This is a Dover republications of a book first published in 1837, entitled Secret Societies of the Middle Ages: The Assassins, the Templars and the Secret Tribunals of Westphalia. I wonder why Dover changed the title. Information on the Templars only takes up pages 143 to 280. The section on the Assassins takes up page 11 to 142, and the Secret Tribunals of Westphalia is only a small section at the end, to page 343, less than half of what is allotted to the other two. So the original title is much more accurate. Thus, the book is not exactly what I thought it would be. It does, however, contain interesting material. There are lots of names which get very confusing, especially the eastern ones, and the locations are not that familiar either. I keep my atlas handy.
    In all, I liked the book, however I have one really big gripe, and I will get it off my chest here at the beginning of this review. The author has a decided bigotry against eastern peoples and religion, and an obvious prejudice in favor of Christianity, which I find offensive. All religion is nothing but a belief embraced by a group of people. There is none that is "right" or "better." There are good and bad people in all ethnic groups, countries and religious organizations. Of course, any sect or cult that promotes evil or harms others is bad, but to criticize Moslems for the very same things that Christians do is ignorant. Some of the most vile, detestable acts ever committed on this planet have been done by Christians, in the name of God, Jesus, or he Bible!! Here are some examples:
    Keightley speaks of the schisms in the Mohammedan religion, and compares it to Christians, stating, "Unlike the schisms of the eastern and western, of the Catholic and Protestant churches, which originated in difference of opinion on points of discipline or matters of doctrine, that of the Mohammedans arose solely from ambition and the struggle for temporal power."
    REALLY??? The Catholic Church is ALL ABOUT POWER. Its formation, embracing Christianity, was simply a means for Rome to control a larger number of people. The Catholic Church has ALWAYS been about power (and money), and it is a political institution as well. And how about the slaughter of so many people in the early formation of Protestant religions—slaughter because they refused to embrace new beliefs. Any religion that kills people who disagree is ALL ABOUT POWER.
    And here's another example of ignorance. Keightley says, "Religion has, in all ages, and in all parts of the world, been made the mask of ambition, for which its powerful influence over the minds of the ignorant so well qualifies it. But the political influence of religion among the calmer and more reasoning nations of Europe is slight compared with its power over the more ardent and susceptible natives of Asia." Again, really? Perhaps now religious wars in the middle east are more prominent, but is it about religion or is it about land and oil rights? And sure, we don't have wars going on now in Europe over religion, but we did, and they were pretty gruesome. Now in the western world, the importance of religion has greatly diminished in the last century. Lots and lots of people just really don't care.
    And here is probably the worst one of all: Keightley says, "The East has been at all times prolific of crime; human life is not there held to be of the value at which it is estimated in Europe; and the dagger and poison are freely employed to removed objects of apprehension, to put obstacles out of the way of ambition, or to satiate the thirst of vengeance."
    No, today, we just have the United States Military and other countries, spraying aerosols out of planes and using electromagnetic frequencies to make it flood or ravage with fire any nation, (including our own), who does not agree with us politically, or whose overpopulations have become and inconvenience to the elite. Mr. Keightley, you must be rolling over in your grave about this time.
    Well, I have spent too much time being critical, but other gripes will turn up as needed. Keightley begins with an introduction where he discusses Pythagoras, whose ancient society (6th century BCE), was probably the only one until the formation of the Assassins. And the story on that begins in Chapter I, during the 7th century, CE. And one more point I want to make is that Keightley's spelling of proper nouns is always different than the modern spelling. I know this is inconsistent, but I am including both. In fact, Keightley's spellings are inconsistent, too. I have noticed at least once, (so there are probably more) times that the same name is spelled differently in different chapters.

The Assassins
    Keightley begins by providing a background on Mohammed, and how he may have believed he was called by God to be a prophet. Again, Keightley is insulting. He says, "A certain portion of self-delusion is always mingled with successful imposture; the impostor, as it were, makes his first experiment on himself." Whatever. In any case, it is he who founded the new religion of Islam, which means "resignation." Though he was illiterate, he dictated the Koran, the Holy Book of Islam, which was written down by scribes over a number of years. Keightley ends the first chapter with another insult. He says, "No one, certainly, would dream of comparing the son of Abd-Allah with the Son of God, of setting darkness by the side of light; but still we may confess him to have been an agent in the hands of the Almighty, and admit that his assumption of the prophetic office was productive of good as well as evil."
    He then goes on to explain the division of Islam into two main denominations, which he spells Soonees, (modern spelling is Sunni) and Sheähs, (now spelled Shia, its followers known as Shiites). I won't go into this in detail, but the Sunnis are the Orthodox Muslims, and 85-90% fall within this group. The Shiites were the dissenters, and the dispute arose over the successor to Mohammed (now spelled Muhammad). There are volumes of information on this online. Here is a page from Wikipedia.
    In any case, the four sects of the Sunnis agreed on the main points of belief, but the Shiite sects differed greatly. It is the Ismaïlites that we will be concerned with here, because that is the branch from which the Assassins sprang.
    The first secret society was concerned with dissemination of information and knowledge. At first, assemblies would gather, one for men and another for women, on Mondays and Wednesdays. But eventually the khalif Hakem-bi-emr-illah, whom Keightley describes as "that extraordinary madman," erected a House of Wisdom, "abundantly furnished with books and mathematical instruments. Its doors were open to all, and paper, pens, and ink were profusely supplied for the use of those who chose to frequent it. Professors of law, mathematics, logic, and medicine were appointed to give instruction; . . . ."
    The course of instruction followed nine degrees, and what is most interesting here is that they were designed to cause doubt and confusion, and to point out the absurdities of the Koran, and also to "repose a blind confidence in the knowledge and wisdom of his teacher." It appears to me, from the explanation given by Keightley, that what went on there was similar to brainwashing in modern cults, and no doubt, not so modern ones, too. We will see later that the Assassins used this technique to create members who would follow their orders blindly. Kinda like the U.S. military . . .
    And now we discuss the man who was the most instrumental in forming the society called the Assassins. Keightley does not include many dates, but I believe it had to be sometime in the late 11th century, because one of the people involved in this story was Omar Khiam (usually spelled now Khayyám) who was an astronomer, mathematician and philosopher, now known for his "earthy" collection of poems called The Rubáiyát, which I have sitting here right in front of me, and he lived from 1048 to 1122. It so happened there was one Ali who lived in Rei, who claimed to have come from Arabia. Though he was a Shia, he pretended to be a Sunni to the governor. He had one son, Hassan Sabah, whom he sent to the celebrated imam Mowafek to study, then he retired to a monastery.
    There Hassan became friends with Khayyám and Nizam-al-Moolk. They all vowed that whomever was successful would share with the other two. Nizam-al-Moolk was the one, attaining the "highest post in the realm, the viziriate, under Alp Arslan." Omar Khayyám congratulated him, but was not interested in a post. He settled for an annual pension.
    Hassan was different, however. He avoided the vizir until the end of Alp Arslan's reign. When prince Malek Shah took over, however, Hassan appeared. Nizam-al-Moolk then records in his own words the experience with his Hassan, who turned out to be a treacherous double-crosser, seeking the favor of the monarch himself, and out to ruin his former friend. After that, their friendship became a hateful game of revenge, on both sides. Later, after the Hassan organized the Assassins, both the sultan and Nizam-al-Moolk were murdered. Below is a picture of the assassination of Nizam-al-Moolk.
    Meanwhile, Hassan lived in Egypt, where he ended up in a political dispute, on the losing side. He was arrested and sent to a castle in Damietta. A tower fell for no apparent reason, seen by some as a miracle of Hassan. So he was shipped off to Africa, when a terrible storm hit the vessel. All were terrified, except Hassan, who proclaimed "Our Lord (Seydna) has promised me that no evil shall befall me." The sea grew calm, a wind blew them to the coast of Syria, and Hassan was set free. Hassan's turning point was his acquisition of the fortress of Alamoot, which again, involved treachery. Hassan was not an honest person, but he became extremely powerful as the leader of the group which some believe was named after him—Hassan/Assassin.
    Most of the rest of the Assassin section of the book tells of the secret society's rise in power by killing off those who got in their way. After about three hundred years of terrorizing a large area of the Middle East, they were finally defeated by the invading Mongols.
    There is one last point of interest I want to mention and that is another possible source for the name "Assassins." It could have come from Hashisheen, or, Hashish, from which were made opiates. "Stout and healthy children" were either purchased from the parents, or obtained otherwise. These children were taken away to, well, let's not mince words—they were brainwashed. They were given these drugs to make them fall into a dead sleep. When they awakened, they believed they were present in the Paradise that awaited them if they obeyed their orders. They were taught that dying for the cause would immediately reward them, so the Assassin warriors were ready to die in battle of by suicide.

Upon awakening from this state of lethargy their senses were struck with all the delightful objects that have been described, and each perceived himself surrounded by lovely damsels, singing, playing, and attracting his regards by the most fascinating caresses, serving him also with delicious viands and exquisite wines, until, intoxicated with excess of enjoyment, amidst actual rivers of milk and wine, he believed himself assuredly in paradise, and felt an unwillingness to relinquish its delights.

    But after four or five days, they were again drugged and returned to where they had been, thinking it was all a vision of what was to come.
    And that concludes my review of The Assassins. Let me leave you with one more quote:

We have thus traced the origin, the growth, and the decline of this formidable society, only to be paralleled by that of the Jesuits in extent of power and unity of plan and purpose. Unlike this last, however, its object was purely evil, and its career was one of blood: it had therefore left no deed to which its apologists might appeal in its defence.

The Templars
    Of course, as expected from Keightley's decidedly Christian bias, while he has condemned the Assassins as being pure evil, about this group, he says:

They became the victims of the unprincipled rapacity of a merciless prince; their property was seized and confiscated; their noblest members perished in the flames; their memory was traduced and maligned; the foulest crimes were laid to their charge; and a secret doctrine, subversive of social tranquility and national independence, was asserted to have animated their councils.

    Ok, so Prince Philip did persecute them, but they weren't saints, either.
    In the first chapter, Keightley introduces what he believes was the motivation for the Crusades. He speaks of the mindset of the medieval people to make a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, but says it was the feudal mindset most of all—the notion that the vassals were to defend their lord. so therefore Christians, vassals of the Lord, could not bear the thought that his burial was in a place of "heathen pollution," and it was their duty to free his sacred relics from that.
    Because the pilgrims needed a place to stay when they visited the Holy Lands, hospitals were set up, and they were more like hotels, or hostels, with entertainment and markets. At first there was just one, then another, the Hospital of St. John, under the care of Gerard and his monks. This one also became known for caring for the poor or anyone who needed help, including Moslems. They also tended to those wounded in battle. "The humility of these Hospitallers was extreme. They styled the poor and the sick their lords and themselves their servants; to them they were liberal and compassionate, to themselves rigid and austere." But nonetheless, money poured in and the Hospitallers expanded. Out of that came the need for protection, as there were disturbances in the Holy Land, and pilgrims were often killed. Nine "valiant and pious knights" formed an association to guard the tomb of the Savior. Baldwin II (King of Jerusalem) gave them a place to live at the palace which was near the Temple, therefore they became the Soldiery of the Temple, or Templars. This was happening throughout the 1120s and beyond.
    But, as in all organizations, I suppose, greed and corruption found its place, both in the Templars and the Hospitallers (who were rivals). By 1161, two popes were elected, and one, Alexander III released the Templars from all spiritual obedience to the Holy See and of paying tithes. Keightley also notes that the pontiffs "were now aiming at universal power," and saw an advantage to hooking up with these noble knights.
    But the Christians were not destined to recapture the Holy Land. In 1187, a fateful battle took place at the brook Kishon, where hundreds of knights were slaughtered by the Turks. But it was the battle of Hittin that broke Latin power in the East. 30,000 Christians died.
    It was not until 1208 that Pope Innocent III finally passed public censure on the Templars and limited their "excesses." But Keightley points out that "It was the lavish generosity of the popes, princes, and nobles, that caused the ruin of the Templars." And in 1291, the capture of Acre was the final destruction of Latin power in the East.
    Keightley tends to skip around, and the fact that he doesn't always include dates adds to the confusion. In Chapter V of this section, he gives us information on the classes of the order of the Templars, and their qualifications. Most of it is about the Knights themselves and the strict criteria for joining the order. They had to prove they came from a knightly family and were legitimately born. They had to be free from any other obligations, like marriage or engagement, not belong to any other order, not in debt, and healthy. They also had to be a knight already. and be at least age 21 or so. The chosen knights had to be accepted as candidates, and this was all in secret, and they went through a series of vows. Since they were from the upper class, they also had to pay a large fee.
    The next class was the Chaplains, and anyone who had received first tonsure could be a chaplain. They were literate, as opposed to the knights who were not, but their position really led to little recognition. Keightley says, "Further, though they shared in the good things of the order and enjoyed the advantage of consideration in which it stood, yet they had no dignities to look forward to, whereas an entrance into a Benedictine order held out to the ambitious a prospect of rich priories, abbacies, and bishoprics, and, at least, a voice in the chapter."
    The Serving-Brethren were often men of "wealth, talent, and valour," though they could also be more common. They had to be born a free man, however, and could not be a knight. Many of the wealthier ones gave a great deal of money to the order. The serving-brethren both fought in the field and did menial household tasks. Later they were divided into two groups: brethren-in-arms, and handicraft-brethren. The former class was held in higher esteem, and though they served the knights, they also ate with them, and there was a rule protecting them from ill treatment.
    These three classes were considered the Templars, but there were also affiliated persons of different ranks, who kept their secular mode of life, but enjoyed certain spiritual and temporal advantages. They also had to take strict vows and if married could no longer share a bed with their spouse. Donates and Oblates served the order without reward, but enjoyed its protection.
    Keightley gives an overview of the different provinces, both East and West. In the East, there were various castles around the Holy Land and other parts of the Middle East, including Cyprus, where an immense amount of hidden treasures was found after the suppression of the Templars.
    In the West, numerous lands and castles belonged to the Templars: in Portugal and Spain, France, the Netherlands, England, (UK), Germany, (Poland, Hungary) and Italy. (Sicily). Keightley says that the number of preceptories was at least 9,000, with an annual income of six millions sterling, but he does not say what years that number represents.
    Quite a bit of the Templars section speaks of their downfall. Apparently, in Keightley's time, people still believed that they were guilty of the heresy charges which led to torture, imprisonment, burning to death, and eventual orders for them to disband. But now it is common knowledge that it was because of Prince Philip IV of France (and the debt he owed them), that their persecution began. It was the fateful "Friday 13th" in October 1307 that their arrests were ordered and the inquisitions began, due to rumors concerning the secrecy of their initiation, such as, that they were forced to spit on the cross and worship idols. Many confessed through torture, but later retracted, Some were set free, but many died in prison or from torture. Pope Clement was nothing but a puppet for Philip, so he did little to defend them. Wikipedia has a much more organized account of the Templars than Keightley.
    And just because they did not commit acts of heresy, doesn't mean they were not corrupt. They most certainly were. Though, yes, the knights did fight in battles to defend Christians, but the organization on the whole was a financial network. Their original vows of poverty quickly changed, making them extremely wealthy all over Europe. According to Wikipedia, they could be called the first Multinational Corporation. Hmmm . . .
    There is evidence that the Freemasons grew out of this organization, and in some places, it was retained and renamed, for instance, Portugal. There it became the Order of Christ. Below is the Templar Convent of Christ Castle inTomar, Portugal, built in 1160. It is now a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Check out these pictures—it is gorgeous.

Secret Tribunals of Westphalia
    Since this is the shortest section in the book, and this review has grown so long, I will only mention a few points. Not much is known about the society, one reason being that it was seriously secret, and any member who revealed any of the secrets was instantly hanged. It was, at the time of its founding, only in existence in Westphalia in Germany, which is not the same as the current location in Germany now. Wikipedia has further information, and since, according to Keightley, the earliest date we have referring to the Tribunal is 1267, that would correspond to the time period in the linked article.
    Like the other societies in this book, this one was linked to religion. In a time when crime was rampant, these men, who were chosen for their virtuous qualities, instilled a sense of fear to those who would commit crimes. They were basically a "free-court" which could and did inflict instant punishment on the guilty, that being death. Only those who were initiated could attend the meetings and most often the Emperor was one of the initiates. However, all freemen could attend court.
    And while they served a purpose at first, as was usual, as their power grew, their quality degenerated. Those who had money, no matter what their character, could become members, thus bringing corruption into the society. In addition, they even harassed the order of Teutonic Knights, the "masters of Prussia and Livonia." But they certainly remained in existence for a very long time. They were abolished in 1811, by the King of Westphalia, Jérôme Bonaparte. That is not in the book, it is from the Wikipedia article. The last Freigraf, or "free count" who was the president of the court for life, died in 1835, two years before this book was published.
    Below: A Vehm on a miniature Herforder Rechtsbuch (ca 1375). The origin of the term Vehm and its meaning are still debatable. Incidentally, Wikipedia is perhaps a little less impressed with their necessary function to deal with rampant crime than Keightley. Their article calls them a "proto-vigilante" organization, and later on, compares their methods to the mob or lynching.

    In all, I learned a great deal from this book, but it was also a quite difficult read, one reason being that it skips around time periods and there are not that many dates supplied. Keightley discusses one aspect, then goes backwards to discuss another, rather than moving on chronologically. That would have been okay, except for the lack of dates. The section on the Templars was the easiest to comprehend; the one on the Assassins had so many unfamiliar names, and the ones that were familiar were spelled differently than currently. The section on the Secret Tribunals of Westphalia was just plain confusing. And Keightley's obvious prejudice against non-Christians is offensive. I think there are probably more modern books on these subjects that are better written and less biased.

All material on this site copyright © 2018 by Laughing Crow.
This site designed and written by Laughing Crow.