Jump to content
Arkivverket
Sign in to follow this  
Carl-Henry Geschwind

Conflict-of-interest rules for lagrettemenn in 1600s

Recommended Posts

Carl-Henry Geschwind

In a skiftebrev dated 23 June 1602 (reproduced in Mandal Sorenskriveri, Ekstrarettsprotokoll nr. 1 [1688-1707], s. 640 - https://media.digitalarkivet.no/view/41798/640, bottom of left-hand side and top of right-hand side), Mats, the husband of Ingeborg Gjestsdotter, was given a portion of Landøy (Halse Sogn, Vest-Agder). Among those witnessing the document was "Torsten Röbierg" (=Torstein Olsson Rauberg; see Per Reidar Christiansen, Folk i Nedenes, Mandals og Lista len 1560-1611, #3653). 

 

There are internet genealogies out there asserting that Mats Landøy was Mats Torsteinsson, son of Torstein Olsson Rauberg. I have found absolutely no proof for this, but am now wondering whether I might have actual disproof. Under the rules in place in the early 1600s, would it have been possible for Torstein Rauberg, as one of the "svoren Laugrettemend", to put his seal on a document for a transaction involving his son? Or does the fact that Torstein was one of the lagrettemenn here demonstrate that Mats was not related to him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carl-Henry Geschwind

Very interesting, Trudy.

 

What Torbjørn seems to be referring to is conflict-of-interest at actual ting meetings - I'm not quite sure this also applies to sealing of documents. I've been trying to see whether I can find the reference in Kristian IV's lov, but I'm not familiar enough with old Norwegian law to find it (my professional training is in U.S. tax law).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dag Thorsdalen

Carl-Henry, this "skiftebrev" is dated to 1602 when Magnus Lagabøte's landslov (State Law) from 1274/76 was still in effect. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnus_Lagabøtes_landslov 

https://www.nb.no/items/URN:NBN:no-nb_digibok_2012060605185 

 

It was costumary to use relatives as legal witnesses (lagrettemenn) to these types of legal acts. That a man was acting as a lagrettemann in connection with other persons, is often (but not always) am indication that there was a relationship between them. The principle was that the closer the connections were, the better a witness was. And the same was a witness with a potential for conflicting interests. I can't remember a father acting as a lagrettemann in a document involving his son. On the other hand, I'm unable to see any legal problems with a father acting in such a role. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carl-Henry Geschwind

Thank you, Dag, that is very helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.