Since the 15th century, orders of chivalry, often asdynastic orders, began to be established in a more courtly fashion[clarification needed] than could be createdad hoc. These orders would often retain the notion of being aconfraternity, society or otherassociation of members, but some of them were ultimately purely honorific and consisted of amedal decoration. In fact, these decorations themselves often came to be known informally asorders. These institutions in turn gave rise to the modern-dayorders of merit of sovereign states.[2]
An order of knights is a community of knights composed by order rules with the main purpose of an ideal or charitable task. The original ideal lay in monachus et miles (monk and knight), who in the order –ordo (Latin for 'order' / 'status') – is dedicated to a Christian purpose. The first orders of knights were religious orders that were founded to protect and guide pilgrims to the Holy Land. The knightly orders were characterized by an order-like community life in poverty, obedience and chastity, which was linked with charitable tasks,armed pilgrimage protection and military action against external and occasionally internal enemies of Christianity. Examples are theKnights Templar,Knights of the Holy Sepulchre officially called The Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem, founded in 1090, theOrder of St. John and theOrder of Malta. These communities only became orders in the sense of canon law through papal recognition of their own binding rules of order and through the dissolution of ecclesiastical diocesan organizations.
In addition to the religious orders of knights, courtly orders of knights emerged in many European royal houses from the middle of the 14th century. This enabled the monarchs and princes to create a reliable household power independent of the church and to combine their court life with knightly virtues. During this time, the Burgundian court culture was leading and so theOrder of the Golden Fleece, founded there in 1430, was for many a model in the sense of a princely order based on the ideals of Christian chivalry.[3]
In the course of time, many orders of knights have been dissolved due to a lack of people or the field of activity has changed. So in many areas the charitable aspect and nursing came to the fore. There were also dissolutions for political reasons, such as the Knights Templar in 1312 or many orders of knights as opposition by Nazi Germany. While the Knights Templar was not re-established, some orders were reactivated after the end of World War II and the fall of the Iron Curtain.
There are repeated attempts to revive or restore old orders of knights. Often, old knight orders are used today to honor personalities. For example, the British Queen Elizabeth II regularly appointed new members to theOrder of the British Empire in the 21st century.[4] In Central Europe, for example, theOrder of St. George, whose roots also go back to the so-called "last knight"Emperor Maximilian I, was reactivated by the House of Habsburg after its dissolution by Nazi Germany. Meanwhile, to this day, deserved personalities in republican France are highlighted by being awarded the Knight of theLegion of Honour.[5] In contrast, the knights of the ecclesiastical orders of knights such as the Sovereign Military Order of Malta and the Order of St. John mainly devote themselves to social tasks, nursing and care.[6]
TheSecretariat of the State of theHoly See – medieval pioneer of the original military orders – distinguishes orders in the following manner:[7]
State orders or orders of merit:order of asovereign state, rewarding military or civil merits of citizens, legally based on the sovereignty of their states
Dynastic orders of a sovereign royal dynasty, either an active "dynastic state order" (e.g.Order of the Garter), otherwise a "non-national dynastic order", as the head of a formerly reigning royal house operating underius collationis (right to confer), typically approved byPapal bulls in the case of older origins (e.g.Order of Saints Maurice and Lazarus)
InDell'origine dei Cavalieri (1566), theItalianscholarFrancesco Sansovino (1521–1586) distinguished knights and their respective societies in three main categories:[8]
"Knights ofCollar", i.e. dynastic orders of knighthood
In a more generous distribution proposed inThe Knights in the Crown: The Monarchical Orders of Knighthood in Late Medieval Europe (1987), the Canadian heraldistD'Arcy Boulton classifies chivalric orders as follows:
Alliance et Compagnie du Levrier, founded by 44 knights in the Barrois (1416–1422), subsequently converted into the Confraternal order of Saint Hubert (see above)
Votive orders are orders of chivalry, temporarily formed on the basis of avow. These were courtly chivalric games rather than actual pledges as in the case of the fraternal orders. Three are known from their statutes:
Cliental pseudo-orders are not orders of chivalry and were princes' retinues fashionably termed orders. They are without statutes or restricted memberships:
Order of the Golden Spur, a papal order (since the 14th century, flourishes in the 16th century)
Together with the monarchical chivalric orders (see above) these honorific orders are the prime ancestors of the modern-dayorders of knighthood (see below) which are orders of merit in character.
The distinction between these orders and decorations is somewhat vague, except that these honorific orders still implied membership in a group. Decorations have no such limitations and are awarded purely to recognize the merit or accomplishments of the recipient. Both orders and decorations often come in multiple classes.[16]
Most orders created since the late 17th century were no longer societies and fellowships ofknights[1] who followed a common mission but were established by monarchs or governments with the specific purpose of bestowing honours on deserving individuals. In most European monarchies, these new orders retained some outward forms from the medieval orders of chivalry (such as rituals and structure) but were in essence orders of merit, mainly distinguished from their republican counterparts by the fact that members were entitled to a title ofnobility.[citation needed] While some orders required noble birth (such as theOrder of Saint Stephen of Hungary, established in 1764), others would confer a title upon appointment (such as theMilitary Order of Max Joseph, established in 1806) while in yet other orders only the top classes were considered knights (such as in theOrder of St Michael and St George, established in 1818). Orders of merit which still confer privileges ofknighthood are sometimes referred to as orders of knighthood. As a consequence of being not an order of chivalry but orders of merit ordecorations, some republican honours have thus avoided the traditional structure found in medieval orders of chivalry and created new ones instead, e.g. theOrder of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany, theDecoration for Services to the Republic of Austria, or theLegion of Merit of theUnited States.
Order of Saints Maurice and Lazarus In 1572, PopeGregory XIII united the Order of Saint Lazarus in perpetuity with the Crown of Savoy.Emmanuel Philibert, Duke of Savoy, merged it with the Savoyan Order of Saint Maurice, and thenceforth the title of Grand Master of the Order of Saints Maurice and Lazarus was hereditary in that house. 1572
Wilhelmsorden (Order of Wilhelm) of Hesse-Kassel, founded 1851, abolished 1875[22]
Order of the Star of India, founded by Queen Victoria in 1861 and has not been awarded since the independence ofIndia in 1947
Order of the Indian Empire, founded by Queen Victoria in 1878 and has not been awarded since the independence ofIndia in 1947
Order of the African Star, founded by King Leopold II of the Congo Free State on 30 December 1888, which became a Belgian order in 1908 and has not been awarded since the independence ofCongo in 1960
Royal Order of the Lion, founded by King Leopold II of the Congo Free State on 9 April 1891, which became a Belgian order in 1908 and has not been awarded since the independence ofCongo in 1960
Order of Pahlavi, founded 1928 byReza Shah, abolished 1979 after theIranian Revolution. There were two classes. The first class, the Grand Collar, was worn by the Shah, crown prince, and awarded to heads of state. The second class, the Grand Cordon, was worn by princes and princesses.
Following the example set by the FrenchLegion of Honour, founded byNapoleon, most multi-level European orders comprise five ranks or classes. The highest is usually called theGrand Cross, then descending with varying titles. Alternatively, the ranks are referred to by number (for example "1st class" instead of "Grand Cross"). Typical rankings are:
Class
Common names
I
Grand Cross, Commander Grand Cross, Grand Cordon, Grand Collar
II
Grand Officer, Commander 1st Class, Grand Commander, Knight Commander, Knight Companion, Commander with Star
III
Commander, Commander 2nd Class, Companion
IV
Officer, Knight 1st Class, Member 1st Class
V
Knight, Knight 2nd Class, Chevalier, Cavaliere, Member
Each of these ranks wear insignia, usuallybadge (often enamelled) on aribbon. Typically these insignia are worn from asash in the case of the senior ranks, around the neck for the middle ranks (see alsoneck decorations), and on the left chest for the lower grades. Many orders use insignia in the form of a cross, but there may also be stars, and military awards may have crossed swords added onto the insignias. Ladies may wear the badge on a bow on the left chest. In orders following the example set by the French Legion of Honour, the two highest classes also wear a star (orplaque) on the chest. In special cases the senior class may wear the badge on acollar, which is an elaborate chain around the neck.
In certain countries with feudal heritage the higher ranks (usually at least the Grand Cross) may have vestments proper to them, including arobe ormantle and ahat. An example of such a modern-day order is theOrder of the British Empire.
The French Legion of Honour democratised the honour systems of orders of chivalry and merit in the sense of formally omitting both the expectations ofnobility on admittees while also no further implying the same status on previously non-noble conferees. Yet some orders may still expect noble ancestry on the part of recipients, such as theSovereign Military Order of Malta and those of theAlliance of the Orders of Saint John of Jerusalem. Others may continue to imply conferral of nobility on any admittee, whether hereditary or personal, such as in some of the cases ofdynastic orders conferred by theHouse of Bavaria or theHouse of Imperial Russia.
Some organisations claim to be chivalric orders but are actually private membership organisations that have not been created by a state or a reigning monarch.[23] The answer to the question of whether an order is legitimate or not varies from nation to nation,[24] François Velde wrote an "order of knighthood is legitimate if it is defined as legal, recognized and acknowledged as such by a sovereign authority. Within its borders, a sovereign state does as it pleases. Most, if not all, modern states have honorific orders and decorations of some kind, and those are sometimes called orders of knighthood."[25] Exactly what makes one order legitimate and another self-styled or false is a matter of debate with some arguing that any monarch (reigning or not) or even the descendants of such can create an order while others assert that only a government with actual internationally recognized authority has such power (regardless of whether that government is republican or monarchical in nature).[26][27] Historically, nobility and knights have also formed Orders of Knighthood. TheNoble Order of Saint George of Rougemont is a Baronial Order and the Ordre de la Pomme d'Or was founded by 14 knights in Auvergne in 1394.[28][29]
^ab"St. George's Chapel: History: Order of the Garter". See the definition of the Order of the Garter as "a society, fellowship and college of knights" there. – St. George's Chapel, Windsor Castle. 2005. Archived fromthe original on 15 September 2006. Retrieved6 November 2006.
^Vachaudez, Christophe; Walgrave, Jan (2008). Diana Scarisbrick (ed.).Royal jewels: from Charlemagne to the Romanovs. New York: Vendôme Press. p. 146.ISBN978-0-86565-193-7.Louis XI founded the Order of Saint Michael in 1469. Initially, there were thirty-six knights, but their numbers increased to such a point that the order began to lose its prestige. Louis XIV reformed the order on 12 January 1665, reducing the number of knights to one hundred
^Anstis, John (1725).Observations introductory to an historical essay upon the Knighthood of the Bath. London: J. Woodman. p. 4.
^The Dean and Chapter of Westminster Abbey (2011)."Order of the Bath".Westminster Abbey. Retrieved11 December 2012.The Most Honourable Order of the Bath was established as a military order by Letters Patent of George I on 18 May 1725, when the Dean of Westminster was made Dean of the Order in perpetuity and King Henry VII's Chapel designated as the Chapel of the Order.
^"REGISTERS".International Commission for Orders of Chivalry (in Italian). Retrieved2022-09-22.
^abSauer, Werner (1950).Die Orden und Ehrenzeichen des Kurfürstentums Hessen-Kassel (in German). Hamburg: Verlag Kleine Reihe für Freunde der Ordens- und Ehrenzeichenkunde. pp. 19–24.
^Barber, Malcom; Mallia-Milanes, Victor, eds. (2008).The Military Orders. Vol. 3, History and Heritage. Aldershot, England: Ashgate. pp. 4–6.ISBN9780754662907.
^Brett-Crowther, Michael Richard (1990).Orders of Chivalry under the Aegis of the Church. London: Lambeth Diploma of Student in Theology Thesis. pp. 80–90.
^Kurrild-Klitgaard, Peter (2002).Knights of fantasy: an overview, history, and critique of the self-styled "Orders" called "of Saint John" or "of Malta", in Denmark and other Nordic countries. Turku: Digipaino.ISBN9512922657.
^Thiou, E. (2002). La noble confrérie & les chevaliers de Saint-Georges au Comté de Bourgogne sous l'Ancien régime & la révolution. Mémoire et documents.
^Bossuat, A. (1944). Un ordre de chevalerie auvergnat; l'ordre de la Pomme d'or'. Bidle/in bistoriqia it stienti/iqm dt I'Aupergite, Uiv (1944), 83–98; H. Morel,'Unc associa, 523-4.
Anstis, John (1752).Observations introductory to an historical essay upon the Knighthood of the Bath. London: James Woodman.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
Burke, John (1725).Statutes of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath.
D'Arcy Jonathan Dacre Boulton (2000) [February 1987].The knights of the crown: the monarchical orders of knighthood in later medieval Europe. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press, Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 1325–1520.ISBN0-312-45842-8.
_pl._XVII.JPG)
.jpg)
.png)
_-_4298_-_Bavarian_State_Painting_Collections.jpg)
.jpg)
