Just War and Holy War in Byzantium

The motivation for warfare

 The Byzantines held a concept of just war, Leo stresses that war can only be made when  “The God of justice is on your side.”[1] Making war to pacify an enemy or to defend territory in the role of the non-aggressor was the only just cause. Appeals for divine assistance and thanksgiving in victory were frequent but do not indicate a religious motivation. Religious imagery was equally used in warfare with co-religionists as with other faiths. For example Emperor Basil II (976-1025) made use of the highly revered Hodegetria icon as a shield while dueling Bardas Phokas (878-968).[2] The use of mercenaries, treaties and subterfuge were standard in Byzantium, consequently a knightly caste did not develop as in the west. Another important difference between the Byzantine wars and the Crusades is the lack of civilian participation on the Byzantine side compared to the mass involvement of western civilians. The lack of non military involvement further weakens the argument of a religiously motivated Byzantine war. Byzantine military ideology made peacemaking the sole purpose of its wars; Leo’s Tactica states that a general should “treat war as a physician treating an illness”.[3] Later in the same treatise Leo explains root of war itself “Out of reverence for the image and the word of God, all men ought to have embraced peace and fostered love for one another instead of taking up murderous weapons in their hands to be used against their own people. But since the devil, the original killer of men, the enemy of our race, has made use of sin to bring men around to waging war, contrary to their basic nature, it is absolutely necessary for men to wage war in return against those whom the devil maneuvers and to take their stand with unflinching resolve against nations who want war.”  Leo identifies peace as the religious duty of ‘all men” and though he asserts that war is inevitable consequence of sin he does not advocate war against others but rather stresses the necessity of self-defense. The identification of the enemy as “nations who want war” reflects the Byzantine view of the world, it does not refer to enemies as infidels to be destroyed or converted as in Holy War but reveals the pragmatic belief that those outside of the empire were all of a relatively even and barbarian standing in Byzantine estimation. The requirements of defensive warfare were flexible in practice because the re-conquest of any of the land previously held by the Roman Empire was considered a legitimate target for liberation. Being under non-roman rule regardless of the duration did not disqualify a territory from Byzantine military defense. [4] The early Byzantine perception of the Crusades as a type of defensive war (at least in principle) accounts for the lack of polemics against the Latin theological element of the crusades when compared to that post 1204.[5] The Byzantine wars were imperial and though appeals for the protection of Christian sites or retribution for crimes against Christianity were common there is no evidence for a religiously motivated Byzantine war.[6]

---

[1] VI, Leo. The Taktika of Leo VI. Translated by George T. Dennis. Washington: Dumbarton Oaks, 2010.p .37.

[2]Psellus, Michael. Michael Psellus (1018-after 1078): Chronographia. Translated by E R. Sewter. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953,p.132.

[3]VI, Leo. The Taktika of Leo VI., p.33

[4] Stouraitis, Ioannis, ‘Byzantine Approaches to Warfare (6th to 12th Centuries)’, Byzantine War Ideology Between Roman Imperial Concept and Christian Religion, ed. I. Stouraitis and J. Koder (Vienna,2012), p.10-11.

[5]  Kolbaba notes the lack of Byzantine complaint to Crusade indulgence prior to 1204, Kolbaba, Tia. "Fighting For Christianity.", p. 216.

[6] Dennis, Three Byzantine Military Treatises Dennis states that religion in the Roman military should not be considered a specific feature of Byzantium’s Christian identity “nor should their wars be viewed as particularly holy or religious.”