Knights templar and conspirators

Hubby just started back at school and guess what book he has to read for a class in an engineering masters program. The DaVinci Code. Yep, the local CINO university, aside from promoting the wacky New Age stuff I previously posted about, now has folks spending their money on this drivel. The prof's argument was that the book includes a lot of "group think" mentality that isn't included in the movie, which is what he is interested in exploring, sooooo one must read this particular book to understand this concept which has never, ever been covered in any other, more standard, text book. A head-shaker of a choice of texts.

But, while Opus Dei is portrayed as a super-secret-blood-thirsty-killing-machine-of-rabid-Catholic-religious-types trying to cover up a super-secret-secret that could rock all of mankind, I have some interesting things going on in my family genealogy. This time it's the Scottish that are keeping things interesting. I've known for some time about my "reputed" Logan connections to a few things. These being (dun-dun-dun) the Knights Templar and the Gowrie Conspiracy.

Who knows, maybe if I keep exploring these theories and my French lines, the Opus Dei and Mary Magdelene claims will actually pan out. The DaVinci code is a historical text book, right?

Here are some tidbits from a website I found on my supposed ancestor, Sir Robert Logan, the 7th and last Baron of Restalrig:

In October 13th 1307 while the Templars were being arrested the Templar Fleet stationed at La Rochelle quietly slipped away. According to tradition and a lot of evidence it carried the records of the Order, and the treasure of the Templar Preceptory of Paris, taking them to the West and East coast of Scotland. Some of these ships must have come to Leith as Berwick was in English hands.

Let us leave the Templars for a moment to tell two strange stories concerning Sir Robert Logan of Restalrig. The first one concerns the discovery of the skull of Sir Robert Logan during the restoration of South Leith Church in 1848. A coffin was found at the West end of the North aisle, under a room used by the Kirk Session. The inspector of Works brought it to the attention of Dr David Robertson and they decided to open it. The coffin was covered with purple velvet. A few taps of a hammer knocked the lid into fragments. Within the coffin they saw a mass of human bones huddled together and in the middle, a human skull. The strange thing was that no lower jaw was found although the skeleton was otherwise complete. The conclusion they came to was these were the mortal remains of Sir Robert Logan. As according to history the skeleton of Sir Robert Logan was put on trial for his involvement in what was called the Gowrie conspiracy against James VI and disinherited. The remains being reburied at South Leith Church. However, would the remains of a man accused of high treason been buried at South Leith Church? Some historians don’t think so, and if they were, the question is why?

Could there be a darker reason? Near to Dunbar lies Fast Castle. By marriage the Logans held the castle between 1552-1606. In 1594 John Napier of Merchiston was asked by Sir Robert Logan to find treasure that was said to have been buried within the castle. The contract between them is found today at Trinity College, Cambridge. Not only did John Napier invent Logarithms as a method of calculation, he was also involved in the Black Arts. He hoped to find the treasure by supernatural means. The contract was to be destroyed once all the conditions were fulfilled, and as the contract was never destroyed and providing the search actually took place, it is assumed the treasure was never found. According to Napier in his memoirs the search did take place. He went to the dreary castle with Sir Robert Logan and the wild Earl of Bothwell both armed to the teeth. So what was the connection between the supposed treasure at Fast Castle and the remains of Sir Robert Logan at South Leith Church? How could someone accused of treason be buried in consecrated ground? The chances are he never was a traitor.

As Laing, a famous historian of the last century said: In regard to Logan himself, it was well known that according to a barbarous custom of the time when it was determined to implicate him by means of forged letters in the Gowrie Conspiracy, was disinterred and brought into court.

The connection is the fact that Sir Robert Logan and the de Lestalric’s before them were Templar Knights to a man, and what Sir Robert Logan was trying to find at Fast Castle was Templar treasure, the treasure from the Preceptory of Paris. This was the reason he was disinherited. So what was the significance of the skull with no jawbone, and why was he buried at South Leith Church? The answer will be on this site shortly when we investigate the Cult of the head”, the Templars, and Freemasonry.
__________________________

A little bit about my supposed 10th great-grandfather, Sir Robert Logan, 7th Baron of Restalrig and his involvement in the Gowrie Conspiracy.

Sir Robert Logan of Restalrig
1555 - 1606

The subject of a unique trial for treason. The Logan family were wealthy landowners, who possessed the Barony of Restalrig from the 14th Century and lived in Lochend Castle. Sir Robert's father died while he was young, but he went on to inherit property in Ayrshire, Coldingham (Scottish Borders). He also inherited Fast Castle in the Scottish Borders from his mother who had taken Alexander, 5th Lord Home, as her second husband.

Logan died in 1606 and was buried in his family tomb at South Leith Parish Church. However, some two years later, suspicions were raised that Logan had been involved in the 'Gowrie Conspiracy' a plot to assassinate King James VI in 1600. The plot had been foiled and the principal conspirators, John Ruthven, the 3rd Earl of Gowrie and his brother, Alexander, Master of Ruthven, had been killed in Perth and their bodies taken to Edinburgh to be displayed.

In 1609, Logan was summoned to appear in court and his body exhumed and laid before the court. With Logan in no position to defend himself, he was found guilty on the flimsiest of evidence and his estates were forfeit.
_______________________________

But, then there is the reversal of attainder by King James...

Reversal of Attainder as follows:
(this is a "pardon" for the minor children of Logan, reinstating their
rights, but not returning their money.)

"James, by the Grace of God, King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland
and Defender of the Faith, to all our loyal subjects, to whom the present
letters shall come, greeting, know ye, that, understanding that, on account of
the process and award of forfeiture made and passed against the late Robert
Logan of Restalrig and Alexander, Jonet, and Anna Logan, his lawful children, the said children were rendered incapable of enjoying and possessing any lands, officies or dignities within our Kingdoms, and calling to mind that the said children at the time of their said fathers forfeiture were all minors, and did not at all participate in any of the crimes for which he suffered forfeiture, so that these ought in no way to be imputed to them, or turned to their prejudice, therefore for divers other good causes and considerations of our special grace, favour and clemency, with the advice and consent of the Lord Commissioners for managing our affairs in our absence, we have recapacitated and reinstated, as by these presents we do reinstate, recapacitate, and restore, the foresaid Alexander, Jonet, and Anna Logan to their former good fame, and secular honours and dignities whatsoever, and we have granted, as by these presents we do grant to them our full power to bear testimony in causes, to exercise and use all other lawful acts, as well in judgment as without the same in prosecution ofall their actions and causes, to be capable of holding all dignities and officies to enjoy, use, and possess, or in any manner whatever have right to all their own lands, farms, possessions and assedations whatsoever, or which they may in the future happen to acquire (otherwise than by succession to their foresaid late father, to which these presents shall in no way extend), in the same manner and as freely in all respects, as they were able to do before the award of forfeiture was pronounced against their foresaid late father; Likewise, we of our Royal Power and Authority do relieve them and their posterity from all infamy, scandal and ignominy which could be imputed to them by reason of the said forfeiture, so that henceforth these shall in no way be turned to their loss or injury either in judgment or without the same; wherefore We command all our lieges and subjects that none shall dare or presume to injure their good fame by word or deed, by reason of the said forfeiture under every penalty which they could incur against our Royal Majesty in this particular. In Witness wherefore we have directed our Great Seal to be appended to the presents at Whitehall the second day of April, the year of our Lord one thousand six hundred and sixteen and in the forty-ninth and fourteenth years of our reign."
[2 April 1616]