Xpression

MYTH, RITUAL AND SEXUALITY were almost inseparable in ancient Mesopotamia. The earliest deity, the creator-goddess Nammu, meaning "the sea," was believed to have been responsible for creation by giving birth to both heaven and earth. In a later era, the myth changed. Nammu was supplanted by the hero god Marduk who, having killed her, cut her down the middle and used half of her body to make the sky. The more familiar, and historically far more widespread, myth of a masculine god as the supreme creator of the world was now in place. Although it is impossible to account definitively for this development, it was probably the result of invasions of hostile tribes whose values were predominantly masculine into the areas populated by the early, settled, goddess-worshipping people.
Such was the importance of the gods in early Sumerian times that what was considered morally right was for the people almost wholly identified with what was ritually correct. For instance, it seems that the gods were quite indifferent to the fact that widows and orphans fared very badly and suffered oppression. Yet they were in the habit of becoming very angry if their worshippers ate ritually impure food. The entire Sumerian culture which dates back to about 5000 BC, was largely underpinned by ritual, much of it explicitly sexual in nature.
The Sumerians were the first literate people, and their written remains provide a glimpse into their world view. Some of the clay tablets, fragments and seals which they inscribed exist to this day, to tell fascinating stories, including the fragmentary story of Inanna. Of all the deities, most of whom were personifications of various aspects of nature, Inanna was the most revered for a long period. Hers was the realm of love and procreation, in which she was a forerunner of Anath of Canaan, Isis of Egypt, and the Babylonian goddess, Ishtar, with whom she is sometimes identified. Inanna herself, it is clear, rejoiced in her sexuality. The story tells how, "When she leaned back against the apple tree, her vulva was wondrous to behold." She herself speaks of making love with her consort, the shepherd Dumuzi, in rhapsodic terms:
"He shaped my loins with his fair hands,
The shepherd Dumuzi filled my lap with cream and milk,
He stroked my pubic hair,
He watered my womb.
He laid his hands on my holy vulva.
He caressed me on the bed."
She addresses him tenderly as "dear to my heart" and "honeysweet" and is explicit in her desire:
"Bridegroom, let me caress you,
My precious caress is more savory than honey,
In the bedchamber, honey filled,
Let us enjoy your goodly beauty,
Lion, let me caress you,
My precious caress is more savory than honey"
Some experts believe that the references to "honey" may well be the origin of our "honeymoon" or "honey month."
The sexual union of Inanna and Dumuzi was the prototype of the Sumerian custom of the "sacred marriage." which was ritually performed at the New Year festival. This rite later became widespread in other societies, notably Babylon and Greece. In its Sumerian form, the high priestess, known as the "Entu," in order to ensure the renewal of fertility throughout the land, would ceremonially mate with the high priest or king, who personified the life force of the earth. In fact, as far as we can tell, the kings of Sumeria may literally have been sons, fathers and consorts of the high priestesses. As the representative of the goddess the priestess would, through sexual union with the king, bestow her divine power upon him, thereby making him fit to rule. In the ceremony itself, it fell to the priestess to take the initiative and grant her heavenly favors, thereby furthering life. For his part the god-king had to bring her offerings and await her pleasure: ultimate power was in her keeping. Any child born of such a union was considered to be half-human and half-divine.
Further fragments of the Inanna story emphasize the importance to the people of this ceremony. It was the successful performance of the sacred marriage that guaranteed the renewed growth of all human, animal and plant life:
"The people of Sumer assemble in the palace,
The house which guides the land.
In order to care for the life of all the lands,
Ihe exact first day of the month is closely examined...
So that the New Yearís Day, the day of rites,
May be properly determined,
And a sleeping place be set up for Inanna."
Inanna is often depicted resting her foot on the back of a lion, offering the king the symbolic objects indicating his ruling power. Lions, when associated with feminine deities, represent the undomesticated, fierce, aggressive aspect of the female. Often such goddesses incorporate a dual nature, the other side of their character manifesting compassion and, gentleness. The Buddhist deity Tara is another example. Although primarily benevolent and merciful she is often represented as a fierce, warlike goddess. But it is precisely because of her lion-like power that she is able to confront dangerous forces and this gives her the ability to protect her followers from suffering.
From other tablets we learn that the Sumerians, by present-day Western standards at least, had very little modesty about sex. In the context of the myth of Inanna, with its delight in the erotic encounter, this comes as no surprise. The signs or hieroglyphs representing male and female were simplified drawings of the sexual parts whilst a married person was signified by the juxtaposition of the two. Incantations make it clear that masturbation, alone or with a partner, was a popular technique for enhancing potency. This attitude is about as far removed as it could be from the much later myth prevalent in Victorian times which, as we shall see, considered the practice more likely to drive its proponent insane. Often a man could achieve an erection only by rubbing his penis, or having it rubbed, with a special mixture of oil known as puru-oil. It seems likely that this special oil was mixed with pulverized magnetic iron ore and pulverized iron, no doubt to provide additional friction so as to be more stimulating.
Anal intercourse was practiced and there is no evidence to suggest that it was considered taboo. The "Entu-priestesses" allowed such intercourse during sexual rites in the temples if they wished to avoid pregnancy. Other tablets report homosexual anal intercourse. Both sexual intercourse and prostitution were believed to form part of the divine laws which had governed the universe from the days of its creation and were known to the Sumerians as me.
The importance ascribed to the goddess was reflected in the position enjoyed by women within society. Early in Sumerian times, as would happen later in both early Egypt and Crete, women were not confined tothe home but instead had a role to play in public life. This was especially true of the priestesses, who owned property and transacted business. Property from family estates was inherited equally by sisters and brothers. A daughter, when she married, was given a dowry that she was allowed to keep in the event of a divorce.
Sometime around 2300 BC, all this began to change. The laws inscribed on the tablets changed and, as the status of women deteriorated, their menfolk took a more authoritarian role. A woman might still own property but it was no longer hers to dispose of freely. Now she must first consult her husband and obtain his permission. This would have been unthinkable during the time when the worship of Inanna as giver and supporter of life was paramount and women, as her representatives, were therefore accorded respect and social position. It can be no coincidence that by this later stage, both Inanna and other female Sumerian deities had lost the high position they once enjoyed.
By the time of the Code of Hammurabi, formulated between 1792 and 1750 BC, the position of women had obviously been greatly eroded. The crimes recorded on the tablets which now outnumbered all others were those of witchcraft and female adultery. According to the Code the accused woman was subjected to the ordeal of the river. If she survived being thrown into a river, she was absolved from any crime. Were she to drown, however, this was considered to be proof of her guilt. This way of ascertaining her guilt or otherwise had a continuing influence for hundreds of years. In Europe, women accused of witchcraft were subjected to similar ordeals by water up until medieval times.
From a much later period comes another myth, the Sumero-Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh, which examines the question of why man must suffer and die. Central to the story is the close friendship of its two heroes, Gilgamesh and Enkidu. Although it is impossible to know with any certainty whether their relationship was homosexual, erotic feelings are certainly implied. Gilgamesh has a dream in which he foresees the arrival of a strange being whom he will embrace "like a wife," and soon after he meets Enkidu and becomes his friend.
Later they meet the goddess Ishtar, who offers to marry Gilgamesh, promising him untold delights. He, however, preferring his friend Enkidu, rejects her advances in a deeply insulting way, referring to her in derogatory terms:
Thou art but a brazier which goes out in the cold:
A back door which does not keep out blast and windstorm;
A palace which crushes the valiant..."
Enraged, Ishtar asks her father to create a heavenly bull to destroy the insolent hero. Gilgamesh and Enkidu kill the bull and Enkidu throws its organs into Ishtar's face. This is too much for the assembly of the gods, who decide that Enkidu must die. This will be the punishment that Gilgamesh must bear. Later, Enkidu is allowed to emerge from the underworld for a visit and Gilgamesh begs him to reveal what death is like. Enkidu's answer, reluctantly given, implies the former existence of a physical relationship between them:
"That which you cherished,
that which you caressed,
and which brought happiness to your heart,
like an old garment is now devoured by the worms.
That which you cherished,
that which you caressed
and which made your heart glad,
is today covered in dust."
Given that myths tend to reflect aspects of the culture prevalent at the time, we may surmise that intimate relationships between men were not considered unusual. This could perhaps be expected in a society where archaeological evidence has shown that women had, by now, a very inferior role. Dual standards existed for married life, where a wife might be put to death for adultery, while a husband was free to enjoy as many women as he chose, provided he did not seduce the wife of another man.
Patriarchal values were indeed increasing in importance at this time, especially in the northern area of Sumeria known as Akkadia, later called Babylonia. This region was inhabited by Semitic tribes in whose view a woman was entirely the possession of her menfolk. So much was this the case that fathers and husbands had the power of life and death over their wives and daughters. The birth of a son was counted as a blessing but an unwelcome daughter might be left, exposed, to die. Not only was a daughter unable to inherit property but she could with impunity be sold into slavery by the men responsible for her. Needless to say, these peoples had no priestesses. As we shall see, this attitude that devalued women had great significance in the later development of Judaism.
Babylon: Home of Sacred Prostitution
Often associated with the Sumerian goddess Inanna and sometimes interchangeable with her was Ishtar, the great goddess of Babylon, who had two main functions. Although the goddess of love and sexuality, she was in another aspect a fierce war goddess, sometimes depicted riding on a lion. Also called Mother of Harlots and the Great Whore of Babylon, she declared of herself, "...a prostitute compassionate am I." Her holy city of Erech was known as "the town of the sacred courtesans." In no way, therefore, was prostitution in the Babylonian era considered a shameful profession. On the contrary, temples to Ishtar were inhabited by sacred prostitutes or priestesses known as ishtartu or Joy-Maidens, dedicated to the service of the goddess. Their sexuality was seen as belonging to her, to be used therefore only in the sacred rites undertaken in her worship. Indeed, the original meaning of the word "prostitute" was "to stand on behalf of," that is, to represent, the power of the goddess. Curiously perhaps, from a contemporary standpoint, Ishtar was often referred to as "Virgin," implying that her creativity and power were self-engendered and not dependent upon a masculine power.
Forbidden to marry in the ordinary sense of the word, the ihtaritu undertook instead the practice of the sacred marriage. Central to this rite was the idea that divine energy was released at the moment of sexual union, where masculine phallic power was received into the feminine embace.
Like Inanna, Ishtar was considered responsible for the power of sexuality and its manifestations. A saying attributed to her makes this clear, "I turn the male to the female. I am she who adorneth the male for the female; I am she who adorneth the female for the male." Sexuality, as the vehicle by which life both physical and psychic was brought into the world, was considered to be a sacred act. What is more, gods and goddesses, as we have seen in the story of Inanna, were believed to enjoy blissful sexual relationships. Human beings, therefore, through sexual intercourse might attain something akin to the state of divine ecstasy. In some temples, only a priest would be allowed to represent the Moon God, symbol of masculine divinity. He would have intercourse with the ishtaritu or another woman whose role was to embody the feminine power of the goddess. Sometimes the woman in question would be one wishing to be initiated into the mysteries of the Great Goddess. She would accordingly sacrifice her virginity in the temple by enacting the sacred marriage, often with the priest but at other times with a representation of the divine phallus. Perhaps the much later custom of droit de seigneur, the right of a feudal lord to have sexual relations with a vassal's bride on her wedding night, was an echo, albeit much distorted, of these ancient religious practices. Some priests, however, although holding office in the temple, would be unable to perform the rite on account of having been castrated. Their devotion to the goddess was such that they had sacrificed their sexuality to her as a way of promoting new life. This practice was later taken up by the Canaanites and in Greece by the priests of Cybele.
What gave the rite of sacred marriage its spiritual significance was its impersonal nature. Those taking the roles of priest and priestess were acting not as man and woman in a human relationship but as incarnations of a divine being. In this way, the participants could expect to have a direct experience of the power of the Great Goddess and feel deeply enriched and energized as a result. Any child born of the union would, as in Sumerian custom, belong to the temple.
In many temples, the priestesses would undertake the sacred marriage with any male worshipper who wanted union with the goddess. The man, whom the priestess had not met before and would not meet again, spent the night with her in the temple precincts. Their intercourse would put him in contact with the rejuvenating energy of the Goddess, mediated through her priestess who would bestow on him an ecstatic experience. For the priestess, the sexual act represented a ritual offering to the goddess. A very real benefit was therefore enjoyed by all concerned, not least the temple itself which could expect to earn considerable income from such worshippers. As a result, priestesses often engaged in commerce and might be involved in import and export, land management, and other profitable endeavors. The modern brothel of our own culture, with its "madam," might perhaps be seen as a somewhat pale reflection of the temple of Ishtar. Apart from their sexual and commercial activities, temple prostitutes demonstrated considerable gifts in other areas. Because their natural secretions were considered to have a beneficial effect, they were greatly respected as healers of the sick. One clay tablet dating from this era tells us that diseases of the eye can be cured by a harlot's spittle. These women also acted as seers and were skilled in sorcery and prophecy.
The sacred priestesses were not alone in undertaking sexual rites in the temple. Any number of other women, including those from the highest families in the land, would also prostitute themselves in the temple at least once during their lifetime. Indeed, there was at one stage a law which required a woman to do so before she married. This was a precautionary measure to deflect the wrath of the goddess, for she did not hold with monogamy. The Greek historian Herodotus gives us an excellent, if not wholly approving, description of the practice:
"The worst Babylonian custom is that which compels every woman of the land once in her life to sit in the temple of love and have... intercourse with some stranger... the men pass and make their choice. It matters not what be the sum of money; the woman will never refuse, for that were a sin, the money being by this act made sacred. After their intercourse she has made herself holy in the sight of the goddess and goes away to her home; and thereafter there is no bribe however great that will get her. So then the women that are tall and fair are soon free to depart, but the uncomely have long to wait because they cannot fulfill the law: for some of them remain for three years or four."
For a contemporary person such an attitude is very strange indeed. But in its pure form, a deeply spiritual significance was attached to these rites. The goddess, because she presided over fertility, represented the creative power which is an essential aspect of all female beings. By sacrificing her sexuality to the deity, a woman was offering herself as a vehicle for the divine energy. The experience of abandoning herself in this way evidently engendered a sense of spiritual fulfillment which was more important to her than either sensual satisfaction or even human love. Temples to Ishtar, at Erech and other places, were also served by male prostitutes. They were referred to as men "...whose manhood Ishtar has changed into womanhood." Attitudes toward homosexuality, however, seem to have changed at a later stage of Babylonian culture. The Middle Assyrian Law Tablets, dating back to the twelfth century BC make it clear that some kinds of homosexuality, at least, could lead to castration:
"If a seignior lay with his neighbor, when they have prosecuted him and convicted him, they shall lie with him and turn him into a eunuch."
In a culture which laid great stress on the duty to procreate, to the extent that a woman's barrenness constituted grounds for divorce, we can deduce that any crime for which castration was the punishment must have been considered extremely serious. As in most civilizations, incest of any form was strictly forbidden:
"If a man violates his own mother, it is a capital crime. If a man violates his daughter, it is a capital crime. If a man violates his son, it is a capital crime."
Life within the temple precincts was, of course, just one aspect, albeit a central one, of Babylonian culture. An ordinary woman did not enjoy the reverence and exalted position ascribed to the sacred prostitute, her legal position being on the whole inferior to that of her menfolk. Nevertheless, a surprisingly wide field of employment was open to her. As early as the third millennium BC there are records of women working as scribes, hair dressers, shopkeepers, spinners, brewers, diviners, and at numerous other occupations. As a wife, a woman was circumscribed by laws definitely favoring her husband. It was quite within his rights to divorce her for being a spendthrift although he could, if he chose, pardon her should she commit adultery. Although a man was allowed only one legal wife, he was at liberty to take concubines if he could afford them. Should the official wife prove unable to bear children, her husband was at liberty to divorce her. Her only alternative, if he would accept it, was to find another woman for her husband who could assume this role.

Isis is the mistress of words and the Goddess of Nature.

Her original headdress was an empty throne chair belonging to her murdered husband, Osiris. As the personification of the throne, she was an important source of the Pharaoh's power. Her cult was popular throughout Egypt, but the most important sanctuaries were at Giza and at Behbeit El-Hagar in the Nile delta.

Other symbols linked with her include the tat, knot or buckle, and the sustrum (rattle).

Isis was a magician, possibly the archetype for the high priestess of the tarot. She learned her magic from Thoth, although according to some legends she obtained her powers from Ra himself by tricking him into revealing his name to her, thus acquiring his full magical knowledge.

Isis later had an important cult in the Greco-Roman world, with sanctuaries at Delos and Pompeii. To the Greeks she was known as Demeter - to the Romans as Ceres.

Her Latin epithet was Stella Maris, or Star of the Sea.

The symbol of Isis in the heavens was the star Sept (Sirius), which was greatly beloved because its appearance marked not only the beginning of a new year, but also announced the advance of the Inundation of the Nile, which betokened renewed wealth and prosperity of the country.

Isis was regarded as the companion of Osiris, whose soul dwelt in the star Sah - Orion.

The Templar Knights or 'Poor Knights of Christ' were a monastic order of knights founded in 1112 A.D. to protect the pilgrims along the path from Europe to the Holy Lands (Jerusalem). They took a vow of poverty which was rare for knights, and had to supply themselves with a horse, armor and weapons.

The Templars were organized as a monastic order, following a rule created for them by Bernard of Clairvaux, the founder of the Cistercian Order. The Templars were well connected and quickly became prime movers in the international politics of the Crusades period. In time, they were endowed with several extraordinary Papal bulls that permitted them, among other things, to levy taxes and accept tithing in the areas under their direct control, facilitating their quick rise to institutional power.

At any time, each knight had some ten people in support positions. Some brothers were devoted solely to banking, as the Order was often trusted with precious goods by participants in the Crusades. But the majority of the Knights Templar were dedicated to warfare. It was primarily a military order directly responsible only to the Pope. Some consider the Knights Templar to be the forerunner of the modern professional army and elite special forces units. The Templars used their wealth to construct numerous fortifications throughout the Holy Land and were probably the best trained and disciplined fighting units of their day.

Seal of the Knights Templar

Their seal became two knights on one horse to show how poor they were. There were also other various interpretations of the seal. They became very powerful and influencial in European political circles since Pope Innocent II exempted the Templars from all authority except the Pope.

Banking System
The Templars got into banking almost by accident. Because they regularly transmitted money and supplies from Europe to Palestine, they gradually developed an efficient banking system unlike any the world had seen before. Their military might and financial acumen caused them to become both feared and trusted. Because of their unselfish defense of the Holy Lands and their monastic vows, they amassed great wealth through gifts from their grateful benefactors. They soon had an army and a fleet as well as surplus money. Since the Knights had taken a vow of poverty they re-invested the money and lent.

When members joined the order, they often donated large amounts of cash or property to the order since all had to take oaths of poverty. Combined with massive grants from the Pope, their financial power was assured from the beginning.

Since the Templars kept cash in all their chapter houses and temples, it was natural that in 1135 the Order started lending money to Spanish pilgrims who wanted to travel to the Holy Land.

The Knights' involvement in banking grew over time into a new basis for money, as Templars became increasingly involved in banking activities.

One indication of their powerful political connections is that the Templars' involvement in usury did not lead to more controversy within the Order and the church at large.

The charge was typically sidestepped, by a stipulation that the Templars retained the rights to the production of mortgaged property.

The Templars' political connections and awareness of the essentially urban and commercial nature of the Outremer communities naturally led the Order to a position of significant power, both in Europe and the Holy Land.

Their success attracted the concern of many other orders and eventually that of the nobility and monarchs of Europe as well, who were at this time seeking to monopolize control of money and banking after a long chaotic period in which civil society, especially the Church and its lay orders, had dominated financial activities. The Templars' holdings were extensive both in Europe and the Middle East, including for a time the entire island of Cyprus.

Their Humble Beginnings
Immediately after the deliverance of Jerusalem, the Crusaders, considering their vow fulfilled, returned in a body to their homes. The defense of this precarious conquest, surrounded as it was by Mohammedan neighbours, remained.

In 1118, during the reign of Baldwin II, Hugues de Payens, a knight of Champagne, and eight companions bound themselves by a perpetual vow, taken in the presence of the Patriarch of Jerusalem, to defend the Christian kingdom. Baldwin accepted their services and assigned them a portion of his palace, adjoining the temple of the city; hence the title "pauvres chevaliers du temple" (Poor Knights of the Temple).

Poor indeed they were, being reduced to living on alms, and, so long as they were only nine, they were hardly prepared to render important services, unless it were as escorts to the pilgrims on their way from Jerusalem to the banks of the Jordan, then frequented as a place of devotion.

The Templars had as yet neither distinctive habit nor rule. Hugues dePayens journeyed to the West to seek the approbation of the Church and to obtain recruits. At the Council of Troyes (1128), at which he assisted and at which St. Bernard was the leading spirit, the Knights Templars adopted the Rule of St. Benedict, as recently reformed by the Cistercians. They accepted not only the three perpetual vows, besides the crusader's vow, but also the austere rules concerning the chapel, the refectory, and the dormitory.

They also adopted the white habit of the Cistercians, adding to it a red cross. Notwithstanding the austerity of the monastic rule, recruits flocked to the new order, which thenceforth comprised four ranks of brethren:

the knights, equipped as heavy cavalry

the sergeants, equipped as light cavalry and drawn from a lower social class than the knights

farmers, who administered the property of the Order

the chaplains, who were ordained priests and saw to the spiritual needs of the Order.

Their Marvelous Growth
The order owed its rapid growth in popularity to the fact that it combined the two great passions of the Middle Ages, religious fervour and martial prowess. Even before the Templars had proved their worth, the ecclesiastical and lay authorities heaped on them favours of every kind, spiritual and temporal. The popes took them under their immediate protection, exempting them from all other jurisdiction, episcopal or secular. Their property was assimilated to the church estates and exempted from all taxation, even from the ecclesiastical tithes, while their churches and cemeteries could not be placed under interdict.

This soon brought about conflict with the clergy of the Holy Land, inasmuch as the increase of the landed property of the order led, owing to its exemption from tithes, to the diminution of the revenue of the churches, and the interdicts, at that time used and abused by the episcopate, became to a certain extent inoperative wherever the order had churches and chapels in which Divine worship was regularly held. As early as 1156 the clergy of the Holy Land tried to restrain the exorbitant privileges of the military orders, but in Rome every objection was set aside, the result being a growing antipathy on the part of the secular clergy against these orders. The temporal benefits which the order received from all the sovereigns of Europe were no less important.

The Templars had commanderies in every state. In France they formed no less than eleven bailiwicks, subdivided into more than forty-two commanderies; in Palestine it was for the most part with sword in hand that the Templars extended their possessions at the expense of the Mohammedans. Their castles are still famous owing to the remarkable ruins which remain: Safed, built in 1140; Karak of the desert (1143); and, most importantly of all, Castle Pilgrim, built in 1217 to command a strategic defile on the sea-coast.

In these castles, which were both monasteries and cavalry- barracks, the life of the Templars was full of contrasts. A contemporary describes the Templars as "in turn lions of war and lambs at the hearth; rough knights on the battlefield, pious monks in the chapel; formidable to the enemies of Christ, gentleness itself towards His friends." (Jacques de Vitry). Having renounced all the pleasures of life, they faced death with a proud indifference; they were the first to attack, the last to retreat, always docile to the voice of their leader, the discipline of the monk being added to the discipline of the soldier. As an army they were never very numerous.

A contemporary tells us that there were 400 knights in Jerusalem at the zenith of their prosperity; he does not give the number of sergeants, who were more numerous. But it was a picked body of men who, by their noble example, inspirited the remainder of the Christian forces. They were thus the terror of the Mohammedans. Were they defeated, it was upon them that the victor vented his fury, the more so as they were forbidden to offer a ransom. When taken prisoners, they scornfully refused the freedom offered them on condition of apostasy. At the siege of Safed (1264), at which ninety Templars met death, eighty others were taken prisoners, and, refusing to Deny Christ, died martyrs to the Faith. This fidelity cost them dear. It has been computed that in less than twocenturies almost 20,000 Templars, knights and serjeants, perished in war.

These frequent hecatombs rendered it difficult for the order to increase in numbers and also brought about a decadence of the true crusading spirit. As the order was compelled to make immediate use of the recruits, the article of the original rule in Latin which required a probationary period fell into desuetude. Even excommunicated men, who, as was the case with many crusaders, wished to expiate their sins, were admitted.

All that was required of a new member was a blind obedience, as imperative in the soldier as in the monk. He had to declare himself forever "serf et esclave de la maison" (French text of the rule). To prove his sincerity, he was subjected to a secret test concerning the nature of which nothing has ever been discovered, although it gave rise to the most extraordinary accusations. The great wealth of the order may also have contributed to a certain laxity in morals, but the most serious charge against it was its insupportable pride and love of power.

At the apogee of its prosperity, it was said to possess 9000 estates. With its accumulated revenues it had amassed great wealth, which was deposited in its temples at Paris and London. Numerous princes and private individuals had banked there their personal property, because of the uprightness and solid credit of such bankers. In Paris the royal treasure was kept in the Temple. Quite independent, except from the distant authority of the pope, and possessing power equal to that of the leading temporal sovereigns, the order soon assumed the right to direct the weak and irresolute government of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, a feudal kingdom transmissible through women and exposed to all the disadvantages of minorities, regencies, and domestic discord.

However, the Templars were soon opposed by the Order of Hospitallers, which had in its turn become military, and was at first the imitator and later the rival of the Templars. This ill-timed interference of the orders in the government of Jerusalem only multiplied the intestine dessentions, and this at a time when the formidable power of Saladin threatened the very existence of the Latin Kingdom. While the Templars sacrificed themselves with their customary bravery in this final struggle, they were, nevertheless, partly responsible for the downfall of Jerusalem.

To put an end to this baneful rivalry between the military orders, there was a very simple remedy at hand, namely their amalgamation. This was officially proposed by St. Louis at the Council of Lyons (1274). It was proposed anew in 1293 by Pope Nicholas IV, who called a general consultation on this point of the Christian states.

This idea is canvassed by all the publicists of that time, who demand either a fusion of the existing orders or the creation of a third order to supplant them. Neven in fact had the question of the crusaders been more eagerly taken up than after their failure. As the grandson of St. Louis, Philip the Fair could not remain indifferent to these proposals for a crusade. As the most powerful prince of his time, the direction of the movement belonged to him. To assume this direction, all he demanded was the necesary supplies of men and especially of money. Such is the genesis of his campaign for the suppression of the Templars.

It has been attributed wholly to his well-known cupidity. Even on this supposition he needed a pretext, for he could not, without sacrilege, lay hands on possessions that formed part of the ecclesiastical domain. To justify such a course the sanction of the Church was necessary, and this the king could obtain only by maintaining the sacred purpose for which the possessions were destined.

Admitting that he was sufficiently powerful to encroach upon the property of the Templars in France, he still needed the concurrence of the Church to secure control of their possessions in the other countries of Christendom. Such was the purpose of the wily negotiations of this self-willed and cunning sovereign, and of his still more treacherous counsellors, with Clement V, a French pope of weak character and easily deceived. The rumour that there had been a prearrangement between the king and the pope has been finally disposed of. A doubtful revelation, which allowed Philip to make the prosecution of the Templars as heretics a question of orthodoxy, afforded him the opportunity which he desired to invoke the action of the Holy See.

Their Tragic End

Two Templars burned at the stake, from a French 15th century manuscript

The fall of the Templars may have started over the matter of a loan. Philip IV, King of France needed cash for his wars and asked the Templars for money, who refused. The King tried to get the Pope to excommunicate the Templars for this but Pope Boniface VIII refused. Philip sent his right-hand man, Guillaume de Nogaret, to "persuade" the Pope, who later died from the wounds inflicted by de Nogaret. The next Pope, Benedict XI, lifted the excommunication of Philip IV but refused to absolve de Nogaret. (Rumor has it that the Pope died of poison soon after.) The next Pope, Clement V, agreed to Philip IV's demands about the Templars, lifted the excommunications, and later moved the papacy to Avignon.

On October 13 (the unlucky Friday the 13th), 1307, what may have been all the Knights Templar in France were simultaneously arrested by agents of Philip the Fair, to later be tortured into admitting heresy in the Order. The dominant view is that Philip, who seized the treasury and broke up the monastic banking system, was jealous of the Templars' wealth and power, and sought to control it for himself.

These events, and the Templars' original banking of assets for suddenly mobile depositors, were two of many shifts towards a system of military fiat to back European money, removing this power from Church orders. Seeing the fate of the Templars, the Hospitallers of St John of Jerusalem and of Rhodes and of Malta were also convinced to give up banking at this time. Much of the Templar property outside of France was transferred by the Pope to the Knights Hospitaller, and many surviving Templars were also accepted into the Hospitallers.

Many kings and nobles supported the Knights at that time, and only dissolved the order in their fiefs when so commanded by Pope Clement V. Robert the Bruce, the King of Scots, had already been excommunicated for other reasons, and was therefore not disposed to pay heed to Papal commands. In Portugal the order's name was changed to the Order of Christ, and was believed to have contributed to the first naval discoveries of the Portuguese. Prince Henry the Navigator led the Portuguese order for 20 years until the time of his death. In Spain, where the king of Aragon was also against giving the heritage of the Templars to Hospitallers (as commanded by Clement V), the Order of Montesa took Templar assets.

In the trial of the Templars two phases must be distinguished - the royal commission and the papal commission. Philip the Fair made a preliminary inquiry, and, on the strength of so-called revelations of a few unworthy and degraded members, secret orders were sent throughout France to arrest all the Templars on the same day (13 October, 1307), and to submit them to a most rigorous examination. The king did this, it was made to appear, at the request of the ecclesiastical inquisitors, but in reality without their co-operation. In this inquiry torture, the use of which was authorized by the cruel procedure of the age in the case of crimes committed without witnesses,was pitilessly employed. Owing to the lack of evidence, the accused could be convicted only through their own confession and, to extort this confession, the use of torture was considered necessary and legitimate.

There was one feature in the organization of the order which gave rise to suspicion, namely the secrecy with which the rites of initiation were conducted. The secrecy is explained by the fact that the receptions always took place in a chapter, and the chapters, owing to the delicate and grave questions discussed, were, and necessarily had to be, held in secret. An indiscretion in the matter of secrecy entailed exclusion from the order. The secrecy of these initiations, however, had two grave disadvantages. As these receptions could take place wherever there was a commandery, they were carried on without publicity and were free from all surveillance or control from the higher authorities, the tests being entrusted to the discretion of subalterns who were often rough and uncultivated. Under such conditions, it is not to be wondered at that abuses crept in.

One need only recall what took place almost daily at the time in the brotherhoods of artisans, the initiation of a new member being too often made the occasion for a parody more or less sacrilegious of baptism or of the Mass. The second disadvantage of this secrecy was, that it gave an opportunity to the enemies of the Templars, and they were numerous, to infer from this mystery every conceivable malicious supposition and base on it the monstrous imputations. The Templars were accused of spitting upon the Cross, of denying Christ, of permitting sodomy, of worshipping an idol, all in the most impenetrable secrecy. Such were the Middle Ages, when prejudice was so vehement that, to destroy an adversary, men did not recoil from inventing the most criminal charges.

It will suffice to recall the similar, but even more ridiculous than ignominious accusations brought against Pope Boniface VIII by the same Philip the Fair. Most of the accused declared themselves guilty of these secret crimes after being subjected to such ferocious torture that many of them succumbed. Some made similar confessions without the use of torture, it is true, but through fear of it; the threat had been sufficient. Such was the case with the grand master himself, Jacques de Molay, who acknowledged later that he had lied to save his life. Carried on without the authorization of the pope, who had the military orders under his immediate jurisdiction, this investigation was radically corrupt both as to its intent and as to its procedure.

Not only did Clement V enter an energetic protest, but he annulled the entire trial and suspended the powers of the bishops and their inquisitors. However, the offense had been admitted and remained the irrevocable basis of the entire subsequent proceedings. Philip the Fair took advantage of the discovery to have bestowed upon himself by the University of Paris the title of Champion and Defender of the Faith, and also to stir up public opinion at the States General of Tours against the heinous crimes of the Templars.

Moreover, he succeeded in having the confessions of the accused confirmed in presence of the pope by seventy-two Templars, who had been specially chosen and coached beforehand. In view of this investigation at Poitiers (June, 1308), the pope, until thensceptical, at last became concerned and opened a new commission, the procedure of which he himself directed. He reserved the cause of the order to the papal commission, leaving individuals to be tried by the diocesan commissions to whom herestored their powers.

The second phase of the process was the papal inquiry, which was not restricted to France, but extended to all the Christian countries Europe, and even to the Orient. In most of the other countries -- Portugal, Spain, Germany, Cyprus -- the Templars were found innocent; in Italy, except for a few districts, the decision was the same. But in France the episcopal inquisitions, resuming their activities, took the facts as established at the trial, and confined themselves to reconciling the repentant guilty members, imposing various canonical penances extending even to perpetual imprisonment. Only those who persisted in heresy were to be turned over to the secular arm, but, by a rigid interpretation of this provision, those who had withdrawn their former confessions were considered relapsed heretics; thus fifty-four Templars who had recanted after having confessed were condemned as relapsed and publicly burned on 12 May, 1310.

Subsequently all the other Templars, who had been examined at the trial, with very few exceptions declared themselves guilty. At the same time the papal commission, appointed to examine the cause of the order, had entered upon its duties and gathered together the documents which were to be submitted to the pope, and to the general council called to decide as to the final fate of the order. The culpability of single persons, which was looked upon as established, did not involve the guilt of the order. Although the defense of the order was poorly conducted, it could not be proved that the order as a body professed any heretical doctrine, or that a secret rule, distinct from the official rule, was practised.

Consequently, at the General Council of Vienne in Dauphiné on 16 October, 1311, the majority were favourable to the maintenance of the order. The pope, irresolute and harrassed, finally adopted a middle course: he decreed the dissolution, not the condemnation of the order, and not by penal sentence, but by an Apostolic Decree (Bull of 22 March, 1312). The order having been suppressed, the pope himself was to decide as to the fate of its members and the disposal of its possessions. As to the property, it was turned over to the rival Order of Hospitallers to be applied to its original use, namely the defence of the Holy Places. In Portugal, however, and in Aragon the possessions were vested in two new orders, the Order of Christ in Portugal and the Order of Montesa in Aragon.

As to the members, the Templars recognized guiltless were allowed either to join another military order or to return to the secular state. In the latter case, a pension for life, charged to the possessions of the order, was granted them. On the other hand, the Templars who had pleaded guilty before their bishops were to be treated "according to the rigours of justice, tempered by a generous mercy".

The pope reserved to his own jugment the cause of the grand master and his three first dignitaries. They had confessed their guilt; it remained to reconcile them with the Church, after they had testified to their repentance with the customary solemnity. To give this solemnity more publicity, a platform was erected in front of the Notre-Dame for the reading of the sentence.

But at the supreme moment the grand master recovered his courage and proclaimed the innocence of the Templars and the falsityof his own alleged confessions. To atone for this deplorable moment of weakness, he declared himself ready to sacrifice his life. He knew the fate that awaited him.

Immediately after this unexpected coup-de-theatre he was arrested as a relapsed heretic with another dignitary who chose to share his fate, and by order of Philip they were burned at the stake before the gates of the palace. This brave death deeply impressed the people, and, as it happened that the pope and the king died shortly afterwards, the legend spread that the grand master in the midst of the flames had summoned them both to appear in the course of the year before the tribunal of God.

Such was the tragic end of the Templars. If we consider that the Order of Hospitallers finally inherited, although not without difficulties, the property of the Templars and received many of its members, we may say that the result of the trial was practically equivalent to the long-proposed amalgamation of the two rival orders. For the Knights (first of Rhodes, afterwards of Malta) took up and carried on elsewhere the work of the Knights of the Temple.

This formidable trial, the greatest ever brought to light whether we consider the large number of accused, the difficulty of discovering the truth from a mass of suspicious and contradictory evidence, or the many jurisdictions in activity simultaneously in all parts of Christendom from Great Britain to Cyprus, is not yet ended. It is still passionately discussed by historians who have divided into two camps, for and against the order.

To mention only the principal ones, the following find the order guilty:

Dupuy (1654), Hammer (1820), Wilcke (1826), Michelet (1841), Loiseleur (1872), Prutz (1888), and Rastoul (1905); the following find it innocent: Father Lejeune (1789), Raynouard (1813), (1846), Ladvocat (1880), Schottmuller (1887), Gmelin (1893), Lea (1888), Fincke (1908). Without taking any side in this discussion, which is not yet exhausted, we may observe that the latest documents brought to light, particularly those which Fincke has recently extracted from the archives of the Kingdom of Aragon, tell more and more strongly in favour of the order.

In June of 1311, the English Inquisition came across some very interesting information from a Templar by the name of Stephen de Strapelbrugge, who admitted that he was told in his initiation that Jesus was a man and not a god. Another Templar by the name of John de Stoke stated that Jacques de Molay had instructed that he should know that Jesus was but a man, and that he should believe in 'the great omnipotent God, who was the architect of heaven and Earth, and not the crucifixion'.

These are the articles on which inquiry should be made against the Order of the Knighthood of the Temple.

Firstly that, although they declared that the Order had been solemnly established and approved by the Apostolic See, nevertheless in the reception of the brothers of the said Order, and at some time after, there were preserved and performed by the brothers those things which follow:

Namely that each in his reception, or at some time after, or as soon as a fit occasion could be found for the reception, denied Christ, sometimes Christ crucified, sometimes Jesus, and sometimes God, and sometimes the Holy Virgin, and sometimes all the saints of God, led and advised by those who received him. -

Item, that they told those whom they received that he was a false prophet.

Item, that he had not suffered nor was he crucified for the redemption of the human race, but on account of his sins.

Item, that neither the receptors nor those being received had a hope of achieving salvation through Jesus, and they said this, or the equivalent or similar, to those whom they received.

Item, that they made those whom they received spit on a cross, or on a representation or sculpture of the cross and an image of Christ, although sometimes those who were being received spat next [to it]. Item, that they sometimes ordered that this cross be trampled underfoot.

Item, that brothers who had been received sometimes trampled on the cross.

Item, that sometimes they urinated and trampled, and caused others to urinate, on this cross, and several times they did this on Good Friday.

Item, that some of them, on that same day or another of Holy Week, were accustomed to assemble for the aforesaid trampling and urination.

Of 138 Templars questioned in Paris during October and November, 105 admitted that they had denied Christ during their secret reception into the order, 123 that they had spat at, on, or near some form of the crucifix, 103 that they had indecently kissed, usually on the base of the spine or the navel, and 102 implied that homosexuality among the brothers was encouraged (although only 3 admitted directly engaging in homosexual relations).

This immediate and virtually unanimous confession of guilt on the part of the Templars, including the Grand Master, Jacques de Molay, and the Visitor, Hughes de Pairaud, cast a pall over the order from which it never recovered. Although the confessions were extracted by torture and later denied before papal inquisitors, the Templars had sentenced themselves out of their own mouths.

Atlantis is one of the world's greatest mysteries. To many, its very name evokes a mystical sense of familiarity and lost memories. It is said to be the lost Atlantic continent, the first home of civilisation, an earthly paradise, struck down by a natural catastrophe at the height of its power, and now lying deep under the ocean, with only the tops of its mountains protruding from the ocean floor.

To others, Atlantis is merely a legend, invented by Plato, the Greek philosopher, as a backdrop for two of his dialogues: Timaeus and Critias.

Another belief is that Atlantis was a true precursor of the early civilisations and not located in the Atlantic at all, but instead occupying some other location, like the Greek islands of Crete or Santorini, as opposed to the Azores, Madeira, or the Canary Islands.

I first became aware of Atlantis whilst attending a workshop on Spiritual Healing given by Michael Bradford. He came over to me, during a break, and told me that I had been in Atlantis, working with crystals, in a past life. Since then I have been researching Atlantis and have spoken to many people who are also curious and have had similar experiences.

The name Atlantis derives from atlas, the giant Greek God who is said to have supported the sky. In Greek, Atlantis means "Daughter of Atlas".

According to Plato, Atlantis was a garden of Eden with an abundance of precious minerals and crystals, particularly orichalcium which was red in colour and considered more valuable than gold. This earthly paradise was a combination of mighty mountains, fertile plains, rivers, marshes and lakes with a thriving population and many species of animals, including elephants.Wood was plentiful for the carpenters. Herbs, flowers, and fruit grew and thrived, being used both as food and for medicinal purposes. The Atlanteans constructed temples, palaces, harbours and docks. They utilized the natural white, black and red stone that were quarried from underneath the centre of the island. Some of their buildings were simple, while others were very elaborate, coated and decorated with gold, brass, tin and the red orichalcium. They built a temple covered with gold and silver pinnacles dedicated to Poseidon, the God of sea, earthquakes and horses. Its ceiling was made of ivory whilst the walls and pillars were lined with orichalcium. There were many statues of gold including the main statue, from floor to ceiling, of Poseidon himself standing in a chariot with six winged horses.

Fountains of hot and cold springs were to be found amidst suitable trees and decorations and relaxing spas. These were used separately by the kings, public and even the horses and cattle! There were many lovely gardens and places of exercise including a horse racing course.

The large and busy harbour bustled with vessels and merchants from all parts of the world.

The surrounding mountains of great height and beauty were inhabited by the wealthy villagers. The meadows, rivers and lakes provided enough food for everyone. It really was the land of plenty!

The large rectangular plain played an important part in this civilization. Straight canals, a hundred feet in width, were cut into it to transport wood and the fruits of the earth down into the city from the mountains.

The inhabitants were divided into groups with leaders who were responsible for their own particular area. For many generations, the people obeyed the laws and possessed true and great spirits, practicing gentleness and wisdom. They lived a very divine life, enjoying their gold and possessions but not abusing them. They believed in friendship and led an almost "idyllic" existence in this land of "milk and honey". Legend says there were many crystal healers, masseurs and therapists, working for the well-being of their fellowman.

A Hopi myth describes Atlantis as a land in which great cities were created and crafts flourished, but when the people became corrupt and warlike, a great flood destroyed their world. It is thought that eventually the Atlanteans did change their peaceful ways and became aggressive with each other. That is when disaster struck!

Where was Atlantis?
There are many different beliefs as to the actual location of Atlantis. A large percentage believe, as did Plato, that it is a sunken island under the Atlantic Ocean. Others believe it is located near the Greek islands of Crete or Thera (Santorini). A severe earthquake on 9th July 1956 disturbed the lower strata in a quarry on Thera and the ruins of what appeared to be an ancient civilization were found. Human bones, teeth and charred wood, together with pottery and other artistic relics were Carbon-14 dated by Professor Galanopoulous. The results pointed to this being the remains of Atlantis.

The Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands, along with smaller Atlantic islands, have also been suggested. The Azores, in common with Thera (perhaps even more so), have the look of sunken islands about them, with great black mountain peaks that rise directly from the ocean.

The Caribbean has also been suggested. In the 1920's, an American psychic Edgar Cayce predicted that Atlantis would rise again in 1968 from the ocean floor near Bimini in the Bahamas. In fact, in 1968 an airline pilot sighted an emergent temple of great antiquity only a few miles away from the predicted site. Since then there have been many more sightings and scuba divers have discovered flights of steps cut into the steep sides of the continental shelf in the same area. Great circular interrupted patterns of monolithic stones have been photographed on the ocean bottom, suggesting a sort of American "Stonehenge". Underwater pyramids, vertical walls and even a great arch have also been observed by scuba divers. Dr. Manson Valentine first discovered and explored the "Bimini Road" a sunken wall, foundation or dock, lying at a depth of about six fathoms, east of North Bimini.

It is very interesting that these ruins lie within the area known as "The Bermuda Triangle", the area between Bermuda, Eastern Florida and east of Puerto Rico. This is where many aircraft, large ships and small boats have been known to disappear without trace. Reported aspects of their disappearances involve spinning compasses, instrument malfunction, radio and radar blackout and electronic drain.

One suggested explanation is that the Atlanteans possessed laser power through gigantic crystals, as was reported by Edgar Cayce through his psychic readings, several decades before lasers became an accepted part of modern technology.

However more recently South America has become the most favoured location. In Peru, enormous stone walls on mountain-tops were a mystery to the conquering Incas and Spaniards. An incredible old city, Tiahuanaco in Bolivia, was apparently built so long ago that prehistoric animals were depicted on the local pottery. Enormous buildings, built at an elevation of 13,500 feet, with walls ten feet thick and foundation stones of 200 tons, were constructed with such exactness and knowledge of physics and astronomy that many investigators are convinced that the builders could not have been of this earth.

Geological discoveries around Tiahuanaco include salt lines in the mountains, former cornfields under the frozen snow-line of the surrounding peaks, and sea shells along the shores of lake Titicaca which indicated that the city was possibly an ocean port, forced up to its present altitude some 15,000 years ago, during volcanic activity which accompanied the melting of glaciers.

In 1965, Dr. Robert Menzies took photos from the research ship, "Anton Bruun", off the coast of Peru. Sonar recordings taken in this area indicated unusual shapes along the floor of the ocean, which otherwise seem to be a mud bottom. Photos taken at a depth of 6,000 feet show what were apparently massive upright pillars and walls, some of which seemed to have writing on them. The camera also took pictures of rocks laying scattered on their side, some in heaps as if they had toppled over, perhaps at the time that this mysterious city fell more than a mile under the sea.

With the advancement of technology, which at present is probing into outer galaxies, the time may come when they are able to turn their attention below the surface of the ocean, and discover the truth about Atlantis.

it is funny how most young people spend all their sapre time doing particaly profitable, and yet we hold it strong that we are the futur of tomorrow, but hello NWES FLASH ; what will the future hold for us when today we do nothing,

To have a stake in todays affiars is to be sure that the future of tomorow will be bright and probably we wouldn't be makiing the same makes that our fathers made. But before we can be sure of not making the same mistakes that out fat5hers made, we must know what they facen what they are facing nad put our selves in thier shoes.

It takes more than guts to have a blis world and future so will it take more than money and just talk to correct the wrongf doings of the past.

WE as youths and young people need to take issues into our owns hands coz if we dont, we'll just have outstanding issues from the past clogging our path way to the future.

There's is a need to make a Change and that time is Now.

WITH US THE REVOLUTION FOR A BETTER FUTUREE HAS JUST BEGAN.

it is funny how most young people spend all their sapre time doing particaly profitable, and yet we hold it strong that we are the futur of tomorrow, but hello NWES FLASH ; what will the future hold for us when today we do nothing,

To have a stake in todays affiars is to be sure that the future of tomorow will be bright and probably we wouldn't be makiing the same makes that our fathers made. But before we can be sure of not making the same mistakes that out fat5hers made, we must know what they facen what they are facing nad put our selves in thier shoes.

It takes more than guts to have a blis world and future so will it take more than money and just talk to correct the wrongf doings of the past.

WE as youths and young people need to take issues into our owns hands coz if we dont, we'll just have outstanding issues from the past clogging our path way to the future.

There's is a need to make a Change and that time is Now.

WITH US THE REVOLUTION FOR A BETTER FUTUREE HAS JUST BEGAN.