The purpose of this paper is to chart the relationship between supplicants and the Knightship and the nobility (K.a.N) during the age of freedom and the identities created in these meetings. The result of this study is based on the parliamentary protocols of 1731, 1746-1757 and 1771-1772. To answer the purpose of this study, three questions have been constructed. First, who were the supplicants and the supplications? Supplicants came from all over Sweden and its provinces. It was mainly nobleman who spoke to K.a.N, but also women, farmers, bourgeois, craftsmen, theologians, academics, officials and cultural workers. The supplications, could be performed by a single supplicant or a larger group, both for personal reasons or for someone else's. The supplications could both, written down short and concise or long and nuanced. Service, economy, benefit, legal goals and permissions are the five different types of supplications that have been categorized. There is a change in the content of supplications over time, which was due to changes in external frameworks such as laws and taxes. Secondly, what strategies and identities were used by the supplicant to try to influence the outcome of the supplication? In total, sixteen different strategies and identities have been indetified. The legal right, Employment, Succession, For king and country, Suffering, Gods will, By the nature, Like so many before, Honors and status, Encouragement, Flattering, The family, Health and mind, Loss, Modesty, and Poverty. Thirdly, how did the K.a.N motivate their decisions? Of the total 182 supplications 147 were appeals. In 1731 a practice was developed where widows were granted half of the amount they sought. In total there were 12 supplications that did not get a decision or were left resting and nine supplications were rejected. The supplications that were rejected were mainly requests regarding succession and recommendations. It has shown that the supplication could create reproach for the K.a.N, partly by showing decisions later regarded as incorrect. Supplications about recommendations often raised discussions within the K.a.N and many advocated that they should not interfere with private matters. K.a.N did not treat the supplications with consistency - but with what was considered appropriate for the individual, even if it was against the law/practice. It was also found that the supplicant's identity was fortified by K.a.N or created, in order to justify approvals. The approval could be written even more nuanced and flattering by K.a.N than the supplication itself.