What REALLY happened to the wealth of Knights Templar

[U238]

Hello Furness, thank you for your reply.


The treasure of the Templars was not gold, it was Real estate, entire companies and industries the order owned throughout Europe, Shipping companies and trade routes. Trade routes at this time in History were protected secrets. Gold was probably the smallest aspect of their wealth.

After their fall in the early 1300's, the order changed names, one of them was the "order of Christ", and continued to make use of their shipping expertise, in Portugal for example prince henry the navigator led the local order of Christ. Portugal became a seafaring influence due to this order.

The hospitallers absorbed many of the knights over Europe, mostly outside of France. The knights of Malta, Knights of St. John, etc. The Knights of malta are an interesting read, the central bank of Malta coat of arms are two knights in battle gear and to this day are actively involved in large scale international banking.

The Bank of England is a murkier origin, but basically King William was in severe debt, bankers agreed to loan him funds if the king would allow the creation of the bank of england, whose charter allowed the printing of money to be used in place of hard asset backed bank notes, what we call fractional banking today. Scottish bankers played roles in this as indicated previously.

Many knights in Europe traveled to Switzerland, and created central banking systems over the years as well.


Wealth does not disappear, it is like energy and changes from one form to another.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[lamar]

Dear U238;
One cannot point to the Swiss banking system as having a Templar influence , as the Swiss banking system did not arise until the mid 1600s, some 300 years after the dissolutionment of the Order. By your own words:
but by studying timelines, events and how they fit we can surmise and extrapolate the likeliest scenario
One can assume that with the passage of 300 years, any and all Templar influence would have disappeared before the first banks appeared in Switzerland.

Likewise, the Bank of England was not established until 1694, almost 400 years after the disbanding of the Templars, therefore one may safely assume that the British banking system was not funded, not even in the smallest part, by prior Templar holdings.

Moving on, the Order of Christ was not EXACTLY like the Templar Order re-born under a new banner, rather it was mostly comprised of a secular class of warrior-monks who had not previously been Templars, mostly because there was one HUGE difference in the vows of proverty, chastity and obedience between the Templars and members of the Order of Christ.

The Templars swore an oath of obedience to the Pope whereas the Order of Christ swore their oath of obedience to the King of Portugal and because of this, it can be considered as the first of all the secular chivalric Orders which followed, many of which were later popularized in England and Scotland.
It's uncertain what percentage, if any, former Templars became members of the Order of Christ. We do know that a large majority of the early membership in the Order of Christ were former members of the Order of Aviz, another Portuguese military Order, which was founded in 1128AD and this Order was heavily involved in the explusion of the muslim threat along the Iberian peninsula as well as supporting the Crusades in the Holy Land.

The reason for granting all former Templar holdings in Portugal to the Order of Christ is sound in light of the fact the Portuguese were undertaking a Crusade of their own at that time, namely expelling the Moorish muslims from their lands in Iberia. It made more sense for the Vatican to grant the Templar holdings to an organization that was closer to the action than to grant those same holdings to the Hospitallers, which were more firmly rooted in the Middle East, as they had been for the previous 300 years.

As a point of fact, the Hospitallers were granted their first charter by Pope Paschal II in 1113AD and confirmed in a Papal Bull that same year, some 6 years before the founding of the Templars in 1119AD.

Also, as another point of fact, to use the current Swiss flag as quasi-proof of Templar influence would be wholly incorrect, as the white cross on a red background is the device of the Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of Malta and not the Templars. Also, the Knights of Malta and the Knights of St. John are one and the same. They have gone by many names throughout the centuries, but they have always been the Hospitallers. This holds true even today and they remain one of three surviving Roman Catholic chivalric Orders.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Smithbrown]

Bravo Lamar.

Hundreds of years; no direct connection.

Smithbrown

 

[lamar]

Dear smithbrown;
Thank you, my friend.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[U238]

Hello Lamar, thank you for your response.

it took hundreds of years for Switzerland to create itself, over a thousand years for England to form( depending on where we draw the timeline), The European Union has gone back and forth for over a thousand years and is still in the process of expanding.

It is in the context of Europe being formed, with borders moving, loyalties created, broken and remade, social and economic upheaval, that we are discussing banking systems and families. We cannot remove the discussion out of context, the world was a dynamic and rapidly changing environment during this time, and if history is any reference still dynamic and changing. The difference is change occurs much more rapidly today.

Of course it took hundreds of years for banking systems to form and establish themselves. This time period was war after war after war, empires and royal families created and destroyed, nations expanding and contracting, social order was in constant flux. We forget what the world was like 500 years ago, how difficult it was to even communicate. It is in this context of social, economic and political upheaval that we are discussing these events.

The amount of time an event takes to complete cannot be evidence to deny it occurred.

 

[lamar]

Dear U238;
Of course, no one can determine with any degree of accuracy, the social and economical impact which the Templars made on Europe during their existence, however we can surmise. For instance you stated that the Templars discovered the first international traveler's cheques system. This statement is quite true, however after the fall of the Templars, traveler's cheques completely disappeared from existence until they were once again issued by the London Credit Exchange Union in 1772 and redeemable in 90 European cities, some 460 years after the Templars were disbanded.

Logically, to state that the Templars were a primary factor in the London Credit Exchange Union's business plan is a very long stretch. In all likelyhood, a niche market was percieved and exploited by the folks at the Exchange Union, in very much the same way that the Templars had perceived the same niche market some 460 years earlier.

To continue surmising, in all likelyhood, the business exploits of the Templars were most likely long forgotten by 1772 and the London Credit Exchange Union needed to *re-discover* the ins and outs of issuing and redeeming traveler's cheques. Much like the Templars, the London Credit Exchange Union had the ways, the means and the wherewithal to incorporate continental traveler's cheques, however, considering that the armories of the Templars were spread throughout Europe and the Middle East, their own services reached a much larger audience over a much greater distance. It was not until the invention of the telegraph that international banking was able to surpass what the Templars were able to accomplish some 700 years earlier.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Oroblanco]

Smithbrown wrote

Bravo Lamar.

Hundreds of years; no direct connection.

Shouldn't we rather say, bravo Knights Templar for such an achievement?
Oroblanco

 

[Smithbrown]

What achievements? You might say they failed- they were set up to defend the Holy Land and lost all their property there. if you want to celebrate anyone, it is the Knights Hospitallers who deserve to be remembered- who clung on to Rhodes long after its defence seemed unfeasible. And kept Malta.
If you mean banking, I think that is more the responsiblity of woolmerchants in Flanders and Italy than anything to do with the Templars.
Smithbrown

 

[ClonedSIM]

I really like Beef Jerky.........!
.
.
sorry, wrong thread.....

 

[Oroblanco]

Smithbrown wrote

What achievements?

Do you not recall your own post?
<Smithbrown wrote>

Hundreds of years; no direct connection.

I would say that is quite an achievement, better even than la Mafia!
Oroblanco

 

[Ramitt]

Lamar,
Interesting and logical theory. I enjoy reading your well thought out posts.

 

[lamar]

Dear Ramittñ
Thank you my friend. I try very hard to post only the historical facts of the matter, without any legends, rumors or unfounded suppositions. And with a subject such as the Templars, it´s a difficult task. Once more, I thank you for your kind words.
Your friendñ
LAMAR

 

[SICARII]

Greetings everyone,


I just wanna ask the relation of this templar treasure and jesuits treasure since the yama$hita treasure used symbols similar to the jesuits... Is this templar and jesuits treasure are the same? Does the japs tracking this treasure?

Sicarii

 

[Oroblanco]

HOLA Sicarii,
It appears that no one has answered your question, but I think it is safe to assume that IF this treasure exists, then it is likely that several organizations are keeping track.
Oroblanco

 

[erik12152003]

OK You all have my head spinning. One question do you believe everything you read even history books. If so you are not very open minded. Just like the bible not all things are true and not all thing tell the truth. Just because if I where to say in the times of the bible writing whole world had a flood how would I know we didn't have phones or planes or even time travel (who would of thunk it) What are you going on books written by humans that heard it from other humans. What do humans do make mistakes and stretch the truth or what we know as the truth. Look at the story and take half of it to make truth you still get something with questions. I cant say that there is anything for certain or not but the mason's seem to have been around and the KKK do you know people in both if not are they real. I just want to know things that you can prove with something I can see touch or read by there own hand not someone else telling there story. Sorry I just like knowledge and want to know everything so let me have it. tell me what you think Thanks Erik

 

[lamar]

Dear erik12152003;
First, welcome to the discussion my friend. You've stated that you only believe that which you can witness for yourself. This is a good concept and I tend to agree with it. In the chain of evidence, the very worst form is the eyewitness account. This has always been so and it remains so. Therefore I tend to disregard all stories, legends, myths, and heresay and rely solely on the physical evidence, although this is often times very slim.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[vastik]

Could this coin be part of the Templar legacy? I hope that someone can help me to identify this tin coin.
Please take a look....
www.mysterycoin.com

 

[Oroblanco]

WELCOME TO TREASURENET VASTIK!!!!
Lamar wrote

In the chain of evidence, the very worst form is the eyewitness account. This has always been so and it remains so.

I must respectfully disagree with this viewpoint, for if we were to take this approach, virtually all religious faiths would be baseless since most rely on eyewitness reports that were simply written down and passed on to us. Can we squeeze God into a test tube? Also, virtually all criminal investigations would be hopeless if based solely on concrete evidence, and criminal investigation is a science unto itself. For that matter, virtually all of science is based on the "eyewitness" or observer(s) <biologists, chemists, physicists, archaeologists, paleontologists, anthropologists, epigraphers, etc> who performed experiments and recorded their findings, which we then take as fact. Eyewitness accounts are not 100% reliable, but nothing is, and eyewitness accounts are surely of some value for us to reach our own conclusions. This is not to discredit concrete evidence, but we ought not dismiss or denigrate eyewitness accounts out of hand.
Oroblanco

 

[Springfield]

WELCOME TO TREASURENET VASTIK!!!!
Lamar wrote

In the chain of evidence, the very worst form is the eyewitness account. This has always been so and it remains so.

I must respectfully disagree with this viewpoint, for if we were to take this approach, virtually all religious faiths would be baseless since most rely on eyewitness reports that were simply written down and passed on to us. Can we squeeze God into a test tube? Also, virtually all criminal investigations would be hopeless if based solely on concrete evidence, and criminal investigation is a science unto itself. For that matter, virtually all of science is based on the "eyewitness" or observer(s) <biologists, chemists, physicists, archaeologists, paleontologists, anthropologists, epigraphers, etc> who performed experiments and recorded their findings, which we then take as fact. Eyewitness accounts are not 100% reliable, but nothing is, and eyewitness accounts are surely of some value for us to reach our own conclusions. This is not to discredit concrete evidence, but we ought not dismiss or denigrate eyewitness accounts out of hand.
Oroblanco

From the 'scientific' point of view, the observations are deemed valid because the methodology yields the same results for any who witness the same phenomena. Ask anyone in law inforcement/judicial proceedings about the reliability of 'eyewitness' evidence - it is ranked as questionable at best and much less desirable than forensic evidence of any type. Despite the qualifications of the 'eyewitness', humans routinely make fundamental mistakes recounting events they have witnessed first-hand. And as far as 'hearsay' is concerned (basis of nearly everything discussed in the Treasure Legends catagory of this forum), you are on extremely thin ice after receiver/repeater #2 and the accuracy continues to diminish with each subsequent retelling.

As far as 'religions' and their 'witnesses' are concerned ... well, perhaps this is not the correct venue to discuss this inherently controversial topic.

 

[Oroblanco]

SWR wrote

I must respectfully disagree with this viewpoint.

and Springfield wrote

From the 'scientific' point of view, the observations are deemed valid because the methodology yields the same results for any who witness the same phenomena. Ask anyone in law inforcement/judicial proceedings about the reliability of 'eyewitness' evidence - it is ranked as questionable at best and much less desirable than forensic evidence of any type. Despite the qualifications of the 'eyewitness', humans routinely make fundamental mistakes recounting events they have witnessed first-hand. And as far as 'hearsay' is concerned (basis of nearly everything discussed in the Treasure Legends catagory of this forum), you are on extremely thin ice after receiver/repeater #2 and the accuracy continues to diminish with each subsequent retelling.

As far as 'religions' and their 'witnesses' are concerned ... well, perhaps this is not the correct venue to discuss this inherently controversial topic.

Your views are in line with Lamar's. Fortunately our court systems (and religions) do not hold the same views. Repeatability of a scientific experiment is not "the" rule in all of science either, for we find that often enough, a theory long held and which seems correct is later proven incorrect. You have totally missed the point on the mention of religious beliefs, apparently, there was no question nor religious view presented in my post. Or are you saying that these "scriptures" held in such high esteem/faith by so many billions of people, can not be believed because the great majority of what is recorded in them is merely the eyewitness reports of those present at that time? I am well aware of the supposed "unreliability" of eyewitness reports, so frequently cited by so many defense lawyers trying to get their guilty clients off.

As for the "grapevine" effect of distorting a report by being repeated, this is true but not always. Oral histories have been proven to be highly accurate time and again, and even when distortions creep in the main points generally are not unduly affected. Hearsay is not allowed as evidence in a court hearing, except in the case of a dying declaration so even hearsay can be held as reliable under certain circumstances.

One other point - a class of evidence so often cited is "documented"; in many cases, documented is simply a written record of an eyewitness report. These documents are I presume to be dismissed by Lamar, SWR and Springfield, in which case most of history is also to be dismissed.

Sorry for going off on a tangent here, this is only peripherally related to the subject at hand. The opponents of eyewitness reports obviously do not want such reports to be used when we are researching the history of the Templars, but our readers will judge for themselves.

I won't bore you any further amigos, please do continue with the discussion.
Oroblanco


"There is none so blind as he who will not see" --> John Heywood?