Tuesday 7 June 2005

Pic of the day: Waking up from the long dark winter.

1905-2005

Today the nation of Norway marked (or some would say celebrated) the peaceful dissolution of our union with Sweden 100 years ago. It wasn't much of a celebration; people still had to go to work as usual. And while it is common to talk about the "liberation" or "independence" from Sweden in 1905, the truth is that Norway was not a colony in the classical sense, and the relationship between our two nations has been pretty good ever since. So a big celebration with lots of nationalism would upset our neighbors for no good reason. Add the fact that over 40% of the population that have an opinion on the matter, are in favor of entering a new union -- the European Union -- which would once again bring us under a common government with among others Sweden. So it wasn't really a party to remember for generations to come.

Even so, I might as well take a look back at history. Unlike most Norwegians, I tend to look all the way back to the Bronze Age when Norway was first colonized by Indo-European speaking tribes of warriors and farmers. We don't really know much about the population that lived here before. They seem to have been hunters and gatherers, and were probably outcompeted rather than killed outright by the newcomers. Especially on parts of the West Coast, the genetic makeup of the population is different from the usual for Germanic tribes, and some place names from the original language seem to have been preserved. Perhaps more interesting, the ancestors of modern Norwegians arrived in two different waves. One seems to have come from the current Netherlands or there about, and colonized the West Coast. They later spread to the long rocky shoreline that connects the northern and southern parts of modern Norway, and then expanded to the islands west of Norway at the early Viking age. The other wave arrived through Denmark and Sweden and colonized eastern Norway with its flatter agricultural landscape. They continued north into the area around Trondheim, which is also flat and good for grain production. The population in eastern and mid-Norway is actually more related -- culturally and genetically -- to the Swedes and Danes than to the population in western and northern Norway.

When the first nationstates started to crystallize in northern Europe, Norway consisted of several ethnic groups which thought of themselves as different "peoples". Some of their names have been preserved in later administrative units including provinces such as "Hordaland", the land of the Hordes, and "Rogaland", land of the Rygi (possibly identical to the Rugii mentioned by Jordanes and the Rugians whose fate is intertwined with the Goths). There were several such large tribes, which had different customs and different gods (or at least they held some gods in higher or lower esteem than their neighbors). When King Harald decided to unite Norway under his rule, the name Norway was already in use but not really as a nation in the modern sense, rather as a common economic area. It is widely agreed that the name does indeed mean "the Northway" and referred to the seaways along the coast.

***

During the Middle Ages, the exact size and shape of nations came to depend on circumstances such as the prowess of kings on the battlefield or in bed. The borders of Norway changed many times, and for much of the time Norway was in union with either Sweden, Denmark or both. In these unions, Norway was always the junior partner. It would not be right to think of Norway as a colony, though. Not in the sense that African colonies were exploited by European powers, for instance. Norway was more a Danish province than a Danish colony, and this continued -- or even improved -- during our union with Sweden from 1814 till 1905. While the Swedish king had the final word, the day-to-day administration and even most of the lawmaking was on Norwegian hands. But Norway had no influence on Sweden, only the other way around.

A while before this, during the 18th century, a powerful cultural wave was rising in Europe. This was nationalism, and it also took root among the cultural elite of Norway and Denmark. Inspired by history and romantic fantasies loosely based on history, they imagined a great and powerful nation of Norway that had supposedly existed during the Viking age. To restore this nation to its proper place became an obsession for the writers, poets and composers of the next few generations. The cultural flowering of Norway during the 19th century is amazing, etching names like Ibsen, Munch and Grieg into the cultural history of Europe and beyond. While Norway was never a great power in terms of population, economy or military, we did briefly become a great power culturally. It was in this tide of (largely nonviolent) national pride that carried Norway towards its independence, and the memory of it has stuck with us ever since. As Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland, long time Norwegian Prime Minister and later leader of the World Health Organization, famously said: "It is typical Norwegian to be good."

Of course, most nations probably believe that it is typical for them to be good. Certainly the USA seems to believe so, but then again they are the world's only remaining superpower. Norway, on the other hand, has less than 5 million inhabitants and these days it is most notorious for winter sports, deep-sea oil wells and some Satanist music. I wish I could say we have kept up our cultural superpower image, but we haven't. (Not that most Norwegians would admit that to a foreigner.)

Still, it is well worth celebrating one of the first (and one of the very few) peaceful dissolutions of a union between two nations. Most of the glory in this probably belongs to Sweden, which had the military and economic resources to subjugate Norway (probably) if they really wanted to. Unusual for those times, they had the good grace to figure that it was better to part as friends. Remember, this was a time of nationalism on both sides. Nationalists often believe that their country has the right to exploit other countries for some obscure reason, or at the very least their nation ought to have the largest borders it has ever had in recorded history.

Ironically, from 1905 until around 1970 the standard of living in Norway was somewhat lower than in Sweden. So it might seem that it could have been better to be Swedes after all, from a purely pragmatic point of view. Only after abundant natural gas and oil was found outside the coast of Norway did we become one of the world's very richest countries. And it is anybody's guess how long that will last. It is also anybody's guess how long Norway will remain a free nation. If we are lucky, perhaps it will last until the whole idea of nations becomes obsolete. I would give that another 20 years or so, but I may be wrong. But one way or another, I am pretty sure that Norway will not celebrate another hundred years. (Of course, if they do, I will not likely be around to admit that I was wrong...)