S.V.Sannikov
Novosibirsk State University
The problem
of development of kingТs authority in a traditional German society has been
observed by many researchers during last hundred years. Relevance of this
problem increases since its observation is connected with a number of
debatable questions of historical macrosociology such
as: the genesis and essence of state, the ways of development
of social stratification, characteristics of the organization of public
authority in early stratificated societies.
Consideration of different aspects of social organization is connected with the
methods of research, appropriate theoretical background for more effective
realization of the available data. The majority of modern researchers, studying problems of theoretical history, infer that the most considerable
contribution to understanding of early stratificated
societies during the XX century has been made by the theorists of cultural
materialism, who suggested to interpret different historical forms of social
organization as a consequently developed structural types. Application of the new social
anthropological methods of research for study of the early stages of social history allowed researchers to produce a
new, more clear, understanding of the political genesis. As
one of the most essential achievement in that area may be considered the
demonstration of existence of a specific intermediate stage of social evolution
between a tribal and a state organization made by Elman
Service. This intermediate stage is characterized by existence of the
centralized political structures, which have some indications of an early
state organization and some considerable features of a tribal society at the
same time.а These structures were designated as лchiefdoms╗, and were observed in a number of researches
of American and European authors. Nevertheless, despite a wide acknowledgement
of the theory of chiefdoms in a modern science, adoption of this theory to the
study of German and Scandinavian societies is still not complete. In
this article an observation of political genesis in a traditional
German and Scandinavian society in context of neo-evotionism
theory has been offered. This research allows to compare the historical development of the
ancient societies of Northern Europe both with its historical anologues and with the theoreticaly constructed social types, to
revise a number of existent stereotypes about the development of лbarbarian╗
societies, to supplement the theoretical data of the historical macrosociologywith the comparative aspects.
The
existent data about the character of social organization of ancient
This
kind of society has considerable indications of a лtribal╗ organization
(according to the definition of tribe, made by Elman
Service). The main indication of a tribal society is the dominance of the
economically independent resident groups, that take the right to protect themselves, due to the absence of the superior power. The
gathering of a public home guard (described by Julius Caesar), made by Germans
in case of any external agression, is very similar to
the mechanism of deliver of the лwar arrows╗, made by Scandinavian bondes in the same situation: л...bondes
turned the invitation to a ting into the war arrow, and called every person in Trandheim for war╗ [11]. Thus, the superior social
structures in this kind of society have a secondary, determined by any external
aggression, character (e.i. there exists a tendency
of a so-called tribalism). The resident groups are presented by the provinces
and regions, ruled by some лprincipes╗, whose social
role may be considered debatable. Most likely, the post of elected leader,
which used to make judgement in separate regions in
ancient German society, may be compared with the Early Medieval Swedish лlaghman╗, the interpreter of the law, who ruled the
province with the council of лhofdings╗ (höfðingi). Taking into account high social
influence of such members of community, it is possible to conclude that every
person of them was an actual chief, who was pretending to take a high place in
a social hierarchy. Snorri Sturluson,
describing a Scandinavian social structure of his time, mentioned, that such
members of community are лthe respectable bondes, who
are enjoying full rights╗ [12]. It is necessary to note that in the given
poetical name (kenning) of these bondes (лthose who
distribute the riches╗ [13], veitanda fjar) exists an allusion to the age of reciprocal
economical relations, that indicates an early origin of this kind of a public
figure.
The
organization of authority in such kind of society has a form of a public
meeting, which involved a council of nobles, and gathering of all the
free people of the tribe, as it might be illustrated by the ancient German
tradition: лThe less important problems are discussed by a council of nobles, more
important Ц by all the people; moreover, the problems, discussed by all the
people, are considered by the nobles╗ [14]. The similar situation might be
noticed in a Scandinavian society of the tribal age: лThe oldest men... from
the twelve tribus, had convoked the common council of
the land (communae terrae placitum), and decreed that from each third (tribus) should be elected people, who would be empowered to
act for the others╗ [15]. It is also necessary to note that this society still
remains to be the subject of authority, since no participant of the council could
infringe the rights of any of the free members of the tribe (л...to
execute, to chain and punish is not allowed for anyone╗) [16], except the case
of making a common decision (if, for instance, the case was a punishment of a
criminal): лIn a common meeting one may have a speech of accusation and offer
for investigation the cases, that entail an execution╗ [17]. Restriction of the
right to carry weapons and to participate in the common meetings
applied only to slaves, whose life conditions, however, were not so hard.
This fact allows to characterize the primary evolution type of the social
organization of Germans as a tribal лmilitary democratic╗ [18].
Influence
of a tribal military democratic type of political organization on the formation
of social consciousness of Germans was very considerable, what was constantly
confirmed during the Early Medieval history. This influence has been reflected by
Early Medieval Germanic laws (by which was adopted the idea of a free man, a
valuable person, that was produced by the tribal age), and by the ethnical designations of
German tribes, in which the idea of the union of free (e.i.
armed) persons in a collective name of Alamanni (e.i. all-the-men) had been adopted. The freedom itself was identified with
the right of carrying weapons, and participation in public gatherings and
military raids. For instance, the tribe of Tencters,
who were raising their claims against the Romans, declared that under the Roman
restrictions Germans were лnot allowed to gather to discuss their cases, and
even if they were allowed to do so, the intolerable conditions for people who
live for war Ц to gather unarmed - were set╗ [19]. The significance of a democratic
tradition had been reflected in repeated revivals of a public councilТs tradition
during the periods of military or dynastic crisises.
For example, during the hard war against the Byzantine forces, king of Ostrogoths Badvila (Totila) had mentioned the existence of a good council of
elders [20], as one of the factors, essential for the victory. Ordinary Ostrogothic warriors, in a critical moment of history of
their kingdom, had elected a лmartial king╗ (regem Martium) [21] right in the battle-field. The tribal form of
social organization substituted kingТs reign in a Langobardian
society after the death of king Klef for a long
period of time: лLangobards after his (KlefТs Ц S.S.) death remained without a king for ten years,
during this time they were ruled by the dukes (ducibus)╗
[22]. The same phenomenon can be noticed in Ostrogothic
society after the death of king Torismuth: л...Ostrogoths bemoaned his death so much, that no one king did
took his place instead of him for forty (!) years╗ [23].
It is necessary to note that the author (Iordanes)
distinguishes the authority of a king from the authority of a duke, saying that
Visigoths were ruled by лtheir chiefs and dukes (primates eorum
et duces), who led them instead of the kings (regum vice illis praeerant)╗ [24].
Military-democratic traditions remained the prevailing form of organization of
German tribes during a long period of time, and even some cases of a strict
resistance of a tribal nobility against the
establishment of any form of a personal authority might be noticed. For instance,
the tribe of Geruls, wishing to live without any
ruler, killed a man, who was carrying out the title of a king [25].
The
similar tendencies can be noticed in the development of Medieval Scandinavian
society. The basis of the social structure of Early Medieval Scandinavia
was formed by the organization of free land possessors, owners of the лdurable
patrimony and the old othal╗ (Fastae faethaerni ok aldae othal) [26]. Influence of the bondes
remained strong even during the age of the Vikings. For instance, bondes repeatedly eliminated unsuitable konungs
and continued living according to the ancient law, declaring to any konung лif you wonТt satisfy our demands, we will rise
against you and kill you. We donТt want to suffer from pressure and crime. That
is like did our ancestors: they had drown five konungs
in a quag at the Mulating
because they were as arrogant as you are╗ [27]. The use of force against any of
free people was strictly prohibited: лIf you will... use force against us, then
all of us, bondes, will refuse from you and will take
another ruler╗ [28]. Norms of traditional Scandinavian law fixed that лSwedes
have a right to take and to refuse a king╗ (...svaer egho konong at taka ok sva vraekae) [29]. This fact
explains why during a long period of Scandinavian history the real power was in
the hands of bondes (лAll the kings of Sweons let bondes to consult them
any questions╗) [30], that made them become a very influential social force,
quite often standing in opposition to a kingТs authority. As it is shown in
later sources, during a peaceful time chiefТs authority was restricted by a
will of the council of bondes. Rimbertus
says that Sweons have such a custom лthat every
common case depends more on unanimous will of the nation (in populi unanima voluntate), than on a kingТs authority╗ [31].
Nevertheless,
despite an existence of deep military democratic traditions in the considered kind of society, it's organization was far from the principle of equality. Many of the evidences confirm the existence of
a stratum of noble people, possessing much more considerable wealth than the
ordinary tribesmen. As a quite significant heritage of that age might be considered
luxuriousMedievalking feasts, which were organized to show the
status of the host of the feast. During the time
described by Tacitus, all the important questions
used to be discussed among the tribal nobility at the feasts: л...during the feasts they
usually discuss the conciliation of the enemies, the conclusion of the
weddings, the election of the elders (principes),
and, finally, the war and peace╗ [32]. These feasts, being the relic of the
ancient reciprocal economic relations, were organized by people from the
famous clans, who wished to obtain the sympathies of the tribesmen. The feasts were most common among the military leaders,
whose influence was strictly related to the realization of such kind of
actions. An influential person, a strong bonde (storbondi), who claimed to be a military raid leader,
was asking for the support of his tribesmen and other influential bondes, what
required a manifestation of a considerable generosity from that person. For
instance, someone Tunni л...distributed the goods to
his people. Therefore he was beloved, and people willingly joined him╗ [33]. It
is necessary to note that the wealth of a candidate for the role of a
military leader had a sacred meaning, and its existence signified that the
leader is beloved by the gods, and his fortune (Hamingja)
will spread upon his war comrades. Generous for presents and feasts leader
became known in a forming epic tradition as лone who distributes the gold╗ (gullbrjota) or лgenerous for the distribution of riches╗ (auðmilding). Such fame made leader very popular among
the hostmen, that is also reflected in Medieval epic tradition:
л...ruler of the Goths was giving me presents generously... let him be glorious
for all the times╗ [34].
It
is possible to suppose that exactly during that time starts the formation of a
permanent chiefТs bodyguard (hird, drott), which size can be shown by the evidence of Snorri Sturluson that лtwenty
people are called the host╗ (drott eru tuttugu menn)
[35]. This information may be compared with the information from the лBeowulf╗,
where the main hero starts his venture with fourteen men,
himself being the fifteenth [36]. Comparison of this numbers with the data
about the strength of the hosts of the Great MigrationТs period (which number some hundred persons) let us state
that in the considered texts is described the formation of only the house-troop, which becomes the chiefТs most close milieu. Relations between the chief
and his men were determined by the keeping of the
promises and oathes of the reciprocal engagements.
The chief engaged himself to lead his host to the victory, showing high
military skills (лIn battle it is a shame for a chief to be emulated by
somebodyТs bravery... chief fights for the victory╗ [37]), and to bring his
bodyguard everything needed for a prosperous life (лHostmen
are longing for a battle horse, and a victorious spear, stained with blood;
instead of payment they receive feasts╗ [38]). Taking into account the fact
that initially the reward of hostmen was in most cases of a natural
character, it is possible to conclude that hostmen
became dependent on his chief voluntarily, sharing with him dwelling and meals.
This order was confirmed by making oath of faithfulness to a chief. Breaking of
that oath considered a serious and disgraceful crime: лThose who swore, and
didnТt follow the chief, are considered as fugitives and traitors and they donТt get
trust any more╗ [39]. The relations between a chief and his bodyguards
were becoming so important that its breaking soon became considered a sign of a
forthcoming death: л...not gifted by the gold, but feeling cold with his flesh,
he, who had lost his chief... sees the dark waves╗ [40].
The
military success reflected directly upon the material maintenance of chief and
his house-troop, producing a rapid increase of the role of the war in life of
nobility. As the work of Tacitus shows, the military
activity soon becomes a main occupation of a chief. This evidence may be
supported by the activity of a famous German chief Ariovistus,
whose host, according to the data of Julius Caesar, лhavenТt seen a roof above
their heads (tectum non subissent)
for fourteen years╗ [41]. Similar phenomena might be seen during the early age
of the Vikings (of the period of the лinner colonization╗ of
This
new type of political organization, being developed during the evolution of a
tribal society, can be characterized as a лsimple chiefdom╗ [47], which
distinctive features are the certain centralization of the government, the
existence of the group of local leaders, subordinated to central leader, and
the arising of a permanent civilian authority of the superior military leader
(the chief), who was named лrex╗ in a Latin variant. This kind of social
organization might be obviously seen as evolutionary developed one, since there are
several evidences, fixing the intermediate forms of development of society
from the tribal structure to the structure of simple chiefdom. For instance, it is possible to discern it from the description of the ancient German tribe of Geruls, made by Procopius Caesariensis, who had described the very beginning of the
centralization process in that tribe, that was the appearance of a permanent
tribal chief, whose authority was yet quite nominal: л...their king was a ruler
only symbolically, having no advantages in comparison with the ordinary
tribesmen╗ [48]. The similar situation is reflected in TacitusТ
evidence that among Germans лthe chiefs dominate more by their personal
example, than by any right to command╗ [49]. From another extract of Procopius it is possible to see that the numerous representatives of
nobility maintained their high social ranks, producing the situation of a real
multiple authority. For instance, when Gerules were
conquered by Langobards, and they had to leave the
place of their living, they were led by the лnumerous chiefs of kingТs kin╗ [50],
although they had lost their superior chief in a battle recently. The multiple authority manifested itself in a form of a hierarchical
coordination, that was realized with the observance of all necessary rites of
the interaction. For instance, Hortarius (Hortar), king of Allemans,
according to the evidence of Ammianus Marcellinus, summoned for the feast лall the kings (reges), people of kingТs kin (regales), and dukes (regulos) of separate regions╗ [51], and such feasts were a
regular action.
Genetic
relation between the kingТs authority and the early tribal military leadership
can be retraced during all the period of the early development of chiefdoms.
Chief, getting a superior status, maintained his unconditional right-duty to
lead big military and predatory actions. Moreover, his tribesmen had a right to
demand that kind of activity from the chief. For instance, the Geruls, лbeing full of anger, abused their king Rodulf without any restraint, and, coming to him, called
him effeminate and weak╗ [52], because their king didnТt organized any war
action during a period of three years. Permanent military actions of Germans
prove that the war was the optimal method of maximization of the economical
effect, which is the pledge of social development. In fact, the war factor was
exactly the basis for development of superior social structures in a
traditional German society, that had entailed the rise
of the social status of nobility.
The
military promotion of chief to the kingТs title might be illustrated by the examples from the sources. Usually for obtaining the kingТs authority one needed a noble origin,
as it was noticed by Tacitus: лGermans choose their
kings from the nobility (ex nobilitate)╗ [53]. Nevertheless, belonging to a kingТs kin could be
substituted by the military achievments of the ancestors, for instance, as it were with
Brinno, chief of Canninefates:
лHe was a son of noble people... his father had risen against the Romans for
many times... the fame of that family attracted the tribesmen to Brinno╗ [54]. In any case, fame of the relatives was very
important for the promotion of a person, what can be obviously seen, for instance,
in Ostrogothic society Ц the chief of Ostrogoths, Uraia, told his
tribesmen that he is a relative of king Vitigis, and
that kingТs failures may pass on him [55]. Having an appropriate origin, chief
used to obtain sympathies of his tribesmen by the bravery and perky speeches. As Tacitus noticed, лamong the barbarians
that one has more trust, who has more impertinence╗ [56]. This situation
might be illustrated by the line-up of Allemanian military
forces before the battle of Argentoratus, where a
successful chief Chonodomarius, raised for his perky
military actions, had the privileged place not only among his host, but also
among other German people [57]. Mentioned by Tacitus
chief Brinno was also famous for his лboundless, but
quite stupid bravery╗ [58].
After
the procedure of a public acclamation and confirmation, chief had to be placed
on a big shield and raised on the shoulders of warriors, according to the
лancient custom╗ (more maiorum) [59]. This procedure,
as it goes from the colourful description of Cassiodorus, was committed лamong the unsheathed swords...
not in the closeness of rooms, but in the broad battle-field, with the roar of
the battle-horns╗ [60]. During that procedure the chief was entrusted the duty
of a superior commander, who operated in agree with the leaders of different
clans, voluntarily submitted to his authority. Generally, it is possible to state the correspondence of ancient German лreges╗ to
Medieval Scandinavian лkonungs╗. The hierarchicaly submited to konungs ancient German лdukes╗ (лpeople of kingТs kin╗, as
they are called by Procopius and Ammianus)
are seemingly correspondent to the Scandinacian
лjarls╗ and лhersirs╗. According to the evidence of Snorri Sturluson, лjarls, hersirs and hostmen are called
the friends, interlocutors or table-companions of konung
(konungs rúnar eða málar eða sessar)╗
[61], what can be well correlatedа with
the given evidence of Ammianus Marcellinus
about the interaction of chiefs of different level. Konungs
themselves could face some difficulties in forming their surroundings from the
number of chiefs of the equal or lower rank, because of the strength of
democratic traditions of German society. For instance, when konung
Olaf had offered the title of jarl to a noble person,
he received the answer that the ancestors of that man were hersirs,
and лhe didnТt want to have a higher rank than they had╗ [62]. Thus, around a
German chief quite often was formed a hierarchy of chiefs, with whom konung could have some problematic relations. For instance,
when Tacitus describes the struggle between the chief
of Cheruscks Arminius and
the Romans, Tacitus says that there were лuneasily
among the Germans, who were excited by the hopes, impatience, and disagreement
among the chiefs╗ [63]. Even though Arminius tried to
operate in agreement with other famous chiefs of Germans, Romans knew well
about the existence of serious disagreements among the German nobility: лWe
(Romans Ц S.S.) may left Cheruscks
and other unruly German tribes by themselves and their own dissentions╗ [64].
The only support for chiefТs struggle for authority against other chiefs, was his host and his personal bravery. For instance,
Arminius, during the hard battle with Romans, was in
the front file of warriors, лby his words, and his own example, and his
firmness in suffer of wounds, making people hold on╗ [65]. The similar deeds
can be noticed in activity of Chonodomarius Ц in the
decisive battle with Romans he was лfull of bravery, and, relying on the
strength of his arms, came forward in the front line, shaking his heavy spear╗ [66],
at the same time when other chiefs led more safe sectors of battle. Seemingly,
the post of chief-konung remained elective for a long
time. According to the evidence of Ammianus
Marcellinus, лevery Burgundian
king is forced to renunciation if the tribe will face military defeats or
failure of crops during his reign╗ [67]. This tradition was also widely
spread in Early Medieval Scandinavian society. For instance, лthe nation of Sweons had such a custom to put down the quality of harvest
to a king╗ [68], and konung could be even sacrificed
if his reign was not very successful [69]. The struggle for the superior power
also quite often led to the death of konung Ц for
instance, Arminius had failed his pursuit for kingТs
title, and felt in struggle with the nobility.
We
might suppose that arising of early Scandinavian kingdoms (chiefdoms) of the Vendel age (VI-VIII c.) was reflected in Anglo-Saxon
poetry, particularly, in the famous poem лBeowulf╗, which tells us about the
legendary events of the history of Danes and Geates.
Main characters of the poem are лkings╗ (cyning),
leaders of the army and nation (leodcyning). Leaders
of that level are known in Medieval Islandic
literature tradition as лsmall konungs╗ (småkonungr). According to the characteristics of
these leaders and specific nature of their activity (лSo ought a young man...
deserve... by fine treasure-gifts, while in his father's keeping, that him in
old age shall again stand by willing companions╗ [70]), we may conclude that in
the poem steady tradition of German chiefdom and succession of kingТs title by
representatives of the nobles are described. This supposition might be
confirmed by the лYnglinga saga╗, which describes the
governing of the ancient konungs. According
to this saga, during the rite of initiation, a successor-konung
лhad to stand up, take and drain a goblet... by making that he inherited the
estate of his father╗ [71]. One of the features, that was inherited by
Medieval Scandinavian society from the ancient German times (when kings were
elected in the battle-field), was a custom of лadoption with the arms╗, when a
future king (chief) of any nation passed a special initiation of taking arms
from the hands of a king of another nation: л...we have such a custom, that son
of a king shouldnТt take a place at the table with his father, before he will
get arms from a king of another nation╗ [72]. The similar tradition is
seemingly presented in the text of лBeowulf╗, when a young leader of Geats went to konung of Danes, to
glorify himself by heroical deeds: лI was advised
that, by my people, the best ones, the clever chaps, that it were thee I should
seek, for that they the force of the strength of mine knew╗ [73]. For a
successful service konung of Danes calls young duke
of Geats his son: лNow, I, Beowulf, you, the best of
men, for me like a son would love in life╗ [74].
Konungs (kings) and jarls (dukes) of
that period were representatives of a close circle of noble clans, and their
upbringing was determined by a specific nature of their predestination. The
main occupation of a young duke can be shown by the following extract: лIn
chamber jarl started to grow; he brandished the shield, interlaced bow-strings,
bent bows, and sharpened arrows, threw the javelins and spears, rode a horse,
set a dogs, and waved a sword, swam skillfully╗ [75]. As we may see, in this
extract a high specialization level of military aristocracy, which supplied
candidates for the post of a konung, can be noticed.
Such a candidate had to win sympathies of his fellow-tribesmen by successful
military actions (just like in ancient German tribal society): лwas to Hrothgar success in warcraft
given, so that his retainers eagerly served him╗ [76]. Becoming a konung, duke accepted лin his own homeland earthly bliss to
command a stronghold of men╗ [77]. But it is necessary to notice that konungТs power was sometimes more nominal, than real,
because in case of making serious decisions, the initiative belonged to the
council of the elders (лMany often sat the mighty at counsel╗ [78], л...with
blended-hair aged... together they spoke╗ [79]),
that is an obvious heritage of an ancient German tribal tradition.
In
purpose of maintaining their authority, konungs
resorted to the distribution of lands for the encouragement of outstanding hostmen: л...gave him seven thousand hides of land,
residence and ruler's seat╗ [80]. The purpose of such distributions was to tie
chieftains to konung strongly with the bonds of
hostТs faithfulness. DukeТs service was to participate konungТs
army with their hosts: лI to you a thousand thanes will bring, heroes as
help... and to you in aid bring a forest of spears,
the support of strength, where you be needful of men╗ [81]. We may also suppose
that konungs used to take care of the hosts of the dukes
that were killed in the war: лbe you hand-bearer to my
young retainers, hand-companions, if battle takes me╗ [82]. It is possible to
suppose that the local hosts, that had lost their leaders in a hard battle,
joined the konungТs host.
KonungТs figure becomes very important
in English and Scandinavian culture of the Vendel
age. Northgerman folklore is full of similar
descriptions of an idealized image of chiefТs dwelling, kingТs chamber where
brave warriors find a shelter. These are Heorot of Hrothgar konung, and Vallhallar of leader of einherjers
Odin, and Bilskirnir of Tor.
The size of such buildings impresses the imagination of contemporaries and
becomes even more fantastical in a mythological reflection. So the Bilskirnir chamber was legendary famous for its immense
size: л...it has five hundreds rooms and forty more. It is larger then any
house people ever built╗ [83]. Most part of his spare time konung
spent in his chamber with his host, maintaining the sympathies of his comrades
by lavish feasts: л...that chamber belongs to... konung...
there are many rooms and a great number of people: some of them were playing,
other were celebrating with feast, others fought, using the arms╗ [84]. In the
text of лBeowulf╗ is an allusion to the immanent activity in the area of such
structures, - author laments: лthere was not harp's joy, delight of glee-wood, nor good hawk soaring through the hall, nor swift
horse trampling the courtyard╗ [85]. According to the лYnglinga
saga╗, one of influential kings of the Vendel age
лhad at his court many different jesters, harpists, and fiddlers╗ [86].
The
development of kingТs authority entailed a growth of hosts and even an immanent
staying of host in adjacent rooms with konung:
л...you in Heorot may sleep without sorrow with you
company of soldiers╗ [87], лhe found then therein the nobles' company
slumbering after the feast╗ [88]. Such staying was a corollary of a structural
apportionment of a лclose╗ host from the number of kingТs comrades: лafter
evening came, and Hrothgar went to his quarters, the
ruler to rest, the hall guarded countless earls╗ [89]. This host had to show
the greatest honour fighting for kingТs life [90].
This feature was also inherited from the Ancient German society; as Tacitus noticed, лto return from the battle, where the duke
felt, means for a hostman to disgrace himself for all
the rest of his life╗ [91]. The лclose╗ host was a military council of king [92],
who followed him in all his ventures: лtheir custom was that they were often
ready for a battle both at home and out harrying, and either of these, for just
such times as for their liege-lord the need arose╗ [93]. The лclose╗ hostТs
reward was the most generous: лThe full cup was brought to him, and a friendly
invitation proffered in words, and twisted gold kindly offered: two
arm-ornaments, robe and rings, the largest necklace of those which I on earth
have heard of╗ [94].
The
symbolical reflection of the kingТs power we may find in an interior structure
of the konungТs chamber. The center of the hall was a
feast table (or there were a special hierarchy of tables by an indication of
proximity to the konungТs table), around which hostmen settled and where the most important questions were
discussed. King observed the feast hall from his seat (лthe gift-throne╗ [95]),
which was raised at the main place of a table. At the feet of a king was a
place for outstanding hostmen, heroes of battles and
campaigns: лUnferth... was also there sitting at the
feet of the Scylding lord╗ [96]. Every hostmen had his own definite place that signified his
status: л...by the bench, where... boys were, Hrethric
and Hrothmund, and heroes' sons, the young company
all together╗ [97]; лI first came there to that ring-hall to greet Hrothgar; straightaway to me... with his own sons he
appointed a seat╗ [98]. The place of a hostman had a
special meaning even in ancient German tradition, for instance, son of Lombardian king, Alboin, who came
to meet a king of Gepids, Turisind,
went to the court of a king, where he was лkindly greeted, and invited to the
kings table, where for him was appointed a seat near the king, by the right
side, were used to seat kingТs own son, Turismod╗ [99].
The kingТs place at the table was sanctified by a sacred authority of the
superior power, and, according to the ideas of contemporaries, had ability even
to frighten off the evil: лthe dark death-shade... in the black nights...а he the gift-throne was compelled to respect╗ [100].
Traditions
of military leadership remained considerable exactly during the early stages of
the development of chiefdom, what can be proved by the description of a chief,
who led such a formation. For example, king Olaf
лused to have fun and to joke, was friendly and easy in converse, starting
everything fiery, very generous, loving to stand out for his bright clothes,
and excelling everybody in battle by his bravery╗ [101]. At the same time, the
successful realization of big military campaigns certainly led to the
consolidation of chiefdom, and even to the development of an absolute
hereditary power of konung. The bright example of
establishment of a hereditary personal power can be shown by the activity of
chief of Vandals Geizerich, who had cruelly
suppressed the mutiny of nobility in the year 442, and established a steady
kingТs reign. Special value has the survived description of temper and
appearance of Geizerich, which let us trace the
changes, that were taking place in image of a typical German leader: л...he was
shortish and lame, reserved, taciturn, despising the
luxury, stormy in his anger, extremely farseeing, when perturbing the tribes,
ready to sow the discord and to incite the hate╗ [102]. As we may see, at this
stage of development of chiefdom occurs a substitution of a generous
enterprising kind of chief for a far-seeing statesman, who was a calculating
commander and cruel politician.
This
new kind of society is distinctive for the development of relations,
that are typical for stratificated societies.
This feature is reflected in the evidence of Tacitus
about the hate that felt the citizens of Svebian
nation to chiefs Vangionus and Sidonus
because of the лslavery╗ [103] they made for people. The hostility that
nobility felt for the chiefs produced regular attempts of revolution and
overthrow of chiefТs authority. For example, king of Svebs
Vannius лoriginally used to be loved by his people,
but his prolonged reign made him proud and he fell because of the hate of his neighbours and the inner dissentions╗ [104]. The hostility
was intensified by the sizeable accumulation of material means: лThere were rumours about the riches of Svebian
kingdom, which were accumulated by Vannius during
thirty years of depredation and collection of tributes╗ [105]. Also there must
be existed the tendency of opposition between the central authority and local
communities, that had a big influence on the proceeding social development,
which was accomonied by the incessant military
consolidation of the central authority, involving the periphery social
formations into its sphere of influence more hard.
Further
development of the outlined tendencies entailed the development of a compound
chiefdom [106], which arose from the incorporation of simple chiefdoms, and is distincted for the despotic authority of the superior chief
upon the local leaders. Snorri Sturluson
characterizes (in a kenning form) the title of a chief, лto whom tributary konungs (skattkonungar) are
submitted╗ as лkonung of konungs╗
(konungr konunga) or
лsovereign konung╗ (þjóðkonungr),
saying that only such konung may have that name, who
лrules a big state╗ (ræðr fyrir þjóðlandi)
[107]. States of the konungs were formed from the
seized lands of other chiefs. For instance, Ingjald konung had лvowed that he will enlarge his state to all the
directions or he will die... after that Ingjald konung had subdued all that lands of konungs,
and collected the tribute from the possessions╗ [108]. The essential background
for establishment of a compound chiefdom existed even in frame of a simple
chiefdom. For instance, it existed in the activity of Julius Civilis, who лdecided to subdue all the neighbouring
tribes, and if someone will resist, those should be compelled by the strength
of arms╗ [109]. The successful campaign entailed the situation when лmany
tribes joined Civilis, some because of fear, other
voluntarily╗ [110].
The
evolutional factor of the development of compound chiefdom can be seen from the
history of Suebish-Marcomanian community of king Marobodus, лwho had reached the superior authority among
his tribesmen not by the compulsion, but, on the contrary, by the consent of
people╗ [111]. That evidence of Vellius Paterculus let us state the fact of establishing of a
simple chiefdom among the Marcomans during the reign
of Marobodus. Further, he with his tribesmen had
occupied the territory to the east from the Herzingian
wood, and had лsubdued all the neigbours partially by
the strength of arms, partially by the parley╗ [112]. The basis of this new
social structure was formed as the simple chiefdom, with the inherent feature
of the multiple authority. For instance, the
representative of the GothsТ nobility, someone Katualda,
who planned the attempt at Marobodus, had лfirst to
seduce the chiefs of Marcomans by the bribery╗ [113].
But at the same time the authority of Marobodus upon
the subordinated chiefdoms had an undisguised despotic character. For example, Katualda longed for revenge himself upon for his flight
лfrom the injustice of Marobodus╗ [114]. The Romans
had even threatened Suebians, that they will restore MorobusТ authority upon the Germans if Suebians
are unruly, what was a kind of threat of a recurring enslavement [115]. The
state of Marobodus had its permanent лcapital city╗ (regia) with the лfortifications╗ (castellum),
where merchants from the neighbouring territories
gathered, being attracted by the military plunder and the riches of the chief [116].
Among the surroundings of Marobodus outstanding place
was kept by his personal Guards of hostmen, which was
formed during the times of simple chiefdom, and which followed chief in all his
ventures. According to the evidence of Vellius
Paterculus, лhe was always accompanied by the Guard,
consisting of his tribesmen╗ [117]. It is also necessary to note that
despite the existence of extensive territories, submitted to the chief, and the
well-developed machinery of authority, there are still not enough reasons to
consider the chiefdom of Marobodus as the state,
because his chiefdom was based more on the traditional for pre-classed
societies system of collecting the tributes from the subdued tribes, than on
any modern system of taxes, that is traditional for state formations.
Most
part of German tribes was at the stage of a simple chiefdom to the moment of
their invasion into the Roman provinces. According to the evidence of Ennodius, Theodorich Amal had united under his leadership as many chiefs, as his
army was able to contain [118]. The simple chiefdom was the organization of Lombardians, when they had invaded in
KonungТs deeds for enlargement of the
lands were extremely cruel. For instance, Norwegian konung
Harald had лordered to kill all the people and burn
the settlements... some people were begging for mercy and they received it if
they joined the konung╗ [125]. Subduing the lands, konung established the following order: лHe set a jarl,
which had to maintain the law and collect the taxes in every fulk. Jarl had to take the third part of the taxes for his
own needs. Every jarl had at his disposal four hersirs
or more, and every hersir received twenty marks for
his keeping and expenses. Every jarl had to supply sixty warriors to konung, and every hersir Ц
twenty. Harald the konung
had augmented the taxes and tributes so much, that jarls obtained more riches
than konungs had before. When it
became known in Trandheim, many of the nobles joined
the konung╗ [126]. It is important to note,
that the autocracy of konungs sometimes had a really
unlimited character. For instance, konung of Uppland, Eistein the Wicked
лinvaded the Trandheim and ravaged the country, and
subdued it. He offered the choice for people of Trandheim:
to accept his slave Torir the Shaggy as a konung, or to accept his dog, named Saur.
They chose a dog, because they thought it will bring them more freedom╗ [127].
Sometimes bondes wanted to opposite the authority of konungs, but they often were not able to do it: лOlaf the Konungr stood up and...
said that everyone who will resist and who wonТt obey his command, will bring
his anger on himself, and that person will be punished by the most serious
methods which exist at his disposal╗ [128]. And after that л...no one ventured
among the bondes to contradict konung.
And since bondes couldnТt reply the konung, he hadnТt met any resistance. And that is why
everybody obeyed the command of the konung╗ [129]. In
that situation, konungs and jarls used to break
easily different ancient laws and rights. For instance, one of the Norwegian
jarls лstarted to lead a dissolute life. His people took the daughters of
respectable people and brought them to him, and he shared the bed with them for
a week or two, and after that he sent them away. By this
deeds he brought a big anger of the relatives of that women upon
himself╗ [130]. To appraise these deeds of konung
correctly, we should notice that crime against the morals considered most hard
in a traditional German society: лAdulteries are extremely rare among the
Germans: the punishment is immediate╗ [131]; лIf someone seduces anotherТs
wife, or forces a girl, he will be executed╗ [132]. The essence of the changes,
that had taken place in organization of society, may be noticed from the
appraisals of the contemporaries, who used to notice the positive
characteristics of the leader, notwithstanding a great number of crimes he had
made: лThe enmity against Hakon jarl was so great,
that everybody called him nothing but the Wicked jarl.
That nick-name remained for a long time after him, but if to be honest, we
should say that Hakon jarl had many of the qualities,
needed by a good ruler: firstly, a noble lineage, secondly, a wit and the
ability to rule a state, bravery in battles, and finally, a good fortune in war
and in fights with the enemies╗ [133].
Despite
the frequent violation of the ancient customs, konungs
used to pay much attention to the codification of the laws: лHakon konung was very clever and
he paid much attention to the establishment of the laws. He had established the
laws of Gulating according to the advices of Torleif the Clever, and the laws of Frostating
according to the advices of Sigurd jarl and other
people of Trandheim, who considered the most clever
ones╗ [134]. That kind of activity was provoked by the opportunity to regulate
the military forces in the regions, and to put them under konungТs
control: л...Hakon konung
established a statue that all the settled lands should be divided into the ship
provinces... It was determined how many ships had every fulk
to supply in case of the convocation of the home guard; and the home guard
should be convoked when enemy army invaded the country╗ [135]. Establishing of
the efficient military system facilitated the convocation of the army for konung in case of the organization of a campaign: лHe
declared to people that this summer he will recruit the army for the campaign
outside the country, and he will demand ships and people from every fulk, and he told the number of ships the fulks were ought to supply╗ [136]. The consolidation of the
military power of konungs was accompanied by the
broad building of the fortified constructions, the centralization of the defences: л...konung of Danes
ordered to put the defense of the country in good order, to strengthen the
Danish Rampart, and to equip the military ships╗ [137]. The Danish Rampart was
constructed this way: лTwo fjords cut into the land from the different sides,
and between the summits of the fjords Danes made a big rampart of stones, turf
and logs, and they dug a wide and deep ditch outside the rampart, and built the
fortifications in front of every gate╗ [138].
Realization
of such a large-scale projects required a permanent
replenishment of the treasury, which couldnТt not be supplied by the military
actions only. As a universal form of collection of the taxes from the dependent
people konungs established the institute of a kingТs
feasts (veizla): л...konung
demanded the payment of his expenses... but bondes
prefer konung to be on a visit in their possessions
while he needed it, and konung had accepted that
offer, and he was travelling over the feasts across
his country with the host, while part of his army was defending the ships╗ [139].
Konungs used to establish special structures for
realization of control over the territories: лAnund konung had built country estates in all the regions of