UPDATE: The watchful eye of Andrew Holt, one of my commenters, detected an error in this post. Apparently there is an index to the Encyclopedia of Wars which was not in the edition that I found, in which the authors actually do index “religious wars,” of which there are 121, and to which Vox Day thought it right to add two others. See Holt’s thoughtful and better-cited response.
It should be noted that I do not consider myself an “academic blogger,” though I was in grad school at the time of this post.
With this addendum in place, the quotation from the book that I cite below still, to a great extent, negates Day’s count.
A friend shared the image above from a Facebook page called WHY?Outreach. I thought the statistic was interesting, so I followed the links they cited for their claim in the caption text.
In one of them, an article at CARM, which I despise and link under protest, Robin Schumacher makes the following claim, which is cited verbatim in the meme:
An interesting source of truth on the matter is Philip and Axelrod’s three-volume Encyclopedia of Wars, which chronicles some 1,763 wars that have been waged over the course of human history. Of those wars, the authors categorize 123 as being religious in nature,2 which is an astonishingly low 6.98% of all wars. However, when one subtracts out those waged in the name of Islam (66), the percentage is cut by more than half to 3.23%.
Footnote 2 is a broken link, but it’s supposed to take readers to a Google Books preview of a book called The Irrational Atheist in which author Vox Day adds up “all the wars that the authors of the Encyclopedia of Wars saw fit to categorize as religious wars for one reason or another.” Day includes several caveats, like some wars being lumped together, but is generally satisfied with his work. At the risk of another dead link like the one suffered by CARM, I include a link to the book preview here.
The claims that (1) there have been 1,763 wars in human history, and (2) only 123 of them are a result of religious causes, appear explicitly nowhere in Encyclopedia of Wars. Those numbers were tallied up by Vox Day using data from Encyclopedia of Wars. Sort of.
Wikipedia’s article on religious war previously included the number as well, citing 3 sources: a Huffington Post article which made the claim but failed to support it, a book called An Atheist Defends Religion which also made the claim but failed to support it or even footnote Vox Day’s work, and finally, Vox Day’s book, pages 104-106. Vox Day’s book, as best I can tell, appears to be the original source of the number (allegedly derived from Encyclopedia of Wars.
While I was tracking down the original source, I learned something about the Encyclopedia of Wars: It’s freakishly expensive. Like $400 expensive. So how the heck did Vox Day get hold of a copy?
Answer: He probably didn’t.
PDF copies of everything seem to live on the internet, however, and an expensive reference book like Encyclopedia of Wars is apparently a prime target. I found a PDF. (The link may have stopped working by the time you get to it; there’s another one on Scribd. If those don’t work, Google is amazing and there may still be a copy floating around.
In case there isn’t, I have a few observations:
1. The Encyclopedia of Wars doesn’t categorize wars as religious or non-religious. I searched the PDF for “religion.” It appeared 201 times. “Religious” appeared 216 times. There is no section of the book where Charles Phillips and Alan Axelrod explicitly “categorize” wars as religious or non-religious. EDIT: I am leaving this here, but it is not quite correct. See note at top of this post; the “categorization” was in the index.
I suspect Vox Day did a word search of a PDF copy of Encyclopedia of Wars, noting which of the entries mentioned religion, and counting up all the other wars. In any event, Robin Schumacher’s claim that “the authors categorize 123 as being religious in nature” and Vox Day’s claim that “the authors of the Encyclopedia of Wars saw fit to categorize as religious” any wars at all are both false. Some entries mention religion, some don’t. The catch here is that to make this claim, Vox Day ignores something critically important:
2. In the introduction to Encyclopedia of Wars on page xxii, the authors note the following:
Wars have always arisen, and arise today, from territorial disputes, military rivalries, conflicts of ethnicity, and strivings for commercial and economic advantage, and they have always depended on, and depend on today, pride, prejudice, coercion, envy, cupidity, competitiveness, and a sense of injustice. But for much of the world before the 17th century, these “reasons” for war were explained and justified, at least for the participants, by religion. Then, around the middle of the 17th century, Europeans began to conceive of war as a legitimate means of furthering the interests of individual sovereigns. (Emphasis mine).
So. Have most of our wars been about religion? According to the authors of Encyclopedia of Religion, for the people who started them, mostly not. For the people fighting them, they mostly have been.
My friend, who was researching with me, un-shared the image when we realized most of the sources… weren’t.
I’m a seminary student seeking ordination in the Presbyterian Church (USA). Why am I sharing this if it makes religion look bad?
Because I don’t think it does. First, as a person invested in a particular religion with a particular truth claim, I think the truth matters. It does Christianity no favors to claim to be in possession of truth while dealing in lies. Lies are not appropriate in support of truth.
Second, I don’t believe religion alone makes people violent. I think people are already violent, and they use religion as an excuse. I think it’s dangerous when people outsource their moral reasoning to their faith communities. I think there is indeed a grave danger of allowing God to be prejudiced on our behalf.
Are atheists also violent? Of course. Is religion, as Phillips and Axelrod suggest, often used as an excuse for violence? Absolutely. Shall we then do away with religion? Certainly not! We shall do away with violence, which has been propped up by religion and atheism alike, and caused by the reasons Phillips and Axelrod cite.
I suspect more than a few unkind religious people would have the proverbial wind taken out of their sails if they were deprived of their religion – just as more than a few unkind atheists would if they were deprived of their atheism.
The point of all this: The claim the meme is responding to, that religion is solely responsible for wars, is overly simplistic rubbish. Also, the counter-claim put forth in the meme, that “The #1 cause of war, death, and suffering is atheistic communism” is also rubbish.
So what is “The #1 cause of wars?”
As I’m confident my Church History II Professor Dr. Heather Vacek would say of the #1 cause of wars… “It’s complicated.”