![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Notes
1 Ristell was Royal Librarian and the first director of the Royal Dramatic Theatre. See Daria Skjoldager-Nielsen and Rikard Hoogland, ‘The Development of the Swedish Theatre System’, in: Karolina Prykowska-Michalak, Daria Skjoldager-Nielsen and Izabela Molińska (eds), The Development of Organisational Theatre Systems In Europe: Sustainability and Changeability (Stockholm, 2018), pp. 116-30, p. 117.
2 [Adolf Fredrik Ristell], Characters and Anecdotes of the Court of Sweden (London, 1790), vol. 1, p. 56. The Queen Mother Louisa Ulrika had many years of experience in the efficient establishment of court parties and their strategic use. See Elise Dermineur and Svante Norrhem, ‘Luise Ulrike Of Prussia, Queen of Sweden, and the Search for Political Space’, in: Helen Watanabe-O’Kelly and Adam Morton (eds), Queens Consort, Cultural Transfer and European Politics, c.1500–1800 (Abingdon and New York, 2016), pp. 84-108.
3 Concerning the whole so-called ‘Munck affair’, see Elise Dermineur, Gender and Politics in Eighteenth-Century Sweden: Queen Louisa Ulrika (1720–1782) (Abingdon and New York, 2017), pp. 226-32; on the public impact see Annie Mattsson, Komediant och riksförrädare Handskriftcirkulerade smädeskrifter mot Gustaf III (Uppsala, 2010), pp. 131-4.
4 Ristell, Characters and Anecdotes, p. 57.
5 Svante Norrhem, ‘Ideological Friction and Political Crisis: Queen Luise Ulrike of Sweden and a Failed Coup d’état’, in: Almut Bues (ed.), Frictions and Failures: Cultural Encounters in Crisis (Wiesbaden, 2017), pp. 67-77.
6 On Louisa Ulrika’s resentment towards her daughter-in-law, see Dermineur, Gender and Politics, pp. 209-10; on Louisa Ulrika and Gustav III see Ralph Tuchtenhagen, ‘“Das gegenwärtige politische System muss aufgeklärt werden”: Wie preussisch war die schwedische Politik zur Zeit Lovisa Ulrikas (1744–1772)?’, in: Norbert Götz, Jan Hecker-Stampehl and Stephan Michael Schröder (eds), Vom alten Norden zum neuen Europa: politische Kultur im Ostseeraum (Berlin, 2010), pp. 203-20, pp. 218-19. Yet the conflict between mother and son should not be overestimated; their relationship was also characterised by cooperation and loyalty: see Elise Dermineur, ‘Pride and Prejudice. Luise Ulrike of Sweden, the Pomeranian War and the Question of Loyalty’, in: Bues (ed.), Frictions and Failures, pp. 77-90.
7 Lyndan Warner, ‘Family, Kin and Friendship’, in: Amanda L. Capern (ed.), The Routledge History of Women in Early Modern Europe (New York, 2020), pp. 53-76.
8 For example, Glenda Sluga and Carolyn James (eds), Women, Diplomacy and International Politics Since 1500 (London and New York, 2016); Helen Watanabe O’Kelly, ‘A Life at Court: A Message from the Society’s New President’, The Court Historian 23 (2018), pp. 82-5, p. 84.
9 Michaela Hohkamp, ‘Transdynasticism at the Dawn of the Modern Era. Kinship Dynamics among Ruling Families’, in: Christopher H. Johnson, David Warren Sabean, Simon Teuscher and Francesca Trivellato (eds), Transregional Families in Europe and Beyond. Experiences since the Middle Ages (New York and Oxford, 2011), pp. 93-106.
10 David Warren Sabean and Simon Teuscher, ‘Kinship in Europe: A New Approach to Long-Term Development’, in: David Warren, Simon Teuscher and Jon Mathieu (eds), Kinship in Europe: Approaches to Long-Term Development (1300–1900) (New York and Oxford, 2007), pp.1-32; Gérard Delille, ‘Parenté et alliance en Europe occidentale. Un essai d’interprétation générale’, L’Homme 193 (2010), pp. 75-135; Elie Haddad, ‘Système de parenté et histoire sociale: éléments pour un débat. Introduction’, in idem (ed.), Les Règles de la parenté, entre histoire et anthropologie. Autour des travaux de Gérard Delille (L’Atelier du Centre de recherches historiques, vol. 19 (2018)). https://doi.org/10.4000/acrh.8609.
11 Liesbeth Geevers and Mirella Marini, ‘Aristocracy, Dynasty and Identity in Early Modern Europe, 1520–1700’, in: eaedem (eds), Dynastic Identity in Early Modern Europe. Rulers, Aristocrats and the Formation of Identities (Farnham and Burlington, 2015), pp. 1-24, p. 12.
12 Wolfgang E.J. Weber, ‘Dynastiesicherung und Staatsbildung. Die Entfaltung des frühmodernen Fürstenstaats,’ in: idem (ed.), Der Fürst: Ideen und Wirklichkeiten in der europäischen Geschichte (Cologne, Weimar and Vienna, 1998), pp. 91-136, p. 95.
13 Claude Lévi-Strauss, ‘Histoire et ethnologie’, Annales ESC 38 (1983), pp. 1217-31, p. 1224. Concerning the discussion of the structuralist concept ‘maison’, see Élie Hadad, ‘Qu’est-ce qu’une ‘maison’? De Lévi-Strauss aux recherches anthropologiques et historiques récentes’, L’Homme 212 (2014), pp. 109-38.
14 See Hamish Scott, ‘Conclusion. The Line of Descent of Nobles is from the Blood of Kings: Reflections on Dynastic Identity’, in: Geevers and Marini (eds), Dynastic Identity in Early Modern Europe, pp. 217-241, p. 220.
15 Jeroen Duidam, Dynasties: A Global History of Power, 1300–1800 (Cambridge, 2016), pp. 97-100.
16 On the complex concept of ‘dynastic legitimacy’, see Ana Maria S.A. Rodrigues, Manuela Santos Silva and Jonathan W. Spangler, ‘Introduction’, in: eidem (eds), Dynastic Change: Legitimacy and Gender in Medieval and Early Modern Monarchy (Abingdon and New York, 2020), pp. 1-17, p. 3. On succession rules between different noble families on a contractual basis, especially in the Holy Roman Empire (the so called Erbverbrüderung, or hereditary fraternisation) see Steffen Schlinker, ‘Die Bedeutung der Erbeinungen und Erbverbrüderungen für die europäische Verfassungsgeschichte’, in: Mario Müller, Karl-Heinz Spieß and Uwe Tresp (eds), Erbeinungen und Erbverbrüderungen in Spätmittelalter und Früher Neuzeit: Generationsübergreifende Verträge und Strategien im europäischen Vergleich (Berlin, 2014), pp.13-39.
17 Lévi-Strauss, ‘Histoire et ethnologie’, p. 1224.
18 Haddad, ‘Système de parenté et histoire sociale’, paragraph 40.
19 Lévi-Strauss, ‘Histoire et ethnologie’, p. 1224.
20 Haddad, ‘Système de parenté et histoire sociale’, paragraph 15.
21 For example, Natalie Zemon Davis, ‘Ghosts, Kin, and Progeny: Some Features of Family Life in Early Modern France’, Daedalus 106 (1977), pp. 87-114, p. 105.
22 ‘Alliance’ in Cyclopædia, or, An Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences (London, 1728), vol. 1, p. 65; ‘Affinité’ in Encyclopédie ou Dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers (Paris, 1751), vol. 1, p. 285; ‘Schwägerschafft’ in Grosses vollständiges Universal-Lexicon aller Wissenschaften und Künste (Leipzig and Halle, 1743), vol. 35, pp. 1777-89.
23 Margareth Lanzinger, Verwaltete Verwandtschaft. Eheverbote, kirchliche und staatliche Dispenspraxis im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert (Vienna, Cologne and Weimar, 2015), pp. 42-52.
24 Bernhard Jussen, ‘Künstliche und natürliche Verwandtschaft? Biologismen in den kulturwissenschaftlichen Konzepten von Verwandtschaft’, in: Yuri L. Bessmertny and Otto Gerhard Oexle (eds), Das Individuum und die Seinen. Individualität in der okzidentalen und der russischen Kultur in Mittelalter und Früher Neuzeit (Göttingen, 2001), pp. 40-58. On the complex attributions of consanguinity see Christina von Braun, Blutsbande: Verwandtschaft als Kulturgeschichte (Berlin, 2018), pp. 27-35.
25 Dermineur, ‘Pride and Prejudice’, p. 90.
26 James Connor, The Sociology of Loyalty (New York, 2007), p. 4. See also Martin Schulze Wessel, ‘Loyalität’ als geschichtlicher Grundbegriff und Forschungskonzept: Eine Einführung’, in: idem (ed.), Loyalitäten in der Tschechoslowakischen Republik (1918–1938). Politische, nationale und kulturelle Zugehörigkeiten (Munich, 2004), pp. 1-22, p. 2.
27 Karl-Siegbert Rehberg, ‘Reziprozität und institutionelle Risikoverminderung. Soziologische Anmerkungen zu ‘Loyalität’’, in Jörg Sonntag and Coralia Zermatten (eds), Loyality in the Middle Ages. Ideal and Practise of a Cross-Social Value. Essays in Honour of Gert Melville (Turnhout, 2015), pp. 423-52, p. 438.
28 Rayne Allinson, A Monarchy of Letters: Royal Correspondence and English Diplomacy in the Reign of Elizabeth I (New York and Basingstoke, 2012), p. 93.
29 Anthony Giddens, The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration (Cambridge, 1984), pp. 64-89. Joachim Eibach refers to the applicability of Gidden’s concept to the conditions of spatial coexistence in the early modern period: Joachim Eibach, ‘Kommunikative Praxis im sozialen Nahraum der europäischen Frühen Neuzeit’, Zeitschrift für Historische Forschung 38 (2011), pp. 621-64, p. 640.
30 On contemporary norms of motherhood see Claudia Opitz, ‘Pflicht-Gefühl. Zur Codierung von Mutterliebe zwischen Renaissance und Aufklärung’, Querelles 7 (2002), pp. 154-70.
31 Giddens, Constitution of society, p. 64.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Kolja Lichy
Kolja Lichy
Kolja Lichy is a lecturer at Justus Liebig University Giessen (Germany). He has worked on the history of the Polish nobility and is leader of the research and edition project ‘The Polish court correspondence of Ursula Meyer’, funded by the German Federal Ministry of Culture. He is currently preparing a book on public banking in the Habsburg Monarchy in the eighteenth century.