On the night of the 13th of October, all the Templars in the French dominions were simultaneously arrested. Monks were appointed to preach against them in the public places of Paris, and in the gardens of the Palais Royal; and advantage was taken of the folly, the superstition, and the credulity of the age, to propagate the most horrible and extravagant charges against them. They were accused of worshipping an idol covered with an old skin, embalmed, having the appearance of a piece of polished oil-cloth. “In this idol,” we are assured, “there were two carbuncles for eyes, bright as the brightness of heaven, and it is certain that all the hope of the Templars was placed in it; it was their sovereign god, and they trusted in it with all their heart.” They are accused of burning the bodies of the deceased brethren, and making the ashes into a powder, which they administered to the younger brethren in their food and drink, to make them hold fast their faith and idolatry; of cooking and roasting infants, and anointing their idols with the fat; of celebrating hidden rites and mysteries, to which young and tender virgins were introduced, and of a variety of abominations too absurd and horrible to be named. Guillaume Paradin, in his history of Savoy, seriously repeats these monstrous accusations, and declares that the Templars had “un lieu creux ou cave en terre, fort obscur, en laquelle ils avoient un image en forme d’un homme, sur lequel ils avoient appliqué la peau d’un corps humain, et mis deux clairs et luisans escarboucles au lieu des deux yeux. A cette horrible statue etoient contraints de sacrifier ceux qui vouloient etre de leur damnable religion, lesquels avant toutes ceremonies ils contragnoient de renier Jesus Christ, et fouler la croix avec les pieds, et apres ce maudit sacre auquel assistoient femmes et filles (seduites pour etre de ce secte) ils estegnoient les lampes et lumieres qu’ils avoient en cett cave… Et s’il advenoit que d’un Templier et d’un pucelle nasquit un fils, ils se rangoient tous en un rond, et se jettoient cet enfant de main en main, et ne cessoient de le jetter jusqu’a ce qu’il fu mort entre leurs mains; etant mort ils se rotissoient (chose execrable) et de la graisse ils en ognoient leur grand statue!” The character of the charges preferred against the Templars proves that their enemies had no serious crimes to allege against the order. Their very virtues, indeed, were turned against them, for we are told that, “to conceal the iniquity of their lives, they made much almsgiving, constantly frequented church, comported themselves with edification, frequently partook of the holy sacrament, and manifested always much modesty and gentleness of deportment in the house, as well as in public.”
During twelve days of severe imprisonment, the Templars remained constant in the denial of the horrible crimes imputed to the fraternity. The king’s promises of pardon extracted from them no confession of guilt, and they were therefore handed over to the tender mercies of the brethren of St. Dominic, who were the most refined and expert torturers of the day. On the 19th of October, the grand inquisitor proceeded with his myrmidons to the Temple at Paris, and a hundred and forty Templars were one after another put to the torture. Days and weeks were consumed in the examination, and thirty-six Templars perished in the hands of their tormentors, maintaining, with unshaken constancy to the very last, the entire innocence of their order! Many of them lost the use of their feet from the application of the torture of fire, which was inflicted in the following manner: – their legs were fastened in an iron frame, and the soles of their feet were greased over with fat or butter; they were then placed before the fire, and a screen was drawn backwards and forwards, so as to moderate and regulate the heat. Such was the agony produced by this roasting operation, that the victim often went raving mad. Brother Bernarde de Vado, on subsequently revoking a confession of guilt, wrung from him by this description of torment, says to the commissary of police, before whom he was brought to be examined, “They held me so long before a fierce fire that the flesh was burnt off my heels, two pieces of bone came away, which I present to you.”
148
148
Ostendens duo ossa quod dicebat illa esse quæ ceciderunt de talis suis.
Processus contra Templarios.
Raynouard
, Monumens Historiques, p. 73, ed. 1813.
Another Templar, on publicly revoking his confession, declared that four of his teeth were drawn out, and that he confessed himself guilty to save the remainder. Others of the fraternity deposed to the infliction on them of the most revolting and indecent torments;
149
149
Ponderibus appensis in genitalibus, usque ad exanimationem. Ib. p. 35.
and, in addition to all this, it appears that forged letters from the Grand Master were shown to the prisoners, exhorting them to confess themselves guilty! Many of the Templars were accordingly compelled to acknowledge whatever was required of them, and to plead guilty to the commission of crimes which, in the previous interrogatories, they had positively denied.
These violent proceedings excited the astonishment of Europe. On the 20th of November, the king of England summoned the seneschal of Agen to his presence, and examined him concerning the truth of the horrible charges preferred against the Templars; and on the 4th of December, the English monarch wrote letters to the kings of Portugal, Castile, Aragon, and Sicily, to the following effect: – “To the magnificent prince the Lord Dionysius, by the grace of God the illustrious king of Portugal, his very dear friend, Edward, by the same grace king of England, &c. Health and prosperity. It is fit and proper, inasmuch as it conduceth to the honour of God and the exaltation of the faith, that we should prosecute with benevolence those who come recommended to us by strenuous labours and incessant exertions in defence of the Catholic faith, and for the destruction of the enemies of the cross of Christ. Verily, a certain clerk (Bernard Peletin,) drawing nigh unto our presence, applied himself, with all his might, to the destruction of the order of the brethren of the Temple of Jerusalem. He dared to publish before us and our council certain horrible and detestable enormities repugnant to the Catholic faith, to the prejudice of the aforesaid brothers, endeavouring to persuade us, through his own allegations, as well as through certain letters which he had caused to be addressed to us for that purpose, that by reason of the premises, and without a due examination of the matter, we ought to imprison all the brethren of the aforesaid order abiding in our dominions. But, considering that the order, which hath been renowned for its religion and its honour, and in times long since passed away was instituted, as we have learned, by the Catholic Fathers, exhibits, and hath from the period of its first foundation exhibited, a becoming devotion to God and his holy church, and also, up to this time, hath afforded succour and protection to the Catholic faith in parts beyond sea, it appeared to us that a ready belief in an accusation of this kind, hitherto altogether unheard of against the fraternity, was scarcely to be expected. We affectionately ask, and require of your royal majesty, that ye, with due diligence, consider of the premises, and turn a deaf ear to the slanders of ill-natured men, who are animated, as we believe, not with a zeal of rectitude, but with a spirit of
cupidity
and envy, permitting no injury unadvisedly to be done to the persons or property of the brethren of the aforesaid order, dwelling within your kingdom, until they have been legally convicted of the crimes laid to their charge, or it shall happen to be otherwise ordered concerning them in these parts.”
A few days after the transmission of this letter, king Edward wrote to the pope, expressing his disbelief of the horrible and detestable rumours spread abroad concerning the Templars. He represents them to his holiness as universally respected by all men in his dominions for the purity of their faith and morals. He expresses great sympathy for the affliction and distress suffered by the Master and brethren, by reason of the scandal circulated concerning them; and he strongly urges the holy pontiff to clear, by some fair course of inquiry, the character of the order from the unjust and infamous aspersions cast against it.
150
150
Acta
Rymeri
, tom. iii. p. 35, 37.
On the 22nd of November, however, a fortnight previously, the pope had issued the following bull to king Edward. “Clement, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to his very dear son in Christ, Edward, the illustrious king of England, health and apostolical blessing.
“Presiding, though unworthy, on the throne of pastoral pre-eminence, by the disposition of him who disposeth all things, we fervently seek after this one thing above all others; we with ardent wishes aspire to this, that shaking off the sleep of negligence, whilst watching over the Lord’s flock, by removing that which is hurtful, and taking care of such things as are profitable, we may be able, by the divine assistance, to bring souls to God. In truth, a long time ago, about the period of our first promotion to the summit of the apostolical dignity, there came to our ears a light rumour to the effect that the Templars, though fighting ostensibly under the guise of religion, have hitherto been secretly living in perfidious apostasy, and in detestable heretical depravity. But, considering that their order, in times long since passed away, shone forth with the grace of much nobility and honour, and that they were for a length of time held in vast reverence by the faithful, and that we had then heard of no suspicion concerning the premises, or of evil report against them; and also, that from the beginning of their religion, they have publicly borne the cross of Christ, exposing their bodies and goods against the enemies of the faith, for the acquisition, retention, and defence of the Holy Land, consecrated by the precious blood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, we were unwilling to yield a ready belief to the accusation…”
The holy pontiff then states, that afterwards, however, the same dreadful intelligence was conveyed to the king of France, who, animated by a lively zeal in the cause of religion, took immediate steps to ascertain its truth. He describes the various confessions of the guilt of idolatry and heresy made by the Templars in France, and requires the king forthwith to cause all the Templars in his dominions to be taken into custody on the same day. He directs him to hold them, in the name of the pope, at the disposition of the Holy See, and to commit all their real and personal property to the hands of certain trustworthy persons, to be faithfully preserved until the holy pontiff shall give further directions concerning it. King Edward received this bull immediately after he had despatched his letter to the pope, exhorting his holiness not to give ear to the accusations against the order. The young king was now either convinced of the guilt of the Templars, on the high authority of the sovereign pontiff, or hoped to turn the proceedings against them to a profitable account, as he yielded a ready and prompt compliance with the pontifical commands. An order in council was made for the arrest of the Templars, and the seizure of their property. Inventories were directed to be taken of their goods and chattels, and provision was made for the sowing and tilling of their lands during the period of their imprisonment.
On the 26th of December the king wrote to the pope, informing his holiness that he would carry his commands into execution in the best and speediest way that he could; and on the 8th of January, A. D. 1308, the Templars were suddenly arrested in all parts of England, and their property was seized into the king’s hands. Brother William de la More was at this period Master of the Temple, or Preceptor of England. He succeeded the Master Brian le Jay, who was slain, as before mentioned, in the battle of Falkirk, and was taken prisoner, together with all his brethren of the Temple at London, and committed to close custody in Canterbury Castle. He was afterwards liberated on bail at the instance of the bishop of Durham.
151
151
Knyghton
, apud X. script. col. 2494, 2531. Acta
Rymeri
, tom. iii. p. 30-32, 34, 35, 45.
On the 12th of August, the pope addressed the bull
faciens misericordiam
to the English bishops as follows: – “Clement, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to the venerable brethren the archbishop of Canterbury, and his suffragans, health and apostolical benediction. The Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, using mercy with his servant, would have us taken up into the eminent mirror of the apostleship, to this end, that being, though unworthy, his vicar upon earth, we may, as far as human frailty will permit in all our actions and proceedings, follow his footsteps.” He describes the rumours which had been spread abroad in France against the Templars, and his unwillingness to believe them, “because it was not likely, nor did seem credible, that such religious men, who continually shed their blood for the name of Christ, and were thought to expose their persons to danger of death for his sake; and who often showed many and great signs of devotion, as well in the divine offices as in fasting and other observances, should be so unmindful of their salvation as to perpetrate such things; we were unwilling to give ear to the insinuations and impeachments against them, being taught so to do by the example of the same Lord of ours, and the writings of canonical doctrine. But afterwards, our most dear son in Christ, Philip, the illustrious king of the French, to whom the same crimes had been made known,
not from motives of avarice
, (since he does not design to apply or to appropriate to himself any portion of the estates of the Templars, nay, has washed his hands of them!) but inflamed with zeal for the orthodox faith, following the renowned footsteps of his ancestors, getting what information he properly could upon the premises, gave us much instruction in the matter by his messengers and letters.” The holy pontiff then gives a long account of the various confessions made in France, and of the absolution granted to such of the Templars as were truly contrite and penitent; he expresses his conviction of the guilt of the order, and makes provision for the trial of the fraternity in England. King Edward in the mean time, had begun to make free with their property, and the pope, on the 4th of October, wrote to him to the following effect:
“Your conduct begins again to afford us no slight cause of affliction, inasmuch as it hath been brought to our knowledge from the report of several barons, that in contempt of the Holy See, and without fear of offending the divine Majesty, you have, of your own sole authority, distributed to different persons the property which belonged formerly to the order of the Temple in your dominions, which you had got into your hands at our command, and which ought to have remained at our disposition… We have therefore ordained that certain fit and proper persons shall be sent into your kingdom, and to all parts of the world where the Templars are known to have had property, to take possession of the same conjointly with certain prelates specially deputed to that end, and to make an inquisition concerning the execrable excesses which the members of the order are said to have committed.”
152
152
Acta
Rymeri
, tom. iii. p. 100-103, 111, 121, 122.
To this letter of the supreme pontiff, king Edward sent the following short and pithy reply: – “As to the goods of the Templars, we have done nothing with them up to the present time, nor do we intend to do with them aught but what we have a right to do, and what we know will be acceptable to the Most High.”
On the 13th of September, A. D. 1309, the king granted letters of safe conduct “to those discreet men, the abbot of Lagny, in the diocese of Paris, and Master Sicard de Vaur, canon of Narbonne,” the inquisitors appointed by the pope to examine the Grand Preceptor and brethren of the Temple in England; and the same day he wrote to the archbishop of Canterbury, and the bishops of London and Lincoln, enjoining them to be personally present with the papal inquisitors, at their respective sees, as often as such inquisitors, or any one of them, should proceed with their inquiries against the Templars.
153
153
Acta
Rymeri
, p. 168, 169.
Among the prisoners confined in the Tower were Brother William de la More, Knight, Grand Preceptor of England, otherwise Master of the Temple; Brother Himbert Blanke, Knight, Grand Preceptor of Auvergne, one of the veteran warriors who had fought to the last in defence of Palestine, had escaped the slaughter at Acre, and had accompanied the Grand Master from Cyprus to France, whence he crossed over to England, and was rewarded for his meritorious and memorable services, in defence of the christian faith, with a dungeon in the Tower. Brother
Radulph de Barton
, priest of the order of the Temple, custos or guardian of the Temple church, and prior of London; Brother
Michael de Baskeville
, Knight, Preceptor of London; Brother
John de Stoke
, Knight, Treasurer of the Temple at London; together with many other knights and serving brethren of the same house. There were also in custody in the Tower the Knights Preceptors of the preceptories of Ewell in Kent, of Daney and Dokesworth in Cambridgeshire, of Getinges in Gloucestershire, of Cumbe in Somersetshire, of Schepeley in Surrey, of Samford and Bistelesham in Oxfordshire, of Garwy in Herefordshire, of Cressing in Essex, of Pafflet, Huppleden, and other preceptories, together with several priests and chaplains of the order. A general scramble appears to have taken place for possession of the goods and chattels of the imprisoned Templars; and the king, to check the robberies that were committed, appointed Alan de Goldyngham and John de Medefeld to inquire into the value of the property that had been carried off, and to inform him of the names of the parties who had obtained possession of it. The sheriffs of the different counties were also directed to summon juries, through whom the truth might he better obtained.
154
154
Concil. Mag. Brit. tom. ii. p. 346, 347. Acta
Rymeri
, tom. iii. p. 174, 175, 178, 179.
On the 22nd of September, the archbishop of Canterbury, acting in obedience to the papal commands, before a single witness had been examined in England, caused to be published in all churches and chapels a papal bull, wherein the pope declares himself perfectly convinced of the guilt of the order, and solemnly denounces the penalty of excommunication against all persons, of whatever rank, station, or condition in life, whether clergy or laity, who should knowingly afford, either publicly or privately, assistance, counsel, or kindness to the Templars, or should dare to shelter them, or give them countenance or protection, and also laying under interdict all cities, castles, lands and places, which should harbour any of the members of the proscribed order! At the commencement of the month of October, the inquisitors arrived in England, and immediately published the bull appointing the commission, enjoining the citation of criminals, and of witnesses, and denouncing the heaviest ecclesiastical censures against the disobedient, and against every person who should dare to impede the inquisitors in the exercise of their functions. Citations were made in St. Paul’s Cathedral, and in all the churches of the ecclesiastical province of Canterbury, at the end of high mass, requiring the Templars to appear before the inquisitors at a certain time and place, and the articles of accusation were transmitted to the constable of the Tower, in Latin, French, and English, to be read to all the Templars imprisoned in that fortress.
On Monday, the 20th of October, after the Templars had been languishing in the English prisons for more than a year and eight months, the tribunal constituted by the pope to take the inquisition in the province of Canterbury assembled in the episcopal hall of London. It was composed of the bishop of London Dieudonné, abbot of the monastery of Lagny, in the diocese of Paris, and Sicard de Vaur, canon of Narbonne, the pope’s chaplain, and hearer of causes in the pontifical palace. They were assisted by several foreign notaries. After the reading of the papal bulls, and some preliminary proceedings, the articles of accusation, a monument of human folly, superstition, and credulity, were solemnly exhibited. It was urged against the Templars: “1. That at their first reception into the order, or at some time afterwards, or as soon as an opportunity occurred, they were induced or admonished by those who had received them within the bosom of the fraternity, to deny Christ or Jesus, or the crucifixion, or at one time God, and at another time the blessed Virgin, and sometimes all the saints. – 5. That the receivers told and instructed those that were received, that Christ was not the true God, or sometimes Jesus, or sometimes the person crucified. – 7. That they said he had not suffered for the redemption of mankind, nor been crucified but for his own sins. – 9. That they made those they received into the order spit upon the cross, or upon the sign or figure of the cross, or the image of Christ. – 10. That they caused the cross itself to be trampled under foot. – 11. That the brethren themselves did sometimes trample on the same cross. – 12. Item quod mingebant interdum, et alios mingere faciebant, super ipsam crucem. – 14. That they worshipped a cat, which was placed in the midst of the congregation. – 16. That they did not believe the sacrament of the altar nor the other sacraments of the church. – 24. That they believed, and so it was told them, that the Grand Master of the order could absolve them from their sins. – 25. That the visitor could do so. – 26. That the preceptors, of whom many were laymen, could do it. – 36. That the receptions of the brethren were made clandestinely. – 37. That none were present but the brothers of the said order. – 38. That for this reason there has for a long time been a vehement suspicion against them.”
The succeeding articles charge the Templars with crimes and abominations too horrible and disgusting to be named.
“46. That the brothers themselves had idols in every province, viz. heads; some of which had three faces, and some one, and some a man’s skull. – 47. That they adored that idol, or those idols, especially in their great chapters and assemblies – 48. That they worshipped them. – 49. As their God. – 50. As their Saviour. – 51. That some of them did so. – 52. That the greater part did. – 53. They said that those heads could save them. – 54. That they could produce riches. – 55. That they had given to the order all its wealth. – 56. That they caused the earth to bring forth seed. – 57. That they made the trees to nourish. – 58. That they bound or touched the heads of the said idols with cords, wherewith they bound themselves about their shirts, or next their skins. – 59. That at their reception the aforesaid little cords, or others of the same length, were delivered to each of the brothers. – 60. That they did this in worship of their idols. – 61. That it was enjoined them to gird themselves with the said little cords, as before mentioned, and continually to wear them. – 62. That the brethren of the order were generally received in that manner. – 63. That they did these things out of devotion. – 64. That they did them everywhere. – 65. That the greater part did. – 66. That those who refused the things above mentioned at their reception, or to observe them afterwards, were killed or cast into prison.”
155
155
The original draft of these articles of accusation, with the corrections and alterations, is preserved in the Tresor des Chartres.
Raynouard
, Monumens Historiques, p. 50, 51. The proceedings against the Templars in England are preserved in MS. in the British Museum, Harl. No. 252, 62, f. p. 113; No. 247, 68, f. p. 144. Bib. Cotton. Julius, b. xii. p. 70; and in the Bodleian Library and Ashmolean Museum. The principal part of them has been published by
Wilkins
in the Concilia Magnæ Britanniæ, tom ii. p. 329-401, and by
Dugdale
, in the Monast. Angl. vol. vi. part ii. p. 844-848.
The remaining articles, twenty-one in number, are directed principally to the mode of confession practised amongst the fraternity, and to matters of heretical depravity. – Such an accusation as this, justly remarks Voltaire,
destroys itself
.
Brother William de la More, and thirty more of his brethren, being interrogated before the inquisitors, positively denied the guilt of the order, and affirmed that the Templars who had made the confession alluded to in France
had lied
. They were ordered to be brought up separately to be examined. On the 23rd of October, Brother William Raven, being interrogated as to the mode of his reception into the order, states that he was admitted by Brother William de la More, the Master of the Temple at Temple Coumbe, in the diocese of Bath; that he petitioned the brethren of the Temple that they would be pleased to receive him into the order to serve God and the blessed Virgin Mary, and to end his life in their service; that he was asked if he had a firm wish so to do; and replied that he had; that two brothers then expounded to him the strictness and severity of the order, and told him that he would not be allowed to act after his own will, but must follow the will of the preceptor; that if he wished to do one thing, he would be ordered to do another; and that if he wished to be at one place, he would be sent to another; that having promised so to act, he swore upon the holy gospels of God to obey the Master, to hold no property, to preserve chastity, never to consent that any man should be unjustly despoiled of his heritage, and never to lay violent hands on any man, except in self-defence, or upon the Saracens. He states that the oath was administered to him in the chapel of the preceptory of Temple Coumbe, in the presence only of the brethren of the order; that the rule was read over to him by one of the brothers, and that a learned serving brother, named John de Walpole, instructed him, for the space of one month, upon the matters contained in it. The prisoner was then taken back to the Tower, and was directed to be strictly separated from his brethren, and not to be suffered to speak to any one of them.
The next two days (October 24th and 25th) were taken up with a similar examination of Brothers Hugh de Tadecastre and Thomas le Chamberleyn, who gave precisely the same account of their reception as the previous witness. Brother Hugh de Tadecastre added, that he swore to succour the Holy Land with all his might, and defend it against the enemies of the christian faith; and that after he had taken the customary oaths and the three vows of chastity, poverty, and obedience, the mantle of the order with the cross and the coif were delivered to him in the church, in the presence of the Master, the knights, and the brothers, all seculars being excluded. Brother Thomas le Chamberleyn added, that there was the same mode of reception in England as beyond sea, and the same mode of taking the vows; that all seculars were excluded, and that when he himself entered the Temple church to be professed, the door by which he entered was closed after him; that there was another door looking into the cemetery, but that no stranger could enter that way. On being asked why none but the brethren of the order were permitted to be present at the reception and profession of brothers, he said he knew of no reason, but that it was so written in their book of rules.
Between the 25th of October and the 17th of November, thirty-three knights, chaplains, and serving brothers, were examined, all of whom positively denied every article imputing crime or infidelity to their order. When Brother Himbert Blanke was asked why they had made the reception and profession of brethren secret, he replied, “through our own unaccountable folly.” They avowed that they wore little cords round their shirts, but for no bad end; they declared that they never touched idols with them, but that they were worn by way of penance, or according to a knight of forty-three years standing, by the instruction of the holy father St. Bernard. Brother Richard de Goldyngham says that he knows nothing further about them than that they were called girdles of chastity. They state that the receivers and the party received kissed one another on the face, but everything else regarding the kissing was false, abominable, and had never been done.
Radulph de Barton, priest of the order of the Temple, and custos or guardian of the Temple church at London, stated, with regard to Article 24, that the Grand Master in chapter could absolve the brothers from offences committed against the rules and observances of the order, but not from private sin, as he was not a priest; that it was perfectly true that those who were received into the