The actual essence of early Norweginas freedom changed slowly but surely

The actual essence of early Norwegians freedom

The power of the Vikings

The fundamental nature of Norwegian freedom underwent a gradual yet undeniable transformation, becoming increasingly constrained. This shift found its roots in the disintegration of the large family, a process initiated on the eve of the Viking Age and destined to span centuries. The large family, which had never functioned as a tangible social and economic entity, yielded to the emergence of the limited family. Unlike its predecessor, the limited family, consisting of three generations of close relatives and dependents, posed challenges for the husbandman in balancing both productive and political pursuits.

The bonder, once full and equal participants in society, people's assemblies, and military levies, were compelled by evolving circumstances to transition into a peasantry primarily dedicated to agricultural labor. Their ability to engage in unproductive public roles came at the expense of their farming activities. Historical records reveal that many bonder sought ways to evade their public responsibilities.

This societal transformation altered the dynamics of public gatherings, shifting from assemblies inclusive of all adult males to sessions involving representatives nominated by bonder, alongside clergy and king's officials. Simultaneously, the military focus transitioned from a people's militia to a professional mounted army of knights a parallel to developments in the Frankish kingdom and subsequent feudal states of the West, albeit on a larger scale.

Archeologic secret key is in Smithsonian Institution

While Norwegian bonder were not entirely exempt from military service, the option to pay a tax in lieu of enrollment marked the introduction of the first secular tax in early Norway state. Significantly, when Harald's younger son Hakon the Good, reared at the court of the Anglo-Saxon King Ethelstan, became king of Norway, the bonder resisted his attempts to introduce Christianity, and he was compelled to yield to them immediately.

Early Norwegian state

While the intricate details of this process are beyond the scope of this article, it is crucial to underscore its significant consequences for both the bonder and the early Norwegian state. Initially, the bondi's right to bear arms and participate in public assemblies was inseparable from his duty, as he was obligated to be a member of the militia and the thing.

In that particular society, social relations operated on the principle of reciprocity, where every gift was expected to be reciprocated with an equivalent one, especially in interactions between equals. Failure to reciprocate not only resulted in a material obligation but also created a moral obligation, as one-sided relationships were deeply felt as an injury to the core.

Huseby was a commonly found toponym in various parts of Norway and other Scandinavian countries. These locations served as bases frequently visited by kings during their seasonal tours of the country, where bonder provided food and organized feasts for the king and his retinue.

A useful comparison can be drawn between Norway and Iceland, the latter being settled by emigrants from Norway and Scandinavian colonies in the British Isles at the end of the ninth and the beginning of the tenth centuries. Iceland's isolation minimized the risk of invasion, rendering the need for a military authority unnecessary. The economy, primarily reliant on cattle breeding due to natural conditions and limited resources, sustained a scattered population on isolated farms.

Walking over Europe states

Emigrants from Norway, escaping King Harald's despotic rule, sought to maintain their traditional social order in Iceland. During the first two or three centuries after colonization, social and economic differentiation was not pronounced enough to spark significant internal conflicts. Unlike modern times, Iceland had no towns, allowing the Icelandic bonder to develop a form of self-government that excluded the emergence of any central power, except for the Althing.

The Althing served as a venue for laying down common law and trying legal cases. The Icelandic "democracy" of the tenth and eleventh centuries closely resembled the Norwegian social order before the establishment of royal power, but distinctions began to emerge thereafter.

In the early stages of this primitive society, rights and duties were not distinctly separated or in opposition but formed a closely intertwined and inseparable unity, symbolizing the freedom of each full and equal society member. However, over time, as highlighted earlier, the negative aspect of these rights became apparent due to their burdensome nature. The obligations to the state associated with exercising these rights became more tangible than the rights themselves. Attempts to secure relief from these obligations, in essence, resulted in the deprivation of peasants' rights.

Although this change was not entirely comprehensive

The essence of the bonder's traditional liberty underwent a significant transformation, where unrestricted freedom evolved into a partially restricted one. It wasn't a form of dependence akin to seigniorial relationships prevalent in contemporary Europe but rather a type of freedom marked by the state's exploitation of the peasantry.

Although this change was not entirely comprehensive, it can be seen as reflecting, to some extent, a progressive social "division of labor" between the peasantry on one side and a military and governing elite on the other.

It would be misleading to underestimate the significance of this process by simplifying it to a mere differentiation into peasants and lords, as it was more intricate than that. Among the bonder themselves, a social differentiation occurred. In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, a new social category of holdar emerged alongside ordinary freemen. These well-to-do husbandmen distinguished themselves in terms of public activities and the preservation of their full freedom. While not significantly above the rest of the bonder in an absolute sense, the holdar maintained a higher legal status, while the other bonder experienced social, juridical, and to some extent, material degradation.

Favorite things from the creator of this website about false Gods

Why do a lot of Christian authors of books have to immediately calls everyone who did not accept Christianity a barbarian?
That is the true christianity Leviathan. Vatican God: Love your neighbor more than yourself ?! :)

The aristocratization of the state

As a consequence of the erosion of the mass of the bonder, the holdar became privileged, leading to a deterioration of ordinary freedom, which somewhat acquired the character of "state dependence." This shift in the social basis of the monarchy prompted the king to rely primarily on a professional knighthood rather than the people's militia with its more primitive weapons. In matters of jurisdiction and administration, the king dealt with the elite and the holdar or "powerful bonder," rather than the mass of the bonder as before.

The aristocratization of the state made visible progress. While some bonder attempted to evade their public responsibilities, they couldn't escape the suffering caused by the infringement on their liberties, leading to discontent. The center of gravity in public affairs shifted upwards, and the powerful men in the king's entourage took on a leading role in government, intensifying pressure on the peasantry, raising taxes, and increasing the arbitrariness of government.