There were many ways of bordering manliness during the historical period covered by my research. Borders have been metaphorically understood as those invisible, often non-enunciated limits that have safeguarded manliness. There were borders separating masculinity from femininity and from childishnes, but there is also a more distant border, separating masculinity from the bestial. The term un-manliness is a useful concept for this analysis, for it can be used to illuminate the different ways in which masculinity has been interrogated. The concept can also be used in comparative analyses of how tolerance towards men deviating from ideas of ideal masculinity has differed according to situation and culture. It has been my ambition to elucidate the particular attitudes, values, customs, knowledge and requirements that influenced the view of masculinity at both individual and the group level. The clearest-cut aspects of manliness and un-manliness expressed in court proceedings were those having to do with sexuality, relations within the household, and the subordinate and dominant masculinities displayed by different court-room actors. The latter, in turn, reflected contemporary social structures, including the social gap that divided the Livonian peasantry’s serfs or former serfs from the ruling Baltic-German elite. Records from the court proceedings have shown the subordinate masculinity of the defendants, subordinate not only to that of the officers of the court but to that of the witnesses. This subordination was an inevitable consequence of the nature of the accusations, regardless of whether they were deemed well-founded or false.  The defendants were placed in a situation where they were forced constantly to be on the alert, ready to defend themselves and show their best sides. As a result, they would often give extremely clear expression to their views of proper masculinity. Such actors stressed, consciously or unconsciously, certain manly traits and behaviour patterns that characterised themselves and others. Their arguments provide insights into what they thought of each other and how they conceived a man should generally be, behave and act in different situations. By the same token, they clearly showed what kinds of behaviours were considered undesirable or outright unmanly. The positioning of the borders of manliness was linked both to time and to space. Deviations have helped different societies set the borders for what they considered acceptable behaviour. There was a clear cultural and geographical border between Sweden as such, and the Swedish province Livonia. This emerges clearly when one compares Livonian results with earlier studies on bestiality in Sweden. This shows that the view of manliness and the tolerance towards certain kinds of behaviour changed as one moved East.

Vilhelm Moberg (1898–1973) var en av sin tids mest inflytelserika svenska författare. De fyra romanerna i hans episka utvandrarserie hör de till de mest lästa svenska romanerna genom tiderna. Trots att forskningsfältet om Moberg är stort har hans verk hitintills inte analyserats utifrån ett queerperspektiv. Syftet med denna magisteruppsats är att göra en queer läsning av Mobergs utvandrarserie, med fokus på relationen mellan Robert och Arvid. Dessa unga drängars relation har sällan givits utrymme inom Mobergforskningen och när den omnämnts har den lästs som kamratskap. Min hypotes är att det, trots indikationerna på ett homofobt förhållningssätt hos Moberg vid tiden för utvandrarseriens tillkomst, är möjligt att läsa fram en romantisk kärlekshistoria mellan männen. I uppsatsen lyfts frågeställningen om huruvida textens djur, djuriskhet och djursymbolik öppnar upp för att läsa fram de unga männens kärlekshistoria. Tidelagstemat som i utvandrarserien är förbundet med Arvid kan förstås som en omskrivning för homosexualitet, vilket ihop med queerbetonad djursymbolik som i texten omgärdar Robert, framhäver deras icke-utskrivna begär och kärlek. Analysen synliggör den dikotomi mellan manlighet och omanlighet som i romanerna gestaltas genom Robert och hans storebror Karl Oskar. Storebrodern tillskrivs stark karaktär, individualism och arbetsstyrka, egenskaper som historiskt sett kategoriserats som manliga. Robert skrivs fram som arbetsskygg, lögnaktig och med ett infantilt drömmande om guld och rikedom, egenskaper som kategoriseras som omanliga. Analysen påvisar att i likhet med tidelagstemat kan också omanligheten läsas som en omskrivning för homosexualitet. Frågan om huruvida Mobergs föreställning om homosexualitet som ett ”olycksöde” har haft konsekvenser för gestaltningen av Robert och Arvid, genomsyrar analysen. Avsikten med detta har inte varit att smutskasta Moberg utan att lyfta det motsägelsefulla med hans homofoba hållning då det i denna uppsats fastställs att han författat en vacker kärlekshistoria om två unga män. / Vilhelm Moberg (1898–1973) was one of the most influential Swedish writers of his time. His epic The Emigrants with its four parts are among the most read Swedish novels of all time. The field of research about Moberg is large; despite this none of his works have been analyzed from a queer angle until now. The purpose of this master’s thesis (one year) is to do a queer reading of Moberg’s The Emigrants, focusing on the relationship between Robert and Arvid. The bond between these young farmhands has rarely been given attention within the research about Vilhelm Moberg; when it is mentioned in previous research, it’s perceived as camaraderie. My hypothesis is that, despite indications of a homophobic attitude in Moberg, it is possible to make visible a romantic love story between these men. In this thesis, a question regarding whether animals, animality or animal symbolism in the text makes the young men’s love story increasingly visible, is raised. The theme of bestiality in The Emigrants coincides with Arvid, and can be seen as a synonym for homosexuality. In combination with queer animal symbolism surrounding Robert, the men’s hidden desire and love is enhanced. The analysis highlights a dichotomy between masculinity and unmanliness that is portrayed through the relationship between Robert and his older brother Karl Oskar. The latter is being ascribed traditionally masculine traits, such as resilient character, individualism and physical ability for labor, whereas Robert is associated with unmanly attributes such as laziness, untrustworthiness, and an infantile longing for gold and riches. The analysis shows that Robert’s unmanliness, just as the bestiality theme, is a synonym for homosexuality. The question as to whether Moberg’s impression that homosexuality is an “unfortunate fate” has had consequences for to the portrayal of Robert and Arvid, permeates this analysis. The purpose has not been to smear Moberg but to highlight the paradox of his homophobic stance, since this thesis conclusively determines that he has written a beautiful love story involving two young men.