ABSTRACT
Neumair von Ramsla's recommendations appeal to self-interests instead of morals. The monarch is not summoned to win his subjects' love or to avoid violent repression for the sake of Christian ethics or for the sake of love, but for the sake of his self-interest in maintaining power and consolidating his reign. The normative concept of tyranny is not central to Neumair's approach, even though he quotes many examples of subjects revolting against tyrannical rule. Resistance against the monarch is only legitimate when he persistently pursues evil intentions and tenaciously proves insensible to their good advice. We will focus on the significance attributed to unrest and resistance and the notion of good governance as it was advocated by the two authors. We would like to propose an outlook towards Swedish government practice in the middle of the seventeenth century when coalitions between different estates, pamphlets and observation of unrest abroad led to government which provided room to manoeuvre for popular politics.
