Idea Transcript
QUAESTIONES MEDII AEVI NOVAE (2011)
I. FRONTIERS AND BORDERLANDS (THE
SECTION EDITED BY
ANDRZEJ JANECZEK)
ANDRZEJ JANECZEK WARSZAWA
FRONTIERS AND BORDERLANDS IN MEDIEVAL EUROPE. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Frontiers and borderlands have long fascinated historiography, including medieval studies, but in recent years we have seen a clear increase in interest in the subject. In the last two decades, there have been numerous international conferences and the publication of a number of collective works involving historians from many different countries on the topic, there have also been appearing with increasing frequency separate monographs and articles in which the author makes frontiers and borderlands the main subject of their analyses1. The expansion of attention paid to these themes in European medieval studies is especially notable, though on the other side of the Atlantic it has been an intensively explored subject for over a hundred years (especially in connection with the colonization of the North American West). The increased interest which has become visible in English, German, French and Spanish historiography and intensification of discussion and research has also led at the same time to a widening of scope of the topic. Various regions, centres and situations have become recognized and emphasized as borderlands, and not only in terms of 1 In order to save space I will cite here a selection of joint-authorship works: Medieval Frontier Societies, ed. by R. Bartlett, A. MacKay, Oxford 1989; the separate volume of Siedlungsforschung. Archäologie. Geschichte. Geographie IX (1991); Frontière et peuplement dans la monde méditerranéen au Moyen Âge, Castrum, 4, ed. by J.-M. Poisson, Rome-Madrid 1992; Grenzen und Grenzregionen. Frontières et régions frontalières. Borders and Border Regions, ed. by W. Haubrichs, R. Schneider, Saarbrücken 1993; Grenzen und Raumvorstellungen (11.-20. Jh.). Frontières et conceptions de lespace (11e-20e siècles), ed. by G.P. Marchal,
6
ANDRZEJ JANECZEK
political boundaries as was traditional, but also as ethnic, religious and cultural boundaries2, or linguistic frontiers3, the boundaries of economic zones4 or even the borders of smaller administrative units or geographical microregions. Thus historians start to follow the line of thinking of Lucien Febvre, who already in 1922 was urging scholars to look at frontiers, rather than studying boundaries particularly political ones5. As a result, the number of different frontiers and borderlands of variable character and importance has increased dramatically in the recent literature. The attention that has been paid to them has produced some interesting results. It is however difficult to avoid the suspicion that the increasing attractiveness Zürich 1996; Menschen und Grenzen in der frühen Neuzeit, ed. by W. Schmale, R. Stauber, Berlin 1998; Frontiers in Question: Eurasian Borderlands, 700-1700, ed. by D. Power, N. Standen, Basingstoke 1999; the separate volume of Annual of Medieval Studies at CEU VI (2000), ed. by G. Jaritz; The Transformation of Frontiers. From Late Antiquity to the Carolingians, ed. by W. Pohl, I. Wood, H. Reinitz, The Transformation of the Roman World, 10, Leiden 2001; Identidad y representación de la frontera en la España medieval (siglos XI-XIV), ed. by C. de Ayala Martínez, P. Buresi, Ph. Josserand, Madrid 2001; Medieval Frontiers: Concepts and Practices, ed. by D. Abulafia, N. Berend, Aldershot 2002; Frontières. Actes du 125e Congrès national des sociétés historiques et scientifiques, ed. by Ch. Desplat, Paris 2002; The European Frontier. Clashes and Compromises in the Middle Ages, ed. by J. Staecker, Lund 2004; On the Frontier of Latin Europe. Integration and Segregation in Red Ruthenia, 1350-1600, ed. by Th. Wünsch, A. Janeczek, Warsaw 2004; Borders, Barriers, and Ethnogenesis. Frontiers in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages, ed. by F. Curta, Turnhout 2005; Frontiers in the Middle Ages. Proceedings of the Third European Congress of Medieval Studies, ed. by O. Merisalo, Louvain-la-Neuve 2006. See also note 2 and 21. 2 Les frontières religieuses en Europe du XVe au XVIIe siècle: actes du XXXIe Colloque international détudes humanistes, ed. by R.R. Sauzet, Paris 1992; Grenzkultur Mischkultur?, ed. by R. Marti, Saarbrücken 2000; Frontiers of Faith: Religious Exchange and the Constitution of Religious Identities 1400-1750, ed. by E. Andor, I.G. Toth, Budapest 2001; Crusade and Conversion on the Baltic Frontier, 1150-1500, ed. by A.V. Murray, Aldershot 2001; The Clash of Cultures on the Medieval Baltic Frontier, ed. by A.V. Murray, Farnham 2009. See also: Ch.J. Halperin, The Ideology of Silence: Prejudice and Pragmatism on the Medieval Religious Frontier, Comparative Studies in Society and History XXVI (1984) 3, pp. 442-466; J. Osterhammel, Kulturelle Grenzen in der Expansion Europas, Saeculum XLVI (1995), pp. 101-138; P. Burke, Cultural Frontiers of Early Modern Europe, Przegl¹d Historyczny XCVI (2005) 2, pp. 205-216. 3 For instance: V. Cornish, Borderlands of Language in Europe and Their Relation to the Historic Frontier of Christendom, London 1936; R. Marti, Sprache und Grenze, in: Granice i pogranicza. Jêzyk i historia, ed. by S. Dubisz, A. Nagórko, Warszawa 1994, pp. 23-37. 4 As an example, see for the borderlands in the Mediterranean zone: F. Braudel, La Méditerranée et le monde méditerranéen à lépoque de Philippe II, Paris 1949. The question of the role of the Elbe as a frontier has been examined by A. Wyczañski, who has refuted the views traditional in economic and social histories on that topic: Granica na £abie w XV-XVII wieku w¹tpliwoci historyka, in: Miêdzy Zachodem a Wschodem. Etniczne, kulturowe i religijne pogranicza Rzeczypospolitej w XVI-XVIII wieku, ed. by K. Mikulski, A. Zieliñska-Nowicka, Toruñ 2006, pp. 17-21. 5 L. Febvre, A Geographical Introduction to History, Westport 1932, pp. 296-315 (orig.: La terre et lévolution humaine, Paris 1922).
FRONTIERS AND BORDERLANDS IN MEDIEVAL EUROPE
7
of the wide use of this concept might bring with it possibilities of its abuse. An additional threat is the incautious use of the term when it is not always appropriate. This would lead to the dilution of the concepts, which are often undefined, superficially envisaged and despite their wide use still insufficiently comprehended. This is to some degree facilitated by the huge elasticity of the concept within which one can place almost every frontier situation, including those as different as the peripheries of settlement as well as a densely-settled area of mixing and exchange, a barrier and a zone of transition, an open zone of expansion as well as a closed fortified defence line, the ordinary edge of administrative units as well as the limits of a civilization, the edge of an empire and the edge of a land-holding, the extensive expanses of steppes dividing various nomadic groups and the narrow boundary between states, the marches of the Empire and an overseas colony. The term can be seen on different scales (from the continental to the micro-regional), can be expressed in different forms (as a line or zone), have a different character (place, society, situation, a movement, a process, a state of mind), various functions, a sphere across which there is a division and across which there is interaction (with nature, another community or society, state, culture), a zone with a variety of significances and influences. In the case of such a wide range of undisciplined use of the concept of a frontier, its cognitive usefulness might run the risk of becoming devalued, leading to it to become an amorphous concept which loses precision and its meaning. There have been problems with the various terms used from the beginning of its career in historiography, which was begun by the famous thesis of Frederick Jackson Turner on the role of the frontier in the history of the American West6. This gave rise to a long discussion, not abating for decades, between historians and sociologists, supporters and opponents, revisionists and imitators both in America as well as outside. This thesis still exerts an undiminished influence, and opinions and research on borders and borderlands are still in one way or another orientated on the vision of Turner. The works of pro-Turnerists, anti-Turnerists, neo-Turnerists and post-Turnerists now constitute a huge literature on this topic7. These problems are now being dealt with also by European 6 F.J. Turner, The Significance of the Frontier in American History, in: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for 1893, Washington 1894, pp. 199-227, reprinted many times. Turner himself used the term somewhat intuitively and loosely, and even admitted that it is an elastic one, and for our purposes does not need sharp definition J.D. Forbes, Frontiers in American History and the Role of the Frontier Historian, Ethnohistory XV (1968) 2, pp. 203-235; P.N. Limerick, The Adventures of the Frontier in the Twentieth Century, in: The Frontier in American Culture, ed. by J.R. Grossman, Berkeley 1994, pp. 67-102. 7 From among the synthetic works, see: M.W. Mikesell, Comparative Studies in Frontier History, Annals of the Association of American Geographers L (1960) 1, pp. 62-74; W.W. Savage, S.I. Thompson, The Comparative Study of the Frontier: An Introduction,
8
ANDRZEJ JANECZEK
historiography, despite a general rejection of theses contaminated by Turnerism8, attempting, still without much success, to create their own theory and to define the boundaries of the concept of a borderland9. The confusion is additionally increased by the differences in meaning of the terminology used. The conceptual vocabulary of different languages is somewhat variable and lacks coherence: English frontier, boundary, borderland, limit; French la frontière, la limite, fins and confins; Italian la frontiera, il confine, termini; Spanish la frontera, el limite, el confin; German die Mark, die Grenze10 (and the derivatives Grenzgebiet, Grenzraum); the Slavic (e.g. Polish) granica (border) and pogranicze (borderland), miedza (baulk, absorbed into Hungarian as megye), rubie¿ (frontier), kresy (ends, distant extent), formerly also kraina (East-Slavic ukraj, ukraina, land on the outskirts, on the edge). in: The Frontier. Comparative Studies, II, ed. by W.W. Savage, S.I. Thompson, Norman 1979, pp. 3-24; D.J. Weber, Turner, the Boltonians, and the Borderland, The American Historical Review XCI (1986) 1, pp. 66-81; A.G. Bogue, Frederick Jackson Turner Reconsidered, The History Teacher XXVII (1994) 2, pp. 195-221; J. Adelman, S. Aron, From Borderlands to Borders: Empires, Nation-States and the Peoples in between in North American History, The American Historical Review CIV (1999) 3, pp. 814-841. This has been discussed in the Polish literature too: H. Litwin, Koncepcja pogranicza w historiografii amerykañskiej. Frederick Jackson Turner, jego kontynuatorzy i krytycy, Kwartalnik Historii Nauki i Techniki XLIII (1998) 1, pp. 115-129. 8 On the influence of Turner on European medieval studies: R.I. Burns, The Significance of the Frontier in the Middle Ages, in: Medieval Frontier Societies, pp. 307-330. The first attempt to introduce Turners theses into European historiography appeared in 1913 and referred to the German Ostsiedlung J.W. Thompson, Profitable Fields of Investigation in Medieval History, American Historical Review XVIII (1913) 3, pp. 490-504. It is considered that a classic example of the application of this thesis to the European Middle Ages is the study of A.R. Lewis, The Closing of the Medieval Frontier 1250-1350, Speculum XXXIII (1958) 4, pp. 475-485. 9 D. Power, Introduction. Frontiers: Terms, Concepts, and the Historians of Medieval and Early Modern Europe, in: Frontiers in Question
, pp. 1-12; D. Abulafia, Introduction: Seven Types of Ambiguity, c. 1100 - c. 1500, in: Medieval Frontiers
, pp. 1-34. The usefulness of the concept in medieval studies has been analyzed by N. Berend, Medievalists and the Notion of the Frontier, The Medieval History Journal II (1999) 1, pp. 55-72, attempting to define in a rigorous manner the use of the term frontier society (again, eadem, At the Gate of Christendom. Jews, Muslims and Pagans in Medieval Hungary, c. 1000 - c. 1300, Cambridge 2001, pp. 6 ff. 10 It is noteworthy that this is a loan word from West Slavic and this has been noted by F. Miklosisch and the Grimm brothers; its spread has been analyzed by H.-W. Nicklis, Von der Grenitze zur Grenze. Die Grenzidee des lateinischen Mittellalters (6.-15. Jhdt.), Blätter für deutsche Landesgeschichte CXXVIII (1992), pp. 1-29. Also H.-J. Karp, Grenzen in Ostmitteleuropa während des Mittelalters. Ein Beitrag zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Grenzlinie aus dem Grenzsaum, Köln 1972; H. Kolb, Zur Frühgeschichte des Wortes Grenze, Archiv für das Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen CCXXVI (1989), pp. 344-356; R. Marti, Grenzbezeichnungen grenzüberschreitend, in: Grenzen erkennen Begrenzungen überwinden. Festschrift für Reinhard Schneider, ed. by W. Haubrichs, K.-U. Jäschke, M. Oberweis, Sigmaringen 1999, pp. 19-33.
FRONTIERS AND BORDERLANDS IN MEDIEVAL EUROPE
9
These names all have their semantic nuances and cannot always be simply substituted one for the other11, which is illustrated by the differences between the English and American understanding of the words frontier and boundary12. The Polish terms (apart from the semantically broad concept pogranicze which is known from Old Polish), and among them the especially widespread Kresy13, have a specific sense emphasizing the factor of peripherialism and marginalisation, a state of separation and dispersion, meaning the end, edge, a place where our world ends, and thus a fines. The term frontier and its Romance-language cognates on the other hand come from the Latin frons14, which means quite the opposite, forehead, front, that which is at the beginning. The different meanings of the terms used are a result of a fundamental difference between two methods of conceptualisation of the phenomenon, in one the frontier is seen as a forward facing front, while in the other it is a backward-facing edge. This is not however a sharp division or the only division, some terms refer to a linearity, while others depict zones, some terms suggest interaction, others do not, and various terms might be more suitable for expressing the various functions of frontiers (e.g., political, administrative). The terms used outside western and central Europe have their own, separate character, for example the Arabic thaghr, the edge of the Islamic territories in the neighbourhood of a war with an enemy, the Ottoman uj, the limit behind which extend the lands of the non-believers, or the Byzantine akra or eschatia, distant from the centre on the semi-barbaric peripheries15. 11 L. Febvre, Frontière: Le mot et la notion, in: idem, Pour une histoire á part entière, Paris 1962 (19281), pp. 11-24; J.R.V. Prescott, The Geography of Frontiers and Boundaries, London 1965; D. Nordman, Frontiere e confini in Francia: evoluzione dei termini e dei concetti, in: La frontiera da stato a nazione: il caso Piemonte, ed. by C. Ossola, C. Raffestin, M. Ricciardi, Roma 1987, pp. 39-55. 12 For a discussion of this: L.K.D. Kristof, The Nature of Frontiers and Boundaries, Annals of the Association of the American Geographers XLIX (1959), pp. 269-282. 13 F. Gross, Kresy: The Frontier of Eastern Europe, The Polish Review XXIII (1978) 2, pp. 3-16. The term Kresy is also a loan word, this time from Germanic; see A. Nagórko, Granica vs Grenze, Kresy vs Kreis (z historii wzajemnych zapo¿yczeñ), in: Granice i pogranicza
, pp. 39-46. 14 The word arose (as frontera) in eleventh-century Aragon Ph. Sénac, La frontière aragonaise aux XIe et XIIe siècles: le mot et la chose pro defensionem Christianorum et confusionem Sarracenorum, Cahiers de civilisation médiévale XLII (1999), pp. 259-272. See also: P. Buresi, The Appearance of the Frontier Concept in the Iberian Peninsula: At the Crossroads of Local, National and Pontifical Strategies (11th-13th Centuries), in this volume of Quaestiones Medii Aevi Novae, pp. 81-99. The history of its acceptance into the English language (both British and American) has been followed by F. Mood, Notes on the History of the Word Frontier, Agricultural History XXII (1948) 2, pp. 78-83. See also M. Pfister, Grenzbezeichnungen im Italoromanischen und Galloromanischen, in: Grenzen und Grenzregionen
, pp. 37-50. 15 Th.F. Glick, Islamic and Christian Spain in the Early Middle Ages, Boston 20052, pp. 52 ff.; C. Heywood, The Frontier in Ottoman History: Old Ideas and New Myths,
10
ANDRZEJ JANECZEK
The variety of terms used in the written sources and modern terminology used in different cultural circles is not only a linguistic curiosity, but is determined by the variety of means by which space and the definition of boundaries are conceptualised and the variety of manners in which they were created, used and crossed. Boundaries are variable, in the same way as the people who created them, in different times and for various purposes, and who filled the space between with political and social organizations, endowed them with special meaning, to define and separate themselves from others, define what is theirs and what is alien. Boundaries are the results of the activities of societies. It is in this that lies the weakness of the theories of Turner which were commented upon by Owen Lattimore: he taught he saw what the frontier did to society, he was really seeing what society did to the frontier 16. In addition to the diffuse use of terms for different categories of frontier, there is another conventional, detached concept of frontier and bordering which has become part of modern scholarship on society and culture. This derives from the observation of the heterogeneity of space produced by social and cultural factors and which undergoes division and qualification by categories such as sacral and secular, private and public, known and imagined, empirical and mythical, familiar and alien, friendly and hostile, good and bad. Such a boundary, defining differently qualified zones could be a fence, town gate, field boundary, the edge of the forest, a ritually drawn circle in the sand or even the lips (the frontier station of the corporality of a man, an entry into the internal world). We may also meet ideas of the portal of a cathedral as the frontier zone between sacrum and profanum, or the porch of a house which comprises the place where the public and private zones meet. Time also is given a similar division, so we see dusk as being a time of transition between day and night, or night as a time zone conquered by the denizens of the night life of one of the great cities, colonizing the darkness by the light of street lamps17. In such a use, the notions of frontier and borderlands are used as a stylistic tool, hyperbole suggestively evoking the imagination by indicating in place of these specific spatial and temporal situations a correlation with territorial boundaries. The different forms of the frontiers and borderlands which have a physical form is only one part of the problem with the significance of the term as we in: Frontiers in Question
, pp. 233 ff.; P. Stephenson, The Byzantine Frontier at the Lower Danube in the Late Tenth and Eleventh Centuries, in: ibidem, pp. 81 ff. 16 O. Lattimore, The Frontier in History, in: idem, Studies in Frontier History. Collected Papers 1928-1958, London 1962 (19551), pp. 469-491, at p. 490. 17 M. Melbin, Night as Frontier, American Sociological Review XLIII (1978) 1, pp. 3-22; idem, Night as Frontier: Colonizing the World after Dark, New York 1987; P. Kowalski, Granica. Próba uporz¹dkowania kategorii antropologicznych, in: Pogranicze jako problem kultury, ed. by T. Smoliñska, Opole 1994, pp. 143-151; J. Adamczewski, Kulturowe funkcje miedzy, Etnolingwistyka IV (1999), pp. 65-82.
FRONTIERS AND BORDERLANDS IN MEDIEVAL EUROPE
11
use it today. It is used by anthropology (particularly the notion of a frontier) in investigations of ethnic groups and awareness of and the formation of identities18. In these studies we observe that differences in language, belief systems, behaviour and even such minor differences as in different style of costume or hairstyle might create a frontier between human groups19. The scope of connections and divisions which forms the boundary between community and Otherness is an invisible line, a symbolic one which runs through human awareness, a mental boundary which can, but does not necessarily have a reflection in physical space, it need not exist in objective terms, but defines the imagined limits of the community. It is created by the process of marking oneself and being marked in processes of adscription and self-adscription, exclusion and self-exclusion, separating members of a group from others, who are beyond its boundaries. The symbolic boundaries between groups, being cultural constructs, interest anthropologists and ethnologists far more than concrete, physical boundaries20. At their centre of interest are social and cultural boundaries, the invisible line created by ethnic differences, differences in religion, language, social condition or sex. Boundaries such as these all played a greater role among people than the frontiers between kingdoms and empires, examples might be: those between pagans and Christians, Catholics and heretics, between people with a common language and peoples with foreign ones, those who are necessarily therefore dumb (this is the etymology of the name Niemcy (Germans) among the Slavs), between inhabitants of towns and village people, between the monastery and the world around it, between men and women, and an infinite number of other means of defining an opposition between us and them. From that perspective, territorial boundaries of political polities are just one specific type of frontier, they are just one link, though the first link, in the chain of significances, associations and reflections which they evoke. There is a similar broadening and shifting of interest in the issues of movement through frontiers and their crossing. This does not concern obviously just movement from country to country, or of contraband, or the military incursion across a border, but of the overcoming of symbolic boundaries, not less real 18 H. Donnan, Th.M. Wilson, Frontiers of Identity, Nation and State, Oxford-New York 1999, present the contribution of the social sciences to the understanding of symbolic frontiers and those existing in a material reality. 19 Such studies are also being carried out by historians. An analysis of medieval iconography discussing the depiction of the factors of Otherness and foreigness has been carried out by G. Jahritz, Social Grouping and the Language of Dress in the Late Middle Ages, The Medieval History Journal III (2000) 2, pp. 235-259; idem, The Visual Image of the Other in Late Medieval Urban Space: Patterns and Constructions, in: Segregation Integration Assimilation. Religious and Ethnic Groups in the Medieval Towns of Central and Eastern Europe, ed. by D. Keene, B. Nagy, K. Szende, Farnham 2009, pp. 235-249. 20 H. Donnan, Th.M. Wilson, An Anthropology of Frontiers, in: Border Approaches. Anthropological Perspectives on Frontiers, ed. by iidem, Lanham 1994, pp. 1-14.
12
ANDRZEJ JANECZEK
than physical ones21. The metaphorical use of the term has become familiar to us through such terms as the frontiers of human knowledge, the borderland of disciplines or literary genres, not forgetting such surprising linguistic fantasies as for example frontiers of banks or frontiers in brain repair. The enthusiasm which these various types of frontiers have aroused material and imagined, physical and conceptual, literal and abstract has now extended beyond anthropology and the concept has become part of the theory of literature, linguistics and other research fields, with an especially keen interest in studies on social communication and transculturalism. This variety of types and fluidity of meaning are an embarras de richesse for various disciplines which make the concept of boundaries a tool for defining and characterizing those particular social, cultural and political phenomena which are created at the point of contact across them through osmosis, penetration, and overlap. Historiography approaches these challenges somewhat cautiously, and attempts to define the general developmental characteristics which would be typical of frontiers and the communities living in borderlands formed at different times and in different places, without much optimism about the success of such approaches. Indeed, attempts to create an unequivocal, stable and uniform model of frontiers have met with no success. As a phenomenon, they are too variable in their geographical, cultural and political conditions, the factors producing change which decided on their individual character have been too strong. The abandonment of attempts to generalise and the recognition of the individuality of cases even led to doubts and questions whether the concept of a frontier and consequently the notion of a frontier society are of any cognitive usefulness as a category of analysis. Furthermore, and what is worse, questions were raised whether they are harmful and misleading concepts, imposing a filter producing a stereotypical dichotomy, creating a sharp contrast in a considerably more complicated reality in which divisions and connections are more fuzzy and tangled, exclusion and integration interwoven and instead of a clear opposition we would see instead more nuanced shades and gradients22. Despite this variety and ambivalence, efforts have been made not to concentrate on local studies and to attempt to see the phenomenon of frontiers in the more general context. Attempts have also been made to introduce some 21 In the field of medieval studies, works on this topic: Crossing Boundaries. Issues of Cultural and Individual Identity in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, ed. by S. McKee, Turnhout 1999; Grenzräume und Grenzüberschreitungen im Vergleich. Der Osten und der Westen des mittelalterlichen Lateineuropa, ed. by K. Herbers, N. Jaspert, Europa im Mittelalter, 7, Berlin 2007; Grenze und Grenzüberschreitung im Mittelalter, ed. by E. Knefelkamp, K. Bosselmann-Cyran, Berlin 2007. 22 See for example E. Manzano-Moreno, Christian-Muslim Frontier in Al-Andalus: Idea and Reality, in: The Arab Influence in Medieval Europe, ed. by D.A. Agius, R. Hitchcock, Reading 1994, pp. 83-99.
FRONTIERS AND BORDERLANDS IN MEDIEVAL EUROPE
13
form of classification, which bearing in mind the differentiation of characteristics, forms and functions separate physical boundaries, social ones, conceptual and symbolic, political and settlement, linear and zonal, direct and transitional, divisive and exclusive, compelling separation and facilitating contact, permeable and isolative, open and closed. Comparative studies have been advanced upon, with full awareness of the risks involved, confronting examples from sometimes totally divergent places on the continent as for example Iberia and east central Europe, in order to identify similarities and differences and thus more clearly see the phenomenon itself and its own characteristics23. One other possibility of overcoming the problems connected with the particularism of the phenomenon was shown by the influential and thought-provoking work of Robert Bartlett. The development of different places in the borderland scattered on the peripheries of the Latin world was treated in a homogeneous manner, as part of a model sequence of conquest, colonisation and acculturation, which contributed to the process of the expansion and formation of Europe24. In many other works, attempts have been made to indicate that, despite the individuality of particular situations, there are a certain number of common characteristics which to a greater or lesser extent are shared by frontier societies. These include aspects such as militarisation, instability and a state of permanent threat, the existence of greater freedoms, but also subject to greater violence, a state of open conflict between cultures and identities, the activity of mechanisms of negotiation and mediation, the liveliness of processes of cultural exchange and the emergence of syncretic cultural forms, social dynamism and the creation of conditions for mobility and advancement, the exalted position of the local aristocracy, multiple loyalties, the creation of the myths of the frontiersmen and the bastion of civilization25. This catalogue of characteristics is neither applicable to all cases, nor is it complete; careful investigation will reveal in 23 The collection Grenzräume und Grenzüberschreitungen
, comprises comparative studies looking at the same problems in pairs of situations one in the east, the other in the west. 24 R. Bartlett, The Making of Europe: Conquest, Colonization, and Cultural Change, 950-1350, London 1993. 25 From the huge literature, see for example: E. Lourie, A Society Organized for War: Medieval Spain, Past and Present XXXV (1966), pp. 54-76; R.I. Burns, The Crusader Kingdom of Valencia. Reconstruction on a Thirteenth-Century Frontier, Cambridge 1967; Th.F. Glick, op.cit.; M. Gonzáles Jiménez, Frontier and Settlement in the Kingdom of Castile (1085-1350), in: Medieval Frontier Societies, pp. 49-74; R. Davies, Frontier Arrangements in Fragmented Societies: Ireland and Wales, in: ibidem, pp. 77-100; P. Knoll, Economic and Political Institutions on the Polish-German Frontier in the Middle Ages: Action, Reaction, Interaction, in: ibidem, pp. 151-174; K.-U. Jäschke, Mehrvasallitäten in Grenzregionen ein Forschungsdesiderat, in: Granice i pogranicza
, pp. 65-117; R. Schneider, Institutionen zur Regelung von Grenzkonflikten im Mittelalter, in: ibidem, pp. 125-132; N. Berend, Medievalists
; eadem, Défense de la Chrétienté et naissance dune identité. Hongrie, Pologne et péninsule Ibérique
14
ANDRZEJ JANECZEK
each case different characteristics which accompany those which are common to all and typical. The impossibility of creating schematic models to cover all cases, their resistance to attempts to theorise about them, their variety and the individuality, these all have been and are typical characteristics of frontiers and borderlands and research done upon them. This continually arouses doubts and objections and justified concerns, but also constitutes the element that makes the subject so attractive and inviting to the investigator. It is precisely in this variety that lie the chances for reaching a deeper understanding through the examination of the similarities and contrasts. The elasticity of the concept is a real threat, but also an advantage, inspiring the use of comparative methods and also an encouragement to the confrontation of the results of the investigations of different disciplines. Caution towards possible oversimplification and uncritical use of the terminology imposes the necessity to pay attention to precision and the strictness of the definition, and the careful justification of the adequacy of the conceptual apparatus to the studies undertaken. In the fact that the terms frontier and frontier society are explanatory concepts, but are not self-explanatory one may perceive both drawbacks but also benefits. This dose of optimism however cannot absolve us from a full realisation of the dangers and risks of the use of these abused, ambiguous and diffuse concepts. The studies collected in this volume reflect both the variety of form which borders and borderlands had, as well as the variety of investigative possibilities and of approach. At the same time of course they do not represent them all this still a phenomenon which is little known and inadequately described. They show and illustrate however individual directions of research on this phenomenon which the more resistant it is to our attempts to dissect its complex nature, the more we are stimulated to try. Discussion of this topic is far from being totally exhausted, and despite the increased attention being paid to it, to judge from the lively resonance that it still evokes, does not give the appearance of becoming atrophied in the near future. We hope that the texts in this volume brought here to the readers attention will lead to the further development of this current of research and be a voice in the continuing discussion of frontiers, borders, margins, edges and the people living among them. translated by Paul Barford
au Moyen Âge, Annales. Histoire, Sciences sociales LVIII (2003) 5, pp. 1009-1027; J. Muldoon, Identity on the Medieval Irish Frontier. Degenerate Englishmen, Wild Irishmen, Middle Nations, Gainesville 2003; J.J. Cohen, Hybridity, Identity, and Monstrosity in Medieval Britain: On Difficult Middles, New York 2006.