hands of the new primate he solicited the ceremony of the coronation; but Eric refused, and for so doing he has been severely censured. It should, however, be remembered, that he could not crown an excommunicated prince. That penalty Swerro had incurred by various crimes—by forsaking the altar without the leave of his diocesan, by the shedding of blood at the head of banditti, by assuming the crown without secularisation, and by taking a wife. No bishop, no metropolitan could absolve him: the pope only was competent to dispense with the authority of the canons. In revenge for this refusal, Swerro, a man of vigorous mind, and without a particle of superstition, endeavoured to curtail the revenues and patronage of the church. He insisted that its claim to the pecuniary fine in case of homicide should be abolished, and that the fine should revert to the crown. For this act he must command our praise; but we cannot praise him for attempting to usurp the patronage of the church. We have scarcely an instance in all history of a king exercising the trust in an enlightened and a conscientious manner. Eric supported with firmness the rights of the church, and by so doing incurred the royal displeasure to such a degree that he was compelled to flee into Denmark. From thence he appealed to the pope, who threatened to place the kingdom under an interdict, unless satisfaction were made to the church. In vain did Swerro endeavour to prove that the pope had no right to interfere in such cases: the canons, he well knew, taught a different doctrine. In vain did he attempt to make the multitude believe that the blindness with which the archbishop was visited during the dispute was owing to the wrath of heaven. The people had more confidence in the primate and in the pope, than they had in a monarch whose early career had not been the most edifying. [Sidenote: 1194 to 1200.]