On The Rise And Fall Of The Knights Templar

The Knights Templar was one of the biggest military orders in Medieval Europe. It was established in 1120 and fell in1312. Its rise and fall was related directly to the Crusades. As the result of the first Crusade,four Crusade states was born in the east.But the west rulers could not maintain public order in the Holy Land. Pilgrims were often attacked by lions,bandits and Saracens, which resulted in the establishment of the Knights Templar. Early Knights Templar was a small organization with limited resources and a unitary function. The Council of Troyes in 1129 approved its existence in the Christendom. Since then, donations in various forms came in a continuous stream and made the Knights Templar's wealth grow rapidly, which, consequently, led to a transition of its function. It became a standing army in the Crusade states. Since 1170's or 1180's it was one of the principal forces defending the Holy Land.The Knights Templar rose during the Crusades and, in return, exerted influence on the theory of the Crusades. Traditionally, the Catholic Church held opposite attitude towards wars.But from ten century circumstances changed the Church's attitude. The theory of Holy War was developped and carried out through the Crusades. This tansition was a breakthrough of Medieval theories. The emergence of the Knights Templar was another breakthrough. It legalized monks' fighting against infidels, which had been forbidden by the canons. Furthermore, it initialized a model of military orders.Comparatively, the fall of the Knights Templar is unimaginably queer. A military order with the Holy War as its cause and defending the Holy Land as its task, and sacreficed greatly constantly in the East for the whole Chritendom, was suppressed in the West by its fellow Christians. It was accused of heresy, idolatry, sodomy and other crimes. Did it really commit these acute crimes? What's the motive behind the inquisition? These questions have been interesting people. This case did not have any material evidences. All witnesses came from hearsays. The confessions were obtained from Templars through tortures. Since 1900s more and more historians believed that the acusations against the Knights Templar were false. Nevertheless, the motivation behind the inquisition is still perplexing.Philip IV was the focus because he dominated the inquisition from sart to finish.He started the accusations and arresting Templars the earliest in Europe. When the Pope suspended French inquisition, he pressed him to continue. When the Vienne Concil was hesitating to suppress the Knights Templar, he went near Vienne with. An instant decision was made in the Council obviously through threat. Why was he so hostile to the Knights Templar?Most reseachers believe that Philip IV's accusations were only an excuse to seize the wealth of the Knights Templar. Since Philip III, the French crown had expierenced acutely financial difficulties caused by wars against England and Flanders. The situation was so desperate during Philip IV's reign that the king robbed the Jews and the Lombards of their wealth. But this was not enough to solve his problem. So he acted against the Knights Templar. He achieved his aim by retaining its property after the arrest of Templars in France. All these led to a conclusion that his motive of accusing the Knights Templar was to get its wealth. This conclusion seems to hold its ground. Nevertheless, it cannot explain why other monarches, the English King, for example, didn't act against the Knights Templar since their situations were no better than Philip IV's, why the Knights Templar became the victim of Philip IV since it was not the only organization who allegedly possessed a large amount of wealth and, above all, why the French King insisted that the property of the Knights Templar be transfered to the Hospitallers instead of the monarches. The theory of material motive cannot explain these facts because it is specious. The suppression of the Knights Templar is not necessarilly related to the French King's fiscal problem.Since the most accepted opinion contradicts the facts, to find out the truth via different routes is worth trying. Researchers don't exclude the possibility that Philip IV did believe that the Knights Templar was guilty, but relegate it to a plainly secondary position. When we talk about the suppression of the Knights Templar,we should bear in mind that it was a religious case so Philip IV's belief mattered. Recent studies on Philip IV's personality reveal that he grew into an adult well known for his personal piety, expressed through penances and abstinences, even to the wearing of a hair shirt. This piety was inherited from his ancestors, especially his grangfather Luis IX and deepened after his beloved wife died in 1305. He, too, was influenced by Medieval fantasy that there were two kinds of enemies, namely pagans and heretics, who had been trying to destroy the foundation of the Christendom from outside and inside. The extreme piety, the contemporary fantasy and the consciousness of responsibility of defending his kingdom made him a fanatic and a bigot.There were at least two events that convinced him that the Knights Templar was guilty. Firstly, the grand master of the Knights Templar didn't agree to the plan of amalgamation of military orders, which was considered widely by ecclesiastic and secular rulers the best way to promote the crusading cause. Molay's refusal surely upset the French king. Secondly, Esquiu of Floyran accused the Knights Templar of heresy, idolatry, sodomy and other crimes. The first event might not have led to the Knights Templar's fall. Philip IV might not have believed Esquiu of Floyran's accusations at once. But when he connected Molay's refusal with Esquiu of Floyran's accusations, he may have concluded that the Knights Templar as heretics intended to descontruct the Crusades. Such a conclusion was fatal for the Knights Templar. When the French Templars confessed their crimes, he became certain of their guilt.If the analysis above holds its ground, we may come to a cautious conclusion that Philip IV acted against the Knights Templar because he was convinced of its guilty. What contributed fundamentally to his final decision is the fanaticism he posessed.Because of the fanaticism,he was more ready than other rulers to accept the validity of the accusations. So the fanaticism resulted in bigoted action. In another word, it was the religious fanaticism, not greed, that ruined the Knights Templar.