Aristocracy of Norway

The earliest times in today's Norway (c. 10000 BC – c. 1800 BC) had a relatively flat social structure, often based on kinship. People were hunters and gatherers who moved over distances in small parties.

However, in the latest part of the Stone Age, some time around 4000 BC, permanent settlements were established in gradually increasing numbers.[1] Before and parallelly with the introduction of agriculture c. 2500 BC, hunter-gatherer societies became larger tribute societies with elements of stratification. Transition to agriculture was both a condition for and triggered the genesis of the very first aristocracy on the Scandinavian Peninsula. The first aristocracy known in archaeology appeared no later than c. 1500 BC.

Comparatively, transition to agriculture happened c. 9000 BC in the Fertile Crescent and c. 4000 BC in the British Isles. The most obvious reason for Scandinavia's relatively late transition is the Weichsel glaciation, i.e. the latest ice age. Norway was almost wholly covered by ice until c. 7000 BC, and most of the ice sheet was not melted until c. 6000 BC.

Burial mound in Western Norway.

The Sun Chariot, Denmark, confirms consumption of luxury goods.

The first known aristocracy in today's Norway existed in the Bronze Age (c. 1800 BC – c. 500 BC) and no later than c. 1500 BC. For this reason, it is called a bronze aristocracy (Norwegian: bronsearistokrati).[2][3] During this age, settlements became more divided into classes as a new dimension appeared: socio-economical differences.

Based on access to and physical control of natural resources, such as furs, walrus teeth, and other goods that were desired by foreigners, a social élite was able to acquire foreign metals. Bronze is essential in this regard. By importing bronze, which they also established a monopoly on, leading persons and their families would not only express their power but even strengthen and increase it. Bronze was also militarily important. It enabled a limited number of possessors to make weapons stronger than those of stone, and unlike the latter, broken bronze weapons could be melted and reshaped. Common people continued to use tools and weapons of stone during the whole age.

Through trade and cultural exchange, the bronze aristocracy was part of the contemporary civilisation in Europe, despite being placed in the geographical outskirts of it.[4] Continental impulses, for example new religious customs and decorative design, arrived relatively early.[5]

Although there was an established aristocracy, the pyramidal social structure is not similar to the feudal system of the much later Medieval Age. Beside other factors, it has been suggested that agricultural production was insufficient to supply an élite that itself did not participate. In general, it is considered as unlikely that the élite possessed total power.[6] Furthermore, power may not only have been based on weapons. Also religious and ancestral factors are important when explaining how certain persons or families managed to maintain authority for generations. For example, impressive burial mounds could consolidate imaginations of a clan's right to an area.

The bronze aristocracy is known primarily through burial mounds, for example a mound (c. 1200 BC) in Jåsund, Western Norway, where an apparently mighty man was buried together with a big bronze sword. Other mounds were filled with bronze weapons and bronze artefacts, for example rings, necklaces, and decorative daggers. The biggest mounds could be up to 8–9 metres in height and 40 metres in diameter.[7] A construction like this required the work of ten men for about four weeks.[8]

The bronze aristocracy faced a challenge when the position of bronze was taken over by iron. Unlike bronze, which remained an aristocratically controlled metal through the whole age, iron was found in rich amounts in the nature, especially in bogs, and was thus owned and used by broader layers of the population.[9]

Oseberg skeletal remains of an aristocrat and perhaps her female servant or slave.

Archaeological examination of graves of the Early Iron Age (c. 400 BC – c. AD 500) has revealed three distinct social strata. Ordinary farmers were cremated and buried in simple, flat graves. (Whilst this sort of burial had existed in the Bronze Age, too, the cremation part was a recently imported custom from Continental Europe—and not imposed on ordinary farmers in particular.) Grand farmers and aristocrats were buried together with grave goods, while chieftains were buried in mounds.[10] Grave goods of this age are dominated by iron artefacts.

In this age, the aristocracy had begun to enslave humans. The use of forced labor in agricultural production made the aristocracy able to spend more resources on military activities, increasing their capacity to control their tax-paying subjects, to defend their territory, and even to expand it. However, thralls were not an aristocratic privilege. In principle, all free men could hold thralls. A thrall was the rightless property of his or her owner. The text Rígsþula identifies three distinct classes and describes extensively how they evolved: chieftains, farmers, and thralls.[11] Religion was used to explain and justify thralldom, but the original motivation was rather economical.

Furthermore, the aristocracy sacrificed humans to be placed in graves of deceased aristocrats. Also this custom was related to religion, i.e. imaginations of life after death. Contemporary sources as well as archaeological remains document this custom. For example, Arab traveller Ahmad ibn Fadlan (fl. 10th century) documented that a female slave was killed for this purpose in a Nordic burial in Russia.

At the beginning of the Late Iron Age (c. 500 – c. 793; in Norway known as the Merovingian Age), there were several changes in Nordic culture: for example the deterioration of the quality of works of art and syncopation of the spoken language. Burial customs in several regions were drastically simplified: stone coffins (stones placed together as a coffin protecting the body within a grave or a tumulus) were no longer used, and tumuli became smaller or were replaced by flat graves. Also grave goods appear to have been lesser in amount than before.

Some historians have interpreted these changes negatively.[12] Some suggest that they were caused by plague or interregional conflict, while others believe that the smaller number of tumuli reflects the consolidation of aristocratic power, which meant that large and splendid monuments were no longer necessary.

Seal of 14th-century Sysselmann Jørund Arnason.

The hird was divided into three classes, of which the first had three ranks. The first class was hirdmann with lendmann as the 1st rank, skutilsvein as the 2nd rank, and ordinary hirdmann as the 3rd rank. Below them were the classes gjest and kjertesvein.[13][14][15]

Lendmen, having the first rank in the group of hirdmen, had the right to hold 40 armed housecarls, to advise the King, and to receive an annual payment from the King. They normally also held the highest offices in the state. The foundation for their rights was the military duty which their title imposed.

Kjertesveins were young men of good family who served as pages at the court, and gjests constituted a guard and police corps. In addition, there was a fourth group known as housecarls, but it remains uncertain whether they were considered a part of or rather served the hird.

The hird's organisation is described in the King’s Mirror and the Codex of the Hird.

The system of hirdmen—regional and local representatives for the King—was stronger and lasted longer in the tributary lands Shetland, Orkney, Iceland, and the Faroe Islands, and also in Jemtland,[13] originally an independent farmer republic which Norwegian kings used much time and efforts to gain control over.

Sculpture of Haakon Magnusson, Duke of Oslo, of Oppland, of Ryfylke, of the Faroe Islands, and of Shetland; later Haakon V.

During the second half of the 13th century continental European court culture began to gain influence in Norway. In 1277 the King introduced continental titles in the hird: lendmen were called barons, and skutilsveins were called ridder. Both were then styled Herr (English: Lord). In 1308 King Håkon V abolished the lendman/baron institution, and it was probably also during his reign that the aristocracy seems to have been restructured into two classes: ridder (English: knight) and væpner (English: squire).

It is difficult to determinate exactly how many knights and squires there were in the 14th and the early 15th century. When King Haakon V signed a peace treaty with the Danish king in 1309, it was sealed by 29 Norwegian knights and squires. King Haakon promised that additional 270 knights and squires would give their written recognition. This were perhaps the approximate number of knights and squires at this time.[16]

The Black Death, which came to Norway around 1349, was bad for the nobility. In addition to the loss of their own members, about two thirds of the population were killed by the plague, and the reduction in available manpower for agriculture caused an economic crisis.

The aristocracy was reduced from about 600 families or 3,600 people before 1350 to about 200 families or 1,000 people in 1450.

The value of land was reduced by 50%–75%, and the land rent was reduced by up to 75%, except in relatively populous central districts like Akershus and Båhus, where the reduction was about 40%. The tithe also reduced by 60%–70%.

Both before and after the plague, Norwegian noblemen were unusually dependent on the King compared with noblemen in other countries. Mountainous Norway has never been conducive to large land estates of continental size. As a consequence of the tremendous reduction in land-related income following the plague, it became even more necessary than before to enter royal service.

Militarily, the Black Death was a catastrophe. As lower and local noblemen were killed by the plague, the recruitment of officers and troop leaders was equally reduced. Having lost their economic base (reduced income of taxes etc.) and their economic guarantees from the King, local aristocrats could often not fulfil their military duties.

The Båhus Fortress.

The system of royally controlled fiefs was established in 1308, replacing the originally more independent lendmen. There were two types of medieval fiefs:

To the first belonged castle fiefs (Norwegian: slottslen) or main fiefs (Norwegian: hovedlen), to which the King appointed lords, and under them petty fiefs (Norwegian: smålen), which had varying connections with their respective castle fief. In the 15th century, there were approximately fifty fiefs in Norway. In the late 16th century and the early 17th century, there were four permanent castle fiefs and approximately thirty small. Thereafter, the number of petty fiefs was reduced in favour of bigger and more stable main fiefs. Lords of castle fief resided in the biggest cities, where the royal farms or the castles were located.[17]

The second type were estate fiefs (Norwegian: godslen), i.e. private, noble estates that constituted independent areas of jurisdiction.[17]

Likewise, nobles were active in the Kingdom's military defence, in which fortresses had a central position. In the early 14th century, the Fortress of Vardøhus in Northern Norway was constructed due to conflicts with the Russian Republic of Novgorod and as protection against robbery raids of the Karelians. The fortresses Bohus and Akershus in Eastern Norway were established approximately at the same time. An earlier fortress was Bergenhus in Western Norway. There would usually be one or more fiefs attached to each fortress. All fortresses were mainly under the command of nobles, who held the military title of høvedsmann.

Austrått Fortress.

During the 14th century members of the hird continued in various directions. The lower parts of the hird lost importance and disappeared. The upper parts, especially the former lendmen, became the nucleus of the nobility of the High Medieval Age: the Knighthood (Norwegian: Ridderskapet). They stood close to the King, and as such they received seats in the Council of the Kingdom as well as fiefs, and some had even family connections to the royal house. There was a significant social distance between the Knighthood and ordinary noblemen.

The Council of the Kingdom was the Kingdom's governing institution, consisting of members of the upper secular and the upper clerical aristocracy, including the Archbishop. Originally, in the 13th century, having had an advisory function as the King's council, the Council became remarkably independent from the King during the 15th century. At its height it had the power to choose or to recognise pretenders to the Throne, and it demanded an electoral charter from each new king. Sometimes it even chose its own leaders as regents (Norwegian: drottsete or riksforstander), among others Sigurd Jonsson (Stjerne) to Sudreim and Jon Svaleson (Smør).

In Norway as well as in Denmark and Sweden, it was in this period that the idea and the principle of riksråd constitutionalism had arisen, i.e. that the Council was considered as the real foundation of sovereignty. Although kings were formal heads of state, the Council was powerful. Their power and active rulership, especially as regents, have caused historians characterise this state as de facto a republic of the nobility (Norwegian: adelsrepublikk).

This aristocratic power lasted until the Reformation, when the King in 1536 illegally abolished the Council. The reign of aristocrats was over when Archbishop Olav Engelbrektsson, who was also noble, the Council's president and the Regent of Norway, left the Kingdom in 1537.

Ludvig Ludvigsen Munk of Nørholm.

Following the abolition of the Norwegian Council of the Kingdom in 1536, which de facto ceased to exist in 1537, the nobility in Norway lost most of its formal political foundation. The Danish Council of the Kingdom took over the governing of Norway. However, the nobility in Norway, now confined to more administrative and ceremonial functions, continued to take part in the country's official life, especially at homages to new kings.

Having defeated the aristocratic and besides Roman Catholic resistance in Norway, the King in Copenhagen sought to secure and consolidate his control in the Kingdom. Strategical actions would further weaken the nobility in Norway.

First of all, the King sent Danish noblemen to Norway in order to administer the country and to fill civilian and military offices. Norwegian noblemen were deliberately under-represented when new high officials were appointed. Whilst this was a part of the King's tactics, also the lack of Norwegian noblemen with qualified education—Norway did not have a university—was a reason for that the King had to send foreigners. The educational sector was considerably better developed in Sleswick and Holsatia, plus in Germany, so only nobles who sent their children to foreign universities could hope to keep or obtain high offices.

Secondly, during the 16th century the system of independent, family-possessed estates as power centra, like Austrått, was ultimately replaced in favour of fiefs to which the King himself appointed lords. A few Norwegian noblemen were given such fiefs, for example Knight Trond Torleivsson Benkestok, Lord to Bergenhus Fortress, but over time these would find themselves possessed almost exclusively by immigrants. Nevertheless, during the 17th century fiefs were transformed into high offices. Also they were considered too risky for the King.

Thirdly, in 1628 the King instituted a national army of soldiers recruited directly from the estate of farmers. At the same time technical development made traditional military methods outdated. As a result, the nobility was defunctionalised in this aspect.

In 1660, when Denmark's estates were gathered in Copenhagen, King Frederick III declared military state of emergency and closed the capital city, thus preventing the nobility from boycotting the assembly by leaving. The nobility was forced to surrender. In the following days, Denmark was transformed from an elective monarchy into an hereditary. On 17 October, the 1648 håndfestning was returned to the King, and on 18 October, the King was hailed as an hereditary monarch. On 10 January 1661, the Absolute and Hereditary Monarchy Act (Norwegian: Enevoldsarveregjeringsakten) introduced absolutism. In Denmark, the Council of the Kingdom faced the same destiny as the Norwegian Council had done in 1536: abolition. The noble monarchy (Norwegian: adelsmonarki) had come to an end.

Formally a hereditary kingdom since old ages, Norway was not affected by Denmark's transition to the same. However, also Norway was affected by absolutism. On 7 August 1661 in Christiania, representatives of the Norwegian nobility signed the Sovereignty Act.[18]

The Faroe Islands in Norway.

The native aristocracy was reduced during the last part of the Late Medieval Age, but not as much as previously believed. Several factors may explain this.

It was a common misunderstanding that Noble status was only transmitted through sons, while in reality, Noble status was inherited according to the specifications in each single Patent of Nobility which in a great number of Patents of Nobility included all descendants, through both female and male lineage, thus the lack of men did not lead to Noble families’ extinction, but were in a large number of cases instead carried on through their daughters.

This precaution was put in place as seen in most of the earliest Patents of Nobility issued in Norway by king Eric of Pommerania,[19][20] and later re-introduced by those kings who wished to ensure their descendants never ran out of out of Nobles to defend them. Since noblemen as warriors were exposed to greater risks than the population in general and therefore died in a young age and often without issue. Thus, by including all descendants through both male and female lines, those of the kings who regularly incorporated the descendants through female lines, had the foresight to ensure the continuous birth of new Nobles to defend their descendants as future kings.

For a brief period (after 1581 and 1582) unequal marriages could lead to the loss of noble status, noble estates, and similar, but only for those families who had received their Patents after 1581 and 1582 as the king specifically refused to reduce any of the rights granted to older noble families by his predecessors. In an application to the King in 1591, the nobility requested that since it ‘[...] often [happens] that noblemen here in Norway marry unfree women, and their children inherit his estate, [...] which is the nobility to reduction and shame [...]’,[21] their children should not inherit noble status or noble estate.

It is also a factor that noble status was not automatically inherited. If a family for generations no longer provided services to the King, they could, due to oblivion, lose their position. An example is the Tordenstjerne family, whose members in the 16th century were squires, but who due to political and military inactivity in the 17th century had to get their noble status confirmed in the 18th century.

It is often claimed that the old nobility ‘died out’ in the Late Medieval Age. This is mostly but not entirely correct. The term ‘extinction’ includes not only families dying out physically, but also disappearance from the written sources of formerly noble families which had lost their political power and importance. This has even obscured the link between the such families before and in the 16th century and their farmer descendants who appear in sources beginning in the late 17th century. In other words, families of the old nobility may in actuality have survived without knowing it or being able to prove it.

The nobility of the 16th century was of a marginal size, thus being socially more exclusive, but also politically more vulnerable. For example, after the Reformation in 1537, the number of nobles was reduced from approximately 800 and to approximately 400, i.e. under 0.2 percent of the population and approximately 1/7 of the size of the Danish nobility. After 1537, only 15 percent of Norwegian land was in noble possession.

Gørvel Fadersdotter of Giske.

There are a few examples of medieval noblewomen who acted with considerable de facto independence. Prominent are Lady Ingegjerd Ottesdotter Rømer of Austrått and Lady Gørvel Fadersdotter (Sparre) of Giske. It is, however, important to know that they acted as so-called 'pseudo men', i.e. in the formal role of a man (usually their deceased husbands, fathers or brothers).[22] Legally, there was no such thing as formal female roles.

In general, noblewomen had larger economical freedom than women of unfree estate. Whilst the Land Law of 1274 and the Town Law of 1276 gave farmer women and burgher women only limited control of their assets, noblewomen could buy and sell as much as they pleased.[22] This estate-based discrimination would last until the Land Law (including the Norwegian Code of 1604, which was mostly a Danish translation) was replaced by the Norwegian Code of 1687, a law that made all non-widowed women legally minor, regardless of their birth. (Some minor restrictions were introduced in 1604, when Norwegian law, granting unmarried women financial independence from their 21st year, was adjusted to match Danish law, which imposed lifelong guardianship on women and their fortune.)[22]

The noble privileges of 1582 decreed that a noblewoman who married a non-noble man should lose all her hereditary land to her nearest co-inheritor, for example her brother. The rule was designed with the intention of keeping noble land in noble hand, which would strengthen the nobility's power base.

The hird in the Faroe Islands is mentioned for the last time in a document of 1479.

In 1262, Gissur Þorvaldsson († 1268) was given the title Earl of Iceland, indicating and imposing that he should rule Iceland on behalf of Norway's king. It is known that approximately 20–30 Icelandic men had the title of knight in the following centuries, among others Eiríkur Sveinbjarnarson in Vatnsfjörður († 1342) and Arnfinnur Þorsteinsson († 1433).[23][24]

In 1457, King Christian I ennobled Björn Þorleifsson. The same honour had been granted Torfi Arason in 1450. Björn was hirðstjóri (a high royal official) in Iceland and as well the richest man in this part of Norway.

In 1488, King John ennobled Eggert Eggertsson, Lawspeaker (Norwegian: lagmann) of Viken in mainland Norway. His son was Hans Eggertsson (fl. 1522), city administrator (Norwegian: rådmann) of Bergen, and the latter's son was Eggert Hansson, Lawspeaker (Icelandic: lögmaður) of Iceland (fl. 1517–1563). This family is known as Norbagge today.[25]

In 1620 at the Althing, Jón Magnússon the Elder, let a letters patent of 1457 be read, originally given to his aforementioned ancestor Björn Þorleifsson. King Christian IV recognised his noble status. It is claimed that Jón was the last Norwegian nobleman in this part of Norway. The era of the nobility in Iceland ended in 1661 with the introduction of absolutism in Norway.

Skálholt, centre of the former Diocese of Skálholt.

There were ten bishops under the Archbishop of Nidaros, namely:

• Bishop of Bergen
• Bishop of Stavanger
• Bishop of Oslo
• Bishop of Hamar
• Bishop of Garðar (Greenland)
• Bishop of Skálholt (Iceland)
• Bishop of Hólar (Iceland)
• Bishop of Kirkjubøur (Faroe Islands)
• Bishop of Kirkwall (Orkney Islands)
• Bishop of Mann and the Isles (Mann and the Isles)

The Cathedral of Stavanger, former residence of the Bishop of Stavanger and twelve canons.

Canons (Norwegian: kannik) were priests who were also attached to one of the dioceses in Norway.

Canons were recruited primarily from the secular aristocracy. Whilst most canons came from the lower nobility, several belonged to the higher nobility by birth. The latter were sons of knights and even of Councillors of the Kingdom. Examples are Jakob Matsson of the Rømer family, Henrik Nilsson of the Gyldenløve family, and Elling Pedersson of the Oxe family.

In the 13th century canons were styled Sira (compare with English Sir).[35]

Priests (Norwegian: prest) constituted the local level of the clergy.

Originally a style for canons in the 13th century, priests were styled Sira in and after the 14th century.[35] Subsequently, Sira was replaced by Herr. Sira and Herr were used in combination with the given name only, e.g. 'Sira Eirik'.

Hjelmsøya in Finnmark, where a setesvein named Sakse lived.

Beside the clerical hierarchy, the Archbishop of Nidaros had his own organisation of officers and servants.

Regional representatives of the Archbishop, setesveins (not to be confused with the noble title of skutilsvein) were seated mainly along the coast of Western and Northern Norway as well as in Iceland. A register of 1533 shows that there were at least 69 setesveins at this time. Their function was to administer the land estate of and to collect the taxes belonging to the Archbishop, and they also traded partly themselves and partly on behalf of the Archbishop.[36] In Northern Norway, a typical location of setesveins was a central position with immediate control of the lucrative fisheries.

Some setesveins belonged to the secular aristocracy too, usually by birth.[36]

After the Reformation in 1537, when King Christian III prohibited the Roman Catholic Church and the Archbishop went into exile, the King punished setesveins who had supported the Archbishop.[36] Many of them had their houses robbed as the King and his soldiers raided the coast.

In Northern Norway ex-setesveins and their descendants were known as page nobility (Norwegian: knapeadel).

Copy of the front of the Decree on the Order of Precedence of 1699.

Nobles at the 1731 coronation of King Christian VI.

A minor but nevertheless considerable element of the modern aristocracy was the office nobility (Norwegian: embetsadel or embedsadel, also called rangadel). It was introduced in 1679 and would, with extensive reductions during the 18th century, last until 1814.

A person holding a high-ranking office within one of the highest classes of rank automatically received ennoblement for himself, for his wife, and for his legitimate children, and for decades this status was normally hereditable for his patrilineal and legitimate descendants.[38] However, basically all such ennoblements were annulled when King Christian VI, tired of his father's generosity, acceded to the throne in 1730, and only those who received a special recognition after making an application retained their noble status. The office nobility as such was not abolished. Subsequent royal decrees introduced a more restrictive policy, under which noble status dependent on offices was limited to the person concerned, to his wife, and to his legitimate children. The Decree on the Order of Precedence of 1671 was radical, for the first time deciding that the nobility did not automatically have the highest rank in the Kingdom. It stated explicitly that the nobility should enjoy their traditional rank above other estates and subjects unless the latter were specified in the order of precedence. In other words, any person within the rank stood above noble persons outside this. The Noble Privileges of 1661 had stated the opposite, namely that the nobility should enjoy rank and honour above all others.[39]

Finally, the Letter of Privileges of 11 February 1679 introduced automatical noble status for the highest members of the order of precedence. As such the office nobility had been established. The letter stated explicitly that these persons of rank as well as wife and children should enjoy all privileges and benefits that others of the nobility had in the present and in the future, and it was also stressed that they should be honoured, respected, and regarded equally with nobles of birth.

The office nobility has later been considered with lesser regard, and for example the Yearbook of the Danish Nobility does not include such persons and families.

Examples:

• Mathias de Tonsberg, who was automatically ennobled in 1704 when he became Councillor of the State (Norwegian: etatsråd).[40]
• Hans Eilersen Hagerup, who was automatically ennobled in 1761 when he became General Commissioner of War.[41] (In 1781 he was even ennobled by letter.)

Letter of nobility of the Munthe af Morgenstierne family.

Beginning already in the High Medieval Age but especially associated with the late 17th century and the 18th century, it became customary to ennoble persons by letters patent (Norwegian: adelsbrev) for significant military or artistic achievements, and there were also persons who were ennobled in this way after making monetary donations. These are informally known as letter nobility (Norwegian: brevadel).

Other families are Rosenvinge and Tordenstjerne, both ennobled in 1505. However, the custom of ennobling by letters patent increased drastically in the late 17th century and the 18th century, when numerous persons and families received such noble status. They were a part of the King's plan of creating a new and loyal nobility replacing the old, who until 1660 had been political enemies of the King. However, letters patent given (unofficially: sold) among others to rich merchants were also a lucrative source of income for the Kings, whose many wars at times lead to a big need for money.

Examples:

• Kurt Sørensen was for bravery in battle ennobled under the name Adeler.
• Ludvig Holberg, a famous writer, was ennobled as a baron for his merits and by bequeathing his fortune to the Sorø Academy.
• Joachim Geelmuyden, the son of a priest and the grandson of a tradesman, held many titles and offices in the Dano-Norwegian state and was subsequently ennobled under the name Gyldenkrantz.

Rosendal, originally a feudal barony.
Photographer: Nynorsk Wikipedia user Ekko

Norwegian-born Marcus Gerhard af Rosencrone (1738–1811), Count of Rosencrone; Prime Minister of the Dano-Norwegian Gehejme Government.

With feudal barons and feudal counts one saw the introduction of a neo-feudal structure in Norway. These modern fiefs were ruled with conditioned independence by noble families, and they were hereditable. Feudal lords were equipped with extensive rights and duties. On the other hand, a fief was formally a dominium directum of the King. It would as such return to the Crown when a title became extinct (see for example Barony of Rosendal) or when a feudal lord was sentenced for disloyalty (see for example Countship of Griffenfeld).

The main architect behind the new system of barons and counts, introduced in 1671, was Peder Schumacher, who himself was ennobled as Peder Schumacher Griffenfeld in 1671 and created Count of Griffenfeld in 1673. In 1675 the citizens of Tønsberg lost their independence, and the city was merged into the Countship. Griffenfeld had been granted the sole right to all mining and hunting within the Countship. He could appoint judges, arrest and charge inhabitants, and punish sentenced criminals. He could appoint priests to all churches, which he owned. Several duties were imposed on the Count's subjects. For example, cotters (Norwegian: husmann) under the Count had to work for him without payment.

Whilst these new politics could bring fundamental changes to each area concerned, the effect and the consequences remained limited in Norway in general, as originally only two countships and one barony were created. These included only a small amount of the Norwegian population. Divided into counties (Norwegian: amt), the rest of Norway was under direct royal administration.

Lutheran Evangelical kingdoms, Denmark and Norway welcomed Huguenots who had escaped from France following the 1685 revocation of the Edict of Nantes. Huguenots were greeted with several privileges, and some even achieved noble status and/or titles. One was Jean Henri Huguetan (1665–1749) from Lyon, who was created Count of Gyldensteen in 1717.

During the 18th century, Norwegian-born noblemen and burghers rose to prominence within the Dano-Norwegian state.

In 1733 King Christian VI introduced the system of stavnsbånd—a serfdom-like institution—in Denmark. This was introduced following an agricultural crisis that lead people to leave the countryside and move into towns. The system would last until after 1788.

The stavnsbånd was not introduced in Norway, where all men had been free since the Old Norse heathen trelldom was fought and abolished by the Roman Catholic Church.

Execution of ex-count Struensee.
Artist: unknown

During the de facto reign of Johann Friedrich Struensee between 1770 and 1772 the power of the nobility in Denmark and Norway was challenged. Whilst he did not mind creating himself and his friend Brandt feudal counts, Struensee was an enemy of the hereditary aristocracy, which he sought to replace with a merit-based system of government. A part of his reforms Struensee abolished noble privileges and decided that state employments should be based on a person's qualifications only.

In a counter-coup on 17 January 1772 Ove Høegh-Guldberg, Hans Henrik von Eickstedt, Georg Ludwig von Köller-Banner and others had Struensee arrested. In a following trial he was sentenced to death. On 28 April ex-counts Brandt and Struensee were executed; first their right hands were cut off, whereafter they were beheaded and had their bodies drawn and quartered.

Severin Løvenskiold.

Seraphim plate of Prime Minister Mathias Sommerhielm.

Satirical cartoon depicting 'Skipper Børre' (the Count of Platen) and 'Uedel Skarnsberg' i.e. 'Ignoble Dirtberg' (Baron Ferdinand Carl Maria Wedel-Jarlsberg) in the 1829 Battle of the Square.

Ambassador Wilhelm Morgenstierne representing Norway when US President Truman signed the North Atlantic Treaty in 1949.

The Constitution of the Kingdom of Norway of 1814, which had been established in the spirit of the principles of the French Revolution and greatly influenced by the Constitution of the United States of America, forbade the creation of new nobility, including countships, baronies, family estates (Norwegian: stamhus), and fee tails (Norwegian: fideikommiss). Beside being in accordance with the contemporary political ideology, the prohibition effectively removed the possibility for Norway's king, who after 1814 also was Sweden's king, to create a nobility of Swedes and loyal Norwegians.

The Nobility Law of 1821 (Norwegian: Adelsloven) initiated a long-range abolition of all noble titles and privileges, while the current nobility were allowed to keep their noble status, possible titles and in some cases also privileges for the rest of their lifetime. Under the Nobility Law, nobles who for themselves and their children wished to present a claim to nobility before the Norwegian parliament were required to provide documentation confirming their noble status. Representatives of eighteen noble families submitted their claims to the Parliament.[42]

In 1815 and in 1818, the Parliament had passed the same law, and it was both times vetoed by the King.[43] The King did not possess a third veto, so he had to approve the law in 1821. Shortly afterwards, the King suggested the creation of a new nobility, but the attempt was rejected by the Parliament.[44]

Many of the Norwegians who had noble status in Norway had noble status also in Denmark and thus remained noble. This and the fact that many Norwegian nobles did not live in the country may have contributed to reduced resistance to the Nobility Law. However, there was resistance, which found its most significant expression in Severin Løvenskiold, who had fought against democracy and who had worked to stop the Nobility Law.[45] Being an important politician and a major political ally of the King, Løvenskiold was not without power. Løvenskiold argued against the law that Norway's king, and thus the Kingdom's government, had granted his family eternal noble status, and the letters patent of 1739 uses the expression ‘eternally’.[46][47] At the same time, the Constitution's § 97 in fact stated: ‘No law must be given retroactive force.’[48]

The last Norwegian count with official recognition was Peder Anker, Count of Wedel-Jarlsberg, who died in 1893. His younger brothers were Herman, Baron of Wedel-Jarlsberg, who died in 1888, and Harald, Baron of Wedel-Jarlsberg, who died in 1897. The cousins Ulriche Antoinette de Schouboe (1813–1901) and Julie Elise de Schouboe (1813–1911), as well as Anne Sophie Dorothea Knagenhjelm (1821–1907), died early in the 20th century as some of Norway's last persons who had had official recognition as noble.

Although the institution of nobility gradually was dissolved, members of noble families continued to play a significant rôle in the political and social life of the country. For example, Stewards and Prime Ministers such as Count Herman Wedel-Jarlsberg (Steward, 1836–1840), Severin Løvenskiold (Steward, 1841–1856, Prime Minister, 1828–1841), Peder Anker (Prime Minister, 1814–1822), Frederik Due (Prime Minister, 1841–1858), Georg Sibbern (Prime Minister, 1858–1871) and Carl Otto Løvenskiold (Prime Minister, 1884) had aristocratic backgrounds.

Aristocrats were active also in the dissolution of the union between Norway and Sweden in 1905. Most prominent were diplomat Fritz Wedel Jarlsberg and world-famous polar explorer Fridtjof Wedel-Jarlsberg Nansen. Nansen, who otherwise became Norway's first ambassador to London (1906–08), was pro dissolving the union and, among other acts, travelled to the United Kingdom, where he successfully lobbied for support for the independence movement. Also in the ensuing referendum concerning monarchy versus republic in Norway, the popular hero Nansen's support of monarchy and his active participation in the pro-monarchy campaign is said to have had an important effect on popular opinion. After the dissolution of the union, the leading person in the creation of the new state's Ministry of Foreign Affairs was Thor von Ditten, a Norwegian of foreign nobility.

Many noble Norwegians are noble also in Denmark and as such included in the Yearbook of the Danish Nobility.

Today, the nobility is a relatively marginal factor in the society, culturally and socially as well as in politics. Members of noble families are only individually prominent, like Anniken Huitfeldt. However, a handful of families, especially Løvenskiold, Treschow, and Wedel-Jarlsberg, still possess considerable wealth. This includes fame and regular appearance in newspapers and also coloured magazines.

Landowner and businessman Carl Otto Løvenskiold owns Maxbo among other companies. The brothers Nicolai and Peder Løvenskiold own a large number of higher private schools in Norway, among others the Westerdals School of Communication, the Bjørknes College, and the Norwegian School of Information Technology.[49] Prominent was also the now late [50] landowner and businesswoman Mille-Marie Treschow, who was one of the wealthiest women in Norway.

Until and during the 20th century, noble persons have served at the Royal Court in Oslo. Prominent are (since 1985) Mistress of the Robes Ingegjerd Løvenskiold Stuart and (between 1931 and 1945) Lord Chamberlain Peder Anker Wedel-Jarlsberg.

Although privileges were abolished and official recognition of titles was removed, some families still consider themselves noble by tradition and—lawfully—still bear their inherited name and coat of arms. Claims to nobility have no effect or support in law. There are still Norwegians who enjoy official recognition from the Danish government;—the nobility in Denmark still exists. They are likewise included in the Yearbook of the Danish Nobility, published by the Association of the Danish Nobility.

The family Roos af Hjelmsäter of the Swedish nobility is among the disappearingly few of Norway's medieval noble families still living today.[51]

In 1814 noblemen were leading when a constitutional monarchy and a parliament were established in Norway. Among them were the Count of Wedel-Jarlsberg, Peder Anker, and Christian Magnus Falsen. The Constitution of the Kingdom of Norway of 1814, which is still in function, was written by a nobleman, namely by Falsen. This constitution grants, among other things, freedom of speech, protection of private property, and prohibition of painful search and seizure.

In 1905 members of the aristocracy were leading in the independence movement. Eystein Eggen has claimed Norway's independence was realised by a 'genuinely aristocratic wave',[53][54] in which especially Fridtjof Wedel-Jarlsberg Nansen and Fritz Wedel-Jarlsberg were important persons.

In culture

• Christian Magnus Falsen was depicted on the 1,000 kroner bank-note between 1979 and 2001.
• Peter Wessel Tordenskiold was together with non-noble Wilhelm Frimann Koren Christie depicted on the 1,000 kroner bank-note, the 100 kroner bank-note, and the 10 kroner bank-note between 1901 and 1945.
• The idiom Tordenskiold's soldiers (Norwegian: Tordenskiolds soldater) is related to aforementioned Tordenskiold.[55]
• Lady Inger of Ostrat is a famous romantic nationalist play published by Henrik Ibsen in 1857. It refers to Lady Ingerd Ottesdotter Rømer to Austrått. Based on the play a movie was made in 1975 by Sverre Udnæs.[56]
• Some official coats of arms display or are inspired by noble coats of arms, among others those of the municipalities Sarpsborg (see Alv Erlingsson) and Våler (see Bolt) and of the county Troms (see Bjarkøy dynasty). The coat of arms of Lillehammer displays a Birchleg. KNM Tordenskjold, the Royal Norwegian Navy's school for maritime warfare, uses aforementioned Tordenskiold's arms.
• The Werenskiold family have produced two prominent artists, namely Erik Werenskiold (1855–1938), who especially is known for his illustrations of Norse sagas, and his son Dagfin Werenskiold (1892–1977), a sculptor and a painter.

In names and places

• Several streets, squares and so on are named after noblemen, among others Grev Wedels plass (Count Wedel Square), Løvenskiolds gate (Løvenskiold Street), Majorstua (a part of Oslo), and Wedel Jarlsberg Land.
• Several buildings, enterprises and so on are named after noblemen, among others Best Western Gyldenløve Hotell (a hotel), Marie Treschow (a private home for old people), and Georg Morgenstiernes Hus (a building at the University of Oslo campus).

Philanthropy Norwegian foundations origined along with settled estates (stamhus) and fee tails (fideikommiss) during absolutism in Norway, and noblemen were among the first to establish such. In 1814, when the Constitution of the Kingdom of Norway was introduced, the foundation system was the only to survive; the creation of new settled estates and new fee tails was prohibited.

Of over 7,000 foundations in Norway today, several have been established by or bear the name of noble persons and families. An example is the Comital Foundation of Hielmstierne-Rosencrone,[57] providing financial support to certain poor women in Bergen. Others are:

• Det Ankerske Broderbørns og Descendenters Midler (Anker family)[58]
• Stiftelsen Det Ankerske Waisenhus (Anker family)[58]
• Eva og Erik Ankers Legat (Anker family)[58]
• Johan Ankers Fond (Anker family)[58]
• Stiftelsen De Ankerske Samlinger (Anker family)[58]
• Assessor L.W. Knagenhjelm og Fru Selma f. Rolls Legat (Knagenhjelm family)[58]
• Otto Løvenskiolds Legat (Løvenskiold family)[58]
• Statsminister Carl Løvenskiold og Frues Legat (Løvenskiold family)[58]
• Legatet til Otto Løvenskiolds Minde (Løvenskiold family)[58]
• Professor Morgenstiernes Fond (Munthe af Morgenstierne family, B.H. von M. af M.)[58]
• Den Grevelige Hielmstierne Rosencroneske Stiftelse (Count and Countess of Rosencrone)[58]
• Den Grevelige Hjelmstjerne-Rosencroneske Stiftelse ved Universitetet i Oslo (Count and Countess of Rosencrone)[58]
• Den Grevelige Hjelmstjerne-Rosencroneske Stiftelse til Universitetsbiblioteket i Oslo (Count and Countess of Rosencrone)[58]
• Den Grevelige Hielmstierne Rosencroneske Stiftelses Legat v/Det Kgl. Norske Videnskabers Selskabs Stiftelse (Count and Countess of Rosencrone)[58]
• Stiftelsen Skoleskibet Tordenskiold (P.W. Tordenskiold)[58]
• Trampes Legat (Countess of Trampe)[58]
• Fritz Gerhard Treschows Minnefond (Treschow family)[58]
• Willum Frederik Treschows Handelhøyskolefond (Treschow family)[58]
• Wedel-Jarlsbergsfond (Counts of Jarlsberg)[58]
• Familien Wedel Jarlsbergs Stiftelse til Fordel for Jarlsberg Hovedgårds Pensjonister (Counts of Jarlsberg)[58]
• Frk Harriet Wedel-Jarlsbergs Pensjonsfond for Bærums Verk (Counts of Jarlsberg)[58]
• Gustav og Maria Smith og Hermann Wedel-Jarlsbergs Legat (Counts of Jarlsberg)[58]
• Jarlsberg Hovedgårds Gravstedlegat (Counts of Jarlsberg)[58]

Wollstonecraft In her work Letters Written in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, published in 1796, Mary Wollstonecraft shares her impressions of Norway. Some descriptions are related to the nobility and to the social structure:[59]

• 'Though the king of Denmark be an absolute monarch, yet the Norwegians appear to enjoy all the blessings of freedom. Norway may be termed a sister kingdom; but the people have no viceroy to lord it over them, [...]' Letter VII.
• '[...] the Norwegians appear to me to be the most free community I have ever observed.' Letter VII.
• 'There are only two counts in the whole country who have estates, and exact some feudal observances from their tenantry.' Letter VII.
• 'In short, I have seldom heard of any noblemen so innoxious.' Letter IX.
• '[In Christiania, i.e. Oslo,] I saw the cloven foot of despotism. I boasted to you that they had no viceroy in Norway, but these Grand Bailiffs, particularly the superior one, who resides at Christiania, are political monsters of the same species. [...] The Grand Bailiffs are mostly noblemen from Copenhagen, [...]' Letter XIII.
• 'The aristocracy in Norway, if we keep clear of Christiania, is far from being formidable; and it will require a long the to enable the merchants to attain a sufficient moneyed interest to induce them to reinforce the upper class at the expense of the yeomanry, with whom they are usually connected.' Letter XIV.

The following list contains families who appeared before, during, and after the so-called unification of Norway (c. 872–1050). To these belonged also the post-unification lendman aristocracy (1050–1184/1240).

	Name	Appearance	Extinction	Information	Ref.
	Arnmødling Dynasty	10th century[60]		Appears with Earl Arnmod, who died in the Battle of Hjörungavágr.	[60]
	Bjarkøy Dynasty, the older line	10th century		Appears with Þórir hundr Þórirsson.	[61]
	Bjarkøy Dynasty, the younger line		1355[61]	Established with Jon Arnason of the Arnmødlings, who married Þórir hundr's granddaughter Rannveig Þórirsdóttir.[61]
	Giske Dynasty	11th century	1265[62]	Established with Torberg Arnason of the Arnmødlings.	[62]
	Rein Dynasty			Appears with Skuli Tostisson, an alleged son of Tostig Godwinson, Earl of Northumbria.	[63]
	Sudreim Dynasty	12th century	Alive.	Appears with Lendman Åle varg Ivarsson. Still alive as the Roos af Hjelmsäter family.	[64]
	Tornberg Dynasty	12th century	1290[65]		[65]

C.o.a.	Name of receiver	House	Title held	Ref.
	Agmund Berdorsson Bolt	Bolt
	Alf Haraldsson Bolt	Bolt
	Alv Knutsson	Tre Roser
	Arne Båt	Båt	Known 1303
	Arne Serksson
	Eiliv Eilivsson	Naustdal
	Einar Olavsson Fluga	Fluga	Known 1482
	Einrid Erlendsson	Losna
	Erling Vidkunsson to Bjarkøy	Bjarkøy
	Finn Ogmundsson to Hesby
	Gaute Eriksson	Galte
	Guttorm Eivindsson
	Guttorm Kolbjørnsson
	Hallvard Jonson Smør	Smør
	Hans Kruckow	Kruckow
	Havtore Jonsson to Sudreim	Sudrheim
	Hermann Moltke	von Molteke	Known 1449
	Ivar Ogmundsson Rova
	Jon Ragnvaldsson Smør	Smør
	Jon Svalesson Smør	Smør
	Jon Toraldesson		Known 1351-1370
	Jøns Erengislesson Hjerne	Hjerne	- before 1379
	Kolbjørn Arnaldsson Gerst	Gerst
	Malis Sparre
	Nikulas Gunnarsson Kane	Kane
	Ogmund Finnsson til Hesby
	Olav to Foss	Rev of Ryfylke
	Olav Nilsson to Talgje	Skanke
	Otte Rømer	Rømer
	Peder Fleming	Fleming	- after 1406
	Pål Eriksson
	Sigurd Brynjolfsson to Aga
	Sigurd Jonsson	Stjerne of Suðrheim
	Svale Jonsson Smør	Smør
	Thore Endridsson Harf
	Torvald Toresson
	Vidkunn Erlingsson to Bjarkøy	Bjarkøy

Squire (Væpner)

Years of denoblement (extinction) refer to when the last noble male member died. It should, however, be noted that several letters patent treated men and women equally; when unmarried or widowed, such women had a personal and independent status as noble. An example is the letters patent of the Løvenskiold family, which uses the term 'legitimate issue of the male and the female sexus'.[74]