Welcome to 🧵3 in this week’s #Jacquerie posts by @mediaevalrevolt . Today I'll talk rebel organization
Medieval revolts often look like undirected mob fury, but most, including the Jacquerie, had formal leadership directing the action - jfb
In the #Jacquerie many villages chose local captains to lead them. Local captains reported to a 'General Captain of the Countryside' named Guillaume Calle. The locations of some of these captains and their movements are shown in blue here. - jfb
Calle had a number of close associates - his 'top brass' - who rode with him and who carried his messages and decisions to local contingents (though they did not always do what he said - more on that anon) -jfb
The sources show these leaders tended to be well-off, literate professionals with families. (I discovered in the archives that Guillaume Calle himself was married. Below is a petition from his widow.) - jfb
These men had well defined objectives and sought to coordinate their efforts with the Parisian rebels and other urban sympathisers. Calle wrote to Paris offering aid and sent messengers to villagers ordering them to join Parisian-led attacks. - jfb
But the #Jacquerie was also a grass-roots mov't. Calle had been chosen by an assembly after St-Leu and most of the local captains were also elected by their communities.
Assemblies were key to rebel mobilisation across medieval Europe - jfb
Rebels naturally used assemblies b/c assemblies were how rural (and urban) communities normally made decisions in the Middle Ages - something I talk about in the Jacquerie book and in this recent chapter in a handbook on medieval rural life - jfb tinyurl.com/5c7zk4st
Assemblies gave the rank-and-file had considerable power to shape the revolt. They often chose their leaders and they expected their leaders to 'lead them where they wanted to go' as one group of villagers demanded. - jfb
This caused conflict between rebel leaders and grassroots followers, especially over how much violence to use and whom to target. - jfb
The captains tried to restrain their troops. One said he was always telling them not to set fires, another that he reminded his not to kill anyone. (They forgot) - jfb
On the other hand, the grassroots objected to attacking some targets chosen by the Parisian (like this castle) because the owners were not nobles. Some villagers refused to attack the homes of their own lords, protecting them against rebels from outside the village. - jfb
These disagreements stemmed from the large and varied coalition of commoners behind the #Jacquerie, which was key to its success but also caused its downfall. I'll talk about who the rebels were and how the rebellion fell apart in tomorrow's thread - jfb
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Hi all, @mediaevalrevolt here, putting up my last #Tweethistorian thread today, this one on how the #Jacquerie ended and how people remembered (and forgot) it afterward. - jfb
When the cities abandoned the Jacques, the nobles' vengeance took free rein. They burned whole villages and slaughtered the innocent along with the guilty. Widows search for the bodies of their husbands to give them proper burial - jfb
Villagers fought back, though, and what started as a social uprising in May turned into a social war in June and July. - jfb
Welcome to #Tweethistorian 🧵4 by @mediaevalrevolt on the #Jacquerie. I am making Thanksgiving dinner (in Scotland 🏴) today and it's going to look exactly like this:
In the meantime, let me tell you about who actually joined the #Jacquerie and how they did and did not get along. Here I'm drawing from my article in Speculum last year and ch. 7 of my book. - jfb journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.108…
First up, men and women: All but 11 of the ca. 500 rebels we know by name were male, but this doesn't mean that women didn't participate or weren't important to the revolt. - jfb
In the previous thread we looked at premodern human rights discourse in Islamic intellectual history. In this final thread we will look at the relationship between Islam and modern human rights discourse.
So let us begin where the genesis of our question lies, at the birth of modern human rights themselves. After WWII the United Nations formed out of the League of Nations to represent the new world emerging out of the ashes of colonialism and world wars.
~aym
Out of these same ashes several forces, including religious forces such as the Catholic philosopher Jacques Maritain (d.1973), used
the post-war momentum to bind the new order to the highest ethical standards that went beyond the earlier international treaties.
The focus of this thread is this question: Are human rights a modern invention? This depends on your definition of human rights. If you believe human rights are exactly like we’ve them today in international law, then yes, that is modern. You can’t project those on the past.
~aym
To compare modern human rights law to Islam is to compare two things that developed in separate contexts, even though Muslim countries were deeply involved in developing modern international human rights law. This comparison is therefore about Islam *and* human rights.
~aym
But as we’ll see, ethical religions like Islam also developed over the centuries their own concepts of human rights. Both as a moral and legal concept, and already in medieval times. And it is of course this aspect of Islam we should compare to modern human rights discourse.
~aym
In a series of threads I’ll focus on another combination of Islamic studies and philosophy of religion: Islam and human rights.
This topic is mainly approached from the pov of legal studies whereby both Islam and human rights are approached as contemporary positive law.
~aym
But as I argue in my JIE article, only one part of Islam overlaps with what we would call positive law, while the rest would fall under legal theory and ethics.
Apart from the false reduction of Islam to law, there is also the issue of the historicity of human rights discourse. Are human rights a modern invention? Have we become more humane over the centuries? Were some ethical concepts unknowable in the centuries before?
This thread will focus on my research on how we can improve the way we do tafsīr studies. As exegesis (tafsīr) functions both as a science of the Qurʾān itself and as a science of the Islamic sciences, it has been technically “all over the place” within Islamic studies.
~aym
The earliest Orientalist works on tafsīr, like Goldziher’s work from over a century ago, did not take the post-classical era seriously as representing an ‘authentic’ Islam. To be real it must come from the first centuries of Islam (7-9th c. CE).
~aym
This Orientalist focus on ‘originalism’ mirrored the focus within 19-20th c. Biblical, Christian & religious studies, but it also mirrored the mindset of 19-20th c. reformist Muslims. And they essentially started to influence one another, both dismissing post-classical Islam.~aym