69 Onthe Use of Natural Law Pufendorf does not use interests of state as a principle to explain political actions throughout. This is the case only for Frederick Williamand Charles Gustavus. Accordingly, they are more favourably treated than others. This may be explained by the fact that Brandenburg and Sweden were the principals of Pufendorf, actually both states at the time when Charles Gnstavus was completed. The apparently higher character of the Swedish monarch may also be seen to reflect the fact that Pufendorf wrote his book on commission from Sweden. When Pufendorf left Sweden, the book existed in manuscript. But, according to his own letters, he reworked and “improved” it no fewer than three times in Berlin.'^ It is not inconceivable that his new position may have had some influence on this work. Not until after half a decade did serious preparations for the printing of Charles Gustavus get under way, and actual publication did not take place until after the death of the author. The original manuscript that had been left in Stockholm had been censored by the Royal Swedish Chancellery, where comments on it had been made by, among others, the Lieutenant-Quartermaster-General Eric Dahlberg. At this later point, further censoring was made."- It is not known, however, what changes may have resulted from this. Neither is it known if it is a, possibly revised, version of the Stockholm manuscript or the “improved” Berlin manuscript that was printed. At the original writing of the manuscript Pufendorf had already cooperated with Eric Dahlberg, who had played a prominent, if disputed, role in the Danish campaign of 1657—1658."^ The excellent plates of Charles Gustavus were also made fromdrawings by Dahlberg."^ By his own words, Pufendorf worked on Charles Gustavus during his time in Berlin. There were direct opportunities, at least for the Swedes, as well as indirect ones to Influence the actual writing of the text and of central parts of it. Samuel von Pufendorf served both Brandenburg and Sweden, but never Denmark. Already this may explain the obvious bias in Charles Gustavus. Furthermore, Pufendorf had personal reasons for bearing a grudge against the Danes. Fie had been a private tutor to the son of the Swedish ambassador in Copenhagen. Unfortunately, part of this time was during the siege in 1658. Since he was in the service of the Swedes, he was interned with them. Apparently he had a harsh time. This may explain his attitude towards the Danes.'^^ But, since other states were also Pufendorf in letter to Pregitzer, Oct. 3rd, 1691, printed in Historische Zeitschrift 70(1893) p 293. Malmströmp 52, 56 ff. Arne Stade, Erik Dahlberg och Carl X Gustafs krigshistoria, Stockholm 1967 and the literature referred to there. Malmströmp 74. Stade p 336 f.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=