Hi!
Ukas, don't blame Pope Clements for Phillip the Fair's persecution of the Templars. He and the Bishop of Paris are responsible for kicking off that cruelty. The Templars weren't so much greedy as they were a product of their times - just like all the other interest groups of that era.
Do you know
how the first European network "banking" institution was started by the Templars? It was designed to allow crusaders and pilgrims to travel without taking their valuables along on their person. This helped to prevent bandits or robbers from relieving them of these goods during travel to their destination. To do this, a crusader/pilgrim went to one of the Templar buildings and "deposited" his valuables in exchange for a detailed account of what was given and a written description of the person who deposited it.
The crusader/pilgrim would then travel to their arrival point, stopping at the nearest Templar building on the way to "withdraw" goods of an equal value by presenting the signed, sealed, officially written letter. This is one of several practices that served to make the Templars rich. Although I must admit that their early ways involved exploiting plunder captured in crusader lands, I feel that I am obligated to point out that just about everyone who was part of any of the crusades committed that practice, Christian AND Muslim, Noble AND King, Rich AND Poor.
The Templars were no more a part of that than anyone. What made the Order rich was the shrewdness of their Grand Masters in making the money
work for the best interests of the Templars. This was accomplished by using said plunder to purchase goods cheap and sell them high - a practice carried out by humans as far back as written History goes. By the time of their persecution, they had really made efforts to "go legit", so to speak.
As to their dirtiness, I should like to point out the Templars were no more into the "don't touch the body" practice than anyone else in Europe at that time. Many ignored it, as they ignored most of the other rantings of the Church. Why is it that people seem to wish to dehumanize people in History and dismiss them as being "too stupid" to do something as common as simple washing?
They were, aside from the Technology, no different than we are today. People are people and have been since they started "Civilization". Lack of Technology had far more to do with the dirtiness of humanity at that time than some Cleric's announcement of "sinful practice".
As to Clement, he was a creature of France, pretty much owned and operated by Phillip the Fair, so-called King of France, who arbitrarily decided that the Templars were the best way he could use to recoup some debt he had gathered. He also decided that the Templars were obsolete because they had lost their last stronghold in the Holy Lands in 1291. It were Phillip's lackeys that spread the Heresy/Blasphemy charges against the Templars, culminating in the arrest of the Grand Master, one Jaques de Molay, in 1307. Nothing "Fair" about that.
Phillip did it for the money. What else can you say about a man who systematically eradicated the Templars for their wealth through the exploitation of Church Law, aided by a Pope whom he had pretty much "bought"? Phillip paid a heavy price for the coin he stole from the Templars. I say he got what he deserved.
Other European Kings were merciful to the Templars by the standard of their day. Most elected to just confiscate Templar wealth rather than their lives. When Phillip turned the scandal into a Continent-wide practice, Northern areas were the most cruel next to France. Spain was far more mercifull and did not get anywhere near as nasty. The Portugese actually allowed the Templars to reform under a different Order name because of their good rep. there.
To find out what happened to Phillip (no king in my book) and his prime church minion,the Bishop of Paris, read my alternate Civilopedia entry for the Knights Templar Wonder elsewhere in this Forum. (Creation + Customization, I believe).
No offense. Just sayin'.
