Introduction à l'étude de la féodalité géorgienne (Le code de Georges le Brilliant) by GeorgesCharachidzéReview by: Cyril ToumanoffThe American Historical Review, Vol. 77, No. 2 (Apr., 1972), pp. 502-503Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Historical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1868733 .

Accessed: 25/06/2014 07:38

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 ofcontent 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 support@jstor.org.

.

Oxford University Press and American Historical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to The American Historical Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.115 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 07:38:42 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

502 Reviews of Books 502 Reviews of Books

in 1030. Numbers 20, 22, 25, and 6o are deeds of donation of various properties on the island of Skyros and on the mainland. Number 59, unfortunately mutilated, concerns the division in 111o between three brothers of property sit- uated in and around Thessalonica, and it con- tains valuable topographical detail. Number 65 (A.D. ii8i), bearing on the same topic as the previously known numbers 66 and 69, is of the highest interest: it relates to a dispute between Lavra, whiclh owned estates in the province of Moglena (northwest of Thessalonica), and the Cuman pronoiars settled in that region. The document lists the names of the Cuman squires who had usurped the services of the serfs (pa- roikoi) bclonging to Lavra, as well as of the serfs themselves, sixty-two in all, many of whom were clearly Slavs. The government ruled in favor of Lavra, and the Cumans were ordered to move elsewhere. Finally, numbers 67 and 68, both of 1196, concern a judicial ac- tion by virtue of wlhich Lavra was allowed to transport wine on its ships to Constantinople without paying duty.

It is impossible in this space to give even a faint idea of the wealth of information that the Acts of Lavra provide on the social, economic, military, ethnic, and, of course, ecclesiastic as- pects of Byzantine history. Nor could the edi- tors tlhemselves lhave commented exhaustively on such a variety of topics. They have gone, however, a long way toward orienting the reader: in addition to the analysis and notes accompanying each document, there is an ex- tensive chapter on the chronology of Lavra until 1204 by Lemerle and an illuminating essay by Nicolas Svoronos on the monastery's landholdings. In all respects, this edition is a notable achievement and does the higlhest credit to Professor Lemerle's center of Byzan- tine studies.

CYRIL MANGO

Dumbarton Oaks, Harvard University

in 1030. Numbers 20, 22, 25, and 6o are deeds of donation of various properties on the island of Skyros and on the mainland. Number 59, unfortunately mutilated, concerns the division in 111o between three brothers of property sit- uated in and around Thessalonica, and it con- tains valuable topographical detail. Number 65 (A.D. ii8i), bearing on the same topic as the previously known numbers 66 and 69, is of the highest interest: it relates to a dispute between Lavra, whiclh owned estates in the province of Moglena (northwest of Thessalonica), and the Cuman pronoiars settled in that region. The document lists the names of the Cuman squires who had usurped the services of the serfs (pa- roikoi) bclonging to Lavra, as well as of the serfs themselves, sixty-two in all, many of whom were clearly Slavs. The government ruled in favor of Lavra, and the Cumans were ordered to move elsewhere. Finally, numbers 67 and 68, both of 1196, concern a judicial ac- tion by virtue of wlhich Lavra was allowed to transport wine on its ships to Constantinople without paying duty.

It is impossible in this space to give even a faint idea of the wealth of information that the Acts of Lavra provide on the social, economic, military, ethnic, and, of course, ecclesiastic as- pects of Byzantine history. Nor could the edi- tors tlhemselves lhave commented exhaustively on such a variety of topics. They have gone, however, a long way toward orienting the reader: in addition to the analysis and notes accompanying each document, there is an ex- tensive chapter on the chronology of Lavra until 1204 by Lemerle and an illuminating essay by Nicolas Svoronos on the monastery's landholdings. In all respects, this edition is a notable achievement and does the higlhest credit to Professor Lemerle's center of Byzan- tine studies.

CYRIL MANGO

Dumbarton Oaks, Harvard University

GEORGES CHIARACHIIDZE. Introduction a le'tude de la feodalite' getorgienne (Le code de Georges le Brillant). (Centre de Recherches d'Histoire et de Philologie de la IVe Section de lf'cole pratique des Hautes iEtudes. Fourtlh Series, Hautes etudes islamiques et orientales d'histoire comparee, Number i.) Geneva: Librairie Droz. 1971. Pp. 162.

GEORGES CHIARACHIIDZE. Introduction a le'tude de la feodalite' getorgienne (Le code de Georges le Brillant). (Centre de Recherches d'Histoire et de Philologie de la IVe Section de lf'cole pratique des Hautes iEtudes. Fourtlh Series, Hautes etudes islamiques et orientales d'histoire comparee, Number i.) Geneva: Librairie Droz. 1971. Pp. 162.

In seven of its ten chiapters (2-6, 9, 1o), this

book deals directly and aptly with the code of George the Illustrious, King of Georgia (1314-46): its editions, translations, date, and sources; the locality it concerns; the questions of property and the Wergeld, and of the local administration mentioned in it; and the poli- cies of King George and the raison d'e'tre of the code. The book presents a new Frenclh transla- tion of the code, far superior to the earlier ver- sions in Russian, English, and (Karst's whimsi- cal) French.

On the other hand, chapters 1, 7, and 8 (leal with vaster problems than the code: the nature of Georgian feudalism and the Georgian social structure. Here, alongside proofs of much eru- dition of a legal and linguistic nature, there are manifestations of a fundamental hiistorical misapprehension that it is the reviewer's duty to note.

The author wisely reacts against the MVarx- ists' abuse, or too broad a use, of the term "feui- dalism," only to fall into the opposite extreme of restricting the phenomenon so designated to the territory "entre le Rhin et la Loire" (on page io and elsewlhere). Yet the existence of feudalism in Japan is admitted and, wlhat is more, clearly proved in Georgia. Had the pertinent works of Adontz been consulted, its existence in Armenia too would lhave been admitted. A total lack of conversancy with English publications (save Wardrop's transla- tion of the code) prevented the author fromn profiting from the thoughtful Feudalism in History (ed. R. Coulborn [1956]), which avoids both the Marxist Scylla and the Charybdis of the French restrictionists. Nevertheless, the au- thor understands feudalism, as when he distin- guishes (pp. 12-13) between the struggle within that system and one between it and another system, for example, etatisme. It is Georgian feudalism that he seems to fail to understand.

Only a few salient points can be singled out here. One is the translation of qrmna(y), later qma. The word has tlhree meanings: child, boy (pais-puer); knight; serf (a later meaning) (see Nicholas Marr and Maurice Briere, La Langue georgienne [1931], 692). In earliest translations it rendered brephos and pais (Joseplh Molitor, Altgeorgisches Glossar [1952], 192). The author himself on pages 24 and 35 states that it can mean "retainer," "vassal." Yet he translates it

In seven of its ten chiapters (2-6, 9, 1o), this

book deals directly and aptly with the code of George the Illustrious, King of Georgia (1314-46): its editions, translations, date, and sources; the locality it concerns; the questions of property and the Wergeld, and of the local administration mentioned in it; and the poli- cies of King George and the raison d'e'tre of the code. The book presents a new Frenclh transla- tion of the code, far superior to the earlier ver- sions in Russian, English, and (Karst's whimsi- cal) French.

On the other hand, chapters 1, 7, and 8 (leal with vaster problems than the code: the nature of Georgian feudalism and the Georgian social structure. Here, alongside proofs of much eru- dition of a legal and linguistic nature, there are manifestations of a fundamental hiistorical misapprehension that it is the reviewer's duty to note.

The author wisely reacts against the MVarx- ists' abuse, or too broad a use, of the term "feui- dalism," only to fall into the opposite extreme of restricting the phenomenon so designated to the territory "entre le Rhin et la Loire" (on page io and elsewlhere). Yet the existence of feudalism in Japan is admitted and, wlhat is more, clearly proved in Georgia. Had the pertinent works of Adontz been consulted, its existence in Armenia too would lhave been admitted. A total lack of conversancy with English publications (save Wardrop's transla- tion of the code) prevented the author fromn profiting from the thoughtful Feudalism in History (ed. R. Coulborn [1956]), which avoids both the Marxist Scylla and the Charybdis of the French restrictionists. Nevertheless, the au- thor understands feudalism, as when he distin- guishes (pp. 12-13) between the struggle within that system and one between it and another system, for example, etatisme. It is Georgian feudalism that he seems to fail to understand.

Only a few salient points can be singled out here. One is the translation of qrmna(y), later qma. The word has tlhree meanings: child, boy (pais-puer); knight; serf (a later meaning) (see Nicholas Marr and Maurice Briere, La Langue georgienne [1931], 692). In earliest translations it rendered brephos and pais (Joseplh Molitor, Altgeorgisches Glossar [1952], 192). The author himself on pages 24 and 35 states that it can mean "retainer," "vassal." Yet he translates it

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.115 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 07:38:42 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Modern Europe 503 Modern Europe 503

throughout as esclave and equates it witlh mona(y) (p. i5), whiclh is found but once in the sense of "vassal," as usedl by an ultraroyalist hiistorian anxious to exalt the Crown at the ex- pense of the nobility (see my Studies in Chris- tian Caucasian History [1963], 258). It can usually be translated, indeed, as "slave." But even mona(y), rendering in earliest translations (Altgeorgisches Glossar, p. 1 9) doulos-servus and also pais, need not always mean "slave," signifying also "servant," that is, famulus. The same ambiguity, by the way, marks also pais and puer, as well as servus. In view of this latitude. the choice of "slave" instead of "vas- sal" is inadmissible in the context of history, that is, of the etlhos of a feudal nobiliary so- ciety.

More serious is the translation throughout of eristcav(i) as "prince" instead of as "(feudal) duke." Here a perusal of my Studies miglht have instilled an awareness, totally lacking in the book, of the dichotomous nature of the Georgian (and Armenian) nobility, at once "dynasticist" and feudal, and of feudalism (es- pecially the dukedoms) as introduced by t:he Crown to control the dynastic princes, from whose midst it had itself arisen. It might have prevented, too, the identification of eristcav(i) with pitiaxK(i).

In fine, this is a splendid study and transla- tion of the code, but hardly a satisfactory initro- duction to the study of Georgian feudalism.

CYRIL TOUNIANOFF

Romne

throughout as esclave and equates it witlh mona(y) (p. i5), whiclh is found but once in the sense of "vassal," as usedl by an ultraroyalist hiistorian anxious to exalt the Crown at the ex- pense of the nobility (see my Studies in Chris- tian Caucasian History [1963], 258). It can usually be translated, indeed, as "slave." But even mona(y), rendering in earliest translations (Altgeorgisches Glossar, p. 1 9) doulos-servus and also pais, need not always mean "slave," signifying also "servant," that is, famulus. The same ambiguity, by the way, marks also pais and puer, as well as servus. In view of this latitude. the choice of "slave" instead of "vas- sal" is inadmissible in the context of history, that is, of the etlhos of a feudal nobiliary so- ciety.

More serious is the translation throughout of eristcav(i) as "prince" instead of as "(feudal) duke." Here a perusal of my Studies miglht have instilled an awareness, totally lacking in the book, of the dichotomous nature of the Georgian (and Armenian) nobility, at once "dynasticist" and feudal, and of feudalism (es- pecially the dukedoms) as introduced by t:he Crown to control the dynastic princes, from whose midst it had itself arisen. It might have prevented, too, the identification of eristcav(i) with pitiaxK(i).

In fine, this is a splendid study and transla- tion of the code, but hardly a satisfactory initro- duction to the study of Georgian feudalism.

CYRIL TOUNIANOFF

Romne

MODERN EUROPE

LOUIS B. WRIGHT. Gold, Glory, and the Gospel: The Adventurous Lives and Times of the Renaissance Explorers. New York: Atheneum. 1970. Pp. xvi, 362. $1o.oo.

Despite Dr. Wright's apparent eagerness to ex- plain why he, an eminent specialist in English colonial expansion, should lhave undertaken to survey the creation of the Iberian empires, readers may still be left wondering.

At various points in both the preface and the introduction the autlhor gives some three or four different reasons for producing his book. On page vii of the introduction, for instance, he is interested in the explorers' motivations: "what made them do it?" Unfortunately, the

MODERN EUROPE

LOUIS B. WRIGHT. Gold, Glory, and the Gospel: The Adventurous Lives and Times of the Renaissance Explorers. New York: Atheneum. 1970. Pp. xvi, 362. $1o.oo.

Despite Dr. Wright's apparent eagerness to ex- plain why he, an eminent specialist in English colonial expansion, should lhave undertaken to survey the creation of the Iberian empires, readers may still be left wondering.

At various points in both the preface and the introduction the autlhor gives some three or four different reasons for producing his book. On page vii of the introduction, for instance, he is interested in the explorers' motivations: "what made them do it?" Unfortunately, the

naivete of trying to explain a great historical movement via the examination of individual psychology produces results with little to rec- ommend them, as a comparison of Dr. Wright's "explanations" with those of Pierre Clhauntu at the close of his recent Clio volume on Euro- pean expansion will make clear. Further on, the author admits to hoping that his book has "distilled the essence from learned works and made it more readily available" (page vii of the introduction). But althouglh the book lacks a bibliography and the footnotes are few, the fact that the autlhor evidently reads neitlher Spanish nor Portuguese (nor French?) means that the illuminating insights of Vitorino M. Godinho, Charles Verlinden, Pierre Chaunu, Richard Konetzke, and many other scholars, whose re- cent contrihutions have remade the field, are not reflected in these pages. Rather, it seems that basic reliance has been placed on a few old war horses, all in English: Morison for Co- lumbus, Henry Hart (!) and (probably) Pres- tage for Portuguese expansion, plus copius draughts from the Hakluyt Society translations.

The actual result comes closer to fulfilling a third of Dr. Wright's professed motives for writ- ing: "to relate important and dramatic epi- sodes that are typical of expansion overseas. . ." (page xvi of the introduction). But here the problem is that something very close to this is already available in either J. H. Parry's muclh superior Age of Reconnaissance (1965), or to a large degree, in the old but still useful survey of F. A. Kirkpatrick, The Spanish Con quista- dors (1934) (not to mention Bores Penrose's

work on Renaissance exploration), to which Dr. Wright has little, if anything, to add.

The "dramatic episodes" around which the author elaborates his work are twelve or so in number, depending upon one's definition of "episode." There is the requisite chapter on Henry the Navigator, followed by others on the Portuguese in Africa, Vasco da Gama, Co- lumbus, and so forth-in short, the whole moldy lot up to and including Cortes and Drake. Certainly the best and most interesting parts of the book are the last two chapters where the author is on lhome ground: hiis essay on the struggle of the non-Iberian powers to breach the peninsular overseas monopoly and his final chapter on the use of Protestant ideol- ogy to support much of the later non-Iberian

naivete of trying to explain a great historical movement via the examination of individual psychology produces results with little to rec- ommend them, as a comparison of Dr. Wright's "explanations" with those of Pierre Clhauntu at the close of his recent Clio volume on Euro- pean expansion will make clear. Further on, the author admits to hoping that his book has "distilled the essence from learned works and made it more readily available" (page vii of the introduction). But althouglh the book lacks a bibliography and the footnotes are few, the fact that the autlhor evidently reads neitlher Spanish nor Portuguese (nor French?) means that the illuminating insights of Vitorino M. Godinho, Charles Verlinden, Pierre Chaunu, Richard Konetzke, and many other scholars, whose re- cent contrihutions have remade the field, are not reflected in these pages. Rather, it seems that basic reliance has been placed on a few old war horses, all in English: Morison for Co- lumbus, Henry Hart (!) and (probably) Pres- tage for Portuguese expansion, plus copius draughts from the Hakluyt Society translations.

The actual result comes closer to fulfilling a third of Dr. Wright's professed motives for writ- ing: "to relate important and dramatic epi- sodes that are typical of expansion overseas. . ." (page xvi of the introduction). But here the problem is that something very close to this is already available in either J. H. Parry's muclh superior Age of Reconnaissance (1965), or to a large degree, in the old but still useful survey of F. A. Kirkpatrick, The Spanish Con quista- dors (1934) (not to mention Bores Penrose's

work on Renaissance exploration), to which Dr. Wright has little, if anything, to add.

The "dramatic episodes" around which the author elaborates his work are twelve or so in number, depending upon one's definition of "episode." There is the requisite chapter on Henry the Navigator, followed by others on the Portuguese in Africa, Vasco da Gama, Co- lumbus, and so forth-in short, the whole moldy lot up to and including Cortes and Drake. Certainly the best and most interesting parts of the book are the last two chapters where the author is on lhome ground: hiis essay on the struggle of the non-Iberian powers to breach the peninsular overseas monopoly and his final chapter on the use of Protestant ideol- ogy to support much of the later non-Iberian

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.115 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 07:38:42 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions