Religious Frontiers and Overlapping Cultural Borders

This art icle was downloaded by: [ Queen Mary, Universit y of London] , [ Ant onella Liuzzo Scorpo] On: 15 Decem ber 2011, At : 06: 17 Publisher: Rout ledge I nform a Lt d Regist ered in England and Wales Regist ered Num ber: 1072954 Regist ered office: Mort im er House, 37- 41 Mort im er St reet , London W1T 3JH, UK Al-Masaq Publicat ion det ails, including inst ruct ions for aut hors and subscript ion informat ion: ht t p:/ / www.t andfonline.com/ loi/ calm20 Religious Frontiers and Overlapping Cultural Borders: The Power of Personal and Political Exchanges in the Works of Alfonso X of Castile (1252–1284) Dr Ant onella Liuzzo Scorpo Available online: 15 Dec 2011 To cite this article: Dr Ant onella Liuzzo Scorpo (2011): Religious Front iers and Overlapping Cult ural Borders: The Power of Personal and Polit ical Exchanges in t he Works of Alfonso X of Cast ile (1252–1284), Al-Masaq, 23:3, 217-236 To link to this article: ht t p:/ / dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/ 09503110.2011.623910 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTI CLE Full t erm s and condit ions of use: ht t p: / / www.t andfonline.com / page/ t erm s- andcondit ions This art icle m ay be used for research, t eaching, and privat e st udy purposes. Any subst ant ial or syst em at ic reproduct ion, redist ribut ion, reselling, loan, sub- licensing, syst em at ic supply, or dist ribut ion in any form t o anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warrant y express or im plied or m ake any represent at ion t hat t he cont ent s will be com plet e or accurat e or up t o dat e. The accuracy of any inst ruct ions, form ulae, and drug doses should be independent ly verified wit h prim ary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, act ions, claim s, proceedings, dem and, or cost s or dam ages what soever or howsoever caused arising direct ly or indirect ly in connect ion wit h or arising out of t he use of t his m at erial. Al-Masāq, Vol. 23, No. 3, December 2011 Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 Religious Frontiers and Overlapping Cultural Borders: The Power of Personal and Political Exchanges in the Works of Alfonso X of Castile (1252–1284) ANTONELLA LIUZZO SCORPO Religious beliefs and creeds have contributed to define identities and a sense of belonging for both individuals and entire communities over the centuries, generating in some cases unsurpassable social barriers. This also applied to the situation of the Iberian Peninsula in the Middle Ages: a melting pot within which Muslims, Christians and Jews interacted, not always without animosity and friction. The questions which I endeavour to answer in this study are how did Christian powers consider and interact with Muslim rulers and subjects? What were the motivations behind the agreement of such relationships? To what extent were they morally and officially accepted? What were the differences, if any, from the customary vassal bonds? These are the main objects of scrutiny of my analysis which will focus on the fragile borders which existed between personal and political interfaith relationships, examined through the perspective of the historiographical and poetic production attributed to the scriptorium of Alfonso X of Castile (1252–1284). ABSTRACT Keywords: Convivencia; Castile – politics; Alfonso X el Sabio, king of Castile; Estoria de Espanna, chronicle; inter-faith relationships The Mediterranean has always been symbolic of homogenised diversity, where arts, languages, religions, policies and ideas have converged by coexisting, borrowing from– or indeed opposing – each other. The profile of the Iberian Peninsula emblematically represents such cultural and religious pluralism, as the peoples who invaded and settled in those territories cohabited more or less peacefully, with the previous occupiers. In particular, after the Arab invasions, which began in 711, and during the various phases of the process of Reconquista, which lasted until the fifteenth-century, the Iberian territory was the stage on which Muslims, Jews and Christians interacted. Nonetheless, even though they shared the same geographical and political space, in practice their social interaction remained extremely limited, in contrast with the artistic and cultural influence that they exerted on each other. The extent and limits of such a cultural process of assimilation and amalgamation have generated endless discussion, in particular with regard to the genetic characteristics of those involved, the specific nature of their cultural impact and Correspondence: Dr Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo, Department of History, Queen Mary, University of London, London E1 4NS, UK. E-mail: [email protected] ISSN 0950–3110 print/ISSN 1473–348X online/11/030217-20 ß 2011 Society for the Medieval Mediterranean http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09503110.2011.623910 Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 218 Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo the phenomena that led to such changes. The philologist Américo Castro coined in 1848 the concept of convivencia (living together) to explain the changes affecting Christian culture after centuries of intimate contact with the Muslim and Jewish groups who cohabited in the Peninsula.1 However, his theory was challenged by the historian Sánchez-Albornoz, who adopted an anti-evolutionary biological approach, arguing that the original Hispano-Roman population might have acquired some phenotypic elements resulting from long-term contact with the other ethnic groups, but that such a relationship did not necessarily imply a structural change in what were considered the Hispanic genetic constituents. As a historian, Sánchez-Albornoz was also interested in analysing social and institutional exchanges, which in fact only rarely, if ever, took place.2 More recently, Thomas Glick, together with other scholars, has rejected that such a theory, as well as the idea of convivencia, is incontestable, while agreeing that it may be accepted when it is primarily its cultural implications that are under consideration.3 With this in mind, in this study I will now focus on the perception of interreligious and inter-ethnic exchanges as presented in the works produced in the scriptorium of Alfonso X of Castile (r. 1252–1284); namely in the events recorded in the Estoria de España and in some of the miracle stories of the Cantigas de Santa Marı́a. In particular, I will discuss the extent to which some of the Alfonsine narrations envisaged historically recognisable events and attitudes, and which of them were mere didactic models that the sovereign sought to transmit. Special attention will be devoted to the complex and volatile connections, as well as to the fragile borders, that existed between personal and political relationships, especially those involving Christian and Muslim rulers. The aim of this analysis is to map out the peculiarities of a range of relationships characterised by pragmatic and opportunistic needs and desires, which frequently overcame social and ethnic differences. Significantly, the lexicon and values of friendship were also adopted as parameters to describe and legitimate both cases of inter-faith connections and 1 Américo Castro, España en su historia: cristianos, moros y judı́os, 2nd edn (Barcelona: Editorial Crı́tica, 1983), pp. 198–205. 2 Claudio Sánchez-Albornoz, España: Un enigma histórico, volumes I–II (Buenos Aires: Editorial Sudamericana, 1956); idem, El drama de la formación de España y los españoles (Barcelona: EDHASA, 1973). 3 Thomas F. Glick, Islamic and Christian Spain in the Early Middle Ages (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1979). For a survey of the historiography of convivencia, see also José Gómez-Martı́nez, Américo Castro y el origen de los españoles: historia de una polémica (Madrid: Gredos, 1975); Cultures in Contact in Medieval Spain: Historical and Literary Essays Presented to L.P. Harvey, ed. David Hook and Barry Taylor ([London]: King’s College London Medieval Studies, 1989); Convivencia: Jews, Muslims and Christians in Medieval Spain, ed. Vivian B. Mann, T.F. Glick and Jerrilynn D. Dodds (New York: George Braziller in association with the Jewish Museum, 1992); David Nirenberg, Community of Violence: Persecution of Minorities in the Middle Ages (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1996); Beyond the Persecuting Society: Religious Toleration Before the Enlightenment, ed. Marcia L. Colish, John Christian Laursen and Cary J. Nederman (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998); Christians, Muslims, and Jews in Medieval and Early Modern Spain: Interaction and Cultural Change, ed. Mark D. Meyerson and Edward D. English (Notre Dame, IN.: University of Notre Dame Press, 2000); Cary J. Nederman, Worlds of Difference: European Discourses of Toleration, c. 1100–1550 (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2000); Alex Novikoff, ‘‘Between Tolerance and Intolerance in Medieval Spain: An Historiographic Enigma’’, Medieval Encounters, 11 (2005): 7–36; Chris Lowney, A Vanished World: Muslims, Christians, and Jews in Medieval Spain (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006); H. Salvador Martı́nez, La convivencia en la España del siglo XIII: perspectives alfonsies (Madrid: Ediciones Polifemo, 2006). Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 Religious Frontiers and Overlapping Cultural Borders 219 those related to vassalage as morally acceptable. Those bonds were structured around military, political, marital and commercial agreements, which were aimed at preserving relationships that were officially banned or forbidden on moral grounds. Alfonso X’s political activity was scarred by the failure of his imperialistic ambitions, the rebellion of the Castilian nobles in 1272 followed by that of his own son Sancho IV (d. 1295) in 1282. Nevertheless, he was one of the most active and notable patrons of the arts and sciences in the thirteenth century, dubbed for this reason ‘‘the Wise’’ and ‘‘the Learned’’ king.4 He supervised a significant number of scientific and literary translations from Arabic into the vernacular language of Castile and patronised the production of original works of history, poetry, law and leisure.5 Significantly, the sovereign created in his own court a cradle of coexisting cultures, which may explain the fact that social, political and private exchanges between different social groups were explicitly regulated in his legal corpus: the Siete Partidas (c. 1256–65). This code gathered the previous Roman, Canon and Visigothic laws, as well as the municipal fueros, into a harmonious unicum that was also a didactic manual, in which Eastern and Western philosophical and literary traditions were blended together, giving rise to a proper encyclopaedia regulating the public, private and moral lives of all the individuals subject to its regulations, including the legislator-king.6 Despite the fact that Alfonso X’s fist attempt to impose his summa potestas materialised in the application of his Fuero Real, while the Siete Partidas were not officially issued until 1348 in the reign of Alfonso XI (d. 1350), this sevenfold code is a valuable witness to the sovereign’s attitudes towards legislation and its value.7 However, such a plethora of principles were not 4 Antonio Ballesteros-Beretta, Alfonso X el Sabio (Barcelona: Salvat, 1963); John Esten Keller, Alfonso X, el Sabio (New York: Twayne, 1967); Alfonso X, el Sabio, vida, obra y época, ed. Juan Carlos de Miguel Rodrı́guez, Angela Muñoz Fernández, Cristina Segura Graiño (Madrid: Sociedad Española de Estudios Medievales, 1989); Manuel González Jiménez, Alfonso X el Sabio, historia de un reinado, 1252–1284, 2nd edn ([Palencia]: Diputación Provincial de Palencia Burgos: La Olmeda, 1999); idem, Alfonso X el Sabio (Barcelona: Ariel, 2004); Joseph Francis O’Callaghan, The Learned King: The Reign of Alfonso X of Castile (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993); idem, Alfonso X and The Cantigas de Santa Maria: A Poetic Biography (Leiden: Brill, 1998); H. Salvador Martı́nez, Alfonso X, el Sabio: una biografı́a (Madrid: Ediciones Polifemo, 2003). 5 Evelyn S. Procter, Alfonso X of Castile: Patron of Literature and Learning (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, [1980] c.1961); Emperor of Culture: Alfonso X the Learned of Castile and his Thirteenth-century Renaissance, ed. Robert I. Burns (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1990); El Scriptorium alfonsı́: de los Libros de Astrologı́a a las ‘‘Cantigas de Santa Marı́a’’, coord. Jesús Montoya Martı́nez and Ana Domı́nguez Rodrı́guez (Madrid: Complutense Editorial, 1999). 6 Las Siete Partidas del Rey don Alfonso el Sabio, cotejadas con varios codices antiguos por la Real Academia de la Historia (Madrid: Imprenta Real, 1807; repr. Madrid: Atlas Ediciones, 1972). For an English translation, see The Siete Partidas, ed. Robert I. Burns, trans. Samuel Parsons Scott, volumes I–V (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000). For an overview on the origin and sources of the Siete Partidas, see Joseph Francis O’Callaghan, ‘‘Alfonso and the Partidas’’ in The Siete Partidas, ed. Robert I. Burns, I: xxx-xlviii; José Sánchez-Arcilla Bernal, ‘‘La obra legislativa de Alfonso X el Sabio. Historia de una polémica’’ in El Scriptorium alfonsı̀, 17–82. See also David Rojinsky, ‘‘The Rule of Law and the Written Word in Alfonsine Castile: Demistifying a Consecrated Vernacular’’, Bulletin of Hispanic Studies, 80 (2003): 287–305; Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo, ‘‘The King as Subject, Master and Figure of Authority: The Case of Alfonso X of Castile’’ in ‘‘Every Inch a King’’: Conference on Kingship in the Near East and Medieval Europe, held in Cambridge (UK), 22–24 September 2008, ed. Lynette Mitchell and Charles Melville, forthcoming. 7 J. Craddock, ‘‘La cronologı́a de las obras legislativas de Alfonso X el Sabio’’, Anuario de Hisria del Derecho Español, 51 (1981): 365–418; Palabra de rey: Selección de estudios sobre la legislación alfonsina (Salamanca: Seminario de Estudios Medievales y Renacentistas, 2008). Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 220 Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo always compatible with the descriptions of the contemporary reality presented in some of the examples given in the Cantigas de Santa Marı́a (henceforth CSM) and in the chronicle of the Estoria de España (henceforth EE). The former is a collection of Marian poetry descibed by Menéndez Pelayo as the ‘‘aesthetic Bible of the thirteenth century’’, because of its impressive combination of lyrics, musical annotations and miniatures.8 The EE is the chronicle of the peoples who ruled the Peninsula from its origins to the reign of Ferdinand III (r. 1217–1252). Alongside the first two official versions of this chronicle – Versión primitiva or regia (1270–74) and Versión crı́tica (1282–84) – several others flourished in the following centuries.9 However, it was only in 1906 that the first critical edition appeared, undertaken by Menéndez Pidal, who also renamed it Primera Crónica General. His edition was enriched by a critical study by Diego Catalán in 1977 and a more recent critical revision has been carried out by Inés Fernández-Ordóñez after her discovery of the MS Ss in Salamanca in 1983.10 What needs to be pointed out is that, despite the widespread belief that the Alfonsine court represented a model of tolerance and enlightenment with regard to some of the attitudes assumed towards the non-Christian groups, this is in fact only true if it is asserted – predominantly, if not exclusively – from artistic and literary perspectives. In fact, a number of sources reveal that both the king and his court showed clear signs of distrust towards non-Christian groups, who were considered 8 Alfonso X, Cantigas de Santa Marı́a, ed. Walter Mettmann, volumes I–III (Madrid: Castalia, 1986–88). For an English translation, see Songs of Holy Mary of Alfonso X, the Wise: a translation of the Cantigas de Santa Marı́a, trans. Kathleen Kulp-Hill, introd. Connie L. Scarborough (Tempe: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2000). An introductory list of some of the numerous studies on the various aspects of the CSM includes: Studies on the Cantigas de Santa Maria: Art, Music and Poetry; Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Cantigas de Santa Maria of Alfonso X, el Sabio (1221– 1284) in Commemoration of its 700th Anniversary Year – 1981, ed. Israel J. Katz and John E. Keller (Madison, WI.: Hispanic Seminary of Medieval Studies, 1987); Joseph Francis O’Callaghan, Alfonso X and the Cantigas de Santa Maria; La música de las Cantigas de Santa Marı́a del Rey Alfonso el Sabio. 1, Fası́mil del códice j.b.2 de El Escorial, ed. Higinio Anglés (Barcelona: Diputación Provincial de Barcelona, Biblioteca Central, 1943, 1958, 1964); Stephen Parkinson, ‘‘The First Reorganization of the Cantigas de Santa Marı́a’’, Bulletin of the Cantigueiros de Santa Marı́a, 1 (1988): 91–7; Valeria Bertolucci Pizzorusso, ‘‘Primo contributo all’analisi delle varianti redazionali nelle Cantigas de Santa Marı́a’’ in Cobras e Son: Papers on the Text, Music and Manuscripts of the ‘‘Cantigas de Santa Marı́a’’, ed. Stephen Parkinson (Oxford: European Humanities Research Centre, 2001), pp. 106–18; Martha E. Schaffer, ‘‘The ‘Evolution’ of the Cantigas de Santa Marı́a: The Relationships between MSS T, F and E’’ in Cobras e Son, pp. 186–213. Roger D. Tinnell, ‘‘Authorship and Composition: Music and Poetry in Las Cantigas de Santa Marı́a’’, Kentucky Romance Quarterly, 28 (1981): 189–98; David Wulstan, ‘‘The Compilation of the Cantigas of Alfonso el Sabio’’ in Cobras y Son, pp. 154–85; Jesús Montoya Martı́nez, ‘‘Algunas precisaciones acerca de las Cantigas de Santa Marı́a’’ in Studies on the Cantigas, pp. 355–86. 9 Mariano de la Campa, ‘‘La versión primitiva de la Estoria de España de Alfonso X: edición crı́tica’’ in Actas del XIII Congreso de la Asociación Internacional de Hispanistas, coord. by Florencio Sevilla Arroyo, Carlos Alvar Ezquerra (Madrid: Alianza, 1998), pp. 59–72; Inés Fernández-Ordóñez, ‘‘Variación en el modelo historiográfico alfonsı́ en el siglo XIII. Las versiones de las Estoria de España’’ in La historia alfonsı́: el modelo y sus destinos, seminario organizado por la Casa de Velázquez (30 de enero de 1995), ed. Georges Martin (Madrid: Casa de Velázquez, 2000), pp. 41–74. 10 Primera crónica general de España: que mandó componer Alfonso El Sabio y se continuaba bajo Sancho IVen 1289, ed. Ramón Menéndez Pidal, with a study by Diego Catalán, volumes I–II (Madrid: Gredos, 1977). See also Diego Catalán, La Estoria de España de Alfonso X: creación y evolución (Madrid: Seminario Menéndez Pidal, Fundación Ramón Menéndez Pidal & Universidad Autónoma, 1992); Versión crı́tica de la ‘‘Estoria de España’’: estudio y edición desde Pelayo hasta Ordoño II, ed. Inés FernándezOrdóñez (Madrid: Fundación Ramón Menéndez Pidal, 1993). Please, note that due to the lack of an English edition, all the translations from the EE are mine. Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 Religious Frontiers and Overlapping Cultural Borders 221 as potential sources of turmoil and crisis in both the political and social fields. As Robert Burns has stated, despite the undeniable ‘‘phenomenon of parallel societies’’ that existed within the Peninsula, there was common agreement that constrictive legal regulation was needed in order to prevent the hosted groups from undermining a legal system that was established in order to operate primarily as a ‘‘Christian constitution’’.11 For this reason the Alfonsine law regulated contacts and exchanges between Christians, Muslims and Jews, and prescribed norms of behaviour that defined the types of relationships they were allowed or forbidden to establish.12 Much of the problem surrounding the law was that it contributed to making social integration nearly impossible to achieve, since its norms highlighted differences and increased ethnic and religious hostility. The law was particularly harsh towards the Jews, who were regarded as betrayers of the true faith, although recognised as people of the Book. Title XXIV of the Seventh Partida, for instance, establishes the death penalty and confiscation of personal belongings for the Jews who tried to convert others to their faith or to enslave either Muslims or Christians. Significantly, despite the fact that Jews were legally forbidden from holding any public office whereby they might damage or put pressure on Christians, in reality they were socially respected for the administrative positions they held, as happened within the Alfonsine court itself. It is also worth noting that the restrictions imposed on them appeared moderate when compared with those that applied to Muslims and Mudejars, against whom insurmountable social barriers were erected.13 One example will stand for many: Muslims, and particularly men, accused of having sexual intercourse with Christians were condemned to death, and even regular marriages between members of the two religions were forbidden. However, things were different in real life, for although on the one hand a high degree of social segregation might be recognised, on the other hand numerous cases of interreligious connections were experienced. For example, inter-faith marriages were celebrated and it was not uncommon to witness cases of Muslim princesses marrying Christian lords. A case in point, reported in chapter 847 of EE, is that of Alfonso VI (r. 1158–1214), who married Zaida, daughter of King Abenhabet of Seville: ‘‘this woman, as somebody has stated, was not the King’s mistress, but his secret wife; [. . .]’’.14 Likewise, other kinds of agreements were signed between representatives of different social and ethnic groups in order to safeguard their territories or preserve their own power. In particular, military and political pacts, either with or against the Muslim counterparts, were frequently signed, even though they accentuated even more the social disparity between the contractors. The EE is rich in episodes depicting the contingencies that prompted Christian lords to befriend the Muslims 11 Robert I. Burns, ‘‘Jews and Moors in the Siete Partidas of Alfonso X the Learned: A Background Perspective’’ in Medieval Spain: Culture, Conflict, and Coexistence, Studies in Honour of Angus MacKay, ed. Roger Collins and Anthony Goodman (New York: Palgrave, 2002), pp. 46–62. 12 SP VII: XXIV and XXV. 13 Robert I. Burns, ‘‘Muslims in the Thirteenth-Century Realms of Aragon: Interaction and Reaction’’ in Muslims Under Latin Rule, 1100–1300, ed. James M. Powell (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1990), pp. 57–102; idem, ‘‘Muslims in Christian Iberia, 1000–1526: Varieties of Mudejar Experience’’ in The Medieval World, ed. Peter Linehan and J. Nelson (London: Routledge, 2001), pp. 60–76. 14 EE 847, ‘‘mas esta, como quier que lo digan algunos, non fue barragana del rey, mas mugier uelada; [. . .]’’. On the figure of the ‘Mora Zaida’, see E. Lévi-Provençal, ‘‘La ‘Mora Zaida’ femme d’Alphonse VI et leur fils l’Infant Don Sancho’’, Hésperis, 18 (1934): 1–8. 222 Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 either for personal purposes, such as the rescue of a family member, or for political reasons, including safeguarding their own kingdoms. One of the first examples in the EE concerns Silo, King of Asturias (r. 774–783) who, in order to impose his power over Galicia: at the beginning of his reign established a pact of friendship with the Moors, and went towards Galicia, which had rebelled against him, and fought its inhabitants [. . .] and he won against them, and he subjugated them and imposed his lordship.15 After Silo’s death, as recounted in EE 605, his son Alfonso II (r. 783, 791–842) was in line to succeed to the throne, but in his uncle Mauregato ‘‘the ambition of becoming king grew’’ and for this reason he signed an alliance with the Muslims to seize his nephew’s power: and he addressed the Muslims, and he made an agreement with them, and he asked for their assistance and he promised to serve them loyally if they would help him in obtaining his nephew’s reign.16 Mauregato’s Muslim allies respected the pact by supporting his advance with their military forces, thus enabling him to take the throne of Asturias, while Alfonso II fled to Navarre. Interestingly, although the initiative that had driven Mauregato to sign the alliance with the Muslims had proven successful, he also tried to preserve this agreement: and in order always to have the Muslims’ goodwill, he did many things that were against God and against His law. And for those actions he was disdained both by God and by all men.17 Nevertheless, the creation and maintenance of a bond of political and military friendship with the enemies of the true faith overstepped the moral rules that any good Christian, as a friend of God, should respect, and for this reason Mauregato was inevitably punished. Similar consequences were experienced by Pedro II of Aragon (r. 1196–1213), who signed an anti-Muslim alliance with Alfonso VIII of Castile (r. 1158–1214)18 and joined Count Raymond of Toulouse (who had also married Pedro II’s sister, Leonor) in defending the Cathars against the Archbishop 15 EE 603, ‘‘Este Silo luego en comienço de su regnado puso sus pazes con los moros, et fue sobre Galizia que se le alçara, et lidio con ellos de la tierra [...] et uenciolos, et metiolos so el su sennorio’’. 16 EE 605, ‘‘cresciol soberuia por alçarse rey’’; ‘‘e fuesse pora los moros, et puso su pleyto con los moros, et demandoles ayuda et prometioles que los seruirie lealmientre sil ayudassen a ganar el regno de su sobrino’’. 17 EE 605, ‘‘e el por auer siempre ell amor de los moros, fizo muchas cosas que eran contra Dios et contra su ley: [. . .]. E por esto que el fazie fue aborrescido de Dios et de los omnes [. . .]’’. For example, it is narrated that Mauregato placed the young women, daughters of his infazones, at the Muslims’ mercy, so that they could do with them as they wished. 18 EE 797, ‘‘Este rey don Pedro de Aragon ouo siempre muy grand amor con el muy noble don Alffonso rey de Castiella, et fue con ell en la batalla de Hubeda do fueron uençudos los moros [. . .]’’. Religious Frontiers and Overlapping Cultural Borders 223 of Narbonne, who had recruited nobles from northern France to undertake a crusade against them: Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 even though King Pedro was a good Christian, since he went to help the Count, with whom he had made a pact to defend the heretics who were people without God, God wanted his death [. . .].19 Although Pedro II honoured the pact signed with his ally, in doing so he destroyed his reputation as God’s friend, and for this reason his death was considered divine retribution, since helping the enemies of God was regarded as an act of treachery that had to be severely punished. These examples suggest that any political action involving individuals belonging to a different religion or ethnic group could be accepted and prove successful only when they did not represent a threat to the Christian parties involved, especially those who had to preserve their roles as rulers and defenders of orthodoxy. In fact, the Alfonsine works abound with examples of agreements and alliances (which in some cases are defined as friendships) that Christian lords established with their Muslim counterparts without ever betraying their own religious beliefs. A case in point is EE 565, which tells of the alcalde of Asturias, Manuça, who ‘‘[. . .] was Christian, but he had sworn his loyalty to the Moors and therefore he was on their side [. . .]’’. Guided by his sensual passion – since he fell in love with King Pelagius’ (r. 722–737) sister – Manuça conjured a plot to marry the lady and in order to succeed ‘‘[. . .] he made friends with him, treacherously’’.20 By falsely professing a friendship, he gained Pelagius’ trust and managed to persuade him to go to Córdoba. The stratagem was useful to gain time so that, during the King’s absence, Manuça could marry his sister.21 Once the king discovered Manuça’s offence, he tried to bring his sister back to Asturias, but Manuça’s Muslim allies had planned to kidnap her again. King Pelagius, warned by a friend about the actions that the Muslims might take against him, managed to reach Asturias and claim his people’s aid (by naming them amigos) in the name of their common faith: Once the Muslims reached Asturias they wanted to take her back; but he discovered the plot thanks to a friend of his who told him that, and suggested that he should flee since he was without any weapons or means of defending himself.22 This is just one example of an alliance inspired by personal motivations and aimed at resolving personal issues; but there were also cases of friendships agreed with the aim of seizing and reinforcing the contractors’ political authority. Most of these agreements have one feature in common: the characters who signed a pact with the 19 EE 797, ‘‘Et maguer que el rey don Pedro era buen cristiano, pero que uiniera en ayuda del conde con quien auie debdo a deffender los hereges que son yentes sin Dios, quiso Dios que muriesse [. . .]’’. 20 EE 565, ‘‘era cristiano, mas pero auie yura fecha con los moros et era de su parte’; ‘[. . .] puso por ende con el su amizdad engannosamientre’’. 21 José-Luis Martı́n, Amor, cuestión de señorı́o y otros estudios zamoranos (Zamora: Centro Asociado de la Uned, 1993), pp. 9–10. 22 EE 565, ‘‘Los moros luego que llegaron a Asturias, quisieran le prender a aleue; mas sopolo el luego por un su amigo que ge lo fue dezir yl conseio que pues que non tenie armas nin poder con que se les pudiesse defender que se fuesse su uia’’. Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 224 Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo Muslim rulers were usually betrayers of the Christian sovereign to whom they owed allegiance. However, they did not work to dismantle the Christian monarchical institution, but rather aimed either at improving their own position within it, or at seizing power for themselves. The events concerning the treachery supposedly committed by Roy Blásquez at the expense of his nephews, the siete infantes de Lara, speaks for itself. We read in EE 738 that Roy Blásquez planned a trap for the siete infantes and tried to involve Al-Mansūr (r. ca. 370–392/980–1002), ruler of _ Córdoba, in his plot. However, Roy Blásquez was not in a position to control the Muslim ruler, who was neither his subject nor his vassal; he therefore had nothing to rely on but the pact of mutual friendship they had previously formed: ‘‘I, Roy Blasquez, embrace you, Al-Mansūr, as a friend whom I love with all my heart’’.23 _ Despite the suggestions given by Roy Blázquez about how to assassinate the princes, Al-Mansūr behaved magnanimously and demonstrated all the qualities _ that were completely lacking in his Christian counterpart. This does not mean that the Alfonsine works contained propaganda that supported the Muslim values against Christian ones, but there is good reason to conclude that acts of treachery were regarded as the worst sins that anybody, of any religion or ethnic origin, might commit. This is also evident from the severity with which treason was regulated in Book Seven of the Partidas, according to which those accused of such deeds might suffer severe punishments, ranging from exile and expropriation to death.24 The overall impression gained from the Alfonsine works under examination is that a traitor was considered much worse than a Muslim, even though the latter could not escape the ‘guilt’ of being a religious dissenter. Moreover, pacts of friendship agreed with Muslims might arouse the disappointment and enmity of other Christian monarchs, as EE 694 suggests. This episode concerns Sancho Garcı́a I of Navarre (r. 905–925), who was accused by King Ramiro II of León (r. 931–c. 950) of betrayal, not just for having attacked his dominions in Castile, but most of all because ‘‘[. . .] in order to damage him even more, you made friends with the Muslims’’.25 Admittedly, most of these treaties that had been agreed with Muslim rulers were instruments adopted in order to safeguard the frontiers of the Christian kingdoms. With regard to this point, the case of Count Fernán González presented in EE 707 is of interest. The chronicle tells us that in 958 the Count, together with all the ricos omnes of Leon, planned a conspiracy aimed at enthroning his son-in-law Ordoño IV (r. 958–960) by usurping the crown of King Sancho I (r. 956–958, 960–966). The latter was obliged to flee to Pamplona, where, assisted by his grandmother Toda Aznárez and his uncle Garcı́a Sánchez I of Navarre (r. 925–970), he managed to regain the throne, although such cooperation was not sufficient to defeat Ordoño IV. In these circumstances, the most sensible option was to appeal to Abd al-Rahmān III (r. 300–350/929–961), _ to whom Sancho I paid homage and swore his friendship: ‘‘King Sancho followed his uncle’s advice, and then he acted in order to establish a truce with Abderrahmen.’’26 23 EE 738, ‘‘A uos Almançor, de mi, Roy Blasquez, salut como a amigo que amo de todo mi coraçon’’. Geraldine Coates, Treacherous Foundations: Betrayal and Collective Identity in Early Epic, Chronicle, and Drama (London: Tamesis, 2009), see in particular chapter 3. 25 EE 694, ‘‘[. . .] por fazerle mayor mal, pusistes uuestra amistad con los moros’’. 26 EE 707, ‘‘El rey don Sancho tomo el conseio de su tio, et enuio estonces luego poner pazes con Abderrahmen’’. 24 Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 Religious Frontiers and Overlapping Cultural Borders 225 The EE continues by reporting the positive outcome of that agreement, which also indirectly influenced Sancho I’s personal life. In fact, treated by an Arab physician, Sancho overcame his obesity (for which he had been dubbed el Gordo), which consequently helped him on the battlefield. The re-invigorated Sancho advanced with his Muslim-Christian army over the territories of León, regained power and forced the usurper Ordoño IV into exile in the Asturias. By 960, thanks to the Muslim military support, the kingdom of León was again under Sancho I’s control. Another example of cooperation with the Muslims in order to usurp power from another Christian ruler and to settle internecine conflicts is found in EE 800. This episode concerns the agreement signed between King Ramiro I of Aragon (r. 1035–1063/9) and the Muslim lords of Zaragoza, Tudela and Huesca, against Garcı́a (r. 1034–1054), Ramiro’s half-brother, who was the legitimate heir of Navarre: In all this, King Ramiro of Aragon, who was Don Garcia and don Fernando’s brother, and don Sancho King of Navarre’s son, the aforementioned King Ramiro established a friendship with the King of Zaragoza and with the Kings of Tudela and of Huesca, who were Moors, and he managed, with the aid of those Moors, to invade the territories of his brother don Garcia, who had been crowned King of Navarre after his father’s death, [. . .].27 As already mentioned, the treacherous actions were regarded as much worse and even more dangerous than any explicit declaration of enmity that might arise between representatives of different faiths.28 In fact, a Muslim – usually belonging to the highest social ranks – might even be regarded as an excellent friend and collaborator, as long as he respected the indispensable condition of loyalty towards his allies.29 Political alliances against people of different beliefs The examples examined up to this point have shed some light on the relationships between Christians and Muslims that were established with the main aim of undertaking a military mission against a third party. However, agreements were also made against the Muslim invaders, in the name of a shared Christian faith. To clarify this point further, it needs to be remembered that thirteenth-century Castile was characterised by a significant lack of serious incentives to conversion, which had, in fact, a pragmatic justification. All the believers of non-Christian faiths were obliged to pay tributes to the crown, a form of taxation from which Christians were 27 EE 800, ‘‘En tod esto el rey don Ramiro de Aragon, hermano deste don Garcia et deste don Fernando, fijo deste don Sancho rey de Nauarra, puso su amiztat esse don Ramiro rey de Aragon con el rey de Saragoça et con el rey de Tudela et con el de Huesca, que eran moros, et trabaiosse con ell ayuda destos moros de correr la tierra a su hermano don Garcia que fincaua rey de Nauarra despues de la muerte de su padre, [. . .]’’. 28 Albert I. Jr. Bagby, ‘‘The Moslem in the Cantigas of Alfonso X, El Sabio’’, Kentucky Romance Quarterly, 20 (1973): 173–207. 29 For another interesting perspective, see: Rebecca L. Slitt, ‘‘Justifying Cross-Cultural Friendships: Bohemond, Firuz, and the Fall of Antioch’’, Viator, 38 (2007): 339–50. Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 226 Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo exempt. What at first sight might appear to be a measure arising from a policy of tolerance was thus in fact a political strategy, aimed at filling the kingdom’s coffers. These circumstances on the ground should make us reflect on the fact that the power of religion, which had always been used as a cohesive element around which both the social and political systems had been organised, was partially undermined. At least publicly, however, friendships in the name of a common faith continued to be strengthened. The examples given in the EE concerning the wide and multicultural Roman Empire are particularly interesting in this context as models of reference. These examples probably illustrate Alfonso X’s personal interests, following his claim to the title of Holy Roman Emperor, which in fact did not succeed.30 However, it has to be borne in mind that the narratives of this historical period were deeply influenced by the relatively tolerant Alfonsine perspective, which coloured these memories with softer hues. An instance of this might be found in a statement that EE 316 attributes to Emperor Constantine: and for this, friends, we want all of you to know that we do not want to force you to become Christians [. . .]. And also that you should not fear to lose our love if you do not convert; our mercifulness is such that we do not want anybody to be afraid of performing good actions. But everybody has to know that those who voluntarily choose to convert to Christianity will be regarded as better and closer friends.31 Centuries later, the Iberian Peninsula was still a melting-pot, even though the occupiers had changed. The Arabs constantly sought new Iberian territories, so the Christian rulers of the newly-born Christian kingdoms were forced to agree pacts of friendships among themselves, either to stop the Muslim advance or to face the enemy in the battlefield. It was for this reason that Alfonso III, King of Asturias (r. 866–910), ‘‘[. . .] made friends with people from his region and from Navarre’’.32 EE 646 also adds that he married Amelina of France, thus establishing a strong link that would guarantee French support and protection for the threatened realm of Asturias. Another example of an alliance established in the name of a common faith is recorded in EE 705. After Ordoño III (r. 951–956)’s initial distrust of Fernán González, whom he suspected of being the instigator of a civil rebellion aimed at seizing power, the sovereign changed his attitude when the Count swore his goodwill and sincere love for him: ‘‘the King was pleased, and from that moment on there was agreement and goodwill between them’’.33 The Count’s loyalty was proved by his intervention against the Muslims who were attacking San Estebán de Górmaz. Fernán González managed to subjugate the Muslim forces, who, for their part, had underestimated the value of the Christian alliance, thinking that the earlier crisis between the two allies had weakened their defences. 30 Charles Fraker, ‘‘The Fet des romains and the Primera crónica general’’, Hispanic Review, 46 (1978): 199–220. Repr. in C. Fraker, The Scope of History: Studies in the Historiography of Alfonso el Sabio (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996), pp. 135–54. 31 EE 316, ‘‘E por esto, amigos, conuiene que sepades todos que no queremos nos que se tornen ningunos por fuerça cristianos [. . .]. Demas no ayan ningunos miedo que pierdan el nuestro amor por non querer seer cristianos; ca la nuestra piedat tal es que no queremos que ninguno aya miedo en fazer bien. Mas pero esto deuen saber todos: que mas nuestros amigos seran aquellos que de su grado quisieren tomar la fe cristiana’’. 32 EE 646, ‘‘puso su amiztat con los prouenciales et con los nauarros’’. 33 EE 705, ‘‘al rey plogol ende, et dalli adelante ouo acuerdo et abenencia entrellos’’. Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 Religious Frontiers and Overlapping Cultural Borders 227 The EE provides detailed accounts of events concerning Iberian history up to the reign of Ferdinand III; but one might wonder what happened during the reign of his successor Alfonso X, and the extent to which he co-operated personally in establishing amicable relationships with the Muslims rulers of the South. In fact, there is evidence to suggest that political friendships, both with and against the Muslims, assumed similar importance during Alfonso X’s reign. An unmistakable case in point is CSM 169, which describes the miracle performed by the Virgin Mary to save the church dedicated to her in the Muslim district of La Arrijaca, in Murcia. Despite several attempts to destroy it, the church appeared inviolable. The Christian sovereigns, who were later to occupy the city, had reluctantly agreed to the demolition of the building, but the Muslims were not able to carry this out, since a blessing protected the sacred place. One of these two Christian monarchs was Jaime I of Aragon (r. 1213–1276), who had supported his son-in-law Alfonso X in the campaigns against the Muslims, for he had realised, after the Mudejar revolt that flared up in Murcia in 1264, that the situation was dangerous not only for Castile but also for his own Aragonese possessions. In 1265, Jaime I invaded Murcia and forced its Muslim inhabitants to surrender. In all likelihood, this is when the Muslim citizens begged for his permission to destroy the church dedicated to the Virgin.34 After this victory and before returning to his dominions, Jaime I handed over the newly-acquired possession to Alfonso X. If one accepts this account as historically reliable, it may be concluded that the Aragonese sovereign was respecting an unwritten agreement made with the Castilian monarch, and that may have been why he deserved mention in the CSM, in which he is poetically commemorated for his exemplary behaviour as a king de gran prez (worthy). CSM 185 is also of interest. Alongside the description of the miraculous intervention of the Virgin Mary to save the castle of Chincoya (in the kingdom of Jaén) from the Muslims who tried to besiege it, its verses provide indications of the ambiguous relationship between Alfonso X and the King of Granada Ibn al-Ahmar _ (r. 635–671/1238–1273). The events, although literarily embellished, are historically recognisable. O’Callaghan has dated them to 1264 and has also demonstrated that it would not be implausible to recognise in the figure of the castellan of Chincoya the Christian alcalde Sancho Martı́nez de Jódar.35 The latter, as reported in the cantiga, was linked in personal friendship with the Muslim castellan of Bélmez and for this reason, as panel 2 of this cantiga shows, the two are depicted kissing each other in ritual gestures performed to confirm a friendly agreement. However, the castellan of Bélmez was a traitor; in fact he offered his friend’s life and castle on a platter to the King of Granada.36 His malevolent plot was carefully designed: first, he would summon the Christian castellan to renew the friendship between them and, once the other was outside the castle, he would capture him, there being nothing else to stand in his way. By behaving in this way, he exploited the other’s trust and benevolence: ‘‘He asked him to come out to sign a pact with him in the presence of those Christians and Moors who were in the place, that they would protect each other and swear solemn oaths on it.’’37 The unexpected factor 34 CSM 169, lines 33–36. O’Callaghan, Alfonso X: A Poetic Biography, 110–13. 36 The aforementioned king was probably Ibn al-Ahmar, dubbed ‘‘the red’’ and actually represented _ in the miniatures of the cantiga with this colour prominent in both his clothes and banner. 37 CSM 185, lines 35–39. 35 Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 228 Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo was that the castle was not abandoned by everybody, for two squires who were accompanying the castellan, decided to turn back, foreseeing the treachery awaiting them: ‘‘[. . .] and as the Moors are treacherous, perhaps they will seize you. Therefore, we wish to return to the castle’’ (Lines 46–47).38 On the one hand, this episode, which is also emblematic of the historical value of the CSM, highlights the existence of good relationships between Muslims and Christians during those periods when a truce was respected; on the other hand, however, it warns the reader against the treacherous actions that Muslims might undertake in order to achieve personal benefits.39 I would generally argue that, in the Alfonsine works, it was religious motivation that was predominantly, although not exclusively, at work in the agreement of armistices and alliances against representatives of other faiths. However, even though in some cases the law, as well as Papal regulations (an instance of this can be seen in the norms issued during the IV Lateran Council in 1215), forbade the concluding of any contact with members of a religious minority, in reality pacts of friendship and mutual support were signed whenever they were required by the demands of defence and protection.40 Political alliances and vassal relationships At this point, two further elements that need to be discussed are the reinterpretation of the classical concept of equality, and the connection between inter-faith agreements and social hierarchy.41 Remarkably, most of these pacts were mere vassal bonds established through ritualised fiefs, oaths and contractual links which, according to some scholars, were the structural pillars around which medieval feudal society was built.42 The Alfonsine narratives attempted a morally acceptable depiction of the most pragmatic and opportunistic agreements by presenting them as instances of friendship, without omitting, however, the possible 38 CSM 185, ‘‘E disse-lle que saisse | con el seu preito firmar ante crischãos e mouros | dos que eran no logar, que o guardasse, ca ele | queria a el guardar, e sobr’ esto fossen ambos | sas juras grandes fazer’’. ‘‘[. . .] e com’ os mouros son falssos, | quiça travarán de vos; o porend’ ao castelo | nos queremos tornar-nos’’. 39 Jesús Montoya Martı́nez, ‘‘Historicidad del cancionero Marial de Alfonso X’’, Medievalismo: Boletı́n de la Sociedad Española de Estudios Medievales, 11 (2001): 59–76, pp. 69–70. 40 Maya Soifer, ‘‘Beyond Convivencia: Critical Reflections on the Historiography of Interfaith Relations in Christian Spain’’, Journal of Medieval Iberian Studies, 1 (2009): 19–35, p. 25. 41 On the classical concept of equality, see E. Kooper, ‘‘Loving the Unequal Equal: Medieval Theologians and Martial Affection’’ in The Olde Daunce: Love, Friendship, Sex and Marriage in the Medieval World, ed. R. Edwards and S. Spector (Albany: State University of New York, 1991), pp. 44–56. 42 For an introduction, see François-Luis Ganshof, Feudalism, trans. Philip Grierson, 3rd edn (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1964); Marc Bloch, Feudal Society, trans. L.A. Manyon, 2nd edn, volumes I–II (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1965); idem, ‘‘Pour une historie comparée des sociétés européennes’’, Revue de Synthèse Historique, 46 (1928): 15–50, trans. as ‘‘A Contribution Towards a Comparative History of European Societies’’, in Land and Work in Medieval Europe (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967), pp. 44–81; Elizabeth A. R. Brown, ‘‘The Tyranny of a Construct: Feudalism and Historians of Medieval Europe’’, American Historical Review, 79 (1974): 1063–88; Jean-Pierre Poly and Eric Bournazel, The Feudal Transformation, 900–1200 (New York; London: Holmes & Meier, 1991); G. Bois, The Transformation of the Year One Thousand: The Village of Lournand from Antiquity to Feudalism, trans. J. Birrell (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1992); Susan Reynolds, Fiefs and Vassals: The Medieval Evidence Reinterpreted (Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 2001). Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 Religious Frontiers and Overlapping Cultural Borders 229 corruptions and difficulties arising from the unequal nature of the relationships and the individuals involved. An interesting observation has been made by Althoff who, looking at the example of the Germanic region, demonstrates that, in the early Middle Ages, the Carolingian kings only established bonds of amity with other secular lords and with the Popes since: ‘‘just as a treaty of friendship between two rulers excluded the payment of tribute, so too a subordinate relationship excluded amicitia’’.43 Nevertheless, a breakthrough was experienced in the ninth century when, as a result of the crisis in the Carolingian Empire, bonds of comradeship and treaties of friendships also began to involve members of lower social status. For the first time, subjects were directly involved in making agreements, although they were regarded only as public witnesses to the pacts that their lords signed publicly rather than as parties to the agreements. Two centuries later, however, this picture had radically changed: what in the ninth century had been regarded as innovative became a consolidated norm, and friendships signed by kings, from the twelfth century particularly, also involved bishops, nobles and magnates who had to behave according to the written provisions established by these pacts. Exceptionally, in the Iberian Peninsula, the networks of relationships involving the sovereign and other members of the social hierarchy evolved differently from the rest of Europe.44 A number of scholars have wondered whether these relationships might be regarded as emblematic of the feudal system that was peculiar to Iberia. According to some of them, the kingdoms of Leon, Castile, Navarre and Aragon (Catalonia underwent a completely different process), together with other Mediterranean areas, cannot be regarded as feudal states, since they only adopted some of the usual feudal institutions.45 Hilda Grassotti has demonstrated that relationships between sovereigns and the individuals to whom they granted lands in full ownership as a reward pro bono et fideli servitio were links that transcended the canonical norms of 43 Gerd Althoff, ‘‘Amicitiae [Friendships] as Relationships between States and People’’ in Debating the Middle Ages: Issues and Readings, ed. Lester K. Little and Barbara H. Rosenwein (Malden, MA.; Oxford: Blackwell, 1998), pp. 191–210, see in particular p. 196. 44 Juan Ignacio Ruiz de la Peña, ‘‘Feudalismo(s)’’ in Tópicos y realidades de la Edad Media, ed. Eloy Benito Ruano (Madrid: Real Academia de la Historia, 2002), pp. 91–118. 45 Pierre Toubert, ‘‘Les féodalités méditerranéennes: un problème d’histoire comparée’’ in Les structures sociales de l’Aquitaine, du Languedoc et de l’Espagne au premier âge féodal: Toulouse 28–31 Mars 1968, ed. Philippe Wolff (Paris: CNRS, 1969), pp. 1–15; Joseph Maria Salrach, ‘‘Les féodalités méridionales: des Alpes à la Galice’’ in Les féodalités, ed. Eric Bournazel and Jean-Pierre Poly (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1998), pp. 313–88; Los orı́genes del feudalismo en el mundo mediterráneo, ed. A. Malpica and T. Quesada, 2nd edn (Granada: Universidad de Granada, 1998). On the specific case of the Iberian Peninsula, see L.G. Valdeavellano, ‘‘Las instituciones feudales en España’’ in appendix to the Spanish translation of Ganshof, El Feudalismo, trans. F. Famosa (Barcelona: Ariel, 1963), and reprinted as El feudalismo hispánico y otros estudios de historia medieval (Barcelona: Ariel, 1981), pp. 63–162; L.G. Valdeavellano, ‘‘Sobre la cuestión del feudalismo hispánico’’ in El feudalismo hispánico, pp. 7–62; Abilio Barbero and Marcelo Vigil, La formación del feudalismo en la Penı́nsula Ibérica (Barcelona: Crı́tica, 1978); J.A. Garcı́a de Cortázar, ‘‘Espacio, sociedad y organización medievales en nuestra tradición historiográfica’’ in Organización social del espacio en la España medieval: la corona de Castilla en los siglos VIII a XV, ed. Garcı́a de Cortázar (Barcelona: Ariel, 1985), pp. 11–40; Hilda Grassotti, Las instituciones feudo-vasalláticas en León y Castilla, volumes I-II (Spoleto: Centro italiano di studi sull’alto Medioevo, 1969). Similarities between the Spanish and the European systems are highlighted in Abilio Barbero, La formación del feudalismo en la peninsula ibérica (Barcelona: Crı́tica, 1978); R. Pastor de Togneri, Resistencias y luchas campesinas en la época del crecimiento y consolidación de la formación feudal Castilla y León siglos X-XIII (Madrid: Siglo Veintiuno de España, 1980). Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 230 Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo vassalage.46 Defining the peculiarities of each agreement and the differences between them has always been an extremely complicated task, but the one indisputable feature was the obligation to make war against or peace with the lords to whom the parties signing the agreement were linked. From this perspective, the vassal connections that existed in medieval Iberia did not differ from those that have been detected in other areas of Europe, at least as far as obligations of defence and mutual support were concerned.47 An attempt to clarify the situation further has been made by José Mattoso in his study of the history of the vassal mentality.48 Not only did Mattoso highlight the difference between the legal stipulations of the vassal oaths and the voluntary and informal acts of submission that subjects performed to a powerful lord in order to obtain his protection, but he goes as far as to state that ‘‘el feudalismo hispánico, aunque en terminos jurı́dicos se puede considerar fluido, mal estructurado y poco coherente, ejerce una enorme influencia sobre la vida cotidiana’’.49 He demonstrates that the model of vassal relationships was founded on mutual help, loyalty, protection and defence of honour, which were the same as the structural characteristics of friendship. To confirm his statement, there are also semantic coincidences between the lexicon attributed to feudal-vassal links and that of amicitia as a social and personal connection. However, while Mattoso affirms that the feudal links operated as structured models of other social bonds, by contrast, as I have also argued in my doctoral thesis The Idea of Friendship in the Literary, Historical and Legal Works of Alfonso X of Castile (1252–1284), friendship was frequently the seed from which any social connection could grow.50 To confirm this point, it might be worth recalling Duby’s interpretation of the feudal institutions, which he considered to be subsequent to and derived from other pre-existing social patterns, and particularly from family and friendship bonds.51 A brief historical note will clarify this point further. In twelfth- and thirteenthcentury Iberia, once the process of Christian expansion had reached its apogee, most of the Muslim rulers of al-Andalus had to submit to the Christian monarchs, swear oaths of vassalage and pay tributes in order to retain their possessions. In some cases, Muslim rulers were even called to help Christian sovereigns in the campaigns that they waged either against other Muslim rebels or against other Christian monarchs who had claimed, legitimately or not, part of the Iberian dominions. However, since the king was regarded as a primus inter pares and the 46 Hilda Grassotti, ‘‘Pro Bono et Fideli Servitio’’, Cuadernos de Historia de España, 33–34 (1961): 5–55. She points out the existence of some royal donations to women, Jews, churchmen and entire communities, such as cities and councils, which were obviously not regarded as canonical vassals. 47 José A. Maravall, ‘‘Del regimen feudal al regimen corporativo en el pensamiento de Alfonso X’’, Boletı́n de la Real Academia Española, 157 (1965): 213–68. 48 José Mattoso, ‘‘La difusión de la mentalidad vasallatica en el lenguaje cotidiano’’, Studia Historica, 4 (1986): 171–84. 49 Mattoso, ‘‘La difusión de la mentalidad vasallatica’’, 172. 50 Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo, ‘‘The Idea of Friendship in the Literary, Historical and Legal Works of Alfonso X of Castile (1252–1284)’’, PhD Thesis, University of Exeter, 2009. 51 George Duby, La société aux XIe et XIIe siècles dans la région maçonnaise (Paris: S.E.V.P.E.N, 1953, repr. 1971), pp. 94–116, 140–1, 172, 177–85, 194–5, 185, 193, 291 (repr. at pp. 93–108, 124–5, 149, 153–8, 164–5, also 158–64, 235–6). Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 Religious Frontiers and Overlapping Cultural Borders 231 highest-positioned figure in society, his connections with individuals belonging to inferior social ranks still implied a certain disparity, which inevitably led the latter to behave reverentially and subordinately. Nonetheless, despite the limitation constituted by the natural gap that separated the parties, in terms of either lineage or ethnic origins, mutual affection and loyalty were regarded as the sine qua non of any worthwhile and durable agreement. An interesting example is EE 692, which tells of King Ramiro II of Leon and Asturias (r. 931–951) who, together with Fernán González, allied themselves against the emir of Zaragoza, who had rebelled against the former. The operation was apparently successful: But Abenahia, who was king at that time, when he realized that King Ramiro and Fernán González, Count of Castile, were allied and friends, feared them, and became the vassal of King Ramiro with all his land [. . .]. And after they did it, King Ramiro went back to Leon full of honour; and Count Fernán González, went back to Castile, full of honour too; and King Ramiro and Count Fernán González [became] friends and they were satisfied with one another.52 This truce was only temporary; in fact, once the two Christian allies left the dominions of Zaragoza, the Muslim leader betrayed them by pledging an oath of vassalage to the Caliph of Córdoba. In a relationship of vassalage, the aforementioned moral norms were required not only of the Muslim subordinates, but also of any Christian subject or lord who wanted to engage himself in a lasting commitment. With regard to this point, an episode worth mentioning is narrated in EE 717, where King Sancho I of Leon, after having used the services and military support provided by his friend and subordinate Count Fernán González, ordered him to abandon his county. Before fulfilling the royal commandment, the Count summoned all his vassals and all the nobles of Castile, addressing them as follows: Friends and relatives, I am your natural lord, and I beg you to advise me as good vassals should do with their lord. [. . .] Friends and vassals, you have heard already what I showed you, and if you have better advice than this, I pray you to tell me, because if I make a mistake you will be blamed for it.53 This shows that those who were regarded as friends and vassals of their lord had the responsibility to advise him in important matters concerning both his private and public life. Moreover, Fernán González reminded his friends and relatives first of all that they had sworn an oath of vassalage to their natural lord and that they were 52 EE 692, ‘‘Mas Abenahia, que era ende rey estonces, quando uio que el rey don Ramiro et Fernand Gonçalez, conde de Castiella, eran acordados et abenidos en uno, ouo grand miedo dellos, et tornose uassallo del rey don Ramiro con toda su tierra [. . .]. Et pues que esto ouieron fecho alli, tornose el rey don Ramiro pora Leon muy onrradamientre; et el conde Fernand Gonçalez, pora Castiella, otrossi muy onrrado; et el rey don Ramiro et el conde Fernand Gonçalez pagados uno dotro et muy amigos’’. 53 EE 717. 232 Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo called to fulfil their duties towards him, and second, that their treacherous actions would be deleterious for themselves, as well as for their successors: Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 And friends, the most important thing is that you preserve loyalty, because even though the body will die, the wrong committed by men never expires, and it is transmitted to his family as a bad inheritance.54 Significantly, the vassals of the king’s friends were themselves tied to the monarch and, as such, they were contractually and morally obliged to support him. For this reason, alliances with royal figures could in some cases prove extremely dangerous and lead to dramatic consequences. A remarkable example concerns the events that followed the Infante Garcı́a’s (r. 1017–1025) murder, perpetrated by the treacherous Vela family, who wanted to take revenge for the dishonour that the prince’s father, Sancho Garcı́a of Castile (r. 995–1017), had inflicted on them by exiling the entire dynasty from Castile. The legend, which the EE took from Lucas de Tuy’s (d. 1249) version, tells that the 13-year old prince was assassinated by his godfather Roy Vela.55 Following the death of the infant, his loyal vassals and friends also suffered the same tragic end: [. . .] and once they killed the infant, they started doing the same with those who were his vassals and friends, and they killed many of them, including the Castilians and Leoneses who came there to help him; [. . .].56 Alfonso X himself also strengthened and maintained strong vassal links, including those with the Muslim rulers of the south of the Peninsula and Morocco. In 1254, at the cortes of Toledo, the Learned King summoned his Muslim allies, since he was ‘‘then much preoccupied with the Moabite and Moorish kings, his vassals’’.57 We know that one of them was the King of Granada, Ibn al-Ahmar, who renewed his _ oath. The Alfonsine sources examined here do not mentioned these events specifically; however, in EE 1070 it is explicitly said that in 1246 Ibn al-Ahmar _ pledged homage to Fernando III, Alfonso X’s father, and committed himself to continue paying an annual tribute and to attend all the summoned corteses. In all likelihood, the king of Murcia Ibn Hūd (r. 625–634/1228–1237) and the king of Niebla Ibn Mahfūz (r. 631–660/1234–1262) declared themselves vassals of the _ _ Castilian sovereign, promising to fulfil all the duties related to their vassal status. 54 EE 717, ‘‘‘Amigos et parientes, yo so uuestro sennor natural, et ruegouos que me consegedes assi como buenos uassallos deuen fazer a sennor.[...] Amigos et uasallos, oydo auedes ya lo que uos he mostrado, et si uos otro conseio sabedes meior que este, ruegouos que me lo digades, casi yo errado fuere, uos en grand culpa yazedes’’’; ‘‘Et la cosa que a sennor mas cumple es buen consegero, ca mucho uale mas que aquel que bien lidia, porque en el consegero yaze bien et mal; [...] Et el buen consegero non deue auer miedo nin uerguença al sennor, mas dezirle toda la uerdad et lo que entiende que es derecho’’; ‘‘Et amigos, sobre todo a mester que guardedes lealdad, ca maguer que muere la carne, la maldad que omne faze nunqua muere, et fincan dell sus parientes con muy mal heredamiento’’. 55 Fernández-Ordóñez, Versión crı́tica de la Estoria de España, 96. 56 EE 788, ‘‘[...] et pues que ellos ouieron muerto ell inffante, metieron mano por los otros que eran uassallos et amigos dell inffante, et mataron y muchos dellos tanbien de los castellanos como de los leoneses que uinien y en acorro; [...]’’. 57 Crónica de Alfonso X: según el Ms. II/2777 de la Biblioteca del Palacio Real, Madrid, ed. Manuel González Jiménez (Murcia: Real Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 1999), 3, pp. 10–11. See also Salma Khadra Jayyusi, The Legacy of Muslim Spain (Leiden: Brill, 1994), pp. 77–8. Religious Frontiers and Overlapping Cultural Borders 233 Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 Significantly, the relationships of vassalage established within the Christian community before and during Alfonso X’s reign conformed to a similar layered structure. The description of the internecine rivalry between the two brothers, Sancho II of Leon (r. 1065–1072) and Garcı́a of Galicia (r. 1065–1071, 1072– 1073), is a case in point. Before their armies clashed on open battlefield, King Garcı́a incited his host by addressing them in the following words: Vassals and friends, you can see the evil that King Sancho, my brother, is doing by trying to expropriate me of the land that my father gave me, and I pray you to come and help me, since you know that, since I became King, I have given you all that I had and I shared my possessions with you: wealth, horses, weapons; and I counted on you for a period and a moment such as this one.58 The King declared openly that his generosity towards his friends and vassals was not offered out of pure love, but was rather motivated by pragmatic interests. In addition, he summoned his host, certain that they would intervene on his behalf for the benefits (wealth, lands and weapons) that they had received as a reward in anticipation of their support.59 There are grounds for arguing that what I like to define as the principle of the inheritance of friendship did not fit this feudal-vassal pattern, according to which any bond of vassalage had to be renewed by the parties to the bond. Further, any alliance had to be voluntarily agreed, since it could not be transferred directly from father to son. For this reason, the aforementioned Ibn al-Ahmar, who had declared _ himself to be Ferdinand III’s vassal, had to renew his oath to the latter’s son Alfonso X during the cortes of Toledo in 1254. Likewise, when a vassal died or passed his power and dominions to his successor, the latter had to renew any pledge previously established by his predecessor in order to maintain it. Nonetheless, although this was the rule, a few exceptions, which consisted of cases in which heirs maintained their ancestors’ virtues and good will, can be found. Only in such exceptional cases could an agreement be automatically preserved with no hesitation as to its renewal. Evidence of this can be found in EE 985, which relates how the virtuous Sancho III of Castile (r. 1157–1158) acceded to the throne after his father Alfonso VII (r. 1126–1157) and managed to retain the relationships that he had personally established: [. . .] and he went to ask King Garcı́a of Navarra, his father-in-law, and King Alfonso of Aragon to confirm and preserve the vassalage that they had conceded to his father, the Emperor don Alfonso.60 58 EE 822, ‘‘‘uassallos et amigos, vos uedes el grand tuerto que el rey don Sancho mio hermano me faze en quererme toller la tierra que mio padre me dio, et ruegouos que uos pese et que me ayudedes, ca uos sabedes que desque yo fuy rey, que quanto oue todo uos lo di et lo parti conuusco, auer, cauallos, armas; et guardeuos pora tal sazon et pora tal dia como este’’’. 59 EE 822, ‘‘Et ellos por amostrarle mas cueral amor llamaronle tu et dixieronle: ‘‘sennor, partistelo muy bien et fezistenos mucho dalgo, et serte a oy muy bien gualardonado si nos pudieremos’’’; ‘‘and they, in order to prove their love to him, addressed him directly and said: ‘Lord, you shared everything righteously and you did other good things, and we are going to reward you now as much as we can’’’. 60 EE 985, ‘‘[...] et fue a demandar al rey don Garçia de Nauarra, su suegro, et al rey don Alffonsso dAragon quel conosçiessen el vassallage que connosçieran a su padre ell emperador don Alffonsso et gele guardaran’’. Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 234 Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo Similarly, the kings Sancho IV of Navarre (r. 1150–1194) and Alfonso II of Aragon (r. 1166–1196) renewed their previously sworn oaths to Sancho III’s father: ‘‘and King Sancho was deeply loved by his vassals, and he was also feared and received with great honour by them’’.61 However, the commitment to be naturales vassallos of a lord implied neither that such a relationship would necessarily last nor that it would guarantee the absolute safety of those involved. If the king himself did not behave as a buen sennor, that is to say as a wise and righteous lord, such coalitions would easily dissolve, as demonstrated in CSM 281. This song narrates the story of a French knight, who lost all his wealth because he was a victim of bad luck. The yearning for his lost fortunes made him bow to the devil’s request and become his vassal. The pact was concluded according to the conventional rituals that accompanied the pledge of any vassal bond: He [the knight] replied: ‘‘Tell me what I may do for you, and I shall do it for you at once.’’ The devil said: ‘‘Agree to be my vassal, and I shall give you much more than you lost.’’ The man agreed to it. After the man kissed his hand, the devil said: ‘‘You shall give me proof of your loyalty, since you are my vassal. Deny your Lord [. . .].’’62 (Lines 26–31) The knight blindly obeyed his liege’s commands and bowed to his will, except for the fact that he refused to deny the Virgin Mary. He respected the prohibitions imposed by the pact, including the ban on entering a church. But one day, while he was accompanying the King of France, he witnessed a miracle: a statue of the Virgin Mary inside a church beckoned him to come in. Although all the witnesses attested the miracle, the knight wanted to confess first, in front of the King and the crowd, his shameful agreement with the devil. After his public repentance he was able to abjure his oath to the devil and he also received apologies from the King of France, who considered himself responsible for these events, since he had not rewarded his knight justly and had consequently indirectly pushed him towards his unhappy destiny: Then the king said: ‘‘Friend, I was to blame, I swear to God, for your being impoverished in my kingdom and among my subjects.’’ He then endowed him with much more than his forebears had possessed, and the knight became rich as befits a man of his estate.63 (Lines 80–3) The knight’s weakness, which never brought him to commit any disloyal action against the king – for which reason he could eventually regain both royal and divine favour – was only one of the elements that caused his fall. In fact, the finger of blame was pointed at the monarch, who was morally and legally obliged to reward his family, friends, vassals and all his subjects according to their merits, but in this 61 EE 985, ‘‘et amaron mucho sus vassallos al rey don Sancho, et fue muy temido dellos et reçebido con grand onrra’’. 62 CSM 281, ‘‘Diss’ el: ‘Di- me que faça, | e logo cho eu farey’. Diss’ o demo: ‘‘Por vassalo | meu t’outorga, e dar-ch-ei mui mais ca o que perdische.’’ | E el foy-llo outorgar. [...] Pois que beijou a mão, | diss’ o demo: ‘‘Un amor me farás, pois meu vassalo | es: nega Nostro Sennor [...]’’. 63 CSM 281, ‘‘Diss’ enton el Rey: ‘Amigo, | eu fui errado, par Deus, de vos averdes pobreza | en meu reyn’ e ontr’ os meus’. E deu-ll’ enton por herdade | muy mais ca ouveran seus avoos, e ficou rico | com’ ome do seu logar’’. Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 Religious Frontiers and Overlapping Cultural Borders 235 case, he had, at least initially, neglected to do so. Without referring to any recognisable historical figure or geographical place, this miracle story clearly provides an overview of the rules under which any vassal bond had to be forged according to the Alfonsine perspective. Indeed, mutual favour, loyalty and righteous rewards were fundamental parts of the equation, but so too was the fear that the subjects felt of the consequences for themselves if they rebelled or did not respect the pact signed with their lords. In fact, a bond of vassalage was, like any other pactum amiciarum, a social agreement aimed at protecting both public peace and the established order. In particular, in eleventh-and twelfth-century Leon and Castile, the rise of the new señorı́os territoriales and the strengthening of the municipal authorities were perceived as potential threats by the weakest social groups, who found protection either under the power of a lord or within brotherhoods that they established.64 With this in mind, Prieto Bances has formulated an interesting observation by distinguishing between the concepts of friendship and alliance, which continued to be thoroughly interdependent although not perfectly coincident: ‘‘pero la paz es diversa según su origen; hay paz nacida del amor y paz nacida del interés mutuo o de la violencia, y a estas distinatas paces corresponden amistades distintas; en el primer caso tendremos la amistad natural, aristotélica; en el segundo, la amistad pactada, y en el tercero la amistad impuesta’’.65 Also of interest is a document probably edited in 1297, describing the council that took place in Ovanos, to which the principal representatives of the cities of Navarre were summoned.66 According to this document, the assembled bins homes (nobles) signed a dita amiztat (pact of alliance), which stated not only that they had to behave with mutual respect, but that they also committed themselves to protect the kingdom of Navarre and its rulers from any dangers and enemies. In the oath the parties swore, they also committed themselves to preserving the alliance, risking monetary penalties for non-compliance. Conclusion I would generally conclude that, in the Alfonsine works, both friendships and vassal bonds established with or against rulers of a different faith were presented in an equally positive light as long as the general and moral rules of friendship were respected. One reason for this may be that, despite the extremely pragmatic and strategic goals behind those agreements – mainly military and political interests – they still conformed, or at least this is how the Alfonsine works presented them, to the fundamental behaviours and formulae that were regarded as the 64 Eduardo de Hinojosa y Naveros, ‘‘La fraternidad artificial en España’’, Revista de Archivos, Museos y Bibliotecas, 13 (1905): 1–18, also published in Obras. T.I. Estudios de investigación (Madrid: Ministerio de Justicia y CSIC, 1948), pp. 259–78. See also idem, El elemento germánico en el derecho español (Madrid, 1915; re-ed. Marcial Pons, 1993), p. 380; Emilio Sáez, ‘‘Un diploma interesante para el estudio de la fraternidad artificial’’, Anuario de Historia del Derecho Español, 17 (1946): 751–52; Hermandat et confradria in honore de Sancte Marie de Transfixio, Estatutos de la Confradı́a de la Transfixión de Zaragoza (1311–1508), ed. Antonio Cortijo Ocaña (Zaragoza: Prensas Universitarias de Zaragoza, 2004), p. xviii. 65 Prieto Bances, ‘‘Los amigos en el fuero de Oviedo’’, Anuario de Historia del Derecho Español, 23 (1963): 203–46. 66 Textos lingüı́sticos del medioevo español, ed. D.J. Gifford and F.W. Hodcroft, 2nd edn (Oxford: Dolphin Book Co., 1966), pp. 145–6. Downloaded by [Queen Mary, University of London], [Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo] at 06:17 15 December 2011 236 Antonella Liuzzo Scorpo indispensable characteristics of friendship. Significantly, the works examined in this study also engendered a wider programme of education, the didactic norms of which were designed to constitute a model of virtues to cover any practical need. Perhaps foreshadowing the reception of this production, most of the aforementioned pacts were defined as friendships rather than as mere vassal bonds and military alliances. Consequently, since political relationships were described as morally based, the possibility of their destruction was frequently attributed to sporadic cases of treachery rather than necessarily being ascribed to religious differences. Might all this be attributed exclusively to Alfonso X’s tolerant attitude towards the religious creeds that co-existed within his dominions? It seems more reasonable to define the relationships analysed up to this point as emblematic of a long-standing situation in which cultural, political, economic and historical factors prevailed over any theologically or ideologically imposed barrier. Alfonso X embodied all the contradictions of his time, whilst becoming the spokesman of a complex reality made of different kinds of pragmatic inter-faith relationships which were sometimes officially silenced, but neither less frequent nor less powerful.