La mediazione giudiziaria dei conflitti sociali alla fine del medioevo: tribunali ecclesiastici e resistenza comunitaria in Valtellina
English summary
From the early fifteenth century onwards, the episcopal court of Como extended its jurisdiction to deal with various types of dispute which had previously been resolved through arbitration or the intervention of civil judges. The bishop’s court was now entitled to examine – in addition to cases involving members of the clergy – all lawsuits regarding the bishop’s property. Given the high concentration of such property in Valtellina and the number and social prominence of its holders (rural communes, nobles and signori), the consequent and highly sensitive “secular” conflict which saw property and rights disputed variously between one local aristocrat and another, between patricians and peasants, between communes and their lords, between communes and other communes, could now be brought before the episcopal tribunal also. Thus the bishop’s court became a key context for the play off between the various social actors and the mediation of conflict; as well as amplifying its own powers by setting up a jurisdictional service which had not previously existed, the court provided litigants with new and additional paths to pursue in the course of their legal battles.
However, the episcopal court was unable to achieve jurisdictional monopoly, and had to coexist with the other instruments and bodies involved in conflict mediation (secular or ecclesiastic arbitration procedures, civil judges and courts, directly negotiated settlements). In addition, the sentences of the episcopal judge were normally appealed against at the higher levels of Church justice available through the apostolic delegates to Lombardy and the Roman tribunals, thus further increasing the potential number of settings for legal confrontation.
A number of cases illustrate how recourse to the bishop’s tribunal became part of the conflict strategies adopted by nobles and communes in Valtellina, who in the course of some noteworthy and lengthy legal battles took advantage of the entire gamut of available solutions: arbitration and violence, direct appeal to the prince, civil and – as stated – ecclesiastic courts, at the various levels of trial and appeal. In particular, three lawsuits lasting from the mid 1400s until the early 1500s between local communities (Grosio, Tresivio Monte and Piano, Fusine and Colorina) and powerful aristocratic families (Quadrio and de Valleve), demonstrate how the bishop’s court had become, amongst other things, a specific context for the staging of anti–seigneurial protest. The common men (homines communis) evidently had access to excellent legal advice, and by approaching the legal system of the day with the necessary shrewdness and savoir faire, managed to obtain a favourable outcome in the Church courts. The ecclesiastic sentences issued allowed them to take control of essential economic resources from the local signori: the rights to own mountain pastures, collect tithes, and use and trade forest products.
Translation: Clare O’Sullivan
