Knights Templar in 250 Facts

[RolandVT]

Almost seven centuries after the “Babylonian disaster” brought upon the Israelites by their king, the Jewish leaders decided to repeat the experience – in much less favorable conditions (at least king Zedekiah had a mighty ally in Egypt).

This decision launched Great Jewish Revolt (known also as First Jewish-Roman War) which became the most catastrophic event in Jewish history, second only to the Holocaust almost two millennia later. Actually, this revolt brought about the “First Holocaust” (genocide of the Jews) out of three committed by Romans.

The immediate catalyst for the revolt occurred in 66 A.D. during Nero’s reign, sparked by a disturbance in Caesarea provoked by a local who sacrificed a bird near a synagogue. Unrest expanded after the Roman governor seized funds from the Second Temple treasury and massacred residents in the city. His actions provoked an uprising in the city, culminating in the capture of the Roman garrison by rebel forces, while pro-Roman Jewish officials fled the city.

There is a theory that this completely suicidal uprising (in the flat terrain of Palestine even the most dedicated and skilled Jewish fighters stood no chance against the mighty Roman military machine) was orchestrated by the Church of Moloch that wanted to use the rebels to exterminate all Christians – and thus make our world defenseless against the demonic onslaught of Army of Darkness.

Regardless of the true origins of the revolt, the subsequent events were predictable. To quell the unrest the legate of Roman Syria led an army into Judaea. After initial advances, the Romans were defeated in Beth Horon, losing a force equivalent to a legion (around 6,000 infantry and cavalry).

In the aftermath, a moderate government was established in Jerusalem, led by former High Priest Ananus ben Ananus. In 67 CE, able Roman general Vespasian, commanding four legions, was sent to suppress the revolt.

He invaded the Galilee, capturing the strongholds of the rebels on his way to Jerusalem. The moderate government was predictably overthrown, and the city descended into infighting between rival insurgent factions.

After Vespasian subdued most of the province, news of Nero’s death prompted his departure for Rome to claim the throne. His son, Titus, led the siege of Jerusalem, which fell in September of 70 A.D. after a brutal four-month campaign, resulting in the destruction of the Temple and the razing of the city. About 200,000 Jews lost their lives and almost 100,000 were sold into slavery.

And the Ark of the Covenant disappeared for over a millennium.

[RolandVT]

When they took Jerusalem in 70 A.D., the Romans treated the city in practically the same way they treated Carthage when they took it more than two centuries earlier.

After the Roman legions subdued all resistance in captured Carthage in 146 BC, commission of ten senators arrived from Rome, ordering Roman commander Scipio to destroy whatever remained of Carthage and decreed nobody was allowed to settle there or rebuild.

It is claimed that Roman forces then sowed the city with salt – which was at the time not an uncommon practice in the ancient Near East. The objective of this ritual was similar to sprinkling with holy water by Christian priests - purifying or consecrating an enemy city captured by the victors.

This claim is hotly debated by historians; however, I believe it to be true. For a very serious reason – Carthaginians practiced genuine devil-worshipping and human sacrifice of children so ghastly and appalling that they horrified even the Romans for whom even the extreme brutality was standard operating procedure.

Destruction of the city (it burned for 17 days and whatever remained was razed to the ground), massacre of the Carthaginians enslavement and expulsion of its population were so horrific, that it has been labelled a genocide by some.

Jerusalem suffered practically the same fate. With the city's fall, Roman commander Titus ordered the whole city and (especially) the Second Temple to be razed to the ground, leaving intact just the western wall to safeguard the Roman garrison stationed there.

However, all the rest of the wall encompassing the city was so completely leveled to the ground as to leave future visitors to the spot no ground for believing that it had ever been inhabited.

According to some accounts, the territory of the destroyed Temple was then… sowed with salt. Just like in Carthage where the temples were burnt, destroyed and their territory sowed with salt.

Why did Roman treat Jerusalem exactly the same as Carthage? It appears that after the Jews rejected Christs, the Church of Moloch (that practiced essentially the same religion as the Carthaginians) somehow hijacked the “Jewish energy channel” and made it work for the Devil filling the world with demonic energies.

In other words, in 30 – 70 A.D. the Second Temple worked exactly like the ones in Carthage two centuries earlier. The Romans somehow got wing of it – and ruthlessly solved the problem exactly the way they did 200 years earlier.

[RolandVT]

The order of Knights Templar was – first and foremost – a unique venture project. The latter because the objective of every venture project is (by definition) to create (build/engineer) a venture. An organization focused on specific objective(s).

Knights Templar were focused on two objectives: (1) keeping and protecting the Ark of the Covenant; and (2) by extension, protecting Jerusalem and the whole Outremer – the home of Knights Templar.

Protecting by becoming shock troops of Christian army – judging by the magnitude of support efforts, it was the objective of the order of the Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon from the very beginning.

Knights Templar were unique in general – there were no similar organization anywhere – and among military-religious orders. The Hospitallers were still mostly the order of physicians (healers) and the Teutonic order for a long time was a part of Hospitallers and subsequently was far more interested in conquering (for the Holy Roman Emperor) and converting to Christianity (for the Church) the Eastern Europe than protecting the Crusader States in the Holy Land.

In modern terms, the “Templar venture project” required organizational engineering – designing and implementing both sides (parts, component) of the order: the military one and the religious (spiritual) one.

Specifically, organizational engineering involves organizational chart (functional units of the order; what each does; who it reports to; etc.); job descriptions (job titles; who is responsible for what; who has which rights; who reports to whom); equipment (horses, weapons, foodstuffs, utensils, etc.); real estate.

Systems of recruiting (locally and in Europe), training (of knights, sergeants and foot soldiers), government relations (ecclesiastical and secular; local and European); public relations (nobility and common folks); procurement and logistics (local and European); financing (donations and money-making enterprises).

Standard operating procedures (in everyday life and on the battlefield); rules of conduct/behavior; corporate culture (values, beliefs, principles, etc.), etc., etc.

It is obvious that Hughes de Payens – a low-level commander (cavalry squadron at most) – could not have designed or managed such a complex system. Only two people could – Hugh of Champagne (he designed and managed the military part that he was familiar with) and Bernard of Clairvaux (the religious part).

It were these two who engineered and the built the order of Knights Templar.

[RolandVT]

To achieve its objectives, the order of Knights Templar had to recruit sufficient number of military personnel (knights, sergeants and foot soldiers) and to raise sufficient amount of financing (money and other liquid assets) and money-generating land (for agricultural and other commercial enterprises).

And it had to be not a one-time recruiting/financing drive; Knights Templar needed to create a powerful recruiting/financing machine which will operate at the highest possible efficiency both in the Outremer and in Europe.

To make it happen, Knights Templar had to be recognized: first locally (in Crusader States – by local secular and ecclesiastical lords) and then globally (by the Church, given their nature as the military-religious monastic Christian order).

Given the highly ambitious objectives of Knights Templar, they had to be recognized first by a local Council of local secular and ecclesiastical lords and then by a Council of high-ranking clerics somewhere in France (as all Knights Templars during the first years of its existence were Frenchmen).

The first objective was accomplished at the Council of Nablus (now a Palestinian city in the West Bank, located approximately 50 km north of Jerusalem). It was convened (no surprise here) by Warmund, Patriarch of Jerusalem (brought ecclesiastical lords), and King Baldwin II of Jerusalem (secular lords).

Contrary to a popular misconception, the Council of Nablus was convened to deal with more fundamental secular and religious issues than just the recognition (formally permission to officially found/register) of Knights Templar (it established the first written laws for the Kingdom of Jerusalem).

Council of Nablus established twenty-five canons dealing with both religious and secular affairs. It was not quite a church council, but not quite a meeting of the royal court either.

Due to the religious nature of many of the canons, it can be considered both a parliament (of sorts) and an ecclesiastical synod. The resulting agreement between the patriarch and the king was a concordat, similar to the Concordat of Worms two years later.

Interestingly, Council of Nablus was not mentioned in the chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres, who served in the entourage of Baldwin II and must have been present.

This is probably because the nature of the canons, dealing as they do with the crimes and sins of the Latin population, contradicted Fulcher’s portrayal of the Kingdom as a Christian utopia.

[RolandVT]

For almost a decade, the local recognition of Knights Templar appeared to be acceptable (in terms of its objectives); however, by the end of 1120s it became obvious that a global (for the whole Christendom) recognition by the Holy Roman Catholic Church is in order.

This recognition was granted on 13 January 1129 by the Council of Troyes which was a joint venture (no surprise here either) by Bernard of Clairvaux and Hugh of Champagne. The former provided the place (he was the Count of Troyes); the latter convened the Council.

Unlike the Council of Nablus that gave initial (local) recognition to Knights Templar, the Council of Troyes was a purely ecclesiastical gathering and was convened specifically to provide the global recognition to the order of the Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon (formally to hear a petition by Hugues de Payens, then nominal Grand Master of the order).

Pope Honorius II did not attend the council (he was already quite ill – he died a year later); however, he sent the papal legate, Matthew, cardinal-bishop of Albano, to represent him. Pope provided his official recognition a few weeks later.

Bernard convened the council on 13 January 1129. The attendees were mainly French clerics (no surprise here): archbishops Renaud of Reims and Henry of Sens, ten bishops, four Cistercian abbots, a number of other abbots, and the clerical scholars, Alberic of Reims and Fulger (a prominent historian).

De-jure Grand Master of Templars Hugues de Payens, officially petitioned the council to approve the Rule for the Templars (co-authored by Bernard of Clairvaux and Hugh of Champagne) – and thus to provide official recognition of the order by the Church. Thanks to the influence pf Bernard, the Rule was approved – and the Templars got their absolutely vital global recognition.

Bowing to the request by Pope Honorius II and Patriarch Stephen of Jerusalem, the Council required Templars to wear a white habit (the famous red cross was added eighteen years later).

In addition to providing official recognition to the Templars, the council addressed the dispute between the bishop of Paris and king of France. Oh, irony of Fate – the order of Templars was officially born with the dispute between secular and ecclesiastical rulers of France… and died with the dispute between these powers.

Not surprisingly, this recognition radically increased both donations to the order and the number of individuals requesting to join the Knights Templar.

[RolandVT]

Knights Templar were a military-religious order; however, as the latter always trumps the former, it was religious first and military only second. And all religious orders live under a certain Rule (sort of a constitution, a charter, a collection of laws/rules/principles that the religious community lives by).

The Latin Rule of Knights Templar (also known as the “Specific Behavior for the Templar Order“) was a document with 72 clauses/rules attributed to Bernard de Clairvaux (correctly) and nominally first Grand Master of the order Hugues de Payens (incorrectly). Incorrectly because the latter simply did not have the competencies necessary for co-authoring such a fundamental document.

Because the order of Knights Templar was religious first and military only second, the Latin Rule was based on rules of “civilian” monastic orders. Not surprisingly, it was mostly based on the Rule of Saint Benedict (it even has the same number of clauses) although it did borrow from the Rule of Saint Augustine.

Not surprisingly because the latter became the model for Rules of all Christian monastic communities – and because of the enormous influence of this document on the whole Western civilization. To this day, The Rule of St. Benedict is the most common and influential Rule used by monasteries and monks, more than 1,400 years after its writing.

Beyond its religious influences, the Rule of St Benedict was one of the most important written works to shape medieval Europe, embodying the ideas of a written constitution and the rule of law. It also incorporated a degree of democracy in a non-democratic society.

Obviously, the Rule of Saint Benedict was adapted (by Hugh of Champagne who had the necessary competencies) for use by warrior knights. For example, the fasts were less severe so that they did not interfere with combat.

The original rule was written in 1128 and added to the minutes of the Council of Troyes in 1129. However, in about 1138 under the direction of Robert de Craon, second Grand Master of the order (1136–1149), the Latin Rule was translated into French and modified. Later, it was expanded to include 609 articles, covering such things as hierarchy and justice within the order (among other issues).

[RolandVT]

After they were officially recognized by the Church, they immediately became the #1 recipient of donations and recruiter of highly gifted individuals, receiving money, land, businesses, and noble-born sons from families who were eager to help with protecting the Outremer in the Holy Land.

But they did not stop there – in 1139, when Innocent II (who was essentially made Pope by Bernard of Clairvaux in 1130), issued the bull Omne Datum Optimum which exempted the order Templars from obedience to local laws and to all authority (secular and ecclesiastical) except the Pope.

This ruling meant that the Templars could pass freely through all European borders, paid no custom duties, fees or taxes (they even did not have to declare their merchandize). Which gave them enormous advantages in any business. They used this advantage – and the constant influx of donations in money, other liquid assets, land and business entities – to the fullest extent possible.

They became prominent in Christian finance (successfully competing with Jews and traditional banking families); non-combatant members of the order, who made up as much as 90% of their members, managed a large economic and financial infrastructure throughout Christendom. Ultimately, the Templars built a network of nearly 1,000 commanderies and fortifications across Europe and the Holy Land.

In 1150 the order began to issue letters of credit for pilgrims journeying to the Holy Land: pilgrims deposited their valuables with a local Templar preceptory before embarking, received a document indicating the value of their deposit, then showed that document upon arrival in the Holy Land to claim treasure of equal value to their funds. This innovative arrangement was the first use of bank cheques; it protected pilgrims from robbery, while augmenting Templar finances.

Templars acquired large tracts of land, both in Europe and the Middle East; they bought and managed farms and vineyards; they built massive stone cathedrals and castles; they were involved in manufacturing, import, and export; they owned fleets of ships; and at one point they even owned the entire island of Cyprus. The order arguably qualifies as the world’s first multinational corporation.

But they were much more than that – they became a genuine shadow pan-European state complete with its own financial and economic infrastructure; its army (the best of the best); Christian temples and priests, its secret religion (Ark Templar) … and even the Ark of the Covenant.

The state that could have taken over the whole Christendom – but didn’t.

[RolandVT]

The bright-red Templar Cross is one of the most iconic symbols (if not the most iconic) of the Middle Ages. It has to components: its shape and its color (blood red).

The practice (the rule, actually) of wearing the cross on tunics and armor of crusaders was introduced by Pope Urban II – the “founding father” of Crusades. He convened and addressed the Council of Clermont which launched the series of Christian military expeditions into Palestine collectively known as the Crusades.

Pope Urban II officially instituted the cross both as a military distinction and as a reminder to Crusaders (knights, sergeants and foot soldiers) that they were fighting for a cause beyond them: that of Jesus Christ and His Church.

The pope ordered that the sign of the Christian cross be cut from any piece of cloth and sewn into the tunics and coats of those who went out to fight. However, all of these crosses were quite disparate: no indication of its shape or color was given.

Strangely, Knights Templar were not supposed to wear any cross at all on their tunics or armor; they were ordered by Pope Honorius II in 1129 to wear white tunics as a symbol of Christian purity.

Only in 1147, eighteen years later, Pope Eugene III (the former student of Bernard of Clairvaux), allowed the Templars to add a red cross to their clothing. Initially, the Templars had to wear it on their left shoulder, on the same side as their heart.

The red cross was a symbol of martyrdom – every Templar demonstrated that he was willing to give his life for Jesus Christ and His Church, if necessary. The death in combat was considered a great honor, as it guaranteed a place in heaven.

However – especially in a visually powerful combination with white tunic or coat – the Templar Cross is also a symbol of power (military power). Also – quite surprisingly – it is a symbol of hope and assistance, particularly during times of crisis (apparently the Templars positioned themselves as protectors in Outremer).

Officially, the Templar Cross is called the “Vermilion Cross” or the “Cross of Gules”. Contrary to a popular misconception, its exact shape is not known and is hotly debated. We do not know exactly whether the Templars were using Greek or Latin Crosses (IMHO, the latter is more likely) – or both.

However, we still do not know exactly why the Templars got the red cross as their symbol. Most likely, the decision was made by Bernard of Clairvaux for whom it was the symbol of protection [of the Ark and by extension, the whole Outremer] from evil forces.

[RolandVT]

The first recorded battle involving the Knights Templar was the Battle of Teqoa (Casal Techue), south of Jerusalem, in 1138. Twenty years (!) after the order was born and nine years (!!) after it was officially approved by the Church.

Contrary to a popular misconception, the Templars did not take part in the “Damascus crusade” in 1129. They only recruited the crusaders; actually, this crusade was unique because its recruitment was undertaken entirely by agents of the King of Jerusalem Baldwin II (the whole endeavor was his brainchild).

Officially, the key recruiter was Hughes de Payens, the first Grand Master of the Templars (hence the popular misconception) … however, he had neither the status nor connections in Europe nor diplomatic experience for such a campaign.

Hence, there is little doubt that the real lead recruiter was the “shadow Grand Master” of Knights Templar Hugh of Champagne (most likely assisted by his strategic partner Bernard of Clairvaux).

Although the crusade failed to obtain official support of the Pope Honorius II, the recruiting drive was very successful (not surprising at all given the clout of Hugh and Bernard). It is unknown how many crusaders Hugh recruited in Europe. But both Christian and Muslim sources agree that the army was a large one.

The Pope apparently was a good judge of military endeavors – the crusade failed to meet its military objectives. Ditto for the Battle of Teqoa (a minor encounter). In fact, practically all first battles of Templars were defeats, because the Seljuk Turks and other Muslim powers used different tactics than those in Europe at that time – and it took the knights quite some time to adapt.

A force of Templars led by their second Grand Master, Robert de Craon, was sent to retake the town after it was captured by Muslims. They were initially successful, but the Muslims regrouped outside the town and took it back from the Templars.

Why did it take the Templars so long to get to the battlefield? As there is no evidence that they ever were involved in protecting the pilgrims, the most likely reason was that their primary objective was to protect the Ark of the Covenant and Jerusalem. In other words, initially they were a security force, not shock troops.

Only when Hugh or Robert was sure that both the Ark and the city were sufficiently secure, he dispatched whoever was available to the battlefield. A bad decision – the losses were very high (the area was “strewn with Templar bodies”).

[RolandVT]

Out of all crimes that French inquisitors charged Templars with; the latter were guilty of only one: homosexual practices (only 12 out of thousands of Templars were guilty of heresy).

However, this charge as hypocritical (to put it mildly) as homosexual practices (first and foremost, anal sex) were common in every Christian monastic order – and among Catholic clergy as well.

So, not surprisingly, official penalties for homosexual behavior within the clergy, both by the church and temporal authorities, were rarely codified or enforced. Several bishops in the Middle Ages were thought by their contemporaries to have had gay relationships, and there was a potentially romantic or sexual tone to the correspondence of others with “passionate” male friends.

Even some Supreme Pontiffs are documented to have been homosexual or to have had male sexual partners, including (I suspect not limited to) Benedict IX, Paul II, Sixtus IV, Leo X, Julius II and Julius III.

In 9th century A.D. Charlemagne recognized the problems of monks’ indulging in homosexuality; a capitulary condemned homosexuality among monks claiming it had become common in monastic orders. Medieval Bishop’s visitation records mention many instances of homosexual acts confessed by monks.

Many Templars claimed that permission had been given to them to engage in homosexual acts (most likely, under torture or the thread of torture as explicit authorization of this sin was unheard of), but few confessed to practicing it (this is not rues either – homosexual behavior was rampant in monastic orders).

Templar brother Bernard Villars of the Order claimed he was told he should allow himself to be used sexually by the Brothers, and was given permission to engage in sex with other Brothers, but said he had not done so and did not know any other Brothers who did. Again, torture most likely was involved – or a threat of one.

Even Geoffrey of Charney (ultimately burned at the stake with Grand Master Jacque de Molay), claimed that he was told, it was ‘…better to have sex between brothers of the Order than to usage their lust with women, but he claimed never to have done this or even to have been asked. IMHO, highly unlikely as well.

Not surprisingly at all, all Guilty confessions of homosexuality (actually, all confessions) were obtained in France and Italy where torture was used, but not in the Iberian Peninsula, Cyprus and England, where torture was not used.