|
Author |
Message |
Admin
Administrator
Posts: 1227
Registered: Dec 2004 |
 Posted January 7th, 2005 04:01 PM IP   
Quote:
What I find interesting reading these books is how involved and influenced history is in respect to freemasonry as well as other organisations, particularly The Templars. Its it purposed that Christorpher Columbus (when sailing, used a maltese cross on his flag), was sailing under templar influence. His wifes father was templar...........or somewhere down the line. This was said to be one of the ways he had access to many of the early world maps. |
That is a very interesting , I have read that too.
They actually found a Templar grave on the
Atlantic coast. That would prove that the templars
were actually hear earlier than Columbus.
So Columbus actually having access to maps
from earler adventures by the templars seems
plausible.
The story goes is that Queen Isabella financed
the voyage , maybe it was actually Templar money.
Can you think of any ways that the Templars
may have influenced Freemasonry through
the ages?
I feel maybe that the rituals that we know today
were put into effect by William St. Clair (Templar)
Templarism actually became Freemasonry.
Does anyone have any ideas on this?
Rick
[Edited by Admin]
Kenilworth #29 Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
|
|
    |
|
skiendhu
Super Moderator
Posts: 2627
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted January 7th, 2005 10:51 PM IP
Quote - They actually found a Templar grave on the Atlantic coast. That would prove that the Templars were here before Columbus.
The grave is in Massachusits (I think that's how you spell it) and the Templar's name was Gunn as I recall, from the scottish clan Gunn.
It is also interesting to note that as well as the Templars, the Norsemen (vikings), The Northern Brits and the French also reached North America before Columbus. Columbus wasn't the first to discover America, he was last.
Grail Knights of North America by Michael Bradley will tell you about the Templars in Canada and the USA.
SKIENDHU
Practical experience is the best teacher
|
|
|
|
skiendhu
Super Moderator
Posts: 2627
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted January 8th, 2005 03:46 PM IP
I don't think that it's possible to seperate the Templars from what much later became known as freemasonry. I don't think that there is any doubt that freemasonry evolved from the operative mason's lodges in Scotland and that the Templar involvement probably came through Sir William St Clair who was Grand Master of masons in Scotland. The majority of craftsmen employed at the building of Rosslyn Chapel came from Europe and could quite possibly have been decentants of masons who were part of the great Templar building projects in France. It could necessarily follow that these European masons were privy to the initiation ceremonies of the Templars which, through Sir William St Clair could have been carried on into the operative mason's lodges and further into the Freemason's lodges.
This of course is complete conjecture on my part, but it does have possibilities.
What do you think, have you got an alternative suggestion.
skiendhu
Practical experience is the best teacher
|
|
|
|
Admin
Administrator
Posts: 1227
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted January 9th, 2005 11:07 AM IP
There is also the opposing view;
That Freemasonry came
into existence around 1717 in England.
That Freemasonry sprang into existence, and
was developed by the Operative Masons of the
time.
Rick
Kenilworth #29 Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
|
|
|
|
Admin
Administrator
Posts: 1227
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted January 9th, 2005 11:49 AM IP
I moved this topic here. It will give everyone
a chance to respond.
Rick
Kenilworth #29 Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
|
|
|
|
skiendhu
Super Moderator
Posts: 2627
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted January 9th, 2005 02:23 PM IP
1717
The City of London in England consists of one square mile. Anything beyond that square mile is known as Greater London. In 1717 there would be very little beyond that square mile. Four lodges within the city banded together and had the audacity to call themselves a "Grand" Lodge. At the same time there was another "Grand" Lodge in the north of England called the Grand Lodge of York.
These two "Grand" Lodges negotiated for over one hundred years, each claiming to be the superior Grand Lodge. Eventually they came to an agreement in 1825 and the "United" Grand Lodge of England was formed.
I find it very difficult to beleive that Freemasonry "suddenly" sprang from a group of lodges in the sqare mile, especially when written records prove that freemasonry was already active in the early 17th century.
That the word "freemason" originated in England is certainly acceptable, but that freemasonry originated in England in 1717? I don't think so.
Try again Admin, that one doesn't cut it.
skiendhu
Practical experience is the best teacher
|
|
|
|
russellholland
Master Mason
Posts: 996
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted February 25th, 2005 05:38 AM IP
My own observation is that the Templars did not come out of nowhere despite the usual histories.
This is partially described in "Indianna Jones and the Last Crusade" where the Templars maintain a desert crypt for the grail. If the grail is older than 11th Century then the story predates the Templars at least as in our current histories. Also if the Templars were pre-existing that might help explain how they became so powerful in such a short time.
The "lapsit exillis" image used for the earliest grail form may well have predated the christian capture of the legend where the grail was claimed as the cup from the last supper. (Why was it so important to capture the legend?)
It may well have been that the Templars re-made Masonry as a vehicle to hide in and later a number of other groups found it useful to hide or survive within Masonry also. This would give rise to the various higher degrees that were so disturbing to craft masons when announced in the 18th century.
Cheers
Russell
Russell Holland
Caboolture 266
UGLQ
Australia
|
|
|
|
Admin
Administrator
Posts: 1227
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted February 26th, 2005 03:07 PM IP
Quote:
Also if the Templars were pre-existing that might help explain how they became so powerful in such a short time. |
I am not a Templar expert..............I am learning
I have read in the Knight and Lomas books, and keep an open mind on this.
After the fall of the temple, the Priestly famlies left
Jerusalem and migrated north into France. They became
powerful and wealthy families.
Then 1000 years later the descendents of these
families became the nine Knights Templars who
excavated the Temple mount.
Correct me if you feel that I am wrong on this.
To me the secret knowledge and wealth that existed
at the temple was already known by these families.
It was just a matter of the right time and planning,
to go back and get it.
Possible or not?
What do you think?
By the way Bro. Russell it 's nice to have you here
to keep us on our toes.
Rick
[Edited by Admin]
Kenilworth #29 Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
|
|
|
|
russellholland
Master Mason
Posts: 996
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted March 5th, 2005 03:39 AM IP
Rick
I think you may be humouring me but I am prepared to be humoured.
So, I think any history that goes " then a 1000 years later.." is skipping a bit quickly.
But the Merovingian story is likely correct. As you may know the Merovingians were founded by the breeding between a "sea monster" and a human female. This sea monster may well have been an annedotus which lived in the sea - the name apparently translates as "repulsive ones" See http://www.burlingtonnews.net/dogons.html for some related material.
And you may know that amphibious beings established the Greek, Chinese and Hindu cultures - according to the records of those cultures.
The annedotus in their turn may be the instruments of something greater.
Our meditation group on a number of occasions saw inwardly and close up a group of cosmic sea creatures that seems to have founded and patronised both Royal Ark Mariners and the Templars. We used to call them the fish people. One woman in the group regularly attracted them. Another woman regularly had Templar beings approach. All the group would see these beings. This last woman was a Templar - this seems to be her first life in a female body for a very long time and it is a bit of a struggle.
If this is so, it may be a bit hard on our brethren to refuse them admittance on the grounds they were so careless as to have a female body this time.
So I suggest that the Templars were and are directed from on high. Would that Masons were so fortunate.
Cheers
Russell
Russell Holland
Caboolture 266
UGLQ
Australia
|
|
|
|
Dave Mavity
Super Moderator
Posts: 2371
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted March 5th, 2005 11:41 AM IP
Interesting topic, Rick; I'm quite a Templar fan.
I don't think the Templar connection is even arguable, although I know many Masons who are in a pretty heavy state of denial over it, for whatever reason.
These are the guys who maintain that 1717 theory, which is clearly utter hogwash. You can see and read
works, clearly Masonic, that predate that. One of my favorites is the painting "The Wayfarer", by Hieronymus Bosch.
The only problem is, I don't think we've got the crucial piece of evidence to explain the actual transferral of tradition from KT to Masons. I've read all the usual stuff, and it just misses that by a little bit.
Rosslyn is a damned fine piece of physical proof of the connection, but doesn't do much to show a real clear descendency, IMO. Maybe whatever is under it?(and there is something to that- been there twice- there is a powerful feel to the place, coming from underground).
As to St. Clair and the Ritual- maybe, but generally, esoteric ritual is pretty universal. A lot of the same elements and symbolism, just terminology varies.
And Bro. Russell: I've always been thankful that my meditative revelations come to me in real simple symbolism- how you more receptive folks even sleep at night is beyond my ken- I'm aquainted w/ a few of you.
S&F,
Dave Mavity
Academia Lodge #847 F&AM, Oakland, CA: Traditional Observance, baby.
Golden City Lodge #1 AF&AM, Golden, CO
Oakland, CA Valley A&ASR
Intra Nobis Regnum Iehova
|
|
|
|
skiendhu
Super Moderator
Posts: 2627
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted March 5th, 2005 04:11 PM IP
Hi Guys.
The reference to fish people caught my attention. I remember reading of a God called Marduk who was supposedly half fish and half man. Then there was the South American God, Inca I think, who was also reputed to have appeared out of the ocean and was part fish. Ancient history and particularly pre-history was passed on mainly by word of mouth, and in written form but in an obscure language. although the stories are passed on in the form of fables, myths or legends, I'm sure they were based on actual historic events. I think we need to interperate these stories and not accept them as read. Fish people is the stuff of Holywood and not of civilized society where most of the people are at least half educated.
My opinion for what its worth is that if you beleive in the existence of fish people, then you almost certainly beleive in werewolves and vampires.Is it possible in this age of high technology to keep ones feet on the ground while flying around in that esoteric sphere.
skiendhu
Practical experience is the best teacher
|
|
|
|
russellholland
Master Mason
Posts: 996
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted March 6th, 2005 03:59 AM IP
Skiendhu
I suggest you start with The Sirius Mystery for an account of fish people.
Greeks, Chinese, Hindus, South Americans, Africans and many others tell us that they were educated by amphibians. These peoples provide many portraits, often very detailed and with many commonalities despite coming from widely separated areas.
Now we could deny the accuracy of the work of historians (and artists) across the world for millennia, despite there being no evidence that they were any less intelligent than we are.
In the case of ancient Egyptians they were demonstrably more skilled than we are - whether in creating artificial eyes for statues or designing pyramids. And if you take Sumer, it is arguable that no new institution has been invented for human society since that time.
If I were an historian faced with such fundamental scepticism of the work of my predecessors, I think I would throw it in and sell real estate.
Cheers
Russell
Russell Holland
Caboolture 266
UGLQ
Australia
|
|
|
|
navymason
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted March 8th, 2005 04:24 AM IP
Symbolism has been such an important part of so much of our history. from a square and compasses to fish people, to the fisher King to Shephards. Symbols provide us with a language where we have the ability to speak plain as day and yet only be understood by those who have the symbol 'sipher' to decode the conversation. Interesting note on fish people though. have you heard the correllation between Jesus as the fish and his deciples being fishermen, during the age of pisces and moses being the shephard in the age of airies? interesting...
|
|
|
|
Dave Mavity
Super Moderator
Posts: 2371
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted March 8th, 2005 10:58 AM IP
Quote:
Interesting note on fish people though. have you heard the correllation between Jesus as the fish and his deciples being fishermen, during the age of pisces and moses being the shephard in the age of airies? interesting...
|
Sure have heard that.
Water and fish symbolism is pretty prevalant; I'm assuming that's because it's fairly universal, and forms a strong analogy.
Moses during the Aries Age is a new one on me.
Interesting also to note that the age we are coming into is the Aquarian.
S&F,
Dave Mavity
Academia Lodge #847 F&AM, Oakland, CA: Traditional Observance, baby.
Golden City Lodge #1 AF&AM, Golden, CO
Oakland, CA Valley A&ASR
Intra Nobis Regnum Iehova
|
|
|
|
cryptickid
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted July 28th, 2005 05:46 PM IP
William StClair who built the chapel died before it was actualy finished. It was his son who added the elaborate carvings insdie the chapel at a later stage. The chapel was one of several collegiate churches( 7 in fact ) to be built in that century. These were built for the locals to repent their sins after the plague etc. These chapels were built on land that belonged to wealthy people and a payment was made for the use of the chapel. Thats the long and short of it, nothing more nothing less. To say that the KT and William St Clair had any part of forming any masonic ritual is absurd.
Scottsh Freemasonry and the Kt are separate organisations, Andrew Ramsay has a lot to answer for. Bearing in mind he was Bonnie Prince Charlies tutor, and had a certain amount of ideals that he could put into practise for the exiled Jacobites.
|
|
|
|
theron dunn
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted July 28th, 2005 08:01 PM IP
Actually, Roslyn is NOT a chapel, despite being called a chapel. The altar was added after Queen Victoria, who, while visiting the area in the 1880’s thought it would be preferable to restore the building, which by then was in a state of considerable disrepair, to something like its former glory and assumed that it was a chapel. In that restoration, an altar was ADDED.
Also, your notation about William St. Clair dying before it was completed is PARTIALLY correct.
Quote:
While the symbolism inherent in the chapel's carvings and geometry may have been solely for the personal edification of Sir William St. Clair it is unlikely. Rather, this building was deliberately designed and left as a learning tool for posterity, a book constructed in most durable medium available at the time, stone. Designed for those in future generations who could decode the designs and make use of the information locked into them. The connections between Rosslyn, the Knights Templar and the Freemasons are inescapable; the symbolism entrained in the carvings and architecture is unmistakable to those who recognise the enigmatic signs. Bearing in mind that William Sinclair who was himself a Templar, approved every last detail of the building, it is obvious that nothing is there by accident. His search for perfection was such that each carving before being sculpted in stone was first fashioned in wood.
http://seekers.100megs6.com/Rosslyn...s%20Templar.htm |
|
|
|
|
Dave Mavity
Super Moderator
Posts: 2371
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted July 28th, 2005 10:27 PM IP
Quote:
theron dunn wrote:
Actually, Roslyn is NOT a chapel, despite being called a chapel.
|
Absolutely correct- a look around, ignoring the later additions, gives a pretty clear picture of a Temple or "Lodgeroom."
S&F,
Dave Mavity
Academia Lodge #847 F&AM, Oakland, CA: Traditional Observance, baby.
Golden City Lodge #1 AF&AM, Golden, CO
Oakland, CA Valley A&ASR
Intra Nobis Regnum Iehova
|
|
|
|
cryptickid
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted July 29th, 2005 03:20 AM IP
Gents,
Yet again I have to disagree, The building was known as a chapel at least as far back as 1774, If you care to read "An Account of the Chapel of Rosslyn 1778", in fact it actually used to be called "A Chapel amidst the Woods"
As for William St Clair being a Templar there is no evidence what so ever to prove this. In all the records regarding the various StClairs such as the charters for "prebenderies", marraige, allocation of lands from King James, sasines, etc, only the word "Knight" is used.
The history of the family written by Father Richard Augustine Hay in approx 1690 makes no mention of Templar. his mother Jean Spottiswood married Sir James StClair of Rosslyn 5 years after he was born. His written history of the family and records all in latin are held in the National Library of Scotland under Hay's Antiquties",34.1.8. and 34.1.9,(i and ii).
In 1835 James Maidment re-wrote and produced them as the "Genealogie of the Sainteclaires of Rosslyn". In Hay's account the first 34 pages not only records the historical records but the oral traditions of the StClairs as well.
This is the book that all these modern day authors quoted when writing all these theories about the KT, StClairs and Rosslyn. However because it was in latin, no lay man could challenge it. Now it has been published in English very few if any use it as a source.
Back to the chapel not being called or used as a chapel. in 1690 Hay writes "therefor to the end he(William StClair) might not seem altogether unthankfull to god for the beneficies he receaved from him, it came to his minde to build a house for God's service".
In 1446 collegiate status was given to the chapel and by 1456 it was being described as a "Collegiate Church" to "ensure salvation for the founder and his family by providing for prayers to be offered in perpetuity by a succession of Priests."
There were approx 45 collegiate churches built around Scotland, by families of the same stature and wealth as the StClairs.
|
|
|
|
theron dunn
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted July 29th, 2005 10:38 AM IP
Well, that may be true, but does not change that it was never meant AS a chapel. If it were, why did it never have an altar built or designed into it? I had read somewhere and I am not sure if it is true, that Roslyn's foundation is a replica of the foundation of Solomon's Temple?
And since the KT were outlaw in the 1300's, I am not surprised that W. St. Clair was refered to as a Knight and not a Knight Templar... which does not change that he may well have BEEN a KT.
And while the "history" of freemasonry coming out of the stonemasons guilds is romantic, it is highly unlikely on a whole host of levels, not the least of which is why a noble would chose to associate with a laborers guild. Or, why a laborers guild would develop a highly intellectual symbolic moral system.
|
|
|
|
cryptickid
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted July 29th, 2005 11:41 AM IP
Hi Theron,
How can you say that it was never a chapel when it was purposely built for the StClair family, as a religious sanctuary to be run by their priests. I would advise anyone who has not read the "historical" books on the chapel to do so. As for StClair possibly being a KT because they were outlawed in the 1300's is also wild speculation.
I would also like to know some of the "host of levels" that you mention. We have to bear in mind that freemasonry in Scotland in the early years was very different to that of the USA and England. Both these countries took what was already around in Scotland, adopted and adapted it to their own society.
I am amazed at the lack of evidence that these theorists put forward with regards Scotlands history and the history of Scottish Freemasonry.
I also have to say again that it seems to be our brethren in America and England who seem to support these ideals without doing any serious research into Scottish Freemasonry.
The Schaw Statutes which effectivly formed the basis of the lodge system which we have today in Scotland. There is nothing romantic about comming from the operative stonemason lodges, what gets me is why people constantly ignore written Scottish lodge records. In our GLoS library and muesum we have an amazing amount of records and documents that UGLE doesn't even have. All these authors don't even bother going near the GLoS to do research before they write their books, and I have that on first hand authority.
If the chapel was so important to the StClairs why did William StClair,( first Grand Master) sell it in 1736?
|
|
|
|
theron dunn
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted July 29th, 2005 12:34 PM IP
Oh, the host of levels is, for one, that there was NEVER AN ALTAR in the "Chapel", just to start with. The "Chapel" is also overrun with non christian symbols, in fact, having reviewed the "chapel" (I haven't had the privledge of visiting yet), I do not recall ANY Christian symbols IN it, though Masonic symbols fill it.
As for why it was sold, I haven't a clue.
|
|
|
|
cryptickid
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted July 29th, 2005 02:09 PM IP
I have to say that I find your outlook on the subject rather poor.
Even after being given historical facts with details you just seem to say "so what" and not even take them into consideration.
"An Account of the Chapel of Roslin 1778", page 34, Printed by James Murray, Parliament Sq, Edinburgh, 1778.
"In the charter of February 1523. Four altars are particularly named: first, that of St Mattew, 2dly, that of the Virgin Mother, 3rdly, that of St Andrew; and 4thly, that of St Peter, which two last perhaps have been lesser alters placed at two of the pillars; or rather, I am inclined to think as formerly hinted that the large altar has been divided in two or three,(with the high altar, and that of the Blessed virgin, which has been, I suppose in the sacristy, through there be no vestige of it now,) make four or five in all"
Also accounted for in Hay's "Genealogie of the Sainteclaires", page 125/126,
"Charter of William Sinclair of Roslin made for the Prebendaries 1523."
As for the chapel not having any christian symbols then it is quite obvious that you have never been.
|
|
|
|
theron dunn
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted July 29th, 2005 02:40 PM IP
ok, thanks. You convinced me.
I found the following, and it appears you were right, it was at one time, a chapel and the church required that the altar be removed.
Quote:
The Presbytery records of Dalkeith reveal that in 1589 William Knox, brother of John Knox and minister of Cockpen, was censured 'for baptizing the Laird of Rosling's bairne' in Rosslyn Chapel, which was described as a 'house and monument of idolatrie, and not ane place appointit for teiching the word and ministratioun of ye sacrementis'.
The following year, the Presbytery forbade Mr George Ramsay, minister of Lasswade, from burying the wife of a later Oliver St Clair in the Chapel. The St Clairs had not yet succumbed to the Reformation and remained Roman Catholics.
This Oliver St Clair was repeatedly warned to destroy the altars in the Chapel and in 1592 was summoned to appear before the General Assembly and threatened with excommunication if the altars remained standing after August 17th, 1592. On August 31st, the same George Ramsay reported that 'the altars of Roslene were haille demolishit'. From that time the Chapel ceased to be used as a house of prayer and soon fell into disrepair. |
Also, it apprears on a re-examination that there are a few christian symbols in the chapel, though to be sure there are certainly more MASONIC symbols than Christian ones.
We seem to be going at this on two separate threads as well. If we are going to discuss the templar association with Freemasonry, would you mind if we chose one, here, or the other 1606 stone to do it in?
[Edited by theron dunn]
|
|
|
|
cryptickid
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted July 29th, 2005 04:04 PM IP
I agree, perhaps it is better to keep to this thread.
|
|
|
|
cryptickid
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted July 29th, 2005 04:12 PM IP
Hi Theron,
I've had a look at your other post so I'll try and address some of your comments here.
You asked me to look at Baigent and Leigh's theories and I have to admit they don't stand up to the test, in my opinion. If we could narrow some theories down to certain questions then perhaps we could address them individualy rather than posting several long post which may lose some valuable points.
|
|
|
|
theron dunn
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted July 29th, 2005 04:15 PM IP
Well, if you want I will dig out my copy and post a summary digest of their points... that may take a while as I have many irons in the fire right now, so lets start with the one I remember clearly, that of the Templar Gravestones that date well into the 1500's...
If the KT were all arrested on Friday, October 13, 1307, why would templar gravestones be laid down for 200 MORE years if there were no Templars left?
|
|
|
|
cryptickid
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted July 29th, 2005 04:17 PM IP
Can I assume you are talking about the grave stones in Argyllshire?
There are approx 73 of these type of gravestones in Kilmartin churchyard. That would mean that between 1307 ( when they were suppressed ) and 1314 (when they supposidly assisted Bruce at Bannockburn) an awfull lot of Templars died within a 7 year period. There would have been no need to have anonomous graves after 1314 as Scotland was a free country.
Of these types of stones there are over 300 in various parts of Scotland which would suggest that there are far more than supposidly first thought.
Many are situated in the following areas,
West Lothian
Stirlingshire
Ayrshire
Dumfriesshire
Edinburgh
Fife
Borders
East Lothian
Galloway
Roxburgh
West Lothian
East Renfrewshire
Peebleshire.
A particular strange one is the one which is to be found in Torphican. As it never was a KT preceptory but always the property of the KT's of St John, why would that particular stone be there.
[Edited by cryptickid]
|
|
|
|
Dave Mavity
Super Moderator
Posts: 2371
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted July 29th, 2005 04:55 PM IP
Gentlemen:
A reminder to all- use your Compasses on this forum.
S&F,
Dave Mavity
Academia Lodge #847 F&AM, Oakland, CA: Traditional Observance, baby.
Golden City Lodge #1 AF&AM, Golden, CO
Oakland, CA Valley A&ASR
Intra Nobis Regnum Iehova
|
|
|
|
theron dunn
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted July 29th, 2005 05:39 PM IP
Cryptickid
My brother, the list provided by Baigent and Leigh was extensive over a large area of Scotland, and was of stones for over a 200 year period after October 13, 1307. Given that I would assume that most KTs were in their 20-30's, and most men did not live beyond 45 or so in the period, 1300-1600, that would make approximately 5-6 generations of men being buried under KT "headstones".
Given that the KT was banned in 1307, and given that there are 5-6 generations of KT's buried in Scotland, wouldn't it be a logical argument that there were indeed Templars in Scotland in the appropriate period?
Another though that occured to me as I wrote this is that the KT were illiterate, at least until 1307 (Jacques DeMolay was quite proud of not being literate, in fact), and the fact that the Templars, having been essentially the worlds first bankers, had a system of passwords and grips and such to identify themselves as being real KT in their travels from West to East (literally, from the European West to the Isreal East), and since stonemasons had no need of such things, that the fact that we have grips and words today, as a heritage from old, that perhaps the KT were an influence?
I am not sure of the reason for the anger that some attach to this theory, could anyone help me with understanding it?
Good words, Dave
|
|
|
|
Dave Mavity
Super Moderator
Posts: 2371
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted July 29th, 2005 07:16 PM IP
Quote:
theron dunn wrote:
I am not sure of the reason for the anger that some attach to this theory, could anyone help me with understanding it?
|
Good question, and I'm not sure.
When I first petitioned the KT/Masonic possibility was a part of my interest, and after I was Raised, a major part of my research. Two things happened: I decided there wasn't conclusive enough evidence to convince me completely(although I still think there is a non- linear relationship) and I became more interested in the esoteric angle.
It comes to the same old fact/Truth discussion, and myth as a useful tool. Anybody who is going to get upset over the Templar conjecture should also get upset over our Hiramic legend, which isn't fact, either.
S&F,
Dave Mavity
Academia Lodge #847 F&AM, Oakland, CA: Traditional Observance, baby.
Golden City Lodge #1 AF&AM, Golden, CO
Oakland, CA Valley A&ASR
Intra Nobis Regnum Iehova
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freemason Discussion Group :: Freemasonry :: History Of Freemasonry :: Was There A Templar Influence On Freemasonry
Page: 1 2 3 |
|
|
|
