"La Regle du Temple" initiation transcript

re:www.abovetopsecret.com...
(this continuation would perhaps have been off topic there)

It was noted in the above thread that some of the rituals/ceremonies of the Knights Templar are in fact known. Apparently Le Dossier de l'Affaire des Templiers by Georges Lizerande, which gets its information from Le Regle du Temple records the intiation ceremony noted in teh thread above. I find the following curious. The leader of the group (or a substitute) asks the applicant;
"Do you promise, likewise to God and Holy Mary, that you will never withdraw from the Order, in weakness or in strength, for better or for worse, unless with the consent of the Master or of the Council who have power (to grant such)?” " And then the ceremony ends with
" And he who is making him a Brother-Knight shall cause him to rise and shall kiss him on the lips"

Sounds like a marriage ceremony almost. I have to wonder which came first even, since the first bolded section is really similar to the words used, and even the intent is the same, to stay together until death, and its interesting that it ends with a kiss, tho this might've been a more common practice in the past anyway.

The whole thing rather makes sense as a type of marriage ceremony, invoking god to keep it toghether, and the rest of the ceremony notes that you have nothing that is solely yours, and your partner (here the groups of templars) have nothing that is soley theirs, but rather everything is shared.

Of course, a lot of it also is probably just a matter of fact, military service is a duty, marriage has duties, and even in the modern era these things could be said to be similar. And of course nuns are known as 'brides of christ', etc etc, and the Templars were a monkish order too. So perhaps its not too surprising.



[edit on 14-7-2005 by Nygdan]

Originally posted by Nygdan
Sounds like a marriage ceremony almost. I have to wonder which came first even, since the first bolded section is really similar to the words used, and even the intent is the same, to stay together until death, and its interesting that it ends with a kiss, tho this might've been a more common practice in the past anyway.

Nygdan,

Interesting observation. I haven't looked at that in a while. The kiss was, as you suggest, VERY common in those days...and even in parts of Europe today people still kiss (each cheek) or make the motion to do so even if their lips don't touch the other person. That would be VERY uncommon in the U.S.

The whole thing rather makes sense as a type of marriage ceremony, invoking god to keep it toghether, and the rest of the ceremony notes that you have nothing that is solely yours, and your partner (here the groups of templars) have nothing that is soley theirs, but rather everything is shared.
Of course, a lot of it also is probably just a matter of fact, military service is a duty, marriage has duties, and even in the modern era these things could be said to be similar. And of course nuns are known as 'brides of christ', etc etc, and the Templars were a monkish order too. So perhaps its not too surprising.

Exactly. Poverty and chastity was a very important pledge of the Templars simply because they were also Monks.

Doesn't sound like the glamor that Hollywood gives to Knights, does it?





[edit on 14-7-2005 by Nygdan]

sounds like sompthing the mobb dose. those guys are crazy

Exactly..."Omerta!"



At least the mafia is honest about protecting their interests.




I would never kiss a man who would ask me to die for him.

That should be my own choice.



Now...before of accusing me of saying silly things,
think of the amount of people who agree to such
oaths as we speak. That is very scary.


Cedric Phi

once again, a serious thread has been turned upside down by ridiculous statements and incoherent rambling.

[sigh]

Originally posted by senrak
once again, a serious thread has been turned upside down by ridiculous statements and incoherent rambling.

The best thing to do is ignore the ignorant, as they say.

Doesn't sound like the glamor that Hollywood gives to Knights, does it?

The intersting thing is that the "grand master" notes something like 'you may be enticed by our fine clothes and apparent wealth" and that its truly apparent, everything belongs to the order, the safe houses belong to the order, the equipment, armour, etc etc, aren't personal property, which is also keeping in with the habit of nuns and monks, even preists. However, it does seem to indicate that the order itself did attain a good degree of wealth, but that should be obvious I think, any successul militant organization in those days is going to be powerful, and especially in those days power and wealth were intertwined.

A futher note on the understandably flashy presentation of hollywood and how it differs from reality is provided here.

Once the resources were available, protection of the pilgrim routes developed quite naturally into a much larger military role for the Templars. In the course of the twelfth century, the order was able to take control of a number of major castles in Jerusalem, Tripoli, and Antioch, encompassing the entire length of the Latin settlements from Baghras in the north to Gaza in the south, while its knights and sergeants were present in all the important military campaigns[...] About half-way between Jerusalem and Jericho stood Adummim, 'the Red Cistern', a spacious rectangular enclosure with a tower and cistern, large enough to accommodate both pilgrims and a garrison, while another six and a half kilometres to the east, the Templars had built a tower at Bait Jubr at-Taktari which, as it was much smaller than the Red Cistern enclosure, was presumably for the Templars' own knights, ten of whom were permanently assigned to patrol the road. At the end of the route, the Templars had refortified the enclosure at the foot of the Mount Quarantene, at a place known as 'the Gardens of Abraham', where many pilgrims were able to spend the night before descending to the Jordan. Theoderich describes this place as a well- watered refuge, protected on three sides, with the fourth patrolled by the knights of the two orders. At the river itself the Templars had another tower, intended to guard against sudden raids at the place of baptism

The paper also notes that the Templars and Hospitallers expanded into europe via these charitable and medical endeavours, providing sick-houses for lepers and 'regular' hospitals'.

Like the Hospitallers, the economic strength of the Temple was founded upon its houses in the west. According to the Rule, the order's western provinces were divided into seven as early as the 1160s, encompassing France, England, Poitou, Aragon, Portugal, Apulia, and Hungary (which probably meant Dalmatia).44 By the thirteenth century Provence and northern and central Italy had become key elements in the system. Inevitably, the primary purpose of these western preceptories was to supply the almost limitless demands of warfare against the Muslims, but they too contributed to an infrastructure which enabled pilgrims and crusaders to overcome the formidable problems of travel to the east. While medical care remained largely in the hands of the Hospitallers or other specialist institutions, the Templars were able to offer finance, shipping, and shelter for pilgrims. Although the many other needs of the order as well as the uneven pattern of donations made it impossible to create a structure entirely geared towards pilgrims (even had the Templars so desired), the order nevertheless succeeded in planting preceptories along the important pilgrimage routes.

Which tends to show that, for a supposedly insidious militant and wanton order, they don't appear to have been all that insidious militant nor wanton. I mean, compare that pattern above to that of thugs and gangs of theives in europe, or even knightly orders that were purely military and political.

Apparently this La Regle du Temple is an all-sorts handbook for the templars, containing this initiation, and also, according to the this researcher's, being "a military manual or How to deliver a cavalry charge"

Another site notes:

Another institutional model of sorts was provided by the military orders. At their best, as La Regle du Temple sought to ensure, these were strictly regulated and rigorously trained permanent forces;' and, as John Walker considers in chapter 3, they were (in theory at least) properly resourced permanent forces, fuelled by aristocratic manpower and revenue-generating preceptories in western Europe.

So this idea of obeidence unto death and complete selflessness is a rathe obvious characteristic of all military orders, whether its the revolutionary french army, the British navy, or the modern american Army.

>>>>ignore the ignorant


In less than 120 years you will all be ignorant,
if not before if you get an acv.


So stop ridiculizing yourselves with your pretentions.



>>>The paper also notes that the Templars and Hospitallers expanded >>>into europe via these charitable and medical endeavours, providing >>>>>sick-houses for lepers and 'regular' hospitals'.



How nice ?


I am sure they were walking the aisles calling the lepers: "ignorant!".


No seriously, I am sure that you wouldn't talk about Mother Teresa because she's not a Templar.


Your arrogance dishonore your interest in the Templars.



>>>So this idea of obeidence unto death and complete selflessness is a >>>rathe obvious characteristic of all military orders, whether its the >>>revolutionary french army, the British navy, or the modern american >>>Army.


Which are all wrong.


Cedric Phi

Originally posted by Nygdan
I think, any successul militant organization in those days is going to be powerful, and especially in those days power and wealth were intertwined.

True. And the Templars took it far beyond that. They set up the first international banking system and protected the wealth of MANY others besides those that belonged to the "Order" This wealth is believed by many to be the REAL reason they were disbanded by Clement and Phillip. (Greed does strange things to people)

Another interesting note about the Templars that wasn't true of any other Order is that in a period when absolute monarchy was the norm, the Knights Templar did not answer to ANY Noble, Lord, Prince, King, etc. They answered DIRECTLY to their Grand Master and he in turned answered ONLY to the Pope in Rome. (No doubt now why conspiracy theories arose if they had THAT kind of power)

Originally posted by Centiment
I am sure they were walking the aisles calling the lepers: "ignorant!".

Awww, did someone's fewling get hoit? :snifle:

]Originally posted by Senrak
the Knights Templar did not answer to ANY Noble, Lord, Prince, King, etc. They answered DIRECTLY to their Grand Master and he in turned answered ONLY to the Pope in Rome

True enough, but the pope was something of a potentate all his own. Of course, he was elected, but then again the german kings were sometimes elected too. Heck, maybe thats the influence of the other great knightly crusader order, the Teutonics.

You're the self-centered fellon.


I'm accusing yor vision of the world,
not what you think of me.



Cedric

Hello Nygdan.

The first Regle du temple was given in 1128 at the council of troyes and had 72 articles.

The second one was Regla Latina. and after that, the french version know as the Le Regle du Temple as you have pointed

In 1160, 202 articles were added called Retraits

Between 1230 and 1249 Statuts

1257 and 1267 Égards

All this articles were added to fit the needs of the Order...

Non nobis...