Full resolution (JPEG) - On this page / på denna sida - VII. Land and People during the Catholic Period
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
Below is the raw OCR text
from the above scanned image.
Do you see an error? Proofread the page now!
Här nedan syns maskintolkade texten från faksimilbilden ovan.
Ser du något fel? Korrekturläs sidan nu!
This page has never been proofread. / Denna sida har aldrig korrekturlästs.
84 Pr0tech°a?ac[erriTaie HISTORY OF THE SWEDES.
by the cardinal points *. So late as the thirteenth
century, although piracy was no longer followed as
a vocation, the peasant had not abandoned the old
custom of sending off his sons to sea, that he might
gain skill and substance upon the waters, or else in
the households of the great
Life and honour as well as property were placed
under the common protection of the kindred.
Good name and repute were so narrowly looked to,
that when, after a previous legal betrothment
(which the families thereby connected treated as an
affair of high importance), the bride took back her
word, she was obliged to restore the spousal
presents, to pay a fine of three marks, and to take
an oath before twelve men, " that she now knew of
no more defects or vices in her former wooer and
his family, than when she was sought by him and
betrothed." The same law ordained that " if the
man’s liking changed," the spousal presents could
not be demanded back6. An insult must be
wiped out by blood, and the law of Upland quotes
as a provision " of the old law which was used in
the heathen time," that whosoever upbraided
another, as not being " a man’s match, nor a man
in his heart," should render himself to do battle
with the man he had insulted, at a spot where
three ways met. If the person against whom the
words had been spoken came not to the meeting, it
is said, then must he needs be such a one as he
hath been called, and can never again bear valid
testimony, nor take oath. If the person who spoke
the words came not, he was to be publicly
proclaimed infamous (niding), and a memorial of the
fact must be erected at the spot7.
Revenge for blood was a sacred obligation, and a
right acknowledged by law ; it was at once the
dearest heritage 8, and the condition of every other,
for in the olden time, if the father lay slain, the
son could not inherit until he had avenged him.
But in order that revenge might not continually
generate new revenge, the law essayed its earliest
exercise of authority in reconcilement. The
homicide, if he was not taken in the fact, must himself
give it publicity ; for to kill secretly was murder
and an infamous crime. He was bound to give
himself up before night-fall9, and afterwards to
appear in the court under safeconduct, where he
might offer a price in atonement of his offence. To
the prosecutor was left open the alternative of
avenging himself or of accepting the fine ; the
latter, however, was at first so rare, that the law of
Gottland declared him who accepted it at the first
offer, even after the expiration of a year, to be a
shameless person. Meanwhile, the perpetrator was
an outlaw without peace and right, obliged to flee
the neighbourhood of inhabited places and retire to
forests and wildernesses. Hence it was said of the
man who sought to atone for his crime by bote,
4 In the division of landed property the laws required that
the ground should be measured by the site of the courtilege,
or as they express it, " the homestead is the mother of the
croft " (tomt ar tegs moder), no doubt in the view that each
might have his lot near hand. In a legal division it was
also a general maxim that all should share alike " in good
and bad, in the best and in the worst," as well in respect to
fields and meadows as forests.
5 Law of the East-Goths, Drap B. f. 5.
8 Law of Westmanland, Arf B. f. 4.
7 Such a mark was called Nidstang. (Niding is our word,
niding, niderling. T.)
Homicides outlawed.
The man-Dote.
that he must "ransom himself from the wood."
With the criminal himself, his father, son, brother,
or nearest relatives were, in old times, obliged to
flee 1 ; only certain times or places consecrated to
peace gave them security. This outlawry was in fact
intended less as a punishment than as a means of
safety for the accused. Even the severe Magnus
Ladulas says of the man who flees from revenge,
that " he may hide himself from his enemies as
well as he can2 ;" and after the ordinary wearing
of arms was forbidden, one in such circumstances
was still allowed " to carry full arms for his defence,
if he will offer botes and amend his fault3." But
on the other side it is said, ’’ the homicide shall
never regain his peace until the lawful heir of the
slain man entreats for him, except when the king
is newly-elected, rides his Ericsgait, and makes his
entry into the province ; then may he grant peace
to three men 4." Yet to this peace they were not
admitted before the heirs were appeased by the
payment of the mulct. For the murder of a man
who was so old that he could not cume to the
court,nor walk without a crutch (kroklokarl,
crutch-man), and for the murder of a woman, a double
mulct was paid. Whosoever broke the
home-peace of any man, and was killed in his assault
within the curtilege, lay unavenged, or was left
" with his deeds."
The compensation was at first paid partly to the
nearest heirs, on whom the exaction of revenge
was incumbent, and partly to the kindred of the
slain man by that of the slayer5. The offender
was besides required to swear with twelve men of
his family, that he would himself be content under
like circumstances with an equal bote. This was
called the oath of parity, corresponding to the oath
of surety6, by which all further revenge was
renounced. The slayer was, besides, for breaking the
peace obliged to pay fines to the king and the
hundred, which is thus shown to have formed
a union for the maintenance of the public
tranquillity. The share of the hundred in the fine
represents that of the people ; hence it is said to
have been paid " to all men," and was probably of
older standing than that of the king, which seems at
first to have been paid only when he gave
judgment in person. With the extension of the royal
power the kin-bote gradually ceased 7, and the fine
went in three parts, to the king, the hundred, and
the prosecutor, whose right to personal revenge
was more and more limited, until at length
homicide, unless excused by imminent danger to life,
was capitally punished, when the offender was
caught in the fact. In other cases, if the
perpetrator came before the king, or whosoever speaks
his doom in Sweden, and confessed his crime, he
was still permitted by the Land’s Law of 1442, to
s It was called vig-arf, hereditary feud. Law of the
Hel-singers, Arf. B. f. 15.
9 Dale Law, Manh. B. f. 22.
1 Law of Gottland, c. 13.
2 Ordinance ofSkenninge, 1285.
3 King Magnus Ericson’s ordinance of 13.35,
4 Law of the East-Goths, Drap B. f 5.
5 sEttar-bot, kin-bote.
6 Jamnader-ed. Tryghder ed. Compare Law of Scania,
v. 30.
7 In the laws of the Gotlilands and Helsingland we find it
retained, and it was first entirely abolished by king Magnus
Ericson, in the ordinance of Skara, 1335.
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
