+Real Crusades History+ is dedicated to
remembering the real contribution of the Knights Templar to the history
of the crusades.
Our fifteen-part series continues today with a brief historical overview of the Knights Templar. Here Dr. Schrader provides a prelude to our series, which will be highlighting ten episodes from the history of the Knights Templar in the coming weeks.
Our fifteen-part series continues today with a brief historical overview of the Knights Templar. Here Dr. Schrader provides a prelude to our series, which will be highlighting ten episodes from the history of the Knights Templar in the coming weeks.
After
the establishment of the Kingdom of Jerusalem following the First
Crusade, pilgrims flooded to the newly freed Holy Land, but the
situation was far from stable and the secular authorities were unable to
guarantee the safety of pilgrims who ventured out upon the dangerous
roads from Jerusalem to other pilgrimage sites such as Jericho and
Nazareth.
In 1115 Hugues de Payens, a Burgundian knight, and Sir Godfrey
de St. Adhemar, a Flemish knight, decided to join forces and form a
band of sworn brothers dedicated to protecting pilgrims. They soon
recruited seven other knights, all men like themselves – stranded in the
Holy Land without wealth or land, and allegedly so poor that Payens and
St. Adhemar had only one horse between them. In 1118 the King of
Jerusalem gave them the stables of what was believed to have been the
palace (or temple) of King Solomon for their quarters, and from this
they took their name, “The Poor Knights of Christ of the Temple of
Solomon in Jerusalem” – a name was soon shortened to the Knights
Templar.
At the same time, or shortly afterwards, these nine knights
took monastic vows of chastity, poverty, and obedience before the
Patriarch of Jerusalem.
The Knights Templar rapidly
attracted new recruits – and powerful patrons -- highlighting the extent
to which the concept of knights dedicated to the service of God touched
a chord in men at this time. But the concept of fighting monks was
revolutionary. Even the crusades had not sanctioned the bearing of arms
by men dedicated to the Church; the crusades had only allowed secular men to serve the interests of the Church. What the Knights Templar proposed was to allow men of God to also be fighting men.
Tomb from the Temple Church in London showing a Templar from the 12th Century |
Recognizing
the need for guidance and official sanction, Payens approached the
Pope, and not only was his new kind of monastic order recognized, it was
enthusiastically praised. Bernard of Clairvaux, the most influential
churchman of his age (credited with founding 70 new Cistercian
monasteries), agreed to write the Templars’ Rule. Not surprisingly, he
fashioned the Templar Rule on that of the Cistercians; more unusual,
however, was that he also wrote a treatise in praise of the Knights
Templar, the De Laude Novae Militiae (In Praise of the New
Knighthood), in which he contrasted the virtuous Templars with the vain,
greedy, and (senselessly) violent secular knights of the age.
According to De Laude Novae Militiae, the
Knights Templar were disciplined, humble, and sober. Thus, “impudent
words, senseless occupations, immoderate language, whispering, or even
suppressed giggling are unknown. They have a horror of chess and dice;
they hate hunting; they don’t even enjoy the flight of the falcon. They
despise mimes, jugglers, storytellers, dirty songs, performances of
buffoons – all these they regard as vanities and inane follies.” The
documented initiation ceremonies – in contrast to the fabricated
accusations of King Philip IV’s paid informers tasked with discrediting
the Order two centuries later – were simple and sober professions of
Catholic orthodoxy and vows to obey the officers of the Order, to remain
chaste, to own no property, and to protect the Holy Land and
Christians.” (See Hopkins, p. 90.)
The
Templars were an instant success (by medieval standards), and their
resources increased exponentially over the next decades. They soon
controlled properties in virtually every kingdom of Christendom, from
Sicily to Ireland, but particularly in France, England, and Portugal.
The Order also rapidly developed a sophisticated hierarchy and
structure. The bulk of the Order’s members were lay brothers: men who
worked the fields of Templar landholdings and served as skilled
laborers, from blacksmiths to stone masons, in the fortresses of
Outremer.
Furthermore, although only men already knighted, i.e., men
from the landed class, could become Knights Templar, men of
lesser birth could be men-at-arms, just as in any other army of the age.
In contrast to the usual pattern, however, these men were not foot
soldiers or archers but mounted fighting men, armed with sword and lance
and called “sergeants.” While the knights were allowed four horses and
two squires, the sergeants appear to have been allowed two horses and
one squire. These squires, incidentally, were not members of the Order,
and not bound by monastic vows nor compelled to fight. Last but not
least, as enthusiasm for the Holy Land waned in the West, the Templars
came to rely more and more on auxiliary troops raised in the Holy Land
itself: men of Armenian, Greek, Arab, or mixed descent, called
“Turcopoles.” The Templars also had their own priests and clerks.
But
manpower is only half the equation. Fighting men, particularly monks
who had renounced all wealth and owned nothing, had to be clothed,
equipped, mounted, armed, and fed at the expense of the Order. The great
castles in the Holy Land – absolutely crucial to the defense of the
Christian kingdoms – had to be built, maintained, and provisioned. The
cost of equipping even one knight was substantial, the cost of keeping a
castle enormous; the costs of maintaining thousands of knights in the
field and dozens of castles in defensible condition were astronomical.
It would not have been possible without the huge estates donated to the
Templars in the West.
The Templar Castle of Collieure in the Languedoc |
The Templars’ extensive properties in
Western Europe provided the Order with recruits, remounts, and above
all, financial resources. They also created a network through which the
Templars could influence secular leaders. Furthermore, the extensive
network of Templar “commanderies,” combined with the Templars’
reputation for incorruptibility and prowess at arms, enabled the
Templars to move money (then still exclusively in the form of gold and
silver) across great distances. Furthermore, the Templar network made it
possible for someone to deposit money at one commandery and withdraw it
from another with a kind of “letter of credit” – a service unknown
before the Templars. Because of their own wealth and the funds deposited
with them, the Templars were soon in a position to provide substantial
loans, and are on record as having lent money to the Kings of both
England and France. Because of their reputation as being scrupulously
honest yet financially astute, they were also often employed as tax
collectors and financial advisors by ruling monarchs, from Richard I of
England to Philip IV of France.
Yet the Knights
Templar would not have attracted these riches or enjoyed such prestige
if they had not delivered impressive military accomplishments in the
Holy Land. The ethos of the Knights Templar called on knights to fight
to the death for the Holy Land, to defend any Christian molested by
Muslims, never to retreat unless the odds were greater than 3 to 1, and
to refuse ransom if captured. Such attitudes clearly set the Templars
apart from secular knights of the period. A hundred years after their
founding and a hundred years before their demise, the Bishop of Acre
wrote in his History of Jerusalem that the Templars were: “Lions
in war, mild as lambs at home; in the field fierce knights, in church
like hermits or monks; unyielding and savage to the enemies of Christ,
benevolent and mild to Christians.”
A modern depiction of a Templar charge |
More important, the vow
of obedience enabled disciplined fighting – a rarity in the Middle Ages,
when most men were proud to fight as individuals, conscious of their
own glory and gain. In contrast, a Templar who acted on his own was
subject to severe disciplinary measures, including imprisonment or
degradation for a year. There are many accounts of the Templars forming
the shock troops during the advance and the rear guard during the
retreat on crusades, of Templars defending the most difficult salient in
a siege, and of Templar sorties to rescue fellow Christians in
distress. At the height of their power, the Templars controlled a chain
of mighty castles from La Roche de Roussel, north of Antioch, to Gaza,
as well as a powerful fleet.
The Knights Templar
suffered a fatal blow, however, when Jerusalem was lost to Saladin in
1187. Although the consequences were not immediately apparent, the loss
of Jerusalem – and the failure of all subsequent crusades to regain
permanent control – slowly eroded the faith in Christian victory and,
ultimately, the interest in fighting for the Holy Land. As the territory
controlled by Christians shrank, so did the resources of the local
barons. Soon, sufficient resources could not be raised in the Holy Land
to finance its defense. This meant that the defense of the remaining
Christian outposts fell increasingly to the militant orders, the
Templars and Hospitallers, who could still draw on the profits of their
extensive holdings in the West.
But these resources proved insufficient
in face of the huge cost of maintaining their establishment in the Holy
Land as enthusiasm for fighting for the Holy Land waned. Throughout the
second half of the 13th century, the crusader territories were lost,
castle by castle and city by city, mostly as a result of the defenders
having insufficient manpower to maintain their garrisons. When the last
Templar stronghold in the Holy Land, the Temple at Acre, fell to the
Saracens in 1291, some 20,000 Templars had given their lives for the
Holy Land.
The
Knights Templar transferred their headquarters to Cyprus after losing
their last foothold in Palestine, but they had lost their raison d’être.
That would have been crippling in itself, perhaps, but what proved
fatal was that they retained their apparent wealth.
King Philip IV,
whose coffers were again empty, decided to confiscate the Templar
“treasure” – meaning their entire property.
To justify
this move, Philip accused the Templars of various crimes, including
devil worship, blasphemy, corruption, and sodomy. Without warning, on
the night of Friday, October 13, 1307, officers of the French crown
simultaneously broke into Templar commanderies across France and seized
all the Templars and their property. While most of the men arrested were
lay brothers and sergeants (since most knights who had survived the
fall of Acre were on Cyprus), Philip IV made sure he would also seize
the senior officers of the Temple by inviting them to Paris “for
consultations” in advance of his strike. All those arrested, including
the very men King Philip had treated as friends and advisors only days
before, were subjected to brutal torture until they confessed to the
catalog of crimes the French King had concocted.
There
is no evidence whatsoever that the Templars were in any way heretical
in their beliefs. Furthermore, although Philip persuaded the Pope to
order a general investigation of the Templars, in countries where
torture was not extensively employed (such as England, Spain, Portugal,
Germany, and Cyprus), the Templars were found innocent.
Meanwhile,
in France, Templars who retracted the confessions torn from them under
torture were burned at the stake as “relapsed heretics.” Tragically, the
Pope at the time lived in terror of King Philip IV, who had deposed his
predecessor with accusations almost identical to those leveled against
the Templars. He preferred to sacrifice the Templars rather than risk
confrontation with King Philip. Thus, although the evidence against the
Order was clearly fabricated and the Pope could not find sufficient
grounds to condemn the Order, he disbanded it in 1312. The last Master
and Marshal of the Knights Templar, Jacques de Molay and Geoffrey
de Charney respectively, were burned at the stake in the presence of King Philip for retracting their confessions on March 18, 1314. Not
until 2007 did the Vatican officially declare the Templars’ innocent based on the evidence still in the Papal archives.
Recommended Reading:
- Barber, Malcolm. The New Knighthood: A History of the Order of the Temple. Cambridge University Press, 1994.
- Hopkins, Andrea. Knights: The Complete Story of the Age of Chivalry, From Historical Fact to Tales of Romance and Poetry. Collins & Brown Ltd, 1990.
- Howarth, Stephan. The Knights Templar. Barnes and Noble Books, 1982.
- Pernoud, Regine. The Templars: Knights of Christ. Ignatius Press, 2009.
- Robinson, John J., Dungeon, Fire and Sword: The Knights Templar in the Crusades, Michael O’Mara Books Ltd.,
and in:
I'm now reading "The New Knighthood," by Malcolm Barber. I'm looking forward to separating fact, from fiction.
ReplyDeleteI could say so much here, but anything I said is liable to give offense to someone as, to this day, there remain many "sides."
But I can say; As enjoyable and enlightening as always, Professor Schrader.