Templars & Freemasons

=== The
d’Aumont Legend: ===
This legend
tells that Pierre d’Aumont, the

Preceptor of Auvergne, together with a number of knights fled from France
to Scotland disguised as operative masons. On their arrival they created a new
order to preserve the ancient traditions of their soon to be defunct Order. This
new order, adopted the name Franc Maçons – Franc (meaning French and Free)
and Maçons in homage to their disguise. Thus, the Franc Maçons became known as
the free Masons when the new order later travelled to England. 17 Disregarding
for a moment the silly notion presented in

the theory as to the etymology of the
term Freemasons, let us unravel the story of d’Aumont, who the theory claims
was Preceptor of Auvergne. While it is true that the Preceptor of Auvergne fled
the arrests of 13 October 1307, his name was certainly not Pierre d’Aumont;
rather, it was Imbert Blanke. Sometime after crossing into England, Blanke was
arrested and later went on to play a role in the Templar trials of that country
by defending his English Brethren. 18 Although Blanke was accompanied by a
number of brethren, the number of Templars that accompanied his mythical
counterpart Pierre d’Aumont is suspiciously Masonic. For in addition to
d’Aumont, we find two commanders and five knights. 19 On first reading, this
arrangement may not seem like anything particularly noteworthy; however, the
following phrase familiar to Freemasons may make things a little clearer:

‘Three rule a lodge, five hold a lodge and seven

or more make it perfect.’

In this sense, d’Aumont and the two commanders play a parallel in the
myth to the Master and his two wardens, while the five knights represent the
five masons who hold a lodge. Combined, the group form the seven or more who
make it perfect. While this theory could easily be used to provide evidence of a
Templar Freemason connection, it is my belief that the reverse is true and that
von Hund’s d’Aumont legend was carefully crafted to bear a Masonic
symbolism. Although the above scenario is speculation on the part of the author,
it is not out of the realm of possibilities, for later Masonic traditions
connected Masonic symbolism to Templar themes.

In his short work *The Templar Orders in Freemasonry*, Arthur Edward
Waite spoke of a ritualhe had discovered called Le Chevalier du Temple,'**which he believed had been created sometimebetween 1768 and 1789. 20**
Although the high degreesin Freemasonry were certainly in operation by
thistime, the Chevalier du Temple operated within thethree Craft
degrees. What is particularly unique aboutthis ritual is that it does
not paint a Templarperpetuation theory; rather, a number of surviving'**knights assembled and created Freemasonry topreserve the chivalry**
that had previously existed intheir persecuted Order. The traditional
history of theOrder claimed that the originators of the secretcombine
required a period of seven years from itsmembers to ensure that they
were worthy. Threewere spent as Apprentices, two as Fellowcraft and the'**final two as Master Masons. The obligation was takenin front of a**
black tomb representing that of themartyred de Molay. The lessons of the
first degreerelated to the Canons of the Holy Sepulchre, thesecond
to the Hospitallers of St John. The thirddegree, as would be expected,
referred to theTemplars, but particularly to the martyrdom of Jacques de
Molay, who is the substitute for HiramAbif. In the final degree, the
part of the three ruffiansis replaced with Clement V, Philip IV and the
Prior ofMontfaucon, the latter of whom had betrayed the Order to the
king. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the Master Mason Degree was the
dual representation of the letters J.B.M., whichFreemasons will
recognise as the initials of the twopillars and the Master’s word.
However, in the ritualsof the Chevalier du Temple, the letters stood for
the initials of Jacques Burgundus Molay. 21'

Sadly, there is little information on this interesting Templar twist on
the Craft rituals outside of the information provided by Waite. Given its late
date, it certainly could not have been among the earliest and the lack of
information on the Order would seem to indicate that its traditional history
never gained the popularity of the d’Aumont legend.

It was Mackey’s belief that the Templar Freemason theories originated
with Ramsay’s Oration, which, in turn, gave rise to the d’Aumont theory of
Templar perpetuation. Let us then close this brief interlude on some of those
theories with the words of Mackey on the matter:

‘The Chevalier Ramsay was the real author of the doctrine of the
Templar origin of Freemasonry, and to him we are really indebted (if the debt
have any value) for the D’Aumont legend. The source whence it sprang is
tolerably satisfactory evidence of its fictitious character.

The inventive genius of Ramsay, as exhibited in the fabrications of high
degrees and Masonic legends, is well known. Nor, unfortunately for his
reputation, can it be doubted that in the composition of his legends he cared
but little for the support of history. If his genius, his learning, and his zeal
had been consecrated, not to the formation of new Masonic systems, but to a
profound investigation of the true origin of the Institution, viewed only from
an authentic historical point, it is impossible to say what incalculable benefit
would have been delved from his researches. The unproductive desert, which for
three-fourths of a century spread over the continent, bearing no fruit except
fanciful theories, absurd systems, and unnecessary degrees, would have been
occupied in all probability by a race of Masonic scholars whose researches would
have been directed to the creation of a genuine history, and much of the labours
of our modern iconoclasts would have been spared.

‘The Masonic scholars of that long period, which began with Ramsay and
has hardly yet wholly terminated, assumed for the most part rather the role of
poets than of historians. They did not remember the wise saying of Cervantes
that the poet may say or sing, not as things have been, but as they ought to
have been, while the historian must write of them as they really were, and not
as he thinks they ought to have been. And hence we have a mass of traditional
rubbish, in which there is a great deal of falsehood with very little truth.

‘Of this rubbish is the Legend of Peter d’Aumont and his
resuscitation of the Order of Knights Templars in Scotland. Without a particle
of historical evidence for its support, it has nevertheless exerted a powerful
influence on the Masonic organisation of even the present day. We find its
effects looming out in the most important rites and giving a Templar form to
many of the high degrees. And it cannot be doubted that the incorporation of
Templarism into the modern Masonic system is mainly to be attributed to ideas
suggested by this D’Aumont legend.’

## References:

-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights\_Templar\_%28Freemasonry%29

-http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/templars/knights\_templars02.htm

-http://science.howstuffworks.com/dictionary/awards-organizations/freemason1.htm

-http://www.knightstemplarfreemasonry.com/freemasonry\_knights\_templar.htm

-http://www.masonicinfo.com/templars.htm

-http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/masonic-legends.html