Husbondret. Rettighedskulturer i Danmark 1750-1920

See English abstract below

Anette Faye Jacobsen kortlægger i dette værk, hvordan en traditionel rettighedskultur i Danmark i tiden 1750-1920 fastholdt en social og juridisk praksis, der var både hierarkisk og kollektiv. Her var husbonden – der kunne være gårdmand, godsejer eller håndværksmester – tildelt en omfattende magt over sin husstand, og han kunne frit disponere over og straffe sine underordnede inden for husstandens rammer.

I bogen bliver det klart, hvordan en stor del af lovgivningen og retspraksis var indrettet på ligefrem at understøtte disse særlige beføjelser.

Også udadtil repræsenterede husbond sin husstand. Det var derfor ham, der fik politiske rettigheder, først i 1830’ernes Rådgivende Stænderforsamlinger og siden i Rigsdagen.

Det påvises i bogen, at når der blev krævet valgret og ligestilling i 1800-tallets politiske kampe, var det underforstået, at det altid var husbondens rettigheder, man talte om.

Husbondret. Rettighedskulturer i Danmark 1750-1920 fungerer både som tværvidenskabelig analyse af rettighedstænkning i Danmark i overgangen til det moderne og som historisk håndbog til det 18. og 19. århundredes juridiske og politiske tænkning.

Værket udgør den første analyse på dansk af rets- og statsfilosofi, retssystematik og -praksis med et begrebshistorisk og retspluralistisk udgangspunkt

Abstract in English:

Master’s Rights. Rights Cultures in Denmark, 1750–1920 describes historically how juridical and political rights were perceived in relation to the individual’s position within the household: the peasant’s household as well as the landlord’s including tenants and other servants.

The book explains the master’s role as a rights holder on behalf of the entire household. This privileged position of the household head influenced the distribution of rights in legislation and legal practise from the time of the great statute compilation Danish Law (1683) and until the beginning of the 20th Century. A similar perception of rights was prevalent in the constitutional development evolving from 1830’s up until the constitutional reform in 1915. The individual was not regarded as a rights holder per se in law and politics but rather as a member of a household unity, and it was the position herein that decided his or her civil and legal status.

The book takes a conceptual history and legal pluralist approach, and for the first time in Danish offers a multidisciplinary analysis of legal and state philosophy, law dogmatic and practice in a political historical context. Moreover, it may serve as the historian’s handbook to Danish legal and political thinking in the 18th and 19th Century.