1 Alternatives to the military state? The Swedish Estates ’ reactions to absolutist policies during the Great Northern War By ph. Dr. Joakim Scherp, Department of History, Stockholm University; joakim.scherp@historia.su.se Abstract: In this article, the meeting of the Estates in 1710, and the policies suggested during this meeting is described. It is argued that the Estates had a different view of state and society than the absolutist regime. As an alternative to the heavily militarized state, which endeavoured to control all parts of society, the Estates suggested policies that they thought would lead to greater prosperity. This would be achieved by freeing the economy from state control, and above all by concluding peace. To solve the immediate financial problems of the Crown, a system of borrowing against guarantees from the Estates was proposed, which would have meant a financial revolution of the same kind that England had recently introduced. Steven Pincus theory of revolutions is furthermore applied to the Swedish developments, and it is argued that the state-modernization forced on Sweden by the disastrous Great Northern war lead to proposals for change both from the Estates and the Crown. Keywords: Estates, absolutism, peace, prosperity State-modernization from below This article will investigate the opinions aired on economic, political and social issues during the meeting of the Swedish Estates (utskottsmöte) in 1710. By doing so, I will try to discern reactions to both the system of absolute monarchy introduced from c.–1680 and the hardships of war during the Great Northern War that had begun in 1700. The fundamental question I will attempt to answer is whether the Estates had any visions of an alternative to the existing policies. The modernization and rationalization of the Scandinavian states have often been viewed as ‘a revolution from above’, led by the kings and their ministers. Maybe there were also attempts to introduce modernization from below? A common view among Swedish historians has been that only the rulers and aristocrats mattered in the developments of political institutions. This outlook is too narrow, especially since the Riksdag (the Swedish parliament) plays such a central role in Swedish history. A related notion has been that only the government had positive, progressive ideas that aimed to transform Swedish society–opponents of the Crown are often portrayed as conservative, if not reactionary, elements with no competing vision of their own. While this may be true for some historical periods, I nevertheless think that its applicability has been exaggerated. Apart from being conservative, the Estates have often been accused of being selfish privilege- seekers with no feeling for the common good. The meeting of the Estates in 1710 is thus said to have expressed no real ideological vision. 1 Of course, I intend to challenge this view. Criticisms of the system and proposals of alternatives had to be vague and indirect in an absolutist monarchy, unless one was willing to risk conflict with the king, which the members 1 SǀeŶ Grauers: Några ďidrag till oppositioŶeŶs historia uŶder Karl XII ;Soŵe ĐoŶtriďutioŶs to the historLJ of the opposition during the reign of Karl XII) Karolinska Förbundets årsskrift 1921 pp 206, 211