The new knighthood

 

Were the Knights Templar heretics? Official history says “no”. But surely, there was *something* strange about the Templars. Their supposed idol Baphomet, for instance. Unknown to the Inquisition, “Baphomet” is actually secret gematria code for “Sophia”, the Goddess of Wisdom. So is it really likely that “Baphomet” was just a name invented by the persecutors? Also, Templars in the Middle East wore pendants with pictures of Abraxas. Another co-incidence, I´m sure. I mean, what do you *do* as a Catholic crusader in Alexandria? Gotta fetch some local currency, man! Also, Templar churches were round, since the Temple of Solomon was supposed to have been so. I´m sure there are nooooo esoterick speculations around this ancient Temple, naaaah.

We know that esoteric knowledge reached Europe from the Middle East during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. What about the Picatrix, for instance? That´s a book about magic! The crusaders were temporary allied with the Ismailites, an esoteric Shia Muslim sect ruling Egypt (before being defeated by Saladin). The High Middle Ages were also the heyday of the Kabbala. Believe it or not, but some Jews actually cooperated with the Templars. My point: how likely is it that a crusading order *in the Middle East* with day-to-day contact with presumably heterodox Muslims and Jews *wasn´t* influenced by various esoteric ideas and speculations? To see the Knights Templar as some kind of Counter-Reformation or Vatican I Catholics is surely anachronistic in the extreme!

Note also that the Templars were formed at the initiative of Bernhard of Clairvaux, a prominent Catholic monk and mystic. His “bride chamber mysticism”, based on the Song of Songs (which just happens to be attributed to Solomon), sounds downright erotic. Indeed, if Bernhard had been a Hindu, he might have been classified as a Left Hand Tantrika of the Shrikula type! Note also that the Valentinian Gnostics called their highest and most secret sacrament “the bride chamber”. All co-incidences, I´m sure.

But does the above mean that the Order of the Temple were heretics or heterodox? Not necessarily, since who is “heterodox” is always a bit relative. Bernhard of Clairvaux became a saint, while the Templars eventually got burned at the stake. As I pointed out several years ago in another blog post, all guilds during the Middle Ages had secret initiation rituals, often with fake “Biblical” traditions appended. Belief in magic must have been widespread, even if the Church officially opposed such things. So it´s certainly possible that the Templars may have had ideas which were only borderline heterodox during the crusades, but became more controversial later.

I´m not sure if the same could be said about the Knights Hospitaller. They venerated the severed head (!) of John the Baptist, but it´s not clear to me how many esoteric speculations there were about this precursor to Jesus. The Mandeans saw John as a prophet, but this Gnostic sect was presumably quite small and far away from Palestine. I sure wonder how Kabbalistic Jews or Ismailites saw John...

Still, from the top of my head, it *does* look strange that the two main crusading orders were named after the Temple of Solomon and John the Baptist, respectively. Two things which may – or may not – have esoteric connotations.