On 27 November 1095, on the penultimate day of the Council of Clermont, Pope Urban II delivered a speech calling on Christians to wage holy war. However, launching the First Crusade was not the only thing on Urban’s agenda that day. An important component of the business of the council was discussion of the Cluniac monastic reforms. Monasteries were powerful and wealthy institutions in the medieval world, operating all around the Mediterranean. Abbots and abbesses were often scions of noble houses, and their abbeys sometimes controlled vast properties – indeed, Urban himself had been the abbot of Cluny before his episcopal career. Monastic orders played an important role in the various reform movements which dominated medieval Church history. Monastic institutions preserved the literature and history of the Christian peoples living under Muslim rule across the medieval Middle East. It seems odd then that a game about the crusades doesn’t model them into gameplay except via events and optional DLCs. With Crusader Kings 3 announced, this seems like the appropriate time to discuss systemic changes like adding monasteries. I will suggest how it could be done within the previous game’s established systems, and why doing so will make gameplay better.
How they might be added
I propose that the game have only two types of holdings: cities, representing administrative centres, and estates, representing rural properties and dispersed settlements. However, each type of holding can be governed by either a civil or religious authority. CK2 already models civil authority over both types of holding. A city governed by a religious authority will be a bishopric, which is appropriate of course because a bishop, by definition, is tied to the city as a centre for ecclesiastic administration. However, this allows the new combination of a religious authority controlling rural estates, which would be a monastery.
Sorry it's not code, I don't know how else to get this to align.
Obviously these are generalized power structures; nuance will be needed to differentiate cultures and religions. Both types of authority would have somewhat different buildings available to improve each type of holding, some of which could make it harder to switch authority (or easier to change it back if it did get flipped by, say, a peasant revolt expelling the bishop). Such a system will have the benefit of correctly situating bishops in cities. Whether a city is governed by a bishop or mayor would merely reflect the present balance of power within local politics – and would allow, for example, the game to correctly model the late-twelfth-century republican government of the Commune of Rome. An added benefit is that such a system might help with creating a better model for the Roman imperial system with its powerful aristocratic landholders (civil authority, rural estates) with its constitutionally-ordered civil systems of authority.
Role-playing benefits
Adding in monasteries will create new gameplay to manage property, family, and religious opinions. Monastic charters – legal documents recording the transfer of property – are important sources for our understanding of the medieval economy, and give evidence that property regularly changed hands between the ownership of laity, the church, and monastic orders. Gemepay-wise, a lord who owns too many estates to manage themselves can choose to found a new monastery which will function as a vassal. It will give a small amount of piety and prestige, at least at first, but give the lord a large amount of control to appoint abbots/abbesses, and even expropriate the wealth if necessary (for a big hit to opinions and stability). Alternatively, the lord could donate the estate to an established monastic community, getting far greater prestige, piety, and stability and gaining influence over an established institution such as the Monastery of St Denis or Monte Cassino, or the crusader orders. Over generations, lords could vie for patronage of major monasteries.
For both AI and player, monasteries need to be an attractive partner for governing a medieval kingdom. While monasteries won’t be providing financial support (they were often medieval tax havens for the ultra-rich), they will provide stability, manpower, and religious authority. The crusader orders (e.g. Hospitallers and Templars), besides benefiting from being mechanically fleshed-out, will help secure the Catholic hold on Outremere. The monastic republic on Mount Athos could also be represented as in-game actors, and not just via events. Especially for poor and marginal estates, monastic ownership should be the optimal way to get any use out of them. Lands in the Alps, Pyranees, or Appenines, which would never be able to provide as much wealth as estates elsewhere, were and should be natural homes for ascetic communities. Monasteries will help turn very large families from liabilities into assets – appointing children, siblings, or cousins as abbots or abbesses will provide new paths for career ambitions which will enhance your dynasty’s prestige. In addition, monasteries will help make the game better able to model the religious and cultural diversity which defined the medieval middle east historically. The monasteries of St Catherine’s in the Sinai, Mar Saba outside Jerusalem, or the White Monastery in Upper Egypt have all operated continuously from Late Antiquity to today. In history, Muslim rulers benefited from protecting these institutions. Adding them to the game can help model the indigenous Christians and their interactions with both Muslims and Crusaders, and not just a colour on the map which gets auto-converted within the first generation of the game’s start.
Mechanical benefits – reforms and decay
Wealthy, powerful monasteries need to be both blessing and curse. They will naturally be major targets for raiders and nomads, keen to grab some easy wealth. Failure to defend one will carry long-term negative repercussions for the liege and potentially his dynasty as well. If monasteries collect too much wealth and their monks stray too far from their vows of poverty, their decadence will alienate reform-minded characters and piss off the exploited peasants who have been bled dry to support these monks’ frivolous lifestyles. Popes and rulers should be encouraged to call ecclesiastic councils to try to bring reforms to reign in the monk’s excesses. In turn, zealous abbots will initiate reform movements targeting the worldly wealth and power of the Church. Not only will a decadent monastery make a peasant revolt more likely, but should the revolt successfully sack and loot its treasury the monastery’s one-time patron might find themselves facing a peasant commune with the financial resources to hire lots of mercenaries.
Finally, adding monasteries as a game mechanic could provide a much-needed ‘decay’ mechanic for established political systems. Monasteries should provide huge benefits to their patron and their patron’s dynasty, but will be corrosive to the prosperity of the state to which they nominally belong. A higher percentage of monasteries will make vassal lords and religious authorities happier, and a state more stable, up to a point. If lords are too good at evading taxes, hiding away too much economically productive land, then tax revenues will collapse. This actually happened in the Palaiologan period, which crippled Roman/Byzantine finances and impeded their ability to reform the state. This will allow for emergent gameplay as a powerful and lucky ruler will be able to liquidate and dissolve a monastic order which becomes too powerful within their realm, as Phillip IV of France did to the Templars in 1307 – and the potential for unmitigated disaster should this plot fail. A kingdom which has had too much of its land handed over to monasteries and unable to summon the authority to dissolve them will drown in a death-spiral, making vast quantities of prestige and piety even as it can’t muster the manpower to defend itself or gold to pay the mercenaries.
How they might be added
I propose that the game have only two types of holdings: cities, representing administrative centres, and estates, representing rural properties and dispersed settlements. However, each type of holding can be governed by either a civil or religious authority. CK2 already models civil authority over both types of holding. A city governed by a religious authority will be a bishopric, which is appropriate of course because a bishop, by definition, is tied to the city as a centre for ecclesiastic administration. However, this allows the new combination of a religious authority controlling rural estates, which would be a monastery.
Code:
City Rural Estate
Civil Authority Mayor (civilian) /Count (feudal) Count
Religious Authority Bishop Abbot (civilian) /Grandmaster (military)Sorry it's not code, I don't know how else to get this to align.
Obviously these are generalized power structures; nuance will be needed to differentiate cultures and religions. Both types of authority would have somewhat different buildings available to improve each type of holding, some of which could make it harder to switch authority (or easier to change it back if it did get flipped by, say, a peasant revolt expelling the bishop). Such a system will have the benefit of correctly situating bishops in cities. Whether a city is governed by a bishop or mayor would merely reflect the present balance of power within local politics – and would allow, for example, the game to correctly model the late-twelfth-century republican government of the Commune of Rome. An added benefit is that such a system might help with creating a better model for the Roman imperial system with its powerful aristocratic landholders (civil authority, rural estates) with its constitutionally-ordered civil systems of authority.
Role-playing benefits
Adding in monasteries will create new gameplay to manage property, family, and religious opinions. Monastic charters – legal documents recording the transfer of property – are important sources for our understanding of the medieval economy, and give evidence that property regularly changed hands between the ownership of laity, the church, and monastic orders. Gemepay-wise, a lord who owns too many estates to manage themselves can choose to found a new monastery which will function as a vassal. It will give a small amount of piety and prestige, at least at first, but give the lord a large amount of control to appoint abbots/abbesses, and even expropriate the wealth if necessary (for a big hit to opinions and stability). Alternatively, the lord could donate the estate to an established monastic community, getting far greater prestige, piety, and stability and gaining influence over an established institution such as the Monastery of St Denis or Monte Cassino, or the crusader orders. Over generations, lords could vie for patronage of major monasteries.
For both AI and player, monasteries need to be an attractive partner for governing a medieval kingdom. While monasteries won’t be providing financial support (they were often medieval tax havens for the ultra-rich), they will provide stability, manpower, and religious authority. The crusader orders (e.g. Hospitallers and Templars), besides benefiting from being mechanically fleshed-out, will help secure the Catholic hold on Outremere. The monastic republic on Mount Athos could also be represented as in-game actors, and not just via events. Especially for poor and marginal estates, monastic ownership should be the optimal way to get any use out of them. Lands in the Alps, Pyranees, or Appenines, which would never be able to provide as much wealth as estates elsewhere, were and should be natural homes for ascetic communities. Monasteries will help turn very large families from liabilities into assets – appointing children, siblings, or cousins as abbots or abbesses will provide new paths for career ambitions which will enhance your dynasty’s prestige. In addition, monasteries will help make the game better able to model the religious and cultural diversity which defined the medieval middle east historically. The monasteries of St Catherine’s in the Sinai, Mar Saba outside Jerusalem, or the White Monastery in Upper Egypt have all operated continuously from Late Antiquity to today. In history, Muslim rulers benefited from protecting these institutions. Adding them to the game can help model the indigenous Christians and their interactions with both Muslims and Crusaders, and not just a colour on the map which gets auto-converted within the first generation of the game’s start.
Mechanical benefits – reforms and decay
Wealthy, powerful monasteries need to be both blessing and curse. They will naturally be major targets for raiders and nomads, keen to grab some easy wealth. Failure to defend one will carry long-term negative repercussions for the liege and potentially his dynasty as well. If monasteries collect too much wealth and their monks stray too far from their vows of poverty, their decadence will alienate reform-minded characters and piss off the exploited peasants who have been bled dry to support these monks’ frivolous lifestyles. Popes and rulers should be encouraged to call ecclesiastic councils to try to bring reforms to reign in the monk’s excesses. In turn, zealous abbots will initiate reform movements targeting the worldly wealth and power of the Church. Not only will a decadent monastery make a peasant revolt more likely, but should the revolt successfully sack and loot its treasury the monastery’s one-time patron might find themselves facing a peasant commune with the financial resources to hire lots of mercenaries.
Finally, adding monasteries as a game mechanic could provide a much-needed ‘decay’ mechanic for established political systems. Monasteries should provide huge benefits to their patron and their patron’s dynasty, but will be corrosive to the prosperity of the state to which they nominally belong. A higher percentage of monasteries will make vassal lords and religious authorities happier, and a state more stable, up to a point. If lords are too good at evading taxes, hiding away too much economically productive land, then tax revenues will collapse. This actually happened in the Palaiologan period, which crippled Roman/Byzantine finances and impeded their ability to reform the state. This will allow for emergent gameplay as a powerful and lucky ruler will be able to liquidate and dissolve a monastic order which becomes too powerful within their realm, as Phillip IV of France did to the Templars in 1307 – and the potential for unmitigated disaster should this plot fail. A kingdom which has had too much of its land handed over to monasteries and unable to summon the authority to dissolve them will drown in a death-spiral, making vast quantities of prestige and piety even as it can’t muster the manpower to defend itself or gold to pay the mercenaries.
