Christians at War
Kategori: Militärhistoria
A short essay concerning the development of Christian ideas about just and meritorious war before the First Crusade
In his book The Race for Paradise: an Islamic history of the Crusades professor Paul M. Cobb argues that it is both possible and necessary to study the Crusades in relation to the Islamic world. This means, among other things, giving attention to not just European sources but also muslim sourcematerial and, which is very important, expanding the tradional geographic and chronological limits in studies of the Crusades.(1) Although I will not be concerned directly with any particular sources (European nor Islamic) in this essay – I very much share the sentiment of professor Cobbs' argument and therefore intend to focus on the period preceeding the First Crusade and in a sense attempt to expand the traditional chronological boundary of Crusader studies.
The purpose of this essay is accordingly to highlight two of the important ecclesisiastical, theological and religious developments that facilitated the First Crusade; the concept of a just war and the notion of meritorious warfare leading to salvation. It is however important to note that other and to a degree related historical aspects were just as (or arguably even more) important to the development of the Crusades. For instance the reform movement of the 11th century, monastic ideals and the expansion of the notion of pilgrimage and the political situation in France after the collapse of the Carolingian Empire and in the Byzantine Empire after the Islamic and subsequent Turkish invasions in the East; these are all critical elements in the history of the Crusades.(2) That being said these two chosen focal points have influenced how we think about warfare even today and they are of great importance in understanding the Crusades and as such they deserve particular attention.
Just warfare
The principles that became important in how the papacy defined what constituted a just war during the 11th and 12th centuries can be traced back to Late Antiquity. More specifically to Augustine of Hippo, the Church Father who lived in northern Africa during the fourth and fifth centuries AD.(3) Although Augustine wrote much about war he never compiled or gathered his thoughts in a systematic text or doctrine. His most important notion however was this: war was justified only as a response to an injury of some kind. This is probably what, atleast partly, motivated pope Urban II to conceive the First Crusade as a war of liberation.(4) It should be remembered that pope Urban II proposed the First Crusade with two aims: to liberate the eastern Christians and to liberate Jerusalem.(5) In fact it seems like this line of reasoning was not uncommon in Late Antiquity. The late Roman emperor Justinian justified his invasion of Vandal north Africa in 533 AD as a response to the discrimination of Nicene Chrisitans at the hands of the Arian Vandals. Another example is the Roman invasion of Sasanid Persia in the 420s which in part was a response to the persecution of Christians and which has, atleast by one modern scholar, been characterized as a Crusade.(6)
However it was only when scholars, and in particular Anselm of Lucca, on the request of pope Gregory VII (1073-1085), compiled, reworked and defined the ideas of Augustine and published them (In Anselms case as the Collectio canonum) that the papacy acquired a strong and coherent theoretical and theological basis for the justification of war.(7) As far as I understand it, this justification consists of five principles or conditions. Causa, which means what Augustine argued – that the cause of a war must be defensive in character. Auctoritas, which proposes that a just war must be fought under the auspices of a legitimate leader. Intentio, prescribes that a just war must be fought with the intention to force evil people to do good. Persona, which means that a just war must be fought by soldiers – not clergy or civilians. And lastly Res, which dictates that the war must be fought over something which the Christian belligerents have a legitimate claim to.(8)
This was not the only theological approach to justify war and indeed there was, during Late Antiquity and Medieval times, always significant theologic and ecclesiastical opposition to the idea that warfare could be completely reconciled with Christianity. In this context Ivo of Chartre warrants special mentioning. Like Anselm of Lucca he wrote canon law collections but with a somewhat different emphasis. According to Ivo even just wars were to some extent sinful and as such required soldiers who killed adversaries in them to perform penance.(9) That being said it seems to me that the theoretical justification offered by Anselm of Lucca and others like him were the most significant means of thinking about just warfare during the time of the First Crusade.
Spiritually meritorious warfare
Even though the development of the concept of a just war was important in facilitating the First Crusade, the idea that war could not just be justified but also meritorious seems to be an even more crucial and defining feature. Jonathan Riley-Smith writes that the idea that someone could achieve martyrdom whilst perpetrating violence was first expressed in western Christian history in 799.(10) H.E.J. Cowdrey confirms this picture by adding that the principal tradition that several popes could draw upon in the genesis of the Crusade was the idea of martyrdom. Cowdrey mentions two examples of popes promising everlasting life to soldiers if they gave their lives for a righteous cause: Pope Leo IV (847-855) and John VIII (871-882).(11) I would argue that in this case too one can detect a precedent in Late Antiquity. For instance: the emperor Heraclius (610-641 AD) promised salvation to those of his soldiers who died in battle with the Persians.(12) Despite this Riley-Smith's point is valid. It was not until the end of the 11th century that belief in warrior-martyrs truly became common.(13)
And it wasn't until the pontificate of Gregory VII that the notion of salvation through warfare started to crystallize. Cowdrey argues that one of the most defining features of Gregory's teachings was the expansion of the concept of martyrdom into the wordly domain. In effect what Gregory's teachings determined was that laymen could achieve martyrdom – i.e not just clergy and holy men.(14) In relation to this broadening of the concept Gregory also expounded upon the manner in which religiously meritorious warfare could be conducted. Firstly, righteous warriors should fight well and manfully (viriliter), secondly they should fight morally(15), thirdly they should fight in such a way that they spread the fear of God amongst the heathen, and lastly war should be conducted as a gesture of love for God by the warriors in the sense that they should be willing to give their lives for their Christian brothers and sisters.(16) Pope Urban II continued the process of refining the conception of martyrdom and spiritually meritorius war in especially one important sense – he put it in a Christian historical context. The main feature of Pope Urban II's historical framework was the idea that Christian history consisted of four stages. The first one being to some extent a golden age when Christian communities lived in “libertas”. The second stage consisted of the “fall from grace” when Christians fell victim to Muslim conquerors due mainly to their own sins. The third stage was the contemporary stage in which God had seen fit to show mercy to the Christians and this would in turn lead to the fourth and final stage: when Christians would take back the lost territories and re-establish libertas.(17) By designing this historical framework Pope Urban II, to quote Cowdrey, “[...] thereby set war as a path to salvation in a fuller, more unified, and deeper setting, which issued in the call to crusade”.(18) And the rest is, as it were, history.
______________
Footnotes
1. Cobb, Paul M., The race for paradise: an Islamic history of the Crusades, 1st ed., Oxford University Press, New York, 2014, pp 7-8.
2. For more information about this see: Riley-Smith, Jonathan, 'The Crusades, 1095-1198', The New Cambridge Medieval History vol 4, Cambridge 2004, pp. 534-536 and Riley-Smith, Jonathan, The First Crusade and the idea of Crusading, London 1986, pp. 1-12.
3. Nationalencyklopedins website, searchword: ”Augustinus”, http://www.ne.se.ezp.sub.su.se/uppslagsverk/encyklopedi/l%C3%A5ng/augustinus, 19th september 2017.
4. Riley-Smith, The First Crusade and the idea of Crusading, p. 17.
5. Riley-Smith, 'The Crusades, 1095-1198', p. 536.
6. Lee, A. D., War in Late Antiquity: A Social History, 2007, pp. 205-206. Although I am very sceptical about classifying this war as a Crusade.
7. Riley-Smith, The First Crusade and the idea of Crusading, pp. 5-6
8. I'm basing this understanding on a discussion that was held in a seminar on the 18th september with professor Kurt Villads Jensen as a part of the course Religion and War.
9. Riley-Smith, The First Crusade and the idea of Crusading, p. 7.
10. Riley-Smith, The First Crusade and the idea of Crusading, p. 115.
11. Cowdrey, H.E.J., 'New Dimensions of Reform. War as a Path to Salvation', Jerusalem the Golden. The Origins and Impact of the First Crusade, ed. Susan B. Edginton and Luis García-Guijarro, Turnhout 2014, p. 11.
12. Lee, War in Late Antiquity, p. 209.
13. Riley-Smith, The First Crusade and the idea of Crusading, p. 116.
14. Cowdrey, 'New Dimensions of Reform.', p. 12.
15. Not morally in the Augustinian understanding but in a more general sense.
16. Cowdrey, 'New Dimensions of Reform.', pp. 14-16.
17. Cowdrey, 'New Dimensions of Reform.', pp. 20-21.
18. Cowdrey, 'New Dimensions of Reform.', p. 20.
In his book The Race for Paradise: an Islamic history of the Crusades professor Paul M. Cobb argues that it is both possible and necessary to study the Crusades in relation to the Islamic world. This means, among other things, giving attention to not just European sources but also muslim sourcematerial and, which is very important, expanding the tradional geographic and chronological limits in studies of the Crusades.(1) Although I will not be concerned directly with any particular sources (European nor Islamic) in this essay – I very much share the sentiment of professor Cobbs' argument and therefore intend to focus on the period preceeding the First Crusade and in a sense attempt to expand the traditional chronological boundary of Crusader studies.
The purpose of this essay is accordingly to highlight two of the important ecclesisiastical, theological and religious developments that facilitated the First Crusade; the concept of a just war and the notion of meritorious warfare leading to salvation. It is however important to note that other and to a degree related historical aspects were just as (or arguably even more) important to the development of the Crusades. For instance the reform movement of the 11th century, monastic ideals and the expansion of the notion of pilgrimage and the political situation in France after the collapse of the Carolingian Empire and in the Byzantine Empire after the Islamic and subsequent Turkish invasions in the East; these are all critical elements in the history of the Crusades.(2) That being said these two chosen focal points have influenced how we think about warfare even today and they are of great importance in understanding the Crusades and as such they deserve particular attention.
Just warfare
The principles that became important in how the papacy defined what constituted a just war during the 11th and 12th centuries can be traced back to Late Antiquity. More specifically to Augustine of Hippo, the Church Father who lived in northern Africa during the fourth and fifth centuries AD.(3) Although Augustine wrote much about war he never compiled or gathered his thoughts in a systematic text or doctrine. His most important notion however was this: war was justified only as a response to an injury of some kind. This is probably what, atleast partly, motivated pope Urban II to conceive the First Crusade as a war of liberation.(4) It should be remembered that pope Urban II proposed the First Crusade with two aims: to liberate the eastern Christians and to liberate Jerusalem.(5) In fact it seems like this line of reasoning was not uncommon in Late Antiquity. The late Roman emperor Justinian justified his invasion of Vandal north Africa in 533 AD as a response to the discrimination of Nicene Chrisitans at the hands of the Arian Vandals. Another example is the Roman invasion of Sasanid Persia in the 420s which in part was a response to the persecution of Christians and which has, atleast by one modern scholar, been characterized as a Crusade.(6)
However it was only when scholars, and in particular Anselm of Lucca, on the request of pope Gregory VII (1073-1085), compiled, reworked and defined the ideas of Augustine and published them (In Anselms case as the Collectio canonum) that the papacy acquired a strong and coherent theoretical and theological basis for the justification of war.(7) As far as I understand it, this justification consists of five principles or conditions. Causa, which means what Augustine argued – that the cause of a war must be defensive in character. Auctoritas, which proposes that a just war must be fought under the auspices of a legitimate leader. Intentio, prescribes that a just war must be fought with the intention to force evil people to do good. Persona, which means that a just war must be fought by soldiers – not clergy or civilians. And lastly Res, which dictates that the war must be fought over something which the Christian belligerents have a legitimate claim to.(8)
This was not the only theological approach to justify war and indeed there was, during Late Antiquity and Medieval times, always significant theologic and ecclesiastical opposition to the idea that warfare could be completely reconciled with Christianity. In this context Ivo of Chartre warrants special mentioning. Like Anselm of Lucca he wrote canon law collections but with a somewhat different emphasis. According to Ivo even just wars were to some extent sinful and as such required soldiers who killed adversaries in them to perform penance.(9) That being said it seems to me that the theoretical justification offered by Anselm of Lucca and others like him were the most significant means of thinking about just warfare during the time of the First Crusade.
Spiritually meritorious warfare
Even though the development of the concept of a just war was important in facilitating the First Crusade, the idea that war could not just be justified but also meritorious seems to be an even more crucial and defining feature. Jonathan Riley-Smith writes that the idea that someone could achieve martyrdom whilst perpetrating violence was first expressed in western Christian history in 799.(10) H.E.J. Cowdrey confirms this picture by adding that the principal tradition that several popes could draw upon in the genesis of the Crusade was the idea of martyrdom. Cowdrey mentions two examples of popes promising everlasting life to soldiers if they gave their lives for a righteous cause: Pope Leo IV (847-855) and John VIII (871-882).(11) I would argue that in this case too one can detect a precedent in Late Antiquity. For instance: the emperor Heraclius (610-641 AD) promised salvation to those of his soldiers who died in battle with the Persians.(12) Despite this Riley-Smith's point is valid. It was not until the end of the 11th century that belief in warrior-martyrs truly became common.(13)
And it wasn't until the pontificate of Gregory VII that the notion of salvation through warfare started to crystallize. Cowdrey argues that one of the most defining features of Gregory's teachings was the expansion of the concept of martyrdom into the wordly domain. In effect what Gregory's teachings determined was that laymen could achieve martyrdom – i.e not just clergy and holy men.(14) In relation to this broadening of the concept Gregory also expounded upon the manner in which religiously meritorious warfare could be conducted. Firstly, righteous warriors should fight well and manfully (viriliter), secondly they should fight morally(15), thirdly they should fight in such a way that they spread the fear of God amongst the heathen, and lastly war should be conducted as a gesture of love for God by the warriors in the sense that they should be willing to give their lives for their Christian brothers and sisters.(16) Pope Urban II continued the process of refining the conception of martyrdom and spiritually meritorius war in especially one important sense – he put it in a Christian historical context. The main feature of Pope Urban II's historical framework was the idea that Christian history consisted of four stages. The first one being to some extent a golden age when Christian communities lived in “libertas”. The second stage consisted of the “fall from grace” when Christians fell victim to Muslim conquerors due mainly to their own sins. The third stage was the contemporary stage in which God had seen fit to show mercy to the Christians and this would in turn lead to the fourth and final stage: when Christians would take back the lost territories and re-establish libertas.(17) By designing this historical framework Pope Urban II, to quote Cowdrey, “[...] thereby set war as a path to salvation in a fuller, more unified, and deeper setting, which issued in the call to crusade”.(18) And the rest is, as it were, history.
______________
Footnotes
1. Cobb, Paul M., The race for paradise: an Islamic history of the Crusades, 1st ed., Oxford University Press, New York, 2014, pp 7-8.
2. For more information about this see: Riley-Smith, Jonathan, 'The Crusades, 1095-1198', The New Cambridge Medieval History vol 4, Cambridge 2004, pp. 534-536 and Riley-Smith, Jonathan, The First Crusade and the idea of Crusading, London 1986, pp. 1-12.
3. Nationalencyklopedins website, searchword: ”Augustinus”, http://www.ne.se.ezp.sub.su.se/uppslagsverk/encyklopedi/l%C3%A5ng/augustinus, 19th september 2017.
4. Riley-Smith, The First Crusade and the idea of Crusading, p. 17.
5. Riley-Smith, 'The Crusades, 1095-1198', p. 536.
6. Lee, A. D., War in Late Antiquity: A Social History, 2007, pp. 205-206. Although I am very sceptical about classifying this war as a Crusade.
7. Riley-Smith, The First Crusade and the idea of Crusading, pp. 5-6
8. I'm basing this understanding on a discussion that was held in a seminar on the 18th september with professor Kurt Villads Jensen as a part of the course Religion and War.
9. Riley-Smith, The First Crusade and the idea of Crusading, p. 7.
10. Riley-Smith, The First Crusade and the idea of Crusading, p. 115.
11. Cowdrey, H.E.J., 'New Dimensions of Reform. War as a Path to Salvation', Jerusalem the Golden. The Origins and Impact of the First Crusade, ed. Susan B. Edginton and Luis García-Guijarro, Turnhout 2014, p. 11.
12. Lee, War in Late Antiquity, p. 209.
13. Riley-Smith, The First Crusade and the idea of Crusading, p. 116.
14. Cowdrey, 'New Dimensions of Reform.', p. 12.
15. Not morally in the Augustinian understanding but in a more general sense.
16. Cowdrey, 'New Dimensions of Reform.', pp. 14-16.
17. Cowdrey, 'New Dimensions of Reform.', pp. 20-21.
18. Cowdrey, 'New Dimensions of Reform.', p. 20.
