and the following year royal librarian. In 1785 he was appointed member of the commission for the improved administration of universities and high schools, and of a second commission to inquire into the state of Iceland; and the following year, of a third for the same purpose, as regarded the peasantry of Denmark. Of Erickson it may be said, that few writings bearing upon the subject of the antiquities of the north, or having reference to the history or economical state of Denmark, Norway, or Iceland, and very few improvements have taken place in these countries, in which he, either as originator or administrator, has not had more or less part.—M. H.
ERIGENA, Johannes Scotus, one of the most remarkable men, both for extent of learning, subtlety of intellect, vigour of mind, and boldness of speculative philosophy, that has appeared in any age. Bearing in mind the age in which he lived, its condition in point of letters, religion, and philosophy, he is all the more remarkable. Erigena, as this appellative unequivocally imports, if indeed that of Scotus could admit now-a-days of a doubt, was an Irishman, a native of that country whose sons, says Mosheim, "were lovers of learning, and distinguished themselves in these times of ignorance by the culture of the sciences beyond all the European nations; the first teachers of the scholastic theology in Europe, and who, so early as the eighth century, illustrated the doctrines of religion by the principles of philosophy." The exact date or place of Erigena's birth is not recorded, but he must have been born early in the ninth century. Like many of his distinguished fellow-countrymen, he travelled through Europe disseminating knowledge, and we have reason to believe that he visited France previous to the year 847. Such a man could not fail to attract the attention of Charles the Bald, whose love of learning made his court the great resort of all the scholars of Europe. The sagacious monarch soon attached to him the subtle, witty, and agreeable Irishman, who became the constant companion of his closet, and the familiar guest at his table. At this period the scholastic mode of considering religious questions was prevalent through Europe. All of religion that was not superstition was the dry and barren chaff of dialectics; philosophy had no place in the exposition or the discussion of theology. John was no cleric—"nullis ecclesiasticæ dignitatis gradibus insignatum," was the pitiful sneer with which a bishop met his reasoning when he had no better answer to it; but he was something more than most of the continental clergy of his day—a dialectician, a philosopher, and an eminent Greek scholar, and so, probably at the desire of his patron, he threw himself into the controversies which then prevailed. One of these was on the subject of predestination. On this point he entered the arena against Godescalchus, a monk who supported views similar to those of St. Augustine and Calvin, and was his most formidable antagonist. This is not the place to discuss this question. We will only say that both parties fell into error—an inevitable result of man's circumscribed intellect attempting to sound and measure the depths of God's inscrutable counsels and illimitable grace. Another theological controversy shortly after set the seminaries of Europe in a blaze of disputation. Pascasius Radbert broached the doctrine of the real presence carnally in the eucharist. Charles requested John to compose a treatise on the subject, which he accordingly did. It is to be regretted this work has been lost; but there is good reason to believe that he differed altogether from the doctrine of Radbert, and maintained views very similar to those of the reformed church of England. Charles also imposed upon his friend the task of translating from Greek into Latin the works attributed to Dionysius the Areopagite. In the execution of his task he became a convert to the mystic theology upon which they were founded, and which was so long popular in the Greek church. The scholastic doctor now applied his bold and capacious intellect to mould and reconcile his former views with the transcendental heights and depths of this captivating mysticism, and thus he introduced a new element into the theology of the Western church, and a new spirit into the philosophy of the age. The translation was received with ardour, and read everywhere with avidity. Having been published without the pontifical license, Nicholas I. commanded Charles to send the book and its author to Rome. To save his patron from the consequences of a refusal, John withdrew from Paris. Whither he went cannot now be ascertained, and the ignorance upon this point probably may arise from the expediency of his concealing his abode from the pope. The story of his going to England and visiting the court of Alfred, though adopted by Leland, wants confirmation, and is now generally discredited. The period of his death is involved in equal obscurity. Ware would seem to make it to occur soon after his retreat from the court of Charles, but this may be doubted. It is, however, reasonable to infer that he died before 875, from the manner in which he is referred to in a letter of that date, though this is only inferential from the form of expression. The great work of Erigena—"De Divisione Naturæ," Oxford, 1681—is the best exposition of his tenets. But while it attests the subtlety and power of his mind, it adds one more humiliating proof to the many that exist, how human intellect must ever fail to measure "the deep things of God;" how the endeavour to make religion and philosophy the alternate exponent, the one of the other, must ever lead to absurdity and disappointment; that the apothegm of Erigena, "veram philosophiam esse veram religionem, conversimque veram religionem esse veram philosophiam," though true in the eyes of omniscience, is to man, who can never do more than "know in part," a truth which, as he cannot apply in all cases, will be sure to be to him what partial truth is always—a fallacy—leading him, as it did Erigena, to the confines of pantheism and materialism. The treatise "De Divina Predestinatione," which arose out of the controversy on that subject already alluded to, sets up the same dogma, and recognizes no authority which is not confirmed by reason. That Erigena was a devout and a holy man, as well as a learned, we have contemporary testimony to warrant us in believing, and it may safely be affirmed that he left the impress of his great intellect upon the theology of his own and of after times. He appears in fine, to adopt the language which with pardonable national vanity is used by Moore, "to have been in the whole assemblage of his qualities, intellectual and social, a perfect representative of the genuine Irish character in all its versatile combinations. Combining humour and imagination with powers of shrewd and deep reasoning—the sparkle upon the surface, as well as the mine beneath—he yet lavished both these gifts imprudently, exhibiting on all subjects every power but that of discretion. His life in its social relations seems to have been marked by the same characteristic anomalies—for while the simplicity of his mind and manner, and the festive play of his wit, endeared him to private friends, the daring heterodoxy of his written opinions alarmed and alienated the public mind, and rendered him at least as much feared as admired."—J. F. W.
ERIK, a name, common in the north in the old times and during the middle ages; also the name of a long line of monarchs in the three Scandinavian kingdoms of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. Swedish history contains fourteen kings of this name, the first seven of whom belong to the sagas or legendary history of the country.
Erik IX., or St. Erik, was elected king of Ostgothland in 1155, and by common consent king of Sweden. In character he was mild, pious, and brave. He lived abstemiously, and was beloved by his people. He built many churches, and used to travel through the country, adjusting wrongs and reconciling enemies. He protected the poor against the rich, and had so little love of money as to refuse increased taxes, when offered by his grateful subjects. He had the honour of introducing christianity into Finland, which, however, was done by the sword, the king weeping over the slain Finns, because they died before baptism. Returning home, he employed himself in bringing the Swedish code of laws into harmony with the spirit of the gospel. Whilst thus employed, Magnus Henriksson, a Danish prince, who had been chosen king of West Gothland, sailed secretly in 1160 to Upsala, and fell upon the good king immediately after mass, took him prisoner, and beheaded him; tradition relating that where his head fell, a fountain of clear water sprang forth, called to this day Erik's spring. His remains were interred in Old Upsala, and in 1273 removed to the cathedral, where his bones are still contained in a silver chest. Erik's messe, or Ersmesse, was celebrated in the Roman catholic times throughout the country with great solemnity; and from king to peasant, it is a common oath, "So help me God and St. Erik, king." He had two sons, Knut and Philip.
Erik X., Knutson, King of Sweden, and grandson of the above, who, after a long war with the rival kings of Ostgothland, was left in quiet possession of the throne. Of him Fryxell says, he reigned only six years, and all that is to be told of him
