Kingdom of Jerusalem ruled by the Holy Orders?

Is it at all posible for the Kingdom of Jerusalem to become ruled by one/more of the Holy Orders hanging about there?

Say one of the early kings dying without any issue 'this side of rome' which by testiment moves the Kingdom towards being ruled by a theocratic council which is seated by the Orders with Papal recognition?

If this happens anyone have half a clue where it'll go, since they would probably be spared some of the more incompetent leaders
 
I think the best bet is to have one of the Kings without an heir leave it in his will to an Order but even that is very difficult. Church doctrine was very clear that Kings were Gods Regents on earth and part of the divine order.
 
It's technically possible to have such testament, after all it did existed OTL in medieval Aragon (Alfonso I gave his kingdom to some orders) But I would think it would sufficiently annoy local nobility (that was already rivaling with Holy Orders locally) to not make it easy and they were eventually the force in presence that would have the last words with the possible heirs.

Political interest, support of a traditional dynastic base (that, being the nobiliar reference, was pretty hard to challenge eventually) would be enough at least for Rome to prevent meddling with a obviously shitty situation.
 

Brightflame

Banned
Getting rid of a King entirely in the 1100's is hard, but he could be either a rubber stamp for the Haute Cour (of which the Orders are members), or the Haute Cour, faced with an imbecile, madman or convoluted succession, could do away with Kings entirely and rule as representatives of Christ.

Or the Orders could be the last free Latins in the Holy Land.
 
Well, suppose that the king leaves the kingdom to the grand master of some order. Assuming this is accepted by the other orders and nobles unaffiliated alike, why wouldn't the grand master just add the title of king to his own?

Or are we proposing some "council" of each order's grand masters choosing one of them as "uber-grand" master, in a conclave like the Pope?
 
my idea would be a conclave not unalike the papal conclave, selecting the leader from within the top brass of the orders, but other ways might work as well

The primary good thing from this would probably be that we'd have competent military leaders in the drivers seat, as protential leaders of the orders would get promoted, at least with one eye on if they're competent or not ... its hard to promote competence in a hereditary dynasty :p
 
my idea would be a conclave not unalike the papal conclave, selecting the leader from within the top brass of the orders, but other ways might work as well

The primary good thing from this would probably be that we'd have competent military leaders in the drivers seat, as protential leaders of the orders would get promoted, at least with one eye on if they're competent or not ... its hard to promote competence in a hereditary dynasty :p

Or you'd get whoever was the most able politician/schemer without regards to their military capabilities.
 
my idea would be a conclave not unalike the papal conclave, selecting the leader from within the top brass of the orders, but other ways might work as well

The primary good thing from this would probably be that we'd have competent military leaders in the drivers seat, as protential leaders of the orders would get promoted, at least with one eye on if they're competent or not ... its hard to promote competence in a hereditary dynasty :p

Those who had to pick up the pieces from Gerard de Ridefort called. They're not entirely sure that the knightly orders were endowed with superior wisdom.
 
Have the land be under Papal control, the Papacy pretty much leaves holy orders to control the lands
 
A monastic state would not be unique. The Teutonic Order later established one in Prussia. There would be some complications.

1) How it begins. As others have posted, a childless king would probably need to gift it to the orders.

2) How it is governed. In Prussia, the Teutonic Knights was the only order - it absorbed all of the lesser orders. The Holy Land has two large crusading orders though, the Templars and Hospitallers. Political conflict between them would be very destabilizing. For it to survive, you would need one order to be dominant. The other order either becomes subservient, or exchanges most of its lands in Jerusalem for those in other lands so that the two orders are not in conflict. Or they are merged together as one under Papal mediation.

3) You still have all of the non-order players still in the Kingdom. The merchant republics have their concessions in the seaports, and you still have all the nobility. An Order State still needs to be able to control all of them and prevent bonehead provocations.

4) It'll take time. The appearance of the holy orders was not immediate but occurred over years after the Holy Land was conquered. The orders would not be able to take control of any kingdom until they are well established and respected.
 
and its the core idea of Teutonic Order in Prussia that i'm hoping to transplant to the Middle east, if at posible without culling to much in the number of Orders hanging around in Crusader Jerusalem (of which the main 4 was Hospitalliers, Templars, Teutonic and the Equestrain Order)

and yeah ... sure they might be able to get a scheming policitian, but given that they are militant orders, the plausiblity of them able to keep going with a strong and sound military, is much higher than it being a dynastic kingdom
 
A very nice idea really,but faces two small problems:the military orders (Templars,Hospitallers)don't get at each other's throats;and, they are too few to maintain such an elongated front against so many enemies:winkytongue:erhaps a modification of their respective charters could help matters...
 
Last edited:
Top