<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<!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" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
    <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">24.06.02</article-id>
            <title-group>
                <article-title>24.06.02, Wiszewski (ed), Legal Norms and Political Action in Multi-Ethnic Societies</article-title>
            </title-group>
            <contrib-group>
                <contrib contrib-type="author">
                    <name>
                        <surname>Christian Raffensberger</surname>
                        <given-names/>
                    </name>
                    <aff></aff>
                    <address>
                        <email>craffensperger@wittenberg.edu</email>
                    </address>
                </contrib>
            </contrib-group>
            <pub-date publication-format="epub" date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2022">
                <year>2024</year>
            </pub-date>
            <product product-type="book">
                <person-group>
                    <name>
                        <surname>Wiszewski, Przemysław (ed)</surname>
                        <given-names/>
                    </name>
                </person-group>
                <source>Legal Norms and Political Action in Multi-Ethnic Societies: Cohesion in Multi-Ethnic Societies in Europe from c. 1000 to the Present, III</source>
                <series>Early European Research </series>
                <year iso-8601-date="2023">2023</year>
                <publisher-loc>Turnhout, Belgium</publisher-loc>
                <publisher-name>Brepols</publisher-name>
                <page-range>Pp. 336</page-range>
                <price>$125 (hardback)</price>
                <isbn>978-2-503-60230-1 (hardback)</isbn>
            </product>
            <permissions>
                <copyright-statement>Copyright 2024 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>Paula Pinto-Costa and Joana Lencart begin their contribution to this volume by noting
            that, “The study of different ethnic groups throughout Europe has undergone a
            significant change through the recent work of historians” (201). This is absolutely
            true, but their contribution is one of only a few in the collection to utilize those
            changes and talk about issues such as acculturation and identity. They specifically
            acknowledge that Portugal was “neither a simple bipolar society (constituted by two
            poles: Christians and ethnic minorities) nor unidirectional” (211). In most of the
            contributions here, “ethnicity” is rarely, if ever, problematized, and the bipolar
            option is the default. For example, Grzegorz Myśliwski essentializes the ethnic identity
            of the various rulers of Poland down to one ethnicity, the “Polish Piast dynasty” (49),
            despite the fact that the “Polish Piast dynasty” was composed of individuals, male and
            female, the latter of which came from Rus, the German Empire, Hungary, and elsewhere.
            These women have had their natal identities expunged in favor of a paternalistic mode of
            ethnic identification. What is ethnicity and what is its role in relation to the
            politics of multi-ethnic societies? The latter is one of the questions that this volume,
            the third in a series sponsored by the Polish Academy of Sciences, sets out to answer.
            The former is not, however, but it should be, and it should be a base upon which each
            piece in the volume builds in order to better create an understanding of what a
            multi-ethnic society is. Instead, the majority of pieces are largely analyses of town
            life in east central Europe, where Jews stand in for “multi-ethnic.” This is not to say
            that all of the pieces do this, as there are several fascinating contributions that are
            highlighted below. </p><p> Religious difference is the main marker of a “multi-ethnic” society
            in the volume, and as such, Jews occur numerous times. Jewish communities in medieval
            Europe were typically given the “protection” of the local ruler (duke, prince, or king).
            This created a legal framework for a discussion of them as a separate category within
            society, which is coded as ethnicity here. Aivaras Poška discusses how the Magdeburg law
            in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania may have provided for communal coverage of Jews
            alongside other groups, rather than singling them out. However, from the seven legal
            documents covering three centuries, it is not clear that this happened with any
            regularity. Furthermore, Poška does not mention ethnicity once in the essay; discussing
            Jews as a community is enough to make it multi-ethnic, as is common throughout the
            volume. In his own contribution, Przemysław Wiszewski (who also edited the volume and
            wrote its introduction and conclusion) was able to discuss a microcosm of the history of
            the Jews in Poland. He notes that despite fourteenth-century pogroms, widespread
            anti-Jewish violence occurred only after 1453 and the arrival of St. John of Capistrano,
            who preached against both Jews and Muslims (36-37). His preaching made the local
            population aware of the “other” in their midst and they took action against them, with
            the government stepping in to seize Jewish property. Jurgita Šiaučiūnaitè-Verbickienė’s
            contribution is a fascinating examination of the ways that the towns of the Grand Duchy
            of Lithuania attempted to limit Jewish economic success, and why they failed; though
            none of this, again, is specifically about ethnicity. Dovilė Troskovaitė adds to the
            focus on Jews (which could have profitably been separated out as a section of the book
            to better compare and contrast) but this time on Karaites. Troskovaitė’s article is
            interesting and problematizes the oft-told tale of the arrival of the Karaites,
            replacing it with economic motives which also motivated the Rabbinic Jews. Again,
            however, ethnicity is not discussed in any specific way. Further, these articles on Jews
            in medieval and early modern Europe do not use Hebrew sources, by and large, and thus
            approach the issue just from the Christian side. All of this makes me curious what the
            reception of the work will be in the Jewish Studies community, if any. </p><p> Religion is also
            the focus for Endre Sashalmi, who deals with the Muscovite law code of 1649
                (<italic>Ulozhenie</italic>) and its inclusion and categorization of groups other
            than Russians. Despite starting with an eighteenth-century context for a
            seventeenth-century law code, this article offers a fascinating analysis of the terms
            and self-definitions used in the law code. In summary, Orthodox Christianity defined
            Russianness, as religion was a marker for other groups such as Jews, Muslims, and
            western Christians (<italic>nemtsy</italic>). This is some of the most in-depth analysis
            of a multi-ethnic society in the whole volume and should be praised for that. Finally,
            Sashalmi’s conclusion, that service to the tsar trumped any other consideration
            (religion, nationality, etc.) serves as an excellent comment on the volume’s titular
            subject. Maria Bonet Donato also deals with religious groups, both Jews and Muslims, in
            Catalonia, covering the legislation that helped to other them from the Christian
            population but also the ways that elites encouraged those groups to stay in a
            Christian-dominated society, and the reasons behind both sets of actions. Flocel Sabate
            Curul builds on this material to discuss late medieval Catalonia, where Jews and Muslims
            were required to engage in disputations with Christians, as well as to listen to
            Christian preaching, a change in the policy articulated by Bonet Donato. And yet, as
            Sabate Curul points out, the groups still lived in conjunction with one another because
            of economic necessity (279). </p><p> In addition to the fine work of Pinto-Costa and Lencart, we
            see ethnicity dealt with well by Cosmin Popa-Gorjanu, whose focus is on ethnicity via
            the category of estates in Transylvania. In this way, Popa-Gorjanu can focus upon a
            specific source base, where the king intervened between estates, and use the language of
            the sources without reading assumptions of ethnicity into the documentary record. He
            also does a good job of problematizing assumptions made by other scholars and keeping to
            the extant evidence, slim (he notes) as it may be. Daniel Bagi problematizes ethnicity
            well in his article on the Cuman law, but the text of the article itself is much more
            about the history and historicity of the law than about ethnicity. And finally, Luciano
            Gallinari deals with Sardinian conceptualizations of identity, which were
            self-consciously created “to strengthen the political aims of the island’s elites in the
            sixteenth and seventeenth centuries” (227). Within that discourse, identities of the
            past were repurposed to demonstrate the Sardinians’ inherent impermeability to immigrant
            cultures. These models have been reified such that they still exist in the twenty-first
            century, though Sardinia has moved from the crown of Aragon to the nation of Italy.
            These pieces do not deal with religious minorities exclusively and all are able to
            contextualize and discuss ethnicity to advance their goals and that of the volume as a
            whole. </p><p> Edited collections can be a mixed bag of materials. This volume is no different.
            One extreme outlier is the piece tucked away at the end of the volume by Joanna Wojdon
            on Polish immigration to the United States. It is modern, not medieval or early modern,
            and deals with an entirely different continent. Not nearly as different but still not
            within the main frame of the volume is the piece by Andrzej Pleszczyński, which has an
            interesting concept--utilizing “foreign” sources when writing a chronicle. However, it
            really should not surprise us that chroniclers relied on source material, and we see the
            same in various places. Further, some of the examples adduced by Pleszczyński suggest
            that Długosz has altered his source material (regarding the conversion of Volodimer
            Sviatoslavich in Rus, for example), when, in fact, Długosz keeps close to the base text. </p><p>
            Audience is an essential consideration in any work, edited or otherwise, and it is an
            open question for this volume. Wiszewski, in his conclusion, draws attention to the
            context of the meetings of their working group in the latter 2010s in Europe, when a
            rise in immigration, Brexit, and conflict in eastern Europe led to questions about
            multi-ethnic societies. And yet, these issues are not well reflected in the volume,
            though they may have been on the scholars’ minds. Other audience issues exist, such as
            the utility of these materials for non-eastern European audiences. For instance, Maps
            3.1, 4.1, and 8.1 are largely illegible except for the biggest text. And even if they
            were legible, they are not in English. If one goal of the volume was to make some areas
            accessible to medievalists of western Europe, it would have helped to have good, legible
            maps (Maps 10.1, 10.2, and 11.1 are excellent examples). Despite this, Brepols is to be
            praised for bringing out useful and interesting volumes, and the Polish Academy of
            Sciences, Wiszewski, and the contributors should be thanked for making the volume open
            access so that one can dive in and sample the pieces of particular interest to learn
            more about the societies under discussion here. </p>
    </body>
</article>
