暴力是维京社会的透镜:挪威和丹麦的比较

IF 2 1区 社会学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY
Jan Bill , David Jacobson , Susanne Nagel , Lisa Mariann Strand
{"title":"暴力是维京社会的透镜:挪威和丹麦的比较","authors":"Jan Bill ,&nbsp;David Jacobson ,&nbsp;Susanne Nagel ,&nbsp;Lisa Mariann Strand","doi":"10.1016/j.jaa.2024.101605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Comparing Viking Age Norway and Denmark, the article examines the primary proposition that as centers of authority become progressively more robust, violence will be proportionately contained. The article introduces a new approach in using indications of violence as a focal point to elicit broader social practices. The disciplines employed in this study – archaeology, osteology, philology, and sociology – are used together in the study of covariance of different indicators across a societal range. The indicators for assessing violence include skeletal trauma and weapon frequency. For assessing the steepness of the social pyramid, we use runestones, indicating variations in social stratification, and monumental constructions as a measure of power to command labor. Among the findings: weapons and interpersonal violence in Norway was much more widespread than in Denmark, and the social pyramid in Denmark was progressively steeper and more complex than in Norway. “Official” executions accounted for the preponderance of violence in Denmark, while rare in Norway. Denmark was evidently a more “civilianized” society than Norway. The comparative research supports the primary proposition. The research, furthermore, suggests that Denmark and Norway were sociologically distinct societies, which accords with recent findings that the respective regions displayed distinct, though still similar, genetic profiles.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47957,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anthropological Archaeology","volume":"75 ","pages":"Article 101605"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278416524000369/pdfft?md5=c58b4c460df561af098c193d7885304b&pid=1-s2.0-S0278416524000369-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Violence as a lens to Viking societies: A comparison of Norway and Denmark\",\"authors\":\"Jan Bill ,&nbsp;David Jacobson ,&nbsp;Susanne Nagel ,&nbsp;Lisa Mariann Strand\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jaa.2024.101605\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Comparing Viking Age Norway and Denmark, the article examines the primary proposition that as centers of authority become progressively more robust, violence will be proportionately contained. The article introduces a new approach in using indications of violence as a focal point to elicit broader social practices. The disciplines employed in this study – archaeology, osteology, philology, and sociology – are used together in the study of covariance of different indicators across a societal range. The indicators for assessing violence include skeletal trauma and weapon frequency. For assessing the steepness of the social pyramid, we use runestones, indicating variations in social stratification, and monumental constructions as a measure of power to command labor. Among the findings: weapons and interpersonal violence in Norway was much more widespread than in Denmark, and the social pyramid in Denmark was progressively steeper and more complex than in Norway. “Official” executions accounted for the preponderance of violence in Denmark, while rare in Norway. Denmark was evidently a more “civilianized” society than Norway. The comparative research supports the primary proposition. The research, furthermore, suggests that Denmark and Norway were sociologically distinct societies, which accords with recent findings that the respective regions displayed distinct, though still similar, genetic profiles.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47957,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Anthropological Archaeology\",\"volume\":\"75 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101605\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278416524000369/pdfft?md5=c58b4c460df561af098c193d7885304b&pid=1-s2.0-S0278416524000369-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Anthropological Archaeology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278416524000369\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anthropological Archaeology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278416524000369","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

文章比较了维京时代的挪威和丹麦,探讨了这样一个主要命题,即随着权力中心逐渐强大,暴力也会相应地受到遏制。文章介绍了一种新方法,即以暴力迹象为焦点,引出更广泛的社会实践。本研究采用的学科--考古学、骨学、语言学和社会学--共同用于研究社会范围内不同指标的协方差。评估暴力的指标包括骨骼创伤和武器使用频率。在评估社会金字塔的陡峭程度时,我们使用符文石来显示社会阶层的变化,并使用纪念碑建筑来衡量指挥劳动力的权力。研究结果包括:挪威的武器和人际暴力比丹麦普遍得多,丹麦的社会金字塔比挪威更陡峭、更复杂。在丹麦,"官方 "处决占暴力事件的绝大多数,而在挪威则很少见。丹麦显然是一个比挪威更加 "平民化 "的社会。比较研究支持了上述主要命题。此外,研究还表明,丹麦和挪威在社会学上是不同的社会,这与最近的研究结果是一致的,即这两个地区显示出不同的遗传特征,尽管仍然相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Violence as a lens to Viking societies: A comparison of Norway and Denmark

Violence as a lens to Viking societies: A comparison of Norway and Denmark

Violence as a lens to Viking societies: A comparison of Norway and Denmark

Comparing Viking Age Norway and Denmark, the article examines the primary proposition that as centers of authority become progressively more robust, violence will be proportionately contained. The article introduces a new approach in using indications of violence as a focal point to elicit broader social practices. The disciplines employed in this study – archaeology, osteology, philology, and sociology – are used together in the study of covariance of different indicators across a societal range. The indicators for assessing violence include skeletal trauma and weapon frequency. For assessing the steepness of the social pyramid, we use runestones, indicating variations in social stratification, and monumental constructions as a measure of power to command labor. Among the findings: weapons and interpersonal violence in Norway was much more widespread than in Denmark, and the social pyramid in Denmark was progressively steeper and more complex than in Norway. “Official” executions accounted for the preponderance of violence in Denmark, while rare in Norway. Denmark was evidently a more “civilianized” society than Norway. The comparative research supports the primary proposition. The research, furthermore, suggests that Denmark and Norway were sociologically distinct societies, which accords with recent findings that the respective regions displayed distinct, though still similar, genetic profiles.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
11.10%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: An innovative, international publication, the Journal of Anthropological Archaeology is devoted to the development of theory and, in a broad sense, methodology for the systematic and rigorous understanding of the organization, operation, and evolution of human societies. The discipline served by the journal is characterized by its goals and approach, not by geographical or temporal bounds. The data utilized or treated range from the earliest archaeological evidence for the emergence of human culture to historically documented societies and the contemporary observations of the ethnographer, ethnoarchaeologist, sociologist, or geographer. These subjects appear in the journal as examples of cultural organization, operation, and evolution, not as specific historical phenomena.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信