In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • Absentee Authority across Medieval Europe ed. by Frédérique Lachaud and Michael Penman
  • Patrick Ball
Lachaud, Frédérique, and Michael Penman, eds, Absentee Authority across Medieval Europe, Woodbridge, The Boydell Press, 2017; hardback; pp. 266; 4 b/w illustrations; R.R.P. £60.00; ISBN 9781783272525.

‘Kingship was always incarnated and rested on the notion of direct access to the person of the king, a reality which stood in opposition to that of the caliphate, where the person of the caliph was often hidden from sight’ (p. 19). In their introduction, the editors suggest this explains why the medieval West, unlike Islam, did not develop a theoretical literature underpinning the delegation of power, and that it presented obstacles to temporal, unlike ecclesiastical, hierarchies of power. When authority derives from presence, rulers experience difficulties: they cannot be everywhere. The lack of theoretical sources has stimulated contributors to the volume to adopt innovative approaches. Chapters range from the Merovingian to early modern eras, span Europe from Italy to Iceland, and address the topic using diverse sources and methodologies.

The subject raises several questions. How did kings project their authority? Laurent Hablot, in a study of wide applicability, examines rulers’ use of emblematic means—banners, coats of arms, and so on—to mark their territories. Taking a specific case, Bruno Dumézil looks at Merovingian kings’ use of gestures, [End Page 226] itineration, poetry, and other means to establish their virtual presence. Léonard Dauphant too considers itineration and its symbolic and practical applications by later French monarchs. The use of seals to assert authority is a recurring motif throughout the volume.

How did rulers delegate authority? That could be problematic. Frédérique Lachaud explores the dispute between Henry III and Simon de Montfort over the nature and powers of the latter’s role as king’s lieutenant in Gascony. Their conceptions seemingly differed. In Burgundy, Philip the Bold (r. 1384– 1404) compensated for his frequent absences by having his wife represent him as governor, but did she have actual power? Not necessarily, Michelle Bubenicek concludes. Conversely, Torsten Hiltmann proposes that French kings commandeered the medieval ‘kings of professions’ (minstrels, mercers), turning them into their representatives, thus extending royal control over these occupations.

What mechanisms were there for coping in a king’s absence through minority, captivity, or infirmity? In Scotland, proxy rulers were required for sixty per cent of the years 1286 to 1424. Various forms of guardianship were tested, which Norman Reid and Michael Penman suggest assisted with the evolution of representative democracy. Hans Jacob Orning cites Icelandic sagas as evidence that, while kings and magnates grappled with questions of authority and obedience, local chieftains were primarily concerned about providing for communal needs.

Normandy, in the early thirteenth century, had two absentee monarchs. England’s king had been expelled; French kings ruled from afar through baillis, charged with re-assimilating the duchy without provoking rebellion. Tom Horler-Underwood’s examination of a 1247–48 inquiry, initiated by Louis IX, reveals that although baillis consolidated the recovery of Normandy, this did not involve the smooth transition to prosperity often supposed. This is one of several chapters that draw revisionist conclusions. Italian bishops’ relinquishment of temporal power during the Investiture Contest, for instance, is typically understood as reflecting ideological abandonment of worldly authority. Robert Houghton, though, taking Parma as a case study, uses charter records to show that, in the decades before their loss of power, bishops were increasingly missing from their sees, cultivating international networks at the expense of their local authority, while other groups rose to prominence.

The editors state (p. 2) that, when defining ‘absentee authority’ they adopted ‘no very fixed parameters’. A few chapters seem to treat ‘absence and authority’ rather than absentee authority, positioning the two concepts in alignment to each other. These conceivably reflect a last-moment alteration in the volume’s title. Late-medieval genealogical rolls of English kings, argues Olivier de Laborderie, present even usurpers as genuine rulers, because their absence would have diminished rightful kings’ authority. James Bothwell investigates internal exiles within the English king’s domains, a group usually neglected by scholars in favour of persons banished altogether...

pdf

Share