出版社：Suid-Afrikaanse Akademie vir Wetenskap en Kuns
摘要：Die oogmerk van hierdie artikel is om 'n diskursiewe ontleding van armoede in die sentrale en laat Middeleeue (laat 11de eeu tot middel 15de eeu) aan te bied. Armoede word hier dus nie bloot as 'n histories-ekonomiese kategorie ondersoek nie maar ontleed aan die hand van die konseptualisering van armoede, oftewel die wyses waarop daar in hierdie laaste twee periodes van die Middeleeue oor armoede nagedink is. Die diskoers oor armoede in hierdie twee periodes het in vyf aanduibare fases verloop. Teen die agtergrond van die ideëhistoriese kenmerking van armoede in die vroeë Middeleeue as 'n toevallige verskynsel of 'n aantal toevallige omstandighede, vind daar eerstens vanaf die middel van die 10de eeu 'n diskursiewe verskuiwing plaas op grond van drastiese omwentelinge in die landbou en handel. Die "nuwe armes" ontstaan gevolglik uit 'n "klas" grondbewerkers en handearbeiders wie se sosioëkonomiese posisie in die 12de eeu druk hersien is. 'n Begripsontwikkeling, grootliks teologies en juridies van aard, wat berus het op 'n betreklik eenvoudige onderskeid tussen heer en dienaar, of dominus en servus, het in die sentrale Middeleeue die genuanseerde diskursiewe register van die vroeë Middeleeue vervang. Terwyl armoede in die vroeë Middeleeue verstaan is as die gevolg van een of meer toevallige faktore, is dit in die 12de eeu vereenvoudig tot 'n verhouding, naamlik tussen heer en dienaar. Armoede was nou 'n "nuwe" ekonomiese probleem wat so doeltreffend moontlik met hierdie elementêre onderskeid tussen dominus en servus aangepak moes word. Tweedens is armoede in die 12de eeu uitdruklik in verband gebring met 'n "minimummatriks", wat die minimumhoeveelheid beboubare grond moes aandui wat 'n individu of 'n groep aanverwante individue vir basiese lewensonderhoud nodig gehad het. Armoede is gevolglik, vir die eerste keer in die Middeleeue, gedefinieer aan die hand van die "vermoë tot selfonderhoud". Hiermee is die definiëring van armoede in ekonomiese terme onherroeplik in die sentrale en latere Middeleeuse diskoers gevestig. Derdens is verset teen sowel hierdie ekonomisering as die kerk en kloosterwese se versuim om die "nuwe armoede" krities aan te pak van stapel gestuur deur aweregse godsdienstige bewegings wat juis in reaksie teen die "nuwe armoede" in die laat 12de en 13de eeu tot stand gekom het. Die ideaal van "vrywillige armoede" is deur onder meer die begyne, Waldense en skoolordes voorgehou ten einde enige assosiasie met welvaart op te skort, juis deur van alle vorme van eiendomsreg afstand te doen en 'n lewe van beslissende solidariteit met die armes te lei. Hierdie verset is, vierdens, spontaan verhewig deur die Franciskaanse orde se konfrontasie in die 14de eeu met pous Johannes XXII oor die orde se verstaan van die verhouding tussen eiendomsreg en gebruik van goedere in besit (usus facti en ordo habeat usum), wat as die spitspunt van die diskoers oor armoede in die sentrale en latere Middeleeue voorgehou sou kon word. Laastens is die 14de-eeuse ontwerp van 'n minderwaardige minderheidsgroep - "die armlastiges", naas die algemene neiging om "mindere minderhede" op grond van etniese, godsdienstige en geslagsidentiteit in die betrokke eeu te skep - 'n aanduiding van die afloop van die diskoers oor armoede in die sentrale en latere Middeleeue. Wat eens geag is die gevolg van onwillekeurige en toevallige faktore te wees, is dus aanvanklik tot 'n "verhouding" gereduseer, daarna tot 'n "klas" geëkonomiseer, en uiteindelik neerhalend as 'n "minderheid" bestempel.
其他摘要：This article aims to analyse the discourse on poverty in the central and later Middle Ages. Poverty is therefore not surveyed merely as a historical-economic category but is analysed by considering idea-historical medieval views on "extreme scarcity", or the way poverty was conceptualised in these last two stages of the Middle Ages. According to this analysis, this discourse on poverty manifests itself in five distinct phases. Against the backdrop of the early medieval understanding of poverty as "contingent" - the result of one or more "accidental" factors - a first discursive development took place in the second half of the 10th century. As a result of revolutionary developments in agriculture and commerce, the "new poor" slowly developed into a "class" of agricultural and manual labourers whose socio-historical position eventually had to be drastically revised from the late 11th century. A subsequent conceptual development, predominantly theological and juridical by nature and relying on a relatively unassuming yet crucial distinction between "owner" and "servant" ('dominus and servus), replaced the articulated conceptual register of the poverty discourse of the early Middle Ages. From the 5th to the 10th centuries poverty was understood to be the result of accidens or accidental factors, but now it was reduced to a mere relation. Poverty now became a "problem" that had to be addressed as effectively as possible, employing this basic and reductionist distinction. Secondly, in the 12th century poverty was explicitly related to a "minimum matrix", which was supposed to indicate the minimum amount of arable land an individual or a group of related individuals needed for basic self-sufficiency. With this matrix, for the first time in the Middle Ages, poverty was defined in terms of the "ability to self-sustain". As a result, poverty was economised (placed in the economic sphere) in the central medieval discourse. Thirdly, in reaction to the "new poverty" of the late 12th and 13th centuries, several unconventional religious movements, such as the beguines and Waldensians, resisted this economisation. The ideal of "voluntary poverty" was posed by these groups in order to dissociate themselves from any form of material prosperity by rejecting any form of ownership and living modest lives in critical solidarity with the poor. Fourthly, this resistance was intensified by the establishment of the mendicant orders, and in particular by the Franciscan order's confrontation with the papal office regarding the order's interpretation of the relationship between ownership (dominium) and the order's factual use of goods in possession (usus facti and ordo habeat usum). In the 14th century, the Franciscan ideal of "holy voluntary poverty" came under severe criticism from the church (not least by the pope, John XXII [1244-1334, pope 1316 to 1334], himself) but later also from academic circles (notably by the Oxonian Richard FitzRalph [ca.1300-1360], in his eight-volume De pauperie salvatoris [ca. 1350-1356]). A dramatic confrontation between this oldest of the mendicant orders and the highest ecclesiastical authority ensued when, from the early 1320s, two high-profile Franciscans, William of Ockham (ca.1285-1349) and Francis of Marchia (ca.1290-ca.1344), a master of theology at the University of Paris and an outspoken opponent of John XXII, repeatedly clashed with the pope about the Franciscans' understanding of corporate scarcity or "holy voluntary poverty". Some years later FitzRalph presented his substantial philosophical and theological critique of what he called the "radicalised mendicant ideal". This work contributed significantly to the development of theories of natural rights in the later Middle Ages and in early modernity. Lastly, the creation of a 14th-century minority - "the poor" - in conjunction with the 14th-century design of several other "minorities" based on ethnic, religious and gender-sexual considerations, was the eventual result of the historical development of ideas about poverty in the central and later Middle Ages. What once was considered to be the result of involuntary and contingentfactors, then reduced to a (simplistic) relation, andfinally defined in economic terms as a "class", was thus ultimately brought under discursive control as a "minority".
关键词：Trefwoorde armoede in die Middeleeue;Franciskane;heilige vrywillige armoede;ideëgeskiedenis;ius commune;latere Middeleeue;Middeleeuse landbou;en handelsrevolusie;natuurlike regte;ordo habeat usum;Pous Johannes XXII;sentrale Middeleeue;usus facti
其他关键词：Apartheid as a worldwide familiar term;way of life since 1652;distancing of peoples with different values;strict apartheid in 1948;white control and survival for stability;apartheid as a policy of "separate but equal" not feasible;economic trends prevented separate development;apartheid isolated;black resistance;racism
