Skip to main content

IMC 2014: Sessions

Session 1736: The Experience and Practice of Empire

Thursday 10 July 2014, 14.15-15.45

Moderator/Chair:Paul Oldfield, School of Arts, Languages & Cultures, University of Manchester
Paper 1736-aHouse of Cards: Deconstructing Angevin Hostilities
(Language: English)
Lauren E. Wood, Department of History, California State University, Fullerton
Index terms: Law, Political Thought
Paper 1736-bPushing the Boundaries: Hugh de Lacy, Angevin Earl - Capetian Lord
(Language: English)
Paul Duffy, Grassroots Archaeology, Wicklow
Index terms: Archaeology - Sites, Charters and Diplomatics, Crusades, Language and Literature - French or Occitan
Paper 1736-cStabilitas imperii: Political Theology and Institutional Practices in the Ottonian Empire, 10th-11th Centuries
(Language: English)
Stefano Manganaro, Istituto Italiano di Scienze Umane, Firenze / Istituto Italiano per gli Studi Storici, Napoli
Index terms: Administration, Political Thought, Politics and Diplomacy, Theology
Abstract

Paper -a:
'A man's enemies are the men of his own house.' The quotation from the prophet Micah can perhaps be applied to most any empire to show the difficulties of sustaining a dynasty through multiple successions. It was specifically used by Gerald of Wales in describing the Angevin Empire of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Although the term 'Angevin Empire' is a neologism, it is sufficient to use it to describe the consolidation of lands under the Plantagenet kings, and it also serves as an interesting case study to show the tensions and hostilities that were present in other empires as well. Using primary sources ranging from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle to a letter addressed to Eleanor of Aquitaine penned by Peter of Blois, this research examines the reasons for the discord between the House of Plantagenet by investigating the history of aggression and familial conflicts stemming from their Norman predecessors, the relationships between the members of the ruling family of Anjou, and the laws of parage versus primogeniture. Three main stages of conflict are discussed to explain that the Angevin Empire, much like any other, was placed in the precarious position of having its existence reliant on the personalities involved far more than the society and legal system of the times.

Paper -b:
In the early 13th century, the Angevin and Capetian 'Empires', although in conflict, comprised a culturally homogenous block extending over much of North Western Europe. Hugh II de Lacy, Earl of Ulster was a man on the fringes of empire constantly expanding the Angevin territory through war and encastellation. With his expulsion from Ireland in 1210, de Lacy found himself at the opposite extreme of the French speaking world, pushing the boundaries of Capetian control deep into the Languedoc.This paper examines how de Lacy was directly responsible for expanding the territories of both the Angevin and Capetain kings in the early 13th century as well as outlining the political environment within which he operated.

Paper -c:
The royal charters of the Early and High Middle Ages often link the most desirable condition of the political order to the concept of the stabilitas imperii. Despite its many occurrences in the sources, medieval studies appear to have overlooked the relevance of this concept. The paper aims to analyze the meanings of the stabilitas imperii in the framework of the Ottonian empire, because of the cluttered polycentrism of this empire and the weakness of its administrative structures. Indeed, these very features made the political stability a very challenging issue. Drawn from the Augustinian lexicon and informed by a biblical awareness, the stabilitas imperii addresses the pivotal issue of the politics as an issue related to 'Time'. As such, its meanings are to be traced back to the theoretical basis of the political theology, which tied the desired enduring time of the earthly kingdom to the eternity of the heavenly one, as well as to the empirical practices of the power, which guaranteed (only partial and unsteady) duration to the Ottonian institutions.