Verrat!

Autor(en)

Tim Neu

Abstrakt

Treason seems to be a universal phenomenon: Whether Brutus in Antiquity, Benedict Arnold in early modern times or Chelsea Manning today, if certain actions are regarded as a breach of trust, they are always labelled as treason. Considering the seriousness of this allegation, the article takes as a starting point the surprising fact that during a crisis precipitated by the Thirty Years War, the Hessian nobles were labelled traitors in 1623, but all charges were dropped as soon as 1625. The article shows that interpreting actions as treason is not a neutral description, but rather a performative speech act exacerbating the underlying conflict. Against this background it seems even more surprising that the Hessian elites stopped speaking of treason in spite of being mutually involved in a conflict, but this can be explained by the fact that a definitive break-up the default outcome in cases of treason was not an option due to socio-political constraints, neither for the landgrave nor the noble. To re-establish a working relationship, the nobles had to turn from treasonous enemies into loyal subjects again at least in discourse.

Organisation(en)

Institut für Geschichte

Journal

Saeculum: Jahrbuch für Universalgeschichte

Band

67

Seiten

103-122

ISSN

0080-5319

DOI

https://doi.org/10.7788/saeculum-2017-0107

Publikationsdatum

2017

Peer-reviewed

Ja

ÖFOS 2012

601020 Regionalgeschichte, 601014 Neuere Geschichte

ASJC Scopus Sachgebiete

History

Link zum Portal

https://ucris.univie.ac.at/portal/de/publications/verrat(904777c8-3e23-48da-bb05-69f508ea4026).html