Revived and Recently Created Orders of ChivalryContents

Introduction Revived Orders: Modern Templars Saint Thomas of Acre The British Order of Saint John The Order of the Militia of Christ The Order of Saint George of Burgundy The Modern Order of Saint Lazarus The Niadh Nask Recently Created Orders

IntroductionThis page describes a few modern orders of knighthood, which are either recreations of specific medieval orders, or imitations of medieval or monarchical orders without specific reference to any one. The term "bogus" is one I don't like, because it was so abused by Arthur Fox-Davies, who thought that any arms which were not delivered on parchment by a royal official were "bogus"; thus relegating 90% of heraldry into inexistence. As far as I am concerned, there is no good reason why anyone could not create "orders of chivalry" today; how seriously such associations would be taken will depend on many factors, such as their membership, stated goals and veritable activities; but also on what they claim to be. Only people who would reject as "bogus" any such organization might be offended by the choice of certain orders. I discuss the general question of legitimacy of orders separately. I discuss two kinds of orders, revived and recently created. I use the term revived to refer to associations which call themselves orders of chivalry but are the only ones to do so, and which also claim to be identical with or directly emanated from well-defined historical orders of chivalry. I discuss here a few, sometimes entertaining examples of associations which have sprung up in the past. In some cases, like Lazarus or the British Order of Saint-John, the origins are what they are, but the orders have, to a large degree, transcended them. By recently created orders I mean institutions which call themselves orders of chivalry, and imitate in their general appearance (name, style, insignia, activities) well-known orders or monarchical orders, without claiming to be the continuation or revival of any specific historical order. Guy Stair Sainty also discusses a large number of self-styled orders (including many not mentioned here) on his Web site (and he predictably disagrees with my placement of the Most Venerable Order on this page!).

A note: in the references, I have listed all documentation that I have found mentioned in various bibliographies, but I have had access to a small portion only. Those books I did consult are marked with an asterisk. I thank James Algrant and Guy Sainty for helpful comments, although the opinions expressed here are mine only and do not engage their responsibility.

Revived Orders: The Modern Templars (18th-20th c.)The abrupt and dramatic end of the Order of the Temple in 1312, and the execution at the stake of its last Grand-Master Jacques de Molay in 1314, created the right conditions for future claims of resurgence. A similar phenomenon has occurred in the past with dynasties: the various impostors Czar Dimitri Ivanovich in 1605, the various people claiming to be Louis XVII (the most famous being Naundorff), the woman who claimed to be Anastasia daughter of the Czar Nicholas II, etc. In Spain and Portugal, the surviving Templars were regrouped into new orders founded by the sovereigns. Elsewhere, the Templars endured various fates, but the organisation itself disappeared, its leadership killed, its assets confiscated and turned over to the Hospitallers of Saint-John. In the 18th centuries several legends emerged, claiming that the Templars had in fact survived as an order. Jacques de Molay, on his way to death, had allegedly appointed someone as his successor and entrusted him with perpetuating the Order in secrecy. That successor is variously named as the preceptor of Auvergne (who fled to England but died there in jail) or an English knight. The successor is said to have gone to England or Scotland and found refuge among the mason guilds. Thus the secret traditions and knowledge of the Templars (acquired in the East, of course) were passed on to the masonic associations. Not surprisingly, these legends appear at the time when freemasonry is created in England and Scotland, in the early 18th century. Knights Templars became a grade in some forms of free-masonry in the mid-18th century, and it seems that an offshoot of that grade became an order in the US and Canada in the late 19th century (see Land, Robert Ernest Augustus: Fifty years in the Malta order. Toronto, 1928). One particular revival occurred in 1804. Two French masons, Philippe Ledru (1754-1832) and Bernard-Raymond Fabr-Palaprat (1775-1838) found the Order of the Temple, and Fabr-Palaprat is made its grandmaster. Napoleon I, who viewed freemasonry favorably, allowed them to carry on their activities, including solemn processions in the streets of Paris (albeit in modern attire with mantles and toques). Later, in 1815, Sir William Sydney Smith (1764-1840) linked up with these neo-Templars. As admiral of the British navy he had successfully defended Acre against Napoleon in 1799, and supposedly was given by the Greek archbishop a Templars' cross (left in Acre by Richard Lionheart) in gratitude. This cross opened the doors for Sir Sydney who became a Templar and tried to create a branch in England, for which he was made Grand-Prior. His aim was to send the order to participate in the liberation and pacification of Greece and other areas under Ottoman control. He also dreamed of establishing a base in Malta and taking over the old activities of the order of Saint-John (since Malta was then in the hands of the British). He managed to get Augustus-Frederick, Duke of Sussex (1773-1843) interested in the project. The duke of Sussex (6th son of George III) became Grand Prior of England. Another individual active in the revival was Charles Tennyson d'Eyncourt (uncle of the poet Alfred Tennyson). On the death of Fabr-Palaprat Smith became Regent of the order, but his subsequent death soon followed by that of the duke of

Sussex dissipated the order in England. D'Eyncourt himself lost interest and resigned from the order in 1849. The French branch seems not to have outlived its founder. In the 20th century, pseudo-Templars proliferated. They are chronicled in Chaffanjon anf Galimard-Flavigny.

References

* Malcolm Barber (ed): The military orders : fighting for the faith and caring for the sick Aldershot, Great Britain, 1994; Variorum. Manuel des chevaliers de l'Ordre du Temple. Paris, 1817 (2d ed.: 1825.) The manual of Palaprat's French order.

The Order of Saint Thomas of Acre (18th-19th c.)This order was originally founded as a purely religious order in in Acre in 1190, probably by Richard Lionheart. It was devoted to Saint Thomas Becket, and retained an English character throughout its history. In 1228, Peter des Roches, bishop of Westminster, reorganized the order into a military monastic order on the model of the Teutonic Order. The order did not play a major military role, and after the fall of Acre in 1291 it retired to Cyprus. Sometime in the 1370s the order was moved to its London house. There it survived as a mainly hospitaller order until it was dissolved along with other orders in 1540. At what time it was revived I do not know for sure. It appears again in the early 18th century in Jacobite circles, and was one of several organizations active in promoting the Jacobite cause. It seems to have been under the protection of the exiled Stuarts in France. George Keith, Earl Marischal of Scotland (1692-1778) was its Grand Master until he transferred the office to Seignelay de Colbert Traill, younger son of Laird Castlehill and bishop of Rodez. Later we find Sir Robert Strange as its Grand Master, and in 1848 Lord Elphinstone (1807-60). At some later point Bertram, 5th earl of Ashburnham (1840-1913) is Grand Master, succeeded in 1908 by Melville de Ruvigny (1868-1921). Other Jacobite orders or associations include the Realm of Sion and the Order of Sangreal. In 1848 Henry Lascelles Jenner, bishop of Dinedin in New Zealand, founded the grandly named Sovereign Sacred Religious and Military Order of Knights Protectors of the Sacred Sepulchre of Our Lord Jesus Christ and of the Most Holy Temple of Zion, which was later merged with Sion and Sangreal into a "federal chivalric condominium" called the Sovereign Order of the Realm of Sion.

References

* Alan Forey, The Military Order of Saint Thomas of Acre, in the English Historical Review (1977), 92:481-503. * Roger Ararat, Preface to Ruvigny: The Jacobite Peerage. 1914.

The Prehistory of the Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of

Saint-John of Jerusalem (MVOSJ) (1827 to 1888)See the official site of the US priory, with links to an in-depth history of the order. What follows is my personal interpretation. This Victorian invention has its origins in the turmoil of the Napoleonic era. Following the capture of Malta in 1798 and the conquest of most of Europe by Napoleon, the Order was quite disorganized in 1814. The return of the Bourbons to France prompted the formation of a "capitular commission" of the French langues by an assembly of French knights in May 1814, which was initially recognized by Louis XVIII, and approved by a papal bull of August 10, 1814. It began lobbying for a return of the Order's French properties, and acting at the Congress of Vienna for a return of the island of Malta. Camille de Rohan was head of the commission, followed in 1816 by Lasteyrie du Saillant and later by Jean-Louis de Dienne. It failed to persuade Britain to return the island, but it obtained French government pensions for the professed knights (about 90 survived) and worked on the return of the estates, which seemed possible if the Order regained its territorial sovereignty. Offers of Elba from the Austrian government were rejected because Metternich demanded control of the Grand-Mastership. The search was on for some vacant island. The French Commission, then controlled by its Chancellor Pierre-Hippolyte de Sainte CroixMolay, then turned to the possibility of helping the Greeks in their war of independence, and a treaty was signed between the Commission and the Greek rebels in June 1823. The treaty promised the order several Greek islands and Rhodes (should it be conquered), and in exchange the Order would raise troops and 10 million Francs. To begin the process the Comission started making knights rather indiscriminately, at least 200 in the space of a few years. But the treaty was opposed by other Greek rebel groups, as well as England and Austria. Under international pressure the French government withdrew its recognition of the Commission and henceforth acknowledged only those knights which had also been authorized by the Lieutenancy of the Order in Messina. (In fact, a royal ordinance of April 16, 1824 stated that only the French royal orders were legal in France, and bearers of foreign orders needed authorization from the government; an instruction of the Chancery of the Legion of Honor of May 5, 1824 provided further details). The Lieutenant of the Order dissolved the commission. The floatation of the loan in the form of bonds on the London market collapsed before it started. The Commission nevertheless revived itself in 1826, under the presidency of Calonne d'Avesnes but still controlled by Sainte Croix-Molay, and continued in its attempts at raising money for its Greek operation. At this time it was totally unofficial, disavowed by the Order of Malta and unrecognized by the French government. The Commission decided to search private sources of funds in England, and opened negotiations with a Scot called Donald Currie, an acquaintance of Sainte Croix-Molay. In 1827 Instruments of Convention were signed between the Commission and Currie, enabling him to raise L240,000 by recruiting new members (even non-Catholics). Currie did not raise much money but he recruited avidly. Greek independence having been achieved without any participation of the Order, Sainte CroixMolay now turned to the possibility of settling in Algeria, conquered in 1830 by the French. But the same year Charles X was overthrown, and the Commission lost all influence with the French government, which also broke diplomatic relations with the Lieutenancy in Messina. Nevertheless the Commission continued to encourage the formation of an English Langue, which took place in January 1831, with the election of Sr Robert Peat, Bart, former chaplain of George IV, as "Prior ad interim of the Tongue of England". However, a split amongst the British members occurred the next year. By 1837, the party which the French Commission had recognized had more or less disappeared, and the other party led by Robert Peat continued on its own. Peat was succeeded by

Sir Robert Dymoke in 1838, Lt-Col. Sir Charles Montolieu Lamb, Bart, in 1847, Rear-Admiral Sir Alexander Arbuthnot in 1860. The English group made contact again with the French knights in 1838, only to learn that Sainte Croix-Molay was considered a disreputable and disavowed character. The English group nevertheless tried to negotiate recognition from the Lieutenancy, who replied that they could not accept non-Catholics. The English also sought the patronage of the duke of Sussex, who turned them down in 1839. The English group almost disappeared, but, led by Sir John Broun, it persisted in hoping for recognition, basing themselves on letters patent of 1557 recreating the order in England (although it was abolished again by Elizabeth I in 1560). Now called "the Sovereign and Illustrious Order of Saint-John of Jerusalem: Anglia", it made contact again in 1857 with the Lieutenancy of the Order in Rome, through a Catholic member of the English group, John James Watts. Negotiations started, with the aim of establishing a Catholic priory, which in turn would form a Protestant branch (the existing group, of course). The Lieutenancy was initially favorably disposed, but the three English knights of Malta, led by Sir George Bowyer, and including John James Watts, who had just been received as members and were to form the Catholic priory decided to break off with the English group instead. A British Association of the Order of Malta was to be founded in 1876. The English association nevertheless persisted in its efforts at some kind of recognition. It enlisted the support of the 7th duke of Manchester who became their grand prior in 1861. The group drew up a Constitution in 1871 and renamed itself more modestly "Order of Saint-John of Jerusalem in England". A corps of ambulances was created in the 1860s, roughly around the same time as (or preceding) the real Order of Malta's charitable activities and those of the Red Cross. The Princess of Wales became Lady of the Order in 1876, and she in turn secured the membership of the Prince of Wales. The priory finally received a royal charter in 1888, which changed its name to The Grand Priory in the British Realm of the Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of Saint-John of Jerusalem, and made the sovereign of Great Britain its Sovereign Head and Patron. The Prince of Wales was appointed Grand Prior in 1890 by Queen Victoria, and since then the Prior has always been a member of the royal family.

After the Royal CharterThis royal charter changed the nature of the order. It now enjoys official recognition in Great Britain, and is indeed a British order of chivalry (albeit one with a peculiar status, totally independent of the government, and the only one conferring neither precedence nor use of the title "Sir"). That is an advantage that few orders, self-styled or otherwise, possess. This, however, changes nothing to the origin of the order: it started as a 19th century revival of a defunct organization, the English branch of Malta, abolished in 1540 by Henry VIII. The desire to represent the Venerable Order as the heir to the historical Order of Saint John is evident in the Librarian of the Order's work, Edwin James King's The Knights of St. John in the British realm: being the official history of the Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem (continued after King's death in 1952 by Sir Harry Luke), published in 1967 in London by the Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem. This was the 3d edition of E. J. King's history of the Venerable Order. The book studies the Priory of the historical Order until its abolition in the 16th century, and describes the organization since 1831 as a "revival" which received "official regonition" (not existence or legitimacy) from the charter of 1888. He writes, for

example: "[In 1871] So far the Order of Saint John had succeeded in re-establishing itself in England and in reviving certain of its ancient dignities (p. 144) [...] The knights of Saint John were now to receive their official recognition in the form of a Charter from Queen Victoria [...] Queen Victoria's charter expressly defines the continuity between the original Grand Priory and its revival in these words: 'The Grand Priory of England is the Head of the Sixth or English Language of the Venerable Order of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem'" (p. 149). Among many other examples, one can cite Appendix F of the book "On the seals of the grand priory", which shows "the ancient seals" (until the 16th c.) and "the modern seals" (since 1831); this is not innocuous, since in English law corporate seals are the legal mark of identity. But Queen Victoria cannot make the Venerable Order into what it cannot be: it cannot be "the Priory in Great Britain" of the Order of Saint John of Jerusalem, because the latter is a Catholic order with its own British association, and the Queen of Great Britain does not have the power to create priories of that order. The language of the 1888 charter is even more jarring: by calling the new order "the sixth or English language" a clear reference was made to the historical Order of Saint John, in which, until the reorganization of the 19th century, the knights were grouped in Languages or Tongues, and England was the 6th. Before and after its transmutation into a British order of chivalry, the order has used a name (Order of the Hospital of Saint John of Jerusalem) which belongs, or is a purposeful imitation of a name which belongs to another institution. The aim of such use is to assume some of the historical prestige and legacy of the historical order of Malta: self-styled orders do no less. The relations between the English Order and the Order of Malta were predictably icy for a long time. But in the end, time worked its magic, and a reconciliation of sorts took place. A Joint Declaration was issued by the Order of Malta and the British Order of Saint John on 26 November 1963:The relationship which exists between the Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of St John of Jerusalem, of Rhodes and of Malta and the Grand Priory in the British Realm of the Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of St John of Jerusalem is not always clearly understood, and it is to dispel any misconceptions which may exist that this statement is being made. A dispute, long since relegated to the realms of academic discussion, as to whether the Most Venerable Order was the lineal desdendent of the old Grand Priory of the Sovereign Order, at one time caused division amongst those concerned with such questions. Certain it is that the Most Venerable Order acquired a completely independent existence when it was granted a Royal Charter by Her Majesty Queen Victoria, who became its Sovereign Head. Since this time the Most Venerable Order has pursued the same high ideals of charity, especially to the poor and sick, which were the very cause of the foundation of the Sovereign Order nearly one thousand years ago. It will be easy to understand, therefore, why two great Orders, representing the same traditions, pursuing the same ideals, serving the same cause and wearing the same famous eight pointed cross, should have the greatest respect and esteem for each other. It is our happiness to declare that such a relationship does truly exist, and that it is the dearest wish of both Orders, to seek ever more ways in which they can collaborate, to serve God's glory and to alleviate the sufferings and miseries of mankind.

Notice that the issue of legitimacy and recognition is skirted adroitly; in particular, the Order of Malta does not recognize the British Order to be "the" Order of Saint John, as its name implies. What one can conclude from this, is that, from Malta's point of view, the British Order is worth collaborating with for purposes of charity, and questions of legitimacy and usurpation of name are secondary. Few other orders enjoy this form of recognition. To this day, members of the Order of Malta are also members of the British Order (as was, e.g., Mgr Bruno Bernard Heim), as good a sign of reconciliation as any.

References

*King:, Edwin James: The Grand Priory of the Order of the Hospital of Saint-John of Jerusalem in England: a Short History. London: Fleetway Press, 1924. King, Edwin James: The Knights of St. John in the British empire; being the official history of the British Order of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem. London: St. John ambulance association, 1934. *King, Edwin James: The Knights of St. John in the British realm: being the official history of the Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem. (3d. edition, continued by Sir Harry Luke). London: Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem, 1967. * Henri de Pierredon: Histoire politique de l'Ordre Souverain de Saint-Jean de Jrusalem: (Ordre de Malte) de 1789 1955. Paris, 1955; Ed. Scaldis. * Malcolm Barber (ed): The military orders : fighting for the faith and caring for the sick Aldershot, Great Britain, 1994; Variorum.

Order of the Militia of Jesus-Christ (ca. 1885)Saint Dominic founded an order by that name in 1216; but it was not an order of chivalry, and it did not survive very long. The modern revival began, innocently enough, in 1870, after the capture of Rome by Italian troops. Former members of the Papal army, under the comte de Beaumont, decided to found an association which would fight for the rights of the Holy See and stand ready to assist it against its enemies. The name of the association was Milizia di Cristo, crociata di preghiera e di azione (Militia of JesusChrist, crusade of prayer and action). This society, which admitted women, was organized in sections headed by "promoters," and was placed under the spiritual guidance of the Dominicans. Its name recalled the Militia of Jesus-Christ founded by Saint Dominic in 1216, although no claim to be a continuation of that institution was made. The Dominicans looked favorably on the new institutions, affiliating its members with the Third Order of the Dominicans. The comte de Beaumont merely called himself Organisateur de la Milice de Jsus-Christ pour la dfense du Saint Sige, and the cross worn by members consisted simply of a cross potent argent with a medallion in the center. One day things changed abrutply. On the occasion of the funeral of the French admiral Courbet in 1885, a Paris newspaper, L'Univers (Aug 30, 1885) mentioned the presence of a representative of the Militia, and asserted that "the Militia [was] a religious and chivalric order founded by Innocent III and Saint Dominic, and Pius IX had appointed the comte de Beaumont as Grand Master of the Order in France". The General of the Dominicans, Padre Larroca, was rather surprised, and made inquiries. He discovered that the comte de Beaumont had retired and been succeeded by Domenico Piccoli, who started calling himself Lieutenant General and Grand Prior of the Cross of Paris of the

Order. The Order was renamed Ordine religioso cavalleresco della Milizia di N.S. Gesu Cristo, its members calling themselves knights and commanders, wearing a uniform with white jacket, and the shape of the insignia had become the black and white cross flory of the Dominicans. Alarmed, the General of the Dominicans wrote to Piccoli and informed him that all links between the Dominicans and the Militia were severed, and asking him to stop using insignia related to those of the Dominicans. His successor also wrote to Piccoli in 1888 telling him not to use titles such as Lieutenant-General or Grand-Master, since theirs was an association, not an order. Some years later, Piccoli made another attempt at obtaining official endorsement, and received a reply from P. Cormier, Procurator General of the Dominicans, once again refusing to have anything to do with the Militia (1897).

Badges of the Militia of Christ. Source: By courtesy of Hermann Historica, Munich.

At this point, Piccoli turned elsewhere for patronage, and persuaded the Melkite Catholic patriarch of Antioch, Peter IV, to become Grand Master, in 1900. Peter IV died in 1902, and the Mastership was offered to his successor Cyrill VIII, who immediately wrote to the Pope for his approval. The Holy See's reaction was swift. In 1904, the Secretary of State of the Holy See wrote to Piccoli to inform him that the Order of the Militia of Christ was not approved by the Holy See, and that Cyrill VIII would not accept the Mastership. In the end, Piccoli assumed himself the Grand Mastership of his order. He died in 1916, but the association seems to have survived him; and it was still in existence in the 1970s. Some members of the Militia, however, went on to found other revived orders. In particular, Paul Watrin, knight of the Militia in 1902, founded in 1910 a revived order of Saint Lazarus and placed it under the protection of the same Melkite patriarch in the same year.

References

* Alberto di Montenuovo: article in Rivista Araldica, 1916, pp.364-7. Piccoli, D. Constitution de l'Ordre de la Milice de Jsus-Christ. Paris, 1887. Piccoli, D. Histoire de la chevalerie, des croisades et de l'Ordre de la Milice de JsusChrist depuis leur origine jusqu' nos jours. Paris, 1905. Bertrand, Paul. L'ordre de la Milice de Jsus-Christ, de Saint-Dominique et de Saint Pierre Martyr. Paris, 1938. (I have not seen this book; the author is the official chronicler of the revived order of St Lazarus).

Noble Ordre de Saint-Georges au Comt de Bourgogne ou de Rougemont (ca. 1920-1937)This noble confraternity, known in English as Saint George of Burgundy, was founded in 1390 by Philippe de Mollans, a nobleman from Franche-Comt or comt de Bourgogne. A tradition claims that he made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land and brought back a relic of Saint George. Soon after he founded the Order in question. Its statutes are known: members had to prove 16 quarters of nobility and 10 degrees of nobility in male line, be natives of Franche-Comt, Catholics and 16 or older, and pay 300 livres. A governor was elected for life; other officers included a chancelor (a cleric), a treasurer and two secretaries. Assemblies were held every year. The society lapsed but was revived in 1485; it swore allegiance to Philip II of Spain in 1569, expelled a Protestant in 1584; it stopped

meeting during the Thirty Years War but resumed after 1648, and met yearly in Besanon. The arms of the order (Gules Saint George or) were registered in 1696. In 1768 the statutes were revised. Many of the order's members emigrated or died during the Revolution, and it had only 25 members in 1814. In 1816 the survivors regrouped under the leadership of Charles-Emmanuel, marquis de Saint-Mauris (1753-1839), baron-pair in 1828, of an ancient local family that had counted many members of the order (Rvrend, vol. 6, p. 194). The statutes were revised to allow for speedy reception of siblings and children of former members, and other receptions brought the order to 78 in 1817, date of the last reception of members. But the order was abolished in 1824 when an Royal ordinance of April 16, 1824 made it illegal to wear decorations and insignia other than those of the Royal orders. An instruction of the Chancery of the Legion of Honor of May 5, 1824 specifically cited the Order of Saint George as abolished. No knights were subsequently received. The last knight, the marquis de Jouffroy d'Abbans, died in 1869, at which point the Order became extinct.In the Bibliothque nationale, collection Clairambault, are two volumes on this order: 1318 contains printed material, 1319 contains a list of members from 1575 to 1703.

The insignia of the order was a medallion showing Saint George killing the dragon, hung from a ribbon, initially red (with the approval of the duke of Burgundy Philippe le Bon), changed to blue under Louis XIV. There exists a book on this order or confraternity: La Noble Confrrie des Chevaliers de SaintGeorges by Eric Thiou.

Badge of St. George of Burgundy. Source: By courtesy of Hermann Historica, Munich.

This story is told by Pidoux de la Madure in an article in Rivista Araldica (Aug 1905 pp. 465-72). Great was his surprise some 25 years later when he learned of a revival of the order (in fact, he even received a diploma as "commander" of the order in December 1929!) The revived order followed a worn pattern. In a typical fashion, it was claimed that the order was actually founded in 1167 in Palestine by Roger, bishop of Arimathea, brought back to France around 1300, reinvigorated in 1390 by Philippe de Mollans. Supposedly, it was not abolished in 1824 but survived until 1880, when, allegedly, new statutes were given to it. It only really surfaces in the 1920s, when it is headed by a Grand Referendary named the comte de Maupas (false title of comte, non-noble family name changed from "Maupas" to "de Maupas" in 1853; Dioudonnat, p. 447). Maupas was succeeded in 1923 by a marquis de Golbery (another false title) and in 1926 replaced by a General Government assisted by a Sacred Council headed by a duc de Lavillatte (yet another false title). In 1929 Francesco Antonio di Gonzaga di Mantua was elected Governor of the order, and revised statutes of the Apostolic and Hospitaller Order of Saint George and Notre-Dame du Mont-Carmel were published. The new order was rather different in spirit: the nobility requirements were dispensed with, the exclusion of non-Catholics was relaxed, and recruitment extended outside of Franche-Comt. The name "Notre-Dame du Mont-Carmel" was added, based on the claim that knights of the French order of Notre-Dame du Mont-Carmel had merged their order with that of Saint-Georges (never mind that N-D du Mont-Carmel was never an independent order, but merely a duplicate of Saint-Lazare). The same year, the French Association of the Knights of Saint George was registered as a non-profit association under French law (14 Mar 1929). In 1931, the order in question dropped any reference to Notre-Dame du Mont-Carmel... By 1934, the Order of Saint-Georges claimed the membership of the French generals Weygand and Gouraud, as well as 3 Italian generals and 3 American generals. It found an ardent supporter in

Adriano Colocci-Vespucci, who wrote several articles in Rivista Araldica (1934, p.562-7, 1935 p.61-63). An article by A. de Rubeis (Rivista Araldica, Feb 1938, pp.79-83) lists other eminent members: the archduke Franz-Josef of Habsburg-Lothringen, the archduke Ferdinando of LorraineTuscany, prince William of Wied (king of Albania in 1914), the French general de Castelnau, the admiral Dartiguez, the vice-admiral de Neresteny, the presidents of Venezuela, Peru, Cuba, the Prime Minister of Czechoslovakia, two cardinals, Victor Dowling (New York Supreme Court), etc. Note that Dowling was also a knight of Saint-Lazarus. One of the individuals involved was an orthodox priest, the archmandrite Demeter de Ser Leo (already connected to the contemporaneous revival of Saint Lazarus, of which he was a member). He was tried in November 1937 by a military court in Rome and found guilty (along with two Frenchmen) of illegal sale of decorations; the same court declared the order to have been abolished in 1824 and inexistent. Even worse, the "duc de Lavillatte", a.k.a. "duc de Saint-Simon", whose real name was Philippe Dissandes de Lavillatte (an old non-noble family from the Berry, according to Dioudonnat), was sued for usurping the name of Saint-Simon and for wearing false orders and impersonating a general. The offending occasion, though not the sole one, was his appearance at the funeral of a general at the Invalides on 10 Jan 1934, styling himself "Most Serene Highness general duc de Saint-Simon", wearing the uniorm of an Italian general, and wearing no less than 22 decorations. He claimed that his father had received the ducal title from the king of Montenegro in 1920, and also claimed to descend from the famous writer duc de Saint-Simon (d. 1755). The court sentenced him to a suspended sentence of 8 days in jail, a criminal fine of 500F and a civil fine to the Saint-Simon family of 8,000F (Tribunal correctionnel de la Seine, 9 Dec 1936; Recueil Sirey, 1937, 2:133). Not surprisingly, the order disappears completely after that date, although it is included in the list of false orders condemned by the Holy See in 1953. The parallels with the revived order of Saint-Lazarus are striking: an ancient order which died out in France after 1830, revived in the 1920s (albeit with membership requirements much loosened), with vague claims that it had survived secretly in the 19th century, some of the same individuals involved in both activities, a Grand-Master with an impressive name chosen in 1929, a sudden surge of activity with famous people supposedly becoming members, including presidents of Latin American countries, etc. There appears to be a recent revival of this order by Pierre Pasleau, an habitu of the false title circuit.

References

Jrgens, G. Storia dell'Ordine equestre di San Giorgio di Borgogna. Roma, 1935. Uyttenhove, J. Ordre souverain de Saint Georges de Bourgogne. Gent, 1960. * various article in Rivista Araldica, cited above.

The Modern Order of Saint-LazarusI discussed briefly the prior history of the Order of Saint Lazarus. It was a hospitaller order founded in the 12th c. in Jerusalem to serve as hospital for knights who had contracted leprosy. Since leprosy did not necessarily incapacitate, the hospital acquired a structure modelled on the other military-monastic orders in the Holy Land, and, as manpower grew scarce in the late 13th c.,

some members were involved in battles against Muslims. After the fall of Acre in 1291, the last remnants of the order moved back to Western Europe, mainly France and Italy. The Pope tried to merge it with the Order of Saint John in 1489, then merged it with the Savoyard order of Saint Maurice in 1572. The remaining French priory, which refused to obey the Pope, was transformed into a French royal order and united with the Order of Notre-Dame du Mont-Carmel in 1608; it underwent many changes and was abolished in 1791. Not restaured in 1814, it disappeared with its last members in the mid-19th century. The Order was revived in 1910 and the organization still exists today. I discuss its modern history in a separate page.

The Niadh NaskThe Niadh Nask was a self-described "non-chivalric order of knighthood" which was claimed to have roots in a medieval caste of Irish warriors and to be associated with the MacCarthy family (princes of Desmond until the 16th c.). Evidence of its existence prior to recent times was scant (for example, a cross-shaped badge hangs around the neck of the last prince of Desmond in a 19th century copy of an alleged 16th c. portrait, now lost, and of stylistically dubious authenticity). Its defenders claimed that it had survived until the 1970s as a rather confidential order confined to the MacCarthy family. It considerably extended its public presence under the grand-mastership of Terence MacCarthy, a.k.a. the "MacCarthy Mr". There was substantial overlap in the memberships of the Niadh Nask and the Order of St. Lazarus. In late 1999, what many people had suspected became patently clear: Terence MacCarthy, whose descent from the princes of Desmond was debunked by Sean J. Murphy, was a complete fraud, and had completely invented the Niadh Nask. Elements of this now obsolete controversy can be found in this page.

Recently Created OrdersAlthough bona fide orders have been created out of private initiative for charitable, military or religious purposes ever since the original order of Saint John (now known as Malta), since the 19th century there has been a large number of orders created either to satisfy personal vanity, or to enrich a group of people (or both). Not all recently created orders of chivalry need be condemned by such a blanket statement, but caveat emptor remains the rule.

Legal StatusLegally, some (but only few) governments have adopted a stand on orders of chivalry:

The French government's position The Italian government's position

On the WebHere are some links randomly collected while surfing the Web (some links may be out of date or broken).

Carl Lindgren's pages several links worth pursuing Patriarchal Order of the Holy Cross of Jerusalem Founded in the late 1960s by the head of the Melchite Greek Catholic Church, the Patriarch Maximos V. It has ranks, titles, fees ($1500 for a knight, $11750 for a grand cross), decorations, fancy costumes, investiture ceremonies, etc. Coincidentally, the patriarch is also the spiritual protector of the order of St Lazarus. Order of Saint Ignatius founded in 1976 by the metropolitan of the Antiochian Orthodox archdiocese of North America, with the blessing of the Antioch patriarch Elias IV. Order of Saint Andrew the Apostle of the Ecumenical patriarchate of Constantinople was founded in 1966, with Pierre DeMets as Grand Commander. Order of Saint Constantine the Great (OMCM), Order of St Helen, Order of St Eugene of Trebizond run by Theodore IX Lascaris Comnenos Sacred Orthodox Order of the Most Holy Cross of Saint Constantine the Great This self-described "ecclesiastical order of merit" made a brief appearance on the Web; it is apparently tied to the Orthodox bishop of Milan. Its badge is a stunning likeness of the badge of the Constantinian Order of St George of the Two Sicilies. Its recognition by the ICOC is said to be pending. There are two associated orders, the Supreme Order of St. Ambrosius and the Orthodox Order of Saint Mary Magdalen at the Holy Sepulchre of Christ. Byzantine Order of the Holy Sepulchre The Religious and Military Order of Knights of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem Created by Lloyd Worley, a professor of English at the University of Northern Colorado (and also count palatine of Mazalla, courtesy of the "house of Alabona-Ostrogojsk", see below). The Order of the Noble Companions of the Swan Created by William Maszer, a.k.a. "His Royal and Serene Highness Prince William I de Alabona-Ostrogojsk-Garama". Noble Order of the Guards of St Germain an invention of "Prince Michael Stewart of Albany" The Emperor of Palm Beach by D. Kinnane-Roelofsma (on Caltrap's Corner) Gauci's response to Kinnane-Roelofsma Gauci's page on Maltese nobility "Peerage Conferred" This title peddler (be a duke for $1500!) also confers the "Order of Saint Andrew of Jerusalem". Dukes get the "Order of St. Victor" for free.

BibliographyI include here a bibliography taken from Ivo Suetens: Bibliographie Numismatique: Ordres et Dcorations, Bruxelles, 1969, 1977. I have not seen these books, and it is likely that they are quite rare, many of them being 16-page pamphlets without place or date of publication. But the list is, of itself, instructive, as it provides traces for the activities of these orders over time. See also the list of fantasy orders established by the Italian Foreign Ministry and another list drawn by the Holy See in 1953.

General Some general sources on self-styled orders. Gillingham, H. E. Ephemeral Decorations. New York, 1935. American Numismatical Society: Numismatic Notes and Mongraphs 66. Zeininger de Borja, H. C. Vanitas Vanitatum, o el trafico de condecoraciones fantasticas. Leysin, 1939. (Zeininger, a serious heraldist, spent a lot of time denouncing self-styled orders, and was a fierce critic of the order of S. Lazarus.) Chaffanjon, Arnaud and Bertrand Galimard-Flavigny. Ordres & contre-ordres de chevalerie. Paris : Mercure de France, 1982. Gonzaga Orders A19th century creation of the so-called prince of Gonzaga-Castiglione, convicted of fraud in 1853. La famille des Gonzagues et l'Ordre de la Rdemption du Prcieux Sang. (mid-19th c.). Villamora, A. de. Notice historique des ordres de chevalerie appartenant a la maison royale des princes de Gonzaga, ducs de Mantoue. Lyon, 1863. Marseille, 1866. Lusignan orders In 1880, a former Maronite priest named Kafta and his wife started peddling an Order of Melusina, claiming to represent the royal house of Lusignan (which reigned over Cyprus in the 13th to 15th centuries) and calling themselves Guy and Marie de Lusignan. After his death, her lover became Grand Master and called himself comte d'Alby de Gratigny, but became involved in a fake art intrigue in 1910. Lusignan, M. de. Ordre de Mlusine, chevalerie d'honneur de Marie de Lusignan. Paris, 1888. Lusignan, G. de. Statuts de l'Ordre royal de la Saint Catherine du Mont Sina. Paris, 1896. Cornaro, F. Reale Ordine di Cipro. S.l., 1948. 16 p. Pelliccioni di Poli, Luciano Il sovrano ordine di Cipro. Rome, 1973. Golden Horn Gybels, V.G.M. Geschiedenis en Symbolen der Geheime orde van den Gulden Hoorn. Merksem, 1933. Grand Centaure Miera, F. de. Statuts de l'Ordre Equestre du Grand Centaure. Verviers, 1872. Saint Agatha of Patern Created in the 1950s by a cadet of the Sicilian family of Patern. See more info. Santippolito, C. L'Ordine dinastico di S. Agata dei Paterno. Messina, 1961. Saint Brigitte of Sweden Orden de los Caballeros del SS. Salvador o de S. Brigida de Suevia. Estatutos. 1948. Ordine dei Cavalieri del S.S. Salvatore o di S. Brigida di Svezia. Statuti. 1950. Bisogni. La Sacra e nobile milizia del SS. Salvatore o di S. Brigida di Suezia. 1950. Van Dijk, B.J.M. De ridderlijke orden van St.-Birgitta van Zweden en van de Roos en het Kruis van Jerusalem, tempelorde. Amsterdam, 1968. Saint Mary of Bethlehem Vargas Machuca, A. de. Il Sacro militare ordine di S. Maria di Bethlemme. Naples, 1936. Saint Denis of Zanthe Founded by Pericles Voultsos in the 1950s, headed now by Thomas John Taglianetti. See more info. Ordre grec-souverain et international de Saint-Dennis de Zante: Histoire, Administration, Buts et activites. New York, 1953.

The International American Institute. The story of the ancient and most exalted Greek Order of Saint Dennis of Zante. Washington, D.C. 1958. Historia de la muy antigua e nobre Ordem grega de S. Dionisio de Zante. Lisboa, n.d. A Spanish version, printed in Santiago de Chile, ca. 1960. C.N. Packett. The story of the ancient and most exalted Greek Order of Saint Dennis of Zante. Bradford, 1962. The Sovereign Greek Order of Saint Dennis of Zante. Historical summary and roster. New York, 1965-. Voultsos, P. Hoi hippotai tou hagiou Dionusiou Zakunthou. Athens, 1973. Saint George of Carinthia Revived in the mid-20th century; seems to be still active. Pelliccioni di Poli, Luciano: L'Ordine di San Giorgio in Carinzia. Rome, 1975. Another edition in 1983 with slightly different title: L'Ordine Sovrano Militare Ospedaliero di San Giorgio in Carinzia. On the cover of the first edition the author is styled "conte di Montecocullo, Gran Cancelliere dell'Ordine". Saint Hubert of Bar A nobiliary confraternity of this name did exist in Old Regime France, similar to S. George of Burgundy. Like it, it was revived in the 20th century by Ernest-Diomede Caprotti during World War II; its chancellor was a Dutchman, Charles J.A. Begeer. This order had as its head a prince Galitzin and later Eugene-Leopold of Bavaria (cf. Zeininger 1953). Caprotti, D. Capitularis Ordo Sancti Huberti Lorenensis ac Barensis e pia Unione dell'Ordine di S. Huberto. Florence, 1944. Saint Sbastien et Saint Guillaume Originally a crossbow practice group of the 15th century, briefly revived in the 1730s. Recreated by L. Doucet inthe 1900s as a pseudo-nobiliary order with Grand-Cross, Commander, Officer and Knight. The insignia was a Maltese cross with two arrows crossed between the branches and surmounted by a countal coronet. Doucet de Chermont, L.M. Documents, statuts et privilges de la noble institution de l'Ordre des Chevaliers de Saints-Sbastien et Guillaume. Montligeon. 1911. Breve Historia da ordem dos Cavalheiros de S. Sebastiao e Guilherme. Rio de Janeiro, 1954. article by Ugo Orlandini in Rivista Araldica, October 1910, p. 624. Constantinian Order and Royal Crown of Vandalia A creation of "Flavian Eugene, 47th duke of Athens". (Cf. Zeininger 1953). Sanz de Andino, F. J. La Orden de Constantino el Grande y de la Real Corona de Vandalia. Madrid, 1947. Cross of Constantine the Great One of the creations of Fortun Koller, who also served as propagandist for the Belgian G. Proot, so-called prince of Thomond. Koller, Fortun. Ordre sacr imprial anglique de la Croix de Constantin le Grand. Rome, 1950. Our Lady of Mercy (N. S. Della Mercede) Ajtay de Vajasd, L. L'Ordine della Mercede. Rome, 1914. Vico, A. Costituzioni del celeste, reale e militare Ordine di N. S. della Mercede. Rome,. 1926.

Knighthood Main Page | Search Heraldica | Heraldic Glossary | Contact Franois Velde Last Modified: Nov 03, 2003

Knighthood and Orders of ChivalryThe following pages deal with knights and knighthood, as well as the related concept of order of knighthood, both in its original form as a medieval institution, and its modern form as an award of merit. See the introduction for a development of these distinctions.

Contents

General Introduction to Knights and Knighthood Women and Knighthood in the Middle Ages History of the Orders of Knighthood: a Survey Specific Orders: The Order of Saint John (Sovereign Military Order of Malta) The Teutonic Order List of the Knights of the Garter from 1348 The French Orders of Chivalry Revived and Recently Created Orders, of which the Order of Saint Lazarus An essay on legitimacy of orders.

BibliographyThere are many, many books on the topic of orders of chivalry. There is an excellent bibliography:

Suetens, Ivo: Bibliographie Numismatique - Supplment: Ordres et Dcorations. Bruxelles, Cercle d'Etudes Numismatiques, Travaux: 1969, 1977 (2 vol.).

Lists of British knightsTo identify a British knight (knight bachelor or knight member of an order), one can use:

Shaw, William Arthur: The knights of England; a complete record from the earliest time to the present day of the knights of all the orders of chivalry in England, Scotland, and

Ireland, and of knights bachelors; Incorporating a complete list of knights bachelors dubbed in Ireland, compiled by G. D. Burtchaell. London, Printed and published for the Central chancery of the orders of knighthood, Sherratt and Hughes, 1906. Shaw's lists go "from the earliest time" to 1904 inclusive. For any honour awarded sinec January 1, 1900, the online edition of the London Gazette can be searched.

Other Resources on the WebListings of Knights

Knights of the Garter (1348-present) Chevaliers du Saint-Esprit (1578-1789) by Arnaud Bunel Knights of the Golden Fleece (1430-present) by T.F. Boettger Knights of the Annunciation (1362-1788) by Federico Bona ORB's page on military orders with scholarly contributions, primary documents (such as the rules of the Templars and Teutonic nights) and links Page on Chivalric Orders by Guy Stair Sainty, the most complete site on the subject. A Page on Honours from the British monarchy's official website. Honours in New Zealand The Canadian Honours System The British Venerable Order of Saint John, US priory (with further links) Knightly Orders & International Nobility, by Luigi Mendola. The ancient Portuguese military orders by Jos Vicente de Bragana links to Military Orders, Orders of Knighthood & Orders of Merit As Ordens Honorficas Portuguesas (in Portuguese) Official Web Page of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta's Assocation in the United States. A page of links related to the Order of Malta from the Brotherhood of Blessed Grard. The Orders of Chivalry Web Site, currently contains articles the British Orders of Chivalry, the Orders of St John (the Sovereign Order of Malta and on the four non-Catholic Orders of St John known as the Alliance Orders), the Order of St Lazarus, and the Order of St Stanislas. Catholic Encyclopaedia entry on Chivalry International Commission on Orders of Chivalry originally founded in 1962, refounded in 1999-2001

Return to Heraldica Main Page Franois Velde

Knighthood and Chivalry

No substantial change since September 1996.

TerminologyThe terms are often confused, and often needlessly distinguished. The term knighthood comes from the English word knight (from Old English cniht, boy, servant, cf. German Knecht) while chivalry comes from the French chevalerie, from chevalier or knight (Low Latin caballus for horse). In modern English, chivalry means the ideals, virtues, or characteristics of knights. The phrases "orders of chivalry" and "orders of knighthood" are essentially synonymous. The German translation for "knight" is Ritter (literally, rider). The Latin term in the Middle Ages was miles, since a knight was by definition a professional soldier. In modern times, the Classical Latin term eques was preferred.

HistoryThe Emergence of knightsSuccintly, a knight was a professional soldier. The old "citizens' armies" of Antiquity had been replaced by professional armies. This trend was reinforced by the appearance in the 8th century of the stirrup, which made mounted men much more powerful and turned cavalry into the most important element of medieval armies. But being a mounted soldier was expensive, since it required enough income to buy and sustain a horse and the equipment (armor, weapons) to go with it. Thus, those who were too poor to provide this service became mere peasants, attached to the land. In feudal society as it emerged in the 10th century, everyone held land from someone else in exchange for goods or services of some kind. Men who were not free provided a portion of their crops and labor services. Men who were free provided military service, either personally or (if they were rich enough) using others' services. Thus, a man who held his estate in knight's fee owed service as a knight to his lord. A more sizeable vassal, when called by his liege, would summon his knights and form a contingent in his liege's army.

The Development of KnighthoodKnighthood was originally a professional association. It included those men who could afford to make and maintain the heavy capital investment required by mounted warfare (horse and armor). It emerges in the 11th century, and its members are nobles (members of the great land-owning families) as well as small land-holders, free men, craftsmen, etc (in Spain, caballeros villanos were common until the 14th c.). It must be understood that, even in the feudal era, the boundaries of knighthood were quite fluid. Anyone who, by luck or effort, managed to obtain the training and equipment to be a knight, could eventually enter that class. In Flanders, there is a famous case of a family of servile (i.e., unfree) origin who entered into knighthood and became castellans of ??? in the 12th c. In the course of the 12th century, a social and ethical dimension is added to this professional aspect. The strong influence of Cluny monks, who try to give an ethos to savage warfare, leads to the

definition of the true miles Christi, a soldier who follows a certain code of behavior, which we now call chivalric. Starting in the second half of the 12th century, literature (gests and Arthurian romances) also provides a model for the knightly community, as well as a means of glorifying it.

Knighthood and NobilityThus, knights were not necessarily nobles, nor were nobles necessarily knights. The noble class and the knightly class slowly came to merge from the late 12th century onward. Nobles become knights with increasing frequency. The French prince (future king Louis VI) was knighted without the knowledge of his father who remains distrustful of a rather heterogeneous professional class, but thereafter every French king is knighted (Favier 1993). Conversely, heredity enters the knightly class in the 13th century. The son of a knight is automatically a squire, thus making him eligible for knighthood on the basis of his ancestry; at the same time, knighthood is more and more restricted to descendants of knights by various legal restrictions imposed over the course of the 13th century. In the late 13th century, a decision of the Parliament in Paris forbade the count of Artois from making unfree men into knights without the king's consent; interesting to note, the two men who had been so knighted were allowed to remain knights subject to the payment of a fine. This marked both the closure of the knightly class as well as the beginnings of a new form of access, by purchase. In England, the evolution was different: those who held land in knight's fee but did not wish to take up the profession could pay a tax. Knighthood did not become a hereditary class in England, and instead the knightly class (those eligible to be knights) became the nucleus of the gentry. See also my page on women knights.

The End of KnighthoodAs a military institution, knighthood was on the wane from the late 13th century on. The end of feudal society meant that sovereigns gained a monopoly on war-making, and the old form of military service owed to one's immediate lord became obsolete. Kings still summoned their knights for wars, but increasingly they turned to other sources of manpower, namely mercenaries whose use became common in the 14th century. The war preparations of Henry V of England, which are well-documented, show how the king formed an army: he signed dozens of contracts (or indentures) with individuals who pledged to provide a specified number of men-at-arms and archers (usually 3 archers for each man-at-arm) at muster time. The development of gunpowder and increasingly more powerful archery meant that the use of massive cavalry charges to break enemy lines and carry swift victory could not be relied upon, and the dominance of cavalry came to an end. If any battle summed up this change, it was the battle of Agincourt in 1415. The charging French knights, compressed by the terrain and the English arrows into a fragmented and ever constricted line of attack, reached the English line without any room to maneuver, and it only took a few fallen horses to prevent all other knights from moving in any direction. Thus, in half-an-hour the battle was decided, and thousands of French knights lay prisoners. The fear of a second attack prompted the English to kill them on the spot, and the French nobility was horribly decimated in a single day. The French learned their lesson; Charles VII, who finally expelled the English, formed the first standing, professional army in Europe. The chivalric ideals continued to live on, perhaps precisely because the reality of knighthood had disappeared, and a free rein was given to romanticizing. The French king Franois Ier insisted on

being knighted on the battlefield of his first victory at Marignano in 1515. Tournaments, pas d'armes were favorite entertainment at the French court of the 16th century. More and more elaborate suits of armor were forged for pure display, in increasingly baroque imitations of earlier models. Ariosto's poetic retelling of the crusades popularized the figures of Orlando and Ruggiero and extended the knightly myth for another 200 years. In the 19th century, when no one read Ariosto anymore, Sir Walter Scott and Romanticism took up the cause.

Orders of KnighthoodThe origins of orders of knighthood are in the Crusades. In the Latin Orient, a new institution emerged, in which knights (professional soldiers) associated themselves under a strict, quasimonastic rule of life, for the purpose of protecting pilgrims and defending Christian conquests in the Holy Land. In the 14th century, just as the original military-monastic orders were searching for a new mission after the loss of the Holy Land, kings began creating orders of their own, modelled in part on these original orders, but with a different purpose, to bind their nobility to themselves. Still later, in the late 16th century, these monarchical orders were imitated in form by the new orders of merit which became common throughout Europe. Because each institution tried to use the prestige of the previous one by imitating it, the term "order of knighthood" has been passed on and is now used for modern awards and decorations which are neither orders nor composed of knights. In modern society, only a very few orders survive from the times of the Crusades, and most "orders of knighthood" awarded by sovereigns or governments (such as the English Garter or the Spanish Golden Fleece) are, in spite of their historical connection, awards of merit. I discuss orders of knighthood at greater length.

Heraldry and KnighthoodThe relations between heraldry, nobility and knighthood are often completely misunderstood. Briefly stated, heraldry appeared in the landed aristocracy and quickly spread to the knightly class in the 12th century, at a time when knighthood and nobility remain very distinct classes. Over the course of the 13th century, knighthood and nobility came to merge, just as heraldry spread far beyond either class to be used by all classes of society. Thus, heraldry is not particularly linked to nobility, although the most easily documented uses of heraldry are among nobles, simply because nobles were the elite. The initial development of heraldry certainly owes a lot to the practices of the knightly class, in particular the growing fashion of tournaments, which became more and more popular from the 13th century, just as knighthood as a military institution was on the wane. Tournaments were the occasion to display coats of arms, and heralds, who were originally a specialized group of minstrels, became responsible for identifying and cataloguing the arms of participants. Their knowledge of coats of arms also helped them identify fighters in battle and dead on the battlefield, and for this reason heralds became associated with battles, truces, declarations of war, in an official capacity.

References

Favier, Jean: Dictionnaire de la France Mdivale. Paris: 1993, Fayard. Walrop: La Noblesse de Flandres avant 1300.

Knighthood Main Page | Search Heraldica | Heraldic Glossary | Contact Franois Velde Last Modified: Jun 01, 2002

Women Knights in the Middle AgesWere there women knights in the Middle Ages? Initially I thought not, but further research yielded surprising answers. There were two ways anyone could be a knight: by holding land under a knight's fee, or by being made a knight or inducted into an order of knighthood. There are examples of both cases for women.

Female Orders of KnighthoodThe Order of the Hatchet There is a case of a clearly military order of knighthood for women. It is the order of the Hatchet (orden de la Hacha) in Catalonia. It was founded in 1149 by Raymond Berenger, count of Barcelona, to honor the women who fought for the defense of the town of Tortosa against a Moor attack. The dames admitted to the order received many privileges, including exemption from all taxes, and took precedence over men in public assemblies. I presume the order died out with the original members. Here is a description taken from Ashmole, The Institution, Laws, and Ceremony of the Most Noble Order of the Garter (1672), Ch. 3, sect. 3: "The example is of the Noble Women of Tortosa in Aragon, and recorded by Josef Micheli Marquez, who plainly calls them Cavalleros or Knights, or may I not rather say Cavalleras, seeing I observe the words Equitissae and Militissae (formed from the Latin Equites and Milites) heretofore applied to Women, and sometimes used to express Madams or Ladies,though now these Titles are not known. "Don Raymond, last Earl of Barcellona (who by intermarriage with Petronilla, only Daughter and Heir of King Ramiro the Monk, united that principality to the Kingdom of Aragon) having in the year 1149, gained the City of Tortosa from the Moors, they on the 31 of December following, laid a

new Siege to that place, for the recovery of it out of the Earls hands. The Inhabitants being a length reduced to gread streights, desired relief of the Earl, but he, being not in a condition to give them any, they entertained some thoughts of making a surrender. Which the Women hearing of, to prevent the disaster threatning their City, themselves, and Children, put on mens Clothes, and by a resolute sally, forced the Moors to raise the Siege. "The Earl, finding himself obliged, bythe gallentry of the action, thought fit to make his acknowlegements thereof, by granting them several Privileges and Immunities, and to perpetuate the memory of so signal an attempt, instituted an Order, somewhat like a Military Order, into which were admitted only those Brave Women, deriving the honor to their Descendants, and assigned them for a Dadge, a thing like a Fryars Capouche, sharp at the top, after the form of a Torch, and of a crimson colour, to be worn upon their Head-clothes. He also ordained, that at all publick meetings, the women should have precedence of the Men. That they should be exempted from all Taxes, adn that all the Apparel and Jewels, though of never so great value, left by their dead Husbands, should be their own. "These Women (saith our Author) having thus aquired this Honor by their personal Valour, carried themselves after the Military Knights of those days." Jeanne Hachette, who fought to repel a Burgundian assault on the town of Beauvais in 1472. The King exempted her from taxes, and ordered that, in an annual procession to commemorate the event, women would have precedence over men. This story seems to be a carbon copy of the Order of the Hatchet story... In Italy, the Order of the glorious Saint Mary, founded by Loderigo d'Andalo, a nobleman of Bologna in 1233, and approved by pope Alexander IV in 1261, was the first religious order of knighthood to grant the rank of militissa to women. This order was suppressed by Sixtus V in 1558. In the Low Countries, at the initiative of Catherine Baw in 1441, and 10 years later of Elizabeth, Mary and Isabella of the house of Hornes, orders were founded which were open exclusively to women of noble birth, who received the French title of chevalire or the Latin title of equitissa. In his Glossarium (s.v. militissa), Du Cange notes that still in his day (17th c.), the female canons of the canonical monastery of St. Gertrude in Nivelles (Brabant), after a probation of 3 years, are made knights (militissae) at the altar, by a (male) knight called in for that purpose, who gives them the accolade with a sowrd and pronounces the usual words. In England, ladies were appointed to the Garter almost from the start. In all, 68 ladies were appointed between 1358 and 1488, including all consorts. Though many were women of royal blood, or wives of knights of the Garter, some women were neither. They wore the garter on the left arm, and some are shown on their tombstones with this arrangement. After 1488, no other appointments are known, although it is said that the Garter was granted to a Neapolitan poetess, Laura Bacio Terricina, by Edward VI. In 1638, a proposal was made to revive the use of robes for the wives of knights in ceremonies, but it came to nought. (See Edmund Fellowes, Knights of the Garter, 1939; and Beltz: Memorials of the Order of the Garter). Unless otherwise noted, all the above is from the book by H. E. Cardinale, Orders of Knighthood, Awards and the Holy See, 1983. The info on the order of the Hatchet is reproduced elsewhere as well, e.g., a Spanish encyclopedia. I have seen the order of glorious Saint Mary discussed elsewhere, but without mention of women. I have yet to identify the orders of the Hornes family.

Women in the Military OrdersSeveral established military orders had women who were associated with them, beyond the simple

provision of aid. The Teutonic order accepted consorores who assumed the habit of the order and lived under its rule; they undertook menial and hospitaller functions. Later, in the late 12th century, one sees convents dependent on military orders are formed. In the case of the Order of Saint-John (later Malta), they were soeurs hospitalires, and they were the counterparts of the frres prtres or priest brothers, a quite distinct class from the knights. In England, Buckland was the site of a house of Hospitaller sisters from Henry II's reign to 1540. In Aragon, there were Hospitaller convents in Sigena, San Salvador de Isot, Grisn, Alguaire, headed each by a commendatrix. In France they are found in Beaulieu (near Cahors), Martel and Fieux. The only other military order to have convents by 1300 was the order of Santiago, which had admitted married members since its foundation in 1175. and soon women were admitted and organized into convents of the order (late 12th, early 13th c.). The convents were headed by a commendatrix (in Spanish: commendadora) or prioress. There were a total of six in the late 13th century: Santa Eufenia de Cozuelos in northern Castile, San Spiritu de Salamanca, Santos-o-Vello in Portugal, Destriana near Astorga, San Pedro de la Piedra near Lrida, San Vincente de Junqueres. The order of Calatrava also had a convent in San Felices de los Barrios. and thirteenth centuries,' Studia Monastica 1987 (vol. 29).

Women KnightsMedieval French had two words, chevaleresse and chevalire, which were used in two ways: one was for the wife of a knight, and this usage goes back to the 14th c. The other was as female knight, or so it seems. Here is a quote from Menestrier, a 17th c. writer on chivalry: "It was not always necessary to be the wife of a knight in order to take this title. Sometimes, when some male fiefs were conceded by special privilege to women, they took the rank of chevaleresse, as one sees plainly in Hemricourt where women who were not wives of knights are called chevaleresses." I could find no trace of any title bestowed on Jeanne d'Arc. Her family was made noble, with nobility transmissible through women, which was quite unusual. She did ride a horse and dress up in armor, but she did not wield a sword and never killed anyone, but rather grasped her banner pretty tightly. See also the Nine Worthy Women (les neuf preuses).

Female Grand-Cross in the ORder of Saint JohnIn 1645, when a Turkish fleet threatened the island of Malta, a French nobleman, Louis d'Arpajon (1601-79), called his vassals, raised an army of 2000 men, found ships and provisions and sailed for Malta. On 27 July 1645, a grateful Grand Master granted to him and his eldest son the right to wear and to bear in his arms a cross of Malta, and to one of his younger sons the right to be admitted as a minor in the order and to be promoted grand cross at the age of 18; furthermore this privilege was to be transmitted to his successors as head of his house, and in case of extinction of the male line it would pass to females. (See his arms). This privilege was The male line became extinct with his grandson Louis d'Arpajon, knight of the Golden Fleece, who died in 1736. He left a daughter Anne-Claude-Louise d'Arpajon (1729-94) who married Philippe de Noailles, comte de Noailles, baron de Mouchy (1715-94). She was received Grand-Cross on 13 Dec 1745 in Paris by the ambassador of the Order, and her husband was received 17 Nov 1750 (he was also knight of the St Esprit 1767, knight of the Golden Fleece

1746, and marchal de France 1775, grandee of Spain 1st class 1741, styled duc de Mouchy 1747. (source: La Chesnaye-Desbois; the prsident Hnault, maternal uncle of the countess of Noailles, witnessed her reception and mentions it in his Mmoires, p. 146.). Their younger son Louis-Marie, vicomte de Noailles (1756-1804) was called to the privilege. He married his cousin the daughter of the duc d'Ayen and had among others a younger son AlfredLouis-Dominique (1784-1812), baron of the French Empire, whose only daughter by his cousin Charlotte de Noailles de Mouchy was Anne-Charlotte-Ccile (d. 1858). She married CharlesPhilippe-Henri de Noailles, duc de Mouchy, and their son Antonin-Just-Lon-Marie (1841-1909) was grand-cross of St. John. The Gotha Franais also names his grandson and successor Henry, duc de Mouchy (1890-1947) as grand-cross, but does not say if the privilege continued. Hnault adds that (in his time, c. 1750), there were only three other female grand-crosses: the "princesse de Rochette in Italy", the princess of Thurn and Taxis (Maria Ludovika von Lobkowicz, 1683-1750), and her daughter Maria Augusta von Thurn und Taxis, duchess of Wurttemberg ((1706-56).

Modern Women KnightsModern French orders include women, of course, in particular the Lgion d'Honneur (Legion of Honor) since the mid-19th c., but they are always called chevaliers. The first documented case is that of Marie-Anglique Duchemin (1772-1859), who fought in the Revolutionary Wars, received a military disability pension in 1798, the rank of 2nd lieutenant in 1822, and the Legion of Honor in 1852. Traditionally, French women on whom the Lgion d'Honneur or other order is conferred use the title "chevalier." However, a recipient of the Ordre National du Mrite recently requested from the order's Chancery the permission to call herself "chevalire" and the request was granted (AFP dispatch, Jan 28, 2000). The first woman to be granted a knighthood in modern Britain seems to have been H.H. Nawab Sikandar Begum Sahiba, Nawab Begum of Bhopal, who became a Knight Grand Commander of the Order of the Star of India (GCSI) in 1861, at the foundation of the order. Her daughter received the same honour in 1872, and granddaughter in 1910. The order was open to "princes and chiefs" without distinction of gender. (Thanks to Christopher Buyers for this item). The first European woman to have been granted an order of knighthood was Queen Mary, when she was made a Knight Grand Commander of the same order, by special statute, in celebration of the Delhi Durbar of 1911. She was also granted a knighthood in 1917, when the Order of the British Empire was created (the first order explicitly open to women). The Royal Victorian Order was opened to women in 1936, the Order of Bath and Saint Michael and Saint George in 1965 and 1971 respectively. Queen consorts have been made Ladies of the Garter since 1901 (Queens Alexandra in 1901, Mary in 1910, Elizabeth in 1937). The first non-Royal woman to be made Lady Companion of the Garter was Lavinia, duchess of Norfolk in 1990 (1995), the second was Baroness Thatcher in 1995 (post-nominal: LG). On Nov. 30, 1996, Marion Ann Forbes, Lady Fraser was made Lady of the Thistle, the first non-Royal woman (post-nominal: LT).

Knighthood Main Page | Search Heraldica | Heraldic Glossary | Contact Franois Velde Last modified: Oct 21, 2005

History of Orders of Chivalry: a SurveySee also Guy Sainty's Chivalric Orders; this page benefited from his comments, although I remain responsible for the opinions expressed here.

Contents

Introduction 1) 1100 to 1291: the military-monastic orders: The Crusades provided the conditions for the emergence of a new institution combining elements of monasticism with elements of chivalry. It was soon imitated in Spain and in Eastern Europe. 2) 1335 to 1470: the monarchical orders of chivalry: In partial imitation of the monastic orders, kings created institutions designed to reward and bind subjects to them. Also, at the same time a wide variety of associations came into being, which are classified here. 3) 1560 to present: Honorific Orders : The emergence of centralized states made monarchical orders unnecessary, and they turned into honorific orders, rewarding past behavior or conferring distinction rather than encouraging future loyalty. New honorific orders, many without nobiliary requirement, start multiplying from 1693. References

IntroductionOrders of Chivalry are, primarily, a historical phenomenon peculiar to Western European Christendom of the Middle Ages. It is in that context that they are most easily defined and understood. An Order of Chivalry is a certain type of institution. In the category of orders of chivalry, a number of institutions have been placed over time. One can distinguish several phases in the history of that type of institution. The original form, during the Crusades, deserved its name of order, since it consisted of individuals bound together by a permanent religious rule of behavior. After the Crusades were over, in the 14th c., monarchs used the trappings of these orders to create a new institution to serve their purpose of binding vassals to their person. After the Renaissance, the old

monarchical orders (and some monastic orders) became purely honorific orders, and other honorific orders were created, once more using the trappings of orders of chivalry. As a result, we have today such disparate institutions as the Order of Malta, The Order of the Holy Sepulchre, the Garter, the Golden Fleece (one of the two, at any rate), Bath, Calatrava, all using the name "order of chivalry" or "order of knighthood" even though they are all very different organizations in history, form and purpose.

1100 to 1350: The Military-Monastic OrdersOriginsOrders of chivalry first appear in the context of Western Europe's military activities against nonChristian populations and states. Starting in the 11th century, Western Europe went into an aggressive expansionary phase, leading it into conflict with non-Christian populations on two fronts: in Spain and in the Middle East. These wars were engaged in for a variety of motives, but they were, at least in some respects, religious wars. The first orders of chivalry inherit this dual aspect, religious and military. The first orders of chivalry were associations of individuals, committing themselves to certain goals and regulated activities. The commitment typically took the form of vows, and the regulation of activities took the form of a Rule and an institutional structure defined by statutes and managed by officers. Thus, orders of chivalry were religious orders, in the same sense that purely religious or monastic orders were created at the same time (Carthusians, Cistercians, Franciscans, Dominicans, etc). The goals were both the sanctification of their members through their devotional and charitable activities, as well as participation in the fight against the "Infidels", either by protecting pilgrims or actively taking part in defensive or offensive military operations. A lot has been written about the origins of this new institution. As with heraldry, it seems difficult for some to accept that Western Europe could invent anything on its own; but, as in the case of heraldry, no convincing evidence has ever been adduced to show that orders of chivalry were an imported concept. Rather, this institution must be seen in the context of the 11th century, when monks and clerics were trying to establish a code of conduct for the new professional class of knights by turning them into "soldiers of Christ." During the Crusades, where religious fervor was at its peak and military skills at a premium, it was natural that these religious and military components fused into the military-monastic orders. The first orders of chivalry in the Middle East (Templars founded as a military order ca. 1119, Saint-John ca. 1080, militarized ca. Saint Lazarus ca. 1100, Teutonic Knights founded ca. 1190) were all created by private initiatives, as were the Orders in the Iberic peninsula (Avis in 1143, Alcantara in 1156, Calatrava in 1158, Santiago in 1164) created in imitation of the orders in the Holy Land. They typically saw their statutes confirmed or recognized by the Pope after a few years.

OrganizationOrders of chivalry, like the Church in general, were recipients of many donations, often in the form of land (e.g., a lord would become a knight and give his possessions to his order). Quickly, the orders became large landowners throughout Western Europe, far from their center of activity. As a

result, structures were created to manage these estates which had been entrusted to them: these estates became known as commendatoriae (cf. the English verb "to commend") and their managers commendatores. Only later was the word corrupted into commander, which gives it a semblance of military rank which it never was. As religious orders, these institutions naturally fell under the authority of the Pope, who typically approved the statutes of the order and thereby gave it a form of official recognition. In practice, the orders managed their own affairs, but in times of crises or uncertainty, the pope could and often did intervene directly, either by abolishing an order, merging it with another order (which usually came down to a transfer of assets to the other order), reforming its statutes, appointing a grand-master, etc. The large degree of autonomy that the orders had enjoyed for long periods of time sometimes led them to resent such outside interference. However, only the Order of Saint-John and the Teutonic Order ever gained enough independence and territorial sovereignty to be thought of as "sovereign orders", and in both cases this only happened after the 14th century. It should be kept in mind that the military-monastic orders were, before all, religious orders. They owned land in various countries, their membership was international, and they managed their own affairs, but so did the Benedictines and the Jesuits, and no one ever calls them "sovereign". The military aspect of these monastic orders explains why they are called Orders of Chivalry. Fighting was a professional activities, and professionals were called knights. Entrance into the social-professional category of knighthood entailed a number of religious rituals which made the idea of a monk-knight only an extension of the general idea of knight. The orders simply recruited individuals who had attained, or could attain, the status of knight. This connection became even stronger as time passed and knighthood became romanticized even as it was losing its professional aspect. I call these orders military-monastic, to emphasize their dual nature, which sets them apart from any other organization of the time. While it may appear difficult for modern-day Christians to understand how one could sanctify oneself by killing, this notion did not seem shocking in a time which took the expression milites Christi quite literally. Some orders, however, did separate the tasks, and had fighting knights alongside praying chaplains (e.g., the Order of Saint-John). In fact, these orders reflected in their structure (chaplains, knights, sergeants) the Three Orders of feudal society (clergy, nobility and third estate). At this point, then, orders of chivalry are an association of individuals, typically members of the knightly class, committing themselves through solemn vows to obey the rules and statutes of a religious order and to engage as professional soldiers in a permanent religious war, but also in religious and charitable activities. As religious orders, these associations usually need the approval of the Pope, and fall to some degree under his authority. Lesser-known orders in the Middle East, the Iberic peninsula and Eastern Europe include :

the Sword, founded by Guy of Lusignan, king of Cyprus, in 1192, disappeared with the conquest of Cyprus by the Turks in 1571, Saint Blasius in Armenia (13th c.-15th c.), Saint-John and Saint-Thomas in the Middle East (1254), Saint Thomas of Acre founded as a military order by Peter des Roches, bishop of Westminster, in 1228, Mountjoy later known as Holy Redeemer and Montfrage, founded in 1175 and merged with Calatrava in 1221, Our-Lady of the Rosary in 1209 by the archbishop of Toledo, soon extinct Our-Lady-of-Mercy in 1233 in Aragon, played a part in the conquests of Valencia and

Majorca but became a purely religious order in the 14th century, Sant-Jordi d'Alfama by the king of Aragon in 1201 (merged with Montesa in 1399), Concord in the 1240s by Ferdinand III of Castile, disappeared after his death in 1252, Saint-James of the Sword, an offshot of the Spanish order in Portugal in 1275, the Sword-Brethren, created in 1197 by a citizen of Bremen, soon militarized by the bishop of Riga, and merged in 1237 with the Teutonic Order.

After 1291: The Orders look for new missionsA major change occurred in 1291, when Acre, the last Crusader stronghold in Palestine, fell to the Arabs. The remaining orders of chivalry had to find a new raison d'tre, since the Holy Land was lost with little hope of regaining it. Some orders managed the transition skillfully: the Teutonic Knights, who had already settled in Eastern Europe and absorbed the native Order of the SwordBrethren, transferred all of their activities to Eastern Europe, where they engaged in colonization of still-pagan areas in Poland and the Baltic, and later in fighting against Orthodox Russia (and even Catholic Poland). The Order of Saint-John conquered Rhodes in the early 1300s and transformed itself into a naval power, pursuing the fight against Arabs and later Turks. Remnants of other orders found refuge in Rhodes under the protection of the Order of Saint-John. The Templars, which, by virtue of their vast network of fund-collecting, had become bankers of sorts, resisted attempts at a merger with the Order of Saint-John, a project the Pope and other rulers insisted on to better marshal resources for new crusades. Impatient with this resistance, irritated at the disorder and lack of morality which prevailed in the order, and probably mindful of the Temple's riches, the King of France arrested the Templars, had them tried on trumped-up charges, and coerced the Pope into pronouncing the dissolution of their order (1312). The Order of SaintJohn became the recipient of the Templars' estates. Two offshoots of the Templars survived in the form of new Orders: the Order of Christ in Portugal (1318) and the Order of Montesa in Spain (1319). Since the 18th century, many other groups have sprung up claiming a filiation with the Templars.

1335 to 1470: The Monarchical Orders of ChivalryA new generation of ordersAs the Crusades became a thing of the past (the last one floundering in 1271), they became romanticized, just as chivalry itself. The aura of orders of chivalry was being actively maintained by the exploits of the Knights of Saint-John ruling their kingdom of Rhodes and fighting the Turks; but most of all by the popularity of the Arthurian novels, international bestsellers of the time, detailing the glorious deeds of the Knights of the Round Table. Indeed, the knights of Saint-John, alone in their kingdom of Cyprus and fighting the nearby Infidels, seemed to many to be the epitome of the Arthurian myth. The emergence of this myth, that of a group of loyal knights devoted to a monarch did not take place in a vacuum of by accident. The 13th and 14th centuries saw the end of feudalism and the emergence of what would become the nation-states of modern Europe, centered on increasingly powerful monarchs. However, the glue of the feudal system, personal fealty to one's immediate superior in the hierarchy, needed a substitute. Until such time as the concept of absolute monarchy became fully developed, monarchs seized on the concept of orders of chivalry. They thus created institutions which recycled some of the trappings of the original orders of chivalry, but with the aim to create a close-knit and devoted circle of noblemen

around the person of the sovereign. These were the monarchical orders of chivalry. These were not the only associations to be called, either at the time or later, "orders of chivalry". The second generation of orders of chivalry, which might be collectively called lay orders of knighthood, included a wide variety of institutions and associations. It should be noted that, at the time, lay devotional confraternities were quite common: these were lay institutions which grouped members for devotional activities, met regularly, and had some form of statutes. One might think of them as the medieval (and religious) equivalent of clubs. Also, princes and lords made a common use in the 14th century of badges and liveries which they distributed to their servants but also to their followers. The fact that some confraternities, and some orders of knighthood, also began using insignia and outer marks of membership results in a great deal of confusion. D'Arcy Boulton (1987) has proposed a classification of these associations: 1. Monarchical Orders: organizations loosely modeled on lay devotional confraternities, but whose presidential office (and the control of membership) was attached to a crown or dominion, and whose main purpose was to foster loyalty to the president (Garter, Golden Fleece). 2. Confraternal Orders: these are like the first kind, but with an elective presidence and cooptive membership. Boulton further distinguishes two classes: Princely Orders founded by princes. Most were created after the Golden Fleece in 1430. These are similar to the monarchical orders, but the presidency was not hereditary. Order of Saint George, founded by Charles I of Hungary in 1325-6, Order of Saint Catherine, founded ca. 1335 by Humbert, Dauphin du Viennois, Order of St. Anthony, founded in 1384 by Albrecht I of Bavaria (although this order may not have been knightly). Society of the Eagle, founded by Albrecht von Habsburg in 1433, Selschapp unnser Liuen Frowen (Society of Our Lady, a.k.a. Order of the Swan, founded in 1440 by Friedrich II of Brandenburg, St. Hubertus Orden (Order of Saint Hubert), founded in 1444 by Gerhard V of Jlich and Berg, Ordre du Croissant (Order of the Crescent), founded by Ren d'Anjou in 1448, Society of St. Jerome, founded in 1450 by Friedrich II of Wettin, Elector of Saxony. Baronial Orders which were like aristocratic versions of the professional guilds of the time. Examples: Order of Saint-Hubert, in Barrois, 1422 Noble Order of Saint George of Rougemont, Franche-Comt, 1440 3. Fraternal Orders: these were a form of brotherhood-in-arms, formed for a specific purpose and a limited duration, binding members with pledges of aid an loyalty. They are similar to the emprises of the time, and distinguished by the use of the name "order" and of insignia. Only four are known: Compagnie of the Black Swan, created by 3 princes and 11 knights in Savoy in 1350, Corps et Ordre du Tiercelet (a kind of falcon), founded by the vicomte de Thouars and 17 barons in Poitou between 1377 and 1385, Ourdre de la Pomme d'Or founded by 14 knights in Auvergne in 1394, Alliance et Compagnie du Levrier founded by 44 knights in the Barrois in 1416 for 5

years, converted into a Confraternal order of Saint-Hubert in 1422. 4. Votive Orders: these were a form of emprise or association formed for a specific purpose and for a definite term, on the basis of a vow (hence the term votive); these were chivalric games, without the mutual pledges which characterized fraternal orders. Only three are known, on the basis of their statutes: Emprise de l'Escu vert la Dame Blanche (Enterprise of the green shield with the white lady), created in 1399 by Jean le Maingre dit Boucicaut and 12 knights for 5 years, Emprise du Fer de Prisonnier (Enterprise of the Prisoner's Iron) undertaken by Jean de Bourbon and 16 knights for 2 years in 1415, Enterprise of the Dragon, undertaken by Jean comte de Foix for 1 year. 5. The Cliental Pseudo-Orders: these were not really orders in that they had no statutes, no limited membership, etc. They were a group bound by a simple oath of allegiance to a prince who bestowed a badge or insignia. These were in fact glorified retinues, misnamed orders, which makes them often confused with princely orders: Ordre de la Cosse de Gent (Order of the Broom-Pod), founded by Charles VI of France ca. 1388, Order of the camail or Porcupine, created by Louis d'Orlans in 1394, Order of the Dove, Castile, 1390, Order of the Scale of Castile, ca. 1430, Order of the Thistle of Scotland. 6. Honorific Pseudo-Orders: these bodies of knights required no specific obligations, and were usually just an honorific insignia bestowed with knighthood, upon a festive occasion or a pilgrimage. They consisted of nothing else than the badge: Knights of the Holy Sepulchre, bestowed by the custodian of the Holy Sepulchre to knights who made the pilgrimage, starting in the 15th century. It was formally organized into an order of merit by the Pope in 1868. Knights of St. Catherine of Mount-Sinai, bestowed in similar conditions from the 12th to the 15th century. Order of the Golden Spur, a papal order, many times reformed. Knights of the Bath, in England. The name was used again for an order of merit created in 1725. Boulton's classification allows us to concentrate on the most complex, long-lived and influential of these associations, the mona