No description available.

No description available.

Count Geoffrey V of Anjou (1129-51) features in Anglo-French historiography as a peripheral figure in the Anglo-Norman succession crisis which followed the death of his father-in-law, Henry I of England and Normandy (1100-35). The few studies which examine him directly do so primarily in this context, dealing briefly with his conquest and short reign as duke of Normandy (1144-50), with reference to a limited range of evidence, primarily Anglo-Norman chronicles. There has never been a comprehensive analysis of Geoffrey’s comital reign, nor a narrative of his entire career, despite an awareness of his importance as a powerful territorial prince and important political player. This thesis establishes a complete narrative framework for Geoffrey’s life and career, and examines the key aspects of his comital and ducal reigns. It compiles and employs a body of 180 acta relating to his Angevin and Norman administrations to do so, alongside narrative evidence from Greater Anjou, Normandy, England and elsewhere. It argues that rule of Greater Anjou prior to 1150 had more in common with neighbouring principalities such as Brittany, whose rulers had emerged in the tenth and eleventh centuries as primus inter pares, than with Normandy, where ducal powers over the native aristocracy were more wide-ranging, or royal government in England. It explores the count’s territories, the personnel of government, the dispensation of justice, revenue collection, the comital army, and Geoffrey’s ability to carry out ‘traditional’ princely duties such as religious patronage in the context of Angevin elite landed society’s virtual autonomy and tendency to rebel in the first half of the twelfth century. The character of Geoffrey’s power and authority was fundamentally shaped by the region’s tenurial and seigneurial history, and could only be conducted within that framework. This study also addresses Geoffrey’s activities as first conqueror then ruler of Normandy. The process by which the duchy was conquered is shown to be more intricate than the chroniclers’ accounts of Angevin siege warfare suggest, and the ducal reign more complex than merely a regency until Geoffrey’s son, the future Henry II (1150-89), came of age. Through use of a much wider body of evidence than previously considered in connection with Geoffrey’s career, and a charter-based methodology, this thesis provides a new and appropriate treatment of an important non-royal ruler. It situates Geoffrey in his proper context and provides an account of not only how he was presented by commentators who were sometimes geographically and temporally remote, but by his own administration and those over whom he ruled. It provides an in-depth analysis of the explicit and implicit characteristics of princely rulership, and how they were won, maintained and exploited in two different contexts.

This dissertation falls in line with work produced during the past fifteen years or so, aimed at improving our appreciation of late medieval/early Tudor English Drama. The approach is based especially on looking at the rapport likely to be achieved between audience and players (and via the players, with the playwrights), in actual performance. Attention is given to the permanent modes of human thought, that are unaffected by the ephemeralities of a particular period; attention is therefore drawn to the traps that may mislead the unwary twentieth-century critic, and some new insights are offered into the purposes of the playwrights. Several cycle plays are treated, together with two of the moralities and two interludes. The point is made that these playwrights showed a considerable mastery of the possibilities inherent in drama, as is demonstrated by the provision for achieving rapport with the audience / M.A. (English)

This work deals with "special" burials among the Anglo-Saxon and Slavs in the early medieval period. The individuals in these graves are frequently labelled as "deviant", "criminals", as "socially other". This dissertation aims to focus more on the possible danger which "special" individuals represented for their communities after their death and on the possibility that the “special” burials were those of potential revenants or vampires. The introduction begins with a brief sketch of the evolution of approaches to burial by archaeologists and historians writing in English. It goes on to argue that “deviant burial” is not a self-explanatory category, but can be applied to a variety of very different inhumations. It suggests it might be better termed “special’ burial or the burial of the “special’ dead and formed part of regular inhumation practice; and it argues that the best way to understand these practices is an interdisciplinary and cross-cultural framework. In particular, it discusses the possible insights offered by the development of the cognitive study of religion and belief, with particular reference to death and burial practices and introduces a “theoretical alternative model” for accessing how the deceased was treated from corpse to the grave. Chapter 1 examines Anglo-Saxon "special" burials, focusing on selected cemeteries where we can observe multiple occurrences of "special" burials or the employment of several "special" practices in one locality. These will first be analyzed with regard to the location of deposition and secondly compared within the wider framework of Anglo-Saxon "special" burial practices. Comparison with "special" funerary rites recorded elsewhere in the world by anthropologists will lead to the proposal of an alternative approach to some of recent and current interpretations of these practices. Chapter 2 focuses on Slavic archaeological material represented by the "special" graves excavated in Slovakia and the Czech Republic: both burials from cemeteries and also a group of individuals deposited in a range of objects found during excavation of Slavic settlements - in grain silos, wells or pits. As with Anglo-Saxon graves, the Slavic "special" burials are analyzed from the point of view of location and then in more global context of Slavic society. The possible interpretations of these findings are discussed. Chapter 3 focuses on the primary sources and their descriptions of "pagan" funerary rituals. It charts shifts in ideas and attitudes towards "special" funeral practices ranging from descriptions of these "pagan" practices, through efforts to delimit and penalize them in the law codes, to narratives of revenant sightings and descriptions of how to recognize and destroy them. This chapter will indicate some of the theories and new approaches proposed in the thesis. The concluding chapter brings these strands together. In particular, it discusses the possible insights offered by the development of the cognitive study of religion and belief, with particular reference to death and burial practices. It examines the changing patterns of religion - from traditional or "pagan" to Christianity – and the ways in which this change influenced both "special" burial practices and perceptions of vampires and revenants, with particular reference to the Christian doctrine of Purgatory. This chapter concludes with a discussion of the theories proposed on the basis of the material collected in this work and reference to corresponding interpretative shifts in present day archaeology and history.

This thesis examines the household of James IV and the people within it. It is the first dedicated study of the royal household in this reign, which contemporaries and historians agree was a high water mark for the Scottish court. Chapter 1 explores the historiography of the court in the fifteenth and sixteenth century and the distinction between the terms ‘court’ and ‘household’. The household was defined by the rules and structures it brought to the world of the court, and those people who served and received rewards according to them, whereas the court was defined as the space around the king and those who occupied it. Chapter 2 considers the forms of structure that the household brought to the court in more detail. The household had two main definitions. In its wider form, expressed by the bill of household from 1508, it encompassed any man of the social standing of gentleman or above, all of whom were theoretically entitled to the king’s hospitality at court, as well as a long list of specified officers, servants and individuals sorted into groups which included the king’s council, chapel royal and officers of arms. Across these definitions and sub-divisions, the household was also ordered according to hierarchy, and this ordering both respected forms of hierarchy in society more broadly, whilst offering opportunities to rise in status, at least in the environment of the court, through household service. Chapter 3 compares this blueprint of the household to the evidence for actual attendance and service at court by members of the household. It shows that the bill of household reflected those who were at court on or near the time it was written, but that the frequency and duration of their attendance varied according to seasons and events, and on a day-to-day basis because of the itinerant movements of the court. It also suggests that household officers operated within broadly defined areas, and that the area they operated in was not necessarily dictated by the office they held. Chapter 4 shows that there was more to life at court for members of the household than just providing service to the king. Members of the household were differentiated by the variety of rewards they could receive, and they could seek advantage for members of their family. The court was also a centre for events that promoted social integration whilst maintaining hierarchical divisions. Chapter 5 looks at some of the ways the household had an effect on the world beyond the physical confines of the court. The wider impact of the household, or, at least, the idea of the household, can be detected in the rental of royal lands and the holding of non-household offices by members of the household, as well as the use of language in documents in the Register of the Great Seal, which also shows how an individual could be associated with the household without being formally attached to it. The household, then, gave structure to, and its members were physically at the core of, the court of James IV, and it provided a framework for day-to-day interaction outside of the formal business of institutions of government such as parliament, council and exchequer. It was an influence on the lives of its members both inside and outside the court.

The subject of Scottish lay religious faith in the eighty years prior to the Reformation of 1559-60 is one in which a variety of concepts and concerns emerge. The choice which has been made reflects the constraints of time and space. Some attempt has also been made to address those areas which have been overlooked by historians, or rarely discussed, such as the role of Mary in lay religious faith. It was necessary to explain lay images of the afterlife in order to understand the path which laypeople chose to attain salvation, so chapters on the Day of Judgement, heaven, hell and purgatory should be seen as the context for understanding the chapters on God, Mary and Jesus. The first chapters discusses the Day of Judgement, an event which must be understood in order to interpret all lay religious attitudes and actions. The basic assumption of the Scots was that all people would be judged at the Day of Judgement, so decisions were made on earth in terms of their understanding of God's expectations on this final day. There were, in effect, two "Days of Judgement", a particular and a general one. An understanding of the nature of these two Days of Judgement illuminates understanding of the laity's conception of the function of purgatory, in particular, and also the importance to salvation of church rituals such as the Eucharist, as well as saintly and human intercession after death. Part of the thesis discusses heaven, hell and purgatory, those states of being which were the laity's future after death.

The topic of my thesis is “The campaigns of the Norman dukes of southern Italy to Byzantium, in the years between 1071 and 1108 A.D.” As the title suggests, I am examining all the main campaigns conducted by the Normans against Byzantine provinces, in the period from the fall of Bari, the Byzantine capital of Apulia and the seat of the Byzantine governor (catepano) of Italy in 1071, to the Treaty of Devol that marked the end of Bohemond of Taranto’s Illyrian campaign in 1108. My thesis, however, aims to focus specifically on the military aspects of these confrontations, an area which for this period has been surprisingly neglected in the existing secondary literature. My intention is to give answers to a series of questions, of which only some of them are presented here: what was the Norman method of raising their armies and what was the connection of this particular system to that in Normandy and France in the same period (similarities, differences, if any)? Have the Normans been willing to adapt to the Mediterranean reality of warfare, meaning the adaptation of siege engines and the creation of a transport and fighting fleet? What was the composition of their armies, not only in numbers but also in the analogy of cavalry, infantry and supplementary units? While in the field of battle, what were the fighting tactics used by the Normans against the Byzantines and were they superior to their eastern opponents? However, as my study is in essence comparative, I will further compare the Norman and Byzantine military institutions, analyse the clash of these two different military cultures and distinguish any signs of adaptations in their practice of warfare. Also, I will attempt to set this enquiry in the light of new approaches to medieval military history visible in recent historiography by asking if any side had been familiar to the ideas of Vegetian strategy, and if so, whether we characterise any of these strategies as Vegetian?

This thesis examines the evidence for the involvement in warfare of clerks and religious in England between the beginning of the tenth century and the end of the twelfth. It focuses on bishops and abbots, whose military activities were recorded more frequently than lesser clergy, though these too are considered where appropriate. From the era of Christian conversion until long after the close of the middle ages, clergy were involved in the prosecution of warfare. In this period, they built fortresses and organised communities of warriors in time of peace and war. Some were slain in battle, while others were given promotion or lands for their martial exploits. A series of canonical pronouncements aimed to forbid or restrict the involvement of Christian clergy in organised bloodshed, and some writers branded militant clergy as corrupted by the lure of earthly power or even as having surrendered their sacerdotal status. This study therefore approaches the military practices of clergy alongside the legal and narrative treatments, and treats the latter as reactions to, not the background of, the former. This requires consideration of a wide range of narrative, diplomatic and legal source material. A broad approach shows that clerics’ military activities cannot be separated from their spiritual powers, that canonical treatment was more fragmented and less influential than has been assumed, and that the condemnations of some authors existed alongside others’ praise for clerics’ valour, loyalty, or commitment to defending their flocks. In consequence, the extended study of clerical participation in warfare is shown to have significant consequences for our conception of the bounds of military history, the construction of the licit and the illicit, and the nature of clerical identity itself.

In the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg, the Middle Ages provide several of the most important historical reference points for national identity. This thesis analyses how this period was given its significance. It studies the presentation of several medieval figures through historiography from their own lifetime to the present, how they entered collective memory and a national narrative of history, and how the symbolic values attributed to them shifted according to changing political needs. In addition, it identifies those figures that were forgotten, so as to explore the mechanisms of historiographical selection. The purported founder of Luxembourg is the tenth-century Count Sigefroid, who was (wrongly) regarded as the first ‘count of Luxembourg’ by the late sixteenth century. In his posthumous career he became the builder of the local castle and city, the creator of the country and father of the nation. He is often joined by his mythological fish-tailed wife Melusine, borrowed from a late medieval French roman that already hints at links to the rulers of Luxembourg. The two founders are linked to later themes through Countess Ermesinde. She was a thirteenth-century ruler, rediscovered by nineteenth-century liberals as an early precursor to their political ideals, while a group of Belgian Jesuits used her to foster a pilgrimage tradition. Historiography of the past two hundred years preferred her persona rather than her two husbands’ for creating a continuity within the different medieval dynasties, adding to their national character. Her descendant John of Bohemia was transformed quickly into the national hero par excellence. This process had its origin in late medieval literature where his ‘heroic’ death at the battle of Crécy is remembered. His tomb within the city of Luxembourg helped to keep him in local memory, while the loss of his remains to Prussia in the early nineteenth century created simmering discontent that lasted until their recovery in 1946. Interestingly, John stands for the pinnacle of a glorious age, whereas his successor Emperor Sigismund tended to embody the miserable decline of an era, despite having been endowed with many crowns and titles. This thesis borrows some of its theoretical framework from the study of lieux de mémoire, and makes use of a broad range of different sources, from historical writing to literature, visual art and popular gimmickry.