THE KNIGHTS TEMPLAR

Various theories have been advanced concerning the origin of the Order of Knights Templar. After the Pope of Rome had declared the Order disbanded, little or nothing is heard concerning its activity. It is claimed that rumors were rife in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries that the Order had again revived and that once in every thirteen years it met on the Island of Malta, and it has been asserted that its hand was visible in the Lutheran reformation. Another theory is that after the burning of DeMolay, and the dispersion of the Order by the Pope and King, that the Knights Templar became Freemasons. There is, however, not the slightest warrant for either belief. Whatever Freemasonry may have existed in the Fourteenth Century, was simply a crude organization of stone masons united in a sort of trades union to maintain their existence as working men. As much of the labor performed by these Craft Guilds was in connection with the erection of great cathedrals and religious edifices financed by the Roman Catholic clergy, it is not believed that any amalgamation between Knights Templar and the Masonic guilds could have existed without being detected by the ever watchful guardians of the power of the Roman Catholic Church.

Nor did the Order of Knights Templar originate, as some suppose, from that numerous brood of Knights Errant or Wandering Knights which spread like an epidemic over Europe, Portugal, and Spain, and which was patterned after the Order of Knights Templar. These imitation Knights consisted generally of some vagabond who managed to procure a horse and a suit of armor, and selecting for his companion a ruffian of the worst type, the unprincipled pair would start out in search of adventure. With the advent of the Knights Errant, came a host of romances which make the cheap novel of today colorless reading. These romances set forth the wonderful exploits of such famous Knights as Amaks de Gaul, Gonsalvo the Brave, and many fictitious heroes. These highly imaginative tales of the Baron Munchausen type relate how these fearless warriors descended into dark and dangerous caverns to liberate christian captives from Moslem giants ; how they climbed inaccessible castles to rescue the enchanted maiden; how they fought fiery dragons; swam the fathomless ocean; vanquished innumerable hosts of infidels; and performed deeds of valor impossible to any but Knights Errant. This travesty on the distinguished Order of Knights Templar continued until Cervantes wrote his inimitable satire which resulted in the exposure of this crude imitation of a once powerful and righteous Order.

The distinguished Masonic authority, Albert Mackey, says "The manufacturers of Masonic legends have found in the death of DeMolay and the dissolution of the Order of Templars, a fertile source from which to draw materials for their fanciful theories and surreptitious documents. Among these legends there was, for instance, one which maintained that during his captivity in the bastile, the Grand Master of the Templars established four Chiefs of the Order, in the North, the South, the East, and the West of Europe, whose seats of government were respectively at Stockholm, Naples, Paris, and Edinburgh. Another invention of these Masonic speculators was the forgery of that document so well known as "The Charter of Larmenius." The English Masonic historian, Hughan, writes: "The Masonic Knights Templar of the Eighteenth Century and since have no connection with the earlier body and never had. The origin of Masonic Templary is unknown."

The English historian, Froud, probably gives the best estimate concerning the legendary origin of the present Order of Knights Templar, for he says, "Many conflicting opinions and surmises have been advanced as to how, why, and when the Templar system was introduced into Freemasonry. The origin of all Masonic degrees is not always easy to ascertain, the Fraternity being adverse to publicity handing down to posterity their peculiar secrets viva voce, with the same caution that the philosophers of old displayed in perpetuating their symbols and mysteries, and the ancient Templars, like the Jesuits, never communicated their proceedings to strangers. Some of them, in their secret conclaves, were even concealed from the greater part of their own members. It is, therefore, not unlikely that small organizations were kept up in many places and the hope cherished that it would be possible to revive the Order. A great and extensive organization could not wholly have lost its vitality and died out without a struggle, but it is equally unreasonable to believe that the fragments entered into any association of workingmen such as that of the corporation of builders or Freemasons who could not have been expected to devote themselves to the restoration of the old military Templar Order in direct opposition to the ban of the church; even personal safety would not have been secured to the Knights, and there is no proof that they ever joined the German building sodalities to restore the Order. . . . It is difficult to understand how Freemasonry and the Order of the Temple could ever have become amalgamated. Symbolic Masonry is of its very existence, cosmopolitan; Templary sprang from an origin chivalric and knightly. The trowel of the one, leveled distinctions and spread the cement of universal fraternity, the sword and spurs of the other could only be obtained and worn by men of noble birth, or those famed for heroic deeds in defense of the Christian faith." "There is not the slightest foundation for the fable that members of the dispersed Templars, after the political suppression in 1314, became Freemasons; it is but one of the fabrications of modern Masonic tradition to account for the amalgamation of Templary with Masonry, totally opposed to historic facts, for it is not even probable that the proud and haughty nobles of that age from which class the Templar Order was selected, would engraft themselves upon a society of mere mechanics, when all the great military Orders in Europe were open to them, and only too glad to receive into their ranks so renowned a military body as the chivalry of the Templars . . . The claims of France rest upon a charter given to Larmenius by DeMolai, which has been proved a forgery."

The four legendary sources from which the Order of Knights Templar is said to have originated may be enumerated as follows: 1. The Templars who claim John Mark Larmenius as the successor of James de Molay. 2. Those who recognize Peter d'Aumont as the successor of Molay. 3. Those who derive their Templarism from the Count Beaujeu, the nephew of Molay. 4. Those who claim an independent origin, and repudiate alike the authority of Larmenius, of Aumont, and of Beaujeu.

Concerning the claim that Larmenius was the successor of James de Molay, it is pointed out, as has already been mentioned, that the document by which lie claimed to acquire the authority of Molay has been found to be a forgery, the document having been executed by a body of men who sought to gain affiliation with the Order. The claim of direct descent through Peter d'Aumont in Scotland is equally fallacious, and has been frankly disavowed. Likewise, the theory that the modern Templar both has been derived through Count Beaujeu, the nephew of Molay, has also been exploded with the result that all attempts to connect the present Order of Knights Templar with the bold warriors of the Crusades is regarded as purely imaginative, and the working out of a mind that seeks not to base its deductions upon historical facts, but rather upon those legendary and speculative deductions which are pleasing.

From 1314 to 1769, a period of four hundred and twentyfive years, is a gap which cannot be measured, and there is absolutely nothing to show any connection whatsoever between the present Order of Knights Templar and that band of brave men who sought to rescue the Holy Land from Moslem possession. For that reason, we must seek an independent origin for the Order.

This much we know; that the Order was resuscitated, and came forth in glorious transformation. The cross was again assumed as a sign of universal good will to men. No more crusades were planned to rescue the Holy Land, but pilgrimages of Charity and Mercy were set on foot and the vow registered that the religion of the Christ should be defended, not with sword and buckler but with charitable thought, noble deed, and an abiding faith in the Fatherhood of God, and the Brotherhood of Man.

Following the organization of the Grand Lodge of England in I717, and the spread of Masonry into various countries, there began the manufacture of a large number of degrees based upon existing legends and such other data as were obtainable. W. J. Chetwode Crawley, the distinguished Irish historian, is authority for the statement that during this era when degrees were propagating, one of the strong ideas then prevalent was that of retribution for wanton injustice by restoring to oppressed people, their inherent rights. This idea took form in the guise of an Order of the Temple, which should arise from its long slumber and smite the tyrants with tremendous sword. According to Crawley, this degree of vengeance, as it was commonly called, was traced to Lyons, the date of its origin being given as 1743. This degree was incorporated into the Rite of Perfection, known as the Scottish Rite system, and became the basis of the now thirtieth degree of that Rite, although later day ritual builders have so modified the degree that its original form is no longer recognizable. It is believed that other degrees were projected at this time in which the exploits of the old Order of Knights Templar were used as a basis of fabricating rituals, and it is suspected that in this jargon of degrees which were so plentiful in this period that there grew in a vague way, certain rituals of strong Knights Templar tendencies, which while lacking anything in the nature of organization were communicated as a means of additional Masonic information, and from these sources in a natural way grew the Order as it has come to us at the present time.

One of the early records of St. Stephen's Lodge, Edinburg, contains minutes which read as follows:

"This day the compliment of six sundry steps was offered to the Office-Bearers of St. Stephens Lodge by sundry of the Brethren from the Ancient Lodge of Perth and Scoon."
Accordingly, two days later, 4th December, 1778:

"This night being set apart by the Brethren of Perth and Scoon Lodge in order to confer on the Office-Bearers of St. Stephen's Lodge, the following degrees of Masonry, viz., Excellent and Suiper-Excellent Masons, Arch and Royal Arch Masons, and Knights of Malta."

The first record of the conferring of the Templar degrees in America is in St. Andrews' Royal Arch Chapter, Boston, on the 28th day of August, 1769. During that month there were stationed in the city three army lodges belonging to British regiments, and these were uniting with St. Andrews' Lodge in the work of Masonry. The minutes of this body state that "Bro. William Davis came before the lodge begging to have and receive the parts belonging to the Royal Arch Masons, which being read, was received and he was unanimously voted in, and was accordingly made by receiving the four steps, that of Excellent, Super-Excellent, Royal Arch, and Knight Templar," and this narks the introduction of the Templar Order into the United States of America. Soon after, these degrees in whatever form they may have been, were taken up by Thomas Smith Webb to whom we owe much of our present Masonic ritual, and by him were introduced into New York, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Maryland, Rhode Island, and Connecticut.

It must not be supposed that the original Order which was conferred in the latter part of the Eighteenth Century will at all compare with the modern Orders as conferred in Commanderies of Knights Templar. The ritual, like everything else connected with the institution of Freemasonry, has undergone a tremendous evolution. Time and the influence of environment have naturally amplified and embellished the degree until it is presented today in an almost perfect form, but the rudiments may be directly traced to the latter part of the Eighteenth Century to that chaotic embryonic period of degree making, when various ideas and conceptions of Masonry were taking form in sporadic rituals, the result of the effort of ambitious degree builders who sought to exploit the fraternity and bring to themselves Masonic prestige.

The first Grand Encampment of which there is any existing record can be traced to South Carolina, there being in the archives of the Grand Commandery of that state, a seal bearing the date 1780. Newspaper accounts and Lodge minutes of the date 1785 disclose the fact that the Masons and Templars of New York appeared in public procession, the Knights Templar regaled in uniform, on December 27, the occasion being the festival of St. John the Evangelist. There are other records of various Encampments of Knights Templar existing from 1785 to 1844. On February 15, of this latter year, a Grand Convention of Knights Templar was held in the city of Philadelphia and the Grand Encampment of Knights Templar in Pennsylvania organized. This organization, after ten years of existence, disbanded, the reasons being given that the members did not feel disposed to join in a general organization of Knights Templar then being contemplated.

On the 13th day of May, 1805, a meeting was held in Providence, R. I., looking to the formation of a Grand Encampment of Knights Templar. This took definite form with the selection of Thomas Smith Webb as first Grand Master. It was not, however, until the year 1814 that a formal organization was accomplished. At this Conclave, DeWitt Clinton became first Grand Master, and served until his death in 1828, and this marked the commencement of the Order of Knights Templar which however feeble in its beginning, has grown into a powerful organization embracing the flower of American manhood.

Back to History and Evolution of Freemasonry [ Next ] [ Previous ]