Landslagarna och kyrkorätten i Sverige och Norge

Abstract

Canon law and the national laws of Norway and Sweden, c. 1270–1360

The Norwegian (1274) and Swedish (c. 1350) national laws lack a section on ecclesiastical law, unlike earlier provincial laws. Historians have sought an explanation in the conflicts between kings and bishops about the laws’ contents. In this article, I re-examine the sources and argue that the usual narrative rests on over-interpretation: in a broader European context, it was normal to exclude ecclesiastical law from secular law books, since the church possessed its own law books in the Corpus iuris canonici.

In Norway, evidence for the supposed clash between King Magnus Lagabøte and Archbishop Jon Røde at a local assembly in 1269 is limited. The key source does not support the idea of an open quarrel. Likewise, the agreements of 1273 (Bergen) and 1277 (Tønsberg), traditionally read as peace treaties concluding serious conflict, do not support such an interpretation. They clarified the boundaries between secular and ecclesiastical jurisdiction in terms consistent with canon law and widely accepted.

In Sweden, the standard explanation for why Magnus Eriksson’s national law had no section concerning church law (kyrkobalk) hinges on a protest in 1347 by five cathedral canons. This event has not previously been read as a formal protestatio. The canons simply reserved all rights and privileges of the church against any changes in the new secular law book. Additionally, the canons protected themselves from appearing to have consented to provisions – such as capital punishment – that clerics were forbidden to endorse under canon law.

I contend that the real reason why the national laws lacked a section on church law lies in the European system of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. By the thirteenth century, church courts handled matters previously covered by the provincial church law texts. In most of Latin Christendom, secular law books no longer summarised this material. Thus, the early Scandinavian provincial laws with their ecclesiastical sections were instead the exception, not the rule. The repeated copying of the old church law sections reflected their enduring cultural prestige and practical use rather than any continuing role as sources of law.