[Inside Front Cover]

BEETHOVEN [presumably in his apartment on the Josephstädter Glacis; possibly Tuesday, April 18]: April, 1820. [//]

[Blatt 1r]

OLIVA [accompanying Beethoven on his shopping errands; probably in the morning of Tuesday, April 18]:

[first at a hat shop:]

He is asking 16 Gulden for the hat. [//]

[at a shop that sold lamp oil:]

One can get it at various places; the best is behind the Hoher Markt, in Natorp's building, then behind it in the small narrow street [Gasse]; I mean lamp oil; the warehouse of the largest factory is there. // If it looks this yellow and clear, it costs 48 kr. per pound; contains a half Mass [measure]; this is the finest. // Landskron- Gasse No. 383 [sic]. //

[at a fish vendor’s:]

Freshly caught, 34 kr. for 4 of them. //

The best pepper is not ground. Have white pepper bought for you; it is healthier than the black. [Blatt 1v]

It is too warm; better to eat them at midday today; the woman just got them yesterday. //

When will you get home? [//]

BEETHOVEN [in a coffee house; presumably the afternoon of Tuesday, April 18]: Rospini, periscopic eyeglasses. [//]

[Blatt 2r]

BERNARD [probably in a restaurant in the City; probably a long midday dinner on the afternoon of Tuesday, April 18]: I have not succumbed to it; this contrary condition is very rare and doesn't last a day when it occurs. My digestion is unequalled and I have never felt the urge to vomit, even after the greatest gluttony. //

In this peaceful city, as in Dresden, one would hardly believe it possible. [//] [Blatt 2v] There is essentially no need here in Vienna, and far and wide in the surrounding region, as much as is spent on security. //

Take Captain Lindner or Artillery Professor Strombeck. You will certainly find both a great pleasure, since both are very educated and pleasant people. [//]

[Blatt 3r]

[joined briefly by other guests:]

This is Baron Brandau, Court Secretary, with his wife. //

Introduction

During President Lula's government, Brazilian diplomacy gave a privileged place to Africa, and relations intensified. A strategic vision and a coherent perspective were the new basis of the Brazil–Africa relations, which became the principal focus of the so-called South–South cooperation. While many believe the relations with Africa proved the solidarity dimension of President Lula's social programme, others consider them as no more than prestige diplomacy, a ‘waste of time and money’. Moreover, some regard these relations primarily as business diplomacy, a kind of ‘soft imperialism’, which was only to be different from China's presence in Africa in its form and intensity.

Lula's successor, Dilma Rousseff, exercised a diplomacy considered ‘continuity without priority’, especially in the case of Africa. Nevertheless, relations between the two sides of the South Atlantic Ocean followed their course. But after Rousseff's impeachment in 2016, the Michel Temer government followed a diplomatic path without a clear African policy strategy. Although Africa is no longer at the top of Brazil's international agenda, the connections already established are working at many levels.

Historical background

Following the end of the Cold War and the creation of Mercosur in 1991, Africa was considered a secondary arena within a diplomacy based on a neoliberal view of globalisation and favouring Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. Fernando Collor de Mello (March 1990 to September 1992) was the first president to be elected by direct vote since Jânio Quadros, back in 1961. After he took office in 1990, his neoliberal economic policies opened a new phase of relative distancing from Africa. The Washington Consensus, whereby vertical North–South relations were given priority over horizontal South–South relations, started to govern the strategic vision of the Brazilian elite. The decline of trade between Africa and Brazil that followed was the result of the adjustment plans on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean, the withdrawal of state financing of exports and many other branches of the economy, and the need to buy oil from Argentina to balance trade relations within the Mercosur, the South American common market. Nevertheless, President Collor visited the region in 1991 after Nelson Mandela's release from prison and the independence of Namibia, which received Brazilian help to structure its navy.

Introduction

From the early 16th to the mid-19th century, Brazil maintained close relations with Africa that were dominated by the slave trade. During this period more than five million Africans were deported to Brazil, making it by far the largest destination of the transatlantic slave trade. Brazil's colonial economy was based on three main pillars: external dependency, large landownership and slavery. The African slaves shaped Brazilian society and culture. Following the end of the slave trade in 1850 and the colonisation of Africa by European powers from the late 19th century, Brazil's relations with Africa ceased for more than a century and were only re-established in the early 1960s when the presidents Jânio Quadros and João Goulart pursued an independent foreign policy that rejected automatic alignment with the United States and Portugal, and sought to expand the country's bilateral relations with socialist countries and newly independent countries in the Afro-Asian world. Brazil was portrayed as an anti-colonial and anti-racist country that shared many similarities with other Third World countries. However, the Independent Foreign Policy was fiercely counteracted by the anti-communist opposition and the influential Portuguese immigrant communities that supported the Salazar regime's colonial policy. In addition, the foreign policy remained ambiguous and inconsistent as, despite the rhetoric, Quadros and Goulart never dared to put Brazil's close relations with Salazarist Portugal or South Africa's apartheid regime at risk.

The military coup in 1964 ended Brazil's first rapprochement with African countries due to the anti-communist military leaders’ realignment of the country's foreign policy with Washington and Lisbon. Africa only reappeared as a target of Brazil's foreign policy when the country's economic growth was threatened by the Arab oil embargo in 1973. Brazil's pragmatic foreign policy offensive towards Africa under the Ernesto Geisel presidency in 1974 was facilitated by the military coup that overthrew the Portuguese dictatorship in April that year. Under Geisel and João Figueiredo, the last two military rulers, Brazil successfully strengthened political and commercial relations with African countries. However, this second rapprochement with Africa also proved unsustainable due to Brazil's financial crisis in the mid-1980s and Africa's economic decline in the same period, when the diplomatic and trade relations between Brazil and African countries dropped to the levels of the early 1960s.

Growing intervention in youth culture reflected wider shifts in how cities and their inhabitants were being governed by the interwar period. In Britain, the early part of the twentieth century saw the consolidation of an increasingly interventionist state with the expansion of government into the ‘social sphere’. Liberal reforms set new standards in areas such as pensions (1908), employment insurance (1911) and schools (1906–7). A few years later the demands of ‘total war’ encouraged more central expansion and socio-economic planning. Interwar legislation grew unevenly, disrupted by economic instability and frequent switches between governing parties, but policy continued to be centralised in new and powerful departments. City councils could consequently find their powers restricted, regulated or taken away entirely – such as with the Unemployment Act in 1934, which created a national system for relief. But the period also saw a last flowering of municipal government. Local councils reached the height of their spending and administrative power, retained most of their municipalised utilities and were encouraged by central aid to enter new areas of social welfare. Signs of the rise of the post-1945 welfare state, then, were apparent – but centralisation was a complex process, and never totally assured.

In the US national myth-making and exceptionalism has often downplayed federal ascendancy. Until relatively recently, according to William Novak, the American past has been seen as one of limited government and an individualist quest for civil, economic and social freedom. The American state however, he argued, has always been ‘more powerful, capacious, tenacious, interventionist, and redistributive’ than commonly believed. The New Deal moment in the mid-1930s, which saw significant social and economic reform across all areas of life, can mask a longer history of state intervention. In the nineteenth century the federal government had frequently acknowledged responsibility for citizens affected by unforeseen disasters and had distributed emergency relief. The First World War also had an unprecedented impact on the expansion of federal government at the local level, as the need to intervene in areas such as ‘enemy alien’ registration, war bond raising and food rationing were central to achieving victory. Before the war, annual federal budgets never reached $800,000,000; during the conflict, expenditure averaged $43,000,000 per day.

For many reformers and associations, the central question of citizenship was how society should guide the lives of the young. They were the next generation: the clay from which workers, soldiers and mothers of the nation would be sculpted. Youth citizenship was conceptualised, in many ways, as an urban problem that had a civic solution. Changing the city and its public culture, reformers believed, would transform both health and behaviour. Fears about the condition of city children were nothing new, and by the late Victorian years there was already an established network of voluntary and charitable organisations that endeavoured to provide direction, welfare and citizenship training. But the problem had evolved by the 1920s. Older debates about urban degeneration and ‘national efficiency’ were now combined with extensive sociological investigation and criticism of how modern youths spent their leisure time. A renewed sense of urgency emerged in the 1930s with the Great Depression, the rise of extreme political regimes in continental Europe and the looming prospect of another global war. Mass unemployment sparked contradictory fears: on the one hand, of possible revolutionary behaviour; and, on the other, of political apathy. Stopping youths from being seduced by crime, malaise or radical ideologies were all of paramount importance.

A new type of citizen, equipped for these competitive challenges, was shaped by the state and voluntary associations. Individual fitness was still emphasised – an element of continuity from the late nineteenth century. But there was also a shift towards foregrounding community and cohesion in the fragmented modern city, reflecting the importance of the ideals promoted by civics education and urban festivals. Youth citizens needed good personal health and morality, but also an enthusiasm for teamwork and social conformity under the umbrella of a collective civic identity. These attributes fitted them into future roles in the local and national economy, urban society and even possible warfare. Young people and their bodies, then, were the problem, but ‘youth’ was a catch-all term for a large group that had many differences in gender, class, race and ethnicity, as well as simply in terms of age. It could, following the growth of scientific and biological understandings of adolescence as a stage of life, be associated with the developmental phase of puberty – itself difficult to pin down in terms of an age range.

In a late-fourteenth-century depiction of the Annunciation, painted around the apex of a triumphal arch, we see the Virgin Mary and Angel Gabriel kneel opposite one another with a vase of lilies placed in between (fig. 7.1). Their diaphanous robes are adorned with geometric patterns on the hems and necklines, down the seam from the elbow to the wrists, and on the cuffs themselves, with an additional rectangular panel attached to Gabriel's sleeve. These trims or borders might easily refer to the practice of stamping gold or silver onto cloth or the stitching of ribbons woven with gold onto garments that visually conferred dignity and status upon the displayed body. In this case, that body was the receptacle for Christ, the woman who would become the vehicle for the salvation of humanity.

The Virgin kneels at a simple domestic prie-dieu that displays an open book. Mary had been reading up until the point of angelic interruption. Two text boxes are precisely ruled in black across the double spread of the book, and they each contain lines of large, loosely described letters. In the little cupboard of the prie-dieu, there is another small book of prayer owned by the Virgin, reinforcing the message about containment and incarnation, about divinity in the making, as well as private devotion. This is made all the more clear in the vignette set to the far left of this biblical episode. Behind the Virgin there is a plain chest, a wooden chair set with a blue and red checked fabric seat, and an upright weaving loom. They are items of domestic furniture that illustrate the Virgin's devotional life and activities, but they also are identifiable with the furnishing of a contemporary home of a well-to-do woman. The compositional layout of the scene thus makes clear that before taking to her knees in prayer, the Virgin had been seated on the chair working at the loom; and it is here that matter becomes material.

The loom is strung with vertical threads from the beam in colours of red and silver (fig. 7.2). A fabric is visible from the bottom to the midway point, where the threads have been pushed down, compacted, by the application of the horizontal shuttle that weaves between the threads creating the warp-and-weft effect of a decorative textile.

The earliest evidence of imprisonment from Anglo-Saxon times to its development under the Normans and Angevins, including prison escapes and attacks on prisons as symbols of oppression. The plethora of places of incarceration in London and Southwark, and the proliferation of gaols of all sorts elsewhere. The gradually increasing use of imprisonment as a punishment, although gaols remained largely as a holding-bay or, in the case of debtors, a means of coercion.

A messenger came before Bertrand and the count of Auxerre and the other afore-named barons and said:

‘May almighty God born in Bethlehem protect from harm, by His gracious will, the lordly Bertrand du Guesclin, whom the king of France has made Marshal of Normandy to take his place in the conduct of battle with loyalty and daring both in field and town. And all you good lords I see here present, may Jesus give you the will to lend aid to my lord in this time of urgent need: I pray you all, give him help and protection – may all, of every degree, have pity on him! Be his support in upholding his right, for some who should be protectors of his person and his right are doing him great wrong.’

‘What's this you're saying, friend?’ said Bertrand. ‘Who's your master, tell me: what's his name?’

‘Truly, sir,’ said the messenger, ‘his name is Charles of Blois. The count of Montfort has laid heavy siege to the castle called Auray – a noble and most valued stronghold. And my lord prays you and all who follow you, of every degree, to go and join him, for he is set upon engaging the count of Montfort and raising the siege of Auray. If you'll come to my good lord he'll be indebted to you all: he sends word that he'll make you rich – he'll give you a share in all his wealth.’

‘You've spoken well, friend,’ Bertrand said. ‘And I pledge before you all that all of us assembled in this field will go and place ourselves at his command: come life, come death, we shan't fail him. Take this destrier I present to you and tell your lord to make ready: we'll join him soon at Guingamp.’

The messenger departed then, and Bertrand called his lords together and spoke to them most courteously.

‘Sirs,’ he said, ‘if it be God's will the year has come when honour will be ours! For we shall do battle in the broad land of Brittany outside Auray, a well-fortified place indeed – a battle between two lords who're competing for the country: the count of Montfort has offered battle and Charles of Blois has not declined! He's summoned an army to go and do battle and we must go at once.’

Almost all the legislation significant in establishing the medieval inquisition against heresy was created in the 130 years between 1184 and about 1320, a period which also saw major developments in thinking about canon and civil law, and about public justice in general. This chapter provides an overview of how the framework of inquisition evolved, with particular emphasis on it as a partnership activity. The papal inquisitor was not the only entity in Italy to have responsibilities for combating heresy: others had such duties before the inquisition took shape, and continued to exercise powers of their own after it was established. Although over the century of this book (1250–1350), the papal inquisition's role was greatly enlarged and entrenched vis-à-vis ecclesiastical and secular partners, the period should not, in Italy at least, be seen in terms of the inquisitor emerging supreme. The organisational structure formalised by Innocent IV in the early 1250s, and renewed by his successors, meant inquisitors continued to need support from both bishops and civic authorities, who also continued to exercise their own independent roles. The exact balance of power between the three parties shifted from place to place, and time to time, not only according to politics and strength of personality, but also the changing geography of heresy itself.

Early efforts against heresy

During the second half of the twelfth century, the Church struggled to find effective ways to combat the two major heresies, of the Cathars and Waldensians, which had taken firm root both in southern France and across north and central Italy. Bishops had responsibility for the spiritual health of their flock, but even when inclined to be active against heresy, they found it increasingly difficult to fulfil this element of their duties in a coherent way. There were a number of reasons for this, some specific to Italy. As Lambert has noted, there was an absence of established procedure, which left bishops uncertain where to turn when heresy was suspected. In both France and Italy there was widespread sympathy for Church reform, reflected in movements like that of the Humiliati. This easily morphed both into public tolerance of the anticlerical aspects of different heresies, and into heresy itself.

So listen now, my noble, honoured sirs, and you'll hear the true story of how Bertrand flourished and won such great renown, and went with a might army to destroy the wicked, deviant infidels.

He vowed he'd be king of the great and populous land of Granada before his time was done; but he was diverted from his goal by grave mischance, for at the time of which my song tells there was a king in the rich land of Spain who never did good as long as he lived. His name was Pedro, and a more evil creature was never born; in the end he had his just reward – bad work should be badly paid.

This King Pedro of Spain, who lived such a shocking life, had a wife who was a finer soul than ever set foot in the kingdom; she was the sister of the duke of Bourbon and the queen of France. The union of one so good and one so wicked was hardly God's finest work: King Pedro led a dreadful life while the good queen never had a sinful thought.

Now, from what I've heard, there was a lady who was much loved by King Pedro, and she ensnared his heart. The queen of Spain, who worshipped true fidelity, thought their affair of little account; but this wicked woman who'd captivated the king had him so intoxicated with herbs and potions that he couldn't cope for a moment without the mad seductress in his sight. Nor could he bear to look at the one he'd married: he didn't eat with her, drink with her or lie with her. So matters stayed for a long while, and it ended in disaster.

Moreover, it was Pedro's constant way to trust the Jews of his land – indeed he loved them a good deal more than he did the Christians; the latter he oppressed, seeking their counsel in no matters and keeping them in the dark, while he informed the Jews of everything and assigned all responsibility to them. There has long been a saying that trusting ill counsel will end in tears; God has the power to pay as and when He pleases – it may not be at once, but sooner or later the day will come.