A question for you history buffs.....is it true Jacque de Molay as he was burning at the stake gave an order for the Templars to go underground , and then put a curse on King Phillip for 13 generations?

[edit on 16-7-2004 by ANTONIO]

As he was burning to death (actually roasting, they did not have the flames up high so it was more painful and took longer) it is SAID that he cursed Prince Phillip and the Pope, calling them to account before the throne of grace before the year was out... and both men died before the year was out.

I don't believe in magic, but I do believe in justice.

By the time Jacques Demolay was immolated, the Templars had been disbanded for over two years and already in hiding, so it is unlikely that he gave orders that would be redundant.

There were three persons cursed by Jacques de Molay: King Philip IV, his advisor Guillaume de Nogaret, and Pope Clement V. Here is what Jacques de Molay allegedly said:

"Pope Clement! Knight Guillaume de Nogaret! King Philip! I summon you to appear before the year is out before the tribunal of God! Cursed, you will be cursed and so will your families for 13 generations to come!"

Pope Clement V died 40 days after the execution.
Guillaume de Nogaret died a month after the Pope, apparently poisoned.
King Philip of France died before the year was out, on November 29, 1314, of a massive stroke - he was 46.

Philip IV's three sons all reigned and died young without descendants. The confusion surrounding their succession gave way to the Hundred Year War (hence the 13 generations).

btw... two books to read if you want to know more about this...

Maurice Druon's "Les Rois Maudits" (The Cursed Kings), a novel beginning with the execution of de Molay and ending with the Hundred Year War.

Umberto Eco's "Foucault's Pendulum", where the protagonist tries to unearth the secret of the Templars.

Nogaret was the King Phillips advisor for lack of better words correct?

that seems to be correct...

Grand Master DeMolay was tortured (he was an old man at the time) and confessed to whatever crime was put before him. Two years later, Prince Phillip decided to put the old warrior on display (a serious mistake), whereupon DeMolay recanted the "confessions" and noted the tortures he had been subjected to... he was dragged down, and later roasted to death... a horrible death.

as i recall the time period from the arrests and beginning of torture to
his public burning was 7 years. from the arrests Oct 13, 1307 to borning
Mar. 1314.

I was working from memory. You are correct, it was seven years.

So this even more confirms my point, that it was unlikely he would give commands for the templars to run and hide, seven years after his arrest...

DeMolay was not executed for the crimes he confessed to. He was executed for recanting the confession. That was a worse crime than the others in the thinking of that era.

you are right TD , I believe any orders he gave in this reguard would have
been given at the same time that he called in all the orders writings.

there is also the story that he gave orders not to resist but also not to reveal.

I just finished a book about the Templars, by the same author that wrote Born In Blood. I found it to be a very enjoyable read, although I have been told that his other book has been debunked, I don't know how accurate the one I just read is, but I just read the final chapters of how the end went down last night and all I can say is "Wow".

According to Mr. Robinson, the torture that some the other Templars were put through (always in plain view of several other brothers, who would in turn take the horrific stories back to the dungeons) was downright hideous. Hot irons were used to sear their skin right off - in fact several Templars had their feet burned completely off, and later were presented carrying bags of blackened bones that had fallen out of their feet as they burned. Jaques de Molay was over 70 at the time. He cofessed to denying Christ, spitting on or alongside the Cross, that the brothers were absolved of their sins by their own officers rather than priests, among other heretical acts such as worshipping idols because he was sure that the torture would kill him in his old age, and he could not fight for the honor of his order if he was dead.

De Molay was convinced that no king had authority to sieze men or properties from the Templars, as they were only answerable to the pope himself. He made it known that he wished to plead the Templars case directly to the pope. King Philip of France did not see it that way. He was in serious debt to the Templars and had many greedy and evil reasons to bring them down. The suppression and torture of the Templars was most extensive and brutal in France. Phillip (by way of an archbishop he had installed) condemned most of the Templars who were set to testify in defense of the order to either life in prison, or death. The ones that weren't killed were so afraid that instead of putting up a defense, most of them only confirmed their confessions, in the hope that they would receive mercy.

Anyway, I said all that to say this: When the time finally came, four Templar officers whose judgement and sentencing the pope had reserved to be decided himself stood on a huge platform built in front of the cathedral of Notre Dame, Where everyone from the clergy to the nobles to the commoners could see them. They were Jaques de Molay, Goeffrey de Charnay, the preceptor of Normandy; Geoffrey de Gonneville, preceptor of Poitou and Aquitaine; and Hugh de Peraud, a former treasurer who had always cooperated with King Philip's officers.

They were all in plain view of everyone as the charges against them were read, and the expectant crowd waited to hear the confessions for themselves, alot of them hiving a hard time believing these warrior monks were actually guilty of heresy. When the time came, de Molay siezed the moment, and his place in history as well. He said:

"I think it only right that at so solemn a moment, when my life has so little time to run, I should reveal the deception which has been practiced and speak up for the truth. Before heaven and earth and all of you here as my witnesses, I admit that I am guilty of the grossest iniquity. But the iniquity is that I have lied in admitting the disgusting charges laid against the Order. I declare, and I must declare, that the Order is innocent. It's purity and saintliness are beyond question. I have indeed confessed that the Order is guilty, but I have done so only to save myself from terrible tortures by saying what my enemies wished me to say. Other knights who have recanted their confessions have been led to the stake, yet the thought of dying is not so awful that I shall confess foul crimes which have never been committed. Life is offered to me, but at the price of infamy. At such a price, life is not worth having. I do not grieve that I must die if life can be bought only by piling one lie upon another."

Geoffrey de Charnay, no doubt inspired by his grand master, followed suit and retracted his confession, shouting out the innocence of the order. As you can imagine, the king was furious, and the two men were to be put to death immediately. They took the two knights to the island of du Palais, in the Seine river to be burned alive. They built the fires out of specially cured wood and charcoal, so that they would burn low and very hot. The two knights were literally roasted from the ground up. As he was burning, de Molay cursed Philip IV and pope Clement V to meet him within the year before the throne of God to answer for their crime. The pope died within a month, and King Philip followed, seven months later.


I apologize that this post is so long, but I just felt like I had to post it, because these men were of the most honorable and respectable types in history. They were as fierce in battle as in their devotion to God, and I just think it is a very inspiring story.

The information above comes from the book Dungeon, Fire, and Sword: The Knights Templar in the Crusades by John J. Robinson. It is a great read, I strongly recommend it to anyone interested in Templar history. The above words are my own, but the de Molay quote is straight from the book.

BTW, according to this book, the suppression and arrest of the Templars started on Friday the 13 of October, 1307, and de Molay was burned at the stake on March 18, 1314. Not quite seven years.

I have not read any convincing refutation of Pilgrim's Path or Born in Blood, and sincerely believe that Masonry today is the last remnants of the Knights Templar.

Jacque DeMolay's ordeal is indeed an inspirational example of honor and integrity... to the grave.

Quite good info put fourth here, as far as Born in Blood being debunked a Mason on this board told me that the author himself debunked his own book in an article in Scottish rite journal ......he gave me the website and i looked through all the back issues and could not find it . I will keep on looking though.

Originally posted by theron dunn
I was working from memory. You are correct, it was seven years.

So this even more confirms my point, that it was unlikely he would give commands for the templars to run and hide, seven years after his arrest...

He didn't have to. Those that weren't picked up in the initial sweep, hid anyway. Evidence points to them fleeing to the UK, Portugal and Switzerland. The Templar navy disappeared completely.
You must remember that Philip's operation against the Templars was pretty thorough in France. His forces had already prefected the technique with a roundup of the Jews a few years earlier.

True, it was very thorough, but many templars were not in France, and found shelter against the pope's edicts. Many that were IN France on that infamous Friday, October the 13th also managed to escape in the Templar Fleet, which was mysteriously missing.

Phillipe also thought he was going to capture the riches of the Templars when he had them all arrested, but was mystified to find all their gold and silver missing (not to hard to understand, if you have an understanding of banking, which the Templars did... they lent out the gold and silver...)

Some Templars surrendered and joined other orders, among them the Hospitalers of St. John, many of course were arrested and tortured. Some confessed to avoid or stop torture and were spared, many were killed.

John Robinson was NOT a mason when he wrote the first two books, but later became a mason. It is my understanding that he never recanted his positions, but was an ardent defender of masonry on talk shows and various other venues.

I have always felt that it was more likely that the Masonic Order evolved
from the Templar order than from a craft guild. much of what i have read of
the history just does not seem to fit the needs of craft workers but does
fugitives from church and state, which prior to and even for many years following
the reformation were virtually the same.

i also think that the possibility of the two groups comming together is very possible.

i ahve a question for those here who are more knowledgeable in Masonic History than I.

if we accept that the Order of The Temple was made up of several layers, IE:
the Knights , those who would serve the knights ( squires for lack of a better term) the foot soldiers, priests/clerks/, and the various craftsmen such as armourers,tanners,builders, etc., many of whom simply melted back into society after the arrests. Could these have provided the basis for a system
similar to the underground railroad of the civil war ? a place where after
relative safety was gained the fleeing knights could reenter society by joining
the ranks of craftsmen such as masons and indeed becomming Master Masons, and providing a safe haven as it were over the next 4 hunderd years for freethinkers and others who opposed the "establishment" ?

Indeed, the ordeal in France was the worst of all the crusader states, but I believe Philip actaully did get his hands on the Templar wealth that was in France. His operation was swift, and it allowed no time to escape with the gold and whatnot. However, King Edward II of England was quite enamored with the Templars, he had been surrounded by them all his life. Upon receiving letters from Philip IV, he wrote letters himself to the pope as well as the Christian kings stressing his belief that the Templars were innocent. He had refused to take any action up to that point. The Templars were his friends, they had willingly loaned him facilities in London and they had fought alongside him in his father's campaigns against William Wallace and the Scots.

Then came the papal bull Pastoralis preeminentae on December 15, 1307. Stating to the Christian kings that all Templars in their territories were to be siezed and tortured to get confessions out of them. Edward now had to act on direct orders from the pope, but he waited until January 7, giving the Templars three weeks to hide out and to gather their gold and silver and escape. The English soldiers, expecting to find a fortune found a remnants of a treasure that added up to a measly 200 pounds. Legend has it that the treasure was smuggled out in a wagonload of hay, but there is no documentation to back up that claim.

Philip, on the other hand was able to sieze any portable items of value when he had the Templars holdings searched. These included chests of gold and silver coins, all the gold and silver religious objects from the altars, the most famous of which was the gold jewel covered reliquary that contained the Templars' own splinter of the True Cross. Guards were left to watch over other valuables, such as furniture, ornamental hangings, weapons, and horses, as the property was in the hands of Philip, he could take what he wanted when he wanted. No need to hurry, it's not like they (the Templars) were coming back for it!

Also it is worthy to note that the Templars were found innocent in Germany, Cyprus, Spain, and Portugal. In England they were found guilty (by pressure on the king from the pope, of course) but had recieved from king Edward was was, for the time period, a slap on the wrist.

[edit on 7/25/04 by The Axeman]

Originally posted by stalkingwolf
I have always felt that it was more likely that the Masonic Order evolved
from the Templar order than from a craft guild. much of what i have read of
the history just does not seem to fit the needs of craft workers but does
fugitives from church and state, which prior to and even for many years following
the reformation were virtually the same.

i also think that the possibility of the two groups comming together is very possible.

i ahve a question for those here who are more knowledgeable in Masonic History than I.

if we accept that the Order of The Temple was made up of several layers, IE:
the Knights , those who would serve the knights ( squires for lack of a better term) the foot soldiers, priests/clerks/, and the various craftsmen such as armourers,tanners,builders, etc., many of whom simply melted back into society after the arrests. Could these have provided the basis for a system
similar to the underground railroad of the civil war ? a place where after
relative safety was gained the fleeing knights could reenter society by joining
the ranks of craftsmen such as masons and indeed becomming Master Masons, and providing a safe haven as it were over the next 4 hunderd years for freethinkers and others who opposed the "establishment" ?

From what I have read, most of the men in service positions like the ones you stated were given the chance to confess, as most of them did for fear of torture, and then they were given "slaps on the wrist" as well. Perhaps they did a little time in jail, paid a small pentance to the church and were released. I think you could be onto something with your theory there. I think it is entirely possible that the footsoldiers, smithies, etc. or at least their descendants could have had a hand in bringing about Freemasonry, but that is TOTAL speculation on my part. I haven't read anything yet that points to that. I bet ML would have a comment to add here.

but I believe Philip actaully did get his hands on the Templar wealth that was in France. His operation was swift, and it allowed no time to escape with the gold and whatnot.

there is evidence that the Order was warned that a "great catastrophe" was
emminent. there is also the various versions of the legend that says the treasure of the Paris Temple ( the main continental bank of the order) was
removed by cart and loaded on ships of the templar fleet at La Rochelle, and taken to Scotland.

The Templar fleet ( around 18 vessels) to this day has not ever been found.
one theory is that the maritime Templars escaping with the fleet took those
vessels and became Pirates and Corsairs flying what became the Jolly Roger
which as i understand it is very similiar to the battle flag used by the Templar fleet.

I bet ML would have a comment to add here

as will several others more knowledgable than i about masonic history. I hope.