Talk:Ragnvald Knaphövde

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Norse history and culture (Rated start-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the Norse people, both in Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the Kalmar Union in 1397. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. WikiProject Biography     (Rated Start-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. Biography Portal Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] This article is supported by the Royalty and nobility work group. WikiProject Sweden (Rated start-Class) The article on Ragnvald Knaphövde is supported by WikiProject Sweden, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page; if you have any questions about the project or the article ratings below, please consult the FAQ. Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. WikiProject Middle Ages Middle Ages Portal Ragnvald Knaphövde is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. Article Grading: The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. WikiProject Middle Ages To do: WikiProject Sweden The article on Ragnvald Knaphövde is supported by WikiProject Sweden, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page; if you have any questions about the project or the article ratings below, please consult the FAQ. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

An entry from Ragnvald Knaphövde appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 26 January 2007.

Can someone please explain why not taking hostages was deemed disrespectful?

I don't see that that's what the text is actually saying (although I know it's what the "Did you know?" says). Both times it's mentioned, the two things (the lack of hostages and the disrespect) are separate; in other words, the fact that he entered without hostages and the fact that he was killed for being disrespectful are not necessarily related. He could have been disrespectful in other ways. It seems more like it's saying that they killed him for being disrespectful (or because they had chosen themselves a different king, Magnus the Strong) and that the assassination was accomplished more easily due to his lack of hostages.

Or perhaps something is lost in the translation to English? Kafziel ^Talk 16:49, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I partially agree. IRL, he was probably murdered solely because the Geats wanted to be independent. However, according to the laws that were put to paper during the following 200 years, the King of Sweden was obliged to take hostages from the powerful clans when he entered a former petty kingdom to be accepted as their king as well. Moreover, the regnal list of the West Geats (Westrogoths) claims that his not taking hostages showed his arrogance. This is also the traditional Swedish interpretation of why he was killed. By not taking hostages he showed that he considered the Geats to be harmless.--Berig 17:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Huh? If I'm understanding this right, you're saying that according to Swedish tradition, the defeated would say something like "enslave us or we'll kill you"? --Kimon 23:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

These were times when tribalism was still going strong. The Geats had two choices: either they accept the king of Sweden and his protection, or they take another king and risk being pillaged by the Swedes. This is speculation, but they probably would not have killed Ragnvald if they had not elected a Danish prince as king, a king who could have provided military protection from Denmark. Unfortunately, no sources on politics remain in Sweden from this time.--Berig 23:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

The hostages where not taken by force but exchanged quite ritually at the border between two "lands". The realm was a federation of lands, each with their own legislative parliament/electorate. (Kings were formally elected then.) The new candidate for the crown had to travel to each thing in the realm in order to be elected (or rejected). The origin of the tradition of travelling with hostages, I imagine, must have started as a means of securing the safety of the candidate against rivalling clans during his election journey. ("eriksgata"). The hostages consisted of individuals from the most prominent clans and must gradually had become a most honourable duty, an acknowledgement of status (political influence and pure military power) of the clan in question. Why Ragvald refused this is obscure. Perhaps he wanted to abolish a tradition he felt was archaic and meaningless, or considered himself such a popular guy that it really shouldn't be necessary. Anyway, the West Geats (or clans thereof) didn't take this display of initiative well, rather as quite an insult, an insinuation that there were no prominent clans at all in West Geatland worthy to be hostage (huh!?), and/or that they all were so meak and weak that they couldn't harm him no matter how hard they tried (HUH!?). The nickname "knaphövde" should by the way rather translate to "short of heads" or "short-headed", either pertaining to the fact that poor Ragvald was promptly made one head short (or shorter) when having the damn gaul to arrive at the Thing of All Geats without a proper hostage; that he never had much of a head to begin with; or most likely, both. Still today, the monarch is obliged by tradition to do an "eriksgata" from time to time, particulary when being installed in office. The tradition of travelling with hostage has however gone out of fashion, and monarch-wannabees are also not decapitated very often nowadays. They are rather gunned down or stabbed.

The article is flawed, presenting the opinion of right wing provincialists. We do not know a lot about the events, more than that Ragnvald was slain. Saxo was not in a position to know about the events. He was not born at the time, and he had an agenda to criminalize Magnus. These facts about Saxo has been know for some hundred years among historians. No serious scholar would accept Saxo at face value. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.224.198.80 (talk) 16:21, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The worst king of Sweden

Ragnvald Knaphövde was voted the worst king of Sweden by historian Dick Harrison on the TV program "Veckans debatt" on Axess TV.

Dick's opinions have no weight as far as I am concerned. He has been convicted in court for power abuse and is consequently of dubious integrity.--Berig 09:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

As if your opinions are worth anything Berig :-) You hardly adhere to any of the rules here, not npov and not no original research. /mof