Annotated Bibliography: Franciscan Perspectives on Race

Campopiano, Michele. “Islam, Jews and Eastern Christianity in Late Medieval Pilgrims’ Guidebooks: Some Examples from the Franciscan Convent of Mount Sion.” Al-Masaq: Journal of the Medieval Mediterranean, vol. 24, no. 1, 2012, pp. 75–89.

In this article, Campopiano explores Franciscans’ views of “other” racialized populations as expressed through guidebooks from an important convent in the Holy Land. This convent was a particularly important place for pilgrims to the Holy Land, so the texts from these guidebooks provide us with two key things. First is an understanding of how Franciscans in this convent—who, by virtue of being in the Holy Land, lived in closer proximity to these racialized groups—viewed their counterparts. Second, due to the number of pilgrims that would have encountered these texts, they provide us with a view of how racialized attitudes were reinforced, reflected, and/or disseminated by these texts. 

One of the most interesting features of this article is the additional exploration of how Eastern Christians were “othered.” This provides an opportunity for some interesting contrasts with other marginalized populations. For example, while it is disheartening to see many of the common antisemitic views of Jewish people as deserving punishment “because of their murder and infidelity” (guidebook text, quoted on 84), it seems that in some ways, the “othering” of Muslims and Eastern Christians is more specifically focused on their religious beliefs. As Campopiano notes, in one text, there were texts that “attack[ed] the belief and rites of Muslims, highlighting the irrationality of their religion as a mix of absurd practices and elements” (85). With regards to Eastern Christians, the guidebooks present a picture of them as “sunk in theological errors and in need of correction by the Latin Church,” which carries strong echoes of paternalism. It would be interesting to further explore the texts Campopiano mentions as well as the political and economic systems operating in the region, to better understand how this “othering” of Muslims and Eastern Christians, in particular, might have extended in more racialized—and not merely theological—ways. However, this is beyond the scope of Campopiano’s argument. As a final note, whereas Campopiano’s article “St. Francis and the Sultan” felt predicated on an argument of absence, this article is much stronger because it is built on the evidence of what is in these texts.

Campopiano, Michele. “St. Francis and the Sultan: The Franciscans and the Holy Land (14th‐17th Centuries).” Muslim World, vol. 109, no. 1/2, Mar. 2019, pp. 79–89.

The title of this article was a little bit misleading, specifically the prominent reference to St. Francis and the Sultan. Instead of directly exploring the legend and impact of St. Francis’s visit with Ayyubid Sultan al-Malik al-Kamil, Campopiano attempts to put forth the argument that “the Franciscans saw themselves first and foremost as a safe haven for pilgrims and guides who could guarantee access to a veridic description of the holy places and their history, rather than as ‘missionaries’ among non-Christians” (80). To support his thesis, Campopiano explores two types of sources: manuscripts that originally came from a Franciscan Convent in the Holy Land and descriptions of the Holy Land written by Franciscans. 

As mentioned previously, this article was misleadingly titled. The title creates the expectation that the article will explore an encounter between St. Francis and the Sultan, or at the very least, how later Franciscans were affected by that. Instead, while the meeting is mentioned, it is not directly related to Campopiano’s thesis. There are Franciscan writings explored, but part of Campopiano’s “argument” seems to rest on the fact that there are not texts recounting Francis’s encounter with the Sultan. Apart from the title of the article, it is important to evaluate the merits of Campopiano’s arguments. Ultimately, I found them unconvincing. First, he seems to be resting his argument on the absence of evidence, which is not as logically strong. For example, his conclusion that Franciscans did not see themselves first as “missionaries” is related to the absence of the St. Francis and Sultan arguments in the writings that were preserved: “No text [from the Franciscan Library of Mt. Zion] recounts Francis’s encounter with al-Kamil or Francis’s supposed travel to the Holy Land” (84) and “we do not find much interest in it among the books produced on Mount Zion” (86). This leads Campopiano to conclude, “The scarce presence in the memory of the Franciscans in Jerusalem of the encounter…becomes less surprising if we consider how the Franciscans saw their role in the Holy Land. They saw themselves as destined to assist the pilgrims, physically and spiritually” (89). The evidence does not seem to adequately support this conclusion, and there are too many inferences being made on how the Franciscans “saw” themselves merely through the texts that they preserved. My criticisms are not intended to disprove Campopiano’s thesis, merely to suggest that because his thesis is predicated on the absence of particular evidence, there is not enough evidence either to support or refute the thesis.

Though at first it seemed promising, this resource would not ultimately be helpful in a larger paper on this topic (Franciscans’ views of racialized “others”). However, it did provide references to a few primary sources about St. Francis’s encounter with the Sultan and some possible secondary sources that might be more helpful to explore in depth.

Debby, Nirit B. "Jews and Judaism in the Rhetoric of Popular Preachers: The Florentine Sermons of Giovanni Dominici (1356-1419) and Bernardino Da Siena (1380-1444)." Jewish History, vol. 14, no. 2, 2000, pp. 175-200.

This article, as indicated by the title, explores the rhetoric of Giovanni Dominici and Bernardino da Siena, a Dominican and a Franciscan, respectively. Though the article specifies “Florentine” sermons, there are extensions into these two preachers’ broader sermons. As Debby notes, both preachers “viewed the Florentine republic as a sacred body where there was no place for corrupting outsiders as the Jews” (176), but their preaching is different in some important ways. Dominici’s preaching was “more interested in theological and historical issues” (187), and the antisemitic strain of his preaching was more focused on the Jewish rejection of Christianity/Jesus as messiah, playing on dangerous ideas such as “Jews as the crucifiers of Christ” (182). By contrast, Bernardino’s preaching was more “pragmatic” (176) and focused on the threat to the “purity” of Christian society, particularly through portraying the Jewish communities as avaricious moneylenders. After presenting textual evidence from both of these preachers’ sermons, Debby compares and contrasts their style and substance, and emphasizes how powerful their preaching was received by the Florentine (and other Italian cities’) citizens of the time.

This article connects to many of the ideas explored in other articles. For example, Hughes’s article references many of Bernardino’s speeches, though it focuses more explicitly on his aims to impose sartorial distinctions between Jews and Christians, as well as limited their ability to exist or operate in Christian society. This type of preaching is foundational for the establishment of the monti di pieta explored by Toaff. Yet this article adds more to the conversation, especially with its contrasts between Bernardino’s and Dominici’s rhetorical approaches, both of which seem to have been effective. This article is particularly helpful in conversation with other articles in this bibliography in giving a fuller picture of the historical context of Franciscan Observant preaching and its real effects on the Jewish communities in this region of Italy.

Hughes, Diane O. "Distinguishing Signs: Ear–rings, Jews and Franciscan Rhetoric in the Italian Renaissance City." Past and Present, vol. 112, no. 1, 1986, pp. 3-59.

Hughes’s expansive article covers extensive ground, exploring the ways in which Jewish people were racialized through practices, including sartorial restrictions, and the ways in which these semiotics shifted in meaning over the course of the fifteenth century. Additionally, Hughes explores how some of these same practices were used to marginalize women—especially prostitutes. This provides an opportunity to see how sartorial cues were weaponized against multiple different marginalized communities. These sumptuary laws and restrictions were especially reinforced by Franciscan rhetoric and served to link Jewish people (and prostitutes) with impurity. As Hughes notes, “the Observant Franciscans, who hoped to return their order to the ascetism and social compassion of its founder, condemned the promiscuous mingling of Christians and Jews in fifteenth-century Italian cities…stress[ing] that association with Jews endangered a Christian’s soul…Church councils had been establishing these truths for two centuries, but the Observant friars expressed them with a persuasiveness, persistence, and sense of menace that let them be heard” (19). Hughes couples this exploration of textual/rhetorical evidence with an analysis of different famous works of art, particularly of the Virgin Mary, the paragon of purity.

While this article covered a lot of ground, there were times when the argument’s presentation felt a little disjointed or unclear. The opening portion dealt entirely with different artistic expressions of a biblical scene, but it was not clear why this was relevant until much later in the article. Additionally, the article’s scope expands well beyond the title of the article itself—the section covering Franciscan rhetoric had sufficient detail, but did not always feel as though it were the focus of the article. Despite these small notes, the article did an excellent job of covering a range of issues, including racializing and misogynistic practices, and the rhetoric that inspired and/or encouraged them.

Ritsema van Eck, Marianne P. "Encounters with the Levant: The Late Medieval Illustrated Jerusalem Travelogue by Paul Walter Von Guglingen." Mediterranean Historical Review, vol. 32, no. 2, 2017, pp. 153-188.

Ritsema van Eck’s article explores a travelogue by Guglingen, an Observant Franciscan pilgrim who traveled on a pilgrimage near the end of the fifteenth century. Guglingen also spent time at the Franciscan convent in the Holy Land, and thus the topic connects loosely to Campopiano’s articles on texts from this monastery. Ritsema van Eck hopes to counter the idea that “curious” exploration is at cross-purposes with pilgrimage, countering scholarship which states that “curious engagement with remarkable sites and phenomena encountered by pilgrims overseas eventually undermined late medieval pilgrimage” (176). Ritsema van Eck argues that examples of travelogues, such as Guglingen’s, demonstrate that curiosity can coexist with devotion, that “paying attention to the natural landscape one passes through as a pilgrim is equivalent to an act of devotion, not an unwanted distraction” (177).

This article is particularly interesting in conversation with Campopiano’s articles. However, though initially promising, the article was not as helpful in illuminating Franciscan views of “othered” communities. The one promising section occurs when Ritsema describes Guglingen’s (distant) encounters with Muslims at a pool in Hebron, where Guglingen saw Muslims washing themselves for ritual purity and praying. Ritsema notes that Guglingen is “disgusted” with this custom, though it is not entirely clear why. We are also able to see a hint of Guglingen’s rhetoric when, it is noted that he “fervently prays to Christ to only allow this excursion [to the nearby mosque] to take place if it will not be to the detriment of their souls and bodies” (166). He later convinces his fellow pilgrims to not enter the mosque, with suspicions about the intentions and reactions of the Muslims there. This small hint teases out the possibility that Guglingen’s viewed the Muslims as “impure”. This would fit with the rhetoric with which other Observant Franciscan preachers cast Jewish populations as a corrupting force in society. However, Guglingen’s views of Muslims is not the focus of the article, so the level of detail is severely lacking. It does however provide a good example of an actual travelogue, and perhaps through its references or a more thorough exploration of Guglingen’s full travelogue, there could be additional explorations of attitudes towards Jewish and Muslim “others.”

Roest, Bert. "Giovanni of Capestrano's Anti-Judaism within a Franciscan Context: An Evaluation Based on Recent Scholarship." Franciscan Studies, vol. 75, no. 1, 2017, pp. 117-143.

Roest’s article explores Franciscan antisemitism in the 15^th century, particularly through the writings and actions of Giovanni of Capestrano. Roest helpfully contextualizes his argument by briefly covering the history of scholarship on Franciscan perspectives on Judaism. He notes the complexities involved—different scholars (Catholic and/or Jewish) bring their particular perspectives. Roest helpfully presents his argument in a nuanced way: confirming Capestrano’s antisemitic strains which some Franciscan scholars have (consciously or unconsciously) minimized, while also viewing it as a part of the larger Catholic-Jewish relationships of the period.

Many of the antisemitic strains of thought that Roest traces in Capestrano’s writing echo  Heng’s chapter on antisemitism in The Invention of Race in the European Middle Ages: accusations of the blood libel and desecrations of the host, as well as the economic difficulties over “usury”. However, Roest also explores an additional dimension with theological roots, the Franciscan perception of Jewish people as “proverbial impenitent[s]: stubborn, unwilling to convert, and thoroughly malicious” (137, emphasis mine). Roest explores how this particular aspect of antisemitism was used in sermons and writings to further distance between the Christian and Jewish communities of the period. Though a somber and disheartening reality, it is important to view Franciscan figures as they really were. Ultimately, Roest argues that Franciscans such as Capestrano held and promoted the antisemitic views that were common in the period.

Rusconi, Roberto. “Anti-Jewish Preaching in the Fifteenth Century and Images of Preachers in Italian Renaissance Art.” Friars and Jews in the Middle Ages and Renaissance, edited by Susan E. Myers and Steven J. McMichael, Brill, 2004, pp. 225-238. 

This brief article is primarily focused on antisemitic depictions of Jewish figures in the art of the Italian renaissance. Though the article title refers to preaching, the focus is much more prominent on exploring representations in art. Connections are made to rhetoric by different “Observant” Franciscans, such as Giovanni of Capestrano, mentioned in other articles included in this bibliography. In artistic depictions of the period, Rusconi explores how Jews are racialized through “Oriental” dress, such as “oriental hats and long beards” (229). In addition to distinctive clothing, different antisemitic tropes, such as moneylending (233).

This article explores some important works of art, though it could certainly connected more fully to the antisemitic preaching of the period. The focus was not exclusively on Franciscan’s views, though some prominent Franciscans were mentioned. However, it would be important to examine all of the artworks in detail. For example, being familiar with Signorelli’s preaching antichrist in the Brancacci Chapel in Orvieto, the claim that the “antichrist’s figure is iconographically depicted as a perfect Christlike figure, that is, a false messiah of Jewish origin” was not fully clear. The antichrist does appear to perversely mimic Jesus, as would be sensible, but there does not appear to be anything distinctively racialized in his portrayal. Further detail in Rusconi’s argument could have clarified some of these points.

Simon, Larry J. “Intimate Enemies: Mendicant-Jewish Interaction in Thirteenth-Century Mediterranean Spain.” Friars and Jews in the Middle Ages and Renaissance, edited by Susan E. Myers and Steven J. McMichael, Brill, 2004, pp. 53-80. 

This source shifted from the discourse around Italian Franciscan-Jewish relationships (primarily in the fifteenth century) to focus on Mendicant-Jewish interactions in Spain. Simon’s aim with this article was “to explore the nature of specific contacts and specific interactions between individual mendicant friars and individual Jews…to offer…some new if modest insights into mendicant-Jewish relations” (54). The texts that Simon “explores” are different than those of the other articles, focusing on letters, registered documents, as opposed to specific laws (e.g. sumptuary laws) or sermons. Simon explores relationships between Dominicans and the Jewish community as well as between Franciscans and the Jewish community.

On the one hand, it is really interesting that this article focuses on an entirely different region and type of text. The issues that arose were more “mundane”, for example, an issue that arose between Franciscans and the Jewish community about the proximity of the monastery and synagogue. However, on the other hand, the resulting impact of the article is not as strong nor as adept in really exposing the Franciscan (or Dominican) attitudes towards their Jewish neighbors in depth, nor a connection to the real motivations behind those attitudes. Simon seems to recognize this on some level, noting “[these] notarial traces are not easily subjected to psychodynamic analysis to reveal attitudes and how they may have shaped various behaviors” (73). He concludes with the note that, “only by studying the daily and the millennial, the mundane as well as the profound, I would argue, will we more fully understand the relations between…these intimate enemies” (74). I am drawn by the argument that these “mundane” moments are important to study and to really understand the relationships between these two communities. Ultimately, however, it takes a lot more exploration of these individual interactions to give that broader understanding. These types of pieces really need to be linked into a much broader context to have their full impact.

Toaff, Ariel. “Jews, Franciscans, and the First Monti di Pieta in Italy.” Friars and Jews in the Middle Ages and Renaissance, edited by Susan E. Myers and Steven J. McMichael, Brill, 2004, pp. 239-254. 

Toaff’s article explores the phenomenon of monti di pieta in Italy, which were essentially systems of charity, championed by Franciscan preachers. The intention behind these monti di pieta was to replace the systems of Jewish money-lending and “usury”. Toaff explains the ways in which the founding of these early monti led to two related phenomena: the explicit criminalization of Jewish moneylending, and the reality that money-lending continued nonetheless (244-5). Interestingly, in one case, there was even a letter of the pope extending some protection to Jewish moneylenders, “if [the preachers] wanted to correct the behavior of the Christian people, they were free to do so, but they were not to harass or harm Jews who respected the law, simply because their customs differed from those of the Christians” (246). This tension was exacerbated by the Franciscan friars, who in many cases, fervently preached against the Jewish communities in these regions.

Toaff presents multiple examples of how these monti operated, and the impacts their presence had on the Jewish communities, explaining things with clear detail. This article presents a nice complement to some of the other articles, which also reference the monti, and works hard to present a nuanced picture through the exploration of different examples. Toaff also has a clear logic to his writing, and presents some nice summaries of his arguments (e.g. 247-248) at certain points throughout the article. This article provides helpful historical context that works to add clarification to some of the other articles.

Todeschini, Giacomo. “Franciscan Economics and Jews in the Middle Ages: From a Theological to an Economic Lexicon.” Friars and Jews in the Middle Ages and Renaissance, edited by Susan E. Myers and Steven J. McMichael, Brill, 2004, pp. 99-117. 

Todeschini’s article provides an excellent foundation for understanding the historical context for most of the other articles explored in this bibliography (which are mostly focused on the Observant Franciscan’s preaching in the fifteenth century). Todeschini explores the development of Franciscan economic views in the 13^th century, and argues that this emerging theory of economics contributed to the antisemitic views, especially with regards to usury, that were particularly prominent in the fifteenth century. Todeschini argues that early Franciscan writing (from 1240 to 1260) are “a strong effort to make the poverty of the Order an economic ideal for Christian society as a whole” (100). This becomes connected to antisemitic views, as the Franciscans linguistically differentiate the activities of fidelis (Christians) and infidelis; through this rhetoric, Jews in particular become “the enemies of Franciscan poverty”, “supporters of usury economy”, and as a result, “dangerous for the Christian moral and economic order” (102).

What is especially infuriating about this Franciscan “othering” of the Jewish community is its failure to recognize the limited options for work. Specifically, the paradox that “Jews must be compelled to do honest labor, but all the jobs that could associate them with Christians–surgery, commerce, domestic service–are prohibited. The result is that the degenerate business, usury, is proscribed but remains the only practicable one for Jews” (111-112). Todeschini goes on to note the crown’s complicity in this system, because of its “right to impose taxes” and “legal right to a portion of the sums to be reimbursed”. One can imagine a world in which the Franciscans had turned their rhetoric more firmly against those in power, and the systems that created impoverishment and imbalance, instead of turning their ire against marginalized communities. However, that was not the reality—in their day or our own.