We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The chapter explores marriage litigation in Northern France and the German-speaking regions. It utilizes a distinction from late medieval Xanten between “simple” and “double” suits. The former pitted claimant against defendant, the latter showed several parties competing for the same partner. The preponderance of simple petitions especially in Germany is indicative of judges passively waiting for litigants to approach them. In fifteenth-century Cambrai and Brussels, the bishop installed a promoter for expert management of the accusations. He served to support persons whose case he found worthwhile or acted as instigator like a modern state attorney. Double proceedings at Cambrai nearly matched the simple ones and considerably outnumbered them at Brussels. Most of the multiparty suits arose when couples had their wedding banns announced in the parish church. At that moment, a person identified as the “opponent” in the sources came forward and objected to the validity of the proposed union. Regardless of the promoter, the courts of the North adjudicated in uniform fashion. They confronted many dozens if not hundreds of marriage cases. A mere handful of them met juristic criteria. The rest would stay within the limits of pastoral concern and lead to certain defeat.
The entry of the United States doomed the Central Powers in the long run but not during 1917, as the collapse of Russia deprived the Allies of their largest army at a time when the Americans could not yet make good the loss. Unable to afford a repeat of the bloody battles of 1916, the Germans resolved to stand on the defensive in the west while the U-boats (and the Bolsheviks) did their work. Meanwhile, the failure of Nivelle’s spring offensive nearly broke the French army, leaving it paralyzed by mutiny for much of the rest of the year, while British and Imperial troops attacked at Arras and Vimy Ridge in the spring, then at Passchendaele in the summer and autumn, gaining little ground at great cost. A November attack at Cambrai, ultimately indecisive, showed how tanks could be used effectively. On other fronts, Russia’s attempt to use Czech deserters against Austria-Hungary was more successful than Germany’s efforts to use Polish deserters against Russia, but not decisively so. The Allies added Greece to their ranks by overthrowing its pro-German king, but nearly lost Italy after the Central Powers achieved a decisive victory at Caporetto, and lost Romania when Russia sued for peace.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.