Normative competition and the early modern culture of ambiguity : [Rezension zu: Arne Karsten, Hillard von Thiessen (eds.), Normenkonkurrenz in historischer Perspektive (Zeitschrift für Historische Forschung, Beihefte, 50), Berlin: Duncker & Humblot 2015, 343 p., ISBN 978-3-428-84635-1]

This special issue of one of the leading German historical journals features case studies and a theoretical model to conceptualize multinormativity in the early modern period. The overarching concept that holds the contr
This special issue of one of the leading German historical journals features case studies and a theoretical model to conceptualize multinormativity in the early modern period. The overarching concept that holds the contributions together is that of "normative competition" (Normenkonkurrenz), developed by Hillard von Thiessen. It offers a dynamic, interactive, and actor-centered approach to the co-existence of potentially conflicting normative orders in the early modern period. Von Thiessen draws attention to the manifold ways in which subjects consciously or unconsciously contribute to the shape and operation of norms. He offers an alternative to existing models that try to describe and explain normative change in the early modern period, such as Gerhard Oestreich’s model of "social discipline" (Sozialdisziplinierung) and Wolfgang Reinhard and Heinz Schilling’s model of"confessionalization" (Konfessionalisierung). In von Thiessen’s view, these models are inadequate. They are implicitly indebted to Max Weber’s paradigm of the gradual rationalization of Western civilization, and they assume a static opposition between norm-creating authorities and norm-receiving subjects. The models of "social discipline" and "confessionalization" start from the belief that citizens’ behavior gradually and homogeneously adapted to the norms laid down by the authorities. Recent historical scholarship has demonstrated that the top-down imposition of norms by state authorities and religious institutions often failed. A gap existed between the norms on the books and the norms in action, to the extent that daily life deviated from norms imposed by central authorities like the state or religious institutions in the first place. Von Thiessen, however, wants to avoid narratives of failure or success. Rather than starting from an antagonistic vision that pits institutional norm-producers against passive norm-receiving subjects, von Thiessen emphasizes the synergistic role played by all actors in the production and implementation of norms. ...
show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

  • Export Bibtex
  • Export RIS
Metadaten
Author:Wim Decock
URN:urn:nbn:de:hebis:30:3-527850
DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.12946/rg26/416-418
ISSN:2195-9617
ISSN:1619-4993
Parent Title (Multiple):Rechtsgeschichte = Legal History
Publisher:Max-Planck-Inst. für Europäische Rechtsgeschichte
Place of publication:Frankfurt, M.
Contributor(s):Thomas Duve, Stefan Vogenauer
Document Type:Review
Language:English
Year of Completion:2018
Year of first Publication:2018
Publishing Institution:Universitätsbibliothek Johann Christian Senckenberg
Release Date:2020/01/20
Volume:26
Pagenumber:4
First Page:416
Last Page:418
Note:
Dieser Beitrag steht unter einer Creative Commons cc-by-nc-nd 3.0
Institutes:LOEWE-Schwerpunkt Außergerichtliche und gerichtliche Konfliktlösung
Dewey Decimal Classification:340 Recht
Sammlungen:Universitätspublikationen
Licence (German):License LogoCreative Commons - Namensnennung-Nicht kommerziell-Keine Bearbeitung 3.0

$Rev: 11761 $