Historians of Olaf's world

Olaf Haraldson, King of Norway, was recognized as a Saint after his death at the battle of Stiklestad fought in the year 1030 against the forces of Canute the Great, King of the Danes and the English.

Owing to his recognition as a Saint, Olaf was probably the best known Scandinavian ruler in the Middle Ages. From the twelfth century, the LATIN SAINT OLAF'S LEGENDS in breviaria, such as the Acta et Vita Sancti Olavi (soon translated into Norwegian) and the Passio et Miracula beati Olavi (written by Archbishop Eystein) spread the official ecclesiastical history of the king's life. As a matter of fact, Olaf is known to have been the last western saint accepted also by the Constantinople Church.

THE EARLIEST HISTORY of the Scandinavian peoples was written both in the native languages and in Latin. The Church supported the production of written literature because of its interests in Scandinavia and, for instance in the case of Olaf Haraldson, it wanted to interpret afresh his warlike history which was already firmly established in oral folklore. In the early Scandinavian literature, there was a continuous INTERCHANGE BETWEEN LANGUAGES. I shall give my examples from Norway:

First, the Islendingabók (The Book of the Icelanders), which Ari Thorgilsson wrote in Icelandic between 1125-32, is supposed to have been the source for the first national history of Norway, the anonymous Historia Norvegiae. However, Ari's volume was partly based on the Latin Gesta Hammaburgensis ecclesiae pontificum of Adam Bremensis.

Secondly, in Norway Latin was used by men of the church who wrote the chronicles of the kings. They were based partly on skaldic verse and Icelandic sources. Monachus Theodricus finished such a chronicle in 1187, the Historia de antiquitate regum norwagiensium, which contains history from Harald Fairhair to Sigurd the Crusader (that is from the ninth to twelfth century).

Thirdly, in the late twelfth century, Odd Snorrison, Theodricus' colleague, published his chronicle of King Olaf Tryggvason, the Viking who was an eager Christian. Odd Snorrison's chronicle was quite soon translated from Latin into Icelandic.

And finally, the skaldic poetry, the secular history of Olaf Haraldson was written up in Icelandic and Norwegian in the first half of the 13th century by the famous Icelandic poet, historian and statesman Snorri Sturlason. His corpus of royal sagas Heimskringla (known in modern editions by the name Kongesagaer, "Kings' Stories") goes as far as the 12th century.

At the end of the 17th century, the Royal Antiquarian of Sweden, Johan Peringskiöld, published Snorri's valuable biographies and incorporated into the volume a Latin translation, Historiae regum septentrionalium.

So, we can state roughly that the Scandinavian literature started in its early phase with Latin and returned back into Latin in the 17th century.

Interpretations of Olaf's cruelty

A dissertation on practical philosophy under the headline De Sancti Olavi Norwegiae Regis pravo religionis zelo, was disputed in 1738 at the old university of Turku by a certain Johannes Tolpo under the guidance of Professor Algoth Scarin.

In this dissertatio historico-politica, Johannes Tolpo treated the violence of the above-mentioned Olaf Haraldson. The author of this academic report debated the king's mission by the sword amongst the Norwegians, his violence in pacifying his rivals, the lesser kings (the so called reguli), and, in general, the violent way he ruled.

The author's attitude to Saint Olaf deviated considerably from the portrait given by Snorri Sturlason in his Heimskringla and, to a great extent, from the one presented by the Catholic historians, namely Adam Bremensis, who was almost a contemporary of Olaf in the 11th century, and the later Johannes Magnus Gothus (1488-1544) and Johannes Messenius (1579-1636).

a) Dissertatio historico-politica and its most important source, the Heimskringla

Peringskiöld's edition of Snorri Sturlason's Heimskringla was the most important source for Johannes Tolpo in verifying Saint Olaf's "pravum religionis zelum", unjust religious fanaticism. In his preface, Johannes Tolpo uses the word of crudelitas (cruelty) which as a word is literal and commonplace but as a concept is probably more common in ancient Latin literature than in the academic dissertations of later times .Johannes Tolpo seems to have been somewhat "disappointed" that after Olaf's death the hatred of the Norwegians towards him turned to pity, and their contempt to reverence. He refers to Olaf's recognition as a Saint.

But, let us see what kind of a man was Olaf according to Snorri Sturlason to whose biography Johannes Tolpo so eagerly refers! First, Snorri's Heimskringla introduces Olaf's youth as the time of Viking raids. Chapters 4 to 18 in the beginning of his chronicle are descriptions of battles around the Baltic Sea. They are based on contemporary (to Olaf) skaldic tradition. According to Snorri, Olaf was a dreadful visitor to the coasts of the Baltic .

The skald Sigvat's phrase (ibid.) from a Viking song (Víkingavísur) "bellum crudele Herdalense contra Finnos ... gessit", gives cruelty a heroic connotation, and certainly this heroic cruelty of Olaf during the expedition was by no means exceptional, if we are to believe the sagas.

Johannes Tolpo, on his part in his disseration, considered that Olaf's use of violence was largely due to his restless youth, lacking morality to distinguish right from wrong and proper religion. He says (p. 31) about Olaf: seculis illis natus fuerit, quibus, in illo septentrionis angulo, veri numinis ignorantia, barbaries summa morum, justi rectique colendi inscitia non familiis privatim modo, sed & summae imperii civilis praesidebat. And Tolpo finally asks (p. 32): In illo vero vitae genere, ad disciplinam justi & aequi & denique magnae fortunae cultum, quae quaeso praeparatio doctrinae, quae morum sperari potuit?

In my opinion, all this is somewhat CONTRADICTORY to what Snorri says (putting again words into the skald Sigvat's mouth) that Olaf was "Moderator regni, jura hominibus tam forensia quam maritima preascribere solebas".

Considering Olaf's violence, the main criticism of the dissertation, in fact, was directed to his struggle for power, under the pretence of promoting Christian faith in Norway. The author draws attention to Olaf's violence against the inhabitants of Norway, his persecution of the leaders of the opposition, the five reguli, who became tired of his tyranny (tyrannidis ejus pertaesi). This choice of expression, tyrannidis ejus pertaesi, indicates, in my opinion, that THE AUTHOR REALLY TRIED TO ESTABLISH THE REASONS FOR OLAF'S VIOLENCE MORE FROM THE KING'S MIND THAN FROM HIS ENVIRONMENT.

Naturally, the dissertation discussing Olaf's pravum religionis zelum presents only one aspect of the king's life and activities; his violent mission. However, IT WAS also, according to Snorri, the main reason for the conflict between the leaders of the Norwegian Upland and Olaf. Snorri, namely, tells us that Olaf severely punished "apostates" (cap. 72 "De itinere regis in Uplandias")

But, as regards Olaf's violence, the account of the Snorri's Heimskringla is, in my opinion, fatalistic rather than a one-sided criticism against him, as one could imagine when reading merely Tolpo's dissertation from the 18th century. Namely, according to Snorri, Olaf seemingly was evil, greedy for power, but the insidious reguli were similarly evil. It is, in fact, impossible to find anyone guilty of starting the violence. Snorri lets Olaf's antagonists speak against Olaf in cap. 73.

Olaf was afraid of his rivals, especially of a certain Roerik who was vir consilio acris, severique ingenii. Therefore, Olaf put out his eyes and arrested him. The fate of the other reguli was likewise miserable. However, judging from the choice of words, Olaf's rivals were worse than the king himself. The skaldic verses in Snorri's account favour Olaf ( Cap. 74 carmen 60 of Ottar [Niger]).

In addition, Snorri's appraisal of Olaf as a king and a man is very flattering, his devotion to the Christian faith not being his only characteristic. For Snorri, Olaf was a hero, the only one who actually dared oppose the might of the great Canute. Snorri praised the king for his serious efforts to create a civilized state putting an end to the raids. Social order had to be created by discipline (Cap. 192 [733]). Olaf's missionary work civilizing the country, his conflict with Canute and the reguli of Upland, were not to be considered as separate incidents. This was quite clearly demonstrated by Snorri.

b) Olaf in Catholic historiography

On the other hand, the Catholic historians refered to by Johannes Tolpo - Adam Bremensis, Johannes Magnus and Johannes Messenius - described Olaf only with laudatory phrases. Accordingly, there is no hint of Olaf's lust for power.

Adam Bremensis approved of the motives for Olaf's warfare. In his Gesta Hammaburgensis ecclesiae pontificum, which is probably the most important written source for the history of Northern Europe in the 11th century, Adam tells us that for Olaf the continuous war against Canute was more a necessity than a delight, and that the Danes fought for power, whereas the Norwegians, under the direction of Olaf, fought for the liberty of their country.

According to Adam, Olaf ruled in peacetime iudicio et iustitia. He particularly emphasizes the king's missionary passion for the Christian faith: Olaf drove out paganism and superstition from Norway. Adam, who was a magister scholarum, gives Olaf a better mark than he does to the earlier disciples of Christianity, Olaf Tryggvason and Harald Fairhair: the former was "a cruel semibarbarus" (lib. II, 40), the latter "was hated by all because he cruelly suppressed tyrants, burnt down churches, persecuted people, and devoted himself to idolatry, in order to win back his people's support" (lib. III, 17). But about Olaf Haraldson Adam says that the king converted people to Christianity co-operating with Grimkell, the bishop of Bremen (lib. II, 57).

The Gothorum Sueonumque Historia of Johannes Magnus Gothus, the last Catholic archbishop in Uppsala (1523-1526), mainly criticized King Canute the Great. Johannes Magnus wrote this Swedish history after leaving for exile in 1526. According to Magnus, Olaf, "patriae libertatis assertor", despite his cruel methods in propagating the Christian faith, was a victim of the tyrant Canute and Olaf's untrustworthy Norwegian compatriots. In other words, Magnus represented Olaf as a martyr who owed his sanctity to his death..

Johannes Messenius was Professor of juris et politices at Uppsala university in 1609-1613, the State archivist of Sweden and Associate Judge of the Court of Appeal (1614-1616). Although Messenius wrote his vast (20 libri) manuscript of Scandinavian history, the Scondia Illustrata (Chronologiae Scondianae) as early as between the years 1616-1635, the work was not published in an abridged form (14 libri) until 1700-1705, long after his death. The reasons for this delay were political. In 1616 Messenius was accused of a secret correspondence with some Polish Catholics, and probably also because of his sympathies with Sigismund III who in 1599 was forced out of his position as head of the Swedish-Polish Personal Union.The court passed a death sentence on Messenius. However, King Gustavus Adolf reduced the punishment to imprisonment in the castle of Kajana (mod. Kajaani, in northern Finland). The Scondia Illustrata was written during these years in prison.

The portrait of Olaf in the Scondia Illustrata conforms to the opinions of Magnus: Olaf preaches, while Canute intrigues. Because the nature of the volume (a general history) did not allow detailed narrative, Messenius concentrated on the religious message: pio mandato Olaf drove idolatry from Norway, killed enemies and confiscated their properties. Like Johannes Magnus, Messenius did not moralize on Olaf's measures in strengthening his own position of power.

Olaf's cruelty and the natural law

Johannes Tolpo, consequently, broke with the Catholic portrait of Saint Olaf. This is not any great surprise. In my opinion, his subject (perhaps rather than the very treatment of it) excellently mirrors the academic currents of thinking during the "era of freedom" in Sweden (1719-1772).

In 1738 at the university of Turku (Ĺbo), his dissertatio historico-politica on Saint Olaf's 'pravum religionis zelum' contributed to the critical Swedish academic discussion on the old Catholic order - and INDIRECTLY on the influence of Lutheran orthodoxy over the absolute Carolingian regime in Sweden between 1680 and 1718.

It was the theory of NATURAL LAW which provided the foundation for this discussion at the Swedish universities. Naturally, in Sweden attention was focused on the religious emphases in the doctrine later than in, for example, Brandenburg and Netherlands. Besides, at provincial Finnish Turku university natural law itself was for a long time, until the "era of freedom", poorly represented as compared with conservative aristotelianism.

The theory of natural law was introduced in philosophy most comprehensively by the Dutch Hugo Grotius in his De jure belli ac pacis (1625) and by the German Samuel von Pufendorf in two treatises, De jure naturae et gentium (1672) and De officio hominis et civis (1673).

In Sweden, the moderate pioneer of natural law was the prominent humanist and founder of classical philology, Johannes Schefferus, Professor of the law of nature and nation (1665) at Uppsala. In 1668, Samuel von Pufendorf was summoned to the university of Lund as professor juris naturae et gentium. Later, in 1677, Pufendorf was appointed Royal State Historiographer of Sweden. Consequently, he became the most influential and respected theorist in the discussion on natural law at Swedish universities.

The criticism of Johannes Tolpo's dissertation directed towards Olaf's struggle for power, under the pretence of promoting the Christian faith. Thus it followed the Pufendorfian doctrines about the separation of Church and State and religious tolerance.

Olaf's courses of action in founding the Norwegian state were not suited to Pufendorf's ideal: AGREEMENT WITH THE PEOPLE. Olaf, instead, used FORCE. Criticizing this, Johannes Tolpo shared, in addition to "Pufendorfian stoicism", also the theories of Thomas Hobbes.

Tolpo seems to have been acquainted particularly with Pufendorf's De officio hominis et civis, when he wrote:

obligationem colendi numinis omnem, quae dissentiat ab illo modo, de cujus honestate in conscientia quis, sive vere sive falso persuasus fuerit, quandoquidem animam ipsam cultus divini, puta spontaneitatem destruit, eandem esse non logiken latreian sed crudelem & perinde peccaminosam.

In Tolpo's criticism against Saint Olaf's religious policy can also be found some PRO-FINNISH tones, which, in fact, conformed with the doctrine of natural law. He, namely, indirectly through his footnotes, reminded us that Olaf's violent mission was unjust to the inhabitants of Norway, as was the crusade of Saint Eric to the Finns.