_The Ecclesiastical Orders
of
Knighthood_
_by_
James van Der Veldt, O.F.M.
_of_
The Catholic University of America
The Catholic University of America Press
620 Michigan Avenue, N.E.
Washington 17, D. C.
1956
Reprinted from
_The American Ecclesiastical Review_
October, November, December, 1955
and January, 1956
First printing—April, 1956
Second printing—July, 1956
Third printing—November, 1957
FOREWORD
Widespread interest in the Ecclesiastical Orders of Knighthood has been
demonstrated by continual requests for information pertaining to them on
the part of libraries and individual persons, particularly those who
have been knighted. In the United States this interest lies chiefly in
those Orders most familiar to Americans, such as the Order of Malta, the
Order of the Holy Sepulchre, the Order of St. Gregory, and in the medals
Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice and Benemerenti. Such interest prompted the
publication of this booklet which contains reprints of four articles
originally published in the “American Ecclesiastical Review.”
The booklet gives a description of the history, organization, emblems
and membership requirements of the various Orders connected with the
Catholic Church and which are still in existence.
By way of introduction, Part One deals with the historical
background—the origin and development of Knighthood in general. Parts
Two and Three treat the Religious Military Orders which originated in
the Holy Land—The Order of Malta, the Order of the Holy Sepulchre, the
Teutonic Order—and the Military Orders of Spain and Portugal. Finally,
Part Four treats of those Orders which are directly bestowed by the Holy
See—the Order of Christ, the Order of the Golden Spur, the Order of
Pius, the Order of St. Gregory, and of St. Sylvester. In addition the
papal decorations are described.
The final pages of the booklet display the insignia of the three
ecclesiastical groups: Military Orders of Knighthood, Pontifical Orders
of Knighthood and Papal Decorations, with a brief description of shape
and color. The pictures present the Knight’s cross, unless otherwise
designated. Since the emblems of the Orders of Calatrava, Alcantara and
Montesa are identical in form, only one picture is used for all three
with a specification of the respective colors. Under the heading of
Pontifical Decorations a picture is given of the Lateran Cross which is
recognized, although not directly bestowed, by the Holy See.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
_Page_
Part I
Historical Background 1
Development of the Orders of Knighthood 7
Part II
The Sovereign Military Order of St. John of Jerusalem 14
The Order of the Teutonic Knights 23
Part III
The Iberian Military Orders 28
The Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem 33
Part IV
Pontifical Orders of Knighthood 41
The Supreme Order of Christ 42
Order of the Golden Spur 47
The Order of Pius 49
Order of St. Gregory the Great 50
The Order of Saint Sylvester, Pope 51
The Papal Decorations 52
Illustrations 55
THE ECCLESIASTICAL ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD
Part I
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The term ecclesiastical orders of knighthood embraces those knightly
orders which, in one way or another, are connected with the Catholic
Church. At the present time they are in two different groups: the
pontifical orders of knighthood in the strict sense and a group of
chivalric orders which derive from medieval military orders and continue
to come under ecclesiastical jurisdiction.
The Pontifical or Papal Orders of Knighthood are conferred directly by
His Holiness the Pope (_Ordini Equestri Pontifici, conferiti
direttamente dal Sommo Pontefice con lettere apostoliche_). They
include: the Supreme Order of Christ, the Order of the Golden Spur, the
Order of Pius, the Order of Saint Gregory the Great, and the Order of
Saint Sylvester, Pope.[1]
The remaining group identified with ecclesiastical orders of knighthood
is that of religious military orders. Originally they were religious
orders of lay brothers and as such came under the jurisdiction of the
Holy See. They enjoyed the approbation and protection of the Holy
Father, and it is in that sense they partake of the name, pontifical.
Yet they always had a certain autonomy, in that they had their own
government, with a grand master at the head, whose office was similar to
that of a Superior General of a religious order. Most of these ancient
military orders are now extinct or have become purely secular orders of
knighthood. A few have retained some features of their ecclesiastical
character. They are the Order of Saint John of Jerusalem, known also as
the Order of Malta, the Teutonic Order, and the Order of the Holy
Sepulchre, as well as the extant Spanish Military Orders.
Difference in objective is another important feature between the two
groups. The military orders, from the outset, pursued a specific
purpose, as the care of the sick and the poor, the protection of the
faith, crusading against infidels. This survives today in the existing
military orders though in a much modified form.
All other existing orders of knighthood, be they ancient or more recent
in origin, are honorary and mere orders of merit. Their only purpose is
that of bestowing tokens of respect for well-deserving citizens, to
reward military or civil services to the country or the crown, to
recognize merit in the field of art, science, charity, or business.
Orders of merit are “orders” only in the broad sense of the term; they
have a constitution or statutes, but such documents usually contain
little more than a description of the origin of the order, its
privileges and the degrees of its members as well as the reason for
conferring the order and its form of the decorations. In fact, the term
“order” has come to be limited to the insignia which the members are
entitled to wear.
Within the framework of the above twofold classification of pontifical
and military orders, another dual grouping exists which is based on
historical criteria. Some of the ecclesiastical orders of knighthood go
back to the age of chivalry; this is certainly the case with the
military orders, the Order of Christ, and probably the Order of the
Golden Spur. The origin of the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre is still
historically debatable. The remaining pontifical orders of knighthood
were established long after the age of chivalry came to a close.
Distinct from the orders of knighthood are a certain number of
ecclesiastical decorations. These are marks of honor (_distintivi de
onore_), without, however, extending the title of Knight to the
recipient. It is, therefore, incorrect to designate a person receiving
such an honor as knighted by the Pope, as it is equally incorrect to put
all the ecclesiastical orders of knighthood under the heading of papal
decorations.
Ecclesiastical decorations, like the ecclesiastical orders of
knighthood, are of two kinds. Those bestowed directly by the Holy See
and consequently strictly pontifical are the Cross “Pro Ecclesia et
Pontifice” and the Medal “Benemerenti.” The second category are those
approved by the Holy See and their recipients may wear the decoration at
the papal court and at ecclesiastical ceremonies. The honor, however, is
not granted directly by the Pope. An example thereof is the Lateran
Cross, which is conferred by the Chapter of the Basilica of Saint John
Lateran.
This brief outline will be clarified as the various orders are treated
in subsequent articles. It is our intention in the present article to
confine ourselves to a survey of the historical background of the orders
of knighthood.
Although much of the information about the early beginnings of
knighthood is rooted in conjecture, a plausible thesis would make
knighthood coincide with the rise of the cavalry in Europe, during the
first half of the eighth century. It coincides with the times when the
Christians in the encounters with the Saracens soon discovered that
their infantry were no match for those who fought on horseback. Such
armies had much greater mobility, and the center of gravity in the
Christian military strategy shifted accordingly.
Throughout the first hundred years after this new horseback “militia”
had been introduced, all free men could join it, on condition that they
were able to provide a horse and equip it at their own expense. Only
people of some means could afford this luxury, and the wealthier class
was that of the landowners. Service in the cavalry, therefore, implied
the possessing of some property, preferably in the form of land.
A revolutionary innovation took place simultaneously in the system of
land ownership, changing from an allodial, i.e., absolute ownership, to
a feudal system. That is why the horseback military service came to be
linked with the feudal method of land tenure. It accounts for the
historical development of knighthood being so closely related to the
history of the feudal system. The history of feudal land ownership is
hardly pertinent here, and it will suffice here to state that the
tenants-in-chief and their subalterns in the feudal system formed the
cavalry of the army; they were the horsemen, chevaliers, or knights.
That is how the original form of knighthood became so intimately
associated with the tenure of land, and how the knights were known as
feudal knights.
While the knights were initially landed gentry, gradually—and already a
considerable time before the Crusades—a different type of knight
appeared, namely, that of the horseman without land. Equally so,
knighthood began to constitute a distinct social class. No longer was
feudal tenure the background of knighthood but rather personal valor.
The development was the consequence of the custom of primogeniture as it
existed in the Frankish form of the feudal system.
Two types of feudal succession were known on the European continent.
Where the Longobard feudal law held sway, as was the case in Italy, at
the death of the feudatory incumbent, the land was divided among his
male heirs. In many cases the original fief was cut into ever smaller
portions during successive generations. This gentry were still
landholders, even though their financial position, due to the divisions
and subdivisions of the ancestral property, might not be much better
economically than that of the peasants who actually worked the land.
In France and other countries where the Frankish feudal system
prevailed, conditions were altogether different. Here, according to the
law of primogeniture, the entire feud passed to the eldest son, who was
then bound by an oath of fealty to his overlord. The younger sons had to
be satisfied with precious little; they might make a livelihood by
offering their service to their eldest brother, in which case they were
obliged to do the menial work of the estate very much the same as that
of domestics and peasants. It is quite understandable that many of these
younger sons, particularly the less amenable and the more venturesome,
could be expected to scorn such an inferior station in life. Being of
noble birth, this dispossessed youth might say with the steward of the
gospel: “What shall I do?... To dig I am not able; to beg I am ashamed.”
Only two callings were open to them, the priestly or the military
vocation, and of the two the calling of soldier was far more attractive.
Upon leaving the paternal domain, they usually were given a horse and
armor to aid in their search for economic independence. For the most
part, they did not have to look long, because war was in progress all
over Europe among the many and small feudal states. Yet, because they
were no longer aligned with the feudal hierarchy, they had no obligation
to render military service to any specific lord and could approach the
highest bidder. This meant that a new and ever increasing group of
independent, non-feudal horsemen came into existence who sought to win
their spurs on their own merit. They became knights, not because they
happened to have a feudal estate, but because of personal exploits on
the battlefield. These soldiers frequently gained more than glory and
honor inasmuch as a grateful employer who had taken them into his pay
would extend his bounty to presenting them with a castle and some land,
upon success in a military expedition. The medieval right of plunder
could provide the victorious knight with the necessary accoutrement to
furnish his newly-won castle. One readily appreciates the consolidation
of the economic position for those concerned. There was this difference,
however, that their possessions came to them not by right of birth but
by personal valor.
The same kind of knight appeared also in the lands of the Longobard
feudal system. The small gentry in Italy, unsatisfied with what little
they possessed, often offered their military services to the rapidly
growing townships. This eventually bettered their economic as well as
their political status.
Two types of knighthood were then in existence, the older form of
territorial knighthood concentrated in ruling fief-holders, and the
newer form, that of chivalry founded on individual military service.
Since the latter was bestowed upon a soldier independently of a fief, it
might be called non-feudatory knighthood.
As the non-feudal knights grew to be the more numerous, knighthood
became a separate class of society. Like any other social institution,
knighthood passed through the storm-and-stress period of adolescence.
Knights in the tenth and part of the eleventh centuries were often
enough no more than bands of lawless brigands. Living as they did
outside the ranks of the feudal hierarchy, these “gentlemen” interpreted
the fact of not being bound by fealty to any particular master as a kind
of charter of freedom from all laws and prohibitions. As narrated in the
medieval lays or ballads, the examples of lawlessness and cruelty among
some knights are, of course, outstanding. Yet, this new social class was
indeed a menace to society. It was understandable, in the long run, that
the authorities should look for means to call a halt to the excesses. In
this effort the civil authorities were strongly supported by the Church,
which launched a kind of peace offensive, endeavoring to direct the
crude energies of knighthood into right channels and make of the new
class an instrument of good in the social structure. There was success
so that little by little knighthood became respectable to a remarkable
degree. The reaction described had set in at the end of the tenth
century, and a century later a change for the better in the moral life
of the knights was everywhere in evidence. The reform was, however, not
due exclusively to outside forces. As a class, the knights had the same
needs and the same aspirations; and the better elements among them would
try to enter into some sort of common tie. That common bond was a code
of honor for knighthood and came to be generally accepted by the end of
the eleventh century, namely around the time of the first Crusade. The
motto of a good knight was succinctly expressed in the following Italian
rhyme: “_La mia anima a Dio, la mia vita al Re, il mio cuore alla Dama,
l’onore per me_ (My soul to God, my life to the Crown, my heart to the
Lady, my own the renown).” The duties of a knight broadened into that of
protecting and defending the Church, the widows, the orphans and the
oppressed, of vindicating justice, and of avenging evil. The catalogue
of the cardinal virtues for chivalry included courtesy, valor, class
loyalty, self-denial, munificence, and hospitality. The code was
well-nigh theoretically perfect, even if all knights did not observe it
in practice. As a matter of fact, the virtues to which the knight was
dedicated sometimes led to exaggerations, distortions, and their very
opposite.
The high point in the age of chivalry came during the Crusades, those
religious wars waged in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries by the
Christians of Western Europe against the Mohammedans for the recovery of
the Holy Land. An interaction came about between the Crusades and
chivalry. The spirit of chivalry was largely responsible for making
possible these campaigns for a religious ideal. Thereby, the Crusades
provided a powerful impetus in the development of knighthood, for it was
during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries that chivalry attained its
highest peak both in quality and quantity. The Crusades did not create a
new type of knighthood, but they gave the knights a chance to show their
mettle.
When the landless soldiers of the Cross distinguished themselves in
battle just as well or perhaps even better than the feudal knights, it
was reasonable that they should claim their reward. If they fought as
well as those who owed knighthood to their feudal status, why should
they not claim the honors and benefits of knighthood? In that way the
Crusades gave the horsemen large scale opportunity to become knights
through personal valor. However, the _conditio sine qua non_ for
becoming a knight at this time was still the old law that the candidates
should be of noble birth, that is to say, that they could trace their
descent from the ancient feudal families. In the century following the
Crusades the decline of knighthood set in, and it is generally admitted
that by 1500 the age of chivalry had passed. Then it was that its
tradition and spirit were kept alive in the orders of knighthood.
DEVELOPMENT OF THE ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD
The first orders of knighthood were radically of a religious nature
inasmuch as they pursued a religious purpose and were organized like
other religious communities. The order of knighthood was composed of a
body of knights, united by some common objective as the care of the sick
or the defense of the Catholic faith, and who were pledged with the vows
of obedience, poverty and chastity, led a community life under a chosen
head and professed a common rule approved by the ecclesiastical
authorities.
The birthplace of all orders of knighthood was the Holy Land and they
appeared during the period of the Crusades. True, some historians
attempt to date the origin of the military orders as far back in
antiquity as possible, for instance, to Charlemagne and his paladins or
to Constantine the Great and his mother, Saint Helena. The claims of
such ancestry fanatics to the contrary notwithstanding, it can safely be
said that no military order of knighthood, either regular or secular,
came into existence before the first Crusade, as the Bollandist
Papebrock said in 1738: “Fallunt aut volentes falluntur adulatores
studio placendi abrepti, quicumque militarium religionum principia ante
XII saeculum requirunt” (_AA. SS. Boll._, Apr., III, 155).
The Holy Land was the scene of the rise of three types of religious
orders. Some were orders of charity, or hospital orders, dedicating
themselves to the care of the poor and sick pilgrims who came to visit
the holy places. The oldest and most famous was the Order of Saint
Lazarus which was functioning even before the Crusades began. Its scope
was the care of lepers; moreover, lepers could become members of the
congregation, and it has been alleged that during a period of its
existence the grand master was chosen from among these sorely afflicted
members. The confraternity always remained primarily an order of
charity. The fact that the brothers admitted some knights stricken with
leprosy who gave aid to the crusaders, particularly during the siege of
Acre, when the common cause demanded everybody’s efforts, is certainly
not sufficient reason to call the congregation of Saint Lazarus a
military order of knighthood. Nonetheless, many centuries after their
expulsion from the Holy Land, the remnants of this congregation were
absorbed into a military order, as we shall see hereafter.
A second group of religious orders founded in the Holy Land had an
exclusively military objective, inasmuch as their purpose was to protect
the pilgrims against the attacks of the Moslems and to defend the cause
of the Cross. The prototype of such knightly societies was the Order of
the Temple.
The third type of religious order in Palestine was of a mixed character,
combining works of charity with military service. The most illustrious
examples of this group were the Order of Saint John in Jerusalem and the
Teutonic Order.
Due to their predominant military character, only the last two groups
are orders of knighthood in the strict sense of the word. Their members
combined the seemingly contrasting qualities of soldiers and monks, of
“militia” and “religio.” Being a “religio” such orders needed
ecclesiastical approbation, but as a “religio militaris” they needed
special authorization from the Holy See which alone could give religious
persons permission “hostem ferire sine culpa,” “blamelessly to strike
the enemy.”[2]
The orders founded in the Holy Land during the Crusades were the
original military orders. The pattern of the military orders founded in
the Holy Land during the Crusades was subsequently copied in various
countries of Europe. We may distinguish several groups which show an
ever increasing secular element and a decrease of ecclesiastical ties.
Of each group only a few examples can be cited, omitting those of lesser
significance.
The most faithful imitators of the original orders are the military
orders set up in the Iberian Peninsula. Although founded by the kings of
Spain and Portugal and used by them for their own purposes, these orders
were directly dependent on the Holy See at first. Only later, when the
sovereigns took over the grandmastership and made it hereditary in their
family, did they lose their independence, without, however, abandoning
their religious character.
The principal military orders in Italy came into existence at a rather
late date in history, on or after 1500, a date traditionally accepted as
marking the end of the age of chivalry. With the grand mastership vested
in the crown, these Italian orders harbored the same cause for
deterioration as eventually appeared in the Spanish orders, because they
were dynastic orders from the start. Nonetheless, the Italian military
orders greatly resembled the original ones, both in objective and
organization. They aspired to the protection of the Italian coastline
against the Moslem pirates from the Barbary States in North Africa who
at the time were infesting the Mediterranean; they harassed the merchant
marine and sporadically attacked harbors and towns along the coast. The
objective of these orders, then, was much the same as that of the Order
of Malta at that time, namely sea-warfare against Islam. Such an
organization was the Order of Saint Stephen, established in 1562 by
Cosimo I, Grand Duke of Tuscany, with the approval of the Holy Father.
The knights of this order which had headquarters at Pisa cleared the
Mediterranean of corsairs and took an active part in the battle of
Lepanto. Eventually, however, it disintegrated, became completely
secularized and survived as an order of merit.
The Order of Saint Maurice and Lazarus, founded in 1572 by Emmanuel
Philibert, Duke of Savoia, has an intriguing history. Comparatively late
in origin, it was a merger of two pre-existing institutions which date
back to much earlier times.
One was the hospital congregation of Saint Lazarus, previously
mentioned. After the fall of Acre the fraternity was transferred to
Europe and for some time flourished in France. The Italian branch soon
declined and was finally suppressed by Pope Innocent VIII in 1490. There
remained, however, the possessions of the order and these were handed
over to certain gentlemen who, far from having an interest in lepers,
did little else but appropriate the revenues for their own use.
The second institution was the so-called Order of Saint Maurice which,
if it was an order at all, hardly merited the name of a military order
by any stretch of the imagination. Yet whatever it lacked of the
military spirit has since been largely supplied by romance, insofar as
it was involved in the story of a layman who became antipope. When
Amadeus VIII, Duke of Savoia, renounced the throne, he retired to
Ripaglia where he had built a church in honor of the holy martyr Maurice
to whom the house of Savoia had a special devotion. There, in 1434, the
duke with five other knights established the Sacred Militia of Saint
Maurice—a rather pompous title for a group of elderly widowers who had
retired into a hermitage.
Four years later, the remnants of the Council of Basle revolted against
the legitimate Pope Eugene IV and elected the above-mentioned Amadeus.
He accepted under the title of Felix V and abandoned his solitude in
Ripaglia in the company of the other knightly widowers. Thenceforth
history has little to tell about the Sacred Militia of Saint Maurice. In
1572, Emmanuel Philibert, after lengthy negotiations, obtained from Pope
Gregory XIII permission to allot the possessions of the Order of Saint
Lazarus in his territory to the languishing Order of Saint Maurice. Out
of this merger developed the military religious Order of Saint Maurice
and Lazarus—the last of the military orders to come into existence. Its
objective was to curtail piracy on the high seas and combat the enemies
of the faith. However, the institution from its very inception was an
affair of the Savoian dynasty, the duke and his successors assuming the
office of grand master. The knights vowed obedience to the duke and were
subject to him not only as vassals but also by virtue of a religious
vow. They pledged themselves to serve in the convents of the order for
five years; one of these convents was in Turin for the ground forces and
the other in Nice for the naval forces. The character of the Order of
St. Maurice and Lazarus was completely changed when Victor Emmanuel II,
in 1860, made it a simple order of merit.
Other dynastic orders of knighthood having some ties with the Church
were quite different. The motives for establishing them were various.
Some owed their origin simply to a chance occasion or a romantic event
not infrequently of a frivolous nature; some were commemorative of a
signal victory in battle or the accession of a prince to the throne.
Often enough, politics played a role, when a sovereign would wish to
bind his nobles closer to the crown.
By way of example, we shall mention here some of the more illustrious
dynastic orders of knighthood.
The Supreme Order of the Annunciation was set up in 1364 by Amadeus VI,
Count of Savoia, during a tournament which was held to celebrate the
victory of Savoia over a rival, the Marquis of Salusso. It would seem
that similar brotherhoods in arms had existed at the Savoyard court
under such romantic titles as the Round Table of the Black Swan, of the
Green Knights, and the like, but the new order was to achieve a
permanent character. At first, the objective of the newly organized
group was only fun and love, as evidenced by the love symbols that
decorated the collar of the knights. For that reason the brotherhood was
dubbed the Order of the Collar. A year later when Count Amadeus made a
trip to Constantinople and came in touch with the then extant religious
military orders, he dedicated the fraternity to the Blessed Virgin. The
religious element was heightened in the symbolic figure of fifteen
knights, representing the fifteen mysteries of Our Lady. When the
knights themselves had no time to say many prayers, they were quite
satisfied to find a convenient substitute for their religious
obligations in the persons of fifteen Carthusian monks at the Chapter
House of Pierre Chatal. The latter became the seat of the order. Their
first and last duty was to honor and serve faithfully their sovereign,
the count, and provide him with material benefits. Such privileges as
exemptions from taxes, a seat in the senate, and financial support from
the crown in case of necessity were given in return to the knights. In
1518 Duke Charles III attached to the knight’s collar a medal
representing the Annunciation of Our Lady, and from that time the
fraternity became known as the Order of the Collar and the Annunciation.
Moreover, the duke augmented the enrollment with five more knights, in
honor of the five wounds of Christ.
In 1869, Victor Emmanuel II, who was soon to become King of a united
Italy, changed the character of the order; it was to be simply a means
of rewarding a restricted number of persons for outstanding services to
the dynasty or the state.
The Order of the Golden Fleece was founded by Philip the Good, Duke of
Burgundy, in 1429, on the occasion of his marriage with the Infanta
Isabella of Portugal at Bruges in the Netherlands. Pope Eugene IV gave
approval in 1433 as did also Leo X in 1516. Of course, the origin and
the name enjoy the aura of the usual legends, one of which is that the
duke wished to commemorate the golden hair of Mary of Rumbrugge with
whom he was supposed to be in love. If such is true, the order was
certainly a peculiar wedding gift for his legitimate wife. The knights,
who numbered thirty-one, were staunchly organized, and the order soon
achieved great fame and was reputed to embody the very spirit of
chivalry. The Dukes of Burgundy and their successors acted as grand
masters. Eventually, it became an order of merit divided into two
branches, one under the jurisdiction of the Austrian Hapsburgs and the
other under the jurisdiction of the Spanish Bourbons. With the overthrow
of both of these houses the order is in abeyance.
The French King Louis XI founded the Order of Saint Michael in 1469.
After having fallen into disrepute, because it took in all kinds of
members, its decoration was dubbed “_le collier à toutes bêtes_—the
collar to fit every animal.” The Order of the Holy Ghost replaced it in
1573 under King Henry III. The investiture of the knights was ritualized
with pompous religious ceremonies.[3]
The foregoing examples emphasize the fact that these and similar
knightly fraternities were not without certain religious features. The
brotherhood was placed under the protection of a patron saint; it might
receive papal approbation; the meeting place of the knights included a
chapel; and the gatherings of the knights as well as the initiation of a
new member were graced with religious rites. The rule of these societies
imposed upon their members a virtuous life, as was fitting for a true
knight, such as the devotion to the Holy Spirit or the Blessed Virgin.
Sometimes the statutes exhorted the members to attend daily Mass, and
prescribed the reception of the sacraments twice or three times a year
as well as the daily recitation of a part of the divine office. However,
the dynastic orders of knighthood were different in character from the
original military orders, with little of “religio” and still less of
“militia.” Despite some religious features, the members did not take the
canonical vows, except the oath of fidelity to the crown, neither did
they live in common. Their military exploits, too, were quite
insignificant in comparison with those of the Templars or the
Hospitallers. When these knights fought at all, they did so not in a
body, but rather as individuals. The very exclusiveness of the Golden
Fleece (thirty-one knights) or the Annunziata Order (fifteen and later
twenty knights) excluded all large scale feats. Besides, the objective
of their military activities was not the defense of the faith, but the
conquest of any enemy with whom their sovereign might become embroiled.
Further development of almost all orders of knighthood is one of
monotonous regularity. Those which did not become extinct were
completely secularized, some during the course of the Reformation and
others during the French Revolution. The latter abolished all orders of
knighthood in France, but in 1802 Napoleon re-established an order of
knighthood—that of the Legion of Honor. It was merely an order of merit,
and served as a model not only for the newer but also reverted upon the
older still existing orders.
A few orders of knighthood did not become reduced to mere orders of
merit and did retain a link with the Church. These include the Order of
Malta, that of the Teutonic Knights, the Holy Sepulchre, and the Iberian
military orders, which will be the subject of the subsequent articles.
THE ECCLESIASTICAL ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD