« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »
Jaabock, a gifted peasant proprietor, who was also destined to become a prominent figure in the political history of the country, Rounds- formed an alliance, with the object of guarding against tion of the any encroachment upon the liberty and independence Morwegian which the country had secured by the constitution of ** 1814. This was the foundation of the great national party, which became known as the “Venstre” (the left), and which before long became powerful enough to exert the most decisive influence upon the political affairs of the country. When, therefore, the proposed revision of the Act of Union eventually came before the Storthing in 1871, it was rejected by an overwhelming majority. The position which the government had taken up on this question helped to open the eyes of the Norwegians to some defects in the constitution, which had proved obstacles to the development and strengthening of the parliamentary system. In 1872 a private bill came before the Storthing, proposing that the ministers should be admitted to the Storthing and take part in its proceedings. After a number of stormy debates,
: the bill was successfully carried under the leadership ance of of Johan Sverdrup by a large majority, but the governministers ment, evidently jealous of the growing powers and to seats in influence of the new liberal party in the Storthing, :- advised the king to refuse his sanction, although the
government party itself had several times in the preceding half-century introduced a similar bill for admitting the ministers to the Storthing. At that time, however, the opposition had looked with suspicion on the presence of the ministers in the national assembly, lest their superior skill in debate and political experience should turn the scale too readily in favour of government measures. Now, on the contrary, the opposition had gained more experience and had confidence in its own strength, and no doubt found that the legislative work could better be carried on if the ministers were present to explain and defend their views; but the government saw in the proposed reform the threatened introduction of full parliamentary government, by which the ministry could not remain in office unless supported by a majority in the Storthing. Before the Storthing separated the liberals carried a vote of censure against the government; but the king declared that the ministers enjoyed his confidence and took no further notice of the vote. Two of the ministers, who had advised the ratification of the bill, resigned, however, and a third minister, who had been in the government since 1848, resigned also, and retired from public life, foreseeing the storm that was brewing on the political horizon. Numerous public meetings were held all over the country in support of the proposed reform, and among the speakers was Johan Sverdrup, now the acknowledged leader of the liberal party, who was hailed with great enthusiasm as the champion of the proposed reform.
This was the political situation when King Carl died (18th September 1872). He was succeeded by his brother, who ascended
Death of the throne as Oscar II. In the following year he Carl gave his sanction to the bill for the abolition of the : office of viceroy, which the Storthing had again
£" passed, and the president of the ministry was afterwards recognized as the prime minister and head of the government in Christiania. Fredrik Stang, who was the president of the ministry at the time, was the first to fill this office. In the same year Norway celebrated its existence for a thousand years as a kingdom, with great festivities. In 1874 the government, in order to show the people that they to some extent were willing to meet their wishes with regard to the great question before the country, laid before the
: Storthing a royal proposition for the admittance of the Storthlag ministers to the national assembly. But this was to for full be accompanied by certain other constitutional changes, £: such as giving the king the right of dissolving the Stor
thingathispleasure, and providingfixed pensions for exministers, which was regarded as a guarantee against the majority of the assembly misusing its new power. The bill which the government brought in was unanimously rejected by the Storthing, the conservatives also voting against it, as they considered
the guarantees insufficient. The same year, and again in 1877, the Storthing passed the bill, but in a somewhat different form from that of 1872. On both occasions the king refused his sanction. The Storthing then resorted to the procedure provided by the constitution to carry out the people's will. In 1880 the bill was passed for the third time, and on this occasion by the the king" overwhelming majority of 93 out of 113. Three : ag's Storthings after three successive elections had now carried the bill, and it was generally expected that the king and his government would at length comply with the wishes of the people, but the king on this occasion also refused his sanction, declaring at the same time that his right to the absolute veto was “above all doubt.” Johan Sverdrup, the leader of the liberal party and president of the Storthing, brought the question to a prompt issue by proposing to the Storthing that the bill, which had been passed three times, should be declared to be the law of the land without the king's sanction. This proposal was carried by a large majority on the 9th of June 1880, but the king and his ministers in reply declared that they would not recognize the validity of the resolution. From this moment the struggle may be said to have centred itself upon the existence or non-existence of an absolute veto on the part of the crown. The king requested the faculty struzzi. of law at the Christiania university to give its opinion between on the question at issue, and with one dissentient the the king learned doctors upheld the king's right to the absolute £ veto in questions concerning amendments of the con- torthing. stitution, although they could not find that it was expressly stated in the fundamental law of the country. The ministry also advised the king to claim a veto in questions of supply, which still further increased the ill-feeling in the country against the government, and the conflict in consequence grew more and more violent. In the midst of the struggle between the king and the Storthing, the prime minister, Fredrik Stang, resigned, and Christian August Selmer (1816-1889) became his successor; and this, together with the appointment of another member to the ministry, K. H. Schweigaard, plainly indicated that the conflict with the Storthing was to be continued. In June 1882 the king arrived in Christiania to dissolve the Storthing, and on this occasion delivered a speech from the throne, in which he openly censured the representatives of the people for their attitude in legislative work and on the question of the absolute veto, the speech creating considerable surprise throughout the country. Johan Sverdrup and Björnstjerne Björnson, the popular poet and dramatist, called upon the people to support the Storthing in upholding the resolution of the 9th of June, and to rouse themselves to a sense of their political rights. The elections resulted in a great victory for the liberal party, which returned stronger than ever to the Storthing, numbering 83 and the conservatives only 31. The ministry, however, showed no sign of yielding, and, when the new Storthing met in February 1883, the Odelsthing (the lower division of the national assembly) decided upon having the question finally settled by impeaching the whole of the ministry before the Rigsret or the supreme court of the realm. The jurisdiction of the Rigsret is limited to the trial of offences against the state, and there is no appeal against its decisions. The charges against the ministers were for having acted contrary to the interests of the country by advising the king to refuse his sanction-first, to the amendment of the law for admitting the ministers to the Storthing; secondly, to a bill involving a question of supply; and thirdly, to a bill by which the Storthing could appoint additional directors on the state railways. The trial of the eleven ministers of the Selmer cabinet began in May 1883 and lasted over ten months. In the end the The minisRigsret sentenced the prime minister and seven of his try seaministers to be deprived of their offices, while three, ''", who had either recommended the king to sanction ** the bill for admitting the ministers to the Storthing, or had
Elections of 1882.
Impeachtnent of ministers by the Storthing, Jö&.
entered the cabinet at a later date, were heavily fined. The excitement in the country rose to feverish anxiety. Rumours of all kinds were afloat, and it was generally believed that the king would attempt a coup d'état. Fortunately the king after some hesitation issued (11th March 1884) an order in council announcing that the judgment of the supreme court would be carried into effect, and Selmer was then called upon to resign his position as prime minister. King Oscar, however, in his declarab tion upheld the constitutional prerogative of the £ crown, which, he maintained, was not impaired by the judgment of the Rigsret. The following month the king, regardless of the large liberal majority in the Storthing, asked Schweigaard, one of the late ministers, whose punishment consisted in a fine, to form a ministry, and the so-called “April ministry” was then appointed, but sent in its resignation in the following month. Professor Broch, a former minister, next failed to form a ministry, and the king was at last compelled to appoint a ministry in accordance with the majority in the first Storthing. In June 1884 Johan Sverdrup was asked tiberal to form one. He selected for his ministers leading ministry men on the liberal side in the Storthing, and the first M884. liberal ministry that Norway had was at length appointed. The Storthing, in order to satisfy the king, passed a new resolution admitting the ministers to the national assembly, and this received formal sanction. During the following years a series of important reforms was carried through. Thus in 1887 the jury system in criminal matters was introduced into the country after violent opposition from the conservatives. A bill intended to give parishioners greater influence in church matters, and introduced by Jakob Sverdrup, the minister of education, and a nephew of the prime minister, met, however, with strong opposition, and was eventually rejected by the Storthing, the result being a break-up of the ministry and a disorganization of the liberal party. In June 1889 the Sverdrup ministry resigned, and a conservative one was formed by Emil Stang, the leader of the conservatives in the Storthing, and during the next two years the Storthing passed various useful measures; but the ministry was eventually wrecked on the rock of the great national question which about this time came to the front—that of Norway's share in the transaction of diplomatic affairs. At the time of the union in 1814 nothing had been settled as to how these were to be conducted, but in 1835 a resolution was issued, that when the The ques- Swedish foreign minister was transacting diplomatic tion of matters with the king which concerned both countries, diplomatic or Norway only, the Norwegian minister of state in £" attendance upon the king at Stockholm should be - present. This arrangement did not always prove satisfactory to the Norwegians, especially as the Swedish foreign minister could not be held responsible to the Norwegian government or parliament. By a change in the Swedish constitution in 1885 the ministerial council, in which diplomatic matters are discussed, came to consist of the Swedish foreign minister and two other
#: members of the cabinet on behalf of Sweden, and of £" the Norwegian minister at Stockholm on behalf of
Norway. The king, wishing to remedy this disparity, proposed that the composition of the council should be determined by an additional paragraph in the Act of Union. The representatives of the Norwegian government in Stockholm proposed that three members of the cabinet of each country should constitute the ministerial council. To this the Swedish government was willing to agree, but on the assumption that the minister of foreign affairs should continue to be a Swede as before, and this the Norwegians, of course, would not accept. At the king's instigation the negotiations with the Swedish government were resumed at the beginning of 1891, but the Swedish Riksdag rejected the proposals, while the Norwegian Storthing insisted upon “Norway's right, as an independent kingdom, to full equality in the union, and there with her right to watch over her foreign affairs in a constitutional manner.” The Stang ministry then resigned, aud a liberal ministry, with Steen, the recognized
leader of the liberal party after Sverdrup's withdrawal from politics, as prime minister, was appointed. The new ministry had placed the question of a separate minister of foreign affairs for Norway prominently in their programme, but little progress was made during the next few years. Question of Another and more important question for the country, parate as far as its shipping and commerce are concerned, consular now came to the front. The Storthing had in 1891 * appointed a committee to inquire into the practicability of establishing a separate Norwegian consular service, and in 1892 the Storthing, acting upon the committee's report, determined to establish a consular service. The king, influenced by public opinion in Sweden, refused his sanction, and the Norwegian government in consequence sent in their resignation, whereupon a complete deadlock ensued. This was terminated by a compromise to the effect that the ministry would return to office on the understanding that the question was postponed by common consent. The following year the Storthing again passed a resolution calling upon the Norwegian government to proceed with the necessary measures for establishing the proposed consular service for Norway, but the king again refused to take any action in the matter. Upon this the liberal ministry resigned (May 1893), and the king appointed a conservative government, with Emil Stang as its chief. Thus matters went on till the end of 1894, when the triennial elections took place, with the result that the majority of the electors declared in favour of national independence on the great question then before the country, The ministry did not at once resign, but waited till the king arrived in Christiania to open the Storthing (January 1895). The king kept the country for over four months without a responsible government, during which time the crisis had become more acute than ever. A coalition ministry was at last formed, with Professor G. F. Hagerup as prime minister. A new committee, consisting of an equal number of Norwegians and Swedes, was appointed to consider the question of separate diplomatic representation; but after sitting for over two years the committee separated without being able to come to any agreement. The elections in 1897 proved again a great victory for the liberal party, 79 liberals and 35 conservatives being returned, and in February 1898 the Hagerup ministry was replaced by a liberal, once more under the premiership of Steen. Soon afterwards the bill for the general adoption of the national or “pure” flag, as it was called, was carried for the third time, and became law without the king's sanction. In 1898 universal political suffrage for men was passed by a large majority, but the proposal to include women received the support of only 33 votes. In January 1902, on the initiative of the Swedish foreign minister, another committee, consisting of an equal number of leading Norwegians and Swedes, was appointed by
the the king to investigate the consular question. The crisis of unanimous report of the committee was to the effect £
that “it was possible to appoint separate Norwegian
consuls exclusively responsible to Norwegian authority and separate Swedish consuls exclusively responsible to Swedish authority.” The further negotiations between the two governments resulted in the so-called communiqué of the 24th of March 1903, which announced the conclusion of an agreement between the representatives of the two countries for the establishment of the separate consular service. The terms of the communiqué were submitted to a combined Norwegian and Swedish council of state on the 21st of December 1903, when they were unanimously agreed to and were signed by the king, who commissioned the Norwegian and the Swedish governments to proceed with the drafting of the laws and regulations for the separate consular services. In due course the Norwegian government submitted to the Swedish government their draft of the proposed laws and regulations, but no reply was forthcoming for several months. About this time the Swedish foreign minister, Mr Lagerheim, who had zealously worked for a friendly solution of the consular question, resigned, and in November the same year Boström, the Swedish prime minister, suddenly submitted to the Norwegian government a number of new conditions under which the Swedish government was prepared to agree to the establishment of separate consuls. This came as a surprise to the Norwegians in view of the fact that the basis for the establishment of separate consuls had already been agreed upon and confirmed by the king in December 1903. According to Boström's proposals the Norwegian consuls were to be placed under the control of the Swedish foreign minister, who was to have the power to remove any Norwegian consul. The Norwegians felt it would be beneath the dignity of a self-governing country to agree to the Swedish proposals, and that these new demands were nothing less than a breach of faith with regard to the terms of agreement arrived at two years before by both governments and approved and signed by the king. The Norwegian government would have been perfectly justified if, after this, they had withdrawn from the negotiations, but they did not wish to jeopardize the opportunity of arriving at a friendly settlement, and Hagerup, the Norwegian prime minister, proceeded to Stockholm to confer with Boström; but no satisfactory agreement could be arrived at. There was therefore nothing left but for the Norwegians to take matters into their own hands. On the 8th of February 1905 Hagerup announced to the Norwegian Storthing that the negotiations had fallen through, and on the 17th the Storthing decided unanimously to refer the matter to a special committee. Owing to some difference of opinion between the members of his ministry, Hagerup resigned on the 1st of March and was succeeded by Christian Michelsen, who formed a ministry composed of members of both political parties. The special committee decided that a bill should be immediately submitted to the Storthing for the establishment of a Norwegian consular service and that the measure should come into force not later than the 1st of April 1906. An attempt was made by the Swedish crown prince, acting as Prince Regent during the king's illness, to enter into new negotiations with the Norwegian government, but the proposals were not favourably received in Norway. In April 1905 Boström resigned, which was considered to be a move on the part of Sweden to facilitate negotiations with Norway. The bill for the establishment of Norwegian consuls was passed by the Storthing without a dissentient voice on the 23rd of May, and it was generally expected that the king, who again had assumed the reins of government, would sanction the bill, but on the 27th of May, in spite of the earnest entreaties of his Norwegian ministers, the king formally refused to do so. The Norwegian Ministry immediately resigned, but the king informed the ministers that Declara- he could not accept their resignation. They, however, tion of declined to withdraw it. A few days afterwards the *ndepend- Norwegian government informed the Storthing of the *nce, king's refusal, whereupon the assembly unanimously agreed to refer the matter to the special committee. On the 7th of June the Storthing met to hear the final decision of the government. Michelsen, the prime minister, informed the Storthing that all the members of the government had resigned in consequence of the king's refusal to sanction the consular law, that the king had declined to accept the resignation, and that, as an alternative government could not be formed, the union with Sweden, based upon a king in common, was consequently dissolved. The president of the Storthing submitted a resolution that the resigning ministry should be authorized to exercise the authority vested in the king in accordance with the constitution of the country. The resolution was unanimously adopted. King Oscar, on receiving the news of the action of the Norwegian Storthing, sent a telegraphic protest to the Norwegian prime minister and to the president of the Storthing. £" The Swedish government immediately decided to Sweden. summon an extraordinary session of the Swedish parliament for the 20th of June, when a special committee was appointed to consider what steps should be taken by Sweden. On the 25th of July the report of the committee was laid before the Riksdag, in which it was stated that Sweden could have no objection to enter into negotiations about the severance of the union, when a vote to that effect had been
given by a newly-elected Storthing or by a national vote in the form of a referendum by the Norwegian people. The report was unanimously adopted by the Swedish Riksdag on the 27th of July, and on the following day the Norwegian Storthing decided that a general plebiscite should be taken on the 13th of August, when 368,211 voted in favour of the dissolution and only 184 againstit. It was thereuptin agreed that representatives of Norway and of Sweden should meet at Karlstad in Sweden on the 31st of August to discuss and arrange for the severance of the union. The negotiations lasted till the 23rd of September, though more than once they were on the point of being broken off. The agreement stipulated a neutral zone on both sides of the southern border between the two countries, the Norwegians undertaking to dismantle some fortifications within that zone. The agreement was to remain in force for ten years, and could be renewed for a similar period, unless one of the countries gave notice to the contrary. The Karlstad agreement was ratified by the Norwegian Storthing on the 9th of #: of October and by the Swedish Riksdag on the 16th of the Wii. same month. On the 27th of October King Oscar issued a proclamation to the Norwegian Storthing, in which he relinquished the crown of Norway. The Norwegian government was thereupon authorized by the Storthing to negotiate with Prince Charles of Denmark and to arrange for a national vote as to whether or no the country would approve of his election for the Norwegian throne. The plebiscite resulted in 259,563 votes for his election and 69,264 against. On the 18th of November the Storthing unanimously elected Prince Charles as king of Norway, he taking the name of Haakon VII. On the 25th of November the king and his consort, Queen Maud, the youngest daughter of King Edward VII. of England, entered the Norwegian capital. Their coronation took place in the Trondhjem cathedral the following year. In 1907 parliamentary suffrage was granted to women with the same limitation as in the municipal suffrage granted to them in 1901, viz. to all unmarried women over 25 years, who pay taxes on an income of 3oo kroner (about £16) in the country districts and on 4ookroner (about £22) in the towns, as well as to all married women, whose husbands pay taxes on similar incomes. Norway was thus the first sovereign country in Europe where the parliamentary vote was granted to women. (H. L. B.)
Early Norse literature is inextricably bound up with Icelandic literature. Iceland was colonized from Norway in the 9th century, and the colonists were drawn chiefly from the upper and cultured classes. They took with them their poetry and literary traditions. Old Norse literature is therefore dealt with under Iceland (q.v.). (See also EDDA, SAGA, RUNEs.)
The modern literature of Norway bears something of the same relation to that of Denmark that American literature bears to English. In each case the development and separation of a dependency have produced a desire on the part of persons speaking the mother-tongue for a literature that shall express the local emotions and conditions of the new nation. Two notable events led to the foundation of a separate Norwegian literature: the one was the creation of the university of Christiania in 1811, and the other was the separation of Norway from Denmark in 1814. Before this time Norwegian writers had been content, as a rule, to publish their works at Copenhagen. The first name on the annals of Danish literature, Peder Clausen, is that of a Norwegian; and if all Norse writers were removed from that roll, the list would be poorer by some of its most illustrious names, by Holberg, Tullin, Wessel, Treschow, Steffens and Hauch.
The first book printed in Norway was an almanac, brought out in Christiania in 1643 by a wandering printer named Tyge Nielsen, who brought his types from Copenhagen. But the first press set up definitely in Norway was that of Valentin Kuhn, brought over from Germany in 1650 by the theologian Christian Stephensen Bang (1580–1678) to help in the circulation of his numerous tracts. Bang's Christianiae Stads Beskrifuclse (1651), is the first book published in Norway. Christen Jensen (d. 1653) was a priest who collected a small glossary or glosebog of the local dialects, published in 1656. Gerhard Milzow (1629-1688), the author of a Presbyterologia Norwegica (1679), was also a Norse priest. The earliest Norwegian writer of any original merit was Dorthe Engelbrechtsdatter (1634-1716), afterwards the wife of the pastor Ambrosius Hardenbech. She is the author of several volumes of religious poetry which have enjoyed great popularity. The hymn-writer Johan Brunsmann (1637-1707), though a Norseman by birth, belongs by education and temper entirely to Denmark. Not so Petter Dass (1647-1708) (q.v.), the most original writer whom Norway produced and retained at home during the period of annexation. Another priest, Jonas Ramus (1649-1718), wrote Norriges Kongers Historic (History of the Norse Kings) in 1719, and Norriges Beskrivelse (1735). The celebrated missionary to Greenland, Hans Egede (1686-1758), wrote several works on his experiences in that country. Peder Hersleb (1689-1757) was the compiler of some popular treatises of Lutheran theology. Frederik Nannestad, bishop of Trondhjem (1693-1774), started a weekly gazette in 1760. The missionary Knud Leem (1697-1774) published a number of works on the Lapps of Finmark, one at least of which, his Beskrivelse over Finmarkens Lapper (1767), still possesses considerable interest. The famous Erik Pontoppidan (1698–1764) cannot be regarded as a Norwegian, for he did not leave Denmark until he was made bishop of Bergen, at the age of forty-nine. On the other hand the far more famous Baron Ludvig Holberg (1684–1754), belongs to Denmark by everything but birth, having left Norway in childhood. A few Norsemen of the beginning of the 18th century distinguished themselves chiefly in science. Of these Johan Ernst Gunnerus (1718–1773), bishop of Trondhjem, was the first man who gave close attention to the Norwegian flora. He founded the Norwegian Royal Society of Sciences in 1760, with Gerhard Schöning (1722-1780) the historian and Hans Ström (1726–1797) the zoologist. Peder Christofer Stenersen (1723–1776), a writer of occasional verses, merely led the way for Christian Braumann Tullin (1728-1765), a lyrical poet of exquisite genius, who is claimed by Denmark but who must be mentioned here, because his poetry was not only mainly composed in Christiania, but breathes a local spirit. Danish literature between the great names of Evald and Baggesen presents us with hardly a single figure which is not that of a Norseman. The director of the Danish national theatre in 1771 was a Norwegian, Niels Krog Bredal (1733-1778), who was the first to write lyrical dramas in Danish. A Norwegian, Johan Nordahl Brun (1745–1816), was the principal tragedian of the time, in the French taste. It was a Norwegian, J. H. Wessel (1742-1785), who laughed this taste out of fashion. In 1772 the Norwegian poets were so strong in Copenhagen that they formed a Norske Selskab (Norwegian Society), which exercised a tyranny over contemporary letters which was only shaken when Baggesen appeared. Among the leading writers of this period are Claus Frimann (1746–1829), Peter Harboe Frimann (1752-1839), Claus Fasting (1746–1791), Johan Wibe (1748–1782), Edvard Storm (1749-1794), C. H. Pram (1756-1821), Jonas Rein (1760-1821), Jens Zetlitz (1761–1821), and Lyder Christian Sagen (1771-1850), all of whom, though Norwegians by birth, find their place in the annals of Danish literature. To these poets must be added the philosophers Niels Treschow (1751-1833) and Henrik Steffens (1773–1845), and in later times the poet Johannes Carsten Hauch (1790–1872). The first form which Norwegian literature took as an inde"endent thing was what was called “Syttendemai-Poesi,” or the poetry of the 17th of May, that being the day on which Treton.” Norway obtained her independence and proclaimed her king. Three poets, called the “Trefoil,” came forward as the inaugurators of Norwegian thought in 1814. Of these Conrad Nicolai Schwach (1793-1860) was the least remarkable. Henrik Anker Bjerregaard (1792-1842), born in the same hamlet of Ringsaker as Schwach, had a much brighter and more varied talent. His Miscellaneous Poems, collected at Christiania in 1829, contain some charming studies from nature, and admirable patriotic songs. He brought out a tragedy of
Magnus Barfods Sönner (Magnus Barefoot's Sons) and a lyrica: drama, Fjeldeventyret (The Adventure in the Mountains) (1828). He became judge of the supreme court of the diocese of Christiania. The third member of the Trefoil, Mauritz Kristoffer Hansen (1794-1842), was a schoolmaster. His novels, of which Ottar de Bretagne (1819) was the earliest, were much esteemed in their day, and after his death were collected and edited (8 vols., 1855-1858), with a memoir by Schwach. Hansen's Poems, printed at Christiania in 1816, were among the earliest publications of a liberated Norway, but were preceded by a volume of Smaadigte (Short Poems) by all three poets, edited by Schwach in 1815, as a semi-political manifesto. These writers, of no great genius in themselves, did much by their industry and patriotism to form a basis for Norwegian literature.
The creator of Norwegian literature, however, was the poet Henrik Arnold Wergeland (1808-1845) (q.v.), a man of great genius and enthusiasm, who contrived within the limits, of a life as short as Byron's to concentrate the labours £
- - .." land,
of a dozen ordinary men of letters. He held views in Weihavea. most respects similar to those pronounced by Rousseau and Shelley. His obscurity and extravagance stood in the way of his teaching, and his only disciples in poetry were Sylvester Sivertson (1809–1847), a journalist of talent whose verses were collected in 1848, and Christian Monsen (1815-1852).
A far more wholesome and constructive influence was that ot Johann Sebastian Cammermeyer Welhaven (1807-1873) (q.v.), who was first brought to the surface by the conservative reaction in 1830 against the extravagance of the radical party. A savage attack on Henrik Wergeland's Poetry, published in 1832, caused a great sensation, and produced an angry pamphlet in reply from the father, Nikolai Wergeland. The controversy became the main topic of the day, and in 1834 Welhaven pushed it into a wider arena by the publication of his beautiful cycle of satirical sonnets called Norges Damring (The Dawn of Norway), in which he preached a full conservative gospel. He was assisted in his controversy with Wergeland by Henrik Hermann Foss (17901853), author of Tidsnornerne (The Norns of the Age) (1835) and other verses.
Andreas Munch (1811-1884) took no part in the feud between Wergeland and Welhaven, but addicted himself to the study of Danish models independently of either. He published a series of poems ' dramas, one of which latter, £ A funch. Sverres Ungdom (1837), attracted some notice. His popularity cornmen. with the appearance of his Poems Old and New in 1848. His highest level as a poet was reached by his epic called Kongedatterens Brude fart (The Bridal Journey of the King's Daughter) (1861). Two of his historical dramas have enjoyed a popularity greatly in excess of their merit; these are Solomon de Caus (1854) and Lord |William Russell (1857).
A group of minor poetical writers may now be considered. Magnus Brostrup Landstad (1892-1880) was born on Maaso, an island in the vicinity of the North Cape, and, therefore, in higher lati- A firror tudest £ He was a hymn-writer poets. of merit, and he was the first to collect, in 1853, the Norske Folkeviser or Norwegian folk-songs. Landstad was ordered by the
overnment to prepare an official national hymn-book, which was £ out in 1861. Peter A'. 1812-1867) published volumes of lyrical poetry in 1838, 1849, 1855, and 1861, and two dramas, . He was also the author of a novel, En Erindring (A Souvenir), in 1857. Aasmund Olafsen Vinje (1818-1870) was a peasant of remarkable talent, who was the principal leader of the movement known as the “maalstraev,” an effort to distinguish Norwegian from Danish literature by the adoption of a peasant dialect, or rather a new language arbitrarily formed on a collation of the various dialects. Vinje wrote a volume of lyrics, which he published in 1864, and a narrative poem, Storegut (Big Lad) (1866), entirely in this fictitious language, and he even went so far as to issue in it a newspaper, Dölen (The Dalesman), which appeared from 1858 to Vinje's death in 1870. In these efforts he was £ by Ivar Aasen and by Kristoffer Janson (b. 1841) the philologist, the author of an £ tragedy, Jon Arason (1867); several novels: Fraa Bygdom (1865); £ (1872): Fra Dansketidi (1875): Han # Ho (1878); and Austamfyre Sol og Vestamfyre Maane (East of the Sun and West of the Moon) (1879); besides a powerful but morbid drama, in the ordinary language of Norway, En Kvindeskjebne (A Woman's Fate) (1879). In 1882 he left Norway for America as a Unitarian minister, and from this exile he sent home in 1885 what is perhaps the best of his books. The Saga of the Prairie. Superior to all the preceding in the quality of his lyrical #" was the bishop of Christiansand, Jörgen Moe (1813-1882). e is, bowever, better known by his labours in comparative mythology, in conjunction with P. C. Asbjörnsen (see £ AND MoE). e names of the Norwegians Ibsen (q.v.) and Björnson (q.v.), in the two fields of the drama and the novel, stand out prominently in the European literature of the later 19th century; and
Mountain Parish), in 1852. Frithjof Foss (1830-1899),who wrote under the pseudonym of Israél Dehn, attracted notice by seven separate stories published between 1862 and 1864. Jacobine Camilla Collett (1813-1895), sister of the poet Wergeland, wrote Amtmandens Dottre (The Governor's Daughters) (1855), an excellent novel, and the first in Norwegian literature which attempted the truthful description of ordinary life. She was a pioneer in the movement for the emancipation of women in Norway. Anne Magdalene Thoresen (1819– 1903), a Dane by birth, wrote a series of novels of nt life in the manner of Björnson, of whom she was no unworthy pupil. One of her best novels is Signes Historie (1864). She also wrote some lyrical poetry and successful dramas. The principal historian of Norway is rtist Peter Andreas Munch (1810-1863), whose multifarious * writings include a grammar of Old Norse (1847); a coletc. lection of Norwegian laws until the year 1387 (1846-1849); a study of Runic inscriptions (1848); a # and description of Norway during the middle ages (1849); and a history of the Norwegian people in 8 vols. (1852-1863); Jakob Aall ###! was associated with Munch in this work. Christian Berg (17751852) was another worker in the same field. Jakob Rudolf Keyser £, printed and annotated the most im nt documents ling with the medieval history of Norway. Carl Richard Unger (b. 181 } took part in the same work and edited Morkinskinna in 1867. #: edition of the elder Edda (1867) forms a landmark in the # of Scandinavian antiquities. Oluf Rygh (1833-1899) contributed to the archaeological part of history. The modern language of Norway found an admirable grammarian, in Jakob Olaus Lokke (1829–1881). A careful historian, and £ was Ludvig Kristensen Daa (1809-1877). Ludvig Daae (b. #! has written the history of Christiania, and has traced the chronic during the Danish possession. Bernt Moe (1814-1850) was a careful biographer of the heroes of Eidsvold. Eilert Lund Sundt £ 1875) published some very curious and valuable works on the condition of the poorer classes in Norway. Professor J. A. Friis (b. 1821) published the folk-lore of the Lapps in a series of valuable volumes. The German orientalist, Christian Lassen (1 1876) was a Norwegian by birth: , Lorentz Dietrichson (b. #! wrote voluminously both on Swedish and Norwegian, chiefly on Norwegian art and literature. In jurisprudence the principal Norwegian authorities are Anton Martin Schweigaard (1808-1870) and Frederik Stang (1808–1884). Peter Carl Lasson (1798-1873) and Ulrik Anton Motzfelt (18o0-1865) were the lights of an earlier generation. In medical science, the great writer of the beginning of the 19th centur was Michael Skjelderup (1769–1852), who was succeeded by Frederi Holst (1791-1871). aniel Cornelius Danielsen (b. 1815) was a prominent dermatologist; but £ the most eminent of modern physiologists in Norway is Carl Wilhelm Boeck (1808-1875). The elder brother of the last-mentioned, Christian Peter Bianco Boeck (1798–1877), also demands recognition as a medical writer. Christopher Hansteen (1784–1873) was professor of mathematics at the university for nearly sixty years. Michael Sars (1805-1869) obtained a European reputation through his investigations in invertebrate zoology. He was assisted by his son Georg Ossian Sars (b. 1837). Baltazar Matthias Keilhau (1797-1858), and Theodor £ 1825-1888) have been the leading Norwegian geologists. athias Numsen Blytt (1789-1862) represents botany. His Norges Flora, part of which was published in 1861, was left incomplete at his death. . Niels Henrik Abel. (1802-1829) (q.v.) was a mathematician of extraordinary promise; Ole Jakob Broch (1818-1889) must be mentioned in the same connexion. Among theological writers may be mentioned Hans Nielsen Hauge (1771–1824), author of the sect which bears his name: Svend Borchman. Hersleb (1784– 1836); Stener Johannes Stenersen (1789-1835); Wilhelm Andreas Wexcis (1797–1866); a writer of extraordinary popularity; and Carl Paul Caspari (1814–1892), a German of Jewish birth, who adopted Christianity and became professor of theology in the university of Christiania.
The political crisis of 1884-1885, which produced so remarkable an effect upon the material and social life of Norway, was not without its influence upon literature. There had followed to the great generation of the 'sixties, led by Ibsen and Björnson, a race of entirely prosaic writers, of no great talent, much exercised with “problems.” The movement which began in 1885 brought back the fine masters of a previous imaginative age, silenced the problem-setters, and encouraged a whole generation of new men, realists of a healthier sort. In 1885 the field was still held by the three main names of
The new anovernent,
modern Norse literature-Ibsen, Björnson and Lie. Henrik Ibsen proceeded deliberately with his labours, and his name at the same time grew in reputation and influence. The advance of Björnstjerne Björnson was not so regular, because it was disturbed by political issues. Moreover, his early peasant tales once more, after having suffered great neglect, grew to be a force, and Björnson's example has done much to revive an interest in the art of verse.in Norway. Jonas Lie, the most popular novelist of Norway, continued to publish his pure, fresh and eminently characteristic stories. His style, colloquial almost to a fault, has neither the charm of Björnson nor the art of some of the latest generation. Ibsen, Björnson and Lie continued, however, to be the three representative authors of their country. Kristian Elster (1841-1881) showed great talent in his pessimistic novels Tora Trondal (1879) and Dangerous People (1881). Kristian Glöersen (b. 1838) had many affinities with Elster. Arne Garborg (1851) was brought up under sternly pietistic influences in a remote country parish, the child of peasant parerts, in the south-west corner of Norway, and the gloom of these early surroundings has tinged all his writings. The early novels of Garborg were written in the peasant dialect, and for that reason, perhaps, attracted little attention. It was not until 1890 that he addressed the public in ordinary language, in his extraordinary novel, Tired Men, which produced a deep sensation. Subsequently Gargorg returned, with violence, to the cultivation of the peasant language, and took a foremost part in the maalstrav. A novelist of considerable crude force was Amalie Skram (1847-1905), wife of the Danish novelist, Erik Skram. Her novels are destitute of literary beauty, but excellent in their local colour, dealing with life in Bergen and the west coast. But the most extravagant product of the prosaic period was Hans Jaeger (b. 1854), a sailor by profession, who left the sea, obtained some instruction and embarked on literature. Jaeger accepted the naturalistic formulas wholesale, and outdid Zola himself in the harshness of his pictures of life. Several of Jaeger's books, and in particular his novel Morbid Love (1893), were immediately suppressed, and can with great difficulty be referred to. Knud Hamsun (b. 1860) has been noted for his egotism, and for the bitterness of his attacks upon his fellowwriters and the great names of literature. Hamsun is seen at his best in the powerful romance called Hunger (1888). A writer of a much more pleasing, and in its quiet way of a much more original order, is Hans Aanrud (b. 1863). His humour, applied to the observation of the Ostland peasants—Aanrud himself comes from the Gulbrandsdal—is exquisite; he is by far the most amusing of recent Norwegian writers, a race whose fault it is to take life too seriously. His story, How Our Lord made Hay at Asmund Bergemellum's (1887), is a little masterpiece. Peter Egge (b. 1869), a young novelist and playwright from Trondhjem, came to the front with careful studies of types of Norwegian temperament. In his Jacob and Christopher (1900) Egge also proved himself a successful writer of comedy. Gunnar Heiberg (b. 1857), although older than most of the young generation, has but lately come into prominence. His poetical drama, The Balcony, made a sensation in 1894, but ten years earlier his comedy of Aunt Ulrica should have awakened anticipation. His strongest work is Love's Tragedy (1904). Two young writers of great promise were removed in the very heyday of success, Gabriel Finne (1866–1899) and Sigbjörn Obstfelder (1836-1900). The last mentioned, in The Red Drops and The Cross, published in 1897, gave promise of something new in Norwegian literature. Obstfelder, who died in a hospital in Copenhagen in August 1900, left an important book in MS., A Priest's Diary (1901). Verse was banished from Norwegian literature, during the years that immediately preceded 1885. The credit of restoring it belongs to Sigurd Bödtker, who wrote an extremely naturalistic piece called Love, in the manner of Heine. The earliest real poet of the new generation is, however, Niels Collett Vogt (b. 1864), who published a little volume of Poems in 1887. Arne Dybfest (1868–1892), a young anarchist who committed suicide, was a decadent egotist of the most pronounced type, but a poet of unquestionable talent, and the writer of a rem:stly