P. Bruns, G. Gresser (Hg.): Vom Schisma zu den Kreuzzügen (J. S. C. Riley-Smith)

• Text
• Metadata
• PDF

Francia-Recensio 2008/4 Mittelalter – Moyen Âge (500–1500)

Peter Bruns, Georg Gresser (Hg.), Vom Schisma zu den Kreuzzügen. 1054–1204, Paderborn (Ferdinand Schöningh) 2005, 271 p., ISBN 3-506-72891-1, EUR 29,90.

rezensiert von/compte rendu rédigé par

Jonathan Riley-Smith, Cambridge

The ten papers published in this collection were read in 2004 at a Symposium in Bamberg, which commemorated two dramatic episodes in the histories of the Latin and Greek Churches, the nine hundredth and Fiftienth anniversary of the putative start of the Great Schism between eastern and western Christianity and the eight hundredth anniversary of the taking of Constantinople by the Fourth Crusade. It was an imaginative and fruitful idea to bring the two anniversaries into closer association. Three papers relate to the schism of 1054 itself. Georgij Avvakumov and Peter Gemeinhardt consider respectively Azymes and the Filioque Clause, the issues which were in the forefront of debate, while Axel Bayer puts the events in a historiographical context. Three papers are concerned with the Fourth Crusade. Christian Lange traces the twelfth-century background in terms of Byzantine understanding, or perhaps misunderstanding, of western crusaders. Ansgar Frenken questions whether the sack of Constantinople had a significant effect on the relationship between the churches in the longer term. Peter Vrankić tries to explain what led to the initial diversion of the crusade to Zadar on the Dalmatian coast. Two papers deal with the attitudes of the Levantine indigenous peoples. Peter Bruns draws attention to references to the crusades in Syrian Christian sources and Axel Havemann analyzes the jihad propaganda of the Muslims who confronted the Latin Christian settlements. Georg Gresser tries to establish when and why Urban II came up with the original plan to crusade in 1095, arguing that it cannot have been before the council of Piacenza, while Josef Johannes Schmid draws attention to those liturgical elements surrounding Frankish monarchy which were similar to Byzantine practices.

The coverage is interesting and the approach of the contributors intelligent, but some of the positions they take are quite conventional. This would not make them wrong, of course, and Avvakumov is probably right to stress the importance to doctrinal disputes of underlying cultural differences, even if he may exaggerate it. On the other hand, Gresser’s revival of the link between the First Crusade and the search for peace in the West, first proposed by Paul Rousset over sixty years ago, is questionable. The reemergence of the Truce of God and its association with the proclamation of a war-pilgrimage is probably to be explained by the fact that Pope Urban knew that chaos would ensue if the western magnates abandoned their districts to go crusading. It is, moreover, no longer convincing for a historian of the First Crusade to build an argument on a relatively limited body of evidence, particularly now that so much new material is being used by others. Lange’s case presupposes that the assault of the Fourth Crusade on Constantinople was inevitable, which it was not. Vrankić revives old questions about the responsibility for the diversion, without drawing enough attention to the fact that everyone believed that the crusade was originally to be directed not to Palestine but to Egypt. By concentrating his attention on the crusades themselves at the expense of the Latin East, Bruns does not allow his readers to understand that his sources are now proving to be of crucial importance to our knowledge of the internal history of the least known of the settlements, the county of Edessa.

In my opinion the most effective contributions are those of Bayer, Frenken, Gemeinhardt and Havemann. In the course of a useful survey, Bayer draws attention to the divisions within the Greek church itself in the middle of the eleventh century. Frenken argues for the importance of the theological issues in the centuries following 1204, pointing out that although memories of the sack of Constantinople certainly led to less willingness to resolve them, its historical significance was secondary. Havemann’s careful analysis shows how the aims of jihad changed over time. Gemeinhardt’s innovative paper sets out to restore the importance of 1054 as a turning point in the relations between the churches and he shows how the next generation of theologians was galvanized by the drama of the event to develop their respective positions. This is a useful, if somewhat variable, collection of papers. Every author has something useful to say. The best are very good indeed.