Arcadia Discussion Zone

Lovuian, had mentioned a Rosslyn connection to the Templars, which I myself didn't have much interest in. Now after taking another look I am having difficulty in not believing there was some kind of link. For one thing Balantrodach and Rosslyn are less than 4 miles apart, with many battles fought in the area. One of these "The Battle of Roslin" of 1303. During this battle, supposedly a retired Templar, "prior Abernethy" had an important role on the side of the Scots. We have been led to believe that if Templars had participated in any of these fights it would have been on the side of the English. As for the Sinclairs and their alledged hatred of the order, which resulted in Sinclairs witness against them in the Edinburgh heresy trials of 1309, Michael Turnbull writes. "Although forty-one witnesses were ORDERED to appear, sworn to tell the truth and each legally examined (including abbots, priest and domestic servants of the Templars and Henry St Clair) their summarised report did not testify to any significant evidence of heresy or immorality, other than a culture of unnecessary secrecy, a tendency to avarice and an uncaring attitude towards the poor whom they neglected in favor of the great and wealthy." There are two interesting points with this, one is that the witnesses were ordered to appear, of course in any trial witnesses are summoned to appear, but this does indicate the Sinclairs did not jump on the bandwagon to find these men guilty of heresy and as a matter of fact they evidently did not witness to any heresy. I know the chapel was built c. 1446, but Rosslyn Castle itself was built more then a hundred years earlier. I'm just thinking there must have been quite a bit of interaction between the owners of Rosslyn and the Knights at Balantrodach.

So, based on Turnbull's use of the word "ordered" instead of "summoned" (which might be significant if we were discussing law courts) and the fact that the verdict was no significant incidence of heresy, you're concluding that Henry St. Clair was forced to appear against his will? Or that he had nothing bad to say about them?

You should probably go the extra mile here, Bill, and find out what actually transpired before you make unfounded assumptions pinned on nothing more credible than a modern author's choice of terms.

TCP

don't know very much about geography eh Roger. Thats too bad, as you seem to know all there is about everything else. I see your jerkitis symptoms havn,t gone away yet either.

no not exactly, I was comparing the two terms, not saying one meant more than the other. If Henry Sinclair did indeed bring up evidence of wrongdoings by the order I cannot find it and I would appreciate any links you could throw my way. btw, I was not saying that the Rosslyn Chapel was dedicated to the Templars or anything like that, only that after several hundred years of existance of less then 4 miles between the two (Templars and Sinclair clan), it seems there would have had to be some interaction, other than only hatred, as my friend Roger mentioned.
There is also the matter of Hughes de Payens actually going to Roslin to procure lands for the preceptory, this certain area must have had some early importance. If you have any links on this Tim, I also would appreciate them. thanks---Bill

Actually, Guillaume de Saint-Clair (who was the first St. Clair Baron of Rosslyn) didn't become the Templars' neighbor until 1280 - less than thirty years before the Order was suspended. See Burke's Peerage, Debrett's Peerage, Cockayne's Complete Peerage and The Scots Peerage, etc. I'm afraid the only place you'll find the wishful myth of the St. Clairs holding Rosslyn since the early 12th century are in more modern genre books which cite Andrew and Niven Sinclair as primary sources. And their websites, of course.



Well, if they did go there, they likely would have met the landlord whose surname would have been Roscelin ("Scottified" as Roskelyn), another Norman family. The above-mentioned Guillaume de Saint-Clair only acquired the barony by means of a fortunate marriage to its heiress, Amecia de Roskelyn, and again that was in 1280 - rather late for Hugues de Payen.

TCP

Roger, you're repeating yourself.

a Frankish knight from the Champagne region, was the co-founder and first Grand Master of the Knights Templar. With Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, he created the Latin Rule, the code of behavior for the Order.

As Grand Master, De Payens led the Order for almost twenty years until his death, helping to establish the Order's foundations as an important and influential international military and financial institution.

On his visit to England and Scotland in 1128, he raised men and money for the Order, and also founded their first House in London and another near Edinburgh at Balantrodoch [1], now known as Temple, Midlothian.

It has recently been claimed that the wife of Hugues de Payens was Catherine St. Clair within the context of the alternative histories of Rosslyn.

A biography of Hugues de Payen by Thierry Leroy[3] identifies his wife and the mother of his children as Elizabeth de Chappes. The book draws its information on the marriage from local church cartularies dealing chiefly with the disposition of the Grand Master's properties, the earliest alluding to Elizabeth as his wife in 1113 and others spanning Payen's lifetime, the period following his death and lastly her own death in 1170.

Married men could become associate or honourary templars, and they and their wives (if they lived apart from the brothers) could retire and live on Templar land. They were known as confraters.
http://gordonnapierhistory.blogspot.com/



The reference showing that Elizabeth de Payns was Hugh's wife is contained in:

The Charters of the Court of Champagne under Henri I, Henri II and Marie (1152-1197), by John Benton. It is part of the Archives kept at the Municipal Library of Troyes.

It is a hand-typed book. It was deposited at the Archives of Aube, in Troyes, during the 1960s; it is the result of a study done by John Benton on the charters of the counts of Champagne.

Some say that she had three children Thibauldus Isabella and Guidin
According to Canon law she went into the convent so he could take his vows when he died she was released

John Benton was a 20th century historian; he was a specialist of medieval Champagne.

would you consider TCP and Roger him legit?

Hey Wayward
It is interesting that out of all of Scotland Payens picked and visited
Balantrodoch
In 1129, the Council of Troyes formally recognized the Order. Balantrodach became their FIRST principal Templar seat and Preceptory in Scotland

so when my guide said it was Headquarters for Scotland it was
We are talking about David I
The term "Davidian Revolution" is used by many scholars to summarise the changes which took place in the Kingdom of Scotland during his reign. These included his foundation of burghs, implementation of the ideals of Gregorian Reform, foundation of monasteries, Normanisation of the Scottish government, and the introduction of feudalism through immigrant French and Anglo-French knights.

are we seeing an IMMIGRATION of FRENCH knights or ANGLO FRENCH knights

Turnbull talks about the trials of the English Templars
Trial of the Templars at Holyrood in December 1309 the trial was unable to conduct in solemnity because Robert the Bruce
Scottish Patriots were attacking Holyrood was held by Master John Soluere of Pope Clement V and William Lamberton Bishop of St Andrews

the church was trying to conduct a trial but Bruce who was excommunicated by the church seem to be disrupting the trial of the Templars even though they be English ...he could have just let them be tried and attack later after they burned them at the stake...Timing is everything

But yes Wayward lets get to that trial where Sir Henry St Clair attended
Walter de Clifton the head Templar was on trial but his predecessor John Housefleet threw off his habit and left the order
???????WHY????? Clifton served 10 years in the Templars...there was another fugitive whose whereabouts noone knew
they went into hiding...their were some other names ...but lets get to the nitty gritty

the trial...Although 40 witnesses came and swore...this were abbots priest and St Clair
the summarized statements showed no heresy
but they did testify to their secrecy and their not giving to the poor who they neglected for the wealthy

Your right Wayward
St Clair didn't testify against the Templars for heresy
he forty testified about some Englishmen who were greedy and mean...from what I know of the Middle Ages these men were standard fare...being greedy and mean isn't a crime ...
but lets face it these trials were a joke
it gets down to the Church prosecutes Templars end of story

Hey Wayward
have you read about the Templar
Brian de Jay, preceptor of the Knights Templar of England, who died at Falkirk in 1298.
he was born in the small lordship of Jay, near Leintwardine, northern Herefordshire. Radnor Forest, which was the outmost post of the Welsh warriors in Central Wales, was 4-5 km away from Leintwardine, and perhaps 3-4 km away from Jay.
Lord de Jay was a vassal of the Mortimers, barons of Wigmore. The largest church in Leintwardine, where the young Brian de Jay and his family must attend mass every Sunday, was St. Mary Magdalene.

he was in Edward Longshanks’s camp the eve of the battle of Falkirk, this time against the Scots. There occurred a rebellion of the Welsh archers. We do not know whether Brian de Jay was any influential in bringing peace to the English camp. What we do know is that he was entrusted with the command of the Welsh mercenaries.

As a military commander, Brian de Jay proved to be a man equal to the task. The Welsh archers were decisive in defeating the Scottish schiltrons. However, when the battle was already won for the English King and William Wallace fled from the battlefield, Brian de Jay felt a necessity to pursue him. The Templar caught the Scot in a place that is still called Brian’s ford. They engaged in a hand-to-hand duel. The Templar lost and Wallace slew him. It was 22nd July, 1298, St. Mary Magdalene’s Day.

Bannockburn was fought on St John's day,


1293: Brian de Jay met with Jacques de Molay at Limassol (Cyprus)
Brian de Jay was Master of Scotland when he went to Cyprus to meet with Jacques de Molay (according to the Calendar of Close Rolls)

and another thing Bill remember this
when the Grandmaster of England is gone ...then the Grandmaster of Scotland is in charge
so there is a time when Scotland Templar Grandmaster is in charge of England Scotland and Ireland
while the Grandmaster of England is gone
http://templarhistory.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=419&start=15

I there was no doubt some interaction, c'mon the the chapel was built OVER A CENTURY after the KT order ended. I suggest posters read Robert Cooper's book The Rosslyn Hoax ? which clears up a lot nonsense about Rosslyn Chapel and Scottish Freemasonry.

again Pilrig, I did not mean that the Templars were involved in the construction of the chapel (I thought I had said that already). But they did live very close to each other (Sinclairs and Templars), they must have met on the road, talked, had meetings, invited the other guy over to dinner. Even with in-laws a person doesn't like there is some interaction. I have been into "The Rosslyn Hoax" and do intend to look into the links that Tim left, but at this point I am basicly just asking. While I am asking, why did "de Payens" consider Balantrodach so important to the Templars so as to actually go there and procure it for the order as one of their first holdings?

Burned at the stake? What gave you that idea? None of the English or Scottish Templars were executed (Although the English Grand Master died in prison for refusing to confess.)

There are any number of reasons for the timing Bruce's assault on Holyrood: to challenge the English king's authority to hold show trials in Scotland, to capture Soluere (Papal legates make terrific hostages) or simplyanger at the Church over his excommunication. If he wants to be King of Scotland, Bruce has to take Holyrood eventually, so why no attack while everyone's distracted by the trial.



In addition to Clifton the other defendants were William de Middleton and Thomas Tocci. Clifton and Middleton had been arrested and Tocci (whose name certainly doesn't sound Scottish or English) who turned himself in.



Correct. A Catholic court found that all the accused were good Catholics and not Cathars or Gnostics and that they did not worship idols, the sun, Mary Magdalene, Isis or heads.

What St. Clair actually testified to is that the Tempars "were not willing to offer hospitality to the poor", and "very anxious to acquire the property of others for their Order, by fair means or foul" (in other words, that they were thieves) He also commented that "if the Templars had been faithful Christians they would in no way have lost the Holy Land".



Actually under Church Law it is. Not a "burning at the stake" crime but for a rich order of "poor knights" failure to render charity could be used (in addition to other charges) as an excuse to dissolve the Order. That's why the Templars' neighbors are constantly being asked to swear to it. St. Clair implies the KTs sometimes use foul means to acquire other people's property, which is also a civil crime. And while it may sound weird to us the accusation of losing the Holy land due to lack of faith might be taken seriously in a world where trial by combat was considered a legitimate way of proving guilt or innocence.



Agreed.

Father Silence

Excellent book written by the curator of the Grand Lodge of Scotland Museum and Library. Full of verifiable facts that undo the Sinclair myths quite handily:

http://www.rosslynhoax.com/coopercv.htm

TCP

exactly Wayward

a theory or thinking out loud

was it because a relative of Payens owned the land and dedicated it to the order
or one who was in the order gave them the land
Thanks Father Silence
and the only reason I said Burned at the stake was that the Church burned them for heresy in France
the Church in England was less apt to prosecute so severely in fact they balked at first for trying the Templars in England but then the King of England agreed


Father Silence
Wow did he say that outloud.....you know many had to wonder why they had been beaten so badly
perhaps Father Silence St Clair meant if the Pope wasn't so greedy and that they followed the Pope so faithfully who wasn't a faithful Christian following the laws of Jesus ...they wouldn't have loss

the words "faithful Christians" can be interpreted many ways when you think about it
Remember it St Clair who takes the excommunicated Bruce's heart to the Holy Land



how did they pick
Balantrodach
Anybody know?

King Edward I was campaigning against the French in Flanders when he learned of the defeat of his northern army at the Battle of Stirling Bridge
battle of the First War of Scottish Independence. On 11 September 1297,

look at the date wayward 9/11
Andrew Moray and William Wallace defeated the combined English forces of John de Warenne, 7th Earl of Surrey and Hugh de Cressingham near Stirling, on the River Forth.
Warrenne married the penniless French Alice de Lusignan, Countess of Surrey

The Lusignans were among the French nobles who made great careers in the Crusades

Almost every head of the house of Lusignan was a crusader.....
http://www.badgergate.demon.co.uk/LUSIG ... signan.pdf

Correct, and Douglas never got further than Spain due to being killed by the Moors.

...which nonetheless fulfilled Bruce's request that the heart be carried into battle "against God's foes". It was returned to Scotland by William Keith.

The excommunication had been lifted since 1324, five years before King Robert's death.

Father Silence

Because King David offered it for free?

Father Silence

Sir Henry St Clair, 7th Baron of Rosslyn

After the death of Robert the Bruce, Sir Henry’s two sons, William and John, were chosen along with Sir James Douglas and Sir Robert Logan of Restalrig to carry the King’s heart to Jerusalem and deposit it in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. They never reached their destination; during a fierce battle with the Moors at Teba in Spain in 1330, William, his brother John, and Douglas were killed.

You know Roger
I'll answer you with a picture from the year


Templar Knights being Burned at the Stake in France. Illustration from the anonymous Chronicle, 'From the Creation of the World until 1384.'
Source: Bibliothèque Municipale, Besançon, France. Erich Lessing/Art Resource, NY.

King Philip the “Fair” of France and Pope Clement V accused the Templars of atheism, sodomy, blasphemy, and worse. Templars were tortured into forced confessions before being executed in large numbers. Scholars have debated whether any charges were true, but it is believed that they were innocent of the accusations and the process against them was solely for gaining access to their wealth and to ensure they could not become a political threat. Even the Catholic Church has apologized.
http://atheism.about.com/od/crusades/ig/Templar-Knights/Templar-Knights-Burning.htm

Father Silence
that is a possibility
David I gave them the land
Payens relatives gave the land to the Templars

In 1307, many of the Order's members in France were arrested, tortured into giving false confessions, and then burned at the stake.[7] Under pressure from King Philip, Pope Clement V disbanded the Order in 1312. The abrupt disappearance of a major part of the European infrastructure gave rise to speculation and legends, which have kept the "Templar" name alive into the modern day.

Grand Master Jacques de Molay, who had confessed under torture, retracted his statement. His associate Geoffrey de Charney, Preceptor of Normandy, followed de Molay's example and insisted on his innocence. Both men were declared guilty of being relapsed heretics, and they were sentenced to burn alive at the stake in Paris on March 18, 1314.

Geoffroi de Charney
de Molay and Geoffroi de Charney arose. They had been guilty, they said, not of the crimes imputed to them, but of basely betraying their Order to save their own lives. It was pure and holy; the charges were fictitious and the confessions false. Hastily the cardinals delivered them to the Prevot of Paris, and retired to deliberate on this unexpected contingency, but they were saved all trouble. 'When the news was carried to Philippe he was furious. A short consultation with his council only was required. The canons pronounced that a relapsed heretic was to be burned without a hearing; the facts were notorious and no formal judgment by the papal commission need be waited for. That same day, by sunset, a pile was erected on a small island in the Seine, the Isle des Juifs, near the palace garden. There de Molay and de Charney were slowly burned to death, refusing all offers of pardon for retraction, and bearing their torment with a composure which won for them the reputation of martyrs among the people, who reverently collected their ashes as relics'

Philippe's death was spoken of as a retribution for his destruction of the Templars, and Clement was described as shedding tears of remorse on his death-bed for three great crimes, the poisoning of Henry VI, and the ruin of the Templars and Beguines.


One legendary artifact that does have some connection with the Templars is the Shroud of Turin. In 1357, the shroud was first publicly displayed by the family of the grandson of Geoffrey de Charney, a Templar who had been burned at the stake with the Order's last Grand Master, Jacques de Molay, in 1314. The artifact's origins are still a matter of controversy, but carbon dating indicates that the shroud may have been made between 1260 and 1390, a span that includes the last half-century of the Templars

http://www.wikinfo.org/index.php/Knights_Templar

In 1453 Margaret de Charny deeded the Shroud to the House of Savoy. In 1578 the shroud was transferred in Turin. As of the 17th century the shroud has been displayed (e.g. in the chapel built for that purpose by Guarino Guarini[24]) and in the 19th century it was first photographed during a public exhibition.

A burial cloth, which some historians maintain was the Shroud, was owned by the Byzantine emperors but disappeared during the Sack of Constantinople in 1204

Historical records seem to indicate that a shroud bearing an image of a crucified man existed in the possession of a French Knight who died at the Battle of Poitiers in 1356 and participated in the First Crusade, Geoffroi de Charny, in the small town of Lirey around the years 1353 to 1357.

Geoffroi de Charny (c. 1300? – 19 September 1356) was a French knight and author of at least three works on chivalry. Geoffroi was a knight in the service of King John II of France and a founding member of the Order of the Star,

He was also the carrier of the Oriflamme, the standard of the crown of France, an immensely privileged, not to mention dangerous, honour, as it made the holder a key target of enemy forces on the battlefield. Geoffroi de Charny was perhaps Europe's premiere knight during his lifetime, with a reputation for not only skill at arms but also piety and honour. In the atmosphere of the Hundred Years' War - a climate poisonous to chivalry - he can be seen as the last of a dying breed in a period where the aristocratic baggage of armoured knights was being replaced by the harsh practicalities of professional soldiering. It was said that in his time he was known as a "true and perfect Knight".[1]

Geoffroi de Charny and his wife Jeanne de Vergy are the first reliably recorded owners of the Turin ShroudGeoffroi de Charny and his wife Jeanne de Vergy are the first reliably recorded owners of the Turin Shroud


We know from the Chronicles of Froissart that de Charny travelled to Scotland by order of the French King on at least two occasions and was well known to the Scottish nobles of the time. The chronicle describes the French Knights' visit and de Charny briefly in this passage written in Middle English: "... Mctray Duglas and the erle Morette knewe of their comynge, they wente to the havyn and mette with them, and receyved them swetely, sayeng howe they were right welcome into that countrey. And the barons of Scotlande knewe ryght well sir Geffray de Chamey, for he had been the somer before two monethes in their company: sir Greffray acquaynted them with the admyrall, and the other knyghtes of France." [4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffroi_de_Charny

exactly and the majority of myths and legends are a whole load of bollocks

I have never believed everything is as cut and dried as many on this forum seem to, even before getting into this graal thing. I think there is some truth behind most legends, of course in some of these there may be none. Or as you say tingra, many possibly are a load, but I don't think the majority are, IMHO.

this is true (probably), but in this case de Payens actually went to Balantrodach. Did he do that in all of these cases of land grants to the Templars, or for some reason was Balantrodach unique? I also believe that Balantrodach was the first of these. Anyhow, that was my question.

The Preceptory of Balantrodach was built around 1129, about 10 miles south of Edinburgh in Scotland, almost at the start of the Knights Templar movement, and was established on one of the first pieces of land to be granted to the movement outside of the Holy Land.

On 10 February 1306 Robert the Bruce and John Comyn, Lord of Badenoch, met at Greyfriars Kirk in Dumfries. There was no love lost between them. Bruce had called the meeting and the two left their swords outside as they entered the church.

A fight broke out before the high altar and Bruce stabbed Red Comyn.

Rosslyn was to have a legend that the apprentice was killed in the church by the master

The Order’s lands in Scotland, as elsewhere, passed by Papal decree to the Hospitaller Order of St. John of Jerusalem and that they immediately took possession and control of the Templar lands in Scotland is confirmed by the following charter ;

Precept by the Master of the house of Torphicen and of all the temple lands of St. John of Jerusalem in Scotland, directed to Adam Marsel, his serjeant of Blantrodach, narrating that by an inquest held on the vigil of SS. Philip and James, Apostles, in 1344 it was found that Alexander Sempil of Hakerstoun was infeft in a land and tenement in Esperstoun, and that Robert, his son, was his heir.


How many lands did the Templars own in Scotland ...some say 600...anybody know the number

A couple of miles to the west south west of Temple was the chapel of St Margaret at Mount Lothian http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk/en/site/51 ... t+lothian/ which I believe belonged to the Cistercians. The remains of this chapel are located on a knoll surrounded by a number of sycamores. BTW there is (almost) direct line from Mount Lothian northward, through Rosslyn Chapel to the ruins of St Anthony's Chapel on the slopes on Arthur's Seat in Edinburgh - I think this has been mentioned before on this forum. As to the site of Balantrodach (or Temple kirk as I prefer to call it) it is situated in a small glen (the road out of which is a b*gger when it's icy), why they chose that site ? No idea.

Newbattle Abbey in Midlothian ( bi-annual site for the Sauniere Society's Scottish symposiums) was founded by the Cistercians also in the reign of David I. Cistercians from Melrose Abbey, may I add. And their interest in the area (other than saving souls) was coal. To get from Newbattle (and Rosslyn and Temple) to Melrose you travel down the valley of the Gala Water ( through which runs the A7), and a few miles south of the village of Heriot near the source of the Gala Water was the site of Halltree Chapel, who occupied this chapel is a mystery as this site mentions there are no traces of it left http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk/en/site/54 ... ee+chapel/ . This has been of particular to me cos two of my g-g-g grandparents lived in nearby Halltree Farm.

Back to the Temple neighbourhood, just to the north of the village of Carrington is Whitehill Aisle built in 1243 for Sir John Ramsay of Whitehill http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/826494

A few miles almost directly west of Roslin, nestled in a glen in the Pentland Hills was St Catherine's Chapel. The chapel has been beneath the waters of the Glencorse Reservoir since the early 19th century http://www.skt.org.uk/CJdeM1314/Glencorse_Chapel.html , one local tale is that you can hear the bells of the chapel on a dark and windy night. Doubt it though, I remember seeing an old photo of the floor of the reservoir when it was empty due to a drought, and you could see that all that remained of the chapel was a pile of stones.

[/quote]


thanks for that Pilirg, I am interested in Scotland also because I just found out my great great grandmother "Margaret" was from Paisely.
Google earth has some pretty good images of the area around Rosslyn, I wonder how close it looks to how it did in the 14th century.