Read history

Saturday, 16 October 1311

Clement V formally opened the council in Vienne's cathedral on Saturday, 16 October 1311, and preached to the assembled clergy.

He identified three principal subjects: the Templar case, assistance for the Holy Land and reform of the Church.

The opening assembly included 20 cardinals, four patriarchs, about 100 archbishops and bishops, and a number of abbots and priors — out of 231 ecclesiastics invited.

What did not happen that day

The Templars were not dissolved, their property was not transferred, and the order was not judicially declared heretical at this opening session.

Clement had convoked the council through Regnans in coelis on 12 August 1308; its opening was postponed while inquiries into the Templars continued.

Many of the council fathers initially favoured allowing the order a proper defence rather than immediate condemnation.

Where the work happened

Deliberation began, much of it through the papal consistory and a selected conciliar committee rather than the full assembly. The Templar question remained unresolved for months.

Philip IV of France, who had initiated the French arrests and prosecutions, did not attend the opening; he arrived the following March. Vienne was not then part of the Kingdom of France, although he exercised immense political pressure nearby.

The opening session should not be merged with Vox in excelso, dated 22 March 1312 and publicly proclaimed on 3 April.

22 March 1312

On 22 March 1312 Clement V committed to writing and presented the decision embodied in Vox in excelso, suppressing the Order of the Temple with conciliar approval.

He did so by papal ordinance or provision, expressly “not by definitive sentence,” because the evidence did not permit a canonical condemnation of the entire order as heretical.

The decree abolished the order's rule, habit and name, and forbade anyone to enter the order, wear its habit or act as a Templar.

What it did not settle

The persons and property of the order were reserved for later papal and ecclesiastical decisions. Vox in excelso did not transfer the assets to the Hospitallers; that was ordered separately by Ad providam on 2 May 1312, with Iberian exceptions.

Jacques de Molay, the imprisoned grand master, was not sentenced by this bull; his personal fate was reserved for later judgment.

The bull did not convict the order of heresy — but it also did not declare it innocent.

Dated in March, read in April

Philip IV had entered Vienne on 20 March with a large retinue and demanded abolition, while Clement faced a council whose prelates had generally considered the evidence insufficient for condemning the order without hearing its defence.

The decision was publicly proclaimed, and Vox in excelso read aloud, at an open council session on 3 April 1312, with Philip IV and his three sons present.

Accounts that call either day “the dissolution date” are referring to different legal stages.

Morning of 24 June: the schiltrons come out of the trees

On the morning of 24 June 1314, Robert I's Scottish army emerged from wooded high ground and advanced in three divisions. Edward II's army had spent the night on low, constricted ground south of Stirling, where its cavalry and infantry could not deploy effectively.

Historic Environment Scotland estimates roughly 6,000–7,000 Scottish spearmen and 500 cavalry against about 16,000 English infantry and 2,000–3,000 heavy cavalry. Both totals are reconstructions rather than surviving muster counts.

This was the second day of a two-day battle that had begun on 23 June.

The cavalry breaks, then the whole line

An English cavalry attack led by Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester, failed. Gloucester was killed while the Scottish schiltrons held and kept advancing — these were compact spear formations, moving offensively rather than standing as fixed squares.

Hemmed between burns and boggy ground, the English cavalry was driven back into its own infantry. The formation collapsed and the retreat became a rout.

A later Scottish source claimed the routed men filled the Bannock Burn so densely that a person could cross without wet feet — a vivid chronicle claim, not a literal casualty count.

Turned away from Stirling Castle

Edward II was escorted from the battlefield. Philip Mowbray, keeper of Stirling Castle, refused him entry because the fortress was now expected to fall, so Edward continued to Dunbar and escaped by ship.

Mowbray had agreed to surrender the castle if it was not relieved by 24 June. That agreement had been made with Edward Bruce, Robert's brother, who led the siege; with the relief force destroyed it went unfulfilled, and Stirling passed to the Scots in the battle's immediate aftermath.

Robert I gained effective control of Scotland. English legal recognition of Scottish independence did not follow until 1328.

Thursday, 2 Rajab 725 AH

In the account later worked into his Rihla, Ibn Battuta says he left his birthplace, Tangier, on Thursday, 2 Rajab 725 AH, intending to make the pilgrimage to Mecca and visit the Prophet's tomb at Medina. Hamilton Gibb's standard English rendering equates that day with 14 June 1325.

The Encyclopaedia of Islam converts the same Islamic date to 13 June. The weekday and the lunar date are secure; the Gregorian equivalent is not.

Alone on the road east

He says he departed alone, with no companion or travelling party — not in a protective caravan. He was 22 lunar years old, 21 years and 4 months by solar reckoning.

Both parents were living, and he recalled that the separation caused sorrow to him and to them.

After reaching Tlemcen he stayed three days to obtain supplies, then rode after two Tunisian ambassadors, and later continued with Tunisian merchants.

A pilgrim, not an explorer

Ibn Battuta described an overpowering religious impulse and a long-held desire to see Mecca and Medina. The surviving passage does not say he left to explore the world or to break a travel record.

The Rihla was dictated and edited decades later — the scholar Ibn Juzayy shaped the recollections into their surviving literary form — so the vivid first-person departure scene is retrospective, not a diary entry written that day.

The historian Ross Dunn's count puts the eventual journey at more than 73,000 miles, a modern route reconstruction rather than a distance Ibn Battuta himself measured or claimed.

The year 2 House

Later Indigenous annals and the Codex Mendoza associate the Mexica foundation of Tenochtitlan with the year 2 House, conventionally correlated to 1325. No contemporary record supplies a month or a day.

INAH notes that the documentary traditions give foundation years ranging from 1325 to 1375. UNAM researchers stress that founding a city was a process rather than a single overnight act — one suggests the date may record an official foundation protocol enacted after people were already living on the site.

Tenants of Azcapotzalco

What the Mexica established was a small settlement on an islet in the Lake Texcoco basin, not the later imperial metropolis in miniature. The land was under Tepanec control.

The ruler of Azcapotzalco permitted them to settle in return for tribute and participation in military campaigns. The settlement began under Tepanec suzerainty, not as the capital of an already existing empire.

Once established, the Mexica organised four initial quarters — Moyotlan, Teopan, Atzacoalco and Cuepopan — around a sacred centre.

The eagle and the cactus were a symbol, not a sighting

Later Mexica accounts presented the patron deity Huitzilopochtli as guiding the migration, and the eagle-and-cactus image worked as a political and sacred foundation emblem. Eduardo Matos Moctezuma reads the scene symbolically, and the serpent was a later addition to the tradition.

Tradition associates a leader named Tenoch with the founding community, but the consulted evidence does not securely establish that a historically documented Tenoch led a datable foundation ceremony.

Every narrative source for the founding — the Codex Mendoza, the Codex Boturini, the Codex Aubin, the Crónica Mexicáyotl — was written later than the event it describes.

Genkō 3, fifth month, eighteenth day

The date usually printed as 18 May is a medieval Japanese lunisolar date. Converted by the consulted chronology, the eighteenth day of the fifth month of Genkō 3 falls on 30 June 1333, and that is the day Nitta Yoshisada began the direct assault on Kamakura.

His victory at Bubaigawara had driven surviving bakufu troops back inside the shogunal capital, and he followed them.

Nitta divided his army to attack three approaches: Gokurakuji, Kobukurozaka and Kewaizaka.

The first day settles nothing

At dawn his forces set fires in the villages around Kamakura and were fighting before noon. The Hōjō defenders generally held their positions.

The city was neither entered nor destroyed on the eighteenth day. Kamakura fell on the traditional twenty-second day of the fifth month — 4 July 1333 in the converted chronology, five days after the assault opened.

Sources differ between the twenty-first and twenty-second days for the final collapse; Japanese reference works and the Kanagawa Prefectural Archives generally commemorate the twenty-second.

Tōshō-ji

Within days of the city falling, Hōjō Takatoki and many supporters died at Tōshō-ji, ending effective Hōjō control of the Kamakura bakufu. The clan itself was not exterminated — Hōjō Tokiyuki escaped and later attempted a restoration.

The cave shown to visitors as Takatoki's suicide place is a traditional commemorative site; official archaeological material locates the last stand at Tōshō-ji.

The Taiheiki, a literary war chronicle, says Nitta threw a gold-mounted sword into the sea and asked eight dragon gods for a path around the defences; a coastal passage at low tide is plausible, but the episode is not independently verifiable.

November 1335: a sudden death on campaign

Abu Sa'id Bahadur Khan, ninth ruler of the Mongol Ilkhanate, died unexpectedly at his military headquarters in Qarabagh on 30 November 1335 — Encyclopaedia Iranica's conversion of 13 Rabi' II 736, one day earlier than the traditionally listed 1 December. He was advancing to meet an invasion by Özbeg Khan of the Golden Horde when he died.

The succession vacuum was total. He left no living son, brother or uncle; his wife Dilshad Khatun was pregnant, but her child was not yet born — and the enemy army was still coming.

Was it really the plague?

Modern retellings have sometimes identified Abu Sa'id as an early Black Death victim. No contemporary or specialist source establishes plague as his cause of death, and recent scholarship holds that plague in Iran by 1335 remains unproved.

The earliest genetically confirmed Black Death burials — at Kara-Djigach in modern Kyrgyzstan — date to 1338–1339, three years after the khan was already dead. Current evidence does not establish that plague had reached Iran by 1335.

Five days to a contested crown

The vizier Ghiyath al-Din Muhammad moved fast, promoting Arpa Ke'un — a distant Chinggisid descended from Ariq Böke rather than from the Ilkhanate's founding line — who was formally enthroned at Qarabagh on 5 December 1335.

It bought time, not stability. Arpa's legitimacy was contested almost immediately, rival commanders began raising alternative khans, and the Ilkhanate slid into the fragmentation that would dissolve it — not overnight, as retellings compress it, but through years of staged struggle that began with one unexpected death.

24 May 1337: a feudal judgment at Paris

On 24 May 1337 Philip VI declared that the Duchy of Aquitaine — by then effectively centred on English-held Gascony — was confiscated from Edward III for default of his feudal obligations. Philip's Great Council in Paris endorsed taking Edward's French fiefs, Gascony and Ponthieu, back into the French king's hands.

Edward's dual status is what made this possible. He was a sovereign king in England, but he held Aquitaine as a vassal of the French crown, and it was that second capacity Philip acted on.

A declaration, not a seizure

The decree was a legal declaration of forfeiture rather than a physical occupation of Gascony. The duchy remained under English administration that night.

Notice reached Edward's seneschal on 13 June. French troops invaded a few weeks after the decree, turning the feudal judgment into open war.

What had built up to it

The declaration followed prolonged disputes over feudal jurisdiction in Aquitaine, Anglo-French rivalry involving Scotland, and Edward's protection of Robert of Artois, a French exile Philip had condemned. Philip framed the action formally as Edward's default and disobedience as a vassal.

Historians commonly date the Hundred Years' War from this decree, though what followed was a series of wars and truces rather than one continuous, formally named conflict beginning at a universally recognised instant.

Edward did not claim the French crown on 24 May. He challenged Philip later in 1337 and formally assumed the title and arms of king of France in 1340.

Rajab 747: a report, not a date

The chronicler Ibn al-Wardi placed severe plague in the 'land of Özbek' — the Golden Horde — in Rajab 747 AH, a span covering October and November 1346, and wrote that towns and villages were emptied of inhabitants. He was relaying a merchant who had crossed the Black Sea, not reporting as an eyewitness.

Rajab 747 is a month, not a day. And 'emptied' is a chronicler's word, not census evidence that every inhabitant died or fled.

The one Crimean place that fits

Hannah Barker's reconstruction places plague at Solgat — Qirim, modern Staryi Krym, and the seat of the Golden Horde's governor in Crimea — in October–November 1346.

The great Golden Horde cities named in Russian sources, Urgench, New Sarai, Astrakhan and Beldjamen, were struck earlier, in summer 1346, and lie mostly outside Crimea. Plague had already advanced through the Horde's Volga and Don urban centres before appearing at Solgat.

How it entered Crimea is not documented.

Numbers that cannot be checked

The medieval reports give roughly 1,000 deaths a day in Crimea, and a total of 85,000 that Ibn al-Wardi attributed to a Crimean qadi. Neither figure is independently verifiable, and neither is a modern demographic estimate.

Black Sea grain traffic stayed halted by wartime embargoes through this autumn. Barker argues that the interruption delayed rather than accelerated transmission across the sea: people crossed in 1346 without starting the Mediterranean epidemic, and she implicates the resumption of grain shipping in 1347.

The first day of the intercalary third month

Ming chronological sources place Zhu Yuanzhang's entry into rebel-held Haozhou on the first day of the intercalary third lunar month of 1352, conventionally converted to 15 April. April is secure; the precise day is a conversion, not a date any source wrote in Gregorian form.

Haozhou was a walled city in the Huai River region of modern Anhui, held by the Red Turban commander Guo Zixing. The former Buddhist novice entered Guo's service there as an ordinary soldier.

He was 23 in the Western-age reckoning of one scholarly biography, and he commanded nobody.

Seized at the entrance

In Zhu's later autobiographical account, guards took hold of him at the city entrance and intended to kill him. Guo Zixing intervened and obtained his release.

Those writings were composed after Zhu became emperor and present the decision as providential, so their dramatic details call for source criticism.

Why he walked into a rebel city

Guo's rebels had seized Haozhou, and the fighting destroyed Huangjue Temple, the monastery that had been Zhu's refuge. A friend's letter urged him to join — traditionally identified as Tang He, a childhood acquaintance already serving the rebels, though that identification is inferred from later evidence.

The letter was itself a danger. Zhu's account says he feared both Yuan punishment and rebel violence, and that a divination at the temple settled it: staying and fleeing were both inauspicious.

Even who burned Huangjue Temple is contested — the early Ming Veritable Records say Guo's own rebel troops did it, while later narratives blame Yuan or Mongol defenders.

One date, two cities

The TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi dates Timur's accession at Samarkand to 12 Ramadan 771 / 9 April 1370, following a decade-long struggle for control of Transoxiana. A competing scholarly tradition, reflected in the caption of a fifteenth-century Zafarnama illustration, places the accession audience at Balkh on the same day.

Modern references therefore disagree about where this happened, not only about how to convert the date.

Calling it the founding of a Timurid Empire, with Timur as its first amir, imposes a later dynastic label on an accession framed at the time through the Chaghatay political order.

A sequence that will not hold

A UNESCO history dates the breaching and capture of Balkh to 10 April. That makes the listed order — the city taken, then the accession on 9 April — chronologically unsafe.

By that account Husayn was found hiding in a minaret, killed by one of Timur's allies, and the city was sacked. Medieval Islamic dates rest on calendrical reconstruction and, historically, on lunar observation, so a one-day discrepancy is unsurprising.

Amir, not khan

Amir Husayn's attempt to consolidate power at fortified Balkh had alienated important Chaghatay chiefs, many of whom shifted to Timur, who then besieged his former ally and brother-in-law's stronghold.

Within days Husayn was dead, Balkh sacked and its citadel demolished, and a gathering of chiefs endorsed Timur's authority. He kept the title amir rather than claiming the Chinggisid title khan, and Suyurghatmish, a Chinggisid, was installed as nominal khan.

Timur also married Saray Mulk Khanum, a daughter of Qazan Khan and one of Husayn's widows, which supported his use of the title Küregen — royal son-in-law.

20 September 1378, in Caetani's castle

Twelve non-Italian cardinals assembled at Fondi on 20 September 1378, in the castle of Count Onorato Caetani, and unanimously elected Cardinal Robert of Geneva. Three Italian cardinals were present but refused to vote.

Robert took the name Clement VII. The electors' own letter dates the election to 20 September and says it was solemnly made public to the clergy and people the following day.

The case the twelve were making

The dissident cardinals had repudiated Urban VI's April election as coerced — made under fear and violence — and declared the papal seat vacant. Negotiations with Urban and the Italian cardinals failed, and they proceeded to a new election under Caetani's protection.

They wrote to Charles V of France announcing Clement's election and requesting French protection.

According to a contemporary account discussed by Treccani, Robert of Geneva had entered that April conclave wearing armour beneath his clerical robes, because he feared the Roman crowd.

Two claimants, and a long way still to go

The modern Catholic Church recognises Urban VI and the subsequent Roman line as legitimate, so Robert is conventionally called an antipope. Contemporaries faced a genuine and contested legitimacy problem.

Clement was not crowned until 31 October, and he did not install his curia at Avignon until 20 June 1379. Urban remained in Rome and began reconstructing his own College of Cardinals.

By the next day Christendom had two men claiming the papacy; the familiar map of European allegiances records choices made afterwards, not a roll call taken on 20 September.