Knights Templar: Faith, Finance, and the Crusading World

A 13th-century depiction of battle outside Antioch from William of Tyre’s Histoire d’Outremer, in the care of the British Museum

Once established, the Templars became an elite military corps. They were heavy cavalry – heavily armoured, highly trained horsemen – and often fought at the centre of Crusader armies. Chroniclers noted they advanced in close order, bearing a large white banner with a red cross, distinguishing them from other troops. They fought in major battles throughout the 12th and 13th centuries, from the battlefields of Antioch and Jerusalem to the coasts of Egypt. While they rarely acted alone (their numbers were never enormous), their presence could turn the tide. At the 1177 Battle of Montgisard, for instance, Templars helped King Baldwin IV rout Saladin’s forces, celebrating it as divine vindication. Yet they also suffered defeats: at the disastrous 1187 Battle of Hattin, the Grand Master Gerard de Ridefort led a Templar contingent at the rear, only to see the army crushed by Saladin. The rout was so complete that the Muslim forces triumphed in Jerusalem days later.

Templar discipline was legendary. Their rule explicitly forbade knights from acting without orders. They were to hold formation, not flee and not charge impulsively. In battle, a Templar might be counselled only by his commander. This chain of command came from their vow of obedience. While we should avoid romantic clichés, it’s clear that a Templar army unit fought very differently from a feudal levy. They entrenched or camped in disciplined fashion; their cook detachment might accompany them to cook in camp, and chaplains performed mass in the field. Refusing to panic, they usually fought on until defeated or victorious – which fed the impression of dogged bravery. Indeed, one later chronicler said that if Templars had charge orders, they would not break them for any reason. The medieval historian William of Tyre regretted their refusal to negotiate or yield in battle, but from the Templar point of view, it upheld their vow.

The Templars on campaign

In practice, Templar brothers, often led by their Grand Master or masters of provinces (known as preceptors), typically joined major Crusades or royal armies. They garrisoned frontier castles (e.g., Jacob’s Ford on the Jordan) to deter Muslim raids. When on campaign, a Templar would join with knights of the Hospitallers, secular knights, and local nobles. Their task was often to hold a critical position – for example, they famously defended the Temple Mount itself in Jerusalem until the city’s fall in 1187. Chronicles mention them making sudden charges at vulnerable moments or holding the flanks of an army. As a cohort, they required supplies; we know they brought cooks, blacksmiths, and the order’s own heralds and officers. In Egypt and Syria, they built and repaired castles (such as Castel Saint Paul and Safad). In short, on Crusade, the Templars functioned as shock troops and fortress builders, forming the backbone of many campaigns.

For example, in 1179, Saladin targeted the new Templar frontier castle at Jacob’s Ford (Chastelet). Baldwin IV had entrusted its command to the Order. Saladin’s assault destroyed it and many Templars (an example of their vulnerability). In battle, at Hattin in 1187, the Templars formed part of King Guy’s “court faction”. The chronicler noted how the new king, Guy of Jerusalem, took the field with his inner circle, including Raynald of Châtillon, Gerard of Ridefort, and the Knights Templar. These deaths showed that the Templars, like others, could be lost if the whole army were. Later, at the Siege of Acre (1189–91) and campaigns of the Third Crusade, Templars under Grand Master Robert de Sablé and later Gérard de Ridefort fought the Muslims at Ascalon, Jaffa and elsewhere. They were often on the front lines of standoffs with Saladin’s forces.

“When they are few, they are called poor knights; when they are many, they are feared.”
— William of Tyre, Historia rerum in partibus transmarinis gestarum

Discipline, rigidity, and battlefield role

The Templar Rule enforced strict battlefield protocol. They famously (though perhaps apocryphally) vowed never to retreat or surrender unless out of arms. Whether or not literally enforced, the spirit was to stand firm. This could be tactically costly; for instance, some secular knights chafed when Templars refused to adapt quickly on an uneven battlefield. Nevertheless, historians agree that Templar discipline made them effective centres of resistance. A Templar unit would ride in formation with sword and mace, or if fighting on foot, would erect a small palisade of stakes. They also used couched lance charges to break enemy cavalry. Their rigidity was a strength on the field, while their training (in horses, weapons and unit manoeuvres) was high by the standards of the time.

Off the battlefield, their discipline was evident in everyday life: they ate in communal refectories, maintained silence except when needed, and adhered to a strict code. Templars observed fasts and prayers like monks in captivity, then donned armour for combat at dawn if required. This blend of austerity and war was their hallmark. Importantly, their military effectiveness often meant they cooperated closely with allies. Crusader kings and nobles relied on Templar cavalry to rescue retreats or break sieges. At the 1260 Battle of Jaffa (during the Seventh Crusade), King Louis IX of France credited the Templars with saving his army from defeat by Muslim forces.

Relations with other crusaders and rivals

Templars had a complex relationship with their fellow crusaders. On the positive side, they were seen as champions of the cause. The papacy and many nobles held them in high esteem, as evidenced by papal bulls and by legends crediting them with victories. However, their independence and privileges also bred resentment. Local barons sometimes accused Templars of arrogance or jurisdictional conflict. For example, Templars might insist on executing a captured knight for violating truce terms, even if a king or count sought to ransom him. Such incidents created friction. Secular knights sometimes joked that Templars fought to fulfil holy vows rather than seize plunder, hinting at envy of their religious cover.

Rivalry with other orders could also flare. The Hospitallers and Templars often competed for donations of land and resources. They even attempted joint projects (like building a castle on Mt Zion), but frequently came to blows over administration. In Iberia, the Christian kings played the orders against each other for influence. A famous clash occurred in 1238 at Montesa, where Aragonese forces effectively suppressed a Bolognese-influenced offshoot of the Templars. (That event led Philip III of France to ban military monastic orders within his realm out of fear of their autonomy.)

One intriguing rivalry was with the Nizari Ismaili “Assassins” of Syria. Medieval legend later conflated the two orders, but historical encounters were pragmatic. In the 1180s, both groups fought Muslims; they even cooperated at times, such as during the Siege of Acre. There was no proven grand conspiracy. After the Templars’ fall, later myths tied them to occult plots against the Assassins, but contemporary sources do not support such espionage tales.