Erik Menved og aristokratiet

Forfattere

  • Karl Lorentzen

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7146/ht.v126i1.168937

Resumé

Erik Menved’s councillors and high officials

The reign of Erik Menved (1286-1319), once considered a disaster and part of a long downward trend for Danish royal power, has been reconsidered by contemporary historians. However, the role of the royal council as an instrument of power has been insufficiently studied. It can be analysed by studying its composition with special attention to the preceding reign of Erik Klipping (Erik Menved’s father), the conflict between Erik Menved and the outlaw noblemen accused of his father’s murder, his relation to the clergy, the role of the nobility in his German policy, the Jutish revolt in 1313 and the election of his brother Christoffer following his death in 1319.
The conclusions are that royal power remained strong under Erik Menved, continuing the trend during his father’s reign. The war with the outlaws allowed him to bolster up his position, and the composition of the council during this time shows considerable support from the aristocracy. Through a combination of cooperation and coercion, Erik maintained good relations with the clergy, using the bishops to balance out the nobles in the council. The expansion in northern Germany did not meet significant opposition from the nobility, several of whom were deeply involved in it, perhaps due to personal economic interests. Open opposition did not arise until the mutiny against Erik in 1309 and the Jutish revolt in 1313, that allowed the king to purge his political opponents. The council included Jutish nobles and princely relatives of German origin, and Erik’s government generally maintained the support of the aristocracy. It was a dynastic coincidence (Erik Menved died a widower without issue) that led to the subsequent weakening of royal power at the election of Christoffer II. Based on this understanding, the period 1241-1340 cannot exactly be considered a time of decline for royal power.

Forfatterbiografi

Karl Lorentzen

Erik Menved’s councillors and high officials

The reign of Erik Menved (1286-1319), once considered a disaster and part of a long downward trend for Danish royal power, has been reconsidered by contemporary historians. However, the role of the royal council as an instrument of power has been insufficiently studied. It can be analysed by studying its composition with special attention to the preceding reign of Erik Klipping (Erik Menved’s father), the conflict between Erik Menved and the outlaw noblemen accused of his father’s murder, his relation to the clergy, the role of the nobility in his German policy, the Jutish revolt in 1313 and the election of his brother Christoffer following his death in 1319.
The conclusions are that royal power remained strong under Erik Menved, continuing the trend during his father’s reign. The war with the outlaws allowed him to bolster up his position, and the composition of the council during this time shows considerable support from the aristocracy. Through a combination of cooperation and coercion, Erik maintained good relations with the clergy, using the bishops to balance out the nobles in the council. The expansion in northern Germany did not meet significant opposition from the nobility, several of whom were deeply involved in it, perhaps due to personal economic interests. Open opposition did not arise until the mutiny against Erik in 1309 and the Jutish revolt in 1313, that allowed the king to purge his political opponents. The council included Jutish nobles and princely relatives of German origin, and Erik’s government generally maintained the support of the aristocracy. It was a dynastic coincidence (Erik Menved died a widower without issue) that led to the subsequent weakening of royal power at the election of Christoffer II. Based on this understanding, the period 1241-1340 cannot exactly be considered a time of decline for royal power.

Publiceret

2026-06-30

Citation/Eksport

Lorentzen, K. (2026). Erik Menved og aristokratiet. Historisk Tidsskrift, 126(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.7146/ht.v126i1.168937