Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Jelle Haemers
University of Leuven
edievalists have regarded revolts and rebellions with a certain ambiguity. At the one hand, they argue that political conflicts in late medieval
times (a period of crisis!) were violent confrontations of people who wanted
to fight and even to destroy each other. If one reads, for instance, the overview
of Michel Mollat and Philippe Wolff on les annes revolutionaires, as they
have called a series of conflicts in the years 1378-81, one is struck on the focus
both authors put on the violence of medieval people, committed by both the
rebels as well as the repressive authorities. One is inclined to think that we
are speaking about a Calamitous Century, as Barbara Tuchman has called
the fourteenth century. In her bestseller of the same name, rebels are brutal
outcasts who aggressively battled against established powers. Though scholars
are well aware of the fact that Tuchman too naively has interpreted medieval
chronicles, such as Jean Froissarts, the image of a revolutionary mob still is
a very powerful one in the description of the political history of the Middle
Ages.1 At the other hand, however, medievalists often categorize medieval
protest as a conservative reaction of conformist people who stuck to their
privileges. I admit my guilt. In an overview on patterns of urban rebellion
in late medieval Flanders, Jan Dumolyn and I wrote that medieval rebels almost never demanded structural changes of society because they just wanted
1. M. Mollat; Ph. Wolff, Ongles bleus, Jacques et Ciompi. Les rvolutions populaires en
Europe aux XIVe et XVe sicle. Paris, 1970; B. Tuchman, The calamitous fourteenth century. New
York, 1978.
154
Jelle Haemers
can provide an explanation of revolt which might apply to other urban centres in late medieval Europe. Therefore, this text focuses on a case study in
another city, namely the revolt of the craft guilds of Leuven in 1378, one of
those revolutionary years distinguished by Mollat and Wolff. Though never
scrutinized in detail, the case-study presented in this article provides us with
unique documents which give us clear insight into the demands and wishes of
the rebels. A comparison with our findings on Bruges and York can thus help
us to discover general patterns of popular politics in wider Europe which is
one of the aims of this collection of essays.
The fact that Leuven differs in many ways from the cities of Bruges and
York makes it an excellent case to compare the socio-political demands and
wishes of the craftsmen across these towns. In distance, Leuven is not so far
from Bruges (about 100 kilometres), but the social and political situation in
both towns clearly varies, for three reasons. First of all, Leuven is situated in
another region, namely the duchy of Brabant, while Bruges is located in the
neighbouring county of Flanders. Though Brabant and Flanders will be ruled
by the same dynasty in the fifteenth century, both regions are at another side
of a national border. While Flanders largely made part of the kingdom of
France, the duchy of Brabant falls under the Holy Roman Empire. The fact
that Emperor Charles IV himself granted the duchy to his relative Wenceslas
in 1356 after the death of the last descendant of the dukes of Brabant shows
that, in the Emperors eyes, the duchy was an important fief in the western
part of the Empire. Wenceslas was a descendant from the house of Bohemia
and was also duke of Luxemburg until his death in 1383.4 Secondly, the city of
Leuven has different economic characteristics than Bruges. While the latter
is a financial centre and a port town in which international merchants sold
their goods and organized long-distance trade, Leuven is an industrial textile
centre, and a gateway for regional trade. The city had c. 40,000 inhabitants
in the fourteenth century, but this number declined continuously as Leuven
increasingly lost its pole position in the duchys economy (and politics) to
Brussels and Antwerp. But, still, the city counted 45 craft guilds which had accumulated a considerable wealth and rights of self-governance in the course
of the fourteenth century.5 In contrast to Bruges, and this is a third difference
with the Flemish town, these crafts did not have political representation in
1378. Therefore, more than in Bruges, political representation was one of the
4. About the fourteenth-century history of Brabant: R. Van Uytven (Ed.), Geschiedenis
van Brabant, van het hertogdom tot heden Leuven, 2004, p. 103-12, 118-25; S. Boffa, Medieval
warfare in Brabant, 1356-1406. Woodbridge, 2004.
5. About the city: R. Van Uytven (Ed.), Leuven, de beste stad van Brabant. Deel I:
geschiedenis van het stadsgewest Leuven tot omstreeks 1600. Leuven, 1980, p. 195-237; and the
emergence of its craft guilds: C. Wyffels, De oorspong der ambachten in Vlaanderen en Brabant.
Brussels, 1951, passim.
155
156
Jelle Haemers
main stakes of the revolts of the craftsmen in Leuven. Though the crafts had
managed to install a new regime in 1360 after having chased away the mighty
merchant families and landlords in town (the so-called geslachten or Sint-Pietermannen), they lost their political power in the 1370s. In 1373, the geslachten
recaptured the aldermanic seats, and with support of the duke they deprived
the craft guilds of political power.6 As a consequence, one of the main stakes
of the crafts revolt of 1378 was to regain the right to influence the election
procedure of the 7 aldermen of town. But the artisans not only wanted to restore rights of political representation in 1378, they also asked for elementary
changes of urban government.
1. Revolt in Leuven, 1378
The revolt of Leuven of 1378 is actually one stage in a series of conflicts,
which started with the revolt of 1360 and ended with a peace settlement in
1385. This period of 25 years wasnt a quarter century of permanent struggle,
but it consisted out of many confrontations between the craft guilds (the ambachten or neeringen in middle Dutch) and the elite of town (de geslechten or
goede lieden). Tension was at its height in 1360 and in 1378, when the craft
guilds succeeded in seizing power in town by establishing a revolutionary regime. In these two tumultuous years, many cities in the Low Countries, and
elsewhere, had to cope with uprisings of craftsmen. In 1360, in the neighbouring county of Flanders, for instance, weavers of Bruges, Ghent and Ypres succeeded in setting up an interurban alliance with the aim to drive political rivals
or competing craft guilds (such as the fullers) from town.7 This can explain why
also the Leuven textile guilds started with an uprising on the eve of Saint Magdalene (22 July). They occupied the market square and the city hall, where they
held the aldermen as hostages. These events, and also the date on which they
started, make clear that also internal reasons were at the heart of the conflict.
Annually, on 22 July, the urban government leased out the consumer taxes of
the city (the so-called assizen), which were very hated by the urban commoners
6. About these turbulent times and the institutions of medieval Leuven: R. Van Uytven,
Peter Couthereel en de troebelen te Leuven van 1350 tot 1363. Kritische nota over de persoon
van een hertogelijk ambtenaar en zijn rol in de politieke geschiedenis van Brabant en Leuven,
Mededelingen van de Geschied- en Oudheidkundige Kring voor Leuven en Omgeving, 3 (1963),
63-97; H. Vander Linden, Histoire de la constitution de la ville de Louvain au Moyen Age. Ghent,
1892; J. Cuvelier, Les institutions de la ville de Louvain au Moyen Age. Leuven, 1935.
7. V. Fris, Les origines de la reforme constitutionnelle de Gand de 1360-1369, Annales du
XXe congrs de la fdration archologique et historique de la Belgique, 1907, p. 427-59;J. Mertens,
Woelingen te Brugge tussen 1359 en 1361, Album Carlos Wyffels. Brussels, 1987, p. 325-30; R.
Verbruggen, Geweld in Vlaanderen. Macht en onderdrukking in de Vlaamse steden tijdens de
veertiende eeuw. Bruges, 2005, passim.
because they weighed heavier in their budget than in that of the elite. Fiscal
requirements, but also political ones, such as a demand of inspection of the
urban accounts, and rights of representation in the urban government, would
motivate the insurgents to take up arms. The chronicle Brabantse Yeesten, which
narrates the history of the dukes of Brabant, mentions that the commoners,
called the ghemeinte, asked goede rekeninge (good accounts) of the ruling elite.
They also successfully strove to appoint the aldermen (the scepenen or the wet).8
A charter of 1306 in which the geslechten had received the monopoly of the
Brabantine duke to appoint the aldermen of Leuven, was symbolically cut into
pieces in front of the city hall. Though the ghemeinte thus initially gained rights
of political participation, the abolition and renewal of these rights would be at
stake during the following quarter of a century.
If one wants to understand why the conflict lasted so long, it is necessary
to know that the 25 year revolt of Leuven was a time of changing coalitions,
in which the duke of Brabant also got involved. The political situation in Leuven was of great interest for the duke as it was one of the most important and
wealthy towns in the duchy. Therefore, the duke tried to intervene many times
into the conflict, with the well-known phrase divide and rule as leading
motto. In 1360, the craft guilds coalesced with Pieter Coutereel, the sheriff
of town (meier in middle Dutch), a nobleman who belonged to the duchys
political elite. He was supported by duke Wenceslas who saw in the rise of the
craft guilds a means to diminish the power of the leading families in Leuven,
who had supported the Flemish count in a struggle against the inauguration
of Wenceslas as duke of Brabant in 1356. The leader of the revolt, Pieter Coutereel, seems to have belonged to a rivalling faction of the leading families in
town (the geslechten). As in Flanders, factional divides within the Leuven elite
apparently lead to an alliance between one of the ostracized factions and representatives of the craft guilds, which used the factional split in the urban elite
to require for political demands.9 The power of the geslechten was however
not to underestimate, as they possessed most land of the town, and they had
huge financial reserves. This explains why duke Wenceslas accepted to reconcile with the leading families of Leuven when they sought his aid to recapture
power in the city. In October 1361 the duke successfully negotiated to set up
a peace settlement which compromised the geslechten and their political challengers, but in April 1373 he agreed with the first to sign a document which
re-established their autocratic rule. The change of coalitions thus empowered
the leading families who monopolised again the election procedure of the
8. Brabantsche Yeesten, ed. J.F. Willems. Brussels, 1843. Vol. II, verse 4684.
9. An overview of factional struggle in Flanders, compared with findings on other regions
in Europe can be found in J. Braekevelt et al., Factional conflict in late medieval Flanders,
Historical Research, 85 (2012), p. 13-31.
157
158
Jelle Haemers
aldermen, and of the deans of the Gilde, an institution which regulated the
urban economics, thus without interference of the craft guilds.10
In 1378, however, a new wave of unrest that questioned the political authority of many elites in European towns, inspired the craft guilds to go on
strike again. In March, they handed over a first petition to the duke, which
informs us in detail about the reasons why they rebelled. The duke did not
give in, which heightened tensions in the city and the duchy again. However, he did not side with the rebels, as in 1360, neither did the relatives of
Pieter Coutereel (who had died in 1373). A second petition was composed
in the course of August, after the craft guilds, again, had occupied the city
hall on the feast day of Saint Magdalene. Leuven was again in roere, as the
Brabantsche Yeesten tells us.11 Moreover, the craft guilds appointed aldermen after having chased away the geslechten from town; those who remained
in town became the victim of brutal repression. Confronted with the violence and his need for cash, the duke granted a favourable charter to the
craft guilds in September 1378.12 Still, however, the city remained a place of
tumult, though information is scarce on the precise course of events. Whatsoever, on 25 January 1383 the craft guilds obtained a new ducal privilege,
which principally confirmed the regulations of the charter of 1378.13 In 1385,
minor issues which had remained unclear were arranged by the Duchess
after the death of her husband. Taken together, the ducal charters of 1378
and 1383, together with the regulations of the duchess, gave the craft guilds
henceforth the right to appoint 3 of the 7 aldermen, two of the four urban
exchequers, and one of the two mayors of Leuven. They were admitted to
the Great Council which decided about the levying of urban taxes, and
they could elect the half of the administration of the Gilde. Last but not least,
their rights of self-governance were confirmed, and they obtained the right
to gather freely. In the end, the craft guilds were thus successful.
Before discussing the concrete wishes of the 25 year revolt in detail,
it is worth noticing that it wasnt as violent as its counterparts in other regions of the Low Countries, and Europe. While in Ghent and Bruges cruel
murders and even military battles between the count and the cities would
determine the course of events in contemporary revolts, the violence in
10. See the lists of aldermen edited by J. Cuvelier, Documents indits concernant les
institutions de la ville de Louvain au Moyen Age, Bulletin de la Commission Royale dHistoire,
99 (1933), p. 269-296.
11. Brabantsche Yeesten, verse 7091.
12. Edited by H. Vander Linden, Histoire de la constitution, p. 175-81; discussed in detail
by R. Van Uytven, Stadsfinancin en stadsekonomie te Leuven van de XIIe tot het einde der XVIe
eeuw. Brussels, 1961, p. 21-6.
13. Edited by H. Vander Linden, Histoire de la constitution, p. 182-94; discussed by J.
Cuvelier, Les institutions de la ville, passim.
159
160
Jelle Haemers
16. For many case-studies on petitioning in late medieval cities, see H. Millet (Ed.),
Suppliques et requtes. Le gouvernement par la grce en Occident (XIIe-XVe sicle). Rome, 2003;
C. Nubola; A. Wrgler (Eds.), Bittschriften und Gravamina. Politik, Verwaltung und Justiz in
Europa (14.-18. Jahrhundert). Berlin, 2005; W. Ormrod et al. (Eds.), Medieval Petitions: Grace
and Grievance . Woodbridge, 2009.
17. J. Dumolyn, Our Land is only founded on trade and industry: economic discourses
in fifteenth-century Bruges, Journal of Medieval History, 36 (2010), p. 375-7. See also M. Prak,
Corporate Politics in the Low Countries: Guilds as Institutions, 14th to 18th Centuries,
M. Prak et al. (Eds.), Craft Guilds in the Early Modern Low Countries: Work, Power and
Representation. Aldershot, 2006, p. 104.
18. The report was edited by A. Schayes, Analectes archologiques, p. 334-98 (petitions on
p. 346-7 and 358-9).
19. The exception are the studies of J. Dumolyn, Rebelheden ende vergaderinghen.
Twee Brugse documenten uit de grote opstand van 1436-1438, Bulletin de la Commission
Royale dHistoire, 162 (1996), p. 297-323; W. Prevenier, Conscience et perception de la
condition sociale chez les gens du commun dans les anciens Pays-Bas des XIIIe et XIVe
sicles, P. Boglioni; R. Delort; C. Gauvard (Eds.), Le petit peuple dans lOccident mdival.
Terminologies, perceptions, ralits. Paris, 2002, p. 177-89; and J. Haemers, Geletterd verzet.
Diplomatiek, politiek en herinneringscultuur van opstandelingen in de laatmiddeleeuwse en
vroegmoderne stad (casus: Brugge en Gent), Bulletin de la Commission Royale dHistoire, 176
(2010), p. 5-55.
20. A. Schayes, Analectes archologiques, p. 347.
21. Ibidem, p. 359.
161
162
Jelle Haemers
York in the last quarter of the fifteenth century was something more systematic, comprehensive and constructive than mere grumbling about fiscal mismanagement of the common good of town. The grievances of the craftsmen
and the solutions which they proposed to resolve them reflected a fundamental concern of taxpayers who believed that urban government should
be fiscally sound and stable and that it should not live beyond its means. According to the petitioners, the fiscal stability had an economic goal that would
be in the interest of every citizen. In the past, they argued, many merchants
of Leuven were imprisoned outside the legal quarter of the city (that is the
surrounding countryside in which only the aldermen of Leuven could judge
the inhabitants) because the city had failed to pay its debts to creditors who
had bought rents and annuities on the total amount of urban revenues. Consequently, trade could no longer flourish because of the risk merchants run
when they left the city. The petitions claimed that the city should pay its debts,
and additionally it proposed a remedy for the acute shortages, namely the
immediate collection of fiscal contributions which were not paid in the last
years. The petition of March planned an investigation of the accounts of the
consumer taxes with the aim to demonstrate whose debts (achterstelle) the
city could cash in the near future. In the meanwhile, the duke was requested
to extend the validity in time of a recent charter in which he had guaranteed
free circulation for Leuven citizens in the duchy.22 Furthermore, the craftsmen
wanted that the revenues of the consumer tax should be in the hands of the
craft guilds or of those who they would appoint. Each month, the petitioners stated, these people should give a demonstration for the common city
(die ghemeine stad) what they had done with the collected contributions.23 In
short, these fiscal measures, and the requirements concerning the political
accountability of rulers show that the crafts had firm and sophisticated beliefs
on what the financial government of the city should be: their demands were
not just about remedying financial excesses of rulers, but also about profound
changes in the administration of the common good of town. Clearly, the
rebels did not want an abolition of taxes, but they wanted to renegotiate the
decision making process of their expenditure.24
Thirdly, these financial concerns lead the petitioners to ask for a permanent representation in the citys governmental institutions. It was a predictable requirement, as the craft guilds had lost their political participation in
the urban affairs in the course of 1373. Remarkably, the craft guilds did not
claim to monopolize urban government as their political opponents had done
in that year. In the petition of August, they proposed that, henceforth, the
council of the city would be half van den goiden luden van de geslechte ende
half van den goiden luden van der ambachten.25 Both quarreling parties of the
last year should thus be equitably represented in the citys administration.
The craftsmen were well aware of the fact that the duke and his powerful ally
(the geslechten) never would accept a domination of craftsmen in town the
wishes of the Leuven craftsmen are not comparable to those of the Florentine
Ciompi who installed a monolithic urban regime by weavers during the revolt
that followed their grab for power in the same year.26 Though, a parallel between Florence and Leuven can be drawn. Exception made for the radicals in
the textile guilds, the leaders of the craft guilds in both towns strove for a kind
of consensus politics.27 A striking difference with Italian towns, however,
is the fact that the craft guilds of Leuven, as those of others cities in the Low
Countries, particularly wanted to be present in existing institutions, while
the popolo in most Italian towns added new political institutions to old ones
when gaining power. In Leuven, in contrast, the craft guilds wanted to share
urban government.
The ideas that motivated this specific political demand can be compared,
too, with the Italian case. In their revolt, the craft guilds in Leuven, as those in
Italian towns, criticized the former governors for moral deficiencies and failure to embrace justice and the common good, a concept that was identified
with the good of the commune, thus affirming the priority of the communes
welfare over that of any individual, family or group. Therefore, the petition
took the idea that those who provided the common welfare of town should
govern it for granted. Such demands were quite common in European towns
in which artisans had gained rights to govern themselves. According to the
crafts corporate beliefs, no city council could rule without extensive cooperation from those over whom it governed. The most obvious reason why the
urban elite in Leuven, and elsewhere, gave in, was that the council normally
lacked enough means of coercion to resist a military assembly of the guilds, as
they had access to weapons and arms. But, a more deep-routed explanation
for demands of political representation is that limitations on the powers of urban elites should be seen as integral to the system of urban politics, a system
163
164
Jelle Haemers
duke) should interfere as little as possible in the craftsmens affairs. This was of
course not a particular concern of the Leuven craftsmen, but more an expression of widespread guild ideology in late medieval Europe. The general view
was that guild officials might legislate and judge matters related to the trade
or craft; this followed from the principle that any corporation can make rules
about its own economic and political businesses.33
3. To assemblee
The right to gather freely not only referred to the possibility of a meeting of the members of one craft guild, but also to the general gathering of
all craft guilds of Leuven. A remarkable charter that dates from 16 October
1360 informs us about the exact meaning of the word gathering when it was
used by the Leuven craftsmen. With a discursive framework that is typical
for corporative thinking, the charter of 1360 sealed a treaty of the 45 craft
guilds of Leuven in which they promise that all of them would stay together
in order to have and to feed the love, peace and unity among each other.34
The fact that the charter forbid one craft guild to part from the others, can illustrate that the unity among them was crumbling away in October 1360. On
its promulgation, the revolt against the aldermen was already three months
ago, and maybe some guilds doubted about their loyalty to the coalition that
governed Leuven. Whatsoever, the charter learns us two notable things about
their revolt and gatherings. Firstly, it demonstrates that the leaders of the
guild were pulling the strings of their men. For one of the central points of
the charter stipulated that no craft guild can gather, nor shall make a gathering, without the advice and the consent of their sworn men.35 We do not have
the names of these sworn men, who were the chosen leaders of the crafts, but
this passage makes clear that the common craftsmen had to obtain the permission of his superiors if they wanted to assemble. This shows that not only
the artisans but also the course of events of the revolt was kept on a tight rein
by these men. This observation reminds us at the revolts of the craft guilds in
the county of Flanders, which were lead by master artisans, called the urban
middle class. These urban middle classes belonged neither to the patrician
33. A. Black, Guilds and civil society in European political thought from the twelfth century
to the present, London, 1984, p. 24.
34. Omme mine, pays ende geode eendrechtecheden onder ons the vuedene ende te hebbene
(edited by H. Sermon, Geschiedenis van Peeter Coutherele. Antwerp, 1860, p. 74). The seals of all
craft guilds are attached to the charter. About its corporative discourse: J. Dumolyn, Privileges
and novelties: the political discourse of the Flemish cities and rural districts in their negotiations
with the dukes of Burgundy (1384-1506), Urban History, 35 (2008), 1-23.
35. Item, dat negheen ambacht ghaderen en sal noch gaderinghe maken, sy en selent doen
met rade ende met consente van haren gheswoernen (Sermon, Geschiedenis van Peeter, p. 75).
165
166
Jelle Haemers
elites, who based their power and status on commercial activities and landed
property inside and outside the city, nor to the lower groups of humble wage
labourers. A social analysis of the leaders of the craft guilds and their representatives in the city benches (once they had gained power), showed that
these people were relatively wealthy, but that they were not extremely rich.
Mostly, they were in leading positions within their guild, being dean or sworn
men.36 Though further research is needed, it seems that the Leuven revolts
also were lead by those who had accumulated a certain wealth in the city, and
a powerful position within their guild.
Secondly, the charter of 1360 informs us about the perception of the
craftsmen about their collective actions. The term which they used to describe their protest, namely gathering (gaderinghe), is a more neutral one than
those which chroniclers habitually used to depict revolts. While their notions
such as commotion, upset, conspiracy, and rebellion contain a certain unfavorable judgment about the meetings of craftsmen, the term gathering shows
that the protest is considered to be a legal act. The use of the word rebel in the
charter of 1360 confirms this view. Rebel appeared twice in the text, namely
when it condemned a craft guild that eventually would break the alliance, and
also when it described a craftsman who would act against the will of those
who govern the ambacht. The document stipulated that all craft guilds will
resist together against a craft guild which wanted to separate or make himself rebel against the others (sciede ochte rebel maecte). Likewise, it dictated
a single craftsmen to obey the orders of the governors of his guild, without
making rebel against it. Such phrases of course had to justify the punishment
of a deserter, and to prevent him to break the treaty in the first place, but it
confirms our conclusion that the protest was strictly organized by the leaders
of the craftsmen. In general, the charter shows that the craft guilds considered
the privilege to gather freely, without the interference of the authorities, as
a gained right. Though, the charter predicts that custom should be obeyed,
namely the hierarchy within the craft needed to be respected. If not, the gathering was seen as an illegal act that was against the will of the leaders of the
protest. Therefore, the charter implicitly gave the urban authorities the right
to repress a gathering that was not lead by the chiefs of the guilds. As a result,
the latter presented themselves as the mouthpiece of the craftsmen, and those
who should be listened at by the urban governors.
A last word should be said about to the justification of the protest. Again,
the charter of 1360 uses the welfare and profit of the city and the community of
craft guilds as the ultimate motivation to join forces.37 Anthony Blacks reading of this well known phrase helps us to understand its regular use in the
petitions and charters of the craft guilds. His book, and numerous case-studies for medieval and early modern Europe, have outlined that the common
good was the phrase most frequently used in official documents and philosophical treatises when referring to the goal or morality of government. It
could refer to the need to maintain the fabric of society, a basis for good relations between people, but often procedural justice, and fair equal treatment
of all before the law was what was meant private interests had to be put
aside.38 Of course, the thinking about the common good was also frequently
used by the urban authorities when they stipulated laws, or by the dukes of
Brabant when they repressed rebellions. Therefore, we can consider the discourse on the common good as a generally used justification of political action that referred to the collective character of government, or in the case
of the guilds, to a regime in which corporative interests should set the lines.
This was not a revolutionary request in the second half of the fourteenth century, as craft guilds had fought already many years for the recognition of their
wishes and rights. But it can neither be considered as a conservative reaction
to an attack on privileges. In the struggle of the Leuven craft guilds which
lasted for a quarter of a century, their gatherings and petitions had the aim
to change urban government. As in York, Bruges, and many other places, the
Leuven artisans wanted to transform the autocratic regime of their town into
a corporative rule of collective welfare. Ideological notions, such as the common good, had to justify this point of view.
4. Conclusion: corporative liberty
In a erudite, but also provocative book on popular protest in late medieval Europe, Sam Cohn argued that rebels in the post-plague fourteenth
century strove toward an implicit sense of equality.39 According to Cohn, a
decade after the first plague epidemic (1347-8) a new spirit for societal change
and a desire for liberty had become deeply rooted in the individuals that had
37. Omme orber ende profit der stad ende der ghemeynte ambachte (Sermon, Geschiedenis
van Peeter, p. 76).
38. A. Black, Political thought, p. 25-9. Case-studies can be found in E. LecuppreDesjardin; A.-L. Van Bruaene (Eds.), De Bono Communi. The discourse and practice of the
common good in the European city, 13th-16th centuries. Turnhout, 2010.
39. S. Cohn, Lust for liberty. The politics of social revolt in medieval Europe, 1200-1425.
Italy, France, and Flanders. Cambridge Mass., 2006, p. 239. See also my review of his book in
Social History, 33 (2008),p. 371-73.
167
168
Jelle Haemers
defined liberties as special corporate privileges since the central Middle Ages.
Instead of defending conservative rights, peasants, artisans, and petty shopkeepers became emboldened with a new self- and class-confidence after the
Black Death. In the opinion of Cohn his material proves that by 1355, medieval insurgents rebelled with increasing frequency to change the here and now,
to gain liberty.40 From this point of view, one must honestly admit Cohns
commendable analysis rightly revaluates medieval revolts. In contrast to previous literature, the book shows that popular protests were not perpetrated
by a revolutionary mad crowd or unstable elements that were ready to attack
the rights of the lord and the upper-class violently at any moment. Cohn also
breaks with the tradition to describe the wishes of rebels as a conservative
claim to restore lost privileges. Politics and the acquisition of political rights
were at the heart of these conflicts; rulers, not landlords, were the objects of
peasant anger and urban resentment. As Cohn rightly argues, rational arguments and well-thought motivations inspired artisans and peasants to rebel,
to gather and (in some cases) to govern the city.
But I disagree with Cohn on two points. Firstly, as studies on the protest in late medieval Flanders have shown, the chronological shift which he
means to detect, is quite an imaginary one. Also in pre-plague Europe, rebels strove for the acquisition of political rights, as they did in the second half
of the fourteenth century.41 In both periods, the same issues were at stake:
political participation, the recognition of corporative rights, fiscal equality, etcetera. Secondly, the Leuven case shows that urban craftsmen wanted to gain
rights or privileges for their corporate group, not the same political and
social rights as those who governed them. Corporate privileges remained the
basis of society, and the liberty rebels, among which the Leuven artisans,
defended or wanted to gain, were privileged liberties, not a constitutional
sense of equality, nor political freedom as we understand it now. The Leuven
evidence seems to fit more into Anthony Blacks view, who wrote that liberty
was indeed a basic political value. But for him, it concerned a widespread
striving to secure for oneself, ones family and descendants the social status of
freedom. Freedom should be widely understood as immunity from seigniorial justice. This could be acquired through membership of an immune community, such as a town. Craft guilds saw their right to corporate organization,
which gave their members economic security through an exclusive right to
ply in a given area, as a form of liberty. Political communities had the right to
govern themselves and this was a kind of liberty which could be vindicated,
40. S. Cohn, Lust for liberty, p. 242.
41. See for instance the synthesis on the medieval history of the urban society of the Low
Countries and its numerous political conflicts in M. Boone, A la recherche dune modernit
civique. La socit urbaine des anciens Pays-Bas au bas Moyen Age. Brussels, 2010.
by law or if necessary by force, against those seeking to suppress.42 In fourteenth-century Leuven, but presumably also in other places in the western
part of the Holy Empire, as in York and Bruges in the fifteenth century, similar ideas motivated craftsmen to take up arms, and pencils, with the aim to
change urban government. The Leuven craftsmen clearly wanted to reform it
into a regime that had a wider political basis, but also into one that remained
unequally open to all citizens. Namely, the common welfare which they strove
for, was above all a welfare in which corporative interests were taken into
account. In 1378, the Leuven craftsmen petitioned to obtain rights for those
who belonged to the corporative structures of town. These corporative liberties were not granted to everyone.
169
Sistemas de comunicacin
y opinin pblica