Duby 1967 Diffussion of Cultural Patterns in Feudal Society.pdf

8/10/2019 Duby 1967 Diffussion of Cultural Patterns in Feudal Society.pdf

1/9

The ast and resent Society

The Diffusion of Cultural Patterns in Feudal SocietyAuthor(s): Georges DubySource: Past & Present, No. 39 (Apr., 1968), pp. 3-10Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of The Past and Present SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/649852 .Accessed: 08/07/2014 13:05

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Oxford University Press and The Past and Present Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserveand extend access to Past &Present.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 1 47.96.1.236 on Tue, 8 Jul 201 4 13:05:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ouphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=pasthttp://www.jstor.org/stable/649852?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/649852?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=pasthttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup


2/9

THE DIFFUSION OF CULTURALPATTERNSIN FEUDAL SOCIETY*I BEGIN WITH AVERYORDINARYDEA,A SIMPLE STATEMENTOFA KNOWNfact. This is that he cultural atterns f the upper lasses n societytend to become popularized, o spread and to move down, tep bystep, to the most deprived ocial groups. If we take the wordculture n its narrowest ense,beginning, hat s, in the realm of

literary r artistic reation, freligious nowledge, elief nd attitudes,it s very asy o discern hisphenomenon f popularization. Hence,I shall confinemyself oillustrating his theme with wo inked ndparallel xamples aken rom ourteenth-century urope.

As is well known, n the fourteenth entury, t least n the towns,and due to the propaganda f the mendicant rders, Christianitybegan to be, what t had not been for some centuries, popularreligion. Sermons n the popular ongue, heatrical epresentationsofholy cenes, he inging f he audes, radually evealed othe aitysomeof he precepts f hegospels nd characteristics f Christwhich

had not hitherto eached hem. Nor was t simply question f thediffusion, utside henarrow onfines f the clerical rder, f certaintexts nd mental mages. This period was one in which forms fpiety which had previously een limited to a small number ofchurchmen nd to monks nd canons,were ntroduced o all strataof urban ociety: hepractices f collective hant, olitarymeditationand, at least for ome of the laity, he regular eading f Books ofHours. During the same period, aymen, n family groups andfraternities, ower and lower down the social scale, appropriatedforms of artistic

xpression ormerly nlyfound

amonga

veryrestricted lite. In the early middle ages only kings had chapels,ornate ombs nd relics. Bythe end ofthe fourteenth entury, anybourgeois amilies ad private ltars, ept chaplains, ad tombs ndemployed rtists o decorate ltar creens r sculpt funerary ffigies.The middling obility adrelicsmounted n their ersonal ewellery.Woodcuts llowed he minor spects f he rt f heupper ristocracy

* This paper was originally communicated at a conference n May 1966 atthe Ecole Normale Superieure in Paris, held to discuss the problem of SocialClasses and Cultural Level . It was also included among the Papers presentedto the Past and Present Conference on 'Literature and the Historian', Io July1967 at University College, London . The paper has been translated byProfessor R. H. Hilton, University f Birmingham.

This content downloaded from 1 47.96.1.236 on Tue, 8 Jul 2014 13:05:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/9

4 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER39

to be diffused mong the widest social strata. And there s thestriking henomenon hereby hearchitectural esigns sedto framethese pious imagesmade woodcuts,which were essentially opularobjets 'art, nto something n the nature f private hapelsfor hepoor. All this s obvious nough nd fairly asy ostudy,' nd thereis no need to labour the point. I mention hesepreliminary on-siderations nly n order opresent hree ypes f problem.

The first an be expressed s a simple uestion. Is the movementof popularization uite so straightforward Did not the descendingmovement f popularization ave a counterpart, reverse rendIn other words, o what xtent, n the MiddleAges,did aristocratic

culture using heword n ts narrowest ense) cceptvaluesor formsarising rom he owest ocial trata Here t is much moredifficultto see just what was happening. On the one hand, the actualmechanics f creative ultural ctivity re hard to discern n themedieval period. On the other, although historians an detectsome aspects of aristocratic ulture, ince these are embodied nforms which have lasted until our own times, we will alwaysbeignorant f almost he wholeof popular culture, nd may not evenbe able to prove ts existence. Onlythree acts, s far s I can see,

stand out clearly.(I) In the course of the development f medieval Christianityculture nd propagandawere one: to educate was to convert. Thecentres f cultural reation were, of course, ocated n the upperlevelsof the social tructure, mong hemembers f the ecclesiasticalavant-garde. But since they were consciouslyworking owardsa popular audience, they readily accepted some of the diffusetendencies, eneral deas and mental mages which were widelyspread n lower ultural evels. The intention asto harness hesetendencies o that he

propaganda,ouched n familiar erms, ould

more easily reach the masses. In other words there was anacceptance f what we would call folk-lore and a folk-lorewhich, ut for his cceptance, ouldbe quite unknown o us. Thisphenomenon s observable n the Merovingian eriod as M. Le Goffhas brilliantly hown),2 o less than n the thirteenth nd fourteenthcenturies hen the Dominicans nd the Franciscans trove omakeChrist living eality n the owns.(2) Aristocratic ulture lso accepted elements f folk-lore n anatural and long lasting fashion s a result of its own leaning

1 G. Duby, Fondements'unnouvel umanismeGeneva, 1966).2 J. le Goff, Culture clericale et traditions folkloriques dans le civilisation

mnrovingienne , Annales, E.S.C., xxii (1967).



4/9

THE DIFFUSION OF CULTURAL PATTERNS IN FEUDAL SOCIETY 5

towards populism . This leaning s clearly een, for example, nfifteenth-century rincely ircles,with heir uriosity bout hepherdsand rustic ntertainments. Moreover, ome of the decorative motifsin their wellings nd some of the elements n courtlymusic, houghstemming ltimately rom ristocratic ircles, cclesiastical nd lay,were derived mmediately rom ower social groups among whichthey had been simplified and falsified) uring he long period ofpopularization.(3) This leads me to a third fact. In penetrating ownwardsthrough uccessive ocial evels, he elements f aristocratic ultureunderwent hanges which, generally peaking, s far as form nd

modes of expression re concerned, re marked y a simplificationand progressive chematization. As to content, he characteristictendency as towards progressive isintegration f ogical tructureand a suffusion with emotionalism. These changes mark, forexample, hereligious rt and piety f the fourteenth entury, henChristianity as being popularized. But at the same time thereseems to have been a rebound, a corresponding hange in theelements f culture t the highest ocial evels. The Christianity fthe topmost ierarchy f the Church nd of the princely ourts n the

fourteenth entury asundoubtedlymuch enriched y a sensibilitythat was popular in origin and that found expression s artisticcreation nd devotional ttitudes enetrated more deeply nto themass of the people. We have, therefore, o try o understand andthis ouldbe a primary ubject f research) owthe popularization faristocratic models - the essential, determining motive force ncultural istory in effect lso established two-way ommunicationbetween he cultures f different ocial evels.

But the ramifications f the problem ecomemuch more omplexas soon as one extends he

nquirynto culture n a broader ense.

One sees immediately hat he movement f popularization peratesover a much wider area, and affects ot only beliefs, knowledge,and religious ttitudes, ut also social consciousness s a whole,individual ehaviour nd ethical values, n brief he wholemode oflife. Here alsothe phenomenon f popularizations seen n its twinaspects: the acceptance nd imitation y lower social groups ofmodels nd attitudes ut forward y the 6lites; nd conversely, headoption y the elites hemselves f some of the values of the owersocial orders. I propose o show hisby analysing he culture inthe widermeaning f he word s used by modern thnologists) f heFrench ristocracy n the leventh nd twelfth enturies.

Here was a social group which became increasingly oherent



5/9


and homogeneous y the gradual evelopment f common ttitudes,juridical rules, accepted manners, morality, n short by theevolution f a common ulture. This happened n spite of the factthat riginally t consisted f nothingmore han number f separatebut superimposed lements, nd comprised diverse ariety f socialtypes. Socially t ranged rom ukesof Normandy o those knightsof the Maconnais that have written bout.3 It included lso allthose soldiers of fortune nd householdknights who were n partemerging from the numerous servitors gathered around noblefamilies n north-western rance. This common culture wasessentially orged y the spread to the whole group of habits which

at first had been the property f a very mall elite only, of theuppermost tratum f the aristocracy, he ancient noble families.And this arger litewasthe groupwhich, round he year ooo, wasitself chieving efinition n the course of that political nd socialtransformation hatwe know s the establishment f feudalism .

Let us consider woaspects f what s certainly, ithin he feudalaristocracy, movement f cultural opularization. First, here sa mental ttitude which seems to me to be right t the heart ofaristocratic ulture. I refer odynastic eeling, o the veneration f

ancestors, o the sense of lineage a collection f mental mageswhich orm he real core of the notion f nobilitas. Recent esearchhas led me to the conclusion hat heorganization f the aristocraticfamily n the basisof ineage, s a house , with genealogy ased onstrictly gnatic rules of filiation, trictly atrilineal, ogetherwitheverything onnectedwith this conception such as matrimonialcustoms, rimogeniture, atronymic urnames, nd heraldic ignswas certainly much later than has generally een thought. Infact, t was a new structure hich ittle by little established tself

amongthe

aristocracyntil it became its

primary rincipleof

organization. But I must add that this establishment f a newstructure f family elationships ookplace progressively rom ighto low, that s by a process f popularization. These newforms refirst o be seen at the highest ristocratic evel, hat of the erritorialprinces nd comital amilies n the middle f the tenth entury; heyappear among hecastellan amiliesbout the year ooo, and amongthe ordinary nights omefifty ears ater.4 A process f populariza-

3 G. Duby, La Socite' dans la region maconnaise aux XIe et XIIe sikcles(Paris, 1953).

4G. Duby, Structures de parent6 et noblesse. France du Nord. XIe etXIIe siecles (to appear in Melanges... Niermayer, Amsterdam); G. Duby,Remarques sur la litterature enealogique en France aux XIe et XIIe siecles

(to appear in Comptes endus es sciences e l'Acaddmie des Inscriptions t BellesLettres, aris).



6/9

THE DIFFUSION OF CULTURAL PATTERNS IN FEUDAL SOCIETY 7

tion s also to be seen taking lace,but more lowly, n the case ofcertain ttributes riginally eservedfor the highest anks of thearistocracy. am thinking, or instance, of the castle keep,which was thought of as the symbol of sovereign power andmilitary nd jurisdictional ominance. To begin with it wasa royal monopoly, kept by the sovereign himself and by hisagents and servants, is counts and bishops. Round about Ioooit becamea more common ossession, aving allen nto the handsof certain rivate amilies,s yet mall n number. Then, during hetwelfth entury, eepsbecame ess rare; some passed to collateralbranches f the great amilies,nd by the end of hecentury rdinaryknights lso beganto put up smallkeeps, o dig moats round heirhouses and to make their ancestral dwellings nto strongholds,replicas n miniature f the great princely ortresses. By similarstages, he exercise f seigneurial ower wasgeneralized, s was theuse of seals, nd of titles. At the beginning f the eleventh entury,the titles dominus , messire had been strictly eserved o theowners f castles, he holders f real power;by I200 they wereusedto qualify ll knights nd to distinguish hem from other men.5Hencebythe nd of he welfth entury, ne can define he ristocracy

in France as that group f men which hared he prerogatives, itlesand usageswhich wo centuries arlier were the privilege f a fewfamilies, heproceres r optimates,nd which wocenturies arlier tillhadbeen heprivilege fonesingle amily, hat f heking.

At the ame ime, n analysis f heculture f hefeudal ristocracyis bound to recognize hat one of its principal haracteristics asdevelopedby a reverse movement, eginning ot at the top of thearistocratic lass but at the bottom. Feudal aristocratic ulturewasorganized round two main notions: hat of nobility which preaddownwards rom he mall lite f bout he

year ooo,and the notion

of knighthood hich ndoubtedly preadupwards rom lower evelof the ristocracy. n fact, lthough y the beginning f he leventhcentury, mileswas a title, t was then used only by adventurers ndlords of middling ealth,whogravitated owards astles nd princes;and militare meant not only to fight but also to serve .Gradually, s the valueswhich he title mplied courage,militaryefficiency, nd loyalty spread nd came to occupy or o long uchan important lace in the aristocratic thos, o the use of the titleitself enetrated nto higher nd higher ocial evels. By 1200, thedevelopment ascomplete: hegreatest f princes, venkings,wereproud obe knights, nd the ceremony f the dubbingwas one of the

5 Duby, La Societddans la rdgionmaconnaise.



7/9


most mportant teps n their ives.6 One thus arrives t anotherdefinition f the French ristocracy t the end ofthe welfth entury,as valid as that given above: it was that group which shared thevirtues, hecapacities nd the specific uties f the milites f the yearooo000,hoseyoungmen, omeof ow socialorigins, hothen madeup

the household nd retinue f the great.The facts I have briefly nalysed raise an important eneral

question. What movements ontribute o the formation f culturalpatterns Is it not often hecasethat, s here, hesepatterns erivefrom opposite extremes f a single social group? If we coulddetermine his,we wouldhave a much better nderstanding, s faras both mental magery nd collective sychology re concerned,of the mechanisms hich eadgradually othe formation f whatwemay entatively alla class.

Finally, want o direct my ast questions t the notion f culturalmodels, which were, in my view, very mportant actors n thecohesion of certain groups and in their separation rom thers.These models f behaviour, xemplary ypes f human chievement,werefirst ut before hemembers f one particular ocialgroup, utvery quickly reached other strata which were dominated y this

group. The fascination xercised y these modelswas one of themost mportantmotive orces n the popularization rocess whichhave described. In western eudal society, here were very fewmodels f this kind. Only wo are clear nd welldefined, nd, whatis more, trictly pposed oeachother: heone oriented owards hesacred and the other towards he profane lement n aristocraticculture. However, s I see it, they represent he two aspects f asingle and doubtless primitive riginal. This is the royal model,relevant ere n so far s the culture f the high middle gesculmi-nates n the

personf the

sovereigns the

mageof

God,and also in

so far s the tarting oint f the wholeprocess f popularization asthe fascination xercised y the example f the monarchy. So thetwo models re on the one hand the man of war, heknight, nd onthe other, hepriest, hecleric. Of the knight haveno more o say.As regards he cleric,we must ry o understand etter ow t wasthat, uring he leventh entury, he lerical dealprogressed owardsa different odel,superior n the moral hierarchy nd nearer ospiritual erfection, amely hemonastic; nd then how, after Ioo,

6 G. Duby, Structures e parente.... for xample, he placeoccupied nthe Historia omitum hisnensium fLambert fArdres y hedescription fthe nitiation eremony f knighthood orArnulf, onof the count f Guines);G. Duby, Les origines e la chevalerie to appear n XIe Settimana i Studio... Spoleto).



8/9

THE DIFFUSIONOF CULTURALPATTERNSN FEUDAL SOCIETY 9

the retreat, whether oluntary r not, of the monastic nstitution,soon left n the fore the clerical ype who specialized s much nintellectual ctivity s in prayer.It will, of course,be necessary o analyse arefully he nature fthese womodels. But other uestions lso arise of relevance n anyconsideration f their owers f ttraction. willconfinemyself ereto two spects f the problem. First, nd very mportant n myview,is the strength nd permanence f the two modelswhose haracteris-tics, already stablished y II30, hardly hanged n France duringthe ucceeding wo nd half enturies. As an instance f this tabilityI quote an examplediscovered y my pupil, JacquesPaul,' who has

made a study of the vocabulary nd other emantic spects of theeulogies omposed . 1260 by the Franciscan alimbene, bout menwhom he had known. These characterizations, houghwritten ya man with n acute and distinctive apacity orobservation, hownot the slightest raceof the nfluence f Franciscan pirituality, orthe least indication f any detachment rom hetwo socio-culturalmodels. All the aymenhe has met who are worthy f respect reboth handsome nd noble , two absolutely omplementary erms;they are docti ad proelium, ourteous, enerous nd rich (poverty

being, or hisFranciscan, defect), nd they redeft n the

compo-sition of songs. In other words, what s praiseworthy bout themcorresponds xactly o the knightly model. On the other hand, llpraiseworthy hurchmen re for Salimbene both holy and learned,corresponding xactly o the clericalmodel. When t was,andunderwhat nfluences, hat these models disintegrated s something hatremains o be investigated rom he iterature nd conography f thelater middle ges.

Asfar s concerns heir rigins, heir laceof birth, nd the factorsinvolved n spreading heir nfluence, believe hat ttention ouldbe most usefully oncentrated, o begin with at any rate, on thatsocialmilieuwhich believe ohavebeen the point of crystallizationof this collective magery the princely ourts. It was around heprince nd sustained y his gifts hat he representatives f the twosocialelitesweregathered the religious nd the ay. Within hisgrouping, within he princely ourt, did not the dynamic lementcome from the young , the uvenes? I have already discussedelsewhere8 he importance n feudal ociety f this group of youngmen already famed for the accomplishment f their military rreligious mission, lready educated, lready ceremonially nitiated

7 An article to appear in Le Moyen Age.8G. Duby, Les 'jeunes' dans la soci6t6aristocratique. France du Nord-Ouest, XIIe siecle , Annales, E.S.C., xix (1964).



9/9

IO PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER39

into adult ociety, ut as yet neither stablished n their wn house-holds nor n religious enefices:men, hat s, who were still eekingtheir fortune. In my article was only concernedwith he youngmen of the knightly lass. But am convinced hat ne couldeasilyfind similar groups among the clerics with similar ttitudes ndfrustrations.9 his clerical nd military roup of the young menin the prince's ntourage asthe focalpoint f rivalry nd emulation.The concept of the prize to be gained in military r oratoricalcompetition s fundamental ere; and the types f perfection hosecharacteristics ere determined y this emulation were naturalpoints f reference hichhad to be accepted y all. The court, hat

is its most youthfulmembers, eemsto me to have been the fire nwhich hemodelswereforged nd where he exemplary igures f theperfect night nd the perfect lerkwere created. In those compe-titions etween oung nights ndyoung lerks, hecontrasts etweenthe two modelswere ccentuated nd fixed: t the end of the twelfthcentury, or xample, ne of the major hemes f the gamesplayed nthe adies'quarters was,whomwas it best to love,clerk or knightAt the ame ime,within hese atherings nd as part f hepermanentcontact between clerk and knight, the two exemplary types

occasionallyame

up againstone another. It was in the

princelycourts, herefore, hat, n the eleventh entury, olinessgraduallytook n a colouring fheroism, hile ater, uring he welfth entury,the knights hemselves ere nclined obecome itterati. The pointof creation herefore as also the ource f diffusion. At every tagealongthose routes which converged nd crossed n princely ourts,these modelswerepropagated nd may herefore roperly e termedcourtly , ourtois. Eventually hey reached he furthest imits f

aristocratic ociety, nd then spread even more widely mong menwho were not themselves oble but who were fascinated y theglamour f the court. On the one side was the prince that s, theking) nd nearhim, heclerk nd the knight; n the other, hemasses,admiring hese models of human perfection: his was the generalframework f feudal ociety. This too was the framework or thecurrents f popularization nd the complex henomena f borrowingsand exchanges t all levels of what we may call,for want of a betterword, ulture.University f Aix-en-Provence Georges uby

9The young Abelard, for example, behaves in a manner very imilar to thatof a knight. He thought of his researches in philosophy as conquests; heopposed his masters n the same aggressive way as young knights pposed theirsenioreswho were well established n their position and who stood in their way;and finally, Abelard, as is well known, was in no way ndifferent o the flatteryof fame or to success in love.

This content downloaded from 1 47 96 1 236 on Tue 8 Jul 2014 13:05:36 PM
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

Duby 1967 Diffussion of Cultural Patterns in Feudal Society.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Duby 1967 Diffussion of Cultural Patterns in Feudal Society.pdf