Saga - 2020, Qupperneq 121

urnar að draga kærurnar til baka. Þar gæti hafa ráðið að einhverju
leyti ótti kvennanna um viðbrögð eiginmannanna og þær ekki séð
neinn tilgang í því að viðhalda kæruferli gagnvart maka, fyrirvinnu
heimilisins. Eins og fram hefur komið tóku mál kvennanna ólíka
stefnu en viðleitni þeirra og frumkvæði að kæra háttsemi eigin-
manna sinna er vitnisburður um að þær hafi ekki talið sig eiga að
búa við eða sætta sig við ofbeldi í hjónabandi. Afstaða þessara
kvenna og dómaranna í málum þeirra er til vitnis um að heimilis -
ofbeldi hafi ekki verið liðið í íslensku samfélagi á tímabilinu.
Abstract
brynja björnsdóttir
My RIGHT AGAINST SUCH AN UNCHRISTIAN HUSBAND. MARITAL VIO-
LENCE AND WOMEN’S LEGAL RIGHTS 1800‒1940
Historically speaking, the existence of domestic violence in Icelandic homes has
only recently been brought into the public discourse. The hidden violence found
in the home was one of the major calls to arms for the women’s rights movements
of the 1990s. They encouraged the public and the government to consider do -
mestic violence, which is mostly directed against women, a societal problem
rather than a private matter. In 2016, almost three decades later, an additional pro-
vision was added to the 1940 General Penal Code to specifically address violence
within intimate relationships and provide additional protection to victims of
domestic violence. As this article makes clear, this provision was not entirely new
but rather a return to an equivalent clause found in the 1869 General Penal Code
and its predecessor; the Danish-Norwegian laws written at the end of the seven-
teenth century during the reign of Christian V of Denmark. When the Danish
laws came into force, medieval laws that stipulated a husband’s right to chastise
his wife were repealed and new provisions introduced which secured the rights
of both parties to charge their spouse for a violent act. The existence of the afore-
mentioned legal provisions on domestic violence reflect the legislative view that
such acts should not be tolerated and be punishable by law. Icelandic medieval
law book Jónsbók contain no provisions that stipulate a husband’s right to
chastise his wife. Such provisions are also not included in a 1746 domestic disci-
pline decree which states that the master and mistress of the house have the right
to inflict corporal punishment upon their children and servants. Temporary
uncertainty regarding active laws and the general penal code’s vague phrasing of
what constituted a husband’s unchristian or tyrannical treatment or abuse of his
wife did not stop wives from bringing their husbands to court for domestic abuse.
Regardless of the seriousness of the violence that the women were subjected to by
minn réttur … 119