As Eric the Priest-hater left no heirs male, he was succeeded by his brother HAKO V. (1299–1319), whom he had created duke of Norway, and who had been admitted to some share in the government. One of his first objects was to resume the negotiations with Denmark; but through the intrigues of the men who were implicated in the murder of Eric Glipping, the signature of the treaty was delayed until 1308. His transactions with Sweden are more important, since they led to a temporary union between the two crowns. His daughter Ingeburga became the wife of Eric, brother of Birger, king of Sweden. When Eric was barbarously murdered by his own brother, Hako armed to revenge the death of his son-in-law. After a war of some duration, Birger was compelled to abdicate, and Magnus, the son of Ingeburga, was elected in his place. As Hako had no heirs male, and females could not inherit, Magnus became the heir of the Norwegian throne, to which he succeeded on the death of Hako. [Sidenote: 1319.] Under this prince, who died in 1319, Norway was not so powerful as it had been under his father: just as in his father’s time it was not to be compared with what it had been under the domination of Hako IV. With this monarch indeed ended the greatness of the kingdom: from his time to the union of the crown with that of Denmark, there was a continued decline in the national prosperity. This decline cannot, as some historians have asserted, be attributed to the cessation of piratical expeditions; for in truth they had ceased long before the reign of Hako IV., or even of Swerro. A better reason is to be found in the wars between the kingdom and Denmark—wars which thinned the population, diminished the national revenues, and aimed a fatal blow at the national industry. A second is the monopoly of trade by the Hanseatic Towns. The vessels of that league had long frequented the coasts of Norway; Swerro had favoured them; Hako IV. in 1250 had conferred upon them exclusive privileges; Magnus VI. had established the foreign merchants in his dominions, especially at Bergen. Hako also exempted them from many of the imposts to which they were subject in other countries. These avaricious strangers did not benefit the country. Where two people trade, _both_ cannot be gainers. The advantage was entirely in favour of these foreigners, who absorbed a traffic which ought to have been divided into many channels, and by their monopoly excluded the natives from other markets. In this respect, we must condemn the short-sighted policy of Hako, or rather perhaps the engrossing disposition of the league. But another reason may also be assigned for the decline of the national prosperity—the increase of luxury—the creation of artificial wants. The cardinal bishop of Sabina[168] had expressed surprise at the condition of the people: he had found, not merely the comforts, but the luxuries of life. After the visit of that dignitary, the evil was not mended.