This article analyzes the targets of papal policies on Christians' relations with non-(Roman)Christians contained in canon law's On Jews, Saracens, and Their Servants in a historical period that has attracted comparatively little attention: the mid-thirteenth to the late fifteenth century. It argues the inherent ambiguity of the normative discourse on “proper” relations with “infidels.” On the one hand, popes and canonists faithfully preserved a taxonomy of otherness inherited from the church's ancient past. On the other hand, they often reduced all difference to the pastoral distinction between flock and “infidels.” The conflation of non-Christians occurred in multiple ways: through the explicit extension of a specific policy's targets, overt canonistic discussion, the tacit application of the law to analogous situations, or its simplification for use in the confessional. As a result, a number of policies aimed originally at a specific target were applied to all non-Christians. In the course of the later Middle Ages, a whole group of policies meant to define Christians' proper relations with others became potentially applicable against all non-Christians. In the words of a widely, if regionally disseminated, penitential work, all that was said of the Jews applies to the Muslims and all that was said of heretics, applies to schismatics.
1. The title of this work comes from: “Quod dictum est de iudeis, per omnia intellige de sarracenis….” Renard Jean Pierre, ed., Trois sommes de pénitence de la première moitié du XIIIe siècle, Vol. II (Louvain-la Neuve: Centre Cerfaux-Lefort, 1989), 87. On “Saracens,” see Tolan John V., Saracens. Islam in the Medieval European Imagination (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002).
2. Renard, Trois sommes de pénitence, II:87, 90. In turn, much of the legislation aimed at the former group also applied to the latter and vice-versa, as will become clear.
3. Pakter Walter, Medieval Canon Law and the Jews (Ebelsbach: Gremer, 1988), Kisch Guido, The Jews in Medieval Germany. A Study of Their Legal and Social Status (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1949); Colorni Vittore, Gli ebrei nel sistema del diritto comune fino alla prima emancipazione (Milan: Giuffrè, 1956); and also, Colorni Vittore, Legge ebraica e leggi locali (Milan: Giuffrè, 1945). A footnote cannot do justice to the vast literature on the subject of Christian–Jewish relations in the Middle Ages. In general, one can start from Chazan's Robert overview, The Jews of Medieval Western Christendom, 1000–1500 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006); and Cohen Mark, Under Crescent and Cross. The Jews in the Middle Ages (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), which explains the condition of Jews under Christian and Muslim rule, arguing their comparatively less stable position in the former case. Much has been done to make the sources of Jewish history widely accessible. Notable examples are Linder Amnon, ed., The Jews in the Legal Sources of the Early Middle Ages (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1997); Grayzel Solomon, The Church and the Jews in the XIIIth Century, Vols. I (New York: Hermon Press, 1966); and II (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1989); and the multi-volume Simonsohn Shlomo, ed., The Jews in Sicily (Leiden: Brill, 1997-). For the outset of the subsequent period, see Stow Kenneth R., Catholic Thought and Papal Jewry Policy, 1555–1593 (New York: The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1977). The relationship between ideas underpinning the canon law on the subject, broader economic, social, and political developments, and the analytical usefulness of the long period itself for assessing actual Christian–Jewish relations, has generated much debate. Cohen Jeremy, The Friars and the Jews. The Evolution of Medieval Anti-Judaism (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1982) has shown the emergence of a polemical discourse, which contrasted the stylized, ahistorical Jew of Christian theology with contemporary Jews, found the latter deviant, and hence undermined the ancient assumption that Christians ought to tolerate the existence of Jews in their midst. Moore Robert I., The Formation of a Persecuting Society (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2007) argues for the high medieval transformation of European society from one in which persecution occasionally occurred, into one that functioned through persecution. Nirenberg David, Communities of Violence. Persecution of Minorities in the Middle Ages (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996) finds the long period of little use, and argues that polemical discourses about Jews resulted in no forward thrust toward an ever more pronounced anti-Judaism. For multiple approaches to the subject of violence, see Abulafia Anna Sapir, ed., Religious Violence between Christians and Jews (New York: Palgrave, 2002). There can be little doubt that the content of the law could be made to bear upon social life—however slowly and with however varied outcomes—through the concerted efforts of preachers, see Hughes Diane Owen, “Distinguishing Signs: Ear-Rings, Jews and Franciscan Rhetoric in the Italian Renaissance City,” Past and Present 112 (1986): 3–59.
4. Kessler Edward, An Introduction to Jewish–Christian Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 107.
5. On the latter point, see also Langmuir Gavin I., “Tanquam Servi:' The Change in Jewish Status in French Law about 1200,” in his Toward a Definition of Antisemitism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990), 167–94, which provides a broader overview of the problem than the title suggests; and Carpenter Dwayne E., Alfonso X and the Jews: an Edition of and Commentary on Siete Partidas 7.24 “De los judíos” (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986). Langmuir's work also briefly presents the debate of the emergence, spread, and meaning of the notion of Jewish servitude, which has been central to debates on the subject: did the concept of the Jews' “servitude” and their place under royal authority (chamber serfdom or not) undermine their legal status more than it enhanced their security (by placing them directly under royal protection)? The latter part of the question can in turn be addressed in terms of both royal protection and royal violence (arbitrary taxation, expulsion). For further implications of the Jews' dependence on royal power see Nirenberg, Communities of Violence, ch. 2–4.
6. Some have argued that Western laws were largely inspired by Islamic law's treatment of dhimmīs populations, whereas others argued that the Islamic law on the subject had itself been influenced by Roman law, or that it had evolved from Mohammad's treatment of Jewish tribes in Arabia. See, respectively, Boisard Marcel A., “On the Probable Influence of Islam on Western Public and International Law,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 11(4) (1980): 429–50, Coulson Noel J., A History of Islamic Law (Edinburgh: At the University Press, 1964), 27 and Ye'or Bat, The Dhimmi. Jews and Christians under Islam (London: Associated University Presses, 1985), 43–49; see also Allain Jean “Acculturation through the Middle Ages: the Islamic Law of Nations and Its Place in the History of International Law,” in Research Handbook on Theory and History of International Law, ed. Orakhelashvili Alexander (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2011), 394–407. Clearly, some Christian legislation predated the emergence of Islam (intermarriage, slave ownership, sharing of meals), other was contemporaneous with it (exclusion from public office), and other, again, was pioneered in Islamic lands (distinguishing signs). For an overview of Muslims' place in the law, see Freidenreich David, “Muslims in Western Canon Law, 1000–1500,” in Christian–Muslim Relations: A Bibliographical History, Vol. III, ed. Thomas David and Mallett Alex (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 41–68. The series itself aims at presenting work that is “written substantially about or against the other faith, or contains significant information or judgments that cast light on attitudes of one faith toward the other.” Ibid, viii. Brief presentations of the authors are followed by more detailed ones of their works' content, significance, extant manuscripts, editions, translations, and studies.
7. To the extent that any consensus concerning the actual condition of Christendom's Muslims as well as non-Christians at large has been achieved, it seems to award primacy to three factors: a given population's size (large Muslim communities in Iberia but small ones in Hungary, larger communities in Valencia than in the Ebro valley); that population's function within society (multifaceted as that of Iberian Jews or specialized as that of Jews in most of later medieval Europe); and its relationship to secular authorities (for example, Iberian Muslims were deemed indispensable in the thirteenth century, but were treated as disposable in contemporary Sicily). A nuanced view is not easily achieved, in part because one and the same body of evidence has been used to support contrasting positions. For nuanced views in the case of Iberia, see Nirenberg, Communities of Violence and Catlos Brian, The Victors and the Vanquished. Christians and Muslims of Catalonia and Aragon, 1050–1300 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004). For Sicily, see Abulafia David, Mediterranean Encounters, Economic, Religious, Political, 1100–1550 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000), especially #XII and XIII; and Abulafia David, Frederick II. A Medieval Emperor (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988). Overall, the literature on Muslim communities under Latin rule is both vast and fragmented. In general, see Powell James, ed., Muslims under Latin Rule, 1100–1300 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990), which covers Iberia, Italy, and the Holy Land. In addition, for Iberia, see also Burns Robert, Muslims, Christians, and Jews in the Crusader Kingdom of Valencia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984). For Hungary, see Berend Nora, At the Gate of Christendom. Jews, Muslims and ‘Pagans’ in Medieval Hungary, c.1000–c.1300 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001). The richness of the literature on the Italian maritime cities can easily surprise the nonspecialist, but it hardly offers systematic treatments of the subject. See, for a discussion of the labels applied to non-Catholics, Balard Michel, “Infidèles ou Comans? A propos des ‘Sarraceni’ de Caffa,” in La Storia dei Genovesi 8 (1988): 9–14. Highly original if not entirely convincing is the statistics-based approach to the subject of Ponomarev A. L., “Territorija i naselenie genuezscoj Caffe po dannim buhgalterskoj knighi – massarii kaznachejstva za 1381–1382 gg [Territory and Population of Genoese Caffa According to Data from the Account Book – Massaria for the Treasury for 1381–1382],” in Prichernomorie v Srednie veka, Vol. 4 [The Black Sea Region in the Middle Ages], ed. Karpov Sergej (St. Petersburg: Aleteja, 2000), 317–443.
8. For the role of this triad in early medieval writings, see Tolan, Saracens, 3–20. For “Saracens” as “pagans,” ibid., 126–27. In literature, “The alternation between ‘pagan’ and ‘Saracen’ is typically a poetic rather than a semantic choice—a matter of syllable count and assonance or rhyme.” Kinoshita Sharon and Calkin Siobhain Bly, “Saracens as idolaters in European vernacular literatures,” in Thomas and Mallett, Christian-Muslim Relations: A Bibliographical History, IV:29–44 (quotation at 32).
9. “Thus, when the canonists came to consider the situation of non-Christians who lived beyond the bounds of Christendom, they began by extending previous discussions of non-Christians living within Europe to fit the new peoples whom they encountered.” Muldoon James, Popes, Lawyers, and Infidels (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1979), 3.
10. Cameron Averil, “Jews and Heretics—A Category Error?” in The Ways That Never Parted: Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, ed. Becker Adam H. and Reed Annette Yoshiko (Minneapolis: Fortress Press 2007), 345–60. On the eastern canon law in general, see Hartmann Wilfried and Pennington Kenneth, The History of Byzantine and Eastern Canon Law to 1500 (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2012). On the place of Muslims in eastern (but excluding Byzantine) canon law, see Freidenreich David M., “Muslims in Eastern canon law, 1000–1500,” in Thomas and Mallett, Christian–Muslim Relations: A Bibliographical History, IV:45–57. “The Eastern Christian communities did not witness anything like the explosion of new legal material within he Roman Catholic Church during the High Middle Ages. Rather, Eastern canon law of the 11th through 15th centuries was conservative in all senses of that term.” “No Eastern Christian authority applies to Muslims laws that relate specifically to Jews….” Ibid., 46, 47–48, respectively.
11. See, most recently, Muldoon James, “From Frontiers to Borders: The Medieval Papacy and the Conversion of Those Along the Frontiers of Christendom,” Quaestiones Medii Aevi Novae 16 (2011): 101–21.
12. Freidenreich David M., “Sharing Meals with Non-Christians in Canon Law Commentaries, Circa 1160–1260: A Case Study in Legal Development,” Medieval Encounters 14 (2008): 41–77. As with Muldoon, the chief interest of Freidenreich lay elsewhere, see his Foreigners and Their Food. Constructing Otherness in Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Law (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2011).
13. On the rift between law and people qua human beings in a modern context, see Noonan John T. Jr., Persons and Masks of the Law (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), which is partly summarized in the following thought-provoking sentence: “At the points of a legal system where it is too much to recognize that a human being exists, a mask is employed,” 26.
14. New interpretations could not derive from changes in policy, but had to be crafted out of the body of preexisting texts: see Helmholz Richard H., “University Education and English Ecclesiastical Lawyers 1400–1650,” Ecclesiastical Law Journal 13(2) (2011): 132–45.
15. It is not my goal to deal with the origins of the law, the condition of non-Christians in the laws of secular rulers, or the degree to which daily life was made to conform to the canons. Nor does this article aim at comprehensive treatment of all laws on the subject. It excludes, for example, those on intermarriage and sexual relations, which were not discussed alongside the canons contained in X. 5.6, which are the subject of interest here. On marriage and sexual relations, see Brundage James, “Intermarriage between Christians and Jews in Medieval Canon Law,” Jewish History 3(1) (1988): 25–40, and Nirenberg David, “Conversion, Sex, and Segregation: Jews and Christians in Medieval Spain,” The American Historical Review 107(4) (2002): 1065–93.
16. Using individual papal letters and counciliar canons as found in modern, critical editions is adequate only when studying the specific cases and contexts of the original documents. In all other cases, one must consult the texts used by medieval lawyers, which were often heavily edited, and hence varied considerably from their original, full-length versions. “The canonists molded the papal letters which they put into their collections to their taste. They shortened them, added sentences, changed words, and summarized passages.” Pennington Kenneth, “The Making of a Decretal Collection: The Genesis of Compilatio Tertia,” in Pennington Kenneth, Popes, Canonists, and Texts, 1150–1550 (Aldershot: Ashgate Variorum, 1993), #8, 83.
17. See, for example, Bat-sheva Albert, “Isidore of Seville: His Attitude towards Judaism and His Impact on Early Medieval Canon Law,” The Jewish Quarterly Review 80(3–4) (1990): 207–20. On early medieval collections, see Kéry Lotte, Canonical Collections of the Early Middle Ages (ca. 400–1140). A Bibliographical Guide to the Manuscripts and Literature (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1999).
18. For law in the period: Bellomo Manlio, The Common Legal Past of Europe, 1000–1800 (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1995); Brundage James A., The Medieval Origins of the Legal Profession. Canonists, Civilians, and Courts (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008); Hartmann Wilfried and Pennington Kenneth, Medieval Canon Law in the Classical Period. From Gratian to the Decretals of Pope Gregory IX (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2008); and Helmholz Richard H., The Spirit of Classical Canon Law (Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press, 2010). For a guide to sources and studies, Gaudemet Jean, Les sources du droit canonique, VIIIe–XXe siècle (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1993), 59–173. The indispensable guide to the life and works of individual canonists is Kenneth Pennington's web site at http://faculty.cua.edu/Pennington/biobibl.htm (August 15, 2013). All biographical notes to canonists in this article are based on Pennington's web site, unless indicated otherwise. For a brief introduction to the reform see Bartlett Robert, The Making of Europe. Conquest, Colonization and Cultural Change, 950–1350 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993), 5–23, 243–55. For a detailed account, see Morris Colin, The Papal Monarchy. The Western Church from 1050–1250 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989). This is not the place to address the dynamics of the reform movement or the papal monarchy debate. It shall suffice to point out that determining the pope's position within the church meant, to a significant degree, specifying the pope's relations to all other bishops. As Pennington points out, a turning point was Innocent III's pontificate. See Pennington Kenneth, Pope and Bishops. The Papal Monarchy in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1984), ch. 1, revised in Pennington, Popes, Canonists, and Texts, #3. For the internal workings of the church, see Brentano Robert, Two Churches. England and Italy in the Thirteenth Century (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988).
19. On the Decretum, see Winroth Anders, The Making of Gratian's Decretum (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000); Landau Peter, “Gratian and the Decretum Gratiani,” in Hartmann and Pennington, Medieval Canon Law in the Classical Period, 22–54; and the literature cited therein. On the history of the papal title, including the positions of canonists and theologians, the chief sections in Maccarrone Michele, Vicarius Christi. Storia del titolo papale (Rome: Facultas Theologica Pontificii Athenaei Lateranensis, 1952) remain useful.
20. See, on the subject, Kuttner Stephan, “Raymond of Penafort as Editor: The ‘Decretales’ and ‘Constitutiones’ of Gregory IX,” Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law 12 (1982): 65–80. Raymond, who was later canonized, was Gregory's personal chaplain and penitentiary. In 1238 he became General of the Order of Preachers. The work was even translated; Puigarnau Jaime M. Mans, ed., Decretales de Gregorio IX versión medieval española (Barcelona: Universidad de Barcelona, 1943).
21. Melloni Alberto, Innocenzo IV. La concezione e l'esperienza della cristianità come regimen unius personae (Genoa: Marietti, 1990), 247–48.
22. On the formation and title of this section, see Kedar Benjamin, “De Iudeis et Sarracenis. On the categorization of Muslims in medieval canon law,” in Studia in honorem eminentissimi cardinalis Aplhonsi M. Stickler, ed. Lara Rosalio Joseph Castillo (Rome: Pontificia studiorum universitas salesiana, 1992), 207–13.
23. Table 1 is based on Friedberg Aemilius, Corpus Iuris Canonici (Graz: Akademische Druck- U. Verlagsanstalt, 1955 ), II, cols. 771–78. Henceforth Friedberg.
24. On the development of the law concerning Jews' slaves and servants, see Pakter, Medieval Canon Law and the Jews, 84–142, for the thirteenth-century canonists see 125–32 (slaves) and 132–39 (servants); and Colorni, Gli ebrei nel sistema del diritto comune, 36–39.
25. See Grayzel Solomon, “The Papal Bull Sicut Judeis,” in Studies and Essays in Honor of Abraham A. Neuman, ed. Ben-Horin Meir, Weinryb Bernard D., and Zeitlin Solomon (Leiden: Brill, 1962), 243–80.
26. On the law see Pakter, Medieval Canon Law and the Jews, 292–301, on its translation into iura propria and social realities, see Colorni, Gli ebrei nel sistema del diritto comune, 48–54 and Hughes, “Distinguishing Signs.” This type of discriminatory legislation first appeared in Islamic lands, in a treaty granted to Hira (Iraq) in 633, Ye'or, The Dhimmi, 47.
27. On the development of law concerning Jews in public office see Colorni, Gli ebrei nel sistema del diritto comune, 20–34 and Pakter, Medival Canon Law and the Jews, 221–47. Pakter, ididem, 240, n. 85 reproduces X. 5.6.18 and finds it to require the king to put Saracens and Jews who collect taxes “under Christian supervision,” ibidem, 241. I understand the canon differently, however, as the relevant section reads: “and if by chance he [the king] sells his revenues to Jews or to pagans, he ought then appoint a Christian not suspected of inflicting burdens upon clergymen and churches, through whom the Jews or Saracens may pursue the royal dues without injury to Christians” (“...et si forte reditus suos Iudaeis vendiderit vel paganis, Christianum tunc deputet de gravaminibus inferendis clericis et ecclesiis non suspectum, per quem Iudaei sive Sarraceni sine Christianorum iniuria iura regalia consequantur”). Pakter's reading of the canon leads him to see the papacy as relaxing this particular part of its Jewry legislation. I agree with Pakter that Jewish collectors must have been under Christian supervision at some level, but the point of the canon seems to be an altogether different one: cutting the physical/visible connection between the actual tax farmer (the non-Christian) and the taxpayers and hence removing the appearance of non-Christians as standing higher than Christians. Thus I find the policy not so much altered as adapted through a compromise that theoretically suited all three parties involved.
28. See Stantchev Stefan K.Spiritual Rationality. Papal Embargo as Cultural Practice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014, forthcoming), ch. 2.1.
29. On this canon, see Freidenreich, “Sharing Meals with Non-Christians,” 50–51.
30. Clem. 5.2. cap.un., Andreae Ioannis, In quintum Decretalium librum Novella Commentaria (Turin: Bottega d'Erasmo, 1963), V:43. On Johannes Andreae's Novella, see Kuttner Stephan, “Johannes Andreae and his ‘Novella’ on the Decretals of Gregory IX,” The Jurist 24 (1964): 393–408.
31. “Item principes catholici non debent in terris suis permittere sarracenos alta voce aliqua verba dicere in honorem Machometi nec aliquem sarracenum ut sanctum venerari.” da Asti Astesanus, Summa de casibus conscientiae (Nuremberg: Anton Koberger, 1482), Lib. II, Title 57.
32. On Bernard's glosses to the Decretals of Gregory IX, which were composed in four redactions, the first 1234–41, the final, 1263–66, see Kuttner Stephen and Smalley Beryl, “The ‘Glossa Ordinaria’ to the Gregorian decretals,” English Historical Review 60(1) (1945): 97–105.
33. For the internal forum of penance and for confession, see Sarah Hamilton, The Practice of Penance, 900–1050 (Suffolk: The Boydell Press, 2001); Goering Joseph, “The Internal Forum and the Literature of Penance and Confession,” in Hartmann and Pennington, Medieval Canon Law in the Classical Period, 379–428; and Salonen Kirsi, The Penitentiary as a Well of Grace in the Late Middle Ages. The Example of the Province of Uppsala 1448–1527 (Saarijärvi: Academia Scientiarum Fennica, 2001).
34. Raymond of Peñafort, Summa de Paenitentia (Rome: Commentarium pro religiosis, 1976) is preserved in 275 copies. This was the single most copied work of legal commentary throughout the high and late Middle Ages, Melloni, Innocenzo IV, 247–48. For an introduction to Hostiensis' work on the subject from the point of view of ecclesiastical jurisdiction over Jews, see Pakter, Medieval Canon Law and the Jews, 78–83.
35. One thing we can be certain about is that what Hostiensis wrote of “Saracens” would apply to pagans, and vice-versa, because he defines “Saracens” as “Those who worship and revere innumerable gods, goddesses, and demons, who acknowledge neither the new, nor the old Testament.” Hostiensis, Summa (Aalen: Scientia Verlag, 1962), f236v.
36. Hostiensis, Summa, f236r (#7); and Raymond of Peñafort, Summa de Paenitentia, col. 311.
37. Hostiensis, whose account is more to the point, concluded that as in the present the Saracens distinguished between foods [like Jews] “it is not licit [for Christians] to eat with them, be [those Saracens] subjects or enemies unless one is provided with a special license” or in case of utmost necessity. Hostiensis, Summa, f236v. On this subject, see Freidenreich, “Sharing Meals with Non-Christians.”
38. “In the lands of Christians, Jews and Saracens of either sex must wear clothes by way of which they be distinguished from the Christians.” Ioannis Andreae, Novella, V, p. 43, Panormitanus, Lectura super Tertio Quarto et Quinto Decretalium (Lyon: Jehan Petit, 1521–2), V, f38r. On Panormitanus see Orazio Condorelli, et., Niccolo Tedeschi (Abbas Panormitanus) e i suoi Commentaria in Decretales (Rome: Il Cigno Galilei, 2000).
39. Brieskorn Norbert, ed., Die Summa Confessorum des Johannes von Erfurt (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1980–81), 991.
40. Astesanus da Asti, Summa de casibus conscientiae, Lib. II, Title 57.
41. Ioannis Andreae, Novella, 43, and Die Summa Confessorum des Johannes von Erfurt, 988.
42. Panormitanus, Lectura, V, f38r.
43. On Henry, including bibliography on him and his work, see Maarten van der Heijden and Bert Roest, Franciscan Authors, 13th–18th Century: a Catalogue in Progress, http://users.bart.nl/~roestb/franciscan/franauth.htm#_Toc427570984 (April 8, 2013).
44. “Item non debent christiani cum iudeis comedere bibere habitare balneari nec medicinas eorum recipere nec recipere eos ad convivia.” “Item non debent permitti habere inter christianos seculares dignitates vel officia publica ne habeant occasionem saviendi in christianos.” “Conpelandi etiam sunt talem habitum vel signum deferre ut ab aliis distinguantur.” Henricus de Merseburg, Summa iuris canonici in compendium redacta, Robbins Collection, ms. 75, f63r.
45. Kisch, The Jews in Medieval Germany, 31, remarks on the connection between content and target audience.
46. On the employment of Jewish doctors, see Shatzmiller Joseph, Jews, Medicine, and Medieval Society (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994). On bathing, see Powers James F., “Frontier Municipal Baths and Social Interaction in Thirteenth-Century Spain,” The American Historical Review 84(3) (1979): 649–67; and Caskey Jill, “Steam and ‘Sanitas’ in the Domestic Realm: Baths and Bathing in Southern Italy in the Middle Ages,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 58(2) (1999): 170–95.
47. Renard, Trois sommes de pénitence, II: 85–87, at 87.
48. Bartholomaeus Pisanus (Bartholomaeus de Sancto Concordio), Summa de casibus conscientiae [Summa Pisana] (Venice: Nicolaus Girardengus de Novis, 1481), 170v–173v at 170v–171r.
49. Bartolomeo does link Jews and Saracens in the case of Christian slaves, while distingusihing between Jews and gentiles when dealing with rites/ceremonies. Summa Pisana, ff. 286v–287r.
50. Freidenreich, “Sharing Meals with Non-Christians,” 72; and Pakter, Medieval Canon Law and the Jews, 140.
51. Milway Michael, “Forgotten Best-Sellers from the Time of the Reformation,” in Continuity and Change: the Harvest of Late Medieval and Reformation History. Essays Presented to Heiko A. Oberman, ed. Bast Robert and Gow Andrew (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 142.
52. Bietenholz Peter G. and Deutscher Thomas B., eds., Contemporaries of Erasmus. A Biographical Register of the Renaissance and Reformation, Vols. 1–3 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995), 265.
53. “Tertio, ut ipsi a communione christianorum assidua abstineant ne simplices ab eis corrumpantur.” Hostiensis, Summa, f236r.
54. C. 28 q.1. c.12 (Friedberg, I, 1087).
55. “Thomas [see below] autem dicit quod illi qui sunt firmi in fide de quibus non timetur quod subvertantur sed potius quod convertant infideles possunt licite cum illis conversari et communicare sed hoc caute facere debeant ne scandalizentur alii.” Caracciolo Roberto, Sermones quadragesimales de peccatis (Venice: Andreas Torresanus de Asula, 1488), ff. 49v–50r.
56. Antoninus of Florence, Summa Theologica (Graz: Akademische Druck–U. Verlagsanstalt, 1959), II:1149.
57. Gilby Thomas, ed., Thomas Acquinas. Summa Theologiae (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006 ), 32:64–7 (2a2ae, 10, 9).
58. “Tertio consideramus saracenorum et mahumethanorum evitationem. Debent christiani evitare periculosa illorum consortia etiam advertant diligenter ne arma aut alia mercimonia eis deferant.” Caracciolo, Sermones quadragesimales de peccatis, f48v. Caracciolo cites X 5.6.6 and 17, as well as Nicholas IV's Olim (1291), all of which speak of trade.
59. “Nota primo, quod cum haereticis prohibita est etiam locutio fidelibus et hoc quia excommunicati sunt…Sed cum aliis infidelibus, ut Judaeis et Saracenis non est prohibita locucio, sed nimia familiaritas et conversatio.” Antoninus of Florence, Summa Theologica, II, col. 1149.
60. “La infedelita de pagani e de giudei e delli heretici e gravissimo peccato el quale mena adamnatione coloro che seguono tali errori. Non e bisogno dire che solo liheretici sieno excomunicati: ma etiam cogiudei non sidebbe havere domestica conversatione e maxime gligrossi et gliignoranti.” Tractato volgare del frate Antonino Arcivescovo di Firenze intitolato Defecerunt che insegna ai confessori diche chasi et in che modo debbe domandare colui che egli confessa (Florence: impressa per ser Lorenzo Margrani & Giovanni di Maganza, 1496), Cap. 135.
61. “Soli enim heretici sunt excommunicati, sed et cum aliis praecipue iudeis non debet haberi domestica conversatio et praecipue idiote.” Antoninus of Florence, Confessionale (Venice: Bartholomaeus Cremonensis, 1473), Cap. 58 (the book is difficult to search despite the presence of a list of capitulae at the end). The same wording appears, among other editions, in Antoninus of Florence, Confessionale (Rome: In domo Francisci de Cinquinis, ca. 1477), f50v; (Speier: Johann and Conrad Hist, ~1487), f60r; (Venice: Antonius de Strata, 1483), f49r; and (Strasbourg: Per Martin um Flach, 1492, 1496), f67v (the first of two folios numbered 67). Other editions vary slightly the wording, altering somewhat the meaning; therefore, “intimate contact” becomes “too much intimate contact:” “…non debet haberi nimis domestica conversatio et praecipue ydiote,” Antoninus of Florence, Confessionale (Cologne: Printer of the ‘Historia S. Albani' [Johann Guldenschaff or Conrad Winters, de Homborch?], 1472), Cap. 23; and (Memmingen: Albrecht Kunne, 1483), f40r.
62. On the former, see Caciola Nancy, Discerning Spirits. Devine and Demonic Possession in the Middle Ages (Cornell: Cornell University Press, 2003), on the latter, see Hughes, “Distinguishing Signs.”
63. “La infidelidad delos paganos et hereticos o judios es muy grave pegado et lieva al infierno et solos los hereticos entre estos son descomulgados et no deve el hombre tener conversacion domestica con judios mayormente et mucho menos deve tener la tal conversacion los idiotas et los que no son letrados.” Antoninus of Florence, Summa de confession (Burgos: Fadrique de Basilea, 1499), f99v.
64. Hostiensis, Summa, seven editions; Gottofredo da Trani, Summa, three editions; Innocent IV, Apparatus, four editions; Johannes Andreae, Novella, including Book V, one edition; Astesanus da Asti, Summa, eight editions; Bartholomaeus Pisanus, Summa, eight editions; and Panormitanus, Lectura, twenty-one editions that include Book V. Information from British Library, Incunabula Short Title Catalogue, http://www.bl.uk/catalogues/istc/index.html (August 15, 2013).
65. “Et ex hoc nota quod dispositio loquens de episcopis non vendicat sibi locum in presbyteris et aliis clericis nisi fiat extensio per legislatorem.” Panormitanus, Lectura, V, f40r.
66. X. 5.7.5–6 (Friedberg, II), col. 779.
67. “Paganos. Et ita idem iuris est in Paganis quod de haereticis. Et idem est de omnibus qui catholici non sunt.” Decretales…una cum glossis restitutae, col. 1671.
68. Hostiensis begins by stating that Jews who refuse to accept the faith are subject to multiple burdens and starts from the issue of bequests. He does not allow bequests to the community of Jews, citing Cod. 1.9.1., but raises the question if one might be allowed to bequeath to individuals, referring to Azo and citing Dig. 34.5.20. Without elaborating any further, Hostiensis then cautions that this is not allowed to clergymen, even if the Jew is the clergyman's brother. Hostiensis, Summa, f236r.
69. “Item clericus iudeo, sarraceno, vel consanguineo suo aliquid in testamento non potest relinquere.” Renard, Trois sommes de pénitence, II:241. This treatment may have stemmed from an error, possibly authorial, for it seems to be found in all three extant manuscripts. As Panormitanus clearly states: “Also, note that this prohibition is only [valid] with regard to non-Catholics (non Catholicorum), not with regard to those that do not belong to one's family (extraneorum). Therefore, a clergyman can bequeath to a Catholic…However, if he dies intestate, not existing blood relatives, the church receives by succession.” Panormitanus, Lectura, V, f40r.
70. da Trani Gottofredo, Summa super titulis Decretalium (Aalen: Scientia Verlag, 1968), 412.
71. Raymond of Peñafort, Summa de paenitentia, col. 311.
72. “Item nullus potest iudeorum congregationi seu alicui iudeo vel pagano aliquid relinquere in testamento et si fecerit etiam post mortem iudicabitur anathema.” Bartholomaeus Pisanus de Sancto Concordio, Summa Pisana, f171r.
73. “Item nullus fidelis potest aliquid congregacioni Judaeorum vel Judaeo vel Pagano in testamento relinquere et si fecerit etiam post mortem judicatur anathema.” Antoninus of Florence, Summa Theologica, II, cols. 1151–52, making an exception for “great necessity.”
74. “Octava regula quod nullus christianus potest alicui iudeo vel congregationi eorum et aliorum infidelium aliquid in testamento relinquere .” Caracciolo, Sermones quadragesimales de peccatis, f50r.
75. “Est autem triplex infidelitas, scilicet Paganorum, Judaeorum, et Haereticorum.” Antoninus of Florence, Summa Theologica, II, col. 1147. Also found in Acquinas, Summa Theologiae, 2a2ae, 10, 5 (32:52–53).
76. R. Naz, Dictionnaire de droit canonique, contenant tous les termes du droit canonique, avec un sommaire de l'histoire et des institutions et de l'etat actuel de la discipline (Paris: letouzey et Ane, 1935–1965) Vol. 6, 409.
77. See Fransen Gérard, “Les décrétales et les collections de décrétales,” in Typologie des sources du moyen âge occidental, ed. Genicot Léopold (Turnhout: Brepols, 1972), 12–44. For more on the subject and for a bibliography of published letters—in toto or by way of regesta—see also Dictionnaire de droit canonique 6, cols. 411–13.
78. On the subject of marital impediments, see Brundage James, Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), particularly 191–96; Donahue Charles Jr, Law, Marriage, and Society in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 27–31; and Salonen, The Penitentiary as a Well of Grace, 103–19. On dispensations, see Simpson W. J. Sparrow, Dispensations (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1935).
79. Tautu Aloysius, ed., Acta Innocentii VI (1352–1362) (Vatican City, Typis Pontificiae Universitatis Gregorianae, 1961), #34 (1354).
80. See McKee Sally, Uncommon Dominion: Venetian Crete and the Myth of Ethnic Purity (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000). On the formation of the Venetian maritime empire, see Thiriet Freddy, La Romanie vénitienne au Moyen Age. Le développement et l'exploitation du domaine colonial vénitien (XIIe–XVe siècles), Ecoles Française d'Athènes et de Rome 193 (Paris: E. de Boccard, 1959). For the fifteenth century, see O'Connell Monique, Men of Empire. Power and Negotiation in Venice's Maritime State (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2009).
81. Boyle Leonard E., A Survey of the Vatican Archives and of Its Medieval Holdings (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 2001), 149.
82. C24 .q3.c26, 28, 31 (Friedberg, I, 997–98). A useful introduction can be provided by considering the rich translated primary sources; see Wakefield Walter L. and Evans Austin P., Heresies of the High Middle Ages (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991 ) alongside Lambert Malcom, Medieval Heresy. Popular Movements from the Gregorian Reform to the Reformation (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2002); and Pegg Mark, The Corruption of Angels, The Great Inquisition of 1245–1246 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001).
83. Hageneder Othmar, Il sole e la luna. Papato, impero e regni nella teoria e nella prassi dei secoli XII e XIII (Milan: Vita e Pensiero, 2000), 79–80.
84. “Quod dictum est de hereticis, intellige de scismaticis.” Renard, Trois sommes de pénitence, II:90.
85. The literature is vast. On the Fourth Crusade, see Queller Donald and Madden Thomas, The Fourth Crusade. The Conquest of Constantinople (Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Press, 1997). For a detailed analysis of the church's involvement in the east see Setton Kenneth, The Papacy and the Levant, 1204–1571, 4 vols (Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1976–84); for the period in which the Latins controlled Constantinople, see also Wolff Robert Lee, Studies in the Latin empire of Constantinople (London: Variorum, 1976).
86. Haluščynskyj Theodosius T., ed., Acta Innocentii PP. IV (1243–1254) (Rome: s.n., 1962), #11.
87. The literature on Caffa is considerable. As a starting point, use Michel Balard, La Romanie Genoise (XII e– début du XV esiecle), in Bibliothèque des Écoles franşaises d'Athènes et de Rome 235 (1978) and Atti della società ligure di stroria patria n. s. 18 (42) (1978), I:199–215. For the relations between Latin Christians and others, see Balard Michel, “Les Orientaux à Caffa au XVe siècle,” Byzantinische Forschungen 11 (1987), 223–38; and Balard Michel,“The Greeks of Crimea under Genoese Rule in the XIVth and XVth Centuries,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 49 (1995), 23–32.
88. The pope then asked the lay authorities to assist the bishop in the correction and punishment of said women, so that these could regain their spiritual health and so that others would be prevented from falling into ruin; see, Tautu Aloysius, ed., Acta Johannis XXII (1316–1334) (Vatican City: Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1952), #9 (1318).
89. Delorme Ferdinand M. and Tautu Aloysius L., eds., Acta Clementis V (1303–1314) (Vatican City: Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1955), #39a, #39 (1309); and Tautu Aloysius, ed., Acta Clementis VI (1342–1352) (Vatican City: Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1960), #106 (1346).
90. The editor of the document speaks of Dragutin instead, Acta Clementis V, 70 n. 3. However, Dragutin was the one with Catholic support, whereas in 1308, Milutin had sought to marry his daughter to Charles of Valois' son in order to break that support; see Fine John V.A. Jr., The Late Medieval Balkans (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1994 ), 257–58.
91. For an outline of the conquests, see Imber Colin, The Ottoman Empire, 1300–1650. The Structure of Power (Palgrave Macmillan, 2002), 1–86. For the Byzantine perspective valuable remains Ostrogorsky George, History of the Byzantine State (New Brunswick, 1969), 533–72.
92. See Verlinden Charles, L'Esclavage dans l'Europe Medievale, 2 vols (Brugge: De Tempel, 1955; Gent: University of Ghent, 1977).
93. On Mamluk slaves, see, in brief Christ Georg, Trading Conflicts. Venetian Merchants and Mamluk Officials in Late Medieval Alexandria (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 121–24.
94. Tautu Aloysius L., ed., Acta Martini P.P. V (1417–1431) (Vatican City, Pontificia Commissio Cpici Iuris Cananici Orientacis Recognoscendo, 1980), #310, 310a, 310b (1425).
95. On crusades after 1291, see Housley Norman, The Avignon Papacy and the Crusades, 1305–1378 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986); Housley Norman, The Later Crusades, 1274–1580: From Lyons to Alcazar (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992); and Housley Norman, Crusading and the Ottoman Threat, 1453–1505 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012).
96. Muldoon, Popes, Lawyers, and Infidels, 36. On this bull, see also Schmieder Felicitas, “Cum hora undecima: The Incorporation of Asia into the orbis Christianus,” in Christianizing Peoples and Converting Individuals, ed. Armstrong Guyda and Wood Ian N. (Turnhout: Brepols, 2000), 259–65. On missionary efforts, see also Kedar Benjamin Z., Crusade and Mission. European Approaches toward the Muslims (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984); and Muldoon, “From Frontiers to Borders.”
97. Tautu, Acta Johannis XXII, #14 (1318) and #48 (1321).
98. On this subject and what follows, see Stantchev, Spiritual Rationality.
99. See, for example, Iorga Nicolae, Notices et Extraits pour servir à l'histoire des croisades au XVe siècle (Bucarest, Edition de L'Academie Roumaine, 1915), IV, #19, 38–40.
100. Cameron, “Jews and Heretics—A Category Error?” 360.
The author thanks James Muldoon for his encourgement, support, and comments on different aspects of the author's work on this subject; Richard Helmholz, Jonathan Rose, David Freidenreich, Thomas A. Green, and the anonymous reviewers of Law and History Review for their comments and suggestions; Laurent Mayali for a Robbins Collection fellowship, which was essential in its preparation; and the staff at the Robbins Collection, UC Berkeley School of Law; the Newberry Library, Chicago; the Hispanic Society of America, New York; and Princeton Libraries for their cooperation. All errors and omissions remain the sole and full responsibility of the author. A note on transcriptions: except for extended standard abbreviations, the Latin, Italian, and Spanish texts herein appear exactly as they do in the manuscripts, incunables, and modern editions consulted; this includes undifferentiated words.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.
Full text views reflects the number of PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.
* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 22nd November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.