The Swedish Revolution of 1772 is invoked in The Federalist as a case in which foreign interference and domestic political corruption helped transform a republic into an absolute monarchy. The account links the purchase of Swedish parties by France and England to widespread national disgust and the king’s sudden, unopposed accession to near-unlimited power.

Foreign Influence in Republics

The episode appears in an argument about a perceived vulnerability of republican government: elected representatives, raised from the community to positions of power, might be offered foreign rewards for betraying their public trust. The essay contrasts this danger with hereditary monarchy, arguing that a monarch’s personal stake in the state and its external standing can make betrayal less attractive. Republics, by contrast, depend on the fidelity of officials whose private interests may be targeted by foreign powers.

As evidence, the account notes that parties in Sweden were alternately bought by France and England. The purchases are described as open and notorious, making foreign influence not a hidden suspicion but a visible feature of political competition. The passage presents the resulting public disgust as a principal cause of the Swedish Revolution of 1772.

The Sudden Change of Government

The revolution’s most striking feature in the account is the speed and manner of the change. In a single day, the king—previously described as the most limited monarch in Europe—became the most absolute and uncontrolled. The transition occurred without tumult, violence, or opposition. The text does not detail the revolution’s actions or identify the parties involved; it emphasizes instead the contrast between the monarchy’s former limits and the king’s sudden concentration of power.

That contrast gives the episode its force in the larger argument. A political order can appear constrained yet remain vulnerable when the parties governing it are exposed to foreign purchase and public confidence has been damaged. The account connects corruption and disgust to a change that sharply increased royal authority, presenting the revolution as a cautionary example rather than a full narrative of events.

Role in the Federalist Argument

The Swedish example supports a broader warning that foreign corruption can contribute to the ruin of republics. It also helps explain why political institutions cannot rely on virtue alone: where officials hold consequential public responsibilities, incentives and safeguards matter. The passage places Sweden alongside the United Provinces and ancient commonwealths as evidence for its claim that republican governments can be weakened by foreign influence.

The episode is therefore significant less for a detailed account of its participants or chronology than for the political sequence the essay draws from it: foreign powers purchased parties; the practice provoked widespread disgust; and the king’s authority expanded dramatically without a violent confrontation. In this telling, the revolution exposes how a republic’s vulnerabilities may culminate not in disorder alone, but in the peaceful establishment of unchecked power.