Gregory of Tours’ Clovis' Conversion to Orthodox Christianity

The battle in which Charles encountered was just the start of his religions war. At first religion served to support political authority. While he won the title of emperor, he also was made overlord of all German principalities and supreme among the monarchs of western Christianity. Although this title did not mean much in terms of power and financial gain in either the German principalities or western Christianity as a whole, it made him the titular political head of western Christianity and thereby the direct counterpart of Sultan Suleyman in the struggle for dominance in the Christian-Muslim world of Europe, the Middle East and northern Africa. (Sivers, Desnoyer, Stow 2012 Pg. 537-538)

Fulcher of Chartres noted that during the meeting with the council of dignitaries in the city of Clermont, France Pope Urban II gave an eternal decree to all Christians that were willing fight the war.2 He promised that any Christian who died in the defense of Jerusalem would be given remission of all sins. Pope Urban II explicitly states “I grant them through the power of God.”3 By giving such a promise that all sins would be forgiven in death, Pope Urban alleviated the fear any Crusader had of being punished by God of wrongdoing. For some that alone was enough justification to go to battle. This “promise” also gives greater

Throughout history, there have been many instances of leaders converting to new religions, but none have had an impact such as the conversion of Constantine I, nor as ground-breaking as that of Clovis I. Constantine I was born in the year 280. During his reign as emperor of the Roman Empire, the state was falling apart. 1 He was the first Roman emperor to convert to Christianity. He called the Council of Nicea in 325 to resolve conflicts arising between the Arian Christians and the Athansian Christians. 2 This resulted in the canonization of Athansian Christianity, to which Constantine I converted his empire. 3Clovis I was born in the year 466, he was the king of the Franks and ruled Gaul for 30 years. 4 It is unknown when he converted to Christianity, however he was baptised in 496. Clovis I was the first Germanic king to convert to Christianity, and while he did not convert his entire state, his conversion was a turning point in Frankish and European history. Behind any conversion, is a reason. For Constantine I, it was an empire coming apart at the seams. For Clovis, it was a need to be more palatable to a mostly Christian populous.

The battle of Milvian Bridge lead by Constantine in 312 (Allan, 45), gave Christians a surge of hope and faith as Constantine would claim king of the Roman Empire. After such a great battle, Christianity would be put into question how it was impacted through living and socio-economic standards.

According to Gregory, what led to the conversion of Clovis? According to Gregory, the conversion of Clovis was caused by a war between his people and the Alamanni. He believed that his army was in danger of being killed and began to pray for help and a victory in war. He made a promise “that if thou wilt grant me victory over these enemies…, I will believe in thee and be baptized in thy name” (Source 10.1 449) and soon after the Alamanni fled, thus giving Clovis the victory. As a result of this victory, Clovis kept his promise and was baptized into Christianity.

Because Christianity could not be completely purged by the Empire, it created an opportunity for Christians to display how strongly they were devoted to the religion. The way in which they responded made all the difference. Under pressure, they would not submit, and this was proof of the force and influence of Christianity.

Constantine is known to have claimed seeing a vision of the cross which was an indication of divine help. And if his soldiers were to paint the symbol of the cross on their shields then, victory would be granted. His victory over the Roman Empire begun what was to be the Christianization of the conquered territory. But it was during the rise of the Carolingian monarchy that seems to have changed the history of war rituals. Doris Bergen mentions three factors that contributed to this change. These were, interest in performance of liturgy, nature of warfare had changed and ambition of the new monarchy which believed that both their activities were divinely sanctioned and that the ruler bore personal responsibility for subjects’ minds and souls. The revival of liturgy credited to the Carolingians and the application of a different kind of warfare in the middle east by the warriors of the first crusade that resulted in great success, would later give birth to what Doris calls “A new kind of war, a crusade, and with it, the liturgical rites that

He was the first king of the Franks by uniting all the tribes under one rule, which marked the end of royal chieftains. However, he was converted to Catholicism and Clovis only converted because he won the battle against the Alamanni, Clovis states, “I beseech the glory of thy aid, and the vow that if thou wilt grant me victory over these enemies, […], I will believe in thee and be baptized in thy name (pp.137-138).” This did not bother Gregory of Tours or his subjects because he was seen as the chosen one by God to rule the Franks. In Charles case, he had always been a devout Christian. Clovis became a devout believer of Christianity and practiced with caution, Clovis states, “If you have decreed that this people of unbelievers, who have always been hostile to you, […], show me a propitious sign as these men enter St. Martin’s (pp.142).” They both defended Christianity and tried to convert non-believers through

In his call at Clermont in 1095, Pope Urban II asked all fellow Christians to join in the aid of the Christians in the East that were then prone to Turkish attacks. Requesting that they all leave their lives and run to their aid, Pope Urban II explained how they would be doing all in the name of God. The Pope let all of the people know that they would all be greatly recompensed in following God's will and fighting for God and in doing so he further led the people to understand that any killing they would do would be forgiven since it was all to be in God's will. In addition, he insisted that if any were to die in this aid, they would all be

The Song of Roland, an epic poem which tells of Charlemagne's excursions into Spain where he was fighting the Saracens or Muslims, is a good example of militant Christianity. Charlemagne, King of the Franks, is a militant committed militant Christian, and it is necessary to understand this to make sense of his fighting the Saracens. As a militant Christian, one of his main goals was to convert others to Christianity. This opportunity presented itself when Marsilla, leader of the Muslims, offered to convert to Christianity if Charlemagne stopped attacking his men. The messenger sent to inform Marsilla actually revengefully betrayed Charlemagne, and thus brought about the defeat and death of the men making up the rear guard of Charlemagne's army. Roland, the leader of the rear guard died a martyr and was taken directly to heaven by angels. In the story, the Christians are seen as good, and the Saracens or Muslims are considered evil. The Christians, whose belief is that good will always triumph over evil in the end,

Raymond of Aguilers on the fall of Jerusalem, is a first-hand account on the siege of Jerusalem which reveals an insight into the war-tactics of the Christians, the overall violence of the event that took place, and the religious fanaticism of the Crusaders. While the text supplies many details on these features, from the perspective of Raymond of Aguilers, a chaplain who participated in the event,1 this paper will argue that the text overall is inaccurate as a historical account, and rather simply an exaggerated interpretation of what occurred. Based on the notion of the Crusader’s superiority as Christians, and the belief that their actions were sanctioned by God2 this paper will attempt to prove that the description is un-objective and biased.

In addition to the horrors carried out by the Seljuk horde on Christians and their shrines, the Byzantines were also begging the pope to protect their empire from other Turkish tribes. Urban II's main incentive for answering this plea for help was not entirely contingent on the letter he received from the Holy Roman Emperor, but more so from the notion that the Eastern and Western sects of the church could be unified. Moreover, they might be fused under the Pope, granting him sovereignty over the entire Christian church. This Papal hope has been revealed to historians through, among other sources, the different accounts of his speech at Clermont. For example, Guibert of Nogent recalls the pope declaring: "And you ought, furthermore, to consider with the utmost deliberation, ..., that the Mother of churches should flourish anew to the worship of Christianity, whether perchance, [God] may not wish other regions of the East to be restored to the faith against the approaching time of the Antichrist" (Peters, Guibert of Nogent, 35). Unfortunately, the Holy Roman Emperor feared his throne was in jeopardy due to the large number of crusaders that arrived to drive out the Turks. He demanded that they press on towards the Holy Land, and for reasons that need not be discussed, strong ties with the Papacy were severed soon

The Crusades hold a place in the canon of Western history as valiant wars against the infidel in the East, motivated by an unparalleled pious zeal. Whilst revisions to this history have considered more mundane and ordinary motives, such as a want for land or an attempt to reinforce the Peace of God movement, there is something to be said of the religious motivations of the crusaders. The words ‘conquest’ and ‘conversion’ seem ideologically charged – with conquest being what is done by temporal rulers to physical land and people, and conversion being what is done to the spiritual self, by someone who does not have anything material to gain from the action. However, it can be argued that these lines can be blurred; I wish to present the case of conquest being religiously charged, and the idea that any subsequent conversion is of little importance. By examining the geographical targets of various crusaders, I will conclude that they were more interested in conquest than conversion: but this was not necessarily for earthly reasons alone.

For my adaptive leadership assignment I decided to write about Constantine. He was born in Naissus, Moesia Superior (modern day Serbia) on 27 February in roughly AD 285. His parents, Flavius Valerius Constantius was an army officer of Rome and his mother, Helena. (Constantine I Biography) After his father death it was known that Constantine was going to be the next Roman emperor, but he was ravenous about ruling the whole four sections of Rome. He was a great military commander that he ended up winning most of his battles. One of his greatest battles was against Maxentius at the Battle of the, Milvian Bridge in AD 312 with the largest army. Constantine claimed that an image of a cross or a Christian God appeared in the sky signifying that

Constantine’s success at the Milvian Bridge was definitely a battle that deserves praise because of his great military operation. Nevertheless, his motivation for fighting was something that must be taking into consideration. It is commonly stated and believed that on the evening of October 27th, while preparing for battle, Constantine had a vision, which let him fight under the protection of the Christian God. Eusebius stated,