Historisk Tidskrift. Utgiven av Svenska historiska föreningen
  Hem Aktuellt Tidigare nummer Bli Medlem Annonsera Om Historisk Tidskrift För skribenter Föreningen In English
 

Historisk tidskrift 125:1 • 2005

Innehåll (Contents) 2005:1

Uppsatser (Articles)

Förhalandets praktik. En politisk och social strategi i det tidigmoderna Sverige

Dag Lindström

Fulltext (pdf)

Summary

Procrastination. A Political and Social Strategy in Early Modern Sweden

Procrastination was an important social and political strategy in Early Modern Sweden. This study is based on evidence from 17th-century provincial towns, but the strategies observed were common in other social settings as well.

The town council avoided effecting many of the orders given by the district governor. Accounts were often not completed for many years contrary to direct orders. Many other obligations were neglected or delayed as well. The king and the royal government, too, used delaying actions as a deliberate strategy. During the 17th century it was a well established praxis that the subjects could bring their concerns and complaints to the king. Petitions were considered by the government and a royal resolution was issued. But many important decisions, such as taxation, conscription, the establishment of marketplaces, access to arable land and expenses for schools and church buildings, could be delayed for decades. In many cases, the resolutions included a declaration of the royal benevolence and the definite intention to fulfil all just requests as soon as possible. But the royal government found many reasons why unfortunately it was not possible to fulfil them immediately. Burghers, peasants and others also delayed taking action on their different obligations. Many burghers systematically delayed tax payments and many cases brought to court were delayed or perhaps never settled at all.

Procrastination was widely accepted and used by the authorities as well as by the subjects. Two rather different patterns can be observed. Sometimes delaying actions were used as a subtle mode of resistance. Local independence was defended and increasing central government control and discipline opposed. The town council, for example, tried to preserve its position as an independent body representing the burgher community when royal authorities tried to incorporate it into the royal administration. Neglected tax payments could be an act of resistance. But the delay could also be a part of a system of bargaining and negotiations rooted in the early modern social order. The administration of justice often followed a similar pattern. Delaying a case gave time to reach a private settlement, which was important since a verdict was not always the principal aim in bringing a case to court. Accordingly, delaying actions were often based on mutual agreement. In the relation between subjects and authorities, delaying actions made it possible to display disapproval without openly opposing the social order. Similar procedures, on the other hand, made it possible for the authorities to avoid legitimate demands from the subjects without neglecting fundamental patriarchal obligations. Thus, procrastination actually facilitated administration and helped to preserve the social order