<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf8'?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.1 20151215//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/archiving/1.1/JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article dtd-version="1.1" article-type="book-review">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id>TMR</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>The Medieval Review</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn pub-type="epub">1096-746X</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>Indiana University</publisher-name>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">14.09.16</article-id>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>14.09.16, Salrach, Justícia i poder a Catalunya (Jonathan Jarrett)</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>Jarrett</surname>
            <given-names/>
          </name>
          <aff>University of Birmingham</aff>
          <address>
            <email>j.jarrett@bham.ac.uk</email>
          </address>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date publication-format="epub" date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2014">
        <year>2014</year>
      </pub-date>
      <product product-type="book">
        <person-group>
          <name>
            <surname>Salrach, Josep M.</surname>
            <given-names/>
          </name>
        </person-group>
        <source>Justícia i poder a Catalunya abans de l'any mil, Referències, 55</source>
        <year iso-8601-date="2013">2013</year>
        <publisher-loc>Vic</publisher-loc>
        <publisher-name>Eumo</publisher-name>
        <page-range>Pp. 244</page-range>
        <price/>
        <isbn>9788497664752 (paperback)</isbn>
      </product>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright 2014 Trustees of Indiana University. Indiana University provides the information contained in this file for non-commercial, personal, or research use only. All other use, including but not limited to commercial or scholarly reproductions, redistribution, publication or transmission, whether by electronic means or otherwise, without prior written permission of the copyright holder is strictly prohibited.</copyright-statement>
      </permissions>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <p> For historians of medieval Catalonia, a new book by Josep María Salrach i Marés is
               an occasion for celebration: Salrach is perhaps the biggest name in Catalonia's
               medieval historiography and his work bears on themes that concern most social
               historians working on the Middle Ages. His works include trenchant volumes on famine
               and the peasantry (<italic>La fam al món: passat i present</italic> of 2009 and<italic>La formación del campesinado en el occidente antiguo y medieval</italic> of
               1997) which deserve to be far better known, even if his potential readers need to
               tackle an œuvre almost entirely in Catalan and Castilian. This volume, which is
               entertaining, illuminating and thought-provoking in equal measure, adopts a more
               local focus, however, on the interaction of the ideals and practice of justice with
               the demands of power in the area that is now Catalonia in the two centuries before
               the year 1000, and Salrach makes no effort to engage it in wider currents of European
               medieval historiography.</p>
    <p> In fact, Salrach engages with almost no historiography at all, a deliberate choice
               to avoid debates with which the author expresses his fatigue (16). Instead, almost
               all his references are to printings of primary material, with which this period and
               area is remarkably blessed and Salrach still more so, since he had access when
               writing to the unpublished volumes of the <italic>Catalunya Carolíngia</italic>
               charter edition for the important county of Barcelona. While this disengagement with
               the historiography presents problems, discussed below, the chosen alternative is
               still an engaging way to proceed, because Salrach sees all his documents as stories
               worth exploring. Rather than systematise unduly (or sometimes at all) he leads the
               reader through case after fascinating case of pre-Catalan judicial practice and by so
               doing expertly reconstructs the structures, tensions and changes of the society whose
               documents he knows so well, providing what he calls an "atypical and internal history
               of the Catalans" (16), or at least, of the predecessors of those who now so identify.
               The human interest of the cases is never far from the surface and peculiarities are
               teased out to illuminating effect.</p>
    <p> The book works first through the systems and procedures of the courts that will be
               discussed. Here we first meet one of the book's recurrent themes, the continuing use
               in the area (as also further west) of the law code of the Visigothic kings of Spain,
               the <italic>Forum Iudicum</italic> (<italic>Conference of Judges</italic>). Two
               tenth-century copies of this work's local version, the <italic>Liber Iudicum
                  Popularis</italic>, survive from this area, one copied by a man who decided many of
               the cases dealt with in Salrach's book and helpfully added a preface of his own on
               the duties of a judge. Salrach defends the label "public" for this system, and
               whatever problems this term may have, in the face of such evidence anachronism cannot
               be one of them.</p>
    <p> The second chapter looks at court disputes between the powerful, including appeals
               to the Carolingian kings who sit at the edge of early medieval Catalan history; here
               we see not least that the counts in whose hands effective government rested could be
               defeated in their own courts, although the explanation, in so far as Salrach gives
               one--which is that by being prepared to lose sometimes they encouraged their subjects
               to use and uphold the system that legitimised their power (88)--has to wait for the
               next chapter. There is something here worth addressing that Salrach does not,
               although as in many places in this book he gives the reader all the materials to
               think of the point themselves: while it is astonishing to have documents preserved by
               the losers in a court case at all (for these documents often come from the comital
               archives, though Salrach does not say so), we do not have them from the Church, where
               Salrach's example of a lost case preserved is the only one known to the present
               reviewer, in which the contested land was split between the cathedral of Girona and
               the defendant (79-80). Special imperatives must have driven the counts' creation of
               such documents. One might note how often these cases involved the actions of the
               presiding count's father, and how a small wave of such cases of expropriation or
               wrongful claim seem to have followed the death of each count of Barcelona as his son
               profited from the chance to palliate the alienated. It was perhaps harder than
               Salrach allows obtaining justice against a living count, at least after Guifré the
               Hairy came to power in 878, but there might still have been more hope of it than
               against the undying Church.</p>
    <p> Such pessimism resounds more in Salrach's next chapter, on disputes between the
               powerful and the less so. A series of cases demonstrate that when it wished to the
               Church could pursue cases to the point where the ordinary norms of justice,
               privileging written evidence that could be checked and considering claims left
               unpursued for thirty years as lapsed, would be set aside in pursuit of the
               ecclesiastically preferred outcome, although the case is made further on in the book
               that some judges would also bend process when strict application of the law would
               ruin the helpless (154-156). Nonetheless, although the Church held more cards (or
               rather <italic>cartae</italic>) in court than anyone else, it is clear that for most
               of the ninth and tenth centuries persons of middling or even low status did come to
               court in hope of justice and so presumably enough of them found it to keep that hope
               alive in society at large, although if the lands in question never came to the
               Church, or land was not what was at issue, such outcomes might be invisible to us
               (102-103).</p>
    <p> Invisibility is also an issue for the fourth chapter, which is on slavery. This is a
               subject on which Salrach has done much important work, some of which is reprised here
               straight from the evidence, but this is the chapter which has least to do with
               justice. Since, however, slaves did not hold property and are rarely themselves
               transferred in what we have (perhaps because they were perishable and thus not worth
               the archiving), trials in which people were reduced to slavery for their crimes are
               much of the evidence we have that slavery was still an institution in the Catalan
               counties of this era. Salrach contends, indeed, that no definition of the term
               serfdom which allows for arbitrary maltreatment of the serf can really be accepted,
               so that his slavery went on for much longer than many scholars would accept. This has
               analytical rigour in its favour, since it places a definite line between statuses,
               but as Salrach himself says it is not clear that there was one in practice.
               Nonetheless, this chapter is a worthy challenge to historians to re-examine their
               categories and what those categories might have meant to live in.</p>
    <p> The next two chapters focus on court business and the use of documents respectively.
               In the former of these Salrach starts by outlining the judge as the crucial part of
               the judicial machinery, but rather than tell us who judges were (though this turns up
               in the conclusions, p. 241, with a mention of previous discussion presumably cut) he
               goes through the types of business with which they dealt, in an immensely informative
               tour of the pre-Catalan judicial machinery. One might wonder why this chapter did not
               follow the first one on judicial ideology, and its final pages, on the Carolingian
               kings' interventions in the area via the documents awarded to those who travelled to
               court to obtain support, do not really connect to the theme. What is here is of great
               interest, though, as it is mostly the cases where something unusual occurred which
               Salrach goes through with the reader (such as the single ordeal recorded in the area
               before 1000, suggested and dramatically, yet not technically, failed by the
               defendant). As a result we are shown people having to make real and difficult
               decisions about ideals versus practice, rather than merely the "rules of the
               game."</p>
    <p> The chapter on literacy and documents has rather less to say to anyone familiar with
               the work of Michel Zimmermann, who escapes the ban on historiography in the form of
               his monumental <italic>Écrire et lire en Catalogne</italic> and provides much of
               Salrach's perspective here. Nonetheless, a particular focus on the reading of
               documents aloud, including from memory while obtaining replacements, pulls together
               oral and written in ways that Zimmermann's discussion does not and forces scholars of
               such matters to accept that here, at least, documents were read and re-read on
               numerous occasions so that people could remember them, even outside Church contexts.
               This is one of several points in the book where one wishes that Salrach engaged more
               deliberately with a wider historiography, as scholars elsewhere have spent years
               trying to expose such processes; if Salrach is aware of this, though, he gives no
               sign.</p>
    <p> The final substantive chapter deals with the degradation of this judicial system as
               the year 1000 approached then passed. Here one cannot miss Salrach's credentials as a
               well-established believer in the so-called "feudal transformation." Readers of his
                  <italic>El procés de feudalització</italic> of 1987 will find much that is
               familiar here, refracted through the optic of court cases in which nobles refused to
               accept verdicts, raised challenges by combat or simply didn't turn up. For Salrach,
               this all shows the long roots of the noble disenchantment with the alliance of Church
               and counts which would explode after the death of Count-Marquis Ramon Borrell of
               Barcelona in 1018.</p>
    <p> Salrach's conclusion shows what he thinks the key themes of this book are. They
               could be summarised as: the question of access to justice, which he believes was not
               class-blind but still remarkably open; the potential of court cases as a window on
               social change; the question of freedom versus slavery in law and in practice; and a
               more technical matter of what was constituted by the renders and duties that magnates
               claimed under the name of <italic>servitium</italic>. He attacks this last issue
               several times in the volume (87-90, 110-112, 126-132, 242-243), proposing that the
                  <italic>servitium</italic> due from fiscal slaves had become generalised to the
               population at large as <italic>servitium regis</italic>, mainly comprising military
               service or its support (unless, as in some cases here (50-53), they could demonstrate
               exemption), but that personal submission to a lord also involved renders called <italic>censum</italic> or <italic>tributum</italic> as part of <italic>servitium</italic>. This has important implications for debates on serfdom and
               fiscality elsewhere in the early medieval world and it is a pity that such thoughts
               are published only as glosses on case notes rather than as a stand-alone thesis. The
               book's lack of historiographical context means that the importance of such
               observations may not be appreciated by a reader who is being told, not without basis,
               that these conclusions are obvious from reading the documents. Salrach's findings on
               the oral value of charters, on <italic>servitium</italic>, or on the preservation of
               documents relevant to properties by those properties' owners even when the documents
               predated that ownership, may seem obvious to him, but they have not been so to many
               scholars elsewhere and they deserve emphasis that this arrangement cannot give.</p>
    <p> More obviously, the lack of citation makes it impossible to be aware if Salrach is
               simply unaware of a work or rather thinks it irrelevant. One very obvious case where
               one must suspect the former is Jeffrey Bowman's 2004 book <italic>Shifting
                  Landmarks</italic>, which addresses many of the same issues and even documents as does
               Salrach, often with different and more critical conclusions. This is especially
               serious where the Visigothic Law is concerned: Salrach's citations leave us in no
               doubt that the ancient text was indeed a frequent resort in the tenth century, but
               Bowman has already shown that this resort was partial and often misleading, despite
               judges well knowing the original sense of the texts they distorted by excerption or
               insertion. This makes Salrach's uses of the <italic>Liber Iudicum</italic> as a
               normative source for tenth-century practice decidedly problematic, and Bowman's work
               should have made a difference here.</p>
    <p> Another issue is one of regionality. Salrach's discussion of Church defence of
               rights against more humble laymen (69-83) is entirely conducted from the documents of
               the Girona cathedral cartulary. On the other hand, his discussion of loans and credit
               and the judges' role in enforcing fair terms (another of the points where one wishes
               Salrach would trumpet his innovative view more loudly) is based entirely on documents
               from Barcelona. The former is not least because the bishops of Girona were in fact
               keener in such efforts than many another--they got charters of immunity from every
               Carolingian king up to (and including, <italic>pace</italic> Salrach) Louis IV, more
               than anywhere else as far as we can tell--and the latter is because credit
               arrangements are far harder to find outside the over-driven land market of Barcelona.
               The contribution to the record of Girona's bishops' diligence is however further
               distorted by the fact that at Girona we are largely reliant on a selectively-copied
               cartulary rather than the wealth of original documents we have from other areas,
               making generalisation here still riskier. Such issues do not make Salrach's points
               invalid, but they do mean that in these cases they need more careful balancing with
               other evidence than is provided.</p>
    <p> All of these critiques show the power of this book to spark debate and inspire new
               thinking, however, and should not minimise or even seriously diminish the insight of
               Salrach's scholarship as here displayed. There are matters here of consequence to
               scholars interested in slavery, literacy, judicial practice and the construction of
               power in many parts of the early medieval world, powered by the ability of
               Catalonia's uniquely dense array of well-published documents of practice to source
               models of how things may have been done in other areas less well evidenced. The
               author, perhaps recognising the limits of his likely audience given his language, has
               not striven to make these connections, but the book nonetheless showcases such
               possibilities well, as well as being founded clearly throughout on fascinating
               evidence. While one might hope that any translation would involve some effort to
               connect to the English-language historiography, this volume is certainly an excellent
               reason for early medievalists with any Romance language ability to see how far they
               can get with Catalan; it will amply repay the effort. </p>
    <p/>
  </body>
</article>
