Talk:Knights Templar: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 04:05, 18 March 2007 editElonka (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators70,958 edits →Good article: - Reference for "tide turning" statement← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 21:54, 18 November 2024 edit undoPARAKANYAA (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers43,626 edits request deactivated, i don't know what this is asking for
(762 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Talk header\|noarchive=yes\|search=no}}
	{{GA}}
			{{Article history
	{{WPMILHIST
			\|action1=FAC
	\|class=GA
			\|action1date=December 5 2004
	\|B-Class-1=yes
			\|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Knights Templar/Archive1
	\|B-Class-2=yes
			\|action1result=failed
	\|B-Class-3=yes
			\|action1oldid=8178816
	\|B-Class-4=yes
	\|B-Class-5=yes
	\|Middle-Ages-task-force=yes
	\|old-peer-review=yes
	}}
	{{facfailed\|Archived_nominations/December_2004#Knights_Templar}}
	{{Archive box\|] ] ] ]}}

			\|action2=GAN
	==Jehan de Vezelay==
			\|action2date=March 1 2007
	Find out more about ] also known as the prohet '''Johannes of Jerusalem'''. Interestingly, there is an article of it in the Albanian version of Misplaced Pages.
			\|action2link=Talk:Knights Templar#Good article
			\|action2result=listed
			\|action2oldid=111793418

			\|action3=WPR
	==Number of members==
			\|action3date=March 6 2007
	It wasn't several members of the church.
			\|action3link=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Knights Templar
	Just saw modern marvels on tv, apparently it was a tenth of the population of the Knights or somethin.
			\|action3result=reviewed
	Very small percentage that where actually tortured.
			\|action3oldid=112925374

			\|action4=FAC
	== Scottish headquarters ==
			\|action4date=03:22, 12 April 2007
			\|action4link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Knights Templar
			\|action4result=promoted
			\|action4oldid=122056095

			\|action5 = FAR
	I didn't see any mention of it here but as there has been a long and ongoing link between Scotland and the Templar Knights I think an inclusion about Temple village might be useful. This was the Scottish headquarters of the Templar Knights. Brief history here:
			\|action5date = 2022-03-26
	http://www.templevillage.org.uk/temple_history.html
			\|action5link = Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Knights Templar/archive1
			\|action5result = demoted
			\|action5oldid = 1079182405

			\|currentstatus=FFA
			\|maindate=October 13, 2007
			\|otd1date=2004-10-13\|otd1oldid=6790308
			\|otd2date=2005-10-13\|otd2oldid=25390924
			\|otd3date=2006-10-13\|otd3oldid=81234870
			\|otd4date=2008-10-13\|otd4oldid=244902990
			\|otd5date=2009-10-13\|otd5oldid=319564877
			\|otd6date=2010-10-13\|otd6oldid=390525087
			\|otd7date=2013-10-13\|otd7oldid=576816997
			\|otd8date=2015-10-13\|otd8oldid=685569216
			\|otd9date=2017-10-13\|otd9oldid=805067359
			\|otd10date=2019-10-13\|otd10oldid=920948834
			\|otd11date=2022-10-13\|otd11oldid=1115758795
			\|otd12date=2023-03-22\|otd12oldid=1145889601
			}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|collapsed=yes\|class=B\|vital=yes\|1=
			{{WikiProject Military history\|class=b\|B-Class-1=yes\|B-Class-2=yes\|B-Class-3=yes\|B-Class-4=yes\|B-Class-5=yes\|Crusades-task-force=yes}}
			{{WikiProject Pritzker-GLAM\|importance=High }}
			{{WikiProject Western Asia\|importance=mid\| Cyprus=y\|Cyprus-importance=mid}}
			{{WikiProject Middle Ages\|importance=high}}
			{{WikiProject Christianity\|importance=Low\|catholicism=yes\|catholicism-importance=low}}
			{{WikiProject Secret Societies\|importance=mid}}
			{{WikiProject England\|importance=high}}
			{{WikiProject France \|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Organizations\|importance=Low}}
			}}
			{{annual readership}}
			<!-- please do not remove this tag -->
			{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
			\|target=Talk:Knights Templar/Archive index
			\|mask=Talk:Knights Templar/Archive <#>
			\|leading_zeros=0
			\|indexhere=yes}}
			{{User:MiszaBot/config
			\|archiveheader = {{aan}}
			\|maxarchivesize = 100K
			\|counter = 8
			\|minthreadsleft = 5
			\|algo = old(90d)
			\|archive = Talk:Knights Templar/Archive %(counter)d
			}}
			{{archives \|search=yes \|index=./Archive index \|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III \|age=90 }}

			== Commanderies Map Request ==

			'''Commanderies''' Map Locations

			== FA concerns - bad sources ==
	yeah that is just davinci code nonsense which people are trying to stick into this article

	==Disbanding of the Knights Templar==

	There is an inconsistancy in the dates noted in this article concerning the year that Pope Clement disbanded the Knights Templar. This article states that this occured in both 1312 and 1314. To the best of my knowledge, 1312 is the correct year. However, I am not positive about this and am researching this to be sure before I make an edit.

	The correct year that Clement IV disbanded the Knights Templar was 1312, the 1314 date is incorrect. --] 23:09, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

	== God wills it! ==

	It is said, "God wills it!" was the battle cry of the Knights Templar. Or it was the common battle cry of all the knights fraternities?

	Another little question: what is the meaning of "wills"? It is the ancient form of the word "wants"?

	Thanks. <small>]]</small> 18:11, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

	A french answer ;)
	The battle cry "God wills it !" (in french "Dieu le veut !") is the battle cry of the crusaders. The sentence used by the knights templar was "Non nobis, Domine, non nobis, sed nomini Tuo da gloriam" (Not in ours, Lord, not in ours, but to your name give glory). As far as I know them, they don't use particular battle cry.

	"Wills" is here the ancient form of "want".

	== OCMTH-IFA SMOTJ-SKT ?? ==
	What is the bit in 'Legends' that mentions "OCMTH-IFA SMOTJ-SKT"? What does this acronym stand for? It looks like vandalism to me. --] 22:44, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

	:A somewhat wading web search turns up ; now I suspect that that is a mix of 'fact', half-truth and brain warping 'balderdash', so I'll leave it to someone else to actually read it in detail! There doesn't seem much else to link the alphabet soup and the various characters. I'm not an expert on the subject, so I'll leave it someone else to stamp it out, and provide critical appraisal. Or, you could pay $70 to go to a cold chicken buffet to find out the 'true inner mysteries'. ] 01:58, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

	I think I have found a useful link about this:
	OCMTH-IFA=Military Order of Christ, Jerusalem Temple, International Federative Alliance
	SMOTJ-SKT=Sovereign Military Order Temple Jerusalem-Scottish Knights Templar
	Their websites are unconvincing to me and I will remove the references.
	--] 14:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
	:A wise move, I feel. ] 15:26, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

	==Vandalism==
	VANDALISM? - What's this bit about how "the knights liked to play with swords and throw them at tables" under the section about the disbanding of the order? {{unsigned2\|17:45, January 30, 2007 \|138.163.0.38 }}
	: Fixed. --]]] 19:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

	==Changing the "Places" section==
	Currently a large portion of this article is "Places associated with the Knights Templar." However, there are few references, and most of the locations are redlinks. Personally, I think that this detracts from the overall quality of the article, so I'd like to talk about changing this. Possible courses of action are:

	* Remove all of the redlinks and poorly-referenced sites, keeping only the most notable examples.
	* Move the list to its own page, "]", and then only mention a few of the more notable (and referenced) ones in the main article

	Does anyone else have thoughts on this? --]]] 19:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

	==Upcoming peer review==
	Company's coming. :)

	I'd like to see about buffing up this article, and seeing if we can get to "]" status (and then eventually maybe even to ]). The first step along the path will be a ], but before I post an official request, I'd like to make sure we're ready for official visitors. So, let's all give the article a good proofread, double-check our sources, and ensure that we've got things up to snuff per the standards at ]. Unless anyone has any objections, I'll go ahead and request a review in a few days. :) --]]] 22:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
	: I have requested a Peer Review of the main Knights Templar article. Please post any comments to ], and we'll see if we can get this to official ] status! :) --]]] 19:43, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

	==Request for expansion==
	Per the comments at this article's ], this article needs to be substantially lengthened (by a factor of 2). There's also been a specific request for more info about the fall of the Templars, including their trial. So if anyone would like to add a sentence or a paragraph somewhere, please feel free! --]]] 18:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

	==Good article==
	Clearly written, well-referenced, and richly informative article passes GA criteria with room to spare. A few initial thoughts on areas calling for work as this fine article moves toward FAC:
	*Membership/Size: How many Knights Templar were there? "ach knight had some ten people in support positions," says the article. Not quite clear--are the "support positions" (a) sergeants and serving brothers, with chaplains ranking seperately; (b) sergeants, serving brothers, and chaplains; (c) sergeants, serving brothers, and non-Templar employees; or (d) or...? In sum, how many members of the order were there, and how many Knights per se?
	*Membership/Demographics: Mostly French, like the order's founder? From all over Europe? Who joined, exactly?
	*Distribution: "Each country had a Master of the Order for the Templars in that region," says the article. What countries were those? All of Europe? Just Western Europe and the Holy Land? "he Templars had become a part of daily life in Europe. They managed many businesses," says the article. So there were substantial business (non-military?) units of Templars all over the place? Where?
	*References/Further reading: Standardize style. Add retrieval dates for online sources. Make it purty. And make sure best sourcing possible used for every cite.
	Battle on. Best, Dan.—] 10:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
	: Will do, thanks! :) --]]] 01:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

	::I learned a lot reading the article. In a couple of places the tone was a little too informal for an encyclopedia, like "the tide turned against them." ] 06:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
	::: Hmm, I kind of like it, and have heard that type of analogy in other Templar sources. For example, in the ] documentary ''Lost Worlds: Knights Templar'' at the 46-minute mark: "Despite the web of fortifications, by 1187, the tide was turning against the Templars. Their great enemy Saladin swept through the Holy Land, grabbing town after town from the Christians. Ultimately, he captured Jerusalem." Does anyone else have an opinion on whether the "tide" analogy is appropriate for the Misplaced Pages article? I think it's worth keeping for the "brilliant prose" requirement towards ], but if the consensus is that it's too informal, we can definitely pull it. --]]] 04:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

			Several of the sources used in this older FA do not seem to be sufficiently reliable, especially since this subject has attracted some fringe views.
	==Red cross pattee==
			* "Stephen A. Dafoe. "In Praise of the New Knighthood". TemplarHistory.com. Archived from the original on 26 March 2017. Retrieved 20 March 2007." - this appears to be someone's blog
	I'm uncomfortable with using the term "pattee" to describe the Templars' cross. The majority of my sources describe their symbol as simply "red cross." The only sources that seem to use the word "cross pattee" are either hobbyist websites, merchandise websites, or Freemason sites. As such (especially because of the commercial merchandise angle), my recommendation is that we remove the term. Does anyone else have an opinion, or can anyone provide a reliable source which uses the "pattee" term? --]]] 16:23, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
			* We shouldn't really be using snopes for an FA, FA sourcing is suppose to be higher standard
	:see ], and (''associated with the Royal Arms of Denmark'') for more general use of the term. The more general description seems to be ''splayed cross''. I think you're right to treat the term with suspicion, in this case it might have some merit. I think the person adding it may well be knowledgeable, but may also be pushing a personal agenda, and that is where the line has to be drawn. Ah, I see you can get a Templar t-shirt (do they come free with 100 edits to this page?). ] 16:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
			* This article uses the History Channel a lot - it's now considered unreliable due to publishing all sorts of fringe stuff; so we really shouldn't be using it to site stuff in a FA when the subject has attracted sizable fringe views
	:: I've been checking my references, and can find no use of the term "pattee":
			* I don't think urbanlegends.about.com should be used
	::: * Barber, ''The New Knighthood'', page 66: "According to William of Tyre it was under Eugenius III that the Templars received the right to wear the charcteristic red cross upon their tunics, symbolising their willingness to suffer martyrdom in the defence of the Holy Land." (WT, 12.7, p. 554. James of Vitry, 'Historia Hierosolimatana', ed. J. Bongars, ''Gesta Dei per Francos'', vol I(ii), Hanover, 1611, p. 1083, interprets this as a sign of martyrdom).
			* "The Order of Christ and the Papacy". 6 May 2008. Archived from the original on 6 May 2008." - from jvarnoso.com. What makes this high-quality RS or even RS?
	::: * Martin, ''The Knights Templar'', page 43: "The Pope conferred on the Templars the right to wear a red cross on their white mantles, which symbolized their willingness to suffer martyrdom in defending the Holy Land against the infidel."
			* What makes medievalwarfare.info RS?
	::: * Read, ''The Templars'', page 121: "Pope Eugenius gave them the right to wear a scarlet cross over their hearts, so that the sign would serve triumphantly as a shield and they would never turn away in the face of the infidels': the red blood of the martyr was superimposed on the white of the chaste." (Melville, ''La Vie des Templiers'', p. 92)
			* ] mainly just publishes New Age/occult stuff, I'm not convinced books published by it are a sound source for this subject.
	:: So, I recommend that the term be removed, unless it can be shown in reliable sources that it's a common way of describing the Templars' emblem. --]]] 12:58, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
			* "Clausen, Daniel (2021). Templar Succession: Establishing Continuity 1307-Present. Codex Spiritualis Press. pp. 21–61. ISBN 979-8465277525." - doesn't appear to be reliable, possibly fringe
	::: Another source of interest says that the Cross Pattee was the emblem of the Portuguese ], a successor order to the Templars. This may have been where the confusion came from. --]]] 13:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
			* " Louis Charpentier, Les Mystères de la Cathédrale de Chartres (Paris: Robert Laffont, 1966), translated The Mysteries of Chartres Cathedral (London: Research Into Lost Knowledge Organization, 1972)." - what makes this RS? RILKO looks pretty fringy
			* "Isle of Avalon, Lundy. "The Rule of the Knights Templar A Powerful Champion" The Knights Templar. Mystic Realms, 2010. Web" - doesn't appear to be reliable
			* Newman mainly writes fiction, what makes her high-quality RS for this article?

			Someone way more familiar with this subject than me should also give this a run-through to make sure this isn't giving undue weight to fringe viewpoints and is adequately representing scholarly consensus. ] <sub> '']''</sub> 15:00, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
	== Cross pattee reference ==
			*Doesn't look great - the sources are variable, but seem generally (from memory) to reflect modern historians' views. The main problem, it seems to me, is the very skimpy account of the order's history in the Middle East when at the height of its importance, a big hole in the middle of the article. The early rise & later fall are dealt with in far greater detail. Some of the phrasing seems iffy too - they weren't monks & the order shouldn't be called "monastic". Would need a deal of work I think. It averages over 4,000 views pd, so it would be good if it can be improved. ] (]) 04:52, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
			*:The issue is that in the history of my people, we spent a lot of time and effory leading people of our trail. So the historians (credible sources) are literally the ones we polluted. To ask a modern historian about us as Knights Templar is to ask a modern historian to tell you what lies we told to protect ourselves from ignoring and opposing kings and the church. Genuinely, the ONLY way you will learn the truth about the order, especially after the fracture, is through Templar historians. ] (]) 05:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
			* Thanks for the great list, I'm reviewing now. As regards snopes.com and urbanlegends.about.com, at the time they were worth including because of the issue with the "Friday the 13th" (incorrect) association with the Templars. It's difficult to prove a negative - There are no reliable sources that state the Friday legend originated with the Templars, but plenty of unreliable sources that do. Even our own ] article doesn't seem to tackle it. And our ] article uses the same Snopes and Urban Legends sources. I haven't looked recently to see if any reliable scholars have decided to publish about this, so if anyone else knows of a good source to prove the negative, that would be very helpful. --]]] 17:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

			== Knights Templar ==
	There is no 'personal agenda' here at all, and I resent the insinuation. It is quite simple, and is a matter of simple heraldic terms, which is something that those Wikipedians in America appear to have very little knowledge or won't listen to those that have.

			<small></small><br/>
	There is no definition in heraldry for a "splayed" cross. Most terms in heraldry come from the French words, e.g. argent, chevron, gules, vert, etc. - with me so far??? The 'splayed cross' was chosen as it was different to the Latin Cross or the Cross of Lorraine (indented arms), or the Amalfi cross - later the Maltese. Eugenus allowed the Templars to choose the colour argent (red) to signify the blood that they were prepared to shed for their cause.
			Quote: While the "Roman Church" has been used to describe the pope's Diocese of Rome since the Fall of the Western Roman Empire and into the Early Middle Ages (6th–10th century), the "Roman Catholic Church" has been applied to the whole church in the English language since the Protestant Reformation in the late 16th century. Further, some will refer to the Latin Church as "Roman Catholic" in distinction from the Eastern Catholic churches. "Roman Catholic" has occasionally appeared also in documents produced both by the Holy See, and notably used by certain national episcopal conferences and local dioceses.
			This article identifies the Templars as founded in 1119 sometime before the Reformation, yet states it was a ''Catholic Military Order.'' Saying it was "Endorsed by the Roman Catholic Church" feels imprecise. Would prefer the church to be called the Christian Church as it would be identified at the time and Christian Military Order. ] (]) 15:50, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

			== Hierosolymitanis/Jerusalem in the name ==
	The definition in heraldry of a cross that has wider parts to the arms than at the centre is 'pattee' after the French term meaning 'paw' - the wider part was described as looking like a paw.

			The infobox's Latin title for the order ends in "Hierosolymitanis," which wiktionary says means "of Jerusalem." But, that's not mentioned anywhere in the intro text or "Name" section. If it was part of the full name, perhaps that should be included in the English somewhere. ] (]) 11:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
	I think having a debate over one word in the definition summary panel is REALLY over-egging the pudding and is going to start making this whole article look over-dramatised if EVERY reference is queried to such a detailed level. I have not seen such nit-picking on many other articles.

			== This is almost completely incorrect. ==
	Also, considering that I have my own coat of arms (properly conferred by the College of Arms) which features the cross pattee (of the last) I knew a lot more about the history of this device than most people in a country that doesn't even have a recognised system of heraldry.

			As a Knight Templar Grand Master and a descendant of the Rolland line, I must correct numerous inaccuracies. The authors and editors of this page rely on biased sources and guesswork.
	I have a lot of information to start putting onto this site to help enrich its content and fill in the details to help it achieve its top grading, but I will be blasted if I am going to have every single contribution questioned.

			Our history has been intentionally concealed. We evaded the Inquisition for centuries by spreading false narratives, ensuring our true nature and activities remained hidden.
	Finally, the Glossary on the English Templar Order's website was constructed using reference material supplied by many academics who actually know this subject, including myself who holds a PhD in it and has studied the subject for 26 years. I don't consult with other academics, and the Order's own archives for the fun of it. ] 18:00, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

			To suggest we were a "French military order" is incorrect. We were not loyal to any single nation but were soldiers of God’s army, dedicated to His divine mission across the entire Earth. We considered the rule of kings over us irrelevant, which led to significant conflicts with secular and ecclesiastical authorities.
	P.S. I notice that nobody has questioned addition of the word mantle - i.e. the correct term that has been used for centuries - or would someone like a reference to when that term was first ever used in a) the English language (and proof thereof), b) that the Templars actually used the term, and c) that it's not spelt incorrectly despite the various morphing of words through history??? Or am I now being pedantic?? then Touche.

			The claim that the Roman Catholic Church dissolved us is also incorrect. While they proclaimed our dissolution, we did not form under their mandate but were merely recognized by them. Their declaration did not end our existence; it marked the beginning of our concealment—what we call "the fracture." We continued to operate in places like Portugal and Scotland, defying the dissolution and maintaining our order. However, we lost communication with each other, meaning that each sliver of the fracture started forming different rules and ways of hiding. Even we Templars are still looking for others of the fracture to reunite. We don't even know the story of all our segments, so there is no way you can.
	:Thank you for that clarification, and I don't think anybody is trying to discourage you from contribution. I'm sure you have much to add, and I've said so. The criteria here though, is very much: no individual research, ie the material has to be available in published, dare I say in peer reviewed form? It is actually an advantage that many editors don't have the benefit of your experience, as then additions and terms that may seem obvious to you, can be made clear and independently referenced. I'm afraid there is much nonsense written about the Templars on the web, and wiki editors are anxious not to add to the weight of it. Not unnaturally, this creates a group of overly suspicious people to anything that goes too far from already established information. As I'm sure you know from your own research that in order to establish a "fact", you need to triangulate from independent sources. This was just the process going on here. Your own sense of humour, is perhaps not an asset. ] 18:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

			The statement that Templars were arrested, tried, or absorbed into other orders overlooks those who persisted, especially in Portugal and Scotland, significantly. The use of “were” implies a past tense, but we are an enduring and current entity.
	:: I'd like to echo Kbthompson's concerns. Also, please be aware that there is currently a major scandal going on, elsewhere in Misplaced Pages, about someone with a faked PhD. If interested, go to http://news.google.com and search on "Essjay", or check here: ]. But regardless of someone's credentials, we still have very strict verification requirements here. See ]. If anything is challenged, it can be taken out of the article unless a verifiable source is provided for that information. And yes, that can go right down to the word "mantle," if anyone genuinely has a reasonable challenge.

			The assertion that there is no clear historical connection to modern organizations is actually a testament to our successful concealment. If such evidence existed, we failed in our efforts. That said, yes, different churches did create different "Templar" groups in their orders—and they can do it today—but that does not mean we are or are not in that group. We could be.
	:: A further concern comes up whenever it looks like someone's primary purpose on Misplaced Pages is to promote their own organization or website. Even with the best of intentions, this can result in a Conflict of Interest. See ]. To avoid a perception of COI, it's best to spend time working on other less controversial parts of Misplaced Pages. In the case of the Knights Templar, there are many books about them, and it should be easy enough to help with other elements of the article. For example, how about expanding the section on the battles that they were involved with, or include more biographical information about some of the lesser-known GrandMasters? Anything like that would be very helpful and appreciated. --]]] 22:45, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

			We continue to seek the whereabouts of all fragments of our order, and relying on books by those who do not understand us is misguided.
	:::: Yes I do have a very dry sense of humour, because I object to this ever-increasing pomposity and attitude on Misplaced Pages that the people who may have 'started' the entry seem to think they then own it for the life of the entry, and thereafter in perpetuity. They shoot down anybody who dares to come and contribute (even in an educated and rational manner) to 'their' article unless it fits with their mantra and so-called standards, that (let's face it) are not standard at all across Misplaced Pages, as the whole system is nowhere near mature enough to have such standards. It is a sort of pontificating attitude, looking down on people who actually know more than they do, as if we have somehow outraged their precious article by daring to try and help it develop.
	continued... If people want to think that they have somehow 'arrived' merely because they have achieved the dizzy heights of being an admin or editor on Misplaced Pages then, I'm afraid, they really have got their priorities in life completely wrong. But, I guess with some people who have very little else, such an 'honour' means the World. It's the old simily with parking attendants of 'I've got the uniform on, so you can call me God'.
	I have not at any time tried sabotaging the entries, and have merely contributed factual and well-known established history and I think far more energy has been expended on discussing this ONE point than the real battle that needs to be fought at the moment, which is the continued inane vandalism from anonymously-IP-addressed visitors. That's where the real criticism should be aimed at the moment, not at highly-quailified historians who have more historical and inside knowledge about the Templars than most of the colonial authors could shake a stick at. Let's face it, the average Templar know-all from across the pond - thousands of miles removed from where that history actually took place - is reading a few books bought from Amazon and looking up all sorts of 'research' sites on the Internet. We are over here living and breathing this stuff every day, and involved in the Order to a far greater extent than most of the other 'authors' on here could dream of.
	With the sole aim of trying to educate the less-informed by adding and enriching the entry, we are then treated with some sort of arrogant 'how dare you interfere with MY page' mentality. Imagine how these so-called American 'experts'(?) would feel if I started editing the pages on the US Constitution, or Stars and Stripes - there would a justifiable hell-to-pay demand.
	It seems that Misplaced Pages was a good idea - however, the practicality of trying to make it workable, when amateur historians start simply regurgitating stuff they have read in books, doesn't work so well in reality. Ah well, we'll see how things pan out - it was worth a shot anyway.
	In the meantime, perhaps you ought to know that the History section on the English Templar website was co-written and double-checked by two of the esteemed authors that are so liberally quoted on all matters relating to the Templars on Misplaced Pages, and in the Reference links for this very article.
	By the way, the cross showing in the Knights Templar series box is not the correct one, but I won't start on that yet, as that will, no doubt, cause even more consternation and disbelief. But I just thought that you might like to know. If you would like a correct Templar cross (not the Amalfi/Maltese variation), then please say so, and I will be happy to oblige.
	BTW, we have loads of 'missing' information on some of the less well-known GMs, and accounts of the battles, but I now fear that any attempt to start publishing this - as was our plan for this year - will be subjected to the same nit-picking, and we really don't have the time to start giving a three-point triangulation verification process on everything that we're happy to put into the public domain. It's odd isn't it - so-called academics and scholars want the goodies to be the first to get their books/articles out, but then aren't flexible enough to start acknowledging that historical documents are now being made available - 'cake and eat it' springs to mind. which is odd, considering the references to many books on these entries that are actually acknoeldged, even amongst academics, as theories in their entirety, and not hard-fact historical tomes, but merely sometime own interpretation of history - yet there are quoted as the gospel truth. Hmmmmmm.
	] 23:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

			You do not know us. If you WANT to know about us, ASK US. Don't assume as your "historians" do. Ask our historians.
	:: quote-'it looks like someone's primary purpose on Misplaced Pages is to promote their own organization or website', well that just about sums it up!!!
	In case it had skipped anyone's mind, 2007 represents a significant anniversary in the history of the Order, hence the willingness to start releasing more info. A case of 'can't win' against such prejudicial and pre-ordained dogma springs fleetingly to mind.
	We'd better take mantle off then, as it's not mentioned in some books, and some books don't even mention the fact that the Templar cavalry rode horses, so we need to delete horses as well... and nobody actually filmed them building Temple Church, so get rid of that while we're at it.
	As to the correction of 'cross' to 'cross pattee' being considered (quote) a 'controversial' matter, then boy, something really is completely out of perspective... I though all the MM stuff was the controversial stuff... how wrong was I in getting that assumption so incorrect.
	] 23:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

			Deus Vult,
	: LK, Misplaced Pages really isn't the place to be releasing new information. Misplaced Pages is only supposed to be used to summarize information that has already been published. If you want to release new info, a better venue would be an article in an academic journal, or via your own website. As for what can be included in the Misplaced Pages article, it's really very simple: It doesn't matter what I think I know, or what you think you know, it's a matter of what either of us can prove, using verifiable sources that ''either'' of us can check. Please please read ]. And, for what it's worth, I ''like'' that we disagree, as this kind of conflict is actually what produces some of the highest quality articles on Misplaced Pages. :) So, let's roll up our sleeves, line up our sources, and figure out what we agree on. That'll make for a ''great'' article! And for anything that we disagree on, but that we can both back up with reliable (but disagreeing) sources, well, I look forward to the debate. :) Seriously, I ''want'' you to help with the article, I'm not trying to keep you out of it. But I also want you to back up your claims with sources that I, or any editor, can lay our own hands on, to verify their reliability. --]]] 23:33, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

			Shannon Smith
	:: Having just re-read this entire article, I have counted over 78 instances where I could just as easily insist on a ({fact}) reference citation to be added or included, but I haven't because most of them are well-known fact, as is the 'issue' about the description of what a Templar cross is actually called in heraldic terms - it would be petty and pedantic behaviour if I did. But, it IS important that the cross is described properly in its proper heraldic term, and not simply 'red cross' - a cross means just about any variation of two lines cutting the axis of each other - even a swastika is a form of the sun cross. Heraldry defines shapes and patterns in exacting and specific terms to distinguish them - th whole system wad developed to ensure that any heraldic artist could execute the blazon in exactly the same way. It is interesting (albeit hypocritical) that the picture shown on the left is of a Templar Knight with a cross pattee on his tunic, and not a red (latin, lorraine, amalfi, maltese, etc.) cross - so who's going to pull that picture off, despite it being a well-known assumptive picture of the artists perception of what a knight looked like. Added to that, the beauceant shown could be argued by some as being the incorrect one - there is evidence to show that one commandry had the white on the top.
			Militi Templi
	As to starting WWIII on arguing the toss on every article put on here, I haven't the time or inclination - I have a life outside Misplaced Pages. I also think that this article is going to look very messy with contrasting sources of information (if any exist) - it already looks daft having reference numbers 15 and 16 effectively contradicting each other as to the source and explanation for the mantle cross. Again, two different authors' interpretations and views on an edict written many centuries ago.
			Sigillum Militum Xpisti
	If you don't want the help as previously offered, then fine... We'll release the info via other sources, and the Wiki articles will look very out of date very quickly.
	In the meantime, the cross with the bevelled ends is WRONG, as in NOT RIGHT, as in INCORRECT, and takes a lot of credibility away from the article by having such a basic error within. ] 00:03, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

			] (]) 05:03, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
	: LK, can you provide a source, aside from personal websites, that uses the term "pattee" in reference to the Templar cross? I have been searching avidly for one, but have not been able to locate anything. Is there a book of heraldry which uses the term? --]]] 21:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:54, 18 November 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Knights Templar article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Knights Templar is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 13, 2007.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 5, 2004	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
March 1, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
March 6, 2007	WikiProject peer review	Reviewed
April 12, 2007	Featured article candidate	Promoted
March 26, 2022	Featured article review	Demoted
Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 13, 2004, October 13, 2005, October 13, 2006, October 13, 2008, October 13, 2009, October 13, 2010, October 13, 2013, October 13, 2015, October 13, 2017, October 13, 2019, October 13, 2022, and March 22, 2023.
Current status: Former featured article

This

level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Military history: Medieval / Crusades

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)
	Crusades task force

Pritzker Military Library High‑importance

	This article is related to the Pritzker Military Museum & Library WikiProject. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.Pritzker Military LibraryWikipedia:GLAM/PritzkerTemplate:WikiProject Pritzker-GLAMPritzker Military Library-related
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Western Asia: Cyprus Mid‑importance

	Asia portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Western Asia, which collaborates on articles related to Western Asia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Western AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Western AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Western AsiaWestern Asia
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Cyprus portal This article is supported by WikiProject Cyprus (assessed as Mid-importance).

Middle Ages High‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity: Catholicism Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Catholic Church portal This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (assessed as Low-importance).

Secret Societies (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Secret Societies, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Secret SocietiesWikipedia:WikiProject Secret SocietiesTemplate:WikiProject Secret SocietiesSecret Societies

England High‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Commanderies Map Request

Commanderies Map Locations

FA concerns - bad sources

Several of the sources used in this older FA do not seem to be sufficiently reliable, especially since this subject has attracted some fringe views.

"Stephen A. Dafoe. "In Praise of the New Knighthood". TemplarHistory.com. Archived from the original on 26 March 2017. Retrieved 20 March 2007." - this appears to be someone's blog
We shouldn't really be using snopes for an FA, FA sourcing is suppose to be higher standard
This article uses the History Channel a lot - it's now considered unreliable due to publishing all sorts of fringe stuff; so we really shouldn't be using it to site stuff in a FA when the subject has attracted sizable fringe views
I don't think urbanlegends.about.com should be used
"The Order of Christ and the Papacy". 6 May 2008. Archived from the original on 6 May 2008." - from jvarnoso.com. What makes this high-quality RS or even RS?
What makes medievalwarfare.info RS?
Red Wheel Weiser Conari mainly just publishes New Age/occult stuff, I'm not convinced books published by it are a sound source for this subject.
"Clausen, Daniel (2021). Templar Succession: Establishing Continuity 1307-Present. Codex Spiritualis Press. pp. 21–61. ISBN 979-8465277525." - doesn't appear to be reliable, possibly fringe
" Louis Charpentier, Les Mystères de la Cathédrale de Chartres (Paris: Robert Laffont, 1966), translated The Mysteries of Chartres Cathedral (London: Research Into Lost Knowledge Organization, 1972)." - what makes this RS? RILKO looks pretty fringy
"Isle of Avalon, Lundy. "The Rule of the Knights Templar A Powerful Champion" The Knights Templar. Mystic Realms, 2010. Web" - doesn't appear to be reliable
Newman mainly writes fiction, what makes her high-quality RS for this article?

Someone way more familiar with this subject than me should also give this a run-through to make sure this isn't giving undue weight to fringe viewpoints and is adequately representing scholarly consensus. Hog Farm _Talk 15:00, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Doesn't look great - the sources are variable, but seem generally (from memory) to reflect modern historians' views. The main problem, it seems to me, is the very skimpy account of the order's history in the Middle East when at the height of its importance, a big hole in the middle of the article. The early rise & later fall are dealt with in far greater detail. Some of the phrasing seems iffy too - they weren't monks & the order shouldn't be called "monastic". Would need a deal of work I think. It averages over 4,000 views pd, so it would be good if it can be improved. Johnbod (talk) 04:52, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
The issue is that in the history of my people, we spent a lot of time and effory leading people of our trail. So the historians (credible sources) are literally the ones we polluted. To ask a modern historian about us as Knights Templar is to ask a modern historian to tell you what lies we told to protect ourselves from ignoring and opposing kings and the church. Genuinely, the ONLY way you will learn the truth about the order, especially after the fracture, is through Templar historians. 125.253.40.117 (talk) 05:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the great list, I'm reviewing now. As regards snopes.com and urbanlegends.about.com, at the time they were worth including because of the issue with the "Friday the 13th" (incorrect) association with the Templars. It's difficult to prove a negative - There are no reliable sources that state the Friday legend originated with the Templars, but plenty of unreliable sources that do. Even our own Friday the 13th article doesn't seem to tackle it. And our Knights Templar in popular culture article uses the same Snopes and Urban Legends sources. I haven't looked recently to see if any reliable scholars have decided to publish about this, so if anyone else knows of a good source to prove the negative, that would be very helpful. --El on ka 17:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Knights Templar

Quote: While the "Roman Church" has been used to describe the pope's Diocese of Rome since the Fall of the Western Roman Empire and into the Early Middle Ages (6th–10th century), the "Roman Catholic Church" has been applied to the whole church in the English language since the Protestant Reformation in the late 16th century. Further, some will refer to the Latin Church as "Roman Catholic" in distinction from the Eastern Catholic churches. "Roman Catholic" has occasionally appeared also in documents produced both by the Holy See, and notably used by certain national episcopal conferences and local dioceses. This article identifies the Templars as founded in 1119 sometime before the Reformation, yet states it was a Catholic Military Order. Saying it was "Endorsed by the Roman Catholic Church" feels imprecise. Would prefer the church to be called the Christian Church as it would be identified at the time and Christian Military Order. Shanno52 (talk) 15:50, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Hierosolymitanis/Jerusalem in the name

The infobox's Latin title for the order ends in "Hierosolymitanis," which wiktionary says means "of Jerusalem." But, that's not mentioned anywhere in the intro text or "Name" section. If it was part of the full name, perhaps that should be included in the English somewhere. SSSheridan (talk) 11:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

This is almost completely incorrect.

As a Knight Templar Grand Master and a descendant of the Rolland line, I must correct numerous inaccuracies. The authors and editors of this page rely on biased sources and guesswork.

Our history has been intentionally concealed. We evaded the Inquisition for centuries by spreading false narratives, ensuring our true nature and activities remained hidden.

To suggest we were a "French military order" is incorrect. We were not loyal to any single nation but were soldiers of God’s army, dedicated to His divine mission across the entire Earth. We considered the rule of kings over us irrelevant, which led to significant conflicts with secular and ecclesiastical authorities.

The claim that the Roman Catholic Church dissolved us is also incorrect. While they proclaimed our dissolution, we did not form under their mandate but were merely recognized by them. Their declaration did not end our existence; it marked the beginning of our concealment—what we call "the fracture." We continued to operate in places like Portugal and Scotland, defying the dissolution and maintaining our order. However, we lost communication with each other, meaning that each sliver of the fracture started forming different rules and ways of hiding. Even we Templars are still looking for others of the fracture to reunite. We don't even know the story of all our segments, so there is no way you can.

The statement that Templars were arrested, tried, or absorbed into other orders overlooks those who persisted, especially in Portugal and Scotland, significantly. The use of “were” implies a past tense, but we are an enduring and current entity.

The assertion that there is no clear historical connection to modern organizations is actually a testament to our successful concealment. If such evidence existed, we failed in our efforts. That said, yes, different churches did create different "Templar" groups in their orders—and they can do it today—but that does not mean we are or are not in that group. We could be.

We continue to seek the whereabouts of all fragments of our order, and relying on books by those who do not understand us is misguided.

You do not know us. If you WANT to know about us, ASK US. Don't assume as your "historians" do. Ask our historians.

Deus Vult,

Shannon Smith Militi Templi Sigillum Militum Xpisti

125.253.40.117 (talk) 05:03, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Categories: