The Swedish Revolution Under Gustavus Vasa | Page 5

honor, the courtiers being now commonly known as magnates. About the year 1200 castles were first erected on some of the crown estates, and the magnates who held these castles as fiefs were not slow to take advantage of their power. Being already the most influential men in their provinces, and generally the county or provincial magistrates, they gradually usurped the right to govern the surrounding territory, not as magistrates of the people, but as grantees of the crown estates. Since these fiefs were not hereditary, the rights usurped by the holders of them passed, on the death of the grantees, to the crown, and in 1276 we find a king granting not only one of his royal castles, but also right of administration over the surrounding land. Thus, by continual enlargement of the royal fiefs, the authority of the provincial assemblies, and even of the county assemblies, was practically destroyed. Still, these assemblies continued to exist, and in them the poor landowners claimed the same rights as the more influential magnates. The magnates, as such, possessed no privileges, and were only powerful because of their wealth, which enabled them to become courtiers or warriors of the king. In 1280, however, a law was passed exempting all mounted courtiers from crown taxation. This law was the foundation of the nobility of Sweden. It divided the old landowners, formerly all equal, into two distinct classes,--the knights, who were the mounted warriors of the king; and the poorer landowners, on whom, together with the class of tenants, was cast the whole burden of taxation. With the progress of time, exemption from crown taxation was extended to the sons of knights unless, on reaching manhood, they failed to serve the king with horse. The knights were thus a privileged and hereditary class. Those of the old magnates who did not become knights were known as armigers, or armor-clad foot-soldiers. The armigers also became an hereditary class, and before long they too were exempted from crown taxation. In many cases the armigers were raised to the rank of knights. Thus the wealthy landowners increased in power, while the poor, who constituted the great body of the nation, grew ever poorer. Many, to escape the taxes shifted to their shoulders from the shoulders of the magnates, sank into the class of tenants, with whom, indeed, they now had much in common. The sword had raised the strong into a privileged aristocracy, and degraded the weak into a down-trodden peasantry.
The aristocracy and the Church,--these were the thorns that sprang up to check the nation's growth. Each had had the same source,--a power granted by the people. But no sooner were they independent of their benefactors, than they made common cause in oppressing the peasantry who had given them birth. They found their point of union in the Cabinet. This was originally a body of men whom the king summoned whenever he needed counsel or support. Naturally he sought support among the chief men of his realm. As the power of the Church and aristocracy increased, the king was practically forced to summon the chief persons in these classes to his Cabinet, and furthermore, in most cases, to follow their advice; so that by the close of the thirteenth century the Cabinet had become a regular institution, whose members, known as Cabinet lords, governed rather than advised the king. In the early part of the fourteenth century this institution succeeded in passing a law that each new king must summon his Cabinet immediately after his election. The same law provided that no foreigner could be a member of the Cabinet; that the archbishop should be ex officio a member; that twelve laymen should be summoned, but no more; and that, in addition, the king might summon as many of the bishops and clergy as he wished. As a matter of fact this law was never followed. The Cabinet lords practically formed themselves into a close corporation, appointing their own successors or compelling the king to appoint whom they desired. Generally the members were succeeded by their sons, and in very many instances we find fathers and sons sitting in the Cabinet together. A person once a Cabinet lord was such for life. The law providing that the archbishop should have a seat in the Cabinet was strictly followed, and in practice the bishops were also always members. The other clergy seem never to have been summoned except in certain instances to aid their bishops or represent them when they could not come. The provincial magistrates were generally members, though not always. As to the number of temporal lords, it was almost invariably more than twelve, sometimes double as many. From the very first, this self-appointed oligarchy saw that in unity was strength; and while the different members