Domestication of violence Flashcards
What is behaviour no longer subjected to?
External forces, controlled and ordered by the self. Now the self is disciplined by the person/the self.
Is Disenchantment a set of idea/discoveries/ processes?
Not that simple. A way of behaving. Modern disenchanted people act in different way than people from enchanted.
What was Norbet Elias 20thc theologises?
The civilising process 1939.
See uncivil behaviours in own nations, works in early modern period.
According to this account, pre-modern people are relaxed about certain forms of behaviour in public. E.G no concern for table manners (previously eat with hands, now we use forks, serving implements for individuals rather than serving bowl. Don’t need to touch.)
Talks about bodily processes and the ‘rising threshold of shame’, people more inhibited about exposing certain body parts e.g toilet in dedicated rooms rather than using pots beside dinner table.
Now, there is a concern to show civility, show good manners. All about self-discipline/ self-control.
The manner/ behaviour of people is linked to political/state power
Elias argued new ideals of civility emerged in a royal/aristocratic courts and taken up by emerging absolutist states. These centralising states play a role in Elias’ vision to change/ shape social changes/ behaviour.
Starts in courts, state then moves outwards to others.
Starts in 16thc and operated over long periods so by 18thc there is a cultural purchase of this refinement and civility.
What do states secure?
The monopoly of violence, states in early modern period coalesce their power rather than elites just acting it out.
How are relationships changing?
Local elite’s autonomy eroded but absolute states can’t be solely absolute, they need the support of local power
Changing ethos of local notable/elites, their honour/ public authority is redefined. Authority is no longer dependent on role in local environment but redefined in terms of loyalty to local sovereign.
There is now an emphasis on martial virtue. Now a respectful public servant and greater standards of self-discipline. No longer warriors fighting to retain.
Over long period, states change behaviour of certain people.
What was violence like in early modern society?
Violence integrated into violence of daily life, written into discourse of daily life.
Rules governing range of forms of violence = violence is ritualized.
Not just example of chaos, when look at court cases and witness of such events, pick apart rules they think should apply, witness may comment negatively when people break those rules of a rules less battle. Ironic e.g two fight, one uses glass as weapon, break rule even though rule less.
Sports/past time, football very violent.
Subject to informal disapprovement and illegal.
Some forms of violence legitimate in certain conditions, acceptable limits to kind of violent behaviour e.g torture by state is legitimate, public punishment enacted by states whipping, death penalty is legitimate.
Does violence change?
Yes.
The amount of this kind of violence declines over 17th 18th c.
Violence becomes less acceptable in public, and in many cases domesticated.
The development of states, social and cultural changes allow this to happen.
What did Julius Ruff think?
‘Violence in Early Modern EU’
Modern preoccupations with the problem of violence are not unique, and that late medieval and early modern European societies produced levels of violence that may have exceeded those in the most violent modern inner-city neighborhoods.
What were attitude towards murder?
Criminal historians say murder well documented, not a lot of murders go unmentioned. In England, the chart shows clear downward trend, steep decline, matches argument of Lawrence stone.
Decline in murder prosecution, fairly good measure of occurrence of murder even though they aren’t the same thing.
Not just decline in no., changing characters in murder that are prosecutes, murder become less public, private houses, enclosed social spaces e.g coffee houses. Increasingly caused by domestic disputes, in London these include fromn17 percent to 30 by end of 18thc (Homicide in family affair increasingly. Literal domestication of violence, setting it within the homes.)
What were the problems with recording violence?
Problems in charting changing level of violence in any society- forms, currency of violent acts not recorded, how do you measure how violent today’s society is todays versus old society. Measured through legal prosecution, not all violence prosecuted when seen as legitimate.
Does the domestication mean violence disappears?
It’s just less public, it continues.
What did Shoemaker argue?
Violence around honour declines.
Violence, a legitimate response when man’s honour called into questions. Violence seen as legit response to insult/ certain kinds of words. E.g cuckholding can’t satisfy wife so she commits adultery, insult to man can’t satisfy wife sexually.
A man must defend reputation.
1681 army captain flew into argument to major so major drew sword. Sense of codes of behaviour, like rules that you can/cannot say so when broken have to defend them. Have no choice to defend insulted honour.
What was the role of duelling?
Semi ritualized fights between two men usually. Violence is delayed/ regimented forms of fighting, not planned.
The invention of duel 16thc, replaces less ritualized spontaneous forms of violence so perhaps an example of domestication.
Rules are established and they are codified in print.
Duels continue into 19thc.
Increasingly less public, away from public eye
E.g Mr putlteneys duel with lord Harvey 1730-34. Happened at dawn, rules that governed duels change over times especially weapons allowed to use. Swords are gradually replaced with pistols.
18thc pistols notoriously unpredictable and difficult to aim, pistols less deadly that blades/swords. The pointless of duel is mocked e.g miss kitty in dispute or new mode of fighting a dual with weapons (suggests men have been feminised)
Loses some of its power, danger.
What did Mooreur? See duels as?
Explanation of the origins of duel comes from Italy,
As a civilising process of elites.
Refinement in duel reflects the inner self control of men engaged ina activity. The duel, though a fight, is a way a man demonstrated refinement and repress more violent emotions/ passions
The role of official punishments?
Crowds came to watch all types of violence.
States inflicted violence on populations, e.g hanging, ties to posts and strangled (common for women), beheading (for nobles common) burning at stakes (witches, and some heretic arsonists), drawn quartered (treason)
Corporal punishments branding whipping amputations blinding piercing of sponge. Pillory (involves crows in process of state punishment)
Carries out in public, designed to demonsatrate wages of sin to mass public, act as deterrents. Without polic forces, this is best way of policing. Era of fear, showing by example.
