DID YOU
KNOW?:
An archived
article of:
Skjold Lodge
- Sons of Norway
Arlington
Heights, Illinois
Visit us on
the Internet at www.skjoldlodge.com.
History 1814-1905
If you came directly to this page
by surfing the Internet you can enter the site this article is tied to, at:
Following are 2
excerpts taken from the Internet that help us understand why Norwegians
celebrate Syttende Mai and why 2005 is a special year for Norway. Later, this article may be expanded to
include a brief history of Norway leading up to 1814 so this page becomes a
mini history lesson instead of just an explanation of what happened in 1814 and
1905.
At the Battle of Leipzig in 1813
Napoleon suffered a stunning defeat. One of his opponents on the battlefield
was the Kingdom of Sweden. Having previously lost Finland to the czardom to the
east, Sweden now wished to have Norway as a safeguard on its western border.
Sweden’s allies had therefore promised that it could have Norway as one of the
spoils of war.
The allied victory at Leipzig was
followed by diplomatic pressure in Copenhagen and a military attack on the dual
monarchy, by way of Holstein. In January 1814, Danish King Fredrik VI
surrendered, cut his ties with Napoleon, and handed Norway over to his Swedish
rivals. Thus ended 434 years of union between Norway and Denmark.
The agreement between Denmark and
its opponents contained political elements that were of major importance to
Norway. The terms firmly established that Norway was again to take its place
among the independent states, in union with Sweden. In a subsequent
proclamation from Swedish King Carl XIII, it was stated that Norway was to have
the status of an independent state, with its own free constitution, national
representation, its own government and the right to levy taxes.
The Norwegians were not
immediately amenable to the prospect of entering into a new union. The nephew
of the Danish King, Prince Christian Frederik, was governor of Norway at the
time. In keeping with an understanding with his uncle, the governor paved the
way for a Norwegian revolt to prevent a Swedish takeover, and presumably also
to secure a collaborative union once again between Denmark and Norway.
The governor’s action led to the
convening of an assembly whose purpose was to forge a constitution. They met at
Eidsvoll, some 70 km north of Oslo, where they formally adopted a Norwegian
Constitution on 17 May 1814, choosing Christian Frederik to be the Norwegian
king. To this day, May 17 is
celebrated as the Norwegian national day.
Syttende Mai (“The 17th of May”).
The victors of the Napoleonic
Wars however, were unwilling to accept any deviation from the terms of the
agreement. The Swedes exerted diplomatic pressure, and when this proved to be
of no avail, they launched a military campaign of trained troops who rapidly
subdued the Norwegians. In August an agreement was signed at Moss, south of
Oslo, whereby the Swedes accepted the Norwegian Constitution signed at
Eidsvoll, with the amendments made necessary by the union of the two kingdoms.
King Christian Frederik relinquished his power on 10 October 1814, and left the
country. Norway had entered into another union.
1905 – A Peaceful Separation
On 7 June 1905, the Norwegian Storting held an emergency meeting, during
which Prime Minister Christian Michelsen submitted the resignation of his
government. Since Swedish King Oscar II could only exercise power over Norway
through its government, this meant that the King lost the ability to exercise
his royal functions. Thereafter, the Storting adopted a unanimous declaration
conferring power on the former government “to exercise the authority vested in
the King in accordance with the Constitution and the Laws of the Realm of
Norway – with those changes necessitated in light of the fact that the King has
ceased to function as the King of Norway, thereby bringing to an end the union
between Norway and Sweden under a single monarch.” With the help of a subordinate
clause, Norway broke out of its union with Sweden.
In 1814, Norway was forced into
its union with Sweden after being taken away from Denmark in the wake of the
Napoleonic Wars. The Norwegians revolted against the imposition of another
union, establishing the Norwegian Constitution on 17 May 1814. Although this
gained Norway some degree of internal self-rule, the Norwegian state was
nonetheless compelled to enter into a new – albeit loose – union comprising two
nations under the same monarch with a common diplomatic service. The union was
formalized in the Riksakten (Document of the Realm) of 1814.
By the 1890s, there was mounting
conflict between the two parties to the union. Nationalistic tendencies were
emerging in both countries, but these were based on widely divergent political
principles. Growing protectionism in Sweden was having an adverse effect on
economic relations between the two countries, making it difficult for union
supporters in Norway to argue convincingly that the arrangement still held
economic benefits for the country. After 1895, both countries launched
substantial military build-up efforts.
Early in 1905, it appeared that
the union was heading for a break-up. Presiding Prime Minister Francis Hagerup
resigned, acknowledging that he had no backing for further negotiation with the
Swedes on the introduction of a Norwegian consular service. A new government
was then formed by Christian Michelsen. Norwegian national hero Fridtjof Nansen
published a series of articles in the foreign press in an effort to enlighten
the public and explain Norwegian claims. In May, the members of the Storting
adopted a bill to establish a Norwegian consular service, knowing full well
that King Oscar II would not approve the legislation. The King’s refusal to
sanction the bill arrived on 27 May, leading to a complete rupture between the
King and government – and between Sweden and Norway. Both nations sought to
gain the support of the major powers in Europe, but none of these countries
wished to get involved in a war in Scandinavia.
A special committee in the
Riksdag (Swedish national assembly) concluded that Sweden could accept the
dissolution of the union, but that the matter had to be decided in a plebiscite
in Norway, and that the conditions for dissolution were subject to negotiation.
This recommendation was adopted by the Riksdag. A Norwegian plebiscite held on
13 August showed an overwhelming majority in favour of dissolving the union.
The Norwegian and Swedish
negotiators met in Karlstad, Sweden on 31 August. The negotiations included
dealing with difficult issues such as the status of Norwegian military
fortresses along the border. The situation was very tense. After much tough
discussion, the negotiations ended in a compromise known today as the Karlstad
Agreement. The agreement was controversial in Norway, but was, ultimately,
adopted by the Storting. The Riksdag approved the Karlstad Agreement without a
vote. On 16 October, The Swedish Riksdag voted to recognize Norway as an
independent nation, and on 27 October the Karlstad Agreement was finally
signed. At the same time, Oscar II abdicated from the Norwegian throne.
There was debate in Norway about
the new nation’s form of government. A new plebiscite was held on 12 and 13
November to decide whether Norway should be a monarchy or a republic. A vast
majority of the voters voted in favour of a monarchy. The candidate chosen to
accede to the Norwegian throne was Prince Carl of Denmark, who was married to
one of the daughters of King Edward VII of Great Britain. Prince Carl and his
family arrived in Norway on 25 November. Two days later he adopted the name
King Haakon VII and took an oath before the Storting to uphold the Norwegian
Constitution.
What made it possible to dissolve
the union between Sweden and Norway without resorting to armed conflict? The
primary reason was that those involved in the negotiations held moderate views
and were willing to be the agents of compromise. Had the negotiations failed,
it is likely that war would have broken out. Both Norway and Sweden had built
up their defences, but the Swedish war machine was greatly superior. One
possible scenario would have been that the Norwegian forces would have managed
to stave off a Swedish attack long enough to allow the major powers to step in
and broker peace. Another is that a Swedish attack and occupation would be
initially successful, but that the Norwegian forces would continue to strike
back, making it a long-drawn-out conflict. Sweden would have little to gain
from such a war, a fact that was probably widely understood. So in the end, all
parties came to believe that the best solution would be a peaceful dissolution
of a union that had clearly outlived its function.
By Øystein Sørensen from http://www.norway.org/