Internal Migration in Norway in the 1700s–1800s: From Valleys to Frontiers

Between the 1700s and 1800s, Norway underwent significant demographic, economic, and social transformations. Internal migration—that is, movement of people within Norway rather than overseas—played a central role in these changes. This article examines the scale, causes, patterns, and consequences of internal migration in Norway in that era, drawing on recent research and historical sources.

Understanding internal migration in Norway during the 1700s–1800s is valuable for genealogists because it provides essential context for tracing ancestors who moved within the country.

Knowledge of these patterns may help us find the birthplace of ancestors who otherwise left no clues about their origin. It aids in identifying where to search for missing records, as families often crossed parish or county boundaries. Recognizing these migration trends may help us break through brick walls and allow us to construct a more accurate family history that also reflects the social and economic realities of Norway’s past.

Population Growth, Pressure, and Social Change

Norway entered the eighteenth century with a relatively small, widely dispersed population, much of it rural and concentrated in valleys and fjord-regions with arable land. As the 18th century advanced, the natural increase (birth minus death) rose, particularly after mid-century, as improvements in nutrition, lower mortality, and, in some places, better agricultural techniques allowed more stable subsistence (Myhre, 2021). By the mid-1800s, Norway’s population had more than doubled compared to the early 1700s (Myhre, 2021; “Population movement to and within Norway, 1830-1914,” n.d.).

One effect of this growth was land pressure. Farms in interior valleys—especially in Eastern Norway (for instance, Gudbrandsdalen, Østerdalen)—were subdivided under inheritance regulations. Over successive generations, plots became smaller and less viable. Many households included “husmenn,” or tenant farmers/cotters, who did not own the land but worked small plots or rented land from others, often with supplemental labour elsewhere (Store norske leksikon [SNL], “bureising,” no.date.).

Definitions & Key Concepts

To understand internal migration in Norway, it helps to know some of the relevant terms:

• Bureising: literally the creation of new farmsteads by clearing uninhabited or marginal land (new soil) and settling there. It often involved people moving outward from old farms or into more remote districts. SNL explains that this has been a recurring phenomenon over centuries, particularly from about 1750 onward, and is sometimes referred to in older sources as “indre kolonisasjon” (inner colonization). (SNL “bureising,” n.d.)

• Indre kolonisasjon (internal colonization) in Norway refers to government- and church-supported efforts, mainly during the 18th and 19th centuries, to settle and cultivate unused or remote land within the country. The goal was to increase agricultural production, reduce poverty, and provide land for landless people by encouraging settlement in forested, mountainous, or northern areas (SNL  “Indre kolonisasjon”).

• Husmannsvesenet: The social‐economic system of the “husmenn”—tenant farmers or cotters—who lacked full land ownership and often held small plots; they were a product of land subdivision, scarcity, and limited opportunity in the main farmed lands. Over time, many of those unable to establish independent farms turned to this system (SNL, “bureising,” n.d.). For a more indepth discussion about the cotters, see my article “Who was the cotter”

Causes and Push Factors

Several interlinked push factors motivated internal migration in Norway in the 1700s and 1800s:

1. Land scarcity and inheritance patterns: In frontier and valley farming regions, the customary inheritance among heirs meant that farms were subdivided repeatedly. Smaller farms were often less productive, especially in harsh climates or marginal soils.

2. Environmental constraints and crop failure: Poor soils, short growing seasons, limited arable land at high altitudes or inland fjords, frequent harvest failures, and sometimes catastrophic natural events (like severe floods or snow damage) all encouraged households to seek alternative land or livelihoods.

3. Population growth without equivalent economic opportunity: With growth in population but slow development of infrastructure or markets in many rural interior places, many people—especially younger sons, or families without sufficient cultivation rights—faced limited scope for upward mobility. This led some to try their luck elsewhere within Norway (Moilanen & Myhr, 2021).

Pull Factors and Opportunities

Conversely, there were significant pull factors:

• New lands in northern and remote districts: Regions such as Inner Troms (Målselv, Bardu) were less densely populated and offered land for clearing. Public support, incentives, or at least leniency (tax or corvée exemptions, freer access to state lands) encouraged settlement outward (SNL, “bureising,” n.d.).

• Coastal economies and trade: Coastal districts provided fishery, trade, shipping, and combined farm and fisheries livelihoods. These offered more diversified income possibilities than purely subsistence interior farming.

• Urban and market opportunities (later in the 19th century): As towns grew and as industrialization began (mills, mining, small manufacturing), wage labour or supplementary employment became available. Communications, transportation (roads, shipping), and information networks improved over time, making both the idea of migration and the physical act more feasible (Myhre, 2021; Moilanen & Myhr, 2021).

Patterns and Phases of Internal Migration

Internal migration in Norway did not occur uniformly; it followed discernible phases and streams.

Early Phase (late 1700s – early 1800s)

• Settlement of new farms (bureising) in remote or undeveloped regions: Clearing forest or moorland for small farms by those without access to larger farms under inheritance. Often these were in the frontier zones (northwards, or in upland/mountainous interior areas). SNL notes that after about 1750 several new settlements were founded in districts like Målselv and Bardu, and colonization in Finnmark accelerated. (SNL, “bureising,” n.d.)

• Growth of husmannsvesenet: As farms became subdivided, many people became tenant farmers or cotters—with little land and limited rights—but tied to main farms. They often supplemented their livelihoods with forestry, hunting, fishing, or seasonal work elsewhere.

• Valley to coastal migrations in regions like Telemark, Hardanger, Valdres: are not well quantified, but qualitative evidence (local histories, church records) show young people moving toward coastal parishes or to towns. Such moves gradually became more common especially from mid-1800s onward.

Mid-19th Century Intensification

• Larger flows from the rural interior to more accessible areas: coastal districts, towns, and places where markets or trade were more developed. Some people moved seasonally or temporarily before permanently relocating.

• Social mobility considerations played a role: Research shows that rural-urban migration in the late 1800s was partly driven by expected occupational gains. Particularly, sons of rural, lower-status families were more likely to move to towns or other rural municipalities in search of better opportunities (Moilanen & Myhr, 2021). This was especially true for younger sons who were not in line to take over a farm or plot.

Late 19th Century and Overlap with Overseas Emigration

• Internal migration increased in scale and diversity. Cities (Oslo, Bergen, Trondheim) grew, providing work. At the same time, overseas emigration (to America chiefly) became an alternative for many. Internal migration often served as a precursor or stepping stone for those planning or considering emigration (Myhre, 2021).

• Between 1830 and 1914, Jan Eivind Myhre estimates substantial movement within Norway — between counties and municipalities — as well as both immigration into Norway (from Sweden and elsewhere) and large emigration. Internal migration helped redistribute population and relieve population pressures in some interior regions. (Myhre, 2021).

Consequences

The internal migration of the 1700s-1800s had significant and lasting consequences for Norwegian society:

1. Redistribution of population: Some of the most overpopulated interior valleys saw relief. Population growth in coastal and northern areas increased. While not eliminating regional inequalities, the movements helped balance density more across the territory.

2. Agricultural development & frontier settlement: New farmlands were brought into cultivation. Frontier areas that were previously wilderness or lightly used forest were settled and farmed. This expanded the total productive land base, though often at the cost of environmental challenges, soil exhaustion, or hardship.

3. Social stratification and class mobility: The rise of husmenn (cotters) as a distinct class, the increasing number of small landholders created through bureising, and the capacity for migration as a path for upward mobility (especially for those of low status) all contributed to changing class relations (Moilanen & Myhr, 2021).

4. Cultural and institutional changes: Migration spread not only people but ideas. Religious revival movements (e.g. Haugean movement), folk culture, agricultural techniques, institutional norms (property rights, inheritance) were diffused across regions. Improved roads, communication, and transport infrastructure over the 19th century both enabled and resulted from population shifts.

5. Prelude to overseas emigration: Many of those who emigrated to America in the latter 19th and early 20th centuries first migrated internally—to towns, to coastal areas, or to frontier lands.  (Myhre, 2021). This “step migration” allowed migrants earn money to pay for the fare abroad.

The flyttelister (migration lists) in the Norwegian church records

The flyttelister (migration lists) in the Norwegian church records on Digitalarkivet are valuable for tracing where and when individuals moved between parishes. To find them, we go to digitalarkivet.no, click “Scanned materials” and choose “Parish registry” (Kirkebøker) Select the county and parish of interest. Under “Contents,” look for entries labeled “Innflyttede” (abbr: if→in-migrated) or “Utflyttede” (abbr: ut →out-migrated). These lists often record names, ages, occupations, destinations or origins, and dates—helpful for tracking family movements and locating them in new parishes.

The flyttelister in Digitalarkivet are valuable but come with several limitations. Not all parishes kept migration lists consistently, and many books are missing entries for certain years or only record one type of movement (either in-migration or out-migration). The level of detail can also vary—some lists include full names, ages, occupations, and destinations, while others only note initials or general destinations like “to Christiania.”

Many migrants were never recorded in the flyttelister. Church regulations required people to obtain a moving certificate (flytteattest) when leaving or entering a parish, but in practice, this rule was not always followed. This may cause problems for us genealogists.

I am working on an article where I look at different strategies to try to break through such “brick-walls”. Be sure to check back!

Conclusion

Internal migration in Norway during the 1700s and 1800s was a multifaceted phenomenon. Driven by population pressure, inheritance structures, environmental constraints, and the lure of new land or economic opportunity, people moved from overused, land-scarce valleys to new farms, coastal districts, and eventually urban centers. These movements reshaped Norwegian geography, economy, and social structure, creating new frontiers, altering class relations, and setting the stage both for more intensive internal migration and for the great waves of overseas emigration that would characterize the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

In a future article I will have a look at what DNA research can tell us about internal migration in Norway.

References

Digitalarkivet. (n.d.). Flyttelister og flytteattester i kirkebøkene [Church migration lists and moving certificates]. Arkivverket. Retrieved October 14, 2025, from https://www.digitalarkivet.no

Holden, L., & Boudko, S. (2018). The Norwegian Historic Population Register and migration. Journal of Migration History, 4, 249–263. https://doi.org/10.1163/23519924-00402002

Moilanen, M., & Myhr, S. (2021). Scraping the bottom of the barrel? Evidence on social mobility and internal migration from rural areas in nineteenth-century Norway. Scandinavian Economic History Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/03585522.2021.1901775

Myhre, J. E. (2021, June 9). Population movement to and within Norway, 1830-1914. Nordics.info. https://nordics.info/show/artikel/population-movement-to-and-within-norway-1830-1914

Singer, S. A. (1960). Norwegian emigration in the nineteenth century. Scandinavian Economic History Review, 8(2), 150-160.

Store norske leksikon. (SNL) (n.d.). Bureising.  Retrieved October 13, 2025, from https://snl.no/bureising

Store norske leksikon. (SNL) (n.d.). Indre kolonisasjon. Retrieved October 14, 2025, from https://snl.no/indre_kolonisasjon

Sommerseth, H. L., & Thorvaldsen, G. (2022). The impact of microdata in Norwegian historiography 1970 to 2020. Historical Life Course Studies, 12, 18-41. https://doi.org/10.51964/hlcs11675