Family historians have already explored conjugal and subsidiary relations, but we know less about the Adelphs, that is to say the brothers and the sisters. At a time when the conception of adelphia is flexible, this relationship encouraged by parents, however, talks about life.
Writing a story of the brothers and sisters in the High Middle Ages is the purpose of the abbreviated version of Justine Audebrand’s thesis that she defended in 2021 and which was published in the collection High Middle Ages Brepols in 2023. The brothers and sisters, generalized in adelphs, have often been abandoned by researchers, preferring to focus on the couple or the representations and standards of kinship. The historian therefore wants to deal with this lack by taking an interest in relations between Adelphs, whether between brothers, between sisters and between brothers and sisters, individually or grouped.
Adelphic relationships on a time and space scale
Through nine chapters, Justine Audebrand draws the evolution of Adelphic relations during the High Middle Ages. The study began in the middle of the 7th century and continued until the beginning of the 11th century, when social relationships changed with the establishment of the feudal system. The classic division of the ancient Roman Empire of the West is therefore abandoned to favor the contours of the Carolingian and Ottonian empires, dynasty dominating the Holy Roman Empire from 919 to 1024.
Originality is mainly found in the inclusion of Anglo-Saxon kingdoms: the comparisons of the territories of across the Channel with those continental are rare in historiography but highlight different structures and dynamics. In this specific case, the Anglo-Saxon royalty favors the succession by the brother and not the son. Finally, the use of various sources – legislation, documents of private and public practice as well as chronic and hagiography – makes it possible to discern a evolution as global as possible.
This research is part of the field of family history and kinship while including contributions from anthropology, sociology and gender. The preference for the use of the term “ adelphia ” instead of “ siblings Aims to include women more in family dynamics, they who are often abandoned or hidden within sources.
The first point of interest of the work is precisely vocabulary: how are the brothers and sisters designated in the sources ? While at the start of the period “ Germanus/A »» was the most used, its use disappeared from the ninth century, faced with that of “ Frater/Soror ». This evolution is to be linked to the discourse of clerics which promote spiritual fraternity to the detriment of that carnal, which must be abandoned to devote itself entirely to God. In the event that the two methods of relationships mingle, the authors do not hesitate to specify the nature of the links by adding adjectives, demonstrating that homogenization does not prevent distinction.
Be a brother or a sister in the High Middle Ages
The study of vocabulary makes it possible to account for the parentage system of the High Middle Ages. Is considered as brother or sister anyone who shares at least one parent, encompassing uterine children-that is to say born from the same mother-and those of the following unions of the father and the mother. The blood link is not an essential criterion of belonging to adelphia in a society where adoption is practiced: condition and proximity take precedence more, highlighting a practical kinship distinct from that biological.
The mention of a different father in sources, moreover, reveals dissensions within the family and often results from an instrumentalization on the part of the sovereigns to legitimize their ascent to the throne. It is precisely the policy used by the English sovereign Eadred which qualifies as Frater Uterinus of King Edmond surely in order to distinguish themselves from their half-brother Athelstan (p. 68-69). From the 10th century, patrilineal tendencies were strengthened, leading to a hierarchy of the brothers with a renegotiation of their roles without leading to the exclusion of the youngest: the cadets often act in concert with their elders especially when they become bishops.
The adelphic relationship is not intangible: it requires being maintained over the long term. The parents’ decision to raise their children together or send some to monasteries influences the depth of their link. The charters show that parents associate their children with their donations in order to strengthen their future collaboration (chapter 3). And it works. Once adult, the Adelphs support each other by promoting a brother, helping a newly widowed sister or, more commonly, by managing parental goods together. These actions demonstrate a real collaboration which is part of wider family strategies that may involve other family members.
Adelphs in the face of crises
Parents’ death is one of the first trials that brothers and sisters can be confronted. The discussions around the inheritance are sometimes sources of discord, but the documentation insists on the association of Adelphs in the choice of the burial of their parents, the maintenance of their memory or thereafter of the common management of the family heritage. All of this is part of a desire for continuity and legitimacy, which explains why the dissensions are more visible within royalty where the competition is exacerbated. Louis the pious, raised far from the court of his father Charlemagne and therefore of his adelphs, struggles to impose himself in front of his sisters which he is forced to oust in order to be able to reign (p. 103).
The death of an adelphe follows the same dynamic especially if he has no children. The brothers and sisters are described at the bedside of the dying and be guarantor of his last wishes. In this context, the continuity approach is also perceptible by the inheritance of goods but also by the maintenance of the memoria. Adelphs make the monasteries donations to guarantee the salvation of the soul of the deceased or the deceased. Some go so far as to found a religious establishment in its memory, a construction which must also be linked to a policy of securing family heritage. The field is thus protected from external claims and, by becoming a family necropolis, can be transformed into a real power center.
The brothers and sisters also offer assistance to their adelphos in case of difficulty. The brothers are presented fighting together in war, the military alliance being considered the norm. Refusing to assist his brother was therefore quite criticized, but can be explained by the shortfall in this association (p. 247-248):
For this reason, today as yesterday, we urge you to strengthen our troops, if we miss them, and to rescue our Adalbéron captive colleague. Also make that, by your encouragement, Bardon and Gozilon behave as a brothers in this critical situation.
The violence between brothers was just as poorly seen and the little mention of dissensions in the texts raises the question of his reality. The rare disputes end almost systematic in a reconciliations, which shows how much the fraternity is important and expected. The reappearance from Xe Century of the fratricide in the texts must be correlated with the strengthening of the primogeniture which allows the eldest son to succeed his father, which was not necessarily the case before: a cadet could take the place of his father or all the brothers could share power. This brings an increase in rivalries between princes, perceptible through this fear of fratricide.
More generally, the condition between Adelphs is visible in sources by acts as well as by words. The brothers and sisters support each other, worries each other for each other. The deep sadness expressed after the loss of a loved one testifies as it is the case of ANTRUDE, Abbess of Saint-Jean de Laon, when she learns the murder of her brother BAUDOIN. Emotional demonstrations are more a female affair: women publicly display their pain in their tears and their cries of pain. We also note that these affliction scenes arrive more often after the death of a brother, the death of a sister is little mentioned in the sources (p. 303-307), which shows a real distinction between genres.
The place of women in adelphia
Studying women prove to be a difficult task by their low presence in altomediéval sources but being interested in sisters and sororities is even more difficult. However, they have special relationships with their brother, with regard to the only non -sexual man/woman relationship valued by the clergymen.
Once married, the woman appears little alongside her family of origin, being mainly mentioned with her husband and children. However, when necessary, she does not hesitate to call on her brother, especially in the event of difficulties with her husband. This protective role of the brother is further strengthened when she becomes a widow and has no children. The fraternal authority can nevertheless be a source of conflicts when he tries to impose a remarriage on his sister. This one, being no longer the girl before her first wedding, less accepts the intervention in her life.
But it is above all with their single and nun that the Adelphs maintain a strong link. She does not base a new home, which allows her to more easily keep privileged relationships with family members. The hagiography testifies to many monastic foundations on family lands with a sister managing the convent as a abbess and his brother dealing with secular affairs as secular or as a bishop, thus holding direct authority on the religious establishment. In this way, women had a significant power, participating directly in family strategies.
However, from the 10th century, the influence of the abbesses fell. More generally, we are witnessing a marginalization of the sisters, with the exception of Ottonian women who exercise a complementary role alongside their brother, taking up the tasks devolved to the wife. This gradual exclusion of women is to be correlated with the Gregorian reform which gives the monks the maintenance of the memoria Via prayers for the salvation of the deceased, a mission previously almost exclusively female.
Conclusion
Through more than 400 pages, Justine Audebrand returns to all aspects of Adelphia, going through the study of vocabulary and specific situations of daily life and taking into account the specificity of royal and aristocratic families. For this, it is based on various sources and illustrates its words by many paintings and graphs.
The comparison between the territories highlights different dynamics, especially on the English side but demonstrates the permanence of adelphic relationships over the centuries and extra and intra-family crises. Brothers and sisters offer themselves mutual support and do not hesitate to express affection or concern towards an adelphe. Like any other relationship with the High Middle Ages, Adelphia is subject to standards involving equality between its members, but it is far from being reality, depending on age, status, power and especially the genre of the person.
This work proves that research on the family is far from being exhausted and it would be interesting to extend the question, going back, which would make it possible to study the Merovingian dynasty and other peoples such as Visigoths, or on the contrary, by pursuing the study towards feudalism.