![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
The redemption of Orkney and Shetland, first mortgaged to Scotland in 1468–1469, was a feature of Scandinavian–Scottish diplomacy throughout the late 15th and 16th centuries. It was also a recurring theme in constitutional disputes between union monarchs and Norway’s independent council of the realm until the body’s dissolution in 1536. While numerous scholars have cited the controversy, there has been little in-depth analysis of its practical or ideological implications. This article examines the development of the redemption policy and seeks to understand how it influenced monarchs’ pursuance of the isles, on the one hand, and their interactions with Norway’s domestic aristocracy, on the other. The author posits that, although unsuccessful in recovering those territories, the council used the issue to strengthen constitutional principles that limited union monarchs’ autonomy of action and ascribed greater agency to the aristocracy in matters of national interest.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Brian Smith and Steinar Imsen for providing helpful commentary on drafts of this article. I would also like to thank my two anonymous peer reviewers. Any remaining mistakes and misjudgments are my own.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1 NgL 2r. 2:1: no. 115: ‘totas et integras terras nostras insularum [Orch]adensium […] omnibus et singulis custumis [proficuis, libertatibus, commodi]tatibus ac alilis justis suis pertinenciis’.
2 Ibid., no. 116. See Crawford, ‘The Earldom of Orkney’; Crawford, ‘The Pawning’; Crawford, ‘The Pledging’; Crawford, The Northern Earldoms, 360–70; Hørby, ‘Christian I’; Thomson, The New History, 189–205.
3 NgL 2r 2:1: nos. 115, 116: ‘donec et quosque per nos, heredes nostros vel successors, Norwegie reges, prefato Jacobo Scotorum regi, heredibus seu successoribus suis de summa […] fuit integraliter et plenoarie satisfactum ac persolutum cum effectu’. On 13 May 1471, James III affirmed that, upon repayment, Orkney shall ‘revert to the king of Norway without contradiction, fraud, deceit or contrivance’ (ad Norwegie regem revertentur, contradiccione, fraude, dolo et machinacione malis exclusis); ibid., no. 115-116, append. 2.
4 Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 16–19.
5 Goudie, ‘The Danish Claims’; Scheel, ‘Orknøerne og Hjaltland’; Laursen, Danmark-Norges Traktater 3, 1–13; Crawford, ‘The Pawning’; Donaldson, ‘Problems of Sovereignty’; Smith, ‘When did Orkney’.
6 Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 18.
7 ‘Riksrådet’ is often translated as the ‘council of the realm’, e.g. Schück, ‘The Political System’, 680. I refer to ‘the council’ for simplicity’s sake.
8 NgL 2r 3:1, no. 1: ‘hwat som Norges rige nw i thesse forledne aar sønderlige i høgborens første konning Cristierns wor kære faders tiid frangonget er’.
9 NgL 2r 4:1, no. 3: ‘att jndlösze Orckenöör och Hettlandt thill kronen egien’.
10 NgL 2r 4:1, no. 86; Aarsberetninger 2, nos. 17, 19, 22, 24, 27.
11 Taranger, Norges historie, 135–46; Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 69, 80, 283, 440, 562; Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 183; Moseng et al., Norsk historie, 353; Imsen, Noregs nedgang, 32–3.
12 Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 215.
13 On Bracton’s ideals governance and jurisdiction, see Tierny, ‘Bracton on Government’; Post, ‘A Romano-canonical Maxim’. Generally, on medieval constitutionalism, see e.g. Kantorowicz, The King’s Two Bodies; McIlwain, Cosntitutionalism; Blyth, Ideal Government. In Nordic contexts, see Hervik, ‘Nordisk politikk’.
14 On Norway’s elective monarchy, from 1449–1450 (NgL 2r 2:2, nos. 3, 5, 21), see Imsen, Arv, Annammelse, Valg; Hervik, ‘Nordisk politikk’, 348–61. On council’s general development, including relations with the crown, see e.g. Helle, ‘Rigsråd’; Nielsen, Det norske Rigsraad; Hamre, Norsk historie, 113–47; Moseng et al., Norsk historie, 307–89; Imsen, Arv, Annammelse, Valg; Imsen, Noregs nedgang, 23–44.
15 Lönnroth, Sverige och Kalmarunionen; Olesen, Unionskrige og stændersamfund; Maarbjerg, ‘Regimen Politicum’; Imsen, Noregs nedgang, 20–2. On charters, see Nielsen, ‘Håndfestning’; Hervik, ‘Nordisk politikk’.
16 On the concept (quod omnes tangit) and parliamentary developments, see e.g. Marongui, ‘Das Prinzip der Demokratie’; Post, ‘A Romano-canonical Maxim’.
17 Post, ‘A Romano-canonical Maxim’, 164. See also Tierny, ‘The Idea’.
18 Hervik, ‘Nordisk politikk’. See also Lönnroth, Sverige och Kalmarunionen.
19 Generally, on the council’s transition, see Helle, ‘Rigsråd’.
20 Imsen, ‘The Union of Calmar’, for historiographic review.
21 Hervik, ‘Nordisk politikk’, 348–56. Imsen, Arv, Annammelse, Valg, 21–51, 64–5, advances that codification of elective principles was a significant expression of positive law. Cf. Beyer, ‘Den norske tronfølgeutviklingen’, who argues that it merely affirmed an existing elective practice. On significance for the council, see e.g. Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 821–2; Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 36–40; Albrectsen, Fællesskabet bliver til, 207–9.
22 Albrectsen, Fællesskabet bliver til, 209.
23 Opsahl, ‘Conflict and Alliance’, 174.
24 See also Opsahl, ‘Fantes det et norsk’, 21–2. Generally on late medieval representation, see e.g. Fletcher, ‘Political Representation’; Pollard, ‘The People’. More broadly on concepts of advocacy and ‘full powers’ (plena potestas), see Post, ‘Plena potestas’; Hervik, ‘Nordisk politikk’, 305ff.
25 NgL 2, 25; See Imsen, ‘Sammenfatning’.
26 DN 3, no. 477. See Imsen, Land og folk, 133–6; Wærdahl, Incorporation and Integration, 70–1: This ideal was not unequivocal, ibid., 71 note 6.
27 Cf. the council’s efforts to address conflicts in Iceland, another tributary province, in the wake of English commercial domination in the 15th century. See e.g. Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 184–9.
28 Taranger, Norges historie, 74. On Norway’s first charter, see also Hervik, ‘Nordisk politikk’, 336–80.
29 Maabjerg, ‘Regimen Politicum’, 144.
30 NgL 2r 2:2: no. 326. See Anderson, The Stewart Earls, 2–3; Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 4–5.
31 Donaldson, ‘Norse and Scottish Law’; Donaldson, ‘Problems of Sovereignty’; Grohse, Frontiers for Peace, 217–20.
32 Imsen, Noregs nedgang, 72–3. This builds upon the idea that kings both before and after 1537 endorsed and protected ‘peasant communalism’ (bondekommunalisme); Imsen, ‘Communalism’; Imsen, Norsk bondekommunalisme.
33 Moseng et al, Norsk historie, 342.
34 Opsahl, ‘Fantes det et norsk’, 16.
35 NgL 2r 2:1, no. 1: ‘at Norges rickes indbyggere skole niwthe theres lag, friiheth oc kwngeligh rettebøther’.
36 On Annual see e.g. Crawford, The Northern Earldoms, 302–3, 360–1, 363, 365–6.
37 Huitfeldt, Diplomatarium, 128; Crawford, ‘The Pawning’, 35–6; Hørby, ‘Christian I’, 57–9; Riis, Should Auld Aquaintence, 16–18.
38 NgL 2r 2:1, no. 115. Christian I likely adopted the draft presented him by James III’s ambassadors; see Charters and other Records, 113; Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 3, note 12.
39 Brøgger, Ancient Emigrants, 196; Donaldson, ‘Problems of Sovereignty’, 19–22; Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 3.
40 Crawford, ‘The Pawning’, 40, 45.
41 Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 1.
42 Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 3.
43 Imsen, Noregs nedgang, 32; Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 183–4; Moseng et al. Norsk historie, 353.
44 Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 5. Cf. Crawford, ‘Sir David Sinclair’, 1.
45 NgL 2r 2:1, no. 3: ‘tiilsagdhe wii oc fwlkommeligh loffwet […] villia vii inghen forpante eller affhende rickens sloth, leen eller renthe, vtthen, thet Gwd forbiude, at ricket saadanth anfall fengie, at nødh oc behoff giordes, tha villia vii thet giøre effther Norges raadz raad’. The council also complained about the Annual, suggesting that it viewed the entire 1468 contract as invalid. This would later be reiterated, e.g. DN 9, nos. 476, 670; DN 10, no. 671.
46 NgL 2r 2:1, nos. 115, 116: ‘de consensu et assensu prelatorum, procerum ac maiorum regni nostri Norwegie predicti nobilium consessimus’.
47 Huitfeldt, Historiske Bescriffuelse, 172: ‘paa Norgis Rigis Raads, som til stede vaar, Samtycke, ved dette Forslag’.
48 Torfæus, Orcades, 188.
49 Scheel, ‘Orknoerne og Hjaltland’, 14; Taranger, Norges historie, 143–4.
50 NgL 2r 2:1, no. 186.2.
51 NgL 2r 2:1, no. 186.2: ‘Primo at Orcknöyer ock Hiälland, som vt är panthet eller borth är gifwit, kome til kronen ock i Nordmenne hender swa frijt ock qwitt, som thet war i koning Christierns tijd, them tijd han Norgis krone oc rige anamede’.
52 The mortgage charters refer to ‘the royal rights of us and our predecessors of Norway’ (nobis regali iure et predicessoribus nostris Norwagie), NgL 2r 2:1, nos. 115, 116. James III’s confirmation also says the isles should ‘revert to the king of Norway’ (ad Norwegie regem revertentur), NgL 2r 2:1, nos. 115-116, append. 2.
53 Historians refer to ‘attempts by Denmark’ (Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 1) and ‘all the Danish king’s right’ (Crawford, ‘The Pawning’, 39). Scottish documents also style him as e.g. ‘kynge of Denmark’; ‘Dacie regem’, Aarsberetninger 3, 112, 113.
54 Register, 151–2; Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 4.
55 Ferreri’s account in Boethius, Scotorum historiae, 389: ‘in perpetuum renuntia uit iuri suo de insulis maris Deucallidonici, nempe Orcadibus Zetlandiae et aliis’; Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 4.
56 Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 4.
57 Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 5.
58 See Hamre, Norsk historie, 67–94.
59 NgL 2r 3:1, no. 1: ‘hwat som Norges rige nw i thesse forledne aar sønderlige i høgborens første konning Cristierns wor kære faders tiid frangonget er, land slot stæder geld rente eller hwat thet helst ware kan, skulle wii vpa Gud oc wor konninxlige eed met al troschab oc macht tilhielpe oc besørge at thet friit oc qwit igen kommer till Norges krone met thet aldre første effther rigens raadz raad’.
60 Aarsberetninger 2, no. 13. See Albrectsen, Fællesskabet bliver til, 250.
61 Hamre, Norsk historie, 86–7.
62 Crawford and Ballin Smith, The Biggings, 31.
63 The late Sigurd Jonsson’s estates were likely in the control of his widow, Philippa Hansdatter, until her death in 1477. See Gørvel Fadersdatters regnskap, 5–6. In 1490, Sigurd’s estates were portioned between Inger and Sigrid Erlendsdotter (represented by Inger’s husband, Arild Kane), Alv Knutsson and his siblings, and Ottar Matsson and his siblings; DN 8, no. 426; SD, no. 32. See Gørvel Fadersdatters regnskap, 5–6; Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 330; Crawford and Balinn Smith, The Biggings, 31; Stylegar and Kjørsvik Schei, ‘The Lords of Norroway’.
64 See Anderson, The Stewart Earls, 1–22; Crawford, The Northern Earldoms, 371–88.
65 ER, 306. See Crawford, ‘Scotland’s Foreign Relations’, 98; Crawford and Ballin Smith, The Biggings, 21; Stylegar and Kjørsvik Schei, ‘Lords of Norroway’, 113.
66 DN 2, no. 1106: ‘nyde bruke och beholde vbehindred ffor oss och wore efftherkomende erchebysper i Trondem i alle maade’.
67 Before election, Christian II styled himself as ‘rightful heir to Norway’ (rett arffuing till Norige); DN 9, no. 475; Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 288. Between his Danish and Norwegian coronations, Christian II styled himself as Rex Daciæ and electus in Regem Novegiæ, but later as king by God’s grace; see Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 82–3, 821–2. Frederick I styled himself e.g. as ‘rightful heir to Norway’ (rett arffwing tiill Norge) in his Danish charter from 4 August 1523; Aarsberetninger 2, no. 17. In a letter from 9 June 1523, he referred to Norwegians ‘toiling and living in our hereditary kingdom of Norway’ (bogghe och baa wttj vart arffue riighe Norghe); NgL 2r 4:1: no. 62.
68 Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 336.
69 Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 287.
70 See Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 61–82.
71 DN 9, no. 476.
72 DN 9, no. 476: ‘loffuede oc swor ether nades herræ fader at indløse tiill Norges riige Orcknøy oc Helltlandh’.
73 Benedictow,Fra rike til provins, 287.
74 Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 74.
75 DN 9, no. 477: ‘om Orkenø oc Hetland at indløse vill hans nade met menige Norges indbyggeres hielp lade sig ther till met tiiden veluillig findes’.
76 NgL 2r 4:1, no. 3: ‘medt vnderszottens hielp, dett förste wy kunde dett become’.
77 Imsen, Noregs nedgang, 33.
78 Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 336.
79 Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 179–85.
80 Taranger, Norsk historie, 322–3; Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 272–94; Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 376–9. Policies included the rejection of kings’ hereditary claim to the throne, a reassertion that only native and naturalized men should hold fiefs and offices, and a ban on ‘Luther’s disciples’ (Lutherj disciple); NgL 2r 4:1, no. 1.
81 NgL 2r 4:1: no. 86: Jtem schulle wij jndløssze Orcknør oc Hiettland tiill Norges kronne egen som høgboren første konning Christiern wor kiere herre fader wdtsette wden Norges riiges raads samtycke oc wilge mett Norges riiges raads jndbyggeres hielp oc trøst. See also Torfæus, Orcades, 190.
82 Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 280–3.
83 Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 283. Frederick I agreed that ‘the documents that have been moved from Norway to Denmark that concern the kingdom of Norway, shall we have brought back to the kingdom of Norway wherever they can be found in Denmark’ (the breff som wdt førde ære aff Norge tiill Danmarcke som Norges riige paa rørendes ære them wele wij lade egen komme tiill Norges riige ehuor the kwnde findes i Danmarcke); NgL 2r 4:1, no. 86. It renewed the article concerning ‘that which has been disposed from the kingdom Norway in the foregone years, in the time of previous kings’ (huad som i Norges riige wthi; thessze forledne aar i framfarnæ konningers tiidt fraagangett er) first in place in Hans’ 1483 charter (NgL 2r 3:1, no. 1), but omitted from Christian II’s 1513 charter (NgL 2r 4:1, no. 3).
84 Huitfeldt, Historiske Bescriffuelse, 190: ‘indtil saa lenge hand, eller hans Effterkommere, konger udi Norge, betalde Kongerne aff Skotland saadanne Penninge, hvor fare samme Lande oc Øyer, effter Breffuens Liudelse, vaare pantset’.
85 Crawford, ‘Sir David Sinclair’, 1; Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 5.
86 Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 5–6.
87 Laing mss, La. III-322, 16–17.
88 Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 5–6.
89 NgL 2r 2:1, no. 3.
90 Laing mss, La. III-322, 16–17: ‘vestris consulibus non parvum vilis et indignationis prouocasse’.
91 DN 6, no. 609; OSR, 56–7; SD, no. 35. See Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 6. David Sinclair, foud of Shetland in 1488, was described as ‘knight and castellan of the king’s [Hans’] estate in Bergen’ (riddare ok høuisman pa kongs garden i Bergwen) and ‘country lord or Shetland’ (landz høfdinghie i Hjætland) in 1496–1497; DN 3, no. 999. See Crawford, ‘Scotland’s Foreign Relations’, 93–4, 97–8; Crawford, ‘Sir David Sinclair’.
92 Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 6.
93 NgL 2r 2:1, no. 115: ‘opem subvencionem et auxilium contra quemcumque seu quoscumque principem seu principes, gentemve populum’.
94 Riis, Should Auld Acquaintance, 19–20.
95 Crawford, ‘Scotland’s Foreign Relations’, 90. Generally on alliances see Riis, Should Auld Acquaintance, 7–35.
96 Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 82–5.
97 Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 84–5; Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 6–7; Flodden Papers, 113–14.
98 DN 1, no. 1042: ‘alle gode men som bygge oc boo po Orcknøø […] wii dog met thet allerførstæ at løsæ ether tiill Noriiges kronæ vnder oss oc Noriiges koninge at bliffue som thet bør met retthæ’.
99 DN 1, no. 1042: ‘vtgøre forne werdugeste fader her erchiebiscop vti Trondhem eller hans ombudzman thet subsidium pallii som hanum bør at haffuæ effter godæ gamble sidweniæ’.
100 Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 7; National Library of Scotland, Adv. MS.35.5.9B. folio 216 verso.
101 Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 84.
102 Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 110ff.; Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 342ff.; Imsen, ‘Union of Calmar’, 474.
103 Riis, Should Auld Aquaintence, 83–4.
104 Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 82.
105 DN 1, no. 1043.
106 NgL 2r 2:2: no. 326, append; DN 7, no. 602.
107 DN 6, nos. 676, 677: ‘bona ad manus venerabilis fratris nostri archiepiscopi Nidrosiensis transmitti’.
108 Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 83.
109 DN 7, no. 640: ‘Vestro consilio vti intendimus de damno et detrimento nostre ecclesie sine juditio et ratione ab archiepiscopo Scotie illato. Hic enim falsis consiliis ecclesiam Orkadensem a nostra obedientia alienam fecit’.
110 DN 9, no. 670; DN 10, no. 672: totam Orchadiam nedum in temporalibus sed eciam in spiritualibus. The bishop of Bergen also raised issues concerning ‘the earldom of Orkney, with the goods belonging thereto’ (grewedømet aff Aarkennøy met then ware som ther faller), DN 10, no. 674.
111 DN 5, no. 1039: ‘enn godt tro norsk mand byggendis oc boendis hoss oss’. See Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 369.
112 DN 18, no. 341: ‘landgillet aff Hietland Orknøø etc.’. See also DN 2, no. 1106.
113 DN 22, no. 129: ‘Orkenøø och Hetlandt som liger wnder Norgis krone’. DN 6, no. 696. See Koht, Vincens Lunge, 75–7; Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 245–50; Larson, Reforming the North, 158.
114 DN 10, no. 671: ‘greffwedømmett Ørchene och Hettland’. See Bull d.e., Vincens Lunge, 103, in which he views these as ‘of the utmost personal interest for Vincens Lunge and the house of Austrått’.
115 On conflicts see e.g. Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 370ff; Rian, Den nye begynnelsen, 20–1.
116 Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 349–467; Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 388–94.
117 Aarsberetninger 3, 113–19. See Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 7; Riis, Should Auld Acquaintance, 22.
118 DN 7, no. 613: ‘the breff om Ørchener Hethland etc. som ederss nade fich her aff domkyrchen oc andre rige(n)s merchelige documenta huilche nw allerbest behoff gøres’.
119 Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 230–1.
120 Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 337–48; Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 386–7; Larson, Reforming the North, 175. On conflict, see Rian, ‘Olav Engelbrektssons kamp’.
121 Torfæus, Orcades, 190.
122 Dawson, Scotland Re-formed, 89–114.
123 The king relations with Norway’s secular aristocracy after reasserting his authority in 1527–1529. His relations with the clergy, including the archbishop, remained untenable. See Hamre, Norsk politisk historie, 349–467.
124 Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 18.
125 The weakening of the council is part of what historians traditionally view as ‘Norway’s decline’ (Norges nedgang). As Imsen points out, this is a historiographical construct that fails to account for administrative, judicial, and social continuities; Imsen, Noregs nedgang; Imsen, ‘Union of Calmar’. Nevertheless, historians agree that the council’s weakening precipitated Norway’s loss of political independence. See e.g. Benedictow, Fra rike til provins; Albrectsen, Fællesskabet bliver til, 245–334; Rian, Den nye begynnelsen, 12–33.
126 Aarsberetninger 2, nos. 19: ‘Norgis riige eller nogre the ledmode, slotte, lande eller sysszell, som ther tiill hörer, kunde bekrefftige eller bekomme vnder vortt hörszom, tha skall thet heer effther weere och bliffwe vnder Dnmarcks krone […] och her effther jcke weere eller hede ingtet koninge riige for seg, menn eth ledemodt aff Danmarcks riige och vnder Danmarcks krone till ewiige tiidt’.
127 See e.g. Koht’s, Schreiner’s, Thowsen’s, and Petersen’s contributions to Imsen and Supphellen, Norske historikere i utvalg; Rian, Den nye begynnelsen, 22–33. Benedictow, Fra rike til provins, 437–42, emphasizes that Norwegian national identity continued to develop despite the loss of political autonomy. Rian, Den aristokratiske fyrstestaten, 21–6, underscores that the Norwegian kingdom remained a separate entity, although it had no agency in royal elections. Imsen, Norsk bondekommunalisme, 108–9, 231, also argues that the foundations of Norwegian governing autonomy were retained despite the terminological changes. See discussion in Berg, Reformasjon, 79–84.
128 Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 8–12.
129 Torfæus, Orcades: ‘De indefessis potentissitnorum Regum Danise Norvegiseque studiis jus suum in Orcades adjacentemque Hetlandiam pacifice repetendi’. See Goudie, ‘The Danish Claims’.
130 Aarsberetninger 2, no. 27: ‘skulle wi och were forpligtet med vndersaatternes hielp, det förste wi kunde dett bekomme, at indlösze Örkenör och Hetland til cronen igien’.
131 Smith, ‘When did Orkney’, 8. Cf. Crawford, ‘Sir David Sinclair’, 1.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Ian Peter Grohse
Ian Peter Grohse, PhD, is Associate Professor of Medieval and Early Modern History at the Department of Archaeology, History, Religious Studies and Theology, the Arctic University of Norway. His holds a PhD from Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet and previously worked as lecturer and researcher at Høgskulen i Volda and Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster. Grohse’s research focuses on Scandinavia in the central and late middle ages. Address: UiT Norges arktiske universitet, Institutt for arkeologi, historie, religionsvitenskap og teologi, Postboks 6050 Langnes, TROMSØ, 9037 Norway. [email: [email protected]]