Norwegian living space

    Prof emeritus i historie,

    UiT, Norges Arktiske Universitet

Foredrag, opprinnelig holdt under et forskningsopphold Cambridge i 1996, med noen få endringer i 2024

Adolf Hoel was born in 1879, he took his degree in mathematics and natural science in 1904. His main interest was geology and during his student days he was drawn into a lively geology circle presided over by Professor W.C Brøgger. Hoel was a research fellow from 1911 until he became Associate Professor of Geology at the University of Oslo in 1919. From 1928 he was director of the newly established Norwegian Svalbard and Polar Sea Reach Program, later  “The Norwegian Polar Institute”.He played a very important role in the policy making within Norwegian polar politics in the 1920-is and in the years when Norway and Denmark disputed the sovereinity over East-Greenland. In 1933 he joined the Nazi party mainly caused by his disappointment with the weak Norwegian polar policy, which  in his opinion lead to a disaster in the Greenland-affair.  When the Germans dismissed the rector of the University in 1941, Hoel was appointed acting rector. 

I this lecture I want too focus Hoels concept living space, a notion he began using during the war. Was he influenced only by the Nazi ideas of “Lebensraum” or is it possible to find other sources. How important was this concept in his agenda for polar politics? How important was the idea of living space in his way of thinking? Is it possible to find changes in his program for polar politics after he  he started using the concept?

 

It is necessary to look into the history of science, particularly the history of subjects like geology and geography, to understand Hoels thinking in this field. The “new” geography developed in the last decades in the 19th century was an experiment to close the gap between the natural sciences and the study of humanity. In  England, the USA and Germany geographer like Harford Mackinder (1861-1947), William Morris Davis (1850-1935) and Friedrich Ratzel (1861- 1904) were in the lead.  In his book,  “The Geographical Tradition”,  David Livingstone puts it in this way:  " - an experiment to ceep culture and nature under one conceptual umbrella".  These geographers thought that historical and political processes could be explained by tracing, “the interaction of man in society and - - - his environment”. The "new" geography was not only; "a science of descriptions nor of distribution”, according to Livingstone, “ but of causality, that its function was to exhibit the way in which a variety of physical causes played, firstly upon one another, and secondly upon man".  

Political geography and geopolitics became important subjects in the "new" geography.  The German geographer Friedrich Ratzel (1844- 1902) is regarded as the founder of modern political geography. In his theory about the organic growing state the concept living space (Lebensraum), was central. The idea is characterized by a deterministic way of thinking typical for the last part of the 19th  century. We will have a closer look at Ratels ideas later on. His theories were developed by the Swedish social scientists Rudolf Kjellén (1864- 1922). He meant, like Ratzel,  that states were analogous to biological organism, they had to grow and expand or die. States had to enlarge their territory. Kjellén developed the concept “geopolitics”, - a notion  where the idea about “living space” was a central element. This gave scientific proof of  an expansive foreign policy. The German professor in geography, Karl Haushofer (1869- 1946), was inspired by Ratzel and Kjellén. 

 

There is little doubt that Haushofer had a influence on the Nazi-regime and the Nazi policy. The “Lebensraum”-theory gave legitimacy to the Nazi imperialism and expansionary policy.  Haushofer and his two sons played important rolls within bureaucracy and science under the Nazis. One of Haushofers former students and later friend was Rudolf Hess.

During the 1930´ies and under the second world war geopolitics was strongly tangled with Nazi ideology.  And after the war the living space theories were stinking because of the  strong connection with Nazism. But as already mentioned; the theory of the organic growing state, and the concept, living space, was developed long before the Nazi-period, and this ideas were widespread in scientific circles in the last part of the 19th century and first decades of the 20th century.

In Hoels works and articles about polar politics  we find the idea that the arctic regions should be regarded as the Norwegian "living space" as early as in the 1920es. Although he does´t use the concept before the second wold war;  all his way of thinking about Norwegian polar politics is influenced by the idea of an expanding state. It appears for example in his reports where he stated the reasons for the establishment of Norwegian Svalbard and Polar Sea Reach Program in 1927. Like the "new" geographers around the turn of the century Hoel was influenced by a deterministic way of  thinking about the interaction of man and environment. 

 

Norwegians were in an exceptional position concerning the Antic Zone.  In 1927 Hoel puts it this way: "No other people but the Norwegians possess abilities to utilize the polar regions”.   In a paper "Our interests in the Arctic" which was first written in 1931, but was corrected and revised many times in the 1930´s, Hoel states: "Norwegians are not only best qualified in scientific work in Arctic, but also in exploiting the polar regions".  

Sometimes Hoel tries to explain why: In 1935 he stated in a speech: "Why is this so?  To answer that question we have to look at Norways position so far up north and height above sea-level. Consequently the economic basis is feeble and the country is therefor thinly populated. If it hasn’t been for the sea it would bee impossible to live in the western and northern part of Norway. The Norwegian Sea is one of the most stormy ocean in the world. The people who had to make a living there were raised to be the best seamen and fishermen in the world."  In a lecture he held under the war Hoel was more explicit: "Norway’s interests in Arctic is a result of geographic and climatic conditions within the country.  - - - Caused by Norway’s nature and climate our people is more qualified to travel in these parts of the world than others and to explore the country and the sea, and to put use of the natural resources. 

Hoel was like Ratzel deposed towards an environmental determinist account of human geography. In Ratels case it implied two main points. Firstly: The Universe was controlled by immanent natural laws. That also included all organic life, as well as human life. Secondly: The human society; including culture, social- and political conditions,  was transformed  by the physical environment. 

And out of this naturalistic ethos his concept of the Lebensraum was born, a theory which he most fully articulated in the book “The Political Geography” in 1897. David Lingsstone puts it this way: “Here in Spenserian fashion, he dilated on biological analogy of the state as an organism which inevitably underwent population enlargement to the point where recourse exhaustion or territorial expansion was inevitable. For the sate to exist, was to extend. In expounding these Malthus-like principles, Ratzel believed he had disclosed the natural laws of territorial growth of states and he happily located the contemporary colonial thrust of the European powers in Africa as manifestation of their quest for Lebensraum.” 

 

But Ratels ideas did not implicate a passive adaptation of the physical surroundings. People who subjugate the nature in one physical space would have an immanent tendency to emigrate to new surroundings. Then a new process of adjustment would occur. The urge to expand was vital for the ability to survive, and at the same time this inevitable tendency to migrate  was the most important reason for cultural alterations. 

Adolf Hoel does also put special focus on emigration and migration  when he deals with Norwegian history.  But contrary to Ratzel he claimed this to be a Norwegian peculiarity:  "We have all once sang the wonderful song written by Bjørnson; "The Norrøna people want to travel. They will bring power to others".  These lines characterize in a masterly way two remarkable features. Since the very beginning of our history and up til today  we have been a travelling people who have given great power to others." 

Emigration and occupation of new land was the "Norwegian" way of crisis strategy according Hoel. The Norwegian people lived mostly on the breadline and a slight change of climate could cause starvation, which has happened repeatedly in our history.  Therefor many of our people have at all times been forced to search other places in order to survive.

Even though Hoel did not use the concept living space before the second world war, his way of thinking was the same. Hoel saw a clear connection between national and political vitality (the Golden Age) and the ability to expand in the north. In the period of Norwegian decline in the late Middle Ages, Norway did not manage to sustain economic activity in the area or hold on to its sovereignty. Instead it was other major powers who exploited the vast riches in the Arctic. 

 

“But as soon as we begin to wake up from our long lethargy, our eyes will turn to the north once more”. Norway had not only a historical right, but also a “natural” right to expand in the north. It was the only direction in which the country had possibilities for expansion, and it was also the “most natural direction for our people.” And Hoel justified, as we have seen, the right to expand because of the characteristic qualities which enabled Norwegians to exploit these regions.

Although I have found many parallels between Hoels and Ratels way of thinking, Hoels do not refer to Ratzel. In his many articles and memorandums dealing with economy, geography, history and human societies Hoels only infrequently  makes reference to literature and sources. Hoel sold his collection of books to “The Norwegian Polar Institute” in the 1950ties. In this collection we only find one publication written by Ratzel, a little article about geography and polar research. Ratels main work, “Politishe Geographie”,  is not among the books which was handed over to the institute.  

But Ratzel was well known among geographers and scientists in Norway. As early as in 1899 we find a long book review in the yearbook for “The Norwegian Geographical Society “ where “Politishe Geographie” was given a broad presentation. This yearbook makes it clear that Ratzel was known in Norway. And we also know that Hoel scientifically was oriented towards Germany. Therefor it is likely that he had read some of Ratels works.

 

Before 1941 ha uses concepts like. “expanding areas” or other analogous concepts. In a manuscript from 1941 he for the first time used the world “living space” in order to legitimate the Norwegian claims that had to be put forward after the war regarding the sovereignty in Arctic. “It is our hope that Norway would gain control over these areas which are our natural living space”.

The following year Hoel held a lecture about “Norway’s sphere of interest in the polar regions”. The lecture was part of an information campaign set up by the Nazi party. The most prominent politicians in the party gave lectures including the leader, Vidkun Quisling. Hoels lecture was also printed in a party-publication. In this lecture in mars 1942 Hoel used the concept living space when he gave his reasons for Norway’s right to expand northwards. 

“These areas, - just next door to our territory, is Norway’s living space and the natural areas of expansion. And as mentioned before, Heels argument was that the Norwegians was the best qualified people to exploit these areas. The well known quisling journalist Halldis Neegaard Østbye edited during the war a boob named, “The national work. The new Norway”. 

In this work, planed to be published in several volumes, Hoel wrote an article with the heading “Norway’s living space”. In this article Hoel examined the economic and political importance of the Arctic and gave his reasons for expansionism. But he do not discuss the notion, living space. In 1942 Adolf Hoel also accepted an invitation to write an article in a book edited by Prof. Credner, working at the Geographical Institute in Munich. The theme in this book was “Lebensraumfragen der europäischen Völker”, and Hoel should deal with “arktischen Räume für Europa” (The European Arctic Space).

It is striking that Hoel only used the concept “living space” during the war. It is obvious in my opinion that Hoel deliberately used the concept in order to derive advantage from using the Nazi rhetoric. In that way he wanted to promote his country’s interests in the North. But his theory about “living space” is far from the Nazi way of thinking. Neither did Hoel changed his mind during the war. 

 

In the 1920ies and -30ies Hoel was worried about the international tension in the Arctic. Many states wanted to expand in that direction and Hoel stressed Norway’s  exposed position in the region. As far as Svalbard was concerned, he drew attention to the fact that foreigners had the same right to exploit the resources and to engage in scientific exploration of the area. Norwegian dominance in the areas of economic activity and research could easily be lost. And in any case, foreign activity would create problems for the Norwegian administration of Svalbard. 

Concerning Norwegian activity in the polar Regions around Svalbard, Hoel was particularly worried about Danish and Russian expansion. “The Russians in the east and the Danes in the west are trying to put us in a tight corner”, he wrote in 1927. He was particularly thinking then of the Russian extent of the limit of their territorial waters to 12 nautical miles and the Danish claims to sovereignty over the whole of Greenland. Hoel was also worried that the major powers were taking possession of considerably areas of ocean There was nothing to prevent Russian extending the limit of her territorial waters to 24 miles or declaring the area between Novaya Zemlya and the north coast of Russian an inland sea. Hoel recalled Great Britain’s practice in the Antarctic Ocean, where the British had annexed large areas of ocean in order to bee able to keep an eye on Norwegian whaling activities. Norway’s position, therefore, was very vulnerable, and the question was how we could best, “defend our position in these distant shares of interests of ours and in outlying parts of our country”.      

But in spite of the political and military tension in the Arctic Hoel always argued that Norway’s interests should bee promoted in a peaceful way. Despite the biting defeat in the Greenland-case Hoel focused The international law as the one and only base when the questions  concerning the sovereignty in the Arctic were discussed. Thus it was of great importance that we were able to prove that we had exploited and made use of these areas for centuries. He did not change his mind during the war. In his Aula-lecture in 1942 he underlined, in front of a audience consisting of members of  the Quisling-party and German military, that the questions concerning sovereignty had to solved not until the war was over as a subject of negotiations. Hoel explicit argued against war: “We can not conquer new land in the Arctic by war. It is only solid knowledge, scientific work in the field and economic exploitation that can help us.” 

Hoels ideas about the living space did not involve expansion by military means. The Nazis stated that a nations had the right to expand using their sword arm.  Hoels way of thinking was different from the Nazi’s also regarding the race.  The Nazi theory about the living space was connected with their ideas about the races. Explaining cultural the Nazis focused the genetic qualities, while Ratzel stressed the environment differences. National identity and solidarity were not results of ethnic and race homogeneity, but rather a consequence of  “geographical conditions which create similar conditions of life”. Neither Hoel focussed the genetic or race qualities when discussing the characteristic qualities which enables the Norwegians to exploit the arctic regions. In my opinion Adolf Hoel was inspired by Ratzel-tradition rather than the Nazi way of thinking.