The sudden death of King Cnut the Great in 1035 CE brought the stability of the most impressive Scandinavian empire of the period into peril. Harthacnut, Cnut’s eldest son born to Emma of Normandy, his second wife, and the heir apparent to Cnut’s state, faced insurmountable odds to retain the lands over which his father held domain. Yet, the breakdown of the empire failed to undermine the legacy of Cnut’s accomplishments, and in proxy, the success of early High Medieval Scandinavian states. Although Cnut’s impressive ‘North Sea Empire’ collapsed as a causality of Cnut’s death, the scope of his empire remained relevant to the power and evolution of Scandinavian states in the later Viking period. The empire Cnut left behind spoke to many
…show more content…
Ironically the radical changes to Scandinavian political structures incited by the influx of power and wealth gained through raids and extortion prompted Norse kings to break with the earlier tradition of raiding to instead focus on tributary collection and territorial conquest. Even by the commonly accepted end of the Viking Age in 1066, marked by King Harald Hardrada’s defeat at the Battle of Stamford Bridge, the structure of Scandinavian society and politics had already deviated largely from its eighth and ninth century roots. The centralization of government and the accumulation of power by petty kings occurred conjointly with the profitability of raiding and tribute collection. Scandinavian kings who could afford to muster large armies capable of enforcing their authority over their neighbors and overseas became increasingly powerful. The financial and military strength of petty kings in the middle and late Viking age allowed for the unification of the kingdoms of Denmark and Norway, which in turn paved the way for political structures comparable to other medieval European …show more content…
First, the influx of new wealth from raiding and extortion stratified wealth and power in Scandinavia society. Those powerful enough to host raids and large armies further secured more wealth and strength over political competitors. The gap in wealth and power grew between kings and inferior chieftains. Over the course of the Viking period, power and authority grew increasingly unequal. The plundered wealth that returned to Scandinavia fueled the divide between powerful and weaker rulers. Kings reinvested their newly gained wealth into bolstering their authority and military capabilities which allowed them to enforce their will over their subjects in fashions to which their predecessor proved incapable of achieving. Kings took domain over large overseas territories, gathered taxes and tribute from a large body of individuals including foreign kings, subservient jarls, and freemen. To maintain their ability to enforce the extortion of wealth, Scandinavian kings found themselves increasingly reliant on military might and power seizure through the retraction of the freedoms of Scandinavian nobles. The expansion of centralized power in kingdoms resulted in exoduses of weaker chieftains in search of independence from the growing authority of Scandinavian kings. Norse sagas, such as the Orkneyinga Saga, the Íslendabok, and the Landnámabók in
Ironically the radical changes to Scandinavian political structures incited by the influx of power and wealth gained through raids and extortion prompted Norse kings to break with the earlier tradition of raiding to instead focus on tributary collection and territorial conquest. Even by the commonly accepted end of the Viking Age in 1066, marked by King Harald Hardrada’s defeat at the Battle of Stamford Bridge, the structure of Scandinavian society and politics had already deviated largely from its eighth and ninth century roots. The centralization of government and the accumulation of power by petty kings occurred conjointly with the profitability of raiding and tribute collection. Scandinavian kings who could afford to muster large armies capable of enforcing their authority over their neighbors and overseas became increasingly powerful. The financial and military strength of petty kings in the middle and late Viking age allowed for the unification of the kingdoms of Denmark and Norway, which in turn paved the way for political structures comparable to other medieval European …show more content…
First, the influx of new wealth from raiding and extortion stratified wealth and power in Scandinavia society. Those powerful enough to host raids and large armies further secured more wealth and strength over political competitors. The gap in wealth and power grew between kings and inferior chieftains. Over the course of the Viking period, power and authority grew increasingly unequal. The plundered wealth that returned to Scandinavia fueled the divide between powerful and weaker rulers. Kings reinvested their newly gained wealth into bolstering their authority and military capabilities which allowed them to enforce their will over their subjects in fashions to which their predecessor proved incapable of achieving. Kings took domain over large overseas territories, gathered taxes and tribute from a large body of individuals including foreign kings, subservient jarls, and freemen. To maintain their ability to enforce the extortion of wealth, Scandinavian kings found themselves increasingly reliant on military might and power seizure through the retraction of the freedoms of Scandinavian nobles. The expansion of centralized power in kingdoms resulted in exoduses of weaker chieftains in search of independence from the growing authority of Scandinavian kings. Norse sagas, such as the Orkneyinga Saga, the Íslendabok, and the Landnámabók in