9

The formation of the territorial structure of

the Templars and Hospitallers
in the medieval Kingdom of Hungary

Zsolt Hunyadi

Hungarian historiography long accepted the idea that the major military-
religious orders arrived to the Kingdom of Hungary with the armies of the
Second Crusade while marching through this region. According to this conviction,
knights from the armies of King Louis VII of France and King Conrad III of
Germany settled down in Hungary and formed the nucleus of the first Templar
and Hospitaller communities.1 This interpretation bears several aspects which
should be reconsidered. First, neither direct nor indirect pieces of evidence
came to light so far proving the settlement of any knights of the army.2 On the
other hand, looking at the militarization of the Hospital, nowadays it seems to
be widely accepted that no active military role was played by the knights of
St. John before the 1160s,3 which makes, among others, unlikely that fighting
Hospitallers were present in the crusading army. Nonetheless, both orders took
steps towards settling down between the late 1150s and the mid-1160s in this
part of Latin Christendom, and they developed their territorial structure by the
end of the first third of the thirteenth century.

1 Recently, see András Borosy, ‘Egyház és honvédelem az Árpád-korban. Hadakozó egyháznagyok,

szerzetes lovagrendek’, [Church and the defence of the kingdom in the Árpád-age. Higher
clergy and the military orders as fighters] Hadtörténelmi Közlemények 100 (1987), p. 220.
2 For the Hungarian attitude, see Zs. Hunyadi, ‘Hungary and the Second Crusade,’ Chronica
9–10 (2009–10), pp. 55–65.
3 Jochen Burgtorf, The Central Convent of Hospitallers and Templars. History, organization,
and personnel (1099/1120–1310), (Leiden – Boston, 2008), pp. 43–44.
184 die geistlicHen ritterorden in Mitteleuropa. Mittelalter

Templars

Hungarian historiography still has serious debts concerning the reconstruc-

tion of the activity of the Templars in the medieval Kingdom of Hungary. Major
trends have been reconstructed4 but scholars still lack a modern detailed study
on the Hungarian province of the knights of the Temple. Undoubtedly, the
sources and the picture drawn on their basis are very much fragmented but
with the help of comparative approach or by using analogies of recent results5
a more thorough reconstruction could be conducted. The period of settling
down would particularly demand such an approach. Strangely enough we are
informed about the existence of the Hungarian province somewhat earlier than
the first record of any Templar presence or possession in the kingdom. The
Statuts hiérarchique, dated to around 1165,6 lists Hungary among the already
existing provinces, but the first mention of Templar presence in the kingdom
dates back to 1169 when they are said to have settled at the former Benedictine
monastic site of Vrana, on the Dalmatian coast.7 It is not clear who the gener-
ous benefactors were but the very first possessions of the Templars became
determinant in the later development of the provincial structure.
The majority of the commanderies established until the very end of the
twelfth century (Vrana, Zengg, Bojisce, and Tinj) are to be found at the Dal-
matian coastal area. Since the source materials are very much fragmented it is
hard to confront the characteristics of the Hungarian situation either with Karl
Borchardt’s theory8 on the first phase of Templar settlement in Central Europe

4 Balázs stossek, ‘Maisons et Possessions des Templiers en Hongrie’, in: The Crusades and the
Military Orders: Expanding the Frontiers of Medieval Latin Christianity, ed. Zsolt Hunyadi
and József laszlovszky, (Budapest, 2001), pp. 245–251; ideM, ‘A templomosok Magyarországon,’
[The Templars in Hungary] in Magyarország és a keresztes háborúk. Lovagrendek és
emlékeik, ed. József laszlovszky, Judit Majorossy, József zsengellér (Máriabesnyő – Gödöllő,
2006), pp. 181–194.
5 E.g. Elena BelloMo, The Templar Order in North-west Italy (1142–c.1330) (Leiden – Boston,
2008), passim.
6 J. M. upton-Ward, The Rule of the Templars (Woodbridge, 1992), p. 41; Burgtorf, The Central
Convent, pp. 56–57, 186. Burgtorf notes that the preceptors mentioned in this sources
were most likely not elected but rather appointed by the master with the consent of the
chapter (p. 191).
7 Codex diplomaticus regni Croatiae, Dalmatiae ac Slavoniae. Diplomatički zbornik kraljevine
Hrvatske, Dalmacije i Slavonije, ed. Marko kostrenčić and Tadija sMičiklas (henceforth:
Smičiklas), 18 vols. (Zagreb, 1904–1998) vol. 2, p. 125. For similar situation of assigning
already existing churches to the Templars, see BelloMo, The Templar Order (as Note 5),
p. 59.
8 Karl BorcHardt, ‘The Templars in Central Europe’, in: The Crusades and the Military Orders:
Expanding the Frontiers of Medieval Latin Christianity, ed. Zsolt Hunyadi and József
laszlovszky, (Budapest, 2001), p. 235.
 tHe forMation of tHe territorial structure of tHe teMplars and Hospitallers 185

31. Templar commanderies in the medieval Kingdom of Hungary

or with that of Elena Bellomo9 on the consolidation of the establishment in

north-west Italy. However, it seems tempting to believe that Templars settled in
the Dalmatian coast have been driven by the same logistical considerations as
those established at important points of the road network of northern Italy.10
The geographical distribution of the early Templar possessions shows the prefer-
ence of maintaining contact either with the Holy Land or towards Italy than to
profitable landed properties. They partly received already existing buildings,
for instance at Vrana and Zengg,11 which also found its parallel in northern
Italy where the Templars obtained churches which had been established prior
to their arrival.12 The second “wave” of donations, however, made the order to
move towards the medium regni. The possession received in or shortly before

9 BelloMo, The Templar Order (as Note 5), p. 21.

10 BelloMo, The Templar Order, p. 66.
11 A church dedicated to St. George, cf. Smičiklas vol. 2, p. 191.
12 BelloMo, The Templar Order, p. 59.
186 die geistlicHen ritterorden in Mitteleuropa. Mittelalter

1209 established the Templar presence in Slavonia,13 for instance, at Hresno,

Gora, Szentmárton, and by the first third of the thirteenth century the order
established houses (Szentlőrinc, Keresztény, Bő, Esztergom) within the borders
of the Hungarian kingdom proper. Until 1217 the circle of commanderies north
and south of the River Drava (i.e. the border of Slavonia) were commanded
separately but from this year onwards one provincial master was in charge for
both regions.14
Similar to other European territories, one of the most important tasks of the
provincial master was to gain more and more lands, to raise profit from the landed
estates and to send it to the Holy Land supporting the fight against the infidel.
The most intensive phase for the Hungarian commanderies was the period of
1201–1235, that is the last years of the rule of King Emeric (1196–1204) and the
tenure of King Andrew II (1205–1235). Altogether almost thirty donations are
known from this period and somewhat less than half of them have been gener-
ously donated by the members of the ruling dynasty. The proportion of private
donations was significantly lower than in Western Europe but it was still much
higher than in case of the Hospitallers settled in Hungary. It is, nonetheless,
noteworthy that the majority of the private benefactors related some ways to
the southern region of the kingdom: they either lived in this region or held royal
offices as wardens or counts.15 The series of donations ceased after the reign
of King Andrew II and Stossek supposes that it might have been in connection
with the Mongol invasion (1241–42).16 With regard to the European trends,
namely the decline of grants and gifts, it is doubtful that it was the aftermath of
the devastation that stopped either the royal or the private benevolence towards
the Templars on the long run.
It is obscure how far the Templar possessions suffered from strikes of the
Mongols but the lack of further donations most likely forced them to manage
their landed estates even more cautious and profitably than ever before. Per-
haps they aimed higher amount of revenues when they arranged an exchange
with King Béla IV (1235–1270) around the end of his rule. The order received
County Dubica in return of the Gecske region in 1269.17 It was the only manifest
change in the Templar province throughout the period between 1235 and 1314.

13 For Slavonia, see ‘Slavonie’, in : Prier et combattre. Dictionnaire européen des ordres
militaires au Moyen-Âge, dir. Nicole Bériou et Philippe josserand (Paris, 2009), p. 881.
14 Smičiklas vol. 3, p. 165.
15 See for instance, wardens of Slavonia: Gyula of the Kán kindred and Benedict; Warden Boris
of Bosnia, Comes Gutitemerus of Gora and Stephen of Gorica. See the respective entries
in Attila zsoldos, Magyarország világi archontológiája, 1000–1301 [A lay archonthology
of Hungary, 1000–1301] (Budapest, 2011).
16 stossek, A templomosok Magyarországon, p. 184.
17 Smičiklas vol. 5, p. 510.
 tHe forMation of tHe territorial structure of tHe teMplars and Hospitallers 187

Thus the assumed plans of the order, which most likely aimed at approaching
the heartlands of the kingdom eventually failed. The last decades of the thir-
teenth century was earmarked by the turbulent circumstances created by the
petty kings, and this situation made the reorganization of the commanderies
even more difficult. But the early fourteenth century profoundly changed the
situation including the fate of the Templars in Hungary.

32. Hospitaller commanderies in Hungary until the mid-thirteenth century18

Hospitallers

Since neither the crossing troops of the Second Crusade, nor King Géza II
(1142–1162) himself played provable role in the settlement of the Hospitallers
in Hungary, the charitable intentions of Queen Euphrosyne (b.1130–†c.1193)19
should be taken into consideration. It seems that the role she played during the
introduction of the Hospital was more important than the military concerns of
18 It is worth comparing the distribution of the Templars and the Hospitallers. The two maps
seem to complement each other.
19 Euphrosyne, daughter of Duke Mstislav of Kiev, was the sister of Grand Duke Isyaslav of
Kiev and she married Géza II in 1146.
188 die geistlicHen ritterorden in Mitteleuropa. Mittelalter

her husband, Géza II. No foundation charter for the first Hospitaller commandery
(Székesfehérvár) is known, so that the chain of events as well as the motivations
behind them must be reconstructed from later sources. The first monastery was
founded just outside the walls of Székesfehérvár in one of the secular and sacral
centers of the kingdom.20 According to a charter of 1193 Archbishop Martirius
of Esztergom (1151–1157) intended to give the building to the Hospital and it
was Queen Euphrosyne who finished the monastery (monasterium … comple-
vit) and granted the Hospital numerous landed properties.21 It is not known,
however, when the building was finished and when its church was consecrated
or when the queen made her grant to the monastery, but this gift later proved
to be of fundamental importance. Taking into account the death of Martirius
and the exile of Euphrosyne, the completion of the Székesfehérvár commandery
can be dated between 1157 and 1186.
The chronological reconstruction is supported by the fact that Euphrosyne’s
devotion was emphasized in other documents pertaining to the Hospitallers’
settlements in the region. According to one of the most informative sources, the
charter of 1186 reports the intention of Princess Elisabeth, daughter of Géza II
and Euphrosyne, on the occasion of a grant to the Hospital.22 Elisabeth’s husband,
Prince Frederick of Bohemia, made frequent grants to the Order, and he also
referred several times to his wife as, he did for instance in 118323 and 1185:24
... dedi ergo ei ecclesiam cum consensu et petitione uxoris mee. In addition, the
donation of 1185 was witnessed by Elisabeth herself. In addition to the dynastic
links between Bohemia and Hungary in the 1180s, the first known leader of the
Hospitaller Hungarian region was a certain Martin, who had been the provost
of Prague. He was sent from the Holy Land, and it is tempting to assume that the
leadership of the Order counted on his knowledge of the region and perhaps
on his network of acquaintances for the establishment of a new regional unit.25

20 Cf. Lajos B. kuMorovitz, ‘Buda (és Pest) ‘fővárossá’ alakulásának kezdetei’, [The beginnings
of the development of Buda (and Pest) into a ‘capital city’], Tanulmányok Budapest
múltjából 18 (1971), pp. 37–40.
21 National Archives of Hungary (MOL) Dl. 27. Árpád-kori oklevelek, 1001–1196. [Charter
of the Árpád Age, 1001–1196], ed. György györffy (Budapest, 1997), pp. 93–96; Codex
diplomaticus Hungariae ecclesiasticus ac civilis [henceforth: Fejér CD], 11 vols., ed. Georgius
fejér (Buda, 1829–1844) vol. 2, pp. 283–290; Monumenta Ecclesiae Strigoniensis (henceforth:
MES), 4 vols., ed. Ferdinandus knauz, et al. (Esztergom – Budapest, 1874–1999), vol. 1, pp.
142–47; Cart Hosp no. 936.
22 Fejér CD vol. 2, p. 230; Codex diplomaticus et epistolaris regni Bohemiae [henceforth:
CDB], ed. Gustav friedricH, vol. 1, p. 285; Cart Hosp no. 770.
23 CDB vol. 1, p. 307; Cart. Hosp. no. 650.
24 CDB, vol. 1, p. 313; Cart. Hosp. no. 718.
25 Cart. Hosp. no. 860. Regesta Regni Hierosolomytani, 1097–1291, 2 vols., ed. Reinhold
röHricHt (Innsbruck, 1893–1904), no. 677; Joseph delaville le roulX, Les Archives, la
 tHe forMation of tHe territorial structure of tHe teMplars and Hospitallers 189

33. Possessions granted of Queen Euphrosyne and confirmed by King Béla III in 119326

Despite the promising start, the founding of new Hospitaller commander-

ies eased down for almost half a century. This may not have been due solely
to the attitude of King Béla III (1172–1196). In order to properly understand

Bibliothèque et le Trésor de l’Ordre de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem à Malte. (Paris, 1883),

p. 221; Judith Bronstein, The Hospitallers and the Holy Land: Financing the Latin East,
1187–1274 (Woodbridge, 2005), p. 12.
26 For the identification of the estates, see Zsolt Hunyadi, The Hospitallers in the medieval
kingdom of Hungary, c. 1150–1387 (METEM Books 70–CEU Medievalia 13) (Budapest,
2010), p. 29.
190 die geistlicHen ritterorden in Mitteleuropa. Mittelalter

the situation, the grant confirmed in 1193 should be examined more closely.
Owing to royal support, the convent of Székesfehérvár became not only the
first commandery in Hungary but it also became the central house of several
membra which were later organized into commanderies in the Trans-Danubian
region during the thirteenth century.27 Important conclusions can be drawn
from a reconstruction of the network of possessions of the Hospital in Hungary
and by locating its estates: the majority of possessions were situated on or near
of the major roads of the Trans-Danubian region as shown on the map with
alternatives in grey lines: for example, Győr-Fehérvár-Földvár-Mohács, Fehérvár-
Somogyvár-Segesd-Zákány.
The remaining estates lay close to the Danube and Drava rivers, which also
served as basic routes for transportation. It is hard to believe that this distri-
bution was accidental even though it is impossible to identify the individuals
responsible for these decisions. It is doubtful whether Queen Euphrosyne’s
donation was determined by any concern for such logistics. It is more likely
that either the local, regional or even central officers of the Hospital exercised
some influence, perhaps on the occasion of official visitations which began in
the mid-twelfth century.28
Two additional establishments, which were not dependencies of Székes-
fehérvár, have been identified as commanderies from the second half of the
twelfth century. The first of these, in 1166, was one of the rare private donations
and consisted of three groups of cultivated lands and a church dedicated to St.
Peter in Zala County.29 Since no commandery dedicated to St. Peter is known
from later sources it is worth briefly dwelling on this issue. Lacking primary
sources on the topic, we are restricted to making analogies.
Basically, there were two ways for a religious order to establish itself in a new
region. One possibility was for the Hospital to receive landed properties and to
create the basic administrative machinery necessary for the management of the
estates. That is, a commandery would develop and facilitate further expansion;
the process of donation resulted in a widely dispersed network of estates.30 The
other possibility, typical for Hungary in the later period, was for the Hospital to

27 At Aracsa, Gyánt, Újudvar, Csurgó and Varasd (Bonyhádvarasd).

28 Cf. Jonathan riley-sMitH, ‘The Origins of the Commandery in the Temple and Hospital’, in:
La Commanderie: institution des ordres militaires dans l’Occident médiéval, ed. Anthony
luttrell and Léon pressouyre (Paris, 2002), p. 12.
29 Fejér CD vol. 2, pp. 174–175; Cart. Hosp. no. 368; Hazai Okmánytár. Codex diplomaticus
patrius, 8 vols., ed. Imre nagy et al. (Győr – Budapest, 1865–1891), vol. 7, pp. 1–2.
30 Cf. Dominic selWood, The Knights of the Cloister: Templars and Hospitallers in Central-
Southern Occitania, 1100–1300 (Woodbridge, 1999), p. 55.
 tHe forMation of tHe territorial structure of tHe teMplars and Hospitallers 191

concentrate its estates by purchasing and/or exchanging land.31 The Hospital was
not the only religious order that did not transform all its landed donations into
monastic sites;32 In the case of St. Peter mentioned above, the grant of a manor
and an adjacent church did not lead to the creation of a commandery.33 For a time
it may have been feasible to administer building complexes of different func-
tion such as oratories, granges, stables or barns from an adjacent, or sometimes
even remote, commandery, which might explain why these associated buildings
rarely appeared in the sources. The Hospitallers did not necessarily transform
all the churches they received into a conventual house, domus conventualis,
but might merely have exercised patronage over them.34 It is widely accepted
that even if the Hospitallers were ready to settle in towns35 – since one of their
original activities was closely related to urban space – they still required rural
sites,36 which were the source of income regardless of whether the revenues
were sent to Jerusalem, Acre, Rhodes or Avignon.
The existence of another establishment, a hospital in Pécs (Baranya County),
has been deduced from the appearance in a charter of a certain Gilbert magister
hospitalis as a witness of a transaction in 1181.37 There are no additional grounds
for supposing that it belonged to the Hospital either at that time or later; appar-
ently it was an episcopal hospital. This interpretation is reinforced by a charter
of 1217, when the master of the hospital of Pécs witnessed a transaction between
the bishop and the canons of the cathedral chapter of Pécs; this indicates that the
hospital was under episcopal auspices.38 Thus, a certain woman, named Froa,

31 Paul freedMan, ‘Military Orders and Peasant Servitude in Catalonia: Twelfth and Thirteenth
Centuries’, Hispanic American Historical Review 65 (1985), 96.
32 riley-sMitH, ‘The Origins of the Commandery (as Note 28)’, p. 10.
33 selWood, The Knights of the Cloister /as Note 30), p. 55; Michael gervers, ‘The Commandery
as an economic unit in England,’ in: La Commanderie, 248; Roberta gilcHrist, Contemplation
and Action: The Other Monasticism (London – New York, 1995), p. 66.
34 Cf. riley-sMitH, ‘The Origins of the Commandery’ (as Note 28), p. 11. See also Libor jan
and Vít jesenský, ‘Hospitaller and Templar Commanderies in Bohemia and Moravia: their
Structure and Architectural Forms’, in: MO, 2, p. 236.
35 Zsolt Hunyadi, ‘Extra et intra muros: Military-religious orders in medieval Hungarian towns’,
in: Les ordres religieux militaires dans la ville médiévale, dir. Damien carraz (Clermont-
Ferrand, 2012), forthcoming.
36 selWood, The Knights of the Cloister, p. 71; See also Karl BorcHardt, ‘Urban commanderies
in Germany’, in: La Commanderie (as Note 28), pp. 297–304.
37 Cf. Tamás fedeles, ‘Gilebertus ispotályos mester. Az ispotályosok középkori pécsi rendházának
kérdése’, [Gilebertus hospitaller master. The question of the medieval Hospitaller house in
Pécs] in ideM, Püspökök, prépostok, kanonokok. Fejezetek Pécs középkori egyháztörténetéből,
Capitulum 5. (Szeged, 2010), pp. 11–13.
38 Árpádkori új okmánytár. Codex diplomaticus Arpadianus continuatus [henceforth: ÁUO],
12 vols., Gusztáv Wenzel (Pest, 1860–1874) vol. 11, pp. 153–154; lászló koszta, A pécsi
192 die geistlicHen ritterorden in Mitteleuropa. Mittelalter

made the grant of 1181 to this hospital39 and not to the Order of the Hospital,
though she finally changed her mind and revoked the donation.40

Prosperity in the thirteenth century

There is no evidence that the older son of Béla III, King Emeric, promoted
the Hospital in any respect either in Hungary or outside it, as he did the Tem-
plars. Moreover, he postponed Hungarian participation in the crusades. It is very
doubtful whether the hospital in Luba41 (see Map 2), on the Dalmatian coast,
belonged to the Hospital in the first half of the thirteenth century. Morover, it
appears that after the 1160s until 1215/16 no new Hospitaller houses or churches
were mentioned in the sources.42 Data from about 1225 clearly shows, however,
that albeit royal support ceased for a while, the consolidation of estates and
the organization of the administrative system continued with no break. It can
be noted that the commanderies at Esztergom and Szirák, which had not been
listed among the possessions of the grant confirmed in 1193, started functioning
by the first half of the thirteenth century. On the other hand, as elsewhere in
Europe, the Hospitallers fought hard for the ecclesiastical tithes, decima, from
their lands from the very end of the twelfth century well into the second half of
the thirteenth century. Tracing this struggle is informative about possessions in
the bishopric of Győr which, presumably, included estates which later became
part of the commanderies of Sopron and Győr.43 Unfortunately, it is unknown
whether the Hospitallers, for example those reprimanded by the pope for not
paying the bucket tax (chybriones) after their vineyards in 1213,44 had both
houses and possessions in the bishopric of Pécs or merely rented vineyards in
that region as extraneus tenants; they were only released from this taxation in

székeskáptalan hiteleshelyi tevékenysége (1214–1353) [The Pécs cathedral chapter as

a place of authentication, 1214–1353] (Pécs, 1998), p. 16, p. 183.
39 As has been thought by many scholars so far. III. Béla emlékezete [Memory of King Béla
III], ed. Gyula kristó and Ferenc Makk ([Budapest], 1981), p. 107.
40 III. Béla magyar király emlékezete [Memory of King Béla III of Hungary], ed. Gyula forster
(Budapest, 1900), pp. 245–246.
41 Fejér CD vol. 7/5, pp. 166–170; Smičiklas vol. 3, pp. 50–52.
42 Cart. Hosp. nos. 1438, 1463; Fejér CD vol. 3/1, pp. 179–180.
43 Fejér CD vol. 3/1, pp. 99–100.
44 Fejér CD vol. 3/1, pp. 141–142. On this tax, see The Laws of the Medieval Kingdom of
Hungary, 1000–1490. Decreta Regni Mediaevalis Hungariae 1000–1526 [henceforth:
DRMH], Series I, 5 vols, ed. János M. Bak, et al. (Budapest – Idyllwild, 1992–2010, ser. 1,
vol. 1, p. 100.
 tHe forMation of tHe territorial structure of tHe teMplars and Hospitallers 193

1238.45 It is certain that the Hospitaller church at Kesztelc was first mentioned
in 1216,46 and in 122647 there was a commandery at Ar(a)csa in the Archdea-
conry of Tolna which is in the bishopric of Pécs where the Hospital earlier held
estates at places mentioned in the confirmation of 1193.
In addition to church tithes, from the beginning of the reign of King Andrew
II, royal backing gave a renewed impetus to the Hospitallers and they received
new forms of support. A letter of privilege issued by Andrew II in 1207 for the
canons regular of the Holy Sepulchre granted the people of seven villages the
same privileges that the Templars and Hospitallers enjoyed.48 Thereafter one
of the most substantial forms of royal support came in the different types of
secular liberties, immunities and exemptions. Under the influence of the cru-
sading ideal, Andrew II, like his father, made grants to Hospitallers outside the
country as well as those settled in Hungary. During his stay in the Holy Land
in the course of the Fifth Crusade he made, or rather promised, a grant to the
overseas Hospitallers as well. The Hospital quickly had it confirmed by Honorius
III in 1218.49 It seems certain that the Hospitallers seized the area between the
Rivers Drava and Sava, but it is unlikely that the castles of Crac des Chevaliers
and Margat (Marqab) ever received the revenues from the salting of Szalacs or
the sum of 1,000 marks for guarding the king during his return from Syria which
had been promised by Andrew II.
Either a reassertion of a traditional royal policy towards the Hospital or
papal reprimand50 caused Béla IV to change his mind profoundly; he soon
began to favour the Hospitallers. In January 1238 he “penitently” restored the
confiscated goods, moreover, he significantly granted them new ones.51 Some
of these new properties were located in the region south of the River Drava, in

45 Fejér CD vol. 4/1, pp. 104–111, vol. 9/5, p. 153; Smičiklas vol. 4, pp. 48–50; MES vol. 1,
p. 326.
46 Fejér CD vol. 3/1, p. 179; Cart. Hosp. no. 1463.
47 A pannonhalmi Szent-Benedek-rend története. [History of the Benedictine order of
Pannonhalma] 12 vols. [henceforth: PRT], ed. László erdélyi and Pongrác sörös (Budapest,
1902–1916) vol. 1, pp. 672–673; Veszprémi püspökség római oklevéltára. Monumenta
romana episcopatus Wesprimiensis 1103–1526 [henceforth: MonWesp]. 3 vols., ed. Vilmos
fraknói (Budapest, 1896–1907), vol. 1, p. 70; MES vol. 1, p. 260, p. 278; ÁUO vol. 1, pp.
222–223.
48 Smičiklas vol. 3, pp. 72–74.
49 Vetera Monumenta Historica Hungariam Sacram Illustrantia, 1216–1352. 2 vols., ed.
Augustinus tHeiner [henceforth: Theiner] (Romae, 1859–1860), vol. 1, pp. 14–18; ÁUO 1:
156–158; Cart. Hosp. nos. 1613–1616.
50 Fejér CD vol. 4/2, pp. 466–469, pp. 504–506; ÁUO vol. 2, pp. 301–303; Theiner vol. 1, pp.
236–238; Cart. Hosp. nos. 2896, 2920; MES vol. 1, p. 454.
51 Fejér CD vol. 4/1, pp. 104–111; vol. 9/5, p. 153; Smičiklas vol. 4, pp. 48–50; MES vol. 1,
p. 326.
194 die geistlicHen ritterorden in Mitteleuropa. Mittelalter

34. Plan of the buildings of the Hospitaller commandery in Székesfehérvár (according to

Gyula Siklósi, Adattár Székesfehérvár középkori ...).

Valkó, Pozsega and Varasd counties. In part, the Hospitallers established them-
selves in various core regions of the realm, such as in Arad, Sopron and Győr
counties, and they also extended their power in territories where they were
already established, that is in Fejér, Somogy and Zala counties. In addition, the
Hospital was granted baths in Győr and in Esztergom in order to facilitate its
“original” activity; the Esztergom baths were established as balnea communia
by Anne,52 grand-mother of Béla IV, and it was he who gave it to the Hospital.
Béla IV’s grant was comparable to that of his grandfather, Béla III, which grand-
son even enlarged several months later by exempting the Hospital from the
chybriones tax to be paid on their vineyards. The importance of these privileges
is signalled by the fact that thereafter neither Béla IV nor his successors, the
later Arpadians and the Angevins, supported the Hospital in Hungary to the
same extent. There may have been several reasons for this on the long-run, but
the most immediate cause was the Mongol invasion in 1241–1242.

52 Anne (Agnes) of Antioch.

 tHe forMation of tHe territorial structure of tHe teMplars and Hospitallers 195

The builders and leaders of the territorial structure

The territorial structure of the Hospital in the Hungarian region, which

later became the basis of the priory, began to take shape in the 1180s, somewhat
later than in the Holy Land or Western Europe.53 At that time the middle level
of the hierarchy within the Hospital, which included the commanderies in
a region, had not yet fully crystallized. A charter of 1186 named the officer in
charge of the Hungarian and Bohemian territories in the following way: “Mar-
tinus quondam prepositus Pragensis nunc vero frater hospitalis Jerusalem et
preceptor Ungarie, Boemie et omnium aliarum terrarum ab oriente et meri-
die et septentrione adiacentium.”54 Accordingly, Martin, the former provost of
Prague, had authority over those territories which had not yet been integrated
into or assigned to any other already existing priory. Anthony Luttrell noted
that Martin was sent to the region from the Holy Land around 1183, although
his origin is still obscure.55 Fortunately, Martin, unlike many other officers of
the early period, did not disappear for a while: he was present at the Hospital-
ler Chapter General held in Tyre in 1188, and a year later he attached his seal as
preceptor hospitalis to the charter of Prince Otto (Conrad Ota) of Bohemia.56
It is not clear, however, exactly what his title referred to since he was followed
by Bernard as prior Boemie on the list of the sealers of the charter. According
to Karl Borchardt, this Bernard might have been the brother who played a role
in the grant of Béla III (Alexios) given to the Order in the first half of 1170.57
The question of these offices has become more puzzling since Libor Jan some
years ago (re)discovered a letter of 119358 in which the Master of the Hospital

53 Cf. riley-sMitH, ‘The Origins of the Commandery’ (as Note 28), p. 9, p. 12; See also Anthony
luttrell, ‘Change and Conflict within the Hospitaller Province of Italy after 1291’, in:
Mendicants, Military Orders and Regionalism, ed. Jürgen sarnoWsky (Aldershot, 1999),
p. 185.
54 CDB vol. 1, p. 317; Cart. Hosp. no. 802.
55 Anthony luttrell, ‘The Hospitaller Province of Alamania to 1428’, in: ideM, The Hospitaller
State on Rhodes and its Western Provinces, 1306–1462. (Aldershot, 1999), XII 23; See also
delaville le roulX, Les Archives, p. 221.
56 CDB vol. 1, p. 328; Cart. Hosp. no. 865.
57 See Karl BorcHardt, ‘Military Orders in East Central Europe: The First Hundred Years’, in:
Autour de la première croisade. Actes de Colloque de la Society for the Study of the Crusades
and the Latin East, Michel Balard, Byzantina Sorbonensia, vol. 14 (Paris, 1996), p. 250.
58 See Libor jan, ‘…Mortuus est persecutor noster Saladinus (K způsobu komunikace mezi
českými zeměmi a palestimou ve 12. a 13. století,’ [... Mortuus est persecutor noster Saladinus
– about the means of communication between Bohemia and Palestine in the twelfth and the
thirteenth centuries] Studia Minora Facultatis Philosophicae Universitatis Brunnensis 44
(1997), p. 32; Previous edition: Walter WattenBacH, ‘Urkunden und andere Aufzeihnungen’,
Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde 11 (1886), 402; Libor
jan, ‘Die Johanniter in Böhmen: Bild des Lebens’, in: Vergangenheit und Gegenwart der
196 die geistlicHen ritterorden in Mitteleuropa. Mittelalter

35. Layouts of Hospitaller churches in medieval Hungary (according to Alexander Ruttkay,

Military and Religious Orders Offering Medical Care, in: Castrum Bene: Castle and Church 5,
p. 178).

addressed Martin as prior in Ungaria. There is another extant letter with the
same content, presently kept in Paris, that was sent to Guillaume de Villiers, the
magister ultramarinus in 1193, thus it is likely that both of them were copies
of a circular letter sent out to European priors.
The next earliest references to Hungarian Hospitaller officers appeared in
the first quarter of the thirteenth century; Hungarian priors were recorded in
charters, for instance, in 120859 and in 1222,60 while a certain R (or B) Hospital-
ler proctor in Hungaria, was mentioned in 1216.61 In 1217 a prior appears in
the sources abbreviated with a P sigla.62 This was none other than the prior sent
by Andrew II to Venice to negotiate the rental of ships for the king’s journey to

Ritterorden. Die Rezeption der Idee und die Wirklichkeit, ed. Zenon Hubert noWak, and
Roman czaja, Ordines Militares-Colloquia Torunensia Historica XI (Toruń, 2001), 185. Cf.
Cart. Hosp. no. 945.
59 Fejér CD vol. 3/1, pp. 56–57; MonWesp vol. 1, p. 17; Cart. Hosp. no. 1302.
60 Fejér CD vol. 3/1, pp. 383–384; vol. 3/5, pp. 383; Cart. Hosp. no. 1747.
61 PRT vol. 1, p. 164, p. 638; ÁUO p. 6, 377–379; MonWesp vol. 1, pp. 36–37; Cart. Hosp. no.
1472.
62 ÁUO vol. 6, pp. 380–383; Cart. Hosp. no. 1605.
 tHe forMation of tHe territorial structure of tHe teMplars and Hospitallers 197

the Holy Land. For the time being, he cannot be identified with certainty, but
a charter of 1216 was witnessed by, among others, Pethe as magister hospitalis
domus.63 He has been identified as the preceptor of Győr commandery64 but
this remains uncertain. The first mention of the Győr commandery occurred
much later and the eschatocol of the charter did not refer to him in this way.
In addition, although this information is relatively early, it seems from the titles
hitherto used that the expression magister meant prior, while single command-
eries were headed by preceptors or commanders. If the usage was to any extent
consistent, the magister mentioned was the ruler of the Hungarian priory at
that time whose name was abbreviated as P in Andrew II’s charter in 1217.
Nonetheless, from the list of the higher dignitaries of the Hungarian-Slavonian
priory65 it is clear that the varying use of the title continued until the last third
of the thirteenth century; that is, the term preceptor could refer to a regional
leader as well as to preceptors of individual houses.

Conclusion

The overall impression may be somewhat uneven since there are much
more extant sources on the Hospitallers than on the Templars at the scholars
disposal. But even the limited and scattered nature of the source materials
shed some light on the differences and similarities in the development of the
regional structure of the Templars and that of the Hospitallers. The two orders
appeared more or less in the same period but the knights of the Temple settled
first on the coastal areas and gradually “moved” towards the central part of the
kingdom. The Hospitallers, however, established themselves in the middle of the
realm and they approached the southern region somewhat later. The Templars
enjoyed remarkably more private donations while the primary benefactors of
the Hospital were the members of the Arpadian dynasty. The two orders were
similar with respect to their early government: both of them administered its
commanderies located in Slavonia separate from the rest of the administrative
units until the early thirteenth century.

63 ÁUO vol. 1, pp. 139–140.

64 Ede reiszig, A jeruzsálemi Szent János lovagrend Magyarországon [The Order of the
Knights of St. John of Jerusalem in Hungary] 2 vols. (Budapest, 1925–1928), vol. 2, p. 61,
p. 69, and others on the basis of his work.
65 Hunyadi, The Hospitallers (as Note 27), pp. 92–93.