The validity of the Knights Templars and Oak Island

[CanadianTrout]

See my 3rd post from the beginning.

I tried to warn ya not to get involved here...

 

[Rebel - KGC]

THAT you did, CT, THAT you did... 'nuff said.

 

[lamar]

See my 3rd post from the beginning.

I tried to warn ya not to get involved here...

Dear Canadian Trout;
You seem to be severely allergic to facts my friend. What's wrong with historical facts? In my very humble opinion, knowing the facts beforehand can save a lot of wasted time, money, effort and frustration. Had FinderKeeper actually RESEARCHED the facts, they may have influenced his decision on whether or not to embark on an exploratory dig in search of evidence of pre-Columbian viking artifacts.

And depending on the media's version of history for one's background research simply will not do either. They are not in the game for historical accuracy, they are in it for viewer ratings and the more interesting they are able to make a story, the more viewers they garner. The media's so-called *experts* are only experts at trying to get as high of a viewer rating as they possibly can.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Smithbrown]

Brian Smith's investigation into Henry Sinclair and the voyage to America might be a good place to start.
http://www.alastairhamilton.com/sinclair.htm

Smithbrown

 

[CanadianTrout]

HAhahaha ur funny lamar. Always looking for a historical/philisophical/whatever debate where ever you can find one. I am not allergic to facts. How dare you and how "holier than thou" of you! In fact, I agree with all of your post, except the part where you assume the role of my physician and diagnose my allergies.

I suggest you re-read my 3rd post again. Read the words that are there; it's a very short post and not overly complicated.
Don't let your brain subconciously twist it into what you want to see so you can enter into "debate mode".

All I said was I was not up for arguing anything with you (or "debating" dont care what you call it) and that I was not interested in discussing what FinderKeeper had researched or not researched. That's up to him and his crew and how they run their operation and / or utilize their finances / resources. Personally, i don't care and neither should you. It's none of your business.

I simpley wish him well and asked to be kept in the loop of what he discovers. If its Templar, well then HOLY SH%@* !!! Wouldn't that be something. If it's from a early 20th century steam ship, then so what.

If someone else made the claim then maybe some PM's maybe in order or something?

Aren't there dedicated Master Debater forums around? Some people just like to have some friendly banter and toss ideas around without getting jumped on by detractors spouting "proove it, proove it!" like.... well you and one other.... just saying...

 

[lamar]

HAhahaha ur funny lamar. Always looking for a historical/philisophical/whatever debate where ever you can find one. I am not allergic to facts. How dare you and how "holier than thou" of you! In fact, I agree with all of your post, except the part where you assume the role of my physician and diagnose my allergies.

I suggest you re-read my 3rd post again. Read the words that are there; it's a very short post and not overly complicated.
Don't let your brain subconciously twist it into what you want to see so you can enter into "debate mode".

All I said was I was not up for arguing anything with you (or "debating" dont care what you call it) and that I was not interested in discussing what FinderKeeper had researched or not researched. That's up to him and his crew and how they run their operation and / or utilize their finances / resources. Personally, i don't care and neither should you. It's none of your business.

I simpley wish him well and asked to be kept in the loop of what he discovers. If its Templar, well then HOLY SH%@* !!! Wouldn't that be something. If it's from a early 20th century steam ship, then so what.

If someone else made the claim then maybe some PM's maybe in order or something?

Aren't there dedicated Master Debater forums around? Some people just like to have some friendly banter and toss ideas around without getting jumped on by detractors spouting "proove it, proove it!" like.... well you and one other.... just saying...

Dear Canadian Trout;
Personally, you SHOULD care, because you and I are the ones who receive the fallout from misguided treasure hunts. Why do you suppose that the various local and national governments are so opposed to individuals or small organizations searching for historical artifacts? Most likely we will see our rights either completely eliminated or severely restricted because of some of our brethren. If you are unable to see this, then I cannot help you.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[FinderKeeper]

Dear Lamar, It is easy to see that you are not a treasure hunter but you always wanted to be one You do not have what it takes so you go to other sites and put down other treasure hunters to make your self look good or YOU WORK FOR THE DEP of HERITAGE and CULTURE and this is the only way they can get back at us. You are against treasure hunting in Nova Scotia and you don't own a metal detector so you are not a treasure hunter WHY are you posting on this site Nice try but what you have to say won't stop us or anyone else from what we want to do

If you are real what have you found or what have you done that makes you worth the post
Your FRIEND
FINDER KEEPER

 

[lamar]

Dear Lamar, It is easy to see that you are not a treasure hunter but you always wanted to be one You do not have what it takes so you go to other sites and put down other treasure hunters to make your self look good or YOU WORK FOR THE DEP of HERITAGE and CULTURE and this is the only way they can get back at us. Nice try but what you have to say won't stop us or anyone else from what we want to do If you are real what have you found or what have you done that makes you worth the post
Your FRIEND
FINDER KEEPER

Dear FinderKeeper;
First, in order for one to find a treasure, there must first be a treasure for one to find. If there does not exist a treasure, then all of the hoping in the world will not make one magically appear out of thin air, my friend.

This is the case with the Templars. You are searching for something that does not exist, nor has it ever existed. We happen to know where all of the Templar holdings were at the time of their demise and their holdings did not include a substantial amount of hard currency. The reason for this is because they were *loaning* the money out to fellow Christians and then charging a *fee* when they recuperated their capitol. No matter how one labels this, it's called *usury* which was, is now ,and shall forever remain a sin for those who follow the Christian faith.

This is why the Templars were disbanded and this is why they had no treasures to speak of. When the Hospitallers took over the management of all Templar assets, they recouped the investments made by the Templars, minus the *fees* involved.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[FinderKeeper]

Dear Lamar, You did avoid the last question so let me state it again. This is a treasure hunting site and you think you know all of the answers so what did you find in the past and what tools of the trade do you use. The laws are about to change in your country and it will effect you more than the outsiders. You won't be able to dig in your back yard for artifacts. We came to your country with a class A permit, not to steal some treasure but to help save your history so get it straight if you are going to quote me We get a permit so the government knows were we are and what we plan to do . We came to Nova Scotia for 3 days and spend thousands of dollars to look for a Viking Ship. The problem is with the people that live in Nova Scotia and dive for sunken ships every weekend for years and keep what they find . We work with the law and we return everything we find but we would like a reward or get credit for the find. We are working with the History Channel on doing a TV show now but in the spring we hope to return to Nova Scotia with them to do a show on the Viking Ship and the Templar Treasure. See you then.
Your Friend
FINDER KEEPER

 

[Galen]

Also, since there are so many *experts* around, why bother studying the history of the Norsemen? For example, MOST Norsemen were rather tall in comparison to their other European counterparts with brunette hair. The blonde and red hair did not appear in most Norse tribes, excepting those Norse who settled in Ireland and what is now Great Britain. The Scandinavian Norse were typically darker haired and darker skinned because they originated in what is now present-day Russia. It wasn't until the latter part of their existence that they started to affect blonde hair and blue or green eyes.

I'm a bit late to the party, sorry about that. A bit off-topic too, I guess.. anyway, this post caused a few question marks to start jumping around in my head.

As a Scandinavian (Technically Swedish, but historically Norwegian, so..) I'm quite interested in these things, and I'm kinda questioning one of these statement. I have never heard anything even similar to your statement about the Norse originating in Russia. Not that I'd mind if they did, given how awesome Russia is, but they were not Slavic. At least not from what I know. Would you mind explaining a bit? I do however admit that Norwegians tend to be somewhat darker than Swedes and Danes, from what I have read due to their large contacts with the Britsh Isles. Don't know how true that is, but still..

Also, a fairly large portion of the Icelandic population were Gaelic thralls, so I'd say that even if theoretically red hair wasn't all that common in Scandinavia, it wouldn't be impossible.

More unrelated: The thing about height. The average Norse male was apparently about 171 cm tall during this period. I don't have any idea how tall other Europeans/North American natives were, but it'd be interesting to know.
Note: I'm by no means taking a stance in the thread's discussion.

 

[Sheldon J]

There are all kinds of legends and un verifiable stories in print, you can chase these until the cows come home and who knows you may find some treasure in with the trash.....

 

[FinderKeeper]

Viking Ship Found in Manhoe Bay ?

I have been checking out the Zeno Narratives on Prince Henry 's trip to the new world and it backs up everything we claim to have found. The link to Zeno Map is below. It tells of a great storm they were in for 6 days when they left Greenland and headed for the new world. Then a cannon from Prince Henrys ship was found in the northern part of the Nova Scotia waters. If a ship was in this storm for days and over loaded I could see it turning over and the cannon falling in the ocean. Than the story says they built a ship at Guysborough Harbor that tells me they had a ship wreck as we have said. But there is no proof that they did build a ship at Guysborough I believe they built the ship in Manhoe Bay , I have a Viking Ship burried in Manhoe Bay on Hobson Island and they found none in Guysborough. The Vikings did bury their old ships.
There are oak trees on Oak Island and a copper mine near New Ross and a castle with foundations near New Ross. The Vikings needed iron or copper rivits to build a ship and they needed oak wood so why wouldn't they land in Manhoe Bay were they had everything they needed. Manhoe Bay is the place everything happen but I am sure to throw everyone off that would be looking for the treasure they said Guysborough. After all if you look at Zenos Map it shows all of lands they went to but Nova Scotia in not on it. Would you show the place were you hid the treasure.

http://bgrahamonline.com/sinclair.html and http://mastermason.com/WallerLodge/zeno.htm

 

[Smithbrown]

Actually no cannon was found from Prince Henry's ship. The cannon you refer to was located at Louisbourg. It is not identical to the cannon in Venice which is bedded breechloading gun, but is a swivel brrechloading gun, identical to guns found in 17th and 18th century wrecks.

Vikings did not bury their ships; pagan vikings used old ships for burying important persons, but otherwise old ships were re-used to build new ones, as shown in the boats at the Roskilde museum.

Smithbrown.

 

[FinderKeeper]

This was taken from the link I posted above ( 600th Celebration) and below the red print it tells that this cannon is exactly the same as the one on display in Venice. I am not the expert that made this up, the ones that did this page are the experts. Check it out I have 2 other sites that back this up and I can post if need be.

Proofs that the Voyage occurred
Niven Sinclair, of London, Great Britain, a businessman, researcher, and inspirer, presented a comprehensive set of "Proofs". These are the result of Niven's tireless efforts to re-trace Henry Sinclair's footsteps around the world. Facts were derived from many reliable references. Aspiring for greatness, Henry became a Baron in 1358, Ambassador to Copenhagen in 1363, Crusader in 1365, and Jarl of Orkney in 1379. While serving as Ambassador, Henry had contact with Carlo Zeno, Ivar Bardsson, Paul Knutson, and of course, Queen Margaret, at which time his planning for the voyage began. In 1392 he went to London to purchase some ships. The "Proofs" are as follows: Zeno Map: Having enlisted Nicolo Zeno as fleet commander several years earlier, four ships were dispatched by Henry to chart the northern seas during 1393 - 1395. The Treaty of Kalmer was signed in 1397. Contingency plans: Ten year prior to this, Prince Henry gave indication of his forthcoming Voyage, because he distributed much of his land; to his brother John he gave Pentland and Shetland, brother David received the lands of Aberdeen, and to his daughter Elizabeth, he directed that his lands in Norway would go to her if he died without a mail heir. Accuracy of Zeno Map: For the next several centuries, the Zeno Map was used by mariners and recognized by such well-known cartographers as Ruscelli, Ortelius, and Cornielle. Professor Hapgood found 37 points of identity between the Zeno Map and recent aerial surveys by the US Air Force. Zeno Narrative: Many references in the Narrative could not have been fabricated by a writer two centuries later. These include the Spring of Pitch and name references to places. 14th Century Cannon: Found in the waters of Louisburg Harbor, this cannon is exactly the same as one on display in Venice, which is authenticated to be late 14th century in origin. Newport Tower: Many features in this Tower provide good evidence, though contested, that it was built by the Sinclair expedition. Legends of the Micmacs: There are many clues in the oral history of the Native Americans which indicate the influence of Henry Sinclair in their land. Westford Knight Carving: Located in Westford, MA, there is a stone ledge onto which is carved a full sized armorial effigy of a 14th century knight, holding a shield bearing the crest of Clan Gunn. Boat Stone: An egg-shaped rock measuring about 18" diameter was found in Westford, MA, bearing a carved impression of a 14th century ship and the numerals "184" with an arrow. Scottish evidence in Rosslyn Chapel: Carved in stone about 1450 there are some Aloe and some Corn, both believed to have been unknown in Europe at the time, unless they were transported back from America by Prince Henry.

 

[Smithbrown]

No, none of them are experts in artillery. You have a problem with this field in that you are having to assume that what people are writing is true. And unfortunately, it is often wishful thinking. Have you examined the cannons in Luoisbourg and Venice? Have you researched their history? Have you comparede these two wrought-iron guns with every other surviving wrought-iron gun t establish if the claims being made are true?

As I said, these two guns are not identical; the Venetian gun cannot be identified as having any connection with the Zeno brothers; It was recovered from the Lido in the last century and could have been lost at any date until the 16th century.
Smithbrown

 

[FinderKeeper]

OK I did check out the cannon story and Smith is right I have enclosed a paper from the Nova Scotia Historical Society and the cannon is not the same as said in the story clip below. You know when I need info I have to go through many stories and Smith is right, some of the writers twist the truth or add something to the story that's not proven. I don't know what to think now because there are experts out there that agree and disagree on everything. So when I quote them it makes me look bad

 

[Smithbrown]

Obsolete by the end of the 14th century?

Note the date on this one: http://www.gtj.org.uk/en/large/item/GTJ18490/

 

[Smithbrown]

Nice drawing here of the Mary Rose wrought-iron guns, went down in the 1540s, carrying guns mazde from wrought-iron hoop and staves

http://nautarch.tamu.edu/class/316/carrack/

 

[Smithbrown]

late 16th century examples

http://www.melfisher.org/cannonsurvey/stjohncannons.htm

 

[Smithbrown]

and an early 17th century example:
http://www.melfisher.org/swivelgun.htm

Pretty good for a technology supposedly obsolete by the late 14th century.... still going in the 1700s.