Makt och Motstånd: Bönderna, örlogsflottan och den svenska staten 1522-1640

The development of the Swedish state is studied through the central and local organizations that built, repaired, maintained and provisioned the Royal Swedish Navy. The state is viewed as an organization which bargained for resources with powerful social groups. Inspiration comes from theories of modern firm growth, powerholder-subordinate relations, and Charles Tilly´s theory of state formation. The statebuilding process has mainly been understood as a top-down process determined by negotiations between rulers and elites. In this dissertation, I argue for the relevance of another perspective, “statebuilding from below”. In 16 th and early 17 th century Sweden around 60 % of the land was owned by freeholders; freeholders who, with property rights and access to central and local representative assemblies, had influence over local political and economic issues. In the absence of a strong nobility and wealthy cities Swedish rulers, and the Swedish statebuilding process were dependent on freeholding farmers; both for their political support and the resources they represented in the form of taxes and labor. The main issue of the dissertation is to explain the different paths the organization supporting the Royal Swedish Navy took over a period of 120 years. From centralization, to decentralization, from state-organized to privately organized, and back. In order to demonstrate this “statebuilding from below” I investigate the organization’s provision of timber, labor and revenue, setting this in a context of power mobilization, conflicts and negotiations. Between 1523 and the mid-1540s the farmer’s met the states demand for resources to the navy with resistance, both open and violent. The state answered with coersion and repression. From the mid-1540s the state was forced to adapt to the reality of power relations between itself, the nobility and the tax-paying farmers. The result was a new way to interact and respond to farmers grievances. The system “the negotiating state” gave protection to ordinary people, against nobles, the authorities and famine, and stopped the open and violent protests. Negotiations and agreements between the king’s bailiffs and the freeholders were central for the state, and for the organizations ability to reach its goals. But as the navy and state power grew the system could not prevent an increased exploitation. To finance the production, shipbuilding was organized with local resources and decentralized to a vast number of local pla