Medieval Academy of America
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Medieval Academy of America Criticism of Papal Crusade Policy in Old French and Provençal Author(s): Palmer A. Throop Source: Speculum, Vol. 13, No. 4 (Oct., 1938), pp. 379-412 Published by: Medieval Academy of America Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2849662 Accessed: 03-10-2015 22:37 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Medieval Academy of America and Cambridge University Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Speculum. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 159.149.103.9 on Sat, 03 Oct 2015 22:37:23 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions A JOURNAL OF MEDIAEVAL STUDIES VOL. XIII OCTOBER, 1938 No. 4 CRITICISM OF PAPAL CRUSADE POLICY IN OLD FRENCH AND PROVENCAL BY PALMER A. THROOP THE repeatedfailure of the crusadeagainst the Moslemin the Holy Land caused more than despair and disappointmentin Europe. It aroused the greatestin- terest in the causes of the failure,an interestmost significantlyreflected in Old Frenchand Provengalliterature.' Why did thesecostly expeditions preached by Holy Church,approved by God, so oftenresult in the defeat of the Cross and the continuedtriumph of Islam? Peccatis exigentibus-becauseof the sins of Christians,the Churchresponded, and peccatisexigentibus became. the classic excuse, the chieftheological prop of crusade apologists. It served St Bernard as his principalargument in his explanationof the fiascoof the second crusade2 -that firstprofound shock to the faithfulof Europe, certainof the triumphof theirholy cause. As failurefollowed failure, the defensedid nobleduty in vernac- ular crusade excitatoria,3and came to be elaborated windily by thirteenth- centuryclergy.4 Peccatisexigentibus, however, was much too vague an explanationto serveas a bulwarkagainst the criticismsof a repeatedlydisappointed Christendom. The thirteenthcentury brought distressing complications that made such an abstract defensemuch less convincing.After the successfulcrusade of the iniquitousFred- 1 In tracingpopular interestin crusade failuresthe followingstudies of crusade songs in the ver- nacular have been of service: J. Bedier and P. Aubry,Les chansonsde croisadeavec leurs m6lodies (Paris, 1909); K. Lewent, Das altprovenzalischeKreuzlied (Berlin, 1905); F. Oeding, Das altfranzo- sische Kreuzlied (Braunschweig,1910); H. Schindler,Die Kreuzziigein der altprovenzalischenund mittelhochdeutschenLyrik (Dresden, 1889); G. Wolfram,'Kreuzpredigt und Kreuzlied,'Zeitschriftfiur deutschesAltertum, xviii (1886), 89 ff. 2 See Bernard of Clairvaux, De consideratione,ed. J. Migne, Patr. Lat. (Paris, 1879), CLXXXII, col. 741 if. 3G. Wolframin his study'Kreuzpredigt und Kreuzlied,' loc. cit.,p. 102, has shownthe similarity betweenthe statementsof the popes as to peccatisexigentibus and the German crusade songs. Good examplesin Old Frenchmay be foundin the anonymous'Parti de mal et a bien aturne,'ed. J. Bedier, Les chansonsde croisade,p. 71, and in Thibaut iv's 'Au tans plain de felonie,'ed. J. Bedier, loc. cit. p. 182. A good examplein Provengalmay be foundin Gavauda's 'Seignors,per los vostrespeccatz,' ed. A. Jeanroy,Romania, xxxiv (1905), 534. The troubadoursalso insistedthat the sins ofChristians hinderedthe launchingof-a new crusade. See K. Lewent, Das altprovenzalischeKreuzlied, p. 66. 4See Roger de Wendover,Flores historiarum,ed. H. G. Hewlett (Rolls Series LXXXVII: London, 1887), ii, 370, 371. 379 This content downloaded from 159.149.103.9 on Sat, 03 Oct 2015 22:37:23 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 380 Criticismof Papal CrusadePolicy erickii, excommunicatedand most thoroughlydamned by the Church,1and the humiliatingdefeat of St Louis,2 who was embarrassinglyfree of sin, peccatis exigentibusseemed somewhat inadequate to the more thoughtfulamong the devout, who found their only refugein the inscrutabilityof God.3 Yet God's inscrutabilityalways remainedcold comfortto those not blessedwith profound faith,and some of the troubadourswere certainlynot so blessed. Even during the twelfthcentury the Monk of Montaudon reproachedGod for permitting the failureof the much-admiredcrusader Richard Lionheart.'He is a foolwho followsYou into battle,' he informedthe Deity.4 Several thirteenth-century troubadoursopenly and vigorouslyproclaimed their disgust with the Almighty forpermitting the failureof crusades,5 nor is thereany evidencethat theysought consolationin the thoughtthat the failurewas just punishmentfor a sinful Christendom. The Church needed and found a less abstract explanation.With complete truththe clergymaintained that a fundamentalcause of the failureof the cru- sades lay in the quarrels among Christianrulers. Throughout the twelfthand thirteenthcenturies a wranglingChristendom was admonishedto make peace and presenta united frontto the hated infidel.6True enough,this defenseis nothingmore than a concreteapplication of peccatisexigentibus. The quarrels of the leaders obviouslyarose fromsins of greed,vanity, etc., but by placing the responsibilityupon certainpersons at certaintimes, the defensemust have becomefar more convincing to the ordinaryperson. Those writingin Old French and Provengalfound this explanationmuch to theirtaste. With indignantre- proofor sly mockery,they rebukedthe quarrelsomerulers who sacrificedthe welfareof the Holy Land fortheir private animosities.7 There were yet bolder criticswho ascribed to the papacy itselfthe reverses which overtookthe Holy Land duringthe thirteenthcentury. The pope, these declared, sent crusades against his enemies in Europe, not against Christ's enemiesin the East.8 Long beforethis, indeed as early as the eleventhcentury, I R. Rbhricht,Beitrdge zur Geschichteder Kreuzzilge(Berlin, 1874), i, 4 ff. 2 L. Brehier,L'eglise et l'Orientau moyen&ge: les croisades(5th edition,Paris, 1928), pp. 922-227, 237-238. 3 Humbert of Romans wroteto Gregoryx ca 1279 and reporteddoubts raised by the death of Louis ix whileon his crusade.Humbert stated: 'I do not knowby what secretjudgment God permits in our timesfrequent misfortunes to occurto crusadersfighting the Saracens,' Humbertof Romans, Opus Tripartitum,ed. E. Brown,Appendix ad fasciculumrerum expetendarum et fugiendarum prout ab OrthuinoGratio ... editus (London, 1690), p. 19g. For the dating of the Opus Tripartitum,see K. Michel, Das Opus Tripartitumdes Humbertusde Romanis (Graz, 1926), p. 11 ff. 4 Monk of Montaudon, L'autrierfui en paradis, ed. 0. Klein, Die Dichtungendes Monchsvon Montaudon(Ausgaben und Abhandlungenaus demGebiete der romanischen Philologie, Heft vii: Mar- burg, 1885), p. 34. Klein dates this poem betweenJune 29, 1193 and February4, 1194. See p. 31. 5K. Lewent, op. cit., p. 7. 6 L. J.Paetow, 'The crusadingardor of Johnof Garland,' TheCrusades and OtherHistorical Essay8 Presentedto Dana C. Munro by His FormerStudents, ed. L. J. Paetow (New York, 1928), p. 214. 7 For a list of rulersreproved by the troubadours,see K. Lewent,Das altprovenzalischeKreuzlied, p. 65. 8 It is a curiousfact that in the thirteenthcentury nearly all criticismsof this sortwritten in the vernacularcame fromFrance, Italy, and Spain. Of the poets writingin German,it seems that only This content downloaded from 159.149.103.9 on Sat, 03 Oct 2015 22:37:23 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Criticismof Papal CrusadePolicy 381 therehad been denunciationsof the pope foroffering spiritual rewards to armies fightinghis European foes. In the eleventhcentury, however, when Leo ix and Gregoryvii were endeavoringto make theocracya political reality,objections had revolvedabout the questionof how farthe use ofarmed force was consonant with Christianity.1Although this vital questionwas stillraised in the thirteenth century,2the crusade ideal preached by Urban ii in 1095 shiftedthe centerof controversy.Urban insistedthat Christianshould no longerwage war against Christian:all forcesshould combine against the Moslem,the enemyof all Chris- tians.3This ideal, upheldin generalby the popes ofthe twelfthcentury, fell into increasingneglect during the thirteenth.4Christian crusaded against Christian, whilethe Saracen triumphedin the Holy Land. This changeof policy brought forth a stormof denunciation in Old Frenchand Provengalpoetry.5 Although a few of the clergyjoined in this chorusof discon- tent,the greaterpart of the criticismcame fromlaymen. A tailor,a merchant, a judge, courtpoets, and simpleknights expressed their views with more force than courtesy.Not onlywere these criticsfrom all walks of life,they were from Walthervon der Vogelweideand Freidankcriticized the papacy, but even thesewriters did not offer the sortof criticismdiscussed in this paper, namely,that the papacy had misdirectedthe crusades. It is trueWalther von der Vogelweideaccused the papacy of fosteringcivil war in the Empire while taxing it and drainingit of silver.See 'Aht,wie kristenllchenfi der babest lachet,' ed. K. Lachman, Die GedichteWalthers von der Vogelweide (Berlin, 1875), p. 34. He also called the pope the 'new Judas' and declaredthe clergyhad become warriors.See 'Wir klagen alle' and 'Ich saz fifeine steine,'ed. K. Lachman,pp.