and the Knights Templar
The few images that exist from the 13th century are very interesting indeed and give a clue as to the reason behind it.
Above image is attributed to be Charlemagne, but a few parts of the image are odd and very interesting to note.
1. The dress looks rather Slavic and not European.
2. Also the beards look Slavic
3. Charlemagne does not wear a crown but a Tiara.
4. The picture of the Roman Eagle looks both East and Westward.
5. The party met by Charlemagne are kings and one of them appears to be Asian.
The following painting made by Durer claims to come close to Charlemagne's real appearance. Again, notice the Eagle looking Eastward.
If the picture is from the 14th century it may very well in fact be a painting later attributed to Charlemagne.
The resemblance with another image, which many researchers have dated to this period, but is placed further back in history is the following:
The features are Slavic also. The features can be enhanced somewhat giving a better result. The cloth is ultimately tied up to the Knights Templar, because it was found in possession of descendants of one of the Knights: Geoffrey the Charny, who died at the battle of Poitiers in 1356. But only in 1390 it is exposed to the public. Although the local bishop wrote to the then anti pope Clements VII that it was a fake, it was kept in the region until 1578 when it was moved to Turin.
Not without co-incidence it ended up in the Cathedral of John the Baptist.
The Knights Templar were the first order to be exempted and subject to the Pope only. In 1307 the order was accused of heresy:
"when professing, the brothers were required to deny Christ, to spit on the Cross, and to place three 'obscene kisses' on the lower spine, the navel and the mouth; they were obliged to indulge in carnal relations with other members of the order, if requested; and finally they wore a small belt which had been consecrated by touching a strange idol, with looked like a human head with a long beard."
Strange that such an image was found in the possession of one of the last Knights, who had been in a position to salvage exactly such an image. The charges are to be spurious though considering the motives of Philip II.
There is an other record of professing loyalty in front of an image. When the Jochids under Baatu Khan and his general Subutai subdued the Russian princes they were required to prostrate themselves in front of an image of Genghis Khan.
"When Michael of Chernigov arrived 'he was summoned before Batu and was made to pass between two fires and ordered to prostrate himself before the tablets of Genghis Khan. Michael replied that he did not object to do obeisance to Batu himself but to adore images of dead man was repugnant. As he persisted in his refusal, Batu ordered him to death."
But the one has nothing to do with the other. Apart from Batu Khan having to send away Buri and Guyuk sons of Ogedai Khan, the great Khan at that occasion, because they made fun of him being 'an old woman with a beard' (with Slavic features). Buri as well as Chagatai, who always had objected to the lineage of Jochi, were almost executed, but spared and sent to the far east wing of the empire (Siberia), never playing a role again. But Guyuk was given a second change. In the end though only the lineages of Jochi and Tolui featured in later history and their wives were sisters.
In fact the family of Genghis Khan had for generations married women of Turkic/Tartar descent. Even the wives of Genghis as well as Jochi and Tolui were of that descent. They had done so from the generation of Alan Gua, widow of Dobu Mergen. Her son Bodonchar Munhag was claimed to be conceived miraculously, which is why he is the only person in Genghis Khan's ancestry whose mother is named instead of his father.
That means for 11 generations this family has married women of Slavic descent.
The Turkic/tartar family of the Uruankhi brought their sons Subutai and Jelma at an early age to the family of Genghis Khan, which is odd, because
Hoelan - also as a widow - did not have any appearance of Royalty and Power at the time. To the contrary, the family was almost casst out and only with help from the regions of the Caucasus helped in its ascendancy to power. The brother became the power behind the Khans and were part of a brotherhood of 9 generals. The similarity with the Knights Templar is striking.
These families from the Caucasus, many of which settled in Western Europe after the Mongol Conquest developed into wealthy banker dynasties.
William of Orange's early ancestor Guilaume de Gelone came with Charlemagne and received territory in France as a liege.
But Charlemagne is only a fathom figure placed in European history at a later date to conceal the origins of European nobility, but maintain the legacy.
We also must not forget that the financial elite at the time were the Knights Templar. Admittedly this most powerful military force at the time, did very poorly against the Monguls. But admittedly also, there hardly was a war in Europe. At the moment of victory allegedly the Monguls backed out. The knights of Uryankhi Subutai and Jelme stayed behind, Subutai with a liege in Scotland and Jelme in France.
William of Ruysbroeck in his account of the Mongols in fact says it in his own words. After explaining that the Khans do what they are told by a group of diviners, who always live opposite their courts:
They predict lucky and unlucky days for the undertaking of all affairs; and so it is that they never assemble an army nor begin a war without their assent, and long since (the Mo'al) would have gone back to Hungary, but the diviners will not allow it.
The mongols had fulfilled their purpose. Create one domain with free trade, religious tolerance and huge technological and civil advancements. For the common man, who lived virtually as slaves bound to a local lord, this meant a huge step ahead. Not necessarily so for the local noblemen, who didn't keep up with the times. Virtually the whole nobility in a period of 200 hundred years was replaced with new families. It became suddenly very fashionable amongst nobility to have Slavic descent.
All they had to do now was to erase their tracks. And here we have the main motive for the demise of the Knights Templar. Philip II was a major force in the rewriting of European history. Nationhood came up and France needed a convincing local history, with roots well beyond.
Which explains why the key facts surrounding Charlemagne are so similar to those of Genghis Khan.