The opening paragraph of this chapter might be more significant than some readers realize:
"After so much ill hap, Hadding could not soon renew his war in Svithjod. He stayed home the following year. There was enough to do, faring about on the king's work and seeing to his own holdings." (p. 148)
There was enough to do... There is always more than enough to do. There is no need to go abroad to perpetuate a dynastic war. Stay at home - or go abroad in peaceful trade. Set an example to warlike neighbours - while making it clear that any attack from them will be driven back.
Does Hadding learn to make a virtue of a necessity? No. The paragraph concludes:
"Yet he grew ever more restless." (ibid.)
Fortunately (?), he learns that a giant has been killing men and that he can fare abroad to kill the giant.
7 comments:
Testing. My comment disappeared.
Sean
Kaor, Paul! Trying again. One problem in those days was that kings were expected to be warlike and aggressive. So a peaceful king content with what he had might come to be thought weak and unmanly, fit to be preyed on by his neighbors. But I agree with the desirability of Hadding being satisfied with Denmark and focusing on building it up and fostering prosperity at home and peaceful trade abroad. AND making it plain to the neighbors that any attacks on Denmark would be fiercely fought. Ad astra! Sean
Kaor, Paul! Again, thanks for restoring my lost comment. Sean
If you had a feud, though, it wasn't -safe- to take a defensive approach. Hadding does manage to get peace with Svidjoth/Sweden, but only after the leader of their royal family who's obsessed with reversing Hadding's takeover in Denmark is disposed of and his brother is on the throne.
For a contemporary version, think of Vladimir Putin, who apparently has been brooding on the comedown of the dissolution of the USSR ever since it happened, and has become more and more unhinged on the subject.
When a ruler starts saying you're the enemy of his blood, best to take it seriously and not to assume that because you want peace, so does he deep down.
Deffo don't assume the other guy wants what you want.
Apart from all the death and destruction for which he is directly responsible, Putin is also responsible for giving his enemies reasons to arm themselves even more against him - not that they don't want to do this anyway but there is no reason whatsoever to give them even more motivation to do it. Governments need to cooperate on the environment, not to perpetuate nineteenth century imperialism. They are like living on another planet.
Kaor, Mr, Stirling and Paul!
Trying again.
Mr. Stirling: In that case, if a leader had to contend with an implacable and unrelenting enemy, I have to agree a defensive posture will not work. Or at least only as long as the aggressor thinks the costs outweighs the benefits. Meaning Hadding didn't have much choice except to settle matters once and for all with the Swedes.
And besides his resentful brooding over the weakening of Russia since the dissolution of the USSR, my view is that Putin has also been shaped by being born and educated in the Soviet period, including indoctrination in Marxism/Leninism and his experiences as KGB/Chekist officer. Meaning bad old Soviet habits did not disappear!
Paul: I disagree, about those 19th century attitudes, or whatever it is that drives Putin and other rulers. They reflect qualities INNATE to all human beings and will not disappear, no matter what crises we face.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment