My abbreviated theory for the Knights Templar treasure in Nova Scotia

[ECS]

That is IF the 18 galleys were actually there, being solely based on de Chalons hearsay testimony that he "heard that 18 galleys set to sea". No collaborating contemporary evidence exists that confirms de Chalons statement that 18 galleys were anchored at La Rochelle ready to be "set to sea".

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Eric the Red lost half his fleet going half as far to a KNOWN destination. The North Atlantic is tough even still. In old wood ships it would have been very unforgiving.

 

[lokiblossom]

You know better than that, Loki, my friend.

If you have read all these versions as claimed, you probably noticed that they all variations on the same material with supporting,writers personal pet theory ;ie, the Templars with Bruce at Bannockburn, Sinclair led the Templars at that battle, Templars became pirates, Templars buried treasure on Oak Island, etc, all circumstantially presented without real solid documented evidence or proof.
What are interesting variations in Captain Tonz version, concerns the "treasure" being books, the 18 galleys on the Seine in Paris and not at La Rochelle, the Templar "fleet" NOT disappearing, but waiting offshore for King Phillip's army, then dividing with one setting to sea for Scotland the other to Portugal.

As you are aware, Loki,what all these versions and variations have in common is that there is NO contemporary Medieval records or documents confirming any of the content of these stories beyond de Chalons very vague testimony reference, allowing the creative assault on minimal period factual information concerning those events concerning the raid and the alleged "flight" to be made into fabricated facts in support of these "modern" Templar fables.

Yes, I have read as many of those reports that I know of that are out there as I claimed. I have not yet claimed anything on this forum that I don't believe to be true.

18 is simply a number, we know for a fact that at least that many vessels were in port because of several historical notes.

For instance, we know for a fact La Rochelle was a very busy Atlantic port that the Knights Templar had full control of and operated trade operations out of up and down the Atlantic Coast. We also know that they kept their whole Atlantic fleet at this port because it was well away from the theater of war.

We know for a fact many vessels had just arrived in France from Cyprus the Templars Eastern Mediterranean headquarters with a large
contingent of Knights, Squires, horses, treasure and ect.

We also know for a fact that all of these vessels disappeared with no record of where they went. If anybody doesn't believe this produce an account of where they went. There actually may be such a record out there as I only premise a small number of them going to Nova Scotia.

We know for a fact that Gerard de Villers whom de Chalons mentioned along with the 18 vessels also disappeared becoming the most wanted man in France.

All of which adds credence to de Chalons testimony of the 18 vessels leaving port.

Then we have the positive evidence of the coconut fibre on Oak Island dated to the correct period, a fibre that could only have come from the Eastern Mediterranean where, guess what, those Templar vessels that were just in the French port before disappearing had come from.

No, my premises hold water, and one thing everybody here keeps forgetting is that I have no idea where most of those vessels went, I only premise a couple (two or three, maybe one or two more) that eventually took the object generally called the Holy Grail to Nova Scotia.

The proof I mention concerns a few Templar Vessels that stopped at Oak Island for an undetermined period, nothing more. They could have come from any French port (I premise La Rochelle), anybody could have lead the group, (I premise de Villers), they could have carried any kind of treasures, (I premise the Holy Grail as identified by Don Brown), they could have deposited their treasures anywhere, (I premise Annapolis Basin). And btw, I have my own evidence for all of my premises, including the "fact" that I stood on the site near Annapolis Basin in 2009.

Cheers, Loki

 

[lokiblossom]

There being several versions of "what happened", only one CAN be true... but none MUST be true.
There is one hypothesis that has not been advanced, but history and precedent provide it with at LEAST anecdotal support (which ALL hypotheses resulting in Templars on Oak Island LACK) - by "anecdotal support" I mean, "it's happened this way dozens of times to others, maybe the same thing happened here"....

This un-discussed hypothesis is this: The 18-ship "Templar Fleet" sailed off into the sunset - and sank in a storm, losing all hands, leaving no trace.

OCCAM RULES!

And from wherever they sunk the coconut fibre they had brought from the Eastern Mediterranean floated (by itself) into Mahone Bay and settled on Oak Island!
Nice story but somewhat unbelievable! sort of like some of the storys of the lost tribes.

Cheers, loki

 

[lokiblossom]

Eric the Red lost half his fleet going half as far to a KNOWN destination. The North Atlantic is tough even still. In old wood ships it would have been very unforgiving.

This group was also going to known destination with a lot more knowledge of the route than Mr.Red had in the 10th century, and with much better tools for navigation such as the cross-staff! Several vessels built similar to Eric's have made the voyage in modern times in relative safety, such as the one my friend crewed on. Even in the 14th century (the same period of the Templar voyage) it is well recorded that the "round" trip was made often and sometimes by very important religious persons.

Cheers, Loki

 

[Raparee]

Even in the 14th century (the same period of the Templar voyage) it is well recorded that the "round" trip was made often and sometimes by very important religious persons.

Okay. I’ll bite. Who made these trips, when, and what material evidence proves it?

 

[ECS]

...18 is simply a number, we know for a fact that at least that many vessels were in port because of several historical notes...

Please post these historical notes to which you refer that place these vessel in the La Rochelle port during the actual days in question, Loki, which can be verified by contemporary Medieval documents.

 

[lokiblossom]

Okay. I’ll bite. Who made these trips, when, and what material evidence proves it?

Some of the evidence of 14th and 15th century trips to Greenland;
Beginning in the late 13th Century all trading vessels to Greenland from Iceland and Norway, when leaving Greenland were required by law to sail directly to Norway, not stopping in Iceland for trading purposes.

In 1341 the Bishop Ivar Bardarson was sent to Greenland as the new Bishop of Gardar, there was a known correspondence with a Bishop of Gardar as late as 1408. Throughout the early part of the 14th Century there are many notes of different Bishops being sent to Greenland as others were replaced.

Icelandic Annals note that in 1346 a Knarri, arrived from Greenland safely with very much goods (Viking Peasants in the Artic).

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia,The Danish Cartographer Claudius Clavus visited Greenland in 1420 and returned.

Two persons who were recorded to have been married in Greenland in 1408 arrived in Iceland in 1410.

In 1448, Pope Nicholas V, told Icelandic Bishops to send a Bishop and Priests to Greenland, which evidently did not happen as the Greenland settlements were almost gone by then.

There is record of a letter having been sent by the Bishop Arne of Bergen on June 22, 1308, and being received by Biship Tord in Greenland. Interestingly the same year as I premise the Knights Templars made the trip.

Cheers, Loki

 

[ECS]

Immaterial and unrealated references as usual, Loki, Greenland is NOT Oak Island/Nova Scotia, not ever close, nor are those in your references, Templars.

 

[lokiblossom]

Immaterial and unrealated references as usual, Loki, Greenland is NOT Oak Island/Nova Scotia, not ever close, nor are those in your references, Templars.

So I shouldn't have answered Raparee's question? Which is also an answer to Charlie's statement.

 

[ECS]

... Even in the 14th century (the same period of the Templar voyage) it is well recorded that the "round" trip was made often and sometimes by very important religious persons.

There is NO problem with answering fellow TN members, the problem was with the phrasing of the post that alluded to "important religious leaders" made the same "round trip" to Oak Island/Nova Scotia as your alleged "Templar voyage" that is NOT "well recorded".

 

[lokiblossom]

There is NO problem with answering fellow TN members, the problem was with the phrasing of the post that alluded to "important religious leaders" made the same "round trip" to Oak Island/Nova Scotia as your alleged "Templar voyage" that is NOT "well recorded".

No, the problem was I answered a post where I was asked if I could show evidence of the voyages I had mentioned as being to and from Greenland in the 14th Century which was clearly mentioned in the first sentence, and you claimed it had nothing to do with Oak Island. The question that had been asked was also posted with my answer. Now you are trying to save face by attempting to claim I was alluding to important religious leaders making trips to Oak Island. If you take a deep breath you will be ok, just relax, this isn't life or death.

Cheers, Loki

 

[lokiblossom]

Some of the evidence of 14th and 15th century trips to Greenland;
Beginning in the late 13th Century all trading vessels to Greenland from Iceland and Norway, when leaving Greenland were required by law to sail directly to Norway, not stopping in Iceland for trading purposes.

In 1341 the Bishop Ivar Bardarson was sent to Greenland as the new Bishop of Gardar, there was a known correspondence with a Bishop of Gardar as late as 1408. Throughout the early part of the 14th Century there are many notes of different Bishops being sent to Greenland as others were replaced.

Icelandic Annals note that in 1346 a Knarri, arrived from Greenland safely with very much goods (Viking Peasants in the Artic).

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia,The Danish Cartographer Claudius Clavus visited Greenland in 1420 and returned.

Two persons who were recorded to have been married in Greenland in 1408 arrived in Iceland in 1410.

In 1448, Pope Nicholas V, told Icelandic Bishops to send a Bishop and Priests to Greenland, which evidently did not happen as the Greenland settlements were almost gone by then.

There is record of a letter having been sent by the Bishop Arne of Bergen on June 22, 1308, and being received by Biship Tord in Greenland. Interestingly the same year as I premise the Knights Templars made the trip.

Cheers, Loki

ECS, Here is my post that evidently has you upset. Please read the first sentence and you will see I never mentioned important religious leaders sailing to Oak Island!

Cheers, Loki

 

[ECS]

This group was also going to known destination with a lot more knowledge of the route than Mr.Red had in the 10th century, and with much better tools for navigation such as the cross-staff! Several vessels built similar to Eric's have made the voyage in modern times in relative safety, such as the one my friend crewed on. Even in the 14th century (the same period of the Templar voyage) it is well recorded that the "round" trip was made often and sometimes by very important religious persons.

Your POST#625 does NOT mention Greenland, and this is your post that I referenced and its ambiguous mention of that alleged Templar and "important religious leaders".
PS: The title of this thread which you started concerns Knights Templar treasure in Nova Scotia not Greenland.
Cheers, Loki! Nice dodging try but NO Cohiba!

 

[lokiblossom]

Your POST#625 does NOT mention Greenland, and this is your post that I referenced and its ambiguous mention of that alleged Templar and "important religious leaders".
PS: The title of this thread which you started concerns Knights Templar treasure in Nova Scotia not Greenland.
Cheers, Loki! Nice dodging try but NO Cohiba!

The first sentence in post 628 answers the where I was alluding to, "Some of the evidence of 14th and 15th century trips to Greenland" the same post you were referencing in your very next post 629, when you called me out for not including Oak Island. Perhaps the problem is that you are too quick to attack and at the same time don't read well.

Again, even with this post you fail to note what we were currently discussing, so I will bring you up to date on how it related to Oak Island.

Charlie had indicated that in the 10th century half of Eric the Red's fleet was lost when he first brought settlers to Greenland, meaning how dangerous the trip from Iceland was even only to Greenland (one other fact that deserves mention is that of the half of Eric's fleet that didn't complete the voyage many had simply returned to Iceland). I was attempting to show that later voyages to Greenland with better knowledge of the dangers faced and better navigation equipment, became safer and even somewhat reliable with even important religious persons making the trip (to Greenland) as late as the 14th century, the same period as the premised Templar voyage. This would indicate, imho, that a few Templars contemplating a voyage to Eric's Son's Vinland (somewhere beyond Greenland, meaning in this case Oak Island) would certainly consider it to be doable.

Another point that I have not brought up earlier is that it was the Pope who ordered the Icelanders to send a Bishop to Greenland at least sometime before 1308, the same Pope the Templars had answered to for 200 years. Did the Church, which certainly had knowledge of Greenland also have knowledge of the route at least as far as Greenland?


Cheers, Loki

 

[DaveVanP]

Interesting to note that coconut hulls were found during 1970's and 1990's archeological work in Albany NY (Fort Orange), in a structure positively dated to the 1640's...but the coconut hulls (presumably from Brazil or the Antilles) were carbon dated to approximately "800 years before present"...hmmm...

 

[lokiblossom]

Interesting to note that coconut hulls were found during 1970's and 1990's archeological work in Albany NY (Fort Orange), in a structure positively dated to the 1640's...but the coconut hulls (presumably from Brazil or the Antilles) were carbon dated to approximately "800 years before present"...hmmm...

It would be interesting if there is a credible source for this information, as all the scientific information that I have from after the year 2000 claims there were no coconuts in Brazil or the Antilles before 1500.

Cheers, Loki

 

[ECS]

The first sentence in post 628 answers the where I was alluding to, "Some of the evidence of 14th and 15th century trips to Greenland" the same post you were referencing in your very next post 629, when you called me out for not including Oak Island.
Perhaps the problem is that you are too quick to attack and at the same time don't read well...

POST# 629:
"Immaterial and unrelated references as usual. Loki, Greenland is NOT Oak Island/Nova Scotia. not even close. not are those in your references, Templars".
As I mentioned on POST#634, that was an observational comment on your POST# 625, NOT POST#628, and NOT as you now claim as an attack.
As for stating that one "don't read well", with your misunderstanding the referenced post, 'NUFF SAID!

 

[DaveVanP]

Then we have the positive evidence of the coconut fibre on Oak Island dated to the correct period, a fibre that could only have come from the Eastern Mediterranean where, guess what, those Templar vessels that were just in the French port before disappearing had come from.

The proof I mention …. Cheers, Loki

The"proof" you mention ISN'T PROOF - it is SUPPOSITION.

BTW.. Coconut shells and fiber has been excavated at Ft. Orange (Albany, NY) in a structure absolutely confirmed as being beilt in 1647, but the fibre was carbon-dated to "800 years before present"...perhaps there is something inherent to cocnut fiber that prevents it from being accurately carbon dated.

Also... It is documented in Peter Martyr d'Anghieras' "Decades of the New World" (De Orbe Novo Decades) that coconuts were "found throughout the many new lands of the Spanish" (Martyr specifically lists San Juan [now Puerto Rico], Santo Domingo, Panama and Hispanola) prior to his 1511 publication of "Decades". He described the "date trees" (the ONLY known palm to Europeans at the time) with a fruit that was "hard, and the size of a man's head; that when pounded fiercely, would split giving sweet milk and white meat". How would coconut palms - which you claim NEVER existed in the New World prior to the Portuguese introducing them in 1499 - how could they become so ubiquitous in "the Spanish lands"), in only a few years?

Martyr went on to say that the Taino and Arawak peoples (who called the tree "coca", by the way) used the fronds for thatching and the fiber for making rough cloth and cord....and had been doing so for centuries. Could this also explain how Mayan hieroglyphs and artwork from pre-800 C.E. also depict palm trees bearing "fruit the size of a man's head"?

 

[lokiblossom]

The"proof" you mention ISN'T PROOF - it is SUPPOSITION.

BTW.. Coconut shells and fiber has been excavated at Ft. Orange (Albany, NY) in a structure absolutely confirmed as being beilt in 1647, but the fibre was carbon-dated to "800 years before present"...perhaps there is something inherent to cocnut fiber that prevents it from being accurately carbon dated.

Also... It is documented in Peter Martyr d'Anghieras' "Decades of the New World" (De Orbe Novo Decades) that coconuts were "found throughout the many new lands of the Spanish" (Martyr specifically lists San Juan [now Puerto Rico], Santo Domingo, Panama and Hispanola) prior to his 1511 publication of "Decades". He described the "date trees" (the ONLY known palm to Europeans at the time) with a fruit that was "hard, and the size of a man's head; that when pounded fiercely, would split giving sweet milk and white meat". How would coconut palms - which you claim NEVER existed in the New World prior to the Portuguese introducing them in 1499 - how could they become so ubiquitous in "the Spanish lands"), in only a few years?

Martyr went on to say that the Taino and Arawak peoples (who called the tree "coca", by the way) used the fronds for thatching and the fiber for making rough cloth and cord....and had been doing so for centuries. Could this also explain how Mayan hieroglyphs and artwork from pre-800 C.E. also depict palm trees bearing "fruit the size of a man's head"?

The report you should read is "Coconuts in the Americas"; published September 2013, Authors Charles Clement, Daniel Zizumbo-Villarreal, Cecil Brown, Alessandro alves-Pereira and Hugh Harries. Their conclusion "It has been clearly established that the Portuguese introduced coconuts to the Cape Verde Islands in 1499, and these supplied the Atlantic Coasts and the Caribbeann in the 1500s".

It was never denied that coconuts existed earlier on the Pacific Coasts of South America, Central America or more specifically the West Coast of Panama. Also, it is important to remember that the early explorers were supposed to find India for their investors, even naming the indigenous peoples "Indians". Its sort of like the Salt Lake City group finding information to prove their existence, or perhaps its only supposition?

As for your Ft. Orange site, I did find where Coconut fiber had been located but could find no dating reports, perhaps you could elaborate.

Cheers, Loki