Itinerant court

Anitinerant courtwas a migratory form of government shared in European kingdoms during theEarly Middle Ages.It was an alternative to having acapital city,a permanent political center governed by a kingdom.

Itinerant kings depicted in a medieval church painting, Dädesjö Old Church, Sweden

Medieval Western Europe was generally characterized by a political rule wherein the highest political authorities frequently changed their location, bringing parts of the country's central government on their journey. Therefore, such a realm had no actual center or permanent seat of government. Itinerant courts were gradually replaced from the thirteenth century, when stationary royal residences began to develop into modern capital cities.

Holy Roman Empire

The itinerant court system of ruling a country is strongly associated with German history, where the emergence of a capital city took an unusually long time. The German itinerant regime (Reisekönigtum) was the usual form of royal or imperial government from theFrankish periodand up to late medieval times.^[1]TheHoly Roman Emperorsdid not rule from any permanent central residence during or after the Middle Ages. They constantly traveled, with their family and court, through the empire. A key reason was certainly that—unlike in England and France—there was no hereditary monarchy in the Holy Roman Empire, but rather the electoral principle, which led to kings of very different regional origins being elected inimperial elections.

Artist's impression ofCharlemagne'sPalace of Aachen

The Holy Roman Empire did not have a capital city. The emperors owned their varying dynastic lands, including castles, but could not limit themselves to these if they wanted to keep control of their large empire, including its often-rebellious regional princes. Therefore, the emperor and other princes ruled by constantly changing their residences. TheMerovingiankings of the Frankish Empire already practiced this system, and the subsequentCarolingian dynastyadopted both the custom and its associated palaces (Kaiserpfalz,lit. 'royal palace'). During the reigns of successive emperors, these palaces were expanded, abandoned, rebuilt elsewhere (often on the kings' own estates), and often became part of the royal estates of the kings' successors. Royalpfalzeswere scattered around the whole country—notably in accessible, fertile areas—and surrounded by imperial property administrated by the palace to ensure supplies.

The locations of royal estates or palaces depended on several factors. Royal granges served as transit quarters and were therefore set up at a distance of 15–19 miles (24–31 km),^[2]which corresponded to a day's journey by the royal entourage with horses and carriages. Individual riders, such as postal riders, on the other hand, covered much greater distances, up to 75 miles per day on dry ground. In 1146,Conrad III of Germanycould travel as fast as 41 miles a day on his journey fromFrankfurttoWeinheim.^[3]During a year, impressive distances were covered. However, these distances could not be maintained on all routes—there were large territories in which no royalpfalzor grange existed, or lacked nearby monasteries or towns. In these cases, the emperors and kings often spent the night in tent camps.^[4]This also occurred during campaigns and sieges in which the kings took part.

Pfalzeswere often located near Roman urban remnants, which constituted the oldest cities in Germany and France. These settlements were also mostly located on navigable rivers—mainly theRhine,Main,andDanube—which enabled quick and comfortable travel and facilitated suppling. Oldbishopricswere often located in these places, another advantage in that bishops were usually more loyal to the king thanregional dukes,who pursued their own dynastic goals.

The routes the court followed during the journeys were calleditinerarium.The composition of the ruler'sretinueconstantly changed, depending on what area the court was passing through and which noblemen joined or left.

In other countries

The itinerant court is often conceived as a typical German institution.Medieval Germanywas, however, not the only kingdom ruled this way; it was also the case in most other contemporary European countries, where terms like "corte itinerante" describe this phenomenon. Kings and their companions traveled continuously from one royal palace to the next. Early historical sources describeScotlandas being ruled by an itinerant court, with theParliament of Scotlandassembling in many different places. InSaxon England,conditions were the same.^[5]

A more centralized way of ruling did evolve during this time, but only slowly and gradually.^[6]LondonandParisbegan to develop into permanent political centers from the late 1300s, andLisbonshowed similar tendencies. Smaller kingdoms too had a similar, but slower development.Spain,on the other hand, lacked a fixed royal residence until the late 1500s, whenPhilip IIelevatedEl EscorialoutsideMadridto this rank.^[7]

EmperorCharles Vmade 40 journeys during his lifetime, traveling from country to country with no single fixed capital city. It is estimated that he spent a quarter of his reign on the road.^[8]He made ten trips to theLow Countries,nine to German-speaking lands, seven to Spain, seven to Italian states, four to France, two to England, and two to North Africa. As he said in his last public speech, "My life has been one long journey."^[9]During his travels, Charles V left a documentary trail nearly everywhere he went, allowing historians to surmise that he spent nearly half his life (over 10,000 days) in the Low Countries and almost one-third (6,500 days) in Spain. He spent more than 3,000 days in what is now Germany and nearly 1,000 days in Italy, with much of the remainder in France (195), North Africa (99), and England (44). For 260 days, his exact location is unrecorded, all of them being days spent at sea traveling between his dominions.^[10]

The evolving capital city

Holy Roman Empire

Germany never developed a fixed capital city during the medieval orearly modern period—its alternative solution was a decentralized state (Multizentralität,"pluricentricity" ) until thelate modern period.

England

Englandwas very different in this respect. Centralpoliticalpower was permanently established inLondonapproximately in the middle of the fourteenth century. Still, London's outstanding position as afinancialcenter had been firmly established many centuries earlier. KingHenry II of England(1133–1189) was attracted by the city's great wealth, but he was hesitant about taking up residence there. During his reign, London became as near to an economic capital as the conditions of the age allowed. But its very prosperity and its extensive and long-recognized liberties, the latter subsequentlycharacterized in Magna Carta as 'ancient',forbade it as a desirable place of residence for the king and his court, preventing it from becoming a political capital.

The king often wished to be near the great city, but he claimed the same power to control the court that the citizens demanded to govern their city. The only way to avoid conflict between the household and municipal jurisdictions was for the king to keep away from the latter much of the time. He could only be in the city as a guest or a conqueror. Accordingly, he seldom ventured within the city walls; on such occasions, he established himself either in theTower Fortressor at hisPalace of Westminsterjust outside the City of London.

Depiction of a 14th-century English carriage

London was the natural leader among English towns. To control England, the kings needed to maintain London first. London was too powerful to handle; it took centuries before the monarchs settled there. They tried, unsuccessfully, to drive the London merchants out of business by making Westminster a rival economic center. They tried to find some other suitable place in the kingdom to deposit theirarchives,which were gradually growing too large and heavy to be transported on their unending journeys.^[11]

Yorktended towards becoming a political capital during times of war withScotland.TheHundred Years' WaragainstFrancecaused the political center of gravity to shift to the southern parts of England, where London was dominant. Gradually, many state institutions ceased to follow the king on his journeys and established themselves permanently in London: theTreasury,Parliament,and the court. The king himself was last to take up permanent residence in London. It was only possible for him to make London his capital city after he had become powerful enough to "tame the financial metropolis" and transform it into an obedient tool of the State's authority.^[11]

Although a country's political center tends to naturally emerge at the same place as the country's economic center, the English historical example shows that this is not always the case—centralizing and centrifugal forces counteracted each other, while wealth was both an attractive and repellent force on the rulers.

Purpose

A migrating form of political power was an inherent feature of thefeudalismthat succeeded the more centralizedRoman Empire.In Eastern Europe,Constantinopleretained the characteristics of a political capital city much more than any western city.^{[citation needed]}

Traveling government enabled better surveillance of the realm. The king's nomadic lifestyle also facilitated control over localmagnates,strengthening national cohesion. Medieval government was, for a long time, a system of personal relationships rather than an administration of geographic areas. Therefore, the ruler had to "personally" deal with his subordinates. During medieval times, this "oral" culture gradually gave way to a "documentary" type of rule—one based on written communication, which generatedarchives,making stationary rule increasingly attractive to kings.^{[citation needed]}

Initially, rulers also needed to travel to meet the court's financial needs, as inadequate transportation facilities simply did not allow a large group of people to stay permanently in one place. Instead of sending resources to the government, the government wandered to the resources. Food supplies and other necessities were usually transferred to the place where the court resided for the moment. In many countries, the traveling kingship persisted throughout the 16th century or even longer.

Consequently, these pure economic benefits must have been less decisive than the political importance of traveling. The transition from a state with an itinerant court to a state ruled from a capital city was a reflection of how an "oral" way of life—wherein kings could win loyalty only by personally meeting their subjects face-to-face—gave way to a "documentary" rule in which the king employed abureaucracyto communicate with his subjects.^{[citation needed]}

Bibliography

Aretin, Karl Otmar von (1983):Das Reich ohne Hauptstadt?In:Hauptstädte in europäischen Nationalstaaten.ed T Schieder & G Brunn, Munich/Vienna.
Berges, Wilhelm (1952):Das Reich ohne Hauptstadt.In:Das Hauptstadtproblem in der GeschichteTübingen.
Bernhardt, John W. (1993):Itinerant kingship and royal monasteries in early medieval Germany, 936–1075.CUP, Cambridge,ISBN 0-521-39489-9.
Brühl, Carlrichard(1968):Fodrum, Gistum, Servitium Regis.Cologne/Graz.
Braudel, Fernand(1973):Capitalism and material life 1400-1800,Harper & Row, New York.
Ennen, Edith (1983):Funktions- und Bedeutungswandel der 'Hauptstadt' vom Mittelalter zur Moderne.In:Hauptstädte in europäischen Nationalstaatened. Theodor Schieder & Gerhard Brunn, Munich/Vienna.
Febvre, Lucien(1977):Life in Renaissance France,edited and translated by Marian Rothstein, Harvard University Press. Harvard.
Fernández, Luis (1981a):España en tiempo de Felipe II, Historia de España,ed R Menéndez Pidal, tomo XXII, vol I, cuarta edición, Madrid.
Fernández, Luis (1981b):España en tiempo de Felipe II, Historia de España,ed R Menéndez Pidal, tomo XXII, vol II, cuarta edición, Madrid.
Graus, František(1979):Prag als Mitte Böhmens.In:Zentralität als Problem der mittelalterlichen Stadtgeschichtsforschung.ed. F Meynen, Vienna/Cologne.
Guenee, Bernard (1985):States and rulers in later medieval Europe.Glasgow.
Hardy, Thomas Duffus(1835):A Description of the Patent Rolls,London.
Hermann, Oliver (2000):Lothar III. und sein Wirkungsbereich. Räumliche Bezüge königlichen Handelns im hochmittelalterlichen Reich (1125–1137).Winkler, Bochum,ISBN 3-930083-60-4.
Jusserand, J.J. (1921):English wayfaring life in the Middle Ages (XIVth century),2nd revised and enlarged edition, London.
Martens, Mina (1964):Bruxelles, capitale de fait sous les Bourgignons.In:Vierteljahrschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte.II.
Opll, Ferdinand (1978):Das itinerar Kaiser Friedrichs Barbarossa.Vienna/Cologne/Graz.
Orning, Hans Jacob (2008):Unpredictability and presence - Norwegian Kingship in the High Middle Ages.Leiden/Boston.
Peyer, Hans Conrad (1964):Das Reisekönigtum des Mittelalters.In:Vierteljahrschrift für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte.ed. Hermann Aubin, vol 51, Wiesbaden, pp. 1–21.
Roloff, Gustav (1952):Hauptstadt und Staat in Frankreich.In:Das Hauptstadtproblem in der Geschichte.Tübingen.
Reinke, Martina (1987):Die Reisegeschwindigkeit des deutschen Königshofes im 11. Und 12. Jahrhundert nördlich der Alpen.In:Blätter für deutsche Landesgeschichte128.
Sawyer, Peter(1983):The royal tun in pre-conquest England.In:Ideal and Reality in Frankish and Anglo-Saxon society,Oxford.
Stretton, Grace (1935):The travelling household in the Middle Ages.In:The Journal of the British Archaeological Association,new series, vol 40, London.
Strömberg, J.B.L.D. (2004):The Swedish Kings in Progress – and the Centre of Power.In:Scandia.70:2, Lund.
Strömberg, J.B.L.D. (2013):De svenska resande kungarna – och maktens centrum. (The Swedish travelling kingdom –and the center of power)Uppsala. Samlingar utgivna av Svenska fornskriftsällskapet. Serie 1. Svenska skrifter 97, 557 pp.ISBN 978-91-979881-1-7.English summary:[1]
Tout, Thomas Frederick(1934):The beginnings of a modern capital, London and Westminster in the fourteenth century.In:The collected papers of Thomas Frederick Toutvol III, Manchester.

Footnotes

^About German conditions, see Bernhardt 1993, passim; Hermann 2000, passim; Reinke 1987, pp. 225-251.
^Brühl 1968 p. 163.
^Martina Reinke:Die Reisegeschwindigkeit des deutschen Königshofes im 11. und 12. Jahrhundert nördlich der Alpen.In:Blätter für deutsche Landesgeschichte128, 1987, pp. 225–251, here pp. 245 and p. 248 (online).
^Ferdinand Opll,Friedrich Barbarossa(Frederick Barbarossa), Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 1990, ISBN 3-534-04131-3.
^Peter Sawyer 1983, pp. 273-299.
^A general survey in Guenee 1985, pp. 126, etc., 238, etc.; Peyer 1964, pp. 1-21; Stretton 1935, pp. 75-103.
^About the German story, see von Aretin 1983, pp 1-29; Berges 1952, pp. 83, etc.; Bernhardt 1993, passim, Brühl 1968, passim; Ennen 1983, pp. 169-174; Hermann 2000, passim; and Opll 1978, passim. About Brussels, see Martens 1964, pp. 180-181. About French conditions, see Roloff 1952, pp. 234, etc. In Scandinavia, see Orning 2008, especially pp. 44, and Stromberg (2004 passim; 2013, passim but especially pp. 83, etc). About Prague, see Graus 1979, pp. 22-47. About Spain, see Fernández 1981a, pp. 63, 77, 599, 601, 602, 605; Fernández 1981b, pp. 609, 617, 662.
^Ferer, Tiffany (2012).Music and Ceremony at the Court of Charles V: The Capilla Flamenca and the Art of Political Promotion.Boydell Press.ISBN 9781843836995.
^Jenkins, Everett Jr. (7 May 2015).The Muslim Diaspora (Volume 2, 1500-1799): A Comprehensive Chronology of the Spread of Islam in Asia, Africa, Europe, and the Americas.McFarland.ISBN 9781476608891– via Google Books.
^Parker, Geoffrey (June 25, 2019).Emperor: A New Life of Charles V.Yale University Press. p. 8.ISBN 978-0-300-24102-0.
^^a ^bTout 1934, pp. 253-254. About the "taming" of autonomous cities, see Braudel 1973 p. 402-406. About English conditions, see also Jusserand 1921 p. 83, 104, 108, 118. John Lackland's itinerary in Hardy 1835, pp. 181, etc.

External links

[1] About German conditions, see Bernhardt 1993, passim; Hermann 2000, passim; Reinke 1987, pp. 225-251.

[2] Brühl 1968 p. 163.

[3] Martina Reinke:Die Reisegeschwindigkeit des deutschen Königshofes im 11. und 12. Jahrhundert nördlich der Alpen.In:Blätter für deutsche Landesgeschichte128, 1987, pp. 225–251, here pp. 245 and p. 248 (online).

[4] Ferdinand Opll,Friedrich Barbarossa(Frederick Barbarossa), Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 1990, ISBN 3-534-04131-3.

[5] Peter Sawyer 1983, pp. 273-299.

[6] A general survey in Guenee 1985, pp. 126, etc., 238, etc.; Peyer 1964, pp. 1-21; Stretton 1935, pp. 75-103.

[7] About the German story, see von Aretin 1983, pp 1-29; Berges 1952, pp. 83, etc.; Bernhardt 1993, passim, Brühl 1968, passim; Ennen 1983, pp. 169-174; Hermann 2000, passim; and Opll 1978, passim. About Brussels, see Martens 1964, pp. 180-181. About French conditions, see Roloff 1952, pp. 234, etc. In Scandinavia, see Orning 2008, especially pp. 44, and Stromberg (2004 passim; 2013, passim but especially pp. 83, etc). About Prague, see Graus 1979, pp. 22-47. About Spain, see Fernández 1981a, pp. 63, 77, 599, 601, 602, 605; Fernández 1981b, pp. 609, 617, 662.

[8] Ferer, Tiffany (2012).Music and Ceremony at the Court of Charles V: The Capilla Flamenca and the Art of Political Promotion.Boydell Press.ISBN 9781843836995.

[9] Jenkins, Everett Jr. (7 May 2015).The Muslim Diaspora (Volume 2, 1500-1799): A Comprehensive Chronology of the Spread of Islam in Asia, Africa, Europe, and the Americas.McFarland.ISBN 9781476608891– via Google Books.

[10] Parker, Geoffrey (June 25, 2019).Emperor: A New Life of Charles V.Yale University Press. p. 8.ISBN 978-0-300-24102-0.

[:0-11] Tout 1934, pp. 253-254. About the "taming" of autonomous cities, see Braudel 1973 p. 402-406. About English conditions, see also Jusserand 1921 p. 83, 104, 108, 118. John Lackland's itinerary in Hardy 1835, pp. 181, etc.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]