Violence and the civilizing process : does it work ?

Abstract

Among historians, especially those investigating violence, Norbert Elias ' theory of civilization has received divergent appreciations recently. In the Anglo-Saxon world, notably in North America, it has obtained increasing recognition over the last ten years or so. In particular, many authors agree that he offers the only theoretical framework which easily accomodates the empirical evidence on the long-term decline of homicide. Conversely, in Continental Europe during the 1990s, a number of historians, notably German historians of crime, have criticized Elias' work. In this discussion, too, the subject of violence looms large.This discussion article confronts the criticism levelled at the theory of civilization, in so far as it pertains to violence. It deals with four broad clusters of problems : (1) the reliability and validity of the evidence for the long-term trend of declining violence ; (2) the character of violence, in particular its function as an indicator for the level of behavioral control ; (3) the interdependence of long-term change in the field of aggression and human emotions on the one hand and the overall development of society on the other ; (4) the new wave of interpersonal violence in the Western world in the late twentieth century.It will be concluded that research on the long-term development of homicide over the last twenty years has yielded impressive new evidence for the theory of civilization, which some historians nevertheless tend to ignore or attempt to explain away. The only objection to the theory not based on a misinterpretation refers to the historical study of honor and ritual. None of the data generated by this research, however, are incompatible with the processes first observed by Elias. Contrary to what his critics assume, the theory of civilization invites creative elaboration, which should be the aim of future research.