Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T18:05:30.973Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Constitutional Conflict and Change in the Hospital of St John during the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2011

A. J. Forey
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The leading studies of the Hospital of St John in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries have presented somewhat differing accounts of the power structure at the centre of the Order. Delaville Le Roulx in his brief analysis of government provides an essentially static picture and maintains that although in theory the plenitude of power rested with the chapter general, which delegated executive authority to the master, in practice the latter's power was almost absolute: although the master had few rights of his own and on most matters was expected to seek the counsel of the central convent or of the chapter general, these bodies would not refuse assent to measures which did not conflict with the statutes and usages of the Order; and, as the chapter general met only infrequently, the master enjoyed a considerable freedom of initiative. Therefore, despite the restrictions on his authority, ‘le róle du grand-maítre était prépondérant’. More recently, Riley-Smith has argued at greater length that the relationship between the master, the central convent and the chapter general did not remain unchanged and that during this period the convent and chapter general assumed predominance, as is shown by the convent's victory in 1299 over the master William de Villaret, who was obliged to travel out to the East and hold a chapter general there against his will. The power gained by the convent and chapter general was not the outcome of a process of gradual evolution, but resulted from a series of bitter constitutional conflicts, in which the convent and chapter general - influenced by current baronial ideas - demanded not only government in accordance with law and custom but also the right to be consulted.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Ecclesiastical History , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , January 1982 , pp. 15 - 29
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Roulx, J. Delaville Le, Les Hospitaliers en Tern SainU et a Chypre {1100–1310), Paris 1904, 313. 328–9Google Scholar.

2 Riley-Smith, J., The Knights of St John in Jerusalem and Cyprus, c. 1050–1310, London 1967, 290–303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The influence of secular practice on Hospitaller government is also stressed by Waldstein-Wartenberg, B., Rechtsgcschichte des Malleserordens, Vienna 1969, 37–8, 54, 57–8Google Scholar.

3 Roulx, J. Delaville Le, Cartulaire general de l'Ordre des Hospitaliers de Saint-Jean de Jirusalem, Paris 1894–1906, i. 276–9 docGoogle Scholar. 403 (hereafter cited as Cartulaire).

4 Ibid., i. 300–1 doc. 434. The ‘chapter’ mentioned here was the central convent, not the general chapter. Where Delaville Le Roulx reads ‘C[asti]’ in this document, the initial should be G, referring to Gilbert d’Assailly.

5 Op. cit., 293.

6 Cartulaire, i. 62–8 doc. 70.

7 Ibid., i. 20, 69–70, 111—12, 138–9, 149–50, 189–90, 222–4, 272–3 docs. 18, 72, 136, 177. 192, 250, 309–10, 399.

8 La Règie du Temple, ed. H. de Curzon, Paris 1886, 42–3; M. Perlbach, Die Statuten des Deutschen Ordens, Halle 1890, 49.

9 Cartulaire, i. 62–8 doc. 70 caps. 7, 9, 10, 12.

10 A judicial decision to be made by the chapter is mentioned in chapter 10.

11 Ibid., ii. 31–40 doc. 1193.

12 Riley-Smith, Knights of St John, 121, accepts that these statutes ‘do not appear to have been altogether original’. King, E. J., The Rule, Statutes and Customs of the Hospitallers, 1099–1310, London 1934, 7–8 Google Scholar, thinks that they contained ‘nothing definitely new’; see also Der Johanniter-Orden: Der Malteser-Orden: Der ritterliche Orden des HI. Johannes vom Spital zu Jerusalem, ed. A. Wienand, Cologne 1977, 244.

13 Cartulaire, i. 276–9 doc. 403.

14 That Alfonso of Portugal, who was then master, had little regard for customs and statutes which limited magisterial power is suggested by the rumours current at the end of the century that he resigned because the convent would not obey an order given by him and that his resignation was occasioned by a dislike of the Margat statutes: W. Dugdale, Monasticon anglicanum, vi, London 1830, 797; Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, MS Fr. 6049 fo. 233.

15 Cartulaire, hi. 368–70 doc. 3670 caps. 1, 2. Both the Latin and French texts state that the new seal was to be kept under the seals (souz la boule, sub bullis) of certain officials, although they do not agree on the officials in question. A more usual arrangement was for a seal to be kept under several locks, with the keys held by various individuals: the Hospitallers had themselves adopted this practice for the custody of priors’ seals: Ibid., iii. 225–9 doc- 3396 cap. 22; and in the Teutonic Order the capitular seal was similarly kept under several locks: Perlbach, Die Statuten, 103. If the 1278 decree is to be taken literally - and there are parallels which can be quoted - the treasurer was presumably not supposed to break the seals without the knowledge of the officials concerned, and the Hospitaller William de Sancto Stephano, in commenting on this statute, said that these officials douent estrepresent quant aucune chose sero bullee de la dite bulle: B.N., MS Fr. 6049 fo. 244.

16 Riley-Smith, Knights of St John, 295.

17 Cartulaire, ii. 565 doc. 2224; E. Strehlke, Tabulae Ordinis Theutonid, Berlin 1869, 69 doc. 87; Riley-Smith, Knights of St John, 295.

18 B.N., MS Fr. 6049 fo. 244.

19 Cartulaire, iii. 450–5 doc. 3844 cap. 2.

20 Accounts were rendered monthly in the Teutonic Order as well: Perlbach, Die Statuten, 107.

21 Cartulaire, iii. 655–7 doc. 4267. Riley-Smith, Knights of St John, 297–8, sees the proposals as being not particularly original and refers to the diffinitors of the friars and Augustinian canons. But the diffinitors in these instances enjoyed only temporary powers at the time of chapter meetings: Galbraith, G. R., The Constitution of the Dominican Order, Manchester 1925, 38–9, 69–85, 99–101Google Scholar; Brooke, R. B., Early Franciscan Government, Cambridge 1959, 233–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Chapters of the Augustinian Canons, ed. H. E. Salter, Canterbury and York Society 1921–2, xv; see also Hourlier, J., Le Chapítre-général jusqu’au moment du grand schisme, Paris 1936, 226–34Google Scholar. Some diffinitors did gain wider powers, but did not hold office permanently : Milis, L., L'Ordre des chanoines reguliers d'Arrouaise, Bruges 1969, 565–80Google Scholar.

22 B.N., MS Fr. 6049 fo. 259V (the reference is given wrongly in Cartulaire, iii. 657 note 8).

23 Ibid., iii. 681–3 doc. 4310; this document is misinterpreted on this point by Riley-Smith, Knights of St John, 207, 298.

24 Cartulaire, iii. 766–79 docs. 4461–3.

25 Ibid., iii. 769–76 doc. 4462.

26 Of course, if the convent's interpretation of the Margat decrees were accepted, the legality of the 1297 assembly would be thrown into doubt. The quashing of the decrees passed in 1297 by the chapter general in 1300 was the logical consequence of this line of argument: Ibid., iii. 810–16 doc. 4515 cap. 20.

27 Ibid., iii. 769–76 doc. 4462.

28 Ibid., iii. 810–16 doc. 4515 cap. 9.

29 Riley-Smith, Knights of St John, 301, argues that by demanding esgart des freres regarding the master's summons to a chapter in the West the convent was rejecting the statute of 1265 and re-introducing a right of formal rebellion: Cartulaire, iii. 118–21 doc. 3180 cap. 10; and, no doubt, if the master had acceded to this demand it could have been used as a precedent. But it would not in fact have implied the rejection of the 1265 decree, for that statute - strictly interpreted - concerned only brothers in the West, and the demand for esgart des freres in 1299 was made by the convent in Cyprus.

30 Cartulaire, ii. 536–61 doc. 2213 cap. 109.

31 Ibid., ii. 536–61 doc. 2213 cap. 88.

32 It was not earlier than the Margat decrees, which it mentions.

33 Cartulaire, iii. 118–21 doc. 3180 cap. 10.

34 Ibid., iii. 655–7 doc. 4267.

35 Ibid., iii. 672–3 doc. 4293.

36 Ibid., iii. 681–3 doc. 4310.

37 Ibid., iv. 36–41 doc. 4574 cap. 11.

38 Ibid., iii. 118–21 doc. 3180 cap. 10. Only the Latin version refers explicitly to the esgart.

39 E.g. Ibid., iii. 186–8 doc. 3317 cap. 6; 225–9 doc. 3396 caps. 5, 24; 450–5 doc. 3844 caps. 7, 18.

40 Ibid., iii. 780 doc. 4464.

41 B.N., MS Fr. 6049 fo. 263–263V; published by L. Delisle, ‘Maitre Jean d’Antioche, traducteur, et frère Guillaume de Saint-Etienne’, Histoire littéraire de la France, xxxiii, Paris 1906, 30–1, where it is pointed out that treschant should read tres sachant.

42 Cartulaire, iii. 776–9 doc. 4463.

43 According to William of Tyre the Order's debts at this time amounted to 100,000 besants: Hisloria rerum in partibus transmarinis gestarum, XX. 5, in Recueil des historiens des croisades: historiens occidentaux, i, Paris 1844, 948–9.

44 Cartulaire, i. 275–6, 283 docs. 402, 409.

45 Ibid., iii. 681–3 doc. 4310.

46 B.N., MS Fr. 6049 fo. 254V; published by Delisle, ‘Maitre Jean d’Antioche’, 31–2, where it is suggested that the beginning of the second sentence should read ‘Et grant charite est chose deue a eaus sera faite...’

47 Cartulaire, i. 276–9 doc. 403.

48 J. L. Martín, Origerus de la Orden militar de Santiago (1170–1195), Barcelona 1974, 248–54 doc. 73; P. Salmon, L’Abbé dans la tradition monastique, Paris 1962, 78, 80, 82–3.

49 Cartulaire, iii. 769–76 doc. 4462.

50 Dugdale, Monasticon, vi. 7 9 7 ; B.N., M S F r. 6049 fo. 233.

51 Cartulaire, iii. 672–3 doc. 4293.

52 Roulx, J. Delaville Le, Les Hospitallers à Rhodes jusqu’à la mort de Philibert de Naillac (1310–1421), Paris 1913, 12 Google Scholar.

53 Cartulaire, iii. 766–76, 780 docs. 4461–2, 4464.

54 Ibid., iii. 776–9 doc. 4463.

55 Schottmiiller, K., Der Untergang des Templerordens, Berlin 1887, ii. 143–400 Google Scholar.

56 Michelet, J., Procès des Templiers, Paris 1841–51, i. 212, 560; ii. 11Google Scholar.

57 Riley-Smith, Knights of St John, 280.

58 Ibid., 282.

59 Ibid., 151–2.

60 Riley-Smith, Ibid., 165, quotes from the Gestes des Chiprois, ed. G. Raynaud, Société de l’Orient Latin 1887, 38—9, to show that in 1228 the Hospital sympathised with the baronage; but the passage in question implies that the Temple and Hospital might act as a restraining influence on Frederick 11 rather than that they favoured the barons.

61 Riley-Smith, J., The Feudal Nobility and the Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1174–1277, London 1973, 226–8Google Scholar.