Machomet’s sectarian ideology is based on the negation of the sacraments, especially marriage and marital chastity. Simple people follow him because of the laxity of the rules he preaches, and remain faithful to his teachings after his death.
Machomet dies as the leader of the religious community, mourned by many, although his death is described as being bizarre. Detailed descriptions of Saracen worship are also omitted from the lives, and Allah is not mentioned at all.
Machomet acts without divine mandate and, indeed, without any relation to divinity. His personal beliefs are not discussed. The literary convention dictates the main ideas, but in each case the details are flavoured by more individual nuancing.
The earliest of the texts, Embricon of Mainz’s Vita Mahumeti, is set in Libya, where Mammutius is the servant of the consul.47 A certain mage, an estranged and bitter heretic, makes Mammutius his disciple, causes the death of the good consul by black magic, and arranges Mammutius’ marriage with a displeased widow, who claims that Mammutius is not her equal in rank, and gives her consent only when pressed by the will of God. Mammutius becomes consul in his master’s place.48
Dull-witted Mammutius obeys the mage implicitly, carries out his plans like a mindless tool, and disperses the heresy.49 When a good son of the Church, the King of Libya, dies, the honour of his kingdom perishes with him.50 With the vile mage on his side, Mammutius rises to power and defiles the sacred law, preaches the sanctity of adultery and provokes incest.51 God punishes him with epilepsy, epileptica pestis,52 and he ends his days lacerated by pigs.53 His followers curse pigs and bury Mammutius in a tomb, which levitates into the air through the use of magnets.54
Guibert of Nogent similarly emphasizes the menace of heresy. His treatise begins with a list of famous heretics: Pelagius, Arius and Manes, the Eunomians, Eutychians and Nestorians.55 After lamenting his inability to name all the thousands of hideous groups of sectarians, he continues with the errors of the Orthodox Greeks, whom he claims to have been justly punished by God because 143
S I N I K A N G A S
of their many sins: denial of the Trinity, marriages of priests, supplying pagans with Christian slaves, and promoting prostitution.56 Next Guibert turns to Mathomus, who, according to popular belief, led Christians astray: he had claimed that the Father was but one, and that Christ was a human being.57 Guibert is vexed by the fact that he has not been able to find mentions of this Mathomus in the pages of the ‘doctors of the church’, thus assuming that Mathomus had probably lived quite recently.58 Guibert, too, ascribes Mathomus’ wickedness to his teacher. The Christian community had disqualified him from becoming the Patriarch of Alexandria because of his heretical views.59 Enraged and vengeful, the wicked hermit chose poor Mathomus as his apprentice, raising him to wealth and importance. He even advised a rich widow to marry Mathomus by promising her a place in paradise. However, the widow was disappointed by his epileptic fits and sought to annul the marriage. The heretical hermit succeeded in convincing her that Mathomus was not an epileptic, but a visionary.
The hermit told everyone that Mathomus was a prophet, and helped him to write a law in which every possible vice was recommended.60 Mathomus then amazed an audience by the miraculous appearance of a cow, which carried the law book on its horns.61 Thus normal became abnormal, and the sectarians who once had been Christians wiped out the name of Christ in the east, Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Libya and parts of Spain.62 Meanwhile, Mathomus’ epilepsy grew worse, and he finally fell down before some pigs, which devoured him, except for his heels. His followers imagined that Mathomus, whom they venerated as an honest man and their patron but not as their god, had ascended to heaven, leaving nothing but his heels to be buried, and condemned the consumption of pork.63
Later their wicked ways grew worse, they practised their religion in their temples called mahomeries, slaughtered Catholics, deflowered virgins, and even committed sodomy against a certain bishop who died during the act.64
Lepage dates Gautier of Compiègne’s Otia de Machomete in an inter-crusade period between 1137 and 1155. This is an interesting period, witnessing both the high point of crusading enthusiasm after the conquest of Jerusalem in 1099 and the turning of the tide by the Turkish reconquest of Edessa (1144), after which the Second Crusade (1147–9) was preached in the west. If the compilation of the text had been provoked by the looming crusade, it might well have been intended to complement preaching. Consequently, it might well also be that several other vitae were commissioned by the time of Gautier’s writing: Bischoff dates Adelphus’s text to c.1150, and this is close enough to lend the theory more plausibility.65 While Adelphus’s version survives in one nearly contemporary copy and Gautier’s in two, it is difficult to draw more precise conclusions, especially when each is as genre-specifically formulated as these are. The content of Gautier’s text, however, supports a date previous to the launching of the Second Crusade.
Compared to Adelphus’s version, the tone is relaxed and Muslims represent no immediate danger to western Christendom. Surprisingly, Gautier’s theme is love.
In Otia de Machomete Machomet is a clever upstart, educated in the seven liberal arts and Christian faith,66 and acting in his own interest. A Christian hermit 144
C R U S A D E P R O P A G A N D A
is again present, but in this case he is depicted as a genuinely holy man, who assists Machomet to win a virtuous Christian lady’s hand to spare the Christian community from greater harm.67 The quest for the love and wealth of this great lady is the main thread of the story, and Gautier primarily describes Machomet as a cunning serf rather than a pseudo-prophet.68 Machomet fails to impress the lady with his own merits, and has to bribe the barons to be able to woo her. Unlike the other examples, this Machomet is a cold-blooded opportunist and completely indifferent towards religion, whether virtuous or sinful. He knows very well that he is not a prophet, but wants to be rich and famous, and works hard to attain this end using means that could be called Machiavellian.69 The villains of the story are the Christian barons who betray a noble and pious lady for money.70 Marital problems arise because of Machomet’s epilepsy, but the hermit eventually succeeds in assuring the lady that his fit during the wedding night was actually a divine apparition during which archangel Gabriel had visited him. Her sorrow turns into overwhelming joy.71 Through his beneficial marriage and successful bribery Machomet is able to become the religious leader of the society. By virtue of the Saracen law brought to him on the horns of his trained bull he renounces baptism, brings back circumcision, and allows one man to have ten wives – and vice versa!72
After his religious leadership has been secured, Machomet becomes involved in warfare against the Persians: Gautier’s remark about God giving victory to those who are humble and who repent could be a direct quotation from a crusade chronicler describing the outcome of a battle.73 Machomet abandons his men to be slaughtered by the enemy on the battlefield, and tells the soldiers’ wives and children that God has destroyed the army for their sins.74 The new religion spreads and Machomet dies old and famous, only to suffer the pains of hell. After his death his disciples embalm the body and make him a miraculous arch, in which his body seems to float in the air. They believe that his soul has ascended to the stars, and his body remains venerated in the city of Mecca.75
Gautier’s main themes – winning the affection of the lady, the wedding festivities and waging war – are essentially closer to chanson de geste than other vitae. The author refers frequently to Machomet’s licentiousness and error, but equally to the consequences of deliberate sinning. The text emphasizes the search for power and social mobility. Gautier’s text is a travesty but, unlike the other three, it is a travesty of a heretical knight and, more precisely, a crusader knight.
Adelphus likewise places the story in a crusading milieu, explaining that he heard it on his way from Jerusalem to Antioch,76 and Bischoff’s dating of c.115077
gives further support to the claim of the author’s participation
in the failed Second Crusade.78 In comparison with Gautier’s text, Adelphus’s version is more realistic, and more pessimistic. Accordingly, Machomet’s sect creates monstrous danger for Christendom, representing another example of the eternal fight between ‘the sacred faith and paganism, the Temple of the Lord and the idol’.79 As the text proceeds, it nevertheless becomes clear that Machomet is completely human, and that the mentions of monstrosity refer to his ruthlessness rather than any biological abnormality. What makes Adelphus’s text interesting is that he describes 145
S I N I K A N G A S
Machomet’s career as a process indicating personal change. It is power that corrupts Machomet, a poor swineherd from the remote mountains of Lebanon.
Adelphus describes learning as a means of social mobility, and draws a direct link between successful dogmatism and communal power. He is the only one among the writers who includes the traditional definition of Saracens – that they should be called Agareni after Hagar, not Saraceni as if they were related to Sarah80 – which is frequently found in ecclesiastic authors’ texts from the Church fathers onward.
Machomet changes when he meets a Nestorian heretic who has been excommunicated and exiled by his community to sylvan, uninhabited mountains. On describing the hermit, Adelphus quotes Paul’s metaphor of foxes despoiling grapevines, which is another commonly quoted verse in learned passages describing the heretical enemies of the Church.81 While tending his herd, a demon leads Machomet to meet this vile man, whom he reveres for his learnedness and authority. Machomet returns again and again to listen to the hermit teaching his diabolical doctrine, and eventually becomes his trusted disciple.82
Together these men begin to preach among Machomet’s people. Adelphus states that the new cult belonged neither to orthodox Christiany nor pagan idolatry, but to Nestorian heresy reformulated by Machomet and his teacher.83 At this phase, Machomet still accepts the hermit as his leader, and swears his loyalty and belief in the piety, dignity and authority of the holy man.84 Machomet’s devotion is obviously real, and his suggestion that the hermit’s doctrine be written down as a holy book is based on genuine devotion. A description of the faked miracle and the training of the cow to give the book to Machomet follows.85
When their following among ignorant people becomes numerous, however, Machomet begins to envy his teacher, who is now venerated as a holy man among the Agarens. Besides, Machomet is not the sole disciple any more, but has to face competition from other favourites. In the middle of the night, Machomet takes his knife and stabs his teacher, later pretending his death is natural.86
In the three remaining paragraphs of Adelphus’s story, Machomet is chosen as the leader of the religious community in his teacher’s place. Not long afterwards, the good King of Babylonia dies, and Machomet, who has secret support even in the court, manages to press the widower queen to marry him.87 Thereafter Machomet is the universal leader of the Saracens, and is able to use his power to distribute his erroneous beliefs until he is eventually lacerated by wild pigs while hunting in a forest. Only the right arm of the false prophet is left behind.88
Adelphus chose the origin, rise and diffusion of a heresy as the central theme of his text. He shows that a clever young man among the landless poor can be raised to religious leadership and that, with adequate support, his ambition will become limitless. Remote areas where the authority of the Church is less pronounced are in particular danger of becoming stained by heresy. Whereas in Gautier’s text Machomet was motivated by love, fortune and glory, Adelphus’s teaching is that Machomet’s opportunism is particularly dangerous, because it derives from spiritual decay. The moral of the story is that all who take up the sword of heresy will perish by that very sword, even if they originally act in good faith.
146
C R U S A D E P R O P A G A N D A
Adelphus does not discuss the imagined perversions of Machomet: accusations of bigamy, sodomy and other indications of loose sexual morals are not once mentioned. The text similarly omits any details of his teaching, other than pointing out that it was not idolatrous. The only act of violence is limited to personal aggression concealed from the community; no declaration of war takes place.
These four texts refer to Muslims as Saracens.89 The geographical place names mentioned – Babylon, Lebanon, Libya, Jerusalem and Alexandria – coincide with the mythical fringes of the known world mentioned in crusader chronicles as well as with the medieval western notion of the east as the cradle of heretical beliefs.
According to Embricon, Mammutius became the Consul of Libia and married the Queen of Babylon. Adelphus locates him in a cave in the mountains of Lebanon, while Gautier originates Machomet among the Idumean race. Typically of medieval treatises, the words Muslim and Islam are not used.
The texts agree on the historical existence of Machomet and his pre-eminence among the Saracen people. Similar to the brave Saracen opponent who brightens the glory of the Christian knight in the chansons, a powerful villain offers an indispensable travesty of the majesty of Christ and his warlike champions. Unlike the noble enemy of epic poetry, however, the vitae deliberately ridicule Machomet before consigning him to hell. Colourful and entertaining, they were produced to appeal to various types of audience. Gautier’s text was later translated into the vernacular, and similar translations of the other three texts may have been circulated at some point. The texts intentionally describe Machomet in pejorative terms, representing the hard edge of crusade sources’ rhetorical attack against the publicly nominated enemy, which in general terms was not produced to educate people, but to arouse them to take up arms.90 The core of medieval religious prejudice is efficiently summarized in this genre, but this is not the complete explanation.
What do we actually learn about Machomet? The authors tell us that he was poor and lacked connections. He lived in a community which knew about Christianity and even had Christian members. At the fringes of this community were individual religious nonconformists, from whom Machomet drew his doctrinal support. Basically, the Saracen society resembles its western counterpart so much as to be an allegory of it. Unlike the chansons, references to the exotic east are absent; nor is Machomet genuinely skilled in magic or trained in oriental astrology. In fact, he is not even possessed by a demon. In his western lives, Machomet is entirely human. At the beginning of the story he is described as a young man, sometimes an imbecile, sometimes cunning, but essentially of servile status, meagre expectations and great hunger for wealth and dignity.91 If the geographical setting were altered, it would not be a difficult task to imagine his twin brother living in a village in the medieval west.
In contrast to chansons and crusader chronicles from the early twelfth century, the western lives of Machomet do not refer to paganism and idolatry.92
Machomet’s followers are mainly mentioned in terms of heresy. They represent a 147
S I N I K A N G A S
sect within a community, and the values that they renounce are essentially Christian: Machomet does not create new doctrine, but turns the old one upside down. He attacks the sacraments and the Christian order and, because he preaches a religion that gives simple people the freedom to sin, he becomes popular. He does not seek to conquer some remote kingdom, but attacks his own community, eventually polluting it by schism. The main charges against him – the denial of sacraments, incest, adultery and prostitution – are all problems that well up from within society, not outside it.
The most detailed and accurate twelfth-century treatise on Islam, Peter the Venerable’s summary Adversus nefandam haeresim sive sectam Saracenorum (1142), suggests the Saracen heresy. As the abbot of Cluny, Peter commissioned the first Latin translation of the Koran; he was personally involved in the process, knew where to find adequate scholars to accomplish the project and carefully studied the information gathered by the brothers responsible for the translation work. He was aware of the monotheism of Islam, of Muhammad’s role as the Prophet, of the holiness of the Koran, and of the five pil
lars of faith,93 but he decided to regard Islam as a heretical movement.
By the mid-twelfth century, two parallel literary traditions concerning Muslims occur in the Catholic west. Peter’s text manifests the standpoint of ecclesiastic scholarship, lumping Islam together with Christian heresy.94 At the same time, popular poetry and the storytelling tradition describe Muslims in terms of idolatrous pagans venerating Muhammad as if he was their god. Both perceptions of Islam were derived from established forms of writing. In Peter’s case, we can trace the origins of Saracen heresy to the ancient dispute between the descendants of Abraham, while the fantastic figure of the Saracen of the geste seems to have been more recent. From the Islamic point of view, both perceptions were erroneous, if not outright blasphemous.
Medieval literary genres reflect these ideas and often combine them. Whereas chansons mostly describe Saracens as idolaters, notions of heresy sometimes emerge between the lines. The western lives of Machomet relied primarily on the heretical interpretation, but they also borrow elements from popular poetry, especially in Gautier’s case. Similarly, crusader chronicles include both the idea of the worthy pagan warrior and the vile heretical adversary in their depiction of Saracens. While the medieval ecclesiastical history-writing and literature often favoured the heresy line,95 such popular major works as Vincent of Beauvais’s Speculum historiale (1220–44) refer to the worship of the idol of Mahomet.96
The Christian idea of Islam as a heresy was, of course, almost as old as Islam itself, originating in the writings of John of Damascus and Theophanes from the early eighth century.97 The typical accusations related to heresy were likewise present from the beginning, portraying Islam as a negation of true Christianity, guilty of moral and religious pollution, perverse sexuality, and hatred for the orthodox faith. Keeping in mind that crusading intensified the strife between the eastern and western Churches, it is no coincidence that crusader chronicles often mention Muslims and Byzantine Christians in the same breath. The effeminate 148
The Crusades and the Near East Page 27
