The Book of Hiram by Knight and Lomas.
Its subtitle is "Unlocking the secrets of the Hiram Key". If you enjoyed "The Hiram Key", you will probably like this one too as it is like a further exploration of the same grounds.

What is interesting is that some of the rituals referenced by Knight and Lomas in this book have been made available to all researchers online.

You can find the resource (The Web of Hiram) here: [url]http://www.bradford.ac.uk/webofhiram[/url]

The Phoenix

Hi Phoenix,

Knight and Lomas books are full of spurious information. Are they still claiming that P.S. has any involvement in the formation of Freemasonry especially after it has been exposed as being a hoax?

Perhaps I would have more respect for them if they published a revised addition of their work admitting that they had been conned! But if they did that they would have to admit that they didn’t do their research very well in the first place wouldn’t they!

As for creating a “The Masonic Testament”, they didn’t include a single reference for it. I suspect the reason for this is that they have taken liberties or used “fluffy logic”, to assemble it. It holds NO authority and is of no help to genuine Masonic researchers.

Your post looks more like an ad!?

If you are connected to the brothers perhaps I can put forward some direct questions to you about their research and in return get some straight answers?

For a start I'm still waiting for a reply on how many wounds Seqenenre Tao II have? Be honest now…

“The impossible has just happened. We had identified Hiram Abif, and what’s more, his body still exists.” – The Hiram Key page 176

If it was impossible then not even they could have done it!!! But in the world of fluffy logic anything is possible I guess.

For any brother wanting to read their books check them out at your local library, don’t spend good money on erroneous research.

If you have read my post carefully and noticed in what subsection it was placed, you would have noticed it is intended for those interested in Masonic Research.

It doesn't matter in the least whether you loved the first book or not, I wasn't asking for a review or anybody's opinion about the book. I said that if one liked the first, then it is likely that one might enjoy this one too.

I also emphasised that the interesting thing in the new book is that it tells about the University of Bradford's Online Masonic Resource and I provided a link to share with serious Masonic researchers.

Even if the books were of no value (not my opinion), the online resources are invaluable.

Besides, you claim some negatives things but do not substantiate them at all:

Don wrote:

Knight and Lomas books are full of spurious information. Are they still claiming that P.S. has any involvement in the formation of Freemasonry especially after it has been exposed as being a hoax?

Can you be more specific and offer some constructive feedback on what is 'spurious information' in the books of Knight and Lomas?

Please provide the page numbers and titles in their books whereby they are 'still claiming that P.S. has any involvement in the formation of Freemasonry'.

I think you are confusing Dan Brown (who wrote nothing more than a novel) with Knight and Lomas who are serious researchers in masonry (that does not mean there aren't some inaccuracies in their work, but only a fool would dispel the whole of their proposals based on a few details).

Quote:

Perhaps I would have more respect for them if they published a revised addition of their work admitting that they had been conned! But if they did that they would have to admit that they didn’t do their research very well in the first place wouldn’t they!

By the very same token, would you provide proof of what you claim above or maybe revise your stance, lest serious readers of this forum lose respect for you because you didn't do your own research very well?

Quote:

As for creating a “The Masonic Testament”, they didn’t include a single reference for it. I suspect the reason for this is that they have taken liberties or used “fluffy logic”, to assemble it. It holds NO authority and is of no help to genuine Masonic researchers.

The whole content from which their 'Masonic Testament' was assembled is in the link I gave above for those who want to see the actual sources. It seems you haven't read the book I mentioned and were eager to spew forth some bile about these authors based on a few things you disagree with them about their first book or else you would have found this information and understood it.

Or else maybe you haven't read it properly.

I'll let other researchers check the book (which does contain a 'Masonic Testament' assembled by the authors) and the online resources for themselves and see whether all this material shared and hosted by the University is worthwhile to their research (read inner research, and not historic research here, although history is also important).

Quote:

Your post looks more like an ad!?

It was to provide a link to some interesting masonic material and rituals to serious researchers. Sorry, but to me, your post smacks of anti-masonry.

Quote:

If you are connected to the brothers perhaps I can put forward some direct questions to you about their research and in return get some straight answers?

Everybody and everything is connected in ONE single entity. Post your questions here if you so wish so that researchers can engage in a debate but only if you can substantiate your claims, otherwise you are wasting your time, mine and that of serious researchers within this forum.

Or you can write to Robert Lomas directly, his email is on his website.

Quote:

For a start I'm still waiting for a reply on how many wounds Seqenenre Tao II have? Be honest now…

I'll be as honest as I can be: who really cares? Both Tao and Hiram Abiff are but symbolic or concrete (Tao) representations of a crucial process. The actual numbers which are true can already be found in the teachings.

Quote:

“The impossible has just happened. We had identified Hiram Abif, and what’s more, his body still exists.” – The Hiram Key page 176

If it was impossible then not even they could have done it!!! But in the world of fluffy logic anything is possible I guess.

Sure, dismiss the whole corpus of work and the resources they willingly share for free online despite the opposition of some because of this line if you are so inclined. To each his own, but I think you are the one who has a fluffy logic.

If you have such a great logic, then turn it inward and rectify to find the truth.

The Phoenix

Sure I would be happy too!

I will answer more of your post when I get time this weekend, if you can extend me the curesty of answering my questions.

First lets clear the air with a few yes no questions, ‘that you avoided answering in my post either intentionally or unintentionally!’

1. Are you one of the authors YES/NO?

2. Are you connected in anyway to University of Bradford YES/NO?

3. Were you placing the post to directed traffic for any reason other than helping others with Masonic research YES/NO? eg If you placed the post to help with any form of optimizing the university website the answer is YES!

4. Is the Masonic Testament in its entirety on line as in the Book of Hiram YES/NO?

5. Does the online Masonic Testament give details relating to ritual with date of publication, region, which Grand Lodge the ritual was used by or even page numbers all essential for researchers YES/NO?

6. Does the book version of the Masonic Testament give details relating to ritual dates of publication, region, which Grand Lodge the ritual was used by or even page numbers all essential for researchers YES/NO?


This is an example of what I call spurious:

“Take out, for a moment the placing of Hiram Abiff in the time of King Solomon and everything else fits.” – page 178 The Hiram Key

In no way is the statement found in their book even a hint at being truthful.

S.Tao II had more wounds than recorded in Masonic Ritual one had actually sighs of healing, his corpse has signs of paralysis in an autopsy conducted by Sir E.G. Smith meaning he would not be employed as a Stone Mason as in our ritual, the location of his attack was in another country, some of his attackers hid in a cave which has no correlation to the ceremony of making a king or a God in Egypt, working tools of Freemasonry aren’t used in Egyptian ceremonies in any sequence relating to having any connection etc… etc… etc… everything else doesn’t fit at all and I haven’t even started…

“… George Washington, at the time master of Alexandria Lodge, No 22 on the roll of the Grand Lodge of New York…” page 457 The Hiram Key

According to The Grand Sec. of Pennsylvania he was the Master of Lodge No.22 on the rolls of Pennsylvania not New York during Washington’s time.

It is getting late but if you answer my post I will spend a couple of hours pointing out numerous errors in The Book of Hiram giving page numbers etc… in the weekend for you.

Let be also state I’m not against studying new idea’s introduced into Masonic Research. I do expect these ideas to be verified and not simply misguided or uninformed individual interpretation. That’s why we have Research Lodges for peer review similar to Doctors or Scientists.

Pick any of there books in the Hiram series and I will give you at least 3 blatant errors by the end of the weekend.

>Pick any of there books in the Hiram series and I will give you at least 3 blatant errors by the end of the weekend.

Don

I fear you could do the same with my lodge's initiation ritual. It has both transcription errors and errors in the logic of the ritual. The latter may have accrued in the 80 years in which when the lodge had no written ritual or perhaps even earlier.

Fortunately, with all its errors the ritual still works. And I have decided that there is enough right about the ritual that I will not object to it.

Of course, you may be correct in implying there is no value in the works of Christopher Knight. But for myself, I find joy in meeting enquiring minds. I would that our lodges were full of them.

Cheers

Russell Holland

Hi Russell,

What else would I expect from an Australian ritual hehehe…

I was talking more about research error than spelling etc...

I enjoy your posts

Kind regards Don

I read the Hiram key and felt that there was some fluffy logic going on, but also that there were some interesting masonic 'facts' discussed especilaly around Holy Royal Arch and Christianity per se.

I read an excellent referenced work by Alexander Piatgorsky Who’s Afraid of Freemasons: The Phenomenon of Freemasonry, ISBN 1 880 460 291, published 1997, 398 inc index & Appendices. Cost £25.

This does not suppose on a king-making ceremnoy but pulls historical parallel ceremonies related to the death of the builder and the widows son. This is a hard read but as it is referenced should be 'more tracable' rather than just more believable.

Des


_________________
Fraternally always an apprentice to those with greater understanding of the Craft.

[quote="Don"]Sure I would be happy too!

I will answer more of your post when I get time this weekend, if you can extend me the curesty of answering my questions.

First lets clear the air with a few yes no questions, ‘that you avoided answering in my post either intentionally or unintentionally!’

[/quote]

[quote="Don"]Knight and Lomas books are full of spurious information. Are they still claiming that P.S. has any involvement in the formation of Freemasonry especially after it has been exposed as being a hoax?
[/quote]

No, you are the one who has avoided answering this simple question. Can you show or prove where Knight and Lomas claim P.S. has any involvement in the formation of Freemasonry as you claim first? I believe you are one very confused person. You probably confused these two authors with Dan Brown who wrote a novel.

The Phoenix


_________________
Phoenix

Hi Phoenix,

You are right, I am confused... I'm confused as to why its taken you the best part of a year to avoid answering 6 yes/no questions?

Regards Don

:lol:

For those who haven’t made the connection yet Knight and Lomas learnt about “Rex Deus” from Tim Wallace- Murphy “TWM”. (see The Second Messiah )

TWM his written a number of books about “Rex Deus”.

The story of the Rex Deus families is almost identical to that of the Priory of Sion. In fact the difference is only semantically debated by the authors who use one name opposed to the other, as their similarity’s seem more numerous than their differences.

Knight and Lomas clearly saw this themselves, as they stated it in The Second Messiah.

Knight and Lomas refer to the Priory of Sion as “Prieure de Sion” and go as far as to say, “At first view, this idea (Rex Deus) seemed similar to the claims made by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln in their book The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, which claimed to have identified an organization called the Prieure de Sion. Baigent and his colleagues believed that Jesus had survived the cross and gone to live in France, where he had raised a family, and his bloodline, coming through the Merovingian kings and the Dukes of Lorraine, had been preserved by this shadowy Prieure de Sion…” “The Rex Deus hypothesis is rather less neat, with a close connection to Jesus but no known bloodline…”

They then go on…“The story of the Rex Deus families explained how the band of Christian knights knew exactly what they were going to find…(to return to the Holy Temple to recover treasure that was their birthright)…The Rex Deus families were at the forefront of the First, and every other Crusade… The Rex Deus families were the first to pledge allegiance to the crusading cause, and Pope Urban II… The Rex Deus group and Hugh de Champagne and Hugues de Payen (both are famous Knight Templars)…told him (Baldwin) that they wanted to post a small contingent of knights in Jerusalem to carry out some exploratory digging…” The rest of the Templar story is self-evident...

No evidence is given for any of these statements relating to Rex Deus, but Pope Urban II, Baldwin , Hugh de Champagne and Hugues de Payen are actual people record historically. No document exists to show a group called “Rex Deus” did any off these things at that time… by that name or any other!

Knight and Lomas also state…“The Leader of the Templars was Hugues de Payen, a middle –ranking noble-man in Champagne who married Catherine St Clair, the niece of his crusading partner Baron Henri St Clair of Roslin, in 1101.( see page 97 The Second Messiah) This stated fact ties together Rex Deus, Rosslyn Chapel and the Knights Templar.

The only problem is according to the St Clair family genealogies ( reprinted by the Grand Lodge of Scotland ) there never was a Catherine St Clair at that time, or a record of her marriage! Nor is there any reference stated as to where they found this little gem that ties everything together for them. *

As to why a sworn celibate Knight Templar would marry any woman is totally unexplained, as is the fact that her whole existence is a mystery to her own family!

*This should get Phoenix at least replying to me, I’m very interested to hear what he can add in the way of his own research on the subject.

By the way Dr Karen Ralls, PhD., FSA Scot states “We have no documented evidence that William St Clair was ever a Knight Templar… Contrary to popular belief, the founder was not a Knight Templar or a Freemason… Again, it is also important to note that there is no evidence to suggest a Templar Order connection with the founder of Rosslyn, or with the modern-day chapel itself.” She should know after all she was Deputy Curator of the Rosslyn Chapel Museum.

http://www.templarhistory.com/mysteriesrosslyn.html

Kind regards
Don

Are you following this Phoenix?

Right, the myth about Catherine St Clair is recorded in the Priory of Sion papers called the ‘Dossiers Secrets’. So what Knight and Lomas did was use information they wanted for ‘Rex Deus’ borrowed from the ‘Priory of Sion’ without the collateral damage of the Priory of Sion being know as a hoax, 'by just about every historian on the planet'.

Now if I go back to Knight and Lomas’s first book “The Hiram Key”, you can find on page 388 that they state the Battle of Bannockburn was fought on the 6th November 1314.
Everyone else, historian or Scot says the date for the main battle was on the 24 June of that year.

The battle was an important tie for Knight and Lomas, connecting once again the Templar connection to the St Clair family and Rosslyn Chapel,

“…the Battle of Bannockburn was won by the arrival of a Templar force led by the Grand Master of the Scottish Templars, Sir William St Clair” page 388 The Hiram Key

Bruce's army was deployed in four large divisions or "battles", each division consisting to two schiltrons. Douglas's division stood on the left flank, Randolph and Edward Bruce took the center, and Robert the right. The small body of Scots light cavalry was placed under the command of Sir Robert Keith, and was deployed on the right at the rear of the army. http://members.aol.com/skyelander/bruce1.html so you can check this online.

What NO St Clair’s or Templars you say?

You are right… there is no contemporary account of them having any important involvement. My own note to mention here is that the English Templars fought for the English at the battle!

The small group that joined the fight that most site as being the Templars was recorded as “The carriage men and poor folk’, recorded around c.1372 by John Barbour in “The Bruce.” Most historians agree that these were either Scots that arrived too late to be trained by Bruce’s men and, or cooking and camp folk.

There is no contemporary account of a Templar flag being flown in connection with the Scots or of Sir William St Clair commanding an elite force of any group, let alone of Templars. Both are stated as being factual stories by Knight and Lomas.

More coming soon about the fiction written about Rosslyn Chapel by Knight and Lomas.

Kind regards
Don