Christiania edition, p. viii. Footnote 143: _Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed_, 1867, 65-109. See above, p. 32. Footnote 144: _Arkiv for nordisk Filologi_, III, 83-88. Footnote 145: _Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed_, 1896, 176-177. The weakness of Captain Blom’s argument is that he supposes the military art described in the _Speculum Regale_ to be the military art of the North at the time when the work was written. If all the engines and accoutrements that the author describes ever came into use in the North, it was long after 1260. Nearly all the weapons and devices mentioned were in use in southern Europe and in the Orient in earlier decades of the thirteenth century; some of them belong to much earlier times. If certain engines and devices which Captain Blom is disposed to regard as mythical are left out of account, it will be found that only three items fail to appear in illustrations from the earlier part of the thirteenth century; and it would not be safe to assume that these were not in use because no drawing of them has been found. Viewed against the background of Norwegian history, those chapters of the _King’s Mirror_ which deal with the nature and the rights of monarchy and with the place of the church in the state take on the appearance of a political pamphlet written to defend and justify the doings of the Birchshank party. The motives for composing an apology of this sort may be found at almost any time in the thirteenth century but especially during the decade that closed with the coronation of Hakon IV. It will be remembered that the author of the _King’s Mirror_ discusses the calamities that may befall a kingdom as a result of joint rule.[146] But in 1235, after one of Earl Skule’s periodic attempts at rebellion, his royal son-in-law granted him the administration of one-third of the realm. The grant was ratified the next year with certain changes: instead of a definite, compact fief the earl now received territories everywhere in the kingdom. In 1237 Skule was given the ducal title and to many men it seemed as if the curse of joint kingship was about to afflict the land once more. Two years later the partisans of the duke proclaimed him king: like Adonijah of old he tried to displace the Lord’s anointed.[147] But after a few months came the surprise of Skule’s forces in Trondhjem and the duke’s own tragic end in Elgesæter convent.[148] It will be recalled that the author defends King Solomon’s dealings with Joab and lays down the principle that the right of sanctuary will not hold against a king.[149] The rebellion of the Norwegian Adonijah was in 1239; he died the death of Joab in 1240. Three years later the believers in a strong monarchy were disturbed by the news that the bishops had revived the old claim to supremacy in the state. Soon after this series of events the political chapters of the _King’s Mirror_ must have been composed. Footnote 146: C. xxxvi. Footnote 147: C. lxvi. Footnote 148: