From this we can assume that they were chaste, tried not to lie, didn’t take oaths, and didn’t believe in the intercession of priests. They also had a kind of baptism, called the consolamentum, that one could take only once. As with baptism in the early days of Christianity, many believers waited until their deathbeds to take this. How many people can be certain that they won’t backslide? That’s why those who accepted the consolamentum early were so honored as perfect ones.
Finally, it was considered by the pope, Innocent III, and many others that the situation was out of control. Even the count of Toulouse, Raymond VI, was considered to be, if not a Cathar, at least a sympathizer.12 In 1208, Pope Innocent excommunicated Raymond VI and called for a crusade against the Cathars.13
The resulting war was long and terrible. At the end, the Cathars were decimated and most of Occitania was under the control of the king of France.
The last stand of the Cathars took place at the fortress of Montségur on top of a rugged mountain in southern France. A group of several hundred had held out against the French army for nearly two years. Finally they realized they would have to surrender. On March 14, 1244, the defenders of the fortress came down the steep path and calmly walked to the pyre that had been prepared for them. Over two hundred men, women, and children died in the flames, including the most important leaders of the church.
A persistent and unsupported legend holds that on the night before the Cathars surrendered and were taken to the pyre, a treasure was lowered down the cliff upon which the Cathar castle of Montségur was perched. Since it is supposed to be a secret treasure important enough to die for, with no evidence that it ever existed, of course some versions of the legend say that it was eventually given to the Templars.
Looking at the fortress of Montségur, I find it hard to imagine how large treasure chests could have been lowered down, by night, with an enemy army all around. I do find it easy to understand how the Cathers and their supporters could have held out there for so long.
So what was the relationship of the Templars to the Cathars?
The fortress of Montségur. (Sharan Newman)
A popular but deeply flawed book posited that some of the Cathars were secret Templars and that one of the Grand Masters, Bertrand of Blancfort (or Blanchefort), was a Cathar, from a Cathar family, and that the Templars provided a refuge for the Cathars.14 This is footnoted(!), so I went to see the proofs the authors gave.
The first, that Bertrand was a Cathar, is based on two Templar charters from the 1130s, ten years before there is any mention of Cathars in Occitania.15Well, I thought, trying to keep an open mind, maybe the family converted early. However, when I went to look at the charters, I discovered that Bertrand of Blancfort was not in them. It was Bernard de Blanchefort, an entirely different person. They may have been related, but there is no indication of that. Also, the book that the authors used is a compilation of Templar charters from many archives. These particular ones come from the Cartulaires de Douzens, one of the earliest of the Templar commanderies in Occitania.16So I went to check that.
The commandery at Douzens has several more charters from Bernard de Blanchefort. All of them are group donations, in which Bernard is giving property along with several of his neighbors. Still, it is established that in the 1130s the family were donating to the Temple. As a matter of fact, in 1147, Bernard’s niece gave land to Douzens.17 Does that mean that the family were Templar supporters? Probably; of course, they may have just been going with the group. Does that mean that Grand Master Bertrand of Blancfort was a member of that family? No. There are a number of Blancfort/Blancheforts in France. We need more evidence.
We also need more evidence for the statement that the family was Cathar, whether or not Bertrand was a member of it. Most of the people in Occitania were not active members of the Cathar church.
What about the charge that the Templars offered shelter to Cathars? The footnote for that is “A document found in the archives of the Bruyères and Mauléon family records how the Templars of Compagne and Albedune (le Bézu) established a house of refuge for Cathar ‘bonhommes.’ This document and others disappeared during the war, sometime in November, 1942” (emphasis mine).18
Well, darn!
Apart from lost documents that were apparently never copied, there is no evidence that the Templars had anything to do with the Cathars. They refused to fight against the heretics for the same reason that they refused to join the crusade against Constantinople or get involved in the wars of the popes. Their job was to fight Saracens and regain land for Christianity.
William of Puylaurens, a chronicler of the crusades against the Cathars, rarely mentions the Templars, but when he does, it’s always on the side of the Roman Church. When Cathar sympathizer Count Raymond of Toulouse ordered that his brother, Baldwin, be hanged, “The brothers Templar asked for and were granted possession of his body, which they took down from the gallows-tree and buried in the cloister at Lavilledieu near to the church.”19
It’s popular now to think of the crusade against the Cathars as something done by outside forces, the pope and the king of France. But it was also a civil war. Baldwin had taken the side of the Church against his brother. The Templars were on his side.
The same group of Templars also gave shelter to the bishop of Toulouse, who could not get into the city while the Cathars held it.20
It’s certain that the Templars in Occitania knew Cathars and were even related to some. Everyone was. The schism divided many families. 21 One scholar who has tried to find contacts between the Templars and the Cathars only came up with the names of three men who were tried for heresy, all after their deaths. Each had donated or sold land to the Templars of Mas Deu. Two were found innocent.22 The third man, Pierre de Fenouillet, had received the last rites and been buried at Mas Deu in 1242. At the trial, twenty years later, it was said that he was a practicing Cathar and that the Templars had allowed the perfecti to come to the commandery and give Pierre the consolamentum . Pierre was convicted; his bones were dug up and burned.23
Did this really happen? I don’t know. The Inquisition doesn’t have a great record for accuracy, but it’s possible. If it is true, does it mean that the Templars of Mas Deu were heretics? No. There are lots of other reasons why they might have allowed Pierre to be buried in their cemetery. If Pierre had been a rich patron or just a good friend, they might have looked the other way. It’s hard to refuse the wish of a dying man, especially if he’s someone you know and like.
A few years before the death of Pierre de Fenouillet, the commander of Mas Deu had been a witness for the prosecution at the trial of the Cathars.24
There is absolutely no evidence that the Templars were Cathars or Cathar sympathizers. The Hospitallers, on the other hand, are known to have taken in and protected Count Raymond VI while he was under excommunication for heresy.25
So why weren’t the Hospitallers the ones who were supposed to have helped the Cathars save their treasure? It couldn’t be because the Templars had been accused of heresy and suppressed and therefore couldn’t be questioned about it. Of course not. It is true that the charges against the Templars were written with the intention of reminding people of the Cathars, who really had been outside of orthodox belief. But there are no similarities between real belief of the Cathars and those of the Templars. Both groups were accused of worshipping a black cat. Both were accused of homosexuality, the Cathars because they preached against procreation and the Templars because they were a bunch of young fighting men who had taken vows of chastity and we all know what that leads to, don’t we?
No serious scholar has ever found a connection between them.
1Cosmos, “Sermon against Bogomilism, 970,” in Heresy and Authority in Medieval Europe, ed. Edward Peters (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1980) p. 109.
2Steven Runciman, The Medieval Manichee: A Study of the Christian Dualist Heresy (Cambridge University Press, 1947).
3Peters, “Introduction to the Cathars,” in Heresy and Autho
rity, p. 104.
4Cosmos, pp. 112-13.
5 Ibid., pp. 113-14.
6Walter L. Wakefield and Austin P. Evans ed. and tr., Heresies of the High Middle Ages (Columbia University Press, 1969) pp. 107-15.
7Peter the Venerable, abbot of Cluny, “Against the Petrobrusians,” in Wakefield and Evans, pp. 120-21.
8Beverly Mayne Kienzle, Cistercians, Heresy and Crusade in Occitania 1145-1229 (York Medieval Press, Boydell, Woodbridge, 2001) pp. 82-84.
9Geoffrey of Auxerre, “Vita Bernardi,” “ex his vero qui favebant haeresi illi plurimi erant et maximi civitatis illius.” Bernard of Clairvaux, Omni Opera, Vol IV p. 227.
10Élie Griffe, L’Aventure Cathare 1140-1190 (Paris, 1966) p. 39.
11Peter of Vaux-de Cernay, “A Description of Cathazrs and Waldenses,” in Wakefield and Evans, p. 239.
12Joseph Strayer, The Albigensian Crusades (Michigan University Press, 1992; rpt. of 1971 ed.) p. 59.
13Michael Costen, The Cathars and the Albigensian Crusades (Manchester University Press, 1997) p. 120.
14Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln, The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail (New York: Random House, 1982) p. 70. This book needs an entire team of scholars to explain all the mistakes in it. I would be happy to volunteer to be one of them.
15Marquis d’Albon, Cartulaire Général de l’Ordre du Temple 1119?-1150 (Paris, 1913) p. 41, charter no. 41, and p. 112, charter no. 160.
16Ibid., and Cartulaires des Templier de Douzens ed. Pierre Gérard and Élisabeth Magnou (Paris, 1965) p. 49, charter no. A 38, and p. 164, charter no. A 185.
17Douzens, pp. 180-81, charter A 207.
18Baigent et al., p. 515. That’s why footnotes are so important.
19W. A. Sibly and M. D. Sibly tr., The Chronicle of William of Puylaurens (Boydell, Woodbridge, 2003) p. 50.
20Ibid., p. 77.
21For a start on learning about Cathars, see Malcolm Barber, The Cathars: Dualist Heretics in Languedoc in the High Middle Ages (London: Longman, 2000); also Griffe, Strayer, Wakefield and Evans, and Peters, cited above.
22Robert Vinas, L’Ordre du Temple en Roussillon (Trabucaire, Carnet, 2001) p. 113.
23Ibid., pp. 113-14.
24Ibid., p. 114.
25Dominic Sellwood, Knights of the Cloister: Templars and Hospitallers in Central-Southern Occitania 1100-1300 (Boydell, Woodbridge, 1999) p. 110.
PART FOUR
The Beginning of the Legends
CHAPTER FORTY-TWO
Templars in Fiction
Considering the amount of popular fiction about them today, it may seem odd that Templars appeared very rarely in the epic and romance literature of the Middle Ages and never as the main characters.
The earliest reference to them is in the dark epic Raoul de Cambrai . The story, written in the last quarter of the twelfth century, is set in what is today northern France, supposedly in the tenth century. It is a tale of betrayal, honor, murder, and redemption. The Templars only figure in the last of these. At the very end of the story the antihero, Bernier, faced with execution for killing his mother’s murderer, volunteers instead to go to Acre and become a Templar as his penance.1
The Temple is used as a place of penance in other epics, such as La Chevalerie d’Ogier de Danemarche and Renaut de Montauban. In Ogier the knight is willing to serve in the “Hospital or the Temple” as his penance.2 This is an early indication that the order of the Hospitallers and the Templars were interchangeable in the minds of many people. Like Raoul, the knight in Ogier, named Charlot, is joining the Temple (or Hospital) as penance for the murder of another knight. It is pointed out, by the way, that Charlot is deeply sorry for this and he leaves all his property to Ogier, father of the murdered knight.3 It was well understood that penance without repentance was useless. Joining the Templars with the wrong attitude earned no points in heaven.
These popular medieval works of fiction underlined the purpose of the military orders as religious houses. They were seen by the authors as places where a well-born fighting man could atone for his sins of violence by using that violence against the enemies of Christ. This is the aspect of the Templars that was stressed in Bernard of Clairvaux’s exhortation to the knights. So in this case, the fictional knights are mirroring the actions of contemporaries and, perhaps, encouraging others to follow their example.
It is surprising that in the many works which make up the epic stories of the crusades, the Templars only appear in a supporting role. In the Chanson des Chétifs (“the song of the miserable prisoners,” sometimes translated as “the song of the bastards”). The character Harpin is based on a real person who was in captivity during the First Crusade.4 While in prison the real Harpin made a vow that, if he were ever freed, he would end his life as a monk. He joined the monastery of Cluny in 1109. However, that didn’t make good drama, so the author of Chétifs has him join the Templars instead.5
Again, in the story the Templars exist, but we never see them fighting or taking an active part.
One role that the Templars often played in medieval fiction was as protectors of lovers. In the thirteenth century a number of romances featured lovers who went to the Templars seeking refuge. In Sone de Nancy, the Templars help the lovers escape from a queen wishing to have Sone for herself.6 I wonder if they weren’t assigned this role in literature because in reality they and the Hospitallers so often made up the escorts for royal brides on their way to their new homes.
In some epics Templars also are those who arrange for the burial of doomed lovers.7 Neither of these roles is that important and, for the most part, the Templars are generic examples of kind, pious, and chivalrous men.
The fact is, the Templars were not that important in medieval literature. Unlike Richard the Lionheart or Saladin, there are no rousing poems extolling their exploits. Why not? I think it’s because the Templars were seen as background. They were a fine group of men doing an important job but not the real players. They were often mentioned in passing as examples of selfless knights, generally to chastise those who neglected their duty. An example is the crusader poet Marcabru, who wrote, “In Spain and here, the Marquis and those of the Temple of Solomon suffer the weight and the burden of pagan pride.”8 Marcabru thinks someone should help.
In modern fiction the Templars are associated with Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table but in medieval lore their only connection with Arthurian literature is as the guardians of the Grail in Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival. The Templars are knights who “dwell with the Grail at Munsalvaesche. Always when they ride out, as they often do, it is to seek adventure. They do so for their sins, these Tempeleisen, whether their reward is defeat or victory.”9 The Templars in Parzival are a small part of the story, more background than anything else, and they have several characteristics that the real Templars didn’t share. For instance, in Wolfram’s story there were female Tempeleisen .
Apart from a few authors who drew on Wolfram’s work, the Templars are not seen in association with the Grail or with the very popular tales of King Arthur and his court. In the world of medieval fantasy, the Templars had no place. By the end of the thirteenth century they were considered more symbols of debauchery than guardians of secret wisdom. The phrase “drunk as a Templar” became commonplace in France. In the sixteenth century, Rabelais uses it in his work. “Once he got together three or four good country fellows and set them to drinking like Templars the whole night long.”10In Germany, “going to the Temple” was a popular euphemism for visiting a brothel.11
For over six hundred years, popular writers didn’t consider the Templars worth their time. This changed at the beginning of the nineteenth century, with Sir Walter Scott’s two novels The Talisman and Ivanhoe. Set in the time of the crusades, these works, a blend of history, legend, and imagination, reintroduced the Templars to a world that, outside of Freemasonry, had forgotten them.
Scott’s villain is Brian de Bois-Guilbert, a Templar who embodies the medieval complaints of pride and
greed. Added to these character flaws, Bois-Guilbert also plots against the true king and lusts after the Jewish woman Rebecca. He is the consummate evil adversary in the neomedieval revival that began in Britain in the early nineteenth century.
Ivanhoe was first published in 1820. It has been filmed many times and the book is still in print. Generations have received their first, sometimes their only, impression of the Templars from Scott’s rousing fiction.
It is only at the beginning of the twenty-first century that the Templars seem to have come into their own in fiction. The last part of the twentieth century saw an explosion of myths and theories about the Templars, most of which can be categorized with Bigfoot and UFOs. These unhistorical theories yielded a gold mine of plot ideas that are still being refined into fun and exciting stories.
Most recently there have been at least three novels about the Templars. Two, The Last Templar by Raymond Khoury and The Templar Legacy by Steve Berry, are set in the modern world. They both show how the legend of the Templars can be relevant to concerns that we have today. The third, The Knights of the Black and White by Jack White, is a historical novel that uses some of the recent legends, placing them in the time of the real Templars.
It seems a shame that the Templars had to wait seven hundred years to finally be given a starring role in fiction.
1Helen Nicholson, Love, War and the Grail: Templars, Hospitallers, and Teutonic Knights in Medieval Epic and Romance 1150-1500 (Boston: Brill, 2004) p. 35.
2Ibid., p. 38.
3Jean-Charles Payen, La Motif du Repentir de la Littérature Française Médiévale (Geneva: Droz, 1968) pp. 212-13.
The Real History Behind the Templars Page 37
