My recently defended fourth thesis (bringing my total to three Bachelor’s degrees and one Master’s degree) examined the rather peculiar office of the Order Bishop, an official within the Royal Orders of Knighthood in Sweden, and its portrayal in the Swedish press during the nineteenth century. An extended version of the thesis’s background chapter has already been published on this journal and can be found here.
The thesis has now been published in DIVA (the Digital Scientific Archive), although unfortunately only in Swedish. For the benefit of non-Swedish readers, I have reproduced the English abstract below:
This thesis examines the framing of the Order Bishop in Swedish media during 1810–1910. The Order Bishop was an ecclesiastical office established by King Gustav III in 1783 to serve as officiant within the Royal Orders of Knighthood, primarily the Order of the Seraphim. Though formally equivalent in rank to diocesan bishops, its duties rapidly fell into disuse, rendering it little more than a nominal title. In 1881, Archbishop Anton Niklas Sundberg refused to consecrate the appointed Order Bishop Frithiof Grafström. Following Grafström’s death in 1883, the office remained vacant until its formal abolition in 1952.
Despite its peculiar position at the intersection of the royal court, state and church, the portrayal of the office and its holders in contemporary Swedish press has not previously been studied. Drawing on contemporary newspapers, this thesis applies framing theory to identify and compare dominant frames across three distinct periods: before 1881, the conflict years 1881–1883 and the period after 1883. The study identifies a number of frames used alternately: an initial formal and ceremonial frame, followed by a satirical and parodying frame, a frame linking the office to royal favouritism and personal careerism as well as a political frame. Another frame, centring on whether an episcopal office without a diocese could constitute a genuine bishopric, emerged during the conflict of 1881–1883. After 1883, a historicising frame gradually takes hold as the office fades from public consciousness. The study further shows that these frames rarely appear in only one form and frequently reinforce one another.
