Publication Cover
Acta Borealia
A Nordic Journal of Circumpolar Societies
Volume 30, 2013 - Issue 2
1,150
Views
8
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

From “Spitsbergen” to “Svalbard”. Norwegianization in Norway and in the “Norwegian Sea”, 1820–1925

Pages 154-173 | Published online: 01 Nov 2013
 

Abstract

The aim of the paper is to enhance our understanding of the Norwegian acquisition of Spitsbergen/Svalbard by using the concept of Norwegianization as a tool for analyzing the political and diplomatic background for the Spitsbergen treaty of 1920, and comparing the Norwegianization polar politics with the Norwegianization concept used to analyze the internal colonization in the Sami districts of northern Norway during the same period. The paper concludes that the politics of Norwegianization on the main islands in the North Ocean – renamed the Norwegian Sea by Norwegian oceanographers in the 1870s – was an offensive policy of expansionism, motivated by historical and geographical considerations and alleged rights to re-establish the Medieval Norse empire.

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to the anonymous reviewers as well as to the editors of Acta Borealia for their helpful comments.

Notes

1 For details and primary sources to the diplomatic history of Spitsbergen, 1870–1925, see Berg (Citation1995b: 145–177, 265–302). On the North Atlantic Ocean Empire, see Riste (Citation2001: 13–30). See Eglinger and Heitmann (Citation2010: 19) on the Norwegian naming at East Greenland 1931–33 as a later example.

2 “[E]n … Stræben efter Fornorskning af Sproget”; signed by the Norwegian linguist Alf Torp.

3 “Fortegnelse over det norske Riges Territoriale Tab medens dette Rige var forenet med Kongeriget Danmark”, “De Strækninger som Russerne have bemægtiget af Finmarken”, Nasjonalbiblioteket, Ms fol 571a, oberst Tidemands Extract Bog No 2.

4 “Hvad ellers Concurrencen med Rusland angaaer, da seer man dog, at de Norskes Foretagender paa Polar-Øerne ere i Fremgang, medens Russernes lidt efter lidt ophøre”.

5 “… fremdeles utgjøre en del av Norges rike”.

6 “[B]aade Beliggenhed og Forholdene forøvrigt […] tilsagde, at Spisbergen, om den skulde tages i Besiddelse, henlagdes under Norsk Statshøihed”.

7 “For den, som har set det nordlige Norges ishavsflaade og er fortrolig med dens virksomhed, vil det være paafaldende og unaturligt at forestille sig Spitsbergen som et fremmed land.”

8 “I spillet om Svalbard brukte altså norske myndigheter bevisst forskningsresultater og forskningsaktivitet som argumenter for at Spitsbergen var norsk. Men også Spitsbergen-forskerne arbeidet planmessig for en norsk erobring, først økonomisk og kulturelt, og i siste runde politisk. De opererte både selvstendig og på oppdrag av myndighetene, i likhet med sine kolleger i andre land. Den vitenskapelige aktiviteten var viktig del av konsolideringen av nasjonalstaten og i forsøkene på å legge nytt land inn under seg.”

9 “at hævde vort Land den Plads i den videnskabelige Verden, som dets Beliggenhed og Naturforhold har anvist det. ”

10 “For mig står det som vor pligt at gjøre mest mulig ud af begivenheder som en Abels fødsel i vor nation; ved at fremhæve dette for al verden fremhæver vi vor ret til at eksistere som egen kulturstat. ” Letter to Bjørnstjerne Bjørnson in 1902.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 53.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 101.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.