Wardship

2021 ◽  
pp. 153-198
Author(s):  
Benedict Wiedemann
Keyword(s):  
Thirteenth Century ◽  
Local Power ◽  
Power Struggles ◽  
James I

In the first decades of the thirteenth century, Popes Innocent III and Honorius III found themselves bound to support the succession of three young kings—Henry III of England, James I of Aragon, and Frederick II of Sicily. Although a supposed feudal right of wardship has often been supposed to have motivated the popes, actually, papal letters changed and altered their justifications for papal solicitude depending on the circumstances of the time. In practice, papal involvement in these royal minorities was reactive: the pope replied to petitions he received. Consequently, papal mandates and instructions were often variable and even contradictory. Papal instructions—rather than being a medium for a centralized papal will to be expressed—were more often the means through which local power struggles were fought.

Partisan to Sovereign

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 140-187
Author(s):  
Kevin Li
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Local Power ◽  
World War ◽  
Power Struggles ◽  
Political Force ◽  
Indochina War

The decade following the end of World War II saw the rise of the Bình Xuyên as a formidable military and political force. How did the Bình Xuyên emerge as local sovereigns? Eschewing the predominant “criminal” framework that has dominated our understanding of the group’s ascent, this article shows that competition to court the Bình Xuyên between the southern DRV and the French-sponsored Vietnamese governments as well as power struggles within those same state entities strengthened the Bình Xuyên’s local power. This pattern of interstate and intrastate competition in the early years of the First Indochina War laid the foundation for the group’s contentious relationship with its nominal Franco-Vietnamese patrons after its ralliement in 1948.

5. The past is in the present

2018 ◽  
pp. 104-126
Author(s):  
James R. Rush
Keyword(s):  
Southeast Asia ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
National Identities ◽  
Local Power ◽  
Power Struggles ◽  
The Past ◽  
New States

What remains today of Southeast Asia’s former kingdoms and colonies and its first-draft nations? “The past is in the present” suggests the answer is quite a lot. The extraordinary heterogeneity of Southeast Asia has not changed. Beneath the skin of the region’s national identities, thousands of separate ethnicities and languages and dialects remain, playing a role in local power struggles and sometimes in national ones. The impressive survival of the new states since independence, and their formal incorporation into a web of international organizations, suggest that Southeast Asia’s nations are here to stay. And yet, Southeast Asia remains rife with conflict. Often, the sleeping mandalas provide an explanation.

scholarly journals Inspecting the ‘extraordinary drain’: emigration and the urban experience in Merthyr Tydfil in the 1860s

Urban History ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-113
Author(s):  
BILL JONES
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Local Power ◽  
Power Struggles ◽  
Urban Experience ◽  
Civic Consciousness

In the 1860s mass emigration from Merthyr Tydfil made a major impact on the town's fortunes and developing public sphere. The ‘extraordinary drain’ occasioned much concern and comment and reconfigured ongoing debates about Merthyr's contemporary condition and future survival. In turn, local power struggles, notions of the town's interests and emerging civic consciousness influenced interpretations of the nature, causes and meanings of the outflow. Emigration and the ‘urban’ thus interacted tellingly to help shape contemporary mentalities.

The Irish courts of law, 1801–1914

1957 ◽  
Vol 10 (40) ◽  
pp. 363-391
Author(s):  
R.B. McDowell
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Sixteenth Century ◽  
Thirteenth Century ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
James I ◽  
Charles I ◽  
Law Courts ◽  
Court Of Chancery

At the beginning of the nineteenth century there were six superior courts in Ireland—chancery, the three common law courts (king’s bench, common pleas and exchequer), the admiralty court and the prerogative court (an ecclesiastical court with jurisdiction over testamentary matters).Four of these courts were of medieval origin. The exchequer was probably in existence before the close of the twelfth century, the Irish chancery was founded early in the thirteenth century, the first Irish chancellor being appointed in 1244, and the antecedents of the courts of king’s bench and common pleas are to be found in the thirteenth century. The other two courts were comparatively modern. The court of prerogative and faculties based its rights to exercise jurisdiction on two sixteenth century acts and two seventeenth century patents, one of James I and one of Charles I. And though admiralty jurisdiction had been exercised in Ireland from medieval times, the Irish court of admiralty had been created by statute in 1784. From the court of chancery and the three common law courts there was an appeal to the court of error (known as the court of exchequer chamber) composed of the judges of the three common law courts, and in 1857 it was enacted that the court of exchequer chamber when hearing an appeal should consist of the judges of the two courts from which the appeal did not arise. From the admiralty court and from the prerogative court there was an appeal to delegates in chancery.

James I and the Rise of Codeswitching Diplomacy in Thirteenth-Century Catalonia

Viator ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 189-208
Author(s):  
Antonio M. Zaldívar
Keyword(s):  
Thirteenth Century ◽  
James I
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document