A letter,* written by Maffei in the year 1712, was sup pressed by papal authority, because that illustrious writer had succeeded in proving what he undertook, and had for ever put an end to all rational belief in the remote origin of orders of knighthood. The fable is, that Constantine the Great, after his defeat of Magentius, received from heaven an express command to institute an order of knighthood for the defence of the Christian religion ; and as this com mand was brought by an angel, who held in his hand a cross of gold, inscribed with the well known words EY V/KOZ, Constantine gave his knights the title of Equites gelici et Aureati. The only authority for the existence of Constantine's order is that of a pretended antique—a stone dug up at Rome, which gives, moreover, a different ac count of its origin. On it appears Constantine seated on his throne, giving a collar to several knights ; and the in scription relates, that the emperor, being cured of the le prosy, and baptised by Pope Sylvester, created, for the de fence of Christianity, Milites Equites aureatos. The le prosy and the baptism by Sylvester are now given up on all hands ; and the use of the word milites has no great re semblance to the language of the fourth century. The real founder of the Ordo Conetantinianus, was without doubt the Emperor Isaac Angelus Conmenus, who took the idea of it from the Franks, and in whose family the mastership so long remained.
The knights of St. George are an order of great anti quity, who have extended themselves from the east to the west. Their patron saint is now, however, supposed to be fabulous, as well as all their legends respecting their own very remote origin and exploits. St. George was, accord ing to them, a Christian saint, who suffered martyrdom in Persia during the reign of Diocletian. But he is common ly confounded with that famous Arian bishop, who was sub stituted in the room of Athanasius in the see of Alexan dria. There is every appearance that they are in fact the same person. Both were born in Cappadocia, and both were called George. George, taking possession of his bishopric, entered Alexandria armed cap-a-pee, and on horseback ; and the other is represented as combating the devil, in the shape of a dragon, on horseback also, and armed in the same fashion. George of Alexandria was massacred by the Pagans ; so he also has his claims to the character of a martyr. The entire silence of all histori ans is sufficient to negative all belief in the legends of the order of St. George. These are not even in concord with each other. Their patron has suffered death in almost every possible way, and in each way upon equally good au thority.
Carcere, cede, site, vinclis, fame, frigore, ji Confessus Christunt ducit ad astra caput.
A martyr so exemplary could hardly have been omitted by all the fathers. It is true that the Emperor John Can tacuzenus made, as is recorded by himself, some knights in the church of St. George rhaziKarcms.t But the very name of the saint is sufficient to prove that he had nothing in common with either George the champion of Cappado cia, or George the bishop of Alexandria. Notwithstand
ing, it appears, that the removal of some relics of this St. George the Candian to Italy, after the Franks had obtain ed possession of Constantinople, was the real origin of this order, the ensign of which has since become so popular. Of all these legends, we may well say— Sunt spina, tricrque et si quid rilius istis.
In order to discover the true origin of the orders of knighthood, we mutt come down to the time of the cru sades, during the 12th century. The piety of some mer chants of Amalfi, who traded in Judea, induced them to build a church in Jerusalem, which long after preserved its name of the Latin, originally conferred upon it on account of the language and rites of which its founders had made use. Near to this church they built an hospital, dedicated to St. John the Almoner, for the reception of the sick and the pilgrims who frequented the holy sepulchre. It is im possible to wish any better authority for these facts, than that of William of Tyre, who wrote in the same centu ry.4 He asserts, that, as the founders had been Latin merchants, the monastery still retained the name of the La tin. He asserts, what is now to our purpose, that these hospitallers, who had so small a beginning, became by de grees wealthy, and that their first step was to withdraw themselves from the jurisdiction of the abbot of the Mon asterium Latinum, till at length, their power increasing to a great degree, the Roman church emancipated them from the authority of the patriarch of Jerusalem. " Sic ergo de tam modico incrementum habentes prxdictx do mus fratres prius e jurisdictions Abbatis se subtraxerunt, deinde, in multiplicates divitius, per ceclesiam Romanum a manu et potcstate Domini Patriarchm sum emancipati." When the princes of the west entered the Holy Land, the hospitallers took up arms in their cause. Some re mained attached to the purposes of their institution, and took care of the sick. Persons afflicted with leprosy were admitted into their body, that they might undertake the care of others in a similar situation ; and the rule was, that the grand master himself should be a leper. But after all the sick persons in the hospital at Jerusalem had been massacred by the Infidels, the order was obliged to retire into Italy, and received from Innocent IV. a dispensation, absolving them from the obligations of their original oath, together with permission to elect a grand-master of full and vigorous health. Those who were inclined for Nv a r, distinguished themselves by actions of valour, which soon attracted great reputation to their order. Such was the origin of the knights of the order or St. John of Jerusa lem, the most ancient of all; who afterwards, under the names of knights of Rhodes, (which island they occupied from 1308 till A. D. 1522), more lately of Knights of Mal ta, were of such signal service in repressing the progress of the Ottoman arms.