#Do I put them with the mediaeval literature section (some of which also functions as a primary historical source- i.e. the Brus)

[the-busy-ghost]

“Ok so the other bookshelf hasn’t arrived yet but why don’t I start organising my books, it will be a fun activity and useful!”

What nobody tells you about said fun activity is that you have to make Choices about how to organise and it’s all very confusing

[archaeologysucks]

Who wants to read my dissertation on the Knights Templar?

I earned my degrees in the UK, first at the University of St Andrews, and then at the University of Sheffield. My first degree was only technically an archaeology degree. Really, it was a Mediaeval History degree, plus one class on archaeological theory. There was no field school or practical component. St Andrews did not offer one. I knew I needed more training, so I decided to do a one year MA at Sheffield, which has a great archaeology department.

When I started at Sheffield, I had just recently read Umberto Eco’s novel, Foucault’s Pendulum (to this day, one of my favourite books), so I already knew how much BS had been written about the Templars over the years (spoiler: it’s a lot). But I was fascinated by the true story of the Templars, so I decided to do my dissertation on them.

Maybe everyone feels this way about their dissertation, but by the end of it, I just wanted it to be done. It only had to be 15k-20k words, but at the time, that felt like a lot. It was 2002, so there was a lot less info available online, and a lot of research has to be done the old fashioned way. I had other factors going on in my life that contributed to the problem. Looking back now, it’s pretty easy to see that I was depressed. All I knew then was that I hated everything, it was nearly impossible to weed through all the Templar BS to find actual credible information, and the only thing that could cheer me up was listening to Christmas music 24/7 ... in the middle of September.

So anyway. Here it is. My Masters dissertation on the iconography of the Knights Templar, written in 2002. It’s not good and it’s not scholarly. I don’t recommend anyone use it as a source for anything. But maybe some of you will find it mildly interesting or entertaining. Or you could do yourselves a favour and just read Helen Nicholson’s books on the subject. Or read Foucault’s Pendulum. Yeah, you should do that....

(Thank you, Wayback Machine, for archiving the first four sections. It turns out I didn’t actually have an uncorrupted copy on my computer. Since the alternative was trying to dig up a printed copy and fix all the corrupted sections, I’ve just left them as-is, with a note where I noticed any corrupted passages. Anything else that does not make sense is probably due to similar corruption. Or else I just wrote a bad paper.)

The Iconography of the Knights Templar

Abstract

From their formation in 1119 to their dissolution in 1312, the Order of the Temple used many images and symbols to represent themselves. Among the most frequently used of these symbols were the various seals of the Order, the clothing they wore, and the arms they carried with them into battle.

The meaning of the seal of the Grand Master of the Temple is very ambiguous, and is discussed here at length, with shorter segments on the seals used by the masters of the European houses, and some information on the use of seals in general during this period.

The habit of the Order evolved over time, and the meanings behind its aspects are more clearly described in contemporary literature than those of the Order's seals. The symbolism of the Templars' habit and arms is connected through the use of St George's cross, but I will also be treating the beauseant, the Templar's less commonly known emblem.

These symbols demonstrated the image the Templars wished to present to the world. I will look at where these symbols came from, when they first appeared, how they came to be used, and what they meant to the Templars and their contemporaries. The meanings of some symbols have been lost, and in some cases, educated guesses by modern scholars are all the is available. Some of the problems of interpretation modern scholars have encountered in studying the Templars and their symbols are also discussed in this paper.

Sources and Acknowledgments

Wherever possible, I have attempted to use the most authoritative academic sources currently available. I am especially indebted to Dr Helen Nicholson for her recent book The Knights Templar, a New History and for her personal help in suggesting useful sources such as Malcolm Barber and Alan Forey. I am also indebted to such freely available online sources as the Online Reference Book for Medieval Studies, the Catholic Encyclopedia and the Internet Medieval Sourcebook, for providing so much valuable information and so many original sources in English translations.

In some places, I have used more controversial sources, such as Peter Partner, Stephan Dafoe and a couple websites which claim to represent current incarnations of the Order, not because I believe their information to be historically significant--or even particularly accurate--but to show some of the less likely origins and meaning currently applied to Templar symbols. Wherever I have used examples from these sources, I have endeavoured to point out their fallibility.

Many of the excellent historical sources on the Templars that I looked at had little to say on the subject of the symbols I discuss, or little that was not said just as well in the sources covered in my bibliography, and I was therefore unable to include them.

Introduction

A Brief History of the Templar Order

Before one can properly look at the iconography of the Knights Templar, one must have a clear understanding of the Order, how it came about, what it represented, and how it came to an end.

Formally known as "The Poor Knights of Christ of the Temple in Jerusalem", they were more commonly known in their own time and today as the Order of the Temple or the Knights Templar. The Order was founded in 1119 by Sir Hugh de Payens, a crusading knight from Champagne, and eight of his crusader comrades, also of the lesser nobility. After the First Crusade was over at the beginning of the twelfth century, most of the people involved felt that they had completed the task for which they had signed up, and could now return home. However, it was necessary for someone to stay and guard the West's interests in the Holy Land, and thus the Knights Templar were born.

The Rule of the Order was approved by the Church ten years later in 1129 at the Council of Troyes. This put the Templars on a par of importance with other holy Orders of their day, such as the Cistercians, though their purpose was very different. The Templars were a military Order. Their purpose, initially, was to act as protectors of Christian pilgrims on the road to Jerusalem. Over the following two centuries, they became western Christendom's most enthusiastic defenders against the Muslims, as well as one of Europe's leading and most trusted banking houses. The Order had a great deal of political and social influence, and was known and respected throughout Europe and the Near East.

In 1307, nearly two hundred years after the Order was founded, the King of France, Philip IV, accused them of heresy, blasphemy and perversion, as well as conspiring with the Muslims, with whom the Templars had made treaties. However, the consensus of modern historians is that he did this, not because he believed these accusations to be true, but because he hoped to lay hands on the vast wealth the Order had accumulated.

Hollister (1982, p. 267) suggests that Philip may have convinced himself that the charges were true, but that the king had to pay his witnesses to testify demonstrates that public opinion was not necessarily against the Order. The king's statement ("If some among them are innocent, it is expedient that they should be assayed like gold in the furnace and purged by proper judicial examination." Royal letter opening the Inquiry into the Templars 1307 [Anonymous 2002, Ancient Templar Quotes]), though, upon opening the Templar inquiry suggests that Philip did not care greatly whether the Templars were guilty or not. In any case, the charges against the Templars were never proved, but some of the brothers confessed under torture, and many French Templars were burnt at the stake after retracting these confessions.

Pope Clement V was forced to officially dissolve the Order in 1312, because it had fallen too far into disrepute to function any longer (Nicholson 2001, p. 12). All of the Templars' property and their archives were inherited by the Knights Hospitaller, another military Order. Popular legend holds that the Templar Order continued to function, unofficially and underground for centuries following their dissolution, but such tales spring mainly from the romantic revival of the Templars in the eighteenth and nineteenth century, and there is no historical or archaeological evidence that they are founded in truth.

Research Problems

Over the course of nearly two hundred years, the Knights Templar adopted and used many symbols to represent themselves. In the centuries since their dissolution, these symbols have acquired an air of mystery, which has made their interpretation problematic. The main difficulty is the abundance of sensational texts which have been written about the Order since accusations were first brought against them in 1307. These texts often suggest that their was some truth behind the French king's accusations, including occult practices and devil worship.

The accusations, backed up by the testimony of paid witnesses, and spread officially and by rumour around Europe, caused the Templars to be demonised in the eyes of the public, and this demonisation lead to the destruction of much contemporary information, either intentionally, through the people's anger at the Templars' betrayal of their trust, or through neglect, because people did not see any need to preserve the memory of the Order.

The majority of surviving contemporary texts concerning the Order were written by outsiders, whose understanding of Templar symbolism was limited, affected by hearsay, and sometimes not recorded at all. Three main factors contribute to this lack of first hand documentation: first, the Templars were not scholars, they were warriors. While other holy Orders devoted themselves to scholarship, the Templars were busy fighting Christendom's battles. Few of the brothers were able to read more than their own native language, and in some Templar houses, learning was frowned upon.

Bernard, Abbot of Clairvaux, who was instrumental in the writing of the Rule of the Templars, and whom the Templars greatly respected, preached a doctrine of the superiority of love to knowledge (Seward 1972, p. 11). In fact, the Order considered educated brothers more likely to ask troublesome spiritual questions, which the uneducated commanders and masters of the Templars would find difficult to answer (Nicholson 2001, p. 12).

The second factor contributing to our lack of knowledge is that the Order's central archive has been lost. It was first held at Jerusalem, but was moved, along with the Templar headquarters, to Acre, after Jerusalem was lost to the West in 1187, and then to Cyprus after the fall of Acre in 1291. Following the dissolution of the Order, these records passed into the keeping of the Knights Hospitaller, who kept them on Cyprus until the island was taken by the Turks in 1571, at which point the records were presumably destroyed (Nicholson 2001, p. 8).

The third factor is that the Templars and their contemporaries knew what these symbols meant, and assumed that everyone else did as well. There was no need to describe in detail the reasoning behind the choice of this colour or that symbol. Neither the Templars nor their contemporaries felt it needful to record these facts, which were--to them--common knowledge, as well as being minor details compared to the task they had set themselves of defending Christendom. In such ways, common knowledge often becomes lost.

These substantial gaps in our knowledge of the Templar Order have, over the last few centuries, been filled in by myth, legend and hearsay. With the romantic revival of the Templars in the 17th and 18th centuries, new symbols were invented, or uprooted from their historical context, and given new significance. These new symbols and meanings often corroborated the Templars' legendary connections with the occult, which modern society largely finds romantic and intriguing, rather than frightening, enhancing the reputation of the Neo-Templar Order. Many writers--and some historians--have become so caught up in the myth and mystery of the Templars that the facts have become muddled and difficult to disentangle.

One would think to find many symbols of the Order preserved in the architecture of Templar churches and houses, but according to Ritook (1994, p. 176), though the masonry was generally of high quality, no special Templar iconography is displayed in the masonry. In my research, I have found nothing to refute his observations. Templar symbolism in architecture seems to be a more recent development--a result of the romantic revival of later centuries. These Neo-Templars apparently had greater need for recognition of their association with Templar imagery that the original Order.

Despite the substantial gaps in our knowledge of the Order of the Temple, a great deal has been written--both contemporary with the Order and by modern historians--on the Templars and their iconography. In this paper, I have tried to assemble a comprehensive, if brief, discourse on a few of the Order's symbols, namely their seals, habit and arms. I will be covering many theories, some of them my own, and attempting to determine the probability of each, as well as explaining why some suggestions could not be true.

The Grand Master's Seal

"At first although they were active in arms they were so poor that they only had one war horse between two. As a result, and as a record of their early poverty and as an encouragement to be humble, there was inscribed upon their seal two men riding one horse." -- Matthew Paris, Historia Anglorum, 1250 (Nicholson 2001, p. 46)

The Importance of Seals

From ancient times, the seal--an individualised wax impression--was the equivalent of the modern signature. Though a literate person could use his signature in conjunction with a seal, even an illiterate person was able to use a seal to show his approval of a document. Affixing a seal was an acknowledgment of a document's authenticity. It was also a declaration that the person or group whose seal was affixed approved of the content of the document, or declared it to be the truth.

Matthew Paris, in his Chronica Majora, twice accuses the Templars of spreading false rumours under their seal. "From then onwards" the chronicler wrote, "we regarded such letters, even if they were true, with more suspicion and dislike." (Vaughan 1984, pp. 193, 217). As we can see, one had to be very careful about what one affixed one's seal to. If one attested to the truth of a statement, using a seal, and the statement was found to be false, one's reputation could be irreparably damaged.

The Grand Masters of the Temple took special care of their seal, to ensure that it would not be misused. It was kept in a locked compartment which required three keys to open. The Grand Master himself kept one of these keys, and two of his high officials held the others (Upton-Ward 1992, p. 41).

A seal affixed to a letter identified the author of that letter, as well as ensuring the security of the information within. Each seal was unique and hand made, which made forgery very difficult. Anything associated with a person's seal reflected on that person, and the imagery used for the seal was also meant to say something about the person who used it.

People used images of animals, words and letters, buildings and other symbols, often taken from their heraldry, deeds they had performed, or their family names. The Templars, like any other individual or group, would have needed a seal whose imagery expressed something positive and fundamental about their organisation.

Two Knights on Horseback

Probably the most instantly recognisable image used by the Templars is that of two knights astride a single horse. Matthew Paris, a thirteenth century English monk and chronicler from St Albans, has left us two examples of this image, one in his Chronica Majora (Plate 1), and another in his Historia Anglorum (Plate 2). Both the Historia and the Chronica were written in about 1250, which was relatively late in Templar history--only about 60 years before the Order was dissolved.

Matthew Paris did not think highly of the Templars, as I mentioned above. He thought they were ambitious and worldly (Vaughan 1958, p. 138), and that if they were really trying, they should have been able to defeat the Muslims. He was not alone in thinking these thing, but this point of view demonstrates how little Western writers knew about the situation in the East (Nicholson 2002, p. 7 and Forey 1992, p. 201-2).

Because they were a military Order, they had set a task for themselves at which they could be seen to succeed or fail (Nicholson 2002, p. 14). While contemplative Orders spent their time in prayer, the Templars were fighting battles, the outcome of which, as people believed at the time, was dependent upon God's favour. Their contemporaries would have seen their apparent lack of success on the field of battle as symptomatic of some spiritual failing within the Order. The fact that the Templars sometimes made treaties with the Muslims, instead of just killing them, was, to these people, proof that the Templars were not doing their job.

Despite the low opinion of Matthew Paris and his contemporaries, his depictions are accurate representation of a Templar symbol, since they are copied from the Grand Master of the Order's official seal. He did not, however, realise that the seal's image did not date from the foundation of the Order.

This image of two men on horseback originally appeared nearly one hundred years earlier than Matthew Paris's illustrations, in 1158 as the seal of the Grand Master of the Temple (Plate 3), Bertrand de Blanchefort, and is the earliest known seal for the Grand Master of the Temple (Nicholson 1995, p. 108), forty years after the Order was formed. Use of this symbol continued under subsequent Grand Masters for as long as the Order survived, however the seal went through more than one incarnation. As you can see, de Blanchefort's seal in 1168 is not the same one used by Reynaut de Vichiers (Plate 5), who was Master of the Temple from 1255-1259. The symbol is the same, but it is obviously not the same seal.

The Grand Master was the head of the Order of the Temple, and since the Order was a military one, his title would have been akin to that of General. His position was based in Jerusalem until 1187 when the headquarters were moved to Acre, then in 1291 to Cyprus. There were twenty-three Grand Masters of the Temple between Hughes de Payens in 1118 and Jacques de Molay in 1314.

There are many theories among historians as to the meaning of the Grand Master's seal. One is that it is a reference to the Templars' vow of poverty, but symbolically, rather than as a representation of an actual occurrence, though contemporary Templar legend would have us believe otherwise (Nicholson 1995, p. 108). Two men in full armor riding a single horse in battle would be a disadvantage at best and fatal at worst, as well as being an impossible burden for the horse.

Contemporary legend held that the symbol represented the initial poverty of the Order; that they could afford only a single horse for every two men. However, the Rule of the Order from the outset permitted three horses and no more for each knight (Upton-Ward 1992, p. 32). Judith Upton-Ward disagrees with Matthew Paris, and other chroniclers who insist on this origin myth, doubting that the image was ever practiced (Upton-Ward 1992, p. 104). Accounts of the origins of the Templars vary widely in their descriptions, and were all written long after the actual founding. The truth was that it took a few years after the Order was founded before word really got around of their existence.

By de Blanchefort's inauguration as Grand Master, the Templars' resources were impressive, but a rapid expansion of military activity during his Grand Mastery drove the Order into debt, and even caused de Blanchefort to suffer a nervous breakdown (Riley-Smith 1987, p. 59), So perhaps the seal was a symbol of caution and economy.

The Order had earned itself a money grubbing reputation in the West by de Blanchefort's time, since all western Templar activity was devoted to the collecting of funds for support of the eastern brothers in their struggles against the Muslims, so the seal may have served to remind the brothers of the need for humility. Outfitting, arming, training and keeping large numbers of men and horses is an expensive business. The customs and statutes of the Order show a distinct fear of poverty and stress the need to economise wherever possible (Nicholson 2001, p. 46). Loss of funding could easily have meant the end of the Order. Even with all the funding they were able to collect, at the height of the Order's prosperity they were only able to put a few hundred men on horseback, though there were many more foot soldiers among the sergeants of the Order (Nicholson 2001, p. 54). The Templars' financial difficulties would have been much on de Blanchefort's mind about the time he created the seal.

Another suggestion found in the more sensational sources, is that this symbol is proof of the homosexuality of which the brothers were accused by the King of France in 1307 (Dafoe & Butler 2002, Seal). I consider this theory to be one of the least likely, since, although homosexuality did undoubtedly exist in medieval Europe, and holy orders were a refuge for those who did not wish to marry, and sought the company of their own sex, such relationships were never sanctioned by the Church. In fact, the Rule of the Order states, "for if any brother does not take the vow of chastity he cannot come to eternal rest nor see God," (Upton-Ward 1992, p. 24). It is fair to presume that the writers of the Rule meant for such a vow to be kept.

Perhaps some of the brothers were so inclined, but the idea that homosexuality was common and accepted--even official--practice among the members of the Order is unthinkable. For the Grand Master of the Temple to openly endorse such a practice by adopting a symbol of it as his official seal would have been an affront to the authority and beliefs of the Church, not to mention a deliberate transgression against the Order's vow of chastity (Upton-Ward 1992, p. 24).

In fact, measures were taken within the Order to check homosexual practice: the brothers were encouraged not to bathe, so that no one would see their naked bodies, and they were to sleep with the lamps lit so that shameful acts could not be hidden by darkness (Dafoe & Butler 2002, Garments). The Rule of the Order mentions that the brothers should sleep dressed, and that their sleeping area is to remain lit, but does not give a reason. However, this was common to all monastic Orders of the period, and homosexual practices may have been--if not the main reason--at least one of the reasons for it (Upton-Ward 1992, p. 25)

I contacted Stephan Dafoe about contemporary sources for the connection between the seal and homosexual practices among the Templars, but he was unable to provide satisfactory answers, stating only that it is mentioned somewhere in the records of the trial. He himself does not adhere to this theory. I was able to confirm no such suggestion contemporary with the Order, so I must conclude that this idea arose out of later rumour. While certainly many of the charges brought against the Templars were of homosexual practices, the inquisitors were only concerned with events which had happened involving people still living, not with de Blanchefort and his seal.

Franklyn (1963, p. 139) associates the Pegasus, a mythical winged horse, with the Templars. Two men seated on a horse would, from a distance, he suggests, convey "an impression of a horse with a pair of wings raised as if ready to become volant." He goes on to tell us that, for this reason, the Knights Templar chose the Pegasus as their device. I have found no other source which mentions the mythical horse in association with the Order, so I am inclined to doubt a historical link between them. Besides this, as I stated above, there could not have been an actual occurrence associated with the seal, and therefore, nothing to be seen at a distance, as Franklyn suggests.

De Blanchefort did not leave behind his reason for choosing the seal for himself and his Templar brothers, and so we can never with any certainty know why he chose it. It seems most reasonable to me that his choice was symbolic, as Selwood (2001, p. 173) suggests, having to do with the dual nature of the knighthood. The brothers were two things at once and, in a way, two people at once--two men on the same horse. They were warriors, but they were also monks. By their vows they were poor, but in practice the Order was wealthy. They were worldly men, but in many ways withdrawn from the world.

This may not have been all that de Blanchefort meant by it; there may be some truth to a few of the other theories, or perhaps something altogether different was being suggested. Maybe the Grand Master was making a connection with the verse in the gospel of Matthew (18:20) which says, "For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them." (Anonymous 1997, Gospel of Matthew), or suggesting that Christ rides with each of the brothers--though this is unlikely, since images of Christ were very stylised during the Medieval period (Plate 20, 21, 22).

De Blanchefort chose a symbol which, to him, best represented the spirit of the Order, and it is usually the case that the best symbols have many layers of meaning.

Men of Letters

The figure of two knights on horseback are not the only significant use of symbolism in the seals of the Grand Masters. Many historical sources will tell you that, around the outer edge of the obverse of the seal reads the phrase SIGILLUM MILITUM CHRISTI, Latin for "the seal of the Knights of Christ". This is not entirely correct. Differences can be clearly seen between the seals of the Grand Masters. De Blanchefort's seal (Plates 3, 4) reads SIGILLUM MILITUM on the obverse, and CHRISTI DE TEMPLO on the reverse, which means "the seal of the Temple of Christ".

De Vichiers' seal (Plate 5), on the other hand, reads SIGILLUM MILITUM XPISTI, "the seal of the knights of Christ". The phrase is in no way out of the ordinary, and is, in fact entirely apt for the Knights Templar. It is the lettering of the phrase which is of symbolic interest.

Although the phrase is written using the Latin alphabet, the first two letters of Christ's name are the Greek XP (Chi Rho) rather than the Latin CHR. I believe this is unlikely to be a mistake, since anyone who knew enough Latin to write SIGILLUM MILITUM XPISTI correctly, would know to write using the Roman alphabet. I submit that this is not a simple spelling error, made out of ignorance.

The Templars, as I have said, were not generally educated men. Some were literate in their own native language, but on the whole, learning was frowned upon within the Order. They had joined to fight, not study. Jaques de Molay, the last Grand Master of the Order was said to have referred to himself as "a knight, unlettered and poor" (Riley-Smith 1987, p. 210).

Despite their general ignorance, however uneducated an individual was in the Medieval period, he or she was able to recognise the Greek letters Chi Rho, and know instantly that the name of Christ was meant. The symbol's origin lies in the early roots of Christianity, but came into popular use after the Emperor Constantine had a vision of it and converted to Christianity in the early fourth century (Plate 11). Eusebius, a historian contemporary with the emperor, described this symbol--called the labarum because of its subsequent use as a military standard--in detail in his Vita Constantini (Knight 1999, Labarum).

From the time of Constantine, it became one of the most significant symbols of Christianity, surpassed only by the cross itself. Its early associations with the military make it the more apt of the two symbols for the Templars. In fact the Chi Rho can also be seen on the shields of the knights on de Vichiers' seal (Plate 5), though this symbol did not actually appear on the arms of the Order.

I assert that the Templar seal was made by an educated person who knew the meaning behind this symbol, but was made in such a way that even the uneducated would understand its significance. The Chi Rho was used in Templar churches before the creation of the Grand Master's seal, but this is not significant, because it was used in many medieval churches.

De Templo Christi

On the reverse of de Blanchefort's seal is an image of a stylised building (Plate 4), and, as I said above, the phrase CHRISTI DE TEMPLO, which some translate as "the Temple of Christ", but which I think is more likely to be a continuation of the phrase begun on the other side; "the seal of the knights of Christ of the Temple". There is some question, however, as to what building is actually depicted on the seal.

Helen Nicholson (2001, p. 31, 116) maintains that it is the Church of the Holy Sepulchre (Plate 8), which was, according to at least one origin legend, the first home of the Knights Templar. Dafoe and Butler (2002, Seal) on the other hand, insists that it is the Dome of the Rock (Plate 7). The Holy Sepulchre was usually referred to as such, while the Dome of the Rock was referred to as the Lord's Temple. The legend on the seal seems to be indicating that the building depicted is the temple which is meant.

While Helen Nicholson is the more authoritative source, I believe the building may well be the Dome of the Rock. If we look at the reverse of Grand Master William de Chartres' seal from 1214 (Plate 6) for enlightenment, we find little. The image of the building is very different here, but even more stylised, though Peter Partner (1982, p. 3-4) insists that it is the Dome of the Rock, based on the shape of the arches. The evidence is inconclusive, since the crowning feature of both buildings is a large dome, and the images are, as I said, very stylised.

It is somewhat ironic that the Templars may have chosen one of Islam's most holy sites to represent themselves, but there is a good reason for this. When the Crusaders came to Jerusalem, most of them had little knowledge of history and even less of Muslim architecture. They knew a few stories from the Bible, but not many details, because, in those days, the Bible was only accessible to those who could read Latin.

They did not realise that Solomon's Temple, mentioned in the Bible, did not exist any longer, and that the Lord's Temple had never even been built. They mistook the Dome of the Rock and the Aqsa Mosque, which was the Templars' headquarters, which were built centuries too late, for these Biblical buildings (Nicholson 2001, p. 19).

Despite their ignorance, they understood well the use of seals. Unlike a signature, a seal can have many layers of meaning. Bertrand de Blanchefort certainly knew this, and made his seal accordingly, with many unique details, which served to mark the Knights Templar as a brotherhood apart. Even if the exact meaning of some of the aspects of his seal did not survive de Blanchefort, still its emblem became ingrained in the minds of the age. To contemporaries, it represented the Knights Templar, which was its purpose.

Other Seals Used by the Order

"Thus in a wondrous and unique manner they appear gentler than lambs, yet fiercer than lions. I do not know if it would be more appropriate to refer to them as monks or as soldiers, unless perhaps it would be better to recognize them as being both." -- St Bernard, In Praise of the New Knighthood, early 12th century (Blanchard 1995, Military Orders)

The Order of the Temple did not have only one seal. This would have been very inconvenient, due to the large number of Templar houses spread all across Europe and the Near East. The masters and commanders of each of the regional Temples had their own seals. The men who made these seals used them to convey their connection with the Templar Order as a whole, but also to distinguish themselves and their houses from the rest.

Not only did this prevent mixups, but it allowed each house or region to distinguish itself by using symbols of the virtues they considered most important. The symbols on the seals of the masters and commanders conveyed these virtues and ideas. Some, such as commanders of the Temple in France (Plate 9), simply wished to show that they were of the Templar Order, and so they copied the motif used by the Grand Master, described above. The commander of the Temple at Richerenches also used an equestrian emblem (Plate 10), though with a single rider, probably St George, whose connection with the Order is discussed below.

Other commanders used different symbols, though it was often the case that the favoured symbol in a given region remained the same throughout the Order's history there, and did not change from one commander to the next, almost as though it became the house mascot. However, the Rule of the Order stated that when a commander died, "the seal of the commander who is dead should be put inside [a sealed bag], for the bags should be sent to the Master," (Upton-Ward 1992, p. 149). In some cases, this was ignored, and the commander passed on his seal to his successor with due ceremony, but in other cases, the rule was followed, and the new commander would have to create his own seal, though often using the emblem of the old. This showed continuity of power.

Animals

Symbols of fierce, predatory animals are fairly straightforward. Eagles, lions and gryphons (Plate 12, 13, 14) are--and were--all animals known for their ferocity, and were associated also with bravery. They were sometimes portrayed as proud animals, but never fearful or lazy. Lions especially were associated with honour (Franklyn 1963, p. 87). They caught the eye and the imagination. The Templars who used these symbols wished to have the characteristics and supposed virtues of these animals associated with them.

However, symbols often have many layers, or even meanings which are the opposite of the ones for which they were chosen. For example, although the commander of Supplingenburg used the lion as his seal (Plate 12), with its associations with bravery and honour, some Templars portrayed the lion in a very different light. In the Templar church of San Bevignate in Perugia, there is a fresco which depicts a group of Templars defying Satan who has taken the form of a black lion (Plate 15). Otto von Brunswick certainly did not choose his seal because of these connotations.

But, besides the instance of Perugia, lions were usually portrayed in a positive light during this period, and in connection with the Templars. St Bernard said of the Order, in his famous de laude novae militae, "they appear gentler than lambs, yet fiercer than lions," (Blanchard 1995, Military Orders) and Jacques de Vitry, a thirteenth century historian, echoed this sentiment, saying that the Templars were "in turn lions of war and lambs at the hearth," (Knight 1999, The Knights Templar).

Religious Symbols

Not all of the Templars considered ferocity in battle to be chief among the virtues. Among these were the English Templars, who used as their seal the image of another animal--the Agnus Dei or Lamb of God (Plate 16, 17, 18, 19). The emblem consists of a lamb with one of its forelegs hooked around the staff of a banner. This was a popular symbol throughout the Templar brotherhood, but the English brothers seem to have been especially attached to it. From at least 1160 and 1304--nearly the entire time the Templars existed in England--the commander of the English Temple continued to use the Agnus Dei as his seal.

The lamb, both historically and Biblically, is a symbol of innocence and purity--as an animal which is both young and white--as well as a symbol of sacrifice. "Agnus Dei" is a Biblical term, referring to the Messiah, with which all Christians of the Medieval period were familiar. As a symbol, the Agnus Dei represents the purity of Christ as well as His sacrifice to save humanity from death. The term "Lamb of God" was first used in the Old Testament book of Isaiah (53:7), when the prophet describes the awaited Messiah (Anonymous 1997, Isaiah). The Templars' use of the symbol represented their desire to emulate Christ, up to and including a desire for martyrdom at the hands of God's enemies, the Muslims.

The Agnus Dei, sometimes called the Paschal or Holy Lamb, is also found in the heraldry of the period. Franklyn (1963, p. 101) describes it as "passant; its dexter fore limb as well as being raised is flexed upon a staff which rises over the animal's shoulder...." From this description, we can see that this symbol was not just a Templar icon, but something commonly known during the Medieval period. Franklyn goes on to tell us that the Paschal Lamb carries, at the head of his staff, a flag bearing the cross of St George, which is also frequently associated with the Templars, as described below.

The Agnus Dei, however, was not the only religious symbol used in Templar seals. The more blatant image of Christ's head was used by some commanders (Plate 20, 21, 22). The primary purpose of a seal was to protect the letter or document it sealed, and to ensure its veracity. What better symbol to use that the head of Christ? Surely there could be no better guardian of the truth, for who would open a letter not meant for him while looking into the face of Christ? And who would doubt the truth of a document which bore such a mark?

Some of the masters of the Temple in Germany chose this symbol for their own seal, but by they end of the thirteenth century, it had been replaced by the image of an eagle (Plate 13). Such a change would seem to imply a shift in focus from a gentle, Christ-like image to a symbol which suggests fierce, bold action. Perhaps the new master thought the German Templars needed a new, more dynamic image.

I had thought perhaps the change was due to the rumours that the Templars worshipped a bearded head, and that the master of the German temple was just being careful. However, the images of Christ used on the seals were very stylised, as was common during the Medieval period, and thus immediately recognisable to contemporaries. Also, such rumours did not actually begin until after the first accusations of 1307. The commanders chose their seals to represent who they--and their men--were. They chose images which expressed ideas about what a Templar should be. Whether the image was fierce or gentle, unique or ubiquitous, it said something about the Order as a whole and in its separate parts. Each chapter wished to express the unique virtues it offered the Order, while still showing its connection to the whole.

The Appearance of the Brothers

"[W]e grant to all knight brothers... white cloaks; and no-one who does not belong to the aforementioned Knights of Christ is allowed to have a white cloak, so that those who have abandoned the life of darkness will recognise each other as being reconciled to their creator by the sign of the white habits: which signifies purity and complete chastity." -- The Ancient Rule of the Order (Upton-Ward 1992, p. 24)

The Habit of the Order

Although initially the Order of the Temple wore whatever clothing people donated to them, in 1129, when the Rule was approved, they were given their first habit. This was a simple, white mantle or cloak which they wore over a dark tunic (Nicholson 2001, p. 23). White, to symbolise purity and chastity, as well as a sign that they had abandoned the "life of darkness" (Upton-Ward 1992, p. 24). When a man became a brother of the Temple, he entered another world, and lived in a different way. The wearing of the habit proclaimed this transition (Plate 23, 24).

Cistercians also wore a white habit, and historians agree that St Bernard, one of the founding members of the Cistercian Order, was instrumental in this choice, as well as in the writing of the Ancient Rule of the Order, which is essentially the same as that of the Cistercians, who lived by the reformed Benedictine Rule. Bernard was very outspoken in his support of the Templar Order from the outset, and was friendly with--and possibly related to--one or two of the original members of the Order.

According to Seward (1972, p. 22), St Bernard "thought of Hugues [de Payen]'s new brethren as military Cistercians. Significantly, brother-knights wore a white hooded habit in the cloister, like Cistercian choir monks, while lesser brethren wore brown, as did Cistercian lay brothers." As one of the founding members of the Cistercian Order, Bernard was probably no less than passionate about their way of life and beliefs, and wished to spread these teachings to as many people--and Orders--as possible, hence his involvement in the creation of the Templars.

That appearance was important to the Templars can be seen in their Rule. The Rule forbade the adding of fur or any other luxury decoration to the habit, because it would encourage sinful pride (Upton-Ward 1992, p. 24), but perhaps also because they wished to present a united and uniform front. When there is nothing to distinguish between one brother and another, any good deed a brother does is simply done by a Templar, to the glory of the Order, rather than to the glory of an individual. The Rule seems to bear this thinking out, since it goes on to say that members of the Order should all have the same clothing, though each brother's clothing should fit him properly, because ill-fitting robes would make the Order appear foolish. They wished to appear not only unified, but respectable.

However, not every member of the Order wore the white habit. The sergeants and squires wore black, or dark brown. The reason for this, says the Rule, is that there was a time when men joined the Templars under false pretenses, and brought shame upon the Order. The bragging of these false brothers' squires caused many scandals. Therefore, all subsequent squires and sergeants had to wear dark clothes made of the cheapest fabric, to teach them humility, as well as to show that they were not full Knights of the Temple (Upton-Ward 1992, p. 35-6). By outfitting the majority of its members in cheap fabric, the Order also managed to save itself a great deal of money.

Although Templar knights--but not their squires of sergeants--were allowed the white habit, it was not, at that time, considered to be a symbol of rank. However, by the time the Teutonic knights came into being in the 1190's, the white habit was considered to be a symbol of knighthood (Forey 1992, p. 177). This is a case of the Knights Templar unintentionally creating a symbol which was widely recognised and used. Many crusading knights subsequently wore white tabards over their armor in battle.

Most of the Templars were not knights. The majority of the brothers wore the dark robes. And yet, in nearly every pictorial representation of a Templar from that period, we are presented with a brother in a white habit. Knight brothers were more visible in a society which wore primarily dark colours. They stood out in a crowd, from a great distance, and were instantly recognisable for the clothes they wore. They were also of a higher class, and so were presented as the ideal of what a Templar should be--what all men should aspire to, even if only some could realistically achieve such a goal. Not a man joined the Order as a sergeant who would not rather have been a knight. Such is human nature. The white habit said "Templar" in a way the dark one never could.

It is somewhat ironic that not all the Knights Templar were knights. The sergeants were not knights in training, but lowborn individuals. Upton-Ward (1992, p. 94) tells us that this policy reflects the fact that the Templars did not train men to be knights, but accepted those who already had the necessary training. Only members of the knightly class were entitled to the white habit. The punishment for impersonating a knight when joining the Order was usually expulsion, though if an individual was indeed sorry for his actions, he might only be demoted to sergeant, and given the dark robes (Upton-Ward 1992, p. 116).

There was a concern that the Templar mantle might be misused by people who wished the Order ill. The Rule specified that anyone who left the Order had two days to return his robes. One reason for this was that it was mainly through expulsion from the Order that brothers left, and one had to do something fairly bad to be expelled. The kind of brothers who were likely to be expelled were also likely to do other bad things, like visit brothels or get drunk or start fights.

If someone wearing a Templar uniform was seen doing something disgraceful, it reflected badly upon the Order, whether the person in the habit was actually a Templar or not. There was also a concern that expelled brothers might try to sell their robes to criminals or confidence artists, who would use them for their own nefarious ends, and give the Order a bad name in the process (Regle in Nicholson 1995, p. 102).

The actions of a person wearing Templar garments, regardless of whether or not that person was, in fact, a Templar, reflected on the Order as a whole. It was only natural that the Templars were very conscious of their image, and took care to preserve it. Regle's statement suggests that there were people who would dress as Templars and intentionally do harmful or immoral things specifically to the detriment of the Order's image. The Templars had to be very careful about who wore their robes.

St George's Cross

The red cross, historically so closely associated in the modern mind with crusading knights, was not added to the official uniform of the Knights Templar until the late 1140's, twenty years after the inception of the Order. Pope Eugenius III allowed them to add this evocative symbol to display that they were knights of Christ. A red cross on a white field is both heraldically and historically a symbol of martyrdom (Nicholson 2001, p. 23), and was the traditional sign of St George (Plate 25)--an early Christian martyr and warrior--representing blood and purity.

The Templars identified with St George in their vocation (Nicholson 2001, p. 149-50), though the parallels between them were perhaps more readily understood then than in the present day. St George was not only a very holy man, but he had also been a warrior. Most depictions of him idealise him as a medieval knight, charging into battle on horseback. There is some questions as to whether St George ever really existed, but if he did, then he would have lived in the third century, long before a knightly class--as the Templars and their contemporaries would have understood it--existed at all.

However, the Templars would have been familiar with many of the legends of St George--for, by the Medieval period, there were multiple and sometimes conflicting versions of the martyr's story (Knight 2002, St George)--and understood it in contemporary terms. As a warrior and a saint, George was evidence that fighting did not preclude holiness, so long as one's cause was just, and one lived one's life otherwise in a way that was pleasing to God.

St George was also a symbol of martyrdom, which held great importance for the Templars, and for all their Christian contemporaries. A martyr is a person so steadfast in his faith, that he is unwilling to deny it, even under pain of death. Martyrs were held in great admiration by Christians, and were often made saints. The Church held that those who had suffered for their faith and paid with their lives did not suffer in Purgatory after their deaths, but went directly to heaven, a reward for which every Christian longed.

However, since Christianity had become the official religion throughout Europe, there was no longer much opportunity for martyrdom. The Templars, however, faced martyrdom regularly. They were glad to have that chance, and were not afraid to die. As St Bernard said, "Gladly and faithfully he stands for Christ, but he would prefer to be dissolved and to be with Christ, by far the better thing," (Blanchard 1995, Military Orders).

The cross, gules on a field, argent--the cross of St George--did not actually become associated with the saint until sometime in the early middle ages, and its origins are mainly heraldic: white for purity and red for blood. By the twelfth century, it had become a popular emblem among the crusaders, and came to signify Christianity's struggle against Islam.

The red cross which was added to the Templar habit was a sign of willingness for martyrdom in more ways than one. It was also meant as a spiritual shield, which each Templar wore over his heart. The bright red cross on the white habit made an ideal target for Muslim archers; the Templars could not hide from their enemies, but must ride bravely into battle to face them, and to face death without fear (Dafoe & Butler 2002, Garments). In donning his habit on the eve of battle, each brother was knowingly inviting martyrdom, and proudly displaying that he was not afraid.

The sergeants, too, were given a red cross to wear on the front and back of their dark mantles, though it cannot have provided such a high-contrast, easy target as those that their knight masters wore. The difference in dress between the upper and lower classes of Templars sometimes caused the sergeants to be mistaken for Hospitallers, who wore black robes with a white cross.

Some Templar robes, however, were kept without their red cross. As proscribed in the statutes of the Order, a brother who was doing penance for some transgression would be made to wear a habit without the customary cross (Upton-Ward 1992, p. 128, 167). This was perhaps to indicate that, for a length of time, that brother was not worthy of the honour of martyrdom.

Hair and Associations with the Muslims

The way in which the Templars wore their hair was also proscribed by their Rule, which states that the brothers should be "so well tonsured that they may be examined from the front and from behind; and we command you to firmly adhere to this same conduct with respect to beards and mustaches, so that no excess may be noted on their bodies," (Upton-Ward 1992, p. 25). Being well-shorn promoted a respectable, tidy appearance, in the same way that having properly-fitting robes did.

Short hair also served a practical purpose. When a knight rode into the heat of battle, the last thing he would want was his vision to be obscured--Medieval helmets cut away enough of their field of vision without having to worry that their hair was going to come flopping down into their eyes.

Long hair was very common among the knightly class of this period. Among the Templars, it would have been considered a symptom of vanity, and sinful, as well as impractical. What use was long hair to a man who did not bathe, and was not hoping to impress ladies with his looks?

Although they kept their hair short, and were, according to the Rule, supposed to keep their beards neatly trimmed, the Templars were actively encouraged to grow their beards long (Plate 23, 24, 28). The reason for this was that their Muslim enemies equated facial hair with masculinity (Dafoe & Butler 2002, Garments). They would never fear a clean-shaven enemy in battle, thinking them feminine or immature, and so the Templars used the psychological effect of facial hair to their advantage. In doing so, they often gained the respect, rather than the scorn of their enemies.

When the Latin Christians first arrived in the Holy Land on the First Crusade, needless to say, the Muslim inhabitants were surprised. They were not entirely certain why these barbaric foreigners had suddenly descended upon them. This confusion about the origin of their enemies led to the Muslims referring to them all as "Franks", though they came from all over Europe.

After a while, however, they began to draw a distinction between new Franks and orientalised Franks, who had lived in the East for some time. The Muslims considered these Franks to be more civilised, and perhaps they were. Usama, an Islamic chronicler contemporary with the Templars, said "Everyone who is a fresh emigrant from the Frankish lands is ruder in character than those who have become acclimatised and have held long association with the Moslems," (Hillenbrand 1999, p. 333). Usama even goes on to describe a group of Templars as his friends.

These "civilised" Franks, with their long beards and understanding of Eastern ways were considered much more worthy opponents in Muslim eyes than their Western brothers. The Templars must have seemed very different in appearance from secular knights; the one with short hair and a full beard, the other clean-shaven with flowing locks; the Templars in their white habits, all alike and indistinguishable, the secular knight with his armorial colours, so that he would stand out on the field of battle and be recognised by his men.

Templars maintained a group identity, and that identity was of purity and fearlessness. So long as they held to their vows, there was nothing to fear. They were willing martyrs, and proud to bear the mark which proclaimed this to the world. Even in a society which regarded with suspicion anything out of the ordinary, they were not afraid to wear beards, though their countrymen went cleanshaven. While this almost certainly fueled the rumours that the Templars were somehow in league with the Muslims, they did what they had to do to gain the respect--and possibly the fear--of their enemy, even if it was detrimental to their image in the West.

The Arms of the Order

“They wear white mantles with a red cross, and when they go to war a standard of two colors called balzaus is borne before them.” -- Anonymous contemporary source (Dafoe & Butler 2001, Beausant)

The Importance of Arms

The purpose of armorial colours and insignia in the Medieval period was for identification o [corrupted]

If a knight performed a great deed, everyone would know, without question, who had performed it, and it would enhance his prestige.    No other knight could steal the glory by claiming mistaken identity.  Even people who did not know him by name might recognise him by his heraldry for the deeds they had witnessed him performing.  As Franklyn (1963, p. 52) tells us, “the knight, identified by his arms, was constrained to act in a manner that could bring nothing but fair renown on his family, and his travels and his conquests added to the brilliance and complexity of his arms.”

Even in the worst-case scenario, a knight’s heraldry was useful.  If a knight failed to return from the field of battle, his men could find his body with relative easy, based on the colours [corrupted]

While other knights stood out as individuals, the Templars had a group identity, and at the same time, anonymity.  A Templar on the field of battle had nothing to distinguish himself from his brothers.  Any deed he did, no matter how great, would not be to his own credit, since as an individual, a Templar was relatively anonymous.  His actions contributed to the reputation of his Order.

“Brothers should not be encouraged to strive for distinction, as this would undermine the discipline of the Order,” (Nicholson 1995, p. 119).  A brother who gained celebrity would disrupt the communal life of the Order.  It is perhaps for this reason that no Templar brother ever attained sainthood--a popular martyr's cult would have trouble forming around an anonymous knight, despite the frequency of martˇyrdom within the Order.

St Bernard praises the Order for their lack of flamboyance, saying “they arm themselves... with steel rather than decorate themselves with gold, since their business is to strike fear in the enemy rather than to incite his cupidity,” (Blanchard 1995, Military Orders).  To the Templars, it was about winning, not showing off and gaining recognition.  This behaviour, somewhat ironically, gained the Order as a whole far greater recognition than secular knights who intentionally sought glory found.

The Order’s banner or standard provided a rallying point for their company in battle.  An army that did not stick together in a fight was doomed, so it was important to have an eye-catching standard, to make finding one’s position easy, even in the most chaotic circumstances.

The importance of the banner inspired a kind of team spirit.  The Templars, as any other group of their day, were fiercely proud of their banner, and would protect it at all cost.  The feeling it inspired was important, [corrupted] (Butler 2002, Beauseant).

Because of the importance of the standard, strict rules were made regarding its treatment.  In peace, the Seneschal protected the banner, but in battle, the Marshall was charged with holding it aloft, and ten Templars were chosen to guard him, and he always carried a spare, in case anything should befall the original.  If the Marshal was killed, it was the commander’s duty to take the standard.  As long as the banner flew, they must fight, and as long as the fight continued, the banner must fly (Dafoe & Butler 2002, Beauseant).

“At [corrupted]

St George’s Cross in the Arms of the Order

Many people erroneously associate St George’s cross with the arms of the Order. When they think of the Templars, they image a shield bearing a red cross on a white field, matching the Order’s habit.  This was not the case--or not entirely.  Franklyn (1963, pp. 69, 309) is one of the only authors I found who strongly associated St George’s cross with Templar arms.

He describes their shield as a pale and fess cross, which is defined as a vertical and a horizontal bar, extending to the edge of the shield.  In some situations, the limbs of the cross might be cut short, or couped.  He also tells us that this emblem is an early example of counterchanging, or reversing the colours of a shield.  In this case, that of the Hospitallers, whose shield and banner bore a white cross on a red field.

St George’s cross was, however, not the usual shield and standard of the Order.  It was more likely to be associated with crusading knights or in images of the host of heaven.  Their official banner was called the Beauseant.

The Templar standard (Plates 1, 2, 27, 28), called the Beauseant, was a simpler design--argent with a chief sable, meaning the bottom part was white and the top black--often called a piebald.  According to heraldic tradition, white was the colour of peace and serenity, while black represented constancy and red military fortitude.  However, scholars believe that the Templar use of the black and white arms represented the contrast between the sinfulness of the world they had left behind and the purity their new life offered them--a transformation from dark to light.  The reason for the arrangement of the two colours on the shield and standard is unclear, though some suggest it may have been Hugues de Payens’ own family crest (Anonymous 2002, Grand M [corrupted]

The Rule of the Order makes many references to the piebald banner or confanon bauçon, but the origin of the name or Beauseant is unclear.  It is variously spelled bauçon, bauçaut, balzaus, baucent and Beauseant, though some variation in Medieval spelling is far from unusual.  Brault (1997, p. 160) tells us that is comes from the Old French baucent or Vernacular Latin baltthe banner.  Thus, the banner became known as the “Beau Seant”, which was also the Templar’s war cry.  

Dafoe and Butler (2002, Beauseant) suggest an altogether different derivation.  They take it from the French word “beau”, which in modern French means “beautiful”, but which, they say, in Medieval French meant something closer to “glorious” or “magnificent”.  This would render their war cry as “be glorious” or “to glory”.

Ernoul, a late twelfth century French chronicler, also mentions the “bauçaut”, but his description is very different (see below).  His states that the derivation is “piebald”.  Perhaps the Templars were just calling the banner what it was.  Or perhaps it was called after a favourite horse of the Order, since piebald is certainly a [corrupted] tee must depend upon his mount not to panic in the face of chaos.

Variations

Upton-Ward (1992, p. 44) describes it as “a two-pointed pennant divided horizontally with white above and black below.”  What she describes is similar to the banner found in the frescoes of the Templar church in Perugia (Plate 28) where we see a banner, shield, and the draping of a horse, all with the white-over-black arms, and featuring a black cross in the white part.

However, Matthew Paris depicts the Beauseant in several places as a rectangular, vertical banner with the black crowning the white (Plates 1, 2, 26, 27).  Since no actual Templar standard survives, it is imanner was the one carried by the regular troops.

However, Ernoul also seem to be describing the Perugian banner in his chronicle (Nicholson 2001, p. 29).  He tells us that the first Templars fell under the jurisdiction of the prior of the Holy Sepulchre.  They had come to the Holy Land as crusaders, and wanted to form their own knightly Order.  When they moved to their own headquarters in the Aqsa Mosque, the Prior allowed them to carry with them a badge with a red cross--the symbol of the holy sepulchre was a cross with two red arms--not a black one as in the Perugian church fresco.  He refers to this banner as the bauçaut or piebald standard.

While his story seems plausible, and we may assume that [corrupted] eir deaths, no one could be sure how it had really happened.

Brault (1997, p. 144, 160) also tells us that the Beauseant was, according to some sources, “surcharged with a red cross,” which would mean that the cross was over the black and the white of the standard.  Another of his sources calls it “argent, on a chief sable a cross patonce gules,” which describes Matthew Paris’s version of the Beauseant, but with a red cross on the black part.  Yet anther of Brault’s sources lists Paris’s banner, but with the red cross in the white part.

It seems that ev [corrupted]

Though these stark, uncomplicated heraldic devices would have stood out on the field of battle, and become recognisable as a regular feature of any battle against the Franks, the Muslim chroniclers, unfortunately, make no mention of them.  Modern historians attribute this to their general disinterest in “Frankish” ways.  Even if they had had much to say on the subject of the Templars, it would not have been detailed, says Hillenbrand (1999, p. 333), “even their descriptions of Muslims are stereotyped.”  It is difficult to glean anything at all about the Templars from the Muslim sources, other than that they were respected by some and hated by others.

The Templars impressed more than just their e [corrupted] --the knowledge that death, too, brought reward.

Conclusion

Founded in 1118, and endorsed by the Church in 1129, the Knights Templar quickly grew in wealth and respect throughout Europe.  They were a refuge for knights who wished to serve their God in a capacity for which they had a talent.  They came to an end very suddenly in 1307 when the King of France accused them of heretical practices.  The Order had to be dissolved.

Very little is left to us of the Templars.  After their sudden dissolution, they continued to exi [corrupted]

Seals were one historical way of expressing identity, like the modern signature.  they could never be perfectly forged, and identified the author of a document.  The owner of a seal chose an emblem he [corrupted]

The seal of the Grand Master of the Temple is one of the biggest mysteries, and is likely to remain so.  Theories on the meaning of the horse with two riders run from homosexuality to spirituality.  The best symbols have many layers of meaning, and it is likely that de Blanchefort meant his to have more than one.  While some of the theories may be what he intended, others are obviously absurd.  The most likely meaning is that it represented the duality and the unity of the Order, being made up of both knights and clergy, at once both and neither.

Templars also used the Chi Rho, an early Christian monogram for the name of Christ.  When Christianity became the official religion, the symbol was adopted by the Emperor Constantine for the shields and banners of his army.

The use of the temple on the reverse of de Blanchefort’s seal was perhaps less apt.  It is not clear what building is begin depicted.  It may be the Dome of the Rock--known to contemporary Christians as the Lord’s Temple--or it may have been the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the first home of the Order, according to some legends.  The Holy Sepulchre would make more sense, due its possible Templar associations, but it was never known as a “temple”, whereas the mosque was.  The building it too stylised to be certain.

Some of the masters and commanders of the smaller temples simply copied the motif of the Grand Master’s seal to show their ties to the Order.  Most, however, developed their own seals.  This was to express their individuality, as they used the opportunity to produceSome seals did not change their emblem through the command of many masters.

Some commanders used animals to express the virtues and characteristics they found important.  These were most often fierce creatures which had connotations of honour and bravery in the face of danger.  Common among these were the lion, the eagle and the griffon.

Other commanders used religious icons.  Some used the face of Christ, while others used the more subtle Agnus Dei--also an animal emblem--which represented Christ and his role as sacrificial lamb.  The Templars wished to be seen in this role--emulators of Christ, with a willingness to suffer and die for their cause.  He is the Church’s sacrificial lamb, and is proud to be so.  This symbol was especially popular with the masters in England.

The Templar’s white habit is, fortunately, one of the few symbols that is explained by contemporary texts.  Its white represents purity, and its roots are in the habit of the Cistercian Order, with which the Templars had close ties.  The habit caused the Templars to stand out as people who had taken vows, and were removed from everyday society.

The red cross--the symbol of St George--was added to the habit later.  The red of blood against the purity of the white habit was a mark of martyrdom.  On the one hand, St George was everything the Templars aspired to: warrior, martyr and saint.  Bearing his mark meant that they had volunteered themselves as martyrs.  It also caused them to stand out of the battle field; perfect and willing targets for the Muslim archers.

Their hair shows that they understood a little about the enemy they were fighting.  The hair on their heads was clipped short, partly so that it would not become a source of sinful pride, but mostly so that it would not get into their eyes when they fought.  They grew their beards long, though, because their enemies associated facial hair with masculinity.  They would not have been frightened of an army of effeminate-looking boys.  The beards gave the Templars a psychological advantage, which earned them respect from their enemies.  It also made them more visible in the clean-shaven west.

Also important the the image of the Templars were the arms they carried in battle.  The coat of arms told contemporaries who a man was, even when his face was obscured by a helmet.  They brought recognition to individuals.  a Templar’s arms identified him as a member of a group, not as an individual.  This was to discourage personal pride, and the seeking o [corrupted]

The Templars did not generally sport St George’s cross on their shields and banners.  They instead use the Beauseant, and simple black and white emblem, which is at time said to incorporate a red or black cross.  While there is no agreed-upon version of the Beauseant, each one would have been easily recognisable, even at a distance, to the men who knew it, and that, after all, was the point.

Through their seal in official practice, and their dress in daily life and on the field of battle, the Knights Templar distinguished themselves in 12th and 13th century Europe.  Though some of the meanings of these symbols are now lost to us, so that we can only guess at them, others live on and inspire thoughts in our minds of who the Templars were.  They call to mind a time, a place and a group unique in history, but their ls have become obfuscated, and it takes resolve to find them.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anonymous, 1997.  The Bible: Revised Standard Version.  http://www.hti.umich.edu/r/rsv/.

Anonymous, 2002.  Ordo Supremus Militaris Templi Hierosolymitani (OSMTH):  Official International Knights Templar Website.   http://www.ordotempli.org/.

Blanchard, L. V. and Schriber, C. (eds.), 1995.  The Online Reference Book for Medieval Studies (ORB).  http://orb.rhodes.edu/.

Brault, G. J., 1997. Early Blazons:  Heraldic Terminology in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries With Special Reference to Arthurian Heraldry. 2nd ed. Woodbridge (Suffolk): The Boydell Press.

Dafoe, S. and Butler, A., 2002.  A History & Mythos of the Knights Templar.  http://www.tem

Forey, A. J., 1992. The Military Orders From the Twelfth to the Early Fourteenth Centuries.  Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Franklyn, J., 1963. Shield & Crest. 2nd ed. London: MacGibbon & Kee, London.

Hillenbrand, C., 1999. The Crusades, Islamic Perspective.  Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Hollister, C. W., 1982. Medieval Europe:  A Short History. 5th ed. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Knight, K. (ed.), 1999.  The Catholic  [corrupted]

Nicholson, H., 1995. Templars, Hospitallers and Teutonic Knights, Images of the Military Orders, 1128-1291. London:  Leicester University Press.

Nicholson, H., 2001. The Knights Templar, A New History.  Gloucester:  Sutton Publishing Limited.

Partner, P., 1982. The Murdered Magicians.  Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Riley-Smith, J., 1987. The Crusades:  A Short History.  New Haven: Yale University Press.

Ritook, P., 1994.  The Architechture of the Knights Templar in England.  In: M. Barber, ed. The Military Orders: Fighting for the Faith and Caring for the Sick.  Hampshire:  Variorum  [corrupted]

Selwood, D., 1999. Knights of the Cloister:  Templars and Hospitallers in Central-Southern Occitania 1100-1300.  Woodbridge (Suffolk): The Boydell Press.

Seward, D., 1972. The Monks of War:  The Military Religious Orders.  London:  Eyre Methuen Ltd.

Upton-Ward, J. M. (translator), 1992. The Rule of the Templars:  The French Text of the Rule of the Order of the Knights Templar. Woodbridge (Suffolk):  The Boydell Press.

Vaughan, R., 1958. Matthew Paris.  Cambridge:  Cambridge University Press.

Vaughan, R. (translator), 1984. Chronicles of Matthew Paris:  Monastic Life in the Thirteenth Century. Gloucester:  Alan Sutton Publishing Limited.

“If some among them are innocent, it is expedient that they should be assayed like gold in the furnace and purged by proper judicial examination.”  Royal letter opening the Inquiry into the Templars 1307 (Anonymous 2002, Ancient Templar Quotes).