Treasures of the Knights Templar - Conspiracy Theories!

[JakefaePa]

"For instance, I can state that Roslyn Chapel was not built until 150 years after the Templars were disolved and before you know it someone will pipe up with "But the current Roslyn Chapel is the THIRD chapel." This is quite true, however, once again there is MORE to the story than just that. The second Chapel was destroyed before the Templars even came into existence so THAT theory gets shot down in flames as well."




Ok , if we take it as the Templars came into being around 1129 and are no longer by 1312 , then look at Roslyn where its recorded that St Clair built his castle and the 2nd and 3rd chapel as we know it , the 1st having been within the castle.
We take a look at title deeds and see St Clair held those lands in 1162.

Thing about early structures in Scotland was when a new structure was being built all material from the earlier version usually gets used.Many villages in Scotland have original early stone bungalows housing because early settlers in that town took the stone from old structures like castles etc ...thats why theres not a trace left of many where they were known to have been.

So the same family that builds Roslyn Castle and chapels held those lands since 1162 , i think thats worth noting.Templers get disbanded in 1312 and a castle goes up in 1330 on this guys land with all these templer legends..interesting?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[lamar]

Dear Newto Pa;
Yes, my friend, I agree that it is interesting, however not as interesting as the Royston carvings in my modest opinion.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[pegleglooker]

Lamar wrote-It's simply what I do, my friend. Someone proposes a theory and I shoot it down. Somebody else proposes another theory and I shoot that one down. I consider myself to be a Anti-Theory Gunner, much like an anti-aircraft gunner. <snicker>

PLL

 

[Oroblanco]

I see that you are IN GOOD HANDS - under care of good Captain Morgan!

Don' t worry Pegleglooker - we will bring Lamar round to our side eventually!


HEY no remarks on my weight, it has been a long winter you know!
Oroblanco

 

[JakefaePa]

Dear Newto Pa;
Yes, my friend, I agree that it is interesting, however not as interesting as the Royston carvings in my modest opinion.
Your friend;
LAMAR

Interesting deflection from Roslyn Sir , what do you make of the Royston carvings ? Ill admit my first initial "kneejerk" feeling when i first seen the royston carvings was , this is a cell ... a jail , the carvings are too intense , somebone or ones had a heck of a lot of time in a small space.

 

[Oroblanco]

HOLA amigos,
Let me see that I have this straight:

Templars disbanded 1312 AD

Rosslyn chapel built 1460<ish>? AD

So what exactly happened to those Templars who were in Scotland in 1312? Did they immediately scatter and return to their homes? Or did events unfold there more similarly to what occurred in Portugal? Thank you in advance,
Oroblanco

 

[JakefaePa]

HOLA amigos,
Let me see that I have this straight:

Templars disbanded 1312 AD

Rosslyn chapel built 1460<ish>? AD

So what exactly happened to those Templars who were in Scotland in 1312? Did they immediately scatter and return to their homes? Or did events unfold there more similarly to what occurred in Portugal? Thank you in advance,
Oroblanco

No Oroblanco , the 1st Chapel we know about appears in 1330 on land that was owned by the same family since 1162.
I think its more they had some kind of stronghold or lands there and went there or those who survived persecution did,some of them around 1312.
How did a handfull of Scots defeat a mighty English army in 1314 at bannockburn? Ask yourself that.

 

[lamar]

Dear NewtoPa;
I formulated the very same opinion as well my friend. When I viewed the carvings, there were no electric lights installed yet and you had to go in with a flashlight, which made viewing the carvings difficult because of the enhanced shadows. I felt that the carvings were done by only one or two craftsmen, over a long period of time and it seemed that these craftsmen were performing them strictly from memory of the Bible. Overall, I found the carvings to be incredibly interesting and I am surprised that so few outside of the British Isles knows about them.

Once I had been informed that the current tunnel was not the original entranceway into the cave and it was explained to me where the original entrance was, I then realized that the cave was quite likely carved in order to house long-term prisoners. The tools utilized for the carvings would have extremely crude compared with other carvings during the same era and this adds weight to the prisoner theory. As you've stated, someone had a lot of time on their hands, my friend.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[JakefaePa]

And i would think you have definately come to a conclusion whos cell it might have been ? Straightforward enough and interesting to note you spotted the same thing and felt the same thing about the tools being very crude that were used as its often overlooked by people who think its old and weathered kind of..cant be weathered.

Edited to add .. i dont mean whos cell exactly but rather whos group or society or beliefs were these people from.

 

[Oroblanco]

HOLA amigos,

NewtoPa wrote

No Oroblanco , the 1st Chapel we know about appears in 1330 on land that was owned by the same family since 1162.
I think its more they had some kind of stronghold or lands there and went there or those who survived persecution did,some of them around 1312.
How did a handfull of Scots defeat a mighty English army in 1314 at bannockburn? Ask yourself that

Thank you for the correct dates amigo - and I never made the connection viz Bannockburn and what had happened just two years previously. It is tempting to connect the dots.
Oroblanco

 

[lamar]

Dear Oroblanco;
You asked:
So what exactly happened to those Templars who were in Scotland in 1312? Did they immediately scatter and return to their homes? Or did events unfold there more similarly to what occurred in Portugal? Thank you in advance,

According to available sources, the Templars folded into the Hospitallers, who also has a presence in Scotland, oddly enough. The Templars had large holdings in the County of Niarn. Here is an excerpt from taken from the history of Nairn:
...There is a writ extant granted in their [the Templars] favour at Berwick, addressed to the Sheriff of Invernairn to put them in possession of their lands, they having made submission to Edward I. This was no doubt done. From the deed of conveyance of the Temple lands in the North from Lord Torpichen, the last Master of the Order, it appears that the following were the lands held here "Those two roods of arable land lying within the territory of the Burgh of Nairn, in that part thereof called (blank) possessed by John Rose, burgess of Nairn, and his sub-tenants; those two roods of arable temple land and house lying within the said territory of Nairn, possessed by Hew Rose of Kilravock and his sub-tenants; all and haill those our temple lands called the lands of Pitfundie lying in the said Sheriffdom of Nairn, betwixt the strype that conies from the lands of Brodie on the east, the fludder or myre upon the south side of the common muir called the Hardmuir on the south side, the lands of Penick and wood of Lochloy on the west, and the Euchcarse of Culbyn on the north, for the most part possessed by the lairds of Brodie, and their sub-tenants." They had also lands at Ardersier, which are designated in old charters as Temple Land, Temple Cruik, Temple Bank, Bogschand. They lay partly in the vicinity of the town of Ardersier, between Connage and the sea, and between Flemington and the sea. A charter granted at Nairn refers to the locus trialis at Ardersier, doubtless an ancient place of trial by wager of battle. The Temple lands of Ardersier were held by Davidsons and Mackays as portioners. They were acquired by Cawdor in 1626. The Temple lands at Brodie and elsewhere appear to have been disposed of about the same time, as in a Brodie, charter of date 1626 the lands of Pitfundie are included in the Brodie estate. The Templars were a religious and military order of Knights who escorted pilgrims to Jerusalem at a time when such pilgrimages were attended by dangers from robbers. They wore a white robe with a red Maltese cross on the breast, and at first were all of noble birth, The Knights of St. John of Jerusalem also had lands in Nairnshire. It is impossible now to identify them. When the Knights Templars were suppressed by Edward II. Their property was given to the Knights of St. John.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[JakefaePa]

HOLA amigos,

NewtoPa wrote

No Oroblanco , the 1st Chapel we know about appears in 1330 on land that was owned by the same family since 1162.
I think its more they had some kind of stronghold or lands there and went there or those who survived persecution did,some of them around 1312.
How did a handfull of Scots defeat a mighty English army in 1314 at bannockburn? Ask yourself that

Thank you for the correct dates amigo - and I never made the connection viz Bannockburn and what had happened just two years previously. It is tempting to connect the dots.
Oroblanco

Its what the dots are for Oroblanco

 

[Oroblanco]

MUCHAS GRACIAS mi compadres Lamar & NewtoPa!

I ran across this, <extract>

"King Robert 1st of Scots, The Bruce, offered them <Templars> sanctuary in return for support in his struggle with England. Although primary source material has not been found (Scottish state documents were destroyed by both Edward 1st of England and Cromwell in attempts to eliminate the existence of a Scottish state from human history) there is strong circumstantial evidence that it was they who led the charge of Sma' folk at Bannockburn and it was the Knights in cavalry charge, with their distinctive white crosses on their shields, rather than the Sma' folk per se that led the English troops to finally break and run in terror. Certainly if they were coming in only when Scottish victory seemed likely there was some 'bet hedging' deal with Bruce.

King Edward 2nd of England confiscated all their property in England in 1315AD, another strong circumstantial indication that they were at Bannockburn. From Bannockburn till the Rerformation in 1560AD they acted as parish clergy in a number of Scottish parishes including the collegiate church called Rosslyn Chapel.
<from>
http://www.siliconglen.com/Scotland/11_21.html
<Bold type mine, to highlight certain passages and dates>

So at least some folks are saying that the Templars did not evaporate in Scotland in 1312 at all. That would make the argument about the Templars not being the builders of Rosslyn chapel because they had been disbanded moot, since they were not gone from Scotland.
Oroblanco

 

[lamar]

Dear NewtoPa;
I agree, my friend, the carvings at Royston are in are remarkable state, due to their location and the way the cave is situated, in sort of a largish upside-down funnel shape. What tends to degrade or destroy stone carvings are errosion and lechens, neither of which are present in the Royston cave, therefore natural factors did not play a role in the Royston carvings. Also, if you look very closely at the carved niches and then close your eyes and imagine the light shining from candles from the niches, you may realize that the light would have been completely inadaquate to have provided more than a very feeble glow from the ground level of the cave, and it's only after understanding that you begin to realize that the niches were carved so the artists would have enough light in order to illuminate the carvings while they were working on them.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[JakefaePa]

MUCHAS GRACIAS mi compadres Lamar & NewtoPa!

I ran across this, <extract>

"King Robert 1st of Scots, The Bruce, offered them <Templars> sanctuary in return for support in his struggle with England. Although primary source material has not been found (Scottish state documents were destroyed by both Edward 1st of England and Cromwell in attempts to eliminate the existence of a Scottish state from human history) there is strong circumstantial evidence that it was they who led the charge of Sma' folk at Bannockburn and it was the Knights in cavalry charge, with their distinctive white crosses on their shields, rather than the Sma' folk per se that led the English troops to finally break and run in terror. Certainly if they were coming in only when Scottish victory seemed likely there was some 'bet hedging' deal with Bruce.

King Edward 2nd of England confiscated all their property in England in 1315AD, another strong circumstantial indication that they were at Bannockburn. From Bannockburn till the Rerformation in 1560AD they acted as parish clergy in a number of Scottish parishes including the collegiate church called Rosslyn Chapel.
<from>
http://www.siliconglen.com/Scotland/11_21.html
<Bold type mine, to highlight certain passages and dates>

So at least some folks are saying that the Templars did not evaporate in Scotland in 1312 at all. That would make the argument about the Templars not being the builders of Rosslyn chapel because they had been disbanded moot, since they were not gone from Scotland.
Oroblanco

Way i see it right now if they were at bannockburn which seems likely , and had lands in Scotland up until the reformation..they were never really disbanded then at all were they or at least not in 1312 they werent , not entirely.

 

[lamar]

Dear Oroblanco;
Nobody stated that the Templars evaporated my friend, merely that the lions' share of them most likely became Hospitallers. There is also no factual evidence of Robert the Bruce offering the Templars sanctuary in Scotland, nor of their participation at the battle of Bannockburn.
Please read this passage VERY carefully my friend:
and it was the Knights in cavalry charge, with their distinctive white crosses on their shields

Please note that Templars crosses were red upon a white background while the Hospitallers crosses were white upon a black background. To continue:
From Bannockburn till the Rerformation in 1560AD they acted as parish clergy in a number of Scottish parishes including the collegiate church called Rosslyn Chapel
It is plainly obvious that whoever wrote this has not the slightest clue about Roman Catholic Orders or the clergy. Ordained members could not have taken vows with the Templars, Hospitallers or anything military Order due to the fact that they were not, and still are not, allowed to spill human blood, now were they permitted to carry arms. This remains true even today my friend. This entire work must be omitted due to glaringly obvious mistakes and it's plain that whoever wrote this is guilty of very shoddy research, or perhaps no true research at all.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[JakefaePa]

Just immediate thoughts Lamar are if i was part of a group who had been persecuted and mudered and i got away and reformed , id think about changing my colours ..just a thought.
I would agree there are many web authors out there who have not done the research and do not have every detail but the gist of it is always there , somebody helped those unfortunate Scots on the field of battle to the extent they routed the English who never for one minute even dreamed of defeat..so who was it that organised that ramshackle mob of an army?

 

[Oroblanco]

Hmm so lets see, the Templars insignia has the RED cross,with a white background rather like this flag of St. George?

(Some say this is a Templar flag)

so unlike this flag, which has the WHITE cross on a RED background,

...and the Templars were renowned as bankers and mercenary soldiers, which is SO unlike the country whose flag I posted for comparison, a country which at its founding was renowned for being BANKERS AND MERCENARY SOLDIERS. Hmm....you have given me yet more food for thought.
Oroblanco

 

[lamar]

Dear NewtoPa;
You wrote:
Just immediate thoughts Lamar are if i was part of a group who had been persecuted and mudered and i got away and reformed , id think about changing my colours
Yes, that would seem logical my friend HOWEVER all the Roman Catholic military Orders swore allegiance to one man, and that man was the sitting Pope. This means that if a Holy military Order such as the Templars or Hospitallers were to engage a sovereign Lord on the battlefield without the express consent of the Pope, that would treason and therefore would be grounds for punishment by death. Likewise, a Holy military order could not take up arms at the behest of a sovereign Lord against any enemy unless that enemy happened to be an enemy of the church, like the Moors, without the express prior approval of the sitting Pope.

These were not a bunch of rogue mercenaries gallevanting around Europe, engaging anyone and everyone at will my friend. They were Roman Catholic Monastetic Military Orders and as such they SWORE holy vows of poverty, chasity and OBEDIENCE. If they were to break any of these vows that would be considered an act of heresy and that penalty incurs automatic excommunication.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[JakefaePa]

Didnt that same Pope want them dead ?

They were nothing more than outlaws at this point.