Christians against Turks, and Infidels: A Micro-Linguistic Analysis of Diachronic War Discourse in Thomas Scott’s and Thomas and Dudley Digges’ Four Paradoxes

This study explores the discourse of war in Christian-Muslim conflicts through two early seventeenth-century texts going by the same title of Four Paradoxes by Thomas Scott and Thomas and Dudley Digges. Published in 1602 and 1604, these works present a duality: Scott’s poetic rendition as a preacher-poet and the Digges’ prose treatise as scientists and diplomats. Scott’s Paradoxes, particularly “Of War”, reflect a Christian call for unity against the Turks, aligning with the Just War tradition. His poetic style employs vivid imagery and rhythmic language to examine divine providence and human frailty. Conversely, the Digges’ prose adopts a structured, analytical approach, exploring military, political, and philosophical paradoxes. Their treatise discusses the strategic and ethical dimensions of warfare from a pragmatic viewpoint. Methodologically, this study analyses lexico-semantic and pragmalinguistic patterns in both texts using Appraisal Theory (Martin and White 2005). It examines linguistic strategies addressing Just War principles and revealing divergences in war rhetoric. By uncovering rhetorical nuances, this essay enhances our understanding of early modern discourse on warfare, religion, and political confrontation, particularly regarding xenophobic attitudes toward Muslims in the seventeenth century.