Swedish Nobility?


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
so who does regulate it? WHo decides who has titles? Isn't there any mechanism for giving them out?

From what I understand, the King of Sweden can no longer confer titles of nobility because the provision in the Instrument of Government of 1809 that allowed him to do so was removed in the new Instrument of Government of 1974. So, no new nobility can be created in Sweden. The House of Nobles, as a private organization (no longer regulated by the Swedish parliament since 2003) mantains, however, a registry of the noble families who are members of the House. Please correct me if I am mistaken.

BTW, the Swedish king can no longer award orders of knighthood to Swedish citizens either, with the exception of members of the Royal House, who, due to a 1995 amendment to the 1974 law that regulates the royal orders, can now receive both the Order of the Seraphim and the Order of the Polar Star, which, obviously, can also be awarded legally to foreign citizens (as they frequently are). According to the Wikipedia, the King can still award though the Order of Charles XIII to Swedish citizens, but that is not a state order regulated by the Swedish government, Could anyone please clarify ?
 
Last edited:
From what I understand, the King of Sweden can no longer confer titles of nobility because the provision in the Instrument of Government of 1809 that allowed him to do so was removed in the new Instrument of Government of 1974, So, no new nobility can be created in Sweden. The House of Nobles, as a private organization (no longer regulated by the Swedish parliament since 2003) mantains, however, a registry of the noble families who are members of the House. Please correct me if I am mistaken.

BTW, the Swedish king can no longer award orders of knighthood to Swedish citizens either, with the exception of members of the Royal House, who, due to a 1995 amendment to the 1974 law that regulates the royal orders, can now receive both the Order of the Seraphim and the Order of the Polar Star, which, obviously, can also be awarded legally to foreign citizens (as they frequently are). According to the Wikipedia, the King can still award though the Order of Charles XIII to Swedish citizens, but that is not a state order regulated by the Swedish government, Could anyone please clarify ?
The Order of Charles XIII isnt an official order but a social order connected to the Freemasons. As such its not regulated by the Swedish Governement.
(Google is my source so please point out if Im wrong.)
 
This question is not really about titles of the Swedish RF, but rather about the use of titles in the Swedish nobility. Since I didn't know where to ask, I thought this forum would be the closest to the topic, but if it is the wrong place to ask, I apologize.



More specifically, I am trying to understand if/when a daughter of a count or a baron can be called a countess or a baroness in Sweden. I came across the text below from the House of Nobility's guidance on use of titles, but I didn't quite fully understand it and Google Translator seems to have got lost in the syntax. Could any native speaker of Swedish please assist me? Thanks.


De kvinnliga titlarna grevinna och friherrinna bärs av hustru till greve eller friherre, liksom av dessas änkor – ibland också, oriktigt, av frånskilda. Titeln baronessa förekommer inte i Sverige. Man skriver således till “Friherre och Friherrinnan X”. När kvinna av grevlig eller friherrlig ätt gifter sig med en adelsman förekommer det att hon kallar sig grevinna eller friherrinna. Gifter hon sig med en ofrälse person används inte någon titel. Ogift kvinna av grevlig eller friherrlig ätt benämns fröken. Den kontinentala titeln comtesse förekommer inte i Sverige.
 
This question is not really about titles of the Swedish RF, but rather about the use of titles in the Swedish nobility. Since I didn't know where to ask, I thought this forum would be the closest to the topic, but if it is the wrong place to ask, I apologize.



More specifically, I am trying to understand if/when a daughter of a count or a baron can be called a countess or a baroness in Sweden. I came across the text below from the House of Nobility's guidance on use of titles, but I didn't quite fully understand it and Google Translator seems to have got lost in the syntax. Could any native speaker of Swedish please assist me? Thanks.

Not a native speaker at all but my take on it is that only the wives or widows may use the title of countess (grevinna; not 'komtesse') or 'friherinna' (not baroness) - but not their daughters, they are just 'fröken' - like other unmarried women.
 
This question is not really about titles of the Swedish RF, but rather about the use of titles in the Swedish nobility. Since I didn't know where to ask, I thought this forum would be the closest to the topic, but if it is the wrong place to ask, I apologize.



More specifically, I am trying to understand if/when a daughter of a count or a baron can be called a countess or a baroness in Sweden. I came across the text below from the House of Nobility's guidance on use of titles, but I didn't quite fully understand it and Google Translator seems to have got lost in the syntax. Could any native speaker of Swedish please assist me? Thanks.
Married women and widows carry their husband's titles. A divorced lady does not have the right to use her ex-husband's title although some do.
The daughters of counts or barons belonging to families that received their titles before 1809 can use their father's titles if they marry a nobleman with another title or no title at all but that's very rare and is generally frowned upon.
To be honest titles are very rarely used today even socially. Everyone in society knows who's what but it would be considered bad form to mention it. A friend of a relative of mine carries his mother's noble surname but "everyone" knows that he's not a "real" von Xxxxxx.
 
Married women and widows carry their husband's titles. A divorced lady does not have the right to use her ex-husband's title although some do.
The daughters of counts or barons belonging to families that received their titles before 1809 can use their father's titles if they marry a nobleman with another title or no title at all but that's very rare and is generally frowned upon.
To be honest titles are very rarely used today even socially. Everyone in society knows who's what but it would be considered bad form to mention it. A friend of a relative of mine carries his mother's noble surname but "everyone" knows that he's not a "real" von Xxxxxx.

Thanks for clarifying it ! My doubt was precisely if they could use the title if they married an untitled nobleman or only if they married another count or baron, but it is clear now.
 
Thanks for clarifying it ! My doubt was precisely if they could use the title if they married an untitled nobleman or only if they married another count or baron, but it is clear now.
That was much more common in the old days when titles were in common usage. Although it was a gradual process Sweden stopped using titles in the mid 1960s.
For context one need to remember that non-noble women didn't start to use the styles of Fru (Mrs) and Fröken (Miss) until the 1800s so even those were signifying social status back the. As is the case with Lady in the UK the women of the Royal family went by Fru or Fröken in the 1500s.
 
Sweden House of Nobility website:

http://www.riddarhuset.se/


Thanks, Blog Real! The site actually answers many of the questions that have been asked here.


1) Who is a member of the Swedish nobility?


The descendants in male line of the families with representation in the House of Nobility are officially recognized as members of the Swedish nobility with the caveat that, for families who were ennobled under Paragraph 37 of the Instrument of Government of 1809 and introduced in the House of Nobility thereafter, only the most senior male agnate (as determined by the usual rules of primogeniture) is considered noble and has the right to use of the family's title, e.g. of count or baron, when the family is titled.



2) What is the legal status of the nobility?


The Swedish nobility nowadays is legally a corporation constituted and governed by the House of Nobility Act. The House of Nobility Act was amended, however, in 2003 by the Swedish Parliament (?) to remove all legal obligations and prerogatives of the Swedish government with respect to the nobility. Those legal obligations and prerogatives included for example:



  • The obligation of the government to give public notice of the annual head tax approved by the Meeting of the Nobility to be paid by all adult members of the legally recognized nobility;
  • The prerogative of the government to call extraordinary Meetings of the Nobility and to introduce motions for discussion therein;
  • The requirement that all amendments to the House of Nobility Act be approved by the government; and
  • The possibility that families who were not previously introduced in the House of Nobility within two years of the granting of their Letters Patent might petition the King to be extraordinarily introduced following a procedure laid down by government regulation.
In addition, all residual legal privileges of the nobility were also repealed in 2003 with the exception apparently of an old ordinance that reserves to the nobility the right to use certain elements in their coats of arms such as helms with open visors and supporters (a "commoner" who uses those elements in his/her coat of arms is subject to a fine).



As a result of the 2003 reforms , all regulations pertaining to the Swedish nobility have been de facto removed from Swedish public law although the nobility properly was not abolished or disbanded and is still governed by the House of Nobility Act and ordinances now approved solely by the Meetings of the Nobility. As a private corporation, the Swedish nobility owns the building of the House of Nobility and its respective archives and mantains the directory of the officially recognized nobility whose adult members are still subject to the head tax.



Given that the King, since 1975, can no longer grant nobility, and given that it is no longer possible for previously ennobled families to seek extraordinary introduction in the House of Nobility, it follows that the Swedish nobility is now a closed class so to speak, restricted only to those families who were introduced in the House prior to 2003.
 
Last edited:
More specifically, I am trying to understand if/when a daughter of a count or a baron can be called a countess or a baroness in Sweden. I came across the text below from the House of Nobility's guidance on use of titles, but I didn't quite fully understand it and Google Translator seems to have got lost in the syntax. Could any native speaker of Swedish please assist me? Thanks.

De kvinnliga titlarna grevinna och friherrinna bärs av hustru till greve eller friherre, liksom av dessas änkor – ibland också, oriktigt, av frånskilda. Titeln baronessa förekommer inte i Sverige. Man skriver således till “Friherre och Friherrinnan X”. När kvinna av grevlig eller friherrlig ätt gifter sig med en adelsman förekommer det att hon kallar sig grevinna eller friherrinna. Gifter hon sig med en ofrälse person används inte någon titel. Ogift kvinna av grevlig eller friherrlig ätt benämns fröken. Den kontinentala titeln comtesse förekommer inte i Sverige.

Married women and widows carry their husband's titles. A divorced lady does not have the right to use her ex-husband's title although some do.
The daughters of counts or barons belonging to families that received their titles before 1809 can use their father's titles if they marry a nobleman with another title or no title at all but that's very rare and is generally frowned upon.

If the daughter of a count or baron belonging to a family that received its titles before 1809 marries and then divorces a nobleman, can she continue to be called a countess or baroness? If not, must she be called fröken or fru? The quotation from the House of Nobility is not explicit about that.


To be honest titles are very rarely used today even socially. Everyone in society knows who's what but it would be considered bad form to mention it. A friend of a relative of mine carries his mother's noble surname but "everyone" knows that he's not a "real" von Xxxxxx.

Interesting. "Society" as in the high society/nobility or the common public?
 
If the daughter of a count or baron belonging to a family that received its titles before 1809 marries and then divorces a nobleman, can she continue to be called a countess or baroness? If not, must she be called fröken or fru? The quotation from the House of Nobility is not explicit about that.

I have no idea. Historically a divorced woman remained a "Fru" (Mrs), but I have no idea about how it would play out in the situation you mentioned. I know that Marie Douglas David was spoken off as a countess in the press during and after her divorce, but it's impossible to know if that was her choice or theirs to sell more papers.

Interesting. "Society" as in the high society/nobility or the common public?
I mean the social circles where titles and status still matter. Most nobles are ordinary people with ordinary jobs and many Swedes have no idea about what the nobility is.
 
Last edited:
Swedish journalist Björn af Kleen has written quite a lot about the same issue. About how siblings to the oldest son are, as you say, "forced by friendly pressure" to relinquish their inheritance and support the application to continue the family entail. Swedish entails were legally abolished from 1964 onwards on the death of the current holder but some have been allowed to continue to protect estates of great cultural and historical significance.
Funnily enough when abolishing the entails the authorities didn't see any need in abolishing the entails of the Royal family.

Given the authorities were willing to amend the inheritance principles of the Royal Family's entails (and throne) to allow them to pass to the eldest child instead of the eldest son, I wonder why they didn't apply the same principle to the remaining non-royal entails?
 
Given the authorities were willing to amend the inheritance principles of the Royal Family's entails (and throne) to allow them to pass to the eldest child instead of the eldest son, I wonder why they didn't apply the same principle to the remaining non-royal entails?

The sole aim of the law (1963:583) was to abolish the entails. This wasn't an attempt to introduce a more "fair" system but to break the significant financial and political power of the landowning nobility.
The authorities most likely sees no direct need to reform the inheritance model of the remaining entails today since they are few (ca 20 today which is a steep decline from a few hundred in the 1960s), all have to reapply for an extension of the entail at the death of each holder and are seen as a temporal exception to the normal laws of inheritance. It would be hard to change the terms of inheritance since all entails have individual terms and the outcome would most likely be to cement entails as a form of ownership instead of having them slowly fade away.
 
Last edited:
The sole aim of the law (1963:583) was to abolish the entails. This wasn't an attempt to introduce a more "fair" system but to break the significant financial and political power of the landowning nobility.

I meant the 21st century authorities, as you said a few exemptions were made to permit a handful of entails to continue on to the present day. If I understand correctly, the authorities modified the royal entails not long ago (in the 2010s?) to eliminate the sex discrimination in their inheritance regulations, so I wondered why they did not do the same for the remaining non-royal entails. Were the royal entails only modified because the family requested it?

ETA: I see you added the following explanation:

The authorities most likely sees no direct need to reform the inheritance model of the remaining entails today since they are few (ca 20 today which is a steep decline from a few hundred in the 1960s), all have to reapply for an extension of the entail at the death of each holder and are seen as a temporal exception to the normal laws of inheritance. It would be hard to change the terms of inheritance since all entails have individual terms and the outcome would most likely be to cement entails as a form of ownership instead of having them slowly fade away.

Thanks. Are the words I've highlighted also applicable to the royal entails?
 
Last edited:
I meant the 21st-century authorities, as you said that a few exemptions were made to permit a handful of entails to continue to the present day. If I understand correctly, the authorities modified the royal entails not long ago (in the 2010s?) to eliminate the sex discrimination in their inheritance regulations, so I wondered why they did not do the same for the remaining non-royal entails. Were the royal entails only modified because the family requested it?
The edit of my last post was probably done after you had read it in it's original form.
To further develop on what I wrote in my edit the landed entails are a political non-issue. The extension given to some of them are meant to be temporary and the entails will most likely all be gone in a generation or two. The royal entails had their terms changed upon request from the Royal family. It was not a political initiative.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for the answer to my original question. Yes, my original reply was posted before I saw you had added content to your last post, which is why I added an ETA of my own. :flowers: If you wouldn't mind answering my follow-up question, I am still curious about that, as well as why you expect the non-royal entails to be gone in a generation or two.
 
I meant the 21st century authorities, as you said a few exemptions were made to permit a handful of entails to continue on to the present day. If I understand correctly, the authorities modified the royal entails not long ago (in the 2010s?) to eliminate the sex discrimination in their inheritance regulations, so I wondered why they did not do the same for the remaining non-royal entails. Were the royal entails only modified because the family requested it?



ETA: I see you added the following explanation:







Thanks. Are the words I've highlighted also applicable to the royal entails?
Since the law of 1963 didn't affect the Royal entails there shouldn't be any need for the family to apply for an extension of the entail after the death of the previous holder.
It should be noted that since the Royal entails were founded after the parliament in 1810 had prohibited the foundation of new entails they must always have been set apart from the other entails.
 
Thank you for the answer to my original question. Yes, my original reply was posted before I saw you had added content to your last post, which is why I added an ETA of my own. :flowers: If you wouldn't mind answering my follow-up question, I am still curious about that, as well as why you expect the non-royal entails to be gone in a generation or two.
To my knowledge there are thirteen (twelve estates and one city property) landed entails left today (three under liquidation, four extended, six remaining under pre-1964 owner) which is down from about forty in 1994. In only the last few years have we seen at least six entails be broken. Two of those because of the death of the King's brother-in-law, Baron Niclas Silfverschiöld. Some of them were sold with their collections scattered while some put their assets in a special kind of limited companies created for former entails. The latter is what many entail holding families chose to do to keep the estates in the family. The two Silfverschiöld entailed estates went to the only son because of an deal struck between the baron and his wife that the son would inherit his father while the two daughters will inherit their mother.
To finally reply to your question I believe that given the rapid decline in the number of entail in only the last few years the form of ownership has no future. It might survive for one, two generations more until the heirs want their share of the inheritance or the authorities says no to an extension of the entail.
I'm most curious to see what happens to the massive Trolle-Ljungby entail centered around it's medieval castle. It's one of Sweden's largest landed estates. The current entail holder is the childless 99-year old Count Hans Gabriel Trolle-Wachtmeister, widower of Mistress of the Robes Alice Trolle-Wachtmeister, who hit the news last year after removing his nephew and heir from the running of the estate. I'm curious to see what he has in mind for the entail - will the heir apply for an extension, will it become a limited company or will it become private property.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom