| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Scherp, Joakim, 1968-
(författare)
-
Biskopen och makten
- 2020
-
Ingår i: År. - Stockholm : Appell förlag. - 9789198548525 ; , s. 89-100
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 4. |
- Scherp, Joakim, 1968-
(författare)
-
De ofrälse och makten : En institutionell studie av riksdagen och de ofrälse ståndens politik i maktdelningsfrågor 1660-1682
- 2013
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- In this thesis the constitutional policies of the three Commoner Estates (Priests, Burghers and Peasants) of the Swedish Riksdag between the years 1660 and 1682 is examined. While many previous historians have focused on the power-struggle between the Crown and the nobility, the Commoner Estates have been presumed to be staunch supporters of absolutism. I argue that the picture is far more complex. Case-studies of a number of political negotiations that concerned the distribution of political power show that the Commoners were flexible in their constitutional policies. When they sensed they were in a strong position, they were explicit in their demand for a say in political decisions. But when they were weak, they were deferential to the government. If there is one constant in their policies it is not blind reverence to royalties: the thesis show that they could sacrifice the interests of powerless members of the royal family in favour of security and defence of Protestant faith. In comparison, the Commoners were more eager to protect the rights of their own Estates and of the Riksdag as a whole. One important feature of Commoner politics was the willingness of Priests, Burghers and Peasants to co-operate, which sometimes made them quite influential. In the thesis the relations between the Estates are examined. I also have endeavoured to examine the political institutions, the rules that governed politics in the Riksdag during the period. It is observed that the institutional structures were quite complex and unclear, which gav an advantage to well-oriented Estates like the Priests and the Nobility in comparison with the Peasants. The Priests also was the best organized Estate of the Commoners. Other factors that favoured the clergy was that they were led by politically experienced bishops; that they had common privileges that all priests were interested in defending; and that they were strengthened and united by their religious ideology.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Scherp, Joakim, 1968-
(författare)
-
Sten Westerberg, Clas Rålamb
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Historisk Tidskrift. - 0345-469X .- 2002-4827. ; 135:3, s. 553-554
-
Recension (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 10. |
- Scherp, Joakim, 1968-
(författare)
-
The estates in the middle : Populist absolutism and constitutionalism in early modern Swedish politics
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Parliamentarism in Northern and East-Central Europe in the Long Eighteenth Century. - London : Routledge. - 9781032071411 - 9781003205555 ; , s. 127-154
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- In this chapter I account for the evolution of the Swedish political system during the early modern period up to the early 1720s, with special attention to the period 1650--1723. The period was characterized by a strong growth in state power, facilitated, I argue, by the rulers’ ability to play out Commoners and Nobility against each other. But the political revolution in the years 1718-1723 meant that royal absolutism was replaced with a constitutionalist system in which the Swedish Diet, the Riksdag, ruled supreme. I claim that the reason for this change was the fact that two of the Commoner estates, the Clergy and the Burghers defected to the constitutionalist position of the Nobility. Due to their ability to ally both with the Nobility on the one hand, and the Peasantry on the other, I will refer to them collectively as ‘the middle estates’. The third commoner estate, the Peasantry, remained largely royalist, and thus kept what I will here call the populist option open to the monarchs. The rulers of Sweden could thus choose between relying on support from commoners and lesser nobles on the one hand (the populist option), and on the aristocracy through opting for constitutionalist power-sharing on the other. The emergence of constitutionalism and greater political strength in the Commoner estates during this period is illustrated by cases from the entire period.
|
|
