the svea court of appeal in the early modern period 114 preserved forms – cases seem to be missing, especially in the finished protocols and there is confusion about exact dates or particular details. In many cases, the draft protocols contain more information regarding individual cases as well as the actual number of the cases before the court. There are also gaps in the information dealing with cases that have been heard at both courts, since it is not unheard of that a case or a relevant detail regarding it is mentioned only in the records of one of the courts. Despite these critical source reservations, the records on the whole form a very informative viewpoint on the town life and judicial practices in early seventeenth-century Stockholm, which was much smaller than the modern town, consisting of 15,000 inhabitants at most – after all, even the district of Norrmalm, previously a northern suburb of Stockholm, was governed as a town of its own between 1602 and 1635.308 The activities within the early seventeenth-century Swedish courts were characterized by a growing degree of literacy. Claims, testimonies, agreements, sentences and settlements were not only written down – cases were discussed and handled on the basis of written documents on many occasions. The courts could of course hear oral testimonies during the hearings and sessions, but much was based on documents. This also meant that people who turned to courts had to express themselves in writing – not necessarily by themselves but by utilizing the assistance from professional scribes and even professional lawyers.309 Consequently, if a case had been heard at the Court of Appeal and a claimant tried to raise it again at the Town Court but without any written reference to the decision made by the higher court, the burgomasters and the councillors refused to deal with it.310 Even a lawyer acting on the behalf of another person was met with the same requirement: in November 1617, lawyer Nicolaus Sabancorus appeared before the Town Court, claiming that the Court of Appeal had obliged the councillors to discuss a certain case again. But he was told that the Town Court would not do so and if the Court of Appeal indeed wan308 Lilja Sven 1995 p. 308. 309 Petrén, Sture 1947; Korpiola, Mia 2009; Korpiola, Mia 2012. 310 Stb 1614–1615, pp. 136-137 (7 Oct. 1615). Modes and Tones of Communication
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=