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.

 

Templars

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 08:31 AM
link   
Heres a nice link about the Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem.

Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem
As you can see there are some parallels between the two Orders. The Templars used a White Surcoat with a Eight pointed Red Cross, and the Knights of malta wore a Black Surcoat with White eight pointed Cross for the non military wing or a Red one with a White eight pointed cross for the Knights themselves. Prob just a coincidence but an interesting one.

Also they some had mysterious begginings themselves.
It would also seem that the Knights of St John were founded a few years before the Knights Templar. Is it possible that the Founders of the Templars could have been former members of the the Knights of St John? That would account for the similer dress code. If they were former members then perhaps someone of influence within the Order of St John made the introduction to the King of Jerusalem there by smoothing the way for them? Just an idea, but an interesting one.




The origins of the order have given rise to learned discussions, to fictitious legends and hazardous conjectures. The unquestionable founder was one Gerald or Gerard, whose birthplace and family name it has been vainly sought to ascertain. On the other hand, his title as founder is attested by a contemporary official document, the Bull of Paschal II, dated 1113, addressed to "Geraudo institutori ac praeposito Hirosolimitani Xenodochii".






[edit on 3-10-2004 by Janus]

[edit on 3-10-2004 by Janus]




posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Janus
They more than likely opperated as small groups

Is there an area where they operated as a large group?

Originally posted by Janus
The templar connection to Scotland is strong, as it is in certain parts of France and Spain.

I've still got no answer about what was exactly their activity there and I'd like to know that.

Originally posted by Janus
It is entirely possible the Templars did indeed over time go from a Knigtly Order to the Masons we know today, but you would have to ask a Mason about that.
Did they anywhere continue the knightly order? Is there anywhere that they remain today? Are there any Mason societies that are heirs to Templars?

Originally posted by Janus
In England there are many Templar Churches and Buildings. After the purge all of these would have reverted back to the Church. Englands Kings have always been an indipendant bunch so perhaps they did allow the Templars to continue in one form or another. But again there is no evidence either way.

Did the English kings grab Templar treasury? If they didn't, that may mean they allied themselves with Templars. If they did, that may mean they did the same that Philip did. If they allowed the Templars to continue their organization, what form of organization it was?

[edit on 3-10-2004 by AtheiX]



posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by AtheiX

Originally posted by Janus
They more than likely opperated as small groups

Is there an area where they operated as a large group?

Originally posted by Janus
The templar connection to Scotland is strong, as it is in certain parts of France and Spain.

I've still got no answer about what was exactly their activity there and I'd like to know that.

Originally posted by Janus
It is entirely possible the Templars did indeed over time go from a Knigtly Order to the Masons we know today, but you would have to ask a Mason about that.
Did they anywhere continue the knightly order? Is there anywhere that they remain today? Are there any Mason societies that are heirs to Templars?

Originally posted by Janus
In England there are many Templar Churches and Buildings. After the purge all of these would have reverted back to the Church. Englands Kings have always been an indipendant bunch so perhaps they did allow the Templars to continue in one form or another. But again there is no evidence either way.

Did the English kings grab Templar treasury? If they didn't, that may mean they allied themselves with Templars. If they did, that may mean they did the same that Philip did. If they allowed the Templars to continue their organization, what form of organization it was?

[edit on 3-10-2004 by AtheiX]



I dont think that they operated after the destruction of the Order in any large groups, there is some evdence that they may have operated for a time in Spain not long after the fall of the Order, but i think the threat of Excomunication was enough to discourage any King from helping or allowing them to continue to operate in any form within the borders of their Kingdoms. We have remeber that they were declared heretics by the Holy Roman Church and to help a Heretic would bring down Excomunication on who ever was helping them. The Kings of the time took that very seriously.

WWhat were they doing in France, Spain and Scotland? No one really Knows for sure. That they had immense weath is beyond dispute, some say that they were given warning of the impending purge and took steps to get as much of that wealth as possible out of France. perhaps it was taken to Spain and then on to Scotland, the honest answer is no one knows for sure. Was the Grail in France and then smuggled to Scotland? Again no one knows if the Grail existed or not so it would be pure speculation to say that it was taken from France to Spain and then onto Sctland or eslewhere.

Im sure the King of England kept some off the wealth of the Templars back for himself, as did Phillip, but i think most of the land was given back to the Church. I dont think the King of England allied himself with the Templars as that would have been going against the will of Rome. But many Templars were the youngest sons of influential Nobles as was the Tradition of the time, the oldest son was the Heir to his fathers estates and the youngest was often sent to the clergy orjoined one of the Orders. It wouldnt supprise me if the King turned a blind eye to some Ex- Templars so he didnt upset their Fathers.

The King of England would not have allowed the Order to operate within his borders for the reasons stated above, but perhaps they went underground as orginisations like this are want to do when their existance is threatened, i too would like to know the answer to that.

[edit on 3-10-2004 by Janus]



posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 10:15 AM
link   
Are there Masonic societies that are heirs of the Templars or are linked with them?
Who's a Mason on this forum?



posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 10:37 AM
link   
There are quite a few masons on ATS but I doubt you will get any of them to confirm any kind of past link to the Templars.



posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
There are quite a few masons on ATS but I doubt you will get any of them to confirm any kind of past link to the Templars.

So you realized what I was going to do. But I want themselves to answer some questions so I hereby ask the to u2u me

[edit on 17-10-2004 by AtheiX]



posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 11:31 AM
link   
As I've already stated, there are no verifiable links between Freemasonry and the Knights Templar.
You don't need U2Us for information, you can post your questions here.

But Atheix, I strongly suggest that you carry out your own research first. A lot of the answers to what you have already asked are freely available if you Google.

There have been many erroneous statements made regarding the subject in this thread. For example, Europe was not a dangerous place for Templars. Most European nations ignored the Papal edict to round up the Templars and, apart from France (for obvious reasons), even those that did bow to the Pope only carried out a half-hearted, token action. The majority of Templars were left to their own devices once the high profile members had been dealt with. Many simply faded back into civilian life in their homelands.
It is highly doubtful that the King of England received any of the Templar wealth. Most of it reverted back to it's original owners when they returned to civilian life. The Templars possessions in Europe were eiither siphoned off by Philip to fund his debts or given to the Hospitallers to carry on their work on the fringes of the Christian kingdoms. Any perusal of a UK map will show you many places with Templar place names which were founded by the returning settlers.
As for confessions made by individuals during English Inquisition - again we have a difference between Europe and England. The Inquisition in England was nowhere near as severe as iit was in Europe. Again, it seems a token gesture was made to appease the Vatican and Knights were offered their freedom if they would only give some propaganda to the Papal cause. Given a choice of imprisonment for life (captured Templars were rarely tortured or executed in England) or a token admission and freedom it is possible that one or more may have chosen this option. After all, the Order was disbanded - they had nothing to lose by toeing the line.

As I stated earlier, most of what you read about the Templars is romantic conspiracy. A throwback to propaganda that was used in the destruction of the Order. The fact is easily available to those who go looking for it. Although there may be some mystery surrounding the Tempars, I think that it isn't half as fantastic as many (including myself at times) would like to believe.



posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leveller


But Atheix, I strongly suggest that you carry out your own research first. A lot of the answers to what you have already asked are freely available if you Google.


I don't think so. I don't think there are many sites and many info on the net about them. If there are many, why won't the people give me them by the opportunity of our talk? And what sites do you mean as an example?
Remember also I'm asking what the people here know



posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by AtheiX

Originally posted by Leveller


But Atheix, I strongly suggest that you carry out your own research first. A lot of the answers to what you have already asked are freely available if you Google.


I don't think so. I don't think there are many sites and many info on the net about them. If there are many, why won't the people give me them by the opportunity of our talk? And what sites do you mean as an example?


Dude. Just tap in "Templar history" into Google. You'll find reams of material.



posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by AtheiX
Are there Masonic societies that are heirs of the Templars or are linked with them?
Who's a Mason on this forum?


There are modern Templar organizations within Freemasonry. In the York Rite, the Order of Knights Templar is the highest Order of Chivalry. The website of the Grand Encampment of Knights Templar of the United States is located here:
knightstemplar.org...

There is also in the York Rite an Order of Holy Royal Arch Knight Templar Priests, which is comprised of honorary degrees. The website of the Grand College of HRAKTP is:
yorkrite.com...

In the Scottish Rite, the 27, 29, 30, and 33 are based on the Templar legend. In the Northern Jurisdiction USA, Canada, and England, the 32 is also a Templar degree.

However, there is not a single shred of evidence that any of these degrees are derived from the original Order. Masonic Templary had its beginnings in the mid-18th century, and was instituted by men who admired their honor, chivalry, and courage in the face of persecution, and established new Templar orders (in contrast to have carried on the original Order).

Fiat Lvx.



posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 12:33 PM
link   
There is a Masonic Templar Society (York Rite) I found on the web but it doesn't have any claims to a lineage.
www.knightstemplar.org...
www.templarhistory.com...
I don't think anyone would really want to though, for all the gloss groups like this put out, its hard to get away from the fact that these guys were ultimately part of a rather underhanded and disreputable organisiation, the only justification that most people give is along the lines of "Yeah, but the Catholic Church was worse..."



posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrNECROS
There is a Masonic Templar Society (York Rite) I found on the web but it doesn't have any claims to a lineage.
www.knightstemplar.org...
www.templarhistory.com...
I don't think anyone would really want to though, for all the gloss groups like this put out, its hard to get away from the fact that these guys were ultimately part of a rather underhanded and disreputable organisiation, the only justification that most people give is along the lines of "Yeah, but the Catholic Church was worse..."


I have never seen anyone offer that in regard to the Knight's Templar. And as for your statement that they were underhanded and disreputable, I have not seen any proof of THAT either...



posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Theron

your expecting a lot aren't you - Proof.

What you have to do is make a statement, so that it sounds like it has been given by a well educated Librarian.

You remember Conman the Librarian , he's at Freemasonry Watch also.

Facts and evidence are for the weak minded.



posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 07:18 PM
link   
I found a link about Modern Templars on the net, most of it is probably bunk but does mention that Masons in France ressurected, or at least tried to, the Order.

Modern Templars

With respect Leveler i think you give the Kings of England too much credit, if there was a chance that Edward or any other English King could have got his hands on some of that Templar wealth he would have. The Wars in Wales alone cost the English Crown over 92,000 Pounds and the Wars in Scotland cost at least that much, probably more. These are enormous sums for the time. And the King was always looking for extra money for the War chest through taxes and the like, something that was never popular with the Barons.So if he had the chance, imo, he would have grabbed it with both hands. The facts as i have given them are accurate as far as i can tell, the rest are my own thoughts and opinions.
In respect to the Monarchs of Europe ignoring the Papal edict laid down declaring the Templars Heretics, i have no doubt you are right, some of them may have. But they would have given no public support to the Templars, they were probably glad that they were out of the way as a lot of them owed the Templars a lot of money. The Templars reputation as Bankers and Money lenders is well known.
As for the Masonic question, as i have said before , im ignorent regarding the Brotherhood and do not feel qualified to comment. The alleged connection is there, i mentioned it because it has become part of the Templar Legend.
You are right the facts are there for anyone who cares to look, it is how we interprate the evidence where the problems start. Where i see a curious set of circumstances at the foundation of the Order, you may not. I have an intrest in all the Knightly Orders that were in Palastine during the Crusades, the Templars are one of Many Orders that were there at the time, some famous like the Templars some not so famous. I dont believe that the Templars found the Grail, as you know artifacts from the Holy land were ten a penny at the time, there must have been enough peices of the true cross around that you could have built a ship from them never mind the Cross of Jesus. But that does not mean that the templars did not believe themseves that they had found it, or that they were actively looking for it. There is no way that we will ever know the truth about them, even the official reports regarding the Order must be viewed with distrust due to the circumstances regarding their quite spectacular fall from grace.
Any information gained from the Inquisition, regardless of if it was the English or European must be viewed as suspect, confessions gleaned from these sources are unreliable in my opinion. The Templars were accused of everything from Devil Worship to Catharism. But then there is no smoke without fire, so im told.


[edit on 3-10-2004 by Janus]



posted on Oct, 3 2004 @ 09:17 PM
link   
Janus, let's split hairs on this:

    In 1118, during the reign of Baldwin II, Hugues de Payens, a knight of Champagne, and eight companions bound themselves by a perpetual vow, taken in the presence of the Patriarch of Jerusalem, to defend the Christian kingdom. Baldwin accepted their services and assigned them a portion of his palace, adjoining the temple of the city; hence the title "pauvres chevaliers du temple" (Poor Knights of the Temple).


      "The Templars "chose the name militia templi - soldiers of the Temple - after the temple supposedly built by Solomon in Jerusalem, near which they had been assigned quarters by the King."
      John J. Robinson, Born in Blood


      "...In 1894 a group of British Army officers, with a budget of just five hundred pounds, set out to try and map the vaults below the ruins of Herod's Temple. The contingent of Royal Engineers led by Lieutenant Charles Wilson conducted some excellent work under very adverse conditions and they could confirm that the chambers and passageways they found were often vaulted with keystone arches. They also confirmed that they were not the first visitors to the subterranean galleries when they came across Templar artifacts discarded some seven hundred and forty years previously. These consisted of part of a sword, a spur, part of a spear or lance, and a small Templar cross."
      Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas, The Hiram Key

      "In 1118, nine Knights Crusaders in the East, among whom were Geoffroi de Saint-Omer and Hughes de Payens, consecrated themselves to religion, and took an oath between the hands of the Patriarch of Constantinople, a See always secretly or openly hostile to that of Rome from the time of Photius. The avowed object of the Templars was to protect the Christians who came to visit the Holy Places: their secret object was the re-building of the Temple of Solomon on the model prophesied by Ezekiel."
      General Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma

      "The real task of the nine knights was to carry out research in the area in order to obtain certain relics and manuscripts which contained the essence of the secret traditions of Judaism and ancient Egypt, some of which probably went back to the days of Moses...There is no doubt that [they] fulfilled this particular mission and that the knowledge obtained from their finds was taught in the oral tradition of the Order's...secret circles."
      Gaetan Delaforge, The Templar Tradition in the Age of Aquarius


One hair at a time- 500 word limit for me. Too many finger pointers otherwise.



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by PublicGadfly
Janus, let's split hairs on this:

    In 1118, during the reign of Baldwin II, Hugues de Payens, a knight of Champagne, and eight companions bound themselves by a perpetual vow, taken in the presence of the Patriarch of Jerusalem, to defend the Christian kingdom. Baldwin accepted their services and assigned them a portion of his palace, adjoining the temple of the city; hence the title "pauvres chevaliers du temple" (Poor Knights of the Temple).


      "The Templars "chose the name militia templi - soldiers of the Temple - after the temple supposedly built by Solomon in Jerusalem, near which they had been assigned quarters by the King."
      John J. Robinson, Born in Blood


      "...In 1894 a group of British Army officers, with a budget of just five hundred pounds, set out to try and map the vaults below the ruins of Herod's Temple. The contingent of Royal Engineers led by Lieutenant Charles Wilson conducted some excellent work under very adverse conditions and they could confirm that the chambers and passageways they found were often vaulted with keystone arches. They also confirmed that they were not the first visitors to the subterranean galleries when they came across Templar artifacts discarded some seven hundred and forty years previously. These consisted of part of a sword, a spur, part of a spear or lance, and a small Templar cross."
      Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas, The Hiram Key

      "In 1118, nine Knights Crusaders in the East, among whom were Geoffroi de Saint-Omer and Hughes de Payens, consecrated themselves to religion, and took an oath between the hands of the Patriarch of Constantinople, a See always secretly or openly hostile to that of Rome from the time of Photius. The avowed object of the Templars was to protect the Christians who came to visit the Holy Places: their secret object was the re-building of the Temple of Solomon on the model prophesied by Ezekiel."
      General Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma

      "The real task of the nine knights was to carry out research in the area in order to obtain certain relics and manuscripts which contained the essence of the secret traditions of Judaism and ancient Egypt, some of which probably went back to the days of Moses...There is no doubt that [they] fulfilled this particular mission and that the knowledge obtained from their finds was taught in the oral tradition of the Order's...secret circles."
      Gaetan Delaforge, The Templar Tradition in the Age of Aquarius


One hair at a time- 500 word limit for me. Too many finger pointers otherwise.


All of those mentioned above could be possible, i havent read any of those books, the Templars could have been there to find an artifact as it was quite common at that time for returning Knights to return home with something like the finger bone of a Saint or a piece of the true Cross. Undoubtedly some took it more seriously than others. The Templars could certainly have done some excavations of some type, and may even have found something they considered an true artifact, say the Grail for example. If they did then no doubt they kept it a secret. Im not saying they did find anything but the possibility exists they did. I didnt know about the Army Officers but i think ill look into it, thanks.



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 07:11 PM
link   
"The real purpose of the nine knights . . . "

-also, don't foeget

""...In 1894 a group of British Army officers, with a budget of just five hundred pounds, set out to try and map the vaults below the ruins of Herod's Temple. ""
The Hiram Key

Bible Archeology magzine, summer (2004) ran a good article on some of the subterranean caverns under Jerusalem.

You (Janus) did raise the question regarding what these original knights did for their first years as I recollect.



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Gadfly:

Again, your sources are deficient. Most of them are very fun and intersting reads, but you seem to be a victim of Von Daaniken's syndrome."

Alot of wishful thinking and pre-determined conclusions replace facts. Mostly opinion masquerading as informed theory. The Hiram Key does not qualify as any kind of scholarly authority on the subject. The authors' work is based on selective use of facts (lots of cherry-picking - a big academic no-no), and undocumented claims. This makes for good reading, but not good history. The authors have done no original source research. They are not familiar with the ancient Greek, Aramaic, Latin, Egyptian, or Hebrew texts.

The book doesn't even have a bibliography. It's a VERY sloppy work. Don't use this as a historical source. It's largely fiction.

About Born in Blood:

Yet another "fun read" that does historiography a disservice. The auhor is an amateur historian and is not a Mason. His work is historical fiction, much like "Holy Blood, Holy Grail."

Both books are interesting, and you can quote from them if you like - it's your right obviously, but I'd be very careful about using them as definitive expositions of Templar and/or masonic history. It's still fun to speculate, though.



[edit on 7-10-2004 by LTD602]



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by PublicGadfly
"The real purpose of the nine knights . . . "

-also, don't foeget

""...In 1894 a group of British Army officers, with a budget of just five hundred pounds, set out to try and map the vaults below the ruins of Herod's Temple. ""
The Hiram Key

Bible Archeology magzine, summer (2004) ran a good article on some of the subterranean caverns under Jerusalem.

You (Janus) did raise the question regarding what these original knights did for their first years as I recollect.


I did raise the question you are right, ive given it some thought and think that perhaps they did go to the King of Jerusalem for a reason. It seems a bit to neat and tidy that they went there just to protect the pilgrims, and for the first few years there is no record of them protecting anything at all.
Im of the opinion that they went in search of something, an artifact, knowlage of some kind perhaps. PublicGadflys opinions are as valid as any others i have heard, and as it is so dificult to find any information about the activitys in their early years in Jerusalem then all opinions regarding them are open to speculation.
It was not unusual for Knights, Nobles bishops etc to try and find artifacts to validate, not that it really need validating, their faith. a kind of comforter if you will. Also and most importantly Holy Relics, regardless of their authenticity, were a good sourch of income for the person who brought them back. What is unusual though is if the Templars did find something they kept it a secret and made not attept to profit from it. Im not saying that all relics or alleged relics were exploited for profit but many were.
So if they did find something it was important enough to them, and they were convinced enough of it authenticity, for them to keep it a secret.
Of course there is no proof of any of it. All we have are the thoughts and speculations of the people who write books like the ones PublicGadfly quoted, and to be honest until someone comes out with a document from the Vatican archives that is authentic and says " The Templars found the Holy Grail " then thats all we have to go on.
Yes it is fun to disscuss topics like these, but its also important to respect each others point of view without the fear of ridicule, dont you agree?



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 09:47 PM
link   
". . . but its also important to respect each others point of view without the fear of ridicule . . ."
No fear on my part.

Naysayers and detractors told the Queen that Columbus was wrong as well. Columbus just found something he didn't expect.

Much like the Templars and the Temple- too much point to some kind of 'grail.' I never bought that and still don't. I buy the treasure angle.

I can't see more than half-a-dozen warriors spending years looking for a mere relic no matter how 'glorious.' Money (treasure) is what they were after.

These were very tough, no nonsense killers of the first magnitude.

Much like the British army that came centuries later we'll never know what they were after or what they found unless, as you (Janus) suggest some physically acceptable proof surfaces.




top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join