Next Colloquium

Spring Colloquium: 'Peace'

February 25 |

10.15 – 11.00 COFFEE, REGISTRATION and WELCOME

11.00 – 11.55
Helen Lacey (University of Oxford)
Interpretations of the King’s Peace in Later Medieval England: ‘occasional privilege to common right’?   

Peace featured in medieval law as a way to conceptualise the reach of royal justice. Crimes were said to have been committed in contravention of ‘the king’s peace’ and outlaws were beyond the protection of this peace. Frederick Pollock argued that by the end of the thirteenth century the king’s peace had ‘fully grown from an occasional privilege into a common right.’ This paper investigates the ways in which people understood ‘the king’s peace’ in Later Medieval England and the relevance it had in the lives of royal subjects. Were older immunities entirely subsumed into the general peace? How did people understand and shape the concept for their own purposes? What light does ‘the king’s peace’ shed on relations between the crown and its subjects?

Publications:

Helen’s book was published in 2009, she is now working on a new monograph on ‘political consciousness’ in Later Medieval England, as part of an AHRC Early Career Fellowship.

The Royal Pardon: Access to Mercy in Fourteenth-Century England (York Medieval Press, Boydell & Brewer, November 2009)

11.55 – 12.50
Jenny Benham (University of St. Andrews)
Peace in Victory, Peace in Defeat: The theory and practice of kingship, law and peace in the high Middle Ages: how did victory impact on the terms of a treaty?

Disputes and disagreements between rulers, in particular those involving military force or threats thereof, make frequent appearances in the narrative sources of the medieval period. It is hardly surprising therefore that scholars often describe the resolution of such disputes by referring to peace negotiations in this period as a preliminary and arbitrary process, which, if unsuccessful, usually led to the dispute being settled by military means. Agreements and treaties were, historians suggest, a diplomatic card – an alternative to violence that could halt, delay or speed up the process of settling a dispute but not usually resolve it. Such arguments follow a well-developed idea based on the notion that victory was the best form of peace. However, if we view negotiations for peace in this way then why were a large number of battles, or military campaigns, followed up by treaties? One would expect that military action settled the dispute and therefore there would be no need to have a treaty.

What I want to do in this paper is to investigate three disputes between rulers that were seemingly settled by decisive battles or series of sieges but which were also followed by agreements. Examining the texts of some of these agreements, this paper will aim to see if they provide evidence of whether or not victory was the only way to achieve peace, and how and if victory impacted on the terms of a treaty. By highlighting the differences and commonalities of these disputes and agreements, it will also investigate the relationship between the theory and practice of kingship, law and peace in the high Middle Ages.

Jenny’s book is out now: Peacemaking in the Middle Ages: Principles and Practice, Manchester University Press, 2011

12.50 – 1.45     
LUNCH
(Please bring your own packed lunch.Hot and cold drinks will be available)

1.45 – 2.40 
Gianluca Raccagni (University of Edinburgh)
An iconic peace settlement between monarch and subjects: the  emperors, the Lombard cities and the battle over the legacy of the Peace of Constance in the thirteenth century

In 1183 the Peace of Constance settled a momentous conflict between the Lombard city republics and their sovereign, Emperor Frederick Barbarossa, and this paper examines its legacy by considering the transmission of its text and the references to it in a variety of sources. It argues that the abundance of copies and the numerous references in chronicles, charters, records of disputes and of alliances, as well as legal and rhetorical treatises, show that it immediately reached an iconic status. However, the points of view of the cities and those of Barbarossa and of his successors were not identical: for the cities the Peace of Constance was a binding agreement, while the emperors were inclined to consider it a series of kind concessions. Its lawfulness was discussed too, especially because of how it checked imperial power, and jurists defended its legality by arguing that it was conceived pro bono pacis. It is quite ironic, therefore, how the Peace of Constance then fuelled the renewal of the conflict between the emperor and the cities that was fought under Frederick II from 1226 to 1250. Its role during it will be compared to that of unwritten custom at the time of Barbarossa, and finally its legacy after the death of Frederick II will be outlined.

New and forthcoming publications
The Lombard League (1167-1225) (Oxford University Press and British  Academy, 2010)
The Second Lombard League and the Italian crusades (1226-1300) (Brill,  forthcoming)

A series of articles are also forthcoming in various journals (Historical Research, Journal of Medieval History, Società e Storia) that illustrate some preliminary findings of the research on the second Lombard League as well as various offshoots. In particular they examine the relationship between the Empire and the Lombard cities in 12th-century Anglo-Norman sources and in the works of Italian rhetoricians of the 13th century.

2.40 – 3.00 TEA

3.00 – 3.50
Rob Ellis (Queen Mary, University of London)
Politicising Peace: Sir Nicholas Brembre’s Anti-Associational Rhetoric

The emergence of a distinctive anti-associational rhetoric in late fourteenth-century London has not gone unnoticed. A wide variety of texts from this period concur in suggesting that London’s peace is threatened by people forming congregations, conventicles, and covines. However, what has yet to be fully appreciated is the central role of the mayor, Sir Nicholas Brembre, in establishing and propagating this anti-associational rhetoric, not only in mayoral proclamations, but also in petitions, judicial processes, and legal ratifications. This paper seeks to explore the development of this anti-associational rhetoric in the period between 1377 (when Brembre was first elected as mayor) and 1388 (when Brembre was executed by the Lords Appellant). As well as demonstrating the central role of Brembre in establishing this rhetoric, this paper also seeks to explore the political uses to which it was put. By claiming that unlawful gatherings threated the city’s peace, Brembre is able to strengthen his own authority as mayor, to justify the use of violence against his opponents, and to gerrymander the mayoral elections to the advantage of himself and his followers. Thus, through Brembre’s attempts to dominate documentary culture in the city peace becomes a highly politicised concept.

3.50 – 4.45
Catherine Nall (Royal Holloway, University of London)
The Problem of Peace in Fifteenth-Century Military Treatises

The fifteenth century witnessed a remarkable outpouring of English translations of Latin and French military treatises. This paper takes some of these translations as its starting point, and explores the various ways in which they constructed the topic of peace. Peace has a prominent presence in these works, but it is rarely treated as a positive or even neutral state. Rather, these texts figure peace as problematic and harmful, both to the individual and the community as a whole. This paper examines these translations’ treatments of peace in relation to wider understandings of the benefits – and dangers – of sustained periods of peace in the fifteenth century. It argues that while many writers fashion a connection between internal peace and outward war, the nature of that connection does not remain stable throughout the century.

Catherine’s new book , Reading and War in Fifteenth-Century England: From Lydgate to Malory , Boydell and Brewer, will be forthcoming this summer.

4.45 – 5.00
Roundtable Discussion