Templar Vault Chamber located in New Ross, Nova Scotia

[NewAge]

with your knowledge you could come work for me!

Sounds good

Or I could just stop in on one of your sites and give you a consultation for a reduced fee if you wish.



* I am aware I altered your quote a little bit.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[rowanns]

I have been following the story out of New Ross for quite a bit of time now and frankly folks, I just can't get my head around why something would be there of all places. Yes, there is the Gold River nearby, but it isn't the friendliest river to use for transportation of any sort. The location is troublesome for me - always has been. Heck a person could have used the Mersey and be just as easily hidden. Even if one came to the New Ross area from the Fundy side down, it still doesn't seem logical to me. As to the stones, they may be a remnant of something, but not a castle. I saw Joan's drawings of the castle and it's simply not possible to get what she wanted out of what is there.

 

[Pippin]

I have been following the story out of New Ross for quite a bit of time now and frankly folks, I just can't get my head around why something would be there of all places. Yes, there is the Gold River nearby, but it isn't the friendliest river to use for transportation of any sort. The location is troublesome for me - always has been. Heck a person could have used the Mersey and be just as easily hidden. Even if one came to the New Ross area from the Fundy side down, it still doesn't seem logical to me. As to the stones, they may be a remnant of something, but not a castle. I saw Joan's drawings of the castle and it's simply not possible to get what she wanted out of what is there.

Yes if they used the Mersey they could have had a direct route to the Annapolis Basin. Or even the LaHave up to New Germany would be a good place. To get to New Ross by way of the Gaspereau River would have required a portage. But then they wouldn't have had canoes would they so they would have to go up by a boat of some sort. It wouldn't have been easy on any of our rivers.

 

[FinderKeeper]

All of the big boulders were moved to the back of all yards in 1960's by Dwite Sanders dad with a big dozer. Sanders started a tree business so he cleared all the fields above the castle site. All the big boulders are still there with 90 degree cuts in some. In the older picture with snow you can see the boulders in the back of Joan's yard with a lot of the stone wall and tower stones. The castle walls were 5' and 3' thick . The foundations are shown in photo of Joan's yard. I am posting this info because we did not cover it in any other post. This was not a small fort it was big and made of stone. The church was made of stone to. If you know Tim the new land owner , ask him if there are BIG Stones in the back of his yard with cuts in them. If you saw the American Unearthed show #13 hunt for the Grail it shows Scott Wolters at the back yard with the boulders and he is checking them out. So I did not make this up, you can try your best to cut this up but its just a matter of time now. This info was on Joan's web site but did anyone take the time to read it. For 4 weeks everyone said something about the walls and joked about this site. Well now is this enough info to prove this was a large stone castle, NO I am sure some of you will still find something to fight about.

 

[sasquash]

Welcome back FK

Great post !

 

[Raparee]

Well now is this enough info to prove this was a large stone castle, NO I am sure some of you will still find something to fight about.

The stones in the 'foundation' you show above are small and roundish. Building a large, stone structure on a foundation like that would be like building it on marbles... unstable. Are there any CONFIRMED Templar castles that are built on similar 'foundations'?

 

[lokiblossom]

Sounds good

Or I could just stop in on one of your sites and give you a consultation for a reduced fee if you wish.



* I am aware I altered your quote a little bit.

Yeah, you did which is unfortunate.
I had said "with your knowledge of wheelbarrows you could come work for me".
But actually I was only funnin you, my guys are very good with wheelbarrows. I think with your attitude you would be more of a hindrance to an otherwise well run organization!

Cheers, Loki

 

[lokiblossom]

Yes if they used the Mersey they could have had a direct route to the Annapolis Basin. Or even the LaHave up to New Germany would be a good place. To get to New Ross by way of the Gaspereau River would have required a portage. But then they wouldn't have had canoes would they so they would have to go up by a boat of some sort. It wouldn't have been easy on any of our rivers.

Why wouldn't they (whoever you think they would have been) have had canoes. All of the French trappers here in Michigan had canoes of which most they built themselves. They also built some canoes that could carry up to 30 persons. The portage between the Gaspereau and Gold rivers would be less than a mile, although I have not actually ever tried it, so don't call me a liar if i'm off a little.

Cheers, Loki

 

[Raparee]

Why wouldn't they (whoever you think they would have been) have had canoes. All of the French trappers here in Michigan had canoes of which most they built themselves. They also built some canoes that could carry up to 30 persons. The portage between the Gaspereau and Gold rivers would be less than a mile, although I have not actually ever tried it, so don't call me a liar if i'm off a little.

Cheers, Loki

Canoeing up the Gold would involve portaging six sets of waterfalls between Mahone Bay and New Ross. Why would they subject themselves to that when they could have sailed up the LaHavre? Not to mention the dozens of other suitable sites in NS that they would have sailed past on the way to Mahone Bay? What is so special about New Ross to have made that unnecessary work worth it?

 

[Pippin]

Why wouldn't they (whoever you think they would have been) have had canoes. All of the French trappers here in Michigan had canoes of which most they built themselves. They also built some canoes that could carry up to 30 persons. The portage between the Gaspereau and Gold rivers would be less than a mile, although I have not actually ever tried it, so don't call me a liar if i'm off a little.

Cheers, Loki

Why would I call you a liar Loki. I'm talking about the Templars of course and no they wouldn't have had canoes unless of course the Mi'kmaq gave them some. Yes the voyageurs had freight canoes but where do you think they got them from or who taught them how to make them. If the Templars came to New Ross they would have walked along the river or would have taken the trail that ran beside their settlement. That trail goes to Chester Basin and has been there for millennia.

Here's a history of the canoe.

THE HISTORY OF THE CANOE

 

[lokiblossom]

Canoeing up the Gold would involve portaging six sets of waterfalls between Mahone Bay and New Ross. Why would they subject themselves to that when they could have sailed up the LaHavre? Not to mention the dozens of other suitable sites in NS that they would have sailed past on the way to Mahone Bay? What is so special about New Ross to have made that unnecessary work worth it?

I don't know! Maybe because it was hard to get to.

Cheers, Loki

 

[lokiblossom]

Why would I call you a liar Loki. I'm talking about the Templars of course and no they wouldn't have had canoes unless of course the Mi'kmaq gave them some. Yes the voyageurs had freight canoes but where do you think they got them from or who taught them how to make them. If the Templars came to New Ross they would have walked along the river or would have taken the trail that ran beside their settlement. That trail goes to Chester Basin and has been there for millennia.

Here's a history of the canoe.

THE HISTORY OF THE CANOE

Anybody can make a canoe, and the French learned how, why not the Knights Templar? Its actually a question that doesn't need answering as canoeing isn't central to most of these premise's, although it is one of my hobbies. Btw, that trail is what the stone triangle pointed to, IMHO.

Cheers, Loki

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

View attachment 1412096View attachment 1412098

For 4 weeks everyone said something about the walls and joked about this site. Well now is this enough info to prove this was a large stone castle, NO I am sure some of you will still find something to fight about.

I am sure as well. No wonder it all fell down and rolled away. The Templers use rounded boulders without LOTS of cement and masonery for foundations or walls. Though must account for why nothing lasted above ground.

Here's Mortimer's Tower, built in the earth 14th century at Kneilworth. The Normans learned to start with a circular "keep" or motte and bailey, or tower and enclosure, which are strong and fast to build, and expand the castle from that.

What you have there I could not call a "castle" or any part of one. Though I must say, when General Sullivan marched through this valley in 1779 he destroyed an "Indian Castle" in what is now called "Castle Creek, NY". It was three wood sheds full of pumpkins; by other written accounts. So maybe castles on this side of the ocean are less impressive.

 

[FinderKeeper]

 

[NostraDanis]

I believe Joan Hope discusses the dispersion of the stones in her writings.
If there were a substantial structure that had fallen into disrepair, and/or was not in use it is reasonable, if not likely, that the stones would have been absorbed into the community. I would imagine that the most useful would go first. leaving behind the smaller, less versatile stones.

Regardless of your position on New Ross, the lack of large, flat, building stones in the photos is easily and reasonably explained.

 

[lokiblossom]

I am sure as well. No wonder it all fell down and rolled away. The Templers use rounded boulders without LOTS of cement and masonery for foundations or walls. Though must account for why nothing lasted above ground.

Here's Mortimer's Tower, built in the earth 14th century at Kneilworth. The Normans learned to start with a circular "keep" or motte and bailey, or tower and enclosure, which are strong and fast to build, and expand the castle from that.

What you have there I could not call a "castle" or any part of one. Though I must say, when General Sullivan marched through this valley in 1779 he destroyed an "Indian Castle" in what is now called "Castle Creek, NY". It was three wood sheds full of pumpkins; by other written accounts. So maybe castles on this side of the ocean are less impressive.

What do you think the stones represent CP? Do you think Joan put them there to fool us?

Cheers, Loki

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Could be native site. Could be remnants of farm stone fences. Could be sheep pens or drainage ditches.

My "hobby farm" is on glacial sill and clay and I subsoil to 18" and then ditch to get dry pasture and garden spots in between. Fill them with the stones from plowing so I can drive and mow over them.

Never had the pleasure of on-site examination up there so it's just speculation. Is there a local archaeology society that might come help?

 

[NewAge]

Well now is this enough info to prove this was a large stone castle, NO

You are correct it is not enough evidence to even come close to proving a huge castle.

There is no way this photo is part of a castle wall.There is simply no mortar.
I have seen rubble foundations or footers of castles using roundish stones but they are much,much wider then this.

There is a picture out there somewhere that shows a smaller castle and everything around the one corner has eroded showing the foundation and it is amazing how large and thick it is.

 

[NewAge]

Here is a good picture of a rubble foundation.

This is from the cathedral at New Serum the construction of this building started around 1220.
Notice how wide the foundation is compared to the remains of the wall.

The difference between the photos from the Joan Harris site and real castles are as stark as night and day.

 

[0121stockpicker]

Was there ever any mention of the "Templars" in NS or oak island before the Da Vinci Code was published / movie?? Everyone went Templar crazy after that. Lots of revisionist history created that sounds an awful lot like Code and also National Treasure movie.

As for this thread... Archeology does not exist in a vacuum. If there was a "Templar" castle/building that would necessitate a fairly large group of people in the area for a fairly long period of time. This would produce an absolute ton of other artifacts such as broken tools, midden piles, broken pottery etc etc etc. This is why real archeologist study sites and not artifacts. An artifact in a vacuum has no context. Best.