Going Among The Infidels

This article was downloaded by: [Moskow State Univ Bibliote]
On: 03 February 2014, At: 15:13

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Mediterranean Historical Review

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fmhr20
Going among the infidels: the

mendicant orders and Louis IX's first
Mediterranean campaign
a
Amanda Power
a
Department of History , University of Sheffield , Sheffield, UK
Published online: 19 Apr 2011.
To cite this article: Amanda Power (2010) Going among the infidels: the mendicant orders and
Louis IX's first Mediterranean campaign, Mediterranean Historical Review, 25:02, 187-202, DOI:
10.1080/09518967.2010.540898
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09518967.2010.540898
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Mediterranean Historical Review
Vol. 25, No. 2, December 2010, 187202
Going among the infidels: the mendicant orders and Louis IXs first
Mediterranean campaign
Amanda Power*
Department of History, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

The relationship between Louis IX of France and the mendicant orders is well known.
Yet it has generally been studied in order to shed light on Louis reign rather than on
the development of the orders. Contemporaries tended to criticize friars who worked
Downloaded by [Moskow State Univ Bibliote] at 15:13 03 February 2014
too closely with secular authorities and their suspicions have passed into
the historiography. This means that we know less than we might about how friars
created and used opportunities to carry out their mission in the wider world. This article
considers how Louis and members of the religious orders worked together during his
crusade of 1248 54 to bring about the conversion to Christianity of Muslims and
Mongols. It looks at the ways in which they drew on ideas of the apostolic life and
wider papal agendas, but also employed standard strategies of diplomacy and debate,
seizing on a range of opportunities as they arose. A second strand investigates their
experiences in the light of scholarship on the Mediterranean and of more global cultural
encounters. How far did their time in the Mediterranean and beyond influence the way
that they thought about the world and their own faith?
Keywords: Louis IX; Franciscans; Dominicans; Seventh Crusade; mission; dialogue;
Mongols; William of Rubruck
An interesting aspect of Louis IXs first Mediterranean campaign becomes visible if one
maps out the associated journeys of envoys and missionaries.1 As Louis travelled from
Paris to Aigues-Mortes, to Cyprus, to Egypt, to the Holy Land and back, other men were
coming and going from his presence to the Middle East, Central Asia and North Africa.
The decade between Louis decision to take the Cross in December 1244 and his return to
France in July 1254 coincided with the first phase of Latin engagement with the Mongols.
The earliest papal envoys were dispatched in April 1245 and the missionary William of
Rubruck returned to Cyprus in June 1255. Most of these men communicated with Louis in
person, as did representatives of the Mongols and various communities of the Near East
during this period.2 The king and much of his surviving army spent a month living among
Muslims as captives of the Ayyubid sultan. As he moved around the Mediterranean, he
was a focal point for enterprises, exchanges, ideas, and aspirations.3 Mendicant friars and
clerics interested in the conversion of non-Christians travelled with him. He had the
opportunity to impose a distinctive character on the conduct of affairs and he certainly
attempted to do so. Those connected with him understood this; some sought to shape his
thinking in accordance with their own ambitions, both at the time and in retrospect.
The close relationship between Louis and the friars was noted by contemporaries and
has not been lost on historians.4 Yet it remains, with the exception of a few specific
*Email: a.power@sheffield.ac.uk
ISSN 0951-8967 print/ISSN 1743-940X online

q 2010 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/09518967.2010.540898
http://www.informaworld.com
188 A. Power
episodes, a very minor strand in the study of the development of the mendicant orders.
Most work on the subject has come from historians seeking to understand Louis, rather
than the friars. There has often been an ambivalence again, among both medieval friars
and modern historians about mendicants too closely connected with the sources of
secular power. Seeing the friars and other religious in Louis train on his return in 1254,
the prominent Franciscan preacher, Hugh of Digne, could not contain his revulsion.5 Yet
the friars were there, and it was Hughs position that seemed striking enough for remark.
Moreover, through their connections with Louis, these and other friars had obtained a
range of specific and distinctive opportunities for evangelism. It was not the vita
apostolica as some liked to imagine it: their living and preaching under the protection of a
powerful monarch. Yet if there had ever been an organic understanding of the mendicant
apostolate, which is doubtful, it had been transformed over the years in collaboration with
successive popes.6 The friars had become agents of the popes in the secular sphere;
confessors and advisors of kings, bishops, administrators, and much else. It was against all
this that Hugh protested. He claimed derisively that they believed they were still
cloistered, despite being in the world, and were still living according to the harsh discipline
of their rule, despite being with the king. If they say [these things] . . . I do not believe
them, he concluded wrathfully.7 He would not countenance the idea that anything could
be accomplished by friars whose commitment to the formalities of apostolic poverty was
in question, and he refused to appreciate the symbiotic relationship of secular and holy at
work in Louis court.8
Uncompromising and critical voices such as that of Hugh have, over the years, tended
to dominate the historiography of the mendicant orders, especially that of the Franciscans.
Their essentially normative claims about the proper conduct of the mendicant life leave
little space for an understanding of the majority of the friars: those who made seeming
compromises in pursuit of the wider aims of the orders and accepted the direction given to
them in papal bulls; those who lacked the will and the words to insist on absolutes;
those who were, possibly, too worldly-wise to try. In the contested atmosphere of
Franciscan debate over their founders intentions and the proper direction for the orders
development, all participants sought the high moral ground.9 The writings produced in this
environment make the ordinary friar seem virtually subaltern. Perhaps as a consequence,
when it comes to the mendicant attempts to evangelize beyond Christendom, scholarship
on religious orders has tended to prioritize the theory. The friars who actually undertook
the work rarely wrote reports, and even those who did seem scarcely to rate a mention.10
Thus we are left with two unreconciled visions of mendicant mission. On the one hand,
there was the imagined apostle burning with the desire for martyrdom whose
terrifying faith might destabilize Islam in the hearts of sultans.11 On the other, there were
those diligent travellers of vast distances, who feared hunger, cold and death, wrangled
about the nature of God through inadequate translators, and returned with a bare handful of
baptisms to show for their pains.12 Neither of these encompasses the experiences of the
friars who were based in the convents established in a tentative crescent from
Constantinople to Damietta, or in the household of a king pursuing the business of the
Cross. Hugh objected to a cloister that extends from this side of the sea to the other, but in
what follows, I should like to explore the physical and mental contours of this vast, porous
cloister.13
Missionaries, in any period, inhabit something of a paradox. They are the embodiment
of a societys moral certainties at their most absolute, but in order to promulgate them,
they need to be able to communicate effectively with those who do not share them. They
must understand something of other societies while remaining inflexibly committed to
Mediterranean Historical Review 189
their own. In their capacity to do so, they operate as protectors of their societys beliefs and
that is where they are often the most valuable. In practice, most of the mendicants in the
eastern Mediterranean, like other clergy in the region, focused their efforts on shoring up
the orthodoxy of the Latin communities rather than proselytizing beyond them.14 This was
a crucial part of their role, for proximity to different interpretations and different beliefs
could be dangerous to the cohesion and conviction of the faithful. The effects of proximity
were visible in various ways, and were commented on negatively by contemporaries.15
Louis humiliating defeat and capture by the Muslims apparently led to a rustle of spiritual
unease among the defeated crusaders, growing in volume as it spread throughout the Latin
West. There were rumours of apostasy, and fears that Muhammads law might be better
than Christs. It was necessary for bishops and religious to intervene, insisting on orthodox
interpretations so as to stem the proliferation of doubt.16 In this, we can hear intimations of
a recognition of unpalatable, alternative realities that had been hinted at by the gestures of
God. It became more important than ever for those mediators of the divine to still and seal
off such perceptions, categorizing them as moral weakness, and reinforcing the old
certainties; wrapping the ecclesia Dei around the faithful.
In order to be able to serve these complex ends, it was necessary for the friars to travel
within a conceptual cloister that kept them apart from the perils and ambiguities of journeys
in other lands. As mendicants, rather than monks, they were already accustomed to seeing
themselves as exiles from the world and its temptations, while still living and acting in the
world. The form of their cloister was laid out for them in their respective Rules, and through
the models offered by the lives of Christ and his disciples. Both Franciscans and
Dominicans sought to influence society by living and preaching specific imaginings of the
apostolic life of the primitive Church. Poverty, humility, obedience, and dedication to the
renewal and spread of the faith were at the heart of their apostolate. They had no word to
distinguish missionary work from any other manifestation of their vocation, which
suggests that the term may be better avoided by the historian.17 They preferred to
characterize themselves as going among the Saracens and other infidels, as the Franciscan
Rule had it.18 This ambiguous expression of intent was deliberate, for Francis of Assisi had
in his earlier Rule suggested two ways that the friars might live spiritually among
[non-Christians]. One was to live simply and humbly, not confronting the population, but
indicating by their behaviour that they were Christians; the other was to announce the
Word publicly so that those who heard them would know the truth and accept baptism.19
The Dominicans were far less explicit about methodology: their earliest constitutions
merely mentioned preaching and the salvation of souls as an objective.20
By the 1240s, successive popes had gathered up these aspirations, elaborated them,
and placed them within a potent world-historical framework. Since the eleventh hour has
come in the day given to humanity, wrote Gregory IX, and Innocent IV after him, it is
necessary that spiritual men [possessing] purity of life and the gift of intelligence should
go forth with John [the Baptist] again to all men.21 At the end of our period, in 1255,
the Franciscans and Dominicans issued a joint encyclical in which they claimed an
essential role for the two orders in the clarifying battles of the end-times.22 It is unclear
how common this sensibility was among ordinary friars, and how directly it influenced
those who did go among non-Christians, but it must have played its part. There is little
evidence to suggest that Louis himself participated in eschatological understandings of
history, but he was certainly placed in them by others; indeed, after his return from the
Mediterranean, enemies of the friars suggested that his growing intimacy with these false
prophets was yet one more sign of Antichrists imminence.23 Such strident objections
arose out of a feeling that the king had fallen so far under the spell of the mendicants that
190 A. Power
he was hardly fit to rule; he was more monk than monarch, improperly inhabiting a
cloister, when he should have been in the world.24
Within three months of Louis vow, the Franciscans had been instructed to preach the
Cross and did so. Inevitably, they coloured the official message with their own
interpretations and priorities. This meant that from the beginning, they were able to
influence the way that the expedition was imagined by those who undertook it, and by the
man who led it.25 Their own sense of the negotium crucis is somewhat elusive, although
there is no doubt that on the whole they actively supported such wars, just as they did other
forms of religiously-motivated violence. There is little reason to imagine that they were at
odds with any part of the agenda promulgated at Lateran IV, which included detailed
instructions for new expeditions.26 People have liked to think of Francis of Assisi, at least,
as a man of peace who preached a message of love that encompassed Muslims qua
Muslims.27 He did preach love but in his world, to love someone was to correct them. He
believed in striking out at sin and error; he was as merciless with others as he was with his
own body, Brother Ass, and its weaknesses. He could only love the infidel as a potential
Christian, and could hardly have wished for any form of peace that permitted
non-Christians to remain on the path to damnation.28 This must have been a common
feeling in the orders, for theirs was a world in which the shedding of blood evoked Christs
willing sacrifice, purifying and transforming humanity. Those who loved God best
suffered most, and God was pleased to have it so.
It has been suggested that the friars, and possibly Louis himself, thought of conversion
as a preferable alternative to war.29 The 1240s were a time of intense reflection on the
functioning of both preaching and warfare within the wider evangelical enterprise.
Innocent IV linked the two in a variety of contexts, ranging from the purely theoretical,
through to his handling of real situations. Pertinent here is his assertion, shortly after Louis
took the Cross, that war could be used to force an unwilling ruler to permit Christian
preachers entry to his territories.30 Kedar considered and dismissed the idea that this was
Louis objective.31 However, there can be no doubt that pope, king, and friars were each in
their own way acting according to a powerful, shared sense of pastoral responsibility. They
were conscious that conversion outside Christian-ruled territories was rare, and that defeat
in war was, for infideles, the surest harbinger of salvation. At the same time, it must not be
forgotten that warfare in the name of God was understood as a valuable penitential
activity, and an occasion to achieve personal glory, as well as glory for God. The business
of the Cross was always a complex and ill-defined affair and only became more complex
as it was preached by friars. Louis insistence on the administrative and, as far as possible,
moral reform of his kingdom before departure was a logical continuation of the sense that
the sins of Christians would damage the crusade, but in practice was something of a
novelty. It had the air of a mendicant initiative and in fact it was largely undertaken by
friars, although with the formal support of Innocent.32 As Lower has suggested, Louis
activities make more sense if the notion of crusade as a motivating force is loosened and
replaced with a wider aim: that of Christianization.33
Louis travelled from Paris to Aigues Mortes as a pilgrim, causing the Franciscan
chronicler, Salimbene, to claim that he was more like a monk in the devotion of his heart
than a knight armed for war. Salimbene encountered the king on various occasions as both
men made their way south for different reasons. He was present in Sens in 1248, when
Louis joined the friars during a provincial chapter in order to ask for their prayers.34
The king spoke so piously that some of the brothers wept inconsolably. The minister
general, John of Parma, praised the king for his humility and kindness to the order, and
outlined Louis reasons for taking the Cross. These were:
to honour our lord Jesus Christ; to bring succour to the Holy Land and defeat the enemies of
the faith and the Cross of Christ; for the honour of the universal Church and all the Christian
faithful; and for the salvation of his soul and all whom he takes with him.35
He assured the king that the order would pray for him. Louis asked him to record his promise in
a letter, with the additional authority of a seal. By this account, John made no attempt to
introduce the issue of conversion of Muslims, but he did emphasize Louis responsibility for
the souls of his followers. John also stressed that the friars would pray for Louis because of his
demeanour and past behaviour, not merely because he had asked it of them.
Louis had, of course, a range of models for his roles as a king, a knight signed with the
Cross, and a humble Christian. His posture shifted as changing circumstances brought
different aspects of these identities to the fore. In the event, it seems that the influence of ideals
of the vita apostolica upon him was particularly pronounced when he was communicating
directly with non-Christians, although it did not always take a straightforward form. Through
no desire of his own, aspects of his experience in Egypt echoed uncannily that of Francis of
Assisi almost thirty years earlier at least as it had been described by Thomas of Celano in the
version Louis would surely have known. After stating his intention of converting the sultan,
Louis, like Francis, crossed the Nile, was beaten, humiliated and captured by the sultans men;
he did not flinch at threats of torture or death; like Francis, he eventually came before the
sultan, who gave him gifts, and had the opportunity presumably to speak of Christianity.36
One imagines that the parallel might have occurred to him, amid the same surroundings,
dealing with Turan Shah, the grandson of the old sultan al-Kamil. Aside from his zeal in
protecting his people, he seems to have adopted a similar simplicity; a similar insistence on his
love for the souls of his enemies.
Rather curiously, the only extant description of an attempt by Louis to convert a sultan
was not linked to this situation at all. Matthew Paris reported a conversation between Louis
and the Sultan of Babylon [Cairo], but he placed it in 1252, after his account of the treaty
that Louis made with the new, Mamluk, sultan, Aybak al-Turkman. Although, as far as we
know, the treaty was secured entirely through envoys, Matthew conjured up a scene in
which the king and the sultan were together and talking through an interpreter.37 In response
to the sultans questions, Louis admitted to a great sadness because he had not yet achieved
his hearts desire. On being asked what that was, he replied: It is your soul, which the devil
claims as his own, to be thrust down into hell. God knew, he went on: that if the whole of
this visible world were mine, I would give it all up for the redemption of souls. The sultan
was astonished, having believed that the Christians had come merely to take Muslim lands
and triumph over them. Louis swore that, on the contrary, I would never desire to return to
my kingdom of France, provided that I could gain for God your soul and the souls of the
other unbelievers. The sultan attempted to reassure the king, pointing out that by following
the laws of Muhammad, he and his people hoped to reach heaven. Louis then reproached the
sultan for following Muhammad, who teaches and allows so many, and such very, shameful
things. He had seen and examined the Koran, he added, which is most vile.38 On hearing
these words, the sultan began to cry bitterly, sighing and groaning, and said no more. Louis
words, Matthew asserted, had found their mark with the sultan, for afterwards: he was not
so strongly inclined or faithful to the superstitions of Muhammad as he had been before.
This encouraged the Christians to hope that he would convert, and Louis resolved to remain
in the Holy Land, for the rest of his life if necessary, until that occurred.39
Both Christian and Muslim sources attest to conversations between Louis and senior
members of the sultans court during his captivity. On these occasions matters of general
interest seem to have been discussed.40 It is likely that Louis made it clear that he desired
the conversion of the Muslims. A well-placed Muslim author, Ibn Wasil, reported that the
192 A. Power
negotiations were undertaken for the sultan by the amir Husam al-Dn ibn Ab Ali,
a model of good judgement and counsel, experienced and trustworthy. The amir
considered Louis a thoughtful and intelligent man. He asked the king:
How did it ever occur to someone of your Majestys wisdom, refinement and sound intellect to
. . . travel across the sea to get to this country, which is full of Muslim troops, in the conviction
that you would conquer it and become its ruler? What you did involved extreme risk for
yourself and your coreligionists.
He went on to explain that some Muslim jurists considered that people who made repeated
sea journeys were clearly mad, and therefore should not be allowed to testify in court. Louis,
the amir reported, laughed and agreed.41 It seems possible that Louis might have used this
opportunity to make the point that Matthew Paris had him making to Aybak. Indeed,
Matthews conversation might be a composite of this better attested one and the sort of
expectations aroused by the accounts of Francis of Assisis encounter with al-Kamil.

This may seem a great deal of space to devote to an episode so poorly substantiated
Matthew gave no source for his information and so formulaic. Yet everything that Louis
is reported to have said publicly on the subject of conversion suggests that his imagination
was stocked with precisely such furniture, and that he might well have taken that approach
had the situation arisen. He is said to have brought farming equipment with him to Egypt
because, as he explained: I made a vow and an oath to come here. . . . But I took no vow
or oath to leave.42 After the capture of Damietta, another letter quoted him as saying:
I do not offer this enemy of Christ my defiance on this or that day; nor do I appoint any date for
peace. I defy him tomorrow and all the days of my life, from now for evermore, until he has
pity on his own soul and is converted to the Lord.43
Later, when a captive, Matthew Paris has him telling the sultans men: God knows that
I came here from France, not to obtain lands or money for myself, but to gain your
imperilled souls for God.44 In his approach as far as we can see it Louis might as well
have been following the advice given in the Franciscan Rule. On a personal level, he
sought to preach by his honourable and humble behaviour and, when the opportunity
arose, he announced his faith.45 There is no indication that he engaged in any serious
theological debate with Muslims, possibly in accordance with his belief that only trained
theologians should do so, whereas laymen should defend the faith with the sword.46
Fortunately, he had with him men better equipped to engage in dialogue with
non-Christians. By the 1240s, both mendicant orders expected the majority of their
members to possess or to acquire the skills needed to defend the faith verbally.
The presence of friars is sketchily but securely indicated in the surviving evidence. Louis
gave the Franciscans a house in Damietta, which they used until the evacuation of the city
in May 1250. He founded a Franciscan convent while he was in Jaffa in 1252 3, and
endowed it with books, vestments and furniture. There were existing convents with small
communities in Bethlehem, Nazareth, Antioch, Tripoli, Beirut, Tyre, Sidon, and Acre.47 It
is hard to tell what relationships existed between the king and his court and these friars, but
two episodes suggest a profitable collaboration.
While in Acre, Louis exchanged embassies with the Old Man of the Mountain, as the
leader of the Nizar Ismailis was known to the Latins. With his envoys went a Dominican,
Yves le Breton, who knew Arabic. Yves seems to have achieved sufficiently easy relations
with the Old Man to pick up a book lying by the Nizars bed and discuss its contents with
him. He took the opportunity to teach him much good doctrine, although the Old Man
remained sceptical. Yves learned much in return. Joinville was able to supply a garbled
account of the origins of Shiite Islam and the beliefs of the Nizars on the basis of what the
Dominican had discovered.48 Despite the lack of concrete success, it is remarkable that,
through his connection with Louis, Yves had been able to preach Christianity and engage
in religious debate in the very heart of the fabled stronghold of the Assassins.
As was often the case, a humbler operation met with greater success. Matthew Paris
reported that, in 1254, some converted Saracens travelled to France. Some were baptized;
others wished to be. The cause of their conversion was as follows, he wrote. They had
first seen Louis freed from captivity, in quasi-miraculous fashion.49 They had then
observed his patience in adversity; inflexible constancy of purpose and they had also
been witnesses to the strength of his faith. Above all, for the love of God, he had exposed
himself to numerous dangers devoting all his effort to winning the souls of infidels
which he could not have done without the support of God. They had furthermore been
taught by the Dominicans and Franciscans that the most foul law of Muhammad was
poison to their souls. They had arrived with letters patent from Louis, asking that they
should be supported until his return.50 Here we have Louis once again preaching by
example, supported by the greater intellectual sophistication of the friars, whose labours
were then reinforced by royal generosity.51
These conversions were valuable to Louis, and are mentioned eagerly by his
hagiographers. Yet the scope of his vision should not be forgotten. He longed to conquer
Egypt and hoped thereby to restore the whole country to Christian worship; its very
landscape changed into a faithful realm.52 Some reports of his entrance to the conquered
city of Damietta echoed the descriptions of the fall of Jerusalem to the soldiers of Christ in
1099. The city was first cleaned of the dead bodies that strewed the streets, then in
triumphant procession, Louis and his army entered as barefoot pilgrims. They made their
way to the mosque and heard Mass there.53 One account related that Louis personally
purified the place and sprinkled it with holy water. To underline the transformation, it
was emphasized that only three days before the most filthy Mahomet had been glorified
[there] with abominable sacrifices, cries from on high, and the blast of trumpets.54 Louis
was in the Mediterranean at a time of high evangelical ambition in the Latin West. Those
who looked for the apocalyptic conversion of the world anticipated a mysterious,
miraculous coming in of the fullness of Gentiles. Others hoped to facilitate the spread
of the faith by converting rulers and giving them the support they needed in order to secure
the baptism of the whole population. This would, allegedly, be part of Louis strategy
when he took the Cross a second time and sailed for Tunis in 1270.55 Were there
intimations of a more global ambition during this earlier expedition?
When the Mongols had first devastated the borders of Europe, Louis had put heart into
Christians with his insouciant suggestion that, if it came to it, they would either send the
Tartars back to Tartarus, hell, from whence they had evidently come; or the Tartars
would send the Christians to heaven.56 He was kept informed as diplomatic relations were
established with these masters of a growing world empire. The Franciscan John of Plano
Carpini, the first papal envoy to return from the Mongols, had visited his court early in
1248, and he obtained, at least, written reports from the other missions.57 When he was
on Cyprus, he received another of the original envoys, the Dominican Andrew of
Longjumeau, who had brought representatives of the Mongols and news of their
receptivity to Christianity. It was increasingly clear that success in converting the Mongol
qaghans would have extraordinary ramifications. Nor was this the limit of Latin ambition
at this time. The historiography has traditionally focused on the intriguing encounter
with the Mongols and their empire, but the Church was on the whole more concerned
with the eastern Christians. Louis dealings with the Mongols, especially while in the
Mediterranean, were far from a straightforward interaction. Instead, they were mediated
194 A. Power
through eastern Christians and, indeed, through Andrew of Longjumeau, who acted as
translator. This material is too well known to be rehearsed profitably here, but I should like
to make a few observations about how the friars connections with Louis both shaped and
facilitated their going among the diverse population of the Mongol empire.58
In line with the main papal approach, the mendicant orders considered the Mongols
and all eastern peoples as, in principle, potential subjects for preaching and conversion.59
In practice, however, few went to the Mongols, and those who did tended to travel as
representatives of Church or secular leaders. Their journeys were never simply diplomatic,
because communications on the Latin side were marked by appeals to the Mongols to
convert to Christianity. Along the way, the friars took the opportunity to proselytize, and
had some small success among schismatic Christian communities.60 These efforts were,
however, hindered, as their movements and behaviour were strictly regulated by their
hosts.61 When it came to the conversion of the qaghans, matters were particularly difficult.
The model of the vita apostolica did not offer much help; indeed it put the friars at a
disadvantage. The Muslims may have been impressed by humility and virtue, but the
Mongols had gaudier tastes. They liked display and lavish gifts, even compelling John of
Plano Carpini and his companion Benedict the Pole, to wear brocade garments over their
habits for no envoy is allowed to see the face of the elect and crowned [qaghan] unless he
is properly dressed.62
It therefore seems once again that collaboration between the friars and the king offered
the best chance of success. Encouraged by the reports of the envoys who had arrived with
Andrew of Longjumeau, Louis prepared an expedition to seek or secure the conversion of
the Mongols. Careful thought was evidently given to how the matter should be
approached. Louis would have understood from Johns report that the Mongols expected
elaborate presents, and grasped something of their taste. The friar had described in detail
the beautiful and luxurious tents, with their scarlet and gold hangings, their brocades and
silk, the throne of jewel-inlaid ivory on which the qaghan sat, and much else.63 Given the
available information, Louis and his advisors showed considerable imagination in sending
a gift that would do honour to the Mongols, appeal to their aesthetic sensibilities, and
simultaneously preach the word of God. The king offered them a scarlet tent, embroidered
with depictions of the Annunciation, the nativity, the baptism of Christ, the stages of the
Passion, the Ascension and the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. It was equipped
with chalices, books and everything else required for the Mass, including some
Dominicans to sing it. It was specifically designed to seduce the qaghan to the faith, and
show and teach him what he ought to believe.64 With this gift went a party of
Dominicans and a fragment of the True Cross from the Christian perspective, this last
was the most precious gift of all, suggesting that Louis was very serious indeed.
The melancholy outcome of the embassy is well known. The Mongols were
undoubtedly impressed by the tent; but they exhibited it as a trophy representing Louis
submission. Louis was informed of their reaction when Andrew returned in 1251, and it
must have come as a fresh humiliation. He was not enthusiastic when a learned Franciscan
from his household, William of Rubruck, announced his intention to go among these
unbelievers in accordance with our Rule.65 By this time William had been with the king
for some years. He had been on Cyprus with Louis, and present during the interview with
Eljigideis envoys. He was also in Damietta, although perhaps with the queen, rather than
with the army, and later in the Holy Land, from which he departed in 1253.66 It seems to
have been the love that Louis and the queen had for William that prompted their support,
rather than a renewed faith in Mongol receptivity to conversion. Williams journey
was meant to be an obscure undertaking consistent with Franciscan notions of the
vita apostolica, but as he quickly discovered, the Mongol world did not function like that.
He carried a letter of introduction from Louis, and this, through a series of accidental and
deliberate misunderstandings, carried him to the Mongol capital at Qaraqorum. There
he engaged in the famous debate between Christians, Muslims, and Buddhists an
extraordinary opportunity that would not, presumably, have been granted him, had it not
been for the confusion over his status.67
When William returned to the Holy Land in search of Louis, he found the king gone
and was obliged by his superiors to remain in Acre for a time. He sent Louis a report of his
travels, concluding with several recommendations. He suggested that Asia Minor was in
such disorder that the army of the Church could pass through and take Jerusalem with
ease; indeed, if they were willing to travel in the way that the Tartar princes move, and to
be content with a similar diet, they could conquer the whole world.68 At the same time as
he recommended the adoption of Mongol culture and discipline, William acknowledged

defeat for his own order and its approaches to conversion. He made it clear that anyone
going to the Mongols merely to preach would be unlikely to receive any kind of hearing.
He recommended to some Dominican friars met on the road that they should invent a
pretext for their arrival in the Mongol camp because: since their sole mission was to
preach, little heed would be paid to them. He later wrote to Louis: I regard it as
inadvisable for any friar to make any further journeys to the Tartars. A bishop sent
in some style by the pope might do better because he would be able to say to them
whatever he wanted and also see to it that they put it down in writing. For they listen to
what an ambassador has to say and always ask whether he wishes to say more.69 After his
final, unsuccessful, attempt to get the qaghan to hear his message, he had left sadly and
concluded: If I had possessed the power to work miracles, as Moses did, he might perhaps
have humbled himself.70 But the qaghan did not, and so William set off on the long
journey back to the Mediterranean, the king, and his brother friars.
There is no indication that Hugh of Digne had paused to hear about the experiences of
the travel-weary company before he began his sermon. Yet in his scepticism about the
largest cloister I have ever seen, he was touching on something that none of the friars could
have denied: the complexity and ambiguity of the experiences to which they had been
exposed.71 There had been moments of great intimacy with the unbelievers: shared ironies,
laughter, food; and the memorable image of Louis arriving in Acre in the clothes provided for
him by Turan Shah black samite lined with squirrel fur, adorned with a lot of gold
buttons.72 William had begun his report for Louis by quoting Ecclesiasticus on the wise man:
He shall pass into the country of strange peoples; he shall discover good and evil in all
things, and went on: this work I have done, my lord King.73 None of those who heard Hugh
speaking, or those left behind to continue the work, had achieved a great harvest of souls.
On the contrary, they had every reason to doubt, as William did, that the confident societies
that they had encountered could be brought to Christianity at all. A pious army had set out
with every conceivable preparation, and been defeated. What was the devout Christian to
make of it all? This was, I think, where Hugh was quite wrong. For they had all travelled
within a cloister that enclosed them as they crossed the sea, and the steppes, and discovered
good and evil among strange men. It had not prevented them from learning about the world
and engaging with its inhabitants, as starker paradigms might suggest, but it had given them a
way to understand it and act in it. For better or for worse, it meant that their experiences had
not destabilized their deeper certainties; this they would have regarded as a singular blessing.
It is clear that travelling with the king had an effect on how and to whom the mendicants
were able to proselytize. They were not going among the infidels quite as the apostles
had done. It was their association with Louis that gained them opportunities to preach and
196 A. Power
to debate the relative merits of religions. They were acting in an artificial context in which
denying them a hearing could have had a negative impact on diplomatic relations.74 More
generally, there is little extant evidence of friars attempting in this period to approach
infideles entirely independently of the support structures offered by popes and monarchs.
Most seem to have carried privileges and letters of recommendation in the hope that these
would secure them standing and protection. This brief examination of opportunities seized
amid the events of Louis ill-fated expedition may indicate something of the methods used
in reality by those who sought to spread the faith. The inconclusive, disheartening and often
baffling outcomes of these encounters may also suggest why much of the official writing
on mission tended to be highly idealized, rather than descriptive.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Tim Harper and Emma Hunter for their help with preparation of this article.
Notes
1. This vision of the Mediterranean, of course, owes much to the work of David Abulafia,
particularly his essay Mediterraneans.
2. These events are discussed in detail in Ruotsala, Europeans; also valuable on the interactions
of this period are Richard, Papaute; Jackson, Mongols; Schmieder, Europa.
3. On Louis Mediterranean experiences, see Le Goff, Saint Louis.
4. Little, Saint Louis Involvement; Le Goff, Saint Louis. Particularly relevant to the present
essay are Lower, Conversion; Maier, Preaching, esp. 62 84; Lawrence, Friars, 166 80.
5. Joinville, Vie, 326.
6. The literature on the papacy and the friars is too extensive to adumbrate here, but useful on this
particular topic are Richard, Papaute; Tugwell (ed.), Humberti, esp. 361 80; Powell,
Papacy; Lapsanski, Evangelical Perfection, 220 36; Kedar, Crusade, 136 69; Bird,
Crusade. Important bulls touching on mendicant mission were: Vineae domini (1225); Cum
qui recipit (1235); Cum hora undecima (1235, reissued 1245, and on several further
occasions); Quoniam abundavit (1237) in Bullarium franciscanum, vol. 1, respectively 24,
127 28, 269 70, 214 15. For the theory in place by the seventh crusade, see Muldoon,
Popes, 3 49.
7. Si il dient . . . de ce ne les crois je pas, Joinville, Vie, 326. Possibly he had a point. Salimbene
described (Cronica, 339) the meal Louis set before the friars in 1248, which included cherries,
fine white bread, fresh beans, fish, crab, eel-cakes, rice in almond milk and cinnamon, roast eel
in optimo salsamento, cakes, cheese, and fruit.
8. For his ideas on the proper conduct of those going among Saracens and other infidels, see his
Rule Commentary, XII, 191 4; Lapsanski, Evangelical Perfection, 17790. On his agenda for
the order and its influence, see Dalarun, Francis, esp. 147 51, 159, 211.
9. On recent trends in historiography, see Powell, Mendicants; on the larger problems of the
Franciscan question, see Dalarun, Malavventura.
10. For example, Daniel, Franciscan Concept, makes no reference to John of Plano Carpini and
only fleetingly to William of Rubruck, while neither appear in Kedar, Crusade. They are of
course extremely well-served by the literature on Mongols, geography, travel, and exploration.
11. Tolan, Saint Francis; Daniel, Franciscan Concept; Daniel, Desire for Martyrdom; Tolan,
Saracens, esp. 214 74; Schmieder, Europa, esp. 128 51.
12. Gueret-Laferte, Sur les routes. On interpreters, see: Sinor, Interpreters, 31120. Moreover, as
Vose has pointed out, even these men were exceptional; most friars were neither able nor
particularly willing to work toward the conversion of non-Christians. Vose, Dominicans, 250.
He goes on: It would be a distortion of history to take their few theoretical statements on
mission, combined with an equally few examples of proselytizing behaviour, and conclude that
serious missionizing characterised relations between Dominicans and non-Christians
throughout the Middle Ages. Elsewhere, he notes that mainstream Franciscans were no more
inclined towards external missions than the Dominicans (29).
13. il dure de ca mer et de la, Joinville, Vie, 326. On the mendicant presence in the Holy Land,
see Hamilton, Ideals, 708 12.
14. This is discussed in Tsougarakis, Latin Religious Orders. I am grateful for the opportunity to
see this material before publication. See also Vose, Dominicans, who makes a similar argument
at 56 9 and elsewhere; Bird, Crusade; Euben, Journeys, 18, 181 97.
15. There is a growing historiography of interfaith and cross-cultural interactions in the eastern
Mediterranean. See Kedar, Franks.
16. Eudes de Chateauroux, Sermo in eodem anniversario, trans. Jackson, Seventh Crusade, 173;
Paris, Chronica majora, vol. 5, 108 9, 169 70, 254. The point is further demonstrated by the
fascinating case of Riccoldo da Monte Croce, whose knowledge of and by contemporary
standards respect for Islam were a factor in his horrified questioning of Gods judgement
when Acre fell in 1291.
17. Kedar does note (xii) that the term mission did not exist at the time, although he uses it. It now
carries a heavy cultural and conceptual baggage (see Dunch, Beyond Cultural Imperialism)
that can seep unhelpfully into discussions of medieval experience. For the same reason, I have
avoided the anachronistic word crusade (Tyerman, Invention, 49 55), preferring to leave
Louis intentions and experiences more open.
18. The relevant sections in both the Rule of 1221 and that of 1223 were entitled: De euntibus
inter saracenos et alios infideles. Regula non bullata, 16; Regula bulllata, 12, in Esser
(ed.), Opuscula, 237, 268.
19. inter eos possunt spiritualiter conversari, Regular non bullata, 16, in Esser (ed.), Opuscula,
237. Although this advice was removed in the final version, it was known, sometimes reinstated
in commentaries, and reitered in context. See Hugh of Dignes Rule Commentary, XII, 191 5;
Letter 246, Adae de Marisco, Epistolae, 431 6.
20. predicationem et animarum salutem quoted in Vose, Dominicans, 34. See his valuable
discussion on the development of concepts of mission, at 21 59; also Tugwells explication
of the ideas developed by Gregory IX in his bull canonizing Dominic: Fons sapientiae
(Humberti, 32980).
21. Bullarium franciscanum, vol. 1, 269 70, translation from Muldoon, Popes, 36 7; Richard,
Papaute, 65.
22. Wadding (ed.), Annales minorum, III, 380 1. For the use of Joachim of Fiore by the
mendicants, see Reeves, Influence of Prophecy.
23. On Louis lack of interest in eschatology, see Le Goff, Saint Louis, 456 60; for attacks based
in apocalyptic thought see Geltner, Introduction to William of Saint-Amour, De periculis,
9 18. On the atmosphere ca. 1245, see Flori, LIslam, 354 63, although Flori considers it to
have been more intense at the time of Louis 1270 expedition (371).
24. On criticisms of Louis see Jordan, Case.
25. Maier, Preaching, 62; Maier, Crusade Propaganda, esp. 52 68; Gaposchkin, Making,
173 80; Smith, Crusading, 75 108.
26. See Bachrach, Friars; Hoose, Francis; Kedar, Crusade.
27. There are numerous examples, some transparently ideological, e.g., Gallant, Francis. More
realistic are the competing interpretations offered in Maier, Preaching, 8 19, 161; Powell,
St. Francis; Hoose, Francis.
28. For a compelling argument along these lines, see Caldwell Ames, Righteous Persecution. She
notes the difficulty that (western) historians still have in getting past the notion that genuine
Christianity must equate with tolerance (11).
29. Powell, St. Francis.
30. Muldoon, Popes, 3 18. On the prehistory and influence of the idea, see Throop, Combat;
Bird, Crusade.
31. Kedar, Crusade, 161 5.
32. Jordan, Anti-corruption Campaigns; Le Goff, Saint Louis, 125 7.
33. Lower, Conversion, 230 1.
34. magis erat dicendus monachus quantum ad devotionem cordis, quam quantum ad arma
bellica miles, Salimbene, Cronica, 336. There are reports of Louis humble requests for
prayers before both of his departures. For the 1270 expedition, see Field (ed. and trans.),
Writings, 48/49.
35. ad honorem Domini nostri Iesu Christi et ad dandum Terre Sancte succursum et ad
debellandum hostes et inimicos fidei et crucis Christi et ad honorem universalis Ecclesie et
198 A. Power
totius fidei Christiane et pro salute anime sue et omnium qui secum transfertare debebunt.
Cronica, 337. On Louis preaching, see Jordan, Louis IX.
36. Compare Joinville, Vie, 166 70 (and for the death threats, the less reliable Guillaume de
Chartres, De vita et actibus inclytae recordationis regis francorum ludovici et de miraculis in
Bouquet (ed.), Recueil, vol. 20, 31), and Thomas of Celanos account of Francis experiences
in his 1229 Vita prima, I.20; Menesto` (ed.), Fontes, 331 2. Louis could also have heard the
version of Henri dAvranches. Tolan, St Francis, 73 9. For the mapping of Louis sanctity on
to that of Francis, see Gaposchkin, Making, 158 80. See also Annala, Brother Francis;
Smith, Crusading, 139 49. On the gifts, see: Cutler, Everywhere and Nowhere, 256 7;
Shreve Simpson, Manuscripts, 354 5. On ideas about converting sultans, see Knobler,
Pseudo-Conversions.
37. Joinville, Vie, 256 9; Rothelin Continuation, 111 2.
38. On this point, see: DAlverny, La connaissance.
39. Animan tuam, quam diabolus sibi vendicat in baratrum detrudendam; si totus iste mundus
visibilis meus esset, totum darem pro luero animarum; nunquam ad regnum meum Franciae
curo remeare, dummodo tuam et aliorum infidelium animas Deo lucrifaciam; qui tot et tam
praecipit et permittit inhonesta (aspexi enim et inspexi suum spurcissimum Alchoranum);
Sed nec unquam post hanc confabulationem salutiferam tam pronus ut ante exstitit vel devotus
Machometicae supersititioni, Chronica majora, vol. 5, 309 10. On the background, see
Richard, Saint Louis, 134 40. The episode is discussed in Le Goff, Saint Louis, 646 9; Kedar,
Crusade, 161 2. Both, however, locate it during the time of Louis captivity in 1250. This
would be more plausible, since Louis did have direct conversations with the Ayyubid sultan,
Turan Shah. Like his grandfather, Turan Shah was known for his scholarly interests and had a
Christian secretary. However, Matthew was quite clear that the discussion was later, several
years after the assassination of Turan Shah. On Matthew Paris reliability as a chronicler, see
Vaughan, Matthew Paris, 131 44.
40. Joinville, Vie, 166 8; Geoffroi de Beaulieu, Vita Ludovici Noni in Bouquet (ed.), Recueil,
vol. 20, 15; Guillaume de Chartres, De vita et actibus in Bouquet (ed.), Recueil, vol. 20, 30;
Jackson, Seventh Crusade, 129, 135, 140, 15 4, 160.
41. Ibn Wasil, Mufarrij al-kurub fi akhbar ban Ayyub, trans. Jackson, Seventh Crusade, 153 4.
42. Vovi et juravi huc venire . . . sed non vovi nec juravi hinc recedere, Letter of Gui de Burcey,
in Paris, Chronica majora, vol. 6, 163; trans. Jackson, Seventh Crusade, 92.
43. Non illa vel illa die ipsum Christi inimicum diffiducio, nec terminum quietis constituo, sed cras
et omnibus diebus vitae meae, ex hoc nunc et deinceps, diffiducio; donec animae suae propriae
misereatur, et ad Dominum convertatur, Letter of Gui, in Paris, Chronica majora, vol. 6, 161;
trans. Jackson, Seventh Crusade, 90 1.
44. Novit Omnipotens, quod huc de Francia veni, non ut terras adquirerem vel pecuniam mihi, sed
tantummodo ut animas vestras periclitantes Deo lucrifacerem, Paris, Chronica majora,
vol. 5, 160. See also Cole, Application, 227 9.
45. For example, Louis refusal to cheat the Muslims out of part of the ransom was noted. Joinville,
Vie, 190;
46. He expressed this idea to Joinville in relation to debating with Jews (Vie, 26 8), but it was
equally applicable here.
47. Moorman, History, 228, 230.
48. li enseigna moult de bones paroles, Joinville, Vie, 226 8. Louis also sent Yves with his
envoys to the Sultan of Damascus (Vie, 218).
49. It was also alleged that some Muslims regarded the capture of Damietta as so miraculous that
they converted. Paris, Chronica majora, vol. 6, 160 1.
50. Et haec fuit eorum causa conversionis; in adversitate patientiam, in proposito inflexibilem
constantiam; fidei suae firmitatem; pro animabus infidelium lucrandis omnem operam
impensurus; quod Machometi lex spurcissima animarum est intoxicativa, Paris,
Chronica majora, vol. 5, 425.
51. Other sources, including the royal accounts, testify to the arrival of the converts, although it
was suggested by another witness that they were interested only in the money Louis offered.
Kedar, Crusade, 163 4.
52. pro tota terra reddenda cultui Christiano, Letter of Guilliaume de Sonnac, quoted in Paris,
Chronica majora, vol. 6, 162.
53. Paris, Chronica majora, vol. 6, 166 7.
54. expiato loco et asperse per aquam benedictam; spurcissimus Machometus cum
detestabilibus immolationibus et vocibus altisonis et tubarum clangore magnificabatur,
Letter of Gui, quoted in Paris, Chronica majora, vol. 6, 160; trans. Jackson, Seventh Crusade,
89 90.
55. Southern, Western Views. See Daniel, Franciscan Concept, 176 80; Whalen, Dominion,
149 74. On the conversion of rulers, see Knobler, Pseudo-Conversions, and on Louis Tunis
strategy: Lower, Conversion.
56. Paris, Chronica, vol. 4, 111 2.
57. Johns report, together with that of another envoy, Simon de Saint-Quentin, was incorporated
by Vincent de Beauvais into his Speculum historiale, which was written under Louis
patronage. See Guzman, The Encyclopaedist; Le Goff, Saint Louis, 475 6.
58. On these episodes, see Paviot, Joinville; Richard, Au-dela`, 159 73; Richard, La lettre;
Jackson, Seventh Crusade, 65 9, 74 85; Ruotsala, Crusaders, and Europeans, 44 7,
60 7.
59. For the range of efforts across the eastern regions, see Richard, Papaute. All the missions sent
out by Innocent IV in ca. 1245, usually presented in the historiography as missions to the
Mongols, had broader targets. John called himself: Sedis Apostolice nuntius ad Tartaros et ad
nationes alias orientis, and said that he had only gone to the Mongols first because they
seemed to present the most pressing danger to Christendom. Ystoria mongolorum in Van den
Wygaert (ed.), Sinica Franciscana, vol. 1, 27.
60. E.g., John of Plano Carpini with the Russian princes. Ystoria mongolorum, 103, 127.
61. Ruotsala, Europeans, 88 100; Rachewiltz, Papal Envoys, 84 124. William of Rubruck
complained that he was sent back to Christendom, even though he had hoped to remain
among the Christian captives as their priest. Itinerarium in Van den Wygaert (ed.),
Sinica Franciscana, vol. 1, 289 90, 299 300; trans. 226, 238 9.
62. quia nulli nuntiorum, nisi adeurate vestito vultum Regis electi et coronati licuit intueri,
Relatio Fr. Benedicti Poloni in Van den Wyngaert (ed.), Sinica Franciscana, vol. 1, 139.
See Ruotsala, Europeans, 74 88; Gueret-Laferte, Les gestes.
63. Ystoria mongolorum, 118 21.
64. monstrer et enseigner comment il devoient croire, Joinville, Vie, 66, 232; report of
Eudes de Chateauroux in Jackson, Seventh Crusade, 82. See Shreve Simpson, Manuscripts,
356 61.
65. ibam apud illos incredulos secundum Regulam nostram, Itinerarium, 168; trans. Jackson,
Mission, 67.
66. When he returned from his travels, he was ordered to teach in the convent in Acre for a time,
but he did eventually reach Louis who had by then returned to Paris. Jackson, Mission, 40 42;
Bacon, Opus maius, vol. 1, 305.
67. On the nature of Louis letter, see Itinerarium, 243; Richard, Sur les pas, 55 61. The debate
(described at Itinerarium, 277 82) is the subject of an extensive literature. See in particular
Kedar, Multilateral Disputation.
68. exercitus Ecclesie; ire sicut vadunt Reges Tartarorum et talibus esse cibariis contenti,
possunt acquirere totum mundum, Itinerarium, 331; trans. Jackson, Mission, 278. John of
Plano Carpini had made a similar suggestion. Ystoria mongolorum, 96 101.
69. Itinerarium, 326, 3312; trans. Jackson, Mission, 270, 278.
70. Si habuissem potestatem faciendi signa sicut Moyses, forte humiliasset se, Itinerarium, 300;
trans. Jackson, Mission, 239.
71. cest le plus large que je veisse onques, Joinville, Vie, 326.
72. Joinville, Vie, 198.
73. In terram alienarum gentium transiet, bona et mala in omnibus temptabit. Hoc opus, domine
mi Rex, feci, Itinerarium, 164.
74. Indeed, Hoose suggests that Francis of Assisi was able to speak so freely to al-Kaml as a
consequence of the same considerations (Francis, 467 8).
Notes on contributor
Amanda Power obtained her doctorate from the University of Cambridge, working under the
supervision of David Abulafia. She subsequently held a research fellowship at Magdalene College,
Cambridge. She is now a lecturer in medieval history at the University of Sheffield. She is
200 A. Power
completing a monograph for Cambridge University Press: Roger Bacon and the Defence of
Christendom. In addition to her work on Roger Bacon, she has published studies exploring the
intellectual, imaginative and religious life of the mendicant orders, especially within the context of
their missionary activities.
Bibliography
Primary references
Adae de Marisco, Epistolae. In Monumenta Franciscana, ed. John Sheridan Brewer. 2 vols.
London, 1858.
Bacon, Roger. Opus maius. Ed. John Henry Bridges. 3 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1897 1900.
Bouquet, Martin, ed. Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France. 24 vols. Paris, 1738.
Bullarium franciscanum. Ed. J.H. Sbaralea. 4 vols. Rome, 1759 68.
Field, Sean, ed. and trans. The Writings of Agnes of Harcourt: The Life of Isabelle of France and the
Letter on Louis IX and Longchamp. Notre Dame: The University of Notre Dame Press, 2006.
Hugh of Dignes Rule Commentary. Ed. D. Flood. Rome: Grottaferrata, 1979.
Jackson, Peter, ed. and trans. The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck: His Journey to the Court of
the Great Khan Mongke, 1253 1255. London: The Hackluyt Society, 1990.
. The Seventh Crusade, 1244 1254: Sources and Documents. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007.
Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis. Ed. and trans. J. Monfrin. Paris: Classiques Garnier, 1995.
Menesto`, Enrico, and Stefano Brufani. Fontes franciscani. Assisi: Edizioni Porziuncola, 1995.
Opuscula Sancti Patris Francisci Assisiensis. Ed. Kajetan Esser. Grottaferrata, Rome: Editiones
Collegii S. Bonaventurae Ad Claras Aquas, 1978.
Paris, Matthew. Chronica majora. Ed. H.R. Luard. 7 vols. London, 1872 83.
The Rothelin continuation of William of Tyre. In Crusader Syria in the Thirteenth Century, trans.
J. Shirley. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999.
Salimbene de Adam. Chronica. Ed. G. Scalia. 2 vols. Turnholt, 1998 9; trans. J.L. Baird,
The Chronicle of Salimbene de Adam. New York: Binghamton, 1986.
Tugwell, Simon, ed. Humberti de Romanis Legendae Sancti Dominici. Rome: Institutum Historicum
Ordinis Fratrum Praedicatorum, 2008.
Van den Wyngaert, Anatasius, ed. Sinica Franciscana, vol. 1, Itinera et relationes fratrum minorum
saeculi XIII et XIV. Florence: Quaracchi, 1929.
Wadding, Luke, ed. Annales minorum. 30 vols. Florence: Quaracchi, 1931 51.
William of Saint-Amour. In De periculis novissimorum temporum, ed. G. Geltner. Paris: Peeters, 2008.
Secondary references
Abulafia, David. Mediterraneans. In Rethinking the Mediterranean, ed. W.V. Harris, 64 93.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Annala, Pauli. Brother Francis and the Fifth Crusade. In Medieval History Writing and Crusading
Ideology, ed. Tuomas M., S. Lehtonen, et al., 10719. Helsinki: Suomalaisen kirjallisuuden seura,
2005.
Bachrach, David S. The Friars Go to War: Mendicant Military Chaplains, 1216 c. 1300.
Catholic Historical Review 90, no. 4 (2004): 61733.
Bird, Jessalynn. Crusade and Conversion after the Fourth Lateran Council (1215): Oliver of
Paderborns and James of Vitrys Missions to Muslims Reconsidered. Essays in Medieval
Studies 21 (2004): 23 48.
Caldwell Ames, Christine. Righteous Persecution: Inquisition, Dominicans, and Christianity in the
Middle Ages. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009.
Cole, Penny, et al. Application of Theology to Current Affairs: Memorial Sermons on the Dead of
Mansurah and on Innocent IV. In Modern Questions about Medieval Sermons: Essays on
Marriage, Death, History and Sanctity, ed. Nicole Beriou et al., 217 45. Spoleto: Centro
Italiano di Studi sullalto medioevo, 1994.
Cutler, Anthony. Everywhere and Nowhere: The Invisible Muslim and Christian Self-Fashioning in
the Culture of Outremer. In France and the Holy Land: Frankish Culture at the End of the
Crusades, ed. Daniel H. Weiss and Lisa Mahoney, 253 81. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 2004.
Dalarun, Jacques. Francis of Assisi and Power. Trans. Anne Bartol. New York: Franciscan Institute,
2007.
. La Malavventura di Francesco dAssisi: per un uso storico delle leggende francescane.
Milan: Edizioni Biblioteca Francescana, 1996.
DAlverny, Marie-There`se. La connaissance de lIslam au temps de Saint Louis. In Septie`me
centenaire de la mort de Saint Louis: Actes des colloques de Royaumont et de Paris (21 27 mai
1970), 235 46. Paris: Belles Lettres, 1976.
Daniel, E. Randolph. The Desire for Martyrdom: A Leitmotiv of St. Bonaventure. Franciscan
Studies 32 (1972): 74 87.
. The Franciscan Concept of Mission in the High Middle Ages. Kentucky: University Press of
Kentucky, 1975.
Dunch, Ryan. Beyond Cultural Imperialism: Cultural Theory, Christian Missions, and Global
Modernity. History and Theory 41 (2002): 30125.
Euben, Roxanne L. Journeys to the Other Shore: Muslim and Western Travellers in Search of
Knowledge. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006.

Flori, Jean. LIslam et la fin des temps: linterpretation prophetique des invasions musulmanes dans
la chretiente medievale. Paris: Seuil, 2007.
Gallant, Laurent. Francis of Assisi: Forerunner of Interreligious Dialogue. Chapter 16 of the Earlier
Rule Revisited. Franciscan Studies 64 (2006): 53 76.
Gaposchkin, M. Cecilia. The Making of Saint Louis: Kingship, Sanctity and Crusade in the Later
Middle Ages. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2008.
Gueret-Laferte, Michele. Les gestes de lautre. Senefiance 41 (1998): 237 53.
. Sur les routes de lEmpire mongol: Ordre et rhetorique des relations de voyage au XIIIe
sie`cles. Paris: Honore Champion Editeur, 1994.
Guzman, Gregory G. The Encyclopaedist Vincent of Beauvais and his Mongol Extracts from John
of Plano Carpini and Simon of Saint-Quentin. Speculum 49 (1974): 287 307.
Hamilton, Bernard. Ideals of Holiness: Crusaders, Contemplatives, and Mendicants. In Bernard
Hamilton, Crusaders, Cathars and the Holy Places, XVI. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999.
Hoose, Adam L. Francis of Assisis Way of Peace? His Conversion and Mission to Egypt. Catholic
Historical Review 96, no. 3 (2010): 449 69.
Jackson, Peter. The Mongols and the West, 1221 1410. London: Pearson, 2005.
Jordan, William Chester. Anti-corruption Campaigns in Thirteenth-century Europe. Journal of
Medieval History 35, no. 2 (2009): 204 19.
. Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade: A Study in Rulership. Princeton: Princeton
. Louis IX: Preaching to Franciscan and Dominican Brothers and Nuns. In Defenders and
Critics of Franciscan Life: Essays in Honor of John V. Fleming, ed. Michael F. Cusato and
Guy Geltner, 219 36. Leiden: Brill, 2009.
. The Case of Saint Louis. Viator 19 (1988): 209 17.
Kedar, Benjamin Z. Crusade and Mission: European Approaches toward the Muslims. Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1984.
. Franks, Muslims and Oriental Christians in the Latin Levant: Studies in Frontier
Acculturation. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006.
. The Multilateral Disputation at the Court of the Grand Qan Mongke, 1254. In The Majlis:
Interreglious Encounters in Medieval Islam, ed. Hava Lazarus-Yafeh, et al., 16283.
Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1999.
Knobler, Adam. Pseudo-Conversions and Patchwork Pedigrees: The Christianisation of Muslim
Princes and the Diplomacy of Holy War. Journal of World History 7, no. 2 (1996): 181 97.
Lapsanski, Duane V. Evangelical Perfection: An Historical Examination of the Concept in the Early
Franciscan Sources. New York: Franciscan Institute of St Bonaventure University, 1977.
Lawrence, C.H. The Friars: The Impact of the Early Mendicant Movement on Western Society.
London: Longman, 1994.
Le Goff, Jacques. Saint Louis. Trans. Gareth Evan Gollrad. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame
Press, 2009.
. Saint Louis and the Mediterranean. Mediterranean Historical Review 5, no. 1 (1990): 2153.
Little, Lester K. Saint Louis Involvement with the Friars. Church History 33, no. 2 (1964): 12548.
Lower, Michael. Conversion and St Louiss Last Crusade. Journal of Ecclesiastical History 58
(2007): 211 31.
202 A. Power
Maier, Christoph T. Crusade Propaganda and Ideology: Model Sermons for the Preaching of the
Cross. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
. Preaching the Crusades: Mendicant Friars and the Cross in the Thirteenth Century.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Moorman, John. A History of the Franciscan Order from Its Origins to the Year 1517. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1968.
Muldoon, James. Popes, Lawyers and Infidels. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1979.
Paviot, Jacques. Joinville et les Mongols. In Jean de Joinville: de la Champagne aux royaumes
doutre-mer, ed. Danielle Queruel, 207 18. Paris: Editions Klincksieck, 1998.
Powell, James M. Mendicants, the Communes, and the Law. Church History 77, no. 3 (2008):
557 73.
. The Papacy and the Early Franciscans. Franciscan Studies 36 (1976): 248 62.
. St. Francis of Assisis Way of Peace. Medieval Encounters 13 (2007): 271 80.
Rachewiltz, Igor de. Papal Envoys to the Great Khans. London: Faber and Faber, 1971.
Reeves, Majorie. The Influence of Prophecy in the Later Middle Ages: A Study in Joachimism.
New ed. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1993.
Richard, Jean. Au-dela` de la Perse et de lArmenie: LOrient latin et la decouverte de lAsie
interieure. Turnhout: Brepols, 2005.
. La lettre du connetable Smbat et les rapports entre chretiens et Mongols au milieu du XIIIe
sie`cle. In Croisades et Etats latins dOrient. Points de vue et documents, ed. Jean Richard,
XIII. Aldershot: Ashgate Variorum, 1992.
. La Papaute et les missions dOrient au Moyen Age (XIIIe XVe sie`cles). 2nd ed. Rome:
Ecole Francaise de Rome, 1998.
. Saint Louis: Crusader King of France. Ed. Simon Lloyd. Trans. Jean Birrell. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1992.
. Sur les pas de Plancarpin et de Rubrouck: la lettre de saint Louis a` Sartaq. In Croises,
missionnaries et voyageurs: Les perspectives orientales du monde latin medieval, ed. Jean
Richard, XII. London: Variorum Reprints, 1983.
Ruotsala, Antti. Europeans and Mongols in the Middle of the Thirteenth Century: Encountering the
Other. Helsinki: Finnish Academy of Science and Letters, 2001.
. The Crusaders and the Mongols: The Case of the First Crusade of Louis IX (1248 54).
In Medieval History Writing and Crusading Ideology, ed. Tuomas M., S. Lehtonen, et al.,
302 9. Helsinki: Suomalaisen kirjallisuuden seura, 2005.
Schmieder, Felicitas. Europa und die Fremden: die Mongolen im Urteil des Abendlandes vom 13. bis
in das 15. Jahrhundert. Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1994.
Shreve Simpson, Marianna. Manuscripts and Mongols: Some Documented and Speculative Moments
in East-West/Muslim-Christian Relations. French Historical Studies 30, no. 3 (2007): 35194.
Sinor, Dennis. Interpreters in Medieval Inner Asia. Reprinted in Dennis Sinor, Studies in Medieval
Inner Asia. Aldershot: Ashgate Variorum, 1997.
Smith, Caroline. Crusading in the Age of Joinville. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006.
Southern, Richard W. Western Views of Islam in the Middle Ages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Throop, Susanna A. Combat and Conversion: Interfaith Dialogue in Twelfth-Century Crusading
Narratives. Medieval Encounters 13 (2007): 310 25.
Tolan, John V. Saint Francis and the Sultan: The Curious History of a Christian-Muslim Encounter.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
. Saracens: Islam in the Medieval European Imagination. New York: Columbia University
Press, 2002.
Tsougarakis, Nicky. The Latin Religious Orders in Medieval Greece, 1204 1500. Turnholt:
Brepols (forthcoming).
Tyerman, Christopher. The Invention of the Crusades. London: Palgrave, 1998.
Vaughan, Richard. Matthew Paris. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1958.
Vose, Robin. Dominicans, Muslims and Jews in the Medieval Crown of Aragon. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Whalen, Brett Edward. Dominion of God: Christendom and Apocalypse in the Middle Ages.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009.

Going Among The Infidels

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Going Among The Infidels

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

This article was downloaded by: [Moskow State Univ Bibliote]

On: 03 February 2014, At: 15:13

Mediterranean Historical Review

Going among the infidels: the

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09518967.2010.540898

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Department of History, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

ISSN 0951-8967 print/ISSN 1743-940X online

expectations aroused by the accounts of Francis of Assisis encounter with al-Kamil.

he recommended the adoption of Mongol culture and discipline, William acknowledged

Knowledge. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi