Earticle

In the classic manors of four estates located at the central part of the Paris Basin, although basic labor services took the form of mixture, generally allotment-labor service which had been the original mode of tenants' labor services from freeman was dominant. On the other hand, corvées were much more imposed on freeman's holdings than slave's holdings and the burden tended to be heavier in the former than in the latter. However, in the estate of the early 9th century which was situated on the west side of the Seine River, the burden of labor services imposed on peasants of classic manors grew greatly owing to the combination of allotment-labor service and week-labor service. On the contrary, in the estates of the middle and late 9th century located east of th river, the burdens of services were much lightened because the basic service was composed of only allotment-service. Such difference wasn't derived from geographical conditions, but from temporal change that was lightening peasants' burden because week-services disappeared or diminished and the mode of allotment-oriented services was built up from the early part of 9th century to the later of the same century. Geographically the estate of St. Remi monastery situated in the upper Champagne shows backwardness with having the highest proportion of slave's holdings and the most characteristics of original labor services proper to slave condition among four estates. It is supposed that this was resulted from the fact that this area is near to ancient Germania. By and large, the mode of labor services and the obligation were similar among the classic manors of the same estate regardless of distance, whether near or far. But it's not always so. They could be different in case manor was located in such far and heterogeneous region as upper Champagne.

This article, focusing on ‘Empire and the unification of social structures’, researched the meaning of the byzantine confrontation on the Bogomils in the politics, military relations and socio-economic problems from the middle of the tenth century to the middle of the twelfth century. So, I analyzed a letter from Patriarch Theophylact of Constantinople to Tsar Peter of Bulgaria, the work of Euthymius Zigabenus, the polemic Discourse against the Heresy of Bogomil written by Cosmas the Priest, a 10th-century Bulgarian official. King Simeon's death in 927 left Bulgaria exhausted. Bulgaria had to face serious internal problems. One of them was the heretical movement started under Simeon's son and successor, Peter. Based upon the conception of earlier Eastern sects as to a permanent struggle between the forces of good and evil, Bogomilism was a Gnostic religiopolitical sect founded in the First Bulgarian Empire by the priest Bogomil during the reign of Tsar Petar I in the 10th century. It most probably arose in what is today the region of Macedonia as a response to the social stratification that occurred as a result of the introduction of feudalism and as a form of political movement and opposition to the Bulgarian state and the church. The Bogomils called for a return to early Christianity, rejecting the ecclesiastical hierarchy, and their primary political tendencies were resistance to the state and church authorities. This helped the movement spread quickly in the Balkans, gradually expanding throughout the Byzantine Empire and later reaching Kievan Rus', Bosnia, Dalmatia, Rascia, Italy, France. Bogomilism was an outcome of many factors that had arisen in the beginning of 10th century, most probably in the region of Macedonia. It was also strongly influenced by the Paulicians who had been driven out of Armenia. The Church in Bulgaria tried to extirpate Bogomilism. Tsar Peter of Bulgaria asked the Byzantine Empire to help to solve problems of Bogomilism. But Patriarch Theophylact of Constantinople gave a several advises to Tsar Peter of Bulgaria. It was not an aggressive attitude, but a passive-negative attitude. Although the heresy was poorly regarded officially, such was the Byzantine Empire's need for manpower that Alexius I Comnenus raised a unit of Bulgarian dualists from the neighbourhood of Philippopolis(now Plovdiv). Alexius did not proceed further against the dualist heretics until the last two years of his reign. At that time, under pressure from the Church to establish religious conformity, many Bogomils were forcibly converted, and their leaders either imprisoned or executed.

This article aims to search for historical factors which made the formation of the legend of Prester John. Medieval Europe believed that he, a descendant of the Three Magi, was a priest and a king dominating an immense kingdom in the three Indies, where there were many marvelous things, precious metals, remarkable fauna and flora, etc. The first document which mentions Prester John is the chronicle composed by Otto, bishop of Freising. According to his chronicle, Hugh, bishop of Jabala, related that a certain John, a prester and a king, won a victory against the kings of the Persians and Medes, and then advanced to the help of the Christians of Jerusalem. In general, this event is generally considered as the beginning of the myth of the Prester John. However, several factors played their respective role in creating the legend of the kingdom of the Prester John. Eastern Christians well established in Orient transferred their existence and activities to Western Christians frequently exaggerating and transforming them. Especially, Nestorians continued to tell stories and informations of the Prester John. The second factor was Prester John's letter addressed to the byzantine emperor about in 1165. It was full of marvelous things including paradise. The original letter was translated into many european languages and enjoyed much popularity so that the story of the kingdom of Prester John became well known to the public. It had much influence on the imagination of the Orient of medieval european people. Lastly, military conflicts and battles against Muslims, for of Eastern Chrisitians' coming to aid the Crusaders, such as rumor of Prester John and king David.

The purpose of this study is to investigate women’s political activities and participation in the Middle Ages, which has been a scholarly lacuna. Medieval politics has been recognized as a male-dominated area from which women were totally excluded. Beatrice’s revolt against her husband provides a clue that women were actively involved in politics, and therefore the medieval female should not be evaluated as politically incompetent. Similar cases have also been observed in the lives of women in many great and small noble families. In these households, noblewomen assumed the roles and responsibilities of wives and mothers, but at the same time represented and protected the interests of their families of origin. These ambiguous attitudes are due to the fact that medieval marriage was more of a family union than one of personal affection, and many women attained political standing due to their kinship ties. In conclusion, the medieval relationships between wives and husbands can be understood within their family constellations. The revolt of Beatrice alludes to this interesting political and social structure in the twelfth century.

This paper is intended to survey the production of texts executed by Charles V and the Princes du sang between 1360 and 1407 in France from the standpoint of the ‘Laws of Imitation’ proposed by Gabriel Tarde. The remarkable quantity of production of texts under Charles V is characterized by the accumulation of the cultural capitals in order to justify the royal political authority, leader of the state system. The success of government of Charles V or the efficient imposition of the state system corresponded with his ideological works. But after his death and the insanity of Charles VI, the political situation is very instable because of the rivalry between the brothers of Charles V, princes du sang. It was about to start the Civil War between the faction of Armagnac and that of Bourgogne. The growing political tension was developed around the state finance and the bastard feudality. In this situation, the princes produced also texts as an imitation of Charles V. But these activity were not the repetition of same texts but the imitation of production itself as the manner of justifying their political authorities. It corresponded to the political situation marked by division and unity of the state system. Concurrence between them and imitation after Charles V became a form of political culture around the year of 1400. This tendency have to be more investigated for the period of the Civil War in the first half of the 15th Century.

프랑스 역사인류학의 역사적, 학문적인 연원은 마르크 블로크와 뤼시앵 페르브가 『아날』지를 창간하면서 주창한 역사학을 중심으로 한 학제간 협동연구로 거슬러 올라간다. 최초의 역사인류학적 연구인 블로크의 『기적을 행하는 왕』(1924년)은 출판 당시에는 별로 주목을 받지 못했고, 1970년대에 역사인류학이 학문적 방법론으로서 성장, 발전하던 시기에 다시 출판되어 재조명을 받게 되었다. 이러한 관심의 변화는 당시 학계에서는 지식인들이 겪고 있었던 탈식민지화의 충격과 그로 인한 문화적 상대주의, 사회적으로는 도시화와 산업화, 그리고 텔레비전 보급에 의한 도시 문화와 표준어의 헤게모니 확산 및 지방색의 소멸 등과 같은 당대의 사회적, 문화적인 맥락과 밀접하게 맞닿아 있었다. 사회의 변화는 과거 농촌의 “민중문화”에 대한 대중적인 향수를 불러일으켰고, 학문적으로는 농민문화에 대한 연구와 이론적인 쇄신이 이루어졌다. 당시 피에르 자케즈 엘리아스의 『교만의 말』과 엠마뉘엘 르루아라뒤리의 『몽타이유』는 상업적인 성공을 거두기도 하였다. 역사인류학은 여러 발전 단계를 거치며 성장하였다. 그 중에서 특히 “민속”과 “민중문화”에 대한 연구는 1960-1970년대에 새롭게 부흥하였다. 역사학자들은 아르놀드 방 즈넵의 “통과의례” 이론과 같은 민속학의 연구방법론을 역사학에 적용하였고, 블라디미르 프로프나 미하일 바흐친 같은 “민중문학” 전문가들의 연구로부터 크게 영감을 얻었다. 장 피에르 베르낭, 피에르 비달 나케, 마르셀 데티엔의 고대 그리스 신화 연구나 자크 르고프와 엠마뉘엘 르루아라뒤리의 멜뤼진 설화 연구, 그리고 필자의 성 긴포르 연구 등이 그 대표적인 예이다. 학문 발전과정에서 역사학과 인류학은 서로 영향을 주고받았다. 인류학은 시간적인 요인을 중시하면서 일종의 “역사화” 과정을 겪었다. 역사학이 인류학으로부터 받은 영향은 다음과 같은 네 가지 측면에서 제시할 수 있다. 첫째, 역사학자들은 인류학으로부터 “구조”이라는 측면을 고려하면서 사회조직들의 변화 논리를 공시적으로 분석하는 방법을 배웠다. 둘째, 역사학자들의 문제의식이 확장되었으며, 신화와 전설의 구조적 분석, 가족과 친족관계 연구, 의례와 의식, 음악과 전례 연구 등으로 연구대상의 폭이 확대되었다. 역사학자들은 인류학자들과 같은 대상을 연구하기 시작하였고, 이것은 상호 대화와 학제적인 협동연구를 가능하게 하였다. 셋째, 이러한 확장된 연구들이 제기하는 질문의 배후에는 문화권에 따라 변화하는 몸의 표상과 역할에 대한 거대한 질문이 도사리고 있다. 몸에 대한 연구는 이미 초창기의 인류학 및 “몸의 테크닉”에 대한 마르셀 모스의 선구적인 연구에서부터 근본적인 문제로 제기되었다. 특히, 중세사학자들에게는, 그리스도의 육화(肉化)가 그리스도교 세계의 종교와 문화의 핵심이기 때문에, 몸은 명백히 중심적인 문제이다. 또한, 자연과 문화 사이의 관계에 대한 인류학자 필립 데스콜라의 연구는 중세사학자로 하여금 자신의 연구대상에 대해서 생각하고 그것을 다른 문화들과 비교하는 데 도움을 주었으며, 서구의 유대-그리스도교 문화에 뿌리 깊게 박혀있는 자연론적인 태도를 감지하는데 기여하였다. 넷째, 역사학자들의 “표상” 연구는 그들이 몸과 자연의 생물학적인 존재와 물질성에 대한 감각을 잃어버릴 수 있는 위험성을 제기하였다. 그렇지만, 최근 미국과 유럽에서는 감정의 역사에 대한 연구가 많이 이루어지고 있으며, 오랫동안 특수한 독립 연구분야로 인식되어오던 과학사와 의학사에서 사회사와 문화사에 귀 기울이고 있다. 또한, 이미지의 인류학적 역사 역시 몸에 대한 연구와 관련되어 있다. 예를 들어, 인류학자 앨프리드 젤의 연구는 이미지가 스스로의 의도를 가지고 있으며, 감정을 일으키고, 행동을 유발하고, 사람들 사이의 사회적인 관계를 수립한다는 점을 지적하였다. 역사학자와 중세사학자에게 있어서 이러한 인류학적인 연구가 지니는 타당성은 무엇보다도 서구의 유비론적, 자연론적인 문화를 세계의 다른 존재론들 및 문화들 사이에서 상대화시킨다는 점에 있다. 역사인류학의 발전에서 보이는 것처럼 역사학에서의 문제제기는 빠른 속도로 발전하였으며, 서로 다른 학문분야 간의 대화에 의해서 새로운 문제와 새로운 방법론, 새로운 연구대상에 관심을 가지게 되었다.