|
EXECUTIONS – OR HISTORICAL LIES ? Were these legendary figures really sacrificed ? When most executions which impinge on the public conscience are proclaimed, nobody would ever imagine that they would not be carried out despite appearing to do so – or were they, just in case? But just in case of what ? Mainly, when the uncertainty of public backlash from the resulting outrage is deeply felt. Sometimes when the spectre of superstition has raised possibilities of uncontrollable public reaction to fear. In short, when they threaten to convert these public acts of “legalized” homicide into reasons for the active removal of the authorities by sheer, popular force. In other words, rebellion . But then let us have a look at some of the more ambiguous ones which have hit the bookshelves after years of research and niggling doubt. There are many, but perhaps just three which are constantly coming up in research will illustrate the point. Joan of Arc. Joan of Arc is a classic example of fear of public retribution by the authorities of the time. Every attempt was made to get her to confess to crimes she did not commit. As was usual during periods of instability of the Church, crimes against God and the apparent alliance with the Devil himself were a couple on the blacklists. They were also ones which they could invent quite easily and find meat for with all the willing witnesses looking for rewards. There is no doubt that the young girl (called La Pucelle after a mythical female Redeemer) was highly gifted in every sense of the world. Very few women of that age would allow themselves the right to demand the obedience of an army of mainly forced recruits, murderers and vicious delinquents. For Joan, the privilege lay in leading an army to rid Gaul of the non Frankish elements which laid claim to the lands which were to become France. She did it, strangely, it would seem, for Charles VII (then an impoverished heir to a local Crown with little general support ) – and thereby hangs a tale. At her age it would have been meaningless for a citizen of the land, especially a country girl, to think about the right to rule of a particular Royal heir and especially one considered weak and advisor dominated. The world of “Gaul “ at the time -for want of a better name, was a Pandora´s box of conflicting claimants to ultimate power of a variety of chiefs of tribal orIgins. They all had lands in a variety of so called countries but yearned for the power of a united, economically viable territory that would one day be called a nation. The warring factors had feet in both camps and their Barons and Princes relied on historical descent to claim Royal status. Joan´s cries for war in the name of Divine powers drew together a powerful force which succeeded in ousting the so called “enemy” and leave the ground clear for a “nation” based on bloodline to emerge. Much to the astonishment of the Church itself the crowds gathered and the able men swore their allegiance. As a civilizing force, the Church knew nothing of boundaries beyond which she could not reach out. She would have cared little about who could be in power for as long as he or she was a subject of her spiritual dne economic might. It is for this reason that the Church had plans of its own in the light of the warring influence of the British who were the emergent powers and with whom they would have to deal at some time or another. Joan would have just been a curious pawn. They just looked on for the moment when they would have had to break her spell and turn her over. It is quite conclusive therefore that they would have wanted this troublesome “witch” out of the way when the stakes had been won and appeasement engineered for the losers. To the Church, national politics would have sounded incomprehensible. Divided territories were easier to handle than anything which could produce men of great power at the helm. If they pushed for one Crown heir or another it was for the simple fact that they offered their allegiance and declared no other font of honour than the papacy. Nationalism even if understood as a coherent move could not have meant any more than childish illusions which could not be taken seriously against the vast territories which covered the whole world of the day and which served invading forces as they came and went. The Church misunderstood the power of culture and tradition. Her dominion over heart and mind was based on pure economics having inherited the Roman Empire in her own way. She also underestimated what was to become the world of Nations and which would turn against her precisely because of this ultimate unit of identity. Colour or code, would become important in the fight for common cultural sympathies but the Church would see it all as full of people ready to pay Peter´s pence and support her own religious demands. The Church knew no terrestrial boundaries and working with the potential winners was always the safe bet. In the case of Joan of Arc, they knew that they would have to work with great public transparency before they dared to kill what the new nation would have considered both a saint and ultimate warrior. She would have been incapable of determining what had in fact changed for ever. Joan, as a spiritual and terrestrial leader of such public recognition was not something she could just eliminate overnight and the period of discredit required to undermine the beliefs of a people had not been long or persuasive enough to dull the sense of the superstitious citizens of the country. Whoever conjured her in their name as a martyr would summon greater support than the weakened Church would have over the “nationalized” people in the future. Only in the understanding the nature and design of each power whether territorial or spiritual can decisions taken by them be seen in the light of public interest. In the case of Joan of Arc, who was to become a leading patron saint of France, the decision to brand her as treacherous to Church and State and kill her before she did further damage, was a very critical move. It was also one that promised to lead nowhere. However, the hate which emanated from the Church establishment of the time against those who preached differently was choleric. The Church was already facing public doubt and disdain that promised to end its rule in the name of Christ. Church and Crowns were to become the main protagonists in feuds which were to lead to wars between them and sometimes, unlikely and delicate alliances with what would be called Holy Roman Emperors. The latter, which was an attempt to create a universal leadership above national crowns would one day face her as an enemy. Such therefore were the considerations that the Church would have had when preparing the ground for a public assassination of a legend. But was it carried out ? Did they dare or perhaps chose a middle road ? Doubts have arisen with respect to this recorded act of poisonous hypocrisy against a figure who had apparently offered her life and victory to her king and God. The former had not even intervened to save her, it would seem and it speaks volumes on the question of honourable response to the hand that feeds. But were there other relevant facts hidden from the public that could have explained such extraordinary behaviour against a national idol ? It seems that perhaps there were. Joan who was apparently brought up by peasants had real parents and it was later surmised that she had been secretly removed from her parental scene at the assassination of her real father who was, according to many, none other than the very Duke of Normandy and heir to the military leadership of the Normans if not the Franks. On his assassination his only child Joan, it would seem, was handed over to a peasant family to safeguard her identity and prepare her future. The Dukes of Normandy as Bourbon Conti, were to give the Templars a Grand Master and it is said that from there stems a source of support molded by design. Some would even say that Joan on her legendary pedestal demonstrated their hidden hands. If she was of a Royal line and presented as that mythical figure of La Pucelle, it would imply that either she was privy to it all or else was genuinely mentally affected and utilized for the purpose when she started t o preach. Like all things historical at that level, it was a provocation to public credibility but it worked. Not for the Church however , which had its own roles to play in the installation of Royal Crowns. Like the defenseless Princes in the tower of so much romantic literature, she had to go. A new book on the subject now states that Joan was not the one in the pyre and that ten years after the event, having been released from a British prison, she appears in court to claim her ancestral heritage. It makes sense but only because none, as often happens, of the powers of the day dared to lay conclusive claim to this heinous act against the person of a figure which had already risen to such heights . They might, after a time have decided to give her a rebirth as a form of public apology and with things going against them. Having the living corpse and the living legend at the same time, was an answer to any future threat brought about by the deed. They could have even turned it into another miracle leaving the public to work it out. The fact that she was raised to the heights of Saint Joan however (and a very long time after the so called execution), shows how the hidden hands of State and Church have long memories and tread the wires with great caution. Although those who posed as family of Joan and her supposed living person, later claimed they had utilized a look alike to lay their claims, it sounds highly improbable with such a well known face. It sounds more likely to represent an attempt to bow out publicly if things went wrong and especially because of one very strange fact – the uncultivated writing attributed to Joan historically, matched that of the claim for legal rights by the so called “imposter” ? Could the family have been bought off by the French Royals in exchange for the declaration of having falsified the claim that Joan was alive and well. ? Now that would make very good sense. Everybody, including a disillusioned public, Joan and her family and the heirs to her efforts, would have by now, reaped some of the glory, but the Church was quite capable of absorbing all the guilt in her bid for fear as an instrument of power. Jacques de Molay. And if we now have doubts about Joan, they also remain with respect to the so called last Grandmaster of the Order of the Temple who was recorded as having been burnt at the pyre in 1314. The same moments of confusion and conflict reigned as the frail old man was tied and expected to die quickly before he drove the crowds to superstitious frenzy. Since the original roundup of the Knights in 1305 and the trials of abuses and heretical preaching were staged, the known world held its breath with apprehension of what could follow from the men of God who feared nothing except their own conscience. Would the hidden hordes emerge and stifle their enemies from within ? Who was in power where - and were they Templar stalwarts ready to go like the Assassins who originally inspired them ? None was more apprehensive than the lamentably weak Edward II of England who had married the only daughter of King Philip the IV (le Bel of Templar fame) who dared to attack such an indomitable force. He had allied with France and was set on dismantling the Templar hold on the English Crown. Nor was the “Order of St. John” any less fearful of consequences if they dared to take the estate left behind and wrongly bequeathed to them. The Hospitallers of St John ,as they were called, had began to realize that the dream of amalgamating with the Templars in an International police force within the Vatican, was over. Never had there ever existed such a poisoned cup and despite the historical events that were about to take place, the hidden presence of the Temple under careful guard of the Cistercian Priors (and later the Jesuits and Franciscans) was to be carefully and secretly recorded. Whether Jacque de Molay ever uttered those curses or some actor in his place from behind the pyre, said those things, will perhaps never be known but that some poor helpless victim of the hypocritical Church died in his place, is still a viable belief. The enigmatic Hiram Abiff of Masonic fame and his ceremonial resurrection points in that possible direction. The hazy figure of the the Builder´s apprentice lies limp against that possibility even as a moral story of jealousy and vested interests. In fact, it does not do the job properly and carries little impact against the incisive value given to the “degree”. The substitution of a scapegoat for the life of a living and much venerated leader of the Order by a doubtful Church would make much more sense. The very idea of a heretic being burnt at the stake by a king for religious reasons is sheer nonsense. It could also explain why the cremation was unusually moved to the Seine Island and further away from a public that would not be allowed to climb its embankments. It was in any case well away from the high figures of the religious and crown authorities. From that distance and stage, anything could be done to create whatever impression was required. The wailing voice of threat and Providence could without doubt have been that of Jacque de Molay himself but not from the pyre. It is said that the strength and diction evoked terror among those condemned in his curse. Was some sort of primitive megaphone technique known to the Templars utilized to project a strong voice over that distance ? Something does not quite add up. Secret ciphers inherited by the modern Order and understood only by chosen few are clearly seen in the tombstones of likely candidates of Templar vengeance. It is therefore possible rather than probable that Jacque de Molay continued to plan and map out the future of an Order that would one day burst out from the Palace of Versailles in 1705 and recruit members throughout the world. The Regent of the Order, a title which replaced Grand Master, was none other than Philip Duke de Orleans and correspondence from the period is amply available in the French National Archives as well as in that of the Cistercians (I personally have photocopies of correspondence from the Duke of Brabant of the early 18th.century on Templar paper). This formidable figre was none other than an heir in line to the Throne of France. The list of members of the aristocracy published a century later were those of the ruling families and that alone should be exclusive testament that the documents were genuine and that the Order was alive and well - at least until the revolution which was to take the Order away from them for ever. The mere thought that published family names of allegiance by the most reputable press of the day could have been forged with not one single public denial is as ridiculous as the persistant and childish attacks by the cults and sects which tried to assume the Order´s legacy and identity. In short, those who even now decry the authenticity of these documents have vested interests in their own puerile claim to the heirlooms of the Order and cannot be taken even remotely seriously. Their jobs, handed out by their taskmasters have always been damage limitation moves devoid of any more sense other than to create doubt however senselessly for others to compound from hidden wings. The known enemies of the Order are well recorded and always the same who shout in horror at anything that supports the survival. The recent findings however, of the acquittal of the Order by the Pope in the Vatican library letter found by Dr. Frale, proves without shadow of doubt that the Order could not be allowed to die in seclusion or lose their recognized mastery over world affairs. The burning of Jacque de Molay by the Church therefore, could not have taken place and the so called virtual scenario could well have been carried out without the real prosecutor (Philip le Bel) knowing anything about the change. Changing roles with a corpse or a dummy, at the end of the day on the part of a sentenced or hounded person , is a well known artifice still utilized today as a ruse to avoid prison or public scord. The clues lie in the few who can verify having actually seen the corpse or were able to identify it. In the main, sand bags or even water bags have often been subscribed to the real contents of many a legendary coffin. Even gangsters and Magnates caught in criminal acts have all too often had their expedient heart attacks and flown off to their new lands and identity with as much as they could carry. In the case of the Templar Grandmaster, the doubts arise with respect to the transmission documents which suggest planned complicity and calmness. The strange figure of the Machiavellian mystic of Mallorca , Raymond Llul comes too close, too suddenly and so close to the supposed end. This enigmatic genius who apparently would have preferred to be buried in the cathedral of Santiago de Compostella for reasons to do with what he thought it stood for, had many a secret shared with the Templars and the very first person to meet the “doomed” Grandmaster on arrival from Cyprus, was the man himself. Considering that the Grand Master would attend a ceremony with the French King in attendance on the very night of the arrests of the French body of knights, it almost feels like a screen play. One day in full glory and another in a filthy dungeon of a filthier period of social decline. The new agenda for a suppressed Order far away from the machinations of Europe were well under way and it would not be surprising if with it went the main hierarchy (Including Jacque de Molay) and new Grandmaster, Marc Larmenius, the Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem. The likely destination and where a huge fleet of Templar ships anchored in La Rochelle appeared to head for, was Newfoundland (Terranova) or L´Arbre Dór which is called Labrador in modern day Canada (the land of promise as in Xanadu and Canaan and Frazer´s Golden Bough of Arcadia. Need more be said ? Whoever laid the titles carried the promise. To cut it short, the burning of such a prominent and well respected figure as Jacque de Molay was hardly the thing a confused Church would have attended or carried out. The Transmission which is challenged by spurious organizations purporting to be Templar heirs etc. cannot be more authentic in spirit and form. If we are to take it seriously as it should be, the very recorded fact that the Scottish Templar s had prepared their own successor against the Scottish Prior, by the name of Aumont was authentic enough. The Scottish inheritors of the Templar tradition in the much respected Royal Order do not deny the connection although they refute since those early days, despite a settlement to the contrary, that the transmission to the Patriarch of Jerusalem was valid. Additionally however, included in the document is the condemnation of the whole Priory of Scotland for its treachery. The ridiculous Masonic modern claims to it all being a fictitious fraud is hardly something that someone five centuries later would have imagined without an original document to refer to. Like most of these claims, they stem mainly from organizations which cash in on the legends for political and economic reasons which prefer the original traces to be wiped out of the challenge . It is for this reason that the attempt to tie down the newly created world headquarters of Freemasonry in London required the acceptance of a relatively genuine source of Templar heritage and this was referred to as the Ancient Scottish Rite. It is understandable that countries (especially under joint crowns) should have enemies, but divisive trends were sources of discontent and subversion and Crowns had began to attack anything foreign as did Britain with all its own versions of foreign Orders intended to keep subjects away from the real ones. The Church moreover, had had more than enough with Henry VIII, Calvin and Luther to want to be seen to be cavorting with an Order that had other reasons to distrust official versions of the story of Jesus. It appeared to turn its back on the Templar heritage, but behind the scenes at high levels, the support can be seen in the records and its participation in Cathedral investitures. An Order of Chivalry without Church presence would lack an essential source of spiritual value difficult to find in civic ceremonial and the symbiotic relationship was born of that interdependence. King Edward II of England. But who would have credited the modern version of the assassination of King Edward the II supposedly by his “vixen she wolf “of France wife ? Yet it now seems that he was not the object of vengeance by the Barons of State or the machinations of one of his beau´s (Galverston) who like Rissio, of Mary Queen of Scots fame, was also dutifully dismembered. In a recent meticulously researched book by Ian Mortimer called Medieval Intrigue there is enough evidence to sink a battleship on what really happened with Edward II. The startling collection of documents appear to show that he was not in any way deprived of life suddenly (and with a poker held by his unrequited wife) , but removed from office quietly by other Barons and Princes. They, as would appear in future correspondence between them and the King himself, organized his removal and declared the false death to clean up a messy page of history beginning to bring the Monarchy down. The feared Templar revival (and until then the most powerful force in the kingdom) was the probable cause of this connivance to remove him from the scene and give him a “double entry” in historical mortality terms. The correspondence from and to the king that has now been brought to light and whilst it makes for interesting reading, also adds other question marks with respect to the burial without a corpse and the originally empty and elaborate tomb at Gloucester Cathedral kept ready for when the real dispatch would eventually take place. In this case, mercifully, no gore or horrendous sacrifice by another ever took place, but a retirement with all the blessings of a few quiet years of abandonment to albeit in seclusion. It was kept secret from the general public and his enemies who would have relished his decimation for the ridicule and dangers which his lover and protégées like Galverston had brought on them. . King Edward would appear to die eventually and unofficially bundled into the grand tomb at some recorded point or another. Being kept alive and ready to intervene should his heir not tow the baronial lines, would not be the only likely reason for such a plot. The King himself and his immediate entourage would have been more than aware of the potential danger they were all in from the wide variety of enemies they had created within the Court itself. He would have agreed in principle to this feigned death to enable his son to do the job of appeasement and rather than live in fear of being tortured and murdered not just by Templar executioners, but powerful lovers of the Queen herself. The Mortimers and Despensiers appeared to be treated with generous Royal gifts and support for reasons not quite clear. The Queen who had suffered all the indignities of a homosexual King and husband, was after all, the sister of Philip le Bel, the Templar scourge. Apart from what appears to be the execution of the Duke of Kent who took some of the blame, surprisingly passively, for King Edward II´s Babylonian captivity, the original story of murder lies in tatters. That Edward II lived for another few years in restricted but continued luxury, is no longer a matter of conjecture but then again who will ever trust national records again if, as it seems at the end of the day, departments of State and religious authorities betray their prudence with respect to what should be left written and what discouraged. In this case, even the new King Edward III must have felt a little uncomfortable at the thought that the rightful Crown head could emerge without warning and put his own head on the scaffold. This is a clear indication that behind the new King the forces were forces which kept father and son within safe control. But then again, perhaps all that had been taken care of by the master puppeteers. Maybe the Duke of Kent was a mere stage piece and lived happily ever after well informed and happy to disassociate himself from the forced and hidden abdication in some terrestrial haven under a different guise. Anything goes it would seem when it comes to timely, strange or violent deaths that leave taunting question marks in place. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael Mifsud starting his writing careet in the House of Commons at the age of 16. He came to fame with the publication of the first trade journal for driver in Britain and then as the mystery Thatcher spy in the Farzad Bazoft case. He travelled with the Royals for over 10 years as a member of the press and was one time director of the Monarchist League of GB. He was also co-opted by the modern order of Knights Templar (Versailles reinstatement) to lead the way and became a legate to many countries directly under the Grand Master including representing him. As a disciplinarian he was not always to everybody´s taste and ethical values and fight for the innocent and supressed both human and animal have filled his life with challenges. He provoked the Prison report on the Gibraltar medieval castle against political defamation and set up a national airline there to alleviate the effects of the Spanish siege. His passion for dogs has enabled him to save many and close a gas chamber in Malaga. He has appeared in many TV programmes on a variety of subjects and written a book on the endearing southern Spanish called Al Andalus - a trail of discoveries.
Related Articles -
jacque de molay, joan of arc, la pucelle, executions, historical lies, edward II, Knights Templar, raymond llul, philip le bel, Templars,
|
