The Teutonic Knights vs The Knights Templar.

Volkov · Jul 2, 2010

Which of these two knightly orders was the mightiest and who would prevail, the conquerors of the Baltic, or the guardians of the holy land? I don't know what would make them fight short of the pope letting the Teutonic Knights loose on the Knights Templar once he hears about their alleged occultism and idolatry instead of just ordering them dissolved.

Personally, I'm inclined to think that the Teutonic Knights would win.

Salah · Jul 2, 2010

Well, this battle is going to have to take place sometime in the 13th Century, or the first couple years of the 14th Century. Both orders would have had more or less identical weapons, armor, training, individual fighting styles, and group battle tactics. The only way you could even tell them apart would be the colors of their shields (black and white vs. red and white)..

The Teutonic Knights were prepared to use "native" auxiliaries - e.g. Prussians, Lithuanians, etc. These could supply support on foot. The Templars, on the other hand, were an exclusively mounted force that didn't even use turcopoles, let alone infantry.

In the late 13th/early 14th Centuries, I am also thinking the average Teutonic Knight was seeing more fighting than the average Templar. So I am inclined to vote for the Teutonic Order here.

merged · Jul 2, 2010

On the other hand, we could argue that the Templars at their height of power and prosperity were a much greater and wealthier organization to be reckoned with with far more and better organized resources in manpower, monies, and influence to draw upon. So if we move beyond a simple one-off battle to a much greater protracted conflict between the two orders, then the Teemplars might have the upper hand in terms of the bigger picture.

Salah · Jul 2, 2010

DIVUS IVLIVS said:
On the other hand, we could argue that the Templars at their height of power and prosperity were a much greater and wealthier organization to be reckoned with with far more and better organized resources in manpower, monies, and influence to draw upon. So if we move beyond a simple one-off battle to a much greater protracted conflict between the two orders, then the Teemplars might have the upper hand in terms of the bigger picture.

I would be inclined to agree with this. But the OP had me under the impression that this would just be a single battle. In a war, yes I think the superior resources and connections available to the Templars at that time would give them an upper hand.

Volkov · Jul 2, 2010

DIVUS IVLIVS said:
On the other hand, we could argue that the Templars at their height of power and prosperity were a much greater and wealthier organization to be reckoned with; with far more and better organized resources in manpower, monies, and influence to draw upon. So if we move beyond a simple one-off battle to a much greater protracted conflict between the two orders, then the Templars might have the upper hand in terms of the bigger picture.

The Teutonic knights were well known for taking on powers that should have defeated them in an straight out duel, such as Novgorod, Lithuania, the Prussian clans, Poland, and managing to pull a victory in the cases of Lithuania and Prussia. After the Templar knights are declared fair game by the papacy and the knights are let loose, the Teutonic knights can wear them down with their constant influx of new members to replace fallen ones and the use of christianized natives, much like how they eventually wore down Prussia and Lithuania. Though Lithuania bit the dust much more quickly than the Prussians, who stubbornly fought on for more than half a century.

But the Templars would have the initial advantage in money and manpower, and if they can work quickly enough before the Teutonic crusade can get into full motion, they can claim victory.

Belisarius · Jul 3, 2010

Salah ad-Din said:
The only way you could even tell them apart would be the colors of their shields (black and white vs. red and white)..

Not always, Templers sometimes used a black and white motif.

Belisarius · Jul 3, 2010

And Teutonic Knights, (see shield in top right)

Sargon of Akkad · Jul 4, 2010

All things being equal, I'd say it's too close to call. As Salah ad-Din said, they were virtually identical. There's nothing in it that seems could swing it either way, looking at an individual battle of equally-sized forces.

Sir Godfrey de Saint Omer · Nov 11, 2014

If the orders were to face off without aid from auxiliary armies; The Templars would win. The Teutonic Knights often had a influx of undisciplined adventure seekers, while the Templars required of their Knights full devotion and dedication at every level of life (I understand this was not the case with the lower levels of the order such as Sergeants). However, the Order of the Temple in Europe was far less active in battle and thus would have probably evened the fight a little with the Teutons.

kazeuma · Nov 12, 2014

I would give it to the Templars - they were never defeated by the early onset of winter when invading a country. The Teutonic Knights were defeated by the early onset of winter when invading Russia - the result was the Knights crossing a frozen over lake, a Russian prince firing cannons onto said lake, and sending them to the bottom.

Isoroku295 · Nov 12, 2014

kazeuma said:
I would give it to the Templars - they were never defeated by the early onset of winter when invading a country. The Teutonic Knights were defeated by the early onset of winter when invading Russia - the result was the Knights crossing a frozen over lake, a Russian prince firing cannons onto said lake, and sending them to the bottom.

The Templars operated mostly in the meditteranean region. How would winter have harmed them? You can't compare them by how they fair in one singular situation when only one of them has had any encounter on valuable note with that situation.

Sir Godfrey de Saint Omer · Nov 12, 2014

I would say the Teutons in the "Battle of Ice" experienced a situation no Templar likely had; being trapped on horseback on frozen ice and having to fight as it collapsed. The worst comparable situation for a Templar would be sinking sand. But this does pose a question, how would the Templars have faired in colder climates like Russia in the wintry months? We know the Teutonic Knights were in Palestine by the 13th Century, but does anyone know of Templars going to the Baltic regions?

Isoroku295 · Nov 12, 2014

Sir Godfrey de Saint Omer said:
I would say the Teutons in the "Battle of Ice" experienced a situation no Templar likely had; being trapped on horseback on frozen ice and having to fight as it collapsed. The worst comparable situation for a Templar would be sinking sand. But this does pose a question, how would the Templars have faired in colder climates like Russia in the wintry months? We know the Teutonic Knights were in Palestine by the 13th Century, but does anyone know of Templars going to the Baltic regions?

They would likely have faired the same. Again, how does this affect the outcome? The Templars never had any noticeable encounter with deep winter, so we can't know. But you can't compare them based off how one would fair in a single situation which is of little importance.

Sir Godfrey de Saint Omer · Nov 12, 2014

Oh contra, if the Templars and Teutonic Knights face each other in Palestine is likely it would be almost evenly matched, except for the aforementioned funds the Templars had. If the battle takes place in say Rus or Poland, and not many or any of the Templars are accustom to harsh winter weather, the Teutons would have the advantage. If one skirmish is the issue, then a protracted war in the Baltic would probably fall in favor of the Teutons for a time and if in Palestine it probably would end in stalemate or with Templars triumphing due to more experienced troops and again more revenue.

Isoroku295 · Nov 12, 2014

Sir Godfrey de Saint Omer said:
Oh contra, if the Templars and Teutonic Knights face each other in Palestine is likely it would be almost evenly matched, except for the aforementioned funds the Templars had. If the battle takes place in say Rus or Poland, and not many or any of the Templars are accustom to harsh winter weather, the Teutons would have the advantage. If one skirmish is the issue, then a protracted war in the Baltic would probably fall in favor of the Teutons for a time and if in Palestine it probably would end in stalemate or with Templars triumphing due to more experienced troops and again more revenue.

I simply don't see this being the case. I don't see the Templars being any less efficient then Teutons in the Baltics. An in any case we have no resources with which to just the Templars effectiveness in colder climates

Sir Godfrey de Saint Omer · Nov 12, 2014

It is a shame that the Templar Archives have been lost. Perhaps we could have gleamed some information about their effectiveness in wintry Outremer.

Isoroku295 · Nov 12, 2014

Agreed.

janusdviveidis · Nov 13, 2014

Teutonic order suffered more than one defeat in Baltic region, but usually by superior force or in unfavorable locations. I know less about Templars, but Teutonic knights were some of the best soldiers in Europe, "guest knights" of the order usually were not as good in war. In the east Teutonic order fought almost without stop for over 200 years, had very good and experienced commanders and soldiers. They often hired professional German infantry, this is advantage in my book when fighting army made only from horsemen if Templar's really had no infantry.

johnincornwall · Nov 13, 2014

They probably had the odd punch-up whilst both in the Holy Land. Rivalry and all that.

Otranto · Nov 13, 2014

DIVUS IVLIVS said:
On the other hand, we could argue that the Templars at their height of power and prosperity were a much greater and wealthier organization to be reckoned with with far more and better organized resources in manpower, monies, and influence to draw upon.

Actually as it turned out, when inventories were drawn during the Templar trial, the Templars were not very affluent and very much incapable of financing any defense of the Holy Land. King Philip's unjust persecution of the Templars must have turned out a sore disappointment, as he thought it would solve his own financial problems.

johnincornwall said:
They probably had the odd punch-up whilst both in the Holy Land. Rivalry and all that.

There was a bit of rivalry, but they never really saw each other as rivals. It was rather the crusaders who gave them a hard time. Unfamiliar with the political and military situation, the crusaders would often ignore the wise advise and policies of both the Templars and Hospitallers. Both the crusaders and the people back in Europe would criticize the military orders for being too reluctant to engage the Muslims, even accusing them of being sympathetic to them. But the reality was that the military orders were much more experienced and much better informed, and it was they and the Latin settlers, and not the crusaders, who would have to live and deal with the terrible consequences of bad crusader policies.

Search

Search

The Teutonic Knights vs The Knights Templar.

Volkov

Salah

merged

Salah

Volkov

Belisarius

Belisarius

Sargon of Akkad

Sir Godfrey de Saint Omer

kazeuma

Isoroku295

Sir Godfrey de Saint Omer

Isoroku295

Sir Godfrey de Saint Omer

Isoroku295

Sir Godfrey de Saint Omer

Isoroku295

janusdviveidis

johnincornwall

Otranto

More History Discussions

Recent History Discussions

Trending History Discussions