The Hospitallers and the Holy Land : Financing the Latin East, 1187-1274

The Hospitallers and the Holy Land FINANCING THE LATIN EAST 1187–1274

The Order of the Hospital of St John was among the most creative and important institutions of the Middle Ages, its history provoking much debate and controversy. However, there has been very little study of the way in which it operated as an organisation contributing to the survival of the Christian settlement in the East, a gap which this book addresses. It focuses on the impact of the various crises in the East upon the Order, looking at how it reacted to events, the contributions that western priories played in the rehabilitation of the East, and the various efforts made to restore its economic and military strength. In particular, the author shows the key role played by the papacy, both in the Order's recovery, and in determining the fate of the crusader states. Overall, it offers a whole new perspective on the connections between East and West. JUDITH BRONSTEIN gained her Ph.D. from the University of Cambridge

The Hospitallers and the Holy Land FINANCING THE LATIN EAST 1187–1274

Judith Bronstein

THE BOYDELL PRESS

© Judith Bronstein 2005 All Rights Reserved. Except as permitted under current legislation no part of this work may be photocopied, stored in a retrieval system, published, performed in public, adapted, broadcast, transmitted, recorded or reproduced in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of the copyright owner The right of Judith Bronstein to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988

First published 2005 The Boydell Press, Woodbridge

ISBN 1 84383 131 7

The Boydell Press is an imprint of Boydell & Brewer Ltd PO Box 9, Woodbridge, Suffolk IP12 3DF, UK and of Boydell & Brewer Inc. 668 Mt. Hope Avenue, Rochester, NY 14620, USA website: www.boydellandbrewer.com

A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Bronstein, Judith, 1964The Hospitallers and the Holy Land : financing the Latin East, 1187–1274 / Judith Bronstein. p. cm. Summary: “A new appraisal of the Order of the Hospitallers, showing how they were responsible for the survival of the Christian settlement in the East” – Provided by publisher. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1–84383–131–7 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Hospitalers. 2. Church history – 12th century. 3. Church history – 13th century. I. Title. BX2825.B76 2005 271'.7912’09022--dc22 2005002720

This publication is printed on acid-free paper Printed in Great Britain by St Edmundsbury Press Ltd, Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk

Contents Acknowledgements

vii

Abbreviations

ix

Maps

x

Introduction

1

1

The Hospitallers in the Holy Land, 1187–1274 Financial activities of the Hospitallers in the Latin East

2

The Order in the West and Crises in the Latin East: The French Priories 1188–1200: the aftermath of Hattin

11 47 64 64

1200–1250: years of investment and expansion Reaction to the expansion: the re-organization of the Order in the 1210s and 1220s 1240–1274: years of change

66 77

1262–1274: a time of financial and political crisis The finances of the priories in Sicily, England and the Iberian peninsula, 1262–1274

92 97

81

3

The Popes, the Hospitallers and Crises in the Holy Land

103

4

Members of the Order Serving in the Latin East and in the French Priories

133

Conclusion

140

Appendix: List of Members of the Order Serving in the Latin East and in the French Priories, 1187–1274

146

Bibliography

167

Index

183

To the memory of my father Reuben Bronstein

Acknowledgements This book is partly based on my Ph.D. thesis submitted in 2000 at the University of Cambridge. The basic dissertation, however, has been much changed following additional research, re-evaluation and further reflection. The book could not have been written without the assistance of many scholars and friends to whom I am deeply indebted. My warmest thanks are due to my former supervisor, Jonathan Riley-Smith. His erudition, his open-mindedness, his enthusiasm, his dedication and confidence in his students made working with him a fantastic experience and an enormous privilege. I cannot thank him enough for the encouragement, support and advice he gave, and is still giving, me. I am also greatly indebted to Sophia Menache. Her inspirational teaching first drew me to the Middle Ages as an undergraduate student, and since then she has given me continuous support and invaluable advice and help, for which I am extremely grateful. I am happy to take this opportunity to express my gratitude and debt to Malcolm Barber, Luis García-Guijarro Ramos, Anthony Luttrell and Miri Rubin for their assistance and continual advice. I am also grateful to Carlos Barquero Goñi, Jochen Burgtorf, Alan Forey, Anne-Marie Legras, Edna and Eliezer Stern, as well as to my Ph.D. examiners, David Abulafia and Bernard Hamilton, for their suggestions, criticism and help at various stages of this work. It is also a great pleasure to thank Damien Carraz, Ruthy Gertwagen and Jenny Horowitz, who read draft versions of several chapters, always kindly and patiently answered innumerable questions and queries, and offered me many constructive suggestions at the last stages of the preparation of this book. For their kind and helpful guidance at the final stages of the work, I would also like to thank Caroline Palmer and the staff at Boydell & Brewer. I owe a great debt to the following for their friendship and support: Thomas Biskup, Laura Cameron, Mark Clarke, Itzik Hen, Diana and Peter Lipton, Marwan Nader, Elizabeth O’Beirne-Ranelagh, Greg O’Malley, Iben Schmidt, Shoshi Squires, Shula Wieder and very special thanks to Nora Berend, Lizzie Dougherty, Nick Duncan and Idit Nathan. I take this oportunity to thank those who provided me with generous financial support, namely the Cambridge Overseas Trust, Emmanuel College, the Ian Karten Charitable Fund, the Lightfoot Fund, and the ORS. I am also grateful to the Council for High Education – Israel, and the University of Haifa, for electing me for a Postdoctoral Fellowship. I would like to conclude these acknowledgements by thanking the people to whom I owe my greatest debt, my parents. Without their unfailing support, their

viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

kindness, and their intellectual encouragement this book would not have become a reality. It is a cause of great sadness to me that my father has not lived to see it. Although a physician, he was an enthusiastic historian, and it is to him, with love, that I dedicate this book.

Abbreviations AD du Rhône

Inventaire sommaire des Archives Départementales du Rhône, Archives Écclésiastiques, série H, ed. M.C. Faure, Lyons, 1945, vol. III. AD du Rhône Inventaire sommaire des Archives Départementales du Rhône antérieures à 1790, (antérieures) Archives Écclésiastiques, série H, Lyons, 1932, vol. II. AD Haute Toulouse, Archives départementales de la Haute-Garonne. Archives Garonne Écclésiastiques, série H. Charters of the Hospitallers and the Templars. AOL Archives de l’Orient Latin, ed. P.E.D. Riant, 2 vols., Paris, 1881, 1884. ‘ATS’ ‘Annales de Terre Sainte’, in AOL, vol. II, pp. 427–61. BEFAR Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises d’Athènes et de Rome, 2 series. Cart. Cartulaire général de l’Ordre des Hospitaliers de Saint Jean de Jérusalem, 1100–1310, ed. J. Delaville Le Roulx, 4 vols., Paris, 1894–1906. Cart. Avignon Cartulaire et chartes de la commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem d’Avignon au temps de la Commune (1170–1250), ed. C.-F. Hollard, Paris, 2001. Cart. Bruxelles Cartulaire de l’Hôpital de Saint Jean de Bruxelles, actes des XII–XIII siècles, ed. P. Bonenfant, Brussels, 1953. Cart. Éterpigny Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, nouv. acq. lat. 927. Cart. Fieffes Paris, Archives Nationales, S5059. Paris, Archives Nationales, S5533. Cart. St. Gilles Cartulaire du Prieuré de Saint Gilles de l’Hôpital de Saint Jean de Jérusalem (1129–1210), ed. D. Le Blevec and A. Venturini, Paris, 1997. Cart. St. Paul ‘Chartularium domus Hospitalis Hierosolymitani Sancti Pauli prope les Romans Romanis’, Cartulaires des Hospitaliers et Templiers en Dauphiné (Bulletin d’Histoire et d’Archéologie du Diocèse de Valence, Collection de Cartulaires Dauphinois), ed. U. Chevalier, Romans, 1875 Cart. Saulce Cartulaire de la commanderie de Saulce sur Yonne, Paris, Archives sur Yonne Nationales, S5235. Cart. Trinquetaille Cartulaire de Trinquetaille, ed. P.A. Amarguier, Gap, 1972. Cart. Velay Cartulaire des Hospitaliers du Velay, ed. A. Chassaing, Paris, 1888. ‘Eracles’ ‘L’Estoire d’Eracles empereur et le conqueste de la Terre d’Outremer’, RHC Oc., vols. I, II. Foedera Foedera, conventiones, litterae, et cuiuscunque generis acta publica inter reges Angliae et alios quosvis imperatores, reges, pontifices vel communitates, 1101–1654, ed. T. Rymer; new edn. A. Clarke et al., 4 vols., London, 1816–69. GCN Gallia christiana novissima, eds. J.H. Albanès and U. Chevalier, 7 vols., Montbéliard and Valence, 1895–1920. Ibn al-Furat Ayyubids, Mamlukes and Crusaders. Selections from the Tarikh al-Duwal wa’l Muluk of Ibn al-Furat, ed. and trans. M.C. and U. Lyon, with historical introduction and notes by J. Riley-Smith, Cambridge, 1971. Marseille-56H Marseille, Archives départementales des Bouches du Rhône, 56H. Charters of the Hospitallers and the Templars. MGH Legum Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Legum, ed. G.H. Pertz et al., 5 vols., Hanover, 1835–89.

x MGH SS

ABBREVIATIONS

Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores, ed. G.H. Pertz et al., 32 vols., Hanover, 1826–1934. PC The Cartulary of the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem in England, Part 2: Prima Camera, Essex, ed. M. Gervers, Oxford, 1996. PL Patrologia cursus completus, series Latina, ed. J.P. Migne, 217 vols., Paris, 1841–1864. Potthast Regesta Pontificum Romanorum, ed. A. Potthast, 2 vols., Berlin, 1873–75. RCAR I Registri della cancelleria angioina ricostruiti, ed. R. Filangieri di Candida et al., 28 vols. so far, Naples, 1950– . Reg. Alexandre IV Les Registres d’Alexandre IV, ed. C. Bourel de la Roncière, A. Coulon and J. de Loye (BEFAR), 3 vols., Paris, 1902, 1917, 1953 (tables, 1959). Reg. Clément IV Les Registres de Clément IV, ed. É. Jordan (BEFAR), Paris, 1893. Reg. Grégoire IX Les Registres de Grégoire IX, ed. L. Auvray (BEFAR), 3 vols., Paris, 1896–1908. Reg. Grégoire X Les Registres de Grégoire X, ed. J. Guiraud (BEFAR), 3 vols. including tables, Paris, 1892, 1906, 1908. Reg. Honorius III Regesta Honorii papae III, ed. P. Pressutti, Rome, 2 vols., 1888–95. Reg. Innocent IV Les Registres d’Innocent IV, ed. É. Berger, 4 vols., Paris, 1884–1921. Reg. Urbain IV Les Registres d’Urbain IV, ed. M.J. Guiraud (BEFAR), 4 vols. including tables, Paris, 1901, 1929, 1958. RHC Arm. Recueil des historiens des croisades. Documents Arméniens, 2 vols., Paris, 1869, 1906. RHC Lois. Recueil des historiens des croisades. Lois, 2 vols., Paris, 1841–43. RHC Oc. Recueil des historiens des croisades. Historiens occidentaux, 5 vols., Paris, 1844–1895. RHC Or. Recueil des historiens des croisades. Historiens orientaux, 5 vols., Paris, 1872–1906. RHGF Recueil des Historiens des Gaules et de la France, ed. M. Bouquet et al., 24 vols., Paris, 1737–1904. RRH Regesta Regni Hierosolymitani, 1097–1291, ed. R. Röhricht, Innsbruck, 1893; Additamentum, Innsbruck, 1904. SC The Cartulary of the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem in England, Secunda Camera, Essex, ed. M. Gervers, Oxford, 1982. Thes. novus Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, ed. U. Durand and E. Martène, 5 vols., Paris, 1717 (repr. Farnborough, 1968). TRHS Transactions of the Royal Historical Society. Vat. Reg. Archivio Segreto Vaticano, Regesta Honorii III. WT Willelmi Tyrensis Archiepiscopi Chronicon, ed. R.B.C. Huygens, Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Medievalis, 63–63A, Turnhout, 1986, 2 vols.

Map 1. The Latin East, 1187–1250, showing places mentioned in the text.

Map 2. The Kingdom of Jerusalem and the County of Tripoli in 1274, showing places mentioned in the text.

Map 3. Hospitaller priories in Europe, 1261–1291.

Map 4. Hospitaller priories in France up to 1274, showing places mentioned in the text.

Map 5. Hospitaller Commanderies in Provence at the end of the thirteenth century, showing places mentioned in the text.

Introduction

Introduction THE MILITARY ORDERS of the Hospital and the Temple are considered the most original products of the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem. These institutions, the main aim of which was defined in terms of fighting for the Holy Land and caring for the poor and pilgrims, were responsible for the survival of the Latin settlement in the East until the final fall of the kingdom of Jerusalem in 1291. The Hospitallers’ standing at the forefront of the defence of Palestine and Syria exposed them to great expense in maintaining their castles and manpower even in normal times; but natural disasters and the defeat of the Order’s forces on the battlefield had devastating effects. This book examines the Order’s function as a medieval international organization, looking at the strategies employed by the Hospitallers throughout the thirteenth century to provide the brothers in the East with the necessary resources and manpower to fulfil their tasks. The history of the Hospitallers in the Latin East and France from 1187 to 1274 is described, especially their responses, as members of an international Order of the Church, to crises in the East. The scope of the study is the period between the battle of Hattin in 1187 and the Second Council of Lyons in 1274. The choice of this period requires some clarification. Even before 1187 the Order had suffered setbacks in the East, for example, falling heavily into debt and undergoing an internal crisis owing to the assistance given to King Amalric in his failed campaign to Egypt in 1168.1 But the defeat at Hattin was a turning point because it necessitated a complete rehabilitation of the Order’s military forces and finances on an unprecedented scale. Likewise at the end of our period, after almost a century in which the Order had made enormous efforts to reconstruct its defensive array and economic resources in the Latin East, ten years of unceasing Mamluk incursions had, by 1274, created a situation not unlike that just after Hattin. The Latin settlement was reduced to several cities along the coast. The Hospitallers had lost most of their castles and lands, and were entirely dependent on supplies from Europe. In addition, 1274 marks the beginning of a new era in crusading history because of the adoption of new crusading strategies and financial approaches resolved at the Second Council of Lyons that year.2 A succession of military defeats and natural disasters powerfully affected the situation of the Hospitallers in the East throughout the thirteenth century. Many letters of appeal show their increasing reliance on the shipment of supplies and manpower from the West. These letters, however, give very little information about their 1 2

J. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John in Jerusalem and Cyprus, c.1050–1310, London, 1967, pp. 61–63. N. Housley, The Later Crusades: From Lyons to Alcazar 1274–1580, Oxford, 1992, p. 5; S. Schein, Fideles Crucis: The Papacy, the West and the Recovery of the Holy Land, Oxford, 1991, pp. 11–12.

2

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

specific needs and none about their use of manpower. To gain a better understanding of the way crises affected the Hospitallers in the East, hence to understand their needs, I have made detailed use of the Order’s sources. The Cartulaire général de l’Ordre des Hospitaliers de Saint Jean de Jérusalem is the largest collection of documents available for the study of the Hospitallers in its eastern and western provinces.3 It contains charters of donations, records of financial transactions, and also papal bulls, correspondence addressed to or issued by the Order, records of its chapters, and decrees. But the Cartulaire is not comprehensive, and for the history of the Order in the East I have also made use of documents relating to local institutions connected with the Order in the East, using as a guide the Regesta Regni Hierosolymitani. Although the Regesta is now slightly out of date, it is still the main calendar of charters, letters, and papal bulls, issued in or sent to the Holy Land between 1097 and 1291.4 Moreover, many references to the Hospitallers, and the Military Orders in general, are made in contemporary Christian and Arab chronicles. The relationship of the Order with the papacy is mainly illumined by material in the papal registers and also by records of Church councils. The sources concerning the European priories are extremely valuable. The Hospitallers were able to meet enormous demands for money and manpower at a time of a continuous deterioration of the military and economic situation of the Latin settlement because their wealth was based in Europe. But only scattered information is available as to the supplies sent to the East. No inventories or shipment lists are known to exist for the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Although the rule of the Order demanded that written accounts should be sent from Europe, together with the supplies and money, these records have not survived.5 Any surviving material for the Hospitallers in Europe is in the cartularies of local commanderies, which deal only with local issues, such as charters of donation, purchases, leases, or alienation of property. They do not contain any references to the connections of these houses to the Order’s headquarters in the East. Nevertheless, the response of European priories to crises in the East can be assessed indirectly from their economic activities; the Order’s needs in the East should have been reflected in its economic policy in the West. Selling or renting out property, for example, could mean that the brothers in Europe were trying to liquidate their assets to supply the East with ready cash. In this study of the Order’s economic activities in Europe, based on an evaluation of their investments and expenditures, the ‘French’ priories of France, St. Gilles, and Auvergne are of special interest. The terms ‘French’ or ‘France’ are used for convenience; medieval boundaries were so variable that the Order’s provincial division in Europe rather than the geographical limits of kingdoms sets the scene. The boundaries of these three ‘French’ priories were therefore not confined to the boundaries of the medieval

3 4 5

Cartulaire général de l’Ordre des Hospitaliers de Saint Jean de Jérusalem,1100–1310, ed. J. Delaville Le Roulx, 4 vols., Paris, 1894–1906. Regesta Regni Hierosolymitani, ed. R. Röhricht, 2 vols., Innsbruck, 1893. Additamentum, Innsbruck, 1904. On the accounts that were required together with the supplies from Europe see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 308–12.

INTRODUCTION

3

kingdom of France. St. Gilles, for example, was responsible for territory, such as Provence, which could be regarded as ‘French-speaking’, in so far as the Langue d’oc is considered a French language, but for most of our period was part of the western empire. There were two main reasons for focusing on the economic activities of the French priories. They were the biggest and wealthiest in Europe, and although their registers are lost, the rich collections of sources that have survived for their subject commanderies, namely unpublished and published cartularies, yield an overall picture of their financial situation and their ability to support the convent in the East. For commanderies of the priory of France we have the cartularies of Hospitallers’ houses in Brussels, Fieffes and Éterpigny.6 For houses of the priory of Auvergne (but until c.1220–40 under the control of the priory of St. Gilles) there is the cartulary of the Hospitallers in Velay, and also charters related to the Order in the rich collection of documents from the county of Forez.7 A wealth of material has survived for commanderies under the control of the priory of St. Gilles. It includes bundles of charters related to the Hospitallers in Lyons, Marseilles and Toulouse found respectively in the Archives départementales du Rhône, des Bouches du Rhône, and de la Haute-Garonne.8 There are also printed Hospitaller cartularies from St. Paul les Romans, Avignon, Trinquetaille, and St. Gilles.9 It is always questionable to what extent one can rely on medieval sources. The absence of evidence of investments by the Order’s commanderies in specific periods or geographical areas does not necessarily signify a change in their economic policy. The cartularies may be fragmentary or material has perhaps been lost. This difficulty can be overcome by studying cartularies from other houses nearby, most probably exposed to similar political and economic circumstances. Here, in addition to Hospitaller sources, there is material of other religious and lay institutions in France. Templar cartularies, for example, those from Saulce-sur-Yonne, Bellenglise, and Provins, provide evidence for the economic activities of an institution with similar aims to those of the Hospitallers.10 Hospitaller cartularies and diplomatic documents from other possible European areas of supply to the East, namely the Iberian peninsula, England, and the kingdom of Sicily, while beyond the scope of this book, are also of value. 6 7 8

Cart. Bruxelles; Cart. Fieffes; Cart. Éterpigny. Cart. Velay; Chartes du Forez antérieures au XIV siècle, ed. G. Guichard, 23 vols., Mâcon, 1933–78. Cartulaire de l’ordre des Hospitaliers: Lyons, Archives départementales du Rhône 48H (for this archive I have also studied printed inventories, here referred to as AD du Rhône and AD du Rhône, antérieures); Marseilles, Archives départementales des Bouches-du-Rhône 56H. Charters of the Hospitallers and the Templars: Toulouse, Archives départementales de la Haute-Garonne, archives écclésiastiques – série H. 9 ‘Chartularium domus Hospitalis Hierosolymitani Sancti Pauli prope Romanis’, Cartulaires des Hospitaliers et Templiers en Dauphiné (Bulletin d’Histoire et d’Archéologie du Diocèse de Valence, Collection de Cartulaires Dauphinois), ed. U. Chevalier, Romans, 1875; Cart. Avignon; Cart. Trinquetaille; Cart. St. Gilles. Although this was titled the cartulary of the priory of St. Gilles, it is actually the cartulary of the commandery, for the city and its surroundings. The confusion arises because St. Gilles was the site of both a priory and commandery. 10 Cart. Saulce sur Yonne, Paris, Archives Nationales, S5235. Histoire et cartulaire des Templiers de Provins, ed. V. Carrière, Paris, 1919. The Cartulary of Bellenglise is included in the Hospitaller cartulary of Fieffes (S5533), fols. 259–80.

4

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

Although the establishment, ideology, and activities of the Hospitallers are described in many secondary works, hardly any research has been done on the function of the Hospitallers as an international Order and the response of their houses in Europe to the Order’s needs in the East. Two important books on the Order’s general history appeared at the beginning of the last century. In 1904 J. Delaville Le Roulx published a history of the Hospitallers in the Holy Land and Cyprus.11 It is arranged chronologically by mastership and provides valuable information on the history of the Order and its internal organization. Delaville Le Roulx made use for the first time of the large collection of material from the Order’s cartulary, which he himself had edited, as well as contemporary chronicles. However, his is a narrative description, without much analysis. He did not consider the relationship between the convent in the East and the Hospitaller houses in Europe, but dealt with these as two separate issues. The approach of H. Prutz in his history of the Military Orders, published in 1908, was more thematic.12 He studied the Order’s establishment and development in different geographical areas. He also described their financial activities, their involvement in political events, and their relations with the papacy. He made more comprehensive use than Delaville Le Roulx of primary sources, including, for example, material from the papal registers. Yet despite being highly informative, his book is little more than a very detailed description of the sources and, as is the case with Delaville Le Roulx’s history, it lacks analysis. J. Riley-Smith’s thorough and analytical work on the history of the Hospitallers in Jerusalem and Cyprus from 1050 to 1310, published in 1967, for the first time places the study of the Military Orders in the general context of the history of the crusade movement.13 It considers the Order an institution which developed and operated within the crusader states and was influenced by them. Riley-Smith studied the structure of the Order and its development as an international Order of the Church, and within this discussion he dealt with the relationship of the convent in the Holy Land with the houses in Europe. His emphasis, however, was on the function of the Order in the East rather than the European priories; questions that my work seeks to examine, relating to the response by these priories to the Hospitallers’ needs in the East, were considered only briefly. Although an impressive amount has been written on the Military Orders since the publication of Riley-Smith’s book, I refer here only to those works which have some direct connection with my field of study. In 1992 A. Forey wrote a general history of all Military Orders from the twelfth to the fourteenth centuries. It refers to the Orders’ international deployment, yet the topics covered are broad and given brief attention, as is often necessarily the case with general works of this sort. In his book The Templars in the Corona of Aragón Forey has an important chapter on the relations between the Templars’ headquarters in the East and its houses in the Crown of Aragon.14 Also on the Templars, M. Barber’s The New Knighthood, published in 1994, is a comprehensive history of the Order from its foundation to its annulment. It 11 12 13 14

J. Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte et à Chypre, Paris, 1904. H. Prutz, Die geistlichen Ritterorden, Berlin, 1908. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John. A. Forey, The Military Orders, from the Twelfth to the Early Fourteenth Centuries, London, 1992 and his The Templars in the Corona de Aragón, London, 1973.

INTRODUCTION

5

contains valuable information on the deployment of the resources of the Order’s European priories and their supply of resources and manpower to the Latin East.15 Besides Forey, who dealt with a number of Orders in different crusading theaters, the works mentioned above focus mainly on the history of the Orders in the East and include some references to their European houses and the supplies sent from them to the Levant. A few important articles have been written on this subject: Barber wrote a general article on the ways the Templars established a support network in Europe for the supply of their brothers in the East.16 Using the remaining Angevin archives J. Pryor wrote on the shipments of supplies from Sicily following the conquest of the island by Charles of Anjou in the 1260s. He has also written articles on the supply of horses from Europe to the Holy Land.17 Still, the lack of specific evidence on the dispatch of resources and manpower from the Orders’ European houses may be the reason why these topics, which are crucial for an understanding of the survival of the Christian settlements and the Military Orders in the East in the thirteenth century, have not been more thoroughly studied. Prosopographical analysis of the members of the Orders might help to clarify how brothers were mobilized. A. Forey’s The Templars in the Corona of Aragón includes a list of officials serving in Aragon, and his article ‘Recruitment to the Military Orders’ concerns issues of places of recruitment and service. But this article is based on the records of the process of the Templars, so it refers to the very late thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.18 The works of Delaville Le Roulx, Riley-Smith, and Barber give descriptions of members of the Orders, but they concentrate on masters or high officers. Jochen Burgtof ’s doctoral dissertation makes a significant contribution to the study of these high officers of the central convent.19 Barber’s discussion of the mobilization of the Templars in his article ‘Supplying the Crusade States’ is also based on the Templar process, and centres on the last decades of the Order’s existence.20 The rich body of material concerning the Hospitallers both in the Latin East and Europe allowed me to engage in prosopographical research on the members of the Order. I drew up lists of names of brothers serving in the Latin East and in the priories of France, St. Gilles, and Auvergne in the course of the thirteenth century, with which I was able to examine questions of place of origin and service. Although the sources provide only scattered information as to the losses the Order sustained in the East, I could assess the consequences of defeat on the

15 16 17

18 19

20

M. Barber, The New Knighthood, Cambridge, 1994. M. Barber, ‘Supplying the Crusader State: The Role of the Templars’, The Horns of Hattin, ed. B.Z. Kedar, Jerusalem and London, 1992, pp. 314–26. J. Pryor, ‘In Subsidium Terrae Sanctae: Exports of Foodstuffs and War Materials from the Kingdom of Sicily to the Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1265–1284’, Asian and African Studies, 22 (1988), pp. 127–44, and ‘Transportation of Horses by Sea during the Era of the Crusades: Eighth Century to 1285 A.D.’, Mariner’s Mirror, 68 (1982), pp. 10–27, 103–25. Forey, The Templars in the Corona de Aragón, and ‘Recruitment to the Military Orders, Twelfth to mid-Fourteenth Centuries’, Viator, 17 (1986), pp. 139–71. J. Burgtorf, ‘Führungsstrukturen und Funktionsträger in der Zentrale der Templer und Johanniter von den Anfängen bis zum frühen 14. Jahrhundert’ (Ph.D. thesis, HeinrichHeine-Universität Düsseldorf, 2001). Barber, ‘Supplying the Crusader State’, pp. 314–26.

6

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

battlefield and to follow the mobilization of manpower from Europe to the East by tracking the brothers’ careers. While general studies on the Military Orders tend to concentrate on their history in the East, studies of Hospitallers’ houses in Europe are mostly limited to their regions of study and have few if any references to the Holy Land. The two major works on the Hospitallers in France are those by E. Mannier on the priory of France, published in 1872, and by J. Raybaud on the priory of St. Gilles, published in 1904.21 Mannier’s is a well documented, descriptive account of the establishment and development of the priory and the Order’s commanderies in northern France, which does not, however, go beyond the year 1200. Although Raybaud did study the history of the priory of St. Gilles throughout the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, his work is in many cases inaccurate and lacks documentation. Regional studies on specific houses published in the last twenty years by French historians such as D. Le Blévec and P. Santoni make very good use of the archives to describe the establishment and development of Hospitaller houses in southern France.22 A book published in 1999 by D. Selwood on the history of the Hospitallers and the Templars in the same area analyses the ways their houses functioned as religious institutions within the societies in which they were established. Although it deals with the obligations of the Orders’ houses to supply the East, it refers only briefly to the influence which political and economic changes had on these houses and the way it affected their financial situation.23 This has been recently examined by D. Carraz, who in his doctoral dissertation made an important contribution to the study of the Templars in Provence.24 And yet, no study published so far on the Hospitaller houses in Europe in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, including excellent works such as Gervers’s introductions to the Essex cartularies, has thoroughly considered the implications of political and economic changes for the ability of these houses to respond to the needs of the convent in the Holy Land.25 The Hospital of St. John was founded in the eleventh century by merchants from Amalfi as a charitable institution to care for the sick and the poor who arrived in Jerusalem. The instability of the kingdom of Jerusalem, the foundation of the Order of the Templars,26 and the acknowledgement of warfare as a valid expression of Christian charity no doubt contributed to turning the Hospitallers into a Military Order. Besides their hospital work they came to play an important role in the defence of the crusader states.27 In 1154 the Hospital became an exempt Order of

21 22 23 24

25 26 27

E. Mannier, Les commanderies du prieuré de France, Paris, 1872; J. Raybaud, Histoire des grands prieurs et du prieuré de Saint Gilles, Nîmes, 1904. See Bibliography for details. D. Selwood, Knights of the Cloister: Templars and Hospitallers in Central-Southern Occitania, c.1100–c.1300, Woodbridge, 1999. D. Carraz, ‘Ordres militaires, croisades et sociétés méridionales: L’ordre du Temple dans la basse vallée du Rhône (1124–1312)’ (Ph.D. dissertation, Université Lyon 2, 2003; forthcoming in Presses Universitaires de Lyon). See Gervers’ introductions to PC and SC. For the history of the Templars see M. Barber, The New Knighthood. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John in Jerusalem, pp. 32–84. For the Order’s origins and earliest history see also A. Luttrell, ‘The Earliest Hospitallers’, Montjoie: Studies in Crusade History in

INTRODUCTION

7

the Church, directly subject to the authority of the pope.28 Extensive donations in Europe had also made it an international Order, which had created a network of support for its activities in the Latin East. The Order’s houses were required to send responsiones, annual payment of one third of the produce of their lands or specified goods, to the headquarters in Jerusalem and later in Acre.29 By the later twelfth century the Hospitallers were an economic and military power in the Latin East. Their income from Europe, and the fact that they held extensive tracts of land, villages, as well as urban properties, made their Order one of the richest institutions in the East. This wealth permitted them to play an essential role in the defence of the Holy Land. They owned at least twenty-five castles in the twelfth century and seven in the thirteenth century, which not only protected the Latin settlement from external attacks but were instruments of conquest and colonization.30 John of Würzburg, a German pilgrim who visited the Holy Land around 1160, commented that in addition to the money spent for the sick and the poor, the Order spared no expense supplying its castles with skilled military men to protect the Christian lands from the Muslims.31 To support their activities in the East the Order developed a distinctive system of government,32 under the leadership of the master, who had powers of general administration, exercised supreme command on military campaigns, oversaw the finances, and convened and presided over the general chapter. He was assisted by a number of high officers. The grand commander was the second most important officer, who administered the Order in the master’s absence and was responsible for the property in the East. The treasurer was responsible for the administration of finances. The marshal was in charge of the military forces and had under his command all brothers-at-arms, sergeants-at-arms and military officers. The drapier was in charge of the clothing store, but his importance during the course of the thirteenth century increased considerably, and he appears to have been responsible for the crucial and complicated task of supplying the Order’s forces during military

28 29 30

31 32

Honour of Hans Eberhard Mayer, ed. B.Z. Kedar, J. Riley-Smith and R. Hiestand, Aldershot, 1997, pp. 37–55. Cart. no. 226. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 40, 45, 50–51, 341–71. For the history of the Hospitallers up to 1187 and their possessions in the East see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 32–84, 477–507; The Atlas of the Crusades, ed. J. Riley-Smith, London, 1990, pp. 53, 107. For the different functions of the Crusaders’ castles see R.C. Smail, ‘The Crusaders’ Castles of the Twelfth Century’, Cambridge Historical Journal, 10 (1950), pp. 133–49; R. Ellenblum, ‘Three Generations of Frankish Castle-Building in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem’, Autour de la Prèmiere Croisade, Actes du Colloque de la Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East (Clermont-Ferrand, 22–25 juin 1995), ed. M. Balard, Paris, 1996, pp. 517–29; for the military deployment of the Hospitallers in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem see also Maps 1 and 2 above. Peregrinationes tres: Saewulf, John of Würzburg, Theodericus, ed. R.B.C. Huygens, Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Medievalis, 139, Turnhout, 1994, pp. 28, 131–35. The following description of the Order’s structure and international organization is based on. Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, pp. 281–404; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 227–373, and his article ‘The Origins of the Commandery in the Temple and the Hospital’, La Commanderie, institution des ordres militaires dans l’Occident médiéval , ed. A. Luttrell and L. Pressouyre, Paris, 2002, pp. 9–18.

8

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

campaigns. The hospitaller stood at the head of the hospital. From the beginning of the thirteenth century the turcopolier commanded the mercenaries. The high officers formed part of the convent, the headquarters of the Order, first in Jerusalem and, after 1192, in Acre. The master’s authority was not unlimited. His power was counterbalanced by the general chapter, an assembly summoned by him, which met only irregularly, and consisted of all the brothers from the central convent, all brothers-at-arms serving in the Holy Land, and the officers serving in Europe. This was the Order’s most important governing body. It legislated through statutes and regulations and advised the master on political and economic policies. It elected the master, and with his advice also elected all capitular bailiffs serving in the East and Europe. Still, although the master and the general chapter were the supreme authorities and important decisions were reserved to them, the Order developed a system by which the master’s authority was decentralized to provincial administrative units, which enjoyed a great degree of independence. The most basic unit in the Order’s provincial administration was the commandery. In a town it might be a hospice or a conventual house which included a chapel and some buildings. It could also be a small village and its dependent lands or just a group of lands conveniently close. The reasons for the establishment of a commandery varied, but it was usually the result of an original donation followed by further expansion of the Hospitallers in the district. Some commanderies, such as Avignon, developed into rich and important administrative centres, which had smaller houses attached to them. At the head of a commandery stood the commander (also named preceptor, prior, or master; to prevent confusion, throughout the book the term ‘commander’ is used for Hospitallers and ‘preceptor’ for Templars). The commander was responsible for a group of brothers who mainly consisted of the prior of the church, a hospitaller and an almoner, as well as servants, skilled workers, and laymen attached to the house as confratres or donats. All the brothers fulfilled administrative functions. They ran the commandery’s estates, collected taxes or rents, dealt with merchants, or brought agricultural products to the markets. Their economic activities were almost independent, because they managed their own budget and decided on financial transactions such as the purchase or alienation of property. Only from 1262 were they required to keep registers of their financial activities. Their main obligation was to pay the provincial priory (or castellany) the responsiones and additional taxes. A number of commanderies geographically close together formed a priory. This was the most important administrative unit in Europe, responsible for collecting and transmitting the responsiones to the East and for ensuring the prudent management of the Order’s estates. The priories’ size and wealth varied, but they usually encompassed extensive geographical areas. By the middle of the thirteenth century the Hospitallers had established the priories of St. Gilles, France, Auvergne, Messina, Barletta, Capua, Lombardy, Venice, Rome, Pisa, Amposta, Navarre, Castile and León, Portugal, England, Ireland, Germany, Bohemia, Hungary, and Morea. Because of his enormous importance in the Order’s administration each prior was appointed by the master and the general chapter and was answerable to them. He was required, if summoned, to travel to the East or to appear before the chapter and report there on the situation of his priory. As the master’s representative he had full

INTRODUCTION

9

power to intervene in legal disputes with lay and ecclesiastical lords and to impose discipline within his priory. He appointed the commanders and had visitation rights in their houses. In his administrative tasks he was assisted by a provincial chapter, which he had the right to summon once a year. This chapter was attended by his conventual brothers and all the commanders of the priory. It was to this that the commanders were to bring the responsiones. In theory the master and the general chapter could have exercised greater authority over the priors; but the irregularity of the meetings of the general chapter, the distance from the headquarters in the Holy Land, and the immense power and wealth placed in their hands meant that the priors enjoyed great freedom of action. There was a risk that their policies would oppose the interests of the master and the brothers in the East or might have adverse consequences for the economic future of the whole Order. This did indeed happen. To prevent it, the masters usually appointed to the post of prior experienced brothers, who had in the past held high office in the East and were aware of the Order’s needs there. Another way of overseeing the priories was by creating grand commanderies, larger administrative units, which conjoined temporarily more than one priory. The grand commanders were ad hoc officers, appointed by the master, who had complete authority over the priors. The grand commander of Outremer, for example, oversaw the priories of France, Belgium, and the north of Spain. However, at different times he also had authority over other priories in the Iberian peninsula, as well as the priories of England and Ireland. Because of his overall authority and his power of supervision over a vast geographical area, the grand commander theoretically could have centralized the Order’s activities in the West, by assembling a convened chapter of several priories, to implement, if necessary, changes in economic and political policies. None of the grand commanders who served in the thirteenth century did so. Equivalent in rank to the prior were the commander and the castellan in the East. Their administrative units were usually based in cities and castles from where the commanders or castellans managed their estates. Because of their geographical closeness to the convent it was not necessary to maintain a commandery-priory structure similar to the one that operated in Europe. Commanders and castellans in the East were capitular bailiffs appointed by the master and the general chapter. They were required to supply responsiones to the convent. The products of these houses and their income from rents and trade were an important component in the Order’s budget and were essential for the day-to-day support of its activities in the East. Not surprisingly, therefore, the master or some of his conventual officers were often involved in the financial transactions of these houses. Still, the commanderies in the East, like all Hospitaller houses in Europe, had their own independent budgets and took independent financial decisions. An example of this is the commanders of the ships, who were directly subject to the convent in the Holy Land; they probably remained financially dependent on it even though they also operated in Europe.33 Their activities and the Order’s inter-

33

Although the Order’s statutes have very few references to the commanders of the ships, the statutes of 1268 specify that except for capitular bailiffs, who were on their way to attend a general

10

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

national financial operations are illustrated by loans taken out in Marseilles to reinforce their fleet on the eve of the first crusade of Louis IX of France. In April 1248 William Odet, commander of the Hospitaller ship La Comtesse, borrowed 500 livres of Marseilles from merchants from Siena to repair and equip his vessel. The security on the loan was the ship itself and a promise not to sail until the money was reimbursed. Similar loans were taken the same year by the commanders of the Hospitaller ships Le Faucon and La Griffone. The loans were taken by the commanders of the ships, who were subject to the master in Acre. The prior of St. Gilles, who was responsible for the Hospitaller’s house in Marseilles, was apparently not involved in these transactions and his representatives only appear as witnesses to some of these agreements. Moreover, the fact that these loans were taken at the same time that the priory of St. Gilles had ready cash to invest to extend its property suggests a clear division of the Order’s finances and a departmental organization of its resources.34 The first of this book’s four chapters deals with the impact of crises, caused by defeat on the battlefield and natural disasters, on the Hospitallers in the East. It focuses on their efforts to restore the Order’s economic power and military forces, for which supplies and manpower were needed from their houses in Europe. In Chapter 2 the response of the Hospitallers in France to the Order’s needs in the East is set out, covering economic activities, mainly their attitude to land and property. The economic activities of some other priories are described to provide a more comprehensive picture of the Hospitallers’ international deployment. Relations between the Hospitallers and the Holy See are the subject of Chapter 3, where the role of the papacy in the Order’s rehabilitation in the East is elucidated. Chapter 4 sets out the results of the prosopographical research conducted on the members of the Order serving in both the Latin East and its French priories from 1187 to 1274.

chapter, all other brothers on the ship would be under the authority of the commander of the ship, who was appointed by the master. See Cart., no. 3317. 34 Cart., nos. 2466 bis, 2467 bis, 2481 bis. See also Documents inédits sur le commerce de Marseille au Moyen-Âge, ed. L. Blancard, vol. I, Marseilles, 1884, nos. 344–45, and J. Piquet, Des Banquiers au Moyen Âge. Les Templiers. Étude de leurs opérations financières , Paris, 1939, pp. 243–44. On the investments of the priory of St. Gilles see Chapter 2 below, pp. 82–83.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

1 The Hospitallers in the Holy Land, 1187–1274

THE HISTORY OF the Latin Kingdom from 1187 to 1274 is marked by a succession of calamities, which had a strong impact on the situation of the Order in the East. The battle of Hattin, on 4 July 1187, led to the contraction of the Latin settlement. After 1188 all that remained of the kingdom of Jerusalem was the city of Tyre, although the Third Crusade was to re-conquer the coast from Tyre to Jaffa, including the important city of Acre. The city of Tripoli, the Hospitaller fortress of Crac des Chevaliers, and the Templar castle of Tortosa were almost all that remained of the county of Tripoli. All the important port towns south of Tripoli, including Gibelet, Beirut, and Sidon, were lost. In the principality of Antioch, only the Hospitaller castle of Margat and the city of Antioch remained, with the land around it and along the coast.1 The collapse of the Latin settlement gravely damaged the economic basis of the Hospitallers in the Holy Land and their military disposition. In the years following Hattin the Order lost most of its castles, fortresses, and lands. Although there is no indication of the number of brothers killed during and after this battle, prosopographic research indicates that the Order may have suffered heavy losses. It will be shown elsewhere that after the battle the Order’s leadership disappeared and was replaced by new men, some from the East, who were promoted to higher ranks, and some transferred from Europe.2 With the fall of Jerusalem on 2 October the Hospitallers lost their headquarters, which were then re-established in Tyre, the only surviving city of the kingdom of Jerusalem. Those Hospitallers who survived regrouped there under the leadership of Borrell, the grand commander of Jerusalem, and from October 1187 under that of Armengaud of Asp, prior of St. Gilles, who was charged with the temporary administration of the Order.3 The presence of some of the Order’s most senior

1

2 3

On the battle of Hattin and Saladin’s campaigns of 1187–88 see J. Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, 2 vols., Jerusalem, 1963 (in Hebrew), vol. I, pp. 526–61, and Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 85–89. On the Third Crusade see J. Richard, The Crusades, c.1071–c.1291, trans. J. Birrell, Cambridge, 1999, pp. 216–37. See Chapter 4 below, p. 138. The Hospitallers sheltering in Tyre seem to have been preparing to flee farther north by sea to Lattakia, fearing perhaps that Tyre would suffer Acre’s fate. See ‘Magni presbyteri annales Rechespergenses’, MGH SS, XVII, pp. 508–9. Armengaud of Asp was castellan of Amposta from1180 until 1183. From 1184 he held both the castellany of Amposta and the priory of St.

12

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

European officers in the East, a year after the battle, attests to the rapid response of the Order, on an institutional level, to the catastrophe of Hattin. In October 1188, Archambaud, grand commander of Italy, Arlabaud, prior of Germany, and Martin, prior of Hungary and Bohemia, were in Tyre. Together with Armengaud, the temporary master, Borrell, the grand commander, and Lambert, the Order’s marshal, they confirmed the rule of the monastery of Sigena, in Aragon.4 This document indicates that together with shipments of supplies and manpower, senior officers hurried out to the East to replace the leadership that had disappeared. They formed a chapter, or a temporary governing body, which must have helped Armengaud, himself a temporary master, to administer and reorganize the Order after a year of terrible losses. It appears from the sources that this temporary leadership was replaced by a permanent one after the re-conquest of Acre in July 1191. Garnier of Nablus was elected master in late 1189 and went with King Richard I to the East. He, together with William of Villiers, commander or grand commander of Acre, and Robert, the Order’s treasurer, witnessed, a deed issued in Acre in February 1192.5 The presence of the master, his deputy, and the treasurer attests to the presence of the convent – the Order’s seat of government – in the city, that is, the establishment of the Order’s headquarters in Acre.6 This newly created convent had the extremely complex task of rehabilitating and expanding the Order’s devastated military power and economy in the Levant. This process consisted of enlarging the Hospitallers’ property in Acre to meet their growing needs following the establishment of their headquarters in the city. It also meant pursuing a policy of intensive investment in the Latin East. To accomplish these aims they had to redeploy their international resources; this required structural changes within the Order. Most of the resources sent from Europe in the years after Hattin were undoubtedly used to build the Order’s headquarters in Acre. Since 1110 the Hospitallers

Gilles. With the loss of the master Roger of Moulins at the battle of Sephoria (1 May 1187), Armengaud, who was the senior officer in the West, was charged with temporary administration of the Order. His presence in Tyre could intimate the presence of the Order’s headquarters in this city. For the presence of Borrell and Armengaud in Tyre see RRH, nos. 659, 665–67, 675, 677–78. For a very detailed account of Armengaud’s place of origin and career see A. Luttrell, ‘Ermengol de Aspa and Sigena’, Hospitaller Women in the Middle Ages, ed. A. Luttrell and H. Nicholson, Aldershot, forthcoming. On Sigena see L. García-Guijarro Ramos, ‘The Aragonese Hospitaller Monastery of Sigena: its Early Stages, 1188–ca.1210’, ibid. I am extremely grateful to Dr. Luttrell and Dr. Guijarro Ramos for allowing me to read their articles before publication. 4 Cart., no. 860; RRH, no. 677. For Martin, called here ‘prepositi’ as prior of Hungary and Bohemia at this time, see also J. Delaville Le Roulx, Les archives, la bibliothèque et le trésor de l’ordre de Saint Jean de Jérusalem à Malte, Paris, 1883, p. 221. 5 Cart., no. 919. William of Villiers is mentioned here as ‘Guillelmus de Meleriis, domus Acconensis bajulus’. For Garnier of Nablus see also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 107–8. On the conventual bailiffs see Introduction above, pp. 7–8. 6 For additional evidence of the presence of the master in Acre after 1192 see, e.g., RRH, nos. 699, 706. For the fact that the headquarters of the Military Orders were established in Acre after 1192 see also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 247, and Barber, The New Knighthood, p. 118.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

13

had owned property in Acre and a commandery in the northern part of the city.7 From Saladin’s advisor, Imâd ad-Dîn al-Işfahâni, we learn that the Order’s compound was not destroyed during the Muslim occupation of the city. It was converted into a theological college,8 where the Hospitallers chose to establish their headquarters after the city was recovered; since, with the loss of Jerusalem, Acre became the de facto capital of the kingdom of Jerusalem.9 The Order’s headquarters were the nerve centre of a large international organization. This was the base of the master and of some of the Order’s conventual bailiffs, and the centre of activity of the Order’s administrative departments. And it was to Acre that the Order’s houses worldwide were required to send responsiones, an annual payment of one third of the produce of their lands and specified goods. Their old commandery in the city was too small for these new functions. As evidence of this, in January 1193 the provincial chapter in the East, to which the master Geoffrey of Donjon summoned all Syrian castellans and commanders, was held in the castle of Margat and not in Acre; so was the general chapter summoned by the master Alfonso of Portugal in 1204. The general chapter was the Order’s most important governing body to which all the brothers from the central convent, all brothers-at-arms serving in the Holy Land, and the officers serving in Europe were called. Its buildings in Acre probably did not have the capacity for such a large number of people.10 The necessary extension and improvement of the Order’s headquarters were feasible owing to significant donations given to the Hospitallers in the years following the re-conquest of Acre. In 1192 Guy of Lusignan gave them a stretch of land to the north of their conventual buildings. Guy’s interest was to enlist the Order’s assistance in the rehabilitation of Acre, but also to gain their political support for his claim to the throne of Jerusalem, considering the good relations existing between King Richard and the newly appointed master of the Hospitallers, Garnier of Nablus, who had sailed with him from England.11 To satisfy Hospitallers’ growing needs on account of the estab7

8 9

10

11

Cart., nos. 20, 471, 663. For a detailed description of the Hospitallers’ expansion in Acre in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries see D. Jacoby, ‘Les communes italiens et les ordres militaires à Acre: aspects juridiques, territoriaux et militaires (1104–1187, 1191–1291)’, Trade, Commodities and Shipping in the Medieval Mediterranean, Aldershot, 1997, essay no. VI, pp. 200–204; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 247–49 and his article ‘Guy of Lusignan, the Hospitallers and the Gates of Acre’, Dei gesta per Francos. Etudes sur les croisades dédiées à Jean Richard, ed. M. Balard, B.Z. Kedar, and J. Riley-Smith, Aldershot, 2001, pp. 111–15. Imâd ad-Dîn al-Işfahâni, Conquête de la Syrie et de la Palestine par Saladin, trans. H. Massé, Paris, 1972, p. 84. For the growing political and economic importance of Acre from the 1180s see J. Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility and the Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1174–1277, London, 1973, p. 64, and D. Jacoby, ‘L’évolution urbaine et la fonction méditerranéenne d’Acre à l’époque des croisades’, Trade, Commodities and Shipping in the Medieval Mediterranean, essay no. V, pp. 98–106. Cart., nos. 941, 1193. On the general chapter see Introduction above, p. 8. By the end of the.thirteenth century a tradition had been established by which the master Alfonso of Portugal lost the Order’s magistracy because he summoned the chapter outside the kingdom of Jerusalem. This must have been only a pretext, because Garin of Montaigu summoned a general chapter in Tarsus in 1225 without suffering similar consequences. On this tradition see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 120. For Garin’s chapter see Chapter 2 below, p. 79. For Guy’s donation see Cart., no. 917. The view that Guy sought the Order’s political support was expressed by Prof. Riley-Smith in a paper delivered in Cambridge in December 1998. On the struggle for the throne of Jerusalem between Guy of Lusignan and Conrad of Monferrat

14

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

lishment of their headquarters in the city, Henry of Champagne granted them a wall and a gate in 1193 and 1194. These donations enlarged the Order’s compound next to the north wall of the city and allowed them to enlarge and improve their buildings.12 Although no written evidence has been found of this building activity, archaeological excavations conducted in the last few years have revealed its magnitude; the Order had extensively expanded the size of their old compound by adding large warehouses, new conventual buildings, as well as an advanced sewage system.13 The Order’s activities in Acre were facilitated by additional donations. In 1200 they received a cemetery from the bishop of Acre. A year later they expanded their property in the city through a donation of four shops, given by a Genoese who entered the Order as a confrater.14 These grants notwithstanding, charters given to, or by, the Order indicate, perhaps as one would expect, that its economic activities in the Latin East between 1187 and 1200 were very limited. There are only two purchases of land and property,15 and very few donations.16 But donations given to the Hospitallers after Hattin, of parts of the walls and towers of some of the most important cities in the Latin East, in the hope that they would rebuild and re-strengthen them, show that the Order was still regarded as a potentially wealthy power. Apart from the significant donations granted to them in Acre, they received two towers in Jaffa in 1194 and a gate in the walls of Tripoli in 1196.17 The economic resources that enabled the Hospitallers to assist in the defence of the Latin East lay in their estates in Europe, and they made great efforts to inform the West about the critical situation in the East.18 They sent a great many letters to their houses in Europe. Their message aimed to set the Order’s international organization in motion so as to ensure the prompt mobilization of manpower, supplies, foodstuffs, and money to the East. Immediately after the battle of Hattin, in August

12

13

14 15 16

17 18

see J. Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility and the Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1174–1277, London, 1973, pp. 112–20, and ‘The Crusading Heritage of Guy and Aimery of Lusignan’, Cyprus and the Crusades, ed. N. Coureas and J. Riley-Smith, Nicosia, 1995, pp. 40–41. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 112 for the relations between Richard and Garnier of Nablus. Cart., nos. 938, 972. For a discussion on the exact location of these donations and their significance.for the Order’s expansion in Acre see Riley-Smith, ‘Guy of Lusignan, the Hospitallers and the Gates of Acre’, pp. 111–15. Eliezer Stern, ‘The Center of the Order of Hospitalers in Acre’, Qadmoniot, 33 (2000), pp. 4–12 (in Hebrew); D. Pringle, ‘The Archaeology of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: A Review of Work 1947–97’, Journal of Medieval History, 23 (1997), pp. 393–94. Cart., nos. 1113, 1145. Cart., nos. 906, 1038. For Garnier of Nablus see also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 107–8. For donations see Cart., nos. 891, 917, 966, 1097, 1113, 1145, 1146. This last grant from 1201 indicates that the Hospitallers were involved in the redemption of Christian prisoners. See also Y. Friedman, Encounter between Enemies: Captivity and Ransom in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, Leiden, 2002, pp. 200–11. Cart., nos. 954, 990. The Order’s efforts were part of intensive correspondence sent by the survivors of Hattin to Europe. Patriarch Eraclius writes in a letter to Pope Urban III in September 1187 that many letters and envoys were sent to all the princes in the West urging them to succour the Holy Land without delay. This letter was published by B.Z. Kedar, ‘Ein Hilferuf aus Jerusalem von September 1187’, Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 38 (1982), pp. 120–22.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

15

1187, the officers of the Order in the East notified Archambaud, the grand commander of Italy, of the defeat. Their letter gave an alarming description of the situation. It stated that the number of Muslims besieging Tyre, Jerusalem, and Gaza was so large that these cities and their Christian populations would soon be extinct unless help arrived from the West.19 One may ask why such an urgent letter was sent to Italy, whose priories and commanderies were not the richest and had not been significant centres of recruitment in the twelfth century.20 But the grand commander of Italy, who was responsible for these priories, was the Hospitaller officer closest to the papal curia.21 It is not surprising that such an important political and diplomatic post was held by Archambaud, who in 1185 had been the grand commander of the Hospital in Jerusalem, the second most important officer after the master,22 and consequently a man who could judge the critical situation in the Holy Land. In November 1188 Armengaud of Asp, as temporary master in the East, informed Duke Leopold V of Austria, an enthusiastic crusader who was to take part in the Third Crusade,23 about the fall of the Order’s most important castles.24 Four years later, in April 1193, the new master Geoffrey of Donjon sent a general letter to the priories of the Hospital in Europe through William of Villiers, grand commander of Outremer. William of Villiers had been commander of Acre, which probably meant grand commander of the Order, in 1192, after the reoccupation of the city.25 He, like Archambaud, would have been well aware of the difficulties and needs of the Order in the East. In his letter Geoffrey reported the death of Saladin and wrote that although there was discord among Saladin’s heirs reconquering the land lost to the Muslims would not be easy; the situation in the East was so difficult that there had been an exodus of people from the Christian lands.26 One of the difficulties implied by Geoffrey was most likely the shortage of food caused by Saladin’s incursions and the devastation of the land. Moreover, lands remaining in Christian hands were also in difficult conditions. Sempad, constable of Armenia, described in his chronicle a severe famine in Antioch in 1192–93. As sufficient amounts of food could not be found locally, there was an urgent need to ferry it in from abroad.27 19 20 21

22

23 24 25

26 27

‘Magni presbyteri annales Rechespergenses’, MGH SS, XVII, pp. 508–09. On the priories of Italy see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 355–56. This task was fulfilled by the prior of Rome, but only from 1215. See Riley-Smith, The Knights ofSt. John, pp. 356, 369. On the prior of Rome and his relationship with the grand commander of Italy, see J. Delaville Le Roulx, ‘Liste des grands prieurs de Rome de l’Ordre de l’Hôpital de S. Jean de Jérusalem’, Mélanges de Rossi, supplement aux Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire publíés par l’École Française de Rome, 22 (1892), pp. 263–64. On the commander or grand commander of the Hospital see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 304–305. In 1185 Archambaud administered the Order during the absence of the master Roger of Moulins, who was in Europe, Cart., no. 754. H. Mayer, The Crusades, trans. J. Gillingham, Oxford, 1986, pp. 140–48. Cart., no. 863. Cart., no. 919; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 366. On William of Villiers see Burgtorf, ‘Führungsstrukturen und Funktionsträger in der Zentrale der Templer und Johanniter von den Anfängen bis zum frühen 14. Jahrhundert’, pp. 768–69. I am grateful to Dr. Burgtorf for sending me his findings regarding William of Villiers. On William’s future career see also below, Chapter 2 (p. 78) and Appendix. ‘manet fere penitus habitatoribus destituta’, Cart., no. 945. La Chronique attribuée au Connétable Smbat, ed. G. Dédéyan, Paris, 1980, p. 67. In a letter sent in

16

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

A letter sent at the beginning of 1201 by Geoffrey to the prior of England gives us an indication of the urgency of these appeals and the kind of resources that had been requested from the priories in the West. Geoffrey starts by describing the state of affairs in the East. Al-Adil, Saladin’s brother, had managed to impose his power over Egypt and Syria.28 He was only prevented from attacking the Holy Land by a severe drought in Egypt, which had caused famine and resulted in migration from Egypt to the Holy Land. Nevertheless, the Muslim forces were immense, while the small number of Christians and their state of poverty prevented them from defending themselves. The master had sent two delegations to England to ask for help, but the first had been lost at sea and the second had been forced to return to Tripoli, fearing a similar fate. He urged the prior to persuade the king of England, and whomever else he could, to support the Order in the East, which was in a critical state: war had devastated the Order’s estates in Sicily, on the supplies of which it was dependent, and also prevented the acquisition and transportation from there of corn, wine, meat, cheese, and other items needed for the houses and castles of the Order. Geoffrey emphasized that enormous expenses were incurred by the Hospitallers in the East, who were at risk of running into heavy debts if immediate help were not sent from their European houses. He concludes his letter by asking the prior for money to be sent on the Easter passage.29 Geoffrey’s letter is important evidence of the ways the Hospitallers deployed their international resources, and also of the difficulties faced by headquarters in doing so. Independent of the Order’s situation in the East, war, political conditions, or, as we have seen in other letters, natural disasters could prevent the shipment of supplies from the Order’s houses worldwide. This crucial assistance could also be delayed by problems of communication. Transmission of information from the East and the shipment of aid from Europe were generally restricted to the sailing seasons, between late March and late October. Not always did the many envoys and letters of appeal reach their targets. They might encounter many difficulties on the way, as happened to Geoffrey’s two delegations. But even if the sailing was uneventful, it would take more than two months to reach Europe.30 By the time the letters or envoys arrived and the Order’s priories worked out a response to these appeals and

1192, Pope Celestine III entreats the Venetians to assist in the shipment of foodstuffs to the Latin East. See Urkunden zur älteren Handels- und Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig mit besonderer Beziehung auf Byzanz und die Levante, ed. G.L. Tafel and G.M. Thomas, Vienna, 1856–57, vol. I, no. 75. 28 On al-Adil see Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 98–100; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 89–90. 29 Cart., no. 1131. From 1199 to 1203 papal forces fought in Sicily against Markward of Anweiler, the imperial representative in central Italy, who claimed the regency of Sicily after Henry VI’s death. See D. Abulafia, Frederick II: a Medieval Emperor, London, 2nd ed. 1992, pp. 94–102. 30 An average passage took more than two months to reach Europe and between four and six weeks to sail to the East. See J. Pryor, Geography, Technology and War: Studies in the Maritime History of the Mediterranean, 649–1571, Cambridge, 1988, pp. 3–4. For problems of communication between East and West and the delay in information transmission see S. Menache, ‘The Communication Challenge of the Early Crusades, 1099–1187’, Autour de la Première Croisade. Actes du Colloque de la Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East (Clermont-Ferrand, 22–25 juin 1995), ed. M. Balard, Paris, 1996, pp. 294–314.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

17

mobilized their resources, the situation in the East could deteriorate gravely, as was the case in 1202. In May 1202, a year after Geoffrey wrote his letter, the situation in the Holy Land became desperate. A great earthquake devastated fortifications and many houses and buildings in the main Christian cities of Acre, Tyre, and Tripoli. Castles that had remained in Christian hands after Hattin, primarily the Hospitallers’ fortresses of Crac des Chevaliers in the county of Tripoli and the castle of Margat in the principality of Antioch, were badly damaged. The Christian population suffered heavy casualties. A plague, which broke out after the earthquake and was aggravated by a severe shortage of food, killed one third of the survivors.31 The priories in the West must have been asked to send substantial amounts of money to the Holy Land apart from their annual responsiones, as a few years later extensive repairs were undertaken in the castles of Crac des Chevaliers and Margat. At Crac des Chevaliers a new enceinte was built, encircling the earlier outer wall, and the inner castle was repaired.32 Margat was fortified with a double wall and additional towers.33 In 1212 the pilgrim Wilbrand of Oldenburg described Margat as a large and strong castle defended by a double wall and many towers. It was supplied by its dependent lands with 500 cartloads of wheat a year, which fed 1,000 people in times of peace. Although he could not visit Crac, he wrote that it was defended by 2,000 warriors.34 The building activity in which the Hospitallers were involved at the beginning of the thirteenth century was remarkable. They built new headquarters in Acre, restored and rebuilt their castles of Crac des Chevaliers and Margat, and from 1210 they fortified Selefkie, on the western border of Cilician Armenia. The town of Selefkie and the castles of Goumardias (Camardias) and Norpert (Castellum Novum) were granted to them in April 1210 by King Leon II of Armenia, who intended the Hospitallers to defend the western frontier of his kingdom against the Seljuks. The reasons for granting Selefkie to the Hospitallers, according to a letter sent by Leon II to Innocent III, were clearly military. He needed their help to defend the kingdom against an ‘infinite number of the Pagans’.35 To arouse their

31

32 33 34

35

The earthquake of 1202 was described in two letters sent by the master of the Hospital to King Sancho VII of Navarre, and by the master of the Temple to the abbot of Cîteaux. They were published by H. Mayer, ‘Two Unpublished Letters on the Syrian Earthquake of 1202’, Kreuzzügeund lateinischer Osten, London, 1983, essay no. X, pp. 295–310. The letter to King Sancho was also published in El gran priorado de Navarra de la Orden de San Juan de Jerusalén, ed. S.A. Garcìa Larrageta, Pamplona, 1957, vol. II, no. 85, where it was wrongly dated to c.1196. P. Deschamps, Les châteaux des croisés en Terre Sainte, Paris, 1934, vol. I (Le Crac des Chevaliers), pp. 279–83. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 194. Although Willbrand was impressed by the Order’s fortifications, he also gave a very grim description of the situation of the kingdom of Jerusalem. He found many of its cities, such as Arsur, Jaffa, and Ramla, destroyed and desolated. Willbrand of Oldenburg, ‘Itinerarium Terrae Sanctae’, Peregrinatores medii aevi quatuor, ed. J.C.M. Laurent, Leipzig, 1864, pp. 169–70, 183–85. Cart., nos. 1344, 1350–51; C. Cahen, La Syrie du Nord à l’époque des croisades et la principauté franque d’Antioche (Institut français de Damas. Bibliothèque orientale, I), Paris, 1940, pp. 614–15; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 132; A. Luttrell, ‘The Hospitallers’ Interventions in Cilician Armenia: 1291–1375’, The Cilician Kingdom of Armenia, ed. T.S.R. Boase, Edinburgh and

18

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

interest in this area, the Hospitallers were also promised territory which was still in Turkish hands. In August 1210 Leon confirmed the donation made by Raymond Roupen of rights over the town of Karama (Laranda), to the north of Selefkie. This donation was given together with rights to conduct in Karama an independent policy with the Muslims, which would have to be honoured by the rulers of Armenia.36 Although the grant of Selefkie did not include this right, which would have made the Hospitallers independent rulers in all the western marches of Armenia, they seem to have attributed great importance to these new acquisitions. Their strategic location and possible revenues, as well as potential income from other donations given to them by the Armenian rulers, would have made these lands a very valuable asset.37 The Hospitallers set out to strengthen Selefkie, as its fortifications, carried out by Alexius Comnenus around 1099, seem not to have been suitable to withstand Seljuk attacks.38 Although no written evidence has been found on their building activity, archaeological evidence led scholars to conclude that during the time it was in their hands, between 1210 and 1226, the Hospitallers rebuilt the castle completely.39 Selefkie became an important castellany and the Order’s administrative centre in Cilician Armenia. The commandery over Selefkie seems to have become a springboard for a future career in the Order. Aimery of Pax, the first castellan of Selefkie, was an experienced brother, who had previously been commander in the castellany of Amposta and castellan of Margat. After being castellan of Selefkie he was appointed grand commander of Outremer. Ferrand of Barras, who was castellan of Selefkie in 1214, was subsequently appointed to a wide range of high offices in the East and in Europe: he was the marshal of the Order in Acre, prior of St. Gilles, and grand commander of Outremer.40 The Hospitallers seem to have met Leon’s expectations of defending his western border. In 1216, only six years after receiving the castle, they withstood a Seljuk attack on Selefkie.41 Although we have no evidence for the cost, the building activity accomplished by the Hospitallers in the East, from the beginning of the thirteenth century, must have

36 37 38

39

40 41

London, 1978, p. 119. On internal political reasons for granting Selefkie to the Hospitallers see K. Molin, Unknown Crusader Castles, Hambledon and London, 2001, pp. 170–71, 179–80. Cart., no. 1349. For similar donations in Tripoli and Antioch see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 55–57. For the economic importance of these donations see below, pp. 48–51. The Alexiad of the Princess Anna Comnena, trans. E.A.A. Dawes, London, 1967, pp. 294–95. For building activity in Asia Minor at the time of Alexius I Comnenus see also C. Foss, ‘The Defenses of Asia Minor against the Turks’, Cities, Fortresses and Villages of Byzantine Asia Minor, Aldershot, 1996, essay no. V, pp. 157–59. Edwards, for example, based this assumption on the fact that many architectonic features in the castle of Selefkie, such as broad windows in the towers or large undercrofts, are atypical of Armenian castle architecture, and very similar to the masonry of Crac des Chevaliers and other Hospitaller castles. A different opinion is expressed by Kennedy, who claims that Armenian traditions of building, such as round towers, influenced Frankish military architecture in the thirteenth century. See R.W. Edwards, The Fortifications of Cilician Armenia, Washington, 1987, pp. 31–32, 224–29; H. Kennedy, Crusaders’ Castles, Cambridge, 1994, pp. 114–15 and Molin, Unknown Crusader Castles, p. 179. On Aimery of Pax and Ferrand of Barras see Appendix below. See also Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers, p. 141, and Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 370. Constable Sempad, ‘Chronique du Royaume de la Petite Arménie par le connétable Sempad’, RHC Arm., vol. I, p. 645.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

19

incurred enormous expense. The hunger for cash led to an intensified propaganda campaign, with many letters and embassies being sent to the papal curia and the courts of Europe.42 In two letters sent by Geoffrey of Donjon to King Sancho VII of Navarre, the master implored the king for help because of the chaotic situation in the Holy Land, caused by both an earthquake and the Muslim threat. The king must have responded to these appeals because in a third letter the master praised him for his help and urged him to continue to protect the Order.43 In September 1207 the German ruler Philip of Swabia wrote to the churchmen and nobles of the empire that he had imposed a special tax ad conservationem Terrae Sanctae. He explained that envoys from the patriarch of Jerusalem and the masters of the Hospitallers and the Templars had come to his court. They had laid bare the distress of the Holy Land tam viva voce quam scripto, saying that unless help was sent urgently to the East from all over the Christian world it would be impossible to re-conquer the land from the Muslims.44 In September 1222 King Philip II of France bequeathed 2,000 marks to the Hospitallers and the Templars, together with a further sum of 150,000 marks, so that the Military Orders and the king of Jerusalem could maintain 300 additional knights for the period of three years.45 The Hospitallers’ need for cash may also have been aggravated by their desire to restore their economic power in the Holy Land and to recover agricultural land. It will be shown below that from the beginning of the thirteenth century they acquired land and property by purchases and as securities for loans throughout the territory still remaining in Christian hands. Many of the places that the Order acquired during this period had sugar-cane plantations, which may suggest that the Hospitallers were involved in its industrial production.46 The sugar industry, like any other form of farming in the Latin East, was affected by the shrinking of Christian territory, by natural disasters such as earthquakes, plagues and drought, and by Muslim raids. Despite the Hospitallers’ great efforts to exploit their lands, the shortages of food were causes of continual anxiety for the Christian population and the Military Orders in the East.47 The region became still less able to provide sufficient provisions with the arrival of new crusaders. On the eve of the Fifth Crusade, in the autumn of 1217, the inhabitants of Acre, fearing they would not be able to feed the arriving crusaders, encouraged them to return home. Some sources report that many indeed did so, and even claim that as many as sixty-six ships sailed back to Europe.48 Although this number seems exaggerated, it shows the logistical problems faced by the Latin settlers. This was emphasized in a letter sent at the same time by 42

43 44 45 46 47 48

For letters sent to the curia see, for example, Die Register Innocenz’ III, ed. O. Hageneder, W. Maleczek and A. Strnad, Rome and Vienna, 1979, vol. II, nos. 180, 258, and Chapter 3 below, p. 107. Mayer, ‘Two Unpublished Letters on the Syrian Earthquake of 1202’, pp. 306–08; El gran priorado de Navarra, vol. II, nos. 85, 86, 87. ‘Philippi curia Quedlinburgensis’, MGH Legum, II, pp. 213–14. Layettes du Trésor des Chartes, ed. J.B.A.T. Teulet, Paris, 1863, vol. I, nos. 1546–47. For these investments and the Order’s involvement in the sugar industry see below, pp. 52–54. See above, note 27. For the exploitation of Hospitallers’ lands and property in the Latin East see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 423–50. ‘Annales Ceccanenses’, MGH SS, XIX, p. 302.

20

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

William of Chartres, the master of the Temple, to Pope Honorius III. He wrote that the crop harvested was far less than had been expected. In response Honorius urged crusaders leaving for the Holy Land to take their own provisions and horses.49 During the siege of Damietta in 1218 the crusaders, including the masters of the Military Orders, often complained to the West about the lack of provisions and money. The Military Orders, each maintaining 2,000 men and 700 knights at the siege, must have incurred enormous expenses.50 Marshall believes that many of the 2,500 crossbowmen who fought in this crusade as mercenaries must have been employed by the Military Orders, which also spent huge amounts on providing war machines for the campaign.51 In a letter addressed to the pope the Christian leaders in Damietta complained about their expenses in supplying war machines, ships, and other military equipment.52 In another letter sent in 1221 by the master of the Templars to the bishop of Elne after the capture of Damietta, he wrote that the expenses of the Order were so great that without help they would not be able to continue the crusade.53 Although the evidence for the number of casualties suffered by the Hospitallers in this campaign is imprecise, they paid a heavy price in human lives: in a letter to Honorius III, James of Vitry wrote that the Hospitallers and the Templars had lost 200 brother-knights during the siege of Damietta. After the conquest of the city the Christians raided the coastal town of Burlus. Although they took a great quantity of booty, the Hospitallers suffered more casualties, including their marshal Aymar of Layron.54 The treaty with Egypt, agreed by Frederick II in February 1229, brought ten years of peace to the kingdom of Jerusalem, although the kingdom was divided by the civil war between the Emperor’s representatives and many of the Frankish nobles.55 In the 1230s the freedom of the Latin settlement from any obvious external threat might have been the reason for a decrease in the number of letters of appeal. During this period, both the Hospitallers and the Templars conducted only limited military expeditions, chevauchées, in the north, mostly to enforce tribute.56

49 50 51 52 53

Vat. Reg., 9, ann. 2, epist. 739, fol. 177. Cart., no. 1633. C. Marshall, Warfare in the Latin East, 1192–1291, Cambridge, 1992, p. 58. Reg. Honorius III, no. 1634. Matthew Paris, Chronica Maiora, ed. H.R. Luard, Rolls Series 57, London, 1875, vol. III, pp. 64–65. 54 Lettres de Jacques de Vitry, 1160/1170–1240, ed. R.B.C. Huygens, Leiden, 1960, p. 121, n. 5. For the losses in Burlus see ‘Gesta crucigerorum Rhenanorum’, Quinti belli sacri scriptores minores, ed. R. Röhricht, Geneva, 1879, pp. 51–52, and ‘Gesta obsidionis Damiate’, ibid., p. 102. For Aymar of Layron see also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 315. For Templar losses see M.L. Bulst-Thiele, Sacrae Domus Militiae Templi Hierosolymitani Magistri: Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Templerordens 1118/9–1314, Göttingen, 1974, pp. 171–78. 55 For the civil war see Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility, pp. 198–207; Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 243–44. I have briefly dealt with the participation of the Military Orders during this conflict in Chapter 3 below, pp. 112–13. 56 Deschamps, Châteaux des croisés, vol. I (Le Crac des Chevaliers), pp. 125–32; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 136–40; Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 137–38; B. Major, ‘Al-Malik Al-Mujahid, Ruler of Homs, and the Hospitallers (The Evidence in the Chronicle of Ibn Wasil)’, The Crusades and the Military Orders: Expanding the Frontiers of Medieval Latin Christianity, ed. Z. Hunyadi and J. Laszlovszky, Budapest, 2001, pp. 63–67.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

21

Still, the letters of appeal that were sent to the West describe the unstable situation of the Latin settlers and the Order in the East. In a letter from Guerin, the master of the Hospital, to Ralph of Neville, bishop of Chichester, he writes that the small number of Christians inhabiting the Holy Land were exposed to peril and ruin owing to the war between the imperialists and the barons and the Muslims’ desire to weaken the Christians in every possible way, for instance, by disturbing the commerce of the Holy Land.57 He urged the bishop to protect and support the Hospitallers and their property in his diocese. Ralph of Neville was also the chancellor and close adviser of Henry III, Guerin presumably saw in him a good promoter of the Order as the Neville family was involved in the crusading movement: Hugh of Neville, Ralph’s uncle and protector, had gone on crusade with King Richard I in 1190, and Hugh’s grandson, John, was to accompany Richard of Cornwall on his crusade of 1240–42.58 The precarious situation of the Latin East regarding manpower is demonstrated by the western response to the losses in the siege of Darbsak in 1237, where the Templars lost 100 out of 120 knights and 300 crossbowmen.59 This defeat generated an immediate mobilization of both the Templars and the Hospitallers in Europe. After the news reached England, Thierry, the Hospitaller prior there, together with his brothers and lay associates, designated a large amount of money to assist the Holy Land, and thirty brothers left for the East from Clerkenwell, the Hospitallers’ headquarters just outside London. The Hospital does not seem to have been involved at Darbsak,60 but its reaction shows how the Orders cooperated in times of crisis, given their mutual commitment to defend the Holy Land. Letters about the defeat at Darbsak were probably sent to the West because King Henry III of England granted the Templars 500 marks as part of the money needed to ransom their prisoners.61 Several papal letters were sent after the defeat to Christian leaders in the East, including the masters of the Military Orders, to promote the cause of prisoners.62 After Frederick’s treaty with Egypt expired in 1239, the Latin settlement was divided over the strategic policy to be adopted. The Templars and most of the nobles supported an agreement made in 1240 by Theobald IV, count of Champagne and king of Navarre, with Sultan Ismail, ruler of Damascus, against Egypt. 57

58 59 60 61 62

The date given to this letter is the magistracy of Guerin: 1 May 1231 – May 1236. Cart., no. 1982 bis. On the disturbance of trade it says, ‘victualia nobis venalia subtrahendo’. Irwin maintains that from the 1230s there was a shift of Near Eastern trade routes, and therefore in the commercial activities of the Latins in the Levant, caused by the advance of the Mongol armies. See R. Irwin, ‘The Supply of Money and the Direction of Trade in Thirteenth Century Syria’, Coinage in the Latin East: The Fourth Oxford Symposium on Coinage and Monetary History, ed. P.W. Edbury and D.M. Metcalf (British Archaeological Reports, series 77), Oxford, 1980, p. 73. Dictionary of National Biography, ed. S. Lee and L. Stephen, London, 1895–1900, vol. XL, pp. 270–71. The castle of Darbsak was located in Cilicia-Armenia. For the castle and the Templars’ defeat see Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 120, 232. Matthew Paris, vol. III, pp. 404–05; Abu’l Fida, ‘Annales’, RHC Or., vol. I, p. 112. While Matthew Paris said that it was a Templar attack, Abu’l Fida speaks about the Franks. S. Lloyd, English Society and the Crusade, 1216–1307, Oxford, 1988, p. 28; Barber, The New Knighthood, p. 367, no. 18. Cart., no. 2179; Reg. Grégoire IX, no. 3991.

22

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

The Hospitallers sided with Richard of Cornwall, who, in February 1241, renewed Frederick’s treaty with Egypt. In 1243, however, a new treaty with Damascus invalidated Richard’s agreement.63 These treaties allowed the Latins to enlarge the frontiers of the kingdom of Jerusalem. According to the treaties with Damascus, they regained Beaufort and the hinterland of Sidon, most of Galilee, including Tiberias and Safad, and the lands west of the Jordan, except for Hebron, Nablus, and Bethsan.64 By the terms of Richard’s treaty, Jerusalem and the road from Jaffa to Jerusalem remained Christian, and the Latins regained the area from Jaffa to Ascalon, where Richard rebuilt the castle, and Bethgibelin.65 Bethgibelin had belonged to the Hospitallers since 1136, and Ascalon was given to them in 1243.66 Although there is no evidence of re-population of Bethgibelin, they did repair Ascalon’s fortifications in 1244.67 With the refortification of castles and fortresses, the Latins, and the Military Orders in particular, hoped to re-establish their rule in these districts and to secure these new borders. Owing to its strategic importance, the Templars began to rebuild Safad almost immediately after the treaty with Damascus was concluded. A sum of 1,100,000 Saracen besants, over and above the Templars’ income from Safad’s dependent lands, were needed for the cost of the first two years of building, and thereafter 40,000 besants annually. In addition, substantial funds were needed for the purchase of barley and grain, horses and arms, and the payment of mercenaries and employees, as Safad held 1,700 men in times of peace and 2,200 in times of war.68 Prutz estimated that the total annual income of the Templars in the 1250s was about three million besants, which means that one third of their annual income was spent on this castle.69 The description of the cost of the refortification of Safad suggests the enormous expenses required from the Military Orders to maintain their positions in the East. These expenses also meant that a greater burden was placed on their priories overseas. In 1243 the Templar master, Armand of Perigord, asked Robert of Sandford, preceptor of the Templars in England, to help towards the building of a new castle north of the Templar castle of Toron of the Knights, near the road from Jaffa to Jerusalem,

63 64 65 66 67

68 69

These events have been thoroughly studied by modern historians. See Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 243–252, and Riley-Smith, Feudal Nobility, pp. 207–13. Matthew Paris, vol. IV, pp. 64–65; on the crusade of Theobald IV see Mayer, The Crusades, pp. 256–58. For the terms of the treaty of 1243 see Matthew Paris, vol. IV, pp. 288–91. Matthew Paris, vol. IV, pp. 142–44; Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 271–73. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 52, 133. See also below, pp. 29–30. Cart., nos. 2301, 2320. As we shall see below, the Hospitallers re-fortified Ascalon and received compensation for it. For an archaeological survey of Bethgibelin see A. Kloner and M. Cohen, ‘The Crusader Fortress of Beth Guvrin’, Qadmoniot, 119 (2000), pp. 32–39 (in Hebrew). For Ascalon see D. Pringle, Secular Buildings in the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: An Archaeological Gazetteer, Cambridge, 1997, p. 21. R.B.C. Huygens, ‘Un nouveau texte du traité “De constructione castri Saphet” ’, Studi Medievali, ser. 3, 6 (1965), p. 384; Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 164–66. H. Prutz, ‘Die finanziellen Operationen der Hospitaller’, Sitzungsberichte der philosophischhistorischen Klasse der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Munich, 1906, p. 29. The huge scale of these expenses can be appreciated by comparison with the money-fief of one knight, around 300–500 besants a year. Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility, p. 10.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

23

hoping that by making this effort ‘it would be easier to keep and defend the land for ever’.70 These territorial gains were soon lost. In response to the violation of the treaty, the sultan of Egypt renewed an alliance with the Khorezmians. A letter sent by the Christian leaders in the East, including the masters of the Military Orders, to Pope Innocent IV, describes how in July 1244 the Khorezmians sacked Jerusalem, killing most of the population, including William of Senlis, grand commander of the Hospital. Throughout the kingdom there were too few knights and pilgrims, and these were scattered and occupied in defending its castles, and therefore unable to save Jerusalem. The letter ended by urging the pope to succour the Holy Land and to exhort kings and princes to do the same.71 A letter sent in 1244 by William of Châteauneuf, master of the Hospitallers, to a certain knight called Brito in Marseilles, revealed that there was then a severe shortage of food. He explained that due to the lamentable state of the Holy Land there was a lack of corn, which was too expensive, and he asked Brito to use his influence with the municipality of Marseilles to get permission to buy corn and export it to the East.72 On 17 October 1244 the Khorezmians and the Egyptians crushed the FrancoDamascene forces in the battle of La Forbie (Harbiyah) near Gaza. The defeat of La Forbie has been compared to Hattin.73 The armies of the kingdom, in particular those of the Military Orders, were destroyed. Two hundred Hospitaller knights were killed, and William of Châteauneuf was captured, together with thirty brothers.74 Considering that the total number of brothers-at-arms in the kingdom of Jerusalem was probably about 300 men,75 this constituted the almost complete annihilation of the Hospital’s conventual manpower, and necessitated the immediate mobilization of men from their European provinces.76 Following the battle the Khorezmians raided the kingdom without interference, and between 1244 and 1247 great territorial losses were sustained, including Tiberias, Mt. Thabor, and Ascalon.77 Immediately after the battle, letters and envoys were sent to the West, again describing the 70 71 72

73 74

75 76 77

Matthew Paris, vol. IV, pp. 288–91 (for Toron see p. 290). Chronica de Mailros, ed. J. Stevenson, Edinburgh, 1835, pp. 156–63. Cart., no. 2322. This letter follows a previous agreement of 1233 with the municipality of Marseilles, which limited the number of Hospitallers’ ships that were allowed to sail from this port. See, Cart., no. 2067 and Chapter 2 below, pp. 74–75. Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, p. 300. Letters sent to the West immediately after the battle reported that the much larger number of 325 knights were killed. See, for example, a letter sent by the patriarch of Jerusalem to the Christian world in the aftermath of La Forbie, in Salimbene de Adam, ‘Cronica’, MGH SS, XXXII, p. 177. However, Riley-Smith, after comparing the different sources, estimates that the Hospitallers lost about 200 knights at La Forbie. See Ibn al-Furat, p. 173, n. 2 to page 5. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 124, 327. See Chapter 4 below, pp. 138–39. See the letter from the Christian leaders in the East to the prelates in the kingdoms of France and England immediately after the defeat, Matthew Paris, vol. IV, pp. 337–44, and one sent by William of Châteauneuf to M. de Merlay (dated after 1250 because William was in an Egyptian prison until then). Matthew Paris, vol. IV, pp. 307–11. Although Prawer gives a description of the territorial losses suffered by the Latins between 1244 and 1247, the evidence in the sources is not so conclusive. See Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 300–2. John of Joinville, for example, who gave a very confused description of the battle and the losses suffered by the Christians, wrote that the Khorezmians took Tiberias, and destroyed

24

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

critical situation of the Latin settlement and begging for help. Robert, patriarch of Jerusalem, one of the few survivors of the battle of La Forbie, notified the Christian world about the loss of Jerusalem and the terrible casualties there.78 In November 1244, less than a month after the battle, Bishop Waleran of Beirut and Arnulf, a Dominican brother, were sent to the West carrying letters from the Christian leaders in the East to the prelates of France and England. Their mission was so urgent that they set out for Europe in November, exposing themselves to great danger by sailing out of season. Their journey took six months and they reached Venice only in May 1245. The letters, which were read out at the Council of Lyons and later sent to the courts of Louis IX of France and Henry III of England, describe the fall of Jerusalem, the sacrilege committed against the Holy places, and the defeat of La Forbie. They emphasize the urgent need for manpower and weapons, for which the survivors of La Forbie had already sent letters and envoys to the king of Cyprus and the prince of Antioch, without receiving any response. They implored the prelates, as faithful vassals of Christ, to give consilium and auxilium to the Holy Land and to send supplies on the next March passage.79 Apart from joint appeals, the Hospitallers apparently made great efforts to transmit the news to Europe independently. From a letter of 1244–45, quoted in the Chronicle of Melrose, we learn that another letter, carrying the terrible news about La Forbie and ‘written not in ink but in blood’, reached a Hospitaller prior, probably Andrew Poliner, prior of France, who brought it to Louis IX.80 Andrew Poliner was also sent by the master William of Chateauneuf to seek help from Theobald of Navarre-Champagne.81 This could be explained by the great interest that Theobald had shown in the Holy Land,82 but it might also have been part of a general approach to European leaders. Andrew’s high position in the Order and his knowledge and experience in the affairs of the Holy Land, as grand commander in Acre in 1235,83 would have made him the best candidate for this task. The restoration of Hospitaller manpower after La Forbie must have been extremely rapid as it made possible the Order’s participation in the Egyptian crusade of Louis IX, only four years later. Although I have not found clear evidence on the number of Hospitallers who took part in this crusade, they, the Templars, and the Latin settlers supplied 700 knights all together. These helped the French

78 79

80 81 82 83

the surroundings of Atlit, Acre, Safad, and Jaffa. See John of Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. J. Monfrin, Paris, 1995, chs. 528–29. Salimbene de Adam, ‘Cronica’, p. 177. These letters do not mention the Hospitallers among the Christian leaders, probably because of the loss of their master. See Matthew Paris, vol. IV, pp. 337–45, 431. In the Annales of Burton there is a similar letter addressed by the patriarch of Jerusalem to the pope. It is not clear, however, whether it was brought by Waleran or by a previous envoy. ‘Annales Monasterii de Burton 1004–1263’, ed. H.R. Luard, Annales Monastici, vol. I, Rolls Series 36, London, 1864, pp. 257–63. Lloyd believes that this is an earlier letter brought to the curia by two Franciscan brothers. See Lloyd, English Society and the Crusade, p. 30, n. 92. For sailing seasons and problems of communication between East and West see above, p. 16. Chronica de Mailros, p. 163. El gran priorado de Navarra, vol. II, no. 304. The date given to this letter falls in the magistracy of William of Châteauneuf, 1243–1258. See Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 176–77. For Andrew as grand commander of the Order in Acre see Cart., no. 2126.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

25

army take Damietta on 6 June 1249.84 Part of the Hospitaller forces were left to guard the city, while, in November 1249, their main contingent, led by John of Ronay the lieutenant master,85 advanced with Louis’ army towards Cairo.86 It seems that at least some of their forces took part in the attack on al-Mansurah on 8 February, as Matthew Paris counted one Hospitaller among the survivors of this attack. According to Joinville, it was John of Ronay who told the king of the death of his brother the Count of Artois in the battle.87 The Templars lost 280 men at al-Mansurah. Although it is not clear how many in the Templars’ force were brothers,88 the number is important as it gives an indication of the size of the forces the Military Orders were expected to supply for these campaigns. As Riley-Smith points out, it is not surprising that the Military Orders were reluctant to initiate a new crusade, and advised Louis IX to negotiate a peace with Aleppo or Egypt.89 The disastrous attack on al-Mansurah was followed by an Egyptian onslaught on 11 February, in which William of Sonnac, the master of the Templars, and John of Ronay lost their lives. The slaughter of members of the Military Orders continued during the retreat of the Christian forces to Damietta. Apparently the Hospitaller’s drapier and all the remaining brothers were killed, except for five who were taken into captivity.90 These casualties must have been a disaster for institutions which only five years before had lost most of their conventual forces in the Holy Land. Louis’ crusade reveals the relentless pressure on them and underlines their need to undertake huge and complex efforts to restore their forces and rebuild their defences in the Holy Land, while at the same time supplying resources and manpower for any campaign. Despite the disastrous results of St. Louis’ crusade, the seizure of power by the Mamluks in Egypt in May 1250 and their conflict with the Ayyubids in Damascus seem to have given the Latin settlement a ray of hope. In a letter sent by Innocent IV to King Henry III of England, the pope urges the king to succour the Franks, as war between the Mamluks and the Ayyubids had made possible the recovery of the Holy Land.91 After his return to Acre William of Châteauneuf sent two letters to

84 85 86 87 88 89

90

91

John of Beaumont, ‘Lettre à Geoffroi de la Chapelle sur la prise de Damiette’, AOL, vol. I, pp. 389–90. John of Ronay acted as head of the Order after William of Châteauneuf was captured in the battle of La Forbie. See Cart., no. 2353, where he is called ‘vices magistri gerentis’. Matthew Paris, vol. VI, p. 192. Matthew Paris, vol. V, p. 154; John of Joinville, ch. 244. Riley-Smith estimates that the Templars’ losses included brothers as well as mercenaries. See Ibn al-Furat, p. 183, n. 6 to page 22. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 182. For the letters sent by the masters of the Military Orders to Louis IX see Odo of Châteauroux, Spicilegium sive collectio veterum aliquot scriptorum, ed. L. d’Achèry and L.F.J. de la Barre, Paris, 1723, vol. III, p. 625. Matthew Paris, vol. VI, pp. 196–97; Hospitaller forces, however, had been left in Damietta and must have returned to Acre with Louis and the remnants of the army. On the capture of Louis and the truce with Egypt see Richard, The Crusades, pp. 343–50. ‘Annales Monasterii de Burton’, pp. 293–95. Another letter on this matter was sent in 1251 by the patriarch of Jerusalem to the queen of France: see ‘Annales Monasterii de Burton’, p. 296. On the Mamluk-Ayyubid conflict see Matthew Paris, vol. V, p. 257; Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 327–34.

26

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

Walter of St. Martin, probably a Dominican preaching the cross in England.92 They described the release of the king, William himself, and other Christians from Egyptian imprisonment. They also gave an account of the conflict between Egypt, Damascus, and Aleppo, emphasizing that with European support the Latins would be able to stop the enemy and reverse the course of events in the Holy Land. Walter had been in the East and was close to the Hospitallers. As the only reason for this intensive correspondence with him seems to have been his personal interest in the Order, Lloyd believes that these letters must be only a small part of a rich correspondence dispatched by the Order after 1250.93 The Egyptian-Syrian conflict gave Louis the relative peace needed to restore the kingdom’s defences. From 1250 until his return to France in April 1254 the king, encouraged by the Military Orders, re-fortified the main Christian cities of Acre, Caesarea, Jaffa, and Sidon.94 On April 1252 he agreed to a fifteen years’ truce with Egypt, according to which Christian captives would be released and a FrancoEgyptian attack would be launched against Damascus. Joseph of Chauncy, the Hospitaller treasurer in Acre, however, did not have much faith in the agreement. In May 1252 he wrote to Walter of St. Martin that although a truce had been agreed with Egypt, the situation of the Latin settlement had never been so critical. The Egyptian army, which was supposed to join the Christians in Gaza, had never appeared and Gaza had been taken by the Ayyubids. At the same time Turcomans had raided the principality of Antioch and the surroundings of Crac and Tripoli, where the Christians had suffered grave losses in manpower and property.95 The validity of the Franco-Egyptian truce was in fact nullified because of the treaty between Egypt and Damascus signed in April 1253, after which the Christians were subjected to raids into the heart of their territory. Ayyubid forces retreating from Gaza pillaged the surroundings of Acre, destroying the mills of the Military Orders at Doc and Recordane, although the mills must have been rebuilt quickly as the Orders contended for their rights over them until 1262.96 From Acre the Ayyubids moved north, raiding the city of Sidon and killing more than 2,000 men.97 The inability of the small Christian settlement to withstand either the Mamluks or the Ayyubids after the return of Louis IX to France was expressed in a letter sent by its leaders to King Henry III of England, who had taken the cross in March 1250. Two mendicant brothers were also sent to his court to explain the severe situation and to

92 93

94

95 96 97

For Walter of St. Martin see Lloyd, English Society and the Crusade, p. 27, n. 83; C. Maier, Preaching the Crusades: The Mendicant Friars and the Cross in the Thirteenth Century, Cambridge, 1994, p. 31. For the Hospitallers’ letters see Cart., nos. 2540–41, and Matthew Paris, vol. VI, pp. 203–05; Lloyd, English Society and the Crusade, p. 27 and Appendix I; C. Humphrey-Smith, Hugh Revel, Master of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem,1258–77, Guildford, 1994, p. 61. On the refortification of Acre see ‘Eracles’, p. 438. For Caesarea, John of Joinville, ch. 470; Matthew Paris, vol. V, pp. 257, 306–07. On Jaffa and Sidon see John of Joinville, chs. 561–63, 588, 615–16. See also Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 328–38. According to Marshall, Louis spent about 95,000 livres on the refortification of these cities. See Marshall, Warfare in the Latin East, p. 70. Matthew Paris, vol. VI, pp. 205–07; Cart., no. 2605. On the Franco-Egyptian truce see Richard, The Crusades, p. 352. ‘Eracles’, pp. 440–41; Cart., no. 3045. John of Joinville, ch. 552.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

27

implore Henry for help. These efforts, however, must also have been part of a general appeal to leaders in the West. The letter specified that the Christians in the East put their hopes in Henry’s relief, and that of ‘other princes of the world’.98 In March 1256 the Latins signed a ten-year truce with both Egypt and Damascus and were temporarily relieved of external threats.99 By then, however, Acre was torn by civil war, the war of St. Sabas. In a conflict which started over commercial rivalries, the Venetians, supported by the Templars and the Teutonic knights, fought the Genoese and the Hospitallers.100 The situation in the Holy Land was desperate. Impoverished and exhausted the Latins had to face the growing danger from the rise of the Mamluks in the south and the advance of the Mongols in the north-east. The Mongols’ advance constituted a serious military threat, but it also had adverse economic consequences. It caused the decline of Acre and other Frankish coastal cities as centres of trade, and the shifting of trade routes to the northern Mediterranean coast and central Asia. The commercial base in the Latin East was also weakened by the civil war and, as Riley-Smith has pointed out, the increased military expenses coincided with a reduction in the profits from commerce.101 These changes may have affected the Order, which had probably profited from its involvement in local trade and may also have taken part in the international trade.102 Scarce evidence makes it difficult to estimate to what extent the relentless military burden and the economic crisis affected the Hospitallers in the Holy Land. Some indication may be derived from a general letter sent by Alexander IV to all prelates in 1255 regarding the Templars. It details the serious repercussions of successive military and political events on the Order; during the previous fifteen years the Templars had lost most of their men, resources, and horses in battles against the infidel. Their properties and incomes in Sicily had been confiscated by

98

‘ad vestram regiam majestatem, in qua inter caeteros mundi principes post Deum nos et caeteri Christiani cismarini spem habemus, recurrimus, ut ad refugium et asylum, supplicantes ut . . . addictae terrae necessitates multiplices relevandas.’ ‘Annales Monasterii de Burton’, pp. 368–69. Lloyd, English Society and the Crusade, p. 30. 99 In 1255 a truce, which was signed with Damascus, acknowledged the borders of the kingdom from the river of Arsur to the surroundings of Beirut. See ‘Eracles’, p. 442; ‘Continuation de Guillaume de Tyr de 1229 à 1261, dite du manuscrit de Rothelin’, RHC Oc., vol. II, p. 630. Matthew Paris (vol. V, p. 522) mentions a truce with Egypt signed the same year, without, however, giving specific details. This agreement had to be renewed a year later, following a Christian raid on Egyptian territory between Ascalon and Gaza. See Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, pp. 198–99; Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 341–42. 100 On the war of St. Sabas see Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility, pp. 215–17; Richard, The Crusades, pp. 386–93. On the economic consequences of the war see Edbury, John of Ibelin, pp. 61–62, and D. Jacoby, ‘New Venetian Evidence on Crusader Acre’, The Experience of Crusading, Volume Two: Defining the Crusader Kingdom, ed. P.W. Edbury and J. Phillips, Cambridge, 2003, pp. 240–56. On the role of the Military Orders in the war see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 184–86. On the Orders’ casualties in this war see Matthew Paris, who claimed that the Templars suffered great losses in an attack on the Hospitallers’ quarters in Acre in 1259. Bulst-Thiele argues, however, that there is no evidence to support this claim. See Matthew Paris, vol. V, pp. 745–46, and Bulst-Thiele, p. 233, n. 7. 101 J. Riley-Smith, The Crusades: A Short History, London and New Haven, 1987, pp. 200–03, and The Feudal Nobility, p. 29; Irwin, ‘Supply of Money and Direction of Trade’, pp. 73–84. 102 The Hospitallers most probably traded local products, such as sugar. See below, pp. 52–54.

28

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

Frederick II and additional goods had been lost in Louis IX’s crusade to Egypt. The Templars continuously strove to restore their resources and manpower for the defence of the Holy Land, for which they incurred great expenses and they were heavily in debt. The pope urged the prelates to encourage the faithful to help the Order pay its debts and, like his predecessor Innocent IV, he granted them the right to transfer to the Order money collected from the redemption of crusading vows for the relief of the Holy Land.103 This privilege was granted in the same year to the Hospitallers. Fearing that they would not be able to pay their debts, as these ‘bad times’ had reduced their income, Alexander allowed them to receive up to 2,000 silver marks. In 1258, for the same reason, Hospitale vestrum importabili prematur sarcina debitorum, he ordered the bishop of Fermo in Italy to transfer to them up to 2,000 silver marks from monies collected through the redemption of crusading vows imposed as a result of the crime of usury and through legacies for the relief of the Holy Land.104 Other evidence of the financial difficulties faced by the Hospitallers is the donation of the nunnery of St. Lazarus of Bethany, which at their request the pope granted in 1256. Although the Hospitallers claimed that the nunnery was almost destroyed by the Muslims, this was an important gift. The nunnery, which after Hattin had moved from Jerusalem to Acre, held property in the dioceses of Tyre, Tripoli, Tortosa, Valenia, and Gibelet. Alexander explained that it was given to the Hospitallers with all its assets, rights and privileges in order to enlarge their income because, according to the brothers, their property was not sufficient to cover the immense expenses incurred in the defence of the Holy Land.105 Significantly, however, although this evidence suggests that the Hospitallers were suffering financial difficulties, it will be shown below that from 1250 to 1263 they were involved in an intensive policy of investments to expand their patrimony in the Latin East. The deterioration of the military and economic situation of the Latin East from the second half of the thirteenth century led lay and ecclesiastical lords to alienate property to the Military Orders.106 The grant of the abbey of Mt. Thabor by Pope Alexander IV in April 1255 was perhaps the most significant of these transactions. The abbey had been conquered by the Muslims in 1247 and was returned to the Latins as part of the truce with Damascus in 1255. It was granted, with all its properties, lands, and rights, to the Hospitallers at their request. In their letter to the 103

Malteser Urkunden und Regesten zur Geschichte der Tempelherren und der Johanniter, ed. H. Prutz, Munich, 1883, pp. 60–61, no. 260. This privilege was first given to the Templars and the Hospitallers by Pope Innocent IV: see Cart., no. 2462; Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 231–32. 104 ‘Cum, sicut accepimus, Hospitale vestrum importabili prematur sarcina debitorum, a qua per proprios redditus et proventus, propter malitiam temporis nimium diminutos et vix sufficientes voragini usurarum exonerari non potest . . .’ Cart., nos. 2772, 2906. 105 Cart., nos. 2781, 2925, 2927, 2929. The nunnery of Bethany was originally located to the east of Jerusalem. After Hattin its community, like other religious communities serving in Jerusalem, was.transferred to Acre. As we shall see, the donation of Bethany to the Hospitallers was revoked by Pope Urban IV in September 1261. On Bethany see B. Hamilton, The Latin Church in the Crusader States: The Secular Church, London, 1980, pp. 299–300. On the annulment of the donation in 1261 see chapter 3 below, p. 120, and Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 401–03. 106 On the policy of investments of the Hospitallers in the East from 1250 to 1263 see below, pp. 56–60. See also below, pp. 35, 59–60 on the situation of the lordships of Sidon and Arsur, bought by the Templars and the Hospitallers in the early 1260s.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

29

pope the brothers explained that the monks were unable to repair the abbey, which had been destroyed by the Muslims. Owing to its religious and strategic importance it was given to the Hospitallers on condition that they defend it and provide for the monks. The Hospitallers were to fortify the place within ten years and garrison it with forty knights, a very significant number considering that at the same time they promised to garrison Crac de Chevaliers, their major castle, with sixty knights.107 The monastery of Mt. Thabor had owned land and property in Jerusalem and Transjordan, but also in cities that were still in Christian hands such as Acre, Tripoli, and Antioch. Its most important possessions were in Galilee, between Nazareth and the Sea of Galilee, which was part of the hinterland of Acre and constituted a large proportion of the very scarce agricultural land that remained under Christian rule. The Hospitallers may well have intended to convert it into an important administrative centre. In June 1255 Joscelin of Tornell, the vice-master, who was to be castellan of Mt. Thabor in 1259, took corporal possession of its casalia and appointed various rais, Muslims responsible for the administration of the villages.108 In a letter sent a year later, in May 1256, the monks wrote to the pope that the Hospitallers had garrisoned the abbey with a number of armed knights and had also garrisoned some of the casalia.109 It seems that together with the changes to their military disposition, the Hospitallers were also re-fortifying their castles. Under the castellany of Nicholas Lorgne a new barbican was built at Crac after 1254.110 Not all the Order’s acquisitions in this period promised to be profitable. In 1256 the Hospitallers reached an agreement with John of Ibelin, count of Jaffa, over the reimbursement of expenses incurred in the fortification of Ascalon, ten years before. This agreement concluded a long dispute over that lordship. The donation of the town to the Hospitallers by Frederick II in 1243 seems to have been challenged by the count of Jaffa. In 1246 Innocent IV instructed the bishop of Nicosia to compensate the Order for its expenses should the town be given to another lord.111 It is significant that although Ascalon was lost to Egypt in 1247, the Hospi107

108

109 110 111

Cart., nos. 2726–27. Some historians believe that these numbers were exaggerated. Unfortunately, there is no evidence on the number of knights that were in fact appointed in Mt.Thabor and Crac. See Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 415, n. 3. Cart., no. 2747. The casalia mentioned in this charter were: Jubeil, Casta, Cafarsset, Sarona, Demie, Sisara, Loubieh, Arbel, and Egdis. For their location see above, Map 2. On the importance of Mt. Thabor and the responsibilities of the rais, see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 415, 424–25, 427. Theresa Vann has shown the Order’s great efforts to seek papal confirmation for every charter issued before 1255 that defined Mt. Thabor’s properties and incomes. Some of these charters were ‘vidimus’ – Hospitallers’ notarized copies of early charters supposedly given to the monks of Mt. Thabor. See T.M. Vann, ‘Hospitaller Record Keeping and Archival Practices’, The Military Orders, Volume 2: Welfare and Warfare, ed. H. Nicholson, Aldershot, 1998, pp. 280–84. Cart., no. 2811. D.J. Cathcart King, ‘The Taking of Le Krak des Chevaliers in 1271’, Antiquity, 23 (1943), p. 87. ‘si ad alterius dominium illud transire contigerit.’ Cart., nos. 2301, 2320, 2394. A thorough account of these events is given by Edbury, John of Ibelin, pp. 81–84, and his ‘John of Ibelin’s Title to the County of Jaffa and Ascalon’, Kingdoms of the Crusades: From Jerusalem to Cyprus, Aldershot, 1999, essay no. VII, pp. 125–27. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 132–33; Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, pp. 208–09.

30

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

tallers still claimed ownership, and in 1252 they asked both the pope and the western emperor to reconfirm their rights. As Edbury points out, the Order’s optimism as to the possibility of recovering Ascalon may have been the result of the disunity of the Muslim world and Louis IX’s negotiations with the Mamluks.112 A final agreement was reached only in 1256 and 1257. By then the Hospitallers seem to have given way, as John of Jaffa agreed to compensate them for their expenses defending the town with 650 carrucates of land as well as fourteen casalia in the lordship of Ascalon, but only when Ascalon was re-conquered by the Christians.113 It has been suggested that the Order was willing to give up its rights because it may have accepted that its claim to Ascalon was weak, or it did not consider it worthwhile to resume its defence should the city be recovered.114 The Hospitallers might not have believed that they could recapture the city at all. Considering the Mongol advance into the region plans, if any, for the recovery of Ascalon may have been abandoned. It is significant that in March 1257 the pope ordered the patriarch of Jerusalem to transfer money designated to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem and Ascalon to other cities and castles, emphasizing that he did not expect these towns to be recovered whereas the Mongol danger was imminent.115 Letters sent by the Latin settlers to Europe in 1256 expressed their fear of an imminent Mongol attack.116 In October 1256 Guy of Basainville, the Templar preceptor, wrote to the archbishop of Arles that the Mongols had devastated much of the Muslims’ territory.117 Letters from the Templars and James Pantaleon, papal legate and patriarch of Jerusalem, were also dispatched to Rome. In response Alexander IV granted the Latin church, in February 1257, 2,000 marks collected in the western empire from the redemption of crusading vows. The money was to alleviate the expenses the church and the settlers would incur defending the Holy Land from the Mongols’ approach.118 The news about the Mongols’ advance had also reached England. Matthew Paris wrote that in 1257 Hulagu, the Mongol ruler of Iran, had defeated the Persian Assassins at Alamut and had sent an ultimatum to Acre 112 113

114 115

116

117 118

On the loss of Ascalon see Matthew Paris, vol. IV, p. 342. On the Hospitallers’ appeals for reconfirmation see Cart., nos. 2587, 2590; Edbury, John of Ibelin, p. 83. Cart., nos. 2810, 2816–17, 2845, 2853. This is not the first time the Hospitallers were given properties and lands outside Christian control in order to ensure their commitment in areas which had great strategic importance. The most significant of these were donations given in the 1140s by Raymond of Tripoli. They were also given property in the territory of Ascalon before the city was conquered by Baldwin III in 1153. See Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 55–57, 66–68, and The First Crusaders, 1095–1131, Cambridge, 1997, pp. 178–80; Cart., nos. 71–73. On the conquest of Ascalon in 1153 see WT, XVII, 21, 27–28. Edbury, John of Ibelin, pp. 82–84. ‘quia vero de recuperatione civitatum et locorum eorumdem [Jerusalem and Ascalon] non speratur ad presens . . . et de Tartarorum incursu non modicum, sicut asseritur, periculum immineat Terre Sancte’ Reg. Alexandre IV , no. 1939. The Latins’ failure to seek a treaty with the Mongols against the Mamluks has been seen by some historians as the cause of their final fall. Letters sent by the Latins to the West in the late 1250s and beginning of the 1260s, however, indicate their real concern over the Mongols’ advance, without showing similar fear of the Mamluks. See P. Jackson, ‘The crisis in the Holy Land in 1260’, English Historical Review, 95 (1980), pp. 481–513. RRH, no. 1251. Reg. Alexandre IV, no. 1726; ‘Richeri Gesta Senoniensis Ecclesiae’, MGH SS, XXV, pp. 325–26. See also Chapter 4 below, pp. 119–20.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

31

demanding surrender, which was rejected by the Military Orders and the Latin settlers. It was probably the master of the Order of St. Thomas of Acre who personally brought this news to St. Albans.119 Fears of Mongol invasion was probably the catalyst for an agreement reached in October 1258 between the Military Orders. After years of general dissension and civil war the masters of the Hospitallers, the Templars, and the Teutonic knights promised to keep the peace among themselves, to help each other in fighting the heathen, and to lay down rules by which disputes over property and litigation in the Latin East would be settled. To resolve their disputes over property the Hospitallers and the Templars agreed in 1262 to a general exchange. Each of the Orders secured sole ownership around some of their major holdings. The Templars renounced all their rights and property in the areas of Margat and Valenia, which were the Hospitallers’ areas of influence, as well in Cafarsset, north-east of Mt. Thabor. They also renounced all their rights in Cabor, which as we shall see below must have been important for the Hospitallers’ sugar industry. The Hospitallers mainly renounced all their rights and property in the lordship of Sidon and the castle of Beaufort, which had been purchased by the Templars two years earlier.120 In February 1258 Hulagu’s army sacked Baghdad, and at the beginning of 1260 it moved into Syria. The apprehension of the Latin settlers is revealed in many letters sent to the West imploring for help. In a general appeal to the faithful of 1 March 1260 Thomas Agni, papal legate and bishop of Bethlehem, wrote that the Mongols had devastated Aleppo and many of the Ayyubid principalities in the north. Terrified by their ruthless advance, the ruler of Damascus and many of his people had fled to Egypt; Bohemond VI of Antioch-Tripoli had preferred to conclude an alliance with the invaders. Only the cities of Acre and Tyre and the castles of the Military Orders could protect the Franks in the south from the impending attack. The kingdom was in a state of readiness: trenches had been dug and instruments of war prepared, but the settlers needed urgent help, for which they put all their hope in God and the faithful overseas.121 Only one day after Thomas wrote this letter Damascus surrendered to Hulagu and in the weeks that followed the Mongols raided Muslim territory on the south and south-eastern frontiers of the kingdom of Jerusalem, including Nablus, Bethgibelin, Hebron, and Karak and the castles of Ascalon and Banyas.122 The old political order in the Levant was collapsing under the weight of the Mongol attack. On 22 April an urgent letter was sent by the Christian leaders in the East, including the master of the Hospital, to Charles, count of Anjou and Provence. They described their fear that, after destroying Aleppo and Damascus, annihilating the Muslim forces, plundering and looting everywhere, the Mongols would advance towards Jerusalem and ‘would inundate our borders like the Flood’. They implored Charles for help as they lacked

119 120

Matthew Paris, vol. V, pp. 654–55; Jackson, p. 489. Cart., nos. 2902, 3026, 3028–29; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 447–49; Barber, The New Knighthood, p. 168. For the purchase of Sidon and Beaufort see also below, p. 59. On Cabor see below, p. 59. 121 ‘Menkonis Chronicon’, MGH SS, XXIII, pp. 547–49; RRH, no. 1288. On the AntiochMongol alliance see Mayer, The Crusades, pp. 275–76. 122 Jackson, pp. 490–91.

32

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

the necessary weapons, men, provisions, and money needed to face such an enormous threat. They believed, or wanted Charles to believe, that ‘with the help of God and those who call themselves Christians, it will be possible to recover Jerusalem and all the kingdom, as many Muslims are already dead and the Mongols will retreat if they encounter resistance from the Christians’.123 Jackson suggests that this passage hints at a more optimistic view of the events by the Franks, who saw in the collapse of the Ayyubids an opportunity to recover the Holy Land.124 This is, however, the only letter I have encountered in which such hope was expressed. The rich correspondence sent from the East shows that fear of the Mongols was overwhelming. Except for the Antioch-Mongol alliance, the Latins’ only attempt to gain any political or military profit was Julian of Sidon’s plundering raid into the territory of Marj-Ayun, now under Mongol control, in August 1260. Even then, the raid was not a result of an overall strategy planned by the kingdom’s leadership but of Julian’s own financial needs. In retaliation the Mongols sacked Sidon, destroyed the city walls, and took 300 prisoners.125 Repeated raids had probably made any attempt to cultivate the land impossible. Ibn al-Furat describes how rising prices caused the Christians in Syria to import foodstuff from other Frankish territories.126 In a letter of March 1260 Thomas Bérard, master of the Templars, wrote to Amadeus of Morestellum, the preceptor of England, that unless the Order received immediate assistance it would not be able to defend the Holy Land, and Christianity in the East would succumb to the Mongols. The letter gives us an indication of the great economic and financial difficulties faced by the Military Orders at this time. Thomas wrote that only the cities of Acre and Tyre and the castles of the Military Orders were capable of resisting the Mongols’ attack. He listed the castles as two owned by the Templars in the kingdom of Jerusalem (Atlit and Safad) and one that belonged to the Teutonic knights (Montfort); three Templar fortresses in the principality of Antioch (probably Baghras, La Roche de Roussel, and Port Bonnel, which fell to Baybars in 1268) and two in Tripoli (probably Tortosa and Chastel Blanc); and in Antioch-Tripoli two belonging to the Hospitallers (Crac and Margat). The master emphasized that because of the critical situation the Order had spent four times more than usual on their fortification. Mercenaries had also become more expensive due to high mortality, and the Order lacked the money to employ or supply them. Unless help arrived from the West, the Templars would have to raise money by selling a great part of their goods and properties overseas. Although they had previously borrowed money from the Italian merchants, this was no longer an option, as the Genoese and other merchants had left Acre, probably as a result of the war of St. Sabas and the decline of trade. Thomas therefore instructed the preceptor to obtain from Henry III a significant loan of 10,000 silver marks. It is clear from this letter that the other Military Orders were facing similar

123

‘Lettre à Charles d’Anjou sur les affaires de Terre Sainte’, ed. C.V. Langlois, Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartes, 78 (1917), pp. 487–90. 124 Jackson, pp. 503–6. 125 Gestes des Chiprois, ed. G. Raynaud, Geneva, 1887, p. 752; R. Grousset, Histoire des Croisades et du Royaume Franc de Jérusalem, Paris, 1935, vol. III, pp. 594–97; Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility, p. 30; Barber, The New Knighthood, p. 156. 126 Ibn al-Furat, p. 43.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

33

difficulties. Thomas Bérard wrote that in a joint effort to appeal to the West a Templar brother was sent to Spain, a Hospitaller to France, and a Teutonic knight to Germany, carrying with them letters from the papal legate, their masters, and the Christian community in the East.127 Although there is no evidence of additional letters from the Hospitallers to their priories in Europe, the Templar correspondence that has survived indicates the ways news was disseminated. In June 1260 Thomas Bérard’s letter reached the visitor of the Templars in the West, the officer who was in overall charge of their preceptories in France, England, and Germany. Instructing him to promote the affairs of the Holy Land in France, it was then forwarded to the preceptor of Aquitaine, and messengers brought it to the papal curia.128 Letters addressed to the English preceptor and the king arrived in England on 16 June. They were carried by a Templar brother, who covered the distance between Acre and London in only thirteen weeks, after delivering similar letters to many magnates on the continent and to Christian rulers along the north-eastern Mediterranean coast. These stressed that the Mongols had devastated the kingdom up to the outskirts of Acre, and threatened to overthrow that city in forty days. They also announced that many Templars and Hospitallers had already been killed and that the Franks were powerless to resist. Unless urgent aid was sent, not only they but the entire world would soon be annihilated.129 These letters seem to be exaggerated, as there is no specific evidence that the Military Orders suffered losses following the Mongols’ advance. Nevertheless, the apprehension of the Latin settlers was genuine. The sacking of Sidon caused great anxiety in Acre, where the Franks were preparing the city for an imminent siege, cutting down trees from the orchards around it and removing the tombstones and stones from buildings to strengthen the city’s fortifications.130 The Mongol attack never materialized. Political instability, caused by the death of Hulagu’s brother, the great Khan Möngke, forced him to return to Iran with the bulk of his army. The Mongol contingent left in Syria was defeated by the Mamluks under Kutuz, the sultan of Egypt, at the battle of Ain Jalut on 3 September 1260. This decisive battle stopped the Mongols’ expansion in the region. In three months Baybars, who usurped the Egyptian throne in January 1261, secured Mamluk suzerainty over Damascus and established an empire which included Egypt, Syria, and northern Iraq. For the first time since Saladin one ruler had managed to unify the 127

On the selling of Templars’ property the text is as follows: ‘oportebit nos in laesionem et scandalum domus nostrae non modicum, ex toto supersedere defensioni Terrae Sanctae, aut alias alienare debonis et eleemosynis domus nostrae in partibus transmarinis in non modica quantitate’. On the loan from Henry III: ‘Praeterea cum magna precum instantia supplicamus domino regi Angliae, et etiam reginae ut ipsum regem rogaret, quod ad relevandam domus nostrae inopiam de decem milibus marcarum argenti nomine mutui deberet misericorditer subvenire.’ See ‘Annales Monasterii de Burton’, pp. 491–95. On castles that were still in Christian hands by the 1270s see Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 160–61; Riley-Smith, Atlas of the Crusades, pp. 114–15, and see above, Map 2. 128 RRH, no. 1303; Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 156–57. On the visitor see Barber, The New Knighthood, p. 245. 129 Flores Historiarum, ed. H.R. Luard, Roll Series 95, London, 1890, vol. III, pp. 451–52; RRH, no. 290; Barber, The New Knighthood, p. 157. 130 Marino Sanudo the Elder, ‘Liber Secretorum Fidelium Crucis (1321)’, Gesta Dei per Francos, ed. J. Bongars, Hanover, 1611, vol. II, p. 221; ‘ATS’, p. 449B.

34

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

Muslim states in the Near East, and this constituted a real threat to the survival of the Christian settlement in the East.131 The Mamluk offensive, however, did not begin until 1263. Baybars was at first busy establishing his rule and restoring his line of defence in Syria and Palestine. He ordered the refortification of Shaizar in northern Syria and of Baalbek in the south. He rebuilt Damascus, which had been partially destroyed by the Mongols, and the castle of Subeibe on the main road from Damascus to Tyre. In northern Transjordan he refortified Bostra and Ajlun, and secured the south by replacing the Ayyubid ruler of the castles of Kerak and Shaubak (Montreal) with his own representative.132 By establishing his rule in Transjordan he completed the encirclement of the kingdom of Jerusalem. From these castles Baybars, who, owing to the unification of the Muslim states in the Near East, disposed of great resources and manpower, launched systematic attacks into the Frankish lands. His military achievements would help to put an end to the crusader states. By 1261, however, the Franks saw in the results of Ain Jalut an opportunity to gain political and economic profit from the devastation of Muslim Syria. In February a significant army of 900 knights, 1,500 turcopoles, and 3,000 foot soldiers launched an attack to the north of the Sea of Galilee, where they were heavily defeated by Turcomans. Most of the army were killed and many were captured. Among them were John of Ibelin, lord of Beirut, John of Gibelet, marshal of the kingdom, and the Templar Matthew Sauvage, commander of the land of Jerusalem. Only the Templar Marshal Stephen of Sissey managed to escape. We may note particularly that while the sources report that the bulk of the Templars’ army, gathered from their convent in Acre and the castles of Atlit, Safad and Beaufort, participated in this attack, there is no mention of a Hospitaller contingent. The explanation for this lies in the precise location of the attack. According to the Gestes des Chiprois the Franks attacked the surroundings of Tiberias. Ibn al-Furat, however, places it more precisely in the Jawlan, north-east of Safad. The attack must therefore have been a Templar initiative, and it was launched in what they probably considered their own area of influence.133 The defeat exacted a heavy price in human lives, but also in money. The Franks were required to pay an enormous ransom of 20,000 besants, on which account John of Beirut was forced to sell Casal Imbert and the fort of Toron Aghmid, in the neighborhood of Beirut, to the Teutonic knights.134 As we shall see below, the Mongol and Mamluk incursions resulted in further

131

On the battle of Ain Jalut and its consequences see Richard, The Crusades, pp. 414–17; Mayer, The Crusades, pp. 270–71; Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 419–23. Marshall asserts that until Baybars’ accession the Muslim states did not constitute a real threat. See Marshall, Warfare in the Latin East, p. 260. 132 Ibn-'Abd-al-Zahir, Life of Baybars, ed. and trans. S.F. Sadeque, Dacca, 1956, pp. 117–18. See also R. Röhricht, ‘Études sur les derniers temps du Royaume de Jérusalem’, AOL, vol. II, p. 369, and Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 426–27. 133 Gestes des Chiprois, p. 163; Abu-Shama, ‘Le Livre des Deux Jardins’, RHC Or., vol. V, p. 204; ‘Eracles’, p. 445; Ibn al-Furat, pp. 47, 49. Riley-Smith gives a thorough description of the battle, mentioning the temporary deposition of Stephen of Sissey, who was blamed for the defeat. See Ibn al-Furat, pp. 195–96, n. 1 to page 49. 134 Mayer, The Crusades, pp. 278–79.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

35

alienation of property to the Military Orders in the 1260s. The Hospitallers leased the castle of Arsur in 1262 and started its refortification a year later. They seem, however, to have signed an individual treaty with Baybars sometime before 1263, in which the sultan forbade the raiding of Hospitallers’ territories, and they promised not to rebuild Arsur’ fortifications. According to Ibn 'Abd al-Zahir, Baybars’ secretary and biographer, the sultan accused the Hospitallers of breaking the terms of the agreement by building a rabad in the city. Al-Zahir reports that Hugh Revel, in a message sent to Matthew Sauvage, by then the preceptor of the Templars in Cyprus, justifies the building for fear of Muslim and Mongol raids.135 The refortification of Arsur and the Military Orders’ refusal of an exchange of prisoners with the Mamluks provided Baybars with an excuse to launch his first campaign into the kingdom of Jerusalem, which was aimed at southern Galilee. In February 1263 he took Nazareth and Mt. Thabor. The taking of the abbey is important as it gives us a better understanding of the Hospitallers’ deployment there. We have seen that the Order took over the defence of Mt. Thabor and promised to fortify and garrison it with forty knights. Significantly, however, the sources that mention the conquest of the monastery do not refer to a Mamluk siege or to any resistance made by the brothers. And although there is hardly any reference to the fall of the abbey in Christian sources, it is noteworthy that Arab sources, such as Ibn ’Abd al-Zahir or Ibn al-Furat, who in other cases describe sieges at length and the number of prisoners taken from Christian cities and castles, only report its fall without adding any details.136 That the Mamluks encountered no obstacles may corroborate Prawer’s argument that the Hospitallers had not fortified the place, and

135

For these events and the alleged Templar letter see Ibn 'Abd al-Zahir, p. 168, and Ibn al-Furat, p. 54. For the lease of Arsur and alienation of additional property to the Military Orders in the 1260s see below, pp. 59–60. For the building activities of the Hospitallers in Arsur see S. Tibble, Monarchy and Lordships in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1099–1291, Oxford, 1989, p. 184; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 133–34. In his commentaries on Ibn al-Furat (p. 198, n. 2 to page 54) Riley-Smith maintains that the Hospitallers must have rebuilt the outer walls of Arsur as its citadel was refortified in 1241. This assumption is corroborated by archaeological excavations in Arsur. They have revealed monumental city-walls which, from their architectonic features, have been identified with the Order’s building activity. See I. Roll, H. Yohanan et al., ‘Appollonia-Arsuf during the Crusader Period in Light of New Discoveries’, Qadmoniot, 33 (2000), pp. 23–24 (in Hebrew). For the meaning of Rabad (from the Arabic Ribat) see A. El’ad, ‘The Coastal Cities of Eretz-Israel in the Arab Period (640–1099) on the Basis of Arab Sources’, Cathedra, 8 (1978), pp. 172–73 (in Hebrew). 136 Christian narrative sources such as ‘ATS’, ‘Eracles’ or the Gestes de Chiprois make no mention of the conquest of Nazareth and Mt. Thabor. Reference to it is to be found in a letter sent in August 1263 by Pope Urban IV to King Louis IX, which mentions the destruction of the cathedral in Nazareth and the church of Transfiguration on Mt. Thabor. See Reg. Urbain IV, no. 344. For the description of these events in Muslim sources see Ibn ’Abd al-Zahir, p. 171; Ibn al-Furat, pp. 56–57, and pp. 88–96 for a very detailed account of the siege of Safad. The refusal to release the prisoners could be explained by the great importance to the Hospitallers of slave labour. See L. García-Guijarro Ramos, ‘Estructuracíon interna y trabajo en las órdenes militares del Temple y del Hospital (siglos XII y XIII)’, El Trabajo a través de la historia, ed. S. Castillo, Madrid, 1996, pp. 135–42. On the Orders’ attitudes to the conversion of Muslims see also A. Forey, ‘The Military Orders and the Conversion of Muslims in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries’, Journal of Medieval History, 28 (2002), pp. 1–22; B.Z. Kedar, Crusade and Mission: European Approaches towards the Muslims, Princeton, 1984, pp. 146–48.

36

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

perhaps never intended to; but although the evidence is scanty we do know that the Order had garrisoned Mt. Thabor and some of its casalia, and it is possible, as Riley-Smith has pointed out, that the monastery was evacuated before Baybars’ approach.137 The Mamluks’ campaign in Galilee must have dealt a massive blow to the Order’s agricultural revenues and incomes there. Many of its casalia, which had been leased only a few years before from the archbishop of Nazareth, were undoubtedly lost or devastated. Before the attack on Nazareth the Mamluk army camped between Naym and Mt. Thabor, on the lands of several of the Order’s estates.138 Following their attacks on Nazareth and Mt. Thabor the Mamluks advanced towards Acre. On their way they raided Cabor, a fortified settlement to which the Hospitallers had obtained full rights through their agreement with the Templars in 1262. Other of the Order’s casalia that were in this area such as Casal Robert, Romene, Cafreezeir and Capharmanda were also probably raided.139 Although many of the Order’s lands and properties were devastated, Baybars did not intend to take possession of the area. Below we shall see evidence that some of the estates, such as Casal Robert, still remained in Christian hands, and that the Hospitallers made great efforts to keep them under cultivation.140 After devastating the kingdom’s agricultural lands in Galilee the Mamluks raided the plains of Acre in April 1263. This was the first of many attacks Baybars launched against the city and its surroundings. According to Ibn 'Abd al-Zahir the purpose of this attack was reconnaissance and the raiding party was only ten horsemen; but this was the vanguard of the main army, which the author of ‘L’Estoire de Eracles’ estimates at 30,000 men. The attack caused great damage to the agricultural hinterland of Acre. The Mamluks took many cattle and a number of horses. The gardens and orchards around the city were burnt down, along with the towers and walls built for their defence. Baybars gave orders for the destruction of the fortified mill of Doc, which belonged to the Templars. Many of its defenders were killed and four brothers-at-arms and about thirty foot soldiers were captured.141 Baybars’ attack cost the lives of twenty-six Christians and emptied the

137

138 139 140

141

Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, p. 440. Riley-Smith in Ibn al-Furat, p. 199, n. 1 to page 56. On the absence of evidence of building work undertaken at Mt. Thabor after it was given to the Hospitallers see M. Benvenisti, The Crusaders in the Holy Land, Jerusalem, 1970, pp. 361–62; D. Pringle, The Churches of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: A Corpus, vol. II, Cambridge, 1998, p. 68. Reg. Urbain IV, no. 344. On Hospitallers’ casalia within this area see below, pp. 56–57, and above, Map 2. Reg. Urbain IV, no. 344. On Hospitallers casalia on the way between Mt. Thabor, Cabor, and Acre see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, map no. 3, and above, Map 2. There is no evidence that Baybars attempted at this stage to reorganize the area. It was not divided up among Baybars’ amirs, as were Caesarea and Arsur after their conquest. See Ibn al-Furat, pp. 80–82; Al-Maqrizi, Histoire des sultans Mamlouks de l’Égypte, trans. M. Quatremère, Paris, 1837, vol. I (second part), p. 13. On the Order’s efforts to keep the casalia in Galilee under cultivation see below, p. 60. Ibn 'Abd al-Zahir, pp. 173–75; Ibn al-Furat, pp. 57–59; ‘Eracles’, p. 450; Reg. Urbain IV, no. 344. Ellenblum believes that the mill was only partly destroyed as it still operated after the fall of Acre in 1291. See R. Ellenblum, Frankish Rural Settlement in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, Cambridge, 1998, p. 209. Doc, however, was probably no longer fortified, as both Christian

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

37

city’s food reserves. Shortage of food was one of the Franks’ biggest preoccupations. As the crops were destroyed they asked, at the end of the year, for a truce which would allow them to sow their fields. A large quantity of seed was taken to plant new crops in the raided lands, but apparently also to put wasteland under cultivation.142 Concern over shortages of food and supplies in the Holy Land is emphasized in a letter sent in August 1263 by Pope Urban IV to Louis IX describing the depredation caused by Baybars’ advance. The pope informed the king about the destruction of the churches in Nazareth, Mt. Thabor, and Cabor, and the Mamluks’ raid on the plains of Acre, emphasizing that its inhabitants were suffering from a dearth of food and even starvation after the gardens and crops which supplied the city had been destroyed. Hasty appeals for help had been sent by the leaders of the Latin settlement, including Hugh Revel, the Hospitaller master, to the papal curia. Urban transmitted this news to all the rulers in the West, in particular to Louis IX, imploring them to help the Holy Land.143 Baybars’ incursions into Galilee and his advance towards Acre seem to have caused confusion, and they made the Latins realize how threatening was the Mamluk military force. In a joint appeal sent on 4 April 1263 to King Henry III of England, the leaders in the East, including the masters of the Military Orders, wrote that at first the devastation of the Muslim states following the Mongols’ incursions and then Ain Jalut had given them hope of recovering the Holy Land. This hope was, however, dashed by the Mamluks, who after breaking their truce with them, raided the kingdom up to the gates of Acre. They begged the king for help as they lacked the resources and manpower needed to face the Mamluk threat. On 5 April 1263 another letter was sent to Henry III by Thomas Bérard, master of the Templars. He mentioned the stream of letters of appeal already sent to the king, stressing that his help and that of the king of France was now their only hope.144 Each new Mamluk attack severely aggravated the situation of the Latin settlers, as it destroyed their defences and economy. Baybars’ next offensive was aimed at destroying the settlement along the Palestinian coast. On 5 March 1265 he took Caesarea and destroyed the greater part of its fortifications. In the following days the Mamluks raided the neighborhood of the Templar castle of Atlit and occupied the town of Haifa, whose inhabitants, like those of Caesarea, were evacuated to Acre by sea. The Mamluks aimed their next attack, on 21 March, at Hospitaller Arsur. The Order, which had leased the town only three years earlier, had improved its fortifications, garrisoned it, and stocked it with a large quantity of provisions. and Arab sources stress Baybars’ systematic demolition of its tower. Both Doc and Recordana formed part of the Christian territory according to the 1283 treaty with Qualawun. See P.M. Holt, Early Mamluk Diplomacy (1260–1290), Leiden, New York and Cologne, 1995, p. 79, and D. Barag, ‘A New Source Concerning the Ultimate Borders of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem’, Israel Exploration Journal, 29 (1979), p. 202. 142 For the number of Christians killed in Baybars’ attack on Acre see Gestes des Chiprois, p. 168, which specifies that many knights and sergeants were killed. The truce is mentioned by Ibn al-Furat, p. 66. See Riley-Smith’s comment as to the possibility that the Franks also wanted to sow.wastelands: Ibn al-Furat, p. 204, n. 1 to page 66. 143 Reg. Urbain IV, no. 344. 144 Diplomatic Documents, ed. P. Chaplais, London, 1964, vol. I, nos. 385–86.

38

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

The money needed for its fortification and garrison was probably transferred from funding originally earmarked to maintain Mt. Thabor.145 At Arsur the Mamluks encountered fierce opposition. The siege lasted more than forty days, until the town’s capitulation on 29 April. The Hospitallers suffered enormous casualties. The number of prisoners taken by Baybars was estimated at about 1,000, among whom were between 80 and 90 Hospitaller brother-knights. Baybars also found a large amount of wheat, oats, animals, and money.146 With the conquest of Caesarea and Arsur the kingdom lost two of its major strongholds and also a significant part of the fertile coastal plain which was essential for the provisioning of the remaining Frankish population. All the Hospitallers’ holdings in the area, which they had acquired with so much effort and money, were lost. Turris Salinarum, for example, a small fortification on the road from Caesarea to Haifa, was demolished by a Mamluk contingent that raided Atlit.147 So probably was the fortified casal of Chatillon (La Meserae), next to Turris Salinarum. Cacho before it fell to the Mamluks was a fortified Frankish settlement where the Hospitallers leased some lands in 1248 from the abbey of St. Mary of the Latins in Jerusalem.148 The Mamluks rebuilt it and transformed into an important administrative centre. Baybars reorganized the district, and many of the Order’s casalia, such as Turcarme, Kalansue, Montdidier, and Turriclee (Tour Rouge), were included in the territories divided up among his amirs.149 But not only did the Hospitallers lose all

145 146

For the fortification of Arsur and the events of 1263 see above, p. 35, and below, pp. 59–60. ‘ATS’, p. 452A; ‘Eracles’ (p. 450) writes that among the 1,000 captives were Hospitaller brother-knights, lay brothers, and sergeants. ‘ATS’ (p. 452B) estimates the number of Hospitallers killed and taken prisoner at 410, and the ‘Chronica minor auctore minorita Erphordiensis’, MGH SS, XXIV, p. 204 puts the figure at 180. These numbers, however, seem an exaggeration considering that the total number of brother-knights serving in the Holy Land at the time was probably no greater than 300. On this point see also Riley-Smith, in Ibn al-Furat, p. 207, n. 1 to page 77. Unfortunately none of the sources give exact details of the spoils taken from the town, which might have given us some indication of the resources needed by the Order to maintain fortified sites of this size. For reference to the booty see ‘Chronica minor auctore minorita Erphordiensis’, p. 204; Abu Shama, p.205; Al-Maqrizi, Histoire des sultans Mamlouks de l’Égypte, vol. I (second part), p. 10; Ibn al-Furat, p. 77. 147 For a detailed description of these attacks see Ibn al-Furat, pp. 68–72. For a very short reference to the conquest of Caesarea in Christian sources see ‘ATS’, pp. 451B, 452A. For Turris Salinarum and this raid see Tibble, Monarchy and Lordships, pp. 150–51; Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, p. 453, n. 34. 148 Cart., no. 2482. For Cacho (or Qaqun) see D. Pringle, The Red Tower (al-Burj al-Ahmar): Settlement in the Plain of Sharon at the Time of the Crusaders and Mamluks (AD 1099–1516), British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem, Monographs Series I, London, 1986, pp. 58–71, and Tibble, Monarchy and Lordships, pp. 141–43. 149 On its re-fortification by the Mamluks see Ibn al-Furat, p. 101, and Riley-Smith’s commentary on p. 218, n. 1 to page 101. On the new administrative division of the lordships of Caesarea and Arsur under the Mamluks see Ibn al-Furat, pp. 80, 82, and Riley-Smith’s commentary on p. 208, n. 1 to page 82. Also al-Maqrizi, Histoire des sultans Mamlouks de l’Égypte, vol. I (second part), pp. 13, 40. It seems that following the treaty with Qalawun of June 1283 some of the Order’s lands in the area of Caesarea were returned to them. Barag points to the singularity of the 1283 treaty, which acknowledged more Frankish villages than that of 1272. He explains that many abandoned places must have been re-populated between 1272 and 1283 by Christian refugees from Galilee and the lands south of Atlit. This, however, could not explain the concession of land in the area of Caesarea, which had been Mamluk since 1265 and could not

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

39

their property in the former lordships of Caesarea and Arsur – and any prospect of income from them; in some cases they were forced to continue paying rents for casalia which were no longer in their hands. They had to renew their lease of Montdidier and Turriclee in October 1267. According to terms of the original agreement it was to be renewed every twenty-five years and the Order had to pay an annual rent of 800 Saracen besants to the abbot of St. Mary as long as Tyre and Acre were in Christian hands.150 The conquests of Caesarea and Arsur broke the territorial integrity of the Christian holdings in the coastal plain. To the south of Acre the Franks held the now isolated castle of Atlit and the city of Jaffa, which since La Forbie had been the southern frontier of the kingdom. It fell to Baybars in March 1268.151 Hugh Revel sent the disastrous news of these losses to Pope Clement IV, who forwarded them to the mendicants preaching the cross in France, as well as to James I of Aragon, Theobald of Champagne-Navarre, Alphonse of Poitiers, and the dukes of Saxony and Bavaria.152 As always in times of great need, the Hospitallers made huge efforts advertising their concerns in Europe.153 In a general letter addressed to all bishops, William II of Agen, the patriarch of Jerusalem, beseeched them to allow Hospitaller brothers sent from the East to preach and raise alms in accordance with Pope Innocent II’s bull Quam amabilis Deo.154 Knowing the political situation in Europe, the Latins must have doubted that aid could be expected from there. The poem Ira et Dolor, written by a Templar knight serving in the Holy Land, shows the rage and despair among the Franks that precisely when they were suffering these terrible losses the papacy was deeply involved in promoting and launching a crusade to southern Italy, diverting crusaders and money originally destined for the Holy Land.155 He wrote that although the Latin settlement was doomed it could not expect any help from the pope or the princes in the West as they were busy fighting in Italy. The Latins had been abandoned not only by pope and princes but also by God:

150

151 152

153 154

155

have been re-settled by the Franks. See Barag, ‘A New Source Concerning the Ultimate Borders’, pp. 198–200 and passim. Cart., nos. 2482, 2491, 3283. Pringle explains that Turriclee probably fell after 1265, along with many other castles in the coastal plain, and, according to archaeological evidence, it was methodically destroyed by the Mamluks. See Pringle, The Red Tower, pp. 86, 128. On the fall of Jaffa see ‘ATS’, p. 453B; Ibn al-Furat, pp. 106–08. Annales Ecclesiastici, ed. C. Baronius, A. Pagi, O. Raynaldus and A. Theiner, Bar-le-Duc and Paris, 1864–85, vol. XXII (1257–1285), pp. 158–60 (ann. 1265, S 38, 40); Documentos de Clemente IV (1265–1268) referentes a España, ed. S. Dominguez Sanchez, León, 1996, nos. 66, 171, 192. See also Chapter 3 below, p. 125. See, for example, the intensive correspondence and the envoys sent to Europe after Hattin and La Forbie; see above, pp. 14–17, 23–24. Cart., no. 3002. This letter was dated by Delaville Le Roulx to 1262–1267, the period when William served as patriarch of Jerusalem. In Quam amabilis Deo Innocent II had asked bishops to encourage the faithful to give donations to the Order and promised to absolve the donors from the seventh part of their yearly penance. See Cart., no. 130. On Charles of Anjou’s crusade to Sicily and the diversion of crusader resources from the Holy Land to southern Italy see Chapter 2 below, pp. 92–96.

40

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

Neither the cross nor the law could protect us against the Turks, as it is clear to all that God strengthens them against us . . . He is a fool he who wishes to fight against the Turks, since Jesus Christ does not contest them any more. They (the Turks) have vanquished. They will vanquish, they know they could destroy us any day, because God, who used to watch over us, is asleep while Muhammad shines with power and causes Baybars to shine.156

After devastating the Christian holdings along the coast Baybars completed the occupation of Galilee in two campaigns in 1266 and 1268. His main attack in 1266 was aimed at the major Templar castle of Safad, which owing to its strategic importance and strength Ibn al-Furat would later describe as an ‘obstruction in the throat of Syria and a blockage in the chest of Islam’.157 It took Baybars more than six weeks to take the castle, which was well supplied and garrisoned with at least 400 men, including Templar knights and sergeants, turcopoles, and crossbowmen. After its conquest, on 23 July, the Mamluks rebuilt it and transformed it into an important administrative centre. They took full possession of the area, which like the lordships of Caesarea and Arsur was apportioned among Baybars’ amirs. With the conquests of Chastel Neuf and Toron on 15 August and the Templar castle of Beaufort two years later, in April 1268, Mamluk dominance over eastern Galilee was assured.158 Baybars’ incursions were efficient, coordinated military offensives. Concurrently with their siege of Safad the Mamluks raided the surroundings of Crac des Chevaliers, Tripoli, Sidon, Tyre, Monfort, Atlit and Acre.159 The purpose of these raids, as Marshall has pointed out, was to isolate a site and prevent assistance reaching it.160 The raids were also intended to devastate the remaining Christian territories. The attack on Crac had ravaged its dependent lands, from which the Muslims took into captivity 700 men and 1,000 women and children.161 In the attack of 1266 on the plain of Acre the Mamluks raided the Hospitaller village of Manueth, from which, according to Ibn al-Furat, the ‘Muslims took spoil upon spoil, so much that no one could be found to buy the cattle and buffaloes’. It also seems that 200 horses were killed in this raid, when the Mamluks burned down the Order’s stables.162 The surroundings of Acre were again raided the following 156

157 158

159 160 161 162

Choix des poésies des troubadours, ed. F. Raynouard, Paris, 1819, vol. IV, p. 131. Lloyd believes that the 1263 letter sent by the leaders in the East to Henry III was the last communal letter sent to the king, probably because the Latins had lost hope of getting any help in view of the political situation in England. See Lloyd, English Society and the Crusade, pp. 30–31. Ibn al-Furat, p. 89. On the siege of Safad see Gestes des Chiprois, pp. 179–80, and Ibn al-Furat, pp. 88–96. On the reorganization of its dependent lands by the Mamluks, and the conquest of Chastel Neuf and Toron see Gestes des Chiprois, pp. 96–97. On Safad’s garrison under Templar rule see Barber, The New Knighthood, p. 166. On the fall of Beaufort see ‘ATS’, p. 453B; Ibn al-Furat, p. 110. The Templars must have built additional fortifications in the southern side of the castle in the 1260s. See Ibn al-Furat, p. 110, and Barber, The New Knighthood, p. 168. Ibn al-Furat wrote that the attack ‘covered all the territory of the Franks, from the confines of Tripoli to the vicinity of Arsur’: see pp. 86–88. Marshall, Warfare in the Latin East, p. 203. Abu Shama, p. 205. Ibn al-Furat, p. 87; ‘Eracles’, pp. 454–55, and Amadi, Chroniques d’Amadi et de Strambaldi, ed. R. de Mas Latrie (Collection de documents inédits sur l’histoire de France), Paris, 1891, vol. I, p. 209, who mentions the loss of the horses.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

41

summer. Over four days Baybars devastated the city’s agricultural hinterland, destroying orchards, vineyards, buildings, and wells and burning the crops. In this attack the Hospitallers’ fortified mill of Recordane was destroyed.163 The mill must have been rebuilt almost immediately because in the treaty the Franks signed with Baybars in 1267, in which they agreed to hold Recordane as a condominium – joint ownership – the place was referred to as: ‘the new mill, recognized as having been set up by the Order of the Hospital’.164 The frequency and devastation of the Mamluk attacks ruined the crops, but also prevented the Franks from working their fields. Manueth, like other villages populated by Christians, was probably evacuated before Baybars’ incursions. Ellenblum believes that because the casal’s lands were laid waste the Order was willing in 1270 to let the Teutonic knights sow them for a period of one year. Although the plain of Acre was raided in 1263, 1265, 1266, 1267, and 1269, Manueth must have recovered as in 1278 the Hospitallers bought land near it.165 Below we shall see that the brothers made great efforts to bring wasteland under cultivation and repair the damage caused by the Mamluks; they paid close attention to preserving the sugar industry. These, however, were fruitless efforts. Baybars’ incursions made any attempt to work the land almost impossible.166 The distress of the Franks following these enormous losses of territory and their difficulties in provisioning and garrisoning their remaining towns and castles was expressed in many new letters of appeal sent to Europe. In May 1267 the Christian leaders in the East wrote to Theobald of Champagne about the devastation of the plains of Acre and the loss of Safad.167 A letter sent in July 1267 by William of Agen, the patriarch of Jerusalem, to Aimery of la Roche, the Templar preceptor in France, gives us valuable information regarding some of the expenses incurred by the Franks defending the Latin settlement. William asked Amaury to arrange through the Order’s treasury in Paris for the money needed for the payment of crossbowmen. Sixty livres Tournois would have to be paid to each of fifty French knights, who had gone to the East in 1265 with the count of Nevers and other lords, to keep them in Acre. The letter also mentioned a loan negotiated by the Military Orders in 1265, according to which 4,000 livres tournois were taken by Louis IX’s representative in Acre to pay the wages of soldiers of the French regiment who defended the city. William also asked Amaury to forward the distressing news from the Holy Land to the pope.168 Clement IV then relayed it to his prelates. In a letter to the papal legates in Sicily and England he wrote about the fall of Caesarea,

163

164

165 166 167 168

Ibn al-Furat, p. 103. Al-Aini claims that the losses the Franks suffered in this raid were the equivalent of 15,000 dinars. See Al-Aini, ‘The Collar of Pearls’, extr. trans., in RHC Or., vol. II, p. 225. Holt, Early Mamluk Diplomacy, p. 32, and D. Pringle, Secular Buildings in the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: An Archaeological Gazetteer, Cambridge, 1997, p. 64. According to Ellenblum both Recordane and Doc functioned until the fall of the kingdom in 1291. Ellenblum, Frankish Rural Settlement, pp. 208–09. Cart., nos. 3400, 3679. Ellenblum, Frankish Rural Settlement, pp. 203–04. See below, pp. 60–62. Thes. novus, vol. I, cols. 1013–14; RRH, no. 1348. RRH, no. 1347. Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 159, 266–67.

42

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

Arsur, and Safad, emphasizing the great casualties suffered by the Hospitallers and the Templars in these attacks.169 In May 1268 the Mamluks took the city of Antioch, and consequently the entire principality, except for Margat and Lattakia, was lost. The fall of Antioch and the Mamluks’ incursion into Cilician Armenia, where they took the Teutonic castle of Adamodana and the castle of Canamella, caused the Templars to abandon their castles of Gaston (Baghras), Roche Roussel, and Port Bonnel in the Amanus mountains north of Antioch. A year later the Christians seem to have lost five additional castles after an earthquake shook Armenia.170 The desperate situation of the Frankish settlement by the summer of 1268 is best illustrated in a letter sent in June by the Hospitaller master Hugh Revel to Ferrand of Barras, prior of St. Gilles. He writes about the loss of the cities of Jaffa, Caesarea, Arsur, and Antioch and the castles of Beaufort, Gaston, and Safad, which were able to hold out for no more than sixteen days although the Templars had praised Safad so much. Only Acre, Atlit, Tyre, and Sidon remained in Christian hands. The Hospitallers were burdened with enormous expenses to maintain their 300 brothers in the Holy Land; at one time they even had to provide victuals for more than 10,000 men. These expenses increased with every new Mamluk incursion. After the loss of Antioch the Christians’ northern frontier was pushed back towards the castles of Crac, Margat, and Belda, which became the only defensive line for the cities along the Syrian coast. However, these castles would not be able to hold out for long with their current resources. The Hospitallers in the East were completely dependent on supplies from overseas. Hugh wrote that the kingdom of Jerusalem had produced nothing for eight years and was suffering from shortages of food and provisions. Yet the supplies from Cilician Armenia, on which the Order depended, had ceased because of a plague and fear of Muslim raids. Supplies from Europe had also diminished. From Spain the Hospitallers had received only a few horses. War had devastated the Order’s estates in Sicily and Tuscany. Civil war had also reduced the responsiones from England, which used to be a major contributor. Hugh pleaded with the prior of St. Gilles to send aid to the East, emphasizing that these enormous expenses had plunged his Order deeply in debt. To cover them, a great part of the Hospitallers’ property overseas would have to be sold.171 169

Annales Ecclesiastici, vol. XXII (1257–85), pp. 185–86 (ann. 1266, S 41, 42). On the French regiment in Acre see C. Marshall, ‘The French Regiment in the Latin East, 1254–91’, Journal of Medieval History, vol. 15 (1989), pp. 301–07. 170 Both ‘Eracles’ and the Gestes des Chiprois estimate the number of Christians taken prisoner after the fall of the city at the enormous figure of 17,000 people. ‘Eracles’, pp. 456–57; Gestes des Chiprois, pp. 190–91. After comparing the different sources Röhricht concluded that a lower, but not less significant, number of 8,000 people went into captivity. Röhricht, ‘Études sur les derniers temps’, p. 392. For the description in Arab sources of the fall of Antioch and the abandoning of the Templar castles see al-Maqrizi, Histoire des sultans Mamlouks de l’Égypte, p. 53, and Ibn al-Furat, pp. 118–27, who claims that the Templars abandoned Gaston without any resistance, leaving behind all its provisions. In Hugh Revel’s letter to the prior of St. Gilles in 1268, however, he specifies that the Templars burned down the castle after they realized that they would not be able to defend it. See Cart., no. 3308 (vol. IV). For the Mamluks’ incursions into Cilician Armenia and the loss of the castles see Ibn al-Furat, p. 99. For the earthquake see Amadi, p. 209. 171 Cart., no. 3308 (vol. IV). The text referring to their debts and the need to sell property abroad

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

43

Faced with this situation the Hospitallers sought a truce with Baybars. Individual treaties had already been signed by the lords of Beirut and Tyre and by the Templars near Sidon. In May 1268 Baybars signed a ten-year truce with the new king of Jerusalem, Hugh of Antioch-Lusignan. By its terms the Mamluks recognized the rights of the Christians only over the city and district of Acre, Haifa and three dependent villages, the castle of Monfort and ten villages, and Atlit and five villages. The remaining land would be shared between Franks and Muslims.172 In 1266 the Hospitallers of Margat had signed a truce with Baybars according to which they agreed to renounce the tributes they received from Muslim cities. This was a significant loss of income as Hamah and Homs had each owed them 4,000 pieces of gold a year, Abu-Qubais 800 pieces, and the Assassins another 1,200 pieces of gold, as well as payments in wheat and barley. A year later, following the devastation of 1267, the Hospitallers requested the ratification of the truce to include both Margat and Crac. They renounced the tributes owed them by the Assassins, Hamah, Shaizar, Afamiyah, and Abu-Quabis as well as an income of 500 dinars they received from the territory of Aintab.173 The truces signed with Baybars show the despair of the Latins and their need for a period of respite. None of these truces held for more than a year. Baybars raided Acre in 1269, and a year later devastated the surroundings of Margat and of Crac des Chevaliers. The Muslim troops used the crops that supplied this castle as pasture for their horses.174 Riley-Smith has shown the reliance of Crac, the Hospitallers’ most powerful castle, on the supplies it received from its dependent lands: because of their expenses supplying and garrisoning the castle the Hospitallers had been exempted in 1255 by Alexander IV from the payment of tithes and first fruits on these lands.175 The ruin of Crac’s crops and its isolation from the Latin enclave along the coast had probably severely weakened its defensive capacity. The Mamluks’ final attack on Crac and the remaining crusader castles in the county of Tripoli was delayed for a year, as Baybars awaited the outcome of Louis IX’s second crusade; with the arrival of news of the failure of the invasion of Tunis and the withdrawal of the crusading army to Sicily the offensive was immediately renewed. In February 1271 the Templar castle of Chastel Blanc, which Ibn al-Furat reports was the key to Tripoli, surrendered and 700 men were taken prisoner. On 3 March Baybars laid siege to Crac des Chevaliers. For almost a month he used combined forces from Hamah, Sahyun, and the Assassins,

172 173

174 175

reads as follows: ‘quam tanta debita contraximus ratione pressurarum, et de die in diem alia contrahere cogimur quod, pro quietatione et solutione eorum, in quibuslibet provinciis transmarinis magnam partem possessionum nostre domus vendere oportebit’. See also Chapter 2 below, pp. 91, 99–100 on the financial difficulties faced by their priories in Europe at that time. Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, p. 472; Röhricht, ‘Études sur les derniers temps’, pp. 388, 393–95. Al-Maqrizi, Histoire des sultans Mamlouks de l’Égypte, vol. I (second part), pp. 32, 42; Ibn al-Furat, pp. 98, 104. For the full text of the treaty of 1267 see Holt, Early Mamluk Diplomacy, pp. 32–41. For a thorough discussion on the tributary policy pursued by the Hospitallers in northern Syria see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 138–41. Al-Maqrizi, Histoire des sultans Mamlouks de l’Égypte, vol. I (second part), p. 78; Ibn al-Furat, pp. 139–40. On the reliance of Crac on its dependent lands see Riley-Smith’s commentary in Ibn al-Furat, p. 236, n. 5 to page 139, and Cart., no. 2727 for Alexander’s exemption.

44

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

as well as mangonels and miners to destroy the castle’s defences, and the Hospitallers capitulated on 30 March.176 With the fall of Crac the Hospitallers had lost all their important castles in the Latin East except for Margat.177 Considering the Mamluks’ superiority in manpower and that no immediate help could be expected from Europe after the failure of Louis IX’s crusade to Tunis, the Hospitallers were forced to renew the truce with Baybars in order to protect Margat. Its terms were humiliating. They had to surrender their castle of Belda and its territory to the north of Margat and to promise not to build additional fortifications in Margat itself. They were forced to renounce all tributes from Muslim lands and to share with the Mamluks their income from Margat’s dependent lands. Their only acts of resistance before they withdrew were the destruction of the towers of Belda and the village of Corveis, next to Margat.178 It is unfortunate that none of the accounts which describe the conquest of Crac give us detailed information on the number of casualties suffered, as was the case with the fall of Arsur. In 1255 the Hospitallers had committed themselves to garrisoning Crac with sixty knights, and it seems reasonable to believe that their number may have increased with the loss of other Hospitaller castles and fortresses following Baybars’ incursions. Part of the garrison of Crac must have been saved, as one of the terms of its capitulation was that the lives of its defenders would be spared and they would be given safe conduct to Tripoli. Some, however, were killed during the siege, and there is evidence that many were massacred when the Mamluks stormed into the castle’s outer ward.179 The Hospitallers may have suffered heavy casualties not only after the fall of their main castles but also following raids and the conquest of town and villages that they helped to defend. With the loss of Antioch, for example, Hospitaller brother knights who garrisoned the citadel were taken prisoner.180 Even a relatively small number of brothers killed or taken prisoners in these attacks would have had a great impact on the Order’s defensive capacity in the Latin East. During the siege of Tripoli in April 1289 the Hospitallers lost forty

176

177

178

179 180

On St. Louis’ crusade to Tunis see J. Richard, Saint Louis: Crusader King of France, ed. S. Lloyd.and trans. J. Birrell, Cambridge, 1992, pp. 314–29; Riley-Smith, The Crusades, pp. 173–76. For the conquest of Chastel Blanc see Ibn al-Furat, p. 143. Chastel Blanc, strategically situated to the south-east of Tortosa, was one of the Templars’ most important castles. See Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 81–82. On the conquest of Crac see Ibn al-Furat, pp. 144–46; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 192–93; Cathcart King, ‘The Taking of Le Krak des Chevaliers’, pp. 83–92. Margat finally fell in 1285. A short description of its siege can be found in Abu’l Fida, The Memories of a Syrian Prince. Abu’l Fid , Sultan on Ham h (672–732/1273–1331), trans. P.M. Holt, Wiesbaden, 1983, p. 12. For the full text of the treaty see Holt, Early Mamluk Diplomacy, pp. 48–57. On these events see also Ibn al-Furat, pp. 146–47 and Al-Aini, ‘The Collar of Pearls’, pp. 238–39. Marshall considers the Mamluks’ superiority in manpower and resources.the key to their overwhelming success. Marshall, Warfare in the Latin East, pp. 247–48. On the garrison of Crac see above, pp. 17, 29. On its conquest by Baybars see Ibn al-Furat, p. 145. Ibn al-Furat mentions that after the city was conquered the garrison was taken into captivity. Ibn al-Furat, p. 126. In his commentary Riley-Smith suggests that these were probably Hospitallers. See Ibn al-Furat, p. 230, n. 1 to page 126.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

45

brother-knights as well as a large number of horses and arms, at a cost estimated at 1,500 silver marks. These losses were so severe that the master John of Villiers ordered each priory to send men, horses, and money with the next August passage.181 It is however noteworthy that although Baybars’ incursions were similar to those of Saladin following Hattin, in the sense that they destroyed the economic base and the military disposition of the Hospitallers in the Holy Land, the Order did not suffer the same number of casualties. The Christian army and that of the Hospitallers very rarely met the Mamluks in open field, and what battles there were never reached the dimensions of Hattin. In response to Baybars’ premeditated offensives, aimed at fragmenting the Latin states, the Franks, lacking resources, manpower and significant support from Europe, conducted only limited military expeditions. Their main aim was seemingly booty. In the winter of 1264, after the Mamluks had devastated the Galilee, a combined force of Hospitallers and Templars attacked Legio (or Lajjun), which had been lost to the Mamluks in 1263. Joshua Prawer tried to find military reasons for this attack, beyond plunder. As Legio had no strategic importance he suggested that they intended to take Petit Gerin (Zarin), located along the important road that connected Acre to Transjordan. If that was the aim, it was never accomplished. Although the Christian force did not encounter any threats on their way they did not go beyond Legio, where they took 300 prisoners and many animals.182 On their return to Acre the Military Orders together with the army of the kingdom raided the neighbourhood of Bethsan. They devastated the area, burned the fields and took much spoil.183 Only the reinforcement of the Franks with a new crusader army could have led to more meaningful military expeditions, powerful enough to change the situation of the Latin settlement. The crusade of King James I of Aragon, however, which set out in September 1269, returned to Europe soon after setting sail because of bad weather. Louis IX’s crusade was aimed first at North Africa and collapsed before Tunis soon after the crusading army had landed.184 The forces that did arrive in Acre from overseas were not significant enough to make any difference to the situation. In 1265 and 1266 fifty French knights, led by Odo, count of Nevers, and more than 150 knights and provisions brought by Hugh of Antioch-Lusignan, by then regent of Cyprus, arrived. In October 1266 these forces, together with the Military Orders and the French contingent in Acre, launched an attack towards Tiberias. Prawer has argued that instead of attacking Tiberias, which had been lost almost twenty years earlier and was too far from the Latin settlements on the coast to be defended even if it was recovered, the Christians, who had gathered a significant army, should have attempted to recover the castle of Safad, which had been lost in 181 182

Cart., no. 4050. The Military Orders did not encounter significant resistance during this raid. The ‘Annales de Terre Sainte’ report that they lost only two men. There was no apparent reason for them not to continue to Petit Gerin, if that was the intention. See ‘ATS’, p. 451. See Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, p. 447, n. 22, and p. 430 on the strategic importance of Petit Gerin. For the identification of Legio as old Megiddo see Röhricht, ‘Études sur les derniers temps’, p. 376, n. 41. 183 ‘ATS’, p. 451. 184 Riley-Smith, The Crusades, pp. 173–76.

46

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

the same year and had great strategic importance. This, however, could have been a very costly enterprise. Baybars had heavily garrisoned Safad with new forces, and any attempt to re-take it could have resulted in the annihilation of the remaining Christian army in the Holy Land. The fact that there is no evidence that the Templars pressed for the recovery of their castle perhaps demonstrates their reluctance to put their forces in real danger and their doubts about their ability to keep castles of that size with their resources and manpower in the East. The attack of 1266 was most probably for the purpose of plunder, but on its way back from Tiberias to Acre the vanguard, which was loaded with booty, was ambushed at Careblier (Tell el Charruba) in the plain of Acre by the Mamluk garrison of Safad. Five hundred knights were killed, among them forty-five Hospitaller brother-knights including Stephen of Messy, the grand commander in Acre.185 The Orders’ reluctance to join battle is understandable considering their inferior numbers, the casualties they had suffered when they engaged the Mamluks on the battlefield, and the insufficiency of the crusading contingents arriving in the East.186 The failed campaign of Lord Edward to Cacho in the spring of 1271, the only attempt made by settlers and crusader forces to regain control of territory, illustrates this point.187 Cacho was the most important Mamluk fortification on the coastal plain, and its reconquest could have given the Christians a foothold on the coastline and better protection and provision for Atlit, their only remaining isolated castle in the kingdom of Jerusalem.188 The Christians gathered a large army, combining Edward’s troops, which had been reinforced with newly arrived troops from England, with the armies of the kingdom and the Military Orders, Cypriot forces brought by King Hugh III, as well as pilgrims and mercenaries.189 Still their inferiority was manifest. Although the Mamluk commander of Cacho abandoned the castle and left it without defences on hearing of the Christian advance, the 185

186

187 188 189

On the French knights arriving in Acre see ‘Eracles’, p. 454, and Marshall, ‘The French Regiment’, p. 305. On the contingents brought by Hugh see P.W. Edbury, The Kingdom of Cyprus and the Crusades, 1191–1374, Cambridge, 1991, p. 89. On the attack see Gestes des Chiprois, pp. 181–82; ‘Eracles’, p. 455; Marino Sanudo, ‘Liber Secretorum Fidelium Crucis’, p. 222. Prawer believed the Christian army to be as large as 1,500 knights. Marshall finds that the only evidence of its size suggests 1,100 knights. Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, p. 463; Marshall, Warfare in the Latin East, pp. 192–93. For Baybars’ efforts to garrison Safad see Ibn al-Furat, p. 96, who maintains that the garrison cost the sultan a significant sum. In the two years after its conquest Safad was re-fortified and became the capital of a Mamluk province. See Benvenisti, The Crusaders in the Holy Land, p. 204. The Hospitallers’ casualties are specified in ‘ATS’, p. 452A. It is interesting that no information has survived regarding the career of Stephen of Messy. He appears for the first time in 1264 as the grand commander of Acre. See RRH, no. 1334; Cart., nos. 3105, 3207, and Appendix below. Crusading armies arrived in Acre in 1269, led by the Infantes of Aragon, and in 1271 led by Lord Edward of England. They were insufficient to challenge Mamluk supremacy. Edward brought 200.knights and 600 infantry, while Baybars’ army was estimated to be 40,000 men. See Marshall, Warfare in the Latin East, pp. 71–73. On the crusade of the Infantes of Aragon see Gestes des Chiprois, pp. 182–83 (which wrongly date these events to 1267) and ‘Eracles’, pp. 457–58. On Lord Edward’s crusade see Riley-Smith, The Crusades, p. 176, and M. Prestwich, Edward I, New Haven and London, 1988, p. 68. For the importance of re-taking Cacho see also Pringle, The Red Tower, p. 60, and Marshall, Warfare in the Latin East, pp. 206–7. ‘Eracles’, p. 461.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

47

Christians were forced to return to Acre after Baybars launched a massive offensive at them. The only achievement of this coordinated Christian offensive was booty.190 In May 1272, after Edward’s military campaign had failed to improve their situation, the Franks signed yet again a ten-year truce with Baybars.191 They were confined now to a narrow strip along the Palestine-Syria coast, which, after the fall of their main castles, was extremely vulnerable.192 To recapitulate: from 1187 to 1274 the Hospitallers in the East suffered a succession of adversities. The battles of Hattin and La Forbie resulted in the almost complete annihilation of their conventual manpower. To restore their forces they needed an immediate mobilization of manpower from Europe, as well as money for the employment of mercenaries both to take part in campaigns and to garrison their castles. Money was also needed to restore their economy and military defences after Hattin and the earthquake of 1202. The establishment and expansion of their headquarters in Acre and the refortification of Crac des Chevaliers, Margat, and Selefkie must have been costly enterprises. Especially from the middle of the thirteenth century we have seen that the Military Orders found it ever more difficult to find the money needed. The Hospitallers assumed increased responsibility for the defence of the kingdom. Their castles, such as Crac, were constantly improved, and they took upon themselves the defence and refortification of new sites, such as Ascalon and Mt. Thabor. These two, however, were lost only a few years after they were granted, and all their castles, except for Margat, would be lost to the Mamluks. One may argue that the losses of castles could have actually eased the Hospitallers’ financial burden. However, together with the castles they lost a large proportion of their estates, and consequently their income from rents and agricultural products diminished. It is difficult to establish from the surviving material the balance between the decrease of expenditure and of income, or to learn from this their financial situation. It will be shown below that they ascribed great importance to their local economy. Despite the continuous devastation of their lands, financial crises, and their many complaints to the West about the lack of resources and money, they conducted throughout the thirteenth century an intensive policy of investment, aimed to re-strengthen their economy and expand their patrimony.

Financial Activities of the Hospitallers in the Latin East We have seen in this chapter the Hospitallers’ commitment to the Holy Land and their determination to rebuild their economy and their military disposition despite their successive adversities. So far it has been understood that the money needed to 190

Al-Aini, ‘The Collar of Pearls’, p. 246; Marino Sanudo, ‘Liber Secretorum Fidelium Crucis’, p. 224; Gestes des Chiprois, pp. 200–01; ‘Eracles’, p. 461. The Christian sources estimate the number of animals taken as booty at the huge number of 5,000. 191 There is no detailed information on this truce. Barag believes that its terms may have been similar.to those of the 1268 treaty, but without Montfort and its dependent lands as these were already been lost. Barag, ‘A New Source Concerning the Ultimate Borders’, pp. 214–15. 192 On the fall of Montfort, the castle of the Teutonic knights located to the north-east of Acre, and of the castle of Gibelacar in the summer of 1271, see ‘ATS’, p. 455B; Gestes des Chiprois, pp. 199–200; ‘Eracles’, p. 460.

48

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

acquire castles, lands, and properties, and to re-strengthen their fortifications, came mainly from their estates in Europe. Very little, if any, attention has been given to their income in the East; yet from their involvement in certain forms of agricultural production, such as the sugar-cane industry, they seem to have been involved in economic activities that generated independent sources of income. To restore their economy after Hattin, the Hospitallers bought property from, or gave loans to, impoverished nobility in return for pledged land. In the region of Acre, they bought two manors in May 1210 for 9,000 besants.193 In 1212 they purchased from the king, John of Brienne, the casal of Manueth near Acre for 2,000 marks of silver. This was a fortified Frankish settlement where sugar-cane, wheat, and barley were grown. The Order was to expand its property in Manueth in 1231 by acquiring a fief contiguous to it for 1,600 besants.194 In November 1212 Aymar of Layron, lord of Caesarea, and his wife Juliana pledged their houses in Acre and Tyre, as well as the casal of Turcarme (in the lordship of Caesarea), in return for a loan of 2,000 besants and an amount of corn. The lord of Caesarea also pledged, a year later, in October 1213, the casalia of Cafarlet, Samarita, and Bobulorum (Bubalcrum) as surety for a debt to the Hospitallers of 1,000 besants; the debt had to be repaid from the revenues of the casalia.195 The civil war, which divided the kingdom of Jerusalem in the 1230s, allowed the Hospitallers to further expand their patrimony. In 1232, John, lord of Caesarea, who needed money to support the Ibelin cause, sold them the Casal of Cafarlet for the significant sum of 16,000 Saracen besants. Tibble explains the sharp increase in the casal’s value by the likelihood that Cafarlet was fortified, following the raid on the lordship of Caesarea by troops from Damascus in 1227.196 To find the money needed to fight the imperial forces in Cyprus, John of Ibelin sold Casal Arames to the Templars in 1232 for 15,000 Saracen besants, and property in Acre to the Hospitallers.197 To compensate for the loss of agricultural land and many cities and ports along the Palestinian-Syrian coastline after Hattin, the Hospitallers seem to have expanded their estates in the northern territories, which were less affected, or not affected at all, by Saladin’s incursions. From the beginning of the thirteenth century they showed a growing interest in the fertile lands of Cilician Armenia, which produced cereals, cotton, wine, wood and sugar-cane.198 With the donation of 193 194 195 196

197 198

Cart., no. 1346. Cart., nos. 1383, 1996. For Manueth see Ellenblum, Frankish Rural Settlement, pp. 154–55, 198–204. Cart., nos. 1400, 1414. ‘Eracles’, pp. 398–99. Tibble, Monarchy and Lordships, p. 145 and p. 128 on the fact that John was a keen supporter of the Ibelins. On the raid on the lordship of Caesarea, see Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 172–73. Cart., nos. 2015–16. Edbury, John of Ibelin, pp. 64–65. For additional acquisitions of land and property by the Hospitallers in this period, see Cart., nos. 1993, 1996, 2126, 2212. On the growing importance of Cilician Armenia after Hattin see S. Der Nersessian, ‘The Kingdom of Cilician Armenia’, Études Byzantines et Arméniennes, Louvain, 1973, vol. I, p. 340. On agricultural products from Cilician Armenia see W. Heyd, Histoire du commerce du Levant au Moyen Âge, trans. F. Reynaud, Leipzig, 1885–86 (repr. Leipzig, 1959), vol. I, pp. 368–69; R. Blanchard, ‘Asie Occidentale’, Géographie Universelle, ed. L. Gallois and P. Vidal de la Blanche, Paris, 1929, vol. VIII, pp. 77–78; J. Lefort, ‘The Rural Economy, Seventh–Twelfth Centuries’, The Economic History of Byzantium: From the Seventh through the Fifteenth Century, vol. I,

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

49

Selefkie and the castles of Goumardias (Camardias) and Norpert (Castellum Novum), located to the north of Selefkie, on the banks of the river Saleph, they took possession of significant tracts of land at the western frontier of Cilician Armenia.199 The Hospitallers fortified Selefkie almost immediately after it was granted to them and turned it into an important castellany.200 They must have been aware of the economic advantages of this town. Under Byzantine control, Selefkie, and other ports located along the southern and western coast of Asia Minor, had an important role in the commercial exchanges between Egypt and the Byzantine Empire, a role which had become more significant with the establishment of the Latin states.201 Local commodities were traded in these ports and they served as entrepots for vessels plying the main routes from the West, or from the Byzantine Empire, to the Holy Land and Egypt.202 During the twelfth century Selefkie was a prosperous town that attracted Jews and other immigrants.203 Potentially, at least, the income from Selefkie and its surrounding estates was significant. The Hospitallers, who were given juridical rights over the town, may well have benefited from its commercial activity.204 They could also have traded in products from the surrounding estates. Josafa Barbaro, an Italian who travelled in this region in the fifteenth century, described the hilly area between Corycus and Selefkie as rich in wheat, cotton, and cattle. Modern historians point to Selefkie as one of the most important districts in Cilician Armenia for the production of cotton.205 It is impos-

199 200 201

202

203

204 205

ed. A.E. Laiou, Washington, D.C., 2002, pp. 248–52. Among the items listed in Pegolotti’s Pratica della mercatura that were traded in Armenia are pepper, ginger, sugar and cotton. But it is impossible to determine from his list which were local Armenian products and which were imported. See F.B. Pegolotti, La pratica della mercatura, ed. A. Evans, Cambridge (Mass.), 1936, pp. 59–63. See above, pp. 17–18. On the location of Camardias and Castellum Novum see T.S.R. Boase, ‘Gazetteer’, in The Cilician Kingdom of Armenia, pp. 158, 175. On the fortification of Selefkie by the Hospitallers see above, p. 18. For a short description of Selefkie and its history see Boase, ‘Gazetteer’, pp. 180–81. On the importance of Selefkie and its surrounding territory in Roman and Byzantine times see The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, ed. A.P. Kazhdan, Oxford, 1991, p. 1866; W.M. Ramsay, The Historical Geography of Asia Minor, London, 1890, p. 58; A. Vasiliev, History of the Byzantine Empire, 324–1453, Oxford, 1952, p. 351; S. Runciman, ‘Byzantine Trade and Industry’, The Cambridge Economic History, vol. II (2nd ed.), ed. M. Postan et al., Cambridge, 1966, p. 139. A. Avramea, ‘Land and Sea Communications, Fourth–Fifteenth Centuries’, The Economic History of Byzantium: From the Seventh through the Fifteenth Century, vol. I, ed. A.E. Laiou, Washington, D.C., 2002, pp. 83–84; Der Nersessian, ‘The Kingdom of Cilician Armenia’, p. 345; Heyd, Histoire du commerce du Levant, vol. I, pp. 366–68; D. Jacoby, ‘What do we Learn about Byzantine Asia Minor from the Documents of the Cairo Genizah?’ Byzantium, Latin Romania and the Mediterranean, Aldershot, 2001, essay no. I, pp. 83–91; Pryor, Geography, Technology and War, pp. 94–97. Jacoby, ‘What do we Learn?’, pp. 92–95. Jacoby’s article is mainly based on a letter sent by a Jewish physician who had settled in Selefkie at the beginning of the twelfth century. The letter was found in the Cairo Genizah and published by S.D. Goitein, ‘A Letter from Seleucia (Cilicia), dated 21 July 1137’, Speculum, 39 (1964), pp. 298–303. See also idem, A Mediterranean Society: The Jewish Communities of the Arab World as Portrayed in the Documents of the Cairo Genizah, Berkeley and London, 1967 (repr. 1999), vol. I, pp. 58, 214. Selefkie, Goumardias (Camardias), and Norpert (Castellum Novum), were given ‘cum omni jure per terram et per mare’. See Cart., no. 1344. Travels to Tana and Persia by Josafa Barbaro and Ambrogio Contarini, ed. Lord Stanley of Alderley,

50

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

sible, owing to the lack of evidence, to assess the Order’s income from this region. Moreover, despite their investment in its refortification, and the town’s potential economic advantages, the Hospitallers surprisingly relinquished Selefkie only sixteen years after it was granted them.206 It is unclear from the sources whether they abandoned or sold the castle,207 and the reasons for relinquishing Selefkie could have been, as Molin has suggested, financial.208 Its agricultural production and commercial activities were possibly disrupted by border wars between Armenia and Byzantium and by the Seljuk threat. If this were the case, Selefkie had perhaps ceased to be such a valuable asset for the Hospitallers. Referring to Selefkie, Edwards states that a grant to a Military Order was often intended to be temporary, as a short-term political and military alliance.209 The brothers might have been willing to undertake the fortification and defence of an exposed frontier castle in return for a political and military alliance with Leon II and Raymond Roupen, and after their deaths with Constantine. These alliances generated more profitable acquisitions in less exposed areas in Cilician Armenia, and, as we shall see below, also in Antioch. To strengthen these political alliances, but also to expand their patrimony, the Hospitallers invested large sums in Cilician Armenia in the form of loans. In 1214 they lent Leon II 30,000 Saracen besants which the King needed for his daughter’s dowry. As a guarantee for the loan, he granted the Order the lordship of Vaner, in the territory of Melon, as well as the land of Giguerius and the port-town of Calamella.210 These were valuable acquisitions. The lordship of Vaner and the land of Giguerius, in the vicinity of Misis (Mamistra) and Til Hamdoun, were rich in wheat and cotton.211 With these acquisitions the Hospitallers expanded their holdings in the region, where they had held

206 207

208 209 210 211

trans. W. Thomas, London, 1873, pp. 44–45; Heyd, Histoire du commerce du Levant, vol. II, p. 612; M. Mazzaoui, The Italian Cotton Industry in the Later Middle Ages, 1100–1600, Cambridge, 1981, p. 39. Cotton was one of the main agricultural products purchased by Italian merchants in Cilicia. See C. Otten-Froux, ‘Les relations économiques entre Chypre et le Royaume Arménien de Cilicia d’après les actes notariés (1270–1320)’, L’Arménie et Byzance. Histoire et culture, Paris, 1996, pp. 170–71. Beaufort, who, at the beginning of the nineteenth century conducted a survey of the area for the British navy, describes the strong currents of the river Saleph (Calycadnus), which flows below the town of Selefkie. On its banks he saw a rich pasture for large herds of cattle. See F. Beaufort, Karamania or a Brief Description of the South Coast of Asia Minor and of the Remains of Antiquity, London, 1817, pp. 223–29. See above, pp. 17–18. Constable Sempad, ‘Chronique’, p. 648. Bar-Hebraeus, The Chronography of Gregory Abu’l-Faraj, 1225–1286, ed. E.A. Wallis Budge, Amsterdam, 1976 (1st ed., Oxford, 1932), vol. I, pp. 389–90. Bar-Hebraeus states that the castle was sold; unfortunately, he does not specify how much Constantine paid for it. This would have been crucial information for us about the cost of castles of that size. Molin, Unknown Crusader Castles, p. 182. Edwards, The Fortifications of Cilician Armenia, pp. 46–50. Cart., nos. 1426–1427. For the location of these lands see Boase, ‘Gazetteer’, p. 185; Edwards, The Fortifications of Cilician Armenia, p. 28; Molin, Unknown Crusader Castles, p. 180. On agricultural products from the Cilician plain, in particular the area of Mamistra and the banks of the Pyramus, see Abu'l Fida, Géographie d’Aboulféda, trans. S. Guyard, vol. II, Paris, 1883, pp. 27–29; Beaufort, Karamania, p. 25; Cahen, La Syrie du Nord, p. 473; Blanchard, ‘Asie Occidentale’, p. 78; Heyd, Histoire du commerce du Levant, vol. I, pp. 368–69.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

51

property since 1149.212 Farther east, in the Gulf of Alexandretta, the Hospitallers received Calamella (Canamela), another important acquisition. The humid lands of the Gulf of Alexandretta were optimal for growing sugar-cane.213 Calamella was also a port for the export of pine timber from the Amanus, and it was granted to the Hospitallers together with the right to trade in timber and other goods.214 It is not clear from the sources whether the Hospitallers held Calamella throughout the thirteenth century. Ibn al-Furat refers to it as a Templar castle, which was raided by Baybars’ troops in the 1260s. Ibn al-Furat may have confused the Orders; yet Calamella, like with many other valuable assets in the Levant which had been disputed with the Templars, might have changed hands or the Orders might have came to some sort of agreement over it.215 The Hospitallers agricultural products from Cilician Armenia were shipped to their headquarters in Acre as part of the responsiones, and the surpluses were probably traded in Misis or the flourishing port of Ayas.216 These products were not only an important factor in their economy, they also became indispensable for the survival of the brothers in the Holy Land. According to Ibn al-Furat, this dependence forced Hugh Revel in 1266 to sue for peace with the Atabek, the commander in chief of the Mamluk army, in order to ensure the supplies from Cilician Armenia and Tripoli. This request was denied, and that same year Calamella was sacked and the rich lands on the coast of Alexandretta were raided.217 The Mamluk incursions, as explained by Hugh Revel in his letter of 1268, had indeed stopped the crucial supply of provisions from Cilician Armenia to Acre.218 The shrinkage of the kingdom of Jerusalem after Hattin must have also increased 212 213

214

215

216

217 218

Cart., no. 183; Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, pp. 139–40. E.G. Rey, ‘Les périples des côtes de Syrie et de la Petite Arménie’, ‘ATS’, vol. II, pp. 332–33. Archaeological excavations conducted in Turkish ‘Kinet’, which the archaeologists suggest is medieval Calamella, revealed evidence of town industries of ironwork, woven goods and pottery. See S. Redford, S. Ikram et al., ‘Excavations at Medieval Kinet, Turkey: A Preliminary Report’, Ancient Near Eastern Studies, 38 (2001), pp. 58–139. Cart., no. 1427. Deschamps, Châteaux des croisés, vol. III (La défense du comté de Tripoli), p. 70. At the beginning of the nineteenth century Beaufort (Karamania, p. 277) described this region as covered with extensive forest, which produced timber of large dimensions. Before the First Crusade Cilicia was the main supplier of timber to Egypt; afterwards the Italians had a major role in this trade, in spite of repeated prohibitions on trading in war materials with the Muslims. I would like to thank Professor Jacoby, who provided me with information regarding the export of wood from Calamella to Egypt. See also his article, ‘The Supply of War Materials to Egypt in the Crusader Period’, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 25 (2001), pp. 119–21. Ibn al-Furat, p. 99; Molin, Unknown Crusader Castles, p. 188; Riley-Smith’s commentary in Ibn al-Furat, p. 217, n. 5. Although Calamella must have changed hands I have not found evidence of a dispute over it between the Orders. Although Ayas suffered Mamluk invasions, it was an important port and an active commercial centre when visited by Marco Polo in 1271. After the fall of Acre it became one of the main ports on the Eastern Mediterranean coast. See Der Nersessian, ‘The Kingdom of Cilician Armenia’, p. 348; J. Richard, ‘The Eastern Mediterranean and its Relations with its Hinterland (11th–15th Centuries)’, Les relations entre l’Orient et l’Occident au Moyen Age, London, 1977, essay no. I, p. 18; Heyd, Histoire du commerce du Levant, vol. II, pp. 73–92. For the export of war materials from Ayas to Egypt see Jacoby, ‘The Supply of War Materials to Egypt’, pp. 121–24. Ibn al-Furat, pp. 87, 99. See above, p. 42.

52

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

the Order’s dependence on supplies sent from its estates around Crac des Chevaliers and Margat, which had not fallen into Saladin’s hands. The establishment of the Hospitallers in these areas was accomplished mostly in the twelfth century.219 In the thirteenth century there was very little room for expansion, and the lack of available land led to a growing number of disputes with the Templars and other ecclesiastical authorities over properties and rights.220 The Hospitallers made few acquisitions in these regions at the beginning of the century. In 1204, with the payment of 2,100 Saracen besants to the constable of Tripoli, they guaranteed their ownership of the fortress of Tuban. Two years later Aimery of Pax, castellan of Margat, bought lands near his castle. The aim of these acquisitions was not purely military. The fortress of Tuban, which formed part of a complex of strongholds defending the eastern marches of Crac des Chevaliers, was located in the fertile valley of La Boquée. From it, as from other lands the Hospitallers owned in the region, they could provide supplies to the castle of Crac.221 As it has been shown elsewhere, this reliance on victuals from nearby lands became crucial once the Mamluk incursions isolated Crac from the main Christian towns along the coast.222 Castles of the size of Crac and Margat, which were inhabited by thousands, demanded vast quantities of foodstuffs, grown on adjacent lands or bought in local markets. But apart from growing food for daily consumption, the Hospitallers were also involved in the industrial production of specific goods. The lands of Casal Robert in the Galilee were planted mostly with olive trees. In their lands in Mt. Pèlerin, in the county of Tripoli, they seem also to have grown olive trees, and vineyards.223 Sugar-cane was cultivated on many of the Order’s estates, which may suggest its involvement in the industrial production of sugar to sell on local markets, or even to export to Europe. This would have been a very profitable enterprise. As sugar-cane needs hot weather and a large quantity of water, and is tolerant of a wide range of soil types, the Latin East became the major producer of sugar for Europe.224 The Hospitallers were producing their own sugar by the second half of

219

220 221 222 223 224

On the Order’s expansion in the areas of the castles of Crac and Margat in the twelfth century see Deschamps, Châteaux des croisés, vol. I (Le Crac des Chevaliers), pp. 116–33; vol. III (La Défense du comté de Tripoli), pp. 264–72. Cart., nos. 2296 (exchange of casalia with the Templars in the areas of Crac and the Templars’ Chateau Blanc), 2388 (agreement with the archbishop of Mamistra over tithes). Cart., nos. 1198, 1232; Deschamps, Châteaux des croisés, vol. I (Le Crac des Chevaliers), pp. 107–9. See above, p. 43. Cart., nos. 2693, 2148; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 434–35. See James of Vitry, ‘Historia orientalis seu Hierosolymitana’, Gesta Dei per Francos, ed. J. Bongars, Hanover, 1611, vol. I, p. 1075. For modern works on the sugar industry in the East see Heyd, Histoire du commerce du Levant, vol. II, pp. 680–93; N. Deerr, The History of Sugar, London, 1949, vol. I, pp. 74–97; Benvenisti, The Crusaders in the Holy Land, pp. 253–57; E. Ashtor, ‘Levantine Sugar Industry in the Later Middle Ages, an Example of Technological Decline’, Israel Oriental Studies, 7 (1971), pp. 227–29; Riley-Smith, Feudal Nobility, pp. 49–50; B. Porëe, ‘Les moulins et fabriques à sucre de Palestine et de Chypre: Histoire, géographie et technologie d’une production croisée et médiévale’, Cyprus and the Crusades, ed. N. Coureas and J. Riley-Smith, Nicosia, 1995, pp. 377–465; A. Peled, ‘Sugar: a Local Industry in the Kingdom of Jerusalem’, Knights of the Holy Land: The Kingdom of Jerusalem, ed. S. Rozenberg, Jerusalem, 1999, pp. 217–21. For a study on the expansion of sugar production from the Near East to Spain and Sicily and from there to the Atlantic Islands, see D. Abulafia, ‘La produzione dello

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

53

the twelfth century. In 1182 their houses in Mt. Pèlerin and Tiberias were required to send sugar to Jerusalem as their responsiones; the sugar was used for making medicines and syrup for the sick.225 The interest of the Order in this industry may have increased at the beginning of the thirteenth century, when Acre became a centre of international trade and a major exporter of sugar to Europe. Casal Bobulorum, which the Order received as surety for a debt in 1213, had sugar plantations, as attested to by an agreement made in 1166 between the lord of Caesarea and the canons of the Holy Sepulchre. It specified that the stream running into the casal would also be used for the production of sugar (canamellae).226 The Hospitallers’ disputes with ecclesiastical authorities and with the Templars intimate that they were trying to industrialize their production of sugar. A sugar factory had existed since 1168 in Casal Manueth, which the Hospitallers bought in 1212. In 1238, agreements with the bishop of Acre over tithes taken from the casal had to be revised because the Order had created new plantations of sugar-cane.227 One of the prolonged disputes between the Hospitallers and the Templars was over the waters of the Flum d’Acre (Nahaman River), which were vital for agricultural purposes and for the operation of the mills at Doc and Recordane. Agreements were signed between the Orders in 1201, 1235, and 1262, preventing diversion of the riverbed by the cutting of canals to carry water to operate the Templars’ mills and irrigate the Hospitallers’ sugar-cane plantations. It is interesting that the two early agreements and the papal letters do not mention the sugar plantations, which may suggest a decision by the Hospitallers after 1235 to concentrate on sugar production in this area.228 The Order probably also had sugar-cane plantations in the fertile plains of Tyre. A charter of confirmation from 1260, issued to the Order by Lord John of Tyre, which specifies its property in the lordship, mentions that some of the casalia were located next to John’s Hortus de la Baquerie, where sugar-cane and vines were planted. Considering that they were granted water rights in the area and owned mills, one may assume that the Hospitallers had their own plantations.229 As we saw

225

226 227

228 229

zucchero nei domini della Corona d’Aragona’, Medioevo Mezzogiorno Mediterraneo. Studi in onore di Mario del Treppo, ed. G. Rossetti and G. Vitolo (Europa Mediterranea, quaderni 13), vol. II, Naples, 2000, pp. 105–19. Cart., no. 627. A donation given in 1116 by Raymond of St. Gilles to the monastery of St. Mary of the Latins mentioned sugar plantations on Mt. Pèlerin. See J. Richard, ‘Le chartrier de Sainte Marie-Latine et l’établissement de Raymond de Saint-Gilles à Mont-Pèlerin’, Mélanges Louis Halphen, Paris, 1951, p. 612. Cart., no. 1414; RRH, no. 425. Cart., nos. 1911, 2200. For sugar industry in Manueth see Pringle, Secular Buildings in the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem, pp. 13, 69, and R. Frankel, ‘Topographical Notes on the Territory of Acre in the Crusader Period’, Israel Exploration Journal, 38 (1988), p. 260. For the archaeological findings in Manueth see Edna Stern, ‘The Excavations at Lower Horvat Manot: A Medieval Sugar Production’, Atiqot 42 (2001), pp. 277–308 (in Hebrew). For additional evidence of sugar-cane plantations in the vicinity of Acre see RRH, no. 344. In 1179, King Baldwin IV donated to the Order an annual rent of sugar to be taken from plantations near Acre. See RRH, no. 582. Cart., nos. 1144, 2107, 2117, 2120, 3032, 3045; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 446–47 and Feudal Nobility, p. 52; Ellenblum, Frankish Rural Settlement, pp. 207–08. RRH, no. 1286. To the west of Tyre, along the seashore, was one of the most important plan-

54

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

above, the Hospitallers at Mt. Pèlerin, in the county of Tripoli, were to provide sugar to the convent in Jerusalem. Throughout the thirteenth century they made great efforts to expand their plantations in the area, with the acquisition of several casalia in the fertile plain of Tripoli.230 Recent archaeological excavations in the Hospitallers’ headquarters in Acre have revealed extensive warehouses, which contained remains of sugar, pottery containers, and many tools for its refining process. These findings predate 1291 and are a further indication of the active involvement of the Order in this industry, and possibly also in the export of sugar.231 They carried this concern to Cyprus, where it became an important export. Although evidence for its production on the estate of the Order in Kolossi is only found in the fourteenth century, Luttrell believes it may have been produced there earlier.232 The Order’s local products, such as sugar, were intended to supply its men and to provide for the sick and the poor, but their surpluses must have been traded. In theory, at least, the Hospitallers had a privileged position in their transactions because papal bulls exempted them from paying secular taxes on their products. Riley-Smith has pointed out, however, that these privileges were not generally applied and they were at times granted at the initiative of secular lords.233 Rights for free passage of the Order’s personnel and goods through the gate of Tripoli were bestowed as early as 1126 by Count Pons, who also gave the Hospitallers the right to trade freely in the town’s market.234 These concessions were expanded in 1144 by Raymond of Tripoli, who granted the Hospitallers and their men an exemption from taxes on whatever they bought and sold in all his lands.235 The Order had also enjoyed these privileges in the principality of Antioch. From Bohemond III’s confirmation of the acquisition of Margat, which includes a description of the privileges given to the Order by the prince, it seems that the Order enjoyed this right not only in all the prince’s lands but also in his ports. He states that he has exempted the Hospitallers from paying customary or curial taxes for their goods, when entering or leaving, selling or buying, throughout his lands and all his dominions, on land and sea.236 In 1212 Guy, lord of Gibelet (Jubail/Byblos), joined the Order as a confrater,

230 231

232

233 234 235 236

tations of sugar-cane in the region, which belonged to the Venetians. See Urkunden zur älteren Handels- und Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig, vol. II, no. 299 (p. 368). See below, pp. 57–58, 61. For this information I am grateful to Edna and Eliezer Stern from the Israel Antiquities Authority. For these findings of sugar and sugar-related items see also Eliezer Stern, ‘Old Akko, the Fortress’, Hadashot Arkheologiyot, 110 (1999), p. 17, and ‘The Hospitallers’ Compound in Acre’, p. 8 (both articles are in Hebrew). A. Luttrell, ‘The Sugar Industry and its Importance for the Economy of Cyprus during the Frankish Period’, The Development of the Cypriot Economy, from the Prehistoric Period to the Present Day, ed. V. Karageorghis and D. Michaelides, Nicosia, 1996, pp. 166–67. For the production of sugar in Kolossi and in general in the Hospitallers’ houses in Cyprus see also P.W. Edbury, ‘The Medieval Kingdom of Cyprus’, Medieval History, 2 (1992), p. 89, and The Kingdom of Cyprus, pp. 77–78. For the papal privileges see Cart., nos. 964, 2017; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 451–55. Cart., no. 79. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 453. ‘concedo etiam eis libertatem de propriis rebus suis per totam terram meam, et per totum

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

55

and gave the Hospitallers the rights to sell and buy merchandise throughout his lands, free of taxes. He also granted them exemption from customary taxes levied in the market and in any other place in the town of Gibelet, as well as the right of free passage from its port to the Order’s vessels.237 Similar grants were given to the Order in the kingdom of Cyprus, which became one of the main suppliers of foods to the Latin settlers in the Holy Land. The confirmation by King Hugh I, issued in 1210, of the Hospitallers’ properties and rights in Cyprus specifies their right to buy and sell their own products without paying any tolls. Their vessels, carrying the Order’s own products, were given permission to enter and leave Hugh’s ports freely. It seems from this charter that the exemption from taxes was valid as long as the Order was trading in, and carrying, its own goods; any other form of transaction was taxable.238 The Hospitallers must have sent shipments of food commodities, mainly sugar, grain, and wine, from their lands around Paphos and Kolossi to their headquarters in Acre. The deteriorating situation of the kingdom of Jerusalem, from the second half of the thirteenth century, intensified their dependence on these shipments.239 This is attested by a letter sent in March 1282 by the Hospitaller Joseph of Chauncy to Edward I of England, which informs the king about the pitiful situation of the Holy Land. The shortage of food, caused by a drought and the Mamluk incursions, was aggravated by the fact that Cyprus and Cilician Armenia were suffering from the same conditions.240 By the beginning of the thirteenth century, therefore, the Hospitallers were trading their products on the local markets of Antioch, Tripoli, and Cyprus, as well as exporting them in their own vessels. They were in an advantageous position,

237

238

239

240

posse meum terra et mari, intrando et exeundo, vendendo et emendo, sine aliqua consuetudine et omni curie exactione’, Cart., no. 783. For earlier grants of free passage in the principality of Antioch see Cart., nos. 183, 311; RRH, no. 428. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 453. ‘libertatem emendi et vendendi quicquid voluerint in tota terra Biblii et omni dominatione mea, ita quod in civitate Biblii intus vel extra, et in omnibus suis pertinentiis per mare et per terram, in portu, in funda vel in aliquo loco . . . Verum cum fratres Hospitalis pro suis negotiis vassellum aliquod conduxerint exeundo vel redeundo, nichil juris vel consuetudinis michi vel meis heredibus, aut successoribus, aut alicui hominum reddant vel tribuant aliquo modo’, Cart., no. 1372. Riley-Smith explains this donation as the strong support given by the Hospitallers to the lord of Gibelet in his dispute with the prince of Antioch. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 162. ‘Dono etiam tibi et predicte domui libertatem per universum regnum meum in Cypro emendi et vendendi proprias res domus Hospitalis per terram et per mare, sine alicujus dricture exhibitione. Dono etiam tibi et predicte domui libertatem intrandi et exeundi cum omnibus vassellis propiis domus Hospitalis, que portabunt proprias res domus Hospitalis, sine alicujus dricture exhibitione . . .’, Cart., no. 1354. For Cyprus’s agricultural resources see J. Richard, ‘Une economie coloniale? Chypre et ses ressources agricoles au Moyen Âge’, Croisés, missionnaires et voyageurs. Les perspectives orientales du monde latin médiéval, London, 1983, essay no. VIII, pp. 348–49. For the Order’s estates in Cyprus and their agricultural production see also N. Coureas, ‘The Role of the Templars and the Hospitallers in the Movement of Commodities Involving Cyprus, 1291–1312’, The Experience of Crusading, Volume Two: Defending the Crusader Kingdom, ed. P.W. Edbury and J. Phillips, Cambridge, 2003, pp. 267–68; P.W. Edbury, ‘The Franco-Cypriot Landowning Class and its Exploitation of the Agrarian Resources of the Island of Cyprus’, Kingdoms of the Crusades: From Jerusalem to Cyprus, Aldershot, 1999, essay no. XIX, pp. 5–6. Cart., no. 3782.

56

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

which benefited them and made these activities even more rewarding. Considering that a percentage of the Order’s products worldwide was to be sent to its headquarters, one would expect to find the Hospitallers possessing similar privileges in the kingdom of Jerusalem. But royal confirmations of properties and rights given to the Order in the course of the twelfth century do not mention exemption from tolls on merchandise and trade, or free anchorage in the kingdom’s ports.241 The Hospitallers apparently enjoyed at least some of these rights. A charter of privilege issued by King Henry in October 1194, giving the Teutonic knights the right to buy clothing and provisions for their own use free of taxes, specifies that this privilege is similar to the one enjoyed by the Hospitallers and the Templars.242 In 1195, King Henry II exempted from tolls the Order’s goods passing through one of the gates of Acre.243 The Hospitallers were seemingly not granted the right to own a market in Acre, and their transactions may have been conducted in the King’s markets, where some of their merchandise, such as sugar, was probably traded at a high profit.244 Although they were exempted from taxes when purchasing provisions, it is not clear whether they paid taxes for their sales. It is also impossible to conclude whether they paid taxes for merchandise exported in their own vessels.245 More evidence has to come to light before we try to reach clear-cut conclusions on these matters; papal privileges of freedom from tolls and taxes might have applied in the kingdom of Jerusalem. Moreover, taking into consideration the vital role of the port of Acre in supplying the Hospitallers in the Holy Land, and considering their aggressive economic policy, they may well have enjoyed a more privileged position than the available sources reveal. The Hospitallers must have striven to attain a privileged position, which would have allowed them to profit from the flourishing economy of Acre in the first half of the thirteenth century. The expansion of the Order in the East came to a halt after the defeat at La Forbie and the heavy expenses incurred during Louis IX’s crusade to Egypt. Still, the Hospitallers were determined not only to restore their military forces, but also to rebuild and expand their economy. The period from 1250 to 1263 is marked by a significant expansion of Hospitaller property in the Holy Land. This was mainly possible because financial difficulties obliged secular and ecclesiastical lords to alienate large tracts of land and property to the Military Orders.246 This was the reason for two major grants to the Order at this time: the abbey of Mt. Thabor and the nunnery of St. Lazarus of Bethany.247 The acquisition of Mt. Thabor was part of a policy of expansion in the Galilee. In August 1254 the Hospitallers purchased Casal Robert, to the north of Mt. 241 242 243 244

Cart., nos. 77, 84, 225. Tabulae Ordinis Theutonici, ed. E. Strehlke, Berlin, 1864, no. 60. Cart., no. 972. The ‘assises de la cour de bourgeois’ listed sugar as one of the items for which duties were paid in the city markets. ‘Livre des Assises de la Cour des Bourgeois’, RHC, Lois, vol. II, no. 262, pp. 173–78. 245 For a detailed discussion of the commercial exemption in Acre see Riley-Smith, Feudal Nobility, pp. 62–98. 246 On the financial situation of the Latin Church from the middle of the thirteenth century see Hamilton, pp. 282–309. 247 On the grants of Mt. Thabor and Bethany see above, pp. 28–29.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

57

Thabor, from Julian, lord of Sidon, for 24,000 Saracen besants. The casal, which seems to have been planted with olive trees, was probably sold because of the acute financial crisis suffered by the lord of Sidon following the raids on his lordship in 1249 and 1253. The Hospitallers’ rights over Casal Robert were disputed by the archbishop of Nazareth. To obtain full right over it, they agreed, in January 1263, to pay him 4,000 Saracen besants of Acre weight, and promised to give him an annual rent of 400. This rent was to be paid as long as the casal was in Christian hands, which must have been for at least another few years, as the agreement was annulled only in 1271.248 They further expanded their property in Galilee with the renting of the casalia of Rome, Romene, Cana Galilee, and Cafreezeir from the archbishop of Nazareth in July 1255. The casalia were leased for the ten-year duration of a truce with the Muslims. The Order agreed to pay 1,300 Saracen besants in the first year, 1,800 besants in the second, and 2,300 besants thereafter. In October 1259, owing to the deterioration of the military situation this agreement was revised in the Order’s favour. The archbishop, who was unable to maintain and defend the casalia because of Muslim raids and daily disagreements with the Muslim peasants, now leased the casalia for 2,000 besants a year. This rent was to be paid even in time of war, as long as 170 carrucates of land were cultivated. If the Order was not able to cultivate more than 100 carrucates, or if the ground could not be fully sown with corn, barley, and beans, the produce would be divided. These casalia must have been included in an agreement made later that month with the archbishop, in which he leased to the Hospitallers nineteen casalia in the archdiocese for 14,000 Saracen besants a year. Both sides concluded that if the revenues from these casalia in the first year did not reach the expected sum the Order would pay the archbishop half the rent. This is an important clause, considering that very little information survives regarding the Order’s income in the Holy Land in the thirteenth century. From the rent they were willing to pay we can estimate their expected income.249 It also shows the measures adopted by the Order and other landholders in the East to cope with the continuous state of war, changes of borders, and the possible loss of territory. An additional example appears in an agreement made between the Hospitallers and the abbey of St. Mary of the Latins in August 1248. The Order leased from the abbey the casalia of Montdidier and Turriclee (Turris Rubea), between Caesarea and Jaffa, as well as the abbey’s rights over the casal of Cacho, for a rent of 800 Saracen besants. After considering the possibility that the casalia would be lost to the Muslims, the Hospitallers agreed, in that case, to pay the rent as long as the cities of Acre and Tyre remained in Christian hands.250 The archbishop of Nazareth was not the only ecclesiastical lord facing financial difficulties. In January 1257, the bishop of Tripoli borrowed 1,900 livres tournois from the Hospitallers in order to travel to Europe. Also, in Tripoli they expanded their sugar-cane plantations with the purchase in 1259 of the casal of Bethorafig

248

Cart., nos. 3050–51. According to Tibble, Casal Robert was a semi-fortified settlement: see Tibble, Monarchy and Lordships, p. 72. For the annulment of the agreement see Cart., no. 3414. 249 Cart., nos. 2748, 2934, 2936. There is also very little knowledge of the capital value of lordships and their annual rent. See Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility, pp. 31–32. 250 Cart., no. 2482. This agreement was renewed following the loss of these casalia to the Mamluks in 1265. See above, p. 39.

58

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

and fifteen pariliatae (or pareillées) – a specific term which defined sugar-cane plantations, for which they paid Hugh of Gibelet 5,000 besants of Tripoli.251 This sale, however, was apparently concluded only in 1264. The agreement clearly indicates that Hugh had been forced to alienate his property because he was heavily in debt. It is interesting that in the charter of 1264 the Order agreed to pay for the same transaction the much larger sum of 12,000 Saracen besants. Although the reason for this increase is not specified, it may have been connected to the importance of the sugar industry in the area, where the Hospitallers bought another fifteen pareillées from Raymond of Gibelet. The increase in the price could be explained by the possibility that the plantations in Bethorafig and its adjacent lands, located in an area still not affected by Mamluk incursions, had been developed and cultivated from 1259, the year the Hospitallers showed interest in the lands, to 1264, the year when the transaction was concluded.252 From the lord of Sidon they bought, in June 1257 or 1258, the casalia of La Maroenie, Haanouf, and Daraya in the vicinity of the city of Sidon for 5,000 Saracen besants. In the same year they also secured their right to make future acquisitions in his lordship for 1,000 Saracen besants.253 With the acquisition of Mt. Thabor, the Hospitallers received shops and houses in the city of Acre, and throughout this period they made a great effort to expand and improve their property in the city and its surroundings. In 1252 they were allowed to build new gates at each end of their street.254 In May 1255 John, the lord of Caesarea, granted the Order all he had in Acre in a street called Rabat: land, houses, a mill and an oven, in return for prayers and an annual rent of 600 besants a year, to be paid to his sister-in-law, Isabel of Adelon.255 In 1257 the Order agreed to pay the bishop of Acre an annual rent of forty Saracen besants for a house in the city next to its own property.256 The Hospitallers also made great efforts to expand their holdings of agricultural land in the surroundings of the city, and in August 1255 they bought from the lord of Arsur two tracts of land in the plain of Acre for 2,000 besants of Acre.257 To the south of Acre, in the fertile land watered by the river Nahaman, they received in 1253 casal Damor, as security on a loan of 12,000 Saracen besants made to the lord of Caesarea. They also bought additional lands in the same area, located north of their mill at Recordane.258 To the east of Recordane 251 252

253 254 255 256 257 258

Cart., no. 2915. Cart., no. 3106 is a French summary of the 1264 agreement. This agreement, together with the purchase of sugar plantations from Raymond of Gibelet (dated to c.1220–1253), is included in a 1274 agreement between the Hospitallers and the lord of Gibelet over these lands. See J. Richard, ‘Le comté de Tripoli dans les chartes du fonds des Porcellet’, Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartes, 130 (1972), pp. 377–82 and pp. 360–66. These last pages include Richard’s commentaries on the historical background of these agreements, their importance for the further development of the sugar industry, and the meaning of the term pareillées. Cart., nos. 2688, 2852, 2856; Tibble, Monarchy and Lordships, pp. 169–75. Cart., no. 2612. Cart., no. 2732. Cart., no. 2865. Cart., no. 2753. On the acquisition of lands in the area see RRH, nos. 1212, 1227. On casal Damor see Cart., no. 2661 and Tibble, Monarchy and Lordships, p. 131. See also Frankel, ‘Topographical Notes on the Territory of Acre’, p. 261, who gives a detailed description of the Order’s expansion in the area to the south of Acre.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

59

the Hospitallers obtained full rights over Casal Cabor following their agreement with the Templars dating from 1262. This emphasizes the involvement of the Hospitallers in the production of sugar in the region. As early as the tenth century Cabor had been famous for its sugar-cane plantations, and its sugar mill operated during the central Middle Ages.259 By 1250 Caesarea was one of the few lordships that still remained in secular hands.260 However, owing to the financial difficulties faced by its lord, the Hospitallers were able to extend their property considerably. Besides Damor, which, as we have just seen, was pledged to the Hospitallers in 1253, they bought casal Chatillon (La Meserae) from the lord of Caesarea in April 1255 for 500 besants. They probably negotiated such a small sum because it was a fortified place that John could no longer maintain. Tibble estimates that 74.3% of the lordship of Caesarea was in the hands of the Templars and the Hospitallers by 1264.261 The Mongol incursions adversely affected the landlords’ economic situation in the Holy Land and resulted in further alienation of property to the Military Orders in the early 1260s. The lords of Sidon and Arsur, who until then were able to retain control of extensive portions of their lands, were forced to sell their entire lordships. Tibble suggests that it was the economic strength of these lordships, and the possibility to buy them en bloc, that made them so attractive to the Military Orders.262 Julian of Sidon, who was unable to repair the damage done to the city by the Mongol raid, sold the entire lordship of Sidon and Beaufort to the Templars in 1260. The money needed for this transaction had to be collected from all their preceptories. Brother Roger, preceptor of San Gimignano in Tuscany, acknowledged in June 1261 that he had taken a loan of ten livres to raise the money that his house, like all the other preceptories, had been ordered to send to Acre for the purchase of Sidon.263 A year later Balian of Ibelin leased the lordship of Arsur to the Hospitallers for an annual rent of 4,000 besants. Although the lordship was now on the kingdom’s border, the Order may have expected to gain some profit from it. Riley-Smith has estimated that the total revenues from Arsur must have been double the rent, about 8,000 besants. From this the Hospitallers had to hand out more than 2,000 to their vassals and supply them with a large quantity of provisions.264 They were probably able to cover this rent from their existing assets in the East. But they

259

260 261 262 263

264

Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, p. 441, n. 7; Porëe, ‘Les moulins et fabriques à sucre’, pp. 411–12. See Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 449. On the agreement with the Templars see above, p. 31. On the attempts made by the lords of Caesarea and Jaffa to retain their lordships see Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility, pp. 28–32. Cart., no. 2725; Tibble, Monarchy and Lordships, pp. 132, 151. Tibble, Monarchy and Lordships, pp. 167–85. Tibble suggests that Sidon may have been leased to the Templars, not sold. From the fact that each one of the Order’s houses was ordered to send at least 10 livres, which must have amounted to a significant sum of money, I tend to agree with Barber that it was probably a purchase. See Tibble, Monarchy and Lordships, pp. 173–74; Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 243–44, 364, no. 65. On the loan see RRH, no. 1303a; Röhricht, ‘Études sur les derniers temps’, pp. 333–34. Cart., nos. 2972, 2985; Riley-Smith, Feudal Nobility, p. 32, and The Knights of St. John, pp. 133–34, 455–56.

60

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

must have needed additional money for the re-fortification of the outer wall of Arsur, on which they started early in 1263.265 The intensive investment of the Hospitallers in the 1250s and at the beginning of the 1260s is surprising, considering that a major theme of their letters and papal bulls was that they were suffering financial difficulties, for which loans were taken and property was sold in Europe. These investments perhaps suggest that they were not as badly off as they would have liked the West to believe. Indeed, one of the main difficulties in studying their correspondence is to identify, among their many complaints, their real needs. We have seen that throughout the thirteenth century they, and the Latin settlers in general, had embarked on a huge propaganda campaign to promote their cause, emphasizing the distress they laboured under; yet they were undoubtedly beset by huge costs. They were able to meet them by putting more pressure on their priories overseas, which, faced by these increasing demands and economic changes in Europe, were forced to alienate property, as we will see in the next chapter. At the same time, they had also adopted what look like desperate measures in the East. For the first time they appropriated the money collected from the redemption of crusading vows in the kingdom of Jerusalem, money which the patriarch of Jerusalem, as papal legate, had the right to collect. To get this money they even risked excommunication, which was imposed by ecclesiastical authorities in the East, probably in 1255 and 1258.266 It can hardly be a coincidence that these events occurred at about the same time that the civil war and the decline of Acre as a centre of international trade were having severe repercussions on the economy of the Latin East. The Hospitallers’ income from trading in some of their products, such as sugar, must have been affected. From 1263 on, the intensity and devastation of the Mamluk incursions destroyed the Order’s economy in the East. It had lost not only most of its castles and urban properties but also the major part of its agricultural lands. Frequent raids ruined the crops and prevented the Franks from working their fields. Nevertheless, the Hospitallers made remarkable attempts to keep their lands under cultivation.267 Many of the Order’s estates in the Galilee were raided during Baybars’ incursion of February 1263. These casalia, which, after the destruction of Mt. Thabor, could still have been protected by the Templar castle of Safad, were probably still under cultivation. In February 1265 the Hospitallers settled a dispute with Eschiva, princess of Galilee, over the ownership of the casalia of Lubie, Seiera, Quepsene, Arbel, Demie, Beitegon, Harousse, and Hordie, which lay to the east of Casal Robert, between the casal and the Sea of Galilee. It was agreed that in return for 200 carrucates of land the Hospitallers would hand these casalia over to the princess.268 Although details regarding the Hospitallers’ income from these casalia might have provided us with important information as to their economic situation in the 1260s and 1270s, it is impossible to estimate it, as the casalia were not leased or purchased, but were given together with the monastery of Mt. Thabor. We have no 265 266 267 268

For Arsur’s refortification see above, pp. 35, 59–60. For these events see Chapter 3 below, pp. 120–21. See also above, pp. 35–44. Cart., no. 3116. Unfortunately, the charter did not specify the location of the land given to the Hospitallers.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

61

evidence on whether the estate was self-supporting or generated an income. Before the Mamluk offensives started, investments in the Galilee might have been profitable. We saw that in the 1250s the Hospitallers leased nineteen casalia there for an annual rent of 14,000 Saracen besants. If the land was used either to yield produce for sale or was sub-let, they would probably have expected a return of double or more.269 This income was bound to have been heavily affected by the Mamluk raids into the region. The Order’s determination to keep the land under cultivation must have been reinforced by the necessity to provide for the brothers and the remaining Latin settlement in Palestine. As part of these efforts, the Hospitallers seemed to have paid close attention to preserving the sugar industry, which was very important for their economy, and which must have been heavily affected by Baybars’ incursions. The plain of Tripoli, which Ibn al-Furat writes ‘produced sugar cane in quantity’, was raided in 1266 and again in 1268. In the first attack the Mamluks devastated the sugar industry to the north of the city of Tripoli. They took the fortress of Albe, where they found a large quantity of copper and sugar. The Templar castle of Arcas (Villejargon), where the Order enjoyed considerable revenues from sugar-cane plantations and cultivated fields, was destroyed. So was Hospitaller Coliath, a small fortress which the Order must have rebuilt in 1212–1266.270 Nevertheless, despite the frequency of the Mamluk incursions, the Franks continued developing and exploiting the area until the fall of Tripoli in 1289. To the north of the city, in the bay of Arcas next to Coliath, the Hospitallers reached an agreement in 1274 with the lord of Gibelet regarding their right to use the water of the river Barid to irrigate their fields. In the fertile plain to the south of the city of Tripoli, the lord of Gibelet re-confirmed in 1274 the sales of casal Bethorafig and thirty pareillées of sugar-cane, which the Order had bought from his ancestors. These lands were still under cultivation and were the cause of disputes with the local church. According to Jean Richard, they must have been part of the fifty pieces of land in the fertile plain of Tripoli for which the Order had obtained exemption from tithes in 1277.271 Their resolve to maintain profitable crops, but also their probably increasing need for agricultural products at a time of continuous contraction of Christian territory and the devastation of Christian fields, is illustrated by an exchange of property made with the lord of Tyre in July 1269. The Hospitallers gave Philip of Monfort a gate in the city of Tyre in return for Casal Maron. This seems to have been a venture transaction, considering that after the fall of the castles of Beaufort, Chastel Neuf, and Toron this casal, which lay to the east of the city, was frontierland, and completely exposed to possible Mamluk attacks. Nevertheless, there is evidence that other Hospitaller casalia located in this area were still under cultivation. In January 1271 John of Montfort, Philip’s son, confirmed the Order’s

269 270

See above, p. 57. Ibn al-Furat, pp. 85–86. On Coliath and the fact that by this time Arcas was a Templar castle see Riley-Smith’s commentaries in Ibn al-Furat, p. 211, nn. 5–6. On Coliath see also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 136, n. 1. Deschamps, Châteaux des croisés (vol. III, p. 312) describes Coliath as a small fortress, with a mediocre defence capability. 271 On the Order’s sugar-cane plantation in Tripoli see above, pp. 57–58, 61. Richard, ‘Le comté de Tripoli dans les chartes du fonds des Porcellet’, p. 361, n. 1.

62

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

property in the area of Tyre, which included the casalia of Tor del’Opital, Migedel, Theyre, Tortiafa, and Maron, as well as gardens, mills, vineyards, and probably sugar-cane plantations next to Hortus de la Baquerie. John also gave the Order water rights so it could irrigate these fields.272 The cultivation of these lands was possible because they must have been protected under the terms of the agreement signed in May 1267 between Baybars and the lord of Tyre, according to which the Mamluks recognized the Christian possession of Tyre and of ninety-nine casalia. Nevertheless, this truce, like many of the treaties the Christians signed with Baybars, did not hold, and the surroundings of Tyre were raided once again in May 1269. In spite of their great efforts to keep and expand their agricultural lands in this lordship, the Hospitallers lost part of their holdings in the following years. Casal Maron, for example, became a Frankish-Mamluk condominium under the terms of the 1283 truce signed with sultan Qalawun, Baybars’ successor.273 Riley-Smith mentions Naria, in the principality of Antioch, as another example of the efforts made by the Order to bring wasteland under cultivation. The gastina of Naria, which was leased from the bishop of Hebron in March 1265 for an annual rent of seventy Saracen besants, had been re-populated by the Order and turned into a casal.274 This was another fruitless effort, as in May 1268 the Mamluks took the city of Antioch, and consequently the entire principality.275 Regardless of successive adversities, throughout the thirteenth century the Hospitallers strove vigorously to restore and improve their economy in the Latin East. This, however, was destroyed in ten years of unceasing Mamluk incursions. The Hospitallers lost all their castles except for Margat, and the major part of their agricultural lands, with a consequent loss of income from money rents and agricultural products. All their efforts to rehabilitate these lands, which I believe were mainly centred on the restoration of their sugar industry, were frustrated with each new Mamluk incursion. The Order’s treasury in Acre must have been empty by then, as it was deprived of local sources of income. The Hospitallers in the East, who were now almost completely dependent on supplies from Europe, would have been expected to adopt urgent measures to cope with this situation. We have seen their intensive correspondence and their efforts to preach their cause in Europe. They may have wanted to implement institutional changes through the chapters general, which from 1262 to 1270 were convened almost every year.276 It is note-

272 273

274 275 276

Cart., nos. 3346, 3393, 3408–09. For the location of these casalia see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 485, map 4, and above, Map 2. Although Ibn al-Furat (p. 103) and al-Maqrizi (Histoire des sultans Mamlouks de l’Égypte, p. 42) record that the 1267 truce included Tyre and ‘its territory, comprising ninety nine villages, to last for a period of ten years’, they do not, unfortunately, mention their names or their locations. This agreement was renewed in 1271 after the fall of Crac, in which Baybars recognized only fifteen Christian villages. See al-Maqrizi, p. 88, and Röhricht, ‘Études sur les derniers temps’, p. 403. On the raid of 1269 see Ibn al-Furat, pp. 133–34. On the treaty of 1283 and the fact that Maron was a condominium see Holt, Early Mamluk Diplomacy, pp. 69–91 (on Maron see p. 75), and Barag, ‘A New Source Concerning the Ultimate Borders’, passim. Cart., no. 3120. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 434–35. See above, p. 42. The chapter general was convened in 1262, 1263, 1264, 1265, 1268, 1270. See Cart., nos. 3039, 3075, 3104, 3180, 3317, 3396.

THE HOSPITALLERS IN THE HOLY LAND

63

worthy, however, that only the resolutions of the general chapter of 1262 hint at the adoption of a long-term economic policy. This chapter, assembled at a time of relative peace in the Latin East, when the Hospitallers were probably still enjoying independent sources of income, legislated to prevent the alienation of the Order’s property in Europe.277 It is most surprising that the following chapters general, summoned at a time of great danger, dealt mainly with technical issues, such as discipline or clothing, although not all the records relating to these chapters may have survived. On the other hand, it may be possible to learn more about the Hospitallers’ reactions to the situation in the East by looking at the deployment of their economic resources in Europe. This is the subject of the next chapter.

277

See Chapter 2 below, p. 91.

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

2 The Order in the West and Crises in the Latin East: The French Priories

THE HOUSES IN FRANCE were the biggest and richest the Hospitallers had in Europe. St. Gilles was the first priory to be constituted, at the beginning of the twelfth century. By the middle of the century it controlled a vast area extending from Aragon and Catalonia in the south to the low countries in the north. It seems also to have administered the Order’s estates in England. St. Gilles’ intensive expansion made it necessary to divide the priory into smaller administrative units. Although it would remain the most important priory in the Order’s provincial structure, the Hospitallers created new priories in the Iberian peninsula, England, Italy and eastern Europe in the second half of the twelfth century. In the area that today is northern France and Belgium, they established in 1179 the priory of France.1 During the first half of the thirteenth century they erected a third priory in France, that of Auvergne, which was responsible for the area of the Massif Central.2 This chapter studies the economic activities of the priories of St. Gilles, France, and Auvergne, from 1187 to 1274, giving an indication of the Order’s reaction to crises in the Latin East.

1188–1200: The Aftermath of Hattin A significant change in the attitude of French priories to land and property after Hattin suggests that they were aware of the critical situation in the Holy Land and consequently tried to raise money and goods to be sent eastwards. The most significant change was a drastic decrease in the number of investments made by the Order in the years 1188–1190. Most of the charters relating to the priories of St. Gilles and France after Hattin concerned donations of privileges, lands and goods.3 Very

1 2 3

For a description of the establishment of the Order’s priories in Europe see Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, pp. 358–402, and Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 353–60. For the establishment of the priory of Auvergne see below, p. 80. For privileges: Cart., nos. 843, 884, 909, 1000 (for donations of privileges before Hattin see, for example, Cart., nos. 484, 507, 525). For lands and goods: Cart., nos. 888, 905, 909, 953 (for

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

65

few investments in land and property were made by the priories at this time. In the years just noted the commander of St. Gilles made only three purchases – half a meadow, a plot of land, and a vineyard – for the very small sums of 60 and 26 sous Raymondins; whereas between 1190 and 1192 the same commandery made eight purchases of land, property, and rights for more than 11,000 sous.4 Delaville Le Roulx’s cartulary, which has no evidence of purchases made by the Hospitallers in France between 1188 and 1190, includes three examples of purchases made between 1190 and 1200.5 Although material may have been lost, evidence has survived for other periods and significantly the absence of evidence of investments by the priories coincides with the years immediately after Hattin. Apparently, in response to the urgent appeals from the brothers in the East or at their own initiative, the French priories temporarily halted their investments. They may have been more interested in transferring surplus cash to the East than in expanding their estates. The priors also appear to have been interested in rents. Two mills donated to the Order in 1188 were transferred by Arnald of Spina, prior of France, to private hands in return for an annual rent. Auger, prior of France, exempted fifteen serfs, given to the Order in 1194, from the talia in return for an annual rent.6 Towards the end of the century the Order received lands in Mainbeiville, which the master of Normandy exchanged for an annual rent from the donor.7 One may argue that such transfers of possessions were a common activity among institutions that owned extensive properties, but the priories of France engaged in this policy more intently just after Hattin.8 Also following Hattin they were involved in the acquisition of grain, which they were not in the period between 1175 and 1187. In 1192 the prior of St. Gilles bought the tasca, a share of the crop, on land owned by the viscount of Provence.9 At least part of this may have been destined for the Holy Land. The Templars had also to adopt urgent measures. Having exhausted their resources defending the Latin East from Saladin’s incursions, they were forced to sell property in Europe to cover their expenses.10 To reorganize the Hospitallers’ resources in Europe, and to ensure that the economic policies pursued by their provinces matched the needs of the Order in the East, the master created, by April 1193, a new grand commandery of Outremer, which assumed control of the priories of St. Gilles and France and the castellany of Amposta.11 This was an important reintroduction of the grand commandery of donations of property and money before Hattin see, for example, Cart., nos. 505, 512, 617, 758, 773). 4 Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 68, 211, 275 and 81, 128–29, 131, 154, 169, 189, 271, for purchases made. between 1190 and 1192. 5 Cart., nos. 904, 937, 971. 6 Cart., nos. 841–42; Cart., no. 965. On the talia and serfs buying their freedom from it in the twelfth but mainly thirteenth century see G. Duby, Rural Economy and Country Life in the Medieval West, trans. C. Postan, London, 1968, pp. 242–52. 7 Cart., no. 1101. 8 There is only one transfer of land from the Order to private hands between 1175 and 1187. See. Cart., no. 528. 9 Cart., no. 926. 10 See Chapter 3 below, p. 105. 11 Because the grand commandery of Outremer was established only ad hoc the geographical areas under its control varied. On the grand commandery see Introduction above, p. 9.

66

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

Outremer, first used in 1164.12 The grand commanders were ad hoc officers, appointed by the master, and had complete authority over the priors. The grand commander could therefore centralize the Order’s activities in the areas under his control, and, if necessary, implement changes in economic policies. Not surprisingly the master, Geoffrey of Donjon, appointed brother William of Villiers to the Outremer post. William had been the grand commander of the Order in Acre in 1192, and had personal knowledge of the difficulties faced by the Order in the East at the time.13

1200–1250: Years of Investment and Expansion At the beginning of the thirteenth century a change is evident in the economic policy of the French priories towards land and property. Instead of raising money and goods, some of the priors were investing heavily in order to enlarge their patrimony. This activity is most noticeable in areas like Champagne, which was enjoying an economic boom. The interest of the Hospitallers in the fairs of Champagne was already evident in 1190, when they urged Marie, mother of Count Henry II of Champagne, to grant them property in Bar-sur-Aube.14 Their interest in this town could be explained by the existence of a Hospitaller house in it and by the fact that one of the fairs of Champagne was held there.15 A cemetery in the town may also have provided them with significant income as those who chose to be buried there might bequeath burial gifts to the Order.16 At the beginning of the thirteenth century the priors of France, Isembard and William of Villiers, were heavily involved in the purchase of property in the region of Provins, another important city which held one of the fairs of Champagne. In 1203 Isembard bought property and lands in Châteaubleau, Carrois, and Countençon, to the north-west of Provins, from the Cluniac priory of Charité-sur-Loire for the significant sum of 2,100 livres parisis.17 In 1209 William of Villiers bought from the same priory its temporalia at

12 13 14 15

Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, p. 414. On William of Villiers see Chapter 1 above, p. 15, below, p. 78, and Appendix below. Cart., no. 888. On the Order’s house in Bar-sur-Aube see H. d’Arbois de Jubainville, Histoire de Bar-sur-Aube sous les Comtes de Champagne, 1077–1284, Paris, 1859, pp. 86–87. On the fair of Bar-sur-Aube see H. d’Arbois de Jubainville, Histoire des ducs et des comtes de Champagne, vol. III, Paris, 1861, pp. 229–33; M. Bur, La formation du comté de Champagne, v.950–v.1150, Nancy, 1977, pp. 293, 298, 301. 16 The burial of laymen in the Order’s cemeteries was constantly challenged by the clergy because it deprived it of a traditional and important source of income. See D. Carraz, ‘Les ordres militaires et la ville (XII – début du XIV siècle): L’exemple des commanderies urbaines de la basse vallée du Rhône’, Annales du Midi, 114 (2002), pp. 287–89; D. Selwood, Knights of the Cloister: Templars and Hospitallers in Central-Southern Occitania, c.1100–c.1300, Woodbridge, 1999, pp. 90–97. Martin Aurell has analysed the ways whereby the popularity of crusader ideology led to associations with the Hospital and to the preference for burial in their cemeteries in ‘Nécropoles et donats: Les comtes de la maison de Barcelone et l’Hôpital (XII–XIII siècles)’, Provence historique, 45 (1995), pp. 7–23. 17 Cart., no. 1177.

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

67

the villages of Croix-en-Brie, St. Just, Courmery, Closfontaine, Sceau, Praaz, Merrevilles, and Bruyères, also located north-west of Provins. He also purchased the chemin chaussé, the old Roman road between Meaux and Sens. This was a very large investment, for which the Order promised to cover a debt of 11,000 livres that Charité-sur-Loire owed a Jew, 6,000 of which had been repaid as a result of this purchase. Charité-sur-Loire was apparently undergoing an economic crisis. The Cluniac priory, like other church institutions in this period, was apparently heavily in debt, although its cartulary does not indicate this clearly. In 1209 it sold all its property in Laingneville to the Templars for the enormous sum of 10,000 livres. In 1213 the monks were accused by Innocent III of corruption and misconduct.18 These investments demonstrate the interest of the Hospitallers in rents. In 1200 they also bought tithes in Pailly and Plessis, along the road between Provins and Sens. In 1227 they expanded their income in this area with the purchase of land and property, together with seigneurial rights, in Fleurigny.19 In 1236 the Hospitallers in Croix-en-Brie were granted forty-four acres of forest land in Montenois and Valpoutre next to a forest that was already in their hands. This kind of donation was probably more important to them by 1225, when land clearing in the Ile-de-France was interrupted, and the need was increasing to keep the forest as an essential source of raw material for energy, building, and food.20 It is interesting that although the Hospitallers were clearly trying to establish themselves in the area of Provins and to profit from its economic activity, no evidence exists of the donation or purchase of property and rights within this city or in relation to its fairs, in which the Templars held a wide range of privileges and extensive property.21 This may imply, as we shall see below, that the Orders had different objectives in their economic deployment in France. Although a decrease is observed in the number of Hospitaller acts for the north of France, from 1230 onwards, and a noticeable difference in the wealth of source-material relating to the two Orders, which makes it difficult to reach clear conclusions, it seems that the Hospitallers were more interested in expanding their estates in southern France. Still, Fossier has suggested that the relatively small number of Hospitaller houses in the north of France could be explained by the charitable role of the Order and its inclination to establish houses at the point of embarkation of pilgrims. He has also maintains that the Mediterranean basin was an important centre of recruitment. This suggestion requires some comparison

18

Cart., nos. 1330–32. For the location of the villages and the chemin chaussé see J. Mesqui and M. Veissière, ‘Un ville de foires en milieu rural’, Histoire de Provins et sa région, ed. M. Veissière, Toulouse, 1988, pp. 92–111, and Mannier, Les commanderies, p. 227. On the economic situation of Charité-sur-Loire see Cartulaire du prieuré de La Charité-sur-Loire (Nièvre), ed. R. de Lespinasse, Nevers and Paris, 1887; J. Richard, Les ducs de Bourgogne et la formation du Duché, Paris, 1954, p. 247; M. Glad, ‘Quelques notes sur la commanderie de Laingneville’, Bulletin et Mémoires de la Société Archéologique et Historique de Clermont-de-l’Oise, 1924, p. 15; Potthast, no. 4680. 19 Cart., nos. 1106, 1851. 20 Mannier, Les commanderies, pp. 226–27; G. Fourquin, Les campagnes de la région Parisienne à la fin du Moyen Âge, Paris, 1964, p. 75. 21 Histoire et cartulaire des Templiers de Provins , pp. LXIX–LXXXVIII; Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 262–64.

68

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

between the number of brothers serving in the north and south of France, which the lack of sources for the north makes difficult.22 Nevertheless, although the evidence is fragmentary and scattered, an examination of the brothers serving in the East in the period after Hattin (1188–1216, before the Fifth Crusade) does indeed suggest that more French-speaking brothers came from areas under the control of the priory of St. Gilles. Twelve brothers originated from Auvergne, Provence, Languedoc, and Burgundy, while eight came from the Domena and Champagne.23 It is noteworthy that although Duke Philip of Alsace led a Flemish army in the Third Crusade, hardly any brothers in the East seem to have come from these areas.24 And although commanderies such as Éterpigny and Fieffes had been established by the second half of the twelfth century their expansion, compared with the Order’s activity in Champagne or the Templars’ investments in Picardy, was meagre.25 One of the most expensive acquisitions of the Hospitallers of Fieffes, in the county of Ponthieu in Picardy, was the purchase in 1224 of eighty acres of land, for which they paid 330 livres parisis. In comparison, the neighbouring Templar preceptory of Bellenglise bought lands for 1,000 livres parisis in 1233.26 The Hospitaller commandery in Brussels was established only in 1198, following the donation to the Order of the hospital of the Holy Spirit by Henry I, Duke of Brabant, on his return from the Third Crusade. Many donations of lands, property, and rent contributed significantly to its enlargment. The brothers, however, made few purchases during the first half of the thirteenth century.27 22

23

24

25

26 27

Fossier calculated that the number of acts regarding the Hospitallers in the north of France (based, however, only on the Cart.) drops from 63 for 1191–1220 to 35 for 1221–1250, while the number of Templar acts (based on the Cartulaire des Templiers de Provins) grows from 38 to 80. He also gives a thorough description of the sources and their complexity: R. Fossier, ‘Les Hospitaliers et les Templiers au nord de la Seine et en Bourgogne, XII–XIV siècles’, Les Ordres Militaires, la vie rurale et le peuplement en Europe occidentale, XII–XIII siècles, Flaran 6 (1984), pp. 13–16. Brothers from areas under the control of the priory of St. Gilles: Sanche of Auvergne, William of Tiniers, from Auvergne (Cart., 1085, 1462); Bertrand of Avignon and Bertrand of Comps, from Provence (Cart., nos. 1032, 1462); Bertrand and Raymond of Pignan, Hugh of Mamolene and Peter of Campignolles, from Languedoc and the Midi (Cart., nos. 941, 1462, 1426–27); Hamo and Ralland of Burgundy, Robert of Lain and William of Beaune, from Burgundy (Cart., nos. 972, 1085, 900; RRH, no. 844). From areas under the control of the priory of France: Ralph of Loudun, Stephen of Corbeil, Adhemar of Layron, Fulk of Warviller and Hugh of Rheims, from the Domena (Cart., nos. 972, 900, 1462; RRH, no. 792a); Roger of Champagne and William of Marolh, from Champagne (Cart., nos. 1085, 972). Philip died during the siege of Acre. See Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 40–41; Riley-Smith, The Crusades, p. 110; Riley-Smith, Atlas of the Crusades, pp. 82–83; Fossier, ‘Les Hospitaliers et les Templiers au nord de la Seine et en Bourgogne’, pp. 15–16. The commandery of Éterpigny was established in 1177 through the donation of that village to the Order by the count of Flanders (Cart., no. 505), although donations to the Hospitaller community were made as early as 1134. See Chartes de coutume en Picardie (XI–XIII siècle), ed. R. Fossier (Collection de Documents inédits sur l’histoire de France, 10), Paris, 1974, no. 5. A number of donations in the second half of the twelfth century contributed to the establishment of the house of Fieffes: see Mannier, Les commanderies, p. 637. Cart. Fieffes (S5059), fol. 1. The cartulary of Bellenglise is also included in the Hospitaller cartulary of Fieffes (S5533). For the purchase mentioned above see fol. 294. Cart. Bruxelles, pp. XIII–XIV, donations of lands and property (for example: nos. 21–22, 39–40, 42), rents (11, 24, 26, 33, 43–44), rights (5), purchases of land and property (27, 31, 56, 61, 69, 77), rents and tithes (15, 76).

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

69

Population growth and the increasing demand for agricultural products caused lay lords to seek the partnership of religious orders in the process of forest clearance and the settlement of new land. This allowed the Hospitallers to enlarge their property and income. Their most intensive plan of colonisation was pursued in the south-west of France, where, as early as the first half of the twelfth century, they had established more than forty sauvetés, or new villages, in the Comminges, on the left bank of the river Garonne, between Muret and St. Gaudens.28 Their desire to enlarge their patrimony and to create a coherent estate also involved, although to a much smaller extent, the establishment of new villages in other parts of France. In 1172 the lords of Conchy-sur-Canche and Beauvoir-sur-Authie, together with the Hospitallers of Villers in Picardy, established a new village next to that commandery.29 In 1208 the Order went into partnership with countess Blanche of Champagne to create the village of Esnouveaux, not far from Chaumont and Bar-sur-Aube.30 The Order’s extensive property in the duchy of Burgundy made possible other partnerships for the creation of the new villages of Thury in 1198 and Escoutot and Essertenne in 1200.31 In 1235 the Hospitallers of Bellecroix agreed to give half their income from the new village of Nuits to Duke Hugh IV of Burgundy after he promised to defend it.32 The Hospitallers of Beaune, wishing to exploit the economic potential of this region, were allowed by Duchess Alice of Burgundy in 1218 to keep a market in Villedieu in the vicinity of Essertenne.33 Richard believes that some of the products that were brought to these markets, for example Burgundian cloths, may have been sent to the Holy Land.34 An important piece of evidence for the transportation of goods to the East is a charter given by Jean of Braine, count of Mâcon, to the Order in 1234. He exempted from tolls Hospitaller products and merchandise transported through Mâcon and Riottiers and destined for the Holy Land.35 The expansion of Hospitaller property in the county of Forez is another indication of the extensive local investments made at this time in order to consolidate and 28

29 30

31 32 33 34 35

P. Ourliac, Les sauvetés du Comminges: Étude et documents sur les villages fondés par les Hospitaliers dans la région des côteaux commingeois, Toulouse, 1947, pp. 24–5, 34. A very thorough description of Hospitaller involvement in land clearing and settlement in the south-west of France is given by C. Higounet, ‘Hospitaliers et Templiers: Peuplement et exploitation rurale dans le sud-ouest de la France au Moyen Âge’, Les Ordres Militaires, la vie rurale et le peuplement en Europe occidentale, XII–XIII siècles, Flaran 6 (1984), pp. 61–78. See also A. Lewis, ‘Patterns of Economic Development in Southern France, 1050–1271 A.D.’, Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History, 3 (1980), pp. 66–67. The Hospitallers were also involved, although to a much lesser degree, in the creation of new villages in the north of France. See M. Miguet, Templiers et Hospitaliers en Normandie, Paris, 1995, pp. 37–42. R. Fossier, La terre et les hommes en Picardie jusqu’à la fin du XIII s., Paris, 1968, vol. I, p. 350. Cart., no. 1286. The village of Esnouveaux was donated to the Order by the count of Clefmont in 1187, Cart., no. 826. For the location of Esnouveaux see J. Richard, ‘Les Templiers et Hospitaliers en Bourgogne et en Champagne méridionale (XII–XIII siècles)’, Die Geistlichen Ritterorden Europas, ed. J. Fleckenstein and M. Hellman, Sigmaringen, 1980, p. 237. Cart., no. 1111; Richard, ‘Les Templiers et Hospitaliers en Bourgogne et en Champagne méridionale’, pp. 236–67. Cart., no. 2101; Richard, Les Ducs de Bourgogne, pp. 251–52. Cart., no. 1635. Richard, ‘Les Templiers et Hospitaliers en Bourgogne et en Champagne méridionale’, p. 237. ‘res ille ad Terre Sancte subsidium specialiter deputate mittebantur’, Cart., no. 2080.

70

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

concentrate the Hospitallers’ possessions. They held property and rights in that county from the middle of the twelfth century.36 Towards the end of the century the political and economic instability of the county allowed them to enlarge their patrimony. Several landowners, who were in debt, entered the Order as corrodists, handing over most of their property. In return the Order was to cover their debts and buy their pledged lands.37 These acquisitions were the basis for the establishment of the commandery in the city of Montbrison. The chapel and cemetery not only served the needs of the brothers, but also those of many merchants and pilgrims who travelled the roads of the Massif Central.38 The interest of the Hospitallers in this area, which was rich in crops and flocks,39 was probably reinforced by the economic recovery and demographic growth of Forez from 1210 onwards. Although the Order’s economic activity did not involve large investments as in the area of Provins, it expanded its patrimony through the persistent purchase of small tracts of land, annual rents, and tithes. In 1213 the Hospitallers of Chazelles bought part of the forest of Fay, thereby enlarging their property around the village of Fay which had been donated to the Order by the count of Forez in about 1180.40 From the beginning of the thirteenth century the Hospitallers were involved in many transactions, acquiring land and property in and around the city of Montbrison.41 In 1215 Armald, master of the Hospital of Montbrison, settled a dispute regarding their right to revenues in the meat market of Montbrison, which had been given to the Order in the 1180s and was renewed by the count of Nevers in 1237.42 Considering the prosperity of the market of Montbrison and that Forez was a major centre for cattle raising,43 this must have been an important privilege. An agreement between the Hospitallers in Verrières (south-west of Montbrison) and the lord of Bussy in 1238 also indicates the importance of cattle raising. The Hospitallers exchanged annual rents of money and goods in return for the exclusive right of pasturage on his lands.44 Likewise in 1220 the Hospitallers were given annual rents of money, wood, and oats in Conols, Ecotay, and Vidrieu, to the south-west of Montbrison, in return for 100 sous and the promise to accept the donor’s son into

36 37

38

39 40

41 42 43 44

Cart., nos. 575, 600, 843. Chartes du Forez, vols. 1–2, p. 14. A corrody was a commitment of the Order to maintain a person for life, with fixed allowances of food and clothing in exchange for property or services. See Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 245; for a more general discussion on this term see also C. de Miramon, Les “donnés” au Moyen Âge. Une forme de vie religieuse laïque v.1180–v.1500, Paris, 1999, pp. 333–34. For the political and economic situation of Forez see E. Fournial, Les villes et l’économie d’échange en Forez aux XIII et XIV siècles, Paris, 1967, pp. 12–14, 41–47. Fournial, Les villes, p. 37. For the importance of the Massif Central for the connection between the north and south of France see R.H. Bautier, ‘Recherches sur les routes de l’Europe médiévale’, Bulletin philologique et historique du comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques , I (1960), pp. 107–130. Fournial, Les villes, pp. 37, 41–47. Cart., nos. 1405, 575. Although many places in Forez were named Fay, I assumed the proximity of the village and forest from the fact that the commandery of Chazelles was involved in both transactions. Chartes du Forez, vols. 1–2, pp. 27, 40, 52; vols. 9–10, p. 924. Cart., nos. 1453, 1599, 2157. Cart., nos. 1430, 2178. Chartes du Forez, vols. 9–10, p. 921. Fournial, Les villes, pp. 41–47, 191. Chartes du Forez, vol. 5, p. 322.

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

71

the Order. In 1239 the Hospitallers received from the lord of St. Bonnet the castle of Le Bois on condition that the Order provided for his nephew, Bernard, until he took the cross.45 By the beginning of the thirteenth century the Order was also engaged in a consistent policy of expansion in Provence. Most of the charters in the cartularies of St. Gilles and Trinquetaille from 1190 to 1210 record acquisitions of property, land, and rights in the areas of St. Gilles, Arles, Trinquetaille, Argence, and, farther south, Crau and the Camargue,46 important areas for the production of wheat and wine and especially for the pasturage of large herds of cattle and sheep.47 The Hospitallers benefited from the changes in the economy of Provence in the thirteenth century. The need for cash for investments in the growing cities and industries led the ruling families to sell the Hospitallers extensive tracts of land. Some of the Order’s more important acquisitions illustrate the degree of its expansion in this region.48 In 1202 the Hospitallers bought part of the Etang de Scamandre, in the Petit Camargue, for 70,000 sous Raymondins.49 In the Camargue they acquired in 1194 part of the lordship of Saliers and Auricet for 3,000 sous Raymondins and another 1,000 sous Melgoriens. In 1209 they extended their property in Gimeaux, along the road from Trinquetaille and the region of the Camargue, for 8,500 sous more.50 Numerous small purchases of lands, meadows, manors, and vine45

46 47

48

49 50

‘recepissent in socium et fratrem corporaliter et spiritualiter Guibertum, filium Alberti Anthonii’, Cart., no. 1665. For the purchase of annual rents in the city of Montbrison see Chartes du Forez, vols. 1–2, p. 27. For Bernard see Chartes du Forez, vol. 5, p. 616: ‘quousque crucem susceperit’. For these purchases see references below. For the economic importance of these areas see V.L. Bourrilly and R. Busquet, La Provence au Moyen Âge (1112–1481), Marseilles, 1924, pp. 421–23; Histoire de la Provence, ed. E. Baratier and V.L. Bourrilly, Toulouse, 1969, pp. 143. D. Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de St. Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon et en comtat Venaissin au XIII siècle’, Des Hospitaliers de Saint Jean de Jérusalem de Chypre et de Rhodes hier aux chevaliers de Malte aujourd’hui, Paris, 1985, pp. 27–29. The material that has survived for the Order in Provence is so vast that a description of its economic activity, similar to the one conducted for Forez, would lead away from the current subject. Closely detailed descriptions of the economic activity of the priory of St. Gilles can be found in P. Santoni, ‘Les deux premiers siècles du prieuré de Saint Gilles de l’ordre de l’Hôpital de Saint Jean de Jérusalem’, Des Hospitaliers de Saint Jean de Jérusalem de Chypre et de Rhodes hier aux chevaliers de Malte aujourd’hui, Paris, 1985, pp. 114–83; N. Coulet, ‘Les ordres militaires, la vie rurale et le peuplement dans le sud-est de la France au Moyen Âge’, Les Ordres Militaires, la vie rurale et le peuplement en Europe occidentale, XII–XIII siècles, Flaran 6 (1984), pp. 37–60; Cart. St. Gilles, pp. IV–IX; Selwood, Knights of the Cloister, pp. 15–19. For Trinquetaille see also Cart. Trinquetaille, pp. VII–VIII; L. Verdon, ‘La seigneurie foncière des Hospitalliers d’Arles d’après le cartulaire de Trinquetaille: Les ressources de l’acapte’, Provence historique, 49 (1999), pp. 501–10. For a comprehensive analysis of the Templars’ activities in the region see D. Carraz, ‘Ordres militaires, croisades et sociétés méridionales. L’ordre du Temple dans la basse vallée du Rhône (1124–1312)’, Ph.D. dissertation, Université Lyon 2, 2003 (forthcoming in Presses Universitaires de Lyon). I am extremely grateful to Dr. Carraz for sending me chapters of his dissertation and many of his articles. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 1 and nos. 2–7 for additional purchases in the region. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 81; Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 52. 223, 241. The Hospitallers were not the only religious order that aimed to expand and consolidate its property in the Camargue. Carraz has shown that the Templars also expended large sums on land acquisition in the region. Most of these acquisitions were made in the first quarter of the thirteenth century. Carraz, ‘Ordres militaires, croisades et sociétés méridionales’, pp. 276–79.

72

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

yards were made in Argence, where the Hospitallers also tried to consolidate their property by buying seigneurial rights.51 Animal husbandry was in the thirteenth century their most important economic activity in Provence. They profited from the increasing demand by the growing population of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries for meat products. Like the Cistercians and other members of religious orders in the south of France, they acquired large amounts of pastureland and were granted free passage and grazing rights.52 Their expansion was apparently so aggressive that by the 1220s the commune of Arles banned the Order’s flocks from grazing on the communal meadows at Crau.53 Further evidence for the significant enlargement of Hospitaller property in Provence from the end of the twelfth century is the establishment of new commanderies: St. Pierre de Campublic in the Camargue and La Fosse in the Petit Camargue.54 To the north of St. Gilles the Hospitallers had established by 1200 the important commandery of Avignon.55 To the east they expanded their patrimony in St. Michel de Puimoisson with very heavy investments. In 1231 Bertrand of Comps, prior of St. Gilles, bought from Raymond Berenger IV, count of Provence and Forcalquier, the rights and property that the count owned in the castle for 11,000 sous Raymondins.56 In Manosque, also to the east of St. Gilles, along the banks of the

51 52

53

54

55

56

Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 109, 154, 169, 190, 196, 212, 251, 259, 260. Santoni, ‘Les deux premiers siècles’, pp. 140–44. For the Hospitallers’ pastoralism see Coulet, ‘Les ordres militaires’, pp. 43–44, and T. Sclafert, Cultures en Haute-Provence, déboisements et pâturages au Moyen Âge, Paris, 1959, pp. 19–24. For Cistercians see C. Hoffman Berman, ‘Medieval Agriculture, the Southern French Countryside, and the Early Cistercians’, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 76 (1986), pp. 94–117. On free passage and grazing rights granted to the Hospitallers see Cart., nos. 884, 1169, 1253, 1327; Cart. Avignon, no. ch. 45; Cart. St. Gilles, no. 38; Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 206; Marseille–56H 4627; Recueil des Actes des Comtes de Provence appartenant à la maison de Barcelone, ed. F. Benoit, Paris, 1925, vol. I, no. 50. Coulet, ‘Les ordres militaires’, p. 43: E. Engelmann, Zur Städtischen Volksbewegung in Südfrankreich: Kommunefreiheit und Gesellschaft. Arles 1200–1250, Berlin, 1959, pp. 127, 128, n. 230; Carraz, ‘Les ordres militaires et la ville’, p. 290. The first mention of a commander of St. Pierre de Campublic in the Cartulary of St. Gilles is from 1198 and a commander of La Fosse from 1202. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 57, 38. On the establishment of the Templars and Hospitallers in St. Pierre de Campublic and on the importance of the region for the production of wine and wheat see B. Beaucage, ‘Difficultés économiques et réaction seigneuriale au terroir de Beaucaire: La commanderie des Hospitaliers de Saint-Pierre de Campublic aux XIV et XV siècles’, Canadian Journal of History/Annales Canadiennes d’Histoire 25 (1990), pp. 1–4. It is not possible, in most cases, to deduce from the sources the exact date on which a commandery was established, as the first charters issued by, or to, the commandery are usually lost. On this problem and on the establishment of commanderies of the Military Orders in urban centres in Provence see Carraz, ‘Les ordres militaires et la ville’, pp. 278–79. On rural commanderies see also Selwood, Knights of the Cloister, pp. 55–57. For comprehensive research on the commandery of Avignon see Cart. Avignon, pp. 12–18; D. Le Blévec, ‘L’ Hôpital de St. Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon et en comtat Venaissin au XIII siècle’, pp. 17–61. Cart., no. 2006; J. Raybaud, Histoire des grands prieurs et du prieuré de Saint Gilles , Nîmes, 1904, p. 141.

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

73

river Durance, the Order invested in lands, meadows, and rights.57 Because of its location in the Durance Valley and along the road between Aix and Sisteron, Manosque became an important trading centre and the Hospitallers must have profited from the trade in their rich crops and animal products in the city market.58 To the north of Manosque, along the Durance, they were granted by Tiburge of Orange the lordships of Tallard, Lardiers, and La Saulce in 1215.59 These lands in the Lure mountains were probably used by the Order for the summer pasture of its herds. Further north the Hospitallers held the commanderies of St. Martin de Gap and St. Paul les Romans, near Grenoble. By the 1220s they had enlarged and consolidated their property at St. Paul, with numerous small acquisitions of lands, meadows, and property. This widespread base of lands and meadows allowed, mainly from the fourteenth century, the summer transhumance of the Order’s flocks from Provence to the rich pastures in the Alps. An intensive economy of animal husbandry was also pursued by the Hospitallers in the Lozère mountains and the Vivarais to the north-west of Avignon.60 Part of the Hospitallers’ agricultural production in these areas supplied their own houses, and part was probably traded on local markets, as in Burgundy and Champagne. The Hospitallers were granted free passage in the county of Provence and the right to buy and sell their own products without paying any tolls. They could have transported their merchandise along the roads of Provence, or on the waters of the Petit Rhône, the Rhône, and the Durance. These rivers were used to transport merchandise and men to embarkation points to the East.61 The Hospitallers were granted rights and exemption from tolls at local as well as international ports. They enjoyed free passage at the river-port of Avignon from 1191 and at the ports of Mataron and Rognonas on the Durance. Adalasie Mataron was forced to sell her rights in this port in 1224 to the Hospitallers so that she could

57 58

59 60

61

F. Reynaud, La commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem, de Rhodes et de Malte à Manosque, Gap, 1981, pp. 37–39, 144–47. For the importance of Manosque and the fact that the Hospitallers’ production in this area was mainly crops and husbandry see Reynaud, La commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean, p. 156, and Sclafert, Cultures en Haute-Provence, p. 21. Raybaud, Histoire des grands prieurs, p. 120. On transhumance in general and Hospitallers in particular see Sclafert, Cultures en Haute-Provence, p. 3, and Coulet, ‘Les ordres militaires’, pp. 43–44. On the Hospitallers’ investments in St. Paul les Romans see Cart. St. Paul les Romans. Most of. the acts included in this cartulary are acquisitions of property by donations and purchases. For the Hospitallers in the Lozère see E. Servière, ‘Commanderie de Gap-Français, ordre des Hospitaliers de St. Jean de Jérusalem’, Revue du Gévaudan de Causses et des Cévennes (Bulletin de la Société des Lettres, Sciences et Arts de La Lozère), 10 (1964), pp. 41–72; D. Le Blévec, ‘Les Hospitaliers de St. Jean de Jérusalem en Bas-Vivarais: La commanderie de Trignan, XII–XIII siècles’, Religion et société en Ardèche et dans l’ancien pays de Vivarais, Actes du 2 colloque, Privas 23–24 mars 1985, pp. 18–35. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 346. In July 1295 the Hospitallers of St. Gilles bought a church, a garden and additional properties in Tarascon, on the bank of the Rhône, on the way between Avignon and St. Gilles. The charter clearly specifies that this new commandery was to serve as a resting place for brothers from Germany, France, England and the Auvergne en route to the Holy Land. See Cart., no. 4284. On the involvement of the Military Orders in trade in the south of France see also Selwood, Knights of the Cloister, pp. 182–83. For Hospitallers’ trade in local markets in Burgundy and Champagne see above, p. 69.

74

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

afford the cost of her son’s education.62 In 1210 Sacristane, a member of the Porcelet family, one of the most prominent families in Arles, donated to the Order her right to the fourth part of the incomes of the port of Arles.63 This donation might have generated a significant income because Arles was enjoying an economic boom by the end of the twelfth century and was an important centre for local trade.64 International trade was increasingly conducted from St. Gilles, which became the most active commercial port on the Rhône.65 In 1209 Hugh I, viscount of Marseilles, granted the Order free passage in the ports of St. Gilles and Trinquetaille.66 The port of Marseilles was the most important embarkation point for the East in the region. In 1178 Hospitaller merchandise coming to the port was exempted from taxes. In 1216 Hugh I of Baux, viscount of Marseilles and confrater of the commandery of Trinquetaille from 1192, allowed the Hospitallers to build their own vessels in the town’s dockyard and to keep ships in its port. These vessels could sail to and from Spain, the Latin East, and any other destination causa defendende Christianitatis. They were allowed to carry pilgrims, merchants with their money, and anything they wanted free of any taxes.67 The same privilege was granted by Hugh 62

63

64 65 66

67

Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de St. Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon et en comtat Venaissin au XIII siècle’, p. 20; Marseilles-56H.1281, fols. 72, 20–22; Cart. Avignon, no. 16. For transport of the Orders’ goods on the rivers see also Carraz, ‘Les ordres militaires et la ville’, p. 285, and Ordres militaires, croisades et sociétés méridionales, pp. 339–45, in which Carraz shows that the Military Orders were not only exempted from tolls, but in some instances were granted the right to collect these tolls for themselves. Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 216. On the Porcelet family see L. Stouff, ‘La commune d’Arles au XIII siècle, à propos d’un livre récent’, Provence historique, 11 (1961), p. 300, and for the family branch in Tripoli see Richard, ‘Le comté de Tripoli dans les chartes du fonds des Porcellet’, pp. 348–58. With the impoverishment of the house of Porcelet, in the course of the thirteenth century, many of its assets and seigniorial rights were purchased by the Templars and the Hospitallers. See Carraz, Ordres militaires, croisades et sociétés méridionales, pp. 339–45. On the impoverishment of the nobility of Provence see also below, pp. 84–85. For the importance of the port of Arles see Stouff, ‘La commune d’Arles’, pp. 294, 97; Bourrilly and Busquet, La Provence au Moyen Âge, p. 440. For the importance of the port of St. Gilles, see Histoire de la Provence, p. 143. Cart., no. 1327. In the thirteenth century the Templars also transported wine from the port of La Rochelle to England, and English wool to the continent, on hired or on their own ships. Some of their ships also carried merchandise for third parties. See J.-C. Bonnin, ‘Les Templiers et la mer: l’exemple de La Rochelle’, La Commanderie, institution des ordres militaires dans l’Occident médiéval, ed. A. Luttrell and L. Pressouyre, Paris, 2002, pp. 307–15; E. Lord, The Knights Templar in Britain, London, 2002, pp. 118–21; H. Nicholson, ‘The Military Orders and the Kings of England in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries’, From Clermont to Jerusalem: The Crusades and Crusader Societies, 1095–1500, ed. A. Murray, Turnhout, 1998, pp. 211–15. Nicholson also refers on these pages to naval services supplied by the Templars to the kings of England. On the fleets of the Military Orders, particularly on the eve of the fall of Acre, see also M.-L. Favreau-Lilie, ‘The Military Orders and the Escape of the Christian Population from the Holy Land in 1291’, Journal of Medieval History, 19 (1993), pp. 205–13. Cart., nos. 542, 1464. For Hugh’s affiliation charter to the commandery of Trinquetaille see Cart., no. 930, and Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 6. For the importance of the port of Marseilles for the shipment of provisions to the East see also Barber, ‘Supplying the Crusader State’, pp. 322–23; Carraz, ‘Ordres militaires, croisades et sociétés méridionales’, pp. 339–45; Selwood, Knights of the Cloister, pp. 189–94. Other evidence of the Hospitallers’ building their own ships can be found in a letter sent by Honorius III to the bishop of Arles in December 1216, in which the

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

75

to the Templars and was confirmed in December that year by Frederick II.68 Lack of evidence makes it difficult to get a clear picture of the transport of food from France to the Holy Land. But the absence of references to the Hospitallers’ employing vessels from Marseilles or the Italian cities for the transportation of men and provisions to the East suggests that their fleet was already significant at the beginning of the thirteenth century; otherwise the hiring of vessels would have generated documentation. Their ships, however, sailed mainly from Sicily, which was the main region of supply for the Holy Land. In 1197, for example, Empress Constance I granted the Hospitallers the right to export goods tax-free in order to support the Holy Land and to meet the needs of their houses.69 In his letter of 1201 the master Geoffrey of Donjon specified that they were expecting supplies of foodstuffs from Sicily.70 The confiscation of the Order’s estates in Sicily by Frederick II at the end of the 1220s, however, must have increased the demand for shipments from Marseilles, leading to a conflict with the authorities, because the Hospitallers’ concessions in the port were restricted in 1233. They were allowed to keep an unrestricted number of vessels for their own use, but only two vessels a year, one in each passage, were allowed to carry pilgrims and merchants.71 The economic expansion of the Hospitallers, as this dispute with the commune of Marseilles exemplifies, could have been influenced by local economic or by political circumstances. There is little evidence of the Order’s involvement in the Albigensian Crusade, one of the most important political events in the south of France in the thirteenth century. Research has shown that the Hospitallers did not take an active role in this crusade and were not directly affected by it.72 Their connection with it is mainly expressed in the form of donations and economic transactions. Crusading was an act of devotion and it was only natural that crusaders would seek spiritual help from monastic institutions, in particular those associated with Jerusalem and the Holy Land. Guy of Tremeloy, who was about to fight in the

68 69

70 71 72

pope orders the bishop to prevent churchmen and laymen from taxing wood belonging to the Order and designated for building ships. See Cart., nos. 1518–19, and Chapter 3 below, p. 110. Acta imperii inedita, saeculi XIII, ed. E. Winkelmann, Innsbruck, 1880, vol. I, no. 139. Acta imperii inedita, saeculi XIII, vol. I, no. 71. For the importance of Sicily as supplier of food to the Latin Kingdom see D. Abulafia, The Two Italies, Cambridge, 1977, p. 77. For the dependence of the Christian settlement in the East on supplies from Sicily in the later period, from 1265 on, see Pryor, ‘In Subsidium Terrae Sanctae’, pp. 127–144. See also below, pp. 97–98. See Chapter 1 above, p. 16. Cart., no. 2067. For the confiscation of Hospitaller property in Sicily by Frederick II see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 164. The purpose of this paragraph is to consider the effects the Albigensian Crusade had on the financial situation of the Order’s houses in the south of France. For the involvement of the Military Orders in this crusade see E. Delaruelle, ‘Templiers et Hospitaliers en Languedoc pendant la Croisade des Albigeois’, Cahiers de Fanjeaux, 4 (1969), pp. 322–27; Du Bourg, pp. IX–XI. For more recent works: Aurel, ‘Nécropoles et donats’, pp. 20–21; D. Carraz, ‘L’anticléricalisme en France méridionale (milieu XII – début XIV siècle)’, Cahiers de Fanjeaux 38 (2002), pp. 384–85, 390–91, and his ‘Ordres militaires, croisades et sociétés méridionales’, pp. 608–14; A. Demurger, Chevaliers du Christ. Les ordres religieux-militaires au Moyen Âge (XI–XVI siècles) , Paris, 2002, pp. 293–94, and his Vie et mort de l’ordre du Temple, 1118–1314, Paris, 1989, pp. 253–54; Selwood, Knights of the Cloister, pp. 43–47.

76

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

Albigensian Crusade in 1226, gave the Order a house in Semon (Burgundy) on condition that the brothers prayed for his soul.73 Donations by crusaders were not the only way the Hospitallers benefited economically from the Albigensian Crusade. They were not actively involved in this crusade and did not assist Simon of Monfort, yet they maintained their connections with the counts of Toulouse; a Hospitaller was sent by Raymond VI to Rome to intervene on his behalf in the papal curia. In 1218, although excommunicated, Raymond was accepted by the Hospital in Toulouse as confrater. The Order’s privileges, which included free passage and grazing rights in the count’s domain, were renewed by Raymond’s son in 1222. The Order’s behaviour seems to be the result of long-term relations with the counts of Toulouse and other local interests in this area.74 The strong connections between the local nobility and the Hospitallers, as in the case of the counts of Toulouse, meant that some patrons of Hospitaller houses in the Midi and Languedoc in the twelfth century were suspected of heresy in the following century. This was the case of the lords of Laurac, who were involved in the establishment of the house of Pexiora in the 1170s.75 In their case, and in that of other lords in the area, donations to the Order could have been regarded as a means of repentance and reconciliation.76 The grant of the castle of Manciet by William Raymond of Montcada, viscount of Béarn, in 1224 illustrates this point. William inherited the viscounty of Béarn from his brother Gaston, who sided with Peter II of Aragon against Simon of Montfort and the Albigensian Crusade. William had already been forced to take the cross to the Holy Land, as penance for the murder of Berenger of Vilademuls, archbishop of Tarragona, following a dispute over property in 1194. But he supported the Aragonese cause and helped Count Nuño-Sanches of Roussillon to defend the castle of Lourdes against the attacks of Simon of Monfort in 1216 and only proposed to set out for the Holy Land in 1224. Owing to illness, however, he remitted his vows and granted the castle of Manciet to the Hospitallers and the Templars in February of that year.77 73 74

Cart., no. 1830. For the affiliation charter of Raymond VI and the confirmation of the Order’s property by Raymond VII see Cart., nos. 1617, 1759. For relations between the Order and the counts of Toulouse see Carraz, ‘Ordres militaires, croisades et sociétés méridionales’, pp. 151–56. For its relation with the local aristocracy see Carraz, ‘L’anticléricalisme en France méridionale’, p. 385. Malcolm Barber maintains that although Raymond VI expressed his desire to be buried as a Hospitaller his burial in their house in Toulouse was not allowed. M. Barber, The Cathars: Dualist Heretics in Languedoc in the High Middle Ages, Harlow, 2000, pp. 50, 114. 75 For the establishment of Pexiora (Carcassone, Aude) see Higounet, ‘Hospitaliers et Templiers’, p. 64. For the lords of Laurac see Delaurelle, ‘Templiers et Hospitaliers en Languedoc’, p. 329. 76 For Raymond VI’s affiliation charter and the confirmation of the Order’s property by Raymond VII see Cart., nos. 1617, 1759. At the same time the Cistercians, who were preaching the crusade, were granted gifts and privileges by Simon of Montfort, the leader of the Albigensian Crusade, but also by his opponent Raymond of Toulouse; they also profited from the acquisition of the property of a number of condemned heretics. See Hoffman Berman, ‘Medieval Agriculture’, p. 124. 77 For the donation of Manciet see Cart., no. 1781, and Du Bourg, pp. 353–55. For Gaston and William of Montcada see J. Miret y Sans, ‘La casa de Montcada en el vizcondado de Béarn’, Bolletín de la Real Academia de Buenas Letras de Barcelona, 1 (1901), pp. 186–99, 239; P. Tucoo-Chala, La vicomté de Béarn et le problème de sa souveraineté, Bordeaux, 1961, pp. 52–54; J. Shideler, A Medieval Catalan Family: The Montcadas, 1000–1230, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1983, pp. 133–34, 139–47.

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

77

Whereas Hattin seems to have temporarily halted the economic growth of the French priories, these conducted an forceful policy of expansion from the beginning of the thirteenth century; investing in land and property and taking part in local and perhaps international trade. Their financial activities coincided with a boom in the French economy, but they do not seem to have been connected with the needs of the Order in the East. Indeed, their economic activities give a first impression that they derived from an independent policy opposed to, or at least separate from, the general policy of the Order dictated from Acre. I hope to demonstrate that the situation was more complex than that.

Reaction to the Expansion: The Re-organization of the Order in the 1210s and 1220s Much of the Hospitallers’ income in France was never destined for the Holy Land. Most of the brothers served in French priories and commanderies, which had also to provide for their associates and servants as well as helping the poor and pilgrims.78 It is nevertheless surprising that the extensive investments made by the Hospitallers in France were made at a time of acute crisis in the Latin kingdom. One might have expected that the demands for resources to rebuild the Order’s power in the East after Hattin and the earthquake of 1202 and to provide additional supplies of money and manpower for the Egyptian campaign would have resulted in the liquidation of property rather than in long-term investments. The priors of France who conducted the expensive transactions with Charité-sur-Loire in 1203 and 1209 were Isembard and William of Villiers. Both were experienced officers. Isembard had been prior of France since 1201. If the transactions in Provins had been against the interests of the Order in general, one would have expected his career to suffer. Apparently it did not, as he was appointed grand commander in Acre in 1207 and 1219. Back in Europe he was the grand commander of Outremer in 1211 and 1222 and he is recorded as prior of France in March 1212.79 The case of William of Villiers, who carried out a much more expensive transaction, was different. He had been commander or grand Carraz has found additional examples of sympathizers with the count of Toulouse who had joined local commanderies of the Military Orders, even though these ‘new recruits’ were also suspected of open anticlericalism. The appeal of the Military Orders was precisely their independence from the bishops and the local clergy. Still, this independence also meant the Orders’ submission to papal authority. As Carraz rightly pointed out, these contradictions emphasize the complex situation in which the Orders found themselves. They had to act in accordance with papal policy and at the same time protect their local interests. See Carraz, ‘L’anticléricalisme en France méridionale’, pp. 385–86. For this possible conflict between local and international interests see also J. Sarnowsky, ‘Regional Problems in the History of the Mendicants and Military Orders’, Mendicants, Military Orders, and Regionalism in Medieval Europe, ed. J. Sarnowsky, Aldershot, 1999, pp. 1–19. 78 See Chapter 4 below for an analysis of places of recruitment and service. On this subject see also Forey, The Military Orders, p. 124; Barber, ‘Supplying the Crusader States’, pp. 319–20. 79 Cart., nos. 1145, 1167; 1250, 1276, 1656; 1360, 1758; 1382. It is however possible that different Isembards held these offices. Delaville Le Roulx (see index of Cart.,) asserts that it is the same man.

78

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

commander in Acre in 1192, grand commander of Outremer in 1193, and prior of England in 1199 before becoming prior of France in 1207–1209. 80 After his transaction with Charité-sur-Loire, however, he no longer appears in any documents, and although one cannot be certain, it appears that his career had come to an end. He might have died; it is more likely, however, that he was replaced as one of many changes in the Order’s leadership in Europe, a process which took place in the following years. For example, Isembard, who succeeded William as prior of France, was replaced by a brother called Geoffrey in August 1212.81 Further evidence of this re-shuffle is the replacement of the prior of St. Gilles, Bermond of Luzancion. Last recorded as prior of St. Gilles in February 1212, he next appears, without title, in April 1214 as a witness in Tarsus to two charters.82 His summons to the East may have resulted in his dismissal. In the summer of 1215 he was replaced as prior of St. Gilles by Martin of Andos. Other important priors were replaced at about the same time. Martin of Andos was replaced as castellan of Amposta by Raymond of Ayscle. Robert the Treasurer, prior of England, was replaced by Henry of Arundel.83 Martin of Andos is an example of how difficult and confusing it is to study the changes in the Order’s leadership from the surviving material. Raybaud, who studied the history of the priory of St. Gilles throughout the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, maintains that in October 1215, only a month after Martin was first mentioned in this office, he was replaced as prior of St. Gilles by a brother called Seignoret, and these two brothers were sent by the grand commander of Outremer to represent the Order at the Fourth Lateran Council.84 Raybaud, however, does not mention his sources, and in the very rich material which survives for the priory of St. Gilles for the beginning of the thirteenth century no evidence is found of Seignoret as prior in 1215–16, although there was a vice-prior by that name in September 1216.85 Moreover, although representatives of the Military Orders were summoned to the Lateran Council, the surviving records do not provide any names.86 To add to the confusion, in February 1216 the prior of St. Gilles and the commander of Montpellier were both named as Martin of Andos. Delaville Le Roulx believes that the two posts were held by two different people of the same name.87 Because of the inconsistency and gaps in the sources one cannot argue with 80 81

82

83 84 85 86 87

Cart., nos. 919, 945, 1056, 1243, 1330–32. For William’s carrer see also Chapter 1 above, note 24. Cart., no. 1397. There seems to be a gap of three years from the priory of William to that of Isembard, and this office was perhaps vacant. The priory would have been then administered. by Isembard in his capacity as grand commander of Outremer. For Bermond of Luzancion as prior of St. Gilles see Cart., no. 1377; Cart. Avignon, p. 14 and no. 75. For his presence in Tarsus see Cart., nos. 1426–27. On relations between the Hospitallers and King Leo II of Armenia see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 152–60. Cart., nos. 1656, 1475, 1426–27, 1446, 1484. For Robert the Treasurer see SC, no. 510. For Henry of Arundel see Cart., nos. 1469, 1444 bis. Raybaud, Histoire des grands prieurs, pp. 121–23. Note that Raybaud’s work is not always accurate and lacks documentation. For Seignoret as vice-prior see Cart., no. 1480. A brother named Seignoret is mentioned as prior of St. Gilles, but only on 5 September 1203. See Cart. St. Gilles, no. 2. For the summoning of the Hospitallers to the Fourth Lateran Council see Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, ed. J.D. Mansi et al., vol. XXII, col. 1079. Martin of Andos appeared as prior of St. Gilles in Cart., no. 1459, and Cart. Avignon, no. ch. 26.

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

79

certainly that changes in leadership necessarily involved a change in policy. It is indeed possible that some of these brothers had died, or being old had been replaced. Significantly, however, all the replacements occurred at about the same time. Bermond of Luzancion, for example, had been demoted from prior of St. Gilles to commander of Manosque in 1217; he was commander of Avignon from 1220 to 1230.88 There could have been an intentional change of leadership in Europe, leading to the demotion of the prior of St. Gilles. Additional changes seem to have been introduced at a general chapter convened in 1225. Evidence of this event is found in a letter from the master Garin of Montaigu to the Hospitallers of Corbeil that year. Garin confirmed the placing of thirteen priests in the church of Corbeil according to an agreement reached with Queen Ingeborg of France the year before, as well as the acceptance of Darun, a citizen of Lyons, apparently as a donat by the house of Tigery (subject to Corbeil). The master concluded his letter by ordering the Hospitallers at Corbeil to send all their surplus money to the Holy Land. These decrees had been written in Tarsus, ‘with the common assent and the council of our brothers and our general chapter’.89 Other evidence for the need of the Hospitallers in the East for cash at this time can be found in a letter sent by Walter Mauclerc, bishop of Carlisle, to King Henry III of England. He mentions that the Hospitaller prior and the Templar preceptor in England were sent to Germany to conduct negotiations with the Saxons. He emphasizes that they should not be delayed in Germany later than Easter ‘as they ought to celebrate their chapters, and their brothers should carry with them money to the Holy Land’.90 The discovery of the general chapter of 1225 is important, not only for an understanding of the internal organization of the Order but also for its legislative development. Because of the lack of evidence some historians had argued that no general chapter was assembled for almost sixty years, from 1206 to 1262; the Order’s legislation stagnated, to be renewed only by the master Hugh Revel. My findings confirm Anthony Luttrell’s assumption, based on the preamble to the 1262 statutes, that many of those statutes are the result of legislation passed in earlier general chapters.91 Although we lack any additional information about the general

88

89 90

91

He. appeared as commander of Montpellier in Cart., no. 1460. In his index to the Cart., Delaville Le Roulx catalogues them separately. Marseilles-56H 1281, fols. 29, 75, 106, 108, 110; Cart. Avignon, pp. 14, 233, 235, and nos. 75, 24, 29, 31, 57, 61, 62, 65–66, 77, 85, 87, 89, ch. 27, 29–41; Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de St. Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon et en comtat Venaissin au XIII siècle’, passim; Reynaud, La commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean, p. 199. ‘de communi assensu et consilio fratrum nostrorum et capituli nostri generalis’, Cart. no. 1817. For the agreement with Ingeborg see Cart., no. 1785. ‘cum oporteat eos capitula sua celebrare et pecuniam in Terram Sanctam cum fratribus suis transmittere’, Diplomatic Documents, vol. I, no. 160. The capitula which Walter Mauclerc referred to were probably the provincial chapters of the Templars and the Hospitallers in England, where the money was collected and from there sent to the East. On the provincial chapters see Introduction above, p. 9. Humphrey-Smith, Hugh Revel, p. 44; A. Luttrell, ‘The Hospitallers’ Early Written Records’, The Crusades and their Sources: Essays Presented to Bernard Hamilton, ed. J. France and W.G. Zajac, Aldershot, 1998, p. 151, and his article ‘The Hospitallers’ Early Statutes’, Revue Mabillon, 75 (2003), p. 17.

80

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

chapter of 1225, it may have been summoned to confirm institutional changes within the Order. It followed a visit by the master Garin of Montaigu to Europe on a fund-raising campaign after the failure of the Fifth Crusade. He met Frederick II in Palermo in 1224, who in response to requests from the master allowed free shipments of supplies to the brothers in the East.92 Garin of Montaigu was then in England together with John of Brienne, king of Jerusalem, asking for help for the Holy Land and visiting the Order’s commanderies. Later he visited the houses of Bordeaux, Paris, and Orange.93 His visit to the French houses may have been connected with the establishment of a third priory in France, the priory of Auvergne, which took over control of the Massif Central from the priory of St. Gilles.94 The re-disposition of the Order’s leadership in Europe and the calling of the general chapter intimate a conflict of interest between the master and the convent in the Holy Land and its European houses, perhaps over a policy of retrenchment that was required in order to face economic crisis in the East. There is, however, no evidence that the replacement of leadership or the visit by the master to Europe changed the economic policy of the French priories. Long-term investments in land and property were still being made. No changes had been instituted by the grand commanders of Outremer, ad hoc officers appointed by the master to be in overall charge in Europe, to suggest they disapproved of the policies being pursued.95 Indeed, Aimery of Pax, grand commander of Outremer from 1215 to 1216, had been involved in one of the most important and expensive acquisitions in Manosque.96 It is therefore unlikely that the investment policies of the French priories ran counter to the wishes of the central convent in the East or that there was a constitutional crisis. It may be that the revenues of the French priories from donations, seigneurial rights, and tithes, as well as the exploitation of their property, were large enough to allow both the expansion of the Order in France and the support of its houses in the Holy Land. The reorganization of the Order’s administration in France may have been a necessary change implemented to cope with its rapid expansion there and could have been one of the reasons for the changes in personnel and perhaps the creation of a new priory. All priories owed responsiones and it may be indicative that the English priory was renting out property at the beginning of the thirteenth century.97 It is difficult, 92

93 94 95 96

97

‘nihilominus etiam res ipsius hospitalis, que ultra mare ad opus ipsius hospitalis et fratrum eius mittuntur, sine contradictione et molestia deportari de cetero permittentes’, Acta imperii inedita, vol. I, no. 268. Matthew Paris, vol. III, p. 82; Cart., nos. 1786, 1789, 1790. The specific date for the establishment of the priory of Auvergne is unknown. See Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, p. 371; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 354–55. For the grand commander of Outremer see Introduction above, p. 9. He bought all that the lord of Serviéres had in the city for 2,000 oboles of gold. Cart., no. 1450; Reynaud, La commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean, p. 37. None of the four grand commanders of Outremer serving from 1193 to 1247 was involved in selling or renting out property. For William of Villiers (1193): Cart., no. 945; Garcia of Lisa (1198–99): Cart., nos. 1022, 1026, 1056, 1057, and Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 263, 273; Aimery of Pax (1215–1216): Cart., nos. 1450, 1444, 1484, 1459, 1460, 1464. Reynaud, La commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean, p. 199; Isembard (1211, 1222): Cart., nos. 1360, 1758. Cart., nos. 1153, 1217, 1233, 1452.

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

81

however, to establish whether the money raised by the Hospitallers in England through leasing was a response to appeals from the East or part of their regular property-leasing policy, which had always been their prime source of profit.98 Although the Hospitallers in the Iberian peninsula owed responsiones and were only temporarily exempted from them in the 1270s,99 their ability to supply them and to react to crises in the East greatly depended on their involvement in the Reconquista. They were probably able to send supplies from the kingdom of Navarre, which was not deeply involved in the defence of frontier land,100 but documents relating to the Hospitallers in Castile and León evince no change in the Order’s economic activity in these kingdoms after 1188.101 One may wonder whether the castellany of Amposta, which was involved in the defence of the reconquered lands of Aragon and the development of their economic and social life, would have been in a position to send significant contributions to the East.102

1240–1274: Years of Change The French priories were the richest and biggest Hospitaller provinces in Europe, and they apparently began to feel the strain in 1247–48, the years following La Forbie and leading to St. Louis’ crusade. As was the case after Hattin, the number of investments significantly decreased after 1247.103 This may well be explained by a lack of sources, as some of the most important French cartularies that survive cover mainly the first quarter of the thirteenth century.104 However, other evidence 98

99 100

101 102

103

104

See, for example, Chapter 1 above, p. 16, for appeals to the prior of England at the beginning of. the thirteenth century. For the economic activity of the English priory see SC, pp. LXXV–LXXX. See also below, p. 99 See below, p. 100. The priory of Navarre also conducted extensive economic activities which included the transfer of property to private hands in return for annual rents. See El gran priorado de Navarra, vol. II, e.g. nos. 68, 74, 88. For a discussion on the participation of the priory of Navarre in the Reconquista see ibid., vol. I, p. 77; J. Goñi Gaztambide, ‘Recensiones’, Hispania Sacra, 9 (1956), pp. 461–64. For a general discussion on the Hospitallers and the Reconquista see A. Forey, ‘The Military Orders and the Spanish Reconquest in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries’, Military Orders and the Crusades, Aldershot, 1994, essay no. V, pp. 197–234. A recent study has been published on the Hospitallers in Spain by C. Barquero Goñi, Los caballeros Hospitalarios en España durante la Edad Media (siglos XII–XV), Burgos, 2003. Libros de privilegios de la orden de San Juan de Jerusalén en Castilla y León, ed. C. de Ayala Martínez, Madrid, 1995, pp. 344–417. For the Hospitallers in Aragon, see M.L. Ledesma Rubio, ‘Notas sobre la actividad militar de los Hospitalarios’, Principe de Viana, 25 (1964), pp. 51–56; M. Bonet Donato, La Orden del Hospital en la Corona de Aragón: Poder y gobierno en la Castellanía de Amposta (S. XII–XV), Madrid, 1994, pp. 30–51. See also below, pp. 99–101. I found a relatively small number of investments for this period: Cart. Velay, no. 53; Cart.Bruxelles, nos. 63, 69, 76; Marseilles 56H 1281, fol. 107; Cart. Avignon, p. 28 and nos. ch. 56, 60–61. For example, the Cart. St. Gilles and Cart. Trinquetaille. See also D. Le Blévec and A. Venturini, ‘Cartulaires des Ordres militaires, XII–XIII siècles (Provence Occidentale, Basse Valle du Rhône)’, Les Cartulaires. Actes de la table ronde, organisée par l’École Nationale des Chartes et le G.D.R. 121 du C.N.R.S., ed. O. Guyotjeannin, L. Morelle and M. Parisse, Paris, 1993, pp. 451–65;

82

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

exists of an economic crisis. In a letter issued in May 1247 Innocent IV emphasized the urgent need of the Military Orders for supplies from Europe. Forbidding the prelates to demand from the houses and churches of the Hospitallers and the Templars in the West the money required from the Church to support the Holy See, he explains that owing to the miserable situation into which the Orders had fallen they expected immediate supplies from their houses and churches overseas.105 The need for cash must also have been the reason for granting the Hospital money collected from the redemption of crusading vows,106 and it may also have resulted in the disposal of property by the French houses. In February 1248 Andrew Polin, prior of France, admitted that the Order still owed the canons of St. Marcel of Paris money for the purchase of a house in the city. In June that year he sold a manor in Beaujeu for 1,000 livres tournois. This transaction was made to cover the needs of the priory and was approved by the French chapter. In February 1250 the new prior of France, Philip of Egly, confirmed a sale of land by a brother called Simon, commander of the houses of Paris and Senlis. He also confirmed a transfer of land by the house of Éterpigny in return for an annual rent.107 The only significant acquisition by the priory of France during this period was of property in Bofles and Neus, for 180 livres parisis, made by the commandery of Fieffes in October 1244. A year later the commandery of Éterpigny bought property in the region for 20 livres parisis. Recall, however, that compared with the purchases by the priors of France at the beginning of the century, and considering the rise in inflation, 200 livres was not a large sum.108 The financial situation of the priory of France apparently differed from that of St. Gilles and of Auvergne, both of which seem to have continued their investments until the 1250s. In 1241 and 1244–45, the commandery of St. Paul les Romans made small acquisitions of lands and rents for about 80 livres viennois.109 In the Midi, the commandery of Devesset (in the priory of Auvergne) bought the village of Chaumargeais as well as lands in the area for 5,000 sous of Puy in 1246.110 A year later the Hospitallers in Avignon bought lands and property in the parish of St. Geniès for 1,900 sous Raymondins.111 In his Histoire des grands prieurs et du prieuré de Saint Gilles, Raybaud mentions, unfortunately without referring to his sources, a number of acquisitions by the prior of lordships, rights, and tracts of forest between 1247 and 1250. In January 1249 Alasatie, lady of Rognes (Provence), entered the Order

105 106 107 108

109 110 111

D. Carraz, ‘Templiers et Hospitaliers en France méridionale (XII–XIII siècles). À propos d’un ouvrage rècent’, Provence historique, 50 (2000), pp. 216–17. Cart., no. 2441. For the exemption of the Military Orders from the taxation imposed by Innocent IV see Chapter 3 below, pp. 116–17. See Chapter 3 below, p. 117. Cart., nos. 2464, 2474, 2515, 2523. Cart. Fieffes (S5533), fol. 190; Cart. Éterpigny, fol. 59. Fossier points out a significant increase in the price of land in Picardy from 1225. Fossier, La terre et les hommes en Picardie, vol. II, pp. 577–79. As will be shown below, the area also suffered acute inflation in the prices of agricultural products. See below, p. 84 and note 121. AD du Rhône, pp. 97–98. AD du Rhône (antérieur), p. 167. According to Chassaing (editor of Cart. Velay), p. II, this is one of the oldest acts of the priory of Auvergne. Cart. Avignon, no. ch. 56; Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de St. Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon et en comtat Venaissin au XIII siècle’, p. 27.

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

83

as a consoror. She bequeathed to the priory of St. Gilles the lordships of Rognes, Lapalud, Pelafol, Meireste, St. Maurice, Trigance, and Lamartre, from which she would keep the revenues for life. The surplus incomes of the commandery of Comps, after deduction of the money needed to support the commandery and for payment of the responsiones, were given to her by Ferrand of Barras as a life annuity. To consolidate this new acquisition he also gave her 30,000 sous to re-acquire Trigance, which she had transferred to another person.112 These investments suggest that as a whole the financial state of the priory of St. Gilles must have been more stable, although the state of individual commanderies within the priory may have differed and some of them were disposing of and renting out property. In 1248 the commandery of Valentine, in the Toulouse area, sold to the Cistercian abbey of Notre Dame de Léoncel lands for 8 livres viennois. This transaction was conducted under instructions from the prior of St. Gilles, and the brothers emphasized that they made this sale because of the needs of their house.113 The failure of St. Louis’ crusade and the aggravation of conditions in the Latin settlement in the second half of the thirteenth century must have increased the reliance of the Hospitallers in the East on supplies from Europe. The gap in the sources, however, makes it extremely difficult to build up a consistent picture of the reaction of the French priories to these demands. From 1250 onwards there is a sharp decline in the number of acts relating to the Hospitallers. As was emphasized above, this could be explained by the fact that only a few of the Order’s surviving cartularies cover the years after 1240. However, even cartularies that include material for later years show a drastic decline in the number of charters. For the period between 1250 and 1260 the Order’s general cartulary includes only two acquisitions of property and two donations in France. In November 1250 the Hospitallers of Pech-Vilauges (county of Toulouse) bought a farm for 1,200 sous of Cahors and in July 1253 the prior of France leased lands in the region of Gaudiempré (county of Artois) for an annual rent of 24 sous.114 Although Delaville Le Roulx’s cartulary is incomplete and could therefore be misleading, other sources give similar indications. The cartulary of Fieffes includes, for the same period, only one acquisition of an annual rent of oats, while the cartulary of Éterpigny records only one purchase.115 Sources other than the commanderies’ cartularies indicate that some investments were still being made after 1250, although to a much smaller degree. The Inventaire sommaire des Archives départementales du Rhône allows us to follow the economic activity of the commandery of St. Paul les Romans, although its cartulary ends in 1225. We have seen that this commandery bought property in the late 1240s. Additional purchases of lands and rents were made in 1252, 1256, and 1262. But the most expensive of these acquisitions was worth not more than 100 livres viennois.116 I have tried to compensate for the lack of primary sources after 1250 with

112 113

Raybaud, Histoire des grands prieurs, pp. 157–59. ‘alienationem predictorum fecimus ob utilitate et necessitatem domus nostre’, Cartulaire de l’abbaye Notre Dame de Léoncel, ed. U. Chevalier, Montélimar, 1869, no. 157. For additional sales see Cart., nos. 2481, 2489. 114 Cart., nos. 2544, 2648. For donations see nos. 2690, 2965. 115 Cart. Fieffes (S5533), fols. 174v–175; Cart. Éterpigny, fol. 59. 116 AD du Rhône, pp. 97–98. These investments seem relatively small as against the economic

84

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

references to the Order’s economic activities in secondary works, although even thorough studies, such as Le Blévec’s article on Avignon, do not cover the years after 1250. The only significant reference I have found was the purchase in 1258 of seigneurial rights in the village of Notre Dame de Romiguier, for which the commander of Manosque paid the abbot of St. Victor de Marseilles 16,000 sous Raymondins.117 A decline in the number of acts is a feature of the charter collections of other Military Orders, and the reasons for it can be found in both Europe and the Holy Land. After 1250 fewer donations were made to the Orders. This decline, as Nicholson has explained, was caused by a number of factors, among them the disenchantment with crusades to the Holy Land following the final loss of Jerusalem and the disaster of St. Louis’ crusade, and, at the same time, a growing popularity of crusades on European soil.118 Le Blévec has identified a decline in the number of donations made to the Hospitaller commandery of Trignan in the Midi from the 1250s, which he has also explained in terms of the unpopularity of crusading to the Holy Land.119 Yet one of the most interesting aspects of charters of donation to the Hospitallers throughout the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, long after the Order’s militarization, is that they were granted for support of the poor and the hospital. The Hospitaller defence of the Holy Land was hardly mentioned. As Nicholson has pointed out, evidence of a decline in the popularity of crusading to the Holy Land would be found in changes to family traditions of endowments. Noble families stopped or reduced their traditional patronage of Military Orders. This also affected the lords’ vassals, who were consequently less willing to grant donations to the Orders. The Hospitallers’ rights and wealth also came under severe criticism and were often challenged by lay lords.120 The willingness, and also the ability, of donors to support the Orders must also have been affected by economic factors. The second half of the thirteenth century was a time of acute inflation. The cessation of forest clearance at a time of continuous demographic growth, together with problems related to imports and international trade, caused a sharp rise in the prices of wheat and wine, as well as animals and their products.121 This unstable economic situation seems to have affected

117

118 119 120 121

activity of this commandery at the beginning of the century. As we have seen, this commandery had consolidated its property with a large number of acquisitions and donations by the 1220s. Reynaud, La commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean, pp. 49–50. Le Blévec gives a very thorough chronological description of the development of the commandery of Avignon and its dependent houses. Yet, except for mentioning that the Hospitallers disputed their seigneurial rights in Orange, he does not cover the years beyond 1250. Note however that neither does he refer to it as a period of crisis. See Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de St. Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon et en comtat Venaissin au XIII siècle’, pp. 36–37 (for their disputes over Orange) and passim. H. Nicholson, Templars, Hospitallers and Teutonic Knights: Images of the Military Orders, 1128–1291, Leicester, 1993, pp. 65–68. Le Blévec, ‘Les Hospitaliers de Saint Jean de Jérusalem en Bas-Vivarais’, p. 22. Nicholson, Templars, Hospitallers and Teutonic Knights , pp. 66–67. For criticism see pp. 69–79. For the fact that the Order’s rights and property were challenged by secular lords see below, p. 90. The rise in wheat prices, for example, was felt mainly in the north. In Lille there had been inflation of 300% from 1187–1246 and imports of grain from England to the ports of Flanders were not able to meet demand. See G. Sivery, L’économie du Royaume de France au siècle de

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

85

regions which were vital for the supply of responsiones to the East. The impoverishment of the nobility of Provence meant that donations to the Templar commandery of Ruou (in the Argens valley, Provence) had almost stopped by 1253. Sigal sees a correlation between the decline in the number of donations and the ability of this commandery to expand; before the second half of the thirteenth century it had consolidated its estates with donations, acquisitions, and exchange of property.122 Note that lack of investments does not always mean that the commanderies faced financial difficulties. In Languedoc, the commanderies of Puysubran and Caignac reached the peak of their expansion and consolidation of property by the 1240s. Afterwards, claims Berthe, the expansion of the Order in this area ceased, not because of financial difficulties but because of scarcity of available lands and areas in which to expand in a period of continuous demographic growth.123 The effect of economic changes on the Military Orders may be seen if one compares two Templar cartularies from the Domena, the preceptory cartulary of Saulce-sur-Yonne, near Sens, and that of Bellenglise (Belle-Eglise), near Amiens. Out of 117 acts dated 1250–60 found in the cartulary of Saulce-sur-Yonne, seventy-one are acquisitions of lands and property, mainly vineyards, valued between 60 sous tournois and 482 livres.124 There is no evidence for acquisitions in the cartulary of Bellenglise for the same period.125 It is, of course, difficult to assess the economic policy of individual commanderies from the surviving material, and the reasons for the discrepancy in the cartularies could be random; Bellenglise was probably a much smaller house (Fossier calls it ‘une modeste maison’).126 It may, however, be possible to explain the investments of Saulce-sur-Yonne, at a time when

122

123

124 125 126

Saint Louis, Lille, 1984, pp. 59–133; R. Fossier, Le Moyen Âge. Le Temps des Crises,1250–1520, Paris, 1983, pp. 24–27. P. Sigal, ‘Une seigneurie ecclésiastique en Provence orientale au Moyen Âge: La commanderie de Ruou’, Provence historique, 15 (1965), pp. 129–33. Duby (Rural Economy, pp. 234–35) states that although some religious establishments were in debt and suffered from financial difficulties, their ability to expand their possessions still more was closely connected with the donations they received. Sivery (L’économie du Royaume de France, pp. 213–14) argues that the second half of the thirteenth century is marked by an economic crisis in Marseilles, aggravated by the loss of markets in the East. Michaud, who placed these events in the last quarter of the century, found that this economic crisis led to a change in the patterns of endowments to religious orders. The large donations of lands, which were a common feature in the twelfth century, were replaced by more modest monetary donations. See F. Michaud, Un signe des temps. Accroissement des crises familiales autour du patrimoine à Marseille à la fin du XIIIe siècle , Toronto, 1994, pp. 40–54. See also Demurger, Vie et mort, pp. 225–26. However, different economic conditions prevailed in different regions in Provence. According to Stouff the development of the Camargue had ceased by 1240 while the most intensive period of clearing and settlement in the Crau was between 1260 and 1340. See L. Stouff, Arles à la fin du Moyen Âge, Aix en Provence, 1986, vol. I, p. 93. Carraz found that although the Templars in Provence faced financial difficulties and suffered from the decline of the traditional nobility, they also looked for new business partners: the bourgeoisie and the Jews. See Carraz, ‘Ordres militaires, croisades et sociétés méridionales’, pp. 339–45. M. Berthe, ‘Deux commanderies Hospitalières du Lauragais, Puysubran et Caignac (XII–XIV siècle)’, Les Ordres Militaires, la vie rurale et le peuplement en Europe occidentale, XII–XIII siècles, Flaran 6 (1984), p. 210. Cart. Saulce sur Yonne, fols. 22–70. Cart. Fieffes (S5533), fols. 259–80. Fossier, ‘Les Hospitaliers et les Templiers au nord de la Seine’, p. 19.

86

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

other houses stopped expanding, by the fact that in the 1250s Paris and the Ile-de-France enjoyed an economic boom. Donations to monastic orders in this region were still being made, and the Templars in Paris were perhaps investing large amounts of ready cash that were deposited with them.127 Nevertheless, if this was the case, and the Templars were still able to invest in the Ile-de-France because it was a prosperous area, one cannot explain the lack of evidence for Hospitaller investments in the same region. The very few acts that I have found for this region all relate to arbitration by the Parliament of Paris regarding the Order’s rights and privileges.128 At the same time as additional sources of income in terms of donations ceased, the Hospitallers, as great landlords, must also have been affected by the economic situation. The only way of keeping rents profitable, for example, would have been to adjust them to the rate of inflation.129 These financial difficulties had to be faced at a time of increasing demands from the East, and they resulted in the alienation of property rather than the readjustment of rents. Innocent IV allowed the Templars in 1253 to sell property worth up to 2,000 silver marks to cover their debts. For the same reason both Orders were granted money collected from the redemption of crusading vows. Papal and Templar letters indicate that in order to maintain their fortifications and forces in the Holy Land the brothers would have to be forced to sell property and goods in Europe.130 At a time of inflation this would mean further losses, as indicated in a letter of May 1257 in which Pope Alexander IV instructed the head of the religious community at St. Etienne de Beaune, in the diocese of Autun, to revoke alienations of property made by the Hospitaller priory of France. This letter was sent in response to an appeal to the pope, in which the Hospitallers explained that they and their predecessors had had to relinquish, or rent for life or for long periods, to laymen and clerics, lands, meadows, vineyards, and other property and sources of income at great loss. The pope asked the prior to declare these transactions illegal as they violated the Order’s resolution of 1206, which forbade the alienation of property without permission from Hospitaller officials and the central government.131 According to Reynaud, a similar letter was sent in 1251 by

127

128

129 130 131

The importance of Paris and the Ile de France as a centre of trade and royal administration increased at a time when traditional centres of trade, such as the fairs of Champagne, were declining. See Sivery, L’économie du Royaume de France, pp. 256–60. On donations to monastic institutions in this area see Fourquin, Les campagnes de la région Parisienne, p. 141. Lack of evidence makes it difficult to establish whether the Templars had indeed invested the money which had been deposited with them. See Forey, The Military Orders, p. 117. Cart., nos. 2876, 2900. For appeals of the Military Orders to the Parliament of Paris see also J.-M. Carbasse, ‘Les commanderies: aspects juridiques et institutionnels’, La Commanderie, institution des ordres militaires dans l’Occident médiéval, ed. A. Luttrell and L. Pressouyre, Paris, 2002, pp. 21–25. Forey, The Military Orders, p. 124. See Chapter 1 above, p. 33, and Chapter 3 below, pp. 105, 117. Cart., no. 2872. See also Chapter 3 below, p. 120. Decree no. 12 of the statutes of Margat, from 1206 (Cart., no. 1193) forbade alienations of property that had not been approved by the general chapter. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 346–47. Alienations of Church property that had not been authorized by the relevant superior was a violation of Canon Law and could be annulled. See Dictionnaire de Droit Canonique, ed. R. Naz, vol. I, cols. 403–415; vol. VII, cols. 377–80.

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

87

Pope Innocent IV to the bishop of Sisteron, instructing him to revoke alienations of property made by the Hospitaller commandery of Manosque. The letter was issued in response to a Hospitaller appeal following disputes over property, most probably over the churches of St. Etienne de Orques and St. Pierre.132 After 1250 both the Hospitallers and the Templars appealed several times to the pope for the annulment of their transactions. In April 1265 Clement IV asked the abbot of Saint-Guilhem-le-Désert, in the diocese of Lodève, to revoke alienations of property made by the Templars in Provence.133 Referring to a similar letter sent by Clement IV to the Templars a year later, Mannier described the brothers’ acts as ‘injustes et bien condamnables’. He claimed that knowing that the Order’s statutes forbade alienation of property, the Templars rented out fallow land and took it back by means of papal letters of this kind, after the land had been improved by the tenants. In fact the Order’s contemporaries criticized its aggressive economic policy. Barber has stressed their resentment and their belief that the Templars’ deep financial involvement had caused their estrangement from their original religious ideals. This may have been a reason for a decline in the number of donations given to the Order after the 1240s, which may have aggravated the Order’s situation.134 Carraz, who conducted a detailed study on the economy of the Templar houses in Provence, also considers the papal annulments of the Order’s transaction a symptom of their economic difficulties.135 It is most surprising that although the papal letters indicate that the Hospitallers were disposing of property there is hardly any evidence of it in their sources. A partial explanation of this is the fact that if they sold the property the deed would most probably have been kept by the buyer.136 This was not the case with rents. And although they should have kept some record I was able to locate only one charter noting that they rented out property. In June 1253 the commanders of Chazelles and St. Bonnet les Places leased to the bishop of Lyons lands in Ponas for an annual rent of 18 livres viennois.137 The lack of rent contracts could be significant at a time when in order to fix the value of rents to the rate of inflation landlords tried to change their long-term contracts into fermages or fermages à temps: tenancies in which the land was worked for short periods (several years) and the rent was in kind.138 Yet given the fragmentary material it is difficult to conclude that the lack of new leases and contracts means that the Hospitaller commanderies in France did not adapt to the changing economic circumstances. In a detailed study on the financial situation

132 133 134

135 136

137 138

Reynaud, La commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean, p. 49; Cart., no. 2570. Malteser Urkunden, no. 322. Unfortunately Mannier did not give a reference to this letter. See Mannier, Les commanderies, p. XV. M. Barber, ‘The Social Context of the Templars’, TRHS, 5th series, 34 (1984), pp. 43–46. Carraz, ‘Ordres militaires, croisades et sociétés méridionales’, pp. 736–37. I was able to find only one example in which the Hospitallers sold property. In May 1265 the commander of Toulouse, under orders from Ferrand of Barras, prior of St. Gilles, sold the Order’s lands and properties in Maurens. See Raybaud, Histoire des grands prieurs, pp. 174–75. Cart., no. 2645. Sivery (L’économie du Royaume de France, pp. 130–31) claims that the fermage à temps was the greatest innovation of commercialized agriculture in the thirteenth century. See also Duby, Rural Economy and Country Life, pp. 257–58.

88

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

of the commandery of St. Pierre de Campublic in the fourteenth century Benoît Beaucage found that by 1334 money rents given to this commandery had been replaced with fixed rents in kinds. The increasing inflation of the thirteenth century and the continuous devaluation of money made this change necessary.139 There is evidence, however, that in areas which enjoyed the most prosperous economy the Hospitallers continued their policy of expansion. In the county of Forez, where the economic crisis was felt only in the 1280s, the commander of Montbrison made a number of purchases of rents.140 Many of these were from members of the knightly class, who, in return for loans, converted their alods into fiefs held by the Order (reprise en fief ).141 In 1261 Bernard of Chambun, commander of St. Bonnet les Places, lent Hugh Arnard 80 livres viennois, for which Hugh pledged his vineyards in Le Puy de Vindrieu.142 The Hospitallers took advantage of Hugh’s financial situation, for he seems to have been heavily in debt. In July 1259 he surrendered to Bernard of Chambun his gardens and a tilery in Courzieu to be held as a fief. Five years later he relinquished to Bernard all his property there. The Hospitallers had a great interest in this area. Courzieu, not far from the commandery, was on the main highway, the old ‘Aquitaine Road’, which connected Lyons with the city of Feurs and from there with Clermont. A number of hospitals and other charitable institutions existed in this area in the fourteenth century. In January 1260 Hugh also gave the Hospitallers property next to their commandery of Chazelles.143 This commandery was also able to enlarge its tenure in the 1250s with a number of 139

140

141

142 143

Beaucage, ‘Difficultés économiques et réaction seigneuriale au terroir de Beaucaire’, pp. 8–9. Beaucage’s detailed analysis of this commandery is based on records of papal inquests conducted in all of the Order’s priories in the course of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. On these inquests see also B. Beaucage, ‘Une énigme des hospitaliers de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem: le déficit des commanderies du moyen Rhône, au prieuré de Provence en 1338’, Provence historique, 30 (1980), pp. 137–62; G. Duby, The Chivalrous Society, trans. C. Postan, London, 1977, pp. 186–215; A.-M. Legras, L’enquête pontificale de 1373 sur l’Ordre des Hospitalliers de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem, Paris, 1987. Although these inquests provide valuable information on the Hospitallers’ economic activities in the fourteenth century, their use for the study of the financial situation of their houses in the thirteenth century is most problematic. After 1312 the extent of Hospitallers’ lands and properties greatly changed following the transfer of the Templars’ possessions to them (on the transfer see Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 304–08). After studying the Chartes du Forez, Fournial concludes that the expansion of religious houses continued in the county until the 1280s. After that date their economic development ceased, as Forez suffered from overpopulation and famine. See Fournial, Les villes, pp. 265–66, 288–89, and Fossier, Le Moyen Âge, p. 25. On the investments of Montbrison see AD du Rhône (antérieures), p. 302; Chartes du Forez, vol. 4, p. 470, vol. 5, p. 624. On his graph of sales of property by the nobility of Forez between 1250 and 1300, based on the Chartes du Forez, Fournial (Les villes, graph no. 3, p. 717) shows that the value of their sales around 1255 was as high as it was towards the end of the century, which he considers a time of economic crisis. It is interesting that he does not refer to this problem in the text. Bernard of Chambun also acquired small rents of grains and money in 1263. AD du Rhône (antérieures), p. 158. For the transactions with Hugh Arnard see AD du Rhône (antérieures), p. 158. For the importance of the area of Courzieu see Fournial, Les villes, pp. 147–48. On reprise en fief see S. Reynolds, Fiefs and Vassals: The Medieval Evidence Reinterpreted, Oxford, 1994, pp. 48–49, 148, and M. Bloch, The Feudal Society, trans. L. Manyon, London and New York, 1989, p. 173. Reprise en fief was a usual measure adopted by indebted alod-holders, in different parts of France, in order to acquire cash. See Richard, Les Ducs de Bourgogne, pp. 312–14.

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

89

reprises en fief , for which it gave in return from 6 to 20 livres viennois.144 The expansion of the Hospitallers in Forez continued into the 1260s and 1270s. In April 1267 Robert of Montrognon, prior of Auvergne, and Giraud of Navis, commander of Chazelles, bought the rights of a quarter of a quarry, lands, vineyards, meadows, rents, and hunting rights in St. Genis Terre Noire and St. Martin la Plaine for 300 livres viennois.145 In September 1274 the prior of Auvergne bought annual rents of 19 sous viennois as well as rents of wheat which Margaret, lady of St. Arit, had in Soleymieux (near Montbrison) for 64 livres tournois.146 A number of purchases of rights over rents were also made by the Hospitallers in Lozère. In October 1250 they bought the rights to annual rents of wheat, oats, and a small sum of money for 33 livres. Five years later the same commandery received a man’s property, which included sheep, cheeses, and a number of huts, for which they paid 40 livres. In 1256 they paid 50 livres for an annual rent of wheat, oats, and a small sum of money.147 In the Languedoc the Hospitaller house of La Bastide-Pradines (near Rodez), bought for 30 sous tournois the rents and incomes which Arnal Amorel received from a farm called Camp Souteyran. This is an interesting transaction which may indicate the desire of the Order’s commanderies to consolidate their property and sources of income, or perhaps resume possession of their property, as the rents may have become unprofitable. The farm had been leased by the Order in 1233 in return for 6 livres Melgoriens and a percentage of the produce. The charter specified that the Order had rented the farm out because for the last thirty years the land had been left fallow and had not produced anything. By the 1250s, however, the house of La Bastide-Pradines had grown and preferred perhaps to cultivate the land directly, instead of leasing it out for cash.148 Also in Languedoc the Hospitallers went into partnership with Alphonse of Poitiers in 1255 in the establishment of a new rural village, a bastide, in St. Sulpice-de-Lézat (Muret, Haute Garonne). This partnership, however, encountered some difficulties and the agreement was revised in 1270. In return for Alphonse of Poitiers’ recognition of their joint ownership over the bastide, William of Villaret, vice-prior of St. Gilles, agreed to pay the count a deposit of 1,200 livres in advance of the 3,600 livres which the Order owed the count for this bastide and for additional acquisitions in the county of Toulouse.149 The Order must have had a great interest in developing and extending its assets in Languedoc, which in the late thirteenth century was an important grazing area for 144 145 146 147 148

149

AD du Rhône (antérieures), p. 150. AD du Rhône (antérieures), p. 166. On additional acquisitions made by the commander of Chazelles in the late 1260s and early 1270s see ibid., pp. 147, 150, 151–52, 158. Chartes du Forez, vol. 5, p. 661. Servière, ‘Commanderie de Gap-Français’, pp. 47, 49. A. Soutou, ‘Trois chartes occitanes du XIII siècle concernant les Hospitaliers de La Bastide-Pradines (Aveyron)’, Annales du Midi, 79 (1967), pp. 122–32, 153–56. According to Lewis (pp. 76–79) the economy of the Midi and Languedoc developed until the 1270s. Layettes du Trésor des Chartes, vol. III, no. 4176; Toulouse, Archives départementales de la Haute-Garonne, H216; Cart., no. 3394. On the. bastide of Saint-Sulpice-de-Lézat see Higounet, ‘Hospitaliers et Templiers’, p. 65. Alphonse’s willingness to resolve this dispute in 1270 and to agree to the Hospitallers’ down payment may have been connected with the count’s pressing need to raise the necessary money to finance his participation in the coming crusade. On Alphonse of Poitiers’ preparation for the Eighth Crusade see Richard, Saint Louis, pp. 306–7.

90

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

horses earmarked for the East. In 1297 Pope Boniface VIII granted the Order the hospital of Aubrac, in the diocese of Rodez, which had the much needed forage. He emphasized the need to help the Order in southern France to care for its horses, as war in Spain prevented their export from there.150 The Order could have shipped these horses from the port of Marseilles, where it enjoyed free passage of two vessels a year, and also from the port of Montpellier, from where, in 1273, their vessels were granted free passage by James I of Aragon.151 And yet the most common acts relating to the Order in the second half of the thirteenth century are the settlement of disputes over property and rights and the exchange of property. Some of these exchanges were an attempt by the commanderies to consolidate and organize their estates; some were the resolution of disputes arising from the desire of secular lords to regain property that had been donated to the Order and to restrict its privileges.152 Most of the Order’s acts from the Ile-de-France were of this nature.153 A number of agreements between the counts of Forez and the prior of Auvergne also indicate conflicts over Hospitaller rights in the county.154 At the beginning of the 1260s the commander of Le Puy concluded an agreement with Margaret of Auvergne, lady of Montlaur and St. Privat, regarding the rights of justice over Mas de Varenne, Poux, and Fonts.155 In November 1269 John of Cheury, vice-prior of France, agreed to put an end to a long dispute with the count of Artois over the rights of justice that the commandery of Fieffes enjoyed in Nues and Villers.156 St. Gilles’ estate was also increasingly challenged from the second half of the thirteenth century. William of Villaret, the Order’s drapier and vice-master, was appointed vice-prior of St. Gilles in October 1269. Immediately on his arrival he was obliged to reach an agreement with Aimar of Poitiers, lord of Valentois, according to which all that the priory had acquired in this lordship in the last forty years would be held in fief. The Order also promised to give Aimar military service of sixty men in case of war.157 The Order’s rights were also challenged in the lordship of Orange, which the Hospitallers had shared with the princes of Orange since 1215. After a long dispute of almost fifteen years, the Hospitallers had to agree in 1272 to hold their share as a fief from the princes.158

150 151 152

153 154 155 156 157 158

Cart., no. 4334. For free shipment from the port of Marseilles see above, pp. 74–75. For James’s grant see Cart., no. 3491. From the second half of the thirteenth century secular rulers tried to restrict Church institutions acquiring lands and property. See Barber, The New Knighthood, p. 297; Forey, The Military Orders, p. 121; Richard, Les Ducs de Bourgogne, pp. 377–79; Fourquin, Les campagnes de la région Parisienne, p. 141, n. 162; S. Raban, Mortmain Legislation and the English Church, 1279–1500 , Cambridge, 1982, pp. 12–29. See above, p. 86. AD du Rhône (antérieures), p. 153; Chartes du Forez, vol. 5, p. 646 (Cart., no. 3249) Cart. Velay, no. 56. Cart. Fieffes (S5059), fol. 7. Cart., no. 3384; Raybaud, Histoire des grands prieurs, p. 181. On William of Villaret see Appendix below, and Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 206–07. Cart., no. 3460. On this agreement and the Order’s possession of Orange see Le Blévec, ‘L’Hopital de St. Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon et en comtat Venaissin au XIII siècle’, pp. 32, 34–35. For additional disputes over the Order’s seigneurial rights see Cart., nos. 3404 (3467), 3416.

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

91

We have seen that some investments were made by the French commanderies between 1250 and 1260, but in general they seem to have alienated property in order to provide the East with funds, and also to match their revenues with the increasing cost of living at a time when donations to them were diminishing. The disposal of property in Europe was a threat to the future ability of these houses to send responsiones to the East. The decrees of the Order’s general chapter in September 1262 illuminate this point. The chapter claimed that the commanders overseas alienated property for which they received a large down payment and low rents; at a time of acute inflation such cash would lose its value very quickly. The chapter decreed that the Order’s property should not be leased. Only in cases in which it would not be profitable or it was not possible to keep the property would it be leased for the largest rent obtainable. Commanders should not ask for more than a one-year entry fine (gersum). Strong measures were also taken to control the priors overseas, who were ordered to keep a record of all their lands, vineyards, and meadows. It was stated that every commandery should have a copy of the part of the register that was relevant to them.159 The 1262 decrees seem to have resulted in the compilation of a number of cartularies, for example, the Maplestead cartulary, which according to Gervers was compiled by 1270 and contains the deeds of the Hospitallers’ administrative centres in Essex.160 Changes in the Order’s leadership in France could be indicative of changes in its economic policy. There was a difference in the dispositions of the leadership of the priories of France and St. Gilles, which may have resulted from the latter’s economy being more stable, as this work has shown. It is important to note, however, that as the material regarding the priories’ economic activities is fragmentary, so is information regarding their officers. Philip of Egly appears for the first time in the Order’s sources in February 1250 already as the prior of France. There is no further information about his term of office, but in April 1256 he appears again as a simple brother in Acre (there is no evidence for the presence of other European priors in Acre at the same time, which could imply a general chapter).161 He was replaced as prior of France by William Pijons, who had been commander of Cyprus in 1248. William is recorded as prior of France for the first time in 1253, which means that Philip’s term of office was very short. William must have held this post for several years as he appears as prior of France in 1256 and 1257.162 In December 1260 Philip reappeared as prior of France, a post which he apparently kept until March 1264.163 No replacements took place in the priory of St. Gilles. Ferrand of Barras was prior and also grand commander of Outremer from 1246 to 1268. He was eventually replaced by William of Villaret, not because of mismanagement but old age.164 No changes of leadership seem to have taken place in some of the 159 160 161 162 163 164

Cart., no. 3039, clauses 15, 16, 23, 25. M. Gervers, The Hospitaller Cartulary of the British Library (Cotton MS Nero E VI), Toronto, 1981, pp. 84, 87, 166–67. Cart., nos. 2514, 2523, 2810. Cart., nos. 2482, 2648, 2881; Cart. Éterpigny, fols. 35–36, 107–08. Cart., nos. 2969, 2991, 3008, 3031, 3036, 3076–77; Cart. Éterpigny, fols. 88–90; Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte et à Chypre, p. 417. Cart., nos. 2419, 2481, 2570, 2604, 2645, 2923, 2965, 2986, 3035, 3301, 3308. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 280–82. For William see Cart., no. 3416.

92

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

commanderies subject to St. Gilles either. Berenger Monge, commander of Manosque, served in this post from 1249 for a record period of almost 40 years. He was also the vice-prior of St. Gilles in 1263 and 1266. 165

1262–1274: A Time of Financial and Political Crisis It is unfortunate that so little evidence survives for the career of Philip of Egly. This brother had a leading role in events that took place in the 1260s, which determined the economic fate of the French priory and its ability to support the Order in the East. As stated above, Philip was in the Holy Land in 1256. Although there is no evidence as to the office he held at that time or his relation with the master Hugh Revel, it is significant that following his reappointment as prior of France in 1260 the number of Hospitaller investments in that kingdom rose considerably. Although evidence for a larger number of recorded deeds may well have been the result of changes in the Order’s archival policy following the decrees of 1262, it could also hint to new economic measures taken by Philip that would match the policy dictated by the master and the general chapter. The cartulary of Éterpigny, which does not record any purchases for 1250–60, has six purchases of lands and seigneurial rights for 1260–67. The most important purchase was in September 1262. The Hospitallers bought 101 acres, next to the commandery, for 700 livres parisis.166 In June that year Philip, with the approval of the provincial chapter of the priory of France, acquired a manor in Éterpigny for which he promised to give an annual rent of 100 sous parisis.167 Similarly, between 1260 and 1274 the Hospitallers in Brussels doubled the number of their acquisitions compared with the previous years, mainly by receiving lands and rights in return for annual rents.168 The economic activity of the French priory ceased, however, in the second half of the 1260s, a change undoubtedly linked with Philip’s involvement in Charles of Anjou’s crusade against the Hohenstaufen in southern Italy. As a result of his victory over Manfred in the battle of Benevento, in February 1266, Charles, count of Anjou, Maine and Provence, conquered the kingdom of Sicily, which he held as a papal fief.169 Three months later Clement IV asked the 165 166

Cart., nos. 2570, 2885; Reynaud, La commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean, pp. 52, 199. Cart. Éterpigny, fols. 119–25. For additional purchases see Cart. Éterpigny, fols. 41–45, 82–83, 69–70, 72–73. 167 Cart. Éterpigny, fols. 88–90; Cart., no. 3031. 168 Cart. Bruxelles, nos. 113, 116, 121, 124, 137, 140. Some of these transactions were reprise en fief , for which the money given by the Order to the alod-holders is not specified. See, for example, nos. 141, 142, 145. 169 The kingdom of Sicily, also generally referred to by the Italian term Regno, encompassed the island of Sicily and the south of Italy, up to the frontier of the Papal State (except for Benevento, a papal enclave). On this and on Charles of Anjou and his policy in southern Italy see D. Abulafia, The Western Mediterranean Kingdoms, 1200–1500: The Struggle for Dominion, London and New York, 1997, pp. 57–66, and his article ‘The Kingdom of Sicily under the Hohenstaufen and Angevins’, The New Cambridge Medieval History, vol. V, ed. D. Abulafia, Cambridge, 1995, pp. 497–521; J. Dunbabin, Charles I of Anjou: Power, Kingship and State-Making in Thirteenth-Century Europe, London and New York, 1998, pp. 3–8, 55–76; N. Housley, The

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

93

master Hugh Revel to put Philip of Egly in overall charge of the Hospitaller houses in the Regno. Although there is no specific evidence that Philip was the prior of France at this time, Delaville Le Roulx believes that he held the priory for some time after 1264. In his letter to the master Clement asked for brother Philip commorantem in Francia. But he addressed Aimery of la Roche in the same way, and the latter was the Templar preceptor in France until 1271. It seems reasonable to conclude that Charles asked for both the Hospitaller and Templar priors of France. The papal petition, with which the master complied, was made following a specific request from Charles of Anjou, who asked that Aimery should also be sent to the Regno. Charles’s request was compelling. The Hospitaller and Templar priors in France were among the most important officers in their Orders and leading figures in the economic and political life of the kingdom of France. The French monarchy had strong links with them and at times even intervened in their appointment: Aimery had become preceptor in France in the 1260s following a petition from Louis IX.170 Charles must have had connections with these priors through his lands in Anjou and Maine, and sought their assistance in southern Italy. Considering the good relations the Hospitallers maintained with Frederick II’s heirs, he perhaps also wanted to ensure the Order’s loyalty.171 This was indeed tested during the rebellion of Conradin’s supporters in Sicily, which preceded the battle of Tagliacozzo.172 In an unprecedented move Clement IV called on the Hospitallers in the Regno, in October 1267, to take up arms against Conradin’s supporters.173 Philip did not fail him. He exhausted the Order’s resources in the region fighting for the Angevin cause, and, as a result, the Hospitaller houses in Sicily were devastated by Charles’s opponents. These events were of grave consequences for the Hospitallers in the Latin East. At a time of great need, all shipments of supplies from the Regno had stopped.174

170

171 172 173

174

Italian Crusades: The Papal-Angevin Alliance and the Crusades against Christian Lay Powers, 1254–1343, Oxford, 1982, pp. 15–34. Cart., no. 3221; Reg. Clément IV, no. 418. On Philip of Egly see Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitalliers en Terre Sainte, pp. 369, 417, n. 3. The Templars, however, did not comply with Clement’s request. See A. Forey, ‘The Military Orders and the Holy War against Christians in the Thirteenth Century’, Military Orders and the Crusades, Aldershot, 1994, essay no. VII, p. 21; Barber, The New Knighthood, p. 274. Note that in the 1270s the Templars had supported Charles’s political ambitions in the Mediterranean in the belief that he was the only hope for the survival of the crusader states. See Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 169–70. The Hospitallers’ property in Sicily was confirmed by Conrad and Manfred in 1253, 1258, and 1259. See Cart., nos. 2638, 2893, 2910. On the Sicilian rebellion and the battle of Tagliacozzo see Abulafia, The Western Mediterranean Kingdoms, pp. 60–61, and Dunbabin, Charles I of Anjou, pp. 168–70. Cart., no. 3279; Thes. novus, vol. II, col. 532. According to Forey, Clement IV was the only pope who had urged the Military Orders to participate in a political crusade in southern Italy. In the offensives against Aragon in the 1280s the papacy avoided involving the Templars and Hospitallers, although they were asked to make monetary contributions. See Forey, ‘The Military Orders and the Holy War against Christians in the Thirteenth Century’, pp. 11–12; Carraz, ‘Ordres militaires, croisades et sociétés méridionales’, pp. 635–37. Cart., no. 3308 (vol. IV). According to this letter of Hugh Revel the Hospitallers in the East received no help from their Italian houses. Just as supplies from the Regno stopped arriving, their houses in Tuscany were raided and despoiled. Although the master did not specify the reasons for these attacks, their houses may have been assailed in the course of the struggle against Manfred’s supporters in Tuscany. On this struggle see Abulafia, The Western Mediterra-

94

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

Philip of Egly may have used not only the Order’s resources in southern Italy, but also money drawn from his former priory. Only two months after Clement had urged the Hospitallers in the Regno to take up arms, he ordered Philip to pay the debts he incurred while serving as prior of France. He explained that the vice-prior and the brothers of the priory complained to the curia that they owed heavy debts and that the priory’s property was pledged to merchants because of loans taken out by Philip. These debts were also mentioned in a letter sent in June 1268 to Ferrand of Barras, prior of St. Gilles. The master wrote that the debts incurred by Philip had exhausted the economic resources of the French priory and prevented the transfer from there of responsiones to the East.175 Nicholson believes that these loans may have been taken to support Charles’s campaign to Sicily.176 Considering Philip’s loyalty to the Angevin cause this could be a possible explanation. Yet no clear-cut conclusion on this matter can be reached. The reasons for negotiating these loans are not specified in the sources. They could also have been the result of the priory’s investments in the early 1260s, and Delaville Le Roulx asserts that the chaotic situation of the priory of France was the result of Philip’s poor administration. Delaville Le Roulx, however, did not analyse Philip’s economic policy, and he bases his argument only on the letter sent by Hugh Revel to the prior of St. Gilles. Riley-Smith argues that this faulty administration was due to the priory’s involvement in political conflicts.177 If this was the case, it is surprising that Clement, who had a great interest in the Order’s involvement in southern Italy, and even levied a tenth from Hospitaller houses in France in order to support Charles’s campaigns,178 considered these debts Philip’s private affair and not the priory’s. The same attitude was adopted by Hugh Revel, who after explaining to Ferrand of Barras about the financial situation of the priory of France, wrote that Philip had promised to cover his debts but had not yet done so. The master also severely criticized the Hospitallers’ involvement in the political events in Italy, which, he wrote, was the result of Philip’s own will (pro suo libito voluntatis), and which frustrated any hope for receiving supplies from there.179 One must remember, however, that Philip’s appointment in Sicily followed a papal petition and was made with the master’s approval. Hugh’s ambivalence towards the Order’s involvement in Sicily seems to reflect the complex situation the master found himself in. He had to comply with papal requests and to manoeuvre in international politics in a way that would not affect the economic security of the Order in the East at a time when the situation there was catastrophic.180 Philip’s appointment in Sicily, therefore, seems to have been a compromise. He was given the administration of the Order’s houses in the kingdom of Sicily, only ad hoc, as

175 176 177 178 179 180

nean Kingdoms, p. 60; Dunbabin, Charles I of Anjou, pp. 83–84; J.K. Hyde, Society and Politics in Medieval Italy: The Evolution of the Civil Life, 1000–1350, London, 1973, pp. 126–27. Cart., nos. 3285, 3308 (vol. IV). Nicholson, The Templars, Hospitallers and Teutonic Knights, pp. 31–33. Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, pp. 221, 369; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 354 and 345, n. 3. Housley, The Italian Crusades, pp. 175, 216–17. On the tenth see below, p. 96. Cart., no. 3308 (vol. IV). Hugh referred to the debts as ‘debitorum que frater Philipus predictus contraxerat in eodem, que non solvit, licet solvere promisisset’. See Chapter 1 above, pp. 35–42.

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

95

during the years he spent in southern Italy he was not replaced as prior of France by a new officer. Until he was appointed to the latter post in 1272, John of Chevry was the acting head of this province only in his capacity as vice-prior.181 Forey is right in arguing that Hugh’s criticism exemplifies the difficulties faced by the master and convent in the East in controlling their officers in Europe, who at times pursued independent policies.182 Hugh may not have realized the extent of Philip’s commitment to Charles of Anjou’s interests in southern Italy, which not only incurred enormous cost and prevented the shipment of supplies to the East, but could also have jeopardized the Order’s relations with the remaining Hohenstaufen. It is important to emphasize that from 1234 the Hospitallers had supported the Hohenstaufen policy in the Latin East and had even criticized papal policy, which could have put at risk future help from the emperor to the Holy Land.183 Not surprisingly, therefore, in November 1268, two years after Philip had been given command of the Hospitaller houses in southern Italy, the master and convent in the Holy Land wanted to depose him. Many letters of complaint, written by the master and the brothers, arrived at the curia. These complaints were, however, ignored by Clement, who in November 1268 extended Philip’s term of office until Easter 1269. The pope was not willing to antagonize Charles, who claimed that the prior’s presence in Sicily was necessary.184 Philip seems indeed to have been not only the count’s keen supporter but also a close adviser. He appears in the list of witnesses, alongside Charles’s key officers in the Regno, in an agreement signed in July 1267 between Charles of Anjou and the exiled Latin emperor Baldwin II.185 Hugh Revel’s letter of 1268 to Ferrand of Barras reveals the chaotic situation in the Holy Land. Following Baybars’ conquests, all that remained in Christian hands were the city of Jaffa, the castle of Atlit, and the coast from Acre to Beirut. Hardly any agricultural land remained, and the kingdom of Jerusalem was completely dependent on supplies from overseas.186 Clearly, the Hospitallers would not have been willing to put their resources in Europe at risk in order to support Charles’s cause. We have already seen the rage of the Latin settlers with regard to papal policy in the poem Ira et dolor, written at this time by a Templar knight serving in the Holy Land. It expresses fierce criticism of the diversion to Italy of resources and manpower destined for the Holy Land: The pope has given pardons to French and Provencals, who helped him against the Germans . . . those who want could leave the crusade (to the Holy Land) for war in Lombardy. Our legates are selling God and his pardon for money.187

181 182 183 184 185

186 187

Cart., nos. 3221, 3285, 3454. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 354. Forey, ‘The Military Orders and the Holy War’, p. 21. On the Order’s support for Hohenstaufen policy in the East and its criticism of papal policy see Chapter 3 below, pp. 112–14, 115–16. Cart., no. 3321; Thes. novus, vol. II, col. 633. RCAR, vol. I, reg. 3, no. 5. This charter is Charles’s promise to assist Baldwin II to recover the. Latin Empire, as agreed in the treaty of Viterbo. On the treaty see Abulafia, The Western Mediterranean Kingdoms, pp. 63–64, and Dunbabin, Charles I of Anjou, pp. 93–4. See Chapter 1 above, p. 42. On Ira et Dolor see Chapter 1 above, pp. 39–40.

96

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

The prior of St. Gilles and the officers in charge of the priory of France refused to pay the tenth levied for Charles’s campaigns. Although the Hospitallers were at first exempted from this tax, owing to Charles’s strong pressure on the papacy, they and other exempt Orders were eventually forced to pay it.188 In March 1266 Ferrand of Barras met Clement probably in order to convince him to exempt his priory from the tenth. The pope did not comply but asked Simon of Brie, the papal legate, to relax the sentences imposed upon the brothers and their churches.189 The Hospitallers had still not paid the tenth by 1270.190 This shows their resistance to any attempt to undermine their privileges but could also hint at their fragile economic situation at a time when, faced with inflation and decrease of income in France, they had to respond to increasing demands from the East. Hugh Revel’s letter to Ferrand of Barras specified that the priory of France was heavily in debt and unable to send any help to the East. Although there is no specific evidence, the priory of St. Gilles seems not to have been in a much better situation by the late 1260s. Hardly any evidence exists of investments made by the priory at this time. We saw above that most of its deeds were resolutions of disputes following attempts by secular lords to encroach on the priory’s property and rights.191 Paradoxically, Ferrand of Barras, who was asked to give financial support to Charles’s campaigns, had to protect his priory’s rights in Provence from the count’s ambitious policy. After obtaining Provence through his marriage to Beatrix, daughter and heiress of the count, Charles united the cities of Arles, Marseilles, Avignon, and Nice under his rule, and claimed the lordship of Manosque from the Hospitallers.192 The brothers owned extensive property in the area and probably could not afford not to come to terms with the count. In July 1262, after a long debate, they agreed to swear homage to Charles for their property in Provence and Forcalquier and to give him military service of ten knights and 100 foot soldiers, a service from which they had been exempted by previous rulers. In return the count exempted the Order from all tolls in his lands.193 The relations of the priors of St. Gilles with Charles of Anjou highlight once again the complex policy the Order had to pursue in order to protect its property and rights. Although they clashed with him over privileges, the Hospitallers, like other religious institutions, were suspected of supporting the count’s efforts to eradicate independent consulates in the largest towns of Provence, fearing that these would violate their rights. As a result the commandery of 188

189

190 191 192

193

For Hospitaller exemption from the tenth see Cart., nos. 3122, 3259. For its enforcement see Cart., no. 3318. For a thorough discussion on the taxation levied on exempt Orders to support Charles’s campaigns in Italy see Housley, The Italian Crusades, pp. 214–19. On the meeting between Ferrand and Clement see Cart., nos. 3215, 3216; Thes. novus, vol. II, cols. 297–98. Housley, The Italian Crusades, p. 217; Raybaud, Histoire des grands prieurs, pp. 175–77. On Ferrand of Barras see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 281–82. RCAR, vol. I, reg. 5, no. 302; vol. II, reg. 8, no. 555; vol. III, reg. 13, no. 624. See above, pp. 86, 90. On Charles’s expansion in Provence see P. Guiral and P. Amargier, Histoire de Marseille, Paris, 1983, pp. 86–88; N. Coulet and L. Stouff, ‘Le village de Provence au Bas Moyen Âge’, Cahiers du Centre d’Études des Sociétés Méditerranéennes, Nouvelle Série, vol. II, 1987, p. 34. For the. Hospitallers’ lordship of Manosque see Reynaud, La commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean, pp. 36–39 and passim. Cart., no. 3035. For Hospitaller homage to Charles see also P. Poindron, ‘L’expansion du comté de Provence vers le nord sous les premiers Angevins’, Provence historique, 18 (1968), p. 217.

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

97

Trinquetaille was raided by Charles’s opponents in January 1249.194 This aggression has been explained by Damien Carraz in the context of growing economic difficulties, as well as strong anticlerical feelings, the repercussion of the Albigensian crusade and the establishment in Provence of the new Angevine dynasty. As a result, the hostility and even violence against the Military Orders was not limited to Arles but was a common feature of other urban communities in Provence, which were jealouse to preserve their economic position and political rights.195 The rising challenge to its rights and income from the second half of the thirteenth century must have aggravated the economic situation of the priory of St. Gilles. In March 1274 Pope Gregory X ordered the bishop of Riez to revoke alienations of property made by the Hospitallers in Provence.196 Lack of investment and the alienation of property could mean that by this time the priory of St. Gilles, like the priory of France, was facing financial difficulties. Inflation and economic crisis at home, increasing demands from the headquarters in the East following unceasing Mongol and Mamluk invasions, and also, from the late 1260s, the diversion of resources to support political struggles in Europe, seem to have made the 1262 legislation practically inapplicable. Short of cash, both priories continued alienating property and taking loans.

The Finances of the Priories in Sicily, England and the Iberian Peninsula, 1262–1274 Although the Hospitallers’ priories in France were the biggest in Europe, and therefore the most important suppliers of money and manpower to the East, the headquarters relied on others as well. It is beyond the scope of this research to study the Order’s economic activities in other regions of Europe in detail. Still, for the purpose of comparison I shall briefly deal with a number of issues regarding the financial situation of the Order’s priories in the kingdom of Sicily, England, and the Iberian peninsula in the 1260s. That situation may have influenced the ability of these houses to react to the events in the Holy Land.197 Although the Hospitallers’ involvement in the political events in the Regno caused a financial crisis in their houses in Italy, Sicily, and probably France, Charles rewarded their loyalty by granting a large number of privileges in the kingdom of Sicily. Pryor has calculated that the major part of the thirty-three charters of privi-

194

GCN, vol. III, Arles, no. 1132. See also L.-H. Labande, Avignon au XIII siècle. L’évèque Zoen Tencarari et les Avignonnais, Paris, 1908 (repr. Paris, 1975), p. 133; Dunbabin, Charles I of Anjou, pp. 42–43, 46–47. 195 Carraz, ‘L’anticléricalisme en France méridionale’, pp. 386–93, and his ‘Les ordres militaires et la ville’, pp. 290–92. See also above (p. 72) for the restrictions imposed by several urban communities in Provence on the Order’s rights and economic activities. 196 Cart., nos. 3534–35. 197 This comparative section is based mainly on secondary sources. Although I carried out original research, it was by no means extensive, given that each region could in itself be the subject of a book. Some of the conclusions may well be modified by new research. Nonetheless, these considerations are worth including, in order to see to what extent the case of the French priories is unusual or conforms to a pattern.

98

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

leges given to the Military Orders in 1269–84, which were in the Angevin archives, were given to the Hospitallers.198 Some were granted in order to protect and strengthen their houses. For example, in September 1269, following a request from James of Taxi, prior of Messina, Charles ordered his officers to protect the brothers and their property. In June 1272 he granted the priory free pasturage for its flocks on his lands in Sicily.199 The most important of these privileges was the right to ship supplies from the Regno to Acre; these were greatly needed for the provision of the Order’s houses in the Holy Land. In July 1269 Charles allowed Peter of Avignon,200 prior of Barletta, to ship from the ports of Apulia to Acre 2,000 salme of wheat, 1,000 salme of barley, and 100 salme of legumes, produced by the Hospitaller houses in the region.201 A year later the brothers were allowed to export 300 salme of wheat and 200 salme of barley from Barletta as well as sixteen horses and mules, wheat, and barley from the port of Brindisi.202 As Pryor has pointed out, the Hospitallers and the Templars ran a regular cargo service from southern Italy to the Holy Land. In June 1271 their ships were exempted from providing the crown with crossbowmen, a duty imposed on all vessels sailing from the ports of the Regno.203 However, the Hospitallers’ export licenses were at times refused by the portulani, the harbourmasters in the Regno, and had to be renewed and enforced following the brothers’ complaints.204 In August 1272 Charles ordered his officers in the ports of Apulia to allow free shipment of 1,000 salme of wheat, 1,000 salme of barley, 100 salme of legumes, seven war horses and seven mules to be sent by the priory of Barletta to Acre.205 In his article on the transportation of horses during the crusades Pryor gives several other examples of royal licenses given by Charles to the Hospitallers to export horses and mules from southern Italy to the Holy Land.206 Considering the importance of Hospitaller houses in the Regno for provisioning the Holy Land it is not surprising that the removal of Philip of Egly from office in the spring of 1269 resulted in changes to the Order’s leadership there. Peter of Avignon, who had served in the 1250s as commander of Tripoli, was appointed prior of Barletta.207 James of Taxi, who was a simple brother in Acre in 1266,

198 199

200 201

202 203 204 205 206

207

Pryor, ‘In Subsidium Terrae Sanctae’, pp. 133–34. Cart., nos. 3347–48, 3457. Additional rights included, for example, the right to transport salt from the Order’s saltpans in Manfredonia for the use of their houses in Apulia: see RCAR, vol. I, reg. 6, nos. 428–29; Cart., nos. 3366–67. Although in the text Peter’s toponym is ‘Neocastrum’, Delaville Le Roulx believes this to be a mistake and that it refers to Peter of Avignon. See Cart., no. 3360, n. 1. Cart., no. 3360; RCAR, vol. I, reg. 6, nos. 402, 410. According to Pryor the salma of grain in Naples in the Angevin period was about 442.5 litres or 320 kilograms. Pryor, ‘In Subsidium Terrae Sanctae’, p. 129, n. 3. For similar privileges granted by Charles to the Templars see Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 239–40. RCAR, vol. III, reg. 13, no. 474. Cart., no. 3423. Cart., nos. 3362, 3415, 3462; RCAR, vol. III, reg. 13, no. 715, vol. VII, regs. 25, 30, nos. 44, 104. Pryor, ‘In Subsidium Terrae Sanctae’, p. 134. Cart., no. 3466; RCAR, vol. VIII, reg. 37, nos. 564–65. Pryor, ‘Transportation of Horses by Sea during the Era of the Crusades’, p. 110. For the importance of horses for the Latin settlement and the Military Orders in the East see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 318–20; Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 236–38. Cart., nos. 2670, 3045, 3357, 3360, 3363.

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

99

became prior of Messina. He, like Philip before him, became a close adviser to Charles of Anjou, who often refers to him as ‘our beloved counsellor’. James, however, apparently did not always perform this task willingly, perhaps because it forced him at times to leave his priory. In 1271 Charles asked Hugh Revel to order the prior to serve him wherever he needed him.208 In September 1272 Charles sent James to demand from the Tunisian ruler the tribute he was forced to pay following Louis IX’s second crusade and to take care of the war machines left there after the crusading army had returned to Sicily. A year later, in March 1273, James was summoned by Charles to discuss the situation of the Holy Land. By the 1270s, particularly after Charles acquired the crown of Jerusalem in 1277, the command of Hospitaller houses in the Regno must have become prestigious and was probably considered a springboard for a future career in the Order. After serving as commander of Messina, James of Taxi replaced Peter of Avignon as prior of Barletta in 1278. In 1286 he was the grand commander of Acre and acting lieutenant on behalf of the master, John of Villiers.209 Although the Order’s houses in southern Italy and Sicily had been affected by Charles’s campaign and the civil war there, by the 1260s these seem to have been the only ones in Europe from which the headquarters in Acre could expect significant shipments of supplies. Economic and political changes had affected the supply of responsiones not only from France but also from the Spanish kingdoms and England. Hugh Revel’s letter of 1268 stressed that the civil war in England between Henry III and the barons, fought between 1263 and 1265, also diminished the English responsiones, on which the Hospitallers in the East were heavily dependent.210 There is indeed evidence that the English commanderies laboured under financial difficulties and that to counter them they chose, like the French priories, to alienate property and take loans. In October 1256 Alexander IV forbade the alienation of Hospitaller property done without the approval of the prior of England.211 In March 1262 Urban IV wrote to the Hospitallers in England that letters carrying the priory’s seal, which had arrived at the curia, showed that they owed several sums to creditors. Although he recognized the need of this priory to pay its debts, he stressed that none of the Order’s property should be sold for this purpose.212 In his letter to Ferrand of Barras, Hugh Revel also complained that the supplies expected from Spain had diminished and that the Order had received only a few horses from there.213 As very little evidence survives it is extremely difficult to assess 208

209 210

211 212 213

RCAR, vol. VII, reg. 31, no. 142. Charles wrote to Hugh: ‘karissimus amicus noster, ad preces nostras mandaverit rel. fr. Iacobo de Taxi, Priori Hospitalis eiusdem in Messana, ut ad requisitionem nostram moretur ubi Nos voluerimus’. On James of Taxi see Cart., nos. 3213, 3348, 3358, 3498; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, 366. On the Tunisian crusade see Richard, Saint Louis, pp. 314–29. Cart., no. 3308 (vol. IV). The Hospitallers’ establishment and expansion in England has been described by Gervers, who in his excellent studies of the Order in Essex has shown that its most intensive expansion was in the 1230s and 1240s. See Gervers, SC, pp. XLV–VI, LXXV–LXXX; PC, pp. LXXXII. On royal patronage to the Hospitallers see Nicholson, ‘The Military Orders and the Kings of England’, pp. 203–18. On responsiones from England see also above, pp. 80–81. Cart., nos. 2834–35. Cart., no. 3016. See Chapter 1 above, p. 42.

100

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

the extent of help sent from the Iberian peninsula to the East.214 The right of free departure of two vessels a year granted in 1262 by James I to the Hospitallers in Aragon is one of the few pieces of evidence of the passage of Hospitallers’ ships from Spanish ports to the East.215 It is doubtful, however, whether the Order’s houses in Aragon were able to send significant help to Acre. In the early 1270s they faced a financial crisis and were heavily in debt. In an unprecedented move they were exempted in February 1273 by the master from sending responsiones and were allowed to use this money to repay their debts.216 In May 1274 Gregory X issued in favour of the Hospitallers in Catalonia and Aragon the bull Ad Audientiam nostram, which annulled alienations of property done by the brothers without the proper approval.217 The financial difficulties faced by the Hospitallers in the Iberian peninsula seem to have been similar to those of the priories in France and were shared by other Orders. In his work on the Templars in the crown of Aragon Forey points out that by the mid-thirteenth century there was a decline in the number of donations given to the Military Orders in north-eastern Spain and a decrease in the number of investments made by the Templars. These brothers, who had to answer to increasing demands from the East and from the Aragonese kings alike, were in great financial difficulties and were forced to take loans and alienate property.218 Military involvement in Spain could also have affected the economic situation of these houses and their ability to assist their headquarters in the East. The Hospitallers built and maintained castles, which defended the Christian kingdoms from Muslim attacks,219 and were actively involved in the Reconquista. They took part in the Aragonese conquests of Valencia in 1238 and Murcia in 1266. To a much lesser degree, the Hospitallers in the kingdoms of Castile and León participated in Ferdinand III’s campaigns to Andalucía.220 In February 1248 the king promised to

214

215

216 217 218

219 220

For the twelfth and thirteenth centuries there is only scattered information on the relations between headquarters and the Order’s priories in the Iberian peninsula and on the supplies sent from there to the East. See Barquero Goñi, Los caballeros Hospitalarios en España, pp. 126, 175. On responsiones from the Spanish kingdoms see also above, p. 81. In a very general and at some points inaccurate article García Larragueta claims that there is no evidence until the end of the thirteenth century of a regular passage of Hospitallers’ ships from Aragon to the East. He bases his argument, however, only on James I’s grant of free passage from Montpellier from 1273. The dearth of evidence makes it impossible to argue this point. See S. García Larragueta, ‘Relaciones comerciales entre Aragón y el Hospital de Acre’, VII Congreso de Historia de la Corona de Aragón (Barcelona), 2 (1962), p. 514. For the 1262 permission see Forey, The Templars in the Corona de Aragón, p. 326. See also pp. 324–25 for examples of permissions given to the Templars to export goods to the East. On the eve of the fall of Acre the Templar master begged King Alfonso III to allow the Order the free shipment of foodstuff, horses, and arms to the East. See Acta Aragonensia, ed. H. Finke, Berlin, 1922 (reprint Berlin, 1966), vol. III, no. 5. Cart., no. 3492. I found no other evidence of exemption from responsiones in the period covered in this research. Cart., no. 3539. M.L. Ledesma Rubio, Templarios y Hospitalarios en el Reino de Aragón (Siglos XII–XIV), Zaragoza, 1982, pp. 163–64; Forey, The Templars in the Corona de Aragón, pp. 60–61, 308–47. On p. 319 Forey mentions a significant number of Templar houses that by 1277 were unable, because of poverty, to pay their responsiones to the provincial chapter. See, for example, Cart., nos. 963, 1162, 1228, 2014. For the participation of the Hospitallers in James I’s campaigns see The Book of Deeds of James I

THE ORDER IN THE WEST AND CRISES IN THE LATIN EAST

101

give the Order an annual rent of 3,800 Marveies once he had conquered the city of Seville. The charter specified that the money was given ‘for the services you gave me during the siege of Seville’.221 It is noteworthy that 1247 and 1248, the years when the Hospitallers were involved in Ferdinand’s campaigns, were also the years when the Order was mobilizing its forces in Europe, following La Forbie and in preparation for the crusade of St. Louis.222 The participation of the Hospitallers in the Reconquista, even if it was not significant, could have affected the capability of their Iberian houses to assist the convent in the Holy Land.223 Hospitaller resources were used to support military campaigns in the peninsula, but also to help supply Iberian crusades overseas. In 1268 Gonzalo Pérez de Pereira, grand commander of the five kingdoms of Spain, offered the Order’s resources in Spain to assist James of Aragon’s crusade to the East.224 Although we do not know the kind of aid the Hospitallers had in fact supplied, the castellan of Amposta, Hugh of Forcalquier, was part of James’s entourage and sailed with him.225 Spanish monarchs were not always willing, however, to support crusades outside the peninsula, which would divert resources from the Reconquista. Royal decrees which prevented fund-raising for crusades to the Holy Land might have affected the ability of Hospitallers’ houses in Spain to help the Order in Acre. In July 1265, following a request from Gonzalo Pérez de Pereira, King Alfonso X of Castile agreed to exempt the Hospitallers from the prohibition against preaching the cross in his kingdom.226

221

222 223

224

225

226

of Aragon. A Translation of the Medieval Catalan ‘Llibres dels Fets’, trans. H. Buffery and D. Smith, Aldershot, 2003, pp. 205, 312, 319; C. Barquero Goñi, ‘El carácter militar de la orden de San Juan en Castilla y León (siglos XII–XIV)’, Revista de Historia Militar, 73 (1992), p. 56–59. For a historiographic study of the Hospitallers’ participation in the reconquista see Barquero Goñi, Los caballeros Hospitalarios en España, pp. 155–67. ‘por el servicio que me fezistes en la hueste de Sevilla, quando la tenia cercada’. See Libro de privilegios de la orden de San Juan de Jerusalén en Castilla y León, no. 301. See also M.A. Ladero Quesada and M. Gonzáles Jiménez, ‘La Orden Militar de San Juan en Andalucía’, Archivo Hispalense, 180 (1976), pp. 129–39. See Chapter 1 above, pp. 24–25, and Chapter 4 below, pp. 138–39. Except for high dignitaries I have found very little evidence of brothers of Iberian origin serving in the Holy Land. See Appendix, below, and J. Bronstein, ‘La organización internacional de la Orden del Hospital. Algunas reflexiones sobre la contribución de los prioratos ibéricos a la Orden en Tierra Santa’, in Órdenes Militares en la Edad Media. II. Alcazar de San Juan (Ciudad Real) (forthcoming). The Book of Deeds of James I, pp. 335–36. On the grand commander of the five kingdoms of Spain (‘El gran comendador de los Cinco Reinos de España’) see Barquero Goñi, Los caballeros Hospitalarios en España, pp. 133–35. The Book of Deeds of James I, p. 340. As the king never reached the Holy Land, it is doubtful whether any significant help arrived at this time from Spain to the convent in Acre. The financial burden on the Aragonese treasury in launching this crusade must have been significant. Although the armies that fought in Egypt in the first crusade of Louis IX were much larger, Jordan estimates that Louis spent at least 500,000 livres tournois on the army alone; this was twice the average annual income of the French monarchy. See W. Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusades: A Study of Rulership, Princeton, 1979, pp. 70, 78–79. Alfonso’s permission reads as follow: ‘E nos, por su ruego e porque entendiemos que era razon e derecho, e es a servicio de Dios e de los pobres de Ultramar, tenemos por bien e mandamos e otorgamos que ande la peticion del Hospital de Sant Johan por todos nuestros regnos para sienpre, e que arcobispo, ni obispo, ni abad, ni prelado, ni otro ninguna no gela embargue por razon de la cruzada ni por otra cosa ninguna’. Libro de privilegios de la orden de San Juan de Jerusalén

102

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

Research on the response of the Hospitallers in the Iberian peninsula to the needs of the Order in the East is of particular interest because the Christian kingdoms in the peninsula, like the Christian settlements in the Latin East, conducted a continuous war against Islam. The participation of the Hospitallers in the Reconquista, the economic activities and the financial situation of the Spanish houses, and royal decrees, which at times prohibited fund-raising for the Holy Land, could therefore have prevented the supplies of responsiones from the Spanish kingdoms. Further research into the economic activities of the Hospitallers in the Iberian peninsula, similar to that which I have conducted for the French priories, could clarify whether their houses reacted to the events in the East. It is important to note that although an impressive amount of work has been published on the Hospitallers in the Iberian peninsula,227 these works, as we have seen already in the case of the French priories, are mostly ‘insular’. They do not consider the implications of the economic policy pursued by local priories and commanderies, and in the case of Spain, military involvement elsewhere than in the Levant, for the international deployment of the Order’s resources and manpower. The aggravation of conditions in the Latin settlement in the second half of the thirteenth century increased the reliance of the Hospitallers in the East on supplies from Europe. Changing economic and political circumstances, however, had deeply affected the financial situation of the European houses which, faced with increasing demands from the Levant, were forced to take loans and alienate their property. On the eve of the second Council of Lyons, in 1274, the Hospitallers were apparently suffering a general economic crisis.

en Castilla y León, no. 342 (no. 372 – Sancho IV’s renewal of this privilege); C. Barquero Goñi, ‘Los Hospitalarios y la monarquia Castellano-Leonesa (siglos XII–XIII)’, Centro de estudios e investigación ‘San Isidoro’ (CECEL), Archivo Histórico Diocesano, León, 1995, p. 101; C. de Ayala Martínez, ‘Alfonso X y la Orden de San Juan de Jerusalén’, Estudios de Historia Medieval. Homenaje a Luis Suarez, ed. V. Alvarez Palenzuela, M. Ladero Quesada and J. Valdeón Baruque, Valladolid, 1991, pp. 41–42. Note also that due to the difficult economic situation of the kingdom, Alfonso imposed significant restrictions on trade and exports. See J.F. O’Callaghan, ‘Paths of Ruin: the Economic and Financial Policies of Alfonso the Learned’, The Worlds of Alfonso the Learned and James the Conqueror: Intellect and Forces in the Middle Ages, ed. R. Burns, Princeton, 1985, pp. 47–52. On the effect of the Reconquista on the Spanish Church see Riley-Smith, The Crusades, pp. 165–66. 227 For bibliographical surveys see M.A. Ladero Quesada, ‘La investigación sobre Órdenes Militares en la Edad Media hispánica durante los últimos decenios: Corona de Castilla y León’, Las Órdenes Militares en la Península Ibérica. Volumen I. Edad Media, ed. R. Izquierdo Benito and F. Ruiz Gómez, Cuenca, 2000, pp. 9–31; C. de Ayala Martínez et al., ‘Las Órdenes Militares en la Edad Media peninsular. Historiografia 1976–1992’, Medievalismo. Boletín de la Sociedad Española de Estudios Medievales, 2 (1992), pp. 119–69, 3 (1993), pp. 142–44; D. Lomax, Las Órdenes Militares en la Península Ibérica durante la Edad Media, Salamanca, 1976, pp. 9–110.

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

3 The Popes, the Hospitallers, and Crises in the Holy Land

THE PAPACY played an important role in the rehabilitation of the Hospital following crises in the Latin East. To help the Order fulfil its double role of defending the Holy Land and caring for the poor and pilgrims the papacy granted it a wide range of privileges.1 The critical situation in the East had led to a change of attitude to the Hospital’s militarization, which had begun in the 1120s and had intensified by the 1160s.2 At first the papacy showed concern with the Order’s increasing participation in military activities. The failed campaign of King Amalric to Egypt in 1168 resulted in the resignation of the master Gilbert d’Assailly, and an internal crisis between a party of brothers who pressed for a more intensive involvement in military affairs and those who wanted to preserve the Order as a hospitaller institution.3 Pope Alexander III (1159–81) supported the latter party. Between 1168 and 1170, probably after he had learnt of the results of the Egyptian campaign, the pope called on the Hospitallers to return to their original aims of providing for the poor, asserting that military activity was against their customs.4 This call was reiter1

2

3

4

At the time of the battle of Hattin the Hospital was an exempt Order of the Church. Its privileged position, which had been established in the course of the twelfth century, has been thoroughly studied by Prutz, Die geistlichen Ritterorden, pp. 142–94; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 375–89; L. García-Guijarro Ramos, Papado, cruzadas y órdenes militares, siglos XI–XIII, Madrid, 1995, pp. 124–32. Historians disagree about the date and the process by which the Hospitallers became a Military Order. As this discussion is beyond the limits of this book it is sufficient to claim here that by the 1160s the Order combined both charitable and military activities. For this discussion see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 52–54; R. Hiestand, ‘Die Anfänge der Johanniter’, Die geistlichen Ritterorden, ed. J. Fleckenstein and M. Hellmann, Sigmaringen, 1980, pp. 64–78; A. Forey, ‘The Militarisation of the Hospital of St. John’, Military Orders and the Crusades, Aldershot, 1994, essay no. IX, pp. 75–89; L. García-Guijarro Ramos, ‘La militarización de la Orden del Hospital: líneas para un debate’, Ordens Militares: guerra, religião, poder e cultura – Actas do III Encontro sobre Ordens Militares, ed. I.C. Ferreira Fernandes, Palmela, 1999, vol. II, pp. 293–302. The main source for the 1168 campaign is William of Tyre, who, however, was critical of the Order’s role. He did not object to its military activities, but to the fact that the campaign broke the peace between the two kingdoms. See WT, XIX, 17 and XX, 5; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 71–73, and ‘Peace Never Established: The Case of the Kingdom of Jerusalem’, TRHS, 5th series, 28 (1978), pp. 87–103. Cart., no. 391 ter.

104

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

ated in 1178–80, when he ordered the master Roger of Moulins to abstain from taking part in military activities unless the standard of the holy cross was carried by the Christian army for the defence of the kingdom of Jerusalem or the siege of Muslim cities. In that case, however, the cost of arming the Order’s forces must not affect the resources directed to the care of the poor.5 The papacy, however, could not ignore the increasing importance of the Hospitallers for the defence of the Holy Land. Alexander’s successor, Lucius III (1181–85), exempted them in 1182–83 from the tax levied to help subsidize the fortification of castles and villages; he justified this privilege on the grounds that their property was devoted to the defence of the Holy Land as well as to charitable activity.6 Lucius met the Hospitaller master Roger of Moulins in Verona in 1184. Roger, who formed part of an embassy that had gone to the West to promote a new crusade,7 undoubtedly put pressure on the pope to support the Order’s military activities in the East. Lucius responded to these appeals by calling for a new crusade and by granting the Hospitaller brothers and their associates a general indulgence similar to that given to the faithful who went to assist the Holy Land.8 The outcome of Hattin brought about full recognition of the Hospitallers’ military functions and an extension of the papal protection of the Templars to include them as well. Letters demonstrated the popes’ awareness of the distressing situation in which the Hospitallers found themselves and a better understanding of the urgent need to help restoring their forces in the East.9 These concerns were also expressed in a great number of bulls issued by the papal chancery following frequent complaints by the Order. Their purpose was to protect the Order’s rights and privileges from the abuses of secular and ecclesiastical lords.10 Notwithstanding this supportive attitude, problems of communication prevented prompt reaction by the popes to events in the East.11 In the critical years 1187–1188 the Hospitallers had to rely on their own resources, which they deployed from 5 6 7

Cart., no. 527, and Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 76. Cart., no. 628. For a thorough discussion on this embassy and its purposes see J. Phillips, Defenders of the Holy Land: Relations between the Latin East and the West, 1119–1187, Oxford, 1996, pp. 251–66. 8 ‘Quanto ad conservationem terre Hierosolimitane, tam operibus pietatis, que incessabiliter exercetis, quam etiam in laboribus aliis, quos eundo et redeundo suscipitis, majora noscimini gravamina sustinere, tanto dignius est ut nobis sint quodam modo propria que in remissionem peccatorum aliis Dei fidelibus generaliter sunt indulta. Ea propter, dilecti in Domino filii, labores et pericula vestra benignius intuentes, vobis et familie vestre, ea qua fungimur auctoritate, concedimus ut illius indulgentie generalis, qua ceteris fidelibus pro subventione illius terre providimus, speciali participatione gaudentes, sicut estis laborum participes, ita etiam sitis in ipsius indulgentie perceptione consortes . . .’, Cart., no. 712. 9 For the reaction of the papacy to the disaster of Hattin see I.S. Robinson, The Papacy 1073–1198: Continuity and Innovation, Cambridge, 1990, pp. 364–66. 10 Rudolf Hiestand has pointed out that papal bulls were usually granted as a response to the Orders’ requests rather than on the pope’s own initiative. R. Hiestand, ‘Some Reflections on the Impact of the Papacy on the Crusader States and the Military Orders in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Century’, The Crusades and the Military Orders: Expanding the Frontiers of Medieval Latin Christianity, ed. Z. Hunyadi and J. Laszlovszky, Budapest, 2001, pp. 12, 15–16. 11 For slow papal reaction see also Hiestand, ‘Some Reflections on the Impact of the Papacy’, pp. 6–7. For problems of communication between East and West and the delay in information transmission see also Chapter 1 above, pp. 16–17.

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

105

Europe.12 Ten months after Hattin, Clement III (1187–91) wrote to the prelates urging them to encourage the faithful to grant donations to the Order since it had recently suffered severely ‘for the defence of the Christian faith’.13 On 7 March 1189 he warned the prelates not to make false accusations in the curia regarding the seizure of parochial churches that the Order claimed to own. The papacy, he wrote, would support the Hospital, which was fighting continuously for the defence of Christendom; its brothers were not afraid of facing extreme dangers.14 In December 1189 Clement urged the bishops in Aragon to defend the Hospitallers in their dioceses and to encourage the faithful to give them donations.15 A similar letter was sent to the prelates in the Iberian Peninsula with the same request for the Templars, as that Order had exhausted its resources in the East in the fight against the Infidels. Moreover, in light of these losses, in a general letter to the nobles of Christendom in January 1190 the pope ordered them not to prevent the Templars from selling their property in order to raise resources. As we have seen in previous chapters, liquidation of property was to become one of the measures adopted by the Military Orders in the course of the thirteenth century to raise cash for the East.16 Celestine III (1191–98) continued Clement III’s policy. He told the Hospitallers not to abuse papal privileges regarding the opening of churches under interdict.17 Yet he emphasized, when renewing Si discrimina, which ordered the prelates to stop bothering, accusing, and taxing them, that if the prelates were to consider the continual efforts of the Hospital in defending Christendom and caring for the sick they would put an end to these nuisances. They would, moreover, severely punish others charged with the same crimes.18 This letter is similar to one already issued by Urban III (1185–87) to the Templars in August 1186–87, in which the pope renewed several papal privileges, among them Si discrimina.19 It is further evidence that after Hattin the papacy came to regard the Hospitallers as another Military Order, who were being granted similar privileges to the Templars. In May 1193 Celestine ordered the prelates in Provence in their preaching to move the believers to grant donations to the Templars; the Order had exhausted its resources avenging the insult done to Christ in the East. A similar letter, issued the same day, the pope called on the barons and prelates of Provence to help the Hospitaller priory of St. Gilles, which was about to incur heavy debts owing to the supplies that it would have to send to the Holy Land.20 The letter being addressed to the priory of St. 12 13

14 15 16

17 18 19 20

On the institutonal deployment of the Order after Hattin see above, Chapter 1, p. 12, Chapter 2, pp. 65–66, and below, Chapter 4, p. 138. ‘pro defensione fidei christiane’, Cart., no. 851. In March 1189 Clement ordered the prelates to exhort the faithful to help the Templars, who, he wrote, lost 230 brother-knights at the battle of Hattin. See Papsturkunden in Spanien vorarbeiten zur Hispania Pontifica , vol. I, Katalanien, ed. P. Kehr, Berlin, 1926, no. 235. Cart., no. 872. Cart., no. 882. Papsturkunden für Templer und Johanniter, ed. R. Hiestand, Vorarbeiten zum Oriens Pontificius, Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen 77, Göttingen, 1972, nos. 199, 217. See also above, Chapter 1, pp. 33, 42, and Chapter 2, p. 91. Cart., no. 961. Cart., no. 982. Papsturkunden für Templer, no. 198. Papsturkunden für Templer, nos. 230–31.

106

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

Gilles, and not to any other of the Order’s provinces, we may assume that it was a response to a specific request. Probably it was intended to help the priory cope with expenses it must have already incurred and to raise the cash it would be required to send to the East. It demonstrates the Hospitallers’ use of papal authority to help them in this situation. Like his predecessor, Innocent III (1198–1216) was a strong supporter of the Order. The importance that he attributed to the Hospitallers’ military and charitable activities is revealed in many letters he issued to defend their privileges and promote them because of their needs in the Holy Land. In Religiosos viros fratres of 1199 he forbade the prelates to impose any taxes on Hospitaller property meant for the use of the brothers and their men. In Cum dilecti filii fratres, issued the same year, he ordered the prelates to defend them and to protect their right to bury confratres and keep their own churches, as ‘the Hospitallers devoted themselves to help the sick and the poor and defend Christianity across the sea’.21 However, fully committed to reform the Church, Innocent did not hesitate to criticize the Order’s misconduct and abuse of papal privileges.22 In 1198 he accused it of appointing lay and uneducated men as alms collectors, as well as appointing unfit priests. These offences scandalized the Church and the faithful, and he ordered the archbishop of Lyons to do everything in his power, including excommunication, to prevent them. In 1199, because of his interest in securing internal peace in the Holy Land, Innocent ordered the Templars and the Hospitallers to bring to an end their dispute over land near Margat. It was ruinous to Christianity and the Orders themselves and, so the pope argued, assisted the enemies of the Christian faith.23 Because of his strong desire to promote a new crusade, Innocent did perhaps more than any other pope to integrate the Orders into the crusade machinery. In Post miserabilem of 1198 he established that crusade preachers would be assisted by Templar and Hospitaller brothers. He wrote to the archbishop of York that the prior of Thurgarton, who was about to preach the cross in England, should be assisted by one Templar and one Hospitaller.24 Committees comprising one Templar, one Hospitaller, and laymen who had taken the cross were to decide on the distribution of funds donated by the faithful in their parish churches among crusaders who could not afford the many expenses of the journey. These crusaders had to commit themselves to fight in the Holy Land for at least one year. They

21

Cart., no. 1060. For additional letters confirming Hospitallers’ privileges in relation to the needs of the Order in the Holy Land see nos. 1013, 1015, 1029, 1081, 1084, 1129. 22 On Innocent’s policy to reform the Church, and his commitment to the vita apostolica see C. Morris, The Papal Monarchy: The Western Church from 1050 to 1250, Oxford, 1989, pp. 433–38; B. Bolton, ‘Serpent in the Dust: Sparrow on the Housetop: Attitudes to Jerusalem and the Holy Land in the Circle of Pope Innocent III’, The Holy Land, Holy Lands, and Christian History, ed. R.N. Swanson, Woodbridge, 2000, pp. 162–65. On the implementation of this policy in the Latin Church see B. Hamilton, The Latin Church in the Crusader States: The Secular Church, London, 1980, pp. 215–16; Hiestand, ‘Some Reflections on the Impact of the Papacy’, pp. 13–14. 23 Cart., nos. 1050, 1069. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 460. 24 Die Register Innocenz’ III, ed. O. Hageneder and A. Haidacher, Grasse, Cologne and Vienne, 1964, vol. I, no. 336; The Letters of Pope Innocent III Concerning England and Wales (1198–1216). A Calendar with an Appendix of Texts, ed. C.R. and M. Cheney, Oxford, 1967, no. 38. See also C.R. Cheney, Pope Innocent III and England, Stuttgart, 1976, p. 240.

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

107

would be allowed to return to Europe only after they had obtained a letter from the king, the patriarch of Jerusalem, or the masters of the Temple and the Hospital confirming that they had fulfilled their vows.25 The Orders had also to send frequent reports to Rome about the situation in the Holy Land. Innocent used them on different occasions as agents in the transmission of funds to the East. In a letter of 1208 to the prelates and the masters of the Hospitallers and the Templars he explained that legates and letters had been sent to different provinces to exhort the faithful to give donations for the Holy Land. The money was to be sent to the officers of the Orders in the East, who would decide how to distribute it.26 The masters of the Military Orders were also to be in charge of the distribution of corn, which Innocent, out of concern over the lack of food, ordered to be shipped to the Holy Land.27 Innocent was the first pope to impose income taxes on the Church to help the Holy Land and to finance a crusade. He ordered the clergy in December 1199 to pay a fortieth of their revenues from one year. The decretal Ad liberandam, issued in December 1215 by the Fourth Lateran Council, ordered churchmen to pay a twentieth of their revenues for three years to support the Fifth Crusade. There is no evidence, however, as to whether the Military Orders were required to pay these levies, although no decree referred to the imposition of taxes on the Hospitallers or the Templars. In the tax of 1199 Innocent decreed that a special injunction in this matter would be sent to the Cistercians, the Premonstratensians, and some other exempt orders.28 In Ad liberandam he exempted from the tax those who had taken the cross, and ‘some religious who have earned the exemption owing to their merit’.29 None of these decrees, however, referred to the imposition of the taxes on the Hospitallers or the Templars. Papal taxation resulted in strong opposition from the Church, which is well documented. That sources related to the pope or the Orders did not refer to this issue at all seems to indicate that they were not taxed. In the 1260s, for example, when papal taxation was eventually imposed, the Hospitallers refused to pay.30 Although the Hospitallers and the Templars were almost certainly not asked to contribute money for Innocent’s crusade, provincial masters of the Templars and the Hospitallers were recruited by the pope as tax collectors.31 Honorius III (1216–27) quoted several letters addressed to him from Damietta in 25 26

27 28

29 30 31

Innocent III, ‘Opera Omnia’, PL, CCXIV, col. 831; Urkunden zur älteren Handels- und Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig, vol. I, no. 81. Cart., nos. 1306, 1328, 1436; ‘Mittitur eis pecunia’, PL, CCXVI, cols. 37–38; Die Register Innocenz’ III, ed. O. Hageneder, W. Maleczek and A. Strnad, Rome and Vienne, 1979, vol. II, no. 258. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 146; Barber, The New Knighthood, p. 275. Die Register Innocenz’ III, vol. II, no. 180. Innocent III, ‘Opera Omnia’, PL, CCLXX, col. 830; Conciliorum oecumenicorum decreta, ed. J. Alberigo et al., Bologna, 1973 (3rd ed.), pp. 268–69. On Church taxation see W.E. Lunt, Financial Relations of the Papacy with England to 1327, Cambridge (Mass.), 1939, vol. I, pp. 240–312. Pages 240–44 refer to Innocent III. On Ad liberandam see also J.M. Powell, Anatomy of a Crusade, 1213–1221, Philadelphia, 1986, pp. 43–47; Riley-Smith, The Crusades, pp. 144–45, and Morris, The Papal Monarchy, pp. 441–42. Conciliorum oecumenicorum decreta, p. 269. See below, p. 126, and Chapter 2 above, p. 96. On the opposition of the Church to these taxes see Lunt, pp. 243–46. On the members of the Military Orders as tax collectors see Cart., no. 1437, and Potthast, no. 5255.

108

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

1218 in further correspondence with ecclesiastical leaders in the West and with crusaders waiting in Europe to be transported to the East. In August or September 1218, for example, he issued a letter to the prelates of France. This quoted another letter he had received from the crusaders in Egypt describing the situation of the Christian army. It stressed the enormous expenses required for the crusade, urging the supply of warriors and money.32 Immediately after his election Honorius set out to implement Innocent’s crusading policy. By bringing the state of the Christian forces in the East to the attention of the Western world Honorius hoped to bring about the quick departure of the crusaders and to encourage the raising of new donations for the cause.33 His support for the crusader movement was extended to the Hospitallers. In December 1216 he issued a new bull, Ad aripiendam, which called on the faithful to succour the Holy Land and to give donations to the Hospitallers, who ‘do not desist from their efforts to reconquer and defend the Holy Land’.34 Indeed, during the papacy of Honorius III the Hospitallers were involved in the Fifth Crusade, as well as in military activities in the Holy Land. They took part in an attack on Mt. Thabor in 1217, during which many Templars and Hospitallers were wounded, and they helped with the refortification of Caesarea at the beginning of 1218.35 To ‘those brothers and servants of the Order who defend and serve the Holy Land and lead a life of real penitence’ Honorius granted, in February 1217, a crusader indulgence.36 The charter clearly specifies that this privilege was granted following requests made by the Order; it could be significant that these were probably made on the eve of the Fifth Crusade. In December 1216, a year before he granted this crusader indulgence, Honorius III forbade Hospitallers from taking vows outside the Order without the approval of the master.37 Crusade preparations may have given rise to expectations of obtaining plenary indulgences by members of the Order fighting in the East, who asked the pope for this privilege.38 32

33 34 35

36

37 38

It seems as if several letters were sent by the crusaders to the pope during the siege of Damietta. In a letter of 13 August 1218 to the Christian army in Egypt Honorius wrote that he had received ‘literis vestris et nunciis’ describing the difficulties of the crusaders. See Vat. Reg., 10, ann. 3, epist. 39, fol. 10. For additional letters see also Vat Reg., 9, ann. 2, epist. 739, fol. 177; 10, ann. 3, epist. 38, fol. 9, and RHGF, vol. XIX, p. 668, the last being the letter sent to the French prelates. Powell, Anatomy of a Crusade, pp. 110–12. Cart., nos. 1505, 1554. For the Order’s activities in the East and their participation in the Fifth Crusade see chapter 1 above, p. 20, and Oliver of Paderborn, Historia Damiatina, ed. H. Hoogeweg, Bibliothek des literarischen Vereins in Stuttgart, 202, Tübingen, 1894, ch. 5. ‘vestris piis postulationibus inclinati, auctoritate vobis presentium indulgemus ut fratres et servientes domus vestre, in defensione ac servitio Terre Sancte fideliter in vera penitentia commorantes, illam peccatorum suorum veniam consequantur que crucesignatis a sede apostolica est indulta’, Cart., no. 1550. Honorius issued a great number of crusader indulgences and some were related to the Military Orders. In 1221 he promised this indulgence to those who would help defend Calatrava and other castles in the Iberian peninsula, Bullarium Ordinis Militiae de Calatrava, ed. I.J. Ortega y Cotes, Madrid, 1761 (reprint Barcelona, 1981), nos. XI, XIV, pp. 55, 57. For Honorius’s indulgences see also J.F. O’Callaghan, Reconquest and Crusade in Medieval Spain, Philadelphia, 2003, pp. 97–98. Cart., no. 1503. For a discussion on the granting of crusader indulgences to members of the Hospital see Forey, ‘Recruitment to the Military Orders’, p. 168; A. Luttrell, ‘Templari e Ospitalieri in Italia’, The

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

109

Although letters written specifically by the Hospitallers at this time have not as yet been found, papal letters indicate that the Order, like other institutions in the East, suffered a lack of provisions and money and was very dependent on the help it received from Europe.39 During this period it seems to have expended great efforts on preaching in Europe, for which it received strong support from Honorius. In Inter cetera, of January 1217, the pope called on the faithful to help the Hospitallers, who commited themselves and all their resources to the service of Jesus Christ, performing charitable work and in particular defending the Christian faith. He went on to emphasize their double function in the East: ‘whenever they or their envoys come to you to ask for donations in order to bring succour to the Holy Land and sustain the poor, you should contribute gladly’.40 The following month he issued another new bull, Non sine gravi, forbidding the prelates to disturb the Hospitallers and their confratres or prevent the testamentary bequests of property reaching them. He again urged the prelates to allow them or their nuncii to preach in their churches once a year, explaining that donations for the poor and the Holy Land had fallen considerably.41 The repeated renewal of these bulls,42 as well as Querelam gravem recepimus, which granted the Order the right to preach in parochial churches and was renewed at least ten times during Honorius’s pontificate,43 demonstrate the continuous efforts made by the Order to promote its cause in Europe and the continuous papal support of the Order. But also the resistance of the local clergy. Honorius, pleading the needs of the Hospitallers in the East, opposed attempts by the faithful and the prelates to disturb or defame them.44 In November 1218 he sent a general letter to bishops throughout the West ordering them to disregard rumours and accusations that were being disseminated about the Hospitallers and the Templars, apparently implying the misuse and waste of donations. The pope explained that these charges had been investigated by Pelagius, the papal legate. He had written to Honorius that without the Hospitallers and the Templars, who had incurred enormous expenses supplying knights and men, the Christian army in Damietta would not have survived. The pope therefore urged the bishops to preach the Orders’ innocence every Sunday and festival day.45 Considering the appreciation that contemporary writers such as Oliver, the scholastic of Cologne and later bishop of Paderborn, showed for the actions of the Hospitallers, and in particular

39 40 41 42 43 44 45

Hospitallers of Rhodes and their Mediterranean World, Aldershot, 1992, essay no. I, pp. 2–3; ‘Gli Ospitalieri e l’eredità dei Templari: 1305–1378’, ibid., essay no. III, p. 68. For letters of appeal sent by the Christian leaders in the East on the eve and in the course of the Fifth Crusade see Chapter 1 above, p. 20. ‘cum iidem vel nuncii eorum ad vos venerint eleemosynas petituri pro succursu Terre Sancte ac sustentatione pauperum, grata subsidia conferatis’, Cart., no. 1536. Cart., no. 1543. Ad aripiendam was renewed five times by Honorius: see Cart., nos. 1554, 1565, 1626, 1661, 1735; Inter cetera que and Non sine gravi were renewed twice: see Cart., nos. 1561, 1808; 1560, 1772. Until 1221 this bull was renewed every few months: see Cart., nos. 1488, 1490, 1497, 1562, 1631, 1634, 1643, 1653, 1690, 1720. For example, Cart., nos. 1532, 1551, 1572, 1648. Cart., no. 1633. The surviving letter was sent to the Sicilian Church, but it seems to have been a general appeal throughout Christendom. According to the register of Honorius III this letter was sent to many others (‘in eundem modum scriptum est multis aliis’). See Reg. Honorius III, no. 1699.

110

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

the Templars, in the campaign to Damietta,46 one explanation for this letter may be the traditional hostility of the clergy to the privileges of the Orders, at a time when they were being asked to pay a three-year tax of one-twentieth of all their revenues. The fact that the brothers of the Military Orders functioned as tax collectors must have contributed to this hostility.47 Honorius was also concerned with the shipment of supplies to the brothers in the East. We have seen elsewhere that by now the Hospitallers had their own vessels, which from 1216 they were allowed to build and keep, free of taxes, at the port of Marseilles.48 Following a request from the grand commander of Outremer, probably Aimery of Pax, Honorius ordered the bishop of Arles in December of that year to prevent churchmen and laymen from taxing wood belonging to the Order and earmarked for building ships, as well as goods intended for the East.49 Papal policy seems to have changed during the pontificate of Gregory IX (1227–41). Although it is difficult to build up a consistent picture of the Hospitallers’ relations with the Holy See, the Order’s needs were apparently overshadowed by major political events in Europe and the Holy Land, particularly the conflict between Gregory and Frederick II and the civil war in the kingdom of Jerusalem. Gregory seemingly originally intended to continue his predecessor’s policy on the kingdom of Jerusalem and the Hospitallers. Like Honorius, he engaged in propagating information about conditions in the Holy Land to muster assistance. In 1227 he forwarded to ‘all the faithful’ a letter he had received from the Christian leaders in the East. It dealt with the return of many crusaders to Europe after hearing about the delay in Frederick’s arrival in the East, and the employment of the remaining crusaders in fortifying Caesarea and Jaffa. The Christian leaders pleaded that help be sent to the Holy Land in order to bring the negotium to a successful end.50 Early in the 1230s, fearing the increasing power of the Khorezmian Turks they wrote more letters to the pope. In an appeal to all the prelates he included one of these, describing the Khorezmians’ threat to the Holy Land and urging the princes of the Church to encourage the faithful to help the Holy Land.51 At this stage, the continuation of the holy war in the Latin East was closely associated in the pope’s mind with the Hospitallers. In June 1227 he issued Quanto majora, which allowed the Order to build new churches ‘in those places, which, with celestial help, you will be able to free from Muslims’ hands’.52 In December 1228 he prohibited the prelates from abusing their right of procuration in the houses of the Order. This bull was issued out of consideration of the heavy expenses incurred by

46 47 48 49 50

Oliver of Paderborn, for example, chs. 11, 21, 27, 71, 74–5. See above, p. 107. See Chapter 2 above, pp. 74–75. Cart., nos. 1518–19. Matthew Paris, vol. III, pp. 127–30. The events described in this letter date to September– October 1227. See Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 165–67. 51 After naming the Christian leaders, including the masters of the Military Orders and Frederick II, Gregory wrote ‘suis nobis litteris intimarunt’, see MGH, Epistolae Saeculi XIII e Regestis Pontificum Romanorum, ed. C. Rodenberg, MGH Epistolae, 3 vols., Berlin, 1893–94, vol. I, no. 433. 52 Cart., no. 1867.

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

111

the Hospitallers in the defence of Christianity in the East, for which a great number of men and horses were required.53 In December 1229, in response to persistent requests from the Order, Gregory granted the same indulgence as that given to crusaders who vowed to served the Order in the East, to fight the Saracens, and to live as real penitents. This grant was not given specifically to Hospitaller brothers but to all who ‘vowed to serve and fight’. This major privilege may well have allowed the Hospitallers to reward with plenary indulgences secular knights, the milites ad terminum, who served with them for fixed terms.54 The date of this privilege could be significant. In February 1229 Frederick II signed a ten-year truce with Egypt, which was not recognized by the pope and most of the Frankish leaders, including the patriarch of Jerusalem and the masters of the Military Orders.55 According to a letter sent by Patriarch Gerold to the pope, the patriarch and the Templars alike were hiring mercenaries to defend the kingdom, fearing that the peace would not hold after the emperor had left. Gerold wrote that Frederick regarded this as a breach of his authority, claiming that mercenaries could not be employed for war without his approval. Gerold added that in a speech Frederick delivered in Acre before he left the Holy Land he forbade any crusaders, of any nationality, to remain behind.56 Prawer argues that Gerold had distorted Frederick’s reaction.57 Nevertheless, even if the patriarch exaggerated the facts it makes sense that the Christian settlers would have liked to prevent crusaders from returning home by offering generous rewards. The Hospitallers were at the time involved in aggressive military campaigns against the Assassins and a number of Muslim cities in the north, which were not included in Frederick’s treaty with Egypt.58 They would perhaps have tried to attract knights to serve with them temporarily by promising extraordinary privileges, such as a plenary indulgence, for which they must have received full support from the pope. From the 1230s, however, a change is apparent in Gregory’s attitude to the Hospitallers, or at least a disregard for their needs. In his ongoing correspondence with Frederick concerning the confiscation of the Order’s property in Sicily the

53 54

55 56 57 58

Cart., no. 1931. The privilege was given to those ‘qui se domus vestre servitio devoverunt’, Cart. no. 1950. Milites ad terminum vowed to serve not only with the Military Orders but with other religious institutions in the East. See Riley-Smith, The First Crusaders, pp. 158–60; G. Ligato, ‘Fra Ordini Cavallereschi e crociata: “milites ad terminum” e “confraternitates” armate’, ‘Militia Christi’ e Crociata nei secoli XI–XIII. Atti della undecima Settimana internazionale di studio Mendola, 28 agosto – 1 settembre 1989, Milano, 1992, pp. 645–97. A similar indulgence to the one given to the Hospitallers was given by Gregory in 1240 to those who fought under the standard of Calatrava. See Bullarium Ordinis Militiae de Calatrava, no. XXII, p. 73. In the 1240s, granting of plenary indulgences became a main way of recruiting assistance for the Teutonic knights fighting in Prussia. See Prutz, Die geistlichen Ritterorden, p. 82; Riley-Smith, The Crusades, pp. 163–64. Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 186–91; Richard, The Crusades, pp. 312–18. Matthew Paris, vol. III, pp. 179–84. See also Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility, p. 170, and Hamilton, The Latin Church in the Crusader States, pp. 258–59. Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, p. 197. On military campaigns fought by the Hospitallers at the time see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 137–38.

112

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

pope does emphasize its essential role in the Holy Land and the importance of its property ‘for the safeguarding and support of the Land’;59 otherwise there is little evidence of his concern. In 1235, in response to the Hospital’s appeals, he allowed the brothers to defend themselves against those who harmed the Order. The offences he mentioned were calumpnia and rapina, but he made no reference to the Order’s needs in the Holy Land.60 A description of its state and needs is not included in his correspondence with the prelates about its rights and privileges. Whereas Honorius III was actively involved in its promotion, there is no evidence of Gregory IX appealing to the faithful to help the Order. Papal bulls allowing Hospitallers to preach in parish churches were seldom renewed by Gregory, although it is difficult to establish if such papal documents existed but have not survived or were not registered.61 The Hospitallers apparently appealed to the pope to renew this right less often than they did before Gregory’s pontificate62 – surprising, considering their dependence on the West. Research has found an increase in the number of gifts given to the Hospitallers in the 1230s. This has been explained as changes in the Order’s popularity or the result of an alms-collecting drive by the Hospital to compensate for their loss of revenue in Sicily, following the confiscations by Frederick II.63 Although this seems to be a logical explanation, Hospitaller preaching should have generated the traditional opposition of the local churches, which would have found its expression in papal letters. If such preaching generated opposition after Hattin, one would expect even more opposition in the 1230s, a period of relative peace in the Latin East. The increase in the number of donations does not seem, therefore, to have been the result of a fund-raising campaign carried out by the Order. It may be possible to explain Gregory’s changing attitude towards the Hospitallers by his preoccupation with his confrontation with the emperor and the political unrest in the Holy Land.64 Gregory sought a political solution to the civil war in the Holy Land that would reflect his political interests in Europe. Following Frederick II’s first excommunication in June 1228, the Military Orders were forbidden to have any contact with him and they were strictly forbidden to give him any assistance during his crusade. They were loyal to the papacy during most of Frederick’s stay in the East. However, before he departed for Sicily in May 1229, the Hospitallers, probably wishing to maintain their neutrality, lodged him in their house in Acre 59 60 61

MGH, Epistolae saeculi XIII, vol. I, no. 428; see also Cart., nos. 1973, 1975, 1976, 1982, 1991. Cart., no. 2105. Ad aripiendam was renewed only once: see Cart., no. 1927; Querelam gravem recepimus was. renewed twice: see Cart., nos. 2045, 2228. Other bulls dealing with Hospitallers’ preaching were not renewed during the papacy of Gregory IX. Maier specified, however, that, on average, only one in five papal letters was registered. See Maier, Preaching the Crusades, p. 7. A study of unpublished French Hospitaller cartularies, among them a cartulary in Lyons which contains a list of papal bulls, has not revealed new material. See Cartulaire de l’ordre des Hospitaliers en Lyon, Archives départementales du Rhône, H(48) 022. 62 For the fact that papal bulls were usually granted as a response to the Orders’ requests rather than on the pope’s own initiative see Hiestand, ‘Some Reflections on the Impact of the Papacy’, p. 15. 63 Nicholson, Templars, Hospitallers and Teutonic Knights , p. 59. 64 On the crusade of Frederick II and the civil war see Prawer, A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, vol. II, pp. 164–242; Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility, pp. 198–213.

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

113

despite his being excommunicated. During the civil war between the baronage and the emperor’s representative that tore the kingdom of Jerusalem apart after his departure, both Orders remained neutral, trying to mediate between the factions.65 Yet after the treaty of St. Germano in July 1230 Gregory instructed them to cooperate with Frederick’s representative in the Holy Land.66 In February 1231 he forbade the Templars to fight the imperial bailiff or break the peace Frederick had signed with Egypt, a treaty that Gregory had strongly opposed only two years before.67 In July 1232 the patriarch of Jerusalem and representatives of the masters of the Hospital and the Templars were summoned to the papal curia to report on the situation in the Holy Land and to advise on ways to end the political struggle. Reports were also sent to Frederick.68 A letter from Gregory to his legate in the Holy Land referred to a peace treaty signed between the Hospitallers and the emperor in 1234. The pope instructed his legate to ensure that the treaty be honoured by the barons and the burgesses of the kingdom, but the letter contained no additional details.69 However, the Hospitallers’ relations with Frederick and his representatives in the Holy Land seem to have improved, at a time of deteriorating relations between empire and papacy; there is evidence of the Order’s cooperation with Frederick even after his second excommunication in 1239. It is noteworthy that although the Hospitallers would in future years criticize the papal political struggle in Europe, which diverted crusaders and resources away from the Holy Land,70 this was the only time they adopted a policy that could have been interpreted as ‘anti-papal’. Riley-Smith explains their behaviour by the fact that they supported the emperor’s claim to the kingdom of Jerusalem and his alliance with Egypt.71 The Hospitallers’ ambivalence towards papal policy and their only partial compliance with Gregory’s orders may have influenced his attitude to them and may explain any differences in the papal attitude to them and the Templars, whose anti-Hohenstaufen policy and loyalty to the pope remained strong.72 Although it is difficult to find bulls issued in the 1230s promoting the Hospitallers, bulls were issued in favour of the Templars which deal with the protection of the Templars’ privileges and their needs in the Holy Land. Following repeated complaints from the Templar master and brothers in Languedoc, the pope wrote in June 1236 to the bishop of Elne to prevent him from taking riding horses and mules which had been 65

66 67

68 69 70 71 72

Relations between Frederick and the Hospitallers have been discussed thoroughly by Riley-Smith (The Knights of St. John, pp. 165–75). On Frederick’s relations with the Templars see Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 133–37; H. Cleve, ‘Kaiser Friedrich II und die Ritterorden’, Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 49 (1993), pp. 53–62. Cart., nos. 2025–26; Reg. Grégoire IX, no. 2704. MGH, Epistolae saeculi XIII, vol. I, no. 427. In June 1229 Gregory wrote to the archbishop of Milan that he had instructed the patriarch of Jerusalem and the masters of the Military Orders not to honour the treaty signed between Frederick and the sultan of Egypt. See Cart., no. 1942. MGH, Epistolae saeculi XIII, vol. I, nos. 468–69, 474; Cart., nos. 2022, 2024, 2025; Reg. Grégoire IX, no. 835. Cart., no. 2088. See below, pp. 115–16. On the Order’s support of Hohenstaufen policy in the East see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 172–87. On the Templars’ relations with Frederick II and Gregory IX see Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 132–37.

114

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

bequeathed to the Order, as they were needed for the defence of the Holy Land.73 In October 1237 he granted the Order 1,000 livres tournois, taken from 3,000 livres collected from the redemption of crusade vows in France and deposited with the Templars.74 In a letter sent to the Templar houses in Spain in January 1239, dealing with episcopal procurations, the pope wrote that the Order should be praised because it did not spare men and goods for the assistance of the Holy Land. He added that the Order’s ‘great necessities are always in front of his eyes’.75 A Templar was responsible for the collection of money required by the pope from religious institutions, including the Military Orders, to conduct his war against Frederick in Europe.76 The interest of Gregory IX in securing the internal stability of the Latin settlements could explain the letters of reproof sent by him to both Orders during this period. In 1235 the pope ordered the Templars and the Hospitallers, under threat of excommunication, to cease quarrelling over the mills of Doc and Recordane near Acre, a dispute which, according to the pope, generated great criticism against them in the Christian world.77 In April 1236 he ordered the archbishop of Tyre to stop the Hospitallers and the Templars from cooperating with the Assassins, their tributaries, against Bohemond V of Antioch, emphasizing the severe offence caused by the Orders. Although committed to protect Christendom they were cooperating with its enemies for money.78 In March 1238 Gregory wrote to the Templars that he had heard that they had failed to protect pilgrims visiting the Holy Sepulchre from being ambushed by the Muslims on their way from Caesarea to Jaffa. He ordered them to secure the region with a greater number of armed men. The pope had also given Walter, count of Brienne and Jaffa, the right to take two sous tournois from each pilgrim for the expenses needed to secure this route.79 Gregory’s strongest criticism of the Orders was expressed in a letter sent to the Hospitallers the same month. He accused them of keeping harlots in their houses and receiving thieves, heretics, and murderers of pilgrims into their Order; some of the brothers were even suspected of heresy. The pope further claimed that individual brothers were holding private property and that the Hospitallers had reduced the alms given to the poor and

73 74 75 76

77

78 79

Reg. Grégoire IX, no. 3174. Reg. Grégoire IX, no. 3923. ‘cujus necessitatem maximam ipse papa eis scribit se cotidie ante mentis oculos habere’, Reg. Grégoire IX, no. 4722. In December 1228 Gregory imposed a tenth on the clergy to subsidize the struggle against Frederick. It seems, however, that the Military Orders were exempted. See Reg. Grégoire IX, no. 251, and Lunt, pp. 247–49. The Templars and the Hospitallers, like other religious institutions, were nevertheless asked to make him loans. See Cart., nos. 2130, 2261; Potthast, no. 10968; Reg. Grégoire IX, nos. 2862, 5888, 5889, 5914. Cart., no. 2120. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 450. According to Nicholson (Templars, Hospitallers and Teutonic Knights , pp. 58–60) and Delaville Le Roulx (Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, p. 166) there was no decline in the number of donations given to the Order in this period, which indicates that the criticism was not widespread. Cart., no. 2149; Reg. Grégoire IX, no. 3294. On the connections between the Hospitallers and the. Assassins against the princes of Antioch see Riley-Smith, The Crusades, pp. 158–59, 162–64. Reg. Grégoire IX, no. 4129. For this letter and for the Templars’ role in the protection of pilgrims see also A. Forey, ‘The Charitable Activities of the Templars’, Viator, 34 (2003), p. 125; Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 87–90.

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

115

changed the wills of dying men for their own profit. He accused them of cooperating with John Ducas Vatatzes, the Byzantine emperor in exile, against whom Gregory launched a crusade that same year.80 As in the case of the Assassins, this was not the first time that Gregory accused the Order of maintaining links with the enemies of the Church and giving shelter to criminals. In March 1238 he instructed the archbishop of Jerusalem to prevent the Hospitallers from abusing the right of sheltering criminals in their houses.81 Although the connection of the Order with the emperor affected its relations with the papacy, Gregory’s criticism may also have been motivated by a genuine call for reform within the Order. As cardinal Ugolino of Ostia, Gregory had been the first cardinal protector of the Franciscans as well as being a personal friend of Francis of Assisi. He had helped compile the Franciscan Rule and perhaps saw in it a basis for the correction and reform of other religious orders, including the Hospitallers.82 Gregory’s successor, Innocent IV (1243–54), had a much more positive relationship with the Hospitallers. His response to the events in the East and his attitude to them, however, should also be seen in the context of the escalation of his conflict with Frederick II. In July 1244 he was forced to flee from Rome to Lyons. There he renewed the crusade against the emperor, after excommunicating and deposing him at the Council of Lyons in July 1245.83 The Hospitallers and the Templars were made responsible for the security of Innocent and the Council,84 but the unstable situation of the papacy might explain the pope’s slow response to the defeat of the Christians at La Forbie and the failure of St. Louis’ crusade and the diversion of resources away from the Holy Land. A letter was sent in 1250 by the officers of the Hospital in Acre to an anonymous addressee and their brothers in France before the return of the remainder of the Christian army from Egypt to Acre. It gives a sometimes confused account of the events, which they had learned from three Templars who had managed to return to Acre and stressed the role and the losses of the 80

81 82

83 84

Cart., no. 2186. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 122, 397; A. Forey, ‘Military Orders and Secular Warfare in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Century’, Viator. Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 24 (1993), pp. 95–96. By 1234 John Vatatzes had regained most of the lands held by the Latin Emperor in Asia Minor and threatened Constantinople. This prompted an immediate reaction from the papacy, which organized a crusade against him. See B. Weiler, ‘Gregory IX, Frederick II, and the Liberation of the Holy Land, 1230–9’, The Holy Land, Holy Lands, and Christian History, ed. R.N. Swanson, Woodbridge, 2000, pp. 199–200; Riley-Smith, The Crusades, pp. 183–85; for relations between John Vatatzes and Frederick II see E. Kantorowicz, Frederick the Second, 1194–1250, London, 1931, pp. 464, 660; for the relationship between pope and emperor in the 1230s see Morris, The Papal Monarchy, pp. 544–46. Cart., no. 2185. For the view that from the pontificates of Honorius III and Gregory IX the reform of the Church was closely connected with the Franciscans see J.M. Powell, ‘The Papacy and the Early Franciscans’, Franciscan Studies, 36 (1976), pp. 248–62. On the Franciscans and on Francis of Assisi’s relationship with Gregory IX, as cardinal and later as pope, see Morris, The Papal Monarchy, pp. 452–62; Maier, Preaching the Crusades, pp. 20–22, 26–29; J. Moorman, A History of the Franciscan Order: From its Origins to the Year 1517, Oxford, 1968, pp. 46–47. Note, however, that Nicholson (Templars, Hospitallers and Teutonic Knights , pp. 34–55), who thoroughly studied the image of the Military Orders in the thirteenth century, found hardly any evidence of criticism of them by the Franciscans at this time. Morris, The Papal Monarchy, pp. 566–68. Sacrorum conciliorum nova, vol. XXIII, col. 612.

116

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

Hospitallers. They mentioned rumours, which even the Muslims agreed with, that these disastrous times were caused by the superbia of the pope and by his great hatred of Frederick. Innocent’s anger prevented them from getting help from the emperor, although ‘our hope and all we breathe are put on Frederick’. Matthew Paris classified this as a Templar letter. There is, however, clear evidence that it is Hospitaller. It points out, for example, that ‘all our conventual brothers were killed except for the vice-master John of Bonay’, meaning John of Ronay (grand commander and vice-master of the Hospital from 1245).85 In their accusations the Hospitallers were probably referring to the fact that the pope had forbidden all Christians in the East, including the Military Orders, to have relations with Frederick.86 Matthew Paris wrote that Innocent’s policy in Europe, and his intention to commute the vows of Henry III and Lord Edmund to fight the Hohenstaufen in Sicily, filled the Latin settlers, including the Hospitallers and the Templars, with fear about their future and with hatred towards the papacy’s deceitful policy.87 Although Matthew was biased and is not always a reliable source, the desperate situation in the Holy Land must have indeed aroused resentment against Innocent.88 During the first years of his pontificate, contemporary with La Forbie and the deterioration of the settlers’ situation, Innocent mainly dealt with the renewal of old bulls relating to the abuse of Hospitallers’ rights.89 Unlike Clement III and Celestine III after Hattin, or Honorius III during the campaign to Egypt, he did not issue general appeals to the prelates and the faithful to succour the Order, which was facing a critical situation in the East,90 but he was aware of its financial difficulties. In July 1245, almost a year after the battle of La Forbie, he exempted it from the tax imposed on the Church at the Council of Lyons, designed to succour the Latin Empire and the Holy Land. The pope stressed the heavy expenses incurred by the Hospitallers in supplying the Holy Land with provisions and manpower.91 This was not the first time the Military Orders were exempted from papal-taxation. Subsequently (April 1248) Innocent issued Attendentes quod, ex constitutione, exempting them from the tax designated to assist the Latin Empire, and Ex tenore vestre petitionis (July

85

86

87 88

89 90 91

As the beginning of this letter is missing it is difficult to establish who were the addressees. It ends by specifying that ‘Hanc epistolam, sed in aliquibus abbreviatam, transmisimus fratribus in Francia commorantibus, sed pleniorem vobis eam duximus transmittendam.’ See Matthew Paris, vol. VI, p. 197. For John’s career see Chapter 1 above, p. 25, and Appendix below. Cart., no. 2471. See also M. Purcell, Papal Crusading Policy: The Chief Instruments of Papal Policy and Crusade to the Holy Land from the Final Loss of Jerusalem to the Fall of Acre (1244–1291), Leiden, 1975, p. 76. Matthew Paris, vol. V, pp. 457–58. Lloyd, English Society and the Crusade, pp. 222. Matthew resented any form of papal interference in England and regarded the commutation of crusading vows and papal taxation as devices to raise money for the Holy See and the English crown. See R. Vaughan, Matthew Paris, Cambridge, 1958, pp. 140–41, and E. Siberry, Criticism of Crusading, 1095–1274, Oxford, 1985, pp. 135–40. On the importance, however, of Matthew’s Chronica Majora for the study of attitudes prevailing in Christendom towards the Military Orders see S. Menache, ‘Rewriting the History of the Templars According to Matthew Paris’, Cultural Convergences in the Crusader Period, ed. M. Goodich, S. Menache and S. Schein, New York, 1995, pp. 185–215. Cart., nos. 2304, 2305, 2306, 2307, etc. See above, pp. 104–5, 109. Cart., no. 2378. On the tax decrees of the Council of Lyons see Lunt, p. 250.

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

117

1249), granting them exemption from taxation designated for the Holy Land.92 Because of the perilous situation of the Latin settlements and the great efforts made by the Hospitallers in repairing and defending Ascalon, located in fronteria paganorum, Innocent ordered the archbishop of Nicosia in December 1246 to secure the reimbursement of the Order should the town be lost. The issue of compensation was raised again in 1252, after the fall of Ascalon in October 1247.93 The pope understood the dependence of the Order on the supplies from Europe. In July 1245 he renewed Querelam gravem recepimus, which granted the Order the right to preach in parish churches.94 Moreover, in May 1247, despite his own financial problems, the pope forbade the prelates to demand from the houses and churches of the Hospitallers and the Templars in the West the taxation imposed on the Church at large to support the Holy See.95 Innocent’s financial support for the Order, which he said ‘did not spare money and lives fighting the infidels’,96 is revealed in a letter of December 1247. In it he ordered Odo of Châteauroux, the papal legate, to transfer to the Hospitallers the money collected from the redemption of the crusade vows of people living on their properties in France.97 The financial state of the Order must have been poor after the failure of the crusade of Louis IX to Egypt, because in March 1251 the pope renewed and expanded this grant. This allowed the Hospitallers to take the revenues from the redemption of crusade vows collected from all their properties throughout the world.98 In this respect it is interesting to note the extensive support he gave to the Templars, who were faithful allies in his anti-Hohenstaufen policy in the Holy Land. Even after Frederick’s second excommunication and Innocent’s specific orders to the leaders in the East, including John of Ronay, the Hospitaller vice-master, to desist from associating with Frederick’s representatives and to do all in their power to expel them from the Holy Land, the Hospitallers still had connections with the emperor.99 The Templars’ loyalty seems to have been generously rewarded. The Order, which was heavily in debt because of its involvement in Louis IX’s crusade and the need to raise money for the king’s ransom, was granted in 1253 the income from the redemption of crusade vows from every country, except Germany, up to a sum of 10,000 marks. It was allowed to sell property in Provence, England, and Aquitaine to cover its debts.100 That same year 92 93 94 95

Cart., nos. 2467, 2505. Cart., nos. 2394, 2587. See also Chapter 1 above, p. 29. Cart., no. 2373. This bull was renewed again in August 1246, Cart., no. 2418. Cart., no. 2441. Innocent’s exemptions from taxation for the East and the Holy See were repeatedly renewed during his papacy. Cart., nos. 2401, 2409, 2506, 2531, 2551, 2603. Although they were exempted from these taxes the Hospitallers and the Templars were instructed to give financial support to Innocent’s legates. Cart., no. 2497; Reg. Innocent IV, no. 4706; Potthast, no. 13289. 96 Cart., no. 2532. 97 Cart., no. 2462. 98 Cart., no. 2555. 99 Cart., no. 2470–71; Historia diplomatica Friderici secundi, ed. J.L.A. Huillard-Bréholles, Paris, 1852–61, vol. VI, pp. 624–25; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 174–75, 182. 100 Reg. Innocent IV, nos. 6256, 6237. For the relationship between Innocent IV and the Templars see A. Spicciani, ‘Papa Innocenzo IV e i Templari’, I Templari: Mito e Storia. Atti del Convegno Internazionale di Studi alla Magione Templare di Poggibonsi, Siena, 29–31 Maggio 1987, ed. G. Minnucci and F. Sardi, Siena, 1989, pp. 41–65; Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 231–32.

118

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

Innocent urged the prelates to help the Order, which had suffered heavy losses in the continuing war against the Muslims.101 A feature of Innocent’s papacy was the diversification of crusading. Besides Louis IX’s crusade to Egypt, crusades were fought against pagans along the Baltic shore, against the Mongols in Hungary, against the Muslims in Spain, and against Frederick II in Italy and Germany.102 Innocent expected the Hospitallers to disperse their forces and resources in order to fight Muslims and pagans in different crusading theatres. As this could have weakened their effort to rehabilitate the Order in the East they were not always willing to comply. In June 1247 the Hospitallers agreed to supply Bela IV of Hungary with military forces in case the kingdom was invaded by pagans or Mongols. The king, fearing a Mongol invasion, had probably asked the pope to ensure the Order’s support. A year later, in June 1248, Innocent exhorted the Hospitallers in this kingdom to defend it against the Mongols. He promised that those members of the familia of the Order who took the cross would be granted a crusade indulgence similar to the one granted to crusaders to the Holy Land.103 In March 1250, following a complaint from James I, he urged the Hospitallers and the Templars to fight alongside the king’s forces in the Aragonese reconquest.104 Diversification was a common feature of thirteenth-century crusading. In 1255 Alexander IV (1254–61), Innocent’s successor, ordered the mendicants to preach the cross in France at the same time as a crusade against Manfred was being preached in Italy and England, for which crusading vows destined for the Holy Land were commuted. Alexander spent the first years of his papacy in abortive negotiations with Henry III to transfer the Sicilian crown to his son Edmund of Lancaster.105 Although many letters of appeal were sent by the Latin settlers to the West between 1254, when Louis IX returned to France, and 1260, when a Mongol

101 102 103

104

105

Catálogo de la documentacíon Navarra de la Orden de San Juan de Jerusalén en el Archivo Historico Nacional, siglos XII–XIX, ed. C. Gutierrez del Arroyo, Pamplona, 1992, vol. I, nos. 163, 172. Riley-Smith, The Crusades, pp. 157–73, and Purcell, Papal Crusading Policy, pp. 66–80. ‘Praeceptorem et fratres Hospitalis Hierosolymitani in Hungaria rogat et hortatur ut ad gentem Tartarorum saevissimam conterendam . . . familiae eorum ac omnibus aliis qui assumpta cruce in Hungariam contra Tartaros processerint illam indulgentiam elargitur quae transeuntibus in subsidium Terrae Sanctae in generali concilio concessa est’, Reg. Innocent IV, no. 4000; Cart., nos. 2445, 2477. The Mongol invasion of Hungary occurred in 1241–1242. In 1247 and 1248 the kingdom was not under attack, but the king, fearing the Mongols’ return, kept seeking military support. See N. Berend, At the Gate of Christendom: Jews, Muslims and ‘Pagans’ in Medieval Hungary, c.1000–c.1300, Cambridge, 2001, pp. 163–65; D. Morgan, The Mongols, Oxford, 1986, pp. 138–41. Cart., no. 2517. Ledesma Rubio, Templarios y Hospitalarios en el Reino de Aragón, p. 55. On the effect of the participation of the Order’s houses in the Iberian peninsula Reconquista on their ability to support the Order in the East see Chapter 2 above, pp. 81, 99–101. On Alexander’s pontificate see ‘Alexander IV’, Dictionnaire de théologie Catholique, ed. H. Hemmer, vol. I, col. 721; Purcell, Papal Crusading Policy, pp. 80–81; Housley, The Italian Crusades, pp. 16–17, 72. On crusade preaching during Innocent IV’s and Alexander IV’s pontificates, see Maier, Preaching the Crusades, pp. 71–79. On Alexander’s negotiations with Henry III of England see Lloyd, English Society and the Crusade, pp. 11, 91–92, 224. On commutation of crusading vows in order to fight in Sicily see, for example, Foedera, vol. II, pp. 319–20, 322.

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

119

invasion was imminent, the struggle in Sicily seems to have taken priority over the affairs in the East.106 Alexander’s main concern was to defend the Order’s privileges and patrimony, which were increasingly challenged by lay and ecclesiastical lords, who wished to restrict its rights and regain ownership over property.107 Cum dilecti filii fratres Hierosolymitani, and Non absque dolore, which ordered the prelates to honour and defend the privileges and donations given to the Hospitallers, were repeatedly renewed during his pontificate. Paci et quieti, which ordered the prelates to excommunicate churchmen and laymen who harmed the Order’s property and men, was renewed several times.108 Alexander’s new bulls also show his concern about these aggressions. In January 1255 he issued Justis petentium desideriis, which reconfirmed its ownership of properties donated by the faithful and of property that it conquered from the Muslims.109 Moreover, in September 1256 he exempted the Order from any form of secular jurisdiction, taxation, and public works.110 Out of consideration for the Hospitallers’ services to ‘the poor and the sick of Christ and also the continuous support they provide the Holy Land, not without great efforts and expenses’, he ordered the prelates in August 1255 to obey papal bulls regarding them. A year later he instructed the bishops to cancel excommunications and other ecclesiastical sanctions that had been imposed on the Order and its men and that were contrary to papal privileges.111 A possible confrontation between papal legates and the Hospitallers was over papal taxation. Alexander protected their immunity, and in Licet sicut lecta, issued in February 1256, he exempted the Hospitallers from taxes imposed by the Holy See in which they were not specifically mentioned.112 In October 1256 he prevented the prelates from demanding new levies from the Order.113 By exempting it from papal taxation Alexander wished to preserve the Order’s privileges, and also to assist it at a time of financial crisis. We have already seen his attempts to prevent the alienation of property made by some of its commanderies 106 107 108 109 110 111

112

113

See Chapter 1 above, pp. 31–33, and P.J. Cole, The Preaching of the Crusades to the Holy Land, 1095–1270, Cambridge (Mass.), 1991, pp. 186–87. See Chapter 2 above, pp. 86, 90. Cart., nos. 2718, 2741, 2767, 2903, 2911; 2712, 2728, 2766, 2768, 2895; 2827, 2891, 2954. Cart., no. 2708. Cart., nos. 2828, 2849. Cart., nos. 2764, 2837. For additional decrees regularizing the Order’s relations with the papacy and the local church see, for example, Cart., nos. 2702, 2711, 2821, 2978, 2981. Papal bulls such as Quam amabilis Deo, which called on the clergy to preach in favour of the Order, or Inter cetera, which urged the faithful to help it, were not renewed during Alexander’s pontificate. For the renewal of Querelam gravem recepimus, which allowed the Hospitallers to preach in parish churches, see Cart., nos. 2724, 2758, 2855, 2905. Cart., no. 2800. The Military Orders, as will be shown below (p. 124), were not exempted from papal taxation during the pontificates of Urban IV and Clement IV. See also Chapter 2 above, p. 96. On papal taxation of the Church see Siberry, Criticism of Crusading, pp. 126–49; Housley, The Italian Crusades, pp. 174–75; Morris, The Papal Monarchy, p. 558. Cart., no. 2838. Unfortunately Delaville Le Roulx included only a summary of this bull in the Cartulaire. The same privilege was, however, granted to the Templars in March 1257. Alexander emphasized that it was granted because: ‘ante oculos mentis nostre habemus cotidie necessitatem maximam Terre Sancte. Non enim possumus nec debemus casus ipsius miserabile oblivisci, et ideo ad devotionis vestre fervorem, cum pro subventione terre predicte nec personis vestris parcatis.’ See Reg. Alexandre IV, no. 1814.

120

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

and priories, which, faced with increasing demands from the East and political and economic changes in Europe, were being forced to sell property. In October 1256 he forbade the alienation of property in England, which had been carried out without the prior’s approval. In May 1257 he ordered the head of the religious community at St. Etienne de Beaune to revoke alienation of property effected by the priory of France.114 Some of the Order’s houses in Europe seem to have been heavily in debt, and in June 1257 the pope forbade the bishop of Orvieto from demanding money from the Hospitallers. He stressed that ‘the brothers run into heavy debts due to the necessities they assigned to maintain the poor and support the Holy Land’.115 Out of consideration for their financial difficulties Alexander granted them 4,000 marks collected from the redemption of crusading vows.116 Wishing to enlarge the Order’s income but also to protect religious institutions in the Holy Land, which owing to the frequency of the Muslims’ raids would have otherwise fallen into ruin, Alexander acceded in April 1255 to the Hospitallers’ request to grant them the abbey of Mt. Thabor. This was a major donation which, besides the abbey itself, included rights over large estates. Considering the expenses incurred by the Hospitallers in the Holy Land he gave them in February 1256 the nunnery of St. Lazarus of Bethany.117 In March 1255 the pope intervened in their favour in a dispute with the bishop of Tortosa, who claimed the tithes from the diocese of Rafania, where the Hospitallers held estates adjacent to the castle of Crac de Chevaliers. Alexander exempted them from payment of tithes and first fruits for the castle and its adjacent lands. This exemption was granted to relieve the Hospitallers of the expenses they incurred defending Crac, which the Order intended to garrison with sixty knights. Alexander emphasized his duty to support the Hospitallers, who faced great danger in the defence of Christendom.118 Concessions given to the Hospitallers in the East were, however, strongly opposed by the Latin church, as they threatened to diminish its income. James Pantaleon, the new patriarch of Jerusalem, challenged the grant of the nunnery of Bethany, as he claimed it was traditionally dependent upon Jerusalem. This claim started a lengthy dispute with the Hospitallers, which ended in September 1261, when James, now the newly appointed Urban IV, revoked the donation.119 Before he arrived in the East to take up the patriarchate120 James complained to the pope that the Military Orders, exploiting his absence, had taken the money collected from the redemption of crusading vows in the kingdom of Jerusalem. The Military

114 115 116 117 118

119 120

Cart., nos. 2834–35, 2872. On the economic situation of the Order in the 1250s and the alienation of its property see Chapter 2 above, pp. 86ff. ‘eorumdem fratrum gravamen indebitum sustinere, utpote quorum bona sustentationi pauperum et Terre Sancte subsidio sunt specialiter deputata’, Cart., no. 2878. See Chapter 1 above, p. 28. See Chapter 1 above, pp. 28, 56. Cart., no. 2727. For a thorough discussion of the Order’s dispute with the bishop of Tortosa see Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 418–19, and Hamilton, The Latin Church in the Crusader States, pp. 285–86. Cart., no. 2993. For the patriarchate of James Pantaleon see Hamilton, The Latin Church in the Crusader States, pp. 267–70, and Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 401–3. James was appointed in April 1255 but went to Acre only in June 1256. See Hamilton, The Latin Church in the Crusader States, pp. 267–68.

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

121

Orders must have regarded this money as an important source of income, and their attempts to collect it seem to have resulted in a bitter conflict with the Latin church and their excommunication. In a letter of December 1255 Alexander promised the patriarch that the collection of the money in the kingdom of Jerusalem by the Orders would not damage his income. He also made sure to remind James that they were immune from excommunication. It is not clear from this letter whether the pope limited or even cancelled the Orders’ right to collect the money,121 because in January 1256 he granted the Templars the right to collect this levy in Germany, the only place where they had not been allowed to collect it till then. The right was granted in response to their request and in order to compensate them for their loss of income on account of the patriarch’s right, as papal legate, to the money collected from the redemption of crusading vows in the Holy Land.122 There is no evidence that this right to compensation was granted to the Hospitallers, a circumstance that probably added to the already strained relations between them and the local Church. In February 1256 Alexander had to emphasize once again the Orders’ immunity. However, as he was keen to secure James’s success in his new post, he ordered the Hospitallers and the Templars to obey the new patriarch and to respect his position as papal legate.123 This appeal does not seem to have been very effective as regards the Hospitallers. While this was the last time Alexander issued a decree forbidding the excommunication of the Templars, he had to renew it for the Hospitallers in September 1258: this time they may have been excommunicated by James himself after he went to Acre in June 1256.124 The 1258 bull was the last renewal of the decree forbidding the Order’s excommunication during Alexander’s pontificate. Although the patriarch left for Rome in 1259 to challenge the donation of Bethany, among other things,125 the Latin church and the Military Orders, alarmed by the Mongols’ advance, were perhaps inclined to settle their differences. This threat had induced the Orders to reach an agreement between themselves in October 1258.126 With the Mongols’ advance a stream of letters of appeal were sent by the Latin settlers and huge propaganda efforts were made by the Military Orders to promote the Holy Land and pool resources in the West.127 Maier has pointed out that in response to the Mongol threat Alexander ordered the secular clergy to preach the cross in 1260 and enormous efforts were made to recruit crusaders and to assemble

121

122 123 124 125

126 127

Cart., no. 2775; Reg. Alexandre IV, nos. 971, 956. Although the Hospitallers seem to have considered this an important source of income, there is no additional information on this matter and we do not know the sums involved. Redemption of crusading vows is a subject thoroughly studied by scholars; however, little attention has been paid to the collection of this money in the kingdom of Jerusalem. See, for example, J.M. Brundage, Medieval Canon Law and the Crusader, Madison, 1969, pp. 68–69, 71–72, 77, and Maier, Preaching the Crusades, pp. 135–60. Reg. Alexandre IV, no. 1085. For the collection of crusading vows in Germany see also MGH Epistolae saeculi XIII, vol. I, no. 450. Cart., no. 2787; Reg. Alexandre IV, no. 1161. Cart., nos. 2797, 2806, 2901. ‘ATS’, p. 449B. According to Hamilton (The Latin Church in the Crusader States, pp. 269–70) the main reason for James’s trip to Rome was to complain about the appointment of Thomas Agni of Lentino as legate a latere to Acre with authority that outranked his own. See Chapter 1 above, p. 31. See Chapter 1 above, pp. 31–33.

122

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

supplies for the Holy Land.128 In a letter sent the same year to the bishop of Marseilles and to the mendicant friars, Alexander described the alarming situation of the Latin settlements. The pope had had news from his legate and received many letters and envoys sent by the leaders in the East, including the masters of the Military Orders. He instructed the bishops and the friars to preach the cross, urging the faithful to succour the Holy Land and to send there on the next passage the money collected from the redemption of crusade vows. This money was to enable the Latin settlers to hire crossbowmen.129 The lack of money to employ or supply mercenaries was indeed stressed as one of their main difficulties in the appeals sent from the East.130 The pontificate of Urban IV (1261–64), Alexander’s successor, reflects Urban’s strained relations with the Order during his patriarchate. As noted, he had journeyed from the East in 1259 to complain in the papal curia about the donation of the nunnery of Bethany. In September 1261, a month after his election, he revoked this grant, claiming that the Order had obtained it dishonestly, by exaggerating the state of the nunnery and the dangers it faced from the Muslims. In 1263 he cancelled Alexander’s decision regarding the tithes from the diocese of Rafania by joining this diocese to that of Tortosa and by invalidating, in the following year, any claim the Hospitallers might have over these tithes.131 Urban’s hostility and even distrust of the Hospitallers appears still more striking when compared with his attitude to the Templars. Representatives of the Templar master Thomas Bérard were sent in June 1261 to the curia to raise several issues such as the Mongol threat, aid to Constantinople, and the situation in Sicily.132 Following Urban’s election the Templars assumed an important place in his administration. A Templar brother was his marshal and another his chamberlain. The latter replaced in this office brother Bonvicino, a Templar who had been the chamberlain of Alexander IV and had a prominent role in the struggle against the Hohenstaufen in central Italy.133 To strengthen his position in that region Urban also appointed Templars as castellans of his castles. Bernard of Gallercetum was the castellan of Cesis and Raymond was the castellan of Proculi, both in the diocese of Spoleto. In the diocese of Anagni a Templar was the castellan of Rocca de Trebis.134 The Templars were responsible throughout Europe for the collection of levies for the Latin kingdom and the Holy See. In June 1263, for example, Urban ordered the bishop of Burgos to transfer 100 marks destined for the pope to the Templar house in Montpellier.135 The Order’s cooperation with the papacy was 128 129 130 131

132 133

134 135

Maier, Preaching the Crusades, pp. 84–85. GCN, Marseille, vol. II, no. 288. See Chapter 1 above, p. 32. Cart., nos. 2993, 3093; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 403, 418–19; Hamilton, The Latin Church in the Crusader States, p. 285. For Urban’s election in August 1261 see E. Jordan, Les origines de la domination Angevine en Italie, Paris, 1909, pp. 291–92. RRH, no. 1303. Barber, The New Knighthood, p. 157. Reg. Urbain IV, no. 2276. Bonvicino had been the papal chamberlain for about thirty years; he also served under Gregory IX and Innocent IV. See F. Bramato, Storia dell’ordine dei Templari in Italia, Rome, 1991, vol. I, pp. 164–65, and Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 251, 276. Reg. Urbain IV, nos. 59C, 329, 126C. See also Bramato, Storia dell’ordine dei Templari in Italia, vol. I, pp. 117–18, 165. Reg. Urbain IV, no. 156C.

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

123

rewarded. In June 1262 Urban not only confirmed its property in Provence, but owing to the frequent attacks on it he appointed two churchmen to protect it for five years.136 The pope emphasized the Templars’ loyalty and reaffirmed his commitment to protect them when renewing Religiosos viros fratres, which ordered the bishops to excommunicate members of their communities who disturbed or taxed them.137 Urban’s firm connection with the Order is also reflected in his intervention in its internal affairs. The decision by the master Thomas Bérard in 1262 to depose the marshal Stephen of Sissey and send him to Rome after the defeat in the Jawlan may have been an acceptable exercise of papal jurisdiction as a last resort.138 A year later Urban asked Thomas Bérard to appoint Amaury de la Roche as preceptor in France, following a request from Louis IX.139 In comparison with Urban’s close connections with the Templars his support for the Hospitallers seems low-key. He issued a number of bulls which were meant to protect the Order and its property. Cum a nobis petitur, which confirmed its privileges, was renewed several times during his pontificate.140 So was Devotionis vestre precibus, which granted the Order the right to claim any property its members would have inherited had they remained in the secular world.141 Urban was aware of the financial difficulties faced by the Order. We have seen that in March 1262 he prevented the Hospitallers in England from alienating their property to pay debts.142 His most important decree regarding them was linked to their fund-raising, which encountered fierce opposition in the West. In October 1261 the pope ordered the bishops to excommunicate not only clerics and laymen who molested the Order, damaged its property, and disturbed its alms collection, but also those who assisted the offenders.143 This last bull must have been connected with Urban’s attempts, in the first years of his pontificate, to promote throughout Europe a new crusade to the Holy Land.144 The local clergy and all exempt Orders, including the Templars and the Hospitallers, were repeatedly requested to give procurations, in supplies and money, 136 137

138

139 140 141 142 143 144

Reg. Urbain IV, nos. 2954–55. These ‘advocates’ were appointed as ‘conservatorem privilegiorum et bonorum militia Templi in Provincia’. Urban wrote to the brothers that this privilege was granted to them ‘pro religione et honestate sua, tanto propensius a malignorum incursibus protegere volumus’, but also, ‘tueri quanto puriorem devotionem circa nos et Romanam ecclesiam habere noscuntur’. Reg. Urbain IV, no. 2957. Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 187–88. For the battle in the Jawlan see Chapter 1 above, p. 34. Historians differ as to the reasons for Stephen’s deposition. Bramato (Storia dell’ordine dei Templari in Italia, p. 125) suggests that it was because of Urban’s hostility to the Templars from the time he was patriarch of Jerusalem. We have seen, however, the close cooperation between the pope and the Order. Melville believes that Sissey strongly opposed Urban’s campaign to Sicily and the commutation of resources from the Holy Land. Considering that Sissey was appointed in 1271 as preceptor of Apulia and had strong connections with Charles of Anjou, this does not make sense. M. Melville, La vie des Templiers, Paris, 1951, p. 230. Reg. Urbain IV, nos. 765, 771, 2865. The Templars acceded to the request and Amaury served as preceptor of France between 1265 and 1271. See Barber, The New Knighthood, p. 274. Cart., nos. 3014, 3025; Reg. Urbain IV, no. 2892. Cart., nos. 3017, 3019, 3024, 3074. See Chapter 2 above, p. 99. Cart., no. 2996. Maier, Preaching the Crusades, p. 80, and Jordan, Les origines de la domination Angevine en Italie, pp.

124

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

to preachers of the cross and tax collectors.145 In June 1264 the pope called on the patriarch of Jerusalem and the masters of the Military Orders to assist him in the preparations for this crusade.146 As former patriarch of Jerusalem, he understood that one of the key elements for the success of any campaign was the political unity of the kingdom. The same month he urged the leaders in the East to reach peaceful settlements of their disagreements and he forbade them to sign individual treaties with the Muslims.147 In response to urgent correspondence sent from the East describing the depredations that accompanied Baybars’ advance of 1263, Urban implored the leaders of the West to help the Holy Land. He also wrote to the Latin settlers that in response to their appeals a hundredth was being levied on the Church and a crusade was being preached in Europe. This money and the many crusaders who had taken the cross would soon be sent to the Holy Land.148 The crusade, however, never materialized. That same year Urban concluded negotiations to transfer the Sicilian crown to Charles of Anjou and a crusade was preached against Manfred in France, parts of the empire, and north and central Italy.149 Purcell has called this ‘a period of almost total orientation of crusading policy towards victory over the Hohenstaufen claimants’.150 To achieve this goal Urban, and his successor Clement IV, diverted money and manpower destined for the Holy Land to support Charles’s campaign in Italy. Simon of Brie, the papal legate in France and Urban’s representative in the negotiations with Charles, was allowed to suspend the crusade to the East for one year, to commute vows, and to use money destined for the Holy Land to Italy. In May 1264 a three-year tenth to support Charles’s campaign was imposed on the Church, from which exempt Orders were not excluded. This was probably the first time papal taxation was imposed on the Hospitallers and the Templars.151 The struggle against the Hohenstaufen reached its peak during the pontificate of Clement IV (1265–68). The pope’s involvement in military campaigns in Italy against Manfred and Conradin and his reliance on Charles of Anjou provide the basis for an understanding of Clement’s attitude to the Holy Land, hence his relations with the Hospitallers. Only a month after Clement’s election in February 1265 news of the fall of Caesarea and Arsur reached the curia. The pope sent several letters to the East, showing his concern and promising that every effort had been made to promote a

145 146 147 148 149

150 151

373, 386–87. In 1263 a five-year hundredth was levied from the Church in order to help the Holy Land. See Housley, The Italian Crusades, p. 72. Cart., nos. 3007, 3009, 3057, 3060, 3078; Reg. Urbain IV, e.g. nos. 395–96, 459C–60C. Cart., no. 3097. Cart., no. 3099. For individual treaties signed with Baybars in 1263 see Chapter 1 above, p. 35. Cart., no. 3098. For the full text see Reg. Urbain IV, no. 867. Abulafia, Frederick II, pp. 415–16, and The Western Mediterranean Kingdoms, pp. 57–58; Jordan, Les origines de la domination Angevine en Italie, pp. 494–95; Housley, The Italian Crusades, pp. 18, 72–73; Riley-Smith, The Crusades, p. 168; S. Runciman, The Sicilian Vespers: A History of the Mediterranean World in the Later Thirteenth Century, Cambridge, 1958, pp. 64–95. Purcell, Papal Crusading Policy, p. 113. Simon was, however, to implement these powers only with a special mandate from the pope. See Housley, The Italian Crusades, pp. 174–75, 83, 98; Jordan, Les origines de la domination Angevine en Italie, p. 494. On the tenth for Charles’s campaign and the exempt Orders see Reg. Urbain IV, no. 804; Housley, The Italian Crusades, pp. 214–15; Chapter 2 above, p. 96.

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

125

crusade in Europe.152 In August he issued a new bull calling for the preaching of the cross in France, Germany, and Scandinavia.153 In the spring of 1265 he informed Louis IX of Baybars’ advance and asked him to hasten the collection of the hundredth in his kingdom in favour of the Holy Land. The pope also forwarded the news from the East to other Western leaders and to the mendicants preaching the cross.154 Yet for all these efforts to promote a crusade and disseminate the news from the Holy Land, Clement gave priority to the crusade against Manfred in Italy in the spring of 1265. In March he instructed Simon of Brie, papal legate to France, to commute crusading vows from the Holy Land to Sicily.155 By the time of the battle of Benevento in February 1266 Clement justified this priority by stressing the threat that Manfred constituted to the existence of the Church in Rome, and the strategic importance of Sicily for a future crusade to the Holy Land. Charles’s success, he wrote, would facilitate the shipment of supplies to the Latin East.156 Clement’s reaction to the news of the fall of the castle of Safad was to promise that urgent help would be sent to the East as soon as the affair in Sicily was settled.157 The fury of the Latin settlers at the diversion of resources and manpower to Sicily is expressed in the poem Ira et Dolor.158 Indeed, only after the struggle against Manfred was concluded could the Franks expect any significant help. The pope sent letters and envoys to the courts of Europe; they described the critical situation of the Christians in the East and begged for help.159 In October 1266 Clement wrote to his legate in England about the loss of the castle of Safad and ordered him to supply the money needed to hire crossbowmen.160 In March 1267 Louis IX took the cross, and a month later Clement ordered the commutation of crusading vows from Sicily in favour of the Holy Land. He also ordered that a crusade for the East be preached throughout Europe and papal taxation be collected to support this expedition.161 The events in Italy had also strongly influenced Clement’s relationship with the Hospitallers, although he had a far more positive attitude to them than his predecessor. During his pontificate he issued and renewed many bulls meant to protect the Order and its property from ecclesiastical and secular lords.162 In February and

152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161

162

Cart., nos. 3128, 3172; Reg. Clément IV, nos. 824, 1792. Maier, Preaching the Crusades, p. 80. Reg. Clément IV, no. 825. Reg. Clément IV, no. 216. On the commutation of crusading vows to Sicily see also Housley, The Italian Crusades, pp. 98–99, and Cole, The Preaching of the Crusades to the Holy Land, pp. 190–93. Cart., no. 3206; Reg. Clément IV, no. 838. For a thorough discussion of the papal justification of the Italian crusades see Housley, The Italian Crusades, pp. 63–70. Cart., nos. 3229, 3230; Reg. Clément IV, no. 1110; Annales Ecclesiastici, vol. XXII (1257–85), p. 186 (ann. 1266, S 45). For Ira et Dolor see above, Chapter 1, pp. 39–40, and Chapter 2, pp. 95–96. See Chapter 1 above, pp. 39, 41–42. Reg. Clément IV, nos. 1145–46; Cart., no. 3232. On Clement’s support see also Marshall, Warfare in the Latin East, pp. 83–84. On the second crusade of St. Louis see Richard, Saint Louis, pp. 293–329; Riley-Smith, The Crusades, pp. 173–76. On the commutation of vows in favour of the Holy Land and the preparations for this expedition see Reg. Clément IV, no. 496; Cole, The Preaching of the Crusades to the Holy Land, pp. 193–94; Purcell, Papal Crusading Policy, p. 114. The bulls are many: see, for example, Cart., nos. 3141, 3156–57, 3163, 3181, 3211, 3233, 3244–45.

126

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

May 1265 he renewed the Hospitallers’ right to receive revenues collected from the redemption of crusading vows.163 In Clement’s correspondence the Order’s activities are clearly identified with the crusades and the defence of the Holy Land. In 29 May he called on the prelates to urge the faithful to give donations to the Hospitallers. ‘Through them’, he wrote, ‘God frees the Eastern Church from the impurity of the pagans and fights the enemies of Christ.’164 Still, for all the pope’s concern over the Order’s financial situation, he had inherited an empty treasury and was in urgent need of large sums of money to finance the military campaigns in Italy.165 Under these circumstances, and under strong pressure from Charles of Anjou, Clement continued Urban’s policy of collecting the three-year tenth from exempt Orders, including the Hospitallers and the Templars. On 19 March 1265, in response to complaints from the Orders, he did instruct Simon of Brie to exempt them temporarily from this tax until the matter could be examined. But that same month, fearing Charles’s reaction to this exemption, he ordered the collection of the tax despite previous privileges given to the Orders.166 The Hospitallers refused to pay the tenth, and Housley believes that Ferrand of Barras, prior of St. Gilles, met Clement in March 1266 to persuade him to rescind his decision. Although the pope did not comply he asked Simon to alleviate the sanctions.167 It is noteworthy that the pope met Ferrand and heard out his complaints, not because of the Order’s charitable work or its role defending the Holy Land but because of the prior’s devotion to the pope and the Church in Rome as well as his personal friendship with Clement.168 But one should also note that the Military Orders did not receive any concessions from the tax because of their crucial role in the East. The priority given to the struggle against the Hohenstaufen over the needs of the Hospitallers in the Holy Land was manifested in financial demands, and also in Clement’s unprecedented request that the Order help fight Conradin’s supporters in Sicily. This had serious implications for the supply of money and resources to the Hospitallers in the Holy Land from their houses in the kingdom of Sicily and probably also in France. Attempts made by the master to change the Order’s leadership in Sicily were thwarted by Clement.169 The claim that the Hohenstaufen and their

163 164

165 166 167 168

169

Cart., nos. 3118, 3143. Cart., no. 3153; Reg. Clément IV, no. 1659. ‘per quos Deus Orientalem ecclesiam a paganorum. spurcicia liberat, et Christiani nominis inimicos expugnat’. This letter is in fact the renewal of Quam amabilis Deo. The donors were reminded that they would be absolved of a seventh part of their yearly penance (see also Cart., no. 130). On the financial situation of the papacy during Charles’s campaigns see Housley, The Italian Crusades, pp. 222–31. Cart., no. 3122; Reg. Clément IV, nos. 1436, 1451. See Chapter 2 above, p. 96. ‘devotione sincera quam ad nos et Romanam gerit ecclesiam, et amicitia speciali quam olim ad personam nostram habuit’, Thes. novus, vol. II, no. 252. It is not possible, owing to the lack of evidence, to determine the nature of the friendship between these two men. The phrase ‘special friendship’ could have been just a writing formula. Still, Clement showed special concern for Ferrand when he absolved the prior from fulfilling his obligation to visit the convent in the East. This is an unusual example of papal intervention in such matters and it was done out of consideration for Ferrand’s advanced years. See Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 280–81, and Hospitallers: The History of the Order of St. John, London, 1999, p. 61. See Chapter 2 above, pp. 92–95.

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

127

supporters were no different from the Muslims was Clement’s justification for demanding that the Hospitallers fight fellow-Christians, which was against their customs;170 an esgart had considered the possibility that individual brothers may be involved in this sort of fighting and had ruled that ‘no brother should fight a Christian’.171 To assuage complaints from the Hospitallers in the East and to gain their loyalty Clement gave them exceptional concessions. On 23 May 1267 he granted them the right to collect revenues from redemption of crusading vows in the dioceses of Salzburg and Magdeburg up to the sum of 3,000 marks. This was the first time the Hospitallers were allowed to collect this money in the Western empire out of consideration for the brothers’ great needs.172 The fighting of the Hospitallers against the rebels in Sicily helped break the Hohenstaufen supporters and contributed to Conradin’s final defeat at the battle of Tagliacozzo in August 1268.173 However, while Clement’s policy in Italy ended in success it had adverse consequences for the situation of the Christian settlements in the East. By the time of his death in 1269 the Franks, who lacked resources and manpower, had lost most of their major castles and were restricted to a number of cities along the coast.174 Any hopes for a quick relief of the Holy Land were shattered by the failure of St. Louis’ crusade in Tunis in 1271. The remaining crusading forces which arrived at Acre were insufficient to provide any significant help.175 In such a vital period the papacy, which after the death of Louis IX in Tunis in 1271 was the only power in Europe capable of promoting and organizing urgent aid, was vacant for almost three years.176 With the election of Tedaldo Visconti, archdeacon of Liège, as Pope Gregory X in September 1271, the Holy Land was once again at the centre of papal policy. Gregory, who was in the Holy Land at the time of his election, was chosen because of his eager support for the Latin settlements and his knowledge of their needs. Following his election he sent small contingents to reinforce the military forces in the East and summoned the Second Council of Lyons, which was to discuss a new crusade.177 The Military Orders were an important element in Gregory’s crusade machinery and the pope was anxious to defend their rights and privileges. In Sub religionis habitu , issued in July 1272, he ordered ecclesiastical authorities in Aix and Forcalquier to protect the properties and rights of the priory of St. Gilles from the many abuses they were exposed to, and instructed them to use Church sanctions against the

170 171 172 173 174

Cart., no. 3279. ‘nul frere ne bate nul Crestien’, Cart., no. 2213, usance no. 55. Cart., no. 3261. See Chapter 2 above, p. 93. On the complete reliance of the Latin settlements on supplies from Europe in the late 1260s see Chapter 1 above, p. 42. 175 On Louis IX’s crusade to Tunis see Riley-Smith, The Crusades, pp. 173–76. On the insufficiency of the remaining crusading forces that arrived at Acre see Chapter 1 above, pp. 45–47. 176 P. Throop, Criticism of the Crusades: A Study of Public Opinion and Crusade Propaganda, Amsterdam, 1940, p. 13. 177 Throop, Criticism of the Crusades, pp. 13–17, 274; Housley, The Later Crusades, pp. 10–12; Schein, Fideles Crucis, pp. 20–22.

128

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

offenders.178 The bull was renewed in 1274 to protect the Order’s property in Acre and sent to the bishop of Lydda.179 The brothers’ frequent complaints to the curia about the abuse of their privileges and possessions led to the renewal of Solet annuere sedes, a papal confirmation of their rights and privileges, seven times during Gregory’s pontificate, more times than any other bull.180 The pope was, however, rigorous when the Hospitallers, again exploiting the vacancy of the see of Jerusalem, took the money collected from the redemption of crusading vows in the kingdom of Jerusalem. With the appointment of the papal legate, Thomas of Lentino, as the new patriarch, the pope ordered in March 1272 that this money be collected by him.181 Aware of the need to reinforce the kingdom’s defences, one of Gregory’s first actions after his election was to supply it immediately with warriors and money, for which he sought urgent help from European leaders and also from the Military Orders. On 4 March 1272 he sent his legate, the archbishop of Corinth, to Philip III of France to ask for money needed to supply the East with knights and ships.182 That same date a letter was issued to the visitor of the Templars and the prior of the Hospitallers in France, in which the pope explained the archbishop’s mission. He stressed the critical situation of the Holy Land and asked them to supply the enormous sum of 25,000 marks in case the king did not provide the money quickly enough. Although the pope reassured them that this sum would probably not be necessary, he instructed them to borrow the money and give their property as surety for the loan.183 As this issue was not mentioned again, it seems that the loan never materialized, perhaps because Philip did send money and manpower to the Holy Land in late 1272 and in 1273.184 Yet although the Orders were not actually asked to supply this money and, therefore, their financial situation was not affected by it, Gregory’s request is important. It shows his perception, shared by his contempo178 179

180 181

182 183

184

Cart., nos. 3458, 3532. Cart., no. 3545. According to Riley-Smith (The Knights of St. John, pp. 409–10) this bull hints at a conflict the Hospitallers in Acre had over property at that time, for which there is no other evidence. The bishop of Lydda resided in Acre as Lydda had been conquered by Baybars in 1268. See Hamilton, The Latin Church in the Crusader States, pp. 273–74. Cart., nos. 3448, 3450, 3537, 3538, 3552, 3564; Reg. Grégoire X, no. 991. Reg. Grégoire X, no. 27. The see of Jerusalem was vacant for two years, from 1270 to 1272. On this and the appointment of Thomas of Lentino, the former bishop of Bethlehem, as patriarch of Jerusalem, see Hamilton, The Latin Church in the Crusader States, pp. 274–76. Reg. Grégoire X, no. 343. The pope’s request reads as follows: ‘consurgentes mutuum usque ad quantitatem viginti quinque millium marcharum argenti, per quod in militibus et galeis promptus possit haberi succursus ad Terram eandem sine tarditatis dispendio destinandus, communiter contrahere curetis, et, si opportunum fuerit, domos militie Templi et Hospitalis Hierosolimitani vobis comissas, propter hoc creditoribus obligare’. Reg. Grégoire X, no. 348; Cart., no. 3440. The idea of using Church property as security for loans was probably not alien to Gregory. His predecessor, Clement IV, had pledged many of the churches in Rome to find the money needed to support Charles’s army. See Housley, The Italian Crusade, pp. 223–24. ‘Eracles’ (p. 463) wrote that in April 1273 Philip sent to the Holy Land a small army of twenty-five knights and 100 crossbowmen. He also sent money. In May 1273 Hugh Revel, the Hospitaller master, asked the count of Flanders for urgent help as the money sent by the king of France had been spent. See RRH, no. 1387. See also Throop, Criticism of the Crusades, pp. 229, 273–74; Schein, Fideles Crucis, p. 19.

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

129

raries, of the Orders as rich institutions, capable, because of their huge patrimony, of raising significant amounts of money to help the Holy Land. One should notice, however, that the pope’s attitude in this matter was not consistent and his request was unusual. Gregory, as we shall see below, showed great concern over the Order’s financial situation. The gap between the contemporary perception of the Orders as rich institutions with unlimited resources and manpower and their real financial situation and ability to defend the Holy Land became obvious at the Council of Lyons. They sent two of their most experienced brothers to the Council, the newly appointed Templar master, William of Beaujeu, and the Hospitaller brother William of Corceles, a former marshal who had served in the East for more than thirty years.185 Their task was to defend the Orders from the traditional attacks by the bishops against their rights and privileges and, more importantly, to discuss ways of assisting the Holy Land.186 They showed little enthusiasm for proposals to launch a major expedition, knowing that with their limited resources in the East they would not be able to hold the land after the crusaders returned to Europe. They supported the idea of sending small contingents, comprising what was soon to be called a passagium particulare, to reinforce the Levant with permanent troops,187 and advised careful

185

Before he became master William of Beaujeu had been the Templar preceptor in Tripoli, and from 1273 preceptor in southern Italy and Sicily. He was in Europe at the time the Council was summoned. See Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 169–71. Both Throop (Criticism of the Crusades, p. 227) and Schein (Fideles Crucis, p. 37) believe that Hugh Revel, the Hospitaller master, was present at Lyons, but while the Order’s sources give no indication of it, they do give clear evidence of the presence of William of Corceles. In January 1274 Charles of Anjou recommended William and other delegates from the Holy Land, who were on their way to Lyons, to his officers in Italy. James I mentioned in his chronicle that a Joan d’Escarcella was asked to speak at the Council. Although James believed him to be a Templar, the brother was most probably William of Corceles. Joan was asked to speak because he was an experienced brother who had served in the Order for ‘sixty years’. After the Council was adjourned Gregory asked William of Corceles, according to the letter ‘a Hospitaller brother, who was in France in order to deal with matters concerned with the crusade’, to wait for instructions from Simon of Brie. A document from 1305 also mentions William of Corceles as the Order’s delegate at Lyons. See Cart., nos. 3528, 3553, 4680; The Book of Deeds of James I of Aragon, pp. 362–64. For William of Corceles as Joan d’Escarcella (Johan Carcella) see also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 143, 285. By 1274 William must have been an old man. He first appeared in documents related to the Order in the East as a simple brother in 1240. He was promoted to marshal after La Forbie, and until 1274 served continuously in the East. See Appendix below. 186 The Franciscan friar Gilbert of Tournai accused the Order of superbia and cupiditas and criticized its exemptions. The Orders had anticipated this criticism, and its delegates at the Council were instructed to emphasize the importance of their privileges and their freedom from authority of the bishops. See Gilbert of Tournai, ‘Collectio de scandalis ecclesiae’, ed. A. Stroick, Archivum Franciscanum historicum, vol. 24 (1931), pp. 56–57, and ‘La défense du Temple devant le concile de Lyon en 1274’, ed. P. Amargier, in 1274: Année charnière: mutations et continuités, Colloques internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, 1977, pp. 495–97. For reference to criticism of the Orders in modern studies see Nicholson, Templars, Hospitallers and Teutonic Knights , pp. 12, 43; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 388. 187 Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 202–04. For the support by the Military Orders of the passagium particulare and the growing popularity of this idea by the time of the Council of Lyons see Housley, The Later Crusades, pp. 12–13, 206, and Schein, Fideles Crucis, pp. 18–19.

130

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

consideration of matters such as war machines, food, and manpower before any expedition set out. Their caution was seen by many of the Council’s participants as reluctance to commit themselves to fight in the East and to make, for this purpose, full use of their extensive resources in Europe.188 Richard of Mepham, Dean of Lincoln and one of the Council’s participants, wrote that it was a well known fact, attested by most kings and princes, that through proper use of their large possessions the Military Orders would have sufficient resources to defend the Holy Land.189 This criticism had already been expressed in the 1240s by Matthew Paris, who, like Richard, saw a link between the continuous appeals for help from the Military Orders in the East and the heavy papal taxation imposed on the English Church. Matthew accused both Orders of keeping the Holy Land in a state of war so that they could receive further donations from the faithful. He claimed that as the Templars had 9,000 manors throughout Christendom and the Hospitallers 19,000, they could supply their needs by sending one knight, fully equipped, from each of these manors to the East.190 This criticism led to a proposal, discussed for the first time at the Council of Lyons, for the union of the Orders, which it was expected would result in a better use of their resources and put an end to their rivalry. This plan was dropped because of strong opposition from the Iberian kings, who wished to maintain the independence of the Spanish Military Orders of Calatrava, Santiago, and Alcantara. However, with the increasing hostility towards the Orders after the fall of the Latin kingdom, plans for their amalgamation were strongly backed by crusader theoreticians and the papacy. In 1291 Pope Nicholas IV ordered the archbishops throughout Christendom to discuss the amalgamation of the Orders at every provincial council. This question was seriously discussed before the suppression of the Templars at the beginning of the fourteenth century.191 The Orders’ defence during the Council of Lyons was to stress the catastrophic situation in the Latin kingdom and their continued commitment to caring for pilgrims and the poor and to fight the Muslims, in spite of their limited resources in the East and the lack of arms, horses, and men.192 Although there is no evidence for the part played by the Hospitaller delegate during the Council, the Templar response to the accusations of inadequate use of their wealth reflects the situation in which by the 1270s both Orders found themselves. They described their financial 188 189

The Book of Deeds of James I of Aragon, p. 364; Throop, Criticism of the Crusades, pp. 228–32. Councils and Synods with Other Documents Relating to the English Church, 871–1313, ed. F.M. Powicke et al., Oxford, 1964, vol. II, p. 815. See also Nicholson, Templars, Hospitallers and Teutonic Knights , pp. 28–29, 132. 190 Matthew Paris, vol. IV, p. 291. Menache, ‘Rewriting the History of the Templars’, pp. 200–4; Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 142, 144, 361, n. 106. It is interesting in this matter to see the hostility not only of the Order’s contemporaries but also of modern historians. Throop (Criticism of the Crusades, p. 238) writes that the ‘greedy Templars and Hospitallers’ asked for the exemptions because their income was dedicated to the Holy War. 191 For the proposal of the amalgamation of the Orders during the Council of Lyons see Cart., no. 4680. For a thorough discussion of this subject by modern historians see Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 282–83; A. Forey, ‘The Military Orders in the Crusading Proposals of the Late-Thirteenth and Early-Fourteenth Centuries’, Military Orders and the Crusades, Aldershot, 1994, essay no. VIII, pp. 317–45; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 202–04. 192 The Book of Deeds of James I of Aragon, p. 364; ‘La défense du Temple devant le concile de Lyon en 1274’, pp. 496, 500.

POPES, HOSPITALLERS, AND CRISES IN THE HOLY LAND

131

difficulties, emphasizing that although they held property in Europe their income there had been drastically reduced because of economic difficulties and wars, which had been fought in every kingdom except England and France. The Orders were heavily in debt and their annual income was barely sufficient to repay their loans.193 Unfortunately, there is no evidence as to Gregory’s opinion of the amalgamation plan, but he does not seem to have shared his contemporaries’ hostility to the Orders. As part of his plan to implement reform in the Church, however, he was critical of their morality. In October 1274 he prevented the Hospitallers from accepting rebellious and apostate brothers.194 But he had only praise for their activities in the East, and far from criticizing their wealth and misuse of resources, he was in fact concerned about their financial situation. The loan to him of 1272, which never materialized, was his only demand from them for financial assistance. This request could perhaps be explained by his urgent desire to help the Holy Land at the time of his election. Gregory had close relations with the prior of St. Gilles, William of Villaret, whom he appointed in 1274 as temporal administrator of the Comtat-Venaissin. Among other things it was William’s task to collect for the pope the revenues from this important region and to report on this to the curia.195 At his meetings with the pope, William probably complained about the financial situation of his priory, which was being forced to liquidate some of its assets in return for cash. In response Gregory issued in March that year Ad audientiam nostram, which revoked alienations of property made by the Hospitallers in Provence. The same bull was issued in the following month for the brothers in Catalonia and Aragon.196 In September 1274 he took the Order under his protection and confirmed its privileges and properties. To promote its fund-raising the pope renewed the decree by which donors would be absolved of a seventh part of their yearly penance.197 In October he exempted the Order from the six-year tenth imposed on the Church at the Council of Lyons to support a crusade to the East. The pope wrote to the brothers that he granted this exemption because ‘for the protection of the Christian faith, you devote yourselves to the perpetual obedience of our religion, with fervour of Christian love you expose your lives and possessions bravely and skilfully against the attacks of the infidels’.198 The popes had indeed an important role to play in the rehabilitation of the Hospitallers following crises in the Latin East. In the wake of Hattin they fully recognized the Order’s military function and gave it additional support. They called on the faithful to help it, they supported Hospitaller preaching, and they were responsible for the dissemination of information regarding the state of the Latin 193 194 195

196 197 198

‘La défense du Temple devant le concile de Lyon en 1274’, p. 499. Amargier explains that 1273–76 were peaceful years both in France and England. Cart., no. 3554; Reg. Grégoire X, no. 1057. Cart., no. 3536. On William of Villaret see also Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, pp. 251–53; Raybaud, Histoire des grands prieurs, pp. 189–90; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 206–07. See Chapter 2 above, p. 100. Cart., no. 3547. ‘pro Christiane fidei tutela, cui perpetuum religionis nostre obsequium dedicastis, in fervore caritatis intrepide ac prudenter exponitis contra infidelium impetus res et vitam’. Cart., no. 3555; Reg. Grégoire X, nos. 1056, 1069.

132

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

settlements and the situation of the Military Orders in the East. But relations between the Holy See and the Hospital were affected by political events in Europe, particularly the struggle between the pope and the Western emperor. Gregory IX expected the Hospitallers in the East to be his political allies. They, however, were willing to risk their relations with the Holy See in pursuing a policy they deemed best suited their own interests and those of the Latin settlements in the East. Therefore, despite the deteriorating relations between the pope and the emperor, they sided with Frederick’s policy in the Holy Land: they supported his claim to the crown of Jerusalem and his treaty with Egypt. They paid a heavy price for their disloyalty; Gregory IX and his successor Innocent IV were indifferent to their needs in the Holy Land and even hostile when they suspected that they sympathized with the emperor. The priorities of the papacy in Europe, moreover, could lead to the diversion of crusades and resources away from the Holy Land. This reached its peak during the pontificate of Clement IV, when he involved some of the Order’s most important provinces in Europe in the fight against the Hohenstaufen in Sicily. Only when the struggle in Europe subsided could Gregory X focus all his attention on the Latin settlements and the Hospitallers in the East. By then, however, the situation of the Holy Land was dire.

MEMBERS SERVING IN THE LATIN EAST AND IN FRENCH PRIORIES

4 Members of the Order Serving in the Latin East and in the French Priories

THE PREVIOUS CHAPTERS have shown that besides a constant transfer of money and provisions, the Hospitallers in the East required a continual supply of manpower. Comparing lists of members of the Order serving in the Latin East with those in the French priories between 1187 and 1274 could help to clarify the brothers’ places of recruitment and service, as well as the mobilization of forces for the Latin East.1 Such a comparison shows that most brothers serving in French houses were locals and were never sent to the East.2 They usually served close to their places of origin: Gaucher of Amiens (Somme) was a simple brother in the house of Corbeil.3 Stephen of Gravesons (Bouche-du-Rhône) and Hugh of Albenaz (Aubenaz, Ardèche) were members of the commandery of Trinquetaille in the early thirteenth century.4 Geoffrey of Albaron (Bouches-du-Rhône) and Pons of Avignon were simple brothers in St. Gilles in 1190s.5 I have found only a few cases of brothers in commanderies and priories far from their places of origin: John of Monzon (Huesca, Aragon), for example, was a simple brother in St. Gilles in 1207. He may have arrived at the priory around 1205, when Ximen of Labata, former commander of Huesca, held both the priory of St. Gilles and the castellany of Amposta.6 Like the simple brothers, the commanders usually also served close to their places of origin. Bertrand of Mornans (Drôme) was commander of Valence in the 1230s and 1240s.7 Bertrand of Pierrelatte (Drôme) was commander of Alais in 1239.

1

2 3

4 5 6 7

For further discussion of these issues see J. Bronstein, ‘The Mobilization of Hospitallers’ Manpower from Europe to the Latin East in the Thirteenth Century’, International Mobility in the Military Orders, ed. J. Burgtorf and H. Nicholson (University of Wales Press, forthcoming). These lists of brothers are included in the Appendix below. Cart., no. 842. Forey has found that a large proportion of the Templar brothers found in the records of the Order’s trials joined houses close to their places of origin, and were therefore known to those receiving them. See ‘Recruitment to the Military Orders’, pp. 141–42. Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 247 (Stephen of Gravesons), 65, 214, 240, 251 (Hugh). Cart. St. Gilles, no. 115 (Geoffrey); nos. 128, 120, 129, 131, 87, 293 (Pons). For John of Monzon and Ximen de Labata see also Appendix below. Cart., nos. 2218, 2489.

134

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

Amand of Cabanes (Aveyron) headed the commandery of Toulouse in 1218. Fulcher of Bonas (Gers) was the commander of Manosque in 1232–35.8 Michael of La Seiye (Alpes-de-Haute-Provence) was the commander of Trinquetaille in 1216.9 It is important however to bear in mind that commanders were not elected by the members of their commanderies but appointed by provincial priors. By replacing them, for example, with more experienced brothers who had already served in other houses, the priors could implement policy changes or ensure a more efficient administration. For instance, Arnald of Campagnoles (Gard, Languedoc) was in charge of the Order’s houses in the lands of Béziers and Agde in 1190 and was made commander of Trinquetaille in 1198.10 Although we do not know the place of origin of Peter Helie, he too had served in several commanderies. He was the commander of Gap-Frances in the Midi in the late 1170s and of St. Gilles in 1198–1201.11 Like him, commanders were usually transferred and promoted within the confines of their own priories. Among brothers identified by their places of origin, Stephen of Broc (Maine-et-Loire), commander of St. Gilles in February 1216, is one of the few examples of a commander who came from a district under the control of the priory of France, but who served in a commandery in the priory of St. Gilles.12 Another example is G. of Ormes, from Normandy, who was the prior of St. Gilles in 1229.13 I could find no examples of French commanders transferred to the East, probably because commanders were administrators, perhaps with little or no experience in the arts of war, which was essential for a command in the Latin East. Heads of important commanderies were natural candidates for the post of prior. They had served for prolonged periods in local commanderies, were familiar with the area, knew the economic and political situation, and probably had personal links with local magnates. Bermond of Luzancion (Midi Pyrenees) was the commander of Trinquetaille from 1207 until at least 1209, before becoming prior of St. Gilles in February 1212.14 Raymond of Aiguille (Haute Loire) was the commander of St. Gilles in the 1190s and was promoted to prior of St. Gilles in 1200.15 John of Chevry was the vice-prior of France from 1269 before he replaced Philip of Egly as prior in 1272.16 An interesting, but also frustrating, result of this research is the absence of evidence of the previous posts of a number of these priors. Bertrand of 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Cart., nos. 2218, 1617, 2030, 2092, 2099. Cart., nos. 1460, 1464. Cart., nos. 893, 1011; Cart. Trinquetaille, passim. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 41, 71, 87, 90, 94, 123, 126, 312; Cart., no. 556. Cart., nos. 1460, 1464. The sources give only the first letter of his name. See Cart., no. 1934. Bermond was probably prior of St. Gilles from February 1212. In April 1214 he witnessed two charters issued in Tarsus. He was apparently removed from office, as in May 1217 he was commander of Manosque and in 1220–1230 commander of Avignon. See also Chapter 2 above, pp. 78–79, and Cart., no. 1258; Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 209, 219; Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 349–50; Cart., nos. 1320, 1375, 1426–27; Reynaud, La commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem, p. 199: Marseilles 56H 1281, fols. 29, 68, 75, 106–07, 110. 15 Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 61, 98, 108, 114, 134, 143, 269, 342; Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 94, 190; Cart., no. 1163. 16 Cart., nos. 3364, 3374, 3425, 3453, 3468, 3475, 3484; Cart. Fieffes (S5059), fol. 7; Cart. Éterpigny, fols. 27–28.

MEMBERS SERVING IN THE LATIN EAST AND IN FRENCH PRIORIES

135

Milhau (Midi Pyrenees), prior of St. Gilles in 1190–92,17 Peter of Faucon (Vaucluse), prior of St. Gilles in 1209,18 Philip of Egly, prior of France in the 1250s, and Robert of Montgronon, prior of Auvergne between 1261–1273, first appear already holding these offices.19 Since there is no mention of them in eastern documents, it is not clear whether they served in the East. If they did, they would have been only simple brothers. This lack of evidence can be partly explained by gaps in the sources, yet the fact that some provincial priors may have never been to the East is significant. The international deployment of the Order could function successfully only if the policies pursued by the priors in Europe coincided with those of the master and the convent in the Holy Land. To achieve this the Hospitallers tended to appoint to key offices, such as priors in Europe, brothers who had previously held posts in the East. These would have personal knowledge of the Order’s needs there, and they may have been involved in determining its policies together with the master. Leading figures in the Order throughout the thirteenth century served both in the Holy Land and in Europe.20 William of Villiers, who had been grand commander of the Order in 1192, was the grand commander of Outremer in 1193, prior of England in 1199, and prior of France in 1207.21 William Pijons was the commander of Cyprus in 1248 and the prior of France from 1253 until 1257.22 If Ferrand of Barras referred to in the sources is one individual, and not an uncle or nephew with the same name, he is an extraordinary example of a brother who held a wide range of high posts in Europe and the Holy Land. He was a simple brother in the priory of St. Gilles in 1180, castellan of Selefkie in April 1214, and marshal of the Order in Acre in 1221. He was appointed prior of St. Gilles in 1246 and served in this post until at least 1253. In 1259 he was appointed grand commander of Outremer, a post he held until at least June 1262. In February and June 1268 he appears again in the Order’s documents as prior of St. Gilles. He was by then very old, for which reason Pope Clement IV requested the master Hugh Revel to exempt him from travelling to the East to attend a general chapter.23 Because of their skills and experience many capitular bailiffs, like Ferrand, usually held a range of key positions in the Order’s administration. This was the case not only with the French priories but also with heads of other important priories and castellanies in Europe. The above-mentioned Ximen of Labata (or Lavata, Navarre) was the commander of Huesca in Aragon in 1198–1200. He was 17 18 19 20

21 22 23

Cart., nos. 926, 930, 937; Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 89, 169. Cart., no. 1317; Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 223; Recueil des Actes des Comtes de Provence appartenant à la maison de Barcelone, ed. F. Benoit, Paris, 1925, vol. I, no. 3. On Philip see Chapter 2 above, pp. 91–95. On Robert of Montrognon see Cart., nos. 2974, 3043, 3249, 3373; Cart. Velay, no. 57; AD du Rhône (antérieures), p. 158. Note, however, as Jochen Burgtorf has shown, that the careers of high dignitaries in the Hospital and the Temple did not always follow a clear-cut pattern. See his ‘Leadership and Structures in the Orders of the Hospital and the Temple (Twelfth and Early Fourteenth Century): Select Aspects’, The Crusades and the Military Orders: Expanding the Frontiers of Medieval Latin Christianity, ed. Z. Hunyadi and J. Laszlovszky, Budapest, 2001, pp. 383–86. Cart., nos. 919, 945, 1056, 1243, 1283. For William see also Chapters 1 and 2 above, pp. 15, 66, 78. On the grand commander of Outremer see Introduction above, p. 9. Cart., nos. 2482, 2648, 2811; Cart. Éterpigny, fols. 35–36, 107–108. Cart., nos. 578, 1426–27, 1718, 2419, 2481, 2570, 2604, 2645, 2923, 2965, 2986, 3035, 3301, 3308 (vol. IV). See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 280–81.

136

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

appointed castellan of Amposta in 1201 and was grand commander of Spain from 1205 to 1210. In 1205 he held both the castellany of Amposta and the priory of St. Gilles.24 Garcia of Lisa was probably a simple brother in Huesca in the early 1180s. In 1186 he was castellan of Amposta, a post he seems to have held for more than ten years. Next he was grand commander of Outremer, from 1196 until at least 1199.25 Aimery of Pax, who had been a commander at the Castellany of Amposta in 1200, held a number of posts in the East before he returned to Europe. He was castellan of Margat in 1206 and Selefkie in 1210. In 1215 he was back in Europe in the prestigious post of grand commander of Outremer.26 Although there were no specific requirements of magistral candidates, they were probably expected to have held priories in Europe and, most importantly, commanderies and castellanies in the East. Two examples could illustrate this point. Garnier of Nablus, a member of the Frankish family of Milly, which held the lordships of Nablus and Oultrejourdain, had a distinguished career before being elected master in late 1189 or 1190. He had been castellan of Bethgibelin from 1173 to 1176. He was then appointed grand commander of the Order, a post he held until 1184 or 1185, when he became prior of England. Before being elected master he held both the priory of England and France.27 On the other hand, Hugh Revel, considered one of the most remarkable masters of the thirteenth century, never held a high post in Europe. But he did have two of the most important offices in the East before being elected master in 1258: he was castellan of Crac de Chevaliers in 1243 and grand commander of the Order from 1253 to 1258. 28 No specific information has survived on the processes of recruitment or selection and training of forces destined for the East.29 Still, by tracking down the members of the Order and following their careers one can gain an idea of the mobilization of the Order’s forces to the East. The Hospitallers in the East needed brothers-in-arms, sergeants, and brothers-inservice, who were recruited in local commanderies and priories in Europe. The list of brothers serving in the Latin East hardly correlates with the list of those serving

24

25 26 27 28 29

Cart., nos. 989, 1014, 1112, 1150, 1165, 1220, 1228, 1319, 1321, 1356, 1357. At the same time a Simon of Lavata appeared in the Order’s documents as prior of Lombardy and Venice (August 1198). I do not believe this is the same man. In 1198 Ximen was only the head of a local commandery, not important enough in the Order’s hierarchy to hold a priory. Cart., no. 1026. Cart., nos. 588, 597–98, 820, 822, 835, 925, 1022, 1026, 1056–57; Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 263, 273. Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, p. 414. Cart., nos. 1114, 1232, 1349, 1355, 1444, 1450, 1459–60, 1464, 1484. Cart., nos. 443, 469, 755, 868–70, 917, 919. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 107–08; Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, pp. 105–06, 408–09, 416, 432. Cart., nos. 2296, 2662–63, 2693, 2714, 2732–33, 2801, 2810. From Cart., no. 2888 and passim he was the master. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 186–87. Basing his research mainly on the records of the Trial of the Templars, Forey has important findings on recruitment in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries. He also deals with the instruction of new recruits, mainly in religion. See A. Forey, ‘Recruitment to the Military Orders, Twelfth to mid-Fourteenth Centuries’, Viator, 17 (1986), pp. 142–62; ‘Novitiate and Instruction in the Military Orders in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries’, Military Orders and the Crusades, Aldershot, 1994, essay no. III, passim.

MEMBERS SERVING IN THE LATIN EAST AND IN FRENCH PRIORIES

137

in commanderies and priories in France. Simple brothers who appear from the outset in the East are not previously mentioned in documents relating to the Order in Europe. Considering the gaps in the sources, these findings suggest that many brothers who were meant for the Holy Land served for very short periods, or not at all, in European houses, before being shipped to the East. If the Peter of Mirmanda who appears in the sources is the same man, he is an exception to a brother serving in the East whose affiliation charter to his local commandery in Europe has survived. Peter joined the commandery of Alleyras (part of Le Puy en Velay) in 1163. He was a married man and his charter of affiliation includes, besides a donation of all his rights over property in Gourlong as an entry gift, the consent of his wife Willielma and his sons Odo and Stephen. We do not know how long he served in Alleyras or in any other commandery in Europe, but twenty years after he had entered the Order he witnessed, as a simple brother, a deed issued in Acre in 1184 and a year later he witnessed a deed issued in Jerusalem. As we shall see below, he must have been one of the survivers of Hattin, and in 1193 he was promoted to castellan of Crac, a post he held for at least six years. In 1202 he became grand commander of the Order.30 The rich information that survives for Peter’s career is an exception. Chassaing, who edited the cartulary of the Hospitallers in Le Puy en Velay, refers to a number of brothers who came from Auvergnais families and served in the East. Among them are very prominent figures such as Garin of Montaigu, master between 1207 and 1227. Garin does not appear in lists of witnesses in any of the French sources; if he served in his country of origin he apparently did not hold any important post there. He appears for the first time in deeds issued by the Order as a simple brother in Acre in 1204. He must had served there for a while because only three years later, in May 1207, he was appointed marshal, and in October that year he became master.31 Yet, the information we have on Peter is extraordinary. For many brothers no information has survived or is only fragmentary. A continuous flow of manpower from the Order’s houses in Europe was necessary for maintaining regular forces in the East, supplying troops for crusades and military campaigns, and replacing losses on the battlefield. The Hospitallers participated in all the important military operations in the Latin East. The Hospitallers and the Templars each deployed 2,000 men and 700 knights during the siege of Damietta in 1218. It is not clear how many brother-knights were among these forces, but the fewer these were, the heavier the expenses became owing to the cost of mercenaries.32 In fact, the Order seems to have kept only a restricted number of

30

For his affiliation charter see Cart. Velay, n. 16. On the fact that married men needed their wives’ consent to join the Order see Forey, The Military Orders, p. 137. 31 Cart. Velay, pp. LX–LXII. For Garin see Cart., nos. 1197–98, 1262, 1272, 1344, 1350 and passim. One should consider Chassaing’s list very cautiously. Carried away by ‘local patriotism’, he refers to other brothers, such as William of Châteauneuf, as Auvergnais, while there is no evidence that they actually originated there. On William’s origin see Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, p. 190. 32 On the Orders’ participation in the Fifth Crusade and for an assessment of the number of mercenaries employed by them see Chapter 1 above, p. 20.

138

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

brother-knights in the East, and when they suffered heavy losses they had to be promptly replaced.33 The two most severe instances of losses of manpower were the battles of Hattin in 1187 and La Forbie in 1244. The sources do not provide specific figures for the number of Hospitaller brothers killed during the battle of Hattin, and afterwards as their castles fell.34 However, their numbers can be assessed, and the Order’s mobilization of manpower from Europe for the East reconstructed, by tracing its members’ careers. Twenty-five brothers who served in the Latin East before Hattin have been identified by the toponyms they used. Some were simple brothers; others were castellans and commanders, which means that one might expect to find them later on in higher offices. Still, only few of these brothers appear again in the East after Hattin: Borrell, the grand commander of the Order was in Tyre by October 1187.35 Anselm of Lucca, who had been a simple brother in Syria in 1180, was in Acre in 1195 and was treasurer of the Order in 1201.36 Geoffrey of Donjon, who had been another simple brother in Syria in 1185, was master in 1193.37 Peter of Mirmanda, who had been a simple brother in Acre in 1184, was castellan of Crac in 1193 and grand commander of the Order in 1202.38 Apart from these brothers, for whom we have evidence of their service in the East before Hattin, a new group appears for the first time in documents relating to the Order in the East in the years following the battle. Some were simple brothers, for example, Bertrand of Pignan, Raymond Pierre, Robert of Capennum, and Hamo of Burgundy.39 Others appear from the outset as officers, for example, Geoffrey le Rat, commander of Antioch in 1198, castellan of Crac in 1204, and master in 1206.40 William of Villiers was commander of Acre in 1192, grand commander of Outremer in 1193, prior of England in 1199, and prior of France in 1207.41 Ralph of Loudun was commander of Tyre in January 1195.42 This research shows that the Order suffered heavy casualties during and after the battle of Hattin and that its leadership was decimated. Brothers were then quickly promoted and mobilized from the Order’s European houses to restore its shattered forces. The same methodology applied in the case of Hattin allows us to follow the Hospitallers’ response to the casualties they suffered on 17 October 1244 at La Forbie, where they lost 200 brother-knights.43 Here the Hospital’s conventual forces were almost annihilated, and massive mobilization in its European provinces followed. Matthew Paris describes how, after news of the disaster spread, the king of France, the Templars, and the Hospitallers quickly sent novice knights (milites

33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

See Chapter 1 above, p. 21 for the mobilization of the Templars and Hospitallers in Europe after the Templar defeat in Darbsak in 1237. On the implications of the defeat of Hattin see Chapter 1 above, p. 11. See Chapter 1 above, pp. 11–12. Cart., nos. 579, 972, 1031, 1145. Cart., nos. 754, 938 (first reference to Geoffrey as master). Cart., nos. 663, 754, 941, 1031, 1085, 1096, 1156. Cart., nos. 941, 972. Cart., nos. 1031, 1085, 1096, 1198, 1231. For William’s career see above, note 21. Cart., no. 972. On the implications of the defeat of La Forbie see Chapter 1 above, pp. 23–24.

MEMBERS SERVING IN THE LATIN EAST AND IN FRENCH PRIORIES

139

neophitos), together with an armed force and a large treasure, to console and help those living in the Holy Land, and to counter the daily attacks of the Khorezmians and other infidels.44 Twenty-two brothers who served in the East before La Forbie (1235–1244) have been identified by the toponyms they used. Although some were castellans and commanders, only a very few of them, as was the case with Hattin, appear again. Examples are John of Ronay, who was the commander of Tripoli in 1241 and lieutenant master in 1245, and William of Corceles, a simple brother in Acre in 1240 and marshal in 1248. Other important officers such as William of Fores, castellan of Margat in 1241, and Arnald of Montbrun, marshal in 1232 and castellan of Crac in 1241, whom one would expect to find later on in other posts, disappeared.45 On the other hand, a new group is found for the first time in the East. Some of them were simple brothers, which may indicate that they were new recruits. Adam of Herouville (from Calvados or Val-d’Oise) was a simple brother in Acre in 1248. So were Bernard of Rome, Hugh of Lorail, and Peter of Aleage.46 Some of these were promoted later. Aimery of la Roche (from Drôme or Rhône) was a simple brother in Acre in August 1248 and became castellan of Crac in 1254.47 Joscelin of Tornell, who was probably young, appearing for the first time as a simple brother in Acre in August 1248, was promoted to castellan of Mt. Thabor in 1254 and marshal in 1262. Other brothers appear from the outset as officers, such as the commanders of Tyre, Tripoli, Antioch, and Cyprus, and the castellan of Margat. Martin Sanche was probably also a simple brother before La Forbie, because there is no record of his name prior to his appearance in the sources as commander of Tripoli in February 1248. In August that year he was the drapier of the Order.48 To conclude, although most of the brothers served in local commanderies in Europe and were never sent to the East, the Hospitallers must also have had a reservoir of brother-knights in the West which permitted prompt mobilization from there after defeats in the East. Their ability to redeploy their forces must have enhanced the value of the Hospitallers and the Templars for the crusading armies.

44 45

Matthew Paris, vol. IV, p. 416. For John of Ronay, Cart., nos. 2289, 2353, 2471, 2482, 2483; William of Corcelles, Cart., nos. 2245, 2482, and Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 143; William of Fores, Cart., no. 2280; Arnald of Montbrun, Cart., nos. 2034, 2067, 2245, 2280. 46 Cart., no. 2482. 47 Cart., nos. 2482, 2670, 2693. 48 Cart., nos. 2482, 2934, 3045. Richard, ‘Le comté de Tripoli’, p. 373, no. 4. Cart., no. 2482 has a list of witnesses which contains the names of all these officers. Unfortunately many of them are just first names, without toponyms, which makes them unidentifiable.

CONCLUSION

Conclusion THIS BOOK has examined the reaction of the Hospitallers, as an international order of the Church, to crises in the Latin East. These crises included defeat on the battlefield, the loss of castles and towns, and natural disasters; they could be so severe as to impel the Order to change its policies or re-deploy its international resources. The defeat of the Christians at the battle of Hattin resulted in the almost complete devastation of the Hospitallers’ military disposition and economy in the Levant. They lost most of their castles, agricultural lands, and urban properties. Although appeals were sent to the West after the battle asking for help, one of the main difficulties in attempting to identify the Hospitallers’ needs is that most of the letters were general in nature and did not include specific requests. Most of these letters emphasized, however, the huge casualties suffered by the Christians at Hattin and the superior size of the Muslim forces indicating that one of the Order’s main needs was manpower. The huge mobilisation from its European provinces reflects the heavy losses suffered in the East. The defeat also prompted changes in the Order’s leadership in the East and in Europe. Immediately after Hattin the Hospitallers formed a temporary governing body in Tyre, composed of surviving conventual officers and of European officers rapidly dispatched to the East to replace those killed. This temporary leadership was replaced by a permanent one following the establishment of the Order’s headquarters in Acre after the city was recovered in July 1191. Although after Hattin manpower was the first priority, a significant change in the approach of the Order’s priories and commanderies in France to lands and property suggests that they also supplied money and provisions. I have shown that the needs of the Order in the East led to a change in its economic policy in the West, as illustrated by the changes in the economic activities of the Order’s commanderies and priories in France. Compared with the period before Hattin these French houses made very few investments in land and property, and engaged largely in renting out property. They were more concerned with transferring cash to the East than in expanding their estates. The impact of Hattin was overwhelming. Not only did it result in a redeployment of the Order’s military forces and affect its economy in the East and in Europe, but it also led to further institutional changes. To ensure that the activities of the provinces in Europe met the brothers’ needs in the Levant, the master reintroduced the grand commandery of Outremer in 1193. At its head he placed William of Villiers, a brother who until this appointment had been the grand commander of the Order in Acre, the master’s second in command. Other experi-

CONCLUSION

141

enced officers who had served in key positions in the Order’s administration in the East, and had therefore personal knowledge of its needs, were also sent to Europe. Hattin was also the catalyst for the final recognition of the Hospital as a Military Order. In their effort to rehabilitate their economy and military power after the battle the Hospitallers sought the assistance of European leaders and the papacy. In recognition of its military functions and its charitable activity, papal bulls were issued to protect the Order and to reinforce it with a wide range of privileges. Aware of the Order’s critical situation in the East the papacy encouraged the faithful to help it, supported Hospitaller preaching, and was responsible for the propagation of information regarding the state of the Latin settlements and the situation of the Military Orders in the East. Innocent III and his successor Honorius III, who promoted and organized a crusade to the East, were aware of the needs of the Order, which they integrated with their crusade machinery: that was to report to the curia about the situation in the East, assist crusader preaching, and advise on the distribution of funding to crusaders and the settlers. Furthermore, the Hospitallers and the Templars were also responsible for the collection of papal taxation imposed on the Church from which, however, it appears they were exempted because of their devotion to the defence of the Christians in the East. The Hospitallers played an important part in all the crusades that were sent to the Near East during the thirteenth century. This, however, required more men, together with money for the employment of mercenaries, the building of war machines, and the general maintenance of their forces. Because of the expenses the Order incurred during the Fifth Crusade Honorius III supported its fund-raising campaign in Europe. Large amounts of money were also necessary for the repair of their main castles and buildings after the earthquake of 1202. Cash was also needed to rebuild their economy in the Levant. This rehabilitation consisted of buying and leasing properties and large tracts of land in Palestine and Syria. This search for new lands and agricultural products spread throughout the eastern Mediterranean coast, to include Cilician Armenia as well as Cyprus. One of the most important features of the Hospitallers’ presence in the Latin East during the thirteenth century was their determination to rebuild their economy and to restore their military disposition despite successive adversities. One would have expected that in order to supply the brothers in the East with the necessary cash the Hospitallers in France would maintain the policy of economic retrenchment they seem to have adopted after Hattin. Yet one of the most interesting results of this research is the finding of a conspicuous change in the policy of the French priories and commanderies on land and property from the beginning of the thirteenth century. They became involved in an intensive policy of investment aimed at expanding their patrimony. This policy is most evident in areas which enjoyed an economic boom, such as Champagne, Forez and Provence. This activity might be interpreted as suiting the commanderies’ local economic interests. One of the aims of my work, however, has been to take the discussion away from the local level and to consider the implications which the economic policies pursued by priories and commanderies in Europe had on the Order’s resources and manpower as a whole. Studying the financial approach of these commanderies can help us to understand their ability to support the convent in the East. The prosperity of the French commanderies at the beginning of the thirteenth

142

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

century allowed money and supplies to be shipped to the Holy Land. The Hospitallers had by then their own fleet and built vessels in important ports of embarkation, such as Marseilles. The importance of this port increased in the 1220s and 1230s with Frederick II’s confiscation of the Order’s properties in Sicily, the main region supplying the Holy Land. Yet although there is evidence that the expansion of the Hospitallers’ commanderies in France still permitted the shipment of supplies to the East, it is surprising that they were investing intensively at a time when the convent in the East was in need of significant amounts of cash. As was the case after Hattin, shortage of cash in the East should have resulted in the liquidation of property in Europe rather than long-term investments, but this was not the case. I thought at first that the activities pursued by the French priories were opposed to the interests of the master and the brothers in the East. The new disposition of the Order’s leadership in Europe and the assembly of the general chapter, which I have identified as taking place in 1225, and which may have resulted in the creation of a new priory, seemed to point in that direction. The master could assemble priors from all the provinces to discuss and evaluate the Order’s policies and, if it was deemed necessary he could demand that the priors make changes in policy, as we have seen was the case at the general chapter of 1262. But if the economic policies of the French priories at the beginning of the thirteenth century had been opposed to the general policy dictated by the master in the Holy Land, we should have seen changes in the economic policy of these houses in the wake of the general chapter. The opposite is the case. No changes seem to have been implemented. Large investments were still being made after the reshuffling of the Order’s leadership in Europe and even after the appointment of a new grand commander of Outremer. This seems to indicate that the economic policy of the French priories was after all in accord with that of the master and the convent in the Holy Land. It is noteworthy that the intensive investments of the Hospitallers in France coincided with heavy investments in land and property made by the brothers in the East. All this activity may be seen as an expression of the Order’s general policy of expansion in the first half of the thirteenth century. The revenues of the French priories were perhaps large enough to allow it to both expand in France and support its headquarters, but the strength of the Hospitallers’ economy in the Latin East may also have been underestimated: they had independent sources of income there. By the beginning of the thirteenth century Acre had become a major trading centre, and the kingdom of Jerusalem was enjoying economic prosperity. The Latin East was the major exporter of sugar to Europe. As this work has shown, the Hospitallers owned sugar-cane plantations along the Palestinian and Syrian coasts and made enormous efforts throughout the thirteenth century to enlarge them and keep them under cultivation. Although we need more evidence we may assume, from the Hospitallers’ intense involvement in industrial sugar production, that they traded the commodity on local or international markets, perhaps with high profits. The defeat of the Christians at La Forbie in 1244 was another massive blow to the Hospitallers’ military deployment in the Holy Land. They lost territory, including the castle of Ascalon, which they had refortified only that year, and they endured a severe shortage of food because of Khorezmian raids. Although their territorial losses were not as severe as after Hattin, their casualties were immense. The prosopographical research that I have conducted concerning the brothers

CONCLUSION

143

serving in the Holy Land during this period has shown that their conventual manpower was almost completely annihilated, and that most of their commanders and castellans must have been killed. These losses were rapidly replaced by brothers sent from Europe, who took part just four years later in the Egyptian crusade of St. Louis. The Order’s rapid mobilization of manpower after La Forbie and its participation in this crusade emphasizes its commitment to a continuous recruitment of brothers and their dispatch to the East along with money for their maintenance and for the employment of mercenaries. In their efforts to restore their forces after La Forbie and the failed crusade to Egypt the Hospitallers in the East appealed for help to the pope and their European priories. However, they encountered obstacles in both cases. The political struggle between the Holy See and the Western emperor affected the popes’ relations with the Hospitallers. During the pontificate of Gregory IX the Hospitallers supported Frederick II, critical of the policies conducted by the pope in the Holy Land. The price they paid for their disobedience was heavy. Gregory seems to have withdrawn his support from the Hospitallers, to whom he had issued at the beginning of his pontificate a large number of grants, including extraordinary privileges such as plenary indulgences to those knights who had fought with them in the Holy Land. His anger at the Order’s behaviour is apparent from his letters and from the strong support he gave to the Templars, his loyal allies in the struggle against Frederick and his representatives in the East. The political struggle in Europe had grave implications for the situation of the Latin settlement. Although the papacy was aware of the difficulties faced by the Order in the East and granted it money collected from the redemption of crusading vows in the West, the struggle in Europe between the pope and the Western emperor had priority over the needs of the Christians in the East. The popes diverted resources and crusaders away from the Holy Land to other theatres, and prevented the Latins from making connections with their political opponents, from whom the Latins could have obtained much needed help. Innocent IV’s policy against Frederick II hindered any possibility of future assistance. At the same time that papal support waned the Hospitaller houses in France were experiencing financial strain. Evidence of this is a sharp decline in the number of acts in their cartularies. It is true that only very few of the surviving cartularies cover the years after 1250, but even those with material for later years show a drastic decline in the number of charters. This decline was not typical only of the Hospitallers. It was shared by other Military Orders and could be attributed mainly to economic changes in Europe. From the second half of the thirteenth century, acute inflation severely affected regions essential for the supply of responsiones to the East. The houses in these regions were under enormous pressure: they had to match their revenues with the rising cost of living at a time when their incomes from donations were diminishing because of the impoverishment of the local nobility. They also had to respond to increasing demands from the East. From 1250 to 1263, however, the Hospitallers expanded their patrimony in the Holy Land. Lay and ecclesiastical lords, who were in debt and no longer able to keep their lands, sold or leased castles and land, mainly in the Galilee and along the coast; likewise their urban properties. It is noteworthy that the Hospitallers were making these investments at about the same time as their income in the East seems

144

THE HOSPITALLERS AND THE HOLY LAND

to have been affected by the Mongol invasion, the civil war, and the decline of Acre as a centre of international trade. The Order’s determination to expand its positions in the East required cash, which was also much needed to maintain its fortifications and to engage mercenaries, with a Mongol invasion imminent. Many letters of appeal from the Order’s leadership to the West refer to the need for cash. This need was also the cause of the Hospitallers’ clash with the ecclesiastical authorities in the Holy Land over the money collected from the redemption of crusading vows in the kingdom of Jerusalem; which resulted in their excommunication. To meet these expenditures in the East more pressure was put on their priories in Europe. Faced with these increasing demands from headquarters and financial difficulties at home, the French priories were forced to borrow money and alienate their property. This was an international crisis. Other provinces, such as the priories in the Iberian peninsula and England, which was an important area of supplies to the East, seem to have faced similar difficulties. Their reaction was like that of the French priories; they liquidated property or pledged it as security for loans. The disposal of property was a threat to the future ability of these houses to send responsiones to the East, and both the papacy and the master had taken steps to stop such alienations. From 1250 on the papacy ordered the local clergy world-wide, in an increasing number of letters, to revoke alienation of property made by Hospitallers’ priories and commanderies. In 1262 the master Hugh Revel convened a general chapter, which in an attempt to settle this crisis adopted a long-term economic policy. Pointing out that transactions made by the Hospitallers’ houses in Europe had resulted in losses, the chapter forbade the alienation of their property. The legislation of 1262 is very important because it is one of the few surviving records of decrees legislated by the chapter regarding international issues. Our possession of evidence of a definite policy also allows us to examine the applicability of institutional decisions taken by the master and the chapter in the Holy Land. It is particularly interesting to examine their ability to implement changes in policy in the 1260s and the 1270s when the situation of the Order in the East and its financial situation in Europe were deteriorating rapidly: by 1271 the Latin settlers’ situation was like that after Hattin. The Mamluks in ceaseless incursions took all the castles that defended the kingdom of Jerusalem, and the Latins were besieged in a few towns along the coast. Although the Hospitallers lost all their castles except for Margat and with them all their dependent lands, they made huge efforts to expand their lands and keep them under cultivation. And yet, Baybars’ incursions were aimed not only at conquering Christian territory but also at exhausting the Latins by raiding and devastating their lands. This, as Hugh Revel’s letter reveals, made any attempt to work the lands almost impossible; from the late 1260s the Hospitallers were almost completely dependent on supplies from Europe. This work has shown, however, that at a time when help was most needed some of the Order’s most important priories in Europe were unable to supply the East. From the pontificate of Urban IV, moreover, the crusade against the Hohenstaufen was given clear priority over the needs of the Christians in the Holy Land. Crusaders and resources were diverted to support Charles of Anjou’s campaigns in southern Italy. The papacy also involved the Hospitallers in this struggle. The Military Orders were required, for the first time, to pay the taxation imposed on the Church to finance Charles’s crusade. Clement IV intervened in the appointment of

CONCLUSION

145

Philip of Egly, prior of France, as the officer in charge of the Order’s houses in the Regno and incited the Hospitallers to take up arms against Charles’s opponents in Sicily. For this cause Philip exhausted the Order’s resources in the Regno and most probably in the priory of France. His involvement in this political struggle exemplifies the difficulties faced by headquarters in controlling the activities of the priors overseas. These officers were leading figures in Europe and managed enormous resources and manpower. Because of the nature of the Order, which gave them great freedom of action, there was always a danger that they would pursue policies opposed to the interests of the Hospitallers in the East, with, moreover, severe implications for the priories’ ability to provide responsiones. It was the task of the master to ensure that these European priories did not function as independent identities, but as part of an international organization, whose main commitment was to the Holy Land. To achieve this aim was sometimes impossible because events in international politics, as Philip’s case has shown, were beyond his control. Attempts made by Hugh Revel to remove Philip of Egly from office were thwarted by Clement IV, who, because of pressure put on him by Charles of Anjou, also ignored the Order’s appeals for exemption from papal taxation. In these circumstances the decree of 1262, which had tried to prevent the alienation of the Order’s property, became impossible to enforce. Faced with financial difficulties, increasing demands from the headquarters in the East, and demands for money to finance Charles’s campaigns, the priories in Europe continued to liquidate their property and take up loans. By the time of the Second Council of Lyons the Hospitallers were suffering an economic crisis and needed urgent help. Many of the council’s participants failed, however, to understand these needs. They perceived the Order as a rich institution, capable, if it only wished, of drawing large resources from its European priories to help the Latin East. They saw the Hospitallers’ appeals for help as no more than expression of the aggressive economic policy pursued by the brothers. This criticism was made not only by the Order’s contemporaries but also by modern historians. It had been claimed that the Military Orders exploited the catastrophes in the East to promote their own interests, which were not always similar to those of the Christian settlers in the East, and that the Orders conducted there independent and jealous policies.1 It is true that the Military Orders made huge propaganda efforts to promote themselves in Europe and that they had been involved in disputes that had adversely affected the situation of the Christians in the East. Yet far from being uninterested in the fate of the Latin settlements, this book has shown that they were determined to maintain the Christian presence in the East and, mainly from the 1250s, they were the only elements still capable of defending it. To fulfil these tasks, however, they needed large amounts of money and resources, which they found more and more difficult to provide.

1

Lloyd, English Society and the Crusade, p. 26; Throop, Criticism of the Crusades, p. 238.

Appendix Members of the Order Serving in the Latin East and in the French Priories from 1187 to 1274 From studying the Order’s sources I was able to draw up a list of brothers serving in the Latin East and the French priories for the period 1187–1274. However, although these findings are crucial for an understanding of the ways the Order made use of its human resources, these lists, due to gaps in the sources, are not comprehensive. They only include those brothers whose names I encountered in the documents and for whom we have clear identification. This means that brothers whose first name only survived are not included.1 I have divided these findings according to the brothers’ places of service and have therefore compiled four lists: brothers serving in the Latin East; and in the priories of France, St. Gilles, and Auvergne. I have argued above that most of the brothers did not serve in the East but in commanderies and priories in Europe.2 It is worth mentioning that the discrepancy in the number of brothers serving in different priories in France is not necessarily the result of a specific policy of recruitment conducted by the Order at the time, but reflects the number of sources which have survived. An attempt has been made to trace the brothers’ places of origin according to their toponyms. If found, the place is given next to their names (for ‘French’ brothers according to the departmental division of modern France). Then their position in the Order is stated, and their appointments in chronological order. The sources quoted follow the sequence of the brothers’ posts. For brothers who held very high positions, for example masters, and who appear many times in the documents, I have given their first and last appearance in that

1

I have included, however, brothers for whom only their first name remained, followed by a cognomen. Some cognomina, as Jochen Burgtorf has suggested, could be indicative of the brothers’ functions in the Order (de Palacio, de Capella, thesaurarios, pincerna, and de Domibus were titles of officials at headquarters: the master’s chamberlain, chaplain, cupbearer, and the brother responsible for the administration of the Order’s real estate in and around Acre). See J. Burgtorf, ‘Wind Beneath the Wings: Subordinate Headquarters Officials in the Hospital and the Temple from the Twelfth and Early Fourteenth Centuries’, The Military Orders, vol. 2, Welfare and Warfare, ed. H. Nicholson, Aldershot, 1998, 217–24. Although the study of cognomina fell outside the scope of my research, future study of other cognomina (such as Pellifex, Candelarius, or Mercaderius) could reveal other functions of the brothers or their profession before entering the Order. 2 See Chapter 4 above, pp. 133–34.

LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE ORDER

147

post. As has been stated elsewhere, many brothers appear for the first time already holding an office; there is no evidence of their previous appointments.3 Brothers for whom there is specific evidence that they served both in the East and in Europe are identified by an asterisk (*) next to their names. The list contains brothers who served between 1187 and 1274. Survivors of Hattin and its aftermath in the East are identified by the abbreviation ‘Hatt.’ Dates are given in the form month/year, so 2/1216 is February 1216.

Brothers Serving in the Latin East Adam of Herouville: Probably French, from Calvados or Val-d’Oise. Simple brother in Acre in 8/1248. Cart. no. 2482. Aimery of Pax*: Commander of Amposta in 4/1200, castellan of Margat in 1206, castellan of Selefkie in 8–9/1210, grand commander of Outremer in 8/1215–3/1216. Cart., nos. 1114, 1232, 1349, 1355, 1444, 1450, 1459, 1460, 1464, 1484. Aimery of la Roche: Simple brother in Acre in 8/1248 and castellan of Crac 3,9/1254. Cart., nos. 2482, 2670, 2693. Albert Almano: Simple brother in Acre in 10/1267. Cart., no. 3283. Albert le Romain: Marshal of the Order in 7/1204. Cart., no. 1197. Albert Roiraid: Commander of Selefkie in 8,9/1210. Cart., nos. 1349, 1355. Alfonso of Portugal*: Master. Probably the son of King Alfonso I of Portugal. There is no evidence for his previous career. He seems to have been elected master while in France in 1203. Served as master in the Holy Land from 1204 to 1206. Cart., nos. 1167, 1232; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 119–20. Andrew Polin (Poliner, Polm)*: Grand commander of the Order in 11/1235, prior of France probably from 1239 to 1248. Cart., no. 2126; RRH, no. 1063 (for Andrew as grand commander in Acre); Cart., nos. 2219, 2231, 2240, 2271, 2275, 2295, 2338, 2356, 2413, 2398, 2425, 2458, 2444, 2457, 2464, 2468, 2474; El gran priorado de Navarra, vol. II, no. 304 (prior of France). A brother named André Polin appears as a witness, without title, in a document issued in Tripoli in 11/1241, Cart., no. 2280; RRH, no. 1102. Anselm of Lucca (Hatt.): Tuscany. Simple brother in Acre in 1/1180, 1/1195, 8/1198. The Order’s treasurer in 1201. Cart., nos. 579, 972, 1031, 1145–46. Armengaud of Asp*: Temporary Master. Castellan of Amposta from 1180 until 1183. From 1184 he held both the castellany of Amposta and the priory of St. Gilles. Charged with the temporary administration of the Order after the loss of the master Roger of Moulins at the battle of Sephoria (1 May 1187). See Cart., nos. 586–88, 592, 597, 601, 619, 677, 765, 781, 818, 820, 822, 829, 835, 860, 863, 871, 901; RRH, nos. 665–66, 676; Cart. St. Gilles, p. XIX; Luttrell, ‘Ermengol de Aspa and Sigena’ (Aldershot, forthcoming); Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 106–07. See also Chapter 1 above, pp. 11–12.

3

See Chapter 4 above, pp. 134–35.

148

APPENDIX

Arnald of Arene: Probably from Orange (Vaucluse). Prior of the church of Crac in 8/1247. Cart., no. 2456, and Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 431. Arnald of Montbrun: Probably from Montbrun-les-Bains, Drôme. Simple brother in Acre in 10/1232, marshal in 10/1233, without title in Acre in 1240 and castellan of Crac in 11/1241. Cart., nos. 2034, 2067, 2245, 2280. Aymar of Layron: Marshal in 2/1216 or 1217. Was captured and probably killed in the attack on Burlus in 1220, during the Fifth Crusade. Cart., no. 1462; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 315. See also Chapter 1 above, p. 20. Beatrice (daughter of Joscelin III of Edessa. Wife of Otto, count of Hinneberg): Consoror, 10/1208. Cart., no. 1313. Bernard Corbel: Infirmarian in Acre in 8/1248. Cart., no. 2482. Bernard of Fabrègue: Aveyron. Simple brother in Acre in 8/1219. Cart., no. 1656. Bernard of Rome: Simple brother in Acre in 8/1248. Cart., no. 2482. Bertrand of Avignon: Commander of Tripoli in 8/1198. Cart., no. 1031. Betrand of Avignon: Simple brother in Tripoli in 1204. Cart., no. 1198. Bertrand of Comps*: Var. Master. Simple brother in the East in 2/1216–17. Cart., no. 1462. Prior of St. Gilles from 1231 until at least 1234. First appearance as prior Cart., no. 2006, last no. 2079. Master from 9/1236. Cart., nos. 2150, 2224. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 174–75. Bertrand of Pignan: Simple brother in the Holy Land in 1/1193. Cart., no. 941. Bertrand of Rochebaron: Simple brother in Acre in 3/1266. Cart., no. 3213. Bertrand of Thessy: Master. There is no information to his place of origin or previous career. Master from 1228 to 1231. Cart., nos. 1959, 1990; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 164–65. Bohemond III of Antioch: Confrater. 9/1193. Cart., no. 948. Boniface of Calamandracen: Grand commander of the Order from 11/1266 to 6/1271. Cart., nos. 3236, 3292, 3422. Borrell (Hatt.): Commander of Jerusalem (grand commander of the Order) in 2/1186, 7,10/1187, 5,10/1188 (in Tyre). Cart., nos. 783, 860; RRH, nos. 649, 659, 665, 675, 677. Durand of Soreis: commander of the Hospital in Acre in 11/1235. He appeared again without a title in 4/1239. Cart., nos. 2126, 2224. Ferrand of Barras*: Simple brother in the priory of St. Gilles in 1180. Castellan of Selefkie in 4/1214. Marshal in 1221. Prior of St. Gilles in 1246, 7/1248, 7/1251, 5/1252, 6/1253. Grand commander of Outremer in 7/1259, 11/1260, 5/1261, 6/1262. Prior of St. Gilles again in 2,6/1268. Cart., nos. 578, 1426–27, 1718, 2419, 2481, 2570, 2604, 2645, 2923, 2965, 2986, 3035, 3301, 3308 (vol. IV). See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 280–81. Fulcher Bremond: Simple brother in Acre in 7/1204 and 12/1207. Cart., nos. 1197, 1276. Fulcher of Warviller: Somme. Simple brother in Antioch in 8/1203. RRH. no. 792a. Garcia of Rospide: Simple brother in Acre in 6,7/1255. Cart., no. 2747. Garcia Semens: Simple brother in Acre in 12/1262. Cart., no. 3045. Garin of Montaigu: From an Auvergnais family. Master. Simple brother in Acre in 1204. Marshal of the Order in 1206. Master from 1207 to 1227. Cart., nos.

LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE ORDER

149

1197–98, 1262. First appearance as master no. 1272, last 1861. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 155–56. Garnier of Nablus*: Member of the Frankish family of Milly, lords of Nablus and Oultrejourdain. Master. Castellan of Bethgibelin from 1173 until 1176. Grand commander of the Order from 1176 to 1184 or 1185. Prior of England and grand prior of France from 1189 to late 1189, the year he was elected to master and served until 1190. See Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, pp. 409, 415, 426, 432, and Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 107–8. Gars Asmaldi: Treasurer of the commandery of Antioch in 10/1209. Cart., no. 1336. Gautier of Braholget: Simple brother in the seige of Acre in 10/1190. Cart., no. 900. Geoffrey of Andabila: Simple brother in Tyre in 10/1188. Cart., no. 860. Geoffrey of Auvergne: Simple brother in Acre in 3/1266. Cart., no. 3213. Geoffrey of Belmont: Simple brother in Antioch in 8/1203. RRH, no. 792a. Geoffrey of Donjon (Hatt.): Master. Simple brother in Acre in 4/1185. May have been treasurer and grand commander of the Order before he became master in 1193. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 117. Geoffrey of Reillanne: Alpes-de-Haute-Provence. Vice-marshal of the Order in 4/1256, but appeared again in the Order’s documents in 10/1259 without title. Cart., nos. 2810, 2934–35. Geoffrey le Rat: Master. Commander of Antioch from 8/1198 to at least 9/1199. Castellan of Crac in 12/1204. Master from 1206. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 155–56. George of Laodicea: Confrater. 11/1250. Cart., no. 2545. Gerard of Domus: Brother in Acre in 2/1255 and 4/1260. Cart., nos. 2714, 2949. Gilles Gerald: Garin of Montaigu’s delegate to the papal curia in 5/1221. Cart., no. 1725. Girent Dedolue: Simple brother in Tripoli in 5/1205. Cart., no. 1262. Guerin: Master. There is no evidence for his place of origin or previous career. Master from 1231 to 1236. First appearance Cart., no. 1983, last 2141. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 165. Guizard (Guitard) of Lentinum: Marshal of the Order in 10/1259. Cart., no. 2934. Hamo of Burgundy: Simple brother in Acre in 1/1195. Cart., no. 972. Helias of La Tour: Simple brother, probably in Selefkie in 6/1210 and 4/1214. Cart., nos. 1349, 1427. Henry of Arena: Simple brother in Antioch in 8/1203. RRH, no. 792a. Henry of Furstenberg*: Grand commander of the Order in 10/1259 and in 12/1262. Grand commander of Germany in 1263 (present in Acre at that time). Cart., nos. 2935–36, 3045, 3047. Hugh Revel: Probably a Dauphinois. Master. Castellan of Crac in 5/1243. Grand commander of Acre from 1253 at least until 1256. Master from 1258 until 1276. Cart., no. 2296. First appearance as grand commander no. 2662, last no. 2810. First appearance as master no. 2888, last 3621. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 186. Hugh of Durban: Simple brother in Acre in 3/1266. Cart., no. 3213.

150

APPENDIX

Hugh of Lardarolium: Simple brother, probably in Acre, in 10/1267. Cart., no. 3283. Hugh of Lorail: Simple brother in Acre in 8/1248. Cart., no. 2482. Hugh of Masmolène: Gap. Simple brother. Witnessed two charters given in Tarsus in 4/1214. Cart., nos. 1426–27. Hugh of Reims: Marne. Simple brother in Antioch in 8/1203. RRH, no. 792a. Hugh of Ruillieu: Simple brother in Acre in 3/1266. Cart., no. 3213. Hugh of Vendac: Simple brother in the Holy Land in 8/1265. Cart., no. 3120. Humbert ‘le blunde’: Simple brother. Witnessed two charters given in Tarsus in 4/1214. Cart., nos. 1426–27. Isembard*: Prior of France in 4/1201, 1203, 4/1212. Cart., nos. 1145, 1167, 1382. Grand commander of the Order in Acre in 2/1207 or 1208 and 1219. Cart., nos. 1250, 1276, 1656. Grand commander of Outremer in 2/1211 and in 10/1222. Cart., nos. 1360, 1758. Appears without title in two charters given in Tarsus in 4/1214. Cart., nos. 1426–27. It is possible that different Isembards held these offices. Delaville Le Roulx, however, identified them as the same man. See index of Delaville Le Roulx cartulary. See also Chapter 2 above, pp. 66, 77. John of Bubie: Castellan of Crac in 8/1248. Castellan of Margat in 3,9/1254. Cart., nos. 2482, 2670, 2693. John of Lunel: Hérault. Simple brother in Acre in 3/1266. Cart., no. 3213. John of Malengh: Master esquire of the Order in 8/1248. Also mentioned without title in 5,12/1255. Cart., nos. 2482, 2714, 2732. John of Montgrison: Simple brother in Tripoli in 11/1241. Cart., no. 2280. John of Ronay: Commander of Tripoli in 11/1241. Grand commander of the Order and vice-prior from at least 3/1245 until 11/2/1249 when he was killed during the retreat from al-Mansurah. Cart., nos. 2280, 2353, 2471, 2482–83. For the circumstances of his death see Chapter 1 above, p. 25. John of Vileloup: Simple brother in Acre in 3/1266. Cart., no. 3213. John l’Alemann, Lord of Caesarea: Confrater. 6/1255. Cart., no. 2738. Joscelin of Tornell: Le Tournel, Lozère. Simple brother in Acre in 8/1248, 3/1254, 6,7/1255. Castellan of Mt. Thabor in 10/1259. Marshal of the Order in 12/1262. Cart., nos. 2482, 2670, 2747, 2934–36, 3045. Joseph of Chauncy*: Probably English. Treasurer of the Order from 1248 until 1271. Prior of England from 1273. First appearance as treasurer Cart., no. 2482, last 3439. As prior no. 3518. See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, p. 312. Marin Mazuc: Genoese. Confrater. 4/1201. Cart., no. 1145. Martin Dandres: Simple brother in Acre or Tripoli in 2/1216–17. Cart., no. 1462. Martin Goceauve: Appears as ‘preceptor’ in the provincial chapter of January 1193 but without title in 1/1195. Cart., nos. 941, 972. Martin of Chiambri: Commander of Cyprus in 9/1254. Cart., no. 2693. Martin Sanche: Commander of Tripoli in 2/1248 (Richard, ‘Le comté de Tripoli’, p. 373). Drapier of the Order in Acre in 8/1248. Cart., no. 2482. Nicholas Lorgne: Master. He may had been Castellan of Margat c.1250 and later Castellan of Crac. Marshal in the second half of 1260 and in 10/1273. Grand commander of Acre in 1271. Commander of Tripoli from 5/1275 and master from 1278 to 1283. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 189–90. Nicholas of Valdieu: Simple brother in Jaffa in 12/1252. Cart., no. 2634.

LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE ORDER

151

Odo of Armenia: Simple brother in Acre in 1240. Cart., no. 2245. Odo of Pins: Drapier of the Order in 10/1273. Cart., no. 3519. Otthon, count of Hinneberg: Confrater (married to Beatrice, daugther of Joscelin III of Edesa). 10/1208. Cart., no. 1313 (charter issued in Acre). Peter Arez: Simple brother in Armenia in 4/1214. Cart., no. 1426. Peter Bega: Simple brother in Acre in 5/1255. Cart., no. 2732. Peter Chavanele: Simple brother in Tripoli in 2/1248. Richard, ‘Le comté de Tripoli’, p. 373. Peter Galus: Simple brother in Antioch in 10/1209. Cart., no. 1336. Peter of Aleage: Simple brother in Acre in 8/1248. Cart., no. 2482. Peter of Ate: Simple brother in the siege of Acre in 10/1190. Cart., no. 900. Peter of Biaune: Marshal of the Order. Died in 6/1254. ‘ATS’, p. 446. Peter of Campignolles: Simple brother in Acre in 7/1204. Cart., no. 1197. Peter of Escurai: Castellan of Margat in 8/1198, 6/1199, 9/1199. Cart., nos. 1031, 1085, 1096. Peter of Garamont: Garin of Montaigu’s delegate to the papal curia in 5/1221. Cart., no. 1725. Peter of Hayem: Hospitalier of the Order c.1263 to 1269. Cart., no. 3047. Peter of Mirmanda (Hatt.)*: For place of origin, personal background and his career in the Order see Chapter 4 above, p. 138. Joined the commandery of Alleyras (part of Puy en Velay) in 1163. Simple brother in Acre in 1184 and in Jerusalem in 4/1185. Castellan of Crac in 1/1193, 8/1198, 6/1199. Grand commander of the Order in Acre in 1202. Cart. Velay, n. 16. Cart., nos. 663, 754, 941, 1031, 1085,1096, 1156; RRH, no. 787b. Peter of Oltremon: Simple brother in Acre in 3/1266. Cart., no. 3213. Peter of Sardines: Turcopolier of the Order in 8/1248. Cart., no. 2482. Peter of Vieille Bride: Master. Probably originated from Auvergne. Simple brother in Tripoli or Acre in 2/1216–17. Grand commander in 6/1237, 12/1238 and 4/1239. Master from 1240. Died on 17/9/1243. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 174–80. Peter of Vieille Bride: Probably from Auvergne. Simple brother in Acre in 12/1253. Cart., no. 2662. Peter ‘Parvus’: Simple brother in Acre 8/1219. Cart., no. 1656. Philip of Egly*: Prior of France in 1,2/1250. Cart., no. 2514. In Acre, without title, in 1256. Cart., no. 2810. Prior of France for the second time in 12/1260, 6/1261, 2/1262. Cart., nos. 2523, 2969, 2991, 3008, 3031, 3036, 3076–77; Cart. Éterpigny, fols. 88–90. In overall charge of the Hospitaller houses in the kingdom of Sicily from 5/1266 to Easter 1269. Cart., nos. 3221, 3279, 3285; Thes. novus, vol. II, col. 633; RCAR, vol. I, reg. 3, no. 5. See Chapter 2 above, pp. 91–95. Pons Bérenger: Simple brother in Tripoli in 12/1204. Cart., no. 1198. Pons Boschant: Drapier of the Order in 5/1221 and 10/1222. Cart., nos. 1718, 1760. Pons of Madières: Turcopolier of the Order in 10/1271. Cart., no. 3433. Rainald (Renaud) of Domus: Simple brother in Acre in 11/1235. Cart., no. 2126. Rainald of Nanteuil: Commander of Tripoli from c.1266 to 1269. Cart., nos. 3213, 3047. Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, p. 433.

152

APPENDIX

Rainald of Ponz: Simple brother in Antioch in 8/1203. RRH, no. 792a. Rainer Aleman: Simple brother in Acre in 10/1233. RRH, no. 1046. Ralland of Burgundy: Simple brother in Tripoli in 6,9/1199. Cart., nos. 1085, 1096. Ralph of Loudun: Commander of Tyre in 1/1195. Cart., no. 972. Raymond Motet: Simple brother in Acre in 4/1239. Cart., no. 2224. Raymond Pierre: Simple brother. Present at the provincial chapter in Margat, January 1193. Cart., no. 941. Raymond Portevin: Chaplain of the master Garin of Montaigu in 2/1216–17. Cart., no. 1462. Raymond of Mandagum: Vice-castellan of Margat in 11/1234. Cart., no. 2094. Raymond of Pignans: Var. Castellan of Crac in 2/1216–17, 1218. Cart., nos. 1462, 1602. Raymond of Périgord: Commander of Tripoli in 12/1204. Cart., no. 1198. Raymond of Stella: Simple brother. Witnessed a charter given in Tarsus in 4/1214. Cart., no. 1427. Robert ‘Anglicus’ (the English): Commander of Acre in 1/1195. Cart., no. 972. Robert of Capennum: Simple brother in Antioch in 1/1193. Cart., no. 941. Robert of Corson: Commander of Tripoli in 8/1236. Cart., no. 2148. Robert of Lain: Yonne. Simple brother in the siege of Acre in 10/1190. Cart., no. 900. Robert of Vela: Simple brother in the Holy Land in 10/1259. Cart., no. 2936. Robert of Vignes: Hospitalier of the Order in 11/1235. Cart., no. 2126. Rodrigue Perez: Marshal of the Order in 8/1271. Cart., no. 3429. Roger of Champagne: Simple brother in Tripoli in 6,9/1199. Cart., nos. 1085, 1096. Roger of Spain: Simple brother in Acre in 10/1233. Cart., no. 2067. Roger of Vere*: Drapier of the Order in 12/1262. Prior of England 6/1269, 4/1270, 8,11/1272. Cart., nos. 3045, 3047, 3339, 3388, 3465, 3480. Sanche of Auvergne: Simple brother in Tripoli in 6,9/1199. Cart., nos. 1085, 1096. Seguin of Montréal: Simple brother in Acre in 3/1265. Cart., no. 3120. Simon of Beco: Simple brother in Acre in 1/1263. Cart., no. 3051. (Probably also in Famagusta in 6/1268. Cart., no. 3311.) Simon of Brolietum: Simple brother probably in Acre in 10/1267. Cart., no. 3283. Simon of Kalansue: Simple brother in Acre in 2/1207. Cart., nos. 1250, 1276. Simon of Villejus: Drapier of the Order in 1/1260. Cart., no. 2943. Stephen of Bracum: Grand commander of the Order in 10/1273. Cart., no. 3519. Stephen of Corbeil: Essone. Simple brother in the siege of Acre in 10/1190. Cart., no. 900. Stephen of Maleville: Aveyron. Simple brother in Acre in 10/1222. Cart., no. 1760. Stephen of Messy: Grand commander of the Order in 8,9/1264, 2/1266. Died in a Mamluk ambush in Careblier in the plains of Acre in 5/6/1266. RRH, no. 1334; Cart., nos. 3105, 3207; ‘ATS’, p. 452A. Stephen of Porticum: Simple brother in Antioch in 8/1203. RRH, no. 792a. Thomas Lorraine: Simple brother in Acre in 11/1235. Cart., no. 2126. Wichard of Kalsberg: Confrater in Acre in 2/1214. Cart., no. 1424. William Borel: Marshal of the Order in 1/1193. Cart., no. 941.

LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE ORDER

153

William Chan: Simple brother in Tripoli or Crac des Chevaliers in 5/1243. Cart., no. 2296. William le Rat: Simple brother in Acre in 11/1235. Cart., no. 2126. William Lombard: Simple brother in Acre in 1/1193. Grand commander of the Order in 1201. Cart., nos. 941, 1145–46. William Marin: Simple brother in Tripoli in 2/1248. Probably also in 3/1259 or 1260. Cart. no. 2914; Richard, ‘Le comté de Tripoli’, p. 373. William Niger: Simple brother in Tripoli in 12/1204. Cart. no. 1198. William of Antioch: Simple brother in Acre in 4/1239. Cart., no. 2224. William of Beaune: Côte d’or. Commander of Cyprus in 9/1210. RRH, no. 844. William of Cervera: Lerida, Aragon. Simple brother in Margat in 11/1234. Cart., no. 2094. William of Châteauneuf: Master. French, but according to Delaville Le Roulx, it is impossible to determine from which region. Simple brother in Acre in 10/1233. Marshal of the Order in 1/1241. Master from 1243 to 1258. Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, p. 190 and passim; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 180–81, 186. William of Cherum: Simple brother in Acre in 3/1266. Cart., no. 3213. William of Corceles: According to the Cart. Velay he was from the Auvergne. Simple brother in Acre in 1240. Marshal of the Order in 8/1248. From 1256 to 1271 he appeared in many charters issued in the Holy Land without title. Riley-Smith believes he must have been an Ancient living in the convent. In 1274 he was the Order’s delegate to the Second Council of Lyons. Cart. Velay, p. II; Cart., nos. 2245, 2482, 2810, 2934–35, 3045, 3120, 3283, 3422, 3433, 4680. Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 143, 285. See also Chapter 3 above, p. 129. William of Domus: Brother in Acre in 8/1219. Cart., no. 1656. William of Forel: Commander of Cyprus in 6,10/1237. Cart., nos. 2163, 2174. William of Fores (Forez?): Castellan of Margat in 11/1241. Cart., no. 2280. William of Lormier: Simple brother in Acre in 12/1261. Cart. no. 3001. William of Marolh: Perhaps from Marolles-les-Bailly, Aube. Marshal of the Order 1/1195, 10/1206. Cart., no. 972; RRH, no. 816. William of Montaigu: Seine-et-Marne or Vendée. Drapier of the Order in 10/1233. Cart., no. 2067. William of Morent: Simple brother in Tripoli in 6,9/1199. Cart., nos. 1085, 1096. William of Moret: Seine-et-Marne. Commander of Tyre in 8/1248. Cart., no. 2482. William of Santeble: Simple brother. Witnessed a charter given in Tarsus in 4/1214. Cart., no. 1427. William of Senlis: Oise. Grand commander of the Order in 1240. Killed in Jerusalem in a battle against the Khorezmians in 11/7/1244. Cart., no. 2245; Matthew Paris, vol. IV, pp. 307–11; Chronica de Mailros, p. 163. See also Chapter 1 above, p. 23. William of Tinières*: According to the Cart. Velay he belong to the house of Tinières, one of the most important families in Auvergne. Commander of Tripoli in 2/1216. Grand commander of the Order in 9/1231. Prior of France in 11/1232. Cart. Velay, p. II; Cart., nos. 1462, 1996, 2036. William of Villaret*: Master. Drapier and vice-prior of St. Gilles in c.1269 until 1271, when he became prior. Administrator for Pope Gregory X of the papal

154

APPENDIX

lands of the Comtat Venaissin. Master from 1296 until 1304. See Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, pp. 251–66; Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 206–09, 298–301. William of Villiers*: Grand commander of the Order in Acre in 2/1192. Grand commander of Outremer in 4/1193. Prior of England from 1199. Prior of France in 1207–1209. Cart., nos. 919, 945, 1056, 1243, 1330–32. See also above, Chapter 1, p. 15, and Chapter 2, pp. 66, 78. William of Valence: Commander of the ships in 4/1234. Cart., no. 2079. William Pijons*: Commander of Cyprus in 8/1248. Prior of France in 7/1253, 3/1256, 7/1257. Cart., nos. 2482, 2648, 2811; Cart. Éterpigny, fols. 35–36, 107–08. William Scarran: Simple brother in Acre in 8/1219. Cart., no. 1656.

Brothers Serving in the Priories of France, St. Gilles and Auvergne, and Commanderies under their Control Priory of France Adam of Abbeville: Somme. Simple brother in Frasnoy (Flandres) in 2/1203. Cart., no. 1172. Adam of Chailly: Perhaps from Chailly-en-Bière, Seine et Marne. Simple brother in Paris in 1189. Cart., no. 868. Andrew Polin*: Grand commander of the Order in 11/1235, prior of France probably from 1239 to 1248. Cart., no. 2126 (for Andrew as commander in Acre). First mentioned as prior of France in Cart., no. 2219, last appearance no. 2474. Arnald of Spina: Prior of France in 1188. Cart., no. 842. Bernard of Lucet: Lucé, Eure-et-Loire. Simple brother in Haute Avesnes (Pas de Calais) in 1190. Cart., no. 890. Fulcher of Thévalles: Mayenne. Simple brother in the priory of France in 11/1232. Cart., no. 2036. Garnier of Nablus*: Member of the Frankish family of Milly, lords of Nablus and Oultrejourdain. Master. Castellan of Bethgibelin from 1173 until 1176. Grand commander of the Order from 1176 to 1184 or 1185. Prior of England and Prior of France from 1189 to late 1189, the year he was elected to master and served until 1190. See Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, pp. 409, 415, 426, 432, and Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 107–8. Gaucher of Amiens: Somme. Simple brother in Corbeil in 1188. Cart., no. 842. Gaucher of Corbeil: Essonne. Commander of the Hospitallers in the area of Cambrai in 4/1201. Cart., no. 1141. Geoffrey: Prior of France 8/1212, 6,11/1216. Cart., nos. 1397, 1475, 1481. Geoffrey of Babylone: Simple brother in Haute Avesnes (Pas de Calais) in 1213. Cart., no. 1406. Gerald of Paris: Simple brother in Corbeil and Paris in 1179, 1188, 1189. Cart., nos. 552, 842, 868. Guèrin: Prior of France in 5/1225, 5,11,12/1227, 1228, 6/1229. Cart., nos. 1812–13, 1889–90, 1900, 1903, 1905, 1941; RRH, no. 981.

LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE ORDER

155

Guitard of La Motte: Perhaps Gard. Simple brother in the priory of France in 11/1232. Cart., no. 2036. H.....: Prior of France in 11/1230. Cart., no. 1970. Henry of Pesunis: Oise. Simple brother in the priory of France in 11/1232. Cart., no. 2036. Hugh of Chaudenay: From Haute-Marne or Saône-et-Loire. Simple brother in Normiers (Côte d’or) in 1196. Cart., no. 983. Imbert of Luquiers: Prior of France in 1219 and 1220. Cart., nos. 1637, 1664. Isembard*: Prior of France in 4/1201, 1203, 4/1212. Cart., nos. 1145, 1167, 1382. Grand commander of the Order in Acre in 2/1207 or 1208 and 1219. Cart., nos. 1250, 1276, 1656. Grand commander of Outremer in 2/1211 and in 10/1222. Cart., nos. 1360, 1758. Appears without title in two charters given in Tarsus in 4/1214. Cart., nos. 1426–27. It is possible that different Isembards held these offices. Delaville Le Roulx, however, identified them as the same man. See index of Delaville Le Roulx cartulary. See also Chapter 2 above, pp. 66, 67. John of Chevry: Vice-prior of France in 6,8,11,12/1269, 6/1271. Prior of France in 6,8,10,11/1272. Cart., nos. 3364, 3374, 3425, 3453, 3468, 3475, 3484; Cart. Fieffes (S5059), fol. 7; Cart. Éterpigny, fols. 27–28. John of Fresnoy: Aube or Nord. Simple brother in Haute Avesnes in 1190. Cart., no. 890. John of Montgrossin: Prior of France in 4/1235, 5/1237. Cart., nos. 2106, 2159; Cart. Fieffes (S5533), fol. 152. Peter of Puy: Simple brother in the priory of France in 6/1261. Cart., no. 2991. Peter of Vitry: Simple brother in Corbeil in 1188. Cart., no. 842. Peter Pielos: Commander of Haute Avesnes (Pas de Calais) in 1213. Cart., no. 1406. Philip of Egly*: Prior of France in 1,2/1250, Cart., no. 2514. In Acre, without title, in 1256. Cart., no. 2810. Prior of France for the second time in 12/1260, 6/1261, 2/1262. Cart., nos. 2523, 2969, 2991, 3008, 3031, 3036, 3076–77; Cart. Éterpigny, fols. 88–90. In overall charge of the Hospitaller houses in the kingdom of Sicily from 5/1266 to Easter 1269. Cart., nos. 3221, 3279, 3285; Thes. novus, vol. II, col. 633; RCAR, vol. I, reg. 3, no. 5. See also Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte et à Chypre, p. 417. See Chapter 2 above, pp. 91–95. Reiner of Esnouveaux: Haute-Marne. Simple brother in the priory of France in c.1190–1196. Cart., no. 883. Renaud of Etamps: Oise. Simple brother in the priory of France in 11/1232. Cart., no. 2036. Robert of Conchy: Simple brother in the priory of France in 9/1231. Cart., no. 1994. Simon of Abbeville: Prior of France in 1199 and 1201. Cart., nos. 1057, 1133. Simon of Paris: Simple brother in the priory of France in 11/1232. Cart., no. 2036. Vital of Fonteney: Simple brother in Corbeil in 1188. Cart., no. 842. Wiiliam of Donjon: Oise (son of the lady of Breteuil). Simple brother in Senlis in 6/1221. Cart., no. 1727. William of Haute Avesne: Pas-de-Calais. Commander of Haute Avesne in 1190. Cart., no. 889.

156

APPENDIX

William of Roussemeau: Yonne. Chaplain in the priory of France in 6/1261. Cart., no. 2991. William of Tinières*: According to the Cart. Velay he belonged to the house of Tinières, one of the most important families in Auvergne. Commander of Tripoli in 2/1216. Grand commander of the Order in 9/1231. Prior of France in 11/1232. Cart. Velay, p. II; Cart., nos. 1462, 1996, 2036. William of Villiers*: Grand commander of the Order in Acre in 2/1192. Grand commander of Outremer in 4/1193. Prior of England from 1199. Prior of France in 1207–1209. Cart., nos. 919, 945, 1056, 1243, 1330–32. See also above, Chapter 1, p. 15, and Chapter 2, pp. 66, 78. William Pijons*: Commander of Cyprus in 8/1248. Prior of France in 7/1253, 3/1256, 7/1257. Cart., nos. 2482, 2648, 2811; Cart. Éterpigny, fols. 35–36, 107–08. Priory of St. Gilles Aimery of Toulouse: Simple brother in Trinquetaille and Avignon in 5/1191, 3/1198, 3/1200, 6/1203. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 88, 41; Cart. Avignon, no. 70, ch. 11; Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 247–48. Aimery Sartre: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 3/1194. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 81. Albert of Port Aiguierra: Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 4/1201. Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 174. Amand of Cabanes: Averyon. Commander of Toulouse in 7/1218. Cart., no. 1617. Armengaud of Asp*: Temporary Master. Castellan of Amposta from 1180 until 1183. From 1184 he held both the castellany of Amposta and the priory of St. Gilles. Charged with the temporary administration of the Order after the loss of the master Roger of Moulins at the battle of Sephoria (1 May 1187). See Cart., nos. 586–88, 592, 597, 601, 619, 677, 765, 781, 818, 820, 822, 829, 835, 860, 863, 871, 901; RRH, nos. 665–66, 676; Cart. St. Gilles, p. XIX; Luttrell, ‘Ermengol de Aspa and Sigena’ (Aldershot, forthcoming); Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 106–07. See also Chapter 1 above, pp. 11–12. Arnald Apis: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 8/1186, 3/1187, 6/1197. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 314, 318, 121. Arnald of Bozzais: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1201. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 94. Arnald of Campagnoles: Gard. Commander of the Order’s houses in Béziers and Agde (Hérault) in 5/1190. Commander of Trinquetaille in 4/1196, 1/1197, 1/1198, 8/1203, 8,9/1204, 8,9/1209, 3,5,6,9,11,12/1210. Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 51, 123, 236, 217, 224, 222–24, 226, 205, 220, 210–11, 213, 216, 305; Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 98, 269; Cart. Avignon, no. 70; Cart., no. 1011. Arnald of Miserata: Commander of St. Gilles in 2/1231, 6,9/1232, 4/1234. Prior of St. Gilles from 1234 to 1236. Cart., nos. 2066, 2018, 2030, 2079; Cart. Avignon, p. 233, no. 91. Arnald of Podium: Commander of St. Gilles in 11/1201. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 89. Arnald of Podium Forigario: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 11/1186. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 303. Arnald of St. Thomas: St. Thomas of Trinquetaille. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 10/1195. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 118–19.

LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE ORDER

157

Berenger Monge: Commander of Manosque and Aix in 7/1251, 10/1257, 5/1273, 4/1278, 7/1283, 8/1286, 7/1288, 12/1292, 8/1293. Cart., nos. 2570, 2885, 3508, 3657, 3838–39, 3939–40, 4008, 4204, 4228. Reynaud, La commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem, p. 52. Bermond of Luzancion: Midi Pyrenees. Prior of St. Gilles. Commander of Trinquetaille in 3/1207, 9/1207 or 1208, 11/1208, 1/1209. Prior of St. Gilles in 2/1212 and probably 4/1214 when he witnessed two charters written in Tarsus. Commander of Manosque in 5/1217. Commander of Avignon from 1220 to 1230. Cart., no. 1258; Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 209, 219; Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 349–50; Cart., nos. 1320, 1375, 1426–27; Reynaud, La commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem, p. 199; Marseilles 56H 1281, fols. 29, 68, 75, 106–7, 110; Cart. Avignon, pp. 233, 235, and nos. 75, 24, 29, 31, 57, 61, 62, 65–66, 77, 85, 87, 89, chs. 27, 29–41; Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de St. Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon et en comtat Venaissin au XIII siècle’, passim. See also Chapter 2 above, pp. 78–79. Bernard Cabot: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 8/1272. Cart., no. 3467. Bernard Causoinus: Priest in St. Gilles in 8,12/1195, 6/1197. Cart. St. Gilles, nos.127, 113, 121. Bernard Coc(c)us: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 3/1187, 1/1194, 1,10/1195, 11/1201. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 318, 130, 282, 118–19, 88. Bernard Honorat: Simple brother in Manosque in 12/1235. Cart., no. 2099. Bernard of Calvison: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1,3/1194. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 60, 81, 130. Bernard of Campagne: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 7/1209, 12/1210. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 358, 376. Bernard of Marcellanum: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1/1209. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 349. Bernard of Porcianum: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 12/1210. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 376. Bernard of Spinaso (Spinason): Commander of Cavaillon (Vaucluse) in 11/1243, 11/1246. Marseilles 56H 1281, fols. 91–92; Cart. Avignon, no. 74, ch. 54. Bertrand Blanc: Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 1/1197. Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 123. Bertrand Berengarius: Donat in the commandery of Avignon in 1223–24. Cart. Avignon, chs. 29–31. Bertrand Braverius: Simple brother in St. Gilles from c.1192 to c.1198, Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 93, 310 (perhaps brother in Trinquetaille ), 74, 115, 123, 124, 127, 130, 282. Bertrand of Barras: Prior of St. Gilles in 1,6–7/1239, 8/1241, 1/1242. Cart., nos. 2218, 2230, 2235, 2278, 2284. According to Riley-Smith (The Knights of St. John, p. 281) Bertrand may have been a relative of Ferrand of Barras, his successor as prior of St. Gilles. Bertrand of Barbetane: Bouches-du-Rhône. Simple brother – witnessed charters issued in Montpellier in 4/1187, in Avignon in 10/1187, 9–11/1188 and in Trinquetaille in 3,6/1194, 4/1195. Cart. Avignon, chs. 5–6; Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 320, 81; Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 162, 52. Bertrand of Bonils: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 7/1209. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 358. Bertrand of Caderousse: Vaucluse. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1/1199.

158

APPENDIX

Commander of Alès (Gard) in 1203. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 312; Cart. Avignon, suppl. 2. Bertrand of Cavairacum: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 2/1194. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 74. Bertrand of Gigondas: Vaucluse. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 5/1203. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 3. Bertrand of Laia: Ail, Alpes Maritime. Commander of Omergues (Alpes-de-HauteProvence) in 4/1234. Cart., no. 2076. Bertrand of Mercurol: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 5/1191, 1/1195. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 88, 282. Bertrand of Milhau: Aveyron. Prior of St. Gilles in 11/1190, 5/1191, 7,8/1192, 1193–95. Cart. St. Gilles, p. XIX and nos. 169, 89; Cart., nos. 926, 930, 937; Cart. Avignon, no. 67. Bertrand of Monteux (Montiliis): Vaucluse. Simple brother in Avignon in 1202–1203, 1208–1210, 1213, 1216. Commander of St. Cécile in 1203. Cart. Avignon, nos. 23, 37, 46, 63, 75, 80–82, chs. 16, 17, 20–23, 25–26, suppl. 2 (comm. of St. Cécile). Bertrand of Mornans: Drôme. Commander of Valence in 3/1239, 10/1248. Cart., nos. 2218, 2489. Bertrand of Olivella: Prior of St. Gilles in 2/1207. Commander of St. Gilles in 3/1207 (there is no evidence to explain this change of post. By 3/1207 St. Gilles had a new prior – Peter of Montfaucon). Cart., nos. 1253, 1255; Recueil des Actes des comtes de Provence, nos. 50–51; Cart., no. 1258; Cart. St. Gilles, p. XIX. Bertrand of Petra: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1/1195. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 282. Bertrand of Pierrelatte: Drôme. Commander of Alais (Gard) in 1/1239. Cart., no. 2218. Bertrand of St. Paul: Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 4/1195. Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 52. Bertrand of Vilamurs (Villemus, Alpes-de-Haute-Provence): Commander of Avignon in 9/1216. Cart. Avignon, p. 235 and ch. 26. Bertrand Pelliserius: Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 10/1200. Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 240. Bertrand Rainaut: Commander of St. Gilles in 5–12/1204. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 86, 44, 51, 4, 321. Bertrand St. Iustus: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1/1209. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 349–50. Bertrand Sartre: Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 3/1199, 4/1201. Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 65, 174. Dodo of Bozagis: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 6/1200. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 71. Durand of La Fosse: Gard. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 8/1184, 12/1188, 7/1190, 5/1191. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 67–68, 43, 88. Emmanuel: Prior of St. Gilles in 7/1221. Cart., no. 1736; Cart. Avignon, Inv. I, 14 (1225). Ermengald of Guilher: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 6/1262. Cart., no. 3035. Ferrand of Barras*: Prior of St. Gilles. Grand commander of Outremer. Simple brother in the priory of St. Gilles in 1180. Castellan of Selefkie in 4/1214. Marshal in 1221. Prior of St. Gilles in 1246, 7/1248, 7/1251, 5/1252,

LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE ORDER

159

6/1253. Grand commander of Outremer in 7/1259, 11/1260, 5/1261, 6/1262. Prior of St. Gilles again in 2,6/1268. Cart., nos. 578, 1426–27, 1718, 2419, 2481, 2570, 2604, 2645, 2923, 2965, 2986, 3035, 3301, 3308 (vol. IV). See also Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John, pp. 280–81. Fulcher of Bonas: Gers. Commander of Manosque in 9/1232, 11/1234, 2/1235. Cart., nos. 2030, 2092, 2099. Fulcher of Thoart: Commander of Alais (Gard) in 3/1271, 5,7/1273. Cart., nos. 3416, 3508, 3512. Fulcher of Tornel (also appeared in the sources as Raymond): Commander of Avignon in 1240–47. Marseilles 56H 1281, fols. 7, 11, 13, 91–92, 103; Cart. Avignon, p. 235 and nos. 2–10, 12, 15–16, 18, 64, 74, 84, 86, chs. 46–49, 52–57, inv. I, 23; Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de St. Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon et en comtat Venaissin au XIII siècle’, p. 61. G. of Ormes: Eure. Prior of St. Gilles in 1229. Cart., no. 1934. Geoffrey of Albaron: Bouches-du-Rhône. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 5/1194. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 115. Geoffrey of Moissac: Tarn-et-Garonne. Simple brother in Manosque in 7/1251. Cart., no. 2570. Gerald Amic: Commander of Orange in 4/1240, 5/1247, commander of Orange and Avignon in 7/1248. Cart., nos. 2250, 2442; Cart. Avignon, ch. 58. Gerald Bella Cara (Bona Cara): Simple brother in St. Gilles in 12/1192. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 110, 129, 131. Gerald Brun: Commander of Avignon in 1208, 1210, 1213–1215. Marseilles 56H 1281, fols. 100–1, 102–3; Cart. Avignon, p. 235 and nos. 37, 63, 75, 80, 81, chs. 20, 22, 23, 25, 26 (9/1216 – ‘ancien précepteur’), inv. I, 13; Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de St. Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon et en comtat Venaissin au XIII siècle’, p. 61. Gerald of Bellecroix: Saone et Loire. Commander of Beaune (Côte d’or) c.1239–1248. Cart., no. 2969. Gerald of Cavaillon: Vaucluse. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 5/1194. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 45. Gerald of Rotmans (or Romans): Drapier of the priory of St. Gilles in 11/1186, 11/1187, 1,8–10/1195, 9/1196, 4/1197. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 303, 306, 282, 61, 127, 99, 118, 269. He appeared, however, without title in several other charters issued by the priory in 10/1186, 3/1187, 6/1196, 6/1197. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 274, 318, 143, 82. Gerald of Villedieu: Vaucluse. Chaplain in Avignon in 2/1202. Cart. Avignon, ch. 14. Guy of Chavellus: Part of Ferrand of Barras entourage when he served as grand commander of Outremer in 11/1260. Cart., no. 2965. Hugh of Aia: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1/1199. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 312. Hugh of Arlenco: Commander of Arles in 2/1213. Cart. Avignon, nos. 75, 82. Hugh of Ascros: Alpes Maritimes. Simple brother in Manosque in 2/1235. Cart., no. 2099. Hugh of Albenas: Ardèche. Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 3/1199, 10/1200, 3/1204, 6/1205. Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 65, 240, 214, 251. Hugh I of Baux: Viscount of Marseilles and lord of Baux. Confrater of the house of Trinquetaille in 8/1192. Cart., no. 930.

160

APPENDIX

Hugh of Mamoléne: Gard. Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 3,10/1200, 1201. Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 41, 240, 94, 174. A brother by that name appeared as witness to two charters written in Tarsus in 1214. Perhaps Hugh accompanied the prior of St. Gilles to Tarsus. Cart., nos. 1426–27. Hugh of Solillaris: Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 11,12/1210. Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 305, 216. Hugh of Villadeus: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 5/1203 and 9/1204. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 3, 25. Hugh Spina: Chaplain of Peter of Faucon, prior of St. Gilles. 1207. Cart. Avignon, ch. 18. Isnard of Flayosc: Commander of Puimoisson in 5/1273. Cart., no. 3508. Isnard of Oraison: Alpes-de-Haute-Provence. Simple brother in Manosque in 2/1235. Cart., no. 2099. Isnard of Puimichel: Alpes-de-Haute-Provence. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 6/1210. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 374. Isnard of St. Michel: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 9/1204. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 136–37. Jacob of Bourg: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 10/1192. Commander of Trinquetaille in 5,6/1194, 4/1195. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 69, 91, 45; Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 52, 165. John Candelerius: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 7/1190. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 43. John Franc (Francon): Commander of St. Gilles in 4/1189–1/1995, 10/1196. Cart., nos. 897, 937; Cart. St. Gilles, p. XXI and nos. 243, 348, 371, 271, 154, 160, 169, 89, 100, 78, 62, 128, 189, 69, 81, 120, 60, 45, 55, 282; Cart. Avignon, no. 51; Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 180. John Mercaderius: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 3/1191/92. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 78. John of Die: Drôme. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 8/1272. Cart., no. 3467. John of Genève: Commander of St. Paul les Romans in 1245. AD du Rhône, pp. 97–98. John of Monts: Commander of Beaune in 12/1260. Cart., no. 2969. John of Monzon: Huesca. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 2/1207. Cart., no. 1253. John of Pont: Commander of Manosque in 10/1243. Cart., no. 2428. John of Tarascon: Bouches-du-Rhône. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 7/1209. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 358. John Pellifex: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 9/1191. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 100. John Sellerius: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 4/1190. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 371. John Thesaurario: Brother in St. Gilles in 11/1190. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 154. Jordan of Aiguebelle (Aquabella): Simple brother in Avignon in 11/1199. Cart. Avignon, chs. 11–12; Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de Saint Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon’, pp. 55–57. Jordan of St. André: Commander of Agenais, Quercy and Lomagne (Lot et Garonne), in 2/1244. Cart., no. 2315. Laurence of St. Cécile: Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 5/1210. Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 220. Martin of Andos: Prior of St. Gilles. Castellan of Amposta in 2/1207, 1/1209, 9/1210, 11/1211. Prior of St. Gilles in 9/1215, 2/1216. Cart., nos. 1256, 1321, 1356, 1369, 1446, 1459. Cart. Avignon, ch. 26 (9/1216).

LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE ORDER

161

Martin of Andos: Commander of Montpellier in 2/1216. Cart., no. 1460. Martin Rufus: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1/1199. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 312. Michael Navaro: Simple brother in Trinquetaille in c.9/1208. Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 291. Michael of La Sieye: Alpes-de-Haute-Provence. Commander of Trinquetaille in 2,3/1216. Cart., nos. 1460, 1464. Michael of Zaragossa: Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 3,4/1204. Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 214, 303. Ougier: Prior of St. Gilles. In 9–11/1188, 3/1189, 3,4/1190. (If the same man, also grand prior of France in 10/1190, 1191, 8/1194, 5/1195, 8/1198, 7/1202.) Cart., nos. 721, 888; 900, 904, 965, 973, 1031, 1164; Cart. St. Gilles, p. XIX and nos. 259, 371; Cart. Avignon, ch. 6–7. Peter Arnaldus: Commander of Valence in 5/1273. Cart., no. 3508. Peter Barravus: Chaplain of Garcia of Lisa (Grand commander of Outremer), in 10/1198. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 273. Peter Boissetas: Priest in St. Gilles in 12/1210. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 376. Peter Helie: Commander of Gap Frances in the the Midi in the late 1170s. Commander of St. Gilles in 12/1198, 1,10/1199, 1,6/1200, 1201. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 41, 71, 87, 90, 94, 123, 126, 312; Cart., no. 556; Cart. Avignon, no. 50, ch. 11; Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de Saint Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon’, pp. 55–57. Peter Mercorinus: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 9/1204. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 136–37. Peter of Alms: Cleric in St. Gilles in 6/1210. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 374. Peter of Bellecroix: Saône et Loire. Simple brother in Burgundy in c.1200. Cart., no. 1104. Peter of Belles: Commander of Marseilles in 5/1273. Cart., no. 3508. Peter of Belvézin: Commander of St. Gilles in 10/1270, 8/1272. Commander of Trinquetaille in 5/1273. Cart., nos. 3404, 3467, 3508. Peter of Biscum: Commander of Poucharrament (Haute-Garonne) in 8/1254. Cart., no. 2690. Peter of Cairanne: Commander of Toulouse in 1246. Raybaud, Histoire des grands prieurs, p. 156. Peter of Châteauneuf: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 12/1198, 1/1201. Perhaps commander of Manosque in 2/1212. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 123, 87; Reynaud, La commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem, p. 199. Peter of Châteauroux: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1/1195. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 282. Peter Stephen of Cavallon (Cavaillon): Vaucluse. Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 3/1199 or 1200. Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 65. Peter of Corilum: Simple brother in Marseilles in 1190. Cart., no. 888. Peter of Frameto: Chaplain of Bertrand of Milhau, prior of St. Gilles. 1191. Cart. Avignon, no. 67. Peter of Goza: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 7/1209. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 358. Peter of La Mota: Gard. Commander of St. Jean de Viviers (Ardèche) in 5/1273. Cart., no. 3508. Peter of Lap: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 7/1209. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 358.

162

APPENDIX

Peter of Melgorio (Melguer, Mauguio): Hérault. Simple brother in Avignon in 9/1191, 5/1194. Cart. Avignon, nos. 67, 51, ch. 5–8. Peter of Montfaucon (Faucon, Falcone): Prior of St. Gilles in 3/1207–1210. Cart., nos. 1258, 1327; Cart. St. Gilles, p. XIX and no. 339; Cart. Avignon, ch. 18; Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 223; Recueil des Actes des Comtes de Provence, no. 3. Peter of Naisa: Commander of Aix in 6/1192. Cart., no. 926. Peter Raymond of Remeianum: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 9/1190. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 271. Peter of Roquita: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1/1199. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 312. Peter of St. Étienne-les-Orgues (‘dels Olegues’): Alpes-de-Haute-Provence. Simple brother in Trinquetaille 1192, 6/1194, 4/1195. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 91; Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 162, 52. Peter of St. Laurencio: envoy of the commander of Avignon in 7/1248. Commander of Avignon in 2,5/1249, 11/1250. Cart. Avignon, p. 235 and chs. 58, 59–61, inv. I. 22. Peter of Vidinobrium: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 9,10,11/1186, 6/1188, 9/1190, 5/1191. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 347, 274, 313, 275, 271, 88. Peter Pellicia: Simple brother in St. Gilles in c.1190–c.1204. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 1, 25, 44, 51, 55, 61, 68–69, 74, 78, 82–84, 86–87, 94, 99, 108–9, 114, 128, 130, 134, 136, 143, 154, 160, 269, 293, 296; Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 247. Peter Porterius: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 5/1194. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 115. Petrus Raimundus: Commander of St. Gilles in 6,9/1188, 3/1189, 1190. Cart. St. Gilles, p. XXI and nos. 275, 347, 259, 211; Cart. Avignon, ch. 7. Pons of Avignon: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 9,12/1192, 12/1198, 1/1201, 10/1202. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 128, 120, 129, 131, 87, 293. Pons of Baion: Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 4/1195, 10/1200, 4/1201, 4/1203, 3/1204. Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 52, 240, 174, 300, 214. Pons of Bonnevaux: Gard. Cleric in St. Gilles in 7/1185, 1/1201. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 307, 87. Pons of Buglum: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 10/1270. Cart., no. 3404. Pons of Caxanicis: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 4,7/1194. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 115, 124. Pons of Cuer: Var. Commander of Orange in 1/1270. Commander of Beaulie in 5/1273. Cart., nos. 3384, 3508. Pons of Esparron: Commander of Trievès (Drôme) in 6/1269. Cart., no. 3340. Pons of Furni: Gard. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 3,5/1185, 11/1186, 11/1190. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 154, 160, 284, 307, 303, 318. Pons of Linac: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 11/1201. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 89. Pons of Lucdunum: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1192. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 91, 96. Pons of Marguerita: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 8/1180, 7,10/1185, 3,11/1186, 11/1187. Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 6/1194. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 106, 307, 35–36, 303, 306; Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 162. Pons of Marginis: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 3/1194, 8/1195. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 60, 81, 127. Pons of Mornacium: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 12/1198. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 123. Pons of Oveillanum: Aude. Commander of St. Cécile (part of the commandery of

LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE ORDER

163

Avignon) and Orange in 1215. Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de Saint Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon’, p. 61. Pons of Valencia: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 9,12/1192. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 128, 120. Raimbaud of Reillanne: Basse Alpes. Simple brother in Manosque in 2/1235. Cart., no. 2099. Ralph of Cadarache: Commander of Manosque in 1248. Reynaud, la Commanderie de l’Hôpital, p. 167. Ralph of Roca: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1/1195. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 282. Raymond Male Nutritus: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 7/1193. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 135. Raymond of Aiguille: Haut-Loire. Commander and vice-prior of St. Gilles in 1,5,9/1196, 2,3,4,6/1197. Cart. St. Gilles, p. XXI and nos. 143, 260, 122, 61, 114, 142, 108, 125, 268–69, 82, 98, 121. Prior of St. Gilles in 11/1199, 1200, 3,6/1201, 5,6/1202. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 342, 134; Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 190, 94; Cart., no. 1163; Cart. Avignon, nos. 70, 50, 52, 76, chs. 11–12, suppl. 1; Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de Saint Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon’, pp. 55–57. Raymond of Alinnanum: Prior of the church of St. Gilles from 10/1186 to 12/1210. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 313, 306, 318, 275, 347, 68, 78, 348, 128, 110, 120, 74, 115, 111–12, 99, 127, 56, 113, 143, 61, 108, 269, 121, 82–83, 123, 71, 87, 89, 79, 7, 2, 376. Raymond of Caican: Commander of Chamier (part of St. Paul tres Chateux, Drôme) in 5/1273. Cart., no. 3508. Raymond Stephen of Cannetum: Gard. Cleric in St. Gilles in 3/1187, 5/1192, 7/1209, 6/1210. Cart., no. 829; Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 96, 358, 374. Raymond of Cetum: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 11/1201. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 89. Raymond of Ciry: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 5/1273. Cart., no. 3508. Raymond of Furni: Gard. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 5/1192, 6/1194, 2,9/1195, 1/1201, 5/1202. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 96, 55, 113, 56, 87, 79. Raymond of Grasse: Alpes Maritimes. Commander of Orange in 7/1272, 5,7/1273. Cart., nos. 3460, 3508, 3512. Raymond of Linac: Chaplain to the prior of the church of St. Gilles in 1/1186, 9/1203. Cart., nos. 781, 1179. Raymond of Lunel: Hérault. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 5,9/1204. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 44, 51, 86, 136–37. Raymond of Malencia: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 11/1190. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 154, 160. Raymond of Mondragone: Commander of Crest (Drôme) in 5/1273. Cart., no. 3508. Raymond of Montpezat: Commander of St. Gilles in 9,10/1202. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 295, 293. Raymond of Monts: Indre et Loire. Commander of Orange in 4/1230. Cart., no. 1956. Raymond of Ortum: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 12/1192, 8/1195, 1/1201, 5/1202, 3/1203, 5/1204. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 110, 127, 87, 79, 109, 86. Raymond of Pont: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1/1201. Commander of St. Gilles in 1,7/1209. Cart. St. Gilles, p. XXII and nos. 87, 349–50, 358, 364.

164

APPENDIX

Raymond of Rocolas: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 3/1194. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 81. Raymond of Saignon: Vaucluse. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1/1201, 9/1203. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 2; Cart., no. 1179. Raymond of Sérignan: Vaucluse. Simple brother in the priory of St. Gilles in 3/1216. Cart., no. 1467. Raymond of Toulouse: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 5/1203. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 3. Richard of Petra: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1/1201. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 87, 195. Rostang of La Fosse: Gard. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1/1194, 8/1195. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 130, 127. Rostang of Reillanne: Alpes-de-Haute-Provence. Simple brother in Manosque in 7/1251. Cart., no. 2570. Sanche of Lombes: Simple brother in St. Gilles in c.1194–1200. Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de Saint Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon’, pp. 55–57. Sanche of Lombers: Vice-prior of St. Gilles in 1/1196. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 143 (most probably the same man as previous). Seignoret: Prior of St. Gilles in 9/1203. Cart., no. 1179; Cart. St. Gilles, no. 2. Stephen of Broc: Commander of St. Gilles in 9/1214, 2,3/1216. Cart., nos. 1460, 1464; Cart. Avignon, no. 80. Stephen of Cavaillon: Vaucluse. Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 5/1210. Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 220. Stephen of Garons: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1186, 11/1190, 5/1194. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 249, 154, 160, 115. Stephen of Gravesons: Bouches du Rhône. Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 2/1203. Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 247. Stephen of Nemausum: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 9/1204. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 136–37. Stephen of Ortum: Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 6/1210. Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 210. Stephen of Vaquerius: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1202. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 83–84, 38. Stephen Sabaterius (Zabaterius): Simple brother in St. Gilles in 12/1198, 11/1205. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 123, 247. U.: Prior of St. Gilles in 1224. Cart., no. 1790. William Ferrum: Simple brother in Avignon in 5/1215, 12/1220, 9/1223. Cart. Avignon nos. 24, 28, ch. 25, 29. William of Albornum: Simple brother in St. Gilles from 5/1179 to 5/1204. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 3, 44, 51, 71, 87, 94, 110, 115, 123, 127, 143, 189, 269, 271, 277, 289, 347. William of Alestum: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1191. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 100. Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de Saint Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon’, pp. 55–57. William of Barjols: Simple brother in Manosque in 7/1251. Cart., no. 2570. William of Barras: Commander of Pernes (Vaucluse) in 1278. Le Blévec, ‘L’Hôpital de Saint Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon’, pp. 55–57. William of Beorgetum: Commander of St. Gilles in 2/1241. Cart., no. 2268. William of Bornum: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 1192. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 91. William of Boscum: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 10/1270. Cart., no. 3404.

LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE ORDER

165

William of Bretsac: Simple brother probably in the priory of St. Gilles in 3/1216. Cart., no. 1467. William of Codaleto: Simple brother in Avignon in 1232. Cart. Avignon, nos. 25, 49, chs. 42, 43. William of Garda (La Garde): Procurator in the commandery of Avignon in 1192. Cart. Avignon, no. 78, ch. 8. William of Grignam: Drôme. Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 9/1186, 4/1195. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 216; Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 52. William of Le Fosse: Gard. Simple brother in St. Gilles in 7/1185, 9/1190. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 307, 271. William of Mannas: Commander of Pernes (Vaucluse) in 7/1204 and Drapier of Trinquetaille in 9/1207. Cart. St. Gilles, no. 4; Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 209. William of Marseilles: Cleric in Trinquetaille in 5,6,9/1210. Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 220, 209, 211. William of Nemauso (Nemse): Nîmes, Gard. Commander of Avignon in 8,9/1207, 2/1209. Cart. Avignon, chs. 18, 19, 21. William of Mauguio: Hérault. Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 4/1205. Cart. Trinquetaille, no. 303. William of Pons: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 8/1272. Cart., no. 3467. William of Remolinis: Simple brother in St. Gilles in 9/1204. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 136–37. William of Rodor (or Rodos?): Cleric in the priory of St. Gilles in 2/1241. Cart., no. 2268. William of Roquette: Perhaps Roquette sur Var, Alpes Maritimes. Simple brother probably in Narbonne in 9/1274. Cart., no. 3546. William of Serras: Simple brother in Trinquetaille in 6/1194, 3/1199, 1/1201. Cart. Trinquetaille, nos. 162, 65, 193. William of Taulinnann: Simple brother in the commandery of St. Gilles in 12/1194, 10/1195, 6/1197. Drapier of this house in 12/1198 and 1202. Vice-commander in 5/1202. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 113, 118–19, 121, 123, 84, 79, 7; Cart. Avignon, nos. 38, 50, 52, 56, chs. 11–13 (in all these without title). William of Villaret*: Master. Drapier of the Order from 1266 to 1270. Vice-prior of St. Gilles in 1269 until 1271, when he became Prior of St. Gilles. Administrator for Pope Gregory X of the papal lands of the Comtat Venaissin. Master from 1296 until 1304. See Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, pp. 251–66. William of Viviers: Cleric in the priory of St. Gilles in 3/1216. Cart., no. 1467. William Sabaterius (Zabaterius): Simple brother in St. Gilles in 5,9/1204, 7/1205. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 51, 136–37, 358. William Scriptor: Commander of Montpellier in 2/1213. Cart. Avignon, no. 75. Ximen of Labata: Navarre. Prior of St. Gilles. Commander of Huesca in Aragon in 2/1198, 2/1200. Castellan of Amposta in 8,9/1201. Grand commander of Spain in 6, /1205, 11/1208, 1/1209, 9/1210. In 12/1205 he held both the castellany of Amposta and the priory of St. Gilles. Cart., nos. 989, 1014, 1112, 1150, 1165, 1220, 1228, 1319, 1321, 1356, 1357.

166

APPENDIX

Priory of Auvergne Berald of St. Privat: Commander of Puy en Velay in 11/1263. Cart. Velay, no. 56. Bernard of Chambun: Commander of Chazelles in 6/1253, 9/1256. Commander of St. Bonnet les Places (member of Chazelles) in 7/1259. Commander of both houses in 12/1263 and 5/1264. Cart., no. 2645: AD du Rhône (antérieur), pp. 150, 158. Bertrand of Espinassa: Commander of Montchamp in 7/1273. Cart. Velay, no. 64. Estorgne Revell: Commander of St. Bonnet les Places in 1/1249. AD du Rhône (antérieur), p. 158. Gerald Esquint: Commander of Puy en Velay c.1188. Cart. Velay, no. 49. Gerald of Charentena: Commander of Chazelles in 10/1273. AD du Rhône (antérieur), p. 153. Gerald of Chasaletum: Simple brother probably in Puy en Velay in 7/1273. Cart. Velay, p. 64. Giraud of Navis: Commander of Chazelles in 4/1267, 7/1269. AD du Rhône (antérieur), pp. 152, 166–67. Manfred of Châteauneuf: Commander of Puy en Velay in 7/1273. Cart. Velay, no. 64. Nicholas of Clermont: Chaplain of the prior of Auvergne in 7/1273. Cart. Velay, no. 64; Cart. no. 3512. Peter of Cenevil: Commander of Puy en Velay in 1248. Cart. Velay, no. 54. Peter of Mirmanda (Hatt.)*: For place of origin, personal background and his career in the Order see Chapter 4 above, p. 138. Joined the commandery of Alleyras (part of Puy en Velay) in 1163. Simple brother in Acre in 1184 and in Jerusalem in 4/1185. Castellan of Crac in 1/1193, 8/1198, 6/1199. Grand commander of the Order in Acre in 1202. Cart. Velay, n. 16. Cart. nos. 663, 754, 941, 1031, 1085, 1096, 1156; RRH, no. 787b. Pons of Melgueil: Hérault. Commander of Puy en Velay in 8/1215. Cart. Velay, no. 50. Raynaud of Lapte: Commander of Devesset (Ardèche) in 11/1246. Cart. Velay, no. 53. Robert of Montrognon: Prior of Auvergne in 1/1261, 12/1262, 3/1267, 12/1269, 10/1272, 2,7/1273. Cart., nos. 2974, 3043, 3249, 3373, 3476, 3487–88, 3512; AD du Rhône (antérieur), pp. 153, 166–67. William of Noalhac: Commander of Belveyre in 8/1258. AD du Rhône (antérieur), p. 19.

Grand commander of Outremer (who has not been mentioned above) Garcia of Lisa: Simple brother in Huesca in 1181 or 1182. Castellan of Amposta in 11,12/1186, 10/1187. Grand commander of Outremer in 1196, 6/1198 and 7/1199. Cart., nos. 588, 597–98, 820, 822, 835, 925, 1022, 1026, 1056–57. Cart. St. Gilles, nos. 263, 273; Cart. Avignon, no. 76 and suppl. 1. Delaville Le Roulx, Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte, p. 414.

Bibliography Manuscript Sources Lyons: Archives départementales du Rhône 48H: Cartulaire de l’ordre des Hospitaliers. Marseilles: Archives départementales des Bouches-du-Rhône 56H: Charters of the Hospitallers and the Templars. Paris: Archives Nationales Cart. Fieffes, S5059, S5533. Cartulaire de la commanderie de Saulce sur Yonne, S5235. Bibliothèque Nationale Cart. Éterpigny, nouv. acq. lat. 927. Toulouse: Archives départementales de la Haute-Garonne Archives écclesiastiques – série H: Charters of the Hospitallers and the Templars. Vatican City: Vat. Reg. 9–13: Regesta Honorii III.

Printed Sources Abu’l Fida, Géographie, trans. M. Reinaud and S. Guyard, 2 vols., Paris, 1848–1883. ———. ‘Annales’, RHC Or. vol. I. ———. The Memories of a Syrian Prince. Abu’l Fid , Sultan on Ham h (672–732/1273–1331), trans. P.M.Holt, Wiesbaden, 1983. Abu Shama, ‘Le Livre des Deux Jardins’, RHC Or, vols. IV, V. Acta Aragonensia, ed. H. Finke, 3 vols., Berlin, 1922 (reprint Berlin, 1966). Acta imperii inedita, saeculi XIII, ed. E. Winkelmann, 2 vols., Innsbruck, 1880, 1885. Al-Aini, ‘The Collar of Pearls’, extr. trans., in RHC Or, vol. II. Al-Maqrizi, Histoire des sultans Mamlouks de l’Égypte, trans. M.Quatremère, 2 vols., Paris, 1837, 1842. The Alexiad of the princess Anna Comnena, trans. E.A.A. Dawes, London, 1967. Amadi, Chroniques d’Amadi et de Strambaldi, ed. R. de Mas Latrie (Collection de documents inédits sur l’histoire de France), vol. I, Paris, 1891.

168

BIBLIOGRAPHY: PRINTED SOURCES

‘Annales Ceccanenses’, MGH SS, XIX, pp. 274–302. ‘Annales de Terre Sainte’, ed. G. Raynaud and R. Röhricht, AOL, vol. II. Annales Ecclesiastici, ed. C. Baronius, A. Pagi, O. Raynaldus and A. Theiner, 37 vols., Bar-le-Duc and Paris, 1864–85. ‘Annales Monasterii de Burton 1004–1263’, ed. H.R. Luard, Annales Monastici, vol. I, Rolls Series 36, London, 1864. Beaufort, F. Karamania or a Brief Description of the South Coast of Asia Minor and of the Remains of Antiquity, London, 1817. Bullarium Ordinis Militiae de Calatrava, ed. I.J. Ortega y Cotes, Madrid, 1761 (reprint Barcelona, 1981). Burchard of Mount Sion, ‘Descriptio Terrae Sanctae’, Peregrinatores Medii Aevi Quator, ed. J.C.M. Laurent, Leipzig, 1864. Cartulaire de l’abbaye Notre Dame de Léoncel, ed. U. Chevalier, Montélimar, 1869. Cartulaire de l’Hôpital de Saint Jean de Bruxelles, actes des XII–XIII siècles, ed. P. Bonenfant, Brussels, 1953. Cartulaire de Trinquetaille, ed. P.A. Amarguier, Gap, 1972. Cartulaire des Hospitaliers du Velay, ed. A. Chassaing, Paris, 1888. Cartulaire du Prieuré de La Charité-sur-Loire (Nièvre), ed. R. de Lespinasse, Nevers and Paris, 1887. Cartulaire du Prieuré de Saint Gilles de l’Hôpital de Saint Jean de Jérusalem (1129–1210), ed. D. Le Blevec and A. Venturini, Paris, 1997. Cartulaire et chartes de la commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem d’Avignon au temps de la Commune (1170–1250), ed. C.-F. Hollard, Paris, 2001. Cartulaire général de l’Ordre des Hospitaliers de Saint Jean de Jérusalem, 1100–1310, ed. J. Delaville Le Roulx, 4 vols., Paris, 1894–1906. The Cartulary of the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem in England, Secunda Camera: Essex, ed. M. Gervers, Oxford, 1982. The Cartulary of the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem in England, Part 2, Prima Camera, Essex, ed. M. Gervers, Oxford, 1996. Catálogo de la documentacíon Navarra de la Orden de San Juan de Jerusalén en el Archivo Historico Nacional, siglos XII–XIX, ed. C. Gutierrez del Arroyo, 2 vols., Pamplona, 1992. Chartes de coutume en Picardie (XI–XIII siècle), ed. R. Fossier (Collection de documents inédits sur l’histoire de France, vol. 10), Paris, 1974. . Chartes du Forez antérieures au XIV siècle, ed. G. Guichard, 23 vols., Mâcon, 1933–78. ‘Chartularium domus Hospitalis Hierosolymitani Sancti Pauli prope Romanis’, Cartulaires des Hospitaliers et Templiers en Dauphiné (Bulletin d’Histoire et d’Archéologie du Diocèse de Valence, Collection de Cartulaires Dauphinois), ed. U. Chevalier, Romans, 1875. Choix des poésies des troubadours, ed. F. Raynouard, 6 vols., Paris, 1816–21. Chronica de Mailros, ed. J. Stevenson, Edinburgh, 1835. ‘Chronica minor auctore minorita Erphordiensis’, MGH SS, XXIV. Conciliorum oecumenicorum decreta, ed. J. Alberigo et al., Bologna, 1973 (3rd edition). Constable Sempad, ‘Chronique du Royaume de la Petite Arménie par le connétable Sempad’, RHC Arm, vol. I. ———. La Chronique Attribuée au Connétable Smbat, ed. G. Dédéyan, Paris, 1980. ‘Continuation de Guillaume de Tyr de 1229 à 1261, dite du manuscrit de Rothelin’, RHC Oc., vol. II. Councils and Synods with Other Documents Relating to the English Church, 871–1313, ed. F.M. Powicke, D. Whitelock et al., 2 vols. in 4, Oxford, 1964–81. Diplomatic Documents, ed. P. Chaplais, 2 vols., London, 1964. Documentos de Clemente IV (1265–1268) referentes a España, ed. S. Domínguez Sánchez, León, 1996.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: PRINTED SOURCES

169

Documents inédits sur le commerce de Marseille au Moyen-Âge, ed. L. Blancard, 2 vols., Marseille, 1884–85. Epistolae Saeculi XIII e Regestis Pontificum Romanorum, ed. C. Rodenberg, MGH Epistolae, 3 vols., Berlin, 1893–94. ‘L’Estoire d’Eracles empereur et le conqueste de la Terre d’Outremer’, RHC Oc., vols. I, II. Flores Historiarum, ed. H.R. Luard, vols. II, III, Rolls Series 95, London, 1890. Foedera, conventiones, literae, et cuiuscunque generis acta publica inter reges Angliae et alios quosvis imperatores, reges, pontifices, principes, vel communitates, 1101–1654, ed. T. Rymer (1739–45); new ed. A. Clarke et al., 4 vols., London, 1816–69. Gallia christiana novissima, ed. J.H. Albanès and U. Chevalier, 7 vols., Montbéliard and Valence, 1895–1920. ‘Gesta crucigerorum Rhenanorum’, Quinti belli sacri scriptores minores, ed. R. Röhricht, Geneva, 1879, pp. 27–57. ‘Gesta obsidionis Damiate’, Quinti belli sacri scriptores minores, ed. R. Röhricht, Geneva, 1879, pp. 71–115. Gestes des Chiprois, ed. G. Raynaud, Geneva, 1887. Gilbert of Tournai, ‘Collectio de scandalis ecclesiae’, ed. A. Stroick, Archivum Franciscanum historicum, 24 (1931), pp. 32–62. El gran priorado de Navarra de la Orden de San Juan de Jerusalén, ed. S.A. Garcìa Larrageta, 2 vols., Pamplona, 1957. Histoire et cartulaire des Templiers de Provins, ed. V. Carrière, Paris, 1919. Historia diplomatica Friderici secundi, ed. J.L.A. Huillard-Bréholles, 6 vols., Paris,1852–61. Ibn-’Abd-al-Zahir, Life of Baybars, ed. and trans. S.F. Sadeque, Dacca, 1956. Ibn al-Furat, Ayyubids, Mamlukes and Crusaders. Selections from the Tarikh al-Duwal wa’l-Muluk of Ibn al-Furat, ed. and trans. M.C and U. Lyon, with historical introduction and notes by J. Riley-Smith, Cambridge, 1971, vol. 2. Imâd ad-Dîn al-Işfahâni, Conquête de la Syrie et de la Palestine par Saladin, trans. H. Massé, Paris, 1972. Inventaire sommaire des Archives Départementales du Rhône, Archives Écclésiastiques, série H, ed. M.C. Faure, Lyons, 1945, vol. III. Inventaire sommaire des Archives Départementales du Rhône antérieures à 1790, Archives écclésiastiques, série H, Lyons, 1932, vol. II. Innocent III, ‘Opera Omnia’, PL, CCXIV–CCXVII. ———. Die Register Innocenz’ III, ed. O. Hageneder and A. Haidacher et al., 7 vols., Grasse, Cologne, Rome and Vienne, 1964–97. ———. The Letters of Pope Innocent III concerning England and Wales (1198–1216). A calendar with an appendix of texts, ed. C.R. and M. Cheney, Oxford, 1967. James I, The Book of Deeds of James I of Aragon. A Translation of the Medieval Catalan ‘Llibres dels Fets’, trans. H. Buffery and D. Smith, Aldershot, 2003. James of Vitry, ‘Historia orientalis seu Hierosolymitana’, Gesta Dei per Francos, ed. J. Bongars, Hanover, 1611, vol. I. Lettres de Jacques de Vitry, 1160/1170–1240, ed. R.B.C. Huygens, Leiden, 1960. John of Beaumont, ‘Lettre à Geoffroi de la Chapelle sur la prise de Damiette’, AOL, vol. I, pp. 389–90. John of Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. J. Monfrin, Paris, 1995. ———. ‘La défense du Temple devant le concile de Lyon en 1274’, ed. P. Amargier, in 1274: Année charnière: mutations et continuités. Colloques internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, 1977, pp. 495–51. Layettes du Trésor des Chartes, ed. J.B.A.T. Teulet, 3 vols., Paris, 1863–75.

170

BIBLIOGRAPHY: PRINTED SOURCES

‘Lettre à Charles d’Anjou sur les affaires de Terre Sainte’, ed. C.V. Langlois, Bibliothèque de l’école des Chartes, 78 (1917), pp. 487–90. Libros de privilegios de la Orden de San Juan de Jerusalén en Castilla y León, ed. C. de Ayala Martínez, Madrid, 1995. ‘Livre des Assises de la Cour des Bourgeois’, RHC, Lois, tom. II. ‘Magni presbyteri annales Rechespergenses’, MGH SS, XVII, pp. 439–534. Malteser Urkunden und Regesten zur Geschichte der Tempelherren und der Johanniter, ed. H. Prutz, Munich, 1883. Marino Sanudo the Elder, ‘Liber secretorum fidelium crucis (1321)’, Gesta Dei per Francos, ed. J. Bongars, Hanover, 1611, vol. II. Matthew Paris, Chronica Maiora, ed. H.R. Luard, vols. IV–VI, Rolls Series 57, London, 1877, 1880, 1882. ‘Menkonis Chronicon’, MGH SS, XXIII, pp. 547–49. ‘Mittitur eis pecunia’, PL, CCXVI, cols. 37–38. Odo of Châteauroux, Spicilegium sive collectio veterum aliquot scriptorum, eds. L. d’Achèry and L.F.J. de la Barre, Paris, 1723, vol. III. Oliver of Paderborn, Historia Damiatina, ed. H. Hoogeweg, Bibliothek des literarischen Vereins in Stuttgart, 202. Tübingen, 1894. Papsturkunden für Templer und Johanniter, ed. R. Hiestand, Vorarbeiten zum Oriens Pontificius, vols. I–II, Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, 77, 135, Göttingen, 1972, 1984. Papsturkunden in Spanien vorarbeiten zur Hispania Pontifica, 2 vols., ed. P. Kehr, Berlin, 1926–28. Pegolotti, F.B. La pratica della mercatura, ed. A. Evans, Cambridge (Mass.), 1936. Peregrinationes tres: Saewulf, John of Würzburg, Theodericus, ed. R.B.C.Huygens, Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Medievalis, 139, Turnhout, 1994. ‘Philippi curia Quedlinburgensis’, MGH Legum, II, p. 213. Recueil des Actes des Comtes de Provence appartenant à la maison de Barcelone, ed. F. Benoit, 2 vols., Paris, 1925. Recueil des historiens des croisades Documents Arméniens, 2 vols., Paris 1869, 1906. Historiens occidentaux, 5 vols., Paris, 1844–1895. Historiens orientaux, 5 vols., Paris, 1872–1906. Lois. Les Assises de Jérusalem, 2 vols., Paris, 1841–43. Recueil des Historiens des Gaules et de la France, ed. M. Bouquet et al., 24 vols., Paris, 1737–1904. Regesta Honorii papae III, ed. P. Pressutti, Rome, 2 vols., 1888–95. Regesta Pontificum Romanorum, ed. A. Potthast, 2 vols., Berlin, 1873–75. Regesta Regni Hierosolymitani, ed. R. Röhricht, 2 vols., Innsbruck, 1893. Additamentum, Innsbruck, 1904. Les Registres d’Alexandre IV, ed. C. Bourel de la Roncière, A. Coulon and J. de. Loye (BEFAR), 3 vols., Paris, 1902, 1917, 1953 (tables, 1959). Les Registres de Clément IV, ed. É. Jordan (BEFAR), Paris, 1893. Les Registres de Grégoire IX, ed. L. Auvray (BEFAR), 3 vols., Paris, 1896–1908. Les Registres de Grégoire X, ed. J. Guiraud (BEFAR), 3 vols. including tables, Paris, 1892, 1906, 1908. Les Registres d’Innocent IV, ed. É. Berger, 4 vols., Paris, 1884–1921. Les Registres d’Urbain IV, ed. M.J. Guiraud (BEFAR), 4 vols. inc. tables, Paris, 1901, 1929, 1958. I Registri della cancelleria angioina ricostruiti, ed. R. Filangieri di Candida et al, 28 vols. so far, Naples, 1950– .

BIBLIOGRAPHY: SECONDARY WORKS

171

‘Richeri Gesta Senoniensis Ecclesiae’, MGH SS, XXV, pp. 249–345. Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, ed. J.D. Mansi et al., 55 vols., Florence, Venice, Paris, Arnhem, Leipzig, 1759–1962. Salimbene de Adam, ‘Cronica’, MGH SS, XXXII. Tabulae Ordinis Theutonici, ed. E. Strehlke, Berlin, 1864. Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, ed. U. Durand and E. Martène, 5 vols., Paris, 1717 (repr. Farnborough, 1968). Travels to Tana and Persia by Josafa Barbaro and Ambrogio Contarini, ed. Lord Stanley of Alderley, trans. W. Thomas London, 1873. Urkunden zur älteren Handels- und Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig mit besonderer Beziehung auf Byzanz und die Levante, 3 vols., ed. G.L. Tafel and G.M. Thomas, Vienna, 1856–57. Willbrand of Oldenburg, ‘Itinerarium Terrae Sanctae’, Peregrinatores medii aevi quatuor, ed. J.C.M. Laurent, Leipzig, 1864. Willelmi Tyrensis Archiepiscopi Chronicon, ed. R.B.C. Huygens, Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Medievalis, 63–63A, 2 vols., Turnhout, 1986.

Secondary Works Abulafia, D. The Two Italies, Cambridge, 1977. ———. Frederick II. A Medieval Emperor, London, 2nd ed. 1992. ———. The Western Mediterranean Kingdoms, 1200–1500: The Struggle for Dominion, London and New York, 1997. ———. ‘The Kingdom of Sicily under the Hohenstaufen and Angevins’, The New Cambridge Medieval History, vol. V, ed. D. Abulafia, Cambridge, 1995, pp. 497–521. ———. ‘La produzione dello zucchero nei domini della Corona d’Aragona’, Medioevo Mezzogiorno Mediterraneo, Studi in onore di Mario Del Treppo, ed. G. Rossetti and G. Vitolo (Europa Mediterranea, quaderni 13), vol. II, Naples, 2000, pp. 105–19. Arbois de Jubainville, H de. Histoire de Bar-sur-Aube sous les Comtes de Champagne, 1077–1284, Paris, 1859. ———. Histoire des ducs et des comtes de Champagne, 6 vols., Paris, 1859–66. Ashtor, E. ‘Levantine Sugar Industry in the Later Middle Ages, an Example of Technological Decline’, Israel Oriental Studies, 7 (1971), pp. 227–76. Atlas historique. Provence, Comtat Venaissin, Principauté de Monaco, Principauté d’Orange, Comté de Nice, ed. E. Baratier, G. Duby and E. Hildesheimer, Paris, 1969. Aurell, M. ‘Nécropoles et donats: Les comtes de la maison de Barcelone et l’Hôpital (XII–XIII siècles)’, Provence historique, 45 (1995), pp. 7–23. Avramea, A. ‘Land and Sea Communications, Fourth-Fifteenth Centuries’, The Economic History of Byzantium. From the Seventh through the Fifteenth Century, vol. I, ed. A.E. Laiou, Washington, D.C, 2002, pp. 57–90. Ayala Martínez, C. de. ‘Alfonso X y la Orden de San Juan de Jerusalén’, Estudios de Historia Medieval. Homenaje a Luis Suarez, ed. V. Alvarez Palenzuela, M. Ladero Quesada and J. Valdeón Baruque, Valladolid, 1991, pp. 29–50. ——— et al., ‘Las Órdenes Militares en la Edad Media peninsular. Historiografia 1976–1992’, Medievalismo. Boletín de la Sociedad Española de Estudios Medievales, 2 (1992), pp. 119–69, 3 (1993), pp. 142–44. Barag, D. ‘A New Source Concerning the Ultimate Borders of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem’, Israel Exploration Journal, 29 (1979), pp. 197–217. Barber, M. ‘The Social Context of the Templars’, TRHS, 5th series, 34 (1984), pp. 27–46. ———. The New Knighthood. A History of the Order of the Temple, Cambridge, 1994.

172

BIBLIOGRAPHY: SECONDARY WORKS

———. ‘Supplying the Crusader States: The Role of the Templars’, The Horns of Hattin, ed. B.Z.Kedar, Jerusalem and London, 1992, pp. 314–26. ———. The Cathars. Dualist Heretics in Languedoc in the High Middle Ages, Harlow, 2000. Barquero Goñi, C. ‘El carácter militar de la orden de San Juan en Castilla y León (siglos XII–XIV)’, Revista de Historia Militar, 73 (1992), pp. 53–80. ———. ‘Los Hospitalarios y la monarquia Castellano-Leonesa (siglos XII–XIII)’, Centro de estudios e investigación ‘San Isidoro’ (CECEL), Archivo Histórico Diocesano, León, 1995, pp. 53–119. ———. ‘La Orden de San Juan en Castilla y León durante la edad media (siglos XII–XV)’, La Orden Militar de San Juan en la Península Ibérica durante la Edad Media. Actas del congreso internacional celebrado en Alcázar de San Juan los dias 23, 24 y 25 de octubre de 2000, ed. R. Izquierdo Benito, J. Molero García and F. Ruiz Gómez, Alcázar de San Juan, 2002, pp. 99–120. ———. Los caballeros Hospitalarios en España durante la Edad Media (siglos XII–XV), Burgos, 2003. Bautier, R.H. ‘Recherches sur les routes de l’Europe médiévale’, Bulletin philologique et historique du comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques, 1 (1960), pp. 99–143. Beaucage, B. ‘Une énigme des hospitaliers de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem: le déficit des commanderies du moyen Rhône, au prieuré de Provence en 1338’, Provence historique 30 (1980), pp. 137–62. ———. ‘Difficultés économiques et réaction seigneuriale au terroir de Beaucaire: La commanderie des Hospitaliers de Saint-Pierre de Campublic aux XIV et XV siècles’, Canadian Journal of History/Annales Canadiennes d’Histoire 25 (1990), pp. 1–20. Benvenisti, M. The Crusaders in the Holy Land, Jerusalem, 1970. Berend, N. At the Gate of Christendom. Jews, Muslims and ‘Pagans’ in Medieval Hungary, c.1000–c.1300, Cambridge, 2001. Berthe, M. ‘Deux commanderies Hospitalières du Lauragais, Puysubran et Caignac (XII–XIV siècle)’, Les Ordres Militaires, la vie rurale et le peuplement en Europe occidentale, XII–XIII siècles, Flaran 6 (1984), pp. 207–13. Blanchard, R. ‘Asie Occidentale’, Géographie Universelle, ed. L. Gallois and P. Vidal de la Blanche, Paris, 1929, vol. VIII. Bloch, M. Feudal Society, trans. L.A. Manyon, London and New York, 1989. Boas, A.J. Crusader Archeology. The Material Culture of the Latin East, London, 1999. Boase, T.S.R. ‘Gazetteer’, The Cilician Kingdom of Armenia, ed. T.S.R. Boase, Edinburgh and London, 1978, pp. 145–85. Bolton, B. ‘Serpent in the Dust: Sparrow on the Housetop: Attitudes to Jerusalem and the Holy Land in the Circle of Pope Innocent III’, The Holy Land, Holy Lands, and Christian History, ed. R.N. Swanson, Woodbridge, 2000, pp. 154–80. Bonet Donato, M. La Orden del Hospital en la Corona de Aragón: Poder y gobierno en la Castellanía de Amposta (S. XII–XV), Madrid, 1994. Bonnin, J.–C. ‘Les Templiers et la mer: l’exemple de La Rochelle’, La Commanderie, institution des ordres militaires dans l’Occident médiéval, ed. A. Luttrell and L. Pressouyre, Paris, 2002, pp. 307–15. Bourrilly, V.L and Busquet, R. La Provence au Moyen Âge, Marseille, 1924. Bramato, F. Storia dell’ordine dei Templari in Italia, 2 vols., Rome, 1991–94. Bronstein, J. ‘La organización internacional de la Orden del Hospital. Algunas reflexiones sobre la contribución de los prioratos ibéricos a la Orden en Tierra Santa’, in Órdenes Militares en la Edad Media. II. Alcazar de San Juan (Ciudad Real, forthcoming). ———. ‘The Mobilization of Hospitallers’ Manpower from Europe to the Latin East in the Thirteenth Century’, International Mobility in the Military Orders, ed. J. Burgtorf and H. Nicholson (University of Wales Press, forthcoming).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: SECONDARY WORKS

173

Brundage, J.M. Medieval Canon Law and the Crusader, Madison, 1969. Bulst-Thiele, M.L. Sacrae Domus Militiae Templi Hierosolymitani Magistri: Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Templerordens 1118/9–1314, Göttingen, 1974. Bur, M. La formation du comté de Champagne, v.950–v.1150, Nancy, 1977. Burgtorf, J. ‘Wind beneath the Wings: Subordinate Headquarters Officials in the Hospital and the Temple from the Twelfth and Early Fourteenth Centuries’, The Military Orders. Vol. 2. Welfare and Warfare, ed. H. Nicholson, Aldershot, 1998, pp. 217–24. ———. ‘Leadership and Structures in the Orders of the Hospital and the Temple (Twelfth and early Fourteenth Century). Select Aspects’, The Crusades and the Military Orders. Expanding the Frontiers of Medieval Latin Christianity, ed. Z. Hunyadi and J. Laszlovszky, Budapest, 2001, pp. 379–94. Cahen, C. La Syrie du Nord à l’époque des croisades et la principauté franque d’Antioche (Institut français de Damas. Bibliothèque orientale, I), Paris, 1940. Carbasse, J.-M. ‘Les commanderies: aspects juridiques et institutionnels’, La Commanderie, institution des ordres militaires dans l’Occident médiéval, ed. A. Luttrell and L. Pressouyre, Paris, 2002, pp. 19–27. Carraz, D. ‘Templiers et Hospitaliers en France méridionale (XII–XIII siècles). À propos d’un ouvrage rècent’, Provence historique, 50 (2000), pp. 207–37. ———. ‘Les ordres militaires et la ville (XII – début du XIV siècle): L’exemple des commanderies urbaines de la basse vallée du Rhône’, Annales du Midi, 114 (2002), pp. 275–92. ———. ‘L’anticléricalisme en France méridionale (milieu XII – début XIV siècle)’, Cahiers de Fanjeaux 38 (2002), pp. 375–404. Cathcart King, D.J. ‘The Taking of Le Krak des Chevaliers in 1271’, Antiquity, 23 (1943), pp. 83–92. Chapoutot-Remadi, M. ‘L’Agriculture dans l’Empire Mamluk au moyen âge d’après al-Nuwayrî’, Les Cahiers de Tunisie, 22 (1974), pp. 23–45. Cheney, C.R. Pope Innocent III and England, Stuttgart, 1976. Cleve, H. ‘Kaiser Friedrich II und die Ritterorden’, Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 49 (1993), pp. 39–73. Cole, P.J. The Preaching of the Crusades to the Holy Land, 1095–1270, Cambridge (Mass.), 1991. Coulet, N. ‘Les ordres militaires, la vie rurale et le peuplement dans le sud-est de la France au Moyen Âge’, Flaran: Les Ordres Militaires, la vie rurale et le peuplement en Europe occidentale, XII–XIII siècles, 6 (1984), pp. 37–60. ——— and Stouff, L. ‘Le village de Provence au Bas Moyen Âge’, Cahiers du Centre d’Études des Sociétés Méditerranéennes, Nouvelle Série, 2 (1987), pp. 32–65. Coureas, N. The Latin Church in Cyprus, 1195–1312, Aldershot, 1997. ———. ‘The Role of the Templars and the Hospitallers in the Movement of Commodities involving Cyprus, 1291–1312’, The Experience of Crusading. Volume Two: Defending the Crusader Kingdom, ed. P.W. Edbury and J. Phillips, Cambridge, 2003, pp. 257–74. Deerr, N. The History of Sugar, 2 vols., London, 1949. Delaruelle, E. ‘Templiers et Hospitaliers en Languedoc pendant la Croisade des Albigeois’, Cahiers de Fanjeaux, vol. 4 (1969), pp. 322–27. Delaville Le Roulx, J. ‘Liste des grands prieurs de Rome de l’Ordre de l’Hôpital de S. Jean de Jérusalem’, Mélanges de Rossi, supplement aux Mélanges d’archéolgie et d’histoire publiés par l’École Française de Rome, vol. XII, 1892, pp. 263–69. ———. Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte et à Chypre, Paris, 1904. Demurger, A. Vie et mort de l’ordre du Temple, 1118–1314, Paris, 1989. ———. Chevaliers du Christ. Les ordres religieux-militaires au Moyen Âge (XI–XVI siècles), Paris, 2002.

174

BIBLIOGRAPHY: SECONDARY WORKS

Der Nersessian, S. ‘The Kingdom of Cilician Armenia’, Études Byzantines et Arméniennes, Louvain, 1973, vol. I, pp. 329–52. Deschamps, P. Les châteaux des croisés en Terre Sainte, 3 vols., Paris, 1934–1973. Dictionary of National Biography, ed. S. Lee and L. Stephen, 63 vols., London, 1895–1900. Dictionnaire de Droit Canonique, ed. R. Naz, 7 vols., Paris, 1935–65. Dictionnaire de théologie Catholique, ed. E. Mangenot, A. Vacant et al., 15 vols., Paris, 1915–50. Duby, G. Rural Economy and Country Life in the Medieval West, trans. C. Postan, London, 1968. ———. The Chivalrous Society, trans. C. Postan, London, 1977. Dunbabin, J. Charles I of Anjou. Power, Kingship and State-Making in Thirteenth-Century Europe, London and New York, 1998. Edbury, P.W. The Kingdom of Cyprus and the Crusades, 1191–1374, Cambridge, 1991. ———. ‘The Medieval Kingdom of Cyprus’, Medieval History, 2 (1992), pp. 86–91. ———. John of Ibelin and the Kingdom of Jerusalem, Woodbridge, 1997. ———. ‘John of Ibelin’s Title to the County of Jaffa and Ascalon’, Kingdoms of the. ———. Crusades. From Jerusalem to Cyprus, Aldershot, 1999, essay number VII, pp. 115–33. ———. ‘The Franco-Cypriot Landowning Class and its Exploitation of the Agrarian Resources of the Island of Cyprus’, Kingdoms of the Crusades. From Jerusalem to Cyprus, Aldershot, 1999, essay number XIX, pp. 1–7. Edwards, R.W., The Fortifications of Armenian Cilicia, Washington, 1987. El’ad, A. ‘The Coastal Cities of Eretz-Israel in the Arab Period (640–1099) on the Basis of Arab Sources’, Cathedra, 8 (1978), pp. 155–78 (in Hebrew). Ellenblum, R. ‘Three Generations of Frankish Castle-Building in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem’, Autour de la Première Croisade, Actes du Colloque de la Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East (Clermont-Ferrand, 22–25 juin 1995), ed. M. Balard, Paris, 1996, pp. 517–529. ———. Frankish Rural Settlement in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, Cambridge, 1998. Engelmann, E. Zur Städtischen Volksbewegung in Südfrankreich: Kommunefreiheit und Gesellschaft: Arles 1200–1250, Berlin, 1959. Favreau-Lilie, M.-L. ‘The Military Orders and the Escape of the Christian Population from the Holy Land in 1291’, Journal of Medieval History, 19 (1993), pp. 201–27. Forey, A. The Templars in the Corona de Aragón, London, 1973. ———. ‘Recruitment to the Military Orders, Twelfth to mid-Fourteenth Centuries’, Viator, 17 (1986), pp. 139–71. ———. The Military Orders, from the Twelfth to the Early Fourteenth Centuries, London, 1992. ———. ‘Military Orders and Secular Warfare in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Century’, Viator. Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 24 (1993), pp. 79–100. ———. ‘The Military Orders and the Holy War against Christians in the Thirteenth Century’, Military Orders and the Crusades, Aldershot, 1994, essay number II, pp. 1–14. ———. ‘The Military Orders and the Spanish Reconquest in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries’, Military Orders and the Crusades, Aldershot, 1994, essay number V, pp. 197–234. ———. ‘The Military Orders in the Crusading Proposals of the Late-Thirteenth and Early-Fourteenth Centuries’, Military Orders and the Crusades, Aldershot, 1994, essay number VIII, pp. 317–45. ———. ‘The Militarisation of the Hospital of St. John’, Military Orders and the Crusades, Aldershot, 1994, essay number IX, pp. 75–89. ———. ‘Novitiate and Instruction in the Military Orders in the Twelfth and Thirteenth

BIBLIOGRAPHY: SECONDARY WORKS

175

Centuries’, Military Orders and the Crusades, Aldershot, 1994, essay number III, pp. 1–17. ———. ‘The Military Orders and the Conversion of Muslims in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries’, Journal of Medieval History, 28 (2002), pp. 1–22. ———. ‘The Charitable Activities of the Templars’, Viator, 34 (2003), pp. 109–41. Foss, C. ‘The Defenses of Asia Minor Against the Turks’, Cities, Fortresses and Villages of Byzantine Asia Minor, Aldershot, 1996, essay number V, pp. 145–205. Fossier, R. La terre et les hommes en Picardie jusqu’à la fin du XIII s., 2 vols., Paris, 1968. ———. Le Moyen Âge. Le Temps des Crises, 1250–1520, Paris, 1983. ———. ‘Les Hospitaliers et les Templiers au nord de la Seine et en Bourgogne, XII–XIV siècles’, Flaran: Les Ordres Militaires, la vie rurale et le peuplement en Europe occidentale, XII–XIII siècles, 6 (1984), pp. 13–33. Fournial, E. Les villes et l’économie d’échange en Forez aux XIII et XIV siècles, Paris, 1967. Fourquin, G. Les campagnes de la région Parisienne à la fin du Moyen Âge, Paris, 1964. Frankel, R. ‘Topographical Notes on the Territory of Acre in the Crusader Period’, Israel Exploration Journal, 38 (1988), pp. 249–72. Friedman, Y. Encounter between Enemies. Captivity and Ransom in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, Leiden, 2002. García-Guijarro Ramos, L. Papado, cruzadas y órdenes militares, siglos XI–XIII, Madrid, 1995. ———. ‘Estructuracíon interna y trabajo en las órdenes militares del Temple y del Hospital (siglos XII y XIII)’, El Trabajo a través de la historia, ed. S. Castillo, Madrid, 1996, pp. 135–42. ———. ‘La militarización de la Orden del Hospital: líneas para un debate’, Ordens Militares: guerra, religião, poder e cultura – Actas do III Encontro sobre Ordens Militares, ed. I.C. Ferreira Fernandes, Palmela, 1999, vol. II, pp. 293–302. ———. ‘The Aragonese Hospitaller monastery of Sigena. Its early stages, 1188–ca.1210’, Hospitaller Women in the Middle Ages, ed. A. Luttrell and H. Nicholson, Aldershot (forthcoming). García Larragueta, S. ‘Relaciones comerciales entre Aragón y el Hospital de Acre’, VII Congreso de Historia de la Corona de Aragón (Barcelona), 2 (1962), pp. 507–515. Gervers, M. The Hospitaller Cartulary of the British Library (Cotton MS Nero E VI), Toronto, 1981. Glad, M. ‘Quelques notes sur la commanderie de Laingneville’, Bulletin et Mémoires de la Société Archéologique et Historique de Clermont-de-l’Oise, 1924, pp. 15–29. Goitein, S.D. ‘A Letter from Seleucia (Cilicia), dated 21 July 1137’, Speculum, 39 (1964), pp. 298–303. ———. A Mediterranean Society. The Jewish Communities of the Arab World as Portrayed in the Documents of the Cairo Geniza, 5 vols., Berkeley and London, 1967 (repr.1999). Goñi Gaztambide, J. ‘Recensiones’, Hispania Sacra, 9 (1956), pp. 461–464. Grousset, R. Histoire des Croisades et du Royaume Franc de Jérusalem, 3 vols., Paris, 1934–36. Guiral, P. and Amargier, P. Histoire de Marseille, Paris, 1983. Hamilton, B. The Latin Church in the Crusader States: The Secular Church, London, 1980. Heyd, W. Histoire du commerce du Levant au Moyen Âge, trans. F. Reynaud, 2 vols., Leipzig, 1885–86 (repr. Leipzig, 1959). Hiestand, R. ‘Die Anfänge der Johanniter’, Die geistlichen Ritterorden, ed. J. Fleckenstein and M. Hellmann, Sigmaringen, 1980, pp. 64–78. ———. ‘Some Reflections on the Impact of the Papacy on the Crusader States and the Military Orders in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Century’, The Crusades and the Military Orders. Expanding the Frontiers of Medieval Latin Christianity, ed. Z. Hunyadi and J. Laszlovszky, Budapest, 2001, pp. 3–20. Higounet, C. ‘Hospitaliers et Templiers: Peuplement et exploitation rurale dans le

176

BIBLIOGRAPHY: SECONDARY WORKS

sud-ouest de la France au Moyen Âge’, Flaran: Les Ordres Militaires, la vie rurale et le peuplement en Europe occidentale, XII–XIII siècles, 6 (1984), pp. 61–78. Histoire de la Provence, ed. E. Baratier and V.L. Bourrilly, Toulouse, 1969. Hoffman Berman, C. ‘Medieval Agriculture, the Southern French Countryside, and the Early Cistercians’, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 76 (1986), pp. 1–179. Holt, P.M. Early Mamluk Diplomacy (1260–1290), Leiden, New York and Cologne, 1995. Housley, N. The Italian Crusades. The Papal-Angevin Alliance and the Crusades Against Christian Lay Powers, 1254–1343, Oxford, 1982. ———. The Later Crusades: From Lyons to Alcazar, 1274–1580, Oxford, 1992. Humphrey-Smith, C. Hugh Revel, Master of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem, 1258–1277, Guildford, 1994. Huygens, R.B.C. ‘Un nouveau texte du traité “De constructione castri Saphet” ’, Studi Medievali, ser. 3, 6 (1965), pp. 355–387. Hyde, J.K. Society and Politics in Medieval Italy. The Evolution of the Civil Life, 1000–1350, London, 1973. Irwin, R. ‘The Supply of Money and the Direction of Trade in Thirteenth Century Syria’, Coinage in the Latin East, The Fourth Oxford Symposium on Coinage and Monetary History, ed. P.W. Edbury and D.M. Metcalf (British Archaeological Reports, series 77), Oxford, 1980, pp. 73–104. Jackson, P. ‘The Crisis in the Holy Land in 1260’, The English Historical Review, 95 (1980), pp. 481–513. Jacoby, D. ‘L’évolution urbaine et la fonction méditerranéenne d’Acre à l’époque des croisades’, Trade, Commodities and Shipping in the Medieval Mediterranean, Aldershot, 1997, essay no. V, pp. 95–109. ———. ‘Les communes italiens et les ordres militaires à Acre: aspects juridiques, territoriaux et militaires (1104–1187, 1191–1291)’, Trade, Commodities and Shipping in the Medieval Mediterranean, Aldershot, 1997, essay no. VI, pp. 193–214. ———. ‘What do we Learn about Byzantine Asia Minor from the Documents of the Cairo Genizah?’ Byzantium, Latin Romania and the Mediterranean, Aldershot, 2001, essay number I, pp. 83–95. ———. ‘The Supply of War Materials to Egypt in the Crusader Period’, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 25 (2001), pp. 102–32. ———. ‘New Venetian Evidence on Crusader Acre’, The Experience of Crusading. Volume Two. Defining the Crusader Kingdom, ed. P.W. Edbury and J. Phillips, Cambridge, 2003, pp. 240–56. Jordan, E. Les origines de la domination Angevine en Italie, Paris, 1909. Jordan, W. Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade: A Study of Rulership, Princeton, 1979. Kantorowicz, E. Frederick the Second, 1194–1250, trans. E.O. Lorimer, London, 1931. Kedar, B.Z. ‘Ein Hilferuf aus Jerusalem vom September 1187’, Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 38 (1982), pp. 112–22. ———. Crusade and Mission. European Approaches Towards the Muslims, Princeton, 1984. Kennedy, H. Crusaders Castles, Cambridge, 1994. Kesten, A. The Old City of Acre, Re-Examination Report 1993, Acre, 1993. Kloner, A. and Cohen, M. ‘The Crusader Fortress at Beth Guvrin’, Qadmoniot, 33 (2000), pp. 32–39 (in Hebrew). Labande, L.–H. Avignon au XIII siècle. L’évèque Zoen Tencarari et les Avignonnais, Paris, 1908 (repr. Paris, 1975). Ladero Quesada, M.A. ‘La investigación sobre Órdenes Militares en la Edad Media hispánica durante los últimos decenios: Corona de Castilla y León’, Las Órdenes Militares en la Península Ibérica. Volumen I. Edad Media, ed. R. Izquierdo Benito and F. Ruiz Gómez, Cuenca, 2000, pp. 9–31.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: SECONDARY WORKS

177

——— and Gonzáles Jiménez, M. ‘La Orden Militar de San Juan en Andalucía’, Archivo Hispalense, 180 (1976), pp. 129–39. Le Blévec, D. ‘L’Hôpital de Saint Jean de Jérusalem à Avignon et en comtat Venaissin au XIII siècle’, Des Hospitaliers de Saint Jean de Jérusalem de Chypre et de Rhodes hier aux chevaliers de Malte aujourd’hui, Paris, 1985, pp. 17–61. ———. ‘Les Hospitaliers de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem en Bas-Vivarais: la commanderie de Trignan, XII–XIII siècles’, Religion et société en Ardèche et dans l’ancien pays de Vivarais, actes du 2 colloque, Privas, 23–24 Mars 1985, pp. 18–35. ——— and Venturini, A. ‘Cartulaires des ordres militaires, XII–XIII siècles (Provence Occidentale, Basse vallée du Rhône)’, Les Cartulaires. Actes de la table ronde, organisée par l’École Nationale des Chartes et le G.D.R 121 du C.N.R.S., ed. O. Guyotjeannin, L. Morelle and M. Parisse, Paris, 1993, pp. 451–65. Ledesma Rubio, M.L. ‘Nota sobre la actividad militar de los Hospitalarios’, Principe de Viana, 25 (1964), pp. 51–56. ———. Templarios y Hospitalarios en el Reino de Aragón (Siglos XII–XIV), Zaragoza, 1982. Legras, A.-M. L’enquête pontificale de 1373 sur l’ordre des Hospitalliers de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem, vol. I, Paris, 1987. Lefort, J. ‘The Rural Economy, Seventh–Twelfth Centuries’, The Economic History of Byzantium. From the Seventh through the Fifteenth Century, vol. II, ed. A.E. Laiou, Washington, D.C., 2002, pp. 231–310. Lewis, A. ‘Patterns of Economic Development in Southern France, 1050–1271 A.D.’, Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History, 3 (1980), pp. 57–83. Ligato, G. ‘Fra Ordini Cavallereschi e crociata: “milites ad terminum” e “confraternitates” armate’, ‘Militia Christi’ e Crociata nei secoli XI–XIII. Atti della undecima Settimana internazionale di studio Mendola, 28 agosto – 1 settembre 1989, Milano, 1992, pp. 645–97. Lloyd, S. English Society and the Crusade, 1216–1307, Oxford, 1988. Lomax, D. Las Órdenes Militares en la Península Ibérica durante la Edad Media, Salamanca, 1976. ———. La Reconquista, trans. A. Moya, Barcelona, 1984. Lord, E. The Knights Templar in Britain, London, 2002. Lunt, W.E. Financial Relations of the Papacy with England to 1327, 2 vols., Cambridge (Mass.), 1939, 1962. Luttrell, A. ‘The Hospitallers’ Interventions in Cilician Armenia: 1291–1375’, The Cilician Kingdom of Armenia, ed. T.S.R. Boase, Edinburgh and London, 1978, pp. 118–144. ———. ‘Templari e Ospitalieri in Italia’, The Hospitallers of Rhodes and their Mediterranean World, Aldershot, 1992, essay number I, pp. 1–11. ———. ‘Gli Ospitalieri e l’eredità dei Templari: 1305–1378’, The Hospitallers of Rhodes and their Mediterranean World, Aldershot, 1992, essay number III, pp. 67–86. ———. ‘The Sugar Industry and its Importance for the Economy of Cyprus during the Frankish Period’, The Development of the Cypriot Economy, from the Prehistoric Period to the Present Day, ed. V. Karageorghis and D. Michaelides, Nicosia, 1996, pp. 165–73. ———. ‘The Earliest Hospitallers’, Montjoie. Studies in Crusade History in Honour of Hans Eberhard Mayer, ed. B.Z. Kedar, R. Hiestand and J. Riley-Smith, Aldershot, 1997, pp. 37–55. ———. ‘The Hospitallers’ Early Written Records’, The Crusades and their Sources. Essays Presented to Bernard Hamilton, ed. J. France and W.G. Zajac, Aldershot, 1998, pp. 135–51. ———. ‘The Hospitallers’ Early Statutes’, Revue Mabillon, 75 (2003), pp. 9–22.

178

BIBLIOGRAPHY: SECONDARY WORKS

———. ‘Ermengol de Aspa and Sigena’, Hospitaller Women in the Middle Ages, ed. A. Luttrell and H. Nicholson, Aldershot (forthcoming). Maier, C. Preaching the Crusades: The Mendicants Friars and the Cross in the Thirteenth Century, Cambridge, 1994. Major, B. ‘Al-Malik Al-Mujahid, Ruler of Homs, and the Hospitallers (The Evidence in the Chronicle of Ibn Wasil)’, The Crusades and the Military Orders. Expanding the Frontiers of Medieval Latin Christianity, ed. Z. Hunyadi and J. Laszlovszky, Budapest, 2001, pp. 61–75. Mannier, E. Les commanderies du prieuré de France, Paris, 1872. Marshall, C. ‘The French Regiment in the Latin East, 1254–91’, Journal of Medieval History, 15 (1989), pp. 301–07. ———. Warfare in the Latin East, 1192–1291, Cambridge, 1992. Mayer, H. ‘Two Unpublished Letters on the Syrian Earthquake of 1202’, Kreuzzüge und lateinischer Osten, London, 1983, essay number X, pp. 295–310. ———. The Crusades, trans. J. Gillingham, Oxford, 1986. Mazzaoui, M. The Italian Cotton Industry in the Later Middle Ages, 1100–1600, Cambridge, 1981. Melville, M. La vie des Templiers, Paris, 1951. Menache, S. ‘Rewriting the History of the Templars According to Matthew Paris’, Cultural Convergences in the Crusader Period, ed. M. Goodich, S. Menache, and S. Schein, New York, 1995, pp. 186–215. ———. ‘The Communication Challenge of the Early Crusades, 1099–1187’, Autour de la Première Croisade, Actes du Colloque de la Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East (Clermont-Ferrand, 22–25 juin 1995), ed. M. Balard, Paris, 1996, pp. 294–314. Mesqui, J. and Veissière, M. ‘Un ville de foires en milieu rural’, Histoire de Provins et sa région, ed. M. Veissière, Toulouse, 1988, pp. 81–105. Michaud, F. Un signe des temps. Accroissement des crises familiales autour du patrimoine à Marseille à la fin du XIIIe siècle, Toronto, 1994. Miguet, M. Templiers et Hospitaliers en Normandie, Paris, 1995. Miramon, C. de. Les “donnés” au Moyen Âge. Une forme de vie religieuse laïque v.1180–v.1500, Paris, 1999. Miret y Sans, J. ‘La casa de Montcada en el vizcondado de Béarn’, Bolletín de la Real Academia de Buenas Letras de Barcelona, vol. I (1901), pp. 186–99, 239–45. Molin, K. Unknown Crusader Castles, Hambledon and London, 2001. Moorman, J. A History of the Franciscan Order. From its Origins to the Year 1517, Oxford, 1968. Morgan, D. The Mongols, Oxford, 1986. Morris, C. The Papal Monarchy: The Western Church from 1050 to 1250, Oxford, 1989. Nicholson, H. Templars, Hospitallers and Teutonic Knights: Images of the Military Orders, 1128–1291, Leicester, 1993. ———. ‘The Military Orders and the Kings of England in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries’, From Clermont to Jerusalem. The Crusades and Crusader Societies, 1095–1500, ed. A. Murray, Turnhout, 1998, pp. 203–18. ———. Love, War and the Grail, Leiden, 2001. O’Callaghan, J.F. ‘Paths of Ruin: the Economic and Financial Policies of Alfonso the Learned’, The Worlds of Alfonso the Learned and James the Conqueror. Intellect and Forces in the Middle Ages, ed. R. Burns, Princeton, 1985, pp. 41–67. ———. Reconquest and Crusade in Medieval Spain, Philadelphia, 2003. Otten-Froux, C. ‘Les relations économiques entre Chypre et le Royaume Arménien de Cilicia d’après les actes notariés (1270–1320)’, L’Arménie et Byzance. Histoire et culture, Paris, 1996, pp. 157–79.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: SECONDARY WORKS

179

Ourliac, P. Les sauvetés du Comminges. Étude et documents sur les villages fondés par les Hospitaliers dans la région des côteaux commingeois, Toulouse, 1947. The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, ed. A.P. Kazhdan, Oxford, 1991. Peled, A. ‘Sugar; a Local Industry in the Kingdom of Jerusalem’, Knights of the Holy Land. The Kingdom of Jerusalem, ed. S. Rozenberg, Jerusalem, 1999, pp. 217–221 (in Hebrew). Phillips, J. Defenders of the Holy Land. Relations between the Latin East and the West, 1119–1187, Oxford, 1996. Piquet, J. Des Banquiers au Moyen Âge. Les Templiers. Étude de leurs opérations financières, Paris, 1939. Poindron, P. ‘L’expansion du comté de Provence vers le nord sous les premiers Angevins’, Provence historique, 18 (1968), pp. 201–245. Porëe, B. ‘Les moulins et fabriques à sucre de Palestine et de Chypre: Histoire, géographie et technologie d’une production croisée et médiévale’, Cyprus and the Crusades, ed. N. Coureas and J. Riley-Smith, Nicosia, 1995, pp. 377–465. Powell, J.M. ‘The Papacy and the Early Franciscans’, Franciscan Studies, 36 (1976), pp. 248–62. ———. Anatomy of a Crusade, 1213–1221, Philadelphia, 1986. Prawer, J. A History of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, 2 vols., Jerusalem, 1963 (in Hebrew). Prestwich, M. Edward I, New Haven and London, 1988. Pringle, D. The Red Tower (al-Burj al-Ahmar): Settlement in the Plain of Sharon at the Time of the Crusaders and Mamluks (AD 1099–1516), British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem, Monographs Series I, London, 1986. ———. Secular Buildings in the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem. An Archaeological Gazetteer, Cambridge, 1997. ———. ‘The Archaeology of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: A Review of Work 1947–97’, Journal of Medieval History, 23 (1997), pp. 389–408. ———. The Churches of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem. A Corpus, 2 vols., Cambridge, 1993, 1998. ———. ‘Templar Castles between Jaffa and Jerusalem’, The Military Orders. Vol. 2. Welfare and Warfare, ed. H. Nicholson, Aldershot, 1998, pp. 89–109. Prutz, H. ‘Die finanziellen Operationen der Hospitallers’, Sitzungsberichte der philosophischhistorischen Klasse der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Munich, 1906, pp. 3–47. ———. Die geistlichen Ritterorden, Berlin, 1908. Pryor, J. ‘Transportation of Horses by Sea During the Era of the Crusades: Eighth Century to 1285 A.D.’, Mariner’s Mirror, 68 (1982), pp. 10–27, 103–25. ———. ‘In Subsidium Terrae Sanctae’: Exports of Foodstuffs and War Materials from the Kingdom of Sicily to the Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1265–1284’, Asian and African Studies, 22 (1988), pp. 127–44. ———. Geography, Technology and War. Studies in the Maritime History of the Mediterranean, 649–1571, Cambridge, 1988. Purcell, M. Papal Crusading Policy: the Chief Instruments of Papal Crusading Policy and Crusade to the Holy Land from the Final Loss of Jerusalem to the Fall of Acre (1244–1291), Leiden, 1975. Raban, S. Mortmain Legislation and the English Church, 1279–1500, Cambridge, 1982. Ramsay, W.M. The Historical Geography of Asia Minor, London, 1890. Raybaud, J. Histoire des grands prieurs et du prieuré de Saint Gilles, Nîmes, 1904. Redford, S., Ikram, S.T. et al., ‘Excavations at Medieval Kinet, Turkey: A Preliminary Report’, Ancient Near Eastern Studies, 38 (2001), pp. 58–139. Rey, E.G. ‘Les périples des côtes de Syrie et de la Petite Arménie’, ATS, vol. II, pp. 329–53. Reynaud, F. La commanderie de l’Hôpital de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem, de Rhodes et de Malte à Manosque, Gap, 1981.

180

BIBLIOGRAPHY: SECONDARY WORKS

Reynolds, S. Fiefs and Vassals. The Medieval Evidence Reinterpreted, Oxford, 1994. Richard, J. ‘Le chartrier de Sainte-Marie-Latine et l’établissement de Raymond de Saint-Gilles à Mont-Pèlerin’, Mélanges Louis Halphen, Paris, 1951, pp. 605–12. ———. Les ducs de Bourgogne et la formation du Duché, Paris, 1954. ———. ‘Le comté de Tripoli dans les chartes du fonds des Porcellet’, Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartes, 130 (1972), pp. 339–82. ———. ‘The Eastern Mediterranean and its Relations with its Interland (11th –15th Centuries)’, Les relations entre l’Orient et l’Occident au Moyen Âge, London, 1977, essay number I, pp. 1–39. ———. ‘Les Templiers et Hospitaliers en Bourgogne et en Champagne méridionale (XII–XIII siècles)’, Die Geistlichen Ritterorden Europas, ed. J. Fleckenstein and M. Hellman, Sigmaringen, 1980, pp. 231–42. ———. ‘Une economie coloniale? Chypre et ses ressources agricoles au Moyen Âge’, Croisés, missionnaires et voyageurs. Les perspectives orientales du monde latin médiéval, London, 1983, essay number VIII, pp. 331–52. ———. Saint Louis. Crusader King of France, ed. S. Lloyd and trans. J. Birrell, Cambridge, 1992. ———. The Crusades. c.1071–c.1291, trans. J. Birrell, Cambridge, 1999. Riley-Smith, J. The Knights of St. John in Jerusalem and Cyprus, c.1050–1310, London, 1967. ———. The Feudal Nobility and the Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1174–1277, London, 1973. ———. ‘Peace Never Established: The Case of the Kingdom of Jerusalem’, TRHS, 5th series, 28 (1978), pp. 87–103. ———. The Crusades: A Short History, London and New Haven, 1987. ———. The Atlas of the Crusades, ed. J. Riley-Smith, London, 1990. ———. ‘The Crusading Heritage of Guy and Aimery of Lusignan’, Cyprus and the Crusades, ed. N. Coureas and J. Riley-Smith, Nicosia, 1995, pp. 32–45. ———. The First Crusaders, 1095–1131, Cambridge, 1997. ———. Hospitallers. The History of the Order of St. John, London, 1999. ———. ‘Guy of Lusignan, the Hospitallers and the Gates of Acre’, Dei gesta per Francos. Etudes sur les croisades dédiées à Jean Richard, ed. M. Balard, B.Z. Kedar and J. Riley-Smith, Aldershot, 2001, pp. 111–17. ———. ‘The Origins of the Commandery in the Temple and the Hospital’, La Commanderie, institution des ordres militaires dans l’Occident médiéval, ed. A. Luttrell and L. Pressouyre, Paris, 2002, pp. 9–18. Robinson, I.S. The Papacy 1073–1198. Continuity and Innovation, Cambridge, 1990. Röhricht, R. ‘Études sur les derniers temps du Royaume de Jérusalem’, AOL, vol. II, pp. 365–409. Roll, I., Yohanan, H. et al., ‘Appollonia-Arsuf during the Crusader Period in Light of New Discoveries’, Qadmoniot, 33 (2000), pp. 19–31 (in Hebrew). Runciman, S. The Sicilian Vespers. A History of the Mediterranean World in the Later Thirteenth Century, Cambridge, 1958. ———. ‘Byzantine Trade and Industry’, The Cambridge Economic History, vol. II (2nd ed.), ed. M. Postan et al., Cambridge, 1966, pp. 132–67. Santoni, P. ‘Les deux premiers siècles du prieuré de Saint Gilles de l’ordre de l’Hôpital de Saint Jean de Jérusalem’, Des Hospitaliers de Saint Jean de Jérusalem de Chypre et de Rhodes hier aux chevaliers de Malte aujourd’hui, Paris, 1985, pp. 114–183. Sarnowsky, J. ‘Regional Problems in the History of the Mendicants and Military Orders’, Mendicants, Military Orders, and Regionalism in Medieval Europe, ed. J. Sarnowsky, Aldershot, 1999, pp. 1–19. Schein, S. Fideles Crucis. The Papacy, the West, and the Recovery of the Holy Land, 1274–1314, Oxford, 1991.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: SECONDARY WORKS

181

Sclafert, T. Cultures en Haute-Provence, déboisements et pâturages au Moyen Âge, Paris, 1959. Selwood, D. Knights of the Cloister. Templars and Hospitallers in Central-Southern Occitania, c.1100–c.1300, Woodbridge, 1999. Serviere, E. ‘Commanderie de Gap-Français, ordre des Hospitaliers de Saint Jean de Jérusalem’, Revue du Gévaudan de Causses et des Cevennes (Bulletin de la société des lettres, sciences et arts de La Lozère), 10 (1964), pp. 41–72. Shideler, J. A Medieval Catalan Noble Family. The Montcadas, 1000–1230, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1983. Siberry, E. Criticism of Crusading: 1095–1274, Oxford, 1985. Sigal, P.A. ‘Une seigneurie ecclésiastique en Provence orientale au Moyen Âge: La commanderie de Ruou’, Provence historique, 15 (1965), pp. 126–45. Sivery, G. L’économie du Royaume de France au siècle de Saint Louis, Lille, 1984. Smail, R.C. ‘The Crusaders’ Castles of the Twelfth Century’, The Cambridge Historical Journal, 10 (1950), pp. 133–49. Soutou, A. ‘Trois chartes occitanes du XIII siècle concernant les Hospitaliers de La Bastide-Pradines (Aveyron)’, Annales du Midi, 79 (1967), pp. 121–72. Spicciani, A. ‘Papa Innocenzo IV e i Templari’, I Templari: Mito e Storia. Atti del Convegno Internazionale di Studi alla Magione Templare di Poggibonsi, Siena, 29–31 Maggio 1987, ed. G. Minnucci and F. Sardi, Siena, 1989, pp. 41–65. Stern, Edna. ‘The Excavations at Lower Horvat Manot: A Medieval Sugar Production Site’, Atiqot, 42 (2001), 277–308 (in Hebrew). Stern, Eliezer. ‘Old Akko, the Fortress’, Hadashot Arkheologiyot, 110 (1999), pp. 16–17 (in Hebrew). ———. ‘The Center of the Order of Hospitalers in Acre’, Qadmoniot, 33 (2000), pp. 4–12 (in Hebrew). Stouff, L. ‘La commune d’Arles au XIII siècle, à propos d’un livre récent’, Provence historique, 11 (1961), pp. 293–316. ———. Arles à la fin du Moyen Âge, 2 vols., Aix-en-Provence, 1986. Tibble, S. Monarchy and Lordships in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1099–1291, Oxford, 1989. Throop, P. Criticism of the Crusades: A Study of Public Opinion and Crusade Propaganda, Amsterdam, 1940. Toubert, P. ‘Les déviations de la Croisade au milieu du XIII siècle: Alexander IV contre Manfred’, Etudes sur l’Italie médiévale (IXe–XIVe s.), London, 1976, essay no. XI, pp. 391–99. Tucoo-Chala, P. La vicomté de Béarn et le problème de sa souveraineté, Bordeaux, 1961. Vann, T.M. ‘Hospitaller Record Keeping and Archival Practices’, The Military Orders. Vol. 2. Welfare and Warfare, ed. H. Nicholson, Aldershot, 1998, pp. 275–85. Vasiliev, A. History of the Byzantine Empire, 324–1453, Oxford, 1952. Vaughan, R. Matthew Paris, Cambridge, 1958. Verdon, L. ‘La seigneurie foncière des Hospitalliers d’Arles d’après le cartulaire de Trinquetaille: les ressources de l’acapte’, Provence historique, 49 (1999), pp. 501–10. Weiler, B. ‘Gregory IX, Frederick II, and the Liberation of the Holy Land, 1230–9’, The Holy Land, Holy Lands, and Christian History, ed. R.N. Swanson, Woodbridge, 2000, pp. 192–206.

182

BIBLIOGRAPHY: UNPUBLISHED DISSERTATIONS

Unpublished Dissertations Burgtorf, J. ‘Führungsstrukturen und Funktionsträger in der Zentrale der Templer und Johanniter von den Anfängen bis zum frühen 14. Jahrhundert’ (Ph.D. thesis, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, 2001). Carraz, D. ‘Ordres militaires, croisades et sociétés méridionales. L’ordre du Temple dans la basse vallée du Rhône (1124–1312)’ (Ph.D. thesis, Université Lyon 2, 2003; forthcoming in Presses Universitaires de Lyon). Stern, E.J. ‘The Sugar Industry in Palestine during the Crusader, Ayubid and Mamluk Periods in Light of Archeological finds’ (M.A. thesis, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1999; in Hebrew).

Index Cast(s). Casty. Com(s). H. LE.

Castellan(s) castellany commander(s) Hospitaller Latin East

Acre, 11, 12, 17, 19, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 39, 40–41, 42, 43, 45, 46, 47, 51, 53, 57, 59, 91, 95, 98, 100, 111, 115, 121, 127, 137, 138, 139, 142, 144. H. headquarters and property, 7, 8, 12–14, 17, 40–41, 47, 48, 51, 54, 58–59, 62, 77, 99, 112–13, 128, 140; H. rights in, 55–56; H. coms. of, 15, 24, 46, 66, 77–78, 99, 135, 138, 140, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154 Ad aripiendam, 108, 109 n. 42, 112 n. 61 Ad audientiam nostram, 100, 131 Ad liberandam, 107 Adalasie Materon, 73–74 Adam of Herouville, H. brother, 139, 147 Aimery of la Roche, H. cast. of Crac, 41, 139 Aimery of Pax, H. Grand com. of Outremer, 18, 80 n. 96, 110, 136, 147 Aimery of la Roche, T. preceptor in France, 93 Ain Jalut, battle of, 33, 34, 37 Aix, 73; H. coms. of, 157, 162 Alasatie, lady of Rognes, H. consoror, 82–83 Aleppo, 25, 26, 31 Alexander III, pope, 103 Alexander IV, pope, 27, 28, 30, 43, 86, 99, 118–22 Alexandretta, Gulf of, 51 Alfonso of Portugal, H. master, 13, 147 Alfonso X, king of Castile, 101 Alice, duchess of Burgundy, 69 Alienation, of H. property, 2, 42, 63, 77, 86–87, 91, 97, 99, 100, 105, 119–20, 131, 144, 145. See also Ad audientiam nostram Alphonse, count of Poitiers, 39, 89 Amadeus of Morestellum, T. preceptor of England, 32 Amalric I, king of Jerusalem, 1, 103 Amand of Cabanes, H. com. of Toulouse, 134, 156

MO. Pr(s). Pry. T.

Military Orders prior(s) priory Templar

Amposta, H. casty. and casts. of, 8, 11 n.3, 65, 78, 81, 133, 136, 147, 160, 165, 166. Andrew Polin, H. prior of France, 82, 147 Animal husbandry, see under cattle, horses, sheep, pasturage, grazing Anselm of Lucca, H. treasurer, 138 Antioch, principality, 11, 15, 17, 24, 26, 31, 32, 42; city, 29, 42, 62; H. coms.of, 138, 139, 149 Apulia, 98 Aragon, 4, 5, 64, 81, 100, 105, 118, 131, 133, 135, 153, 165. See also Amposta, James I , Peter II Arcas, 61 Archambaud, H. Grand com. of Italy, 12, 15 Argence, 71, 72 Arles, 30, 71, 72, 74, 96; H. com. of, 159 Arlabaud, H. pr. of Germany, 12 Armand of Périgord, T. master, 22 Armengaud of Asp, H. temporary master, 11–12, 11 n. 3, 15, 147, 156 Arnald, H. com. of Montbrison, 70 Arnald of Campagnoles, H. com. of Trinquetaille, 134, 156 Arnald of Montbrun, H. cast. of Crac, 139, 148 Arnald of Spina, H. pr. of France, 65, 154 Arsur, 17 n. 34, 35, 37–38, 40, 42, 44, 59–60, 124 Ascalon, 22, 23, 29–30, 31, 47, 117, 142 Assassins, 30, 43–44, 111, 114, 115 Atlit (Château Pèlerin), 32, 34, 37, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 46, 95 Attendentes quod, ex constitutione, 116 Aubrac, 90 Auger, H. pr. of France, 65 Auricet, 71 Auvergne, 68; H. pry. and prs. of, 2, 3, 5, 8, 64, 80, 82, 89, 90, 135, 166

184

INDEX

Avignon, city, 73, 96; H. cartulary of, 3: H. comy. and coms. of, 8, 72 n. 55, 79, 82, 84, 134 n. 14, 157, 158, 159, 162; H. rights in, 73 Ayas, 51 Aymar of Layron, H. marshal, 20, 148 Baalbek, 34 Baghras, 32, 42 Balian of Ibelin, lord of Arsur, 59 Banyas, 31 Bar-sur-Aube, 66, 69 Barid, river, 61 Bastide see Colonization Baybars, sultan of Egypt, 32, 33–34, 35–41, 43–47, 51, 60–62, 95, 124, 125, 144 Beaufort, 22, 31, 34, 40, 42, 59, 61 Beaune, 69, H. com. of, 159, 160 Beirut, 11, 95 Bela IV, king of Hungary, 118 Belda, 42, 44 Bellecroix, 69 Bellenglise, T. preceptory of, 68, 85 Berenger Monge, H. com. of Manosque, 92, 157 Bermond of Luzancion, H. pr. of St. Gilles, 78–9, 134, 157 Bernard of Chambun, H. com. of St. Bonnet les Places, 88, 166 Bernard of Rome, H., 139, 148 Bertrand of Comps, H. pr. of St. Gilles, 72, 148 Bertrand of Milhau, H. pr. of St. Gilles , 134–35, 158 Bertrand of Mornans, H. com. of Valence, 133, 158 Bertrand of Pierrelatte, H. com. of Alais, 133, 158 Bertrand of Pignan, H., 138, 148 Bethany, St. Lazarus of, nunnery, 28, 56, 120, 121, 122 Bethgibelin, 22, 31; casty. and casts, 136, 149 Bethorafig, 57–58, 61 Bethsan, 22, 45 Blanche, countess of Champagne, 69 Bobulorum, 48, 53 Bohemond III, prince of Antioch, 54, 148 Bohemond V, prince of Antioch, 114 Bohemond VI, prince of Antioch-Tripoli, 31 Boniface VIII, pope, 90 Bordeaux, 80 Borrell, H. Grand com., 11–12, 138, 148 Brindisi, 98 Brussels, 68, 92 Bruyères, 67 Burgundy, 68, 69, 73, 76

Cabor, 31, 36, 37, 59 Cacho, 38, 46, 57 Caesarea, 26, 37–38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 57, 59, 108 Cafarlet, 48 Cafarsset, 31 Caignac, 85 Calamella (Canamella), 50–51 Camargue, Petit Camargue, 71–72, 85 n. 122 Careblier (Tell el Charruba), 46 Castile and León, 81, 100–101 Cattle, 36, 40, 49, 70, 71. See also pasturage Celestine III, pope, 15 n. 27, 105–6, 116 Cemetery , 14, 66, 70 Champagne, 66, 68, 73, 141 Chapters, General, 8, 13, 62, 135, (1225) 79–80, 142, (1262) 62, 91, 144 provincial, 9, 13, 79 n. 90, 82, 92 Charité-sur-Loire, Cluniac pry., 66, 78 Charles I, count of Anjou and Provence, 5, 31–2, 92–99, 124–27, 144–5 Chastel Blanc, 32, 43 Chastel Neuf, 40, 61 Chatillon (La Meserae), 38, 59 Chaumont, 69 Chazelles, 70, 87, 88, 166 Cilician Armenia, 17–8, 42, 48–51, 55, 141 Clement III, pope, 105, 116 Clement IV, pope, 39, 41, 87, 92–3, 124–27, 132, 144–45 Clerkenwell, H. pry., 21. See also England Clermont, 88 Coliath, 61 Colonization 69, 89 Comminges, 69 Communication, letters and envoys, 2, 14–16, 19, 20, 21, 23–24, 25–27, 30–33, 37, 39, 41, 42, 60, 86, 109, 110, 121, 124, 128 n.184, 140, 143, 144, 145 Problems of communication, 16–17, 104–105 Dissemination of information regarding the LE., 27–28, 37, 41, 107–108, 109, 110, 111, 113, 122, 124–25, 130–32. See also individual popes Comps, 83 Conradin, king of Jerusalem, 93, 124, 126–7 Constance I of Sicily, Roman Empress, 75 Corbeil, 79, 133 Corrody, 70 Corycus, 49 Cotton, 48, 49, 50 Courzieu, 88 Crac des Chevaliers, 11, 17, 26, 29 32, 40, 42, 43–44, 47, 52, 120; casts. of, 136, 138, 139, 147, 149, 150, 152

INDEX

Crau, 71–2, 85 n. 122 Criticism of MO., 106, 109, 110, 114–15, 120, 130, 145. See also individual popes, Second Council of Lyons Croix-en-Brie, 67 Crossbowmen, 21, 98, 122, 125, 128 n. 184 Crusades, Albigensian, 75–76, 97; Frederick II, 111–13; Fifth, 19–20, 68, 80, 107–8, 137, 141, 148; Italian, 39, 92–93, 118, 124–27, 144–45; James of Aragon, 45, 101; Lord Edward, 46–47; Richard of Cornwall, 21; St. Louis (Egypt), 10, 24–25, 28, 56, 81, 83, 84, 115, 117, 118, 143, (Tunis) 43, 44, 45, 99, 127; Third, 11, 12, 15, 68. See also Second Council of Lyons Indulgences, given to H. and associates, 104, 108, 111, 118, 143 Preaching, 26, 39, 101, 76 n. 76, 117, 118, 121, 122, 124, 125; H. assisting preachers, 106. See also Mendicants, H. preaching Taxation of the Church and MO. for crusades, 82, 96, 107, 110, 116–17, 123–24, 126 ; MO. as tax collectors 110, 114 Vow, 107; commutation of , 116, 118, 124, 125; redemption of, 28, 30, 60, 76, 82, 86, 114, 117, 120–21, 126, 127, 128, 143, 144 Cum a nobis petitur, 123 Cum dilecti filii fratres, 106 Cum dilecti filii fratres Hierosolymitani, 119 Cyprus, 24, 48, 54, 55, 91; H. coms. of, 135, 139, 150, 153, 154 Damascus, 21–22, 25–7, 28, 31, 33, 34 Damietta, 20, 25, 107–8, 109–10 Damor, 58, 59 Darbsak, siege of T. castle of, 21 Daraya, 58 Debts, 58, 67, 70, 88, 117, 143. See also financial difficulties Devesset, 82 Devotionis vestre precibus, 123 Disputes over property and rights, 29–30, 31, 51, 52, 53, 57, 60, 61, 70, 75, 87, 90, 96, 106, 114, 120 Doc, 26, 36, 53, 114 Donat, 79 Durance, river, 73 Edmund of Lancaster, 116, 118 Edward I, king of England, 46, 55 Egypt, 1, 16, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24–25, 26, 31, 33–4, 49, 56, 101 n. 225, 103, 107–8, 113, 115, 116, 117, 132, 143

185

England, 13, 21, 24, 26, 30, 32, 33, 41, 46, 55, 78, 79, 80, 106, 117, 118, 125, 131; H. pry. and prs., 8, 16, 42, 64, 79, 80–1, 99, 120, 123, 135, 136, 138, 144, 149, 150, 152, 154. See also Clerkenwell Eschiva, princess of Galilee, 60 Escoutot, 69 Esnouveaux, 69 Essertenne,69 Establishment and early history of H., 6–7 Etang de Scamandre, 71 Éterpigny, 68, 82, 83, 92; H. cartulary of, 3 Ex tenore vestre petitionis, 116 Fay, 70 Ferdinand III, king of Castile and León , 100–1 Fermages, see under rents Ferrand of Barras, H. Grand com. of Outremer, 18, 42, 83, 91, 94, 95, 96, 99, 126, 135, 148 Feurs, 88 Fieffes, 68, 82, 83, 90; H. cartulary of, 3 Financial difficulties, H., 16, 27, 28, 32, 42, 60, 85, 86, 94, 95, 97, 99, 100, 105, 106, 116, 120, 123, 131, 143, 144, 145. See also alienation of property, Second Council of Lyons Food, dependence on supplies of, 14, 15, 42, 52; Import to LE. of, 23, 32, 55, 75, 93, 100 n. 215; Shortage of, 15, 16, 17, 19, 23, 37, 42, 55, 88 n. 140, 107, 142 Forey, 4–5, 100 Forez, 69–70, 88–90 France, H. pry. and prs., 2–3, 5, 8, 64, 67–8, 77–8, 82, 86, 90–97, 134, 135, 136, 138, 146, 154, 155, 156; Kingdom of, 24, 26, 33, 37, 39, 41, 65–6, 75–6, 80, 93, 96, 97, 114, 138, 140 Franciscan order see under Mendicants Frederick II, emperor of Germany and Sicily, 20, 28, 29, 75, 80, 93, 110–13, 118, 142, 143 Fulcher of Bonas, H. com. of Manosque, 134, 159 G. of Ormes, H. pr. of St. Gilles, 134, 159 Galilee, 22, 29, 35–36, 40, 45, 52, 56–7, 60–1 Garcia of Lisa, H. Grand com. of Outremer, 136, 166 Garin of Montaigu, H. master, 13 n. 10, 79–80, 137, 148–49 Garnier of Nablus, H. master, 12, 13, 136, 149 Garonne, river, 69 Gaucher of Amiens, H. brother, 133 Gaza, 15, 23, 26

186

INDEX

Genoa, Genoese, 14, 27, 32 Geoffrey, H. pr. of France, 78 Geoffrey le Rat, H. master, 138, 149 Geoffrey of Albaron, H., 133, 159 Geoffrey of Donjon, H. master, 13, 15, 16–17, 19, 66, 75, 138, 149 Gerold, patriarch of Jerusalem, 111 Gibelet, 11, 28, 54–55, 61 Giguerius, 50 Gilbert d’Assailly, H. master, 103 Gimeaux, 71 Gonzalo Pérez de Pereira, H. Grand com. of the five kingdoms of Spain, 101 Goumardias (Camardias), 17, 49 Grains, 22, 38, 48, 55, 65, 89, see also wheat Grand commander, 7, 11, 12, 15, 23, 24, 46, 66, 77–8, 116, 135, 137, 138, 147, 148, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154 Grand commandery of Outremer, 9, 15, 18, 65–6, 77–8, 80, 91, 99, 110, 135, 136, 147, 148, 150, 155, 166 Grand commander of Italy, 12, 15 Grazing rights see pasturage Gregory IX, pope, 110–15, 132, 143; as Cardinal Ugolino of Ostia, 115 Gregory X, pope, 97, 100, 127–32 Grenoble, 73 Guerin, H. master, 21 Giraud of Navis, H. com of Chazelles, 89, 166 Guy, lord of Gibelet, confrater, 54–5 Guy of Basainville, T. preceptor, 30 Guy of Lusignan, king of Jerusalem, 13 Haanouf, 58 Haifa, 37, 38, 43 Hamah, 43 Hamo of Burgundy, H., 138, 149 Hattin, battle of, 1, 11–5, 17, 23, 28, 45, 47, 48, 51, 64–5, 68, 77, 81, 104–5, 112, 116, 131, 137, 138, 140–1, 142, 144 Hebron, 22, 31 Henry of Champagne, lord of Jerusalem, 14 Henry of Arundel, H. pr. of England, 78 Henry II, king of Jerusalem, 56 Henry III, king of England, 21, 24, 25–26, 32, 37, 40 n.156, 79, 99, 116, 118 Henry I, Duke of Brabant, 68 Hohenstaufen see under Frederick II, Conradin, Manfred, Italian Crusade, individual popes Homs, 43 Honorius III, pope, 20, 107–10, 112, 116 Horses, 5, 20, 22, 27, 36, 40, 42, 43, 45, 90, 98, 99, 111, 113, 130 Hugh I, king of Cyprus, 55 Hugh III of Antioch-Lusignan, king of Jerusalem and Cyprus, 43, 45, 46

Hugh I of Baux, viscount of Marseilles, H. confrater, 74, 159 Hugh IV, duke of Burgundy, 69 Hugh of Albenaz (Aubenaz), H., 133, 159 Hugh of Forcalquier, H. cast. of Amposta, 101 Hugh of Lorail, H. brother, 139, 150 Hugh Revel, H. master, 35, 37, 39, 42, 51, 79, 92–7, 99, 128 n. 184, 129 n. 185, 135, 136, 144, 145, 149 Ibn 'Abd al-Zahir, Baybars’s secretary and biographer, 35 Ibn al-Furat, Egyptian chronicle, 32, 34, 35, 40, 43, 51, 61 Ile-de-France, 67, 86, 90 Imâd ad-Dîn al-Işfahâni, Saladin’s advisor and secretary, 13 Inflation, 32, 82, 84, 86, 87, 91, 96, 97 Ingeborg, queen of France, 79 Innocent II, pope, 39 Innocent III, pope, 17, 67, 106–7, 108, 141 Innocent IV, pope, 23, 25, 28, 29, 82, 86, 87, 115–18, 132, 143 Inter cetera, 109 Ira et Dolor, 39–40, 95, 125 Isembard, H. pr. of France, 66, 77–8, 155 Jaffa, 11, 14, 22, 26, 39, 42, 57, 95, 110, 114 James I, king of Aragón, 39, 45, 90, 100–1, 118 James of Taxi, H. pr. of Messina, 98–99 James of Vitry, bishop of Acre, 20 Jean of Braine, count of Mâcon, 69 Jerusalem, city of, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13, 15, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 53, 54, 75, 84, 137 Jews, 49, 67 John Ducas Vatatzes, Byzantine emperor in exile, 115 John, lord of Joinville, chronicler, 23 n.77, 25 John of Brienne, king of Jerusalem, 48, 80 John of Chevry, H. pr. of France, 90, 95, 134, 155. John of Gibelet, marshal of the kingdom of Jerusalem, 34 John of Ibelin, count of Jaffa, 29–30 John of Ibelin, lord of Beirut, 34 John of Montfort, lord of Tyre, 53, 61–62 John of Monzon, H., 133, 160 John of Ronay, H. lieutenant master, 25, 116, 139, 150 John of Villiers, H. master, 45, 99 John of Würzburg, German pilgrim, 7 Josafa Barbaro, Italian traveller, 49 Joscelin of Tornell, H. vice-master, 29, 139, 150 Joseph of Chauncy, H. treasurer, 26, 55, 150

INDEX

Julian, lord of Sidon, 32, 57, 59 Justis petentium desideriis, 119 Kalansue, 38 Kerak, 31 Karama (Laranda), 18 Khorezmians, 23–4, 110, 139 Kolossi, 54, 55 La Bastide-Pradines, 89 La Forbie (Harbiyah), battle of, 23–4, 39, 47, 56, 81, 101, 115, 116, 138–39, 142–43 La Maroenie, 58 La Roche de Roussel, 32 La Saulce, 73 Lambert, H. marshal, 12 Land clearing, 67, 69, 84 Languedoc, 68, 76, 85, 89, 113 Lardiers, 73 Lateran Council, Fourth, 78, 107 Lattakia, 11 n. 3, 42 Legislation of the H., 2, 8, 79, 86 n. 131, 91, 127, 144 Legio (Lajjun), 45 Leon II, king of Armenia, 17–18, 50 Leopold V, duke of Austria, 15 Licet sicut lecta, 119 Louis IX, king of France, 24–25, 26, 28, 30, 37, 41, 43, 44, 45, 56, 99, 101 n. 225, 117, 118, 123, 125, 127, 143 Lozère, mountains, 73 Lucius III, pope, 104 Lyons, 3, 79, 88 Lyons, Councils of, (1245) 24, 115–16; (1274) 1, 102, 127, 129–31, 145, 153 Mainbeiville, 65 Mamluks, 1, 25, 30, 33ff, 51, 58, 60, 61–62, 97, 144 Manfred, king of Sicily, 92, 93 n. 174, 118, 124, 125 Manosque, 73 n. 58, 79, 80, 84, 87, 92, 96, 134, 157, 159, 160, 163 Manpower, H., 5, 11, 14, 21, 23, 24, 25, 46, 47, 68, 77, 95, 97, 102, 124, 125, 129, 133–39, 141, 142–43, 145. See also appendix Manciet, 76 Mansurah, battle of, 25 Manueth, 40, 41, 48, 53 Maplestead, H. cartulary of, 91 Margat, casty. of, 11, 13, 17, 18, 31, 32, 42, 43, 44, 47, 52, 54, 62, 106; Casts. 18, 136, 139, 144, 147, 150, 151, 152, 153; Statutes of Margat, 86 n. 131 Markets, 52, 55, 66, 67, 73, 86 n. 127, 142; H. rights in, 54, 55–56, 69, 70

187

Maron, 61–62 Marseilles, 3, 10, 23, 74–75, 85 n. 122, 90, 96, 110, 142 Martin, H. pr. of Hungary and Bohemia, 12 Martin of Andos, H. pr. of St. Gilles, 78, 160 Martin Sanche, H. drapier, 139, 150 Massif Central, 80, 64, 70 Mataron , 73 Matthew Paris, chronicler, 25, 30, 116, 130, 138 Meaux, 67 Mendicants, 39, 115, 118, 122, 125, 129 n. 186 Mercenaries, 20, 22, 32, 46, 47, 111, 122, 137, 141, 143, 144 Michael of La Seiye, H. com. of Trinquetaille, 134, 161 Militarization of H., 84, 103 Milites ad terminum, 111 Mills, 26, 36, 41, 53, 58, 59, 62, 65, 114 Misis (Mamistra), 50, 51 Money, fund-raising campaigns, 112, 123, 131, 141; loans, 10, 32, 57, 59, 128, 144; need for, 2, 14, 16, 17, 20, 32, 45, 47, 109, 126, 141, 142, 143; supplies to the LE., 2, 21, 41, 64, 77, 79, 107, 122, 124, 125, 126, 128, 140 Mongols, 27, 30–34, 37, 118, 121 Montbrison, 70, 71, 88, 89 Montdidier, 38–39, 57 Montfort, 40, 43 Montpellier, 90, 100 n. 214. H. com. of, 78 Mt. Pèlerin, 52, 53, 54 Mt. Thabor, 23, 28–29, 35, 36, 37, 38, 47, 56–57, 58, 60, 108, 120; H. casts. of, 29, 139, 150 Murcia, 100 Muret, 69, 89 Nablus, 22, 31 Nahaman, River (Flum d’Acre), 53 Naria, 62 Natural disasters, 1, 19, 140; Drought, 16, 19, 55; Earthquake, 17, 19, 42, 47, 77, 141; Plague, 17, 19, 42 Nazareth , 29, 35, 36, 37 Nicholas IV, Pope, 130 Nicholas Lorgne, H. cast. of Crac des Chevaliers, 29, 150 Non absque dolore, 119 Non sine gravi, 109 Norpert (Castellum Novum), 17, 49 Notre Dame de Léoncel, Cistercian abbey, 83 Odo of Châteauroux, papal legate, 117 Olive trees, 52, 57

188

INDEX

Oliver of Paderborn, preacher and chronicler, 109–110 Orange, 73, 80, 90 Paci et quieti, 119 Palermo, 80 Papacy, see individual popes Paphos, 55 Pareillées, 58, 61 Paris, 41, 80, 82, 86 passagium particulare, 129 Pasturage, 43, 49 n. 205, 70, 71, 72, 76, 90, 98 Pelagius, papal legate, 109 Peter II, king of Aragon, 76 Peter of Aleage, H. brother, 139, 151 Peter of Avignon, H. pr. of Barletta, 98, 99 Peter of Faucon (Montfaucon), H. pr. of St. Gilles,135, 162 Peter Helie, H. com. of St. Gilles, 134, 161 Peter of Mirmanda, H. Grand com., 137–38, 151 Petit Gerin, 45 Pexiora, 76 Philip, duke of Alsace, 68 Philip, duke of Swabia, king of Germany, 19 Philip II, king of France, 19 Philip of Egly, H. pr. of France, 82, 91–95, 98–99, 135, 155 Philip of Monfort, lord of Tyre, 61 Picardy, 68, 69 Pilgrims, 23, 46, 67, 70, 74, 75, 77, 103, 114, 130 Pons, Count of Tripoli, 54 Pons of Avignon, H., 133, 162 Port Bonnel, 32 Post miserabilem, 106 Preaching, H., 39, 62, 101, 109, 112, 117, 131, 141. See also, Querelam gravem recepimus Provence, 68, 71–73, 85, 87, 96–97, 105, 117, 123, 131, 141 Provins, 67, 70 Puysubran, 85 Querelam gravem recepimus, 109, 117. See also preaching, H. Quanto majora, 110 Rafania, 120, 122 Rais, 29 Ralph of Loudun, H. com. of Tyre, 138 Ralph of Neville, bishop of Chichester, 21 Raymond, lord of Gibelet, 58 Raymond II, count of Tripoli, 54 Raymond VI of St. Gilles, count of Toulouse, 76

Raymond VII of St. Gilles, count of Toulouse, 76 Raymond Berenger IV, count of Provence and Forcalquier, 72 Raymond of Aiguille, H. pr. of St. Gilles, 134, 163 Raymond of Ayscle, H. cast. of Amposta, 78 Raymond Pierre, H., 138, 152 Raymond Roupen, prince of Antioch, 18, 50 Recordane, 26, 41, 53, 58, 114 Religiosos viros fratres, 106, 123 Rents, 39, 47, 57, 58, 59, 61, 62, 65, 67, 68, 70, 82, 83, 86, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 101, 140 Resources, diversion from the LE., 39–40, 95, 97, 101, 113, 115–16, 124, 125, 132, 143, 144 Responsiones, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 17, 42, 51, 53, 80, 81, 83, 85, 91, 94, 99, 100, 102, 143, 144, 145 Richard I, King of England, 12, 13, 21 Richard, earl of Cornwall, 21, 22 Richard of Mepham, dean of Lincoln, 130 Rights in ports, H., 54–56, 73–75, 90, 98 Robert, H. casal, 36, 52, 56–57, 60 Robert, H. treasurer, 12, 78 Robert, patriarch of Jerusalem, 24 Robert of Capennum, H., 138, 152 Robert of Montrognon, H. pr. of Auvergne, 89, 135, 166 Robert of Sandford, T. preceptor in England, 22 Robert the Treasurer, H. pr. of England, 78 Roger of Moulins, H. master, 11 n. 3 Rognonas, 73 Safad, 22, 32, 34, 40, 41, 42, 46, 60, 125 St. Bonnet les Places, 87, 88; H. com. of. 166 St. Gaudens, 69 St. Gilles, H. pry. and prs., 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 11, 64, 65, 68, 72, 78, 79, 80, 83, 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 96, 97, 105–06, 126, 127, 131, 133, 134, 135, 136, 156–65; H. cartulary of, 3, 71 St. Gilles, port-town of, 72, 74 St. Martin de Gap , 73 St. Mary of the Latins, abbey, 38, 57 St. Michel de Puimoisson, 72; H. com. of, 160 St. Paul les Romans, 73, 82, 83; H. com. of, 160 St. Pierre de Campublic, 72, 88 St. Sabas, war of, 27, 32 St. Sulpice-de-Lézat, 89 St. Victor de Marseilles, Benedictine abbey, 84 Saladin, Salñh-ad-D†n YÃsuf, sultan of Egypt and Syria, 13, 15, 16, 45, 48, 52, 65 Samarita, 48

INDEX

Sancho VII, king of Navarre, 17 n. 31, 19 Saleph, river, 49 Saliers, 71 Saulce-sur-Yonne, cartulary of T. preceptory of, 3, 85 Sauvetés, see colonization Sea of Galilee, 34, 60 Selefkie, 17–18, 49–50; H. casts. of , 135, 136, 147, 148, 158 Seljuks, 17, 18, 50 Sempad, Constable of Armenia, 15 Senlis, 82 Sens, 67, 85 Seville, 101 Shaizar, 34 Shaubak, 34 Sheep, 70, 71, 72, 73, 89, 98 Shipping, H., 10, 55, 56, 74–75, 90, 98, 100, 110, 142 Sicily, 3, 5, 27–28, 41, 43, 92–95, 116, 119, 125–27, 132. H. property and rights in, 16, 42, 75, 93, 97–99, 111–12, 142, 145 Simon of Monfort, earl of Leicester, 76 Simon of Brie, papal legate in France, 96, 124, 125, 126 Sigena, H. nunnery, 12 Sisteron, 73, 87 Solet annuere sedes, 128 Spain, 3, 8, 9, 33, 42, 74, 90, 99–102, 114, 118, 135–36, 144. See also Amposta, Aragon, Castile-Leon, Navarre Stephen of Broc, H. com. of St. Gilles, 134 Stephen of Gravesons, H., 133, 164 Stephen of Messy, H. Grand com., 46, 152 Stephen of Sissey, T. marshal, 34, 123 Sub religionis habitu, 127 Subeibe, 34 Sugar, 19, 31, 41, 48, 51, 55, 56, 57–58, 59, 61–62, 142 System of government of H., 7–10 Tagliacozzo, battle of, 93, 127 Tallard, 73 Tarsus, 13 n. 10, 78, 79, 134 n. 14, 157. See also general chapter of 1225 Templars, order of Knights Templar, Agreements with MO., 31, 36, 59 Alienation of property, 87, 100, 105, 117 Excommunication of, 121 Financial difficulties, 27–28, 65, 82, 85, 86–87, 100, 105, 122 Investments, 48, 59, 67, 68, 85–86 Involvement in crusade machinery, 106–07, 122, 141 Losses and mobilization of manpower, 20, 21, 24–25, 36, 138–39

189

Participation in military campaigns, 20, 24–25, 34, 45–46, 108, 137–38 Political involvement, 21, 27, 43, 93, 111, 113–114, 143 Relations with papacy, 105, 113–14, 117–18, 122–23 Rights in markets and ports, 56, 74 Supression, 130 See also individual officers, castles, Ira et dolor, Sicily, individual popes, Second Council of Lyons Teutonic Knights, order of, 27, 31, 32, 33, 34, 41, 42, 56, 111 n. 54 Theobald IV, count of Champagne and king of Navarre, 21, 24, 39, 41 Thierry, H. pr. in England, 21 Thomas Agni of Lentino, patriarch of Jerusalem, 31, 121 n. 125, 128 Thomas Bérard, T. master, 32–33, 37, 122–23 Thury, 69 Tiberias, 22, 23, 34, 46, 53 Tiburge of Orange, 73 Til Hamdoun, 50 Tortosa, 11, 28, 32 Toulouse, city, 76, 83. county, 76, 83, 89; H. com. of, 134, 156, 161 Trignan, 84 Trinquetaille, 71, 74, 97; H. comy. and coms. of, 156, 157, 161; H. cartulary of, 3 Tripoli, city of, 11, 14, 17, 26, 29, 40, 43, 44–5, 54, 61; county of, 11, 28, 32, 43, 51, 52, 54, 55, 57–8, 61; H. comy. and coms. of, 98, 139, 148, 150, 151, 152 Tuban, 52 Tunis, 44, 45, 99 Turcarme, 48 Turcopoles, 8, 34, 40 Turriclee, 38, 39, 57 Turris Salinarum, 38 Tyre, 11, 12, 15, 17, 28, 31, 32, 34, 39, 40, 42, 43, 48, 53, 57, 61–2; H. comy. and coms. of, 138, 139, 152, 153 Urban III, pope, 105–6 Urban IV, pope, as James Pantaleon, patriarch of Jerusalem, 30, 120–21; as pope 37, 99, 120, 122–24, 144 Valencia, 100 Valenia, 28, 31 Valentine, 83 Vaner, lordship of, 50 Venice, Venitians, 27 Verona, 104 Verrières, 70 Villers, 69

190

INDEX

Vineyards, 41, 52, 62, 65, 71–2, 85, 86, 88, 89, 91 Vivarais, 73 Walter, count of Brienne and Jaffa, 114 Walter Mauclerc, bishop of Carlisle, 79 Walter of St. Martin, Dominican, 26 Wheat, 17, 38, 43, 48, 49, 50, 71, 72 n. 54, 84, 89, 98. See also grains Wilbrand of Oldenburg, pilgrim, 17 William II of Agen, patriarch of Jerusalem, 39, 41 William Odet, com. of H. ship La Comtesse, 10 William of Beaujeu, T. master, 129 William of Chartres, T. master, 20 William of Châteauneuf, H. master, 23, 24, 25–26, 153

William of Corceles, H. marshal, 129, 139, 153 William of Fores, H. cast. of Margat, 139, 153 William Pijons, H. pr. of France, 91, 135, 156 William of Senlis, H. Grand com., 23, 153 William of Sonnac, T. master, 25 William of Villaret, H. master, 89, 90, 91, 131, 153–54 William of Villiers, H. Grand com., 12, 15, 66–67, 77–78, 135, 138, 140, 154, 156 William Raymond of Montcada, viscount of Béarn, 76 Wine, see vinyards Wood, 48, 51 n. 214, 70, 110 Ximen of Labata, H. pr. of St. Gilles and cast. of Amposta, 135–36, 165