knights, albeit in adisjointed style, as far as I have been able to discover it bycareful inquiry among old writers and old men. It remains forour posterity, whom one authority considers to be dwarves on
the shoulders of giants,107 to beautify this treatise with rhetorical figures and high-flown language108 and to supply what is
missing by bringing it to a conclusion in a style more elegant.

SUPPLEMENT TO LEX CASTRENSISThe Old Danish Vederlov

The Witherlax ræt (see pp. 5–6 above) is here translated, with occasional
light paraphrase, from the version in the Uppsala manuscript, De la Gardie
44, fol. 159r, written in the first half of the fifteenth century. The edition
followed is that by Erik Kroman in DR, 1–5. It begins: Incipit statutum
Kanuti regis filii Waldemari regis et archiepiscopi Absalonis quod dicitur
witherlax ræt. The page-numbers in brackets refer to the comparable
passages in the LC translation above.

_________________[pp. 31–2, 34] This is the Law of the Witherlag which KingKnut, son of Valdemar, and Archbishop Absalon caused to be
written down just as it was in Old Knut’s days. Old Knut was

king in Denmark and England and Norway and Samland andhad a large hird gathered from the lands he was king over, andhe was unable to keep them united and at peace unless there
were strict justice for those who offended others. And for thatreason he, and with him Øpi Snialli of Sjælland and Eskil
Øpi’s son, made in England the Witherlag 1 severe and strict sothat no man should dare to offend another.
[p. 36] And he ordained first that the king, and other honourable men who might have a hird, should stand by their men andbe kindly towards them and be prompt in giving them theirpay.2 Men should show loyalty and service towards their lords,
and be ready to obey all their commands.
[pp. 42–3] If any man should become a bold and miscreant
traitor and contrive Judas-work with evil plotting against hislord, then he has forfeited his own life and all that he owns.
[pp. 36–8] If the king wishes to dismiss a man from theWitherlag, then in his household he should first get two menof the Witherlag to summon him, in his company and in his‘quarter’3, to appear at a huskarlastefna, and announce to him
the place and the day. If he does not come to the meeting, then

The Law of the Retainers

45

the king shall have them go home to his house and summon
him a second time, and tell him the place and the day. Should
he not heed the summons, then he shall have him summoneda third time, at home at his house, and tell him when and where
he shall attend. If he does not attend the meeting, then let him
be condemned and flee the country and let the king take all that
he owned. If he comes to the meeting, and the king, with thewitness of two men of the Witherlag and with a sacred oath,can prove him guilty of the charge that he willed an attack
either on his life or on his country, then he has lost his place in
the Witherlag and forfeited his life. If men of the Witherlag do
not dare to bear witness to that and to swear a sacred oath, thenhe shall be either lost or saved by God’s verdict, that is by theordeal of hot iron, according to the laws that Old Knut made.
[p. 36] If any man should want to leave his lord’s service, thenhe should get two men of the Witherlag to renounce his service
on the eighth eve of Christmas.4 Then he may serve anotherlord thereafter.
[p. 42] If a man infringes the Witherlag by giving a blow or awound, then he shall be driven from the king’s household with
the name of Nithing, and flee from all the lands that Knut was
king over. And after that, any man of the Witherlag who meets
him should attack him if he be one shield stronger than him, orelse he shall be called Nithing without having offended bygiving a blow or a wound.
[p. 37] If anyone complains that a man5 of the Witherlag haddone him wrong, then that should be prosecuted at the huskarlastefna. If he can prove it by the witness of two men of theWitherlag and with a sacred oath, then the other should sit one
place farther out than he sat before. And all the disputes thatarise between them shall be prosecuted at the huskarlastefna
and nowhere else.
[p. 37] If there are disputes concerning property or seizure ofhousehold goods,6 then the one who is judged by the house-

46

Sven Aggesen

carles to have the law more on his side shall bring as proof theoath of six men chosen by lot from his ‘quarter’. Lesser cases
shall all be settled by the oath of two men of the Witherlag, one
who sits in from him and one who sits out from him.
[pp. 39–41] The Witherlag was faithfully accepted between
lords and their men and stood thus unblemished through thedays of eight kings—Old Knut, Harthaknut, Magnus theGood, Sven Estrithsen, Harald Whetstone, St Knut at Odense,
his brother Olaf, and Erik the Ever-good—and it was not
infringed before the days of the ninth king—that was Nicolaus.
Then Kristiarn Svensen made an assault and used a weapon on
Thuri Doki,7 and that was the first infringement of the Witherlag.
Then both the king and Kristiarn’s kinsmen thought it a badthing to drive him away from the king’s household with thename of Nithing, for two of his brothers were bishops, Archbishop Asser and Bishop Sven of Viborg, and two otherbrothers of his, Eskil and Aggi, and their father, Sven Thrugun’sson, were chief men in Denmark, and these would rather let thecase be settled by compensation. Then they inquired of Bo
Hithinsen of Vendel, who had been a man of Old Knut’s, andof others who were the oldest men in Denmark, if there were
any instances when the Witherlag had previously been infringed
and compensation paid afterwards; and they could find noprecedents. Then Bo Hithinsen said: ‘Since there is no precedent
for such a thing before our days, then let us set a precedent tostand after our days: that is, that the man who infringes theWitherlag by giving a blow or a wound shall atone to the kingwith forty marks, and to all the men of the Witherlag withanother forty marks, and to the man who was injured with forty
marks, and give two marks of gold as gørsom.8
After that, Aggi Thver used a weapon on Esger Ebbesen, thebailiff of Varde, at Withi the Staller’s house at Borg, under thearm of King Nicolaus.9 Then the king and all the king’s men
wanted to seize Aggi, but Withi would not let him be taken, but

The Law of the Retainers

47

stood in their way and offered compensation and guarantees inaccordance with the precedent of the payment Kristiarn had
made. And the compensation was paid at Bo Ketilsen’s inLime, and since then many compensations have been paid inaccordance with the precedent of Kristiarn’s payment.

A SHORT HISTORY
OF THE KINGS OF DENMARK
Preface
Often, as I was studying the books of the ancients1 anddiscovering numerous deeds of early times recorded in themost elegant language, I sighed continually at the perpetualsilence to which the mightiest achievements of our own kingsand chiefs have been consigned. They were no less great intheir merit and in their proven virtue, but their distinction has
not been proclaimed aloud to the same extent.
However, as this world grows old and evils gather apace, aman can strive to commemorate the things that ought to beremembered with all the care and industry he can muster, andhe will still be wholly unable to deflect the shafts of defamation.2 And so for a long time I was in two minds: should I accept
the charge of presumption and write down a short record of thepedigrees and successive reigns of our kings in my own style,unpolished as it is, or should I let them all pass away intosilence? However, I thought it better not to avoid displaying
my arrogance, and to penetrate the thickets of the neglected
past, thus clearing the way for our successors, who will be
armed with a sharp and lively intelligence and a fertile store ofelegant learning, rather than that I should let the achievementsof our famous princes be clouded over by the gloom of
oblivion.
However, Martianus tells us that ‘the statement of theunknown must not appear to be mixed with falsehood,’3 andlest I should seem to be narrating fable as history, I shall givean abbreviated account of what I have been able to ascertain
by questioning aged men and ancient authorities.4 Not allkings have been equally celebrated for their victories, nor have
all triumphed alike, and they certainly differed from each otherA Short History

49

in their claims to the kingdom. Therefore I shall attempt tocommemorate those whose famous deeds I found to be knownwith more certainty. To the deeds of those whom fleeting famehas passed by I shall attend less urgently.
Peasants and princes share the common nature of all men,whereby reputation instigates this man to do well, while loveof sloth tarnishes that one.5 This man endeavours to perpetuate his claims to nobility; little cares the other if glorious
renown be dimmed. And so our tale will now restore to life theman whom our remotest forebears6 first commended to eternal
remembrance.
[1] I have learned that Skiold was the first man to rule over theDanes, and if we may make a pun on his name, he was called
this because he used to protect most nobly all the boundariesof the realm with the shielding power of his kingship.7 He was
the first after whom kings were called Skioldunger in the
poetry of the Icelanders.8
He left heirs to the kingdom called Frothi and Halfdan.9
These brothers fought each other for the kingdom, and eventually Halfdan killed his brother and obtained the sole kingly
authority.10 He begot a son called Helghi to inherit the kingdom, and Helghi was so exceedingly valiant that he became apirate chief, and occupied himself with constant pirate raids.
And since he had laid waste the shores of all the surrounding
kingdoms and subjected them to his command with his pirate
fleet, he was known as king of the sea.11
His successor as king was his son, Rolf Kraki,12 who became
powerful through his inherited valour, and was killed at Lejre.
This was then the king’s most famous residence, but now, near
the city of Roskilde, it lies scarcely inhabited among quite themeanest of villages.13
His son Rokil ruled after him, and he was known by thesurname of Slagenback.14

50

Sven Aggesen

His son succeeded him as king and won a surname by his
speed and vigour: in our common tongue people used to call
him Frothi the Bold.15[2] His son and the inheritor of his kingdom was Wermund,and he so excelled in the virtue of prudence that he acquired aname for that. He is called Wermund the Wise.16
He had a son called Uffi, who repressed his power of speech
until the thirtieth year of his age. This was because of adreadful disgrace which befell the Danes at that time. Two
Danes had set out for Sweden to avenge their father, andtogether had killed his slayer.17 For at that time it was ashameful disgrace if two men put an end to one, especially as
the superstitious heathens of those days18 tried to devote theirenergy solely to acts of valour. So Wermund, mentioned
above, held the government of his kingdom until his old age,
and at last he was so worn out with age that his eyes weredimmed with senility.19
When the news of his infirmity was spread abroad in thelands beyond the Elbe, the proud Teutons pompously puffed
themselves up, for they were never content with their own
boundaries. Their emperor sharpened his furious rage against
the Danes, with a view to conquering the kingdom andacquiring a new sceptre.20 Emissaries21 were therefore sent tocarry the commands of the proud prince to the king of theDanes—to Wermund, that is—and they laid before him achoice of two courses, neither of which was fit to choose. For
he ordered him either to resign his kingdom to the Roman
empire and pay tribute, or to find a man sufficiently skilled inbattle to settle the matter by taking on the emperor’s champion
in single combat.
When the king heard this, he was dismayed. He called
together all the chiefs of the kingdom in a body and questioned
them carefully about what was to be done. For the kingdeclared that he was unable to come to a decision. It was his

A Short History

51

duty to fight, and he was bound to protect the kingdom; but
blindness had darkened his sight, and the heir to the kingdom
was speechless and had grown slack with inactivity, so that itwas commonly held that there was no hope of salvation to be
expected from him. For Uffi, whom we mentioned above, hadbeen sunk in gluttony from childhood, and had diligently
applied himself to the kitchen and the cellar in the manner ofthe Epicureans.22 In such matters he had served with diligencerather than with sloth; for in his youth he had decided topreserve the strength of his body unspent. And so the kingrevealed the ambition of the Germans to the assembled chiefs
and to a gathering of the whole kingdom, and the old man maderepeated inquiries into how he was to make a choice which was
scarcely a choice at all.
And while the whole crowd was sunk in perplexity andplunged into silence, Uffi was the only one who rose to his feetin the middle of the assembly. When all the people caught sightof him, they were astonished beyond words, for a speechless
man was taking up an attitude as if to make a speech.23 As every
rarity is held to be worth looking at,24 he held the attention of
all of them.
Thus risen, from on high his speech he thus began.25‘Let us not be troubled by the threats of these challengers.
That habit of Teutonic turgidity is something they are born
with: to brag with bombastic words and to dismay the weakand cowardly by threatening them with flatulent menaces.26
Nature brought me forth to be the sole and true heir of the
kingdom: surely you must know that it rests on me alone
boldly to meet the test of single combat, and to fall for the sakeof the realm. Let us therefore knock the wind out of theirthreats, and tell them to carry back this message to theemperor: that his son and the heir to his empire, along with his
most outstanding champion, must dare to meet me on my own.’

He spake, and thus pronounced these words with haughty voice.27

52

Sven Aggesen

When he had finished the speech, the old man asked thosesitting beside him whose oration it was. And when he heard
from the bystanders that it was his own son who had utteredthese words, who until then had been as if he were dumb, heordered him to draw near and let him feel him. He touched him
all over his shoulders and chest, his buttocks, calves and shins,
and the other limbs of his body, and then he said: ‘I call to mind
that such a one was I, in the flower of my youth.’28
What then? The date and place of the combat were fixed, andthe envoys went back to their own country with the answer
they had received.
[3] All that remains is to gather arms indisputably worthy of
the warrior. The king had the best swords in the kingdom
sought out and brought together, and Uffi wielded each one ofthem with his right hand and smashed them into the smallest
fragments. ‘Are these the weapons,’ he asked, ‘with which I
am to defend my life and the honour of my kingdom?’
And when his father discovered how very outstanding was
his skill at arms, he said, ‘There is only one refuge left both forour kingdom and for our life.’
He ordered that he be led to a burial mound where he hadonce hidden a most well-tested sword,29 and, instructed bymarks among the characters on the stones,30 he told them to dig
up this supreme blade. He seized it at once in his right hand anddeclared, ‘Here it is, my boy. Many a time have I triumphed
with it, and it always protected me without fail.’ So saying, hehanded the sword to his son.
It was not long before the time appointed for the conflict wasnear at hand. Uncountable masses came together from all
directions, and the place of battle was fixed on an island in theRiver Eider 31 so that the combatants should be separated fromthe crowds on either side and remain unassisted by any of theirsupporters. So the Germans sat down together across the riverin Holstein, and the Danes were drawn up on this side of theA Short History

53

stream. The king chose to sit in the middle of the bridge,32 sothat if his only son should fall, he might throw himself into thedepths of the river rather than survive the loss of both his sonand his kingdom ‘to carry his white hairs in sorrow’ to theother world.33
The combatants were let loose on either side and came
together on the island in midstream. And when our noble
warrior caught sight of the two men who were hastening tomeet him as arranged, he roared from his mighty breast like alion34 and with a steady heart rushed boldly and without delay
towards the two picked men, wearing at his side the blade
which his father had kept hidden, as told above, and holding
another drawn sword in his right hand.
As soon as he met them, he addressed them both in turn. We
seldom read of such an occurrence, but our most rare ofchampions,35 whose ‘remembrance will never be effaced,’36
encouraged his own adversaries to fight:37 ‘If longing for our
kingdom fires your ambition, and you want to gain possessionof our wealth and power and plenty, you ought by rights to go
ahead of your retainer. Then you may both extend the boundaries of your kingdom and win a reputation for valour in frontof your watching warriors. However, let us set to!38 Take a lessonin skill from your opponent, and feel the stroke of the smiter.’
But he addressed the champion like this: ‘Here is the place
to broadcast the proof of your valour. Take the lead now, andmake known to the Danes without more ado the prowess you
have already exhibited to the Germans.39 Now you will be able
to add to your reputation for skill in battle. If you go before
your lord and protect him with your defending shield, you will
be enriched with a gift of outstanding generosity. I implore
you: let the experienced and valiant Germans do their best to
instruct the Danes in the finer points of the art of combat,40 sothat you may win the longed-for victory at last, and go back toyour native land rejoicing in triumph.’

54

Sven Aggesen

When he had finished his words of encouragement, he struck
the champion’s helmet with all his might, and the sword hestruck with was ‘distributed in two’.41 It made a noise thatechoed throughout the whole gathering of warriors.42 The
German cohort shouted aloud with delight, and the Danish
phalanx on the opposite side were stricken with sorrowful
despair and groaned in their grief. As soon as the king heardthat his son’s blade was shattered, he ordered that they should
place him on the edge of the bridge.
And suddenly Uffi drew the sword he was wearing, dyed itin gore from that champion’s hip, and with no further delay
sliced off his head as well.
Thus ‘playful Fortune, variable as the moon’,43 now mocked
what had happened before, and looked with the unfriendly
gaze of a stepmother 44 on those she had just now favoured totheir boundless jubilation. When the old man heard of this,he regained his confidence and had himself returned to hisformer seat.
The victory was not in doubt for long, for now Uffi drove theheir of the empire to the bank of the island and there had nodifficulty in slaying him with the sword. Thus he defeated two
men on his own, and by his glorious courage he erased withsplendour enough the shame which the Danes had incurred
long before. The Germans went home ashamed of their dishonour, and their threats and their outrageous verbosity45 werebrought to nothing. After that, far-famed46 Uffi ruled his
kingdom in peace and tranquillity.
[4] He begot a son to whom he gave the name of Dan; Dan alsobore the surname of the High-minded or the Proud.47 He was
succeeded as king by his son Frothi, who was also called the Old.
After him his son Frithlefer undertook the government of therealm. His son was Frothi Frithgothæ, who was also called theMagnificent because he embraced liberality above all otherA Short History

55

virtues: gold and silver he ‘counted as clay’.48 His son Ingiald
succeeded him.49
After his time no son succeeded his father to the throne fora space of many centuries. It passed to grandsons, or nephews,
who, to be sure, were sprung from the royal stock on the one
side.50
The one who succeeded next, Olaf, vigorously subdued all
the surrounding countries, even as far as across the River
Danube, where he marched in triumph for seven days.51
However, in case I should be accused of making up stories andtelling untruths, by stringing together the reigns of kings
whom I have learned to be quite widely separated by intervalsof time,52 and since I may have passed over many illustrious
men, owing not to my idleness but to the unfruitfulness of myresearch, so I leave the inquiry to my diligent successor,53 thatby his careful investigation he may supply what I have left out
through memory’s eclipse.54
After this Sighwarth, the son of Regner Lothbrogh, invaded
the kingdom of Denmark; having joined battle with the king,he killed the king and gained the kingdom. And while he wasin possession of the conquered kingdom he took to his bed thedaughter of the slain king.55 When he had had knowledge ofher as a wife, the king’s daughter asked him what he should
call their offspring. The king answered and told her that after
she had given birth, the mother would remember her girdle.
And when the time of her giving birth had passed, she called
the boy Knut, alluding to the word for knot,56 and he was thefirst who had that name in Denmark. And he was the only one
sprung from the royal line after the Frothi whom we mentioned
above.57
While he was still a boy, a landowner from Sjælland called
Ennignup58 was made guardian of the kingdom; but as soon as
Knut came to manhood, he took control of the kingdom. Time

56

Sven Aggesen

passed, and he had a son whom he chose to call Snio.59 He hada son whom he called Klak-Harald.60
He was followed by his son and heir, Gorm Løghæ, asluggard who merely indulged in sensuality and regal drinking-bouts.61 His wife was that most glorious queen called
Thyrwi, who was surnamed the Ornament of the Realm.62 And
I cannot refrain from speaking of her laudable renown. For it
is customary to relate the deeds of those whose reputation
stands high above the rest.
[5] Now this Thyrwi whom we have mentioned was a woman
conspicuous for every virtue. Nature strove to bless her with
uncountable gifts. For she was fair of face, and the rose and thelily had been wedded to paint the pinkness63 of her cheeks; andshe was chaste, modest and cheerful, overflowing with anabundance64 of all manner of courtesy. Furthermore, thekindness of Providence had enlightened her mind with suchradiance that she was believed to have drunk from one spring
the prudence of Nestor, the cunning of Ulysses, and thewisdom of Solomon. If only she had been cleansed by the
spring of baptism, she might indeed be accepted as a queen of
Sheba, who came to learn wisdom of Solomon: if only thatlady had been orthodox.65
In those days the emperor, Otto, had made Denmark tributary.66 I think it was because of the inactivity of the king, who
was given over to the pleasures of gluttony, as we recorded
above. When Otto learned of this, he arrogantly conceived afierce longing to try and inflict a mark of shame67 on the
kingdom. He even made a thorough attempt to ensnare themodesty of the above-mentioned queen with his wiles. He
therefore sent envoys to meet the queen in private under thepretext of collecting the tribute, and they were also given
instructions to suggest to her that a queen of her surpassing
beauty and prudence ought rather to be an empress, and ruleover the Roman empire, than remain the queen of a tributaryA Short History

57

or no more than middling kingdom. ‘So take the wiser course,’
say they. ‘Do not carelessly refuse the powers that are offered
you. Cherish the renown of so famous a prince in your inward
affection with a lasting and unshakeable return of his love, andjust as his love’s embrace enfolds you, so let your reciprocal
emotion succumb to his friendly vigour.’68
When she heard those words, she asked for time to deliberate, so that she might reply to such a choice greeting with akindly and appropriate answer in the same terms. And since
they delayed but a short while, the urgency of the matter drove
her to collect her thoughts more pressingly. Thus, when they
asked her what answer they should take back to their lord, that
far-famed and commendably virtuous lady, who alone deserved to be called queen, had devised a stratagem in her
cunning mind, and she began to coax them with the mosthoneyed words69—as the saying goes, ‘You bear honey inyour mouth, but gall lies hidden in your heart.’70
These were the words she poured forth, as if in prophecy:‘May my tongue cleave to my jaws if I remember thee not.’71
To her questioners she indicated that she consented and was
ready to carry out the vow. However, she made it clear that, if
she were to scorn the bed of her own husband and fly to theembraces of another man as an adultress, she would beembarking on a momentous undertaking. Much money would
therefore be needed to atone for and indemnify so great anundertaking and so infamous a wrong: money to be paid out tothe inhabitants of the kingdom, both male and female, to stop
the mouths of slanderers. Indeed, she contrived with womanly
blandishments that, if they wished to accomplish their purpose, they must concede the tribute to herself for three years
in order to atone for that same misdeed.
And so they immediately set out for the emperor at great
speed to bring back to him her reply and the condition attached
to it. This he accepted with the utmost readiness and joyfully

58

Sven Aggesen

promised what she asked for, provided only that she gave
security for their pact with hostages. The envoys hasten backto Denmark and convey the emperor’s wishes to the queen,
demanding hostages to confirm the agreement. Twelve of themost noble sons of her chief men are selected as hostages
without delay, to go to Saxony with the envoys.
[6] Meanwhile the queen sent a decree throughout the kingdom that the entire population of the whole realm72 should becalled together and assemble near Schleswig,73 and all those
who had their abode within the kingdom were to set to workwith their own hands to build a strong fortification with all
speed. However, she helped those who were pressed by lackof worldly goods by supporting them with the tribute: this was
how she spent the tribute which she had obtained by deceit.
She gave none the privilege of exemption: the young, the old,and all adults who were neither impeded by their infancy nor
prevented by the weakness of old age, were obliged to labourat that fortification.74 They all had to obey her, because
everyone, rich and poor alike, tilled her fields like tenant
farmers. For in those days our kings exercised lordship over allland in the kingdom by right, just as they possessed the power
to rule.75 And so it was she, first of all, who built thatmarvellous work which thereafter always presented the surest
defence of the Danes against the fury of the Germans, as if they
were fenced in by a hedge.76
When she had devoted two years’ labour to this, news of thisenormous construction came to the emperor’s ears. Onceagain he sent envoys to Denmark, and they shrewdly inquired
why the queen was applying herself to this kind of work,
unless she was trying to break their agreement. The queen
always had a ready answer, and this is how she replied to them:‘I cannot adequately express my astonishment that a prince ofsuch outstanding prudence, who by the grace of the Lord hasborne aloft his throne almost to the stars77 and by his penetrat-

A Short History59

ing counsel has subjected so many ferocious peoples to his
empire, should deign to inquire the meaning of her plans froman incapable woman. For I think what even your intelligencemust have deduced cannot have been hidden from his: that
there is no way through for the passage of infantry or cavalry
in your direction except over a smallish stretch of level groundwhere I have now erected this enormous obstacle of a wall.
Whereas previously the kingdom was patently open to all, now
the road is closely blocked by the obtruding wall, and a very
narrow gateway will keep in those who wish to leave. Of
course, as the faithful servant of my lord I shall carry out his
design, and when I have gathered in the entire wealth of the
kingdom, I shall surrender myself to your will, and our
infuriated people will be held back by the retaining wall. The
entrance which will allow us an unhindered passage willremove the possibility of pursuit by the national army.’
When the envoys heard this, they greatly commended thecunning of the woman and went joyfully back to their own
country, reassured that she would keep her promise. Meanwhile the queen pushed on all the more earnestly with the work
she had begun; and thus the cunning of a woman deceived theinflated vanity of the Germans. And when three years had
passed and the building of this ingenious work was brought toa conclusion, and it was properly adorned with bastions, theygave this most magnificent construction the name of
Danevirke,78 because it had been accomplished and completed
by the sweat of the Danes. As for the queen by whose peerlessingenuity freedom has been won for the Danes to remember
for evermore, they gave her the not unworthy name she fully
deserved: Thyrwi, the Ornament of Denmark.79[7] The emperor immediately orders picked knights of theempire to set out for Denmark with immense parade to meetthe queen. A crew of minstrels, making music with viols80 andharps and ‘timbrels and dances’81, escort them with noisy

60

Sven Aggesenrhythm. They sent on a few of the more important men into
Denmark to sound the mind and wishes of the queen, andpitched their tents by the Eider to await her arrival.
And when she learned of their arrival, she summoned to her
the wiser men of her kingdom, and in the hearing of them all
she gave the following reply: ‘What the emperor demands, I
deny. What he desires, I refuse. What he seeks, I avoid.82 I will
not play the adultress, and at once disgrace the kingdom,
defame my sex, and dishonour the king. You reproach me withthe king’s inactivity. You may be certain that this suits me very
well. The whole kingdom obeys my wishes, and there is not alawsuit or prosecution which is settled otherwise than at ourpleasure. Thus, as you know, I am fully respected both as kingand as queen. And you may rest assured that the king is highly
distinguished in the nobility of his birth, for he is the offspringof kings on either side. Therefore, even if he cannot match83 thesize of the emperor’s power, he is in no way inferior in his royallineage. And to conclude my short speech: I shall forthwith
liberate the Danes from the yoke of servile tribute, and they
will owe you no further submission or respect whatever.’84
The legates were immediately stunned to silence by thedreadful disrespect 85 of this unlooked-for reply, and they
hastened in disarray back to the tents of the nobles mentioned
above. A crowd of these nobles converged on them in troops,
asking what it could be that sped their return at so urgent apace. Without hesitation the envoys reported directly to all ofthem that they had been foiled in their intentions and outwitted
by the cunning of a woman.
When the emperor discovered this, he ordered that the
hostages should undergo sentence of death on the spot. For
that most illustrious queen knew a long time in advance that
this would be the outcome of the matter, as if she were giftedwith knowledge of things to come.86 However, she decided
that it was better to redeem the whole kingdom from servitude

A Short History

61

by the death of a few rather than to serve foreigners to the very
end.87
Then was the ambition of the Germans confounded and their
joy turned to grief. Back they went, grieving and lamenting.
And when that famous queen and the king her husband hadcompleted their span of years, leaving a son, Harald Bluetooth,88 who was also the heir to the kingdom, Harald had both
his parents buried according to heathen rites in almost identical mounds of equal size by the king’s residence at Jelling, toserve as glorious mausoleums.89[8] This Harald held sway over the kingdom with his royal
sceptre for a long time afterwards. This was the first king toreject the filth of idolatry and worship the cross of Christ.90
However, he sent the army to haul the immense rock which heintended to have raised over his mother’s mound in memoryof her achievements, and disorder began to seethe among thepeople. It was caused both by the new religious observancesand by the unbearable servile yoke.91 Then the commons brokeout in rebellion against the king, and all together they drove
him from the kingdom. He fled with speed, for ‘fear added
wings to his feet,’92 and arrived in Slavia as a refugee. There
he is said to have had a peaceful reception and to have founded
the city which is now called Jomsborg; whose walls I, Sven,saw levelled to the ground by Archbishop Absalon.93
During his exile his son Sven was raised to the throne; he was
surnamed Forkbeard.94 And he adopted as a true worshipper of
God the faith which his fugitive father had in the end renounced.95 Reborn in the holy waters of baptism and madeorthodox in the faith, he ordered the seeds of God’s word to besown throughout the land.
In the course of time envoys arrived to repair the discord which
had arisen between the fugitive father and the son who occupied
the royal throne. The king therefore decided that his father andthe Slavs should meet him in the straits of Grønsund96 to make

62

Sven Aggesen

peace. The king arrived there first with the Danish fleet at thetime appointed, and waited a long time for his father. The
fugitive Harald meanwhile accepted the suggestion of one of
his counsellors—that is, of Palna-Toki, a man with two
names97—and constructed for himself a rapid vessel best
suited for rowing. This he manned with the most experienced
sailors and put the above-mentioned Palna-Toki in charge,
who set off with all speed to meet the king.
When he reached the Danish fleet, he ranged his oarsmen on
deck and, with treachery in mind, gave orders that his shipshould make for the king’s. With his crew in position, at thefirst light of dawn he quietly roused the king in his restingplace.98 When the king woke, he asked who it was. ‘It is us,’he said, ‘the envoys of your father. We have been sent over toyou to discuss peace-terms.’ When he gathered this, the kingwanted to inquire more closely into how his father was, and heput his head a little way over the gunwale of the ship.99 Then
Palna-Toki grabbed him by the ears and the hair, gave a more
powerful heave against his unavailing resistance, and dragged
him willy-nilly out of his own ship. Although he yelled andshouted, just a little, they made their escape with furious oarstrokes while everyone else slumbered in ignorance. Nor did
they heave to until they reached the city of Jomsborg.100
When the Slavs caught sight of him, the people rose up andcondemned the prisoner to various forms of death and refined
torture. However, the better sort of their leaders prevailed withwiser counsel. They decided that, rather than put an end to him
by killing him forthwith, they would be better advised to have
him ransomed for a large tribute; in that way the Danes would
be impoverished and Slavia would perpetually rejoice in her
wealth. It would yield but little profit to the community if they
were to condemn their prisoner to death.
So they charge their envoys to announce to the kingdom thatthey may buy back their king with three times his weight inA Short History

63

gold and silver; and they did so without much delay.101 The
Danes collected a levy from almost the entire kingdom, andwhen the Slavs arrived at Vindinge102 with the captive monarch, they were eager to redeem their king. But the levy proved
insufficient to release him, and in order to ransom him themarried women agreed to make up the shortfall in coin with
their own jewellery. They topped up the king’s levy by adding
rings, bracelets, ear-rings, necklaces and all their chains. And
when it was complete, the Danes obtained from the king theirfirst common rights over woods and groves.103 Moreover, inrecognition of the goodwill and generosity of the married
women, he was also the first to concede that in future a sistershould share with her brother a half portion of the division of
the family inheritance;104 for women had previously beenwholly excluded from any share in what was inherited fromthe father. For he considered it was agreeable to all reason thata display of whole-hearted love and a giving of gifts ought tobe rewarded in equal measure, as if to say, ‘the same measurewith which you have measured shall be measured unto you.’105[9] When Sven died, his son Knut succeeded to the kingdom,
and they also surnamed him the Old. He widened the boundaries of his kingdom by the amazing force of his valour. By his
manifold prowess he added to his own empire the neighbouring kingdoms from farthest Thule almost to the empire of the
Greeks. Yes indeed, with not inconsiderable gallantry hesubjugated Ireland, England, France, Italy, Lombardy, Germany, Norway, Slavia, and Samland too.106 And while heenjoyed the calm of peace in England, he was the first to makelaws for his retainers, which I have outlined above according
to the small measure of my slight abilities.107
He also had a daughter called Gunhild, a famous woman
whom the Emperor Henry, son of the Emperor Conrad, took
in marriage.108 And when the Romans drove Henry from theroyal throne by seditious riot, he went to his father-in-law and64

Sven Aggesen

begged for his assistance. Seizing the opportunity thus afforded him, the noble and renowned Knut raised his own army
and first invaded and ravaged Gaul; and so, marching on, helaid waste Lombardy and Italy, and afterwards forced the
Romans to yield their city by his manifold valour. Thus herestored the emperor his son-in-law to the throne.109 After that,he travelled with much rejoicing as far as France, and masterfully carried away with him from Tours to Rouen the relics ofthe blessed Martin. For Knut loved her more than others, witha special affection.110
The above-mentioned Knut also begot two sons. He called
one of them by his own name, and he was given the surname
Hard: it was a name he got not because he was harsh or
inhuman, but because there was a province of the same namefrom which he came originally by birth.111 His father put thisson in charge of the kingdom of Denmark. He called the otherson Sven and delegated the government of Norway to him.
Knut himself ruled England [as king for nearly five quinquennia, and during that time the sons to whom he had committed
those kingdoms112 ] paid the debt of Adam and left their father
as survivor.
When the king heard that the kingdom of his fathers was
bereft of a ruler, he speedily returned to Denmark. Because thechurch was newly planted in Denmark113 he brought with him
many priests and bishops; some he kept by him and others hesent out to preach. Scattered abroad throughout Sweden,
Götaland and Norway, and sent over to Iceland as well, they
sowed the seed of God’s word and gained many souls for
Christ—as it is written, ‘Their sound has gone out to all lands,
and their words to the ends of the earth.’ Among them were thebishops Gerbrand and Rodulf, and one of them—that is,
Gerbrand—he appointed as the first to rule the church of
Roskilde, while to the governance of Rodulf he entrusted thechurch of Schleswig.114

A Short History

65

Now, as he was unable to attend to several kingdoms on his
own, he invested his nephew (Sven, that is), despite his youth,
with royal rank and entrusted him with the government ofDenmark. His father was Ulf, who was known by the surname
Sprakaleg,115 and his mother was the king’s sister Estrith.
[10] When King Knut was dead, his nephew, this same Sven
who had been placed on the throne by his uncle, undertook thegovernment of the realm. Not long did he rule it in peace andquiet,116 for the Norwegian king, Magnus, son of the blessed
King Olaf by a concubine,117 invaded Denmark with his fleet
in pursuit of conquest. King Sven met him near Helgenæs andfought a sea-battle with him, in which Magnus triumphed andwon Jutland, Fyn and Slavia.118 But while the victor was trying
to chase Sven into Scania, he met an unexpected accident inSjælland: he was thrown from his falling mount,119 hit a tree
and died. After that, Sven was restored to the kingdom andheld the government of the realm in peace.
The rustics called him ‘the father of kings’ because he wasa most prolific begetter of numerous sons,120 five of whom
wore the shining diadem of kingship in succession. I have
deemed it superfluous to recount their deeds in full, lest theyshould be repeated too often and weary my readers, for thenoble Archbishop Absalon informed me that my colleague
Saxo was working to describe at greater length the deeds ofthem all in a more elegant style.121
However, it ought not to be overlooked in passing that it was
the primeval custom of our forefathers that, when kings wereraised to the throne, all the Danes came together in a body at
Isøre, so that royal inaugurations should be enhanced by theconsent of all.122 And so, when King Sven died, his son Harald,whom they called the Whetstone because of his complaisant
softness, was raised to the throne.123 He was the first to givelaws to the Danes in the place where kings were enthroned,
which we have mentioned.124

66

Sven Aggesen[11] When he died, his brother Knut succeeded to the kingdom, and the church of Odense boasts of him as their crowned
martyr: killed not, as some consider, on account of his exces-

sive harshness or because of the unbearable yoke which hewould have imposed on the plebs as a result of his harshness.125
For the reason why he was persecuted was the following.
At the time when he enjoyed the ‘plenitude of power’, hegrieved that he had not inherited the sovereign sway of his
father’s uncle. So he summoned an army and a fleet for theinvasion and conquest of England, and went to Humlum,
which in those days was a harbour connected to the sea; there
he ordered the army to assemble.126 He was waiting for afollowing east wind with the assembled fleet when a sudden
rumour reached the king’s ears that treachery against the realm
had arisen at Schleswig. He hastened there with all speed to put
an end to that conspiracy127 at the outset, and when he arrived
there, he arrested and bound the originators of the crime andtook them into his own keeping. He then hastened back withextreme rapidity to the fleet he had unexpectedly abandoned,
and thought to find his men in the same place where he had
unfortunately left them.
However, when he came to the appointed place, he discovered that the whole lot of them had mutinously and disobediently rowed back to their homes. Blazing with over-muchfury, he anxiously asks himself how to inflict the signal
retribution128 which so great a misdeed deserved. For theunhappy king was in two minds,129 considering that he ought
to be less severe because it would involve the undoing of somany men, nor would he be able to punish so great a communal
crime with as much strictness as was needed to deter themisdeed of a private person. Therefore each steersman wasmade liable to pay a composition of forty marks, just as therigour of the king had ordained, and the compensation also

A Short History67

required of each sailor was three marks, because they hadruined the king’s army by their dispersal.130
While visiting each province he would exact payment withthe full rigour of the law;131 and he began to levy the fineamong the Vendel-dwellers first of all.132 This was a brutal anduncivilized people, who were thirsting for innocent blood withferocious cruelty, and instead of their tax they presented theirinnate fury. Moreover, such a mass of people had cometogether that not a single householder had the privilege ofstaying at home. When the king learned of their outrageousness, he took instruction from the words of truth, ‘If you arepersecuted in one city, flee to another’;133 and he tried to escapetheir rage and deprive them of the opportunity of doing evil.
But the enemy were infected by the suggestions of the Old
Prevaricator;134 their frenzy mounts, to threaten the king’s
head; profane plebeians devise the prince’s death.135 Whispering rumour spread, urgently resounding, and with repeatedslanders roused the whole body of the realm against the king’s
harshness.
Good news flies slow, by envy stayed,
Bad news on feather’d wings doth spread.136

Nor did the frenzy of the infuriated rabble cease137 before hehad been driven out across the Little Belt138 and pursued toOdense. And there he was crowned with martyrdom, andcommended his soul to Paradise.139[12] Once he was dead, his brother Olaf was made king, andin his time there was a famine so terrible that the common
people called him the Famished; but it lasted no longer thanseven years.140 On his death his brother Erik the Good takes hisplace.141 And at the end of his reign he followed Christ and took
the cross upon his shoulders.142 For he set out for Jerusalem
and committed his soul to Christ on the way; having removed
himself from the prison of this life, he rests in the island of

68

Sven Aggesen

Cyprus. During his reign he was the proud begetter of children
from a noble stock, although from various successive hymeneal unions.143 For he begat Knut of Ringsted, father of King
Valdemar, [and also Erik, the father of King Sven, and Harald
Kesia, the father of Biorn Ironside144 and his eleven brothers.
After] Erik his brother Nicolaus succeeded, and the rabble
named him the Old because he governed the kingdom forseven quinquennia.145 He had a son by lawful marriage who
was called Magnus, great in name and great in height. For, like
King Saul, ‘from the shoulder and upwards he stood above’146
all the warriors of the kingdom and his contemporaries.
[13] During the time of that same king, Knut of Ringsted,147 a
man who was wise, discriminating, courteous, energetic andstrong in the virtue of honesty, became famous as the duke ofSchleswig. He cowed the wild fury of the Slavs by his
wonderful vigour and prudence148 and brought them under his
jurisdiction by his extraordinary virtue. Envy meditated on his
virtues . . . and began to grow sick, for her head is apt to hang
low at the prosperity of others.149
With timorous ambition, Magnus began to plot his death, sothat he would not be deprived of the transient kingdom150 even
if he failed to win the everlasting crown. For goodness isalways suspect to kings:
and thus:. . . all power will be
Impatient of a consort . . .151

Right, law and goodness perish,
And all respect for life and death.152

For they put aside the ties of kinship and joined together withthe same Duke Knut’s kinsman—that is, with Henrik theLame153—and took counsel [for the killing of Knut154] incovert conclave, as if it were a high matter of state.
So they appointed a place in the wood at Haraldsted155 toconfer with him. And the fearless champion of Christ,156

A Short History

69

conscious of his own good faith alone, did not hesitate to meetthem. Marked out only by the banner of the Holy Cross,protected neither by shield nor by helmet and escorted by no
more than two guards, the lamb stood there ready for the
furious wolves. The criminals arrive later, wolves in sheep’s
clothing,157 with hoods and cloaks concealing coats of mailand helmets. Without delay the enemies of peace make haste
to slaughter the ‘Israelite indeed’,158 their own cousin, andoccupy themselves in sending to Heaven the soul that had
previously been held captive within the prison of the flesh.
Followers of Christ afterwards bear his lifeless body to Ringsted for burial,159 where by the divine power of the Lord many
miracles were worked by Christ before numerous witnesses.
[14] And so this monstrous crime subsequently stirred up afierce rebellion in the kingdom. Erik is moved by the finger ofthe Lord160 to avenge his brother, while his uncle Nicolaus,
mentioned above, is still ruling, and he is stirred up to try theissue in battle. Erik was raised to the throne with the title ofking and afflicted his uncle with manifold persecutions. They
fought each other often but the most famous fields of battle
were these.
First they fought at Rønbjerg161, where Nicolaus won theday, and he captured my grandfather Kristiarn and sent him,bound with iron shackles, to be held in custody at the fort
which overlooks the town of Schleswig.
After a while there was another meeting between the contestants at the bridge at Onsild,162 and although the fighting
was even fiercer, Nicolaus’s party prevailed again. Erik’s
army turned tail, and he would have been captured on the spot
had not the Biorn mentioned above, who was nicknamed
Ironside on account of his famous strength, in company withmy father Aggi, fought back manfully in the middle of thebridge. They resisted a shower of missiles with such couragethat they were thought to be immovable pillars.163 While

70

Sven Aggesen

defending the way across the bridge, they beat back theenraged attackers with such wonderful valour that they might
have crossed the bed of the stream dry-shod on the corpses ofthe slain. Although hampered by numerous wounds, they did
not cease to guard the bridge until the king had embarked on
his ships and was ready to escape. They followed him at once
and accompanied him in his flight to Scania.
King Nicolaus had now triumphed in two encounters.164
Therefore he tries to drive his hostile nephew out of the
kingdom altogether. He gathered a fleet and pursued him to
Scania, where he made a rapid landing at a place which iscommonly known as Fotavik165 and belongs to Lund. The
commons of Scania, who are always mightily upright,166 hadcalled together the entire manpower of the land. This was awell-equipped force, and they had no hesitation in meetinghim. Battle was joined, and they hacked and haled to Hades theking’s son Magnus, the perpetrator of the crime previously
spoken of, along with two prelates.167
And so King Nicolaus was beaten, and bereft of his son andheir at the same time, and he sailed to Schleswig, and theburghers of that city received him within their enclosing walls
and treacherously slew him.168[15] Having gained a glorious victory, the above-mentioned
Erik, who is known as Ever-memorable,169 held the kingdom
after him in peace, and freed the aforesaid Kristiarn from his
chains. So he gained the kingdom but, having risen to power,
he forgot the reason for the vengeance he had wrought, andbegan to rage against his own kinsmen more cruelly than thetiger. For with anger in his heart he had his brother, Harald
Kesia, summoned to a meeting in the silence of the dead ofnight170, while he was staying at his manor of Skibing [?].171
Bidden from his bed, boding naught baleful, once roused hehastened to the king his brother, weaponless. And in that very
place commissioners caught him and cut off his head.172

A Short History

71

Not long after that he meted out a dire retribution to repay his
own nephew, the Biorn mentioned above. He seized him, tied
him to a millstone, and sank him in the depths of a bottomlesspit.173 He ordered Biorn’s brothers to be put to death by thesword as well. They numbered ten adults, some flourishing
youths and some children.174 In this he bore little resemblance
to his father.175
And since he was the author of so great a crime and had
wholly exterminated these budding kinglets,176 the righteous
judgment of God’s authority went against the exalted power of
the king, and the avenger of innocence quickly destroyed theauthor of the crime ‘in the breath of his mouth’.177 For Plogh
the Black ran him through with a spear at the Urne-thing, while
he was surrounded by a circle of warriors.178[16] And so the king was killed, and another Erik was placedon the throne. They called him the Lamb on account of his
sweet and gentle nature, and in his days there was a plenteous
abundance of everything.179
And when he was dead, Knut, the son of that Magnus who
had been killed in Scania (as we have recorded above), wasmade king at the Viborg assembly, and Sven, the son of theabove-mentioned cruel Erik, was put on the throne by the
Scanians. And while they were engaged in numerous battles,
Valdemar, the scion of holy blood, the son of Knut of Ringsted, gained possession of his father’s fief180 and gave assistance to both in turn, as if he stood between them.
However, after a long time, a council was held in Lolland181,
and the rulers decided to divide the kingdom into equal thirds
and to confirm the treaty by an oath. But the treaty did not
remain firm for long, as the outcome of the arrangement
showed. For after the council had been held, the three we havementioned came together that autumn in the city of Roskilde
for a feast, and they dined first with King Sven.182 The peace

72

Sven Aggesen

and trust between them had been broken, and he had prepareda trap: he plans to kill Knut and Valdemar that evening after
vespers by means of commissioners previously instructed.183
When the lights had been snuffed,184 they slew Knut andcrowned him with martyrdom;185 but while they were trying torun Valdemar through with a naked sword, he was seriously
wounded in the thigh,186 but God’s grace preserved him187 andhe escaped. However, as soon as he had recovered somewhat
from the pain of his wound, he set out for Jutland and gathered
together an army.
[17] Sven, who was king of Scania, hastened after Valdemar,
king of Jutland, and they joined battle at Grathe.188 Nor was thevictory long in doubt, for Sven was beaten, and killed by thehand of a peasant. And so the glorious victor, King Valdemar,
gained possession of the kingdom.
After that he governed the realm for five quinquennia andtwo years.189 This man secured190 the boundaries of the kingdom with such glorious valour that, whereas previously thewild Slavs were encouraged by our internal divisions and laid
waste all our sea-coasts and our islands as well, he tamed theseaways, brought them under his jurisdiction, and subjugatedthe Slavs, making them pay tribute to himself.
[18] He accomplished many things worth remembering, but
his memory shines with a starry radiance from three of themalone.191
In the first place, under his rod of iron and outstretched
arm,192 he compelled the Rugians to be regenerated in thewaters of holy baptism.
And the second remarkable feat was that he was the first tobuild a tower of fired bricks, on the island of Sprogø.193
And the third was that he first repaired the rampart of theDanevirke with a brick wall, but he was prevented by his deathfrom completing it.194

A Short History73

For while he lived he was a man found acceptable in all
things: fair of face, courteous, discriminating, wise, mostpenetrating in counsel, vigorous, an outstanding warrior, an
accomplished wit, victorious, popular, always successful;
only more cruel towards his own people than was just.195[19] This Valdemar took to himself in marriage as his queen
Sophia,196 sister of Knut, the king at Roskilde. Nature strove
immoderately to enhance the utter loveliness of her appearance. For all the skill of the ancients would fail to describe
her.197 However, I borrow no solicited opinions for the ‘blazoning of her beauty’,198 for many a time I used to see the much
admired masterpiece of Nature with my own eyes.
And in the end, God’s grace increased the reputation of theillustrious King Valdemar so widely that surrounding kingsand princes strove to pay him honours as if they were his
due.199[20] And when he had paid the debt of Adam, his son Knutfollowed by hereditary right and succeeded to his father’s
kingdom without degenerating from his father’s virtue. Indeed, he repressed the wild Slavs with such manful couragethat he laid waste the whole territory of the Slavs and the
Pomeranians with his fleet200 and forced their duke, Bugislav,
to pay him tribute and homage. This was done aboard theking’s ship, glittering with gilding on stem and stern,201 not far
from the city which was founded by the fugitive Harald, as werecalled above;202 and I saw it done. And I have decided that it
is worth recounting the heavenly sign of that submission.
For after they had concluded the treaty, such a thunderclap
rang out that they thought the elements were collapsing.
Indeed, we considered that this was done with God’s permission by the Old Prevaricator203 and the Enemy of Peace. For thesame violent whirlwind and storm almost swamped and sankthe smaller boats, which were carrying the bishop of Kamien204

74

Sven Aggesen

and the above-mentioned Bugislav, along with the king’s
brother Valdemar,205 a young man of the most brilliant naturalabilities. When that was concluded, we rowed homeward withimmense jubilation. May the Ruler of all things order thisconclusion in His peace!206

NOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION
1. Saxo’s debt to Sven has often been demonstrated, e.g. by Curt Weibull
1918. But there are no tributes to the precursor in Saxo’s work. Instead,
Saxo implies that he had none (GD, 3; PF, 4), or at least very poor ones
(GD, 100; PF, 109). At the beginnning of book seven he seems todissent from one of Sven’s genealogical guesses (GD, 181; PF, 201),
and later (GD, 265; PF, 294) he slights the historians who dealt withthe regent Ennignup: they included Sven. He spoils, or underplays,
Sven’s best stories.
2. GD, 410 (EC, 414) for the ‘temerity’ of Aggi. He advised King Svento attack rather than wear out Valdemar’s army, despite Valdemar’s
superiority in numbers.
3. De Eskillo archiepiscopo et duobus Eskilii patruis narratio, from theExordium Magnum, composed c.1200; SM, ii 428–42.
4. According to Saxo (an unsympathetic witness), Eskil first sold hisloyalty to Knut V and Valdemar, and then abandoned Sven III on apretext by which Sven was not deceived (GD, 398; EC, 396).
5. Gertz, 158, 196, followed by Arup, i 253, and others. On Danes in
Paris see now Munk Olsen.
6. Gertz, 197, n. 26; Skyum-Nielsen, 205, 214. Most of Skyum-Nielsen’s
precursors assumed that Sven was a hirdman, even if Saxo may nothave been. Fenger 1989, 205–8, refers more cautiously to Sven’s‘connection with the hird of Valdemar and Knut VI’.
7. DD, i:3, no. 96 (c.1180–3) and no. 225 (1197–1201).
8. NL, 122, for Archdeacon Sven. Another Sven is the fourteenth in thelist of deacons. On Asser Svensen see Weeke, 141, 225.
9. For the synod of 1187 see Hamsfort in SRD, i 282, and SkyumNielsen, 224–5; for the archidiaconate, Eskil’s 1145 charter, DD, i:2,
no. 88.
10. Provost Asser’s bequests are recorded in the Liber daticus of Lund
and of Sorø (an ultimate beneficiary, thanks to Absalon). He died on
25 March in some year between 1185, when he was still in exile,
witnessing Magdeburg charters (DD, i:3, no. 127), and 21 Oct. 1194,
when his successor Salomon was in office. He left a house in Lund, anassart near Venestad in Scania, and land at Bjæverskov in Sjælland.
See Weeke, 70, and SRD, iv 360, 470.
11. Lagerbring, i 218ff., ii 99; SRD, i 42ff.; Velschow, xviii–xxiv.
12. The older historians found what they wanted in the void which is
Sven’s biography. Steenstrup 1896, 707, praised ‘the heartiness that

76

Sven Aggesen

distinguishes this enthusiastic, almost fantastic, nobleman’, andJ. Olrik (KV, 26, 32) was sure that ‘he certainly did not belong to theclerical order, but . . . was a member of the . . . Tinglid’ with a ‘naive
love of life’; ‘no churchman,’ wrote Arup (i 253), ‘but solely a royalhirdman’. Skyum-Nielsen, 205, insisted on the social divisiveness of
the Vederlov as it appeared in LC: ‘aristocratic in the worst sense of
the word’. Fenger 1989, 207, n. 8, describe’s Sven’s treatise as ‘ideological propaganda for a growing royal power’, and Birgit Sawyer
1985a, 51–2, argues for the unofficial standpoint of Saxo but maintains
that Sven was ‘making propaganda for royal power by the grace ofGod’, claiming that ‘there is no doubt that Sven Aggesen wrote insupport of royal policy.’ See however her interesting argument (1985b,
688–91) that ‘Sven Aggesen’s and Saxo’s works may . . . be seen as
representing . . . two families, each claiming to be official history but
in fact offering partisan views.’ Perhaps; but neither makes such aclaim openly, and I doubt whether the concept of ‘official history’
existed in Denmark before the sixteenth century. Nanna Damsholt
1985, 157–60, elaborates on the partisanship of Sven. My own views,
as expressed in EC, esp. 156 and 228, are tainted by an uncriticalacceptance of Sven as a political propagandist, and have since beenrevised.
13. Cf. Saxo’s formal acknowledgment of his debt to Absalon and his
dedication to Archbishop Anders Sunesen (GD, 3; PF, 4), andTheodricus’s dedication to Archbishop Eysteinn (MHN, 3–4). A true
political propagandist like Otto of Freising left his readers in no doubtof his commission by expounding it in an epistle to the emperor andtwo prologues.
14. The conventional courtliness of Sven’s eulogy of the Queen Motherwas insisted on by Karsten Christensen and Niels Skyum-Nielsen in
SS, 130, 138; cf. p. 73 above, and p. 138, nn. 197–8, below.
15. DD, i:4, no. 24, with bibliography, and DGL, i:2, 774: a decree whichapplied only to Scania and was not strictly speaking a national law.
16. Harald Whetstone’s laws are mentioned by Ælnoth and specified by
Saxo; see J. Olrik 1899–1900. Frithkøp occurs in the Lund charter of1085 as a royal perquisite. The situation was memorably summed up
by Axel E. Christensen as ‘law without power’; see Axel E. Christensen
1978, 11–29, where gild regulations are used as examples of consensual rather than public law.
17. As suggested by Brøndum-Nielsen.
18. Recorded in the Rüde Annals (c .1250), and from them in the
fourteenth-century Ribe Annals; DMA, 166, 258.

Notes to the Introduction

77

19. DD, i:2, no. 143: ‘We concede moreover to ailing fideles at the endof their lives that in obedience to the law of the Danes they may give
half of all their possessions clearly and freely to the . . . brothers . . .’20. As in the preamble to the Sjælland and Scanian church law, DGL,
i:2, 821.
21. The best edition is in DGL, ii. This law never became valid for thewhole kingdom, but Kroman 1973 argued that ‘it was originally intended to apply to the whole country.’
22. In 1898 Erslev deduced an annual income of 33,000 marks andupwards from the sources listed in KVJ (Skyum-Nielsen, 305). Carpenter
calculates revenues for the young Henry III well below this in 1225,
when he got only £16,500 (21,994 marks). The comparison is
unfortunately almost meaningless because the estimate of Henry’s
revenues depends on recorded receipts, which do not exist for Valdemar
II’s Denmark. Valdemar’s ransom, finally agreed in 1225, included acash payment of 45,000 marks. Richard I’s ransom of 150,000 marks
may be a more realistic indicator of their relative wealth.
23. The text of Hir›skrá is in NGL, ii 387–450. See also KL, vi 580–2(Seip), and the discussion of the hird in Foote and Wilson, 100–5.
24. Danish historians agree that the composition and function of the hirdchanged significantly in the period 1086–1186, but not when or how.
The question of whether it developed into a brotherhood of administrators, as Arup argued, or, as in Bolin’s view, that it became a new
knightly élite of nobles enjoying privileged status by their membershipof the royal household, was not resolved by Aksel E. Christensen 1945,
and now appears to have been an opposition between two rather
hypothetical positions. More recent historians tend to be less sure of
the twelfth-century hird : see Skyum-Nielsen, 174–8, Riis, 227–35,
Hørby, 192–4, Fenger 1989, 44–5. For a brief summary see KL, vi
577–9 (H. Nielsen). I doubt whether the hird actually existed as an
institution before Sven. It was just a name given to any great man’s
following. Cf. Lindow, 64–7, who argues that the term hird was not
used in Denmark either before or after Knut’s time, and that the authorof WR employed it ‘only in a strictly historical context’. He thinks WR
is earlier than Sven’s LC. If he had concluded that it was later, as it
certainly seems to be, his case is stronger.
25. GD, 298 (EC, 44). Saxo’s narrative of twelfth-century events includes several which are hard to square with Sven’s LC. In 1131
Magnus, son of King Nicolaus, was prosecuted at a popular ‘thing’ formurder and exiled but recalled by his father’s royal will (GD, 357–8;

78

Sven Aggesen

EC, 130–2). In 1137 Erik II fined Eskil, then bishop of Roskilde,
twenty gold marks (160 of silver), for opposing his wishes. That was
the equivalent of the highest bot laid down in the Vederlov ; the fine
was levied after an appeal for clemency by Kristiarn Svensen rather
than after a trial by the men of the Witherlag (GD, 370; EC, 354). Sven
III (1146–57) introduced judicial combat as a way of settling cases atlaw (GD, 388; EC, 382); and Valdemar I threatened his cousin andretainer, Magnus Eriksen, with the ordeal by hot iron as the Danish
mode of defence against treason charges (GD, 508; EC, 557)—a modeabsent in LC in both Sven’s and Saxo’s version but present in WR.
26. . . . amaris cum conviciis insequuntur . . . etiam contumeliae damnationem iunxerunt (GD, 398; EC, 397). The best study of the light shedon the hird by Saxo is by Skyum-Nielsen in SS, 180–91.
27. For the best texts see DR, nos. 7–10. I am unconvinced by Riis, 48–
54, who attempts to redate the Treason Law to 1139–40, and adhere to
the fundamental work of Holberg. To these documents must be added
the brother-list appended to KVJ. It contains 215 male names organized into 62 brotherhoods (of 3–8 men) under headings corresponding
to the main administrative areas west of Scania: Jutland’s fourteen
syssler, Fyn and Sjælland. The identifiable names belong to nobles,
officials and bishops in the period c.1190–1202, a few from before andafter. Tage E. Christiansen doubted whether this was primarily a list of
royal retainers and suggested an analogy with the English jurati ad
pacem; others have argued for a monastic fraternity associated with
Sorø. Hørby, 159, prefers the older view that this was ‘an exploitationof the old hirdman ideology’, binding all the chief men to the newhereditary kingship as ‘brothers’; and most commentators agree with
Aksel E. Christensen 1945, 47–8, that the list ‘can scarcely be explained except in connexion with the royal hird.’ If so, the extensionof the household to include ‘country members’ as well as ‘boarders’ in
one association coincides with the composition of LC by Sven to
define the terms of the association.
28. See Jómsvíkinga saga (1962), ch. 16; (1969), ch. 14, for the ten or
dozen laws of the Jómsborg Vikings. In the first of the three chapters,of uncertain date, appended to the Flateyjarbók recension of Jómsvíkingasaga, it is reported that Sven Forkbeard established ﬂingamannali›
garrisons at London and ‘Slessvik’ and that the troops made laws
(ﬁingamenn settu ﬂau lög at . . . ), though the rubric of the chapter reads
Lagasetning Sveins konungs ; see Flat., i 203, and a normalised text
from there in EE, 92–3. Cf. EE, 89, where it is concluded that it isNotes to the Introduction

79‘obvious’ that the author of the Flateyjarbók chapters took the laws of
the ﬂingamenn from Jómsvíkinga saga itself. Individually these laws
are not strictly comparable with LC, neither are the laws of hólmganga
in Kormáks saga or the rules of the Hálfsrekkar in Hálfs saga. And see
now Abels, 161–3, for an apt dismissal of the Jómsborg connection.
29. Snorri ascribed a household law to Óláfr in his Óláfs saga helga ofc.1230 (ch. 43 in Den store Saga ; ch. 57 in Heimskringla); there is no
earlier reference. For St Olaf’s other reputed laws see Authén Blom,
61–75.
30. See Liebermann, i 620–6. He dated the Constitutiones de Foresta to
the later years of Henry II, following the Woodstock decrees of 1184,
which imposed a real forest code. The Constitutiones are comparable
to LC not because of any textual relationship but because both documents justify innovations by invoking the same highly respected legislator of the past. The genuine codes of Knut kept his reputation alivein England: apart from Anglo-Saxon copies, at least ten twelfth-century
manuscripts of the Latin versions survive (Liebermann, iii 330, 334),
and at St Albans these versions were regarded as Knut’s own work (seeRoger of Wendover, s.a. 1022).
31. The gild theory goes back to Lappenberg and Kemble, was adoptedby Steenstrup, Normannerne, iv, ch. 6, and expounded by Larson 1904,
160ff. Stenton followed suit: ‘It is clear from later Danish evidence thatthe members of this body formed a highly organized military guild’(Stenton 1950, 406; cf. Stenton 1932, 119–21). Ditto Hollister, 11–12;
ditto even the vigilant Abels, 165, who concludes ‘that Cnut would
have organized his household in this manner is far from implausible,
since guilds seem to abound in tenth and eleventh century England.’Far from implausible, perhaps: but, as Hooper, esp. 167–70, has demonstrated, there is no contemporary evidence that this particular gild,which would have been the most important in the country, ever existed.
32. The loan-word husting was applied to the London gemot, never togild-meetings; see Nightingale.
33. In st. 4 of Gísl Illugason’s erfikvæ›i on King Magnús Bareleg(d. 1103) húsﬂing refers to a council-of-war held by the king on apunitive expedition to Trøndelag against the party of Steigar-ﬁórir,probably in 1094. The conjecture made by Hofmann, 203, that theword is a contracted form of húskarlaﬂing is groundless, since the latterterm is never found. A húsﬂing was in effect a private meeting (sometimes indoors) as opposed to a public meeting. Cf. also Steenstrup,
Normannerne, iv 175–80.

80

Sven Aggesen

34. ﬁingali› occurs on a Swedish rune-stone at Kalsta (Häggeby parish,
Uppland). The compound ﬂing(a)mannali› is found in saga texts. Notlong before Haraldr har›rá›i’s invasion of England in 1066 the king’s
stallari, Úlfr Óspaksson, could refer to a picked man of the English
army as a ﬂingama›r : ef . . . hrøkkva . . . skulu tveir fyr einum . . . undan. . . ﬂingamanni (Skj. A, i 403, B, i 372; Morkinskinna is the oldest
source for the strophe).
35. Kinch argued for thegn, but Steenstrup, Normannerne, iv 133–4, forﬂegning. Hofmann, 75, gives Bugge and Steenstrup as authorities forthis loan but has doubts; Alexander Jóhannesson, 1228, had none. Peter
Sawyer, 303, refers to ‘Knuds thegnlith’, and Abels, 170, repeats
Larson: ‘thingmenn, an Anglo-Saxon loan-word derived from thegnung,‘service’, and related etymologically to thegn ’. The word ﬂegn evidently had several meanings in Scandinavia: see Moltke, 284–91, fora concise discussion of this vexed problem.
36. There are 20 examples in Lexicon Poeticum, and Foote discusses the
poetic references. The verb ﬂinga may be a more helpful source of
explanation than the chief recorded sense of the noun, and a plausible
analogue for ﬂingama›r found in the term málama›r, a man who
receives máli, pay by contract, esp. for military service—for a goodcollection of references see Cleasby–Vigfússon, s.v. máli.
37. E.g. the horse-tending rules, applied before the knights employedgrooms; the bootlessness of all crimes of violence under the old law;
the old restriction on the choice of oath-helpers, and on the right ofcounter-oath; the process of outlawry by sea, which only applied towarriors stationed abroad.
38. Saxo: Adeo quondam castrensis notae dedecora iudiciali repellebantur umbone (GD, 296; EC, 42). Nunc vero, solutis hebetatisque pristinis
militiae nervis . . . priscae consuetudinis forma convellitur (GD, 298;
EC, 44). Contrast Sven’s triumphant announcement that the old customs have been revived and recorded.
39. The brief and scattered allusions to ius militare in Justinian’s Codewon the concept some recognition in Gratian and the glosses of thecanonists; see Decretum, pt 1, dist. 2, 3, c. x. Isidore offered a working
definition in Etym., V, vii.
40. Edited as ‘Den Gamle Gaardsret’ in KR, v 23–46. On these texts see
Maurer, Jørgensen, 61–2, and KL, v 645–6 (Liedgren).
41. Clause 5 of the Proem to the Institutes refers to law desuetudine
inumbratum imperiali remedio illuminatum.

Notes to the Introduction

81

42. Sven has: controversiae (chs. 3 and 9) for disputes at law; calumnia(chs. 5 and 8) and contumelia (ch. 8), both varieties of iniuria in Roman
law; generalis constitutio (chs. 8 and 9), distinguished in the Institutes
from constitutio personalis ; querela (ch. 9) for accusation; the two civil
claims of vendicatio and praescriptio (ch. 9). But all these words areused by canonists. Delictum is unforensically modified by transgressionis in ch. 11, and in ch. 4 and elsewhere praevaricatio is used forsimple ‘transgression’ rather than for ‘sham accusation or defence;collusion’. On the whole, Cicero seems a likelier source of the civil law
vocabulary than the Code; but not for the herciscunda or the catholicianiof HC; cf. pp. 124, 134, nn. 104, 172, below.
43. For a full etymology see Azo, lib. I, tit. xvii, De Vetere Iure
Enucleando.
44. For law-texts in use under Archbishop Anders Sunesen see Haastrup,in Ebbesen, esp. 107–11, and on the archbishop’s jurisprudence, Frosell,in Ebbesen, 243–53. See also N. K. Andersen.
45. As Bernard of Pavia, 3, put it at the beginning of his Summa
Decretalium from 1187–91: ‘The reason for making a constitutio is forthe restraining of malice, and for the definition of a new point of law.’See p. 86, n. 3, below for Gratian’s view of law, and note the references
to sin and penance in Sven’s text.
46. The excommunicated monk seeking absolution ‘throws himself on
the ground before the community’ in RB, ch. xliv; cf. also Saxo’s story
of Sven II’s self-abasement before the bishop of Roskilde (GD, 311–
15; EC, 62–6). The affinity of the Vederlag with the monastic rule wasnoted by the Cistercian author of AR (DMA, 162; cf. DMA, 256, and
SRD, ii 170). He says that Knut (he calls him ‘Hartheknut’) quasi
religiosis leges et statuta prescribebat honestatis.
47. See MGH, Epp. iv: Epp. Karolini Aevi, ii 24, for the shortened text.
An English translation of most of the full text is in EHD, 773. PopeJohn VIII drew the same comparison for the bishops conspiring against
Charles the Bald in 876; see MGH, Epp. vii: Epp. Karolini Aevi, v 319.
From the seventh century Judas appears in the anathema section ofcharters as the prototype of treachery; not of treason. It is the clergy
who most delight in flinging the epithet Judas at each other.
48. As in the preface to HC, p. 49 above: ‘Peasants and princes share thecommon nature of all men, whereby reputation instigates this man to
do well, while love of sloth tarnishes that one.’
49. See Skyum-Nielsen, 251–3, on Hævn og Hærværk.

82

Sven Aggesen

50. Or, as Holberg, 37, argued, man-to-man relations within the Witherlag were regulated less harshly, but man-to-king relations more so.
51. See pp. 26–7 above. The combination Leges—Reges—Genealogia
reverses the sequence of King Rothari’s ‘Edict’ of 643, in which thekings and lineages come first, before the Lombard laws, but follows thepractice of scribes and binders who gathered similar elements in thesame order as Sven from the early eleventh century onwards, as e.g. in
Codex Skoklosterianus, which has the law of the Visigoths followed bya chronicle of the kings (MGH, Leg., i 457–61).
52. On Annales Colbazenses see Anne K. G. Kristensen 1969, 25–7, andfor the text DMA, 1–11.
53. See Anne K. G. Kristensen 1968–9, a remarkable ‘detective story’.
Ralph Niger’s two chronicles were edited by Anstruther in 1851; cf.
Flahiff, and Gransden, 222.
54. For the theory that the pedigree from Skjo≈ldr was made by Sæmundr
fró›i see Bjarni Gu›nason, 150–80: it seems that he provided his son
Loptr with an ancestry to match his bride’s, a daughter of King Magnús
Bareleg of Norway. Whatever its origin, a version of this pedigree
came to Sven’s notice shortly before or about the same time as anotherversion was used in Skjo≈ldunga saga (c.1180–1200). For collections of
the various renderings and fragments of this lost saga see Danakonungaso≈gur and Skjoldungernes Saga.
55. The two versions of the text were edited by Gertz in SM, i 176–85,
152–5. It has been argued that Sven’s genealogy could be later than
Abbot William’s; see Lukman and others contra in SS, 138–9.
56. For example: Knut’s first cousin, Knut of Lolland, still alive in 1188,
and his cousin once removed, Sverker Karlsson, who survived to 1208;
Bishop Valdemar and Nicolaus, grandsons of King Nicolaus; King
Knut of Sweden, son of Biorn Ironside’s daughter; Benedikt, Birger
Jarl and Magnus, the surviving great-grandsons of St Knut of Odense
through his daughters; Poppo, future bishop of Bamberg, born before
1188, the grandson of Sven III.
57. Chronica Slavorum, iii 5; see now Munk Olsen, in Ebbesen, 75–94,
and T. Riis 1982.
58. Before 1177 Bishop Absalon had ‘many Norwegians’ in his retinue:
DD, i:2, no. 132 (witness-list). After 1180 Denmark was a refuge for
Sverrir’s enemies. While Archbishop Eysteinn went to England, King
Magnús Erlingsson fled to Denmark in 1180/1 and 1183/4, and from1185 the Kuflungs were maintained by a Danish magnate named Sven.

Notes to the Introduction

83

59. In the following Theodricus is cited before the dash, Sven after it:

Rudi licet stylo . . . perstrinxi — Stilo . . . licet illepido
breviter annotare — sub compendio memorie commendarem
scriptorum inops — pari preconio non extiterunt
Hugo . . . canonicus Sancti Victoris . . . Sigibertus quoque Gyemblacensis —veterum in codicibus contemplatione
investigatum ab illis, quos nos . . . Islendingos vocamus — modis Hislandensibus

For Theodricus’s citations see Jens S. Th. Hansen; Tenney Frank,
82–3; A. O. Johnsen, 29–37. He cited Lucan eight times, Vergil once,
Statius once (under Lucan’s name), Ovid once.
60. Theodricus, chs. 3 and 6, for lineages. Solus obtinuit regnum totius
Noruagie (ch. 1); Ericus fratris interfector (ch. 2); and King Eysteinn
compared with Augustus (ch. 32).
61. Gertrud Simon offers the best survey of prefatory topoi.
62. I discount the possibility that Sven also knew the anonymous Historia
Norwegiae (MHN, 70–124) because the arguments for a later date forthe composition of it appear stronger; see Gudrun Lange, 141–63, forthe most recent discussion of the problem. The prologues of the twoworks employ similar topoi, but this cannot prove interdependence. In
the following the passages from Historia Norwegiae precede the dash,those from Sven Aggesen follow it:

hucusque latino eloquio intentatum — in Latinum sermonem transferre
conaborquam sit onerosum, et ob invidos quam sit periculosum . . . illorum edacem
livorem postponendo mea scripta — detractionibus tamen neuticam declinabit dispendium
non rhetorico lepore polita — stilo, licet illepido
in omnibus seniorem assertiones secutus — quantum ab annosis et veteribus
certa valui inquisitione percunctam
quoniam multorum magnificentias . . . ob scriptorum inopiam a memoria
modernorum quotidie elabi perspexi — nostrum . . . immanissima gesta
eterno deputari silentio . . . obsoleta in negligentie illabuntur laberintum

63. On these events see Danmarks Historie, i 357–8, and Skyum-Nielsen,
213–16. The main sources are Arnold of Lübeck’s Chronica Slavorum,
composed c.1210–13, and the Danish Annales Valdemarii (DMA, 76–9), composed probably in the 1220s using a lost Lundensian source.
64. It has been suggested (e.g. by Lukman in SS, 138) that the tone andtense in which Sven wrote of Queen Sophia, numerosius . . . oculata
fide perspicabar, imply that she was dead at the time of writing, which
would therefore be after 1198. However, the passage refers to the reign

Sven Aggesen

84of Valdemar I and to Sophia’s prime; both were over by 1185 when she
was in her mid-forties and absent from Denmark as the wife of thelandgrave of Thuringia. An imperfect tense would be appropriate.
65. See p. 117, n. 62, below; Annales Valdemarii, s.a. 1187 (DMA, 76):
Dux Valdemarus II miles factus est 7. Kalendas Ianuarii ; and Annales
1095–1194 (DMA, 308): . . . cum magna solemnitate Roskildiæ.
66. See Chronica Slavorum, iii, ch. 21: Kanutus . . . manifestas ex illa die
inimicitias contra imperatorem exercere cepit, ita ut omnem terram . . .
usque ad Albiam sui iuris esse diceret . . . iustam se causam contra
Teutonicos habere arbitratus est. 1187 was the turning-point.
67. In 1190 Duke Valdemar and his cousin, Bishop Valdemar, invaded
Holstein in the absence of Count Adolf (so according to a lost source
used in the seventeenth-century Annales Bartholiniani, SRD, i 342);
the Ditmarsk vassals of the archbishop of Bremen had already transferred their allegiance to Bishop Valdemar (Chronica Slavorum, iii, ch.
22). In 1194 King Knut conquered Holstein and levied tribute fromCount Adolf. Thereafter Danish kings pursued aggressive policies
along the Baltic littoral for nearly thirty years.
68. Sed quia horum gesta non disposuimus, seu genealogiam historiali
more narrare . . . (Glaber, 10).
69. iugique digna memoria : the same phrase as is used of King Erik
Emune in HC, p. 70 above.
70. Lacuna in A; sensim, ‘slowly’, supplied by Gertz.
71. in negligentiæ illabuntur laberintum A: as Gertz suggested, thisspelling of the last word may have encouraged an etymology of ‘labesintus’, a ‘falling-within’, as if a labyrinth were a pitfall; hence illabuntur (HS, 89). Cf. Laborintus quasi labor intus (Jones and Jones, Commentary, 37).
72. melliti gutturis orisque aurei : ‘mellifluous mouth’ is used by Boethiusof Homer, and occurs in the epistle prefacing Historia de Profectione
Danorum, SM, ii 457. Gertz detected aurata vox in Martianus Capella,v 429.
73. The conclusion of this sentence was rather boldly reconstructed byGertz. I have not followed him. A reads:
quali quisq: claruerit turpitudo q: singulorum gesta subperornent elegam.

Gertz in X:
quali quisque claruerit triumpho, et singulorum gesta stili perornent elegantia.

Notes to the Introduction85

And emended further in SM, i 142:
quali quisque claruerit triumpho, nudaque singulorum gesta stili perornent
elegantia.

Here turpitudo is clearly antithetical to gesta (elegantia) ; the q: following it seems more likely to represent quippe than -que ; and the subprefixed to perornent is an unlikely misreading of stili : an abbreviatedsubter fits better, since Sven’s invitation is for a continuation of what
he has begun. X’s elegantia may then be read for A’s elegam but as an
adj. qualifying gesta rather than as a noun.
74. See the superb clarification by Riis, 151–94. Riis provides the best
analysis of the political and cultural milieu of twelfth- and thirteenthcentury Denmark which has yet appeared in a language other than
Scandinavian.

NOTES ON THE LAW OF THE RETAINERS
1. reperta is here interpolated by Gertz to help the sense: ‘to be discoveredby our diligent study’.
2. contubernii iuventus militaris : here used in the classical sense ofsoldiers sharing a tent or billet, rather than as in Mark 6: 39. In HC,
p. 65 above, Sven refers to Saxo as his contubernalis, but the meaning
in this case is uncertain; cf. Introduction, pp. 2–3.
3. ut improborum refrenaret audaciam : echoes Gratian, Decretum, pt 1,
dist. 4, i: Causa vero institutionis legum est ut humanam cohercere
audaciam et nocendi facultatem refrenare.
4. ODan. witherlogh has several meanings: punishment, retaliation, payment, or exchange (it is used for commutatio in Matthew 16: 26); see
Kalkar, s.v. Here it seems to mean ‘penalty, penalties’ (the only senseof vi›rlog≈ in WN laws); and the WR title, Witherlax ræt, is correspondingly ‘penal code’. As Sven says, it is not the same as his title, Lex
castrensis sive curie. In the ordinances of King Kristofer from the
1250s (DR, 50–1) the withærlogh is the body of men subject to thehousehold law. See A. D. Jørgensen 1876, 56–60.
5. legem castrensem . . . militarem . . . curiae : the usual meaning wouldbe ‘of the camp, military’. However, it appears from ch. 5 that by
milites Sven means knights, and from the rest of the text that this is nota ‘law of the camp’. Tertullian, De Corona, xii, used castrenses forpalace attendants: ‘There is also another kind of militia in the royalhousehold, they are called castrenses.’ Ducange, s.v. castrum (ad fin.),accepted that this was Sven’s usage, and he has been followed here.
6. Absalon, son of Asser the Rich, was bishop of Roskilde 1158–92 andmetropolitan archbishop of Lund 1178–1201.
7. Knut VI was born in 1162. He was crowned as his father’s heir on 25
June 1170, and ruled as sole king 1182–1202. He is primi Valdemarifilius because Valdemar II, Knut’s brother, was already eminent as
duke before he succeeded him in 1202. Saxo attests that Knut made his
first raid overseas in 1179 under Absalon’s protection (GD, 521; EC,
576). There is no other evidence that Absalon fostered him in any
formal sense. The word nutricius used by Sven meant ‘nurse, fosterer’in classical Latin but acquired the sense of ‘pupil’ in Carolingian times.
Theodricus (MHN, 9) uses it to correspond to ON fóstri: Hocon
nutricius Halstani for Hákon A›alsteinsfóstri.
8. in matriculam conscripsit : matricula is ‘muster-roll’ in Vegetius, but
it could mean any sort of list or scroll. Such rules came to be known

Notes on the Law of the Retainers

87

as skrár after the material on which they were written. Sven’s phrase
is like ON setja á skrá, skrásetja, ‘record in writing, enter in a list’. His
next sentence recalls Alan of Lille’s prologue to AC: Scribendi novitate vetus iuvenescere carta  Gaudet . . .
9. The reference is either to Sven’s lost genealogy or to HC itself. A
sentence which could be Sven’s was detected by Gertz, 112–14, 195,
at the beginning of the late thirteenth-century Incerti Auctoris Genealogia, a work which owes something to HC. See Introduction, p. 27.
10. qui, quare et ubi : the interrogative mode of the law-schools, cf. e.g.
Azo, 871. The same approach had also become a recognised part ofrhetorical inventio ; cf. e.g. Arbusow, 94, Lausberg, §§ 40–2.
11. tanquam leo frendens auitis potitus successibus : I have translated thelast word as successionibus. The lion is from Isaiah 5: 25, and Proverbs
20: 2: ‘The fear of a king is as the roaring of a lion: whoso provoketh
him to anger sinneth against his own soul.’ In 1 Peter 5: 8 the raging
lion is the Devil, but Knut VI and his successors used the shield of lions
and hearts. King Sven is also called Tygeskeg, ‘fork-beard’, in CR,
c.1140, and Abbot William’s Genealogy, c.1193 (SM, i 19, 178);
tjúguskegg in the Norwegian Ágrip of about the same date as the
Genealogy.
12. Gerionem praecellens Hesperium: Aeneid, vii 662 and viii 202; Silius
Italicus, i 277; Justin, xliv 4. The three-bodied monster slain by Hercules
was usually celebrated for his monstrosity, not his valour. Peter of
Blois (Ep. cxvii) used him as a type of the Devil, but others followed
the note by Servius on Aeneid, vii 662, making him the amphibious
ruler of the Balearic Isles. The Commentary on the First Six Books of
the Aeneid, composed 1125–50 and attributed to Bernard Silvestris,
says: ‘We read that Geryon was a three-bodied monster, whom historians understand as having been a king who ruled three kingdoms’(Jones and Jones, Commentary, 75). In John of Genoa’s Catholicon, adictionary completed by 1286, he appears, s.n. Gereones, simply as ‘aking of Spain’. Knut ruled five kingdoms, says Sven, which was morethan Geryon. Gertz, HS, 4, n. 1, makes the unlikely suggestion that
Sven merely confused Geryon with his slayer, Hercules.
13. par Alexandro: Gertz considered that Sven would have known of
Alexander from one of the romances based on Pseudo-Callisthenes (onwhich see Cary, 24–61), but both Quintus Curtius and Walter ofChâtillon were known to Saxo.
14. Finlandiam (A and S): rejected by Gertz, 154, as a misread semlandiam and as inherently improbable since Knut the Great had nothing

88

Sven Aggesen

to do with Finland. However, when Sven refers to Samland (theKönigsberg peninsula in East Prussia) in HC, he calls it Samia. ‘Old’
Knut may have had nothing to do with Finland, but young Knut VI sent
raids there in 1191 and 1202. No expedition to Samland is known
before Valdemar II’s raid of 1210, which falls somewhat outside theterminus ante of Sven’s work (see Szacherska 1988). Finland should
stand.
15. Oak-leaves, garlanded to reward heroes: see Ovid, Tristia, iv 8, 23;
Lucan, Pharsalia, vi 427; Jones and Jones, Commentary, 123.
16. stemmatis titulis florere . . . : cf. Sedulius Scottus, Carmina, ii 7, 55;
LHL, 262: florenti stemmate fulget. Sven’s distinction is not only bybirth, but it implies that birth and wealth go together. Saxo fully
accepts the coincidence of birth and valour in his Bjarkamál verses(clarissima Martem  Stemmata conficiunt ), but he says nothing about
this preliminary sifting, which has been seen as inspired by the nobiliary pretensions of the retainers of Sven’s day. In the 1150s Sven III had
advanced low-born men in his household, ‘so that those he enrichedmight attribute their good fortune to the king’s generosity rather than
to their own birth’ (GD, 388; EC, 381).
17. Gilded, or rather chased and inlaid, axe-heads of the Viking period
survive, usually with silver or copper as the applied metal; the examples from Mammen and Bustorf are well known. See GrahamCampbell, 46, 49, 63–5, 244, 245. Plain axes were cheaper than swords;
decoration made them acceptable as a status symbol, as borne by
Godwin’s shipmen in Florence of Worcester, s.a. 1040: gladium
deauratis capulis renibus accinctum, Danicam securim auro argentoqueredimitam . . . Even Alexander the Great was served by men with thedacha bipennis in Alexandreis, i 237.
18. A word famulariter, unknown to the dictionaries, was here substitutedby Gertz for familiariter in A, perhaps to avoid the repetition offamiliaritas . . . familiariter within the same clause. But Sven loves
repetition.
19. si cetus eum . . . comitetur herilis : echoes Aeneid, viii 462, gressumque canes comitantur herilem.
20. humana proclivis ambitioni conditio: see also n. 29 for another use of
the phrase ‘human condition’, drawn from the Fathers, e.g. Jerome’sCommentary on Jeremiah, i 1, 16, vitiis subiacet humana condicio.
21. subputeretur could also mean just ‘calculated’. The figure of three
thousand is conventional for a picked force: Riis, 230, n. 22, cites
1 Kings 13: 2; 24: 3; 26: 2; 1 Maccabees 9: 5. Gideon’s was only threeNotes on the Law of the Retainers

89

hundred, but that was after two selections. For Tinglith see Introduction, p. 12.
22. quorum ritus dissona . . . varietate discrepabant : echoes Martianus
Capella, ii 102, dissonans discrepantia nationum nec diversi gentium
ritus.
23. contectales : ‘people living under the same roof’, but usually ‘married
couple’ (Niermeyer, s.v., and in Thietmar of Merseburg). Sven’s contemporary, Jocelyn of Brakelond, has it for ‘house-mate’. The preamble to Consiliatio Cnuti (SE English, c.1110–30) also presented
Knut as a unifier of dissonant customs: ‘He decreed, after rationalreflection, that as the realm of England was ruled by one king, so it
should have one common law’ (Liebermann, i 618).
24. Sven’s fondness for the ‘organological’ model of society (see alson. 63 below) recalls John of Salisbury.
25. nisi pene . . . praecipitium temperaret excessus (A): Gertz supplies
enormitate, inspired by immanitate in S. Both seem too strong for thecontext.
26. quietis tranquillitate : variation of pacis ; see p. 112, n. 46, below.
27. Øpi is a name compounded to form three Sjælland Øverups andØverød near Copenhagen. Eskil is a name that recurs in Sven’s own
family; see the Appendix, p. 141. Neither occurs in any English recordof Knut’s reign, and Saxo drops Eskil.
28. experientiae providentiam in A becomes experientiae propter evidentiam in Gertz’s reconstruction. Knut selected Øpi and Eskil as his
secretarii. That could mean as scribes, secretaries, notaries, porters,
ushers, or confidants, but Sven seems not to have a written code inmind—he means they were close to the king.
29. ad transgressionis praecipitium humana sit proclivis conditio : cf. n.
25 above; Augustine, Enarratio in psalm. 145 (PL 37, 1897), Ubi
finitur via peccatorum, praecipitium est.
30. singulis praevaricationis casibus accurata . . . remedia : the commonplace ‘law as medicine’ is also in Knut VI’s homicide ordinance: huicmorbo providere curavimus medicinam.
31. A is very corrupt here, and X most imaginative. Following S, Gertz
reads the meaningless Tuscani negotia as a misinterpretation of abbreviated transeamus negotia.
32. priscorum curialium qui et nunc militari censetur nomine : now they
were called riddare, once they were called huskarlar or hirdmenn. The
literary evidence suggests that the knightly skills were found in Denmark

90

Sven Aggesen

from the early twelfth century, but the earliest royal charter to beattested by milites is dated 1177 (DD, iii:1, no. 62). Whatever the term
huskarlar had meant in the early eleventh century, by the late twelfth
it chiefly meant ‘servants’, though in Norway, then and later, it wasalso used of the sworn retainers of kings and great men (cf. Edda
Snorra, 162, where the author is describing the early thirteenth-century
present, not the past). They are never mentioned in Danish sources
except in the compound huskarlastefna; cf. n. 52 below. On housecarls
in England see Hooper.
33. alieno caballo, runcino, palefrido, dextrario subvectus : four types ofhorse in ascending value, according to twelfth-century terminology.
The caballus was the plain work-horse, for ploughing or transport. The
Vita of St William of Æbelholt has a story about an old roncinus, whichbegan to amble with spirit when ridden by the abbot: evidently a quiet
sort of horse for an elderly clergyman (VSD, 333). But Abbot William
also sent a magnificent ‘golden-hued’ Danish horse to Stephen ofTournai in 1179–85: the letters they exchanged suggest that Danish
breeders knew the French market and would have labelled that horse
palefridus. The army laws of Frederick Barbarossa draw a useful
distinction: ‘If a foreign knight shall come to the camp in peace, sitting
on a palfrey without shield and arms, whoever harms him shall be
judged a peace-breaker. If however he comes to the camp sitting on a
destrier with his shield round his neck, his lance in his hand, whoever
shall harm him has not broken the peace’ (Rahewin, Gesta Friderici, iii,
ch. 28). On Danish horses in German romance see Ohley. For thecooperative grooming Saxo offered a historical explanation: ‘Whenever the king undertook a cavalry operation, the warriors who had nohorses remained on duty to take turns in grooming them’ (GD, 294;
EC, 38). The author of WR ignored the whole matter. Sven may have
had religious disciplines in mind, e.g. ‘Let the brethren wait on one
another in turn,’ RB, ch. xxxv. Saxo also reminds his readers at thispoint that Knut waged war by sea oftener than by land, and an attempt
has been made to relate the Vederlov to a naval rather than a knightly
organization; see Hjärne, esp. 92–110. Sven seems unaware of thispossibility.
34. ut pro porcione pociores et priores loca capesserent digniora : Gertz’s
amendment of vtppote [sic] posiores et priores . . . in A, which seems
unnecessary. A fixed seating order for hir›menn is insisted on in
Konungs skuggsjá, ch. 37 (tr. Larson 1917, 210), but the principle ofallocation is not mentioned. Saxo simplifies it to date of enlistment

Notes on the Law of the Retainers

91(militiae vetustas), and adds that not even lateness could disqualify aman from his proper seat. The notion that Knut the Great sat down todinner with 3000 men is absurd, but Saxo has Valdemar I dining inpublic with the regia clientela, c.1177, a force which he was able toassemble within his bed-chamber (GD, 506; EC, 554).
35. similem . . . culpam par pena condempnat : a maxim which echoes
Isidore’s Sententiae : Neque enim erit impar supplicio cuius error
quisque par est ac vitio (PL 83, 723), also cited c.1090 by Bonizo in
Liber de vita Christiana, 80. The earliest reference by a civilian appears
to be in Godefroy’s gloss on Novella, 127, ch. 4: Paribus delictis parimponenda est poena. Anders Sunesen, Hex., 6019, has maior poena
maiori debita culpae.
36. Archbishop Ælfheah was pelted with bones, and finally dispatchedwith an axe, by Thorkel’s men in 1012, according to the Anglo-Saxon
Chronicle (C, D, E, F). What Sven describes here is horseplay, notcapital punishment. For other examples in Saxo and Hrólfs saga kraka
see SG, ii 74, and Kock, 179–81.
37. communicabit : the change to the future indicative suggests that thisis current custom, or about to become so. Again, it was old monastic
practice: ‘Let that brother who is found guilty of a more grievous
offence be excluded from the table . . . let none of the brothers consort
with him . . . separated from the companionship of all, let him eat alone,
his portion of wine being taken from him’ (RB, chs. xxv, xliii). The
Lund Consuetudines (c.1123) laid down that brothers who harm eachother by word or deed should be separated from the common table, andbe ‘last of all in all places’ (Cons. Lund., 149). For degradation after
three offences cf. RB, ch. xxiii.
38. calumnie patronisare (A): calumnia is defined by some canonists as‘a plea or refutation which is definitely known to be unjust’ (Bernard
of Pavia, 30; but cf. n. 90 below). The verb patronisare is apparently
not found elsewhere before 1382, and then in the sense of captaininga ship; see Ducange, s.v. The patrocinari of S is better: cf. OFr.
patrociner, ‘to plead at law’.
39. This provision against favouritism is not found in other versions of
the Vederlov, but Saxo inveighs against current indiscipline in similarterms: qui culpae punitor esse debuerat, patronus existat (GD, 298;
EC, 44). His target must be Valdemar II.
40. A difficult sentence in A, not clarified by Gertz’s emendations or by
the paraphrase in S: ‘But as the law had to be settled on many matters,
King Knut instigated it, and it originated from his princely authority.

92

Sven Aggesen

Moreover, he wanted so to suit himself to the wishes of the warriors byhis merciful and gentle disposition that he himself might prescribe forthem the pattern and the need for obedience.’
41. Placuit igitur exercitatus (A): reconstructed by Gertz as placuit igitur(regem) exerci(tu comi)tatum.
42. This injunction is put near the beginning of WR, and Saxo puts
something similar in the mouth of King Athelstan of England (GD,
269; EC, 3–4). Sven’s vultus hylaritatem exhibere reflects Proverbs
16: 15, In hilaritate vultus regis vita.
43. recumpensantes : rare, but found by Quicherat in Gregory the Great,
Aldhelm and Bede.
44. Frustra . . . exigit qui quod debet non impendit : another canonist’s
maxim. Frustra petit debitum qui quod debet non impendit is no. 35 in
the brocards of Damasus (completed 1215–30).
45. principis maiestate illibata could mean ‘without committing treason’.
The crimen laesae maiestatis is invoked as early as c.1140 in a charterwrit of King Erik III protecting the monks of Næstved (DD, i:2, no.
79), and in 1158–62 Valdemar I also threatened offenders against
his maiestas in his charters for Esrum and Ringsted (DD, i:2, nos.
128, 131).
46. A reference both to the usual calendar and to the January festival of
the pagan Romans. Isidore insisted that the church fasted on 1 Jan.
propter errorem gentilitatis (De ecclesiasticis officiis, ch. 41; PL 83,774), and the canonists anethematized those who celebrated the day
ritu paganorum (Decretum, pt 2, causa xxvi, quaest. vii, cc. xv–xvi).
47. Saxo dates the discharge as the first of the Kalends of Jan., WR
similarly as the eighth evening of Yule (i.e. after nones on 31 Dec.).
48. causis hujusmodi incantationis antidotum: ‘enchantment’ (‘Dølgesang’,
HS, 13) fits here, but it may be that we should take it that the remedy
was inspired by Ovid’s song cited below, cf. n. 49, and Sven’s phrase
rendered ‘antidote from the Song’. In Valdemar IV’s privilege for
Malmö (1360) incantare is used to mean ‘warn, give notice’ in the legal
sense (DGK, 30), but a ‘remedial summonsing’ here in Sven would be
too clumsy.
49. From Ovid, Remedia Amoris, 91–2: Principiis obsta . . . It is also
cited at the beginning of the Vita (c.1230) of St William of Æbelholt(VSD, 302).
50. This next sentence is not from Ovid, who took the opposite view in
Ex Ponto, ii 2, 59: Vulnus id genus est . . . Gertz detected a debt to Johnof Salisbury’s Policraticus, iv 8 (ed. Webb, i 262), but the sentiment isNotes on the Law of the Retainers93

also in the prologue to the Decreti and Panormia (c.1096) of Ivo ofChartres: et nunc ferro secat, cui fomento subvenire non poterat (PL161, 48); cf. Sven: Ferro enim resecanda sunt vulnera, que fomentorum
non senserunt medicinam (SM, i 76).
51. iniuriam viz. inferendo : for a fuller definition of personal affronts andactionable insults see e.g. the Norwegian Gulathing Law, chs. 195–6(NGL, i 69–70).
52. Huskarlastefna: ‘muster of retainers’, like the Norw. hir›stefna, thehouse-meeting of the king’s followers. This has been seen as theembryo of the Danish parliament (danehof ) by e.g. Riis, 256–60, andas the equivalent of the supposed ‘thing’ of the London ﬂingamenn: forobjections see p. 12 above. Saxo avoids giving the court a name andrefers to it simply as concio, ‘assembly’; but Sven means to insist on
the exclusive jurisdiction of this court over members of the household.
53. Witterlog mannæ (A): Saxo deals with the procedure for the prosecution of lesser offences only in connexion with the plea of wrongfuldisplacement at table. Thus the citation of the two proxime circumsedentes as oath-helpers to the plaintiff appears to relate to this kind of
charge rather than to others (see n. 61 below). Cf. the Schleswig Law,ch. 15 (DGK, i 6), for a burgher’s purgation with ‘five neighbours
chosen three from his right-hand side and two from his left’. The
procedure agrees in principle with the provisions of the Gulathing Law,ch. 187 (NGL, i 68), ‘On quarrelling in an ale-house’, except that theaccused’s immediate table-mates (sessar ) or his messmates (mot≈ unautar )or his nearby table-mates (násessar ) were cited in that order for the
defence, or failing them men from among the drinkers in general; andif convicted he paid fifteen marks to the king and double compensation
to the injured.
54. There is no provision for rebutting the charge. Saxo (GD, 295; EC,40) made much of this omission, as proof of the inflexible veracity of
the ancients.
55. constitutione . . . generali cautum est : the civilians (and the canonists)
distinguished between the general and the personal constitutio. In thiscontext the distinction is not obviously useful, although the provisions
for the treatment of the nithing might perhaps have qualified as
personal.
56. controversia de fundis et agris : not in Saxo, but WR, ch. 8, begins Of
iortha dela ær. Sven may have had ODan. iorth oc akær in mind.
57. According to Valdemar II’s Jutland Law (ii, ch. 44; DGL, ii 219),
boran is ‘when a man enters another man’s enclosure and takes away

94

Sven Aggesen

any of his cattle or clothes or weapons or anything else to the value ofhalf a mark in money.’ It is one of several varieties of ran, or daylightrobbery. In civil courts, conviction meant compensating the injured
party and paying three marks to the king.
58. ius venditionis (A and S): emended by Gertz, following Kinch, 260,
to ius vendi(ca)tionis, the Roman law action respecting title to property, as in Digest, 44, 7, 24, and Azo, 215, on Institutes, iv, tit. vi,
c. 15, defining vindicatio and condictio.
59. in suo cetu, id est fjarthing : this fourth part of the hird must therefore
have consisted of more than seven men, but this makes the total sizeof the force in Sven’s day no easier to calculate, pace Skyum-Nielsen,
205 and n. 13. WR, § 4, says that a man should be summoned in his
sveet and in his fiarthing : no proof that sveet was a subdivision of thefiarthing. ON sveit is a common and early word for a band of men, later
conventionally numbered at a dozen; cf. Hjärne, 85, 100, and Kinch,
275–6.
60. prescriptionem . . . tueatur : in Roman law a title based on 30 years’
occupation, but Anders Sunesen used the word to express Dan. hævd,a claim to land made good by three years’ possession, like the Roman
usucapio; see Azo, 215 and 770, and for the canonist view of prescription, Bernard of Pavia, 53–6; for de prescripcione in Scanian law see
DGL, i:2, 510. Saxo says nothing of these property cases.
61. These oath-helpers are the sessar of Norwegian law; see n. 53 above.
The vetus constitutio must be the rules prior to Absalon’s codification,rather than an imaginary reconstruction of the precepts of Øpi theWise.
62. humani sanguinis insidiator, prosperitatis emulus, iusticie calumniator : Satan is called insidiator by Anders Sunesen, Hex., 6219, one
among many including Gregory the Great. Anders Sunesen was also to
blame ‘the enemy of the human race’ for the homicidal tendencies of
the Danes in his Scanian laws, ch. 43 (DGL, i:2, 552).
63. The ‘organological’ model again; see n. 24 above. Aconite, or wolf’sbane, was best known from Ovid, Metamorphoses, vii 416–19, where
Medea attempts to poison Theseus with this herb.
64. iracundie accensus furore : another parallel with Alexander the Great
who, according to Seneca, Ep. 113, ‘though victor over so many kingsand peoples, fell victim to anger.’ In Saxo’s version of the story Knut
was drunk.
65. ambigua sententia . . . indulgentia : the quaestio is an interesting one,bearing in mind the maxim that ‘the rank of the offender aggravates theNotes on the Law of the Retainers95

offence’ (Damasus, rule no. 62) and the Roman law presumption infavour of the prince’s immunity. In his note on Saxo’s book ten
Stephanius noted how many ancient legislators were supposed to havebroken their own laws: Lycurgus, Pericles, Solon, Zaleucus of Locris,Charondas the Thurian, Tennes of Sidon. Peter of Blois reminded
Henry II that ‘even Alexander the Great was fearlessly prosecuted byhis fellow-soldiers before a military tribunal and condemned’ (Ep. 95;
PL 207, 302). However, Sven may be arguing for the accountability ofkings, or he may be inventing a precedent for the indulgence shown tohis own grandfather later on in ch. 12. He may be building on the wellknown story that Knut had ordered the killing of his own follower, Ulf
Jarl; but that tale involves payment of compensation, to Ulf’s widow,
Knut’s sister, who afterwards apportioned it ‘as a tithe’ to Trinity
church in Roskilde (so in Saxo, GD, 293, EC, 36; straight to the church
in which Ulf was killed in Snorri’s Óláfs saga helga, ch. 145 in Denstore Saga, ch. 153 in Heimskringla). Cf. n. 67 below.
66. ne in posterum traheretur inconsequentiam (A): Gertz emended thelast word to inde consequentiam, in which case it would mean ‘so thatno consequence was to be drawn from it in future’, i.e., that it was not
to serve as a precedent. However, inconsequentia occurs in Quintilian,
and the prospect of men drawing the ‘wrong’ conclusion from theking’s self-abasement needed to be averted.
67. In Saxo’s version the homicide is expiated by a royal submission to
the court, followed by a verdict that the king should punish himself.
Knut paid a huge fine of 360 marks of silver plus nine marks of gold,
to be divided equally among the king, the warriors and the kinsmen of
the victim. The king assigned his share to the church. This is a brash
distortion of the story Sven tells about his own grandfather in ch. 12,
which Saxo omits.
68. nithingsorth : ON ní›ingsor› or ní›ingsnafn, the name of utter vilenessincurred on conviction of quite a large category of crimes in Norway;
see the Gulathing Law, ch. 178 (NGL, i 66). The name of nithing
occurs less frequently in Danish codes, but the outlaw status that went
with it was the ordinary penalty for varieties of aggravated homicide,rape and arson specified in the ordinances of Knut VI and Valdemar II
and in Anders Sunesen’s Scanian laws, ch. 61 (DGL, i:2, 552, 721,
732). The name also went with expulsion from the Odense gild.
69. in sequentibus clarius edocebimus : the reference is to HC, see p. 64,
where Sven claims that Harthaknut was not in fact harsh or cruel but

96

Sven Aggesen

was named after the province where he was born. Knut is called ‘old’
Knut in three sets of annals; see DMA, 83, 161, 268.
70. Nicolaus reigned from 1103/4 to 1134. According to Saxo (GD, 342;
EC, 108), he reduced his ordinary guard to a detail of six or seven
warriors; according to Kn‡tlinga saga, ch. 94, he maintained a larger
following later.
71. Christiernus Suenonis filius : Kristiarn was apparently a magnate in
Jutland, an open enemy of King Nicolaus in the civil war of 1131–4,
and a king-maker in 1137 (GD, 360–1, 367, 371; EC, 134–6, 350, 356).
In HC, ch. 14, Sven relates that, after losing the battle of Rønbjerg
in 1132, Kristiarn was captured by Nicolaus and imprisoned atSchleswig. He was held in irons, the deepest insult of all. After 1134,
according to Saxo, he advised Erik II to murder his nephews, forreasons of security.
72. Turidokæ (A), Thukonem Dokæ (S), Thura Doka (WR): Thuri cannot
be identified. Tilnavne, s.n., identifies his by-name as either the Frisianpersonal name Doke or as ON doki, ‘strip’, but the latter is a nonexistent word, see Fritzner IV, s.v. Thuri’s addition might be the sameas ON dokka, ‘windlass; doll’, found as a by-name in Norway; see
Personbinamn, 62. Was this the first wounding between the king’smen, or the first mitigation of the penalty of outlawry?
73. Asser was archbishop and metropolitan from 1104 to his death in
1137. All contemporary sources confirm Sven’s view of his importance.
74. Sven was bishop of Viborg 1133–53. He cannot have been bishop at
the time of this incident, which must predate the civil war of 1131–4.
75. The Cistercian author of the Exordium Magnum records that Eskil
and his brothers inter . . . proceres post regem videbantur sublimiores,
and that Eskil fought for King Erik Emune and died on pilgrimage
about 1153–4 (SM, ii 437–9).
76. Sueno filius (A), Sveno filius Trugoti (S), Swen Thrundason (WR):see the Appendix on Sven Aggesen’s family, p. 141.
77. Wandalum (A), af Wænla (WR): i.e. from Vendel or Vendsyssel, thenorthern extremity of Jutland. Freeman called him ‘Boethius the Wend’.
78. taxatio humana : not here in the civil law sense of a ‘delimiting
clause’, but as in Anders Sunesen, Hex., 2866–9: ‘certain things cannot
by right be bought or sold, since there is no taxatio justa of their value. . .’ Thus, ‘scale, tariff’ (of compensations).
79. opere precium: a cliché of medieval latinists, including Theodricus(MHN, 3) and Abbot William of Æbelholt (SM, i 176).

Notes on the Law of the Retainers

97

80. gyrsum: ON gersemi, gørsemi, ‘jewel, costly and precious thing’.
The term is not used in WN or Swedish laws but is explained in
Valdemar II’s Jutland Law as a payment added to bot to placate themore powerful kinsmen of the injured party (DGL, ii 190, 395–6).
Stephanius, 186, noted the proverb, ‘Awe makes most gørsum ’. In the
Scanian Law it is called iwirbøther (cf. WN yfirbœtr) and came to 26 2/
3 silver marks over the 30 mark mantzboodth (DGL, i:2, 755). In the1284 Schleswig Law gørsum of one gold mark was payable in addition
to the bot for homicide (DGK, i 4). King Erik’s Sjælland Law refers to
the stranded whales and sturgeon that belonged to the king’s householdas gørsums fisk (DGL, v 354). The tripling of the normal bot of 40
marks for homicide is also found in the ordinances of King Abel andKing Kristofer (apparently issued 1251–9) which laid down that ‘if ahirdman (decurion) kills another hirdman, he shall be obliged to pay
compensation for homicide three times over, and three sums of forty
marks, so that he hands over the first to the heirs of the slain man, thesecond to the king, and the third to the community of the court’ (DR,44). The same applied to wounding. Here, however, Sven says nothingof the nature of the sums paid by Kristiarn: they are pena, satisfactio
and emendatio, without distinction. It may be that he takes the payment
of ordinary compensation for wounding for granted. If this really was
the law in the royal household before 1200, it served as a model for theaggravation of penalties for homicide found in the royal ordinances
after that date and introduced to the provincial laws. Anders Sunesencomplained that in the older law of Scania the payment for homicide
never exceeded fifteen marks (DGL, i:2, 522); but in the new law,
aggravated homicides incurred additional payments of 80 marks (DGL,
i:2, 550). Saxo applies the compensation-story to the account of Knutthe law-breaker, and raises the sum to 360 marks plus nine gold marks(GD, 297–8; EC, 43). Thus he sees the payment as sui generis, not asa precedent: a sign of royal magnanimity rather than of royal weakness,
as in Sven.
81. The allocation of the third payment to the rest of the warriors
anticipates the ordinances of King Abel and King Kristofer (see n. 80
above) and is paralleled by the rules of the gild of St Knut at Flensburg,
chs. 4 and 30; see Nyrop, 8, 12.
82. Cf. p. 88, n. 20, above.
83. Aggi thuer (A), Aggo Thuer (S), Aggi Thwer (WR): presumably
ODan. thuær, ‘cross, contrary’, perhaps in the sense ‘gaaende paatværs, skæv’; cf. Tilnavne, s.n. Thwer.

98

Sven Aggesen

84. Esgi Ebbonis filium in Warwath functum villicatione (A), ÆsgiEbbesun Bryte aff Wartwik (WR): i.e., he was bailiff or reeve in charge
of Varde, a royal manor and administrative centre 25 miles NW of Ribein West Jutland. Ebbe villicus witnessed King Nicolaus’s grant of ashare in the Lønborg fishery to the Odense churches (DD, i:2, no. 34):
Esger’s father? Esger’s membership of the household is evidence thatit included administrative officials, or that members of the household
were appointed to act as such; see N. C.Hansen, 89–90. Esger was sub
regis ascella (A); for the sense of ‘wing, protection’ for ascella, ‘armpit’, see Blaise, 99.
85. in Burgh, in Guidonis ede stabularii (A), at Withe Staller i Byrgh(WR): ‘Wido’ the staller, with the stallers ‘Johannes’ and ‘Wolff’,
witnessed King Nicolaus’s privilege for St Knut’s at Odense (1104–17;
DD, i:2, no. 32). Borg is too common a place-name element for
identification, but there is a strong argument for believing it was thehall at Nonnebakken in Odense; see N. C. Hansen, 84–9.
86. in Lymum (A), in Lynum (S), i Limum (v.l. Lund )(WR): identified
as Lime or Lihme, which lies off Venø Bugt at the west end of the
Limfjord in North Jutland, in Rødding herred in Salling. That must be
the place, for in the 1170s another Bo Ketilsen was living at Lime; see
N. C. Hansen, 84.
87. Saxo emphasizes the indiscipline and degeneracy of modern warriors
about the court, and blames ‘the princes of our time’, i.e. Knut VI and
Valdemar II, for their tolerance and partiality. Here, Sven seems to be
alluding to tensions within the household resulting from the civil warsof 1131–57.
88. Blows with the fist or a stick were highly actionable in Danish civil
law, classed as Stangehug. Both the Scanian laws and Valdemar’sSjælland Law made all violence against the person without weapons
liable to a three-mark fine, and the charge could only be rebutted by a
twelve-man oath. If an attack with a stick had been sworn to by twomen, it could only be denied by going to the ordeal; otherwise the bot
was of six marks. According to Anders Sunesen, ‘more shame accompanies the beaten man from the rod than the wounded man from thewound’ (DGL, i:2, 560). Saxo states that blows finally became subject
to compensation payment, but not blows with a stick ‘because this was
how dogs were driven off, and our proud ancestors attached deep
disgrace to a shameful blow’ (GD, 297; EC, 42).
89. eius pedibus geniculari : geniculor in the sense of ‘kneel’ is post-

Notes on the Law of the Retainers

99

classical; S prefers the more classical pedibus advolveretur. Saxo says
nothing of this.
90. cum sex commilitionibus suam aboleat infamiam (A): Saxo agrees;
WR mentions the siax manna eth only in connexion with charges ofboran or property claims. Is qui calumniatur : ‘he who has brought aclaim’ rather than a ‘false claim’; see Holberg, 271, and Eskil’s
Villingerød charter of 1176–4 (DD, i:2, no. 184) for a lawful calumpnia
by a canon of Lund.
91. aut sciens aut ignarus (A): Saxo has less to say about this class ofoffence, but Anders Sunesen discusses it in his Scanian laws, ch. 67:‘If anyone wounds another by chance . . . the injured party shall notreceive less than the whole compensation on that account, because it
cannot lessen the injury that it was inflicted by chance rather than bydesign . . . but nothing is owed for this to the king or the bishop.’ Ifchallenged by the king’s or bishop’s officer, the accused can establish
his innocence by a twelve-man oath including himself and the injured
party (DGL, i:2, 662). The Old Serpent who is blamed for this problem
by Sven was tracked by Gertz to Revelations 12: 9 and 20: 2. Among
many other contexts, he occurs in prayers for the reconsecration ofviolated churches and cemeteries in the Lund Pontifical (Strömberg,
106, 151).
92. According to Saxo, six oath-helpers were needed to establish inadvertent injury.
93. iuxta formam pretaxatam (X): i.e. by kneeling before the injured
party.
94. ignorantia a transgressionis (peccato) non excusare (X): Gertz inserted peccato but reatu (S) seems better: this is a question of liability,
not of sin. The maxim is common to many legal systems; Leges
Henrici Primi, ch. 90, 11a, claims that ‘it is a rule of law that a person
who unwittingly commits a crime shall wittingly make amends,’ andcites an OE saw to the same effect.
95. Here Gertz inserted a passage, which may be translated: ‘that all thewarriors serving together in the household must know each other. For
that is dealt with in the general ordinance by which it is ordered that. . .’ The second sentence he took from S. The preceding passage
appears to be his own invention but, as he admits, it is an improbablerule (Gertz, 152). The whole in S reads: ‘For by the same laws it was
forbidden that any man should smirch the flower of military renown
with the soot of ignorance. For it is fitting to live honourably, and menof noble blood should not blacken titles of honour with slothful

100

Sven Aggesen

ignorance. Therefore it was determined by a general ordinance that. . .’ This is awkward too, but may be just as close to the original as X.
96. omnes controversias quae legum discisione sunt divisae (A): discissio
makes little sense here, but Gertz keeps it; S reads decisio. I suggest amisread legum discussione, in the common ecclesiastical sense of‘trial’; see Niermeyer, s.v.
97. The last word of the sentence is missing in A. Gertz proposed gradumor culmen to agree with ultimum; Kroman preferred cumulum. The
ladder of sin is in A, and may be traced from Pseudo-Augustine, forexample, although in quite a different sense from Sven’s: ‘We make aladder of our vices, if we tread down the vices themselves’ (Sermon
176, 4; PL 38, 2082). All other authors, including St Bernard, see thesteps of sin as leading downwards; this may be one of Sven’s misunderstandings (cf. n. 107).
98. principis sui perditionem vel mortem . . . aggreditur machinari : Sven
does not name the crimen laesae maiestatis here, pace Fenger 1989, 51;
the words occur in the chapter-title in S and in the passage supplied byGertz to make good the following gap in A and S (see n. 101).
99. WR has iudas wærk at winna meth ilt rath gen herra sinum; Saxo si
maiestati insidias struxisset. Inspired by WR, Gertz reconstructed quodinde proditoris in A as quod Jude proditoris. This makes good sense.
It does not follow that ‘Judas’s work’ was a common phrase fortreachery (it occurs nowhere else), but it seems rather that the Danish
author of the WR was translating Sven as best he could. See p. 16
above for the significance of Judas, who appeared as the type of treason
and regicide in the legenda both of St Knut of Odense and of St Knutof Ringsted (VSD, 114, 116, 151, 198, 214).
100. The old Scanian Law, ch. 90 (DGL, i:1, 69), states that the outlaw
loses all his goods to the king but not his lands. Anders Sunesen’s
version, ch. 62 (DGL, i:2, 553), claims that ‘in a certain case, the realestate as well as the moveables are awarded to the king’s majesty, thatis, when anyone dares to enter the kingdom with hostile intent to attack
the king.’ This is probably a case of clarification rather than innovation. As Riis has pointed out, there are examples of the confiscation oflands for treason going back, in his opinion, to the 1140s. I would
suggest further back still, to the 1120s, with the disinheriting anddegradation of Jarl Elef as related in Saxo (GD, 344–5; EC, 112).
101. A gap in both A and S at this point is filled by Gertz with a lengthy
text confected from Saxo and WR, see Gertz, 44. Saxo’s version of theoutlawry procedure for graver crimes, including treason, involves threeNotes on the Law of the Retainers101

summonses of the accused, an unanswerable attestation of guilt by only
two accusers, and a verdict by the whole court. Then the condemned
man could choose to depart by land or sea. If by sea, then he was given
a boat, food, water, sail and oars. WR, § 4, implies that, on the contrary,
the accused could clear himself by going to the ordeal. Whatever theprocedure described by Sven, it probably differed little from Saxo’s,
and was omitted as giving the accused rights curtailed by the legislation of the 1250s, e.g. to an oral summons, superseded by literaeammonitoriae in DR, 45.
102. Favonii favor non affuerit (X), Favonio non favente (S), favoni favor
non faverit (A): A is clumsy but should stand: the alliteration andrepetition are typical. Favonius just means ‘a light, unsteady wind’ in
Thesaurus Novus, 224.
103. terno quasi classici clangore (X), classico clangore (A and S). Svenevidently intended to liken the yell to the classicum, ‘battle trumpet or
signal’, as in Aeneid, ii 313, vii 637. This rough music is like, but not
the same as, the vapnatak, outlawry of a man ‘by words, and the
clashing and rattle of weapons’, described in the Scanian laws (DGL
i:1, 112, i:2, 592).
104. si in solo natali extiterit (X): this phrase suggests that the accused
was not given the choice of exile as in Saxo (terra profugere maluisset ),but made to float if overseas and take to the wilds if in Denmark.
105. King Erik’s Sjælland Law gave the fugitive outlaw the rest of the
day and all night to escape into the woods. After that he could bechased or killed (DGL, v 93).
106. Literally, ‘shall incur the penalty of throwing out with the word ofshameful naming’—probose nuncupationis in S. Saxo repeated thisprovision, which is in the spirit of his imaginary laws of King Frothi:‘He also ruled that any of the military who sought a name for provencourage must attack a single opponent, take on two, evade three by
stepping back a short distance, and only be unashamed when he ran
from four adversaries’ (GD, 133; PF, 148). In his LC he added to theceremonies of outlawry a solemn curse by the bishops of Knut’s three
kingdoms (DR, 39).
107. The image illustrates Priscian’s Quanto iuniores, tanto perspicatiores (Institutes, prol.), and was ascribed to Bernard of Chartres(d. 1130) by John of Salisbury (Metalogicon, iii 4). It was used byAlan of Lille in the prologue to AC and by Peter of Blois (Ep., 92; PL
207, 290), and Otto of Freising explained it at length in the preface tobook five of the Chronicle of Two Cities. Sven sees himself as aSven Aggesen
superannuated dwarf, unsupported by the gigantic learning of theAncients, which will be at the disposal of his successors. Or perhaps,
as Gertz imagined, he is saying to those successors: ‘It is certainly
possible that you can put the theme on which I have written into a finerand more decorative Latin style than I have achieved: but you owe thewhole foundation to me’ (HS, 29 n. 1, and Gertz, 158 n.). The passage
is not in S.
108. verborum scematibus oratione . . . falerata (X): Gertz was remindedof Quintilian’s schemata orationis (Institutes, ix 1, 1) and of the phalerata
dicta of Terence’s Phormio, i 500 (3, 12, 16). This is another commonplace: cf. Geoffrey of Monmouth’s disclaimer, tametsi infra alienos
ortulos falerata verba non collegerim, and rhetoricis fucata schematibus in the prologue of De profectione Danorum (SM, ii 459). Kinch
made the unlikely deduction that Sven used the adj. phaleratus, lit.
‘ornamented on breast and head’, of his oratio, because he was a knightin armour rather than a cleric: demolished by Holberg, 268–9. Sven’s
own real or assumed modesty, and his insistence on harmony, decorum,and restraint among the knights, cast doubt on Jaeger’s claim, 136–7,
that ‘the vocabulary and concepts of courtliness’ are entirely Saxo’s
contribution to the Vederlov and that ‘there is no trace of them in the
text of Sven Aggesen.’102

NOTES ON THE SUPPLEMENT TO THE LEXCASTRENSIS
1. Acc. pl. with suffixed article, witherloghen, may here mean simply ‘thepenalties’; cf. p. 86, n. 4. Witherlag, -log is used both of the law thatbound the body of retainers and of that body itself; it is kept in thetranslation and is to be understood according to context.
2. rætta . . . rætheligha male therra : ‘hand over readily their pay’. The
verb rætta is not construed with a dat. object and male is best taken as
the relic of an original mala, acc. sg. of mali, ‘contracted pay, esp. formilitary service’ (cf. p. 80, n. 36). (The form male was perhaps influenced by at førsta male, ‘first’, in the opening clause of the sentence.)

This word does not seem to appear in dictionaries of older Danish but
is common in early Swedish and WN sources. Cf. von Schwerin, 195
and n. 2 there for refs. The clause in WR then answers in all brevity to
Sven’s: Opere precium etiam fuit adnectere, ut stipendia militibus suis,cum usus uel necessitas postulauisset, sine mora omnique contradictione remota ministraret . . . (p. 36 above).
3. The numbers in, and even the distinction between, these ‘company’and fjarthing divisions of the Witherlag are uncertain. Cf. p. 94, n. 59.
4. skulde han . . . latæ after sigia thiæneste sin meth twa witherlaghæ
mæn: the same construction as in § 4 above: skulde han [the king] . . .
meth twa witherlagha men latæ hannum . . . stefna. On the timing cf.
p. 92, n. 47.
5. The text has pl. men.
6. On boran see p. 93, n. 57.
7. (Kristiarn, Aggi) ‘used a weapon on’: here and at the beginning of thenext paragraph for the indeterminate hio of the text.
8. On gørsom see p. 97, n. 80.
9. vnder Niclis kunungs arm: this looks like a literal translation of Sven’s
sub regis ascella Nicolai (p. 41) but perhaps by someone who did notunderstand ascella in its postulated metaphorical sense (p. 98, n. 84).
At least, there appears to be no record of an idiom ‘under someone’s
arm’ in the early Scandinavian languages meaning ‘under someone’s
protection, wing’ (pace Alboge, 309), though the phrase undir hendi
e–s in that sense is well attested. On Borg see p. 98, n. 85.

NOTES ON THE SHORT HISTORY
1. perspicabar (A), perspicerem (S): passive for active voice, perhaps byanalogy with dep. sus-, con- and de-spicari (Gertz, 174). Sven uses it
to mean ‘note’ or ‘perceive’, and later, SM, i 140, oculata fide perspicabar is used for his admiring the Queen Mother. This is the sort ofeccentricity the S text tends to smooth out. I cannot find an earlier
example than in the late twelfth-century Thesaurus Novus, 524. The‘books of the ancients’ is a frequent topos among historians of thisperiod, and the demands of unrecorded virtue another; see Curtius, 85–
9, and Simon, 71–83. The closest analogue seems to be Regino of
Prüm’s Preface to his Chronicon. Gertz changed diutius . . . gemitibus
in A to diurnis . . . because A reads diurne for divino in the proem toLC. But S has diutinis here, and to sigh every day or all day over thismatter seems excessive; cf. Gertz, 139.
2. commendibilia . . . quis conatur commendare . . . detractionis . . .
declinabat dispendium: an attempt to reproduce Sven’s frequent alliteration has been made in the translation. ‘As the world grows old . . .’is another common theme, also in LC, p. 31, and in De Profectione
Danorum, ch. 1: ‘As the world draws to its close, and various evils
grow more frequent . . .’ (SM, ii 460). It can be traced back to St
Gregory in his Epistola ad Leandro (Moralia in Iob, i 2), and was usedin the prologue to Fredegar’s Chronicle. In justifying his efforts, Sven

employs the same topos as the Encomiast of Emma and Einhard in his
prologue to the Vita Karoli : ‘the dignity of the subject outweighs theauthor’s failings.’ See Simon, 85–7, 91–2.
3. Martianus Capella, viii 831, on the constellations visible from theantarctic circle, which he forbore to describe ‘lest my unverified statement appear to smack of falsehood’. See Gertz, 51 and 111, nn., for two
possible echoes of Martianus later on: the debt is very small. The
appeal to the more learned and polished latinists of the future is alsoin De Profectione Danorum (SM, ii 459–60). On the topos of humility
see Simon, 101–2, 108–19.
4. ab annosis (= living ancients) et veteribus (= dead authorities); but
Gertz preferred ‘hos aarrige og gamle Hjemmelsmænd’ (HS, 35). The
memory of Sven’s father and of his uncle, Archbishop Eskil, will haveextended back at least to the 1120s, but there is little sign that Sven
used any personal recollections or old men’s tales in HC. This is
another historian’s topos ; see Simon, 91 and 89–90.
5. A generalization translated quite differently by J. Olrik (‘The same

Notes on the Short History105

disposition is not to be found among all men, for as with peasants, sowith princes . . .’, KV, 36) and by Gertz (‘For as for peasants, so also
for princes and magnates, there is a natural condition to all, that . . .’,HS, 35), but it comes to much the same thing: different forms ofemulation affect man’s nature whether he be of high or low birth. Svenis not simply endorsing the anti-rustic proverbs of the time (e.g. Walther,
27001, 27002, 27024a, 27026, 27028), nor the obsequiousness ofWilliam of Malmesbury in his epistle to Robert, earl of Gloucester, atthe beginning of De Gestis Regum: ‘The lower classes make the virtuesof their superiors their own by venerating those great actions to thepractice of which they cannot themselves aspire’ (tr. Giles). Sven later
praises the plebs Scanensium (p. 70).
6. retexat oratio : perhaps simply ‘narrate’, but retexere is used in thesense of ‘restore to life’ in Ovid, Metamorphoses, x 31 and xv 249.
priscorum annositas is lit. ‘the agedness of our earliest forbears’.
7. Note the resemblance to the opening lines of Beowulf ; but the immediate source must be a version of the pedigree of the Oddaverjar
confected by the Icelander Sæmundr Sigfússon before 1133, on which
see Bjarni Gu›nason, 175–7, Jakob Benediktsson, 60–1, and A. Olrik,
396–412. To the Icelanders Skjo≈ldr was little more than a name: a sonof Ó›inn in Skjo≈ldunga saga and the pedigrees in Flat., i 26, 27; a sonof Skelfir in Flat., i 25; or of Heremó› in Edda Snorra, 4. The ruler as
shielder of his land was a poetic commonplace; see Malmros 1985,
120, for a table of examples from the skalds. The derivation of kingshipfrom the useful function of defence rather than from depredation(latrocinium in St Augustine) is found in Justin, i 1: ‘The custom wasto protect the boundaries of empire rather than to push them outwards;
kingship was confined to the native land.’8. Modis Hislandensibus skiolding (A), Skioldunger (S): see Lexicon
Poeticum for many references. It seems likely that a personal nameSkjo≈ldr was formed from skjo≈ldungr, ‘shield-bearer’, rather than viceversa. In Hyndluljó›, st. 16, Skjol≈ dungar, Skilfingar, O≈›lingar, Ynglingar
and Ylfingar all appear as descendants of Hálfdan, and Hálfdan himself
was ‘the highest of the Skjo≈ldungar ’.
9. Frothi and Halfdan appeared as father and son in the Icelandic pedigrees seventeen generations below Skiold. Here Sven uses CL, which
introduced Helgi and ‘Haldanus’ as sons of Ro, ruling the sea and theland respectively.
10. According to Skjo≈ldunga saga Hálfdan was killed by Ingjaldr (AJ,
22); but Sven needs a primeval fratricide on the model of Romulus. For

106

Sven Aggesen

the ramifications of the story see A. Olrik, 294–301. Gertz interpreted
the super regni ambitione of A and S as semper . . . ; but super makes
sense. ‘Sole authority’ (monarchia) is in the exordium of the 1186
diploma, DD, i:3, no. 134.
11. In CL, ch. 7, and in Skjo≈ldunga saga Helgi was the Viking and his
brother ‘Roas’ stayed at home and was killed by his nephews, Hrœrekr
and Fró›i, sons of Ingjaldr (AJ, 26). Sven avoids telling the story of
Helgi’s rape and incest found in CL (SM, i 47–8), but gives him the
Ciceronian title of archipirata.
12. Rolf Kraki: not in A, supplied in S; cf. CL, ch. 7. The full story is in
Saxo (GD, 48–62; PF, 51–64) and in Hrólfs saga kraka. Sven summarizes the account given in CL; on the Hrólfr of the sagas see BjarniGu›nason, 162–73.
13. CL emphasizes the wealth and importance of Lejre in early times. It
was not mentioned in KVJ of c.1230, and appears in the 1688 landregister as a churchless hamlet of six farms within the parish ofAllerslev. The recent discovery there of post-holes indicating a large
hall suggests that it was not insignificant as late as c.1000. The bishopsof Roskilde owned land in Allerslev in the fourteenth century (SRD, vii
66, 120), and the contiguous manor of Kornerup was assigned to thechapter by the bishop before 1194 (DD, 1:3, no. 118). On the Lejre(Hlei›ra) of the sagas see A. Olrik, 324–47, and H. Andersen. It was
only of passing interest to Sven, as a topos of vanished greatness, like
Walter of Châtillon’s lines on Troy, Alexandreis, i 464–7.
14. Rokill . . . Slagenback (A), Rokil . . . Slaghenback (S): alias Hrœrekr
hno≈ggvan(d)baugi, Hrœrekr slo≈ngvan(d)baugi, two separate rulers in
Icelandic sources, one the miser, the other the flinger of rings. Thisversion of the by-name, like Saxo’s Roricus Slyngebond, suggests
blind copying of a written source (Bjarni Gu›nason, 287). In Skjol≈ dunga
saga he is the son of Hálfdan, not of Hrólfr. Sven appears to discard CL
at this point because it gave Rolf no son. He returns to the Icelandic
pedigree, but picks the wrong Hrœrekr, or gives the wrong by-name to
the right one; see A. Olrik, 68–74, for the connexion with Hrethric sonof Hrothgar in Beowulf.
15. Frothi hin Frökni (X): the same cognomen is given to Leifr Herleifsson(AJ, 8), but there Fró›i is magnus and his brother Áli is hinn fræckne(AJ, 16–17). In Ynglinga saga, ch. 26, Fró›i became hinn frœkni ; byalliteration? CL made Frothi the grandson of Rolf by a daughter (SM,i 52). Saxo put Frothi ‘the Active’ (vegetus) in quite a different context(GD, 101; PF, 110). The pedigrees in Flat. made Fró›i hinn frœkni son

Notes on the Short History

107of Fri›leifr and father of Ingjaldr; they made Vermundr the son of an
earlier Fró›i.
16. Vermundus . . . Prudens : Vermundr hinn vitri in Skjo≈ldunga saga; theWærmund of the Mercian genealogy (Wermundus in the Florence ofWorcester appendix), and Warmundus in the St Albans Vitæ duorum
Offarum (c.1200). Saxo offers an explanation of the nickname (GD,
94–5; PF, 103–4). The large literature on Vermund and Uffi/Offa issummarized in SG, ii 67–9. Did Sven get the story from England or
Denmark or Iceland? The Icelanders knew the name of Vermundr, andUffi appears to crop up as Óláfr hinn lítilláti (Flat., i 27); the duel on
the Eider escaped their notice. Widsith and Beowulf allude to the duel,
which is relocated to the West Midlands in the St Albans Vitæ. Svenis the first Northern writer to use this material, and the arguments of
Rickert and of Boberg in favour of his borrowing from England arestrong, but not overwhelming. The Danish form of the name, Uffi, andthe location of the duel on the Eider do not necessarily point to a
Danish source. The poet of Widsith placed the fight on the Eider, andSven was capable of naturalizing names. However, the view of Olrik
and Chadwick that Sven and Saxo used an independent Danish tradition is still widely held; see Chadwick, ch. 6, and SG, i 93. As the St
Albans Vitæ are conventionally dated after 1195 (on insecure grounds),
Sven cannot have used the surviving text.
17. An allusion to the story of Keti and Vigi who killed Athisl of Sweden
to avenge their father Frovin, told at length by Saxo (GD, 95–6; PF,
104–6) and in AR (DMA, 153). Saxo makes Uffi marry the sister of theavenging brothers but does not explain his speechlessness as a result of
their deed—there is no necessary connexion here. Uffi’s silence, orinertia, appears to have originated as a play on his English name Offa,
which is the Latin for ‘lump, shapeless mass, abortion’: aufer illam
offam porcinam in Plautus, Miles gloriosus, iii 1. Thus the Offa of the
St Albans Vitæ was blind to the age of seven and dumb to the age ofthirty (Chambers, 218–19). Saxo possibly employed this restraint of
the fandi possibilitas (Martianus Capella, iv 335) as a reference to Knut
VI’s failure to ‘speak out’ against German influence until after hisaccession (cf. n. 20 below; Johannesson, 313).
18. Saxo qualified this statement by claiming that Vermund approved ofthe deed, although among foreigners it became proverbial as a breachof custom (GD, 97; PF, 106). It seems he interpreted Sven’s gentiles ina purely ethnic sense rather than as ‘the heathen’, as in Judith 14: 6. As
Kemp Malone pointed out, ‘the interpretation of a two-against-one

108

Sven Aggesenfight as shameful or unfair has no place in the Heroic Age; such a pointof view belongs rather to . . . the Age of Chivalry’ (Widsith, 134; andsee Ellis Davidson, 199–200, and contra, Stephanius, 21).
19. He is called Wermundus Blinde in AR (DMA, 153) and other Danish
sources post 1200; Vermundr hinn vitri in Skjol≈ dunga saga (cf. Boberg,
140–1). In the St Albans Vitæ Offa is blind (until his seventh year),
Warmundus is merely decrepit.
20. Transalpinas partes (A and S): Transalbinas partes, ‘beyond theElbe’, so Gertz following Langebek; turgiditate Teutonica intumit :cf. n. 26 below. The German claim to Denmark, or to overlordship ofthe Danish king, had been asserted at various times since the 1130s, butaccording to Saxo was rejected by Knut VI at Absalon’s prompting in
1182/3. There was a state of mistrust and covert hostility between Knutand Frederick Barbarossa thereafter, and some fear of Hohenstaufen
reprisals for the subjugation of the Pomeranian duke in 1185; see
pp. 25–6 above. Sven evidently read contemporary tensions back to the
distant past. In Widsith Offa’s opponents were called Myrgingas. In
the St Albans Vitæ he fought an ambitious Mercian noble called
Riganus or Aliel. But there was another English Offa legend, told byWalter Map, 86–7, in which the Roman emperor laid claim to his
kingdom and was frustrated by the champion Gado.
21. spiculatores (A and S) occurs in Mark 6: 27 and the St Albans Vitæ(Chambers, 242) in the sense of ‘executioners’; similarly in Theodricus(MHN, 51). In the Roman army however speculatores were special
imperial runners or military messengers, which is what is meant here.
Garmonsway and Simpson, 223, prefer the earlier sense of ‘spearmen’.
22. Epicureorum more: cf. the several denunciations of Epicureans as‘followers of vain pleasure’ in John of Salisbury’s Policraticus. According to Salvian of Marseilles, they confused pleasure with virtue,and so God with incuria and torpor (De Gubernatione Dei, i 5); see also
Glaber, iii 27.
23. orationem gestus informaret : Cicero uses informare oratorem in thesame way in Orator ad Brutum, 9, 33. In the St Albans Vitæ Offa also
begins to speak ore facundo, sermone rhethorico to the astonishment of
his hearers (Chambers, 219).
24. Proverbial, although according to Walther, no. 40258, not foundearlier than Gruter’s Enchiridion (1625) in the form Rebus admirationem raritate compares.
25. Sic tantus orsus cæpit ab alto in A becomes Sic fatum solio tunc orsus
cepit ab alto in X, which, as Gertz says, is a Leonine hexameter

Notes on the Short History

109

reminiscent of Æneid, xi 301 or ii 2. But Tandem sic orsus cœpit in S
suggests that the original was Sic tandem orsus cepit ab alto, and that
the A copyist misread an abbreviated tandem as tantus ; no need for ahexameter.
26. Uffi’s scorn arms him with rare words: turgiditas is in Thesaurus
Novus, 587, as an alternative to turgor. Alan of Lille uses ampullositas
twice in De Planctu Naturæ (1179–82; PL 210, 467, 468; on arroganceand envy), probably referring to Horace’s proicit ampullas et sesquipedalia verba. But comminitatio is Gertz’s unwarranted substitute forcommunicatione (A) and comminatione (S): the latter will do, as in
Saxo, sub duelli comminatione (GD, 186; PF, 206). Sven’s formationof abstract nouns strongly recalls Alan of Lille who in the passages
cited above also uses pompositas and verbositas. Gibes at Teutonic
pomposity, guile and arrogance were common: e.g. John of Salisbury
in the 1160s, The Letters, i 205–6, 207; ii 54, 592: loquuntur grandia,
minis tument ; and Suger, Vita Ludovici Grossi, 56, 60.
27. For ‘haughty voice’ Gertz recalls voce superba, Æneid, vii 544; cf.
Statius, Thebaid, xi 360, and elsewhere: here there is a hexameter. The
assertion of hereditary monarchy resembles the St Albans Vitæ, where
Offa announces that he will not ‘abandon the fatherland which hitherto
the successive members of our family have held by hereditary right’(Chambers, 219). In Denmark Valdemar I had devoted many years toensuring the succession of his son Knut, but Knut had to face opposition, both in Jutland on his accession and in the revolt of two pretenders
from collateral branches, Harald Skrænk in 1183 and Bishop Valdemarof Schleswig in 1192.
28. In the St Albans Vitæ Offa I is introduced as ‘tall of stature, wholeof body, and most elegantly shaped’ (Chambers, 218–19); Saxo emphasized his hugeness (GD, 98; PF, 107).
29. mucronem expientissimum (A), mucronem experientissimum (S): asin 2 Maccabees 8: 9, in bellicis rebus experientissimo, ‘a captain who
in matters of war had great experience’. That must be right, although
Gertz preferred mucronem exuperantissimum, which is a superlative
used only by Appuleius among the ancients, once in De Platone andtwice in De Mundo, of the attributes of the supreme being (Opuscules
philosophiques, 72, 146, 150). I doubt that Sven read these pieces ordeveloped exsuperans (Ovid and Aulus Gellius) on his own initiative.
Saxo names the sword Skrep and laboriously explains why it was
hidden: when brought to light it seemed so brittle and corroded that
Uffi durst not test it before battle.

110

Sven Aggesen

30. intersigniis (X), ‘among the characters’, following S; inter singulis in
A. Intersignum could mean ‘brand’ in twelfth-century France (Niermeyer, s.v.), and Alan of Lille used pl. intersigna (AC, iv 188); intersignium (Bailey’s appendix to Forcellini). As elsewhere, Gertz’s preference is open to doubt. Garmonsway and Simpson, 225, translate ‘bymeans of tokens marked on the rocks’; Gertz, HS, 41, ‘anbragt med
Mellemrum ved Mærker paa Stenene’, which is better. No doubt Svenhad runes in mind. On Nordic swords in grave-mounds see SG, ii 69;
but a closer analogue is the story of King Ægeus of Athens who left his
son Theseus a sword under a rock, and who later cast himself into thesea in the belief that Theseus was dead (Hyginus, Fables, xliii: Ariadne). In the St Albans Vitæ the episode is reduced to ‘the king . . .
girded his son with a sword in a solemn royal ceremony’ (Chambers,
220). There may be an allusion by Sven to the events of 26 Dec. 1187,
when the seventeen-year-old Duke Valdemar was knighted and put incharge of the southern frontier of Denmark at Schleswig (DMA, 76).
31. mediamnia : properly an eyot; defined as a freshwater island by
Priscian and others (Ducange, s.v.). According to Saxo, a fort was built
on the same site by Sven II’s son, Biorn (GD, 334; EC, 96); heprobably meant Rendsborg. According to AR, the place was still called
Kunengikamp in the thirteenth century (DMA, 154), and this points to
Kampen, a royal manor NW of Rendsborg. Others prefer to locate thesite nearer the mouth of the river, by Tönning or Dingsbüll. There is
no reason to suppose that Sven had a particular site in mind, whatever
may have been the folklore of the debatable swamplands. The island
merely suits the ON word for duel, hólmganga. The great King Knut
was later supposed to have fought for the lordship of England on asimilar eyot in the Severn. The settlement of property disputes by(illegal) duels survived in Norway until the nineteenth century; for an
example see Bø, 140.
32. In the St Albans Vitæ Warmundus retires to ‘a safer place’ while his
son joins in a full-scale battle against the usurpers (Chambers, 223); his
enemy, Riganus/Aliel, is drowned in the Avon after the deaths of hissons. On King Ægeus of Athens see n. 30 above.
33. Genesis 42: 38.
34. tanquam leo pectore robusto infremuit : perhaps from Silius Italicus,
xi 247. Like Walter of Châtillon’s Alexander, Uffi ‘carries a lion in his
lofty heart’ (Alexandreis, i 57; tr. R. Telfryn Pritchard), for ‘the virtueof the lion lies in his breast’ according to Hugh of St Victor (De Bestiis,
ii 1; PL 177, 57). In the St Albans Vitæ Offa charges the foe ‘after theNotes on the Short History

111

manner of the lion and the lioness when their whelps have been takenfrom them’ (Chambers, 222). The seal of Knut VI already bore theDanish arms of three lions passant gardant on a field semée of hearts;
see Riis, 192–4.
35. athleta noster elegantissimus : the vir elegans, choice and handsome
but not dainty or luxurious, is a type of medieval knighthood rather
than a classical figure. On p. 74 the future Valdemar II is described as
iuvenis indolis elegantissimæ.
36. Exodus 17: 14: ‘I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek,’and Psalm 9: 6. The memorability of Uffi is a commonplace of all theversions of the story, as in the St Albans Vitæ—possibly as a result of
the importance of the Eider as a frontier. Sven’s words also echo thoseof CL on Dania, quod nomen in eternum non delebitur (SM, 1 45).
37. quod raro legitur accidisse : heroes of the classical epics do not incite
their foes except by taunting. Even Byrhtnoth was terse in encouraging
his enemy Vikings (Maldon, 93–5), and Offa in the St Albans Vitæ wasenraged by the ‘insulting and shameful words of his opponents’ (Chambers, 222).
38. agedum (X), rather than agendum (A); an imperative favoured by
Statius in the Thebaid. The sentence is missing in S, mangled in A, andowes everything to Gertz: see Löfstedt, 171.
39. Alamanni : here and on pp. 51, 52, and 54 Sven uses this word forGermans, elsewhere Teutonici. Chadwick suggests it might be derived
from the Swæfe of the Offa lines in Widsith, since the Suabi were also
called Alamanni (Chadwick, 129, with reference to Paulus Diaconus,
Historia Langobardorum, iii 18). But Alamanni, Alemanni is normal
twelfth-century usage for Germans, especially in France and Italy. In
Saxo the foe are Saxons, no doubt because of deteriorating relations
with the Schaumburgs and Welfs after 1190. Sven may have had the
Hohenstaufen in mind, who were Alamanni in the Suabian sense.
40. vafritiis artis pugillatoriæ: the adj. from Plautus, Rudens, iii 4, 16.
41. distribueretur : an extraordinary word for the breaking of a sword:
perhaps a facetious echo from the schools. ‘Distribution’ was both amethod of argument and a stage in the presentation of a case; it was
divided into the two categories of enumeration and exposition; see Ad
Herennium, i 10 and 17, iv 35.
42. fragor per universum intonuit exercitum : cf. Æneid, viii 527 and ii
629, subitoque fragore intonuit lævum. In the St Albans Vitæ Offa
splits the skull of Brutus/Hildebrand after penetrating his helmet, andmortally wounds his brother, Sven (Chambers, 222).

112

Sven Aggesen

43. Proverb no. 14070 in Walther: Ludus fortunæ variatur in ordine lunæ, Crescit, decrescit, in eodem sistere nescit.
44. novercali vultu : cf. Henricus Septimellensis, Elegia de Diversitate
Fortunæ (c.1192): Numinis ambiguos vultus deprendo : novercam 
Sentio fortunam, que modo mater erat (PL 204, 844, lines 1–2; Walther,no. 19128). Alan of Lille referred to fortuna novercans (AC, vii 369);
and see Alexandreis, ii 175–81, for Walter of Châtillon’s address to
Fortune, quis te impulit illi  velle novercari.
45. cassatisque minarum ampullositatibus : see n. 26 above.
46. in pacis tranquillitate præcluis (Wffo) . . . regebat : ‘tranquillity ofpeace’ (not the same as ‘peace of tranquillity’, for which see Alan of
Lille, Summa de Arte Prædicatoria, ch. 22; PL 205, 156) is used twice
in LC (see p. 89, n. 26, and pp. 124, 126, nn. 107, 116). It originatesin the prayer, Deus regnorum omnium, regumque dominator, includedin the Mass in Time of War in most rites from the Gelasian Sacramentary(c.750) onwards. It is in Alcuin’s supplement to the Gregorian Sacramentary (CBP, 1563 and 143) and in the eleventh-century Canterbury
Benedictional (prayer Pro Rege, CBP, 1389), and in the Roman Missal(Blaise, Vocab., s.v. Pax, and Bruylants, ii 128). It is used by otherhistorians (e.g. EE, 52, Vita Ædwardi, 30, 51), but according to CR it
was a catch-phrase of Bishop Peter of Roskilde (1124–34): ‘if anything
can remain with Mary and James in the tranquillity of peace’ (of church
property, SM, i 26). The adj. præcluis is probably borrowed from
Martianus Capella (i 3 and 24, ix 906), but also occurs in the office for
St Kjeld (c.1200; VSD, 280). In Saxo’s version of the story Uffi wins
not only freedom for the Danes but empire over the Saxons as well
(GD, 100; PF, 109): a change of emphasis on which see pp. 21, 26
above.
47. Dan nomen indidit : Dan was a learned eponym in William of Jumièges,writing c.1070 (6–8; a passage used by Roger of Wendover and Johnof Wallingford), perhaps borrowed by Sæmundr, and transplanted in
CL to the Danish islands. He founded Lejre, defeated the Emperor
Augustus at the Danevirke, and was elected king of Denmark; his wife
was Dannia and his son Ro. Abbot William of Æbelholt and Saxo
accepted him as a founding ruler, but the Icelanders grafted him into
the pedigree of the Skjo≈ldungar further down the sequence, either as
the husband of Ólo≈f Vermundardóttir or as the son of Óláfr hinn lítilláti
Vermundarson: see Langfe›gatal, Alfræ›i, iii 59, and AJ, 8–11. Svenputs him here in obedience to his Icelandic source. Elatus vel Superbus
becomes hin Storlatene in AR (DMA, 154); the epithet in AJ is hinnNotes on the Short History

113

mikilláti, which forms a doublet with hinn lítilláti. In AR it is suggested
that he was in fact Olaf, Uffi’s son; this was after Saxo had invented
three separate Dans.
48. The sequence Frothi—Frithlef—Frothi—Ingiald occurs both in CL
and in the Icelandic pedigrees. The duplication of Fró›is and Fri›leifs
sems to have been originally inspired by the preference of the early
twelfth-century chiefs in Oddi for a lineage of 29 or 30 generations,like Christ’s from King David in Matthew 1. CL refers to Frothi largus,
which Sven explains by using Wisdom 7: 9: ‘All gold in respect of her
is as a little sand, and silver shall be counted as clay before her.’
49. Alias Ingjaldr Starka›arfóstri, whose story is elaborated in Saxo’s
book six but who seems to have played little part in Skjo≈ldunga saga ;cf. SG, ii 102. He first appears as Ingeld, son of Froda, in Widsith andBeowulf, or as Alcuin’s Hinieldus (Chambers, 20–5). After him Gertz
inserted an Olaus and his son Frothi, because the next King Frothi tobe mentioned cannot be the Frothi Frithgothæ named above. However,neither A nor S has a lacuna at this point, and I doubt whether Sventhought Olaus was a son of Ingiald, since he places him after the
break. All the Icelandic pedigrees give Ingjaldr a son, Hrœrekr
hno≈ggvan(d)baugi; cf. p. 106, n. 14, above.
50. nepotes, altera nempe parte regali stirpe editi (A): Gertz qualified
nepotes by filiarum, ‘grandsons through daughters’, which is unwarranted—Sven just means ‘relations’, as in Æneid, vi 864, magna destirpe nepotum. The pedigree in Flat. carried on undaunted at thispoint, with Hrœrekr—(Fró›i)—Hálfdan—Hrœrekr—Haraldr hilditon≈ n
and Rá›bar›r, and CL gave Olavus—Asa. This divergence seems tohave troubled Sven.
51. In CL Olaf (Olavus) is the son and successor of Ingiald (SM, i 53);
but Saxo commented that ‘some offer the doubtful opinion that he wasthe child of Ingeld’s sister’ (GD, 181; PF, 201). ‘Some’ probably
means Sven: if so, it would help explain the reference below to Frothi
as the last direct transmitter of royalty for several generations. Saxo
also states that ‘posterity has received little accurate information of his
doings,’ and he ignores the Danubian triumphs suggested by Sven: it
sems that he has already used them in the war of Frothi against the
Huns, when the Danes and their allies triumphed after proelio septem
dies extracto (GD, 132; PF, 147–8). Battles against the Huns were
attributed to King Angant‡r in the Saga Hei›reks konungs (using thefragmentary Hlo≈›skvi›a); cf. The Saga of King Heidrek, xxi–xxix;
SG, ii 82–4.

114

Sven Aggesen

52. temporum interstitio : Martianus Capella, vi 601. Saxo also uses
interstitium in a temporal sense.
53. diligenti . . . successori : perhaps a reference to Saxo, who filled thegap between Olaf and Sigwarth with some 27 kings. The Series ac
Brevior (c.1230) made do with 25, and AR (c.1288) produced 35.
54. ex ecclipsi memorie (cf. Gertz’s constructed virtutibus eclipsatus,
n. 149 below): Alan of Lille wrote of an ‘eclipse’ of the sense of touch,of ‘the stars of virtue’, and of probity (AC, iv 166, 327; De Planctu
Naturæ, PL 210, 478).
55. Regneri . . . regnum . . . rege . . . regem . . . regnum . . . regno . . .
regis : humorous alliteration; cf. n. 72 below. Stories about the Viking
hero or villain Ragnar Lothbrok were current all round the North Sea
in the eleventh century, and Icelanders began to insert him in theirpedigrees in the early twelfth. In these he is given a father called
Sigur›r ormr-í-auga, who may have had a historical antecedent in the
Sigefridus of the Annals of St Bertin (s.a. 882) and Adam of Bremen.
Sven rejected this scheme. He may have read in CR that the sons of‘Lothpard’ were Norwegian pirates who enlisted the help of unnamed
Danish kings to devastate Britain and the continent (SM, i 16–17). He
was probably aware that in France the ninth-century raiders were seen
as ancestors of the Danish royal family. In 1188, the eloquent abbot,
Stephen of Tournai, was trying to raise money from Knut VI andBishop Valdemar of Schleswig on the grounds that the abbey of St
Geneviève in Paris had been destroyed in 857 by Berno, chief of theLoire Northmen; see DD, i:3, nos. 154–6, 158–9. This was a somewhat
tainted connexion. The grafting of the Ragnar strain on to the royal
Danish stock through a son who was not involved in the more lurid
deeds of the Gallic Vikings may have been a way of lessening the taint.
(Sigefridus was remembered, if at all, for having stabled his horses inthe emperor’s palace at Aachen, cf. Ann. Fuld., s.a. 881, and CR, SM,i 17, a feat after Sven’s own heart, although he doesn’t mention it.) It
was left for Saxo to make Ragnar a full king of the Danes, withcharacteristic awkwardness, in his book nine; even there, the connexion is through marriage. Some Icelanders had no such misgivings andproduced a perfect male descent from Ingjaldr to Ragnarr in six generations (so in Flat., ii 26–7, seven in the Resen manuscript, on which
see Faulkes).
56. At this point Gertz, 154, inserted the words, ‘He had been begotten
at the first untying of her maidenly girdle, which is called knut by ourcommon people.’ There is no gap in A or S here, although the word

Notes on the Short History

115

utpote ought, if used correctly, to introduce an explanation. There is no
reason to interpret this tale as Danish folklore; it is probably Sven’s
own rather jocular gloss. The Icelanders explained the name more
cumbrously, from the knotted cloth found with the foundling Knut; but
it was the classical poets (e.g. Æneid, i 324), not the Danish peasantry,
who used nodus as a synecdoche for a woman’s girdle. Saxo omits thestory and makes Knut the grandson rather than the son of Sighwarth.
For a summary of the large literature on the name Knut see
Søndergaard, esp. 157–8.
57. primus in Dacia functus hoc nomine . . . solus post Froti . . . regali
extitit oriundus prosapia : This first King Knut disturbs the numbering
originally favoured by Sven’s own monarch, Knut, son of Valdemar.
In an Odense charter of 20 Nov. 1183 he is referred to as ‘the fifth’(corrected to ‘fourth’ in DD, i:3, no. 116), and in the great Odense
donation of 21 March 1183 he is definitely ‘the fourth’ (DD, i:3, no.
111). This would make Knut, son of Magnus, who ruled 1146–57,
Knut III; St Knut (1080–6) Knut II; and Knut the Great Knut I—
Harthaknut not being accepted as a sole king in the Lund king-list or
in Sven (see p. 64). It seems that between March and November 1183
someone found another Knut, probably in an Icelandic pedigree—a
Knútr fundinn rather than a Ho≈r›aknútr—and Sven makes use of the
discovery. Abbot William subsequently introduced one more, by restoring Harthaknut to his place in the king-list after Knut the Great(SM, i 178–9), and so Knut son of Valdemar was retrospectively
promoted to Knut VI in e.g. Vedel’s translation of Saxo. Sven insiststhat this Knut primus was a son of a Danish king, even if his father
Sighwarth was not. Sighwarth’s predecessors had been merely nepotesof kings, all the way back to Frothi; but the last Frothi to be mentioned
had been succeeded by his son Ingiald. There is no need to assume withGertz that a passage about a later Frothi has been dropped. This raises
more problems than it solves, because Sven states clearly above (it isin both A and S) that no son succeeded his father directly after the daysof Ingiald. Either he meant that after ‘the time of’ King Frothi, who was
succeeded by his son, the direct line was broken, or that the last kingbefore Sighwarth had been Frothi, Sighwarth’s father-in-law, mentioned but not named above.
58. Sealendensis bondo, after a gap in A: S supplies the name Ennignup(‘forehead-crag, beetle-brow’), which appears to refer to the historicalKing Chnob, known from Adam of Bremen. He was subjugated by
Henry the Fowler in 934 and is named as the father of King Sigtryg on

116

Sven Aggesen

Haddeby stones 2 and 4 (gen. knubu ; Moltke, 194–6). Saxo also notedthat Ennignup was Knut’s guardian, and complained that ‘some inexpert historians ascribe a moderately important (not ‘central’, pace PF,294) place to him in their chronicles’ (medium in fastis locum tribuunt ;GD, 265; cf. SG, ii 162). According to Saxo, the guardian was chosen
by lot. Sven calls him bondo, ODan. bondi, a usual word in Danish
charters for ‘landowner, freeholder’. By Sealendensis he presumably
meant that he came from Sjælland; as adj. or substantive the term does
not occur elsewhere in Sven’s writings, but it is common in othertwelfth- and thirteenth-century Latin texts in that sense. It is perhaps
conceivable that the base of the word is pl. sjólo≈nd, which is occasionally found in Icelandic with reference to the Danish islands (thosesouth of Sjælland and Fyn, viz. Møn, Falster, Lolland, Langeland—theusual Icelandic term for Sjælland is sg. Sjá-, Sjóland). Adam of Bremen
says that Chnob/Gnupa came from Sweden, and archaeology suggeststhat his dynasty was strong in the southern islands and Schleswig (cf.
Lis Jacobsen; and P. Sawyer, 217–19). The story told by Sven may be
an Icelander’s way of reconciling an account (Adam’s?) of Chnob’s
rule with the series of Gorm’s kingly ancestors in the Oddaverjar
pedigree.
59. Snio occurs in CL as a shepherd promoted by the Swedes to be tyrantof Denmark in the days before Rolf kraki (SM, i 49). He appears in theCatalogus Regum Daniæ (1170–82) as the fifth ancient pagan king of
the Danes (SM, i 159), and as Snær son of Frosti in the tracts Hversu
Nóregr bygg›isk and Fundinn Nóregr, Flat. i 21–2, 219–20. Sven may
have fitted him in here because he wanted a link between Klak-Harald
and Knut, and he connected the first element in Klak-Harald’s namewith the root in ON klaki, ‘frozen ground’. Instead of Snio S has
another Frothi, but Snio survived in the chronicles and king-lists
because Saxo restored him as an ancient king; see GD, 235–8; PF 258–
62; cf. SG, ii 140. In AR he is associated with the year 687 (DMA,
157–8).
60. Klakk-Haraldr in WN texts (e.g. Jómsvíkinga saga, ch. 2), where heappears as a jarl in Holstein and the father of ﬁyri Danmarkarbót rather
than of Gormr. Danes tended to identify him with the King Herioldus
who was baptized at Mainz on 24 June 826 and played a well-recordedpart in Franco-Danish relations from 812 to 827; cf. Series ac Brevior(1220–42; SM, i 162) and Annales Lundenses (c.1265; DMA, 37–8).
The relative failure of Herioldus as a king, as described in AB, i 15,
may possibly have earned him his nickname—if we knew precisely

Notes on the Short History

117

what it meant. In Tilnavne it is equated either with early Dan. klak,‘Smuds, Plet’, or with ON klakkr, ‘stejl og spids Klippe’ (both Klakker
and Klack occur as by-names in early Swedish). It is certainly not clear
who Sven thought he was. In his persona as the first baptized king of
the Danes Harald is not given the by-name Klak in CR, nor in the listof kings in the Lund necrology: on the contrary, Klak-Harald in CR isHarald Bluetooth. Saxo has a third King Harald, but he is described as
an exile and a tyrant, not affiliated to the royal family (GD, 253, 255;
PF, 282, 284).
61. Gorm Løghæ : Bram Løghæ (A), Gorm Lóghæ (S). In the Incerti
Auctoris Genealogia (SM, i 186) he appears as Gorm Løkæ, and fromthis form a hypothetical derivation is given from an ODan. adj. *løker,‘træg’, related to the Norw. substantive løkje, ‘tung, dorsk Person’(Tilnavne, s.n.). The nickname has also been associated with MDan.
loj, explained in a seventeenth-century Comenius translation as‘vanmectig og doven’, but this loan-word from German cannot becredited in Sven’s text. In Icelandic sources he is most often referred
to as Gormr the ‘Old’, but in Jómsvíkinga saga as the ‘Stupid’ and the‘Mighty’ as well. Saxo disposes of the inconsistency by providing
three separate Gorms: an active one in book eight, and in book nine one
unsuccessful one and another who is inactive, blind and old. See
Lukman 1976, 32, 44, for speculations on the subject; Ousager; andSG, ii 162–4.
62. This is the ﬂurui of Jelling stone 1; what follows is Sven’s attempt to
explain the epithet tanmarkar : but in that same inscription (Moltke,
206). She is described in terms similar to those used of Queen Sophia
at the end of HC (p. 73 above), and her story seems to be connectedwith Sophia’s adventures in 1185–7, when she was married to thecount of Thuringia, the emperor’s nephew, and then repudiated, to thefury of her son, Knut VI. Her daughters were also rejected as consorts
by the emperor’s sons (Chronica Slavorum, iii 21). Sven offered solace for these rebuffs in his tale of Queen Thyrwi. He may have been
inspired by the dominant queens of Justin’s Historiæ : Semiramis who‘outdid not only men but women in courage’ and fortified Babylon;
Tomyris who defied King Cyrus and avenged her son’s death bytrapping and destroying the Persian army; and most of all, Dido (orElissa) who practised deceit to liberate the Tyrians in order to obtain
land on which they could settle and to avoid becoming the wife of aneighbouring king, ‘who sued for marriage under threat of waging war’
(Justin, i 2 and 8, xviii 5 and 6). On Thyrwi in Sven and Saxo, see118

Sven Aggesen

L. Weibull; Damsholt 1985, 158–62; and Strand, 156–63, with full refs.
63. et rosa lilio maritata purpureum genis colorem inpinxerat : bothHorace and Ovid use ‘purple’ for rosy or pink, and there are many
similar passages in Sven’s contemporaries, e.g. Alan of Lille, AC, iii
153–4, and William of Blois, Alda, 130–1 (ed. Cohen, i 135).
64. These phrases are later repeated in the eulogy of Valdemar I, p. 73.
Here Gertz prefers perfecta to reserta redundabat in A, referta erat in S.
65. Divergences in A and S have here been skilfully reconciled by Gertz.
Sven seems to have been influenced by the myth of creation in Bernard
Sylvestris and his disciples. In this, Nature (rather than God) ‘compounds bodies, the dwelling places of souls, out of the qualities andmaterials of the elements,’ and Noys, or Providence, assists her in thecreative act; thus Cosmographia, ch. 2 (tr. Wetherbee, 67–75). Alan of
Lille believed that the qualities of the great ones of the past were
immanent in the cosmos, at the disposal of the creator: hence Thyrwi’s
imaginary drinking-companions. The fount they shared was either the‘fount of wisdom’ of Proverbs 18: 4, or the founts of wisdom andphilosophy referred to by Cicero in Tusculan Disputations, i 3, 6; but
it should also be noted that John of Hauteville, Architrenius, ii 291,
believed that ordinary wine ‘introduces Nestor to our hearts, Ulysses
to our tongues.’ Sven’s comparison with the Queen of Sheba is engagingly maladroit. His wish that Thyrwi had been baptized into theorthodox faith came true in Saxo, who made her an English princess
who, some said, ‘declined the caresses of the nuptial couch so that by
her abstinence she could win her bridegroom over to Christianity’(GD, 266; PF, 295). Osbert of Clare (Vita Ædwardi, 74) was able tocompare the Confessor and Queen Edith to Solomon and Sheba
unreservedly. See Damsholt 1985, 155–7, and on the influence of Alanof Lille and John of Hauteville on Anders Sunesen see Boje Mortensen,
in Ebbesen, 209–19.
66. All Northern sources follow Adam of Bremen’s mistake, AB, ii 3,
where Otto I invades and conquers Denmark. He maintained some kindof hegemony there, but it was his father, Henry the Fowler, who
subjugated the Danes in 934 (AB, i 7), and his son, Otto II, who
invaded Denmark in 974.
67. infamiæ discrimen : the second word is translated as crimen, ‘reproach,shame’; otherwise it would mean ‘trial, test, danger’, as in famæ suæ
discrimen (SM, i 82). Gertz, HS, 48, has ‘et Forsøg paa at sætte Riget
i Fare for at plettes af Vanære’.
68. virtutique commode mutuus succedat affectus : I have not followedNotes on the Short History

119

Gertz in preferring occedo, ‘go towards’ (Plautus) to succedo in A, nonprosequi in S. Otto wanted more than a meeting of emotions. We mustnote that the emperor ‘is not in the least interested in Thyra herself, but
only in using her as a means of disgracing Denmark. She is an object’(Damsholt 1985, 159 and cf. 162). Feminists make heavy weather ofthis story.
69. dulcibus alloquiis : Horace, Epodes, 13, 18. Damsholt feels thatThyrwi’s stratagem reflects Danish policy towards the Germans: ‘wedeceived them whenever we could.’ I suspect it was the Germans who
deceived the Danes, at least in 1152, 1162 and 1181, and Sven felt it
was time for a change.
70. LM suspected a Northern proverb here, but Gertz pointed out theresemblance to Plautus, Truculentus, 176: in melle sunt linguæ sitævostræ atque orationes lacteque; corda in felle sunt sita atque acerbo
aceto ; and there are several medieval Latin analogues; see Walther,nos. 14574, 14577, 38168e. Alan of Lille gave Logic a flower and ascorpion to hold: Mel sapit ista manus, fellis gerit illa saporem (AC, iii
27).
71. Psalm 136: 3. The ensuing passage repeats, ironically, the conclusionof the Kristiarn Svensen episode in LC, p. 40: honour has a price. But
see Damsholt 1985, 159.
72. regina . . . regnum . . . regni . . . regno : cf. p. 114, n. 55 above, ande.g. Aldhelm, Quam rex extorrem Romæ qui regna regebat (LHL, iv495), and Rex ruit et regnum rapiens rex alter habebit (MGH, Script.,xxiv 240).
73. prope Slesuik : not in A and added by Gertz from S, prope Slesvicum.
For a summary of the archaeological dating of the Danevirke fortifications see Danevirke, i 79–84. A beginning was made on Danevirke III
c.968, west of Hedeby, but there were no other great works in the tenthcentury. Sven’s story reflects Valdemar I’s rebuilding and extension of
the old walls from 1163 onwards (DMA, 166), and the connexion of
Semiramis with Babylon’s walls, cf. p. 117, n. 62 above, and Orosius,
ii 6, 8–11.
74. operi (S) præfato insudarent : Gertz supplied munimini to fill a gap
in A. Valdemar II exacted dues in silver from contiguous districts tomaintain the wall (KVJ, i:2, 9–11), but how his father found the labour
to build it is unclear.
75. The theory that all land-rights had once been vested in the ruler wasadvanced by the twelfth-century Italian jurist Martinus (see Gierke, 79
and 178). Cf. however Snorri’s account of Haraldr hárfagri’s seizure of

120

Sven Aggesen

Norwegian lands in his saga, ch. 6, in Heimskringla, and the pervasive
folklore of ultimate or primeval royal land-ownership; see Hoebel,
226, and Diamond, 286. ‘What no man owns, the king owns’ is astatement in the 1241 Jutland Law (DGL, iii 61).
76. tanquam inclusos indagine : Sven means a hedge (as translated byGertz, HS, 52) rather than a net; see Diefenbach, 293; Ducange, s.v.;
Synonyma, line 536.
77. Cf. Vergil, Eclogues, ix 27: ‘singing swans shall bear aloft to thestars.’ For ‘obstacle of a wall’, muri obicem, at the end of the next
sentence, cf. Orosius, iii 19, muri obice.
78. The name was used c.1170 in CL (Danæwirchi). In that source awooden stockade had already stood there before the kingdom wasfounded; it was where Dan defeated Augustus Caesar before he became king (SM, i 44–5). Saxo insisted that Thyrwi built the earthworks
after her husband’s death (GD, 272; EC, 6); he evidently found Sven’s
tale too frivolous.
79. Decus datiæ : a translation of tanmarkar : but on the Jelling stone 1,
cf. p. 117, n. 62 above. What it means has been too long disputed to be
discussed here. Saxo may have tried to do better than Sven, with his
Danicæ maiestatis caput (GD, 274; EC, 10); see the summary in
K. M. Nielsen, 155–60, and Moltke, 207.
80. in fiolis, cytharis : cf. Alexandreis, v 483–5. OFr. viole is latinized as
vitula, videla or fiola ; see Diefenbach, s.v. fiala. The cithara is astringed instrument played with a bow or plectrum; it is associated withtympana in Genesis 31: 27, Job 21: 12, Isaiah 5: 12 and 30: 32.
81. choris et tympanis : Exodus 15: 20, Judges 11: 34, Psalm 150: 3.
Instrumental music is a topos of decadence, as in Saxo (cf. Starkather
and the flute-player in GD, 168–9; PF, 186); also of enchantment (GD,
63, 335–6; PF, 69; EC, 98–9). When played by histriones, as here, theworst can be expected.
82. renuto . . . recuso . . . devito : a formula of rejection from the schoolbook; cf. e.g. contemnit, renuit, simul abnuit atque recusat (Synonyma,line 536). Gertz preferred the rare renuto to renuntio in A or renuo in
S: each is more frequent in the glossaries, and renuntio should stand.
83. parificari non valeat : parifico is used by Suger and by John ofSalisbury (Policraticus, iii 14; cf. Ducange, s.v.). Gorm’s descent fromkings ‘on either side’ of the family is not hinted at earlier; ‘on every
side’ would be better for Sven’s undique, cf. ‘i enhver Henseende er
oprunden af Kongers Æt’ (Gertz, HS, 55), ‘i alle Maader’ (LM, 25).
84. Saxo attributes a similarly defiant speech to Archbishop Absalon,

Notes on the Short History

121

when Landgrave Siegfried of Thuringia made a ‘pompous andmenacing’ request that Knut VI should do homage to the emperor
in 1182/3 (GD, 539–40; EC, 606).
85. For reverentiam et vocem (A) Gertz read irreverentiam atrocem (X):
but A will do, ‘. . . stunned at the awesomeness and tone of this . . .
reply’.
86. Prophetic powers were attributed to Thyrwi in Jómsvíkinga saga
(1962), ch. 3; (1969), ch. 3, and by Saxo when she interprets Gorm’s
dream (GD, 267; PF, 296).
87. ad institutionem (A), ad internecionem (S), ad interstinctionem (X):
Gertz’s word is unknown except to Arnobius, who used it to mean a‘distribution’. Paulus Diaconus, HR, 238, used internecio for the destruction of the Ostrogothic realm by Narses: this is better.
88. Blatan : a by-name which occurs first in CR (before 1150), cognomine
Blatan sive Clac-Harald (SM, i 17). It was also used in Abbot William’s
Genealogy (1193/4) and explained as dens lividus vel niger (SM, i
178).
89. quasi masoleis illustribus : ‘as if’ because mausoleum usually meant
an ornate burial within a church, as e.g. in William of Malmesbury’s
Gesta Pontificum and Adam of Bremen (AB, ii 82, for St Willehad’s
tomb at Bremen). On the Jelling burials see K. M. Nielsen (withbibliography).
90. As in Adam of Bremen and CR.
91. The dragging of the rock and the rebellion of the army are elaborated
by Saxo in his book ten. The mutiny is attested earlier (EE, 8–9). The
supposed cause may be a story invented to explain the siting of twomemorials away from Jelling, at Læborg and Bække, to a lady called
Thyrwi, who may have been identified as Gorm’s queen (cf. Moltke,
228–30).
92. Æneid, viii 244, on the flight of Cacus from Hercules.
93. Hynnisburg(h) in A and S, Hyumsburgh in X: a place implicitly
identified by Sven and Saxo with Wolin on the Dziwna, now in Poland.
Saxo’s detailed narrative of the Danish raids on Wolin in 1170 and1173(?) suggests that the city was defenceless at the time of the second
raid, ruined but not by Absalon (GD, 482, 487, 501; EC, 519, 526,
546). In 1188 the bishop of Pomerania moved his see to Kamien
because Wolin ‘is deserted on account of war-damage’ (Clement III’sbull, CPD, no. 63). However, in 1180/1 the Wolinsky had fortified themouth of the Swina, 23 km west of Wolin, with two forts to keep theDanes out. In August(?) Absalon ordered his brother to burn these122

Sven Aggesen

forts, and on the way home the king ordered ‘the burnt-out ruins of theforts to be levelled with the ground’—solo æquari in Sven’s phrase—
and the still-glowing foundation stones sunk at sea (GD, 547; EC, 618).
This must be the scene Sven remembers; so either he used moenia tomean ‘defences fifteen miles away’, or else Absalon levelled Wolin’s
walls on an occasion not mentioned by Saxo. According to Jómsvíkingasaga (1962), ch. 15; (1969), ch. 13, Pálna-Tóki founded Jómsborg, andAdam of Bremen says that Harald took refuge in Iumne (Wolin) when
expelled by his son. Sven may have invented the story of a foundation
by Harald, and was followed by Saxo. The evidence on the Jómsborg–
Wolin question is summarized in Jómsvíkinga saga (1962), vii–ix; onthe modern myth of the Jómsvikings see Abels, 162–4.
94. Tygheskeg (X), Tycheskeg (A), Tiugeskeg : Ágrip (c.1190) and later
Icelandic sources have tjúguskegg ; accurately explained in Abbot
William’s Genealogy as furcata barba (SM, i 178). The nickname is not
in CR or Saxo.
95. As in Abbot William’s Genealogy (SM, i 179), but not in Adam ofBremen or CR, where Harald dies a Christian and is buried in Roskilde,‘like a second David’ (SM, i 19). However, his ill repute, as a jealous
father, appears earlier, in EE, 9. These opposing views endured. Saxo
followed Sven but in AR (c.1300) the annalist wrote that Harald was‘blamelessly wounded and made a martyr’ (DMA, 255).
96. freto Grönæsund : supplied by Gertz from S, where A has a gap after
an initial ‘r’. Grønsund is the strait between Falster and Møn, where thefleet sometimes assembled for Valdemar I’s raids on the Slavs.
97. binomius extitet (X): i.e., he could be known by a double name(Paulus Festus gives Numa Pompilius and Tullus Hostilius as examples) or by alternative names (Astyages or Assuerus in Otto of
Freising, Chronicle, ii 1). In the sagas he is presented as Pálnir son of
Tóki but regularly called Pálna-Tóki; but see Kousgaard Sørensen,
104–5, who rejects the possibility of a patronymic. To the Icelanders
he was the founder of Jómsborg, the foster-father and ally of Sven
Forkbeard, and the slayer of Harald Bluetooth. To Saxo he was justToko, a retainer of Harald’s who was tested to the limits of endurance
by the king’s malice and deserted to Sven. He eventually killed Haraldwith an arrow, as Pálna-Tóki did in Jómsvíkinga saga. Saxo exonerated
him from the kidnapping of Sven Forkbeard; this was attributed to
Sigvaldi jarl in the saga, (1962) ch. 25; (1969) ch. 26. It is uncertain
how much of this story was invented by Sven. In Kn‡tlinga saga,ch. 40, Sven’s great-grandmother ﬁorgunna is described as the daughter

Notes on the Short History

123of a Vagn Ákason; in Jómsvíkinga saga Vagn is the son of PálnaTóki’s son, Áki. Thus, according to mid-thirteenth-century genealogical convention, Sven is here telling the tale of one of his ancestors.
However, he gives no sign that he was aware of the connexion. See
Appendix, p. 142.
98. in reclinario : a contracted form of reclinatorium (Song of Solomon
3: 10, where it seems to mean a head-rest). The entry in Ducange ismisleading: no one else uses the word, although according to Stephanius,
79, ‘the older lexicographers interpret it as ‘a place for lying down, ora store-room in a ship’. Thus ‘Kahytten’ (Fenger, 22), ‘Soverum’(HS, 58). The oarsmen, ordinatis per foros, ‘ranged on deck’, could
have been ‘on their rowing-benches’, as in the Gertz translation; but
Cicero, De Senectute, ch. 106, uses per foros for ‘deck’, and Isidore,
Etym., I, xix 2, gives ‘hollow sides’ for fori. Neckam, 166, gives fori
. . . per que remi exire possint.
99. subgrunda (X) is from S; it is not in A. It means the eaves of a houseor overhang of a roof in Varro, Vitruvius and the Digest, and in
medieval usage survived as subgrundium, subrunda, subundra(Ducange). Sven appears to use it for the top strake, thus ‘over Skibets
Ræling’ (HS, 58). The top edge would be reinforced with a bor›stokkr,
with a moulding inside or outside to support a row of shields. Thus
there would be a slight overhang, which might suggest the eaves of ahouse. If he was thinking of a decked ship, then the drainage or
scupper-holes in the upper strakes would make subgrunda more appropriate; cf. Fenger, 22, ‘Kahytslugen’ (‘cabin-hatch’). In Saxo King Svenputs back the ship’s awning and sticks his head out (GD, 278; EC, 16).
100. Cf. the speech Saxo attributed to the Rugian envoy Domborus (GD,
426–7; EC, 438–40), boasting of the prosperity of the Slavs at theexpense of the Danes. Capture for ransom was practised by both sides
well into Sven Aggesen’s lifetime. In the sagas Sven Forkbeard iscompelled to marry Gunnhildr, the daughter of their overlord, Búrizláfr,
king of the Wends; Búrizláfr himself marries ﬁyri, sister of King
Sveinn. This is an ingenious combination of two fairly certain facts:that at some period Sven Forkbeard was captured and ransomed, andthat he married a sister of Boleslaw Chrobry of Poland (Thietmar of
Merseburg, vii 36 and 28, viii 39). The combination was probably
made by Oddr Snorrason, the first biographer of Óláfr Tryggvason(c.1190). Here Sven elaborates one element of the story and avoids thespiritual interpretation of Sven Forkbeard’s tribulations found in Adamof Bremen and CR.

124

Sven Aggesen

101. According to Thietmar, Sven was twice captured by ‘Northmen’ andtwice ransomed ‘for an immense price’, and thereafter called a slave by
ill-wishers. Adam of Bremen calls his captors Slavs. Saxo improves
the ransom-story by speculating on the public benefit of Sven’s weightloss in captivity (GD, 278; EC, 18).
102. in Winningha : a not uncommon place-name; here either Vindinge,
west of Nyborg on Fyn, or, more likely, Neder-Vindinge near Vordingborg in southernmost Sjælland (the royal manor of ‘Wynning’ in KVJ,
i:2, 20). The name means ‘reclaimed land, assart’ (Houken, 140),
which makes it appropriate for this concession of woodlands.
103. sylvarum et nemorum . . . communia : common rights in woods
and groves are defined by Anders Sunesen (DGL, i:2, 636–8) and
Valdemar I’s charter for Glumsten wood in Halland (c.1177; DD, i:3,
no. 66). Saxo distinguishes between forest rights bought communallyin East Denmark and purchased by families in Jutland (GD, 277; EC, 16).
104. herciscundæ portione (S), heresundæ portione (A): in Roman law
the familiæ herciscundæ actio was a suit brought by co-heirs for thedivision of their inheritance (Institutes, iv, tit. xvii, div. 4, and tit. vi,
div. 20). All Danish codes accept the woman’s right to a share in
inheritance: ‘Sons and daughters shall receive men’s shares, but theprivilege of sex shall be observed, that the inheritance left to the sonshall always be twice as large as the daughter’s’ (Anders Sunesen’s
Scanian laws; DGL, i:2, 480).
105. Luke 6: 38. Note that Anders Sunesen saw this system as a maleprivilege, while Sven (and Saxo) account for it as a concession to
women, who had previously got nothing. See B. Sawyer 1985a, 49–50.
106. A longer list than in LC, p. 32 above. Sven adds five countries andsubstitutes Samia for Finland. Knut’s conquests are listed in Óttarr
svarti’s strophe, Svá skal kve›ja (Skj. i A 299, B 275), in EE, 34 (cf.
EE, lxii) and in book six of Henry of Huntingdon’s Historia Anglorum,
whose gessit eleganter foreshadows Sven’s eleganter subiugavit.
107. For the ‘calm of peace’ see p. 112, n. 46 above; the reference is to LC.
108. From AB, ii, chs. 65 and 74.
109. The tale is an imaginary exaggeration of Knut’s journey to Rome toattend the coronation of Conrad II in 1027, which is described byAdam of Bremen. Henry was not married to Gunnhild until 1036, after
Knut’s death, and was never driven from Rome; nor was Conrad,
though he subjugated North Italy in 1026 and the South in 1027. Svenis merely completing a trio of humiliations for the Germans, after Uffi
and Thyrwi. See Damsholt 1985, 160.

Notes on the Short History

125

110. The relics of St Martin helped to repel the Danes from Tours in
841 and 903; they were removed, to escape the Vikings, in 853–4
and 865–77(?); see Gasnault. However, the body was never taken to
Rouen, and Knut had no known connexion with Tours. The end of
Sven’s sentence, eo quod illam præ ceteris specialiter diligebat, has
usually been interpreted as meaning that Knut translated St Martin’s
relics to Rouen ‘because he loved that city more than others’. Thus

Gertz inserted the word civitatem into X although it occurs in neither
A nor S and makes no historical sense in the context. Rouen was aplace of transit on Knut’s military expeditions, not a beloved residence,and there is no evidence of any Martin relics there in Sven’s time or
Knut’s. On the other hand, such relics existed at Lund when Archbishop Asser dedicated the altar crypt in 1126 (DD, i:2, no. 48); they
may have arrived via Hildesheim, since Bishop Bernward there wasgiven relics of Martin at Tours on a journey to France in 1006 (Thangmar,
Vita Bernwardi, MGH, Script., iv 776). Thus illam must refer not to thecity of Rouen but to Gunnhild, the wife-to-be of Emperor Henry, on
whose behalf Knut’s expedition to Rome and back was conducted.
Knut ‘carried away’—asportavit, not apportavit—the relics to the nearest port for England and the North, which was Rouen. This may be
nonsense, but it is not quite as nonsensical as the supposed endowmentof Rouen, which Saxo, never to be outdone in marvels, made the siteof Knut’s tomb (GD, 299; EC, 44). Sven may have known that Martin
had twice driven Danes away from Tours and that his relics were twice
removed to escape them. CR had noted Knut’s historical connexions
with Normandy (SM, i 20–1).
111. An unlucky gloss, to rectify the explanation of the name in LC: quiet austerus siue durus est cognominatus (p. 64 above). Harthaknut justmeans ‘tough-knot’. The conceit that he was born in Harsyssel,
N. Jutland, is also found in Flat., i 98, but the Ho≈r›aknútr there is King
Gorm’s father, the supposed son of Sigur›r ormr-í-auga. Harthaknut,
Knut’s son by Emma, must have been born in England. See EE, 97.
112. The words in parenthesis, missing in A, were supplied by Gertz
from S. Sven’s fondness for measuring time in lustra may reflect his
reading of Ovid, who used the word fifteen times in his works to meana period of five years. The inaccuracy of Sven’s regnal chronology was
no greater than that of other Danish writers of the period: see the kinglists in SM, i 157, 159. All they had to go on were Adam of Bremen’serratic dates: he claimed that Knut waged war in England for three
years and then ruled for twenty-two (AB, ii, chs. 53 and 73), which

126

Sven Aggesen

make five lustra if added together. Adam also said that Knut put threesons in charge of three kingdoms under his rule (AB, ii, ch. 66), butlater made it clear that the sons survived their father (AB, ii, ch. 74).
It seems that Sven was using a drastic abridgment of Adam’s work, or
perhaps the Lund king-list, which has only one Kanutus harthe, rulingfrom 1015 (NL, 45).
113. Psalm 143: 12; the commonest cliché of mission history. Adam
also introduces his account of Knut’s bishops by saying that hereturned to Denmark (which he did, in 1019 and 1022), to secure thecountry after the death not of his son but of his brother, Harald, as
in AR (DMA, 161).
114. ‘Their sound has gone out . . .’ is from Psalm 18: 5. These bishops
are mentioned by Adam (AB, ii, chs. 55 and 71) but are not in CR (butcf. SM, i 21, n.). Gerbrand was appointed in the early 1020s, Rudolf
in 1026 (not after 1035 as in AB). Sven is more accurate here but heomits Bishop Bernard of Scania and Bishop Reginbert of Fyn.
115. Ulf . . . Sprakeleg : Saxo and the sagas agree in giving this nickname
to Thrugils/ﬁorgils, Ulf’s father (GD, 288; EC, 30; Kn‡tlinga saga,ch. 5). Ulf is usually called ‘jarl’, and according to CR and the sagas
Knut had him killed in Roskilde church (SM, i 21).
116. An exaggeration of Sven II’s own exaggeration of his youthfulimportance in his conversations with Adam of Bremen. Events are
telescoped by the erasure of Harthaknut’s reign, 1035–42, which isalso omitted in the Lund list and the Catalogus Regum Danie (SM, i
157, 159). For ‘peace and quiet’ see p. 112, n. 46 above.
117. AB, ii, ch. 77, and CR (SM, i 20) both mention the concubine, theÁlfhildr of the St Olaf sagas, who according to William of Malmesbury
later became a much respected anchoress in England. All sources otherthan Sven agree that Magnús became king of Denmark in 1041 or 1042
and was confronted by a rebellious Sven the following year. Sven
Aggesen cannot accept the legitimacy of Magnús’s rule as an elected
foreigner with no hereditary title. Saxo can (GD, 301; EC, 48).
118. A compression of events from 1042 to 1046/7 which are copiously
and variously recounted by Theodricus and in Ágrip, Morkinskinna,
Fagrskinna, Heimskringla and Kn‡tlinga saga, mainly on the basis of
ambiguous verses by Arnórr Jarlaskáld, ﬁjó›ólfr Arnórsson and ﬁorleikr
fagri. At some point, Magnús won a day-long battle at Helgenæs.
Sven’s note that he won West Denmark and Slavia thereby suggests:(i) that he knew of Magnús’s victory over the Wends at Lürschau/
Lyrskov and placed it before Helgenæs, unlike Theodricus and Ágrip;

Notes on the Short History127(ii) that he wished his readers to believe that his rival Sven kept controlof East Denmark until 1046/7.
119. subvectoris sternacis (A): cf. Æneid, xii 364, equus sternax, and LC,
p. 35 above, where subvectus is used for ‘carried on horseback’ (SM,i 72). According to Saxo, Magnús’s horse was scared by a hare and ran
him into a tree at Alsted (GD, 303; EC, 51). According to Adam ofBremen, he ‘died in his ships’, while the sagas say he died on land in
Jutland.
120. Sven’s lust and offspring are mentioned by Ælnoth (VSD, 89); heis called pater regum only in Sven’s work.
121. Absalone referente, contubernalis meus Saxo . . . omnium gesta
executurus prolixius insudabat : ambiguous. It could mean that ‘Saxo
was . . . using . . . Absalon as his source,’ but I prefer to follow Gertz(HS, 66), with prolixius rendered ‘for a long time’, as by Friis-Jensen,
334 n. On contubernalis see Weibull 1918, 187ff., Christensen in SS,
132–3, 140–2, and pp. 2–3 above.
122. A constitutional theory supported by Saxo (GD, 67, 350, 359;
PF, 73; EC, 106, 134) but not by others. Other royal inaugurations,
down to 1182, took place at Viborg, or at consecutive provincial
assemblies. Saxo may have persuaded Sven of Isøre’s prior claim(cf. Hoffmann 1976, 45–60, and Hude, 15), misled by Ælnoth’s words(VSD, 90) on Harald’s ‘election by the whole people’ in that place, on
the spit west of the Isefjord inlet in N. Sjælland. Sven says the election
was omni(um) convenientia, but whether he used the noun in Cicero’s
sense of ‘harmony, agreement’ or in the later sense of ‘pact, contract’is not clear. However, he uses it later to mean ‘assent’ (SM, ii, Index i),
and S has assentientibus omnium civium suffragiis. For ut ipsa omnium convenientia in X, I read A’s utpote omnium convenientia.
123. intronizatur (X), successit in regno (S): absent in A. Latin Cos
represents ODan. Hen, ON heinn, ‘whetstone’. Kn‡tlinga saga, ch. 23,
offers a witty gloss to explain the usage, but cf. De Profectione
Danorum, ch. 6, where Aki the Crusader is praised because he ‘neverceased to play the whetstone by sharpening up all the men he could’(SM, ii 469).
124. leges Danis tribuit : from Ælnoth (VSD, 90–1) and CR (SM, i 23)
where he is praised highly; but Saxo condemned him as too indulgent. See J. Olrik 1899–1900, Hude, 15–16, Breengaard, 64–5, andWeibull 1986, 24.
125. The Odense view of Knut’s sanctity was expressed in the Passio ofc.1095 and in Ælnoth’s work (VSD, 62–136). CR records that ‘by a128

Sven Aggesen

new and unheard-of law he compelled the people to pay a tribute which
our people called the poll-tax’ (SM, i 24); however, this writer recognized the king as a martyr (Breengaard, 53–5, 65), and Sven’s remarks
are probably directed at popular opinion rather than at this text inparticular. The cult flourished alongside a strong tradition of disapproval of the martyr’s tyrannous rule. In 1186 Knut VI announced his
personal veneration in confirming Knut IV’s Lund privilege (DD, i:3,
no. 134).
126. Knut’s ‘plenitude of power’ is not an allusion to the canonists’plenitudo potestatis (Decretum, pt 2, causa iii, quaest. vi, c. viii), which
defines the pope’s power over the church, but a more general usage;
see Post. Ælnoth wrote of the Danish fleet waiting for the king at theoccidentalis portus (VSD, 99), and Sven’s Humlum (in Humla S) is avillage south of Oddesund, fifteen miles from the western outflow of
the Limfjord, then open. AR, a Jutland source, puts the muster at
Fiskbæk, near Viborg (DMA, 162). maris continuum in A is better thanmaris contiguum in X (S has no adj.), ‘connecting with the sea’ rather
than ‘next’ to it (Weibull 1918, 192).
127. The Passio and Ælnoth (VSD, 67, 100) located the conspiracy in the
fleet, not at Schleswig. The king’s brother Olaf was sent to voice thetroops’ discontent at the king’s delay, arrested at Schleswig andsent to Flanders. Saxo and Kn‡tlinga saga elaborate. Then, according to Ælnoth, the fleet disbanded with the king’s permission. Svenmay have followed an independent tradition or he may simply havemisread his sources.
128. recumpensatione : see p. 92 above, n. 43. It refers to the lethangwite,
reserved as a royal privilege in Knut’s 1085 charter to Lund: ‘If he shallhave neglected the “leding” (expeditio), he shall make amends to theking’ (DD, i:2, no. 21). Nevertheless, large-scale derelictions of duty
occurred under Valdemar I, and the young Knut VI condoned one
mutiny just before his accession in 1182 (GD, 535; EC, 598).
129. Interpreted by Gertz, HS, 69–70, as a reference by the king to a
maxim against excessive rigour ‘which might be found in Roman law’.
There was a proverb, ‘It is not always worth enforcing the law withrigour . . .’ (Walther, no. 18182), which elaborated Proverbs 30: 33,‘the forcing of wrath bringeth forth strife.’
130. Forty-mark fines for the gravest offences were exacted in Sven’s
own day, and three marks was the conventional payment in lieu ofoarsman’s service in the thirteenth century (DGL, iv 104). Ælnoth says
nothing of the fine and blames the discontent on royal officials who

Notes on the Short History

129

tried to increase the weight of the stater and to ‘pervert judgements’ atlaw (VSD, 102). Sven may have invented this story, but he wasfollowed by Saxo. Again, I have followed A and S, regis rigor, rather
than Gertz, legis rigor ; cf. Weibull 1918, 186.
131. According to Ælnoth, Knut was on a customary visit to collect hisdues (VSD, 104); Sven seems to confuse census and exactio.
132. in Vandalis : Ælnoth says at Børglum, in Vendel ‘which means
turning’. The Wiener Neustadt Vita of St Knut, composed about 1220,
adds that he went ‘over the river which is called Limfjord, to the islandof Vendel. For it was then an island containing two provinces, that is
Thiutha and Wendela [Thy- and Vendsyssel]; today it is called apromontory rather than an island’ (VSD, 546). In the next sentence
prerogativam . . . remanendi is an ironical reference to the right ofpaying kuærsæta instead of doing military service, conceded in somecharters from 1146–57 (Skyum-Nielsen, 159).
133. Matthew 10: 23; from Ælnoth, who applies the text to Knut’s retreat
from Børglum to Aggersborg (VSD, 105).
134. Ælnoth addressed the Devil at this point as ‘the most ancientseducer’ (VSD, 112), but Sven liked ‘prevaricator’ enough to repeat it
at the end of his work. For Judas as ‘prevaricator’ see CBP, 1190.
135. plebs prophana principi letum: but Ælnoth suggests that nobles andcommoners combined against the king (VSD, 103). The ‘whisperingrumour’ of the next sentence recalls Ovid, Heroides, xxi 233.
136. For the proverb see Walther, no. 8819.
137. plebicule rabies furiosa : a rage described at length by Ælnoth(VSD, 105–6).
138. Medium Transitum: literally Middelfart, but the Passio and Ælnoth
say he sailed from Schleswig; perhaps through rather than over the Belt
to enter Odense by the fjord to the north.
139. For a recent evaluation of the lives and cult of St Knut see KnudsBogen, especially the articles by Breengaard and Meulengracht
Sørensen, with bibliography; also Hoffmann 1975, 101–39.
140. Olavus . . . Famelicum: the by-name is Hunger in AR (DMA, 163),
Fames in Vetus Chronica Sialandie (SM, ii 23), both from c.1250. Svencorrects CR, which claimed a nine-year famine (SM, i 24). Ælnoth
claimed there was hunger, disease and invasion for eight years and ninemonths until Knut’s remains were elevated (VSD, 129–30). Others
blamed the famine on Olaf’s failure to ransom his brother Nicolaus,
who had taken his place in Flemish custody (Ralph Niger, 86). Kn‡tlinga
saga, chs. 64–9, tells of Sven Aggesen’s ancestors, the sons of ﬁorgunna,

130

Sven Aggesen

undergoing this imprisonment and of their miraculous liberation partly
through St Knut’s intervention.
141. Spelt Henricus in A, Ericus in S; in CR he is Hericus Bonus. The
Ringsted Office (VSD, 189) and other sources give him the surname
Egoth, ‘Ever-good’ (cf. Tilnavne, s.n.). He was commemorated as abenefactor at Lund on 10 July, chiefly for having obtained the pallium
for this see from Paschal II (Weeke, 173).
142. crucem baiulando : Luke 14: 27. Erik’s ‘holy design’ of a pilgrimage
to Jerusalem was recorded in Robert of Ely’s lost Vita of Knut Lavard,
Erik’s son, composed 1135/7, and it was celebrated 30 years before
that in Markús Skeggjason’s Eiríksdrápa (st. 28–31; Skj. i A 450–1,
B 419–20). Ralph Niger, 86, styled him ‘confessor’. In the next sentence‘from the prison of this life’ represents Gertz’s final amendment, vite
ex ergastulo (SM i, 180) of vitæ segastulo in A; he had earlier preferredvite segregatus lute. S has none of that and states that Erik died on his
way back from the Holy Land, presumably misled by Abbot William’s
Genealogy (SM, i 180). The earlier sources make it clear that he died
and was buried at Paphos in Cyprus before he reached Jerusalem.
143. licet variis hymenei successibus : so S and X; A reads narus forvariis. Variously rendered: ‘a high-born posterity of sons, who were
the fruit of a series of different alliances’ (Olrik, KV, 70); ‘a noblyborn brood of sons, although his marital unions were conducted withchangeable fortune’ (Gertz, HS, 73); ‘with various offspring by mating’ (Riis, 206). The reference must be to the bastards mentioned in CR(SM, i 25) and later by Saxo, born to different mistresses, rather than
to the variable character of the offspring.
144. The words in brackets are not in A but introduced by Gertz from S.
Biorn is singled out from his brothers, no doubt because he fought
alongside Sven’s grandfather at Sønder Onsild in 1132; see pp. 69–70
above.
145. In fact, just over six lustra, 1103–34; see pp. 125–6, n. 112. No othersource names him grandevus ; for ‘old’ Knut Sven uses vetus.
146. Samuel 1: 2 and 10: 23. For opposing interpretations of this period
see Paludan, and Breengaard, 183–205. Sven stresses Nicolaus’s legitimate marriage as a contrast with the union that produced his daughter(pace Riis, 216–17).
147. Alias Knut Lavard, ‘the Lord’; commemorated as a martyr by papal
canonization from 1170, and the subject of a Vita et Passio, now lost,
written by Robert of Ely 1135/7. Sven draws his account from the later

Notes on the Short History131

work, c.1170, represented by the lections of the Ringsted Ofice; see
VSD, 189–204, and 175 for borrowings noted by Gertz.
148. Knut bought the crown of the Abotrites from King Lothair andsubjugated the Slavs with German assistance; see Helmold, i, ch. 49.
Both strenuitas and prudentia were involved, but Nam quæ jurestrenuitatis prudentia in A is corrupt, and singulari fortitudine in S mustbe paraphrase. Gertz gives Nam et mire strenuitatis prevalentia, butmire strenuitatis prudentia, if clumsy, involves less alteration. Saxo
invented a ‘bequest’ of Slavia to Knut by the last Slav ruler (GD, 347;
EC, 116–17).
149. cuius virtutibus [M. eclipsatus] languescere cepit invidia, que caput
assolet [in prosperis] alterius [rebus dimittere] : this may be anotherproverb, or a maxim distilled from Horace, Epistles, i 2, 58: ‘The
envious man grows lean because his neighbour thrives’; cf. Stephen ofTournai: ‘Some men burn at the successes of other men’ (Ep., 164;
Lettres, 191). However, all the words in brackets were invented byGertz. S merely reads, Sed conspicuis ejus virtutibus incitata, effervescere coepit invidia. The following ‘with timorous ambition’ is good,
but not Sven’s own: this is nearly all Gertzian fantasy.
150. regno momentaneo : the use of momentaneus, to distinguish
this world from the next, is a common post-Carolingian habit; see
NGML, s.v.
151. Lucan, Pharsalia, i 92–3; also cited twice by Theodricus (MHN, 10, 25).
152. Statius, Thebaid, i 154–5. Theodricus (MHN, 9) cites Thebaid,i 151, but attributes the line to Lucan.
153. Skatelar : explained in Tilnavne as ‘magpie-thigh’; in Kn‡tlinga
saga, ch. 92, he is called Heinrekr halti. The saga also notes there that‘it is the saying of most people’ that he struck the death-blow. He was
the son of Sven, an elder brother of King Nicolaus, and so a cousin of
Knut Lavard. At this point A is defective and S somewhat abridged,
with the names of two other conspirators, Ubbi and Hakon, probably
added from Saxo. Sven’s source is still the Passio known in the
Ringsted Office.
154. Added by Gertz from S.
155. in silva penes Haraldstathæ : four miles north of Ringsted, in the
middle of Sjælland; from Sven’s source, see VSD, 197.
156. Christi athleta : Ælnoth applied this designation of martyrs, common
at least from Cassian and Ambrose onwards (Blaise, 230), to Knut IV andhis henchmen, but the surviving hagiography does not use it of Knut
Lavard.

132

Sven Aggesen

157. Matthew 7: 15; the hoods and cloaks are from Sven’s source, the text
known from the Ringsted Office, but there it is Magnus who holds
Knut by the caputium of his cappa (VSD, 199).
158. John 1: 47.
159. The soul ‘imprisoned in the flesh’ was identified by Gertz as a loan
from the versicles and responses of the Ringsted Office (VSD, 224).
On Knut’s burial and miracles see the lections from that Office, Alexander III’s letter of canonization, and the list in the miracula (VSD,
200–2, 246, 242–5). The cult was renewed in 1186 by a joint donation
to the Ringsted houses (DD, 1:3, no. 135).
160. domini instigatus digito : Exodus 8: 19, Digitus Dei est hic, andAugustine, ‘The Holy Spirit is called the finger of God’ (Sermon
156, 14; PL 38, 857). In his 1135 Lund charter Erik II ascribed his
victory in the civil war to God’s protection (DD, i:2, no. 65); but CRsays that the ‘sedition’ against Nicolaus and Magnus was merely apretext for usurpation (SM, i 27), and that God brought about Erik’s
fall, not his rise (SM, i 31).
161. Primo in Rinebiergh preliantes : what Gertz, 186, calls the ‘nominative absolute’ construction. The battle of 1132 at Rønbjerg, four miles
SW of Skive in Jutland, was not the first between them; there had been
an earlier clash at Jelling in 1131(?): see e.g. DMA, 17, 56, and GD,
359 (EC, 135). Erik’s first assault on Jutland was there repulsed by
King Nicolaus and the bishop of Ribe; evidently Sven’s family was not
involved.
162. Othenshylle : in N. Jutland, where Erik’s troops were retreating over
the Skals river to re-embark for Scania. Note that CR describes thesetroops as ‘a collection of all the oathbreakers and villains’ (SM, i 27).

Saxo mentioned this battle without alluding to the heroic rearguard
action of Aggi and Biorn: ‘And several of his [Erik’s] troops who wereembarking too slowly were slaughtered by the oncoming army of theking’ (GD, 361; EC, 136). The Danish annals ignore the episode.
163. columpnæ . . . immobiles : an ecclesiastical metaphor, used of
St Paul by Clement (inspired by Galatians 2: 9, and 1 Timothy 3: 15),
immobilis columna disciplinæ, but more widely later. Geoffrey of
Monmouth used ‘column’ of Robert of Gloucester, Waleran of Meulan
and King Stephen in his second and third dedications of the British
History, and Stephen of Tournai so described Absalon’s kinsman,Peter (c.1188; DD, i:3, no. 53). Saxo called Absalon ‘column of thefatherland’ and Starkather ‘column of battle’ (GD, 409, 214; EC, 408;
PF, 238).

Notes on the Short History

133

164. Sven leaves out those battles which did not concern his family andfriends: the sea-fight off Sejerø in 1132, Nicolaus’s reconquest ofSjælland in 1133, and the fights at Værebro and Roskilde described in
CR and Saxo.
165. Lundoniarumque in loco A: the bay on the SW tip of Scania formedby the Skanör peninsula. Weibull 1918, 185–6, dismissed the reading
and argued for nundiniarum, ‘of the markets’, because Skanör did notbelong to Lund. The battle was fought on 4 June 1134, and Sven’s
account can be supplemented by others in CR, Saxo, Helmold andsome German annals. It is remarkable that he makes no allusion to thepart played in these events by his great-uncle Archbishop Asser, theonly prelate to support Erik at this point (so CR; SM, i 28–9).
166. plebs . . . pollens probitate : Erik had been proclaimed king in Scania
on 11 April 1131, but the Scanians rejected him after he lost Sjællandin 1133, and only ‘repented’ when he escaped from captivity in Norway in the spring of 1134 (SM, i 27–8); this apparent inconstancy
underlies Sven’s assertion of Scanian ‘probity’. Neither he nor Saxo

reveals that Erik was also reinforced by a squadron of 300 German
knights, who caught the enemy unprepared while they were disembarking (Erfurt Annals and Annalista Saxo, MGH, Script. vi 539, 768).
Nevertheless, according to Saxo, Fotavik was a byword for Scanianprowess in the 1180s (GD, 528; EC, 588).
167. ad tartara trucidantes transmiserunt : cf. Knut VI’s immunity-grantto the bishop of Schleswig, 20 Nov. 1187, rudentibus inferni detractos
in tartarum tradidit (DD, i:3, no. 143). Sven conveys the triumph of the
Scanians, CR the deep dismay of the non-Scanian clergy; see
Breengaard, 35–9, on the commemoration of the battle ad villam
hamar in the Lund Memoriale Fratrum and Liber Daticus. Sven’s two
bishops are presumably those of Roskilde and Vestervig commemorated at Lund (NL, 140–1; Breengaard, 222–3), but CR records several
more: the bishops of Ribe, Aarhus and Sigtuna, and the bishop of
Schleswig who died of wounds later (SM, i 29).
168. perfide trucidabant : cf. CR, infideliter interfectus est ; on 25 June
1134, according to NL; with all his retinue, according to Saxo; Erik II
rewarded the citizens for the deed, according to CR (SM, i 30).
169. Henricus iugi commemoratus memoria A, Ericus, æterna dignus
memoria S: Emun(i) in AR and Annales Lundenses (DMA, 164 and57). According to CR, Erik was ‘always a profligate man, full of rage
and deceit’, and the text of Knut Lavard’s Passio in the Ringsted Officedescribed him ‘slaughtering and sparing no one in avenging his brother134

Sven Aggesenwith lion-like ferocity’ (VSD, 202). In Icelandic sources his nickname
is eymuni or eimuni, explained in Kn‡tlinga saga, ch. 99: ‘And because
many thought they would long have cause to remember his cruelty, he
was called Eiríkr the ever-memorable.’ Sven and Saxo are more sympathetic, but only Saxo defends his reputation after his triumph in
1134. For a comparison of the sources see Breengaard, 224–36.
170. intempestæ noctis silentio : this was a cliché even in the eighthcentury Corpus glossary; cf. e.g. Martianus Capella, i 37, and Orosius,
3, 2, 5.
171. Haraldum kesiæ in curia sua seuiens A, Haraldum Kæsiæ in curia
sua Jaling S: Gertz changed seuiens to Scibiensi, because CR called theplace ‘Scipying’ (SM, i 30); Saxo has ‘Scypethorp’. Gertz took it to be
Skiby manor, close to Aarhus in NE Jutland, which later in the century
was held by King Nicolaus’s great-grandson, St Nicolaus (VSD, 399;
Gertz, 137). St Nicolaus was not however a direct descendant of Harald
Kesia (the by-name means some kind of spear or halberd; it occurs
more often in Icelandic than in Danish sources) or of Erik Emune, andit seems that CR’s ‘Skipying’ was probably Skibing in Dover, west of
Kolding; see Orluf.
172. stratu suscitatus . . . sinistri suspicatus : alliteration heightens thegrimness; cf. nihil sinistri suspicatum, of St Ethelbert of East Anglia,
in the St Albans Vitæ duorum Offarum (Chambers, 241). Catholicianicorripientes caput : these ‘fiscal officers’ of the Theodosian Code,
Justinian’s Codex (9, 49, 9, 3), and the Basilics, seem to be needed forthe sake of alliteration rather than of precision; but the word recurs (seen. 183 below), and must mean ‘henchmen’ here. Cf. LMP, ii 251, forlater Polish usage.
173. According to CR, Biorn and his brother, Henry the Deacon, weredrowned before, not after, the death of their father (SM, i 31). Saxo
gives details and blames Sven’s grandfather Kristiarn for egging on the
king to murder for raisons d’état (GD, 367; EC, 350).
174. According to CR, eight of Harald’s other sons were killed and buried
in a pit; Olaf escaped to Sweden; the Scanians are blamed for themurder. Saxo relates that these other sons were captured with theirfather in January 1135, and CR tells how they were held in irons in
Scania until their deaths in August.
175. haut patrisando A: patrisso (Plautus, Pseuodolus, i 5, 27), ‘to takeafter the father’; thus, unlike Erik I and Sven II, great propagators ofsons. In the St Albans Vitæ Warmundus says of Offa, non degener est
fili me genealis, sed patrissans (Chambers, 224).

Notes on the Short History

135

176. regulosque pullulantes prorsus extirpasset : not quite, since Olaf thesurvivor had escaped in women’s clothes (Saxo) or disguised as abeggar or pilgrim (CR) and was to rule in Scania c.1138–41.
177. 2 Thessalonians 2: 8.
178. CR also recognized the hand of God in Erik’s assassination, andplaced the event near Ribe. The Urne-thing (in vrnensi placito A) was
the plenary assembly of the South Jutlanders, held on the eastern sideof the peninsula, off the Hærvej near Aabenraa; the date was 18 Sept.
1137 (NL). The ‘circle of warriors’, militari corona stipatum, recalls
Statius, virum stipante corona (Thebaid, i 612), and Walter of Châtillon,
iuvenum stipante corona (Alexandreis, iii 128). Transverberavit, theword for Plog’s deadly thrust, is, if biblical, from Judith 5: 28. Sven
ignores Erik II’s expeditions to Norway and Rügen, which Saxo noted
to the king’s credit.
179. He died at Odense on 27 August 1146 (NL, 215). This Erik was theson of Knut Lavard’s sister, Ragnhild. He was criticized by the authorof CR as undignified and two-faced, apparently because he imposed
Bishop Riko on the Roskilde chapter uncanonically. Sven presents thefavourable view of all other sources except Saxo: they call him the‘Lamb’ or the ‘Pacific’ (Spak(e), Icelandic (hinn) spaki ). His hardfought civil war with Olaf, Harald Kesia’s son, is ignored, although
Sven’s uncle, Archbishop Eskil, was much involved in it (cf. GD,
371–5; EC, 356–61).
180. Two sentences summarize the events of 1146–57, which Saxo
treats in detail (GD, 375–412; EC, 362–416). Sven’s predecessors (thelections of the Ringsted Office, Helmold) either ignore the election of
Knut V or, in the case of the source followed by Ralph Niger, insist that
he was ‘elected by the whole community at Viborg, where it is thecustom for kings to be chosen.’ Sven ignores the rivals’ parity, andavoids saying that it was Sven III who invested Valdemar with theSchleswig duchy in 1148/9. The word feodo in patris feodo is lacking
in A and Gertz took it from S. If it stood in the original manuscript, it
is its first recorded use in a Danish source. Saxo prefers præfectum andbeneficium for the honour. Valdemar appears to have supported Sven III
until 1152, and then inclined to Knut. Here Valdemar is described as
sacro cruore oriundus, perhaps from Passio Petri et Pauli, 262, 280(LHL, i 509), and the stress is on his independence rather than his
cunning. According to Ralph Niger, 89, Knut raised Valdemar to thekingship.

136

Sven Aggesen

181. 25/6 July 1157 in Ralph Niger, 89. Saxo reports that Sven III got
Scania, after Valdemar had awarded himself Jutland; Knut was left
with the islands, including Sjælland; Kn‡tlinga saga agrees.
182. 8 August 1157. Saxo has a detailed narrative of this episode in GD,
402–8 (EC, 402–10), but he insists that Knut was the host; so does thesource used by Ralph Niger (89). The discrepancy with Sven’s apud
Suenonem is seen as highly significant by R. Malmros, who argues that
Sven was using an ‘unofficial’ account of the murder, which predated
the attribution of host-betrayal, as well as other infamies, to Sven III;see Malmros 1979 for a full discussion of the sources and their implications. I am not convinced by the argument. Sven Aggesen may justhave deduced that Sven III was the host from a careless reading of
hospitem suum (so in Ralph Niger) as ‘his guest’ rather than ‘his
host’—although admittedly this would mean that he ignored the preceding passage. Or he may have used apud to mean ‘in the presenceof’. Saxo says they let Sven as the oldest preside at the feast.
183. catholiciani : see p. 134, n. 172, above.
184. extinctis vero luminaribus : suggests luminaria in the ecclesiasticalsense of ‘lights, candles’ rather than the classical ‘windows, shutters’;
but cf. Saxo, fenestras reserantibus (GD, 405; EC, 406). They would
hardly have tried to kill their victims in pitch darkness. Saxo says they
opened the shutters to be sure of finishing off their work.
185. martyrio coronantes interemerunt : the same phrase was used earlier
for the martyrdom of St Knut of Odense; and Kn‡tlinga saga, ch. 114,
says, ‘The Danes declare him [sc. Knut V] to be a saint.’ There is noevidence of a formal cult or of requests for papal canonization. Ralph
Niger refers to him as christianissimus rex.
186. stricto mucrone confodere molirentur X: echoes Valdemar I’s
foundation charter for Vitskøl abbey (1157–8; DD, i:2, no. 120),
eductis gladiis confodere conati sunt. The following coxa is Late Latin‘thigh’ rather than the classical ‘hip’; cf. Saxo, femur quam gravissime
sauciatus est.
187. divina elapsum conservavit gratia : again the view expressed in the
Vitskøl charter.
188. secus Gratham: a large heath sixteen miles south of Viborg,
Grathæheth in the Ringsted lections in translacione S. Kanuti (VSD,203), where the battle was fought on 23 Oct. 1157.
189. More lustra (cf. p. 125, n. 112, p. 130, n. 145, above), and anotherinaccurate dating. Valdemar ruled for only 25 years after 1157, although
he had been styled king since 1155. The calculation may however beNotes on the Short History

137

based on a misdated accession, as in the earliest Lund annals,
s.a. 1155 (DMA, 18).
190. persecurizavit X, prosiciscatur A, pacificavit S: one of Gertz’s lessconvincing emendations; persecurizo is a very rare bird, which occurs
in a fifteenth-century note on a manuscript of Annalista Saxo (MGH,
Script., vi 550). Even if the word had been abbreviated as Gertz
suggests, it could hardly have been misread to give the A or S reading.
As early as 1170 the in translacione lections of the Ringsted Officeincluded a brief eulogy of Valdemar’s rule (VSD, 203); this may haveinspired Sven here.
191. Henry of Huntingdon (1153–4), followed by Robert of Torigny,
attributed three great achievements to ‘old’ Knut of England andDenmark. Sven may have known of this. He may also have wished to
improve on the passage in the source used by Ralph Niger which
attributed two achievements to Valdemar: the conquest and baptism of
the Rugians, and the building of a castle ‘in the exit of Denmark’ so as
to block the way in (Ralph Niger, 89–90; see Anne K. G. Kristensen
1968–9, 432, for refs.).
192. Psalm 2: 9 and Ezekiel 20: 33, but the immediate source was
Alexander III’s bull of 1169(?) putting the newly conquered Rugians
under the see of Roskilde (DD, i:2, no. 189).
193. Possibly a reference to Alexandreis, ii 351, where the Persianmonarch boasts of the ‘fired brick’ and the ‘tower constructed with
bitumen’ at Babylon. Sprogø is halfway over the Great Belt on the
crossing from Nyborg to Taarnborg (where Valdemar also built). The
fort on Sprogø has been replaced by a lighthouse.
194. On the Danevirke see p. 120, n. 78, above. Between 1163 and 1182
Valdemar and Absalon fortified about 4 km from Kurburg to theDannewerk See with a brick wall 22 feet high and 6–8 feet thick; see
Neergaard. These achievements are recorded in similar style, but withthe mention of Sprogø and the Danevirke reversed, on the lead plate
which was discovered in Valdemar’s grave at Ringsted in 1855. The
inscription appears to have been added, perhaps in 1241 or 1250, by areader of Sven’s work (SM, ii 77–9, 87–8). For a comparison with the
X and S texts see Christensen, 28–30.
195. The eulogy repeats the facetus and omni urbanitate already used todescribe Queen Thyrwi. A omits a word after plus iusto, and S supplies
crudelior, which Gertz, 149–50, found difficult to accept, with goodreason. A passage in Ralph Niger refers to Valdemar as crudelis etfortis, and if Sven knew such a judgment, he may have wished to tone

138

Sven Aggesen

it down. However, ‘just cruelty’ is not a quality he commends in otherrulers; ‘more severe’ or even ‘more indulgent towards his own’ would
make better sense. The contrast between cruelty and justice usuallyneeds greater emphasis, as in Geoffrey of Monmouth, 294, on King
Morvidus: Hic nimia probitate famosissimus esset, nisi plus nimie
crudelitate indulsisset. Valdemar certainly imprisoned his cousin Buris
in 1167, and was later said to have blinded and castrated him, but headopted an illegitimate cousin, the orphan Valdemar, son of Knut, ‘asif he were his own son’ (letter of 1205; BD, no. 41).
196. Sophia, half-sister of Knut V, daughter of Prince Volodar of Minsk
and Richiza of Poland, married Valdemar in 1157 at the age of
sixteen(?), and in 1184 made a second marriage with Landgrave
Lewis III of Thuringia, who repudiated her in 1187. She died in 1198
and is buried in Ringsted church. Canuti regis Roschildensis is a titlealigning Knut V with the other martyrs, St Knut of Odense and St Knut
Lavard of Ringsted; see p. 136, n. 185, above, and Anne K. G. Kristensen
1968–9, 44.
197. syncoparet : a grecism which in twelfth-century usage meant ‘voicing
only part of a word’; see Ducange (who cites St Bernard, Sermon40), also Architrenius, i 484, and Alan of Lille’s De Planctu Naturæ
(PL 210, 454), locutionis syncopatæ, a humorous repetition of theword. Gertz supplies ‘the skill of the ancients’ to fill a gap in A, but S
may be better: ‘for to describe her would defeat the eloquence of
Cicero, would dry up the fluency of Ovid, and tire the ingenuity ofVergil’ (cf. Weibull 1918, 187 n.); a usage much favoured by Alan
(PL 210, 464, 468, 479–80).
198. mendicata suffragia : as in Alan of Lille, mendicata mei tandem
suffragia dentur (AC, ii 18), and in De Planctu Naturæ (PL 210, 470);formæ preconia : as in Ovid, Amores, iii 12, 9. Behind this courtly
praise there is a hint of AC, ii 325–62, where Nature enlists the aid ofSophya, or Fronesis, to form the soul of the New Man: a passage inwhich Cicero’s eloquence and the poetry of Ovid and Vergil are also
extolled. Sven’s eulogy may be compared to the elegant skull of Queen
Sophia photographed and described in F. C. C. Hansen, 50. Her image
appeared with Valdemar’s on some coins.
199. The claim is not as far-fetched as it sounds. Valdemar became increasingly formidable after 1170. In that year Erlingr skakki, the effective
ruler of Norway, became his vassal (GD, 480–1; EC, 517–18), and by
1171 Count Bernard of Ratzeburg was his homager for a fief in Jutland(GD, 496; EC, 540). In 1177 the chief men of Sweden attended his

Notes on the Short History

139

son’s wedding, and his own father-in-law, Volodar of Minsk, sent
him a ship laden with gifts (GD, 512, 517; EC, 564, 572). In 1180 DukeHenry the Lion of Saxony crossed into Denmark to ask for his help
(GD, 523; EC, 530), and in the winter of 1180–1 the ousted King
Magnús Erlingsson of Norway took refuge in Denmark (Sverris saga,chs. 48, 50). In 1181 Count Siegfried of Orlamünde sued for and married
Valdemar’s daughter Sophia at Schleswig (GD, 534; EC, 596). Thatsummer Valdemar arrived in Lübeck to meet Frederick Barbarossa; hecame ‘with a large retinue, and made a show of himself, boasting
loudly of his glory’ (Chronica Slavorum, ii 21); and made arrangements for two other daughters to marry the emperor’s sons (GD, 532–4;
EC, 592–6).
200. S includes here a short eulogy on Knut VI, who ‘was a religiousman, chaste, noble, handsome, an outstanding warrior . . .’ The pasttense betrays a later hand. According to Saxo’s book sixteen, Knut’s
success in war outdid the achievements of his father, but were attributable mainly to the assistance of Absalon; ignored by Sven. Yet thesuccessful raids of 1184 and 1185 would have been impossible if
Absalon’s victory over the Pomeranian fleet in May 1184 had not
deprived Prince Bugislav of his ships and saved Denmark from invasion. However, this is a book of kings, not of bishops, and Absalon’s
triumph over Jomsborg has been mentioned above, p. 61.
201. rostris deauratis choruscabat : classical rostrum, ‘ram’, was later
applied to prows and sterns; cf. ardebat aurum in rostris, EE, 18, of
Knut’s invasion fleet in 1015; rostrum deauratum, of Godwin’s ship in
the B manuscript of Florence of Worcester.
202. Saxo says that Bugislav did homage to Knut after submitting to him
outside Kamien, fifteen miles downstream from Wolin (GD, 550–1;
EC, 622–3); but neither Saxo nor Kn‡tlinga saga, ch. 129, is precise
about the site, and anywhere between the two towns would be nonprocul from Wolin (non procul in S, preferred by Gertz; procul in A).
Sven was an eyewitness, and the other sources agree that the Danes had
been ravaging away from Kamien just before the surrender.
203. ab antiquo preuaricatore : see p. 129, n. 134, above. Saxo also
records the thunder-clap, and comments that ‘it was conjectured by
the wise that this event portended the downfall of the kingdom of
the Slavs.’ He preferred to keep the Devil out of history (GD, 551; EC,
624; Blatt, in SS, 12).
204. Conrad, bishop of Pomerania, who had moved his see from Wolin
to Kamien in 1176; see p. 121, n. 93, above.

140

Sven Aggesen

205. Valdemar, second son of Valdemar I and Sophia, was born 28 June
1170, governed Schleswig as duke from 1187 to 1202, and reigned in
Denmark from 1202 to 1241. Here he is iuvenis indolis elegantissimæ,which may, but need not, suggest that the words were written before
1202.
206. cunctorum gubernator in sua pace disponat : the valedictory formulawhich concludes the prayer after the reconciliation of the dying penitent in the Gelasian and other sacramentaries: Hanc igitur oblationem
Domine cunctæ familiæ tuæ . . . diesque nostros in tua pace disponas(Wilson, 67); also found in the opening of a blessing by Alcuin which
includes the phrase in pacis tranquillitate (CBP, 1563a); cf. p. 112,n. 46, above. Saxo appears to answer Sven’s prayer at the end of GD,
where he records that Bugislav remained loyal to Knut VI until his
death in 1187, and that afterwards Knut acted as guardian of hischildren.

APPENDIX
SVEN’S FAMILY(1)THRUGOT = (2)THRUGUN(3)INGA = (4)THORKIL / SVEN

Thrugunnuson
1085(5)?ASSER

Aggesen1085___________________________________________________(10)AGGI
bp & abp
the Old
bp of
warriorof Lund1130–7
Viborg & pilgrim
1089–1137
1133–53
d. 1153
pilgrim(11)?KARL(6)ASSER (7)KRISTIARN (8)SVEN (9)ESKIL___________________________________________________(12)ESKIL(13)SVEN(14)AGGI
bp of Roskilde
Kristiarnsen
1132–57?
1134–81145
abp of Lund
1138–78
d. 1181______________________(16)KARL = (17)DAUGHTER (18)KRISTIARN (19)ASSER (20)SVEN
Eriksen1176
provostAggesenprefect of
exiledof Lund1185
Hallandexiled 1176
1145–53
d. by 1194___________________(22)KARL
Karlsend. 1180(21)KNUT(23)ASSER

Kristiarnsen(24)ESKIL
1176

(15)
?NICOLAUS

countd. by 1156

142

Sven Aggesen

Known as the Thrugot or Thrugun family (Dan. Trugotslægt, Trundslægt )by modern historians, they, like other twelfth-century Danish dynasties,
had no recorded designation at the time. The identity of the group wasasserted by the use of recurrent names (Kristiarn, Asser, Agge, Eskil,Sven) and by public cooperation between kinsmen, usually for or against
the king. Descent from a common ancestor also counted for something:from Skialm the White in the case of Absalon and his cousins, fromThorkil/Sven in the case of Sven Aggesen’s family.
They were eminent in both Jutland and Scania and held land in Sjælland
as well. The loss of land through Archbishop Eskil’s endowments of newmonasteries and canonries, the loss of the Eigenkirche of Lund in 1178,
and the purges of 1177–82 reduced the cohesion and importance of thefamily, which ceased thereafter to play a central role in political affairs.
Elaborate and largely imaginary pedigrees of these people were published by Langebek in SRD, i, tracing descent from Pálna-Tóki, Hákon
jarl Eiríksson and Ulf of Galicia. These are connexions wrenched out ofcontext from saga-genealogies and cobbled together. They do not occur
in Kn‡tlinga saga, a compilation of c.1250, which contains some
Lundensian traditions of the Thrugot family. The ascertainable historyof the dynasty begins in 1089, with the appointment of Asser Svensen (no. 6)
to the see of Lund, although it must already have been important by then.
_______________
1. THRUGOT: Sueno, filius Thrugut (LC, p. 40 above), presumably a
Jutlander alive in the first half of the eleventh century.
2. THRUGUN: Kn‡tlinga saga, ch. 40: Sveinn and Ástrá›r váru kalla›ir
ﬁorgunnusynir. ﬁorgunna, mó›ir ﬂeira, var dóttir Vagns Ákasonar. A
plausible tradition, supported by WR (see p. 46) and by NL, but Sven
Aggesen uses ‘son of Thrugut’, not ‘son of Thrugun’.
3. INGA: mater venerabilis Azeri, NL, 105 (Weeke, 195; 19 Nov.).
4. THORKIL /SVEN: obiit Throckil pater archiepiscopi, qui dictus est Suen
(NL, 78; 20 June). Sueno, filius Thrugut—see no. 1 above. If he wasinter primores regni, he may have been the staller Sven who witnessed
the great Lund donation of 1085 (DD, i:2, no. 21). Kn‡tlinga saga, chs.
66–8, tells that he and his brother, Ástrá›r, served Knut IV and were

imprisoned in Flanders as hostages for the release of King Olaf Hunger
until freed by the intercession of the martyred Knut. The story seems
to reflect later links between the descendants of St Knut and of Thorkil/
Sven; see no. 16 below.

Appendix

143

5. ASSER: an Ascer Akonis filius witnessed the 1085 Lund charter after
Sven (no. 4 above), and the recurrence of these names among Thorkil/
Sven’s descendants suggests kinship.
6. ASSER: bishop of Lund from 18 Nov. 1089, archbishop from 1103, died5 May 1137: vir acer et amarus, et sapiens et nullius constancie (CR;SM, i 28). If he was of canonical age at his election, he must have beenborn c.1050, but he remained politically active to at least 1134.
7. KRISTIARN: Christiarn pater domini arch. Eschili (Weeke, 128; 20 May);
Christiernus, Suenonis filius (LC; p. 39 above). Surnamed Gamlæ, ‘theOld’, in annals (DMA, 319, 320). According to Saxo, born to highstatus in Jutland and politically active against King Nicolaus and laterin the election of Erik III (GD, 360, 361, 371; EC, 135–6, 356). (Thetwo brothers, Asser and Kristiarn, flourished in the period down to1137; the other brothers were active in the 1140s and 1150s and may
not have been sons of Inga.)
8. SVEN: canon of Lund, provost and bishop of Viborg 1133–53, died inPalestine 3 March 1153/4 (NL, 63 n.) on pilgrimage with his brotherEskil, no. 9 below (SM, ii 437–41). Famous for his piety and high birth,with St Kjeld as his provost from c.1147.
9. ESKIL: also inter primores regni according to Sven in LC (p. 40 above);described in SM, ii 437, as ‘warlike and carnal, swollen with power . . .
ferocious and fearsome’; died in Palestine on pilgrimage with his
brother, Bishop Sven, on 3 March 1153/4 (SM, ii 437–9; NL, 63 n.).
Not mentioned by Saxo, but he could be the præfectus of Erik III whowitnessed DD, i:2, no. 85 (1142/6) and the villicus of Roskilde in 1145
(DD, i:2, no. 91).
10. AGGI: mentioned in LC (p. 40 above); he could be the chamberlain
Ago of DD, i:2, no. 76 (1104/17), and possibly the father of no. 11.
11. KARL: Karl agisun attested the 1145 Lund charter, DD, i:2, no. 86.
12. ESKIL: provost of Lund c.1131, bishop of Roskilde 1134–8, archbishop of Lund 1138–78; died at Clairvaux 6 Sept. 1181. Apparently
married when young; see no. 17 below.
13. SVEN: attested DD, i:2, no. 88 (1 Sept. 1145) as Swen Christians sun ;mentioned by Saxo as the father of Kristiarn and Asser, nos. 18–19
below (GD, 511, 512; EC, 562, 563).
14. AGGI: patre meo Aggone in HC (p. 69 above); fought with Biorn
Haraldsen for Erik II at Onsild in 1132, and for Sven III at Grathe
Heath in 1157 (GD, 410; EC, 414). Possibly the brother who diedunreconciled to Archbishop Eskil (SM, ii 436–7).
15. NICOLAUS: comes, carne et sanguine michi proximus in Archbishop

144

Sven Aggesen

Eskil’s 1158 charter for Esrum (DD, i:2, no. 126). He became a monk
there and left land to the brothers at Tjæreby and Veksebo in N. Sjælland(DD, i:2, no. 127). The Vita Prima of St Bernard (iv, ch. 26) records
that he was propinquus to Eskil, but a great sinner, and dead (Weeke,
102; 30 April) by the time of Eskil’s visit to Clairvaux in 1156. As heheld the rare new title of ‘count’ (greve) and was still adolescens at his
death, he must have been the son of a powerful man or woman, perhapsof Count Erik (fl. 1130–45), whose son Karl married Eskil’s daughter(no. 17 below), or of Count Ubbi Esbiornsen (DD, i:2, nos. 32, 34),
who married King Nicolaus’s daughter, Ingerd (Ingigerth) and was
hanged in 1133 (GD, 364; EC, 140). His connexion with Eskil waspresumably through Eskil’s mother or sister. See McGuire, andSzacherska 1977, 140 n., for further refs.
16. KARL: the ‘Lord Karl’ was a charter witness 1145–57/8 (DD, i:2, nos.
88, 102, 121); son of Cecilia, daughter of Knut IV; Saxo says he wasgoverning Halland for Sven III in 1153 (GD, 388; EC, 382).
17. ESKIL’S DAUGHTER: Saxo says that the sons of Karl, the conspirators of1176/7, had Eskil as their maternal grandfather (GD, 503; EC, 549),
although he fails to mention the fact earlier, when he describes how in1153(?) Karl’s wife (unnamed) was abducted by Jon Sverkerson of
Sweden and later returned to him (GD, 388; EC, 382). This alliance of
the Thrugot family with Knut IV’s descendants through Cecilia createda yet more powerful group, perhaps in response to the growing powerof the Skialm family under Ebbi Skialmsen in Sjælland and Toki
Skialmsen, who married Knut Lavard’s daughter, also in the 1140s,
and got land in Jutland.
18. KRISTIARN: a ‘Kristiarn, whose father was Sven’ was exiled after
confessing complicity in Magnus Eriksen’s plot in 1176/7 (GD, 511–
12; EC, 562–3).
19. ASSER: canon and provost of Lund by 1171 (DD, i:3, no. 19), exiled
for conspiracy 1176/7 (GD, 512; EC, 564); at Magdeburg 1185–6 (DD,i:3, nos. 119, 125); died before 1194 (Weeke, 62; 25 March), and left
land at Venestad and Bjæverskov to his chapter (Weeke, 70–1). He
may have had a sister, Gunnild doter Suens (Weeke, 89), and he leftheirs who sold more land at Bjæverskov to the brothers of Sorø c.1200(SRD, iv 36 and 470).
20. SVEN: for his biography see pp. 1–4 above.
21. KNUT: son of Karl; an extremely well-connected but unlucky nobleman, who was implicated in the conspiracy of 1176/7, fled to Sweden,
invaded Denmark 1179/80, was wounded, imprisoned and disinherited

Appendix

145

by Valdemar I (GD, 502–23; EC, 549–80). According to Saxo, he was
grandson of Eskil, cognatus with Absalon (through Absalon’s mother,Inga, perhaps a sister of Count Erik, Knut’s paternal grandfather?), andpropinquus to Birger jarl of Sweden (also a great-grandson of Knut IV,
through his daughter Ingerd/Ingigerth). Date of death unknown; no
known descendants.
22. KARL: shared his brother Knut’s fortunes but was mortally woundedin the invasion of 1179/80, and his corpse later found in a wood on the
Halland-Götaland frontier (GD, 523; EC, 580). These brothers wereaided by a half-brother, a bastard son of Karl Eriksen called Benedikt(GD, 506–9; EC, 554–9), and the appearance of a Bendict Karlssun
among the twelve Scanian worthies who swore to the boundaries of the
Lund estate at Bällingslev (1202/41; DD, i:4, no. 72) raises the possibility either that Benedikt the bastard lived to be very old, or that a sonof Karl Karlsen was named after his uncle Benedikt.
23. ASSER: Ascer Cristiarnsun appears in a brotherhood associated with
Harsyssel, NW Jutland, in the Brother-list (KVJ, i:2, 84, ii:2, 550);
presumably a descendant, alive in the 1190s, of old Kristiarn, no. 7 above.
24. ESKIL: Asceri hic filius erat wrote Saxo of a conspirator unmasked in
1176/7 (GD, 511; EC, 562), and the only Asser he mentions in thecontext was Provost Asser (no. 19 above). It is possible that Archbishop Eskil had an otherwise unmentioned brother called Asser, who
could have been this Eskil’s father.
_____________
Thus within four years, 1176–80, six members of the most powerfulgroup of kinsmen in Denmark were dead or exiled or imprisoned. Eskil
the former archbishop was preparing for death as a monk at Clairvaux;
and the way was clear for the dominance of Archbishop Absalon and his
kinsmen: Esbiorn Snara, Alexander Petersen, Ebbi Olafsen, Suni Ebbesen and his seven sons, Aki Stighsen and Provost Toki Stighsen, and thefour sons of Ingerd/Ingigerth Petersdottir.
However, the records of Lund, the Brother-list, and the Avia Ripensis
suggest that descendants of Sven Aggesen’s family survived as local‘gentry’ in both Scania and Jutland. A Benedikte Kristiarnsdottir married
Thorkil Bille c.1230 (Weeke, 203–4); Peter Aggesen and Kristiarn andNicolaus, Aggi and Kristiarn, formed brotherhoods in Omersyssel and
Almindsyssel; Kristiarn Benediktsen lived near Aarhus in 1243 (SM, ii223); and Kristiarn Aggesen was alive in 1275 (Avia Ripensis, 20).

ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
Note. The following is a finding-list, complete or virtually so, for the authors andtitles mentioned in the Introduction and Notes other than works by classicalauthors which are readily found in series of standard editions. Place of publication is noted only in the case of sixteenth-century prints.
A

AarbøgerAB
Abbot William’s Genealogy
Abels
AC
Adam (of Bremen)ÆlnothÁgrip
AJ
Alan of Lille
Albøge, Gordon
Alexander Jóhannesson

AlexandreisAlfræ›iAncher, P. K.

The text of AM 33 4to in Gertz 1915/
16 and SM, i.
Aarbøger for nordisk Oldkyndighedog Historie.
Adam of Bremen, Gesta Hammaburgensis ecclesiae pontificum. Ed.
B. Schmeidler. 1917.
Wilhelmi Abbatis Genealogia regum
Danorum. SM, i 176–85.
R. P. Abels, Lordship and Military
Obligation. 1988.
Anticlaudianus. See Alan of Lille.
See AB.
Gesta Svenomagni regis et filiorum
eius et passio gloriosissimi Canuti
regis et martyris. VSD, 77–136.
Ágrip af Nóregskonunga so≈gum. Ed.
Bjarni Einarsson. ÍF xxix. 1985.
Danasaga Arngríms lær›a [Jónssonar].
In Danakonunga so≈gur, 3–38.
Anticlaudianus. Ed. R. Bossuat. 1985.
De Planctu Naturæ. In PL 210.
Summa de Arte Prædicatoris. In PL
205.
‘Til Vederloven’, Festskrift til Kristian Hald (1974), 293–318.
Isländisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. 1956.
See Walter of Châtillon.
Alfræ›i íslenzk. Ed. Kr. Kålund and
N. Beckman. 1908–18.
En Dansk Lov-Historie fra Kong Harald
Blatands Tid til Kong Christian den
Femtes. 1769.

Abbreviations and Bibliography147

Andreæ Sunonis Filii Hexaemeron.
Ed. S. Ebbesen and L. B. Mortensen. 1985–8.
Anders Sunesen’s Scanian laws Anders Sunesøns latinske Parafrase
af Skånske Lov. In DGL, i:2.
Andersen, N. K.
‘ Kanonisk Rets Indflydelse paa
Jydske Love’, Med Lov skal Land
bygges (ed. E. Reitzel-Nielsen,1941), 84–120.
Anderson, H.
‘Hovedstaden i Riget’, Nationalmuseets
Arbejdsmark (1960), 13–35.
Ann. Fuld.
Annales Fuldenses. Ed. R. Rau. 1969.
Annales 1095–1194
In DMA, 307–9.
Annales Bartholiniani
In SRD, i.
Annales Lundenses
In DMA, 21–70.
Annales Ripenses
In DMA, 254–67.
Annales Ryenses
In DMA, 149–75.
Annales Valdemarii
In DMA, 75–9.
Annalista Saxo
In MGH, Script., vi.
Annals of St Bertin
Annales Bertiniani et Annales
Vedastini. Ed. R. Rau. 1969.
Appuleius
Opuscules philosophiques . Ed .
J. Beaujeu. 1973.
APS
Acta Philologica Scandinavica.
AR
See Annales Ryenses.
Arbusow, L.
Colores rhetorici. Second ed. 1963.
Architrenius
Johannis de Hauvilla Architrenius. Ed.
P. G. Schmidt. 1974.
Arnold (of Lübeck)
Chronica Slavorum. Ed. G. H. Pertz.
1868.
Arup, E.
Danmarks Historie, i. Land og Folk
til 1282. 1925.
Augustine, St, Ep(istolæ)In PL 33.
Augustine , St ( and Pseudo Augustine), Sermones
In PL 38.
Avia Ripensis
Samling af Adkomster . . . og kirkelige Vedtægter for Ribe Domkapittel og Bispestol . . . kaldet‘Oldemoder’. Ed. O. Nielsen. 1869.
Anders Sunesen, Hex.

148

Sven Aggesen

Summa Azonis. Basel 1563.
Bullarium Danicum. Ed. A. Krarup.
1932.
Bernard of Pavia
Bernardi Papiensis Summa Decretalium. Ed. E. A. T. Lespeyres.
1860.
Bernard Silvestris
W. Wetherbee, The Cosmographia of
Bernardus Silvestris. 1973.
Bjarni Gu›nason
Um Skjöldungasögu. 1963.
BlaiseA. B. Blaise, Dictionnaire latinfrançais des auteurs chrétiens. 1954.
Blaise, Vocab.
A. B. Blaise, Le vocabulaire latin desprincipaux thèmes liturgiques.
1967.
Blatt, in SS
Franz Blatt, ‘Saxo, en repræsentant
for et 12. århundredes renæssance’,
SS, 11–19.
Blom, G. Authén
Kongemakt og privilegier i Norge
inntil 1387. 1967.
BobergInger M. Boberg, ‘Die Sage von Vermund und Uffe’, APS, xvi (1942),
129–57.
Bolin, S.
Ledung och frälse. 1934.
Bonizo, Liber de vita Christiana Ed. E. Perels. Second ed. 1930.
Bosworth–Toller
J. Bosworth, T. N. Toller, An AngloSaxon Dictionary. 1898–1921.
Breengaard, C. B.
Muren om Israels Hus: Regnum og
Sacerdotium i Danmark 1050–
1170. 1982.
(the) Brother-list
In KVJ, i:2, 164–6; cf. ii 544–66.
Bruylants, P.
Concordance verbale du Sacramentaire Léonien. 1945.
Brøndum-Nielsen, J.
‘Om Sprogformen i de Sjællandske
Love’, APS, xxix (1973), 81–110.
Bø, Olav‘Hólmganga og einvígi ’, MSc., ii(1969), 132–48.
Carpenter, D.A.
The Minority of Henry III. 1990.
Cary, G.
The Medieval Alexander. 1956.
Catalogus Regum Daniæ
In SM, i 159–60.
AzoBDAbbreviations and Bibliography
CBP
CCSL
Chadwick, H. M.
Chambers, R. W.
Aksel E. Christensen 1945
Aksel E. Christensen 1978
Christensen
Christensen, in SS
Christiansen, Tage E.

Chronica Slavorum
Chronicon Lethrense
Chronicon Roskildense
CL
Cleasby–Vigfússon
Cohen

Cons. Lund.
Consiliatio Cnuti
Corpus iuris civilis
CPD
CR

149

Corpus benedictionum pontificalium.
Ed. E. Moeller, OSB. CCSL, 162.
1971–3.
Corpus Christianorum Series Latina.
The Origin of the English Nation.
1907.
Beowulf. An Introduction. Third ed.
1959.
Kongemagt og Aristokrati. 1945.
Ret og Magt i dansk Middelalder.
1978.
Karsten Christensen, Om Overleveringen af Sven Aggesens Værker.
1978.
Karsten Christensen, ‘Forholdet mellem
Saxo og Sven Aggesen’, SS, 128–37(and ‘Diskussion’, 137–42).
‘Isti tres fratres. Broderlisten i Kong
Valdemars Jordebog’, MiddelalderStudier tilegnede Aksel E. Christensen (1966), 77–112.
See Arnold.
In SM, i 43–53.
In SM, i 14–33.
See Chronicon Lethrense.
R. Cleasby, Gudbrand Vigfusson, An
Icelandic-English Dictionary. 1874.
G. Cohen, La ‘Comédie’ latine en
France au xii e siècle. 1931.
Consuetudines Lundenses. Statutter
for Kannikesamfundet i Lundc. 1123. Ed. E. Buus. 1978.
In Liebermann, i.
Ed . P . Krueger , Th . Mommsen ,R. Schoell, W. Kroll. 1888–95.
Codex Pomeraniæ Diplomaticus. Ed.
K. F. W. Hasselbach and K. G. L.
Kosegarten. 1843–62.
See Chronicon Roskildense.

150

Curtius, E. R.
Damasus
Damsholt 1978
Damsholt 1985

Danakonunga so≈gur
Danevirke
Danmarks Historie, iDD

Decretum
DGK
DGL
Diamond, A. S.
Diderichsen, P.
Diefenbach, L. D.
DigestDMA
DR
Ducange
EbbesenSven Aggesen
European Literature and the Latin
Middle Ages. Tr. W. R. Trask.
1953.
Damasi . . . Regulae Canonicae. Cologne, 1564.
Nanna Damsholt , ‘ En studie i
Valdemars - tidens kvindesyn ’,Kvindestudier, ii (1978), 117–44.
Nanna Damsholt, Kvindebilledet i
dansk højmiddelalder. 1985.
Ed. Bjarni Gu›nason. ÍF xxxv. 1982.
Ed. H. Andersen, H. J. Madsen,
O. Voss. 1976.
I . Skovgaard - Petersen , Aksel E .
Christensen, Helge Paludan, Tiden
indtil 1340. (Gyldendals) Danmarks
Historie, i. 1977.
Diplomatarium Danicum. I. Række,i–iii. 1963–77.
Corpus iuris canonici. Pars prior,
Decretum Magistri Gratiani. Ed.
A. Friedberg. 1879.
Danmarks gamle Købstadslovgivning.
Ed. E. Kroman. 1951–61.
Danmarks gamle Landskabslove.
Ed. J. Brøndum-Nielsen and P. J.
Jørgensen. 1933-41.
Primitive Law. 1971.
Dansk Prosahistorie. 1968.
Glossarium Latino-Germanicum. 1857.
In Corpus iuris civilis.
Danmarks middelalderlige Annaler.
Ed. E. Kroman. 1980.
Den danske Rigslovgivning indtil
1400. Ed. E. Kroman. 1971.
C. du Fresne du Cange et al., GlossariumMediæ et Infimæ Latinitatis. 1883.
Anders Sunesen. Stormand, teolog,
administrator, digter. Ed. Sten
Ebbesen. 1985.

Abbreviations and Bibliography(Saxo) EC

Edda Snorra
EE
Einhard, Vita Karoli
Ellis Davidson, H.
EHDEp., Epp.
Erfurt Annals
De Eskillo archiepiscopo etduobus Eskilii patruis narratio [from Exordium Magnum,
Distinct. III, cc. xxv–xxvi]
Etym.
Fagrskinna
Faulkes, A. R.
FengerFenger 1989
Flahiff, G. B.

Flat.
Florence of Worcester
Foote, P.

151

Saxo Grammaticus. Books X–XVI.
Tr. Eric Christiansen. 1980–1.
Edda Snorra Sturlusonar. Ed. Finnur
Jónsson. 1931.
Encomium Emmæ Reginæ . Ed .
A. Campbell. 1949.
Einhardi Vita Karoli Magni. Ed.
G. Waitz. 1911.
The Sword in Anglo-Saxon England.
1962.
English Historical Documents, i, 500–
1042. Ed. Dorothy Whitelock. 1955.
Epistola, Epistolæ.
In MGH. 1844.
In SM, ii 428–42.
See Isidore.
Fagrskinna. Nóregs konunga tal. Ed.
Bjarni Einarsson. ÍF xxix. 1985.
‘The genealogies and regnal lists in amanuscript in Resen’s library’,
Sjötíu ritger›ir helga›ar Jakobi
Benediktssyni (1977), 177–90.
R . Th . Fenger , Svend Aagesens
Danmarks Krøniker, oversat og
oplyst. 1842.
O. Fenger, Kirker rejses alle vegne.
(Gyldendal og Politikens) Danmarks Historie, iv. 1989.
‘Ralph Niger: an introduction’, Medieval Studies, ii (1940), 104–26.
Flateyjarbók. Ed. Gu›brandur Vigfússon and C. R. Unger. 1860–8.
Chronicon ex Chronicis . Ed . B .
Thorpe. 1848–9.
‘ Things in early Norse verse ’,Festskrift til Ludvig Holm-Olsen(1984), 74–83.

152

Sven Aggesen

Foote, P., and Wilson, D. M.
Forcellini
Frank, Tenney
Fredegar’s Chronicle
Friis-Jensen, K.
Fritzner, iv
Frosell, B.

Fundinn Nóregr
Den Gamle Gaardsret
Garmonsway , G . N ., andSimpson, J.
Gasnault, P.

(Saxo) GD

The Gelasian Sacramentary
Genealogy of the Kings ofDenmark by an Unknown
AuthorGeoffrey of Monmouth
Gertz; Gertz 1915/16

The Viking Achievement. 1970.
J. Facciolati, E. Forcellini, Totius
Latinitatis Lexicon. Ed. J. Bailey.
1826.
‘Some classical quotations from the
middle Ages’, Classical Philology,iv (1909), 82–3.
The Fourth Book of the Chronicleof Fredegar. Ed. J. M. WallaceHadrill. 1960.
‘ Was Saxo a Canon of Lund ?’,Cahiers de l’Institut du Moyen-âge
Grec et Latin, lix (1989), 331–57.
J. Fritzner, Ordbog over Det gamle
norske Sprog, iv. Rettelser og
Tillegg ved Finn Hødnebø. 1972.
‘En gejstlig stormand ser på retten iSkåne,’ in Ebbesen, 243–53.
In Flat., i 219–21.
In KR, v 23–46.
Beowulf and its Analogues. 1968.
‘Le tombeau de Saint Martin et lesinvasions normandes dans l’histoire
et dans la légende’, Revue d’histoire de l’église de France, xlvii(1961), 51–66.
Saxonis Gesta Danorum. Ed. J. Olrikand H. Ræder. 1931.
Ed. H. A. Wilson. 1894.
See Incerti Auctoris Genealogia.
The Historia Regum Britanniae ofGeoffrey of Monmouth. Ed. A.
Griscom. 1929.
M. Cl. Gertz, En ny Text af Sven
Aggesøns Værker genvunden paa
Grundlag af Codex Arnæmagnæanus 33, 4to. 1915/16.

Abbreviations and Bibliography
Gierke, O.
Giles
GlaberGodefroy
Graham-Campbell, J.
Gransden, A.
GratianGregory, St
Grundtvig, N. F. S.
Haastrup, W.

Hálfs saga
Hamsfort
F. C. C. Hansen
N. C. Hansen
Jens S. Th. Hansen
HC
Heimskringla
Helmold
Henry of Huntingdon

Ad Herennium
Hex.
Hir›skrá

153

Political Theories of the Middle Ages.
Tr. F. W. Maitland. 1900; repr.
1958.
William of Malmesbury’s Chronicle.
Tr. J. A. Giles. 1847.
See Rodulfi Glabri Historiarum libri
quinque.
Corpus Iuris Civilis accesserunt commentarii D. Gothofredi. 1624.
Viking Artifacts. 1980.
Historical Writing in England c.550
to c.1307. 1974.
See Decretum.
Moralia in Iob. Ed. M. Adriaen.
CCSL, cxliii. 1979.
Danmarks Krøniker. 1818–22.
‘ Bøger i Danmark på Anders
Sunesens tid’, in Ebbesen, 99–114.
Hálfs saga ok Hálfsrekka. Ed. A. Le
Roy Andrews. 1909.
Chronologia . . . secunda, in SRD, i.
De ældste Kongegrave og Bispegrave
i Roskilde Domkirke. 1914.
‘Nogle Navne fra Vederloven’, APS,xi (1936–7), 82–90.
‘Theodoricus Monachus and European literature ’, Symbolae
Osloenses, xxvii (1949), 70–127.
See Historia Compendiosa.
Snorri Sturluson. Heimskringla. Ed.
Bjarni A›albjarnarson. ÍF xxvi–
xxviii. 1941–51.
Chronica Slavorum. Ed. B. Schmeidler.
1937.
Historia Anglorum. Ed. T. Arnold.
1879.
Ad C. Herennium de ratione dicendi.
Ed. and tr. H. Caplan. 1954.
Hexaemeron. See Anders Sunesen.
In NGL, ii 387–450.

154

Sven Aggesen

Historia Compendiosa
In Gertz 1915/16 and SM, i.
Historia Norwegiae
In MHN, 70–124.
Historia de Profectione Danorum In SM, ii 443–92.
Hjärne, E. H.
‘Vederlag och sjöväsen’, Namn och
Bygd, xvii (1929), 83–116.
Hoebel, A. Adamson
The Law of Primitive Man. 1954.
Hoffmann 1975
E. Hoffmann, Die Heiligen Könige
bei den Angelsachsen und den
skandinavischen Völkern. 1975.
Hoffmann 1976
E. Hoffmann, Königserhebung undThronfolgeordnung in Dänemark bis
zum Ausgang des Mittelalters. 1976.
Hofmann, D.
Nordisch-englische Lehnbeziehungender Wikingerzeit. 1955.
Holberg, L.
Dansk Rigslovgivning. 1889.
Hollister, C. W.
Anglo-Saxon Military Institutions.
1962.
Hooper, N.
‘The housecarls in England’, AngloNorman Studies, vii (1984), 161–76.
Houken, Aage
Håndbog i danske Stednavne. 1975.
Hrólfs saga
Hrólfs saga kraka. Ed. D. Slay. 1960.
HS
Sven Aggesøns historiske Skrifter. Tr.
M. Cl. Gertz. 1916/17; repr. 1967.
HT(D)(Dansk) Historisk Tidskrift.
Hude, Anna
Danehoffet og dets Plads i Danmarks
Statsforfatning. 1893.
Hugh of St Victor, De Bestiis
In PL 177.
Hversu Nóregr bygg›isk
In Flat., i 21–4.
Hyndluljó›
In Norrœn fornkvæ›i . . . Sæmundar
Edda. Ed. S. Bugge. 1867.
Hørby, K.
In Niels Lund og Kai Hørby ,Samfundet i vikingetid og middelalder. (Gyldendals) Dansk social
historie, ii. 1981.
ÍFÍslenzk Fornrit, i– . 1933– .
Incerti Auctoris Genealogia(Regum Danie)
In SM, i 186–94.
(Justinian’s) Institutes
In Corpus iuris civilis; and in Justinian’s Institutes. Tr. P. Birks and
G. McLeod. 1987.

Abbreviations and Bibliography

155

Isidore, De ecclesiasticis officiis In PL 83.
Isidore, Etym.
Isidori . . . Etymologiarum libri XX.
Ed. W. M. Lindsay. 1911.
Isidore, Sententiæ
In PL 83.
Ivo of Chartres, Decretum
In PL 161.
Ivo of Chartres, Panormia
In PL 161.
Jacobsen, Lis
Svenskevældets Fald. 1929.
JaegerC . S . Jaeger , The Origins of
Courtliness. 1985.
Jerome, Commentary on Jeremiah S. Hieronymi . . . Opera . . . In Hieremiam. Ed. S. Reiter. CCSL, lxxiv. 1960.
Jakob Benediktsson‘Icelandic traditions of the Scyldings’,
Saga-Book, xv:1 (1957), 48–66.
Johannesson, Kurt
Saxo Grammaticus. 1978.
John of Genoa
Catholicon. Rouen 1515.
John of Hauteville
See Architrenius.
John of Salisbury, The Letters The Letters of John of Salisbury. Ed.
W. J. Millor, SJ, and C. N. L.
Brooke. 1955-86.
John of Salisbury, Metalogicon Ed. C. C. I. Webb. 1929.
John of Salisbury, Policraticus Ed. C. C. I. Webb. 1909.
Johnsen, A. O.
Om Theodricus og hans Historia de
antiquitate regum Norwagiensium . Avh . utg . av Det Norske
Videnskaps-Akademi. II. Hist.-filos.
Klasse, 1939, No. 3.
Jómsvíkinga saga (1962)
The Saga of the Jomsvikings. Ed. andtr. N. F. Blake. 1962.
Jómsvíkinga saga (1969)
Jómsvíkinga saga . Ed . Ólafur
Halldórsson. 1969.
Jones and Jones, Commentary Commentary on the First Six Books ofthe Æneid [attr. to Bernard Silvestris].
Ed. J. W. Jones and E. F. Jones. 1977.
Justinian
See Institutes.
Jutland Law
In DGL, ii–iv.
Jørgensen
P. J. Jørgensen, Dansk Retshistorie.
Sixth ed. 1974.
A. D. Jørgensen 1876
‘Bidrag til Oplysning om Middelalderens Love og Samfundsforhold.
III . Witherlogh . Worthhæld ’,Aarbøger (1876), 56–92.

156

Sven Aggesen

A. D. Jørgensen 1879
Kalkar, O.
Kemble, J.
Kinch, J.
KL

Knuds-Bogen
Kn‡tlinga saga
Kock, A.
Konungs skuggsiá(Konungsskuggsjá)
Kormáks saga
KR
Anne K. G. Kristensen 1968–9
Anne K. G. Kristensen 1969
Kroman 1973KV
KVJ
Lagerbring, S.
Lange, Gudrun

Valdemar Sejr. Udvalgt Samling af. . . Kildeskrifter . . . i dansk
Oversættelse. 1879.
Ordbog til det ældre danske Sprog(1300–1700). 1881–1918; repr. 1976.
The Saxons in England. 1876.
‘Om den danske Adels Udspring fra
Thinglid’, Aarbøger (1875), 247–350.
Kulturhistorisk leksikon for nordisk
middelalder . Ed . L . Jacobsen ,G. Rona et al. 1956–78.
Knuds-Bogen 1986. Studier over
Knud den Hellige. Ed. T. Nyberg,
H. Bekker-Nielsen, N. Oxenvad.
Fynske Studier, xv. 1986.
In Danakonunga so≈gur, 93–321.
‘ Etymologiska anmärkningar om
nordiska ord’, Arkiv för nordisk
filologi, xxiv (1908), 179–98.
Ed. L. Holm-Olsen. Second ed. 1983.
The King’s Mirror. Tr. L. M. Larson.
1917.
In Vatnsdœla saga. Ed. Einar Ól.
Sveinsson. ÍF viii. 1939.
J . L . A . Kolderup - Rosenvinge ,Samling af gamle Love. v. Danske
Gaardsretter og Stadsretter. 1827.
‘Knud Magnussens Krønike’, HT(D),12. Række, 3 (1968–9), 431–52.
Danmarks ældste Annalistik. 1969.
E. Kroman, ‘Danmarks gamle Love’,
APS, xxix (1973), 111–26.
Krøniker fra Valdemarstiden. Tr.
J. Olrik. 1900–1.
Kong Valdemars Jordebog. Ed. SvendAakjær. 1926–43.
Monumenta Scaniensia. [Lund disputations publ. by S. Bring] 1744–51.
Die Anfänge der isländisch norwegischen Geschichtsschreibung.
Studia Islandica, 47. 1989.

Abbreviations and Bibliography
LangebekLangfe›gatal
Larson 1904
Larson 1912
Lausberg
Law of the Retainers
LC
Leges Henrici Primi
Lejre Chronicle
Lex Castrensis

Lexicon Poeticum
LHL
Liebermann
Liedgren, J.
Lindow, J.
LM
LMP
Lukman 1976
Lukman, in SS
Lund Liber daticus
Lund king-list
Lund Memoriale fratrum
Lund necrology
Lund PontificalLæssøe Müller, P.
Löfstedt, E.

157

See SRD.
In Alfræ›i, iii 57–9.
L. M. Larson, The King’s Household
in England before the Norman
Conquest. 1904.
L. M. Larson, Canute the Great. 1912.
H. Lausberg, Elemente der literarischen Rhetorik. Sixth ed. 1979.
See Lex Castrensis.
See Lex Castrensis.
Ed. L. J. Downer. 1972.
See Chronicon Lethrense.
In Gertz 1915/16 and SM, i; cf. DR,
6–34.
Sveinbjörn Egilsson, Lexicon poeticum
antiquæ linguæ septentrionalis. Ed.
Finnur Jónsson. Second ed. 1931.
O. Schumann, Lateinisches Hexameter Lexicon. 1979–82.
Die Gesetze der Angelsachsen. Ed.
F. Liebermann. 1903–16.
‘Gårdsrätt’, KL, v 645–7.
Comitatus, Individual and Honor.
1975.
See Læssøe Müller.
Lexicon Mediae et Infimae Latinitatis Polonorum. Ed. M. Plezia. 1953– .
N. Lukman, ‘Ragnar lo›brók, Sigifrid,
and the Saints of Flanders’, MSc.,
ix (1976), 7–50.
See Christensen, in SS . . . ‘Diskussion’.
In NL and Weeke.
In NL.
In NL.
In NL.
See Strömberg.
[Sven Aggesen’s] Kortfattet Historieom Danmarks Konger. 1944.
Arnobiana . Lunds UniversitetsÅrsskrift, NF, Avd. 1, xii 5. 1917.

158

Sven Aggesen

The Battle of Maldon. Ed. E. V.
Gordon. 1937.
Malmros 1979
R. Malmros, ‘Blodgildet i Roskilde
historiografisk belyst’, Scandia,
xlv (1979), 43–66.
Malmros 1985
R. Malmros, ‘Leding og Skjaldekvad’,
Aarbøger (1985), 89–139.
Map, Walter
De Nugis Curialium. Ed. T. Wright.
1850.
Martínez-Pizarro, J.
‘Sven Aggesen’, (Scribner’s) Dictionary of the Middle Ages (ed. J. H.
Strayer, 1988), xi 322–30.
Maurer, K.
Das älteste Hofrecht des Nordens.
1877.
McGuire, B. P.
‘ Politics and Property at Esrum
Abbey : 11 5 1–1 25 1’, MSc ., vi(1974), 122–50.
MGH (Ep., Leg., Poet., Script.) Monumenta Germaniæ Historica. Ed.
G. H. Pertz et al. 1826– .
MHN
Monumenta historica Norvegiæ. Ed.
G. Storm. 1880.
Moltke, E.
Runes and their Origin. 1985.
Morkinskinna
Ed. Finnur Jónsson. 1932.
Mortensen, L. Boje
‘Hvem var Anders Sunesens muse?
En undersøgelse . . .’, in Ebbesen,
205–19.
MSc.
Mediaeval Scandinavia.
NeckamDe nominibus utensilium. Ed. A.
Scheler, Jahrbuch für Romanische
und Englische Literatur, vii (1866),
155–73.
Neergaard
C . Neergaard , ‘ Teglstensmuren ,Kong Valdemar den Stores Værk’,
Nordiske Fortidsminder, i (1890–
1903), 283–97.
NGL
Norges gamle Love indtil 1387. Ed.
R. Keyser et al. 1846–95.
NGML
Novum Glossarium Mediae Latinitatis. Ed. F. Blatt, Y. Lefèvre. 1957– .
H. Nielsen‘Hird: Danmark’, KL, vi 577–9.
MaldonAbbreviations and Bibliography
K. M. Nielsen
Niermeyer, J. F.
Niger, Ralph
Nightingale, P.
NL
Nyrop, C.
Oddr Snorrason
Ohley, F.

Óláfs saga helga
A. Olrik
Olrik 1899–1900
Olrik, J.
Olsen, B. Munk
Orluf, F.
Otto of Freising, Chronicle (ofTwo Cities)
Ousager, B.
Paludan, H.

159‘Jelling Problems. A Discussion’,MSc., vii (1974), 156–79.
Mediæ Latinitatis Lexicon Minor.
1954–76.
Radulphi Nigri Chronica . The
Chronicles of Ralph Niger. Ed.
R. Anstruther. 1851.
‘The origin of the court of Husting. . .’, English Historical Review, 102(1987), 559–78.
Necrologium Lundense: Lunds Domkyrkas Nekrologium. Ed. L. Weibull.
1923.

Danmarks Gilde og Lavsskraaer fra
Middelalderen. 1895–1904.
Saga Óláfs Tryggvasonar af Oddr
Snorrason munk . Ed . Finnur
Jónsson. 1932.
‘Die Pferde im “Parzival” Wolframs
von Eschenbach’, Settimane di Studio del Centro Italiano di Studi
sull’alto Medioevo, xxxi:2 (1985),
849–927.
See Heimskringla and Den store Saga.
The Heroic Legends of Denmark. Tr.
Lee M. Hollander. 1919.
J. Olrik, ‘Harald Héns Love’, HT(D),7. Række, 2 (1899–1900), 177–212.
See KV.
‘Anders Sunesen og Paris’, in Ebbesen, 75–97.
‘Hvor dræbtes Harald Kesia?’, Danske
Studier (1953), 54–64.
Ottonis . . . Chronica, sive Historia
de duabus civitatibus . Ed . A .
Hofmeister. 1912.
‘Gorm Konge’, Skalk, Nr 2 (1957),
19–30.
‘Flos Danie’, in Jyske Samlinger, NyRække, vii (1966–7).

160

Sven Aggesen

Paulus Diaconus , Historia
Langobardorum
Paulus Diaconus, HR

PersonbinamnPeter of Blois(Saxo) PF

PL

Post, G.
Quicherat, L.
Rahewin, Gesta Friderici
RB
Regino of Prüm
Ribe Annals
Rickert, E.
Riis
Riis 1982(the) Ringsted Office
Robert of Torigny

Rodulfi Glabri Historiarum libri
quinque
Roger of Wendover
Roskilde Chronicle
Rüde Annals
S

Ed. L. Bethmann and G. Waitz, in
MGH. 1878.
Pauli Diaconi Historia Romana. Ed.
A. Crivelluci. 1914.
E. H. Lind, Norsk-isländska personbinamn från medeltiden. 1920–1.
Petri Blesensis Epistolæ. In PL 207.
See SG, i.
Patrologia Latina (Patrologiæ cursus
completus series secunda). Ed.
J.-P. Migne. 1844–1905.
‘Plena potestas and consent in medieval assemblies’, Traditio, i (1943),
355–408.
Addenda Lexicis Latinis. 1862.
Ottonis et Rahewini Gesta Friderici I
Imperatoris. Ed. G. Waitz. 1884.
Regula Benedicti. Ed. and tr. D.
Hunter Blair. 1906.
Chronicon. Ed. F. Kurze in MGH. 1890.
See Annales Ripenses.
‘The Old English Offa Saga’, Modern Philology, ii (1904–5), 29–76,
321–76.
T. Riis, Les institutions politiques centrales du Danemark 1100–1322. 1977.
T. Riis, ‘Autour du mariage de 1193’,
La France de Philippe Auguste (ed.
R. H. Bautier, 1982), 341–62.
In VSD, 189–204.
Chronique de Robert de Torigni. Ed.
L. Delisle. 1872.
Ed. J. France. 1989.
Flores Historiarum. Ed. H. O. Coxe.
1841–4.
See Chronicon Roskildense.
See Annales Ryenses.
The text from Stephanius in Gertz
1915/16 and SM, i.

Abbreviations and Bibliography

161

The Saga of King Heidrek the Wise Ed. and tr. C. Tolkien. 1960.
Salvian of Marseilles, De Gubernatione Dei
In PL 53.
Sawyer 1985a
Birgit Sawyer, ‘Saxo—Valdemar—
Absalon’, Scandia, li (1985), 33–60.
Sawyer 1985b
Birgit Sawyer, ‘Valdemar, Absalonand Saxo ’, Revue Belge dePhilologie et d ’ Histoire , lxiii(1985), 685–705.
Sawyer, P.
Da Danmark blev Danmark. 1988.
Scanian Law
In DGL, i:1.
Schwerin, C. vonDänische Recht. Germanenrechte,viii. 1938.
Seip, D. A.
‘Hirdskrå’, KL, vi 580–2.
Series ac Brevior ( Historia
Regum Danie)
In SM, i 161–6.
ServiusServii Grammatici . . . commentarii.
Ed. G. Thilo, H. Hagen. 1881–4.
SG, iSaxo Grammaticus. The History of
the Danes. Tr. Peter Fisher (=[Saxo] PF). Ed. H. Ellis Davidson.
1979.
SG, ii
H. Ellis Davidson and P. Fisher. Saxo
Grammaticus. The History of theDanes. Books I–IX. Commentary.
1980.
(A) Short History (of the Kingsof Denmark)See Historia Compendiosa.
Simon
Gertrud Simon, ‘Untersuchungen zur
Topik der Widmungsbriefe mittelalterliche Geschichtsschreiber bis
zum Ende des 12. Jahrhunderts’,
Archiv für Diplomatik, iv (1958),
52–119, v (1959), 73–153.
Sjælland Law (Valdemar’s)
In DGL, vii–viii.
Sjælland Law (Erik’s)
In DGL, v–vi.
Skj.
Den norsk-islandske Skjaldedigtning.
Ed. Finnur Jónsson. 1912–15.
Skjoldungernes Saga
Ed. C. Lund and K. Friis-Jensen. 1984.
Skjo≈ldunga saga
In Danakonunga so≈gur, 3–90.

162

Sven Aggesen

Kvinde og Slave. 1971.
N. Skyum-Nielsen, ‘Saxo som kilde
til et par centrale institutioner i
samtiden’, SS, 174–86.
SM
Scriptores minores historiæ Danicæ
medii ævi. Ed. M. Cl. Gertz. 1917–22.
SRD
Scriptores Rerum Danicarum medii
ævi. Ed. J. Langebek et al. 1772–
1878.
SS
Saxostudier. Ed. I. Boserup. 1975.
St Albans Vitae (duorum Offarum) In Chambers, 217–43.
Steenstrup 1896
J. C. H. R. Steenstrup, Danmarks Riges
Historie, i. 1896.
Steenstrup, Normannerne
J. C. H. R. Steenstrup, Normannerne.
1876–82.
Stenton 1932
(Sir) Frank Stenton, The First Century of English Feudalism. 1932.
Stenton 1950
(Sir) Frank Stenton, Anglo-Saxon
England. 1950.
Stephanius
Svenonis Aggonis Filii . . . quæ extant
Opusculi. Ed. Stephanus Johannis
Stephanius. 1642.
Stephen of Tournai, Lettres
Lettres d’Etienne de Tournai. Ed.
J. D. Desilve. 1893.
Den store Saga
Den store Saga om Olav den Hellige.
Ed . O . A . Johnsen and JónHelgason. 1941.
StrandB. Strand, Kvinnor och män i Gesta
Danorum. 1980.
Strömberg, B.
Den pontifikale Liturgi i Lund och
Roskilde. 1955.
Suger, Vita Ludovici Grossi
Vie de Louis VI le Gros. Ed. and tr.
H. Waquet. 1929.
Sven Aggesen
Historia Compendiosa (HC, ShortHistory), in Gertz 1915/16 andSM, i.
Sven Aggesen
Lex Castrensis (LC, Law of the
Retainers), in Gertz 1915/16 andSM, i.
Sverris saga
Ed. G. Indrebø. 1920.
Skyum-Nielsen, N.
Skyum-Nielsen, in SS

Abbreviations and Bibliography
Synonyma
Szacherska 1977
Szacherska 1988
Søndergaard, G.
Sørensen, J. Kousgaard
Thangmar, Vita S. Bernwardi
Theodricus, Historia de antiquitate regum Norwagiensium.
Thesaurus Novus
Thietmar

Tilnavne
Vedel
Velschow

Vita Ædwardi
Vita Prima (of St Bernard)
Vita of St William of Æbelholt
VSD
Waitz, G.

163

Opus synonymorum. Ed. P. Leyser,
in Historia Poetarum medii aevi
(1721), 312–20.
S. M. Szacherska, ‘The Political Role of
the Danish Monasteries in Pomerania
1171–1223’, MSc., x (1977), 122–55.
S. M. Szacherska, ‘Valdemar II’s
Expedition to Pruthenia and theMission of Bishop Christian ’,MSc., xii (1988), 44–75.
‘Canutus—historien om et navn’,
Knuds-Bogen, 157–80.
Patronymer i Danmark. 1984.
In MGH. 1841.
In MHN, 3–68.
Thesaurus Novus Latinitatis. Ed. A.
Mai. 1836.
Thietmari Merseburgensis Episcopi
Chronicon. In MGH. 1889.
Danmarks gamle Personnavne. II.
Tilnavne. Ed. G. Knudsen, M.
Kristensen, R. Hornby. 1949–64.
A. S. Vedel, Den danske Krønicke
som Saxo Grammaticus screff.
Copenhagen 1575.
Saxonis Grammatici Historia Danica.
Ed . P . E . Müller and J . M .
Velschow. Pars posterior, Prolegomena et Notæ uberiores. 1858.
Vita Ædwardi Regis. The Life of King
Edward. Ed. and tr. F. Barlow. 1962.
In MGH. 1882.
In VSD, 300–69.
Vitae Sanctorum Danorum. Ed. M.
Cl. Gertz. 1908–12.
‘Zur Kritik Dänischer Geschichtsquellen’, Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche
Geschichtskunde, xii (1887), 25–39.

164

Sven Aggesen

Walter of Châtillon
Walther, H.
Weeke, C.
Weibull 1918
Weibull 1986
L. Weibull

WidsithWilliam of Blois, Alda
William of Jumièges
William of Malmesbury, Gesta
Pontificum
William of Malmesbury, De
Gestis Regum
WilsonWolff, Odin
WR
X

Ynglinga saga

Galteri de Castellione Alexandreis.
Ed. M. L. Colker. 1978; The Alexandreis. Tr. R. Telfryn Pritchard. 1986.
Lateinische Sprichwörter und Sentenzen des Mittelalters. 1963–9.
Lunde Domkapitels Gavebøger .
1884–9; repr. 1973.
Curt Weibull , ‘ Saxoforskning ’,Historisk Tidskrift för Skåneland,vii (1918), 181–241.
Curt Weibull, ‘Ny och äldre historieskrivning om Danmark under tidig
medeltid’, HT(D), lxxxvi (1986),
1–25.
‘Tyre Danmarkar bot’, Scandia, i(1928), 187–202.
Ed. Kemp Malone. 1936.
In Cohen.
Gesta Normannorum Ducum. Ed.
J. Marx. 1914.
De Gestis Pontificum Anglorum. Ed.
N. E. S. A. Hamilton. 1870.
De Gestis Regum Anglorum. Ed. W.
Stubbs. 1887–9.
See The Gelasian Sacramentary.
Den förste Danske Historieskriver
Svend Aagesens kortfattede
Danmarks Historie. 1807.
Witherlax ræt (see Introd., p. 5).
The reconstructed text in Gertz 1915/
16 and SM, i.
In Heimskringla, i.

INDEXES
I. Persons (other than authors). II. Authors, ancient and modern. III. Places andpeoples. IV. Laws, sources, texts. V. Institutional and legal matters. VI. Various
topics; style; realia. VII. Some words commented on in the Notes.
In the following indexes page-references to the translated texts are printed bold.
The Notes are only selectively indexed; the words ‘Denmark’ and ‘Danes’, which
occur passim, are not included at all. Abbreviations used are: abp = archbishop;
bp = bishop; d. = daughter; E = Emperor; f. = father; K = King; KD = King ofDenmark; KN = King of Norway; m. = mother; P = Pope; Q = Queen; s. = son.
I. Persons (other than authors)
Abel, KD 10, 97
Abraham 27
Absalon, abp 1–6, 9–11, 13, 17, 31, 44,
61, 65, 108, 120, 132, 139, 142, 145
Aggi (brotherhood member) 145
Aggi Svensen 40, 46, 143
Aggi Kristiarnsen 1–2, 69–70, 143
Aggi Thver 41, 46
Aki (the crusader) 127
Alexander (the Great) 32, 88, 94, 95,
110
Alexander III, P 132, 137
Alexander Petersen 145Álfhildr, m. of Magnús the Good 126
Alfred, K 10
Anders (Andrew) Sunesen, abp 15, 91,
94, 95, 96, 99, 100
Andrew, deacon of Lund 3
Angant‡r, K 113
Asser Aggesen 143
Asser Kristiarnsen 145
Asser Svensen, abp 40, 46, 142, 143
Asser Svensen, provost 1, 3, 144Ástrá›r ﬁorgunnuson 142
Athisl, K 107
Augustus, E 120
Benedikt Karlsen 145
Benedikte Kristiarnsdottir 145
Bernard of Ratzeburg, Count 138
Berno (a viking) 114
Bernward, bp of Hildesheim 125
Biorn Ironside, s. of Harald Kesia 68,
69–70, 143
Birger jarl 145
Bo Hithinsen 40, 46
Bo Ketilsen 41, 47

Bugislav I, Duke of Pomerania 22, 25,
73, 139
Bugislav II 26, 140
Buris Henriksen 138
Byrhtnoth 111
Canute — see Knut
Cecilia, d. of Knut IV 144
Charlemagne 25
Chnob, KD 115
Conrad II, E 63, 124
Dan the High-minded, s. of Uffi, KD
19, 54, 112
Dannia 112
Dido 117
Dodona 32
Domborus 123
Ebbi Olafsen 145
Ebbi Skialmsen 144
Edward the Confessor, K 112, 118
Eiríkr (Blood-axe), KN 24
Elef jarl 100
Ennignup (Sealendensis bondo), regent
in Denmark 55, 75
Erik, Count 144, 145
Erik I, the (Ever-)Good, s. of Sven II,
KD 39, 46, 67–8, 130
Erik II, the Ever-memorable, KD 9, 22,
68–71, 84, 96, 143
Erik III, the Lamb, KD 8, 9, 22, 71, 92, 143
Erik V, Glipping, KD 10
Erlingr skakki 138
Esbiorn, archdeacon 3
Esbiorn Snara 145
Esger Ebbesen 41, 46
Eskil Assersen 145
Eskil Kristiarnsen, abp 1–4, 78, 142,
143, 144, 145

166

Sven Aggesen

Kazymar II, Duke of Pomerania 26
Eskil Svensen 40, 46, 143
Keti and Vigi 107
Eskil, s. of Øpi 14, 34, 44
Estrith, Old Knut’s sister, m. of Sven II Kjeld, St 112, 143
Klak-Harald, s. of Snio, KD 56, 116–
65
17
Ethelred, K 12
Knut, kings of Denmark so named 115
Eysteinn, abp 23, 76, 82
Frederick Barbarossa, E 21, 26, 90, 108 Knut (I), s. of Sighwarth, KD 55–6
Frithlefer, s. of Frothi the Old, KD 54 Knut (II), Old Knut (vetus Kanutus,
Frothi the Bold, s. of Rokil, KD, 50
Kanutus Senis), s. of Sven Forkbeard,
Frothi Frithgothæ, KD 11, 54, 101
KD 9, 10–12, 13–17, 25, 30, 32–39,
40, 45–6, 63–5, 89
Frothi the Old, s. of Dan, KD 54
Knut (III) — see Harthaknut
Frothi, s. of Skiold, KD 49
Knut IV, St Knut of Odense, s. of Sven
Gerbrand, bp of Roskilde 64
II, KD 18, 39, 46, 66–7, 82, 100, 128–
Geryon of Hesperus 32, 87
Gorm Løghæ, s. of Klak-Harald, KD 30, 142
Knut V, s. of Magnus, s. of Nicolaus,
56, 117
KD 9, 19, 22, 71–2, 73 (Canutus rex
Gunhild, d. of Old Knut 63
Gunnhildr, Q in Norway 24
Roschildensis), 136
Gunnild, d. of Sven 144
Knut VI, s. of Valdemar I, KD 1, 3, 5,
Hadrian I, P 16
7–9, 12, 13, 17, 20–2, 26–7, 31, 44,
Hákon A›alsteinsfóstri, KN 11
73, 82, 89, 107, 109, 111
Hákon jarl Eiríksson 142
Knut Karlsen 144–5
Hakon malus (Hla›ajarl) 24
Knut Lavard, Duke, St Knut of Ringsted, s. of Erik I 20, 22, 68–9, 71,
Halfdan, s. of Skiold, KD 49
Harald Bluetooth, s. of Gorm, KD 61– 100, 144
Kristiarn (two brotherhood members)
2, 73, 117
145
Harald Kesia, s. of Erik I 68, 70
Harald, s. of Sven Forkbeard, KD 126 Kristiarn Aggesen 145
Harald Whetstone, s. of Sven II, KD 7, Kristiarn Benediktsen 145
Kristiarn Svensen 1, 13, 15, 39–40, 41,
39, 46, 65–6
46, 47, 69–70, 78, 119, 143, 145
Haraldr har›rá›i, KN 25, 80
Harthaknut (Canutus austerus sive Kristiarn Svensen (conspirator) 144
durus), s. of Old Knut, KD 25, 39, 46, Kristofer I, KD 10, 86, 97
Lothair, K 131
64, 115
Magnus the Good, s. of St Olaf, KN &Helghi, s. of Halfdan, KD 49
KD, 24, 25, 39, 46, 65
Henrik the Lame 68
Magnus, s. of Nicolaus 22, 68–71
Henry the Fowler, K 115, 118
Magnus Eriksen 10, 144
Henry (III), E 63
Martin, priest 3
Henry the Lion, Duke 21, 26, 139
Martin, St 64, 125
Hercules 87, 121
Nestor 56
Herioldus, K 116 (cf. Klak-Harald)
Nicolaus (brotherhood member) 145
Jon Sverkerson, K in Sweden 144
Nicolaus, Count 143–4
Judas 16, 42, 44, 100
Nicolaus the Old, s. of Sven II, KD 1,
Kamien, bp (Conrad) of 73, 121
Karl Agisun (= s. of Aggi [Svensen]?) 9, 39, 41, 46, 68–70, 82, 130, 143,
144
143
Nicolaus, St 134
Karl Eriksen 144, 145
Offa 21, 30
Karl Karlsen 145

Indexes

Olaf (Olaus), KD 27, 55
Olaf (Olaus Famelicus), s. of Sven II,
KD 39, 67, 142
Olaf Haraldsson, St, KN 11, 24, 65,
79
Olaf, s. of Harald Kesia 134–5
Otto, E 24, 56–60
Palna-Toki (Palna Tokki ), Pálnatóki 11,
62, 142
Peter Aggesen 145
Peter, bp of Roskilde 112
Philip II Augustus (married to Ingeborg,
d. of Valdemar I), K 20
Plogh the Black 71
Ragnar — see Regner
Raki, Dog-king 19
Regner Lothbrogh 11, 55, 114
Ro 19, 105, 112
Rodulf, bp of Schleswig 64
Rokil Slagenback, s. of Rolf Kraki, KD
49

167

Sven, s. of Old Knut, KN 64
Sven II, Estrithsen, KD 25, 39, 46, 65, 81
Sven III, Grathe, s. of Erik II, KD 1, 2,
9, 22, 68, 71–2, 88, 143, 144
Sven Kristiarnsen 2, 143
Sven Svensen, bp of Viborg 40, 46, 143
Sven, s. of Thrugot 40 (= s. of Thrugun46) (alias Thorkil 142)
Theseus 94, 110
Thorkel (the Tall, s. of Strút-Harald) 11
Thorkil — see Sven, s. of Thrugot
Thorkil Bille 145
Thrugot 40, 142
Thrugun 46, 142
Thuri Doki 39, 46
Thuringia, Landgrave (Lewis III) of 26,
84, 117, 138; and see Siegfried
Thyrwi, Ornament of Denmark, Q 21,
24, 26, 56–61
Toki Skialmsen 144
Toki Stighsen 145
Tomyris, Q 117
Ubbi Esbiornsen, Count 144
Uffi, s. of Wermund, KD 26, 30, 50–4
Ulf of Galicia 142
Ulf of Ribe 9
Ulf Sprakaleg 65, 95
Úlfr Óspaksson 80
Ulysses 56
Vagn Ákason 142
Valdemar I, s. of St Knut of Ringsted,
KD 1, 2, 7–9, 19–22, 31, 68, 71–3,
91, 92, 122, 137, 145
Valdemar II, s. of Valdemar I, KD 7–8,
15, 26, 74, 88, 91, 97, 110
Valdemar IV (Atterdag), KD 92
Valdemar Knutsen, bp of Schleswig 19,
26, 82, 84, 109, 114, 138
Volodar, Prince of Minsk 139
Wermund the Wise, s. of Frothi theBold, KD 50–4
William, abbot of Æbelholt 20, 90, 92,
112, 115, 121, 130
Withi the Staller (Guido Stabularius)

Rolf Kraki, s. of Helghi, KD 49, 116
Romulus 105
Saul, K 68
Schleswig, bp of 133; Duke of 110,140
Semiramis 117
Sheba, Q of 56
Siegfried, Landgrave of Thuringia,
Count of Orlamünde 121, 139
Sigefridus (= Sigur›r ormr-í-auga?) 114
Sighwarth, s. of Regner Lothbrogh, KD
27, 55
Skiold, KD 20, 27, 49, 105
Snio, s. of Knut, KD 56
Solomon, K 56
Sophia, d. of Volodar of Minsk, halfsister of Knut V, wife of Valdemar I
4, 22, 26, 73, 117, 138
Sophia, d. of Valdemar I 139
Suni Ebbesen 145
Sveinn ﬁorgunnuson — see Sven, s. of
Thrugot
Sven Aggesen 1– 4 ( Sveno archi diaconus 3), 61 (ego Sueno), family 41, 46
142–5Ælfheah (Alphege), abp of Canterbury,
Sven I, Forkbeard, KD 11, 21, 32, 61– St 11, 91
3, 78
Øpi the Wise (Snialli ) 14, 34, 44, 94

168

Sven Aggesen

II. Authors, ancient and modern
Abelard 28
Abels, R. P. 79
Adam of Bremen 18, 19, 114, 115–16,
118, 121–7
Alan of Lille 23, 87, 109, 112, 114,
118, 119, 138
Albøge, G. 6
Alcuin 112, 140
Aldhelm 92, 119
Ancher, P. Kofod 16–17
Appuleius 109
Arnold of Lübeck 23, 83, 117
Arup, E. 76
Augustine, St (& Pseudo-Augustine) 89,
100, 105
Azo 81, 94
Bering, V. 28
Bernard of Chartres 101
Bernard of Clairvaux, St 100, 138, 144
Bernard of Pavia 81
Bernard Silvestris 87, 118
Boethius 84
Bonizo 91
Brøndum-Nielsen, J. 76
Chadwick, H. M. 20, 107, 111
Christensen, A. E. 76, 77–8
Christensen K. 7, 76
Cicero 81, 108, 118, 123, 127, 138
Damasus 15, 92, 95
Damsholt, N. 76, 119
Diderichsen, P. 6
Dorotheus 14
Fenger, R. T. 28–9, 123
Festus, Paulus 122‘Florence’ of Worcester 88, 107, 139
Friis-Jensen, K. 3
Garmonsway, G. N. 30
Geoffrey of Monmouth 23, 102, 132,
138
Gertz, M. Cl. 2, 5; translation by 29,
105, 123; notable emendation by 84–
5, 87, 89, 91, 92, 99, 102, 108–9, 114,
118–19, 125, 131
Gísl Illugason 79
Glaber, Rodulfus 26, 108
Godefroy, D. 91
Gregory, St , P 94, 104

Grundtvig, N. F. S. 29
Helmold 135
Henricus Septimellensis 112
Henry of Huntingdon 124, 137
Holberg, L. 16–17, 29, 82, 102
Horace 109, 119, 131
Hyginus 110
Hørby, K. 16, 78
Isidore of Seville, St 80, 91, 92, 123
Ivo of Chartres 93
Jaeger, C. S. 102
Jocelyn of Brakelond 89
Johannesson, K. 14
John of Genoa 87
John of Hauteville 118
John of Salisbury 92, 101, 108, 109,
120
John of Wallingford 112
Joseph of Exeter 23
Justin 105, 117
Justinian 14–15, 134
Jørgensen, A. D. 29
Jørgensen, P. J. 5
Kemble, J. 30, 79
Kristensen, A. K. G. 3
Kroman, E. 5, 6
Lagerbring, S. 3
Lange, G. 25
Langebek, J. 3, 5, 28, 108, 142
Larson, L. M. 30, 79
Lehman, O. 28
Liebermann, F. 10
Lindow, J. 77
Lucan 23, 131 (cf. 68)
Lyschander, C. 4
Læssøe Müller, P. 29
Malling, O. 28
Malmros, R. 136
Malone, K. 107–8
Martianus Capella 48, 84 , 89 , 1 04 ,1 07 , 11 2 , 11 4 , 1 34
Martínez-Pizarro, J. 4
Martinus, jurist 119
McGuire, B. 144
Niger, Ralph 19, 129, 130, 135–7
Oddr Snorrason 123
Olrik, A. 20
Olrik, J. 29, 76, 104, 130

Indexes

Orosius 119, 120, 134Óttarr svarti 124
Otto of Freising 76, 101, 122
Ovid 23, 37, 83, 94, 105, 125, 138
Paulus Diaconus 121
Peter of Blois 95, 101
Plautus 107, 111, 119, 134
Priscian 101, 110
Quintilian 102
Radulphus Diceto 18
Regino of Prüm 104
Riis, T. 5, 6, 85, 93, 100, 130
Robert of Ely 18, 130
Roger of Wendover 18, 112
Salvian of Marseilles 108
Sawyer, B. 14–15, 76
Sawyer, P. 80
Saxo (Grammaticus) 1–3, 5–11, 13, 14,
16, 18–19, 22, 23, 26–9, 65, 143–5
Servius 87
Simon, G. 104
Simpson, J. 30
Skyum-Nielsen, N. 17, 76, 94
Snorri Sturluson 11, 79, 119
Statius 23, 83, 109, 111, 135 (cf. 68)
Stephanius, St. J. 4, 18, 27–8, 95, 97,
108, 123
Stephen of Tournay 90, 114, 131, 132
Suger 120
Sven Aggesen 1–4 (Sveno archidiaconus 3), 61 (ego Sueno), family 142–5
Szacherska, S.M. 144
Sæmundr hinn fró›i 20, 82, 112
Tertullian 86
Theodricus Monachus 23–5, 108, 131
Theophilus 14
Thietmar of Merseburg 123
Tribonian 14Úlfr Óspaksson 80
Vedel, A. S. 28
Vegetius 86
Velschow, J. M. 3
Vergil 23, 83, 87, 111, 113, 115, 121,
138 (cf. 33, 51, 58, 61)
Waitz, G. 5
Walter of Châtillon 23, 87, 106, 110,
112, 137
Walter Map 108

169

Weibull, C. 75, 133, 138
William of Blois 118
William, abbot of Æbelholt 20, 90, 92,
112, 115, 121, 122, 130
William of Jumièges 112
William of Malmesbury 18, 105, 121,
126
Wolff, O. 28
ﬁór›r Kolbeinsson 12Ælnoth 18, 127–9, 131
III. Places and peoples
Aachen 114
Aarhus 145
Almindsyssel 145
Ascanians 21
Bällingslev 145Bjæverskov 75, 144
Borg 41, 46
Bremen 84, 121
Børglum 129
Canterbury 18
Clairvaux 1, 143–5
Copenhagen 4
Cyprus 68
Danube, R. 55
Dingsbüll 110
Eider, R. 26, 52, 60
Elbe, R. 50
England 10, 11, 25, 32, 34, 38, 44, 63,
64, 66, 78, 89, 108
Esrom (abbey) 2, 92, 144
Finland 32, 87–8
Fiskbæk 128
Flanders 142
Flensburg 97
Fotavik 70
France 2, 14, 20, 21, 23
Fyn 65, 126
Gaul 64
Germans (Alamanni, Teotonici ) 18, 21,
29, 50–54, 58, 61, 63
Grathe (Heath) 1, 72, 143
Greeks 32, 63
Grønsund 61
Götaland (Gotia) 64, 145
Haraldsted 68
Harsyssel 64, 145

170

Sven Aggesen

Helgenæs 65
Hohenstaufen 21, 26
Holstein (Holzatia) 26, 52, 84
Holy Land 26
Humlum (Humla) 66
Iceland, Icelanders (Tyle, Islandia,
Islandenses) 23, 32, 49, 63, 64, 105–7,
112–13
Ireland (Hybernia) 63
Isøre (Hysøre) 65
Italy 26, 63, 64
Jelling (Ialang) 21, 61, 132
Jerusalem 67
Jómsborg (Hyumsburgh) 11, 61, 62, 73(‘the city . . . founded by . . . Harald’)Jómsvíkingar 11, 21, 78
Jutland (Iucia, Iutia) 8, 15, 65, 72, 93,120, 142, 144, 145
Kamien 73, 121, 139
Kampen 110
Kn‡tlingar 20
Kolbacz 19
Lejre (Letra) 49, 112
Lime 41, 47
Limfjord 128, 129
Little Belt (Medium Transitum) 67
Lolland (Lalandia) 71
Lombardy (Langobardia) 63, 64
London 11, 93
Lund 1, 3, 4, 19, 40, 70, 128, 142, 145Læborg 121
Magdeburg 75, 144
Mecklenburg 26
Norway (Noruegia) 11, 24, 25, 32, 44,
63, 64, 93, 95, 110, 138
Norwegians 8, 23, 82
Oddaverjar 20, 113
Odense (Othonia) 8, 18, 39, 46, 66–7,
98, 115
Omersyssel 145
Onsild (Othenshylle) 69, 143
Palestine 143
Paris 2, 23, 75, 114
Pomerania, Pomeranians 1, 3, 19, 22,
25, 73, 108
Ribe 132
Ringsted (Rinstadia) 8, 68, 71, 92
Roman Empire 50, 56

Romans, city of 64
Roskilde (Roschildensis civitas) 19, 21,
49, 64, 71–2, 95, 112, 126, 137, 143
Rouen (Rotomagus) 64
Rugia, Rugians 25, 72, 123
Rønbjerg (Rinebiergh) 69, 96
Samland (Samia) 44, 63, 87–8
Saxons, Saxony (Saxonia) 8, 58
Scania, Scanians 1, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 65,
70–2, 134, 142, 145
Schleswig (Slesuik) 9, 19, 26, 58, 64,
66, 68–70, 129, 139
Sejerø 133Sjælland (Sialandia) 34, 44, 55, 65, 127,
133, 142, 144
Skialm family 142, 144
Skibing (?) 70, 134
Skioldunger 49
Skjo≈ldungar 20–1
Skåne — see Scania
Slavia, Slavs 9, 25, 32, 61–3, 65, 68,
72, 73Sorø 4, 75, 144
Sprogø (Sproua Insula) 72
Sweden (Suetia) 50, 64, 107, 116, 138,
144, 145
Teutons — see Germans
Thule — see IcelandTjæreby 144
Tommerup (abbey) 7
Tours (Turones) 64
Trondheim 23
Urne (Urnehoved) 71, 135
Varde (Warwath) 41, 46, 98
Veksebo 144
Vendel(-dweller, -dwellers) (Wandalus,
in Vandalis) 40, 46, 67
Venestad 75, 144
Viborg 40, 46, 71, 143
Villingerød 99
Vindinge (Winningha) 63
Vitskøl 136
Wends 25
IV. Laws, sources, texts
Annalists (Danish) 3, 19, 76, 83, 84, 96,
122, 132, 133
Avia Ripensis 145

Indexes

Beowulf 105, 106
Books (ancient) 48
Brother-list 78, 145
Canon law 14–15, 77, 80, 86
Charters (of Valdemar I) 8, 92
Chronicles (Danish) — see Lejre andRoskilde
Cistercian sources 81, 96
CL — see Lejre Chronicle
Codex Resenius 114
Compendiums (historical) 18
Consiliatio Cnuti 11, 89
CR — see Roskilde Chronicle
Draco Normannicus 23
Eiríksdrápa 12(Den gamle) Gaardsret 14(Lost) Genealogy (by Sven Aggesen?)
26–7
Genealogy by Abbot William 20, 112,
115, 121, 130
Genealogy of the Kings of Denmark by
an Unknown Author 27
Gesta Suenomagni regis 18
Gulathing Law 11, 93
HC — see Short History
Hexaemeron 15 (see Anders Sunesen,
Index I)
Hir›skrá 8
Historia de antiquitate regum Norwagiensium 23
Historia compendiosa — see Short History
Historia Norwegiæ 83
Historia de profectione Danorum 84,
102, 104, 127
Justinian (Codex, Institutes) 14–15, 134
King-lists 115, 125–6
Kn‡tlinga saga 126, 129–31, 136, 142
Konungs skuggsjá 8, 90
Law of the Retainers 2, 4, 5, 6, 7–17,
25, 26, 28–30; translated 31–43; cf.
Vederlov, Witherlax ræt
Laws: of K. Abel 10, 97; II Cnut 10; of
Erik V 10; of Forest 11; of Frederick
Barbarossa 90; of Harald Whetstone
7, 65; of Henry I 12, 99; of Jutland 8,
15, 93, 97, 120; of Knut VI (decree
for Scania) 7, 10, 17, 89; of Kristofer

171

I 10, 86, 97; of Lombardy 82; of
Norway 11, 93, 95; of St Olaf 79; ofRegner 11; of Scania 94, 97, 98, 99,
100, 101, 124; of Schleswig 93, 97; ofSjælland 7, 97, 98, 101; of Valdemar
I 7; of Valdemar II 7–8, 15, 97. Cf.
Consiliatio Cnuti, Gaardsret, Gulathing Law, Hir›skrá, Justinian, Lex
Castrensis, Roman law, Vederlov,
Witherlax ræt
Lejre Chronicle (CL) 19, 20, 23, 111
Lex Castrensis (LC) — see Law of the
Retainers
Lund annalists 3, 19, 137, 145
Lund Consuetudines 91
Lund king-list 115, 126(Ringsted) Office of St Knut Lavard
131–2
Old men as sources 20–1, 32, 40, 43,
48, 83, 104
Roman law 13, 80–1, 91, 94, 128
Roskilde Chronicle (CR) 19, 21, 112,
122, 132–5
Short History (Sven Aggesen’s) 2, 5,
14, 18–26, 27, 30; translated 48–74
Sven Aggesen’s works 4–7 (texts of),27–30 (translations of)Vederlov 5, 9, 15, 17; cf. Law of the
Retainers, Witherlax ræt
Vetus Chronica (of Sjælland) 129
Vita Ædwardi regis 112, 118(St Albans) Vitae duorum Offarum 21,
107, 111, 134
Vulgate 88, 108, 109, 110, 113, 135 (cf.
32, 53, 55, 57, 59, 63, 64, 67, 68, 69,71)
Witherlax ræt (WR) 5, 6; translated 44–
7; cf. Law of the Retainers, Vederlov

V. Institutional and legal matters
Bishops 14, 46, 64, 70, 73, 101, 133
Boran 37, 99
Bot 16, 39, 40–2, 57, 78, 98
Catholiciani, ‘commissioners’ 70, 72,
134
Crimen laesae maiestatis — see Treason
Fjarthing, ‘quarter’ 37, 44, 46
Frithkøp 7

172

Sven Aggesen

Forest rights 63
Government (of Denmark) 8–10
Gyrsum (gørsum) 41, 46, 97
Hird, hir› 8–10, 44
Hir›stefna 93
Hof, hofmæn 10, 14
Homage 36, 121
Homicide 38, 39, 49, 50, 60–1, 67, 69,
71, 72, 89
Hostages 58, 60–1
Humiliations 35, 38–9, 39–40, 41, 81, 124
Huskarlastefna 10, 12, 15, 37, 44, 45
Huskarlar, housecarles 45–6, 89–90
Husting, húsﬂing 11–12
Høfthinge(r) 10
Kings 48, 49, 51, 58, 63, 66, 68, 72
Knights 8–9, 34, 59, 133Kværset 129
Lething 8, 128
Málama›r, máli 80, 103
Monday Court (in London) 11
Nithing (nithingsorth, ‘name of nithing’)
9, 39, 45, 46
Nobility, rank 32–3, 49
Oaths 37–8, 41, 42, 45
Officials 8, 78, 98
Ordeal 45, 78
Outlawry 39, 43
Pay 36, 44
Penance 16
Queens 56–61, 73
Remedies 15, 34–7
Satisfactio 16, 97
Summonsing 44–5
Staller(s) 8, 41, 46
Tinglith — see ﬁingali›
Treason 9–10, 13, 42–3, 44–5, 66, 70
Urne-thing (in Vrnensi placito) 71, 135
Witherlagh, -logh 31, 37, 44, 45, 46
Viborg assembly (Viburgense placitum)

VI. Various topics; style; realia
Adam (debt of) 64, 73
Axes, gilded 33
Beating 14, 41, 98
Bricks 72
Cheerfulness, duty of 36 (cf. 44)
Contubernalis, contubernium 2
Cross of Christ 61, 67, 69
Danevirke 58–9, 72, 112, 120
Devil (Enemy of Peace, Old Prevaricator, Old Serpent) 15, 22, 38, 42, 67,
73, 94, 139
Dishonour (shame, disrespect) 42, 43,

49, 50, 54, 56, 57, 60‘Distribution’ 54, 111
Dwarves (on shoulders of giants) 43,
101–2
Epicureans 51, 56
Fortune 54, 112
Gilds 11, 97
Gluttony 51, 56
Horses 8, 34–5, 65

Imitatio Christi 27
Irony 17, 53, 57, 59
Labyrinth (of forgetfulness) 27
Ladder (of undutifulness) 42
Latin 31, 102
Lion 32, 53, 134
Lustra (quinquennia) 64, 68, 72, 125
Music 8, 59, 120
Nature 49, 56, 73, 118
Organological politics 34, 94
Orthodoxy 56, 61
Pedigree, lineage 20, 24, 26–7, 32, 48;(Icelandic) 105–7, 112–3, 115, 123;
(Sven Aggesen’s) 141–5
Pilgrimage 67, 96, 143
Plebeians 49 (agrestes), 61 (vulgaris
tumultuatio), 65 (turba agrestis ),66 (plebs), 67–8 (popularis turba;
71
plebicula), 70 (plebs Scanensium)
Worthæl (var›hald) 10
Plenitudo potestatis 66, 128
ﬁegn 12
Propaganda 4, 22, 28–9
ﬁeningmenn 12
Ransom 62–3, 77, 123
ﬁing 11–12
Rhetoric 27, 31, 43, 108
ﬁingali› (ﬂingamenn, ﬂingamannali›) Schools (of Paris) 2, 23, 75
11–12, 33 (Tinglith)
Seating (in king’s hall) 35, 37, 45

Indexes

173

Style 15, 18, 43, 48, 65, 83
Swords 33 ( hilts) ; 38, 39 ( drawn
swords); 52, 53, 54 (swords of champions); 71, 72 (sword-blows)
Tranquillity (pacis, quietis tranquillitas)
22, 38, 54, 63
Tribute 50, 56–7, 60, 62
Vernacular ([sermo] vulgaris noster ;vulgaris assertio) 41, 50, 67
Women 24 (folly and wisdom); 56(virtues); 59–60 (cunning); 63 (inheritance rights)

prescriptio 94
recumpensantes 92
runcinus 90
secretarii 89
stangehug 98
stemmata 88
subputo 88
sveet, sveit 94
taxatio 96
thver 97
vapnatak 101
witherlogh 86

VII. Some words commented on in the Notes(a) with reference to the Law of the Retainers
aconite 94
ascella 98, 103
boran 93–4
caballus 90
calumnia 91, 99
castrenses 86
catholiciani 134
classicum 101
condicio humana 88
constitutio 93
contectales 89
contubernium 86
curiales 89
dextrarius 90
discissio 100
doki 96
faleratus 102‘famulariter’ 88
Favonius 101
fjarthing 94
geniculor 98–9
gyrsum, gørsum 97
huskarlar 89–90
huskarlastefna 93
incantatio 92
inconsequentia 95
insidiator 94
matricula 86
nithingsorth 95
nutricius 86
palefridus 90
patronisare 91(b) with reference to the Short History
Alamanni 111
ampullositas 109
asporto 125
binomius 122
blatan (bláton≈ n) 121
bondo 116
catholiciani 134
columpna 132
comminitatio, comminatio 109
convenientia 127
cos 127
coxa 136
cythara 120
discrimen 118
distribuo 111
ecclipsus 114
elegantissimus 111
expientissimus, experientissimus 109
eymuni 134
feodum 135
fiola 120
forus 123
gentiles 107
hen (heinn) 127
herciscunda 124
indago 120
internecio 121
intersignium 110
interstitium 114
iugi memoria 133–4
kesia 134
klak 116–17
knut 114–15

174

lethangwite 128løghæ 117
luminaria 136
masoleum 121
mediamnia 110
momentaneus 131
monarchia 106
nepos 113
nodus 115
novercalis 112
parifico 120
patrisso 134
perspicior 104
persecurizo 137
plenitudo potestatis 128
præcluis 112
prerogativa remanendi 129
prolixius 127

Sven Aggesen
pugillatorius 111
purpureus 118
reclinarium 123
recumpensatio 128
renuto, renuntio 120
retexere 105
rigor regis 129
rostrum 139
Sealendensis 116
skatelar 131
spiculatores 108
subgrunda 123
subvector 127
syncopare 138
Tartara 133
tranquillitas pacis 112
turgiditas 108, 109
tygheskeg 122