This ambitious collection aims to "identify the gaps in academic research on representative institutions" and to enlarge the scope of inquiry by examining the balance between rulers and assemblies, investigating the persons and actions present at assemblies and their relations to changing political dialogues, and analyzing events that led to changes in political discourse (3). Almost all the authors achieve their goals admirably, providing close studies of specific assemblies from a variety of perspectives and attending carefully to often subtle linguistic strategies of participants.
The volume comprises three sections: the first focuses on the institutional settings of representation in late medieval and early modern Europe; the second emphasizes connections between prosopographical research and changes in political dialogue; the third focuses on the ideological world of representation and seeks "to discern patterns in which political discourses were triggered by institutional developments" (309). The editors and many of the contributors emphasize the frameworks provided by two specific works: David Stasavage's States of credit. Size, power, and the development of European polities (2011), and Michel Hébert's Parlementer. Assemblées representatives et échange politique en Europe occidentale à la fin du Moyen Âge (2014). The first presents a hypothesis-based examination of the relationship between political representation, public credit, and state formation, while the second focuses more on specific sources dealing with representative practices, especially on the Iberian peninsula. Together these works allow for a wide range of investigation and provide broad contexts within which various historians can situate their specific research.
Overall, this deeply researched collection raises many profound questions about the nature of representation and explores them with great care and sensitivity. Political scientists, economists, and historians of all periods will find much of value in the collection; many of the chapters require readers to acquaint themselves with very specific circumstances and institutions, but the authors do a fine job of explaining why these details matter and what light they shed on specific aspects of representation. Lastly, the editors at Brill deserve praise for their care in publishing the work; too often excellent volumes suffer from typos and thoughtless errors, but happily such was not the case here.
The chapters are too rich and complex to permit a neat summary; I will aim instead to indicate the focus of each and mention its more important contributions. In the longest (and one of the best) chapters, Peter Hoppenbrouwers leads off with an examination of assemblies of estates across Europe, clarifying issues regarding "their origins and durability, the terms used to describe key features, and the differences in prerogatives exercised by them" (20). He takes pains to emphasize precisely why these earlier assemblies are in many ways the opposite of modern representative bodies (25), and then raises the important question of what exactly representation was, of whom, and what assumptions underlay the elision of, for example, "the Commons" and "the commons" (28). Assemblies in non-royal principalities and in complex and composite states receive brief but informative treatment before Hoppenbrouwers turns to a crucial question: if these assemblies allowed non-aristocratic groups to have a say in matters of state, what exactly did they have a say over? (44). A clear list of what subjects were discussed (listed from always to rarely) enjoys support from the many specific examples he provides. The author then examines "the autocratic turn" (50), and ends with a concise summary of his trajectory that highlights his main conclusions.
María Asenjo-González follows with a close examination of "Political Representation and the Fiscal State in Late Medieval and Early Modern Castile." She traces the development of the Cortes and the somewhat paradoxical position of the city procurators, who from 1425 received their salaries from the royal exchequeur (56). While having procurators "allowed the city to feel part of the court and become familiar with some key aspects of the politics of the kingdom," the fees and favors procurators enjoyed "practically set the procurators up as clients of the monarchy to act in its service, a tactic that perverted the function of the procurator as emissary" (61). Her main focus is the relationship between the Cortes and the monarchy's fiscal interests, however, and the remainder of the chapter examines the ways in which the collaboration between crown and Cortes resulted in efficient taxation that, not surprisingly, favored those cities with representation in the Cortes--thus justifying the urban estates' acceptance of the procurators' function as their "representatives" (68).
Moving to northern Italy, Marco Gentile analyzes the varied patterns of political representation in the Lombard region under the "Stato/ducato visconteo-sforzesco," whose name itself, Gentile points out, indicates the fundamental ambiguity of this urban/dynastic entity (69). Questioning Stasavage's distinction between "city-states" and "territorial states," Gentile points out the close and ancient ties between Italian cities and their territories, "particularly evident in the Po valley" (73). What exactly, then were the relationships between the dukes of Milan and their subject cities? The Privy Council was not representative, though after 1466 Galeazzo Maria Visconti included more of the provincial landed aristocracy, thus creating some presence, if not exactly representation, for Lombards outside Milan. Each subject city maintained a bilateral relationship with the dukes; those representing the city could reflect ongoing internecine struggles between urban oligarchs and other factions or entities, such as the parish, vicinia, or quarter (78). Gentile briefly examines these dynamics in Parma, Alessandria, and Piacenza, concluding that "political representation may exist even in the absence of the classic representative institutions considered by Stasavage" (83).
Arguing vigorously for the independent, not imitative, development of the Irish Parliament, Coleman A. Dennehy highlights the unique features of that institution's growth and composition. Raising the question of representation, he states that the members of Irish Parliament were elected, largely in towns whose franchise varied considerably. The theoretical ownership of all Ireland by the English crown "never extended further than the king's writ"; in fact, the Gaelic Irish "never acknowledged...the king of England as lord of Ireland, never paid monies into the royal treasury, and never made use of the royal courts" (89-90). And while Gaelic-Irish men were not admitted to the English nobility and thus were not summoned to Parliament as lords, the upper clergy was well represented (91). Unlike the English, the Irish inferior clergy were "[Q]uite possibly the best represented segment of Irish society until the 1530s," having their own third house in Parliament (93). Representation of towns and shires emerged at the end of the thirteenth century, though shires and boroughs with representation were designated in haphazard fashion until the early Stuart era (94). Another unique and relatively large electorate came from the potwalloper boroughs (in which the franchise was extended to those with a hearth large enough to boil a substantial pot). Individual cities, especially Dublin, enjoyed special status, as did manor boroughs, closely controlled by the seneschal of the manor on behalf of the patron (95). Major changes came in the early 1600s, with the creation of 42 new boroughs, a change designed to create a working Protestant majority; this shift culminated in 1692 with an all-Protestant Parliament the year after Catholics were excluded from it. Given these top-down decisions, it is difficult to accept Dennery's conclusion that "more gradualist trends over representation were slowly wrought by a Parliament that was consistently evolving in what was usually an organic fashion" (105). More tenable are the claims for the existence of a medieval and early modern Irish Parliament that included some representative elements, one that changed constantly over time, and that experienced significant modification under the Stuarts.
Tim Neu examines how political representation arose and developed in Hesse and Württemberg, expanding on Michael Saward's general idea that "representation is a dynamic relationship based on performative claim-making" (107). Following Stasavage, Neu focuses on the significance of small geographic scale and the presence of a political elite with liquid wealth that could act collectively and have a say in taxation (109). Saward constructively argues that by focusing on claims to be representative, rather than on whether an instance of representation is "real" or "legitimate," historians can weigh how individuals "offer themselves as speaking in the name of a political collective actor," voicing claims that must be asserted, repeated, and sometimes abandoned (111). Turning to specifics, Neu begins with the murky origins of Hesse's collective agency regarding the contested regency of Anne, left by her husband Landgrave William II (d. 1509), as guardian for their four-year-old son, Philip. In reaction, the "Prelates, Counts, Nobility and Towns" formed a union to overturn William's directive: "Because theLandschaft is a corporation permitted by law, it had the right and power to do what was good for it" (115). Similarly, Württemberg displayed no early traces of a single collective body wielding political power until a different crisis provoked its creation, in this case the unacceptable actions of the new duke, Eberhard II, after his ascension in 1496. Unlike their Hessian counterparts, the estates of Württemberg had a legal basis for their opposition in the 1492 Treaty of Esslingen; inhabitants of the territory used this mechanism to take over the regency and depose the duke. While specific political crises prompted the creation of these two bodies, Neu then examines the ways in which they acquired the right to levy general taxes as "a consequence of the estates' intensifying involvement in matters of imperial taxation" (117). The imposition of the Türkenhilfe, aid against the Turks granted by the Imperial Diet in 1530 and 1532, did much to hasten this transformation, though more clearly in Hesse than in Württemberg.
Part 2 of the collection examines the composition of representative institutions specifically in Scotland, Brabant, and Holland. Michael Penman finds the troubled reign of Robert Bruce/King Robert I (r. 1306-1329) the starting point for the transformation of the full council to full parliament, with widening participation which included the burgess class along with nobles and prelates (126-127), though reference to "three estates" appeared only in the later fourteenth century. To legitimate himself and his rule (difficult as an excommunicate who had committed murder in a church as well as treason), Robert coerced and manipulated Parliament and falsified its records. His military successes helped him to establish consensus, but even towards the end of his reign, he continued to rely on pressure and rhetoric to create an appearance of harmony in the face of "communal efforts, large and small, to manage royal power and protect subjects' interests" (129). As in England, tensions between the crown and tenants-in-chief surfaced with force (132), and as in England under Edward I, the monarch often responded favorably to petitions from "great men and nobles," thus linking subjects' access to redress with royal prerogative (135). Evidence of conciliar or parliamentary pressure appeared forcefully concerning the succession, and when Robert needed an extraordinary subsidy in the 1320s to pursue the war against England (136-137). Perhaps taking advantage of the king's ill health, the "community" in Parliament required the king to live of his own and use any extraordinary subsidy "only for designated purposes"--the community being defined in this case by the "earls, barons, burgesses(sic) and all the freeholders of his kingdom assembled in the same place" (139). Robert also agreed to specific exemptions from this levy for those still suffering economic privation and damages from war (140). The end of the century saw a significant diminution of representation, however, with lesser clergy, burgesses, and rural freeholders reduced to seeking redress from the king with "rough music" that disturbed his sleep (141).
Maintaining the focus on Scotland, Alastair J. Mann examines the dual roles that many officers of state, appointed by the crown, also played as representatives to the Scottish Parliament. Over the course of several centuries, more and more offices came to exist, from the sheriff and justiciar in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries to treasurers, comptrollers, and men of law down through the sixteenth. While chancellors had originally been clerics, increasingly they were nobles, a trend that characterized others offices as well over time. Not surprisingly, many of the newer positions dealing with legal matters were occupied by lawyers. Several long-term trends, such as the expansion of the Scottish peerage and the introduction of shire elections, further complicated relations among crown, officers, noble, and gentry. Mann uses the lives and careers of three individuals to illustrate the many complex ways in which lineage, ability, and personal history and allegiance could play into the performance of officers of state. These brief biographical sketches and color portraits breathe life into affairs of state and make Mann's analyses engaging and accessible.
Two other well-documented assemblies, the Estates of Brabant and the States of Holland, allow for examinations of the political discourse and stratagems that representatives and representative assemblies deployed. Mario Damen argues that the regular meetings of the Estates of Brabant between 1356 and 1430 gave rise to both a powerful political elite and a sophisticated political discourse on representation and governance (161). While the cities, particularly the four capitals, were the most active participants in meetings of the Estates, Damen's focus is the second estate: the nobility, though neither they, nor the clergy, nor the cities, were homogenous but rather conglomerations of interest groups (162). Many nobles held lordships and also acted as members of the court or as administrators on "national," regional, or local levels. The role of the nobility and of the Estates in general was especially important in the first decades of the fifteenth century, as Brabant became integrated into the Burgundian composite state. Damen traces the complex and uneven status of various representatives as well as their actual participation in assemblies and their relations with one another. The cordial relations of bannerets, those who held lordship from the duke, with urban elites became apparent in 1421; the duke tried to oust the most influential bannerets, who then rebelled against him, with the support of the cities. The rebellion succeeded, to the point that the charter of the New Government of 1422 stipulated that the duke could do nothing without the consent of his council (179). All that changed in 1430, when Philip the Good came to power and largely replaced the nobility in the Estates with his own permanent council and 26 new posts in his household, eight especially for bannerets and all for Brabantine nobles. Damen concludes by pointing out the difference between the numerical supremacy of the squires and the political supremacy of the bannerets; by highlighting the importance of lordship with high jurisdiction; and by examining the geographical division between more urban and more rural districts, particularly regarding the active role nobles played in urban institutions. He points to a topic of future research, namely the role of parties and factions, particularly regarding Brabantine nobles who received rent-fiefs from Philip the Bold, creating a pro-Burgundian group in the 1380s, seconded by the "bastards of Brabant" in the 1390s, all of whom stemmed from illegitimate branches of the ducal house (181). Such an analysis will find a warm welcome should it prove as illuminating as this chapter.
Ida Nijenhuis maintains the northern focus in her examination of ways in which Holland used its representatives' attendance and experience to control the Dutch States General from 1626 to 1630. She begins by highlighting the problems that might arise from sending more representatives to the assembly for longer stretches of time, focusing primarily on the expense of doing so, and then on the fears that longer exposure might result in increased political savvy in representatives from states other than Holland. The concerns raised over the proposed expansion of the assembly reveal the anxieties and insecurities of Hollanders regarding their prominence, despite their majority share of financial support for the United Provinces (184). Nijenhuis first examines the urban strength of Holland and the relative equality of seven major towns, which led to provincial cohesion. She then traces Holland's rise to prominence, culminating in the 1579 Union of Utrecht, according to which Holland took the lead in formulating goals and preparing resolutions, undergirded by its 58% contribution to the Union's budget. During the last quarter of that century, the States of Holland changed from an advisory body to an assembly that took on legislative and executive functions. In 1572 they created a standing committee in permanent session, a model soon imitated by all other provinces but one. The States of Holland's prominence in the war effort naturally led to The Hague becoming the permanent home of the States General.
In Part 3, the focus shifts to more abstract issues of ideas and discourses. Robert Stein uses an unusual and engaging source, the literary text entitled, "The Deeds of the Dukes of Brabant" by Jan van Boendale (1280s? - 1351), an important municipal official. Boendale wrote several important works in Middle Dutch rhyme, in which "he expresses a strict attitude toward the magistrate (sic) and its moral obligations" (209). Still more important, however, is the prince, charged with liberating and protecting the people and "governing the land for the common good and to the honour of God" (211). Despite his elevation of the ruling dynasty, Boendale's admiration for the dukes is conditional, and aligned with the expectations of the towns as well (214). After the duke fended off the aggressions of the "Eastlords" in 1318, 1324, and 1330, Boendale revised earlier sections of his text, going back to the Battle of Worringen of 1288 to underscore Brabantine superiority over the Eastlords. He added final chapters on the excellent character of John III and his praiseworthy wife, Mary of Evreux (217). More subtly, the chronicle begins with the financially ruinous reigns of John I and John II, which had led the towns to revolt, create an urban league, and reorganize ducal finances. Boendale did not set John III in opposition to this league, however; rather he appeared as the heart of their cooperation (220). This rich source, and Stein's careful reading of it, present evidence of a complementary rather than combative relationship between representatives and ruler; the many excerpts from the chronicle beautifully support Stein's argument.
Marie Van Eeckenrode examines the unbelievably rosy picture of harmony and respect that characterized official political dialogue in 15th-to 16th-century Hainault in "Rituals of Unanimity and Balance." The registers of the deliberations of the Estates of "give us insight into several strategies of negotiations within the county assembly," as do the registers from the City Council of Mons, the most influential representative of the third order of the Estates (226-227). In their careful presentation of consensus, these registers were instruments of political communication, records that could function as "a material symbolization (sic) of the deputies' idea of their own role in the county, and of the role of the assembly itself" (228). The same smoothing-out of difference characterizes other documents relating to the Estates as well. Van Eeckenrode provides an example of a situation in which clearly different parties had different goals concerning the concession of a certain degree of financial autonomy from the duke of Burgundy. From the registers, however, it looks like "a matter of a slight administrative adjustment rather than a fight between the different levels of power," which it surely must have been (229). The three orders in Hainaut enjoyed equal footing in deliberations, the most important of which involved granting subsidies to the prince, the burden of which they also shared equally. Harmony thus had to be maintained horizontally among the three orders as well as vertically with the prince. Even when the Estates succeeded in deposing their countess in favor of Philip the Good in the 1420s, they did not revolt but worked within the overarching linguistic framework of the common good (237). This fascinating study concludes by emphasizing the constant effort required of all parties to maintain balance among all, or at least "make believe that this balance was indeed maintained" (239).
The lengthy title, "Speech Acts and Political Communication in the Estates General of Valois and Habsburg Burgundy c. 1370-1530. Towards a Shared Political Language" encompasses the range of Jan Dumolyn and Graeme Small's contribution. Arguing that "the depth and diversity of the tradition of representative assemblies in the Low Countries is striking" (240), they trace the roles of specific assemblies and the various composites formed from them. They focus on the spoken word, direct sources of which are scanty at best for this time and region; such an investigation is still possible, however, by turning to indirect sources such as chronicles, occasional extended memoirs by deputies, and above all the many fragmentary accounts of reports of envoys communicating the doings of regional Estates and the Estates General to the municipal authorities whom they represented (243). Both chronicles and memoirs have significant inherent problems, whereas the accounts delegates rendered could be more easily verified, especially because they brought scribes with them. Despite the growth of literacy, speech acts dominated political communication, as petitions, proposals for reform, or ducal ordonnances (249). To analyze their sources, the authors turn to the SPEAKING model of sociolinguist Dell Hymes (249), which they apply to various types of oral presentation and exchange. They then identify main genres of discourse: the sacred, the legal, and the historical, the last of which largely emanated from the prince (260-262). Like sermons in the English Parliament, Dumolyn and Small conclude that speeches at the Estates General contributed to the emergence of "a common political language" (264)--though of course the same words could mean different things to different people. Opening the door to further inquiry, they question how much such speech, and how much the vagaries of dynastic politics, each contributed to the stability of political unions in the Low Countries (266).
David Grummitt continues investigation into the role of public performance with "Parliament, War, and the 'Public Sphere' in Late Medieval England. The Experience of Lancastrian Kent," asking to what extent "ordinary people shared a common political language with their social betters" (266). That common language encompassed the activities of Parliament increasingly, as subjects gained access to royal justice, paid royal taxes, and served in royal armies. Many who were unlikely to serve in Parliament themselves nonetheless interacted with those who did in both public and private contexts, and the plague allowed commoners to demand higher wages and ultimately revolt in 1381. He argues as well that by 1300 a commonly understood vernacular took shape that allowed speakers of widely differing dialects to communicate (269) and that the new Lancastrian dynasty used to justify its claims and policies. Public spheres arose and grew, particularly in Kent, where good road to ports connecting to the English-held lands in France saw the steady traffic of diplomats, courtiers, administrators and soldiers. At the same time, many isolated communities persisted, and the absence of a strong noble lordship promoted the presence of a powerful class of local gentry. Thus both situated and unsituated public discourse flourished, one in relative security, the other in a potentially more anarchic setting. As examples of the former, he points to the county court, the patchwork of local jurisdictions, the activities of the wardens of the Rochester Bridge, and the commission of array, at which men aged 16-60 assembled in order to ascertain their ownership of arms and armour. By contrast, an example of the way in which public discourse could quickly slip free of elite control appears in the rapid spread of Lollardy in Kent in the 1420s (277). Even more radically loose discourse erupted in 1450 with Jack Cade's rebellion. Triggers for that crisis might include the return of MPs after Parliament and even the king's image on the coinage (as the image of a ship gave way to jibes about sheep) (279), as a contemporary poem suggested. In fact, popular political poetry, the "literature of clamour" provided the rebels with ready-made language and themes. Like others, Grummitt suggests new avenues for future research: the examination of the Church as a "situated public sphere," and the ways in which the public sphere was transformed from the 1450s on; both should prove fruitful areas of investigation.
The last essay before the conclusion, Wim Blockmans' "Who Has a Say? The Conditions for the Emergence and Maintenance of Political Participation in Europe before 1800," was the only disappointment in this otherwise excellent volume. In an attempt to articulate a metatheory of representation, Blockmans too often instead presents ungrounded or obvious statements. As an example of the former, "Traditional historiography has most described representative institutions, and, more generally, political systems, in isolation from their economic, social and even ideological context," (287), a claim that in no way resonates with what I have read in the past thirty years. Nor have historians "taken for granted that monarchies ruled over communities living in well-established territories"; what is most striking in medieval and early modern studies of Europe is the opposite, namely the remarkable mutability of the ideals and realities of political power and the creation or absorption of various political entities. Among the more obvious oversimplifications is "Another geographical dimension with an evident impact on the functioning of representative institutions is the sheer space [by which he seems to mean size] of a polity" (290) and geography generally. Well yes, no argument there, but hardly a revelation. The same is true for considering the formation of a political community "through the interaction between rulers and subjects as a constitutive element in the analytical framework for the study of political representation" (296), along with a society's social and economic characteristics, composition and coherence of the political elite, and political conflict and institutionalization (289-290). I found myself waxing increasingly sarcastic as I read, but did note the helpful concluding suggestions for future inquiry: investigation about numbers and social status of the participants in politics and the frequency of their appearance, and more definition of what items were open to negotiation, as specified by whom, with what outcomes, and more information on how widely information about assemblies was disseminated and to whom.