Right from the first affidavit to survive without damage from the Languedoc enquiry, the interrogated monk, a sergeant called Guillaume Collier from Buis-le-Baronnies (Drôme), told that he was admitted with a normal ceremony, but that immediately after the preceptor refuted some fundamental dogmas of Christianity, such as the divinity of Jesus and the Virgin Birth; then he opened a secret window in a part of the church, where a silver idol with no less than three faces was kept. He was told that that idol represented a mighty patron of the Order who could get them any kind of grace from Heaven. Then suddenly he saw a mysterious red cat appear near the idol; immediately the preceptor and all those present doffed their caps and paid homage to the idol, whose name was Mahomet (Magometum).[54]
This is a genuine cliché that forms a pattern for the path of confession and is repeated from affidavit to affidavit; however, as each successive Templar speaks, the pattern grows more elaborate and more gross, as in a kind of ghastly crescendo. According to the next monk to be questioned, another sergeant called Ponce de Alundo from Montélimar (again in the Drôme), the idol even has horns; indeed, it is no longer a simple image, but a real demon who even lives and speaks – the candidate talks with him as one would with a real person, asks him for material favours and is promised its support. This time the mysterious cat who appears by the idol is black, so more similar to the animal whom contemporary imagination placed with witches; by the preceptor’s order, the devil-cat is to be adored and kissed on its anus. As we go on reading other testimonies, we find that the obscene detail of the kiss of the cat is a constant, and that the animal also seems to be nearly always black. However, two theatrical details appear: the magical feline vanishes miraculously as soon as he has received the new monk’s homage, and someone concludes that it must in effect be the Devil in the shape of a cat.[55]
The records then bring in a further sensational development: a knight by the name of Geoffroy de Pierrevert, preceptor of the mansion of Rué in the department of Var, said that he had been present at an admission ceremony during which, apart from an idol with no less than four faces and a devil-cat, the demonic presence was also manifested with the apparition of some women in black mantles, who materialised in the room even though all the doors had been closed and barred. According to him, the strange women had no carnal relations with the monks present at the ceremony. This surely disappointed greatly the inquisitors but they soon got their own back when during another session, Garnier de Luglet, from the diocese of Langres, said the witches who had appeared had indeed been allowed to corrupt the monks, vanishing immediately after they had dragged them along into deadly sin.[56]
In short, the questions were built according to a scheme that tended to dig through successive layers: first the accused was questioned about the idol’s presence, then the questioner asked whether a cat was also present, and if the answer was not positive, they proceeded to investigate the animal’s role in the ceremony and its real nature. With those who proved ready to give a positive answer in this crescendo, the questioning moved further, asking first about the apparition of witches, then hammering on the question about celebrating a demonic orgy. The procedures employed in Languedoc had unique features in the context of the broader trial. I think that it is beyond comparison that the area where the evidence is most polluted by the conscious intervention of the inquisitors: here the charges against the monks are much more serious than those conceived by Philip the Fair in his order of arrest, which was intended to get the Templars condemned as fast as possible. The very minutes of the investigation say it in so many words: witnesses would be first properly prepared with suitable tortures, then they were left several days to reflect (or recover at least enough to be able to speak), and finally were questioned again.
The way such trials were managed speaks volumes: during the inquest held in Poitiers from 28 June to 2 July, 1308, Clemens V interrogated, with the help of his assistant Cardinals, 72 Templars within five days; Philip the Fair himself and the Inquisitor of France Guillaume de Paris, immediately after the arrests, had questioned no less than 138 brothers captured in the Temple of Paris in barely a month, from 19 October to 24 November, 1307. The investigators who managed the Languedoc inquiry, however, took an amazing two months to question barely 25 persons; the “preparation” of witnesses must have been horrendous.[57]
A letter written by the Inquisitor of France Guillaume de Paris to Bernard Gui, the most famous Inquisitor of the 1300s, entrusts him with some operations in the trial against the Templars, and rouses a legitimate suspicion: the Languedoc inquiry, Languedoc being Bernard Gui’s headquarters, did not follow the scheme of Guillaume de Nogaret, but rather another drawn up by the dreadful Inquisitor, who pursued charges of sorcery and devil-raising.[58] In the indictment written in Paris by the royal lawyers, the idol is in fact quite a marginal issue and there is no trace whatever of devils; whereas, in the confession extracted from Templars in Languedoc, the strange idol is one and the same with the Devil in the shape of a cat and with witches, and the description of these sinister rituals takes up a great deal of the text. To the contrary, in the north of France, the charge of sodomy is placed very much to the forefront, as though it alone were enough to blast the Order’s reputation beyond remedy, and a boy is found who is ready to confess that Jacques de Molay (who was well beyond 60) had even abused him no less than three times in a single night.[59]
In the south, on the other hand, sodomy went altogether unmentioned: maybe the ordinary mentality was more tolerant, or else it was simply decided to go for something much more “explosive”. In a way, the idol had indeed many faces: faces different from each other, indeed sometimes incompatible, which the prosecutors hid or showed according to what the tastes and fears of the public were.
[1] Partner, I Templari, pp.155-159.
[2] Partner, I Templari, pp.115-132
[3] Ibid. pp. 106-109.
[4]Capitani, Gregorio VII, pp,189-203; Traniello, Giovanni XXIII, p.646; Rapp, Il consolidamento del papato, pp.119-123.
[5] Stove, Magdeburger Centuriatoren, col. 1185
[6] Partner, I Templari, pp.133-154
[7] Koch, Hammer-Purgstall, Joseph Frh. von, p. 401
[8] Schottmüller, II, p.90; Finke, II, p. 323
[9] Peterson, Ofiti. coll. 80-81; Camelot, Ophites, coll. 100-101.
[10] Hammer-Purgstall, Mémoire sur deux coffrets, pp. 84-134; Mignard, Monographie du coffret, pp.136-221.
[11] Partner, I Templari, pp. 160-162; Introvigne, Il
[12] Jung, Nicolai (Christophe) Friedrich, p. 446; Schilson, Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim, coll. 851-852.
[13] Penna, I ritratti, I, pp. 11-13.
[14] Marini, Memorie storiche, pp. CCXXIII-CCXLIX; about the Galileo trial, see Pagano, I documenti del processo.
[15] See veda Pagano, Leone XIII e l’apertura dell’Archivio Segreto, pp. 44-63.
[16] Gualdo, Sussidi per la consultazione, pp. 34-40; Gadille, Le grandi correnti dottrinali, pp. 111-132, alla p. 113.
[17] Dante Alighieri, Purgatorio XX 91-96.
[18] On their origins, see for instance Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 1-37; Demurger, Vita e morte, pp. 20-23, and Ibid. Chevaliers du Christ, pp. 36-40.
[19] Demurger, Vita e morte, pp. 54-57. The original name is reconstructed by Tommasi, Pauperes commilitones Christi, pp. 443-475.
[20] Demurger, Vita e morte, p. 22.
[21] Hiestand, Kardinalbischof Matthäus von Albano, pp. 17-37; Cardini, I poveri commilitoni, pp. 81-114, Cerrini, La rivoluzione dei Templari.
[22] D’Albon, Cartulaire général de l’Ordre du Temple, nn. 5, 8, 10.
[23] Curzon, Règle, § 16; Cerrini, Une expérience neuve, �
� 6; Barbero, L’aristocrazia nella società francese, pp. 243-324; Demurger, Vita e morte, pp. 66-67.
[24] Curzon, Règle 87-88; Michelet, Le Procès, II, pp. 361-363.
[25] See for instance Michelet, Le procès, I, pp. 646-647; Schottmüller, II, pp. 392-393.
[26] Gaier, Armes et combats, pp. 47-56; Demurger, Chevaliers du Christ, pp. 41-43, 131-147.
[27] See The Horns of Hattin, ed. B.Z. Kedar, Jerusalem 1988, passim, and Lyons & Jackson, Saladin, pp.255-277.
[28] See the items collected in Quarta crociata.
[29] Demurger, Trésor des templiers, pp. 73-85; Di Fazio, Lombardi e Templari; Metcalf, The Templars as Bankers; Piquet, Des banquiers au moyen âge.
[30] Demurger, Vita e morte, pp. 235-236; Barber, The New Knighthood, pp. 119-220.
[31] Ibid., see for instance pp. 213, 217, 236-237; Favreau-Lilie, The Military, pp. 201-227; Edbury, The Templars in Cyprus, pp. 189-195.
[32] Frale, L’ultima battaglia dei Templari, pp. 43-48; Lizérand, Le dossier, pp. 2-15.
[33] Lizérand, Le dossier, pp. 16-19. .
[34] Frale, L’ultima battaglia dei Templari, pp. 311-323.
[35] Ibid., pp. 169-205.
[36] Frale, Il papato e il processo ai Templari, pp. 139-192.
[37] Frale, L’ultima battaglia dei Templari, pp. 265-299.
[38] The Bull’s text is in Villanueva, Viaje literario, V, pp. 207-221; Barber, The Trial, pp. 227-234.
[39] Frale, L’ultima battaglia dei Templari, pp. 300-304; Demurger, Jacques de Molay, pp. 263-277.
[40] Frale, L’ultima battaglia dei Templari, pp. 207-263.
[41] Michelet, Le Procès, II, 363-365; I, 394-402.
[42] See for example Frale, L’interrogatorio ai Templari, for instance pp. 243, 253-254, 258, 259 ecc.
[43] Ibid., pp. 243-245; Bini, Dei Tempieri, p. 474; Sève, Le procès, p. 114; Finke, II, p. 323.
[44] Gilmour-Bryson, The Trial, p. 255; Frale, L’interrogatorio ai Templari, pp. 252-253.
[45] Ibid., pp. 245-246.
[46] Tommaso da Celano, San Francesco, p. 73; Cardini, Francesco d’Assisi, pp. 178-208.
[47] Gregory the Great, Letters, IX, epist. LII, in PL 77, 971.
[48] Runciman, Storia delle crociate, II, pp. 628, 660-675; Lyons & Jackson, Saladin, pp. 250, 303-304.
[49] Michelet, Le Procès, I, pp. 44-45.
[50] See for instance Michelet, Le Procès, I, p. 187; II, pp. 209, 215.
[51] Wehr, Trinità, arte, coll. 544-545; Naz, Images, coll. 1257-1258; Curzon, La Règle, §9.
[52] Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vat. Lat. 3550, f. 5r.
[53] Frale, L’interrogatorio ai Templari, for instance pp. 254, 255, ecc.; Ménard, Histoire civile, Preuves, p. 210; Michelet, Le Procès, II, p. 363.
[54] Frale, L’interrogatorio ai Templari, pp. 243-245.
[55] Ibid., pp. 245-246
[56] Ibid., pp. 256-257, 267-269.
[57] Archivio Segreto Vaticano, Archivum Arcis, Armarium D 208, 209, 210 (number 217 is the Chinon parchment), and Reg. Av. 48, ff. 437r-451v): about the edition, see Schottmüller, II, pp. 9-71; Finke, II, pp. 324-342; Michelet, Le Procès, II, pp. 275-420; Frale, L’interrogatorio ai Templari, pp. 199-272, alla p. 226.
[58] Frale, Du catharisme à la sorcellerie, pp. 168-186; Frale, L’interrogatorio ai Templari, pp. 199-242. On the myth of the idol, see also Reinach, La tête magique, pp. 25-39.
[59] Michelet, Le Procès, II, pp. 289-290.
II
Behold the man!
A peculiar sacredness
Once we have cleared the field of all the confusion and ascertained the origin of the charges of Islamism and black magic, the other descriptions of the Templars’ idol seem suddenly very concrete; it’s simply a human portrait, made of diverse materials and representing an unknown man. It’s in this group of realistic observations, descriptions of simple objects of sacred art, that we find the most interesting data. The idol is a simple object, although for some reason the Templars seem to see it as incomparably valuable. That it was a portrait came out immediately, during the very first interrogations that followed the arrests of October 1307; but the sensationalism with which the Templars’ arrest had been advertised confused everyone’s ideas. People had started yelling about heresy and sorcery, and now they saw them everywhere.
Sergeant Rayner de Larchent saw it twelve times during twelve separate general chapters, and the last was the one held in Paris the Tuesday after the feast of the Apostles Peter and Paul, the July before the arrest. As he described it, it was a bearded head that the monks kissed, calling it their “saviour”; he did not know where it was placed or who kept it, but he guessed that it was the Grand Master or the officer who oversaw the general chapter. It was also seen in Paris by brothers Gautier de Liencourt, Jean de La Tour, Jean le Duc, Guillaume d’Erreblay, Raoul de Gisy and Jean de Le Puy. The ceremonial display was presided over by the Grand Master, or more often the Visitor of the West, Hugues de Pérraud, who was the second in the Templar hierarchy and became the most powerful templar in Europe when the Grand Master happened to be in the East.[1] When questioned, Hugues de Pérraud admitted the existence of this idol and its cult, but said precious little to help us in our modern historical research.
Of the head we just mentioned, he said under oath that he saw, held and touched it near Montpellier during a chapter. Both he and the other brothers worshipped it: he, however, only pretended adoration, acting with the mouth but not with the heart, and could not say who else offered adoration from the heart. Asked where the idol was, he said that he left it with brother Pierre Allemandin, who was preceptor of the mansion of Montpellier: but he could not say whether the King’s agents would find it. He said that this head had four feet, two in front on the side of the face, and two behind.[2]
The testimony does not specify what kind of simulacrum this was. However, it states that it had four feet, which points at a three-dimensional object held up by supports.
At the end of his and the Roman Curia’s inquest in the summer of 1308, the Pope removed the investigations from the inquisitors and decreed that they were to be handed over in each territory to special commissions formed by the local bishops. These were not dependent on the King of France and did not have to follow the plans of his legal strategists; the Pope only tasked them with shedding light on that thorny affair. Some of these bishops may not have loved the Templars for personal reasons; it is well known that there was widespread envy towards this rich and powerful religious order with its many privileges: but they had no direct interest in persecuting as was the case with the King and with Guillaume de Nogaret’s group. It’s hardly surprising that it is during the investigations carried out by diocesan bishops many of the accusations thrown in the previous period started to totter, while others suddenly took a more rational and credible aspect. The diocesan bishops swiftly came to understand that the Templars’ notorious idol-head was in fact a reliquary, an upper bust sculpture containing the remains of some saint, a very widespread class of object in mediaeval sacred art: this comes out clearly as soon as the management of interrogations was handed over to the Pope, and in the very inquiry held in Poitiers in June 1308, Clemens V was able to come to the conclusion himself. In his presence, the sergeant brother Étienne de Troyes said:
Concerning the head, he said that it was the Order’s custom to celebrate each year a general chapter on the day of the Apostles Peter and Paul, and one of those was held in Paris the year he was admitted into the Order. He took part in the Chapter all the three days it lasted: they woul
d begin in the first watch of the night and went on until the first hour of day. During the first night of the chapter they carried a head: it was borne by a priest, who was preceded as he moved forth by two brothers who held large torches and burning candles in silver candelabra. The priest laid they head over the altar, on two pillows and a silken carpet. The witness thought it was a head of human flesh, from the top of the skull to the knot of the epiglottis; it had white hair, and nothing covered it. The face also was of human flesh, and seemed to him very livid and discoloured, with a beard of mixed white and dark hair, similar to the beard that Templars wear. Then the Order’s Visitor said: “Let us worship him and pay him homage, for it is he who made us and it is he who can dismiss us”. They all approached it with the highest reverence and paid it homage and worshipped that head. He heard someone say that that skull had belonged to the first Master of the Order, brother Hugues de Payns: from the Adam’s apple to its shoulder blades, it was covered in gold and silver and studded with precious stones.[3]
The Templars and the Shroud of Christ Page 7
