Jamestown Virginia, Don Quixote and the Firm Island of
Amadis de Gaula.
By Cort Lindahl 1/19/2020
Post
Tenebras Spero Lucem; “After darkness I hope for light” Job 17:12
It may be that specific examples of medieval and
renaissance literature were meant to tell of real events in metaphor that were
meant to hide or obscure the true identity of the characters being discussed.
These periods of history are long before modern media which has no problem
discussing the successes and failures of powerful people. In the past this
would have not been allowed especially in the age when people were starting to
become more literate. Hand in hand with this literacy came the knowledge of the
power of the written word and how it could affect real events and people.
Authors who wished to portray real events often accomplished this under the
guise of works of fiction that often involved the chivalrous and romantic
exploits of heroes and villains.
Many people have pointed to the works of Shakespeare as
possessing hidden yet real subject matter which may have only been understood
by some in metaphor and codes. These realities such as the criticism of a King
or other noble could be accomplished as part of an entertaining play where only
some may pick up on the real overtones of what is being said. In this way some
people were initiated in how to find the hidden meanings in other works of art
such as paintings and sculpture in addition to literary works. In tandem with
art portraying hidden themes is the way these same “secret” techniques were
applied to those who were scientists. Part of all of this may also involve
providing a way for people to research aspects of history that are neglected or
forgotten.
Many new concepts of the science were being uncovered by
people like Leonardo, Sir Isaac Newton, Giordano Bruno, as well as earlier Magi
like Michael Scot and Dr. John Dee. Some of their discoveries were considered
heretical exemplified by the fate of astronomers like Galileo for example. In
response scientists had also developed a highly efficient way to keep things
secret to avoid persecution often in the form of the inquisition and other
orthodox religious movements. These tenets of secrecy were also employed by
stone mason’s guilds that in turn were applied by Freemasons and Rosicrucians
in mystery school fashion. In this way we may see the practical overtones of
concepts involved in alchemy which also encoded real scientific concepts.
These sorts of secret tenets of art had been propagated and
guarded by artists guilds and literary salon’s in the eras preceding the lives
of William Shakespeare, Sir Francis Bacon, Edward de Vere, and Philip Sidney
for example. All of these men have produced a great deal of speculation as to
hidden meanings and authorship of the works of Shakespeare for instance.
Regardless of who actually produced the works of Shakespeare each of these men
were known as writers who had possibly hidden things in their works under the
guise of it being fiction.
In fact there are quotes and hints from all of these men
that do indicate that they were telling truths in their writing. As time went
on and history progressed the need for hiding things in literature or visual
art were no longer valued as they once had been due to concepts like freedom of
speech in America becoming the norm and being seen as a right of any citizen.
It may be this concept of freedom of speech or lack
thereof that leads us to the conspiracy theories surrounding the works of
Shakespeare. An entire genre of research has developed from many people’s
suspicion that either Sir Francis Bacon or the 17th Earl of Oxford
Edward de Vere had written the works of Shakespeare. If true they were using
William Shakespeare as a proxy since both men were from noble backgrounds that
would have excluded them from writing popular plays and fiction. If one of
these men were writing the plays then undoubtedly some of the characters they
created were based on real people who may have not been happy if they knew who
was parodying them. Thus one reason for secrecy. It is also possible that
William Shakespeare did write these things. All of the hidden aspects that
people have pointed to overwhelmingly come from the First Folio of Shakespeare
that was printed later.
There is no way to compare the First Folio to the
original manuscripts of the work as they don’t exist. The missing manuscripts
of Shakespeare in this way have become somewhat of a Holy Grail themselves with
any number of theories supposing where they may have been hidden. Among the
candidates for a hiding place is Oak Island and the Bruton Vault of
Williamsburg Virginia. There are also many theories that suppose the
manuscripts are hidden somewhere in England which also makes a great deal of
sense.
The other reasons for all the cloak and dagger
applications or hidden aspects of some of these literary works involves
Rosicrucian values or hidden Christian values that may have also been cause for
persecution if they weren’t veiled in what was supposed to have been a
fictional story. Hence all of the analysts that have found hidden codes and
patterns in some of the great early works of fiction such as Dante’s “Divine
Comedy,” Philip Sidney’s “Arcadia,” and Cervantes’ “Don Quixote” to name a few
more popular examples.
Another popular and influential piece of literature from
the 13th century entitled “Amadis de Gaula” may also have some
importance in this realm. Other earlier works that detail the Arthurian legends
and myths such as the Rochefoucauld Grail illuminated manuscript lead us to
stories of King Arthur and his Knights of the Round table in conjunction with concepts
like the Holy Grail that are still popular in the 21st century.
It may be that elements of the chivalrous romance of
“Amadis de Gaula” had also led to an emulation of various plot lines of this
work being incorporated into Philip Sidney’s literary work “Arcadia.” Sidney’s
“Arcadia” in turn is said to have inspired some of the plot elements in various
works of Shakespeare. These plot elements seem to comprise a kind of literary
dna that seeded other great works of literature. In turn these pieces of
literature often reference Greek and Roman mythology. Manuel Cervantes’ great
work Don Quixote is one of the most famous books ever written. Amazingly the
book is widely regarded as a parody of “Amadis de Gaula.”
Note that many of these romantic works had ties to the
concepts of courtly love that had been popularized by the troubadours of the
12th century and later eras. Grail romances like “Parcival” and the sagas of
King Arthur had also contributed a great deal to this genre. Given this it is
important to note that “Amadis de Gaula” and “Arcadia” do not include any
references at all to the fabled Knights Templar. Most of these stories involve
royal or noble Knighthoods associated with a King or Queen and not the Knights
Templar who had somewhat of the opposite associations that in part may have led
to their downfall. The same may be assumed of the Rochefoucauld Grail
illuminated manuscript discussed earlier as well and the “Hunt of the Unicorn”
tapestries that were also associated with the Rochefoucauld family.
Here we will examine how elements of these works of
literature may have influenced some of the more storied treasure or hidden
vault legends of the world. Many of these tales also seem to apply to what
would become Freemasonry just a little later in history. Many of these legends
also borrow liberally from apocryphal stories from the book of Enoch and the
Gospel of Mary Magdalene for example. These types of alternate Christian views
would have been one of the subject matters that various authors of the day
could have included in a hidden or allegorical way that only those schooled in
these concepts would have recognized.
The most obvious choice to look at here may have been
presented to the public in the form of the original folklore of Oak Island Nova
Scotia. Many people have associated the works of Sir Francis Bacon with Oak
Island. This author has also associated Philip Sidney’s “Arcadia” to the Money
Pit folklore. This notion may be supported by the fact that the original Baron
of Nova Scotia William Alexander had later amended Sidney’s book with a new
chapter that he added. As we may see there is another colonial site that may
fit the bill with a lot more evidence of intrigue along with the application of
some mystery school lore and techniques that may expose the truth of these
legends in what would become Canada and the United States.
The literary heritage we may examine here includes the
fact that both Sidney’s work “Arcadia” and Cervantes’ “Don Quixote” both were
inspired by “Amadis de Gaula” which was likely written by Enrique (Henry) of
Castile while imprisoned in the grail fortress of Castel de Monte that had been
built by one of this family relations Frederick II Holy Roman Emperor and King
of Naples, Sicily, and Jerusalem in the mid thirteenth century. The book became
even more popular after being edited and amended by Montalvo in 1505. Recent
scholarship and similarities between the events and characters in “Amadis”
makes a strong argument in favor of the work having been written by Enrique
during his period of incarceration and Castel de Monte. His family background
included many of the same ancestors of Frederick II and also included the
earlier King of England Henry II. Enrique’s sister was also the Queen of
England Eleanor wife of Edward I. Enrique’s family was also a forebear of
Philip II of Spain who was also once married to Mary I of England later in the
16th century.
One of the plot elements of “Amadis de Gaula” includes
what is termed “The Firm Island.” The Firm Island is described as what is
really a peninsula. This landform is what appears to be an island connected to
the mainland by a thin strip of land or natural causeway thus allowing access
to the “island” easily from the mainland. The Firm Island is the home to a
population of people who live an ideal and pastoral lifestyle safe from the
rest of the word. Via his adventures Amadis eventually becomes the King of the
Firm Island. Indeed even Sir Francis Bacon himself may have been influenced by
the description of the Firm Island in his penning of “The New Atlantis” first
published in 1626 after Bacon’s passing.
Both Bacon’s New Atlantis and the Firm Island of Amadis
include peaceful and intelligent populations who seem to have access to magical
powers or advanced learning and technology. Given the 1590 date of the first
English translation of “Amadis de Gaula” by Munday we may assume that Bacon had
possibly read the work. In addition Bacon may have been fluent in Spanish and
had already been familiar with the work prior.
Many literary historians also point to similarities
between Philip Sidney’s “Arcadia” and “Amadis de Gaula.” While there is no
mention of a mysterious island in “Arcadia” a treasure vault story is told in
the pages of Sidney’s work that does resemble the description of the vault on
the Firm Island in “Amadis de Gaula”. In fact this plot element of “Arcadia” in
many ways resembles the original folklore of how three young men discovered the
Money Pit on Oak Island, Nova Scotia.
Within the pages of “Amadis” is a description of how the
hero Amadis passes a gauntlet of three magical columns or pillars to enter the
treasury vault left by the previous king on the Firm Island. In this way a
literary tradition mixed with local folklore may have affected the public’s
view of the reality of what ever went on at Oak Island. The Money Pit itself
may be present at Oak Island but the location lacks many of the more detailed
elements of the descriptions present in “Amadis de Gaula” that resemble what we
see in Bacon’s “New Atlantis.”
One conspiracy theory tells of how Sir Francis Bacon was
possibly the child of Queen Elizabeth I and Sir Robert Dudley. If this were to
be somehow true this would then make Sir Francis Bacon and Philip Sidney first
cousins. Sidney’s mother was Robert Dudley’s sister. In addition, two of
Philip’s nephews William and Philip were the subjects of the dedication of the
First Folio of Shakespeare which many people point to as having secrets
embedded into the text and artwork in the volume. Many researchers such as
Petter Amundsen have also identified strange codes and ciphers within the pages
of the First Folio of Shakespeare. In fact a very similar code located on a
tomb in the Bruton Parish Churchyard of Williamsburg seems to adhere to the
same kinds of coded information that is possibly included in the First Folio.
The description of the tree columns that guard the
treasure vault on the Firm Island are reminiscent of the three Masonic pillars
of Wisdom, Strength, and Beauty. In the story of Amadis and the Firm Island the
columns represent a magical spirit or force that assails the person trying to
enter the vault with invisible blows such as a knight sees in battle. Only the
worthy may pass the gauntlet and enter the vault where his name appears
magically on a stone just as in the descriptions of the Holy Grail in the
classic grail romance literature that “Amadis de Gaula” was contemporary of. Though
the information is not available it would be interesting to know if Montalvo
had added or embellished the story to include what would later be considered
Masonic concepts in his 1505 editing and amendment of the piece. That date is
still long before the advent of modern Freemasonry and may apply to values
already held by stone mason’s and Knighthoods. It seems these concepts may have
been originally applied to Knighthood’s which does make sense in a Masonic context.
Really the most important work we will discuss here
associated with “Amadis” is the famous work of Cervantes entitled “Don
Quixote.” This work is said to be a direct parody of “Amadis de Gaula.” Events
in this work mirror events in Amadis via the exploits of Don Quixote himself
and his sidekick Sancho Panza. “Don Quixote” was first published in 1605 just a
few years prior to the settlement of Jamestown, Virginia and has since become
one of the most famous and well-known books in the world. Thomas Jefferson is
said to have considered the work one of his favorites that had also aided him
in learning the Spanish language. A copy of the book was once present in the
library of Monticello.
Cervantes’ treatment of the concept of the Firm Island
has Don Quixote leaving his squire or sidekick Sancho Panza as governor of the
Island of Barataria just as Amadis does prior to his return to the Firm Island
in “Amadis.” In addition to this there are many other similarities between the
two works including combat with Dragons and Giants. “Don Quixote” does lack the
in depth description of the Firm Island that is included in “Amadis de Gaula”
but it is clear this plot element is present in both works.
The similarities in plot between the works of literature
discussed here include Bacon’s “New Atlantis” when one considers that some
historians do dispute the authorship of Don Quixote and even ascribe it to
people who are more usually associated with the mystery of who penned the works
of Shakespeare. Theories have been put forth by earlier pundits like Ignatius
Donnelly that Sir Francis Bacon had actually written “Don Quixote.” Other
researchers also state that the 17th Earl of Oxford Edward de Vere
had actually penned the work thus repeating the debate between factions of
people who believe one or the other produced Shakespeare including a faction
that believes William Shakespeare wrote the works.
If either one of these Englishmen had written “Don
Quixote” then it may indeed be true that the story of the Firm Island in Amadis
de Gaula had been the later inspiration for some mysterious reality in Virginia
or to a lesser degree Oak Island Nova Scotia. In fact whether true or false
with regard to who penned what famous piece of literature in many ways the
imagery in question points us to Jamestown Island in Virginia and not other
more popular candidates that seem to also reference imagery from these works of
literature including Bacon’s “New Atlantis.”
Jamestown Island is surrounded by marshes that may be
described as a swamp. Just as the Firm Island is described the island is
connected to the mainland by a thin strip of land. Jamestown itself was an
attempt by colonists to settle a new land in the era of Sir Francis Bacon who
actually held shares in the venture of the Virginia Colony. Members of the same
Bacon family as Sir Francis took part in settling Virginia including two men
named Nathaniel Bacon who both had a large impact on the colony though with
opposing views. Later descendants of the elder Nathaniel Bacon Edmund and
William would go on to work for President Jefferson at his Monticello estate.
Jefferson’s later secretary William Burwell was also descendant of the sister
of the elder Nathaniel Bacon.
Also interesting in our study here is the fact that a
Spanish Mission had been attempted and failed in the same region where
Jamestown would later be established. This is also interesting given the
overtones of “Amadis de Gaula” as the Spanish settlement had occurred in the
later sixteenth century prior to the publication of “Don Quixote.” To date
there is no indication that the failed Spanish settlement had occurred on
Jamestown Island itself. In the end the Spanish Mission had been wiped out by
Native American’s who allowed one of the altar boys to survive.
Of course, the younger Nathaniel Bacon had a great impact
on what may be considered a lost vault or treasure legend that begins in
Jamestown and was later transplanted when the colonial capitol was moved from
Jamestown to Williamsburg only a few miles away. Though this legend didn’t come
to light until about 1934 there are indications that a similar story had been
told in Virginia for a long time previous. Nathaniel Bacon the famous colonial
rebel is the basis for what is today known of as the Bruton Vault sometimes
referred to as Bacon’s Vault.
This legend states that Nathaniel Bacon the younger had
brought Sir Francis Bacon’s papers to Jamestown where they were hidden in a
vault beneath the tower room of the Jamestown church. When the capitol was
moved to Williamsburg this vault was then said to have been moved to the belltower
room of the new Bruton Parish Church in Williamsburg. This church was then
replaced in 1700 with a new one only yards away from where the old church was
originally located.
The delineation of the old church is today marked in the
churchyard or graveyard that surrounds the 1700 church. The newer 1700 Church
does include the presence of the tombstone of the elder Nathaniel Bacon that
had been moved from his property to the Bruton Parish Church in more recent
times. The tombstone is set into the northern wall of the belltower room and
includes the arms of Bacon as those valued by Sir Francis Bacon and other
members of the family. In this way there is an actual “Bacon’s Vault” located
in the Bruton Parish Church.
Nathaniel Bacon the younger is also the instigator of
what is known of as “Bacon’s Rebellion” in early Virginia. Bacon’s Rebellion
took place in 1676 and 1677 one hundred years prior to the American Revolution.
The Rebellion was based on how later settlers and indentured servants were
treated at the hands of the first wave of Jamestown settlers that had become a
sort of landed gentry which controlled commerce and the prime real estate of
the growing colony. Since Bacon had come in the later seventeenth century his
land grants and others served as a buffer zone between local Natives and the
more established gentry that included people like colonial Governor William
Berkeley who had named the Bruton Parish Church after his family’s seat of the
Bruton Priory in Somerset, England. After a time, these never immigrants became
dissatisfied with the way they had been treated by the landed gentry of
Williamsburg. Indentured servants were left with no property after their terms
of servitude had expired. Part of the problem in these outer settlements was
that they were told they could not defend themselves from what they considered
the encroachment of the local Native Americans.
Eventually the rebels led by Nathaniel Bacon gained the
upper hand in this conflict causing Berkeley to retreat to the Eastern Shore of
Virginia to a region that coincidentally had been termed Arcadia by early
explorer Verrazzano. Eventually Bacon became ill and passed thus taking the
wind out of the rebellious faction of colonists and the gentry soon gained
control of the colony. Eventually several people were hung for their
participation in Bacon’s Rebellion.
One interesting overtone that may apply to any mystery of
Bacon’s Vault or the Bruton Vault may include the missing remains of Nathaniel
Bacon. No one is sure where the body of Bacon was entombed but the lore of
Bacon’s Vault at the Bruton Church may indicate that he was secretly buried
there. Bacon’s missing remains also evoke the imagery of the many Rosicrucian
“Man in the Mountain” myths that all involve tales of a hidden vault or crypt
that contains an important person’s remains coupled with libraries of rare
manuscripts thus possibly providing the basis for the later legend of Bacon’s
papers having been brought to the colony by the famous rebel Bacon. It may be that simply the presence of someone
named Bacon who was related to Sir Francis Bacon was enough to inspire this
entire tale.
As we will see Frederick II Holy Roman Emperor was a
descendant of Charlemagne who had created a kind of mystery himself in the
tradition of the man in the mountain. It is possible that Frederick II built
Castel del Monte where Enrique of Castile had penned “Amadis” in this
tradition. In many ways these kinds of stories all can trace their origins back
to Charlemagne and possibly Constantine and other Byzantine rulers.
The family of Thomas Jefferson through history seems to
have had both a hidden knowledge of the secrets of literature and an affinity
for the literature we have discussed here thus far. There are several examples
of this including the Bacon family members who worked for Jefferson and the
fact that Jefferson points to Sir Francis Bacon as one of his three favorite or
influential historical figures.
Jefferson’s mother’s family the Randolph’s seem to have
all had a high appreciation for literature and what even may be termed
Rosicrucian ideals of the day. The Randolph family held a large tract of land
known of as Turkey Island directly adjacent to Rebel Nathaniel Bacon’s property
known of as the Curles Neck Plantation. The Randolph’s were neighbors of Bacons
property at least. This also included the later Wilton House of William
Randolph II. William had named his home after the Wilton House of Mary Sidney
Herbert the Countess of Pembroke who was Philip Sidney’s sister.
Wilton House is actually considered the place where
Sidney wrote his important work “Arcadia” that is pivotal to our story here. Wilton
house is also the namesake of the Wilton Writers Circle which was a literary
salon hosted by Sidney’s sister at Wilton House. Later his sister the Countess
of Pembroke would also amend and edit the work that is also sometimes referred
to as “The Countess of Pembroke’s Arcadia.” So it is notable that Jefferson’s
forebear William Randolph II had named his home in honor of Wilton House owned
by the Countess in England not far from Stonehenge. Wilton House still survives
today though it was dismantled and rebuilt in Richmond and now serves as a
museum.
The Randolph family also included a man named Thomas
Randolph who was a direct forebear of Jefferson’s mother and all the Randolph’s
of Virginia. Thomas was an accomplished author and poet during the same era
near the end of Bacon’s life. He lived in England and was a contemporary of
many of the literary minds of the early seventeenth century associated with
people like Ben Jonson and Robert Beale.
The Randolph family not only appreciated art and
literature in a Rosicrucian vein but also included family members that were
involved in these things during an important era of history as discussed. William
Alexander the Baron of Nova Scotia was also an accomplished writer during this
same time frame. There is one book that espouses the fact that it was Alexander
who had penned Shakespeare! A later nineteenth century man Paschal Beverly
Randolph would go on to establish the first official Rosicrucian Order in North
America.
Thomas Jefferson himself also had a great admiration for
a man named Algernon Sidney who may have inspired Henry Lee and Jefferson in
their ideas. Algernon was the grandnephew of Philip Sidney who lived in the
later half of the 17th century. Sidney was a proponent of a
republican or constitutional form of government that gave more power to
citizens and less power to the gentry and nobility just as the rebel Bacon had
espoused earlier in history. Jefferson was inspired by the Declaration of
Nathaniel Bacon and the works of Algernon Sidney in his penning of the
Declaration of Independence. Ironically Algernon Sidney would eventually lose
his head due to his political views thus providing us with another memento mori
as part of this story. It is entirely possible that some of the so called
skullduggery associated with the Bruton Vault and Beale Treasure legends refer
in part to Algernon Sidney and his writings.
Hampden-Sydney College in Virginia is in part named for
Algernon Sidney. At one point Henry Lee even accused Jefferson of plagiarizing
Algernon Sidney in penning the Declaration of Independence. Later nineteenth
century members of the Randolph family would be named Algernon Sidney Randolph
and Philip Sidney Randolph. Given this and the naming of the earlier William
Randoph II house Wilton we may see an appreciation for these themes over a wide
span of history from the family of Thomas Jefferson himself. Many prominent
families in Virginia chose to name their children after Algernon and Philip
Sidney.
It is not surprising that such a successful family that
are related in turn to all of the other powerful families or First Families of Virginia
would have such an appreciation for literature and art that may tell the truth
about history in a hidden yet intentionally designed manner. As we may see the
theme and existence of the Declaration of Independence is central to many of
these historical mysteries in Virginia. Given this it is terribly interesting
that older literature like “Amadis de Gaula” “Arcadia” and “Don Quixote” may
play a role or have inspired such things. In addition, it is clear that even
Bacon’s “New Atlantis” references some aspects of these works and even provides
us with a more up to date version of the pastoral theme of Arcadia itself.
The Don Quixote authorship debate.
As stated there are some opinions out there that espouse
the fact that as in the case of Shakespeare many people believe that either Sir
Francis Bacon or the 17th Earl of Oxford Edward de Vere had been the
actual authors of Don Quixote. Some of the stated reasons involve artwork that
is associated with the earliest printings of the work. Volume I was printed in
1605 and Volume II was printed in 1615. The fly leafs of both books are nearly
identical but with some minor differences that we will discuss shortly.
Other similarities that have been pointed out by a
variety of people include the writing style and progression of the plot as
being similar to what Shakespeare would have done. The added feature of the
work being written in Spanish at first would have hindered any of those that
weren’t familiar with the language from appreciating any possible secrets
hidden in the book. Using Spanish to write this book would effectively encode
it with regard to any English person that wanted to read the book. They would
have had to learn Spanish prior to the book’s first English printing.
In many ways, it is interesting that late 19th
century politician Ignatius Donnelly had expressed the opinion that “Don
Quixote” had been written by Bacon. Donnelly had published a few books and
articles about what may considered alternate history in the current era. Among
his works was “Atlantis: the antediluvian world” and other’s such as “Ragnorok:
The Age of Fire and Gravel.” Interestingly modern author Graham Hancock
expresses some of the same opinions that Donnelly had espoused in “Ragnorok.”
Donnelly’s writing about Atlantis also has some
applications to modern alternate theories that consider Atlantis a reality. This
does possibly have a distant connection to Sir Francis Bacon and his “New
Atlantis.” In the mind of this author may of the concepts that Donnelly
promoted as being real or true history may have been his interpretation of
things that had been left in allegory and metaphor in earlier literature. The
age in which Donnelly lived is also known for how political and social
organizations would present a history that complimented their points of view.
In some cases, these points of view seem to be fabricated out of thin air.
Donnelly also wrote “A Great Crypotgram” about the true
authorship of the works of Shakespeare in which he espoused that Sir Francis
Bacon had been the true author. At this time he also presaged other researchers
in stating he also thought Bacon had been the true author of Don Quixote.
Famous author Mark Twain also wrote a book about Bacon and the authorship of
Shakespeare. This illustrates how popular this subject has been for a very long
time now. Recently (2020) this subject has seen somewhat of a renaissance with
tie ins to places like Oak Island and the Bruton Vault. It is also possible
that these types of techniques may have been used by any number of people to
keep things they valued a secret or to even hide valuable items. In fact, we
may all agree that history in some ways has been crafted to order for hundreds
if not thousands of years.
Some aspects of the life of Ignatius Donnelly also may
connect him to the phenomenon that is known of as the Kensington Rune. The
Kensington Rune is a rune stone that was found in a Minnesota farmer’s field in
1898. Donnelly was a congressman from Minnesota where the Kensington Stone was
discovered at the time it was discovered and has also written of “alternate
history” in his book Ragnorok and others. Given this he was also friends or
associates with those that later espoused the authenticity of the rune as being
a real Norse relic that claimed the region for them. With this in mind it is
notable that Donnelly never publicly commented on the Kensington Rune even
though it had been found five years prior to his passing.
Again, we know he believed Bacon had written Don Quixote
and it is notable that the tome is considered to be a parody of “Amadis de
Gaula.” There is nothing in the pages of “Don Quixote” or “Amadis de Gaula”
that speaks of the Knights Templar or Vikings for instance. Though all of the
literature discussed here in the Arthurian and Grail Romance genre involves
chivalric Knights none of them are referred to as Knights Templar and most of
them are associated with royalty and their interests.
Donnelly lived in an era where many bogus attempts had
been made to convince people that Vikings had come to what is now America in an
era prior to the Viking site at L’ Anse Aux Meadows having been discovered.
Many of these attempts were easily debunked and patently false and had been
inspired by some people’s wish to degrade the status of Christopher Columbus
who did have ties to the Republic of Genoa and Knighthoods of the Crusader era.
Thus, it is interesting that Columbus sometimes signed
his name in Greek including the famous and strange font representative of the
“A” sound in runes appearing as a letter X. In fact Columbus has closer ties to the real
Knighthoods of Spain and Portugal than can be suggested by any of the theories
or movements that sought to degrade his contributions to the discovery of new
lands. From that perspective, it is even more interesting that his Greek
signature includes such a symbol. In the end the hook as part of Columbus’
signature could be nothing more than a flourish of the pen.
It is also somewhat suspicious that the same symbol
appears in Columbus’ Greek signature and is also present on the Kensington
Rune. About five years prior to the Kensington Rune being discovered (1898) the
Colombian Exposition in Chicago was being staged (1893). The entire exposition
was in a way a veneration of the accomplishments of Christopher Columbus as it
was meant to mark the 400th anniversary of his famous first voyage.
In response those that supported the point of view that the Norse had
discovered North America brought a Viking Ship replica and moored it adjacent
to the site of the exposition. Here we can see two different points of view at
play in the era prior to any knowledge of the Viking site at L’Anse Aux
Meadows, Newfoundland. People had taken the time to build a Viking long ship
and bring it to the exposition but then we are supposed to believe that they
could not have also produced a rune?
With this in mind it is somewhat of a grand coincidence
that the Kensington Rune also displays a font or stylized rune X that is very
similar to Columbus’ Greek signature. What are the odds that this symbol would
be present in both Columbus’ Greek signature and on a rune in Minnesota that was discovered in a era during which it
was being debated who should get the credit for the discovery of the Americas?
The Kensington rune itself was then used after its discovery in an attempt to
degrade the perceived accomplishments of Christopher Columbus. It may be
possible that those that produced the rune were completely aware of this and
intentionally used a similar symbol on a rune. Objectively one answer may
involve the fact that the symbols though similar are not related to each other
at all.
What are the odds that these opposing points of view
would include the same symbol? There is absolutely no evidence that Christopher
Columbus was aware of any rune or associated land claim in Minnesota and it is
somewhat dubious to suggest such a thing. The entire thing is completely
suspicious and does not make any sense at all. The most we may assume at this
point is that it is possible that Columbus was aware of the Norse Sagas and the
stories told therein.
“Don Quixote” was originally published in 1605 with
Volume II being published in 1615. In many old books analysts point to artwork
that is part of the flyleaf of the book as having hidden symbols that belay the
influence of others in the production of the book. In this case some people
point to the flyleaf of “Don Quixote” as having these tenets. Here we will
reveal a new observation by this author for the first time.
The flyleaf’s of Volume I and Volume II of “Don Quixote”
are at first glance identical. This author noted one small difference in the
artwork of the different editions. The artwork consists a neatly arranged oval
with artwork depicting a hooded Falcon with a somewhat reclining Lion (see
illustrations below). The outer band of the oval consists of the Latin
inscription “Post Tenebras Speros Lvcem (Lucem).” This is a quote from Job
17:12 that translates to “After Darkness I hope for Light.” It is of interest
that this motto or quote from Job was included here as this phrase was popular
with Protestants during the age of Cervantes. That may be telling as the story
unfolds.
The words are spaced by a Greek Cross composed of simple
line marks at the top of the oval while the two sides include flower-like
designs on the right and left perfectly arranged so as to define half of the
oval. At the bottom of the oval is a very strange symbol indeed. This design is
the letter “X” arranged so it is on its side or rotated ninety degrees.
Amazingly the lower stave of the “X” includes the same
hook on the letters or runes “X” that are present on the Kensington Rune. The
only difference here being the “hook” of the “X” being on what would be the
left part of the letter and not the right. In addition this letter X is
sideways with its longer axis from left to right. This strange letter X is only
present on the flyleaf of the 1605 edition and though the X is still there in
the 1615 edition of Volume II it does not include the “hooked” part of the X.
This is interesting and notable even if it does not relate to the Kensington
Rune. Now we may be seeing a Spanish connection to this symbol via “Don
Quixote” and the Greek signature of Christopher Columbus. It is strange that
this design is present on the older version and not that of Volume II.
Why is this present in the earlier Volume I and not
included in Volume II? This is an intentional altering of the same design in a
very subtle manner. It is even more interesting if Bacon or de Vere had been
the actual author of the book. It is indeed odd that Donnelly had espoused the
alternate theory of “Don Quixote’s” authorship and had also had seemingly
ignored a rune stone found in his own state while at the same time espousing
different points of view with regard to history. This author believes Donnelly
was involved in whatever the Kensington Stone represents while at the same time
questioning the authenticity of the stone as having been placed where it is in
the fourteenth century as many of the proponents of its authenticity state.
Though technically the flyleaf of Don Quixote does not
have the same symbol that is on the Kensington Rune they are frighteningly
similar. The one in the flyleaf of Volume I is the same if it is viewed upright
in mirror image. So that is also strange given the way Leonardo once also
encrypted or wrote most of his notes and other writings backwards as to be
viewed in a mirror.
Note also that the much ballyhooed “Hooked X” is also
present on a late nineteenth century document known of as the Larson Papers
that also includes a Masonic pig pen cipher. This form of the X rune is also
present in a few local examples from the later nineteenth century related to
what is a young men’s agricultural society in Sweden. Other examples are seen
in a document known of as the Copiale Cipher that seems to be a kind of
Jacobite handbook of Masonic ritual associated with a form of Templarism
created by the exiled Stewart Kings of England, Ireland, and Scotland which had
many close ties to Swedish Freemasonry during the eighteenth century era of
Bonnie Prince Charlie (Stewart). Many modern authors and those curious about
the exploits of the original Order of Knights Templar may confuse the original
group with this later version that also used all the iconography and imagery of
the crusader era Knights Templar.
While we can’t unequivocally state that a “Hooked X” is
present on the Volume I flyleaf it is still of interest as to why the design
was changed in Volume II. It is clear that the artwork from Volume II is the
same but that it is also a separate piece of art that may have been copied from
Volume I with it being obvious from viewing the details that Volume II does not
include the strange X as in volume one. Volume II also includes minute
differences that suggest it is a copy of the original engraving yet reproduced
using a new engraving for the later Volume II in 1615.
After taking all these facts into consideration we may
also assume that the occurrence of this X shaped design may not have the same
intent or hidden purpose as similarly designed X on the Kensington Rune
regardless of its authenticity. If the Kensington stone is a fake someone still
used a similar symbol. Why? Why aren’t there any more ancient examples of this
strange font?
In some ways it appears that Columbus’ signature, and the
design on the flyleaf of “Don Quixote” could be related to a different source
or cause than the design seen on the Kensington Rune. Too little is known about the origins and
meaning of the design to say if this is true or not and it is possible that the
designs do relate to each other and was also later applied to a bogus rune in
Minnesota. If so then the only connection throughout all of the occurrences of
the design includes faith based and Masonic overtones. The most well known
group to value both concepts would be the Jacobites of the exiled Stewart
Kings. With that in mind the three examples cited here are all much older than
the development of Jacobite philosophy. Why would Spanish people be using what
others consider a rune on the flyleaf of their book? It doesn’t make any sense.
Jamestown as the “Firm Island” of “Amadis de Gaula”
The landform of Jamestown Island where Jamestown was
first established does resemble the description of the Firm Island that is part
of the plot of “Amadis de Gaula.” Though a highly speculative idea it is
possible that this resemblance was not lost on the early colonists at
Jamestown. The first English edition of Amadis had been printed in about 1590.
It is also known that Philip Sidney whose “Arcadia” includes elements that had
likely been inspired by Amadis owned an original copy of the work in Spanish at
his Penhurst estate library. It is likely that both books were popular in
England and had been read by at least some of the colonists.
Sidney had also been named for Philip II of Castile who was
in fact his godfather. This is interesting to note also that his family was so
closely associated with Philip II during an era in which Queen Elizabeth was constantly
at war with Spain. In addition, Sidney was also known of as an ardent
Protestant. Undoubtedly The Catholic Philip II of Spain would also have had an
appreciation for the literary work of “Amadis de Gaula.” It appears that one of
his ancestors Enrique “The Senator” of Castile had written the book.
Philip II King of Spain had many impressive titles
including King of Portugal as well as being Grand Master of the Order of the
Golden Fleece, Order of Calatrava, Order of Santiago, Order of Montessa, and
Order of Alcantara. The orders of Montessa, and Alcantara are all related to
the Order of Calatrava or sprang from that order which was created by the
Cistercian Order of monks just as the Knights Templar had been. Calatrava had
been created at about the same time as the Knights Templar yet weren’t given an
official charter until a later date. The Order of Montessa is said to have
included many former Knights Templar at the time of the dissolution of the
Templars. Philip II inclusion in all these orders of Knights also lend credence
to the notion that a certain amount of intrigue and secret society overtones
were the order of the day. In many ways “Amadis de Gaula” was a handbook for
these Knighthoods and even later Freemasons.
The said author of Amadis de Gaula Henry “the Senator” of
Castile is indeed a forebear of Philip II of Castile. Both men include many of
the same ancestors with Enrique or Henry having lived about 270 years prior to
Philip II who was born in 1527 and passed in 1598. Philip II outlived Philip
Sidney who passed in 1586. The odd fact that Philip II was Sidney’s godfather may
also serve to suggest the notion that somehow Jamestown was thought of as the
Firm Island from “Amadis de Gaula.”
The relation of Enrique of Castile and Philip II of
Castile Sidney’s Godfather may also serve as a distant suggestion that this is
true. It is also of note that Enrique and Philip II also both held a family
relation to Frederick II who had built the “grail castle” of Castel de Monte in
what is today Southern Italy once part of the Kingdom of Naples likely in veneration
of Aachen Cathedral that had been built by Charlemagne who was also a distant
ancestor of Frederick II as well as Enrique and Philip II. In legend Frederick
II was said to have solved some of the grail mysteries that were left behind by
Charlemagne. With this in mind it is significant that Amadis had been penned at
Castel de Monte. Both Philip II and Enrique of Castile also held direct
relations to English Kings and Queens including other lesser nobility of
England.
Philip Sidney also held family relations to two families
that would have a large impact on the development of the Virginia Colony over
time. Ancestors of Sidney include members of the Wingfield family and West
family of Lord de La Warr the namesake of the great state of Deleware. Both the
Wingfield and West families were present during the early stages of Virginia
and later periods as well. Both families contributed to what may be termed the
First Families of Virginia that all sprang from the original Jamestown
colonists.
Given these kinds of family ties and the later inclusion of families like Berkeley and Bacon it is easy to see how this sort of historical imagery would have meant something to these families. It is not too much of a stretch to assume that some of these early Virginians were familiar with the works of Shakespeare, “Amadis de Gaula, and “Arcadia” by Philip Sidney.
Given Virginia history we may also consider the
importance of the themes of Amadis and “Arcadia” to a later faction of
Virginians that were all associated with King Charles I in the mid seventieth
century. Charles had been on the losing side of the English Civil War. It is
said that his last words were “Pamela’s Prayer” from the pages of Sidney’s
“Arcadia.” In this way the theme of Arcadia may have meant something to his
supporters known of as Cavaliers who had been exiled in Virginia after the war.
To the Cavaliers Arcadia may have represented a kind of hidden appreciation of
the theme due to its association with their fallen king. Though no one has
associated Colonial Rebel Nathaniel Bacon with the Cavaliers he did arrive in
Virginia just after the time of Charles II along with a later faction of
Cavaliers.
One important Cavalier that came to Virginia at this time
was Thomas Beale whose later family of course would come to be associated with
the famous Beale Treasure legend of Virginia. Beale had been a Cavalier body
guard or part of Charles I personal troops. Thomas Beale was also a parishioner
of the Bruton Parish Church where a pew there includes a brass plaque with his
name. One of his descendants from the early twentieth century Truxton Beale
chose to have himself entombed in the Bruton Parish Churchyard instead of his
native California. This fact will become of note later in this saga.
Another Cavalier of Charles I and II was a man named
George Wither. Wither wrote a “Book of Emblems” in which the poetry and
illustrations in the book are said to be clues used to solve the mystery of the
Bruton or Bacon’s Vault in Williamsburg. Wither’s later family would settle in
Virginia after the time of Charles II and are possibly also involved in the
Beale Treasure as well as the story of the famous trainloads of lost
Confederate gold that disappeared after the Civil War. It is possible the Beale
Treasure story is simply an extension of the same folklore present in
Williamsburg and the Bruton Parish Church.
The fact that Jamestown Island may be a kind of metaphor
for the Firm Island of Amadis is interesting given all these facts and related
people. All of these tenets may also be considered when examining the legacy of
Oak Island Nova Scotia and its famous Money Pit in this vein. It is obvious
that a story of a very similar “money pit” is included in the pages of Sidney’s
“Arcadia.” This possible inspiration for the Money Pit of Oak Island is
mirrored in Jamestown where there is quite frankly a lot more evidence of these
associations even up to and including the “New Atlantis” design of
Williamsburg.
Actual Bacon family members and people related to Philip
Sidney contributed to the success of the Virginia Colony. There is no need to
apply the imagery of Sir Francis Bacon to Jamestown and Williamsburg. His
family members helped to create the two towns and the entire colony. In the
case of Jamestown and Williamburg there is no Money Pit but a vault is rumored
to exist. It would be no surprise that some Jamestown residents and other early
colonists were fans of the works of Sir Francis Bacon and Philip Sidney.
So, is there a treasury guarded by three pillars on
Jamestown Island? The answer would be no at first but when one considers the
Legend of “Bacon’s Vault” first being located in the belltower room of the
Jamestown Church this may be possible at least in metaphor whether the legend
is true or not. The story of Bacon’s vault if true or not still includes the overtones
of “Arcadia” and “Amadis de Gaula” no matter when this imagery was applied. This
may also apply as to whether Bacon or de Vere wrote “Don Quixote.” Given this
it is remotely possible the design of Jamestown Fort was based on the three
pillars theory. It is just as likely that there is no relation though an
appreciation for these works of literature may have been valued by some of the
colonists over the span of time during which the colony was developing.
When considering the presence of the three pillars
included in the story of the Firm Island in “Amadis de Gaula” we do see a
parallel to this concept in Jamestown in the plan of the original fort there.
The plan is triangular with three towers at each corner. The Jamestown Church
is within the fort and may be analogous to the treasury or temple that the
pillars guard in the plot of the book. So in reality early Jamestown did
resemble the Firm Island in the book even if this was unintended. Still it is
possible that this is what is going on. If some of the colonists were familiar
with the story of the Firm Island in Amadis then it may have been viewed this
way or discussed among them.
The notion that Jamestown is also a place where relics
may be recovered is part of the historical record. Recently what is known of as
the Archer Reliquary was found in the grave of Captain Archer who passed in
1610. The reliquary is a small silver box that is hexagonal in profile.
Analysis of the its contents includes the presence of bone fragments and a
small piece of a leaden holy water ampule of the type favored by pilgrims
during the era of the Crusades. The reliquary is thought to date from the 12th
century and may have even come from Spain originally.
Amazingly the Archer Reliquary has some interesting
designs that may also be interpreted as the “hooked X” on one end of the
artifact. Analysts at the archaeological lab in Jamestown have come to the
conclusion that these markings were intentionally incised into the surface of
the reliquary. This is somewhat amazing again given how this design is present
in the Greek signature of Christopher Columbus and again on the flyleaf of the
first printing of Volume I of “Don Quixote” in 1605. Here again there is no sign
that the symbols etched into the surface of the reliquary have anything to do
with runes, the Knights Templar, or Vikings.
We are being presented with three examples of this design
that are all related to other sources than the Knights Templar or Norse who may
or may not have left a rune stone in Minnesota in the fourteenth century. The
Archer Reliquary, Columbus, and “Don Quixote” all instead point to Spain as the
source of the designs associated here. There do seem to have been different
uses for the strange X seen on the Kensington Rune though they do resemble each
other. Note that the symbols discussed here on the reliquary may not be
associated with runes at all. Their true interpretation is up in the air. We
may also say the same about Columbus’ Greek Signature and the strange inclusion
of a similar symbol on the first edition of “Don Quixote’s” flyleaf. The
Kensington Rune does have runes on it. Other case as stated above which do
include the design as in the case of the Copiale ciphers use it as part of a
code and not a runic quote or phrase.
With all of this evidence in mind it may also be possible
that the designs on the Archer Reliquary, Columbus’ Greek signature, and the
flyleaf of “Don Quixote” are not related to the Kensington Rune at all. We
should at least consider that possibility yet again it is suspicious that the
same symbol appears on an artifact that was used as evidence that someone else
had “discovered” the America’s. It is possible that those that had created the
rune if not authentic had done this intentionally.
Either way “Don Quixote” has had a huge impact on the
development of literature and as stated it is a parody of “Amadis de Gaula”
that in turn may have inspired people over time to tell real stories in the
pages of fiction as espoused by Philip Sidney himself. As art and literature
have progressed into the modern age the need to do this has kind of fallen by
the wayside leaving us what appears to be many mysterious tenets of older
literature that were meant to convey real history, people, and events in secrecy.
See illustrations below.
 | ||||
| The 1605 Volume I flyleaf of Don Quixote |
 |
| The 1615 flyleaf to Volume II of Don Quixote |
 | ||
| Left the Volume II flyleaf; Right Volume I Don Quixote flyleaf showing strange X. |
 | |
| The strange X shaped symbols on the Archer Reliquary |
 |
| The Archer Reliquary with mock ups of its contents. |
 |
| The Greek Signature of Chistopher Columbus also displays similar strange X symbols. |
Christopher Columbus and Rosslyn Chapel?
In past works this author has considered the fact that
Rosslyn Chapel defines a Prime Meridian among the many other alternate theories
with regard to this grand structure. If a north to south line of longitude or
Prime Meridian is supposed for Rosslyn Chapel this meridian includes the Orphir
Round Kirk on Orkney Island that was also built by an Earl or Jarl of Orkney.
Both William Sinclair and Haakon Paulsson were Earls of Orkney during their
lives. Paulsson had been the Jarl of Orkney right at the time the Knights
Templar were being formed. Haakon was sentenced to going on Pilgrimage to the
Holy Land for slaying his rival on the altar of a church just as Robert the
Bruce would do almost two centuries later. As a result Haakon built the Orphir Round Kirk as a copy
of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem which he had seen on pilgrimage. This story
states that Paulsson was a pilgrim and not a combatant in the Crusades.
William Sinclair was the last Earl of Orkney as he was
forced to give up that domain because King James III of Scotland had been given
Orkney as part of a dowry for marrying the King of Norway’s daughter. William
Sinclair was made the Earl of Caithness as a result. Prior to this Orkney had
been the domain of the Jarl of Orkney who was loyal to the King of Norway. This
historical fact displays how the Earls or Jarls of Orkney were in many ways
loyal to the King of Norway up until this time including the earlier legendary
Jarl of Orkney Henry Sinclair who had even been eligible to be the King of
Norway at one point.
We know that Norway was also home to a value of the Norse
Sagas including the existence of what would become known of as L’Anse Aux
Meadows Viking site is what is today Newfoundland. At this point in history
Scandinavians including Norway had a large value of Santiago de Compostela
where the crypt of St. James is said to be located. King Sigurd of Norway
visited Santiago de Compostela prior to the Norwegian Crusade that lent troops
to the First Crusade. Elements of his army would later become the fabled
Varangian Guard of Byzantine rulers of the day.
Henry Sinclair is the subject of a great deal of debate
with regard to the theories that state he may have come to North America or
more specifically Nova Scotia. There are also some theories out there that
attempt to link him to the Newport Tower in the same fashion alternate
historians have linked him to Nova Scotia and the Oak Island phenomena. In
truth if there is any imagery of North America at Rosslyn Chapel it makes more
sense that this information had come to William Sinclair Jarl of Orkney via the
Norse Sagas and not a voyage to that region on the part of Henry Sinclair.
Both Henry and William were essentially Norwegian during
an era when Scottish and Norwegian culture were both mixed and appreciated in
Scotland. There is a value on Orkney to this day of their Norwegian heritage. This
connection would not have been unknown to those that later attempted to link
the Zeno Narrative to the life of Henry Sinclair for their own reasons. The
Zeno Narrative essentially is trying to alter history by suggesting the
influence of Venice in the discovery of North America. This ploy may have been
aimed at one of their rivals the Republic of Genoa who did have an impact on
efforts to find new lands to the west.
Unfortunately, almost all the theories that state Henry
Sinclair came to North America are based on what may be considered unreliable
material. In the case of both the theories including Henry Sinclair, Nova
Scotia, and the Newport Tower the evidence is comprised almost entirely of what
may be considered “found manuscripts.” For example, the Zeno Narrative is a
found manuscript that many people attempt to interpret as involving Henry
Sinclair when his name is never even mentioned in relation to North America as
well as a few other places in the manuscript that don’t seem to even exist in
reality. The concept of the found manuscript leaves a very large door open for
later scam artists to produce a document that is in no way, shape, or form able
to be authenticated. In turn, a found manuscript can then be taken as authentic
as in fitting an already conceived notion of history that is not true for
political or personal reasons. As a consequence those that are already
predisposed to believe in such things are now provided with bogus information
that supports their theories with no way to authenticate said information.
It is clear that the story of the Zeno Narrative includes
it being found, destroyed, and then copied from memory. No original document
exists to examine it for authenticity. These aspects of the found manuscript
may then be used by any number of pranksters and con artists who wish to
present a version of history that mirrors their sometimes bogus and racist
political views in the modern era. Among these hucksters and con artists are
several authors and pundits who have come to actually innocently believe what
was likely propaganda of the era. In short the ploy is an effective way of
drawing in those that already believe such things.
This concept leads in many ways to why deductions about
the works of Shakespeare are all speculation based on the fact that none of the
original manuscripts are available. Deductions in this realm are usually based
on books like the First Folio of Shakespeare that was produced by other people
at a later date. Not William Shakespeare. This has led to a mania of many
treasure legends adapting the fact that these manuscripts are part of or lead
to the treasure. In truth it is just as plausible that all the secrets seemingly
hidden in the works of Shakespeare were likely added at a later date by a third
party who was adept at such things.
Proponents or believers in the Zeno Narrative can now
point to the fact that many medieval and earlier manuscripts only survived
because they had been copied at a later date. In the recent era some stories
have surfaced that mirror the exact story of the Zeno Narrative along with all
the factors that make it of dubious provenance and truth. This includes the
Cremona Document and other similar lost or found manuscripts that are used by
authors who wish to have us believe that the Knights Templar had come to
America long before the time of Columbus who, incidentally never even really
came to North America.
When a found manuscript begins to elicit such speculation
it is time to ask some hard questions that usually can’t be answered by those
that want to believe they are authentic. Via these same techniques a large
amount of the public has been convinced that the Newport Tower is Norse, Henry
Sinclair was a Knights Templar, the Kensington rune is an authentic Norse artifact,
the Knights Templar came to Oak Island or any other number of patently false
and unprovable theories.
Columbus’ achievements did include the notion that it was
possible to cross wide swaths of ocean and discover and subsequently colonize
what they considered new lands. Of course, this was a disaster for the Native
populations that had already been living in these regions for thousands of
years. Colonization ultimately resulted in the wholesale destruction of every
Native culture that was encountered. This continued as exploration and
settlement reached westward including the later nineteenth and early twentieth
century. From this view it is now ironic and somewhat alarming that many Native
Americans have now adapted the lore of the Knights Templar coming to America as
part of their heritage.
This leads us now to another avenue by which some authors
and researchers attempt to rationalize their theories about Templars or even
Vikings in America along with the theories about Prince Madoc and others. Many times,
obscure or misinterpreted aspects of Native American oral tradition are pointed
to as evidence the Knights Templar had come to not only the east coast but the
central portion of what is now the United States. Unfortunately, within oral
history is no scale of time or calendar that may help to correspond these
stories with a specific date. How does Native oral history relate what happened
a hundred years prior to what happened five hundred years prior?
For example, French and Spanish missionaries and priests
who wore garb very similar to the Knights Templar or other monks accompanied
all the exploration and settlement parties. Earlier we discussed the Spanish
Mission that was located somewhere near Jamestown prior to the English
settlement there. The French also included missionaries in all their colonial
ventures who saw it as their duty to shepherd the Native inhabitants and
convert them to Christianity.
What this may represent is one faction blaming Columbus
for the destruction of Native American cultures while making heroes out of the
Knights Templar who are being portrayed as the friends and supporters of Native
culture. None of it really makes any valid historical sense at all and there is
very little to no material evidence any of this is true. Examples like a burial
in Maine that was found including a man in armor with a native woman are
pointed to by people who want to believe these things. In reality said burial
is most likely that of Jean Vincent d’Abbadie St. Castin who was an early
Acadian French military commander who actually became chief of the Abenaki
tribe of Maine. Baron St. Castin is the namesake of Castine, Maine who was from
a very influential French family that may be related to what is known of as the
Great Cyclic Cross of Hendaye detailed in Fulcanelli’s book “Mystery of the
Cathedrals.”
Body armor was common in early colonial ventures
including Jamestown and parts of New England. If a Native oral tradition points
these things out it does not mean it was the Knights Templar. It is highly
likely that the early colonial inhabitants of Nova Scotia whether they be
English, Scottish, or French wore body armor that sometimes even included the
iconography of the Knights of Malta St. John which was still a viable
organization during the colonial period of North America. Even d’Abbadie is
said to have been a Knight of Malta for example.
Ironically many of these oral traditions were first
recorded by anthropologists from organizations like the Smithsonian institute.
The Smithsonian is often pointed to by alternate historians as having hidden
certain aspects of history away from the public as in the case of the “Giants
in America” phenomena as some sort of academic conspiracy. If this were true
why would you then trust the Native oral histories that were first recorded by
them; the same people you point to as having executed a historical conspiracy
to hide the truth? One simply can’t trust them on one hand while discarding anything
else that is said by the same faction.
All of this distortion of the truth began after the time
of Columbus’ discoveries with subsequent colonies like Acadia also including
monks and priests among their parties. In short there is no scale of time in
oral history that could differentiate between Knights Templar or ecclesiastical
or military figures who wore the same type of garb i.e. robes with crosses on
them or body armor. So Native lore and oral history though valuable and
insightful may not include an accurate time stamp.
In addition, it is clear that many early colonial
attempts at settlement included the wholesale destruction of Native culture in
favor of the Europeans who had now come to what they considered new lands. The
fact that modern Native Americans would now believe this story is mind boggling
when in fact the colonists were the one’s who destroyed their culture. The only
solution to that conundrum is to now convince them that Knights Templar had
come to teach them everything they knew and to save them from the later evil
colonists? In a way, all of this suggests that the Knights Templar were now
responsible for any achievements or cultural development the Native’s had
experienced.
All of this could link to why Columbus signed his Greek
signature with a symbol that would later magically appear on a bogus rune in
Minnesota. What are the real reasons this symbol was valued? We know also that
a similar design exists in Rosslyn Chapel in the form of what appears to have
been graffiti. The symbol at Rosslyn includes one of the cross bars of the
strange X being a sword. The order of Odd Fellows a later Masonic organization
also includes a similar symbol among the many they value for example. Is it possible
that Christopher Columbus is related to the strange imagery at Rosslyn Chapel
that many point to as proving the outrageous claims of the Zeno Narrative?
Some people have pointed to the fact that Columbus was
very distantly related to the Sinclair family though this relation is many
times removed from the family and not very significant. The Sinclair family
does have some interesting links to Spain via family members value of Santiago
de Compostela and the cult of St. James that exists there in association with
the famous “way of St. James” pilgrimage route or the Camino de Santiago.
Researcher Tim Wallace Murphy (r.i.p) states that William Sinclair was a Knight
of Santiago. It appears that Scottish people at the time of Rosslyn’s
construction and prior eras were ardent Catholics who even plead for help from
the Vatican in the Declaration of Arbroath.
An examination of the use of the name James in relation
to Scottish nobility also reveals that its origins or value comes from an
association with Santiago (St. James) de Compostela where many Scottish people
also went on pilgrimage. This pilgrimage was especially popular during the eras
in which the Holy Land was controlled by Muslims. In this way, we may see the
concept of a “New Jerusalem” being applied to Santiago Compostela. This was
indeed appreciated by Scottish people prior to the reformation and ultimate ban
on Catholic ideology in what would become the United Kingdom. Technically even
James I and the naming of Jamestown in Virginia where the Archer Reliquary was
discovered are a result of a value of St. James and Santiago de Compostela.
An earlier William Sinclair had perished in the Battle of
Teba in Spain along with Sir James Douglas in 1330. As this story goes upon the
death of King Robert the Bruce the King requested that his heart be taken on
Pilgrimage to Jerusalem and be left at the Holy Sepulcher. There are many
variants on this story and it is surprising in the lack of detail given the
importance of this history. It appears that Bruce’s request came at a time when
the Muslims controlled the Holy Land and Sir Douglas and Sinclair first took
the Heart of the Bruce to Santiago de Compostela according to many versions of
this tale. Unfortunately, Sir Douglas and Sir Sinclair lost their lives while
battling the Moors at the Battle of Teba in 1330. Douglas was said to have kept
a large locket containing the embalmed heart of the King around his neck during
the battle.
Authors
note: I have a big story coming up about the Heart of Robert the Bruce and
Melrose Abbey in Scotland that relates some of this to American History. The
Heart of the Bruce may be at Santiago de Compostela while the heart found at
Melose is that of Avenel.
Here we see how there are many relations between Scottish
Knights and Nobility with Spain via a value of St. James and Santiago de
Compostela. The two countries also include some noble Scottish families who
married into Spanish and Portuguese families thus extending an appreciation and
association with Spain. For Example Henry the Navigator of Portugal’s
grandmother was from the Comyn family of Scotland. Queen Mary I of England was
once married to Philip II of Spain as well. The point being here is that it is
no surprise that there may be a distant connection between Rosslyn Chapel and
Christopher Columbus that has been overlooked.
As stated it is possible that Rosslyn Chapel and the
Orphir Round Kirk form a north to south Prime Meridian. This would be somewhat
analogous to what the Greenwich or Paris Meridians define and represent. A
Prime Meridian represents the zero point of any grid used to define the earth
as used in navigation and mapping. Any line of longitude can be designated the
zero point. For example, Rome and Athens may have also once been home to prime
meridians used in this fashion.
If it is possible that Rosslyn was the point of creation
of this meridian then what about the east to west associations of the same
structure? Since the chapel is oriented at what appears to be zero degrees
north then the east to west orientation would be just as accurate and would
also loosely define the equinox. This relates to the use of the structure as an
axis mundi or the center of a map projection in which many different directions
can be measured. The use of an axis mundi is analogous to a Polar Projection
being used at the point on earth where the temple, in this case Rosslyn Chapel
is located.
With is in mind we may see a startling and strange
association with Rosslyn Chapel.
Using Google Earth digital globe, one can create a
westerly trending arc on the globe based on the east to west orientation of
Rosslyn Chapel. This arc on the globe transects the central portion of the
Atlantic Ocean eventually also intersecting with San Salvador Island which is
widely accepted as being the first landfall Columbus made on his original
voyage of discovery. Is it just a coincidence that Rosslyn Chapel forms a prime
meridian and also has this association with where Columbus first made landfall?
If not it is an amazing coincidence in that both his
signature and graffiti at Rosslyn both include the strange X seen in other
places discussed in this study. The east to west orientation of Rosslyn Chapel
“points to” San Salvador Island on the globe. William Sinclair may have been a
Knight of Santiago and not a Knights Templar since they didn’t exist any longer
during his life. Is it possible that this landfall at San Salvador Island had
been Columbus’ goal from the start of his voyage?
Columbus and his brother were known dealers in maps. Columbus
himself obviously became adept at the art of Navigation. It would be no
surprise if somehow Columbus had become privy to the fact that Rosslyn also
defined a navigational aid. The use of Rosslyn in this fashion also goes right
along with theories that examine the iconography of the chapel and how it may
relate to places that hadn’t been discovered at the time of its construction.
The construction of Rosslyn about 57 years prior to the
famous voyage of Columbus does mean that this information was relatively new
and may have been shared with others to the advantage of the Sinclair family
and others. Again it does appear as if William Sinclair the builder of Rosslyn
did have a value of Spain via his Catholic faith and membership in the Knights
of Santiago. Though there are no records it is well within the realm of
possibility that William had even visited Santiago de Compostela more than
once.
None of this in fact relates to Henry Sinclair beyond the
great fiction that has been developed around his life and persona. In fact
there is very little verifiable information available about Henry Sinclair
while we do have reams of historical information about the life of Christopher
Columbus who lived in the fifteenth century. Thus the existence of three “found
manuscripts” which are currently being used to promote the Henry Sinclair story
as opposed to that of Columbus. Actually, William Sinclair would make a better
candidate since it was he who built the Chapel not long before Columbus’
voyages. Since a great deal more is known about William it is obvious he never
undertook any such voyage and no found manuscripts apply to his exploits.
Many people point to the fact that Columbus had red
crosses on his sails as a connection to the Knights of Christ of Portugal who
do have some connections to the history of the Knights Templar as well as
amazing voyages of discovery. Why would he fly the colors of Portugal when he
was in the employ of Queen Isabella of Spain? We do know that Columbus was from
the Republic of Genoa which also values the Cross of St. George as a national
symbol that is on their flag.
It is a fact that Columbus donated ten percent of his
earnings in his colonial venture to Genoa. Even the original flag of England
was the flag of Genoa. The English actually paid tribute to Genoa to use the
same flag which features a white field with a large red cross of St. George on
it. The use by the English of the flag of Genoa goes beyond the simple use of
the same flag which we will discuss soon. The Cross of St. George of course was
also a symbol valued by the Knights Templar though their flags were much
different than those of England and the Republic of Genoa.
The historical record also indicates that Queen Isabella
banked and borrowed money from the Republic of Genoa. Later Queen Elizabeth I
of England would also bank and borrow money from the Republic in addition to
many other royal and noble interests. In fact the Republic of Genoa did have
many historical ties to the original Order of the Knights Templar and had even
owned the navy that transported the Templars and pilgrims to and from the Holy
Land.
The Ibelin family of Genoa as well as others were
involved in the First Crusade during which they set up trading relations that
would result in great wealth and add a great deal to the historical value we
may have all misinterpreted as being related to the Knights Templar. All of
this also supplies us with more rationale as to why Venice would later supply
us with the Zeno Narrative that disputes all of this with absolutely no real
evidence to back it up. Here we are seeing real recorded history explain
something that has been neglected and painted over by those that wish us to
believe an alternate reality.
With all this in mind it is bizarre that Rosslyn Chapel
and San Salvador Island have these geographic associations that are possibly
included in one of the greatest feats of Navigation in history. It is possible
that a Scottish influence was indeed included in what Columbus had learned that
enabled him to first cross the Atlantic Ocean. Given this it is amazing that
all of the alternate theories involving Knights Templar and Native interests
serve only to degrade the real accomplishments of Columbus that in the end did
relate to the destruction of Native Peoples of the Western Hemisphere.
Is it possible someone else had “discovered” North
America prior? Possibly but unfortunately this was not recorded in an accurate
manner somewhat in the same way the Norse contributions to this concept may
have been obscured. In the end it is clear the Knights Templar had nothing to
do with any of this until their image and spirit were revived by Jacobites in
the early eighteenth century.
Some of the scheming undertaken by Jacobite interests in
order to retake their lost crowns did seem to include a distortion of history
that favored their point of view and the entire concept as presented of early
incursions into North America on the part of the Knights Templar fit a pattern
of intrigue and skullduggery that likely also includes them having played a
role in the creation of the phenomena that is the Kensington rune. Once
something was claimed royal interests will never give up that claim and may do
anything to get it back if it is lost to them. The creation of the United
States and other republics in the Americas was a direct threat to their domain
and control. The location of discovery of the Kensington Rune is directly
related to a royal claim of property and this was noted by Constantine Beltrami
in his book about his North American travels.
It is the opinion of this author that the “Cremona
Document” was created by later Jacobite factions who did include a mixture of
real history and geography in the story they had crafted. As we will see they
were involved in many interesting aspects of eighteenth and nineteenth century
American history that do reflect that they were the ones who had created this
so called medieval document for their own reasons. In so doing they included
historical elements that happened long after the time during which the document
is promoted as having been created.
Where does this leave us with regard to the original The Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the
Temple of Solomon more popularly known of as the Knights Templar? From the view
of western civilization, the Knights Templar have had a great deal of folklore
and falsehoods foisted on their legacy. In reality, the original basis of their
creation was to provide a military force that had the discipline of monks of
the Cistercian Order. The Order of Calatrava in Spain was also created by the
Cistercian Order for similar reasons related to fending off the Moorish invaders
of Europe.
Opinions expressed here
include the fact that many bogus concepts were applied to this organization in
more modern times. The imagery and iconography of the Knights Templar was later
adapted for groups that had stated political goals that wanted to craft a
history that complimented those goals. It was in this manner than many of the
patently bogus concepts we see today were applied to such a storied order of
Knighthood. Even today in the current era there are many groups who use the imagery
of the Knights Templar who espouse a variety of nationalistic ideals both
positive and negative in nature.
After the Holy Land and
other places like Cyprus and Greece also fell to the Muslims many of the
political powers of the Latin Kingdom no longer had a use for the Knights
Templar and in many ways, they became a threat to established monarchies such
as that of France. They were like an army that no longer had a purpose that had
not sworn fealty to any single entity except the Catholic Church and appendant
Cistercian Order. This coupled with aspects of their organization that included
banking and credit may have also contributed to their downfall. As a result, in
the modern age many theosophical and new age concepts have been applied to a
group of people that originally had fought for Christendom as defined by the
Catholic Church and no other organization. Anything beyond that is simply
speculation that does not include any period sources to back it up.
No comments:
Post a Comment