Originally Posted by SwordsMaster
The question i think i may be able to answer right now; The Swedish parliament DID trust Charles XII completely! They granted him Absolute Rule upon his coronation! The parliament was divided into four corporations, Nobility, Clergy, Burghers and Peasants. To the peasants a strong king was the best guaranty that they never again would be oppressed by the nobility. This also was felt by the Clergy and Burghers, who also was vary of the ambitions of the nobility. The strange ting was that the nobility also voted for giving absolute rule to Charles. Maybe out of loyalty for Charles XI and his memory. He also had been granted Absolute Rule 1680, and that had lead to a twenty year period of peace and growing prosperity!
Regarding the army. Charles XII did not raise it! His father did! And the cost was payed by the nobility. 1680 he started a process called the reduction, which stripped the nobility of most of its ill-gotten wealth and put it back into the national treasury were it belonged. previously the farmers had been organized into the Rote system were tree to four farms together was responsible for recruiting, keeping and equipping a soldier in peacetime. The soldier was given a small homestead for himself and his family, and some land to till. He also was supposed to be a handyman for the farmers in the Rote. Only in wartime or training did the Crown answer for his upkeep. Being a Rote soldier was a very popular career choice for those young men who couldn´t expect to inherit a farm of their own. Besides, the were very popular with the girls, in their dashing uniforms, which they wore to church every sunday. If they wanted to remain faithful to their wife, they had to use a club to fend of the local uniform groupies.
It was somewhat less popular to become a soldier in wartime, but the local Parrish council had absolute power to select
replacements for vacancies in the local Rotes. They tended to choose the least useful male members of the society; vagrants, petty criminals, troublemakers and such, providing they met up with minimum physical standards. They were then promptly marched to the nearest depot station, and shipped away to their regiment, to join in the quest for honour, glory, or at least a dinner party for worms. "Say farewell little butterfly to amusements...!"
This system tended to minimize criminality and enhance harmony in the community, since it gave the young men a motivation to behave.
With the newly aquired resources Charles XI began to organize the officers corps in the same way, giving each a homestead of which to make a living in peacetime, from corporals up to colonels. The homesteads of course getting bigger the higher the rank.
This created a permanent army, with a permanent officers corps, which cost the Crown virtually nothing when un-mobilized.
The soldiers, noncoms, and officers of each parrish trained outside the church after the sermons each sunday, while the rest of the congregation usually had a picnic and watched, taking great pride in "Our boys". also giving the girls ample opportunity to target the next victim of their seduction attempts.
I don't know where you got the idéa that the Swedish economy was ruinous in 1700 - it wasn't. It had exactly the size of army it could afford. And that wasn't enough to protect all of the empire. Especially since the provinces outside Sweden Proper wasn't part of the Rote system, and had to to be garrisoned by mercenaries. As an example; the province of Bremen - Verden cost more to garrison, than it produced in taxes and other revenues. The UK actually did us a favor in taking over that province, moving the hole from our wallet to theirs.
Regarding why Patkul hated Sweden, i honestly don't remember. It might have something to do with the fact that Charles XI on two occasions tried to abolish serfdom in Livonia, and both time was vetoed by the Livonian parliament. Charles XI's Absolute Power only applied in Sweden Proper, not in the "Co-Countries" which was rather autonomous. I seem to remember that the southern gentlemen of Dixieland experienced a mild form of irritation when the US Congress worked towards the abolition of black slavery! This might be something like it.
But the vast majority of the "Livonian Knights" (Actually they were Germans - real Livonians - "the Un-germans" - had very little say in Livonia. Most were the very serfs discussed.) were fierce Loyalists, including every other male member of the Patkul family. Families like Palme, Taube, Rehbinder, Sternberg, von Ungern, Patkul, Paikull et c. (Guess which family i belong to!) lost most of their able-bodied males in the following years of war.
There was no secession movement. They weren't stupid. They knew that they would be worse of as Russians or Poles. If Prussia (Brandenburg) had been stronger, that would have been something else...
Bookmarks