Transfer of the property of the Order of the Temple to the Hospitallers
Even before the burning of Mole, disputes flared up in all parts of Europe over the property of the Order of the Temple. In France, this property was seized by agents of the king on October 13, 1307, a little later than elsewhere. Clement V immediately demanded that it be handed over to the Church in order to use it in the interests of the Holy Land. It was also necessary to determine who would manage the possessions of the Templars in anticipation of the outcome of the trial: the monarchs did not yield and retained this right for themselves. The king of Aragon openly said that in any outcome he would leave part of the order's property for the crown.
Thus, the profits that could be derived from the property of the Temple went to the rulers. Between 1308 and 1313 the king of England received from the possessions of the Order of the Temple nine thousand two hundred and fifty pounds sterling income, which in annual terms amounted to 4% of state profits. Some of these funds were used to help the imprisoned Templars.
However, royal control was not at all tough: estates were transferred or sold, and sometimes they were arbitrarily seized by secular feudal lords or religious organizations: in Castile and England, examples of this kind were not uncommon. Edward II rewarded the Scottish nobility who had gone over to him with the estate of the Order of the Temple. When the case dragged on, attempts of this kind began to multiply. Moreover, no one agreed with the use of the funds of the order for the needs of the Holy Land.
For the Pope, the quickest and easiest solution to implement was to transfer these estates to the Hospitaller Order. The Hospitallers themselves were quiet during the trial, giving no reason to think that they were pleased with the misadventures of the Order of the Temple.
Western European monarchs were not enthusiastic about this decision, which differed little from the merger of the orders. On the one hand, they intended to keep some of the property of the abolished order: the evolution of the views of Edward II and Jaime II between October and December 1307 is due in part to the attractive power of these additional profits. In addition, what we will talk about later, Philip the Handsome was not at all "unselfish" in this matter, no matter what his singers might say. However, it was difficult for the kings to lay claim to all the possessions of the Order of the Temple - this would mean the plunder of the Church. However, it was still possible to find a solution. Jaime II was ready for any decision except one - the transfer to the Order of the Hospitallers. He had time to feel what a danger to the royal power the military order 509 could pose. It was clear thatthat he is opposed to strengthening the existing order. The trial of the Order of the Temple allowed Jaime II to raise the issue of the Order of the Hospitallers and its integration into the Aragonese state. As a result, the king began to advocate for the creation of a new, Aragonese, order, to which the property of the Templars, and at the same time the Hospitallers, could be transferred. It was this position that was entrusted to defend his representatives at the council in Vienne.
The tasks that Philip the Fair set himself led him to the same conclusion: he dreamed of a crusade with a purified, reformed military order, the grand master of which would be the prince of the blood or, why not, he himself. However, the Hospitallers in Philip's eyes were worth no more than the Templars. Consequently, a completely new order was required.
Thus, at the council, on the question of the property of the Templars, the pope was in the minority: the fathers, little convinced of the guilt of the Order of the Temple, preferred the idea of a new order. The situation was defused by Angerrand de Marigny, who managed to convince the French king to agree to a compromise with the pope. In exchange for several tithes, the king joined the decision of Clement V. On May 2, 1312, the bull "Ad providam" transferred the possession of the Order of the Temple to the Order of the Hospitallers, and the question of the Iberian Peninsula was left to await a special decision.
Promotional video:
For the Hospitallers, the most difficult thing remained ahead - to claim the property, of which they were from now on the rightful owner. Not all of the Templars disappeared after 1307. In 1310, the brother of the Templar Vivolo was still in charge of the command in San Savinho, in the papal state. During the interrogation of the investigators, he replied that he knew nothing, being a “rural man and a farmer” (ruralis homo et agricola)! The Hospitaller Order never received this estate 511. On November 6, 1312, the Doge of Venice, Giovanni Soranzo, promised the Hospitallers to help them drive out the Templars who still lived in the house of St. Mary in Broilo 512. In Germany, the Templars also sometimes had to be expelled by force.
In France, however, it was necessary to reckon with the king and his agents. The king presented a list of expenses of two hundred thousand livres, which, according to him, cost him the maintenance of the disputed property. The Hospitaller Order paid. But then the king's agents began to drag out the case, and the king had to order Jean de Voseillet, Bailly of Tours, to release the Templar estates in Brittany for the Hospitallers. The order was issued in March, but it was not until May that Bailly sent two officials to carry out the royal order. On December 27, 1313, Deodat de Rouvier, a citizen from Toulouse who was in charge of the property of the Order of the Temple, removed the sequestration and handed over the house and church to the Hospitallers. However, as early as 1316, there were constant disputes in parliament. The king himself kept the Templar tower in Paris in order to pass it on to Queen Clementia (we are talking about Louis X the Grumpy). To expedite the transfer of real estate in Ireland, Edward II had to convene a council of barons and prelates. To take possession of Ballantrodach, the chief commander of Scotland, the Hospitallers succeeded only in 1351.
The question of the Iberian Peninsula remained open. The decision was made only after the death of Clement V: he, of course, could not allow the Spaniards what he refused to the king of France. A compromise was reached in 1317 (June 10): in the kingdom of Valencia, the estate of the Temple, increased by the possessions of the Hospitaller Order, went to the new Aragonese Order of Monteza. In exchange for this concession, the Order of the Hospital received the possessions of the Templars in Aragon and Catalonia. Almost the same decision was made in Portugal: the ownership of the Order of the Temple passed to the new Order of Christ, a more direct heir to the Temple than the Order of Montez. Finally, the property of the Order of the Temple in Castile was largely decimated - (en, and it was not easy to return it to be transferred to the local orders. Talk about this property did not subside until 1361.
What happened to the Templars?
Their further fate after such a process gave rise to a lot of fabrications and aroused great sympathy. No doubt so many of them wanted to be forgotten. What happened to them was what happens to every silent majority: they have stood up for them many and very unsuccessfully.
Some left the Order of the Temple before the trial, but we will not consider them all apostates and traitors. Eskier de Fluaran was a scoundrel. But others left the order because there were obvious abuses in many commanderships that they did not approve of. In relation to some of them, for example Roger de Flore, who was literally robbed by Molay (although it is quite possible that Muntaner, a great friend of Roger, tried to whitewash his image and actions), injustices were committed. Finally, Mole showed tactlessness not only in dealing with the king and the pope, but he could well insult one of the knights or sergeants of the order.
As soon as the persecution began, some fled and did their best to be forgotten. But the examples of some Catalan and English Templars, recaptured two or three years later, prove that shaving a beard was not enough to remain unrecognized. In this regard, they often cite a unique, and therefore not very illustrative example of an Aragonese Templar named Bernard de Fuentes, who fled in 1310 and became the head of a Christian squad in the service of the Muslim ruler of Tunisia. In 1313 he returned to Aragon as an ambassador516.
But most of the Templars were in custody at the time. The necessary part of the confiscated income of the order was allocated for their maintenance. In Toulouse, the knight was entitled to eighteen deniers, and the sergeant nine517. In Ireland, they received income from three houses - Kilklogan, Crook and Kilburny518.
The convicted Templars were divided into three categories: those recognized as innocent, who confessed their delusions and who were reconciled with the Church, convicted.
In Ravenna, where they were acquitted, it was decided that the Templars, albeit innocent, would appear before their bishop and, with seven witnesses, purge themselves of the charges brought against them. This oath of purification was prescribed because among the Templars, as elsewhere, there was no shortage of unscrupulous people. It is known that on June 26, 1311, Bartolomeo Tencanari, a Templar from Bologna, appeared before Bishop Umberto. A letter from the Archbishop of Ravenna Rinaldo da Concorrezzo was read, after which Bartolomeo swore his innocence and the purity of his faith. Twelve people testified in his favor, including eight clergymen519.
Elsewhere, the Templars, released or reconciled with the Church, were ordered to live in the houses of the Order of the Temple or in monasteries of their choice. They were supposed to be supported, which was to be paid by the Order of the Hospitallers, who received the property of the Order of the Temple at their disposal. Raimund Sá Guardia, abbot of Ma De, released along with all the Templars of Roussillon, continued to live in his command, "without paying any rent or rent, consuming vegetables from the garden and fruits from the orchard only for his own sustenance." He also had the right to collect firewood in the forest and received an allowance of three hundred and fifty livres520.
Some ended badly - having become defrocked, they got married without worrying about their monastic vows. In 1317, the papal authority called on ecclesiastical and secular authorities to be more vigilant. A link has been established between the misconduct of these individuals and the excessively high pensions they were awarded. The content has been cut.
As for those who were sentenced to a "high security" prison, they rotted for a long time in captivity, like Pont de Boer, chaplain of the Order of the Temple in Langres, who spent twelve years in very difficult conditions. He was only released in 1321.521 Others died in prison, such as d'Ocellier, Marshal of the Order in Cyprus (in 1316 or 1317), and probably Hugo de Peyro.
Finally, there were those, exclusively in France, who died at the stake - in Paris, Senlis, Carcassonne - for example, on June 20, 1311.