The Knights Hospitaller Commanderies

Stephen Degiorgio (2010)

What was a Commandery and what was its Importance?

The first instance of a property donation to the Hospitaller organisation of St John

came about before its formal recognition as an institution by the papacy in 1113. It
coincided with the First Crusade’s capture of the Holy City of Jerusalem in 1099,
when Godfrey de Bouillion, leader of the Crusading forces, donated to the
Hospitallers a number of estates in his homeland in gratitude for the medical
assistance extended towards wounded Crusaders. The object of his donation
clearly implied devolution in perpetuity of all the income derived from such property
to benefit the Hospitaller Order.1 He moreover exhorted other Christian princes to
emulate his example and enhance the Hospitaller organisation with further
properties, revenues and privileges.2 Undoubtedly, the purpose of de Boullion’s
munificence was a visible mark of distinction to pay tribute to the Hospitallers, and
concurrently, a sharp awareness for the financial requirements necessary for the
self-governing maintenance of the hospital and the continuity of its sterling service.
De Boullion’s noble gesture laid the foundations for the future expansion of a vast
patrimony of property scattered in every corner of Europe. We have, in effect, the
genesis of a network of landed property whereby the Hospitallers funded almost all
their financial requirements necessary for the running of an institution.

Throughout their existence in the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem until their ultimate
eviction from the Near East in 1291, the Hospitallers’ concerns had solidly ramified
into a military raison d’être complementary to their Hospitaller status and the very
essence of their survival. In the first third of the 12th century benefactions to the
Hospitallers in the Holy Land poured predominantly from Provence and Spain, Italy
being particularly unresponsive apart from the apparent output from Amalfitan
merchants and a few foundations forthcoming from the extreme north-west. From
the mid-12th century supportive enthusiasm issues also from northern France and
England. In the sequel to the Second Crusade (1147-48), general support
extended throughout Europe, incorporating Hungary, Poland and Scandinavia. At
about this time we identify the beginnings of a network of pilgrims’ hospices which
were eventually absorbed into the framework of the Hospitallers’ activity. As far as
we are able to ascertain, the entire network of the Hospitallers’ organisation was
governed from two points: Messina and Saint-Gilles. By the 1150s, the three
priories of Aragon, Castile and Portugal were established and linked to the office of
a grand Commandery for Spain.3
The title of Grand Commander grew out of necessity for defining or designating the
individual incumbent holder of a series of property estates found in a region,
province or country. This office, already established within the Hospitaller set-up in
the Latin territories Outremer, became homologous to similar charges for territorial
holdings in Europe: in France (c. 1178-79), Italy (1188), Germany (1249), and
Spain by the end of the 13th-century.4 The office would incorporate a number of
properties, designated as priories, which in turn incorporated a number of minor or
inferior holdings designated as commanderies. At the time of Raymond du Puy
(1120-1160), such properties or ‘houses’, were termed as obedientiae, and later,
domus and mansio. The more frequent term of preceptoria was also adopted, and
particularly, from the 13th century onward the commendatoria. Thus, the head of
the house was styled as commendator, being the chief man vested with the
command of the estate/commandery falling under his charge. This designation was
later corrupted to commander, commandeur or commendatore.5

Riley-Smith gives us further information regarding these immovable divisions, their

holders and their administrative configuration within an ‘umbrella’ termed as
Provincial Government. He identifies two groups: First, the castellanies and
commanderies of Syria and Cyprus, administered by capitular bailiffs; and
secondly, the priories, capitular castellanies and capitular commanderies of
Europe, likewise administered by capitular bailiffs. There was, however, some
confusion as the Hospitallers seem to have conferred official titles without apparent
distinction in hierarchical nomenclature. The title of prior was used both by
ecclesiastical members heading the clergy as well as by the commanders, by
agents of capitular bailiffs and by the capitular bailiffs themselves. The
administrators of minor estates were commonly referred to as commanders or
preceptors, but were also referred upon as priors, masters and procurators.
Furthermore, capitular bailiffs, usually entitled priors, could also be castellans or
commanders. And the title of bailiff was likewise widely adopted.6

The property holdings or estates in Europe were divided into units referred to as
commanderies, each incorporating a village or proximate settlements, a manor, a
church, convent, hospice, or simply an agglomeration of nearby lands. Each
commandery was administered by a commander and hosted a number of variable
resident brethren, subject to the extent of revenue accrued from such properties.
As we have already pointed out, these units were grouped into priories, capitular
castellanies or capitular commanderies, again, varying in size and wealth. The
incumbent prior, castellan or commander was vested with certain administrative
rights over his subordinate commanders, but enjoyed a superior hierarchical status
over that of his peers as he was appointed directly by a Chapter-General,7 and
later, I would add, by the Master and his Council. These priories and capitular
commanderies were in turn grouped into larger regional units governed by grand
commanderies. Ultimately, by the 13th century, the combination of regional units
into specific geographical provinces representing a country, kingdom or ethnic
tongue – perhaps a necessary development related to the need for a central
representation and payment of revenues.8 This was, in effect, in accordance to
what had been laid out as early as 1113, in Pope Paschal II’s bull – the Pie
postulatio voluntatis – whereby all landed property had to devolve a proportion of
its income to the central treasury of the Hospitaller Order.

The commandery, therefore, was concurrently a unit of land and a unit of

government, supporting an officer and brothers whose responsibilities were not
dissimilar to that of the Hospitallers serving in the prioral and magistral convent.
The commander, in representation of the magistral government, would convene
weekly chapters for his resident brethren and the proper administration of the
house. Numbers never seemed to exceed twenty for the larger commanderies and
as few as three for the smaller units. Apart from resident knights and sergeants-at-
service the house would also be supplemented by the attachment of servants and
donats.9 A commander’s administrative obligation not only envisaged the proper
upkeep and management of the property estate but was also the observation of
religious duties, the support of any dependant ecclesiastical patronage, and the
direction of a hospital if this was at hand. Besides upholding the statutory laws of
the Order with subordinates under his charge he also administered justice to
vassals on his estates (excluding recourse to capital punishment). Moreover, he
was bound to give assistance and hospitality to those travelling brethren passing
by his house.10

The most pressing obligation, though, was the financial support to the Order’s
Treasury. The basic annual tax requirement imposed by the Order’s central
government was the collection of one third of all the proceeds accrued into the
coffers of the commandery. These taxes, known as responsions, were transmitted
to a prioral commandery or grand commandery, pooled with other revenues, and
forwarded by capitular bailiffs to the Order’s banks or general Treasury. Other
sources of income would enhance incoming profits: donations, ‘passage’ fees,
extraordinary levies or impositions.11 From 1343, responsions were supplemented
with charges of Mortuary and Vacancy. Mortuaries consisted of revenues derived
from any priory or commandery, commencing from the day of the holder’s death up
to the following 1 May (only if the subject died after the occurrence of St John’s
feast on 24 June), with proceeds reverting to the Treasury; and likewise, the
proceeds emanating for the whole of the following year when the status of Vacancy
occurred.12 Not all commanderies proved to be profitable, there were times when
running costs, natural or economic disasters, poor produce, political turbulence,
harmed prospects and stripped incoming profits or available financial resources.
There were also extraordinary instances when the Pope and other Christian
princes partially or entirely confiscated funds collected by most commanderies to
suit their economic or political ends. To compound the matter further, at times, the
grand priors/commanders levied taxes unilaterally from subservient commanderies,
impoverishing the overall financial performance of the same estates. To forestall
such ‘abuse’ the General-Chapter of 1265 ordained that no tallage be imposed by
priors in their province until the commanderies’ responsions due had been entirely
paid in.13

Abuse or mismanagement not only occurred beyond the confines of a

commandery, oftentimes, it was the incumbent prior or commander himself who
took advantage of the Order’s revenues for personal ends.14 Successive Chapter-
Generals in the 13th century tried to curb such infringements in a concerted effort
to prevent any alienation of lands, and henceforth, it was forbidden for any
commander to relinquish, sell, lease or otherwise pledge any of the assets or
properties belonging to the Order, neither could he transfer or otherwise alienate
such properties to secular persons without prior consent and prescription from a
prioral chapter or magistral authority.15 Further shortcomings reflected an imprecise
and incomplete notion of the commanderies’ total incomes and manpower and to
what proportion these resources could be exploited by the magistral council at the
Convent. Inevitably, statistics were approximate and incomplete.16

But commanderies did more than produce men and money. They constituted
important centres of recruitment and training, retirement homes for aged brethren,
residences for the Orders’ clergy, and as points of vital contact with the public. As
their religious obligation of prayer was fundamental to their spiritual well-being they
also built and maintained churches and other buildings which, with the passage of
time, became artistically elaborate. They celebrated their own liturgies, patronized
their own saints, and venerated their relics.17 They administered hospices for
sheltering pilgrims, and depots for mustering goods, materials, medicinal and
hospital commodities required by their outposts in the East.18

The priorate was one of the highest posts in the provincial hierarchy of the Order. It
was administered by a prior or capitular bailiff who governed a provincial territory
incorporating a number of commanderies, and was empowered to summon annual
provincial chapters. Priors could have been appointed either at a Chapter-General
or by discretionary powers enjoyed by the Master and the Council. They appointed
most of the commanders and performed visitations to all commanderies within their
regional limits in order to assess their good order and improvement, to collect taxes
and responsions, and otherwise the general inspection of ancillary services. By
way of discipline they could impose sanctions (excluding Commanderies of Grace)
and administer justice only in conjunction with his own chapter.19 Priors were
directly responsible to the Master and the Council.

A commander was normally appointed by his prior. These could either be knights,
servants-at-arms, priests and sergeants. All were required to serve with the Order
for specific periods of time prior to the assignment a commandery. He was
expected to administer such property consistently and unfailing loyalty toward the
jurisdiction of his prior. He was charged with paying responsions, tallages and
other obligations towards regional grand priories/commanderies and to attend on
annual chapters. He also hosted his superiors whenever these exercised their right
of visitation. Conversely, a prior could not impose brethren, sisters, donats and
members of his entourage upon a commander, neither could he levy additional
funds beyond what was licit without any magistral authority, or otherwise interfere
with the possession of a commandery.20

A number of ‘perks’ or financial benefits which further endowed a commander’s

income included the so called émutitions, consisting of the conferment of a
commandery of superior value than a previously held tenure (lasting five years).
Such commanderies were divided into two categories: those of first acquisition
were referred to as chevissements, and of the second as méliorissements.21
Aspirant candidates vying for such properties very often petitioned their respective
provincial or conventual priories to accede to superior benefices (commanderies).

The second half of the 13th century ushered the institution of the Commanderies of
Grace, these being conceded to brethren for life or specific terms. They are first
found in 1262 and later regulated in 1278 when such concessions or revocations
had to be ratified by way of magistral bulls. These commanderies were bestowed
to favourite or meritorious brethren directly by the Master and/or his Council (the
Conventual Bailiffs). Initially, no brother could possess more than one
commandery, however, with the outcome of the Chapter-General held in 1270,
brethren could be allotted with multiple commanderies. These beneficiaries were
not exempt from submitting responsions.22 We may also define the camera, an
alternate version to a Commandery of Grace. This was usually conferred to high
officials of the Order and held in absentia, the incumbent possessor appointing an
agent to administer it on his behalf. Most Masters, moved by greed, precluding the
assignment of vacant priories to priors, retained them as their camerae, thus
enjoying unto themselves the benefits of prospective revenues.23 These
‘requisitioned’ priories by the Master were often referred to as camere magistrali.

We evince that commanderies and priories were an essential element of the

Hospitallers’ property estates that rendered possible a virtual lifeline to the Order’s
existence, within their respective national boundaries as much as in their
possessions and Convent establishments overseas: the Holy Land, Cyprus,
Rhodes and Malta. They funnelled huge revenues for the operation and
maintenance of their central government – their Convent, with its various
departments, particularly the hospital and the navy, and the mega-defensive
projects wherever they established themselves. The overall capital income was
supplemented with passage fees from enrolments, donations, wills and the Spogli,
being the proceeds issuing from the effects of deceased knights, levies, taxes,
auction of slaves and booty, corsairing, etc. We may observe severe financial
repercussions brought upon the Order with the advent of the French Revolution,
when roughly three-fifths of the funds flowing into the coffers of the Treasury were
extinguished through the nationalisation of all of the Order’s assets in France.24

The National Library of Malta, housing the vast collection of manuscript volumes
(Archives of the Order of Malta) belonging to the Knights of the Order of St John,
has a particular classification (section 16), entitled Cabrei (vols. 5259-6382),
whereby reports of the visitations and ameliorations of the priories and
commanderies are recorded. They also include relevant matter related to
revenues, rents, upkeep and progress achieved in the property estates of the
Order in Europe. Financial reports as well as the description of each priory and
commandery is likewise evinced in this section of the records. Apart from these
administrative details most of these Cabrei (terrier-registers) are documented with
artistic drawings and plans bearing the widest range of property, from manor
houses to barns, churches to hospices, woodland to farmland, which present a rich
source of reference to any scholar wanting to explore the Hospitallers’ former
property holdings in Europe, and indirectly, also explore most of the ex-Templars’
property inherited by the Hospitallers following the suppression of the former in
1312, by act of Pope Clement V.

Sources:

1
Iacomo Bosio, Dell’Istoria della Sacra Religione..., vol I, Rome, 1594, pp. 8-9.
2
Ibid., p. 10.
3
H.J.A. Sire, The Knights of Malta, New Haven, 1994, p. 101.
4
Ibid.
5
Ibid., p. 102.
6
Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Knights of St. John in Jerusalem and Cyprus c.1050-1310, London,
1967, p. 341.
7
Ibid.
8
Ibid., p. 342.
9
Ibid., pp. 347-348.
10
Ibid., pp. 342-343, 347.
11
Ibid., p. 344.
12
H.J.A. Sire, op. cit., p. 106.
13
Jonathan Riley-Smith, op. cit., p. 345.
14
Ibid. pp. 346, 364.
15
Ibid. p. 346.
16
Anthony Luttrell, ‘The Military Orders 1312-1798’, in Jonathan Riley-Smith (ed.), The Oxford
Illustrated History of the Crusades, Oxford, 1995, pp. 342-343.
17
Ibid. pp. 344-345.
18
H.J.A. Sire, op. cit., pp. 103-104.
19
Jonathan Riley-Smith, op. cit., pp. 360, 362, 363, 366.
20
Ibid. pp. 348-349.
21
H.J.A. Sire, op. cit., p. 106.
22
Jonathan Riley-Smith, op. cit., pp. 349, 350.
23
Ibid., pp. 351, 352.
24
H.J.A. Sire, op. cit., p. 234.