Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T10:41:57.513Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feudal Europe, 800–1300: communal discourse and conflictual practices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Markus Fischer
Get access

Extract

The discipline of international relations faces a new debate of fundamental significance. After the realist challenge to the pervasive idealism of the interwar years and the social scientific argument against realism in the late 1950s, it is now the turn of critical theorists to dispute the established paradigms of international politics, having been remarkably successful in several other fields of social inquiry. In essence, critical theorists claim that all social reality is subject to historical change, that a normative discourse of understandings and values entails corresponding practices, and that social theory must include interpretation and dialectical critique. In international relations, this approach particularly critiques the ahistorical, scientific, and materialist conceptions offered by neorealists. Traditional realists, by contrast, find a little more sympathy in the eyes of critical theorists because they join them in their rejection of social science and structural theory. With regard to liberal institutionalism, critical theorists are naturally sympathetic to its communitarian component while castigating its utilitarian strand as the accomplice of neorealism. Overall, the advent of critical theory will thus focus the field of international relations on its “interparadigm debate” with neorealism.

Type
Articles
Information
International Organization , Volume 46 , Issue 2 , Spring 1992 , pp. 427 - 466
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. See Ashley, Richard K., “The Poverty of Neorealism,” International Organization 38 (Spring 1984), pp. 225–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2. Indeed, critical theorists have already begun to appropriate the institutional component of liberalism. See Kratochwil, Friedrich, “Regimes, Interpretation and the ‘Science’ of Politics: A Reappraisal,” Millennium 17 (Summer 1988), pp. 263–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wendt, Alexander and Duvall, Raymond, ”Institutions and International Order,” in Czempiel, Ernst-Otto and Rosenau, James N., eds., Global Changes and Theoretical Challenges: Approaches to World Politics for the 1990s (Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1989), pp. 51–73Google Scholar; and Keely, James F., “Toward a Foucauldian Analysis of International Regimes,” International Organization 44 (Winter 1990), pp. 83–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar. With regard to critiquing liberal utilitarianism as part and parcel of neorealism, see the following works of Ashley, Richard K.: “The Three Modes of Economism,” International Studies Quarterly 27 (12 1983), especially pp. 481–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and “Untying the Sovereign State: A Double Reading of the Anarchy Problematique,” Millennium 17 (Summer 1988), especially p. 236Google Scholar.

3. See Banks, M., “The Inter-Paradigm Debate,” in Light, M. and Groom, A. J. R., eds., International Relations: A Handbook of Current Theory (London: Frances Pinter, 1985), pp. 7–26Google Scholar; Hoffman, Mark, “Critical Theory and the Inter-Paradigm Debate,” Millennium 16 (Summer 1987), pp. 231–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Keohane, Robert O., “International Institutions: Two Approaches,” International Studies Quarterly 32 (12 1988), pp. 379–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4. See Walker, R. B. J., “History and Structure in the Theory of International Relations,” Millennium 18 (Summer 1989), pp. 163–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5. Waltz, Kenneth N., Theory of International Politics (New York: Random House, 1979), p. 66Google Scholar. Neorealism has been largely shaped by the works of Waltz, , including his earlier book Man, the State and War (New York: Columbia University Press, 1954)Google Scholar. See also Waltz, Kenneth N., “Reflections on Theory of International Politics: A Response to My Critics,” in Keohane, Robert O., ed., Neorealism and Its Critics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1968), pp. 322–45Google Scholar. Recently, Walt, Stephen M. has elaborated the neorealist mechanics of balancing and bandwagoning in his The Origins of Alliances (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1987)Google Scholar. Closely associated with neorealism is the work of Robert R. Gilpin; see his War and Change in World Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981)Google Scholar.

6. Max Horkheimer, Critical Theory: Selected Essays, trans. Matthew J. O'Connell et al. (1936; reprint, New York: Herder & Herder, 1972), p. 66. For a general introduction to critical theory, see Bauman, Zygmunt, Towards a Critical Sociology (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1976)Google Scholar; Held, David, Introduction to Critical Theory: Horkheimer to Habermas (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980)Google Scholar; and Geuss, Raymond, The Idea of a Critical Theory: Habermas and the Frankfurt School (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981)Google Scholar.

7. Representative articles beyond the ones already cited include the following: Cox, Robert W., “Social Forces, States, and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory,” Millennium 10 (Summer 1981), pp. 126–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cox, Robert W., “Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations: An Essay in Method,” Millennium 12 (Summer 1983), pp. 162–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Linklater, Andrew, “Realism, Marxism, and Critical International Theory,” Review of International Studies 12 (10 1986), pp. 301–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ashley, Richard K., “The Geopolitics of Geopolitical Space: Toward a Critical Social Theory of International Politics,” Alternatives 12 (10 1987), pp. 403–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wendt, Alexander, ”The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory,” International Organization 41 (Summer 1987), pp. 335–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Halliday, Fred, “State and Society in International Relations: A Second Agenda,” Millennium 16 (Summer 1987), pp. 215–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For an important extradisciplinary source, see Giddens, Anthony, The Nation-State and Violence, vol. 2 of A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987)Google Scholar.

8. Ashley, , “The Geopolitics of Geopolitical Space,” p. 406Google Scholar.

9. Ruggie, John G., “Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity: Toward a Neorealist Synthesis,” World Politics 35 (01 1983), p. 273CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10. Heteronomy, a term formed from the Greek hetero (other) and nomos (law), means being under someone else's law. By contrast, sovereignty denotes a condition of giving the law unto oneself.

11. Ruggie, , “Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity,” p. 274Google Scholar. In this passage, Ruggie is citing from Strayer, J. R. and Munro, D. C., The Middle Ages, 4th ed. (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1959), p. 115Google Scholar; and Anderson, Perry, Lineages of the Absolutist State (London: New Left Books, 1974), pp. 37–38Google Scholar.

12. Ruggie, , “Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity,” p. 280Google Scholar.

13. Cox, Robert W., “Postscript 1985,” in Keohane, , Neorealism and Its Critics, pp. 244–45Google Scholar.

14. See Brunner, Otto, Land und Herrschaft: Grundfragen der territorialen Verfassungsgeschichte Österreichs im Mittelalter (Land and rule: Fundamental issues in the history of Austria's territorial constitution) (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1973)Google Scholar; Gurevich, Aron J., Categories of Medieval Culture, trans. Campbell, G. L. (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985)Google Scholar; Ullmann, Walter, Principles of Government and Politics in the Middle Ages (London: Methuen, 1961)Google Scholar; and Burns, J. H., ed., The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, c. 350-c. 1450 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15. Bloch, Marc, Feudal Society, 2 vols., trans. Manyon, L. A. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960)Google Scholar; Boutruche, Robert, Seigneurie et féodalitié (Lordship and feudal society), vol. 1, 2d ed. (Paris: Aubier, 1968)Google Scholar; Boutruche, Robert, Seigneurie et féodalité, vol. 2 (Paris: Aubier, 1970)Google Scholar; Mundy, John H., Europe in the High Middle Ages, 1150–1309 (New York: Basic Books, 1973)Google Scholar; Poly, Jean-Pierre and Bournazel, Eric, La mutation féodale, Xe-XIIe siècles (The feudal transformation, 10th–12th centuries) (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1980)Google Scholar; and Reynolds, Susan, Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, 900–1300 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984)Google Scholar. See also the following seminal works of Duby, Georges: La société aux XIe et XIIe siècles dans la region mâconnaise (The society of the 12th and 13th centuries in the Mâconnais region)(Paris: Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, 1971)Google Scholar; and The Chivalrous Society, trans. Postan, Cynthia (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980), pp. 15–80Google Scholar. Except for direct quotations, the analysis of the Mâconnais will be based on these two works of Duby without further citation.

16. On the fusion of the Germanic and Roman-Christian traditions, see Bendix, Reinhard, Kings or People: Power and the Mandate to Rule (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978), pp. 23–26Google Scholar; Gurevich, , Categories of Medieval Culture, p. 18Google Scholar; Markus, R. A., “The Latin Fathers,” in Burns, , The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, p. 93Google Scholar; P. D. King, “The Barbarian Kingdoms,” in Burns, ibid., pp. 123–24; and Ullmann, , Principles of Government and Politics in the Middle Ages, pp. 22 and 145Google Scholar.

17. On the wholeness of medieval thought, see Black, Antony, “The Individual and Society,” in Burns, , The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, p. 592Google Scholar; Jean Dunbabin, “Government,” in Burns, ibid., pp. 484–88; Brunner, , Land und Herrschaft, pp. 48 and 133–36Google Scholar; Gurevich, , Categories of Medieval Culture, pp. 44–45, 56–57, 84–86, 98–113, 154, 165–67, 175, 273–74, and 288Google Scholar; Lovejoy, Arthur O., The Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1936), pp. 67–98Google Scholar; and Reynolds, , Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, p. 19Google Scholar.

18. Barraclough, Geoffrey, The Mediaeval Empire: Ideal and Reality (London: G. Philip, 1950), p. 26Google Scholar. On the idea of universal empire and absence of sovereignty, see Brunner, , Land und Herrschaft, pp. 141–46, 231–37, and 387–93Google Scholar; Gurevich, , Categories of Medieval Culture, pp. 167–70 and 192Google Scholar; Luscombe, D. E., “Introduction: The Formation of Political Thought in the West,” in Burns, , The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, pp. 163–64Google Scholar; Janet Nelson, “Kingship and Empire,” in Burns, ibid., p. 227; Markus, “The Latin Fathers,” in Bums, ibid., pp. 115–16; Pacaut, Marcel, Les structures politiques de I'Occident médiéval (The political structures of the medieval West) (Paris: Armand Colin, 1969), pp. 165–75Google Scholar; and Ullmann, , Principles of Government and Politics in the Middle Ages, pp. 19–26Google Scholar.

19. Ullmann, , Principles of Government and Politics in the Middle Ages, pp. 20–21Google Scholar.

20. See Ganshof, Francois Louis, Feudalism, trans. Grierson, Philip (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1964), p. 16Google Scholar; and White, Lynn Jr, Medieval Technology and Social Change (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962), pp. 27–31Google Scholar.

21. Ganshof, Francois Louis, Frankish Institutions Under Charlemagne, trans. Lyon, Bryce and Lyon, Mary (Providence, R.I.: Brown University Press, 1968)Google Scholar.

22. See Elias, Norbert, Power and Civility, trans. Jephcott, Edmund (New York: Pantheon Books, 1982), pp. 16–18Google Scholar; Mitteis, Heinrich, The State in the Middle Ages: A Comparative Constitutional History of Feudal Europe, vol. 1, trans. Orton, H. F. (Amsterdam: North-Holland & American Elsevier, 1975), pp. 91–92Google Scholar; and Weber, Max, Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology, vol. 1, ed. Roth, Guenther and Wittich, Claus (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968), p. 257Google Scholar.

23. See McNeill, William H., The Shape of European History (New York: Oxford University Press, 1974), pp. 86–88Google Scholar; Strayer, Joseph R., Western Europe in the Middle Ages: A Short History (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1955), pp. 59–60Google Scholar; and Strayer, Joseph R., “Feudalism in Western Europe,” in Cheyette, Fredric L., ed., Lordship and Community in Medieval Europe: Selected Readings (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1968), p. 18Google Scholar.

24. Painter, Sidney, Medieval Society (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1951), p. 26Google Scholar.

25. On the ideological support of kings, see Strayer, , Western Europe in the Middle Ages, pp. 64 and 119–26Google Scholar; Elias, , Power and Civility, p. 23Google Scholar; and Reynolds, , Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, pp. 259–61 and 278–97Google Scholar.

26. See Mundy, , Europe in the High Middle Ages, pp. 25–27Google Scholar; Mann, Michael, The Sources of Social Power, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), pp. 379–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Strayer, , Western Europe in the Middle Ages, pp. 100–106Google Scholar.

27. See Bloch, , Feudal Society, pp. 348–50Google Scholar; Boutruche, , Seigneurie et féodalité, vol. 1, p. 202Google Scholar; and Reynolds, , Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, p. 128Google Scholar.

28. On feudal fragmentation and its causes, see Bloch, , Feudal Society, pp. 238, 376–79, and 394–401Google Scholar; Boutruche, , Seigneurie et féodalité, vol. 2, pp. 31–39Google Scholar; Fourquin, Guy, Lordship and Feudalism in the Middle Ages, trans. Sells, Iris and Sells, A. L. Lytton (New York: Pica Press, 1976), pp. 93–94Google Scholar; Mitteis, , The State in the Middle Ages, p. 92Google Scholar; Mundy, , Europe in the High Middle Ages, pp. 56, 226–27, and 421Google Scholar; Pacaut, , Les structures politiques de I'Occident médiéval, pp. 116–32Google Scholar; Painter, , Medieval Society, pp. 19–20 and 26Google Scholar; Poly, and Bournazel, , La mutation féodale, pp. 81–87 and 129Google Scholar; Strayer, , Western Europe in the Middle Ages, pp. 57–66Google Scholar; and Van Caenegem, R., “Government, Law and Society,” in Burns, , The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, pp. 175–85Google Scholar.

29. Fourquin, , Lordship and Feudalism in the Middle Ages, p. 93Google Scholar; and Ganshof, Francois Louis, Histoire des relations internationales: Le moyen age (History of international relations: The middle ages) (Paris: Hachette, 1953), pp. 139–40Google Scholar.

30. See Dhondt, Jan, “Medieval ‘Solidarities’: Flemish Society in Transition, 1127–1128,” trans. Cheyette, Fredric L., in Cheyette, , Lordship and Community in Medieval Europe, pp. 274–75Google Scholar; and Van Caenegem, , “Government, Law and Society,” pp. 179–80Google Scholar.

31. Elias, , Power and Civility, pp. 43 and 98–99Google Scholar; see also p. 64.

32. Schlesinger, Walter, “Lord and Follower in Germanic Institutional History,” in Cheyette, , Lordship and Community in Medieval Europe, p. 91Google Scholar.

33. Elias, , Power and Civility, pp. 99–131Google Scholar.

34. See Hallam, Elizabeth M., Capetian France, 987–1328 (London: Longman, 1980)Google Scholar.

35. Duby, , La société aux XIe et XIIe slècles dans la région mâconnaise, pp. 164–65Google Scholar.

36. Ibid., p. 165.

37. On the organic Christian community, see Black, , “The Individual and Society,” pp. 592 and 596–97Google Scholar; Brunner, , Land und Herrschaft, pp. 399–404Google Scholar; Dunbabin, , “Government,” p. 480Google Scholar; Duby, Georges, The Three Orders: Feudal Society Imagined, trans. Goldhammer, Arthur (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980)Google Scholar; Gurevich, , Categories of Medieval Culture, pp. 61 and 197–209Google Scholar; and Poly, and Bournazel, , La mutation féodale, pp. 222–34Google Scholar. See also the following essays in Burns, , The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought: Luscombe, D. E. and Evans, G. R., “The Twelfth-Century Renaissance,” pp. 307–14Google Scholar; Quillet, Jeannine, “Community, Counsel, and Representation,” p. 543Google Scholar; and Robinson, I. S., “Church and Papacy,” pp. 261–66Google Scholar.

38. Mark 12:29–34.

39. On functional cooperation, see Black, , “The Individual and Society,” pp. 593 and 596Google Scholar; Bloch, , Feudal Society, pp. 312–19Google Scholar; and Gurevich, , Categories of Medieval Culture, pp. 61, 132, 163–64, 176, and 186Google Scholar. On corporation theory, see Canning, J. P., “Law, Sovereignty and Corporation Theory, 1300–1450,” in Burns, , The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, pp. 443–49Google Scholar.

40. On the subjugation and abuse of the clergy, see Baldwin, Marshall W., The Mediaeval Church (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1953), p. 28Google Scholar; Bloch, , Feudal Society, pp. 405–7 and 414Google Scholar; Boutruche, , Seigneurie et féodalité, vol. 1, pp. 135–36 and 202–5Google Scholar; Boutruche, , Seigneurie et féodalité, vol. 2, pp. 88–91Google Scholar; Duby, , The Chivalrous Society, pp. 125–28Google Scholar; Elias, , Power and Civility, p. 181Google Scholar; Fourquin, , Lordship and Feudalism in the Middle Ages, pp. 33–34 and 134–35Google Scholar; Hallam, , Capetian France, p. 18Google Scholar; Hay, Denis, The Medieval Centuries (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1964), p. 84Google Scholar; Lemarignier, Jean-Francois, “Political and Monastic Structures in France at the End of the Tenth and the Beginning of the Eleventh Century,” trans. Cheyette, Fredric L., in Cheyette, , Lordship and Community in Medieval Europe, pp. 111–12Google Scholar; Mann, , The Sources of Social Power, vol. 1, p. 382Google Scholar; Pacaut, , Les structures politiques de l'Occident médiéval, pp. 148–49Google Scholar; and Poly, and Bournazel, , La mutation féodale, pp. 97–98 and 234–50Google Scholar.

41. Bloch, , Feudal Society, p. 415Google Scholar. See also Baldwin, , The Mediaeval Church, p. 33Google Scholar; Brunner, , Land und Herrschaft, p. 33Google Scholar; and Hay, , The Medieval Centuries, p. 91Google Scholar.

42. On clerical efforts at armed defense, see Bloch, , Feudal Society, p. 346Google Scholar; Brunner, , Land und Herrschaft, p. 268Google Scholar; Duby, , The Three Orders, pp. 156 and 178–79Google Scholar; Fournier, Gabriel, “Rural Churches and Rural Communities in Early Medieval Auvergne,” trans. Cheyette, Fredric L., in Cheyette, , Lordship and Community in Medieval Europe, pp. 326 and 331–32Google Scholar; Fourquin, , Lordship and Feudalism in the Middle Ages, p. 88Google Scholar; Hay, , The Medieval Centuries, pp. 48 and 66Google Scholar; Pacaut, , Les structures politiques de I'Occident médiéval, p. 150Google Scholar; and Pirenne, Henri, Medieval Cities: Their Origins and the Revival of Trade, trans. Halsey, Frank D. (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1952), pp. 66–70Google Scholar.

43. On the subjugation of the peasantry, see Bloch, , Feudal Society, pp. 171 and 241–74Google Scholar; Duby, , The Three Orders, pp. 152–53Google Scholar; Hintze, Otto, “The Nature of Feudalism,” trans. Cheyette, Fredric L., in Cheyette, , Lordship and Community in Medieval Europe, p. 27Google Scholar; Poly, and Bournazel, , La mutation féodale, p. 92Google Scholar; Reynolds, , Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, p. 105Google Scholar; and Van Caenegem, , ”Government, Law and Society,” p. 196Google Scholar.

44. On the belligerent origins of towns, see Elias, Norbert, The History of Manners, trans. Jephcott, Edmund (New York: Pantheon Books, 1982), p. 198Google Scholar; Hay, , The Medieval Centuries, pp. 110–11Google Scholar; Mundy, , Europe in the High Middle Ages, p. 154Google Scholar; Painter, , Medieval Society, pp. 72–74 and 78–79Google Scholar; Pirenne, , Medieval Cities, pp. 118–21, 134–35, 148–51, and 170–83Google Scholar; and Rörig, Fritz, The Medieval Town (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967), pp. 19–20, 41, 155, 159, and 164Google Scholar.

45. Pirenne, , Medieval Cities, p. 150Google Scholar.

46. Duby, , The Chivalrous Society, p. 49Google Scholar. See also Duby, , La société aux Xle et XIIe siècles dans la région mâconnaise, p. 168Google Scholar.

47. On the legal features of vassalage, see Bloch, , Feudal Society, pp. 145–47 and 218–30Google Scholar; Critchley, John S., Feudalism (London: Allen & Unwin, 1978), pp. 30–31Google Scholar; Ganshof, , Feudalism, pp. 83–96Google Scholar; Gurevich, , Categories of Medieval Culture, pp. 169–70 and 186Google Scholar; Luscombe, , “Introduction,” p. 160Google Scholar; Pennington, K., “Law, Legislative Authority and Theories of Government, 1150–1300,” in Burns, , The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, pp. 440 and 449Google Scholar; Quillet, , “Community, Counsel, and Representation,” pp. 545–54Google Scholar; Reynolds, , Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, p. 339Google Scholar; and Van Caenegem, , “Government, Law and Society,” p. 210Google Scholar.

48. On the legal aspects of dependency and servitude, see Brunner, , Land und Herrschaft, pp. 258–72Google Scholar; and Gurevich, , Categories of Medieval Culture, pp. 186–87Google Scholar.

49. On the legal characteristics of the fief, see Brunner, , Land und Herrschaft, pp. 252–53Google Scholar; Critchley, , Feudalism, pp. 17–18Google Scholar; and Ganshof, , Feudalism, pp. 113–17 and 132–67Google Scholar.

50. See Bloch, , Feudal Society, pp. 211–12Google Scholar; Ganshof, , Feudalism, pp. 49–50 and 102–3Google Scholar; and Luscombe, , “Introduction,” pp. 160–62Google Scholar.

51. Van Caenegem, , “Government, Law and Society,” p. 201Google Scholar. See also Bloch, , Feudal Society, p. 235Google Scholar; Boutruche, , Seigneurie et féodalité, vol. 1, p. 222Google Scholar; and Poly, and Bournazel, , La mutation féodale, pp. 137–42Google Scholar.

52. Hallam, , Capetian France, p. 27Google Scholar.

53. Lemarignier, , “Political and Monastic Structures in France at the End of the Tenth and the Beginning of the Eleventh Century,” p. 110Google Scholar.

54. Fourquin, , Lordship and Feudalism in the Middle Ages, p. 128Google Scholar. See also Bloch, , Feudal Society, p. 214Google Scholar.

55. See Boutruche, , Seigneurie et féodalité, vol. 2, p. 172Google Scholar; Fourquin, , Lordship and Feudalism in the Middle Ages, p. 121Google Scholar; and Poly, and Bournazel, , La mutation féodale, p. 145Google Scholar.

56. Fulbert, of Chartres, The Letters and Poems of Fulbert of Chartres, trans. Behrends, F. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976), pp. 90–91Google Scholar.

57. On the alignment character of vassalage, see Bloch, , Feudal Society, pp. 171–73Google Scholar; Boutruche, , Seigneurie et féodalité, vol. 2, pp. 160–61Google Scholar; Fourquin, , Lordship and Feudalism in the Middle Ages, pp. 118–20 and 135–37Google Scholar; Ganshof, , Feudalism, pp. 121–24Google Scholar; Painter, , Medieval Society, p. 16Google Scholar; and Poly, and Bournazel, , La mutation féodale, p. 145Google Scholar.

58. On the enserfment of the peasantry, see Bloch, , Feudal Society, pp. 255–74Google Scholar; Boutruche, , Seigneurie et féodalité, vol. 2, pp. 53–82Google Scholar; Hintze, , “The Nature of Feudalism,” pp. 27–28Google Scholar; Mundy, , Europe in the High Middle Ages, p. 224Google Scholar; Poly, and Bournazel, , La mutation féodale, pp. 193–219Google Scholar; and Van Caenegem, , “Government, Law and Society,” pp. 196–97Google Scholar.

59. Thietmar, of Merseburg, cited by Bloch in Feudal Society, p. 160Google Scholar.

60. Philip, of Remi, lord, of Beaumanoir, cited by Mundy in Europe in the High Middle Ages, p. 224Google Scholar.

61. On communitarian beliefs and their practical manifestations, see Black, , “The Individual and Society,” pp. 588–97Google Scholar; Gurevich, , Categories of Medieval Culture, pp. 81–82, 163–64, 178–79, 185–90, and 273Google Scholar; Gurevich, Aron J., Medieval Popular Culture: Problems of Belief and Perception, trans. Bak, Janos M. and Hollingsworth, Paul A. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), pp. 55–56Google Scholar; Quillet, , “Community, Counsel, and Representation,” pp. 520–26Google Scholar; and Reynolds, , Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, pp. 1–11, 67–78, 90–100, 148–54, and 168–214Google Scholar.

62. On the power aspects of community and cooperation, see Duby, Georges, L'économie rurale et la vie dans les campagnes (The rural economy and the life in the countryside) (Paris: Aubier, 1962), pp. 97–107, 118, and 122Google Scholar; Pirenne, , Medieval Cities, pp. 171–72Google Scholar; Reynolds, , Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, pp. 109–13, 125–30, 139–40, 144, 146, 148, 167, 173–76, and 192–93Google Scholar; and Rörig, , The Medieval Town, pp. 18–28, 122–23, 149, and 154Google Scholar.

63. Reynolds, , Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, pp. 140 and 182Google Scholar.

64. Ibid., p. 140.

65. Ibid., pp. 100 and 113.

66. Duby, , La société aux XIe et XIIe siècles dans la région mâconnaise, p. 199Google Scholar.

67. Ibid., p. 163.

68. Ibid., p. 160, fn. 51.

69. On the legal aspects of feud, vengeance, and peer court, see Brunner, , Land und Herrschaft, pp. 19–41 and 237–38Google Scholar; Gurevich, , Categories of Medieval Culture, p. 175Google Scholar; and Reynolds, , Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, pp. 26–27 and 45Google Scholar.

70. On the power-driven reality of feud and vengeance, see Bloch, , Feudal Society, p. 230Google Scholar; Brunner, , Land und Herrschaft, pp. 42–43 and 46–47Google Scholar; Hay, , The Medieval Centuries, pp. 37–38 and 62Google Scholar; Painter, , Medieval Society, p. 27Google Scholar; and Stephenson, Carl, Mediaeval Feudalism (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1942), p. 34Google Scholar.

71. Strayer, , Western Europe in the Middle Ages, p. 94Google Scholar. On the painful reality of peer court procedures, see Bartlett, Robert, Trial by Fire and Water: The Medieval Judicial Ordeal (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986), especially pp. 3–37 and 103–26Google Scholar; Bloch, , Feudal Society, pp. 128–29 and 373Google Scholar; Boutruche, , Seigneurie et féodalité, vol. 2, pp. 133–36Google Scholar; Hay, , The Medieval Centuries, p. 62Google Scholar; Painter, , Medieval Society, p. 21Google Scholar; Reynolds, , Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, pp. 23–38Google Scholar; and Stephenson, , Mediaeval Feudalism, p. 34Google Scholar.

72. On intuitu personae and arbitration, see Bloch, , Feudal Society, pp. 129–30, 288, and 332–35Google Scholar; Bosl, Karl, “Ruler and Ruled in the German Empire from the Tenth to the Twelfth Century,” trans. Sambursky, Miriam, in Cheyette, , Lordship and Community in Medieval Europe, p. 361Google Scholar; Cheyette, Fredric L., “Suum Cuique Tribuere,” French Historical Studies 6 (Spring 1970), pp. 287–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Reynolds, , Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, pp. 26–27Google Scholar; White, Stephen D., “Pactum…Legem Vincit et Amor Judicium: The Settlement of Disputes by Compromise in Eleventh-Century Western France,” American Journal of Legal History 22 (10 1978), pp. 281–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Van Caenegem, , “Government, Law and Society,” pp. 180–81Google Scholar.

73. On the legitimizing nature of customary law, see Bloch, , Feudal Society, pp. 113–16Google Scholar; Duby, , The Chivalrous Society, p. 4Google Scholar; Elias, , Power and Civility, p. 62Google Scholar; Gurevich, , Categories of Medieval Culture, pp. 181–85Google Scholar; Poly, and Bournazel, , La mutation féodale, pp. 93–95Google Scholar; Reynolds, , Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, pp. 12–14Google Scholar; and Van Caenegem, , “Government, Law and Society,” p. 182Google Scholar.

74. Bloch, , Feudal Society, pp. 114 and 411Google Scholar. See also Brunner, , Land und Herrschaft, pp. 138–39Google Scholar.

75. Schlesinger, , “Lord and Follower in Germanic Institutional History,” p. 84Google Scholar. See also Reynolds, , Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, p. 38Google Scholar.

76. Matt. 16:18–19. On the social role of the church, see Bloch, , Feudal Society, pp. 360–61Google Scholar; Boutruche, , Seigneurie et féodalité, vol. 2, pp. 136–37Google Scholar; Mann, , The Sources of Social Power, vol. 1, pp. 379–83Google Scholar; Mundy, , Europe in the High Middle Ages, pp. 25–27Google Scholar; and Ullmann, , Principles of Government and Politics in the Middle Ages, pp. 32–114 and 138–49Google Scholar.

77. Mann, , The Sources of Social Power, vol. 1, p. 383Google Scholar.

78. The accounts of the cases presented here are drawn from the following works: Tierney, Brian, The Crisis of Church and State, 1050–1300 (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1964), pp. 53–55, 85–86, and 128Google Scholar; and Watt, J. A., “Spiritual and Temporal Powers,” in Burns, , The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, pp. 384–85 and 394Google Scholar.

79. Mundy, , Europe in the High Middle Ages, pp. 330 and 325Google Scholar. See also Nelson, Janet, “Kingship and Empire,” p. 248Google Scholar.

80. Duby, , La société aux XIe et XIIe siècles dans la région mâconnaise, p. 169Google Scholar.

81. Bloch, , Feudal Society, p. 410Google Scholar.

82. Ruggie, , “Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity,” p. 275Google Scholar.