State and religion

The state and religion are two powerful institutions that historically have played a big part in human societies. Despite their apparently different roles, governments and belief systems have usually been quite closely connected. Religious figures were often among the most learned and skilled people in society. Many worked as advisors to rulers and as government officials. Rulers frequently provided money and support to religious institutions like churches, temples, and shrines. Sometimes, rulers have been seen as religious leaders themselves. Often, they have claimed to have the support of God or the gods. At other times, of course, religious leaders and state rulers have clashed with each other.

All of these kinds of relationships existed in the period c. 1200–1450 CE. But, as we will see, state and religious leadership usually supported each other in ways that might seem strange to us today.

The Islamic world

The relationship between state and religion was often very strong in the Islamic world. Between the seventh and tenth centuries, the area in which Islam was practiced was like a single state: the Caliphate. By 1200, this unity was gone. In its place was a large region of the world—stretching from West Africa to parts of Southeast Asia—where Islam was a dominant religion, but where political authority was divided among lots of different states.1

Nor was Islam really a single religious faith in this period. Most Muslims were members of one of two sects: Shi’a (which was based in Persia) and Sunni (which was more widespread). Those two sects disagreed about who should govern and how to interpret religious texts. Muslim thinkers and scholars from both sects served as qadi, or judges. They helped sultans and other rulers keep order within society. In return, the rulers funded Islamic schools and temples.

However, Islamic thought could also inspire some to oppose the state. In particular, a movement emerged within Islam known as Sufism, which emphasized personal spiritual experience. Sufism stressed equality and brotherhood rather than obedience to authorities. Many Muslim rulers saw the growing Sufi movement as a threat. Both Sunni and Shi’a leaders began cracking down on Sufis in their territories.

Religious pluralism in South and Southeast Asia

Two of the biggest religions in the world by this period, the Hindu faith and Buddhism, emerged first in South Asia. Hinduism is a polytheistic faith, meaning that Hindus worship many gods rather than only one. Hinduism was based on older practices from northern India, and developed a powerful priestly class, the brahmins. Hinduism spread as far as Southeast Asia by about 200 CE.

Buddhism emerged in the sixth century BCE, in the same region and from the same set of older practices as Hinduism. However, Buddhists took a very different approach. Buddhism emphasized personal pathways to enlightenment, rather than gods and the authority of a priestly class. Buddhism spread rapidly into Southeast Asia and then to China, Korea, and Japan. Over time it took on many different forms and developed distinct schools of thought.

In general, Hinduism proved to be more useful as a religion to rulers in South Asia. In India, rulers of kingdoms—the Rajputs—supported Hindu temples and religious orders. As a result, a strong alliance emerged between the priests (brahmins) and rulers. In Southeast Asia, meanwhile, many rulers embraced Buddhism, and established a series of monasteries. The monks and nuns from these monasteries gained quite a bit of political influence in states across the region.

The Chinese model

In China, Buddhism had become very important by the time of the Song Dynasty (960–1279 CE). It existed alongside Daoism, a belief system popular among peasants that emphasized nature and harmony with the world. These two belief systems often proved troublesome to the government as neither emphasized obedience to the state.

Instead of either Buddhism or Daoism, the Song Dynasty government promoted Confucianism. This philosophical system was based on the ideas of the fifth century BCE thinker Confucius. These ideas were collected in a book, the Analects, which became the basis of examinations for scholar-officials. The Analects emphasized the importance of loyalty and relationships based on social rank, including relationships between ruler and subject. It argued that these relationships reflected the relationship between Heaven and earth.

Christendom

In Christian Europe, religious leaders and rulers formed alliances as well. This was especially true in the Byzantine Empire, where the patriarchs (religious leaders) of the Orthodox Church and the Byzantine emperors generally worked quite closely together. They governed the empire and spread the religion to neighboring people, such as the Slavs in Eastern Europe. Christian clergy also provided rulers with administrators.

In Catholic Europe as well, rulers relied on priests and monks. Priests generally called upon people to obey their kings and princes, who were believed to rule with God’s approval. The two leaderships also cooperated on religious wars, or crusades, directed against Muslims in the Mediterranean.

However, there was also a division here. The Catholic popes were political figures as well as religious leaders, and they often competed with powerful kings. Popes could, in some ways, charge taxes and raise armies of their own. They also had another powerful weapon. They could expel, or excommunicate, people from the community of Christians. In addition to the spiritual anguish this might cause, an excommunicated ruler faced the risk of rebellion from their faithful Catholic subjects. In the mid-thirteenth century, the most powerful rulers of central Europe, the Holy Roman Emperors, fought with the pope for influence in that region. Emperor Frederick II was excommunicated by Pope Innocent IV in 1239, but in return Frederick expelled many priests from his territory. In general, however, Christianity was too important to the population, and priests too useful to rulers, for a permanent break to occur.

Bantu rulers and social healing

In sub-Saharan Africa outside of the Islamic world, rulers were also closely tied to belief systems. This was true throughout the Bantu-speaking world, the vast region of central, southern, and eastern Africa. Here, in most cases, there were no separate religious leaders. Instead, communities shared a common set of beliefs, focused on ancestors and spirits. Many Bantu-speaking states were confederations, or unions, made up of several communities. The rulers of these confederations used shared beliefs and practices to “heal” disagreements between communities and unify the different groups.

The Mongols

The Mongols created a huge empire through conquest. Among the conquered peoples were Buddhists, Muslims, Christians, Jews, and followers of many other faiths. The Mongols’ own ancestors were generally animists, who worshiped a number of different gods, spirits and ancestors. But the Mongols quickly adapted to their new surroundings. In the center and south of the Mongol Empire, many converted to Islam, although they mixed the new faith with their own preexisting practices and traditions. In China and surrounding regions, many Mongol leaders adopted Buddhism. In the west, some Mongol leaders became Christians.

What did this mean for the Mongol state? Mongol rulers, called Khans, generally allowed many different religious to coexist. They defended religious minorities and supported temples and churches of many different faiths. Some scholars have argued that this was necessary to keep the peace in a vast empire. Others see it as a form of insurance, meaning Mongol rulers supported all faiths just in case one turned out to be the “true” religion.

1 Rulers of later states like the Ottoman Empire claimed to be Caliphs—spiritual leaders of all Muslims—right up to the twentieth century. But they didn’t really have that power or authority.