The Desert Cross, Symbols of The Knights of Templar Unearthed

reply to post by KSigMason

The connection between the Templars and the Masons is only a theory as there exist no documents to prove anything concrete.

The connection verifiable so far as the symbolism and even organizational structure, you can call it what you want even derivative but it remains a connection...

In any case the symbolic derivation alone do not seem to indicate a simple case of chance. Consider the message that the simple symbolic connection signified (the Templars started to be disbanded in 1307) Freemasonry was already well established in England by 1390. Masonic documents indicate that the craft of masonry had been brought to England during the reign of King Athelstan (924 to 939), dating the Masons as an organization even before the formation of the Templars (officially recognized in 1129 but operating before that).

For the rest there are points that do link the organizations (geographically and in geopolitical reality). This without putting the Cathars into the blender. Considering all that was happening in that part of Europe in the way to the Holy Land and the multitude of conflicts...

Freemasonry is not against the Catholic Church, you have it backwards.

To decide if someone is a foe (intending to do you harm) it mustn't be declared by consensus, it suffices that one party declares itself as hostile. Against active attack there can only be active defense. It is clear that deciding that joining Freemasonry entailed automatic excommunication if not worse ( In Eminenti Apostolatus). I get that most lower ranks may not participate in the need for active security of the organization (or be heavily concerned about it) or even something that would be good to advertise.

We have our hierarchy, but its not what you think it is. Nor is it as authoritarian as you make it out to be.

You don't see in that phrase a contradiction in terms? An hierarchy can only survive by authoritarian means. If no authority is maintained over the existence of an hierarchy then it serves no function. I get form it that you may have wanted to signify voluntary submission to the hierarchy (from below and not from above) but again that is an illusion, as the only reason for the existence of an hierarchy is to consolidate power and favor order and discipline.

In any case my interest in not at all about Masonry, nor am I opposed to it beyond a strong opposition to any secret organization (even if in part it no longer is) or mutual support cliques. As for subversion of Masonry one just needs to be attentive, from industrial espionage, trade in influence, arms deals etc the list is vast on how the organization and its secrecy has been leveraged to perform "social" subversion many times.

reply to post by network dude


Look everyones going to jump on you about this im sure you know but let me tell you this. There is a better fit for the Knights templars see even the freemasons would have been to public for them. Remember these people were arrested there lands taken burned at the stake. I can guarantee that they organized they would have had to if only to help hide there friends. There is rumors that the knights of malta is the knight templars again similarities good place to hide. But this brings in a connection with the vatican since they are sworn to the edicts of the pope. But that is also a topic for another thread.

reply to post by Panic2k11

Oh Lord. It is very apparent you haven't done your research, but rather just read a few sites on the sensationalized theories.

Consider that the Regius Poem may have been written around 1390, but was thought to be started around 926 AD with King Athelstan at the assembly in York. This though cannot be decisively proven, but is an acceptable theory. The Templars weren't disbanded until 1312 with the issue of Vox in Excelso. This however doesn't prove that there is any connection nor that the Templars led to speculative Masonry rising during the 17th century.

The Catholic Church may hold ill will against us, but we do not hold it against them. We allow Catholics to join.

Please spare me this whole "lower ranks" BS as that dog don't hunt.

An hierarchy can only survive by authoritarian means.

False. It exists at the will and pleasure of the members of the body. Our leaders are not dictators, but elected leaders who are bound by the laws established and maintained by the same members. Authoritarian doesn't mean exercising authority, but rather enforcing strict obedience to the law at the expense of personal liberties; Freemasonry does nothing of the sort.

...the list is vast on how the organization and its secrecy has been leveraged to perform "social" subversion many times.

I'm sure the list of charges is long, but the facts are few.

reply to post by KSigMason


I'm not here to discuss Masonry (I have my mind made on that subject and facts as you state disprove your claims, I couldn't care less about the crazy or anti-Masonic propaganda nor do I partake in it). As for the Templars the date I indicated was the correct one, that was when Templars started being persecuted (the legalization of the fact came later in the date you stated).

Since you care so much about my view on Masonry I can state that I think the proposed goals are righteous but the methodology is bad and provides cover for nefarious enterprises and conflict of interests (I already stated some of them and they are indeed verifiable and even acknowledged by the Masonic institutions, but labeled as corruptions, something that to me does not diminishes the guilt of the institution). I also put all Masonic rites in the same box, I don't see any benefit in making distinctions when participation is intentionally kept private and all are permitted to identify themselves as Masons.

reply to post by Panic2k11

Well, I'm only responding to your posts. If you don't want to talk about Masons then don't bring them up.

The date you provided was not the right one. The arrests were perpetrated in 1307, but they were not disbanded until March 22nd, 1312, when the Pope issued "Vox in Excelso", which is the official declaration of disbandment of the Templar Order.

Well the devil is in the details so when I see erroneous statements made I will respond. That's just my nature.

KSigMason
reply to post by Panic2k11

 

Well, I'm only responding to your posts. If you don't want to talk about Masons then don't bring them up.

The date you provided was not the right one. The arrests were perpetrated in 1307, but they were not disbanded until March 22nd, 1312, when the Pope issued "Vox in Excelso", which is the official declaration of disbandment of the Templar Order.

Well the devil is in the details so when I see erroneous statements made I will respond. That's just my nature.

Well since you like to correct people i figured id do the same. You're wrong the knights were first disavowed on 22 November 1307. The pope clement the 5th ordered what known as a papal bull called Pastoralis Praeeminentiae this ordered the arrest and seizure of all property owned by the Templars. The pope issues a new decree in 1312 well actually two of them one Ad providam gives the Knights of Malta the property previously owned by the Knights Templars pope made a mistake here in his first decree he didnt mention who gets the property only it should be confiscated.This allowed church property to be taken and sold sometimes property that didnt even belong to the Templars. And the second was Vox in excelso this one overturned the papal bull from Pope Honorius II this was done because it was pointed out the rules of chivalry didnt allow for the church to persecute knights of the church. So the original order was supposed to include the edict removing the previous papal bull. It was a paperwork issue but you have to realize the word of the pope is supposed to be the word of god so to speak so people were still uncomfortable with what happened to the Knights and their order. In fact many considered them martyrs and the people supported them. This caused a problem for the pope which he corrected by making people choose him of the Templars.

So in effect you are claiming a a 2nd order which just goes into more detail than the first was the order to disband when it was actually a clarification of the original orders. The Pastoralis Praeeminentiae removed papal support took there stuff and made them criminals doesnt that sound like its over for them.

reply to post by Panic2k11


POPE PAUL V1, asked All Roman Catholics / Christians to Pray harder - the Reason ? - he told us how Satatn was about to enter the Vatican and he was right, for although the Vatican had oppossed Freemasons for Centuries. Time was about to change and such Freemasons were - during the late 70s - winning permission to enter the Vatican. Pope Paul v1 was eventually replaced by a look alike, research such and see for yourselves,. try En,Wikipedia - pope paul vi and then fiTnd more detailed links. Why do you think 1 Pope only reogned for 33 days? Before being silenced??? Was he about to blow the whistle ???
There is a book out called IN GODS NAME, in which much is spelt out clearly. No doubt the present POPE Francis, was carefully selected by you know who and like a puppet is now calling for the Vatican to be closed. Templars felt honoured when allowed to meet the Pope.

reply to post by dragonridr


That was more or less my understanding of the issue. Of course that "legalization" of the situation took time, communications weren't anything like we have today, and the world was in a larger flux also, even if ideas and ideals were fewer they also were a lot stronger in the binding of man's actions especially monarchs in their continued balancing act of appeasing and contest of the Pope and the Church.

I have taken note of your mention of the Knights of Malta to do further research but I agree with your view that the Templars must have in part joined with the other orders. One thing that seems interesting is the influence of Catharism in the realms and movements that needed to cross their area of influence (Southern Europe) in the way to crusades. For instance in Portugal the Knights Hospitaller had a large influence much more visible than that of the Templars (even if the Templars seem more significant in deciding events), the Hospitaller are of course the origin of the Knights of Malta (and previously the Knights of Cyprus and Rhodes), again in the previous regions of influence of Catharism that seemed to prevail in the regions where the population was not as controlled by the Roman Church and in flux due to the war with Islam. If we consider the possibility that Masonry predates (as its lore indicates) all this orders and its origins may link even to Egypt, it becomes an interesting mixture, and food for speculation in regards to how the ideas and events may have evolved in parallel fashion.

reply to post by dragonridr

The arrest and inquisition was not the same as the official disbandment in 1314, which is my entire point. Vox in Excelso was the official order to dissolve the Templar Order:

...it is not without bitterness and sadness of heart that we abolish the aforesaid Order of the Temple, and its constitution, habit and anme, by an irrevocable and perpetually valid decree; and we subject it to perpetual prohibition with the approval of the Holy Council, strictly forbidding anyone to presume to enter the said Order in the future, or to receive or wear its habit, or to act as a Templar.

The 1307 Papal Bull never mentions of dissolving, abolishing, or disbanding.

KSigMason
reply to post by dragonridr

 

The arrest and inquisition was not the same as the official disbandment in 1314, which is my entire point. Vox in Excelso was the official order to dissolve the Templar Order:

...it is not without bitterness and sadness of heart that we abolish the aforesaid Order of the Temple, and its constitution, habit and anme, by an irrevocable and perpetually valid decree; and we subject it to perpetual prohibition with the approval of the Holy Council, strictly forbidding anyone to presume to enter the said Order in the future, or to receive or wear its habit, or to act as a Templar.

The 1307 Papal Bull never mentions of dissolving, abolishing, or disbanding.

My suggestion to you would be to read about the trials of the Knights Templars before you make statements that they were still in existence until 1314. Since there isnt a scholar on the planet that would agree with you i already explained how it happened.Ill tell you what if you really want to discuss this topic id suggest you start with this.

www.scribd.com...

reply to post by dragonridr

I have an entire bookcase on the Knights Templar. Technically speaking they were in existence until 1314, but many in and around France were arrested, but they were not officially disbanded and dissolved until Vox in Excelso, scholars agree on that point; no other Papal Bull disbanded or dissolved the Templars. In Germany the Templars were found innocent, and the Spanish and British were extremely reluctant to go after the Templars.

dragonridr
If they found a cross made in the 1600s then decided to add stuff to it to make the find fit there beliefs is very believable. Since you see other stuff that was found later that just seems amateurish. Meaning they were not as good at smelting lead. Especially that sword if someone took the time to make it it would have been ceremonial and it would have been alot better.

I was thinking about this and I thought that perhaps if the Jesuit missionaries understood the local culture sufficiently to know that the Cross of Lorraine would hold familiar symbolism to those people, perhaps they used other props in order to illustrate Christianity to them, knowing that totems and symbols often speak louder than words. Therefore, to a warrior culture, they may have wanted to illustrate the 'warriors' of Christianity, the rather crude sword would be an ideal prop, it is the symbol of the apostle James for one, and given that the 'vision' of Ignasius Loyola was of Christ as a chivaldric knight fighting for 'right'...it has a common sense ring to it. The various conversion 'props' were perhaps buried by the missionaries when they left, or by locals who considered them taboo.

KSigMason
reply to post by dragonridr

 

I have an entire bookcase on the Knights Templar. Technically speaking they were in existence until 1314, but many in and around France were arrested, but they were not officially disbanded and dissolved until Vox in Excelso, scholars agree on that point; no other Papal Bull disbanded or dissolved the Templars. In Germany the Templars were found innocent, and the Spanish and British were extremely reluctant to go after the Templars.

Then you know they were put on trial by the pope in aug 12th 1308 with Faciens misericordiam which made them placed under arrest until their trial and set out the rules for their trial by setting up cardinals to make the ruling.See nothing happened back them quickly there trial wasnt over until 1312.Until that point they were still to be arrested to stand trial (this meant torture until they confessed things like spitting on the cross) or my personal favorite Illegally amassing vast wealth in their preceptories. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black anyway the disbanding of the order was a paperwork function after there trial if you can call it that was completed.The order disbanded in 1308 because the templars either went in to hiding were arrested or in other cases killed. By the time the papal bull of 1312 there were no templars left in any country. I suspect many hid within the Knights Hospitaller because they now had received the task of defending the holy land. And if you took over this area where you knew very little your going to want people with experience in the area. This is also the reason i think they commissioned the pope to turn over the Templars property to them.

reply to post by dragonridr

I don't disagree on your point of when they were arrested and when the trials began. I'm just pointing out that they were not officially decreed dissolved until the issuance of Vox In Excelso.

I have all sorts of theories as to what the Templars did. I believe there wasn't a massive exodus to any one country or infiltration of any group. For the knights it was hardest so they probably had to hide as they couldn't just go back home (depending on the power of their family). You also hear various theories about white knights showing up in various places like Scotland or Switzerland, and helping the people. The Templars in the German area was not persecuted any many were found innocent. The Spanish ones just became the Order of Christ. The lower classes of the Templars could have easily just blended back in or just moved to a new town.

Nice catch! Thanks. As a retired archaeologist I find these things fascinating even if they don't fall within my specific field of study. But I do have a few questions that the video didn't answer.

What about the lead ore they collected; did it match as source material of the artifacts?
Are all the artifacts made of the same material; same source?
How were artifacts cleaned when first discovered?

Just an observation about the reptile---did anyone else notice that it is not as skillful in execution as the other designs. I know a video isn't like handling the artifact but---the eye of the reptile especially, but possibly the entire image---seem to be an addition. The incising appears to be very different but I'd have to handle and look at them under a scope to be sure.
Oh, and one other observation about the lead ore and smelting; yes they did find the ore. However, it takes quite a bit of heat to melt that ore into lead and if memory serves me the area was a desert in 800AD so where did they find the fuel to melt the ore into lead?

I have nothing to add about the Knights Templar, another abyss of ignorance on that one. My Dad was a Mason, he spent at least one Saturday a month with others from his lodge fixing the houses of the widows of brothers. They also did fund raisers for the widows and ophans' home run by the Masons. My mother and aunts made quilts and rugs for the widows and orphans.