Laity, laicisation and Philip the Fair of France
in Law, laity and solidarities
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact manchesterhive@manchester.ac.uk for pricing options.

ACCESS TOKENS

If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

This chapter explores the appropriateness of distinguishing sharply between lay (or secular and temporal) and clerical (or ecclesiastical) as it attempts to comprehend the ideas and activities of the people of medieval and early modern Europe. With historians of sixteenth-century France and Victorian England emphasising the dangers of drawing neat distinctions between lay and ecclesiastical and between the sacred and the secular, it considers the possibility that historians of the Middle Ages should also eschew such divisions. In examining this issue the chapter first considers Susan Reynolds's own approach to lay activity and ideas, and turns to Joseph R. Strayer's hypotheses concerning the laicisation of society and government in the Middle Ages. It also offers the author's own appraisal of the relationship between lay and ecclesiastical, church and state, and secular and sacred, focusing on the reign of Philip the Fair.

Law, laity and solidarities

Essays in honour of Susan Reynolds

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 18 18 4
Full Text Views 0 0 0
PDF Downloads 1 1 1