The premise that some of the Knights Templar fled to Scotland before and during the arrests is a simple one. But to fully understand and accept it, one must be familiar with the circumstances that led up to, and surrounded, the arrests of the Templars on Friday 13 October 1307.
The first significant event occurred on 14 September, when King Philip IV signed the order for the preparation of the arrest warrants for the Knights Templar, and the confiscation of their property. Matters concluded a month later.
Obviously there were hundreds of people involved when the Templars were arrested. But only a few actively participated in the major events and are known. The ones whose roles are known to be significant are:1
Jacques de Molay – Grand Master of the Knights Templar from 1293 until his execution by King Philip IV on 18 March 1314.
Philip IV (known as Le Bel or Philip the Fair) – King of France from 1285 until his death on 29 November 1314.
Pope Clement V – Pope from 14 November 1305 until his death on 20 April 1314. He was considered to be a puppet of King Philip IV. Rather than being a puppet, Pope Clement V had health problems and was not politically adroit.
Hugh de Pairaud/Pérraud – Treasurer of the Temple. He held the office of Visitor General and was second only to de Molay.2
Gerard de Villiers – Preceptor of the Temple of France.
Hugh de Châlons – A knight and the nephew of Hugh de Pairaud.
Pierre Flote – Keeper of the Seals, and head of the Chandlery (candle makers and storage) from the early 1290s until his death in 1302.
Guillaume de Nogaret – A lawyer who was very influential from the mid-1290s. He became Keeper of the Seals from 1307 and held this position until his death in 1313.
The Templars, Pope Clement V, and King Philip IV each had their own goals and agendas. To begin to understand the situation in 1307, one must go back to 1265 and the fall of the town of Caesarea and the fortress of Arsuf in Syria. With these, and a number of other defeats, the ultimate downfall of the Christians in Outremer was inevitable. During this period, the Templars went from the universal acceptance they enjoyed after the Council of Troyes, to alienation and distrust arising from their haughty and insular attitude, and their greed which emanated from their aggressive business practices. With the shrinking of the crusader states, there was also a waning interest among the Church and the nobility in Europe. In France, King Philip was more interested in expanding his kingdom. In England, Edward I had his hands full with the Scots. This left the crusades to the Pope and the Orders of the Templars, the Hospitallers, and the Teutonic Knights.
The problems accelerated after the fall of the city and Templar stronghold of Acre on 25 May 1291. After this, the original purpose of the Knights Templar and the other Orders was gone. The Templars’ role shifted from that of warrior to being managers of their estates, mills, wineries, tenants, livestock, and their treasury and banks. The rationale for their continued existence was the prospect of the Pope’s authorization of another crusade at some point in the future. This required not only the management of the Templars’ wealth, but its continued accumulation. Unfortunately, the Templars were primarily made up of poor knights or second sons who were illiterate, or barely literate, and who had not been trained in the use of power and authority. This resulted in an immense abuse of the Templars’ power that had been consolidated by the numerous papal bulls and had given them immunity from local and secular authority. The consequence was an attitude of arrogance and greed. This is highlighted in the story that was told over 100 years ago.
In Sir John Mandeville’s Travels a little anecdote is introduced graphically illustrating the aggrandizing spirit of the Order, and its fatal results. The author says: ‘And in that country [Little Armenia] is an old castle that stands upon a rock, the which is clept the Castle of the Sparrow-hawk that is beyond the city of Layays [Lajazzo] beside the town of Pharsipee [Perschembé] that belongeth to the lordship of Cruck [Korgo] that is a rich lord and a good Christian man, where men find a sparrow-hawk upon a perch right fair and right well made, and a fair lady of faerie that keepeth it: And who that will watch the sparrow-hawk seven days and seven nights, and as some men say three days and three nights, without company and without sleep, that fair lady shall give him, when he hath done, the first wish that he will wish of earthly things; and that hath been proved oftentimes … A Knight of the Temple watched there, and wished a purse evermore full of gold: And the lady granted him: But she said to him that he had asked the destruction of their Order, for the trust of the affiance of that purse, and for the great pride that they should have: And so it was.’3
Jacques de Molay became Grand Master in late 1293. His goals were to re-establish Christian authority in Outremer, and to preserve the integrity of the Order. As to the former, he continued to gather supplies in Italy and France, and to maintain a base on the small island of Ruad off the city of Tortosa in Syria. Unfortunately, when the base on Ruad was wiped out by a large Egyptian force in 1302, the Templars were forced off the island, and no longer had a stronghold in the Mediterranean east of Cyprus.
Between 1296 and 1306 the Templars were sometimes major participants in King Philip’s financial affairs, and at other times they were rejected and ignored. But they were always, to varying degrees, his bankers. For example, between 1292 and 1295 King Philip moved much of his treasury to the Louvre, and out of Templar control. Then, after his defeat at Courtrai in 1302, he moved much of it back to the Templars’ Paris Temple and ordered Hugh de Pairaud to collect war subsidies to cover the costs.
During the period that included the arrest and trials of the Templars, Pope Clement V’s primary goal was to initiate another great crusade. This was probably done at the request of Philip IV who was always in need of revenue. To begin the process, in June 1306, under the guidance of King Philip, Clement summoned Fulk de Villaret, the Grand Master of the Hospitallers, and Jacques de Molay of the Templars, to meet him in Poitiers in France to discuss the force needed for a new crusade, and the unification of the Templars and the Hospitallers.
Jacques de Molay arrived in late 1306 or early 1307. He brought with him two memoranda. There is no record of what Fulk de Villaret brought, if anything. De Molay’s first memorandum dealt with troop strength; he recommended a complement of 15,000 knights and 5,000 foot soldiers. The second memorandum argued strongly that the two Orders should not be united.
Historians are unanimous in their opinion that de Molay’s arguments were very weak. Considering his age, and his longevity as a Grand Master, it is clear that he could not look upon the situation objectively.4 As a result, his refusal, or inability, to realistically consider union with the Hospitallers is thought to have accelerated the Templars’ downfall.
The proverb ‘If someone says it’s not the money, it’s the principal, you know it’s the money’, would apply to King Philip. Philip was one of the last Capetian kings, a descendent of Hugh Capet whose reign and dynasty began in 987.5 When Philip IV assumed the throne in 1285, he also assumed a substantial amount of debt that had been accumulated by his father, Philip III. The situation was made worse by Philip IV’s efforts to expand his kingdom, and in particular the extraordinary expenses arising from a continuing series of battles and ongoing disputes with Flanders (now Belgium) to the north and Gascony in the south-west.6
Philip IV’s considerable debts, and constant need for fresh capital, existed because in the thirteenth century there was no regular county-wide basis of taxation like there is today. The king’s income was linked to revenue from his properties, rents arising from the enforcement of his feudal rights, and numerous iniquitous taxes. But this income was fairly constant and there was little else that could be used to reduce the debt. One of the main problems was the expense of his army. A king could often cover his living and household expenses with his income, but a minimal army at least had to be maintained, and this was a substantial draw on a king’s finances. That is why taxation was often linked to a particular war or campaign. And, as Philip IV’s kingdom expanded, so did his need for an army. As a result, he sought new taxes and novel methods to raise income.
One method of raising revenue was to levy a tax or a fee on an entire area. The reasons were usually trumped-up. For example, King Philip would declare an area heretical, and then confiscate the possessions of its residents. Rich groups, with little or no ability to retaliate, such as the Lombard merchants and bankers, would be singled out and then be economically ravaged by the king. One group ripe for taxation was the Jewish community; another was the clergy.
In 1307, Philip IV was so far in debt that he used a gimmick that almost resulted in his downfall. He debased the currency by a factor of about two-thirds. The result was catastrophic. Riots ensued throughout Paris that had to be put down by armed force. A number of alleged riot leaders were hanged as examples in order to prevent such riots from happening again. The devaluation was finally rescinded and France returned to a stable currency. But this left Philip with the problem of having little hard currency, i.e. gold and silver. In terms of the Templars, Philip’s solution may have been right under his nose. During the riots, Philip sought refuge in the Paris Temple where he was apparently surrounded by untold wealth. Whether this was a motivating factor in the arrest of the Templars is unknown. But, the timing seems more than coincidental. And Philip was desperate to get out of debt. Further, Philip’s financial problems, the unsuccessful currency devaluation and heavy taxation, may have been the result of decisions made and carried out by his advisors because Philip was more interested in hunting than in micromanaging financial details.7
By the latter part of 1307 Philip, or his advisors, had experimented with almost every financial expedient known to medieval rulers. Yet he had failed to achieve any significant, and lasting financial security. 8 Ultimately, Philip IV’s last resort was the Knights Templar. As described by Malcolm Barber, ‘The Templars, among others, were sacrificed as the monarchy thrashed around for an answer’ to the king’s significant financial problems.9
There is another very good argument as to why Philip chose to arrest the Templars. He wanted to control both the Templars and their wealth. Philip had initially tried to join the Templars with the intent of ultimately becoming the Grand Master. But he was denied membership.10 After this, he was instrumental in the efforts to unite the Templars and the Hospitallers. His plan was to then make himself, or one of his sons, the ‘Master-King’ or ‘Bellator Rex’, the Warrior King of a united order.11 But he was wholly unsuccessful, and with Clement V campaigning for a new crusade, King Philip would have had little reason, or excuse, to raise a substantial amount of money for a new military effort, or to have control of a major fighting force.
The arrests were well planned and Philip did not act without first claiming to have a good reason: that ‘persons worthy in the faith’ had made a number of accusations that resulted in charges against the Templars.12 According to Malcolm Barber, the charges were not made by Philip IV but by a number of others. They included the denial of Christ, spitting three times on the image of Christ, and a number of the acts that seemed to give the charges credibility. There was also the claim that Hugh de Châlons had been involved in a plot to kill King Philip.13 Although the arrests and intended confiscation were consistent with Philip’s previous practice of arresting heretics and seizing their property, he was well aware that they would not initially be a popular move. To counter this, he gave the impression that he doubted the truth of the charges. But he eventually came to the conclusion that he believed them. He then claimed to have met with the Pope, to have taken council from the prelates and barons as to how best to proceed, and ultimately acceded to the request of Guillaume de Paris, papal inquisitor in France.
But in fact, Pope Clement had not been asked about or even advised of the arrests. There apparently had been some discussion between the two men, but no mutual decision.14
On 14 September 1307, at the Abbey of Maubuisson near Pontoise, a few miles north of Paris, using the claim that ‘persons worthy in faith’ had made a number of accusations, 15 Philip IV ordered the preparation for the arrest of the Templars throughout his kingdom.
The order was made under seal, with the additional command that it was not to be opened until the night of Thursday 12 October.16 The arrests began on Friday.
An analysis of this subject is essential because there is a huge variance in the estimated number of arrested Templars in France. Also, it is necessary to know how many Templars could have escaped, and from this extrapolate how many of those could have gone to Scotland.
There are no existing records that state the number of Templars in France on 13 October 1307. The Templar records were secret and were not published. There was no census of Templars. All we have are estimates based on records of King Philip’s trials and Clement V’s inquisition. But one fact is certain. Among the knights arrested in France were the Grand Master Jacques de Molay, Hugh de Pairaud, visitor of France, and Geoffroi de Charney, Preceptor of Normandy. Gerard de Villiers, Preceptor of France, escaped. The questions are how many others were arrested, and how many escaped? The answers vary widely. Almost all of the readily accessible statistics deal with France.
One view is that on 13 October Jacques de Molay and virtually all of the 5,000 Templars in France were arrested by King Philip’s men.17 Only about twenty of these managed to escape.18 Another view estimates the number of Templars arrested in France at 15,000, including knights, sergeants, chaplains, servants and laborers.19 There is also the general view that the number of Templars in France was estimated to be around 2,000 by Clement V. All of them were said to have been arrested. But a fairly credible source puts the number between 500 and 700, of which only 50 to 100 were knights.20
According to Baigent and Leigh there were 556 full Templar preceptories in France and numerous other smaller holdings. They estimate that there were at least 3,200 Templars working in various capacities at these sites; of whom approximately 355 were knights and 936 were sergeants. It is generally believed that about 650 Templars were arrested. Baigent and Leigh estimate that, using these percentages, only 250 knights and sergeants were arrested, leaving 1,030 military members free.21 Many of these men escaped from France and apparently went to Scotland and Portugal.
Historians appear to be relatively consistent in the estimate that 138 Templars were arrested in Paris. Of those, the range in age was from sixteen to eighty. They included priests, stewards, shepherds, laborers and carpenters. Only fifteen were knights.22
From the best estimates, it appears that from 210 to 355 knights avoided capture, as well as 556 to 936 sergeants, or totals that range from 766 to 1,291 knights and sergeants; an average of 1,030 fighting men. There were also approximately 1,550 other Templars who escaped. Of the 2,580 Templars in total, there is no way of knowing how many simply removed their tunics and melted into the local population, how many sailed to Portugal, and how many sailed for Scotland, Ireland and Wales. But if ten ships sailed for Scotland, this means that at least several hundred Templars arrived there, and they were all that was needed to help Robert the Bruce.
1 There are many others who were involved in the Templars’ arrests, but those listed are the ones who are essential to the Templars’ flight to Scotland.
2 Barber, Malcolm, The Trial of the Templars, Cambridge University Press, Canto edition (Cambridge, 1993), p. 41.
3 Edwards, John, ‘The Knights Templar in Scotland’, Transactions of the Scottish Ecclesiological Society, Vol. IV (Aberdeen, 1912–1915), p. 40, citing Pollard, Travels of Sir John Mandeville, pp. 98–99.
4 Jacques de Molay was middle-aged when he became Grand Master.
5 Barber, The Trial of the Templars, p. 27. See Fawtier, R., The Capetian Kings of France, tr. L. Butler and R.J. Adam (London, 1960), pp. 55–56.
6 Barber, The Trial of the Templars, p. 32.
7 See Barber, The Trial of the Templars, pp. 28–30.
8 It is unknown whether it was Philip IV who developed direction and policy, or his ministers. It is known that he was served by two very competent and powerful advisors who held the position of ‘Keeper of the Seal’. The first was Pierre Flote, who held the position from the 1290s until his death in 1302. He was followed by Guillaume de Nogaret, whose influence began in the late 1290s. He was ennobled by Philip in 1299 and became Keeper of the Seals in 1307, holding it until his death in 1313.
9 Barber, The Trial of the Templars, p. 32.
10 Howarth, The Knights Templar, p. 258.
11 Edith Simon, The Piebald Standard, a Biography of the Knights Templar, Little, Brown and Co. (Boston, 1959), describes King Philip’s goals as being even more ambitious. At p. 227 Ms Simon states that ‘he calmly proposed that:
– The Kings of France (beginning with himself) should be hereditary grand masters of the combined military orders;
– The incomes of all prelates, including archbishops, should be limited to a fixed minimum, the surplus to Rex Bellator for the conquest of the Holy Land;
– Propertied monks should be sent out into the world only for preaching and hearing confession, mendicant friars live immured, and their revenues beyond the same fixed annual rent likewise accrete to Rex Bellator’s Coffers:
– The hereditary royal grand master should command four cardinal-votes at papal elections.’
12 Barber, The Trial of the Templars, p. 45.
13 Ibid., p. 46.
14 Ibid., pp. 47–48.
15 Ibid., p. 45.
16 Howarth, The Knights Templar, p. 247.
17 Ibid., p. 274.
18 Ibid., p. 278.
19 Read, Piers Paul, The Templars, St Martin’s Press (New York, 1999), p. 264.
20 Partner, Peter, The Knights Templar and their Myth, rev. edn, Destiny Books (Rochester, Vermont, 1990), p. 59;and Forey, Alan, ‘Towards a Profile of the Templars in the Early Fourteenth Century’, in Malcolm Barber, ed. The Military Orders, Fighting for the Faith and Caring for the Sick, Variorum (Aldershot, 1994), p. 198. Mr Forey’s statistics are the result of an examination of the Templar trial deposition transcripts of between 506 and 681 Templars. The range exists because he included a study of the Templars examined in Paris in both 1307 and 1310–11. His range includes Templar examinations in Paris, Poiton, Clermont, Provence, the British Isles, Mas Den, Lerida, Cyprus, and Ales.
21 Baigent and Leigh, The Temple and the Lodge, pp. 65–66, citing ‘extant charters’.
22 For example, see Burman, The Templars, Knights of God, p. 162, and Barber, Malcolm, The Trial of the Templars, Cambridge University Press, Canto edition (Cambridge, 1993), pp. 58–59.