It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Merovingian Kings usurped by Charlemagne and Pope Leo III

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2005 @ 10:58 AM
link   
I stumbled on to this researching another thread, and it has always tugged at me, like the story of Aleric the Goth does.

Interestingly enough, I Googled the phrase 'Merovingian Kings usurped by Charlemagne and the Pope', and came up with a great link touching on the subject of the bloodline of the Biblical 'seed of promise' from Jesus to the Merovingian Kings, and how, in one of the West's first major conspiracies, The Franks and Rome conspired to overthrow the bloodline of Christ. Is it true? I don't know. What do you think?

"From the 1st century, the Ring Lord culture fell into decline when various Roman emperors decreed that the Messianic heirs (the descendants of Jesus and his family) should be hunted down and put to the sword. This fact was recorded by eminent chroniclers such as Hegesippus, Africanus and Eusebius. Then, once the Roman Church was operative from the 4th century, the sacred dynasty was forever damned by the bishops.


It was this formal damnation which led to such events as the Albigensian Crusade in 1209 and the subsequent Catholic Inquisitions - for these brutal assaults by the papal machine were specifically directed against the upholders and champions of the original concept of Grail kingship, as against the style of pseudo-monarchy which had been implemented by the Bishops of Rome.


In practical terms, Church kingship has prevailed from the 8th century and has continued, through the ages, to the present day. But the fact is that, under strict terms of sovereign practice, all such monarchies and their affiliated governments have been invalid.


Church kingship is precisely that with which we have become so familiar. It applies to all monarchs who achieve their regnal positions by way of Church coronation by the Pope or other Christian leader (in Britain, by the Archbishop of Canterbury). Previously, in terms of true kingship, there was no necessity for coronation because kingly and queenly inheritance were always regarded as being 'in the blood'.


The change was made possible by way of a text called the Donation of Constantine - a document which led to just about every social injustice that has since been experienced in the Christian world. When the Donation made its first appearance in 751, it was alleged to have been written by Emperor Constantine some 400 years earlier, although strangely never produced in the interim. It was even dated and carried his supposed signature. What the document proclaimed was that the Emperor's appointed Pope was Christ's personally elected representative on Earth. He had the power to 'create' kings as his subordinates since his palace ranked above all the palaces in the world.


The provisions of the Donation were enacted by the Vatican, whereupon the Merovingian Kings of the Grail bloodline in Gaul were deposed and a whole new puppet-dynasty was supplemented by way of a family of hitherto mayors. They were dubbed Carolingians and their only king of any significance was the legendary Charlemagne. By way of this strategy, the whole nature of monarchy changed from being an office of community guardianship to one of absolute rule and, by virtue of this monumental change, the long-standing code of princely service was forsaken as European kings became servants of the Church instead of being servants of the people."

Was the sacred bloodline of Jesus through the Messianic Kings, the Merovingians, deliberately usurped by Charlemagne's father Pupin and the Vatican? Was Rome so dedicated to wiping out the heirs of Christ (did they even exist?) that it fomented a conspiracy within the Roman Empire and the RCC over centuries to accomplish its nefarious task? Are the repercussions of that betrayal still echoing around the world today?

What of the sacred geometry and the one inch to twenty-five mile scale (that can only be achieved through aerial survey) of the layout of Reinnes, France, and its surroundings? The Prime Meridian? Its just one fanciful question after another.

The Ancient Legacy of the Ring and the Grail

STRUGGLE BETWEEN SWORD AND SEE




[edit on 4-5-2005 by Icarus Rising]




posted on May, 4 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Offhand I'd say it was Medieval Bardic Legendry. There's no real evidence of a "messianic lineage" other than in bardic tales. And I think we should go check the references, because I think they're just a tad suspect (or that someone's rewording them to their own meaning and not to what they would have meant to a person of that time.)

For the rest of you, the Merovingians are interesting... these are the first kings of France (500-600 AD) and as I recall, they sort of put themselves out of power as local rule supplanted the need for empire rule:
www.ac.wwu.edu...



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Thanks for the perspective and the informed reply. I was curious about source credentials, as well. It also may be true that the truth too fantastic to become history becomes myth and legend.....

What about sacred geometry and the one inch to twenty-five mile map ratio, and its purported link to the layout of Reinnes, France, and the Prime Meridian? Any comments on that?



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 04:25 PM
link   
For the record, I thought the second link was good -- it matched what I (vaguely) knew of the period. It's the "legacy of the ring and the grail" that I have problems with.


Originally posted by Icarus Rising
Thanks for the perspective and the informed reply. I was curious about source credentials, as well. It also may be true that the truth too fantastic to become history becomes myth and legend.....


Well, no. It's that on the Internet you can make up whatever you like for people to read. You don't actually have to study the subject. So, on the Ring&Grail (R&G) link, they start out with a huge whopping error:

The ring wasn't the symbol of the king's authority... the SEAL was. There are lots and lots of those, and they are made generally out of stone though fired clay was used as well (and other substances.) Gold didn't carve that well and if you kept mushing it onto things, it lost its shape.

No golden seal rings. Sorry. Not until they began annealing gold with other metals.

Check the Enumma Elish for yourself -- there is no ruling council of nine Annunakis and the Annunanki didn't have "rings of power."

Someone's confusing mythology with fiction.

There are older petroglyphs and pictographs around, but the oldest confirmed alphabet is Sumerian. And as far as I can tell, Julius Africanus reported that Jesus’ relatives had spread the gospel everywhere starting from the Jewish villages of Nazareth and Cochaba -- but didn't exactly say they were the DESCENDANTS of Jesus. Just relatives. Like cousins, or aunts, or second cousins (families in those days were large and you were related to most of the people in your home village.)

There's no concerted effort to wipe out these villages reported anywhere.

The rest of the material is Hungarian apologist material, and should be taken with a grain of salt. There's some truth in there, but there's also some magnification of things that weren't that significant or important to make the culture itself appear to be more prominent.



What about sacred geometry and the one inch to twenty-five mile map ratio, and its purported link to the layout of Reinnes, France, and the Prime Meridian? Any comments on that?


??

I think I missed that.

But sacred geometry is a principle that goes back to Greek times and got rather bizarre (and had nothing to do with Jesus or the Merovingians.) I'm not sure why one inch to 25 miles should be terribly significant other than it makes the map fit on the size paper they had.

And the meridian was moved all over the place:
gpsinformation.net...

I think it finally was set in stone/concrete in 1851 or so, which is long after that period of time.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Byrd,

Granted, that first link does go pretty far afield, and there is no historical link between Jesus and the Merovingians.

The sacred geometry thing got in there because of whatever it was Berenger Sauniere found on the parchments in the Gothic pillar at Rennes le Chateau in the late 1800's that may have had a bearing on the link between Jesus and the Merovingians. I later learned that the 1:25 ratio and the Prime Meridian were somehow fixed in the geography of the area, as determined by sacred geometry. I'm reaching to connect alot of things here, but most good conspiracy theories do, don't they?

The Meridian in the Mountains at Rennes-le-Chateau

Thanks for your interest and the great information you are providing me.





posted on May, 5 2005 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Charlemagne was declared Emperor of the Western Empire on Christmas Day 800ad after a deal between Byzantium and the Pope.

However his father Pippin III became king by usurping the Merovingians. Charlemagne had nothing to do with it, since he was about seven at the time.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 08:28 AM
link   
Yes, but in my opinion the deal wasn't officially sealed until Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne Emperor in a bid to launch Church kingship, and possibly fulfill the long Roman quest to eliminate the perceived threat to the RCC of the bloodline of Jesus in the Merovingian Kings.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Charlemagne was declared Emperor as part of a deal between the Orthodox (Byzantine) and Catholic (Roman) churches.
Having seens Charlemagnes success in creating a vast empire (France, Germany, N. Spain and big chunks of the Balkans) Byzantium feared an invasion by this apparant military genius and so sued for peace.

The Romans were Chrisitian by the end, why would they kill any possible bloodlines of Jesus? What do they gain?



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 08:56 AM
link   
The Roman Empire became the Holy Roman Empire became the Holy Roman Catholic Church, with the Pope taking over for Emperor. Charlemagne was the military force of the day that was needed to consolidate their power in the west. The Merovingians were the threat, and if the claims of descent from Jesus are true, an even greater threat to expose the lies that had already become a part of RCC dogma. That the resurrected Jesus returned to earth and sired a race of kings would certainly be something the RCC would want suppressed and eliminated. Again, my opinion, and there are some big IFs in there. The Romans effectively appropriated Christianity at the time in order to create a worldwide empire of citizens that were members of the church, not the state.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 09:06 AM
link   
Sorry, but you have the history of the Holy Roman Empire wrong.

The empire emerged as a result of several centuries of warfare in the Franksih empire. It was named because the Emperor was to be appointed by the Church. However this was not the case, instead the emperor was voted in by royalty from the various member states.

In effect the Emperor was a figurehead and the Empire a simple way of grouping a large number of small states together.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 09:23 AM
link   
Cost Versus Benefit Analysis


Originally posted by Uncle Joe
The Romans were Chrisitian by the end, why would they kill any possible bloodlines of Jesus? What do they gain?

Perhaps the more apt question would be: What would they lose if they did not?

Despite being a devout Jew of advanced age (30 was pretty old back then), Jesus is rumored to have never married, even though not doing so was (and is) frowned upon in Judaism, particularly if he was a rabbi.

If Jesus was married, and had children, that opens up quite a few cans of worms for people holding positions of power who were (and are, for that matter) unwilling to part with it.

I don't know if this "Merovingians were descendents of Jesus" business has any merit one way or the other.

But I know for a fact that church leaders, like all leaders, covet power.

The proof of that lies in their own actions: they openly seek power and guard it jealously.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 10:30 AM
link   
I may have simplified the process somewhat as to the transition from Roman Empire to RCC, but the outcome is still there for all to see. Of course it took a while (several hundred years) for the church to consolidate its power, and there were plenty of people at the time, regardless of the Holy blood in the Merovingian line angle, who could see what was going on, and fought like heck to maintain succession by blood based on stewardship of the people.

The outcome of the success of the RCC's efforts at the time, and the shift in ruling technique from stewardship of the people to exploitation of the people by force, can be seen all around us today. That is why this is such a crucial turning point in history to recognize, a lynchpin holding in place the lopsided world of today.





posted on May, 6 2005 @ 08:29 AM
link   
You still seem to think that the HRE and the RCC are the same thing when thry are not. There is no major link between the two, just tbe names.



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 10:32 AM
link   
The HRE and the RCC are not the same thing, and I never said they were. They appear, historically, to have the same objective, though. Not power to the people, but power over the people. All for the people's own good, they assure themselves, as they prey on the weak and stuff their pockets with their ill-gotten gains.

But what about the sacred geometry in the layout of Rennes, France? Is the connection there to Berenger Sauniere and the 'pillar parchments' more than a coincidence, or of any consequence at all?



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 12:00 PM
link   

From the 1st century, the Ring Lord culture fell into decline when various Roman emperors decreed that the Messianic heirs (the descendants of Jesus and his family) should be hunted down and put to the sword

Yes, i read the davinci code too


www.chronique.com...
The greatest of medieval kings was born in 742, at a place unknown. He was of German blood and speech, and shared some characteristics of his people- strength of body, courage of spirit, pride of race, and a crude simplicity many centuries apart from the urbane polish of the modern French. He had little book learning; read only a few books- but good ones; tried in his old age to learn writing, but never quite succeeded; yet he could speak old Teutonic and literary Latin, and understood Greek.

In 771 Carloman II died, and Charles at twenty-nine became sole king. Two years later he received from Pope Hadrian II an urgent appeal for aid against the Lombard Desiderius, who was invading the papal states. Charlemagne besieged and took Pavia, assumed the crown of Lombardy, confirmed the Donation of Pepin, and accepted the role of protector of the Church in all her temporal powers.

Returning to his capital at Aachen, he began a series of fifty-three campaigns- nearly all led in person- designed to round out his empire by conquering and Christianizing Bavaria and Saxony, destroying the troublesome Avars, shielding Italy from the raiding Saracens, and strengthening the defenses of Francia against the expanding Moors of Spain. The Saxons on his eastern frontier were pagans; they had burned down a Christian church, and made occasional incursions into Gaul; these reasons sufficed Charlemagne for eighteen campaigns (772-804), waged with untiring ferocity on both sides. Charles gave the conquered Saxons a choice between baptism and death, and had 4500 Saxon rebels beheaded in one day; after which he proceeded to Thionville to celebrate the nativity of Christ.



www.fordham.edu...

. The Merovingian Family

The Merovingian family, from which the Franks used to choose their kings, is commonly said to have lasted until the time of Childeric [III, 743-752] who was deposed, shaved, and thrust into the cloister by command of the Roman Pontiff Stephen [II (or III) 752-757]. But although, to all outward appearance, it ended with him, it had long since been devoid of vital strength, and conspicuous only from bearing the empty epithet Royal; the real power and authority in the kingdom lay in the hands of the chief officer of the court, the so-called Mayor of the Palace, and he was at the head of affairs. There was nothing left the King to do but to be content with his name of King, his flowing hair, and long beard, to sit on his throne and play the ruler, to give ear to the ambassadors that came from all quarters, and to dismiss them, as if on his own responsibility, in words that were, in fact, suggested to him, or even imposed upon him. He had nothing that he could call his own beyond this vain title of King and the precarious support allowed by the Mayor of the Palace in his discretion, except a single country seat, that brought him but a very small income. There was a dwelling house upon this, and a small number of servants attached to it, sufficient to perform the necessary offices. When he had to go abroad, he used to ride in a cart, drawn by a yoke of oxen driven, peasant-fashion, by a Ploughman; he rode in this way to the palace and to the general assembly of the people, that met once a year for the welfare of the kingdom, and he returned him in like manner. The Mayor of the Palace took charge of the government and of everything that had to be planned or executed at home or abroad. [...]
Pepin, however, was raised by decree of the Roman pontiff, from the rank of Mayor of the Palace to that of King, and ruled alone over the Franks for fifteen years or more

Charlemagne did not depose the merovingians. They were ineffectual. When europe was threatened by islamic domination, it was not the merovingians who stoped them it was the Hammer at Poitiers, for example.


It was this formal damnation which led to such events as the Albigensian Crusade in 1209

Thats very far removed from the time of charlemagne.


The provisions of the Donation were enacted by the Vatican, whereupon the Merovingian Kings of the Grail bloodline in Gaul

The merovingians were not descendants of jesus. The whole grail bit wasn't even somethign people at the time were concerned with. The merovingians don't claim this. The merovingians were paganistic germans that had invaded 'france'.
en.wikipedia.org...

also

en.wikipedia.org...
By the 7th century, the kings ceased to wield effective political authority and had become symbolic figures; they began to allot more and more day-to-day administration to a powerful official in their household called the maior domo or major-domo. This Latin title literally translates to "the greater one of the house"; the usual English translation is Mayor of the Palace, although this official was not a mayor in the modern sense of the word. The office of Mayor of the Palace itself became hereditary in the Carolingian family. Soon the Mayors were the real military and political leaders of the Frankish kingdom. This fact became manifest in 732

The RCC didn't even exist at the time of the early merovingians. Things like the Donnation were, obviously, political frauds used to extend temporal power. I don't see why the merovingians are enemies of the RCC at this point.



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Icarus Rising
The Roman Empire became the Holy Roman Empire became the Holy Roman Catholic Church, with the Pope taking over for Emperor.

Thjis is not correct tho. The Roman empire split into two, western empire with the capital at ravenna, and an eastern empire with the capital in constantinople (formerlly byzantium, currently Istanbul). The western empire went thru some really hard times. The state came to be run by germanic BTO's within the empire, like Stilicho. Eventually, the emperor Romulus Augustulus was deposed, and no more roman emperors were put into place. Italy itself came to be completely ruled by German invaders, the Langobardi tribe (long beards. Coincidentally, italy, for years was then known as langobardia, and currently, the northern italian state of Lombardy carries the name). Anyway, more germans invaded old gaul, and in particular the various tribes called 'the franks' came to real power. The merovingians were a group that dominated their own frankish subtribe and was eventually able to dominate the other frankish tribes and surrounding areas. Somewhere along the way they became christians. Also, somewhere along the way, the universal christian church schismed, and the former Archibishop in itally became the Pope. Meanwhile, the merovingians deteriorated, with their court officers becoming more important, and eventually those officers were the real power, in all but name. Then, they took the name also. Then, charlemagne comes along, and the papal states are part of his dominion/charge. The papacy annoints him (apparently with the consent of the church in byzantium, where there was a roman emperor, and the people called themselves 'rhomanoi' (or sum such) until 1452) as an emperor, and this leads to the idea of a holy Roman empire (the subject of voltairs great statement, 'which was neither holy nor roman nor an empire'). The Roman Catholic Church, was a seperate body. When the Holy Roman Empire finally fell, hundreds of years later, the 'church' didn't assume the reigns.
Also, I don't think it requires the donation of constantine for the church, any church, to annoint kings.



The Merovingians were the threat, and if the claims of descent from Jesus are true, an even greater threat to expose the lies that had already become a part of RCC dogma.

Why would the merovingians be a threat.


That the resurrected Jesus returned to earth and sired a race of kings would certainly be something the RCC would want suppressed and eliminated.

The story is that jesus wasn't resurrected, that he died, that he was just a guru, and that he had children, who magically ended up in france, as kings of a group of germans. I, personally, think its ludicrous to suggest that the church knew this, but decided to coverit up anyway and make up this 'fake' christianity, (along with the orthodox church), and that all the christian communities did so too, and everyone just 'forgot' about the whole thing unitl hundreds of years later.



The Romans effectively appropriated Christianity at the time in order to create a worldwide empire of citizens that were members of the church, not the state.

Why would the romans want to do this in the first palce? The great powers of the time weren't the churches, the church had to appeal to charlemagne and other rulers to protect them. If the romans, in their empire, wanted to assume control, they'd've' gotten control of the barbarians (which they did, to a degree), not make up a christianity, and then, hundreds of years later, split it up into an orthodox and catholic church.



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Really a well thought out and presented reply. I'm not going to argue it, either. My entire intent in starting this thread was to gain insight and perspective on this transition and the Merovingians role in it. I had heard they were in contact with and influenced by the Nordics, that they could heal by the laying on of hands, and that they had other paranormal and psychic powers. I find it fascinating how myth and legend intertwine with history to focus my attention on different aspects of the past. Thanks for the great input. I hope others have more to add.



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Icarus Rising
Really a well thought out and presented reply. I'm not going to argue it, either. My entire intent in starting this thread was to gain insight and perspective on this transition and the Merovingians role in it.

A worthy intention and an interesting thread because of it!


I had heard they were in contact with and influenced by the Nordics, that they could heal by the laying on of hands, and that they had other paranormal and psychic powers.

I wouldn't give the slightest ounce of creedence to reports like that. The merovingians apparenlty are the subject of speculation and conspiracy mongering, probably because of the sources the Dan Brown used in writting the Davinci code.



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Ok.

Any thoughts on the purported sacred geometry of the Rennes region, and any connection to Berenger Sauniere and the 'pillar parchments'?

Hey, I really appreciate you sharing your knowledge, Nygdan.





posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 02:06 PM
link   
dear fellows,

i am reading a manuscript at the moment on early holly architecture at that time and its benefits. there is definitely a co-relation beetween this and the secret of Rennes le chateau.

i am speaking seriously and i do not care much about the da vinci code fuss.

this is highly intereting if you complement these with I Ching and Feng shui...i wish i could have mathusalem time....;-)

anyone into this feel free to share with me



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join