Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:12:55.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Beyond Eurocentrism and Orientalism: Revisiting the Othering of Jews and Muslims through medieval canon law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 December 2015

Julia Costa Lopez
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

While the historical turn in IR has produced significant advances in historicising both international relations and the discipline itself, the way in which the Middle Ages have been approached, studied, and referenced even in this historically-informed scholarship unwittingly works to reinforce two myths that these scholars challenge: Eurocentrism and Orientalism. The main goal of this article is to problematise the uses of the medieval that reinforce these narratives by unpacking the linguistic and conceptual constructions that underpinned the interactions between Latin Christendom and rest of the world. In doing so, it makes two closely-connected arguments: first, drawing from the abundant literature on historical sociology and Eurocentrism, it argues that we cannot understand medieval Europe, and particularly European identity-formation, without paying attention to its relations with the non-Christian world. Secondly, and most crucially, it shows that these interactions never rested on the unified idea of an ‘infidel enemy’ that seems to emanate from the IR crusading literature. Rather, an examination of the constructions of Jews and Muslims in canon law shows an extremely nuanced and varied conceptual apparatus that creates several dynamics of Othering – and consequently allows for a variety of ways of relating ranging from toleration and coexistence to conquest.

Type
Articles
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 42 , Issue 3 , July 2016 , pp. 450 - 470
Copyright
© 2015 British International Studies Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Research for this article was supported by La Caixa Foundation and the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Oxford. A previous version of this article was presented at the 2015 ISA Annual Convention. I am grateful to Xavier Guillaume and Amélie Barras, as well as to the other attendants to the panel for their helpful feedback. Special thanks to Quentin Bruneau, Oscar Costa, Edward Keene, Nivi Manchanda, Katharine Millar, Ellen Jenny Ravndal, Michael Sampson, and Claire Vergerio for their generous readings, and helpful comments and suggestions on earlier versions. Thanks also to three anonymous RIS reviewers whose insightful engagement greatly improved this piece.

References

1 Hobden, Stephen and Hobson, John M. (eds), Historical Sociology of International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)Google Scholar; Bell, Duncan, ‘International relations: the dawn of a historiographical turn?’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 3:1 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Wight, Martin, ‘Why is there no international theory?’, in Herbert Butterfield and Martin Wight (eds), Diplomatic Investigations: Essays in the Theory of International Politics (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1966), p. 26Google Scholar.

3 Some useful starting points in this literature are Hobden and Hobson, Historical Sociology of International Relations; Reus-Smit, Christian, The Moral Purpose of the State (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999)Google Scholar; Buzan, Barry and Little, Richard, International Systems in World History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000)Google Scholar; Rosenberg, Justin, The Empire of Civil Society: a Critique of the Realist Theory of International Relations (London: Verso, 1994)Google Scholar; Barkawi, Tarak, Globalization and War (Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield, 2006)Google Scholar.

4 The claim is not that all references to and work on the Middle Ages fall into both grand narratives. On the contrary, most of the Works that is examined below actively and successfully challenges at least one of them. The contention here is that in doing so, a significant number of scholars have indirectly reinforced either one or the other, and as such, the imaginary that emerges from the total corpus suffers from both.

5 Barkawi, Tarak and Laffey, Mark, ‘The postcolonial moment in security studies’, Review of International Studies, 32:2 (2006), p. 331CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Hobson, John M., Eurocentric Conception of World Politics: International Theory, 1760–2010 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hobson, John M., The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wallerstein, Immanuel Maurice, European Universalism: the Rhetoric of Power (New York, London: New Press, 2006)Google Scholar; Gruffydd Jones, Branwen (ed.), Decolonizing International Relations (Plymouth: Rowman & Littlefield, 2006)Google Scholar; Shilliam, Robbie (ed.), International Relations and Non-Western Thought: Imperialism, Colonialism, and Investigations of Global Modernity, Interventions (London: Routledge, 2011)Google Scholar.

7 For stylistic reasons, ‘Latin Christendom’, ‘the West’, ‘(Western) Europe’, and ‘Christianity’ will be used as synonyms throughout this article to refer to the polities located in the westernmost peninsula of Eurasia that accepted the authority of the Roman Church. This is far from ideal, particularly as not only are these concepts in themselves controversial, and their meanings distinct and changing, but equating them possibly reinforces the Orientalist narrative that this article seeks to challenge by presenting ‘Europe’ as a timeless continuum.

8 Osiander, Andreas, Before the State: Systemic Political Change in the West from the Greeks to the French Revolution (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Phillips, A., War, Religion and Empire: The Transformation of International Orders (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Teschke, Benno, The Myth of 1648: Class, Geopolitics, and the Making of Modern International Relations (London: Verso, 2003), p. 98Google Scholar.

10 Bhambra, Gurminder K., Rethinking Modernity: Postcolonialism and the Sociological Imagination (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Hall, Rodney Bruce and Kratochwil, Friedrich V., ‘Medieval tales: Neorealist “science” and the abuse of history’, International Organization, 47:3 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hall, Rodney Bruce, ‘Moral authority as a power resource’, International Organization, 51:4 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Alkopher, Tal Dingott, ‘The social (and religious) meanings that constitute war: the crusades as realpolitik vs. socialpolitik’, International Studies Quarterly, 49:4 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Alkopher, Tal Dingott, ‘The role of rights in the social construction of wars: From the crusades to humanitarian interventions’, Millennium – Journal of International Studies, 36:1 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 Latham, Andrew A., ‘Theorizing the crusades: Identity, institutions, and religious war in Medieval Latin Christendom’, International Studies Quarterly, 55:1 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Latham, Andrew A., Theorizing Medieval Geopolitics: War and World Order in the Age of the Crusades (New York: Routledge, 2012)Google Scholar.

14 Latham, ‘Theorizing the crusades’, passim.

15 Alkopher, , ‘The role of rights’, p. 16Google Scholar.

16 Alkopher, ‘The social …’.

17 Davis, Kathleen, Periodization and Sovereignty: How Ideas of Feudalism and Secularization Govern the Politics of Time (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Indeed, a variety of authors see modernity as constitutive of the very idea of international relations, see Walker, R. B. J., Inside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993)Google Scholar; Jahn, Beate, The Cultural Construction of International Relations: the Invention of the State of Nature (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 The importance of a historicised understanding of the past for the exploration of the present is a recurring theme in both Historical Sociology and constructivist literature. See, for example, Hobden and Hobson, Historical Sociology of International Relations, particularly ch. 1 and Christian Reus-Smit’s chapter in the same volume.

20 Huntington, Samuel, ‘The clash of civilizations?’, Foreign Affairs, 72:3 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 Hobson, , The Eastern, p. 98Google Scholar.

22 Bowden, Brett, ‘The colonial origins of international law: European expansion and the classical standard of civilization’, Journal of the History of International Law, 7 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bowden, Brett, The Empire of Civilization: The Evolution of an Imperial Idea (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gong, Gerrit W., The Standard of ‘Civilization’ in International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984)Google Scholar; Halperin, Sandra, ‘International Relations theory and Western conceptions of modernity’, in Branwen Gruffydd Jones (ed.), Decolonizing International Relations (Plymouth: Rowman & Littlefield, 2006)Google Scholar.

23 For the training and professional careers of medieval lawyers see Brundage, James A., The Medieval Origins of the Legal Profession: Canonists, Civilians, and Courts (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Both Latham and Phillips, for example, emphasise the centrality of canon law. See Latham, Theorizing Medieval Geopolitics; Phillips, War, Religion, ...

25 Doty, Roxanne Lynn, Imperial Encounters: the Politics of Representation in North-South Relations, Borderlines (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996), p. 5Google Scholar.

26 Said, Edward W., Orientalism (London: Penguin Books, 2003)Google Scholar; Todorov, Tzvetan, The Conquest of America: the Question of the Other (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1999)Google Scholar; Neumann, Iver B., ‘Self and Other in International Relations’, European Journal of International Relations, 2:2 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Campbell, David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity (rev. edn, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1998)Google Scholar.

27 The literature on the legal status of Jews in the Roman Empire is vast. A good starting point is Linder, Amnon, ‘The legal status of the Jews in the Roman Empire’, in Steven T. Katz (ed.), The Cambridge History of Judaism, Vol. 4: The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006)Google Scholar.

28 Despite the extensive historical literature that points to the fundamental role of Jews in the production of Christian identity since at least the Middle Ages, IR scholarship has largely ignored these dynamics.

29 For a more extended analysis of the Agustinian image of the Jew, as well as for the evolution of this tradition in the Early Middle Ages see Cohen, Jeremy, Living Letters of the Law: Ideas of the Jew in Medieval Christianity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999)Google Scholar, esp. ch. 1.

30 Innocent III, Constitutio Pro Judeis, trans. and ed. in Grayzel, Solomon, The Church and the Jews in the XIIIth Century (New York: Hermon Press, 1966)Google Scholar, fn. 5

31 Abulafia, Anna Sapir, Christians and Jews in the Twelfth-Century Renaissance (London and New York: Routledge, 1995), pp. 65–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For the evolution of the idea before the twelfth century, see Gilchrist, John, ‘The perception of Jews in the canon law in the period of the first two crusades’, Jewish History, 3:1 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 C.24, q.8, c.11. All translations in this article are my own, except for where explicitly indicated. I follow the traditional system for citation of canon law. Thus, for Gratian’s Decretum, D.1, c.2 corresponds to distinction 1, ch. 2; and the citation at the beginning of this footnote corresponds to causa 24, quaestio 8, canon 11. For the Liber Extra, X.1.7.15 indicates Book 1, Title 7, Chapter 15. For more information on the canon law citation system see Brundage, James A., Medieval Canon Law (London and New York: Longman, 1995), pp. 190–197Google Scholar. Citations from the text in the Decretum and the Liber Extra are based on Emil Friedberg, Corpus Iuris Canonici, 2 vols, vol. 2 (Leipzig, 1878). Citations of the ordinary gloss are based on the Roman edition of 1582.

33 Cited with some slight modifications in Abulafia, David, ‘The servitude of Jews and Muslims in the medieval mediterranean: Origins and diffusion’, Mélanges de l’Ecole française de Rome, 112 (2000), p. 693Google Scholar.

34 Walker, Inside/Outside; Bartelson, Jens, A Genealogy of Sovereignty (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35 Keene, Edward, International Political Thought: a Historical Introduction (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2005)Google Scholar.

36 See, for example, Powell, James M. (ed.), Muslims Under Latin Rule, 1100–1300 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014)Google Scholar.

37 Discussions about the origin of the name of the community emphasised that although Muslims called themselves Saracens after Sarah, they actually descended from Abraham’s slave Hagar, and as such were better called Hagarens. In doing so, they were not only putting emphasis on the inferior origin of the group and thus placing Muslims in a subordinate position, but also pointing to and ridiculing Muslim arrogance in calling themselves descendants of Sarah.

38 Henricus de Segusio (Hostiensis), Summa aurea to X 5.6 (Venice, 1574) Also in Ramon de Penyafort, Summa de Poenitentia 1.4.1 (Farnborough: Gregg Press, 1967) and in Bernardus Papiensis, Summa decretalium, 5.5, ed. Ernst Adolph Theodor Laspeyres (Graz: Akademische Druck-u. Verlagsanstalt, 1956 [orig. pub. 1860]).

39 Said, Orientalism; Doty, Imperial, p. 7.

40 Samaritanism is a religion closely related to Judaism based only on the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible). For more on the Samaritans see Schur, Nathan, History of the Samaritans (2nd edn, Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 1992)Google Scholar.

41 One notable, and certainly not casual, exception is again Alfonso X’s Siete Partidas, which states that: ‘The Moors are a people who believe that Mohammed was the Prophet and Messenger of God’, at 7.25.0, trans. and ed. in Robert I. Burns and Samuel Parsons Scott, Las Siete Partidas, Volume 5: Underworlds: The Dead, The Criminal, and the Marginalized (Partidas VI and VII) (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001), p. 1438. After this, however, it proceeds with an almost literal transcription of the standard legal definition seen above (7.25.1).

42 Hostiensis, Summa aurea 5.5 v. Qui sunt.

43 Indeed, the prevalent trend among theologians was to classify Muslims as heretic. Tolan, John, ‘“Cel Sarrazins me semblet mult hérite”, L’hétérodoxie de l’autre comme justification de conquête (XIe–XIIIe siècles)’, Actes de la Société des historiens médiévistes de l’enseignement supérieur public, 33:1 (2002)Google Scholar.

44 Freidenreich, David M., ‘Muslims in Western canon law, 1000–1500’, in David Thomas et al. (eds), Christian-Muslim Relations: a Bibliographical History (Leiden: Brill, 2011), p. 42Google Scholar.

45 D.56, c.10

46 Cited in Zacour, Norman, Jews and Saracens in the Consilia of Oldradus de Ponte (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1990), p. 17Google Scholar, fn. 55.

47 Ibid., p. 22.

48 C.23, q.8, c.11.

49 Johannes Teutonicus, Glossa ordinaria to C.23, q.8, c.11 v. persequuntur. ‘It is clear therefore that if Saracens do not persecute Christians we cannot attack them. For we can certainly eat with them … And the law [Roman law] says that if they live quietly we should not harm them.’ The reference to ‘not harming them’ shows the cross-fertilisation between canon and Roman law, as it is an explicit reference to Cod. 1.11.6, which establishes that law-abiding Jews and pagans that live quietly should not be harmed.

50 Antonio García y García, Constitutiones Concilii quarti Lateranensis una cum commentariis glossatorum, Monumenta iuris canonici. Series A, Corpus glossatorum (Città del Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1981), p. 109.

51 C.11, q.3, c.24 and C.23, q.4, c.17. For more on commensality between Christians and non-Christians see Freidenreich, David M., ‘Fusion cooking in an Islamic milieu: Jewish and Christian jurists on food associated with foreigners’, in David M. Freidenreich and Miriam Goldstein (eds), Beyond Religious Borders: Interaction and Intellectual Exchange in the Medieval Islamic World (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Freidenreich, David M., ‘The food of the damned’, in Mohammad Hasan Khalil (ed.), Between Heaven and Hell: Islam, Salvation and the Fate of Others (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013)Google Scholar; Freidenreich, David M., ‘Sharing meals with non-Christians in canon law commentaries, circa 1160–1260: a case study in legal development’, Medieval Encounters, 14:1 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

52 Huguccio, Summa decretorum, on C.11, q.3, c.24 v. Omnes, cited in Freidenreich, ‘Sharing meals’, pp. 59–60.

53 Zacour directly suggests that this is the primary way in which canonists conceived of Others, and Muldoon seems to also point in that direction. Zacour, Jews and Saracens; Muldoon, James, Popes, Lawyers, and Infidels: the Church and the Non-Christian World, 1250–1550 (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1979)Google Scholar.

54 Doty, Imperial.

55 Summa animal est substantia, on D.54, c.13 v. Mancipia, ed. E. C. Coppens available at: {http://www.medcanonlaw.nl/Animal_est_substantia/Introduction.html} last accessed 26 August 2015.

56 For example, Ramon de Penyafort, Summa de poenitentia 1.4.1 defined Jews as ‘those who follow literally the law of Moses, and practice circumcision and everything else that is prescribed by that law [alia legalia faciendo]’. For more on the identification of Jews with a literal interpretation of the Bible see Cohen, Living Letters.

57 See Freidenreich, ‘Sharing meals’ for more examples.

58 Innocent III, Etsi iudeos, trans. and ed. in Grayzel, The Church, no. 18.

59 D.54, c.14.

60 D.54, c.13.

61 For the anthropological concept of pollution see Douglas, Mary, Purity and Danger: an Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo (London: Routledge, 2002)Google Scholar.

62 To this effect: D.54, c.14

63 IV Lateran Council, canon 68 in García y García, Constitutiones, p. 107.

64 For more on this topic see Tolan, John, ‘Of milk and blood: Innocent III and the Jews, revisited’, in Elisheva Baumgarten and Judah D. Galinsky (eds), Jews and Christians in Thirteenth-Century France (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015)Google Scholar.

65 For an IR reference to this see Neumann, Iver B. and Welsh, Jennifer, ‘The other in European self-definition: an addendum to the literature on international society’, Review of International Studies, 17:4 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

66 Matthew, 28.19.

67 For an in-depth analysis of this text see Muldoon, Popes; Muldoon, James, ‘Extra ecclesiam non est imperium: the canonists and the legitimacy of secular power’, Studia Gratiana, 9 (1966)Google Scholar.

68 Hostiensis commentary on the same passage did indeed argue for this position. Apparatus on 3.34.8.

69 Sinibaldo dei Fieschi (Innocent IV) Commentaria doctissima in quinque libros decretalium on 3.34.8. (Frankfurt, 1570).

70 For more on natural rights see Tierney, Brian, The Idea of Natural Rights: Studies on Natural Rights, Natural Law, and Church Law, 1150–1625 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997)Google Scholar.

71 Innocent IV, Commentaria on 3.34.8

72 D.45, c.5, trans. Jessie Sherwood.

73 Johannes de Ancona, Summa iuris canonici on 3.34.8 cited in Kedar, Benjamin, ‘Muslim conversion and canon law’, in Stephan Kuttner and Kenneth Pennington (eds), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference of Medieval Canon Law, Berkeley 1980 (Città del Vaticano, 1985), p. 329Google Scholar.

74 The literature on medieval tolerance in not only canon law but also theology is vast. The classical study is Lecler, Joseph, Histoire de la tolérance au siècle de la Réforme (Paris: Aubier, 1955)Google Scholar, and for juristic elaborations on tolerance Condorelli, Mario, I fondamenti giuridici della tolleranza religionsa nell’elaborazione canonistica dei secoli XII–XIV (Milano: Dott. A. Giuffrè, 1960)Google Scholar. A more recent starting point from the perspective of political theory is Nederman, Cary J., Worlds of Difference: European Discourses of Toleration c.1100–c.1500 (University Park, Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000)Google Scholar.

75 Along with Innocent IV’s discussion of the same issue mentioned above, this constitutes one of the few texts of the canonistic tradition that have been examined by IR scholars. See, for example, Bowden, The Empire of Civilization.

76 Hostiensis, Apparatus super quinque libros decretalium on 3.34.8 v. rursus (Strasbourg, 1512).

77 See Sapir Abulafia, Christians and Jews.

78 Cohen, Living Letters. p. 51.

79 Raimon de Penyafort, Summa de poenitentia, 1.4.1

80 Innocent III, Constitutio pro Judeis in Grayzel, The Church, fn. 5, emphasis added.

81 Zacour, Jews and Saracens, number 72, pp. 47–53.

82 Ibid., pp. 50–1.

83 Hobson, The Eastern; Buzan and Little, International Systems in World History; Teschke, The Myth ..., p. 96.

84 Abulafia, David, ‘The role of trade in Muslim-Christian contact during the Middle Ages’, in D. Agius and R. Hitchcock (eds), The Arab Influence in Medieval Europe (Reading, Beirut: Folia Scolastica Mediterranea, 1994)Google Scholar.

85 For a detailed evolution of papal regulation of trade, see Stefan K. Stantchev, Spiritual Rationality: Papal Embargo as Cultural Practice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), p. 41 ff. See also Menache, Sophia, ‘Papal attempts at a ommercial boycott of the Muslims in the crusader period’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 63:2 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

86 Carr, Mike, ‘Crossing boundaries in the Mediterranean: Papal trade licences from the Registra supplicationum of Pope Clement VI (1342–52)’, Journal of Medieval History, 41:1 (2014), pp. 119Google Scholar, and doc. 21 in the appendix.

87 Stantchev, Spiritual, pp. 56–7.

88 Ibid., pp. 61–2.

89 See Stefan K. Stantchev, ‘Embargo: the origins of an idea and the implications of a policy in Europe and the Mediterranean, ca. 1100–ca. 1500’ (Phd thesis, University of Michigan, 2009); Stantchev, Spiritual.

90 Carr, ‘Crossing boundaries’, p. 116.

91 Hobson, The Eastern.

92 Quaglioni, Diego, ‘“Christianis Infesti”: Una mitologia giuridica dell’età intermedia: l’ebreo come “nemico interno”’, Quaderni Fiorentini per la Storia del Pensiero Giuridico Moderno, 38:1 (2009)Google Scholar.

93 Pennington, Kenneth, The Prince and the Law, 1200–1600: Sovereignty and Rights in the Western Legal Tradition (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993)Google Scholar; Tierey, The Idea of Natural Rights.

94 The work of James Muldoon is key point of reference. See Muldoon, Popes; Muldoon, James, ‘The contribution of medieval canon lawyers to the formation of international law’, Traditio, 28 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Muldoon, James, ‘Papal responsibility for the infidel: another look at Alexander VI’s Inter Caetera’, Catholic History Review, 64:2 (1978)Google Scholar.