Regimen Politicum and Regimen Regale: Political Change and Continuity in Denmark and Sweden (C. 1450-C. 1550)
2000; University of Illinois Press; Volume: 72; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês
ISSN
2163-8195
Autores Tópico(s)Historical and Archaeological Studies
ResumoPolitical Change and Continuity in Denmark and Sweden (c. 1450-c. 1550) INTRODUCTION In June OF 1439, the Danish Council of the Realm rescinded its oath of allegiance to Erik of Pomerania, ruler of the Kalmar Union (1397/1412-1439) and followed the example of its Swedish counterpart three years earlier in deposing him as their ruler. This act ended forty years of growing monarchical power in Scandinavia under the Kalmar Union (1397-1521) and heralded a protracted contest between two opposing ideologies of government: the royalist regimen regale and a regimen politicum under which the crown shared power with church and nobility.(1) In Sweden, the deposal spelled a return to the political struggles of the fourteenth century, while in Denmark it represented a reversal of a century of centralization of royal power.(2) For the Kalmar Union itself, it signaled an end to a tight monarchical union of the three countries pursued by King Erik and his predecessor, Queen Margrethe (1387-1412), the architect of the Union. Nevertheless, the Union held together for the next eight decades--in theory if not always in fact--as a personal union of the three Nordic crowns. To all appearances, church and nobility had cemented their power, and the principle of regimen politicum had prevailed. A century after King Erik's deposal, the subsequent breakup of the Union, and the introduction of the Reformation in Scandinavia, the contest between these two ideologies came to a dramatic head. In Sweden, as in Denmark, the monarchical principle of regimen regale emerged strengthened, but in both countries, features of regimen politicum survived in the ensuing political accommodations. Given the very different socio-political conditions in the two countries, the resulting political structures took quite different forms, however. The purpose of this paper is to trace the contest between the two ideologies and its resolution in Denmark and Sweden(3) from the aftermath of Erik's deposal to the immediate post-Reformation period. FIEFS AND POWER IN LATE MEDIEVAL SCANDINAVIA In the broadest sense of the term, medieval Scandinavia was a feudal society. It was characterized by the same strict social divisions with the clergy and nobility constituting the politically and socially dominant elite, as elsewhere in late medieval Europe.(4) The privileges of these two estates included a near monopoly on high government positions, widespread tax exemptions (except for the nobility in Norway), and various legal immunities. They also had the right to represent the commoners at the herredage, meetings of the lords, on most issues involving the government of the realm.(5) Throughout Scandinavia, royal administration was decentralized and based on fiefs of varying sizes and composition. In the late Middle Ages, bishops and the high nobility were the beneficiaries of the most important fiefs. Their responsibilities generally combined all administrative and military duties of the area assigned to the fief, though not control of the judicial system. There was little feudal disintegration, however, as the fiefs remained under long-term royal control. They were awarded for limited periods, or occasionally for life, for services to the crown against a fixed rent to the crown or were mortgaged. In these cases, the income of the fiefs went to the holder. Another form of enfeoffment, permitting more direct control of the fief and facilitated the removal of the holder was becoming common during the period under review. Under this arrangement, the fief holder was paid a salary and made fully accountable to the crown for the income of the fief. These fiefs were still attractive as the remuneration was very significant.(6) During the later Union period, crown, nobility and church were the main protagonists in the Union struggles with the Swedish commoners becoming an increasingly important factor. The almost exclusive reliance by the crown on the nobility and church for administrative support in governing the realm meant that they were locked in mutual rivalry and dependency throughout the period. …
Referência(s)