I’m getting this question from reading “Caisel Mor’s” “Lady of the Lamp”, but it must have a factual answer in terms of the hygiene practises of the actual knights templar so I’m guessing its for GQ not for Cafe Society.
In Mor’s novel the knights templar are portrayed as filthy and stinking while the Pagans in the novel wash frequently and are physically repulsed when they meet templars. I’ve found St Bernard’s “wash seldom” quote:
But to what extreme did they take this? Would ordinary people have been repulsed by the Templar’s or in actual fact did everyone pretty much stink equally in that time and washing was actually uncommon for everyone?
Muslims in that time would still have bathed several times a day if they were religious, so was it a case that christian’s in general stank worse than other religions, or only the Templars or what? Lets assume we’re interested in common practises around 1200 AD… that seems to be when the novel is roughly set.
so these two pages seem to indicate that washing was quite common for ordinary christians of the period who weren’t part of a religious order as well as observant Jews and Muslims.
So the question is how severe was the Templars prohibition on washing? Sounds to me like the book is fairly accurate… someone that didn’t wash for even a week, riding on horseback and wearing armour would be pretty rank and repulsive to a normal merchant or nobleman who washed most days.
Yes, it would depend on whether they could. The Templars were frequently out in the field or traveling (as their order initially was formed to excort pilgrims). That’s not an environment conducive to everyday bathing. But baths and bathing were common all over the place - no less common than bathing in the early part of the century. Unless Mors’ novel was describing a specific incident, he’s just plain wrong.
The company of women is a dangerous thing, for by it the old devil has led many from the straight path to Paradise.
We believe it to be a dangerous thing for any religious to look too much upon the face of woman. For this reason none of you may presume to kiss a woman, be it widow, young girl, mother, sister, aunt or any other; and henceforth the Knighthood of Jesus Christ should avoid at all costs the embraces of women, by which men have perished many times, so that they may remain eternally before the face of God with a pure conscience and sure life.
That’s a bit different. There were some monastic orders (many of which were hermitic) which did not bathe - but they did this as a an ascetic purity thing. It was not a part of the Templar order per se.
But Michael was specifically describing the Templars as seen from his description of Hugh de Payens. And they were, of course, a variety of monastic order. Whether it was an actual rule or just a tendency, he does seem to have associated the practice with the Templars, which would validate at least some of them stinking like a ten-day-dead hog.
Now it’s possible Michael might be speaking second hand and just assuming facts not in evidence based on similar observations of other monastic groups, so it is worth taking his description with a grain of salt. But in this case, as a local of some prominence that seems somewhat unlikely. Also it is reasonable to assume that this practice, if it were unofficial, might vary widely from period to period and charter house to charter house.
Still, I’d be a little more inclined than not to accept the general descriptor based on that single source, though certainly more would be helpful. And it seems at least a semi-reasonable basis for a fictionalized account.
ISTR that personal hygiene was actually better in the early Middle Ages or Dark Ages, as the Roman public baths continued to be used in the cities. Then some time in the High or Late Middle Ages, the public baths became more unpopular and may even have been banned in some places, because they were regarded, not entirely falsely, as sinks of adultery and fornication. Personal hygiene in the cities thus took a major turn for the worse.
I’m gonig completely from memory here, so take it with a grain of salt. Also, in the Middle Ages we’re talking about a very rural society, so what happened in the cities doesn’t necessarily reflect what’s happening with most people.
we have two sources from the time indicating that they didn’t wash. The first link I quoted was St Bernands letter describing the Templars:
“Their hair is worn short, in conformity with the Apostle’s saying, that it is shameful for a man to cultivate flowing locks. Indeed, they seldom wash and never set their hair–content to appear tousled and dusty, bearing the marks of the sun and of their armor.”
second Tamerlan’s quote from Patriache of Antioch: Hugues de Payens was the founder of the entire Templar order, so the direct quote “They imposed upon themselves a monastic rule, not taking a wife, not bathing, not having any posessions in common” is describing the Templar order. Thats not some minor offshoot, he’s talking about the first Grand Master who made the rule for the whole order.
Their rule has a section about “scorn the temptations of your body”, and at the time bathing and spending time in bath houses was seen as a hedonistic pleasure byt the Church hierarchy so it’s easy to see why it would have been actively discouraged.
Seems like its accurate to me that in general they are described as not washing by two historical accounts and that most people would have found that pretty repulsive.
Datum: a bath the day before the vigil was a normal part of the knighthood ceremony, according to the Durants’ The Age of Faith. I don’t know if the Templars followed the usual knighthood ritual, but if they did, then at least a newly-minted Templar wouldn’t stink.
The church allowed baths such as the one prior to the knighting ceremony, for “medicinal purposes” - basically, for reasons other than vanity or personal comfort. So while the Templars might have seldom bathed they probably did bath occasionally.
