Violence Flashcards
Violence on Film
Medieval violence as brutal Medieval violence has own norms Military violence Juridicial violence Religious violence & on Film
Medieval violence as brutal
Childish lack of control "Analogue of the negatively construed West" Distancing ourselves from violence "Othering" Inter-connection
Medieval violence not more brutal & w/ own norms
Not more violent Statistical analysis Consensus - own norms Centrality to identity formation Insiders vs outsiders Concepts of cruelty Gillingham, slavery & non-combatants
Military violence
War different? Profit during war Heroism in profit & prowess Chivalry Battles - set piece battles VS sieges Immediacy of violence
Juridicial violence
Law itself violent Interpersonal violence quasi-legal Attempts to codify Torture Ruler's legitimate violence Individual legitimate violence
Religious violence
God's legitimacy Knights & God Crusades Different conventions for Christian / non-Christian places Legitimate religious violence Divine punishment / God's violence
Reasons for MA to ignore medieval norms
Appealing to modern audience w/ different norms Entertainment - Visually pleasing set-piece battles - Shock factor Back story for sympathy Cultural power Legitimising current violence Reflecting on modern violence in safe context Exploring own personal existential drama Ignorance
BRUTAL MED VIOLENCE 1
Childish lack of control
Jan Huizinga - 1919 - the Waning of the Middle Ages: childlike nature of medieval violence / emotional life.
Norbert Elias - the Civilising Process - 1939: “People [in the MA] are wild, cruel, prone to violent outbreaks and abandoned to the joy of the moment”.
BRUTAL MED VIOLENCE 2
“analogue of the negatively construed West”
Thierry & Falk: “analogue of a negatively construed West” - operates in much the same way as modern violence, but in its darkest form - repressive states, persecuting majorities, patriarchal structures - “darkly familar”
Continuing to see violence as “top-down”, excluding intra group violence or patterns of us/them in MA - Christians against Muslims, men against women
Current concerns - “ethnic nationalism and international conflicts”.
BRUTAL MED VIOLENCE 3
Making violence seem “Other”
Skoda: associated w/ unwanted groups, used to marginalize.
Tracy - chat about sadistic torture - torture-legislation and War on Terror - trying to distance ourselves from violence/torture in modern era by situating it in the past, convincing ourselves we are not as violent as medieval society.
Tracy cont. same sort of Othering occurred in the MA as early as the 12th c, throughout the 13-14th centuries - culture-based radical identities.
Identity formation & violence.
BRUTAL MED VIOLENCE 4
Inter-connection
Prevalence of contemporary violence
Violence as structuring power relations today (Skoda) - esp. b/c growth of monopoly of state violence from MA.
MED VIOLENCE NORMS 1
Not more violent
Finch: Over-focus on homicide - in focuses on diocese of Bayeux, records on and off again from 1314-1486 - most men could only expect to be involved in one act of physical violence. Male-dominated; some groups more involved than others.
Brown: statistics unreliable b/c unclear about population, less dangerous weapons vs less good hospitals - but roughly comparable.
J. B. Given - 13th c English eyre roles - homicide high.
P. C. Maddern - violence in statistics either legal fiction or low key - but generally acceptable.
MED VIOLENCE NORMS 2
Norms
Internally coherent rules, conventions & behaviours, inc “aberrant violence”
Change over time
Different communities, different perspectives
Skoda:
- Could be ordering / disordering.
- Formation of identity.
Thierry & Falk: “form of social discourse”
Tracy: T&F over-normalise violence.
Brown:
- Legitimate individual violence.
- Needs of ruler first.
MED VIOLENCE NORMS 3
Insiders Vs Outsiders
Norms dependent on whether individual is “inside” or “outside”.
National vs international - 21st c.
Less clear / smaller but socio-economic distinctions biggest part of inside/outside distinctions.
MED VIOLENCE NORMS 4
Concepts of cruelty & Gillingham on slaves, non-combatants etc
Slavery: Gillingham - non-combatants - 11th c- early ma, enslavements of non-combatants legitimate - slavery ends in Christian West, no longer legitimate - hurt, but not deliberately (but Rus - more complicated).
Criticising other’s excessive violence & actions contrary to their own
Richard of Hexham’s account of King David 1 of Scotland invasions of the north of England (Gillingham)
Tracy & the criticism of torture.
MILITARY VIOLENCE 1
War difference?
Brown: early MA - neighbouring kings / neighbouring knights - warred for same reasons on different social scale - only near the end, big royal wars viewed differently.
MILITARY VIOLENCE 2
Profit during war - Heroism in profit & prowess
Expectation that war would be profitable (Gillingham)
Booty as indicating knightly heroism
Deeds convey valour (Kaepur)
Importance of being “first among many”
Violence & heroism not contradictory
MILITARY VIOLENCE 3
Chivalry
Contradictory norms
Protection of women? Against whom? Left widows, orphans, destitute farmers in their wake. Ladies only slightly more secured. Mere women - sexual prey.
Licit violence of knights - Kaepur - some degree of juridiction - elite arms bearers. Sense of sacred honour. Change [/time] w/ increasing royal monopoly on licit violence.
JUDICIAL VIOLENCE 1
Torture
Image: torture inflicted w/ impunity - w/o provocation - Tracy
Legal torture/illegal torture:
- More common in continental jurisprudence - particularly in France - French inquisitorial procedure
- Also used in Italian city-states, German principalities, Flanders & Spain (though these countries still produced literature that rejected it).
- No part of English law
Constructed as cruel / Other - Tracy sees portrayals of torture/brutality in literature - indicative of satire, critique, dissent - didactic and political functions.
Contemporaries aware of dangers.
Distinction between torture & punishment.
JUDICIAL VIOLENCE 2
Ruler’s legitimate violence + Individual legitimate violence
State monopoly on violence in 21st century (Brown)
God legitimising the king - increasing monopoly on war
Brown: for most of MA, “a person’s right to wield violence on his own behalf and in his own interests was assumed”, right person / right reasons.
RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE 1
God’s legitimacy
Thierry & Falk: groups employing violence under the veil of divine will.
Neo-Carolingian kingly impulse to extend duty to God > claim to regulate violence. Angevins.
RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE 2
Knights & God (Kaepur)
Practised piety / legitimacy - considered faithful sons of the church - asserting God’s blessing on their violent & demanding lives. God is the fountainhead of chivalry. Kaepur.
Semi-independence - ability to reject some things - purposefully selected or rejected - clerical dictates on matter of tournament - sexuality, warfare.
Self-sacrificing element?
RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE 3
Different conventions for Christian / non-Christian places
Weird in between space w/ non-Catholic Christianity
Knights still fought fellow Christians by brutal methods
Attitudes to Rus change over time - get worse (Gillingham)
RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE 4
Legitimate religious violence
Religious men could be violent themselves
Other could legitimately be violent on their behalf
Saints often violent
