# A History of the Knights of Malta/Chapter 7

CHAPTER VII.
1338.
It has already been stated that at its first institution the Order of St. John was composed of three separate classes, ranked wider the respective heads of Knights, Chaplains, and Serving Brothers. Of these the second class, namely, the Chaplains, gradually became subdivided into conventual chaplains and priests of obedience. The former were specially attached to the bead-quarter convent, and performed all the ecclesiastical duties appertaining thereto; whilst the latter carried on such parochial duties as were incident to their profession in the numerous European commanderies. The serving brothers were also soon divided into two classes, one comprising those who entered the Order in this rank with the hope of winning their spurs under the White Cross banner, and afterwards of obtaining admission into the class of Knights; the other, composed of men who, owing to the want of advantages of birth were unable to enter in any other capacity. ​At the chapter-general, held in 1357, under the Grand-astership of Roger de Pins (referred to in the last chapter), the former of these two subdivisions was abolished, it being then decreed that no member of the class of serving brothers should be eligible for promotion into the rank of knights of justice.
As time wore on, and the advantages of birth were more and more considered, the regulations for admission into the first class gradually increased in stringency. The insignia of the belted knight were no longer deemed a sufficient guarantee for the introduction of the wearer; it was made necessary that he should adduce proofs of the nobility of his descent before he could claim admission as a knight of justice. These proofs were of four kinds—testimonial, literal, local, and secret. The proof testimonial was so called from its being the testimony of four witnesses, themselves gentlemen by birth, who guaranteed the nobility of the candidate; the proof literal was gained from title-deeds or other legal documents; the local proof was obtained through commissioners who were appointed by the Order to proceed to the district where the candidate resided, and there to inform themselves as to his birth. The secret proof was a further investigation carried out by the same commissioners without the knowledge of the postulant. In the various langues these proofs of nobifity differed materially, four quarterings only being required in the English, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese ltvigues; eight in the French; whilst in the German no less than sixteen were called for. The stringency of these regulations was not relaxed until a later period of the Order’s existence. Then an innovation gradually crept in, and knights of grace were appointed to meet the case of wealthy candidates whose parentage was not such as to bear the requisite test. The establishment of the princely mercantile families who formed the mainstay of the Venetian and Genoese republics led originally to this addition.
Over and above this tripartite division we have already seen ​that during the Grand-Mastership of Elyon de Villanova, in the year 1331, the fraternity was separated into seven langues, viz., Provenee, Auvergne, France, Italy, Germany, England, and Aragon. In the year 1461 an eighth langue was added by the division of that of Aragon into two parts, the new portion receiving the title of Castile and Portugal.
The supreme head of this fraternity, which comprised amongst its members natives of almost every country in Europe, was the Grand-Master. The position of this dignitary in the scale of potentates had varied with the fluctuations that took place in the fortunes of the institution. During their stay in Palestine he was possessed of a very powerful voice in the councils of that kingdom, sharing with the Grand-Masters of the other two Orders almost the entire direction of affairs. His influence in Europe was at that time but slight. It is true that his fraternity possessed landed property to a considerable extent in every country, which property naturally gave him a certain amount of influence in its vicinity. Still, residing as he did at a point so far remote from the centre of European politics, that influence could rarely be exercised in any great degree. When the expulsion of the Latins from Syria compelled the brotherhood to seek a new home, and led to their establishment in the full sovereignty of the island of Rhodes, all this became changed. On the one hand their influence in the East gradually diminished as the prospect of re-establishing the Latin kingdom grew more and more hopeless. On the other hand, the barrier which they had set up in their new home against the encroachments of the Turk on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean led to the admission of the Order of Rhodes as a by no means unimportant member of the body politic of Europe. The Grand-Master as its head, found in consequence, that the consideration with which he was treated rapidly increased. The subsequent transfer of the convent from Rhodes to Malta led to a still further augmentation of this influence, and we shall eventually find him not only arrogating to himself the rank and privileges of a sovereign prince, but actually in correspondence upon terms almost of equality with the principal potentates of Europe.
It is curious to mark how, during these successive ages, the authority which the Pope exercised over the Order became ​gradually reduced. Constituted originally as a religious establishment, it owed its earliest organization wholly to his fiat, and during the first two centuries of its existence appears never to have disputed his authority. Indeed, it was to the fostering approval of so many successive pontiffs that it was indebted for the first development of that power into which it subsequently expanded. As by the expression of his approval the successor of St. Peter gave to his protégés a support which carried them triumphantly through all the difficulties of their position, so there is but little doubt that the exercise of the same power on his part in an antagonistic direction would have been equally successful in crushing them. Time, however, gradually brought great changes in their relative position. Many rude shocks diminished the extent of the Pope’s authority, whilst each succeeding generation augmented the influence of the military friars. Step by step they gradually shook off the dictatorial yoke of papal domination until eventually his sovereign authority became little more than nominal, and the Grand-Master ruled over the island in which his fraternity was domiciled with absolute power.
The rules of the institution do not appear to have contemplated the exercise of autocratic sway by its chief over the members of his Order; being, on the contrary, framed so as to mark the extreme jealousy with which his authority was to be limited. Even after the possession of the island of Malta had established him in the rank of a sovereign prince, and entitled him to maintain envoys in all the principal courts of Europe, his power over the members of his own fraternity was so limited as to render his position often very difficult to support. The doctrine laid down in the rules appears to have been that the sovereignty was vested in the Order generally, and not in the Grand-Master personally; in fact, he only ranked as the first amongst his equals, or, to quote the language used in the statutes, primes infer pares. The principle of the Habeas Corpus, so justly prized by Englishmen as the sheet anchor of their liberties, was carried out to its fullest extent in these statutes; it being illegal for the Grand-Master to detain a member in custody for a period of more than twenty-four hours without bringing him to trial. Nor did the vow of obedience taken by a candidate at his profession give his superior that power over ​his actions which might have been expected. He was permitted, in case he disapproved of any order, to appeal to the Court of Egard, and to persist in his disobedience until the sentence of that court should have been pronounced.
This Court of Egard was originally established as a tribunal before which any dispute arising between members of the fraternity might be brought to trial or arbitration. It had its origin at a very early date in the annals of the institution, and although, as time wore on and wrought changes in the Order, certain alterations in the Egard were also introduced, still it always remained the same in principle. Even until the very last years of the knights’ existence as a sovereign body, this court continued to be the principal, nay, the only tribunal of appeal before which they sought redress for their grievances.
It was composed of one member from each langue, whose appointment rested with the langues themselves. Over these a president was placed, named by the Grand-Master. It will be seen that, by this arrangement, the langue to which the president belonged would have two votes, whilst each of the others had but one. It was in this way, and in this way only, that the Grand-Master could exercise any influence in its decisions. On the assembly of the Egard, either of the disputants had the right of challenge, the person objected to being, in such case, replaced by another member of the same langue. The cause having been gone into, the depositions of the witnesses, which were verbal and never reduced to writing, were summed up. At this stage the disputants were directed to withdraw, the members of the Egard discussed the ease with closed doors, and gave in their verdict by ballot. The parties were then called back into court, and, before the result of the ballot was made known, they were asked whether they were willing to abide by the award of the Egard. If they assented, the ballot-papers were examined, and the votes of the majority carried the cause.
Should, however, either of the parties have refused to abide by the award, the votes were nevertheless examined and recorded, and a new court was assembled to act as a court of appeal. This was called the renfort of the Egard, and its constitution was the same as the first, except that the number of members was doubled. From the decision of this court a ​further appeal lay with a third, which was called the renfort of the renfort, in which there were three members of each langue. Should either of the litigants still continue dissatisfied, a court of ultimate appeal was appointed, of which the decision was final. This was called the bailiffs’ Egard, and was composed of the conventual bailiffs, or, in the absence of any of their number, of the lieutenants who were performing their duties. The Grand-Master selected whom he pleased from amongst their number to act as president. That functionary must have in no ease presided in either of the three preceding courts. The decision of this tribunal being final, its sentence was carried into execution immediately after its promulgation.
It would be difficult to conceive a court of equity more admirably calculated to administer justice without partiality. The doctrine that every man should be tried by his peers was recognized and acted on. The decision resting upon the votes of the members gave it all the leading features of a trial by jury. The possibility of favouritism was obviated by the selection of members from every langue. The right of appeal was most amply provided for, the constitution of the tribunal assuming in each case a broader basis until there remained no possibility of a wrong verdict. The proof of the estimation in which these courts were held lies in the fact that, throughout the Order’s existence, no important change was made in them. When the fraternity was expelled from Malta by the French, at the close of the eighteenth century, the courts of Egard were in principle what they had been four centuries earlier.
Next in importance to the Grand-Master in the governance of the Order ranked the bailiffs, or grand-crosses. These dignitaries were of three kinds: the conventual bailiffs, the capitular bailiffs, and the bailiffs ad honores, or honorary bailiffs. The first-named of these resided continuously at t.he convent, and were the immediate chiefs of their respective langues. There was consequently only one for each langue. His election lay, not with the Grand-Master, but with the members of the langue itself. The principle of seniority was generally recognized, but not universally applied in cases where great merit, or, as was sometimes the case, extreme popularity led to the selection of a junior knight. The capitular bailiffs ​did not reside in the convent, their presence there being only required on the occasion of a chapter-general. They were, on the contrary, presumed to fix their abode within the European possessions of their langue, of which they were the grand-priors. In the English langue there were two of these capitular bailiffs, or grand-crosses—the grand-prior of England and the grand-prior of Ireland. The bailiffs ad honores were originally appointed either by a chapter-general, or, in its default, by the Grand-Master in council, acting under the sanction of a papal bull. This prerogative was gradually found to be highly inconvenient. The princes of Europe were perpetually urging the Grand-Master to its exercise in favour of their own friends, and had their requests been always complied with, the rank would have lost its value from the number of its holders. Eventually, therefore, the Grand-Masters surrendered the privilege, whereupon the Pope assumed to himself the right thus yielded. Under papal auspices the appointments became so numerous, and such strong opposition was offered, that at length the privilege was almost entirely abolished, certain titular or honorary bailiffs being attached to each langue. There was one such in the English langue, viz., the bailiwick of the Eagle; thus giving to that langue four grand crosses: the conventual bailiff, two capitular bailiffs, and one bailiff ad honores.
The conventual bailiffs each held ex-officio an important post in the active government of the fraternity. Thus the bailiff of Provence was the grand-commander. This office made him president of the treasury, comptroller of the expenditure, superintendent of stores, governor of the arsenal, and master of the ordnance. The bailiff of Auvergne was the grand-marshal. He was commander-in-chief of all the forces, both naval and military. In those days the services were not kept distinct as they are now, and the knights served indiscriminately either on land or sea. The grand standard of the Order, the famous White Cross banner, which had waved over so many a well-fought field, was intrusted to his charge. The bailiff of France was the grand-hospitaller, under whose control came, as the name imports, the supreme direction of the hospitals and infirmaries of the Order. The bailiff of Italy was the grand-admiral. He acted as second in command to the ​grand-marshal. The bailiff of Aragon was the grand-conservator, whose duties were somewhat analogous to those of a commissary-general in a modern army. The bailiff of Germany was grand bailiff of the Order, his jurisdiction being that of chief engineer. The bailiff of Castile and Portugal was grand-chancellor, and, as such, was supreme over the legal tribunals. The bailiff of England was the Turcopolier or chief of the light cavalry.
It has been a matter of some dispute as to what was the real signification of the term Turcopolier. The most probable of the explanations seems to be that of Ducange, who states in his glossary that the word Turcopolier is derived from the Greek πωλος, a colt, and thence an offspring generally, signifying the child of a Turkish parent. They were in all probability the children of Christian fathers by Turkish mothers, who, having been brought up in their father’s religion, were retained in the pay of the Order. “Being lightly armed, clothed in eastern fashion, inured to the climate, well acquainted with the country and with the Mussulman mode of warfare, they were found extremely serviceable as light cavalry and skirmishers, and consequently always attached to the war battalions.” The earliest record now in existence where mention is made of an English Turcopolier is dated in 1328, when an English knight was appointed to the office, and from that time until the year 1565, the post was invariably filled by an Englishman.
It is difficult to account for the arbitrary attachment of a peculiar office to each different langue, when it is remembered that most of these posts seem to have required much technical professional knowledge, and should, one would have thought, have been held by men chosen owing to their fitness for the appointment. It would certainly have appeared more sensible to have selected as chief engineer a man who had made the science of engineering, as then known and practised, his peculiar study, rather than to have given the appointment invariably to the bailiff of Germany, when that dignitary may have been, and probably very generally was, ignorant of the simplest rudiments of the profession. The only solution of this ​incongruity seems to be that it was designed to prevent the jealousies and cabals which would inevitably have sprung up on the occasion of every vacancy. Again, although the Grand-Master did not actually possess the patronage of these offices, still he must have been enabled, from his position, to influence the selection, and as that influence would probably often be exercised in favour of his own countrymen, the result would have been to overthrow the balance of power between the various nationalities. As it was, the preponderance of the French element perpetually led to disagreement. It will be seen, later on, that it was the source of much difficulty at a critical juncture in the Order’s fortunes. The regulation was, therefore, very probably made as a precaution against the monopoly of the all-powerful French langues. It certainly seems the simplest method by which that result could be obtained.
Even, however, granting this reason, it still becomes difficult to account for the particular selection of the offices attached to each langue. The French element being so overpowering, it was natural that the three most important offices should be attached to the heads of their three langues, but as regards the others, no such solution can be given. It may have been that the offices which chanced to have been held by the different langues at the time when their respective apportionment was decreed, were from that moment permanently attached to them. This surmise is somewhat strengthened by the fact that the office of Turcopolier was held by an English knight in the year 1328, and in the year 1331 it was, at the general division of offices, definitively appropriated to that langue. This may have been the case with other nations.
Lieutenants were nominated in the same manner as the bailiffs, whose duty was to act for them, and to occupy their position whenever they were absent from the convent, or when they were incapacitated by sickness from attending to their duties in person. The property held by the Order in the various countries of Europe was, for the convenience of superintendence, divided into estates of moderate extent, which were called commanderies. Several members of the fraternity were attached to each of these ​estates in various capacities, and at its head was placed a brother, in whose hands was vested its supreme control, and who bore the title of commander. Although it was a post of importance and responsibility, it was not necessarily held by a knight of justice, a certain number of the commanderies in every priory having been reserved for the other two classes. It seems strange, but it is a fact, that in commanderies thus governed, there were nevertheless knights attached in the subordinate position of confratres. The commander was bound to exercise the most rigid supervision over the estate under his control, and to husband its resources with care. Grand-priors were appointed, under whose surveillance a certain number of commanderies were placed (usually all those contained in a province or other territorial division). These officials received from the oommanderies all their surplus revenues, which were lodged in the treasury of the priory.
The payment to be made by the grand-priory to the convent at Rhodes, under the title of responsions, was calculated at one-third of the gross receipts of the commanderies. An average was struck, and a fixed amount based thereon. As the commanderies paid over to the treasury of the prior the actual balance remaining of their revenues after payment of expenses, the grand-priory was either a gainer or loser, according as those remittances were more or less than had been calculated on. The responsions were remitted to the treasury through the medium of receivers nominated to act in the capacity of bankers in most of the leading commercial cities of Europe. The grand-prior was bound to make a personal inspection of each commandory in his district at least once in every five years. He had full authority to correct abuses, and to order such renewals, alterations, and improvements as seemed to him necessary to develop the productive resources of the various estates.
It is an interesting study to observe how the system carried out by the Order of St. John adapted itself to the varied circumstances of the localities where its property was situated. In Palestine there were pilgrims to be tended, and sick to be nursed; there was also constant warfare to be waged against the Moslem. We find, therefore, that here the Hospitaller in ​his barrack convent was half soldier, half monk. At one time clad in the black mantle of his profession, he might be seen seated by the pallet of the humble and lonely wanderer, breathing into an ear that might perhaps be shortly deaf to all earthly sounds, the consolations of that faith which they both professed, and which had drawn them to that distant spot, so far from all the ties of home and kindred. At another time he might be seen mounted on his gallant steed, clad in burnished steel, hewing a pathway for himself and his brave companions in arms through the serried ranks of the foe. The spirit of the times was in accordance with such strange transformations, and the Order, in thus adapting itself to that spirit, laid the sure foundation of its future grandeur and eminence.
In later years, when the fraternity had established itself in Rhodes, we find great changes rapidly made in their organization, habits, and duties. The hospitals were still maintained and tended, but they no longer constituted an important branch of the knights’ duties. There were no weary and harassed pilgrims to sustain and support; the sick had dwindled into the ordinary casualties incident to the population of a small island. The knight was no more to be seen forming one of that squadron who, under the white cross banner, had so often struck dismay into the hearts of the enemy. Having established himself in his new home, and expeditions for the recovery of the Holy Land having ceased to be practicable. he commenced to fortify his stronghold. Rampart and ditch grew and extended, and the skill of engineering science was exhausted to devise fresh defences, or to improve those already existing. The fortress of Rhodes, and, at a later date, that of Malta, remain imperishable records of the energy, the perseverance, and the skill with which he. carried on his work. Meanwhile he was busily engaged in developing the power of his Order on the sea. The flag of his adoption waved in every corner of the Mediterranean, the terror of the infidel and the bulwark of Christianity. On the waters of this, his new dominion, he trod the deck of his galley every inch a sailor. Few who saw him now would recognize in the hardy mariner of the Levant the warrior-monk of Palestine.
Whilst these changes were taking place in the characteristics ​of the fraternity, another sphere was at the same time opening for the display of their gift of adaptation to circumstances and place. Having been originally organized as a body, one of the leading features of which should be the poverty of its members, they had ended in amassing wealth almost fabulous in extent. True, the individual remained without possessions of his own, the acquisitions continually falling into the hands of the fraternity being common property. Under cover of this distinction they sheltered themselves against the apparent inmsistency between their vows and their acts. Whilst, however, they thus disclaimed all personal interest in the benefits of their wealth, they were never remiss in turning it to the best possible advantage. In addition to its privileges property has also its duties, the due performance of which requires special aptitude and training. We find the knight of St. John in his European commandery abandoning the chivalric aspirations of the Syrian crusader and the reckless intrepidity of the island seaman, and appearing under a totally different aspect from either, as a genial lord of the manor and a wary steward of the property of his Order.
Nor was the new duty thus imposed upon him by any means an easy task. The mere existence of these bands of warrior monks, acting under an organization of their own, free from external control, was a perpetual source of contention with the powers that be, in every land wherein they had gained a footing. Freed by the dicta of papal bulls from most of the restrictions imposed on the laity, and yet only partially acknowledging the authority of the church, they held extensive property in countries to the crown of which they paid no due allegiance, and the revenues of which they transmitted for expenditure to a distant land and for foreign objects. At the same time they refused to the church those tithes which she gleaned from all her other votaries. They were dreaded by the monarch, who scarce knew whether to regard them as friends or foes, and they were hated by the genuine ecclesiastic, who looked upon them as unauthorized encroachers, despoiling the church of much property which the piety of her sons might otherwise have dedicated to her own special use. It was a difficult matter for the commander. placed in such a position, to steer a middle course, and undeterred by the threats of the monarch on the ​one hand, or the mitred churchman on the other, to pursue the even tenor of his way, and with calm steadiness and perseverance to carry on that process of extraction for which he had been appointed to his office.
In different countries this system must of course have varied; still the leading features of the operation were undoubtedly the same in all. We are fortunate in being able to form a very accurate notion of what this was from a report drawn up in the year 1338 by the then grand-prior of England, Philip de Thame, to the Grand-Master Elyon de Vilanova. The picture which this document affords of the stewardship of landed property in England in the fourteenth century is most valuable, and a careful study of its contents will give the reader an accurate representation of the position of agriculture in its various branches at that period.
The document is practically a balance sheet of income and expenditure. Let us begin with the income side. In each manor the first item recorded is the mansion, with its kitchen garden and orchard. The house itself was not a source of actual revenue; still, in so far as it obviated the necessity of any payment of rent, it was valuable property. The garden and orchard appear in every instance to have produced somewhat more than was required for the consumption of the household. The amount realized for the excess varied from a few shillings up to nearly a pound, but rarely approaching the latter sum. A further source of profit was the colurnbarium, or dovecote, which in some cases produced as much as thirty shillings, the usual average being from five shillings to half a mark.
Next on the list stands the rent received from amble, meadow, and pasture land. The first varied much iii the different counties. In Lincoln and Kent it ran as high as two shillings ​an acre, whilst in Somerset and Norfolk it did not yield more than three halfpence. Meadow land seldom fell below a rental of two shiffings an acre, and in Oxfordshire it reached as much as three shillings. Pasture land was not calculated by the acre, but by the head of cattle; the average receipt from that source may be taken at something like the following figures:—An ox or a home, a shilling; a cow, two shillings; a sheep, a penny; a calf, sixpence; a goat, three farthings.
Messuages, mills, and fisheries stand next on the list, and do not require any special explanation. The profit of stock afforded a very considerable source of revenue. This was the return produced by the cattle bred and fattened on the home farm. In more than one instance it is recorded that through the devastation of enemies, damage by inundations, and other causes, the stock returned no appreciable profit.
A fruitful source of income was that derived from churches and chapels appropriated to the Order, the funds of which were paid into the treasury, vicars and chaplains being provided by it. A glance at the figures given under this head will show that, as is the fact with many parishes in the present day, the lay impropriators swept off the lion’s share of the substance originally dedicated to the support of the church. In the case of sixteen of these, the combined amount paid to the credit of the langue was no less than £241 6s. 8d., whilst the cost of providing chaplains was only £34 10s. Certainly this anomaly, which has so many bitter opponents in the present day, can plead the excuse of long standing, since we find it flourishing even in the beginning of the fourteenth century.
In those days the system of villainage, or compulsory service of bond tenants, was universal throughout Europe. We see it figuring largely on the credit side of our balance-sheet. These services were generally rendered either by payments in kind, such as poultry, eggs, corn, &c., or by the giving of a certain amount of labour for the benefit of the lord of the manor. As these latter have almost invariably been entered in the accounts as money receipts, there can be little doubt that a fixed commutation had been concurred in between landlord and tenant. The former thus secured for himself a certain and settled revenue, whilst the latter was protected from the caprice of his lord, ​who might otherwise have demanded his services at a time when his own crops required attention. From an entry which occurs in the manor of Shaldeford, the price at which this labour was commuted may be deduced, it being in that instance flied at twopence a day, the total amount received under this head throughout England being £184 16s. 8d.
We next come to the rent paid by freeholders, the entry for which is placed under the heading of redditus assisus. In only one instance is its nature specified. In the manor or bailiwick of Godsfeld in Hampshire it is distinctly stated to be rent for houses in the two towns of Portsmouth and Southampton. The profits arising from the fees and perquisites paid to the manor courts, constitute an entry in almost every bailiwick. In some cases they amounted to a considerable sum. An officer called the steward of the manor was appointed for the collection of these dues.
There yet remains an item of income to be explained which was of a totally different character to the rest, and could only have arisen under an ecclesiastical régime. This is a voluntary contribution from the neighbourhood, and is entered under the title of confraria. The mode of collection is not specified, but we may presume that by a system similar to that practised in the present day in many Roman Catholic countries, a house-to-house visitation was annually made for the purpose of extorting the charity of the pious. The amount thus scraped together by the wealthy mendicants of St. John from the overtaxed and harassed commons of England amounted in 1338 to nearly £900. It appears that even this large sum was less than what had previously been obtained, as may be gathered from an entry where the smallness of the contributions under this head is accounted for by the poverty of the country, and the heavy taxes payable to the king for the support of the navy. ​Having thus glanced at the various items standing on the credit side of the balance-sheet, we now come to the expenditure. The first and principal charge against the funds of the cornmandery was that for the maintenance of the household. In every manor there was a commander, in whose charge was vested the property, and attached to him were other brethren termed confratres. These, together with the chaplains, formed the first class in the establishment, and a separate table was provided for their use. There appear to have been three different tables, at which, according to their rank, the members of the establishment had their commons; the first, that already mentioned, the second for the free servants of the Order, and the third for the labourers or garciones kept in its employ. Most of the provisions consumed at these several tables were provided from the stock on the land, and consequently cost nothing. There appears, however, very generally an item under the name of coquina, which embraced the supply of meat and fish beyond what was taken from the estate. Three different kinds of bread were supplied to the several tables, iris., white bread, ration bread, and black bread. There were also two kinds of beer, the melior and the secunda. In addition to their keep the commander and his confratres had an annual allowance for their dress, and as this was the same in each cominandery it may be assumed that it had been fixed by authority. It consisted of £1 for a robe, 6s. 8d. for a mantle, and 8s. for other articles of clothing. The members of the household had wages in addition to their keep, which not only varied greatly for the different classes, but also for the same service in different commanderies. The highest in rank was the armiger, who in some cases received as much as £1 a year; the more usual stipend for him as. well as the claviger, the ballivus, the messor, and the coquus, being a mark. The wages of the lotris or washerwoman seem to have been the smallest, in most cases amounting to 1s. only.
A very heavy charge is of frequent occurrence in these accounts under the head of corrody. This term signified a claim to commons at the different tables of the establishment, and was probably originally granted either in repayment for money lent ​or as a return for some favour conferred on the Order. The table from which the corrodary drew his commons, depended upon his rank. Those who were of gentle blood were accommodated at the higher table with the commander and his confratre8; the others, according to their position in life, were quartered either on the liberi servientes or on the garciones. In some cases these corrodaries were in the receipt of very luxurious rations. For instance, at Clerkenwell, William de Langford is entitled to his commons at the commander’s table whenever he chooses to dine there, together with a place for one chamberlain at the second table, and for three inferior servants at the third. But on occasions when it was not convenient for him to be present he drew instead an allowance of four loaves of white bread, two of ration bread, and two of black bread, three flagons of best beer and two of the second quality, one whole dish from each of the three tables, together with, nightly, for his bedroom one flagon of best beer, and, during the winter season only, four candles and a faggot of firewood. For his stable he drew half a bushel of oats, hay, litter, and one shoe with nails daily. All these allowances were granted to him for the term of his life by charter from Thomas Larcher, who was at the time grand-prior of England. This worthy seems to have distributed pensions and corrodies right and left with the most reckless profusion; so much so, that some years prior to the date of this report he was either superseded by, or resigned his post to, Leonard do Tybertis, grand-prior of Venice, under whose fostering care the revenues of the English langue underwent a rapid change for the better.
The charge for repairs was infrequent and small in amount. We may infer from this that it had always been the practice to keep up the buildings in good substantial repair, and thus prevent large outlay at any particular time for restorations. It must be remembered that charges under this head are only for materials other than the timber and stone found on the estate, and would not include the labour which, in most cases, could be furnished from the staff of the establishment.
In addition to the expenses incurred for the maintenance of the household and its corrodaries, there was in many commanderies a heavy item under the head of hospitality. The ​rules of the Order were very strong as to the free exercise of this virtue, and it seems clear, on studying the accounts, that they were always most rigidly and liberally complied with. In fact, the various commanderies seem to have partaken very much of the character of houses of public entertainment, where both rich and poor might feel certain of a hospitable reception. Of course no charge was made for this service. It seems, however, probable that the item of co,fraria, which has been already alluded to, had its proportions considerably swelled by the donations of such among the better class of travellers as had experienced the hospitality of the fraternity. How far this claim to reception and maintenance on the part of the wayfarer may have extended it is difficult to determine, but there must have been a limit somewhere, since, unless the fourteenth century differed widely from the present day, an unrestricted system of open housekeeping would have entailed the maintenance of all the idle vagabonds in the country. The Anglo- Saxon law limited the claim in the case of monasteries to three days; probably, therefore, the same restriction was made at the commanderies. It may also be assumed that in the case of the poorer class of wayfarers a good day’s work on the farm was extorted in return for the day’s keep, thus, in a measure, deterring the idler from seeking a shelter, the sweets of which could only be purchased by the sweat of his brow.
This wholesale system of hospitality was not to be traced purely to a pious motive; there were many sagacious reasons of policy which much encouraged the practice. It must be borne in mind that in those days newspapers did not exist, the majority of men travelled but little, and information was slow in spreading from one point to another. We may readily conceive, therefore, what a vehicle for the collection and distribution of important intelligence the table of the commander must have been. The grand-prior, in his head-quarters at Clerkenwell, might be regarded somewhat in the light of the editor of a metropolitan journal receiving constant despatches from his correspondents at their provincial commanderies. These would contain a digest of all the gossip, both local and general, which may have enlivened the meals of the preceding week. This information could, of course, be collated and ​compared with that forwarded from other quarters, so that the earliest and most correct intelligence would always reach the prior, and this he could at times turn to very valuable account. We may conceive him, on some occasions, in a position to give a friendly hint to the king, in council, of some projected political movement hatched in the fastnesses of the north or in the secluded glens of the west. For such information we may feel sure that an ample qulil pro quo was expected, in the shape either of a direct donation or of exemption from some of the numerous burdens with which the less fortunate laity were oppressed. The knights were well aware of the advantages which their organization gave them on this head, and were not slow to avail themselves of it. The records exhibit carefully the expenses they incurred in hospitality to travellers, but they do not say anything of• the results, pecuniary and otherwise, which were obtained by the practice. The intelligent reader may, however, perform that calculation for himself, and it is to be feared that on striking the balance but little would remain to be carried over to the credit of charity.
There are, nevertheless, some entries which show that this exercise of hospitality was not always free from inconvenience. Although the fraternity did not grudge a heavy bill for the sustenance of their numerous provincial guests, provided the information forwarded by the commander was of a value commensurate with the expenditure, yet cases might, and constantly did occur, where the outlay was large and the results disproportionately small. A few items of local gossip or provincial scandal would be dearly purchased at the expense of many a good quarter of wheat and malting barley. Under such circumstances it was but natural that an exculpatory note should accompany the obnoxious item to explain, away its unwelcome appearance. It was frequently necessary for the commander, whose position gave him considerable standing in the county where he resided, to receive at his table those of the laity who considered themselves his equals, and who chanced to live near him. This has, in more than one case, been quoted as an excuse for the extent of the housekeeping accounts. Thus, for instance, we find at Hampton that the Duke of Cornwall is made to bear the blame of the heavy bread and beer bill ​which the fraternity had contracted, and in the Welsh cornmanderies the trampers became the scapegoat, who, to quote the expressive language of the accountant, “multum confluunt de die in diem et sunt magni devastatores et sunt imponderosi.” The accounts of Clerkenwell, the head-quarter station of the Order in England, show that its proximity to the court rendered it peculiarly liable to this expense. The king had the right, not only of dining at the prior’s table whenever he might choose to honour that dignitary with a visit, but also of sending to the priory such members of his household and court as he might find it inconvenient to provide for elsewhere. It is not, therefore, surprising that we find among the housekeeping expenses of this establishment 430 quarters of wheat at Ss. a quarter, 413 quarters of matting barley at 4s., 60 quarters of dragget malt at 3s., 225 quarters of oat malt at 2s., 300 quarters of oats at is. 6d., in addition to a lump sum, which we may call the kitchen bill, of £121 6s. 8d., besides many minor items for meal, porridge, pease, candies, &c. It was, indeed, a long price that the community had to pay for the presence of the monarch and his satellites, yet, doubtless, they received such consideration for the same as enabled them to bear the burden without succumbing thereto.
Of all the entries on the expense side of the account, that which seems the most strange is the outlay for law charges. Many of these entries reflect much disgrace upon the administration of the law in the fourteenth century. Some of the items are innocent enough; as, for instance, the salaries of the law officers of the Order, and the fees of counsel, which appear to have been usually 40s. a year with robes. In addition, however, to these, there are numerous others which prove the barefaced venality of our courts of justice, almost all the leading judges being in the pay of the fraternity. Thus, in the exchequer, we find the chief baron, Sir Robert Sadyngton; the barons William Everden and Robert Scarburg; the engrosser, William Stoneve; and the two remembrancers, Gervase Willesford and William Broklesby, each in the receipt of £2 a year. The opponitor, Roger Gildesburgh, figured for an annual salary of £5. In the ​court of common bench, the chief justice, Sir William Herle, received £10 a year; judge William Shareshull, £5; judges Richard Aldeburgh and John Shardelowe, £2 each. In the king’s bench, the chief justice, Geoffrey Scrope, received £2 besides a couple of manors at Huntingdon and Penhull. His brother justice, Richard Willoughby, figures on the list for £3 6s. 8d., and in the court of chancery four of the clerks pocketed an annual fee of 40s. each. All these entries are expressly stated to be payments made to the legal authorities to insure quiet possession of the lands which had been transferred from the recently suppressed Order of the Temple.
Before leaving this valuable document it may be well to mention that the number of the fraternity at this time resident within the limits of the grand-priory of England was 119, in addition to three donats and eighty corrodaries. Of these, thirty-four were knights of justice, fourteen of that number being commanders; forty-eight were serving brothers, of whom sixteen were commanders; and thirty-four were chaplains, of whom seven were commanders. The rank of the remaining three is not specified in the document. It must be remembered that these numbers only include that portion of the English langue comprised in the grand-priory of England. The langue embraced as well the Scotch preceptories and the grand- priory of Ireland. The actual numbers in these are not known.
In addition to the commanderies the Order held in England smaller estates called cameræ. These were not of sufficient importance for the appointment of commanders. They were either administered by bailiffs or farmed out. Their proceeds went directly into the treasury of the grand-priory, none of the fraternity being maintained by them. The langue also stood possessed of sundry manors formerly the property of the Templars. Lists of the commanderies, camer, and Templar lands are furnished at the end of this chapter, showing their respective gross incomes and local expenditure; the balance being available for the general treasury of the priory.
The total amount thus credited to the grand-priory was £3,826 4s. 6d. The expenditure of the general treasury in pensions, bribes, &c., was £1,329 2s. 4d., leaving a balance for ​the payment of responsions of £2,304 15s. 2d. The grand- priory of England was assessed at the amount of £2,280. It will be seen, therefore, that in the year in question the receipts readied a trifle over that sum; the balance came into the hands of the grand-prior.
The income of this dignitary, as shown in the accounts, was £1 per diem. For a period of 121 days, this charge appears in the several commanderies, two or three days in each, under the head of the grand-prior’s visitation. For the remainder of the year it is charged in a lump sum as one of the expenses of the general treasury. He received, in addition, an allowance of £93 6s. 8d. for robes for himself and his household.
The property which the Order possessed in Scotland does not appear to have realised anything in 1338, owing to the constant wars which were devastating the country. It was estimated to have yielded in former years the sum of £133 6s. 8d.
The amounts given in these lists appear small, but when taken in comparison with the cost of articles of food at the time, become important. The accounts do not give us sufficient data to obtain an average price for these; but there is an assize of the year 1335 in London, which constitutes a fair guide, always remembering that country prices would be smaller. By this we find wheat priced at 2s. per quarter, a fatted ox at 6s. 8d., a fat sheep 8d., pigeons 2d. per dozen, a fat goose 2d., and a chicken id. At these prices a shilling would go very much further than a sovereign does at the present time.
The list given of Templar lands shows that the Order had by the year 1338 received a considerable addition to its income from the transfer. It will also be seen that there were many estates held by tenants for life, either rent free or at a very low rate. This property may therefore be considered as of a gradually improving character. It must not be assumed that the Hospitallers were equally fortunate with their Templar estates in other countries. Nowhere did that ​body hold so much land as in England, nor was the transfer of their possessions by any means so honestly carried out in other countries. Even in England very extensive Templar estates fell into secular hands, and although twenty years had elapsed since their suppression, the accounts show that the grand-prior had not been able as yet to obtain their restoration. He enumerates them at the end of his report, giving the names of the spoilers who were still standing between the Hospital and its own. They are as follow:—
The mauor of Strode, value £50 Held by the CounDeneye £66 13g. 4d. tess OX remeroke. ,, ,, ,, Hurst and Neusom, £120j Flaxflete cum Cane, £100, held by Randolph Nevill. A water mill at York, £13 6s. 8d., held by the king. The manor of Carleton, £13 6s. 8d., held by Hugh le Despencer. Normanton-in-the-Vale, £10, held by Lord do Roos. ,, ,, ,, Lydleye, £66 13s. 4d., held by the earl of Arundel. Penkerne, £20, held by the earl of Gloucester. ,, ,, ,, Gutyng and Bradewell, £133 6g. 8d., held by Master Pancium. Bristelesham, £66 13g. 4d., held by the earl of Salisbury. Bulstrode, £50, held by the abbess of Burnham. ,, ,, Sadelescombe, £66 13s. 4d., held by earl Warrenne.
Such was the mode of life carried on in the commanderies of the English langue during the first half of the fourteenth century. It will not be too much to assume that in other countries a very similar system was pursued. Certain differencee must, of course, have been made to suit the habits and character of the people. Although the liberty of the English peasant in those days was but limited, it was far greater than ​that enjoyed by his continental brother. Doubtless the commander in a French or Spanish manor ruled over his peasantry with an autocratic despotism, denied to him in England. We may also safely assume that in no other langue would there have been so large an expenditure in the item of beer, either melior or secunda. Certainly nowhere else ‘would so noble a revenue have been extracted from the same extent of land. Still, allowing for these and other minor differences, the report of the grand-prior, Philip de Thame, affords a very excellent clue to the general system of governance adopted by the Order of St. John in the management of its property.
COMMANDERIES OF THE ORDER OF ST. JOHN IN ENGLAND. :
| County. | Commandery. | Gross Income. | Gross Income. | Gross Income. | Expenditure. | Expenditure. | Expenditure. |
| | | £ | s. | d. | £ | s. | d. |
| Berkshire | Grenham, including Shaldeford | 76 | 13 | 6 | 34 | 8 | 8 |
| Wiltshire | Anesty | 93 | 0 | 0 | 39 | 18 | 8 |
| Dorsetshire | Mayne, including Kyngeston and Waye | 96 | 2 | 10 | 42 | 5 | 4 |
| Devonshire | Bothemescomb, including Coue | 50 | 11 | 0 | 22 | 3 | 2 |
| Cornwall | Trebyghen | 75 | 11 | 4 | 20 | 10 | 8 |
| Somerset | Bucklands, including Halse | 124 | 10 | 4 | 83 | 9 | 8 |
| Hampshire | Godesfield, including Badeslee and Runham | 66 | 13 | 11 | 30 | 3 | 8 |
| Sussex | Palyng | 78 | 11 | 3 | 34 | 0 | 0 |
| Oxford | Clanefeld | 60 | 13 | 4 | 34 | 9 | 0 |
| Gloucestershire | Quenyngton | 179 | 8 | 4 | 57 | 6 | 9 |
| Herefordshire | Dynemoor, including Sutton, Rolston, and Wormebrigge | 182 | 7 | 3 | 82 | 1 | 4 |
| Pembrokeshire | Slebech | 307 | 1 | 10 | 141 | 2 | 7 |
| North Wales | Halstan, including Dongewal | 157 | 6 | 10 | 79 | 7 | 0 |
| Warwickshire | Grafton | 78 | 15 | 2 | 29 | 15 | 1 |
| Derbyshire | Yeveley | 95 | 6 | 0 | 63 | 6 | 0 |
| Yorkshire | Newland | 56 | 5 | 4 | 30 | 6 | 0 |
| Ditto | Mount St. John | 58 | 8 | 4 | 24 | 16 | 0 |
| Ditto | Beverley | 83 | 17 | 6 | 43 | 17 | 6 |
| Northumberland | Chibourn | 23 | 18 | 8 | 17 | 13 | 4 |
| Nottinghamshire | Oscington | 95 | 0 | 8 | 77 | 7 | 0 |
| Lincolnshire | Maltby | 116 | 6 | 8 | 50 | 6 | 6 |
| Ditto | Skirbeck | 84 | 11 | 8 | 79 | 5 | 0 |
| Leicestershire | Dalby, including Beaumont | 128 | 15 | 8 | 66 | 8 | 3 |
| Northamptonshire | Dyngley | 79 | 4 | 0 | 37 | 0 | 4 |
| Buckinghamshire | Hoggeshawe | 74 | 14 | 10 | 28 | 16 | 4 |
| Bedfordshire | Melcheburn | 106 | 2 | 4 | 49 | 17 | 10 ​ |
| Bedfordshire | Hardwyck, including Clifton and Pelyng | 69 | 3 | 5 | 15 | 10 | 0 |
| Cambridgeshire | Shenegeye, including Wendeye, Arnyngton, and Cranden | 187 | 12 | 8 | 60 | 18 | 8 |
| Ditto | Chippenham | 110 | 16 | 9 | 94 | 16 | 6 |
| Norfolk | Kerbrok | 192 | 2 | 4 | 71 | 12 | 7 |
| Suffolk | Batesford, including Codenham, and Melles | 93 | 10 | 8 | 33 | 3 | 10 |
| Essex | Mapeltrestede | 77 | 16 | 8 | 37 | 16 | 8 |
| Ditto | Staundon | 34 | 15 | 4 | 23 | 0 | 0 |
| Kent | Swenefeld | 82 | 4 | 4 | 52 | 18 | 4 |
| Ditto | Sutton-atte-Hone | 40 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — |
| Middlesex | Clerkenwell | 400 | 0 | 0 | 421 | 12 | 4 |
* ↑ “Fratrum nostrorurn triplex est differentia. Alii enim aunt mutes, aiii sacerdotes, alii servientes. Sacerdotum autem et servientium status rursus in duo dividitur; Sacerdotum in sacerdotes conventualesetsacerdotes obedientia. Servientium in servientes armorum, videlicet in conventio receptos, et servientes officii vel stagii. Qui vero sub gradu militiw ad hoe idoneus et aptus pro formà statntorum et consuetudinum ad professionem nostri ordinis admitti postulabit, priusquam habitum suscipiat et professionem faciat, cingulo militim decoretur neoesse eat. Si autem ab aliqno principe Catholice, aut altero, facultatem militiam priestandi habente militte insignia non fuerit adeptus a fratre milite ordinis nostri suam professionem recipiente, aut altero fratre milite militiæ hujusmodi insignia, secundum consuetudinem militiam priestandi recipiat; et demum ordine prfato meat professionem.”—Consuetudo Ord. Sac. Mil. Sanct. Johan. Geros.
* ↑ Addison’s “History of the Templars.”
* ↑ This report, which exists in MSS. in the Record Office at Malta, was printed by the Camden Society in the year 1857, under the title of “The Hospitallers in England.” The report was prefaced by a most admirable digest from the pen of the Rev. L. B. Larking, to whose essay the author is indebted for much of the matter contained in the remainder of this chapter. The original MS. is in perfect preservation, and although somewhat difficult to decipher, from its crabbed and contracted Latin, still the writmg is as distinct and clear as on the day when it was first penned.
* ↑ The mark was thirteen shillings and fourpence.
* ↑ “Item ibidem collecta que semel fit per annum in diversis ecclcsiis que vocatur confraria et ad voluntatem hominum si velint aliquid contribuere neene quis non possunt coinpelli ad contribuendum et solebat valere per annum 27 marcas (£18) et aliquando plus et aliquando minus et nunc in presenti propter paupertatem communitatis regni et propter diversas oppressiones ut in tallas (sic) contributionibus domino regi pro defensiono mans et lanis quas dominus rex capit per totem terram non posaunt levari nunc nisi et vii 10 li (£10).”—Extract from revenue account of Grenliam Hospitallers in England.
* ↑ “Una cum supervenientibus quia dux Cornublie juxta moratur.”—Extract from reprise of Hampton manor.
* ↑ “Terre et tenementa, redditus et servicia, ecciesie appropriate, et omnes possessiones hospitalis in Scocia stint destructa combusta per fortem guerram ibidem per multos amos continnatam nude nil hiis diebus potest levari. Solebat, tamen, tempore pacis, reddere per annum C C marcas.”