Executions of , or historical fabrications? Did these mythological characters really make sacrifices? Nobody would ever think that, even though they appeared to, the majority of executions that violate public conscience would not actually take place—or were they, just in case? just in case, though? primarily when there is a strong sense of unpredictability over the public’s reaction to the ensuing fury. Occasionally, the threat of superstition has created the potential for an uncontrolled public response to dread. essentially, when they make the threat to turn these open instances of legalized killing into justifications for the overt overthrow of the government by the overwhelming will of the people. Put another way, disobedience. However, let’s examine a few of the more unclear ones that have made it onto book shelves after years of investigation and persistent uncertainty. There are several, but maybe focusing on just three that often surface in studies can highlight the main idea. Joan of Arc is a prime example of a person who feared punishment from the government in public at the time. They tried all they could to get her to confess to things she had not committed. Crimes against God and the seeming partnership with the devil himself were a few on the blacklists, as was customary during times of instability in the church. They were also ones that they could easily fabricate and obtain meat for, as there would be plenty of eager witnesses seeking incentives. Without a doubt, the little girl—dubbed la pucelle after a legendary female redeemer—was exceptionally endowed in every way. At that age, very few women would grant themselves the authority to demand the allegiance of an army composed mostly of murderers, forced recruits, and violent miscreants. Joan considered it an honor to command an army to purge Gaul of the non-French factions vying for control of the future French territories. She seemed to have done it strangely—for Charles vii, the destitute heir to a regional throne with little popular backing at the time—and there hangs a narrative. For a rural girl at her age, it would have been useless to evaluate the right to govern of a certain royal heir, particularly one who was seen as weak and dependent on advisors. At the time, the realm of gaul, for want of a better term, was a Pandora’s box of rival leaders from various tribal backgrounds vying for supreme control. Despite having land in many different so-called nations, they all desired the strength of a single, economically stable region that they might call home one day. Both sides were affected by the battling forces, and their barons and princes claimed royal title by claiming ancestral lineage. Joan’s calls for battle in the name of supernatural forces rallied a strong army that was able to drive out the so-called enemy and prepare the way for the emergence of a nation based on ancestry. The church was shocked to see how many people showed there and how the able men pledged their loyalty. The church was a force for civilization, and she had no idea when her reach would stop. As long as that person was a target of her spiritual and financial might, she would not have given a damn about who would hold the reins of authority. Due to the conflicting influence of the British, who were the emerging powers and with whom the church would eventually have to cope, the church made preparations of its own for this purpose. Joan would only have served as an intriguing pawn. They just watched, waiting for the opportunity to unspell her spell and turn her over. It follows that when the cards were dealt and the losers were being made to feel better, they would have wanted this annoying witch out of the way. National politics would have sounded unintelligible to the church. Divided lands were simpler to manage than anything that might create powerful persons in leadership positions. If they supported a particular royal heir, it was only because they pledged devotion to the pope and acknowledged it as the only source of honor. Even if nationalism had been a cohesive movement, it could only have represented silly ideals that could never be accepted in opposition to the enormous lands that at the time comprised the whole planet and were used as staging grounds for incoming and departing military troops. The church miscalculated the influence of customs and culture. Having inherited the Roman Empire in her own unique fashion, her control over the heart and intellect was founded only on economics. She also misjudged the world that would eventually come to be known as the nations, which would turn against her due to this ultimate identity unit. In the struggle for shared cultural values, color or code would become crucial, but the church would regard it all as full of individuals willing to pay Peter’s penny and uphold her own religious standards. The church was transcendental, and it was always best to collaborate with the winners-to-be. Before they would have dared to assassinate the person whom the new country would have revered as both a saint and the ideal warrior, they realized in the instance of Joan of Arc that they would need to operate with extreme openness to the public. Forever after, she would never have known what had really changed. As a spiritual and terrestrial leader with such widespread renown, Joan was not something she could just remove from the public eye over night, and the time of disrepute necessary to challenge a people’s beliefs had not been sufficiently prolonged or convincing to numb the superstitious population of the nation. In the future, whomever summoned her in their name as a martyr would have more power over the nationalized people than the crippled church did. Decisions made by them can only be seen in the context of the public interest if one understands the nature and intent of each power, whether it be territorial or spiritual. The choice to label Joan of Arc as a traitor to the church and state and have her executed before she could do further harm was a crucial one in the life of the future famous patron saint of France. It was also a promise that will never come true. yet, the animosity which came from the church establishment of the period against those who taught differently was choleric. The public’s mistrust and contempt for the church, which had pledged to abolish its authority in Christ’s name, was already present. Church and kingdoms were to emerge as the primary players in rivalries that would eventually result in conflicts between them and, sometimes, improbable and precarious coalitions with the so-called holy roman emperors. The latter, an effort to establish a global leadership hierarchy above national thrones, would eventually confront her as an adversary. Thus, these were the things the church would have thought about before setting the stage for a well-publicized legend’s killing. But was it really done? Were they bold, or did they choose the middle route? There have been questions raised about this documented act of venomous hypocrisy against a person who had seemingly promised her king and god both victory and her life. It seems that the former had not even attempted to rescue her, which says a lot about the issue of an honorable reaction to the hand that feeds. But were there any other pertinent details that were kept from the public that would have provided an explanation for such unusual actions against a national hero? It seems as if maybe there were. Joan, who was reportedly raised by peasants, had real parents. It was later assumed that she had been taken out of her family’s public view when her real father—who was, by many accounts, none other than the Duke of Normandy, heir apparent to the Norman military leadership, if not the Franks—was assassinated. It seems that Joan, his only child, was given to a peasant family after his killing in order to protect her identity and plan for the future. The templars were to receive a grand master from the dukes of Normandy as their conti, and it is thought that here is where a source of support shaped by design originates. Some even claim that Joan displayed their concealed hands on her fabled pedestal. If she belonged to a royal family and was portrayed as the legendary La Pucelle, this would suggest that she was either aware of everything or that when she began to preach, she was really psychologically impacted and used for the intended purpose. Similar to everything historical at that level, it was intended to undermine public trust, yet it succeeded. not for the church, which had responsibilities related to the laying on of regal crowns of its own. She had to depart, just like the helpless princes in so many romance novels’ towers. According to a recent book on the issue, Joan was not the person on the funeral pyre, and 10 years after the incident, after being freed from a British jail, she shows up in court to assert her ancestry. It makes sense, but only because, as is often the case, none of the ruling classes of the time dared to definitively attribute this horrible deed to the person of a leader who had already to such great heights. They may have eventually chosen to provide her a second chance as a public apologies when things started to go wrong. Being both the living legend and the live corpse at the same time served as a defense against any potential threats that the conduct may cause in the future. They may have even performed yet another miracle and let the people figure it out for themselves. She was elevated to the status of Saint Joan, nevertheless, and this happened a long time after the alleged execution, demonstrating how the hands of power in the state and church are covert and cautious while navigating the political landscape. Even though the people who pretended to be Joan’s relatives and her purported surviving relative subsequently claimed they had used a lookalike to support their claims, it seems very unlikely given her well-known features. Given one peculiar historical circumstance, it seems more plausible that the effort to openly withdraw if things went wrong was motivated by Joan’s uncivilized writing, which corresponded historically with the imposter’s claim to legal rights. Could the French royals have paid off the family in return for the admission that they had fabricated Joan’s claim to be alive and well? ?That would make perfect sense right now. By now, everyone would have shared in the glory, including the disillusioned public, Joan and her family, and the successors to her efforts, but the church was more than capable of taking full responsibility for her attempt to use terror as a tool of power. Jacques de Molay. If we still have concerns about Joan, they also apply to the alleged last grandmaster of the Temple Order, who is said to have perished at the pyre in 1314. The same moments of uncertainty and tension pervaded the situation as the feeble elderly man was bound and anticipated to pass away soon before inciting the throng into superstitious hysteria. The world has been terrified of what would happen to the men of god who just feared their own conscience ever since the first roundup of the knights in 1305 and the trials of abuses and heretical preaching were conducted. Would the hordes of the unseen ones rise up and crush their adversaries from within? Who controlled what and were the mainstays of the templars prepared to follow in the footsteps of their initial inspiration, the assassins? The pathetically weak Edward II of England, who had wed the only daughter of King Philip the IV (the famous Bel of the Temple), was the most fearful of all those who ventured to take on such an unstoppable power. He was determined to break the templars’ control on the English throne and had formed an alliance with France. The order of St. John was also not any less apprehensive about the repercussions should they attempt to claim the estate that was mistakenly entrusted to them. The aspiration of uniting with the templars to form an international police force under the vatican had come to an end for the so-called hospitallers of St. John. Never had such a poisoned cup existed, and in spite of the historical events that were about to occur, the temple’s concealed existence, guarded by the Cistercian priors (and subsequently by the Jesuits and Franciscans), was to be meticulously and covertly documented. It may never be known whether the curses were actually said by Jane de Molay herself, or if someone else spoke them from behind the pyre, but it is still plausible to believe that some poor, defenseless victim of the deceitful church perished in her place. That may be indicated by the mysterious Hiram Abiff of Masonic renown and his ritualistic resurrection. The vague image of the apprentice builder sways against that notion, even as a cautionary tale of enmity and self-interest. In actuality, it performs poorly and has little effect on the sharp value assigned to the degree. It would make much more sense for a dubious religion to replace the life of a revered and active head of the order with a scapegoat. It is absurd to think that a ruler would burn a heretic at the stake for religious grounds. It could also explain why the cremation was strangely shifted to the seine island, further from the public that was forbidden from ascending its embankments. In any event, it was a long distance from the powerful religious and royal elites. Anything could be done to make the necessary impact from that distance and stage. Undoubtedly, the mournful sound of danger and destiny may have come from none other than Jean de Molay, but it wasn’t the pyre. It is reported that people under his curse were terrified by his power and diction. Was there some type of antiquated megaphone method that the templars were aware of that was used to transmit a loud voice that far away? There is a discrepancy in the amount. The tombstones of potential targets of templar vengeance prominently display secret ciphers that were passed down to the present order and are only deciphered by a select few. Hence, it is more likely than not that Jean-Jacques de Molay persisted in strategizing and charting the course of an organization that would eventually emerge from the Palace of Versailles in 1705 and enlist followers globally. Correspondence from the period is widely available in the national archives of France and the Cistercians (I personally have photocopies of correspondence from the Duke of Brabant of the early 18th century on templar paper). The regent of the order, a title that replaced grand master, was none other than Philip, Duke of Orleans. This imposing figure was really the heir apparent to the French throne. The fact that the reigning families were included on the list of aristocrats released a century later should be sufficient evidence that the papers were authentic and the order was still in place—at least until the revolution that would permanently take it away from them. The idea that family names of loyalty published by the most respected publications of the time could have been formed without a single public rejection is as absurd as the cults and sects’ constant and naive assaults on the order’s identity and heritage. To put it simply, anybody who continue to contest the legitimacy of these records are motivated by their own petty claims to the order’s artifacts and should not be given any weight at all. Their taskmasters have always assigned them damage limitation assignments that make no sense other than to sow uncertainty, albeit unnecessarily, so that others may compound from concealed wings. The order’s well-documented adversaries are consistently the same and scream in terror at anything that threatens their life. However, new discoveries of the pope’s acquittal of the order in a letter discovered by Dr. Fraile in the Vatican Library reveal without a reasonable doubt that the organization could not have been let to die in solitude or lose its acknowledged dominance over international affairs. Therefore, the church’s attempt to burn down Jane De Molay could not have happened, and the so-called virtual scenario may very easily have been executed without the actual prosecutor, Philip Le Bel, being aware of the alteration. Ultimately, assuming the identity of a corpse or dummy on behalf of someone who has been condemned to prison or is being harassed is a well-known trick that is being used today as a cover to escape publicity or jail time. The few people who can confirm that they have seen the body or were able to identify it are the ones with the clues. Generally speaking, water or sand bags have been said to constitute the actual contents of several mythical coffins. All too often, even wealthy and powerful individuals involved in illicit activities have had a sudden cardiac arrest and fled to other places, taking with them whatever belongings they could carry. Regarding the transmission records in the templar grandmaster case, there are questions since they seem to indicate serenity and premeditated complicity. Raymond Lul, the eerie figure of the Machiavellian mystic of Mallorca, approaches the imagined conclusion too quickly and too closely. This mysterious genius had many secrets with the templars and was the first person the doomed grandmaster met upon arriving from Cyprus. It seems he would have preferred to be buried in the Santiago de Compostela cathedral for reasons related to what he believed it represented. It nearly seems like a screen play, given that the grand master would be present at a ceremony on the same night that the French body of knights were arrested, along with the French monarch. One day in splendor, the next in the squalid prison of an even dirtier era of societal collapse. It wouldn’t be shocking if the new grandmaster, Marc Larmenus, the orthodox patriarch of Jerusalem, and the whole hierarchy—including Madame de Mola—went with the new agenda for a repressed order far apart from the schemes of Europe. the likely destination and where a huge fleet of templar ships anchored in la rochelle appeared to head for, was newfoundland (terranova) or l´arbre dór which is called labrador in modern day canada (the land of promise as in xanadu and canaan and frazer´s golden bough of arcadia. need more be said ? whoever laid the titles carried the promise. to cut it short, the burning of such a prominent and well respected figure as jacque de molay was hardly the thing a confused church would have attended or carried out. the transmission which is challenged by spurious organizations purporting to be templar heirs etc. cannot be more authentic in spirit and form. if we are to take it seriously as it should be, the very recorded fact that the scottish templar s had prepared their own successor against the scottish prior, by the name of aumont was authentic enough. the scottish inheritors of the templar tradition in the much respected royal order do not deny the connection although they refute since those early days, despite a settlement to the contrary, that the transmission to the patriarch of jerusalem was valid. additionally however, included in the document is the condemnation of the whole priory of scotland for its treachery. the ridiculous masonic modern claims to it all being a fictitious fraud is hardly something that someone five centuries later would have imagined without an original document to refer to. like most of these claims, they stem mainly from organizations which cash in on the legends for political and economic reasons which prefer the original traces to be wiped out of the challenge . it is for this reason that the attempt to tie down the newly created world headquarters of freemasonry in london required the acceptance of a relatively genuine source of templar heritage and this was referred to as the ancient scottish rite. it is understandable that countries (especially under joint crowns) should have enemies, but divisive trends were sources of discontent and subversion and crowns had began to attack anything foreign as did britain with all its own versions of foreign orders intended to keep subjects away from the real ones. Furthermore, the church had had enough of Henry VIII, Calvin, and Martin Luther, and did not want to be seen as siding with an authority that had further grounds for mistrusting the canonical accounts of Jesus’ life. Though it gave the impression of abandoning the templar tradition, high-level support is evident in the records and its involvement in cathedral investitures. Without churches, an order of chivalry would be devoid of a vital source of spiritual significance that is hard to find in municipal ceremonies, and that reliance gave rise to the symbiotic connection. English king Edward II. However, who would have given credence to the contemporary account of King Edward II’s murder, which claims that his French wife, the vixen she wolf, was responsible? However, it seems that he was spared the wrath of the state’s barons or the schemes of one of his beau´s (Galverston), who, like Rissio of the Mary Queen of Scots renown, was also obediently dismembered. Ian Mortimer has written a well researched book titled Medieval Intrigue, which has enough proof to bring down a battleship on the true events surrounding Edward II. The astonishing array of records seems to indicate that he was not abruptly taken from life (and with a poker in the hand of his unfulfilled wife), but rather was gently removed from government by other barons and princes. They orchestrated his deportation and announced his fake death, as would be revealed in later communication between them and the king, in an effort to clear up a sloppy chapter of history that started to undermine the monarchy. This cooperation to remove him off the scene and give him a double entry, in the words of historical mortality, was most likely motivated by the dreaded templar revival, which up until that point had been the most powerful force in the realm. The recently discovered correspondence between the king and himself raises additional questions about the burial without a body and the elaborate, initially empty tomb at Gloucester Cathedral that was kept ready for the eventual real dispatch. Nevertheless, the correspondence is an intriguing read. Fortunately, nothing gruesome or horrifying occurred in this instance; instead, there was a retirement with all the benefits of a few peaceful years of abandonment, although in solitude. The information was withheld from the public and his adversaries, who would have enjoyed his destruction for the risks and mockery that his lover and protégés, such as Galverston, had brought upon them. ..At some time in history, King Edward would seem to pass away and be informally bundled into the magnificent grave. Being kept alive and prepared to step in if his successor did not follow the baronial rules was probably not the sole motive for this kind of scheme. The monarch and those close to him would have known full well that they may be in danger from the diverse range of opponents they had infiltrated into the court. He would have, in theory, accepted this faked death in order to save his son from the threat of being tortured and killed—not just by templar executioners, but also by influential lovers of the queen herself. For unclear reasons, the mortimers and despensiers seemed to get royal favor and presents in plenty. After all, the queen was the sister of the templar scourge, Philip Le Bel, and had endured all the humiliations of a gay monarch and spouse. The original murder account is in ruins, with the exception of what seems to be the execution of the Duke of Kent, who shockingly accepted some of the guilt for King Edward II’s imprisonment in Babylon. The possibility that Edward II lived for a few more years in restricted but luxurious circumstances is no longer speculative, but who will ever trust official records again if state and religious authorities ultimately appear to be betraying their caution about what should be discouraged and what should be left unwritten? In this instance, even Edward III, the newly crowned monarch, had to have cringed at the idea that the legitimate head of state may suddenly appear and place his own head on the scaffold. This is a blatant sign that the troops supporting the new monarch were those who ensured the safety of the father and son. Nevertheless, it’s possible that the skilled puppeteers had already handled everything. Perhaps the Duke of Kent was just a prop, and he led a happy life after, wisely distancing himself from the forced and covert abdication in some terrestrial paradise by adopting a new identity. When it comes to abrupt, bizarre, or violent deaths that leave teasing questions unanswered, it seems like anything goes. At the age of sixteen, Michael Mifsud began his literary career in the House of Commons. He initially gained notoriety as the mystery thatcher spy in the Farzad bazoft case, and later as the publisher of the first commercial newspaper for drivers in Britain. He was formerly the director of the Monarchist League of Great Britain and spent more than ten years traveling with the royal family as a member of the press. In addition, he was taken over by the contemporary Knights Templar (reinstatement of Versailles) to pave the way and serve as the grand master’s direct envoy in several nations. His struggles in life have come from fighting for the rights of the innocent and suppressed, both human and animal, and from being a strict disciplinarian who wasn’t always to everyone’s taste and ethical standards. In an attempt to mitigate the impact of the Spanish siege, he established a national airline there and incited the jail report on the Gibraltar medieval fortress against political slander. His love of dogs has allowed him to shut a gas chamber in Madagascar and rescue countless more. He is the author of the charming book Al andalus: A Trail of Discoveries and has made several appearances on television shows covering a wide range of topics. related articles: templars, raymond llul, philip le bel, executions, historical falsehoods, Jackie De Molay, Joan of Arc, La Pucelle, and Edward II
I love myBlogd
