From the Radio Free Michigan archives

ftp://141.209.3.26/pub/patriot

If you have any other files you'd like to contribute, e-mail them to

bj496@Cleveland.Freenet.Edu.

------------------------------------------------

"Every age has its own ideals of beauty, goodness and personality, but the

practical joke is universal and timeless. It had all started almost as a

boyish prank one day. Hugh de Payens and a friend decided to hide by a

watering place on the open road where the pilgrim transports were wont to

stop for refreshment and which consequently was a favorite Saracen ambush.

Imagine - as they might have told their cronies afterwards - the

consternation of the Infidel marauders when they found the tables turned..."

- Edith Simon

"The Piebald Standard"

Perhaps in 1959, when this passage had been published, the romantic ideals

of a "boyish prank" developing into the mysterious and enigmatic Knights of

the Temple of Solomon seemed the best explanation for the Order's founding.

In it's day, the whole idea might have enticed more than a few other nobles
and knights in the East to participate in this sort of activity.

However, there are three important points to consider in hindsight.

First, the Knights Templar started off as the Poor Fellow-Soldiers of

Christ and the Temple of Soloman. These Knights had a responsibility to

defend pilgrims in the Holy Land and took vows similar to those of the

contemporary priesthood. Vows that eventually included chastity and poverty,

which would seem to restrict some rather "boyish" activities.

Second, Hugues de Payen had made no secret of the fact that the life

which the Templars were leading was wearing on himself and other members

of the Order. The tone of some letters indicates the Templars were on the

verge of disbanding the Order.

Third, acording to contemporary historian Guillaume de Tyre (who was

historian to the court of Jerusalem from 1175 to 1185, and hence was

writing about the foundation of the Templars some seventy years later),

the Knights originally consisted of nine brethen, the same number as in 1129.

Actually, there were definatly 10 members in 1129, and probabaly more.

Given the fact that these ten members lived by a religious lifesyle with

very few others to share their plight, it seems that dispair and discontentment

would become a problem quickly. If these ten men were living such "humble"

lifestyles for so long with little or no help, what inspired them to stay

doing it for a few weeks, let alone several years?

THE ORIGIN OF THE ORDER OF THE TEMPLE

 In looking for the reasons for the establishment of the Knights of the

Temple, one needs to determine who the founders were and what their motivations

were. In the case of the Templars, however, that proves to be more difficult.

Not only did the Templar's founders live almost 900 years ago, but the first

contemporary historian to make record of the Order wasn't writing about them

until neerly half a century later.

Information about the foundation of the Order comes from Guillaume de Tyre,

historian from 1167 to 1184. Of the historians to mention the Templars before

him, Jacques de Vitrey mentions only the Templars performance at Damascus in

October of 1129, and Odo de Deuil mentions the Templars only in passing in his

comentary on activities following Vezelay in 1146. Fulk de Chartress,

historian to the court in Jerusalem in the 1110s made no mention of the

Knights, despite Badouin II's endorsement and bestowment of the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Drawing from three sources, we have the following lists;

Les Origines... The Knights Templar Holy Blood, Holy Grail

a:Paul Naudon a:Stephen Howarth a:Baigent, Leigh, Lincoln

--------------- ------------------- ---------------------------

Hugues de Pains Hugh de Payens Hugues de Payen

Geoffroi de Saint-Omer Geoffrey of St-Omer Bisol de St. Omer

Payen de Montdidier Payen de Montdidier Nivard de Montdidier

Archambaud de St-Aignan Archambaud de St-Agnan Archambaud de Saint-Aignan

Andre de Montbard Andre de Montbard Andre de Montbard

Godefroy de Bissot Geoffrey Bisot

Gondemar Gondemare Gondemar

Roral/Roland Rossal/Roland Rossal

Godefroy

Hugues, Comte de Champagne

The above lists are justified as such;

Paul Naudon draws his list from the writtings of Guillaume de Tyre, historian

to the court of Jerusalem in 1173. It should be noted that this was more than

50 years after the establishment of the Templars, and was probably drawn from

sources supplied by the Templars. One must make one's own judgement as to the

validity of any sources which the Templars may have made available to Guillaume

de Tyre at this time. As one of the other four authors notes, "Archbishop

William of Tyre...held a permanent grudge against the Templars...," and this

may serve to explain why Guillaume is the first Crusader historian to make any

mention of the Templars' origins.

Stephen Howarth does not give a clear indication as to his source. He also

only lists eight founders, and says about the ninth only that "[t]radition says

there were nine in this original brotherhood, but tradition does not give the

name of the ninth." In this respect, it is perhaps Howarth's list which can be

given the most credence, as he is willing to admit that he is unable to find

proof to support a ninth name.

Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln give as their source a

report known as the "Dossiers secrets." This report is claimed to have been

found at the Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris. The list is mostly accurate,

containing seven names which are confirmed by the other two lists. The
additional name, Hugues, Comte de Champagne, is speculative, and likely false.

First, lets take aside the eight names which match, and produce the list of

eight confirmed founders, as they will be refered to from this point onward.

Hugues de Payens Geoffrey de St-Omer Payen de Montdidier

Archmabaud de St-Agnan Andre de Montbard Godefoy Bisol

Gondemar Roland

First, we come to the ninth name on Paul Naudon's list; Godefroy. This is

probably based upon the Rule of the Temple, article 7. The rule reads;

"And also present was Brother Hugues de Payens, Master of the

Knighthood, with some of his brothers whom he had brought with

him. They were Brother Roland, Brother Godefroy, and Brother

Geoffroi Bisot, Brother Payen de Montdidier, Brother Archambaut

de Saint-Amand."

Article 7 was comprised at the Council of Troyes in 1129, along with many of

the earliest articles of conduct for the Order. The list of Knights who

acompanied Hugues includes Godefroy de St Omer, Roland, Godefroi Bisot, Payen

de Montdidier, and Archambaud de St.Amand. Apparently, Geoffrey de St Omer

had been recorded simply as Godefroy (second on the list).

As for Hugues, Comte de Champagne, he is recorded historically as joining the

Order in 1126, and is considered to be the only the second non-founding member
(not including Count Fulk of Anjou, who had joined as an associate member in

1120. Remarkably, this is the same Fulk who married Melissande, and thereby

eventually became King of Jerusalem on Sept 14, 1131) along with Robert de

Craon, whose date of joining the Order is in question. The reason for

the suggestion that Hugues de Champagne was one of the founders is that he had

a long history of activity in the east, starting in 1104. He returned to

France in 1108, then returned to the east again in 1114, intending to join

the "milice du Christ." Supposedly, he changed his mind, and returned to

France. Likely, he did just that, but there is still the possibility that

the Order was esablished by 1114, or in it's early stages, and that Hugues

did have something to do with it. While there is little evidence to support

this theory, there is nothing to discount it either, as Hugues was in the

east at a time when the Templars would have been organizing. For now, however,

we will discount this, and leave the ninth founder unknown.

Of the other eight mentioned as founders, we know which Knights were still

members of the Order in 1129; Hugues de Payens and five others in Troyes with

Andre de Montebard and Gondemar noted in a letter from Badouin II to St

Bernard before the Council of Troyes in 1129. If there were only eight of the

original Knights in the Order at this time, along with Robert de Craon and

the Comte de Champagne, who was recently admitted to the Order, this leaves us

with the nine members stated as part of the Order. Even if there had been a

ninth founder (who was not Hugues de Champagne), perhaps he had died by 1129.

There are two other possibilities for the unknown ninth founder, however.

The second Master of the Templars was Robert de Craon. The date of his
joining the Order is somewhat questionable. He is not indicated as part of

the Order in 1129, but there is a charter dated 1125 witnessed by "Robert the

Templar." It has been suggested that Robert was the ninth founder, and that he

is not recorded in 1129 because he is not included in Article 7 or the letter

Bernard. If none of the documents availible to Guillaume had included Robert's

name, then he would not have been included.

Second, if there was in fact an organization working out of the abbey on Mt

Sion, then perhaps someone within the abbey had helped found the order. That

person may have been one Prior Arnaldus. Several documnets of the period were

found bearing the seal and signature of one or another prior from the abbey on

Mt Sion (known as the Notre Dame de Sion). There is one from July 19, 1116,

signed by Prior Arnaldus. There is another from May 2, 1125, where Prior

Arnaldus' name appears with Hugues de Payens.

How many more connections could actually be found to link the abbey on

Sion III with the Templars?

MOUNT SION; WHY IS IT IMPOTANT?

Archaeologically speaking, there have been a series of constructs built

atop Mt. Sion near Jerusalem. However, geograpically speaking, there are

three rises in the area which have been called Mt. Sion over the last 3000

years.

When King David captured Jerusalem in about 1000 BCE, the south-eastern

ridge was known as Mt. Sion. This is the site of the City of David, and is
refered to as Sion I. This hill has been the subject of recent excavations

seeking more information about the City of David.

When King Solomon built his temple to the Lord on the ridge to the north,

the Temple Mount was refered to as Sion. It is refered to as Sion II or Mt.

Moriah.

The Mt. Sion most commonly refered to is Sion III, which is located south-

west of the Temple Mount. It is on this hill that the Church of the Apostles

sat durring the time of Jesus. On that same site, an abbey was erected by

order of Godfroi de Bouillon after the conquest of Jerusalem. Today, the

Dormition(meaning "passing away") Abbey is located there, keeping with the

tradition that it marks the site of the "passing away" of Mary.

It is Sion III which will be focused upon here. In addition the the

actual constructs found here, the history of visitors to Sion before the

Crusades will show that someone was interested in Mt. Sion for a very long

time.

The first construction is from 73 CE. After the destruction of the city

of Jerusalem in 70 CE, (from Euthychius, 10th century patriarch of Alexandria,

so, again, the information is written long after the event, and thereby

questionable) the Judeo-Christians who fled to Pella "returned to Jerusalem

in the fourth year of Vespian, and built there their church." Their leader

was Simon Bar-Kleopha, second bishop of Jerualem, and a decendant of the

Davidic family.

Returning at that time, these Judeo-Christians would have at their

disposal the ashlars from Herod's Temple as well as ruins from other buildings

of the old city from which to build their church. Certainly, looking at the

remaining walls from the older constructions, it is obvious that blocks of

various sizes were used. This church, built before the term church had come

into use, would have been called either a Beit or Beth Knesset, which means

"house of assembly." From the Greek assembly, it became "synagogue."

This synagogue stood alone atop Sion III commemorating the site of the Last

Supper and the death of Mary. Over the next three centuries, several other

constructs were added. In 333 CE, a man known as the Pilgrim of Bordeaux

visited the site, and mentioned entering the "wall of Sion," which might have

been a wall construced by the Judeo-Christians to fend off Pagen and Byzantine

influence and trespass. In about 382 CE, Theodosius I had an Octagonal church

constructed on Sion III next to the synagogue, a representations of which can

be seen in the 400 CE mosaic of the Last Supper at the Basilica of St.

Pudentiana in Rome.(In the mosaic, the octaginal church and the synagogue

are just to the right of the Christ's head.)

This octaginal church stood next to the 1st century synagogue until about

415 CE, when it was replaced by the Hagia Sion Basilica, which abutted the

1st century synagogue along it's north wall. Also in 415, the bones of St.

Stephen were found. The then Bishop of Jerusalem, John II, had the relics of

St. Stephen transfered to the synagogue on Mt. Sion, where thay remanined until

the empress Eudocia had a new church erected to honor St. Stephen, located

north of the Damacus Gate, in 439 CE. The bones of St Stephen were moved to

the new church, however some of the bones were taken to Constantinople and
others went to the Mount of Olives. The sarcophagus remained in the sanctuary

on Mt. Sion.

At the time, it was believed that the "wall of Sion" was a part of the Palace

of David, and that the City of David had stood on the same hill (the western

hill, Sion III). Similarly, since the kings of Judah were interred in the

City of David, the tombs of David and Solomon were also on the western hill.

Two more memorial tombs were added in the 10th century to reflect this belief,

and it was these two tombs along with St. Stephen's sarcophagus which the

Crusaders found upon Sion in 1099.

Upon thier arrival, the Crusaders found the Hagia Sion Basilica in ruins.

On the south part of the ruins, the new abbey was built, known as Notre Dame

de Sion. This Crusader church was built to include the synagogue within it,

using the synagogue as the south-east corner. Above the remaining walls of the

synagogue, the Crusaders built a second floor, known as the cenacle. This

cenacle commemorated the Last Supper and the Pentecost (Acts 2).

One unconfirmed story relating to Mt. Sion relates the account of Benjamin

of Tudela. While in Jerusalem, a man named Abraham told of two workers who

had accidentally happened upon a passage and found themselves in a palace of

marble columns, which they believed to be the Tomb of David. They also

reported that a golden sceptre and a golden crown were on a table, and

riches were littered all around. The pair were supposedly struck down by a

whirlwind and told to leave by unseen voices, and were found sick in bed,

claiming "We shall never again return there, for God does not want this place

to be seen by any human being." Most likely, the pair were lying, since the
City of David has been found to be on the east hill (Sion I), and the Tomb

of David would likewise be so.

After the defeat at Hatin, the Crusaders entrusted the abbey to the Syrian

Christians, who were in turn forced to abandon the complex when it was

destroyed by order of one of the Ayubic sultans of Damascus in 1219 CE.

Between 1335 and 1337 CE, a group of Franciscan fathers bought Mt. Sion from

the Saracens. They repaired the roof of the cenacle and built a new monestary

south of it. The Franciscans were never able to occupy the ground floor of

the cenacle, since Moslem holy men had made their abode there. Eventually,

the Moslems drove the Franscans from the site in the 16th century and had both

the tomb and the centacle declared mosques.

IS THERE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OF A LINK BETWEEN THE TEMPLARS AND THE ABBEY?

There was indeed an abbey constructed on the western hill(Sion III), as

proven by archaeological evidence. This abbey, the Notre Dame du Sion, was

dedicated to Mary, the mother of Jesus. It was occupied by the Crusader

from 1100 until 1187, when it was turned over to the Syrian Christians.

The Templars, irreguardless of their founding date, were established in the

El Aqsa Mosque on the souternmost region of the Temple Mount Complex by order

of Badouin II in 1118, and were using the area beneath the temple as thier

horse stable as early as 1124.

(It should be noted here that the "Stable of Solomon" was not originally used
 for livestock, but was in fact used to support the southern extension of

the Temple Mount Complex, and stable is derived from the stabilizing of the

Complex rather than housing livestock. Additionally, these vaults were

built by order of Herod, not Solomon.)

Besides the aforementioned appearance of Prior Arnaldus' signature with that

of Hugues de Payens, there is additional connection between the Templars and

the Notre Dame du Sion.

First, there is the prayer offered by the Templars upon the election of the

Grand Master. The prayer is recorded in Article 222 of the Templar Rule, and

the pertinant section reads as follows;

"...Make safe your servant. R. My Lord, who puts his trust in you.

Send to him, Lord, help from the sanctuary. R. And watch over them

out of Zion.

Be to him, Lord, a tower of strength..."

The second line in the above passage is most important. The first part, "help

from the sanctuary," could be a reference to either a heavenly sanctuary or an

earthly sanctary. Notre Dame du Sion would certanly qualify as one possible

sanctuary. The second part, "them out of Zion," also has two possible

interpretations; either watching over those who are outside of Zion (the name

transfered upon Jerusalem from the Jesubite citadel conqured by King David),
or being watched over from [out of] Sion.

Hence, the two interpretations are;

1. Send help to this new leader from Heaven, and watch over the

others who are outside of Jerusalem.

2. Send help to this new leader from [pos: Notre Dame de Sion] and

watch over him from Sion.

Under the name Zion, the city of Jerusalem had been referred to as Sion

before; once in Psalms 136, again in Isaiah 60. Psalms 137 recounts the loss

of Jerusalem being mourned from exile in Babylonia durring the sixth century

BCE. In Isaiah, the second Isaiah calls for a return to Jerusalem/Sion. The

Crusaders had captured the city from the Infidels, thus symbolically answering

Isaiah's call, but the King of Persia had opened the city of Jerusalem to the

Isrealites after conquering the Babylonians in 538 BCE. Since these two

Biblical references have no bearing on the Crusader situation, it seems

unlikely that the Crusaders drew inspirations from these passages, yet the

Templars refer to "Sion" in their inagural prayer.

And the Templars definatly comitted themselves to the sanctity of the

mother of Jesus. In additon to their role as peacekeepers and financers,

there was one other project which the Templars embarked upon on several

occasions. As Edith Simon points out;

"They might shun the female principle, that peril to salvation,

incarnated in the daughters of Eve, but as the worldly knight had

each his lady, so, too, must they have theirs. The churches they
 had been empowered to build for their own use were for the most

part dedicated to...Mary, the Queen of Heaven, Mercy personified."

The Templars definatly had a very strong connection with the Notre Dame du

Sion, else why dedicate their churches to Mary, rather then Jesus the Christ,

of whom they were sworn knights?

If the Templars were calling upon God to watch over those (either other

Templars or all Christians) outside of Jerusalem, then why choose Sion? There

were several other ways of calling for this blessing, including using the

name Jerusalem, or perhaps the phrase Outremer, which indicated the lands

"Across-the-Sea," which would have included the Kingdom of Jerusalem.

It is almost assured that the Templars had a strong connection to the Notre

Dame de Sion. Also, if the 'Dossiers secrets' are reliable, Sion executed a

considerable influence with the Kings of Jerusalem. Badouin II had felt

"obliged" to Sion for his throne. Fulk of Anjou, who was affiliated with the

Templars, and thus with Sion, married into the throne with his marriage to

Melissande. Even after his departure from the Templars and until his death

in 1143, Fulk still paid annual dues to the Templars of 30 pounds of silver,

despite being King of the land. The extent of the Templars influence went far

beyond the Holy Land, and Hugues de Champagne, who was Hugues de Payens leige,

joined the Temple, effectively pledging loyalty to his own vassal.

Both Fulk of Anjou and Hugues de Champagne had a long history with the Holy
Land. Fulk's ancestor, also named Fulk, had made the pilgrimage to the city

of Jerusalem in 1009,