Excavation Of The Temple Mount

jason

Seanchaí
Staff member
Do you think the Knights Templar ever found anything below the Temple Mount?
 

accer

New Member
There is an old saying about where there is smoke, there is fire. I think they probably DID find SOMETHING.....but I have no idea what. I also suspect it wasn't as great as the legend would have us believe.
 

BG_TRBL

Watcher of the posts
not sure if you are talking actually, or metaphorically. If you follow the York Rite Branch to the Templar Knights, There is reference to what was found.

PM#232
Sir Knight
 
R

removed121010

Guest
of course they found it and if you go thru york rite are you knighted.
 

DavisB

Member
What determines a literal knighting?
Hmmm...an interesting question. Initially I thought that maybe it was being knighted with the intent of actually going into battle. But then I remembered that half of the Knights Templar never intended on going into battle as they worked as bankers or monks in Europe. So I am not really sure what would qualify it as literal or if there is any difference at all...
 

Winter

I've been here before
If, or what, they found is irrelevant.

The "copper scroll" details where the hidden cache's were hidden. That location "may" or may not have been one of them. But, you can, today, go and take a tour of the Templar excavations inside of Mount Moriah. Draw you're own conclusions.

But the fact that we are still talking about the possibility 700 years later means that they left us somethimg...

Soap Operas for men! :D
 
G

Gary

Guest
Then could the head of any state knight someone?
I'm no authority, and don't claim to be one. But "state" in this context denotes a leader of a country. Typically a monarchy, and performed by royalty.
 

DavisB

Member
I'm no authority, and don't claim to be one. But "state" in this context denotes a leader of a country. Typically a monarchy, and performed by royalty.
Yes. I was thinking more in modern times. I think if any president came out and tried to knight someone people would think it was ridiculous.
 

DavisB

Member
But I do think that they probably found something. I am not sure what. But if I were to guess it was probably written documents, though I am not sure what they would have contained. It is more difficult for me to believe that they found artifacts of importance.
 

Duncan1574

Lodge Chaplain & arms dealer
Hmmm...an interesting question. Initially I thought that maybe it was being knighted with the intent of actually going into battle. But then I remembered that half of the Knights Templar never intended on going into battle as they worked as bankers or monks in Europe. So I am not really sure what would qualify it as literal or if there is any difference at all...
The word 'knight' is a Germanic word and was carried forward into the UK.

Be definition:

a. Abbr. Knt. or Kt. A medieval tenant giving military service as a mounted man-at-arms to a feudal landholder.
b. Abbr. Knt. or Kt. A medieval gentleman-soldier, usually high-born, raised by a sovereign to privileged military status after training as a page and squire.
c. Abbr. K. A man holding a nonhereditary title conferred by a sovereign in recognition of personal merit or service to the country.
2. Abbr. Knt. or Kt. A man belonging to an order or brotherhood.

So by definition #2, Freemasons are all knights.

I have been knighted into the leadership of my Renaissance Faire Clan and I have knighted 2 men, each into their own orders such that they are the charters of those organizations and the leader.

The Templar knighting was a ritual with fasting, repentance, and a buffet.
(Anyone who has seen Kingdom of Heaven has seen a Templar style knighting).
 

jason

Seanchaí
Staff member
Hmmm...an interesting question. Initially I thought that maybe it was being knighted with the intent of actually going into battle. But then I remembered that half of the Knights Templar never intended on going into battle as they worked as bankers or monks in Europe. So I am not really sure what would qualify it as literal or if there is any difference at all...
When the Knights Templar were at their peak, there were 15,000 to 20,000 members involved with 10% of whom were actually knights.
 

PatrickWilliams

I could tell you ...
When the Knights Templar were at their peak, there were 15,000 to 20,000 members involved with 10% of whom were actually knights.
Precisely correct. Indeed, there were 3 (count 'em, 3) classifications in the Templar organization: Knight (for which you needed to be of noble birth), cleric, and sergeant. The sergeants handled the mercenary foot soldiers that the organization hired. The clerics handled the books, the banking activities, and anything that needed to be written down (remember, at this time most people were illiterate and indeed the noble classes saw literacy as something that "other people" did). The Knights themselves were the smallest group of Templars.

Now ... what makes a Knight? Masonic knighthoods are neat - I've got several of them, but they really do NOT make someone a Knight outside of the organization. Knighthoods can only be passed by a fons honorum, that is, a fount of honor. Typically, Kings, Queen Regents, Popes and the Grand Masters of organizations created by them classify as fons honori. At any rate: true Knights, real Knights, were almost always: of noble birth, Catholic by faith, and created by someone that everyone agreed had the ability to make someone a knight. Today, we're talking the Kings/Queen Regents of Europe (there are very few of them left) and the Pope.
 
Top