This research aims to examine and evaluate four figures who emerged in European events of the thi... more This research aims to examine and evaluate four figures who emerged in European events of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. In my humble opinion, they made significant contributions without receiving the recognition they deserved. The methodology used is largely based on the categories of Le Goff’s school, supplemented by elements from modern personal evaluation models. This approach helps outline their characteristics, highlight their acquired skills, and explore the connections between them.
The figures studied are: Peter des Roches, Bishop of Winchester (ca. 1160/70–1238) – MAN OF POWER Guillaume d’Auvergne, Bishop of Paris (ca. 1190–1249) – MAN OF KNOWLEDGE Peter von Aspelt, Archbishop of Mainz (1240–1320) – MAN OF THE EMPIRE Baldwin of Luxembourg, Archbishop of Trier (1285–1354) – MAN OF THE EMPIRE
The definitions next to their names serve as key terms for the research, which aims to analyse the network that connects them—whether directly or indirectly—and to explore the following aspects: 1. The international framework in which they operated. 2. Their loyalty or opposition to the authorities to whom they owed obedience. 3. Their ability—or difficulty—in fulfilling both ecclesiastical and political duties simultaneously. 4. The risks and dangers their actions entailed. 5. The successes and failures resulting from their choices. One evident link between them is their ecclesiastical office; another is their close proximity to kings or emperors. However, the aspect I particularly wish to highlight is their remarkable diplomatic skill—though not without its setbacks—in an era that can only be described as turbulent. Yet, they navigated this complex period with both shrewdness and cunning. Other noteworthy factors include their origins. All four came from continental Europe, particularly from regions of France that had long been contested by the English and French crowns. Peter des Roches, for instance, faced constant challenges in his career due to his "foreign" origins. Baldwin and Aspelt were born near border regions, in a land that, due to "significant coincidences," played a crucial role in European affairs. Moreover, with the exception of Baldwin, none of them held noble titles. They came from “legitimate” families (a prerequisite for episcopal office), but at most from minor fiefdoms—contradicting the common assumption that social advancement was impossible for the bourgeoisie. Finally, all were highly educated. Baldwin and Guillaume are known to have studied successfully at the Studium (likely referring to the University of Paris), though there are no documented sources confirming Peter des Roches' or Peter von Aspelt’s academic background. However, Aspelt was credited with the titles of "medicus" and "magister," suggesting a significant level of erudition.
Prendendo le mosse dall'analisi simbolica della Lupa Capitolina si intende realizzare una ricogni... more Prendendo le mosse dall'analisi simbolica della Lupa Capitolina si intende realizzare una ricognizione sui significati evidenti e/o sottesi che si intersecano intorno al monumento e ad un possibile percorso per dirimere una " strana " connessione tra l'etimologia greca e latina. 1. La Lupa Capitolina e le origini dei Lukeres. Questo scritto prende avvio dalla consapevolezza che l'età moderna, e soprattutto, quella tecnologica non trova spesso le categorie di interpretazione dei significati simbolici. Troppo spesso ci dimentichiamo che oggetti notissimi non hanno solo una loro storia, ma rappresentano un tale intreccio di storie, leggende, miti che continuano ad agire attraversando il tempo e le culture. Guardando, e non per caso, uno dei monumenti più noti, la famosa Lupa Capitolina con i suoi gemelli, tornano in mente le storie e i miti legati alla statua, ma si ricorda pure quel passo di Tito Livio1 quando afferma che le prime tribù di Roma furono: Ramnes (Romolo) Titienses (Tazio, i Quirites/Sabini) e i Lukeres (di cui non si conosce l'origine). Se poi si continua a guardare, senza neppure troppa fantasia, sventola l'emblema di Roma (ora Roma Capitale – sarebbe meglio Urbs – ma c'è una nota polemica!!) Il tetragramma S P Q R ha le lettere maiuscole spaziate che non possono tradurre il-que (enclitica), e se il Q indicasse i Quirites, cioè i Sabini associati al governo da Romolo stesso, allora la sigla assumerebbe un significato più legittimo: Senatus populum (contrazione diffusa di populorum) Quiritium Romanum (ho assunto la contrazione, ma il significato non cambia se si usa la desinenza classica); pertanto si tratterebbe del " Senato " , il consiglio degli anziani dei popoli (gentes/tribù) Quiriti e Romani. … E i Lukeres? La tribù dimenticata ma fondamentale per la nascita di Roma? Sono rappresentati a livello simbolico e iconico dalla Lupa? L'indagine storiografica e archeologica non ha fornito molte informazioni ma neppure li ha trascurati del tutto: una corrente di pensiero li vorrebbe etruschi, da cui i Lucumoni 2, anche se non sembra convincente che i Romani abbiano attribuito questo potere agli etruschi, quello di nutrire le giovani tribù (i gemelli), neppure " obtorto collo ". 1 T. Livio Ab Urbe Condita L. I, 13: Eodem tempore et centuriae tres equitum conscriptae sunt. Ramnenses ab Romulo, ab T. Tatio Titienses appellati: Lucerum nominis et originis causa incerta est. Inde non modo commune sed concors etiam regnum duobus regibus fuit. 2 La più antica testimonianza che ricordi l'origine delle tribus preserviane è un frammento di Volnio tràdito da Varrone (L. 5. 55), in cui si precisa che i nomi sono parole etrusche. Varrone doveva considerare Volnio una fonte attendibile al riguardo, poiché ricordava che era autore di tragedie etrusche. Anche Giunio ed Ennio rimandavano all'Etruria, ma per i soli Luceres , il cui nome facevano derivare da Lucumone. Per i nomi invece dei Ramnes e dei Tities Ennio (riportato sempre da Varrone), come anche tutte le altre testimonianze, pensava a Romolo e a Tazio. Paolo riconduce a Lucerus la forma Luceres o Lucereses come indicante la terza parte del popolo romano (nella ripartizione operata da Romolo e Tazio), precisando l'identità del personaggio: si tratterebbe del re di Ardea che fu d'aiuto a Romolo nella guerra sabina (contro Tazio), impresa attribuita altrove a Lucumo (oltre a Giunio e a Cicerone, vd. Infra Properzio, Pseudo-Asconio e Servio, che ne fa uno dei lucumones intesi come capi etruschi).
This research starts with the analysis of the life and works of Henry d'Avranches (approximately ... more This research starts with the analysis of the life and works of Henry d'Avranches (approximately 1190-1262), and draws from varying sources and interpretations of subject matter experts. The analysis processes into Henry d'Avranches uncovered a number of questions worthy of further inspection. In this context, my contribution aims to try to clarify some of these doubts and to effect an increase into our knowledge of the poet. Questions remain, first of all, around the dates of some compositions made for different patrons that do not coincide among the experts, Furthermore, historical and political circumstances in which Henry D'Avranches should have been present and involved are often not taken into account and are deserving of further investigation. This paper sets out to demonstrate and confirm, by comparing Henry's life with the wider European landscape of events taking place during his lifetime. It's very interesting to see how the poet could gain access to and be assigned tasks and responsibilities by such opposing and prominent figures that were locked into political and institutional conflict.
This research aims to examine and evaluate four figures who emerged in European events of the thi... more This research aims to examine and evaluate four figures who emerged in European events of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. In my humble opinion, they made significant contributions without receiving the recognition they deserved. The methodology used is largely based on the categories of Le Goff’s school, supplemented by elements from modern personal evaluation models. This approach helps outline their characteristics, highlight their acquired skills, and explore the connections between them.
The figures studied are: Peter des Roches, Bishop of Winchester (ca. 1160/70–1238) – MAN OF POWER Guillaume d’Auvergne, Bishop of Paris (ca. 1190–1249) – MAN OF KNOWLEDGE Peter von Aspelt, Archbishop of Mainz (1240–1320) – MAN OF THE EMPIRE Baldwin of Luxembourg, Archbishop of Trier (1285–1354) – MAN OF THE EMPIRE
The definitions next to their names serve as key terms for the research, which aims to analyse the network that connects them—whether directly or indirectly—and to explore the following aspects: 1. The international framework in which they operated. 2. Their loyalty or opposition to the authorities to whom they owed obedience. 3. Their ability—or difficulty—in fulfilling both ecclesiastical and political duties simultaneously. 4. The risks and dangers their actions entailed. 5. The successes and failures resulting from their choices. One evident link between them is their ecclesiastical office; another is their close proximity to kings or emperors. However, the aspect I particularly wish to highlight is their remarkable diplomatic skill—though not without its setbacks—in an era that can only be described as turbulent. Yet, they navigated this complex period with both shrewdness and cunning. Other noteworthy factors include their origins. All four came from continental Europe, particularly from regions of France that had long been contested by the English and French crowns. Peter des Roches, for instance, faced constant challenges in his career due to his "foreign" origins. Baldwin and Aspelt were born near border regions, in a land that, due to "significant coincidences," played a crucial role in European affairs. Moreover, with the exception of Baldwin, none of them held noble titles. They came from “legitimate” families (a prerequisite for episcopal office), but at most from minor fiefdoms—contradicting the common assumption that social advancement was impossible for the bourgeoisie. Finally, all were highly educated. Baldwin and Guillaume are known to have studied successfully at the Studium (likely referring to the University of Paris), though there are no documented sources confirming Peter des Roches' or Peter von Aspelt’s academic background. However, Aspelt was credited with the titles of "medicus" and "magister," suggesting a significant level of erudition.
Prendendo le mosse dall'analisi simbolica della Lupa Capitolina si intende realizzare una ricogni... more Prendendo le mosse dall'analisi simbolica della Lupa Capitolina si intende realizzare una ricognizione sui significati evidenti e/o sottesi che si intersecano intorno al monumento e ad un possibile percorso per dirimere una " strana " connessione tra l'etimologia greca e latina. 1. La Lupa Capitolina e le origini dei Lukeres. Questo scritto prende avvio dalla consapevolezza che l'età moderna, e soprattutto, quella tecnologica non trova spesso le categorie di interpretazione dei significati simbolici. Troppo spesso ci dimentichiamo che oggetti notissimi non hanno solo una loro storia, ma rappresentano un tale intreccio di storie, leggende, miti che continuano ad agire attraversando il tempo e le culture. Guardando, e non per caso, uno dei monumenti più noti, la famosa Lupa Capitolina con i suoi gemelli, tornano in mente le storie e i miti legati alla statua, ma si ricorda pure quel passo di Tito Livio1 quando afferma che le prime tribù di Roma furono: Ramnes (Romolo) Titienses (Tazio, i Quirites/Sabini) e i Lukeres (di cui non si conosce l'origine). Se poi si continua a guardare, senza neppure troppa fantasia, sventola l'emblema di Roma (ora Roma Capitale – sarebbe meglio Urbs – ma c'è una nota polemica!!) Il tetragramma S P Q R ha le lettere maiuscole spaziate che non possono tradurre il-que (enclitica), e se il Q indicasse i Quirites, cioè i Sabini associati al governo da Romolo stesso, allora la sigla assumerebbe un significato più legittimo: Senatus populum (contrazione diffusa di populorum) Quiritium Romanum (ho assunto la contrazione, ma il significato non cambia se si usa la desinenza classica); pertanto si tratterebbe del " Senato " , il consiglio degli anziani dei popoli (gentes/tribù) Quiriti e Romani. … E i Lukeres? La tribù dimenticata ma fondamentale per la nascita di Roma? Sono rappresentati a livello simbolico e iconico dalla Lupa? L'indagine storiografica e archeologica non ha fornito molte informazioni ma neppure li ha trascurati del tutto: una corrente di pensiero li vorrebbe etruschi, da cui i Lucumoni 2, anche se non sembra convincente che i Romani abbiano attribuito questo potere agli etruschi, quello di nutrire le giovani tribù (i gemelli), neppure " obtorto collo ". 1 T. Livio Ab Urbe Condita L. I, 13: Eodem tempore et centuriae tres equitum conscriptae sunt. Ramnenses ab Romulo, ab T. Tatio Titienses appellati: Lucerum nominis et originis causa incerta est. Inde non modo commune sed concors etiam regnum duobus regibus fuit. 2 La più antica testimonianza che ricordi l'origine delle tribus preserviane è un frammento di Volnio tràdito da Varrone (L. 5. 55), in cui si precisa che i nomi sono parole etrusche. Varrone doveva considerare Volnio una fonte attendibile al riguardo, poiché ricordava che era autore di tragedie etrusche. Anche Giunio ed Ennio rimandavano all'Etruria, ma per i soli Luceres , il cui nome facevano derivare da Lucumone. Per i nomi invece dei Ramnes e dei Tities Ennio (riportato sempre da Varrone), come anche tutte le altre testimonianze, pensava a Romolo e a Tazio. Paolo riconduce a Lucerus la forma Luceres o Lucereses come indicante la terza parte del popolo romano (nella ripartizione operata da Romolo e Tazio), precisando l'identità del personaggio: si tratterebbe del re di Ardea che fu d'aiuto a Romolo nella guerra sabina (contro Tazio), impresa attribuita altrove a Lucumo (oltre a Giunio e a Cicerone, vd. Infra Properzio, Pseudo-Asconio e Servio, che ne fa uno dei lucumones intesi come capi etruschi).
This research starts with the analysis of the life and works of Henry d'Avranches (approximately ... more This research starts with the analysis of the life and works of Henry d'Avranches (approximately 1190-1262), and draws from varying sources and interpretations of subject matter experts. The analysis processes into Henry d'Avranches uncovered a number of questions worthy of further inspection. In this context, my contribution aims to try to clarify some of these doubts and to effect an increase into our knowledge of the poet. Questions remain, first of all, around the dates of some compositions made for different patrons that do not coincide among the experts, Furthermore, historical and political circumstances in which Henry D'Avranches should have been present and involved are often not taken into account and are deserving of further investigation. This paper sets out to demonstrate and confirm, by comparing Henry's life with the wider European landscape of events taking place during his lifetime. It's very interesting to see how the poet could gain access to and be assigned tasks and responsibilities by such opposing and prominent figures that were locked into political and institutional conflict.
Uploads
Papers by Barbara Egidi
The methodology used is largely based on the categories of Le Goff’s school, supplemented by elements from modern personal evaluation models. This approach helps outline their characteristics, highlight their acquired skills, and explore the connections between them.
The figures studied are:
Peter des Roches, Bishop of Winchester (ca. 1160/70–1238) – MAN OF POWER
Guillaume d’Auvergne, Bishop of Paris (ca. 1190–1249) – MAN OF KNOWLEDGE
Peter von Aspelt, Archbishop of Mainz (1240–1320) – MAN OF THE EMPIRE
Baldwin of Luxembourg, Archbishop of Trier (1285–1354) – MAN OF THE EMPIRE
The definitions next to their names serve as key terms for the research, which aims to analyse the network that connects them—whether directly or indirectly—and to explore the following aspects:
1. The international framework in which they operated.
2. Their loyalty or opposition to the authorities to whom they owed obedience.
3. Their ability—or difficulty—in fulfilling both ecclesiastical and political duties simultaneously.
4. The risks and dangers their actions entailed.
5. The successes and failures resulting from their choices.
One evident link between them is their ecclesiastical office; another is their close proximity to kings or emperors. However, the aspect I particularly wish to highlight is their remarkable diplomatic skill—though not without its setbacks—in an era that can only be described as turbulent. Yet, they navigated this complex period with both shrewdness and cunning.
Other noteworthy factors include their origins. All four came from continental Europe, particularly from regions of France that had long been contested by the English and French crowns. Peter des Roches, for instance, faced constant challenges in his career due to his "foreign" origins.
Baldwin and Aspelt were born near border regions, in a land that, due to "significant coincidences," played a crucial role in European affairs.
Moreover, with the exception of Baldwin, none of them held noble titles. They came from “legitimate” families (a prerequisite for episcopal office), but at most from minor fiefdoms—contradicting the common assumption that social advancement was impossible for the bourgeoisie.
Finally, all were highly educated. Baldwin and Guillaume are known to have studied successfully at the Studium (likely referring to the University of Paris), though there are no documented sources confirming Peter des Roches' or Peter von Aspelt’s academic background. However, Aspelt was credited with the titles of "medicus" and "magister," suggesting a significant level of erudition.
Drafts by Barbara Egidi
The methodology used is largely based on the categories of Le Goff’s school, supplemented by elements from modern personal evaluation models. This approach helps outline their characteristics, highlight their acquired skills, and explore the connections between them.
The figures studied are:
Peter des Roches, Bishop of Winchester (ca. 1160/70–1238) – MAN OF POWER
Guillaume d’Auvergne, Bishop of Paris (ca. 1190–1249) – MAN OF KNOWLEDGE
Peter von Aspelt, Archbishop of Mainz (1240–1320) – MAN OF THE EMPIRE
Baldwin of Luxembourg, Archbishop of Trier (1285–1354) – MAN OF THE EMPIRE
The definitions next to their names serve as key terms for the research, which aims to analyse the network that connects them—whether directly or indirectly—and to explore the following aspects:
1. The international framework in which they operated.
2. Their loyalty or opposition to the authorities to whom they owed obedience.
3. Their ability—or difficulty—in fulfilling both ecclesiastical and political duties simultaneously.
4. The risks and dangers their actions entailed.
5. The successes and failures resulting from their choices.
One evident link between them is their ecclesiastical office; another is their close proximity to kings or emperors. However, the aspect I particularly wish to highlight is their remarkable diplomatic skill—though not without its setbacks—in an era that can only be described as turbulent. Yet, they navigated this complex period with both shrewdness and cunning.
Other noteworthy factors include their origins. All four came from continental Europe, particularly from regions of France that had long been contested by the English and French crowns. Peter des Roches, for instance, faced constant challenges in his career due to his "foreign" origins.
Baldwin and Aspelt were born near border regions, in a land that, due to "significant coincidences," played a crucial role in European affairs.
Moreover, with the exception of Baldwin, none of them held noble titles. They came from “legitimate” families (a prerequisite for episcopal office), but at most from minor fiefdoms—contradicting the common assumption that social advancement was impossible for the bourgeoisie.
Finally, all were highly educated. Baldwin and Guillaume are known to have studied successfully at the Studium (likely referring to the University of Paris), though there are no documented sources confirming Peter des Roches' or Peter von Aspelt’s academic background. However, Aspelt was credited with the titles of "medicus" and "magister," suggesting a significant level of erudition.