487 Two hundred years later the social make-up of the perpetraters of violence had changed, in comparison with the situation at the beginning of the 17th century. It created no surprise that the mayor himself was involved in disputes of a physical nature in Linköping in the 1600s. In Uppsala the University Council had great difficulty in restraining the noble students’ rampages with rapiers and other weapons on the streets of the town. Violence was part of Sweden’s era as a great power, both on the battlefield and in everyday life. There was a large number of merchants, master craftsmen, farmers and other relatively propertied persons among those sentenced to fines. In the 19th century the lists of fines from Härnösand and Linköping show that the propertyless are overrepresented even in relation to their growing share of the population. This would confirm Norbert Elias’ theory that own control of effects occurs first among the more established in society and later on spreads to those who are lower on the social ladder. The lists of fines from the north of Sweden show that even lay members of the jury and other established farmers were involved in violent battles during the latter part of the 16th century, an occurrence which during the 17th century appears to already be less usual. Amongst the elite in the local community a greater measure of respectability seems to have spread. Violence as a means of solving disputes was on its way to becoming less accepted. A formof disciplinary process probably took place, of which certain traces are visible in peaceful areas during the 17th century and having even more tangible effects during the 18th and 19th centuries. The question is then, what type of factors brought about this change? One has been mentioned previously, access to weapons. But people did not bear weapons because they assumed it would be necessary to use them. A high level of violence had a power of its own to perpetuate. There existed a reciprocal connection between conflicts in general, access to weapons and the level of violence. The Swedish historian Johan Söderberg discusses a development which may have been of Importance, even if it is difficult to decide what are independent respective dependent factors. He points out that during the 17th century the courts were used increasinglv to solve civil disputes. This can be interpreted as the non-violent, legal disputes having, to a certain extent, replaced disputes of a physical nature. When it comes to the worst acts of violence then this is compatible with empirical results. Written agreements could neutralize many conlhcts where previouslv fists had been used to defend rights. Honour and renown were more important for the survival of the individual in illiterate society, than compared to later years. This can also explain why the number of cases of defamation decreased in time. The more propertied farmers and merchants, who often were involved in disputes concerning economic resources, in time came to find other solutions to their problems than the use of their fists. It is not necessary to grasp Norbert
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=