Maktens tal och talets makt : Kunglig maktlegitimering i Erik XIV:s och Johan III:s tid

Sammanfattning: This thesis examines how Erik XIV and Johan III of Sweden used ethos construction and rhetoric to legitimize the new strong royal power during their combined reign from 1561 to 1592. The study analyses three different crises of legitimacy to understand how the kings and their allies negotiated these challenges and how the various strategies used by the rulers affected their ability to expand the space of legitimate royal power. The three crises are the dynastic crisis, the crisis of church politics, and the foreign policy crisis. The source material used includes written speeches, official letters from the kings, instructions for negotiators, and sermons. A key argument of the study is that the art of rhetoric is central to understanding the political conflicts of this era, and that, furthermore, 16th-century Swedish political culture should be analyzed as a part of the European Renaissance. The historical period is framed as a transitional political phase between an older political culture where legitimacy often came from sources connected to personal relationships and a new political culture where stable institutions fill that function. The results show that the Swedish kings shaped their royal ethos very differently, mainly depending on Erik's position as a hereditary ruler with initially strong legitimacy and Johan's much more precarious position as the usurper of Erik's throne. Erik, therefore, based his ethos on sources of legitimacy more connected to institutional tropes and was subsequently criticized for his inability to form and retain virtuous relationships. As an effect, Johan's ethos had to be the opposite. Since both relational and institutional sources of legitimacy were available, it was valuable to control the rhetorical arena of political negotiation. Political adversaries often switched positions between them as it fitted their argument. Historians have often misconstrued this as signs of irrationality or even mental illness. Instead, the study argues that it should be interpreted as careful positioning by rulers sensitive to the effects and benefits of ethos construction. Therefore, the main conclusion of this thesis is that the politics of rulers steeped in the political culture of the renaissance must be analyzed through the filter of rhetoric.