prolonged noble property disputes – anu lahtinen 157 The documents of the Svea Court of Appeal have the potential to shed light on many interesting aspects of early modern Sweden, even on the conditions and circumstances of the sixteenth century. Judging from the cases discussed, inLiber causarumone can find useful collections of original and copied documents dating back to the previous century. Studying the long histories of certain court cases, one can see the consequences of marriages, sibling relations and guardianship negligence and that property strategies affected the wealth and life of several generations. The nasty details of the cases also help to understand why the nobility wanted to have its disputes judged by peers only, since the details of these disputes were not something they wanted to be leaked out to the commoners.441 While there was no Court of Appeal in the sixteenth century, it can be seen that the lengthy disputes had been handled by instances that previously took on the task of delivering definitive judgements. Since town courts, the High Council, local stewards and the king had been involved in many stages of the property disputes, it was natural that the final judgements were sought from the Svea Court of Appeal. The results of the court cases may have been dual, though; while some property rights may have been consolidated, some details of the disputes remained to be considered and possibly contested by trusted local men. The cases analyzed share many characteristics. They seem to reflect a world in which women’s well-being depended on the goodwill and ability of their guardians and representatives, be it a father, an uncle, or a husband. In both of the present cases, the men at the court are to a great extent taking action on behalf of their female family members; in both cases, too, allegedly mean-spirited guardians play a role that serves to illustrate the shortcomings of legal control over the rights of orphaned unmarried women and underage boys. Joen Planting defends the inheritance rights of his wife, Anna Johansdotter (Boga). Hieronymus Birckholtz defends 441 For more information about the forum privilegiatum principle, see Elsa Trolle Önnerfors’s article in this volume. Conclusion
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=