Historisk tidskrift 126:3 • 2006
Innehåll (Contents) 2006:3
Uppsatser (Articles)
Våld som aggression eller kommunikation? Hemfridsbrott 1550–1650
Karin Hassan Jansson
Fulltext (pdf)
Summary
Violence as Aggression or Communication? Breaches of ‘Home
peace’ 1550–1650
Based on a study of around a hundred breaches of ‘home peace’
in Sweden between 1550 and 1650, this article investigates
the cultural meaning of acts of violence and the relationship
between masculinities and violence in early modern society.
A central theoretical assumption is that violence has a cultural
meaning. Furthermore, in legal proceedings, violant acts was
loaded with meaning by the parties, witnesses and judges.
In
Court records certain symbolically charged elements tend to
appear frequently. A central element is that the aggressor
appeared at the home of the defendant in arms, knocked loudly
on the door and insulted the defendant. The aggressor thereby
signalled the existence of a conflict and challenged the defendant
to fight it out. According to the records, the defendants typically
declined the challenge and tried to stop the attack. Many defendants
hid themselves, others sent out their wives to meet the aggressor
or attempted to calm him down. Violence exercised in conjunction
with breaches of ‘home peace’cannot be said to be signs of
a failure to exercise self-restraint. Rather, such violence
was charged with symbolic meaning, which was interpreted against
the backdrop of a number of written and unwritten norms.
Court
records describe the aggressor as a rash and uncontrolled man—the
opposite of the ideal man. His actions were characterised by
fits of rage and unwarranted hostility. In contrast, the defender
was described according to a positive stereotype. An important
part of this stereotype was the refusal of the defendant to
accept the challenge to fight and his attempts to avoid bloodshed.
Previous research has argued that the male ideal of the sixteenth-
and seventeenth centuries demanded that men defended their
honour with violent means if necessary. This study demonstrates
the existence of a more complex set of norms surrounding violence
and manliness. It also shows that self-restraint was an important
element of male ideals already in the early modern period,
even in violent conflicts. Failure to appreciate this aspects
of the male ideal are due to the failure of present day observers
to appreciate the nuances and the shifting meanings of acts
of violence in early modern society.
Keywords
early modern, Sweden, masculinity, ritual violence, breaches
of ‘homepeace’
|