THE INDISCRIMINATE DESIRE FOR TITLES, ORDERS DECORATIONS AND HONORS

by

Dr. PANGLOSS

An All Too Human Need

Two centuries after the American and French revolutions, a world-wide market flourishes in false titles of nobility and bogus orders of chivalry. It does so because it caters to a universal human desire to feel good about oneself, a sense of well-being dependent on the drive to assert one's distinctiveness and the yearning for recognition.

Possessing status symbols is one way of making a claim to such recognition. But it is the nature of such symbols to be expensive or hard to come by. Otherwise their acquisition would not confer status. That is why there is a worldwide market in counterfeit Cartier watches, Gucci shoes and Chanel clothes. It is a market catering to those not in a position to obtain the authentic item. For similar reasons, the international market exists in fake titles and bogus knighthoods.

Many men and women, although they may not talk about it, long to be a part of a select group, some exclusive club not accessible to just anyone, an aristocracy of one sort or another, and to have visible signs that they belong. It is a need that may afflict those who by any worldly standards move in exalted circles and who may be the children of families that have done so for centuries. Moreover it is a need that persists despite the cult of egalitarianism, propagated by the American and French revolutions and to which in our time all levels of society, including the most privileged, pay deference, at least in public.

Pride in ancestry is no longer widely accepted as grounds for self-esteem. People are appraised on the basis of their personal merits and faults and the individual, seeking assurance of his worth, becomes all the more dependent on recognition and praise bestowed by his fellows, including the attestations of public authorities, whether princes or presidents. Nevertheless, despite the anti-elitist spirit of the times, there continue to be those at every social level who quest for medals and diplomas to set themselves apart, much as people in earlier days sought gratification from rulers who dispensed golden chains, elaborate mantles, expensive weapons, jewelled snuffboxes and other trinkets as well as landed estates and nobiliary titles.

As J.H.B. Bedells, an English specialist in honors, writes, kings understood that "human society will not function without rewards, anymore than it will without punishments".. or as the First Consul, Bonaparte, observed when instituting the Legion of Honor, "Men are led with such baubles." Hence the attraction exercised by orders of knighthood of various sorts. Membership in a chivalric order still implies a superior social standing.

The opportunity for turning a profit by exploiting this situation has, since the eighteenth century, resulted in the creation of all sorts of associations and confraternities, many of which have taken on not only the outward trappings of knighthood but also the names of ancient but long extinct orders. Some, as a ploy to deceive the unsuspecting, have taken on appellations which mimic those of existing orders. Other "orders" have been created out of whole cloth by zanies or crooks who pick the name of a saint and invent a history going back centuries. Then, they may, in another frequently used ploy, approach the patriarch or bishop of a minor, often little-known Christian denomination which claims an apostolic succession that more often than not is questionable. From such a prelate, they obtain a letter extending his "spiritual protection" over the so-called order.

The same urge is at work in mounting such operations as when people seek entry into an elevated camaraderie by admission to authentic and established orders. In many cases the difference is merely that those admitted to recognized orders are more fortunate: they move in a world that provides entry to prestigious groups while the less fortunate become the targets of conmen and fantasists, and sometimes their knowing if unconfessed accessories.

The Germans have a word for a compulsive appetite for honors that one can wear. It is Ordenshunger, a hunger for orders and decorations that afflicts people of all backgrounds. Prominent sufferers from this affliction in the twentieth century have been Reichsmarschall Hermann Goering of Nazi Germany, President Josip Tito of the ill-fated Yugoslav republic, and the high-born cousin of Queen Elizabeth II, Earl Mountbatten of Burma. At such a level, the honors which are sought tend to be of the best quality. Further down the social scale are those whose achievements have earned them authentic distinctions, say a British knighthood, yet who eagerly sport the insignia of an order set up by scoundrels and sharks. Those suffering from Ordenshunger tend to join every order they can, whether unimpeachably authentic or doubtful. Sometimes the justification for doing so that is offered is that they are really just "collectors" of insignia. Others knowingly join mock orders because these encourage conviviality, hold dinners and dances which provide an excuse for dressing up and at which they think they may meet someone helpful to their business or to their social advancement. Their's is a world not so distant from that of the Shriners but far removed from that of authentic orders.

Knighthood, nobility and personal encounters.

In the traditional pecking order in Western societies with a monarchial past or present, possession of a title such as baron or count was in general held to place a person at a higher social level than holding a knighthood. However, in the present world, in which the pecking order formed around the start of the twelfth century is in the process of dissolving completely, those resorting to dubious honors brokers more often seek a knighthood than a title. Part of the reason may be that membership of an order brings with it visible insignia that may be worn and admired by others whereas a title is something that is broadcast less forcefully, in conversations or writing. But something else is also at work: the decline in the creation and use of titles, even in the surviving monarchies where the nobility has a recognized position, is being accompanied by governments more than ever conferring what may be loosely called medals, and publicizing their conferral more than ever.

In the United States, the award of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the senior federal honor for civilians, has in past decades become something of a sentimental media occasion akin to the award of those Oscars given, not for best director or best actor, but for a lifetime of service to the motion picture arts. In the years since the Second World War, federal departments have created their own honors quite unknown to earlier generations of politicians and officials schooled in republican simplicity. The Communist states, led by the Soviet Union, handed out a multitude of decorations while the Conservative government of John Major had instituted a policy of seeking out deserving British citizens of very modest position for inclusion in what are still called orders of knighthood. Peers now tend to eschew the use of their titles in their professional lives. Viscount Norwich, the author and broadcaster, is always referred to as John Julius Norwich. At the same time, a bus conductor becomes a Member (equivalent to a chevalier in a continental European order) of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire.

The current process is in a way the undoing of a conflation that occurred centuries ago. Although knighthood and nobility originated historically as separate and distinct institutions, membership in the two increasingly overlapped as they developed during the late Middle Ages, promoting the perception that both were aspects of a single social category. Despite the decline in the use of real titles by those possessing them and the popularization of admission to so-called orders of knighthood, the old system lingers in peoples' imagination. This assists purveyors of bogus orders and decorations to also supply equally phony titles of baron, count, prince and duke. That is, when they can find a suitably affluent candidate for such elevation. Such candidates not only have suitable financial resources, they may also move in very acceptable social circles, as I learned when I had my first encounter with the twilight world of bogus honors.

In 1970, my wife and I were living in Paris and taking a modest part in the round of official but still sophisticated engagements that are part of life there. We had been invited to an independence day diplomatic reception at one of the African embassies. Flitting among the guests as though he were the host was a short, balding impeccably-dressed gentleman sporting a large multi-colored rosette in his lapel. He must have been in his early fifties. He was urbane and personable, stopping here and there to flatter a lady or to exchange a bon-mot with a gentleman. He eventually spotted me, came over and introduced himself in flawlesss French as Baron Francesco Caponera de Sebaste. He was, he said, an international jurist and juridical counsellor and came from Italy. He noticed my glancing at the rosette and commented that my own lapel was bare. Shrugging, I pointed out that as it happened, the particular lapel did not have a buttonhole. My curiosity was piqued, however, and I asked if what he was wearing was a French decoration. No, he replied, it was the Grand Cross of the Sovereign Military and Hospitaller Order of St. Thomas and St. John of Acre. He informed me that he was the representative in France of the Order which had its seat in Rome. As we exchanged calling cards, he said that if I was interested in learning more about this Order we could get together when he returned from his forthcoming visit to the Grand Master in Rome. This worthy was called, "His Serene Highness Prince Amorosa de Aragon."

The name meant nothing to me at the time but I was to learn later that the prince was a leading light among the shadows of the chivalric underworld. I had forgotten about the baron when ten days later he telephoned to invite me for tea at his apartment. My interest was aroused and I accepted. The apartment turned out to be a third story walkup in a neglected building but in one of Paris' most fashionable neighborhoods, the sixteenth arrondissement. Caponera greeted me effusively at the landing and ushered me into his living room. An elderly lady served tea. The room was somewhat untidy and contained an ecclectic array of furniture and memorabilia including pictures of the baron with the venerable Grand Master. There was a magnificent diploma on the wall with several large red wax seals and coats of arms which attested to Caponera's quality of Knight Grand Cross. I made a show of being impressed but in reality I was already beginning to realize that there was something not quite on the square about my new found friend. It was not long -- about half an hour -- before he invited me into his order. He assured me that its members came from the highest level of the French and other European nobility, that it sponsored several charitable activities which he did not describe and which, I confess, I did not ask him to specify. The order, he told me, met regularly over dinners in good Parisian restaurants. Professing to not wish to appear to be pressing me, he handed me some literature on the order as well as an application and a schedule of fees.

While leafing through the statutes I came across a passage that asserted the Grand Master could create titles of baron in the order. The passage had been crossed out in ink. Caponera, seeing what I was reading, informed me that the Grand Master had, from time immemorial, the right to create barons and other nobiliary titles, a privilege granted him by the Popes. He had not done so in some time, Caponera continued, although the Grand Master could do so whenever he came upon a meritorious candidate. Caponera concluded by murmuring that these titles were only used within the order.

Tea over, I thanked the baron for his hospitality and left, now thoroughly intrigued. The next day, I rang up the Italian embassy and asked about the status of the order, its Grand Master and the representative in France. An official told me the order was not recognized by the government of Italy and that the reputations of its two main protagonists were less than limpid. My interlocutor at the embassy concluded with the warning, caveat emptor. Later I called the chancellery of the Legion of Honor, the body that oversees what foreign orders are recognized by the French government and so what decorations French citizens are permitted to wear. The lady with whom I spoke reiterated what the diplomat at the embassy had said, that the so-called order was not recognized by the French government. Several months later the baron invited my wife and I to one of the Order's dinners, an invitation we accepted.

The restaurant was one of those reliable if not distinguished institutions, not fashionable but attracting a solid middle class clientele. We were surprised to find the other guests were pleasant and in some cases very charming people. Chatting to them I learned that about half were long standing members of the order while the other half had met Caponera more or less as we had, at some big social event where strangers meet and exchange cards. It did not take much reflection to conclude that the farther away we kept from the Order of St.Thomas and St. John of Acre, the better off we would be. The experience was to launch me into my crusade to monitor the activities of purveyors of fantasy orders and when they are involved in fraud to debunk them. The chase continues.

Who Can Confer Honors?

When those concerned with honors, whether real or whimsical, meet certain words and concepts there invariably appear certain questions. The terms employed are often unfamiliar to non-specialists and give rise to false impressions that those promoting counterfeit honors are quick to exploit. Let us take up some of these questions and terms.

One question frequently raised is: "Who can create, revive, and award an order of knighthood or ennoble a commoner?" The short answer is these things can be done by a currently existing fons honorum or fountain of honor, that is, a ruling monarch. and by the head of a sovereign but not necessarily monarchial state. In the view of some, a deposed monarch or the head of a former ruling house, even if he has never ruled, retains the capacity of fons honorum. Others hold that once a monarch or a ruling house lose political power, they have lost the capacity to confer honors.

For understandable reasons, the latter view is always taken by foreign ministries. They, after all, have to deal with the post-monarchial authorities in former monarchies and diplomatic recognition of a government includes an obligation to recognize the honors system it operates. Consequently, in theory, no government, and therefore no ruling monarch, is likely to recognize the capacity of those deposed to confer honors. There may be exceptions to this when a deposed ruler or government is regarded as the legitimate authority despite having lost control of the national territory. Historically, this was illustrated by the French monarchy's recognition of the right of the deposed Stuarts, in exile in France, to create titles and give the Order of the Garter to supporters, despite the fact that of William of Orange, Anne and then the House of Hanover ruled Britain. In recent times, the orders and decorations of the Polish government in exile were recognized by the Allied powers during World War II although Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union occupied Poland.

A different case exists when heads of formerly ruling dynasties are accepted as retaining the right to award membership in certain historical orders which belong not to the state but to the family. This is the case with the Habsburg Golden Fleece and Constantinian Order of St George which is in the possession of the head of the House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies.

The view that heads of deposed dynasties retain the capacity of fons honorum is well grounded in the laws and customs that have shaped the nature of royalty in Europe over the ages. In this view, possession of fons honorum is a dynastic attribute inherited by the head of any sovereign house whether he has reigned or not provided, the realm over which his family ruled constitutionally allowed the creation of titles of nobility and the conferral of membership in chivalric orders. Not all monarchies have nobilities. The Kingdom of Yugoslavia did not and the Kingdom of Norway does not. While churches do not qualify as fountains of honor, the Pope is one as monarch of an internationally recognized sovereign entity.

In ascertaining what honors are authentic, there is no problem about a chivalric order conferred by the Pope or a peerage given by the Queen of England or any other honors coming from recognized heads of state. One enters a gray area when the source is someone who is not an actual head of state. Separating the sheep from the goats in this gray area has resulted in various efforts to set up guides intended to be authoritative in what they accept as authentic and what they reject.

One such effort was made in the 1960s by Robert Gayre, the somewhat eccentric Scottish heraldist and promoter of the Order of St Lazarus in the English-speaking world. Gayre, with some participants in an International Congress of Genealogical and Heraldic Sciences and members of the Order of Saint Lazarus, established an International Commission for Orders of Chivalry. This commission was an unofficial enterprise and the orders which it listed in its register were not necessarily universally recognized. Some people have asserted, probably with reason, that the Commission was established by Gayre for the purpose of including the controversial Order of St Lazarus in its register of approved orders. Most of the orders it listed, however, were above reproach. We shall have more to say on the Commission further on.

Whatever its merits or faults, the commission fell into abeyance but, like the phoenix recently appears to have risen from the ashes this time with more faults than merits. In point of fact today there is no international body of any standing that publishes a list of orders that may be regarded as authoritative. The sole international body concerned with noting orders of doubtful authenticity is the False Orders Committee set up by the Sovereign Military Order of Malta which includes representatives of the legitimate orders of St John in Britain, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden. The remit of the committee is limited in practice to keeping track of the two dozen or so fake orders of St John or knights of Malta that currently attract those lacking a sense of chivalric discrimination. This commission appears to value discretion above all else. While it may work successfully as an internal service for its member orders, it has had no public effect, if only because it avoids any public role.

Some countries, such as France, have passed legislation which governs the wearing by its citizens of insignia which resemble official French decorations . The Grand Chancellery of the Legion of Honor is the official body which oversees orders, both French and foreign, and regulates the wearing of their insignia by French citizens. Spain lumps together all non-profit organizations, non-governmental orders and religious confraternities and requires each to follow the same registration procedures. In Germany the Johanniterordern, the Protestant Order of St John, is recognized under a special federal law.

In the United States, as in other republics, the government awards decorations for valor and meritorious service but has no legal provision for orders of knighthood as such. chivalric bodies, such as the legitimate orders of St John, are treated as private associations, registered as such with the state in which they have headquarters. The most sought-after status for American groups is that of a non-profit, tax-exempt charitable institution. While not easy to obtain, such status ignores whether or not a body is an authentic chivalrous order. In these circumstances it is easy to see why there has been indiscriminate use and abuse of the term, order of knighthood.

Webster's Unabridged Dictionary defines an order of knighthood as, "An organized body of knights, belonging to one of two classes: either associations or fraternities, possessing property and rights of their own as independent bodies or honorary associations established by sovereigns within their respective dominions. To the former class belonged the military and religious orders founded during the Crusades: Templars, Hospitallers, Teutonic Knights."

It may be added that so do the Spanish orders of Montesa, Alcantara, Calatrava and Santiago. The other class consists of titular orders and takes in most of the existing European orders. This latter class includes both state decorations of merit and dynastic orders awarded by heads of ruling or of former ruling houses.

Another term at the heart of any discussion of the system of honors is chivalry. It is probably best defined as a code of behavior. Frances Gies suggests that while it was perhaps more often violated than honored, the code exercised an undeniable influence on thought and conduct over the centuries and down to recent times. Maurice Keen in his work, Chivalry, describes it as "an ethos in which martial, aristocratic and Christian elements were fused together". He amplifies this by saying: "that the military aspect of chivalry is associated with skill in horsemanship specifically, a costly expertise which could be hard to acquire, for one not born to a good heritage. The aristocratic aspect is not just a matter of birth; it is connected with ideas of the function of knighthood and with a scale of virtues which implies that aristocracy is a matter of worth as much as it is of lineage. The Christian element is presented surprisingly free of the imprint of ecclesiastical prejudice and priorities. Chivalry as it is described in the treatises . is a way of life in which we can discern these three essential facets, the military, the noble and the religious."

Another definition with which we must deal is the word sovereign which appears in the titles of certain orders. This is perhaps the term for which the most varied definitions are claimed by supporters of both historical orders of chivalry and proponents of fantasy ones. As recently as 1953 the definition of sovereignty was the subject of an ecclesiastical court case between the Sovereign Military Order of Malta and the Roman Curia. We shall cover this case in some detail in due course in another paper when dealing with the history of that order. For our purpose, however, I refer once again to Webster's definition for sovereign: "Independent of all others, as a sovereign state."

These terms and concepts find material expression in the insignia of orders and decorations. The varieties of insignia taken together constitute a rich, varied but sometimes confusing array of signs and provide the most opulent jewelry Western society still allows men to wear.

Insignia and Their Differing Connotations

The insignia of orders and decorations nearly all derive from marks of honor that evolved over centuries of European history. The result is basic similarities in their appearance and how they are worn, similarities that may obscure the invisible differences between true orders of chivalry, merit orders and decorations. While looking at how these insignia developed, one should also take heed of the different connotations conveyed by the typically enameled gold insignia worn hanging from a ribbon on the left breast, pendant at the neck, in the form of a large star or attached to a knot where the ends of a wide ribbon, worn over the shoulder. meet at the hip.

Confusion arises when the similarity in appearance between insignia is taken to imply that the same kind of relationship exists between those who receiving decorations and the conferring authority, members of national orders of merit and their head of state and members of chivalric orders and the heads of their order.

A decoration is an honor awarded for having performed a deed or a series of deeds. In the United States decorations are conferred by the armed forces, civil departments of the federal government and some local governments or their agencies, such as the New York Police Department. Like an order of knighthood, a decoration is conferred on a personal basis and the right to wear it cannot be passed on to another person. The Congressional Medal of Honor and the Victoria Cross are eminent examples of decorations awarded for valor. They tell the world, this is a very brave man.

An order which is much like a decoration is the Legion of Honor, awarded for high deeds and outstanding services but organized in a hierarchy of grades like a chivalric order. So its insignia indicate both recognition bestowed for personal achievement and the bearer's position in a social system. The higher the grade, the higher the bearer's officially recognized position. So a soldier received into the Legion of Honor as a simple chevalier, because of his outstanding valor, wears an insignia that like the Medal of Honor, tells us this is a very brave man. But the large silver star of a Grand Officier of the Legion tells us something different. It says, this is a very important man whose successful career has won him high recognition from his government.

Such insignia of high rank in an order conferred for merit overlaps the significance of another category, insignia that indicate membership of a social elite that may be the result of the individual's own efforts or those of his forebears. The badge that British baronets wear at the neck is an example of such an insignia, the origins of which can be traced back to the gold ring worn by members of the noble equestrian order in ancient Roman times.

A third category of insignia are those that indicate office, such as the elaborate collars and badges worn by Lord Mayors. These insignia descend from the medieval convention that a rich, golden collar was a sign that the wearer exercised authority, in his own right or in some cases as the honored servant of a ruler. While the bearer keeps the insignia of the first two categories for life, insignia of office are, of course, surrendered when the office ceases to be held.

While insignia for chivalric orders, merit orders and decorations tend to be similar in appearance, they imply different relationships between the authority bestowing the insignia and the recipient. Decorations, given for past deeds, do not imply a necessarily continuing relationship between the recipient and the authority. It is otherwise when an authority admits a person to membership of an order, especially a truly chivalric one.

An important element in being made a member of an order is a pledge of allegiance to the order and its head. The degree of commitment varies. In some orders it may be no more than a sense of community with confrères and appropriate deference to the head of the order. In others it may mean embracing rules that govern how one lives and vowing indefectible loyalty to the head. Such a commitment is required of those admitted as professed knights in the Sovereign Military Order of Malta.

While insignia indicating personal accomplishments or membership in an elite existed in classical antiquity, the great majority of such insignia in use today derive from forms used by medieval chivalric bodies of a specifically Christian character, however secularized the modern order. The most widely employed pattern throughout modern Europe is the eight-pointed cross, first used by the Hospitaller knights of St John. Another widely employed pattern derives from the Napoleonic variant of this cross. When the Legion of Honor was set up Bonaparte added a fifth arm, also with two points, to the four arms of the eight-pointed cross. Other orders and decorations have added additional two-pointed arms, six for the French National Order of Merit, seven for the British Order of St Michael and St George, eight for the French Order of Arts and Letters and ten arms for the Tuscan Order of St Joseph. The United States copied the Napoleonic model when the Legion of Merit was instituted during the Second World War. Originally intended as something to give foreign military officers in reciprocation for the orders and decorations conferred by their governments on Americans, it was subsequently integrated into the honors system of the United States Army.

While the crosses of the crusading orders, such as that of St John, were first displayed on mantles that formed a uniform for the order, these crosses were later made into jewels worn suspended from a ribbon around the neck. Eventually the badges embroidered on mantles, and later on coats, were set off by surrounding them with star-like rays. Another source of insignia were the prestigious collars in jeweled precious metals worn over the shoulders as signs of authority and favor which medieval princes presented to their peers and followers. With the creation of orders such as the Garter in England, the Golden Fleece in the Duchy of Burgundy and the Annunciation in the Duchy of Savoy, distinctive collars were designed with their links composed of heraldic badges and allegorical devices used by the head of the order. Hence the roses in the Garter collar and the flint-stone and steels of the Golden Fleece.

The badge of the order, as distinct from the heraldic badges of the princes conferring the order, were suspended from the collar. Most often these would be of an explicitly religious significance, such as the Garter's figure of St George slaying the dragon and the Annunciation's Angel Gabriel announcing to Mary that she was to bear the Christ child. Sometimes, however, the meaning would be less obvious and intentionally so.

From the fourteenth century onwards, a taste developed in the chivalric culture of France and neighboring lands for allegorical images combined with mottoes and displayed as a coat of arms would be, on walls and furniture, horse trappings and tournament wear, hat badges and pendants. His coat of arms identified the bearer as a member of a family or lord of a territory that could range in size from a simple knight's holdings up to the Empire. In contrast, the device or imprese, to use the widely employed Italian term, conveyed to those who understood it a personal statement.

One device-like emblem favored by the Valois Dukes of Burgundy was the Golden Fleece, the precious pelt sought by Jason and the Argonauts in ancient Greek legend. It became the badge and name of a chivalric order of unsurpassed prestige, established by Duke Philip the Good in 1430.

As the fashion for wearing great jeweled collars declined with changes in men's clothing, the badges of orders began to be suspended a narrow ribbon around the neck or from the knot in a broad sash worn across the body, most often passing over the right shoulder to the left hip. Starting with the institution of the Order of the Holy Spirit by Henry III of France in 1578, badges that were not in the shape of a cross began to be placed at the center of a cross. Most often an eight-pointed cross was chosen, as with the Holy Spirit, but other forms of cross were also employed, making a cross of one type or another the form for the badge of the greater part of the new orders founded from the seventeenth century onwards.

The crown of the ruler conferring the order began to top the badge and provide a support for a ring through which passed the ribbon in the distinctive color or colors of the order. While the broad sash continued in use as did badges hung from the neck, insignia also began to be worn suspended from a ribbon threaded through the button hole of a coat. In time this last became a short ribbon, with the pendant insignia, pinned to the left breast. At about the same time, early in the nineteenth century the embroidered star-surrounded badge of the order gave way to a metal one.

Today members of orders that still have full, metal collars, such as the Garter, the Golden Fleece and Swedish Order of the Seraphim, rarely have an opportunity to wear them. The British orders have so-called collar days when they are worn for ceremonies marking the feast day of the order's patron saint or similar annual occasions. The collar of the Golden Fleece, in both the Spanish Bourbon and Habsburg branches, is now worn virtually only by a new member when he is admitted. Otherwise the badge is worn suspended at the throat from a red ribbon or in miniature size from a small ribbon on a coat lapel.

The Legion of Honor, from its foundation, has had but a single collar, worn by the Grand Master who today is always the current President of France. It is most frequently to be seen in formal photographs of a president, dressed in white tie and tails. In the French popular imagination, the collar has become a primary symbol of the office of president.

Today insignia most often is seen in the form of ribbons, rosettes and small badges worn in the buttonhole of a suit lapel or in miniatures worn on the lapel of formal and semi formal evening attire. Full size neck badges and breast stars are also worn with evening wear while the braided and embroidered military style uniforms or great mantles of many orders are nowadays seen only at annual or other occasional church services.

Categories of Present Day Orders

What constitutes a legitimate, recognized or acceptable order of knighthood? The chivalric ideal and various groups claiming to honor it are still to be found despite the present cultural environment characterized by efforts to delegitimize values and institutions handed down from the past. The theory and practice of the chivalric code survives to different degrees and in different fashions in organizations that range from the eight-centuries old Sovereign Military Order of Malta to the Scouting movement founded by Lord Baden-Powell during the Victorian revival of the cult of chivalry, it is perhaps the twentieth-century organization that has come closest to inculcating chivalric values.

The Sovereign Military Order of Malta is the only surviving crusading order which has retained its independence. Two other orders with authentic roots in the age of the crusaders are the Teutonic Order, more formally the Order of St Mary of the Germans, which was recognized as an independent military order about 1190, and the Order of the Holy Sepulcher, founded in 1149. The former is now a small religious order of brothers and nuns based in Austria which confers its insignia on friends among the Catholic laity, not as a sign of membership but in appreciation of their support. The latter, administered by a cardinal, serves principally as an illustrious means of giving recognition to Catholic laymen, most often proposed by their bishops, for exceptional devotion and generosity towards the Church.

Other bodies asserting a chivalric character in today's world may be conveniently grouped into a number of categories. These are:

a) Vatican Orders of Knighthood. These are orders of merit proferred for service to the Church. In order of precedence they are the Supreme Order of Christ, the Pian Order, the Order of St Gregory the Great and the Order of St Sylvester. They are awarded by the Vatican as a sovereign power whose ruler, the Pope, possesses fons honorum. The Vatican is sovereign because it exercises the full powers of a sovereign state over the Vatican City, a territorial entity albeit a tiny one and because it is recognized by governments around the world as such. No other religion possesses such an internationally recognized and territorial embodiment of sovereignty and no other can be considered capable of exercising through its head the capacity of a fountain of honor, creating and maintaining orders of knighthood. Any patriarch or bishop other than the Pope who endows any association with his "spiritual protection" may enrich it in some other-worldly way but not with anything that is juridically meaningful..

b) Dynastic orders of knighthood. These are awarded by heads of reigning dynasties and of former reigning houses to individuals who have served them well in some capacity or other. They are, in a sense, merit orders. Among them are the Order of St George given by the Duke of Bavaria, the Holy Spirit which has been conferred by the French legitimist pretender, the Duke of Anjou and Cadiz, orders of the former Kingdom of Italy, conferred by the Italian pretender, the Prince of Naples, and those bestowed by the heads of other deposed houses. Among these is the prestigious Order of the Golden Fleece.

Since the eighteenth century this order has been divided between an Austrian and a Spanish branch. In recent years, the latter has been conferred by King Juan Carlos while Archduke Otto of Austria, head of the Habsburg family and thus heir to the imperial throne of Austria and the crown of Hungary, has bestowed the former. The case of the Golden Fleece is the most lofty example of a chivalric order divided under two chiefs. While the Austrian branch has maintained its nobiliary requirements, that of Spain has become the Spanish state’s senior merit order and has been awarded to chiefs of state and other personalities without regard to religion or nobiliary status. Another dynastic order that has split is the Constantinian Order of St George, an institution which by its constitution is the property of the head of the House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies. There are two claimants to that position, each considering himself to be the rightful Grand Master, one based in Madrid and the other living in France but with a chancellery in Naples.

Count Raoul de Warren, a noted French genealogist active in the middle decades of the twentieth century, defined a pretender as "any person who claims to be the head of a former ruling house or from the head of a ruling house and has followers, regardless of their numbers, who affirm, even against his will, that he is the only one qualified, in the case of a monarchic restoration, to accede to the throne.". It goes without saying that a pretender must not only claim but must be in a position to show documentary proof of his descent. Contrary to widespread opinion, pretenders with legitimate claims tend to award their dynastic orders very sparingly indeed. When such an honor is conferred, it is in recognition of substantial services rendered or distinguished achievement.

c) Decorations for merit. These are modeled on the forms of chivalric orders, awarded by sovereign states. The most celebrated of these is the French Legion of Honor. Its insignia and system of grades has served as a model for many subsequent national orders in Europe and Latin America and in the United States for the Legion of Merit. While those receiving these awards may be designated Chevalier, Cavaliere, Caballero or the word for knight in whatever language, such state orders bear little resemblance to historical orders of knighthood.

d) Revived extinct orders. These usually describe themselves as "military and hospitaller" and are given out by private individuals. The names of such bodies tend to be those of orders that once existed under the authority or protection of the Papacy or another sovereign ruler but no longer do so. Some of these "revivals" seek the "Spiritual Protection" of one Church or another. While unable to demonstrate convincing descent from an historical order, these groups, such as the Order of St Lazarus, may underwrite very considerable good works and maintain strict criteria for admission. If their historical pedigrees are unconvincing, it should be borne in mind that full, uninterrupted historical continuity may also be lacking in orders whose legitimacy, however, is assured by the recognition accorded them by governments.

Since no qualified international body exists to lay down guidelines by which to judge the legitimacy of orders of knighthood, and so long as these render worthwhile and measurable service there is no reason why they should not be socially tolerated. So long, of course, as they do not make false claims about their origins, do not pretend to be what they are not, and do not violate the laws of the countries in which they operate. Unfortunately some in this category, while attempting to justify themselves through works of charity, maintain in spite of compelling evidence to the contrary, that they descend directly from orders founded during the crusades but which are known to have become moribund if not entirely extinct centuries ago. Or they may claim exotic roots such as Russian priories of the Order of Malta or descent from other extinct or abolished orders. (f)

e) Decorations bestowed by religious denominations. An order of The Holy Cross of Jerusalem is awarded by the Melkite Church. The Order of St. Augustine is conferred by the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Order of Orthodox Hospitallers was founded by Archbishop Makarios, the late President of the Republic of Cyprus. This order is unique in having been founded as a kind of combined state and religious order, the Archbishop functioning as both head of state and head of the church in his country. Its legitimacy derives from his having been President of Cyprus rather than from his also being primate of the Cypriot Orthodox Church.

f) Dubious dynastic orders and questionable private initiatives. These are intended for sale to the unsuspecting. As we have said, those originating such so-called orders may obtain, in an effort to acquire a semblance of respectability, the spiritual support and patronage of the Patriarch of an autocephalous Eastern Church. In addition to making unjustifiable historical claims about their origins, their promoters invariably assume bogus titles of nobility ostensibly showing them to be the heads of former reigning houses and thus genuine fountains of honor. These "princes" tend to readily arrange for their members of their "orders" to acquire equally false titles at the cost of substantial "chancellery fees".

(to be continued)

FOR COMMENTS PLEASE CLICK BACK TO CALTRAP'S CORNER AND SIGN GUEST BOOK