Killing in Ireland at the Turn of the Centuries

Abstract

This diminution in violent death has been found in other countries and over longer time periods. Stone observed that: 'It looks as if the homicide rates in thirteenth-century England were about twice as high as those in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and that those of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were some five to ten times higher than those today.' 3 Stone's article generated a lively debate around questions of methodology and interpretation, in particular the extent to which rates could be derived with confidence when population estimates were uncertain, the degree to which shifts in annual counts of homicide reflected changes in quotidian brutishness and hostility, and the relationship between better medical treatment and the death rate from assaults. 4 However, it is probably fair to say that a consensus now exists concerning the trajectory of lethal violence, while competing claims may remain regarding its magnitude and meaning. In his wide-ranging crossnational review of historical trends in violent crime, Eisner concluded that 'the evidence is so consistent, the secular decline so regular, and the differences in levels so large, that it seems difficult to refute the conclusion of a real and notable decline '. 5 But how to make sense of this pattern? Some scholars have drawn on the work of Norbert Elias to elaborate a theoretical frame of reference that aids understanding of the changing nature of aggression. 6 In broad terms, Elias argued that the passage of time was marked by increasing internal controls on the expression of violence. The 2 growth of the state led to higher levels of personal security and stability. These allowed the development of a market economy and the establishment of complex webs of interdependence. Open displays of aggression were replaced by codes of etiquette and manners; violence was pushed behind the scenes. These social and psychological changes, described as a 'civilizing process' by Elias, took place over several centuries. A tension existed between an emerging civilized mentality that idealized self-restraint and abhorred naked aggression, and more deeply-rooted customary notions that saw direct confrontation as legitimate, necessary and even playful. The customary mentality was defined by a preference for physical retribution, an emphasis on community autonomy, and the maintenance of norms through fist and fear.The tendency towards refinement was characterized by a progressive narrowing of the circumstances where violence could be justified (with the remainder dismissed as the product of unfathomable rage and atavistic savagery), together with a determined linking of violence to social causes and effects. This process started with the élite and then filtered down the social hierarchy. The further that the middle classes distanced themselves from violence the more they were repulsed by the working-class enthusiasm to resolve conflict through blood letting. Infanticides are excluded from the results shown below on the basis that very little informa...