Talk:First Swedish Crusade

Untitled
"Worth noting is also the fact that the Swedish bishop normally involved in the eastern campaigns was the Bishop of Linköping, not the Bishop of Uppsala." - What eastern campaigns? East of Sweden or the East of Finland? This remains unclear. Jatrius 20:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * When historical records mention a Swedish bishop involved in eastern campaigns of that time, it was the Bishop of Linköping. These activities include the embargo against Novgorod 1229 and invasion to Estland in 1220. This has its roots in the 11th century church decision to have a bishop in "Birka" responsible for "islands of the Baltic sea", meaning the heathen countries in the east. This position was clearly inherited by the Bishop of Linköping, even though it is not clear how that happened. --Drieakko 05:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Mythical?
Though the historicity of this Crusade is debated, I think mythical is 1. Taking a stance in an ongoing historical debate and 2. Far to extreme. Maybe 'Legendary' 'Semi-Myhthical' or 'Semi-Legendary' might give the article a more neutral tone.

But Heimskringla Already says a Swedish viking named Erik conquered parts of Finland during the 9-10 century. 83.251.143.7 (talk) 01:27, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Erik is also mentioned by Ansgar so probably Western Finland or the southwestern coast was Already under Swedish control 800-900 ad. Erik was also worshipped as a god. Showing the great importance of this great king among the Swedish tribe. So they just made him their Christian king Erik a replacement of their old Eric worship instead. The so-called crusade most either be self-defence or some sort of Finnish/Swedish pagan uprising against Swedish Christianisation of western Finland. Archeological findings show that the western parts were already under Viking control 83.251.143.7 (talk) 01:29, 4 March 2021 (UTC)