The Nuts and Bolts of Cian O’Brian Presco

Ninety million people all over the world consider genealogy their hobby. My nephew says I am wasting my time – at least!

https://rosamondpress.com/2018/06/06/an-angel-over-her-head/

https://rosamondpress.com/2019/07/12/willy-of-the-rock/

My brother had a son in 1967 four months after I died – and came back! Our sister, Chritine, gave birth to a daughter in 1967. Shannon Rosamond Sidle was the adult Heir named in Christine Rosamond Benton’s Will. My nephew, Cian O’Brian, is the famous ‘Garden Child’ that was rendered by the world famous artist ‘Rosamond’ who is the subject of two biographies. Julie Lynch has sold a screenplay about Cian’s aunt that she promised would be a movie four years ago. Three ghost writers have written about Christine and our family. Cian is not mentioned, once, and thus he has no interest in our family success story. what he does for a living, I don’t know. Do I, or anyone outside the O’Brian family care? You see, Cian changed his surname from Presco to O’Brian, which is the surname of the second man Patty Presco married. She used to be Patty Presco. Is she in Tom Snyder’s bad biography? No! This is Rosamond’s ex-sister-in-law!

Cian has achieved his life goal. He QUIT the godless and insane Presco Family, and became a honorary bloodkin of this dude named O’Brian. I forgot his first name. Does it matter? Is this guy a writer, or artist? I think he is a Catholic Psychologist who took pity on my nephew just after he got Patty in the sack. He had heard how fucking up my brother, is, and, want more of Patty’s pussy, he took it upon himself to rehabilitate the poor boy, employing highly specialized Catholic Philosophy on him, that Cian high suggested he use on me before I worth communication with.  But, first he has to convince me I am utterly insane and worthless, which is the Catholic Specialty for over two thousand years. Cian accuses me of “self-loathing”. He does a Saint Paul on my brain and my balls.

Seeing I have a great interest in genealogy, he goes after that, he not even considering an attribute, or vocation, event though several of my peers made money off their books. Dan Brown is one of them. Because I have no published book, then I have to be in a state of degeneracy. Good Catholics, are Good Achievers. Because my brother is a godless atheist who called his grandchildren “mud babies” because they are half Fiipeno, and therefor he wants nothing to do with them, then my nephew needs someone to practice on, someone who does not hurt him like his father does. Just – do it to Uncle John – just tie the rat in a cage on my face, and get me to turn on everyone!

From Garden Child to Catholic Android servant who is adopted by Andrew O’Brian, the Hierophant of Hyperspace who puts fellow human being through a rigorous test to see if they are worthy of Time Travel in order to escape the pesky Original Sin and Expulsion from Paradise. God is more than a possibility. The fall from grace can be achieved via a Immaculate Family Transfer.

These e-mails were exchanged in 2008. Cian wants me to focus on the things going on in my heart. However, this is worth money to the outsider Sydney Morris sold the creative family legacy to that I began at 12. My biography has yet to be published. It will include much information on Christine, which the parasites want in order to pay their mortgage.

After getting my DNA tested, I found out Cian and I have important Church people in our family tree.

https://rosamondpress.com/2019/06/08/the-wilson-leigh-line-to-bohemia/

https://rosamondpress.com/2018/06/06/an-angel-over-her-head/

To be continued.

John Presco

Copyright 2019

https://rosamondpress.com/2015/11/25/sandra-faulkner-storyteller/

https://rosamondpress.com/2018/06/06/an-angel-over-her-head/

https://rosamondpress.com/2019/07/13/the-lost-teutonic-treasure/

https://rosamondpress.com/2019/07/13/the-cave-and-cleft-of-god-2/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicentennial_Man_(film)

Cian Obrien’s birthday is 06/09/1967 and is 52 years old. Cian’s Reputation Score is 2.62. Cian Obrien lives in Sunnyvale, CA; previous city include Mountain View CA. In the past, Cian has also been known as Cian M Presco, Cian Presco, Cian M Obrien, Cian O Brien and Cian M P Obrien. Background details that you might want to know about Cian include: ethnicity is unknown, whose political affiliation is currently a registered None; and religious views are listed as unknown. As of this date, Cian is married. Other family members and associates include Richard Obrien, Patricia Obrien, Maryann Arviola, Eileen Cahill and Mallann Mall-ann. View All Details 

Cian O’Brien <cian_obrien@comcast.net> wrote:

Uncle John,

I fear your methods will not achieve their intended ends, nor do they appear to others as the communication of a stable or healthy mind.  I am reluctant to participate – in support or otherwise.  The fact of the matter is this family is very ill, and these sorts of interactions only make me want to turn away and deal with things more tangible to what is going in my life.  Further your methods and emphasis seem unhealthy and counterproductive.  Your apparent obsession with both seemingly irrelevant historically genealogy (irrelevant to others) and the skeletons that reside in the Presco families closet (a topic with varying relevance to others), have kept you isolated from others and serve to drive those you want to be close to away from you.  You seem to have put yourself in a cycle of fear of rejection – that leads to behaviors that push those you fear will reject you away from you.  You may indeed be closer to the truth of the matters you have focused enormous energies towards… but at what cost?  One might conclude that you suffer from a sort of self loathing that supports a self fulfilling prophecy, feeling unworthy of love you might be driving people away from yourself and affirming a conscious or subconscious negative self image.  The constant cycle of actual rejection also increases your expectations of rejection.  For example, you recently sent me an email asking me not to give up on you and Heather – expressing fear of rejection – when you had no grounds to have such a fear.  Then you cited something in regards to my Catholic faith and how my family is Catholic, thus giving you the right to assume that they had convinced me not to deal with you and Heather for some strange reason.  This is not healthy thinking nor fair to me, my family nor to Catholics in general.  The Catholic/Christian leanings in my life and interactions, only support the parts of me that want to reach out to you and be there as best as I can.  It its truest sense – the Christian message is one of inclusion not exclusion.  But this is not a monolog about my Religious beliefs or practices.  This is an earnest communication to you with the intent to let you know how I react to your communications and how others apparently react – and how in my perception you are hurting yourself.  And enabling others to hurt you as well.

I do not say these things out of spite, or to hurt you.  I really want to tell you that you need to focus on other things – your current methods are not serving you well.  You need to focus – focus on the now and block and tackle the issues really going on in your heart, mind and soul.  You need to study John (you the person – not the scripture) as he is today – and temporally let go of the past of others.  There is a sense in your writings that you live in a world that others do not share, are reluctant to share or are unwilling to share.  I am not as concerned with the absolute truth value of any of the possible worlds discussed here and in your mails.  I am only concerned with the truth that you are in a hurting state, and the truth that this state can be overcome.  If you want my assistance I am willing to correspond give you a phone call or what have you.  But I will not read mails about history/genealogy, nor mails about the family unless they relate directly to your current feelings or thoughts.  I will respond to mails where you speak about your feelings – struggles to understand yourself, philosophical implications and spiritual matters.  I make this restriction because I think that is where your thought energies are best spent.

Sincerely and with Love,

Cian

Birthday: 6/9/1967
Political Party: None
Ethnicity: Info Pending…
Religion: Info Pending…
Income: Info Pending…
Net Worth: Info Pending…
Relationship: Married
Kids: Info Pending…
John Ambrose <braskewitz@yahoo.com>
To:cian_obrien@comcast.net
Dec 29, 2005 at 9:58 PM
” Your apparent obsession with both seemingly irrelevant historically genealogy (irrelevant to others) and the skeletons that reside in the Presco families closet (a topic with varying relevance to others),”
I belong to several e-groups that discuss the Templars, Teutonic Knights, and the Davinci Code that was a best seller.
nor do they appear to others as the communication of a stable or healthy mind.”
What are you talking about. Give an example
“Then you cited something in regards to my Catholic faith and how my family is Catholic, thus giving you the right to assume that they had convinced me not to deal with you and Heather for some strange reason. “
Heather and I made an effort to have a relationship with you, but, after that attempt – NOTHING! Not so much as a card or a call. You did not answer my e-mails for months. Why should I not wonder why?
“One might conclude that you suffer from a sort of self loathing that supports a self fulfilling prophecy, feeling unworthy of love you might be driving people away from yourself and affirming a conscious or subconscious negative self image”
Go pin this on your Dad, if you haven’t all ready. You sound like the lie. This did not happen.
So in that setting, the contentiousness among family members, once
again able to hate each other face to face as they had not in years,
boiled to the surface. Everyone seemed furiously self-righteous
about something. If it is possible for the recently departed to have
a final glimpse, Christine would have had a sardonic chuckle at the
behavior of the characters on stage.”
 
” Your apparent obsession with both seemingly irrelevant historically genealogy (irrelevant to others) and the skeletons that reside in the Presco families closet (a topic with varying relevance to others),”
I’m done with all members of my family – and their history that is fucking INSANE. I will remove the artistic and literary legacies that are rotting there – and be gone! You Vicki, and Mark hate Art. Why? Who cares, as long as there are not Artisits around for you to hurt. They are all gone.
” It its truest sense – the Christian message is one of inclusion not exclusion.”
No it is not!
It blows my mind that you do not object to your ex-family being vilified like this in a book – when none of it is true!
“”Before the service, Vicki had taken the trouble to go through
Christine’s bedroom, putting her jewelry and intimate belongings
out of sight. As matters turned out, it did little good. For the
funeral was not long over before family members and others were
ravaging Christine’s house, taking whatever could be carted away.
The artist’s closet – a veritable mother lode – took the worst
beating. World-class spender that Christine had been, much of the
clothing had never been worn. So whatever still bore price tags was
hauled off to be exchanged for money. Jewelry disappeared, as well
as other personal belongings. Gallery employees and close friends of
the family, along with Vicki, were doing their best to staunch the
flow – the estate had not been inventories – but to little avail.”

John Ambrose <braskewitz@yahoo.com>

To:cian_obrien@comcast.net

Dec 30, 2005 at 1:49 PM

Here’s some more CREATIVE family history. We have founded cities and industry. What is your claim to fame?

  1. You changed your surname from Presco to O’Brien.
  2. You changed your religion from Muslin to Catholicism.

Excuse me while I roar with laughter!

This was a good beginning……

“In 1825, in the village of Fenagh in county Leitrim in Ireland , a gang of Catholic youths attacked the Rosamond home. The Rosamonds were staunch Protestants. James, aged 20 (born 1805) and his brother Edward, aged 15, attempted to protect their mother. A shot was fired by Edward and a youth was dead. ”

Jon

http://almonte.clal.ca/articles/rosamond_no_1_mill.html

http://almonte.clal.ca/images/pictures/parks_canada/disc_1/

http://almonte.clal.ca/articles/shoddy_mill_changed_hands.htm

http://www.almonte.com/historic/rosamond_mill_advertisement.html

http://www.textilemuseum.mississippimills.com/

http://www.cdli.ca/monuments/on/volunteer.htm

THE
ROSAMOND WOOLLEN COMPANY
OF ALMONTE:
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
IN A RURAL SETTING

By Alex Hughes

Excerpt from a talk given to the LCGS on Oct 2, 1996. Published in the LCGS newsletter, October, 1996.

In 1825, in the village of Fenagh in county Leitrim in Ireland , a gang of Catholic youths attacked the Rosamond home. The Rosamonds were staunch Protestants. James, aged 20 (born 1805) and his brother Edward, aged 15, attempted to protect their mother. A shot was fired by Edward and a youth was dead. The boys fled to Canada . James went to Merrickville where he worked for James Merrick as a weaver. Edward, still fearing arrest, worked his way eventually to Memphis , Tennessee .

James Rosamond worked for James Merrick for five years and he came to Carleton Place in 1825. We know that by 1830 he was operating a sawmill, an oat mill and a carding and a fulling mill in Carleton Place on one side of the Mississippi River and a lumber mill on the other side of the river.

In 1831 he married Margaret Wilson who was born in Scotland . James and Margaret were to have five children, all born in Carleton Place : Bennett, Mary Ann (known as Marion, who later married Andrew Bell, their son was James McIntosh Bell ), Rosalind, William and James. [See more on Andrew Bell & Mary Ann in Carol Bennett McCuaig’s article A LOVE STORY].

In the 1830’s, James built a very fine stone home on Bell Street in Carleton Place , close to St. James’ Church where he was a church warden for fifteen years. It was a time of great expansion. No one worried about pension funds, or the government looking after your, that was your responsibility. James burst upon the scene and started many businesses, all of which seem to have been successful.

James, in what was to prove to be a landmark decision, decided to turn his fulling and carding mill into a woolen factory. In 1864 he advertised that he had purchased spinning and weaving machinery which he had bought from firms in Toronto , Ogdensburgh and Watertown , New York . By 1846 he was in operation and was selling “Plain Cloth either grey or dyed, Cashmere , Satinett, Flannel, all wool or cotton and wool, Blankets, etc.” James had started with three narrow looms, one spindle jack of one hundred and twenty spindles and one bolting roll. He expanded as best as he could in Carleton Place but the limiting factor was the amount of water power to make everything run. He ran his operation in Carleton Place for another ten years, but by 1857 his water rights had lapsed and he erected a stone mill in Almonte on the site of the Ramsay Woolen Cloth Manufacturing Company which had been destroyed by fire.

This building, or part of it, still stands at the foot of Mill Street and it was then known as the Victoria Woollen Mill. (Almonte was then called Victoriaville ). This mill was a two set mill, that is it contained two sets of carding equipment and a requisite number of finishing machines. James and his wife Margaret built a house called “The Croft” on what is now the grounds of “Greystone House”. (Greystone House being built by his son James Rosamond and his wife Lilla).

James Rosamond’s mills prospered and his sons Bennett, William and James carried on the tradition, and in 1866 started building the mill which is now Millfall Condominiums. When this mill was up and running, the population of Almonte had swelled to some 4000. With the death of Alex Rosamond in 1916 at Courcelett, the mills went into decline. Alex’s brother Archie carried on but did not have the necessary business acumen. Alex’s widow, Mary Rosamond, left Almonte in 1948 and the mills were sold in 1952. A great tradition ended.

Almonte Gazette January 18 and 25, 1995

From: John Ambrose [mailto:braskewitz@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 3:53 AM
To: Holly Hunt; Heather Hanson; Michael Dundon; Shamus Dundon; Shannon; Cian O’Brien; patrice@vom.com
Subject: Open Examination by Family

Shamus;

 

Here is you and your mother’s chance to clear your good name in regards to one crime, the ravaging of Christine’s house by  “family members and others”.

 

The chances that I will ever have a relationship with my daughter and grandson again, are very slim. Heather told me she cut off all contact with me three years ago because I was accusatory. She recently told me this is why she did not betray me by continuing a secret and close bond with Vicki who has to be the source of these accusation that appeared in Christine’s biography.

 

“So in that setting, the contentiousness among family members, once
again able to hate each other face to face as they had not in years,
boiled to the surface. Everyone seemed furiously self-righteous
about something. If it is possible for the recently departed to have
a final glimpse, Christine would have had a sardonic chuckle at the
behavior of the characters on stage.”

 

Go get your mother, Shamus. If you’re innocent of any wrong doing, best prove that by addressing these other crimes that were brought ot the public’s attention when Snyder’s biography was published. I did not rehash old stuff. The executor was pushing for a movie to be made that would have involved more investigations into what happened, would it not? So, get her here, the one who knows it all  Let’s identify these “family members and others”. I mean if Vicki can continue to give evidence to my seventeen year old daughter behind my back, why not in front of the family. Let’s get it on – in the open!

 

Jon

 

“Before the service, Vicki had taken the trouble to go through
Christine’s bedroom, putting her jewelry and intimate belongings
out of sight. As matters turned out, it did little good. For the
funeral was not long over before family members and others were
ravaging Christine’s house, taking whatever could be carted away.
The artist’s closet – a veritable mother lode – took the worst
beating. World-class spender that Christine had been, much of the
clothing had never been worn. So whatever still bore price tags was
hauled off to be exchanged for money. Jewelry disappeared, as well
as other personal belongings. Gallery employees and close friends of
the family, along with Vicki, were doing their best to staunch the
flow – the estate had not been inventories – but to little avail.”

 

Dear Heather;

 

I just talked to my aunt Lillian on the phone and she told me you were going to name my grandchild “Lilly Rose”. I asked her who she heard that from, and she said Vicki “of course”.

 

In your e-mail you say I am going to have a “grandson” Did you have a test to determine the sex of this un-born child? If so, then you must have come up with “Lilly Rose” before the test, and thus Vicki and Lillian knew I was going to be a grandfather months before I did. Lillian says she was flattered you were going to name this child after her, and then added she had never met you. Is this true?

 

Why are you doing this? Why are you betraying your father? What is it you think I have done to you that you feel justified – to not only ostracize me from your family –  but my family? Who are you doing this for, yourself, or your mother? What is it I did to your mother where I deserve this insult and humiliation? Do realize how powerless this renders me in my family dynamics,? Your mother does – for sure!

 

Your mother has been using you to get near a famous dead artist, and thus get power for her. Your mother used you from the day you were born to hold power over her abusive husband she returned to – because she wanted to go back to him. She never told me she was pregnant, or the child she born was mine. She wrote in a e-mail she knew your were my child the day you were born. Not able to admit that she put you in arms of a violent convicted criminal who spent time in San Quinton, and that she made a mistake, she holds a secret tribunal with members of my family, and outsiders, in order to convict me of telling lies about Shamus. Shamus is a fucking liar! He took my sister from me, my daughter from me, and now my grandchild – with the help of your mother! They have turned you into my Mordred, a evil child who has no heart about destroying her father. Your mother, and my family, have turned you into the monster they are.

 

To go around any father to attache yourself to that man’s family, is as vicious and parasitical an attachment I have ever heard of.

 

Lillian also told me Sandra Faulkner did not interview Christine before she died, and snubbled Lillian at a gallery reception when Stacey took over. Stacey lied to the world when she anounced on Drew’s webpage that Christine chose Faulkner to write her biography, she seeing her photograph in ‘Love Match’. I am contacting Right-wing polititicans who will be pleased to learn of this fraud around this novel, a lesbian novel, especially when they get YOU on the witness stand to hear exactly what Ms, Pierrot has been telling you – and your mother – who will not get away with this evil transferance. Are you a good liar too, or just a good actress?

 

To use an un-born child to empower yourself an your mother is as low as you can go as a woman. I will not rest until I expose your mother’s abuse which is the same as Rosemary’s abuse. This abuse of living ficariously through your children, and un-born children is the topic of Alice Miller’s ‘Drama of the Gifted Child’. Read it and free yourself of these parasites.

 

I am sending a copy of this to Shannon, who is going to make sure all the parasties are shooed off the corpse of her mother – like flies!

Davinci Code & Rose Line
Yahoo/Sent
  • John Ambrose <braskewitz@yahoo.com>
    To:cian_obrien@comcast.net,holly@huntcosmeceuticals.com,hthr_hanson@yahoo.com.,homelesshawaiian@yahoo.com,rzmond@aol.com
    Apr 14, 2006 at 10:21 AM
    After seeking out Cian, and bringing him back into the fold, he went behind my back and employed me and my daughter in his agendas, one being to get his father to acknowledge his two grandsons. He then had the nerve to tell me my interest in heredity and genealogy is deluded, the quest of an isolated insane person. He admitted to me he gave this opinion to Heather and her mother when he invited them to his home – behind my back.
    Here is one of several e-groups I belong to that discuss the Templars, a Grail Bloodline from Jesus and Mary that has been titled “roseline” that refers to Roslyn chapel built by the Sinclair family. This family and chapel play a role in the movie made by Ron Howard that Catholic leaders claim is deluded fiction. Never the less, millions will be made from the movie the Davinci Code, and from the books that will come out after this movie is released. One of them may be my book I have been authoring for nine years that I have discussed in these groups, and discussed with Heather and Patrice when I first met them. That they went to those who were writing a rival biography, and at the same time gather vital family information about me, suggests they are writing a secret book. Heather told me she thinks my study is the result of mental illness. Whatever, when one steps back and beholds the big picture, this IS a fight over my rosy heritage and bloodline, even the story of Rosamond the ‘Rose of the World’.
    Here are some of the conversations I have had with other researchers, and scholars. Millions are interested in this “roseline”. Cian’s attempt to isolate me has backfired, and his devious slander, and dark ambitions WILL be incoorporated into my novel – along with Patrice’s dark and evil design.
    She and her daughter, nor my grandsom will be employed by her in her powerplay to own my Rosy Story.
    Jon Presco
    From: “Shawn Douglas Sinclair” <sofiatemplar@…>
    Date: Sun Mar 19, 2006  9:57 am
    Subject: Jesus and Mary
    With
     Easter fast approaching us I would like the families thought as
    to the question of "do we descend from Christ or not".All have
    researched this and have read page's and page's of other people's
    thought.What do you say cousin Sinclair's?
    Shawn Douglas
    Here we see Mel the Roseneck in the robes of a Knight Templar. Is
    that bearded chap, Ian Sincliar?
     
    http://www.clansinclairsc.org/smotj.htm
     
    Some Sinclairs claim Henry Sinclair came to America before Columbus .
    Did anyone stay, a liniage perhaps that awaited the holy mother
    vessel bloodline to return so they could have a reunion on this Holy
    Roseneck Ground?
     
    http://www.sciway.net/maps/cnty/union.html
    http://sinclair.quarterman.org/us-sc.html
     
    "SINCLAIR, John W. spouse Rosamond S born 1906 died 1983      -
    Veterans Flag
    SINCLAIR, Rosamond S spouse John W. born 1911 died 1993 "
     
     
    http://www.angelfire.com/folk/scsites/browns_creek_area.htm
    http://sinclair.quarterman.org/ca-ns.html
    http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/sc/greenville/church/mtncreek12.jpg
    http://www.clansinclairsc.org/melclan.htm
    http://www.clansinclairsc.org/descendants_of_john_sinclair.htm
    http://www.clansinclairsc.org/melclan.htm
    http://www.clansinclairsc.org/DescendJohnNotes.htm
    http://www.clansinclairsc.org/sinclairline.htm
    http://www.clansinclairsc.org/records.htm
    http://www.clansinclairsc.org/smotj.htm
    http://www.sciway.net/maps/cnty/union.html
    http://sinclair.quarterman.org/us-sc.html
     
     
    http://www.angelfire.com/folk/scsites/browns_creek_area.htm
    http://sinclair.quarterman.org/ca-ns.html
     
    In Medieval times the Virgin Mary, mother of Jesus, was known as
    Santa Maria della Rosa, and according to a 19th century antiquary,
    Godfrey Higgins, in his magnum opus Anacalypsis Vol. II,
    1836: "Jesus was called the Rose - the rose of Sharon". This may
    suggest that Jesus was of a rose lineage, hence a possible
    genealogical connection with the Clan St. Clair of Roslin -
    Roseline? It is interesting to note from the signature of Sir
    William Sinclair, a former Earl of Rosslyn, that he signed his
     name
    St. Clair of Roselin. Sir William Sinclair (St. Clair) was referred
    to as the "last of the Roslins" and his death in 1778
    terminated "the lordly line of high St. Clair." Furthermore, ancient
    Scottish charters were witnessed by a certain Roger de Roselyn (my
    italics).
    >    Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 02:53:21 -0000
    > >    From: "rpcv.geo" <thesnowleopard@...>
    > > Subject: Re: Paula Stiles, Kate Clinton and Rosslyn Fantasies
    >  
    >  
    > > This sounds like an attempt to show that William of St Clair had
    no
    > > connection to the Temple in 1430 by claiming that his ancestors
    had
    > > a negative connection to the Temple in
     1309.
    >  
    > I hate to agree with Paul Smith (I REALLY, really do) but he's
    dead on
    > here. Paula, just look at what you wrote above. The only people
    that had
    > even the most obscure connection to the Templars in 1430 were the
    Knights
    > of Christ in Portugal . And even they (obviously) no longer had any
    former
    > Templars in their ranks by 1430.\
     
    Bill, get a grip and reread my post. I said that Paul needed to
    decide which he wanted--a connection between the Sinclairs and the
    Templars or not. Because he was basing his claim that there was no
    connection on documentation of a negative connection. So, obviously,
    there *was* a connection: that the Sinclairs in the early fourteenth
    century testified against the Temple (which makes sense as they were
    living just down the road from a Templar preceptory; nothing
    sinister about that). Now, does this argue against Sinclair trying
    to make a connection between himself and the Templars nearly a
    century and a half later? Well...not really, because we don't have
    any evidence in the period between those two events.
     
    So, what Paul is arguing (that there is no connection between
    Sinclair and the Templars) remains unproven. All we can say is that
    there is no evidence of such a connection, which is not the same
    thing as saying that there is no connection. Someday, once we get a
    better idea of what Sinclair was thinking (maybe), they may become
    the same thing, but they are not the same thing
     right now. It's too
    dangerous to argue from negative evidence when there is so little of
    it. Right now, we know that the Sinclairs testified against their
    neighbors the Templars during the Trial and that over a century
    later, one of the Sinclairs' descendants built a chapel a few miles
    away from one of the Temple 's former preceptories. Paul is having
     no
    success in creating a direct cause and effect between those two
    events and neither are you.
     
     
    > Prior to 1982, no Sinclair ever made any claim regarding a Sinclair
    > connection to the Templars. Furthermore, no writing prior to 1982
    ever
    > claimed a link between Roslyn Chapel and the Temple . What makes
    this such
    > an easy proof is that the Sinclairs were definitely writing about
    > themselves prior to 1982. They have been shameless self-promoters
    ever
    > since they tried to claim hereditary hegemony over Freemasonry in
    the
    > 18th century. There are oodles of Sinclair writings to examine. In
    NONE
    > OF THEM is there the least reference to the Knights Templar--until
    after
    >
     1982.
     
    Again, this is arguing from negative evidence. Worse, it's arguing
    from modern negative evidence to try to read the mind of someone who
    lived nearly six centuries ago.
     
    >  
    > Paula, you are going down the wrong path here. William St. Clair
    had no
    > connection to the Templars. The supposed connection is, quite
    simply,
    > another Sinclair lie.
     
    See above. Arguing a negative is risky because it's so bloody hard
    to prove. And you always risk the possibility that some new piece of
    evidence will turn up that proves you wrong. Is it probable that
    there is no direct connection because the Sinclairs, who were as
    shameless in their self-promotion as any other Renaissance Scottish
    lords, never mentioned such a connection until modern times (that we
    know of)
     at a moment when it was convenient to them? Sure. Is that
    conclusive evidence? Unfortunately, no. It's like arguing that
    paranoid schizophrenics' enemies are always imaginary. Except that
    I've heard a first-hand story or two from psych professionals about
    patients who were admitted with that diagnosis and turned out to be
    exactly what they said they were. "Probably" and "definitely"
     don't
    conflate here.
     
     
    No way. Templars, for that matter, were not the only
    > knights wearing crosses on their garments.
     
    Not initially (it originally being a symbol from the
     First Crusade),
    but it did become their order's official symbol after the 1140s, by
    papal decree. This appears to have cut down quite a bit on its use
    elsewhere, since the Templars were rather ferocious in going after
    people who wore their uniform and behaved badly (for example, see
    regulation 68 of the Rule). It tarnished their reputation.
     
    Your main problem here seems to be that you are trying to argue two
    different things as the same thing: 1. that there was no connection
    between Sinclair and the Templars and 2. that people did not seek a
    connection between themselves and the Temple after the Temple 's
    suppression. The problem is that you and Paul are already claiming a
    connection, but it is so distant and brief that its influence on the
    Sinclair who built Rosslyn Chapel seems faint, if it existed at all.
     
    As far as 2. is concerned, due to the popularity of chivalric orders
    in the 14th and 15th centuries and the confusion surrounding the
    disposition of the Order's property and members (the Hospitallers
    did not get actual possession of the property until 1318), lay
    people did continue to claim connections to the Temple well into the
    16th century (and after the early 18th century, but those were
    different groups and for different reasons). A document in 15th
    century Huesca in northeastern Spain , for example, refers to the
    Hospitallers as "Templars". The Knights of Christ in Portugal were
    also sometimes referred to as "Templars" well into the 16th century.
     
    These were both groups who absorbed former members of the
     Temple
    (the Knights of Christ being, in fact, a well-known example of a
    direct successor order to the Temple , like the Knights of Montesa in
    the Crown of Aragon) and you only need to read Alan Forey's recent
    study on the fall of the Temple in the Crown of Aragon or the very
    first page of Malcolm Barber's The New Knighthood to find instances
    of Templars who did not absorb well into their new situations and
    created problems of identity within the groups they were forced to
    join and that these issues continued into the 1330s (by which time,
    those Templars had all apparently died off). That's a primary
    influence for which we have plain documentation. The secondary
     (let
    alone tertiary) influences over the next two centuries of this
    transfer of property, brethren and tradition are what are
    controversial. We won't get into the documentation about those
    Templars who were busted for getting married and trying to lead a
    secular life once the matter of their order's disposition was
    settled or those who fled arrest.
     
    In terms of the Templar habit, some chivalric groups wore costumes
    that were variations on the Templar theme in the 14th and 15th
    centuries. It seems disingenuous to claim that after nearly two
    centuries of this habit being strongly associated with the Temple ,
    nobody would notice some kind of implied connection to the Order.
     
    Does this mean there was a true connection? No. History is rife with
    instances of people claiming fictional, or at least iffy, historical
    associations to enhance their current reputation. Isn't HBHG a
    classic example of that? But it still does not answer the
     question
    of whether or not the Sinclair who built Rosslyn was influenced by
    these contemporary attempted associations with the Temple and trying
    to make his own claims in that respect. However, *if* he was a
    member of a chivalric order, the possibility that he was goes up.
    This does not suggest that Sinclair was a Templar or had
     any
    connection with the actual order, only that it's possible he was
    doing much the same thing that his descendants are doing now.
     
    >  
    > > Myself, I'm highly skeptical that St Clair had the Templars
    directly
    > > in mind (or any direct connection, positive or negative) when
    > > building Rosslyn Chapel. Karen Ralls in "The Templars and the
    Grail:
    > > Knights of the Quest" asserts that he was a member of the Order
    of
    > > the Golden Fleece and the Order of Santiago (pretty standard
    > > organizations for a fifteenth century Prince of Orkney to have
    > > joined).
    >  
    > It should be noted here that Karen Ralls is a member of SMOTJ. I
    don't
    > know if she believes in the myth of the Larmenius Charter. Some
    members
    > still adamantly claim they are the continuation of the original
    Order,
    > despite the disclaimers on the SMOTJ web site. My guess is that
    when
    > their feet are put to the fire, SMOTJ members will admit the myth.
    But
    > they don't spend a lot of time spreading that around. All their
    members
    > are suspect in their historical research, IMHO.
     
    This would be why I noted her name and the name of the book and then
    said "asserts", no? I'm not making a judgement either way, just
    noting that it is a current claim/theory and that from a historical
    point of view, it is possible that he was a member of those
    chivalric orders. That doesn't mean that he was. I did notice that
    Ralls was doing a bait and switch with the sources in that section
    that hides the fact that she is not citing primary sources there,
    but a secondary source by R. Brydon called "Rosslyn: A History
     of
    the Guilds, the Masons and the Rosy Cross" published in 1994 with
    the Rosslyn Chapel Trust.
     
    My point, though, was that the supposedly "Templaresque" aspects of
    Rosslyn Chapel could as easily be attributed to influences from
    contemporary chivalric orders as from the
     no-longer-contemporary
    Templars, probably more easily. Sinclair would not have needed to be
    a member of these orders to know about the symbols they used. They
    weren't exactly private.
     
    >  
    > C'mon, Paula. That is no connection at all.
     
    See above. We're talking about six degrees of separation, here.
    You're trying to argue a total lack of connection which is
    unrealistic in the relatively small cultural (and genetic) milieu of
    the late Middle Ages, specifically, the even smaller culture of the
    nobility. I'm saying that's unfeasible.
     
     
      The Hospital also took in
    > Templars, but that was waaaay before William Sinclair built the
    > chapel--just as you point out. As for the Golden Fleece, I did not
    know
    > that they were
     a monastic order, and still don't.
     
    Please. I never said that the Golden Fleece was a military order. It
    was a chivalric order. Are you sure that *you* know the difference?
     
    A monastic order is a church order that follows a church-approved
    rule (most live in seclusion from the world, but orders
     like the
    friars do not).
     
    A military order is a monastic order where the members' main purpose
    is military in nature: usually the defense of a specific nature and
    involvement in a specific contest with a specific group of non-
    Christians (Muslims, pagans, etc.).
     
    A chivalric order is a group of knights who follow certain precepts
    of behavior that have little to do with a monastic order. They are
    secular laypeople and not part of the church hierarchy, though they
    often have a patron saint and may model themselves on a known
    military order. A chivalric order is always part-time and makes
     no
    direct attempts to control the behavior of its members, let alone
    expect them to take the monastic triple vow of poverty, chastity and
    obedience. You can also quit a chivalric order; you cannot quit any
    kind of monastic order.
     
    There were four international military orders
     (Templars,
    Hospitallers, Teutonic Knights and Knights of St Lazarus) and
    numerous local military orders ( Santiago , Calatrava, Knights of
    Christ, Montesa, Swordbrethren of Livonia , etc.). People often
    confuse military orders with chivalric orders because during and
    following the Reformation,
     several military orders degenerated into
    chivalric orders (Hospitallers) or otherwise secular groups
    (Teutonic Knights). However, the two were never the same thing.
     
     
      There were many
    > knightly orders created to place honors onto the friends of
     the
    crown in
    > many countries. There is no Templar influence there.
     
    See above. Again, there is certainly an influence if you look at it
    from the point of view of people trying to associate themselves with
    a crusading military order that was safely past tense. As the
     first
    military order, the Templars influenced by example the making of
    every other military order (or conversion to a military order like
    the Hospitallers) that came after them and the military orders
    influenced the origins and creations of the later chivalric orders.
    So, in that general sense, those orders would not have existed
    without the Temple . I'd call that Templar influence.
     
    Now, if you're looking for direct influence, as I said, the picture
    gets too fuzzy to read after the 1330s, at least from what we have
    right now. But to argue that the Templars had no influence on later
    orders like the Golden Fleece is a bit like saying that
     Charlemagne
    had no effect whatsoever on the formation of the Kingdom of France .
     
     
      For that matter, we
    > have no reason to believe that William Sinclair had anything to do
    with
    > the design of the chapel. When history tells us that some nobleman
    > "built" a chapel, it means that he paid for it and commissioned
    > it--nothing more. I'm not saying he didn't make design decisions,
    only
    > that we have no reason to believe that he did.
     
    This strikes me as a wee bit unlikely. At the very least, he and his
    descendants had the final veto vote due to to the fact that Sinclair
    commissioned, bought and paid for the chapel. I highly doubt that
    anything went in there that the Sinclairs did not, at the very
    least, approve. It was the family chapel and the sheer amount of
    decoration indicates a certain obsessiveness over the final product
    by its ultimate owners. After all, it was supposed to typify what
    *they* saw as the perfect chapel. I really can't see the masons who
    did the actual construction going to that much trouble without
    knowing for a fact that what they put in would stay in. It goes
    against human nature to go to that much trouble
     for something in
    which you have no personal stake (especially if it meant you might
    get fired or worse, not paid for what you'd already done). It would
    require concrete proof of influences other than Sinclair and those
    of his descendants who completed the construction, I think, to make
    those outside influences likely.
     
     
    >  
    > Once again, Paula, I think you are mixing apples and oranges. What
    you
    > seem to be saying is that, since there is a connection between
    William
    > Sinclair, the Templars, and Roslyn, then the Green Men must have
    some
    > Templar significance.
     
    Oy vey. You really are looking for things that aren't there today,
    aren't you? Green men are a common feature in medieval churches all
    over
     Britain --I've *seen* them. They were popular in Sinclair's
    time; that's probably why he put them in there. What I *said* was
    that they are on-topic for this list because we find them in Rosslyn
    Chapel. Rosslyn Chapel is on-topic for this list because of its
    legendary (that means, "not proven", Bill) connections to the
    Templars. Therefore, *any* decoration inside the chapel is
     also on-
    topic. That does not mean that every (or even any) bit of decoration
    inside the chapel has any connection the Templars, themselves, just
    that discussion of certain themes of decorations inside the chapel
    are on-topic, regardless of whether they are directly connected to
    the historical Templars or not. Let's face it: if we only stuck to
    actual historical facts about the Templars, as opposed to their
    posthumous legends, this list would be both a lot smaller and a lot
    quieter.
     
     
    >  
    > Bill Arney
    >  
     
    Paula Stiles
     
    “Jon Presco” <montrose44@comcast.net>
    Date: Mon Apr 3, 2006  10:44 pm
    Subject: Subject: Re: Paula Stiles, Kate Clinton and Rosslyn Fantasies
    drjndee@... wrote:
    >  
    > Thanks Bill:
    >  
    > I've said it a million times. After Baigent, Leigh and
    Lincoln's "Holy Blood
    > - Holy Grail" came out in 1982, everyone just put their brains
    on "hold" and
    > the book stores have exploded with more fiction passing itself off
    as
     history."
     
    After watching Baigent promote his 'Jesus Papers' on T.V., I
    understood how he was working the mojo. It's a Ouija board thing,
    combined with a séance. The come on is.....
     
    "The Holy Ghost of Jesus is trying to get the truth to you! But,
    once again, the Catholic church does not want you to own the truth,
    because, you can't handle the truth. I and Jesus believe you can!
    Only through me will the truth alas arrive, for I am the medium.
    Together we will find a way."
     
    Historically, the Christian church employs the exact same method, in
    regards to the conversion of Saint Paul whom Jesus speaks to from
    beyond the grave - and no one else!
     
    The whole sponge on a stick, thing, plays into my hands, as I have
    been promoting a sound theory that this was used to break the
    Nazarite vow Jesus took, more then likely
     when he met John, they
    both in their mother's wombs, and now both filled with the Holy
    Spirit. It was prophesiezed John would be a Nazarite while in his
    mothers womb, till the moment of his death.  When Jesus gives up the
    Holy Spirit, DEAD saints rise from their tombs and go into Jerusalem
    and talk to LIVING
     people. This is altered later by saying this
    happened AFTER Jesus's resurrection, but, the centurion is a witness
    to this happening there and then.
     
    Baigent did not cover the raising of the dead in his revelation, and
    claims ONLY Jesus overcomes DEATH via a trick. Was this raising of
    dead saints a
     cheap trick too? No, it is the fulfilling of Jewish
    PROPHECY, and no one wants to know that. Most folk in the West want
    to play the game that began with the lie the Jewish priests did not
    want the truth to get to the Gentiles, and thus they murdered Jesus,
    their God's son they couldn't recognize. But, Gentiles have had no
    problem. Gee, I wonder why! Baigent has proven "why".
     
    Jon Presco
     
     
    27:45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land
    unto the ninth hour.
    27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice,
    saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God,
    why hast thou forsaken me?
    27:47 Some of them that stood there, when they heard that, said,
    This man calleth for Elias.
    27:48 And straightway one of them ran, and took a spunge, and filled
    it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to
     drink.
    27:49 The rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to
    save him.
    27:50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up
    the ghost.
    27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the
    top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks
     rent;
             BOM: 4 Nephi 30
     
    27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints
    which slept arose,
     
    (27:52-53) When Jesus died, "the graves were opened; and many bodies
    of the saints" arose. But they stayed in their graves until Jesus
    rose from the dead, when they began to walk around, appearing to
    many in Jerusalem .
    Is death final?
     
    27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went
    into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
    27:54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching
    Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they
    feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.
     
    > Now, with people like Dan Brown cashing in on all this nonsense,
    it only gets
    > worse.
    >  
    > The problem is that nowadays too many people don't have the
    educational
    > backgrounds to be able to tell the sh*# from the shinola.
    >  
    > There are too many people buying their reading material at grocery
    stores.
    >  
    > S & F,
    >  
    > Pete Normand
    >  
    >  
    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Kate wrote:
     
    "One might allow family background counted for much in ages past in
    terms of nobiliary requirements or the fact one was typically born
    essentially in
     the Medieval-Renaissance periods into a guild of the
    working class, that is, insofar as establishing one's candidacy
    initially, or the tendency for families or institutions to maintain
    certain long held traditions out of respect or pride, say. Family
    background alone, however, simply did not cut it with this corps."
     
    Some have claimed the Knight Templars were at the battle of the
    Golden Spurs and helped the weaver's guilds slaughter the flower of
    French chivalry that was sent to Flanders by King Philip 1V of
    France who would later slaughter Knight Templars. These Flemish
    craftsmen and businessmen more then likely learned military skills
    while on Crusade. Many Dutch
     Crusaders would migrate to Prussia and
    help the Teutonic Knights.
     
    I have found what ammounts to a Family Grail that blonged to Fritz
    Rosenmund. Members of the shoemakers guild of Basel were allowed to
    drink from the "Rosenmund-Becher" that belonged to Fritz after
     they
    were a member for fourty years.
     
    After the victory of the Golden Spurs the guilds began to break away
    from church rule and create what has be called true capitalism.
     
    jon
     
    http://www.rougeknights.blogspot.com/
     
    http://www.gerbernzunft.ch/index.php?id=19
     
    Our Guild Treasure
     
    Our
     guild treasure consists of several articles which are taken out
    again and again for different ceremonies. During the year these
    articles are in the Obhut our historical museum which provides
    maintain and of the following articles:
     
    Small lion
    Large lions
    Coat of arms board
    Coat of arms book
    Rosenmund cup
    Master chain
    Banner

About Royal Rosamond Press

I am an artist, a writer, and a theologian.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.