` ::::::::::But there were not any national institutions at the time, other than the king himself, and thus not really a ``national level`` above the provincial assemblies. The king was just as much king of Västergötland as he was king of Sweden. Even if the local ``stormän`` organised Västergötland in a way similar to Iceland, they were not oligarchs who could do what they pleased so long they got along with their peers. Iceland stopped being an oligarchy in 1262 just like Västergötland had done several centuries ago (if they ever had been one).  ::::::::::Oligarch, meaning ``one of the few who rule``, is just not a good translation for ``storman`` (``great man`` in Swedish) as aristocrat, meaning ``one of the most powerful members of the society`` (with the root aristos meaning ``best`` or ``prominent``) . Even the historic use of the word nobleman is a lot closer to ``storman`` than oligarch.  ::::::::::An example of how the sentence could be phrased is: ``customary hostage from the local aristocratic families``. The only difference from the current text being that prominent is replaced with aristocratic and clans with families. However, ``local aristocracy`` would make the sentence shorter and essentially have the same meaning.  `