Abstract
Al-Masaq, Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2008 Editor’s introduction JO VAN STEENBERGEN For the political cultures of pre-modern societies, it is now widely accepted that ‘‘informal’’, personal, or—perhaps even better—private processes and procedures tended to be at least as defining, crucial, and decisive as their more traditional ‘‘formal’’ counterparts, or—more aptly put—all things public to a political process. This...
Al-Masaq, Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2008 Editor’s introduction JO VAN STEENBERGEN For the political cultures of pre-modern societies, it is now widely accepted that ‘‘informal’’, personal, or—perhaps even better—private processes and procedures tended to be at least as defining, crucial, and decisive as their more traditional ‘‘formal’’ counterparts, or—more aptly put—all things public to a political process. This private-public dichotomy, or, rather, the blurring of the line between the two when it comes to politicking, is in fact characteristic of all three ‘‘overlapping circles’’—to borrow from one Byzantinist’s view—that made up a central axis of the medieval world: the Byzantine Commonwealth, the Islamic Orient, and Latin Christendom. One aspect that fits this description of blurred boundaries for all three circles of political culture is the theme of counsel and advice, of providing or eliciting consultation, guidance and assistance in issues of power and governance. In July 2006, a strand was organised at the International Medieval Congress (IMC) (Leeds, UK) to allow for a comparative approach to this theme within the wider remit of political culture and rulership in the Latin West, the Byzantine Commonwealth, and the Islamic World. This strand, consisting of 7 sessions and 21 papers in
Al-Masaq: Journal of the Medieval Mediterranean – Taylor & Francis
Published: Mar 1, 2008
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.