DSCF0043

ESSAYS IN SWEDISH HISTORY

Charles, whose share in this arrangement would have been limited to the nomination of one of the seven, chose to see it as evidence of the sinister purposes of Sparre and his circle, and transmitted the idea to Gustav Adolf: see Soenska riksdagsakter, I Series, ii, 792 (for the relevant clause of the statute), and ibid., ii, 867; iii, 775, 934; iv, 122, 165, for characteristic comments by Charles. John himsełf, though he had agreed to the statute, later associated himself with Charles’s accusations: ibid., ii, 896.

³⁵ See the letter which Svante Sture wrote at Erik’s dictation: printed in Handlingar rdrande Skandiruwiens historia, iv, 119—23.

⁸⁶    Soenska riksdagsakter, I Series, ii, 967-8, 894-5, 9°9i    75*

⁸⁷    See the tense debates in the council on 26 and 27 Feb. 1649,    24

Sep. 1650; RRP, xiii, 343-6; xiv, 309. ‘Poland* was an emotive word, used by both sides: e.g. Jakob de la Gardie’s condemnation of the privileges of the Polish nobility (ibid., xiii, 259); or Oxenstiema, urging better observance of the rules of order in the Riddarhus (29 Jan. 1642): *. . . and not do as is done in Poland ... where when they hołd a diet, one says “write this”, and another gets up and says “write that”, and so one after the other until at last somebody says “tear the whole thing up”, and they depart no better than they came’: STomifoj] R\idderskaps och] A[dels] R\iksdags] P\rotokoll\₃ I Series, Stockholm, 1855-, iii, 211.

³⁸    R. Holm, Johannes Elai Terserus, Lund, 1906, p. 304.

³⁹    Lts Anecdotes de Suede, The Hague, 1716, pp. 105-6; Sven Grauers, ‘Kring fórspelet till 1680 ars riksdag’: Historiska studier tillagnade Nils Ahnlund_y Stockholm, 1949, p. 145.

⁴⁰    One of the things that annoyed Fryxell was Geijer’s remark that it was not the people that had been untrue to Charles xn: Fryxell, Om aristokrat-fordómandet, i, 23.

⁴¹    A. A. von Stiemman, Alla Riksdagars och Motes Besluth, Stockholm, 1728, i, 536.

⁴³ Printed in Soenska riksdagsakter, iii, 328. Lagerroth, logically but sur-prisingly, considered that the demanding of a Charter as a precondition for the accession of a hereditary king was unconstitutional: F. Lagerroth, ‘Revolution eller rattskontmuitet?* Scandia, ix (1936), p. 7.

⁴³    Hermansson, pp. 183-4; Runeby, pp. 45-78. An indication of Gharles’s personal taste in polidcal theory is perhaps afforded by the fact that the first book to be published as a result of his commission to Erik Schroderus to translate notable foreign works into Swedish was James i’s Regium donum: Lars Gustafśson, Virtus politica. Politisk etik och nationellt soarmeri i den tidigare stormaktstidens litteratur, Uppsala, 1956, p. 48.

⁴⁴    Lagerroth wrote: ‘Our history can show no morę provocative a crime against the principle of legał continuity’: op. cit., p. 9.

⁴⁶ Printed in Soenska riksdagsakter, II Series, Stockholm, 1932—, i, 69—76.

⁴⁴ In particular, that their advice should not be judged ex eoentu, and them-selves be liable to disfavour if it tumed out ill. This is not explicitly stated in the Charter, but it formed a prominent item in the counciTs Schedule of grievances, and was no doubt covered by the promise not to degrade or deprive of office without lawful judgment: for the council’s grievances, see Soenska riksdagsakter, II Series, i, 69.

ON ARISTOCRATIC CONSTITUTIONALISM

⁴⁷    As Johan de la Gardie observed in 1636: ‘It was in generał H.M. naturę, that he was very ready to augment his regalia and royal prerogative, and to diminish and cut down the privileges of others’: RRP, vi, 361. And cf. Sven A. Nilsson, ‘Reaktionen mot systemskiftet 1611. En linje i Gustav n Adolfs politik’, Scandia, xx (1950), passim.

⁴⁸    Text in E. Hildebrand, Soeriges regeńngsformer, pp. 1-41.

⁴⁹    As Oxenstiema himself rightly claimed in 1644: RRP, x, 680.

⁵⁰    Runeby, p. 239.

⁶¹ Gustav Adolf’s intention (ran the preamble) had always been ‘an ordered constitution, wherein the king’s majesty, the counciTs authority, and the reasonable rights and liberties of the Estates were properly preserved and defined’: Hildebrand, Soeńges regeńngsformer, p. 2.

⁸² Erik Sparre had drawn the distinction too: Strómberg-Back, p. 188.

⁶³ B. Lóvgren, Standstridens utdaning, Uppsala, 1915, pp. 18-26; N. Ahnlund, Standsńksdagens utoeckling, Stockholm, 1933, pp. 229-30. Gyllen-hielm, who was Charles ix’s illegitimate son, was a leading champion of the dynasty’s interests during Ghristina’s minority, and a prickly defender of his father’s reputation: see the sharp clash about this in RRP, viii, 592 (5 May 1642).

⁶⁴Salvius to Oxenstiema, 18 August 1634, ąuoted in G. T. Odhner, Soeriges inre historia under Drottning Christinas fórmyndare, Stockholm, 1865, p. 31, n. 1. Compare the following exchanges in the council, 21 June 1636:

Episcopus Arosiensis: Officiorum constitutio nowadays, sińce regnum has become successioum, pertinet ad Regem. When it was electioum, it inclined morę to democraticum statum. But now it inclines morę to monarchiom statum, sioe status inclines morę to formom monarchicam.

Herr Johan Skytte: Aliud est status, aliud administratio status; status has not been changed, but administratio status.

Episcopus Arosiensis: Dantur gradus in monarchico statu . .. Alius status monarchicus is in Polonia, alius in Gallia: RRP, vi, 309.

Karl dc’s draft of a revised version of the Land Law had taken care to debar father and son, or two brothers, from sitting in the Council at the same time: Severin Bergh, Karl IX och den soenska adeln, 1607-9, Uppsala, 1882, p. 107. The Additament of 1660 enacted that not morę than one of each family should be a member of the regency, nor morę than three be members of the rad (clause 3): E. Hildebrand, Soeriges regeringsformer, p. 46: when the provision was yiolated there were strong protests: see Stiemman, Alla Riksdagars och Motes Besluth, Bihang, p. 421.

⁸⁶    RRP, v, 330. Strong pressure was brought to bear on members who were slack in attendance: ibid., v, 156, 167, 172; vi, 2, 39.

⁸⁸ For the development of the council after 1611, see RRP, i, 9-10; J. E. Nordwall, Om soenska riksradets utoeckling mot centralisation under Gustaf II Adolf, Uppsala, 1891, passim; Nils Eden, Den soenska centralregeringens utoeckling till kollegial organisation i bórjan af sjuttonde drhundradet, Uppsala 1902, pp. 117-44.

⁸⁷    Salvius reported Oxenstierna as saying that ‘to be asit were a mediator between king and Estates is a great and parlous business. The king’s rights

49