Journal of Balkan and Black Sea Studies
Year 3, Issue 4, June 2020, pp. 63-77.
Historiographic controversy about the Crusades
against Bosnian “heretics”
Dženan Dautović
Abtract:
The teachings of the Bosnian Church constitute one of the greatest mysteries
of the medieval period of Bosnian history. The issue whether it acted in the
realms of heresy or orthodoxy has been disputed in a scientific battleground
in historiographical circles many times. Just a touch less controversy is linked
with the nature of military missions proclaimed and executed against Bosnian
''heretics''. Some authors characterize these conflicts as religious, so typical for
crusades, while others, however, emphasize the political and territorial
pretensions of Hungary regarding Bosnia, as the main motif, describing the
Holy war idea as a cover story for the sake of the Papal curia. The triangle
between Hungary, Rome and Bosnia was the focal point of discourse in which
numerous accusations on one side and explanations from the other occurred,
along with war propaganda, anti-heretic warnings and attempts to prove
innocence and that right path were followed. Interestingly, the Bosnian
medieval state, so many times threatened with crusades against it, became the
leading advocate for crusade missions against the Ottoman danger in the 15th
century. This transformation did not occur because crusader ideas prevailed,
but rather because of an evolution within the social and administrative
structures. This work will explore all the differences between the opposing
historiographic streams, their approaches regarding sources and literature.
Assoc. Prof. Dr., Regional Museum Travnik and Faculty of Pedagogy University of Bihać,
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-7858-3977
e-mail: [email protected]
Submitted: 11.05.2019, Accepted: 20.06.2020
DŽENAN DAUTOVIĆ
The main goal is to determine how research performed with more or less
identical source material, can produce such opposing results. 1
Keywords: Medieval Bosnia, Crusade against heretics, 13th – 15th Century,
Church of Bosnia, propaganda, historiography, different interpretations.
Studying of the Crusades against the medieval Bosnian state implies
the analysis of whole sets of propaganda activities aimed at the
exploitation of accusations about the existence of heretics in Bosnia.
Unlike most other Crusades, when main propaganda activities came
from ecclesiastical circles,2 from the beginning of correlation of Bosnia
with heresy, main accusers were its neighbours, who almost always had
either territorial or economic motives. Thus, the first mention of heresy in
Bosnia originates from a letter created in 1199 by Vukan, the ruler of
Duklja, in which he informed Pope Innocent III that the ruler of Bosnia,
Ban Kulin (1180-1204), shelters and protects heretics in his realm.3 It
would be naïve to conclude that Vukan had purity and wellbeing of the
Catholic faith on his mind when he sent this denuntiation against the
bosnian ruler to the papal curia, as some authors advocate.4 Concrete
political motives which arose from the existence of the two conflicting
political alliances were prevailing reason for labeling Bosnia as heretical
haven.5
1 This paper initialy was presented on the Conference “The Fairest Meadows in the Worlds:
Crusades and Crusaders in the Balkans”, which was organized by St. Cyril and St.
Methodius University in Veliko Tarnovo, Bulgaria, on November 7 th - 9th 2013.
Unfortunately, the volume with the essays from this Conference never was published.
2 Christoph T. Maier, Crusade Propaganda and Ideology. Model Sermons for the Preaching of the
Cross, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000) 280.
3 Since that in this occasion Innocent III did not mention the possibility of launching a
Crusade against Bosnia, this topic is not included in paper. More information about a series
of events that Vukan’s letter triggered, and eventually end with the so-called Abjuration of
Bolino Polje, one of the most famous documents from medieval Bosnian history, can be
found in vast literature. We emphasize: Dragutin Kniewald, “Vjerodostojnost latinskih
izvora o bosanskim krstjanima.” Rad JAZU 270 (1949): 115-283; Pejo Ćošković,
“Interpretacija Kniewaldovog kritičkog izdanja Bilinopoljske izjave.” Prilozi 32 (2003): 75-
115; Lujo Margetić, “Neka pitanja abjuracije iz 1203. godine,” in Fenomen ‘’krstjani’’ u
srednjovjekovnoj Bosni i Humu, ed. Franjo Šanjek (Sarajevo and Zagreb, 2005) 27-103.
4 Ivana Komatina, Crkva i država u srpskim zemljama od XI do XIII veka, (Beograd: Istorijski
institut, 2016), 231.
5 Dženan Dautović, “Prilog tumačenju značaja pisma Inocenta III od 9. novembra 1202.
godine (Reg.Vat. 5, ff: 53v-54r, e: 103) za proučavanje političkih odnosa u Jugoistočnoj
Europi početkom 13. stoljeća”, in Bosanski ban Tvrtko ‘’pod Prozorom u Rami’’, ed. Tomislav
Brković (Prozor, Sarajevo and Zagreb: Synopsis, 2016), 195-212.
64
CRUSADES AGAINST BOSNIAN “HERETICS”
In historiographical writings we can find that there were eight
different occasions when Crusades were launched to medieval Bosnia.
The main goal of this paper is to gather in one place all sources about
these events, and to present very different historiographical opinions and
interpretations of these sources, and finally to show how many of them
we can acctualy label as Crusades. Regarding the precodnitions which
have to be present so one military campaign could recieve a crusader
prefix, one can still rely on the arguments by famous German medievalist
Hans Eberhard Mayer, who stated that such a campaign have to be
authorized by the Pope, participants had to pledge a crusader oath, and
a pope had to issue general indulgences for every participant.6
Acontius’ Crusade (1221-1222)
The first half of 13th century was witohut a doubt the period of most
intense relations between Bosnia and the Papacy, so it is not surprising
that the majority of alleged Crusade campaigns happened at that time. It
started with a mission of the papal legate Acontius on the eastern Adriatic
coast. The main task of this papal chaplain was to deal with pirates from
Omiš who attacked Crusade armies and pilgrimages on their way to the
Holy Land.7 While he was in Dalmatia, Acontius was warned that
heretics were warmly welcomed in Bosnia. This information reached
Pope Honorius III. who, in his letter Inter alias Sollicitudines, from the 3rd
December 1221, for the first time in history called for a Crusade on
Bosnia.8 The leader of this Crusade was supposed to be the King of
Hungary Andrew II., but he was preoccupied with some problems in his
kingdom, so Archbishop of Kalocsa Ugrin was appointed to this honour
instead.9 Acontuis on the other hand, organized a synod in Dubrovnik,
6 Hans Eberhard Mayer, The Crusades, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988), 30-37. Cf.
Rebecca Rist, The Papacy and Crusading in Europe, 1198-1245, (London: Continuum, 2009), 1.
7 The most detailed description of this mission can be found in: Ivan Majnarić, „Papinski
poslanik Akoncije u Dalmaciji i Hrvatskoj 1219. – 1223. godine,“ in Humanitas et Litterae, ad
honorem Franjo Šanjek, eds. Lovorka Čoralić and Slavko Slišković (Zagreb: Dominikanska
nakladna istina and Kršćanska sadašnjost, 2009), 79-98.
8 Augustino Theiner, Vetera Monumenta Historica Hungariam Sacram Illustrantia, Vol. I
(Romae: Typis Vaticanis, 1859), 31.
9 King Andrew II promised to Ugrin that he would give him Bosnia and Usora, if he
managed to expel heresy from there: „Honorius episcopus servus servorum dei venerabili
fratri Ugrino archiepiscopo Colocensi salutem et apostolicam benedictionem. Cum a nobis
supplicasti, siquidem nobis, ut cum karissimus in Christo filius noster Andreas Ungarie rex
illustris terras quasdam, videlicet Bosnam, Soy et Wosora, infectas heretica pravitate tibi
purgandas committens, eas ecclesie tue in perpetuum pia liberalitate donavit, prout
eiusdem presentate nobis littere plenius continebant, donationem huiusmodi apostolico
dignaremur munimine roborare, presertim cum idem rex nobis super hoc porrexit preces
suas. Nos itaque tam ipsius regis quam tuis supplicationibus annuentes, terras ipsas sicut
65
DŽENAN DAUTOVIĆ
with all the bishops from “Pannonia, Trachia and Illyria”, with one theme
only – the fight against the heretics in Bosnia.10
Most authors agree that this campaign was not realized, and
Hungarian and Croatian noblemen were pointed out as main culprits.11
Some of the studies that deal with crusades in the 13th century do not even
mention this mission,12 which cannot be accepted as proper methodology
since with this campaign the Crusade wars had been established as a
specific sort of diplomatic relations between papacy and Hungary with
Bosnian state. Outside all these interpretations, stands the opinion of
Dominik Mandić (which is supported only by Miroslav Brandt) who
claims that “this crusade, had actually happened, and that Acontius and
Ugrin assembled a large army and attacked Bosnia, whose defences,
unprepared for war, were overrun and suffered heavy losses. The
Crusaders managed to conquer most of the country, and thousands of
infidels were deported to southern Hungary”.13 However, these
arguments were discarded as unfounded constructions.14 Regarding the
pie ac provide sunt donate, tibi et ecclesie tue per te salvo iure regio in redditibus et
rationibus consuetis auctoritate apostolica confirmamus et presentis scripti patrocionio
communimus. Nulli ergo etc. nostre confirmationis etc. Si quis etc. Datum Tibure idibus
maii, (pontificatus nostri) ano nono“. Tadija Smičiklas, Codex Diplomaticus Regni Croatiae,
Dalmatiae et Slavoniae, Vol. III (Zagreb: Ex officina societatis typographicae, 1905), 243;
Theiner, Vetera Monumenta Historica Hungariam I, 55-56.
10 Whether this synod actually took place or not still is not finally decided in historiography.
More information in: Giacomo Lucarri, Copioso ristretto de gli annali di Rausa, (Venetia: Ad
instantia di Antonio Leonardi, 1605) 35; Majnarić, „Papinski poslanik Akoncije u Dalmaciji
i Hrvatskoj“, 92-93.
11 Franjo Rački, „Bogomili i patareni“, Rad JAZU 10 (1870), 146-147; Vjekoslav Klaić, Poviest
Bosne do propasti kraljevstva, (Zagreb: Tiskom dioničke tiskare, 1882), 66; Marko Perojević,
„Ban Stjepan“, in Poviest hrvatskih zemalja Bosne i Hercegovine, od najstarijih vremena do godine
1463, (Sarajevo: HKD Napredak, 1942) 217; Sima Ćirković, Istorija srednjovekovne bosanske
države (Beograd: Srpska književna zadruga, 1964), 58-59; Anto Babić, Iz istorije
srednjovjekovne Bosne, (Sarajevo: Svjetlost, 1972), 246-247; Milan Loos, Dualist Heresy in the
Middle Ages (Prague: Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, 1973), 212; Jaroslav Šidak, Studije
o ''Crkvi bosanskoj'' i bogumilstvu (Zagreb: Sveučilišna naklada Liber, 1975), 182; John V. A.
Fine Jr., The Bosnian church: A New Interpretation (New York and London: Columbia
University Press, 1975), 135; Dragoljub Dragojović, Krstjani i jeretička Crkva bosanska
(Beograd: Balkanološki institut SANU, 1987), 60; Salih Jalimam, Historija bosanskih bogumila
(Tuzla: IP Hamidović, 1999), 104; Majnarić, „Papinski poslanik Akoncije u Dalmaciji i
Hrvatskoj“, 91.
12 Mladen Ančić, „''Križarske vojne'' XIII stoljeća“, Radovi Hrvatskog društva za znanost i
umjetnost 4 (1996): 12-35.
13 Domagoj Mandić, Bogomilska crkva bosanskih krstjana (Chicago: The Croatian Historical
Institute, 1962), 57; Miroslav Brandt, „Dubrovnik i heretička Bosna u prvoj polovini XIII
stoljeća“ Anali 12 (1970): 29-30.
14 Šidak, Studije o Crkvi bosanskoj, 182, footnote 27: „This conceptualization, for which he
(Mandić) couldn't find any contemporary source, should corroborate his main hypothesis
66
CRUSADES AGAINST BOSNIAN “HERETICS”
aftermath of this campaign, there are a lot of disagreements about
whether, after the collapse of the idea of a crusade, Acontius went to
Bosnia and died there, or not.15
Ugrin’s Crusade (1225-1227)
As we could see, the origins of this campaign were established
during the mission of legate Acontius, when King of Hungary Andrew
III. appointed Ugrin, the Archbishop of Kalocsa, as the leader of the
crusade army. Ugrin needed an experienced military leader for his
crusade units, so he promised a wage of 200 marks of silver to Ivan
Angelos, son of the Byzantine Empress Margareta, and nephew of King
Andrew III.16 This campaign was began on the 15th May 1225 with the
issuing of the papal confirmation of King Andrews grant of Bosnia, Soy et
Wasora to Ugrin. No crusade rhetoric was repeated until a year later when
Ugrin bought castrum Požega from the King of Hungary. He pleaded to
the Pope for confirmation of this purchase referring to the need that
“heretics in those lands should be destroyed”.17 Obviously, not even this
papal confirmation was sufficient entice warriors to a Crusade on Bosnia,
because only a couple of days later, Pope Honorius III. reminded prince
Angelos of his commitments.18
Sources are silent on whether the Hungarian-Byzantine prince and
the Archbishop of Kalocsa fulfilled their promise, but historiography is
almost unanimous that none of these crusading armies entered Bosnia at
this time.19 Vjekoslav Klaić even claims that the failure of the crusade idea
led to the change on the Bosnian throne, when the previous ruler Ban
Stephan, was replaced by Ban Mathew Ninoslav.20 However, this is
almost impossible to prove, and we must treat that assumption with a
great deal of suspicion. As the only result of this campaign Marko
about fled of pretended djed Bartul-Tomaš from Bosnia to France. To these arguments of
Mandić, with same arguments, accepted M. Brandt“.
15 More about that in: Majnarić, „Papinski poslanik Akoncije u Dalmaciji i Hrvatskoj“, 91-93
(although we cannot agree with authors baseless statement that in that time there wasn't
any secular power in Bosnia).
16 Ančić, „''Križarske vojne'' XIII stoljeća“, 18.
17 Smičiklas, Codex Diplomaticus Regni Croatiae, Dalmatiae et Slavoniae, Vol. III, 264; Šidak,
Studije o Crkvi bosanskoj, 183.
18 Smičiklas, Codex Diplomaticus Regni Croatiae, Dalmatiae et Slavoniae, Vol. III, 264-265. Šidak,
Studije o Crkvi bosanskoj, 183; Rački, „Bogomili i patareni“, 149.
19 Rački, „Bogomili i patareni“, 149; Šidak, Studije o Crkvi bosanskoj, 183-184; Babić, Iz istorije
srednjovjekovne Bosne, 246-247; Loos, Dualist Heresy in the Middle Ages, 212, 222; Fine Jr., The
Bosnian church, 136-137; Dragojović, Krstjani i jeretička Crkva bosanska, 60-61.
20 Klaić, Poviest Bosne, 67.
67
DŽENAN DAUTOVIĆ
Perojević mentions the building of some fortress on the Hungarian-
Bosnian border,21 while Mladen Ančić just states that the results of this
campaigns remain “a subject of vivid discussions between historians, but
without any real results”.22 Of course, there were some authors who
claimed that Ugrin’s Crusade was real and very bitter. This time round
Dominik Mandić did not even mention the events from 1225 to 1227
because they did not suit his theories about the successful war from 1222,
whereas his faithful follower Miroslav Brandt, in the attempt to make
Mandić’s arguments stronger, wrote about the three Crusades of
Archbishop Ugrin in 1221, 1225 and 1227.23 Salih Jalimam approached
this historiographical stream with his analyses, but without any real
progress,24 and even Sima Ćirković “assumed” that these early crusades
were successful, even though in the same text he claimed that the course
of events remains unknown.25
Koloman’s Crusade (1234-1239)
During the following 10 years there were not any military actions,
but some very important events happened. First of all, in that period, the
friars of the Dominican order arrived in Bosnia. These fierce fighters
against heresy, proved their eagerness for the preservation of the purity
of church in southern France.26 Then, in late 1233 some complaints about
Bosnia reached the Roman curia again. The energetic leader of the
catholic world Gregory IX sent his representative, the legate Iacopo
Pecorarius, to investigate allegations against a domestic Bosnian bishop
who was accused of being illiterate in Latin and of living in a village,
together with his brother who was “heresiarch” – the leader of the
Bosnian heretics.27 The main results of this investigation were the
replacement of the accused bishop and exemption of the Bosnian diocese
from the jurisdiction of the Ragusan archdiocese. The new Bosnian ruler
Ban Mathew Ninoslav, who was “born in heresy”, together with his
relative Prijezda, accepted Christianity, and as insurance, Prijezda’s son
21 Perojević, „Ban Stjepan“, 218.
22 Ančić, „''Križarske vojne'' XIII stoljeća“, 18.
23 Brandt, „Dubrovnik i heretička Bosna“, 31-33.
24 Jalimam, Historija bosanskih bogumila, 104-105.
25 Ćirković, Istorija srednjovekovne bosanske države, 60.
26 More in: Salih Jalimam, Djelatnost dominikanaca u srednjovjekovnoj Bosni (Tuzla: IP
Hamidović, 1999), 196. In one dominican chronicle from 1259. it was written that they
established two monasteries in Bosnia where they burned heretics (Sima Ćirković, in:
Leksikon srpskog srednjeg vijeka,s.v. „Dominikanci“), but that source was never subject of
serious scientific exploration.
27 More information about these events can be found in: Šidak, Studije o Crkvi bosanskoj, 184-
186.
68
CRUSADES AGAINST BOSNIAN “HERETICS”
was handed over as hostage to Dominicans. With these actions, the stage
was prepared for the attempt of the final solution for all ecclesiastical
problems in Bosnia.
King Andrew II again avoided assuming a direct role in this
campaign, and appointed his son, Duke Coloman as the leader of his
armies. And again, same as Archbishop Ugrin before him, Coloman was
to be rewarded with lands in Bosnia for his success. Pope eagerly
confirmed this donation.28 The recetly apointed Bosnian bishop,
dominican friar Johannes von Wildeshausen (Johannes Teutonicus) was
at that time very tired in carrying out his duty, and was eager to withdraw
from his function, but was averted with a papal letter in which he was
persuaded to “kill infidels”.29 Most authors agree that this was the only
implemented Crusade war on the bosnian soil. Their conclusions rest on
the assumption that the Bosnian ruler Ban Ninoslav, had actually, at first,
taken the side of the crusaders. He appealed to Pope Gregory IX. that he
fought against heretics in his land, and confiscated their property, but
also that he encountered big opposition among nobles. That same day the
Pope wrote three letters, one to the Ban, to Prince Koloman, and to the
Dominicans with further instructions.30 But soon the Bosnian ruler
realized that religious motives were secondary in Koloman’s goals, and
that sovereignty of his realm was in danger, so he distanced himself from
the invaders. This role of the Ban Ninoslav was probably wrongly
interpretated, though sources did say that Koloman had much success in
this campaign, enough to boast about his victories to the Pope,31 and the
position of the defenders in Bosnia was obviously very difficult. The
salvation came from a direction nobody expected. The fiercest warriors
of their time, the Mongols, attacked Hungary in 1241. inflicting heavy
defeat to the Hungarian army in the Battle of Mohi (11th April 1241) where
Prince Koloman was murdered, and King Bela IV. was forced to flee all
the way to the city of Trogir. Bosnia, because of its mountainous terrain
did not suffer in these incursions, so ban Ninoslav used these events to
re-establish his power over the Bosnian banate.
This Crusade campaign lasted very long, and had many
consequences, so it was natural that it left significant marks in
28 Smičiklas, Codex Diplomaticus Regni Croatiae, Dalmatiae et Slavoniae, Vol. III, 443.
29 “... si cruce officii pontificalis assumpta hostes crucifixi indutus armaturam dei hacentus
viriliter expugnaris, si te belli labores opprimunt, si ad regressum e contra insurgentia pro
fide certamina te inducunt“; Theiner, Vetera Monumenta Historica Hungariam I, 137; Rački,
„Bogomili i patareni“, 156.
30 Theiner, Vetera Monumenta Historica Hungariam I, 120-121.
31 Theiner, Vetera Monumenta Historica Hungariam I, 169.
69
DŽENAN DAUTOVIĆ
historiography. We will start with the most radical of all the theories, that
of Nada Klaić. The renowned Croatian medievalist stated that even this
campaign never happened, that Hungarian armies never crossed Bosnian
borders, and that Koloman’s bragging to the Pope was in fact lies
fabricated to cover the fact that he failed to fulfil his promise.32 This brave
theory of a historian known for her very rigorous relations to the sources
did not found many supporters. Events presented in previous lines were
drawn first from the sources by Franjo Rački, who was then followed by
most historians who stressed political over religious motives of the
Hungarian forces.33 One of the few historians, who highlighted
Koloman’s religious components as well as the other 13th century
campaigns on Bosnia, was Mladen Ančić, but he also stands alone
regarding this interpretation.34 There were also some disputes over the
exact meaning of the term “hereticos de Sclavonie partibus” in one of the
previously mentioned papal letters, but that is not the subject of this
paper.35
Later Thirteenth century Crusade
Mathew Ninoslav felt confident enough that, only a couple of years
after the Hungarian catastrophe on Mohi, he participated in some
activities within the domestic policy of the Hungarian kingdom. He got
involved in the quarrel between towns of Split and Trogir, and took the
side of the commune of Split, against King Bela IV. who favoured Trogir.
However, the restored military power of the Hungarian kingdom once
again proved to be too strong for Bosnian forces. In 1244. the Ban was
forced to sign a peace agreement in which Bela imposed some
requirements considering the organization of the church in Bosnia.36
These arrangements did not probably work, because two years later the
Archbishop of Kalocsa again called for a Crusade, and in 1248, Pope
Innocent IV. declared that “the Bosnian diocese is so deep in heresy, that
it no longer can be considered even a part of the Catholic church”.37 This
campaign did not result with a military expedition, but with an action
with far-reaching consequences. The Bosnian diocese was removed from
32 Nada Klaić, Srednjovjekovna Bosna. Politički položaj bosanskih vladara do Tvrtkove krunidbe
(1377. g.) (Zagreb: Eminex, 1994), 100-101.
33 Rački, „Bogomili i patareni“, 155-158; Vladimir Ćorović, Historija Bosne (Beograd: Srpska
kraljevska akademija, 1940), 196; Ćirković, Istorija srednjovekovne bosanske države, 62-64.
Mandić, Bogomilska crkva, 427.
34 Ančić, „''Križarske vojne'' XIII stoljeća“, 18-20.
35 More in: Šidak, Studije o Crkvi bosanskoj, 279-280, 363-365.
36 Ćirković, Istorija srednjovekovne bosanske države, 67.
37 Theiner, Vetera Monumenta Historica Hungariam I, 204-205.
70
CRUSADES AGAINST BOSNIAN “HERETICS”
Bosnia and relocated to the city of Požega in the Hungarian kingdom.38
After this time, Bosnia became the only medieval state that broke its
connections with the Papacy, and from the vacancy within the Bosnian
diocese arose the Church of Bosnia, as a fine example of a state-church.
This situation remained long after the disapereance of the Bosnian
medieval state.
Fourteenth and Fifteenth century Crusades
After the turbulent events in the 13th century, there were four other
occasions when Bosnia was marked as a target of crusade campaigns. We
must emphasize that none of these incidents were implemented with
actual military expeditions, but all of them were filled with crusader
terminology, papal indulgencies and other similar folklore that
accompanied proper Crusade wars. The first attempt was from 1337.
when Croatian and Hungarian nobles managed to acquire a papal
permission for a crusade against the Bosnian ruler Stephen II.
Kotromanić.39 It failed because King of Hungary Charles I. Robert did not
allow this attack on his loyal ally. There are a lot of different explanations
with a political context behind this campaign. The main theory is that it
was a product of a struggle between the Croatian nobility and the King
for power and more autonomy within the realm of the Hungarian
crown.40 The Bosnian ruler was caught in the middle of this struggle.
Traditionally, Rački the main role in the proclamation of war address to
the Pope;41 Marko Perojević regarded the aspirations of Duke Nelipčić as
the main motive,42 whereas John Fine had doubts in choosing between
these two options.43
38 More information about these events in: Dubravko Lovrenović, „Translatio sedis i
uspostava novog konfesionalnog identiteta u srednjovjekovnoj Bosni – I“, in Franjevački
samostan u Gučoj Gori, ed. Velimir Valjan, (Guča Gora and Sarajevo: Franjevački samostan
Guča Gora and Kulturno-povijesni institut Bosne Srebrene, 2010), 113-125.
39 Theiner, Vetera Monumenta Historica Hungariam I, 616-617.
40 Ćirković, Istorija srednjovekovne bosanske države, 110. То some degree, this thesis was
supported by Ćorović, Historija Bosne, 257, and Loos, Dualist Heresy in the Middle Ages, 296.
41 Rački, „Bogomili i patareni“, 179. Also, V. Klaić and S. Jalimam accept this thesis, Klaić,
Poviest Bosne, 121; Salih Jalimam, „Spor dominikanaca i franjevaca u srednjovjekovnoj
Bosni“, Croatia Christiana Periodica 13 (1989): 18.
42 Marko Perojević, „Stjepan II Kotromanić,“ in Povijest hrvatskih zemalja Bosne i Hercegovine
od najstarijih vremena do godine 1463 (Sarajevo: HK Napredak, 1942), 262; also in: Dubravko
Lovrenović, „Utjecaj Ugarske na odnos crkve i države u srednjovjekovnoj Bosni“, in
Znanstveni skup ''Sedam stoljeća bosanskih franjevaca 1291 – 1991., ed. Marko Karamatić
(Samobor: Franjevačka teologija Sarajevo, 1994), 60.
43 Fine Jr., The Bosnian church, 179.
71
DŽENAN DAUTOVIĆ
In 1357. Bosnia was again linked with a Crusade. The powerful King
of Hungary Louis I. the Great, wanted to obtain crusade status for his
campaign against Serbia. This action woke up the old idea of a crusade
against the Bosnian heretics inside the Hungarian ecclesiastical circles.
Especially active in the implementation of these ideas was the new
Bosnian bishop Peter Siklosi, who three years later received a letter from
Pope Innocent VI. encouraging him for the fight against heretics.44 It is
certain that in that period no campaigns were led against Bosnia, but
there are still some issues about the war between Bosnia and Hungary
from 1363. Due to the fact that King Louis justified his attack with words
“… ubi in regno nostro Bozne innumerabilis multitude hereticorum et
patarenorum pululasset in errore fidei orthodoxe”,45 some historians also
characterized this campaign as a Crusade,46 while others pointed out the
writings of the King’s secretary John archdeacon, who described the war
as “an attempt to destroy the arrogance of some rebels”.47 As we could
not find any papal reactions on these events, we are willing to say that
this war either was not a crusade campaign, or that it was a continuation
of propaganda activities initiated in 1357, when the crusade idea, more
than any time before that, was used as a camouflage of political
aspirations of the Hungarian King.
At the end, there are two conquest attempts by King Sigismund of
Luxemburg. This medieval ruler was a master of all kinds of diplomatic
pressure, so he also used crusade vocabulary in his numerous attempts
to obtain the Bosnian crown. In late 1391. Sigismund sent his plea to the
Pope Boniface IX. to assure that his campaign against “Turks, Manicheans
and heretics” in neighbouring lands got a form of a Crusade war. Of
course, this request was approved, and the Pope in a letter from 18 th
December 1391. promised the same indulgences as for the fighters in
Holy Land.48 Eventually, nothing happened, because Sigismund had a lot
of problems in his other projects. These events did not attract much
44 Tadija Smičiklas, Codex Diplomaticus Regni Croatiae, Dalmatiae et Slavoniae, Vol. XIII
(Zagreb: Tisak dioničke tiskare, 1915), 18-19.
45 Smičiklas, Codex Diplomaticus XIII, 358; Šidak, Studije o Crkvi bosanskoj, 235.
46 In fact, Nada Klaić even named one of chapter in her book: „Failed Crusade of Louis on
Bosnia from 1363.“, Klaić, Srednjovjekovna Bosna, 238-247.
47 Marko Perojević, „Ban Stjepan Tvrtko,“ in Povijest Bosne i Hercegovine od najstarijih vremena
do godine 1463 (Sarajevo: HK Napredak, 1942), 300; Ćorović, Historija Bosne, 285; Mandić,
Bogomilska crkva, 400; Lovrenović, „Utjecaj Ugarske“, 68.
48 Tadija Smičiklas, Codex Diplomaticus Regni Croatiae, Dalmatiae et Slavoniae, Vol. XVII
(Zagreb: Jugoslovenska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti, 1981), 409-410; Dubravko
Lovrenović, Na klizištu povijesti. Sveta kruna ugarska i Sveta kruna bosanska 1387-1463, (Zagreb
and Sarajevo: Synopsis, 2006), 69.
72
CRUSADES AGAINST BOSNIAN “HERETICS”
attention in historiography. Fine said that these events “must be taken in
the context of the war Sigismund waged against Ladislaus, Bosnian King
Tvrtko (recently deceased) and various Croatian nobles including
Hrvoje”,49 but the most logical assumption is that the main motive for this
campaign was the great victory that the new Bosnian King Dabiša
achieved earlier of the same year over a strong contingent of the Ottoman
army.50 Sigismund had to wait for a new chance for more than fifteen
years. These events belong to a very turbulent period of Bosnian-
Hungarian relations from the first decade of 15th century.51 Armies of
King Sigismund had a lot of success in Bosnia, and then a letter arrived
from Pope Gregory XII. who summoned “the whole Christian world” to
gather help for the King of Hungary in the fight against “Turks, Arians,
Manicheans and other infidels”.52 Whether this appeal worked or not, is
unknown, but in the next year the Hungarian King launched another
overwhelming attack on Bosnia. What is certain is that this war had
nothing to do with religious motives. It was a usual conquest war for
territory and power. Obviously, “wars of Sigismund against Bosnia,
guided under the pretence of the Christian zeal, were very far from the
religious ideals which once powered the crusade idea. Just an ideological
49 Fine Jr., The Bosnian church, 198.
50 Lovrenović, Na klizištu povijesti, 69.
51 More about that in chapter: „Years when only weapon spoke (1404-1408.)“ in: Lovrenović,
Na klizištu povijesti, 121-142.
52 „Gregorius etc. Universis et singulis Christi Fidelibus presentes litteras inspecturis
salutem etc. In vinea Domini Sabaoth Sancta videlicet et universali Ecclesia Cultores atque
Custdes, quanquam immeritos, inscrutabilis dispositione consilii deputatos attentius
vigilare nos convenit, ne gens impiisfima de Sylva tanquam essera progrediens videlicet
Teucrorum quos Turcos vocant, Arianorum, Manichaeorum ac aliorum perfidorum
infidelium vineam ipsam inhumaniter depascatur, et quantum nobis ex alto conceditur, ut
eadem vinea praeservetur illaesa, impetum bestiarum illam demoliri satagentium sub
omnipotentis virtute dexterae reprimamus. Verum Sacrosancta Romana Ecclesia mater
omnium fidelium et magistra suspiria producit ab intimis, eculi ejus solvuntur in
lachrymas, vehementibusque genitibus ipsius pectora quatiuntur, eo quod praeter
hostilitares, quae a blasphemis crucis adversus fidei professores exercentur extrinsecus,
undique bella fremunt intrinsecus, seditiones intestinae dilaniant et inquietant domesticae
simultates, gladiisque fidelium, qui ad Christianorum salutem et exterminium malorum
foret contra hostium fidei cuneos exercendus, conversus, conversus in proximos, proh
dolor! Inebriatur sanguine christiano et (quod acrius excoquit mentem nostram) scelerati
filii et a devotione semoti caeco furore immaniter debachati armantur in matrem, ac illum
ex quo prodierunt uterum, nituntur summis viribus lacerare; quo sit, ut nos una cum
memorata Ecclesia sponsa nostra circa exhibitionem opportuni subsidii in hac parte juxta
desiderium nostrum et apostolicae debitum servitutis manus adjutrices extendere
nequeamus ...„ Joseph Koller, Historia Episcopatus Quinqueecclesiarum, Vol. III (Posonii:
sumptibus Joannis Michaelis Landerer, 1784), 283-288; Lovrenović, Na klizištu povijesti, 134.
73
DŽENAN DAUTOVIĆ
shell remained from former ideals which served as a cover for political
goals”.53
***
The crusade wars against Bosnia and its “heretics” are very
complicated questions that delve into some of the most dubious aspects
of Bosnian medieval history, such as the teachings of the Church of
Bosnia, Bosnian-Hungarian-papal relations etc. Lack of contemporary
sources leaves room for very diverse historiographic interpretations and
theories, which arose during the previous century and a half. These
interpretations proved to be very rigid, and one’s opinion was hardly
ever altered with strength of argument from the other side.
Obviously, campaigns from the 13th century, mainly the Koloman
Crusade (others were only threats and not real campaigns), were more
serious and had more long-term consequences. They eventually resulted
in the dislocation of the Bosnian diocese outside Bosnian borders, which
was the direct cause for the appearance of the Bosnian church. With that,
Bosnia became the only medieval European state that ended all formal
connections with papacy. In the later period, crusades against Bosnia
were declared several times, always as purely political wars, without a
genuine religious background. Additionally, these events are a great
example of how religion, its postulates and its importance in the society,
were used in the Middle Ages as a weapon for completing political
ambitions. One can easily say that the whole story of heresy in medieval
Bosnia was a well-used political theatre by the Hungarian Kingdom,
warmly welcomed at the Papal curia.
We can see that one of the most widespread romantic perceptions
(beside the alleged link between Bosnian krstjani and Bulgarian
Bogomils) about the medieval Bosnian history – Bosnian state as a victim
of numerous Crusade wars, doesn’t have almost any confirmations in
contemporary sources, and it had to be abandoned as one of the main
narratives in popular culture. However, that one occasion when the
crusade war against Bosnia most probably was realized, is sufficient
argument that medieval Bosnia should be included as one, although
particular episode of crusade warfare on the European soil during the
Middle Ages.
53 Lovrenović, Na klizištu povijesti, 155-156.
74
CRUSADES AGAINST BOSNIAN “HERETICS”
Bibliography
Ančić, Mladen, „''Križarske vojne'' XIII stoljeća“, Radovi Hrvatskog društva
za znanost i umjetnost 4 (1996): 12-35.
Babić, Anto. Iz istorije srednjovjekovne Bosne. Sarajevo: Svjetlost, 1972.
Brandt, Miroslav. „Dubrovnik i heretička Bosna u prvoj polovini XIII
stoljeća“ Anali 12 (1970): 29-30.
Ćirković, Sima. Istorija srednjovekovne bosanske države. Beograd: Srpska
književna zadruga, 1964.
Ćorović, Vladimir. Historija Bosne. Beograd: Srpska kraljevska akademija,
1940.
Ćošković, Pejo. “Interpretacija Kniewaldovog kritičkog izdanja
Bilinopoljske izjave.” Prilozi 32 (2003): 75-115.
Dautović, Dženan. “Prilog tumačenju značaja pisma Inocenta III od 9.
novembra 1202. godine (Reg.Vat. 5, ff: 53v-54r, e: 103) za proučavanje
političkih odnosa u Jugoistočnoj Europi početkom 13. Stoljeća.” In
Bosanski ban Tvrtko ‘’pod Prozorom u Rami’’, ed. Tomislav Brković, 195-
212. Prozor, Sarajevo and Zagreb: Synopsis, 2016.
Dragojović, Dragoljub. Krstjani i jeretička Crkva bosanska. Beograd:
Balkanološki institut SANU, 1987.
Fine Jr., John V. A. The Bosnian church: A New Interpretation. New York and
London: Columbia University Press, 1975.
Jalimam, Salih. „Spor dominikanaca i franjevaca u srednjovjekovnoj
Bosni.“ Croatia Christiana Periodica 13 (1989): 9-19.
Jalimam, Salih. Djelatnost dominikanaca u srednjovjekovnoj Bosni. Tuzla: IP
Hamidović, 1999.
Jalimam, Salih. Historija bosanskih bogumila. Tuzla: IP Hamidović, 1999.
Klaić, Nada. Srednjovjekovna Bosna. Politički položaj bosanskih vladara do
Tvrtkove krunidbe (1377. g.). Zagreb: Eminex, 1994.
75
DŽENAN DAUTOVIĆ
Klaić, Vjekoslav. Poviest Bosne do propasti kraljevstva. Zagreb: Tiskom
dioničke tiskare, 1882.
Kniewald, Dragutin. “Vjerodostojnost latinskih izvora o bosanskim
krstjanima.” Rad JAZU 270 (1949): 115-283.
Koller, Joseph. Historia Episcopatus Quinqueecclesiarum, Vol. III. Posonii:
sumptibus Joannis Michaelis Landerer, 1784.
Komatina, Ivana. Crkva i država u srpskim zemljama od XI do XIII veka.
Beograd: Istorijski institut, 2016.
Loos, Milan. Dualist Heresy in the Middle Ages. Prague: Czechoslovak
Academy of Sciences, 1973.
Lovrenović, Dubravko. „Utjecaj Ugarske na odnos crkve i države u
srednjovjekovnoj Bosni.“ In Znanstveni skup ''Sedam stoljeća bosanskih
franjevaca 1291 – 1991., ed. Marko Karamatić, 37-93. Samobor:
Franjevačka teologija Sarajevo, 1994.
Lovrenović, Dubravko. Na klizištu povijesti. Sveta kruna ugarska i Sveta kruna
bosanska 1387-1463. Zagreb and Sarajevo: Synopsis, 2006.
Lovrenović, Dubravko. „Translatio sedis i uspostava novog
konfesionalnog identiteta u srednjovjekovnoj Bosni – I.“ In Franjevački
samostan u Gučoj Gori, ed. Velimir Valjan, 113-125. Guča Gora and
Sarajevo: Franjevački samostan Guča Gora and Kulturno-povijesni
institut Bosne Srebrene, 2010.
Lucarri, Giacomo. Copioso ristretto de gli annali di Rausa, Venetia: Ad
instantia di Antonio Leonardi, 1605.
Maier, Christoph T. Crusade Propaganda and Ideology. Model Sermons for the
Preaching of the Cross. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Majnarić, Ivan. „Papinski poslanik Akoncije u Dalmaciji i Hrvatskoj 1219.
– 1223. godine.“ In Humanitas et Litterae, ad honorem Franjo Šanjek, eds.
Lovorka Čoralić and Slavko Slišković, 79-98. Zagreb: Dominikanska
nakladna istina and Kršćanska sadašnjost, 2009.
Mandić, Domagoj. Bogomilska crkva bosanskih krstjana. Chicago: The
Croatian Historical Institute, 1962.
76
CRUSADES AGAINST BOSNIAN “HERETICS”
Margetić, Lujo. “Neka pitanja abjuracije iz 1203. godine,” In Fenomen
‘’krstjani’’ u srednjovjekovnoj Bosni i Humu, ed. Franjo Šanjek, 27-103.
Sarajevo and Zagreb: Institut za istoriju and Hrvatski institut za
povijest, 2005.
Mayer, Hans Eberhard. The Crusades. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1988.
Perojević, Marko. „Ban Stjepan“, In Poviest hrvatskih zemalja Bosne i
Hercegovine, od najstarijih vremena do godine 1463, 216-218. Sarajevo:
HKD Napredak, 1942.
Perojević, Marko. „Stjepan II Kotromanić“ in Povijest hrvatskih zemalja Bosne
i Hercegovine od najstarijih vremena do godine 1463, 250-285. Sarajevo:
HK Napredak, 1942.
Perojević, Marko. „Ban Stjepan Tvrtko.“ In Povijest hrvatskih zemalja Bosne i
Hercegovine od najstarijih vremena do godine 1463, 286-312. Sarajevo: HK
Napredak, 1942.
Rački, Franjo. „Bogomili i patareni“, Rad JAZU 10 (1870), 160-263.
Rist, Rebecca. The Papacy and Crusading in Europe, 1198-1245. London:
Continuum, 2009.
Smičiklas, Tadija. Codex Diplomaticus Regni Croatiae, Dalmatiae et Slavoniae,
Vol. III. Zagreb: Ex officina societatis typographicae, 1905.
Smičiklas, Tadija. Codex Diplomaticus Regni Croatiae, Dalmatiae et Slavoniae,
Vol. XIII. Zagreb: Tisak dioničke tiskare, 1915.
Smičiklas, Tadija. Codex Diplomaticus Regni Croatiae, Dalmatiae et Slavoniae,
Vol. XVII. Zagreb: Jugoslovenska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti,
1981.
Šidak, Jaroslav. Studije o ''Crkvi bosanskoj'' i bogumilstvu. Zagreb:
Sveučilišna naklada Liber, 1975.
Theiner, Augustino. Vetera Monumenta Historica Hungariam Sacram
Illustrantia, Vol. I. Romae: Typis Vaticanis, 1859.
77
