【作者】 赵亮；

【导师】 李秀清；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法大学 ， 法律史， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 瑞典是西方发达国家之一，有独特而发达的宪法和宪政制度，但目前各国对瑞典宪法史研究的角度、深度和广度尚有待拓宽。本文认为，瑞典贵族对瑞典宪法的产生和发展发挥了决定性的、巨大的和非常积极的推动性作用。古代瑞典人奉行日耳曼原始民主制，国王由上层贵族选举产生，贵族势力强大，通过与国王达成契约，在政治、军事、行政、经济等各方面与王权分享国家统治权。但在同时，贵族亦努力维护王权的存续，以昭示王权与贵族在国家权力结构中应该共存以及王权应受到贵族制约的原则。在这种背景下，瑞典历史上王权的产生及统治并非依赖于王的武力征服。王权自其肇始即为贵族集团出于统治需要而主动设置和努力维护的象征性权力机构。这为后来瑞典的贵族等级能够长期而有效地制约王权提供了观念和制度基础。在这些基础上，瑞典逐渐产生了以“亭”为代表的各类地方自治机构和区域，并由此演化出地方性和全国性议会，且这些议会由具有实力的贵族把持和主导。因此，无论从瑞典王权产生的原因和产生的方式的角度观之，还是从瑞典王权产生后参与国家权力运行的范围和程度的角度来审视，瑞典的王权其实在国家权力机构的设置理念、组织构成以及权力的实施这三个层面，都直接或间接地受到贵族的有力制约。这种国家权力的构成模式，实质上是一种二元化模式的国家权力机构——即贵族和王权并存且互相制约的权力构成机制。在上述基础上，瑞典早在12世纪就出现了旨在昭示王权和贵族等级之间平等性的、契约性关系的宪法性文件，并在此后陆续出现了其他类似的法律文件，包括《韦斯特耶特兰法》、《兰德斯拉法》、《卡尔玛条约》、《克里斯托弗法》、《哈尔姆斯塔德条约》、《佛斯特罗斯条例》等。瑞典贵族通过这些法律文件，逐步在国家政治生活中确立起贵族必须而且能够与王权分享国家统治权的原则和观念。当然，在这一时期以及此后的时期不时出现过王权专制。然而，瑞典贵族并未采取推翻王权的手段来达到其分享政权的目的，而是通过与王权持续性的博弈、妥协甚至合作，使贵族在国家统治结构中的地位和作用不断得到认可和强化，从而推动了1634年宪法和1720年宪法的出现，使瑞典于18世纪早期进入完全在贵族主导下的、议会主义的“自由时代”时代，结果是瑞典贵族的统治能力及实力达到了历史上最强盛的时期。然而，极端的议会主义最终导致物极必反的效果，导致18世纪晚期的瑞典出现君主专制。但是，正是由于君主专制的出现及其与贵族自古所推崇的立宪主义的冲突，接下来又导致了瑞典1809年的贵族政变以及在贵族的领导下制定了瑞典第一部现代化宪法——1809年宪法。在此后的1866年，在西方资产阶级革命的影响下，瑞典贵族又顺应大势，以和平的方式推动了贵族民主制向资产阶级民主制度的改革，为瑞典贵族在瑞典宪法史中所发挥的一系列不可磨灭的作用画上了圆满的句号。如果将瑞典、英国、德国和法国贵族与宪法的关系作一比较，我们可以看到，瑞典与英国的情形更为相似，即：在历史上，两国的贵族都与王权保持了一种动态的均势；贵族既是王权的维护者，同时又是王权的制衡者；贵族既努力保持自己的特权统治地位，同时又能够与时俱进，适时地团结甚至接纳新生的资产阶级力量来巩固自己的统治地位。在这一过程中，两国的贵族都在客观上发挥了社会矛盾缓冲地带的功能。其结果，就是在经过统治阶级的内部博弈和统治阶级与新生资产阶级的博弈后，最终确立了君主立宪政体。相对而言，法国和德国的情形却是两个极端。法国贵族因其相对于王权的明显式微和对资产阶级的敌视，导致其在资产阶级革命中上被淘汰出权力舞台，并因此导致极端革命性的资产阶级宪法的产生。而在德国，则是因长期以来其上层贵族在政治、军事方面相对于王权的绝对优势，导致德意志直到19世纪中期才出现由高度保守的上层贵族制定的、自上而下的全国性宪法，尽管这种宪法的发展史是和平而稳健的。通过上述的分析和比较，本文得出结论，认为瑞典贵族是瑞典宪法形成和发展的核心推动力。综合各方面考量，瑞典贵族与宪法的关系与英国贵族与宪法的关系最为相似，二者都既制约王权又兼具保王传统，且能够与王权保持长期动态而和平的博弈，这为两国皆发展出堪称为典范的宪法提供了最为重要的条件。更多还原

【Abstract】 The present study of foreign constitutional history of China has been focusing on constitutional histories of major developd countries including the USA, the UK, Germany, France and Japan. The study of the constitutional history of non-mainstream developed countries, i.e., those not in the leading position in international politics, economy, military affairs and cultural affairs, e.g., Sweden, is not sufficient. However, this implies that there is a great space for the academic community to explore in this field. As such, the auhthor believes that the constitutional history of Sweden is worth studying.Being one of the developed western countries, Sweden has a unique constitution and constitutional system which are drawing increasing attention from the international academic community. This is attributable to the following main characteristics of the Swedish constitution:one, it has a time-honored history; two, its development has been continuous and steady; three, Sweden has a unique constitutional cultural; and four, the evolution of the Swedish constitution is rooted in a unique social structure. In the study, the author came to know that the main reason that the Swedish constitution has such characterirtics is that since the very ancient times Sweden has had a highly stable and powerful nobility class. The chronical strife between raoyalty and nobility is the basic reason of the above-mentioned characteristics of the Swedish constitutional history.The emergence of the royal power manifests a strong characteristic of the primitive Germanic democracy institution, i.e., the royalty was elected by the upper tier aristocrats. The aristocrats dominated the elections. In the Middle Ages, the demand of wars gave rise to Fralse, a privileged nobility class. Later, the Swedish nobility acquired growing powers in military, economic and political spheres. Eventually the nobility and the royalty arrived at a state of dynamic but constant check and balance with each other. The formation of such balance of power provided a foundation as well as basic conditions for the early emergence and steady evolution of Swedish constitutions, and enabled Swedish constitutions to mature and develop in the course of struggles bewteen nobility and royal power. During this process, the political tradition of maining royal power of the Swedish nobility safeguarded the existence of the royal power; in the mean time, the nobility also tried to assert its privileged position by mainitaining the royal power and the king election tradition. Such tradition secured that the conflict between the nobility and the royal power had always been kept within an appropriate extent, even when the nobility was an orligarchy and the royal power was rather weak. With such a political culture and in the context of such evolutionary process of the constitution, in1809the Swedish nobility promulgated the1809constitution which is both progressive and concervative. From then on the Swedish constitution was ranked in modern constitutions. Another character of the Swedish nobility is that they can always strike an appropriate balance between progress and conservatism. This directly led to the drastic but peaceful struggle between the nobility and other classes in1866. The result of this struggle was the adoption of the reform plan of the Swedish parliament and termination of the social hierarchical system. Sweden entered into the age of general sufferage and the era of modern democracy.Comparing the relations between the Swedish nobility and the Swedish constitutional history and that in the UK, Germany and France, one can see that there is a similarity between the case of Sweden and that of the UK. Specifically, in history both their nobilities maintained a dynamic balance of power with their royal powers. In such relations, the nobility acted both as a guardian and as a checker of the royal power; it tried to maintain its privileged status while also learning to collaborate with the newly emerging bourgeois clsess in order to reinfornce its ruling status. In this sense the nobility of these two coutries both served as a buffer zone for class conflict. As a result, in both countries constitutional democracy was established. The situations in France and Germany are two extremes. The French nobility was wiped out of the political arena of France due to its weakness before the royal power and its hostility toward the bourgeois class, hence resulting in a highly revolutionary and unstable constitution. In Germany, on the contrary, as a result of the nobility’s lasting prevelance over the royalty in political and military aspects, the nobility class was highly conservative during the bourgeois revolutionary era in the19th century. As a result, only by mid-19th century did Germany promulgate a nationa-wide constitution under the dominance of the nobility.The conclusion of the author is that the Swedish nobility had played a pivotal role in the formation of Sweden’s constitutional culsture and constitutional history.更多还原