Templars at La Rochelle

TCP · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 12:51 am

wayward wrote:

Sorry Tim, I have studied Joans work extensively and I do believe she discovered a 13th century castle site. Her own notes, "13th C. By comparison with structures in Europe, castle with seven towers probably built ---------17th C. small mansion built on castle site, incorporating old Norse hall, wooden with two porticoes and gold dome, Palladian style; building E-shaped as in England at that time." I had promised I wouldn't subject her work to ridicule or argument so that is all I will say about her. There was an even earlier site then the 13th century one, and if you had ever studied the location it would be easy to understand why. As for the Templar part, I have my own very good reasons for believing that, and my research is ongoing in that respect. Yes you are right Templars are ( although I wouldn't say sexier), certainly more entertaining. I just wonder why it is so difficult for some to accept the possibility of some of these men escaping to North America.---Bill

You're free to disagree, Bill. What to some looks suspiciously like a 17th century barn or granary on the same site as a 17th century manor house might very well seem like a 13th century Templar castle to others. And hey, if it's gonna sell more books, why not?

I'd probably be more open-minded about a mass Templar flight to North America if it had something to substantiate it other than rife speculation. Tools? Are they marked "property of the Knights Templar, please return if found"...? Stone buildings? Were Templars the only Europeans known to live in stone buildings? Don't even get me started on the Zeno Narrative or map.

What would have been their motive for setting sail across the Atlantic and leaving civilization as they knew it behind forever? Did those who sailed the fleet out of La Rochelle in the wee hours of 13 October 1307 know that their Order would be dissolved five years later? It seems to me that too many people ask "why not?" while far too few ask "why?"

TCP

wayward · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 1:55 am

TCP wrote:

wayward wrote:

Sorry Tim, I have studied Joans work extensively and I do believe she discovered a 13th century castle site. Her own notes, "13th C. By comparison with structures in Europe, castle with seven towers probably built ---------17th C. small mansion built on castle site, incorporating old Norse hall, wooden with two porticoes and gold dome, Palladian style; building E-shaped as in England at that time." I had promised I wouldn't subject her work to ridicule or argument so that is all I will say about her. There was an even earlier site then the 13th century one, and if you had ever studied the location it would be easy to understand why. As for the Templar part, I have my own very good reasons for believing that, and my research is ongoing in that respect. Yes you are right Templars are ( although I wouldn't say sexier), certainly more entertaining. I just wonder why it is so difficult for some to accept the possibility of some of these men escaping to North America.---Bill

You're free to disagree, Bill. What to some looks suspiciously like a 17th century barn or granary on the same site as a 17th century manor house might very well seem like a 13th century Templar castle to others. And hey, if it's gonna sell more books, why not?

I'd probably be more open-minded about a mass Templar flight to North America if it had something to substantiate it other than rife speculation. Tools? Are they marked "property of the Knights Templar, please return if found"...? Stone buildings? Were Templars the only Europeans known to live in stone buildings? Don't even get me started on the Zeno Narrative or map.

What would have been their motive for setting sail across the Atlantic and leaving civilization as they knew it behind forever? Did those who sailed the fleet out of La Rochelle in the wee hours of 13 October 1307 know that their Order would be dissolved five years later? It seems to me that too many people ask "why not?" while far too few ask "why?"

TCP

Its going to sell more books; c'mon Tim give me a break, and yes the tools did say "return to Templars if found" and I have no remarks for the Zeno Narrative. As for leaving La Rochelle in the wee hours of 13 October, I don't know, but as I have said a transatlantic crossing in mid October would have been suicidal, more then likely a temporary stop in Scotland. Safety in Europe, maybe, but remember Clement ordered the arrest of all Templars in Europe on the 22nd of November. Anyplace in Europe that was not under the control of the RCC, you had to think soon would be. I also understand that in 1312 some of these men were allowed clemency, but could they have known it would happen 5 years earlier, and was this the beloved RCC granting this? Yes many would have chosen to stay in Europe and assimilate into other orders, but some, and I stress some would have wanted more, say adventure, safety, or what ever. I'm not saying all or most, but you have to agree they could have seperated. Every man for himself, so to speak. BTW, Roger, that is the most civil response you have given me to date, why? Are you getting ready to strike? I have to disagree with Roger, One vessel in Nova Scotia would have meant, they went to Nova Scotia. Love you guys.---Bill

TCP · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 4:08 am

wayward wrote:

Its going to sell more books; c'mon Tim give me a break, and yes the tools did say "return to Templars if found" and I have no remarks for the Zeno Narrative.

Oh, I'd say it will sell nicely, indeed. Marketability seems to be all the justification needed these days for historical revision. Public school history texts in the U.S. and even the Bible itself are being re-written for no other purpose than replacing one perceived political bias for another. Where does one draw the line? Profitability, I guess.

wayward wrote:

As for leaving La Rochelle in the wee hours of 13 October, I don't know, but as I have said a transatlantic crossing in mid October would have been suicidal, more then likely a temporary stop in Scotland. Safety in Europe, maybe, but remember Clement ordered the arrest of all Templars in Europe on the 22nd of November. Anyplace in Europe that was not under the control of the RCC, you had to think soon would be.

So, what do you think the Templars had in their possession on 12 October that enabled them to see five weeks into the future? Crystals, Tarot cards, a Ouija board perhaps? It would have taken weeks to outfit a fleet with provisions for a long sea voyage, and it would stand to reason that if they'd had that much lead time, more Templars throughout France would have prepared themselves to fight back. Instead they were caught unawares in their beds. The fleet would have escaped with no time to spare, thus common sense would argue for a short voyage to a safe port - and there were plenty of safe ports as of 13 October with the Papal arrest order being five weeks off. A few sea miles between France and the closest haven would have done the trick, at least until the second hammer struck on 22 November.

wayward wrote:

I also understand that in 1312 some of these men were allowed clemency, but could they have known it would happen 5 years earlier, and was this the beloved RCC granting this?

In 1312 all but the highest officers who did not "confess" (or who had recanted their previous confessions) were granted clemency. There was no longer any need to run, they weren't being hunted. And yes, it was the RCC that granted clemency.

wayward wrote:

Yes many would have chosen to stay in Europe and assimilate into other orders, but some, and I stress some would have wanted more, say adventure, safety, or what ever. I'm not saying all or most, but you have to agree they could have seperated. Every man for himself, so to speak. BTW, Roger, that is the most civil response you have given me to date, why? Are you getting ready to strike? I have to disagree with Roger, One vessel in Nova Scotia would have meant, they went to Nova Scotia. Love you guys.---Bill

I would think that if they wanted to resume some semblance of their former lives (and stay true to their vows), another order would have afforded them the lifestyle they had chosen. True, some did walk away from their vows and resume life as civilians. We really can't know whether their motivation was adventure or peace, can we?

TCP

wayward · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 10:21 am

Tim, of course they could see 5 weeks into the future. They knew ahead of time about the 13th, did they not? Also, I don't think you read my post correctly, as I do not believe anyone would have attempted that voyage in October, it would have made more sense to hole up somewhere for the winter of 07-08, while preparing for this voyage. Also I was halfway through a bottle of wine when I made that post ( hence the, love you guys), certainly it would have taken more then a few to accomplish all of this.---Bill

rain · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 12:43 pm

Quote:

Also I was halfway through a bottle of wine when I made that post ( hence the, love you guys), certainly it would have taken more then a few to accomplish all of this.---Bill

I read that and had to laugh, glad you explained it.

TCP · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 2:42 pm

wayward wrote:

Tim, of course they could see 5 weeks into the future. They knew ahead of time about the 13th, did they not? Also, I don't think you read my post correctly, as I do not believe anyone would have attempted that voyage in October, it would have made more sense to hole up somewhere for the winter of 07-08, while preparing for this voyage. Also I was halfway through a bottle of wine when I made that post ( hence the, love you guys), certainly it would have taken more then a few to accomplish all of this.---Bill

Bill, I note that you and I are in agreement that an October trans-Atlantic voyage would have been highly unlikely, a well as tragic. Do you really believe that if the Templars had advance warning of what was going down on October 13th, they would have been caught unaware in their beds? Would Jacques de Molay and the high officers of the Order have allowed themselves to be taken? The Templars were a fighting force, had they been tipped off it is more than likely they would have fought. Clearly Philip IV had the element of surprise working to his advantage. And from surviving accounts of the ships at La Rochelle, it isn't clear whether they sailed out hours ahead of the execution of the arrest order, or immediately after.

TCP

wayward · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 2:53 pm

Tim,
The fact is that they did indeed know about the arrest order. Why De Molay allowed himself and several others to be arrested, I do not know. Of course there are many possibilities, such as, "I believe Clement will come to our aid, but I am not sure" or "We must stay and conduct business as usual so the others can escape". But one thing is certain, the Knights knew what was coming. Perhaps they did not know how bad it would get, but they knew about it.---Bill

TCP · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 3:09 pm

wayward wrote:

Tim,
The fact is that they did indeed know about the arrest order. Why De Molay allowed himself and several others to be arrested, I do not know. Of course there are many possibilities, such as, "I believe Clement will come to our aid, but I am not sure" or "We must stay and conduct business as usual so the others can escape". But one thing is certain, the Knights knew what was coming. Perhaps they did not know how bad it would get, but they knew about it.---Bill

Sorry, Bill, I don't accept that as "fact" - the true facts of the incident indicate otherwise. I know that various and sundry revisionist theories fall apart when those facts are applied, but that's not my issue. Shame on the revisionists for ignoring the facts in favor of a more marketable tall tale.

TCP

TCP · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 5:04 pm

Roger wrote:

Quote:

The Templars were a fighting force, had they been tipped off it is more than likely they would have fought. Clearly Philip IV had the element of surprise working to his advantage.

I'm surprised, Tim, I'm sure you realise that - by that late date - the Order consisted in the main of elderly Knights, chaplains, and administrators/farmers, very few combat hardened and experienced fighters remained. de Molay's earlier strenuous efforts to re-inflate the Order's relevance by planning a "new Crusade" were risible and only served to underline the fact that the Order had no real purpose any more. All that remained was its considerable but illiquid wealth, as well as its enormous archives of information, financial and otherwise, from its politically dicey "banking business".

Well, actually, yes - that is a very good point, by 1307 they were not the crack fighting force they had been a generation previously, and Clement had intended to combine the Templars and the Hospitallers two years prior in order to consolidate wealth and manpower.

Roger wrote:

While they may well have had some residual capacity to fight, in a few areas (which, by the way, makes the legend of a Templar intervention in a crucial Scottish battle, all the more unbelievable), they were very much past their sell-by date, and concentrated their efforts on lobbying, and placed unwarranted confidence in the Pope, to whom they remained sickeningly loyal, despite owing their existence to the party of the Emperor.

But surely you don't think it was their unwarranted confidence in the Pope that would have kept them from fight-or-flight had they known they were about to be arrested by the king's men?

Roger wrote:

The circumstances that made the Pope jettison them to Philip's predatory hunger actually had very little, if anything, to do with the Order. They knew well what was to come, and took steps to secure their archives and what little liquid wealth they had on hand which did not belong to their "banking clients". Fighting was simply not a realistic proposition. The only "element of surprise" was the simultaneous manner and swiftness with which the arrests were conducted.

I agree that they must have assumed that a forced merger with the Hospitallers was inevitable; I don't believe they knew the manner in which this would be forced on them. Now, if a merger was all they were expecting, then of course there would be no need to flee, but simply to secure and stash wealth away quietly. Had they known they were about to be accused of heresy, imprisoned, and tortured into making coerced confessions, whether or not they could still fight becomes less of an issue than whether or not they could make a clean getaway.

TCP

TCP · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 6:15 pm

Roger wrote:

The merger with the Hospitallers was a very late "fix" to try to mitigate as much as possible the loss of so much land from Papal authority. Initially, it wasn't part of the plan at all, and rightly so considering the quite well deserved enmity of the Templars towards the Hospitallers.

A late fix, but a recent proposal - 1305. Revisited again in 1306. Obviously not something that Clement was willing to let go of, considering the fact that the series of events which followed culminated in exactly that outcome.

Roger wrote:

The real fight was a continuation of the investitures war and the struggle by the Emperor's faction to eradicate as much Papal authority as possible. Philip merely used this to his advantage, quite cleverly, assisted by that wretch Nogaret (and his Colonna paymasters). Nogaret's attacks were "grand-guignolesque" and included threats of disinterring a previous Pope, among other grotesque attacks on the Papacy.

So, is it your suggestion then that the Templars were playing both sides against the middle?

Roger wrote:

Context is everything. And the "fight or flight" reflex - while quite a relevant notion, doesn't take into account that "fight" was a non-starter, and "flight" meant abandoning everything.

But then the recourse is to sit idly by while the floodgates open. Which is essentially what happened, but I have a bit of difficulty squaring the idea that the Templars simply sat idle doing nothing if they had any inkling of what would be coming down on them.

Roger wrote:

Of course, you're correct in that no one anticipated that Nogaret would be allowed free rein to exceed all bounds in his mission. But this is something that developed quite rapidly and also surprised the Inquisition... The reports and correspondence are still available for study. (Much to the chagrin of esotericists everywhere, who have no recourse but to studiously ignore the history)

Yes, precisely - events spun out of control very rapidly, and I think that argues the point that the Templars didn't know what exactly was in store of them.

TCP

wayward · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 6:51 pm

Isn't that what I said, Tim, "the Templars didn't know what exactly was in store for them", What argument?---Bill

TCP · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 7:21 pm

wayward wrote:

Isn't that what I said, Tim, "the Templars didn't know what exactly was in store for them", What argument?---Bill

Over what they knew and when they knew it.

TCP

Eginolf · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 7:51 pm

TCP wrote:

What would have been their motive for setting sail across the Atlantic and leaving civilization as they knew it behind forever? Did those who sailed the fleet out of La Rochelle in the wee hours of 13 October 1307 know that their Order would be dissolved five years later?

The fleet could have simply waited all these years in a hidden bay ("easy does it") and then only leave when the order was finally dissolved. Why not? :wink:

... some south-american archaelogists even say that they found templar traces in Argentina. Ever heard of this?
(I got the link somewhere, just gimme some time ... )

TCP · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 8:00 pm

Eginolf wrote:

TCP wrote:

What would have been their motive for setting sail across the Atlantic and leaving civilization as they knew it behind forever? Did those who sailed the fleet out of La Rochelle in the wee hours of 13 October 1307 know that their Order would be dissolved five years later?

The fleet could have simply waited all these years in a hidden bay ("easy does it") and then only leave when the order was finally dissolved. Why not? :wink:

I think a better questions is "why?"...

Eginolf wrote:

... some south-american archaelogists even say that they found templar traces in Argentina. Ever heard of this?
(I got the link somewhere, just gimme some time ... )

Oh lordie, this I've gotta see!

TCP

Eginolf · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 8:01 pm

wayward wrote:

Why De Molay allowed himself and several others to be arrested, I do not know. Of course there are many possibilities, such as, "I believe Clement will come to our aid, but I am not sure" or ...........

AFAIK they were not at all allowed to fight against christians! :!:

Eginolf · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 8:05 pm

Roger wrote:

They knew well what was to come, and took steps to secure their archives and ..............

Oh yes, these archives! Never found! Never uprised again! Never published.

I wonder WHO got them. Must have been one of the templar families. Any usual suspects? :mrgreen:

Eginolf · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 8:14 pm

Roger wrote:

In fact, de Molay's leadership was very much a reflection of the Order's decline. He was as poor a politician as one could find, and as piss poor a strategist as one could possibly imagine.

... and he wasn't "french". He was actually a "german", from the village Molay in the Alsace.

Eginolf · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 8:18 pm

TCP wrote:

I think a better questions is "why?"...

... because they played "let's get lost" (a long time before Chet Baker

).
The fleet went disparu, n'est-ce pas? So? ---> They went SOMEWHERE. No?

Eginolf · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 8:31 pm

TCP wrote:

Eginolf wrote:

... some south-american archaelogists even say that they found templar traces in Argentina. Ever heard of this?
(I got the link somewhere, just gimme some time ... )

Oh lordie, this I've gotta see!

TCP

http://www.fuertetemplario.com.ar/

Quote:

There is an enormous amount of information and documentation about the Knights Templar of Spanish origin for example which has never been consulted by English-language scholars who tend to think only in terms of France. Many Templar structures are to be found in Spain in excellent condition and with many strange facets. There is a wealth of knowledge still to be tapped. With reference to primary documents available to the historian in a local archive south of Andorra, it appears that the organisation was in existence at least nine years before 1118.
The Templar fleet sailed from La Rochelle on 12 October 1307 and it is known its vessels divided and went to Scotland, Morocco, Arab destinations and Teneriffe. The possibility exists that a part of the Fleet reached Argentina. If so, South America was discovered before Columbus. Since charts began, there has always been a "ruined fort" of unknown origin marked at 41 deg S on the Gulf of San Matias south of San Antonio del Oeste. This has recently been excavated and is thought to be Templar.
To the west of these ruins is a vast, windswept, almost uninhabited plateau known as Somnacura described as "a desert within a desert". One hundred kms from anywhere on this plateau is a village by the name "El Cain". Nearby there is a strange pyramid-shaped hill. The village has been there since records began. "El Cain" means "The Evil One" and researchers wonder whether this was originally a Templar settlement.

http://www.fuertetemplario.com.ar/templarios-en-la-patagonia.htm

wayward · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 8:59 pm

wayward wrote:

Tim,
The fact is that they did indeed know about the arrest order. Why De Molay allowed himself and several others to be arrested, I do not know. Of course there are many possibilities, such as, "I believe Clement will come to our aid, but I am not sure" or "We must stay and conduct business as usual so the others can escape". But one thing is certain, the Knights knew what was coming. Perhaps they did not know how bad it would get, but they knew about it.---Bill

Tim; I will stand by this statement to the death, or at least until you prove me wrong.---Bill

TCP · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 9:31 pm

Eginolf wrote:

wayward wrote:

Why De Molay allowed himself and several others to be arrested, I do not know. Of course there are many possibilities, such as, "I believe Clement will come to our aid, but I am not sure" or ...........

AFAIK they were not at all allowed to fight against christians! :!:

Which wouldn't explain their role in the Albigensian Crusade, but I digress. They did a pretty nice job on the Byzantines too. And the Hospitallers from time to time.

TCP

TCP · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 9:33 pm

wayward wrote:

Tim,
The fact is that they did indeed know about the arrest order. Why De Molay allowed himself and several others to be arrested, I do not know. Of course there are many possibilities, such as, "I believe Clement will come to our aid, but I am not sure" or "We must stay and conduct business as usual so the others can escape". But one thing is certain, the Knights knew what was coming. Perhaps they did not know how bad it would get, but they knew about it.---Bill

Tim; I will stand by this statement to the death, or at least until you prove me wrong.---Bill

It sounds like you do have a book in the works! Am I right? Would this be the keystone of your theory?

The historical narrative speaks for itself, Bill - ergo it wouldn't be incumbent on anyone to prove you wrong, but on you to prove yourself right. Good luck with that. :lol:

TCP

TCP · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 9:50 pm

Eginolf wrote:

Quote:

There is an enormous amount of information and documentation about the Knights Templar of Spanish origin for example which has never been consulted by English-language scholars who tend to think only in terms of France. Many Templar structures are to be found in Spain in excellent condition and with many strange facets. There is a wealth of knowledge still to be tapped. With reference to primary documents available to the historian in a local archive south of Andorra, it appears that the organisation was in existence at least nine years before 1118.
The Templar fleet sailed from La Rochelle on 12 October 1307 and it is known its vessels divided and went to Scotland, Morocco, Arab destinations and Teneriffe. The possibility exists that a part of the Fleet reached Argentina. If so, South America was discovered before Columbus. Since charts began, there has always been a "ruined fort" of unknown origin marked at 41 deg S on the Gulf of San Matias south of San Antonio del Oeste. This has recently been excavated and is thought to be Templar.
To the west of these ruins is a vast, windswept, almost uninhabited plateau known as Somnacura described as "a desert within a desert". One hundred kms from anywhere on this plateau is a village by the name "El Cain". Nearby there is a strange pyramid-shaped hill. The village has been there since records began. "El Cain" means "The Evil One" and researchers wonder whether this was originally a Templar settlement.

http://www.fuertetemplario.com.ar/templarios-en-la-patagonia.htm

Oh boy, it looks like we're gonna see Fluguerto Marti vs. Tim Wallace Murphy on Celebrity Death Match in the near future...

Has anyone else noticed a familiar and over-used pattern to these sorts of claims? There's always an "enormous amount of documentary evidence" that experts are supposedly unaware of, which they never seem to offer specifics for; then they piggy-back their theories onto unproven theories by other "alternative" authors of recent vintage; and then they hesitantly surmise "possibilities" rather than definite findings. Does this seemingly unknown "evidence" prove anything or not? We'll never know, because they'll never show it and we'll just be expected to take them at their word.

Perhaps I should start revealing "hidden truths" and alluding to secret documentation about the heretofore unknown Templar settlement on the Southern California coast (the one that only "Templar families" are aware of). Hell, we've got some pretty nice stained glass out here, I've got some old gardening tools that I'm sure someone would carbon date to the 13th century, and I can chip an equal-armed cross into a rock over the weekend and claim I found it during an excavation. Anyone have any good connections to publishing houses?

TCP

TCP · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 10:31 pm

Roger wrote:

Their role in the Albigensian crusade? What was that?

Officially neutral, but some knights lent their support in the battlefield to both sides in the conflict.

Roger wrote:

They did a nice job on the Byzantines, true... but the Hospitallers didn't really get but a really small taste of what they actually deserved!

That's still a violation of the "no fighting with other Christians" rule!

TCP

TCP · **Posted:** 14 May 2010 10:36 pm

Roger wrote:

There's a great deal of confusion (willfully so, by certain parties) regarding so-called "Templar explorations" that were actually conducted quite a bit later by the Portuguese.

That big red and white cross of the Ordem de Cristo gets 'em every time...

TCP

Arcadia Discussion Zone

Templars at La Rochelle

Who is online