Continued From Part One

The round or octagonal churches came a little later. One of the best surviving examples of a Templar round church is to be found in London. (An article elsewhere in this edition deals specifically with the church in question.) Where it proved necessary, as in the London example, the expansion of a church might include a rectangular chancel and significant numbers of outbuildings, though in the main Templar churches remained 'modest', in comparison with the massive Cathedrals and abbeys springing up during the same period. In those areas where Templar personnel had been recently fighting in the Holy Land, it can be observed that their churches begin to look more like fortified manors, such as examples in Portugal and Spain, though even here the circular and rectangular examples predominate. It is likely that a preference for circular and octagonal churches sprang from a reverence for the very buildings the Templars were trying to protect in Jerusalem, such as the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

It is important at every level in our research not to imbue the Knights Templar with superhuman qualities. There is nothing particularly unusual about any Templar building, when taken alongside similar buildings of the same period created by other agencies. What is noticeable is the polyglot approach to architecture, which might be expected of an organization with such international connections, and which travelled so extensively. However, quality seems to have been of paramount importance, together with functionality, a consideration that permeated practically every aspect of Templar achievement throughout the whole reign of the Order.

As wealth and influence grew, which was also the case with the Templars monastic brothers the Cistercians, so St Bernard of Clairvaux's original instructions for 'simple architecture', began to be forgotten. Later Templar buildings, and particularly the churches, are clearly more ornate. For example, originally, neither the Cistercians or the Templars allowed burials with effigies to invade the sacred space of churches. Later Templar churches, such as the London example, show how this cast iron rule was eventually forgotten, or circumnavigated, with rich patrons laid to rest within the church, often under elaborately carved canopies. In the main however it is observable that the Templars stuck to St Bernard's observation much more than did the Cistercians, though this may be due to a proliferation of small Templar churches, as opposed to the fewer, but much grander Cistercian abbeys.

Architecture represented only one arm of the Templar empire. Of course it was important, particularly at the level of defence, so it is hardly surprising that we marvel at the sheer 'bulk' of Templar castles and citadels. However, it took many thousands of Commanderies, farms, granges and toll cottages to keep even a comparatively few castles in the Holy Land garrisoned and supplied. At the demise of the Templars many of their humbler architectural creations will have been either demolished, or incorporated into later structures. Had this not been the case, modern observers may find themselves overwhelmed by the sheer 'number' of Templar buildings across Europe and beyond, rather than by the architectural splendour of any specific example.

The Knights Templar were practical men living in an unforgiving world. They knew about the nuts and bolts of life better than any other organization of their time, and they responded accordingly. That so many of their architectural creations are still to be found (in the case of Churches many still in use) proves the soundness of their techniques and the durability of their craftsmanship. Perhaps we may find any number of geometric certainties or arcane mysteries embedded within the arrangement of specific Templar creations. However, to this writer at least the sheer scale of Templar building, in such a comparatively short period of time, and across so wide an area, proves to be the most breathtaking realisation.